ML20042F242
| ML20042F242 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | FitzPatrick  |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1989 |
| From: | Fernandez W POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (NEW YORK |
| To: | Martin T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| References | |
| JAFP-90-0358, JAFP-90-358, NUDOCS 9005080037 | |
| Download: ML20042F242 (217) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:- - . . , . fhpesAPmWW62 heleet Powet Mont P.O. Bon 41 ! 1-
. Lycommg, New York 13093
[
, '. 315 M2 3HO Willlem Femender 11 Resident Manager April 27, 1990 ,
JAFP-90-0358 ' United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I ' 457 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 Attention: Thomas T. Martin ; Regional Administrator
SUBJECT:
JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT RADIOLOGICAL ! ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE DPR-59. DOCKET NO. 50-333 Gentlement Enclosed please find the 1989 Annual Radiolocical Environmental Ooeratino Reoort which covers the operating period of January 01, 1989 through December 31, 1989. This report is submitted in accordance with the requirements of Amendment 93, Section 7.3.d i of the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Technician Specifications. Distribution for this report is in accordance with the Regulatory Guide 10.1, Revision 4. Very tr ly yours, LI ERN Z WFtBGtis Enclosures cc: c Document 1 Controlw Center' desk n (USNRC)e(18 )- J.W. Blake (NYPA/WPO) R.E. Beedle (NYPA/WPO) J.J. Kelly (NYPA/WPO) J. Toennies (NMPC) H. Flanagan (NMPC)- G. Vargo E. Mulcahey l A. McKeen 1 RES File l WPO Records Management Library Document Control Center CERTIFIED MAIL, RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED 9005080037 891231 g_g g ' {,DR ADOCK0500g{33 /
M 9" . . ,.
' 4 t e c' *
~
1989'
~
L . RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL
~
L SURVEILLANCE REPORT .
~
( . JA140ARY 1. tems through 88CtM8ER R 1988 e l . A ' e e _p, ga . . . . M T 'f [.{J
; i .a - H1 .
Q 3 fu , njX- y
"' ,
- h t i
=
A
.y
'8'
. i ,
mucuaneowencuar . J 3 g
.: L EW, @. W!, M M$rmos sas y ..
. .= ,
'9 g
~
p [ ', - .
s: - ( r W 1989 - s. 3 s MADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT 7
~
aqueny a meimeann orcrimaeau, tw
, i 4
JAntE$.A,FITZRATRICK
~ ' ~ ..
NUCLEAN+ POWER Pt. ANT. s- '4: g
, , OPERATING (JCENSE NO.OPRJ- 99 obCERT MOA- m V
.. ( +
x
% . .a' ,
j,
i l l iI lI 'I i
)
- E ..
i 3 1-
- 3
' i 3 ,. 1 1
- I NEW YORK POWER AUTHORITY-J 4 1 ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIR0084 ENTAL OPERATING REPORT l JANUARY 1, 1989 - DECEMER 31, 1989 g -
l FOR (
'l JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT' !
i FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE DPR-59 . 4 g DOCKET NUM ER 50-333 j
\
I ! I I 1 I q I 1 _ ..__~ _ ___
I l TABLE OF CONTENTS I I. INTRODUCTION PJult g A. Executive Sumary I-1 B. Introduction I-4 I C. Program Objectives I-6
- l II. PROGRAN IMPLEMENTATION AND DESIGN II-1 A. Sample Methodology II-2 l B.
C. Analysis Perfoiined Changes in Program II-8 11-9 l D. E. Exceptions to the Program Compliance With LLD Requirement 11-10 11-11 I F. Operational Radioloaical Environmental Monitoring Program ITable) 11-12 G. Statistical Methodologies 11-18 III. SAMPLE
SUMMARY
TABLES 111-1 I IV. ANALYTICAL RESULTS IV-1 I V. DATA SUMARIES AND CONCLUSIONS V-1 l A. 8. Surface Water (Lake) Program-Terrestrial Program V-6 V-21 , I C. D. Conclusion References V-53 V-55 VI. HISTORICAL DATA VI-1 VII. FIGURES AND MAPS VII-1 l VIII. SUMARY OF USEPA ENVIRONMENTAL RADI0 ACTIVITY LABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON STUDIES. PROGRAM VIII-1 RESULTS i l I
1 'l i l LIST OF TABLES ! lI = l i Table I le Collection and Analysis 11-13 Reauired (1/1/89 - Samp/31/89) 12 J I Table II Detection Capabilities For Environmental II-21 i e Analy is, Lower Limit of Detection ,
~
Table IV-1 Shoreline Sediment Results IV-2 Table IV-2 Fish Results IV-3 , Surface Water Composite Results, Tritium IV-6 Table IV-3 i Table IV-4 Surface Water Composite Resultr,, Gamma IV-8 Isotopic i Table IV-5 Off-site Particulate Filter Results, IV-14 i Gross Beta Table IV-6 On-site Particulate Filter Results, IV-18 i Gross Beta Table IV-7 Off-site Stations Airborne I-131 Results IV-20 Table IV-8 On-site Stations Airborne I-131 Results IV-22 Table IV-9 Particulate Composite Results, Gamma IV-24 Isotopic Table IV-10 TLD Results IV-40 g Table IV-11 Milk Results, I-131 IV-44 l Table IV-12 Milk Results, Gamma Isotopic IV-47 l Table IV-13 Milch Animal Census Results IV-50 Table IV-14 Food Product Results, Gamma Isotopic IV-52 Table IV-15 1989 Residence Census IV-53 g Table IV-16 Environmental Sample Locations IV-54 i l I 11 L m . . _ . . _ - . _ . . . . . _ , , , . _ . . _ _, . - . _ . . . . - ._,,,,.......__,,,,__,..._,.___._,m.. , _ _ _ _ , . . . . , _ _ _ . . - - . . - . . . . . . .
l < I il "&n%'o^.%" I - I '*6""-' t;8tMit:rt":M:iW480lf"' ""-" Table VIII-2 Tritium Analysis of Water (pci/L) VIII-3 l Table VIII-3 ign of Water (pC1/L) VIII-4 .
""~ "~
!$$!IkN0i$'!O' I'N N g
lI . I I I I l iii
LIST OF FIGURES N - P_ase L Figure 1A Off-site Environmental Stations and TLD VII-2 ! Locations [ Figure IB Off-site Environmental Stations and TLD Locations - Southern Oswego County VII-3 Figure Off-site and Onsite Environmental Stations, VII-4 2 -l TLD Locations Figure 3 Nearest Residence and Food Product VII-5' . l Locations 1 Figure 4 Milch Animal Census and Milk Sample VII-6 [ Locations , i Figure 5 New York State Regional Map VII 4 [- Figure Graph - Fish (Cs-137) 6 VII-8 i Figure 7 Graph - Surface Water Tritium VII-9 [- . Figure 8 Graph - Air Particulate Gross Beta, Annual VII-10 , ( Figure 9 Graph - Air Particulate Gross Beta, Weeks VII-11 l 1-26 (1989) ; [- Figure 10. Graph - Air Particulate Gross Beta, Weeks VII-12 ! 27-52 (1989) { Figure 11 Graph - Air Particulate' Composite (Co-60) VII-13 i Figure 12 Craph - Air Particulate Composite (Cs-137) VII-14 Figure 13 Graph - Air Radiodine (I-131) VII-15 Figure 14 Graph - Milk (Cs-137), Annual VII-16 i [. Figure 15 Graph - Milk (I-131) VII-17 Figure 16 Graph - TLD Data VII-18 (- ; iv l
lL . l ,.l 7 l i l .; i; Il i l : l-1 r i
! -1 4
1,
' l: ,
} 1 INTRODUCTION !l. } 1 I t ,
~
.#> NewWrkPbwer
!-l- &W i i. 1
...____;...-. . , _ , , . . . . . . . . . . . - , , . , . . . . . _ , . . . , . . . - _ . - ~ ~ , - . , . . .
I I I I-A EXECUTIVE St# MARY I This report is published pursuant- to Section 7.3.d of the I l Radiological Effluent- Technical' Specificat' ions (RETS) -which requires that the results from the _ Annual Radiological Monitoring l j- Program be- provided to the Comission. The. report contains the analytical 'results for 1989 Sampling and Analysis _ Program. In
-l l
addition to the results, the report must contain a program description, QA results, data summaries,. data interpretation,- environmental impact assessment and comparisons to historical I l data. I The following format has been used for the 1989 report: Section I Introduction and program objectives Section II Operational details of the monitoring program j L Section III Summary of analytical data in the format specified by-the NRC Branch Technical Position ' l Section IV Tables of Analytical Results for the 1989_ program j g Section V Analysis of Results Section VI Historical Data (1972 - 1989) - 1 l Section VII Sample -location maps and graphs of current and historical data
-l Section VIII Summary of QA'results g Results for the 1989 sampling and analysis program showed the l presence of radionuclides that were naturally occurring, the Q
Lu direct result of atmospheric radionuclides that can be related to operations at the Nine Mile nuclear testing and those Point site. Radionuclides falling into. this last category
-l include Cs-137, Co-60 and Zn-65. These radionuclides were detected at very low concentrations in several of the sample-media collected.
-l 4
I-1 LI
'g Cesium-137 was detected in 1 ofLthe 25 vegetation samples and 15 of the 24. fish samples collected during 1989. The presence of-Cs-137 in the vegetation and fish samples -is of little significance and is most likely the- result- of past nuclear I:l!
weapons testing. These sample results are addressed in detail in-section V of the report,- Cesium-137 was also detected in the ({! indicator shoreline sediment samples. The source of the'Cs-137 ! in the sediment samples is not easily discerned and could gl possibly be the result of both past weapons . testing Land plant- 1 operations.- The presence .of Cs-137 in- the sediment samples is ~!. j insignificant with respect to the resulting dose to man. The l calculated whole body dose for the measured concentrations was-0.0013 mrem per year whole body dose to the maximum exposed l individual, gjl The analysis of samples collected from the air sampling stations ! showed the presence of Zn-65 and Co-60' in several on-site' air lL particulate composites. These air sampling stations.:are located inside the site boundary. Neither of these radio'nuclides were detected in the samples from the off-site- sample ' location ly] 1 collected during this same time period. DoseLto man calculations were done for the measured concentrations of Zn-65 and Co-60.with gi ! the maximum dose to a child being 0.00019 mren _per Eyear to the g? whole body and 0.0034 mrem per year. to- the :1ung- which is the B1 critical organ. These calculated' doses are insignificant from the view point of the health and safety of .the general public. l' Neither Zn-65 or Co-60 were detected in any of the .other environmental media sampled as part of- the. 1989 monitoring program. l With the exception of the shoreline sediment and air particulate sample results noted above, the results of the 1989 Environmental ' Monitoring Program showed results which were consistent with previous years. In several cases such as air particulate gross l i beta and fish Cs-137 concentrations, the 1989 program' results further documented a downward trend of the levels of manmade l radionuclides in the environment. g I-2
- 4 In summary, the 1989 Environmental ' Moni toring Program e demonstrated the routine operation of the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant had no significant inpact on-:the environment.
p-u [ [ l l l 4 6 9
~.
t [ f I-3
L T; I-B INTRODUCTION The New~-York Power Authority (NYPA) is the owner and h1 u licensee of' the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear ~ Power Plant
.(JAFNPP). .The FitzPatrick. . Plant is located on the eastern (q portion' of the Nine Mile Point promontory approximately one-half- l mile due east of the Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation-(NMPC) Nine Mile-Point Nuclear Power Stations-(NMPNPS).- NMPNPS-#1, a 620 MWe g'
(net) boiling water reactor located on. the western portion of.the g site, .has been in operation since 1969. Located between the :EL; JAFNPP and NNPNPS. #1, is Nine Mile Point-.#2. NMPNPS' #2' began l;I commercial operation in March of 1988 and- has generation-capacity of 1,100 MWe (net). The JAFNPP .is a . boiling' water reactor with a power output of 810 MWe (net). Initial' fuel: L loading of' the reactor core. was completed in November of = 1974. )! Initial criticality was achieved in late' November, 1974 and L commercial operation began in July 1975.- The site is located on the southern shore of Lake Ontario l; in Oswego County, New York, approximately seven smiles northeast of the city of Oswego, New York. coordinates north 4,819, 545.012 m,. east 386, 968.945 m', on the The JANFPP is located at g Universal Transverse Mercator System. Syracuse,.New.Yorkjis the g' largest metropolitan center in the area and -is located' 40 miles m to the south of the site. The area consists of partially wooded land and shoreline. The -land adjacent to the site is; used mainly for recreational and residential purposes. For many miles to the l west, east and south the country is characterized - by rolling . l: terrain rising gently up from the lake, composed mainly of glacial deposits. Approximately 34 percent of the -land area in g Oswego County is devoted to farming. Responsibility for the JAFNPP Radiological Monitoring Program (REMP) is shared jointly by NYPA and : NMPNC. Environmental f 1 Similar Technical Specifications for NMPNPS #1, NMPNPS #2 and JAFNPP for radiological monitoring of the environment allows for l' majority of the sampling and analysis to be a joint undertaking, g I-4 I
Data. generated by the program is shared by the three. facilities. 5- . with review and publication of the. data undertaken through each organization. This: report is submitted in accordance with Section 7.3.d= of the r Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications (RETS) to DPR-59, Docket 50-333. l l 1 I
. l I
I l a l ! l i . I l I-5
- . I-C PROGRAM = OBJECTIVES l L
j. The objectives of the Radiological Environmental- Monitoring Program are to: l l 1.- Detemine and - evaluate the effects of plant operation on I[: l the environs and to verify the effectiveness of the g'
- controls on radioactive material sources'. Ej
- 2. Monitor and evaluate natural environs of the JAFNPP' site, radiation- ' levels. in the g:
l 1
- 3. Meet the requirements' of- applicable state: and ' federal ~ ll regulatory guides and' limits.
- 4. Provide infomation by' which the' general public can- ,
evaluate the environmental. aspects of ~ nuclear power using l data which is factual and-unbiased. I I, I~ I;; I. I I-6 I i
l i 1 ' l-J l l. il l- l' t 4
- l g
/
ll' i: t W N.v s
/
!l: l fl l PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION AND DESIGN) f ll i l- !l l ' l- . 'l 4 NewVorkPbwer . (l-j
& Authority :
-- _ _ .- . . _ - -_ _ - -. ~ - - _ - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - - _ _ _ _ - _ _.
'l l? II PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION AND DESIGN l J
\
l " The JAFNPP Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program 1 l nel ud)e:(REMP , consists of sampling and analysis of various media that lg , o Shoreline Sediment !E o Fish - '5 o Surface Waters *I o Airborne Particulate and Iodine -l' Milk
- l l
o o In addition, Food Products direct radiation 'm surements are performed J .E using thermoluminescent dosimeters TLDs). These sampling d 5 programs are described in Table I. e adequacy of the JAFNPP ! REMP samplint is verified - by ar, annual- land use census. The L E- accuracy of tie program is assured by participation-in The United j 4 5 -States Environmental Protection -Agency- USEPA Environmental 1 Radioactivity Laboratory Intercomparison Pro (gram.)- Il Sam le collections for' the radiol ical accomplifhed by a dedicated site environmenYal staff " gram-rom both the James A. FitzPatrick Plant and the-.Nine Mile -Point Station. o are i i l lE l The site staff is assisted by a contracted envi ronmental I 5 engineering company, EA Science and Technology, Inc. (EA). l I q I 1 I I. I I , I 1 I: 11-1 1 1
l A .- SAMPLE COLLECTION METHODOLOGY
- 1. . Surface Water Il-L
- Surface water sam les are taken from the res ective inlet canals of, AFN 'and Niagara Mohawk's swego Steam
.I' Station (OSS located in the-City of Oswego.- The-JAFNPP-
! removes water from Lake Ontario on=a continuous basis and 1 L ' enerally r resents a "down-current" samaling point for. J [ : - he Nine Mi Point Site. The OSS inle; canal removes' water from Lake Ontario:- at a: point approximately 7.6-j- miles west of .the : site. This up-current" location is -- i-considered a control location ?because< of- the distance from the site as well as lake current patterns and
'[
current patterns from the Oswego River located nearby. . [ i- Samples from- the JAFMPP. are composited from automatic sampling ipment which discharges into a- ting. , tank. S es. are obtained from the ' tank- non hly and ' , analyzed for amma. emitters. Samples from the OSS: are
- E
- 5 equipment and l
also composit discharged to a d from automatic compositin tank. sampling Samp lesi from 'this. ; I location are obtained wee and composited 1to form L monthly composite samples. . nthly samples: are analyzed for gamma emitters. 3 jl L A portion locations composite is of, the monthly sam les from each of the saved andl composfted tot form- uarterly samples for calendar uarter. uarterly a composite samp es are analyzed for.t itium. lJ ! In addition- to the FitzPatrick and Osweto ' Steam Station. < facilities data is- presented for the Eine Mile- Point i Unit 1 and ' Unit- 2 facility inlet canals and city water from the-Ci of Oswego. The latter three locations.are ! not require by the Technical Specifications -- but . are t optiona l samples. Monthly composites samples from these
'l: three locati ons are analyzed for gamma : emitters and ,
quarterly composite. samples are analyzed for tritium. . I- Surface water sample' locations are shown:in Section VII on Figure IA.
- 2. Air Particulate / Iodine The air sampling stations required by the Radiological I the general area of the site bounda(ryEffluent RET -are located in' Technical ithin Specificatio 0.7' miles) in sectors of hi Ihest calculated meteorol ical de osi -
tion factors based on historical ata. hese stations - R-1,(- I and- R-3 are .1ocated in the- east east-south (east, he Nine Mile Point Nuclear Stat E the center of t 5 reactor building. The RETS also : require that a fourth > II-2
air sampling station be -located. in the- vicinity of a year R-round community having the: highest calculated dispersion. 5i
. factor (D/Q again based on historical meteorological data. This) station is . located in the southeast sector 'a-(R-4)'. A fifth station required by the RETS is located ~g at a site 16.4 miles from the site in a. least prevalent wind direction of- east-northeast (R-5) and is considered L
a control location. In-addition to the RETS required' locations ' there'are.six . l . other sam ling: stations 1 cated within the, site boundary E' - l -(D1, G, I J, - These 1ocations-- generally . 5-L ' surround he :, area and K .-occup ed -by'three the 11enerating L facilities but- are: well within the site bounc ary. -One' m' I other : air , sampling -station is located off-site in the . ga southwest ' sector ~and cis in the vicinity of' the City of l Os ego (G off). Three tremainina ' air sampling stations (D , E, F) are 1ocated s in the ESE, : SSE - and S sectors: l,
- an range in distance from 7.2 to 9.0 mile,s. >
t l -glass At ; each airborne . particulates are - collected by - station'ilters E1 u. fiber 1 (47. - millimeter. diamet r) and radioiodine 'by charcoal cartridges The F samplers run continuously coal andcartri the char (2- 3" 3x l use of calibrated gas flow meters volume located isatdetermined the samplebyd ischarge. Gross. beta analysis is performed for each particulate filter. Charcoal cartrid-ges are analyzed weekly for radioiodine'-using a Ge(Li) or .l. i HPGe detector. The particulate filters are composited for gamma analyses articu- 1 on late a filters monthlyhave basis 1bycounted been location forafter all weekly gross-beta actpvity. g Air sampling stations are shown in Figures 1A,1B, and 2.
- 3. Milk l.
Milk samples are collected in polyethylene bottles from the- bulk storage tank at each sampled- farm. Before the g. sample is drawn the tank contents- are agitated from three to five mi,nutes to assure. a homogenous mixture 'of milk and butterfat. Two gallonsLate col lected -during the Ei first half and second half of each month from each of the 3 selected locations within ten- miles of the site and from a control location. . The samples are chilled and shipped a . to the - anal,ytical laboratory within thirty-six hours of 3 'I collection in insulated shipping containers. Milk sample location selection is based on deposition factors generated from average (D/Q)istorical h Deposition factors are meteorological maximum data l and effluent parameters for each of the licensed site g -) II-3
g ]- reactors. The Technicail . S sample 1ocations within- 5.0 pecificationsmiles of re theuire sike2three with the-- highest calculated - deposition: factors. Durin< ) there were no milk. sample locations within'5.0 mi'1 1989esthal could 'be sampled.- However - there . were a . number :of L locations. beyond five- miles- th,at were sampled. A fourth sample : location Jrequired:' by' the RETS: is located " in a least-prevalent wind direction from the site. This' location is :in the southwest sector and -serves as a
- control location. Milk' samples are collected- and lyzed twice- per month during the! local grazing: season. -
ril: - December. forJ emitters and> I-131. itional samples w)ould -be' gamma collected January'- March ini the event I-131-isLdetected in November.and December of .
. the preceding year. - No such samples were required for-- f 1989.-
1 The milk sampling locations are found in Section- VII on j Figure 14.;
- 4. Food Products"(Veaetationi j Food products are collected once per year during the late a f- summer -harvest Jseason. A- minimum . of three. diff i kinds of broad- leaf vegetation' edible or inedible - are u collected from two different ind(icator garden ions. locat)erent Sample locations are selected from gardens identified 1 during the annual census which have the: highest' estimated i deaosition factors. -(D/Q), based on - h storical . site N me:eorological ' data. - ControlEsamples are also col-lected from available locations greater.'than 9;3 miles 1 distance i; from the site in a least. -
Control samples are 'of the ' prevalent same . or-wind-similardirection. type of ! vegetation when available. Food product sam les are analyzed for gamma ' emitters-using gamma isoto ic analysis. . Food product locations are shown in section VII on Figure
- 3. <
- 5. Fish Samoles q
Available fish species are selected from the Nine Mile e Point Aquatic Ecolog;r Study monitoring collections during: t the spring and fall collection wriods. Samples are-collected from a combination of tie, four on-site < sample transects and one off-site sample transect (see Section Ficure 1A . VII,folTowing the g)uidelines:Available species are selected under
- 1) 0.5 to 1 kilogram of edible portion only of a j maximum of three species per location.
II-4
i I b)- Samples . composed of more than 1 kilogram 'of single . species- from the same location are- divided into l", samples of:.1 kilogram each.. A maximum of three : samples:per: species per location are'used. Weight of samples:are Lthe edible portions- only. l; Selected = fish - samples 1 are- frozen- immediately after. collection: and sejregated. by species and location.
- a 5 Samples are shippec frozen in. insulated : containers for analysis.- Edible portions of each sample are- analyzed m ";
for ' . emitting radionuclides. . - Fish- . collec ion gi locatJammatons-are shown in Section:VIIn on Figure 1. -
- 6. Shoreline' Sediments'-
One: kilogram. of shoreline : sediment- is collected ati one - ( : area;of existint or potential. recreational value and from Ea l one area :beyonc the . influence of the site. Samples . are . 5-collected-as: surface: scrapings to acdepth of approximate- _{ ly 1 inch.. The samples: are - - a4 sealed and shipped for analysis -in-insulated placed Ein. plastic bags,- containers, g. Sediment sam are. : analyzed - for gamma _ emitting radionuclides.ples - i Shoreline sediment locations - are' shown in Section VII on - I Figure 1A.
~
- 7. TLD'(direct radiationI Thermoluminescent dosimeters' are used - to measure
-direct radiation- (gamma dose)(TLDs)he are supplied and : processed by :Teled
-in t -environment.TLDs Isotopes of l
'Westwood,- New Jersey on sa- quarterly ynebasis. Shipment control TLDs and from. the v(endor's ' labora) tory.at Shipment .least two . accompany control TLDs -la each also accompany collected and arethe shielded
- TLDs when by. they lea d .when they are not.are being E-being used. TLD data.results:are corrected for a transit E-
,. dose by.use of the data from the shipment control TLDs. Five different types of areas: are evaluated by environ-mental TLDs. These areas include; l. ._ o On-site
-E'I
! required. by areas the-. (RETS)-areas within the site boundary not B j o Site boundary. . area in each of the sixteen meteoro- - logical sectors g ring in'ofeight TLDs (located four to five miles o An from outer the site available land based meteoro-logical-sectors) l o Special interest TLDs -(located at sites of ~ high population density) II-5 l; ,
. . . . . _ - _ .._ _.. -. ,_-_. . __ . _. ..._ _ . ,. . - .-_ ~ ~ .. _ . _.-
q ] o Controll TLDs located att sites'-beyond significant i influence-of the site. ] L Skecial' interest TLDs- are located at or near i dustrial -sites,- schools, or proximal' Ltowns. or com - large. L munities.; . Control TLDs are 1ocated to Lthe southwest south and east-northeast of the site'at distances-of 12.8 to 19.8 miles.- u TLDs used during '1989 were composed of rectangular- 'i teflon wafers impregnated with 25 - ercent CaSO :r These were-placed in a: pol et lene package4 o-l phosphor. - ensure dosimeter' integri y. TLD pac ages were placed in- i open webbed plastic- olders L and were attached- to- ! [ supporting structures, usually- trees or. utility poles.- . l Environmental _TLD locations are ' shown in Section VII. 1 Figures 1A, 1B, and-2.
- 8. Land Use Census !
A land use census is conducted during the: beginnino of ' the grazing season to determine the utilization. of land with' { n the vicinity of the site. The land-- use census - consists- of three types of. census. A milk: animal- census'- is conducted .to identify all milk animals within :a a distance of ten miles from the site.- Thisc census is j conducted by usin . road :surve ,. -contactin - 1ocal 1 , agricultural authori tes, . post car s, and -inves igating. i references from-other owners. .j A second type of census is u a residence census. This census is conducted in order to identify the closest. residence-in each of the sixteen, 221s degree meteorolog-ical sectors. .A residences for the . purpose. . of this - census, is a residence that is occupied on: a- rt' time. - I basis year round such asFor asis. a summer camp). or the residence 'on a full census, ~ t me,f several' o the . meteorolo ical sectors are over Lake. Ontario because the site is ocated at. the- shoreline. No ' residences are located- in these sectors. There - are only ei
, over land'where residences are located withinive-miles. t"ht'. sectors A third census .is conducted each year to identify the gardens near the site -to be used for the collectionmof ~
food product samples. The results of this. census;are.not included in this re) ort, as the- findings from this .' census are used only to identify appropriate sample-locations. A garden census is not required by the Technical Specifications if broad leaf vegetation sampling and analysis is perfonned. ' II-6
w a
.9. Interlahoratory Comparison Procram L An interlaboratory comparison program is conducted with i l- reference samples originating from the Environmental e Protection Agency (EPAh . As. required by the- Technical .-
3 j, Specifications participation in .this program includes ' media for- which ' environmental samples are routinely-collected and for which intercomparison samples-are- ; l .. ' e available. ': l .: 3: I , I: 4 IR - IH ; ID 19 E;! l > L I 1 I! 4 I^ 4 c II-7 I I1,
. . _ , . _u.
[ B. ANALYSIS PERFORMED The analysis of the majority- of- environmental samples is perfonned Laboratory by(JAFECL).the.TLD' James andA. milk FitzPatrick I-131Environmental analysis areCounting-Teledyne -Isoto The following samples performed are analyzed by at. the JAFECL: pes (TI). o- Air Particulate Filter gross beta' (weekly) ,. o Air Particulate Filter Composites - gamma-- spectral -- analysis-(monthly)
.o Airborne Radioiodine gamma spectral analysisL (weekly) o Surface Water. Monthly . Composites = -- gamma = spectral analysis o Surface Water Quarterly Composites . tritium o Special Samples (soil, etc.) - gamma spectral analysis (as collected) o Fish gamma spectral analysis o Shoreline Sediment gamma -spectral; analysis o Milk gamma- spectral analysis Quality assurance samples are analyzed by .TeledyneElsotopes and the Yankee Atomic Environmental Counting Laboratory.
II-8
- . . - - - - - . - _ _ . . . _ _ - - _ _ - - - - _ ~ _ _ - _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _
L h Il C. CHANGES TO'THE 1989 SAMPLE PROGRAM
- 1. A change in the Environmental Monitorin was - required as a< result of Techni a1Sam $pec' le Locations i fication l',l Amendment No. -127, issued on May 9,1989.- Amendment-No.-
127 removed the - requirement - rto sample and analyze- . E.- vegetation at'the site boundary and added the: requirement 5: ito: sample and analyze food products in- the form of- broad leaf = vegetation,c from two off-site locations ahaving the. E. ;
-highest predictedisite average D/(Lvalue. In. addition a; 5' control sample from a 1ocation invin a low -predicied site average- D/Q. value is -also require .- -
.g Pursuant to Table' 6.1-1 Amendment No.127, food product -
samples were collected during the 1989 harvest season.- l . I: I [ I: L g I I I I; I I , II-9 -
. g-8 Weeeeg e'* e ge *-ee g M gw-1g4y9?py9r '-e*? g
s ~ D. EXCEPTIONS-TO THE 1989 SAMPLE PROGRAM ] Exceptions or to requirements monitoring the-1989 sample wh fcfram areconcern those required by samplinh the. JA l Technical Specifications.
- 1. The air sampler - at the R-4 -off-site: Environmental Sampling Station was: inoperable from February 16, 1989:
[1830 hrs to February -17 1989: hrs .- The-- noperabil)ty i was caused by a,mechanica(1530l pump-fa)91ure. '
- 2. The air saml>1er at -the R-2 off-site Environmental I Sampling Station was inop rable fr 1400-hrs)- to March 13 1989- 1310 hrs . . March 9, 1989 (lity The' inoperabi was caused by a me,chanica pump fai ure.
r- 3. The air sampler at the R-4'.off-site Environmental-t 1989 Sampling Station was 1989 inoperable from March 20, bility(2300. The.inopera was-hrs) to March 21, caused by a mechan ical p(0930 hrs). ump: failure. j
- 4. The air sampler. at the- R-4. off-site Environmental' Sampling Stat on was inoperable from March 21, 1989 (1600-1
( hrs) to March 22,.1989-(0905 hrs). The inoperability.of the pump was caused -by human error. The pump .was - not returned - to service after maintenance on the - cabinet ! blower system.
-l S. The air sampler at- off-site Environmental sam ling Station R-4 was ino)erable from -September 12, 1989- 0815 1 hrs) to September 11 was caused by a pump,1989 (0715 hrs mechanical .
failu)re.The inoperab lity
- 6. The air sampler at off-site Environmental Sam ling '
;. Station R-4 was inoperable from November 11,.1989 1630
[ hrs) to November 14 -1989 0830 hrs . wn caused by a pump, electr(ical/ mech)anical- failure.The inoperab lity- , A determination of the air sampling equipment reliability can be made based on the sample system outages noted above. The five air sampling stations were in operation a' total of 43,449 hours out.of-a 680 hours. This calculates to a total percent cown >ossible time43,f o 0.53% due to mechanical failure and human error, i 11-10
-g E. LCOMPLIANCE WITH LLD REOUIREMENT-gi Section 7.3. of=:the Radiological Effluent Technical Specification re B' LLDs required = RETS)b,le Ta quiressee 6.1 that all analyses report in which the Table- II were not. _B.!
routinely achie able be-discus (sed in the Annual Ra)diological-Environmental Operat ng Report.
- 1. All sample- analyses required by the RETS achieved the Lower = Limit of htection (LLD); specified by RETS Table
'6,1-3.
l'~I \ I IH I. 4 Io Il I g I' I I' II-11 l.
L l F.- OPERATIONAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM
. Table I describes the-: requirements of the Radiological
[ Environmental Monitoring Program as-specified by .the James A., FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Radiological: Effluent Technical Specifications.- a w. II-12
TABLE 1-
' OPERATIONAL' RADIOLOGICAL ENVIR0letENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM l Exposure Sampling and i Pethway Gnd/or Sample Number of Samples *) and Incations Collectioy"I Frequency Type and Frequency' of Analysis.
4 AIRBORNE '! Radioiodine Samples frun 5 locations: Continuous sam- Radioicdine Canisters:- ' and ple operation-- Analyze weekly for 131. , a. Particulates 3 sanples.frun off-site locations in dif- .with sagle' col-- ferent sectors of the hi< pest calmlated lection weekly Partimlate Samples: '
- site averige D/Q (based on all licensed or as required
~
Gross beta radi<w+ivi i
- - site reactors). by dust loading, following filter change I whichever is composite (by location)'.
- b. 1 sanple front the vicinity of a n===waity more frequent. for ryume isotopic having the highest calm lated site aver- quarterly (as a minim =).
age D/Q (based on all licensed site re-y actors).
- c. 1 sample frun a control location 9 to 20 miles distant g in the least prevalent
, wind direction . l Direct 32 stations with two or more dosimeters Quarterly (:amme dose monthly or i_ RadiationI ") placed as follows: An imer ring of stations quarterly. in the general area of the site boundary and
~
an outer ring in the 4.to 5 mile range front
- the site with a station in each of the land based sectors of eadi ring. 'Ihere are .16 -
land based sectors in the imer ring, and 8 land based sectors in the outer ring." 'Ihe
- balance of 'the. stations (8)' are placed in -
special interest areas such as population
~
centers, nearby residences, schoals, and in 2 or 3 areas to serve as umhul stations. l E E E E E E - E E E E E. E ,; , , E ' E E -l 1
TABLE 1-(CONTINUED)
-OPERATIONAL RADIOLOGICAL'ENVIRONNENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM Exposure Sampling and Pathway cnd/or Sample Number of Samplesg ,) ' and Incations Collectiog Frequency Type and Frequency of. Analysis
-WATERBORNE Surface ff) a. 1 sanple urm^uesia. Ocuposite same. c.a==== isotopic analysis ple over one monthly. Otmposite for month period I9) .
- b. 1samplefranthesigsmostdownstream Tritiganalysisquar-cooling water intake . terly .
Sediment from 1-sanple from a downstream area with existing Wioe per year. Shoreline c.a==ma isotopganalysis samianrmily or potential recreational value.
>=4' I
- g' INGESTION Milk a. Sanples fran milch anim1s in 3 locations W ice per month, cammaa isotopic and I-131 within 3.5 miles distant having the hig! - April throu@t analysis twice per month est calculated site average D/Q. .If December (samt- idhen milch anim1m are there are none, then 1 sample front mildt . ples will'be on pasture (April throup animals in each of 3 areas 3.5 to 5.0 collected in nma**r); monthly (Jan . miles distant having the hiquest calal- ' January throu p uary g Mardi), if lated site average D/Q { on all Mardi if I-131 required . licensal site reactors) is detected in November and -
- b. 1 sanple from mild 1' animals at a uniuul . December of the
- location (9 to 20 miles g ir ilng year).
less prevalent wind direction) p in a . O M g
, ,m...
, _ - m., s.... 3 s --w -w.- - - , . - - y- , m -%,- + -
- + %.e~w- %. f e , . ~ , , (_m aum
z TABLE 1 (CONTINUED)' OPERATIONAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIROINIENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM Exposure Sampling.and Pathway and/or Sample . Number of Samples I "I and Incations Collectioy"I Frequency Type and Frequency of Analysis FISH
- a. 1 sanple of eact1 of 2 -rcially or Twice per year. c.ammme isotopic (c)' ,,,1y ,g ,,
recreationally important species in the of edible portions. vicinity of a site discinarge point.
- b. 1 sanple of eact1 of 2 species (aamaa as in a. above or of a species with similar .
feeding habits) frcun an t least 5 -
- miles distant fram the site .
i: M N I
+
, ^ FOOD PRODUCTS .
i a. In lieu of the garden census as specified once during c - isotopicI I. in 6.2, samples of at;least 3 different harvest saaarm. . analysis of edible kinds of broad leaf vegetation (sudi as portions. (Isotopic . vegetables) grown nearest eadi of two to include I-131. I different off-site locations of hichest
. predicted site average D/Q (hnapri on all '
- licensed site Reactors).
- One (1) sanple of eact1 of the'similar
- broad. leaf vegetation grown at least 9.3milesdistantinTdf wind direction sector i-l I
.. m. ..
,'. - , . ~. -_ ,y.
-.#s.
,,,. c -
we NOTES FOR TABLE I
-(a) o It is recognized practical that, samples to obtain at times, =heofmetia t of choice at theit may not be possible or most: desired location or time. In these instances suitable alternative media and locations may .be chosen for the '
particular pathway" rom in question. - Actual--locations: (distance and directions) the site - shall be provided in the - Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Re rt. Calculated site averaged D/Q . values and meteorol ical " parameters are based on historical data (specified i the -- DDCM) for all_ licensed site reactors. , (b) Particulate sample filters should be analyzed for gross beta . 24 hours or more after If-
-sampling to allow for radon and :
thoron: daughter decay. gross-- beta activity in air is 1 greater than 10 times a historical yearly mean of control samples, Jamma . isotopic analysis shall be performed on the individua _ samples. - (c) Gamma isotopic analysis means the identification and i quantification of gamma emitting radionuclides that may be. attributable to the effluents from the plant. (d) The -purpose of these samples is to obtain background-information. If it is not practical. to establish control locations in accordance with the distance and wind direction o ( criteria -other sites which -provide valid background . data may be su,bstituted. i (e) such as a pressurized ion- chamber, One or more instruments,dini for measuring and recor dose rate- continuously ;may be-or in add tion to integrating dosimeters. usedthe For inpurpose place of,f o this table,-a the,moluminescent-dosimeter- , may be considered to be .one phos two or more phosphors in a pocket may be cons"phor- dered andas two or .more-dosimeters. Film badges shall not be .used for measuring i direct radiation. ' i (f) The " upstream sample" shall be taken at a distance beyond significant influence of the discharge. The " downstream sample" shall be taken in an area beyond, but near, the mixing zone, if practical. b (g) Com les should be collected with equi egu$ositevalent) ich is capable of collectino an ahnt- uot(or at time intervals which are very short (e ., , tourly relative period monthl in order)to assure tothecompositingivesamp'(e.gs,obtaine. that a representa e
.{
3 II-16 i ___m_.
IR ; L (h)- Aasmilk sam lin having a location location as re a least lbuired milking--in Table cows 1 is defined present at a l;" designated milk sample location. It Has been found from-past experience, and as. a result of conferring. with local E farmers, that a minimum of-10 milkina cows is necessary to 5 ' guarantee an adequate supply of; milR twice per month for analytical purposes. Locations with less than 10 milking 3-cows- are usually utilized- .for breeding pur which. I eliminates .a stable supply of-milk for sampTes. poses: as L a result ' t of suckling: calvessand periods- when :the- adult animals . are ei a dry.- In the event that 3 milk sample locations cannot- meet - 3 '. the requirement forn10 milking cows,- then a sample . location- , having less than 10 milking cows can'be used if an adequate supply of milk can reasonable and reliably _be obtained based - on communications with the farmer. .-
-l' j ,
t la ga E, y I I-I, g3 IL IL I lu 11-17 f{
s s I G. STATISTICAL METHODOLOGY There are a--' number of statistical calculation methodologies ! used in evaluating the data from the environmental monitoring' ! e program. These methodologies include- determination : of. L- standard' deviation the mean and' associated error for the mean and the. lower , limit of detection (LLD). q [- 1. Estimation of!the Mean and' Standard Deviation. The mean, Xm), and standard deviation s ' were used in ' the ' reduct(ion of- the data generated b,y (th)e,' sampling and [. analysis of the various media - in the- J. A. FitzPatrick N.P.P. Radiolo Environmental Monitoring Program. l r' The following gicalequations were utilized to estimate the . i L mean (Xm) and the standard deviation (s): - l
- a. Mean 1' N
xj ! Xm i-1 , N -l [ where, -( . : Xm = estimate of the mean, i = individual sample, i. [- N= total number of samples with' positive indica- ; tions. xi = value for sample i above the. lower limit of p detection. a
- b. Standard Deviation I N N 1/2 =
(xi-x)2 [ = s , ( i=1- N-1 J l where, , s = standard deviation for the sample population. 1 II-18
L J
-2. Estimation of the Mean and the Estimated Error for the L IjI Mean i l
- recounts of ' samples 3 !
L 'In areaccordance - with procram often performed. When the.policy,itial In count indicates. 51 the> presence- of radioactivi , two recounts are per-
' formed. When a radionuclide s- sitively identified ini two or more counts, - the -anal tical result- for the: ~
R t radionuclide is ~ reported as the mean iof. the >osi ti ve.. l l detections..and the associated propagated error #or that. i mean. In1 cases where .more Shan .one positive sample. ': - result is available, the; mean of- the. sample- results : and -t . the' estimated > error. for. the mean are; reported 'in the Annual Report, g, The following equations were : utilized to estimate the ( mean:(Xm) and the associated. propagated error. . L
- a. Mean .
.N 'Il' Xj Xm i=1' N
.l; a.
where, , Xm = estimate of the mean. l 1 = individual sample -i.: -. total number of sa,mples with positive indications. l N = xi = value -for sample i above the? lower limit of ; detection..
- b. Error of the Mean IN N 1/2 l:
(ERROR)2 ERROR MEAN = ki=1 J N j where, z agated error. ERRORMEAN=brbgma'errorsoftheindividualanalysis' ERROR = ' lL: N = number of samples with positive indications.. g ,: II-19 l> e, , . . , - . , , ,
5
- 3. Lower Limits of Detection (LLD)
L The LLD predetermined concentration or activity level used to establish a detection limit for the analytical procedures. { The LLDs are specified by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for each radionuclide in soecific media and [ are determined by taking into account overall measurement methods. The equation used to calculate the LLD is: , [ .LLD = E . V . 2.22 . Y . exp (-Aat) [ Where: LLD is the a nriori lower limit of detection, as defined [ above (in picoeurie per unit mass or volume); sb is the standard deviation of the background counting [' rate or of the counting rate of a blank sample, as-appropriate (in counts per minute); s the counting efficiency (in counts per transfoma- { V is the sample size (in units of mass or volume); ( 2.22 is the number of transformations per -minute per picocurie; 1 Y is theapplicable (when fractio $al; radiochemical yield I A is the radioactive decay constant for the particular radionuclide; [. ' At is the of the elapsed sample time between) collection period sample collection and time for end of counting. (- In the program, RETS LLDs are used to ensure that minimum acceptable detection capabilities are met with r specified statistical confidence levels f95 L probability with 5% probability of negative a false . Table 11 uired LLDs% fo)rdetectionp r specific media and radionuclides as speci"ied by the NRC. ( The LLDs actually achieved are usually much lower since l the " required LLDs* represent the maximum allowed, i [ . l 11-20
i l TABLE II i l- REMfIRED DETECTION CAPABILITIES FOR ENVIROISENTAL SMrLE AIIALYSIS- . i LeidER LINIT OF DETECTICII (LLD) i ! l s l Water Airborne Particulate Fish Nilk Food' Products . Sediment l l Analysis (pCi/1) or Gases (pCi/m3) (pCi/kg, wet) (pCi/1) (pCi/kg, wet) (pCi/kg, dry) ' t ! t gross beta 4 0.01 ! H-3 3,000 i
- Mn-54 15 130 Fe-59 30 260 i Co-58,60 15 130
.T Zn-65 30 260 ro 1
- " Zr/Nb-95 15 i
. i I-131(a) 15 0.07 -1 60 i : l Cs-134 15 0.05 130 15 60 150 ! i l l Cs-137 18 0.06 150 18 80 180 . ! i l Ba/La-140 15 15 i i i l (a) No drinking water pathway exists at the Nine Mile Point Site under normal operating j conditions due to the direction and distance of the . nearest drinking water intake. .
- Therefore, an LLD value of 15 pCi/ liter is used.
aus === som nas .ame um. em.
I . I I I I g in I . I l # I I 4 SAMPLE SUMMARIES g I I I I I C RERP"" I
! ) III SAMPLE SupMARIES l ll All sample data is summarized in table fom. titled the following fomat: Radiological Monitoring Program Annual Sumary" and use The tables are ! Column g 1 Sample medium. ! 2 Type and number of analyses perfomed. j ll 3 Required Low (page 11-17 . data is base)er Limits of Detection This wording indica es.)that inclusive d on 4.66 sigma of background (see section LLD see Table II 1 !g ! II,6,C).
- 4 The mean and range of the positive measured values of g the indicator locations.
. 5 The mean, range, and location of the highest indicator i !e annual mean. Location designations are keyed to Table ,g IV-16. - 6 The mean and range ons.of the positive measured values of 'g the control locat 7 The number of nonroutine reports sent to the Nuclear ! ,g Regulatory Commission. !E t i !l A NOTE: Only sositive measured values are used in statistical lE calculations. The use of LLDs in these calculations would result in means being based high. l I l
- I
. 111-1 l 1
M M M M M 1 i i ;
..?s s .s y?; ~
; ;; , , 9(y. GG yy ,
-~,. ~ , ..
~
' J ',
r* l m. .- , MTA10'FMTRICK: M M N N TW1i 4 3330 -
- *': $w m2 ,, c JFg cs o ~, O5IER w ,, COWfYJSTATE:
;- OF4 WM JWIRT
" SEC8WER 1989 '
..w:
i Incaticus (b) of T W e asut Isuti<= tor Incestions: Hispueust Assuaal Mean: O mt m l inenticut. h of Mediust >=dwe of Mean fa) in==tiase & neues (a) M fa) Musureutbue 4 (urnits) Analysis ' IID mange Designeticus misup muupe M garts 'l l l Shoreline GSA (4): 4 Sediment ' l (pCi/g-dry) Cs-D4 0.15 <1ID <IID <HD 0 Cs-u7 0.18 0.28 (2/2) No. 5 0.28 (2/2) <IID 0 O.25-0.32 1.5080* O.25-0.32 ,
- t Fish GSA (24)
1 .-. (Pci/g-wet) i i [ M1-54 0.D <IID <IID <HD 0 1 I
$ Fe-59 0.26 <IID <IID <IID 0 00-58 0.D <IID <IID <IID 0 l C0-60 0.13 <IID <IID <MD 0
- i
, Zn-65 0.26 <IID <IID <MD 0
- l. Cs-134 0.u <MD <un <IID 0 Os-D7 0.15 0.034 (10/16) No. 3 0.035 (6/8) 0.034 (5/8) O ;
O.020-0.044 0.6@55* O.025-0.044 0.028-0.043 i Food GSA (20): i Products ; (pCi/g-wet) 1-131 0.06 <1ID <IID <MD 0 ! Cs-134 0.06 <HD <uD <IID 0 i , ! Cs-137 0.08 0.011 (1/17) K O.011 (1/2) <MD 0 l j O.011
- 1.7996* O.011 '
I I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _- ___ ~ . _ , , - . . - - -. .- .. ~, .~.,2 _m 4-._._m... .._ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - --
i i
^ ::c: 7
, , , , , , ,s .
, ' M M ' M ,:m: M M' M $
n s, ~, l~ ;s - ', y_,,,,-
- .g ,
f,..... , e- . . y , ,s ;
- n. -
,. + , , ,fffj? :khb _
8 i hpQ .'ls ,'fsin'a$8$1EES ,WWNYsj$TATROE;gg;m Jammaarg;gECSWER E559; j ;,3 , , I Isamtiari (b) of - . InrRkutor Taruticess: Type ast$ Mispuest Assem1 Meurt: Guitrol tarutiest: N of ! Meditan meewr of Neen fa) in-ticss & Muses (a) Rumma (a) Reutentim ! (innits) . Analysis IID ' muge Designation nange amnge mugsorts I Surface H-3 (8): 3000 225 f3/4) No. 3 255 (3/4) 186 (3/4) O l (Iake) Water 135-288 0.5070* 135-288 143-217 l (pCi/ liter) i GSA (24): I g 1 l Mrt-54 15 <TlD <IID <IID 0 i i 4 Fe-59 30 <IID <IID <IID 0 i 4 - Co-58 15 <IID <IID <IID 0 J ' ~
.-. 00-60 15 <IID <IID <IID 0 W Zn-65 30 <IID <IID <IID 0 l
1 Zr-95 15 <IID <IID <IID 0 I 10-95 15 <IID <IID <IID 0 l l I-131 15 <IID <IID <IID 0 1 , ! Cs-134 15 <IID <IID <IID 0 J 4 Cs-137 18 <IID <IID <IID 0 i Ba/Ia-140 15 <IID <IID <IID 0 1 , 4 d ! I 1 , f 4 + l
. t i . . .. .
mm \ 1 \ i i
;a ,, n. >, , ..
- n. ,. . , . . ,,
, - - n .: .n .~ , - , ,
.' $g$*
j $ $3 y [:y ; % igni h;;j;j $ .. s' ,J BanifE M 6 m ' M g "?:P , y,%,;;. - wi:;s.wegs{g ..>.s c
' aq y'e si+* g - ,: s aus-^,.
- c' :wia ~- 'www;e. . ..n we+ - ww:2 e':n-:'.:i 2.. ::4' ,
*: m s.gee i'M::., .m.,:g-
.4L' :. . :w::3 ' M::- ~
~
s A::-Q' :.,c,d,M:9'+ a,d!'.'t;r- -^>o -: 4, f - - : - - -: : ~- m ":2: ^ ' 9 ' ~ +M " Jan " 758 -
' ' ' 'j ; ', n~~.f: e ~ -
' ;M.. ..,.c '"^ r -
r fy'g' .
; . c(3 'Y$ifkEIE!! '$A0E/~16 ;N;g5TATEV0F3 HiM' Mrh1 MNiM2 ' syJ ?" 71 %.
ns, 2 ,
'dhe 'JyskR!s!M@iP,/;#ais;n e, A$!:if7' J MS '+ 9&n#P-f%s ' ' MnW%Wgwin ~J@8wC 7WT ^D. ..e w ] ?$My Iocatim (b) of Type ard Irdiator Incatiers: Highet Asumaal Meert: Gntrol linnatim: Number of Medium ph of Neart (a) Incatim ar Mean (a) Maast fa) Nantautine (tanits) Analysis IID Rarge Desimpatie Range Barupe Ryorts Milk (f) GSA (126):
(pCi/ liter) G-134 15 <IID <IID <IID 0 G-137 18 <IlD <IID <IID 0 Ba/Ia-140 15 <IlD <IID <IID 0 [ I-131(126): 1 <I JD <IID <IID 0 i b
-- - " ' '" "i== i -
-- - - - .ii i 'n - i i
.=i ,. i o - .i. p I M
hl h$Nh . j. US Y 4
,s ..i$k.:,..A@&g f1M .
. i!$
V w,-,s,&f
,!, ,n' ,,.:.:,,.J~
~- 4,,,:r.
. # ,^ w,, , ' w,
- ge'-+pt e, g y p M, r: ; p yM:s '
- w;~
'e m- ~, ,
i i: '
'.'. s s
, 4th$n.
~cm. m.ed. .m. ..g,~
s mm.s: us.n e. , - ,~ mw- a.w - w, -
.. c- - :p , - -
t 4' Iccatican (ts) of - swe asus Indic=ter 1-ticse: W . messat namn: anstat Icontices: meeer of Medium Ihadser of Wenn fa) YMirr. & Rees (a) Ihan fal Itsuttudisse 4 4 (imaits) Analysis :12D muuge r-1,_^*= munge W Inessorts i i i j ! Air G.B. (260): 0.01 0.017 (206/208) R-4 0.018 fS2/52) 0.017 (52/52) 0
- Particulates 0.007-0.041 1.89143* 0.009-0.038 0.007-0.039 armi Radiciodine I-131f260): 0.07 <IID <IID <T Jn 0 (d) i
- (pci/m3) ;
csa (60): i i
- . - Os-134 0.05 <TJn <TJn <TJn 0 l l t l-
<n' Os-137 0.06 < tin <IID < tin O .
1 l 1 1 l TID Gammma * ! (utesa per Dose (130): N/A 5.2 (118/118) (c) No.85 14.0 (4/4) (e) 4.8 (12/12)_ 0 l stardarti 2.1 - 15.4 0.29294* 12.0-15.4 2.9-6.4 !, morth) ' k - i l J i t 4 t i ) I W W W W W W . . ~ .. - . ... . .. - . . ._ - . -- -_ .-
I I ANNUAL SUMARY TABLE NOTES
* = Data for the Annual Tables is based on RETS re uired samples on1 Summak exce for TLD locations #99-101 whychareinludedb},arenotRETSlocations.
N/A = Not applicable. (a) = Fraction of detectable measurement to total measurement. (b) = Location is distance in miles, and direction in compass degrees. (c) = Indicator TLD locations are: #7 23 75 78 79 I 80, 81, 82, 95 94,trof T
, 84, 85, 86
, 98 99 106,87,88,89,76,77,92,93, 101-located,
, 1$
9 91 018 58 an,d 58 Con site #14, 49)l,l T 1 are RETSyond are a ,the ,infl,uence of locations except #9-1 g . l (d) = Indicator samples from environmental stations R1 off-site R2 off-site, R3 off-site, and R4 off-site. Control sam les are samples from R5 off-site environmental g stapion. (e) = This dose is not representative of doses to a member of I the public since this area is located near the north shoreline which is in close proximity to the enerating and is not l acili he public see S tion V.4-TLDs) accessible to members of I (f) = The RETS criteria for indicator milk sample locations includes locations within 5.0 miles of the site. There are no milk sample locations within 5.0 miles of the' site. milk samples are collected from locations I Therefore greater than 5.0 miles from the site based on site D/Q values. I ' I I III-6
i- =! l I; .I 1 4 :
- i
.l IV f / ^ 1 x . l f AN ALYTICAL RESULTS . i u F ? W y ggm ,
l I l IV ANALYTICAL RESULTS
- l. A. Environmental Samale Data
- 1. Environmental sample data is summarized in table format.
I Tables are provided for select sample media and contain data based on actual values obtained over the year. These values are comprised of both positive values and g LLD values where app 1' cable. ,
- 2. The LLD is the smallest concentration of radioactive -
material in a sample that will be detected with 955 I robability and with 55 probability of falsely concluding hat a blank observatdon represents a real' signal . see Section II-C for detailed explanation). ,
- 3. When the initial count of a sample indicates the presence two recounts are nomally perfomed.
- B of radioactivity,ide When a radionucl is positively. identified in two or 5 more counts, the analytical results for that radionuclide
; is reported as the mean of the positive detections and I the associated error for that mean (see Section II-B for methodology).
- 4. Many of the tables are footnoted with the term " Plant i Radionuclides *. Plant related radionuclides are radionuclies that are produced in the reactor as a result of plant operat g fiss on process. ion either through the activation or I
I IV-1
N W ____ W _ W W W- W W W W W W W W W W W W W
~
TABLE IV-1 CONCENTRATIONS OF GAfetA EMITTERS IN SHORELINE SEDIMENT SAMPLES Results in Units of pCi/g (dry) i 2 Sigma
- K Co-60 Cs-134 Cs-137 STIER5**
- Sunset Beach ;
i (05) 04/24/89 16.011.1 <0.05 <0.04 0.3210.04 <LLD Lang's Beach ! ! (06, Control) 04/25/89 13.311.!1 <0.04 <0.04 <0.04 <tLD !
- Recollections: -!
i< I i ,' m Sample Location A 05/24/89 <0.11 <0.07 0.14+0.06 14.311.4 <LLD t Sample Location B 05/24/89 14.311.6 <0.08 <0.07 <0!10 <LLD . Sample Location C 05/24/89 15.4+1.9 <0.10 <0.08 0.10+0.05 <LLD Sample Location D 05/24/89 17.2TO.6 <0.06 <0.10 0.3470.03 <LLD Sample Location E 05/24/89 17.510.6 <0.06 <0.10 0.31T0.03 <tLD
! Sample Location F 05/24/89 16.811.3 <0.07 <0.05 0.2410.05 <LLD -
i Sunset Beach i (05) 10/30/89 18.011.3 <0.06 <0.04 0.2510.05 <LLD ! c Lang's Beach l (06, Control) 10/30/89 13.710.5 <0.05 <0.08 <0.05 <LLD ' i i i Corresponds to sample locations noted on Figure IA, Section VII.
- Plant Related Isotopes 4
i .-. . .- , . - . - . . - - . - .- - - - . - - . - . . . . l'
- '.r....__._.__. _ - - - - .
TABLE IV-2 1 ! DATE TYPE K4 Mn Co-58 Fe-59 Co-60 .Zn-45-Cs-134 ' Cs-137f OTNER$S ! FITZPATRICK 06/06/89 Lake Trout 4.3810.49 <0.024 <0.034 <0.091 <0.022 <0.060 <0.024 0.03910.024 <LLD 06/08/89 Brown Trout 4.6410.47 <0.023 <0.030 <0.069 <0.024 <0.052 <0.024 0.03010.015 <LLD , 06/08/89 White Sucker 4.8010.64 <0.037 <0.050 <0.122 <0.046 <0.093 <0.035 <0.040 <tLD NINE MILE POINT #1 w 06/07/89 Lake Trout 4.5710.51 <0.030 <0.040 <0.095 <0.018 <0.057 <0.025 0.04310.015 <tLD i 06/07/89 Brown. Trout 3.9910.21 <0.035 <0.039 <0.110 <0.036 <0.085 <0.032 0.02010.010 <LLD 06/22/89 White Sucker 5.2610.49 <0.025 <0.028 <0.069 <0.025 <0.055 <0.025 <0.028 <LLD , OSWEGO HARBOR (Control) 06/06/89 Lake Trout 4.57 0.24 <0.036 <0.047 <0.110 <0.032 <0.094 <0.031 0.03210.010 <LLD. 06/06/89 Brown Trout 5.1410.65 <0.037 <0.054 <0.142 <0.026 <0.056 <0.035 0.04310.012 <LLD 06/06/89 White Sucker 3.9910.49 <0.032 <0.034 <0.077. <0.026 <0.057 <0.028 <0.031 <LLD
- Plant Related Radionuclides s W W W W W W W W W W W W W M- M M m W. m
TABLE IV-2 (ConTrave3) DATE . TYPE. 3K-40 Mn-54: Co Fe-59 Co-60 'Zn-65: LCs-134f 'Cs-1371OTNEN5* FITZPATRICK 09/19/89 Lake Trout #1 4.0510.14 <0.039 <0.051 <0.13 <0.032 <0.102 <0.042 0.02510.008 <LLD 09/19/89 Lake Trout #2 4.0010.20 <0.031 <0.042 <0.12 <0.026 <0.061 <0.026 0.03110.008 <LLD 09/19/89 White Sucker 3.9710.46 <0.027 <0.037 <0.10 <0.027 <0.061 <0.022 <0.027 <LLD 09/22/89 Smallmouth 4.9610.34 <0.028 <0.037 <0.08 <0.028 <0.056 <0.024 0.04210.014 <LLD Bass 7* 09/19/89 Walleye 5.6610.32 <0.029 <0.040 <0.11 <0.029 <0.075 <0.027 0.04410.011 <LLD NINE MILE POINT #1
- 09/19/89 Lake Trout #1 4.4910.58 <0.030 <0.060 <0.15 <0.039 <0.092 <0.032 <0.039 <LLD i 09/19/89 Lake Trout-#2 3.6510.19 <0.028 <0.041 <0.12 <0.032 <0.070 <0.027 0.04010.018 <LLD j 09/19/89 White Sucker 6.0510.58 <0.027 <0.040 <0.09 <0.032 <0.068 <0 029 <0.032 <LLD 09/19/89 Brown Trout 5.6410.60 <0.034 <0.043 <0.11 <0.024 <0.069 <0.031 <0.039 <LLD 10/23/89 Wa11 eye 5.6910.32 <0.023 <0.024 <0.06 <0.022 <0.054 <0.025 0.03010.015 < L LD o Plant Related Radionuclides i
TABLE IV-2 (ConTrnues)
- q ,, ;' ..;,:;; w .g ,;zv;, ,9 : :.-:,:: :: ;- :- . -
. . , ~, n ~ ~ :, s x ::. > ~ :
, , e ,. .
' ' !s b;~' 's ",,
^ "'
T'/,mj;/,':.f
- , ;, f.:'/.'@;;p'!,
' ~,: Ff?,'J:'/!OiSJ'tNTIONS q ;lfg : 80$41ts, in, Units 0F GMen'of1pC1/g95TT35 (wet) 12 31'Ftm'$298.81%'[Vy';
'sIgne's :Ii ' ff g .:. , ';: ' ' 'A f f ij g J s
^
, i ' ? c:': : ' t';, fi9 'l' /J'd!4/4'4;,s. ';c?>;' ::' //e'6' " - ' ' l . ' ?+ Q C b '1 3-'
~
.'*:' ' ~ ' ' ' t "^ i
' c
4 DATE- TYPE' K Mn-54 Co-58 Fe _Co-60 Zn-65 .Cs-134 Cs-137 OTHERS* OSWEGO HARBOR (Control) 09/19/89 Lake Trout #1 4.0210.32 <0.037 <0.039 <0.12 <0.033 <0.075 <0.030 0.03210.011 <LLD
- 09/19/89 Lake Trout #2 4.2310.26 <0.025 <0.038 <0.08 <0.021 <0.046 <0.023 0.03310.010 <llD 09/22/89 White Sucker 4.9010.52 <0.030 <0.039 <0.08 <0.025 <0.067 <0.028 <0.030 <lLD i 09/22/89 Brown Trout 5.1210.62 <0.043 <0.048 <0.15 <0.038 <0.102 <0.035 <0.046 <LLD Walleye <0.023 <0.024 <0.05 <0.022 <0.045 <0.024 0.02810.009 <LLD
% i u,
10/28/89 4.8310.27 i
- Plant Related Radionuclides I
h 1 i 6 8 N
TABLE IV-3 i rnurnlTRATICIIS OF TRITIONE IN SWFACE MTER (GRIARTBILY COIWOSITE SANI.ES) Results in Units of pCi/ liter i 2 signa i STATICII CODE PERIOD - DATE- - TRITINE j FITZPATRICK* First Quarter 12/29/88-03/31/89 1351106 (03, INLET) Second Quarter 03/31/89-06/30/89 2881103 Third Quarter 06/30/89-09/29/89 2511105 Fourth Quarter 09/29/89-01/02/90 <172 !- OSWEGO STEAM
- First Quarter 12/31/88-03/31/89 217+107
!? STATION l* (08, CONTROL) Second Quarter 03/31/89-06/30/89 1991102
- Third Quarter 06/30/89-09/29/89 143+104
. Fourth Quarter 09/29/89-01/02/90' <172 l
L i
- Samples required by. the Technical Specifications. !
l s t
4 i TABLE IV-3 (CoNTIWWES) CONCENTRATIONS OF TRITIM IN SURFACE MTER (GNARTERLY COW OSITE SAM LES) Results in Units of pCi/ liter i 2 sigma . . STATION CODE PERIN MTE TRITIM 'l
.NINE MILE First Quarter 12/31/88-03/31/89 1791107 POINT UNIT 1**
(09, INLET) Second Quarter 03/31/89-06/30/89 2141102 I
, Third Quarter 06/30/89-09/29/89 3021106 'I l Fourth Quarter 09/29/89-01/02/90 <172
! NINE MILE First Quarter 12/31/88-03/31/89 135+106 i< POINT UNIT 2** ! l4 (11, INLET) Second Quarter 03/31/89-06/30/89 2271102 i Third Quarter 06/30/89-09/29/89 2471105 , Fourth Quarter 09/29/89-01/02/90 <172 OSWEGO CITY ** First Quarter 12/31/88-03/31/89 248+108 -! WATER (10) . Second Quarter 03/31/89-06/30/89 2401102 Third Quarter 06/30/89-09/29/89 2421105 Fourth-Quarter 09/29/89-01/20/89 <172 1
- Optional samples.
Oswego City Water samples are composites of twice per week grab samples.- s S & &. ' M ~
& & & ~&"
E... .
TABLE IV-4 CONCENTRATICNS OF GAf90A ENITTERS IN 50RFACE WATER SAfrLES - 1989 Results in Units of pCi/ liter i 2 Sigma
? STATION CODE
- NUCLIDEj JANUARY LFEBRUARY NARCN 5APRILF MAY' JINE i
! OSWEGO STEAM I-131 <0.48 <0.35 <0.41 <0.26 <0.41 <0.30 j STATION Cs-134 <3.02 <3.61 <2.71 <2.72 <3.10 <2.82 i (08, CONTROL) Cs-137 <3.15 <3.65 <3.01 <2.88 <3.24 <2.76 .l Zr-95 <8.80 <10.2 <8.39 <6.39 <8.87 <7.35
- Nb-95 <3.91 <4.49 <3.75 <3.66 <4.53 <3.47 1 Co-58 <3.05 <4.70 <3.31 <2.73 <3.72 <2.83 2
Mn-54 <3.00 <3.88 <2.59 <2.61 <3.47 <2.58 Fe-59 <6.91 <7.67 <7.33 <5.58 <7.54 <6.54 1 Zn-65 <5.98 <6.49 <5.63 <5.92 <6.98 <6.23 Co-60 <2.93 <4.37 <2.76 <2.61 <3.75 - <2.52 K-40 234+34.1 188+49.3 202+31.1 229+35.4 215+39.8 236+40.7 ! L Ba/La-140 <5708 <7767 <6T86 <5773 <7.74 <5785 IS FITZPATRICK I-131 <0.46 <0.34 <0.30 <0.21 <0.47 <0.24 - (03, INLET) Cs-134 <3.07 <3.60 <2.50 <3.05 <2.89 <3.39 Cs-137 <3.56 <3.76 <2.75 <3.26 <3.01 <3.44 'i Zr-95 <9.62 <9.51 <7.02 <7.95 <7.65 <8.85 Nb-95 <4.83 <4.66 <3.46
<4.26 <3.79 <4.64 Co-58 <4.30 <4.00 <2.80 <3.21 -<3.02 <3.96
! Mn-54 <3,62 <3.97 <2.63 <2.84 <3.18 '4.08 i Fe-59 <9.02 <8.70 <5.36 <6.94 <7.58 <8.65' ! Zn-65 <7.65 <7.88 <5.23 <6.37 <6.35 <7.60 l Co-60 <4.15 <3.67 <2.28 <3.05 <2.98 <3.09 ! K-40 191+41.4 216+42.3 183+29.7 203+34.5 310+42.8 221+45.6
- Ba/La-140 <8757 <6!28 <5T90 <6T79 <5722 <6T31
- Corresponds to sample locations listed on Figure IA, Section VII.
l , , ; S
TABLE IV-4 (CONTINUE 3) - CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMA EMITTERS IN SURFACE WATER SAMPLES - 1989 Results in Units of pCi/ liter i 2 Sigma j STATION CODE
- NUCLIDE( JANUARY FEBRUARY NARCN : AMtIL ' lMAY: JINIE NINE MILE I-131 <8.23 <8.82 <7.28 <11.0- <9.31 <11.6 POINT Cs-134 <2.46 <2.78 <3.26 <3.58 <2.68 <4.08
, UNIT 1** Cs-137 <2.47 <3.04 <3.09 <4.18 <2.70 <3.48 i (09, INLET) Zr-95 <6.24 <7.23 <8.59 <9.49 <6.20 <8.45 l Mb-95 <3.31 <3.59 <4.03 <4.53 <3.17 <5.40 Co-58 <2.70 <3.19 <3.17 <4.03 <3.14 <4.78
- Mn-54 <2.64 <2.59 <2.97 <3.46 <2.56 <3.64 Fe-59 <6.36 <6.66 <7.70 <8.54 <7.69 <7.91 i Zn-65 <5.43 <5.40 <8.49 <7.48 <5.46 <11.3
- Co-60 <2.34 <3.09 <3.65 <3.09- <2.74 <4.25 K-40 65.5+20.9 234136.7 35.5+11.5 203+42.6 58.1+22.4 31.6+11.9 !
j,- Ba/La-140 <6T53 <7.02 <8794 <7T36 <5 75 <17.3
- c !
!o NINE MILE I-131 <13.6 <7.64 <7.82 <6.76 <9.82 <8.81 POINT Cs-134 <4.30 <3.43 <2.41 <2.29 <4.11 <3.70 l UNIT 2** Cs-137 <4.44 <2.68 <2.62 <2.60 <2.88 <3.45 i i (11, INLET) Zr-95 <11.1 <8.35 <5.95 <6.67 <8.79 <8.09 i
~
- Nb-95 <6.09 <4.22 <3.02 <3.27 <5.06 <4.41 i Co-58 <4.76 <3.62 <2.56 <2.83 <4.30 <4.11 i Mn-54 <4.38 <3.17 <2.49 <2.32 <4.04 <3.95 i Fe-59 <10.6 <7.50 <6.45 <5.42 <8.26 <6.74 ,
Zn-65 <10.2 <8.37 <5.24 <4.52 <10.7 <8.78 ! Co-60 <4.28 <2.38 <2.77 <2.34 <4.54 <4.12 i . K-40 172+39.9 48.1+11.3 100+25.8 53.2+21.2 30.5+15.4 63.2+12.4 l Ba/La-140 <11.3 <8T51 <6T06 <4797 <1T.3 <9707 l
- Corresponds to sample locations listed on Figure 1A, Section VII.
i ** Optional sample location. Sample not required by Technical Specification. 1 l aus aus aus aus mas aus aus aus sus uma me aus aus ,amm sus aus mas amm ,
TABLE IV-4 (CoNTINUEO) L CONCENTRATIONS OF GAf984 EMITTERS IN SURFACE WATER SAMPLES - 1989 Results in Units of pCi/ liter 2 Sigma STATION' CODE
- NUCLIDE JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCN ~ APRIL'- MAY JUNE OSWEGO CITY I-131 <8.37 <11.4 <8.53 <11.5 <12.7 <10.7 WATER ** Cs-134 <2.68 <3.43 <3.33 <3.86 <3.31 <3.75 (10) Cs-137 <2.80 <3.71 <2.68 <4.28 <4.22 <3.25 4 Zr-95 <6.34 <8.72 <8.82 <9.48 <9.55 <8.70 i Nb-95 <4.37 <4.20 <4.09 <5.54 <4.76 <5.30 Co-58 <2.84 <3.49 <3.38 <4.36 <3.71 <4.39 Mn-54 <2.86 <3.38 <3.14 <4.39 <3.95 <3.61
- l. Fe-59 <6.00 <9.30 <8.15 <9.52 <10.3 <8.90
- Zn-65 <5.58 <7.23 <8.07 <8.63 <7.33 <9.14 i Co-60 <2.10 <3.34 <3.66 <3.91 <3.88 <3.80 i K-40 101+30.3 237+41.6 65.1+12.7 175+45.1 222+40.9 66.0+13.5 i Ba/La-140 <6758 <6741 <1I.2 <9734 <8706 <15.4 i
o
- Corresponds to sample locations listed on Figure IA, Section VII.
** Optional sample location. Sample noi required by Technical Specification.
i l i *
. . - . . - - . . . . .- - - _ - . _ - _ _ . - _- - - -= - - -. .- ._. ...
TABLE IV-4 (CONTINUED) i CONCENTRATIONS OF GAf9tA EMITTERS IN SURFACE WATER SAMLES - 1989 Results in Units of pCi/ liter i 2 Sigma i I DECEIRER STATION CODE
- NUCLIDE? JULY- AUGUST SEPTEfBER OCTOBER 'MOVEMBER' OSWEGO STEAM I-131 <0.23 <0.22 <0.43 <0.31 <0.43 <0.16 STATION Cs-134 <3.87 <2.98 <2.70 <3.58 <3.66 <3.02 .
! (08, CONTROL) Cs-137 <3.35 <3.02 <3,02 <4.29 <3.66 <2.94 Zr-95 <8.42 <7.70 <7.86 <9.83 <8.70 <7.99 Nb-95 <4.30 <3.84 <3.72 <4.88 <4.73 <4.29 Co-58 <4.46 <3.56 <3.48 <3.76 <3.81 <3.26
- Mn-54 <3.59 <3.01 <2.64 <4.38 <4.02 <3.14 i Fe-59 <8.40 <7.02 <6.68 <9.67 <9.45 <6.31
. Zn-65 <9.99 <6.62 <5.29 <7.20 <7.07 <6.89 I Co-60 <3.87 <2.82 <2.65 <4.01 <3.82 <3.02 , K-40 38.5+13.0 334+48.8 236+38.9 151+38.1 216+44.4 265 38.1
<8!75 <5 71
; Ba/La-140 <9765 <6791 <4772 <7746
. ;: FITZPATRICK I-131 <0.24 <0.22 <0.30 -<0.30 <0.40 <0.40 ! (03, INLET) Cs-134 <3.01 <4.60 <3.80 <2.79 <3.86 <3.09 i Cs-137 <3.10 <3.08 <3.99 <3.32 <3.54 <3.19 Zr-95 <6.98 <8.72 <9.33 <6.82 <8.26 <8.51 i Nb-95 <3.90 <4.22 <4.97 <3.63 <5.05 <3.64 i Co-58 <3.11 <4.50 <4.09- <3.12 <4.38 <3.00 i Mn-54 <2.90 <3.41 <3.90 <2.49' <3.44 <2.82 i Fe-59 <6.52 <8.45 <9.09 <6.50 <8.05 <7.05 Zn-65 <6.80 <9.50 <7.06 <5.71 <9.91 <6.32 l Co-60 <3.16 <4.54 . <3.40 <2.38- <4.36 <2.86-i K-40 182+30.4 48.1+13.6 214+46 257+34.9 49.4+11.8 239+34.8 Ba/La-140 <6T09 <16.4 <7T50 <4739 <16.2 <6!32 !
- Corresponds to sample locations listed on Figure 1A, Section VII.
l l . i
TABLE IV-4 (ConTrauc) CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMA EMITTERS IN SURFACE WATER SAMPLES - 1989 l Results in Units of pCi/ liter i 2 Sigma 1 , STATION' CODE
- NUCLIDEL ' JULY AUGUST ~ SEPTHRER LOCTOBER NOV9BER ' DECEMER i-4 NINE NILE I-131 <12.9 <11.9 <7.84 <8.69 <13.5 <9.48 i POINT Cs-134 <4.39 <3.70 <2.56 <2.51 <4.23 <3.00
; UNIT 1** Cs-137 <4.80 <3.79 <2.52 <2.64 <4.79 <3.06 (09, INLET) Zr-95 <11.6 <9.18 <6.68 <6.82 <10.8 <7.93 Nb-95 <6.04 <4.97 <3.01 <3.63 <4.89 <3.86 Co-58 <4.90 <3.96 <3.05 <3.12 <4.56 <2.91 i Mn-54 <4.51 <4.00 <2.92 <2.49 <3.96 ' <3.15 Fe-59 <10.1 <9.10 <6.99 <6.50 <12.1 t <6.30 Zn-65 <9.33 <7.63 <5.52 <5.71 <9.37 <6.45
- Co-60 <4.09 <3.25 <3.01 <2.38 <3.45 <3.21 K-40 160+44.8 225+44.1 52.0+21.9 257134.9 117+51.7 68.9+25.7
; Ba/La-140 <7756 <BT71 <5T89 <4.39 <15.1 <6789
; NINE MILE I-131 <8.35 <9.08 <8.06 <9.92 <9.06 <11.6 POINT- Cs-134 <2.80 <4.01 <4.07 <3.98 <2.66 <3.09 UNIT 2** Cs-137 <2.83 <2.95 <3.43 <2.98 <2.68 <3.25 (11, INLET) Zr-95 <6.76 <8.78 <7.94 <9.08 <6.37 <8.31 Mb-95 <3.58 <4.67 <4.74 <4.61 <3.64 <4.26 Co-58 <3.12 <4.45 <4.09 <4.34 <2.71 <3.42' Mn-54 <2.95 <3.98 <3.50 <3.60 <2.80 <3.26
.Fe-59 <7.43 <8.45 <8.95 <7.80 <5.82 <6.45
- Zn-65 <5.45 <9.60 <9.31 <8.93 <5.89 <6.52 Co-60 <2.56 <4.86 <4.25 <4.31 <2.38 <3.09 i K-40 101+28.9 48.9+13.6 45.8+13.4 84.3+13.8 262+38.3 259+36.3 i Ba/La-140 <7T42 <16.6 <9790 <16.8 <5T65 <6724 q _
!
- Corresponds to sample locations listed on Figure 1A, Section VII.
l ** Optional sample location. Sample nnt required by Technical Specification. l E !
i TABLE IV-4 (ConTrwu d ! CONCENTRATIONS OF GAfstA EMITTERS IN SURFACE MATER SAMPLES - 1989 ! 4 Results in Units of pCi/ liter i 2 Sigma
. STATION' CODE
- NUCLIDE.' JULY- AUGUST SEPTBBER OCTOBER' -NDVDBER DECUSER OSWEGO CITY I-131 <14.3 <14.1 <10.7 <9.55 .<13.2 <10.0 ;
WATER ** Cs-134 <3.98 <4.57 <3.98 <2.38 <4.17 <3.60 (10) Cs-137 <4.41 <4.58 <2.88 <2.88 <4.50 <3.15 i Zr-95 <12.1 <11.4 <9.25 <7.18 <11.0 <8.42 Mb-95 <5.79 <6.03 <5.03 <3.42 <5.35 <5.17 Co-58 <4.43 <5.62 <4.08 <3.06 <4.51 <4.42 ~ Mn-54 <4.39 <4.43 <3.52 <2.63 <4.56 <3.78 ! Fe-59 <10.2 <11.5 <7.47 <6.13 <9.82 <8.26 Zn-65 <9.35 <9.35 <9.48 <6.03 <8.39 <8.37 Co-60 <3.66 <3.88 <4.31 <2.48 <4.69. <4.13 , .F K-40 169+47.8 185+46.9 73.4+13.2 239135.6 275+64.4 57.0+14.1
- Ba/La-140 <16.9 <15.3 <17.9 <5.45 <8793 <1T.1 c-
- Corresponds to sample locations listed on Figure IA, Section VII.
'** Optional sample location. Sample ng_t required by Technical Specification.
l t i i l l l M M MM M M M M M M M M M .m M M M M
L NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN.*NNNNNNNm I
- w e oooooooooooooooooooooooooo i r w. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o o. o. o. o o. o. o. o. o o. o. o. o. o L oooooooooo oo cooco oooo J
+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+1 l+l,+l+l+1
.a mO . oeoNme8 N ,< N N N .< ,0<mc4oos m I l +<lN+1 i+l+l+l+1+1 eo e4 o ao e
< c4 N .< .< c4 m r4 o o s < c4 c4 o c4 N m < m in I
- .m-' oooooooooooooooooooooooooo a L $$$$$$$$$$dddddd$$$$$$$ddd 1 r' l~ M E NNNNNNmNNNmNNmNNNNNNNNNNNN
- i
- e(
wi oooooococcooooooooooooooco i l. [ o. o. o. o o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. 1- ol.<l m l l e Al&l el el el m mla lw al l m mlm l 1 l 1 m 1 ImI *IeiN ,* m o ao101 1
- =*
- T u. - s N .< N N .< N .< .< c4 N .< ed .< c4 .w .< o o .< ,* s ,< o rd ed e W .m' 1 o o. o. o . .o o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o o. o. o. o.
i .
>=
y . . oooooooooooooooooooooooooo, ; t s-m N .. N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N e4e4 N N N N N N N
- e. oooooooooooooooooooooooooo f M W +1 w- o. o. o o. o. o o. o. o o. o. o...o o o.o ... o o o. o o. o o. o. o. o.
w O ';
. . . . m m oooooooo o ooooooooooooooo E
< +l+l+l+l+l+l+l+1 l+1 l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+1 o W a -m eo ao ao m e in m m wswNawsssssssNswwooMMMwoax o ao N w e m N co o w
- N o co in so M l b 57 _ [ %.- g . age oooooooooooooooooooooooooo at g a$ e dddddddddddddddddddddddddd j :
l
$$ U (W
20s - M ' NNNNNNNNNwNNNNNNNN&NNNNNNN E m
.e oooooooooooooooooooooooooo a +
uR w.. .c
. w; o.o. o. o. o. o.o o. o.o o. o. o.o. o.o. o o. o.o. o o. o. o o. o
. . . . . . O w - O. oooooooooooooooooooooooooo s
+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1 2 Lu N co e to .< N o o o n m & w m m e e o e co in
- N .< m o m :c a0 1 e4 .* e4 N N e4 N e4 e4 N .* cd ed e4 es ed ed o o e4 .* ed M o c4 e4 O
-M C. o. o o.o. .o o. o. o o. o. o o.o. o.o o o o o. o o. o ooo W m . . . .... . .... g.e y oooooooooooooooooooooooooo I .
k Q W NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNe4NNNNNNNm H !
- 4- oOoooooocooooooooooooooooo D lm 1 ma we O^
Ad -:
- li
- o. o. .o. o. o oooooooooooooooooooooooooo
. o o. o. .o...o o o o. o.o
+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1 o m c4 w N e c4 m o e4 no in 9 N W CO N N co w w m c4 m N m ooo N .* N N N e4 N e4 N N e4 e4 e4 e< c4 c4 ed o o c4 es e4 c4 o
- e4
...... oooooooo or W
a: mW E> i Mn OH o o.o. o. o o. o. o.o. o.. o. o o. o.o.o. o.o e . . . o o. o o. o. o. o o.
. . Hp oooooooooooooooooooooooooo bg W
0 t
-2 l WH m W m o W m e4 6 @ m o 6 M o b w e4 co Ln N o to N @ @ m 3
.S-' o c4 N m o e4 N N o c4 N N o c4 e4 N o o c4 N M o es e4 N o A4 WW ~ NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN EE c4 em c4 e4 N N N N m m M M w w w w in Ln to in LO @ @ @ W b aC D I hd .
ooooooooooooooooooococ0000 mA I. W - NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN l W. mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ** l 3 CD co to ao to 80 to 50 co 80 80 ID 10 co 10 80 co CC CO CD co CD co CD co EC
- i
_ . . . _ . _ _ _ . . -. . . _ . . . . . _ . _ _ _ . . . . . . _ . , _ . . . _ . _ _ ._ .._ __, .. a
- ~ _ - - . . - - . - . . .-. --.. - - - - .- .~~.- - - - -
I! ; i NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNssNNNNNNN ooooeooooooooooooooooooooo Ij ; ooooooooooooCoooooeooocooo i dddddd'd'dd*i*'dddd'dd'dddd
+1gl+l+l+l+1 N N $ $ $ $ $i +1 $$C l +1gl .< C lUl Igl +1N .gigt l +141 Igl +1gl +1 N .w
-) '
l
- o $ N .< O M E .m C l
- o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. 1 OooooooooooooooooeoooooooO ,
I g , -; I
- H ,
W . 4 NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNWsNNNNNNN i
& oooooooooooooooooooooooooo '
M ! i u, - O. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. O. o. o. o o. [ li I I I I l 1 i ,1 1,1 1 1 1 1 I I I I I I l lOl I N O N .,< O U o'E w .< I!.w o N $ . M wi $$N%NCCNNN oooooooooooooooooooooooooe i 1 m dididididdiiid&iidiididdii .
! 'N
^ m i
$+1 d
m 8 H ( M W , h N NMNNNNNNNNNNNNNN e4NNNNNNNM U a g w *.= g oooooooooooooooo ooooooooo , g ,
>" k. ,
W. o. c. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o.o.o.o. o o o. o o. oe o . . M ! $ 1 w l l l l l l o M M o o olm l ml. l l l
. N Nl lwle hm l I l l l l l l l w g>=8a i , s .
Msmtm 4
, sNsNNsNNssssssss oossssoas m bbbbbbbbbbb oob bboo bbb
- b w yC z
>" b a
h w M 4 NNNNNNNNNMNMMNNNNe4NNNNNNNN oooooooooooooooooooooeoooo o
' 6: o. o. o . o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. ... o o o s. o. o o. o o. .. .o o o o. o w
g g . . . E o oooooooooooo ooooooooooo m o
+1 N W l.+l+l+l+l+l.+l+l+l.+4 MNWo 6N N W Nl +l +l @+1e4 1+l+l+l+l+l+l+1+l+l+l+1 m o 9 M N o m m N of I .
.4 4 e4 N N .H N .4 e4 N e4 N .4 e4 e4 4 e4 o c4 e4 4 e4 4 e c4 e4 W .
l i- oooooooooooooooooooooooooo g I n didddidididdddddiiddidiiii mm . z> . OH 4 H E-* , 4 W: -; Oc t O Wh a g'. m e M o e M a n w M o n M o n e .a . m N o m N m e m o c4 N M o e4 N N o e4 N N o .H e4 N o o c4 N M o s s N o Q. A ww - ssssssssssssssssssssssssss xx -
>= 1 ed s c4c4 N N N N M M M M v e w w m m m m m c w @ c o -t wg: oooooooooooooooooooooooooo <E m
d-
= k.k.k.k.k.k.k.k.k.k.k.k.k.k.k.kk.k.k.k.k.k.k.k.k.k. . .
L IV-15 t
I i i e l NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNmNNNNNNNNN 4-W. oooeoooooooooooooooooooooo
- o. o. o. o. o. o. o. ..o. o o o. o. o. o. o o. o. o. o o. o o. o. o.. . .
l o. o l I l 1 l l l 1 l l l 1 l l l l 1 l l 1 l m' m b m W mlol@ @l m N W el m w M m m w
- b b m N m M Ml i 1 M N H N e4 N ed ed e4 N ed o ed e4 N o m ed ed e4 M N N N N N m oooooooooooooooocooooooooo
- l. diddddiddddddddidddddd&&di i
'l i
NNNNNNNNNmNNNNNNmNONNNNNmN
- oooooooooooooococoeMooooooo p #'.
w w o. o o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o .- i
- O o oo oc o ooo coooooooo
)
$ .* +1 m
1 +l +1 1 +l +1 i +1 i +I +l +1 1 I o l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+1 e4 m ew m a0 e m e0 o op e c4 to e e< m I ,! w T. ed e4 N ed e4 N e4 eM e4 N ed o e4 4 ed o m e4 m e4 N W e4 N N N g .m o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o o.o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o.o. o. oooooooooooooooooooooooooo y$ N g_ m j 'N NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNmNNNNNNNNN
- e. oooooooooooooooooooooooooo
, g $+1 6 w o.o.o. o o. o.o.o.o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o o. o. o.o.o. o. o. o.o o. 4 W m C. ooooooooooo coo o cooooooo m i I * +l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+1 +l +8 +1 i +1 l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+1
- M w a m mwsemeNewne ens M mmmeMoMn o
>
- 1 e4 e4 N N ed e4 e4 e4 N N eN o 94 e4 N e4 9 N e4 e4 e4 e4 N N N e4 H i N.- m oooooooooooooooooooooooooo E.
l N dddd5$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ ~
- g H g l' w < H .
i Q
> ai-f":
U j g uH ba NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNmNNNNNNNNN s m W e.. oooooooooooooooooooooooooo 4 w. ao.. o 6 o. o. o o. o o. o. o. o. o. o o o. o. o. o. o. o o. o. o. o o. o..ql ! O oc oooooooo ococcoo ococoo u g H +1 +1 1+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+1 l+l+l+l+l+l+l+1 l+l+l+l+l+l+1 H W N wm ommW6mNb z im i m m m ed m e m co m m N m m l M i- e4 e4 N N e4 ed e4 e4 e4 N ed o e4 e4 c4 e4 m e4 e4 e4 e4 e4 e4 N ::l
-m
( o. o o. o. o.o o.o. o. o. o.o.
. . .. o o o. ... o. o o o o. oo. . o.oo.o. u
. N e4 W
g oooooooooooooooooooooooooo b 4 > cQ Q to t , NNNNNNNNNmWNNNNNMNNNNNNNNN Ql 14f oooooCooooooooooooCooooooo l,,, r H
- s i
- o. o. o o...o o o. o. o o... o o o. o. . .o o o o o o o o. . .o.. ooo
..... cx 1 o o ooo ocoooooooooooooooo to ;
. , +1 l +1 l +1 +1 +1 +1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1 a:
=s - m e4 w Co m o e w m e0 m o o cic0 y e & w N N N o
.= . c< c4 N N e4 e4 e4 e4 N N N o e4 e4 N e4 y es s e o e4 ew N N N e4 m to
- m: z>
o c. o. .c .o o. o. o. o o. o o. o. o. o. o.
. . . . . o. o o .o. . .o. o o o o. os
. o ooooococcoooooooooooooooco H E* i w .*
d, 4 O 3 ' G= o 6
- e4 6 w H 40 m eg c0 m N m W m o @ m o 5 w e4 00 @ N C4 H E
1 WW N e4 N m o e4 N N o c4 e4 N o o c4 N M o ei N N O e4 e4 N o .l
>= NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN b 5 5 h e000c0e0 m m e m o o o o o c4e4e4e4 N N N N e4 44 ;
o o o o o o o o o o o o c4e4e4e4 M e4 M e4c4 M e4 M e4 o EE ndg W ' NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN sic D cfJ 4 W 3 mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmo ** 40 0010 to to 80 # *O E0 to 80 CD 00 to 80 to CD to CD C0 00 to to CO CD m . m, - i
. _ . _ ._ _ _ . ._ _IV-16_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Il
! 2 222998822299999999999828 o 3l m
m *99999**9 9999999 99 9 I l l l l l l l l l il l l l l l l l l l l l l l l
@ M M 4N MMM m rw MM 9******9******R9***%******
ooCooooooooooooooooooooooo I! l E I e
- e M naaanununnaananaa oooooooooooooooooooooooooo W dd ddddd d ddd dddddddd I C 'k. gl ai$1 %' al al al el $i kl al al $l e' el %I el $l ai gl gi ti al ai al gi-
M w MNNNMNMMMNMcMMMMMMMMMMNNNN' m oooooeooooooeoeooooeooeoeo 3 l
'N
^
d+1 g E' 3 m .z O~ e EW a g agaaaananagaaaaaaaaaaaaa 6 l-b mmc }4w R**R*****9***RRR*R*****R9R 2 l: [vg bE ?!?i?i?i?til?i U 4 $w = = = gi?i?iji?i?ijiji?i?i?i?i?i?i?i?l?i?i?: n-n-Nan ==== =
- g-c gg essessseses9esusesessses oooooooooooooooooooooooooo
=
a E w 5 a n. 6 3 w< a
- b CO
=
O w M b d w-20agaaaaaaaaaaaoaoaaaaaaaa oooooooooooooooooooooooooo o l in; ddd 'ad 'd 'dadsddddddd 'dddd
- u giaiti$ia.lti$igi$.igiigisixigigiiaix.igi$.isigigii$i a, E i u,
-. u -
.i M .< M N MM N N , M M N o n ,< ,. M ,. MMNNN e S' 00o00000000000000o00o0000o W
, dddddddddddddddddddddddddd [, g.
3 z :> 5 w SH "sbL O l , m5 a E.
- a a n s ,.<n w 8 . m .< . m N m e n o w m a n ,M . e N A 04 M e4 N M o e4 N N O e4 eM N o o e4 N M o c4 N N O M e4 N O E*5 E '- .
~ *I >>>>>>>>>>>>oooo.o.>M >>> M hk.kk>
M MMe mE w.g e o o o o e o e o o o o .4 ,< M .< . E k. k. k. k. k. k. k. k. k. k. k. k. k. k. k. k. k. k.o k. k. k.. k. k.- ;
++
ll : L IV-17 l.' t
[I NNNmNNNNNNNNNNNNNNHNNNNNNN l oooooooooooooooooooooooooo
- o. o o o. o. o. o. o o o. o. o.o. o. o. o. o. o o. o o. o. o. o. o. o. .
j 3 o oooo
+ 1 I l+l+l+l+1 I l+l+1 oo ococo oooooooo i l+l+l+l+l+1 . @Neo og emo.m l+l+l+l+l+l.+1+l+1 wwmNo Me aNmmNmNNmammmmmmmmomammoam
- o. o. o. o. o. o. o o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o.
i ococooowoooooooooooooooooo l NNNNNNHNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN k oooooooooooooooooooooooooo i
- c. o. c. o o. o o. o. o. o.o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o o. o. o e ooo o o cooococo o oo i
+l + l +1 1 +1 1 1 I l +1 5 .-;
1 m .l +1 N m n 1.+lwmoomo+l +l +l +l +l +l .+1 N i .+l ,+1 m n amaamaammmmammammaosaanomN ? q o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o.
~
> oooooooooooooooooooooooooo M ,
f W . l > M mmmNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNmMNNN ,! M oooooooooooooooooooooooooo '*; 1 w o. c. o. c. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. c. c. o. c. o. c. o. o. o. o. o. 5-M ococo ooooooooooooooooooo -
+1+1+1+1+1 I om@wm l l +1.+1 m m+1.+1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 SmNooNMmwovo Nm +1 +1.+1 +1 +1
- N M NNNNNNNMMMmHMMMMMMcMMMMonM M
W +l o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. oooooooooooooooooooooooooo
? '
i W
- w
- f m[mt NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNMMNNNNNNN 1
g Wg
> @m oooooooooooooooooooooooooo oooooooooooooooooooooooooo <
y
- ddddde ddddddddedddddeedde J g@5 ># $. +l+l+
i i a D> - 8 z I- m m .l+l+l.+1 wo wasNawsmsNNwassasoossswoss l+l.+l+l+l+l+l+l.+l+l+l+l.+l+l+l+l+i+l+l+1 w moomm wNo mWesmee
$sb >w > a 4 e' M gm> RW
- o. o. o
. .o o. o. o. o o. o.o o.
oooooooooooooooooooooooooo
. . . .o o o. o. o. o o. o o.
. . . o.. . o o o o. .
)
m< W< b t NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNWNNNN e oooooooooooooooooooooooooo 1 : 1 w M o. o. o. o. o. o o. o. o. o.o. o.o. . . o.. o o o o. o o. o. o. o. o o o. I ooooo oooooooooooooooooo o '
< +1+1+ l +1 mm l os o m .1+1+1 +1 +1.+1 ovoomms N +1.+1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1mmeNe +1 +1.+1 +1 +1 o +1 +1 +1 4
a 4 w ammNamNNmNmammammmommamona n z
- o. c. o. c. o. o. o. o o.o.o o. o.o. o..o. o.. .o. o. o o o. o. o. o. o.-
oooooooooooooooooooooooooo
. M NNNWNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN 4
M
> oooooooooooooooooooooooooo
- z o. o. o o. ..o o o. o o. o.o. o.o o. o o. o. o. o. o. o o. o. o. o. o W oooooooooooooooooooooooooo
+1+1+1+1+
w m m o v .1.+1 +1 mm+1.+1 mo+1 +1.+1 wmoomo +1 +1 +1 +1mens +1 +1.+1 +1 wo +1 +1 +1.+1 +i +1 a swamawwNewsmwwwsssownwwoms
- o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o.o.o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o o. o. o. o. o. o. .
- oooooooooooooooooooooooooo &
E MNNmoMNNoHNNoHMNooMNmoMNNo WW NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
> MMMmNNNNMMMMwww 900000@@@@o '
Mg oooooooooooooooooooooooooo ; E
.= k.k.k.k.k.k.k.k.k.k.k.k.k.k.kk.k.k.k.k.kk.k.k.k.k. . .
i
. - - . - - - - . - ---- - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - -
. .. . -.- ,~ - - - . ~.-.- --. . . ~ .
- i y: NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNMNNNN'NNNNN o o f-$ H o te Q O O M n o o 4 o o o o o O O o o o o o
-" , - - y
- o. o. o. o. o. o. o.-o. o .o. .o. o. o .o. o. o. o. o. o. . o. C. o. c. o. o. o. . -
oooooooooooooooooooooooooo
+l+l+l+l+l+l+1+l+l+l+1+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+l+1 l- n + -
i W; Me M re e c4 m ei ec4 w r.4 e44 e4 e ec.e 4 .-i m e-t emc4 o es M c.c m r-oMMr-et ew.4m N o o r- mNNNo.- e, i
- o. o. o. o. o. e. o. o. o o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o o. o. o o. o. o. o.
oooooooooooooooooooooooooo- -
.q ; \
NNNMNNNNNNNe4NNNNMNNNNNNNNN ! 1 oooooooooooooooooooooooooo ,. i
-1
- o. c. o. o. o. o. o. .- -o o. o. o. o. .o. o. o o. o. o.
. . o.
-. o. o o o. o. o. o.
- e ooooooooooooooooooooooooeo
+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1 *
,- 5 M ' e e o w e e r- e t- =
- r* m e e m as .4 N = = = m m o e e4 et N N e4 e4 4 e4 et et e 4 o e4 e4 e4 o M N e=0 e-4 ed e4 et .4 N .-4 i
-~PSL
>= s' .'
I eg o. o. -o.. o o. o. o. o.
. . . o o o. o. o.. o. . o o o. o. o. o. o o. o. o. o. o
>= ; oooooooooooooooooooooooeoo '
W - W '
, >=
N- NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNMNNNNNNNNN m oooooooooooooooooooooooooo , am x o. o. o. o. o.o.o. o. o. o. e- o o. o. o. o. o. o. o o. o. o. o o. o.o. o. e . . o 5 oooooooooooooooooooooooooo w m +1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1 i o e .. . m m m N w e r- m e r- o m e M N o o o w o m m o c4 m m E N .
- e4 e4 e4 N e4 ed .4 4 et e 4 ed o ei et N c 4
- N e4 N et e 4 N N N e4 m m o. o. o. o. o. o o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. o. '
3
- k. W +1 . .
E .l ' CooooooooCooocoococoC00000 j O in U < w M%.E I
* .e= -
N N M N N N N N N N N N et N N N M N N N N N N N N N .
. ~
3 ' WUOE oooooooooooooooooooooooooo l M MWh g ococoocococooooooooooooooo i
$hh q
p MD WM Eg y -E k'k'k'k'N'k'f'k'N'N'N'N'N'k'k'N'N'N'k'N'k'k'!'k'k'fi c 1 et c4 N et e4 c4 ed et r4 e4 o o c=4 el e 4 M N e4 N M N N c=4 N N
- o. o o.o. o. o. o.o..o. o o. o. o o. o o. o. o. o. o. o. o. .o ..o o o.
M d >=u oooooooooooooooooooooooooo-
~
- a. <
W< Ep u ', W NNNNNNNNNMNNNNNNMNNNNNNNNN = an oooooooooooooooooooooooooo - um o. o. o. o o.. o. o
. . .o.o. o o o. o o...
. o ..o .o. o. o
. .o..o. o . o .. o o o -
Me oooooooooooooooooooooooooo
- *O +1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1+1 c 2 m- -
e M r* m m m e- e m -i w a r* M o e m N M o e M N N N o - F Je :We .-e ce ce ce et et .-t c4 et N c 4 o e 4 e4 N o M N et N c=4 N N N N N - o...o o o. o. o..o. o o. o. .o.o. o. o. .o o.~o. o..o. o.-.o. o. o . .o o o
>=
z .' oooooooooooooooooooooooooo , W
~ B m l, M .~.. NNNNNNNNNMNNNNNNMNNNMMNNe4N M .lu oooooooooooooooooooooooooo 'i
-t > o. o o. o. .o.o- o. o.. o o. o o. o. o. o o. o o o. o. o. .o.o. o. .o o , gj 3 . . . . .- p oooooooooooooooooooooooooo 4 W ..s -t c +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 +1 c s?w.'. r- r- e e e w e r en m e o e M e4 o e ce r o r- et e e r- m
- A. et e4 et e4 et et c4 c=4 et c4 et c4 v4 et N et M N et e4 e4 N et e t o e4 ,
s EP c o. o. o. o o. o. o. o o.. .o o o. o... o o. o. c. o. .o.. o o .o.. .o o o oooooooooooooooooooooooooo P $ W+ !
!- ... [y 1 _.-97 c 4 co m e4 00 m N m O N m e M o r- W e4 r-
- c 4 co m N m @ N g i '
, 'E:
e4 et N O o e4 N N o et et N o e4 e4 N M o e4 N N o c=4 c4 N o WW 4 N N 'N N. N 'N 'N 'N N. 'N N 'N N 'N 'N N. 'N, 'N 'N 'N 'N N 'N N 'N N c :>- r% r% r no e m ao m a m m e o o o o o e s et c4 e4 N N N N c4 i,
- 4. ; W< o o o o o o o o o o o o e t c4 c 4 e4 et c4 c4 et e4 e4 e t e-4 c4 o t t :'W- W@ N. N, N N 'N N,'N N, N N. N, N 'N N N 'N N N N, N N N N, 'N N. 'N mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmo 1
==mmmmmmmmmmmm===me==me==m
.: :n : r jq i j e . IV-19 l
)
@NN@@N@@@@ M @M M@W@MMM@NM 1 CMCCC C C M CM COMCMMMcCC 1 W CC
. C. C. C. C. C. . C. . C. . C. .C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C
) . . . . CC000C00000oC0000000000000 vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv ( l l ( N@CMeN@NNMcCC@CNomsw@@mM@m t 6 COMWcCCCOM MMCMCMCOMCCOMoo C.C.C.C.C C.C.C.C C. .C.C C.C.C.C.C. C
. . . . .C. C C.C. o. o C CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCoCCCC vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv M
E MN@mCCNmNN CMcCMCCCCC MCCC ONNN@ @N@@NC@NC CC COMCOM
% W C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C. C. C. C. C. . *. C C.
. . . C. C C. C. C. C.
]
f g CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC V V V V V vvvvvvvvvvv CCCCCCoCC vvvvvvvvv W W M M N mm@@NcCNMMmN@@NWNMMCOMMMMM CCCCCCMCMM i MMCCCCoCMMMCMMC - g ( C C C.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C. C.C. C. .C C.C. C
. . . . . . C.o. C . .C . .o. o. C C 1 \
oCCooCCCCCCCCCCoCCCCooCoCC vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv vvv IM MN
)
h4! 4 C@NWN@MONCNC@NNW@@ MON @C@N@ MCCCCCCMCMCMCMCCCOMCMcMcCC M y m W E N g g I C.C. .C. C. C C.C C.C.C C.C C.C.C. C
. . . . .C
. .C. C C o.o. C . .C C.C .
O ggg g 3 CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCooCCCCCC V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V V * *
- V V V V M
W M N O M W .- M M WQU H U y (QO 4
- a 2
ag, g C@omCem@mecemMNem@@m@@@~C@ - 4 ggp a W
# MCMCMCMCCCMCOMCCCCOMCCCoMC v W gw 4,
E I C00C0000.C.0C.000000C0000000C w A ym g CooCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCocCooC vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv e JU ' 44 4 C
- qw m & MNmmN@NmNmcmN@CCC@mmNm@Mo@
CCCCCCCCCCCCCCOMMcCooCoMMC b E gi M E gw E I C C.C.C.C C.C.C.C C C C.C.C.C. C.C.C. C
. . . . . . .C. C C.C.C C.C . .
v g CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv W H E = 4 NN@@NNMNM@@NW@@@W@@COMNMCC CCCCCCMCMMCCCCCCCCOMMMMcCM C w N m 1 C.C.C C.C C.C.C.C. C
. . . C.C.C.C.C.C. C . .C. C . C C.C C.o C.C -
% 5 CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCococcoCC D
3 Z vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv v v v o W W % mw 4 @@@CN@CMMWmMNW@@CNNM@@NWMM ED W CCCMMCMMMCOMCCCCMCMMCOMCMo CM MW E I C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C o.c.c.o C.o.c.o
. . . . Hg CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv vv v <2 uw CL JC C E E @@MC@MMN@MONMONvMmmNomNG@M WM WW QMNMCMNNOMNNOMMNCOMNMcMMNC 4 H' NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN 11 M4 MMMMNNNNMMMM@vvemmmmmC@@@N EE WC CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCoccoCC NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN
<D WA W @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
3 WCWMQWMMWWCmWWOMWWCQ@@@@MM *
- w:
- IV-20 _
- m C CC C Ch N N M co @ N e e m M N N co -e Ch ch -* Ch m @ - M C M C o-eC C O s-eC C c4-eG e-ec o c e-sc o m o ,-e,e m e C
C C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C C.C.C
. - . .C CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC vvvvvvvvvvvvVV V v v v v v-v v v v v-v' -
L
** N,-4,w e-s c o eg =e Q W C C C C C o e s M -e C C -e .-e .-e ew w oe-* C CO Ch N C m C N CO CO N Ch ch e c e-d N e* I.
C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C. CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC .. Y v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v-v M l Cm cO CC o m M C CC C ,-* N CO *-4 @ m Ch CO ch N Ch ch -* C N ' H @ O N-e C o o w o ee M C M e-s c o c4 C C C o c e-e C C e-e' ee4 I.bl *
>=
4 C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C. H CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC g v v v-V V V V V V V V V V V V V vv-vvvvvvvv - g W
. B, M
M N up N @ Ch ch o ed
** m Ch e e-e N @ N N m C m M M CO -4 CO N Ch .j
- u. " C i C C CCC.C g . . C. . W C g '-e ** g C C '-e C '-s '-* C ed C '-* C - C. C. . C. C. .C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C. -1 a . . . - 85 CC==CooC=CCCCCCCCC=CC=CCCC y v v v v v v-v v v v v v-V vvvvvvvvvvvvv E IM ' kt !
>= . MN -
I E W Co m N N M C M .-s Ch N e-e C N N CO N Ch C M O3 C N .-4 M M *-e 0 J +l g comommmmommmmmooommommmmmm dy g
- m. C.C.C.C.C C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C C.C
. . . . C.C.C.C.C.C C.C.C.. . m .
p g y M CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC E-
, g._g o v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v.v v v v v v.v v v v C
> W '- M g. W g aut 7p U
--s c e* Co ch M CO C M @ Ch m N m CO O N N CB N Ch o m v e=* r 3 h m k
gg dp o a $ e e 4 -t w=e C o
- C o-e s-* *-e C C C C C -e C e* M C C -4.-4 -* *=e - W q gm M i C.C.C.C.C.C C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C
. - .C. .C C.C.C . -C. .C . C.C C.C
. . y h) g M CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC v v v v v v v v v v v v v v ,v v v v v - v v v v v v v -
W CL.
.Ju "
adC 4 g-mMCOMoodmMMCC 2I 4 M N@ C C C Ce-4.-eeee-eC C ,=ec C C C m C N wmCN-e C C -4 C C -< -e .-e .-e c ,-e .-4 C e.4 '* -e E Y U" l- C.C.C.C C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C C.C.C.C. C
. .. C.C.C .. .C C.C.C .C . C. m G CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC U g vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv w 4 H b
g >- ' m C ,
- $ N C Nw Cho we-9 C C0 o mCC -sMeCeN CCD M e-o C CCh
,-eCD,-s e=* oC CO
.-4 C-4e-eC CO N e-o C .-e e-* to4 N.-eO.-4,-4
.-4.
*=4 C -)
1 N W l- C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C C.C.C.C.C.C. C
. - - . . .C C.C.C.C C.C.C.C. C
. . ce
% E CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC -
p v v.Y v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v v .v v - v v v v C
! O
~
MN .m 9 N CC CO e=ewCco*=4 c cO C Cch e wNNMCe=e C c=* ON e-eC.=e
-* cO e-e co O Cco Ce ed4C@ -* -*
C CO N-e+-4 e-o e* N E v=8 C M l C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.. m CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC >--
~
vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv-vvvvvvvvvv .cc y C
..J N w W N w -4 cO to W CO LO N Ch @ M C @ M O N w M CO @ N .
B WW C.=4 *-e N M C o-* N N C e=9 e=4 N C C e-e N M C -* N N C -e r W 9NC NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN -J
>== N N N N CD CO CD CD Ch Ch Ch m o O C C C -8 e-9 e-4 *=4 N N N N *-4 CL.
M aIC C C C C C C C C C C C C .-e e * .=e e-o e-o e-* -* c-4 -* -* e e e-e e-4 C E WQ W NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN -
.cc Ch m Ch Cm Ch CM Ch Ch Ch m Ch Ch Ch Cm Ch Ch CB CD CD CB Ch Ch Ch m Ch C m '
3 CD CO CO CO CO CO 03 CO CO CD CO CO CD CO C CO CC CO CO CO CD CO CO CO CO Ch IV-21 _a
W e@CMmmNwmMNmNmmmomNmNMcMNO MCMMCCCMcMCCCCCCMCMCOMCMCM C.C.C.C C.C.C.C.C C.C..C C.C.C.C.C.C.C. C..C C.C. C 4 . - -
. .C. C M CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv vvv WNmNcc@@mMNmmmmm@NmomNMmmM CCCCOMCCOMMCCONCOMCMCMMCOM l C C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C C.C.C.
. . l 1
g 7 CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv.vvvvvvvv a 5M i H 4
- H M
W 1
~
N NmMmN@mmNCmmMNmm@MNommmcMm j McMCCCCCCMCONCC ~~lr 1 C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.O O N O M C M M C M CC.C.C.C.C 5
- oooooooooooooo==oooooooooo vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv i 4M
- g. i M
WN d g +1 1'
-WEm i h*g g g N@N@NN@CMmmmmmMmemommmmmme !
> w w.n%. , m, g o MCCCCCOMMCCCCCMCCCMCCCCCCM-
- g g, C.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.C.0.C.C.0.C.C.C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 y
g qm Sg 4+ y CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv.vvvvvvv vv i e NH> C 4 4.W - fl H EqM
}
EUD _ M 1 JW CU . C4
,m g
gm
, 5i Mmm@Nm@NemmcmNmcmMNmmNNomM MoeCCCCCCCCCCCCCC-CCowC-C-yg I C.C C.C.C.C C.C.C.C.C.C.C..C C.C.C.C. C
. . . C.C. C. C.C. C . .C g
m @ CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv 4> Z W I. <
~
mMmmmCNM@MMmCNmMmm@NNOMMON-CMcNOMMMCMMCMcCMCCC----CM-w -
-t C.C.C.C.C.C. C. .C
- C.C.C.C.C C.C.C.C.C. C
.- .- C.C.C C.C.C. C M
Q CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv C .ONwMheMcNewmwMmmNo@mCCmC@m E MMNMCMNNOMNNOMMNCOMNMCMNNO W NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN M MMMMNNNNMMMMwwwemmmmm@@@@N W CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN W mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm 3 mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm s IV-22 _. . _ _ _ _
o :
- W o .H e-4 M Ch -e m m m ch 03 Ch m o .-g ew e4 CO CO e-e e-e _ Ch Ch m .. !
- e e c s e-e e 4 C e* C C C C C o o r-s eM e e e-s C o e e e-t -e c c e* .
O.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C. t
- P'D CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC g vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv. l
- m. 3.>
> e >
d :
> 'I m - i W CNm--NmommmmNNm O @mmmm-NN ~
H -CC--CC-CCCC--O - CCCC---- r
,% C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.
. . C. .C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.. ..:
g a "
>=e CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC -
W v-v v v v v v'V V V V V V vvvvvvvvvvvvv , 3 g, s
?
"g I' C
WEm
$r" :
g -mN-MmWommCNNmNCCmNmNNWom-
,T ,[ M"g . - C.-e- - C - - C C - C - C --CCCC---C- 3i C,, t:I C C.C. C.C C. C. C. C.C.C.C. C C.8.C.C.e.C
. . . . * * * *
- C C C C C C C. -
y y hgh 'E CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv i Sg y 1 CO > > - C eIC EW -J ! W 4-UD JW ..' - 40 o nC g ,,, J. O m -d Ch C Ch C _ @ ch Ch N ed ch N Ch co ch c0 e-* @ C C CO C O
-C-C-C-CCCCC-CCeCCC-C--C-- :
.gm,,,4 H y, ;W t C.C.C.C C.C.C.C C.C.C.C.C C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C .C. C.C C.
w CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC g V V V V v v v v v'v v v v v v v v v v v v.v v v-v v 4 E y .. 3 .
' -Nm_MCMNM-mN-@CNNmNW_CMNN-
-CC-------C--C-CCC-C------
w . C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C.C C.C.-C.C.C.C.C CCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCC J@M - vvvvvvvvvv.vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv l i E -- m _ C- m
- N C .H _ NN mN O_ -N*=e m _N CC N.H
..-NW-m_Nm.N e-a N M C e-*N N Ce-e- N C
- W NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN N N N CO CO CO CO a3 Ch Ch Ch Cn C C C C C -
- 4.-e -N N N N c-*
-M C C C C C C C C C C C C e-o e-4 e-g e-e eg e-4 c-4 c-e e-4 e-e e-o e 4 -4 C W NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN W CB CB Ch Ch CM Ch m @ m Ch Ch Ch Ch CM Ch Ch Ch m th Ch CB Ch Ch Ch m C 3 mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmme IV-23
'- m m m m TABLE IV-9 CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1989 Results in Units of 10-3pCi/m3 1 2 Sigma NUCLIDES JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL NAY JUNE R1 0FFSITE COMPOSITE
- Ce-144 <5.77 <4.56 <4 03 <5.24 <5.46 <2.98 Ce-141 <1.98 <1.42 <1.30 <1.51 <1.55 <6.41 Be-7 102116.7 67.0+12.5 94.9112.9 62.7113.3 82.4113.2 91.8+15.7 Zn-65 <3.24 <1790 <1.06 <2.52 <1.36 <2774 Cs-134 <1.11 <0.94 <0.94 <1.01 <0.99 <1.02 Cs-137 <1.21 <1.05 <1.01 <1.33 <1.04 <1.19 Zr-95 <3.47 <2.49 <2.08 <2.76 <2.30 <2.58 Nb-95 <1.83 <1.38 <1.13 <1.38 <1.50 <1.18 Co-58 <1.13 <1.05 <0.70 <1.12 <0.93 <1.48 Mn-54 <1.03 <0.94 <0.83 <1.24 <0.94 <1.24
== Co-60 <1.66 <0.78 <0.76 <0.96 <0.91 <0.92 d3 K-40 <24.1 13.4+8.4 <21.4 10.7+8.7 22.7+11.3 13.5+10.5 Otherst <LLD < LED <tLD <LCD < LED < LED R2-0FFSITE COMPOSITE
- Ce-144 <4.42 <4.43 <4.41 <5.96 <4.74 <3.99 Ce-141 <1.28 <1.57 <1.28 <1.66 <1.70 <1.40 Be-7 80.7112.0 72.1+11.7 80.0i13.4 78.2114.4 57.8+12.1 Zn-65 <1.68 <1T73 <1.19 94.2112.6
<1.94 <1!86 <2.22 Cs-134 <0.88 <1.02 <0.89 <1.26 <1.08 <0.81
, Cs-137 <0.70 <0.96 <0.89 <1.16 <0.92 <0.68 l Zr-95 <1.90 <2.85 <2.51 <3.33 <2.98 <1.57 Nb-95 <1.10 <1.16 <1.22 <1.68 <1.39 <0.84 l Co-58 <0.99 <1.06 <1.08 <1.45 <1.32 <0.65 Mn-54 <0.97 <1.06 <0.84 <1.18 <1.03 <0.93 . Co-60 <1.06 <1.02 <0.84 <0.66 <0.77 <0.79 K-40 30.9+12.1 32.1+13.5
<15.4 22.1+13.5 36.1+13.8 36.8+11.7 Otherst < LED < LED < LLD- < LED <tED < LED Sample Locations Required By Technical Specifications.
t Plant Related Radionuclides.
TABl_E IV-9 (CONTINUED) CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1989 i Results in Units of 10-3pCi/m3 1 2 Sigma MAYL JUNE.. . MARCH APRIL JANUARY' FEBRUARY NUCLIDES-R3 0FFSITE COMPOSITE *
<4.04 <6.84 <4.49
<5.93 <3.50 <2.08 <1.44 Ce-144 <3.75 <1.28 <1.39
<1.27 <1.78 68.3+10.9 86.8+17.0 82.0+12.6 Ce-141 64.2+13.6 78.3+10.6 <3736 <1733 Be-7 67.8+11.8 <1T45 <2T14
<0.86
<1.74 <2T16 <0.89 <1.29 Zn-65 <1.28 <0.73 <1.51 <1.01 Cs-134 <0.89 <0.80 <0.72 <2.13-
<0.74 <1.11 <1.68 <4.00-Cs-137 <2.26 <1.78 <1.90 <0.81 Zr-95 <2.41 <1.00 <0.98
<0.89 <1.46 <0.75 <1.40 <1.25 Nb-95 <1.47 <0.74 < 1.~ 15 <0.95 Co-58 <1.15 <0.62 <0.92 <0.78
<1.13 <1.06 - <1.11 <1.05 Mn-54 <1.42 <1.00 17.5+12.7 24.8+11.6 Co-60 <0.87 30.0+10.0 38.9+12.4 l2 <12.0 22.4+13.6 < LED. < LED < LED i K-40 <tED < LED D$ Otherst <LLD R4- OFFSITE COMPOSITE *
<4.51 <6.35 <5.17
<4.26 <4.69 <2.31- <1.95' Ce-144 <5.78 <1.66 <1.57
<1.89 <1.51 77.6+16.1 97.9+15.5 Ce-141 77.6+12.6 84.9+14.6 82.2114.1~ <2T98 Be-7 93.0+15.7 <1.70- <3781
<2T45 <2T40 <0.87 Zn-65 <1712 <0.85 <0.82 <0.94
<0.84 <0.90 <0.75 ' <0.88 <1.26 Cs-134 <0.96 <0.85 <3.68 <3.32 Cs-137 <1.32 <2.85 <2.05
' 2.17-
< <2.54 <1.08 <1.80 <0.86
-Zr-95 <1.24 <1.32 <1.59 <1.46 Nb-95' <1.45 :<0.92 <0.80
<1.48 <1.02 <0.89 < 1.33 <0.95 Co-58 <0.58 < 0.96- <1.28 <1.50 Mn-54 < 1.12 - <1.14 <0.82 -
15.5+10.6
<0.64-Co-60 <0.69 40.6+15.8 .39.2+16.5 46.1+15.9 22.7+12.0- < LED' K-40 29.8+14.8 < LED <tED. .<LED < LED
< LED Otherst
- Sample Locations Required By Technical Specifications.
t Plant Related Radionuclides.m m m M ~_ m m ' W W W p-mmam m m m m
~,
TABLE IV-9 (CosermUE3) CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COWOSITES OF JAF/ MP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES --1989 Results in Units of 10-3 ci/m3 p 1 2 Sigma 2 9$1EARYy,' MARCN i i kAPRI[ I JMAYF - JWE,
/NUCLIDES2 [ FEBRUARY R5 0FFSITE COMPOSITE (CONTROL)*
Ce-144 <4.89 <5.79 <3.69 <4.75 <4.72 <4.55 Ce-141 <1.55 <1.83 <3.50 <1.59 . <1.54 <1.64 Be-7 86.0113.1 65.4113.2 70.2110.9 76.0113.0 94.8113.6 84.116.7
<1.59 <1.85 < 2.70 Zn-65 <1.24 <3.10 <1.48 Cs-134 <0.89 <0.96 <0.92 <0.97 <0.93 <1.11 Cs-137 <1.02 <1.53 <0.88 <0.93 <0.81 <1.06 Zr-95 <2.47- <3.39 <2.10 <3.00_ <2.21 <2.29.
Nb-95 <1.24 <1.64 <1.13 <1.52- <1.21 <1.61 Co-58 <1.29 <1.27 <0.89 <0.85 <0.95 <1.59 Mn-54 <0.86 <1.35 <0.78 <1.24 <0.81 <1.50
<1.36 <1.58 <0.85 <0.92 -<1.07 <1.25
%i Co-60 24.5+13.6 11.6+8.20 10.1+8.50 -46.6+14.9 <13.9 K-40 34.2+14.6
< LED <LLD
$ Otherst' < LED < LED < LED < LED
' D2- 0FFSITE COMPOSITE ** -
Ce-144 <5.31 <4.77 <5.77 <5.55 <4.97- <4.50-
<1.78 <1.41 <1.63 <1.58 <1.64 <1.47-4 Ce-141 i Be-7 93.9+14.6 56.7+11.1 -77.5+14.0 70.4+13.7 79.0+13.4 99.2+14.2-Zn^65 <2T64 <2T60 <2T95 <2T63' <1799 <0!82 l Cc-134
- <0.98 <0.81 <1.15- <1.21 <1.00 <0.78 I Cs-137 -<0.96 <0.99 <1.09 <1.34 <1.08 <0.70 Zr-95 < 1. 95 - <2.62 <2.28 <3.19 <2.16~ <2.86 -
.Nb-95 <1.45 <1.11' <1.32 <1.75 <2.17- <1.19 Co-58 <1.26 <0.75. <1.36 <0.99. <0.73 <1.31 Mn-54 <1.38 <0.96~ <1.15 <1.05 <1.10' <0.54 Co-60 <0.95 <1.08 <1.28 <1.55 -<0.90 <0. 81 -
K-40 24.5+12.1 29.2+12.0 <31.7- 25.0+12.8 '28.0+12.6 <18.0
< LED <LLD- < LED <tED <tLD 0therst < LED
- Sample -Locations Required By1 Technical Specifications.
** Optional Sample Location. Not Required _By The Technical-Specifications.-
t Plant Related' Radionuclides. ~
-. . - .- -. - . a ..
TABLE IV-9 (ContruuED) CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS'IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES 0F JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1989 Results in Units of 10-3pCi/m3 2. Sigma NUCLIDES JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL ~MAY JUNE-- E OFFSITE COMPOSITE ** Ce-144 <5.65 <4.21 <3.89 < 5.62 <4.55 <4.16 Ce-141 <1.88 <1.48 <1.25 <1.67 <1.57 <1.41 Be-7 77.3+15.1 69.2+11.3 82.0ill.1 76.3+14.0- 76.3+12.5 85.0+11.8 , Zn-65 <3T45 <2766 <1.15 <2T38 <2753 <1T71 Cs-134 <1.22 <0.89 <0.75 <1.08 <1.23 <0.75 Cs-137 <1.18 <0.85 <0.71 <0.76 <1.13 <0.90 Zr-95 <2.72 <1.53 <1.86 <2.09 c2.52 <2.40. Nb-95 <1.21 <1.09 <1.01 <1.66 <1.37 <0.94 Co-58 <1.64 <1.11 <0.85 <1.59 <1.15 <0.96
- Mn-54 <1.26 <0.94 < 0.86 <1.07 <1.15 <0.73
< Co-60 <1.62 <0.58 <0.33 <1.17 <0.63 <1.05 t
E K-40 <29.9 30.8+13.3 27.1+10.1 33.7+15.2 .48.4+14.2 38.3+11.9
" <LLD < LED < LED < LED < LED < LED i Otherst F OFFSITE COMPOSITE **
! Ce-144 <4.35 <5.52. <4.97 <3.65 <5.34- <4.36
.Ce-141 <1.45 <1.79 - <1.90 <1.46 <1.84 <1.61 i Be-7 69.7+12.0~ 75.4+14.6 78.8+13.2 59.6+11.0 87.7+14.2 78.9+12.4 '
Zn-65 <2T11 <1T63 <1761 <1793 <2763 <2713 Cs-134 <0.72 <1.14 < 0.92 < 0.89 <1.13 <1.00 Cs-137 <0.71 <1.34- <0.91 <0.84 <0.92 <1.03 : i Zr-95 <2.14 <2.61. <2.71 <2.18. <3.01 <2.64 i Nb-95 <2.12 <1.72 <1.33 < 1. 85 - <1.53 <1.14 Co-58 <0.78 <1.42 <1.23 <0.66- <1.22- <1.26 Mn-54 <0.37 <1.13 - <1.09 <0.84 <1.00 <0.73 Co-60 <1.23- <1.35 .<0.94 . <0.92 < 1. 24 - <1.05 , n K-40. 32.2+11.9 <28.8 31.9+14 0. 11.7+7.3 50.9+15.5 28.7+11.9
<LLD- < LED < LED < LED <t[D Otherst < LED
'** O tional Sample Location. 'Not Required :By The Technical Specifications.
g ageg gongeg ,
4 TABLE IV-9 '(CCNTINUES) CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1989 Results in Units of 10-3pCi/m3 i 2 Sigma NUCLIDES^ LJANUARYL FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL - :MAY. LJUNE'
- G OFFSITE COMPOSITE **
a Ce-144 <5.43 <4.91 <3.39 <5.61 <4.62 <5.04-Ce-141 <1.70 <1.96 <1.09 < 1. 67 - <1.58 <1.58 Be-7 87.0+14.0 56.3+12.5 70.1+11.2 76.4+13.9 87.6+13.0 94.5+7.0 Zn-65 <2748 <2T19 <2!07 <3!10 <1T47 <3758 Cs-134 <1.16 <1.26 <0;87 - <1.33 <0. 79 ' <1.03 Cs-137- <1.16 <1.32 <0.74 <1 08 <1.14 <0.80
. Zr-95 <2.99 <2.96 <1'.86 <2.81 <2.35 <2.93
- O Nb-95 <1.40 <1.92 <1.28 <1.31 <1.13 <1.35
- A Co-58 <1.27 <1.00 <0.89 <1.19 <0.98 <1.45 icn Mn-54 <0.77 <1.15 <0.78 <1.00 <0.92 <1.11
- Co-60 <0.55 <1.44 <0.95 <1.82 <1.05 <1.38 K-40 31.5+14.2 21.7+13.6 20.5+9.3 20.6+13.5 . 32.0+12.7 10.5+4.1 -
Otherst < LED < LED .
< LED <LE.D- < LED < LID.
i . . - Optional' Sample Location. Hal Required By The Technical Specifications. 1 l_ t Plant Related Radionuclides. m i ! 6
.nsn.- ,, ,
4 , -e --- .- :.~---s-s.y -.
.sg..y --- m- m gy'~- 9 , .- ,.. , .,+,. ., , , . . . , ,
~
TABLE IV-9 -(ConnuuED) , CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY' COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1969 ' Results-in' Units of 10-300i/m3 + 2 Siena NUCLIDES ' JANUARY- FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY -JUNE L D1 ONSITE COMPOSITE ** L Ce-144 <5.32 <3.39 <4.64 <5.44 <
'4.96 <5.75 .i Ce-141 <2.18 <1.06 <1.59 <1.70 <1.68- <2.00 Be-7 76.8+15.4 65.5+5.9 84.9+11.3 63.4+12.4 80.1+13.4 98.0+17.2 i
. Zn-65 <1772 <2T76' <1T86- <2T53 <1791 <3T67 i Cs-134 <1.53 <1.10 <0.80 <0.94 <0.99 <1.14 Cs-137 <1.03 <1.08 <0.75 <0.98 <0.91 <1.13
.Zr-95 <3.52 <3.26 <2.25 <2.30 <2.85 <3.04-Nb-95 <1.57 <1.59 <1.11 <1.66 <1.15 <1.97 Co-58 <1.43 <1.26 <0.83 <1.29 <0.87 <1.61 ~ 'Mn-54 <1.12 <1.19 <0.83 <1.17 <1.02 <1.13 '
7 Co-60 <1.58 <1.11 13.1+5.5-
<0.90 40.9+12.0
<1.12-41.1+15.4
<0.78 30.0+13.3
<1.35-19.0+12.6-
!@ K-40 25.8+14.5
< LED < LED < LED < LED < LED Otherst < LED i
- G ONSITE COMPOSITE **
Ce-144 <4.38 <3.23- <3.59 <4.83 <5.11. :<4.95-Ce-141 <1.37 <0.98 . <1.12- <1.62 <1.70 <1.67' Be-7 93.7+14.4 81.8+6.1 83.1112.8 71.9+12.1 85.9+14.2 91.6+15.3 Zn-65 <2T24 <3709 <1.03 < 2T23 '~ <2737 <2T37-Cs-134 <0.97 <1.05 <0.69. <0.87 <1.01 <0.96 Cs-137 <0.93 <0.89 _ <0.66 <0.99 <1.01 < 1. 28 - Zr-95 <2.39 <2.78 <2.18' <2.13' <1.73 <2.77. 1 Nb-95 <1.18 <1.05 <1.00 <1.35 <1.29 < 1. 41 - i-Co-58 <0.76 <1.47 <0.99- <1.09 <1.33 <1.01 Mn-54 <0.97 <1.09 <0.95~ <0.84 <1.10 -<0.73 i Co-60 <1.19 <2.30 . <0.84 - <1.04 <0.91 <1.11 K-40 .21.0+10.7 15.014.6 - 12.118.0 39.2113.6; -28.6112.1 <20.6
<LLD' <LLD <LLD <l I D Otherst < LED <LLD -
** Optional Sample Location. Not Required By The Technical Specifications. '
tgntglatgRagnuclides.W W. - W- M .M . W m' W m _.~. . - , - - - . , . _ _ _ s , . .., _ _ ,, ,, % , _ . , _ __ , , , _ , _ . . _ . .
TABLE IV-9 (CCMINUE3) CONCENTRATIONS 0F GAMMA EMITTERS-IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES. OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1989 Results in Units of 10-3pCi/m3 1 2 Sigma NUCLIDES' JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH ' APRIL MAY JUNE H ONSITE COMPOSITE ** Ce-144 <5.02 <5.60 <3.53 <5.13 <4.10 <4.23-i Ce-141 <1.61 <1.62 <1.20 <1.60 <1.55 <1.28 Be-7 77.8+12.7 61.4112.8 78.2+13.0 63.7+11.7 78.6+12.1 85.4+12.6 Zn-65 <1791 <2.64 <2T52 <2719 <2722 <2T21 Cs-134 <0.93 <1.10 <0.94 . <0.91 <0.97 <0.91-Cs-137 <0.99 <1.34 <0.50 .<1.04 <0.72 <0.83
- ' Zr-95 <2.52 <2.92 <2.02 <2.96 <2.72 <2.28 Nb-95 <1.71 <1.88 <1.22 <1.21 <1.09 <1.07 Co-58 <1.21 <1.17 <0.83 < 1.16' .<1.32 <0.87
; Mn-54 Co-60
<1.05
<1.13
<1.20
<1.09
<0.79
<0.65
<0.99
<1.39
<0.92
<0.71
<0.69
<0.93 is K-40 30.9+12.2 14.4+11.6 <16.8- 37.0+14.4 36.1+14.0' 35.4+11.3
'0therst < LED < LED <LLD. < LED < LED . <LED I 0NSITE COMPOSITE **
Ce-144 <5.62 <3.81- <4.04- <4.77 <4.16 <5.60 Ce-141 .
< 1.91 <1.20 <1.39 < 1.74 . <1.52 <1.85 Be-7 88.4+16.4 64.8+11.6 89.9+12.7 . 61.1+10.9 .73.1+13.8 73.5+13.2 Zn-65 <3714 <1765 <2T51 <2740 <2724 <2T96 Cs-134 <1.17 <0.90 <0.76 < 0.99 <0.88 <1.24 Cs-137 < 1. 37. <0.91 <0.63 <0.77 <1.17 <1.09 Zr-95 <3.28 <1.61 <2.78 <2.20. <2.18 <2.96
~ Nb <2.11 <1.14 <1.10 <0.96 <1.33 <1.53 Co-58 <1.56 <0.97. <1.10 <1.19 <0.73 <1.04-l Mn-54 <1.48 <0.76- <0.60 <0.83 <1.31- <0.78
. Co-60 <1.83 <1.52 <1.19 <0.81 <1.16 <1.54 ,
K-40 <14.1 8.36+7.9' 21.7110.0 45.0+13.6 <17.9- 29.0+13.4 g Otherst <LLD -
' <LEDL <LLD. < LED <tLD < LED-
** Optional-Sample Location. Not Required By. The TTechnicai Specifications.
t Plant Related Radionuclides.-
- n . . _ _ _ ~ 2 .. - ~ 2_ -.__'_._i________________
TABLE IV-9 (CONTINUED) CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN. MONTHLY COMPOSITES-0F JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1989 Results in Units of 10-3pCi/m3 1 2 Sigma FEBRUARY MARCH ~ APRIL MAY. JUNE
.NUCLIDES' TJANUARN J ONSITE COMPOSITE **
<4.61 <3.20 <3.69 <5.27 <5.58 <5.14 L Ce-144 <1.68 <1.75 Ce-141 <1.48 <1.03 <1.33 <1.77 l Be-7 60.9+12.0 52.6+5.1 67.5+10 6 . 51.7+11.7 49.5+11.5- 85.0+7.4 !
<1792 <3719 <1T13 <2T15 - <3T18 <3T18
- Zn-65 <1.05 <1.47 i
Cs-134 r<1.09 <1.00 <0.74 <0.84
<1.07 <0.97 <0.76 <0.84 <1.24 <1.30 Cs-137 <3.41 <3.66 Zr-95 <2.'73 <2.29 <1.85 <2.84
<1.44 <1.14 <0.88 <1.30 <1.45 <1.67 i i Nb-95 <1.25~ <1.90-i Co-58 <1221- -<1.28 <0.69 <1.18 !
1 ~* Mn-54 <0.84 <1.03 <0.79 <1.23 ' <1.18 <1.36 l
<1.341 <1.07 <0.65 <1.60 <1.69 <1.95 1F Co-60 42.8+16.3 10.6+5.04:
K-40 32.8+13.6- 13.8+4.46. 33.8+10.8 35.4+14.3 Rf < LED < LED < LED
< LED < LED < LED
.0therst .
L o K ONSITE COMPOSITE **
<4.96 <6.16 <4.75 <5.23 <7.10 <5.43 -
Ce-144 <1.62 <2.19 <1.82 Ce-141 <2.07 -<1.91 <1.56 j- Be-7 83.li14.2 ~74.2+15.1 73.5112.8- 61.7+11.3 82.4+16.3- .99.8+16.3-
<2T69 <1.86 <2T66 <3T17 <3738 Zn-65
< 1.~ 99
<1.17 <1.06 <1.12- <1.09 <1.19 <1.29 Cs-134 <0.95 <1.56 <1.30 q Cs-137 -cl.24 <1.24 <0.99
<2.81 <4.13 <2 02 <2.67 <2.94 <2.95 Zr-95' <1.10 <1.13: <1.77 <1.30-
- Nb-95 <1.89 <2.24
<1.15 <1.10 <1.18 <1.19 <1.841 <0.94 -i" Co-58 <1.18 <1.86 <1.32 Mn-54: <1.33 cl.34 <0.97
<1.44 . <1.22- <0.76 <0.74 <1.70 <0.93 .
Co-60 <26.5- 23.3+13.6- !
- K-40 40.2+16.2 40.4116.4 26.3+11.9 ' 33.1+12.4-
< LED <LLD < LED. <iLED <LLD < LED' j , Otherst o* 0)tional Sample Location. Not Required By-The Technical Specifications. -
t )lant Related Radionuclides. ! W W W - M m M m m m._ - m - m- e e e e .g g - g l .; " _u -___ _ _ _ _
+ , - - ___ _____m + i=__r____c_____c_ _2e-,,_~ - -
-TABLE IV-9 (CONTINUE 3)
CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MDNTHLY COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1989 Results in Units of 10-3pCi/m3 1 2 Sigma , i
- j. NUCLlDES JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER ' OCTOBER' NOVEMBER DECEfBER-l-
- R1 0FFSITE COMPOSITE
- Ce-144 <4.97 <5.54 <6.37 <4.89 < 4.14 <5.24- '
Ce-141 <1.69 <1.69 < 1. 9 7 - <1.88 <1.55 <1.90
- Be-7 103+14.4 80.9+14.9 89.6+7.85 -75.7+13.0 - 61.3+5.85 61.5+12.2 '
Zn-65 <1773 <4709 -<7T23 <3708- <3734 <2T26 ' Cs-134 <0.85 <1.22 <3.62 <1.12 <1.01 <1.00 Cs-137 <1.09 <1.23 <1.52 <1.05. <0.91 <1.18 1 Zr-95 <2.37 <1.94 <3.17 <2.50 <2.97 <2.69 L Nb-95 <1.39 <1.02 '3.03
< <1.50 -<1.55 <1.75 Co-58 <0.97 <1.22 <1.98 <0.87 <1.47 <1.16
- -4 Mn-54 <0.92 <1.07 <2.06 <0 87 -
. <1.14- <1.02 21: Co-60 <0.90 <1.55 <2.47 <1.09 <1.35 <1.07
!<e K-40 44.5+15.4 <29.2 <19.3 44.2+15.3 9.02+4.04 34.0+14.6
- "' <LLD < LED-Otherst < LED < Ll_D < LED < LED-R2-OFFSITE-COMPOSITE * .
Ce-144 <5.40 <4.79 <4;87 <5.54 <3.47 <6.55
- Ce-141 <1.56 <1.64 <1.54 <1.77 <1.22 <2.25 Be -7 98.2+14.9 '85.3+13.3 72.9+12.0 70.8+13.4 - 51.9+10.3 ~ 75.0+16.5 ,
I .Zn-65 <2T91 <2?77 <2739 <3T13. <3706- <3763 ,
- Cs-134 <0.95 <0.95 < 0.187 <1.03- c0.72 <1.45 i Cs-137 -<1.03 <0.96 <1.02 <1.01 <0.84 - <1.51 Zr-95 <2.10 <2.35- <3.06 <2.35 <1.24- <3.15 1
- Nb-95 <1.32 <1.55- <1.25- <1.95 <1.39 ~ < 2.56
. Co-58 <0.85 <1.12 <0.78 <0.88 +0.96 <1.41- ] Mn-54 <1.13 .<0.58 <0.93 <1.26 <0.84 <1.05 i Co-60 <1.08 <1.41 - <0.44 -.<0.78 <0.46 41.68 i K-40 -24.2+13.5 33.1+13.6 '20.4+9.99- 35.7+15.1 11.0+8.29 <25.3
< LED- < LED < LED. < LED < LED, <LLD j Otherst :
- Sample Locations Required By Technical Specifications.
- f t Plant Related Radionuclides.' ;
"' a "'W' C - Y - L E'-_'%E-+--__- . . '---
_-__----_R._ssL---.-_a .a ^
---:-- e.
TABLE IV-9 (CourinuED) CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES ' OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1989 Results in Units of 10-3pCi/m3 1 2 Sigma
- NUCLIDES- 1JULYs AUGUST SEPTEMBER- .OCTOBERi NOVEMBER DECEMBER R3 0FFSITE COMPOSITE * -
Ce-144 <4.66 <5.21 <5.23 <5.48 <4.33 <4.74 , Ce-141 <1.49 <1.77 <1.64 <1.73 <1.44 -<1.79 Be-7 98.8113.6 82.8+16.4 64.315.94 86.7113.3 53.1+5.84 55.9+11.3 Zn-65 <2.06 <2T28 <4.64 <2.26 <2776 <2T52 - Cs-134 <0.96 <1.08 <2.07 ' 1.10
< <1.13 <0.92
<1.17 <1.25 <1.18 <1.22 <0.95 Cs-137 <1.00 .
' <3.02 <2.36 <3.02 <2.67 i Zr-95 <2.04 <2.26 i Nb-95 <1.02 <1.69 <2.16 <1.22 <1.60 <1.44- ,
Co-58 <0.92 <1.33 <1.61 <1.21 <1.40 <1.08
-. 'Mn-54 <0.73 <0.98 <1.54 <1.03- <1.13 <0.98
'fos- Co-60 <0.84 <0.95 ~1.51
< <0.75 <1.33 -<0.90' K-40 34.7+13.2 '32.5+13.2 12.5+5.11 32.2+12.7- 11.1+3.84 39.8+12.7'
< LED ~ .< LED < LED < LED < LED L '" Otherst < LED R4-OFFSITE COMPOSITE
- i Ce-144 <5.57 <5.50 ~<6.32 <5.32 -<4.96- <4.98 Ce-141 <1.76 <1.71 <2.35 . <1.75 <1.91 <
'2.07 68.9+13.4 '65.8+7.69 76.7+14.5 l Be-7 99.1+14.7 80.8+1218 82.6+15.1 i- Zn-65 <2702 <2716 <2792 ' <3720 <1799 <2T54 Cs-134 <1.18 ~1.03
< <1.29 <1.17 ' <0.96 <1.10 Cs-137 :<1.13 <1.05 <1.18 <0.99 <0.88 <1.44-Zr <2.46 <2.02 <3.21. <2 92 <2.67- <2.89 Nb <1.43 <1.08 <2.10 < 1. 45 ' <1.70 <1.78 i Co-58 <1.24 <1.32 <2.02 <1.34 <1.26 <1;23L
<0.87 <1.15 <1.13 < 1.01 < 1. 09.
Mn-54 <0.89 , 'Co-60. <1.06 <1.17 . <1.57 <0.54. .
<0.80 <1.21 K <27.3 135.6+15.2 .22.0+13.4 . 28.0+13.5. 43.9+9.46~ 31.9+13.7 Otherst <LLD .<LED < LED. < LED- < LED .<LED'
[
- Sample Locations-Required:By Technical 3pecifications.
t Plant Related Radionuclides. m m m m :m) m M .m m m m m m' m "' mmm
- m. - _.- ( .- , .. _ _ i ___ __ _i _ _ .
' TABLE IV-9-(CONTINUED) -
1 CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1989 Results in Units cf 10-3pCi/m3 il2 Sigaa NUCLIDES JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER ~ OCTOBER. NOVEISER . DECEMBER R5 0FFSITE COMPOSITE (CONTROL)* Ce-144 <4.94 <5.73 <5.12 <5.19 <4.29 <5.71-Ce-141 <1.58 <1.92 <1.71 < 1.85 <1.32- <2.32.
~
Be-7 101+15.7 87.0+8.38 68.5+11.7 87.6+13.7 66. 0 +10. 6 -- 61.4+13.7 Zn-65 <2702 <5T22 <2T43 <2702 <1780 <3719 Cs-134 <1.01 <1.83 <0.95 <1.01 <0.74 <1.29 Cs-137 <1.09 <1.63 <1.09 <1.22- <0.81' <1.27 Zr-95 <2.20 <4.54 <2.88 <2.67 ' <2.17 . <2.96-Nb-95 <1.42 <2.26 <1.60 <1.23 <1.02 <2.05'.
<1.41 <1.63 < 1.17 . <1.18 <0.81 <1.74 Co-58 y Mn-54 <1.08 <1.73 <1^.03 <0.82' <0.82 <1.08-Co-60 <1.17 <1.92 <1.10 <0.98 <0.77- <1.87 i% K-40 <19.2 18.4+4.96 31.4+12.6 41.0+14.4 35.2+11.2 <33.6 U 0therst <LLD -< LED < LED < LED < LED <LLD 1 1
.D2 0FFSITE COMPOSITE ** - j Ce-144 <4.68 <5.00 <5.07 <6.23' <
'4.07 <4.90 Ce"141 <1.53 <1.66 <1.66 <1.96: < 1. 38 .- <1.55 Be-7 103113.3 84.2+13.9. 74.2+6.43 70.1+14.0 57.319.58 .67.3+12.2 J
.Zn-65 <2.35 < 2T57 <4T99 <3T09 <1.59 <2T19 l Cs-134 <0.83 <1.08' <2.10 ' <1.45 <0.78 <0.88
. Cs-137 <0.91 <0.94 <1.15 <1.42 <0. 69. <1.07.
.Zr-95 < 2.08 <2.70- <3.63. <3.51: <1.95 <3.02
<0.92 <1.45 <1.98 <0.96 < 1.45 Nb-95 <1.32 J
<1.44 <1.37 <0.55 <0.94 i Co-58 <1.15 < 1.~ 12 '
i Mn-54 <0.93 <
'0.95 <1.31 <1.21 <0.79 <1.01.
i Co-60 <0.71 <0./5 <1.77 <1.81- :<0.56 <1.15 K-40 30.9+12.5 25.1+12.6 .10.0+5.45' ' <25.2 '34.2+10.4 27.4+12.1- ' < LED.- <LLD < LED < LED. 0therst < LED < LED I
- Sample Locations Required By Technical Specifications. .
** Optional Sample- Location. .Not- Required By The Technical. Specifications.
l- t Plant-Related: Radionuclides. '
.. n _ .
_i.. _ _ _ '__L_ - __ _ _=
TABLE IV-9 (CowTrnuED) CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES ' 0 0F JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1989 l j Results in' Units of 10-3pCi/m3 1 2' Sigma-NUCLIDES . JULY. AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEfEER E OFFSITE COMPOSITE ** Ce-144 <5.60 <5.72 <5.39 <5.20 - <3.84 <6.24 l i Ce-141 <1.69 <1.57 <1.89 <1.86 <1.41 <2.14-Be-7 98.1+14.8 74.2+12.4 86.3+15.1 76.5+14.0 65.7+12.5- 51.4+12.7-Zn-65 <2729 <2793 <3T80 <2T66 <1738 <2T19 Cs-134 <0.86 <1.12 <1.07 <1.04 <0.84 <1.25 Cs-137 <1.01 <0.98 <1.26 <1.21 <0.88 <1.51-Zr-95 -<2.91- <2.29 <3.07 <3.28 <2.09 <2.77 Nb-95 <1.05 <1.09 <2.01 <1.70 <1.22 <1.97 q Co-58 <1.39 <0.99 <1.33 <1.36 <1.16 <1.87
** Mn-54 <1.10 <1.22 <1.51 <1.14 <1.00 <1.33 7 Co-60 <1.22 <1.29 <0.61 <1.30 <1.02 <1.86-
.g ' K-40 23.7+12.0 46.8+15.4- 25.2+13.6 25.0+11.8 9.28+7.28 <22.5 Otherst < LED. < LED < LED- .<LED' < LED <LLD F 0FFSITE COMPOSITE ** Ce-144 <5.53 <5.90 <3.92 <5. 64 - <4.26. <3.49 ' Ce-141- <1.94 <1.60 <1.41 . <1.77 <1.53 <1.70 Be-7 103+14.5 84.1+14.9 68.8+10.9 75.2+13.6 .6420+11.0 '72.4+14.0 .! Zn-65 . <2767.. <1783 <1709 <2T32 <2T38 <2T41- . Cs-134 <1.08 <1.25 <0.71 <0.75 <0.77 < 1. 02 - a Cs-137 <1.05 <1.42 <0.72 <0.93 <0.68 <1.23 i Zr-95 <3.12 <2.95 <2.58 <2.64 ' <2.35 <3.10 Nb-95 <1.65 <1.39 <1.28 <1.19 .1.13
< <1.28
-Co-58' <1.10. <1.00 <0.68 <1.13- <0.76 < 0.95' Mn-54 <1.05 <0.90 <0.67 <0.93 <0.57 <1.06 -
Co-60 <0.89: <0.61 < 0. 51 . <0.78 <0.70 <1.27
. K-40 .
35.7+13.5 <22.4 34.4+11.9 58.4+19.0~ ~42.6+12.9 <21.7 Otherst < LED <LLD- < LED. - < LED < LED <LLD i l i
** Optional Sample Location. Not Required By The Technical Specifications.
t P1 ant.Related Radionuclides. M M M. M -M .M 'm-M M m[ lm ' m M. . ,m M m m ;m;
- - - - ~- -. _
' TABLE IV (CONTINUE (D)
CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY. COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES -~1989 Results in Units of 10-3pCi/m3 1 2 Sigma NUCLIDES: < JULY AUGUST SEPTEMBER. ~0CTOBERl lNOVEMER DECEM ER. i G OFFSITE COMPOSITE ** Ce-144 <4.72 <5.73 <4.19 <5.49 <4.86' <5.01 Ce-141 <1.57 <1.86 <1.68 <2.05 <2.08 <1.58' 3 Be-7 98;3+14.4 82.0+7.54 81.7+7.18 69.1+13.1 65.9+13.4 - 44.7+11.7 Zn-63 <1794 <4T83 <3765 <2T69 <2T71 '<2T49
- l Cs-134 <0.93 <1.75 <1.44 <1.22 <0.95 <12.7 Cs-137 <1.11 <1.22 <1.30 <1.30 <0.98 <11.2 J
.Zr-95 <2.34 <4.69 <2.89 <2;32 <2.89 <2.26 G Nb-95 <1.41 <2.11 <2.23- <1.72- <1.68 <1.33 4 Co-58 <1.23 <1.62 <1.59 <1.25 <1.38 <0.98 n Mn-54 <0.73 <1.77 <1.18 <1.15 <1.06 <0.94 :
Co-60 <0.95 <1.31 <1.46 <0.47 <1.19 <1.17 - K-40 31.0+12.7 10.4+6.31 <17.8 54. 3+16. <25.4: <13.8-0therst < LED < LED <LLD < LED <LLD <LLD 4
]
o* Optional Sample Location. !htt Required' By The Technical Specifications. t Plant Related Radionuclides.
}
j
- } ? .. . . . . . .
TABLE IV-9-(CONTINUED) CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES --1989 Results in Units ~of 10-3pCi/m3 2 Sigma SEPTEMBER 0CTOBER NOVEMBER LDECEMBER NUCLIDES JULY AUGUST D1 DNSITE COMPOSITE **
<5.84 <5.07 <5.17 <4.92 <3.69 Ce-144 <5.83 ~< 1.52 <1.81 <1.39
<1.95 <1.99 '< 1.85 Ce-141 62.8112.2 67.6+11.5 46.819.98 8e-7 86.7+14.2 83.0+14.4 88.6115.5 <2.00
<2764 <2.27 <2.95 <2742 Zn-65 <2750 <0.76 <0.87
<1.03 <1.15 <1.07 <0.88 Cs-134 <1.11 < 1.03 ' 0.68
< <0.64 Cs-137 <1.11 <1.21 <2.56
<3.12 <1.72 <2.60 <2.67 Zr-95 <3.02 <1.26 <1.29 <0.980 Nb-95 <1.54 <1.49 <1.86
<1.16 <1.26 <1.09 <1.20 <0.701 Co-58 <1.10 <0.98 <1.07 <0.44:
Mn-54 <1.34 <0.89 <0.84 l2 <1.28 <1.15 <1.26- <0.86 <0.94 a Co-60 <1.28: 49.6+15.3 30.3+12.3- 17.1+10.4 K-40 57.4+18.1 54.2+17.0 26.7+14.4~ ti < LED < LED < LED < LED
<tED < LED
.0therst G ONSITE COMPOSITE **
<4.73 <3.45 <5.01 <3.86 <4.52 '
Ce-144 <5.36 . <1;19 <1.60- <1.44 <1.83 Ce-141 <1.56 <1.86 88.1+14.2 73.2111.2 69.6112.6 . 71.0+11.5 75.4+12.4 Be-7 76.1+13.9 <2.89. <2707 <1775 Zn-65 <0T93 <2T96 <I.83
<1.17 <0.73 .0.94
< <0.78 <1.02 Cs-134 <0.99 <0.99 <0.78 <1.0-Cs-137 <1.09 <1.17 <0.83
<3;09 <2.78 <1.82 <2.22 <2.52 <2.68 Zr-95' <1.40 <1.26 <1.31 <1.28 <1.11 Nb-95 <1.45 <1.50 ~d3.93 <1.15 Co-58 <1.14 <1.21 <0.82
<0.49 <0.83- <1;13 44).186 <0.94 Mn-54 <1.24 <0.85 <0.71
<0.77 '<1.10 <0.50 <0.93 Co-60 30.0+11.9' 38.4+15.2- 38.9+12.0- 29.8+12.8 20.1+9.95 K-40 ~41.0+15.1- < LED < LED < LED
< LED < LED < LED-Otherst-
** Opt'ional' Sample Location. Not Required By The Technical Specifications.
t Plant Related-Radionuclides. mmm m
'M M MMM M M M M mm m m m; m
- 7 mn cw t- >
TABLE IV-9 (CSNTINUE@)' CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES OF JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1989 Results in Units of 10-3pCi/m3 i 2 Sigma i SEPTEMBER LOCTOBER !.NOVEISERL .DECEMER NUCLIDES' JJULn -> ' AUGUST H ONSITE COMPOSITE **
<7.65 <6.54 <2.58 <5.06 <3.90 <4.90
.Ce-144 <1.44 <1.50 <1.80 Ce-141 <2.02 <1.82 <4.30 75.1+16.8 70.4+6.70 56.8+11.0 61.1+7.01 58.3+6.15 54.3+6.44 Be-7 4.70T1.28 27.3T2.42 <2T65 Zn-65 <4730 <4T37 <2T21 .
<1.08 <2.31 <0.88 <0782 <0T88 '<1.64 Cs-134 <0.89 <0.63 < 1. 22 -
Cs-137 <1.19 <1.47 <0.84
<3.48 <3.53 <2.92 <2.69 <2.27 <3.45 Zr-95 <1.18 <1.18 <1.39 <1.75 Nb-95 <2.03 <2.30
<1.36. <1.81 <0.93 <0.76 < 1.52 <1.72 Co-58 <0.79 <1.14 <1.29 l2 Mn-54 <1.42 <1.88 <1.00 .
<0.80 <2.26 <0.91 <1.05 1.20+0.56 <1.52 8
Co-60 43.2+8.08 25.1T6.06 <16.8 E$ K-40 45.7+21.0 14.1+6.46 33.2+12.4-
< LED < LED < LED < LED <LLD-Otherst < LED
-I ONSITE COMPOSITE **
<5.03 <5.83- <4.23 <5.33 <4.14 <4.33-Ce-144 <1.68 <1.50 <1.60 Ce-141 <1.72 <1.94 . <1.42 8e-7 89.5+15.5 67.8+12.1 64.7+6.12 55.316.66 58.2+6.54 44.8111.4
<1783 <2731 <3T47 2.52+1.08 5.36T1.21 <1.97 Zn-65 <1709 <0T84 <0.94 Cs-134 <1.47 <1.09 <1.28
<1.14 < 9.103 <0.86 -<1.10 <0.86 <1.09 Cs-137 <3.03- <2.83.
Zr-95 <3.24 <2.63- <2.88- ~ <2.57-
<1.63 <1.18' <1.38 <1.20 < 1.18. <1.08 Nb-95 <1.16 <1.00 <1.12 l
Co-58 <1.17 <1.29 <1.74
<1.13 <1.13 <1.06 <'0 99. <0.90 <1.44 Mn-54 <1 66 <0.87 ~<1.14:
Co-60 <1.50 <1.00 <1.40
-25.5+15.0- 50.5+14.8' <13.8- 38.4+10.7. 3426+6.79 <12.4-K :< LED < LED <LLD
< LED < LED <LLD#
Otherst
** Optional Sample Location. Not . Required By. The Technical Specifications.
1 Plant Related Radionuclides.
TABLE IV-9 (ConTrnuED) - o CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN MONTHLY COMPOSITES 0F JAF/NMP SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1989 Results in Units of 10-3pCi/m3 i 2 Sigma . NUCLIDES 7JULV! AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER ' NOVEMBER- :DECEMER J ONSITE COMPOSITE ** Ce-144 <6.02 <6.06 < 3.187 <5.13 <4.24 <4.87 Ce-141 <1.90 <1.82 <1.64 <1.62 <1.50 <1.87 58.0+5.98 53.8+14.3 Be-7 87.9113.6 57.3+15.4 71.5+12.6 68.9+13.2 . Zn-65 <3.00 <3724 <1!90- <2757 2.86i0.88 <2753 i Cs-134 <1.17 <1.06 <0.88 <0.98 <0T78 <1.01 .I Cs-137 <1.23 <1.50 <0.72 ' <1.02 <0.92 <0.89 Zr-95 <3.36 <3.41 <2.78 <3.12 <2.03 <2.92 Nb-95 <1.77
. <1.91 <1.10 <0.75 <1.06 <1.45 Co-58 <1.10 <1.26 <1.15 <1.18 <1.07 <1.39 Mn-54 <1.00 <1.26 <1.11 <1.11 <1.21 41.37' l
- <1.08 <1.34 <1.46 < 1. 05. <0.90 .<1.57 i1 Co-60 13.6+9.71 56.7+16.9 35.6+6.91 28.9+14.1
! " K-40 47.1+15.7 52.1+18.8 ! Otherst < LED < LED < LED < LED: < LED < LED .i = i K DNSITE COMPOSITE ** - I i i Ce-144 <5.58 <4.90 <4.06 <5.30- <3.98 <5.54 ! Ce-141 <1.65 <1.81 <1.61 <1.77 <1.44 <2.09 -!
- i. Be-7 73.7i13.6- 85.1+18.1 70.5111.2 44.0+11.7 49.219.90 50.7+12.6
'L Zn-65 .<1.91 <2T95 <1.60 <2!31 <1.49 <3704. Cs-134 <1.02 <1.20 R<10. 72 <1.09 <0.98 :<0.89 , Cs-137 <1.12 <0.76 <0.91 . <1.14 < 1.08 <1.21 Zr-95 <2.32 <3.06- e2;58 <3.14 <1.87 <3.16-Nb-95 <1.67 '<1.28- <1.10- <1.65 <1.20 <1.88 . e Co-58 <1.04 <1.52' <0.84 -<0.95 <1.09 <1.44 Mn-54 <0.87 <1.12 <0.65 <1.05 < 0l. 78 .< 1.27 i Co-60 <0.56 <1.48' <0.651 <0.78 <0.86 <1.16-F K-40 27. 3+12. 6 : <14.3. 34.4112.4 37.9+15.8 21.4+10.3 <33.2- ;
'<LLD' <LLD. ' <LED- < LED <tLD Otherst < LED.
. o*OptionalSampleEocation. Not ~ Required By The Technical Specifications. t Plant;Related~ Radionuclides. m _m. m m. m
- 1 M M .m . M : M M M .m: m m mm m.
. _ _ ~ - . . . _ - - . - - . _ - _ _
TABLE IV-10 % , DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENT RESULTS (1989) Results in Units of mrem /std. Month 12 Sigma
' LOCATION '
STATION LOCATION FIRST SECOM THIRD FOURTH. (DISTANCE A M - NUMBER QUARTER OUARTER QUARTER QUARTER DIRECTION)** 3 D1 Onsite 12.0+0.6 14.5+2.9 13.1+2.0 9.1+1.0 0.2 miles 0 69* 4 D2 Onsite 6.2TO.6 5.9T0.5 6.8T0.6 l4.8T0.7 0.4: miles 0 140' 5 E Onsite 4.970.6 5.4T0.5 6.6T0.5 4.8T0.5 0.4 miles 0 175* i 6 F Onsite 4.4TO.9 4.810.4 5.7TO.8 - 3.7T0.6 0.5-miles.0 210* 7* G Onsite 4.6TO.3' 5.0+0.2 5.8T0.2 3.8T0.5 0.7 miles 0 250* l 8* R-5 Offsite-Control 4.870.4 5.210.3 6.4TO.4 4.7TO.6 16.4 miles 0 -42' 9 D1 Offsite 4.6TO.4 5.4+0.3 :5.310.2 4.0T0.5 - 11.4 miles 0 80* , 10 D2 Offsite 4.4TO.3 5.0TO.3- 5.0+0.2 3.4TO.4 9.0 miles 0 117* 11 E Offsite 3.2TO.2 5.2TO.3 5.4T0.2 .3.2TO.6 7.2 miles 0 160* 'i 12 F Offsite 4.2T0.2 4.8TO.3 4.8TO.2 ?2.8i0.2- 7.7 miles 0 190* 13 G Offsite 4.7T0.3 5.170.2 4. .2 .3.7T0.5 5.3 miles 0 225* M 14* DeMass Rd., SW Oswego-Control 4.8T0.5 5.610.4 5. .4 2.910.4 -12.6 miles 3 226* li 15* Pole 66 W. boundary-Bible Camp 4.2TO.1 -4.410.2 5.2 .1: 2.110.3 0.9 miles 0.237* 'o 18* Energy Info. Center-Lamp Post, 3.810.3 5.610.4 5.6 0.2 3.810.4 0.4 miles OL265* SW . 19 East Boundary-JAF, Pole 9 5.2+0.3 5.110.2 -6.3+0.5 3.3+0.3 1.3 miles 0- 81* 23* H Onsite 6.270.5 6.610.4 7.710.4' 4.0i0.4- 0.8 miles ~0 70* 24 I Onsite ~5.1TO . 4 - 5.410.5' 6.2+0.5- 5.2TO.7 0.8 miles-0 98* 25 J Onsite 4.9T0.5- 6.1+0.2' 5.210.5- 4.2TO.7
- -0.9 miles 0 110*
4 26 K Onsite 4.5T0.4 5.810.5- 6.0+0.6- '2.7T0.'6 0.5 miles 0 132* 27 N. Fence, N. of Switchyard, JAF 22.2T3.8 25.0+4.11 22.8T3.5 14.973.5- 0.4 miles-0 60* l 28 N. Light-Pole,-N. of 42.116.1 38.617.6~ 41.216.8- 32.514.2 0.5 miles 0 68* Screenhouse, JAF' 29 26.8+6.7' 29;2+8.2. 29.216.0 21:3+4.6 0.5 miles 0 65* 30 N. N. Fence Fence,(N. NW)ofJAF W. Side 17.411.7. 18.712.2 17.7+1.8~ 11.8T1.6 0.4 miles:0 ~57' 31 N. Fence (NW) NMP-1 6.9+0.8l .7.5+0.6 8.470.8- 6.0TO.6 0.2 milesie 276* 39 N. Fence, Rad.-Waste-NMP-1 10.611.4- 11.610.1 13.011.2 10.2T1.4 0.2Lmiles'0 292* ! 47 N. -Fence, (NE) JAF- 10.5+1.4 10.811.9 10.3+1.4 7.011.5 0.6_ miles O' 69* ' 49* Phoenix, NY-Control 3.7T0.2 5.0+0.2 5.2T0. 4 : 4.2+0.4- 19.8 miles 0 170* 51 Liberty & Bronson Sts., E of OSS 4.010.2 -5.010.3 6.210.5 4.070.7- '7.4 miles 0 233'
- 52 East 12th & Cayuga.Sts., Osw. 4.610.4 .4.810.2 5._410.7- '3.310.3 5.8 miles'0 227,*
j School .j l _-n-y - s.-y.e-- , , , . , , , .
,_ ---99 . .,
TABLE IV-10 (CONTINUE @) DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENT-RESULTS 0989) Results in Units of mrem /std. Month 1.2 Sigma LOCATION-FIRST .SEC0fB ' THIRD' FOURTH. (DISTANCE AIS STATION LOCATION GUARTER; 00ARTER : DIRECTION)**L GUARTER-
~
GUARTER NUMBER 4.410.3 5.410.4 ~5.510.3' 3.610.4 13.7 miles 9 183* 53 Broadwell & Chestnut Sts. - Fulton H.S. 5.310.2. 3.010.2- 9.3 miles 9 115* 54 Liberty St. & Co. Rt. 16 - 4.410.2 4.810.3. Mexico H.S. 3.4+0.2 4.810.2 5.6+0.2" 3.0+0.3 13.0 miles 9' 75* 55 Gas Substation Co. Rt. 5-Pulaski 4.810.2 5.410.3 4.510.5 5.3' miles 9'123* 56* Rt. 104-New Haven SCH. 4.610.3 (SE Corner) 4.310.2 5.010.4 5.410.2 3.410.5~ 3.1 miles 9 220* 58* Co. Rt. IA-ALCAN (E. of Entrance Rd.) 6.110.6 7.310.6 4.610.5 0.1 miles 9 5* 75* Unit 2, N. Fence, N. of Reactor 4.910.2 Bldg. 6.610.3 :4.510.5 0.1 miles 0 -25*
';;; 76* Unit 2, N. Fence, N. of Change 4.710.3 6.610.4 i House 9.2 miles 9 '45' ;*: Unit 2, N.. Fence, N. of Pipe 6.410.5 8.210.6' 8.110.9' 5.610.8-77*
B1dg. 6.0+0.5- 3.6+0.6 1.0 miles-0 90* 78* JAF, E. of E..Old Lay Down Area 5.310.3 6.010.4 Co. Rt. 29, Pole #63,-0.2 mi. S. 4.410.2 5.010.3 5 . 810. 5 '.. 2.810.6 1.1 miles 9.115* 79* - of. Lake Rd. -5.610.3 3.210.4- 1.4 miles 0.133* 80* Co. Rt. 29, Pole #54, 0.7 mi. 4.610.4 5.610.4 S. of Lake Rd. 5.210.2. :3.010.5 1.6 miles 9 159' 81* Miner Rd., Pole #16, 0.5 mi. W. 4.410.2' -5.410.5 of Rt. 29 1.6 miles 9 181* Miner Rd., Pole #1 1/2,-1.1 mi. '4.610.3 4.810.2 6.010.4- 12.910.5 82*- W. of Rt. 29 .(1) 6.310.4 4.210.3 1.2 miles 9 200* 83* Lakeview Rd., Tree 0.45 mi. N. 4.610.2 of Miner Rd. Pole #6117, 4.510.2; 5.710.3 6.010.3~ 3.210.4- 1.1 miles 9 225* 84* Lakeview Rd., N., - 200 ft. N. of Lake Rd. 14.211.4' 15.411.9 12.0il.2. 0.2 miles'9 294* 85* Unit:1,'N. Fence, N. of W.~ Side 14.411.6 Screen House- 6.211.1- 0.1 miles 9 315' Fence, N. of W. Side- '8.410.8 86* Unit 2,.N. 6.010.'4 7.411.0 of Screen House
.n . . _
TABLE IV-10 (ConTxmues) : i DIRECT-RADIATION MEASUREMENT RESULTS (1989)- t Results in Units of mres/std. -Month 1-2 Sigma j 1
.. . LOCATION-STATION LOCATION
~'
FIRST. SECOIS THIRD FOURTH' 1(DISTANCE AIB - NINEER GUARTER (WARTER. WNutTER5 WIARTER : DIRECTICID ** - , 87* Unit 2, N. Fence, N. of E. Side 5.610.4 6.410.8 7.811.0 4.610.7 0.1 miles.9 341* 88* of Screen House Hickory Grove Rd., Pole #2. 0.6
]
i 4.410.2 5.010.3 6.210.4- 5.210.7 4.5 miles 9 97* l mi. N. of'Rt. 1
~
89* Leavitt Rd., Pole #16, 0.4 mi. 4.810.3 5.610.2 6.510.5- 3.710.5 4.1 miles 9 lil' l S. of Rt. 1 L 90* Rt. 104, Pole #300, 150 Ft. E. 4.810.2- 4.910.3 6.010,2 3.510.5 4.2 miles 9.135* ! of Keefe Rd. i , 91* Rt. 51A Pole #59, 0.8 mi. W. 4.410.2 4.810.3 5.810.2- 2.510.2- 4.8 miles 9 156' of Rt. $1' !- '92* Maiden Lane Rd. Power Pole, 0.6 4.810.4 6.210.4 6.810.3 4.010.5 4.4 miles.9 183* '< mi. S. of Rt. 104 -l 'i 93* Rt. 53, Pole 1-1, 120 ft. S. 4.610.2 5.310.2 6.010.2. 3.010.3 4.4 miles 9 205*
- N of Rt. 104 j' 94* Rt. 1, Pole #82,.250 ft. E. of 4.210.4 5.810.4' 5.810.3 2.710.2 4.7 miles?9 223*
Kocher Rd. (Co. Rt. #63) - 95* Lakeshore Camp Site from Alcan 4.410.2 6.010.2 5.910.2 .2.610.2 4.1. miles 9 237*
- ~ W. access Rd. Pole I21,.1.2 mi.
. N.-of Rt. 1 96* Creamer 4.510.4 5.610.3 6.210.4 3.610.2 3.6 miles 9 199* l Middle'y Rd.,
-Rd. 0.3 Pole 1 1/2mi. S. of 97* Rt. 29 Pole #50, 200 ft. N. of 4.810.2 :5.510.2 6.410.3 3.610.2 1.8' miles 9 143*
- Minerkd.
.98* Lake Rd. Pole #145,.0.15 mi. 5.010.3. 5.410.3 '7.010.2 3.510.3- 1.2 miles 0 101*
ofRt.20 99 NMP Rd., 0.4 kii. N..of Lake Rd., 4'.410.3 .5.810.3 6.410.3- 4.010.4 1.8 miles 9 L88* . Env. Station'R1 Offsite . 100 Rt. 29 and Lake Rd., Env. Station :4.310.2- 6.010.3 5.810.2- '3.810.3' 1.1 miles 9 104* R2 Offsite 101 Rt. 29, 0.7 mi. S. of Lake'Rd., 3.810.3i 5.110.4- 6.010.4- 3.910.1 1.5 miles 0 132* Env. Station'R3 i, n ' i
- - _ , _ _ _ _ __ ___ . _ .z-. . + - . . -,,. - = - , a -.; __ _.___ _ ? l -
TABLE IV-10 (CourznoeD) . DIRECT PADIATION MEASUREMENT RESULTS (1989) Results in. Units of mres/std. Month 1 2 Sigma i .. 4 - LOCATIEW STATION LOCATION' FIRST . SECOIS 'THinD FOURTH ?(DISTANCE'AIS! ORNBER. OUARTER: GUARTER~ GUARTER MIARTER ;DIREETIWO**1 4 u 102 EOF /Env. Lab, Oswego Co. Airport 3.610.2 5.510.3 6.010.2- -4.010.5 11.9 miles 9 175* 1 fulton airport, Rt. 176)
~
i 103 IC -East Garage Rd.,' Lamp Post 3.910.2 6.210.3 6.010.2- 4.110.6 0.4 miles 9 267* 1 4 R36ffsite ~ 104 Parkhurst Road Pole #148 1/2-A, 4.510.1 5.410.2 5.010.2 3.810.5 1.4 miles 9.102* 1 0.1 miles Soutfi of Lake Rd. 4 105 Lakeview Rd., Pole 16125, 0.6.mi. 4.410.2 6.010.4 5.410.3 4.210.4 1.4 miles 9 198* 1 South:of Lake Rd. .l 106 Shorelins cove, East of NMP-1, 5.010.2 5.610.4 6.710.4 4.610.6 0.3 miles 9 274* Tree'on West Edge - 0.3 miles 9 272*
~
- '107 Shoreline Cove -East:of NMP-1 5.4 .4 6.2+0.3 6.8+0.3 4.8 .5 i y 108 Pole #143, Soufh of~ Lake Road, 4.7 .5 5.810.4. 6.410.4 4.4 .5 1.1 miles.9 104*
A 300.ft. East of Route 29 1.1 miles 9 103*
" '109' Tree North of Lake' Road, 300 ft. 3.910.3 5.610.2' 6.210.7 4.010.5 East of' Route 29-
'110 Control, Baldwinsville, NY 3.4+0.1 :5.210.5: 5.2+0.2 4.4+0.5 26.4 miles 9 166*
111 Control, Sterling, NY 3.610.2 5.410.7 5.210.3 3.710.5 21.8 miles 9 214*
- Technical Specification Location
** Direction and distance' based on NMP-2 reactor centerline and sixteen ~22.5 sector grids.
(1) TLD lost in field i .i { l I l
.- ,. - - ~.,- - , , ,,,,_.._,_~ -- _ -l
. TABLE IV-11 .
CCNCENTRATIONS OF 10 DINE-131-IN NILK , Results in Units' of pCi/ liter i 2 Signal 3 I t
. STATION *7 [04/83/89i 04/17/89: (05/08/89 iO5/22/09: )86/05/89l 06/19/89 ..
No. 60 <0.15- <0.18 <0.19 <0.15' <0.13 '< 0.14' No. 55 <0.26 <0.16 <0.19 <0.15- <0.13- <0.16 No. 50 <0.13 <0.15 <0'.30 <0.16 <0.19 <0.19 No. 7 <0.16 <0.16 <0.28 <0.14 <0.13 -<0.16' H !O .
<0.12- <0.20
- 1 No. 4 <0.14 <0.17 <0.31 <0.'20 '
ia No. 16 <0.17 <0.16 <0.17 <0.16
- <0.14 '<0.18
. 'l No. 65 (Control) <0.13l <0.16 <0.17 <0.22 <0.14 :<0.21 1
- Corresponds to sample locations noted on Figure 4,'Section VII.
I t > 4 6_
i
-TABLE IV-11 (CourresueM-CONCENTRATIONS OF IODINE-131 IN NILK. u Results in Units of pCi/ liter i 2 Sigma
,. STATION
- 07/05/89 07/17/89 08/07/89- 08/21/89 09/05/89' 09/18/89 No. 60 <0.13 <0.13 <0.23 <0.19 <0.16 < 0.15 '
i
-No. 55 <0.12 <0.12 <0.15 <0.11 <0.-15 <0.14 l No. 50 <0.15 <0.15 <0.18 <0.12 <0.18- '<0.15 No. 7 <0.18 <0.11 <0.15 <0.10 <0.19 <0.15 2
<0.26 <0.13 <0.22 <0.11 <0.17 <
0.13: !1 No. 4 2;. No. 16 <0.20 <0.15 <0.15 <0.12' <0.18 <0.21 i No. 65 (Control) <0.29 ' <0.11 <0.15 . <0.10 <0.15 <0.17 1
- Corresponds to sample locations noted on Figure 4, Section'VII.
i } i,
,. _m ._ , __ .. .. _ ., _,_ _ __ _
- u
; TABLE IV-11 (CoNU NUEO) -
p
. CONCENTRATIONS OF 10 DINE-131 IN MILK Results in Units of pCi/ liter i 2 Sigma 1
t l STATION *- ?19/02/89; 10/16/89. 11/06/89- '11/ht/89 $12/04/891~~ 12/18/89 i No. 60 <0.15 <0.14 <0.41 <0.33 <0.50 <0.34 i l
- - No. 55 <0.17 <0.18 <0.40 <0.37 <0.29 <0.22- !
No. 50 <0.19 <0.19 <0.42 <0.38 < 0.49 <0.32 i No. 7 <0.16 <0.17 <0.21 <0.44 <0.21 <0.19 M <0.13 <0.15 <0.40- <0.19 <0.50 .<0.17 Q No. 4 i* No. 16 <0.15 <0.15 <0.31 <0.50 <0.23 <0.26 l i No. 65 .. (Control) <0.14 <0.15 <0.35L <0.30 <0.20' <0.36 q
- Corresponds to sample locations noted on Figure 4, Section.VII.
l i i-2 i
. ~
TABLE IV-12 ! CONCENTRATIONS OF GADMA EMITTER $ IN MILK ' l Results in Units of pCi/ liter i 2 Sigma li < e 5TATION* NUCLIDES 04/03/89 04/17/89 05/08/89 05/tt/89 06/05/89 06/19/89 j No. 60 K-40 1450 134 1440 156 1490 184 1555 144 1610 166 15 .5 i Cs-134 <3 88 <7 53 <7 41 <4 08 <5 85 <7 0 i Cs 137 <4.27 <7.09 <9.40 <6.09 <6.64 <6.03 l Ba La-40 <2.98 <5.45 <9.10 <3.63 <5.74 <10.1 j Ot erst <LLD <LLD (LLD <LLD <LLD < L LD l I No. 55 K-40 1650 167 1580 161 1680 201 1620 171 1600 135 14 140 ! Cs-134 <6 30 <6 37 <9 02 <7 10 <5 18 <5 4 i Cs-137 <8.34 <6.90 <7.63 <7.13 <5.36 <6.09 ' Ba/La-40 <4.48 <7.09 <8.94 <6.59 <5.68 <4.45 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD ! No. 50 K-40 15401185 1400160 15701137 15801188 1670il2 16501168 Cs-134 <7.09 <5.92 <5.35 <7.71 <7.30 <6.35 Cs-137 <7.95 <5.57 <5.90 <9.74 <8.18 <6.53 Ba/La-40 <7.95 <5.95 <3.10 <8.94 <9.47 <4.66 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD No. 7 K-40 Cs-134 13901131
<4.84 15801134
<5.28 15701164
<6.02 16801144
<5.35 1650+138
<5702 1640+137
<5.17 l
Cs-137 <5.44 <6.18 <7.42 <5.72 <6.01 <6.17 Ba La-40 <3.42 <4.07 <5.71 <3.78 <5.61 <4.66
- Ot erst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD No. 4 K-40 15201177 17201191 14601139 14401176 15901136 1480fl80 Cs-134 <3.83 <7.18 <4.90 '
<7.30 <5.36 <8.21 Cs-137 <3.58 <8.88 <5.71 <9.85 <6.33 <8.43 Ba La-40 <4.77 <7.02 <4.03 <8.00 <4.26 <8.98 Ot erst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD l
No. 16 K-40 1480+129 15301181 16001165 1520166.0 1730 174 1660+148 l Cs-134 <4780 <7.39 <5.40 <5.82 <6.59 <5.03 I Cs-137 <5.52 <9.53 <6.21 <5.46 <7.14 <5.79 Ba La-40 <4.26 <7.37 <6.51 <7.23 <5.41 <5.08 l Ot erst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD g No. 65 K-40 1570+161 1440+125 1630+145 1650 139 1460 183 1500 65 (Contml) Cs-134 <6730 <4780 <6723 <4 82 <8 68 <8 88 l' Cs 137 <7.36 <5.24 <6.16 <5.95 <9.96 <6.41 ! Ba La-40 <4.98 <3.83 <5.76 <5.39 <7.03 <8.32 : i Ot erst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <lLD <LLD l l
- Corresponds to sample locations noted on Figure 4, Section V11.
t Plant related radionuclides l I IV-47
l TABLE IV-12 (CcarzwuEc) CONCENTRATIONS OF GA>04A EMITTERS IN NILK Results in Units of pCi/ liter i 2 Sigma STATION
- NUCLIDES 07/05/89 07/17/89 08/08/89 08/21/89 09/05/89 09/18/89 No. 60 K-40 17201171 16201191 15301161 15401145 16001190 1470166 Cs-134 <6.66 <6.38 <6.58 <4.69 <7.92 <6.13 Cs-137 <6.64 <8.69 <7.87 <6.38 <7.91 <5.87 Ba/La-40 <7.30 <6.70 <4.04 <3.65 <6.75 <5.83 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD No. 55 K-40 1480167.2 15501166 16701147 15201138 14901144 14701140 Cs-134 <7.91 <6.27 <4.08 <5.23 <4.55 <5.17 Cs-137 <6.98 <7.69 <6.38 <5.38 <6.59 <6.13 Ba/La-40 <7.44 <6.10 <5.12 <5.02 <4.74 <5.18 Otherst <lLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD No. 50 K-40 15101184 1540 143 1680 70 1500165.7 1560 188 1620 169 Cs-134 <6.38 <5.17 <7.37 <6.98 <8.11 <6.81 Cs-137 <8.17 <4.85 <6.84 <6.18 <8.81 <7.13 Ba/La-40 <4.26 <6.23 <5.83 <7.93 <6.76 <5.16 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD No. 7 K-40 17201141 1540167 15401134 15201165 15501165 14701183 Cs-134 <4.61 <7.68 <5.67 <6.50 <7.37 <7.30 Cs-137 <5.30 <6.41 <6.49 <7.96 <7.96 <8.93 Ba/La-40 <5.10 <6.43 <5.58 <6.12 <7.29 <5.99 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD No. 4 K-40 1550165.3 16001187 14901141 1740+420 1460+140 1590HS7.8 Cs-134 <6.46 <6.85 <4.62 <5T58 <5T17 < T. 27 Cs-137 <6.84 <9.29 <5.94 <6.17 <5.86 <6.18 Ba/La-40 <6.38 <9.03 <2.68 <5.33 <3.15 <9.03 Otherst (LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD No. 16 K-40 16201168 1970!151 1580167 16401139 1810+143 153&e66.4 Cs-134 <7.10 <4.22 <6.57 <5.80 <6T04 <6.30 Cs-137 <7.87 <5.55 <7.05 <5.95 <6.17 <5.53 Ba/La-40 <6.54 <4.84 <7.91 <5.60 <4.05 <8.33 Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD No. 65 K-40 14401181 1570167 13001171 1380 174 13701174 16101137 (Contnal) Cs-134 <7.30 <8.46 <7.62 <7.72 <7.20 <6.08 Cs-137 <7.19 <5.61 <9.96 <10.2 <9.29 <5.72 Ba/La-40 <5.99 <9.07 <6.34 <6.31 <7.74 <5.34 Otherst . .
<LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD
- Corresponds to sample locations noted on Figure 4, Section VII.
t Plant related radionuclides IV-48 _ ____
__ ~. _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _. _ _ . _ _ - - - . ___ _ _ _ l l'
; TABLE IV-12 (Courztu c)
CONCENTRATIONS OF t#94A EMITTERS IN NILX e j Results in Units of pCi/ liter i 2 Sigma 5 1 STATION
- NUCLIDE5 10/02/89 10/16/89 11/06/89 11/20/89 12/04/89 12/18/89 l I No. 60 K-40 16601139 16101144 16101137 1550 191 17501142 16101169 Cs-134 <5.16 <5.84 <4.82 <8.76 <5.27 <7.17
~ Cs 137 <6.12 <6.16 <7.08 <9.41 <5.72 <5.98 ;
- Ba La-40 <5.34 <5.66 <3.24 <11.4 <4.29 <6.11 .
Otherst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD i J . 1 No. 55 K-40 1430 137 16701139 16301139 17301142 14401188 1600+196 ~
! Cs-134 <5 04 <5.07 <5.46 <5.62 <8.14 <9.33
- . Cs 137 <5.12 <5.67 <5.17 <4.91 <9.29 <9.41 i Ba La-40 <2.66 <5.95 <4.19 <4.66 <8.34 <9.40 Ot erst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LL3 l
I No. 50 K-40 1520 134 1570 191 1470 138 1670 171 1450 189 1550 191 Cs-134 <4 22 <3 52 <5 93 <6 35 <8 36 <8 14 Cs-137 <5.78 <4.47 <5.64 <7.87 <7.74 <8.76 Ba La-40 <4.09 <5.41 <4.64 <6.17 <7.39 <8.04 Ot erst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD No. 7 K-40 Cs-134 15601143
<5.66 17401203
<8.44 15601138
<4.45 1460 139
<5 10 1590 191
<9 24 1690f97
.< 4 141 l 1 Cs-137 <6.02 <7.99 <6.17 <5.72 <10.0 <4.17
- Ba La-40 <6.03 <8.05 <6.44 <5.43 <10.0 <3.10 2
Ot erst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD No. 4 K-40 13601175 1530~+143 17301172 1590+144 15101141 15301163 3 Cs-134 <7.82 <4.77 <6.89 <4.84 <5.87 <7.17 5
- Cs-137 <8.31 <5.38 <8.21 <5.56 <6.17 <7.69
<5.16 <5.45 <4.65 Ba La-40 <7.39 <4.74 <5.92 m j
4 Ot erst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD l i No. 16 K-40 18201174 16401169 17601152 16701197 16101146 1520+68 Cs-134 <6.19 <6.27 <5.04 <9.05 <4.98 <7.59 Cs-137 <7.13 <6.84 <7.52 <10.5 <4.98 <6.10 Ba <7.35 <3.42 <5.14 <6.27 <4.63 <10.1 Ot{La-40 erst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD g l
- No. 65 K-40 1630 168 1670 174 1510 186 1790 147 1760 142 1580 144 (Contml) Cs-134 <6 10 , <6 02 <8 04 <5 27 <5 17 <4 70 Cs-137 <6.84 <7.96 <10.7 <5.67 <5.24 <5.87 Ba La-40 <6.12 <6.17 <6.59 <5.11 <2.69 <6.05 i Ot erst <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD ,
! B
- Corresponds to sample locations noted on Figure 4, Section VII. e i t Plant related radionuclides g i
l I IV-49
~
TABLE IV-13 MILCH ANIMAL CENSUS 1989 [ NUMBER OF NUMBER TOWNORAREA(a) CENSUS MAP (I)DEGREES (2)DISTANCE (2) 0F MILCH ANIMALS ( Scriba 1 220' 3.0 miles None 16* 190' 5.2 ' 39C - [ 2 195* 8.0 ND . 3 190' 4.5 4C 6 62* 2.2 1C r 26 115' 1.6 ND L 61 140' 3.0 1C, 12G 62 183* 6.7 6G 63 185* 8.0 33C New Haven 8 130' 9.2 None ( 9 95* 5.2 40C 4* 113' 7.8 100C 45i 125' 8.0 10C 10 130' 2.6 28C 5 146' 7.2 49C 11 130' 8.5 30C 7* 107' 5.5 62C 64 107' 7.9 52C Mexico 12 107' 11.5 20C 13 114' 11.2 None 14 120' 9.8 68C 15 100* 10.8 None 17 115* 10.2 1C 18 110' 10.0 None 19 132' 10.5 40C 20 123* 11.2 None 60* 90' 9.5 30C 50* 93* 8,2 165C 55* 95* 9.0 55C 21 112' 10.5 72C 68ti 108* 11.6 28C 49 88* 7.9 3G Richland 22 85* 10.2 45C Pulaski 23 92* 10.5 92C Oswego 24 214' 8.8 None IV-50
i I! j TABLE IV-13 (CONTINUED) ) MILCH ANIMAL CENSUS 1989 'l NUMBER OF NUMBER TOWNORAREA(a) CENSUS MAP I1) DEGREES (2)DISTANCE (2) 0F MILCH ANIMALS Hannibal 40 220' 15.2 None i Sterling 65** 220' 17.0 45C Volney 25 182* 0.5 None 70 147' 9.4 250, 2G 66 158' 7.8 700, 1G 67 152' 8.3 3G l . I I C = Cows G = Goats g l
* = Milk sample location
** = Milk sample control location f = Reactivated farm it u New location l ND = Did not wish to participate in the survey (1) = References Figure 4 l
(2) = Based on Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Reactor Centerline None = No cows or goats at that location. Location was a previous l location with cows or goats. (a) = Census performed out to a distance of approximately ten miles. l I I I IV-51
_ mm_m - o 1 > w TABLE IV-I4 CONCENTRATIONS OF GAf90A EMITERS IN VARIOUS FOOD PRODUCTS Results in Units of pCi/g (wet) i 2 Sigma COLLECTION SAMPLE DESCRIPTION Be-7 K-40 I-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 Ra-226 SITE DATE 08/28/89 Beet Greens 0.1C+0.05 5.43+0.16 <0.013 <0.019 <0.017 0.37+0.11 08/28/89 Squash Leaves 0.3270.08 5.03TO.31 <0.014 <0.015 <0.014 0.2570.15 (T) <0.015 <0.014 <0.016 0.3010.13 08/28/89 Cabbage <0713 3.4010.31 08/28/89 Squash Leaves 0.56+0.04 4.09+0.13 <0.010 <0.009 0.011+0.004 0.29+0.08 (K) <0.018 <0.015 <0T017 0.3710.20 08/28/89 Strawberry leaves 0.7810.12 4.4210.35 08/28/89 Bean Leaves 0.3610.07 3.02+0.25 <0.012 <0.011 <0.012 0.14+0.11 08/28/89 Cucumber Leaves 0.7710.05 2.9710.11 <0.011 <0.013 <0.011 0.30i0.09 (L) <0.018 <0.018 <0.018 0.3510.16 y 08/28/89 Squash Leaves 0.6110.11 5.7710.42 E <0.019 <0.016 0.34+0.12 08/28/89 Collard Greens 0.1910.04 4.4410.16 <0.015 08/28/89 Swiss Chard 0.11+0.05 6.40+0.35 <0.011 <0.013 <0.012 0.1770.10 (P) <0.015 <0.015 <0.014 0.3610.15 08/29/89 Beet Greens 0.1610.07 3.9310.32 08/30/89 Swiss Chard <0.10 5.4910.33 <0.013 <0.012 <0.014 0.22+0.12 (M) <0.013 <0.011 <0.012 0.28T0.15 (Control) 08/30/89 Squash Leaves 0.2210.06 4.35+0.28 08/30/89 Cabbage <0.12 2.9610.13 <0.013 <0.017 <0.016 0.3810.12 09/05/89 Cabbage <0.09 3.48+0.24 <0.011 <0.012 <0.012 0.27+0.10 09/05/89 Squash Leaves 0.43+0.10 ' 4.3710.36 <0.015 <0.015 <0.016 0.40TO.17 (Q) <0.015 <0.013 <0.014 0.3210.19 09/05/89 Cucumber Leaves 1.5610.12 5.1510.31 09/05/89 Squash Leaves 0.5410.05 4.3910.15 <0.013 <0.019 <0.014 0.3410.12 09/05/89 Pepper Leaves 0.0810.05 7.4210.38 <0.011 <0.011 <0.011 0.3010.15 (Y) <0.015 <0.013 <0.016 0.4010.16 j 09/05/89 Egg Plant leaves 0.2810.08 5.8410.38 NOTE: Other Isotopes <LLD
i TABLE IV-15 l ! 1989 RESIDENCE CENSUS , l 1 l MAP METEOROLOGICAL
- LOCATION DESIGNATION (b) SECTOR DEGREES (a)DISTANCE (a)
I w N . w NNE I w NE w ENE l Sunset Bay A E 82' O 9 miles Lake Road B ESE 119' O.7 miles Parkhurst Road C SE 127' 1.2 miles County Route 29 D SSE 149' 1.2 miles Miner Road E S 173* 1.6 miles Lakeview Road F SSW 210* 1.7 miles Lakeview Road G SW 233' 1.5 miles Bible Camp Retreat H WSW 249' 1.3 miles w W w WNW l w NW i w NNW i w This meteorological sector is over Lake Ontario. are no residences within three miles. Then l I (a) Based on J, A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Reactor E Centerline. 3 (b) See Figure 3, Section VII. I IV-53
I TABLE IV-16 . { ENVIRGISIENTAL SAM LE LOCATIONS SAWLE LOCATICII MEDIENE DESIGNATION LOCATION DESCRIPTION OFanFFS A10 DISTAIBCEW Shorline 05* Sunset Bay 80* at 1.5 miles Sediment 06 Langs Beach, Control 230* at 5.8 riles Fish 02* Nine Mile Point Transect 315* at 0.3 miles 03* FitzPatrick Transect 55* at 0.6 miles 00* Oswego Transect 235* at 6.2 miles Surface Water 03* FitzPatrick Inlet 70* at 0.5 miles 08* Oswego Steam Station 235' at 7.6 miles 09 Nine Mile Point Unit 1 Inlet 305* at 0.3 miles 10 Oswego City Water 240* at 7.8 miles 11 Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Inlet 304* at 0.1 miles E Air R-1* R-1 Station,- Nine Mile Pt. Rd. 88* at 1.8 miles J, Radiciodine R-2* R-2 Station, Lake Road 104* at 1.1 miles
- and R-3* R-3 Station, Co. Rt.-29 132* at 1.5 miles Particulates R-4* R-4 Station, Co. Rt. 29 143* at 1.8 miles R-5* R-5 Station, Montario Point Rd. 42' at 16.4 miles D1 D1 Onsite Station, Onsite 69* at 0.2 miles D2 D2 Offsite Station, Co. Rt. 64 117* at 9.0 miles E E Offsite Station, Co. Rt. 4 160* at 7.2 miles F F Offsite Statio7, Dutch Ridge Rd. 190* at 7.7 miles -
G G Onsite Station, Onsite 250* at 0.7 miles I H H Onsite Station, Onsite 71* at 0.8 miles I I Onsite Station, Onsite 98* at 0.8 miles J J Onsite Station, Onsite 110' at 0.9 miles K K Onsite Station, Onsite 132* at 0.5 miles G G Offsite Station, St. Paul St. 225* at 5.3 miles Technical Specification location (1) Based on Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Reactor Centerline
TABLE IV-16 (CONTINUED) i j ENVIR00 MENTAL SAfrLE LOCATIONS l i < 1 l SAMLE LOCATION , MEDIINI DESIGNATION LOCATION DESCRIPTION nFCEFFT A W DISTANCE (1) l i I Thermo- 3 D1 Onsite Station 69* at 0.2 miles
- luminescent 4 D2 Onsite Station 140* at 0.4 miles !
i Dosimeters 5 E Onsite Station 175* at 0.4 miles ~ (TLDs) 6 F Onsite Station 210* at 0.5 miles 7* G Onsite Station 250* at 0.7 miles , 8* R-5 Offsite Station 42* at 16.4 miles i 9 D1 Offsite Location 80* at 11.4 miles . 10 D2 Offsite Location 117' at 9.0 miles ! 11 E Offsite Location 160* at 7.2 miles i i 12 F Offsite Location 190* at 7.7 miles 13 G Offsite Location 225* at 5.3 miles. 14* SW Oswego - Control 226* at 12.6 miles i 15* West Site Boundary 237' at 0.9 miles i; 18* Energy Information Center 265* at 0.4 miles !i 19 East Site Boundary 81* at 1.3 miles i!E 23* H Onsite Station, Onsite 70* at 0.8 miles j 24 I Onsite Station, Onsite 98* at 0.8 miles i 25 J Onsite Station, Onsite 110* at 0.9 miles i 26 K Onsite Station, Onsite 132' at 0.5 miles
- 27 North Fence, JAFMPP 60* at 0.4 miles
- 28 North Fence, JAFNPP 68* at 0.5 miles
- 29 North Fence, JAFNPP 65* at 0.5 miles
- 30 North Fence, JAFNPP 57* at 0.4 miles 31 North Fence, NMP-1 276* at 0.2 miles i 39 North Fence, NMP-1 292* at 0.2 miles
- 47 North Fence, JAFMPP 69* at 0.6 miles
! 49* Phoenix NY - Control 170* at 19.8 miles 51 Oswego $ team Station, East 233* at 7.4 miles 1 52 Oswego Elementary School, East 227' at 5.8 miles ! 53 Fulton High School 183* at 13.7 miles 54 Mexico High School 115* at 9.3 miles
; -55 Pulaski Gas Substation, Route 5 75* at 13.0 miles j 56* New Haven Elementary School 123* at 5.3 miles
~~
- Technical Specification location
! (1) Based on Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Centerline 4 W W .M M M M M M M M M M , , W W W
.ft. ., ., e.sa< ~ , , , , . , . .r.-- -
.,-y v.>-- --,..,yr. ~ . - * - , ,s .--v._ - . . - . . . ....,...ww,._,. .-~.,...,,m , -.m .-
TABLE IV-16 (ConTxmoEo) ENVIROl98 ENTAL SANPLE LOCATIONS SAMLE LOCATION IEDIlpt DESIGBIRTI(Ni LOCATION DESCRIPTION OFGMFM AINB DISTAIEEUI Thermo- 58* County Route 1 and Alcan 220* at 3.1 miles luminescent 75* North Fence, NMP-2 5* at 0.1 miles Dosimeters 76* North Fence, NMP-2 25* at 0.1 miles 77* North Fence, NMP-2
~
45* at 0.2 miles (TLDs) East Boundary JAFNPP 90* at 1.0 miles 78* 79* County Route E9 115* at 1.1 miles 80* County Route 29 133* at 1.4 miles 81* Miner Road 159* at 1.6 miles 82* Miner Road 181* at 1.6 miles 83* Lakeview Road 200* at 1.2 miles 84* Lakeview Road 225* at 1.1 miles 85* North Fence, NMP-1 294* at 0.2 miles 86* North Fence, NMP-1 315* at 0.1 miles % 87* North Fence, NMP-1 341* at 0.1 miles 8 88* Hickory Grove Road 97* at 4.5 miles 89* Leavitt Road Ill' at 4.1 miles E 135* at 4.2 miles 90* Route 104 and Keefe Road 91* County Route SIA 156* at 4.8 miles 92* Maiden Lane Road 183* at 4.4 miles 93* County Route 53 205* at 4.4 miles 94* County Route 1 and Kocher Road (Co. Rt. 63) 223* at 4.7 miles 95* Lakeshore Camp Site 237* at 4.1 miles 96* Creamery Road 199* at 3.6 miles 97* County Route 29 143* at 1.8 miles - 98* Lake Road 10l* at 1.2 miles I 99 Nine Mile Point Road 88* at 1.8 miles 100 County Route 29 and Lake Road 104* at 1.1 miles 101 County Route 29 132* at 1.5 miles 102 Oswego County Airport 175* at 11.9 miles 103 Energy Information Center, East 267* at 0.4 miles 104 Parkhurst Road 102* at 1.4 miles 105 Lakeview Road 198* at 1.4 miles 106 Shoreline Cove, East of NMP-1 274* at 0.3 miles o Technical Specification location (I) Based on Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Centerline
i TABLE IV-16 (CounleWED) I I ENVIROOMENTAL SAfrLE LOCATIGIf5 I i SAMLE LOCATION NEDIlm DESIENATION LOCATION DESCRIPTION DECRFFT AIS DISTAIEE(1) i Thermo- 107 Shoreline Cove, East of NMP-1 272* at 0.3 miles luminescent 108 Lake Road 104* at 1.1 miles Dosimeters 109 Lake Road 103* at 1.1 miles (TLDs) 110 Baldwinsville-Control 166* at 26.4 miles 111 Sterling-Control 214* at 21.8 miles Cows Milk 7* Indicator Location 107* at 5.5 miles 16* Indicator Location 190* at 5.9 miles
- 50* Indicator Location 93* at 8.2 miles 55 Indicator Location 95* at 9.0 miles 60 Indicator Location 90* at 9.5 miles 4 Indicator Location 113* at 7.8 miles
,_, 65* Control Location 220' at 17.0 miles
!' Si Food Products K Indicator Location 96* at 1.7 miles N L Indicator Location 82* at- 1.7 miles
- - Y Indicator Location 110* at 2.1 miles
! P Indicator Location 101* at 1.9 miles i T Indicator. Location 84* at 1.6 miles 0 Indicator Location 136* at 1.7 miles M Control Location ' 225* at 15.6 miles i i t [ . i i
)
[ ! -- i *' Technical Specification location
; (1) Based on Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Centerline
! m m W W W m- m e e
9 I i I l v {I I I l A DATA SUMMARIES AND CONCLUSIONS
#> Power
O
- I
!I
- V DATA SlHiARIES AND CONCLUSIONS i ll
! Each year the results of the Annual Radiological , Environmental Monitoring Program are evaluated considering the lg i natural processes of the environment and the array of past data. A number of factors are considered in the course of evaluating !
,g '~
I5 and interpreting the annual Environmental Radiological Data. The interpretation of data can be made at several levels including
~
ll l trend analysis, population dose, risk estimates to the general population based on environmental concentrations, effectiveness - ll l of plant effluent controls and specific research areas, among others. This report not only presents the data collected during lg the 1989 sample program but also to assess the significance of j the radionuclides detected in the environment. It is important
- g to note that detection of an radionuclide is not of itself an 1 5 indication of this environmental significance. Evaluation of the impact of the radionuclide in tems of potential increased dose ll i
to man, in relation to natural background, is necessary to determine the true. significance of the detection. lI There are four separate groups of radionuclides that were i ig detected in the environment during 1989. Several of these radionuclides could possibly fall into three of the four groups. I The first of these groups is naturally occurring radionuclides. It must be realized that the environment contains a broad inventory of naturally occurring radioactive elements. , Background radiation as a function of primordial radioactive elements and cosmic radiation of solar origin, offers a constant l exposure to the environment and man. These radionuclides, such as Th-228, Ra-226, Be-7 and especially K-40, account for a ! l majority of the annual per capita background dose which- is equal to approximately 300 mrem per year (Reference No. 17). ll A second group of radionuclides that were detected are a , g result of the detonation of thermonuclear devices 'in the earth's. l upper atmosphere. Atmospheric nuclear testing during the early V-1 1
- - - . _ _ . . - . - - . . ~ . , _ - . . _ . . . . - . - _ _ _ . _ . - . - ~ . . - _ . - . . . - . . - . , _ . _ - . . . . , . - .
l ll l ! 1950s produced a significant inventory of radionuclides found in the lower atmosphere as well as in ecological systems. The 1963 l l Atmospheric Test Ban Treaty greatly reduced the global inventory gl' through the decay of short lived radionuclides, deposition, and i the removal (by natural processes) of radionuclides from.the food gi l chain by such processes as weathering and sedimentation. This u , process is referred to in this report as ecological cycling. l Since 1963, several- atmospheric weapons. tests have been conducted lj!
- l. by the People's Republic of China. -In each case, the usual I radionuclides associated with nuclear detonations were detected '
l,' ! for several months following the test and then after a peak detection period, diminished to a point where most could not be l i detected. The last such weapons test was conducted in October of gl 1980. The resulting fallout or deposition from this test has influenced the background radiation in- the vicinity of the site g! ' ) and was very evident in many of the sample medias analyzed during g; the 1981 sample program. Quantities of Nb-95, Zr-95, Ce-141, Ce- Ei 144, Ru-106, Ru-103, La-140, Cs-137, Mn-54 and Co-60 were typical I i in air particulate samples during 1981 and were the direct result of the 1980 weapons test. Cs-137 is currently the major remnant l for this testing and is still detected- in a number of lI environmental media. A third group of radionuclides was detected as a result of I , the Chernobyl accident which occurred in the Soviet Union in I g April 1986. The resulting fallout or deposition from this accident influenced the background radiation in the vicinity of the site and was very evident in many of- the sample. media g) E analyzed during 1986. Quantities of Nb-95, Ru-103, Ru-106, I- 1 131, La-140, Cs-134, and Cs-137 were detected in air particulate samples during May and June of 1986. Milk samples collected and l analyzed after April, 1986 contained measurable concentrations l;; of 1-131 and Cs-137. The origin of these radionuclides was a direct result of fallout from the Chernobyl accident. During g 1987, Cs-137 was detected in several milk samples collected during the first half of the grazing season. In 1988, Cs-137 was V-2 I:
s < \ L detected in one milk sample. The presence of Cs-137 in the milk L samples is attributed to the ubiquitous concentrations of Cs-137 from weapons testing and from the Chernobyl releases. [ The fourth group of radionuclides detected in the i environment during 1989 were those that could be related to r operations at the site. These select radionuclides were - , r detected in a few of the sample medias collected and at very low _, ' concentrations. Many of these radionuclides are a byproduct of . r nuclear detonations, the Chernobyl accident, and the operation of , L light water, reactors thus making a distinction between the sources difficult, if not impossible. The dose to man as a ( result of these radionuclides is small and significantly less than the radiation exposure from naturally occurring sources of radiation, medical isotopes and consumer products. Thus, a number of factors must be considered in. the course i of radiological data evaluation and interpretation. The , evaluation and interpretation is made at several levels including I trend analysis, dose to man, etc. An attempt has been made not only to report the data collected during 1989, but also to assess ; ! the significance of the radionuclides detected in the environment I as compared to natural radiation sources. It is- important to l note that detected concentrations of radionuclides that are
- possibly related to operations at the site are very small and are not of environmental significance. ,
I The 1987 per capita dose rate was determined to be 360 mrem j per year from all scc.ces, as noted in the NCRP Report No. 93 (Ref. No. 17). This average dose includes such exposure sources , as natural, occupational, weapons testing, consumer products, I medical, etc. The 1987 per capita dose rate due to natural sources was 300 mrem per year. The' 1970 per capita dose rate i due to the nuclear fuel cycle was 0.028 mrem per year. More recently, the nuclear fuel cycle dose was estimated by a USEPA-l l V-3 1
P Ii l l study to be less than 0.6 mrem per year by the year 2000 ll (Glasstone Reference #19). Background gamma radiation around- the Nine Mile Point Site, as a result of radionuclides in the atmosphere and the ground, E l accounts for approximately 60 - 65 mrem per year. This dose is a aI i result of radionuclides of cosmic origin (for example, Be-7), of a primordial origin (Ra-226, K-40, and Th-232) and, to a much l[jl L smaller extent, of a man-made origin from weapons testing. A l'l
- dose of 66 mrem per year, as a background dose, is significantly
!. greater than any possible doses as a result of operations at the ! site'during 1989. lq i [ Each sample medium is discussed in section V.
.g-
! Concentrations of radionuclides detected and exposure to man are ! presented and scrutinized. L ( I
- In the routine implementation of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program, additional or optional ll
- i. environmental pathway media are sampled and analyzed. These j
l samples are obtained to monitor the secondary pathways and to maintain the analytical data base established in 1975 when .the l l i plant began commercial operation. include; aquatic vegetation (cladophora), bottom sediment, These additional samples gI mollusk, milk (Sr-90), meat / poultry and soil' samples. In g addition to the optional sample media, many additional locations u
- , are sampled and analyzed for those pathways required-by Technical Specifications. These additional sample locations are obtained !-
! to insure that the important environmental pathways are monitored j in a comprehensive manner. Data from. additional sample locations l;l common with Technical Specification required sample media are 3 l normally included in the data. presentation and evaluation. additional locations are included, the use of this' data will be. When lJ specifically noted in section V. g ! l l Section VI, titled HISTORICAL DATA, contains statistics from a 3 V-4 i
- I
.--e . - ~ . ~ . - - , - - , ~ , , , - - - - r-,-,rw. - - , - - , - - - - - - - - - - - - - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - * - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
_--'y'- l pr evious \l impact ofenvironmental sampl scrutiny of plant operation ing. g \ discerned. past analytical on the The pr ocess of sensit Due data, a envir to i improv e ,ivities, as the tool onment determining the data by whichincludes the example, envir minimum dcomparisonsstate is in change in of-the artconstan trends are standards.onmental samplesetection some detection analytical cases would becapabilities difficult. for th capabilities e For analyses consider d unaccepte 1969 of able by curr ent V-5
'x l
l g BAH the 1989 analytica two theg l it sampled during 4, in Section IV, l s obtained at media a A. water were used for the Tables 1 through aquatic /lakeFish samplesdesigna Off-ego l results 1989 sampling for theprogram.The transectare served as l NM on-site locations. sampling in the therefore, locationscollected and, on-sitesamples were 00) area g< of site (off-site Harbor from the inlet canals #2, J. control samples. collected Unit In g were#1, Nine Mile PointSteam Station.of samples sample p water Unit Oswego The Lake the I Nine Mile PointN.P .P . , lant and routine also obtained. was samples, a location. FitzPatrick the control an area addition to power pdrinking served as water inlet existing obtained in city Oswego Station samples were to have suitable Steam Oswego sediment which provedup which was an area site from Shoreline up. downstream from theand was a physical make coll value The control samplesimilar physical make recreation for sampling. site with a upstream from the V-6 mw
- ~ . . . . . . . . . . ~
4 i I l previous environmental sampling. The process of detemining the impact of plant operation on the environment includes the l scrutiny of past analytical data, a tool by which trends are discerned. Due to the constant change in analytical as state-of-the-art detection capabilities lg sensitivities, improve, data comparisons is in some cases difficult. For
- example, minimum detection capabilities for the 1969 analyses of ig environmental samples would be considered unacceptable by current standards, iI
!I !I i I iI !I
- I .
.I I 3 I lI
- I
!n V-5
- g i
. . . , _ . ~ , . - _ . . , , . . - . . . . , .
-l j A. SURFACE WATER (LAKE) PROGRAM g>
Tables 1 through 4, in Section IV, list the 1989 analytical g results for the aquatic / lake water media sampled during the 1989 sampling program. Fish samples were obtained at two g on-site locations. The transect designations used for the 5 on-site sampling locations are NMPP (02) and JAF (03). 'Off- , site samples were collected in the vicinity of the Oswego l. Harbor (off-site -
- 00) area and, therefore, served as :
control samples. , l
- Lake water samples- were' collected from the inlet canals of gi Nine Mile Point Unit #1, Nine Mile Point Unit #2, J. A.
FitzPatrick N.P.P., and the Oswego Steam Station. In addition to power plant: samples, a routine sample' of the r Oswego city drinking water inlet was also obtained.- The g i Oswego Steam Station served as the control location. 5-l Shoreline sediment samples were obtained in an area downstream from the site which proved to have existing l-recreation value and a physical make up which was suitable for sampling. The control sample was collected from an area l upstream from the site with a similar physical makeup. I-I I' I L I-I I' V-6 I:
s - 1. SHORELINE SEDIMENT - TABLE IV-1 Shoreline sediment samples are routinely collected twice per [ year along the shoreline of Lake Ontario. Samples are collected from one indicator location (Sunset Beach), and one control location (Lang's Beach). Three sample collections were made during 1989. The first ' sample collection was made in April at both the indicator and
}
control locations. A recollection of the April indicator g location was made in May. The sample- recollection was made L to verify sample results from the April collection. The third shoreline sample collection was made in October 1989 ' at both the indicator and the control locations. The results of these sample collections are presented in Table IV-1. Several radionuclides were detected in sediment samples { using gamma spectral analysis. Three of these radionuclides were naturally occurring. K-40 was detected at both the control location and indicator location. The results ranged from 14.3 pCi/g (dry) to 18.0 pCi/g (dry) at the indicator location, and 13.3 pCi/g1(dry) to 13.7 pct /g (dry) at the control location. Concentrations of AcTh-228 '
.[ and Ra-226, which are also naturally occurring, were detected at both the indicator and control locations.
l i A fourth radionuclide, Cesium-137, was present in seven of j the eight indicator samples collected for the 1989 program. Cs-137 was not present in the two control samples which were ! collected in conjunction with the indicator samples. The initial indicator sample- collected on April 24, 1989 l contained a Cs-137 concentration of 0.32 pCi/g (dry). This sample location was recollected to verify the presence of the measured Cs-137 concentration. A total of six samples were collected from the Sunset Beach location on May 24, 1989. Five of the six samples contained measurable levels V-7
. O
i 6 Ii of.Cs-137. The concentrations ranged from a minimum of 0.10 l; pCi/g (dry) to a maximum of 0.34'pCi/g (dry), with a mean of l 0.23 pCi/g (dry). The fall sample from the. Sunset Beach gl location contained a Cs-137 concentration of 0.25 pCi/g ' (dry). As .noted above, neither the spring or fall samples g collected from the control locations showed the presence of 3
- Cs-137.
The source of the Cs-137 detected in the indicator shoreline I sediment samples is difficult to fully evaluate. principle source of Cs-137 released to the environment has The l been the atmospheric testing =of nuclear. weapons. Cs-137 and lI Cs-134 are both produced in fission reactors, but only Cs- ; 4 137 is found in weapons test debris. significantly shorter half-life, detected concentrations of
.Since Cs-134 has a g; Cs-137 attributable to plant operations (e.g., recent-g releases), should be accompanied by Cs-134. An absence of such collaborating Cs-134- concentrations, indicates that the g, presence of Cs-137 in these samples is not distinguishable u-from the existing. background and should be attributed primarily to weapons testing. When Cs-137 is released to l',
the environment, it exhibits a appreciable reconcentration . in fresh water ecosystems. Bottom and shoreline sediments in a fresh water ecosystem can act as ar. ion exchange media l which will concentrate soluble forms of Cs-137.. These g i sediments over time, may become a source of Cs-137 when they are resuspended during periods of increased turbulence. It g is most likely that the concentrations of Cs-137 in the , . indicator samples is the- result of Cs-137 inventory from g past atmospheric testing. The fact that Cs-137 was not 5 detected in the control samples maybe the direct result of the sediment type found at this location and the amount of bottom sediment available from resuspention from the off-l shore area. Due to the fact that few shoreline regions in the general area of the site (indicator and control) contain l ! sediment and/or sand, it is difficult to obtain control g-
- V-8 I,
[ samples which are representative of the physical and ; (' chemical characteristics of the indicator samples. This l inconsistency can further complicate evaluation of ; I analytical results.
. 1 The radiological impact of the Cs-137 measured in the j
[- shoreline sediment can be evaluated on the basis of. dose to f man. In the case of shoreline sediments, the critical ,j ( pathway is direct radiation to the whole body and skin. J Using the parameters found in Regulatory Guide 1.109, the ' projected dose to man in mrem per year can be calculated. The following assumptions can be used in calculating the - dose to man: J o A teenager spends 67 hours per year at the beach area or on the shoreline. o The sediment has a mass of 40 kg/m2 (dry) to a depth of I l 2.5 cm. i o The shoreline width factor is 0.3. I ( o The maximum measured concentration of 0.34 pCi/g (dry) { l remains constant for the year, y l Using these conservative parameters, the resulting dose to the maximum 1y exposed individual (teenager) would be 0.0012 ' mrem / year to the whole body and 0.0013 mrem / year to the , skin. This calculated dose is very small and is insignificant when compared to natural background doses. No long term historical data exists to compare the shoreline sediment indicator sample results with previous results. The Technical Specification Requirement to collect and-analyze shoreline sediment was first initiated in the second half of 1985. A review of sample results for 1985 - 1988 indicated only naturally occurring- radionuclides present in shoreline sediment. The inventory of nuclide identified in V-9
Il 1 l l 1989 is identical to that seen in 1985 through 1988. concentrations for. these radionuclides are consistent with 1989 l j previous deteminations, g, 1 Table VI-1 and VI-2 illustrates Historical Environmental for g shoreline sediment samples. 5 Il Il IE
- I I
I; lo I I L I I, 1 I V-10 I I;
i L , 2. FISH - TABLE IV-2. L Fish samples are ~ collected twice during the year, once in ' the spring and again in the fall. Collections were made utilizing gill nets at one off-site location greater than ; p five miles from the site (Oswego Harbor area), and at two l ' on-site locations in the vicinity of ~ the Nine Mile Point Unit #1 (02), and the James A. FitzPatrick (03) generating ;[ facilities. - The Oswego Harbor samples served as control
~
i ; samples while the NMP (02) and JAF (03) samples served as ! ( indicator samples. . Samples were processed using edible - portions only and were analyzed for gamma emitters. Data is ( presented in the ANALYTICAL RESULTS section of the report on ; Table IV-2. ! t A total of 24 fish samples were collected for the 1989 sample program. Analysis of the 1989 fish samples indicated ' i detectable concentrations of radionuclides related to past weapons testing and natural origins .(naturally occurring). I Small concentrations of Cs-137 were detected in 15 of 24 or , approximately 60% of the fish samples collected- from both l the on-site and off-site locations. The ratio of positive detection to total samples collected was approximately equal ' for both the indictor and control locations. The same ratio of positive detection to total samples. collected was also consistent with results from 1988. Detectable concentrations of K-40, a naturally occurring radionuclide, , were found in all fish samples collected for the 1989 1, program. ( Spring fish collections were comprised of three separate - species and nine individual samples. The two species ! representing one feeding type, lake trout and brown trout, l are highly predacious and feed on significant quantities of smaller fish such as smelt, alewife, and other predacious species. White sucker samples, which represents bottom feeding species, were collected at each of the three sample-l V-11
, . _ . . , , , ~ , . . . . _ ._r. - . , , - . . . . , - - , . - . . . . , , , , . , . . . . , _ . . . , - , . , , , . _ . . ~ , . , . . , . , . - , , - . - - - - - . -
l 0 transets (control / indicator). g Cs-137 was detected in four of the six indicator samples and in two of the four control samples collected in the g spring samples. Cesium-137 concentrations were not detected a j in any of the three white sucker. samples. Positive ' detections of Cs-137 were found in each of the six trout ! samples. The lack of Cs-137 in the white sucker samples may i be indicative of their feeding habits and level in the lj aquatic food chain. The control samples contained a mean Cs-137 concentration that was slightly higher than' the ' g' , indicator sample mean concentration. The Cs-137 l concentrations detected in 1989 samples are not- g significantly different from past years and are considered ; be representative .of base line or background to concentrations of Cs-137 found in Lake Ontario fish. Cs-137 gl 5 in the spring indicator samples . ranged from 0.020 pCi/g (wet) to 0.043 pCi/g (wet) and averaged 0.033 pCi/g. l' Control samples-for this same period ranged from 0.032 pCi/g (wet) to 0.043 pCi/g (wet)- and averaged 0.038- pCi/g (wet). K-40 was detected in all of the spring samples collected. l K-40 is a naturally occurring radionuclide and is not related to power plant operations. Detectable g' concentrations of K-40 in the indicator samples ranged from 3.99 to 5.26 pCi/g (wet) and 3.99 to 5.14 pCi/g (wet) for g. the control samples. Radium-226, a naturally occurring g radionuclide was the only other gamma emitter detected in 5 the spring fish samples. I> Fall sample collections were comprised of five separate species and fifteen individual samples. Samples of lake l' trout, brown trout, small mouth bass, walleye and. white sucker were collected at each of two on-site sample j locations (NMP and JAF) and one off-site sample location (OswegoHarborarea). Samples were collected by gill net in L September and October and included two species not found in g the spring collection (walleye and smallmouth bass). V-12 I
L i Cs-137 was detected in six of the ten fall indicator samples I and in three of the five control samples. White sucker, j the one species of bottom feeder collected at all three l sample locations during the fall season, showed no l detectable Cs-137, again .most likely a result of the L different feeding habits for this species which places it : lower in the food chain than the other predacious species represented in the sample collection. " '. 2 The absences of Cs-137 in the white sucker samples was also ~ [ demonstrated in the 1988 and 1987 sample results. l K-40 was detected in all of the fall fish samples collected. Detectable concentrations of K-40 in the indicator samples ; i ranged from 3.65 to 6.05 pCi/g (wet) and. 4.02 to 5.12 pCi/g (wet) for the control samples. As noted for the spring ( sample collection, Ra-226 was the only other radionuclide detected in fish sample collected in the fall. r A review of historical data shows that since 1980 the Cs-137 i concentration in Lake Ontario fish, in the vicinity of the l Nine Mile Point promitory, has remained stable with a' slight i downward trend. The average Cs-137 concentration in fish for this historical time period is- 0.041 pCi/g (wet) including both the indicator and control results. During ; this time period of 1980-1989, the ' measured concentration for the indicator and control sample locations demonstrate , little significant difference in measured concentrations. , l This fact would strongly indicate that the source of Cs-137 found in the fish population is most likely residual cesium: l from the weapon testing. The specific data for '1989 is , consistence with data- from the previous five years. A review of the graph of historical concentration (figure 6, l section -VII) demonstrates the relative stakility of Cs-137 l concentrations from 1980 to the present. Figure 6 also-shows that the current level of Cs-137 in the indicator fish l V-13 i
samples has. decreased significantly since 1976 when a peak concentration of 1.4 pCi/g (wet) was detected. The current ll l mean indicator concentration of 0.034 pCi/g (wet) shows a decrease in concentration from 1976 by a factor of gj ' approximately 40. Control sample results have also decreased from a ' maximum level of 0.12 pCi/g (wet) in 1976 g 5 l: to a level of 0.034 pCi/g (wet) in.1989. Fish results for the 1989 indicator samples show a decrease in. concentration l;, by a factor of 2 when compared to preoperational data. -j I' The general decreasing trend for. Cs-137' is most probably a j result of the cesium being removed from the active 'g ! l environment. A significant portion of Cs-137 detected since- l 1978 in fish is a result of weapons' testing fallout, and l g'< the general downward trend in concentrations will continue as a function of inventory reduction through natural processes such as ion exchange in sediment and radiological decay of the cesium. There was .no significant effect from 1986 Chernobyl Nuclear Plant accident since 1987 relative to Cs-137 results in fish samples. The Chernobyl accident may l have increased the Cs-137 inventory slightly.in the area but the increase in fish Cs-137 concentration is most likely due l to natural variables, g! Lake Ontario fish are considered an important food source g, by many, therefore, fish is an integral part of the human - 5 > l food chain. Based on the importance of fish in the local L diet, a reasonable estimate of dose to man can be ! calculated. Assuming that the adult consumes 21.0 kg of fish per year (Regulatory Guide _1.109, maximum exposed. age l' group) and the fish consumed contains an average Cs-137 concentration of 0.034 pCi/g (wet) (annual mean result of-indicator samples for 1989), the ' whole body dose received l would be 0.051 mrem per -year. The critical organ in this g case is the liver which would receive a calculated dose of ; 0.078 mrem per year. The calculated Cs-137 whole body and g V-14 . I-
n . critical organ doses are conservative doses associated with L consumption-of fish from the Nine Mile-Point area (indicator samples)l, No radiological decay is assumed- for the'- calculation of- . doses. The whole - body and critical organ - doses can be calculated. for the consumption of fish from th'e control locations: as well; --In 1989' thej mean control value-is. equal to the mean indicator which would result in annual dose which-is. equal to that calculated above.- [_ [ 4 In summary, the whole body. and critical - organ doses q calculated as. a result of consumption of fish is small.-
-i Doses received from the. consumption-of indicator and- control -l sample fish are approximately the same. Doses- from both:
samplei groups Lare considered -to be background -exposure. A? graph of past -Cs-137 concentrations can be- found in Section1 j VII and Historical Data Tables 'are included in' Section VI. l 1 1 i l 1 1 l V-15 -1
Il
- 3. SURFACE WATER - TABLES IV-3 AND IV-4 (j
hrface water samples are' taken from the respective inlet g'
.anals of- the James A. FitzPatrick .N.P.P. and Niagara ibhawk's- Oswego Steam . Station. The FitzPatrick facility g reasoves water from Lake Ontario on a continuous -basis and EL>
generally represents a "down-current" sampling point - from the Nine. Mile Point Unit 1 and Unit 2 facilities.. Oswego Steam Station inlet canal removes water from Lake The_ l Ontario at a point _ approximately 7.6 miles. west of the. ,l}. site. This- "up-current" location -is considered a control location because -of the distance from the site .as well 'as.- g(I the result of the lake current patterns and_. current patterns ' from the Oswego River located nearby (see- Figureo1A)'. Samples from the FitzPatrick facility are. composited from-automatic sampling equipment' which discharges into a . compositing tank. Samples are obtained from: the _ tank monthly and analyzed for gamma emitters. Samples from--the- l-Oswego Steam Station are also composited from automatic sampling equipment which discharge to a -compositing . tank. Samples from this location are: obtained weekly ~and are l composited to form monthly composite samples. samples are analyzed for gamma emitters. Monthly g! A portion of the samples from-each of the locations is saved - and composited to form quarterly composite samples for each calendar quarter. Quarterly composite samples are analyzed for tritium. Gamma spectral analysis was performed on 24 . monthly composite samples (two locations) required by the RETS. With the exception of tritium, only two radionuclides were-l : detected in samples from the'five 1ocations over the course g l V-16 I Il
. of the11989 Sampling Program. Both these radionuclides are .! t naturally-occurring and are not plant related. { I K-40' was ~ detected intermittently- in both -Technical Specification required- intake canals. The James A. FitzPatrick -inlet canal _ samples showed K was detected in ten of theitwelve: monthly samples and ranged from 48 to 310 , pCi/ liter. K-40 in the Oswego Steam Station inlet canal 'was .. detected in ten of the twelve. samples and ranged from 38 to- , 236 pCi/ liter. - The. Nine Miler Point Unit #1 Inlet Canal, , Unit #2 Inlet Canal, and the - Oswego City water samples-showed K-40 detections in all of.the twelve monthly samples ~h1 (:- from' each location. The K-40 concentrations for; these j samples, ranged 31-257 - pCi/11ter, 45-262 pCi/11ter,' and 57-275' pCi/ liter respectively. j Ra-226L was also detected intermittently 'in both locations required by-l Technical { Specifications and at the other' optional sample locations. Tritium samples _ are quarterly sampics -that were 'a- composite i of the appropriate monthly samples. Tritium was. detected in j six of the eight samples.-taken at the two locations required j by Technical Specifications. Tritium concentrations for the-James A. FitzPatrick inlet canal ranged from :135LpCi/ liter ' to 288 pCi/ liter and showed a mean concentration of 225 j pCi/ liter. Both the indicator and control sample results ! for the fourth quarter had an LLD valueJof <172 - pCi/ liter. ! The Technical Specification control location- (Oswego ' S4eam- 3 Station inlet canal) showed tritium results- which ranged { from 143 pC1/ liter to 217 pCi/ liter with' a-mean' 4 concentration of 186 pCi/ liter. Tritium was also detected' ' in nine of the twelve optional samples taken, with the exception being the fourth quarter results which hadLan LLD ! value of 172 pCi/ liter. These particular sample analyses indicated that the tritium concentration was below the Lower-Limit of Detection (LLD) or the sensitivity of the analyses. V-17
{' A1 summary of _ tritiumJresults iof the 19891 sample: program 11s listed below: [' Sample Tritium Concentration pCi/ liter Location Minimum- -Maximum Mean-(Annuall . -l-JAF Inlet 135 288-Oswego-Steam Inlet 143-
;224 g1 217 186 NMP #1' Inlet <172 -302 232 g' NMP #2 Inlet :135 247 203 5-City Water Intake. <172 248 243. H Ia A review of current data sho'ws that the tritium -
concentrations ~.in the lake-are consistent between locations.. l~ The- source of tritium- detected in the lake water.. is past testing 'of. thermonuclear devices in the atmosphere. It has 'g ! been estimated that in the early .1960s_ the concentration of tritium of surface water in the United States was:as high as 4000 pCi/ liter. The levels of tritium in the environmental - has been . reduced 'over the years through physical process to gg the levels that are currently being measured.- The - tritium E. > concentration measured during the 1989 -samplingeprogram:are
-ll considered'_to be-background : levels and are not'the -result of .
the. operation- of the nuclear facilities at the Nine Mile Point Site. .lI' i Review of historical surface water- dataishows no 1ong -term g1 impact ~ from operations of the power _ plants on the surface water. Cs-137. results from .1979 through 1988 shows that g '1
'this radionuclide was detected only- once at- the control location during 1979, at a concentration of-- 2.5 pci/ liter.
Cs-137 at the indicator location (JAF inlet canal) was E^ a detected only once, in 1982; at a concentration of 0.43 ' pCi/ liter. The 1979 control sample result is suspect and lR may have been a result of contamination during handling or instrument background since Cs-137 was not detected in the ll, indicator inlet canal. The one positive Cs-137 result from the' indicator location (JAF inlet canal) V-18 during 1982 was ( f
'l ) ] detected in a January composite sample and may have been a , result of inlet canal tempering (the addition of discharge ] water to the inlet canal) or instrument background. Cs-137 was not detected during 1989 in surface water samples. Review of previous environmental data for K-40 showed that the detectable concentrations found during 1989 were , representative of concentrations found during 1979-1988. Gamma isotopic results for the 1989 surface water samples were consistent with results from the previous five years. No plant related radionuclides were detected in surface water samples collected during the period of 1984 - 1989. ( No comparison can be made with preoperational data due to j the fact that surface water sampling was not initiated until 1978. [ l Previous annual mean results for tritium at the indicator sample location (FitzPatrick inlet canal) have been variable since 1976. Sample results were reviewed from 1976 through 1989 and showed a maximum annual mean value of 641 pCi/ liter (1982) and a minimum annual mean value of 225 pCi/ liter (1989). The annual mean tritium result at the indicator location for 1989 was 225 pCi/ liter. Mean tritium results of the control location (Oswego Steam Station) cannot be evaluated with regard to long term historical data since sampling was only initiated at this location in 1985. The maximum annual mean tritium value for the control station for the period of 1985-1989 was 373 pCi/ liter. The minimum annual mean value for this same time period was 186 pCi/ liter. Some idea of the variability of historical control sample data can be obtained by a review of previous data from the City of Oswego drinking water samples. The drinking water samples are likely to be representative of the current control location because of the effects of the distance, predominate lake currents, and V-19
3bi bj
)
the discharge'of the Oswego ~ River. Therefore, this previous- {, sample- data. represents acceptable control sample data _. for-evaluation purposes. The Oswego _ City .Lwater intake is. I1 u 1ocated in. the same general vicinity as the Oswego Steam l Station inlet. l!
. Annual mean tritium'_ results- fram nrevious city water samples from- 1976 to 1989. show that- the. tritium l[ -
concentrations have decreased. 'The maximum annual 4 mean a concentration was found . in 1976 (652 pCi/ liter) 'and the
,l minimum in 1982 (165 pCi/ liter). The 1989 City water annual mean results was calculated to -be 243 pCi/ liter. .Meanc g annual results from 1979-1988' have ' remained: relatively ,
consistent. The 1985, 1986,, 1987 and 1988 annual mean g' e tritium results for the Oswego Steam Station were - 287, 373, 210, and 320 'pci/ liters respectively. These.- results 'were slightly higher than; the . drinking. water . samples' (with the exception of 1987), but were within the natural _ variability l range. Tritium results- for the 1989 surface _ water samples l' were consistent with results from = the.' previous' five years ' for both the indicator and control -locations. The tritium-concentrations for the period. of- 1984'-'1988- range-from 205
-l_
L pCi/1 to 373 pCi/1 for : the control ' and 282 pCi/1 to 530 pCi/l for the indicator location. The mean 1989 tritium concentration for the control and indicator locations were 1 186 pC1/1 and 225 pCi/l respectively. The 1989 tritium j results show no significant variation from preoperational data. l~ l l The impact, as expressed as a dose to man, is not eval'uated because no plant related radionuclides were detected in l surface water samples with the exception' of_ tritium. Any impact associated with the fluctuation of tritium levels is l' considered to be background and not a result of operations g at the site. See Historical Data, Section VI and Annual Tritium Results, Graph Section VII. V-20 t l'l
4 B . -- TERRESTRIAL PROGRAM r L The terrestrial program consists of samples ~ from four.
~ environmental: pathways. -These' pathways are:
[l o Airborne particulate and.radiciodines- {- o Direct radiation' o -Cow / milk 'O (= and o Food' products [ Tables 5 through 14 represent the ' analytical results =for the- -! terrestrial samples collected for-the 1989 reporting: period.. j 1 {! t l i i i V-21
I s1. AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA ~--TABLES IV-5-and IV-6 l Tables -IV-5 and IV-6 contain the results for the weekly air j particulate gross beta analysis for a. total of:nine off-site and six ~ on-site sample- locations. Five'of the nine off-site locations are required . by- Technical Specifications. These- I sample - locations - are R-1, R-2,.- R-3, - R-4, -(all located near: the . site boundary) and. R-5 (located at a-- control location g[ 5 beyondL any significant influence from .the site).- Data contained on Tables IV-5 and IV-6 L also shows the ' results l.ai f from other optional air sampling locations not required by_ - - the RETS.- These locations are designated:as D-1 on-site, G s on-site, H on-site, :I on-site, J on-site, K j on-site, D-2 lll . off-site, E off-site, F off-site, and G off-site loc'ations, A total of 52 samples were collected from the control-gl location R-5 and 208 indicator samplesc were collected from gl indicator locations R-1, R-2, R-3, and - R-4 during 1989. e ; The gross beta analysis requires: that samples are counted a minimum of- twenty-four hours after collection to allow for the decay of naturally occurring, radionuclides ~ .with short -l. half-lives. The average yearly - gross - beta- indicator ! concentration was 0.017 pCi/m3 in:1989. The average yearly control concentration was -0.017' pCi/m3. for the same time l ' period. The minimum, maximum, and average gross beta results for sample locations- required' by Technical g? Specification are: Location ** Minimum
- Maximum
- Averace*
R-1 0.007 0.041 0.017L 'l j R-2 0.008 0.033 0.017-R-3 0.007- 0.041 0.017 g. R-4 0.009 0.038 -0.018 R-5 (control) 0.007 0.039 0.017 g
* - Concentration in pCi/m3 i
** - Locations required by the Technical Specifications k V-22 I I.
1 I The small fluctuations observed in the general gross beta activity can be attributed to changes in the environment, ) especially seasonal changes. The concentration of naturally occurring radionuclides in the lower levels of the ] atmosphere directly above land areas are affected by 1.ime f related processes such as wind direction, precipitation, snow cover, soil temperature, and soil moisture content. With the exception of the 1986 sample data, which was t effected by the Chernobyl accident, the general trend in air particulate gross beta activity has been one of decreasing - activity since 1978 as indicated by the graph below. JAMES A. FITZ P ATRIC K N.P.P. AIR PARTICULATE GROSE BETA
- 0. 20 m 0.18 1978 & lo t e 1980-otmospherte tests !
, 1986 Chernobyt occicent 1974 pre-op for SAFNPP O. 14
- 0.12 -
N o. i o - : 0.08 - ! ! ct - 0 06 - - -
, I LEGENO Eh?Sf 0 0* q l l ,,
['~ ' l i i l l ' lll E EE 2 S %4S7 tem %4S%l S8fselS8toeh'isetS8?see The trend for the previous five years is a sub set of the overall decline in gross beta concentrations, again with the exception of 1986 which was effected by the Chernobyl accident. The 1989 results are the lowest mean concentrations measured when compared to the previous five years for both the indicator and control locations. The 1989 air particulate filter gross beta results are a factor of 20 less than the concentrations measured in 1969 which is V-23
l L L considered to-- be preoperational results for the ' site.- The; l:j; l- reean annual gross beta concentration at theicontrol: station j has decreased from: a maximum- concentration of: 0.165 pCi/m3 g L in 1981 to 0.017 pCi/m3' in 1989. The mean- annual concentration ifor the indicator stations ranged fromi a g maximum of 0.151 pCi/m3 1n 1981 to a minimum of 0.'017
~
r o pCi/m3 in.1989'. For both the indicator stations and control , j stations, .the gross _ beta concentration- during -1974:L to L 1982' ..j fluctuated as a result of fallout' from the detonation ~of thermonuclear weapons. The ,mean - annual :results for- the: -l years' 1983, 1984,; 1985, 1987; and 1988 from -both the l indicator andi control . locations :have been- similar and _ l1
- ranged from 0.017 to 0.026 pCi/m3 This l level of activity- 1 appears to be baseline . range. The 1986 annual mean result was-l0.039 pCi/m3 for both the indicator and control g'
stations. -This concentration 11s slightly higher than- 1983- g. 85 and- 1987-1989' levels, and. is . attributed to fallout from . E the Chernobyl accident.
~ Historical data and graphic representations of f air - _
particulate gross beta activity are presented in Sections VI l'j and VII respectively, g' ID g9 I! i l. I g V-24 l'
,r r- e.w-, w --y y 1 vr --
) 2. MONTHLY PARTICULATE COMPOSITES (GAMMA EMITTERS) - TBL. IV-9 Weekly air particulate samples were grouped by location to i fonn monthly composite samples. The monthly composite samples required by the Radiological Environmental Technical Specifications (RETS) include R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, and R-5. Other sample locations not required by the Technical , Specifications for which analytical results are presented _ include D-1 on-site, G on-site, H on-site, I on-site, J on-site, K on-site, D-2 off-site, E off-site, F off-site, and G off-site locations. The results of all monthly composite samples are included on Yable 9. - j The resul ts for the monthly composite samples showed positive detections for Be-7, K-40, Ra-226 and AcTh-228. Each of these radionuclides are naturally occurring. Be-7 .. was detected in each of the monthly composite samples from all locations required by Technical Speci fications. Be-7 concentrations ranged from 0.051 to 0.103 pCi/m3 for the indicator locations (R-1, R-2, R-3, and R-4) . The control location results (R-5) showed Be-7 concentrations ranging from 0.057 to 0.101 pCi/m3 K-40 was found intermittently in the Technical Specification required monthly composite samples. Historically, the naturally occurring radionuclides Ra-226, K-40, and Be-7 have shown fluctuations that are representative of naturally changing conditions. No significant trends were noted during 1989. No plant related radionuclides were detected in any of the required or optional off-site air sampling locations. Two plant related activation product radionuclides were detected at three optional on-site air sampling stations in 1989. Zinc-65 (Zn-65) was detected in October at the H on-site and I on-site sampling locations and in November at the H on-V-25
E site, I on-site and J on-site sampling: locations. _ Cobalt-60 -(Co-60) was; also: detected Jin- the H ,on-site November gj 1 composite. below:- The detected- concentrations- are - summarized g' 8
'l; COMPOSITE- .
AIR SAMPLING LOCAIION SAMPLE 'NUCLIDE CONCENTRATION:IN 10-JpCi/m3- : :, PERIOD- - j H ON-SITE I,0N-SITE 'J ON-SITE: ; October. Zn - 4.7 1.3 2. 5~+1.1 : <2.6 E-
-Co-60' t- < 1.1 ' < 1. 7 - <1.1 .
51 November Zn-65 '27.312.4 '5.4il.2- 2.9+0.9 - t C6 -60 1.210.6 <0 9: <0 9 . The- presence of Zn-65 or;: Co was not detected in ..any of EH the other air monitoring . stations, including the control
]
- station during this same sample period. -l 1
- An evaluation of the presence- of :Zn-651and Co-60 .in. the monthly air composite samples was' made. \The weekly samples .
which :make up the monthly composites were: . analyzed separately. It was determined that the- detected activity-l-l . was present in the- October composite. on a sample whic!h represents the sample period designated as week No. 41 {l
-(10/09/89 -
10/16/89). The -detected ' activity in the November composite was on two filters which trepresent the- { ' sample periods designated- as week 4 :No. 46 '(11/13/89-11/20/89) .and .week No. .47 (11/20/89 - 11/27/89). Meteorological data was reviewed for these sample periods- g and it was determined that wind patterns during this time- B were such that the- H,. I and J on-site sampling locations could-be affected by plant effluents. l Plant effluent records were also reviewed for the sample j periods. The evaluation of effluent isotopic measurement showed that Zn-65 and Co-60 were present in plant effluents, g V-26 i
4 Based on Lthe- evaluation of-~ meteorological idata and plant- 1 effluents, the presence of -Zn and Co-60 in the October-
- and November air particulate filter composite samples was
[ the result of- operations at the FitzPatrick Plant. 4 Due : to . the - fact that Zn-65 'and' Co-60 were not -detected - at i sample locations outside the site boundary, the dose to man jl 1s not significant.. ' For the- purpose of evaluation, the dose: .
;j to' man canbe: calculated based on the measured l concentrations - of' Zn and ! Co-60 ' at the on-site 1ocations !
[ using the methodology found iniRegulatory-G'uide.1.109. This' l calculated dose is conservative and is not representative of H [- the dose to man beyond-the site' boundary.but can-be used to- 1 illustrate the significance of .the ' resulting dose: relative:
~
[. to background radiation. Using the inhalation rate for the maximum exposed individuals in-' each Lage group found in Regulatory Guide- 1.109. and the maximum: concentrations ! { measured at the: H -on-site and I on-site.. air sampling stations, the following dose to man was calculated: 1
-AGE-GROUP DOSE-(mremF WHOLE BODY LUNG ADULT 0.00013 0.0029-TEEN 0.00016. 0.0042 "
CHILD 0.00019- -0.0034 The conservative whole body and critical organ (lung) doses calculated as' a result of the Zn-65 and Co-60 air-concentration measured on-site are very low when comparedLto
. background. Dose to man in the general area of:the site is t approximately 60 mrem / year. Because no airborne concentrations of Zn-65 or Co-60 were detected off-site, the actual dose to man from these effluents is probably zero but in any case misch less than that calculated.
V-27
A. review of . historical data shows that1Zn-65 has not been -( , detected in_ air samples collecte'd and" analyzed l ~during the previous years. -. Historical- data' on Co-60 shows that ~ positive detections of this radionuclide were made in~ eight t of. the last thirteen . years (1977-1989).- .Co-60 was. detected g '. in each of the; years from _1977 through 1984 :at both the E. indicator andt control locations, with the; exception of 1980 when Co-60 was not: detected- atothe control location. The .l,.
.Co-60 concentration in air particulate . samples ; has .;
fluctuated -as a ' result of' previous weapons: testing.-_ ' Co-60 , l ;' average con'centrations at:- the: indicator. And control locations - fromi:1977. to 1978 decreased from -a'pproximately
-0.0176 to 0.0022 pCi/m3 Average ' concentrations decreased gi '
significantly during 1979 and 1980?whenicompared to- 1977. These results where 0.007 to O'.0016 pC1/m3 respectively. In -1981 'and 1982. the average:Co-604 concentrations decreased to 0.0007: and 0.0006 pCi/m3 Average indicator.and~ control concentrations were approximately! equal duringi1979 to 1982. l The' 1983 -indicator mean- Co concentration' was 0.0007 pCi/m3 or slightly greater than. the 1982 concentration. The l" 1983 control mean Co-60 concentration was also'0.0007 pCi/m3 g; which was slightly greater than' 1982- control results. As noted'in previous annual reports, however, a portion of the g Co-60 detected .during 1983 was attributed to; contamination during handling of the unused ' filters . prior.-to . installation. g.1 Co-60 was detected during the first _ quarter of 1984 and E-averaged- 0.0008 ' pCi/m3 at the control stations and 0.0012 > pC1/m3 at the indicator stations. However, the.1984 Co-60 l positive results were a -result of contamination during handling and not. a result of operations at the site. The _l~' l general reduction in previous indicator and control Co-60' j concentrations (1981 - 1983) was a result of nuclear decay- (y ; and ecological cycling of Co-60 initially produced .by the l 1980 Chinese weapons test. Co-60 was, not detected during j l 1985 - 1986 in air particulate samples from either indicator I or control locations. During 1987, Co-60 was detected once a ! 3 V-28 L lI
at. a concentration- of c 0.0017 ' pCi/m3~ at: 'an optional air monitoring station.- .However, thei Co-60. detectedL during- ) p 1987 was a result of contamination from improper handling of? the sample, and not as a result. of -effluents from the - site. i This evaluation - is contained in the 1987s annual report. "
-Results1from- 1988 -showed that Co-60 was not : detectedJat either control or indicator sample locations. .
LA further review of historical-data shows that-Cs-137 is thel-fission product radionuclide most frequently ;det'ected in the air particulate filter composites. Cs-137 was - not
, []j however detected- during- the 1989 sampling _ program.- j Historically, Cs-137 has been variable during theJpast! and.
l has been present- a number nof times :in . air particulate- ; samples since 1977. DuringD1977, both on-site (indicator) [ ] and off-site- (control), Cs-137 average concentrations' were approximately ' equal and averaged. 0.039 pCi/m3.- Cs-137' average concentrations -at the- indicator and control , locations . decreased during.1978 !and L1979 to"0.0017 =and-0.0013 pCi/m3 respectively. Average-. concentrations ' during 1980 and 1981 were approximately equal at ; control' and' indicator- 1ocations. Cs-137 during 1980;was approximately-equal to 1979 and increased slightly in- 1981 from -1979 level s. The - 1980 and 1981 ' average concentrations were - 0.0013 and 0.0015 pCi/m3 respectively. The 1mean 1982 I concentration for Cs-137 decreased to _0.0004 pCi/m3 The 1983 mean Cs-137 concentration for the indicator and. control. composite samples were 0.0002-and 0.0002 pCi/m3 which was a reduction from 1982 results. Cs-137 was not detected during. .i 1984 in any of the indicator or control air particulate composite samples. The reduction in Cs-137 results is attributed to nuclear decay and ecological cycling of Cs-137 : initially produced by the 1980 Chinese weapons test. Cs-137 was not detected during 1985 in-air particular samples, but was detected in 1986 due to the fallout from the Chernobyl accident. Cs-137 was not detected during the 1987, 1988 or V-29 i
'gl
'1989: air monitoring: program. Il
- Prior to 1983;andL1984, several radionuclides were detected- l:
that were: associated with the 1980 Chinese weapons test and-other weapons tests _ prior to 1980.- These radionuclides 1were; j not . detected. during- 1984 .and 1985 ' as a - result of nuclear decay -and natural envi ronmental - processes. These include ' Zr-95, Ce-141',.Nb-95,.Ce-144h Mn-54,.Ru-103, Ru-106'and-Ba- 1 140.. In addition, La-140.was detected once during 1983 'and _'
. infrequently - during 1978 and; 1981'. La-140.was not detected- ,
during119841and -1985. However, ' La-140~, Nb-95, ' Ru-103,. Ru-
'.l
.106,: and I-131: were detected in air ; particulate' composite samples 'during ' 1986 as' a- result of' the ' fallout from the chernobyl accident. .The above referenced radionuclides were-not detected in- the 1987, 1988 ort ,1989. ' air monitoring.
l program. g Historical data for air. particulate results are presented g in Section VI. Graphic representation of- air _ particulate a composite 'Co-60J and Cs-1371 concentrations are . presented in Section VII. .I. . I g, g L I: IL ; i I: V-30 g'
n ,
- f 3. . AIRBORNE RADI0 IODINE (I-131) - TABLES IV-7 AND IV-8 ;
) Airborne radioiodine is: monitored .at the air sampling stations that are also used to collect air particulate. samples (see :Section- V.3). The air monitoring network is of fifteen sample locations. There are nine y made: up stations considered off-site locations. Of these nine,.five. L are1 required by Technical Specifications and:'are designated.
~
i as:R-1, R-2, R-3, and R-4.. These stations are 1ocated near , o l the site boundary 1 and are ' indicator stations. - A fifth, lL Technical Speci fication - location designated 'as. R is ! located! beyond - any significant influence from the! plant and ' < f 'i s considered a. control location. As noted under the -air j l . particulate gross beta section, . ten additional air sampling . l locations .are maintained :in addition to those irequired by-1
- Technical Specification. Six of these ' stations -are. located' l within-the site' boundary and are designated as1 01'on-site,_G- i h on-site, H .on-site, I on-site, J on-site, 'and K on-si te.
The four_ remaining optional stations are located off-site and are designated as D2 off-site, E off-site; F off-site,_ l and -G off-site. The analytical data for each Lof: these ! sample locations is included in this report. l
- During the 1989 sampling program, airborne radioiodine was '
l not detected in any of the fi fty-two weekly: samples- ! collected at the control _ location . required by? Technical ! Specifications. The LLD values for the control . location [ ranged from <0.006 to <0.030 pCi/m3 Iodine 131'(I-131) has [ been . detected in the past at control locations. During ' 1976, the .mean off-site I-131 concentration averaged- 0.604 i [ pCi/m3 1977 showed :an I-131 concentration that decreased L to 0.323 pCi/m3 and for 1978 the concentration decrea' sed by , j' a factor ' of ten to 0.032 pCi/m3 During 1979 --1981 and- ? ! :- 1983 - 1985, I-131 was not detected. I-131 was detected. once during 1982 at a concentration of 0.039 pCi/m3 [ V-31 1
p k-
~
In 1989 Radioiodine-131 was- not detected in any 'of the 208 - indicator samples required __by -Technical Specifications. I-131 was alsoLnot' detected in any of'the 520: optional samples -gi taken during 1989. The LLD values for thet four indicator g. ; sample locations required by Technica1L Specifications ranged B from 0.005 to 0.039 pC1/m3, A review of historical data' shows that I-131 has been l detected in the -past at -indicator or off-site stations. During 1976, the mean off-site I-131 concentration averaged llj 0.'604 pCi/m3, 1977 .showed an I-131 concentration that decreased to 0.323^ pCi/m3 and for 1978, the concentration j' decreased by a factor:to ten to 0.032-pCi/m3.- During 1979, g; 1980, 1981, 1983, 1984, and -1985, I-131 was not detected. .a_ l I-131 was detected once during - 1982 at a concentration - of . 0.039-pCi/m3, lt : 1-131 has been detected in the past at the on'-site stations-and was detected at a mean concentration of 0.328 and. 0.-309 l1 pCi/m3 - during 1976 and 1977. -The average concentration g> decrease to 0.041 pCi/m3 during' 1978'and was not ?detected during 1979. The 1980-82 average concentrations were 0.013, 0.029, and- 0.016 pCi/m3 which were'-reductions -in view of g; previous I-131 concentrations. During 1983, the mean I-131 g concentration was 0.028 pCi/m3 which represented' a slight u increase compared to .1982. The concentrations detected ' during 1983_at the on-site sample stations were a result of operations at the site. I-131 was not detected in -any of I the 1984 or 1985 on-site samples. I-131 was detected'in-a total of 75 weekly samples collected during the 1986 sample l program. The concentrations detected in 1986 ranged from a minimum of 0.011' pCi/m3 to a maximum of 0.36 pCi/m3 Each l ' of the positive detections .of I-131 in 1986 were a direct ' result of the Chernobyl Nuclear accident. g- i V-32 I I:
J -Thelend -result of the 1989 I-131- sampling effort showed no'- significant- impact';'due to the operation; of the plant..
; During- 1989, I-131 was not detected- in any other LT environmental _ sample media' including milk and green- leafy vegetables.
.c nj
[: , h h o L V-33
l[n (;
- 14. ; DIRECT RADIATION (TLD. ENVIRONMENTAL DOSIMETRYI TABLE-IV-10 l_l
( Thermoluminescent dosimeters: (TLDs)1were: collected and read once. per quarter duringL the 1989 sample year.. The TLD' results are, .for the most part, ' an' average' of. eight' g 7 independent readings at each . location and are reported in' I mrem per standard month. 1 TLDs required by the Technical -Specifications include two TLDs at each location - with! four. independent readings; per: - TLD. TLD.~ results included in Table 11V-10 are comprised of-TLDs required by the Technical Specifications- and special
~
l.L ! interest -TLDs not required by the Technical Specifications, i During 1989, TLDs were ' collected on approximately March _30,
.1989, June 29, 1989, September. 29, 1989 ~ and December 29,_
{ l 1989.
.0verall TLD results are' evaluated by organizing g' environmental TLDs. into fi.ve different groups. These u!1 groups include: (1) on-site .TLDs (TLDs- within the site boundary not - required .by- the Technical = Specifications)', (2) l'!
L site boundary TLDs '(one in each of the sixteen 22 1/2 degree meteorological sectors), _(3) airing? of TLDsifour~_ to five miles from the site in each of the land -based 22 1/2 I degree meteorological sectors, (4) special interest' TLDs in {; areas of' high population density, and (5) control TLDs .in I areas beyond any significant influence of .the generating g' : facilities. Special i nterest TLDs are located. at or near j large industrial sites, schools,: or ' proximal ; towns or gi communities. Control TLDs are~ located to the southwest, u-south, south-southeast, and northeast- of the site at distances of 12.6 to 26.4 miles from the-site. l' Most of the TLDs required by the -Technical Specifications during 1989 were initiated in 1985 as a result of the issue g': of new Technical Specifications by the NRC. Therefore, g these TLDs can only be compared to 1985 - 1989 results. 5 V-34 f _ _ _
- _ _ _ _ - 2 -ut --erw- e=r- r av _ ce u' ' * *1s- w 2 -4mrwb-_.
m e -,rw_ y- --W mw-+*'uw-*+- fwar*-wwe*e e r e +ama *wa--e*,s'e' m 9'
1 Other TLDs which include -several TLDs required by the: Technical. Specifications (i .e., numbers- 7, 14,-15, 18, 23, 49, 56 and 58)' and other 'optionaliTLDs, -can1be- compared to results prior to11985 since these -TLDs were established i prior to 1985. t On-site TLDs are TLDs at special- interest areas and,D withL ll the exception- of TLD numbers 7 and 23, are not; required by; ; the Technical Specifications. These Jare -located, near- the generating facilities and at previous ~or.1 existing. on-site ] l air sampling stations. TLDs located at the: air sampling stations include number 3, 4, 5,- 6, . 7, 23, 24, 25. and: 26. U Thes results for these TLDs are generally consistent with previous : years results although -a = slight increase' was noted- j when compared to : 1988. These- results. ranged from 2.7 to 1 14.5 mrem lper standard month. TLD- #3 is ; located in. the. vicinity of Nine Mile Point Unit 2 and .is between' the Unit /1 facility the FitzPatrick facility.- The results for TLD #3 were approximately double the results of: the other' TLDs during 1989 because of- the : effects from the Unit' 2 and' the' ' FitzPatrick facility. 'Other on-site TLDs include: special interest TLDs located near the- north shoreline- of the -Unit 1, Unit 2 and- FitzPatrick facilities, .but in close proximity 'l to radwaste facilities 'and the Unit I reactor building. These TLDs include number 27, 28, 29,. 30, 31-, 39 and L 47.. Results for these TLDs during 1989 were variable and _ ranged from 6.0 to 42.1 mrem per standard month as a result of- ' activities at the radwaste facilities and 'the operating modes of the generating facilities. Results for- 198L are i consistent the ranges of variability noted in 1988 for TLDs- ~ ' at or near these locations. TLDs in this group ranged up to approximately seven times control TLD results. The-on-site- 1 TLDs are located -i n controlled areas that are not accessible to the general public. These measured doses are not representative of dose measure off-site beyond the site , boundary. V-35 .
L
. Additional on-site TLDs arellocated near the. on-site Energy Information Center. (EIC)L and 'the; associated northeast l 1 l
shoreline. 107. These TLDs include: numbers 18, 103,- :106 and TLDs numbered 103, 106 and 107. are located to the l! L east of the Energy : Center and - to the1 west of - the Unit.1 facility. TLD-number 18.is located on the west side of the gl . EIC. Results during 1989L showed these .TLDs ranged from 3.8 g
- 6.8 mrem per standard month and were slightly. less than u ,
the'1988 results. Slight increases:were'noted in the,second and third quarter results as 'was noted for all; TLDs, ' l' ! including control TLDs. I-Site' boundary TLDs- are required by-. the=? Technical Specifications and are located in. the approximate area of g the site boundary with ~ one in each ' of the sixteen' 22 1/2 degree meteorological sectors. These : TLDs L include numbers - 75, 76, 77, 23, 78, 79, 80, 81=, 82,- 83, 84, 7, 18, 85,c86 and 87. TLD : numbers - 78,.79, 80, 81, 82, 83; 84, 7 and 18 .g. showed results that were consistent.with control TLD:results 5: and ranged from 2.8 to 6.3 mremcper. standard month. Site boundary TLDs during 1989 were' consistent with -1985-1988 li i results. TLD numbers 75, 76, 77, 23, 85,'86;andi87 showed results- that ranged up to three times thes results of control TLDs. These results ranged from 4.2. to 15.4 mrem l per standard month. This latter,grouplof TLDs are located g'! near the lake shoreline (approximately 100 feetL from the l shoreline), but are also located in close proximity of the reactor building and radwaste facilities of Nine' Mile Point gf L linit 1 and Unit 2 reactors and the - radwaste facilities of g [ the FitzPatrick facility. 5 A net site boundary dose can be estimated from-available TLD results and control TLD -results. TLD results from TLDs l ' L located near the site boundary in sectors facing' the land occupied by members of the public- (excluding TLDsonear the l generating facilities and facing Lake Ontario) -are compared g F V-36 1 . In
m i iio control TLD results. - The sit'e: boundary TLDs ' include . numbers l78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83,'84, 7 and'18. Control TLDs include ' numbers - 8, 14, 49, - 110 and 111. NetLsite boundary ; doses: for each quarter in arms ner standard month are as - l follow: 1 Qgatter ' Net Site Boundary Dose
- l 1 +0.4- l 2 +0.1- *
.3 +0.3 ..
4 -0.6L l
-l
- Dose in mrem per standard month j
Site-boundary TLD numbers:75, 76,:77, 23, 85, 86-and-87 were-
- t excluded: from, the -net site boundary doseTcalculation since these TLDs are not representative-of ' doses at areas where a l member of the public may be located.- These areas are near; j the north shoreline which -are in close proximity to the q
-generating ' facilities and - are not accessible to_ _ members of j the public. 1 third group of? environmental- -TLDs are those TLDs The ! located four to five-miles from the siteLin each of the land j based 22.5 degree meteorological . sectors. These TLDs::are 1 required by the Technical Specifications. - At this. distance, TLDs are not present in eight of-the sixteen meteorological ! sectors that are located over Lake Ontario. l 1 Results for this group of TLDs during .1989 ' fluctuated slightly as a result of changing naturally occurring conditions and the different concentrations: of naturally 3 occurring radionuclides in the ground.-at each of the:: locations. These TLDs were established in 19851 and include
-numbers 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94 and 95.. - Results- o fluctuated from 2.5 to 6.8 mrem -.per standard month. These results are generally consistent with control. TLD results-during 1989. Results for this group of TLDs were consistent l
with the 1985 - 1988 results. Results were also consistent V-37 l _____l
e with other off-site TLD results during '1989 and previous to.- 1989. Again, second and- . third: quarter TLD results were-g slightly elevated. along- with - all- other. groups of TLDs q
. including control groups.
fourth group.. of environmental TLDs are those. TLDs-
~
'The located new the site boundary and at special interesti areas such as industrial sites,. schools, . nearby communities, l}
towns, off-site; air sampling stations', thel closest residence to the ' site, and the off-site environmental laboratory. Many .of these' TLDs -are required by 'the Technical- j! Specifications. - Others are' optional .. This group of1TLDs' y g' 9 l include numbers 9, 10, 11, 12,.13, 15, 19,'51, 52, 53; 54, - [ 55, 56, 58,.96, 97, 98, 99,.100,-101, 102, 108:and 109. TLD -- l numbers 108 and >109 are new- TLD locations = that were I
. established durira i.988 and. were' added to: assist; in the evaluation of' the critical residence. Results ranged from l: _
2.1 to 7.0 mrem per standard month. All:.the TLDitesults fI from this group were within the general variation' noted for-the control- TLDs. Results during.1989 -for' TLDs established l , during previous years were consistent with1 results noted for - g.' p those. years. Overall, second and third quarter.TLDLresults ] l for this group- were slightly~ elevated as were other TLD g groups, including the control group.- The fifth group of TLDs- includen those !TLDs considered as control TLDs. These TLDs are required by the Technical Specifications and include number 14 and 49. Optional l: control. locations are TLD' numbers 8, 110 : and ' 111. TLD numbers 110 and 111 were added to the program.during 1988 to -l expand the data base for control TLDs. Results for 1989 i ranged from 2.9 to 6.4 mre per standard month. Results {'j from 1989 were consistent with previous years results. However, an annual average increase was = noted in 1986.- This g increase may have been a result of the Chernobyl ' accident and was not noted during 1987 - 1989. Control TLDs results a 5: V-3F
f Lin 1989 (second and third-quarter) were slightly; elevated as were other TLD groups.- j J f Review of past TLD results reauired by 'the Technical.
'loecifications show that these -TLDs. can be. separated into four groups',, These groups - include site boundary TLDs in-each meteorological sector (16 TLDs total), 'TLDs' located ^j off-site in-each land. based sector at a distance of 4 to 5- l miles -(8 TLDs total),- TLDs located at 'special interest ]
areas (6 TLDs total) and TLDs 1ocated at control 1ocations ^ { (2 TLDs total). As noted..previously,- since the present h Technical- Specifications- became effective in 1985,. these ~ TLDs, for the most part, can - only be evaluated _ for 1985-- ; 1988. TLDs located at the site boundary averaged 6.2 mrem. per standard month during'.1985. During 1986, 1987^and.1988 site boundary TLDs averaged- 7.0, 6.1, .and~.6.4 -mrem- per standard month respectively.- As ' noted . previously, this' group ' of i TLDs can fluctuate because' several .of -these TLDs are located in close . proximity to the . generating facilities. An increase was noted during 1986 although such an ' increase l was noted for all TLDs including' control TLDs. -During i 1989, site boundary TLDs averaged 5.9 mrem per standard ' month. t TLDs located off-site at a distance of 4 to 5. miles- from the site in each of the land based meteorological sectors ' averaged 5.0 mrem during 1985. During 1986, 1987 and'1988 : off-site sector TLDs averaged 6.0, 5.2 and 5.3 mrem per standard month respectively. The 1986 results demonstrated an increase for this group of TLDs. Results for 1989 for the group averaged 4.9 mrem per standard month. This is fairly consistent with previous years results. Again, 1989 second and third quarter TLDs showed slight increases. V-39
I Special interest TLDsiare located at areas -representative j'j of- high population density, such- as. major work sites, i communities, schools,. etc. and at residences near the site gi (criticaltreceptor areas).- This group of.TLDs averaged 5.3 mi :; mrem per standard month during 1985. During 1986, this same. group.of TLDs averaged 6.1 mrem.- The 1987 results showedLa' k;I decease when compared to the 1985 and- 1986 results and averaged 5.1 mrem per standard month.- 1988 results averaged lg;; 5.3; mrem perzstandard month. 1989 results for this location J
- averaged 4.8 mrem per standard month.
llLl The . final- group- of .TLDs Lrequired- by the Technical = Specifications Lis the control group. This group utilized gi ; two' TLD locations positioned well beyond the- site.. Results g' from 1985' for the -control group averaged 5.4 mrem _ per 5: standard month. During 1986, this same group of TLDs averaged 6.3 mrem.per standard month. A marked increase was
-noted in the.second quarter of 1986. The increase may have-been a result of the Chernobyl accident. . Results for :1987- l: '
and 1988 averages 5.2 and 5.4 . mrem _ per standard; month respectively. Results- for 1989 averaged 4.6 mrem -per {;' standard month and showed levels slightly. less; than previous years. Slight increases:were noted in -second: and i third quarter results. During 1989, all -envi ronmental TLD groups required by Technical Specifications were consistent with results observed during 1988. However, all- TLD groups (including.- control) showed decreased levels for the fourth quarter of l 1989. In general,- second and third quarter results were higher than first and fourth quarter results. This : may be l' ' explained by the fact that the second and third quarter are primarily dry, with little ground cover from rain or snow l- ' precipitation. This, in particular, may explain why the fourth quarter 1989 results were in fact, less than any g . fourth quarter results observed since 1985. The fourth V-40 I
i l quarterL 1989, experienced record snowfall in the ' month 1 of-o December and subsequentidecreased: results for- that period.: ,, 1 Tables VI-15' and' VI-16 show1 the historical environmental - sample data : for' environmental-'TLDs.
~
A graph ofl historical
~TLD'datalis. presented in'.Section VII. :
i Overall, environmental TLD~ results -for 1989 -showed no ., significant impact _ from direct radiation measured outside p- "the site boundary..- ,
.i t l r '!
I L (. ( t L t V-41 ; l
'5. MILK - TABLE IV-11 AND IV-12 (
Milk samples were collected from aitotal of six indicator locations (within 10 miles of the, site),. and one control g[ ; location -(beyond _10 miles from the site)~ during 1989. The ~ RETS require. thatt three. locations .be sampled for milk - within - 5.0 miles' of the: site. During 1989, there were no g;,
~
milk sample : locations within 5.0 miles- of the site. The! Ef locations that were sampled during.1989L are. located 'from 5.5 to 9.5 miles from the site.. ControlJ milk samples were , l; collected from location: #65 which 'is located ':17' miles from? the site.. Sample location descriptions _ for all milk sample - {j locations utilized ' .during. 1989 are . listed - below. - These- ? locations are consistent with those sampled in 1988.. Location No. Direction from Site DistancefromSitefmilesI 7 ESE 5. 5. 16 S 5.9 50 E 8.2 ^l 4 55 E 9.0 ; ! 60 E 9;5 L 4 ESE 7.8 E, 65 (Control) SW 17.0 5i ' l During 1989, . milk samples were collected at leach of - the ,six indicator locations and the control location in the first { half and the second half of each month. collected during the months of ' April through December. 'Since Samples were gj I-131 was not detected during November .and - December of 1988, - E: no additional samples were required for January through March 5 of 1989. For each - sample, analyses were performed for gamma ~ emitters (analysis by GeLi, Ge detectors) and I-131- using 'a -l, resin extraction / gamma spectral analysis. Sample analysis results for gamma emitters are found on . Table 'IV-12. 1-131 analytical results are found on Table IV-11.
- l' I
The gamma spectral analysis of the bimonthly samples showed K-ll l 40 to be the most abundant radionuclide detected in the milk g; V-42 .
, - - . - -, - ., -,. -.... ~~..~...-- J.n., . , - . . - . ~ . . - - . * , - - - . < . . ~ . - . - - - - , . . . . - . . , - -
l samples collected deving 1989. K-40 was detected in every I sample analyzed and ranged in concentration from 1360 pCi/litor to 1970 pCi/ liter at the indicator locations and 1300 pCi/ liter to 1790 pCi/ liter at the control location. K-40 is e naturally occurring radionuclide and is found in many of the environmental media sampled. Relatively high levels of K-40 are found in cows milk due to the biological concentration of potassium in the milk production process. The dose to man which results from the concentrations of K-40 , 3 in milk and other environmental media can be calculated. This calculated dose illustrates the significance of the dose received from naturally occurring radionuclides when compared to the dose received due to exposure from plant related radionuclides. K-40 has been measured in many environmental samples at significant levels. A 70 kilogram (154 pound) adult contains approximately 0.1 microcuries of K-40 as a result of normal life functions (inhalation, consumption, etc.). The dose to the bone tissue is about 20 mrem per year as a result of internally deposited K-40 (Eisenbud). By comparison, the adult bone dose calculated for the maximally exposed individual using 1989 plant effluent data for 1989 was 0.023 mrem. This dose was calculated using the methodology specified in the plants Off-site Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM). The calculated dose as a result of plant effluents is insignificant compared to the dose from potassium-40. A review of historical data shows that Cs-137 is the only man made radionuclide detected in milk samples collected as part of the environmental surveillance program. Cs-137 was detected in milk sample during 1983 at a concentration of 5.1 pCi/ liter. Results from 1986 showed a mean Cs-137 concentration of 8.6 pCi/ liter at the indicator location. Cs-137 in 1986 milk samples was a result of the 1986 Chernobyl Nuclear Plant accident. During 1987, Cs-137 was found in two V-43
l;
)
indicator samples at a mean concentration of 6.8 pCi/ liter g and was also determined to be the result of the Chernobyl ; accident, g In addition to gamma spectral analysis, each of the milk gl samples collected in 1989 were analyzed for I-131. Iodine-131 5 ; was not detected during 1989 in any of the control or ! indicator samples. All I-131 milk results are reported as l', lower limits of detection (LLD). The LLD results ranged from-
<0.11 to <0.50 pCi/1 for all milk samples. ,
l A review of historical data shows that the detection of I-131 g" in milk samples has not been routine. In past sampling programs, I-131 has been detected in milk samples only in conjunction with fresh fallout- from atmospheric testing or gi l from the 1986 Chernobyl accident. Numerical evaluation shows g that annual mean results ranged from 0.2 pCi/ liter to 6.9 5 , pC1/ liter at the indicator locations during 1976-1978. I-131 during these years was a result of intermittent weapons l; ' testing. During 1979 - 1985, I-131 in milk samples at the indicator locations was not detected, with the exception .of l' 1980. The mean result during 1980 was 0.4 pCi/ liter and was a result of the 1980 Chinese atmospheric weapons test. Results g from 1986 showed that I-131 was detected at a mean. concentration of 5.2 pCi/ liter as a result of the Chernobyl accident. I-131 was not detected in milk samples during 1987, g: 1988 and 1989. l Historical data for I-131 from the control locations showed that I-131 was detected during 1980 at a mean concentration of 1.4 pCi/ liter. There was no detectable I-131 during the l period of 1978-1985 with the exception of 1980. During 1986, I-131 from the control location showed a mean concentration of l 13.6 pCi/ liter as a result of the Chernobyl accident. I-131 g was not detected during 1988 at the control location. V-44 I . IH
I Historical data and graphic representations of milk sample results for Cs-137 and I-131 are presented in Section VI-and I VII. I I ' I I I I I I I I : I I t I I I
- g. V-45
I! ;
- 6. LAND USE CENSUS - TABLES IV-15 AND IV-16 l i A land use census is conducted to detemine the utilization of The land use census g! '
land in the vicinity of the site. actually consists of two types of census. A milk animal g> census is conducted to identify all milk animals within a 3 distance of 10 miles from the site. A census covering areas g, i out to a distance of 10 mile exceeds the distance required by El the Technical Specifications. A second type of census is a residence census. The census is conducted in order to identify the closest residence in each of the 22.5 degree meteorological sectors. For the residence ll , census, several of the meteorological sectors are over Lake Ontario because the site is located at the shoreline. g! ' Therefore, there are only eight sectors over land where E ', residences are located within 3 miles. E In accordance with the Technical Specifications, a land use census was conducted during 1989 to identify within a distance of five miles the location of all milk animals goats) and the location of the nearest residence in. each of (cows and l ; the sixteen 22.5 degree meteorological animal census was actually conducted out to a distance of ten sectors. The milk l! miles in order to provide a more comprehensive census. g' The milk animal census is an estimation of-the number of cows and goats within an approximate ten mile -radius of the' Nine g, Mile Point Site. The annual census is conducted each spring by sending questionnaires to previous milk animal owners and ' also by road surveys to locate any possible new owners. In the event that questionnaires are not answered, the owners are contacted by telephone or in person. The local agricultural l agency was also contacted as a further source of information concerning the milch animal population in the vacinity of the site. l! g V-46 I'l
The number of milk animals located within the ten mile radius ) of the site was estimated to be 1165 cows and 27 goats for the J 1989 census. The number of cows decreased by 28 and the L number of goats increased by 12 with respect to the 1988 census. One new milk location and one reactivated milk location were identified during the 1989 census. However, no changes were made to 1989 sampling program because the new . locations were not qualified locations (Technical Specification), nor located such as to provide a higher D/Q value then the existing sampling locations. Therefore, there were no changes made to the milk sampling program. Most of the goats found on the census were milking goats. However, I any milk produced was consumed by the owners and was not available for the sampling program. The results of the milk ( animal census are found on Table IV-15. Milk animal locations are shown on Figure 4. A residence census was conducted during 1988 to identify the nearest residence in each of the sixteen 22.5 degree meteorological sectors within a distance of five miles form the site. At this distance, some of the meteorological sectors are over water. These sectors include: N, NNE, NE, ENE, W, WNW, NW and NNW. There are no residences in these sectors. The results of the 1989 residence census showing the applicable sectors and degrees and distance of each of the nearest residence are found on Table IV-16. The nearest residence are shown in Figure 3. V-47
i : I; L
- 7. FOOD PRODUCTS - TABLE IV-14 g' i
Food product samples collected during 1989 were comprised of g -l garden vegetables and other types of broad-leaf vegetation. W l Samples were collected during the late summer / fall harvest [ The collection of annual food product samples became L season. l a- requirement as a result. of Technical Specification l[i ! Amendment 127. Food product samples were collected,- analyzed ; and reported as optional samples in past reports (1985- , l; 1988). j Samples were collected from six indicator locations and one I!i control location. The indicator locations were represented g! by nearby gardens in areas of highest D/Q (deposition factor) m, values based on historical meteorology. The control location was represented by a garden location' 9-20 miles distant in a l; ' l l 1 east prevalent wind direction. Garden vegetables were ! comprised of cabbage, beet greens, swiss chard and collard l3l greens which are all considered broadleaf vegetables. Where l broadleaf vegetable were not available, non-edible broadleaf g
- vegetation was collected. Non-edible broadleaf_. vegetation collected in 1989 consisted of strawberry leaves, green bean 1 eaves, egg plant leaves, cucumber leaves, pepper leaves, and gl ..
I squash leaves. One sample of each similar type of vegetable g, l or vegetation was collected at the control location. 5 , K-40 was detected in each' broadleaf vegetable and broadleaf ll vegetation. Broadleaf vegetables and vegetation showed 1 concentrations of K-40 ranging from 2.97 pCi/g to 7.42 pCi/g (wet). Be-7 was detected in all but two broadleaf l vegetables / vegetation samples. The Be-7 concentrations in the samples ranged from 0.08 pCi/g (wet) to 1,56 pCi/g (wet). l,' Cs-137 was detected in one sample of non-edible broadleaf vegetation from the indicator locations. The detected V-48 i l: L - - - _ _ _ __ . - - ___ _ __ - _ - - _ _ .
l quantity was near the limit of detection and was 0.011 pCi/g l (wet). LLD values for all other samples ranged from 0.011 to 0.018 pCi/g (wet). The detected quantity of Cs-137 was found at location "K'. It is probable that the quantity of Cs 137 found is a result of root uptake by the squash plant and not leaf deposition. Cs-137 was also detected in one sq0 ash leaf sample collected in 1988. The source of the cesium is most ' likely from the soil. The ultimate source of Cs-137 is from ' weapons testing, the Chernobyl accident, operations at the ' site, or possibly all three. Cs-137 has been detected in soil samples from areas near the site and-at areas well-beyond the site as a result of past weapons testing. Cs-137 was not - detected at the control location. No other radionuclides were detected in the 1989 collection of food product vegetation. The impact of detectable Cs-137 in food product samples can be evaluated by calculating a dose to the maximum exposed individual as a result of food consumption. Using standard methodology from NRC Regulatory Guide 1.109, the maximum exposed organ is the bone of a child. The maximum whole body dose would be to an adult. The Cs-137' concentration is 0.011 ! pCi/g (wet). The consumption rate is assumed to be a maximum consumption rate of 26 kg per year for a child. This comsumption rate is conservative due to the fact that squash leaves are normally consumed by humans. The calculated doses are 0.094 mrem per year to a child's bone tissue (maximum organ dose) and 0.013 mrem per year to the child's whole body. The maximum whole body dose occurs to the adult. Assuming a Regulatory Guide 1.109 maximum consumption rate of 64 kg per year for an adult, the maximum organ dose is 0.077 mrem to the liver' and 0.053 mrem to the whole body. A maximum organ and whole body dose are small and insignificant when compared to dose from the natural radiation environment. , V-49
}
Review of past environmental. data indicates-that K-40 has been Il consistently detected in food crop _ samples. concentrations have fluctuated from one sample.to another but K-40 lj j the annual ranges have remained relatively consistent from l year to year. Be-7 has been detected occasionally during the g' i past in leafy vegetables (1978 through 1982, 1984 and-1987). Cs-137 has been detected intemittently during the years of 1976-1988 at the indicator locations and during the years of ll E! 1980-1986 at the control locations (control samples were not 5l obtained prior to 1980). Review of indicator sample results from 1976-1988 showed that Cs-137 was not detected during 1976-1978,1981-1984 and 1986. During 1979 and 1980, Cs-137 lil 1 in fruits and/or vegetables showed annual mean concentrations l,! of 0.004 and 0.036 pCi/g (wet)' respectively. Cs-137 was found ! at one indicator location during 1985 at a concentration of O.047 pci/g (wet). Control samples during 1980-1986 showed g' l Cs-137 detected only- during 1980 at a concentration of 0.02 E pCi/g (wet), u Cs-137 detected during the past at both indicator and control locations is indicative of weapons testing. During 1987, Cs-137 was found at the indicator locations at a mean concentration of 0.016 pCi/g (wet). Cs-137 was not l. ' detected at the control location during 1987.
.l-I!
Ii I:i . V-50 g 5 :
=___
s - 8. ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE LOCATIONS - TABLE IV-16 L Table 16 contains the locations of the environmental samples [ presented in the data tables of Section IV. The locations are given in degrees and distance in miles from the Nine Mile [ Point Nuclear Station Unit # 2 reactor centerline (middle site reactor). Table IV-16 also gives the figure (map) number as , well as the map destination for each sample location by sample { . medium type. { [ [ [ [ [ V-51
l
- 9. INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM - SECTION VII l .
l Section 6 3.a of the Radiological Effluent Technical gl' Specifications for the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant requires that a sumary of the results obtained as part of an interlaboratory comparison prcgram be included in the gl W Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report. l. Presently, the only NRC approved interlaboratory comparison l. ,. program is the USEPA Cross Check Program. Section VIII shows l: r i the results of the EPA's reference results and the licensee's, ! l- results in tabular form. Some of the EPA reference samples i have been analyzed by the site. Other EPA reference samples g;
- have been analyzed by a vendor who normally analyzes those l types of sample media for the site. Participation in the EPA Cross Check Program includes sample media for which g
- ,
environmental samples are routinely collected, and for which intercomparison samples are available from the EPA. - l I: Il I I: I: Ii l I I V-52 I
t C. CONCLUSION t The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program is an I ongoing effort to determine the radiological impact from the ) operation of the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant on the local environment. As demonstrated by the analytical results of the 1989 program, the major radiological impact on the environment was the result of fallout from atmospheric nuclear testing and the 1986 Chernobyl accident which created a ubiquitous inventory of background Cs-137 in the environment. Samples representing food sources consumed at higher trophic levels, such as fish and milk, were reviewed closely to evaluate any impact to the general environment or to man. In addition, the data was reviewed for any possible historical trends. In regard to doses as a result of man-made radionuclides, a significant portion of the small doses received by a member of the public was from past nuclear weapons testing and fallout from the Chernobyl accident. It should be noted that most of the radionuclide detected in 1986, as a result of the Chernobyl accident, were not present in the sample media collected for the 1987, 1988 and 1989 programs. Doses as a result of naturally occurring radionuclides, such as K-40, contributed a major portion of the total annual dose to members of the public. Any possible impact as a result of site operations is extremely minimal when compared to the radiological impact from natural background levels and sources other than plant operation. It has been demonstrated that almost all environmental samples contain traces of radionuclides which are a result of weapons testing, Chernobyl, or naturally occurring sources (primordial and/or cosmic related). Whole body doses to man as a result of natural sources (naturally occurring radionuclides in the soil and lower atmosphere) in V-53 t _ _ ___ _ _----
Oswego County account for approximately 67 mrem per year as g demonstrated by control environmental TLDs. Possible doses j due to site operations are a minute fraction of the annual exposure. gj 1 1 1 During 1989, the presence of several fission product nuclides ] was noted in four environmental sample media. These media included shoreline sediment, air, fish and food products in l[ the fom of broadleaf vegetation. The source of the fission i product radionuclides is for the most part past: .weapons , l' testing. One sample medium, airborne particulates, showed activity in two monthly on-site composite samples (October, g November) that were the result of operations at the- l FitzPatrick plant. The impact, expressed in tems of the dose to man from the presence- of Co-60 and Zn-65 .and is El 5 insignificant when compared to natural background doses. The - actual impact from presence of. these radionuclide in the I*l ' environment is not truly measurable because the positive results were obtained from on-site locations and no activity was detected at any of the off-site sampling locations. l ! Using the data presented in this report, and earlier reports l as a basis, it is shown that no appreciable radiological - environmental impact has resulted from - the operation of the g-l, James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant. The results of the g' 1989 Radiological Environmental program demonstrate that B , controls on radiological effluents both by the. design and safe operation of the plant are effective in protecting the Ii ' environment and the general public. I. I. 1 I V-54 I gl
D. REFERENCES
- 1. U.S. Nuc1 ear Regulatory Commission Regul atory Guide 1.109, " Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Effluent for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix 1",
March, 1976. '
- 2. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.109, ' Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Effluent for the Purpose of.
Evaluating Compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix 1", October, 1977.
- 3. Eichholz, G., Environmental Aspects of Nuclear Power.
Fi rst Edition, Ann Arbor Science Publishers, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1976.
- 4. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), Environmental Radiation Measurements. NCRP Report No. 50, 1976.
- 5. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), Natural Backaround Radiation in the United States. NCRP Report No. 45, 1975.
- 6. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), Cesium-137 from the _ Environment to Man:
Metabolism and Dose. NCRP Report No. 52, 1977.
- 7. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), Radiation Exposure from Consumer Products and Miscellaneous Sources. NCRP Report No. 56, 1977.
- 8. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 4.8,
" Environmental Technical Specifications for Nuclear Power Plants", December 1975.
V-55
- 9. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Branch Technical Position to Regulatory Guide 4.8, 'An Acceptable l
Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program", November, 1979. gl,
- 10. Eisenbud, Merril, Environmental Radioactivity. -Second Edition, Academic Press, New York, New York, 1973. l
- 11. Francis, C. W., Radiostrontium Movement in Soils and i Untake in Plants, Environmental Sciences Division, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Department of - Energy, -
l 1978. gl
- 12. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), Radiation Exposure from Consumer Products and l:
Miscellaneous Sources. NCRP Report No. 56, 1977.
- 13. Pochin, Edward E., Estimated Pooulation' Exoosure from Nuclear Power Production and Other Radiation Sources. '
Organization for Economic Co-operation .and Development, . 1976.
- 14. ICRP Publication ' Number 29, Radionuclide Releases into I the Environment: Assessment of Dose to Man 1979.
g
- 15. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Preparedness and Response National Center of Devices and in Radiation- Accidents.
Radiological Health, l Rockville, MD 20857, August, 1983. -l;
- 16. Kathren, Ronald E., RADI0 ACTIVITY IN THE ENVIRONMENT:
SOURCES. DISTRIBUTION. AND SURVEILLANCE. First Edition, , Harwood Academic Press, New York, NY, 1984.
- 17. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement I (NCRP), Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States, NCRP Report No. 93, 1987 L
I, V-56 g
..._...__,__...._m...,,,.._.-.-_...._...~-_,..._._......m.--.. ---..m._ - , _ _ _..--- _ -- .--_...--_-__ ___--_-_--_
ll 18. Glasstone, Samual and Jordan, Walter H., Nuclear Power and Its Environmental Effects. First Edition, American 'l Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, Illinois, 1980. !I - i .. i' 4 l I. l I I I 1 1 1 V-57 g
E I l VI I I I yaN I xou I ' I HISTORICAL DATA l I I I ! l
p I VI HISTORICAL DATA g S -le Statistics frce Previous Environmental' Samnlina The- mean, minimum value and maximum value were calculated for selected sample mediums and isotopes. Special Considerations:- I 1. Sample data listed as 1969 was taken from the (T GE M'[ E 8014T . PRED>ERLTION SilRVEY . 1969 1.nd - ENVI t[ INEN"4 sud' T ? IL :B G RE OR' FOR I IA iAl3 40 (AldK P06 ER CORPORAT.lDR N.[ M E II - Uf T NUCLELR STAL[DB IDi EP BER. 19M 2. Sam 198 , $le 1984data listed 1974,and197810071979, 1985, as1986 was 1980, taken 1981, from1982, the respective , environmental operatin reports for Nine Mile I Point Nuclear Station and James A. gFitzPatt'ick Nuclear Power - Plant.
- 3. Only measured values were used for statistical calculations.
- 4. The tem MOL was used prior to 1979 to represent the concept of Lower Limit of Detection (LLD). MDL = Minimum Detectable g Level. -
I I I I i; I I I VI-1 I I -
I l TABLE VI-1 LIltif0RICAL BlHR(M WfiAL$$ AIR I BATAl
. , ~
s
, tassastImeri$gDIgggi'
~
s
!ResiltslinMt/gf(d1Y)/, '
I LOCATION: CONTROL
- R Isotope Cs-134 Cs-137 Co-60.
Year Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Mean Min.. Max. Mean 1969 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1974 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** g 1975 1976 ** ** ** 1977 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **~ ** 1978 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1979 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** l 1980 1981 1982 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1983 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1984 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** l 1985 1986
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD (LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD I 1987 1988 (LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD Langs Beach - beyond influence of the site in a westerly direction.
No data. Sam le not required until new technical specifications implemented i 1985, I VI-2 I I
l l TABLE VI-2 l ! i * ' (NISIMICAd DNIMBIDITAL3SMFLE;.l0ATAj g l . l SINRELDE/SEDDENT 1.. y l
- - }-I ,..c. -- , , . . . . . . . . . . . --A+-
,N'I:,
(Resultsa; nisti/g?('Wy)'[$ ' =' l g LOCATION: INDICATOR
- 5 .
Isotope Cs-134 Cs-137 Co-60 , Year Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Mean 1969 l! 1974 1975 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** j g 1976 1977 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1978 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** i 1979 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1980 1981
** l 1982 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** **
1983 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1984 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1985 1986
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<lLD
<LLD
<LLD (LLD
<LLD
<LLD l>
l 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD E l 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD E 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.25 0.32 0.28 <LLD <LLD <LLD I Sunset Beach - closest off-site location with recreational value. No data. Sample not required until new technical specifications l implemented i 1985. VI-3 i I I
l TABLE VI-3
, , ,, c sc , s
..s ,
, ' S ,'l? hh ' - l l Y\p! :b$\ 'lll ~5? ,' ':f,,
>o : ;>'rx8n'
,'"',',;if, .fla:: :'l';lm<,';i'l, ,,;-
., ,;~ '<~u : , c , ,
^ ' ' ,' ?' : w
, , , ~, ,,f?,Anseits ia pct, /0
~
- (tet),' V; >
l',, , i' , >; < > LOCATION: CONTROL
- Isotope Cs-137 Year Min. Max. Mean 1969f No Data No Data No Data 19741 0.09 0.94 0.43 1975 <MDL <MDL <MDL 1976 1.2 1.2 1.2 1977 0.13 0.13 "
0.13 1978 0.04 0.20 0.09 ' 1979 0.03 0.06 0.04 1980 0.029 0.110 0.059 1981 0.028 0.062 0.043 1982 0.027 0.055 0.047 1983 0.040 0.060 0.050 1984 0.015 0.038 0.032 1985 0.026 0.047 0.034 1986 0.021 0.032 0.025 1987 0.017 0.040 0.031 1988 0.023 0.053 0.034 1989 0.028 0.043 0.034 Control location was at an area beyond the influence of the site (westerly direction). i 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP. VI-4
l TABLE VI-4
!NESTRECAL WMMWITAL:SAfrLE BATAL J
l 2 n. Resslts % # /g((wet)) LOCATION: INDICATOR * (NMP/JAF) Isotope Cs-137 1 Year Min. Max. Mean i
)
19691 1974f 0.01 0.08 0.13 4.40 0.06 0.57 l 1975 1.10 1.70 1,38 g 1976 0.50 3.90 1.4 5 1977 0.13 0.79 0.29 1978 0.03 0.10 0.08* 1979 0.02 0.55 0.10 ll 1980 0.030 0.100 0.061 g; 1981 0.027 0.10 0.061 5 1982 0.034 0.064 0.050 1983 1984 0.030 0.033 0.060 0.061 0.050 0.043 l 1985 0.018 0.045 0.030 g; 1986 0.009 0.051 0.028 e 1987 0.024 0.063 0.033 l 1988 1989 0.022 0.020 0.054 0.044 0.032 0.034 l Indicator locations are in the general area of the NMP-1 and J. A. I FitzPatrick cooling water discharge structures, i 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP, I n-5 I ! I' I'
k TABLE VI-5 _n llI$1GtM2L BlWWWWITi$ddlPLE'OATA$ . g gg
' H -1 .,__,_ ....
a ,, JResultsfin;pC1/11terf LOCATION: CONTROL i Isotope Cs-137 Co-60 Year Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Mean 196911
- 1974tt * * * * *
- 1975 * * * * *
- 1976 * * * * *
- 1977 ** ** ** ** ** **
1978 <MDL <MDL <MDL ** ** ** 1979 2.5 2.5 2.5 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1980 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1981 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1.4 1.4 1.4 1982 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1983 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1984 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1985 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1986 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <tLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <tLD <LLD <tLD <LLD No gamma analysis performed (not required). Data showed instrument background results, t Location was the City of Oswego Water Suppl Oswego Steam Station inlet canal for 1985 y 1989, for 1969 - 1984 and the 11 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP. VI-6
TABLE VI-6 l NISMICALLENVIRNSENTAL SAWLE'04TA?
- s .a samma unm;
, . a
- ResultsT;taipC1/11terj l LOCATION: INDICATOR i l Isotope Cs-137 Co-60
- Year Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Mean 196911 1974tt l
1975 g 1976 1977 ** ** ** ** ** **
, g 1978 ** ** **
<MDL <MDL <MDL 3' 1979 <LLD <LLD <LLD (LLD <LLD <LLD 1980 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD g
1981 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD
- 1982 0.43 0.43 0.43 1.6 2.4 1.9 g l 1983 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 5 1984 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD l 1985 1986
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<tLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD l
1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD l <LLD <LLD <LLD g 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 5 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD No gamma analysis performed (not required). Data showed instrument background results, g i Indicator location was the NMP 1 Inlet Canal for the period 1969 - 1973, and the JAf Inlet Canal for 1974 - 1989. It 1969 data is considered to be pre-o erational for the site. 1974 data isconsideredtobepre-operationalfortheJAFNPP. ; VI-7 I I
J' ) TABLE VI-7 h
;NISTORICAL ENVIR00pIENTAliSAllPLsfOATA-l SURFACEMTERh1RITIlpis '
, .x, --
?. I,, ,. ,4 .
Res06stM % )11t{p t
+- , ,
LOCATION: CONTROL
- Isotope Tritium Year Min. Max. Mean f 19697 No Data No Data No Data 1974f <MDL <MDL <MDL 1975 311 414 362 1976 440 929 652 1977 300 530 408 ,
1978 215 490 304 1979 174 308 259 1980 211 290 257 1981 211 357 293 1982 112 307 165 1983 230 280 250 1984 190 220 205 1985 230 430 288 1986 250 550 373 1987 140 270 210 1988 240 460 320 1989 143 217 186 Control location is the City of Oswego, drinking water for 1969 - 1984 and the Oswego Steam Station inlet canal for 1985 - 1989. t 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP. VI-8
I. i TABLE VI-8 l i - i
=======. gl lm.a
'M S1 M KAL N Ak SMDLELDATA5 5 m
,, n;g , g N ACEiMTW 1RITIM ,
, ,' g 4lf lj I
+ gm jyg -
l LOCATION: INDICATOR
- Isotope Tritium Year Min. Max. Mean No Data No Data 19691 19741 No Data 380 500 440 ll1 !
1975 124 482 335 gi 1976 297 889 513 5 1977 380 530 450 1978 1979 253 176 560 286 389 234 l 1980 150 457 263 1981 183 388 258 1982 194 2780 641 1983 1984 190 110 560 370 317 282 l 1985 250 1200** 530 1986 260 500 g 380 1987 160 410 322 1988 1989 430 135 480 288 460 225 l I Indicator location was the NMP-1 Inlet Canal during the period 1969- m 1973, and the JAF Inlet Canal for 1974-1989. 5 Suspect sample contamination. Recollected samples showed normal levels of tritium. t 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP. VI-9 Il, i I I
i t TABLE VI-9 ( '
> g agSTGtEAL{WWEENERALISMPLEft4TAY
{ ,;[ w $ 5MfPARTM E A ( S OBS[8 ETAT y; - m LOCATION: CONTROL
- Isotope Gross Beta Year Min. Max. Mean 19691 0.130 0.540 0.334 ..
j 19741 0.001 0.808 0.121 1975 0.008 0.294 0.085 1976 0.004 0.240 0.051 1977 0.001 0.484 0.126, 1978 0.010 0.650 0.144 1979 0.010 0.703 0.077 1980 0.009 0.291 0.056 1981 0.016 0.549 0.165 1982 0.011 0.078 0.033 1983 0.007 0.085 0.024 1984 0.013 0.051 0.026 1985 0.013 0.043 0.024 1986 0.008 0.272 0.039 1987 0.009 0.037 0.021 1988 0.008 0.039 0.018 1989 0.007 0.039 0.017 Locations used for 1977 - 1984 were C off-site, D1 off-site D2 off-site,ite and G off-site. Controllocation R-5 off-s was used fore off-site, 1985F off-site
,1989 (formerly C off-site location).
i 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP. VI-10
. . - - - - . -. -- . - . . - _ __ - .~ - .. - . .
I-TABLE VI-10 l, f MIS 131 CAL'] 2 4 - 2 Ak$NFL1 MTA! m ...~ . m
, _t %. . . .. . i ,
? AIR PM TICE ATE M S MTAi e
[ , g ' fahsshikisf4NM ; LOCATION: INDICATOR
- l
- Isotope Gross Beta I Year Min. Max, Mean 19697 19741 0.130 0.003 0.520 0.885 0.320 0.058 l ;
0.001 0.456 0.067 1975 1976 0.002 0.191 0.047 g! j I 1977 0.016 0.140 0.070. 1978 0.006 0.340 0.102 1979 0.001 0.271 0.058 1980 1981 0.002 0.004 0.207 0.528 0.045 0.151 l 1982 0.001 0.113 0.031 g' 1983 0.003 0.062 0.023 5 1984 0.000 0.058 0.025 1985 1986 0.001 0.007 0.044 0.289 0.021 0.039 l 1987 0.009 0.040 0.021 g 1988 0.007 0.040 0.018 5 1989 0.007 0.041 0.017 Locations used for 02 on-site, E on-site I F on-site and G on-site. 1969-1973were01on-site Locations used for 1 $74-1984wereD1on-site, H on-site, I on-site, J on-D2 on-site, E on-site, as Fa on-site, icable. G on-site,1989 1985 - locations were R-1 of f-site and k on-site, site, R-2 off-site, R-3 f-site, and R-4 off-site. i 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP. 1974 data I-VI-11 I I
TABLE VI-11 l
. z,!INNTORICAL DRfIR01BWITAL SAMPLE!BATA s
, - Ikd N$tiPARTICRATOM@ ' ' ->
y > sResuitsd. s .a ~it)PCi/m3l ;w ~ 7 LOCATION: CONTROL ** Isotope Cs-137 Co-60 Year Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Mean 19691 * * * * *
- 19741 *
- 1975 * * * * *
- 1976 * *
- 1977 0.0002 0.0112 0.0034 0.0034 0.0347 0.0172 1978 0.0008 0.0042 0.0018 0.0003 0.0056 0.0D20 1979 0.0008 0.0047 0.0016 0.0005 0.0014 0.0009 1980 0.0015 0.0018 0.0016 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1981 0.0003 0.0042 0.0017 0.0003 0.0012 0.0008 1982 0.0002 0.0009 0.0004 0.0004 0.0007 0.0006 1983 0.0002 0.0002 0.0002 0.0007 0.0007 0.0007 1984 <LLD <LLD (LLD 0.0004 0.0012 0.0008 1985 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1986 0.0075 0.0311 0.0193 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD No data available (not required prior to 1977).
Locations included composites of off-site air monitoring locations for 1977 - 1984. Sample Location included only R-5 air monitoring location for 1985 - 1989, i 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP. VI-12
I TABLE VI-12 l m k@h$cN. w i ,+n1 p-lMSMR.E(04TAS , s ['
', s syl ((:T @;s;s gi$ [g $ [AIRi ';J;g ,
4
., a.w ,
31 g ' m it$i h:^ gr ,
.s s
n
~f ,
S, % - ' ' ' < NY k.', y(? ' w .: 4
? ;d. ::. ' i i s
N {hh > kh.o.L
- , !< $ I LOCATION: : INDICATOR **
Isotope Cs-137 Co-60-- Year. . Min._ ; Max.: Mean . Min.- Max.: Mean , 19691 * * * *
- 1974f * * * *
- j 1975 * * * * *
- 1976 * * * *
- 1977 0.0001 l!
0.0105 0.0043 0.0003 0.0711 0.0179 ! 1978 0.0003 0.0026 0.0016 0.0003 0.0153 0.00'23 1979 0.0003 0.0020 0.0010 0.0003 0.0007 0.0005 lI 1980 0.0005 0.0019 0.0011 0.0016- 0.0016 0.0016 gi 1981 0.0002 0.0045 0.0014 0.0002- 0.0017 0.0006 5 1982 0.0001 0.0006 0.0004 0.0003 0.0010 0.0005 ! 1983 0.0002 0.0003 0.0002 0.0003 0.0017 0.0007 1984 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.0007 0.0017 0.0012 ll 1985 (LLD <LLD <LLD 1986
<LLD <LLD <LLD gl 0.0069 0.0364 0.0183 <LLD <LLD <LLD 5 i 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLO <LLD <LLD l.
<LLD No data available (not required prior to 1977).
I-Locations included composites of on-site air monitoring locations for 1977 - 1984. Locations included R-1 through R-4 air monitoring locations for 1985 - 1989. l T 1969 data is cor.sidered to be pre- rational for the site. 1974 data isconsideredtobepre-operationalfortheJAFNPP. VI-13 I I
_ = _ - = = _ TABLE VI-13 p is 9.Wh 2 ~ ~ - : hh'W'M ** ~ w.a n' -WO. i - - > '
- "b. %sg? NISMIC'E5 ENVIROMENTEi$MPLE DATA Y,
y , ~gj;h fp k n N jhh0
, j .
DINE h i$ yf m ..k ,, ,8 .. - LOCATION: CONTROL
- Isotope Iodine-131 Year Min. Max. Mean 1969t ** ** **
1974f ** ** ** 1975 <MDL <MDL <MDL 1976 0.01 5.88 0.60 1977 0.02 0.82 0.32 . 1978 0.03 0.04 0.03 1979 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1980 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1981 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1982 0.039 0.039 0.039 1983 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1984 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1985 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1986 0.041 0.332 0.151 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD Locations D1 off-site, D2 off-site, E off-site, F of f-site, and G off-site used for 1976 - 1984. Location R-5 off-site used for 1985 - 1989. No results - I-131 analysis not required. t 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP. VI-14
TABLE VI-14
- i. W IESTR ECAL 2 m; - ie >
A ISN M Kl/BATAk J. m
-s o m e. w
~
,f 4 4
. m, s
;gy .
Y ',' $$Nk}::
,g. . I AIR N<5 [MMbp,. 2 ;d:1 >
s w a - n :?e , [1
,~; y, 3 .; 43 Jg ,y,-
s, Sig - gepg gs9g ,. Result Mal.pCj/m3y,; g ,, ;g
'w ~ '. '
i ! LOCATION: INDICATOR
- l' Isotope Iodine-131 Year Min. Max. Mean 1969i- >
1974f 1975 1976
'O.25 0.01 0.30 2.09 0.28 0.33 l
1977 0.02 0.73 0.31 g 1978 0.02 0.07 0.04 5 1979 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1980 1981 0.013 0.016 0.013 0.042 0.013 0.029 l 1982 0.002 0.042 0.016 1983 0.022 0.035 0.028 1984 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1985 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1986 0.023 0.360 0.119 1987 0.011 0.018 0.014 g 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD < 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD
- Locations used for 1976 - 1984 were 01 on-site, D2 on-site, E on-site, F on-site,le. G on-site H on-site, I on-site, J on-site, and- K on-site as applicab Locations used for 1985 - 1989 were R-1 off-site, R-2, of f- _ '
t site, R-3 off-site, and R-4 off-site.
** No results - I-131 analysis not required.
g' i 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP. VI-15 I I:
TABLE VI-1FA L W. jQ ; e&,, W4M;a;, ..
; i . .; .
..,.:,.. W ,
"ls ', y : gflMRESTORICAL(EllVDOpelTElfME104TA (
( Ridig ;;Mo . .: .. = ' w . x mgm . S %. ;gJEllV191BOWNTAQ1tBjsggy- _y m yg~
.;:@ g&
.ggE f;1?}3;$;.3 xg 3 3
,7 g ,, 6 ~
^ diiW i@ M@Reshltd;; .ggg/g _ g.ggg. .lifateres standardimodh2
>w M 3;' ' , ; , ,
-- yg , 3453 -
LOCATION: CONTROL ** 1 1 Year Min. Max. Mean PREoPI [ 1970 6.0 7.3 6.7 ( 1971 2.0 6.7 4.3 ( 1972 2.2 6.2 4.4 t 1973 2.2 6.C 4.7 t 19741 2.7 8.9 5.6 . 1975 4.8 6.0 5.5 1976 3.2 7.2 5.4 1977 4.0 8.0 5.3 1978 3.3 4.7 4.3 1 1979 3.3 5.7 4.7 f 1980 3.8 5.8 4.9 ( 1981 3.5 5.9 4.8 l 1982 3.8 6.1 5.1 1983 4.9 7.2 5.8 fll 1984 1985 4.7 4.5 8.2 7.6 6.2 5.6 1986 5.3 7.5 6.3 1987 4.6 6.6 5.4 1988 4.4 6.8 5.6 1 1989 2.9 6.4 4.7 Data not available.
** TLD #8, 14, 49, 110, and 111.
i 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP. VI-16
I. TABLE VI-158 l l%% Tk , ;-F . w n; l
${W'D M ' N ET .Mn. : MTAE
s
% 4
.s
'yy ;O.
- Go e .. + '@ ' ^ '
~'
' :.l.g;$ !N ' W ] gn;M,*) -' ' ..N: 8'C'
?,i
; -... ...;. l ,. , , ,_ .,j.l1l;,m J fe; , , s j.6 y ,,me
, s, i Resul.tsd.flLIBM.IR/St.
- q --
48det1l[Septhg .yg- j sif
- LOCATION: RETS CONTROL ** '
Year- Min.- -Max. Mean l-PRE 0Pi * *
- 1970 6.0 7.3 6.7 1971 2.0 6.7 4.3 1972 2.2 6.2 4.4 1973 2.2 g
6.9 4.7-19747 2.7 8.9 5.6 . I 1975 4.8 6.0 5.5 -{ 1976 3.2 7.2 5.4 l 1977 4.0 8.0 1978 3.3 4.7 5.3 4.3 l;! 1979 3.3 5.7 4.7 g1 1980 3.8 5.8 4.9 5; 1981 3.5 5.9 4.8 1982 3.8 6.1 5.1 1983 4.9 7.2 5.8 li 1984 4.7 8.2 6.2 1985 4.4 6.8 5.4 g 1 1986 5.5 7.2 6.3 1987 4.6 5.8 5.2: 1988 4.8 6.8 li 5.4 1989 2.9 6.4 4.1 g Data not available. l TLD #8, 14 and.49 (RETS Control Locations). t 1969 data is considered to be pre-onerational for the site. 1974 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP. VI-17 I , I l.
t - TABLE VI-16A.
@ <w + , aM9.. AY m%
W- : . . gggggggaL ggggggggMRL.8MMEDATA?!f , " '" ' a Q 9? i JJ y<?SN g} 3 c$4 ;g wreg g . ma g .. 4 g +q s t ,
, g.
t 2l;$g b @$k;MfjiMMNi%Q1,(*.g;g
- f R
,' M :.< : ';,,
sRese1
..,;;.;y M,; n z g1 % yN.b,:.Jsn W10ereatpeystand5NlifmonthM,'^ '
- ' ' s#1 ? J g y f h gfl , Myp4W
, , :g 'h: l >
mu >
- LOCATIONr ' SITE BOUNDARY. **
. Year Min.. Max. Mean f
*
- i PREoPi
- i 1970 * * * '
1971 * *
- 1972 *
- j 1973 * *
- 1 1974f *
- I 1975 * * *
- I 1976 *
- 1977 * *
- 1978 * *
- 1979 * * * :
1980 * *
- 1981 * *
- 1982 * *
- 1983 * *
- 1984 * *
- 1985 4.1 12.6 6.2 1 1986 4.4 18.7 7.0 1987 4.4 14.3 6.1 1988 3.4 17.9 6.4 ,
1989 2.8 15.4 5.9 I Data not available (not required prior to 1985)._ . TLD locations initiated in 1985 as required by the New Technical I Specifications. Includes TLD Numbers 7, 18, 23, and 75 - 87. t 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974' data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP. VI-18
I I TABLE VI-168 l
- c. o- '
- ~
s , . . ,
.- :- '. g N N R$$ AMPLE . : ..
DATAT Bi e '+ '
. \
,y
," ENVMNS W T&j;TLDT , .
l a g-s, ,
. . . . ... . . .. s . . . . . . ..
m- ' J
'(Resultsfin(arem stan
, g: gg pe$m dardimonthl' Lw m.
a; w , :.< ~m - , ; a - > LOCATION: ' 0FF-SITE SECTOR $. ** Year PRtoPT Min. Max. Mean. l 1970 * *
- 1971 * *
- i 1972
- i 1973 * *
- g '
1974f * *
- 1975 * * * '
1976 * *
- 1977 *
- 1978 * *
- g 1979 * * -* '
1980 * *
- 1981 * *
- 1982 1983
- l 1984 * -*
g 1985 4.0 7.1 5.0 5 1986 4.6 8.6 6.0 1987- 4.3 6.0 5.2 1988 3.8 7.0 l' 5.3 1989 2.5 6.8 4.9 g No data available (not required prior to 1985). TLD locations initiated in 1985 as required by the new Technical e Specifications. Includes TLD number 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, and 95. i 5 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 data is considered to pre-operational for the JAFNPP. VI-19 I I
5.. / v .' e TABLE VI-16C L
", N$ :' ' kafb N NN " ( bb+
'4
. ' , ifkNhhh .1.1 x: c
- f;;
- MSM3tICAL WV5mlBiBFAL'fallPLE; DATA? , /7< ,m p;, ,,[2 L
hd i'4' W
,m, S m
epg$N/gy$1 ggg kd YIIEIk;og;h.4.;, gp g gg , s
- .wh uggggggj%eadsdaenIMM4 Matgrgetpem;8 A
[ ' nd,,MW%?gapswi
- y u p q g n e m y g p e n c ~ ,+ w p y a ' ~;
LOCATION: Special Interest ** Year- Min.; - Max. - Mean PRaoPT * * * ! 1970 * * *- 1971 * *
- 1972 * *
- 1 1973 * *
- l 1974f * * * .
1975 * * -* .( 1976 * *
- 1977 * * *
- 1978 * * *
[ 1979 * * '* l 1980 * *
- y ,
t 1981 *
- 1982 * *
- 1983 * *
( *
- 1984
- 1985 3.9 6.8 5.3 1986 4.8 8.2- 6.1 1987 3.5 6.0 5.1 1988 .3.9 6.6 5.3.
1989 2.1 6.4 4.9
]
= No data available- (not required prior to 1985).
TLD locations initiated in 1985 as required by the new Technical S3ecifications. TLD's included are numbers 15, 56, 58, 96-105, 108 and ! 109, which are located near critical residences and populated areas near the site. i 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 data-is considered to pre-operational for the JAFNPP. ; VI-20
L I TABLE VI-16D
, .-.,4-
' < , #p 35We 6e , s ry ' ,, w , < , :-6.
g 4 g gs M(( N if M f :L > C 10fr1 M j $ TA? sq 13-..;
- w. "yg ~ A.6hlhygg%Rf %~ W% M < W a n M @n ,
, a
~L [;
'f"n ' '7s ,nig, . ww w ,,' 6 2 E m-.:.b---h m e.4;;lfg#i$m s %,llS$' snq+-
;4 * ,
h$'6 we 51:W:j ' i I ShhkIl$' ! .. ' M
'h , @/ -
' ifAi[ $l 'd .:.gf TjdQ$d '
@[id " ' \ '*
LOCATION: ON-SITE INDICATOR ** Year-PREoPT Min.- Max. Mean ll 1970 4.7 9.0 6.0 1971 1.5 7.7 4.7. 1972 2.3 8.2 4.9 1973 3.0 g 24.4 6.6 19747 3.1 10.6 5.7 . . 1975 4.6 16.0 7.3 1976 3.7 18.8 6.9 1977 3.0 15.3 5.7 1978 3.0 g 9.0 4.3 1979 2.7 8.3 4.3 g 1980 3.9 12.0 5.3 5 1981 4.1 11.8 5.8 1982 3.9 13.0 6.3 1983 5.0 l, 16.5 6.9 1984 4.6 13.2 7.0 1985 4.7 g' 15.9 6.3 .5 1986 4.7 16.1 7.0 1987 4.0 11.4 5.8 1988 4.4 11.9 l' 6.0 1989 2.7 13.1 6.0 g No data available. Includes TLD numbers 4 5, 6 and 7 Includes TLD E numbers 3 4 5 6 7 3,3 2 ,24, 25,, and 26 (1970 - 1973) . existing o,r p,rev, iou,s o,n-si,te environmental a(1974 - 1989). locations, are ir monitoring Locations 5 t 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 data is considered to pre-operational for the JAFNPP. VI-21 I I
v , L- - TABLE VI-16E
' l$l'. ; y. . .: ^ f, Y $;\ '
!$! lN>l " '
O.h? ' W , (FIT ,,__,,.._y ;(;
,_ I ' l' nl ~
o g$ 5g;7 pn' m- am we' Wg $mg; 1hE,f!' > 5x ,, , r
$<,h?s
(- r
% .. yn;w;c .. g ; gg ng ;pe g;g rg;6$iTW"]- g@g 7 7, .. 7. g'. .
- . : .',fh;'
- if bg,g ~y a??#M HUQ707'
! i - -r-:
;-tju..s. ;r '1' sg/.f!O
.;; s ,
.a y ?se.> %N@M -
's s,
a,
- g*g.- & .21 Resul tsM aTammigerfsteedgedjaon;
- :: .. . ..u.;th N w
.ill J @ @- M %
- s e W L 7 % sq n g ) ' g@g W %AW LOCATION: 0FF-SITE INDICATOR **
Year-- Min.- ; Max. Mean { * * *
'PREOPi 1970 5.0 8.0 6.7 l 1971 1.1 7.7 4.5 1972 1.8 6.6 4.4 1973 2.2 6.9 4.1 1974f 2.4 8.9 5.3 .
1975 4.5 7.1 5.5 1976 3.4 7.2- -5. 2 1977 3.7 8.0- 5.3 1978 2.7 4.7 3,7 1979 -3.0 5,7 4.0 1980 3.1 5,8 4.6 1981 3.6 5.9 4.7-1982 4.0 6.2 5.2 1983 4.6 7.2 5.6 1 1984 4.6 8.2 6.1 1985 4.6 7.7 5.5 1986 5.0 7.6 6.1 1987 '4.4 6.6 5.2 1988 4.2 6.6 5.4 1989 2.8 6.4 4.6 No data available. Includes TLD numbers 8 9 air monitoring locations,), , 10, 11, 12, and 13 (off-site environmental i 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 data is considered to pre-operational for the JAFNPP. VI-22
l-TABLE VI-17 l
, M.'?;" ',,s>i, -
' 46' ggggg gggA < ? ',',s 3
[ 'f ; ']jl: ', ' l& 5:,;llllll'-l 5
>l '
'f "l'l;y ll ;'l ?l ,,
~
+ -
'l
. o;,1; ,/; ' t.,/;" j 'y,/ 980el b 'la;pDI N,itisir;
, 4 ~ ,. . ,,,,,~s ,, _
,,'[ ',.
s 't [ ' ;: . s W s LOCATION- CONTROL **- Isotope 'Cs-137. 1-131- ' Year- Min.- Max.- Mean Min. Max. Mean 19691 * * * * *
- 19747 * * * * *
- 1975 * * * * *
- 1976 * * * * *
- 4 1977 * * * * * * .
1978 2.4 7.8 5.8 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1979 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1980 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1.4- 1.4 1.4 1981 7.0 7.0 l, 7.0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1982 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1983
<LLD <LLD <LLD g
<LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD E 1984 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1985 1986
<LLD 5.3
<LLD 12.4
<LLD 8.4
<LLD 0.8
<LLD 29.0
<LLD 13.6 l
1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD g 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD I No data available (sample not required) g Location used was an available milk sample location in a least prevalent wind direction greater than ten miles from the site, i 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP. VI-23 I 1 1
s-- n+ 5
; TABLE VI L
'i :' ! ", ei N',NI515t3
', > , , , m ,
s, o CAL N'98,,5tiORTA ,,; 5 ,r 4 s, - t ,s e, e, , ' <, h ,' ' Q', Yl y Y ksES i ', & !'; ,' , , h, ,,
,8-, > ;*' , ,,,",l $j, . tv l '~ ' ~,A S
~
- + ' > ;,t - : ' mea- >
A. : n ,, , ; >
>~
v
,, : ; < .';:'n,:;m
'<,;Resn1ts ta'QC1(Mter u,,,, ,,
~:.r' 'E , , :'"t
;<> . .,c
-LOCATION:1LINDICATOR'*'
Isotope Cs-137- I-131-Year - Min..- Max. Mean- Min. Max.- Mean- { 1969f ** ** ** ** ** ** h 1974f 1.6 39 10.5 0.70 2.00 1.23 1975 6.0 22- 16 0.01 2.99 0.37 1976 4.0 15.0 9.3 0.02 45.00 3;20 {- 1977 11.0 22.0 17.1 0.40 0.22 0.02- j 1978 3.4 33.0 9.9 0.19 0.19 0.19- [ 1979 2.7 40.0 9.4 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1 1980 4.0 21.0 9.7 0.4 8.8 4.9 ; J 1981 4.3 29.0 7.6 <LLD <LLD <LLD i 1982 3.1 18.0 6.3 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1983 5.1 5.1 5.1 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1984 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD- <LLD 1985 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD { 1986 6.1 11.1 8.6 0.3 .30.0 5.2 1987 5.5 9.4 7.4 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 10.0 10.0 10.0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD i Locations sampled were available downwind locations within ten' miles 1 with high deposition potential. No data available (control samples not required). i 1969 data is considered to- be pre-operational for the site. 1974' data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP. VI-24 i
I TABLE-VI-19 h
.n ,a w u. m E
; g g g g. . ggyp.
j, s.- g k j, lp kp :nh ph00 pegggbTS $fk!!g g p ', ' I ,- '
?
(nBM * ,
- c ..
1 i L $.;g+.,9eb,ijtNzu, . . .-:.. e+N,w) a5in[pC.1/..di( 2' . -
" ,t PE D' P !
c .. LOCATION: CONTROL
- Isotope -Cs-137-
-Year Min. . Max.. Mean 1969t ** ** **
1974f ** ** ** 1975 ** ** **- 1976 ** ** ** (l i i 1977 ** ** ** 1978 ** ** ** gi s, 1979 ** ** ** 1980 1981
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD l
1982 <LLD <LLD <LLD . 1983 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1984 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1985 1986
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD
<LLD l,'
<LLD 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD g'
1989 <LLD <LLD <lLD Locations was an available food product sample -location in a least prevalent wind direction greater than ten miles from the site, No data available (control samples not required), t 1969 date is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 data is consireri.d to pre-operational for the JAFNPP. g if Data comprised of broadleaf and non-broadleaf vegetation (1980-1984). Data comprised of-broadleaf vegetation only (1985-1989). VI-25 ' I I
l
-TABLE VI-20 1
I - -
,ap ,
,v.... . . . . . . , . . . . ~ . . .
mg /:gg$70RICAE c- V dvnAUISABW4fDATAi s, ' er > gg 1 ;ng' = , , F900 MIDOBCT$ d h r%c , I
~ , m, [ 7'M, ,$lis3DC.i/sN,uib~[8,' - .-
LOCATION:-INDICATOR * ; Isatope Cs-137-Year Min. Max. Mean ; 19691 ** ** ** 1974f 0.04 0.34 0.142 l 1975 1976
<MDL
<MDL
<MDL
<MDL
<MDL
<MDL 1977 <MDL <MDL <MDL 1978 0.01 0.01- 0.01 1979 <LLD <LLD <LLD l 1980 1981 0.004
<LLD 0.060
<LLD 0.033
<LLD 1982 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1983 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1984 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1985 0.047 0.047 0.047 I 1986 <LLD <LLD <LLD >
1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 0.008 0.008 0.008 1989 0.011 0.011 0.011 Indicator locations were available downwind locations within ten miles of the site and with high deposition potential. 1 No data available (control samples not required). I 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for -the site. 1974 data g is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP. it Data comprised of broadleaf and non-broadleaf vegetation (1976-1984). Data comprised of broadleaf vegetation only (1985-1988). VI-26 I I
w.h w I I
! Vil !
l , I I ! AgN l x*/ 1 o I , I l FIGURES AND MAPS l J ; I I , I l I C R 2%""" l 1
l
- I VII, FIGURES lAND MAPS.
1.- DATA GRAPHS This .section -includes-: graphic representation; of selected sample results. For; graphic representation; results less than the MDL or LLD-
.l.' were considered, to be at the MDL or LLD' level of activity.
MDL and LLD values were indicated where possible. J 2. SAMPLE LOCATIONS-le locations referenced as letters and numbers' on
-Samyysisresults-tables'areplottedonmaps, ana i I
g
.I I
I I 1' g-l I I : g . I VII-1
m m m m m m m W m M M M M m m _ m . m m m FIGURE 1A f ^
- N OFF-SITE ENVIROMENTAL STATION _ A F
=
AND TLD LOCATIONS 1, '
- _ vN ~lfh w;p
. - g 1
ea w; E h~ ,Nd F$
@a ._.J
>1, r' L
p~v~/ / M>)3 1 . ,
. . . . . -~=w I- ,*
f w , r -- & s.aosseo ,,
&E LAKE #M i h "( ,
=-
s m - 3 ,-
* ' ::;'t"lL"^,;'" 9 ONTARIO ::: -
,. i
.," 1
- a. --=
~- > 3 j
i - n, m.u. v s-N e 5m s s
, Id " * ' * "
)
' N i _
-= - -
/ \ . - . ?,De J.
p
- zy
( , c <.
, o.
/ M =. W3 _
. 5
~
r- M l x
' i .? I f N YZ ~ .
Mk oe . gsI' k, _ .jd@$MMID ' AS m a t- uter tTr eu _a...=n g b G r%&t 3 Ch [ : 7L . i g Q >i .,.% p}Q p L ; _ q q ; ; _
---m.--m-- . - - - - - - - , - , ~ . - - - - - -
n I'~ ' '
\
' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ~ '
I :
~
; U-l, i
x ~~_ _ j ~.
. ,i., f/, ;\., ,
k'n [ .' - l,
}
np y njg
' e ~ .'
9 / n A -
- go
\,s } i lr,1 .
Gy --> g I g1 b '" [ j f' - l c tj n,i .
;..J'- ',,. I j; 5Jjjjgj I
s ti j# ! I j f i a [ - an g- u .
} - / , 1 1i r1 JJ y 1
l'
. /._d _m io' ('h..
e [e I N 3(I-E E' i I s , d m g a (_[ [ g h hh g n.: in umat% w__ , y 3 2 W wa F ('d i
- E gi "L c h L hrMk g g E,!b - fh . ...
a 4 I MMD' \ d_ ly11-3 I
i 1 i
*v g}
~
s p
}/"# me 7
. ,y-a a a9 44 9 i W s cewr d\ L
>=-- -
-a l
.s+\ 4 g. 7 i
,x F
/
r l I \ p
#2 Db m M,, e< .
i
, 7> '" ~1: -t= /,,4 g eA c
* :=r >
~
. I A TLD Location f "'1 5 '
i"
~
\ I o
%l i W
i e FIGURE 2 ON-SITE ENVIR0l#4 ENTAL STATION AND TLD LOCATIONS
/
N fg /
~ x I
*? N N y
/ ,\ (
Y' --y - '
/ fo, e
I)i
~ --- -
9'
? -
J'j' 3 4 VII-4 L____ _____ _ - - . - .
+
, iu
- _ ryg v;py :,j p ,
r . .. s .. '
~ p. <A n f i yd ,3/ a;u , h.j. y [g !
3 n' l u pi ' a _
,, 1
- n ~( e }i y ' . ,
9# M? ' -
}l
) , m 4;. [(g p" t n /
= t g in l}4gj;y_i _ m ,y 2 g m o l k , , j
[j
~ l # , -
3dy M. ~
<l; '
I e mg . I; o ai f, / g i
, T >1; .
J 2, M jo.';-
'47 1
e . m - l;
,ws s ,
4, (,d !! 4j. s.- a p'ljp a l g s n r
) m a. b
,p . M s
,q g,
_w
* \ * ]g jv 6 e
,a, 1 -
- s 7 ,
t - g 3 o x as e. a. s, s 4 in . M 8 N, g $ f I 8 -- l t
=. g
.. 3- 1 ~
! 8 f I
m
=,gQ Ps '
- i at n
l iii
~
f%}} o -_ 1
; Ii 1
l [ ._- . , l g
,, aim. .. .. . " ' .i - '
l ,a m- ~ e siw p a,no w' I
~
8 il 1 / 11.-- M. x, ,. - i
,l,p ;s L "a }j 4 '
4 9 _ g., .
- s' ,
E s $ 'trh[ lll'y 'I' ' ( l ~
' IfsId%h [4l$
agi Siv.1 y W. Nil {w / 'p!~'< . a e 73yeg Jrjtw u<y g(,(4: 'l- - i 99 jg o. 4ya - - 9g,Ny j . +, . i p l / y ly ln - 7;; t ., Mkr b ,, , "
',8
*H y fy , y b ,Y c,
l t ;] ,tf, .h4a L : j p. p 5 {P%* _s y u g*! _J_/ gj g i"T m
'ig"? - jjj3p *
[g [ m o s "y d,1 -f9Rxwx ArV{ L
\ mMtia 5
e $e a.'- /. n8 i y f g= a _w- Cm. _ ..-, - 1 55 lii = o VII-6
n-4 I FIGURE 5 1 NEW YORK STATE MAP ll
'I
/
b l-ll take ontatl*- s*, n aj I
,_ r - = surm.o gg g j _, ,
A a NEW L YTO:R K j 5l t l.. . j Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit I Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 2 .- l James A. FitzPatrick Nuc1 car Power Plant av m cm I . 3 I; ; Ii VII-7
FIGURE 6 JAMES A. FITZPATRICK N.P.P. FISH ,Cs-137 2.0 - 1974 nsidered . pre-op. for JAF 1.8 - J . CONTROL DATA LESS THAN DETECTABLE -1975.1981 1.6 -
~~
- 1. 4 -
< 1. 2 -
G e M 1.o -
~
- o. 8 -
g O. 6 - - LEGEND
- INDICRTOR
= 0.4'-
e CONTROL
- 0. 2 -
- 0. 0 - i _l ; i
'S I "*"""' y y y y y 1974 - ~'1976- 1978- 1980- 1982~ 1984 1986 1988 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 -1985 .1987 1989
Figure 7 JAMES A. FITZPATRICK N.P.P. SURFACE WATER TRITIUM 1000 -
~ ^^ '
' ^ -
900 - - 1985-1989 CONTROL DATA OSWEGO STEAM STATION INLET-800 - 700 - $ 600 - 500 -
~
I 400 - O 300 - LEGEND
~
200 -- C 100--
-g' 0 .; _i. g. .; g' g- g. g _g. i ; g -. ;g g Y97b f977 f97b 98f f98b f98b I987 f989
,[ _
%, m , _ , , , _ _ . _ _
* - + - -
Figu re 8 JAMES A. FITZPATRICK N.P.P. AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA - 0.20 - 1978 & late. 198O-otrnospheric tests O.18 - 1986 Chernobyl: _ accident.
~
~
~
1974 pre-op for JAFNPP 0.14 - 3 < 0.12 - 1o 2~ N 0.10 -
-0.08 -
n ~ O. De - -LEGEND. O.04 - G222a C R 53 0.00 .,E--g. g. g. ._ , g. -- g .g .g. -g. g_ .
-g j. -g.
Y97b f977 f97b 98f $83 Y98b 987 f989. ~ _
. _. . = . . . - . - - .---_,-._---: -: .
..._........_...__..__._.._......_............_......__...._... .....s_ _ _ . _ . . .
Figu re 9 . JAMES A. FITZPATRICK N.P.P. AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA ^ 0.030 - O.027 - O.024 - (T) . ,,,s = < 0.018 - ; 0.015 - O.012 - 0.009 - LEGEND-O.006 - .j E2m OFFSITES 0.003 - 3 7. - 11 3 ,15 I7 19 21 23 25 8 0 6
w FIGURE 10 b JAMES A. FITZPATRICK N.P.P. AIR PARTICULATE GROSS -BETA 0.050 - O.045 - O.040 - 0.035 - ! CO i
- 5 < 0.030 - !
T > ! 5 N 0.025 - ! (_) 0.020 - j
,; [j ;
n ; : j , 0.015 - l g j j g
! l l LEGEND j j j j j j j j anusONSITES-O.010 - j ; ; j -
! ! ; ; OFFSITES:
0.00s - l ! ! ! ! ! ! ! S ' E 0.000 ; ;_. ..; j :. ; . g _ j.; g; -; g. g g_g ;- g 28 30 32 34 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 mm . 1
- . - - . - - . . . - _ . . - - - _ -..._..a_-- :. . - ,.:~ _2- . . _ __ _ . ___
_ _ = _ = _ _ - _
- O FIGURE 11 JAMES A. FITZPATRICK N.P.P.
AIR PARTICULATE COMPOSITE! Co O.020 -
^
0.018 - CHERNOBYL ACCIDENT 1986 0.016 - 1986-1989. LESS THAN - - DETECTABLE-- O.014 - lNDICATOR AND CONTROL : VALUES _y CO O < 0.012 -
$ T N 0.010 -
l l . U 0.008-- n LEGEND O.006 -
- INDICATOR 0.004 -
^
e CONTROL _ 0.002 -
-' " 8 "U EE E O.000 ,
,. g ,
i
.1977- '1979 :
1981 1983- "1985 1987 1988-1978 1980 .1982: 1984 1986. m en - m m :n m~ m e m; e :m) m . m m m :. m a g.
Fig ure 12 JAMES A. FITZPATRICK N.P.P. AIR PARTICULATE COMPOSITE Cs-137 0.040 - t 1978 & late 1980 0.036 - otmospheric testing 0.032 - Chernobyl occident 1986 0.028 - C < 0.024 - j- 2 N 0.020 - H - (_) o.ois - O.012 - LEGEND ImusINDICATOR 0.008 - a2zaCONTROL 0.004 - . O.000 E3 m'd M3 EE _. i I i g , i i _ 1977 1979 1981- 1983 1985 1987 1989 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988
' ' " ' ' ' ' I ' ' I 'I I m ll l E ' p l' ' l Bl h in R Ell INlll R l lH l*IlP ' ' " ' ' ' ' " " ' ' ' " ' I 4
a. Figure 13 i JAMES A. FITZPATRICK N.P.P. AIR RADIOIODINE 1.0 - 1978 & 1 te 1980-otmospheric tests O. 9 - ! 1986 Chernobyl occide'n t -
' o. 8 - .
l
- o. 7 -
C -< o. s -
- $;- Z N o. s -
H . (_) O. 4 - o O_
- 0. 3 - LEGEND-
- INDICATOR
- o. 2 - e CONTROL
- o. 1 -
.i i
- 0. 0 i i l i i 'l I l-1 I i i 1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989 1976- 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 c
M M M M M M M M M M M M M m'M M M M M
FIGURE 14 JAMES A. FITZPATRICK N.P.P. MILK Cs-137 20 -
~
18 - 1986 CHERNOBYL ACCIDENT
~
NO CONTROL DATA 1974-1977 14 - 12 - 10 -
~
8- f l-~ l =!!!E-2- Y975 97h 97 98 983 f%h 987 989
FIGURE '15 JAMES A. FITZPATRICK N.P.P. MILK 1-131 20 - 1978 & LATE 1980-ATMOSPHERIC TESTS 18 - 1986 CHERNOBYL ACCIDENT 16 - NO CONTROL DATA 1974 -1977 14 -
$, 12 -
t; I 10 -
~
l-l 8- ; O O 6- LEGEND
- INDICRTOR 4- , ezzza CONTROL 2- $ .
l 0 E]E ] . 1974 1976 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988
; ; i : g , ,
1975 1977 1979 1981 1983 1985 1987 1989
.I
. _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ . _ - _ - _ = _ _ _ _ = _ _ _ . . _ = _ . -
um ums em ums amm aus aus em um amm um num uma es uns amm amm amm amm i . FIGURE 16 [ JAMES A. FITZPATRICK N.P.P. l TLD DATA 10 - l NO SITE BOUNDARY VALUES PRIOR TO 1985 LEGEND j 9- ammeCONTROL j l NO OFFSITE SECTOR (3-5 MILES) 122223 SITE BOUNDARY , VALUES ' PRIOR TO 1985 i O 7-
$ 6- <
5- l
~
; s l ;
i s s s O 4- s s l l . N s l s l s 1 3- l l l l ! LLI ' s
~
l 1 2- I l l I l' l l l l
- 1- l s l s l s l s .
O g g .
.: : ; i j i i g' i j g. g' ;
$975 977 !979 981 983 Y985 987 989 i
i i
,~. - _.. . . ,. - . . , . . , . . . . . . . . - - . ~ . . . ~ - , . -
I I I I l Vlli l i Do l w/ N" I l I USEPA ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY : LABOR ATORY INTERCOMPARISON STUDY' PROGR AM l I ; I I I SM*' l I l
VIII SUPO4ARY OF USEPA ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY LABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON STUDIES PROGRAN RESULTS-This section includes results of JAF analyses compared to. [- reference - samples originatin from the United States Environmental Protection Agency . Technical specifications partici SEPA)in ion this program includesAs required by media for which environme,ntal samples are routinely collected. { All intercomparison data is summarized in table -fom. The tables are titlec 'USEPA Environmental Radioactivity Laboratory. [ Intercomparison Study Program". The USEPA reports interlaboratory results in tems of [- nomalized results are deviations consideredfrom a knownby'the-acceptable NDKV1. value (EPA Interlaborator if the -laborator 'y NOKV for a sample is between plus 3 and minus 3. For examp e,s the NDKV for QA 89-031 is 0.58. Since this value is less t an {' plus 3 but greater thar, minus 3, the EPA considers this value acceptable. The laboratories's perfomance was acceptable-results within 3 nomalized deviations were obtained for 38 of- 36 analysis.- [ . NONCONFORNITIES k QA-89-009 The JAF Laboratory gamma in water results for- Ru-106 was outside the acceptance bounds for the NDKV. The efficiency calibration for Ru-106.was evaluated and l (- found to be correct. A review of- the analytical ! results showed no discrepancies in the analysis. The a other five radionuclides measured in this sample were ! [ within one standard deviation from the known, indicating that- there is no systematic error. The ; i sample was re-analyzed using new calibration factors.- ! r The re-analysis results were consistent with the i original results. No cause- for the confomit was detemined. The Ru-106 results for QA-89-058 (y6/89) 4 (; which was a similar sample were acceptable. ' VIII-1
- i
! TABLE VIII-1 !I l! . USEPAtENVIRONMENTAQRAD10ACTIVITYsLABORATORYH
;INTERCOMPARIS0N[$TUD%)R0GRAN
'E lGaoss?Bava AnaLystsfor?AralPaarscetavtsFattaesT(PC /r Lisal ,E Gnoas t Sera 1 AnaLysss ier g unten ;(PCr/Lrtsat
--- -- m===m == mmmmmmmmmmme ==========m m ====m ------- - -=======
!l DATE JAF ENV ID NUIRER MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF RESULT (1) EPA RESULT (2) NDKV (5) I l ! 03/89 QA 89-031 APF BETA 61 2(3) 6215 -0.58 lI 60 2 60 2
.l 04/89 QA 89-032 WATER BETA 5012(3) 5213 5715 -2.42
- 4812 05/89 QA 89-047 WATER BETA 51 3(3) 5015 -0.46 lE i
lu 47 3 48 3 l 08/89 QA 89-090 APF BETA (6) (6) (6) ,I l 09/89 QA 89-105 WATER BETA 6 1(3) 615 -0.12 iE ,5 61 51 l 10/89 QA 89-129 WATER BETA 32 1(3) 30 1 3215 -0.35 i 31 1
- I
- I lI l VIII-2
I I TABLE VIII-2 I
;USEPA1ENVIR0l#4ENTAkRADI0 ACTIVITY;uB0RATORY?
- INTERCOMPARISONISTUDOR0 GRAM !
LTatizesefAsus.vs siesdint1te! mci /Laran)j g JAF ENV JAF EPA e DATE ID NUMBER NEDIUN ANALYSIS RESULT RESULT NDKV (1) (2) (5) E l 02/89 QA 89-012 WATER H-3 3066 140(3) 27541356 1.85 I 3181 141 3154 141 3300 100(4) 27541356 1.20 l 2900 100 g 2800 100 3 06/89 QA 89-063 WATER H-3 4961 155(3) 45031450 1.93 5036 156 5013 155 g 4300 100(4) 40531450 -0.64 4400 100 m 4300 100 l l 10/89 QA 89-119 WATER H-3 36781149(3) 34961364 0.12 3335i146 l 35491148 g 3500 200(4) 34961364 -0.30 3400 100 m l 3400 100 g I I VIII-3 l
- TABLE VIII-3 l USEPAiLENVIR0084ENTAll RADIGACTIVITV j LABORATORY <
?INTERCOMPARIS0NiSTUDI$ PROGRAM ilosansi: Annysasi ori Warsa d(pCji/s.staanameTMa ut Mr / Lum)
ENV JAF JAF EPA DATE ID NUMBER MEDIUM ANALYSIS RESULT RESULT NDKV (1) (2) (5) 02/89 QA 89-011 WATER I-131 107 5(3) 106111 0.31 109 6 108 4 94 20(4) 106111 -1.58 96 20 98 20 08/89 QA 89-082 WATER I-131 87 1(3) 8318 1.15 88 3 90 3 83 1(4) 8318 -0.79 80 3 75 3 VIII-4
I l TABLE VIII-4 I l USEPA:ENVIR00MENTALTRADI0 ACTIVITY! LABORATORY:- I
?INTERCOMPARIS0N{STUDCPROGRAM 4
l h AssListh or MELui:YTrasikz/Laran)? i ANDE AIR f PARTICULATE 1FILTsas:JPCr/rrLran) g JAF ENV JAF EPA a DATE ID NUMBER MEDIUM NUCLIDE RESULT RESULT NDKV g (1) (2) (5) 02/89 QA 89-009 WATER Cr-51 216118(3) 235124 -0.94 225 35 225127 g Co-60 10+1(3) 1015 -0.12 1f3 9 l Zn-65 14916(3) 159116 '0.83 i !!$$}2 ! Ru-106 143 16(3) 178118 -3.56 a 143 24 5 137 24 Cs-134 8 1(3) 92 1015 -0.35 l 10 2 Cs-137 9 2(3) 10 5 -0.35 10 3
. 82 03/89 QA 89-031 APF Cs-137 27 5(3) 2015 2.19
~
26 ! l 04/89 QA 89-032 WATER Cs-134 18 2(3) 16+4 2015 -0.92 l 18i4 Cs-137 19+4(3) 19T4 2015 -0.23 l 2015 VIII-5 l
G [ TABLE VIII-4 (c0NTINUED) [ : USEPAt ENVIR0000 ENTAL ( RADI0ACTIVITYJ LABORATORY! IIINTERCOMPARISON3STUDYjPROGRAM Gassen ~Amavass(orYLtdWataal(stbIA. tant (amo;AnatP aavacuara FILisas?(pCs/r LTea). [ JAF ENV JAF EPA - DATE ID Mll0SER NEDIUM NUCLIDE RESULT RESULT NDKV [ (1) (2) (5) l [ 04/89 QA 89-033 MILK Cs-137 50 8(3) 5015 -0.12 50 8 49 9 06/89 QA 89-058 WATER Co-60 34+4(3) 3115 0.35 ( 3312 , 2914 ( Zn-65 172 6(3) 165117 1.70 198 14 175 13 ( Ru-106 127 17(3) 128 13 -0.36 127 28 122 27 Cs-134 3712(3) 3915 -0.58 38+4 - [ 3714 Cs-137 1812(3) 2015 0.00 20+4 2213 08/89 QA 89-090 APF Cs-137 1014(3) 1015 0.35 12+4 1115 VIII-6
B l I; I TABLE VIII-4 (CowTrwuro) I '
- USEPA? ENVIR0004ENTAtt RADI0 ACTIVITY / l.ABORATORY :
JINTERCOMPARISON?STUDYfPROGRAM* ! tweenfAndystaf or NaixNivandeci/t.tran)? E
- Ano1Asa Paavaceta w Fztrans APCS /FrLisa): E
' DATE JAF ENV ID NUMBER MEDIUM NUCLIDE JAF RESULT (1) EPA RESULT (2) NDKV (5) l 10/89 QA 89-106 WATER Ba-133 6416(3) 5915 0.00 I lii6 I Co-60 28 5(3) 29 5 32 5 30i5
-0.12 l
Zn-65 134 15(3) 129113 0.80 I 136 14 135 16 l Ru-106 138 32(3) 161116 -1.88 E 138 36 E 155 43 Cs-134 2614(3) 2915 -1.15 I 26+4 l 2615 Cs-137 59 6(3) 5915 0.12 3 59 6 3 60 6 I I VIII-7 l
I I TABLE VIII-4 (CONTINUED) l
;USEPAl ENVIRONMENTALs RADI0ACTIVITYRABORATORYe
!I s I NTERCOMPARISON ? STUD.Y;:! PROGRAM l l ' Gassen' Am4 Lysis or flaut jlinhir:MCr/s. van)1 inne Ara;PaaraceLata F ;Lvans 9pCr/Frtraat
- JAF JAF ENV EPA ,
DATE ID NUMBER MEDIUM NUCLIDE RESULT RESULT NDKV (1) (2) (5) 1 !l i 10/89 QA 89-129 WATER Cs-134 5 2(3) 42 512 515 -0.12 Cs-137 g(3) 515 -0.12 lg 512 lI 'l s l (1) - RESULTS REPORTED AS ACTIVITY 1 THE ERROR (2 SIGMA). (2) - RESULTS REPORTED AS ACTIVITY 1 THE STANDARD DEVIATION OF THE
- l ERROR.
l (3) - ANALYZED AT THE SITE ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY. (4) - ANALYZED AT A VENDOR LABORATORY. (5) I NDKV IS THE NORMALIZED DEVIATION FROM KNOWN VALUE AS DETERMINED BY THE EPA. VALUES WITHIN THE RANGE OF +3 AND -3 INDICATE ACCEPTABLE RESULTS. l (6) - INTERCOMPARISON STUDY ON THIS SAMPLE WAS DETERMINED TO BE INVALID BY THE USEPA DUE TO A PROBLEM WITH THE I-131 WHICH WAS DEPOSITED ON THE FILTER.
;I VIII-8
.,--..y,..,-,.e . _ . _ , .s.- ,..,,--...,.,......_.,._,...,.c- , . . - ~ , , . . - - - . - -}}