ML19289D775

Environ Radiation Surveillance Program, Jul-Dec 1978

ML19289D775
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Saint Vrain
Issue date:	02/26/1979
From:	Holmes M, Jerrica Johnson PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF COLORADO
To:
Shared Package
ML19289D766	List: ML19289D764 ML19289D775
References
NUDOCS 7903140376
Download: ML19289D775 (122)

Text

.

gADIATlON

-9

\

l '

. / s

'. 7 N' -

l i

/ FORT ST. VRAIN  %

\, '((

', 7

!* / NUCLEAR ',.

1 gf '

GENEftATING STATION

. "O LLJ f

e l l PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY

'O OF i

COLORADO i

- ~ - 1

e

,/ i s

l \,'

i ,

~ s' l PROGRAM

'e

SUMMARY

REPORT THIRD AND FOURTH QUARTER 1978 e

PURCHASE ORDER 38951 e /

COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY CORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80521

• 7903140$ % WO3M ,

FORT ST. VRAIN NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION ENVIRONMENTAL RADIATION SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM Sunmary Report for the period July 1, 1978 - December 31, 1978 Prepared by:/s/ [ D UMN 2 2.6 79 Janes n, Professor, Colorado State University Date U E. JohnJs Reviewed by:/ N [ '

Health Physics Department, Fort St. Vrain Date Reviewed by:/s/ /b i /g? [' r~,(

, />. -10 Nuc lear Projsct Department , Date Approved by:/s/

' U Operations Manager, Fort St. Vrain Date s u d by /s/ - -

d a- /2M7tf Nuclear Project Department Date

Acknowledgements The following have worked hard and conscientiously on this project and are acknowledged here to receive credit for all phases of its operation.

For the past half year these have been:

Diane Berry Sharon Clow Bob Fox Larry floffman Fred JoN's Don Jordan Lori Krupke Peter Marcol Marion Mcdonald Jim Roberts Charles Sheahan and Sons Judd Sills Kati Tengerdy Frank Vumbaco Susan White

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No.

List of Tal'les lii List of Figures vi

1. INTRODUCTION 1 II. SURVEILLANCE DATA FOR JULY TilROUGil DECEMBER, 4 1978, AND INTERPRETATIO!: C' 'ESULTS A. External Gamma Exposure Rates 4 B. Air Sampling Data 7 C. h'ater, Sediment, and Precipitation 24 Sampling Data D. Food Chain Data 60 E. Aquatic Biota 77 F. Beef Cattic 92 G. Sample Cross Check Data 94

11. Conclusion and Summary 100 III. ENVIRONMENTAL RADI ATION SURVEILLANCE 116 PROGRAM AND SCliEDULE A. Collection and Analysis Schedule 116 B. Sampling Locations 118 ii

LIST OF TABLES Page No.

II.A.1 Gamma Exposure Rates Measured by the TLD Techniquc. 6 II.B.1 Concentration of Long-lived Gross Alpha 8 Activity in Airborne Particles.

a. Third Quarter, 1978. 8

b. Fourth Quarter, 1978. 9 II.B.2 Concentrations of long-lived Gross Beta 10 Activity in Airborne Particles.

a. Third Quarter, 1978. 10

b. Fourth Quarter, 1978. 11 II.B.3 Tritium Concentrations in Atmospheric Water vapor. 15

a. Third Quarter, 1978. 15

b. Fourth Quarter, 1978. 16 II.B.3a Tritium concentrations in Air 17

a. Third Quarter, 1978. 17

b. Fourth Quarter, 1978. 18 II.B.4 Iodine-131 Concentrations in Air (Composite). 22 II.B.5 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations 23 in Air (Composite).

II.C.1 Gross Beta Activity in Water 26 II.C.la Gross Beta Activity in Effluent Water, Goosequill 32 (E-38).

II.C.2 Tritium Concentrations in Surface Waters. 33 II.C.3 Strontium-90 Concentrations in Surface Waters. 34 II.C.4 Strontium-39 Concentrations in Surface Waters. 35 II.C.4a Tritium, Strontium-89-90 in Effluent Water, Goosequill, 36 (E-38).

II.C.5 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in 37 Water.

II.C.Sa Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in 43 Effluent Water, Goosequill (E-38).

iii

List of Tables (Cont.)

Page No.

II.C.6 Gross Beta Activity Concentrations in Bottom 47 Sediment.

II.C.7 Strontium-90 Activity Concentrations in Bottom 48 Sediment.

II.C.8 Strontium-89 Activity Concentrations in Bottom 49 Sediment.

II.C.9 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations 50 in Bottom Sediment.

II.C.10 Gross Beta and Tritium Deposition from Precipitation. 58 II.C.11 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Deposition from 59 Precipitation at Location F1.

II.C.12 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Deposition from 60 Precipitation at Location F4.

II.C.13 Radiostrontium Deposition from Precipitation. 61 II.D.1 Tritium Concentrations in Water Extracted from Milk. 64 II.D.2 Strontium-90 Activity in Milk. 65 II.D.3 Strontium-89 Activity in Milk. 66 II.D.4 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations 67 in Composite Milk Samples.

II.D.5 Tritium, Strontium-89, and Strontium-90 Concentrations 70 in Forage.

II.D.6 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in 73 Forage.

II.D.7 Gross Beta Concentrations in Forage (nCi/kg). 76 II.E.1 Gross Beta and Radiostrontium Concentrations in 78 Aquatic Biota Samples.

iv

List of Tables (Cont.)

Page No.

II.E.2 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations 85 in Aquatic Biota Samples.

II.F.1 Radionuclides in Facility Area Beef Cattle 93 II.F.2 Radionuclides in Beef Satple from Local lierd. 93 II.G.1 Sample Cross Check Data Summary. 95 11.G.2 Cross Check Analysis of Milk Samples Collected 98 at Location F-44.

II.G.3 Correlation of EPA values and CSU values for all 99 cross check samples.

1 1 .11. 1 Data Siumnary. 104 III.A.1 Environmental Radiation Surveillance Program 117 Schedule III.B.1 Facility Area and Effluent Sampling Locations for 120 Environmental Media.

III.B.2 Adjacent Area and Downstream Sampling Locations for 121 Environmental Media.

III.B.3 Reference Area and Upstream Sampling Locations for 122 Environmental Media.

v

LIST OF FIGURES Page No.

II.B.1 Tritium Concentration in Atmospheric Water 19 Vapor - July-December, 1978.

II.C.1 Tritium Concentration in Surface Water 45 July-December, 1978.

III.B.1 On-site Sampling Locations. 118 III.B.2 Off-site Sampling Locations.

vi

1 I.

Introduction to Radiation Surveillance Data for the second half of 1978.

During the last six months of 1978 the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station generated power as follows:

Dates With No. of Days Gross Elcetric Without Generation Month Generation Generation M01 July 3-14, 17-31 5 85,839 August 18, 19, 21-31 18 14,496 September 1-8 23 25,147 October 5-12, 14-17, 31 18 24,880 November 1-?> 1 110,594 December ^ 31 8 92,583 It is significant to note that during this period the reactor operated more consistently than any previous reporting period. Therefore the data collected during this period may be more easily tested against the preoper-ational period data to determine if the reactor effluents produced measureabic increases in environmental radioactivity.

Also during this period the Mainland Chinese conducted an atmospheric nuclear weapons test. The test date was December 14, 1978 and the tropo-spheric debris was apparent only in a few sample types by the end of this reporting period.

The environmental sampling and analysis program was essentially unchanged as compared to previous reporting periods. All radioactivity data measured on this project are near background levels and more importantly near the minimum detectable activity (MDA) levels for each radionuclide and sample type. It is well documented that even independent of the above reasons, environmental data exhibit great inherent variability. As a result,

2 the overall variability of the surveillance daea is quite large and it is necessary to use mean values to make any conclusions about the true absolute radioactivity concentrations in any environmental pathway.

It is well documented that environmental radiation surveillance data commonly exhibit non-normal frequency distributions. More often than not the data can be satisfactorily treated using log-normal statistics. However, when the number of observations is small, i.e. less than 10, log-normal treatment is tentative.

h' hen a high percentage of data points are less than MDA or MDC, the minimum detectable concentrations of activity in that sample type, calcu-lation of true mean values is impossible. Therefore in this report we have chosen to not include mean values with each data tabic. At the end of this report in Section II.ll., Conclusions and Summary, we have listed the calculated arithmetic means and confidence intervals for the entire reporting period as well as for the last year. h'e also list the geometric means and standard deviations for the last year of data reporting. If the data point measured resulted in a negative value, this value was used in calculating the true mean value in Table II.H.1. This is the current accepted practice by the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. It should be noted that we have not used any footnote for values less than 50C. Rather we list the measured value as less than the actual MDC value. Because this value is dependent upon variables such as the background count time and sample size, the MDC value will be different for each sample type and even within sampic type.

bbny sets of data were compared in this report. The statistical test used was cither a "t"-test or a paired "t"-test. If data sets are noted to be significantly different or not significantly different, the confidence for the statement is at the 95% IcVel (a = 0.05) .

3 The following is the footnote system used in this report.

b. Sample missing at site.

c. Instrurent malfunction.

d. Sample lost during analysis.

c. Insufficient weight or volume for analysis.

f. Sample unavailabic.

g. Analysis in progress.

N.A. Not applicable.

4 II. Surveillance Data for July through December, 1978, and Interpretation of Results.

A. External Gamma-ray Exposure Rates The average gamma-ray exposure rates expressed in mR/ day are given in Table II.A.1. The values were determined by CaF2:Dy (TLD-200) crystals for each of the 37 locations. The total exposure recorded by each TLD was divided by the number of days that elapsed between pre-exposure and post-exposure annealing to obtain the average exposure rate. The TLD devices are changed monthly at each location.

The data are grouped for Facility (F), Adjacent (A) and Reference (R) 7.ones. See Figures III.B.1 and II.B.2 and Table III.B.1, III.B.2, and [II.B.3 for the exact TLD locations.

The TLD data indicate that the measured exposure rate in the Facility area was approximately 149 mR/ year. This is slightly but not significantly less than the value estimated for the first half of 1978. The exposure rate is due to cosmic rays, to natural gamma-ray emitters in the carth's crust and to surface deposition of fission products from world wide fallout.

In this data set there are 7 " outlier" values. This is far more than in any previous reporting period and show at least some degree of uniformity which hints that the values may not be simply due to methodological error (A-35). It seems proper to conclude that reactor offluent could not possibly be responsible for the high values. If this were the case high values would have been observed in other TLD devices in the same area and in our other sample types. liigh transient exposure rates are possible from well logging sources which are known

5 to be used in the area, but we know of no such activity around A-35 in particular. For this reason we have assumed that the high values are indeed aberrant and have arbitrarily omitted them in determining mean values.

Doing so--the mean values for the Facility, Adjacent and Reference areas for the second half of 1978 are not significantly different.

Close inspection of Table II. A.1 again reveals a monthly variation which is the same for the three sampling zones. This is presumed due to monthly variations in calibration of the TLD reader and has been evident since the inception of the project. The literature (licalth Physics 30:125-133, 1976) indicate that CaF 2:Dy type TLD's have superior accuracy but greater variability as compared to other types. It is assumed that it is this variation which is responsible for the calibration error. Beginning Jan. 1, 1978 we have used more TLD chips pe. calibration experiment in an effort to decrease the calibration random error.

It should be noted that the monthly values reported do not include a correction for fading while in the field. All devices are located on the north side of each pole to minimize this response. More importantly the correction is not performed so that the data co11ceted during the preoperational phase may be compared directly to postoperational.

G 6 Table II. A.1 Camma Exposure Rates Measured by the TLD Technique (mR/ day).

9 Facility Area Average Daily Gamma Exposure Rates - 1978 Locations July August Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.

F 1 .37 .41 .93 .39 .94 .39 F 3 .42 .42 .39 .43 .40 .42 g F 4 .39 .36 .35 .44 .42 .41 F 7 .37 .39 .38 .42 .42 .35 F 8 .40 .43 .40 .46 .41 .39 F 9 .41 .44 .37 .48 .43 .46 F 11 .34 .39 .34 .44 .42 .39 F 12 .45 .39 .42 .45 .14 .46 F 13 .42 .41 .38 .48 .45 .40 F 14 .39 .41 .38 .40 .42 .39 F 46 .44 .45 .43 .41 .38 .45 F 47 .39 .44 .36 .40 .40 .44 F 51 .36 .42 .35 .42 .41 .92 Adjacent Area Locations A 5 .36 .42 .35 .46 .42 .39 A 6 .38 .38 .35 .42 .36 .35 A 27 .31 .41 .36 .40 .93 .37 9 A 28 .33 .37 .33 .44 .39 .41 A 29 .38 .38 .37 .44 .43 .52 A 30 .41 .43 .42 .44 .49 .44 A 31 .37 .35 .36 .39 .36 .52 A 32 .36 .39 .32 .44 .41 .57 A 33 .39 .41 .42 .47 .35 .38 A 34 .35 .45 .36 .45 .44 .44 A 35 .41 2.69 .39 4.85 .44 2.80 A 36 .30 .44 .38 .45 .41 .41 Referenc- Area Locations

& .42 R 15 .31 .40 .37 .39 .45 R 16 .43 .45 .38 .47 .44 .46 R 17 .35 .38 .28 .35 .40 .40 R 18 .36 .37 .39 .39 .39 .39 R 19 .37 .37 .38 .38 .38 .35 R 20 .41 .43 .40 .44 .44 .41 R 21 .36 .42 .35 .42 .38 .43 R 22 .42 .41 .40 .37 .46 .41 R 23 .32 d .39 .43 .42 .42 R 24 .45 .49 .44 .49 .49 .48 R 25 .29 .41 .39 .39 .45 .39 R 26 .29 .38 .42 .42 .41 .42

d. Sample lost during analysis.

7 II.B. Air Sampling Data

1. Gross alpha and beta activity. Concentrations of gross alpha and beta activity in air particulates for the sampling sites in the Facility and Adjacent areas are listed in Tables II.B.1 and II.B.2.

Gross alpha activity in air showed a pronounced peak during the week of August 11-19. This was evident at all sampling locations. Inspection of Table II.B.2 shows a peak in gross beta activity but not during the same period. The gross beta peak occurred from 1-3 weeks earlier (assuming the influx could be a singic event and occur any time during the 7 day sampling period) and is over a longer time period. Since there were no announced nuclear weapons tests immediately previous to the period it is assumed that the peaks are due to influx of stratospheric debris, perhaps due to summer thunderhead storms that break through the troposphere.

There was an announced Chinese weapons test on December 14, 1978.

Gross beta activity showed a peak during the week ending December 23.

There was no significant difference between the mean values of gross alpha concentrations for Facility sites and Adjacent sites for the last half of 1978. The mean values for gross beta concentration in air were however significantly higher for the adjacent air sampling sites compared to Facility. No reason for this difference can be proposed.

Table II. B.1 .

Concentrations of Long-lived Cross Alpha Activity in Airborne Particles (fCi/m ).

a) Third Quarter', 1978 -

Date Facility Arcas Adjacent Areas Collected 1 2 3 l 4 5 l 6 35 .

1978 ,

July 1. 3.1 (0.7) 22.0 (0.5) **

1.6 (0.4) 35.3 (10.3) 7.3 (1.6) 4.7 (1.4)

July 8 3.8 (0.8) 1.3 (0.4) 0.8**(0.2) 1.5 (0.3) 17.5 (6) 9. 4 - (1. 9) 5.3 (2.1)

July 15 5.2 (1.1) 3.9 (0.8) 1.9 (0.4) 14.5 (3.4) 8.1 (1.5) 9.3 (2.4)

July 22 2.2 (0.5) 1.5 (0.4) 0.6 (0.3) 2.4 (0.5) **

. 6.8 (1.6) 4.8 (1.7)

July 27 4.7 (1.0) 3.0.(0.6) 1.7 (0.5) 1.7 (0.4) 15.8 (3.8) 9.6 (2.2)

August 5 3.2 (1.2) c- 6.0 (0.7) 7.3 (0.7) 3.9 (1.5) 5.1 (0.6) 2.5 8.1 ((7)1.2)

August 11 20.5 (1.8) 31.5 (2.7) ** 21.7 (2,1) 27.1 (2.8) 20.5 (2.1) 6.8 (2.8)

August 19 8.6 (1.2) 16.9 (1.7) 9.5 (1.5) c c 10.3 (1.5) 2.3 (0.6)

August 26 5.1 (0.-9) 8.6 (1.5) 3.1 (1) 8.6 (1.6) 8.8 (2.2) 6.6.(1.2) 6.8 (1.3)

Sept. 2 12.9 (2.3) 7.4 (1.2) 2.3**(0.7) 1 5.7 (1.1) 7.3 (2.0) c 2.7 (3) .

Sept. 9 11.0 (2.0) 9.1 (1.8) **

10.3 (2.4) c 5.9 (1.4)

Sept. 16 9.1 (1.9) 4.9 (1.1) **

7.7 (1.7) **

5.5**(1.1) 5.1 (1.4)

• Sept. 23 6.6 (1.5) 3.1 (1.5) **

c **

3.3 (1.2)

Sept. 30 8.4 (1.9) 7.7 (1.4) 9.2 (2.0) ** **

7.2 (2.0)

Quarterly -Minimum 0.3 Quarterly -Minimum 1.0 (46 sampics) -Maximum 31.5 (32 samples) -Fbximum 35.3

-Average 6.1 -Average 15.9

-15 All concentrations are expressed in femtocuries per cubic meter of air: 1 fCi/m = 10 Ci/ml.

• Uncertainties (in ' parenthesis) are for the 95% confidence interval (1.96 S.D.). .

• • Excessive dust loading, analysis uncertain.

c Instrument malfunction. Pump in for repair and recalibration.

Table II. B.1 3

Concentrations of Long-lived Gross Alpha Activity in Airborne Partic1,es (fC1/m ).

b) fourth Quarter, 1978 -

Date Facility Areas Adjacent Arecs Collected 1 2 3 4 5 , 6 35 .

1978 _

October 7 8.4 (1.8)* 14.4 (1.8) **

22.7 (2.6) **

21.1 (2.29) 52.3 (5.6)

October 14 8.7 (1.6) 17.6 (2.6) **

9.8 (1.9) ** **

October 21 12.1 (2.6) 18 3 (2.1) 22.4 (2.3) 8. 7 (1. 0) 25.0 (2.8) 6.0 (1.0) 6. 3 (1.0) 18.4 (2.2)

October 28 6.4 (1.9) 9.8 (2.1) 9.0 (1.0) 3.3 (1.0) 2. 2 -(0.p) 2.3 (0.7) 2.5 (2.2)

November 4 d' 19. 8- (2. 0) 23.1 (2.6) 20.9 (2.1) c '

17.4 (2.1) ***

November 11 c 14.4 (1.9) 12.6 (1.9) 14.1 (1.7) e 8'.7 (1.4) .

November 18 22.1 (2. ~8) 18.1 (1.9) 15.5 (1.8) 12.2 (1.6) 9.6 (1.1) 28.9**(4.3)

. November 25 13.2 (1.5) 13.2 (1.5) 9.0 (1.2) 19.7 (2.3) c December 2 8.4 (1.1) 6.1 (0.8) 8.8 (1.1) 10.5 (1.5) 4.6 (0.7.) 9.9-(1.5)

December 9 2.8 (0. 7) 3.5 (0.7) 13.2 (1.5) 4.5 (1.0) 1.5 (0.3) 4.6 (1.0)

December 16 4.0 (0.1) 3.3 (0. 7) 2.4 (0.5) 2.1 (8. 7) 1.4 (0.3) 9.5 (1.8)

December 23 4.1.(0.8) 4.0 (0.8) 13.0 (1.9) 7.0 (1.7) 2.8 (0.6) 4.4 (0.9) *

-December 30 2.3 (0.5) 3.6 (0.7) 1.1 (0. 5J 5.5 (1.2) 1.5 (0.5) 3.4 (0.9)

Quarterly -Min 2 mum 1.1 Quarterly -Minimum 1.4 (48 samples) -Maximum 25.0 (23. samples) -bhximum 52.3

-Average 10.9 -Average 20.4

.. " All concentrations are expressed in femtocuries per cubic meter of air: I fCi/m = 10 -15 Ci/ml.

• Uncertainties (iq parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval (1.96 S.D.).

• • Excessive dust loading, analysis uncertain.

• • • Pump removed from field 11/4/78. New site being locat.ed.

c Instrument malfunction. Pump in for repair and calibration. .

9 e

Table II. B.2 Concentrations of Long-lived Gross Beta Activity in Airborne Particles (fCi/m3 ).

~" -

a) Third Quarter',~1978. - --

~

Date Facility Areas Adjacent Areas Collected 1 2 j 3 4 5 6 35 1978 -

July 1 38 (1)* 24 (1) 18 (7) 15 (1) 30 (7) 25 (2)

~

91 (4)

July 8 57 (2) 39 (2) 7 (1) 24 (1) 417 (13) 110 (4) 82 (6)

July 15 5'2 (2) 34 (1) 19 (1) 14 (1) 131 (4) 49 (2) 75 (5)

July 22 166 (1) 96 (7) 33 (6) 14 (1) 11.(1) 43 (2) 399 (38)

July 29 40c(1) 28 (1) 73 (1) 13 (1) 177 (6),* 59 (2) 46 (4)

August 5 27 (1) c 18 (1) 14 (1) 38 (2) 13.(1) :14 (2)

August 11 24 (1) 40 (1) 50 (3) 20 (1) 39 (2) 27 (1) 36 (4) c

~

. August 19 33 (1) 36 (2) 6 (1) c 30 (1) 26 (2)

August 26 <1 14 (1) 37 (2) 27 (2) 5 (1) 18. (1) 61 (2)

Sept. 2 50 (3) 9 (1) 49 (2) 37 (2) 10 (2) c 29 (6)

Sept. 9 41 (2) 45 (2) 39 (2) 48 (3) 24 (2) c 9 (2) ,,

Sept. 16 39 (2) 33 (1.6) 21 (1) 22 (2) 13 (1) 7 (1) 17 (2) o

. Sept. 23 24 (2) 9 (1) 13 (1) c 12 (1) 20 (1) 52 (3)

Sept. 30 42 (2) 28 (2) 19 (1) 49 (2) 18 (1) 17 (1) 67 (3)

Quarterly -minimum <1 Quarterly -minimum 5 (52 samples) -maximum 166 (39 samples) -maximum 417

-average 30 -average 73 All concentrations are expresse'd in femtocuries per cuoic meter of air: I fCi/m = 10 -15 Ci/ml.

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval (1.96 S.D. ) .

c Instrument malfunction. Pump in for repair and recalibration.

S 9

, e

.e

Table II. B.2 3

Concentrations of Long-lived Gross Beta Activity in Airborne Partic1,es (fCi/m ).

b) Fourth Quarter, 1978.

~

Date Facility Areas Adjacent Arens Collected 1 2 3 , 4 , 5 6 35 .

1978 -

October 7 35 (2) 26 (1)* ,24 (1) 19 (2) 3 (1) 12 (1) 22 (3)

October 14 27 (1) 49 (2) 26 (1) 36 (2) 16 (1) 23 (1) 28 (3)

October 21 24 (1) <1 <1 33 (2) <1 19 (1) 22 (1)

October 28 '

17 (3) 21 (2) 16 (1) 20 (2) 10 (1) 9 (1) 13 (4)

November ( cm 31,(2) 26 (2) 30 (2) c'  ! <2 ** '

November 11 c 25 (2) 27 (2) 22 (1) c 19 (1)

November 18 61 (3) 32 (2) 29 (2) 34 (2) 18 (1) 62 (4)

, November 25 29 (2) 24 (1) 20 (1) 39 (2) c 22 (1)

December 2 18 (1) 17 (1) 22 (1) 33 (2) 8 (1) 33,(2)

December 9 18 (1) 72 (1) 19 (2) 30 (2) 10 (1) 19 (1)

December 16 12 (1) 12 (1) 6 (1) 11 (1) 7 (1) 25 (2) ,,

December 23 145 (3) 118 (3) 117 (4) 298 (7) 52 (1) 163 (3) -

December 30 18 (1) 21 (1) 7 (1) 37 (2) 13 (1) 21 (1)

Quarterly -Minimum <1 Quarterly -Minimum <1

( 50 samples) -Maximum 298 (25 samples) sximum 163

-Average 37.1 -Average 22.6

. All concentrations are expressed in femtocuries per cubic meter of air: 1 fCi/m = 10

-15 Ci/ml.

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95*. confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

• • Pump removed from Tield 11/4/78. New site being located.

c Instrument malfunction. Pump in for repair and recalibration.

O e

12

2. Tritium Activity. Atmospheric water vapor samples are collected continuously in Silica Gel at all seven air sampling stations (four in the Facility area and three in the Adjacent area). The specific activity of tritium in water in weekly sampics from these stations is listed in Table II.B.3. The specific activity of tritium in weekly sampics per unit volu ic of air is listed in Table II.B.3a.

Concentrations of tritium in atmospheric water vapor have remained relatively stable for the past year for sampling sites F3, F4, AS, A6, and A35. There are variations in even the average values of the sampling sites reflecting the variability associated with the source term of the tritiated water being measured.

In Table II.B.3, note the significantly higher mean tritium values for sampling sites F-1 and F-2 than for the other sampling site location.

liigher values may be observed especially during the months of October and November of 1978. Due to the very close proximity of Goosequill Pond and the effluent slough Icading into Goosequill Pond with respect to sampling sites F-1 and F-2 (see Figure II.B.1), we assume that these elevated values are the result of evaporation of liquid effluent tritium releases from Fort St. Vrain being absorbed on Silica Gel at the nearest sampling locations. Ilowever, there is no significant difference for mean tritium values observed for all sites between the first half of 1978 and the last half of 1978. The elevated values at F-1 and F-2 did not significantly affect the overall mean.

It can be seen in Table II.C.2 and in Table 11.11.1 that tritium activity in surface water has greater average values than in atmospheric water vapor. Gstlund (1) and Jacobs (2) noted that t rit iated water

13 precipitation that falls into the ocean is rapidly diluted. Subsequently, reevaporation of water into water vapor and precipitation on land has a much lower tritium content. Reevaporation from land surfaces undergoes less dilution and therefore, this water retains a higher tritium content.

This observation implies that the current major source of tritium in water vapor (and also precipitation) is the oceans which have lower tritium concentrations due to their great dilution ability (1).

At location F-4 a hygrothermograph has been operational for most of the last half of 1978. Using the temperature and relative humidity data from the hygrothermograph it is possible to convert specific activity of tritiated water collected on Silica Gel (pCi/ liter) to activity per unit volume of air (pCi/m ). This is critical in assessment of immersion dose from tritiated water vapor. Two equations are used in the conversion of pCi/ liter of water to pCi/m of air. The first equation is used to determine the vapor pressure of water (3):

log 10 = A - B / (C+t), where: P = vapor pressure (mm lig) t = temperature (C)

A = 8.10765 B = 1750.286 C = 235.0 The temperature used is the integrated weekly value taken from the hygrothermograph. The conversion is completed in the second equation which is the " Ideal Gas Equation"-

PV = nRT, where: P = vapor pressure (mm lig)

V = volume (liters) n = number of moles of gas R = 0.08206 liters-atmospheric / mole-K T = temperature in K The number of grams of water per cubic meter of air is then determined.

It should be noteu that in past reports when determining "n", a value of 760 mm lig was used for the total mean air pressure, however, this is

14 the sea level value for mean air pressure. To correct for this error a mean air pressure value of 635 mm lig is now used in this calculation at Fort St. Vrain's altitude. This value was obtained from the Colorado Climatology office at Colorado State University in Fort Collins. To correct the value reported in pCi/m in past reports, one must multiply the value by 760/635 (1.20).

The value of "n" obtained is for saturated air. The relative humidity P

is therefore integrated over the week and this percentage of the saturated air value is taken. The final value . ; reported in pCi/m . This procedure has been applied to data collected for the third and fourth quarters of 1978 and listed in Table II.B.3a. These values are functions of both specific activity of tritium in water and the concentration of water in the air.

(1) 11. G. Ostlund. Tritium in the Atmosphere and Oceans. In Tritium.

Edited by A. A. Moghissi and M. W. Carter, 1971.

(2) Jacobs, D. G. ,1968, " Sources of Tritium and Its Behavior Upon Release to the Environment," Oak Ridge National 1.aboratory, USAEC Report TID-24635.

(3) 11. A. Lange, llandbook of Chemistry. 19th edition, revised.

McGraw-liill Book Co. , New York, 1967. pp 1436-1450.

Table II. B.3 Tritium Concentrations in Atmospheric Water Vapor (pCi/1).

a) Tnird Quarter,1978.

Date Facility Areas Adjacent Areas Collected 1 2 3 4 5 6 35 7-1-78 f <201

1. 20] <201 b64)* 8) 78) 887 930 379 409 541 474 594

~ ~

(271) (271) (265) ( '. o ., ) (267) (268) (267) 1,264 872 510 444 413 615

() (265) (265) (268)

(275) (273) (262)

. 817 411 536 487 557 665 (276) (271) (273) (272) (273) (275) 7-29-78 518 600 485 605 3T2

-~

(265) (266) (264)

< 6 (266)

< 80 (2631 5 8-11-78 931 911 814 416 279 578 Sl0 (270) (270) (268) (264) (262) (266) (265) 891 1,017 658 612 730 725 8-19-78 <280 (269) (271) (267) (266) (267) (267) 58 508 8-26-78 <308 <308 (294) (262) (291) (299) (290) 418 564 384 563 542 748

-~

()

(300) (291) (289) (291) (291) (293) 9-9-78 <313 <313 <313 <313 <313 <313 <313 1,610 5,070 , 461 597 428 435 (307) (3J 3) (295) (296) (294) (294) 1,571 966 820 611 645 540 9-23-78 <313 (307) (300) (299) (296) (297) (296) 8 9-30-78

<316 <316 <316 <316 73 0 9

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

• • Two-week time period. The sample was for the periods 7 7-29 and 8 8-11 due to pro-cedural problems. It is assumed that the concentration measured is applicable as the average for the two periods. The sample was sealed during the period 7 8-5.

e Insufficient weight or volume for analysis.

i

Table II. B.3 Tritium Concentrations in Atmospheric k'ater Vapor (pC1/1),

b) Fourth Quarter, 1978.

Date Facility Areas Adjacent Areas Collected 1 2 3 4 5 6 35 879 1030 433 601 601 795 555 October 7 (303)* (304) (297) (299) (299) (302) (299) 1600 1610 987 952 1390 696 910 October 14 (311) (311) (303) (303) (308) (300) (303) 1020 2660 October 21 (288) (276) <299 <299 <299 <299 <299 1500 1280 339 508 348 447 October 28 (293) (293) (293) (280) (280) <299 (281) 1470 2200 447 319 442 388 November 4 (293) (301) (281) (280) (281) (280) <299 3400 6820 293 November 11 (284) (315) (252) <269 <269 <269 e 5 1050 2900 345 323 282 November 18 (260) (379) (252) (252) <269 (252) <269 930 1850 501 472 374 779 680 November 25 (260) (270) (256) (255) (254) (259) (258) 562 907 422 430 669 430 789 December 2 (256) (260) (255) (255) (258) (255) (259) 281 416 364 December 9 (253) (255) <271 <271 <271 (254) <271 426 December 16 <275 <275 <275 <275 e <275 (259) 1910 455 596 821 December 23 (271) (256) <271 <271 <271 (257) (259) 974 546 430 430 December 30 (260) (256) (255) <271 <271 (255) <271

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95*. confidence interval (1.96 S.D.).

e Insufficient weight or vol'ime for analysis.

Table II.B.3a Tritium Concentrations in Air (pCi/m )

Third Quarter, 1978.

Date Facility Areas Adjacent Areas Collected 1 2 3 4 5 6 35 7-1-78 c e c c c c c 7-8-78 13.3 13.9 5.66 6.11 8.08 7.08 8.88 7-15-78 20.3 14.0 8.21 e 7.15 6.65 9.90 7-22-78 <4.54 12.9 6.48 8.46 7.68 8.79 10.5 8-5-78 7.25 8.40 6.79 <3.30 8.47 <3.92 5.21 C 8-11-78 14.1 13.8 12.3 6.31 4.23 8.76 7.73 8-19-78 9.54 10.9 <3.00 7.04 6.55 7.82 7.76 8-26-78 13.6 13.7 <4.91 <4.91 8.72 6.12 8.09 9-2-78 5.38 /.26 4.94 7.24 6.97 9.62 e 9-9-78 <3.73 <3.73 <3.73 <3.73 <3.73 <3.73 <3.73 9-16-78 15.2 47.8 <2.95 4.35 5.63 4.04 4.10 9-23-78 10.5 6.45 2.09 5.47 4.08 4.30 3.60 9-30-78 6.93 11.3 <2.65 <2.65 3.67 <2.65 <2.65 c Instrument malfunction.

e Insufficient volume or weight for analysis.

• Two week time period. The sample was for the periods 7/22 - 7/29 anu 8/5 - 8/11 due to procedural problems. It is assumed that the concentration measured is applicable as the average for the two perious. The. sample was scaled during the period 7/29 - 8/5.

Table II.B.3a Tritium Concentrations in Air (pCi/m )

Fourth Quarter, 1978.

Date Facility Areas Adjacent Areas Collected 1 2 3 4 5 6 35 10-7-78 4.73 5.54 2.53 3.23 3.23 4.27 2.99 10-14-78 10.1 10.2 6.25 6.03 8.81 4.41 5.77 10-21-78 6.40 16.7 1.87 1.87 1.87 1.87 1.87 10-28-78 9.31 7.94 2.10 3.15 2.16 1.86 2.77 11-4-78 7.51 11.2 2.28 1.60 2.26 1.98 1.53 5 11-11-78 14.8 29.6 1.05 1.17 1.17 1.17 e 11-18-78 3.05 8.44 1.00 0.94 0.78 0.82 0.78 11-25-78 2.90 5.77 1.56 1.47 1.17 2.43 2.12 12-2-78 1.75 2.83 1,32 1.34 2.08 1.34 2.46 12-9-78 e c c c c c c 12-16-78 c c e c c c c 12-23-78 e c c c c c c 12-30-78 e c c c c c c c Instrument malfunction.

e Insufficient volume or weight for analysis.

19 10 Figure II.B.1

. TRITIUM CONCENTRATIONS IN ATMOSPHERIC WATER VAPOR JULY - DECEMBER ,1978 SITES:

~

- e- ---* F - 1

- c oF-2 n o----o A - 35

~

l

,'l' .

t u l '

\ t 5 \

h 1 I z /, ,

y 3

10 - 8 b i i i

li ,7

' i R 1 'g i ['i I I i

O

\

/\ k

! \g i 1

I il I 11 Ii

\ l i fg  :

t

>\+ \  ! l

\

\j' 'i j!'i, ! l 1

h i

\1

/ \ i2 I s\

l \

t j \

- \

o\

i b \

' ,I

! \g S

\t 11 \

\ l l ik I

i , ki y I

a f

2

'N V' '

10 ' '

'JdLY' DEC '

' 'AbG' ' ' S'EPT '1978 0 T'

g 20

3. Activity of gama-ray emitting radionuclides in air.

Table II.B.4 lists the concentrations of I-131 observed in air by 9

activated charcoal samoling and gamma-ray spectrum analysis. This char-coal sanple is a composite from all air sampling stations. All charcoal samples are counted approximately 20 days post collection to allow Rn-222 decay and minimize decay of I-131. The I-131 concentrations presented here and in the report for the first half of 1978 are the result of decay correction back to the midpoint of the sampling period. Dat. presented in previous semiannual reports were erroneously decay corrected to the sample collection date. Decay correction to the midpoint of the sampling period is appropriate as any I-131 in air does not arrive at the sampling station at a constant rate, but rather in pulses short compared to the collection period. This is the case whether the I-131 source tenn is weapons testing fallout or reactor stack effluent. Table II.B.4 shows air concentrations of I-131 during the second half of 1978 to be generally lower than the first half of 1978. The peak values during the period cannot be explained. The

, peak during the last two weeks of December are probably the result of the Chinese weapons test of December 14, 1978.

Table II.B.5 lists the results of the gama-ray spectral analyses of

, weekly composites of the membrane air filters in each sample head. No evi-dence of the December 14 Chinese weapons test was apparent.

The radioruthenium data is listed in the tables as Ru-106. However,

, it is true that the activity measured is often a mixture of Ru-103 and Ru-106. Both isotopes have gamma-rays at essentially the same energy and they cannot be separated by NaI(Tl) spectral analysis. No separation g by half-life determination was attempted on the data. Since the half-life of Ru-103 is 40 days and that of Ru-106 is one year, in periods soon after an atmospheric test, a high proportion is expected to be Ru-103, and 9

21 at later times predominately Ru-106. Since the ruthenium isotopes have negligible biological availability, neither has any consequences in cal-culation of population dose and efforts to separate them is not warranted.

22 Table II. B.4 Iodine-131 Concentrations in Air (Taken From Composites of Activated Charcoal at all Air Sampling Stations and Determined by Gamma Spectrometry).

Sample Ending Dates I (fCi/m )

7-1-78 <1.44 7-8-78 43.1 (21.1) 7-15-78 <1.41 7-22-78 54.9 (19.8) 7-29-78 <1.59 8-5-78 <1.51 8-11-78 15.0 (22.6) 8-19-78 <2.61 8-26-78 <1.26 9-2-78 <3.37 9-9-78 <3.28 9-16-78 61.0 (25.6) 9-23-78 28.0 (29.2) 9-30-78 <1.95 10-7-78 108 (23.5) 10-14-78 d 10-21-78 d 10-28-78 <1.49 11-4-78 30.9 (15. 9) 11-11-78 <2.96 11-18-78 <2.87 11-25-78 <3.03 12-2-78 <1.86 12-9-78 588 (37 3) 12-16-78 <1.77 12-23-78 30.7 (31.3) 12-30-78 53.9 (24.8)

All concentrations are eXPresggd 3 in femtocuries per cubic meter of air: 1 fCi/m = 10- HCi/ml.

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

d Lost in analysis.

23 Table II. B.5 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Air (Taken from Composites of all Air Sampling Stations) (fCi/m 3),

Sample Ending 106 95 Ru Cs Zr & Nb Dates 7-1-78 10.9 (5.667 2.63 (0.904) 1.02 (0.513) 7-8-78 <4.64 1.89 (0.939) 0.932 (0.514) 7-15-78 7.76 (5.44) 2.34 (0.876) 0.537 (0.429) 7-22-78 2.95 (2.43) 0.933 (0.397) 0.412 (0.194) 7-29-78 <4.72 3.38 (0.977) 1.12 to.459) 8-5-78 6.91 (5.48) 1.08 (0.907) < 0. 4 34 8-11-78 7.77 (6.20) 1.67 (1.02) 0.577 (0.448) 8-19-78 <7.96 <1.78 <0.758 8-26-78 <6.22 1.88 (1.23) <0.592 9-2-78 <3.20 1.82 (0.851) <0.307 9-9-78 <10.0 2.83 (2.01) 1.71 (1.84) 9-16-78 8.60 (6.82) 1.54 (1.01) <0.485 9-23-78 <5.84 2.67 (1.17) 1.40 (0.963) 9-30-78 9.47 (6.25) 1.73 (0.952) <0.453 10-7-78 <5.19 <1.16 <0.494 10-14-78 <2.05 1.24 (0.549) 0.269 (0.427) 10-21-78 <4.45 3.70 (0.935) 2.27 (0.684) 10-28-78 <6.07 2.18 (1.23) 0.720 (0.833) 11-4-78 12.3 (11.5) <1.97 <0.842 11-11-78 4.17 (4.63) 2.85 (0.727) 2.18 (0.495) 11-18-78 7.77 (8.26) 2.31 (1.31) 2.09 (0.826) 11-25-78 <9.83 <2.20 1.39 (1.15) 12-2-78 <5.54 1.41 (1.12) 0.689 (0.632) 12-9-78 6.43 (7.51) 1.49 (1.26) <0.603 12-16-78 5.84 (6.35) <1.17 <0.502 12-23-78 40.9 (8.25) <1.40 1,47 (0.589) 12-30-78 <4.53 <1.01 0.724 (0.393)

Allcongentrat{gnsareernr<ssedinfemtocuriespercubicmeterofair:

1 fCi/m = 10 pCi/ml.

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

24 II.C.1 Radionuclide Concentrations in Surface Water Table II.C.1 lists the gross beta activity in surface water and potable water supplies in the vicinity of the reactor. Values are given for both the suspended and dissolved solids fraction of the total water sample. The suspended solids fraction contains algae and sediment particles which have very high concentration factors for radionuclides and consequently is considerably higher than the dissolved solids fraction. These values are given for samples collected monthly. Potable water retairs a negligible suspended solids fraction and consequently the gross beta values for potable water are significantly lower.

Values of gross beta concentrations in surface water fluctuated widely within upstream, downstream.and effluent sites. Mean values for upstream sampling sites were higher than other sites (see Table II .H.1) ,

however, there was no significant difference between upstream, downstream or effluent water sample mean values. Mean values were very close to those measured during the first half of 1978.

Weekly samples, although not required by the Technical Specifications, were collected at E-38, the farm pond on the Goosequill ditch. This is the principal effluent route for liquid discharges from the reactor and a monthly sample was not adequate to reflect periodic discharges. Gross beta concentrations are shown in Table II.C.1A. A high concentration was observed on 12/23 and 12/30/78. These correspond to high tritium releases during those periods (Table 11.C.2).

Table II.C.2 lists tritium in surface water and potabic water supplies for each monthly collection for the last half of 1978. Values occasionally fluctuate widely within Upstream and Downstream sites, but this variability cannot be attributed to any direct cause. The mean values for

25 Upstream, Downstream and Potable water locations for tritium are not significantly different. There was no significant difference in values for these locations between the first half of 1978 and the last half of 1978.

Significantly high tritium values were again observed at effluent sampling sites in the last half of 1978. This is directly attributed to liquid effluent releases by Fort St. Vrain. Downstream locations did not reflect any significant increases in tritium concentration, therefore no dose commitment calculations were made. Tritium values observed for weekly samples taken from E-38 are comparable to tritium values in monthly composites. Note the especially large values observed in December.

Due to our grab sample technique, it is assumed that these large values were obtained during a particularly large release of tritiated water in the liquid effluent by Fort St. Vrain. A cross check on the highest value was obtained as the Colorado Department of Health analyzes the same samples.

Their measured concentration was 2.4pCi/ liter. Our value (Table II.C.2) was 2.2pCi/ liter. We consider this cross check agreement to be excellent.

Table II.C.3 and II .C.4 lists Sr-90 and Sr-89 concentrations in surface water at the same sampling locations. Table II.C.4.A. lists the same radionuclides as well as tritium in reactor effluent water samples collected weekly at E-38.

The concent rations of Ru-106, Cs-137 and Zr-Nb-95 in surface and potable water are given in Table II.C.S. The same radionuclides were measured in the weekly samples collected at E-38 and this data is shown in Table II.C.5..\. No unusually high values were observed.

26 Table II. C.1 Gross Beta Activity in Water for Samples Collected July 8, 1978 .

Sampling Suspended Solids Diss01ved Solids Total Water Locations pCi/kg pCi/kg Concentration pCi/l Effluent 85,600 25,900 18.3 E 38: Farm Pond ( ' }* (' } (

(Coosequill)

E 41: Slough to <144,000 23,900 '5.5 St. Vrain Creek (3,930) (4.44)

Downstream 2,570 22,400 24.0 (1,490) (4,610) (4. 50)

D 37: Lower Latham Reservoir D 40: S. Platte River 82,800 20,500 28.0 Below Confluence (24,200) (4,100) (4. 09)

D 45: St. Vrain <10,600 23.000 18.9 Creek (4,550) (4.26) 885,000 796,000 61.6 U 42: St. Vrain (122,000) (88,600) (4.38)

Creek U 43: S. Platte 218,000 40,200 22.8 River (125,000) (18,800) (4.06)

Potable 47,200 2.08 F 49: Visitor's (11,800)

N.A. (0.521)

Center D 39: Gilcrest 17,000 18.8 City Water N.A. (3,550) (3.94)

N.A. Not applicable.

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

27 Table II. C.1 Gross Beta Activity in Water for Samples Collected August 5, 1978 .

Sampling Suspended Solids Dissolved Solids Total Water Locations pCi/kg pCi/kg Concentration pCi/l 1"*"'

<80,700 28,600 32.9 E 38: Farm Pond (4,830) * (4.27)

(Goosequill)

E 41: Slough to 266,000 134,000 36.9 St. Vrain Creek (17,700)

(166,000) (4.47)

Downstream 51.600 40,200 28.3 D 37: Lower Latham (78,100) (6,340) (4.41)

Reservoir D 40: S. Platte River 51,200 23,300 28.8 Below Confluence (26,300) (4,030) (4. 34 )

D 45: St. Vrain <25,000 29,400 31.0 Creek (4.310) (4. 59)

Upstream

<1664000 29,300 35.5 U 42: St. Vrain Creek (4,030) (4. 63)

U 43: S. Platte <6.},700 42,100 27.3 River (6,680) (4.42)

Pgtable F 49: Visitor's xx 67,400 4.04 Center N.A. (15,500) (0.927)

D 39: Gilcrest 23.500 26.2 City Water N.A. (3.850) (4. 30)

N.A. Not applicable.

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

xx Collected 8/6/78

28 Table II. C.1

.;ross Beta Activity in Water for Samples Collected September 9, 1978 ,

Sampling Suspended Solids Dissilved Solids Total Water Locations pCi/kg pCi/kg Concentration pCi/l Effluent E 38: Farm Pond 23,200 19,200 18.6 (Goosequill) (8,090) * (3,190) (2.16)

E 41: Slough to 86,600 13,400 19.6 St. Vrain Creek -

(50,000) (2,020) (2.75)

Downstream D 37: Lower Latham 20,900 51,500 16.7 Reservoir (13.800) (8,460) (2.51)

D 40: S. Platte River 26,400 4,750 20.9 Below Confluence (16.100) (2.020) (1.53)

D 45: St. Vrain 15,200 16.9 Creek <18,400 (2,280) (2.76)

Upstream U 42: St. Vrain 21,300 12,100 17.8 Creek (13,100) (2,130) (2.70)

U 43: S. Platte iver 12,600 13.3

<68,000 (2,400) (2.35)

Potable C

N.A. ( .0 ) ( 5 4)

D 39: Gilerest 14,700 3.46 City Water N.A. (2,610) (0.612)

N.A. Not applicable. -

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

30 Table II. C.1 Gross Beta Activity in Water for Samples Collected November L1,1978 ,

Sampling Suspended Solids Disso lved Solids Total Water Locations pCi/;.g pC1/kg Concentra tion pC1/1 Effluent E 38: Farm Pond 43,400 15,200 21.8 (Goosequill) xx (20,200)* (2,150) (2.77)

E 41: Slough to 50,100 14,700 23.0 St. Vrain Creek (41,600) (1,920) (2.88)

Downstream D 37: Lower Latham < 55,200 10,900 15.5 Reservoir (1,880) (2.71)

D 40: S. Platte River < 61,900 <11,000 2.03 Below Confluence (2.20)

D 45: St. Vrain 18,300 8,930 16.8 Creek (11,300) (1,560) (2.71)

Upstream 8,060 9,610 7.38 U 42: St. Vrain (3,790) (2,800)

Creek (2.15)

U 43: S. Platte 47,000 9,310 8.50 River (27,300) (3,070) (2. 36)

Potable F 49: Visitor's 23,200 2.59

.A.

Center (5,020) (0.562)

D 39: Gilerest 13,700 14.9 City Water N.A. (2.300) (2.51)

N.A. Not applicable.

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

xx Collected 11/14/78

29 Table II. C.1 Cross Beta Activity in Water for Samples Collected October 14 1978 .

Sampling Suspended S' lids Dissolved Solids Total Water Locations pCi/kg pCi/kg Concentration pCi/l Effluent E 38: Farm Pond 70,600 19,600 23.0 (Coosequill) (34,700)* (2,600) (2.79)

E 41: Slough to St. Vrain Creek <57,400 13,500 20.8 (1,qqn) (7.R41 Downstream <65,400 12,400 12.3 D 37: Lower Latham (2.380) (2.65)

Reservoir D 40: S. Platte River <65.500 15.300 14.4 Below Confluence (2,550) (2.73)

D 45: St. Vrain <250,000 9,760 9.98 Creek (2,350) (2.52)

Upstream 13,400 14.4

<55,600 U 42: St. Vrain (2,400) (2.66)

Creek U 43: S. Platte <103,000 15,600 13.8 River (2,850) (2.63)

Potable F 49: Visitor's 36,200 2.39 N.A.

Center (8,300) (0.548)

D 39: Gilcrest 8,570 3.01 City Water N.A. (1,730) (0.607)

N.A. Not applicable.

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

31 Table II. C.1 Gross Beta Activity in Water for Samples Collected December 23, 1978 Sampling Suspended Solids Dissilved Solids Total Water Locations pCi/kg pCi/kg Concentra tion pCi/l Effluent E 38: Farm Pond 49,100 15,700 26.9 (Coosequill) (15,300), (1,970) (2.84)

E 41: Slough to 217,000 12,200 19.1 St. Vrain Creek (77,500) (2,010) (2.64)

Downstream D 37: Lower Latham 32,900 9,220 9.22 Reservoir (24,500) (2,640) (2.42)

D 40: S. Platte River 4,670 3.63 Below Confluence <46,000 (2,28G) (2.01)

D 45: St. Vrain 7,420 7.30 Creek <60,100 (2,200) (2.47)

Upstream U 42: St. Vrain 16,800 16.8 Creek <19,200 (2,680) (2.69)

U 43: S. Platte River g f f Potable F 49: Visitor's 24,600 1.13 N.A. (10,600) (0.487)

Center D 39: Gilcrest 6,070 4.05 City Water N.A. (2,960) (1.98)

N.A. Not applicable.

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

f Sample unavailable.

3 32 Table II.C.1.A.

Gross beta activity in effluent water, Goosequill Pond , E-38.

Third and fourth Quarter,1978 Total Water Co11cetion Date Suspended Solids Dissolved Solids Concentrations pCi/kg* pCi/kg* pCi/1 7-1-78 48,500 (19,800)* 15,300 (3,490) 13.0 (2.34) 7-8-78 85,600 (19,300) 25,900 (6,690) 18.3 (2.54) 7-15-78 18,800 (17,800) 15,700 (3,380) 11.8 (2.41) 7-29-78 <31,400 14,300 (2,860) 11.5 (2.61) 8-5-78 <80,700 28,600 (4,830) 32.9 (4.27) 8-11-78 <16,200 19,200 (3,590) 11.9 (2.65) 8-19 78 <30,100 14,000 (2,220) 14.9 (2.81) 8-26-78 19,900 (15,700) d 1.54 (1.28) 9-2-78 <16,700 13,300 (2,870) 10.2 (2.59) 9-9-78 23,200 (8,090) 19,200 (3,190) 18.6 (2.16) 9-24-78 <29,700 12.300 (2,660) 10.9 (2.57) 10-3-78 91,700 (48,400) 12,900 (2,220) 16.9 (2.64) 10-10-78 <12,100 17,700 (2,300) 19.9 (2.96) 10-14-78 70,600 (34,700) 19,600 (2,600) 23.0 (2.79) 10-21-78 <31,900 14,700 (2,220) 17.8 (2.78) 10-28-78 30,900 (13,400) 13,300 (2,100) 19.3 (2.70) 11-4-78 32,400 (9,950) 13,100 (1,870) 23.4 (2.76) 11-11-78 43,400 (20,200) 15,200 (2,150) 21,8 (2.77) 11-21-78 <44,200 6,100 (2,350) 17.9 (2.81) 11-29-78 <77,800 4,520 (1,770) 4.64 (2.44) 12-9-78 <23,100 15,300 (2,540) 15.2 (2.71) 12-23-78 49,100 (15,300) 15,700 (1,970) 26.9 (2.84) 12-30-78 339,000 (7,160) 476,000 (10,100) 490 (7.81)

Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval.

d Lost in analysis

Table II. C.2 Tritium Concentrations in Surface Waters (pCi/1).

Sampling Monthly Collection Dates Locations 7-8-78 8-5-78 9_9 78 10-14-78 11-11-78 12-23-78 Effluent E 38: Farm Pond 2,720 655 1,030 597 3,820 ** 170,000 (Goosequill) (298)* (260) (260) (255) (289) (999)

E 41: Slough to 571 603 1,430 2,110 2,930 2,150,000 St. Vrain Creek (273) (206) (268) (271) (291) (9,470)

Downstream D 37: Lower Latham 394 630 993 285 765 941 Reservoir (271) (260) (259) (253) (259) (260)

D 40: S. Platte River 6,544 1,270 712 356 899 bl Below Confluence d (324) (262) (256) (254) (260)

D 45: St. Vrain 715 416 1,230 790 773 1,280 Creek (275) (257) (262) (257) (259) (264)

Upstream U 42: St. Vrain 2,260 1,140 679 723 1,120 16,300 Creek (293) (266) (256) (257) (262) (391)

U 43: S. Platte 603 380 931 847 997 River (274) (257) (259) (258) (261) f Potable F 49: Visitor's 741 488 1,070 818 782 1,720 Center (275) (258) ** (260) (258) (259) (268)

D 39: Gilcrest City 1,280 446 1,260 979 902 2,080 Water (282) (258) (262) (259) (260k. (272)

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

d Sample lost during analysis.

f Sample unavailable.

• • E38, D39 collected 11/14/78, f49 collected 8/6/78

Table II. C.3 Strontium 90 Concentrations in Surface Waters (pCi/1).

Sampling Monthly Collection Dates Locations 7-8-78 8-5-78 9-9-78 10-14-78 11-11-78 12-23-78 Effluent E 38: Farm Pond 3. 97 * *

(Goosequill) c c <1.89 d (1.16) 1.37 E 41: Slough to 1.42 5.97 1.24 St. Vrain Creek c c (1.15) <1.14 (1.71) (1.12)

Downstream D 37: Lower Latham 4.96 Reservoir c c <1.32 <1.72 (1.25) <1.50 D 40: S. Platte River 4.22 u Below Confluence e c <1.37 <1.17 "

(1.25) <0.976 D 45: St. Vrain Creek c c <1.32 <1.14 d <0.968 Upstream U 42: St. Vrain 2.66 1.71 Creek c c <0.896 (1.24) <1.09 (1.37)

U 43: S. Platte 1.14 38.7 c c <1.16 (1.30)

River (3.63) f Potable F 49: Visitor's 5.19 2.95 Center c c <1.06 (1.50) <1.59 (2.21)

D 39: Gilcrest City 2.86 i Water , c e <0.984 <0.917 (1.21)** <1.44

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95* confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

c Instrument malfunction.

d Lost in analysis.

f Sample unavailable.

• • E38, D39 collected 11/14/78, f49 collected 8/6/78.

Table II. C.4 Strontium 89 Concentrations in Surface Waters (pci/1).

Sampling Monthly Collection Dates Locations 7-8-78 8-5-78 9-9-78 10-14-78 11-11-78 12-23-78 Effluent E 38: Farm Pond ,, 2.17 (Goosequill) c c <1.69 d <1.19 (2. 39)

E 41: Slough to 1.59 1.13 St. Vrain Creek c c <1.02 (3.21) <1.67 (1.64)

Downstream D 37: Lower Latham 4.76 3.40 Reservoir c c <1.20 (8.63) <1.29 (2.58)

D 40: S. Platte River 1.07 d Below Confluence e c <1.23 <1.10 <1.21 (1. 77)

D 45: St. Vrain 0.986 Creek c c <1.22 <1.09 d (1.82)

Upstream U 42: St. Vrain Creek c c <0.874 <1.06 <0.812 <1.00 U 43: S. Platte River c c <1.08 <0.989 <4.24 f Potable F 49: Visitor's Center c c <1.06 <1.46 <1.14 <1.69 D 39: Gilcrest City Water c c <0.966 <0.883 <1.09** <1.47

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95'o confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

c Instrument malfunction.

d Lost in analysis.

f Sample unavailable.

• • E38, D39 collected 11/14/78, f49 collected 8/6/78.

9 36 O

Table II.C.4.A Tritium, Strontium 89, and Strontium 90 Concentrations in Effluent Water, Goosequill Pond , E-38.

Third and Fourth Quarter, 1978.

g Collection Tritium Strontium 89 Strontium 90 Date (pCi/1) (pCi/1) (pCi/1) 7-1-78 8,720 (342)* d d 7-8-78 2,720 (298) e c g 7-15-78 5,840 (314) d d 7-29-78 1,580 (287) <1.59 3.86 (1.81) 8-5-78 655 (260) e c 8-11-78 5,250 (349) <1.46 2.59 (1.66) g 8-19-78 549 (276) <1.35 2.68 (1.68) 8-26-78 2,200 (317) 6.46 (5.19) 1.68 (1.66) 9-2-78 1,180 (306) <l.26 <1.46 9-9-78 1,030 (260) <1.69 <1.89 g 9-24-78 2,850 (324) <0.883 0.907 (1.09) 10-3-78 28,000 (499) <0.565 <1.52 10-10-78 1,370 (293) <1.09 <1.16 10-14-78 597 (255) d d g 10-21-78 32,200 (487) <1.10 <1.16 10-28-78 11,600 (354) <1.46 <1.16 11-4-78 2,950 (281) 2.13 (2.53) 1.31 (1.18) 11-14-78 3,820 (289) <1.19 3.97 (1.16) g 11-21-78 1,200 (263) <1.33 <1.65 11-29-78 5,630 (306) 24.4 (3.46) 2.34 (1. 39) 12-9-78 3,150 (283) <1.72 3.03 (1.79) 12-23-78 170,000 (999) 2.17 (2.39) <1.37 g 12-30-78 94,400 (763) <0.992 <0.992

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1. 96 S. D. ) .

g e Instrument malfunction.

d Lost in analysis.

9

Table II. C.5 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Water for Samples Collected July 8, 1978 .

Sampling Suspended Solids (pC1/kg) l Dissolved Solids (pC1/kg) Water (pCi/1)

Locations 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr&Nb 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr&Nb 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr&Nb Effluent E 38: Farm Pond 0.996 (Goosequill) <17,200 <5,290 <2,250 <4,140 <1,280 <548 <4.53 (0. 804 )* <0.290 2,140 403 '

O.576 E 41: Slough to St. Vrain Creek <286,000 <88,000 <37,400 (2,040) <605 (352) <4.53 <0.803 (0.541)

Downstream

<43,500 <13,400 < 5,700 <2,310 (56 ) <306 <4.53 (0$ 97) <0.290 tj e rv D 40: S. Platte River 556 0.632 Below Confluence <15,600 <4,810 2,040 <2,370 <731 (459) <4.53 <0.803 (0.568) 35,900 433 1.05 0.893 D 45: St. Vrain <184,000 :56,800 (27,400) <2,260 <698 (446) <4.53 (0.807) (0.570)

Creek Upstream U 42: St. Vrain l 36,500 31,600 18,400 9,260 2.77 2.01 Creek <105,000 26,200) (15,700) <16,800 (4,270) (3,300) <4.53 (0.827) (0.572)

U 43: S. Platte River <43,900 - '13,500 <5,740 <4,270 <1,320 <561 <4.53 <0.803 <0.290 Potable 1,400 870 1.41 0.875 F 49: Visitor's N.A. N.A. N.A. <4.53 Center

<2,590 (650) (510) (0.653) (0.513)

D 39: Gilcrest City N.A. N.A. N.A. <1,840 <572 <244 <4.53 <0.803 <0.290 Water

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

N.A. Not applicable.

Table II. C.5 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Water

~

for Samples Collected August 5, 1978 ,,

Sampling l Suspended Solids (pCi/kg) Dissolved Solids (pCi/kg) Water (pCi/1)

Locations 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr&Nb 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr&Nb 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr&Nb Effluent E 38: Farm Pond (Goosequill) <17,800 <5,480 <2,340 <3,130 <962 <413 <4.53 <0.803 <0.290 E 41: Slough to 296

<232,000 <71,400 <30,500 <2,120 <653 (412) <4.53 <0.803 <0.290 St. Vrain Creek Downstream 0.302 D 37: Lower Latham <0.803 Reservoir

<111,000 <34,400 <14,600 <2,710 <843 <357 <4.53 (0. 501)* g D 40: S. Platte River Below Confluence <26,200 <8,070 <3,440 <2,070 <645 <275 <4.53 <0.803 <0.290 D 45:,St. Vrain 14,100 1.32 0.458 Creek <25,400 (6,200) <3,350 <1,890 <588 <251 <4.53 (0.803) (0.543)

Upstream U 42: St. Vrain 248,000 693 1.41 Creek 226,000) <71,500 <30,500 <2,090 (517) <276 <4.53 (0.802) <0.290 U 43: S. Platte 1,830 72P 1.46 0.590 River <677200 ~ <20,800 <8,850 <3,420 (857) (659) <4.53 (0.806) (0.563)

Po ta'al e ,,

22,100 7,990 1.63 0.589 F 49: Visitor's N.A. N.A. N.A.

Center <34,700 (8,770) (5,980) <4.53 (0.646) (0.440) 1,730 648 1.57 0.585 D 39: Gilcrest City Water N.A. N.A. N.A. <1,890 (470) (281) <4.53 (0.424) (0.253)

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

N.A. Not applicable.

• • F-49 collected 8/6/78.

Table II. C.5 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Water for Samples Collected September 9, 1978 .

Sampling Suspended Solids (pCi/kg)* Dissolved Solids (pCi/kg)* Water (pC1/1).*

Locations 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr&Nb 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr6Nb 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr6Nb Effluent E 38: Farm Pond 5,000

• 2,880 1,180 653 1.98 1.11 (Goosequill) <12,500 (3,160) (2,050) <2 , 62 0 (666) (415) <4. 5 3 (0.832) (0.529)

E 41: Slough to 62,700 21,700 2.02 -

0.713 St. Vrain Creek <82,400 (21,000) (13,200) <811 <231 <107 <4.53 (0.823) (0.515)

Downstream 15,400 10,400 1.88 1.38 D 37: Lower Latham <117,000 <36,500 <15,5 00 <26,400 (6,750) u Reservoir (4,220) <4 . 9 8 (0.919) (0.581) c D 40: S. Platte River 0.339 Below Confluence <44,800 <14,000 <5,960 <1,570 <489 <20S <4.53 <0.803 (0.503)

<36,800 <11,400 <4,900 <2,040 <634 <269 <4.85 <0.860 <0.311 Cr e Upstream 27,800 . 10,300 854 215 1.72 1.28 (25,400)' <7,820 (4,000) <1,450 (363) (224) <4.53 (O.823) (0.516)

C e U 43: S. Platte 28,000 0.964 River 13T,~0001 <41,8 00 (21,400) <5,260 <1,630 <695 <6.39 <1.13 (0.723)

Potable s or,s 1,740 534 2.17 0.668 F 49. N.A. N.A. N.A. <2,660 <5.54 (669) (400) (0.836) (0.499)

D 39: Gilcrest City 1,890 1,590 1.87 1.57 Water N.A. N.A. N.A. <2,610 (672) (424) <4.53 (0.666) (0.420)

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

N.A. Not applicable.

Table II. C.5 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Water for Samples Collected October 14, 1978 .

Sampling Suspended Solids (pCi/kg) Dissolved Solids (pC1/kg) Water (pCi/1)

Locations 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr&Nb 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr6Nb 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr&Nb Effluent 21,700 12,800 1,360 381 2.32 0.850 E 38: Earm Pond <4.53 (Goosequill) <26,700 (8,500) (5,4507 <1,960 (501) (269) (0.615) (0.349)

E 41: Slough to 13,600 St. Vrain Creek <104,000 <32,400 (16.500) <1,460 <451 <193 <4.53 <0.803 <0.290 Downstream 24,300 D 37: Lower Latham <229 <95.8 <4.53 <0.803 <0.290 $

Reservoir <159,000 <49,600 (25,000) <732 38,800 36,300 3,080 1,660 1,160 2.57 1.99 D 40: S. Platte River <4.53 (26,800) (18,200) (976) (246) (144) (0.583) (0.378)

Below Confluence <170,000 103,000 2,030 624 2.66 1.15 D 45:,St. Vrain <318,000 <99,300 (54,800) <2,130 (547) (336) <4.53 (0.692) (0.435)

' Creek Upstream 20,600 0.867 0.751 U 42: St. Vrain <28,000 (14,300) <1,930 <600 <256 <4.53 (0.862) (0.522)

<89,700 Creek 36,100 839 763 1.16 U 43: S. Platte River <1B5~,000 . <57,700 (29,500) <2,550 (645) (379) <4.53 <0.803 (0.508)

Potable 868 509 1.04 0.610 F 49: Visitor's N A. N.A. N.A. <4.53 Center <686 (230) (138) (0.276) (0.165)

D 39: Gilcrest City 360 1.06 N.A. N.A. N.A. <2,080 (517) <275 <4.53 (0.639) <0.290 Water

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

N.A. Not applicable.

Table II. C.5 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Water for Samples Collected November 11, 1978 .

Sampling Suspended Solids (pC1/kg) Dissolved Solids (pCi/kg) Water (pCi/1)

Locations 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr&Nb 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr&Nb 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr6Nb Effluent 265 E 38: Farm Pond ** <4.53 <0.803 <0.290 (Coosequill) <37,100 <11,600 <4,860 <1,390 <435 (194)*

E 41: Slough to 905 293

<101,000 <31,500 <13,200 <1,480 (373) (206) <4.53 <0.803 <0.290 St. Vrain Creek Downstream 2,710 1,270 508 0.596 D 37: Lower Latham <33,200 (193) (107) <4.53 <0.803 (0.294) 3 Reservoir

<106,000 <13,900 (763)

D 40: S. Platte River 5,720 2,220 614 1.11 0.358 Below Confluence <170,000 <53,200 c22,300 (2,420) (619) (335) <4.53 (0.814) (0.427)

D 45:,St. Vrain 34,000 364

' Creek (15.100) <4,650 <2,000 <748 (250) <98.5 <4.53 <0.803 <0.290 Upstream U 42: St. Vrain > 428 305 0.292 Creek <4,040 <1,260 <530 <1,110 (370) (215) <4.53 <0.803 (0.197)

U 43: S. Platte 94,800 31,600 10,600 1,440 2.54 0.739 River (52,300T_ [13,300) (7,310) <2,880 (726) <380 <4.53 (0.827) (0.464)

Potable F 49: Visitor's 14,200 4,700 1.18 0.393

'A' 'A' 'A' <4.53 Center <31,400 (7,900) 4,490) (0.661) (0.375)

D 39: Gilcrest City 358 0.423 Water N.A. N.A. N.A. <2,070 <647 (300) <4.53 <0.803 (0.354)

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

N.A. Not applicabic.

• • Collected 11-14-78.

O O O O O O O O O Table II. C.5 Gamma-ray Bmitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Water for Samples Collected December 23, 1978 .

Sampling Suspended Solids (pC1/kg) Dissolved Solids (pCi/kg) Water (pCi/l)

Locations 106- Ru 137 Cs '95 Zr&Nb 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr&Nb 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr&Nb Effluent 4,570 2,330 287 0.843 E 38: Earm Pond <0.803 (Goosequill) <26,600 <8,380 (2,870) * (1,440) <458 (173) <4.53 (0.366)

E 41: Slough to 47,400 St. Vrain Creek <143,000 (35,700) <19,000 d d d <4.53 <0.803 <0.290 Downstream D 37: Lower Latham 233 338 0.468 Reservoir <51,300 <16,100 <6,660 <665 (176) (94.8) <4.53 <0.803 (.243) d D 40: S. Platte River 14,100 5,170 Below Confluence <105,000 < 32,700 (11,700) (2,420) < 707 <?T5 <4.53 <0.803 <.290 3,230 4,490 1,190 4.99 1.51 D 45: St. Vrain

' Creek <186,000 < 57,600 :24,600 (2,220) (610) (274) <4.53 (0.834) (0.375)

Upstream 1,200 483 1.27 0.412 U 42: St. Vrain '

< 38,700 <12,000 < 5,12 0 < 2,460 (618) (310) < 4.53 (0.815) (0.380)

Creek U 43: S. Platte River

' f - ~~7-_ '-f f f f f f f f Potable 47,900 28,300 13,000 2.20 1.01 F 49: Visitor's N.A. N.A. N.A. (31,800) (8,450) (3,880) < 4. 53 (0.655) (0.300)

Center 2,050 1,310 603 1.42 0.650 D 39: Gilcrest City

< 4.53 (0.251) (0.116)

Water N.A. N.A. N.A. (892) (233) (108)

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

N.A. Not applicable.

d Lost in analysis.

f Sample unavailabic.

Table !!.C.3.

Ga r m u - rr.- _ . itting Radionuclide Concentrations in Eff:uent . inter, Goosecuill Pond , E-3S.

Collection Sunnended Solids (pCi/kg) Dissolved Solids (pCi/_kg) ?nter (pCi/1)

Date 106 au 137 Cs 95 2r65S I t' f' au 137 Cs 95 Zr65b 103 Ru 137 Cs 95 ZrLNb 7-1-78 <33,000 <10,100 <4,330 <3,870 <1,210 -7,870 <4.53 <0.803 4.58 (3,100)* (1.61) 7-8-78 <17,200 <5,290 <2,250 <4,140 <1,280 <548 <4.53 0.996 <0.290 (0.804) 7-15-78 <35,300 29,900 <4,650 <3,690 <1,140 -732 <4.53 2.21 0.601 (8,800) (632) (0.815) (0.504) 7-29-78 <36,400 <11,20 <4,790 <2,670 984 <354 <4.53 <0.803 <0.290 (663) 8-5-78 <17,800 <5,420 <2,340 <3,130 <962 <413 <4.53 <0.803 <0.290 8-11-78 <30,600 <9,430 <4,020 <3,630 <1,120 <480 <4.53 <0.803 <0.290 8-19-78 <49,700 24,200 <6,580 <3,810 <1,180 <501 <4.53 <0.803 0.374 &

(12,400) (0.412) 8-26-78 <27,100 <8,410 <3,620 <3,290 <1,020 <433 <4.53 1.04 0.334 (0.812) (0.479) 9-2-78 <29,800 <9,220 4,040 <2,950 <913 <390 <4.53 <0.803 <0.290 (4,590) 9-9-78 <12,500 5,000 2,880 <2,620 1,180 653 <4.53 1.98 1.11 (3,160) (2,050) (666) (415) (0.832) (0.529) 9-24-78 <25,300 <7,860 <3,350 <2,490 <772 <330 <4.53 <0.803 <0.290 10-3-78 212,000 <39,800 20,700 <2,030 659 <269 4.72 1.34 0.573 (133,000) (22,500) (508) (3.36) (0.829) (0.525) 10-10-78 37,300 13,000 6,460 <1,870 <583 <247 5.30 1.37 0.976 (20,100) (4,980) (3,230) (3.32) (0.839) (0.491) 10-14-78 <26,700 21,700 12,800 <1,960 1,360 381 <4.53 2.32 0.850 (8,500) (5,450) (501) (269) (0.615) (0.349) 10-21-78 <53,800 <16,700 <7,140 <1,960 <614 <260 <4.53 0.861 <0.290 (0.822)

• Concentrations (in 'arentheses) a re for *.he 93S confidt uce interval, (1.96 S.D.).

"nV_e II.C.5.A.

'A ma-ray L..: .:in;, 2colo _uclide Concentrntions in EfC ent fato . Goosequill I'ond , E-3S.

Co:lection Susnended Solids (cCi/ke) rissolved Solids (ppi/k:0 .-later (rCi/1)

Date 106 du 137 Cs 95 Ir6N'a l '.: 0 Ru 137 Cs 95 cra5o 106 su 137 Cs 93 Zr6.\b 10-28-78 <25,200 <7,840 <3,320 <1,590 815 286 <4.53 1.84 0.399 (400) (215) (0.824) (0.433) 11-4-78 <16,600 <5,170 <2,200 <1,560 <488 <205 <4.53 <0.803 <0.290 11-11-78 <37,100 <11,600 <4,860 <1,390 <435 265 <4.53 <0.803 <0.290 (194) 11-21-78 <69,800 25,800 <9,250 <2,440 <605 <255 <4.53 1.14 <0.290 (17,400) (0.825) 11-29-78 <137,000 <42,700 <18,200 <3,200 8,140 3,470 <4.53 1.46 0.970 (1,070)* (631) (0.565) (0.300) 12-9-78 <46,200 <14,400 <6,150 40,700 16,200 15,400 <4.53 1.89 1.50 (26,200) (6,590) (3,950) (0.827) (0.432) I 12-23-78 <26,600 <8,380 4,570 2,330 <458 287 <4.53 <0.803 0.843 (2,870) (1,440) (173) (0.366) 12-30-78 4,320 <1,090 1,470 3,070 1,960 843 5.78 3.25 1.64 (4,460) (511) (1,480) (395) (185) (2.30) (0.612) (0.282)

Concentrations (in parentheses) are for the 93S confidence interval, (1. 9G S . D. ) .

45 7 rigure II.c.

10 -_

[ TRITIUM CONCENTRATIONS IN SURFACE WATER JULY - DLCEMBER ,1978 StTES 10k +---* E - 3 8

c a E -41 o----o D - 3 7 R

i\

5 I\

10 -- I b

. I 1

- I

- I

- I 1

I

? l S et I si it I is l\ l It st I 11 l g not l\ !k l

l

?

-\.

I \

I I I

\ I I

'\ ,8 y  !\ l  ;', , l

\ I \ l g\l

- 1 I s1 l t il \g j\ l I g f 8 r g

is i1 ,

ps l 8

! V

\

g I l

- g i iS f I g i

L i 1 g\ t I l N I l ;g i I gi

\ l \ l M l f

'i \,I 'gf

, \h i - , t 'y 's ( ~~ \

< 'q' b I I I 5 5 g 5 5 g g

g i g 3 JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC 1978

46 II.C.2 Radionuclide Concentrations in Sediment Sediment is always the major compartment for radionuclide contami-nants in a fresh water system due to the high concentration factors for fission products in the sediment mineral matrices. Table II.C.6 lists gross beta activity in sediment samples from the sampling sites in the water courses. The mean values for effluent, upstreau, and downstream samples are very similar and were not significantly different.

Table II .C.7 and II .C.8 list the Sr-90 and Sr-89 concentrations in the same sediment samples respectively. Table II.C.9 shows the concentration in sediment of the fission products Ru-106, Cs-137, and Zr-Nb-95.

though occasional high values appear, the mean values for these sample types (Table II.H.1) indicate no significant difference for any of the fission products in each of the sampling locations.

It should be noted that the sand fraction of the sediment samples is removed and only the silt plus clay mineral fraction is analyzed.

These two particle size fractions contain essentially all of the radio-activity.

Table II. C.6 Gross Beta Activity Concentrations in Bottom Sediment (pCi/kg).

Il Sampling Monthly Collection Dates Locations 7-8-78 8-5-78 9-9-78 10-14-78 11-11-78 12-23-78 Effluent E 38: Farm Pond 58,200 38,60u 32,300 30,500 36,600 32,200 (Goosequill) (2,630) * (1,550) (1,500) (1,470) (1,570)** (1,650)

E 41: Slough to 62,500 31,700 33,600 28,200 30,000 32,300 St. Vrain Creek (2,710) (1,480) (1,530) (1,420) (1,430) (1,390)

Downstream D 37: Lower Latham 50,000 29,100 34,500 28,000 32,100 . 30,500 Rese rvoir (2,460) (1,430) (1,540) (1,410) (1,500) (1,380) D D 40: S. Platte River 60,000 30,800 34,900 13,800 39,100 32,700 Below Confluence (2,650) (1,470) (1,550) (1,060) (1,620) (1,500)

D 45: St. Vrain 83,200 31,300 37,200 35,400 29,600 35,600 Creek (3,080) (1,480) (1,600) (1,560) (1,440) (1,550)

Upstream U 42: St. Vrain 51,500 28,200 34,200 28,000 35,800 28,400 Creek (2,500) (1,410) (1,540) (1,410) (1,570) (1,430)

U 43: S. Platte 67,100 31,400 30,200 33,300 32,300 River (1,800) (1,480) (1,460) (1,520) (1,500) f

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

Collected 11/14/78.

f Sample unavailable.

Table II. C.7 Strontium 90 Activity Concentrations in Bottom Sediment (pCi/kg).

Sampling Monthly Collection Dates Locations 7-8-78 8-5-78 9-9-78 10-14-78 11 11-78 12-23-78 Effluent E 38: Farm Pond 10,300 541 (Goosequill) (584)* 259 (275) <250 <306** <365 E 41: Slough to 8,610 359 265 St. Vrain Creek (508) (381) . (299) <192 <198 g Downstream D 37: Lower Latham 9,730 436 $

Reservoir (554) (216) <261 <209 <34 3 <303 D 40: S. Platte River 623 636 Below Confluence (285) (356) <202 <189 <340 <454 D 45: St. Vrain 4,800 767 Creek (463) (419) <256 <229 <316 <397 Upstream U 42: St. Vrain Creek 236 <377 <178 <184 < 605 <346 U 43: S. Platte 11,400 481 217 River (668) (356) <216 (235) <297 f Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

• • E3S collected 11/14/78.

f Sample unavailable.

g Analysis in progress.

Table II. C.8 Strontium 89 Activity Concentrations in Bottom Sediment (pCi/kg).

Sampling Monthly Collection Dates Locations 7-8-78 8-5-78 9-9-78 10-14-78 11-11-78 12-23-78 Effluent E 38: Farm Pond 565 220 419 (Goosequill) g g

_ (778) (100) (907)** <271 E 41: Slough to 305 St. Vrain Creek 8 g <242 (609) <177 g Downstream D 37: Lower Latham $

Reservoir g <204 8 <193 <271 <243 D 40: S.Platte River 644 Below Confluence g <281 <193 (603) <261 <356 D 45: St. Vrain 248 1,070 Creek 8 <313 <216 (768) <221 (774)

Upstream U 42: St. Vrain 2,230 600 1,170 Creek g (3,6.00) (733) <181 <502 (675)

U 43: S. Platte River g g <216 <182 <249 f

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

• • E38 collected 11/14/78.

f Sample unavailabic.

g Sample in progress.

Table II. C.9 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Bottom Sediment (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected July 8, 1978 .

Sampling 106 95 Ru Cs Zr & Nb Locations Effluent E 38: Farm Pond 31,300

<795 <281 (Goosequill) (7,080)

• E 41: Slough to

< 4,100 <715 <253 St. Vrain Creek Downstream D 37: Lower Latham 633 Reservoir <3,880 <676 (673) $

422 D 40: S. Platte River

<3,880 <676 (682)

Below Confluence D 45: St. Vrain 4,000 1,080 Creek (6,840) (772) <239 Upstream U 42: St. Vrain 434 Creek <3,880 <676 (690)

U 43: S. Platte River <3,880 <661 <237

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

Table II. C.9 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Bottom Sediment (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected August 5, 1978 .

Sampling 106 137 95 Ru Cs Zr & Nb Locations Effluent E 38: Farm Pond 4,900 (Goosequill) (6,530) * <663 <246 E 41: Slough to 457 -

St. Vrain Creek <3,880 <667 (476)

Downstream D 37: Lower Latham 388 Reservoir <3,880 <671 (497)

D 40: S. Platte River 4,210 Below Confluence (6,450) <663 <243 D 45: St. Vrain 4,470 Creek (6,330) <655 <239 Upstream U 42: St. Vrain  ;

Creek <3,880 <779 <235 U 43: S. Platte <3,870 <655 <239 River

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

Table II. C.9 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Bottom Sediment (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected September 9, 1978 .

Sampling 106 Cs Zr & Nb Ru Locations Effluent E 38: Farm Pond 3,640 810 (Goosequill) (4,970) * (590) <117 E 41: Slough to 1,300 St. Vrain Creek <3,810 (779) <236 Downstream D 37: Lower Latham Reservoir <3,880 <648 <236 m ra D 40: S. Platte River

<3,880 <671 <235 Below Confluence D 45: St. Vrain

<3,880 <655 <239 Creek Upstream U 42: St. Vrain

<239

<3>880 <655 Creek

<3,810 <648 (5 )

Riv r

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are ior the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

Table II. C.9 Camma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Bottom Sediment (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected October 14, 1978 .

Sampling 106 Ru Cs Zr & Nb Locations Effluent E 38: Farm Pond (Coosequill) <3,990 <671 <239 E 41: Slough to

<4,260 <721 <259 St. Vrain Creek Downstream D 37: Lower Latham

<3,990 <671 <239 m Reservoir D 40: S. Platte River

<690 <248 Below Confluence <3*970 D 45: St. Vrain

<3,990 <671 <239 Creek Upstream U 42: St. Vrain  ;

<3,910 <663 <238 Creek

'98 U 43: S. Platte River

<3,990 <671 (513).

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

O O O O Table II. C.9 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Bottom Sediment (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected November 11, 1978 .

Sampling 106 g 137 Cs Zr & Nb Locations Effluent E 38: Farm Pond (Coosequill) ** <3,990 <671 <239 E 41: Slough to

<3,990 <671 <239 St. Vrain Creek Downstream D 37: Lower Latham

<3,890 <682 <239 Reservoir D 40: S. Platte River

<239

<3,990 <671 Below Confluence D 45: St. Vrain

<662 <232 Creek <3*770 Upstream 5,960 U 42: St. Vrain

<756 <264 (6,770)*

Creek U 43: S. Platt

<671 <239

<3,990 River

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

• • Collected 11/14/78.

Table II. C.9 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Bottom Sediment (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected December 23, 1978 .

Sampling 106 Ru Cs ' Zr & Nb Locations Effluent E 38: Farm Pond 677 276 (Goosequill) <3,810 (722)* (412)

E 41: Slough to St. Vrain Creek <4,010 <694 <243 Downstream D 37: Lower Latham Reservoir <3,810 <659 <231 m m

4,940 365 D 40: S. Platte River Below Confluence (6,300) <659 (410) 731 292 D 45: St. Vrain Creek <3,810 (787) (405)

Upstream 641 U 42: St. Vrain Creek <3,810 <659 (388)

U 43: S. Platte f f f

River

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

f Sample unavailable.

56 II.C.3 Precipitation Gross beta and tritium deposition values are given in Table II .C.10.

Precipitation collectors of size sufficient to produce a significant sampic are located at only two locations, F-1 and F-4. Values are expressed as 2

deposition (i.e. pCi/m ) as only this value can be correlated to food chain transport. Studies of world-wide fallout have shown that forage and subsequent milk or meat values can be reasonably predicted from deposition values. Tritium values have generally decreased in recent years and exhibit variability that originates from the variability of the source of the pre-cipitation (i.e. thunderstorms, precipitation associated with fronts, etc.) .

Tritium values exhibit no significant difference for mean tritium values between F-1 and F-4 for the last half of this year. Also no signi ficant differences were observed for F-1 and F-4 between the first half of 1978 and the last half of 1978.

Table II.C.11 and II.C.12 list the precipitation deposition of Ru-106, Cs-137 and Zr-Nb-95. The agreement between the measured values at F-1 and F-4 is exec 11ent. The denosition values probably represent stratospheric debris from previous Chinese weapons test injected into our troposphere as is common during late spring and early summer.

Table II.C.13 lists the deposition of the strontium radioisotopes.

There were no significant differences in Sr-90 between the mean values for F-1 and F-4 locations. The Sr-90 values seem to correlate with the deposi t ion of the gamma-ray emi t t ing fission prottuet s anti confirm t hat it was indeed world-wide fallout. If such is the case no Sr-89 would be expected due to its relatively short half-life and lesser fission yield.

57 Note that radioruthenium data is listed in the tables as Ru-106.

Ilowever, it is true that the activity measured is often a mixture of Ru-103 and Ru-106. Both isotopes have gamma-rays at essentially the same energy and they cannot be separated by NaI(TI) spectral analysis. No separation by half-life determination was attempted on the data. Since the half-life of Ru-103 is 40 days and that of Ru-106 is one year, in periods soon after an atmospheric test, a high proportion is expected to be Ru-103 and at later times predominately Ru-106. Since the ruthenium isotopes have negligibic biological availability, neither has any consequences in calculation of population dose and efforts to separate them is not warranted.

Table II. C.10 Gross Beta and Tritium Deposition from Precipitation at Locations F1 and F4.

S ple Cumulative Gross Beta Deposition (pCi/m ) Tritium Volume

• Deposigion (liters) Suspended Solids Dissolved Solids Total (pCi/m )

F1 F4 F1 F4 F1 F4 F1 F4 F1 F4 7-29-78 88 57 <0.016 390 180 96.6 179 428 732 621 (9. 2 2) ** (15.2) (9.17) (28.6) (13.0) (275) (274) 8-26-78 45 58 19.1 60.1 34.0 355 53.1 415 518 632 (12.9) (14.4) (5.07) (15.5) (13.4) (21.2) (291) (292) 9-30-78 4.20 4.65 8.10 13.2 14.3 4.84 22.4 19.1 673 416 $

(0.405) (0.440) (0.917) (0.640) (0.935) (0.764) (277) (274) 10-28-78 65 67 606 529 329 304 935 834 (10.4) (10.3) (16.9) (15.1) (19.3) (18.6) <271 <271 11-25-78 15 46 21.8 5.16 31.6 75.7 53.4 80.9 921 336 (3.79) (12.8) (2.74) (7.36) (4.61) (14.3) (259) (254) 12-30-78 100 65 <0.0171 <0.0104 54.3 69.1 49.3 25.1 787 (12.5) (9.02) (30.5) (20.9) (259) <271

• Samples are analyzed at the end of each month if sufficient volume has accumulated.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

Table II. C.11 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Deposition from Precipitation at Location F1.

Sample Total

• Suspended Solids (>Ci/m ) Dissolved Solids (pCi/m ) Total (pCi/m )

Da ( te s) Ru Cs Zr-Nb Ru Cs Zr-Nb Ru Cs Zr-Nb 7-29-78 88 <45.3 39.0 19.3 154 <16.1 <6.87 191 46.3 19.5 (11.2)** (7.43) (54.2) (70.7) (17.2) (10.6) 8-26-78 45 <22.9 18.6 5.33 92.5 17.6 5.48 101 36.2 10.8 (5.83) (2.60) (26.2) (6.79) (2.84) (34.4) (8.92) (3.85) 9-30-78 4.2 <5.94 6.34 0.983 <11.7 <3.64 <1.55 <12.4 9.70 2.04 (1.55) (0.954) (3.13) (1,90) $

10-28-78 65 <10.6 117 23.2 <39.1 <12.2 12.6 <67.0 125 35.8 (3.85) (2.09) (5.76) (9.66) (5.55) 11-25-78 15 <7.79 <2.4 3 <1.03 <8.78 <2.73 2.48 <15.5 <2.75 1.76 (1.50) (1.74) 12-30-78 100 <50.8 26.8 <6.68 <58.5 <18.2 <7.74 <103 <18.3 <6.62 (12.8) l

• Samples are analyzed at the end of each month if sufficient volume has accumulated.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

Table II. C.12 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Deposition from Precipitation at Location F4.

Sample Total

• Suspended Solids (pCi/m ) Dissolved Solids (pCi/m ) Total (pCi/m )

106 Da e te s) Ru Cs Zr-Nb Ru Cs Zr-Nb Ru Cs Zr-Nb 7-29-78 57 <27.0 <8.32 7.59 142 30.2 16.3 152 29.7 23.9 (3.35)** (34.1) (8.37) (4. 81) (4 3.1) (10.6) (5.77) 8-26-78 58 <27.7 <8.59 <3.67 101 47.9 9.89 106 50.4 9.33 (32.4) (8.66) (3.63) (41. 4) (10.9) (4. 74) 9-30-78 4.65 <5.79 <1.82 <0.770 <10.0 6.18 2.58 <11.6 6.41 2.20 (2.54) (1.50) (2.81) (1.70) g 10-28-78 67 <32.7 20.5 <4.29 89.4 <11.8 9.97 <65.0 27.8 12.0 (8.21) (39.8) (6.35) (12.6) (6.89) 11-25-78 46 <22.4 <7.00 <2.95 <7.86 9.22 6.86 <44.6 10.1 6.07 (2.64) (1.04) (3.08) 12-30-78 65 <31.0 <9.66 <4.08 <35.7 <11.1 <4.72 <63.1 19.6 5.13 (11.7) (5.30)

• Samples are analyzed at the end of each month if sufficient volume has accumulated.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 957. confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

Table II. C.13 Radiostrontium Deposition from Precipitation at Locations F1 and F4 (pCi/m ).

9 Sample Ending Strontium 89 Strontium 90 1 s)

F1 F4 F1 F4 F1 F4 1978 July 88 57 <62.9 <40.1 651 (56.3)* 442 (35.5)

August 45 58 297 (106) <16.0 <17.4 <24.1 September 4.20 4.65 <1.52 <1.45 9.22 (6.44) 3.71 (1.50)

October 65 67 <19.1 <20.9 66.0 (16.5) 70.7 (29.2)

November 15 46 <5.57 29.8 (28.9) 12.5 (6.09) 11.3 (11.7)

December 100 65 <18.2 <19.6 <21.7 <23.8

• Samples are analyzed at the end of each month if sufficient volume aas accumulated.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 957, confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

62 II.D. Food Chain Data

1. Milk. Tritium concentrations in milk are summarized in Table II.D.1. There was no significant difference in mean tritium values obtained from water extracted from milk at the only dairy in the Facility area (F-44), the Adjacent Composite, and the Reference Composite, for the second half of 1978 (see also Table I I .11.1) . Tritium mean values for Facility, Adjacent and Reference sites were similar to values observed the first half of 1978. Tritium concentrations in milk should respond rapidly to changes in tritium concentrations of the water intake to the cow due to the short half-life for water in the cow (about three days for the lactating cow). As noted in previous reports, tritium activity per liter reflects the tritium in the water extracted from the milk and not the activity per liter of milk. Whole milk is approximately 87t water (1 3- 4 'o , depending on the cow, pasture, and feed). Skim milk accordingly has a higher water content.

It may be assumed though that the remaining solids in milk (proteins, carbo-hydrates, and lipids) also contain some tritium due to exchange of t ritium with hydrogen on these large molecular structures. This tritium concentration will be very much lower than in the water fraction.

Tables II.D.2 and II.D.3 list the Sr-90 and Sr-89 concentrations in milk. There was no significant difference between the three sampling zones.

The concentrations of I-131, Cs-137 and K-nat in milk are given in I

Table II.D.4. Although there is some relationship between measured l concentrations in milk and those in air (Table 1 1 . 11 . 4 ) , the correlation is low and is due to feeding practices discussed below.

Due to the availability of a large Nal(TI) scint illation crystal, shield and pulse height analy:cr that has been dedicated to only counting project milk samples, we have lowered our MDC for I-131. A counting time

63 of 3000 minutes per sample with a slight reduction in background has achieved a MDC value of approximately 0.6 pCi/L. This is preferable to any chemical concentration process and nearly all milk sample data reported here were for 3000 minutes counting time.

The natural K concentration of milk is reported because it is determined by gamma-ray spectrometry of the K isotope. Potassium concentrations in milk are held in only high biological control by the cow and are useful in detection of aberrant I or Cs values. The accepted K concentration for all lactating cow species is 1.50 g/L.

It should also be noted here that a close relationship between forage deposition and milk concentrations should be expected for the strontium radioisotopes, fo r Cs and for I only if the cows are on pasture or fed green cut grass or al fal fa. This unfortunately is not the general feeding pract ice at the dai ries around the reactor. Nearly al: cattle l'eed is hay grown either locally, from Nebraska or the North Park region of Colorado. It can at times be even cuttings from the previous year.

This makes correlation of milk concentrations very difficult. On the 131 other hand, if elevated 1 concentrations are noted, the surface deposition must have been reasonably elated in time and location.

Table II. D.1 Tritium Concentrations in Water Extracted froc Milk (pCi/l).

Facility Area 44 Adjacent Composite

• Reference Composite

• D 78 Pasture Season July 1 <270 487 ( 255) ** 521 (256)

July 8 363 (254) <270 516 (256)

July 15 <270 293 (253) <270 July 22 350 (253) 633 (257) <270 July 29 298 (256) 419 (257) <273 August 5 <273 339 (256) <273 August 12 354 (257) 349 (257) <273 August 19 <308 <308 <308 ,

August 26 <308 <308 <308 s September 2 <308 500 (290) 316 (288)

September 9 495 (290) <308 984 (296)

September 16 <292 419 (274) <292 September 23 593 (276) 388 (274) <292 September 30 329 (273) 480 (275) 618 (277)

Post-Pasture Season October 9 480 (275) <292 701 (278)

November 11 699 (256) 560 (255) 404 (253)

December 2 <275 <271 479 (255)

• Adjacent Composite Locations: A6, A28, A31, ASO, A 36, A48.

Reference Composite Locations: R16, R17, R20, R22, R23, R25.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

Table II. D.2 Strontium 90 Activity in Milk (pCi/1).

^ "

Facility Area 44 Adjacent Composite

• Reference Composite

• D 98 July 1 d 16.5 (3.27)* 4.04 (2.37)

July 8 6.13 (1.41) 4.39 (1.31) 3.51 (1.29)

July 15 2.91 (1.32) 3.45 (1.58) 2.45 (1.52)

July 22 3.00(1.32) 3.38 (1.24) 5.77 (1.52)

July 29 4.43 (1.84) 4.80 (2.12) 3.15 (1.74)

August 5 7.78 (2.36) 9.09 (2.54) 4.90 (2.56)

August 12 <1.94 20.4 (5.24) d August 19 d 2.71 (1. 22) 3.04 (1.20)

August 29 <1.83 1.14 (1.14)

September 2 3.45 (1.27) e 2.02 (1.57) < 1.43 3.30 (1.82)

September 9 <1.15 1.82 (1.23)

September 16 < 2. 66 3.16 (1.72) 12.7 (4.07) 4.63 (3.93)

September 23 2.28 (1.30) < 3.13 < 2.97 September 30 3.53 (2.09) 16.2 (5.58)

October 7 5.65 (1.44) 5.91 (1.75) 5.51 (1.54) 4.59 (1.34)

November 4 3.28 (2.54) 6.01 (1.97)

December 1 5.36 (2.59) 3.72 (2.57) 4.75 (2.01) 3.72 (2.49)

• Adjacent Composite Locations: A6, A28, A31, A50, A36, A48.

Reference Composite Locations: R16, R17, R20, R22, R23, R25.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.93 S.D.).

d Lost in analysis.

Table II. D.3 Strontium 89 Activity in Milk (pCi/1).

Facility Area 44 Adjacent Composite

• Reference Composite

• D 97 July 1 d <3.31 20.5 (22.5)

July 8 28.7 (10.7) * <1.41 2.69 (9.31)

July 15 2.01 (10.1) <1.61 3.27 (11.7)

July 22 <1.16 <1.17 <1.65 July 29 <1.90 6.93 (11.1) 11.5 (9.40)

August 5 <2.03 <2.52 4.90 (12.7)

August 12 2.04 (7.63) <4.65 d August 19 d 3.09 (4.30) 2.67 (4.08)

August 27 16.9 (6.42) 8.14 (3.76) 3.23 (4.07)

September 2 8.91 (4. 70) 7.94 (5.46) 7.05 (5.56) $

September 9 11.1 (4.03) 9.86 (3.70) 8.17 (4.94)

September 16 3.53 (8.83) <4.25 <3.40 September 23 <1.14 70.0 (11.0) 57.3 (10.9)

September 30 19.2 (5.31) <5.20 <1.68 October 7 <1.66 <1.72 <1.28 November 4 <2.27 <2.02 <2.71 December 1 <2.16 <1.89 <2.50

• Adjacent Composite Locations: A6, A28, A31, A50, A36, A46.

Reference Composite Locations: R16, R17, R20, R22, R23, R25.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

d Lost in analysis.

67 Table II. D.4 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Composite Milk Samples.

I (PCi/1) Cs (pCi/1) Nr.t . K (g/1)

C d 7-1-78 Facility <0.199 12.1 (1.15) ** 1.54 (0.0164)

Adjacent <0.199 5.94 (1.13) 1.47 (0.0163)

Reference 2.11 (1.96) 7.67 (1.13) 1.45 (0.0162) 7-8-78 Facility <0.115 10.1 (0.980) 1.46 (0.0125)

Adjacent <0.199 5.59 (1.19) 1.41 (0.0168)

Re ference <0.199 4.71 (1.19) 1.39 (0.0167) 7-15-78 Facility <0.283 6.56 (1.42) 1.44 (0.0213)

Adjacent <0.200 5.72 (1.14) 1.60 (0.0166)

Re ference <0.200 6.43 (1.14) 1.51 (0.0164) 7-22-78 Facility <0.159 <0.151 1.49 (0.0140)

Adjacent <0.201 7.85 (1.14) 1.58 (0.0166)

Reference <0.159 6.56 (1.01) 1.50 (0.0140) 7-29-78 Facility <0.101 <0.0954 1.47 (0.0111)

Adjacent <0.639 <0.608 1.46 (0.0447)

Re fe rence <0.639 <0.608 1.42 (0.0443) 8-5-78 Facility 7.91 (1.42) 14.4 (0.856) 1.53 (0.0116)

Adjacent 19.5 (1.65) 13.0 (1.08) 1.63 (0.0165)

Re ference 13.9 (1.50) 12.2 (1.08) 1.55 (0.0163) 8-12-78 Facility 6.13 (1.44) 13.5 (0.868) 1.49 (0.0119)

Adjacent 6.69 (1.38) 8.12 (1.08) 1.60 (0.0164)

Re ference 6.71 (1.50) 9.86 (1.08) 1.53 (0.0163) 8-19-78 Facility 5.91 (2.20) 11.2 (1.12) 1.49 (0.0166)

Adjacent 11.4 (1.29) 11.0 (0.993) 1.54 (0.0142)

Re ference 9.93 (1.56) <0.175 1.42 (0.0165) 8-26-78 Facility 1.02 (1.33) 5.25 (0.953) 1.45 (0.0137)

Adjacent 6.59 (1.26) 7.65 (0.895) 1.23 (0.0122)

Reference 13.2 (2.29) 8.55 (1.16) 1.52 (0.0177) 9-2-78 Facility <0.110 1.83 (0.874) 1.34 (0.0118)

Adjacent <0.105 1.63 (0.867) 1.63 (0.0119)

Reference 12.0 (1.32) 11.3 (1. 03) 1.54 (0.0151) 9-9-78 Facility <0.105 3.61 (0.868) 1.55 (0.0118)

Adjacent 5.19 (1.43) <0.105 1.56 (0.0117)

Reference <0.116 5.45 (0.896) 1.45 (0.0123) 9-16-78 Facility <0.107 1.85 (0.863) 1.45 (0.0118)

Adjacent 6.87 (1.40) 4.88 (0.841) <1.30 Re ference 41.3 (4. 01 ) 22.2 (2.62) 1.75 (0,0339) 9-23-78 Facility <0.413 <0.417 1.51 (0.0330)

Adjacent 4.26 (1.34) 4.94 (0.804) 1.53 (0.0113)

Reference 11.5 (1.53) 4.98 (0.999) 1.45 (0.0145) 9-30-78 Facility 8.57 (0.962) 6.13 (0.809) 1.48 (0.0113)

Adjacent 4.37 (2.18) 5.21 (0.930) 1.55 (0.0139)

Reference 10.7 (1.20) 6.62 (0.854) 1.47 (0.0122) 10-7-78 Facility 9.73 (1.72) 4.31 (1.02) 1.39 (0.0138)

Adjacent 4.86 (1.40) 5.01 (1.00) 1.60 (0.0154)

Reference <0.567 0.775 (2.57) 1.44 (0.0440)

• Adjacent Composite Locations: A6, A28, A31, A50, A36, A48.

Reference Composite Locations: A16, R17, R20, R22, R23, R25.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval (1.96 S.D.).

68 Table II. D.4 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Composite Milk Samples.

Co d I (PCi/1) Cs (pCi/l) Nat. K (g/l) 11-4-78 Facility 8.70 ( 1. 08 )* * < 0.102 1.40 (0.0114)

Adjacent 18.7 (1.85) 8.04 (0.856) 1.55 (0.0119)

Reference 17.1 (1.41) 7.76 (0.840) 1.47 (0.0115) 12-2-78 Facility < 0.116 < 0.114 1.50 (0.0122)

Adjacent < 0.105 6.44 (0.857) 1.47 (0.0116)

Reference 31.5 (1.34) 11.8 (0.864) 1.38 (0.0115)

Adjacent Composite Locations: A6, A28, A31, A50, A36, A48.

Reference Composite Locations : R16, R17, R20, R22, R23, R25.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95*6 confidence inverval (1.96 S.D.)

69 II.D. Food Chain Data

2. Forage. Table II.D.5 lists the tritium specific activity in water extracted from forage samples as well as Sr-89 and Sr-90 concentrations in the forage dry matter. Many samples were too dry to extract sufficient water for tritium analysis. Tritium values that were obtained were similar to those reported in past reports. 'here were no significant differences in mean tritium values between Faci?- '

, Adjacent and Reference locations.

Table II.D.6 lists Ru-106, Cs-137 and Zr-Nb-95 activities in forage samples for the second half of 1978.

Gross beta concentrations in soil and forage collected at the same locations are given in Table II.D.7.

From Table 1I.11.1 it is observed that mean values for all radio-nuclides in each sample type are very close to those measured in the first hal f of 1978.

Cattic forage samples, i.e. fresh cut grass or alfalfa hay is the sample of choice for several reasons. Forage integrates atmospheric wet and dry deposition over a large surface area per unit weight and also is a direct link in the dairy and beef food chain transport of 11-3, Cs-137, and the strontium radioisotopes. Such samples are collected when possible.

Ilowever, due to feeding practices, vagaries of weather and other factors, often silage or cut hay sampics must be collected. These samples may or may not be harvested locally and may represent different fallout periods.

This often presents difficulties in data int e rp ret a t i on .

70 s

Table II. D.5 Tritium, Strontium 89, and Sr.rontium 90 concentrations in Forage for Samples Collected .luly 29, 1978 .

Ardas Tritium Strontium 89 Strontium 90 (pC1/1) (pCi/kg) (pCi/kg)

Facility 4 e < 35.9 61.0 (40.3)

• 44 + e -- 775 (69.5) 48.7 (12.7)

Adjacent 6+ e <55.0 686 (34.0) 28 + c <60.4 723 (48.2) 31 + e <59.4 242 (49.9) 36 + e 823 (82.6) 99.3 (16.9) 48 + e <28.0 127 (23.1) 50 f f f Reference 16 + e <31.9 180 (22.4) 17 + e <44.0 869 (38.6) 20 + e <45.6 428 (35.8) 22 + e <88.2 713 (55.1) 23 + e <50.1 13 (23.9) 25 + 199 (96.9) 176 (25.7)

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

+ Silage or Dry llay.

e Insufficient weight or volume for analysis.

f Sample unavailable.

71 Table II. D.5 Tritium, Strontium 89, and Strontium 90 Concentrations in Forage for Samples Collected August 11. 1978 .

Tritium Strontium 89 Strontium 90 (pCi/1) (pCi/kg) (pCi/kg)

Facility 4 e <23.7 84.4 (31.0)*

44 + e <51.6 603 (41.3)

Adjacent 6 <280 127 (92.9) 144 (25.4) 28 + e <22.2 95.7 (19.7) 31 e <30.5 177 (19.8) 36 + e <67.3 519 (35.6) 48 + e <31.6 150 (25.8) 50 + e <92.3 901 (44.6)

Reference 16 + <280 <28.0 217 (19.6) 17 + e <15.7 142 (13.3) 20 + e <17.3 148 (12.0) 22 2' e <42.9 235 (148) 23 + c <47.8 113 (15.6) 25 e <13.8 603 (52.3)

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

+ Silage on dry hay.

e Insufficient weight or bolumn for analysis.

72 Table II. D.5 Tritium, Strontium 89, and Strontium 90 Concentrations in Forage for Samples Collected September 16, 1978 A# "" Tritium Strontium 89 Strontium 90 (pCi/1) (pCi/kg) (pCi/kg)

Facility 4 923 (299)* 20.8 (91.0) <13.1 44 + 977 (300) <20.9 131 (18.3)

Adjacent 6+ e 794 (861) <16.8 28 + 516 (295) <97.? 552 (49.1) 31 + 718 (296) 85.2 (108) 144 (25.3) 36 + 998 (301) <40.2 '

102 (50.9) 48 + 1,377 (304) <l.79 < 12. 3 50 + < 0. 213 1.07 (0.227)

Reference 16 + 476 (295) <0.395 2.61 (0.301) 17 + 476 (295) <0.348 1.20 (0.242) 20 982 (300) <1.05 2.86 (0.746) 22 + e 1.51 (1.07) 0.653 (0.248) 23 + e 1.38 (0.977) 1.62 (0.232) 25 + e <0.915 6.43 (0.485)

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

+ Silage or Dry llay.

e Insufficient volume or weight for analysis.

73 Table II. D.6 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Forage (pC1/kg) for Samples Collected July 27, 1978 .

Areas Ru Cs Zr & Nb Facility 4 155 (105)* 176 (26.7) 84.3 (15.0) 44 + 51.2(54.5) 171 (14.4) 47 6 (9.33)

Adjacent 6+ 116 (41.0) 178 (11.2) 58.5 (6.29) 28 + 138 (60.6) 144 (16.5) 52.2 (8.80) 31 + 95.5(52.4) 198 (13.9) 70.7 (9.02) 36 + 4.68(4 ! . 7) 59.8 (10.9) 57.3 (7.71) 48 + 692 (65.0) 344 (17.2) 235 (9.37) 50 f f f Reference 16 + 59.8(30.6) 82.0 (8.09) 30.3 (5.48) 17 + 98.6(41.5) 94.4 (10.2) 44.5 (6.93) 20 + 60.1(44.8) 158 (12.1) 47.0 (6.97) 22 + 314 (83.9) 309 (22.7) 98.1 (11.7) 23 + 186 (138) 105 (35.6) 66.9 (19.7) 25 + 145 (43.6) 167 (11.7) 42.4 (6.07)

' ne ar nties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence

.n t.. . , , (1.96 S.D.).

i Sw.aple tx;available.

+ Silage or dry hay.

74 Table II. D.6 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Forage (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected August 11, 1978 .

Areas Ru Cs Zr 6 Nb Facility 4 <71.9 149 (20.3)* 44.1 (18.2) 44 + 127 (51.9) 207 (33.1) 74.5 (13.6)

Adjacent 6 <38.9 78.1 (11.7) 23.4 (10.6) 28 + <50.4 62.9 (14.7) 55.8 (17.1) 31 106 (36.7) 139 (9.20) 58.7 (8.77) 36 + 49.9 (34.3) 71.1 (8.64) 37.5 (7.72) 48 + <38.7 17.5 (11.6) 51.7 (16.9) 50** + 107 (41.7) 172 (11.1) 81.2 (8.39)

Reference 16 + <42.6 14.2 (12.1) 15.3 (11.5) 17 + 98.0 (54.6) 121 (13.3) 56.9 (11.8) 20 + <39.2 52.0 (11.9) 33.9 (10.9) 22 + 206 (70.5) 209 (17.7) 140 (16.0) 23 <80.2 93.9 (21.9) 70.8 (20.3) 25 :34.4 187 t;1.2) <4.54

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) arc for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

• • Co11ceted 8-26-78.

lage or dry hay.

75 Table II. D 6 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Forage (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected September 16, 1978 .

Areas Ru Cs Zr & Nb Facility 4** 124 (24.6)* 153 (5.78) 89.7 (5.62) 44 + 62.2 (54.4) 73.3 (12.2) 77 7 (16.2)

Adjacent 6+ 327 (23.1) 328 (5. 70) 179 (6.23) 28 + 94.4 (24.0) 127 (5.56) 86.9 (7.47) 31 + <39.3 165 (13.0) 56.5 (11.8) 36 + 143 (49.7) 122 (12.1) 83.4 (12.5) 48 + 9.10(5.52) 11.4 (1.30) 10.8 (1.71) 50 + 128 (11.7) 59.8 (2.72) 82.2 (3.32)

Reference 16 + 118 (18.8) 104 (4.50) 40.8 (4.34) 17 + 83.5 (40.6) 70.6 (9.44) 47.9 (10.6) 20 23.3 (21.2) 47.4 (4.64) 63.3 (6.28) 22 + <32.0 61.4 (10.3) 53.6 (12.8) 23 + 131 (24.0) 361 (6.02) 124 (6.72) 25 282 (18.5) 326 (4.65) 109 (4.85)

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for che 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

• • Collected 9-23-78.

+ Silage or dry hay.

76 Table II. D.7 Gross Beta Concentrations in Forage (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected Third Quarter, 1978 .

Saapling '

Location July 27 August 11 September 16 Facility

, 40,500 24,700 2,470 4 (817) * (431) (122) 44 25,000 19,100 21,400 (447) (330) (366)

Adjacent 6 26,900 17,100 23,900 (501) (302) (397) 28 38,400 9,230 29,500 (752) (246) (498) 31 34,400 18,600 7,980 (667) (332) (319) 36 34,200 17,900 18,100 (606) (329) (418) 48 28,800 16,200 1,570 (607) (291) (36.9) 50 19,400 2,220 f

(346) (63.2)

Reference 16 2,710 11,900 12,600 (150) (308) (269) 17 14,100 11,900 11,300 (325) (308) (350) 20 6,120 18,000 17,400 (237) (295) (322) 22 31,100 18,500 22,500 (611) (415) (365) I 23 19,400 12,600 24,800 l (468) (298) (446) 25 35,300 16,000 16,500 (563) (292) (321) I

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

f Sample unavailabic.

77 II.E. Aquatic Biota Table II.E.1 shows gross beta and strontium concentrations observed in aquatic biota collected during the second half of 1978.

Unusually high values for gross beta concentrations were observed in Fish and Benthic organisms during October. These samples were reanalyzed and the same results were obtained. The high activity concentrations cannot be explained at this time.

Table II.E.2 lists Ru-106, Cs-137 and 2r-Nb-95 concentrations.

liigh fission product concentrations were not noted in the October samples that showed high gross beta concentrations. The high MDC values for seston are due to the fact that such samples are counted by a Ge(Li) spectrometer system rather than the Nal used for most other sample types.

This is because seston, which is principally algae, collects and concentrates particulate radioactivity and high resolution is necessary for radionuclide measurement.

Ta'ile II. E.1 Gross Beta and Radio <;trontium Concentrations in Aquatic Biota Samples (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected .luly 1978 .

Sampling Locations

• Gross Beta Strontium 89  ;

strontium 90 Fish  !

l-Upstream 7/23/78 19,800 (1,150) * * <69.2 355 (56.7).

Downstream 7/23/78 3,580 (193) 164 (276) 111 (51.3)

Effluent 7/23/78 13,600 (619) <14.2 139 (65.3)

Benthic Organisms Upstream 7/20/78 1,440 (286) <68.1 170 (73.0)

Downstream 7/20/78 20,400 (1,080) 276 (288) 62.2 (52.9)

Effluent 7/20/78 17,700 (802) <142 340 (88.7) u Vascular Plants Upstream 7/8/78 31,800 (717) 114 (146) 64.2 (24.5)

Downstream 7/8/78 3,070 (182) <29.0 246 (30.7)

Effluent 7/8/78 1,090 (367) 57.8 (21.6) 4.52(2.79)

Seston ,

Upstream 7/20/78 45,000 (1,940) <204 493 (433)

Downstream 7/20/78 50,700 (2,250) <165 525 (159)

Effluent 7/20/78 46,100 (1,620) <208 296 (139)

• Upstream Composite: U 42, U 43.

Downstream Composite: D 40, D 45.

Effluent: E 38.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.),

Table II. E.1 Gross Beta and Radiostrontium Concentrations in Aquatic Biota Samples (pC1/kg) for Samples Collected August 1978 ,

Sampling Locations

• Gross Beta Strontium 89 Strontium 90 I Fish  !

Upstream 8/15/78 12,400 (678) * * <87.6 307 (86.7)

Downstream 8/21/78 31,700 (578) <98.6 178 (62.1)

Effluent 8/5/78 88,900(1,440) <42.6 222 (28.3)

Benthic Organisms Upstream 8/5/78 159,000(2,680) 413 (806) 391 (157)

Downstream 8/24/78 111,000(1,750) 305 (688) 252 (159) 8/24/78 15,400 (585) <113 253 (96.9)

Effluent Vascular Plants E

Upstream 8/5/78 10,500 (240) <26.8 161 (19.4)

Downstream 8/5/78 9,280 (198) 36.4 (65.9) 92.5 (11.5)

Effluent 8/5/78 15,500 (288) 313 (75.4) 22.0 (13.2)

Seston Upstream 8/5/78 22,800(1,070) 1,230 (572) <104 23,200(1,460) 2,070 (1,280) <141 Downstream 8/21/78 Effluent 8/24/78 50,000(1,260) <60.I 197 (73.1)

• Upstream Composite: U 42, U 43.

Downstream Composite: D 40, D 45.

Effluent: E 38.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.),

g-__ . . ._g Table II. E.1 Gross Beta and Radiostrontium Concentrations in Aquatic Biota Samples (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected September 1978 .

Sampling Locations

• Gross Beta Strontium 89  ;

Strontium 90 Fish l Upstream 9/7/78 9,910 (372)** <101 165 (66.4).

Downstream 9/21/78 43,800 (771) <76.7 161 (56.9)

Effluent 9/21/78 10,600 (413) <45.5 107 (36.3)

Benthic Organisms 6,430 (424) d d Upstream 9/21/78

<60.7 125 (39.0)

Downstream 9/15/78 7,400 (473)

Effluent 9/15/78 47,200 (1,060) <442 <364 Vascular Plants Upstream 9/9/78 1,970 (118) 391 (87.2) <87.2 Downstream 9/9/78 16,300 (374) <36.6 226 (39.4)

Effluent 9/9/78 18,200 (372) <23.3 134 (20.0)

Seston Upstream 9/21/78 d d d d d d Downstream 9/21/78 Effluent 9/21/78 28,400 (1,300) <138 257 (102)

• Upstream Composite: U 42, U 43.

Downstream Composite: D 40, D 45.

Effluent: E 38.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.),

d Lost in analysis.

Table II. E.1 Gross Beta and Radiostrontium Concentrations in Aquatic Biota Samples (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected Fourth Quarter, 1978 .

Sampling Locations

• Gross Beta Strontium 89 Strontium 90 Fish Upstream 10/28/78 1,630 (195) <35.6 81.4 (37.0)

<104 237 (72.9)

Downstream 10/28/78 8,580 (384) 6,650 (363) <43.4 100 (42.9)

Effluent 10/28/78 Benthic Organisms d d Upstream 11/4/78 5,490 (453) 9,220 <201 208 (159)

Downstream 11/30/78 (504) 5,790 (464) <492 590 (389)

Effluent 11/29/78

• Upstream Composite: U 42, U 43.

Downstream: D 40, D 45.

Effluent: E 38.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

d Lost in analysis.

Table II. E.1 Gross Beta and Radiostrontium Concentrations in Aquatic Biota Samples (pC1/kg) for Samples Collected October 1978 .

Sampling Locations

• Gross Beta Strontium 89 ,

Strontium 90 Vascular Plants .

Upstream 10/14/78 17,000 (335) d d Downstream 10/14/78 3,540 (157) 51.4 (123) 165 (30.4)

Effluent 10/14/78 1,610 (166) <27.6 110 (21.7)

Seston Upstream 10/21/78 29,000 (1,850) 537 (800) <161 Downstream 10/21/78 32,100 (1,590) <133 <121 Effluent 10/21/78 45,400 (2,080) d d

• Upstream Composite: U 42, U 43.

Downstream Composite: D 40, D 45.

Effluent: E 38.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

9 Table II. E.1 Gross Beta and Radiostrontium Concentrations in Aquatic Biota Samples (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected November 1978 .

Sampling Locations

• Gross Beta Strontium 89 Strontium 90 Vascular Plants Upstream 11/11/78 2,210 (144) <166 228 (116)

Downstream 11/11/78 7,120 (289) <74.6 109 (54.7)

Effluent 11/11/78 10,900 (260) <31.9 87.2 (25.1)

Seeton 95,100 (4,820) 1,920 (1,120) <178 Upstream 11/16/78 11/24/78 27,500 (1,410). 1,680 (847) <269 Downstream 15,400 (720) 2,590 (1,390) <442 Effluent 11/30/78

• Upstream Composite: U 42, U 43.

Downstream Composite: D 40, D 45.

Effluent: E 38.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

Table II. E.1 Gross Beta and Radiostrontium Concentrations in Aquatic Biota Samples (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected December 1978 .

Sampling Locations

• Gross Beta Strontium 89 Strontium 90 Vascular Plants Upstream 12/23/78 5,040 (113) <31.8 140 (36.9)

Downstream 12/23/78 7,030 (222) <34.5 100 (24.4)

Effluent 12/23/78 2,000 (94.6) g g Seston Upstream 12/27/78 29,700 (1,340) 666 (330) <167 Downstream 12/21/78 34,400 (1,420) 454 (445) <188 Effluent 12/21/78 16,400 (1,030) d d

• Upstream Composite: U 42, U 43.

Downstream Composite: D 40, D 45.

Effluent: E 38.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

d Lost in analysis.

g Analysis in progress.

Table 11. "2 .

Gamma-ray xtitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Aquatic Biota Samples (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected July 19'78 .

Sampling Locations

• Ru Cs Zr & Nb Fish Upstream 7/23/78 <256 <78.4 <33.7 Downstream 7/27/78 <254 <78.6 <33.6 Effluent 7/23/78 <256 118 (63.8)** .

<33.7

_ Benthic Organisms Upstream 7/20/78 <254 146 (64. 7) 78.5 (31.6)

Downstream 7/15/78 444 (256) 228 (66.2) 124 (33.5)

Effluent 7/20/78 <253 132 (64.1) 94.4 (31.3)

Vascular Plants $

Upstream 7/8/78 333 (333) 185 (99.5) 52.0 (48.1)

Downstream 7/8/78 <364 <112 <47.9 Effluent 7/8/78 <656 <202 101 (98.2)

Seston Upstream 7/20/78 <7750 <1320 <473 Downstream 7/27/78 <7750 <1320 <473 Effluent 7/27/78 <7910 <1330

<467

• Upstream Composite: U 42, U 43.

Downstream Composite: D 40, D 45.

Effluent: E 38.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

Table II. c.2 Gamma-ray ".mitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Aquatic Biota Samples (pC1/kg) for Samples Collected August 1978 .

Sampling Locations

• Ru Cs Zr & Nb Fish Upstream 8/5/78 <256 100 (64.1)** 48.4 (27.9)

Downstream 8/21/78 701- (263) 201 (65.4) 91.9 (43. 6)

Effluent 8/5/78 281 (242) <78.4 <33.7 Benthic Organisms Upstream 8/5/78 311 (250) 200 (66.8) 88.2 (29.1)

Downstream 8/24/73 471 (270) 294 (67.4) 169 (45. 3)

Effluent 8/24/78 <255 110 (64.2) 47.1 (43.2)

Vascular Plants Upstream 8/5/78 <339 170 (85.5) 55.2 (45.9)

Downstream 8/5/78 <379 378 (97.5) 134 (52.0)

Effluent 8/5/78 981 (811) <252 156 (110)

Seston Upstream 8/5/78 <7740 <1310 <479 Downstream 8/21/78 <12,200 <2060 <754 Effluent 8/24/78 <10,200 2270 (1980) <629

• Upstream Composite: U 42, U 43.

• Downstream Composite: D 40, D 45.

Effluent: E 38.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

Table II. . 2 Gamma-ray 1mitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Aquatic Biota Samples (pC1/kg) 1or Samples Collected September 1978 .

Sampling Locations

• 1 6 Ru Cs Zr & Nb Fish Upstream 9/7/78 <257 102 (62.9)** <34.0 Downstream 9/21/78 <261 <81.6 <34.6 Effluent 9/21/78 <258 <79.7 -

<34.1 Benthic Organisms Upstream 9/21/78 <267 199 (66.3) 74.7 (41. 7)

Downstream 9/15/78 258 (257) 149 (63.5) 93.6 (42. 8)

Effluent 9/15/78 <257 123 (62.8) 89.6 (41.4)

Vascular Plants Upstream 9/9/78 <289 <90.8 63.5 (55.6)

Downstream 9/9/78 <341 305 (88.5) 245 (68.8)

Effluent 9/9/78 382 (337) 161 (79.9) 93.9 (61.7)

Seston Upstream 9/21/78 d d d Downstream 9/21/78 d d d Effluent 9/21/78 <7980 <1340 <478

• Upstream Composite: U 42, U 43.

Downstream Composite: D 40, D 45.

Effluent: E 38.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

d Lost in analysis.

Table II. E.2 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Aquatic Biota Samples (pC1/kg) for Samples Collected Fourth Quarter, 1978 .

95 Sampling Locations

• Ru Cs 2r & Nb Fish Upstream 10/28/78 81.5 (119)** <25.1 28.7 (20.5)

<80.6 50.1 (28.8) 43.7 (20.2)

Downstream 10/28/78

<256 147 (66.0) <34.1 Effluent 10/28/78 Benthic Organisms Upstream 11/4/78 <79.4 147 (27.0) 259 (21.1)

Downstream 11/30/78 387 (258) 200 (65.3) 104 (38.1)

<7810*** <1330 <482 Effluent 11/29/78

• Upstream Composite: U 42, U 43.

Downstream Composite: D 40, D 45.

Effluent: E 28.

• • Uncertainties ( in parentheses) are for the 9 i% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

• • • The MDC values are of a different magnitude because this sample was counted on a GeLi spectrometer.

Table II. E.2 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Aquatic Biota Samples (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected October 1978. .

06 1 Sampling Locations

• Ru Cs Zr & Nb Vascular Plants Upstream 10/14/78 <121 81.4 (38.6)** 21.2 (22.0)

Downstream 10/14/78 <404 <127 <53.5 Effluent 10/14/78 <387 367 (101) P5.7 (57.0)

Seston Upstream 10/21/78 <7,770 <1,360 820 (1,170)

<7,770 <1,360 <477 Downstream 10/21/78 Effluent 10/21/78 12,500 (13,000) <1,360 628 (1,120)

• Upstream Composite: U 42, U 43.

Downstream Composite: D 40, D 45.

Effluent: E 38.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

Table II. E.2 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Aquatic Biota Samples (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected November 1978. .

Sampling Locations

• 16 Ru Cs Zr & Nb Vascular Plants Upstream 11/11/78 444 (442)** 145 (105) 158 (54.8)

Downstream 11/11/78 <223 249 (61.5) 128 (48.3) 645 <159 1T0 (101)

Effluent 11/11/78 (547)

Seston Upstream 11/16/78 <7,920 <1,350 <476

<7,810 <1,330 <482 Downstream 11/24/78

<11,100 <1,890 <687 Effluent 11/30/78

• Upstream Composite: U 42, U 43.

Downstream Composite: D 40, D 45.

Effluent: E 38.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

Table II. E.2 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Aquatic Biota Samples (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected December 1978 .

6 Zr & Nb Sampling Locations

• Ru Cs Vascular Plants Upstream 12/23/78 <432 224 (109)** 62.1 (55. 3)

Downstream 12/23/78 <394 <123 <52.2 Effluent 12/23/78 237 (188) 56.3 (47.6) 21.2 (24.4) 0 Seston Upstream 12/27/78 <7,920 <1,350 <476 Downstream 12/21/78 <7,630 <1,320 610 (/62)

<7,630 <1,320 692 (734)

Effluent 12/21/78

• Upstream Composite: U 42, U 43.

Downstream Composite: D 40, D 45.

Effluent: E 38.

• • Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

92 II.F. Beef Cattic. Two head of cattle that graze the Facility area are counted each quarter in the CSU whole-body counter. The animals are washed carefully and counted for 20 minutes each. This method is far more sensitive than counting meat samples and is the method of choice for detecting Cs-137 in the meat food chain to humans. If thyroid I-131 contamination were significant this would be detected from the whole body count.

Table II.F.1 gives values for the second half of 1978 for whole body counting of beef cattle. The animals are selected each quarter at random; however, the animal number is recorded and the animal may be retrieved and recounted if necessary. The Cs-137 concentrations appeared to be higher for the last quarter of 1978 as compared to the third quarter.

This difference if real, probably only reflects a different cutting and/or source of hay for these animals.

Table II.F.2 gives the concentrations of the radionuclides that are 137 transported through the food chain. The Cs concentration is considerably lower than for the whole-body counts, but again probably represents animals with different feed intakes. The biological half-life of Cs in beef cattle is approximately 30 days and, therefore, muscle concentrations rather rapidly respond to intake concentrations. The tritium concentration in body water is in good agreement with forage water concentrations over the approximate feeding period.

93 Table II. F.1. Radionuclides in Facility Area Beef Cattle In-vivo Gamma ray activity in Fort St. Vrain Area beef cattle.

Third Quarter Values 131 137 september 2, 1978 7 Cs pCi/q K Cow 1 None 24.9 Cow 2 None 21.3 Fourth Quarter blues Cow 1 None 35.0 Cow 2 None 36.7 Table II. F.2.

Radionuclides in Beef Sample frora Local flerd.

Aniraal Slaughtered, Fourth Quarter,1978.*

Hamburger 137 Cs pCi/Kg K g/kg Tritium pCi/l 13.3 (1.80) 3.15 (0.0300) 741 (259)

Bone 9 90 Sr pCi/Kg Sr pCi/Kg

<378 4,150 (245)

• Uncertainties (shown in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval (1.96 S.D. ).

94 II.G.1 Sampic Cross Check Data Since 1975 e have participated in an EPA sponsored laboratory intercomparison study on air filters, milk and water sampics. The latest results are shown in Table II.G.I.

Of the 55 crosscheck sets, only 11 were outside the control 65 limit of 3 sigma. Of these 6 were for Cr and Zn in water samples.

Jince these radionuclides are not expected in FSV effluents, emphasis has not been given to their calibration. The other aberrant values were on 89 Sr, and in one case 17 Cs in air filters.

O Sr and In all of these we attribute the analytical error to equipment problems determined after the fact. In the case of any value outside the 3 sigma control limit the practice is to repeat the analysis if possible and determine al1 possible reasons for the discrepancy.

Table 11.G.2 presents an additional crosscheck program with 1.Fli laboratories.

Table II.G.3 presents an analysis of our experience to date in the EPA crosscheck program. The linear correlation coefficient for each principal radionuclide in each sample type is listed. It can be noted that for milk samples which represent the most important dose pathway for reactor radio-2Ictive effluents, that the correlation is high and very acceptable. For J

al filters and water samples the correlation is less consistent, but it mus't be noted that the data presented in Table II.G.3 includes all values

\

since the incept ion of t he cross check program. During t hat period we have of ten made changes in our procedures largely as a result of the cross check results.

95 Table II.G.I. EPA Cross-Check Data Summary.

i Kadio CSU Actual i Precision Control Limits *. deviation Date huclide Value Value I (1 sigma) (3 Signa) from known Air filters pCi/ filter O

6/24/77 Sr 25 28 1.5 4.5 12 l ,

Cs 19 24 5 15 21 l

Gross a 16 14 5 15 12 Gross 6 86 80 5 15 8 9/30/77 bs 73 67 5 15 12

^39 0.6 67 Pu 3 2 0.2 Gross a 18 13 5 15 41 Gross 6 37 32 5 15 17 O

12/23/77 Sr l 24 25 1.5 4.5 4 Cs  ; 75 67 5 15 12 Gross a i 47 40 10 30 18 Gross 6 134 117 6 18 15 O

3/24/78 Sr 9 8 1.5 ,

4.5 0.1 C's 33 22 5 15 50 Gross a 18 11 5 15 64 Gross 6 37 38 5 15 3 c 1.5 6/23/78 Sr 9 4.5 137 Cs 2 18 5 15 89 i

l Gross a 13 10 5 15 30 l

' Gross 6 35 36 5 15 3 i

e Instrument malfunction ,

96 Table II.G.I. EPA Cross-Check Data Summary (cont'd) .

Radio CSU Actual l Precision Control Limits +, deviation Date inuclide Value Value i (1 sigma) (3 Sigma) from kno',m I

j1 l Milk, pCi/1 89 15 24 7/21/78 Sr 11 41 , 5 Sr  ! 61 49 l 2.5 7.5 24 131 1 0 0 - - -

Cs 40 53 5 15 25 140 ~~

J Ba 0 0 - - -

I 8 K mg/l i 1450 1560 78 234 j Water, Tritium pCi/1 i /

2270 349 1047 29 6/9/78 11 .1659 8/11/78 I 11 892 1230 330 990 '

23 i

j Water, Alpha G lleta pCi/1 l i i j

29 20 15 45 7/14/78;a r 5  ;

I 15 45 l6 16 29 5 i' 1 l 9/22/78 a i 9 5 5 15 80 i

8 8 10 5 15 f 20 12 11 5 15 9 11/17/7ka i 18 26 5 15 31 8

i l Water, Gamma pCi/1 Cr 149 102 5 15 46

. 6/2/78

! " Co 22 22 5 15 0 i Zr 72 54 5 15 33 Ru 63 58 5 15 9 Cs 25 22 5 15 14 137 '

15 27 Cs 38 30 5 l

97 Table II.G.I. EPA Cross-Cher.k Data Summary (cont'd) .

!gadio CSU Actual Precision Control Limits 9, deviation Date 'nuclide

, Value Value (1 sigma) (3 Sigua) from known Watcr, Gamma pCi/1 Cr 87 105 5 15 17 8/4/78 60 5 15 7 Co 29 27 65 15 34 Zr 83 62 5 Ru 45 41 5 15 10 I 11 Cs 16' 9 5 15 137 15 5 15 0 Cs 15 Cr 57 117 6 18 51 10/20/78 60 15 9 Co 21 23 5 65 15 39 Zr 114 82 5 Ru 46 46 5 15 0

' ' Cs 25 '

25 5 15 0 Cs 134 125 6 18 7 Water, Strontium 89 f 90 Sr 15 13 5/5/78 18 16 5 O

Sr 24 27 1.5 4.5 11 9/1/78 Sr 0 19 5 15 100 Sr 33 16 1.5 4.5 53

98 Table II.G.2. Crosscheck analyses on milk samples collected at Location F-44.

II I pCi/1 Cs pCi/1 Sr pCi/1 Collection Date CSU LFE CSU LFE CSU LFE 1978 July 1 <0.199 <0.5 12.1 8 1 d 3.6 0.2 (1.15)*

July 29 <0.101 <0.5 <0.1 8 1 4.43 3.1 0.3 (1.84)

September 2 <0.110 <0.5 1.83 6 1 2.02 1.4 0.2 (0.874) (1. 57)

October 7 <0.5 9.73 4.31 4 1 ! 5.91 1.1 0.2 I

(1.72) (1.02) I(1.75)

November 4 8.70 <0.5 <0.1 3 1 g 1.3 0.2 (1.08)

December <0.116 <0.5 <0.1 ** **

g Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (1.96 S.D.).

• • LFE did not analy::e December sample for Cs-137 and Sr-90.

d Lost in analysis.

99 Table II.G.3 Correlation of EPA Values and CSU values for all cross check sample types.

Sample Type Radionuclide r n Air Filters Sr-90 .6011 9 Cs-137 .9450 11 Gross a .9376 11 Gross B .6801 10 Milk Sr-90 .7908 9 Sr-89 .8870 9 I-131 .9649 9 Cs-137 .9286 9 K-4 0 .7155 8 Water Tritium .9375 12 Gross a .9857 18 Gross B .9813 18 Sr-90 .4418 4 Sr-89 .1534 4 Cr-51 .7430 8 Co-60 .8532 8 2n-65 .0095 8 Ru-106 .9:T9 8 Cs-134 .3696 7 Cs-137 .9984 8

100 II .II. Summary and Conclusions ,

Tabic I1.11.1 presents a summary and analysis of data collected during 1978. The tabular data may be used for comparison to other operating periods, to preoperational data and to the effluent data from other types of power reactors. For each sample type the numbte of sampics analyzed in the reporting period and the maximum and minimum values for each sample type are given. From log-normal analysis of each data set for the entire year the geometric mean and standard devia' ion is presented. The arithmetic mean is calculated back for the entire year and for the last half year reporting period. It should be noted that the tabular data presented in the body of this report contain only positive calculated values. Any values less than zero or less than the minimum detectable concentration (MDC) are listed as less than the actual MDC for that sample ana;ysis. Ilowever, the actual sample result was used in tr.e calculation for the mean values for the last six months. Therefore all values, negative as well as positive, were included. This procedure is now generally accepted and gives a closer approximation to the true mean value. Because of this procedure, however, the values listed in Table II.H.1 cannot be calculated directly from the tabular values in the report.

The log-normal probability treatment was to plot all data for each sample type over the last full year on log-probit coordinates. The samples are ranked by increasing activity concentration and the cumulative percentage of rankings a re plotted on the probit abeissa versus t he act ivity concen-trat ion on the log ordinate. The geometric mean value , is determined directly from the 50th percentile point. The geometric standard deviation is simply the slope of the line, which can be calculated from the ratio between the 84.1 percentile and the 50 percentile. In a normal distribution

101 the arithmetic standard deviation is an additive parameter to the arithmetic mean (; + o ), whereas in the log-normal distribution the geomet cic standard deviation a . is a multipleative parameter to the geometric mean (x g a ag ),

i.e.,

the area betweengE divided by o8, and g5 multiplied by a g should contain 68% of the frequency values. The log-normal statistical treatment is difficult when the number ot sample, in the group is small. For this reason only the last full year of data points is treated by this method.

With the log-normal analysis, no bias results from using less than MDC values.

From the values presented in Table II.H.1 and the tabular data of the report the following observations and conclusions may be drawn:

1. Air sample concentrations wert in general less during the last half of 1978 than during the first half. This is attributable to the Chinese atmospheric nuclear weapon test April 14, 1978.

2. The conclusion that the weapon's f allout deposition was greater during the first half is supported by observation of the precipitation values also. The significant dif ference between deposition values for Ru-106(103) and Zr-Nb-95 for the first half and second half was due to high precipitation deposition following the April 14 test. However, no significant difference was observed in Cs-137 deposition values and subsequent food chaia values.

3. High tritium concentrations in effluent water samples on site were again observed after reactor releases. It is important to note tha t the effluent releases did not produce significant downstream concentrations

102 of tritium and therefore dose calculations are not warranted.

4. It was again observed that the surface water effluent releases of tritium can affect tritium concentrations in surface air water vapor.

This is concluded from the high values in water vapor at both F-1 and F-2 that seem to correlate with effluent releases to Goosequill pond (See II.2 and Figure II.B.1).

5. The only evidence of the December 14, 1978 Chinese weapons test was seen in gross beta activity in air the following week. It is anticipated that higher values for most sample types will be observed in January of 1979.

6. The log-normal treatment of all the data revealed that for most of the data such analysis is appropriate. Ilowever, sigmoid dist ributions were quite often observed. Sigmoid distributions can be resolved into bimodal or even trimodal log-norma 1 distributions. This i s gene rr.1 ly interpreted to mean that there is more than one significant activity s ou rce . It was again noted that for all of the data analyzed over the past year by the log-normal treatment, those sample types that are reservoirs or sinks for activity, e.g. , soil, sediment and TLD, tended to be described by a single distribution. Those sample types which are less stable and fluctuate, e.g., air and precipitation tended to be bimodal or trimodally distributed.

7. As in every previous report, it was again apparent that the variability observed around t he mean values was great . This variability is not due to counting statistics or methodological error, but t rue envi ronmen ta l va ri at ion . It must be recognized and accounted for in analysis of any set of environmental data before meaningful conclusions can be drawn.

103 It is concluded, however, that the sampling network around the FSV reactor contains a sufficient number of sites and sample types and that the sampling frequency is appropriate to detect radioactivity due to reactor effluents in the presence of natural and fallout radio-activity background.

8. The power production of the reactor was higher during the last half of 1978 than in the first half and yet the radioactivity in nearly all sample types was less during the second half than the first half.

This further supports the environmental impact statement conclusion that under normal operation, even at full power, any radioactivity released from this reactor type will produce negligible radiation doses to humans in the vicinity.

Table II.H.1. Mean Values for all Sample Types.

Number of Minimum Maximua Sampics Value Observed Value Observed i o E 8 Analyzed 6 Months 6 Months i i Sample Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months TLD Facility 78 .34 .94 .43 (1.21) .43 .41 External Adjacent 72 .30 4.85 .42 (1.41) .42 .40 (mR/ day) Reference 71 .28 .49 .41 (1.15) .41 .40 Composite 221 .28 4.55 .42 (1.27) .44 .40 t

Air Facility 94 ,

0.3 63.4 4,40 (2.73) 7.27 6.1 Gross a Adjacent 55 1.0 81.6 5.10 (2.68) 8.29 15.9 (fCi/m3) Composite 149 0.3 81.6 4.66 (2.69) 7.59 8.7 Air Facility 103 <1 298 38.5 (2.91) 68.1 27.1 Gross S Adjacent 66 <1 434 43.1 (3.31) 88.0 48.9 ,,

(fCi/m3) Composite 169 <1 434 40.8 (3.08) 76.9 45.2 g Air Facility 104 < 201 6820 441 (2.30) 578 786 Tritium Adjacent 75 <201 1441 366 (1.95)- 394 436 (pCi/1) Composite 179 <201 6820 412 (2.16) 539 500 Air Composite 25 <1.26 1110 9.82 (5.08) <1.26 3.19 1311 (fCi/m3 )

Air Composite 27 <2.05 40.9 10.6 (3.16) 10.1 3.05 106Ru (fCi/m3)

Table I1.11.1. Mean Values for all Sample Types.(Cont'd.)

Number of Minimua Maximum Samples Value Observed Value Observed i o E E Analyzed 6 Months 6 Months i i Sample Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months Air Composite 27 < 1. 01 3.70 2.31 (2.32) 3.72 1.77 137Cs (fCi/m3 )

Air Composite 27 < 0. 307 2.18 1.15 (2.56) 2.90 0.646 95Zr '

3 (fCi/m )

Water Effluent 12 18.3 36.9 17.0 (2.18) 23.1 23.9 Gross S Downstream 18 2.03 31.0 11.8 (2.63) 18.9 16.9 (pCi/1) Upstream 11 7.38 61.6 16.3 (2.28) 23.0 21.7 Potable 12 1.40 26.2 3.66 (2.37) 5.31 7.00 E Composite 53 1.40 61.6 10.6 (2.84) 18.3 17.3 Water Effluent 12 571 2,150,000 4230 (6.77) 74,000 87,800 Tritium Downstream 17 285 6,540 710 (2.13) 975 1,120 (pci/') Upstream 11 380 16,300 625 (2.09) 764 1,047 Potable 12 741 1,720 470 (5.23) 832 1,130 Composite 52 285 2,150,000 1301 (5.10) 44,400 33,000 Water Effluent 11 <0.144 40.5 0.854 (2.96) <0.571 1.97 90Sr Downstream 17 <0.968 34.3 0.601 (3.43) <0.593 <0.968 (pCi/1) Upstream 11 <0.896 38.7 0.802 (4.08) 3.32 8.23 Potable 12 <0.917 38.0 0.822 (2.41) <0.627 <0.984 Composite 51 <0.144 40.5 0.747 (2.46) <0.571 <0.968

Table II.11.1. Mean Values for all Sample Types. (Cont'd.)

Number of Minimum Maximum Sampics value Observed Value Observed xg o , _

Analyzed 6 Months 6 Months 8 x x Sample Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months Water Effluent 11 <1.02 12.5 1.38 (2.13) <1.02 <1.02 89Sr Downstream 17 <1.10 4.76 1.35 (2.30) <0.697 <1.10 (pCi/1) Upstream 11 <0.812 <0.812 1.01 (4.35) <0.794 <0.812 Potable 12 <0.883 <0.883 0.831 (2.98) <0.689 <0.863 Composite 51 <0.812 12.5 1.14 (2.86) <0.689 <0.812 Water Effluent 29 <4.53 5.78 1.43 (2.1'9 ) <4.53 <4.53 106Ru Downstream 18 <4.53 <4.98 4.07 (2.37) 2.02 <4.53 (pCi/1) Upstream 11 <4.53 <6.39 5.10 (2.15) 4.17 <4.53 Potable 12 <4.53 <5.54 2.16 (3.45) 1.48 0.992 Composite 70 <4.53 <4.98 3.27 (2.87) 0.872 <4.53 _

Water Effluent 29 <0.803 3.25 1.09 (2.32) 1.23 0.951 137Cs Downstream 18 <0.803 4.99 1.15 (2.30) 1.42 1.13 (pCi/1) Upstream 11 <0.803 2.77 0.945 (2.48)- 1.09 1.12 Potable 12 <0.803 2.20 1.24 (3.03) 1.13 1.36 Composite 70 <0.803 4.99 1.03 (2.21) 1.24 1.09 Water ,

Effluent 29 <0.290 1.64 0.461 (2.91) 0.582 0.478 95Zr Downstream 18 <0.290 4.99 0.543 (2.78) 0.793 1.05 (pCi/1) Upstream 11 <0.290 2.01 0.702 (2.13) 0.788 0.673 Potable 12 <0.290 1.57 0.571 (2.05) 0.664 0.598 Composite 70 <0.290 1.57 0.555 (2.41) 0.681 0.605 12 28,200 62,500 39,900 (1.35) 41,700 37,200 Sediment Effluent Downstream 18 13,800 83,200 34,900 (1.57) 38,600 37,200 Gross B (pCi/kg) Upstream 11 28,200 67,100 39,800 (1.38) 41,800 36,400 Composite 41 13,800 83,200 38,700 (1.36) 40,600 36,900

Table II.H.1. Mean Values for all Sample Types. (Cont'd.)

Number of Minimum Maximum Sampics Value Observed Value Observed 2 0 Analyzed 6 Months 6 Months 8 8 i i Sample Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months Sediment liffluent g g g g g 8 90Sr Downstream 8 8 8 8 8 g (pci/kg) Upstream g g g g g g Composite g g 8 8 g g Sediment Effluent g g 8 -g g g 89Sr Downstream E g g g 8 g (pCi/kg) Upstream g g g g g g Composite E 8 8 g g g Sediment Effluent 12 <3,810 31,300 3,750 (1.89) <3,810 <3,810 ,_.

10GRu Downstream 18 <3,880 4,470 3,320 (2.85) 1,260 891 $

(pCi/kg) Upstream 12 <3,810 <3,990 3,140 (2.57) <3,810 <3,810 Composite 42 <3,810 31,300 3,400 (2.47) <3,810 <3,810 Sediment Effluent 12 <663 810 378 (2.42) 64.6 <663 137Cs Downstream 18 <655 1,080 411 (2.57) 123 13.3 (pCi/kg) Upstream 12 <655 < 799 533 (1.79) 287 124 Composite 42 <663 1,080 424 (2.47) 132 <648 Sediment Effluent 12 <117 <457 191 (1.75) <117 4117 95Zr Downstream 18 <239 633 196 (2.08) <231 60.5 (pCi/kg) Upstream 12 <235 434 214 (2.42) 155 105 Composite 42 < 11'7 633 201 (2.03) <117 <117 Precipitation F-1 6 49.3 935 147 (3.81) 355 75.1 Gross S F-4 6 <25.1 834 249 (6.72) 947 300 (pCi/m2 ) Composite 12 <25.1 935 210 (5.24) 651 188

Table II.H.1. Mean Values for all Sample Types.(Cont'd.)

Number of Minimum Maximum Samples Value observed Value observed i o 8 8 Analyzed 6 Months 6 Months i i Sample Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months Precipitation F-1 6 <271 921 465 (2.71) 510 575 Tritium F-4 6 <271 632 366 (1.53) 345 374 (pCi/m2) Composite 12 <271 921 412 (2.14) 525 477 Precipitation F-1 6 <12.4 191 136! (4. 38) 447 36.1 106Ru F-4 6 <11.6 152 122 (8.37) 612 43.6

'(pCi/m2) Composite 12 <11.6 191 123 (6. 4'6) 530 39.9 Precipitation F-1 6 <2.75 125 8.80(3.54) 28.5 36.7 137Cs F-4 6 <10.1 50.4 23.9 (2.36) 23.3 23.6 (pC1/m2) Composite 12 <2.75 125 21.2 (2.89) 25.9 30.2 ,

Precipitation F-1 6 1.76 35.8 16.9 (4.42) 16.1 9.62 95Zr F-4 6 2.20 23.9 19.4 (3.54) 40.1 9.77 (pCi/m2) Composite 12 1.76 35.8 18.2 (3.83) 28.1 9.70 Precipitation F-1 6 9.22 651 14.0 (5.28) 70.1 128 90Sr F-4 6 3.71 442 11.3 (4.81) 50.6 89.8 (pCi/m2). Composite 12 3.71 651 12.6 (4.89) 60.3 109 Precipitation F- 1 '6 <1.52 297 24.9 (6.08) 10.4 <1.52 89Sr F-4 6 <1.45 29.8 21.7 (5.59) 67.1 <1.45 (pCi/m2 ) Composite 12 <1.45 297 23.2 (5.62) 38.7 <1.45 Milk Facility 17 <270 699 295 (1.92) 228 280 Tritium Adjacent 17 <270 633 258 (2.44) 251 255 (pCi/1) Reference 17 <270 984 223 (2.51) 279 316 Compesite 51 <270 984 259 (2.28) 253 284

Table 11.11.1. Mean Values for all Sample Types. (Cont'd.)

Number of Minimum Maximum Samples Value.0bserved Value Observed 2 9 Analyzed 6 Months 6 Months E 8 i i Sampic Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months Milk Facility 15 <1.15 7.78 2.38 (2.52) 2.95 3.31 90Sr Adjacent 17 <1.43 20.4 3.56 (2.33) 4.68 6.39 (pCi/1) Reference 16 <2.97 5.77 3.01 (1.84) 3.58 4.00 Composite 48 <1.15 20.4 3.00 (2 22) 3.75 4.63 Milk Facility 15 <1.14 28.7 2.65 (2.88) 1.24 2.85 89Sr Adjacent 17 <1.17 70.0 2.88 (2.44) <1.17 <1.17 (pCi/1) Reference 16 <1.28 57.3 3.28 (2.64) 2.24 4.87 Composite 48 <1.14 70.0 2.93 (2.63)

<1.17 <1.17 Milk Facility 17 <0.101 9.73 1.41 (7.23) 2.94 < 0.101 131I Adjacent 17 < 0.105 19.5 2.25 (5.60) 3.96 0.919 5 (pCi/1) Reference 17 < 0.116 41.3 2.63 (5.60) 5.24 6.12 Composite 51 < 0.101 41.3 2.12 (6.03) 2.58 < 0.101 Milk Facility 17 < 0.0954 14.4 3.20 (4.99) 6.53 4.86 137Cs Adjacent 17 < 0.105 13.0 4.50 (2.82) 5.93 5.36 (pCi/1) Reference 17 < 0.17 5 22.2 4.71 (2.66) 6.20 7.09 Composite 51 < 0.0954 22.2 4.08 (3.45) 6.22 5.77 17 1.34 1.55 1.51 (1.06) 1.51 1.47 Milk lacility 17 < 1. 30 1.63 1.47 (1.18) 1.49 1.47 Nat. K Adjacent 1.48 17 1.38 1.75 1.48 (1.05) 1.48 (g/1) Reference 1.75 1.49 1.49 1.48 Composite 51 < 1. 30' (1.11) 2 923 977 570 (1.78) 644 950 Forage Facility 559 492 652 Tritium Adjacent 5 < 280 1377 (1.64) 4 < 280 982 402 (2.23) 377 501 (pCi/1) Reference 510 473 651 Composite 11 < 280 1377 (1.95)

Table II.l!.1. Mean Values for all Sample Types. (Cont'd.)

Number of Minimum Maximum Samples Value Observed Value Observed i o g 8 Analyzed 6 Months 6 Months i i Sample Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months Soil Facility NA NA NA 42,800 (1.29) 43,850 NA Gross B Adjacent NA NA NA 33,500 (1.40) 35,300 NA (pCi/kg) Re ference NA NA NA 31,400 (1.26) 32,200 NA Composite NA NA NA 33,500 (1.40) 37,900 NA Soil Facility NA NA NA 5.51 (1.29) 5.68 NA Gross 8 Adjacent NA NA NA 4.32 (1.40) 4.55 NA (pCi/m2) Reference NA NA NA 4.05 (1.26) 4.15 NA Composite NA NA NA 4.3.5 (1.34) 4.54 NA Soil Facility NA NA NA 400 (1.65) 389 NA -

106Ru Adjacent NA NA NA 306 (1.87) 359 NA C 2

(nCi/m ) Reference NA NA NA 403 (1.60) 448 NA Composite NA NA NA 340 (1.80) 527 NA Soil Facility NA NA NA 61.8 (2.64) 89.6 NA 137Cs Adjacent NA NA NA 63.9 (1.93) 109 NA (nCi/m2) Re ference NA NA NA 49.8 (2.47) 63.1 NA Composite NA NA NA 57.2 (2.24) 97.0 NA Soil Facility NA NA NA 19.1 (2.92) 27.8 NA 95 Zr Adjacent NA NA NA 22.6 (2.91) 31.0 NA 2

(nCi/m ) Re ference NA NA NA 23.5 (1.73) 67.4 NA Compositc< NA NA NA 23.3 (2.80) 60.5 NA Soil Facility NA NA NA 416 (1.57) 466 NA Tritium Adjacent NA NA NA 458 (1.44) 598 NA (pCi/1) Reference NA NA NA 497 (1.66) 531 NA Composite NA NA NA 479 (1.49) 503 NA

Table II.H.1, Mean Values for all Sample Types.(Cont'd.)

Number of Minimum Maximum Samples Value Observed Value Observed i o Analyzed 6 Months 6 Months 8 i i Sample Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months Forage Facility 6 <20.9 775 43.1 (3.07) <19.4 <20.9 89Sr Adjacent 17 <0.213 823 34.8 (5.62) <0.05 <0.213 (pCi/kg) Reference 18 <13.8 199 43.4 (2.41) <9.0 <13.8 Composite 41 <0.213 823 38.3 (3.91) <0.05 <0.213 Forage Facility 6 <13.1 603 97.5 (5.06) 189 155 90Sr Adjacent 17 <12.3 901 149 ( 3. 3'6) 242 277 (pCi/kg) Reference 18 <30.0 869' 220 (2.12) 348 304 Composite 41 <12.3 901 160 (3.48) 255 271 Forage Facility 6 <71.9 155 115 (1.69) 100' 16.1 106Ru Adjacent 17 <38.7 692 98.0 (2.87) 118 96.5 C (pCi/kg) Reference 18 <32.0 282 140 (3.09) 260 105 Composite 41 <32.0 692 112 (2.84) 173 85.8 Forage Facility 6 73.3 207 125 (1.56) 170 155 137Cs Adjacent 17 11.4 344 97.8 (2.13) 123 134 (pCi/kg) Reference 18 14.2 361 120 (1. 97) 145 142 Composite 41 11.4 361 111 (1.98) 164 141 Forage Fu." 6 43.6 89.7 49.4 (1.73) 69.3 6'8.3 95Zr Adjacent 17 10.8 235 33.9 (3.69) 56.6 75.3 (pCi/kg) IMference 18 < 4.54 140 46.7 (2.85) 66.5 60.3 Composite 41 < 4.54 235 41.1 (3.09) 60.7 67.7 Forage Facility 6 2,470 40,500 19,500 (2.40) 24,100 22,200 Gross S Adjacent 17 1,570 38,400 19,100 (2.13) 22,800 20,300 (pCi/kg) Reference 18 2,710 35,300 17,700 (1.95) 20,000 16,800 Composite 41 1,570 38,400 18,700 (2.05) 22,500 19,000 g Analysis in progress.

Table II.!!.1. Mean Values for all Sample Types.(Cont'd.)

Number of Minimum Maximum Samples Value Observed Value Observed i o Analyzed 8 8 p

. 6 Months 6 Months , 3 Sample Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months Soil Facility N.A. N.A. N.A. 35.0. (1.93) 41.1 N.A.

89Sr Adjacent N.A. N.A. N.A. 18.8 (7.78) 34.9 N.A.

(pCi/kg) Re ference N.A. N.A. N.A. 34.9 (2.69) 89.6 N.A.

Composite N.A. N.A. N.A. 26.9 (4.15) 58.1 N.A.

Soil Facility N.A. N.A. N.A. 240 (1.70) 239 N.A.

N.A.

~

90Sr Adjacent N.A. N.A. 154 (2.43) 210 N .' A .

(pCi/kg) Reference N.A. N.A. N.A. 221 (1.71) 251 N.A.

Composite N.A. N.A. N.A. 193 (1.97)- 231 N.A.

Aquatic Biota Upstream 4 1,630 19,800 6,840 (3.63) 10,600 10,900 Fish Downstream 4 3,580 43,800 14,400 (3.20) 27,100 29,600 C Gross 8 Effluent 4 6,650 88,900 18,400 (3.98) 21,900 30,000 (pCi/kg) Composite 12 3,580 88,900 12,490 (2.95) 16,900 20,400 Aquatic Biota Upstream 4 5,490 159,000 9,'480 (7.36) 34,200 42,100 Benthic Downstream 4 7,400 111,000 19,800 (3.42) 43,684 37,000 Gross S 4 5,790 47,200 Effluent 16,500 (2.36) 41,800 41,800 (pCi/kg). Composite 12 5,490 159,000 14,600 (3.83) 31,100 67,700 Aquatic Biota Upstream 6 1,970 31,800 6,030 (2.70) 29,400 37,300 6 3,070 16,300 7,070 18,600 Vascular Plants Downstream (3.07) 7,723 Gross S Effluent 5 1,090 18,200 6,600 (1.86) 16,500 13,000 (pCi/kg) Composite 18 1,09D 16,300 4,700 (3.54) 47,500 27,460 Aquatic Biota Upstream 5 22,800 95,100 38,500 (1.75) 46,300 44,320 Seston Downstream 5 23,200 50,700 2,900 (1.19) 33,600 33,600 Gross 6 Effluent 6 15,400 50,000 30,100 (1.71) 37,400 33,600 (pCi/kg) Composite 16 15,400 50,000 33,300 (1.60) 39,300 37,000 N.A. Not applicable.

Table II.!!.1. Mean Values for all Samplo '!ypes. (Cont'd.)

Number of Minimum Maximtun Samples Value Observed Value Observed i o Analyzed 8 g p 6 Months 6 Months 3 Sample Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 .vonths Aquatic Biota Upstream 4 <35.6 <35.6 52.2 (2.56) <26.0 <35.6 Fish Downstream 4 <76.7 164 <51.1 89 Sr 92.9 (1.47) ~76.7 Effluent 4 <14.2 <14.2 54.1 (2.41) <14.2 <14.2 (pCi/kg) Composite 12 <14.2 164 71.8 (1. 87) <14.2 <14.2 Aquatic Biota Upstream 2 <68.1 413 158 (3.58) 30.0 142 Benthic Dotms t ream 2 <60.7 305 129 (1.93) 76.4 166 89Sr Effluent 4 <113 <113 135 (3.36) <43.4 <43.4 (pCi/kg) Coaposite 10 <60.7 413 158 (2.42) <43.4 <43.4 Aquatic Biota Upstream 5 <26.8 391 109 (3.64) 127 <26.8 Vascular Plants Downstream 6 <29.0 51.4 58.1 (2.80) <29.0 <29.0  %

89 Sr g "

Effluent g g g g g g (pCi/kg) Composite g g g g g g g Aquatic Biota Upstream 5 <204 1720 242 (2.49) 493 646 Seston Downstream 5 <133 2070 714 (3.27) 542 542 89Sr Effluent 4 <60.1 2590 206 (4.29) 200 291 (pCi/kg) Coraposi te 14 <60.1 2590 398 (3. 49) 417 507 Aquatic Biota Upstream 4 81.4 355 147 (2.83) 180 227 Fish Downstream 4 111 237 157 (1.30) 162 344 9USr liffluent 4 100 222 122 (1.62) 152 142 (pCi/kg) Composite 12 100 355 141 (1.91) 157 180 Aquatic Biota Upstream 2 170 391 276' (1.54) 292 281 Henthic Downstream 4 62.2 252 192 (2.57) 242 162 90Sr Effluent 4 253 590 359 (1.42) 181 181 (pCi/kg) Composite 10 62.2 590 258 (1.89) 234 193 Aquatic Biota Upstream 5 <87.2 228 , 117 (1.74) 134 131 6 92.5 246 131 Vascular plants Downst ream (1.45) 153 156 90Sr liffluent 8 g g g g g g g g g (pCi/kg) Composite 8 g g g g Analysis in progress.

Table 1I .11.1. Mean Values for all Sample Types. (Cont'd.)

Number of Minimum Maximura Samples Value observed Value Observed j o ,, _

Analyzed 6 Months 8 x x 6 Months ,

Sample Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months Aquatic Biota Upstream 5 <104 493 77.7 (3.65) 69.7 78.7 Seston Downstream 5 <121 525 142 (2.24) 192 192 90Sr Effluent 4 <197 296 297 (1.34) '185 157 (pCi/kg) Composite 14 <104 525 153 (2.44) 123 118 Aquatic Biota Upstream 4 8.1. 8. <257 172 (1.72) 248 46.5 Fish Downstream 4 <80.6 701 207 (3.86) _242 206 106 Ru Effluent 4 95.3 281 205 (1.67) < 256 26.6 (pCi/kg) Composite 12 <80.6 701 184 (2.08) 129 93.0 Aquatic Biota Upstream 4 <79.4 <267 126 (1.85) 562 79.7 Benthic Downstream 4 258 471 380 (1.31) 324 390  %

106 Ru Effluent- 3 <253 <257 <253 <253 <253 (pCi/kg) Composite 11 <79.4 471 276 (3.81) 355 189 Aquatic Biota Upstream 6 <121 444 590 (4.72) 2910 199 Vascular Plant Downstream 6 <223 <4 04 349 (6. 32) 1220 <223 106 Ru Effluent 6 <3S7 981 548 (3.58) 1740 470 (pCi/kg). Composite 18 <121 981 ,501 (4.66) 1960 261 Aquatic Biota Upstream 5 <7740 <7740 <7740 <7740 <7740 Seston Downstream 5 <7630 <7630 <7630 <7630 <7630 106 Ru Effluent 6 <7630 12,500 8300 (1.43) <7630 <7630 (pCi/kg) Composite 16 <7630 12,500 <7630 <7630 < 76 I.0 Aquatic Biota Upstream 4 <25.1 102 5'6. 8 (4. 03) 64.1 66.2 4 <78.6 201 <78.6 <78.6 <78.6 Fish Downstream 137Cs Effluent 4 <78.4 147 <78.4 <78.4 82.3 12 <25.1 201 41.9 (4.36) 58.5 65.2 (pci/kg) Composite 4 146 200 220 (1.77) 256 173 Aquatic Biota Upstream .

4 149 294 191 (1.39) 200 218 Benthic Do..nstream 137Cs 4 110 132 121 (1.10) 122 122 Effluent 12 110 294 181 (1.57) 231 175 (pCi/kg) Composite g Analysis in progress.

Table I1.11.1. Mean Values for all Sample Types.(Cont'd.)

Number of Minimum Maximun Samples Value Observed Value Observed i o Analyzed 6 Months 8 8 i 6 Months i Sample Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months Aquatic Biota Upstream 6^ <90.8 224 122 (3.17) 115 144 Vascular Plant Downstream 6 <112 378 190 (2.13) 214 193 137 Cs Eff;uent 6 <159 367 176 (1.65) 170 < 159 18 <90.8 378 180 (1.90) 160 166 (pCi/kg) Composite -

Aquatic Biota Upstream 5* <1310 <1310 <1310 <1310 <1310 gton Downstream 5 <1320 <1320 <1320 <1320 <1320 Cs Effluent 6 <1320 2270 4320 <1320 <1320 (pCi/kg) Composite 16 <1320 2270 <1320 <1320 <1320 Aquatic Biota Upstream 4 <33.7 48.4 <33.7 <33.7 <33.7 -

Fish Downstream 4 <33.6 91.9 38.8 (1.66) 36.6 37.4 G 95Zr Effluent 4 <34.1 <34.1 <34.1 <34.1 <34.1 (pCi/kg) Composite 12 <33.6 91.9 27.3 (2.10) 29.4 25.3 Aquatic Biota Upstream 4 74.7 259 124 (1.83) 144 125 Benthic Downstream 4 93.6 169 82.5 (2.36) 102 123 952r Effluent 3 47.1 94.4 73.6 (1.47) 77.0 77.0 (pCi/kg) Composite 11 47.1 259 94.1 (1.95)

Aquatic Biota Upstream 6 21.2 158 132 (3.29) 271 107 Vascular Plants Downstream 6 <47.9 245 14 7 (3.57) 241 99.8 95Zr Effluent 6 31.2 156 125 (3.50) 231 99.6 (pCi/kg) Composite 18 21.2 245 134 (3.34) 248 102 Aquatic Biota Upstream 5 <472 820 515 (1.26) <473 <473 Seston Downstream 5 <473 610 <473 <473 <473 95Zr Effluent 6 <467 692 481 (1.56) <467 <467 (pCi/kg) Composite 16 <467 820 <467 <467 <467 Beef F-44 4 21.3 36.7 ' 25.6 (1.27) 26.3 29.5 137Cs pCi/g L.t K

116 Ill. liNVIRONMENTAI. RADI ATION SURVEII I.ANCE PROGRAM SCllEDULli Ill.A. linvironmental Radiation Surveillance Schedule Table Ill. A.1 outlines the collection and analysis schedule for the radiation surveillance program. This is identical to Table 5.9-1 in the Technical Specifications.

The surveillance program provides for collection and analysis of environmental samples within an area extending to a twenty-mile radius from the reactor site. A concentrated area of sampling within a one-mile radius is designated the " Facility" zone; the area irom one to ten miles, the " Adjacent" zone; while the " Reference" :one extends from ten to twenty miles. The data obtained from the Facility zone are statistically compared to those from the Adjacent and Reference zones to test for any significant differences in values. A similar rationale is used for surface waters and sediments. These are partitioned into " Effluent" (Farm Pond and Slough), " Downstream" and " Upstream" locations for statistical analysis.

The sampling locatiens are shown in Figures III.B.1 and III.B.2.

Table II.B.1, III.B.2, and III.B.3 give some detail of the sampling sites in the Facility, Adjacent and Reference zones respectively.

It should be noted that the air sampler at the A-35 site was unoperative for a long period at the end of 1978. The owner apparently turned the power off after the sample collection personnel would install the new air filter. A new site could not be procured until the end of the year. The air sampler was operative after February ID, 1979.

• /. 2 L'.

. T . A.'._ ENV.RON.V.ENTA'. R AD ATION SURVE. _ANCE PRCGRAM SCHE 1 E

_ vos. . .-.. . .

. . ,cs C, i SA.VPLING F REQUENC:ES AND AN ALYSES lw Act.oq Levc's.

A ,dio & Sa~me Td:s based upon :::,a: cmiss.ons as percer t:ps of re:::sc rates catF.c .zad by 10 CFR 20 (NO of loca'r; A:t.cn Leve' . Less :han 3% j Actro : Lev:i 2. 3% :: 10% l Act.on Levet 3 Graater than 10~

EXT 2 RN AL 2XPOS ,. ?.E , l T L ; Onv. _

Aver:p .mR - e:cterr.?2d by GUARTE PLY c.imulative es : n r

• A. crap mR/ day deterrn.ned by (3J .:at.ct s , j cc" s :naivus M roth cn of 1/3 of asi TLDs MCV ist Y. UC' TriL Y an3: fu nf 1Tlfh A T ?.iOSPr4 E .5:2 Vembrar.c ? r s ,. - Cross bet., acry fc . WE E LY; Same as for evet i. p. s s css Cross alpha and beta, every ? lter; partcucts.cna*;;. l gamma spectrum of .:cr anc a'pha on one weekly set of gamma spectrum of fi:ter O*d car < ega 'ar.,d -: a csrtricge c;mposites, VONTriLY. f.Iters. MONTH LY. cartridge composites, att V4 2 LY.

(7 003hcrsi i Tr.ti m oxn Spec.f.c activity of tritium in atmospheric water vapor by pass.ve absorpooq and huuid scmtil :at.on count:q.

(7 IO0ationS) QUARTERLY g MONTHLY g VsE E K LY I

W ATC R l Potab'c w e j Gross beta, trit.orn and gamma spectrum analyses; F;a.t i arm and nearest c:.' ..te supply (2 :C C a'iC N. :49 & 033) (shate w wel!s at town of Gi:c ;st. ; m.tr s no theast).

auART.Ine unNinty MONTHLY. plus Sr 89 & GO analyses Precip. tat r Nr. ;s.:cction or ana:yses of Gross beta. MONTrs LY Gross beta, tritium and Sr 89 & 90 (2 locations: F1 & F4) prec#tahon at Leve; - VCNTHLY; gamma spectrum of

.aguvie GU ARTE R LY.

Sur: u'v. w r N s , Gross 00 J. trif aurt :nd9 mma .,

Same .'s f.. .evel I het Same as 'ar Level 2, p'. s (7 icca'onb :pectrum. CUARTE.0LY. P?ONT r1 Lv  ; s 39 & DJ Mym. s.M -, . s ,

[

I FCCO CH A:N5 S 'ca.; a crops Strum and gamma spectrum an:'yses of fcr s : cracs m the % a . c.utes to rnan.

(1* GCat.O r P CU ARTE AY. as ava.abte VONTHLY during gr v;. ' q secs:.n e i me as Leve: 2 pra Sr 69 6 90.

b.e., spring. summer ro f a' h c., approx. Aprit ta Gc:wcr'. I n'us concorrer.t sod samples au:yicd f:r ttic same nucm C N T %.Y daring er n.vinq g ;som Od catt:c No analysis of beef at levm 1. Gamma mectrum, tritium and ' ,e as fer Level 2. plus total (F 1, Sr 89 & 90 analyses on cm f at body count of 2 to 4 ammaa sample from beef raised in Fu from Facility Area. QU ARTE RLY.

Area. ANNUALLY. at ena c,: v;4 ~

i season (i.e.. ' ne f a").

l i i

M.- Trit am. gamm spectrum md E s0 & 90 ana:yscs e.i compouh i 5ame as for Level 2. but (13 :ocat.c 3; Fcc.;.ty Area on!y, QUARTE HLY. F.>cility. Ad,acent and He crenc. " , WLE KLY dureng pasture sea,on.

YGNTHLY Curing pmture ucn. otherwue. MON T H LY.

otherwise QUARTE A LY.

ACU ATIC 0;CTA (2 f.I' cat':. abo <c Greis betc a-d gamma spectru . analyses of composites of each of 4 cattec es: same as for Level 2.n'as a- Oc:ow U. ) : . spence" - ;an s"s. (2) benthic ordnisms. !3) vascular p!arn ...d 14: " '

Sr 89 & 90 ana yses.

Ca: arge : -y OU ARTE R J. as swa We. . PMNTHLY during summer; j c terw.se CU ART ;- LY. cs a. c.Mc .  ;

118 Figure III.B.1. On-site Sampling Locations.

fN .

l ' '

- . I T

's 1 N, e '%? fl T I __,/ 5

/

j sl

-~

/

.A x

/ l i

l[

-4 F-l q

F-1 g g

/ '%'

k \

/

i \

/

l s'

n r1

~~

'W l  ;

)

\

\

l l,p 0" 4' (~geriwr----i w

\* \

\ \

G

\ l

'u 8w p-- - --- 1 l

\  % '

1

/

\ i

~~.__ J I

t j I

[

8' l

l [

\(l! \ l@ l

/

/ l

~- .

On-site and close-in su,7.!ng 1 locations.

F = facility area, E = ef?luent stream, U = upstream, D = downstream.

119 Figure III.B.2. Off-site Sampling Locations.

l r_tr I '

EM 1 i C' .

l

\l

• #^

k-kI,t,!, es r ym, q ,

i ~

.o.3-.j y

""/:M;

_,n b ,h,( /f

a. a --

n

,',9,' @ # " *~I ,.c, ,

,- MM

-- ; 9  ; - - A- ,

,ef t-coo g 9 9 I leccs.u. f l I- I

,)deh

_r zs tr m.

,tcler #" ' l ,

idek w yp_1_ , _ _a _. _. t

- - - -o

~

• J4 g>; '

(gP u-43

' _ _ __ p _ _____7

.' juj _

,_3a -j  !  ! - - - -

c:i c- g ugao -j i i .ji - ,i uitTen- n as.

, g g _ _

, , [. _. __ p _ _ _ . c. __. _.

D ' ~

! __ L __ _ _ . ,

-.H_

= v

_o- l ,t, rre I 3j N,.'g ,ij ,

a -

a- -H j-li ar 'y '

~ ~ ~ ~

c

,g

~

touwent p8 c k

4 % f_ p ,g i, Q l-~~~~'l_-j[~

~

[UJ g %  !

q.f p -_l___L j-F--h d  !

- - - ~ ~ ~ ~

--h-i x[ o r _,_ -.

m 17 4., ,1

>3 p7.Y  %

4,l -,

l FT.LUPTON vs- I 2

( l

_M7/ 1 '

I '

q T r-i f PPi ( 7 l 0 5 miles IOmiles SCAL.E

Table III .B.1. Facility area and effluent sampling locations for environmental media.

Loc. Media Sampled at Location Location and Description (see Fig. II.B.1)

No. TLD AIR M ' S 'Hp0 AQB Distance and Direction from Reactor; Comments F 1  ; O.8 mi. N; potato cellar; TLD on pole at NE corner barn; precipitation l on hill E of barn F 2

• l 1.1 mi. NNE; cabin.

F 3 *

• i I 0.7 mi. SE; old dairy carn ; TLD on 1st pole N of drive.

F 4 *i 0.8 mi. S; first shed along drive; precipitation in corral; forage and soil S of shed.

F 7

• l 0.8 mi. NNE; pole by gate at corner of Goosequill Rd.

F 8 *  !

0.6 mi. NE: 2nd pole S of cattle-guard on hill.

F 9

• 0.8 mi. SSE; 2nd pole W of pumo house.

F 11

• l ,

0.9 mi. SSW; 0.3 mi. W of intersection of 195 and 34.

F 12 l O.8 mi. SW; 7th pole N of intersection.

F 13

• l l 0.6 mi. WSW; pole nearest intersection.

F 14

• 1.0 mi. NW; pole nearest corner. O F 44 * '* 1.1 mi. E; Leroy Odenbaugh dairy.

• O.3 mi. N; Ted Horst farm, pole SW of house.

F S1 '

F 46  ! 1.0 mi. SW; 2nd pole N of intersection, near Aristocrat Angus office.

F 47

• l 0.4 mi. E; pole near driveway to pump house.

F 49 1

• 0.1 mi. W; tap outside Visitors Center (well water)

E 38 *

• 1.3 mi. NNE; Goosequill pond.

E 41

• 0.2 mi. NW; Concrete slough above and below point of entry of

! plant water.

Codes: F = Facility area (within one mile).

E = Effluent surface streams.

TLD = Thermoluminescent Dosimeter for measuring external gamma exposure.

AIR = Air sampling location; ** = atmospheric precipitation collected.

M = Milk sampling locations.

HO2 = Water sampling locations; silt also sampled from surface sources.

AQB = Aquatic biota sampling locations.

S = Soil and Forage sampling locations.

Table III.B.2 Adjacent area sampling locations for environmental media.

Loc. Media Sampled at Location Location Description (see Figs. II.B.1 and II.B.2)

No. ,

TLD AIR M S' H2O AQB Distance and Direction from Reactor; Comments I l A5 l 4.5 mi. NNE; Lloyd Rumsey farm; 2 mi. N,1.5 mi. W of Peckham.

A6 i

• * *

• 5.5 mi. S; Clifton Wissler farm; 2 mi. W, 2.5 mi. S of Platteville; TLD on pole 30 ft. N of parlor.

A 27 l

• 5.0 mi. NW; 1 mi. S of Colo. 56,1 mi. E of I-25, pole on NE corner.

A 28 !

• 6.0 mi. NW; Virgil Podtburg dairy; Colo. 60, 2 mi. W of Johnstown; TLD i on last pole on NE corner.

l  !

A 29 l

• i 3.5 mi. NNW; 3 mi. S; 1.6 mi. E of Johnstown, TLD on pole by the stand of trees.

A 30 l

• 3.5 mi. NE; 1 mi. S of Colo. 256 on Colo. 60, pole on NE corner.

A 31 1

• I 6.0 mi. ENE; 1.5 mi. E of Peckham; TLD on pole in front of house.

A 32 i

• 4.0 mi. E; 3 mi. N of Platteville; 1.2 mi. E of US 85; NW pole.

A 33 l *

5.0 mi. SE; Niles Miller Dairy; 0.2 mi. S, 0.5 mi. E of Platteville.

A 34

• l  ; 6.5 mi. SW; 1 mi. E of I-25 at Colo. 254; pole on SW corner.

A 35 *

• i 3.0 mi. SSW; Old Gowanda store; TLD on pole E of house. -

A 36

• l*

• 8.0 mi. W; Bob Johnson dairy; 2 mi. W of I-25 on Colo. 56, then 1.5 U mi. S. TLD 0.5 mi. W.

A 48 *

• 6.0 mi. NNE; Bill Ewing Dairy; 1 mi. E of Peckham.

A 50 *

• 4.5 mi. SE; 0.8 mi. E of Platteville.

D 37

• 12.5 mi. ENE; Lower Lathan Res.; 2.5 mi. E of LaSalle.

D 39

• 5.0 mi. ENE; Gilcrest water from U.S. Post Office D 40 5.5 mi. ENE; South Platte River at Colo. 60.

D 45 l l 1.0 mi. N; St. Vrain Creek at Jct. Rd. 19b, 0.2 mi. from discharge.

Codes: A = Adjacent area (one to ten miles from reactor).

D = Downstream potable or surface waters.

All ather symbols same as for Table III.B.1.

Table III. B.3. Reference area and upstream sampling locations for environmental media _

Loc. Media Sampled at Location Location Description (see Figs. II. B.l. and II. B.2.)

No. TLDI AIR M S H90iAQB Distance and Direction from Reactor: Comments.

11.5 mi. NW; 4.2 mi. W of 1-25 on Colo. 60; TLD on pole W of farm R 15

• driveway.

R 16 * * * ~* 11.8 mi, NNW; Mountain View Farms; N side of Colo. 402 W of I-25.

R 17 * *

• 11.8 mi. NNE; Bob Schneider Dairy; 1 mi. S of US 34 on RD 25; on pole 0.5. mi. N of parlor on RD 25.

R IS

• 10.0 mi. NNE; on pole on SE corner of intersection of 65th Ave. and 37th Street (Greeley).

R 19

• 13.3 mi. NNE; US 34 at 47th Ave. (Greeley); pole on SW corner, opposite golf course.

R 20 * *

• 11.1 mi. ENE; Wally Kaufman dairy; 0.5 mi. E; 1.6 ri. S of LaSalle; TLD on pole W of parlor. C R 21 * ,

11.9 mi, E; 5 mi. E of US 85 on Colo. 256; then 1 ml. S; TLD cn pole on SW corner.

R 22 * *

• 11.1 mi. SE; Hagans Bros. Dairy; 4.2 mi. S of Platteville; 4.2 mi. E of US 85; TLD on 1st pole E of drive.

R 23 * *

• 11.5 mi. S; Alvin Dechant Dairy; 2.2 mi. W; 0.3 mi. S of Ft. Lupton; TLD on 1st pole W on drive.

12.2 mi. SSW; l-25 at Colo. 52; pole W. of the f rontage road; R 24

• NW corner.

R 25 * *

• 11.7 mi. USW; Angelo Vendegna Dairy; 4 ni. N of Colo. 52 on RD 1.

12.2 mi. WNW; On US 287, 2.5 mi. of Colo. 56, 2nd pole 9 on RD 2E.

R 26 *

• 1.5 mi. WSW; St. Vrain Creek at bridge, RD 34.

U 42 South Platte River, at dam and inlet ponds.

• 0.6 mi. E U 43 Codes: R = Ref erence area (greater than 10 miles from reactor).

U = Upstream from effluent discharge points.

All other symbols as in Table III B.1.