ML19332B194

Environ Radiation Surveillance Program,Summary Rept for Jan-June 1980.

ML19332B194
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Saint Vrain
Issue date:	08/29/1980
From:	Jerrica Johnson, Swart F COLORADO STATE UNIV., FORT COLLINS, CO, PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF COLORADO
To:
Shared Package
ML19332B189	List: ML19332B188 ML19332B194
References
62156, NUDOCS 8009260233
Download: ML19332B194 (132)

Text

_ ____- _____-__

)

O \

gADIATION

$~

) .  : .

's /

/[::

's [

FORT ST. VRAIN - \$('

h ' ~ '

N,'"

g;'

l NUCLEAR

, .ff.

10

/ GENERATING STATION .

laj '

l

- ;Y 3

PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY 3 OF COLORADO 3

,/ \

s l ',

b s'

PROGRAM

SUMMARY

REPORT FIRST AND SECOND QUARTERS 1980 J

PURCHASE ORDER 62156 D

COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY FORT COLLINS, COLORADO 80521 3

8009266 1 3 7

( )

i

) FORT ST. VRAIN NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION

! ENVIRONMENTAL RADIATION SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM i

Summary Report

) for the period January 1,1980 - June 30,1980 Prepared by:/s/ .

2.4 1980

- James E; Johnson Pr ofessor, Colorado State Univ. Da'te V

Reviewed by:/s / I (Y Ddte Health Phys 4cs Departy Fort St. Vrain

)

Reviewed by:/s/ h[N#1/ - 29 Auu M80 Date g1[a[P ectDepapnt Approved by:/s/ f- 4b, MMJ h; 26/ag/f60 Date

~

Operations Manager / Fort St. Vfain g/

)

u by / b. '

77 $, 8/47/EU Nuclear Project Department Date

)

6

D Acknowledgements D The following persons have worked hard and conscientiously on this project and are acknowledged here to receive credit for the many phases of its operation. For the past half year these have been:

D Diane Berry John Combs Charly Domingue S Betsy lleadrick Diane liiggins Marion Mcdonald 9 Alan Miller Ilildy Morgan Carolyn Ponce 9 Sandy Steadman Sara Webber April Whicker 9

D

)

P O

O i

D TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No.

D List of Tables tii List of Figures vi 1

I. INTRODUCTION II. SURVEILLANCE DATA FQR JANUARY THROUGH JUNE . 4 1980, AND INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS External Gamma Exposure Rates 4 A.

Air Sampling Data 8 3 B.

C. k'ater, Sediment, and Precipitation 25 Sampling Data Food Chain Data 66 D.

J 86 E. Aquatic Biota 93 F. Beef Cattle 94 G. Sample Cross Check Data H. Conclusion and Summary 97 I. Errata 112 III. ENVIRONMENTAL RADIATION SURVEILLANCE 117 3 PROGRAM AND SCHEDULE A. Collection and Analysis Schedule 118 B. Sampling Locations 119 D

P P

r 3

l ii O

T

) LIST OF TABLES Page No.

II.A.1 Garmna Exposure Rates Measured by the TLD Technique. 6 II.B.1 Concentration of Long-lived Gross Alpha 9 Activity in Airborne Particles .

a. First Quarter,1980 . 9

) b. Second Quarter,1980 . 10 II.B.2 Concentrations of Long-lived Gross Beta 11 Activity in Airborne Particles.

a. First Quarter,1980.

) 11

b. Second Quarter,1980 12 ,

II.B.3 Tritium Concentrations in Atmospheric Water Vapor. 15

) a. First Quarter,1980 16

b. Second Quarter,1980. 17 II.B.3a Tritium Concentrations in Air 18

)

l

a. First Quarter,1980; 18 '

i l b. Second Quarter,1980. 19 '

II.B.3b Tritium Released in Reactor Effluents, 20

) II.B.4 Indine-131 Concentrations in Air (Composite). 23 l II.B.5 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations 24 l in Air (Composite).

1 II.C.1 Gross Beta Activity in Water 28 l

II.C.la Gross Beta Activity in Effluent Water, Gocsequill 34 (E-38).

l II.C.2 Tritium Concentrations in Surface Waters. 36

)

r II.C.3 Strontium-90 Concentrations in Surface Waters. 37

?

II.C.4 Strontium-89 Concentrations in Surface Waters. 38

. II.C.4a Tritium, Strontium-89-90 in Effluent Water, Goosequill, 39 .

)- (E-38). l II'C.5

. Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in 41 l Water.

iii D

)

List of Tables (Cont.)

Page No.

Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in 47

) II.C.5a Effluent Water, Goosequill (E-38).

Gross Beta Activity Concentrations in Bottom 51 -

II.C.6 Sediment.

) Strontium-90 Activity Concentrations in Bottom 52 II.C.7 Sediment.

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

) Gama-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations 54 II.C.9

. in Bottom Sediment.

Gross Beta and Tritium Deposition from Precipitation. 62 II.C.10 63 II.C.11 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Deposition from

) Precipitation at Location F1.

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

Radiostrontium Deposition from Precipitation. 65

) II.C.13 68 II.D.1 Tritium Concentrations in Water Extracted from Milk.

Strontium-90 Activity in Milk. 69 II.D.2 Strontium-89 Activity in Milk. 70

) II.D.3 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in 71 II.D.4 Composite Milk Samples.

Tritium, Strontiun-89, and Strontium-10 Concentrations 74 11.D.5

) in Forage.

Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in 76 II.D.6 Forage.

Gross Beta Concentrations in Forage (pCi/kg) and 78 ,

) II.D.7 l Soil (pCi/kg) l II.D.8 Gross Beta Soil (pCi/m2 ). 81 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in 82

( II.D.9

) Soil.(nCi/m2 ),

Tritium, Strontium-89, and Strontium-90 Concentrations 84 11.D.10 in Soil.

iv

S List of Tables (Cont.)

Page No.

3 II.E.1 Gross Beta and Radiostrontium Concentrations in 87

/quatic Biota Samples.

II.E.2 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations 90 in Aquatic Biota Samples.

O II.F.1 Radionuclides in facility Area Beef Cattle. 93 II.G.1 Sample Cross Check Data Summary. 95 II.H.1 Data Summary. 100 3 II.I.1 Errata 113 III.A.1 Environmental Radiation Surveillan:e Program. 118 III.B.1 Facility Area and Effluent Sampling Locations for 119 Environmental Media.

g III.B.2 Adjacent Area and Downstream Sampling Locations for 120 Envirnmental Media.

III.B.3 Reference Area and Upstream Sampling Locations for 121 Envirnmental Media.

3 G 6 D

D D

D

D List of Figures J

^

Page No.

III.B.1. On Site Sampling Locations 122 III.B.2. Off-site Sampling Locations 123 0 I l

l 1

I O

3 J

e O

9 J

vi 3

)

List of Figures .

Page No.

3 III.B.I. On Site Sampling Locations 122 111.8.2. Off-site Sampling Locations 123 J

J D

D ,

l D

D

~

D 3 vi 1

l 1

0

I. Introduction to Radiation Surveillance Data for the First Half of 1980.

During the first six months of 1980 the Fort St. Vrain Nuclear Generating Station produced power as follows:

Dates With Number of Gross Electric Days Without Generation Month Generation Generation MWH January 0 31 0 February 0 29 0 bhrch 5-11,16-21 11 48,427 12, 24, 26-28 30, 31 i

April 1-18, 23-30 4 80,351

. May 1-31 0 108,245 l

l June 1-17, 30 12 75,923 l

From the above it can be observed that the reactor operated for only approximately one-half of the reporting period. The power generation was 2.2 x the previous reporting period and during only the last four months.

If indeed any environmental radioactivity contamination is due to reactor effluents, such a pattern of reactor operation should make an ideal test case l for this surveillance program. This is discussed in detail in II.H. A complete l

l listing of radioactivity released by all effluent routes may be found in the semiannual ~ Effluent Rescase Report to the NRC.

No announced atmospheric nuclear weapons tests occurred during the reporting period or the immediate preceeding 12 month period. Stratospheric .

i

) radioactive debris from previous tests however, is still apparent and observed generally during spring and early summer months.

The environmental sampling and analysis program was essentially

) identical to that used in the previous reporting period. A few minor changes '

in sampling locations occurred,and these and the reasons for such are given in Section III.

c h

l l

)

Essentially all radioactivity data measured on this project are near background Icvels and, tr. ore importantly, near the minimum detectable activity (MDA) levels for each radionuclide and sample type. It has been well documented that even independent of the above reasons, environmental data exhibit great inherent variability. As a result, the overall variability of the surveillance data is quite large, and it-is necessary to use mean values to make any con-clusions about the true absolute radioactivity concentrations in any environmental pathway.

Environmental radiation surveillance data commonly awhibit non-normal frequency distributions. More often than not the data can be satisfactorily treated using log-normal statistics. Ilowever, when the number of observatiens

! is small, i.e. less than 10, log-normal treatment is tentative.

! When a high percentage of data points are less than MDA or MDC, (the minimum detectable concentrations of activity in that sample type), calculation of true mean values is impossible. Therefore in this report we have chosen to not include mean values with each data table. At the end of this report in Section II.II., Conclusions and Summary, we have listed the c11culated l arithmetic means and confidence intervals for the entire reporting period as vell as for the last. year. We also list the geometric means and standard deviations for the laat 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 11.11.1. This is the current accepted practice by the i

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. It should be noted that we have not

)

used any footnote for values less than MDC. 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 sample type.

1

)

Many sets of data were compared in this report. The statistical test used was either a "t"-test or a paired "t"-test. If data sets are noted to be significantly different or not significtntly different, the confidence

( for the statement is at the 95% level (a=0.05).

The following is the footnote system used in this report,

a. Sample lost prior to analysis.

I

b. Sample missing at site.

c. Instrument malfunction.

)

d. Sample lost during analysis.

c. Insufficient weight or volume for at.41ysis.

f. Sample unavailable.

g. Analysis in progress,

h. Sample collection omitted.

N.A. Not applicable.

)

l h

i

)

?' 1 l

l

4

)

l II. Surveillance Data for January through June 1980 and Interpretation of Results.

) A. External Gansna-ray Exposure Rates l

l The average gaana-ray exposure rates expressed in mR/ day are l

l given in Table II.A.1. The values were determined by CaF2:Dy

) (TLD-200) crystals for each of the 37 locations (See Table III.B.1-l

III.B.3). Two TLD packages are installed at each site and the mean

[

l value is reported for that site. The mean calculated exposure then

) was divided by the number of days that elapsed between pre-exposure l

! and post-exposure annealing to obtain the average daily exposure i

! rate. The TLD devices are changed monthly at each location.

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

)

The TLD data indicate that the mean measured exposure rate in the facility area was approximately 145 mR/ year. The standard deviation for all facility sites was 22 mR/ year. The mean exposure rate was

) 148 mR/ year for the Adjacent area and 165 mR/ year for the Reference area. There were no significant differences between the values for the Facility, Adjacent and Reference areas even though the variability

) in this reporting period was extremely high. Note the high values

! recorded for R26 in April, for R15 in January, for A34 in February,

! for R24 and R22 in May, for F8 in February, and for R15 in March.

) In all cases it was concluded that these high readings were not i

l instrument malfunctions as both TLD chips at the particular site l

i gave nearly the same high values. Since there is no correlation

)

l with reactor operation, no pattern with the other TLD stations and no correlation with other surveillance data for the same periods, l

,-w

)

no explanation can be effered at this time.

It is important also to note that no unusually high values were observed at the previous A-35 site during the entire period.  ;

Beginning in May of 1978 and continuing through December of 1979 a i

bimonthly peak value was observed at this station which was the

)

Miller produce farm at the intersection of route Colorado 66 and Weld County Road 19, 3.1 miles SSW of the reactor. The most previous report details the exposure rate variation. In June of 1979 we began installing 4 additional TLD devices at the A-35 site at the

- beginning of the month and collecting one per week to determine the time of the peak value more accurately. The A-35 air sampling location

! was changed in October of 1979 and a TLD was installed at the new site but the weekly TLD collection continued at the ol.d site. Table II.A.2 shows the values measured at the old A-35 site during this reporting period. It is interesting to note that no pronounced variation as seen previously was observed. No explanation of this phenomenon can as yet be offered.

j The exposure rate measured at all sites is due primarily to l

cosmic rays, to natural gamma-ray emitters in the earth's crust l

and to surface deposition of fission products from world-wide

)

fallout. The variation in measured values is due to true variation d the above sources plus the variation due to the measurement method.

The purpose of the TLD ring around the reactor is not to raeasure l exposure rate generated from the reactor facility itself but to document the presence or absence of deposition of gamma-ray emitters in the reactor effluent pathways.

)

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

)

Facility Area ^#*#*8*

• I " *" * **

Locations January February March Anril May luna F 1 ;34 .33 .41 .38 .38 .44

) F 3 .37 .33 .46 .38 .36 .41 F 4 .35 .34. .40 .39' .34 .43 F 7 . .' 40 .35 .35 .39 .34 .43 P 8 .40 .67 .32 .40 .43 .46 F 9 .45 .37 .46 .38 .43 .48 F 11 .39 .36 .45 .37 .41 .45

) F 12 .42 .38 .43 .34 .40 . 48 F 13 .43 .39 b .37 .37 .48 F 14 .36 .34 .39 .34 .37 .43 F 46 .41 .36 .47 .37 .31 .50 F 47 .33 .33 .42 .34 .31 .51 F 51 .40 .35 .43 .40 .37 .54

)

. Adjacent Area Locations A 5 .38 .39 .42 .37 .35 .37 A 6 .37 .34 .41 .32 .36 .43

) A 27 A 28

.33

,42

.50

.33

.39 .36 .37 .46

.39 .36 .34 .47 A 29 .36 .37 .39 .37 .40 .43 A 30 .48 .42 .47 .39 .42 .46 A 31 .35 44 .37 .33 .39 .42 A 32 .42 .31 .41 .33 .39 .43

) A 33

.44 b .37 .44 .38 .37 .44 A 34 .76 .47 .41 .46 .47 A 35 .38 .36 .56 .38 .40 .46 A 36 .39 .43 .35 .37 .43 .46 Reference Area

) Locations R 15 1.37 .32 .62 .34 .39 .40 R 16 .47 .51 46 .37 .54 .45 R 17 .36 .29 .40 .29 .37 .42 R 18 .44 .34 .42 .34 .35 .39 R 19 .36 .33 .42 .34

) R 20 .36. .31 .45 .38

.38

.40

.38

.43

^

.37 .32 .43 .37 .40 .41

.47 .40 .43 b .75 .42 x 23 .41 .37 .43 .35 .35 .41 R 24 .48 .42 .44 .42 -70 .48

.45

) R 25 R 26 .39

.39

.34

.32

.30

.32 2.84

.37

.35

.42

.44 b Sample missin9 from site.

3

)

Table II.A.2 Gamma Exposure Rates Measured at the Previous A-35 Site Collection Date X, mR/ day 1/28/80 0.30 1/30/80 0.52 2/7/80 0.39

) 2/21/80 c 2/28/80 c 3/12/80 0.27 3/19/80 0.46

) 3/24/80 0.36 4/3/80 0.56 4/15/80 0.34 4/23/80 0.39

} 5/1/80 0.33 5/5/80 c 5/13/80 0.37 5/20/80 0.35

) 5/29/80 0.40 6/10/80 0.50 6/21/80 0.42 6/25/80 0.47 e

} 6/28/80 0.45

) l

)

)

)

II.B. Air Sampling Data

1. Gross alpha and beta activity.

)

The concentrations of gross alpha and beta activity measured on air particulates for the Facility and Adjacent sampling sites are listed in Tables II.B.1 and II.B.2. Although mean values for the four facility sites

)

are slightly higher than for the three adjacent sites, these differences are not statistically different for either gross alpha or gross beta air concen-trations.

)

The mean values for both gross alpha and gross beta concentrations for the three collection zones were all slightly less than the previous six month reporting period (See Table I1.11.1) . This difference was not statistically

) -

significant.

The high gross alpha concentration measured at A-35 for the week ending January 12 was rechecked and considered to be real. There was a

)

corresponding high value observed for gross beta, activity for the same period. )

l The Semi-annual Release Report indicates no noble gas or fission product '

release during that period.

During the period April 6 through April 26 no data was collected for A-35 as the land owner requested the, air pump to Se moved and a new location was being sought.

h l

)

i I

l l

O O O O O O O O O O O Table II. B.1 Concentrations of Long-Lived Gross Alpha Activity in Airborne Particles (fCi/m3 ),

a) First Quarter, 1980 Date Facility Areas Adjacent Areas Collected 1 2 3 l 4 5 6 35 Jan. 6 4.3 (0.7)* c 2.3 (0.4) 3.2 (0.6) 4.9 (0.8) 2.6 (0.4) 6.0 (1.0)

Jan. 12 4.6 (0.5) c 11.1 (1.2) 9.2 (1.2) 9.7 (1.0) 4.4 (0.6) 36.7 (4.5)

Jan. 19 1.6 (0.3) c 2.8 (0.5) 3.3 (0.6) 3.4 (0.7) 1.4 (0.3) 2.4 (0.4)

Jan. 27 1.2 (0.3) c 2.9 (0.7) 2.1 (0.5) 2.7 (0.6) 1.4 (0.3) 1.5 (0.4)

Feb. 4 1.5 (0.3) c 4.8 (0.9) 4.3 (0.6) 3.9 (0.7) 1.7 (0.3) 4.3 (0.7)

Feb. 9 1.4 (0.3) 3.0 (0.8) 1.5 (0.8) 2.8 (0.7) 1.3 (0.4) 0.9 (0.3) 1.4 (0.4)

Fcb. 16 0.8 (0.2) 2.1 (0.7) c 1.4 (0.4) 0.6 (0.3) 1.4 (0.4) 1.0 (0.3) 0.8 (0.2) 1.7 (0.4)

~

Feb. 23 0.8 (0.2) 2.7 (0.6) 2.1 (0.6) 1.3 (0.4) c Mar. 1 0.8 (0.2) 1.9~(0.7) 1.5 (0,5) 0.8 (0.3) c 0.5 (0.1) 0.8 (0.3) .

Mar. 8 1.0 (0.2) 7.1 (1.4) 4.2 (1.0) 2.4 (0.5) 5.0 (1.1) 0.5 (0.2) 1.5(0.3)

Mar. 15 0.6 (0.2) 3.9 (0.9) 3.8 (1.0) 2.6 (0.6) 3.4 (0.8) 0.6 (0.2) 1.7 (0.4)

Mar. 22 0.5 (0.2) 1.2(0.4) 2.5 (0.7) 1.9 (0.5) 3.0 (0.8) 1.2 (0.3) 1.0 (0.3)

Mar. 30 2.5 (0.7) 1.7 (0.5) 3.3 (0.8) 1.7 (0.4) 4.9 (1.3) 1.4 (0.3) 1.3 (0.3)

Quarterly -minimum 0.5 Quarterly -minimum 0.5 (46 samples) -maximum 11.1 (37 samples) -maximum 36.7

-average 5.4 -average 6.6 3 -15 pC1/ml.

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

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

c Instrument malfunction.

Table II. B.1 Concentrations of Long-Lived Gross Alpha Activ.ity in Airborne Particles (fCi/m3 ),

b) Second Quarter, 1980 Date Facility Areas Adjacent Areas Collected 1 2 3 4 5 6 35 1980 April 5 1.3 (0.4)* 1.7 (0.6) 1.6 (0.5) 1.4 (0.4) 1.7 (0.5) 0.5 (0.2) 1.0 (0.2)

April 12 2.0 (0.6) 2.9 (0.6) 3.1 (0.7) 1.5 (0.3) 2.2 (0.5) 1.5 (0.4) **

April 20 5.0 (1.0) 6.2 (1.2) 6.6 (1.3) 3.9 (0.7) 6.0 (1.2) 2.1 (0.5) **

April 26 7.0 (1.5) 9.8 (1.7) 3.9 (0.8) 3.5 (0.7) 5.6 (1.3) 1.6 (0.5) **

May 4 3.8 (0.8) 1.6 (0.4) 1.8 (0.4) 2.5 (0.5) 5.8 (1.2) 0.9 (0.3) 4.2 (0.9)

May 10 2.8.(0.9) 2.1 (0.6) 1.6 (0.4) 2.5 (0.5) 5.8 (1.3) 1.4 (0.4) 1.8 (0.6) o May 17 1.6 (0.5) 1.1 (0.3) 0.8 (0.2) 1.1 (0.3) 3.4 (0.8) 0.3 (0.1) 2.0 (0.5)

May 24 4.1 (0.9) 3.1 (0.7) 1.6 (0.4) 3.7 (0.8) 5.1 (1.3) 1.4 (0.4) 2.8 (0.7)

May 31 4.9 (1.0) 1.2 (0.4) 1.7 (0.4) 4.1 (0.8) 9.5 (2.2) c 3.7 (0.9)

June 8 6.3 (1.2) 3.1 (0.7) 2.6 (0.5) 3.6 (0.7) c 1.9 (0.5) 3.3 (0.8)

June 15 5.6 (1.2) 3.5 (0.9) 2.0 (0.4) 2.0 (0.4) c 1.5 (0.4) 5.2 (1.2)

June 21 4.8(1.1) 1.7 (0.4) 1.7(0.4) 2.7 (0.6) c 2.2 (0.5) 5.9 (1.1)

June 28 ***

2.9 (0.6) 1.9 (0.4) 4.7 (0.8) c 2.4 (0.5) 5.0 (1.1)

Quarterly - minimum 0.8 Quarterly - minimum .0;5 (51 samples) - maximum 9.8 (31 samples) - maximum 9.5

- average 3.1 - average 2.9 All concentrations are expressed in femtocuries per cusic meter of air: I fCi/m3 = 10-15 pCi/ml.

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

• • New site being located.

• • • Excessive dust loading, analysis uncertain.

c Instrument malfunction.

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

a) First Quarter, 1980 Date Facility Areas Adjacent Areas Cpliected 1 2 3 1 4 5 1 6 35 Jan. 6 6 (1)* c 4 (1) 5 (1) 9 (1) 6 (1) 9 (1)

Jan. 12 10 (1) c 21 (1) 19 (1) 13 (1) 8 (1) 43 (3)

Jan. 19 4 (0.5) c 7 (1) 9 (1) 6 (1) 4 (0.4) i; (1)

Jan. 27 4 (0.4) c 11 (1) 6 (1) 7 (1) 4 (0.4) 6 (1)

Feb. 4 7 (1) c 24 (2) 12 (1) 12 (1) 6 (0.5) 14 (1)

Feb. 9 7 (1) 17 (1) 12 (3) 12 (1) 7 (1) 4 (1) 9 (1)

Feb. 16 3 (0.4) 9 (1) c 4 (1) 3 (1) 6 (0.5) 4 (1)

Feb. 23 3 (0.3) 9 (1) 10 (1) 7 (1) c 4.(0.4) 6 (1)

~

Mar. 1 5 (0.4) 15 (2) 10 (1) 7 (1) c 4 (0.4) 6 (1)

Mar. 8 8 (0.5) 45 (3) 34 (3) 19 (1) 31 (2) 9 (1) 11 (1)

Mar. 15 6 (0.5) 23 (2) 21 (2) 13 (1) 15 (1) 5 (0.5) 7 (1)

Mar. 22 4 (0.4) 10 (1) 13 (1) 11 (1) 12 (1) 4 (0.5) 6 (0.5)

Mar. 30 20 (1) 15 (1) 15 (1) 10 (1) 24 (2) 5 (0.5) 6 (0.5)

Quarterly -minimum 3 Quarterly -minimum 3 (37 samples)

-maximum 43 (46 samples) -maximum 45

-average 24 -average 18 All' concentrations are expressed in femtocuries per cubic meter of air: 1 fC1/m3 = 10-15 Ci/ml.

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

c. Instrument malfunction.

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

b) Second Quarter, 1980 Date Facility Areas Adjacent Areas Collected 1 2 3 4 5 6 35 April 5 13 (1)* 13 (1) 16 (1) 11 (1) 11 (1) 4 (1) 6 (1)

April 12 17 (1) 22.(2) 22 (2) 7 (1) 10 (1) 6 (1)

April 20 21 (1) 22 (2) 24 (2) 10 (1) 23 (2) 7 (1)

April 26 26 (2) 23 (2) 10 (1) 11 (1) 19 (2) 8 (1)

May 4 14 (1) 5 (1) 6 (1) 7 (1) 18 (2) 4 (0.4) 13 (1) }

May 10 16 (1) 11 (1) 6 (1) 7 (1) 18 (2) 3 (1) 9 (1)

May 17 9 (1) 4 (1) 3 (0.4) 2 (0.4) 13 (1) 1 (0.3) 8 (1)

May 24 20 (1) 14 (1) 9 (1) 11 (1) 25 (2) 5 (1) 14 (1) j May 31 "

22 (1) 6 (1) 10 (1) 15 (1) 32 (3) c 16 (1)

June 8 29 (2) 17 (1) 10 (1) 16 (1) c 8 (1) 18 (1)

June 15 22 (2) 12 (1) 7 (1) 7 (1) c 10 (1) 14 (2)  ;

June 21 i 22 (2) 9 (1) 8 (1) 10 (1) c 5 (1) 21 (1)

June 28 28 (2) 9 (1) 8 (1) 13 (1) c 5 (1) 17 (1)  ;.

I Quarterly Quarterly (52 samples) - minimum 2 (31 samples) - minimum 1 t

- maximum 29 - maximum 32 j.

- average 13 - average 12 ,

'All concentrations are expressed in femtocuries per cubic meter of air: I fC1/m3 = 10-15 C1/ml.

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

O* New site being located.

c Instrument malfunction.

13

2. Tritium Activity. Tropospheric water vapor samples are collected continuously on Silica Gel at all seven air sampling stations (four in the' Facility area and three in the Adjacent are). The specific activity of tritium in water in weekly samples from these stations is listed in Table II.B.3. The air concentration of tritium for the same weekly samples is listed in Table II.B.3a.

The variation of the measured tritium specific activity in tropospheric water vapor has consistently been large at all facility and adjacent air sampling sites. The facility sites F-1 and F-2 are closest to the main water effluent pathway from the reactor (See Figure III.B.1). Inspection of Table II.B.3 indicate that for a given date, with a few exceptions these two sites show higher values than those not on the liquid batch release route. This observation has been noted for some time, and the high values are assumed to be due to tritiated water evapoation from the discharge ditch or the pond impoundments. The total reactor effluent release of tritium is given in Table II.B.3b. A high correlation with individual batch release and tritium specific activity does not occur, but this is to be expected because of temperature, humidity, flow rate, release time and other variables.

It is important to note that elevated concentrations of tritium in the local terrestrial or aquatic food chains have not resulted however, due to the great dilution with water from the hydrosphere.

From Table II.H.1 it can be observed that the mean value of tritium g specific activity in water vapor was higher for the Facility Area sampling sites than for the Adjacent. Although this difference is not statistically significant the same trend was noted during the last half of 1979. When there is no deposition of world wide fallout tritium the reactor effluents are the principal source for the entire site and this is not unexpected.

O

14

)

It can also be noted that the measured mean values were slightly lower as compared to the previous six month period even though the reactor power

)

generation was greater during the first half of 1980. Release of tritium fromCthe reactor is not highly correlated with power production during periods of sporadic operation.

)

The high value observed,at A-6 during the week ending January 27, 1980 was evidently due to gaseous release during that period and a narrow

, dispersion pattern. It is unfortunate that A-35 which is in essentially

)

the same direction was not in operation during that week.

At location F-4 the hygrothermograph was operational for only most i

of the second quarter of 1980. 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 3

volume or air (pci/m ). This is critical if calculation of immersion dose

)

t from tritiated water vapor were ever necessary.

l Two equations are used in the conversion of pCi/ liter of water to 3

l pCi/m of air. The first equation is used to determine the vapor pressure j l

i of water (1):

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

A = 9.10765

) B = 1750.286 C = 235.0 The temperature used is the integrated weekly value taken from the j l

hygrothermograph. The conversion is completed in the second equation which is the " Ideal Gas Equation " '

l PV = nRT, where: P = vapor pressure (atmospheres)

V = volume (liters) n = number of moles of gas

)

R = 0.08206 liter-atmospheres / mole- K T = temperature in OK The number of grams of water per cubic meter of air is then determined.

Y -

15 '

)

u '.

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

~

humidity is therefore' integrated over the week and this percentage of the

) '

saturated air value is taken. The final value is reported in pCi/m . This procedure has been applied to data collected for the second quarter of 1980 and listed in Table II.B.3a. The hygrothermograph instrument was under

)

repair for a period of four months during December of 1979 and the first  ;

quarter of 1980. However,since the weekly integrated relative humidity at the F-4 site is relatively constant,the correlation of measured tritium i

)

specific activity in atmospheric water vapor and air concentration is very high. It is for this reason that a hygrothermograph is located at only one site.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)'

v v v v v v- v v v - --

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

a) First Quarter, 1980 .

Date Facility Areas Adjacent Areas 1 2 3 l 4 5 l 6 1 35 Collected 1 1 1-6-80 < 307- < 307 < 307 < 307 495 f < 307 (288)*

1-12-80 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 f < 307 1-19-80 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 307 1-27-80 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 3,320 e -

(282) 2-4-80 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 f 2-9-80 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 275 (252)  ;

2-16-80 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 2-23-80 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 3-1-80 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 3-8-80 286 438 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 < 270 (203) (205) 3-15-80 365 1,400 < 228 < 228 < 228 < 228 < 228 (204) (214) 3-22-80 < 264 < 264 < 264 < 264 374 1,090 < 264 (237) (244) 3-30-80 389 300 264 368 < 264 749 < 264 (238) (237) (236) (237) (241)

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

e Insufficient weight or volume for analysis, f Sample unavailable.

~ ~ ~ ' ' ~ ~

d O O U U U O .

O V U N 1 i

i Table II. B.3 [

Tritium Concentrations _in Atmospheric Water Vapor (pCi/1). '

b) Second Quarter, 1980 Date Facility Areas Adjacent Areas Collected 1 I 2 1 3 1 4 5 1 6 1 35 '

4-5-80 < 264 < 264 < 264 610 < 264 < 264 < 264 (240)*

4-12-80 627 3,700 580 426 416 < 264 **

(208) (239) (208) (206) (206) 4-20-80 448 1,120 435 285 315 493 ,,

(207) (213) (207) (205) (205) (207) 4-26-80 709 1,010 622 438 539 428 ** '

(209) (212) (208) (207) (208) (206) 5-4-80 < 233 < 233 < 233 < 233 < 233 < 233 < 233 q 5-10-80 798 490 469 3,000 < 233 267 232 (214) (211) (211) (209) .

(209) (208) 5-17-80 239 ~243 < 233 692 < 233 < 233 334 (208) (208) (213) (209) 5-24-80 765 1,060 < 233 283 < 233 < 233 310' (213) (216) (209) (209) 5-31-80 < 230 612 < 233 266 < 233 663 422 i (208) (204)

(208) (206) 6-8-80 828 1,460 541 434 743 321 234' (210) (216) (207) (206) (209) (205) (206) 6-15-80 262 1,020 389 567 242 < 277 591

^

(202) (209) (203) (205) (202) (205) 6-21-80 512 < 277 < 277 < 277 < 277 < 277 < 277 (250) 6-28-80 447 704 < 277 < 277 < 277 < 277 < 277 (249) (251) 2

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence interval, (196 S.D.).

• • New site being located. ,

i  ! l > ,tl t;;  ; t l  ! t ' " lt g _

U .

U

~

~ ll

~

5 U 3 c c c c c c c c c c c c c ,

s

~

a e

~

r A

t U n 6 e

c c c c c c c c c c c c c c

j a .

d _

A U 5 c c c c c c c c c c c c c O 4 c c c c c c c c c c c c c

)

m

/

i C

O (

p 3 c c c c c c c c c c c c s c.

r a i e A r A

n y i

t s 0 i n 8 l O o 9 i i 1 c t

a , F a 2 c c c c c c c c c c c c c r r t e _

n t n ae r .

o

3. cn a i u t o Q c B. C n U I t u I m u

s r

1 c e e e c e c e c c c c c f l

ei i a

l t F m bi ar )

t TT a ll n

d e

e m 0 0 0 0 0 u

t 0 0 0 r O ec t e 0

8 -8 8 -8 0 0 8 8 0 0- 88 88 8

- 8 8 - - - -

t s

al - 2 9 7. - - 6 3 - - 5 2 0 n

- Dl o

6 1 1 2 4 9 1 2 1 8 1 2 3 I

C 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 3 33 3 3 c O

i i' :  !' !j s }  ! 1j ' ]1 :i:j; 1: jI f $i! $ iii! !i '

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

b) Second Qua.rcer, 1980 Date _

Facility Areas Adjacent Areas Collected 1 2 3 4 5 6 35 4-5-80 < 2.59 < 2.59 < 2.59 < 5.99 < 2.59 < 2.59 < 2.59 2.68 2.62 < 1.44 **

4-12-80 3.95 23.3 3.65 c **

4-20-80 c c c c c 3.94 3.13 **

4-26-80 5.18 7.35 4.54 3.20 5-4-80 < 1.55 < 1.55 < 1.55 < 1.55 < 1.55 < 1.55 < 1.55 5-10-80 7.63 4.69 4.48 28.6 < 2.22 2.55 < 2.22 G 5-17-80 1.79 1.82 < 1.75 5.19 < 1.75 < 1.75 2.50 5-24-80 e c c c c c c 5-31-80 < 1.53 4.07 < 1.53 1.77 < 1.53 4.41 2.80 6-8-80 6.93 12.2 4.53 3.63 6.22 2.69' - 1.96 6-15-80 3.00 11.7 4.46 6.50 2.77 2.60 6.77 6-21-80 c c c c c c c 6-28-80 5.30 8.35 < 3.29 < 3.29 < 3.29 < 3.29 < 3.29

• • New site being located.

c Instrument malfunction.

- 20 s

Table II.B.3b. Tritium Released (Ci) in Reactor Effluents First IIalf of 1980 bbde Jan Feb Mar Apr May June Total Continuous liquid 0.057 0.045 0.148 0.719 0.584 0.318 1.87

, effluent, turbine

's building sump and reactor sump Gaseous stack 0.034 0.076 0.164 0.182 0.115 0.084 0.655

, Batch Liquid 4.85 0.627 19.0 28.5 29.3 18.0 100.3 J

Total 4.94 0.748 19.3 29.4 30.0 18.4 102.8 O

D 1

l O

l O

) l l

i l

0

, 1 J

L J

21

)

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

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

) activated charcoal sampling and gansna-ray spectrum analysis. The sample l

counted is a composite from all seven air sampling stations. All charcoal samples are counted approximately 20 days post collection to allow Rn-222 h decay and minimize decay of I-131. The I-131 concentrations presented i

j are the result of decay correction back to the midpoint of the sampling l

l period. Decay correction to the midpoint of the sampling period is p 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 th collection period. This is the case whether the I-131 source term is weapons testing b

1 fallou't or reactor stack effluent.

The air concentrations of I-131 during the first half of 1980 were generally less than the second half of 1979 even though power generation.

~

was greater during the first half of 1980. Due to the short half-life of l

l I-131, measured air concentrations, if due to the reactor, should correlat; i

! highly with power generation. The highest values wer s in /.pril, May and 1

O June, a period during which the reactor was operating.

Table II.B.5 lists the results of the gamma-rey spectral analyses l

l l of weekly composites of the membrane air filters in each sample head. The l

C concentrations of the three radionuclides were generally low and showed

! little correlation with the I-131 data. Mean values were also lower than in the last half of 1979. All samples are counted after decay of Rn and Tn daughters.

l I 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 O Ru-106. Both isotopes have gamma-rays at essentially the same energy and I

i j they cannot be separated by NaI(TI) spectral analysis. No separation by half-life determination was attempted on the data. Since the half-life l

22

) . 1 I

of Ru-103 is 40 days and that 'of Ru-106' is one year, in periods soon after an atmospheric weapon test, a high proportion is expected to be Ru-103, and at later times predominately Ru-106. Since the ruthenium isotopes have i negligible biological availability, neither have any consequence in calculation of population dose and efforts to separate them are not warranted.

) -

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

g 23 Table II. B.4 Iodine-131 Concentrations in Air (Taken From Composites of I Activated Charcoal at all Air Sampling Stations and Determined l

_J by Gamma Spectrometry).

131 Sample Ending Dates I (fCi/m )

3 1-6-80 < 4.03 1-12-80 56.0 (3.91f 1-19-80 3.58 (14.5) I 1-27-80 < 3. 31 1

,J 2-4-80 < 3.25 2-9-80 < 4.21 j 2-16-80 14.1 (5.23) 2-23-80 < 3.15 3 3-1-80 < 3.29 3-8-80 5.59 (3.55) 3-15-80 < 3.01 3-22-80 < 2.77 3 3-30-80 < 3.16 l 4-5-80 84.7 (4.78) 4-12-80 < 3.71 l l

4-19-80 15.9 (4.01)

D 4-26-80 25.3 (5.07) l 5-4-80 25.1 (3.56) 5-10-80 9.04 (2.79) 5-17-80 20.0 (9.04) j J 5-24-80 20.0 (2.30) 1 5-31-80 17.3 (3.13) l 6-8-80 10.2 (3.48) l 6-15-80 < 2.59 3 6-21-80 3.01 (2.99) 6-28-80 18.9 (13.2)

All concentrations are3exPres g in femtocuries per cubic meter of air: 1 fCi/m = 10- pC1/ml.

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

3

4 3 24 i Table II. B.5 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Air (Taken from i 3

3 Composites of all Air Sampling Stations) (fCi/m ), ,

I I

Sample Ending 106 Cs 9

Zr & Nb Ru j Dates

. I'-6-80 5.60(5.55)* 3.89(0.884) 6.05 (0.700) 1-12-80 < 3.89 < 0.868 < O'377-1-19-80 13.6 (4.06) < 0.710 < 0.309 3 1-27-80 19.1 (2.08) < 0.243 1.16 (0.185) 2-4-80 7.88(4.24) < 0.758 < 0.330 2-9-80 < 4.40 < 0.982 ,

< 0.427 2-16-80 < 3.63 < 0.809 < 0.352 0 2-23-80 18.9 (3.96) < 0.752 < 0.327 3-1-80 19.7 (4.12) < 0.787 < 0.342 3-8-80 14.4 (3.93) < 0.760 < 0.330 3-15-80 < 0.939 2.92 (0.249) 2.55 (0.118) 3 3-22-80 < 0.880 0.322(0.226) < 0.0853 3-30-80 < 3.31 2.30 (0.652) < 0.341 4-5-80 < 1.21 < 0.269 < 0.116

} 4-12f80 < 3.88 _

1.05 (0.768) < 0.374 j~~~~~~

O 4-19-80 < 4. 71 < 0.245 < 0.307 4-26-80o < 3.97 3.76 (0.780) < 0.386 5-4-80 < 2.45 0.673 (0.546) 0.390 (0.129) 5-10-80 < 3.27 < 0.730 < 0.318 O 5-17-80 < 2.57 0.593(0.505) < 0.249 5-24-80 < 3.18 1.51.(0.633) < 0.309 5-31-80 < 3.56 1.49 (0.715) 0.539 (0.380) 6-8-80 < 2.85 0.948(0.530) < 0.276 9 6-15-80 < 3.50 3.68 (0.753) 2.88 (0.359) 6-21-80 < 2.98 1.20 (0,557) < 0.287 6-28-80 < 2.93 < 0.653 < 0.283 O

Allcongentratgnsareexpressedinfemtocuriespercubicmeterofair:

pCi/ml.

1 fC1/m = 10-

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

O l

25 g

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 fractions 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 treated water retains 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 within upstream, downstream and effluent sites but the mean upstream and the mean downstream values were very similar. The mean upstream value was 8.3 pCi/L,and the mean downstream value was 9.5 pCi/L. There was,however, no significant difference between these mean values. Mean values were slightly less than those measured during the last half of 1979. The gross beta concentrations in both potable water sources are lower but more variable than in surface water. The concentrations should be lower due to water purification which removes suspended solids and the variation is probably due to mixing of different reservoir sources which vary due to different runoff areas.

Weekly samples, although not required by the Technical Specifications, were co11ceted 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 may not be adequate to reflect periodic discharges. Gross beta concentrations are shown in Table II.C.la. The mean concentration was 12.9 pCi/L and less than in th; last half of 1979. The mean was not significantly different from downstream or upstream values. High values D

) 26 were observed en several occasions and presumably due to the effluent release patterns. Although the effluent also has high tritium concentrations, the tritium is lost in preparation for gross beta analysis.

Table II.C.2 lists tritium in surface water and potable water supplies for each monthly collection for the first half of 1980. The mean values for Upstream, Downstream and Potable water locations for tritium are not significantly different even though there were wide variations.

No reason can be given for these wide variations, particularly for the potable water supplies.

Significantly high tritium values have always been observed at effluent sampling sites and this was true for the first half of 1980.

(See Table II.C.4a). 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 are warranted. No increased fission product concentrations were observed as well.

The E-38 weekly grab samples have always been taken on the east side of the Goosequill farm pond. A continuous water sampler has been under construction and will be installed shortly at the outlet of the farm pond.

This procedure will have two distinct advantages. Since the reactor discharge is very periodic a continuous sampler will insure against missing any petk water value and sampling at the outlet will allow greater dilution and mixing in the pond. The outlet water concentration will be more useful in predicting resultant downstream concentrations.

Table II.C.3 and II.C.4 lists Sr-90 and Sr-89 concentrations in surface water at the same sampling locations. Surface water samples could not be collected in January due to inclement weather and two sets were

collected in February to make up for this loss. This is noted in the Tables.

}

27 J

Table II.C.4a lists the same radionuclides as well as tritium in reactor .

effluent water samples collected weekly at E-38.

3 The concentrations of Ru-106, Cs-137 and Zr-Nb-95 in surface and potable water are given in Table II.C.5. The same radionuclides were measured in the weekly samples collected at E-38 and this data is shown in Table II.C.5a.

The fission product concentrations in all cases over the 6 month period were not significantly different from background and indicate, as 3

expected, negligible release of fission product activity from the reactor r 1

I by the surface water route.

D 1 l

l 0

0 D

D D

O 28 Table II. C.1 Cross Beta Activity in Water for Samples Collected Februarv 4. 1980.

m V

Sampling Suspended Solids Dissolved Solids Total Water Locations pCi/kg pCi/kg Concentration pCi/l O -

Effluent 104,000 9,460 9.71 E 38: Farm Pond (57,600) * (1,850) (1.61)

r.onsequill) 7,920 9.92

.. ugh to 163,300 E 41. (1,600)

St. vrain Creek (63,500) (1.62)

'O 26,380 7,550 13.1 D 37: Lower Latham (5,400) (1,370) (1.73)

Reservoir

O 33,000 8,250 10.9 D 40

S. Platte River (8,000) (1,690)

Below Confluence (1.65) ,

D 45: St. Vrain 36,600 6,820 8.76 creek (8,200) (1,800) (1.56)

Upstream

-Q 44,100 5,590 8.56 U 42: St. Vrain (9,300) (1,600) (1.58)

Creek U 43: S. Platte 75,000 10,100 13.8 River (9,590) (2,090) (1.69)'

Potable F 49: Visitor's 16,800 1.14

"*** (5,370) (0.365)

Center D 39: Gilcrest 6,710 7.89

'O City Water N.A. (1,440) (1.69)

N.A. Not applicable.

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

O O

O

O 29 j

{

1 s eta Ectivity in Water for Samples Collected Fahrnarv 9'4 1 QM 1

Sampling Suspended Solids Dissolved Solids Total Water Locations pCi/kg pCi/kg Concentration pCi/1 D

Effluent 38,570 9,480 9.53 )

E 38: 'iarm Pond (10,940) * (2,020) (1.55) i I

(Goosequill)

E 41: Slough to 23,400 9,200 6.53 ,

'O St. Vrain Creek (2,080) (1.47) l l

Donstream 38,870 8,300 14.8 l D 37: Lower Latham (6,310) (1,340) (1.69)

Reservoir l O D 40: S. Platte River 30,140 7,750 10.5 Below Confluence (5,670) (1,710) (1.56)-

D 45: St. Vrain 24,980 6,200 11.1 Creek (3,980) (1,400) (1.59)

Upstream O 5,750 5,910 9.03 U 42: St. Vrain (1,210) (1,560) (1.56)

Creek U 43: S. Platte 37,700 9,080 10.1 River (8,300) (1,950) (1.55) q' Potable F 49: Visitor's 21,500 1.36 Center

"*** (5,750) 4 (0.362)

D 39: Gilcrest 7,186 5.58

.O City Water N.A. (1,930) (1.50)

N.A. Not applicable.

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

_O i

O

30

)

Table II. C.1 Cross Beta Activity in Water for Samples Collected March 30,1980 .

)

Sa:npling Suspended Solids Dissolved Solids Total Water l Locations pCi/kg pCi/kg Concentration pCi/1 Effluent E 38: Farm Pord 36,800. 8,270 12.6 (Goosequiii) (8,900)* (1,410) (1.63)

E 41: Slough to 68,800 9,790 13.7 (18,000) (1,490)

) St. Vrain Creek (1.66)

Downstream D 37: Lower Lathan: 60,300 6,020 9.41 Reservoir _

(19,700) (1,280) (1.56)

) D 40: S. Plate.e River 16,100 4,830 14.2 Below Confluence (1,470) (1,380) (1.64}

D 45: St. Vrain 14,400 4,500 7.66 Creek (3,960) (1,240) (1.49)

Upstream

)

U 42: St. Vrain 18,900 3,140 6.45 Creek (4,030) (1,280) (1.46)

U 43: S. Platte 14,700 7,420 8.11 River (3,470) (1,990) (1.42)

Potable F 49: Visitor's 26,700 0.987  !

N.A. (9,240)

Center (0.342)

D 39: Gilcrest

) City Water N.A. f 'f 1

N.A. Not applicable. i

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

f Sample unavailable.

)

1

) I l

) .

I 1

1 31

)

l o ta tivity in Water for Samples Collected _Ancil 2n loan .

Sampling Suspended Solids Dissolved Solids Total Water Locations pCi/kg PCi/kg Concentration pC1/1

)

Effluent E 38: Farm Pond 18,900 6,840 9.96

< (Goosequill) (12.900), (1.230) (1.561 E 41: Slough to 26,100 7,720 8.43

) St. Vrain Creek (31,200) (1,530) (1.51)

Downstream 11,900 5,800 9.33 D 37: Lower Latham (4,280) (1,200) (1.55)

Reservoir

) D 40: S. Platte River 11,900 6,510 6.87 Below Confluence (4,350) (1,820) (1.45)

D 45: St. Vrain 15,000 5,810 6.70 Creek (5,320) (1,700) (1.46)

Upstream

)

U 42: St. Vrain 1.1,600 4,390 4.90 Creek (5,450) (1,690) (1.41)

U 43: S. Platte 12,300 8,620 9.80 River (2,900) (1,850) (1.53)

~

)

Potable

• • 25,200 4.11 F 49: Visitor's N.A. (5,440)

Center (3.61)

D 39: Gilcrest ** 6,200 9.71

) City Water N.A. (1,330) (4.46)

N.A. Not applicable.

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

• • Chfecteh4-26-80.

)

)

i 32 r)

I 1

tivity in Water for Samples Collected May 31,1980 _.

, C ta s

Sampling Suspended Solids Dissolved Solids Total Water i Locations pCi/kg pCi/kg Concentration i pC1/1 O

Effluent 13,400 3,620 3.71 E 38: Farm Pond (4,250)* (2,030) (1.36)

(coosequill)

E 41: Slough to 16,700 8,060 7.04 J St. Vrain Creek (6,720) (2,110) (1.45)

Downstream D 37: Lower Latham 20,100 3,580 6.35 Reservoir (9,300) (1.060) (1.47)

O D 40: S. Platte River 14,800 7,260 6.33 Below Confluence (2,910) (3,230) (1.41)

D 45: St. Vrain 12,800 1.83 (6,110) < 2,630 Creek (1.29)

$ Upstream U 42: St. Vrain 12,700 6,170 3.68 Creek (6,610) (3,190) (1.35)

U 43: S. Platte 14,000 9,250 7.38)

River (2,140) (4,220) (1.43)

Potable F 49: Visitor's 14,700 3.46 N.A. (4,800) (3.60)

Center D 39: Gilcrest 3,680 4.56 m

City Water N.A. (1,180) (1.47)

N.A. Not applicable.

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

g g

33

)

Table II. C.1 Cross Beta Activity in Water for Samples Collected June 21.1980 .

Sampling Suspended Solids Dissolved Solids Total Water Locat.lons pCi/kg pCi/kg Concentration pCi/l

) Effluent E 38: Farm Pond 12,600 96,800 38.4 (Goosequill) _(1,560), (6,510) (2.06)

E 41: Slough to 13,900 48,900 (4,740) 20.0 (1.71 )

) St. Vrain Creek (9,690)

Downstream D 37: Lower Latham 12,200 < 1,210 1.92 (1.32)

Reservoir (3,090)

< 3,490

) D 40: S. Platte River Below Confluence 10,800 (4.810) 1.80 (1 Ei i D 45: St. Vrain 12,400 77,600 ,34.6 Creek (4,290) (5,200) (1.98)

Upstream u 42: St. Vrain 15,900 4,830 4.23 Creek (8.330) (2.1101 (1.37) l 12,300 30,700 13.2 U 43: S. Platte River (1,560) (6,110) (1.56)

Potable l F 49: visitor's N.A. 10,500 0.671 i Center (5,150) (0.330) 32,300 28.5 D 39: Gilcrest (2,420)

N.A. (2.14)

) City Water N.A. Not applicable.

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

)

l D

34 h

Table II.C.I.A.

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

First Quarter, 1980 Total Water Collection Date Suspended Solids Dissolved Solids Concentrations pCi/kg* PCi/kg* pCi/1 1-12-80. 22,700 (6,370)* 13,400 (2,020) 14.3 (1.73) 1-19-80 29,300 (6,630) 11,400 (1,900) 13.4 (1.71) 1-27-80 20,800 (2,920) 9,680(1,760) 14.7 (1.75)

) 2-4-80 104,000 (57,600) 9,460 (1,850) 9.71(1.61) 2-9-80 155,000 (39,950) 10,000 (1,900) 41.3 (1.65) 2-16-80 162,000 (71,580) 8,900 (1,800) 9.71(1.61) y 2-23-80 38,570 (10,940) 9,480(2,020) 9.53(1.55) 3-1-80 177,000 (53,900) 19,400 (2,310) 16.8. (1.72) 3-8-80 48,700 (22,200) 12,100 (1,700) 13.1 (1.65)

) 3-15-80 46,800 (10,700) 15,800 (1,380) 18.1 (1.39) 3-22-80 70,400 (21,000) 7,530 (975) 16.8 (1.178) 3-30-80 36,800 ( 8,290) 8,270 (1,410) 12.6 (1.63)

}

i

)

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

I I

i m-

) 35 D

Table II.C.I.A. ,

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

Second Quarter, 1980 D Total Water Collection Date Suspended Solids Dissolved Solids Concentrations pCi/kg* pCi/kg* pCi/1 3 4-5-80 22,700 (5,500)* 7,790 (1,310) 10.1 (12.6) 4-12-80 3,360 (292) 7,740 (1,350) 51.2 ( 3.73) 4-20-80 18,900(12,900) 6,840 (1,230) 9.96(1.56)

O 4-26-80 52,600 (18,900) 8,450(1,680) 9.56(1.53) l 5-4-80 22,900 (6,000) 8,210 (1,570) 10.7 (1.56) 5-10-80 17,300 (4,840) 7,500 (1,680) 9.00(1.52)

O 5-17-80 13,000 (4,390) 7,350(1,810) 7.83(1.48) 5-24-80 12,600 (5,970) 7,370 (2,230) 5.94 (1.42) 5-31-80 13,400 (5,930) 3,620 (2,030) 3.71 (1.36)

O 6-8-83 13,800 (5,440) 8,873 (2,900) 5.77 (1.40) 6-15-80 9,880 (4,830) 6,990 (2,800) 4.59 (1.37) 6-21-80. 12,600 (1,560) 96,800 (6,510) 38.4 (2.06) 6-28-80 < 3,720 24,600(4,000) 9.49(1.50)

,D Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 951, confidence interval.

l f

l l

C

O U e m u v v u v v v ,

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

Sampling Monthly Collection Dates

"*"'I "*

2-4-80*** 2-23-80 3-30-80 4-20-80 5-31-80 6-21-80 24,400 6,300 1,230 E 38: Farm Pond < 264 < 264 < 264 (441) (264) (257)

(Goosequill) 798 852 2,300 E 41: Slough to < 264 < 264 < 264 St. Vrain Creek (214) (210) (268)

Downstream 968 522 280 D 37: Lower Latham < 264 < 264 < 264 (207) (207) (248)

Reservoir g 303 *

< 264 339 295 D 40: S. Platte River < 264 < 264 Below Confluence (209) (205) (248) 580 280 D 45: St. Vrain < 264 < 264 < 229 < 223 Creek (204) (248)

U P stream 346 282 329 373

< 264 < 223 U 42: St. Vrain (237)* (236) (205) (249)

Creek 43:

Riv r < 264 < 264 < 229 < 223 < 227 ( )

Potable

< 264 33 F 49: Visitor's < 229 < 223** < 227 ( q8)

Center ( )

D 39: Cil '

247** 372 641

,te < 264 < 264 (f) (208) (205) (251)

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

• • Collected 4-26-80 f Sample unavailable due to weather,

• • • January sample collected Feb. 4 due to weather.

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

Sampling Monthly Collectior. Dates Locations 2-4-80*** 2-23-80 3-30-80 4-20-80 5-31-80 6-21-80 Effluent 0.111 * < 1.33 1.53 < 1.41 < 6.33 < 0.963 E 38: Farm Pond (Goosequill) (0.983) (1.20)

E 41: Slough to < 0.964

< 1.17 < 0.815 < 1.11 < 1.55 < 6.29 St. Vrain Creek Downstream 1.66 < 0.798 < 1.11 < 1.12 < 1.66 < 0.635 D 37: Lower Latham Reservoir (1 14) w D 40: S. Platte River "

< 1.17 < 0.998 < 0.763 < 2.06 < 1.52 < 0.957 Below Confluence D 45: St. Vrain < 0.998 < 0.972

< 1.74 4 1.11 < 1.80 < 5.38 Creek Upstream 0.771 < 0.768 < 0.902 < 0.924 < 1.43 < 1.05 U 42: St. Vrain Creek (0.763)

U 43: Platte < 0.887 < 1.53 < 1.03 < 0.957 < 1.04

< 1.43 Potable F 49: Visitor's < 0.831 < 0.887 < 0.992 < 0.802** < 1.90 < 0.976 Center 1- <

D 39: Gilcrest City d.902 f < 0.910** < 0.824 < 0.967 Water I* )

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

• • Collected 4-26-80 f Sample unavailable.

• • • January sample collected Feb. 4 due to weather.

O O O O U U . O U U 9 0 Table II. C.4 Strontium 89 Concentrations in Surface Waters (pci/1).

Sampling Monthly Collection Dates Locations 2-4-80*** 2-23-80 3-30-80 4-20-80 5-31-80 6-21-80 Effluent 0.971 2.20 < 1.02 < 1.16 < 5.39 < 0.826 E 38: Farm Pond (coosequill) (2.35)* (3.18)

E 41: Slough to 2.50 < 0.707 < 0.966~

< 5.39 (3.33) (2.87). (15 )

St. Vrain Creek Downstream 4.23 1.08 < 0.963?. 2.78 1.71 , 0.843 D 37: Lower Latham Reservoir (1.66) (1.81) ,

(2.22) (2.14)

D 40: S. Platte River 3.41 4.03 < 0.673 < 1.72 < 1.33 << 0.824 Below Confluence (3.21) (2.40)

D 45: St. Vrain 4.59 2.37 < 1.55 < 4.51 < 0.870 < 0.828 Creek (4.84) (2.67)

Upstream U 42: St. Vrain < 0.652 < 0.669 < 0.788 < 0.755 < 1.22 < 0.831 Creek U 43: S. Platte .68 < 1,31 1.10 < 0.850 < 0.815

< 1.21 (2.16)

River (2.27)

Potable F 49: Visitor's < 0.710 < 0.761 < 0.856 < 0.678** < 1.63 < 0.824 Center D 39: dilcrest City 5.13 < 0.791 f < 0.780** < 0.770 Water (3.29) ( )

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

• • Collected 4-26-80.

f Sample unavailable.

• • • January sample collected Feb.4 due to weather.

39 g

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

First Quarter, 1980 O Collection Tritium Strontium 89 Strontium 90 Date (pCi/1) (pCi/1) (pCi/1) 1-6-80 1,580(500)* 2.92 (5.13) < 1.14 O 1-12-80 370(254) < 0.740 < 0.849 1-19-80 879(242) < 1.22 < 1.43 1-27-80 3,020(263) < 0.736 < 0.849 i

'O 2-4-80 < 264 0.971(2.35) 0.111(0.983) 2-9-80 669(240) < 1,41 < 1.66

.i 2-16-80 1,820(252) < 1.61 < 1.90 0 2-23-80 < 264 2.20 (3.18) < 1.32 3-1-80 < 264 < 1.41 < 1.33 i 3-8-80 650(240) < 9.30 < 1.07 O 3-15-80 < 264 < 0.768 < 1.37 3-22-80 < 264 < 1.11 < 1.24 3-30-80 < 264 < 1.02 1.53. (1.20)

'O i

j lO T

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

"O

40 3

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

Second Quarter, 1980 Collection Tritita Strontium 89 Strontium 90 3 Date (pCi/1) (pCi/1) (pCi/1) l l 4-5-80 < 264 < 1.01 < 1.17 g 4-12-80 < 229 < 1.05 1.45(1.27)*

! 4-20-80 24,400(441) < 1.16 1.41 (0.850) 4-26-80 69,100(883) < 0.902 < 1.10

'g 5-5-80 957 (211) < 0.878 < 1.01 1 5-10-80 15,600(355) < 1.49 < 1.73 5-17-80 90,100(1,090) < 1.56 < 1,81 l

i

[3 5-24-80 805(210) < 3.25 < 3.79 ,

5-31-80 6,300(264) < 5.39 < 6.33 I 6-8-80 1,650(215) 3.28 (3.10) < 2.37

3 6-15-80 9,590(293) 1.22(1.61) < 0.964 6-21-80 1,230(257) < .837 < 1.00 6-28-80 < 277 < .836 < .949 O

l lO l

l

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

.o i

F

'- U U S 5 9 9 U U U U W Table II. C.5 Camma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Water for Samples Collected February 4,1980*** .

Sampling 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 < 259,000 < 81,500 < 34,400 < 2,780 3,720 < 371 < 2.16 2.99 < 0.286 (Goosequill) (716)* (1.18) 3,730 *14

< 0.286 E 41: Slough t < 259,000 < 81,500 < 34,400 < 2,970 < 397 < 2.15 St. Vrain Creek (762) (0.999)

Downstream ,

D 37: Lower Latham < 20,000 < 6,320 < 2,670 8,090 < 187 < 78.8 9.87 < 0.229 < 0.286 f:

Reservoir (951) (2.87)

D 40: S. Platte River 2,270 1.32 0.0980

< 9,160 < 2,880 < 1,210 < 2,820 < 376 < 0.679 (2.42)

Below Confluence (707) (0.468) 36,700 41,700 1,380 4,733 6.43 7.74 D 45: St. Vrain < 28*100 (6,750) (19,200 < 3'750 (1,060) < 1.30 Creek (373) (0.623) (2.21)

Upstream u 42: St. Vrain 117,000 < 10,100 10,000 < 3,000 < 933 < 400 8.96 < 0.655 0.442 Creek (33,500) (4,880) (4.08) (0.525)

U 43: S Platte < 8,663 < 2,700 < 1,090 < 3,080 < 386 < 2.13 < 0.266

( 3)

Potable F 49: Visitor's N.A. N.A. N.A. c 37,000 < 11,500 < 4,930 < 2.82 < 0.878 < 0.377 Center D 39: Gilcrest City N.A. N.A. < 2,260 < 1,050 < 288 < 2.71 < 1.26 < 0.344 N.A.

Water _

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

N.A. Not applicable.

• • • January sample collected Feb.4 due to weather.

Table II. C.5 Camma-uy Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Water for Samples Collected February 23,1980 .

Sampling Suspended Solids (pCi/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 E 38: Farm Pond 184,000 < 15,500 < 6,650 15,200 < 1,030 < 443 2.05 < 0.700 < 0.300 (Goosequill) (46,900)* (3,190) (2.17) t ai Creek (4 )

43,600 (f0 )

< 3,@0 < 1,060 <E (f, )

< 0.683 < 0. m Downstream

< 140,000 < 43,600 22,600 < 3,450 < 1,070 < 457 2.44 < 0.683 < 0.292 D 37: Lower Latham Reservoir (20,600) (1.48) ,

~

m D 40: S. Platte River Below Confluence

< 18,700 < 5,760 (f*' )

< 2,910 1}

( 0)

< 413 < 2.20 (f*)

< 0.289 D 45: St. Vrain < 11,300 < 3,520 < 1,480 < 2,620 < 818 < 350 < 2.23 < 0.607 < 0.293 Creek Upstream

< 4,030 2,590 < 573 < 2,570 < 798 < 341 < 2.19 1.36 < 0.312 u 42: St. Vrain (1,020) (1.08)

_C_ree k

• ** < 430 < 0.312 g1y,, < 29,800 < 9,260 < 4,220 < 3,250 < 1,010 < 2.20 g

'~

Potable F 49: Visitor's N.A. N.A. N.A. < 30,300 < 9,460 < 4,050 < 2.81 < 0.877 < 0.376 Center ter N.A. N.A. N.A.

x , O <W <M < 2. 9 < 0.8M N 0.W

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

N.A. Not applicable.

U. U U U e e * * -

Table II. C 5 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Water for Samples Collected March 30, 1980 .

. Sampling 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&hY 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr&Nb Effluent E 38: Farm Pond < 30,700 < 9,520 4,210 < 2,430 < 799 < 324 < 2.22 < 0.865 0.311 (coosequill) (2,980), (0.408) 41: Siou < 70,%0 < 22,000 < 9,M < 688 <N '

< 0. W < 0. m t ain Creek ( ) (3. )

Downstream D 37: Lower Latham < 77,200 < 24,000 < 10,200 < 1,980 1,021 711 < 2.21 1.01 1.01 Reservoir (467) (188) ;, (0.991) (0.399) ,

0 D 40: S. Platte River < 1,720 < 2,370 < 734 < 311 < 0.697 < 0.734 Below Confluence ( ) ( ) ( )

5

< 2,120 D 45: St rain < 15,700 < 4,900 < 380 < 164 < 0.461 (,

( ) (3 ) )

Upstream U 42: St. Vrain 24,300 1,500 646 < 2,090 809 < 313 < 2.59 6.56 < 0.0748 Creek (5.490) (1.460) (592) (531) (0.796)

U 43: S. P atte < 465 < 2,780 < 861 < 364 < 0.638 < 0.641 < 0.087

) ( )

Potable

~

F 49: Visitor's N.A. N.A. N.A.

< 29,300 < 9,090 < 3,840 < 2.00 < 0.619 < 0.262 Center D 39: G11 crest City Water N.A. N.A. N.A. f f f g f f f

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

N.A. Not, app 11 cable.

f Sample unavailble.

U U U U U U v v v' v v Table II. C.5 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Water for Samples Collected April 20,1980 .

Sampling Suspended Solids (pC1/kg) Dissolved Solids (pCi/kg) Water (pCi/l) 137 Cs 95 Zr&Nb 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr&Nb: 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr&Nb Locations 106 Ru Effluent _ < 2.16 < 0.676 < 0.292

< 50,000 < 15,500 < 6,710 < 2,140 < 666 < 289 E 38: Farm Pond (Goosequill) 1.15 0.594 E 41:' Slough to 64,400 30,200 < 2,490 < 777 < 334 < 2.19

< 180,000 (44;500) (32,100) (0.927) (0.544) st. Vrain Creek Downstream 3,010 < 512 < 160 < 68.7 28.6 < 0.676 2.07 D 37: Lower Latham 251,000 < B,590 (17,200) (1,960) (2.68) (0.287) ,

Reservoir .,

• 0.665 0.201 1,270 < 2,940 < 917 < 395 < 0.171 D 40: S. Platte River < 5,090 < 1,580 (2.31) (0.306)

Below Confluence (844) 22,300 3,520 2,100 5.71 4.15 24,200 > < 14,900 < 0.800 D 45: St. Vrain < ,000 (5,480) (7.050) (265) (338) (0.706) (0.904)

Creek Upstrear

< 1,750 1,340 < 2,930 < 913 < 392 < 0.699 0.296 ~. 0'. 418

< 5,660 u 42: St. Vrain (853) (0.614) (0.284)

Creek

< 3,340 < 1,040 < 448 < 2.20 < 0.683 < 0.289 U 43: S. Platte < 9,210 < 2,860 < 1,210 River Potable O.

< 35,470 < 11,060 ', < 2.33' < 0.727

1. '" ** N.A. N.A. N.A. ) ( )

[.I ,

D 39: Gilerest Cig N.A. < ,060 < 640 < 28O < 2.19 < 0.683 < 0.293 Wter N.A. N.A.

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

N.A. Not applicable.

• • Collected 4-26-80.

O O O O~ O O O O O O O Table II. C.5 ,

Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Water for Samples Collected May 31, 1980 .

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

Locations 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr&Nb 106 Ru 137 Cs 106 Ru 95 Zr&Nb 137 Cs 95 Zr&Nb Effluent E 38: Farm Pond <.39,900 < 12,400 < 5,300 < 27,100 < 8,430 < 3,620 < 3.26 < 1.01 < 0.434 (Goosequill)

E 41: Sl " 27,300 3.33 0.143

< 35,200 < 10,900 < 4,680 < 8,450 (2,710) < 1,130 < 0.813 (0.789) (0.399) t ain Creek Downstream D 37: Lower Latham 135,000 < 14,700 < 6,280 < 2,100 < 653 < 280 3.04 < 0.676 < 0.281 Reservoir (44,500) (3.90) ,

D 40: S. Platte River < 10,100 < 3,150 2,670 8,200 3.41 0.887 (1,280) < 6,250 < 837 < 2.17 Below Confluence (1,540) (0.832) (0.744)

D 45: S Vrain < 26,100 < 8,100 < 3,470 < 6,670 < 2,070 < 887 < 2.18 g) ( )

Upstream U 42: St. Vrain < 30,900 < 9,600 < 4,107 < 2,010 < 625 659 < 2.17 0.352 0.465 Creek (334) (0.727) (0.354)

U 43: S. Platte < 7,490 1,160 11,000 3,230 5,200 2.48 1.18

< 2,330 < 0.682 River '(856) (8,200) (1,900) (1,750) (3.47) (0.610)

Potable F 49: Visitor,a 11,900 .

0.708 N.A. N.A. N.A. < 12,200 (3,840) < 1,640 < 0.725 < 0.097 (0.227)

D 39: Gilcrest City 904 1.07 Water N.A. N. A. . N.A. < 2,160 (504) < 290 < 2.57 (0.698) < 0.344 .

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

N.A. Not applicable.

e O 9 9 9 U U U U W W- -

Table II. C.5 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentration a in Water for Samples Collected June 21, 1980 .

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

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 < 1,490 5,720 1,320 < 1,68C 6,360 1,370 < 0.716 5.80 1.29 (coosequill) (470) (300) (541) (340) (0.343) (0.216)

E 41: Slough to < 16.300 < 5,080 < 2,170 < 4,44C 5,840 1,050 < 2.56 2.91 0.407 St. Vrain Creek (1,090) (656) (0.791) (0.467)

Downstream D 37: Lower Latham < 6,260 14,500 f 2,900 < 2,280 < 664 < 306 < 1.18 3.33 < 0.158 Reservoir (1,660) (1,050) (0.592)

D 40: S. Platte River < 11,300 1* < 8,920 < 1,190 < 1.86 Below Confluence (2, ) ( ) ) (flf0) ( 5)

D 45: St. Vrain 18,800 2,220 800 ,y,gy 6.22 0.655

< 15'800 (3,810) (2,350) < 14*160 (8,3201,080)

Creek (.538) (0.842)

. (0.491) _

Upstream U 42: St. Vrain < 29,100 < .9,040 7,450 < 3,200 4,870 1,420 < 2.17 3.52 1.01 Creek (3,700) (794) (489) (2.63) (0.594)

< 5,310 10,700 1,860 4,330 6.15 0.

U 43: S. Platte < 3,790 < 508 < 1.81 (0.p95 River (1,370) (694) (916) (0.842) 461)

Potable F 49: Visitor's 2 5,890 3.13 0.704 N.A. N.A. N.A. < 23'600 (6,2005,670)(3,540) < 2.82 Center (0.678) (0.423)

D 39: Gilcrest City 2,440 3.07 Water N.A. N.A. N.A. < 2,070 (496) < 277 < 2.60 (0.624)

< 0.349*

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

N.A. Not applicable.

v v v v v -

v v v v v v f

Table II.C.5.A.

Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Effluent Water, Goosequill Pond , E-38.

Collection Suspended Solids (pCi/kg) Dissolved Solids (pCi/kg) Water (pCi/1)

Date 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr6Nb 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr6Nb 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr6Nb 1-5-80 < 35,000 < 11,100 < 4,740 < 2,820 < 884 < 374 < 2.21 < 0.698 < 0.297 1-12-80 < 22,800

. < 7,240 < 3,080 < 2,840 1,000 < 384 < 2.22 0.720 < 0.300 (688)* (1.07) 1-19-80 < 22,300 < 7,030 < 2,960 < 902 309 258 < 2.25 0.976 0.246 (328) (187) (0.759) (0.475) 1-26-80 < 8,730 < 2,750 < 1,160 < 1,650 770 221 < 1.46 < 0.459 < 0.193 (480) (269)

< 259,000 < 81,500 < 34,400 < 2,780 3,720 <.371 < 2.16 2.99 < 0.286 f3 2-4-80 (716) (1.18) 2-9-80 279,000 < 57,000 < 23,900 < 21,630 675 < 216 < 1.49 0.506 < 0.196 (173,000) (463) (0.767) 2-16-80 < 256,000 < 79,800 < 32,000 < 3,230 < 952 471 < 2.22 < 0.694 < 9.279 (343) 2-23-80 184,000 < 15,500 < 6,650 15,000 < 1,030 < 443 2.05 < 0.700 < 0.300 (46,900) (3,190) (2.17) 3-1-80 < 108,000 < 35,500 < 15,000 < 3,090 < 1,020 < 438 < 1.50 < 0.494 < 0.211 3-8-80 < 93,800 < 31,000 < 13,300 < 3,110 < 2,340 < 375 < 2.12 < 5.90 < 0.300

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

f Table II.C.5.A.

Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Effluent Water, Goosequill Pond , E-38.

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

Collection 137 Cs 95 Zr6Nb Date 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr6Nb 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr6Nb 106 Ru

< 41,500 < 13,000 21,100 , < 2,960 4,090 2,500 < 2.16 4.43 5.00 3-15-80 (0.398)

(5,970) (781)- (409) (1.16)

< 98,800 < 30,900 13,600 < 271 156 419 < 0.737 .0.380 < 0.105 3-22-80 (11,300) (95.9) (47.5) (0.647)

< 30,700 < 9,520 4,210 < 2,430 < 799 < 324 < 2.22 < 0.865 0.311 3-30-80 (2,980) (0.408)

< 20,400 < 6,320 < 2,700 < 1,660 < 519 < 222 < 2.21 < 0.687 < 0.294 4-5-80 3.58 1.48 05 4-12-80 < 2,000 3,190 1,160 4,490 < 717 < 309 < 2.19 (2,200) (0.815)

(492) (1,659) (1.03)

< 50,000 < 15,500 < 6,710 < 2,140 < 666 < 289 < 2.16 < 0.676 < 0.292 4-20-80

< 78,100 < 24,300 < 10,400 < 834 < 261 < 112 < 2.04 < 0.635 <,0.272 4-26-80

< 19,100 8,890 < 2,560 < 2,430 < 757 < 325 < 2.21 1.07 < 0.325 5-3-80 (4,700) (0.996)

< 21,800 < 6,780 < 2,910 < 2,760 3,620 447 < 2.21 3.55 < 0.296 5-10-80 (709) (429) (1.15)

< 20,100 < 6,290 < 2,700

< 3,000 1,430 < 421 < 2 17 1.74 < 0.288

. 5-17-80 .

(772) (1.04)

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

-_--____y-_-----__- _--.--___y----_----------m-------- - - - - - - - - - .

m --- m m . --

Table II.C.5.A.

Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Effluent Water, Goosequill Pond , E-38.

4 Suspended Solids (pCi/kg) Dissolved Solids (pCi/kg) Water (pCi/1)

Collection 137 Cs 95 Zr4Nb Date 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr6Nb 106 Ru 137 Cs 95 Zr6Nb 106 Ru

< 7,620 < 3,250 < 3,920 < 1,230 < 528 < 0.679 0.679 0.464 5-24-80 < 24,500 (0.999)* (0.492)'

< 39,900 < 12,400 < 5,300 < 27,100 < 8,430 < 3,620 < 3.26 < 1.01 < 0.434 5-31-80

< 20,000 < 6,220 < 2,660 < 5,200 < 1,630 < 700 < 2.18 < 0.677 < 0.290 6-8-80

< 20,200 49,500 26,300 < 4,920 6,160 < 660 < 2.17 8.56 2.93 6-15-80 (5,340) (2,950) (1,210) (1.02) (0.619) 6-21-80 <.1,500 5,700 1,320 < 1,680 6,360 1,370 < 0.716 5.80 1.29 g (470) (299) (541) (340) (0.343) (0.216)

< 16,200 19,400 < 2,170 < 5,880 8,030 < 789 < 2.16 6.10 0.382 6-28-80 (3,970) (1,460) (0.982) (0.530)

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

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

50 l

l

( II.C.2 Radionuclide Concentrations in Sediment Sediment is. the major compar' ient for radionuclide contaminants in a fresh water ecosystem due to the high concentrction factors for fission products in the sediment mineral matrices. Although the samples are always i

collected at the same point, it is impossible to collect a sample with a l

known surface area to volume ratio as far soils. The sample itself is a result of sediment movement downstream and is therefore a function of water flowrate which fluctuates greatly during the year. Table II.C.6 lists gross beta activity in sediment samples from the sampling sites in the water courses. The mean values for effluent, upstream, and downstream samples were nearly identical and were not significantly different (see Table II.H.1) and indicate that the sediment samples are very homogeneous.

The gross beta activity is predominately naturally occurring radionuclides.

Tabi.a II.C.7 and II.C.8 list the Sr-90 and Sr-89 concentrations 1

in the same sediment samples respectively. Table II.C.9 shows the concen-tration in sediment of the fission products Ru-106, Cs-137, and Zr-Nb-95.

Although occasional high values appear, the mean values for these sample

! types (Table II.H.1) indicate no significant difference for any of the l fission products in each of the sampling locations.

It should be noted that the sand fraction of the sediment samples

).

l is removed and only the silo plus clay mineral fraction is analyzed.

l l these two particle size fractions should contain essentially all of the l.

radioactivity, both natural and any due to reactor effluents.

The upstream sample at U-42 was unavailable for January and February as the entire sampling site was frozen'over. Due to weather the

' January sample was collected the first week in February.

t 3

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

Sampling Monthly Collection Dates Locations 2-4-80**- 2-23-80 3-30-80 4-20-80 5-31-80 6-21-80 Effluent E 38: Farm Pond 37,600 38,800 36,100 34,900 35,600 36,400 (coosequill) (1,560)* (1,710) (1,610) (1,590) (1,580) (1,630)

E 41: Slough to 32,100 31,000 33,300 35,200 32,300 32,700 St. Vrain Creek (1,430) (1,580) (1,540) (1,590) (1,570) (1,620)

Downstream D 37: Lower Latham 30,400 30,800 28,300 28,900 35,400 20,800 Reservoir (1,460) (1,600) (1,440) (1,440) (1,890) (1,233) ,

~

D 40: S. Platte River 37,400 33,400 41,200 34,700 35,100 38,200 Below Confluence (1,520) (1,600) (1,680) (1,580) (1,620) (1,870)

D 45: St. Vrain 32,300 42,400 36,500 31,200 55,400 36,100 Creek (1,530) (1,920) (1,620) (1,480) (2,010) (1,530)

Upstream U 42: St. Vrain f f 32,400 30,300 35,900 32,000 Creek (1,540) (1,480) (1,730) (1,540)

U 43: S. Platte 30,700 36,600 34,000 35,600 35,100 33,800 River (1,380) (1,760) (1,530) (1,610) (1,820) (1,260)

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

f Sample unava lable due to weather.

• • January samp;, e collected Feb.4 due to weather.

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

Sampling Monthly Collection Dates Locations 5-31-80 6-21-80 2-4-80** 2-23-80 3-30-80 4-20-80 Effluent 227 < 144 182 < 151 < 152 < 151 E 38: Farm Pond (coosequill) (189)* (168)

E 41: Slough to 182 < 152 < 143 < 151' g

< 135 St. Vrain Creek (148)

Downstream

< 143 < 138 < 100 < 157 < 151 < 155 ,

D 37: Lower Latham N

, Reservoir D 40: S. Platte River

< 183 < 151 g Below Confluence < 171 < 150 < 174 ___

D 45: St. Vrain < 175 < 144 < 170 < 265 < 151 g Creek Upstream U 42: St. Vrain f f < 155 < 192 g g Creek U 43: S. Platte 215 < 166 < 145 < 222 < 151 g River (199)

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

f Sample unavailable.

g Analysis in progress.

• • January sample collected Feb.4 due to weather.

l 1

v v v v v v v v v -

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

Sampling Monthly Collection Dates Locations 2-4-80** 2-23-80 3-30-80 4-20-80 5-31-80 6-21-80 Effluent E 38: Farm Pond < 149 < 128 < 145 283 < 134 230 (coosequill) . (477) (256)

E 41: Slough to 123

< 157 < 135 215 < 136 g (342)*

St. Vrain Creek (430)

Downstream D 37: Lower Latham 338 < 130 < 138 143 184 < 136 Reservoir (324) (316) (276) $

D 40: S.Platte River 600 179 692

< 150 < 155 g Below Confluence (142) (455) (306)

D 45: St. Vrain 935 208 < 133

< 145 < 213 g Creek (726) (364)

Upstream U 42: St. Vrain f f < 136 < 159 g g Creek U 43: S. Platte < 157 < 144 < 130 < 192 < 133 River - 9

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

f Sample unavailable.

Analysis in orogress.

• p January sample collected Feb.4 due to weather.

U x; U S 9 U 4 U V O O Table II. C.9 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in B,ottom Sediment (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected February 4.1980 ** -

Sampling 106 137 95 Cs Zr & Nb Locations Effluent 3,660 < 642 < 231 E 38: Farm Pond (5,740),

(coosequill) __

E 41: Slough t

< 3,510 St. Vrain Creek

< 642 < 231 Downstream D 37: Lower Latham < 3,510 < 642 < 231 Reservoir D 40: S. Platte River 5,880 < 642 443 Below Confluence (5,870) (304)

D 45: St. Vrain 5,000 < 714 < 253 Creek (6,350)

Upstream U 42: St. Vrain f f f Creek U 43: S. Platte 5,470 < 642 < 231 River (5,740)

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

f Sample unavailable.

• • January sample collected Feb.4 due to weather.

g v

v '

b 9 )

N 9 8 3 7 3 3 2 2 20 2

& 2 2 2 2 30 f 2 73 r < < < < ( < .

)

v Z .

D.

S

)

g 6 k 9

/

i 1 C (

p v (

l t a n vr e

m e i t d n e i S

e m s 1 4 1 0) c v o t

C 5 1

5 5 4 13 4 5

n e

6 6 6 6 2,6 f 6 t 7 d o < < < < 1( < i B f n

n _

o i c s  %

n . 5 o 9 v i .

t e a h r0 t t8 n9 r e1 o c f n3 o2 e C r y a v er * -

d a 0 0 ) 0 ) ) ) _

i u u 0 0 08 5 70 00 s _

l r R 8, 0, 18 6, 10 06 e _

cb 6 1, 2, 2, 8, f 7, 3, s ue 0 3 3 3 e _

nF 1 55 45 65 h o < < ( .

1( ( t i n d e ad r _

v R e t

a p .

gc e ne nl _

i l i b tl ( a _

t o l _

9. i C m

si ea CE s e i v m e k rc t a

. yl e en nn -

e I ap ve i u . .

I rn ) r m iu a _

N eaS

- a s

l l

C m a

a h

Rl f

t e rl l m gn t di n e t r en n m n e ep b mr no n nu ti r ai t o i a i t c m e

aao ii oq a t Lo tC a e a t na TGf l t u P e h r s v a r r r a US pa l s gV n rr l w Vk t Vk l r mc f mo u w ee Po e s

.ee Pe

• f ao f E

ro aG o . o ws oe .le .e p U

v SL l t D t r t r .i _

V F( SS LR SB SC SC SR -

m 8 1 7 3 5 2 3 3 4 e 4 4 4 4 E E D D D U U U

() U U U U b U U V u L' Table 11. C.9 -

Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in B7ttom Sediment (pci/kr) fo Samples Collected March 30, 1980 .

Sampling l 106 7.r & t;b Ru Cs Locations i 1,

i Effluent E 38: Farm Pond  ; < 3,730 < 648 < 231 (Coosequill) b F 41: Slough to

< 3,730 < 648 < 231 St. Vrain Creek Downstream D 37: Lower Latham < 3,748 < 650 < 236 Reservoir y a

D 40: S. Platte River < 3,120 < 542 < 193 Below Confluence D 45: St. Vrain < 3,730 < 648 < 231 Creek Upstream

< 3,730 < 648 < 231 U 42: St. Vrain Creek U 43: S. Platte

< 231

, River < 3,720 < 648

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

g

V U. U V U V U U v v v Table II. C.9 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Cot entrations in Bottom Sediment (pCi/kn) for Samples Collected Aoril 20, 1530 .

~ 137 95 7,r 6 Nb Sampling 106 Cs Ru Locations Effluent < 230

< 646 E 38: Farm Pond (Goosequill)

• }*

< 3,760 595 299 E 41: Slough to (292)

St. Vrain Creek (738) ____,

Downstream

< 3,760 < 621 < 229 D 37: Lower Latham Reservoir

< 3,770 638 < 229 D 40: S. Platte Rivee (748)

Below Confluence

< 3,760 - 920 < 229 D 45: St. Vrain Creek (744)

Upstream

< 3,710 < d51 < 231 u 42: St. Vrain Creek

< 3,409 583 < 207 U 43: S. Platte (710)

River

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

C v v v v v v v v v v Table II. C.9 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Bottoia Sediment (pci/kn) for Samples Collected May 31. 1980 .

Sampling 106 g 137 95 Cs Zr & Nb

. Locations Effluent

'E 38: Farm Pond- < 5,040 < 872 < 313 (Coosequill)

E 41: Slough t < 3,270 < 557 < 206 St. Vrain Creek Downstream ,

D 37: Lower Latham < 3,720 985 < 234 Reservoir- (770) , ,

en D 40: S. Platte River < 4,120 < 703 < 260 Below Confluence D 45: St. Vrain < 5,400 < 922 < 341 Creek I

Upstream

< 6,950 < 1,190 < 440 U 42: Sr vrain Creek U 43: S. Platte

< 653 < 211

< 3,830 River , _

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

~~

N' - v v v v v v v v v v Table II. C.9 -

Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Bottom Sediment (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected June 21,1980 .

Sar.pling 106 Cs Zr & Nb

, Ru Locations Effluent

< 3,720 < 635 < 235 E 38: Fara Pond (Goosequill)

E 41: Slough to < 264 St. Vrain Creek < 4,140 . < 715 Downstream D 37: Lower Latham < 3,740 < 651 < 232 Reservoir u; D 40: S. Platte River < 644 < 237 Below Confluence < 3'720 D 45: St. Vrain

< 5,600 < 971 < 358 Creek Upstream

< 3,720 < 644 < 237 u 42: St. Vrain ,

Creek U 43: S. Platte < 3,740 < 651 < 232 River s

roe

f a

l l 60 l

II.C.3 Precipitation l

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

Precipitation collectors of size sufficient to produce a significant sample 1 l

are located at two locations, F-1 and F-4. Values are expressed as depo-sition (i.e. pCi/m )2 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 l values. The deposition measured is the sum of dry and precipitation deposition

)

as the collectors are washed down each time. The tritium deposition is calculated as the product of the specific activity measured in the water 4

and the total volume. The sample collected February 4, 1980 included all  :

)

f of January. A sample could not be collected in January due to inclement weather. The concentrations measured were less than for the last half of 1979.

i l This was true although the tritium released from the reactor was greater in the first half of 1980 than the second half of 1979. The explanation is that the major source of tritium has always been from world wide fallout due to i

l weapons testing. The increment due to reactor effluents is small compared l

)

l to weapons fallout even when the latter is decreasing. The mean deposition l

l I for the 6 month period was not statistically significant between the two sites.

l l It should be noted that no significant differences have ever been o). served

)

t far F-1 and F-4. Since these collection sites are at opposite directions

[

( and in the predominant wind patterns around the reactor, this observation supports the fact that observed deposition values are due to world-wide l J fallout and not to reactor effluents.

l Table II.C.11 and II.C.12 list the precipitation deposition of Ru-106,  ;

I i

Cs-137 and Zr-Nb-95. The mean values at F-1 and F-4 were not significantly different. ' Vandalism of the collection jug seriously hindered the collection of samples at the F-1 site.

D-

61

)-

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-l' and F-4 locations.

)

)

) ,

t l

l

)

)

)-

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

Cumulative Gross Beta Deposition (pC1/m ) Tritium g

Volume

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

D F4 F1 F4 F1 F4 F1 F4 F1 F4 F1 21.5 8.71 < 35.5 31.9 2,660 1,990 2-4-80 32 50 < 35.5 23.2 (6.93)** (8.13)' (3.66) (7.49) (260) (253) 14.8 9.62 7.88 21.9 22.7 < 229 < 229 3-30-80 50 50*** 12.3 (6.78) (6.45) (3.81) (3.53) (7.49) (7.06) 3.41 7.37 7.86 11.2 11.3 445 < 223 as 4-26-80 40 50*** 3.80 "

(5.28) (6.15) (3.03) (3.52) (5.88) (6.84) (210) 6.66 f 13.8 f 20.5 f 870 5-10-80 f 50 f (6.17) (3.72) (7.00) (280) 112 f 37.5 f 150 f 684 6-8-80 f 54 f (9.06) (15.3) (17.2) (251)

_a

• 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.).

• • • Collected March 1 and April 1%, 1980, respectively.

f Sample unavailable, jug vandalized.

v v v v v v v v v v v Table 17. 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 )

106 Zr-Nb

( t ) Ru Cs Zr-Nb Ru Cs Zr-Nb Ru Cs 2-4-80 32 460 384 65.9 e e e 460 384 65.9 (165)** (45.5) (16.4) (165) (45.5) (16.4) 3-1-80 50 < 18.9 < 5.85 < 2.50 35.6 < 10.0 < 4.80 < 18.9 9.55 < 2.50 (30.7) (8.95) 4-26-80 40 < 20.0 < 6.22 < 2.69 < 26.0 < 8.09 < 3.47 < 20.0 < 6.22 22.69 (3.30) g 5-10-80 f f f f f f f f f f 6-8-80 f f f f f f f f f f a

• 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.),

e Insufficient weight or volume for analysis, f Sample unavailable, jug vandalized.

v v v v v v v~ v v v v 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 )

Dts 6

Ru Cs Zr-Nb Ru Cs Zr-Nb Ru Cs ' Zr-Nb

ite )

2-4-80 50 48.8 < 15.7 13.1 < 30.6 < 9.55 12.4 36.9 15.3 25.8 (21.9) *

• f(5.99) (2.37) .(2 96) (34.8) (9J41) (3.77) 3-30-80 50 30.9 7.93 < 2.48 < 30.3 < 9.40 < 3.98 < 30.3 7.79 < 2.48 (17.7) (4.72) (8.52) ,

a 4-12-80 50 < 23.6 < 7.33 < 3.16 20.0 12.7 < 1.41 < 9.44 16.9 < 1.41 (13.2) (3.51) (6.59) 5-10-80 50 < 23.4 < 7.27 < 3.11 < 30.3 53.0 4.63 < 23.4 58.5 6.72 (7.69) (4.45) (9.53) (6.32) 6-8-80 54 < 9.83 < 3.05 1.59 .< 29.7 29.8 < 3.98 < 9.83 30.3. 5.00 (1.69) (7.23) (7.21) (3.60)

• 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.).

O U S U U U U U U V U Table II. C.13' Radiostrontium Deposition from Precipitation at Locations F1 and F4 (pCi/m ).

"" * "" Strontium 90 Sample Ending g ) , ""* Strontium 89

• • F1 F4 F1- F4 F1 F4 50 13.0 (28.3) ** 70.3 (29.9) 15.0 (9.64) < 10.2 2-4-80 32 3-30-80 50 50*** < 12.1 11.8 (32.3) < 14.0 < 10.6 50*** 15.1 (25.0) < 7.62- <f7.30 9.57 (8.77) 4-26-80 40 17.5 (25.9) f

< 8.74 5-10-80 f 50 f

< 8.02 f

< 9.20 g 6-8-80 f 54 f

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

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

• • • Collected March 1 and April 12, 1980, respectively.

f Sample unavailable, jug vandalized.

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

66

)

II.D. Food Chain Data

1. Milk. Milk is the most important radiation dose pathway for f 11-3, I-131, Cs-137 and Sr-89,90. Tritium concentrations in milk are summarized I in Table II.D.1. There was no significant difference in mean tritium values l

in water extracted from milk at the only dairy in the Facility area (F-44) and the Adjacent Composite and the Reference Composite mean values for the first half of 1980 (see also Table 11.11.1). Tritium mean values for Facility, Adjacent and Reference sites were 269, 261 and 222 pCi/1 respectively

) and were less than values observed during the second half of 1979. Tritium concentrations in milk should respond rapidly to changes in tritium concen-trations of the water intake to the cow due to the short biological 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 87% water (13-4%, depending on the cow breed, pasture, and feed). Skim milk accordingly has a higher water content. It may be assumed though that the remaining solids in milk (proteins, carbohydrates, and lipids)

) also contain some tritium due to exchange of tritium with hydrogen on these j large molecular structures. This tritium concentration will be very much lower than in the water fraction and is not significant for dose considerations.

) Tables II.D.2 and II.D.3 list the Sr-90 and Sr-89 concentrations l

l in milk. There was no significant difference between the three sampling zones. As expected the mean value for Sr-89 was less than the MDC.

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

in Table II.D.4. Although there is some relationship between measured I-131 and Cs-137 concentrations in milk and those in air (Table II.B.4), the

) correlation is low due to feeding practices discussed below. The peak vales observed 4-5-80 correspond to a peak in measured I-131 air concentration on the sa.,e collection date. K-nat, as measured by K-40 is very constant in

)

67 l

milk. The mean literature value is 1.5 g/L. K-nat is measured and reported therefore only as a quality coritrol measure of Cs-137 and I-131 measured in the same sample by gamma-ray spectrometry.

Due to the availability of a large NaI(TI) scintillation crystal, shield and pulse height analyzer that has been dedicated to only counting h

i project milk samples, we have lowered our MDC for I-131. A counting time 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. Differences in counting l time produce different MDC values.

It should be noted here that a close relationship between forage deposition and milk concentrations should be expected for the strontium radioiso*. opes, for Cs-137 and for I-131 only if the cows are on pasture

) or fed green cut grass or alfalfa. This unfertunately is not the general feeding practice at the dairies around the reactor. Nearly all cattle feed 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 'nilk concentrations very difficult. On the other hand, if elevated I-131 or tritiura concentrations are noted, the surface deposition must have been reasonably: related in time and location.

l

)

k .___ _ ______-___ _ _______~______________.____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . _

O' C

~

07 'O- O U U U U U ,

U Table II. D.1 Tritium Concentrations in Water Extracted from Milk (pCi/1).

Facility Area 44 Mjacent Composite

• Reference Composite

• D , 80 Pre-Pasture Season January 12 < 270 - < 270 < 270 February 9 257 (205)** < 229 401(206)

March 1 249 (205) 307 (205) < 229 Apri) 5 321 (205) 326 (206) < 229 Pasture Season Ma~y 4 313 (209) 425 (210) < 233 May 10 313 (209) < 233 286 (209) .

May 17 < 233 < 233 m 328(209)

May 24 < 233 431 (210) 356 (209)

Phy 31 < 230 < 230 < 230 June 8 < 230 < 230 < 230 June 15 580 (205) 663 206) 583 (205)

June 21 595 (205) 663 206) 415(203)

June 28 < 227 290 248) 230 (247)

• Mjacent Composite Locations: A6, A28, A31, A50, 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.).

U U $ U $ U U V U V v Table II. D.2 Strontium 90 Actisity in Milk (pCi/1).

• " Facility Area 44 Adjacent Composite

• Reference Composite *

,, g Pre-Pasture Season January 5.54 (1.98) ** 3.30 (1.15) 14.8 (6.15)

February 3.74 (1.03) 2.83 (1.05) 4.05 (2.57)

March 1.77(1.26) 2.69 (2.03) 1.55 (0.921)

April 2.66 (2.04) 1.55 (1.59) < 3.95 Pasture Season May. 4 < 1.40 < 2.24 < 2.56 May 10 < 4.30 2.34 (1.91) < 2.84 $

May 17 d 1.15 (1.07) < 2.70 May 24 <0 < 0.994 1.09 (1.02)

May 31 2.46(878) 1.37 <1.31 < 1.31 June 8 < 5.55 1.52 (0.925) < 1.31 June 15 1.93 (1.35) 2.93 (1.40) < 1.31 June 21 g < 1.31 < 1.31 June 28 g g g

• 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, (1.96 S.D.).

g Analysis in pro 9ress.

d Sample lost during analysis.

U v v v v v v v v v -v Table II. D.3 Strontium 89 Activity in Milk (pCi/l).

Facility Area 44 Mjacent romposite

• Reference' Composite

• D Pre-Pasture Season January < 1.60 < 0.912 < 4.65 February < 0.749 0.828 (2.27)** 10.2 (7.12)

March < 1.39 < 1.70 < 0.778 Qr11 < 1.74 < 1.38 < 3.39 Pastui* % son K- 4 1.19 (2. 0) < 1.97 < 2.14 Me- : < 3.63 < 1.72 < 2.44 5 May 17 d '< 1.57 < 2.44 May 24 < 1.21 < 1.43 < 0.965 May 31 < 1.17 < 1.13 < 1.14 June 8 < 4.74 < 1.37 < 1.13 June 15 < 2.08 < 1.97 < 1.25 June 21 g 1.07 -(1.83) < 1.16 June 28 g ~g g

• Mjacent 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, (1.96 S.D.).

g Analysis in progress.

d Sample lost during analysis,

~

71

)

Table II. D.4 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Composite ,

P1)k. Samples.

) '

I (PCi/1) Cs (pCi/1) Nat. K (g/1)

C d t

) 1-12-80 Facility 6.62 (0.938)** < 0.106 0.710(0.0108)

Adjacent 6.02 (0.938) < 0.106 1.53 (0.0119)

Reference 8.34 (0.952) < 0.103 1.52 (0.117) 2-9-80 Facility 0.450(0.891) 3."28 (0.816) 1.55 0.110)

Adjacent 3.59 (0.899) 1.69(0.828) 1.73 0.114)

) Reference 0.383(0.925) 0.981(0.816) 1.60 0.111) 3-1 80 Facility < 0.106 0.802(0.844) 1.50 (0.117)

Adjacent < 0.111 2.93 (0.859) 1.52 (0.120)

Reference 2.31(0.990) 5.51 (0.857) 1.49 (0.119)

) 4-5-80 Facility 39.9 (0.712-) 28.6 (0.698) 2.47 (0.0111)

Adjacent 11.8 (0.707) 10.4 (0.667) 1.46 (0.0102)

Reference 13.5 (0.616) 9.43 (0.587) 1.60 (0.0879) 5-4-80 Facility 1.69 (0.950) 1.59(0.925) 1.45 (0.137)

Adjacent 2.02 (0.862) 2.68 (0.823) 1.52 (0.116).

) Reference < 0.136 < 0.135 0.955(0.0124) 5-10-80 Facility < 0.169 < 0.170 2.97 (0.153)

Adjacent 5.09(0.955) 5.52(0.906) 1.45 (0,012)

Reference 42.3 (0.980) 15.4 (0.902) 1.94 (0.124) 5-17-80 Facility d d d Adjacent 4.95(1.05) 4.34 (0.907) 1.57 (0.125)

Reference < 0.998 < 0.100 < 0.001 5-24-80 Facility 7.57 0.788) < 0.092 1.55 (0.011)

Adjacent

) Reference 7.14 0.810) 8.33 1.01) 5.66 (0.759) 5.55(0.933) 1.52 1.55 (0.016)

(0.014) 5-31-80 Facility < 0.0985 < 0.099 1.34 (0.114)

Adjacent 2.33(0.963) 1.17 (0.878) 1.55 (0.012)

Reference 1.17 (0.907) 0.671(0.847) 1.36 (0.0116)

)

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

)

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

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

.d Sample lost during analysis.

72

)

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

)

^

• Cs (pci/1)

C d I (PCi/1) Nat. K (g/l)

) 6-8-80 Facility 24.0 (0.919)* 30.2 ' (0.871) 1.73 (0.012)

Adjacent 0.658(0.880) 24.0 ~ (0.851) 1.46 (0.117)

Reference 2.13(0.937) 24.3 (0.886) 1.38(0.123) 6-15-80 Facility .

d d d Adjacent 31.3 (1.02) 8.34 (0.914) 1.83(0.0132)

) Reference 11.1 (0.964) 7.40 (0.878) 1.51 (0.0124) 6-21-80 Facility 7.97 1.27) 6.59 1.20) 1.46 0.0159)

Adjacent 44.5 0.9/6) 31.9 0.923) 1.90 0.0128)

Reference 8.35 1.10) 6.08 1.03) 1.54 0.016)

) 6-28-80 Facility 4.27(1.06) 4.42 (0.963) 1.4 (0.0151)

Adjacent 3.32(0.920) < 0.100 1.51(0.0120)

Reference < 0.135 < 0.128 1.84 (0.00838) .

)

l l

l

)

)

l

)

• 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, (1.96 S.D.).

d Sample lost during analysis.

73

)

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. Tritium values that were obtained were similar to those reported in past reports. There were no significant differences

) in mean tritium values between Facility, Adjacent and Reference locations even though the Facility mean value was the highest. The tritium in forage water was greater than the concentration in milk. This indicates that the

) forage sampled is not the principal local cattle feed.

Table II.D.6 lists Ru-106, Cs-137 and Zr-Nb-95 activities in forage samples for the second half of 1979.

) Gross beta concentrations in soil and forage collected at the same locations are given in Table II.D.7. The low values measured for R-25 and the two facility samples on May 24, 1980 were due to sawdust that had been

) mixed with the sample.

From Table II.H.1 it is observed that mean values for all radio-nuclides in each sample type are very close to those measured during all of

) 1979.

Cattle forage sampics, 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 H-3, Cs-137, and the strontium radioisotopes. Such samples are collected when possible.

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

f This often presents difficulties in data interpretation.

?

74

)

Table II. D.5 Tritium, Strontium 89, and Strongiumy 24, 90 g entrations in

) Forage for Samples Collected ,

Tritium Strontium 89 Strontium 90

^#*** (pCi/kg) (pCi/kg)

(pC1/1)

)

Facility t

4 ** e < 4.85 84.0(6.73) t 44 e < 4.67 22.1 (5.89)

Adjacent t e < 9.26 206 (5.89) 6

) t 28 e < 8.24 39.5(6.82)

• 9 9 31 t

• 9 9 36

) t 48 e . -

89.1(9.71) 50 e < 10.7. 45.2 (11.1)

Reference

}

16 e < 11.4 58.4 (12.0) l 17 e 9 9  !

e

) i 20 9 9 22 < 230 < 8.78 251 (14.5) 23 e < 10.3 128 (12.9) 25 e < 22.3 176 (21.2) 3

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

) i Silage or dry hay.

e Insufficient volume for analysis.

g Analysis in progress.

• • Collected May 31, 1980.

)

75

)

Table II. D.5 Tritium, Strontium 89, and Strontium 90 Concentrations in

) Forage for Samples Collected June 15, 1980 .

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

)

Facility t4 f f f t 44 870(208).,* g g Adjacent t e g g 6

) t 28 795(210) g g t

31 376(203) g g i

36 496 (204) g s

) t 48 8 9 9 t

• 9 9 50 Reference

]

t 393 (203) g g 16 t e g g 17 t

• 9 9 20 t

22 846(207) g g t

23 510(204) g g 9 9

] t 25

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

)

J

• Silage or dry hay.

e Insufficient volume for analysis.

f Sample unavailable.

g Analysis in progress.

D

76

)

Table II. D.6 Garma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Forage (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected by N !QRn

) -.

Areas Ru Cs Zr & Nb

) , Facility ,

~

4 ** e e e 44 < 46.2 87.7 (12.2) 21.1 (7.48)

)

Adjacent 6 < 48.S < 32.3 28.8 (12.2) 28

) 9 9 9 31 < 72.6 < 22.6 30.0 (17.5) 36 < 56.1 < 17.5 18.3 (14.0) 48 < 77.0 59.1 (20.7) 33.9 (13.0)

)

50 < 54.7 < 17.5 42.0 (15.0)

Reference

)

16 < 91.0 < 28.3 38.3 (22.9) 17 < 33.8 19.9 ( 9.54) 10.6 ( 8.25) 20 < 41.1 77.7 (12.5) 34.3 (10.6) 22 < 45.7 43.0 (14.0) 43.4 (12.6) 23 < 50.4 80.4 (15.0) 70.7 (13.9) 25 < 70.9 31.0(20.9)

) 14.6(17.6)

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

progress.

) ** Collected May 31, 1980.

e Insufficient weight or volume for analysis.

l i

77

.O Table II. D.6 Ganuna-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Forage

,O (pci/kg) for samples Collected J,m. ic; ionn Areas Ru Cs Zr & B O Facility 4 9 9 9

! 44 9 9 9

O Adjacent 6 9 9 9 28 9 9 9

!O 31 9 9 9 36 9 9 9 48 9 9 9 0

50 9 9 9

"*f""*"""

-O 16 9 9 g

] 17 9 9 9 20 9 9 g lO 22 9 9 9 23 9 9 9 25 9 9 9

!O

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

O g Analysis in progress.

i 1

78

)

Table II. D.7 Gross Beta Concentrations in Soil and Forage (pci/kg) for

) Samples Collected Second Quarter, 1980.

May 24,1980 June 15, 1980 3,,pyg

) Location Soil Forage Soil Forage Soil Forage Facility 4 ** 30,800 3,900 f f (1,490)* (184)

) 44 28,200 7,500 32,300 15,474 (1,350) (251) (1,500) (240)

Adjacent 6 28,500 17,000 27,000 19,200

) (1,430) (392) (1,290) (317) 28 7,200 11,900 22,000 17,500 (852) (316) (1,300) (293) 25,500 15,800 28,300 18,200 31 (1,350) (325) (1,430) (335) 25,800 14,300 25,000 17,800

) 36 (1,.360) (307) (1,350) (250) 30,300 17,100 30,200 22,800 48 (1,400) (352) (1,480) (333) 28,600 29,400 30,300 14,900 50 (1,430) (624) (1,440) (240)

)

Reference 16' 25,000 25,000 26,200 24,800 (1,300) (534) (1,370) (395) 17 21,600 14,300 27,000 20,900

) 20 (1,250) (312) (1,290) 26,200 (357) 20,100 28,600 20,400'?

22 hf',$hh 2 (1,410) 2 (531) hk',h0h (1 270) (333) 23 30,700 18,900 29,200 21,300

) 25 (1,500) 24,500 (402) 6,340 (1,260) 23,500 (314) 18,500 (1,330) (211)' (1,340) (316)

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence

) interval, (1.96 S.D.).

f Sample unavailable.

• • Collected May 31, 1980.

)

79 9

II.D. Food Chain Data

3. Soil. Table II.D.8 presents gross beta activity of soil per G

unit surface area for the first and second quarter of 1980.

Soil sampics are collected at the same time and Iceation as forage samples. A core borer is used to collect the sample. The sample depth is 10.3 cm and the area is 102 cm2. Gros' soil density is approximately 1 g/cm .

There was ao significant difference in the gross beta activity values 3

between the Facility, Adjacent and Reference collection areas. The gross beta concentrations are extremely constant because the measured activity is due primarily to naturally occurring radionuclides.

]

The activities of the fission products Ru-106, Cs-137 and Zr-Nb-95 per unit surface area are given in Table II.D.9 for the same period. This analysis is performed by Ge(Li) spectrometry due to the predominant concen-3 tration of the naturally occurring radionuclides. Essentially oniy Cs-137 can be measured in the local soil. This is because the recent deposition of Ru-106 and Zr-Nb-95, the short-lived fission products, is minimal compared to J

the past deposition of Cs-137. Cs-137 has a half-life of 30 years and is trapped by ion exchange in the top 2-3 cm of soils with elay minerals. For this reason soils that are disturbed or turned over for agricultural purposes

-) ,

will have widely varying Cs-137 concentrations. Most of the soil sampling j sites in the surveillance program fall in the latter category.

Tritium, Sr-89 and Sr-90 in soil are shown in Table II.D.10.

D Tritium specific activity in soil is statistically the same as that in l other environmental samples. e.g. water, forage and milk. The concentrations l

of the strontium radioisotopes were quite variable. The mean Sr-89 value was l strongly influenced by a few samples and the mean concentration of Sr-90 was 33,69 and 102 pCi/kg for the Facility, Adjacent and Reference zones respectively.

80 3

These mean values are not significantly different and less than observed in the previous reporting period.

3 The numbers given in parentheses next to all values above the minimum detectable concentration are the 95% confidence intervals for each measured value. This number is calculated solely on the basis of counting statistics. Obviously this uncertainty is only a part 3

of the total expected variation that must be assigned to any measured analytical value. The total variation must include the true environmental (often called sampling) variation as well as the analytical or methodological 3

variation. The variation due to counting is only part of the methodological

, variation. While the true environmental variation cannot be determined

,) directly the methodological variation can be measured. An experiment was conducted previously in which a single large soil sample was thoroughly homogenized and 10 aliquots taken for Sr-90 analysis. The standard deviation 3 as a percentage of the mean value (coefficient of variation) was 63%. This l

is the methodological standard deviation which in the experiment included counting statistics. The environmental variation is expected to be g considerably greater. This is due to the fact that Sr-90, like Cs-137, i

is deposited largely on the soil surface, and when.the surface is disturbed '

the surface layer is often greatly diluted or not even part of the sample 3 collected. For these reasons the variation in reported Sr-90 and Sr-89 soil concentrations, although large, should be expected. j i

1 D i l

D

81 lO Table II. D.8 Gross Beta Activity in Soil per Unit Surface Area (pCi/m ) for

O Samples collected Second Quarter, 1980.

Sampling Location. May 24, 1980 June 15, 1980

!O Facility 4 ** 3.97 (0.193)* h 2

0 44 3.63 (0.175) 4.03 (0.194)

Adjacent 6 3.68 (0.184) 3.48 (0.167)

.; 28 0.928 (0.110) 2.84 (0.168) 31 3.29(0.178) 3.65 (0.185) 36 3.33 (0.175) 3.22 (0.174)

O 48 3.91 (0.180) 3.89(0.191) 50 3.69(0.185) 3.92 (0.186)

Reference 16 3.22(0.168) 3.38 (0.176) 17 2.79 (0.168) 3.48 (0.167) 0 20 3.69(0.180) 3.38 (0.176) 22 3.55 (0.181) 3.30 (0.163) 23 3.97 (0.194) 3.77 (0.163) 0 25 3.17(0.171) 3.04 (0.173)

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

!o h Sample co'llection omitted.

• • Collected May 31, 1980.

iO

82 ,

) .

Table II. D.9 Gamca-ray Emitting Radionuclide Ac:ivity per Unit Surface

) Area of Soil (nCi/m 2 ) for Samples Collected May 2d_10An .

Sampling 106 95 Ru Cs Zr & Nb

) Location Facility 4 < 317 87.7 (67.5)* < 19.7

) 44 < 401 < 70.0 < 24.9, Adjccent 6 < 337 58.8 (65.5) < 20.4

)

28 < 320 < 54.7 < 20.1 31 < 318 < 55.6 < 19.7 36 < 401 81.9 (96.0) < 24.1

) < 371 < 64.9 < 23.1 48 50 < 318 < 55.6 < 19.7

) Reference 16 < 337 104.0 (71.3) < 20.9 17 < 317 < 54.7 < 19.7

) 20 < 467 < 78.9 ,

< 292.

22 < 421 < 72.6 < 26.1 23 < 462 < 78.9 < 29.1

) P.5 < 472 < 81.7 < 29.4

.I. '

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence )

interval, (1.96 S.D.). )

) ** Collected May 31, 1980.

1

) '

l

(13 9

Table II. D.9 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Activity per Unit Surface g Area of Soil (nCi/m 2) for Samples Collected _ June 15,1980 .

106 9 Sampling Ru Cs Zr & Nb G Location Facility 4 h h 5 9 44 < 573 < 100 < 35.7 Adjacent 6 < 695 < 119 < 42.6~

O 28 < 451 < 76.9 < 27.6 31 < 341 < 58.2 < 20.8 f 36 < 470 < 80.2 < 28.9 g _.

48 < 530 < 90.6 < 32.6 50 < 228 46.7 (57.57 23.5 (21.4) e Reference 16 434(521)* < 56.8 < 20.9 17 < 323 < 55.1 < 19.7

_' < 32.6 20 < 533 196(93.0).

22 1570(490) 168(64.6) 39.1 (24.5) 23 < 533 192 (93.0). < 32.6 3 25 < 508 < 86.7 < 51.2 (

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

h Sample collection omitted.

i

84

)

Table II. D.10 Tritium, Strontium 89, and Strontium 90 concentrations in

) r il for Samples Collected May 24, 1980 .

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

) Location Facility 4 ** 343 (205)* 252 (124) < 80.7

) 44 < 230 < 73.5 < 84.8 Adjacent 6 < 223 166 (158) < 114

) < 230 28 s 07 < 124 31 < 230 < 206 < 247 36 267(209) < 87.3 < 101 -

) < 230 48 < 101 117 (120) 50 < 230 < 109 < 129 Reference 16 < 223 < 85.7 210 (105)

~

17 < 223 < 108 ' < 121 3 20 < 223 < 70.7 136 (85.9) 22 < 230 204 (208) 430 (124) 23 < 230 191 (151) < 78.2 3 25 292 (209) < 68.0 97.8(78.2)

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

) ** Collected May 31,1980.

)

1 85

)

Table II. D.10 Tritium, Strontium 89, and Styoutium 90 Concentrations in

) Soil for Samples Collected ._ June 15. 1980 .

Sampling Tritium Strontium 89 Strontium 90

) (pCi/1) (pCi/kg) (pCi/kg)

Location Facility 4 h h h

) 44 581(207)* < 102 4 119' Adjacent '

6 714 (209) <.90.9 4 106.

)

28 324(205) < 76.5 < 85.7 l e < 10? < 118 31 36 e < 84.0 130 (103)

) ,

48 263(204) < 86.8 < 99.0 l l

< 230 < 78.1 < 90.0 50

)

Reference 16 774 (209) < 88.9 < 104 17 662(208) 168(201) < 145

) e < 82.5 159(102) 20 22 e < 90.7 < 110 23 e < 70.2 < 78.4

) e < 116 < 137 25 i

• Uncertainties (in parentheses) are for the 95% confidence

) im erval e Insufficien(t 1.96 S.D. f)r analysis.

volume .

o h Sample collection omitted.

)

86

)

II.E. Aquatic Biota Table II.E.1 shows gross beta and strontium concentrations observed

) in aquatic biota collected during the first half of 1980. Serious sample collection problems were experienced during this reporting period due to unusually high run off. Benthic organisms and seston were nearly impossible

) to collect. It should be noted that collection of aquatic biota has been subcontracted to a private commercial fisheries company. Due to weather and a contract misunderstanding, the first quarter samples were collected

) the first week in April and the samples for May were inadvertently omitted. Samples were collected Nice in June to make up the deficit.

Gross beta concentrations in the sample types are higher than any particular

) fallout fission product because of the presence of the naturally occurring radionuclides,e.g. K-40. The few strontium-89, Sr-90, and gross beta concentrations observed were essentially the same as in previous reporting

) periods,and those from the downstream locations were not significantly different from the upstream locations. As expected Sr-89 concentrations were less than MDC in almost all cases.

) Table II.E.2 lists Ru-106, Cs-137 and Zr-Nb-95 concentrations. No explanation can be given for the great variation in the measured concentrations.

Due to the low number of samples no statistical comparisons could be made.

) The high MDC values for seston are due to the fact that such samples are counted by a G~e(Li) spectrometer system rather than the NaI used for most other sample types. This is because seston, wh'ich is principally 3 algae, collects and concentrates particulate radioactivity and 2

high resolution is necessary for radionuclide measurement of fission product activity in the presence of Ra-226 and Th-232 natural radioactivity.

3 Seston radionculide concentrations are generally higher than for the other sample types for all of the radioactivity analyses.

i

?

U U U U U U U U U V U Table II. E.1 Analyais of Composita

• Aqus, tic Biota For Samples collected n ret nua rter _ X, t **

Gross Beta Strontium gg Strontium 90 Sampling locations pC1/Kg pCi/Kg pCi/Kg Fish Upstream 4-4-80 6,980 (234) < 20.9 71.2 (23.8)

Downstream 4-4-80 10,740 (366) < 24.2 41.3 (22.9)

Effluent 4-4-80 7,960 (288) < 31.9 56.7 (38.7)

Benthic Organisms Upstream f f f Downstream f f f Effluent 4-4-80 7,160 (414) 9 9 Vascular Plants Upstro m 4-5-80 3,310(124) g g Downstream 4-5-80 2,270 (117) g g Effluent 4-5-80 2,420 (159) g g Seston Upstream f f f Downstream f f f Effluent f f f

• Upstream Composite: U 42, U 43.

Downstream Composite: D 40, D 45.

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

f Sample un: ailable.

g Analysis in progress.

@ U U .._ U U V U O U U V Table II. E.1 Analysis of Compositco Aqustic Biota For Samples collected ,1mne 19_19PO .*

Gross Beta Strontium gg Strontium 90 Sampling locations pCi/Kg pCi/Kg pCi/Kg Fish Upstream 6-21-80 8,210 (214) 9 9 Downstream 6-21-80 10,900 (312) g 9 Effluent 6-21-80 11,700 (331) 9 9 Benthic Organisms Upstream f f f-Downstream f f f' Effluent 6-21-80 11,000 (509) g g Vascular Plants Upstream 6-21-80 g g g Downstream 6-21-80 g g g Effluent 6-21-80 g g g Seston Upstream f f f Downstream f f f Effluent f f f

• Upstream Composite: U 42, U 43.

Downstream Composite: D 40, D 45.

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

f Sample unavailable.

g Analysis in progress.

Q U U U 4 V U v 0 V U Tcble II. E.1 Anolysis of Composite

• Aquatic Bicto For Samples collected June 30. 1980 .

Gross Beta Strontium gg Strontium 90 Sampling locations pCi/Kg pCi/Kg pCi/Kg Fish Upstream f f f Downstream 6-30-80 13,200 (496) g g Effluent 6-30-80 12,200 (348) g 9 Benthic Organisms Upstream 6-30-80 9,140 (427) g 9 Downstream f f f Effluent f f f Vascular Plants Upstream *** *** ***

Downstream *** *** ***

Effluent Seston Upstream 6-30-80 31,600 (1,280) e e Downstream 6-30-80 24,100 (1,500) e e Effluent 6-30-80 17,200 (1,390) e e

• Upstream Composite: U 42, U 43.

Downstream Composite: D 40, D 45.

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

• • • Monthly sample reportea in June 19, collection, e Insufficient weight or volume for analysis.

f Sample unavailable, g Analysis in progress.

O O O O U U U U U U L Table II. E.2 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Aquatic Biota Samples (pci/kg) for Samples Collected First Quarter, 1980 , *

• Sampling Locations

• 106 Ru Cs Zr & Nb

~

Fish

~

Upstream 4_4-80 399 (243) < 77.7 < 33.5 Downstream 4-4-80 357 (245) < 77.7 47.6 (32.4)

Effluent 4-4-80 < 80.0 118 (25.4) 36.3 (13.2)

Benthic Organisms Upstream f f f Downstream f -

f f Effluent 4-4-80 < 259

. 1,070.(76.6) 452 (96.2)

Vascular Plants Upstream 4-5-80 < 278 < 86.5 < 39.5 Downstream 4-5-80 < 287 113 (71.1) < 40.8 Effluent 4-5-80 < 287 < 89.5 < 40.8 Seston Upstream f f f Downstream f f f Effluent f f f

• Upstream Composite: U 42, U 43.

Downstream Composite: D 40, D 45.

Efflvent: E 38.

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

f Sample unavailable.

- p

Table II. E.2 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Concentrations in Aquatic Biota Samp1:3 (pCi/kg) for Samples Collected June 19, 1980 .**

106 l Sampling Locations

• Ru Cs Zr & Nb Fish Upstreac < 241 278 (58.2) < 32.2 Downstream < 253 421 (62.0) < 33.8' Effluent < 248 145 (59.4) 143 (39.3)

Benthic Organisms f f f Upstream f f f Downstream Effluent 6-21-80 < 209 , 496(54.1) 171 (28.1)

Vascular Plants Upstream 6-21-80 g g 9 g g g Downstream 6-21-80 Effluent 6-21-80 g g c 4

Seston f f f Upstream f f f Downstream f f f Effluent

• Upstream Composite: U 42, U 43.

Downstream (;omposite: D 40, D 45.

Effluent: E 38.

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

f Sample unavailable.

g Analysis in progress.

v v v v v v v v - ~ ~

Table II. E.2 Gamma-ray Emitting Radionuclide Qoncentrations in Aquatic Biota Samples (pCi/kg) for Samples Collect M June 30. 1980 . **

Sampling Locations

• Ru Cs Zr & Nb Fish f f I Upstream Downstream < 995 1,480 (246) 239 (136)

Effluent 9 9 9 Benthic Organisms Upstream < 1,780 2,720 (435) < 238 Downstream * - f f f Effluent f f f N

Vascular Plants Upstream Downstream Effluent Seston Upstream e e e Downstream e e e Effluent e e e

• 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.).

• • • Monthly sample reported in June 19 collection.

e Insufficient weight or volume for analysis, f Sample unavailable, g Analysis in progress.

93

).

II.F. Beef Cattle. Two head of beef 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 of humans. If thyroid I-131 contamination were .

significant this would be detected from the whole body count. Detectable I-131 concentrations have never been observed.

I Table II.F.1 gives values for the first half of 1980 for whole body counting of beef cattle. Unfortunately, due to heavy snow during the first quarter cattle could not be collected and transported to the whole body i

l counter. The animals are selected at random; however, the animal number is

) recorded and the animal may be retrieved and recounted if necessary. The Cs-137 concentrations are nearly identical to those observed during the last quarter of 1979. Variation in Cs-137 concentration only reflects a different cutting and/or source of hay and pasture for the animals.

The Cs-137 concentration is expressed as pCi per gram of K in the whole animal. This is done to more easily compare the counts between animals.

) K and Cs are both intracellular cations and by normalizing the Cs-137 i

activity to K, differences due to fat percentage in the animals are eliminated, i.e. the K concentration of fat free muscle is very constant.

f Table ~II.F.1 Radionuclides' in Facility" Area Beef Cattle' In-vivo Gamma ray activity in Fort St. Vrain area beef cattle June 21, 1980 I-131 Cs-137 (pCi/gK)

Cow 1 None Detected 20.1 Cow 2 None Detected 17.8

)

)

H

_ _ _ a

i 94-h:

I II.G.1 Sample Cross Check Data Since 1975 we have participated in a national EPA sponsored laboratory 7 intercomparison analytical program. We analyze air filters as well as milk-and water samples for the important radionuclides. The results obtained l since the last report are given in Table II.G.I.

h Inspection of Table II.G.1 reveals few aberrant measured values i.e. greater than the 3 sigma control limit. Only 6 of the 40 separate determinations exceeded the 3 sigma control limit. We reinvestigated all O of those and in most cases determined the source of error. In the case of the water sample for 2-1-80, Cr and 60Co values were in error due-to using I

the wrong calibration constant. Since these radionuclides are not expected b in FSV effluents we have in the past put little attention to their accurate calibration. As a result of the EPA crosscheck result we have recalculated calibration constants for each.

90 h .The Sr determination in water dated 9-7-79 seriously overestimated the concentration. We checked all calculations for the determination and can not determine the source of error. It is concluded that the error was l

O due to a coprecipitation problem which was corrected shortly thereafter.

l The better results for the 1-4-80 and 5-2-80 cross check samples indicate

! the problem has been corrected.

I h The results a the milk sample for 1-25-80 were in serious error 90 for Sr and particularly 1I I. No reason could be determined for the errors.

The results on the milk sample for 4-25-80 were outside the 3 sigma

• limit again for 90Sr. An exhaustive check of the calculation did not reveal the cause for error. Due to the above observations, however, we will shortly 131 recalibrate the milk counting' geometry for I and conduct an experiment O to' check chemical recovery of the 90Sr radiochemical procedure for milk samples.

l 0

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

95

)

Table II.G.I. EPA Cross-Check Data Sununary Radio CSU Actual Precision Control Limits % deviation

) Date nuclide Value Value (1 sigma) (3 Sigma) from known Air Filters, pCi/ filter 12-21-79 90Sr 13 9 1.5 4.5 44 137Cs 8 10 5 15 20

) Gross a 10 IC 5 15 0 Gross 8 29 29 5 15 0 3-28-80 90Sr 11 10 1.5 4.5 10 137Cs 16 20 5 15 20 Gross a 15 15 5 15

) Gross 8 c d' 5 0

15 -

l Milk, pCi/1 1-25-80 89Sr 8 10 5 15 20 90Sr 12 25 1.5 4.5

) 131I 24 .01 48 0.1 0.3 -

137Cs 33 40 5 15 18 K 1,732 1,600 80 240 8 4-25-80 89Sr 6 10 5 15 ., .40 90Sr 21 15 1.5 4.5 40

) 131I 23 33 5 15 30 137Cs 39 28 5 15 29 K 1,110 1,190 60 180 7 Water, Tritium ~pCi/l 12-14-79 3H 1,867 2,040 346 1,038 8 2-8-80 3H 1,100 1,750 341 1,023 37 4-11-80 3H 2,866 3,400 360 1,080 16 i 6-13-80 3H 2,235 2,000 345 '1,020 11

)

)

c Instrument malfunction.

)

96

)

Table II.G.I. EPA Cross-Check Data Sumary Radio CSU Actual Precision Control Limits S. deviation

) Value (1 sigma) (3 Sigma) from known __

Date nuclide Value Water, Al pha and Beta pCi/l 1-18-80 Gross a 23 30 8 24 23 Gross 8 34 45 5 15 24

)

3-21-80 Gross a 16 13 5 15 23 Gross 8 19 22 5 15 14 -

5-16-80 Gross a 31 23 5 15 35 Gross 6 20 14 5 15 43

) ,

Water, Gama pCi/11 2-1-80 slCr 211 101 5 15 109 60Co 26 11 5 15 45 ssZn 48 25 5 15 92

)

106Ru 45 51 5 15 12 134Cs 12 10 5 15 20 137Cs 34 30 5 15 13 Water, S-;rontium 89 and 90

)

9-7-79 89Sr < MDC 3 5 15 -

90Sr 61 28 1.5 4.5 225 1-4-80 89Sr 21 10 5 15 110 90Sr 20 20 1.5 4.5 0

)

5-2-80 895 r 5 5 5 5 0 90Sr 10 12 1.5 4.5 17

)

)

97

)

II.H. Summary and Conclusions Table II.H.1 presents the primary summary and analysis of data D collected during the first half of 1980. The tabular data may be used for comparison to other operating power reactors. For each sample type the number of sampics analyzed in the reporting period and the maximum and minimum values D

for each sample type are given. From log-normal analysis of each data set for the last 12 month period the geometric mean and standard deviation is presented. The arithmetic mean is also calculated back for the entire year and for the reporting period. It should be noted that the tabular data presented in the body of this report contain only positive calculated values.

Any calculated values less than zero or less than the minimum detectable con-3' centration (MDC) are listed as less than the actual MDC for that sample analysis. However, the actual result in all cases was used in the calculation for the arithmetic mean values for the last six months. Therefore all values, 9

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 9

directly from the tabular values in the report. It must be emphasized that while it is true that no sample can contain less than zero radioactivity due to the random nature of radioactive decay it is statistically possible 9

to obtain sample count rates less than the background and hence a negative result.

The log-normal probability treatment is 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 are plotted on the probit abcissa versus the activity concen-tration on the log ordinate. The geometric mean value x , is determined g

directly from the 50th percentile point. The geometric standard deviation v

98

)

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

)

' the arithmetic standard deviation is an additive parameter to the arithmetic mean (i i o), whereas in the log-normal distribution the geometric standard deviation 8, is a m Iti licative P parameter to the geometric mean (i g j g) *

) 1.e., the area betweeng i divided by go , andgi multiplied by a3should contain 68% of the frequency values. The log-normal statistical treatment is difficult when the number of samples 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 either actual values or less then MDC values.

From the values presented in Table 11.11.1 and the tabular data of the report the following observations and conclusions may be drawn:

1. There is no evidence that effluents from reactor operation during

) the reporting period produced statistically significant off-site concentrations above background in any of the sample types. The power generation of the reactor was greater during the first half of 1980 than during the last half of 1979 and it was observed that for nearly all sample categories the l

radionuclide concentrations decreased in this reporting period. This is l

l because environmental radioactivity input from previous atmospheric weapons i

test is still decreasing.

l

2. The log-normal treatment of all the data revealed that for most l

of the data such analysis is appropriate. However, sigmoid distributions were quite often observed. Sigmoid distributions can be resolved into l

bimodal or even trimodel log-normal distributions. This is generally l 4 interpreted to mean that there is more than one significant activity source. l

\

Y It was again noted that for all of the data analyzed over the past year i

by the log-normal treatment, those sample types that are reservoirs or j l

)

99  !

o  !

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

=O fluctuate. e.g., air and precipitation tended to be bimodal or trimodaily distributed.

4 3. As in every previous report, it was again apparent that the

~O variability observed around the mean values was great. This variability is l due to counting statistics and methodological error, but principally due to true environmental variation. It must be recognized and accounted for in 0 analysis of any set or environmental data before meaningrui conclusions can j be drawn, a

4. It can be concluded that the radiation dose from reactor operations 4

"O to nearby inhabitants or other parts of the nearby ecosystems is negligible compared to natural background radiation dose.

O

O T

4 I

l l

40 i 1

iO l

f i

(O

Table II.11.1. Mean Values for all Sample Types. .

Number of Minintan Maximum Sampics Value Observed Value Observed i o

& 3 Analyzed 6 Months 6 Honths i Sample Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months TI.D Facility 77 0.310 9.54 0.442 1.50 0.434 0.398 External Adjacent 77 0.320 0.76 0.433 1.18 0.440 0.405 (mR/ day) Reference 77 0.290 2.84 0.458 1.40 0.499 0.453

• Composite 231 0.290 2.84 0.44b 1.38 0.458 0.419 Air Facility 97 0.500 11.1 3.75 2.49 5.82 2.93 Gross a Adjacent 68 0'.300 36.7 3.08 2.43 4.46 3.24 (fci/m3) Composite 165 0.300 ~36.7 3.45 2.47 5.25 3.06 Air Facility 98 2.00 45.0 12.2 1.74 14.1 12.6 Gross 8 Adjacent 68 1.00 43.0 9.36 1.84 11.2 10.5 (fCi/m3) Composite 166 1.00 45.0' 10.9 1.81 12.9 11.7 _

Air Facility 104 < 266 4,250 299 2.84 370 278 Tritium Adjacent 71 < 229 3,320 230 2.30 209 199 (pci/1) Composite 175 < 229 4,250 268 2.63 304 246 Air Composite 26 < 2.59 84.7 10.7 4.21 < 2.59 < 2.59 131; (fCi/m3 )

Air Composite 25 < 0.939 19.7 5.06 2.625- :< 0.880 < 0.880 106Ru (fCi/m3) 9

Mean Values for all Sample Types. (Cont'd.)

Table 11.11.1.

Number of Minimum Maximum Value Observed i o Samples Value Observed g 8 x x Analyzed 6 Months 6 Months ,

1 Year 1 Year 6 Months Sample Type Area 6 Months 3.89 1.07 3.25- 1.86 .623 Air composite 25 < 0.730 137g3 (fci/m3) 6.05 0.512 3.41 0.630 .432 Air Composite 25 . < 276 952r (fCi/m3) 51.2 14.1 1.69 16.1 12.9 Water Effluent 31 3.71 9.53 1.80 34.6 9.86 1.95 11.7 Gross B Oownstream 19 8.27 3.68 13.8 11.8 1.93 14.5 Upstream 12 6.18 (pci/1) 0.671 28.5 3.48 2.60 5.49 Potable 11 10.1 ,2.25 13.1 10.3 @

Composite 73 0.671 51.2 90,100 1,5E0 6.29 8,030 ~ 7,190 Water Effluent 32 < 229 968 314 2.27 287 131 Downstream 18 < 264 Tritium

< 264- 373 257 2.03 217 86.5 (pCi/;) Upstream 12 134 11 < 264 641 292 1.70- 208 Potable 90,100 609 4.81 3,650 3,220 Composite 73 < 229 9 9 9 9 9 Water Effluent 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 90Sr Downstream - g 9 9 9 9 9 9 (pci/1) Upstream 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Potabic 9 9' 9 9 9 9 9 Composite 9 9 g Analysis in progress.

__ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ - - e

U U U U U U U U U U U Table I1.11.1. 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 8 i i Saiaple Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months

, Water Effluent 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 83Sr Downstream 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 (pci/1) Upstream 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Potable 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Composite 9 9 9 9; 9 9 9 Water Effluent 37 < 2'.12 4.96 2.58 2.38 < 0.679 < 0.679 106Ru Downstream 18 < 1.30 28.6 2.61 2.73 < 0.697 < 0.697 (pci/1) Upstream 12 < 2.59 8.96 2.04 3.79 < 0.683 < 0.638 Potable 11 < 2.59 0.470 2.47 2.86 < 0.725 < 0.725 Composite 78 < 2.59 28.6 2.48 2.70 <Q.g38 < 0.638 Water Effluent 37 < 0.635 8.56 1.01 2.98 0.385 1.15 5 137Cs Downstream 18 < 0.803 10.0 0.951 3.28 1.12 2.49 (pci/1) Upstream 12 < 0.641 .6.15 1.33 3.10 1.74~ 2.59 Potable 11 0.029 91.8 0.951 5.04 5.14 9.30 Composite 78 < 0.803 91.8 1.02 3.31 1.44 8.01 Water

• Effluent 33 < 0.272 5.00 0.402 2.78 0.105 0.365 952r Downstream 18 < 0.158 7.74 0.491 2.70 0.515 0.933 (pci/1) Upstream 12 < 0.748 1.18 0.418 2.89 0.418 0.001 Potable -

11 < 0.344 0.704 0.347 2.02 0.248 0.177 Composite 74 < 0.748 7.74 0.414 2.66 0.198 0.416 Sediment Effluent 12 31,000 38,800 33,700 l'.17 33,800 34,700 Gross S Downstream 18 20,800 55,400 33,400 1.17 33,800 34,900 (pci/kg) Upstream 10 30,300 36,600 32,800 1.12 33,000 33,600 Composite 40 31,000 55,400 33,300 1.13 33,600 34,500

g. Analysis in progress. '

Table II.H.1. Mean Values for all Sample Types-(Cont'd.) -

Number of Minimum Maximum Samples Value Observed Value observed i o R 8 i i Analyzed 6 Months 6 Months Sample Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months sediment Effluent g g 9 9 9 9 9

'30Sr Downstream 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 (pci/kg) Upstream 9 . 9 9 9- 9 9 9 ,

Composite 9 9 9 9 9 9 9

'9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Sediment Effluent 89Sr Downstream 9 9 9 9 9 9 .9 9 9 9 9 9 (pCi/kg) Upstream 9 9 Composite 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Sediment Effluent 111 - 560 3,660 3,890 2.14 < 3,270 < 3,270 106Ru Downstream 12 1,145 14,200 3,890 2.28 < 373 < 373 -

(pCi/kg) Upstream 8 422 6,700 4,950 2.16 < 3,720 < 3,720 8 Composite 31 422 14,200 4,170 2.19 < 373 < 373 i

Sediment Effluent 10 - 13.2 533 457 2.57 202 < 557 I

137Cs Downstream 16 13,9 1,210 353 4.28 < 542 < 542 (pci/kg) Upstream 8 48.4 759 497 1.% < 642 < 642 1,210 composito 34 13.2 418 3.11 < 542 < 542 Sediment Effluent 12 15.3 265 227 2.70 < 206 < 206 95Zr Downstream 18 1 46.2 732 214 2.03 < 193 < 193

(pci/kg). Upstream 10 120 255 217 2. 02,. < 227 < 227 Composite. 40 15.3 732 219 2.20. < 227 < 227 Precipitation F-1

.3 15.1 6.18 43.9 15.9

- 11.2 ~ 35.5 Gross 8 F-4 5 150 18.5 2.35 24.8 10.8 8 -11.3 16.8 3.93 33.7 12.6 (pci/m2) Composite 11.2 150

, g Analysis in progress.

_.1__________ _ -_ _. _ - -

Table 1I.11.1. Mean Values for all Sample Types.(Cont'd.) .

Number of Minimum Maximum Samples Value Observed Value Observed 2 o N E Analyzed 6 Honths 6 Months i i Sample Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months Precipitation F-1 3 126 2,660 1,540 3.82 2,452 1.080 Tritium F-4 5, 191 1,990 850 4.22 1,672 745 (pci/m 2) Composite 8 126 2,660 1,100 4.00 2,010 870 ,

Precipitation F-1 3 17.7 460 28.0 11.7 89.7 144 106 flu F-4 5 8.69 36.9 20~. 2 ' 2.93 < 23.4 < 8.08 (pCi/m2) Composite 8 8.69 460 23.3 5.75 31.1 30.7 Precipitation F-1 3 < 6.22 384 21.5 4.62 67.0 131 137Cs F-4 5 5.44. 58.5 19.6 2.93 28.7 25.8 (pci/m 2) Composite 8 5.44 384 20.4 3.48 45.5 65.3 Precipitation F-1 3 < 2.50 65.9 8.67 3.38 10.6 13.6 5 95Zr F-4 6 0.802 25.8 3.66 4.24 6.15 1.65 (pci/m 2) Composite 9 0.802 65.9 5.22 4.00 8.00 Ss64 Precipitation F-1 3 3 82 15.0 11.4 1.92 11.6 4.85 90Sr F-4 5 1.67 10.6 11.5 2.63 12.3 0.780 (pci/m 2). Composite 8 1.67. 15.0 11.4 2.27 12.0 , 2.31 Precipitation F-1 3 8.47 15.1 9.39 1.35 2.11 12.2 89 Sr F-4 5 < 7.62 70.3 10.0 2.77 < 7.62 10.7 (pci/m 2) Composite 8 < 7.62' 70.3 9.74 2.16 < '/.62 11.3 Milk Facility 13 15.2 595 291 52 . 7 7 356 268 Tri tium 19.3, Adjacent - 13 663 258 3.30 374 261 (pci/1) Reference 13 122. 583 324 1.98 241 222 Composite. 39 15.2 663 290 2.67 368 250

y - -

y- -

Table 11.!!.1. Mean Values for all Sample Types. (Cont'd.) -

Number of Minimum Maximum Samples Value Obser'ed Value Observed i o N 8 i i Analyzed 6 Months 6 Honths Sample Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months Milk Facility 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 90Sr Adjacent 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 (pci/1) Reference g 9 9 9 9 9 9 .

Composite 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Milk Facility 9 9 9 9 9 9 9-89Sr Adjacent 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 (pci/1) Reference 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 composite g 9 9 9 9 9 9 Milk Facility 11 < 0.106 39.9 1.53 9.40 2.08 6.90 tal l Adj acent 13 < 0.111 44.5 1.39 8.93 2.95 9.44 ,_.

(pci/1) Reference 13 < 0.136 42.3 1.47 7.92 2.25 5.78 S?

composite 37 < 0.136 44.5 1.46 8.51 2.44 7.40 Milk Facility 11 < 0.170 30.2 1.32 7.99 3.07 ~

5.14 137Cs Adjacent 13 < 0.106 31.9 1.02 7.65 .2.30 6.51-(pci/1) Reference 13 < 0.100 24.3- 1.24 6.78 1.42 2.35 Composite 37 < 0.100 31.9' 1.18 7.30 2.25 4.64 Milk Facility ,

11 0.710 2.47 1.26 1.54 1.35 1,47 Nat. K Adjacent 13 1.45 1.90 0.188 1.60 1.61 1.58 (g/1) Reference 13 0.955 1.94 1.46 1.15 1.47 1.53 Composite 37 0.710 2.47 1.44 1.32 1.48 1.53 Forage Facility 1 870 870 761 1.13 765 870 Tritium Adjacent 3 376 795 479 1.87 510 556 (pci/1) Reference 5 50.7 846 548 2.36 724 482 Composite 9 50.7 870 535 2.07 641 550 g Analysis in progress. -

Tabic II.l!.1. Mean Values for all Sample Types. (Cont'd.)

Number of Minimum Maximum Sampics Value Obscryed Value Observed 2 o , ,

Analyzed 6 Months G Months 7* E x x Sample Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months fo ranc Facility g g g 9 9 9 9 89Sr Adjacent g g g g g g g (PCi/kg) Re ference g g g g g g 9 .

Composite g g g g 9 9 9 Forage Facility 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 90Sr Adjacent 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 (pci/kg) Reference 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Composite 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Forage Facility 9 9 9 9 9 5 9 106Ru Adjacent 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 -

(pCi/kg) Reference 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 8 Composite 9 9 9 9 9 9- 9 Forage Facility 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 137Cs Adjacent 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 (pCi/kg) Reference 9 9 9- 9 9 9 9 Composite 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Forage Facility '

9 9 9 9 9 9 9 95Zr Adjacent 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 (pci/kg) Reference 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Composite 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Forage Facility 3 3,900 15,500 17,200 2.10 20,900 8,970 Gross 8 Adjacent 12 1,700 29,400 17,000 1.64 18,400 16,'700 (pci/kg) Reference 12 6,340 27,000 20,000 1.32 20,700 20,000 composite 27 1,700 29,400 18,300 1.58 19,700 17,300 g Analysis in progress.

Table II.!!.1, Mean Values for all 3ampic Types. (Cont'd.)

Number of Minimum Maximum Samples Analyzed Value Observed 6 Months Value Observed 6 Months

( o 8

x x'

. Sample Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months Soil Facility 3 28,200 32,300 30,600 1.12 30,800 30,400 Gross B Adjacent 12 7,200 31,200 26,300 1.30 26,900 25,800 (pci/kg) Reference 12 21,600 30,700 25,400 1.14 25,600 26,300 Composite 27 7,200 32,300 26,600 1.22 27,000 26,500 Soil Facility 3 3.63 4.03 3.95 1.06 3.96 3.88 Gross 8 Adjacent 12 0.928 3.92 3.39 1.30 3.47 3.32 2 Reference 12 2.79 3.97 3.27 1.14 3.30 3.40 (uci/m ) 1.22 3.46 3.41 Composite 27 0.928 4.03 3.40 Soil Facility 3 187 187 421 1.51 < 317 < 317 106Ru Adjacent 12 36.5 244 338 3.85 < 228 < 228 -

12 7.80 1,570 390 2.77 67.9 < 317 S (nci/m2 ) Reference 27 7.80 1,570 370 3.05 < 228 < 228 compositc Soil Facility 3 87.7 87.7 74.8 2.10 < 70.0 70.0~

137Cs Adjacent 12 7.18 81.9 41.8 4.60 43.6 1.96 2 Reference 12 26.4 196 63.2 2.77 109 71.5 (nci/m ) 3.48 58.7 < 54.7 Composite 27 7.18 196 53.9 Soil . Facility 3 7.51 7.51 35.0 4.35 21.7 < 24.9

'35Zr Adjacent 12 5.82 23.5 31.4 3.05 8.34 < 19.7 (nci/m2) Reference 13 2.92 39.1 26.9 3.37 44.2 < 19.7 Composite - 28 ,

2.92 39.1 29.7 3.30 26.0 < 19.7

, Soil Facility 3 28.1 581 257 2.71 286 317 Tritium Adjacent 10 88.4~ 714 293 1.90 231 176 Reference 8 4.22~ 774 295 3.48 369 202 (pCi/1)

Composite 21 4.2E 774 288 2.67 299 206

Table II.!!.1. Mean Values for all Sample Types.(Cont'd.)

Number of Minimum Maximum Sampics Value Observed Value Observed i o N N i i Analyzed 6 Nonths 6 Months Sample Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months Soil Facility 3 49.5 252 92.9 1.65 < 75.0 118

"%r Adjacent 12 0.702. 166 73.4 3.07 < 76.5 < 76.5 6.92 240 91.0 1.96 < 68.0 8.75 (pCi/kg) Iteference 12

< 68.0 9.53 Composite 27 ~ 0.702 252 83.1 2.41 soil Facility 3 7.51 104 122 3.32 173 32.9 12 130 135 3.87 229 65.0 90Sr Adjacent 2.70 ,

(pci/kg) Iteference 12 21.5 430 192 2.63 270 102 27 430 155 3.25' 240 78.0 Composite 2.70 2 6,980 8,210 6,460 2.51 ~ -8,080 7,600 Aquatic Biota Upstream 11,600 10,740 13,200 10,900 1.14 10,900 -

Fish Downstream 3 10,600 g 3 7,960 12,200 14,500 2.71 27,700 Gross 6 Effluent 16,000 10,200 (pci/kg) Composite 8 6,980 13,200 10,200 2.24 9,140 9,140 10,000 1.17 10,100 9,140 Aquatic Biota Upstream 1 f f f Benthic Downstream 0 f f f 10,100 2 7,160 11,000 9,920 1.24 9,080 Gross 8 Effluent 10,100 9,433 (pci/kg). Composite 3 7,160 11,000 9,920 1.19 Aquatic Biota Upstream 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Vascular Plants Downstream" g 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Gross B Effluent 9 Composite 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 (pci/kg) 31,600 31,600 30,000 1.09 30,100 31,600 Aquatic Biota Upstream

• 1 30,300 24,100 Seston Downstream 1 24,100 24,100 1.23 30,900 1 17,200 17,200 22,800 1.21 23,100 17,200 Gross 6 Effluent 31,600 27,300 1.23 27,800 24,300 (pci/kg) Composite 3 17,200 f Sample unavailable.

g Analysis in progress.

i

Tabic 11.11.1. Mean Values for all Sample Types. (Cont'd.)

Number of Minimum Maximum Samples Value observed Value Observed i o Analyzed 6 Months 6 Months N 8 i i Sample Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months Aquatic Biota Upstream 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Fish Downstream 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 89 Sr 9 9 Effluent 9 9 9 9 9 (pci/kg) Composite 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Aquatic-Biota Upstream g 9 9 9 9 9 9-Benthic Downstream 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 89 Sr Effluent 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 (pCi/kg) Composite 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Aquatic Biota Upstream g g g 9 9 9 9 vascular Plants Downstream g g 9 9 9 9 9 g 89 Sr Effluent g 9 9 9 9 9 9 e (pci/kg) Composite g 9 9 9 9 9 9 Aquatic Biota Upstream f f f f f f f Seston Downstream f f f f f f f 89Sr Effluent f f f f f f f (pci/kg) Composite f f f f f f f Aquatic Biota Upstream g g g g 9 9 9 Fish Downstream g g g 9 9 9 9 90 Sr Effluent g g 9 9 9 9 9 (pci/kg) Composite 9 . 9 9 9 9 9 9 Aquatic Biota Upstream g g g 9 9 9 9 Benthic Downstream 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 90 Sr Effluent 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 (pci/kg) Composite g 9 9 . 9 9 9 9 Aquatic Biota ' Upstream g g 9 -

9 9 9 9 vascular Plants Downstream 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 90Sr liffluent 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 (pCi/kg) Composite g g g 9 9 9 9 9 Ii!"$U !ss.

Table I1.11.1, Mean Values for all Sample Types. (Cont'd.) .

Number of Minimum Maximum Samples Value Observed Value observed i o E E Analyzed 6 Months 6 Months E i Sampic Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months Aquatic Biota Upstream f f f f f f f Seston Downstream f f f f f f f

'30Sr Effluent f .f f f f f f (pci/kg) Composite f f f f f f f Aquatic Biota Upstream g g g 9 9 9 9 Fish Downstream g g 9 106 Ru 9 9 9 9 Effluent g g 9 9 9 9 9 (pci/kg) Composite g g 9 9 9 9 9 Aquatic Biota' Upstream 1 < 1,780 < 1,780 1,200 3.79 1,580 < 1,780 Benthic Downstream 0 f f 637 3.32 925 f 106 Ru Effluent 2 < 209 < 259 882 7.20 5,170 < 209 C (pci/kg) Composite 3 < 1,780 < 259 897 4.51 2,840 < 209 Aquatic Biota Upstream 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Vascular plant Downstream 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 to6 Ru Effluent 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 (pCi/kg). Composite 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Aquatic Biota Upstream 'f f f f f f f Seston Downstream ~ f f f f f f f 106 Ru Effluent f f f f f f f (pCi/kg) Composite f f f f f f f Aquatic Biota Upstream

• 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Fish Downstream 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 137Cs Effluent 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 (pci/kg) Composite 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Aquatic Biota Ups t ream 1 2,720 2,720 -

275 6.44 804 2,720 Benthic 137Cs Downstream 0 f f 195 1.19 198 f Effluent 2 496 1,070 325 3.40 108 783 (pCi/kg) Composite 3 496 2,720 268 3.51 364 1,760 f Sample unavailable.

g Analysis in progress. .

Table.II.II.1. Mean. Values for all Sample Types. (Cont'd.) -

Number of Minimtma Maximuni

, Samples' Value Observed Value Observed i o N 8 Analyzed 6 Months 6 Months i i

. Sample Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Months

' Aquatic Biota Upstream g' g g g g g g vascular Plant Downstream g g g g- g g g 137 Cs g g g g g g Effluent 9 (pci/kg) Composite g g g g- g g 9 Aquatic Biota Upstream f f f f f 'f f ton Downstream f' f f f f f f-

- gs,Cs Effluent f f f f f f f >

i (pci/kg) Composite f f f f f f f Aquatic Biota Upstream 9 9 .9. 9 9 9' 9 Fish Downstream 9 9 9 9~ 9 9 9 952r Effluent 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0

~

(pCi/kg) Composite 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 Aquatic Biota Upstream 1 216 216 259 4.74 837 216' centhic Downstream 0 f f 205 3.07 295 f

• 952r Effluent 2 171 452 172 2.86 218 312 (pCi/kg) 3 171 452 207 3.25 445 613 Composite

~

Aquatic Biota Upstream 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 vascular Plants Downstream - 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 95Zr Effluent 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 i (pci/kg) Composite 9 9- 9 9 9 9 9 Aquatic Biota Upstream . f f f f f f f Seston Downstream f f f f f f f 95Zr Effluent f f f. f f f f (pci/kg) Composite f f f f f f f Beef F-44 2 17.8 2D.1 ,

15.2 1.59 16.4 19.0 137Cs l pCi/g Nat K f Sample unavailable. ~

. g Analysis in progress. - .' - - '~ -

112 II.I. Errata The following table is included as the data for the 12-1-79

) collection had not been complete at the printing of the previous semi-annual report.

,)

,3 3

3 O

l 3

l e

D D

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

3, , Cumulative Gross Beta Deposition (pCi/m ) Tritium Volume *

(liters) Suspended Solids Dissolved Solids Total Deposig)

(pCi/m ion Fl' F4 Fl F4 'F1 F4 F1 F4 F1 F4 8-11-79 50 50 .32.4 40.2 45.9 16.5 78.3 56.7 3,840 3,090 (11.2)*" (13.8) (6.18) (5.80) (12.3) (13.9) (2,751) (2,570) 8-18-79 100 '100 112' 54.1 33.6 36.4 146 93.5 4,150 4,650 (17.0) (19.4) (7.06) (8.35) (16.0) (19.7) (3,860) (3,620) 9-29-79 50 50 262 47.7 38.3 50.2 300 97.9 3,013 3,500 12-1-79 50 50 < 12.3 30.5 < 4.92 35.3 < 4.92 65.8 < 3,432 < 246 (7.39) (4.88) (8.68)

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

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

• • • December sample includes precipitation from October and November. , (1.96 S.D.).

~

?

--y m--- v v v v v m y ,, ,.

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

Sample Total

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

Da 06 137 95 '

te ) Ru Cs Zr-Nt Ru Cs Zr-Nb Ru Cs ' Zr-Nb 8-11-79 50 <25.2 12.9 < 3.45 a a a < 25.2 12.9 < 3.45 (6.29) (6.29) 8-18-79.. 100 <23.6 26.5 < 23.13 < 30.2 32.7 < 4.00 < 23.6 59.2 < 3.13 (8.22) (10.4) (13.2) 9-29-79 50 104 37.3 36.1 102 24.9 8.97 206 62.2 61.0 (10.0) (2.45) (1 60) (31.3) (7.74) (5.53) (29.2) (7.21) (6.26)  ;.

12-1-79 50 < 24.2- < 7.62 < 3.21 < 8.08 < 2.54 < 1.08 FC

< 8,08 5.44 < 1.08

=

o (9.41)

W I

• 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.).

• • • December sample includes precipitation from October and Novembdr, a Sample lost prior to analysis, e . .

%m

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

t Sample Ending

" ," Strontium 89 Strontium 90 F1 F4 F1 F4 F1- F4 8-11-79 50 50 < 8.82 < 10.1 11.1 (18.2) 29.3 (27.0) 8-18-79 l 100' 100 < 9.23 < .7.91 17.9 (12.5) 25.3 (18.8) 9-29-79 50 50 < 7.15 < 10.6 14.8 (11.4) 16.3 (12.3) 12-1-79 50 50 < 9.32 < 9.05 23.2 (11.3)

• • • ' 35.6\i(11.8)

, U' i

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

are for the 95% confidence interval

• • Uncertainties

• • • December sample (in parentheses)ipitation includes prec from October and November. , (1.96 S.D.).

e ep #

[ S'w.

_- _ . ~

m-2 Table II.H.1. Mean Values for all Sample Types.(Cont'd.)

1979 Number of Minimum Maximum Samples Value Observed Value Observed x g 8 - -

. Analyzed 6 Months 6 Months x x Sample Type Area 6 Months 1 Year 1 Year 6 Honths Precipitation F-1 4 3,013 4,150 4,840- 1,680 3,430 3,610 Tritium F-4 4 76.6 4,650 " 916 , 3.62- 1,650 2,830 (pci/m 2) Composite 8 76.6 4,650 1,240 y 3.60 2,540 3,220 Precipitation F-1 4 129 171 35.2. 3.48 39.2 81.5 106Ru ' F-4 4 8.08 206 10.4' 5.14 < 7.39 16.3 (pci/m 2) Composite 8 8.08 206 14.1 5.70 13.1 32.8 Precipitation F-1 4 6.69 58.4 14.8 3.41 24.3 29.0 137Cs F-4 4 < 2.54 62.2. 11.6 3.37 32.5 (pCi/m2) 19.1 Composite 8 < 2.54 62.2 11.7 3.26 19.7 30.8 Precipitation F-1 1 5 20 9 952r

'(pci/m 2)

F F-4 < l' 61.0 k*hhh:hf hlh Ihk

• Composite 8 < 1.07 61.0 4.63 4.59 8.35 10.7 4

Precipitation F-1 4 11.1 23.2 12.1 9.13 10.8 16.8 90Sr F-4 4 1.60 22.1 11.5 2.93 16.8 26.6 (pci/m 2). Composite 8 1.60 23.2 10.3 3.59 13.8 21.7 F-1 -4 < 2.00 Precipitation 6.60 6.07 3.40 < 4.25 < 7.15 09Sr F-4 4 < 1.36 1.36 8.66 2.70 < 2.47 < 7.91 (pci/m 2) Composite 8 < 1.36 6.60 7.25 3.01 < 2.47 < 7.91 Milk Facility 15 59.2 1,080 377 2.75 440 424 Tri tium Adjacent 16 19.0 1,220 356- 2.65 467 450 '

(pci/1) Reference 16 118 967 424 1.67 435 407

Composite 47 19.0 1,220 385 2.35 447 458

117

)  !

l III. ENVIRONENTAL RADIATION SURVEILLANCE. PROGRAM SCHEDULE i

III.A. Environmental Radiation Surveillance Schedule Table III. 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 desi nated the " Facility" z& 3; the area from.one to l

ten miles, the " Adjacent" zone; while the " Reference" zone extends from ten to twenty miles. The data obtained from the Facility zone are statistically

)

l

, 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.  ;

i The sampling locations are shown in Figures III.B.1 and III.B.2. i Table II.B.1, III.B.2, and III.B.3 give some detail of the sampling sites

)

l in the Facility, Adjacent and Reference zones respectively.

l l

The following changes in sampling locations were made during the first half of 1980.

)

l 1. Effective 4/27/80 A-50 location was changed to the Hendrickson

! dairy, Weld County Road 32, 0.8 mile east of Platteville.

(The previous A-50 dairy went out of business).

j 2. Effective 4/27/80 air sampling station A-35 was changed to the M.

l McDermott residence, 9476 State Highway 66, Platteville, CO.

i l TLD devices have been left at the old A-35 site (Miller produce store) to document the long standing fluctuations noted there.

U U U

~

O O O O O O O O D**D b63 D TM *'

TA!)LI- fl I . A.J. Ef1VI'tOfir1EN T AL RADIAllON SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM SCllEDULE

• Esposure Routes o, SAMPLING FREQUENCIES AND ANALYSES . by Acton tevels.

Media & Samp8e Types based upon actual em ssions as percentagas of release rates authoritart try 10 CF H 20 (No of locations / zone)* Act on Level 1. Less than 3% l Action Level 2: 3% to 10% Action Level 3 Greater than 10%

EXTERNAL EXPOSURE TLD Clups Average mRfriay determ.ned by OU AR TE R LY cumulat ve cuposures; Average mR/ day deterrrwnerf by (F-13 A-12 R-12) coilection and analysis m rotat.on of 1/3 of att TLDs MONTHLY. MONTHLY analysis of a88 T LDS ATMOSPHE RE .

Membrane filters for Gross beta, every fitter, WE E KLY; Same as for Level 1, plus gross Gross alpha and beta, every filter; particulates; charcoat gamma spectrum of filter and alpha on one weekly set of g.mma spectrum of filter and cartridges for iodme. cartridge compositas, MONTHLY. filters, MONTHLY. cartridge composites, all WE E KLY, j (F-4. A-3)

Tntium onsde Specific actsvity of tritium m atmospherse water vapor by passive absorption and liquid scintitiation countmg.

.(F-2) OUARTE RLY g MONTHLY l WEEKLY 3

WATER Potable water Gross beta, tratium and gamma spectrum analyses; Facility area and nearest of f eite supply (F-1, A-1) (shallow wells at town o Gescrest,6 cules northeasti.

MONTHLY plus Sr 89 & 90 analyses Precipitation No collect.on or analyses of Gross bets MONTHLY Gross bete. tritium and Sr 89 & 90, (F-2) precipitation at Level 1. MON THLY: gamma spectrum of composite. QU ARTE R LY.

Surface water & silt Gross beta. tritium 3 and gamma Same as for Level 1. but Same as for Level 2, plus (F-3. A-4) spectrum. QU ARTERLY. MONTHLY. Sr 89 & 90 analyses, MONTHLY.

FOOD CHAINS Soil, forage & crops Tritium and gamma s.wetrum analyses of forage and crops in the most probable routes to man.

(F-2. A-6. R-6) OU AR TE R LY, as avaitable MONTHLY durmg growing season Same as Level 2, plus Sr 89 & 90 (i.e., sprmg, summer and f all). (i.e., approx. Apret to Octobert. * , plus concurrent so.1 samples analyzed for the same nuclides.

MONTHLY dunng growing season.

Beef cettie No scalysis of beef at Level 1. Gamma spectrum, tritium and Same as for Level 2, plus tow (F-1) Sr 89 & 90 analyses on one meat tely count of 2 to 4 emmets sample from beef raised in Facility from Facility Area. QUARTERLY, Area: ANNUALLY, et end of grazmg i season (i.e., late f aliL Milk Tritium, gamma spectrum and Sr 89 & 90 analyses on composite: Same as for Level 2, but (F-2, A-6. R-6) Facility Area only QUARTERLY, Facility, Adjacent and Reference Areas: WEE KLY durmg posture season, MONTHLY during pasturv season, otherwise, MONTH LY, otherwise OUARTERLY.

AQUATIC BIOTA (2 streams, above Gross beta and gamma spectrum analyses of composites of each of 4 categories: Same as for Level 2, plus and below (Il suspended organisms, (2) benthic organisms. (3) vascular plants and (4) fish. Sr 89 & 90 analyses.

discharge points) OU AR TE R LY, as ava lable. MONTHLY during summer:

(F.2, A-2) otherwise QUARTERLY, as avaitable.

• Table S 9-1. en TechnocalSpecoincafrons.

l 1. Legend

, F - Facility Zone 4

A - Ad acent i Zone R - Reference Zone l 2. Tritium Analysis of Surface Water Only 1

1 s,--e..., ,. ,, . . - . - -

O O O O O O U U U *

.O G

~

Table 111.8.1. Facility area and effluent sampling locations for environmental media.

Media Sampled at Location Location and Description (see Fig. II.B.1) '

Loc. Distance and Direction from Reactor; Comments No. TLD AIR M S H90 AQB l

F 1 * ** 0.8 mi. N; potato cellar; TLD on pole at NE corner barn; precipitation on hill E of barn F 2

• 1.1 mi. NNE; cabin.

• 0.7 mi. SE; old dairy barn ; TLD on 1st pole N of drive.

F 3 first shed along drive; precipitation in corral; forage and .

• **

• 0.8 mi. S;

- F 4 soil S of shed.~

4 F 7

• 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 pump house.. '

F 11

• 0,9 mi. SSW; 0.3 mi. W of intersection of 194 and 34.

• 0.8 mi. SW; 7th pole N of intersection. .

_F 12 F 13

• 0.6 mi. WSW; pole nearest intersection. l F 14

• 1.0 mi. NW; pole nearest corner.

,; F 44 *

• 1.1 mi. E; Leroy Odenbaugh dairy

• , 0.3 mi. N; Ted Horst farm, pole SW of house.

F 51 2nd pole N of intersection, near Aristocrat Angus office.

• 1.0 mi. SW; F 46 F 47

• 0.4 mi. E; pole near driveway to pump house.

• 0.1 mi. W; tap outside Visitors Center

.F 49 *

• 1.3 mi. NNE; Goosequill pond.

E 38 Concrete slough above and below point of entry of E 41

• 0.2 mi. NW; plant water. -

Codes: F = Facility area (within one mile). .

E = Effluent surface streams.

TLD = Thermoluminescent Dosimeter for measuring external gasus exposure.

AIR = Air sampling location; ** = atmospheric precipitation collected.

M = Milk sampling locations.

HO2

= Water sampling locations; silt also sampled from surface sources, j AQ8 = Aquatic biota sampling locations, j S = Soil and Forage sampling locations.

a p 4

. _ _ . , . ... . s... wee m e. .-

O O O O O O O O y _O O O Table Ill.B.2 Adjacent area sampling locations for environmental media.

Loc. i

__Ejdia Sappled at _ Location No. ILD AIRt M S Locatior. Description (see Figs.11.B.1 and 11.B.2)

H2O'AQB Distance and Direction from Reac' tor; Conments A5 *

• 4.5 mi. NNE; A6 * * *

• Lloyd Rumsey farm; 2 mi. N,1.5 mi. W of Peckham.

5.5 mi. S; Clifton Wissler farm; 2 mi. W, 2.5 mi. S of Platteville; A 27

• TLD on pole 30 ft. N of parlor.

5.0 mi. NW; I 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 A 29

• on last pole on NE corner.

3.5 mi. NNW; 3 mi. S; 1.6 mi. E of Johnstown, TLD on pole by the stand A 30

• of trees.

3.5 mi. NE. 1 mi. S of Colo. 256 on Colo. 60, pole on NE corner.

A 31 * *

• 6.0 mi. ENE; A 32

• 1.5 mi. E of Peckham; TLD on pole in front of house.

4.0 mi. E; 3 mi. N of Platteville; 1.2 mi. E of US B5; NW pole.

A 33 5.0 mi. SE; A 34

• Niles Miller Dairy; 0.2 mi. S, 0.5 mi. E of Platteville.

6.5 mi. SW; I mi. E of I-25 at Colo. 254; pole on SW corner.

A 35 *

• 3.5 mi. SSW; A 36 * *

• Mike McDermott; 9476 Hwy 66; b mi. w of Jt. Col.66 & Rd 21 8.0 mi W; Bob Johnson dairy; 2 mi. W of I-25 on Colo. 56, then 1.5 K A 48 *

• mi. S. TLD 0.5 mi. W. '

6.0 mi. NNE; Bill Ray Dairy 17376 Weld Cty, Rd 46; 4 E of l5'Ub on KG 4b A 50 *

• 5.0 mi. SE; 0 37

• 0.8 mi. E of Platteville. - - -

12.5 mi. ENE; Lower Lathan Res.; 2.5 mi. E of LaSalle.

0 39 t

• 5.0 mi. ENE; 0 40 .*

• Gilcrest water from U.S. Post Of fice 5.5 mi. ENE; South Platte River at Colo. 60.

0 45 *

• 1.0 mi. N; St. Vrain Creek at Jct. Rd.19h, 0.2 mi. from discharge.

Codes: A =

Adjacent area (one to ten miles from reactor).

D = Downstream potable or surface waters.

All other symbols same as for Table III.B'.1.

e

O O- O O O O O O O O O-Table III. B.3. Reference area and upstream sampling locatiens for environmental media Loc. Media Sampled at Location Location Description (see Figs. II. B.l. and II. B.2.)

No. TLD AIR M S H90 AQB Distance and Direction from Reactor; Comments. _

R 15

• 11.5 mi. NW: 4.2 mi. W of I-25 on Colo. 60; TLD on pole W of farm

. driveway.

R 16 * * *

• 11.8 mi. NNW; Mountain View Farms; N sida of Colo. 402 W of I-25.

• R 17

• I *

• 11.8 mi. NN2; Bob Schneider Dairy; 1 mi. S of US 34 on RD 25; on pole 0.5. mi. N of parlor on RD 25.

R 18

• 10.0 mi. NNE; on pole on SE corner cf 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.mi. 5 of LaSalle; TLD on pole W of parlor.

R 21

• 11.9 mi. E; 5 mi. E of US 85 on Colo. 256; then 1 mi. S; TLD on pole on i

- SW corner. .

R 22 * *

• 11.1 mi. SE; Hagans. Dros. 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.

R 24 * . 12.2 mi. SSW; I-25 at Colo. 52; pole *W. of the frontage road; NW corner.

R 25 * * * '11.7 mi. WSW; Angelo Vendegna Dairy; 4 mi. N of Colo. 52 on RD 1.

R 26

• 12.2 mi. WNW; On US 287, 2.5 mi. of Colo. 56, 2nd pole S on RD 2E.

U 42 * * .1.5 mi. WSW; St. Vrain Creek at bridge, RD 34.

U 43 *

• 0.6 mi. E South Platte River, at dam and inlet ponds. .

Codes R = Ref erence area (greater than 10 miles from reactor).

U = Upstream from effluent discharge points.

All other symbols as in Table II.I B.l.

'O Figure III.B.1. On-site Sampling Locations.

O M.

O

_ I I

\' d T

1 i

O -

- 1 F-2 'd

) s

/ 'i 0

/

y$\ -

\ '

l \

/

/ r -"<330 l \

s. i

\

O -

F l S T ggygge---j I

/

si = i

('

)

l # ,,ia

@ ^*

c=

l '* '

<$ID )l O

4 p__ _._a

- _ . _ _ _  :?

jM

\ l /

l /

\o2%>l

\ <=

, _3

/

I l /

.o N ,(F-4P p N N _ __

x On-site and close-in sampling locations.

O F = facility area, E= effluent stream, V = upstream, D = downstream.

!O

I3 O

Figure III.B.2. Off-site Sampling Locations.

l l  : I 'erj l I l [ l k r - t.-- m -

' t - - '

i

__J__

s p

.O l l i

o -X '\ \ f .

t

/ l

\ 1

\

R-IB l EVAW /

jf

/

7 V

. , w e ..,.

1. ,

stow n ,

l j,_. _

or- ., -m ,u, o .  ; ,,

- 1 o'W 9 9

-statwouo ,% _

l rec MAu, J~E > . l o r i

iE y C

~ ~ - -*s L .:y kt_-i c r i i-l T ->

jet w u d

g

~:

l---'1 i

'-~~+-~"'s~

I

~~ i

~

~~'

O l~ o e N g Gp j " [ ... - p3, r'ptre -1 l

=

_5, sw M ___4 i

2 I

_ _i r~3 L( x.

w  %. - .1. -_

s gu _1._ x j

o a _

_.a_1 ! v 1

-- ,f -_ L_ i-- _. L , .L ,, _ _ . _ . . .L_) ,c _.

i g-' I d l l i

e- -

- - _ _ ._ q _ s s, -

i

' ~

g

_ .] a _ _ _ry_ _.__. ' 4 4"

_g \ _

rT.Lurron  !

M / L /J '

J' af

-/

W> f  ; i -/li I O S miles 10 miles O

SCALE .

l O

O