ML18038A250

Annual Radiological Environ Operating Rept,1986. W/870430 Ltr

ML18038A250
Person / Time
Site:	Nine Mile Point
Issue date:	12/31/1986
From:	Lempges T NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORP.
To:	Russell W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
References
NMP25519, NUDOCS 8705040150
Download: ML18038A250 (141)

Text

~ '.g>

STORY QPi)%TIE>'> DIRTRIPUTIGN R~R IDB)

ACCF BBIOis' )QR: $ 70 .0403, 50 DOC. DATE: B6/12/31 NOTA>R I 7 ED: NO DOCri~T Jl"e'ECUl vc FAC IL'0-220 N-'ne ~ilk I e P o1n'v NUc I ec '~ .3 i on> > > Un>1 v .i> ilier"gg> 8 P 05000220

'UTH 'iAi'lE 'AUiHQH A - l-'LI AT I LEi~lPQES> T. E. i~loheiiif: Po:"=-- Corp.

Gi'iaqaro REC IP. NAi'iE REC IP I EiNT AFF Il I AT I> >N RUBB=LL !p. i. Roqi an I, 0,"-i".ice a-, D'.- ec "o-t BUG JE> T Annvdl RGoio'ogle(3I L3>Y>: on Gpe> a'0l )1o Re o ~i. l>J/8 /043~ 1>>'i .

DISTRIBUTION CODE: IE25D COP IEB RECE TVED. LTR NL IZ TITLE: Enviv'onmenia1 Y>ani boring rRe p ='.

( " er Tec h Specs)

RECIPE> NT COP I EB REC IP I ENT COP IEB ID CODE/NAi'iE LTTR ENCL I D CODE/NA".iE LTTR Er'C L PD i-1 LA 0 PD1-1 PD 5 5 p,ELLY> J 1 INTERNAL AFGD/DQA A.=OD/DBP/TPAB . 1

'ARN TL=('ll A@V LPDR f!RR/DREP/PPB GP. v c i '~ ~~ I 4>> ) I 1

,.it T V* /ORB'-i/EP"".L<

EXTLRi~lAL: NRC PDri TOTAL NUNBER OF COP IEB REQUIRED: LT3 R 21 ENCL 20

t NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION

~ \ } NIAGARA ~Q>>

MOHAWK 331 PLRINFIEI.O ROAD SYRACV SF . NY 13212 THOMAS E 'MPGES VCf v>>C$ 44x>~VCR'+ Cl tv'<~ NMP 25519 April 30, 1987 Mr. William T. Russell Regional Administrator United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region 1 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 RE: Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit I Facility Operating License DPR-63 Docket No. 50-220

Dear Mr. Russell:

In accordance with the Technical Specifications for Nine lfile Point Nuclear Station Unit 1, we are enclosing the Annual Radiolo ical Environ-mental 0 crating Re ort for the period January, 1986 through December, 1986.

Data presented in this report also provides documentation of the Preopera-tional Environmental Monitoring Program for Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 2.

Any questions concerning the enclosed report should be directed to Hugh J. Flanagan at Nine IMile Point (315/349-2428).

Very truly yours, Thomas E. Lempges Vice President Nuclear Generation TEL/HJF/meh Enclosure cc: Document Control Desk

0 4 I I r

I C

I 7 V JF r- \ 'I QV I I

~ ~ \~ ~

$ f ~ l/)5CCvhh77V-.FF II

)PC}+@VAN) 0)}'i l,) fU~UL<kic( t~ )PLY )Usl-

., f4IBt cion:a 4.

I ,I o

V I I I ~' V V 7 I

7 I' . I ~

I C

I r

"~ ~ ~

I

~ . h .. VF " Ve.faaS afNk F,W CtM ~'0~5 9~5

• I ~

r '

Ic ~ E, + Fcg Q'.c,hc7 +'wQ,"lhvv)77v chb '"eh@ \, cq9%$ 77$ }pl 7 7I' c chc Ic cl Q 7 s( gvhcrh 7 cqr jv$Fy4 ~ . r ~c (c'(+ag4

NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT January 1, 1986 December 31, 1986 for NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION UNIT 1 Facility Operating License DPR-63 Docket Number 50-220

<< I 0

>I

~-

TABLE OF CONTENTS

~pa e List of Tables List of Figures Introduction II. Description

1) Sample Collection Methodology and Analysis

2) Analyses Performed

3) Changes to the 1986 Sample Program

4) Exceptions to the 1986 Sample Program III. Evaluation of Environmental Data 12 A) Aquatic Program 14

1) Shoreline Sediment 14

2) Fish 19

3) Surface Mater 22 B) Terrestrial Program

1) Air Particulates Gross Beta 24

2) Monthly Air Particulate Composites 26

3) Airborne Radioiodine (I-131) 33

4) TLD (Environmental Dosimetry)

5) Milk 38

6) Land Use Census 43

7) , Food Products

8) Interlaboratory Comparison Program 45

9) Environmental Sample Locations 46

10) Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Annual Summary 46

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

~Pa e C) Conclusion D) General Reference Material 48 E) Data Tables 1986 50

LIST OF TABLES Table No. Content ~pa e Table 1 Sample Collection and Analysis, Site Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program A. Aquatic Program 51 Table 2 Sample Collection and Analysis, Site Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program B. Terrestrial Program 52 Table 3A Concentration of Gamma Emitters in Shoreline Sediment Samples (pCi/g-dry) 53 Table 3B Concentration of Gamma Emitters in Shoreline Sediment Samples (pCi/kg-dry) 54 Table 4A Concentration of Gamma Emitters in Fish Samples (pCi/g-wet)

Table 4B Concentration of Gamma Emitters in Fish Samples (pCi/kg-wet) 56 Table 5 Concentration of Gamma Emitters in Surface Mater Samples 57 Table 6 Concentration of Tritium in Surface Mater Samples 61 Table 7 Environmental Airborne Particulate Samples-Off-Site Stations, Gross Beta Activity 62 Table 8 Environmental Airborne Particulate Samples-On-Site Stations, Gross Beta Activity 63 Table 9 Concentration of Gamma Emitters in Monthly Composites of NMP Air Particulate Samples Table 10 Environmental Charcoal Cartridge Samples-Off-Site Stations, I-131 Activity 79 Table 11 Environmental Charcoal Cartridge Samples-On-Site Stations, I-131 Activity 80 Table 12A Direct Radiation Measurement Results (mrem per standard month) 81 Table 12B Direct Radiation Measurement Results (mrem per quarterly period) 85

LIST 0

OF TABLES (Continued)

Table No. Content ~Pa e Table 13 Concentration of Gamma Emitters in Milk 89

~ Table 14 Concentration of Iodine-131 in Milk 95 Table 15 Milk Animal Census 97 Table 16 . 1986 Residence Census 99 Table 17A Concentration of Gamma Emitters in Food Pro'ducts (pCi/g-wet) 100 Table 17B Concentration of Gamma Emitters in Food Products (pCi/kg-wet) 101 Table 18 Interlaboratory Comparison Program Results 102 Table 19 Environmental Sample Locations 109 Table 20 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Annual Summary -0

LIST OF FIGURES Content ~Pa e Figure 1A Off-Site Environmental Station and 124 TLD Locations Figure 1B Off-Site Environmental Station and TLD 125 Locations (Southern)

Figure 2 On-Site Environmental Station and TLD 126 Locations Figure 3 Nearest Residence and Food Product Locations 127 Figure 4 Milk Animal Census and Milk Sample 128 Locations Figure 5 New York State, Map 129

0 NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT INTRODUCTION This report is submitted in accordance with Appendix A (Radiological Technical Specifications), Section 6.9.l.d to License DPR-63, Docket No. 50-220 for the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 1 for the year 1986. This report is also submitted as pxeoperational monitoring, data for Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 2, Docket No. 50-410

'I.

DESCRIPTION The sample. collection and analysis schedule required by the Technical Specifications fox'he Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 1 (NMPNS) is listed in'able 1 and'.

The sample collections for the radiological program are performed by two groups. Ecological Analysts Incorporated (EAI) performs much of the environmental sampling. EAI is presently performing the Nine Mile Point Biological Monitoring Program required by the Station's SPDES Permit. The staff requix:ed by EAI to perform this program is used to perform the terrestrial sampling required for the site Radiological Environmental Monitoring Progxam (REMP). In-plant canal sampling a remaining terrestrial sampling is performed jointly by the NMPNS a the James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAFNPP) staffs.

Sam le Collection Methodolo and Anal sis A. Surface Water ll Surface water samples are taken from the respective inlet canals of the J.A. FitzPatrick facility and Niagara Mohawk's Oswego Steam Station. The FitzPatrick facility removes water from Lake Ontario on a continuous basis and generally represents a "down-current" sampling point from the Nine Mile Point Unit 1 facility. The Oswego Steam Station 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 the result of the lake current patterns and current patterns from the Oswego River located nearby (see Figure lA).

Samples from the FitzPatrick facility axe composited from automatic sampling equipment which discharges into a laxge compositing tank. Samples are obtained from the tank monthly and analyzed for gamma emittexs. Samples from the Oswego Steam Station are also composited from automatic sampling equipment and discharge to a compositing tank. Samples from this locatio are obtained weekly and are composited to form monthly composi samples. Monthly samples are analyzed for gamma emitters..

II. DESCRIPTION (Cont'd)

1. Sample Collection Methodolo and Anal sis (Cont'd)

A. Surface Mater (Cont'd)

A portion of the samples from each of the locations is saved and composited to form quarterly composite samples for each calendar quarter. Quarterly composite samples are analyzed for tritium.

In addition to the FitzPatrick and Oswego Steam Station facilities, data are presented for the Nine Mile Point Unit 1 facility inlet canal and city water from the'ity of Oswego. The latter two locations are not required by the Technical SpeciEications, but are optional samples. Monthly composite samples Erom these two locations are analyzed for gamma emitters and quarterly composite samples are analyzed for tritium.

Surface water sample locations are shown on Figure 1A (refer to Table 19 for location designations and descriptions).

B. Air Particulate/Iodine The air sampling stations required by the Technical Specifications are located in the general area of the site boundary (within 0.7 miles) in sectors of highest calculated meteorological deposition factoxs (D/Q) based on histoxical meteorological data. These stations (R-l, 5-2, and R-3) are located in the east, east-southeast, and southeast sectoxs as measured from the center of the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 2 reactor building. The Technical Specifications also require that a fourth air sampling station be located in the vicinity of a year round community having the highest calculated deposition factor (D/Q) based on historical meteorological data.

This station is located in the southeast sector (R-4). A fiEth station requixed by the Technical Specifications is located at a site 16.4 miles from the site in a least prevalent wind direction of east-northeast (R-5). This location is considered a control location, In addition to the Technical Specification required locations, there are nine other sampling stations located within the site boundary (Dl, D2, E, F, G, H, I, J, and K). These locations generally surround the area occupied by the three generating facilities, but are well within the site boundaxy. One other air sampling station is located off-site in the southwest sector and is in the vicinity of the City of Oswego:

At each station, airborne particulates are collected by glass fiber filters and radioiodine by charcoal filters. Air particulate glass fiber filters are approximately two inches (47 millimeters) in diameter and are placed in sample holders in the intake line of a vacuum sampler. Directly down stream from the

IX. DESCRIPTION (Cont'd) 1 ~ Sam le Collection Methodolo and Anal sis (Cont'd)

B. Air Particulate/Iodine (Cont'd) particulate filter is a 2 x 1 inch charcoal cartridge used to absorb airborne radioiodine. The samplers run continuously and the charcoal cartridges and particulate filters are changed on a weekly basis, or as required by dust loading. Gross beta analysis is performed for the individual particulate filters on a weekly basis. Charcoal cartridges are analyzed weekly for radioiodine by GeLi detector.

The particulate filters are composited Eor gamma analyses on a monthly basis by location after all weekly particulate filters have been counted for gross beta activity.

Air sampling stations are shown in Figures 1 and 2 (refer to Table 19 for location designations and descriptions).

C. Milk Milk samples are collected in polyethylene bottles from the bulk storage tank at each sampled farm. Before the sample is drawn, the tank contents are agitated from three to five minutes to assure a homogenous mixture of milk and butterfat. Two gallo are collected during the first halE and second galf of ea month from each of the selected locations within ten miles o the site and from a control location. The samples are chilled and shipped fresh to the analytical contractor within thirty-six hours of collection in insulated shipping containers.

Milk sample location selection is based on maximum deposition factors (D/Q). Deposition factors are generated from average historical meteorological data based on all licensed reactors.

The Technical Specifications require three sample locations within 5.0 miles of the site with the highest calculated deposition factors. In addition to the three required locations, several other locations with high deposition factors are sampled for milk. These samples are optional.

A fourth sample location required by the Technical Specifications is located in a least prevalent wind direction from the site. This location is in the southwest sector.

Milk samples are collected twice per month (April December) and analyzed for gamma emi t ters and I-131. Samples are collected and analyzed in January March in the event X-131 is detected in November and December of the preceding year.

The milk sample locations are found on Figure 4. (refer Table 19 for location designations and descriptions).

II. DESCRIPTION (Cont'd)

1. Sample Collection Zethodolo v and Anal sis (Cont'd)

D. Food Products Food products are collected once per year during the late summer at the approximate height of the harvest season. Approximately one kilogram of broadleaf vegetables is collected from garden locations with the highest deposition factors (D/Q) based on average historical meteorological data. Six samples are collected from at least two sectors. Additional samples may also be obtained. Control 'samples are also collected from available off-site locations 9 to 20 miles distant in .a least prevalent wind direction: Control samples are of the same or of a similar type of vegetation. All samples are shipped fresh as soon as possible aftercollection.

Food product samples're analyzed for gamma emitters (ganma isotopic analysis). The gamma isotopic analysis also includes I-131. )

Food product locations are shown on Figure 3 (refer to Table 19 for location designations and descriptions).

Fish Samples Available fish species are obtained from collections during the spring and fall.. Samples are collected from two of four possible on-site sample transects located in the vicinity of the site discharge points and one off-site sample transect.

Available species are, selected under the following guidelines:

1. Samples of 0.5 to 1 kilogram of edible portions For a minimum of two species per locations

2. Shen two independent species are not available at all sample locations, a species may be divided into two samples for each location. This procedure may be accomplished provided that a'ufficient sample size is available for the species in question at all three locations.

Selected fish'amples are segregated by species and location and are processed immediately after collection. Samples are shipped frozen in insulated containers. Samples are analyzed for gamma emitters in edible portions.

Fish sample transects are shown on Figure lA (refer to Table 19 for location designations and descriptions).

F. Shoreline Sediment Shoreline sediment samples are collected twice per year for one area of existing or potential recreational value and from one area beyond the influence of the site. The area of potential

/ a

II.

0 DESCRIPTION (Cont'd)

1. Sam le Collection Hethodolo and Anal sis (Cont'd)

F. Shoreline Sediment recreational value is the only area from which samples are required by the Technical Specifications. Approximately one kilogram of shoreline sediment is obtained from areas washed by the lake shore surf at the two locations twice per year. All samples are shipped and analyzed for gamma emi t ters. Optional samples may be collected from other shoreline locations at or near the site.

Shoreline sediment locations are shown on Figure 1A (refer to Table 19 for location designations and descriptions).

G. TLD (direct radiation)

Thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD's) are used to measure direct radiation (gamma dose) in the environment. TLD's are obtained Erom Teledyne Isotopes on a quarterly basis and are read at Teledyne Isotopes'acility in'estwood, New Jersey. Shipment control TLD's (at least two) accompany each shipment to and Erom the vendor's laboratory. Shipment control TLD's also accompany the TLD's when they are being placed or collected and are shielded by lead when they are not being used. TLD data resul are corrected for a transit dose by use of the data from t shipment control TLD's.

Five different types of areas are evaluated by environmental TLD's. These areas include on-site areas (areas within the site boundary not required by the Technical Specifications), the site boundary area in each of the sixteen meteorological sectors, an outer ring of TLD's (located four to five miles from the site in eight available land based meteorological sectors), special interest TLD's (located at sites oE high population density) and control TLD's located at sites beyond significant influence of the site. Special interest TLD's are located at or near large industrial sites, schools, proximal towns or communities or other special activity areas. Control TLD's are located to the southwest, south and east-northeast of the site at distances of 12.6 to 19,8 miles..

TLD's used during 1986 were composed of rectangular teflon wafers impregnated with 25% CaSO~. 'Dy Phosphor. These were placed in polyethylene packages to ensure dosimeter integrity.

TLD packages were placed in open webbed plastic holders and were attached to supporting structures, usually trees or utility poles.

Environmental TLD locations are shown on Figures 1A, 1B, and (refer to Table 19 for location designations and descriptions).

II. DESCRIPTION (Cont'd)

1. Sam le Collection Methodolo v and Anal sis (Cont'd)

H. Land Use Census A land use census is conducted to determine the utilization of land within a distance of 3 miles from the site. The land use census actually consists of two types of census' milk animal census is conducted to identify all milk animals within a distance of 10 miles from the site. A census covering areas out to a distance of 10 miles exceeds a distance of 3 miles required by the Technical Specifications. This census is conducted during the beginning of the grazing season using road surveys, contacting local agricultural authorities, post cards, and investigating references from other owners.

A second type of census is a residence census. This census is conducted in order to identify the closest xesidence in each of the 22.5 degree meteoxological sectors. 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, For the residence census, several of the meteorological sectoxs are over Lake Ontario because the site is located at the shoreline. No residences are located in these sectors. There are only eight sectors over land where residences axe located within 3 miles.

The results of the two land use census are shown on Figures 3 and 4.

Interlaboratory Comparison Program An Intexlaboratory Comparison Program is conducted with .

reference samples originating from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). As required by the Technical Specifications, participation in this program includes media for which environmental samples are routinely collected and for which intercomparison samples are available.

The results of the Interlaboratory Comparison Program are shown on Table 18.

2. Anal ses Pexformed The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) samples were analyzed by Teledyne, Isotopes and by the Site Environmental Laboratory during 1986. The following samples were analyzed by the site:

Air particulate filter (weekly gross beta analysis)

Air paxticulate filter (monthly gamma spectral analysis)

II. DESCRIPTION (Cont'd)

2. Anal ses Performed (Cont'd)

Airborne radioiodine cartridge (weekly gamma spectral analysis)

Lake water (monthly gamma spectral analysis)

The remainder of the sample analyses, as outlined in Table 1 and 2, were analyzed by Teledyne Isotopes.

3. Chan es to the 1986 Sam le Pro ram A. Duxing October of 1986, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission issued the Technical Specifications fox Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 2. The Unit 2 Technical Specifications required the same basic sampling and analysis as the Unit 1 Technical Specifications. However, sampling specifications for food products may be interpreted as being slightly different for Unit 2 when compared to Unit 1. Therefore, additional sampling was performed. All results are included on Tables 17A and 17B.

B. Progxam TLD numbex 88 was moved from Demster Beach Road (4.8 miles at approximately 97 degxees from the Site) to Hickory Grove Road (4.5 miles at approximately 97 degrees from t Site). This change was effective April 2, 1986. This TL which is required by the Technical Specifications, was relocatea because of continual theft.

C. Program TLD number 104 was added to the monitoring program on April 2, 1986. Number 104 was added because the location is a critical residence near the site boundary. The TLD is located on Parkhurst Road (1.4 miles at 102 degrees from the site).

D. Progx am TLD number 105 was added to the monitoring program on April 2 1986. TLD number 105 was also added because it is located near a critical site boundary residence. This TLD is located on Lakeview Road (1.4 miles at 198 degrees from the site).

Program TLD number 106 was added to the monitoring pxogram on Apx'il 3, 1986. TLD number 106 was added to assist in calculating doses to membexs of the public who participate in activities within the site boundary. The TLD is located near the Lake Ontax'io shoreline west of Unit 1 (0.3 miles at approximately 274 degrees from the site).

F. Milk control sample location number 40 was deleted from 'the sampling program, during August of the year ~ This location was deleted because the owner sold all his dairy stock. Therefore sampling could not be continued at this location. Milk, samp location number 40 was located 15.0 miles at 223 degrees fr the site.

-7

II. DESCRIPTION (Cont'd)

A new milk control sample location (number 65) was added to the sampling program during August of the year (8/18/86). The new location is in close proximity to the old location. This location is 17.0 miles at 220 degrees from the site.

G. Several food product locations were added and several were deleted during 1986. The changes .were all a result of a survey which showed that at least one previous food product sample location was no longer available (i.e., there was no longer a garden established at the previous location> or that gardens were established at locations during 1986 that had a greater potential for radionuclide deposition.

Location N (1985) was deleted during 1986 because there was no longer a garden at this location. Locations 0 and Q (1985) were deleted because other locations were identified that had greater deposition potential. These other locations were not available during 1985 'ocations T, U and V were added to the 1986 sample program because these garden locations showed a greater potential for radionuclide deposition.

Exce tions to the 1986 Sam le Pro ram Exceptions to the 1986 sample program concerns those samples or monitoring requirements which are required by the Technical Specifications. This section implements section 3.6.20 of the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 1 Technical Specifications.

A. Air Radioiodine and Particulate Sampling Required by the Technical Specifications

1. Environmental air sample equipment at R-2 off-site air sampling station was inoperable from 1/7/86 (1815 hours0.021 days <br />0.504 hours <br />0.003 weeks <br />6.906075e-4 months <br />) to 1/14/86 (0848 hours0.00981 days <br />0.236 hours <br />0.0014 weeks <br />3.22664e-4 months <br />). The pump integrator fuse was found blown and was replaced.

2. Environmental air sample equipment at R-l, R-2, R-3, and R-4 off-site air sampling stations was inoperable from 1/20/86 (0835 hours0.00966 days <br />0.232 hours <br />0.00138 weeks <br />3.177175e-4 months <br />) to 1/20/86 (0850 hours0.00984 days <br />0.236 hours <br />0.00141 weeks <br />3.23425e-4 months <br />). The vacuum pumps were inoperable due to an off-site power loss that resulted from a winter storm.

3. Environmental air sample equipment at R-3 off-site air sampling station was inoperable from 5/14/86 (1545 hours0.0179 days <br />0.429 hours <br />0.00255 weeks <br />5.878725e-4 months <br />) to 5/20/86 (0835 hours0.00966 days <br />0.232 hours <br />0.00138 weeks <br />3.177175e-4 months <br />). The pump integrator fuse was found blown and was replaced.

4. Environmental air sample equipment at R-1 off-site air sampling station was inoperable for a period of 2.3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br />.

The inoperability, as recorded by a lapse time integrator, was presumably due to an .off-site power loss.

II. DESCRIPTION (Cont'd)

4. Exce tions to the 1986 Samole Pro ram (Cont'd)

5. Environmental air sample equipment at R-2 off-site air sampling station was inoperable for a period of 2.3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br />.

The inoperability, as recorded by a lapse time integrator, was presumably due to an off-site power loss.

Other occurrences of downtime for optional air sampling statjons were documented for 1986. However, these occurrences are not presented here because optional air sampling stations are not required by the Technical Specifications. Documentation includes downtime for air sampling equipment as well as environmental radiation monitoring equipment.

B. Environmental Thermoluminescent Dosimeters (TLD)

The following environmental TLD's were lost as a result of theft. These TLD's are required by the Technical Specifications.

Environmental TLD /P 58 (Off-site Dose Calculation Manual TLD iP33) was missing during the first quarter of 1986 as a result of theft. Data were not available for this location from 1/3/86 to 1/16/86. A spare TLD was placed at this location on 1/16/86. Data were available for the rest the quarter (1/16/86 4/3/86).

2. Environmental TLD 8 58 (Off-site Dose Calculation Manual TLD iP 33) was missing during, the second quarter of 1986 as a result of theft. Data were not available for this location from 4/3/86 to 5/2/86. A spare TLD was placed at this location on 5/2/86. Data were available for the rest of the quarter (5/2/86 7/2/86).

3, Environmental TLD /P 80 (Off-site Dose Calculation Manual TLD iP 12) was missing during the second quarter of 1986 as a result of theft. Data were not available for this location from 4/2/86 to 7/2/86.

Environmental TLD SP91 (Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual TLD iP25) was missing during the second quarter of 1986 as a result of theft. Data were not available for this location from 4/2/86 to 7/2/86.

5. Environmental TLD PP77 (Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual TLD

88) was missing during the third quarter of 1986 as a result of theft. Data were not available for this location from 7/1/86 to 10/2/86.

Normally, environmental TLD's are not relocated unles theft is continual. Past history has shown 'hat usual TLD's are stolen only once.

II. DESCRIPTION (Cont'd)

Exce tions to the 1986 Sam le Pro ram (Cont'd)

Environmental Thermoluminescent Dosimeters (TLD) <Cont'd)

Other occurrences where TLDs were stolen and which were not required by the Technical Specifications were documented during 1986, Since these TLDs were optional and were not required by the Technical Specifications, these results are not presented here.

C. Food Products The Technical Specifications require that environmental samples analyzed for the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program meet the lower limits of detection (LLD) found on Table 4.6.20-1 of the Nine Mile Point Unit 1 Technical Specifications, The specifications also require that the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program be conducted as specified in Table 3.6 '0-1.

Technical Specification Section 6.9 1 d <Annual Radiological

~ ~

Environmental Operating Report) requires that a discussion be presented in the annual report of deviations from Table 3.6.20-1 and of instapces where the LLD limits of Table 4.6.20-1 could not be achieved.

During 1986, the analysis of several food product samples deviated from the exact specification of Table 3.6.20-1 and Table 4.6.20-1, although the overall intent of the specifications was met. Table 3.6.20-1 requires that food product samples be analyzed by gamma isotopic analysis and that the isotopic analysis include I-131. Many of the food product samples (fruits and/or vegetables) showed gamma isotopic analysis results with I-131 LLDs greater than the, value on Table 4.6.20-1 (i.e., greater than 0.06 pCi/g-wet). In order to meet the requirement of Table 4.6.20-1, these same samples were also analyzed by a radiochemical extraction process to yield I-131 LLD values less than 0.06 pCi/g-wet. All of the sample analyses using the radiochemical extraction process yielded I-131 LLD values of less than 0.06 pCi/g-wet. Thus, the overall intent of the specifications was met as well as the intent of NRC technical specification guidance as presented in NUREG 0472 and NUREG 0473.

Normally, a gamma isotopic analysis of a food product sample can yield an I-131 LLD value of less than 0.06 pCi/g-wet provided that the sample is analyzed within a reasonable short period of time and the count time is adequate. During 1986, food product samples were sent to a vendor for analysis. At this time there was a significant sample load at the vendor's facility as a result of the accident at the Chernobyl facility. Upon discovery of the I-131 LLD problem, it was decided to perform a radiochemical extraction after evaluating the required count time of any further gamma isotopic analyses and the availability of additional sample media.

-10

II. DESCRIPTION(Cont'd)

4. Exce tions to the 1986 Sam le Pro ram (Cont'd)

C. Food Products (Cont'd)

During 1987 and thereafter, it is anticipated that samples will be counted within a reasonable period of time to yield a gamma isotopic I-131 LLD value of less than 0.06 pCi/g-wet. In the event this appears not to be possible at a vendor's facility, then food product samples will be analyzed at the site within a short period of time. In addition, a revision to the Technical Specifications for Unit I will be submitted to the Commission to allow for the analysis of I-131 to be accomplished by either gamma isotopic analysis or by a separate analysis for I-131.

D. Lower Limit of Detection for Environmental Samples The 'Technical Specifications require that environmental samples analyzed for the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program meet the lower limits of detection (LLD) found on Table 4.6.20-1 of the Nine Mile Point Unit 1 Technical Specifications. All of the 1986 environmental samples which showed no net activity (with the exception of section C. above) were less than the required values found on Table 4.6.20-1.

Section 3.6.21 of the Nine Mile Point Unit 1 Technical Specifications requires the site to conduct an Interlaboratory Comparison Program utilizing QC samples from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This section also requires that deviations from the sample schedules be reported in the Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report. The sample schedule is set by the EPA and includes media for which environmental samples are routinely collected and for which interlaboratory comparison samples are available from the EPA.

During 1986, sample media offered by the EPA for the Interlaboratory Comparison Program, and for which environmental samples are routinely collected and analyzed, were obtained and analyzed. The amount of samples obtained from the EPA program was 'based on the maximum amount available per participant or on a ten percent or better level (percent of the ratio of EPA samples to the total required sample volume).

A review of the 1986 results showed that one EPA sample, which was scheduled during December, was not received. This sample was a water sample spiked with I-131. Since this sample was not received, it could not be analy'zed and the data are not included on Table 18 (Interlaboratory Comparison Program Results).

Subsequent investigation of the missing spike sample showed th the sample was never sent by the EPA to the program participant

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA There were four separate groups of. radionuclides that were detected in the environment during 1986. A Eew oE these radionuclides could possibly fall into two of the four groups.

The first oE these groups is naturally occurring radionuclides.

It must be realized that the environment contains a broad inventory of naturally occurring radioactive elements.

Background radiation, as a function of primordial radioactive elements and cosmic radiation of solar origin, offers a constant exposure to the environment and man. These radionuclides, such as Ra-226, Be-7 and especially K-40, account for a majority of the annual per capita background dose.

A second group of radionuclides that were detected are a result of the detonation of thermonuclear devices in the earth's upper atmosphere. The detonation frequency during the early 1950's produced a significant inventory of radionuclides found in the lower atmosphere as well as in ecological systems. A ban was placed on atmospheric weapons testing in 1963 which greatly reduced the inventory through the decay of short lived radionuclides, deposition, and the removal <by natural processes) of radionuclides from the food chain such as by the process of sedimentation. 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 several months afterwards, and after a peak detection period, diminished to a point where most could not be detected. The last such weapons test was conducted in October of 1980. The resulting fallout or. deposition from this test has influenced the background radiation in the vicinity of the site and was very evident in many of the sample media analyzed during 1981. Calculations from 1981 of the resulting doses to man from fallout related radionuclides in the environment show that the contribution from such nuclides (such as Sr-90 or Cs-137) is significant and second in intensity only to natural background radiation. Quantities of Nb-95, Zr-95, Ce-141, Ce-144, Ru-106, Ru-103, La-140, Cs-137, Mn-54 and Co-60 were typical in air particulate samples during 1981 and have a.

weapons test origin. During 1986, Cs-137 was the only radionuclide detected in environmental samples that has a weapons testing origin.

The third group of radionuclides includes those detected at the site that were a result of the Chernobyl Nuclear Station accident. These radionuclides were first detected in May of the year and were found in samples of air particulates, air radioiodine and milk. Applicable radionuclides include I-131, Cs-134, Cs-137, Nb-95, Ru-103, Ru-106, and La-140, The fourth group of radionuclides detected in the environment during 1986 were those that could be related to operations at the site. These select radionuclides were detected in a Eew of the sample media collected and at very low concentrations. Many

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)'f these radionuclides are a by-produot of both nuclear detonations and the operation of light water reactors thus making a distinction between the two sources difficult, if not impossible. Radionuclides falling into this category (as applicable to the 1986 Nine Mile Point Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program) include Cs-137 and Co-60. The dose to man as a result of these radionuclides is small and significantly less than the radiation exposure from naturally occurring sources of radiation and from fallout.

Thus, the evaluation and interpretation of environmental data must be made at several levels including trend analysis, dose to man, etc. An attempt has been made not only to report the data collected during 1986, but also to assess the significance of the radionuclides detected in the environment as compared to natural radiation sources. It is important to note that detected concentrations of radionuclides that are possibly related to operations at the site are very small and are not an indication of environmental significance. In regards to these very small quantities, it will be further noted that at such minute concentrations the assessment of the significance of detected radionuclides is very difficult. Therefore, concentrations in one sample that are two times the concentration of another, for example, are not significan overall. Moreover, concentrations at such low levels may show particular radionuclide in one sample and yet not in anothe because of counting statistics.

The 1970 per capita dose rate (Eisenbud) was determined to be 209 mrem per year from all sources. This average dose includes such exposure sources as natural, occupational, weapons testing, consumer products, medical, etc. The 1970 per capita dose rate due to natural sources was 130 mrem per year. Of this dose, approximately 20 mrem per year is received by the gonads and other soft issues and an additional 15 mrem per year is received by the bone tissue for a 70 kg (155 lb) man. These doses (ie.

20 mrem and 15 mrem) are the result of just K40 alone, a naturally occurring relatively high energy beta emitter (1.3 Mev). The 1970 per capita dose rate due to the nuclear fuel cycle was 0.028 mrem per year. The nuclear fuel cycle dose was estimated by a USEPA study to be less than 0.6 mrem per year by the year 2000 (Glasstone).

Background gamma radiation around the Nine Mile Point Site, as a result of radionuclides in the atmosphere and the ground, accounts for approximately 76 mrem per year during 1986. This dose is a result of 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 76 mrem per year, as a background dose, significantly greater than any possible doses as a result operations at the site during 1986.

-13

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

A. A uatic Pro ram Tables 3 through 6 show the 'nalytical results fox the aquatic media collected during the 1986 sampling progxam. Aquatic samples were collected at four possible indicator locations.

The locations (on-site transect designations) used for on-site sampling were NMPM (01), NMPP (02), JAF (03), and NMPE (04) (see Figure 1A). Because of the unavailability of various sample media, on-site samples may be collected from combinations of the above listed locations, when required. NMPM and NMPP may be combined into location NMPP. NMPE and JAF may be combined into location JAF. Off-site samples were collected at the Oswego Harbor area or further to the west (ox east> and therefore served as control samples.

Data are evaluated only from locations- required by the Technical Specifications. Data from optional sample locations are not evaluated unless indicated otherwise ~

A. l. Shoreline Sediment Table 3 Shoreline sediment samples were collected twice during 1986 were made in Apxil and October at one off-site or 'ollections control location (near Oswego Harbor) and at one indicator location (shoxeline area just east of the site with recreational value). In addition to the two locations noted above, another shoxeline location at the site was sampled. This optional location was the location xequired by. the previous Technical Specifications. This location was sampled during 1986 because

-plant related radionuclides had been detected during previous years and had been noted in previous annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports.

The results of the shoreline sediment samples collected during 1986 at the indicator and control locations are shown on Table

3. Only the Sunset Bay location was required by the Technical Specifications during 1986.

Several radionuclides were detected in sediment samples using gamma spectral analysis. These radionuclides ranged from naturally occurring primordial radionuclides to man-made radionuclides. K-40 was detected at both the control location and indicator locations fox both collection periods duxing 1986. K-40 ranged in concentration from 7.3 pCi/g (dry) to 11.9 pCi/g (dry) at the control location and 8.4 pCi/g (dry) to 19.1 pCi/g (dry) at the indicator locations.

Ra-226 and Th-228, in addition to K-40, were also detected and are also naturally occurring radionuclides. Ra-226 was detected only at the indicator location and optional location at concentrations that were representative of normal background level fluctuations. Ra-226 was found at concentrations of 0.91 pCi/g (dry) to 2.37 pCi/g (dry). Th-228 was,found at all

-14

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

A. 1. Shoreline Sediment Table 3 (Cont'd) indicator locations and ranged from 1.00 pCi/g (dry) to 1.19 pCi/g (dry) and 0.41 pCi/g (dry) to 0.47 pCi/g (dry) at the optional location. Be-7 was not detected in any of the indicator or control samples. Be-7 is a naturally occurring radionuclide and has been detected intermittently during the past.

Cs-137 was detected in one of the optional Nine Mile Point samples collected during the year. Cs-137 was detected in one optional indicator samples only and none of: the normal program samples. The concentration detected was small and was, for the most part, indicative of operations at the site. Cs-137 was detected in April at a concentration of 1.07 pCi/g (dry). As noted above., Cs-137 was not detected in any of the control samples, although Cs-137 has been routinely observed in the past in control samples (prior to 1981). Cs-137 was not detected at the Sunset Bay indicator location.

~

was detected in one of the opti'onal Nine Mile Point I'o-60 indicator samples collected during 1986. 'Co-60 was detected at 0.10 pCi/g (dry) in the April sample. The control location samples showed no detectable Co-60. Co-60 has not been noted in previous years at the control location. Co-60 detected durin 1986 at this location is a result of operations at the sit Co-60 was not detected at the Sunset Bay indicator locati during 1986.

Cs-134 was not detected in any of the indicator or control samples during 1986. Cs-134 had been detected once during 1983 in a Nine Mile Point sample at a concentration of 0.09 pCi/g (dry) which was greater than the LLD values for the 1986 samples.

No other radionuclides were detected in shoreline sediment samples using gamma spectral analysis.

Evaluation of average historical data (1979-1986) shows that Cs-137 has ranged from 0.05 pCi/g (dry) in 1982 to 0.22 pCi/g, (dry) in 1979 at the control location. Cs-137 at the Nine Mile Point indicator location has, ranged from 0.07 pCi/g (dry) in 1982 to 1.81 pCi/g (dry) in 1983 and 1985. 1986 results ranged from (0.04 pCi/g (dry) to 1.07 pCi/g (dry) at the Nine Mile Point indicator location. Cs-137 was not detected at the control location during 1983 1985 or 1986. Overall, the control location results have decreased since 1979, while the Nine Mile Point indicator results have increased starting with the one 1982 sample result for Cs-137 of 0.80 pCi/g (dry).

Indicator sample result.". at Nine Mile Point have remained fairly consistent since the fall of 1983 and appear to be decreasing in 1986.

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

A. l. Shoreline Sediment Table 3 (cont'd)

Since the new Technical Specification location was initiated in 1985, there is no previous data to compare the 1985 and 1986 results to. As noted above, however, Cs-137 was not detected at the Technical Specification indicator location during 1985 or 1986. Cs-137 LLDs values ranged from <0.08 pCi/g (dry) to <0.08 pCi/g (dry) during 1986.

The evaluation of past Co-60 data indicates that Co-60 has not been detected during the period of 1974-1982 at either the Nine Mile Point indicator or control locations with the exception of one sample from the Nine Mile >>Point indicator location in 1982 (0,16 pCi/g-dry). Results from 1983 show that Co-60 was detected in both of the required Nine Mile Point indicator samples (0.14 and 0.36 pCi/g-dry) . During 1984, Co-60 was detected at concentrations of 0.21 and. 0.26 pCi/g (dry). During 1985, Co-60 was detected at 0.18 pCi/g (dry) and 0.11 pCi/g (dry). Co-60 was detected only once during 1986 at a concentration of 0.10 pCi/g (dry). Co-60 has not been detected in any of the control samples from 1979-1986. It appears that Co-60 concentrations at the indicator location have increased (from not previously detected), remained somewhat consistent through 1984 and decreased during 1985 and 1986.

As noted previously, the new Technical Specification location was initiated in 1985. Therefore, there is no previous data to compare the 1985 1986 Co-60 results to. Co-60 was not found at this location during 1986. Co-60 LLDs values ranged from 0.08 pCi/g (dry) to < 0.08 pCi/g (dry) during 1986.

Samples from the Technical Specification indicator location (Technical Specification location at the time) collected during November 1982 showed levels of Cs-137 (0 '0 pCi/g dry) that indicated an increased concentration of this radionuclide in comparison to previous years (1979-1981). In addition, Co-60 was detected in the November 1982 sample at a low concentration (0.16 pCi/g-dry). Co-60 had not been detected previous to the November 1982 sample. In view of the increase in Cs-137 concentrations and the appearance of Co-60 in shoreline sediment samples from the Nine Mile Point location, extra samples were collected in March 1983. These samples showed no positive detection of Co-60 and the Cs-137 concentration was less than the November 1982 concentration (0. 16 pCi/g-dry). Subsequent samples collected in May and November 1983, which were the normal Technical Specification samples at the time, showed Co-60 to be detected again. Co-60 in May 1983 was detected at a concentration similar to the November 1982 concentration (0.14 pCi/g-dry). The November 1983 sample showed an increase in the Co-60 concentration to 0.36 pCi/g (dry). The May and November 1983 samples showed Cs-137 . concentrations of 0,85 pCi/g (dry) and 1.81 pCi/g (dry), respectively.

-16

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA A. 1. Shoreline Sediment These samples Table 3 (Cont'd) demonstrated (cont'd) an increase in the Cs-137 1

concentration to 1.81 pCi/g (dry). In addition to Cs-137 and Co-60, Cs-134 was detected in the November 1983 Nine Mile Point indicator sample. Cs-134 had not been detected previous to 1983 in either control or indicator samples. Cs-134 was detected at 0.09 pCi/g (dry). Concentrations of Cs-137 and Co-60 during 1984 and 1985 were relatively consistent with 1983 concentrations and may have demonstrated a very slight decrease. Results for Cs-137 and Co-60 during 1986 appears to reinforce this decreasing trend. Cs-137 and Co-60 were not detected during the second half of 1986. Cs-134 was not detected in 1984 1986. These concentrations, although greater than previous concentrations at this location, have no significant dose consequences to members of the public in regards to 10 CFR 50, Appendix I. An assessment of Co-60 and Cs-137 in shoreline sediment samples is included at the end of this section.

The source of the elevated Co-60 and Cs-137 concentrations is believed to be liquid effluents from the site. Site liquid effluents during 1982 1986 were well within Technical Specification limits, although the quantities of Co-60, Cs-137 and Cs-134 did increase during the first three quarters 1983. Other potential . sources of radionuclides in liqui effluents are the sewage treatment facility effluent and the storm sewer drainage which accepts its most significant drainage from building foundation sumps, roof drainage, and roadway drainage. Grab samples are obtained weekly from the storm sewer drainage system and from the sewage treatment plant effluent which both di scharge at points near the Nine Mile Point shoreline sediment sample location. Review of weekly data showed no detectable concentrations of 'Co-60, Cs-137 or Cs-134 from the end of 1982 through 1986.

The presence of Co-60, Cs-137, and Cs-134 in other aquatic sample media shows no similar trends, as observed in shoreline lower concentrations of these radionuclides when detected.

During 1984, Cs-137 concentrations remained the same, although Co-60 and Cs-134 were not detected. For 1985 1986, Co-60, samples (data not presented in this report). In addition, fish sample results showed no detectable Co-60 nor Cs-134 during 1983-1985. Cs-137 was detected in indicator fish samples as well as control samples with no significant differences between the two. Quantities of Cs-137 detected during 1984 were equal to 1983 quantities. Results from 1985 1986 demonstrated an apparent decreasing trend. It appears, therefore, that t increased concentrations of Cs-137 and Co-60 during '983-19 are specific to shoreline sediment and are not able to .b observed in other aquatic sample media.

7

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

A. 1. Shoreline Sedimentable 3 (cont'd)

Shoreline sediment samples, as required by the Technical Specifications, as well as optional samples of the Nine Mile Point location, will continue to be collected and analyzed.

These samples may be supplemented with additional samples, if necessary, in an effort to further assess any trends and any possible impacts.

The impact of the 1986 shoreline sediment sample results is minimal and can be evaluated by projecting a dose to man using standard Regulatory Guide 1.109 methodology. The critical pathway, in this case, is direct radiation to the whole body, The presence of Co-60 and Cs-137 at the optional Nine Mile Point location, is a result of operations at the site. Although the shoreline area is controlled by NMPC personnel, a dose may be calculated assuming that the area in question is utilized as a beach ax'ea. Assuming that 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 shoreline (Regulatoxy Guide 1.109), and the sediment has a mass of 40 kg/m (dry) to a depth of 2.5 cm, then the associated dose to the whole body in mrem per year can be calculated.

Further assumptions must be made and include: no radiological decay of the, detected radionuclides, the shoreline width factor is 0.3 (Regulatory Guide 1.109), the average Co-60 and Cs-137 concentrations detected are constant for half a year (Cs-137 and Co-60 were not detected during the second half of the year) and the detected quantities are a result of site operations. Whole body and skin doses are as follows.

Radionuclide Concentration >> Whole Bod Dose~ Skin Dose>

Co-60 0.10 0.0007 0.0008 Cs-137 1.07 0.0018 0.0021

>Dose in mrem

>>Concentration in pCi/g (dry)

The radionuclide concentrations used are 0.10 pCi/g (dry) for Co-60 and 1.07 pCi/g (dry) for Cs-137. The whole body dose from Co-60 is 0.0007 mrem per year and 0.0018 mrem per year from Cs-137 or a total whole body dose of 0.0025 mrem.

A whole body dose from Co-60 and Cs-137 can not be calculated for shoreline sediment samples collected at the 1986 Technical Specification location since no gamma emitting radionuclides, with the exception of naturally occurring xadionuclides, were found.

-18

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

A. 1. Shoreline Sediment Table 3 (cont'd) .

A whole body dose of 0.0025 mrem per year at, the Nine Mile Point location is very small and can be compared to the whole body dose from natural back'round radiation in the area surrounding the site. The natural background dose as a result of parameters such as cosmic radiation and naturally -occurring radionuclides in the atmosphere and the ground, has been demonstrated by environmental dosimeters (TLD's) to be approximately'.3 mrem per month or 76 mrem per year. The calculated dose of 0.0025 mrem per year as a result of Co-60 and Cs-137 in shoreline sediment is conservative in the sense that it is a high dose estimate and the shoreline area is not a beach area. Even in view of this conservatism, this dose is extremely small and is 0,0003 of the annual natural background dose of 76 mrem per year.

A. 2 ~ Fish Table 4A, 4B A total of eighteen fish samples were analyzed as a result of collections in the spring season (June July 1986) and in the fall season <October-November 1986). Collections were made utilizing gill nets at one control location greater than five miles from the site (Oswego Harbor area), and at two indicator locations in the vicinity of the lake discharges for the Nine Mile Point Unit fPl (02)., and the James A. FitzPatrick generating facilities. The Oswego Harbor samples served (0~

control samples while the NMP (02) and JAF (03) samples served as indicator samples. Samples were analyzed for gamma emitters.

Table 4A shows results in units of pCi/g (wet) for purposes of data evaluation. Table 4B shows results in units of pCi/kg

<wet), as required by the Technical Specifications.

Analysis of the spring 1986 fish samples indicated detectable concentrations of radionuclides related to past weapons testing and natural origins (naturally. occurring). Small detectable concentrations of Cs-137 were found in all fish samples (including control samples) with the exception of one sample.

Spring fish collections were comprised of two separate species and nine individual samples. The two species represented one feeding type. Lake trout and brown trout are highly predacious and feed on significant quantities of smaller fish such as smelt, alewife, and other smaller predacious species. Because of the limited availability of species present in the catches, no bottom feeding specimens were collected in the spring samples.

Cs-137 was detected in all indicator and control samples collected during the spring for both species collected.

Indicator samples showed Cs-137 concentrations to be slightly greater than control results for some samples and slightly less

-19

III'VALUATIONOF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

A. 2. Fish Table 4A, 4B (Cont'd) than or equal to control results for other samples. The average indicator Cs-137 concentration was slightly less than the average control concentration. The indicator results, however, are not significantly different from the control results and ate therefore considered to be representative of background concentrations. Cs-137 in lake trout samples ranged from 0.020 to 0.030 pCi/g (wet) for the indicator samples. Cs-137 in control samples ranged from 0.027 to 0.032 pCi/g (wet) for lake trout. Cs-137 in brown trout samples ranged from 0.020 to 0.022 pCi/g (wet) at the indicator locations. Cs-137 in the control sample was 0.023 pCi/g (wet) (one sample collected).

K-40 was detected in all of the spring samples collected. K-40 is a naturally occurring radionuclide and is not related to power plant operations. Detectable concentrations of K-40 in the indicator samples (lake trout and brown trout) ranged from 2.57 to 3.10 pCi/g (wet) and 2 '8 to 3.07 pCi/g (wet) for the control samples. No other radionuclides were detected in the spring fish samples; Fall fish sample collections were comprised of two separate species and nine individual samples. Six samples of lake trout, and three samples of carp were collected at a combination of two indicator sample locations (NMP and JAF) and one contr ol sample location (Oswego Harbor area) . Samples were collected by gill net in October November.

Cs-137 was detected in eight of the nine samples including two of the three control samples. Indicator samples showed an average Cs-137 concentration that was greater than the control sample mean from the off-site location. The detected concentr'ations were not significantly different from one another because of the extremely small quantities detected. Cs-137 in lake trout samples at the indicator locations ranged from 0.032 to 0.051 pCi/g (wet) and 0.021 to 0.022 pCi/g (wet) at the control location. Carp samples from the indicator locations ranged from 0.009 to 0.021 pCi/g (wet). The associated control sample was (0.008 pCi/g (wet). The amount of Cs-137 was significantly less in samples of carp when compared to samples of lake trout. This is most likely a result of the different feeding habits of the two species.

K-40 was detected in all of the fall samples collected.

Detectable concentrations of K-40 in the indicator samples (lake trout and carp) ranged from 2.50 to 3.11 pCi/g (wet) and 2.16 to 2.77 pCi/g (wet) for the control samples. No other radionuclides were detected in the fall fish samples.

-20

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA"(Cont'd)

A. 2. Fish Table 4A, 4B (Cont'd)

Review of past environmental data indicates 'hat 1985-1986 Cs-137 concentration has decreased from 1984 sample results and decreased significantly from the 1979 through 1976 results for indicator samples. Average concentrations for these l

the mean samples decreased from a level of 1 4 pCi/g (wet) in 1976 to a level of 0.028 pCi/g (wet) in 1986. Control sample results have also decreased from a level of 1.2 pCi/g (wet) in 1976 to a level of 0.032 pCi/g (wet) in 1986. Results from 1980 to 1986 have shown a fairly consistent decreasing trend for control and indicator samples.

v The general decreasing trend for Cs-137 is most probably a v > result of ecological cycling. The concentrations of Cs-137 detected since 1976 in fish are a result of weapons testing fallout, and the general downward trend in concentrations will continue as a function of ecological cycling and nuclear decay.

There was no apparent effect from the Chernobyl Nuclear Plant accident during 1986 relative to Cs-137 results in fish samples.

Lake Ontario fish are considered an important food source by many. Therefore, fish is an integral part of the human food chain. Based on the importance of fish in the local diet, reasonable conservative estimate of dose to man can calculated. Assuming that an adult consumes 21.0 kg of fish year (Regulatory Guide 1.109 maximum exposed age group) and the fish consumed contains an average Cs-137 concentration of 0.028 pCi/g (wet) (annual mean result of indicator samples for 1986),

the whole body dose received would be 0.042 mrem per year. The critical organ in this case is the liver which would receive a calculated dose of 0.064 mrem per year. The Cs-137 whole body and critical organ doses are conservative calculated doses associated with consuming fish from the Nine Nile Point area (indicator samples). No radiological decay is assumed for the calculation of doses.

Conservative whole body and critical organ doses can be calculated for the consumption of fish from the control location as well. In this case the consumption rate is assumed to remain the same (21.0 kg per year ) but the average annual Cs-137 concentration for the control samples is 0.025 pCi/g (wet). The calculated Cs-137 whole body dose is 0.037 mrem per year and the associated dose to the liver is 0.057 mrem per year.

In summary, the whole body and critical organ doses observed as a result of consumption of fish is small. Doses received from the consumption of indicator and control sample fish are approximately the same. The doses from indicator sample fish are slightly greater although well within natural variabilit For example, the whole body and organ doses from the cont samples were greater during 1985. Doses from bbth sample grou are considered background doses.

'-21

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

A. 3 Surface Water Tables 5 and 6 Surf ace water samples were analyzed monthly for gamma emi t ter s (using gamma spectral analysis) during 1986. Tritium analyses were performed quarterly. Quarterly samples (i.e., analysis for tritium) were composite samples.

The analytical results for the 1986 surface water samples showed no evidence of plant related radionuclide buildup in the surface water in the vicinity of the site. Indicator samples were collected from the inlet canal at the James A. FitzPatrick facility. The control location samples were collected at the inlet canal of Niagara Mohawk's Oswego Steam Stations These two locations are required to be sampled by the Technical Specifications. Tables 5 and 6 show the results of surface water samples analyzed during 1986.

Gamma spectral 'nalysis was performed on twenty four monthly composite samples (two locations> required by the Technical Specifications. In addition, two optional sample locations were evaluated. These included the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 1 inlet canal and the City of Oswego drinking water supply. The drinking water supply composite samples consisted of twice per week grab samples. Only two radionuclides were detected in samples from the four locations oyer the course of 1986. These radionuclides were naturally occurring.

K-40 was detected intermittently in both Technical SpeciEication requi red intake canal samples . The James A. F i tzPatr i ck inlet canal samples showed K-40 detected in six of the twelve monthly samples and ranged from 12.5 to 154.0 pCi/liter. K-40 in the Oswego Steam Station inlet canal was detected in six of the twelve samples and ranged Erom 13.6 to 221.0 pCi/liter. The Nine Mile Point Unit 1 inlet canal and the city water samples showed K-40 detected in seven and six respectively, of the twelve 'onthly samples for each location. For these samples, K-40 concentrations ranged from 18.0 223.0 pCi/liter and 14.7 347.0 pCi/liter respectively.

Ra-226 was detected intermittently in samples from all four locations. Ra-226 was detected in five oE the twelve monthly samples from the Nine Mile Point Unit PP1 inlet canal and ranged from 13,5 to 128.0 pCi/liter. Samples from the FitzPatrick location showed Ra-226 in seven of the twelve monthly samples and ranged from 11.5 to 151.0 pCi/liter. The control sample location (Oswego Steam Station) showed Ra-226 in six oE the twelve monthly samples and ranged in concentrations from 19.3 110.0 pCi/liter. The city water samples results showed Ra-226 detected in nine of the twelve monthly samples and ranged from 12.5 125.0 pCi/liter.

-22

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

A. 3 Surface Water Tables 5 and 6 (Cont'd)

Tritium samples are quarterly samples that are a composite of the appropriate sample time period. Tritium was detected in samples taken at all four locations. One of the sample results showed that tritium was not detected within the analytical sensitivity of the analysis. The City of Oswego drinking water.

showed tritium concentrations ranging from 200 pCi/liter to 400 pCi/liter with a mean of 282 pCi/liter. Tritium concentrations for the James A. FitzPatrick inlet canal ranged from 260 pCi/liter to 500 pCi/liter and showed a mean concentration of 380 pCi/liter. Inlet canal samples taken at Nine Mile Point Unit 1 showed tritium concentrations ranging from 130 pCi/liter to 340 pCi/liter. The annual mean concentration was 255 pCi/liter. The Technical Specification control location (Oswego Steam Station inlet canal) showed tritium results which ranged from <160 pCi/liter to 550 pCi/liter with a mean for positive results of 373 pCi/liter.

Review of past environmental data for Cs-137 from 1979 through 1986 shows that this radionuclide was detected only once at the control location during 1979 at a concentration of 2.5 pCi/liter. Cs-137 at the indicator location (JAF inlet canal) was detected only once during 1982 at a concentration of 0.43 pCi/litex. The 1979 control sample x'esult is suspect and m have been a result of contamination during handling instrument background since Cs-137 was not detected in th indicator inlet canal. The one result from the indicator location (JAF inlet canal) during 1982 was detected in a January composite sample and may have been a result of inlet canal tempering (the addition of discharge water to the inlet canal) or instrument background. Cs-137 was not detected during 1986 in surface water samples.

Other plant related radionuclides detected during a review period of 1979 1986 include only Co-60. The control sample location results showed that Co-60 was detected once in 1981 (the May composite sample). This result is suspect and, as noted above, may be a result of contamination during, handling or may be instrument background. This result was 1.4 pCi/liter.

Results from the indicator location showed that Co-60 was detected three times during 1982 and averaged 1.9 pCi/liter.

These positive results were attributed to inlet canal tempering and instrument background. Co-60 was not detected during 1986 in suxface watex'amples.

Previous annual mean results for tritium at the indicator sample location (FitzPatrick inlet canal) has decreased since 1976.

Mean sample results were reviewed from 1976 through 1985 and value of 530 pCi/liter (1985) and showed a peak average minimum value of 227 pCi/liter (1980) . The annual mean

.result at the indicator location for 1986 was 380 pCi/liter.

triti~ a

-23

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

A. 3. Surface Water Tables 5 and 6 (Cont'd)

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

Some idea of the variability of control sample data can be obtained, however, by review of previous data from the City of Oswego drinking water samples. The drinking water samples are not likely to be affected by the station because of the effects of the distance, lake currents, and the discharge of the Oswego River. Therefore, this previous sample data represents acceptable control sample data for evaluation purposes.

Mean annual tritium results from previous city 'ater samples from 1976 to 1986 show that the tritium concentrations have steadily decreased. The maximum annual average was found in 1976 (652 pCi/liter) and the minimum in 1982 (165 pCi/liter).

The 1986 city water annual mean result increased and was noted at 282 pCi/liter. Mean annual results from 1979 1986 have remained relatively consistent. The 1985 and 1986 annual mean tritium results for the Oswego Steam Station were 278 and 373 pCi/liter respectively. These results were slightly higher than thb drinking water samples but were within natural variability.

The impact, as expressed as a dose to man, can not be evaluated because no plant related radionuclides were detected in surface water samples with the exception of tritium. Plant related radionuclides were not found in the optional drinking water samples either. Any impact associated with the fluctuation of tritium levels are considered to be background and are not considered to be a result of operations at the site.

B. Terrestrial Pro ram Tables 7 through 14 and 17 represent the analytical results for the terrestrial samples collected for the 1986 reporting period.

Data are evaluated only from locations required by the Technical Specifications. Data from optional sample locations are not evaluated unless indicated otherwise.

Air Particulate Gross Beta Tables 7 and 8 Tables 7 and 8 contain the results for the weekly air particulate gross beta analysis for a total of six off-site and nine on-site sample locations. Five of the six off-site locations are required by the Technical Specifications. These sample locations are R-l, R-2, R-3, and R-4 (all located near the si.te boundary) and R-5 (located at a control location beyond any significant influence from the site). Data contained on Tables 7 and 8 also shows the results from other air sampling locations not required by the Technical Specifications. These

-24"

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd) '

1. Air Particulate Gross Beta Tables 7 and 8 (Cont'd) locations are designated as Dl on-site, -D2 on-site, E on-site, F on-site, G on-site, H on-site, I on-site, J on-site, K on-site and G off-site locations. A total of 52 control samples from location R-5 and 207 indicator samples from locations R-l, R-2, R-3, and R-4 were collected and analyzed during 1986.

Increases in the levels of gross beta activity were observed in several of the weekly air particulate filter samples collected and were a result oE the accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Plant on April 26, 1986. The minimum, maximum, and average gross beta results Eor sample locations required by the Technical Specifications are presented below.

Location "" Minimum" Maximum" Average" R-1 0.009 0.268 0.038 R-2 0.007 0.273 0.040 R-3 0.009 0.283 0.036 R-4 0.008 0 '89 0,040 R-5 (control) 0.008 0.272 0.039 Concentration in pCi/m Locations required by the Technical Specifications The air particulate gross beta concentrations observed during 1986 were relatively consistent except Eor the evident fallout over a five to six week period from the April 26, 1986 accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Plant. Gross beta concentrations remained fairly consistent up to May 5, 1986. Subsequently, gross beta concentrations increased to slightly over a factor oE ten in some cases until approximately June 10, 1986. A second increase in gross beta activity was noted during the period of August 25 to September 3, 1986 and resulted in an increase in activity by a factor of two to three. Weekly results were normal subsequent to September 3, 1986. The second increase in gross beta concentration may have been a result of changing global wind patterns or an increase in the release of radionuclides Erom the Chernobyl facility subsequent to the initial release.

As required by the Technical Specifications, individual air particulate filters that showed activities greater than ten times the annual average gross beta concentration for 1985 were analyzed by gamma spectral analysis to determine the gamma/beta emitting radionuclides responsible for the increase in gross beta activity. Individual samples from the periods of May 5 to May 13, 1986 and May 27 to June 3, 1986 were analyzed by gamma spectral analysis. Because the increase in gross beta activit was a result of the Chernobyl Nuclear Plant accident and no effluents from the 'site, these data'are not presented. However, these data have been retained on file.

-25

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

1. Air Parti'culate Gross Beta Tables 7 and 8 (Cont'd)

The observed small increases and decreases in general gross beta activity (other than those resulting from the Chernobyl Nuclear Plant accident) can, be attributed to changes in the environment, especially seasonal changes. The concentration of naturally occurring radionuclides in the lower limits of the atmosphere directly above land areas are affected by processes such as wind direction, snow cover, soil temperature and soil moisture content. Little change was noted in gross beta activity which corresponded with weapons testing as has been observed in past years. Review of air particulate gross beta concentrations shows that no significant increases in concentration, other than those associated with the Chernobyl accident, occurred during

'986.

'n general, the trend in air particulate gross beta activity has

'een one of decreasing activity since 1974 (extent of the review period). The gross beta concentration at control or off-site

'oc'ations I

has decreased from a level of 0.121 pCi/m in 1974 to 0.024 in 1983 and 1985. Results from on-site or indicator air samplinq locations ranged from O.ill pCi/m in 1974 and 0.151 pCi/m in 1981 to 0.023 pCi/m in 1983. For both indicator (on-site) locations and control (off-site) locations, the gross beta concentration during 1974 to 1985 fluctuated with the detonation of thermonuclear weapons. The Technical Specification indicator and control results during 1986 were 0.038 pCi/m and 0.039 pCi/m respectively which represented an increase when compared to the previous three years (1983 1985). The increase was a result of the Chernobyl Nuclear Plant accident. The annual mean results for the indicator and control locations during the last three years (1983, 1984, and 1985) have been approximately equal and ranged from 0.023 to 0.026 pCi/m . The range noted during these last three years appears to be a baseline range. The remaining effects of past weapons tests, if any, appears to be at an insignificant level.

2. Monthl Air Particulate Com osites Table 9 Weekly air particulate samples were composited by location to form monthly composite samples. The monthly composite samples required by the Technical Specifications include R-l, R-2, R-3, R-4, and R-5. Other sample locations not required by the Technical Specifications include Dl on-site, D2 on-site, E on-site, F on-site, G on-site, H on-site, I on-site, J on-site, K on-site, and G off-site locations. The results of all monthly composite samples are included on Table 9.

-26

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

2. Mo'nthl Air Particulate'om osites , Table 9 (Cont'd)

The results for the monthly composite samples showed positive results for Be-7, K-40, and Ra-226. All three of these radionuclides are naturally occurring. Be-7 was found in each of the monthly composite samples from all locations, including those sample locations required by the Technical Specifications. Be-7 ranged from 0.086 to 0.184 pCi/m for the Technical Specification indicator locations (R-l, R-2, R-3, and R-4). The Technical Specification control location (R-5) results showed Be-7 ranging from 0.092 to 0.167 pCi/m . K-40 was found intermittently in the monthly composite samples required by the Technical Specifications. K-40 ranged from 0.013 to 0.078 pCi/m at the control location (R-5) and 0.010 0.071 pCi/m at the indicator locations. Ra-226 ranged from 0.017 0.026 pCi/m at the indicator locations required by the Technical Specifications. The Technical Specification control location showed only one positive result for Ra-226.

This result was 0.016 pCi/m As a result of the Chernobyl Nuclear Plant accident in April 1986, several radionuclides attributable to the fission process were detected in air particulate samples. These radionuclides included Cs-134, Cs-137, Nb-95, Ru-103, Ru-106, La-140 and I-131. The measured radionuclides were detected during, t months oE May and June'only.

Cs-134 was detected during both months (May and June) at all of the Technical specification locations. The Technical Specification indicator sample locations (R-l, R-2, R-3, and R-4) showed Cs-134 concentrations ranging from 0.003 0.018 pCi/m . The Technical Specification control location (R-5) showed Cs-134 ranging from 0.003 0.017 pCi/m . Cs-134 averaged 0.009 pCi/m3 at the indicator locations and 0.010 pCi/m at the control location. Average concentrations were approximately the same.

Cs-137 was also detected at all of the Technical Specification locations for both months of May and June. Concentrations at the Technical Specification indicator locations ranged from 0.007 0.036 pCi/m . At the Technical Specification control location, Cs-137 ranged from 0.008 0.031 pCi/m . The indicator and control results showed average concentrations of 0.018 and 0.019 pCi/m respectively. In addition to Cs-134 and Cs-137, Ru-103 was also prevalent and was found at all the Technical Specification control and indictor locations. The Technical Specification indicator locations showed Ru-103 at concentrations that ranged from 0.009 .0.038 pCi/m . The Technical Specification control location showed Ru-103 to range from 0.012 -0.028 pCi/m . The mean concentrations from bo indicator and control locations were equal and were calculat as 0.020 and 0.020 pCi/m respectively.

-27

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONHENTAL DATA .(Cont'd)

2. Honthl Air Particulate Com osites Table 9 (Cont'd)

Other radionuclides in particulate form that were detected included Nb-95, Ru-106, .La-140 and I-131. Nb-95 was not detected in any of the Technical Specification indicator or control location samples. Nb-95 was only detected once during Hay at the E on-site sample location which is an optional sam~le location (the detected concentration was 0.002 pCi/m ).

Ru-106 was only detected once during June at a Technical Specification indictor location (R-1) at a concentration of 0.010 pCi/m . Ru-106 was not detected at the Technical Specification control location although it was detected on several other occasions at option sample locations. La-140 was not detected at any of the Technical Specification indictor or control locations. La-140 was detected, however, at. two optional sample locations (F on-site and on-site) at concentrations of 0.007 and 0.008 pCi/m .'he G final fission product radionuclide in particulate form that was detected was I-131 '-131 was detected during Hay at all Technical Specification indicator sample locations and the Technical Specification control location. I-131 was also found at all the optional sample locations during the month of Hay. The Technical Specification indicator location samples showed I-131 concentrations that ranged from 0.016 '- 0.024 pCi/m . The Technical Specification control location showed an I-131 concentration of 0.023 pCi/m . The mean concentration for the Technical Specification indicator and control locations for I-131 was 0.019 and 0.023 pCi/m respectively.

No other naturally occurring or plant related radionuclides were detected using gamma spectral analysis during 1986.

The location, concentration range and mean, and frequency of occurrence of each radionuclide detected during 1986 at the Technical S ecification re uired locations are included below.

Radionuclide Location ~Ran e" Mean> Fre uenc Ra-226 Indicator 0.017 0 '26 0.020 6/48 Ra-226 Control 0.016 0.016 1/12 K-40 Indicator 0.010 0.071 0.041 25/48 K-40 Control 0.013 0 '78 0.049 6/12 Be-7 Indicator 0.086 0.184 0.128 48/48 Be-7 Control 0.092 0.167 0.132 12/12 Cs-134 Indicator 0.003 0.018 0.009 8/48 Cs-134 Control 0.003 '- 0.017 0.010 2/12 Cs-137 Indicator 0.007 0,036 0 '18 8/48 Cs-137 Control 0.008 0.031 0.019 2/12 Nb-95 Indicator ND ND ND Nb-95 Control ND ND ND

-28

III, EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

2. Monthl Air Particulate Composites Table 9 (Cont'd)

Radionuclide Location ~Ran s* Mean~ Fre uenc RU-103 Indicator 0.009 0.038 0.020 8/48 RU-103 Control 0.012 0.028 0.020 2/12 Ru-106 Indicator 0.010 0.010 1/48 Ru-106 'Control ND ND ND La-140 Indicator ND ND ND La-140 Control ND ND ND I-131 Indicator 0.016 0.024 0.019 4/48 I-131 Control 0.023 0.023 1/12 Results in units of pCi/m .

>> Frequency is number of times detected over the number of samples.

ND Not detected at Technical Specification locations although detected at optional sample location(s).

Historically, the naturally occurring radionuclides Ra-226, K-40 and Be-7 have shown fluctuations that are representative of natural changing conditions. No significant trends were noted during 1986.

In the past, Co-60 has fluctuated in air particulate samples as.

a result of previous weapons testing. Co-60 avera concentrations at the on-site or indicator and off-site control locations from 1977 to 1978 decreased from approximatel 0.0175 to 0.0015 pCi/m . Average concentrations decreased significantly during 1979 and 1980 when compared to 1977. These results where 0.007 to 0.0016 pCi/m respectively. 1981 and 1982 average Co-60 concentrations decreased to 0.0007 and 0.0005 pCi/m . Average indicator and control concentrations were approximately equal during 1977 to 1982. The 1983 indicator average Co-60 concentration was 0.0007 pCi/m 3 or slightly greater than the 1982 concentration. The 1983 average control mean Co-60 concentration was also 0.0007 pCi/m which was slightly greater than 1982 results. As noted in previous annual reports, however, a portion of the Co-60 detected during 1983 was- attributed to contamination during handling of the unused filters prior to installation. Co-60 was detected during the first quarter of 1984 and averaged 0.00079 pCi/m at the control stations, and 0.00123 pCi/m at the indicator stations. However, the 1984 Co-60 positive results were a result of contamination during handling and not a result of operations at the site. The general reduction in previous indicator and control Co-60 concentrations (1981 1983) was a result -of nuclear decay and ecological cycling of Co-60 initially produced by the 1980 Chinese weapons test. Co-60 was not detected during 1985 or 1986 in air particulate samples.

~-

-29

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

2. Monthl Air Particul'ate Com osites Table 9 (Cont.'d)

Historically, Cs-137 has been variable during the past and has been present in air particulate samples since 1977 and prior to 1977. During 1977, both on-site,. or indicator and off-site or control Cs-137 average concentrations were approximately equal and averaged 0.0039 pCi/m3. Cs-137 average concentrations at indicator and control locations decreased during 1978 and 1979 to 0,0017 and 0.0013 pCi/m respectively. Average concen-trations during 1980 and 1981 were approximately equal at control and indicator locations. Cs-137 during, 1980 was approximately equal to 1979 and increased slightly in 1981 from 1979. The 1980 and 1981 average concentrations were 0.0013 and 0.0015 pCi/m respectively. The mean 1982 concentration for Cs-137 decreased to 0.0004 pCi/m . The 1983 mean Cs-137 concentration for the indicator and control composite samples were 0.0002 and 0.0002 pCi/m which was a reduction from 1982 results. Cs-137 was not .detected during 1984 in any of the indicator or control air'articulate comoosite samples. As noted above fox'he average annual Co-60 results, the reduction in Cs-137 results since 1981 is attributed to nuclear decay and ecological cycling of Cs-137 initially produced by the 1980 Chinese weapons test. Cs-137 was not detected during 1985 particulate samples. Cs-137 was detected 'during 1986 as a in'ir result of the Chernobyl Nuclear Plant accident in April 1986.

Mean Cs-137 concentrations for indicator and control sample locations were 0.018 and 0.019 pCi/m respectively.

Prior to 1983 and 1984, several radionuclides were detected that were associated with the 1980 Chinese weapons test and other weapons tests prior to 1980. These radionuclides were not detected during 1984 or 1985 as a result of nuclear decay and ecological cycling. These include Zr-95, Ce-141, Nb-95, Ce-144, Mn-54, Ru-103, Ru-106 and Ba-140. In addition, La-140 was detected once during 1983 and infrequently during 1978 and 1981. La-140 was not detected during 1984 or 1985. During 1986, however, several fission product radionuclides were detected that were a result of the Chernobyl Nuclear Plant accident. These included Cs-134, Cs-137, Nb-95, Ru-103, Ru-106, La-140 and I-131. All of these, with the exception of Cs-134 and particulate I-131, were detected subsequent to the 1980 Chinese weapons test (1981 1983). These radionuclides were not detected during 1984 1985. The concentrations detected during 1986 as a result of the Chernobyl accident were generally greater than the concentrations detected as a result of the 1980 Chinese weapons test. The presence of the radionuclides from the Chernobyl facility, however, extended over a very brief period (two months) while many of the radionuclides from the 1980 Chinese weapons test were present for approximately two years'30

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

2. Monthl Air Particulate Com osites '- Table 9 (Cont'd)

Assessment of the presence of fission product radionuclides in air particulate composite samples can be depicted by calculating doses to man as a result of inhalation. The maximum exposed age group is the teenager considering the radionuclides detected.

The critical organ is the lung. Other data include: a teenager breathing rate of 8000 m per year, an exposure time of only two months, and dose factors from Regulatory Guide 1.109. In addition, since the radionuclides detected were noted over a short period of time and in order to be conservative, no radiological decay is assumed. Based on the above and the average concentrations detected at Technical Specification locations, the following teenager lung doses and whole body doses are calculated.

Concentration Months Lung Dose Whole Body Dose Radionuclide Detected mrem mrem Cs-134 (I) 0.009 2 0.00022 0.00082 Cs-134 (C) 0 010 F 2 0.00024 0.00091 Cs-137 (I) 0.018 2 0.00036 0;00093 Cs-137 (C) 0.019 2 0.00038 0 '0098 Nb-95 (I) ND ND ND ND Nb-95 (C) ND ND ND ND Ru-103 (I) 0.020 2 0.00261 <0.00001 Ru-103 (C) 0.020 2 0.00261 <0.00001 Ru-106 (I) 0.010 1 0.01340 0.00001 Ru-106 (C) ND ND ND ND La-140 (I) ND ND ND ND La-140 (C) ND ND ND ND I-131 (I) 0.019 1 (a) 0.00004 I-131 (C) 0.023 1 (a) 0.00005 Indicator Total Lung Dose = 0.01659 mrem Indicator Whole Body Dose = 0.00181 mrem Control Total Lung Dose = 0.00323 mrem Control Whole Body Dose = 0.00195 mrem ND Not detected at Technical S ecification location(s).

(a) No applicable dose factor for I-131 lung dose.

(I) Indicator locations.

(C) Control locations.

The table above illustrates that the lung dose received by a teenager from the inhalation of air with average radionuclide concentrations based on indicator locations is approximately 0.02 mrem during 1986.- This dose is small and can be compared to the dose received from every day activities. Individuals that reside in homes that utilize natural gas for cooki purposes receive approximately ll mrem per year to the lung as

.result of naturally occurring 'radon gas and radon gas decay

-31

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

2. Monthl Air Particulate Com osites Table 9 (Cont'd) products found in natural gas (NCRP Report No. 56). A total lung dose of 0.02 mrem is small when compared to a dose of mrem from cooking with natural gas.

ll The whole body dose shown is also very small and can be compared to the whole body dose received from increasing altitude as a result of cosmic radiation from natural sources. A whole body dose of approximately 0.002 mrem is equal to the dose received From residing at a location for 37 days that is 330 feet higher in altitude.

The doses calculated above from detected radionuclides at indicator and control sample locations during 1986 are a result of the Chernobyl Nuclear Plant accident.

During the 1986 sampling program, airborne radioiodine was found in five of the fifty-two weekly samples from the control location required by the Technical Specifications. The of I-131 were a result of the April 1986 accident at detected'uantities the Chernobyl Nuclear Plant. The observed results ranged from 0.041 0.332 pCi/m and averaged 0.151 pCi/m . The positive results were found only during the time period of May 6 to June 10, 1986. Airborne radioiodine was not found .

during any other time period relative to 1986. LLD values at the control location during time periods when radioiodine was not detected ranged From 0.005 0.018 pCi/m I I-131 has been detected in the past at off-site or control locations. During 1976, the mean off-site I-131 concentration averaged 0.604 pCi/m . 1977 showed an I-131 concentration decreased to 0.323 pCi/m and for 1978 the concentration 3.'hat decreased by a factor of ten to 0.032 pCi/m3. During 1979 1981 and 1983 1985, I-131 was not detected. I-131 was detected once during 1982 at a concentration of 0.039 pCi/m As a result of the Chernobyl Nuclear Plant accident during, 1986, airborne radioiodine was detected at all of the indicator sample locations required by the Technical Specifications'irborne I-131 was detected in twenty of the two hundred and seven weekly samples. The observed results ranged from 0.023 0.334 pCi/m . The mean of the positive results was 0.119 pCi/m Airborne I-131 was detected only over a five week period which included May 6 June 10, 1986. The time period and the quantities detected are consistent with the results found at the control location. Radioiodine was not found during any other time periods for 1986. LLD values during these times ranged from 0.004 0.028 pCi/m

-32

III, EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont,'d)

B. 3. Airborne Radioiodine (I-131) - Tables 10 and 11'-131 has been detected in the past and was detected at a mean concentration of 0.328 and 0.309 pCi/m during 1976 and 1977.

The average concentration decreased to 0.041 pCi/m during 1978 and was not detected during 1979. The 1980-1982 average concentrations were 0.013, 0.029, and 0.016 pCi/m3 which were reductions in view of previous I-131 concentrations. During 1983, the mean I-131 concentration was 0.028 pCi/m which represented a slight increase compared to 1982. For the most part, I-131 in indicator and control samples was a result of I-131 from weapons testing. A small portion of the concentrations detected may have been a result of operations at the site. The concentrations detected during 1983 at the on-si.te sample stations were a result of operations at the site. I-131 was not detected in any of the 1984 or 1985 on-site samples.

Radioiodine was also detected in samples from the optional sample locations during 1986. Positive results were noted over the same time period (May 6 June 10, 1986) and at all optional sample locations. Results for I-131 ranged from 0.011 0.360 pCi/m3.

The end result of the 1986 air radioiodine sampling effo showed no significant impact due to operations at the sit During 1986, detectable concentrations of I-131 were a result o the Chernobyl Nuclear Plant accident and not a result of operations't the site.

The impact of the measurable concentration of I-131 at all of the Technical Specification indicator and control locations can be assessed by projecting a dose to the maximum exposed organ (thyroid) and the whole body as a result of inhalation. The maximum exposed age group is the child. Using Standard Regulatory Guide 1.109 methodology, an inhalation rate of 3700 m per year and the average indicator location and control location I-131 concentration, conservative doses can be calculated. In order to be conservative and to simplify the computations, no radiological decay is assumed. Maximum child thyroid and whole body doses are presented below.

Sample Mean Weeks Thyroid Whole Body Locations(s Concentration Detected Dose Dose Indicator 0.119 0.1859 0.0003 Control 0.151 0.2358 0.0004 (1) Concentration in pCi/m3 (2) Dose in mrem for 1986

-33

IlI~ EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

Airborne Radioiodine (T-131) Tables 10 and 11 (Cont'.d)

The calculated .total dose for the critical individual (child) would be 0.2358 mrem to the thyroid and 0.0004 mxem to the whole body using the higher mean concentration at the control location. The difference in the indicator and control doses is due to the difference in detected concentrations. The concentration can differ from location to location based on error associated with sampling and analysis methodologies and the distribution of small quantities of I-131 over a given area.

B. 4. TLD (Environmental Dosimetr ) Table 12 TLD's were collected and read once per quarter during the 1986 sample year. The TLD results are, for the most part, an average of eight independent readings at each location and are repoxted in mrem per standard month and in mrem per quarterly period.

TLD's required by the Technical Specifications include two TI.D's at each location with Four independent readings per TLD or a total of eight readings. TLD results included on Tables 12A and 12B are compx'ised of TLD's xequixed by the Technical Specifications and special interest TLD's not required by the Technical Specifications. In 1986, TI.D's were collected on approximately April 2,'986, July 1, 1986, October 1, 1986 and December 30, 1986.

TLD results are evaluated by organizing environmental TI.D's into five different groups. These groups include: (1) on-site TLD's (TLD's within the site boundary not required by the Technical Specifications), (2) site boundary TLD's (one in each of the sixteen 22 1/2 degree meteorological sectors), (3) a ring of TI.D's foux to five miles from the site (in each of the land based 22 1/2 degree meteorological sectors), (4) special interest TI.D's (in areas oF high population density), and (5) contxol TLD's (in areas beyond any significant influence of the generating facilities). Special intexest TLD's are located at or near large industxial sites, schools, or proximal towns ox communities. Control TLD's are located to the southwest, south, and northeast of the site at distances of 12.6 td 19:8 miles from the site.

Most of the TLDs required by the Technical Specifications during 1986 were initiated in 1985 as a result of the issue of the new Technical Specifications by the NRC. Therefore, these TLDs can only be compared to 1985 results. Other TLDs, which include a few TLDs required by the Technical Specifications (i.e., numbers 7, 14, 15, 18, 23, 49, 56, and 58) and other optional TLDs, can be compared to results prior to 1985 since these TLDs were established pxior to 1985.

34

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont,'d)

B. 4. TLD (Environmental Dosimetr Table 12 (Cont'd)

On-site TLD's are TLD's at, special interest areas and are not required by the Technical Specifications. These are located near the generating facilities and at on-site air sampling stations. TLD's located at the air sampling stations include numbers 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 23, 24, 25 and 26. The results for these TLD's are consistent with previous years results and are in agreement with control TLD results. These results ranged from 4.7 to 16.7 mrem per standard month. TLD IP3 is located in the vicinity of Nine Mile Point Unit 2 and is between the Unit 1 facility and the FitzPatrick facility. The results for TLD $P3 were approximately double the results of the other TLD's because of the effects from Unit 1 and the FitzPatrick facility as well as any possible radiography work at Unit 2. A general increase in TLD results was noted for the second quarter results. A similar trend was noted for the control TLD's.

Other on-site TLD's include special interest TLD's located near the north shoreline of the Unit 1 and FitzPatrick facilities but in close proximity to radwaste facilities and the Unit 1 reactor building. These TLD's include numbers 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 39, and 47. Results for these TLD's during 1986 were variable and ranged from 8.5 to 59.9 mrem per standard month as a result .o activities at the radwaste facilities and the operating modes the generating facilities. Results for 1986 are within t ranges of variability noted in previous years for TLD's at or near these locations. TLD's in this group ranged up to approximately ten times control TLD results. A general increase was also noted in the second quarter for these TLDs as was noted in the, control TLD results.

Additional on-site TLD's are located near the on-site Energy Information Center and the associated northeast shoreline.

These TLD's include numbers 18, 103, and 106. TLD number 106 is a new TLD and was established in, the second quarter of 1986.

Therefore, no previous results for this TLD exist, although results were slightly greater than control TLD results and ranged from 6.4. to 7.8 mrem per standard month. TLD number 18 results during 1986 were fairly consistent and were within the range of control TLD data. Results were consistent with previous years and ranged from 5.8 to 7.2 mrem per standard month. TLD number 103 was established during the second quarter of 1985. This TLD is located on the east side of the Energy Information Center. Results were consistent with the results from 1985 and ranged from 6.0 8.7 mrem per standard month.

TLD numbers 18 and 106 (noted above) are located to the west of the center and to the east of the Unit 1 facility.

-35

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL'ATA (Cont'd)

B. 4. TLD (Environmental Dosimetr ) '- Table 12 (Cont'd)

Site boundary TLD's are required by the Technical Specifications and are located in the approximate area of the site. boundary with one in each of the sixteen 22 1/2 degree meteorological sectors. These TLD's include numbers 75, 76, 77, 23, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 7, 18, 85, 86 and 87. TLD numbers 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 7 and 18 showed results that were consistent with control TLD results and ranged from 4.4 to 7.5 mrem per standard month. TLD numbers 75, 76, 77, 23, 85, 86, and 87 showed results that ranged up to twice the results of control TLD's. These results ranged from 5.4 to 18.7,mrem per standard month. This latter group of TLD's are located near the lake shoreline (approximately 100 feet from the shoreline), but are also located in close proximity of the reactor building and radwaste facilities of Unit 1 and the radwaste facilities of the FitzPatrick facility. TLD number 78 was slightly greater than the other site boundary TLD's not affected by facility reactor buildings or radwaste buildings. This TLD is located closer to the FitzPatrick facility and is at least 500 feet within the site boundary or site property.

A net site boundary dose can be estimated from available TLD results and control TLD results. TLD results from TLD's located near the site boundary in sectors facing the land occupied by members of the public (excluding TLD's near the generating facilities and facing Lake Ontario) are compared to control TLD results. The site boundary TLD's include numbers 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 7 and,18. Control TLD's include numbers 8, 14 and 49. Net site boundary doses for each quarter in mrem per standard month are as follows:

Quarter Net Site Boundar Dose~

-0.2

-0.2

-0.4

-0.9 "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 TLD's 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 generating facilities and are not accessible to members of the public.

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

-36

II1. EVALUATION OF'NVIRONMENTAL DATA B. 4. TLD (Environmental Dosimetr Results for (Cont'd),

) Table 12 (Cont'd) this. group of TLD's during 1986 fluctuated slightly 0

as a result of changing naturally occurring conditions and the different concentrations of naturally occurring, radionuclides in the ground at each of the locations. These TLD's included numbers 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94 and 95. Results fluctuated from 4.6 to 8.6 mrem per standard month. These results are generally consistent with control TLD results during 1986.

Results for this group of TLDs were consistent with the 1985 results. Results for 1986 were also consistent with other off-site TLD results during 1986 and previous to 1986.

The fourth group of environmental TLD's are those TLD's located.

near. the site boundary and at special interest areas such 's industrial sites, schools, nearby communities, towns, off-site air sampling stations, the closest residence to the site, and the off-site environmental laboratory. Many of these TLDs are required by the Technical Specifications. Others are optional, This group of TLD's include numbers 9, 10, ll, 12, 13, 15, 19, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 58, 96, 97, 98, 99 100, 101, and 102.

Results ranged from 4.6 to 8.9 mrem per standard month. All the TLD results from this group were within the variation noted for the control TLD's. Results during 1986 for TLD's establish during previous years were consistent with results noted those years.

The fifth group of TLD's include those TLD's considered as control TLD's, These TLD's are required by the Technical Spec if i cat i ons and include numbers 14 and 49. An opt i onal control location is TLD number 8. Results for 1986 ranged from 5.5 to 7.6 mrem per standard month. Results from 1986 were consistent with previous years results. A slight increase,was noted in the second quarter of 1986. This trend was also noted in the other groups of TLD's evaluated during 1986.

Review of past TLD results required by the Technical Specifications show that TLDs can be separated into four groups, These groups include site boundary TLDs in each meteorological sector (16 TLDs total), TLDs located off-site in each land based sector at a distance of 4 5 miles, (8 TLDs total), TLDs located at special interest areas (6 TLDs total) and TLDs located at control locations (2 TLDs total). .As noted previously, since the present Technical Specifications became effective in 1985, these TLDs, for the most. part, can only be evaluated for 1985 and 1986.

TLDs located at the site boundary ranged from 4.1 12.6 mrem per standard month and averaged 6.2 mrem per standard month during 1985. During, 1986, site boundary TLDs ranged from 18.7 mrem per standard month and averaged 7.0 mrem per 4.4~

standa~

month. As noted previously, this group of TLDs can fluctuate

-37

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIROMHENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

B. 4. TLD (Environmental Dosimetr Table 12 (Cont'd) because several of these TLDs are located in close proximity to the generating facilities. An increase was noted during 1986 although such an increase was noted for all TLDs including control TLDs.

TLDs located off-site at a distance of 4 5 miles from the site in each of the land based meteorological sectors ranged from 4.0 7.1 mrem per standard month and averaged 5.0 mrem during 1985. During 1986, off-site sector TLDs ranged from 4.6 8.6 mrem per standard month and averaged 6.0 mrem pex standaxd month. 1986 results also demonstrated an increase for this group of TLDs.

Special interest TLDs are located at areas of high population density, such as major work sites, communities, schools, etc.

and at residences near the site (critical receptor areas). This group of TLDs ranged form 3.9 6.8 mrem per standard month and averaged 5 ' mrem per standard month during 1985. During 1986, this same group of TLDs ranged from 4.8 8.2 mrem per standard month and avex aged 6.1 mxem. The 1986 results showed an increase when compared to the 1985 results.

The final group of TLDs required by the Technical Specifications is the control gxoup. This group utilizes two TLD locations positioned well beyond the site. Results from 1985 ranged from 4.4 6.8 mrem per standard month and averaged 5.4 mrem. During 1986, this same group of TLDs ranged from 5.5 7.2 mrem per standard month and average 6.3 mrem per standard month.

During 1986, all TLD groups required by the Technical Specifications showed an increase. The average percentage increase from all groups ranged from 13'1. to 207. The site boundary TLDs showed the smallest increase (13".). The off-site TLDs located 4 5 miles from the site showed the gxeatest increase (20'fo). The control TLDs showed a 17% increase from 1985 to 1986. Increases since 1985 are a result of conditions other than those associated with activities at the site.

Ovexall, TLD results for 1986 showed no significant impact from direct xadiation measuxed outside the site boundary.

B. 5 Hilk-Tables 13 and 14 Hilk samples were collected from a total of six indicator locations (within 10 miles of the site) and one control location (beyond 10 miles from the site) during 1986. The Technical Specifications require that three locations be sampled for milk within 5.0 miles of the site. During 1986, there were no milk sample locations within 5.0 miles of the site. The locations that were sampled during 1986 are located from 5.5 to 9.5 miles

-38

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

B. 5 Milk-Tables 13 and 14 from the site. The only sample location required by the Technical Specifications during 1986 was the control location which was located 15.2 miles to the southwest from the site (location fP40) and 17.0 miles to the southwest of the site after August 4, 1986 (location /f65). Sample location descriptions for all milk sample locations utilized during 1986 are listed below.

Location No. Direction From Site Distance From Site (miles) 7 ESE 5.5 16 S 5.9 50 E 8.2 55 E 9.0 60 E 9.5 ESE 7.8 40 SW 15.2 65 SW 17.0 During 1986, milk samples were collected at each of the six indicator locations and the control location in the first half and the second half of each month. Samples were collected durin the months of April through December 1986. Since I-131 was detected during November and December of 1985, no additio samples were collected in January through March of 1986. For each sample, analyses were performed for gamma emitters (analysis by GeLi detector) and I-131 using a resin extraction. Sample analysis results for gamma emitters are found on Table 13 and for I-131 on Table 14.

The gamma spectral analyses of the bimonthly samples showed K-40 to be the only natural occurring radionuclide detected in the milk samples collected during 1986. K-40 was detected in every sample analyzed and ranged in concentration from 1030 pCi/liter to 1,570 pCi/liter at the indicator locations and 948 pCi/liter to 1,450 pCi/lit'er at the control location. K-40 is a naturally occurring radionuclide and is found in many of the environmental media sampled.

Cs-137 was detected a total of fifteen times during the 1986 sample season (April through December) ~ The detected quantities were a result of the April 1986 accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear plant. Indicator sample location results showed that Cs-137 was detected a total of twelve times. Cs-137 at these locations ranged from 6.1 11.1 pCi/liter. The mean of the positive results was 8,6 pCi/liter. One positive result was found during May, three results during June, three results during July, three results during August, and two results in September. Fi results were found at location 7, two at location 16, one resul

-39

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL,DATA (Cont'd)

B. 5 Milk-Tables 13 and 14 (Cont'd) at location 55, three results at location 60, and one result at location 50. Cs-137 was detected five times during 1986 at location 7. It is interesting to note that the milk animals at location number 7 were not pastured. The diet of these animals consisted mostly of locally grown haylage during the period when Cs-137 was detected. Overall, the quantities of Cs-137 found in each sample was small.

Control samples wexe collected from two different locations duxing 1986. The initial sample of the year was collected on April 7 at control location number 40. Control samples were collected at location number 65 starting on August 18 and through the last sample date of the year (December 15, 1986).

Control sample results showed Cs-137 detected in three samples during the year. Cs-137 results ranged from 5.3 12.4 pCi/liter. The mean of the three results was 8.4 pCi/liters Positive Cs-137 results were found in two June samples and one September sample. The two June Cs-137 results were from location number 40. The one September result was from location number 65. The 1986 sample results showed that the highest Cs-137 concentxation was found among, the control samples. The mean of the control samples, however, was slightly lower than the mean of the indicator samples (8.4 vex'sus 8.6).

No other radionuclides were detected in milk samples using gamma spectral analysis.

During 1986, milk samples were also collected and analyzed twice per month for I-131. I-131 was detected in several of the milk samples collected in the late spring and early summer months.

I-131 was detected in milk samples collected during the second half of May (May 19) as well as the first and second half of June (June 2 and June 16). Milk sample results showed detectable quantities of I-131 for these three sample pexiods only. In addition, I-131 was detected at all sample locations during this period except Eor location number 60. At location 60, I-131 was detected only duxing the second half of May 'umber (May 19) and the first half oE June (June 2). Quantities of I-131 detected during 1986 were a result of the Apxil 1986 accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Plant.

Indicator milk sample results showed I-131 ranging from 0.3 30.0 pCi/liter. The mean for indicator sample results was 5 '

pCi/liter. I-131 was detected at all indicator locations on the sample dates of May 19, June 2, and June 16 except Eor location number. 60 which yielded no detectable I-131 on June 16. There were no other occasions during 1986 where I-131 was detected.

-40

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd),

B. 5 Milk~Tables 13 and 14 (Cont'd)

Control milk sample results dur'ing 1986 showed that I-131 was detected during the same time periods of May 19, June 2, and June 16 as was noted for the indicator samples. I-131 ranged from 0.8 29.0 pCi/liter. The mean was 13.6 pCi/liter. The range for the control samples was approximately equal to the range for the indicator sample results. The mean Eor the indicator sample results was significantly greater than mean Eor the control sample results. The difference is because of the small number of control samples as compared to the indicator samples (one control location versus six indicator sample locations).

As noted previously, the detected quantities of I-131 in control and indicator milk samples were a result of the April 1986 accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Plant. I-131 was not detected during any other time periods of the year. LLD values for I-131 control and indicator samples ranged from 0.2 0.5 pCi/liter.

Evaluation of site historical milk data shows that Cs-137 has been detected in environmental milk samples at both indicator (within 10 miles) and control locations (beyond 10 miles). Mean Cs-137 concentrations for 1976 1981 remained fairly consiste and ranged from 8.1 (1980) to 17.1 pCi/liter (1977) at indicator locations. The 1982 indicator mean was 5.7 pCi/li which showed a decrease when compared to 1976 1981. Cs-137 in milk during 1983 yielded a mean of 7.2 pCi/liter which was slightly greater than . the 1982 mean but was less than the 1976 1981 mean range. During 1983, however, Cs-137 was detected in only 3 of the 66 samples, while in 1982, Cs-137 was detected in 10 oE the 54 samples analyzed. Cs-137 was not detected dur ing 1984 or 1985 in indicator milk samples. At the control location, Cs-137 has remained fairly consistent for all years Erom 1978 1982 except for 1979 and 1982. =

For these years, this radionuclide was not detected. Control samples were not obtained prior to 1978. Cs-137 ranged from 3.9 5.8 pCi/liter during 1978 1982. Cs-137 was not detected at the control location during 1983, 1984, or 1985. The absence of Cs-137 during 1983 through 1985 may be a result of a three to five year time interval since the last weapons test.

The impact as a result of Cs 137 in 1986 milk samples can be assessed by calculating conservative doses to man from the consumption of milk with detectable quantities of Cs-137. The calculated doses are a result of the Chernobyl accident. In order to calculate doses, several assumptions .are made. These include: a mean Cs-137 concentration oE 8.6 pCi/liter for indi'cator sample results, a mean Cs-137 concentration of 8. 4 pCi/liter for the control sample results, a consumption rate 330 liters (87 gallons) per year for an inEant (the maxi exposed individual), an applicable time period of 4.5 month (indicator samples) and 1.5 months (control samples) of the year (Cs-137 was not detected consistently throughout the year) and no radiological decay. Dose factors are taken from Table E-14 of Regulatory Guide 1.109.

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

B. 5 Milk-Tables 13 and 14 (Cont'd)

The infant whole body dose is calculated as 0.05 mrem. The infant critical organ is the liver. The dose to the liver is 0.65 mrem. These doses are from consuming milk from the indicator locations. Calculated doses from consuming milk from the control location are 0.21 mrem to the liver and 0.02 mrem to the whole body of an infant. Doses from the indicator sample results are greater because Cs-137 was detected more frequently as a result of a greater number of samples and possibly grazing habits.

The maximum organ dose is the liver of an infant. The maximum whole body dose, however, is to an adult. Using the .same criteria as above, except for a new consumption rate of 310 liters (80 gallons) per year for an adult, the maximum exposed organ (liver) dose to an adult is 0.11 mrem for indicator samples. The adult whole body dose is 0.07 mrem. The adult liver dose is less than the infant dose. The whole body is greater than the infant whole body dose. Corresponding doses calculated from control sample results are 0.04 mrem to the liver and 0.02 mrem to the whole body.

For the purpose of illustration, the significance of the above doses can be brought into perspective by comparison to background doses due to the cosmic radiation with changes in altitude. The whole body dose to an adult is 0.07 mrem as a result of consuming milk from indicator'ample locations with detectable Cs-137 during 1986. A dose of 0.07 mrem is equal to the increase in dose as a result of residing at a location that is 100 meter (328 feet) higher in altitude for 13 days. The increase in dose is for a sea level elevation, Because the dose due to cosmic radiation is greater at higher altitudes, a whole body dose from milk consumption of 0.07 mrem is equal to residing in the city of Denver, Colorado for only 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> (NCRP Report No. 45).

An additional comparison can be made to naturally occurring K-40. K-40 has been noted in almost all environmental samples at significant levels. A 70 kilogram adult weighs approximately 154 pounds and contains approximately 0.1 microcuries of K-40 as a result of normal life functions (inhalation, consumption, etc.). The dose to the bone tissue is about 20 mrem per year as a result of internally deposited K-40 (Eisenbud). For comparison purposes, an adult bone dose can be calculated that results from the consumption, of milk with an average 1986 concentration of Cs-137. Using the same criteria used for calculating the preceding doses, the adult bone dose is 0.08 mrem per year. This calculated dose is small and is only 0.004 of the annual bone dose received from naturally occurring K-40.

-42

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

B. 5. Milk-Tables .13 and 14 (Cont'd)

The impact of detectable quantities of I 131 in milk can be assessed by calculating a dose to the critical individual from drinking milk. The critical individual for this pathway is an infant. The critical organ is the thyroid of an infant. In order to calculate doses, several assumptions are made. These include: the mean I-131 concentration for indicator samples is 5.2 pCi/liter, the mean concentration for the control samples. is 13.6 pCi/liter, an infant consumes a maximum of 330 liters (87 gallons)'er year, doses were received only over a two month period since I-131 was only detected during two months, and there is no radiological decay of I-131. Infant dose factors are obtained from Regulatory Guide 1.109, Table E-14.

The 'infant thyroid dose is 3.98 mrem and the whole body dose is 0..005 mrem f'rom drinking milk with a mean I-131 concentration of 5,:2'pCi/liter from indicator samples. Corresponding calculated

'"doses based on the mean I-131 concentration of 13.6 pCi/liter

rom the control samples are 10.40 mrem to the infant thyroid

'nd', 0.014 mrem to the whole body. The difference between the control and indicator sample doses is mostly a result of the fact that the indicator mean was based on six locations while the control mean was only 'based on one location. The differenc in 'grazing and feeding habits are also contributing agents.

noted previously, the presence of I-131 and the subsequent dos are a result of the April 1986 accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear

'lant.

, The whole body doses calculated from the indicator and control samples are small. The thyroid doses are well below cri teria utilized by the Federal Public Health Service and Food and Drug Administration to protect the health and safety of the general population (U. S. Department of Health and Services). The preventative protective action guide for I-131 in milk is a peak concentration of 15,000 pCi/liter. The highest concentration observed during 1986 from the milk sample program was 30.0 pCi/liter. The guide for Cs-137 in milk is 240,000 pCi/liter.

The maximum Cs-137 concentration observed during the 1986 sampling program was 12.4 pCi/liter. The observed I-131 and Cs-137 concentrations are 'well below the protective action criteria.

B. 6 Land Use Census Tables 15 and 16 In accordance with the Technical Specifications, a land use census was conducted during 1986 to identify within a distance of three miles the location of all milk animals (cows and goats) and the location of the nearest residence in each of the sixteen 22.5 degree meteorological sectors. The milk animal census w.

actually conducted out to a distance of ten miles in order provide a more comprehensive census.

-43

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

B. 6 Land Use-Census Tables 15 and 16 (Cont'd)

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. A census is conducted once per year in the spring.

The census is conducted by sending questionnaires to previous milk animal owners and also by road surveys to locate any possible new owners. In the event questionnaires are not answered, then the owners are contacted by telephone or in person. The local agricultural agency is also contacted.

The number of milk animals located within the ten mile radius of the site was estimated to be 1253 cows and 10 goats for the 1986 census, .Eight new locations were added since the 1985 census

.(861, 862, 1163, lP65, tP66, IP67, and IP70) . The number of cows increased by 125 and the number of goats increased by 9 with respect to the 1985 census. The results of the milk animal

.census are found on Table 15, A residence census was conducted during 1986 to identify the nearest residence in each of the sixteen 22.5 degree meteorological sectors within a distance of three miles from the site. At this distance, some of the meteorological sectors are over water. These sectors include: N, NNE, NE, ENE, W, WNW, NW, and NNW. There axe no residences in these sectors. The results of the 1986 residence census showing the applicable sectors and degrees and distance of each of the nearest residences are found on Table 16.

B. 7 Food Products -Table 17 Food product samples collected during 1986 were compxised of garden vegetables, fruit and other types of vegetation. Samples were collected from six indicator locations and one control location. The indicator locations were represented by nearby gardens in areas of highest D/Q (deposition factor) values based on historical meteorology and all site release points at operating facilities. The control location was xepresented by a garden location 9-20 miles distant in a least prevalent wind direction. Garden vegetables were comprised of cabbage, beet greens, collard greens, squash leaves, and swiss chard which are all considered broadleaf vegetables'ther broadleaf vegetation consisted of grape leaves. In addition, non broadleaf fruits or vegetables were collected. Non broadleaf fruits ox vegetables collected in 1986 consisted of tomatoes. At the control location, one sample of each of, a similar type of fruit, vegetable or vegetation was collected. Fruits, vegetables and vegetation were collected in the late summer harvest season.

K-40 was detected in all broadleaf and non-broadleaf vegetation. Broadleaf vegetation (Swiss chaxd, collaxd greens, beet greens, cabbage, squash leaves and grape leaves) showed

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

B. 7 Food Products-Table 17 (cont'd) concentrations of K-40 ranging from .1.29,pCi/g to 6.70 pCi/g (wet). Non-broadleaf fruits (tomatoes) showed concentrations of K-40 ranging from 1.57 pCi/g to 2.51 pCi/g (wet). Be-7 was found intermittently in broadleaf vegetation samples. This radionuclide ranged from 0.30 1.93 pCi/g (wet). Be-7 was not found in any samples of cabbage, swiss chard and collard greens. Non-broadleaf vegetation (tomatoes) show no detectable Be-7. K-40 and Be-7 are both naturally occurring, radionuclides.

No other radionuclides were detected in the 1986 samples of fruits, vegetables, or other vegetation.

Review of past environmental data indicates that K-40 has been consistently detected in food crop samples. K-40 concentrations have fluctuated from one. sample to another but the annual ranges have remained relatively consistent from year to year. Be-7 has been detected occasionally during the past on leafy vegetables (1978 1982, and 1984).

Cs-137 has been detected intermittently during the years of 1976 1985 at the indicator locations and during the years of 1980 1985 at the control locations (control samples were not obtained prior to 1980). Review of indicator sample results from 1976 1985 showed that Cs-137 was not detected during 1976 1978 a 1981 1984. During 1979 and 1980, Cs-137 in fruits and/or vegetables showed annual mean concentrations of 0.004 and 0.036 pCi/g (wet) respectively. Cs-137 was found at an indicator location during 1985 at a concentration of 0.047 pCi/g (wet).

Control sample results during 1980-1985 showed Cs-137 detected only during 1980 at a concentration of 0.02 pCi/g (wet).Cs-137 was not detected at indicator or control locations during 1986.

B. 8 Interlaborator Com arison Pro ram-Table 18 Section 3/4,6.21 of the Technical Specifications for the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 1 requires that a summary of the results obtained as part of an Interlaboratory Comparison Program be included in the Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report. Presently, the only NRC approved Interlaboratory Comparison Program is the USEPA Cross Check Program. Table 18 .shows. the results of the EPA's reference results and the licensee's results. Some of the EPA reference samples have been analyzed by the site. Other EPA reference samples have been analyzed by a vendor who normally analyzes those types of sample media for the site. Participation in the EPA Cross Check Program includes sample media for which environmental samples are routinely collected, as required by Table 3.6.20 1 of the Technical Specifications and for whi intercomparison samples are available from the EPA. Where ma samples are available from the EPA, a QC sample to progr sample ratio of ten percent is utilized, where applicable.

-45

III. EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

B. 9 Environmental Sample Locations-Table 19 Table 19 contains the locations of the environmental samples, presented in the data tables (Section E). The locations are given in degrees and distance from the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 2 reactor centerline. Table 19 also gives the figure <map) number as well as the map designation for each sample location by sample medium type. The requirement for Table 19 is found in section 6.9.1.d of the Technical Specifications for the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 1.

B. 10 Radiolo ical Environmental Monitorin Pro ram Annual

~aemmae -Table 20 Table 20 contains a summary of basic statistics for environmental sample media as required by the Technical Specifications. Table 20 is in the format presented on Table 3 of the NRC Branch Technical Position <Revision 1 dated November 1979) to NRC Regulatory Guide 4.8 "Environmental Technical Specifications For Nuclear Power Plants". The table is presented to meet the requirements of section 6.9.1.d of the Technical Specifications effective January 1, 1985 for Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit l.

C. Conclusion The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) was established to detect and evaluate any possible impact to the environment surrounding the Nine Mile Point area resulting from operations at the site.

Samples representing food sources consumed at higher trophic levels, such as fish and milk, were reviewed closely to evaluate.

any impact to the general environment or to man. In addition, the data was reviewed for any possible historical trophic level bioaccumulation trends. Little or no impact could be determined resulting from radionuclide deposition considering all sources

<natural, weapons testing etc.). In regards to doses as a result of man-made radionuclides, a significant portion of the small doses received by a member of the public was from past nuclear weapons testing. Doses as a result of naturally occurring radionuclides, such as K-40, contributed a major portion of the total annual dose to members of the public.

Any possible impact as a result of site operations is extremely minimal'hen compared to the impact from natural background levels or weapons testing. It has been demonstrated that almost all environmental samples contain traces of radionuclides which are a result of weapons testing or naturally occurring sources (primordial and/or cosmic related). Whole body doses to man as a result of natural sources (naturally occurring radionuclides in the soil and lower atmosphere) in Oswego County account for approximately 76 mrem per year as demonstrated by control environmental TLD's. Possible doses due to site operations are a minute fraction of this particular natural exposures

-46

III'VALUATIONOF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA (Cont'd)

C, Conclusion (Cont'd)

During 1986, the presence of, fission product radionuclides was noted in several environmental sample media. These media included air particulate samples, airborne radioiodine samples, and milk samples. Since the indicator and control sample concentrations were similar after accounting 'for statistical uncertainty and bioaccumulation effects, where applicable, the source of the fission product radionuclides was attributed to the April 26, 1986 accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Plant. The presence of the radionuclides was short, however, in contrast to radionuclides from past weapons testing which lasted for several years from a single test event. The impact of the detectable radionuclides, as measured by a dose to man, was small and well below protective action recommendation criteria established by the U. ST Department of Health and Human Services.

Therefore, as determined by review of the data presented herein, no impact due to operations at the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station was detected that would effect the health and safety of the public.

-47

D. GENERAL REFERENCE MATERIAL U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.109, "Calculation of Annual Doses to Han from Routine Releases of Reactor,Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance with 10CFR Part 50, Appendix I", March 1976 (Revision 0).

2. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.109, "Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance With 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I", October 1977 (Revision 1).

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

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

November 1979.

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

Environmental Radiation Heasurements, NCRP Report No. 50, 1976.

6. National Council on Radiation Protection and Heasurements (NCRP), Natural Back round Radiation in the United States, NCRP Report No. 45, 1975.

7, National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP),

Cesium-137 from the Environment to Man: Metabolism and Dose, NCRP Report No. 52) 1977.

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

Radiation Exposure from Consumer Products and Miscellaneous Sources, NCRP Report No. 56, 1977.

9 ~ International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), Radionuclide Release into the Fnvironment'ssessment of Doses to Han, ICRP Publication 29, 1979.

10, Eichholz, G. Environmental As ects of Nuclear Power, First Edition, Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Inc., Ann Arbor, Hichigan, 1976.

Eisenbud, Merrill, Environmental Radioactivit , Second Edition, Academic Press, New York, NY 1973.

12. Francis, C.W., Radiostrontium Movement in Soils and U take in Plants.

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

Department of Energy, 1978.

13. Thomas, C.W. etc al., Radioactive Fallout from Chinese Nuclear Wea ons Test, September 26, 1976. (BNWL-2164) Battelle, Pacific Northwest Laboratories, U.S. ERDA, 1979.

-48

D. GENERAL REFERENCE MATERIAL .(Cont'd)

14. Pgchin, Edward E., Estimated Population Ex osure from Nuclear Power Production and other Radiation Sources, Nuclear Energy Agency, Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development, 1976.

15 Glasstone, Samuel and Jordan, Walter H., Nuclear Power and Its Environmental Effects, First Edition, American Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, Ill., 1980.

16. U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Radiolo ical Health Handbook. Bureau of Radiological Health, Rockville, Maryland 20852.

January 1970.

17. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Pre aredness and Res onse in Radiation Accidents, National Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Rockville, Maryland 20857. August 1983.

E. DATA TABLES - 1986

-50

TABLE 1 SAMPLE COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS SITE RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM >

A. A UATIC PROGRAM MEDIA ANALYSIS FRE UENCY LOCATIONS 1)

1. Shoreline Sediment GSA 2/year 1 Indicator (2)

2. Fish GSA 2/year 2 Indicator (3), 1 Control

3. Surface Water GSA M. Comp. 1 Indicator (4), 1 Control H-3 qtr. Comp. 1 Indicator, 1 Control NOTES:

Sampling and analysis program as required by the Technical Specifications.

(1) Indicator samples collected in the vicinity of the site; control samples collected at a distance of at least five miles from the site.

(2) Indicator sample from an area of potential recreational value.

(3) Indicator samples from an area near the vicinity of a site discharge point. Control samples of the same species or of species of similar feeding habits.

(4) Indicator sample from the J.A. FitzPatrick i,nlet canal.

TABLE 2 SAMPLE COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS SITE RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM<

B. TERRESTRIAL PROGRAH HEDIA ANALYSIS FRE UENCY LOCATIONS

l. Air Particulates GB Meekly 4 Indicator, 1 Control GSA H. Composite

2. Airborne I-131 GSA Weekly 4 Indicator, 1 Control (1)

3. TLD Gamma Dose Quarterly 30 Indicator, 2 Control (2)

4. Hilk I-131 2/Month 3 Indicator, 1 Control (3)

GSA 2/Month

5. Human Food Crops GSA, I-131 (5) Annually (4)

NOTES:

Sampling and analysis program as required by the Technical Specifications.

(1) Three indicator samples from near the site boundary in three of the highest D/Q meteorological sectors, one indicator sample from near a year round conununity, and one control sample from an area ofleast prevalent wind direction.

(2) Indicator samples from the site boundary, four-five miles from the site, special interest areas, and control areas (greater than ten miles from the site).

(3) Three indicator samples from areas within 5.0 miles of the site. Control sample from an area of least prevalent wind direction.

(4) Six samples total utiliz,ing at least two meteorological sectors in areas of highest D/Q. One sample of each of similar food product in a least prevalent wind direction.

(5) Gamma spectral analysis to include I-131.

TABLE 3A CONCENTRATION OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN SHORELINE SEDIMENT SAMPLES Results in units of pCi/g (dry) + 2 sigma ample Collection ocation Date Be-7 K-40 Co-60 Cs-134 Cs-137 Ra-226 Th-228 Others angs Beach 4-24-86 <0.29 7.3+0.8 <0.03 <0.04 <0.04 <0.76 <0.09 <LLD Gontrol)>" 10-27-86 <0.58 11.9+1.2 <0.05 <0.06 <0.06 <0.78 <0.12 <LLD unset Beach 4-24-86 <0. 58 16.7+1.7 <0.08 <0.08 <0.08 2.37+1.32 1.00+0.10 <LLD Off-Site) 10-27-86 <0.74 19.1+1.9 <0.08 <0.09 <0.08 2.33+1.04 1.19+0.19 <LLD ine Mile Point 4-24-86 <0. 60 14.7+1.1 0.10+0.03 <0.05 1.07+0.08 0.91+0.48 0.41+0.13~ <LLD On-Site)>> 10-27-86 <0. 37 8.4+0.8 <0.05 <0.03 <0.04 1.94+0.44 0.47+0.12" <LLD

• J

':Represents AcTh 228

~Sample not required by the Technical Specifications (Optional sample location)

Results in units oy activity ~ec sam dcy weight

TABLE 3B CONCENTRATION OF G&9fA EHITTERS IN SHORELINE SEDIHENT SAMPLES Results in units of pCi/kg (dry) + 2 .sigma mple Collection cation Date Be-7 K-40 Co-60 Cs-134 Cs-137 Ra-226 Th-228 Other s ngs Beach 4-24-86 <229 7340+850 <26 <39 <39 <760 <89 <LLD

,'ontrol)>> 10-27-86 <580 11900+1200 <54 <60 <61 <780 <120 <LLD inset Beach 4-24-86 <580 16700+1700 <76 <81 - <75 2370+1320 996+101 <LLD off-Site) 10-27-86 <740 19100+1900 <80 <89 <83 2330+1040 1190+190 <LLD ne Mile Point 4-24-86 <600 14700+1110 100+34 <50 1070+81 909+482 406+128+ <LLD

>n-Site)>> 10-27-86 <268 8410+831 <47 <34 <39 1940+444 468+121+ <LLD Represents AcTh 228

Sample not required by the Technical Specifications

TABLE 4A CONCENTRATION OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN FISM SAMPLES Results in units of pCi/g (wet) + 2 sigma GAMMA EMITTERS Sam le Date Sam le T e Fe-59 Co-58 K-40 Mn-54 Co-60 Cs-134 Cs-137 Zn-65 Others OSWEGO CONTROL) 00 S7/1/86 Lake Trout 41 <0.027 <0.010 2.69+0.27 <0.007 <0.008 <0 007 F 0.027+0.008 <0.017 <LLD 7/1/86 Lake Trout 82 <0.034 <0.012 2.58+0.26 <0.009 <0.008 <0.009 0.032+0.007 <0.020 , <LLD 7/1/86 Brown Trout <0.022" <0.007 3.07+0.31 <0.005 <0.006 <0.006 0.023+0.005 <0.014 <LLD 10/2/86 Lake Trout Ol <0.034 <0.010 2.77+0.28 <0.007 <0.007 <0.007 0.022+0.006 <0.017 <LLD 10/2/86 Lake Trout 82 <0.032 <0.009 2.63+0.26 <0.006 <0.006 <0.007 0.021+0.005 <0.018 <LLD 10/21/86 Carp <0.027 <0.010 2.16+0.22 <0.008 <0.007 <0.008 <0.008 <0.018 <LLD NINE MILE POINT 02 1

16/4/86 Lake Trout 0'1 <0.036 <0.010 2.97+0.30 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 0.020+0.006 <0.016 <LLD 6/4/86 Lake Trout 02 <0.038 <0.010 2.83+0.28 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 0.030+0.006 <0.016 <LLD x7/1/86 Brown Trout <0.021 <0.007 3.10+0.31 <0.004 <0.005 <0.005 0.022+0.005 <0.013 <LLD 10/2/86 Lake Trout Pal -<0.030 <0.008 3.11+0.31 <0.005 <0.006 <0.006 0.033+0.007 <0.015 <LLD 10/2/86 Lake Trout 82 <0.028 <0.008 2.77+0.28 <0.005 <0.005 <0.005 0.049+0.006 <0.014 <LLD 10/21/86 Carp <0.027 <0.010 2.93+0.29 <0.007 <0.008 <0.008 0.021+0.007 <0.017 <LLD JA FITZPATRICK 03 16/4/86 Lake Trout SCl <0.036 <0.011 2.57+0.26 <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 0.022+0.005 <0.016 <LLD 6/4/86 Lake Trout PC2 <0.052 <0.017 2.74+0.27 <0.010 <0.008 <0.010 0.025+0.008 <0.025 <LLD

'6/6/86 Brown Trout <0.039 <0.012 2.75+0.28 <0.007 <0.007 <0.006 0.020+0.006 <0.018 <LLD 10/2/86 Lake Trout PCl <0.043 <0.015 2.50+0.25 <0.010 <0.008 <0.010 0.051+0.008 <0.022 <LLD 10/2/86 Lake Trout PP2 <0.028 <0.007 2.98+0 30

~ <0.006 <0.006 <0.006 0.032+0.006 <0.014 <LLD 11/6/86 Carp <0.022 <0.008 3.03+0.30 <0.006 <0.007 <0.008 0.005+0.005 <0.017 <LLD 0

TABLE 4B CONCENTRATION OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN PISH SAMPLES Results in units of pCi/kg, (wet) + 2 sigma GAMMA EMITTERS am le Date Sam le T e Fe-59 Co-58 K-40 Mn-54 Co-60 Cs-134 Cs-137 Zn-65 Others OSMEGO CONTROL 00 7/1/86 Lake Trout PP1 <27 <10 2,690+270 <7 <8 <7 27+8 <17 <LLD 7/1/8& Lake Trout /52 <34 <12 2,580+260 <9 <8 <9 32+7 <20 <LLD 7/1/86 Brown Trout <22 <7 3,070+310 <5 <6 <6 23+5 <14 <LLD l

)/2/86

)/2/86

)/21/86 .

Lake Trout 81 Lake Trout 0'2 Carp

<34

<32

<27

<10

<9

<10 2,770+280 2,630+260 2,160+220

<7

<6

<8

-'6 <7

<7

<7

<7

<8 22+6 21+5

<8

<17

<18

<18

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD NINE MILE POINT 02 i/4/86 Lake Trout Pal <36 <10 2,970+300 <6 <6 <6 20+6 <16 <LLD i/4/86 Lake Trout ij2 <38 <10 2,830+280 <6 <6 <6 30+6 <16 <LLD

'/1/86 Brown Trout <21 <7 3,100+310 <4 <5 <5 22+5 <13 <LLD

)/2/86 Lake Trout Ol <30 <8 3, 110+310 <5 <6 <6 33+7 <15 <LLD

)/2/86 Lake Trout 82 <28 <8 2,770+280 <5 <5 <5 49+6 <14 <LLD

)/21/86 Carp <27 <10 2,930+290 <7 <8 <8 21+7 <17 <LLD JA FITZPATRICK 03

)/4/86 Lake Trout 81 <36 <11 2,570+260 <6 <6 <6 22+5 <16 <LLD i/4/86 Lake Trout 82 <52 <17 2,740+270 <10 <8 <10 25+8 <25 <LLD I/6/86 Brown Trout <39 <12 2,750+280 <7 <7 <6 20+6 <18 <LLD I/2/86 Lake Trout tP1 <43 <15 2,500+250 <10 <8 <10 51+8 <22 <LLD i/2/86 Lake Trout 82 <28 <7 2,980+300 <6 <6 <6 32+6 <14 <LLD

./6/86 Carp <22 <8 3,030+300 <6 <7 <8 9+5 <17 <LLD

-56

TABLE 5 I

CONCENTRATION OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN SURFACE WATER, SAMPLES Results in units of pCi/liter + 2 sigma Station Nuclide January February March April May June 1986 OSWEGO CITY K-40 <12.7 14.7+7.9 <13.9 17.4 90.5+15.8 65.7+10.7 WATER Ra-226 16.0+7.6 <17.3 <20.4 15.3+8.0 32.7+12.3 34.3+12.5 Cs-134 <0.95 <1.02 <1.14 <1.06 <0.94 <0.86 Cs-137 <1.08 <1.02 <1 19

~ <1.11 <0.96 <0.92 Zr-95 <4.01 <2.69 <3.50 <3.65 <2.70 <2.70 Nb-95 <2.54 <1.66 <2.00 <2.19 <1.62 <1.49 Co-58 <1.45 <1.24 <1.29 <1.44 <1. <1.19 Mn-54 <1.07 <0.92 <1.18 <1.25 28'0.94

<0.93 Fe-59 <1,64 <1.66 <1.77 <2.19 <1.90 <1.86 Co-60 <1.17 <1.08 <1.36 <1.09 <1.07 <0,82 Zn-65 <2.66 <1.67 <2.63 <2.79 <2.44 <1.85 I-131 <23.0 <7 ' <7.2 <29.8 <8.9 <9.0 Ba/La-140 <12.1 <4.8 <5.2 <11.1 <3 ' <4.1 NINE MILE K-40 18.0+7.4 <14.8 <12.9 <16.7 . <14.4 59.2+9.9 POINT Ra-226 <20.2 <46,1 <20.4 13.5+7.6 <17.5 28 '+11.0 (02, INLET) Cs-134 <0.96 <1.15 <1.08 <1.11 <0.97 <1.00 Cs-137 <0.95 <1.02 <1.15 <0.90 <1.09 <0.93 Zr-95 <3.01 <3.35 <2.90 <3.16 <2.61 <2.55 Nb-95 <1.61 <1.92 <1.65 <2.10 <1.30 <1.34 Co-58 <1.29 <1.15 <1.06 <1.28 <1.19 <1.16 Mn-54 <0.96 <1.09 <1.10 <1.29 <0.96 <0.91 Fe-59 <1+75 <1.69 <2.25 <2.06 <2.06 <1.86 Co-60 <1.17 <1.17 <1.33 <1.40 <1.08 <0.70 Zn-65 <1.89 <2.64 <2.62 <2.36 <2.13 <1.84 I-131 <15.2 <8.3 <9.4 <17.2 <13.1 <8.2 Ba/La-140 <4.9 <3.6 <4.8 <4.4 <7.3 <3.5

" Optional sample location. Sample not required by the Technical Specifications.

0 TABLE 5 CONCENTRATION OF GAMHA EMITTERS Results in units of (Continued)

IN SURFACE, WATER pCi/liter + 2 sigma SAMPLES Station Nuclide January February Harch April May June 1986 FITZPATRICK K-40 <14. 3 13.5+7.8 12.5+6.9 <14.3 <15.6 <12.9 (03, INLET) Ra-226 11.5+7.6 <36.3 13.1+7.8 15.1+10.3 22.6+14.3 <19.4 Cs-134 <0.98 <1,21 <1.06 <1.05 <1.00 <1.15 Cs-137 <1.04 <1 02

~ <0.99 <1.01 <0.96 <1.04 Zr-95 <2,42 <2,94 <3.33 <2.85 <2.68 <3.57 Nb-95 <1.36 <1.68 <1.72 <1 52

~ <1.69 <1.63 Co-58 <1.15 <1.44 <1.29 <1.33 <1.12 <1.44 Mn-54 <0.83 <0.84 <0.85 <1.13 <0.87 <1.18 Fe-59 <2.06 <1.86 <1.74 <1.75 <1.66 <2.17 Co-60 <1.00 <1.58 <0.99 <0.99 <1.08 <1.17 Zn-65 <2.47 <2.27 <1.87 <2.12 <2.43 <2.35 I-131 <5 ' <11.1 <0.4 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 Ba/La-140 <4.3 <6.1 <6.6 <7.8 <4.4 <9.3 OSWEGO K-40 13.6+6.8 <13,8 <14.6 18.7+10.3 14,6+10 F 7 <11.5 STEA2J Ra-226 <18.6 <38.0 <39.2 20.6+13.9 19 '+12.8 <21.5 STATION Cs-134 <0.96 <1.08 <1.19 <0.95 <1.06 <1.03 (00, CONTROL) Cs-137 <1,02 <1,08 <1.15 <0.99 <1.03 <1.03 Zr-95 <2.34 <3.03 <3.19 <2.94 <2 '0 <2.94 Nb-95 <1.32 <1.83 <2.,21 <1.43 <1.48 <1.67 Co-58 <1.07 <1.46 <1.61 <1.25 <0.98 <1.08 Mn-54 <0.87 <1.10 <1.24 <0.82 <0.82 <0.94 Fe-59 <1.73 <1.87 <1.87 <2.10 <1.97 <2.29 Co-60 <1.04 <1.17 <0.86 <1.21 <0.76 <0.82 Zn-65 <2,29 <2.36 <2.27 <2.02 <1.76 <2.59 I-131 <7el e11.5 <0.4 <0.5 <0.4 <1.0 Ba/ La-140 <4.0 <6.4 <5.7 <3.0 <3 ' <2.4

>>-Sample required by the Technical Specifications

TABLE 5 (Continued)

CONCENTRATION OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN SURFACE WATER SAMPLES Results in units of pCi/liter + 2 sigma Station Nuclide July August September October November December 1986 OSWEGO CITY K-40 15.7+6.6 70.3+26.9 <46.8 <43.3 <51.7 347.0+49.6 WATER Ra-226 12.5+7.8 98.2+57.4 <109.0 112.0+46.7 69.7+39.3 125.0+39.5 Cs-134 <1.08 <3.62 <4.39 <3.12 <4 '4 <3.34 Cs-137 <1.09 <3.79 <4.40 <3.14 <4.23 <3.76 Zr-95 <3 '3 <8.93 <12.00 <8.00 <9. 91. <9.76 Nb-95 <1.96 <5.20 <4.55 <5.01 <6.81 <5.17 Co-58 <1.22 <3.81 <4.79 <3.94 <4.79 <4.54 Mn-54 <0.92 <3.29 <4.69 <3.59 <4.56 <3.85 Fe-59 <1.95 <6.95 <10.70 <7.77 <12.00 <9.56 Co-60 <1.50 <4.25 <4.42 <4.31 <4.32 <3+33 Zn-65 <2.43 <7.99 <10.20 <6.33 <10.20 <7.36 I-131 <14.7 <17 ' <15.5 <15.1 <24.0 <18.7 Ba/La-140 <7e3 <12.0 <10.9 <8.6 <12.4 <10.5

.NINE MILE K-40 <13.8 223:0+31.4 41.4+26.6 50.5+24 ' 30.9+18.8 212.0+32.3 POINT Ra-226 <20.7 122.0+33.5 <119.0 <84.6 66.0+34.8 128.0+40.3 (02 INLET) Cs-134 <1.10 <2.93 <3.87 <3.30 <3.54 <2.63 Cs-137 <1.16 <2.89 <4.33 <2.95 <3.64 <2.60 Zr-95 <3.05 <6.87 <12.10 <8.37 <9.10 <7.10 Nb-95 <2.06 <3.55 <5.52 <4.78 <4.93 <3.74 Co-58 <1.55 <2.75 <5.04 <3.82 <4.25 <3.03 Mn-54 <F 05 <2.63 <4.44 <3.55 <3.63 <2.56 Fe-59 <1.75 <5.63 <11.40 <7.79 <8.42 <7.53 Co-60 <1.36 <2.56 <5.62 <3.94 <4.30 <2.51 Zn-65 <2.48 <5.34 <7 '1 <6.80 <8.04 <5.22 I-131 <1.5. 5 <12.1 <15.7 <15.3 <13.5 <12.9 Ba/La-140 <4.1 <7+3 <9.5 <8.2 <10.1 <8.5

> Optional sample location. Sample not required by the Technical Specifications.

-59,

TABLE 5 (Continued)

CONCENTRATION OF GAUD EHITTERS IN SURFACE MATER SAMPLES Results in units of pCi/liter + 2 sigma Station Nuclide July August September October November December 1986 FITZPATRICK K-40 12.6+6.8 59.6+5.6 154.0+32 .5 <36.7 (47.2 40.9+23.1 (03, INLET) Ra-226 (21.4 24.5+4.2 151;0+46 .2 <85 ' 69.6+38 .7 <75.5 Cs-134 <1.05 <0.37 <3 '7 <3.81 <3 '0 <3.43 Cs-137 (1.08 <0.41 <3.43 <3o12 <3.26 (2.99 Zr-95 <3e32 (1.11- <8.68 <9.01 <9.21 (8.21 Nb-95 <1.74 <0*60 <4.13 (4.65 <4.31 (3.69 Co-58 (1.19 <0.44 <4,06 <3.82 <4.42 <3.26 Hn-54 <0.91 <0.38 (3.22 <3.97 (3.58 (3.56 Fe-59 <2.11 (0 '8 <8.34 <10.40 <10.10 <7.95 Co-60 (1.40 <0.44 <3 '5 <4.20 (3.68 (3.87 Zn-65 <2.48 <0.81 (6.65 <7.55 <6.30 <6.78 I-131 <1 0

~ <0.4 <0.5 <0.4 <0.4 <0.3 Ba/La-140 <7.0 <1.6 <7.6 <10.8 (11.1 <9.2 OSWEGO K-40 67.9+11.6 213.0+32.5 <52,3 <42.6 <45.3 221.0+32.9 STEAM , Ra-226 23.3+8.4 108.0+33.6 110.0+4 7.0 <87.6 <88.0 110+34.1'2.60 STATION Cs-134 <1.00 <2.42 <4,33 <3.29 <3.31 (00, CONTROL) Cs-137 <1.06 <2.73 <4.94 <3.54 <3.34 <2+52 Zr-95 (3.14 (7.10 <9 '5 <9.88 <9.41 <6.87 Nb-95 <<1,70 <3.40 <5.'59 <5.20 (5.23 <3.65 Co-58 (1.35 (2.97 <4.94 <4.05 (4.19 <3.30 Hn-54 <1 03

~ (2.67 <4.60 <3.95 <4.12 (2.66 Fe-59 <1.79 (5.83 <7.85 <10.50 (9.28 <6.67 Co-60 <0 '2 <2.49 <3.46 <4.28 <4.36 <2.33 Zn-65 <2.34 <5.55 <9,44 <6.84 <7.24 <5.54 I-131 <1.1 <0.4 <0.4 <0.4 <0.4 <0.3 Ba/La-140 <5e3 (6.1 <10 0~ <10.0 <9 ' (6.7

>>-Sample required by the Technical Specifications

-60

TABLE 6 CONCENTRATION OF TRITIUM IN SURFACE WATER SAMPLES (QUARTERLY COMPOSITE SAMPLES)

Results in units of pCi/liter + 2 sigma Station Period Date Tritium JAF INLET > First Quarter 12/30/85 3/31/86 260 + 90 Second Quarter 3/31/86 6/30/86 300 + 90 Third Quarter 6/30/86 9/30/86 500 + 80 Fourth Quarter 9/30/86 1/2/87 460 + 180 NMP-1 INLET ~~ First Quarter 12/31/85 3/31/86 240 + 80 Second Quarter 3/31/86 6/30/86 310 + 90 Third Quarter 6/30/86 9/30/86 340 + 80 Fourth Quarter . 9/30/86 12/31/86 130 +- 80 OSWEGO CITY WATER >> First Quarter 12/31/85 3/31/86 210 + 70 Second Quarter 3/31/86 6/30/86 400 + 90 Third Quarter 6/30/86 9/30/86 200 + 110 Fourth Quarter 9/30/86 12/31/86 320 + 90 OSWEGO STEAM First Quarter 12/31/85 3/31/86 + 120 STATION > Second Quarter 3/31/86 6/30/86 (160 (CONTROL) Third Quarter Fourth Quarter 9/30/86 12/31/86'50 6/30/86 9/30/86 550 + 110 320 + 60 Samples required by the Technical Specifications.

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

TABLE IIP/JAF S TE EhJIRIOIEHTAL AIRBMIE PARTICULAT ~A'R.ES - GFF SITE STATIOIIS GROSS BETA ACTIVITY p i/a 3 > 2 Siaria LOCAT IN "PUHP NOT OPERATJOMAL

.MEEK EIS OATE RI-OFF R2-OFF R)-OFF R4-OFF G OFF 86/Ol/07 a.o22 o.oo) 0.026>0.003 0.016t0.002 0.022>0.003 0.025>0.003 0.019<0.003 86rol/14 0.026>0.003 0,025+Q.003 0 02S 0.003

~ 0.025<0.003 0.026+0.003 86rl /21 0.025<0.003 0.017<0.002 O.O22 a.aa) 0.026>0.004 0.020>0.003 0.036+0.004 86/1 /28 0.021<0.003 0.023<0.003 0.022+0.003 0.023+0.00) 0'.023 0'.aa) 0 024+0 004 86/02/04 0.020>0.003 0.022 0.003 0.022<0.003 0.023<0.003 0.021+0.003 0.051<0.014 86/02/ll 0.020+0.003 0.021+0 003

~ 0.022<0.003 0.019<0.003 0,01&50.003 0 023<0 003 86/02/19 0.026+0.003 0.029+0.003 0.022 0.003 0.023<0.003 0.025+0.003 0.026>0.003 86/02/25 0.023 0.003 o.ol& o'.oa) 0.020<0.003 0.020sa.aa) 0,021~0.003 0.020<0.003 86/03/04 0.022+0.003 0.020>0.003 0.024+0.003 0.022<0.003 0.019<0.003 a.a23 o.oo4 86/03/11 0.027 0.003 0.023>0.003 0.024>0.003 0.027<0.004 0.031 0.004 0.027i0.004 86/0)rl& 0.016<0.003 0.020>0.003 0.019>0.003 0.016+0.003 0.01&ID.003 0.017~0.004 86/03/25 o'.o)3 o.'ao4 0.025 0.003 0.027<0.003 0.030<0.004 0.030+0.004 0.027~0.004 86/04/01 0.026>0.004 0.023+0.003 0.022~0.003 0.023 0.003 0.021>0.003 0.'025ia. oo4 86/G4/08 0.017+0.003 a'.ols o'.oo) 0,019ta.aa) 0.017T0.003 D. OD<0. 003 o'.o17 a'.oo) 86/04/15 0.008+0.002 0.009 0.002 0.007>0.002 0'.009 o'.oo2 0.008>0.002 0.007>0.002 86/04/22 0. 019>0. 003 0. 01& <0. 003 0.020+0.003 0.020 0.003 0.022 0;00) 0.022T0.004 86/04/29 0.035i0.004 0.029IO.DD) o.'a29 o.'o04 0.030<0.004 0.028>0.003 o.061 o.a15 86/05/06 0.029+0.004 0,029 0.003 0.028+0 004 F 0.027>0.004 O'.O)I O'.OO4 0.024>0.004 86/a5/l) 0.272+0.010 0.268<0.009 0.273<0.010 o'.2&3 a'.Dlo 0.289<0.011 0.308>D.DII

&6/05/2a 0.141+0. 008 0.142+0.007 0.139>0.007 0'.047ia'.004 0.159>0.008 0.169<0.009 86/D5/27 0.102+0.006 o'.osa o'.oo5 0.086+0.005 0.072>0.005 0.082>0.005 0.074I0.006 86/06/03 0.214< 0. 009 0.219>0.009 0.261+OA10 o'.2160'.009 0.228 0.009 0.222 0.010

&6/06/10 0.146>0.008 0.114>0.006 0.161IO.DD& 0.128+0.007 o,'14& o.'oas 0.139>0.008 86/06/17 0.029ia.aa) 0.032<0.003 0 037+0. 004

~ 0.027+0.003 o'.o)3 o'.ao4 0.032~0.004 86/06/24 0.034~0.004 0.0)I>0.003 0.029<0.003 0.029>0.003 0.031>0.004 0.034i0.004 86r07/01 o'.a)o o.'oo) 0.027<0.003 0.029<0.003 0.028 O.OD3 0. 02970. 003 0.028>0.004 86/07/0& 0.0>>+0.004 0.030<0.003 0.030>0.003 0.030+0.003 0.032<0.004 o'.o)1 o'.oa4 86/07/15 0.017>0.003 0,017+0 003

~ D.al6 a.oo) 0.015~0.003 0.012+0.002 0.016>0.003 86/07/22 0. 026>0. 003 0.028 0.003 0.024ia.aa) D.G21>0.003 o.'a27 a.'oo4 0.023>0.004 86/07/29 0.026>0.003 0.027<0.003 0.'02&ia.'003 0.025>0.003 0.029ID.DD) 0.027>0.004 86/OS/05 0.018 0.003 0.021~0.003 0.016+0.003 0.021+0.003 0,020<0.003 0.019+0.003 86/08/12 0.027I0.004 a.'o24 o.ao) 0.023>0.003 0.027>0.004 0.023<0.003 0.025>0.004 86/08/19 0.0)ai0.004 0.028<0.003 0.030+0.004 0.028>0.004 0.02&>0.004 0.0)2<0.004 86/08/26 o.'o2o o.aa) 0.023>0.003 0.022 0.003 0.024 0.003 o.'o22 o'.ao) 0.022 0.003 86/09/03 D.062+0.005 o'.o74 o'.oa5 0.072<0.005 0.074>0.005 0.080<0.005 0.049+0.005

&6/09/09 0.029 0.004 O.D26+D.004 0.026+0.004 0.029>0.004 0.026<0.004 0.027+0.004 86/09/16 0.026~0.003 D.023+0.003 0.026>0.003 0.023+0.00) 0.024+0.003 0.024>0.003 86/09r23 0.'019 a.'oa) 0.020+0.003 a.'o2o a.oo) 0.019>0.003 o'.als o'.aa) 0.020<0.004 86/09/30 0.024<0.003 a.'o27 o'.ao) 0.022ID.003 0.025ja.aa) 0.022Ã0.003 0.029+0.004

-86/lo/07 0.017<0.003 0.015+0.003 0.017>0.003 o'.016 0'.oa) 0.017~0.003 o.'o17 a.'oo) 86/10/14 0.016>0.003 o.'ol& a'.oo) O.OP+0.003 o'.a2co'.Oo) 0.021>0.003 0.024>0.004 86/lo/21 o'.a14 o.'oo) 0.018~0.003 0.015>0.003 0.016 O.D03 0.015+0.OD3 0.01) 0.003 86/lo/28 0.02eio.oa) 0.0>>+0.003 0'.029 a'.Da) 0.030~0.003 0.031>0.003 o.'o)1 o.oa4 86rll/04 o'.a22 o'.ao) D.021+0.003 0.024<0.003 D.OIS>0.003 o.'o24 a.'aa) 0.022>0.003 86rll/ll 0.011>0.003 0.0150.003 0.013~0.003 0.012>0.003 Q.D17+0.003 0.016>0.003 86/11/18 0.024>0.003 0.023+0.003 0.02&>0.003 0 '22+0.003 0 '24+0.003 0.022<0.003 86/11/25 a'.o)4 o'.Do4 0.031~0.004 0.029 0.003 0.0)1+0.004 0.028>0.003 0.028>0.004 86/12/02 0.025 0.003 0,026>0.003 0.027+0.003 0.025<0.003 0.024+0.003 0.025<0.004 86/12/09 0.014~0.003 0.014+0.003 0.015>0.003 D.010>0.00) 0.016<0.003 0'.017~0.003 86/12/16 0.032<0.004 0.030>0.003 0.031+0.003 0.025 0.003 0.029>0.003 0.0)G>0.004 86rl2/23 0.022+0.003 0.026 O.DD5 0.027+0.003 0.025>0.003 0.""5+0.003 G.G"3~0.004 86/12/30 o.'o)o o.'ao) 0.0)1 0.003 0.032>0.003 0.032>0.004 0.057<0.004 0.0)~>0.004

TABLE 8 HIIP/JAF SITE EHVIROIIEHTAL AIRBOIIE PARTICULATE SAIIPLES - OH SITE STATIONS GROSS BETA ACTIUITY pCi/n"3 t 2 Signa "PUMP HOT OPERATIONAL LOCATION MEEK EHO OATE Ol-OH O2-OH E-OH F OH G OH I OH J-ON K ON 86/01/06 0.021+0.003 0.019+0.004 0.022t0.003 0.030+0.004 D.o19 a.oa3 0.021+0.003 0.009 0.002 0.018>0.003 0.019>0.002 86/01/0 0.020+0.003 0.023<0.004 0.024>0.003 0.026+0.003 O.D23+0.003 0.022<0.003 0.024+D.OD3 0.017T0.003 0.022<0.003 86/1 r20 0 ~ 023+0.003 O.'O24 O'.OO4 0.027<0.003 0'.02& io'.004 0.024>0.003 0.026<0.003 0.024>0.003 D.OD+0.003 0.021>0.003 86rl r27 0.020 0.003 0.023+0.004 0.021+0.003 a.'o26 o'.oa4 0.019 0.003 a.'a2a o.'oo3 0.018+0.003 0,018+0.003 0.014>0.002 86/02/03 0.021<0.003 0 '21+0.004 o'.DI&io'.003 0.019+0.003 0.021I0.003 0.023<0.003 0.020>0.004 0.017T0.002

&6/02/la a'.o2a o.'oo3 0.015T0.003 0.019>0.003 0.01840.003 D.019+0.003 0.018+0.003 D. 018+0. 002 0.013+0.003 0.017+0.002 86/02/18 0.026<0.003 0.827 8.003 0.030>0.003 0.028<0.003 0.028<0.003 0.027 0.003 0.024>0.003 0.017T0.003 0.024ID 003

~

86/02r24 0.018>0.003 0.017j0.003 0.020<0.003 0.015>0.003 0.019+0.003 0.012<0.003 0.015+0.003 o'.olo 0'.oa3 o.'a14 o.'oo5 86/03/03 0.023+0.a03 0.027>0.004 0.026+0.004 0.024+0.003 0.022+0.003 0.023>0.003 0.024>0.003 0.023>0.004 0.011+0.003 86/03/10 0.022 0.003 0.021>0.005 0.027<0.004 0 '25+0.004 0.0260.003 0.022 0.003 0.025>0.003 O'.O15 O'.OO3 0.007>0.002 86/03/D 0'.016 o'.oa3 0.021+0.004 0,018>0.003 0.020<0.004 O.OD+0.003 0.013<0.002 o'.a17 o'.oa3 0 OIOTO 002 0.016 0.002 86/03/24 D.026+0.003 o.'o24 a.'oa4 0,02&<0.003 0.025>0.003 o.'o3o o'.oa4 0.013+0.005 0,022>0.003 0.018>0.003 0.009 0.002 86/03r31 a'.o25 o'.ao4 0.023>0.004 0.022+0.003 0.023>0.004 0.022+0.003 0.020>0.003 0.018+9.003 0.012>0.002 86/04/07 0.016+0.003 o.'DI&ia.'004 0.016>0,003 0.017+0.OD3 0.015<0.003 f 0.012<0.005 0.006>0.002 0.012<0.002 86/04/14 0.009<0.002 0.009>0.003 0.009+0.002 0.009i0.002 0.008+0,002 0.009+0.003 0.008>0.002 0.005>0.001 86ra4/21 0.019>0.003 0.022+0.004 0,026>0.004 0.019i0.003 0.020>0.003 D.018 0.003 0.019>0.003 0.020>0.003 86/04/28 0.027+0.003 D.029+0.005 0.026+0.004 0.027+0.D04 0.026i0.004 0.012>0.004 o.'o28 o.'oa4 0.015>0.003 0.026 0.003 86/05/05 o.'a2o a.'ao3 0.023>0.004 o'.o23 o'.ao3 0 '22+0.003 0.023>0.003 0.0100.002 0,016+0.003 0.013+0.003 0.010<0.002 86/05/12 0.226>0.009 0.208>0.011 0,247>0.009 0 ~ 225T0.009 0.248>0.010 0.210>0.008 0.203+0.009 0.096+0.006 0.134+0.006 86/05/19 0.199+0.009 0.163>0.009 0.193+0.008 0.191 D.009 0.175+0.008 0.155+0.007 0.175<0.009 0.195'. 009 0.159TO.DDB 86/05/27 o'.o7a o'.oa4 0.079<0.006 0.082<0.005 0.083<0.005 0.068+0.005 0.064<0.005 a'.o74 o',oo5 0.072<0.005 0.078<0.005

&6/06/02 0.186>0.009 0 ~ 202 0 F 012 0.195<0.009 0.201<0.009 0.182>0.009 .169+0.008 0.193+0.010 0.194<0.011 0.191TD F 010 86/06/la 0.168+0.007 0. 181+0. 010 0.177+0.007 O.1&1<0.008 0.155>0.007 .130<0.006 0.141+0.007 0.172<0.009 0.151>0.007 86/06r16 0.033 0.'004 0 029 0.004

~ 0.040<0.004 o'.a4o+o.'oo4 a.'034ia.'004 0.034i0.004 o'.o31 o'.aa4 0.032<0.005 0.030<0.004 86/06/23 0.031<0.003 0.030+0.004 0.034i0.004 0.033<0.004 0.030>0.003 0.026+0.003 0.030<0.004 0.032>0.004 0.030<0.004 86/06/30 0.024 0.003 0.021>0.003 0.017<0.003 D.021+0.003 0.020>0.003 0.018+0,003 0.021<0.003 0.020+0.003 0.020X0.003 86/07/07 0.025<0.003 0.027+0.004 0.026+0.003 0.024<0.003 0.024>0.003 0.025>0.003 0.026<0.004 0.023<0.003 0.024T0.004 86/07/14 O.OD+D.003 0.022+0.004 O.ODT0.003 0.018+0.003 0.015+0.003 0.016+0.003 0.019>0.003 0.015i0.003 0 019<0 003 86/07/21 0.020<0.003 0.016<0.003 - 0.018+0.003 0.0250.003 O.OD+0.003 0.017+0.003 0.017>0.003 0.014<0.003 0.022>0.004 86/07r28 D.022 0.003 0.026<0.004 0.025>0.003 0.024<0.003 0.019<0.004 a.ol& a.'oo3 0.023+0.003 0.021 0.003 0.021 0.004 86/08/04 0.019+0.003 0.022>0.004 0.01&TO.003 D.OIB>0.003 0,019+0.003 0.015+0.003 0.018+0.003 0.016>0.003 0.016I0.003 86/08/11 0.023<0.003 o'.a31 o.'oa5 0.023+0.004 0.025>0.004 0.019i0.003 0.024 D.003 0.023+0.004 0.027 a.o04 0.025<0.004 86/08/IB 0.030+0.004 0.030T0.005 0.032>0.004 0.038>0.004 0.028+0 ~ 004 D.030+0.004 0.028<0.007 0.034>0.004 0.031<0.004 86/08/25 0.019i0.003 0.022 0.004 0.018>0.003 0.020 0.003 0.020>0.003 0.019i0.003 0.020+0.003 0.022 0.004 0.022<0.004 86/09/02 0.049+0.004 0.038<0,004 o.'a43 o'.oo4 0.049<0.004 0.045~0.004 0.045<0.004 0.058<0.005 0.047T0.004 o.'o55 a'.oo5 86/09/08 o.'o24 a.'oo4 0.028<0.005 O.D24 0.004 0.028<0.004 0.025+0.004 0.0260.004 o.'o25 o'.aa4 0.026<0.005 0.026<0.005 86/09/15 0.024+0.003 0.025<0.004 0.026+0.003 0.025 0.003 0.024<0.003 0.026>0.004 0.02&ID.004 0.026+0.004 0.024<0.004 86/09/22 O.D26+0,004 0.020 0.003 0.018+0 003

~ 0.01&<0.003 0.019i0.003 0.015+0.003 0.017T0.003 o'.ol& o'.oa4 0.01&TO.004 86/09/29 0.026 0.003 O.D30+0.004 0.026<0.003 0.024<0.003 0.024>0.003 0.029+0.D04 0'.033 0'.ao5 0.026>0.004 0.023~0.004

&6/la/06 D.01&+0.003 0.019>0.003 0.020 0,003 0,018<0.003 0.016+0.003 0.004 0.002 0.016 0.003 0.016<0.003 0.'019 o'.ao3 86/10/14 0.022+0.003 0.020>0.003 o'.al& o'.oo3 0,022>0,003 D. 021+0. 003 0.020 0.003 0.020<0.003 o.'o15 a.'ao3 o.'o23 a.'o04 86/10/20 0.013>0.003 0.013>0.003 0'.012 o.oa3 o'.o14 o'.oa3 0.014>0.003 a.'016 D.oa3 0.017+0.003 0.012<0.003 0.014i0.003 86/lar27 o'.a36 o'.o04 0.035i0.004 0.033>0.003 0.031>0.003 0.031+0.004 0.033>0.004 a'.o28 o'.oo3 0.032+0.004 0.024<0.005 86/ll/03 0.020 0.003 0.022<0.003 0.018+0.003 0.021>0.003 0.020+0.003 0.022>0.003 0.020 0.003 0.024>0.004 0.023T0.004 86/11/10 0.015t0.003 0.015~0.003 0.014T0.002 0.014<0.003 0.013+0,003 0,016<0,003 0.017>0.003 0.014>0.003 0.014<0.003

&6/11/17 0.021+0,003 0.027<0 004

~ 0.022 0.003 0,023t0.003 0.024+D.003 0.023+0.003 0.024>0,003 0.026>0.003 0.023 D.003 86/ll/24 0.033i0.004 0.032+0,004 0.030>0.003 0.029<0.003 0.030+0.004 a.'o28 a'.ao3 0.031>0,004 0.029 0.003 o'.o32 a'.oa4 86/12/01 0.022+0.003 0.024T0.004 0 '27 0.003 0.022<0.003 .021>0.003 0.01340.003 0.022 0.003 0.002<0.002 0.021 0.003 6/12/08 O.OD>0.003 0.015<0.003 0.015T0.003 o.'a14 o'.ao3 16>0.003 0.016+0.D03 0.018>0.003 0.015>0.002 o'.o15 o'.a 6/12/15 0.027i0.003 0.026>0.004 0.028+0.003 0.027>0,00 8+DE 004 0,028>0.003 0.026>0.003 0.015<0.003 0.025~0.0 4/12/22 0.025<0.003 0.027+0.004 0.03QT0.003, 0 033io 004 <~0'.004 0.023+0.003 o'.o2& a'.ao3 0.029i0.003 0.02lio.o

/12/29 o.'o25 a.'oo3 0,033<0.004 0.030>0.003 0,029+0.003 ;io.'003 0.029>0.003 0.037T0.004 o.azl o'.Do3 0.02&>0.003

TABLE 9 CONCENTRATION OF GAi~ EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF NiMP AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES R-1 OFF-SITE STATIONS Results in units of ~10 Ci/m + 2 sigma Nuclides January February March April May June 1986 ~

Co-60 <1.3 <2 ' <1.3 <1.7 <1.4 <0.9 Mn-54 <0.5 <1.0 <1.7 <1.7 <1.3 <2.0 Cs-134 <1.2 <1 4

~ <1.2 <1.6 16.5 + 2.0 2.6 + 1.2 Cs-137 <1.1 <1.0 <1.7 <2.0 26.7 + 2.7 7.5 + 1.9 Nb-95 <2.1 <2.1 <2s3 <2.0 <2s3 <2.3 Zr-95 <3 ' <3.1 <3.1 <2.7 <3.3 <2.5 Ce-141 <1.8 <3.0 <2.2 <2.1 <3.0 <2.8 Ce-144 <5.1 <8.9 ~ <5.5 <5.5 <7.4 <7.5 Ru-106 <5.9 <9,6 <9.8 <13.5 16 5 10.0 + 7.4 Ru-103 <ls2 <1.9 <2.0 <1.7 25.6 + 2.9 10.3 + 2.5 Be-7 118.0+19 ' 1S7,0+23.7 114.0+21.4 118.0+20.4 113.0+17.8 156.0+25.3 K-40 <16.2 11.7+10.4 <28.2 <32s7 49 '+17.4 <27.7 La-140 .<5.7 <3.7 <5.5 <4.8 <6.5 <7s3 Ra-226 <18.2 <29.5 <21.4 <25.7 <30 ' <27.9 I-131 <6.4 <8,1 <4.9 <3.4 19.2+4.5 <9.0 Nuclides July August September October November December Co-60 <1.9 <1.5 <ls7 <1.9 <1.6 <1.6 Mn-54 <1.6 <1.2 <1,6 <1.2 <1.6 <1:6 Cs-134 <1.4 <1 1~ <1.5 <1.1 <1 4

~ <1.5 Cs-137 <1.0 <1.4 <1.2 <1.3 <1.5 <1.6 Nb-95 <1.6 <F 6 <1.9 <'2 . 0 <1.8 <2.1 Zr-95 <3.4 <3.4 <3s7 <2 . 8 <3.9 <4.4 Ce-141 . <2.1 <2sl <2s3 <2 . 1 <2.5 <2.6 Ce-144 <6.4 <5.8 <7,4'14.9

<5 . 2 <7.0 <6.6 Ru-106 <11,6 <10.1 < 13 . 1 <14 ' <14.8 RQ-103 <1.7 <1.5 <1. <1 . 4 <2.1 <1.7 Be-7 137,0+19.0 149,0+18 ' 5'34.0+18.5 1 S 3 . 0+2 1 . 3 100.0+19.9 96.7+17.1 K-40 66.9+20 ' 42.8+15.0 47.9+18.1 < 22 . 4 <33 ' 61.2+20.5 La-140 <1.8 <3 ' <2.9 <3 . 4 <2.7 <4.2 Ra-226 17.3+13.9 17.3+9.1 <30.2 < 20 . 6 <28.0 <29.4 I-131 <4.3 <5:6 <5.0 <6 . 2 <4.3 <6.3

~ - Location required by the Technical Specifications.

-64

TABLE 9 (Continued)

CONCENTRATION OF GAMRfA EMITTERS. IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF NMP AIR PARTICULATE'SAMPLES R-2 OFF-SITE STATION>

Results in units of ~10 Ci/m e 2 sigma Nuclides January February March April May June 1986 Co-60 <1,8 <2.6 <2e2 <1.8 <1.2 <1 '

Mn-54 <1.4 <2.2 <1., 7 <1.3 <1.6 <1.8 Cs-134 <1.1 <1.6 <1.1', <1.8 18.2+2.7 4.1+1.4 Cs-137 <1.5 <1.8 <1.7 <1.2 36.4+3.9 6.9+1.8 Nb-95 <1.9 <4.4 <2. <2e2 <4.0 <2.4 Zr-95 <4.2 <5,4 4'4.0

<5.1 <5.3 <3.9 Ce-141 <1.9 <4 ' <2,5 <2.5 <4.3 <3.0 Ce-144 <5,2 <10.7 <6.8 <7.8 <8.8 <7e7 Ru-106 <13.7 <15.7 <8.7 ': <16.5 <22.4 <17.4 Ru-103 <1.6 <2.7 <2.2:; <2.0 37.5+5.0 10.3+2.3 Be-7 107.0+19,9 124.0+24.6 113.0+22.8 166.0+26.7 125.0+26.9 146.0+22.3 K-40 <21.5 <27.6 15.6+13.1 <32.9 <21.5 54.4+20.4 La-140 <3.9 <14.1 <3.9, <4.1 <17.8 <5.2 Ra-226 <19,4 <31.0 <23.5 <25.0 ~

<35.2 <31.4 I-131 <7.4 <19.0 <7,8 <7.9 <48.2(a) <8.5 Nuclides July August September October .November December Co-60 <1.6 <1.6 <1,3 <1.7 <2.5 <1.8 Mn-54 <1.5 <1 1~ <1.4 <0.9 <le7 <1.9 Cs-134 <2 ' <1.1 <1.2 <1.1 <1.3 <1.4 Cs-137 <2.0 <1.3 <1.3 <0.8 <1.0 <1.8 Nb-95 <2.0 <1.2 '<1. 2 <0.8 <1.8 <1.8 Zr-95 <3.1 <2 ' <2,9 <3 ' <2.9 <5.0 Ce-141 <2e3 <1 8~ <1.3 <2 ' <2.0 <2.8 Ce-144 <6.8 <5e2 ,<5.7 <4.3 <6.1 <7.6 Ru-106 <13 ' <11.8 <11.1 <6.8 <10.4 <14.8 Ru-103 <1 7

~ <1 4~ '<1.4 <1.6 <2e3 <2.0 Be-7 134.0+19,1 136.0+19.6 111.0+20.1 129.0+21.1 114.0+22.6 91.3+18.4 K-40 64.7+21.1 <15.5 <24.1 10.2+9.5 <41.4 51.9+21.8 La-140 <1.8 <2.5 <4.0 <4.0 <2.6

<3.9'19.1 Ra-226 <27.8 <22.6 <18.4 <27.1 <26.5+19.8 I-131 <4.6 <4.5 <3.4 <8.7 <4.6 <5.8

~ Location required, by the Technical Specifications.

(a) Recount result. Initial result showed 16.1 + 5.6

-65

TABLE 9 (Continued)

CONCENTRATION OF GAMMA EHITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF NHP AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES R-3 OFF-SITE STATION%'esults in units of ~10 Ci/m + 2 sigma Nuclides January February March April Hay June 1986 Co-60 <1.8 <1.8 <1,7 <2.0 <1 3

~ <2 '

Hn-54 <1 3

~ <1,9 <0.7 <ls5 <ls7 <2.0 Cs-134 <1.4 <1 ~ 5 <F 6 <1.6 10.9+1.9 3.1+1.4 Cs-137 <1,2 <ls2 <2.0 <2.0 21.8+2.7 7.6+2.2 Nb-95 <2.2 <2.3 <1.9 <2.2 <2.4 <3.2 Zr-95 <2 ' <3.0 <5,0 <4.6 <4.5 <3.7 Ce-141 <2.2 <2 ' <7.9 <2.7 <3.0 <2.9 Ce-144 <5s3 <6 ' <26.2 <5.9 <7s7 <8.2 RQ-106 '11.3 <14 ' <12.2 <15.7 <19.5 <20.2 Ru-103 <1.7 <1.3 <1.6 <2s2 24.0+3.1 9 '+2.5 Be-7 131.0+21,4 133.0+23 ' 99.2+22.2 132,0+25.9 85.9+17.3 184.0+28.5 K-40 <28,5 <24.8 <22.1 <32.1 66.5+19.5 , <33.4 La-140 <6.7 <6.1 <6 ' <8.0 <6.0 <7s2 Ra-226 <20,2 <29,1 <34.9 <30.5 <33 ' <30.4 I-131 <6.5 <5.5 <6.7 <11.8 24 '+5.2 <11.6 Nuclides July August September October November December Co-60 <1,7 <1,1 <2.1 <1.5 <2.4 <1.0 Hn-54 <1.2 <ls3 <1.7 <1.4 <1.0 <1.1 Cs-134 <1.5 <1.2 <1.3 <ls2 <1.9 <1.5 Cs-137 <1.9 <1.2 <0.9 <1.1 <1.5 <1.1 Nb-95 <1.1 <1.6 <ls7 <1.6 <2.4 <2.0 Zr-95 <2.9 <3.1 <2s7 <3s2 <4.3 <3 '

Ce-141 <2,0 <1.9 <1.7 <1.8 <2s3 <2.2 Ce-144 <5 ' <5,5 <5.5 <5.3 <6.9 <5.5 Ru-106 <9.1 <10.3 <15s2 ,<7 1

~ <16.0 <13.9 Ru-103 <2s2 <ls7 <1.8 <1.4 <2s2 <1.6 Be-7 132.0+22.4 147.0+18.7 104.0+18.9 119.0+19.6 145.0+24.7 116.0+21.5 K-40 <22s7 39.4+15.5 17.3+14.0 22 '+12.7 20.2+15.1 22.4+14,8 La-140 <5.6 <3s7 <3.7 <3 ~ <5.4 <4.6 Ra-226 <24.0 18.2+12.2 <24.7 6'23.2

<33.5 <24.6 I-131 <4.8 <5.0 <4,2 <7.1 <5.8 <5.4

~ Location required by the Technical Specifications.

-66

TABLE 9 CONCENTRATION OF GAMMA EMITTERS (Continued)

IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF PARTICULATE SAMPLES NMP'IR e

R-4 OFF-SITE STATION" s

Results in units of ~10 Cilm + 2 sigma Nuclides January February March April May June 1986 Co-60 <1.1 <le 3 <2e2 <1.9 <1.3 <1.4 Mn-54 <1.4 <1.7 <1.6 <1.7 <1.8 <1.0 Cs-134 <1.0 <1.4 <1.7 <le5 14.9+2.3 3.2+1.3 Cs-137 <lel <2.3 <1.5 <1.6 32 7+3 3 7.1+2.1 Nb-95 <1.6 <1.8 <2 ' <2.3 <2.5 <2.0 Zr-95 <3 ' <4.5 <5,2 <2.9 <3 ' <4.7 Ce-141 <1.9 <2e2 <2e3 <3 ' <3.4 <3.0 Ce-144 <4.9 <6.6 <6.9 <7.6 <9.5 <9.6 RU-106 <11.5 <13.7 <14.5 <12.7 <20.6 <14.2 Ru-103 <1.5 <1,6 <1.9 <2r2 29.7+3.5 14.9+3.0 Be-7 138.0+21.2 152.0+23.7 116.0+23.1 139.0+24.6 130.0+21.1 146.0+22.8

<22.4 <19.7 <30:9 17.9+16.5 58.2+20.3 61.9+22.6

,K-40,'a-140

<5.9 <7.4 <5.6 <6 ' <6.8 <2.8 Ra-226 <17.4 <26.7 <28.7 <28.3 21.7+13.8 I-131 <4,9 <7.1 <5.2 <6.7 17.1+6.8 <10.

Nuclides July August September October November December Co-60 <1.2 <1.4 <2e3 <1.5 <1.8 <1.7 Mn-54 <1.8 <lel <1.7 <1.0 <0.7 <1.1 Cs-134 <1.5 <1.4 <1 4

~ <1.1 <1.1 <1.7 Cs-137 <1 7

~ <1.4 <1.3 <1.3 <1.2 <1.4 Nb-95 <1 8~ <1.8 <1.7 <2.1 <1.5 <2.3 Zr-95 <4 ' <3 ' <2e7 <3.9 <3.1 <4.1 Ce-141 <2.4 <2e3 <1.8 <2.3 <1.9 <2.5 Ce-144 <7.4 <6 ' <5.1 <5.2 <6.6 <7.6 Ru-106 <13 ' <12.9 <9.8 <12.8 <15.6 <14.1 Ru-103 <2.1 <1.7 <F 9 <2.0 <1.6 <2.1 Be-7 156.0+22,5 135.0+18.1 107.0+20.0 121.0+21.5 136.0+21.7 105.0+17,6 K-40 53.5+20.4 57.2+18,5 15.0+11,6 <24.4 20.6+13.7 71.1+23.0 La-140 <4.7 <3.5 <3e7 <5.9 <2.9 <2.1 Ra-226 <30,7 <26.2 <22.6 17.6+16 ' <23.9 <29.4 I-131 <6.4 <6.5 <3,8 <7.4 <F 6 <6.2

< Location required by the Technical Specifications.

o-

-67

TABLE 9 (Continued)

CONCENTRATION OF GAg-LC EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF NMP AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES R-5 OFF-SITE STATION (CONTROL)~

Results in units of 0g

~~i1n Ci/mg e 2 sigma Nuclides January February March April May June 1986 Co-60 <0,8 <2e2 <2e3 <1.9 <2.0 <1.9 Mn-54 <le2 <1.7 <1.4 <1.8 <1 6

~ <1.6 Cs-134 <1.1 <1.5 <le2 <1.4 17.1+2.5 3.4+1.2 Cs-137 <0.9 <1.4 <1,2 <1.8 31.1+3.6 7.5+1.8 iNb-95 <1.0 <1.7 <1 8~ <1.9 <2.7 <2.4 Zr-95 <3.9 <2.8 <4.2 <6.3 <4.4 <4.3 Ce-141 <1 ~ 7 <2.4 <2.0 <2.4 <2.8 <2.9 Ce-144 <3.9 <5 ' <5.5 <8.1 <8.3 '8.3 RQ-106 <11.1 <12.7 <8.2 <17.2 <20.9 <16.8 RU-103 <1,7 <1.3 <2.2 <1.9 28.0+3.9 11.9+2.6 Be-7 108,0+18.2 167,0+24.2 104,0+21.1 126.0+25.5 137.0+24.6 154.0+22,6 K-40 <18.6 <34.7 <10.7 18.5+15.1 '<21 e 5 75.'8+24.2 La-140 <4,8 <3.6 <5.9 <4.3 <8.2 <3.8 Ra-226 <18.5 <21,2 <24.0 <27.1 <28.5 <30.7 I-131 <6.2 <6.'4 <5,6 <8.7 22.7+6.1 <9.2 Nuclides July August September October November December Co-60 <1.3 <1.1 <3 ' <1.4 <1.4 <2. 7 Mn-54 <le5 <l,l <1 3~ <1.6 <1.4 <1.1 Cs-134 <1.5 <1.5 <1.8 <1.0 <1.6 <1.4 Cs-137 <1.6 <1.3 <2 ' <0.8 <1.6 <1.8 Nb-95 <1.9 <2 ' <2.0 <1.4 <1.6 <1 1

~

Zr-95 <3.6 <3.6 <5,8 <3.1 <3.4 <4.4 Ce-141 <2.6 <1.8 <2e7 <2.0 <2.1 <1.7 Ce-144 <7.2 <4.9 <9.5 <5.4 <6.4 <5.7 Ru-106 <12.3 <9.0 <20.9 <10.5 <14.3 <10.3 Ru-103 <1.9 <1.7 <2 ' <1.5 <1.3 <1 2

~

Be-7 144.0+20.9 138. 0+21. 4 149.0+24.5 123.0+19.6 143.0+22.5 92.0+19.8 K-40 78.4+22.3 <23.7 76.1 +26.6 12.7+12.0 32.8+18.7 <27.0 La-140 <4 ' <2.9 <4.6 <4.9 <3.9 <3.2 Ra-226 <29.4 15.7+F 7 <35.8 <21.6 <27.2 <22.9 I-131 <6.1 <5.4 <5.2 <6.6 <4.8 <4.5

~ Location required by the Technical Specifications.

-68

TABLE 9 (Continued).

CONCENTRATION OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF; NMP, AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES Dl ON-SITE STATION >

Results in units of ~10 Ci/m + 2 sigma Nuclides January February March April May June 1986 Co-60 <0.8 <2.0 <2 ' <l. 4 <1.1 <1.0 Mn-54 <1.1 <1.0 <1.7 <1.5 <1.5 <1.4 Cs-134 <1.0 <1 3

~ <1.4 <la3 14.2+2.5 2.8+1.3 Cs-137 <1.0 <1 2

~ <1.8 <1.8 30.8+3.6 7.0+2.0 Nb-95 <0 ' <la2 <2.0 <1 3~ <2.0 <2.6 Zr-95 <2 ' <4.1 <2.2 <3a2 <4.2 <4.7 Ce-141 <1.8 <3.0 <2.0 <2.1 <2.8 <2.8 Ce-144 <5.7 <11.9 <6.3 <5.9 <6.9 <7al RQ-106 <8.1 <14.8 <16.6 <14.0 11.4+8.8 <19.1 RU-103 <1.5 <l. <2.0 <1.3 25.6+3.5 11.4+2.6 Be-7 111.0+18.8 4'33.0+22.8 91.8+20.0 133.0+22.6 143.0+23.0 149.0+24.2 K-40 <23.8 12.2+10.9 <28.6 <31.1 <26.7 <25.1 La-140 <2.8 <7a7 <3 ' <2.9 <8.3 <6.3 Ra-226 <17.0 <30.2 <21.2 <26.1 <27a7 <30.7 I-131 <3.8 <6.5 <4.8 <5.4 19.1+5.4 <9.1 Nuclides July August September October November December Co-60 <1.8 <1.5 <2.0 <1.5 <1.3 <1.4 Mn-54 <1.5 <1.2 <1.4 <0.7 <1.6 <2.2 Cs-134 <F 1 <1.3 <2.1 <1.2 <1.8 <2.0 Cs-137 <1,9 <0.9 <1.7 <1.4 <1.2 <1.7 Nb-95 <1 8~ <2 i2 <1 7

~ <1.3 <2.0 <2.3 Zr-95 <3.6 <3.4 <2.6 <3 ' <3.9 <4.1 Ce-141 <1.6 <2.4 <2a2 <1.3 <2.2 <2.4 Ce-144 <6 ' <6 ' <6.9 <4.9 <6.8 <6.6 RU-106 <11.0 <9.5 <10 ' <8.5 <13.3 <13.9 Ru-103 <1 8~ <1.4 <1.6 <1.3 <1.7 <2.0 Be-7 164.0+23,1 140.0+18.0 153,0+25.1 130,0+19.0 148.0+22.7 116.0+21.2 K-40 <27.4 47,1+16,1 <39.0, <20.5 21.5+15.8 <29.2 La-140 <4.0 <3.0 <4.9 <2.4 <2a7 <4.2 Ra-226 <24,9 12.6+8.8 <28.3 <19.2 24.7+16.1 <27.1 I-131 <3.5 <6.3 <3e7 <4.0 <4.9 <4.5

>-Optional sample location

-69

TABLE 9 (Continued)

CONCEiVTRATIOsV OF GAD<A EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF NMP AIR PARTICULATE SA fPLES D2 ON-SITE STATION +

Results in units of ~10 Ci/mg + 2 sigma Nuclides January February March April May June 1986 Co-60 <1.0 <2s2 <3s3 <3sl <2 3

~ <1 3

~

Mn-54 <2.3 <1.8 <3sl <2.0 <2.6 <1.3 Cs-134 <1.4 <2.0 <2,4 <2 ' 12.7+2.4 2.3+1.4 Cs-137 <1,9 <1.9 <2s7 <2.5 24.9+3.5 6.2+2.1 Nb-95 <2.2 <2.8 <3.1 <4 ' <3.8 <3.3 Zr-95 <5.4 <5.4 <8.2 <4.6 <6.5 <4.9 Ce-141 <2.3 <2.9 <3.6 <3.0 <3.8 <3,6 Ce-144 <4.9 <8.7 <10 ' <8.4 <12.1 <9.9 RU-106 <15.5 <18.3 <20.0 <26.7 <24.1 <23.6 Ru-103 <2.0 <2.5 <3.8 <3.4 19.7+3.7 16.9+3.7 Be-7 124.0+23.0 103.0+23.9 147.0+30.4 158.0+32.2 130.0+25.0 151 '+26.3 K-40 <29.4 <34.7 <54,6 26.6+24..1 76.0+28.0 103.0+29.5 La-140 <4.3 <4.9 <4.9 <4.7 <7.0 <9.2 Ra-226 <24.8 <33 ' <40.6 <40.9 <49.2 38.9+22.1 I-131 <6.5 <10.5 <6.9 <6.6 18.7+5.7 <10.9 Nucli des July August September October November December Co-60 <2.2 <2.9 <1.6 <1.4 <2.1 <2.1 Mn-54 <1.6 <1 2

~ <1.2 <1.2 <2.4 <2.3 Cs-134 <2s2 <1 2

~ <1,9 <lsl <2.4 <2.1 Cs-137 <2.0 <1.9 <1 0~ <1.0 <1.9 <1.7 Nb-95 <2s5 <2.3 <1 4~ <le7 <2.0 <2.4 Zr-95 <4.7 <4,1 <4.5 <3,6 <7.4 <3.4 Ce-141 <2.9 <2.4 <2s2 <1.9 <2.7 <3.1 Ce-144 <8.6 <5.4 <6.5 <4,2 <9.2 <8.4 Ru-106 <15.1 <10.3 <14.7 <12.0 <21 6 F <17.2 Ru-103 <2.3 <2.6 <1.9 <1.5 <2.4 <2.5 Be-7 135.0+22.2 157.0+25.7 137.0+23 ' 109.0+19.4 148.0+28.6 80.8+18.9 K-40 80,5+26.3 <27.5 <29,8 <26.7 <31.8 45.0+21,4 La-140 <3.0 <6.0 <6.2 <2.8 <6.1 <5.7 Ra-226 31,0+18.6 <24.8 <30.9 <21.6 <32s3 23.7+14.4 I-131 <4.2 <9.1 <6.0 <4.7 <6.6 <6.0

~Optional sample location

-70

TABLE 9 (Continued),.

CONCENTRATION OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN" MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF NMP AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES E ON-SITE STATION A Results in units ei ~10 Ci/m + 2 sipms Nuclides January February March Apr il May June 1986 Co-60 <1 0

~ <l. 9 <1.9 <2e2 <1.0 <1.4 Mn-54 <1.4 <1.5 <le7 <1,6 <1.6 <2.1 Cs-134 <1.2 <1.6 <1.7 <1.6 15.6+2.3 4.3+1.5 Cs-137 <1 2

~ <1.3 <2 ' <1.8 29.7+3.0 9.3+2.1 Nb-95 <1.5 <2.5 <1.5 <3el 1.7+1.0 <2.7 Zr-95 <4.4 <3.6 <3e5 <5.1 <3.8 <4.4 Ce-141 <2e3 <2.0 <2,4 <2.9 <3.1 <3.0 Ce-144 <5.9 <5e7 <7.8 <6,6 <8.6 <8.7 Ru-106 <17,2 <15.7 <13.4 <17 ' 14 '+9.1 <16.8 Ru-103 "

<1.5 <1.5 <2 ' <1.8 28 F 0+3.2 15.5+2.8 Be-7 121.0+22.6 149.0+23 ' 123.0+22.3 144.0+28.4 134.0+20,1 126.0+21.8 K-40 19.0+13.7 <25.1 <30.6 <28.6 66.3+19.5 64.5+22.4 La-140 <8.7 <3,8 <5.7 <7e2 <6.2 <2.6 Ra-226 <22.1 <24.9 <29.7 <24.0 <33.0 <32.9 I-131 <7.0 <7.6 <4 ' <21.7 21.7+6.0 <8.6 Nuclides July August September October November December Co-60 <1.5 <1.3 <1,2 <1.2 <2el <1.6 Mn-54 <1.5 <1.3 <1.5 <1.5 <ls3 <1.2 Cs-134 <2.0 <1.1 <1.2 <lel <1.5 <1.5 Cs-137 <2.1 <1.6 <1.3 <1.1 <1.3 <1.8 Nb-95 <2.2 <1.1 <2.6 <1.6 <2.1 <1.6 Zr-95 <4.5 <3.1 <2e7 <3 ' <2.4 <4.0 Ce-141 <2,4 <1.9 <2.9 <1.7 <2e3 <2.0 Ce-144 <7.5 <4.3 <5.4 <4.6 <6.4 <6.8 RU-106 <13.1 <13.2 <9.6 <10.6 <13.4 <9.7 RU-103 <2.1 <1.4 <2.5 <1.9 <1.8 <2.2 Be-7 133.0+20.8 121.0+20.5 143.0+26.4 150.0+22.5 138.0+22.2 68.8+16.2 K-40 63.2+21.5 <21.6 <25.1 <12.9 <28.5 <32.0 La-140 <3e3 <4.4 <16.0 <3.9 <3.9 <3.9 Ra-226 23.7+14.9 14.0+9.0 <23.9 <22.8 <27 ' <25.8 I-131 <4.5 <8,7 <20.5 <6.5 <3.9 <6.2 "Optional sample location

.71

TABLE 9 (Continued)

COiVCEiVTRATION OF GAME EMITTERS IN MONTHLY,COMPOSITES OF iVMP AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES F ON-SITE STATION "

Results in units of ~10 2 Cilmg e 2 sigma Nuclides January February March April May June 1986 Co-60 <1.8 <1. <2.5 <2.3 '<1. 2 <1.9 Mn-54 <1.8 0'1e2

<2.0 <1.9 <1.5 <1.6 Cs-134 <1.2 <1.6 <1.4 <1.9 18.1+2 ' 5.2+1.5 Cs-137 <1.6 <1,5 <1:7 <1. 28.1+3.1 11.0+2.2

<2.4 <2.3 9,'2.

Nb-95 <1.6 <1. 9 <2.1 5" Zr-95 <2.4 <5.'5 <4.4 <3.9 <4.7 <4.0 Ce-141 <2.1 <2,8 <2.8 <2 ~

6': <3.2 <3.1 Ce-144 <5.1 <7.0 <8.4 <6.4 ~ <9.1 <9.1 RQ-106 <15,5 <15,7 <15.1 <15.3 <21.6 <18.3 RU-103 <2.0 <2el <2 ' <2.5 33.5+3.4 14.4+2.6 Be-7 129,0+21.8 122.0+23 128.0+25,2 127.0+23".9 134.0+21.4 171.0+24.3 K-40 <28.0 <35.6 15.9gl5.4 <17.0 49.8+17.7 75.4+24.5 La-140 <5.4 <3 ' <3e7 <8.0 6.7+4.1 <4.6 Ra-226 <21,1 . <25.5 <35.0 <28.4 <35.1 <35.3 I-131 <F 6 <7,6 <5e2 <7.3 22.3+7.4 <9.4 Nuclides July August September October November December Co-60 <1. 0 <1. 1 <0.9 <0.7 <2.8 <1 ~ 5 Mn-54 <0.9 <lel <1.2 <1.1 <1.2 <1.5 Cs-134 <1.8 <1.2 <1.2 <1 2~ <1.5 <1.5 Cs-137 <2e2 <1.5 <1.4 <1.2 <1.8 <1.6 Nb-95 <2.5 <1.6 <1.6 <1.9 <1.5 <1.8 Zr-95 <4 ' <3.1 <3.1 <F 1 <5.7 <4.3 Ce-141 <2e3 <2e7 <1.8 <2.0 <2.0 <2.6 Ce-144 <7.4 <6 ' <5.7 <4.8 <5.7 <7e7 Ru-106 <10.6 <12.9 <lle7 <9.8 <14.9 <15.4 Ru-103 <2 ' <2.3 <1 6~ <1.7 <1.5 <1.8 Be-7 134.0+23.3 145.0+19.4 132.0+20'4 117 '+19.1 133 '+24.1 88.7+16.3 K-40 <27.9 50.0+17.9 32.8+16.5 <18.8 <24.4 88 '+23.6 La-140 <3.0 <3,0 <3.5 <4.6 <4 ' '<5. 0 Ra-226 <30.3 <24.4 <24.5 <20,7 <28'. 7 <31. 4 I-131 <5.5 <10,9 <3.5 <6.5 <4.6 <4 '

>-Opt i on el s ample loc a t i on.

-72

DECONCENTRATION TABLE 9 OF GAMMA EMITTERS AIR

(,Continued)

IN PARTICULATE SAMPLES MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF NMP 0

G ON-SITE STATION A Results in units ug ~10 Ci/m + 2 sigma Nuclides January February March April May June 1986 Co-60 <2e2 <1.4 <1 6~ <1.5 <1.7 <1.0 Mn-54 <0.9 <1.2 <1.5 <1.8 <1.8 <1.8 Cs-134 <1.0 <1.0 <1.5 <1.3 11.3+2.2 2.8+1.5 Cs-137 <0.6 <1,3 <1.7 <1.8 29.1+3.6 8.5+2.3 Nb-95 <1.6 <1.9 <2e2 <2 ' <3.5 <1. 8 Zr-95 <1.1 <3.7 <4,4 <4.7 <4.6 <4.3 Ce-141 <1.7 <2.0 <2e3 <2e3 <2.9 <2.8 Ce-144 <4.9 <5.5 <6.0 <6.9 <7.7 <8.4 RQ-106 <8.4 <11.3 <17.3 <14.5 <20.2 <21.2 Ru-103 <1.5 <1.6 <2 ' <1.8 25.3+3.6 15.8+3.2 Be-7 115.0+18.5 121.0+21.8 114.0+22.8 133.0+24.3 123.0+22.6 143.0+25.4 K-40 <21.9 <21e3 <30.9 <19.6 <24.1 12.6+11.8 La-140 <4.5 <6.6 <3.4 <4.2 4.9+3.9 <4.1 Ra-226 <19.2 <20.3 <24.3 28.6+18.1 <34.3 <29.5 I-131 <5 ' <5.5 <5.3 <7.0 16.4+5.7 <10.

Nuclides July August September October November December Co-60 <1.6 <1.2 <1.8 <1.4 <1.7 <1.7 Mn-54 <1 ~ 7 <1.2 <1.6 <1.4 <1.3 <1.8 Cs-134 <1.9 <1 4

~ <1 ~ 7 <1.2 <1.4 <2.0 Cs-137 <1,9 <1.5 <1.7 <le2 <1.9 <2.0 Nb-95 <2.1 <2.4 <2e2 <2.1 <1.9 <2.1 Zr-95 <4.7 <4.0 <4.8 <3.9 <4.4 <4.1 Ce-141 <2.8 <2.9 <2.6 <1.9 <2.5 <2.7 Ce-144 <8.7 <6.6 <7e5 <5.5 <7.4 <8.4 Ru-106 <15.8 <13.3 <12.2 <9.3 <14.2 <$ 6.1 Ru-103 <2.2 <1,9 <1.8 <1.7 <1.6 <2.0 Be-7 148.0+23.5 97.5+17a.3 105.0+17.1 103.0+18.7 113.0+21.5 93.0+18.0 K-40 89,8+28.7 45.0+16.2 74.7+22.6 <23e7 <33.7 67.6+23.6 La-140 <2,4 <6.2 <4.5 <3.8 <6.7 <2.5 Ra-226 <35.4 <21.3+11.3 20.9+13.9 <25.3 <28.9 30.0+17.4 I-131 <4.9 <11.5 <4.9 <9.5 <5.6 <5.5

"-Optional sample location

-73 0

TABf.E 9 (Continued)

CONCENTRATION OF GAg&fA EHITTERS IN MONTHfY COMPOSITES OF NHP AIR PARTICULATE SAMPf ES H ON-SITE STATION "

Results in units of og

~~~le Ci/mg + 2 sigma Nuclides January February March April May June 1986 Co-60 <1.1 <ls3 <2.7 <1.2 <1.4 Mn-54 - <1.2 <1.6 <2.2 <1.3 <1.8 Cs-134 <1.2 <1.2 <2.3 11.7+1.9 2.6+1.2 Cs-137 <1.5 <1.0 <2.4 25.3+2.8 5.0+1.8 Nb-95 <2e2 <2.2 <2.2 <2.2 <2.8 Zr-95 <2.4 <2 ' <6.6 <4.7 <5 '

Ce-141 <1.8 <2.2 <3 ' <2.8 <3.0 Ce-144 <5.2 <5.7 <10.0 <8.1 <7e5 Ru-106 <10 ' <10,0 <24.0 <18.2 <18.8 Ru-103 <1.4 <1.7 <2.0 20.9+2.8 13.8+2.9 Be-7 120.0+19,8 114,0+21.5 78.4+24.5 87.7+16.2 134 '+24.6 K-40 20,4+12.4 <24.1 <40.3 55.2+17.5 <32 '

La-140 e <7,7 <7.9 <10.3 <5.6 <6.7 Ra-226 <17.2 <26.9 <37.7 35.6+16.6 <30.9 I-131 <6.3 <7,0 <12e7 15.4+4.7 <8.4 Nuclides July August September October November December Co-60 <1.4 <1.4 <1.8 <1.6 <3.0 <1 8

~

Hn-54 <1.3 <0.8 <1.1 <0.8 <2.1 <1.5 Cs-134 <1.5 <1 2

~ <1.4 <1.2 <2.0 <1.6 Cs-137 <1.8 <1 2

~ <1.2 <1.2 <2.4 <1.7 Nb-95 <2.1 <2s3 <1.8 <1.9 <2.0 <1.7 Zr-95 <4.1 <4.1 <3.4 <3.6 <5.3 <5.0 Ce-141 <2.5 <2.9 <2.2, <2.3 <2.8 <2 '

Ce-144 <7.4 <6.0 <7 e3 <5 ' <7.4 <7.4 Ru-106 <16.7 <11.8 <10.9 <14.2 <18.1 <13.5 RQ-103 <2.0 <2e3 <1.8 <1.7 <2.3 <1.4 Be-7 120.0+20 ' 120.0+18.9 104.0+21.5 118.0+20

<17.0

', 138.0+29.0 39.8+25.7 55.6+14.3 67.6+21.6 K-40 67.6+22.5 60.1+18.4 <28.0 La-140 <3.5 <6.0 <2,9 <4.4 <4.5 <2.8 Ra-226 <31.2 <25.5 <28.5 <21.1 25.3+15.3 <32e2 I-131 <5.1 <11.1 <5 ' <9 ' <5.8 <5.9

~-Optional sample location

>>-Environmental station not operable during April 1986.

TABLE 9 (Continued)

CONCENTRATION OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF NMP AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES I ON-SITE STATION '4 Results in units of ~10 Ci/m g 2 sigma Nuclides January February March April May June 1986 Co-60 <0. 7 <0.9 <2.9 <2.0 <1.7 Mn-54 <0.7 <1.3 <1.4 <2.0 <2.1 <2 '

Cs-134 <1.0 <le2 <1.3 <1.5 13.1+2.4 2.9+1.8 Cs-137 <0.8 <1.4 <1.1 <1.8 28.9+3.8 7.4+2.2

<1.8 <2.1 <1,2 <2.5 <2.6 Nb-95 Zr-95 Ce-141

<2.6

<1.6

<4.1 1'1.2 <1 ~

<1.9

<2.8

<8.8 7

<3.7

<2.0

<6,4

<5.0

<2.7

<9.0

<5.3

<2,6

<8.0

<5.9,

<2.8

<8.7 Ce-144 Ru-106 <10.6 <13.8 <13,2 <16.7 <22.3 <22e3 Ru-103 <1.1 <0,9 <2.4 <2.8 26.1+3.8 11.5+3.1 Be-7 93.6+16.5 126.0+20.5 106 '+19.5 127.0+29.9 111.0+24.4 121.0+27.2 K-40 <20.3 <20.6 17.4+14.5 <33.8 <25e2 <31.1 La 140 <5.1 <7e3 <4.8 <9.8 <7e2 <8.3 Ra-226 <13.5 <24.2 <24.5 <30.4 <32,0 <34.3 I-131 <5. <6,2 <F 1 <11.8 15.7+5.6 <11.3 Nuclides July August September October November December Co-60 <1.2 <2.5 <1.5 <1.0 <1.4 <1.8 Mn-54 <2.1 <1.5 <2.3 <1.1 <1.3 <1.9 Cs-134 <1.8 <1.3 <2e2 <1.2 <1.7 <1.9 Cs-137 <1.8 <F 6 <2.1 <1 ~ 5 <1.8 <1.2 Nb-95 <2.9 <3.1 <2e7 <1.3 <1.7 <2.9 Zr-95 <5.5 <3.4 <5.5 <5.4 <2.9 <4.7 Ce-141 <2.6 <3.0 <3.0 <2.0 <2e2 <3.0 Ce-144 <7.5 '5.8

<10.6 <5.7 <7.5 <8.2 Ru-106 <20.1 <12.0 <20.8 <9.0 <15 ' <18.7 Ru-103 <2.2 <2.1 <3.1 <2.0 <2.0 <2.6 Be-7 135.0+25.3 134.0+25.5 100.0+20.1 112.0+20.7 130.0+27.3 90.0+19.0 K-40 <30.5 <36.3 80.5+25.1 <14.6 <31.7 49.9+22.2 La-140 <6.1 <5 ' <4.9 <4.7 <4.2 <6.0 Ra-226 <32.9 <27.9 <40.4 <23.9 <30.2 <31.9 I-131 <6.1 <13 ' <6.8 <6.6 <4.8 <5 '

~-Optional sample location

~ -'75

TABLE 9 (Continued)

CONCEi'JTRATION OF GAR~X EMXTTERS XN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF NMP AXR PARTICULATE SAMPLES J ON-SITE STATXON ~

Results in units of ~10 Ci/m + 2 sigma Nuclides January February March April May June 1986 Co-60 <2.0 <1.4 <1.5 <2.0 <1.4 <1.3 Mn-54 <1.6 <2 ' <1,3 <2el <la2 <2.6 Cs-134 <la3 <1.6 <1.4 <1.8 10.2+1.9 3.5+1.9 Cs-137 <1,4 <1.9 <1.9 <1.9 20 '+2.8 10.7+2.7 Nb-95 <2.2 <1.7 <1.4 <3e7 <2.8 <3.2 Zr-95 <4.9 <4,3 <3.5 <5.7 <4.6 <5.4 Ce-141 <2.8 <4.2 <2.4 <4.4 <3.0 <3.2 Ce-144 <6.9 <14.2 <7.0 <8.9 <9.1 <8.9 Ru-106 <17 ' <21.5 <14,0 <18.4 <20.9 <27.2 RU-103 <2.7 <3.0 <1,9 <3.1 22.2+3.0 12.1+3.3 Be-7 64.7+19.2 88.8+23 ' 62.3+17.7 104.0+21.4 104.0+21.2 129.0+28.8 K-40 <20.8 <26.0 <30,0 69.6+23.0 78.8+22.5 <36 '

La-140 <9.9 <13.2 <5,'6 <7 ' <6.4 <F 2 Ra-226 <26.8 <39.9 <25.4 <35.9 <37.1 <38.2 I-131 <7.0 <10.7 <4 ' <18.9 18.8+6.2 <14.4 Nuclides July August September October November December Co-60 <2a3 <1.8 <2.4 <1.7 <1.4 Mn-54 <1.8 <1.6 <1.7 <1.4 <1.8 <1.6 Cs-134 <1.8 <1.5 <1.9 <1.5 <1.7 <1.7 Cs-137 <1.9 <1.7 <1.7 <1.2 <1.3 <2.1 Nb-95 <2.0 <2a2 <3 ' <2.2 <2.9 <2.1 Zr-95 Ce'-141

<4.9

<2.8

<3.8

<3.2

<3a5

<2.1

<4.8

<2.6 7'2a2 <4.8

<2 '

<5.1

<2a3

<6.6 Ce-144 <8.1 <7.5 .<7.5 <6.8 <6.6 Ru-106 <16.8 <16 ' <17.0 ,<10. 4 <18.4 <11.1 Ru-103 <2.5 <2,5 <1 ~ 7 ~ <2.4 <1.9 <1.8 Be-7 154.0+25.2 146,0+22.6 121,0+23.5 128.0+24.7 123.0+23.8 77.8+18.0 K-40 73.0+25.1 43.9+16.9 <30.2 <23.0 <31 '

La-140 <4.0 <5.0 <3.4 <10.4 <5.4 <2.9 Ra-226 <30,4 <28,5 <33.2 <29.2 <22.4 <27.4 I-131 <6.0 <12.6 <2.6 <7 ~ <4.9 4.7

~-Optional sample location

"*-The data report showed the error to be equal to the net activity. Therefore, a result is not reported here. The original result was 13.0+13.0

-76

TABLE 9 (Continued)

CONCENTRATION OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES'F NMP, AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES K ON-SITE STATION >

Results in units of ~10 Ci/m + 2 sigma Nuclides January February March April May June 1986 Co-60 <0 ' <1 1

~ <1.4 <1.5 <2.0 <1.6 Mn-54 <0.7 <1.8 <1.2 <1 4

~ <1.4 <1.8 Cs-134 <0.6 <1.8 <1.2 <1.1 9.8+2.0 3.6+1.&

Cs-137 <0.9 <1.6 <1.5 <ls2 23 7+3 1 10.9+2.4 Nb-95 <lel <2 ' <2 ' <1.5 <1.8 <2.7 Zr-95 <1.4 <5 ' <2.0 <2.7 <3.0 <5.6 Ce-141 <1.4 <3 ' <1.6 <1.8 <2.6 <3.2 Ce-144 <3.9 <13.0 <5.7 <5.4 <7.4 <10.3 Ru-106 <7e3 <12.8 <8,2 <15.1 <17.0 <17.0 Ru-103 <1.2 <2.0 <1.4 <1.6 23.1+3.5 10.5+2.8 Be-7 81.1+15.0 101.0+21.8 72.7+17,2 121.0+20.7 108.0+19.5 152.0+25.9 K-40 <13 ' 41.5+22.8 <22.6 <33 ' <23.8 79.1+26.0 La-140 <4.0 <6.8 <2 ' <3 ' <8.2 <4.5 Ra-226 I-131

<16.0

<5.3

<33el

<7 '

<20.9

<4.5

<20.4

<8.7

<27.6 13.5+5.2

<<40 Nuclides July August September October November December Co-60 <2e2 <1.0 <3. 1 <3.1 <2.3 <1. 7 Mn-54 <1.8 <1.9 <1.6 <1.6 <1.2 <1.7 Cs-134 <1.5 <le7 <2.2 <1.4 <1.9 <1.6 Cs-137 <2.1 <1.4 <1 9

~ <le7 <1 3

~ <2.1 Nb-95 <le5 <2.6 <2.4 <3.1 <2.5 <3.1 Zr-95 <6.1 <2.4 <5.0 <7,6 <3.8 <2.5 Ce-141 <2.4 <2.6 <3.6 <2.8 <2.5 <2.6 Ce-144 <7.9 <6.4 <10.0 <8.2 <7,4 <8.0 Ru-106 <13.4 <14.9. <19.2 <14.4 <14.9 <15.9 RU-103 <2a2 <2a2 <2.6 <2el <1.6 <1.4 Be-7 133.0+26.9 133.0+25,0 101.0+21 ' 123.0+26.4 142.0+26.4 61.4+19.6 K-40 <32.6 <14.3+12.1 68,2+25.8 29.7+19,1 <28.4 <35.3 La-140 <7.7 <10.2 <6.0 <12.8 <9.6 <5.9 Ra-226 <34 ' <26.0 26.3+16.8 <28.5 <28.1 <28.0 I-131 <6.6 <14.2 <6.9 .. <14.1 <6.9 <6.8

• -Optional sample location

-77

TABLE 9 (Continued)

CONCEiVTRATION OF GARE& EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COaHPOSITES OF NHP AIR PARTICUF ATE SAHPLES G OFF-SITE STATION ~

Results in units of og

~~iln Ci/mg + 2 sigma Nuclides January February Harch April May June 1986 Co-60 <1.1 <2e5 <2e7 <2.8 <2.4 <1 7

~

Mn-54 <1.5 <1.4 <F 9 <2.3 <2.4 <F 9 Cs-134 <1.6 <1.6 <1.9 <2.1 17.0+2.5 3.0+1.7 Cs-137 <F 6 <1.4 <F 6 <2.4 33 2+3 7 8.4+2.2 Nb-95 <3.0 <2.4 '3e3

<3e2 <2.5 <3.5 Zr-95 <4.2 <5.0 <6.4 <7e7 <4.5 <4.4 Ce-141 <2e7 <3.6 <F 6 <4.5 <3.4 <3 '

Ce-144 <6.6 <11.2 <23.6 <lle2 <10.3 <9.7 Ru-106 <12.2 <15.2 <19.9 <23e3 <22.2 <20.2 Ru-103 <2.0 <2e3 <2 ' <3.5 31.4+3.8 7.9+2.4 Be-7 120.0+23.1 107.0+22.2 115.0+26.6 98.9+28.0 141.0+24.3 155.0+25,9 K-40 23.0+15.6 <32.6 <32.8 60.7+32.4 69 '+23.0 75.5+26.4 La-140 <7e3 <8.7 <5.6 <F 6 <8.4 <4.7 Ra-226 <29.5 <33.6 <36,7 <44.8 <40.9 <39.7 I-131. <8.9 <12,1 <8,0 <12.5 <24.0+6.4. <lle3 Nuclides July August September October November December Co-60 <1.5 <1.8 <1.9 <2.1 <1.4 <1.9 Hn-54 <1.8 <1.2 <1.2 <1.1 <2.0 <2.1 Cs-134 <1 8

~ <le2 <1.2 <le3 <2.1 <2e3 Cs-137 <1.9 <1.3 <2.1 <le2 <2 ' <2e2 Nb-95 <2.6 <1.5 <1,5 <1.8 <2.8 <3.0 Zr-95 <5.0 <3.4 <3.6 <4.0 <4.2 <6.0 Ce-141 <2.6 <2.1 <2.4 <2.6 <2e7 <3e3 Ce-144 <8.1 <5.0 <7.1 <5.6 <6.6 <7.6 RU-106 <15e3 <11.0 <18.3 <15.7 <15.8 <23.4 RU-103 <2 ' <2e3 <1.8 <2 ' <2.4 <2.6 Be-7 138.0+23.3 154.0+23.1 135,0+25.2 138.0+22.8 155.0+28.7 106,0+21.2 K-40 82.3+24.2 22.3+16.4 21.3+15.9 <22.7 <29.7 85.4+28.3 La-140 <3.8 <4.9 <3 ' <7e3 <5.0 <4.4 Ra-226 38.1+19.6 <20.0 <32.1 <23.5 25.8+18.3 24.0+15.0 I-131 <7e5 <5.2 <3.8 <8.6 <6. 5 <6.6

>-Optional sample location

-78

TABLE 10 EHUIROHtIEHTAL CHARCOAL CARTRIOGE SNPLES - OFF SITE STATIONS I-131 ACTIUITY pCi/s"3 < 2 siaaa "PUMP NOT OPERATIONAL LOCATIOH LEEK EHO OATE -. Rl-OFF R2-OFF R3-OFF R4-OFF G--OFF 86/01/07 <0.011 <0.008 <O.OD9 <0.011 <o.ao6 <0.010 86/Ol/14 <0.007 <0.011 <0. 011 <0.009 <o'.a15

&6/1 /21 <a.'oil <a.'o14 <O.D06 <0.013 <0.009 <0.013 86/1 /28 <0'.an5 <0.009 <0.008 <O.OD9 <0.007 <0.014 86/02/04 <0.012 <o.'ao7 <0.010 <0.014 <0.008 <0.052 86/02/11 <0.013 <0.011 <0.011 <0.015 <0.011 <0.013 86/02/19 <0.009 <0.005 <0.008 <0.011 <0.008 <0.009 86/02/25 <0.014 <0.'009 <o'.Dla <O.OI3 <0.00& <0.015 86/aj/O4 <0.009 <0.011 <0.011 <0.013 <0.012 <0.018 86/03/ll <0.016 <0.009 <0.012 <0.013 <0.016 <0.015

&6/03/18 <0.012 <0.009 <0.012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.013 86/03/25 <0.010 <0.006 <0.013 <0.016 <0.011 <0.'009=

86/04/01 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 <0.010 ~ <0.020 86/04/08 <0.013 <0.010 <0.011 <0.013 <0.011 <0.012

&6/04/15 <0.015 <0.011 <0.009 <0.015 <0,015 <0.019 86/04/22 <0.013 <0.010 <0.009 <0.018 <0.009 <0.019 86/04/29 <0.018 <0.028 <0.016 <0.010 <0.012 <0.047

&6/O5/O6 <0.011 <0.013 <0.014 <0.015 cD.016 <0.018

&6/a5/13 0.332+0.035 0.254+0.030 292<0.033 0.334>0.036 0.290<0.038 0.360>0.042 86/05/20 0.266+D.035 0.206>0.023 0. 220<0.D25 0.062 0.016 0.187+0.025 0.259<0.038 86/05/27 0.067+0.015 0.052<0.014 0. a49 a'.o12 o.a55 0.016 0.052>0.013 0.054>0.017 86/06/03 0.050<0.013 0.048+0.015 0. 065>0.016 0.047T0.017 0.058<0.018 0.074<0.021 S6/06/10 0.041+0.015 0.023>0.010 0. 024+0.011 0.032>0.014 0.023+0.011 0.023<0.012 86/06/17 'O.oij <0.018 I <D.DD <0.012 <0.016 <0.015 S6/06/24 <D.013 <0.013 <0.010 <a'.olj <0.012 <0.020 86/07/01 <0.009 <0.014 I <0.010 <o.'ola <0. D12 <0.011 86/07/08 <0.014 <0.012 . <a.'oil <0.014 <0.013 <0.019 86/07/15 cD.009 <O.OD& <0.011 <0.009 <0.013 <0.011 86/07/22 <0.011 <0.011- <0,010 <0.013 <0.009 <0.015 86/07/29 <a.'oa9 <a.'olo <0.011 <0.010 <0.011 <0.013 86/08/05 <0.015 <0.013 <0.009 <0.009 <0.011 <0.013 86/08/12 <0.010 <0.011 <0.013 <0.011 <0. 00.9 <0.014 86/08/19 <0.012 <0.011 <0.012 <0.012 <0,011 . <0.013 86/OS/26 <0.'o16 <0.009 <0.014 <0.012 <0.009 <0.012 86/09/03 <0.014 <0.011 <D.009 <0.011 <0.011 <o.alo 86/09/09 <a.'o14 <0.014 <0.012 <a.'ola <0.014 <0.007 86/09/16 <0.014 <0.010 <0.012 <0:009 <0.011 <0.009 86/09/23 <0.012 <o.'oa4 <0.011 <a.'oil <0.008 <a.'009 86/09/30 <0.009 <0.010 <0.009 <0.013 <0.011 <0.013

&6/lO/07 <0.014 <0.013 <0.011 <0.012 <0.011 <0.013 86/lo/14 <0.009 <0.008 <0.007 <0.014 <0.012 <0.013 86/10/21 <0.010 <o,'oa& <0.013 <0.010 <0.011 <0.012 86/10/28 <0.014 <0.012 cD.011 <0.013 <0.012 <0.014 86/11/04 <0.009 <0.012 <0.010 <0,013 <0.009 <0.013 86/11/11 <0.016 <0.007 <0.014 <0.010 <0.013 <0.011 86/ll/1S <0.011 <0.013 <0.011 <0.010 <0,009 <a.'olo 86/ll/25 <o.'ola <0.011 <0.013 <0.011 <0.009 <0.009 86/12/02 <0.011 <0.013 <0.0 <0.013 <0.012 <0.015 12/09 <0.010 <0.010 <0 <0.006 <0.011 <0.018 12/16 <0.009 <0.012 <a <0.014 <0.010 <0.016

'~.2/23 <0.014 <0.014 <0.. <0.013 <0.011 <0.016

.2/30 <0.012 <0.011 <D.oli <0.012 <0.007 <0.012

RP/OAF SITE.

ENIRIIEHTAL OIARCOAL CARTRIDGE SNPLES - ON SITE STATIONS "'PUMP NOT OPERATIONAL 1-131 ACTIUITY pCi/a*3 < 2 sigaa LOCATION LM< END DATE Dl-ON D2-ON E-ON F DN G-ON H-OH- I DN KDN 86/al/O& <o.ola <0.021 <0.012 <0.017 <0.014 <D.aoa <0.009 <0.017 <0.010 86/Ol/13 <0.011 <0.015 <0.010 <0.009 <0.009 <0.013 <a.'oil <0.012 <a.ao&

86/I /20 <0.012 <0.013 <0.011 <0.010 <0.013 <o'.oa& <0.007 <0.014 <0.00&

86/1 /27 <0.013 <0.099 <o.'a!4 <0,016 <0. 00 <o.oaa <0.010 <0.010 <0.099 86/02/03 <0.014 <o'.ola <0.010 <0.00& <0.010 <0.011 <a.'016 <0.008 S6/02/10 <0.010 <0.011 <o.ao7 <0.008 <0.019 <O.G10 <0.011 <0.014 <0.007 86/02/18 <0.009 <D.009 <0.008 <0.014 <a'.oo5 <0.009 <0.008 <0.012 <0.005 86/02/24 <0.011 <0.014 <0.011 <0.013 <0.012 <0.013 <0.009 <a'.alj <0.0!7 86/03/03 <0.012 <o'.a!4 <0.011 <0.007 <0.009. <0.008 <0.008 <o.'a!5 <0.922

&6/Oj/la <0.013 <0.025 <0.011 <0.012 <0.012 <0.0!0 <o.'ao7 <0.014 <0.008 86/03/17 <0.014 <0.015 <0.024 <0.011 <0.016 <0.011 <0.017 <0.011 <0.010

&6/03/24 <0.013 <0.012 <0.013 <0.010 <0.910 <0.025 <0.011 . <0.014 <0.007 86/03/31 <0.011 <0.917 <0.014 <0.011 <0.0!4 <0.009 <0.011 <0.008 86/04/07 <o.'alo <D.oil <0.012 <0.012 <0. D12 C <0.021 .<0.015 <o.ao&

86/04/14 <0.012 <0.022 <O.D10 <0.016 <0.012 <0.016 <0.018 <o.'oa&

86/04r21 <o.'all <D.017 <o.'a!5 <0.016 <0.012 <o.'aos <0.017 <0.012 86/04r28 <0.039 <0.012 <0.026 <0.011 <0.019 <0.018 <0.027 <0;012 <0.025 86/05/05 <0.098 <0.023 <D.012 <0.014 <0.010 <a.'o!5 <0.013 <0.016 <0.008 86/95/12 0.199>0.027 0.163<0.032 0.211<0.029 0.14D<0.025 0.13S+0.025 0.177i0.025 0.191>0.030 0.188<0.028 0.172<0.025 86/95/19 o.'jal a.'oja 0.218+0.031 0.309<0.035 0.19&<0.025 a'.2D o'.a27 0.299<0.034 o.'255+a'.ojo 0.293+0.036 0.284 O.D29 86/05/27 0.959>0.015 0.063+0.018 0.066+0.015 0.046<0.015 0.075+0.017 0.955>0.013 0.047<0.016 0.080<0.017 '.058+a.ol&

86/06/02 0,05&+0.017 0.063>0.022 0.070>0.018 0 034>0.012 F 0. 038+0. 017 0.044>0.013 0.064I0.019 D.OS9 0.023 0.056>0.01&

86/06/10 0.035<0.012 0.020>0.012 0,035T0.013 D.DIIT0.007 0.026 0,011 0.01470.009 0.029+0.013 0.031>0.013 0.02&TO.011 86/06/16 <G.III7 <0.916 <0. II20 <0.61& <D,III&. <0.520 <O.B2 <D.II25 <D.III&

86/96r23 <0.020 <0.017 <0.015 <0.015 <0.012 <D.DD" <0.012 <0.018 <0.012 86/06/30 <0.008 <o.'a17 <0.012 <0.012 <0.013 <0.011 <0.013 <0.'ola <0.012

. 86/07/07 <0.011 <o'.alj <0.017 <0.012 <0.014 <0.015 <0.014 <0.014 <0.015 86/07/14 <0.005 <0.015 <a.'olj <0.012 <0.'DOB <0.015 <a.'alo <0.015'a.'oil

<o.'ola 86/07/21 <D.012 <0.011 <0.011 <a'.oil <0.016 <0.011 <0.012 <0.014 86/07/28 <0.006 <0.020 <0.011 <0.007 <0.020 <o.'a12 <0.'Olj <0'.0!4 <0.012

&&/O&/a4 <0.009 <0. D14 <0.008 <0.011 <O.OD <0.011 <0.015 <0.013 <0.019 8&/08/ll <0.010 <0.016 <0.011 <o.'all <a.'oln <0.012 <0.013 <0.019 <0.013 8&/08/18 <0.011 <0.018 <0.023 <0.012 <0.014 <0.012 <0.032 <0.012 <0.012 86/08/25 <O.D13 <0.014 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 <0.012 <0.010 <o'.al4 <0.015 86/09/02 <0.009 <0.014 <0.011 <o'.alo <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 <0.913 <0.015 86/09/08 <0.014 <a.'o14 <0.014 <9. 012 <o.'a!5 <o.ola <0.014 <0.017 <o'.ola 86/09/15 <0.007 <0.0!3 <0.009 <o'.ala <0.911 <0.014 <0.016 <0.017 <0.013 86/09r22 <0.012 <0.012 <0.006 <0.010 <0.012 <3.140 <0.015 <0.015 <O.D12

&6/09/29 <0.009 <0.010 <0'.ao& <0.005 <o.'ooa <0.010 <0.017 <0.013 <0.011

&&/la/O& <0.014 <0.010 <0.013 <0.012 <0.010 <0.013 <0.016 <a.o15 <0.016 86/iarl4 <0.014 <a.oo& <0.013 <0.004 <0.012 <0.009 <0.010 <0.013 <0.01) 86/10/2a <o.'oa5 <0.013 <0.012 <0.013 <a.'oa9 <a.'a!4 <0.018 <0.021 <0.010 86/10/27 <0.014 <0.012 <0.008 <0.010 <0.012 <0.010 <0.014 <0.012 <0.014 86/ll/03 <0.011 <9.093 <0.006 <0.011 <0.012 <0.010 <0.010 <0.015 <0.010 86rll/lo <0.015 <o.'ola <0.012 <0.012 <o'.a!4 <0.013 <0.016 <0.021 <0.017

'86/ll/17 <0.013 <0. 020 <0.011 <0.009 <0.013 <0.005 <0.015 <0.012 <0.008 86rll/24 <0,009 <a'.o!5 <o'.ola <0.012 <0.011 <0.013 <a'.o14 <0.009 <0.911 86/12/01 <0.006 <0.016 <0. 012 <0.007 <0.014 <0.013 <o.'aoa <0. D15 <0.009 86/12/08 <0.011 <o'.alo <0.011 <0.011 <D.OOB <0.012 <0.011 <o.'ao& <0.009 86/12/15 <0.011 <0.014 <o.'oa4 <0.097 <0.011 <0.012 <0.014 <0.014 <0.931 86/12/22 <D.OD9 <0.014 < D. 012 <O.oo& <0.011 <D.DI! <O',915 <G.oji <0.0'a&

86/12r29 <0.008 <0.009 <0.009 <0.010 <0.912 <O.a!3 <0.01) <0.010 . <0. 910

TABLE 12A DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENT RESULTS Results in units of mrem/standard month + 2 sigma January April July October Location Station 1986 Through Through Through Through (Direction and Number Location March June September December (Distance)(3)

M3 Dl On Site 12.4+1.3 16.7+1.6 12.7+1.5 10.6+1.1 0.2 miles 9 69

'4 D2 On Site 6.4+0.2 8.6+1.2 7.0+0.6 6.1+0.4 0.4 miles 9 140 E On Site 5.7+0.4 8.8+0.6 F 7+0.9 5.4+0.4 0.4 miles Q 175 6 F On Site 4.9+0.3 6.8+0.6 6.1+0.6 4.7+0.3 0.5 miles 9 210

7* G On'Site 5.2+0.3 6.7+0.6 5.6+0.2 4.8+0.3 0.7 miles 9 250

'8 R-5 Off Site-Control 5.8+0.4 7.6+0.6 7.0+1.0 6.2+0.6 16.4 miles Q 42 9 Dl Off Site 5.3+0.2 7.2+0.4 5.8+0.4 5.0+0.4 11.4 miles 9 80 10 D2 Off Site 5.6+0.2 6.8+0.4 6.3+0.3 5.9+0.2 9.0 miles 9 117 ll 12 E Off Site F Off Site 5.0+0.1 5.2+0.4 6.6+0.6 7.6+0.7 6.2+0.4 6.2+0.4 5.2+0.4 5.8+0.5 7.2 7.7 miles miles Q 160 9 190 13 G Off Site 5.8+0.3 6.8+0.4 6.4+0.6 5.4+0.4 5.3 miles 9 225 14% DeMass Rd,, SW Oswego-Control 5.6+0.4 7.2+0.6 6.8+0.7 6.6+0.4 12.6 miles 9 226 15> Pole 66, W. Boundary-Bible Camp 5.2+0.3 5.8+0.3 5.6+0.2 4.8+0.3 0.9 miles Q 237 18~ Energy Info. Center Lamp Post, SW. 6.0+0.4 7.2+0.3 6.8+0.7 5 F 8+0.3 0.4 miles 9 265 19 East Boundary-JAF, Pole 9 6.2+0.5 7.4+0.4 6.6+0.4 5.4+0.2 1.3 miles Q 81 23~ H On Site 7.4+0.4 9.4+1.0 7.4+0 6~ 7.0+0.6 0.8 miles Q 70 24 I On Site 6.1+0.3 7.1+0.5 6.5+0.7 5.4+0.3 0.8 miles 9 98

'5 J On Site 5.9+0.2 6.6+0.5 6.1+0.5 5.3+0.3 0.9 miles 9 110 26 K On Site 5.9+0.5 6.3+0.3 5.3+0.4 5.3+0.3 0.5 miles 9 132 27 N. Fence, N. of Switchyard, JAF 18.6+3.7 25.3+5.6 21.2+5.4 18.3+4.4 0.4 miles Q 60 28 N. Light Pole, N. of Screenhouse, JAF 27.4+9.0 35.1+8.6 26.7+9.5 22.8+7.8 0.5 miles Q 68 29 N. Fence, N. of W. Side Screenhouse, JAF 48.0+10.1 59.9+12.0 40 '+11.0 32.8+9.8 0.5 miles Q 65 Wl if

TABLE 12A (Continued)

DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENT RESULTS Results in units 'of mrem/standard month + 2 sigma I

January April July October Location tation 1986 Through Through Through Through (Direction and

'umber Location March June September December (Distance)(3) 0 N. Fence (NW) JAF 14.5+2.6 19.6+2.8 16.2+F 6 13.2+2.8 0.4 miles 9 57~

1 N. Fence (NW) NMP-1 9.2+1.2 11.4+2.8 8.9+1.4 8.5+1.3 0.2 miles Q 276 9 N. Fence, Rad Waste, NMP-1 12.7+2.6 16.1+1.5 12.8+2.4 12.2+2.6 0.2 miles 9 292 7 N. Fence, NE, JAF 11.2+1.5 18.4+2.4 13.8+1.9 12.0+1.6 0. 6 miles 9 69 9w Phoenix, NY-Control 5.5+0.2 6.6+0.6 6.2+0.4 5.7+0.4 19. 8 miles Q 170 1 Liberty & Bronson Sts., E of OSS 5.7+0.4 (1) 5.8+0.3 5.7+0.4 7.4 miles Q 233

2. East 12th & Cayuga Sts., Osw. School 5.4+0.2 7.0+0.3 5.8+0.4 6.0+0.3 5.8 miles 9 227 3 Broadwell & Chestnut Sts., Fulton H.S. 5.0+0.2 7.6+0.5 6.4+0.3 5 '+0.2 13.7 miles 9 183 4 Liberty St., & Co. Rte. 16, Mexico H.S. 4.8+0.2 6.8+0.4 6.3+0.4 5.0+0.3 9.3 miles 9 115 5 Gas Substation & Co. Rt. 5 Pulaski 4.6+0.3 7.6+0.4 6.1+0.4 5.0+0.3 13.0 miles 9 75 Rt. 104 New Haven Sch. (SE Corner) 5.2+0.2 7.8+1.0 6.2+0.3 5.1+0.3 5.3 miles 9 123 Co. Rt. 1A Alcan (E. of E. Entrance Rd.) 6.1+0.2 8.2+0.4 6.4+0.4 5.7+0 ~ 2 3.1 miles 9 220 9 Environmental Lab JAFNPP 7..7+0.8 (4) (4) (4) 0.5 miles 9 95 5A Unit 2, N. Fence, N. of Reactor Bldg. 6.8+0.6 7.4+0.6 6.5+0.4 6.0+0.3 0.1 miles Q 5o Unit 2, N. Fence, N. of Change House 6.2+0.4 7.2+0.2 6.7+0.4 5.4+0.3 0.1 miles 9 25 7 J( Unit 2, N. Fence, N. of Pipe Bldg. 6.6+0.4 8.2+0.4 (1) 8.3+0.6 0.2 miles Q 45 8* JAF, E. of E. Old Lay Down Area 5.8+0.4 7.5+0.3 6.8+0.4 6.9+0.6 1.0 miles Q 90 9'4 Co. Rt. 29, Pole 863, 0.2 mi. S. of Lake Rd. 5.2+0.2 6.8+0.4 6.3+0.6 5.0+0.2 1.1 miles 9 115 OA Co. Rt. 29, Pole 854, 0.7 mi. S. of Lake Rd. 4.9+0.3 (1) 6.2+0.2 5.0+0.2 1.4 miles 9 133 Miner Rd., Pole PP16, 0.5 mi. W. of Rt. 29 4.4+0.2 6.6+0.3 6.2+0.4 5.0+0.2 1.6 miles Q 159 Miner Rd., Pole 81 1/2, 1.1 mi. W. of Rt. 29 5.6+0.2 6.7+0.4 6.4+0.3 5.0+0.4 1.6 miles Q 181

'3w Lakeview Rd., Tree, 0.45 mi. N. of Miner Rd. 5.8+0.3 6.7+0.6 6.3+0.2 5.6+0.3 1.2 miles Q 200

-82

TABLE 12A (Continued)

DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENT RESULTS Results in units of mrem/standard month + 2 sigma January Apr il July October Location (Direction and Station 1986 Through Through Through Through Number Location March June September December (Distance)(3) 84% Lakeview Rd. N., Pole 86117, 200 Ft. N. of Lake Rd. 5.6+0.2 6.8+0.5 6.4+0.4 5.0+0.6 1.1 miles 9 225 85> Unit 1, N. Fence, N. of W. Side of Screen House 13.1+2.6 18.7+5.4 13.4+2.0 13.9+2.3 ~

0.2 miles 9 294 Unit 2, N. Fence, N. of W. Side of Screen House 7.9+1.1 10.4+1.2 8.0+1.0 7.0+1.2 O.l males 9 315 87" Unit 2, N. Fence, N. of E. Side of Screen House. 7.8+0.2 8.7+0.9 6.4+0.6 6.5+0.8 O.l miles 9 341 88" Hickory Grove Rd., Pole $52, 0.6 mi.

N. of Rt. 1 6.4+0.2 6.8+0.4 5.2+0.4 5.8+0.3 4.8 males 9 97 89< Leavitt Rd., Pole 816, 0.4 mi. S. of Rt. 1 6.0+0.4 7.8+0.6'.6+0.8 5.4+0.3 5.6+0.4 4.1 miles 9 111 90%' Rt. 104, Pole 8300, 150 Ft. E. of Keefe Rd. 5.6+0.4 5.2+0.3 .5.0+0.2 4.2 miles 9 135 1'4 Rt. 51A, Pole fP59, 0.8 mi. W. of Rt. 51 5.5+0.2 (1) 5.8+0.4 4.7+0.2 4.8 miles 9 156 92~ Maiden Lane Rd., Power Pole, 0.6 mi.,

S. of Rt. 104 5.6+0.2 7.4+0.4 6.8+0.4 6.1+0.4 4.4 miles 9 183 93* Rt. 53, Pole l-l, 120 Ft. S. of 104 5.0+0.4 6.9+0.4 6.5+0.6 5.2+0.2 4.4 miles 9 205 g4* Rt. 1, Pole 882, 250 ft. E. of Kocher Rd. 4.6+0.2 6.4+0.2 6.0+0.6 4.8+0.2 4.7 miles 9 223 95* Lakeshore Camp Site, From Alcan W.

Access Rd., Pole 821, 1.2 mi. N. of Rt. 1 5.6+0.2 6.6+0.4 5.8+0.2 6.4+0.2 4.1 miles 9 237 96~ Creamery Rd., 0.3 mi. S of Middle Rd.,

Pole 1 1/2 5.8+0.2 6.8+0.6 6.0+0.2 5.4+0.4 3.6 miles 9 199 97% Rt. 29, Env. Station R4, 200 Ft. N.

of Miner Rd. 5.7+0.4 7.9+0.5 5.6+0.4 5.0+0.2 1.8 miles 9 143 985k Lake Rd., Pole 41145, 0.15 mi. E. of Rt. 29 5.9+0.4 7.2+0.6 6.6+0.4 5.4+0.2 1'.2 miles 9 101

TABLE 12A (Continued)

DIRECT RADIATION HEASUREMENT RESULTS Results in units of mrem/st'andard month + 2 sigma January April July October Location

'tation 1986 Through Through Through Through (Direction and lumber Location Harch June September December (Distance)(3)

)9 NMP Rd., 0.4 miles N. of Lake Rd., Env.

Station Rl Off-Site 5.7+0.4 7.2+0.5 6.1+0.6 5.3+0.2 1.8 miles 9 88

.00 Rt. 29 and Lake Rd., Env. Station R2 Off-Site 5.8+0.4 7.2+0.4 6.5+0.5 5.2+0.2 1.1 miles 9 104

.01 Rt. 29, 0.7 mi. S. of Lake Rd., Env.

Station R3 Off-Site 5.3+0.2 6.7+0.4 6.0+0.4 4.8+0.2 1.5 miles 9 132

.02 EOF/Env. Lab, Oswego Co. Airport (Fulton Airport), Rt. 176, E. Driveway Lamp Post 5.9+0.6 8.9+0.2 6.6+0.4 6.4+0.4 11.9 miles 9 175

.03 EIC, East Garage Rd., Lamp Post 6.0+0.3 8.7+0.6 7.0+0.3 6.4+0.2 0.4 miles 9 267 04 Parkhurst Road, Pole 148 1/2-A, 0.1 mi.

S. of Lake Rd. (2) 6.9+0.7 6.4+0.4 5.2+0.2 1.4 miles 9 102

~05 Lakeview Road, Pole 6125, 0.6 mi. S. of Lake Rd. (2) 7.4+0.3 6.4+0.4 5.3+0.2 1.4 miles 9 198 I.06 Shoreline Cove, E. of NMP-1, Tree on M.

Edge ('2) 7.8+0.8 7.0+0.5 6.4+0.6 0.3 miles 9 274 TLD lost in field.

TLD not established during the quarterly period.

Direction and distance based on NMP-2 reactor centerline and sixteen 22.5 sector grid.

TLD deleted.

Technical Specification location.

TABLE 12B DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENT RESULTS Results in units of mrem/quarterly period + 2 sigma January April July October Location Station 1986 Through Through Through Through (Dxrectxon and Number Location Harch June September December (Distance)(3)

3 Dl On Site 37.0+2.0 48.2+2.2 38.0+2.2 31.7+1.6 0.2 miles Q 69 4 D2 On Site 19.2+0.3 24.9+1.7 21.0+0.9 18.2+0.5 0.4 miles Q'40 5 E On Site 17.1+0.6 25.4+0.8 20.0+1.4 16.2+0.6 0.4 miles Q 175 6 F On Site 14.7+0.4 19.8+0.9 18.3+1.0 14.0+0.5 0.5 miles Q 210 7'A G On Site 15.4+0.6 19.3+1.0 16.6+0.4 14.6+0.4 0.7 miles Q 250

'8 R-5 Off Site-Control 17.0+0.6 22.6+0.9 21.0+1.5 18.6+0.8 16.4 males Q 42

.9 Dl Off Site 15.5+0 3~ 21.6+0.6 17.4+0.6 15.1+0.6 11.4 miles Q 80 10 D2 Off Site 16.4+0.2 20.1+0.6 18.7+0.4 17.6+0.3 9.0 miles Q 117

11. E Off Site 15.0+0.2 19.7+0.8 18.8+0.7 15.5+0.6 7.2 miles Q 160 12 F Off Site 15.2+0.6 22.6+1.4 18.6+0.6 17.4+0.6 7.7 miles Q 190 13 G Off Site 17.2+0.4 20.0+0.7 19.0+0.8 16.3+0.6 5.3 miles Q 225 14> DeHass Rd, SW Oswego-Control 16.84-0.6 21.4+0.8 20.2+1.1 19.6+0.6 12.6 miles Q 226 1 5'4 Pole 66, W. Boundary-Bible Camp 15.4+0.4 17.2+0.4 17.0+0.2 14.3+0.4 0.9 miles Q 237 18+ Energy Info. Center-Lamp Post, SW 18.2+0.6 21.5+0 5~ 20.1+F 0 17.4+0.4 0.4 miles Q 265 19 East Boundary-JAF, Pole 9 18.2+0.7 22.2+0.7 19.6+0.6 16.2+0.4 1.3 miles Q 81

.23+ H On Site 21.9+0.8 28.0+1.6 22.2+0.8 20 '+0.8 0.8 miles Q 70 24 I On Site 17.9+0.4 21.3+0.8 19.6+1.0 16.2+0.4 15.7+0.4 0.8 miles 0.9 miles Q 98 25 J On Site 17.5+0.3 19.7+0.8 18.4+0.8 Q 110

.26 K On Site 17.4+0.8 18.8+0.5 16.0+0.6 15.7+0.5 0.5 miles Q 132 27 N. Fence, N. of Switchyard, JAF 54.4+5.4 75.8+8.3 63.2+8.1 54.7+6.5 0.4 miles Q 60

,28 N. Light Pole, N. of Screenhouse,JAF 80.2+13.2 105.0+12.8 79.8+14.2 68.2+11.6 0.5 miles Q 68

TABLE 12B (Continued)

DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENT RESULTS Result" in units of mrem/quarterly period + 2 sigma January April July October Location tation 1986 Through Through Through Through (Dxrectxon and umber Location March June September December (Distance)(3)

N. Fence, N. of W. Side Screenhouse, JAF 140.8+14.8 179.1+17.8 120.6+16.5 98.2+14.7 0.5 miles Q 65 0 N Fence (NW) JAF 42.7+3.9 58.6+4.2 48.2+3.8 39.6+4.1 0.4 miles Q 57 1 N. Fence (NW) NMP-1 26.6+1.8 33.4+4.0 26.9+2.0 2S.4+2.0 0.2 miles Q 276 9 N. Fence, Rad. Waste, NMP-1 36.4+3.7 47.2+2.2 38.8+3.6 36.5+4.0 0.2 miles Q 292 7 N. Fence, NE, JAF 33 2+2 2 53.8+3.4 41.4+2.8 35.7+2.4 0.6 miles Q 69 99( Phoenix, NY-Control 16.0+0.4 19.4+0.8 18.7+0.6 17.0+0.6 19.8 miles Q 170 1 Liberty & Bronson Sts., E. of OSS 17.0+0.6 (1) 17.4+0.4 17.1+0.4 7'4 miles Q 233 t2 East 12th & Cayuga Sts., Osw. School 16.3+0.4 20.7+0.4 17.2+0.6 17.9+0.4 5' miles Q 227 l3 Broadwell &. Chestnut Sts., Fulton H.S: 14.6+0.2 22.8+0.7 19.0+0.5 16.2+0.4 13.7 mile's Q 183 4 Liberty St. & Co. Rt. 16, Mexico H.S. 14.1+0.3 20.4+0.7 18.6+0.7 15.0+0.5 9.3 miles Q 115 5 Gas Substation, Co. Rt. 5, Pulaski 13.4+0.4 22 8+0.5 F 18.2+0.4 15.2+0.4 13.0 miles Q 7S Rt. 104 New Haven Sch. (SE Corner) 15.3+0.4 23.0+1.4 18.4+0.4 15.2+0.4 5.3 miles Q 123 Co. Rt. 1A Alcan (E. of Entrance Rd.) 15.4+0.2 16.4+0.4 19.0+0.7 16.8+0.4 3.1 miles Q 220 9 Environmental Lab JAF 22.7+1.1 (4) (4) (4) 0.5 miles Q 95 ~

4 Unit 2, N. Fence, N. of Reactor Bldg. 20.6+0.8 22.3+0.9 19.2+0.6 18.2+0.4 0.1 miles Q So Unit 2, N. Fence, N of Change House

~ 19.1+0.8 21.4+0.3 19.8+0.6 16.2+0.5 0.1 miles Q 25

'7k Unit 2, N. Fence, N. of Pipe Bldg. 20.0+0.5 24.0+0.6 (1) 23.9+0.8 0.2 miles Q 45 ~

JAF, E. OF E. Old Laydown Area 17.2+0.6 22 0+0.4 F 20.0+0.6 20.7+0.8 1.0 miles Q 90 18.8+0.8 14.9+0.4 1 miles

'9A Co. Rt. 29, Pole 863, 0.2 mi. S. of Lake Rd. 16.0+0.3 19.9+0.6 Q 115

,Oa Co. Rt. 29, Pole 854, 0.7 mi. S. of Lake Rd. 14.9+0.4 (1) 18.3+0.4 15.0+0.3 1.4 miles Q 133 Miner Rd., Pole PP16, 0.5 mi. W. of Rt. 29 12.8+0.2 19.2+0.5 18.3+0.6 15.0+0.4 1.6 miles Q 159.

l2> Miner Rd., Pole iC 1 1/2, 1.1 mi. W. of Rt. 29 16.8+0.4 19.6+0.6 19.0+0.5 15.0+0.6 1.6 miles Q 18ly

TABLE 12B (Continued)

DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENT RESULTS Results in units of mrem/quarterly period + 2 sigma January April July October Location Station 1986 Through Through - Through Through (Direction and Number Location March June September December (Distance)(3)

Lakeview Rd., Tree, 0.45 mi. N. of Miner Rd. 17.4+0.4 19.6+1.0 18.6+0.4 16.6+0.4 1.2 miles 9 200 Lakeview Rd., N., Pole 8 6117, 200 Ft.

N. of Lake Rd. 17.2+0.4 20.2+0.8 19.0+0.6 15.1+1;0 1.1 miles 9 225 85% Unit 1, N. Fence, N. of W. Side of Screen House 37.6+3.8 54.8+8.0 40.4+3.0 41.6+3.4 0.2 miles 9 294 86* Unit 2, N. Fence, N. of W. Side of Screen House 24.0+1.6 30.2+1.6 23.8+1.4 21.1+1.8 0.1 miles 9 315 87'4 Unit 2, N. Fence, N. Of E. Side of Screen House 23.6+1.9 25.2+1.4 18.9+0.8 19.4+1.1 O.l miles 9 341 Hickory Grove Rd., Pole ft2, 0.6 mi. N.

of Rt. 1 18.2+0.4 20.2+0.6 15.4+0.5 17.4+0.5 4.8 miles 9 97 9%A Leavitt Rd., Pole 016, 0.4 mi. S. of Rt. 1 17.4+0.6 23.0+0.8 16.3+0.4 16.8+0.5 4.1 miles miles 9 ill Rt; 104, Pole SC300, 150 Ft. E. of Keefe Rd. 16.2+0.4 25.8+1.2 15.4+0.4 15.2+0.4 4.2 9 135 Rt. 51A, Pole 859, 0.8 mi. W. of Rt. 51 16.1+0.4 (1) 17.0+0.5 14.2+0.2 4.8 miles 9 156 Maiden Lane Rd., Power Poli, 0.6 mi. S.

C'A of Rt. 104 16.4+0.4 22 '+0.6 20.2+0.5 18.1+0.7 4 4 males Q 183 Rt. 53, Pole 1-1, 120 Ft. S. of Rt. 104 . 14 '+0.5 20.6+0.6 19.4+0.8 15.8+0.4 4.4 miles 9 205 Rt. 1, Pole ft82, 250 Ft. E. of Kocher Rd. 13.8+0.4 19 0+0.4 F 18.2+0.8 14.1+0.3 4 7 males 9 223 5'4 Lakeshore Camp Site, From Alcan W. Access 1 ~

Rd., Pole f121, 1.2 mi. N. of Rt. 1 16.8+0.3 19.4+0.5 .17.2+0.4 16.2+0.4 4.1 miles 9 237 Creamery Rd., 0.3mi. S. of Middle Rd.,

Pole 1 1/2 17.2+0.4 20 '+1.0 18.0+0.4 -. 3.6.0+0.6 3.6 miles 9 199

TABLE 12B (Continued)

DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENT RESULTS Results in units of mrem/quarterly period + 2 sigma January April July October Location

'tation 1986 Through Through Through Through (Direction and lumber Location March June September December (Distance)(3)

Rt. 29, Env. Station R4, 200 Ft. N.

of Miner Rd. 17.2+0.7 23.4+0.8 16.5+0.6 14.8+0.2 1.8 miles 9 143 j 8)h Lake Rd., Pole Pta45, 0.15 mi. E. of Rt. 29 17.8+0.5 21.8+0.8 19.3+0.6 16.2+0.4 1.2 miles 9 101

)9 NMP Rd., 0.4 miles N. of Lake Rd., Env.

Station Rl Off-Site 17.1+0.7 21.4+0.8 as.2+o.s 16.0+0.4 1.8 miles 9 88

'00 Rt. 29 and Lake Rd., Env. Station R2 Off-Site 17.8+0.6 21.2+0.6 19.2+0.8 15.8+0.3 1.1 miles 9 104 oa Rt. 29, 07 mi. S. of Lake Rd., Env. Station R3 Off-Site 16.1+0.4 19.8+0.4 17.6+0.5 14.7+0.2 1.5 miles 9 132

02 EOF/Env. Lab, Oswego Co. Airport (Fulton Airport), Rt. 176, E. Driveway Lamp Post 17.4+0.9 26.3+0.4 19.8+0.5 19 0+0.6 F 11.9 miles 9 175

'.'03 EIC, East Garage Rd., Lamp Post 18.2+0.4 25.8+0.8 20.8+0.5 19.0+0.4 0.4 miles 9 267

'04 Parkhurst Road, Pole 148 1/2-A, O.l mi.

S. of Lake Rd. (2) 20.4+1.0 19.2+0.6 15.6+0.2 1.4 miles 9 102 305 Lakeview Road, Pole 6125, 0.6 mi. S. of Lake Rd. (2) 21.6+0.5 19.0+0.6 15.8+0.3 1.4 miles 9 198 I

06 Shoreline Cove, E. of NMP-l, Tree on liest Edge (2) 22.8+1.2 21.4+0.8 18.8+0.9 0.3 miles 9 274 Il) TLD lost in the field.

2) TLD not established during the quarterly period.

l3) Direction and distance based on NMP-2 reactor centerline and, sixteen 22.5 sector grid.

(4) TLD deleted.

Technical Specification location

-88

TABLE l3 CONCENTRATION OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MILK Results in units of pCi/liter + 2 sigma Station Nuclides 4-7-86 4-21-86 5-5-86 5-19-86 6-2-86 6-16-86 K-40 1360+140 1410+140 1310+130 1500+150 1320+130 1190+120

.Cs-134 <4 ' <7.9 <5.2 <6.1 <4.3 <5.6 Cs-137 <4.4 <7.6 <6.7 <5.7 <5.1 <7.1 Ba/La-140 <5.8 <11 ' <7.9 <7.0 <6.5 <7.6 Others. <LLD <LLD <LE,D

'LLD

<LLD <LLD 16 K-40 1230+120 1240+120 1170+120 1510+150. 1410+140 1170+120 Cs-134 <4.3 <4.0 <7.7 <4.6 <8.2 <8.2 Cs-137 <4.2 <4.0 <7.6 7.0+3.6 <7.4 <8.3 Ba/La-140 <5.8 <6.3 <10.0 <6.4 <9.1 <11.0 Others <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 50 K-40 1360+140 1210+120 1030+100 1270+130 1280+130 1280+130 Cs-134 <4.1 <5+7 <6.2 <4.6 <5.6 <6.4 Cs-137 <4.2 <5.7 <6.0 <4.6 <5.5 <6.4 Ba/La-140 <5.8 <7.9 <9.2 <5 ' <6.9 <9.5 Others <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 55 K-40 1320+130 1290+130 1360+140 1400+140 1250+130 1440.1.140, Cs-134 <5.9 <5.7 <4.1 <8.4 <8.7 <4.4 Cs-137 <6.1 <7.3 <4.4 <7.8 <7.8 7.1+3.1 Ba/La-140 <8.1 <8.5 <4;7 <8.9 <10.0 <4.9 Others <LLD <LLD . <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD '-

TABLE 13 (Continued)

CONCENTRATION OF GAHHA EHITTERS IN HILK Results in units of pCi/liter + 2 sigma Station Nuclides 4-7-86 4-21-86 5-5-86 5-19-86 6-2-86 6-16-86 60 K-40 1260+130 1420+140 1340+130 1420+140 1260+130 1310+130 Cs-134 <F 6 <6.2 <3.6 <6.0 <6.5 <4.8 Cs-137 <4.8 <5.8 <4.1 <6.2 10.6+4.5 9.2+3.8 Ba/La-140 <6.2 <9.5 <5.1 <6.6 <7.8 <5.0 Others <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD K-40 1290+130 1380+140 1240+120 1270+130 1400+140 1410+140 Cs-134 <4.1 <5.8 <5.9 <4.1 <4.8 <6.2 Cs-137 <4.3 <5.4 <6.4 <4.2 <5.4 <6.6 Ba/La-140 <5.6 <7.0 <7.9 <6.7 <6.0 <6.9 Others <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 40% K-40 1390+140 1140+110 1250+130 1150+120 1390+140 1400+140 (Control) Cs-134 <4.4 <7.4 <5.4 <7.8 <4.9 <5.6 Cs-137 <4.3 <6.6 <5.1 <7.2 12.4+4.3 7.4+4.0 Ba/La-140 <5.5 <9.3 <7.2 <9.0 <5.9 <7.5 Others <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 65 Jtk K-40 (Control) Cs-134 Cs-137 Ba/La-140 Others

"-Technical Specification location

>>-New Technical Specification control location as of 8/18/86. Location 40 deleted 8/18/86.

-90

TABLE 13 (Continued)

CONCENTRATION OF GAMA EMITTERS IN MILK Results in units of pCi/liter + 2 sigma Station Nuclides 7-7-86 7-21-86 8-4-86 8-18-86 9-8-86 9-22-86 7 K-40 1250+120 1310+130 1480+150 1280+130 1570+160 1240+120 Cs-134 <5.6 <5.3 <4.9 <6.0 <6.2 <6.0 Cs-137 <6.9 6.1+3.4 9.9+4.6 8.8+4.5 8.5+4.2 10.4+4.7 Ba/La-140 <8.5 <7.6 <6.3 <8.6 <8,2 <8.0 Others <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

.16 K-40 1330+130 1290+130 1400+140 1290+130 1380+140 1370+140 Cs-134 <8.7 <4.3 <4.2 <4.4 <5.3 <3 7 Cs-137 <8.1 6.1+3.3 .<4.4 <4.5 <6.1 <4.1 Ba/La-140 <12.0 <6.7 <6.8 <7.0 <11.0 <6.0 Others <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 50 K-40 1310+130 1340+130 1410+140 1280+130 1240+120 1180+120 Cs-134- <6.5 <4.4 <6.5 <4.3 <4.5 <5.1 Cs-137 <6.4 <4.2 8.5+4.5 <4.2 <4.2 <6.3 Ba/La-140 <10.0 <6. 7 <7.8 <6.3 <6.2 <7.2 Others <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 55 K-40 1320+130 1290+130 1470+150 1390+140 1340+130 1240+120 Cs-134, <6.6 <6.2 <4.4 <4.4 <4.6 <6.3 Cs-137 <5.9 <6.1 <4.9 <4.6 <4.4 <6.2 Ba/La-140 <8.2. <8.6 <5 ' <5.6 <7.8 <9.3 Others <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

TABLE 13 (Continued)

CONCENTRATION OF GAMMA EMITTHRS IN MILK Results in units of pCi/liter + 2 sigma station Nuclides 7-7-86 7-21-86 8-4-86 8-18-86 9-8-86 9-22-86 i0 K-40 1380+140 1340+130 1480+150 1250+130 1410+140 1120+110 Cs-134 <4.9 <4.3 <4.5 <6.2 <4.6 <3.8 Cs-137 11.1+3.9 <4.9 <4.5 <6.1 <4.1 <4.1 Ba/La-140 <6.4 <7.3 <5.9 <8.3 <6.9 <5.6 Others <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD K-40 1250+120 1210+120 1330+130 1350+140 1250+130 1190+120, Cs-134 <5.7 <4.2 <4.9 <4.2 <4.& <8.6 Cs-137 <6.4 <4.2 <4.6 <4 ' <4.4 <8.0 Ba/La-140 <8.1 <6.5 <5.7 <5.6 <6.3 <10.0 Others <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

$ 0'4 . K-40 1410+140 1380+140 1440+140 (Control) Cs-134 <7+5 . <4.2 <5.9 Cs-137 <6.9 <4.8 <5.4 Ba/La-140 <9.7 <6.0 <7.6 Others <LLD <LLD <LLD

$ 5'AA K-40 1360+140 1380+140 1450+150 (Control) Cs-134 <4.6 <4.6 <8.0 Cs-137 <4.5 5.3+3.1 <7.0 Ba/La-140 .<7.3 <8.5 <9.1 Others <LLD <LLD <LLD

~-Technical Specification location.

""-New Technical Specification control location as of 8/18/86. Location 40 deleted 8/18/86.

-92

TABLE 13 (Continued)-

CONCENTRATION OF GAMMA EMIXQERS IN MILK Results in units of pCi/liter + 2 sigma..

Station Nuclides 10-6-86 10-20-86 11-3-86 11-17-86 12-1-86 12-15-86 K-40 1290+130 1490+150 1120+110 1450+150 1380+140 1440+140 Cs-134 <4.2 <4.6 <5.5 <4.4 <4.1 <5.2 Cs-137 <4.4 <4.4 <6.8 <4.1 <4.2 <5.1 Ba/La-140 <4.7 <7.0 <6.9 <6.1 <5.6 <4.2 Others <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 16 K-40 1480+150 1180+120 1280+130 1300+130 1330+130 1160+120 Cs-134 <5.6 <4.2. <8.3 <8.5 <4.4 <6:1 Cs-137 <5.3 <4.2 <7.8 <8.5- <5.2 <5.8 Ba/La-140 <7.4 <5.8 <10.0 <9.6 <5 ' <6.0 Others <LLD <LLD <PLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 50 K-40 1350+140 1310+130 1240+120 1300+130 1300+130 1400+140 Cs-134 <4.8 <4.0 <6.4 <6.3 <4.1 <4.6 CB-137 <4.8 <4.1 <6.2 <6.0 <4.3 <4.5 Ba/La-140 <6.3 <5 ' <9.7 <7.2 <7.3 <4.6 Others <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 55 K-40 1320+130 1390+140 1170+120 1350+140 1520+150 1330+130 Cs-134 <4.1 <4.4 <4.4 <4.2 <4.1 <4.9 Cs-137 <4.1 <4.6 <4.6 <4.9 <4.3 <5.2 Ba/La-140 <4.4 <7.8 <5.2 <6.0 <5.2 <4.7 Others <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

TABLE 13 (Continued)

CONCENTRATION OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MILK Results in units of pCi/liter + 2 sigma

'tation Nuclides 10-6-86 10-20-86 11-3-86 11-17-86 12-1-86 12-15-86

)0 K-40 1190+120 1230+120 1160+120 1320+130 1120+110 1290+130 Cs-134 <6.3 <4.3 <6.5 <4.6 <6.3 <4.9 Cs-137 <6.0 <4.3 <6.1 <4.8 <6.2 <5.1 Ba/La-140 <6.6 <6.1 <7.8 <5.6 <6.9 <5.0 Others <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD K-40 1090+110 1430+140 1250+130 1480+150 1310+130 1360+140 Cs-134 <8.0 <6.1 <6.0 <4.8 <4.1 <5.1 Cs-137 <7 ' <5.7 <6.0 <4.5 <4.1 <4.8 Ba/La-140 <9.8 <8.8 <7.6 <6.0 <5.3 <4.3 O.thers <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

)0% K-40

Control) Cs-134 Cs-137 Ba/La-140 Others j5)kk K-40 1430+140 1330+130 1350+140 1310+130 948+95 1300+130

Control) Cs-134 <4 ' <4.0 <7.7 <7.6 <7.7 <4.0 Cs-137 <4.4 <4.2 <7.2 <6.8 <7.1 <4.5 Ba/La-140 <5.0 <5.5 <10.0 <9.7 <10.1 <4.5 Others <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

'-Technical Specification location.

'"-New Technical Specification control location as of 8/18/86. Location 40 deleted 8/18/86.

TABLE 14 CONCENTRATION OF IODINE 131 IN,MILK (1)

Results in units of pCi/liter + 2 sigma Station 4-7-86 4-21-86 5-5-86 5-19-86 6-2-86 6-16-86 7 <0.4 <0.3 1.7+0.2 6.9+0.4 1.2+0.3 16 <0. 2 <0.4 <0.2 30.0+1.0 15.0+1.0 1.6+0.3 50 <0.4 <0.3 <0.3 3.0+0.3 1.6+0.3 0.3+0.2 55 <0.3 <0.4 <0.2 9.2+0.3 3.9+0.3 0.4+0.2 60 <0.4 <0.3 <0.2 0.6+0.2 2.9+0.2 <0.4 40k'5%A'0.3 <0.2 <0.4 <0.3 8.3+0.3 2.1+0.3 0.3+0.2

<0.2 <0.3 <0;3 29.0+1.0 11.0+1.0 0.8+0.2 Station 7-7-86 7-21-86 8-4-86 8-18-86 9-8-86 9-22-85 7 <0.2 <0.4 <0.3 <0.2 <0.4 16 <0.2 <0.3 <0.3 <0.2 <0.2 <0.4 50 '<0.2 <0.2 <0.5 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 55 <0.2 <0.2 <0.5 <0.2 <0.2 <0.3 60 <0.3 <0.2 <0.4 <0.2 <0.2 <0.3 40K'5'AA'0.4 4 <0.2 <0.3 <0.5 <0.3 <0.5

<0.3'0.2

<0.2 <0.3 <0.5

<0.3 <0.4

• Control result. Technical Specification location.

• > New Technical Specification control location as of 8/18/86. Location 40 deleted 8/18/86.

(1) Iodine 131 results are corrected for decay to the sampling stop date.

TABLE 14 (Continued)

CONCENTRATION OF IODINE 131 IN HILK (1)

Results in units of pCi/liter + 2 sigma Station 10-6-86 10-20-86 11-3-86 11-17-86 12-1-86 12-15-86 7 <0.2 <0,3 <0.4 <0.4 <0.4 <0. 4 16 <0.3 <0.4 <0.5 <0.4 <0.4 <0.3 50 <0.2 <0.3 <0.2 <0.4 <0.4 <0.2 55 <0.2 <0.2 <0.3 <0.4 <0.4 <0.2 60 <0.3 <0.5 <0.3 <0.3 <0.3 <0.2

<0.2 <0.2 <0.4 <0.4 <0.3 <0.2 4 O'A 65 A'k <0.2 <0.5 <0.3 <0.4 <0.3 <0.2 Control result. Technical Specification location.

New Technical Specification control location as of 8/18/86. Location 40 deleted 8/18/86.

(1) Iodine 131 results are corrected for decay to the sampling stop date.

-96

15 MILK ANIMAL CENSUS 1986 Number on . Number of Town or Area( Census Map( Degrees Distance Milk Animals Scriba 1(b) 3.0 miles None 16+ 5.9 40C 2 8.0 ND 3 220'90'95'.90'62'J.4'.40'83'85'ABLE 4.5 2C 6 (b) 2.2 lc 26 (b) 1.5 None 6 1 A 4'*( o ) 3.0 4G 62*** 6.7 3G 63m'"a 8.0 26C New Haven 8 23C 9 95 0 5.2 42C 4* 113'25 7.8 78C 45 8.0 16C 10(b) 2.6 32C

' 45C ll7*

5 130'46'.30'0 7 8.5 5.5 38C 62C 64~*~ 7'.07'.07 7.9 45C Mexico l2 11.5 68C 13 11.2 2C 14 9.8 15 114'.20'00'.15'10'. 10.8 17 10.2 18 10.0 50C 19 10.5 40C 20 J.32'23'0'3'5 11.2 None 60+ 9.5 40C 50 A'5k 8.2 140C 9.0 53C 67%*4'.30 21 49 112'8'5 10.5 7.9 69C lG(2)

Ricnland 22 10.2 42C 23 10.5 81C Oswego 24 147'56'52'.2 92'14 8.8 None Hannibal 404& 220 15. 0 30C 65m*a 220'82 17.0 43c Volney 25. 9.5 None 70@A'4 9.4 8C 66AA* 7.8 70C, lG(2) 8.3 3G MILKING ANLQJ TOTALS: 1,326 Cows (including control locations) J.O Goats J.,253 Cows (i 10 Goats 0'.-":

97"""

TABLE 15 (Continued)

MILK ANIMAL CENSUS 1986 Cows Goats Milk sample location Milk sample control location New location ND = Did not wish to participate in the survey

<1) References Figure 4

<2) Goat is not currently producing milk None= No cows or goats at that location. Location was a previous location with cows or goats.

(a) Census performed out to a distance of approximately ten miles.

(b) Location within three miles (Technical Specification requirement).

(c) Totals excluding control location results.

TABLE 16 1986 RESIDENCE CENSUS Map(l) Meteorological Location Location Sector De rees< ) Distance<

N NNE NE ENE Lake Road A E 99 1.3 miles Lake Road B ESE 102 1.1 miles County Route 29 C SE 130 1.4 miles Miner Road D SSE 163 1.6 miles Miner Road E S 170 1.6 miles Lakeview Road F SSW 207 1.2 miles Bible Camp Retreat G SW 234 0.9 miles Bible Camp Retreat H WSW 238 0.9 miles W

WNW NW NNW This meteorological sector is over Lake Ontario. There is no residence within three miles.

(1) Corresponds to Figure 3.

(2) Based on NMP-2 reactor centerline.

-99

TABLE 17A CONCENTRATION OF GAMA EHITTERS IN FOOD PRODUCTS Results in units of pCi/g (wet) + 2 sigma

'ollection Sample Site Date Description Be-7 K-40 I-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 Others T 9-15-86 Beet Greens 0.30+0.10 5.91+0.59 <0.042 <0.013 <0.012 <LLD T 9-16-86 Squash Leaves 1.13+0.ll 3.16+0.32 <0.030 <0.009 <0.011 <LLD T 9-16-86 Grape Leaves 1.05+0.20 2.30+0.24 <0.060 <0.019 <0.014 <LLD P 9-16-86 Cabbage <0.10 2.28+0.23 <0.011 <0.009 <0.010 <LLD P 9-16-86 Swiss Chard <0.13 3.70+0.37 <0.047 <0 '12 <0.012 <LLD P 9-16-86 Squash Leaves 1.17+0.12 2.21+0.22 <0.020 <0.006 <0.006 <LLD P 9-16-86 Collard Greens <0.23 4.14+0.41 <0.022 <0.017 <0.017 <LLD R 9-16-86 Beet Greens <0.15 6.70+0.67 <0.019 <0.011 <0.011 <LLD R 9-16-86 Squash Leaves 1.93+0.19 2.71+0.27 <0.019 <0.012 <0.011 <LLD R 9-16-86 Grape Leaves 0.60+0.12 1.31+0.13 <0.020 <0.009 <0.009 <LLD V 9-15-86 Cabbage <0.20 2.19+0.23 <0.017 <0.016 <0.018 <LLD H~ 9-15-86 Swiss Chard <0.13 2.55+0.26 <0.016 <0.009 <0.009 <LLD H" 9-15-86 Squash Leaves 0.89+0.11 1.29+0.13 <0.016 <0.008 <0.009 <LLD 9-16-86 Grape Leaves 0.78+0.15 1.83+0.18 <0.032 <0.013 <0.011 <LLD T 9-15-86 Tomatoes <0.04 2.02+0.20 <0.017 <0.005 <0.005 <LLD P 9-16-86 Tomatoes <0.10 1.57+0.16 <0.017 <0.010 <0.009 <LLD R 9-16-86 Tomatoes <0.12 2.03+0.20 <0.017 <0.009 <0.011 <LLD V 9-15-86 Tomatoes <0.13 2.51+0:25 <0.020 <0.011 <0.010 <LLD U 9-15-86 Tomatoes <0.08 2.19+0.22 <0.011 <0.007 <0.007 '<LLD S 9-15-86 Tomatoes <0.13 1.80+0.18 <0.016 <0.010 <0.009 <LLD H< 9-15-86 Tomatoes <0.25 1.81+0.27 <0.020 <0.021 <0.019 <LLD Control result. activity wet weight.

Re"nits in units cE ~es sam

-100 E

TABLE 17B CONCENTRATION OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN FOOD PRODUCTS Results in units of pCi/kg (wet) + 2 sigma ollection Sample Others Site Date Description Be-7 K-40 I-131 Cs-13.4 Cs-137 9-15-86 Beet Greens 299+97 5910+590 <42 <13 <12 <LLD T

0 T 9-16-86 Squash Leaves 1130+110 ,3160+320 <30 <9 <ll <LLD 9-16-86 Grape Leaves 1050+200 2300+240 <60 <19 <14 <LLD T

P 9-16-86 Cabbage <100 2280+230 <ll <9 <10 <LLD 9-16-86 Swiss Chard <130 3700+370 <47 <12 = <12 <LLD P

9-16-86 Squash Leaves 1170+120 2310+220 <20 <6 <6 <LLD P

9-16-86 Collard Greens <230 4140+410 <22 <17 <17 <LLD P

R 9-16-86 Beet Greens <150 6700+670 <19 <ll <11 <LLD R 9-16-86 Squash Leaves 1930+190 2710+270 <19 <12 <ll <LLD 9-16-86 Grape Leaves 605+120 1310+130 <20 <9 <9 <LLD R

V 9-15-86 Cabbage <200 2190+230 <17 wl6 <18 <LLD M~ 9-15-86 Swiss Chard <130 2550+260 <16 <9 <9 <LLD M'lt 9-15-86 Squash Leaves 889+113 1290+130 <16 <8 <9 <LLD M* 9-16-86 Grape Leaves 777+154 1830+180 <32 <13 <11 <LLD T 9-15-86 Tomatoes <40 2020+200 <17 <5 <5 <LLD P 9-16-86 Tomatoes <100 1570+160 <17 <10 <9 <LLD R 9-16-86 Tomatoes <120 2030+200 <17 <9 <ll <LLD V 9-15-86 Tomatoes <130 2510+250 <20 <11 <10 <LLD U 9-15-86 Tomatoes <85 2190+220 <11 <7 <7 <LLD S 9-15-86 Tomatoes <130 1800+180 <16 <10 <9 <LLD M" 9-15-86 Tomatoes <250 1810+270 <20 <21 <19 <LLD

TABLE 18 INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRLH RESULTS Analysis Date Medium Site Reference No. EPA Result (1) Site Result (2)

Beta 4/86 Air Filter QA 86-29 47+5 59+6 (3)

(pCi/filter) 59+6 62+6

.Beta 9/86 Air Filter QA 86-102 66+5 78+5 (3)

(pCi/filter) 79+5 81+5 Tritium 2/86 Mater QA 86-9 5227+523 5100+100 (4)

(pCi/liter) 5300+300 5400+200 Tritium 6/86 Mater QA 86-55 3125+360 3100+100 (4)

(pCi/liter) 3100+200 3100+200 Tri turn 10/86 Mater QA 86-114 5973+597 5900+100 (4)

(pCi/liter) 6000+200 6000+600 I-131 2/86 Milk QA 86-13 8+2 (4)

(pCi/liter) 8+2 8+2

-102

TABLE 18 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM RESULTS Analysis Date Medium Site Reference No. EPA Result (1) Site Result (2)

I-131 4/86 Mater QA 86-25 9+6 10+1 (4)

(pCi/liter) 10+2 10+2 I-131 8/86 Mater QA 86-79 45+6 40+2 (4)

(pCi/liter) 43+2 45+2 Gamma 1/86 Food QA 86-4 20+6 21+4 (4)

(I-131) (pCi/kg) 22+4 23+4 Gamma 1/86 Food QA 86-4 15+5 18+4 (4)

(Cs-137) (pCi/kg) 19+4 20+4 Gamma 1/86 Food QA 86-4 950+143 829+83 (4)

(K-40)~ (pCi/kg) 867+87 863+86 Gamma 7/86 Food QA 86-68 30+6 24+3 (4)

(I-131) (pCi/kg) 26+5 26+7 Gamma 7/86 Food QA 86-68 20+5 22+4 (4)

(Cs-137) (pCi/kg) 25+4 25+4

TABLE 18 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM RESULTS Analysis Date Medium Site Reference No. EPA Result (1) Site Result (2)

Gamma 7/86 Pood QA 86-68 1150+58 1010+100 (4)

(K-40)~ (pCi/kg) 1010+100 1090+110 Gamma 2/86 Mater QA 86-5 38+5 31+11 (3)

(Cr-51) (pCi/liter) 34+15 37+17 Gamma 2/86 Water QA 86-5 18+5 16+2 (3)

(Co-60) (pCi/liter) 18+2 19+2 Gamma 2/86 Water QA 86-5 40+5 40+4 <3)

(Zn-65) (pCi/liter) 41+5 46+4 Gamma 2/86 Water QA 86-5 0+5 (LLD (3)

(RU-106) (pCi/liter)

Gamma 2/86 Water QA 86-5 30+5 25+1 <3)

(Cs-134) (pCi/liter) 25+2 26+2 Gamma 2/86 Mater QA 86-5 22+5 20+2 (3)

(Cs-137) (PC>/later) 21+2 22+2

-104

TABLE 18 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM RESULTS Analysis Date Medium Site Reference No. EPA .Result (1) Sate Result (2)

Gamma 6/86 Water QA 86-52 0.0+5.0 (LLD (3)

(Cr-51) (pCi/liter)

Gamma 6/86 Water QA 86-52 66+5 61+7 (3)

(Co-60) (pCi/liter) 62+7 62+8 Gamma 6/86 Water QA 86-52 86+5 79+14 (3)

(Zn-65) (pCi/liter) 79+11 85+14 Gamma 6/86 Water QA 86-52 50+5 43+19 (3)

(Ru-106) (pCi/liter) 48+30 56+20 Gamma 6/86 Water QA 86-52 49+5 39+4 (3)

(Cs-134) (pCi/liter) 40+5 43+6 Gamma 6/86 Water QA 86-52 10+5 9+3 (3)

(Cs-137) (pCi/liter) 10+3 ll+4 Gamma 10/86 Water QA 86-113 59+5 75+24 (3)

(Cr-51) (pCi/liter) 84+35 89+52 0

TABLE 18 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY COHPARISON PROGRAH RESULTS Analysis Date Medium Site Reference No. EPA Result (1) Site Result (2)

Gamma 10/86 Mater QA 86-113 31+5 33+14 (3)

(Co-60) (pCi/liter) 36+6 38+13 Gamma 10/86 Water QA 86-113 85+5 101+16 (3)

(Zn-65) (pCi/liter) 102+32 103+11 Gamma 10/86 Water QA 86-113 74+5 62+22 (3)

'(Ru-106) (pCi/liter) 67+66 79w38 Gamma 10/86 Water QA 86-113 28+5 28+11 (3)

~ (Cs-134) (pCi/liter) 29+11 30+4 Gamma 10/86 Mater QA 86-113 44+5 48+13 (3)

(Cs-137) (pCi/liter) 51+5 54+14 Gamma 4/86 Water QA 86-28 10+5 14+4 (3)

(Co-60) (pCi/liter) 15+3 16+4

-106

TABLE 18 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM RESULTS Analysis Date Medium Site Reference No. EPA Result (1) Site Result (2)

Gamma 4/86 Air Filter QA 86-29 10+5 12+2 (3)

(Cs-137) (pCi/filter) 13+2 14+2 Gamma 6/86 Milk QA 86-63 41+6 37+2 (4)

(I-131) (pCi/liter) 38+2 38+3 Gamma 6/86 Milk QA 86-63 31+5 37+4 (4)

(Cs-137) (pCi/liter) 37+5 37+5 Gamma 6/86 Milk QA 86-63 1600+80 1410+140 (4)

(K-40)'4 (pCi/liter) 1460+150 1490+150 Gamma 10/86 Milk QA 86-124 49+6 49+4 (4)

(I-131) (pCi/liter) 55+4 55+11 Gamma 10/86 Milk QA 86-124 39+5 41+5 (4)

(Cs-137) (pCi/liter) 44+6-48+5 107 e

TABLE 18 (Continued)

IWTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM RESULTS Analysis Date Medium Site Reference No. EPA Result (1) Site Result (2)

Gamma 10/86 Milk QA 86-124 1565+78 1220+120 (4)

(K-40)~ (pCi/liter) 1240+120 1330+130

~-EPA K-40 results reported as mg per unit of total potassium. Site results reported as K-40 only.

(1)-Results reported as activity + the standard deviation of the error.

(2)-Results reported as activity + the error (2 sigma).

(3)-Analyzed at the site environmental laboratory.

(4)-Analyzed at a vendor laboratory.

, -108

TABLE 19 ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE .LOCATIONS Sample Map Figure Location Degrees and Medium Designation Number Description Distance (1)

Shoreline 055k Figure 1A Sunset Bay 80 at 1.5 miles Sediment 06 Figure 1A Langs Beach, Control 230 at 5.8 miles 07 Figure lA Nine Mile Point 275 at 0.3 miles Fish 02" Figure lA Nine Mile Point Transect 315 at 0.3 miles 03% Figure lA FitzPatrick Transect 55 at 0.6 miles 00'A Figure 1A Oswego Transect 235 at 6.2 miles Surface Water 03 Figure lA FitzPatrick Inlet 70 at 0.5 miles A'8<

Figure 1A Oswego Steam Station Inlet 235 at 7.6 miles 09 Figure 1A NMP Unit 1 Inlet 305 at 0.3 miles 10 Figure lA Oswego City Water 240 at 7.8 miles

TABLE 19 (Continued)

ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE LOCATIONS Sample Map Figure Location Degrees and Medium Designation FJumber .Description Distance (1)

Air Figure lA R-1 Station, Nine Mile Point Road 88 at 1.8 miles Radioiodine and R-2+ Figure 2 R-2 Station, Lake Road 104 at 1.1 miles Particulates Figure 2 R-3 Station, Co. Rt. 29 132 at 1.5 miles Figure 2 R-4 Station, Co. Rt. 29 143 at 1.8 miles Figure 1A R-5 Station, Montario Point Road 42 at 16.4 miles Dl Figure 2 Dl On-Site Station 69 at 0.2 miles D2 Figure 2 D2 On-Site Station 140 at 0.4 miles Figure 2 E On-Site Station 175 at 0.4 miles Figure 2 F On-Site Station 210 at 0.5 miles Figure 2 G On-Site Station 250 at 0.7 miles Figure 2 H On-Site Station 71 at 0.8 miles Figure 2 I On-Site Station 98 at 0.8 miles

-110

TABLE 19 (Continued)

ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE LOCATIONS Sample Map Figure Location Degrees and Medium Designation Number Description Distance (1)

Air Figure 2 J On-Site Station 110 at 0.9 miles Radioiodine'nd Figure 2 K On-Site Station 132 at 0.5 miles Particulates Continued Figure lA G Off-Site Station, Saint Paul Street 225 at 5.3 miles Thermo- Figure 2 Dl On-Site Station 69 at 0.2 miles luminescent Dosimeters Figure 2 D2 On-Site Station 140 at 0.4 miles (TLD)

Figure 2 E On-Site Station 175 at 0.4 miles Figure 2 F On-Site Station 210 at 0.5 miles Figure 2 G On-Site Station 250 at 0.7 miles Figure lA R-5 Off-Site Station 42 at 16.4 miles Figure lA Dl Off-Site Location 80 at 11.4 miles 10 Figure lA D2 Off-Site Location 117 at 9.0 miles

TABLE .19 (Continued)

ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE LOCATIONS Sample Hap Figure Location Degrees and Medium Designation Number Description Distance (1)

Thermo- Figure lA H Off-Site Location 160 at 7.2 miles luminescent Dosimeters 12 Figure 1A F Off-Site Location. 190 at 7.7 miles (TLD)

Continued 13 Figure 1A G Off-Site Station 225 at 5.3 miles 14> Figure lA Southwest Oswego Cont'rol 226 at 12.6 miles 15" Figure 1A Vest Site Boundary 237 at 0. 9 miles I

Figure 2 Energy Information Center 265 at 0.4 miles 19 Figure 1A Hast Site Boundary 81 at 1.3 miles 23+ Figure 2 H On-Site Station 70 at 0.8 miles 24 Figure 2 I On-Site Station 98 at 0.8 miles Figure 2 J On-Site Station 110 at 0.9 miles 26 Figure 2 K On-Site Station 132 at 0.5 miles 27 Figure 2 North Fence, JAFNPP 60 at 0.4 miles 28 Figure 2 Worth Fence, JAFNPP 68 at 0.5 miles

-112

TABLE 19 (Continued)

ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE LOCATIONS Sample Map Figure Location Degrees and Medium Designation Number Description Distance (1)

Thermo- 29 Figure 2 North Fence, JAFNPP 65 at 0,5 miles luminescent Dosi'meters 30 Figure 2 North Fence, JAFNPP 57 at 0.4 miles (TLD)

Continued 31 Figure 2 North Fence, NMP-1 276 at 0.2 miles I

39 Figure 2 North Fence, NMP-1 292 at 0.2 miles 47 2 North Fence, JAFNPP- 69 at 0.6 miles Figure 1B Phoenix, NY Control 170 at 19.8 miles 51 Figure 1A Oswego Steam Station, East 233 at 7.4 miles 52 Figure lA Oswego Elementary School, East 227 at 5.8 miles 58%'igure 53 Figure 1B Fulton High School 183 at 13.7 miles 54 Figure lA Mexico High School 115 at 9.3 miles Figure lA Pulaski Gas Substation, Rt. 5 75 at 13.0 miles 5 6'4 Figure 1A New Haven Elementary School 123 at 5.3 miles Figure lA Co. Rt. 1 and Alcan 220 at 3.1 miles

TABLE 19 (Continued)

ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE LOCATIONS Sample Hap Figure, Location Degrees and Medium Designation Number Description Distance (1)

Thermo- 59 Figure 2 Environmental Lab, JAFNPP 95 at 0.5 miles luminescent Dosimeters 75k Figure 2 Worth Fence, NMP-2 5 at 0.1 milos (TLD)

Continued 76> Figure 2 North Eence, NMP-2 25 at 0.1 miles 7 75k Figure 2 North Fence, NHP-2 45 at 0. 2 miles 78+ Figure 2 East Boundary, JAFNPP 90 at 1.0 miles 7 9'k Figure 2 County Route 29 115 at 1.1 miles 80" Figure 2 County Route 29 133 at 1.4 miles 81~ Figure 2 Miner Road 159 at 1.6 miles

'2" Figure 2 Hiner Road 181 at 1.6 miles 83~ Figure 2 Lakeview Road 200 at 1.2 miles Figure 1A Lakeview Road 225 at 1.1 miles 85+ Figure 2 North Fence, NHP-1 294 at 0.2 miles 86" Figure 2 North Fence, NMP-1 315 at O.l miles

-114

TABLE 19 (Continued)

ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE LOCATIONS Sample Map Figure Location Degrees and Medium Designation Number Description Distance (1)

Thermo- 87" Figure 2 North Fence, NMP-2 341 at 0.1 miles luminescent Dosimeters 88+ Figure lA Demster Beach Road 97 at 4.8 miles (TLD) Hickory Grove Road (4-2-87) --97 at 4.5 miles Continued 89" Figure lA Leavitt Road ill at 4.1 miles 90> Figure lA Route 104 and Keefe Road 135 at 4.2 miles 91> Figure lA County Route 51A 156 at 4.8 miles 92> Figure lA Maiden Lane Road 183 at 4.4 miles 93'4 Figure lA County Route 53 205 at 4.4 miles 94" Figure lA County Route 1 and Kocher Road 223 at 4.7 miles 95% Figure lA Lakeshore Camp Site 237 at 4.1 miles 96> Figure lA Creamery Road 199 at 3.6 miles 97k Figure 2 County Route 29 143 at 1. 8 miles 98~ Figure lA Lake Road 101 at 1.2 miles 99 Figure lA Nine Mile Point Road F 88 at 1.8 miles

TABLE 19 (Continued)

EN/IRONMENTAL SAMPLE LOCATIONS Sample Map Figure Location Degrees and Medium Designation Number Description Distance (1)

Thermo- 100 Figure 2 County Route 29 and Lake Road 104 at 1.1 miles luminescent Dosimeters 101 Figure 2 County Route 29 132 at 1.5 miles

'TLD)

Continued 102 Figure 1B Oswego County Airport 175 at 11.9 miles 103 Figure 2 Energy Information Center, East 267 at 0.4 miles 104 Figure 1A Parkhurst Road 102 at 1.4 miles 105 Figure 2 Lakeview Road 198 at 1.4 miles 106 Figure 2 Shoreline Cove, East of NHP-1 274 at 0.3 miles Cows Milk 4 Indicator Location 107 at 5.5 miles 16 Figure 4 Indicator Location 190 at 5.9 miles Indicator Location at 8.2 miles 65'igure 50 55 Figure Figure 4

4 Indicator Location 93 95 at 9.0 miles 60 Figure 4 Indicator Location 90 at 9.5 miles Figure 4 Indicator Location 113 at 7.8 miles 4 O'A Figure 4 Control Location 223 at 15.2 mile" Figure 4 Control Location 220 at 17.0 miles

TABLE 19 (Continued)

ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE LOCATIONS Sample Map Figure Location Degrees and Medium Designation Number Description Distance (1)

Food Products Figure 3 Indicator Location 84 at 1.6 miles Figure 3 Indicator Location 101 at 1.9 miles Figure 3 Indicator Location 114 at 1.5 miles Figure 3 Indicator Location 112 at 2.0 miles Figure 3 Control Location 223 at 15.0 miles 4

Figure 3 Indicator Location 110 at 2.0 miles Figure 3 Indicator Loc'ation 141 at 1.9 miles

~-Technical Specification location.

(1) Degrees and distance based on Nine Mile Point Vnit 2 reactor centerline.

1

TABLE 20 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONXTORING PROGRAM ANtJUAL

SUMMARY

NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATIOJJ DOCKET NO. 50-220 OSWEGO COUNTY, STATE OF NEW YORK, JANUARY DECEMBER 1986>

Location (b) of Type and Indicator Locations: Highest Annual Mean: Control Location: lJumber of Medium Number of Mean (f) Location J'N Mean (f) Mean (f) llonroutine

~Units A~nal ses ~LLD(a Ran e Ran e Ran e Re orts Shoreline GSA(4):

Sediment "

(pCi/kg-dry) Cs-134 150 <LLD <LLD <LLD Cs-137 180 <LLD <LLD <LLD Fish ~ U~RA 18).(h)

(pCi/kg-wet)

Mn-54 130 <LLD <LLD <LLD Fe-59 260 <LLD <LLD <LLD Co-58 130 <LLD <LLD <LLD Co-60 130 <LLD <LLD <LLD Zn-65 260 <LLD <LLD <LLD Cs-134 130 <LLD <LLD <LLD Cs-137 150 28 12/12 NMP: ~29 AIA ~p5 (5gg 9-51 0.3 at 315 20-49 21-32

-118

TABLE 20 (Continued)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION DOCKET NO. 50-220 OSWEGO COUNTY, STATE OF NEW YORK, JANUARY DECEMBER 1986>

Location (b) of Type and Indicator Locations: Highest Annual Mean: Control Location: Number of Medium Number of Mean (f Location 8 M~ean (f M~ean (f Nonroutine

~Dni ts A~nal ses LLD(La Ran e Ran e Ran e ~Re orts Surface (~38 Water >

(pCi/liter) H-3 3000 380 4/4 JAP: ~380 (4/4 373 (3/4 0-260-500 0.5 at 70 260-500 250-550

~GSA 24 Mn-54 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD Fe-59 30 <LLD <LLD <LLD Co-58 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD Co-60 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD Zn-65 30 <LLD <LLD <LLD Zr-95 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD Nb-95 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD I-131 15(c) <LLD <LLD <LLD

TABLE 20 (Continued)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAH ANNUAL

SUMMARY

NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION DOCKET NO. 50-220 OSWEGO COUNTY, STATE OE NEW YORK, JANUARY DECEMBER 1986+

Location (b) of Type and Indicator Locations: Highest Annual Hean: Control Location: Number oF Hedium Number of Hean (f) Location 6 Hean (f) M~ean fi Nonroutine

~Units A~nal ses LLD(a ~Ran e Ran e Ran e Re orts Surface Cs-134 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD Water *

(pCi/liter) Cs-137 18 <LLD <LLD <LLD (Continued)

Ba/La-140 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD Air Gross Beta: 0.01 0.040 51/52 0.039(52/52 Particulates" ~260 0.007-0.289 1.1 at 104 0.007-0.273 0.008-0.272 (pCi/m3)

~I-131 260: 0.07 0.130(5/52) 0.151(5/52 . 0 0.023-0.334 1.1 at 104 0.024-0.292 0.041-0.332

~GSA 60 Cs-134 0.05 R-2 0.011(2/12) 0.010(2/12 0.003-0.018 1.1 at 104 0.004-0.018 0.003-0.017 Cs-137 0.06 0.019(2/12 0.007-0.036 1.1 at 104 0.007-0.036 0.008-0.031 Ru-103 N/A R-2 0.024(2/12) 0.020(2/12 0.009-0.038 1.1 at 104 0.010-0.038 0.012-0.028

TABLE 20 (Continued)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION DOCKET NO. 50-220 OSWEGO COUNTY, STATE OF NEW YORK, JANUARY DECEMBER 1986>

Location (b) of Type and Indicator Locations: Highest Annual Mean: Control Location: Number of Medium Number of M~ean E Location & M~ean (E M~ean (E Nonroutine

~units A~nal ses LLD(a Ran e Ran e Ran e ~Re orts Air Ru-106 N/A 0.010(1/12 <LLD Particulates" 0.010 .1.8 at 88 0.010 (pCi/m3)

(Continued) I-131(i) N/A 0.019 4.48 R-3 0.024 1/12) 0.023 1/12) 0.016-0.024 1.5 at 132 0.024 0.023 TLD>> Gamma (d) 117/120 TLD/t 85 ~43.6 4/4 (gi ~18.6(8/8 (mrem per ~Dose 128 12.8-54.8 0.2 at 294 37.6-54.8 . 16.0-21.4 quarterly period)

Milk< ~GSA 1&

(pCi/liter)

Cs-134 (e) <LLD 0 Cs-137 18 (e) (e) 8.4 3/18 5.3-12.4 Ba/La-140 15 (e) (e) <LLD 0 ~

~I-131 18 I-131 (e) (e) 13.6 3/18 0.8-29.0

TABLE 20 (Continued)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL HONITORING PROGRAH ANNUAL SUHHARY NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION DOCKET NO. 50-220 OSWEGO COUNTY, STATE OE NEW YORK, JANUARY DECEMBER 1986" Location (b) of Type and Indicator Locations: Highest Annual Mean: Control Location: Number. of Hedium Number of M~ean (F Location 6, Hean (f) Mean (f) Nonroutine

~Units A~nal ses LLD(a) Ran e Ran e Ran e Reports Food Products* U~SA (8 (PCi/kg-wet)

I-131 60 <LLD <LLD <LLD Cs-134 60 <LLD <LLD <LLD Cs-137 80 <LLD <LLD <LLD

-122

TABLE 20 (Continued)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 'PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION DOCKET NO. 50-220 OSWEGO COUNTY, STATE OF NEW YORK, JANUARY DECEMBER 1986~

Table Notes:

Data for Table 20 is based on Technical Specification required samples unless otherwise indicated.

N/A = Not applicable (a) LLD values as required by the Radiological Technical Specifications effective January 1, 1985. LLD units are specified in the medium column.

(b) Location is distance in miles and direction in compass degrees based on NMP-2 reactor centerline. Units for this column are specified in medium column.

(c) The Technical Specifications do not specify a particular LLD value for surface water analysis (non-drinking water) for I-131. A value of 15 pCi/liter is used here and represents the most recent guidance from the NRC.

I (d) The Technical Specifications do not specify for environmental TLDs. The NMP-1 Off-Site a particular Dose LLD val~

Calculation Manual contains specifications for environmental TLD sensitivities.

(e) The Technical Specification 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, the only sample location required by the Technical Specifications is the control location.

(f) = Fraction of number of detectable measurements to total number of measurements. Mean and range results are based on detectable measurements only.

(g) = The results for TLD 085 must be evaluated with the knowledge that this TLD is in close proximity (300-500 feet) of the Nine Mile Point Unit 1 reactor building'nd the radwaste buildings'his TLD, as well as other TLDs in this area, are adjacent to the lake shoreline which is a restricted area to members of the public. There are no

'residences or private property near this area.

Data includes results from optional samples in addition to. samples required by the Technical Specifications.

(i) = Data for particulate I-131.

~-

N

~~raailr CI ak FIQIRE IA OFF-SITE EÃZIROff)lElffhl STATIOH Ia AHD TLD LDCATIOHS 5 A H D C R E F K I i Ooaoa Or 5555KO h

LEORffD LAKE 40 teal 1~

4oovvly 07 ON7'ARf0 No l aaaara rovaoo

'A H 0 Of II ~ ~N k.v TLD IDCATIOH a

v EHVIRONHEfffhL STAT I OH Noo loaoa aart I~

55 00 Io 55 OO A 5~

IW INI

~o I' NN Cvava V R "H I 15 ~ akv

~NO I I Ioaloo NNO ON NN via ~ io

~

• 51 55 O$ ~

IN Ivoaava

~5 S C J v

2 M E cX I N

aha rva NN voav i

Iraa I koaa g 'I> vva

55 I

, If I

a 5o ~ rvovo I r( IVN lak v (j)i ~ \

(ooy

Iy ' gg~,"II t ~ '. 4 .~g Ptr:P~ l I ~I I .rr, ~tt- IJ ng-e.

45 'a Corners Sa Mtneilo

~ I r I uaat II I llII 45 Result 4 Sdtrr IK sr ntrt Ia-

~t Ca!! ~

sa Rara

)tear Cr sac'5 FIGURE 1-8 4 Corners A L E R M 0 4 4 4 P 6FF SITE ENVIRONhfENTAl acus Russ Calli Coma ll I ~a 45 SCSI STATION AND 5) Mluuea as )P2 C"'

ktttl)

TLD LOCATIONS l 45 (SOUTflERN) V 0 anoints Comers IS ul ~nlu a Or eeoc ~ )enno

5) Canary

>~won IIIla utun 4 Peat Corn<<s 8erut<<'4

'l Corn<<a ktl4fs

( Comers IS <

nlul r I(<<- Center II l Ha nlbal rrs CK FULTOH ll Ctt' ursa 'art!too) 4 N a N I B A! L L.Nrerelullere t

' Rooserett nl

~ ae 53 l tcatahon'5

,Cor

)! uu aN ~5 5!

) tennibat I) 54 Center nnutt la ll Z

+C n'I ~ IueallIl Iur rl 1

~ I!allall t nels utile 'P 4 ~ Mu 54 RS euu SellIK R L uaenla, 0+

ee ItellMu <<tnan 5! y ss e +O

<<at tt ~ nl Il fQ

'To H. l: )TO COUNTY ~IIII~ I 4 Pn Aurlul ul CAYUGA nror hkrarren 5 II

~ IM u.

~ ltl~ llln 44 IulllllIa tlu II nl la

~K lal ~ a Ial illlou I '5 ~I o

4 lll Ansuar-nueulu Ia ~ I4 Selt alt SIKI! le) pn boo nlx>

tt  !) !!I IS A ~

lllutt 'I I

COUNTY ONONDAGA IIII~ I Illla

'5) a)

~~

Iaal' Ill<<aa It!4

- Environmental TLD L cation t'o Strrelwe three Stile!a

~ n I ~ II I

+4!1/ N 21 P1 pps f

LAKE OIV/lisRl ss S1

$$ c?

<<W n

~~!02 ~o) 8 28 Qso F

8, FIGURE 2 II ON-SITE I EX"it RO!i~I1ENTAL t STATION AiND TLD Qo LOCATIONS 0r

~ I Q Environt2ental Station TLD Location Iol ~ I?S j

I ~ IIII 1$

'0 I

ag Oi 0

?

?

0

~ 01 81 R.4 Q~L2 82 $ IIIIIS JI

!Ii

-126

y '.> '

olrgraa 5 'a! )", By, '>>5: .

". ",I t N<J, va '+~5>> 'w t<~('-r ct. ~:B.r - =-'I--'~ .v '

~>> .'-,.I;Aqua;,.

Solkuk SCALE OF MILES I

sraos Saoral Stars Pwl

~ SISCS ~

mone Beach

)

3Ml '>>Cesar Moxko Point FIGURE 3 Moxko Bay Beach T , E A P4asant Hkkory NEAREST RESIDENCE AND take )to 8 Poult Gro ~

Zoaas roao G R Barrrlrro FOOD PRODUCT LOCATIONS gsru esp swor at as 4 North

\ F tyuuch cx

~ I or us aa a is>>st t&

AntIW I~

hlII, )

~a sler 4 WSW cso aa 4

~ a 4)

SE assr>> IIIW Haven I VI Ilol rog J

oa Gate Ia Ia I LAKE ONTARIO IlI~I as ~

~

~

III( "N W s~ V O

sar E I

~ xk tyloxlco Itad Ilao sl

~ alwallla Isle Ia<<Ital avh South Bu fty 44 waist I'l. sass ~ ss will Iao al ~ II OS 0 cw Haven 41

<<r I n \

.J cssrs arl

<<IIWIS C II 8 A a(E Austin'I C.X I

/"X~

waa I aas gs Corn4r ~ I MSI*

tensing a!art 44 D Bistate

~

sfp sly~

O WII4alv

)<<. Klocks Nasal

~ I Comers null lrxrv laaaau '

~4 South Scr gas 15 )

5) rr M Iur sstutt

'IEJ 8 Irlfia ~ t oo ralala Disso

~ I I (St 4 Crooa vo lrlvkols

~ I< !Ionh V ey

'll III& . Ilus wc arrl Sou!ho sl Oswego Center

)0 ll 4 Oswego n >+~us w 1 4

is c<

cl )5 IIa II*

~)E 6 0 << I aaa)is

~

4 CS cs 's Corners ~ Mungcr'5 niss Ii tgtngl)0 Cwncrs lsl Vl st

~ sana )I laa I I I II

~4 la aa IS I

~ aaaaawl has yvstt ~

~ ~yrsra kryou' ~ a u~l tounl Ckllord k>> as Br)surges ~ us

~ l P!extant Orake'4

)Sx tsaar Comers A L 6 <<II /A 0 I

~ aalall )5 l5 kraal kulv Iewla>> I Mras Cot tsst/

a a'll txstlt PDrnlrstc I ~5 tttt ass>>I Paternal Utsuol M o I aulsll'll /

~ ~ Mc catt) I5

/

l5 Itutt-I n koollus Corners

/

Nonh

~5 t4nrutsat 5 Islusu

~4 I ll a 0 Os wars>>

Couory

~ >>a

. I4! lNI.,I . a I lwo

I " ee <<4 tt~etorrpne I

~ rk(

I AKL oka 10Lll aot I) I ARIO I

ON T ) kkc Skk sr<

~

~

I:IOUIII: 4 kk )S Hll.)a ANIMAL CENSUS ANI) 1~

~

~ <<<<

Ill I.N SA) IPLL'X)CATIONS NMP lie>Ice Str 8>octa I s<<wk Coos Pre>loki Ieuol

~c I(

I I t ~ i

~a I I

~ ee << eo

'IN S<<<<<<rkk

~<<

cae

)gkSE Ne 14r<<t 4I at

<< 4 oa

~ rc I?) I aoetaraf C<<ear ~

E W V E N

~e<<t H o ~

n n

<<<<I<<I<<I

~

2 osV/E I s 14<<<<

I Io Nlhae<<

10M I S I

l. r

/

S S A Sktltrt M'IE cX P

c)g C ej IIC4' IINt la Corktn r\

I roa Voter 5>lo I

I (I

if .(l)) tt1 (ll e2 II~

Scots Sitka

?

r'< n 4I a-.. B") I'4<<

? << er Vor Ca<<ote n

~ ~

rtor p? rtrrta '<<I

?

ww I PO ps 5 I W NE 0 <<rcl).k4",' Hk I

~ I la 's llettga Ckr >tel Concrete

~ Co

~

rk ~ I (aea Xt . argot't Oak Saao lot

~

42 1 o(i(IA I 0 I I l seato I'

Cteooel L C (( M 0 L Pp= '2 lI+re la

'I e<<t<< Parce<<a J

))  ?

2 D

0

~ I norse It>rata)

I' I r si ~ I oro ~t~la0 Y

QoC I ac<<os Corotn Ika V N ~

k eat

~ ao II ak at N (s Poa Corkoil? co<<)er ~

P I r+l

~

Oes ~ atter)

II 'It

~tt ~

h<<NIn

? Corkers .

t.)t ~ ~ I kors re Crerne 4eker ="Al. J FULTON ek tt

<I'tc I>as ~ ttr~<<i)a I N t N I 8 Aq)Lili J- (a.

r~aa ~SI.<<) 4)

FIGURE S NET YORK STATE iilAP gake OIItaI

IP~

ROCHESTER ~ UTICA SYRACUSE BUFFALO ALBANYe NEW Y OR K Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit I Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 2 James A. Fit-Patrick Nuclear Power Plant

-129