ML20064J402
| ML20064J402 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 03/01/1979 |
| From: | ALABAMA POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19261B804 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7903060281 | |
| Download: ML20064J402 (60) | |
Text
l l
l
,r i ANALYSIS OF THE JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT'S CONTRIBUTION TO CHEMICALS IN THE CHATTAHOOCHEE RIVER, UNIT ONE STUDY m
I 1
r i
7903060 AI/! -
' n l
s f
r'
('
t
SUMMARY
The Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS), Section 3.1.l(a)-1, require a chemical study of the Chattahoochee River. The objective of the study is to determine the plant's contribution to increases above ambient concentrations for chemicals in the waters of the Chattahoochee River and to provide data for use in assessing any significant adverse impact observed on aquatic biota of the Chattahoochee River. Ar.y'such impact on the biota by the operation of Farley Nuclear Plant is addressed in a separate report. -
Beginning with the commercial operation of Unit No.1, the study was to last for a period of one year. The analysis period was extended to thirteen months to provide a larger data base.
To assist in the analysis of the data, the analyses are summarized in numerical and graphical form. The graphical form gives a pictorial representation of the trends for each parameter. These trends are presented for two different groupings of the data. The May-December grouping provides an indication of the change in the concentration ~~
of the tested parameters as one proceeds downstream. If the intake sample point has any abnormalities which would affect the discharge sample point, then these abnormalities can be observed. However, e ily data for eight months, including the additional data for the month of December,1978, are available for each parameter at each test point.
A second grouping gives the trends for the upstream, discharge, and downstream points for thirteen months. This larger number of data points helps eliminate any statistical errors which may have occurred. A l problem arises in that any contributions to pollution levels at the intake will not be taken into account. This may tend to fault erroneously the --
plant for increases in pollutant levels.
Based upon the data available, the conclusion is reached that
, Farley Nuclear Plant does not contribute significantly to the ambient l concentration of chemicals in the Chattahoochee River.
p INTRODUCTION
- The Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant Environmental Technical
/
Specifications (ETS), Section 3.1.1(a)-1, require a chemical study of
,the Chattahoochee River. The objective of the study is to determine the plant's contribution to increases above ambient concentrations for chemicals in the waters of the Chattahoochee River and.to provide data for use in assessing any significant adverse impact observed on aquatic biota of the Chattahoochee River. Any impact on the biota of the Chattahoochee River by the' operation of Farley Nuclear Plant is addressed in a separate report.
entitled Environmental Non-Radiological Monitoring of Acuatic Communities in the Chattahoocnee River. Beginning with tne commercial operation of Unit No.1, the study was to last for a period of one year. Unit No.1 began commercial operation on December 1,1977. The analysis period was extended to thirteen months to provide a larger data base.
The parameters which were sampled are given in Table 3.1.1-1 of the ETS. This table is reproduced as Table I of this report. The sampling locations are given in Figure 3.1-1 of the ETS and reproduced as Figure I ,
of this report.
Occasionally'a parameter's concentration was not determined because of technical difficulties. The dates when this occurred are indicated in the tabulation of monthly chemical data (Appendix I).
Additionally, through an administrative oversite, the required parameters were not monitored at the intake structure until May,1978. It is regrettable that the oversite occurred; however, this loss of data did not interfere with determining the plant's contribution to chemical con.:entra-tions in the river. _
To assist in the analysis of the data, the analyses are .sumarized in numerical form (Tables II and III) and in graphical form (Appendices II and III). The graphical form gives a pictorial representation of the trends for each parameter. These trends are presented for two different groupings of the data. Appendix II presents the data for May - December,1978 for all locations. This grouping provides an indication of the change in the concentration of the tested parameters as one proceeds downstream. If the intake sample point has any abnormalities which would affect the discharge sample point, then these abnormalities can be observed. However, only data- -
for eight months, including the additional data for the month of December, 1978, are available for'each parameter at each test point.
A second grouping, Appendix III, gives the trends for the upstream, discharge, and downstream points for thirteen ranths. This larger number of data points helps eliminate any statistical errors which may have occurred.
A problem arises in that any contributions to pollution levels at the intake will not be taken into account. This may tend to fault erroneously the plant for increases in pollutant levels.
The analyses were conducted according to the methods specified in the FEDERAL REGISTER, Volume 41, dated December 1,1976. A 95% confidence interval for the accuracies of each test was determined. These accuracies for each test method are given in Tables II and III.
( The temperature was taken each time the dissolved oxygen was determined. These temperatures were instantaneous readings and as such are 5
. not part of the data recorded for the report on the thermal contribution of Farley Nuclear Plant to the Chattahoochee River'.
DATA ANALYSIS Four Sampling Point Analysis The averages for the concentrations of the parameters for the four point analysis are given in Table II and the trend analyses are given in Appendix II. A review of all data reveals that only in three instances does the variations of the means exceed the 95% confidence interval. These are nitrogen, iron, and silica. Of these three, nitrogen and iron are on the low side of the confidence limit for the discharge. The silica concentra-tion is on the high side of the confidence interval; however, the intake concentration is higher than the discharge concentration.
The parameters.
exists for four trend analysis of the data reveals that a positive slope These are dissolved oxygen, calcium, potassium, and dissolved phosphorus. Since an increase in dissolved oxygen is. ~
considered beneficial, this parameter will not be discussed further in this
-section.
Potassium at the discharge is 2.22% higher than at the intake.
This difference is considered insi between the intake and discharge. gnificant because Additionally, of the emphasized it is again small difference that the differences analytical method. within this grouping are well within the accuracy of the The concentration of calcium is higher at the discharge by 0.8%
for the upstream point, by 2.74% for the intake point, but is lower by 2.10% for the downstream value. Since the discharge is lower than the downstream value, it may be stated that if the plant contributes to the calcium level, such contribution is small compared with nature's contri-bution. However, the accuracy'of the test accounts for variations in this parameter. ,
i The dissolved phosphorus concentration is 0.037 ppm for upstream, 0.032 ppm for intake, 0.039 ppm for discharge and 0.036 ppm for downstream; -
l 1
however, the August concentration for the discharge point is missing. By 1
. omitting the concentrations for the month of August, the averages would be !
0.040 ppm, 0.034 ppm, 0.039, ppm and 0.038 ppm for the uostream, intake, I discharge, and downstream points, respectively. Since the upstream, discharge, !
and the downstream cuncentrations are approximately equal, then it appears I that the plant does not contribute significantly to the dissolved phosphorus '
levels in the river. '
i There are six cases in which the discharge concentrations exceed the intake concentrations. .
dissolved phosphorus, turbidity, and chloride.These are dissolved oxygen, potassium, $ ca l The dissolved oxygen, I calcium, dissolved in previous sections.phosphorus, and potassium have been adequately explained 4
[
(
i (
The sample for turbidity for the discharge is taken at a point where the discharge water enters the river. The velocity of the discharge f is such that there is a possibility that the sediment in the river is stirred-up in a localized area. The downstream sample point has a marked decrease in turbidity. The discharge turbidity therefore is assumed to be a localized phenomenon and of negligible impact.
The chloride concentration is 0.65 ppm greater at the discharge than at the intake. These values are well within the confidence limits for the chloride test. The downstream concentration is lower than the discharge, intake, and upstream concentration. The higher concentration at the discharge compared with the downstream proves that any addition of chloride by the plant has been negated by the time the water reaches the downstream location. Additionally, since 50% of the waters in the United States have a chloride concentration of at least 9 ppm, then any plant contribution of chloride is insignificant.
In conclusion, based upon the four sampling point analysis, the Farley Nuclear Plant did not contribute significantly to ambient -
concentrations of chemicals in the Chattahoochee River. This statement is primarily based upon the fact that in only one case did the average concentration for the discharge lie on the high side of the 95% confidence interval about the mean. In this one case the concentration of this pollutant is greater at the intake than at the discharge.
Three Samplino point Analysis The averages for the thirteen months of data are given in Table -
III and the trend analyses in Appendix III. An anu ysis of the data indicates that in no instance do any of the average concentrations fall outside of the 95% confidence interyal about the mean.
The trend analysis reveals that a positive slope exists for four parameters. These are sodium, magnesium, manganese, and potassium.
The differences in the sodium concentrations between the discharge and other points are less than one percent. These small differences between the points indicate that no trend can be established. Magnesium is.found to increase as one proceeds down the river. A small difference in the upstream and _
discharge concentrations confirms that the Farley Nuclear Plant does not contribute to the magnesium concentration in the river. The manganese concentration at the discharge is less than at upstream and downstream points. Potassium does show a slightly higher concentration at the discharge than at the other points. However, again it must be emphasized that the differences between the concentrations are within the error produced by the analytical method.
There are three parameters in which the discharge gives higher values than the other points but still produces a negative sloping curve.
These are chloride, silica, and turbidity. The chloride and turbidity have been addressed in the section for the four point analysis. The arguments presented in that section apply here. The silica curve for the four point analysis indicates that the discharge concentration is higher than the upstream and downstream but that the intake is higher than all points. It is therefore assumed that some abnormaility exists at the intake which
( causes the high concentration of silica at the discharge.
v-
1 The remaining parameter to be discussed, dissolved oxygen, is g- found to be lower at the discharge than at the other points. However, reviewing the data in Appendix I, the April dissolved oxygen is unusually low at the discharge. With the April value not included in the average then the difference between the upstream and discccrga is about one percent which is considered insignificant. The opast teason for the low readings cannot be established. Regardless of whether or not the April reading is in error, the difference of 0.4 ppm is insignificant.
In conclusion, for the three test sampling point analysis the Farley Nuclear Plant does not contribute significantly to ambient concentrations of chemicals in the Chattahoochee River. This statement is based upon the fact that the difference between the means of the three sample points is within the accuracies of the test methods.
6 ene M
i e
a g@
FIGURE I (r'
Andrawe Lock & Dom .
i l
s i CRM 46 Schematic Diagrcm of Chattahoochee River Near the Joseph M. Farley Nuclear -
Plant
- CRM 45
\
. I
- CRM 44 CRM 43.8 2 - PLANT INTAKE i
PLANT DIEHARGE CRM 43.5 -
CRM - Chattahoochee River Miles 3
( -
? RM 43
/
(1) Sampling station upstream from intake canal. if (2) Sampling sta: ion in intake canal. ',
(3) Sanpling station below plant discharge.
(4) Sampling station downstream from discharga i
- ,CRM 42 /
structure. }
CRM 41.3 4(-
l CRM 41 r
i Ii, l
I l ALADAMA PDetR COWre4Y JOSEPH M. FARLEY NUCLEAN %Aarf (NVimomutNTAL TECwwsCAL $PECIFfCATions
(
' THERMAL MONITORING B l NON-RADIOLOGICAL WATER f '~
SAMPLING STATIONS
\
'3 -17 FIGURE 3. 5 -1 e
" *5****.e- ww een, e . . . , - . , ,
W9 9
7
(
W TABLES t
i I
- - "~g _, m... ~*~'m=a-%,,,
TABLE 3.1-1 LISTING OF NONRADIOLOGICAL CIIEMICAL PARAMETERS TO DE ,
- ANALYZED DURING THE OPERATIONAL P51ASE
\ OF THE FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT Test Boron (mg/1)
Phosphorus, total (mg/1)
Phosphorus ~, dissolved (mg/1)
Sulfate (mg/1)
Ammonia (mg/1)
Nitrogen-Nitrate-Nitrite (mg/1)
Calcium (mg/1)
Manganese (mg/1)
- Magnesium (mg/1)
G
(
Iron (mg/1)
Sodium (mg/1)
Potassium (mg/l) ,
Chlorine, total residual (mg/1)
[
Chloride (mg/1)
I Silica (mg/1) l i
Lithium (mg/1)
Dissolved Oxygen (mg/1) f i
Turbidity (JTU)
Total Dissolved Solids (mg/1) pli (Standard units)
- ' Temperature ( C) l ((
l
- 3- 15 TABLE 1
~
i TABLE II Sunnary of Chemical Data May - December,1978 Upstream, Intake, Discharge and Downstream Sample Points i
l l
(' ~
f
. . . . . .1 4
(- .
i Farley Nuclear Plant Non-Radiological Chemical Surveillance May 1978 - December 1978 (2)
(1) 957, Up- Down- Standard Confidene stream Intake Discharge stream Average Deviation Interval Temperature CC 22.7 22.7 24.1 22.6 Ofssolved Oxygen-mg/l 8.0 7.5 7.9 7.9 7.8 0.5 1.0 pH - units 7.4 7.5 7.4 7.4 7.4 0.5 1.0 Total Dissolved Solids-mg/l 65.6 61.3 52.8 50.4 57.5 5 10 Chlorine, total-mg/l <0.1 (0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 ..
Boron-ug/l 130.0 104.0 91.0 109.6 108'.5 27 54 Phosphorus, Total-mg/l 0.058 0.057 0.053 0.057 0.056 0.003 0.006 Phosphorus, Dissolved-mg/l 0.037 0.032 0.039 0.036 0.036 0.003 0.006 Sulfate eg/l 6.6 7.2 6.9 6.3 6.7 0.6 1.2 Armenia mg/l 0.05 0.04 0.04- 0.04 0.04 0.01 0.02 N i trogen-Ni trate-mg/l 0.43 0.80 0.39 0.35 0.49 0.02 0.04 Calcium mg/l 6.2 6.0 6.2 6.3 6.2 0.6 1.2 Manganese ug/l 98.5 126.5 86.0 95.5 101.6- 17 34 Magnesium mg/l 1.14 1.11 1.04 1.14 1.11 0.2 0.4 Iron mg/l 1.43 1.85 1.00 1.48 1.44 0.08 0.M Sodium mg/l 8.1 8.0 7.3 7.9 7.8 0.5 1.0 Potassium mg/l 1 .71 1.76 1.80 1.74 1.76 0.07 0.14 i Chloride mg/l 6.2 6.0 6.6 5.6 6.1 0.5 1.0 Silica mg/l 8.0 8.78 8.57 7.83 8.33 0.07 0.14 Lithium ug/l <10.0 <10.0 <10.0 (10.0 <10.0 4 8 Turbidity JTU 12.0 13.8 14.0 12.0 12.8 2.5 5.0 (1) Standard deviation was determined for the test method by running severa1'hundred known samples.
(2) The confidence interval was determined by multiplying the standard deviation by two.
(3) These values are for May - December 1978 only.
(- -- , . , ,
r TABLE III Summary of Chemical Data December 1977 - December 1978 Upstream, Discharge, and Downstream Sample Points 9
)
i
(~
1
/ F mj
(
\ -
Farley Nuclear Plant Non-Radiological Chemical Surveillance I
December 1977 - December 1978 (2)
(1 95%
Standard } Confidenc Upstream Discharge Downstream Average Deviation Interval
. Temperature OC 17.9 19.3 17.8 Dissolved Oxygen-mg/l 9.0 8.6 9.0 8.9 0.5 1.0 pH - units 7.3 7.2 7.3 7.3 0.5 1.0 Toti.1 Dissolved Solids-mg/l 58.9 50.7 49.0 52.9 5.0 10 Chlorine, total-mg/l <0.1 (0.1 < 0.1 <,0 ,1 ,
B oron-ug/l 110.8 81.4 91.5 94.6 27 54
~
Phosphorus Total-mg/l 0.058 0.056 0.058 0.057 0.03 0.006 Phosphorus, Dissolved-mg/ 0.037 0.032 0.039 0.036 0.~003 0.006
. Sulfate mg/l 6.9 6.7 6.5 6.7 0.6 1.2
(~
Annonia mg/l 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.01 0.02 Nitrogen-Nitrate-mg/l 0.45 0.42 0.38 0.42 0.02 0.04 Calcium mg/l 6.5 5.8 5.8 6.0 0.6 1.2 Manganese ug/l 88.4 71.7 94.8 85.0 1.7 34
- Magnesium mg/l 1.05 1.05 1.13 1.08 0.2 0.4 Iron mg/l 1.57 1.44 1.56 1.52 0.08 0.16 Sodium mg/l 7.0 7.1 7.0 7.0 0.5 1.0 Potassium mg/l 1.69 1.79 1.76 1.75 0.07 0.14
. Chloride mg/l 5.2 5.6 4.9 5.2 0.5 1.0 Silica mg/l 8.30 8.77 8.18 8.42 0.07 0.14
'- Lithium ug/l (10 '8
<10 <10.0 <10.0 4 Turbidity JTU 15.0 16.0 15.0 1~.7 2.5 5.0 (1) Standard deviation was detemined for the test method by running several hundred known
, samples.
(2) The confidence interval was determined by multiplying the standard deviation by two.
(3) These values are for June - December only.
(4) Tnese values are the same as the four point analysis.
e
/
i O
M 6
APPENDICES m
t w_
I l
t
I I
APPENDIX I ,
lionthly Deteminations of Chemical Data f
I .
I f
I i
i l
t f .
..,a g
g Farley Nuclear Plant No yRadiological Chemical Surveillance December 13, 1977 Upstream Intake (a) Disenarge Downstream Temperature DC 11.0 14.0 11.5 Dissolved Oxygen-mg/l 9.8 9.2 10.2 pH - units 7.6 7.3 7.6 Total Dissolved Solids-mg/l 57.0 62.0 65.0 Chlorine, total-mg/l < 0.01 < 0.01 (0.01 B oron-ug/l .
124.0 105.0 86.0' Phosphorus, Total-mg/l 0.042 0.035 0.046 Phosphorus, Dissolved-mg/l (a) (a) (a)
Sulfate mg/l 8.9 7.4 9.5 Anmonia eg/l 0.02 0.03 0.02, Nitrogen-Nitrate-mg/l 0.59 0.61 0.64 .
Calcium mg/l 4.8 (b ) 4.8 Manganese ug/l 46 54 93 Magnesium mg/l 0.90 0.83 2.9 Iron mg/l 1.29 1.02 1.65
. Sodium mg/1 6.7 7.5 8.1 _
Potassium mg/l 2.1 2.5 2.8 Chloride og/l 4.0 4.5 4.5 t
Silica mg/l 7.90 8.76 8.0 l
l - Lithium ug/l <10.0 <10.0 (b)
Turbidity JTU 12.0 13.0 13.0
~
( (a) Analysis not conducted because of acministrative error .
(b) Analysis not conducted because of technical difficulties.
l I
s .
. 5 e
/
. . .. .. . . .A i
( .
Farley Nuclear Plant.
- NoyRadiological Chemical Surveillance January 17, 1978 Upstream Intake (a) Discharoe Downstream Temperature DC 6.0 7.0 6.0 Dissolved Oxygen-mg/1 11.8 10.6 11.6 pH - units 6.8 7.0 7.2 Total Dissolved Solids-mg/l 37.0 41.0 31.0 Chlorine, total-mg/l <0.01 < 0.01 <0.01 B oron-ug/l 72.0 (b) 50.0~
Phosphorus Total-mg/l 0.041 0.060 0.064 Phosphorus, Dissolved-mg/l (a)
Sulfate mg/l 8.3 6.8 7.7 Anmonia mg/l 0.03 0.03 0.03_
Nitrogen-Ni trate-mg/l 0.66 0.66 0.58 Calcium mg/l 12.0 (b) (b) 29 34 34 Manganese ug/l ,
Magnesium mg/l 0.47 0.58 0.48 1ron mg/l 0.83 0.70 0.69 Sodium mg/l 5.8 6.0 5.8 Potassium mg/l 1.86 1.97 2.02 4.5 4.75 4.25 Chloride mg/l 6.79 7.67 6.83 Silica mg/l
< 10.0 < 10.0 <10.0
- Lithium ug/l 6.3 6.7 3.4 Turbidity JTU
~
(a) Analysis not conducted because of' administrative error.
(b) Analysis not conducted because of technical difficulties. <
- 9 5
s i .
. .a
[
t Farley Nuclear Plant NoyRadiological Chemical Surveillance February 15, 1978 Upstream . Intake (a) Discharce Downs tream Temperature OC 6.7 7.5 6.5
. Dissolved Oxygen-mg/l 11.6 12.4 12.6 pH - units 7.5 7.0 7.2 Total Lissolved Solids-mg/l 75 67 70 Chlorine, total-mg/l ( 0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 B oron-ug/l 95.0 87.0 87.0-Phosphorus, Total-mg/l 0.072 0.068 0.061 .
Phosphorus, Dissolved-mg/l
Sulfate mg/l 5.0 3.72 5.0 0.07 0.00 0.07 Amonia eg/l Nitrogen-Ni trate-eg/l (b) I (b) (b) 8.0 4.0 3.6 Calcium mg/l 94 81 72 Manganese ug/l ,
Magnesium mg/l 0.54 0.53 0.54 Iron eg/l 2.47 3.13 2.38 3.5 3.6 3.41' ~
l ,
Sodium eg/l ,
Potassium mg/l 1.40 1.56 1.40 3.0 3.5 3.25 Chloride mg/l 10.5 10.39 10.63 Silica mg/l l
<10.0 <10.0 <10.0 Lithium ug/l 36.0 38.0 35.0 Turbidity JTU (a) Analysis not conducted because of administrative error.
(b) Analysis not conducted becat.se of technical difficulties.
/
( -
/
-. a
/
t Farley Nuclear Plant NoyRadiological Chemical Surveillance
!! arch 16.1978 Upstream . intake (a) Discharge Downstrean Temperature CC 11.0 12.0 11.0 Dissolved Oxygen-mg/l 10.8 10.2 10.8 pH - :: nits 6.4 6.6 6.6 Total Dissolved Solids-mg/l 49 53 4a Chlorine, total-mg/l (b) (b) (b)
Boron-ug/l 21.0 14.0 32.0,-
Phosphorus, Total-mg/l 0.068 0.067 0.065 Phosphorus, Dissolved-mg/l (a) (a) (a)
Sulfate mg/l 7.4 7.1 5.3 Annonia mg/l 0.14 0.11 0.12 Nitrogen-Ni tra te-mg/l 0.43' (b) 0.18 Calcium mg/l 6.0 4.4 4.8 Manganese ug/l 52 ,
48 51 Magnesium mg/l 1.66 0.90 0.76 Iron mg/l 2.18 2.09 2.15 Sodium mg/l 3.92 ".98
, 3.87-Potassium mg/l 1.37 1.43 1.32 l Chloride eg/l . 3.5 3.2 3.5 i Silica mg/l 9.00 9.35 9.28 Lithium ug/l < 10.0 <10.0 <.10 . 0 Turbidity JTU 23.0 23.0 23.0 i
(a) Analysis not conducted because of administrative error.
f l
t (b) Analysis not conducted because of technical difficulties.
(n.
i e
( *
.. . 4
(
Farley Nuclear Plant .
NopRadiological Chemical Surveillance April 12, 1978 Upstream Intake (a) Discharoe Downstrea:
Temperature OC 16.7 18.0 16.7 Dissolved Oxygen-mg/l 8.4 5.8 7.6 pH - units 7.1 6.8 6.8 Total Dissolved Solids-mg/l '
30.0 14.0 24.0 Chlorine, total-mg/l <0.01 < 0.01 < 0.01 Boron-ug/l 85.0 43.0 66.0 Phosphorus. Total-mg/l
- 0.066 0.072 0.068 Phospherus, Dissolved-mg/l (a) (a) -
(a)
Sulfate mg/l 7.1 S.4 6.8 Anmonia eg/l 0.07 0.06 0.06, Ni trogen-Nitrate-mg/l 0.35 0.28 0.37 Calcium mg/l 4.8 5.6 5.6 Manganese ug/l 76 , 27 76 Magnesium mg/l 0.92 1.90 0.92 Iron mg/l 2.13 0.52 1.52 Sodium mg/l 6.5 5.5 6.7 Potassium eg/l 1.4 1.4 1.3 Chloride mg/l .
3.5 4.00 3.5 Silica mg/l 8.93 9.28 9.14 Lithium ug/l ( 10.0 (10.0 410.0 Turbidity JTU 19.0 18.0 20.0 (a) Analysis not conducted because of' administrative error.
(b) Analysis not conducted because of technical difficulties.
C -
O
~
I .
L
/
\ -
Farley Nuclear Plant NoyRadiological Chemical Surveillance fiay 23,1978 Upstream Intake Discharge Downstream Temperature OC 24.1 24.2 26.0 23.9
. Dissolved Oxygen-mg/l 8.6 8.0 8.2 8.4 pH - units 7.4 7.5 7.3 7.25 Total Dissolved Solids-mg/l (b) 29.0 4.0 20.0 Chlorine, total-mg/l <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 ( 0.01 B oron-ug/l 33.0 (b) 30.0 40.0 Phosphorus, Total-mg/l 0.059 0.060 0.057 0.060 Phosphorus, Dissolved-mg/l (a) (a) (a) (a) .
Sulfate mg/l 5.0 (b) 5.0 5.0 Asmania eg/l <0.01 < 0.01 <.0.01 <0.01 Nitrogen-Nitrate-mg/l 0.50 0.49 0.49 0.494 Calcium mg/l 5.6 4.8 5.2 6.2 Manganese ug/l 64 , 264 47 65 Magnesium eg/l 0.70 1.16 0.70 0.70 Iron mg/l 1.80 4.05 1.68 1.58 Sodium mg/l 3.5 3.6 . 3.8 3.7 Potassium mg/l (b) (b) (b) (b)
Chloride eg/l 5.5 4.0 a.25 3.75 Silica mg/l 7.32 7.67 7.74 7.11 Lithium ug/l (10.0 <10.0 <.10.0 <,10 . 0 Turbidity JTU 18.0 19.0 20.0 15.0 (a) Analysis not conducted because of administrative error.
-(b) Analysis not . conducted because of technical difficulties.
O l
l
. l
(~
Farley Nuclear Plant NoyRadiological Chemical Surveillance
. June 13, 1978 Upstream intake Discharce Downstream Temperature DC 25.5 25.2 25.5 24.6 Dissolved Oxygen-mg/l 7.9 7.8~ 7.8 7.9 pH - units 6.9 6.8 6.7 6.9 Total Dissolved Solids-mg/l 115.0 61.0 64.0 62.0 Chlorine, total-mg/l <0.01 <.0. 01 < 0.01 <.0.01 Boron-ug/l 106.0 38.0 30.0 69.0 Phosphorus, Total-mg/l 0.134 0.089 0.107 0.110 Phosphorus, Olssolved-mg/l 0.107 0.084 0.102 0.103 Sulfate mg/l 4.9 10.7 7.4 7.1-Annonia mg/l 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.03 Nitrogen-Nitrate-mg/l 0.58' O.44 0.54 0.50 Calcium mg/l 6.0 6.0 5.2 5.6 Manganese ug/l 134 , 131 59 99 Magnesium mg/l 1.1 1.0 1.0 1.0
- Iron mg/l 3.48 3.76 3.18 2.80
~
\
l Sodium mg/l 5.0 6.0 , 6.6 6.0 !
Potassium mg/l 1.5 1.5 1.6 1.5 l Chloride eg/l 3.50 3.75 4.00 3.75 l
l Silica mg/l 11.0 11.0 10.9 10.2 Lithium ug/l (10 <10 <10 s10 Turbidity JTU 31.0 33.0 34.0 25.0 i
f .
- . 5 Farley Nur. lear Plant ,
Moy Radiological Cnemical Surveillance July 12,1978 Upstream . intake Discharoe Downstream Temperature DC 27.2 27.6 28.9 27.3 Dissolved Oxygen-mg/l 8.2 7.4 7.8 7.3 pH ' units 7.15 7.4 7.2 7.3 Total Dissolved Solids-mg/l 60 93 44 43 Chlorine, total .mg/l (0.01 <0.01 40.01 .0.01
~
Boron-ug/l 86.0 77.0 97.0 72.0 Phosphorus. Total-mg/l 0.054 0.044 0.052 0.057 Phosphorus. Dissolved-mg/l 0.036 0.026 0.022 0.022 Sulfate :ng/l 8.9 7.1 7.7 8.3 Anrnonia mg/l 0.05 0.06 0.05 0.05, Witrogen-Nitrate-mg/l 0.11' O.09 0.11 0.15 Calcium mg/l 5.6 6.8 6.0 6.0 Manganese ug/l 84 , 111 97 180 Magnesium mg/l 1.1 0.8 1.0 1.0 Iron mg/l 0.88 1.45 1.05 1.42 Sodium mg/l 6.9 6.5 6.9 6.5 Potassium mg/l 1.6 1.5 1.6 1.6 Chloride mg/l 4.5 4.0 4.5 4.0 Silica mg/l 8.4 13.5 8.4 9.0 Lithium ug/l (10 <10 <10 <10 7.8 9.2 10.0 10.0 Turbidity JTU e
t l
WA
( ,
Farley Nuclear Plant NoyRadiological Chemical Surveillance August 22, 1978 Upstream Intake Discharoe Downstream Temperature DC 22.2 22.2 23.6 22.2
. Dissolved Oxygen-mg/l 7.4 7.2 7.8 8.3 pH - units 7.2 7.3 7.2 7.2 Total Dissolved Solids-mg/l 79.0 75.0 84.0 74.0 Chlorine, total-mg/l <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 Boron-ug/l 121.0 70.0 77.0 113.0. -
Phosphorus, Total-mg/l " 0.051 0.025' O.051 0.052 Phosphorus Dissolved-mg/l 0.024 0.019 (b) 0.021 Sulfate mg/l 9.2 5.7 7.4 4.5 ,
Ammonia mg/l 0.09 0.05 0.04 0.03
. i Hitrogen-flitrate-mg/1 0.22* 0.19 0.19 0.19 Calcium mg/l 6.0 6.4 6.8 6.8 Hanganese ug/l 132 , 119 115 118 Magnesium mg/l 1.2 1.2 1.4 1.5 Iron mg/l 1.17 1.35 1.33 1.83 Sodium mg/l 9.3 8.5 ,,
8.5 S.7 -
' 1.5
, Potassium mg/l 1.8 1.6 1.6 l
Chloride mg/l .
4.3 4.0 4.0 4.0 Silica mg/l 8.3 8.5 9.2 8.1 Lithium ug/l <.10 <10 <10 e.10 Turbidity JTU 8.6 7.8 8.7 8.0 (b) Analysis not conducted because of technical difficulties.
l i
~.
J l
f
.. . 1
(
Farley Nuclear Plant NoyRadiological Chemical Surveillance September 19, 1978 Upstream . Intake Discharae Downstrearr Temperature OC 28.2 28.2 29.0 28.2 Dissolved Oxygen-mg/l 5.8 5.5 6.2, 5.8 pH - units 7.5 7.3 7.3 7.4 Total Dissolved Solids-mg/l 55 79 59 58 Chlorine, total-mg/l <.0.01 <0.01 < 0.01 <,0.01 B oron-ug/l ,
53 71 ;- 53 Phosphorus, Total-mg/l 0.038 0.063 0.033 0.038 Phosphorus, Dissolved-mg/l 0.010 0.016 0.023 0.011 Sulfate mg/l 2.5 2.7 4.1 2.8 Aarnonia mg/l 0.11 0.12 0.08 0.13 I
Nitrogen-Ni trate-eg/l 0 .51 3.68 0.46 0.27 Calcium mg/l ,
9.2 6.4 7.2 -
6.4 Manganese ug/l 171 , 147 129 191 Magnesium mg/l 1.1 0.9 1.0 1.0 Iron eg/l 0.88 0.77 0.74 0.79 Sodium mg/l 8.6 8.9 , 8.6 8.6 ~
Potassium mg/l 1.9 1.8 1.9 i.9 Chloride mg/l .
16.0 14.0 16.0 14.0 Silica eg/l 8.5 8.4 8.6 S.2
<10 <,10 <10 (10 Lithium ug/l Turbidity JTU 5.2 5.4 8.5 5.1 C .
.n e
O j
( .. . s a i
1 Farley Nuclear Plant Noy Radiological Chemical Surveillance October 17, 1978 Upstream Intake Discharae Downstream Temperature CC 21.0 21.0 23.0 21.0 Dissolved Oxygen-mg/l 7.7 7.5 7.0 7.5 pH - units 8.2 8.3 8.2 8.2 Total Dissolved Solids-mg/l 32 32 42 35 Chlorine, total-mg/l <0.1 < 0 .1 <0.1 40.1 Boron-ug/l 196 127 117 164 Phosphorus, Total-mg/1 0.035 0.041 0.038 0.036 Phosphorus, Dissolved-mg/l 0.015 0.017 0.022 -
0.017 Sulfate eg/l 5.5 5.7 5.5 5.1 Asmonta mg/l 0.04 0.03 0.05 0.04-0.07 I 0.02 0.08 0.03" hitrogen-Nitrate-mg/l Calcium mg/l 5.2 5.6 6.0 7.2 9S 76- 89 73 Manganese ug/l ,
1.4 1.3 1.3 1.3 Magnesium mg/l 0.92 0.94 0.98 0.74 Iron mg/l 10.1 10.1 10.5 10.5 -
Sodium mg/l ,
1.9 1.9 1.9 1.9 Potassium mg/1 4.0 4.8 5.5 4.5 Chloride eg/l 74 7.4 8.8 7.6 Silica mg/l
<10 410 <10 410 L1thfum ug/l 7.6 6.7 10.0 7.3 Turbidity JTU C- -
- s.
O a
f .
.A f
\ .
Farley Nuclear Plant .
NoyRadiological Chemical Surveillance Neverrber 28. 1978 Upstream . intak e Discharoe Downstream Temperature CC 18.0 18.5 18.0 18.2
. Dissolved Oxygen-mg/l (b) (b) (b) (b) pH - units 7.6 7.8 7.8 7.7 Total Dissolved Solids-mg/l 50 53 54 52 Chlorine, total-mg/l <0.1 <0 .1 <0.1 <0.1 Boron-ug/l 278 202 168 173 Phosphorus, Total-eg/l 0.038 0.076 0.0 34- 0.042 Phosphorus. Dissolved-mg/l 0.027 0.024 0.027 -
C.024
, Sulfate mg/l 7.8 8.2 8.5 7.0 :
Asmonta mg/l <0.01 ( 0.01 0.02 0.01 ,
l Nitrogen-Ni trate-mg/l 0.521 0.69 0.49 0.48 l i
Calcium mg/l 4.0 5.6 6.4 7.2 Manganese ug/l 68 ,
78- 78 85 Magnesium mg/l 11 1.1 1.1 1.1 0.91 1.09 1.11 1.12 i Iron eg/l Sodium mg/l 9.2 9.2 ,
9.4 9.4 Potassium mg/l I7 17 1.7 1.7 Chloride eg/l 6.5 8.3 9.5 6.0 j .
6.7 6.5 7.0 6.3 Silica mg/l
<10 (10 <10 <10 Lithium ug/l f 7.4 8.4 9.3 7.7 l
Turbidity JTU (b) Analsyis not conducted because of technical difficulties.
r e ,
1 '
\
. ** .t"
.8, q 4'
1 l '
l
i ,a Farley N'uclear Plant
- Noy Radiological Chemical Surveillance December 11,1978 Upstream Intake Discharoe Downstream Temperature CC 15.0 15.0 18.7 15.0 Dissolved Oxygen-mg/l 10.5 9.2 10.8 10.3 pH - units 7.3 7.3 7.3 7.3
~
Total Dissolved Solids-mg/l 68 68 71 59 i Chlorine, total-mg/l < 0.1 (0.1 < 0 .1 <0.1 Baron-ug/l 170 145 153 185 .
Phosphorus Total-eg/l 0.058 0.055 0.050 0.061 r l
0.039 0.035 0.043 M.osphorus, Dissolved-mg/l 0.043 -
Sulfate mg/l 11.5 10.6 11.9 12.8 Annonia eg/l 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.02 Nitrogen-Nitra te-mg/l 0.91 1 0.78 0.75 0.66~
Calcium mg/l 7.6 5.4 6.8 5.2 Manganese ug/l 101 83- 74 95 Magnesium eg/l 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.4 Iron eg/l 1.42 1.38 1.12 1.56 Sodium mg/l 11.1 11.0 10.9 9.9 -
Potassium mg/l 21 2.1 2.3 2.0 Chloride eg/l 5.0 5.0 5.3 4.5 Silica eg/l 7.2 7.3 7.9 6.0 Lithium ug/l (10 <10 (10 <10 14 13 13 13 Turbidity JTU
~ -
l l
l l
,- l t
i, APPEflDIX II ,
Trend Analysis for Four Point Analysis t
- M A
- E
- R
- T S
N
_ ^ W 8 O 7 D 9
1 -
C -
E -
D ~
- ~
Y -
. A -
. M ~
~ E
. ~
G
. E ~
R
_ C ~ I A N -
H ;
A -
C
. L - S
. L - I
. I -
D E -
VE -
_ RR -
UU -
_ ST -
A -
LR -
AE -
_. CP -
__ IM -
ME ET H
C E
_ L K
A -
l A
C - T
, I N
I
. G E -
O -
_ L U -
_ O LE -
I AU -
D VL -
_- A A -
R EU -
- G -
N AD -
_ O RN -
_ H EE -
VR -
. AT -
P. -
M N. " ^ A
^
E F - R T
S 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 P 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 U
_ DEG CEgCIUS W:
A .m, F.H.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURVEILLANCE MAY-DEC,1978 DISSOLVED OXYGEN 10 9.5 -
9 ~ AVERAGE VALUE
-~~~' TREND UALUE 8.5 _
8 - .....------ = -----------------------------
7 _ . .
6.5 _ -
M 6 _
G
/ 5.5 -
L 5 _
4.5 _
4 _
. 3.5 _
3 _
2.5 _
2 _
1.5 _
1 i i i UPSTREAM INTAKE DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM
, +
,R -
F.N.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURUEILLANCE MAY-DEC,1978 i l pH 14 l 13.5 _
I 13 -
AUERAGE UALUE 12.5 "-
,2 TREND UALUE 11.5 _
g 11 _
! T 10.5 _
A 10 .
g 9.5 _
D 9 -
A 8.5 -
R 8 _
D 7.5 _ _ _ _ _ _ ____________
? _
U 6.5 _
H 6 - '
I 5.5 _
T 5 _ .
8
, 4.5 _
4 _
3.5 _
3 _
2.5 _
2 _
1.5 _
1 1 i UPSTREAM INTAKE DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM t
(
n
-g I
F.H.P. HON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURUEILLANCE MAY-DEC,1978 TOTAL DISSOLUED SOLIDS I 75 i
70 _ AVERAGE VALUE
TREND UALUE 65 -
G g
- 9 g 60 _ , ...,,
55 _
M .
g . .
/ 50 . -
L 45 .
40 _
35 _
30 _
25 , ,
UPSTREAM INTAKE DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM G
0
.O F.H.P. HON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURUEILLANCE MAY-DEC,1978 BORON 150 145 _
140 _ AVERAGE UALUE 135 -
~~" TREND UALUE 130 _
125 _
120 _....,,,
115 -
110 .
U " -
G 105 _
/ 100 _ ...,
t 90 _
85 .
80 -
75 _
70 _
65 _
60 _
55 _
50 -
1 I UPSTREAM IHTAKE DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM i
I I
l l
l
p ,
F.N.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURVEILLANCE MAY-DEC,1978 TOTAL PHOSPHORUS 0.1
.095 _
.09 _ AVERAGE VALUE
.085 - ---" TREND VALUE ,
.08 _
.075 _
.07 _
.065 _ -
.06 _ -
' " " " " - - - " " - " - - - - - - - ~
$ .055 _ - - " " " " " " - " " " " - " - " " " ' = --"-----
/ .05 _
L .045 _
. 04. .
.035 _
.03 _
.025 _
.02 -
.015 .
.01 .
.005 _
0 , ,
UPSTREAM INTAKE DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM i
p .
F.H.P. HOH-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURUEILLANCE MAY-DEC,1978 TOTAL DISSOLVED PHOSPHORUS 0.1
.095 _
.09 _ AUERAGE VALUE
.085 _
""' TREND VALUE
.08 _
.075 _
.07 -
.065 _
.06 -
M g .055 -
/ .05 _
l .045 .
.04 _
.035 _
. Gee .
.02 -
.015 .
.01 _
.005 _
0 g i UPSTREAM INTAKE DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM
, i
\
F.N.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURVEILLANCE MAY-DEC,1978 SULFATE -
10 9.5 _
g- ---- AVERAGE VALUE TREND UALUE 8.5 _
8 _
7.5 _
~
M G-G
/ 5.5 _
L 5-4.5 _
4_
- 3.5 _
3_
2.5 _
2_
1.5 _
1 1 I UPSTREAM INTAKE DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM I
O ,,
F.H.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURVEILLANCE 'MAY-DEC,1978 AMMONIA
.06 i
.055 -
AUERAGE VALUE
-"" TREND UALUE
.05 _
.045 _
.04 - "'-~~-----------.. ....
n .035 _
G
/ .03 _
L
.025 _
.02 _
.015 _
.01 _
.005 _
0 I I UPSTREAM INTAKE DISCHARGE DOUNSTREAM e
- e
- p. n F.H.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURVEILLANCE MAY-DEC,1978 I NITROGEN-NITRATE
! 1 i 0.95 _
! 0.9 _ AVERAGE VALUE I
1 0.85 _ ----- TREND UALUE 0.8 - .
0.75 _
0.7 _
0.65 _
0.6 _
$ 0.55 _ ""~~~
/ 0.5 - - -
L ....," " " "
0.45 _ ....... ,,, -
e.4 _ -
0.35 _
0.3 _
0.25 _
0.2 _
0.15 _
0.1 _
.05 -
0 I I UPSTREAM INTAKE DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM O
w
p . . ~
S F.H.P. HON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURUEILLANCE MAY-DEC,1978 CALCIUM 10 9.5 -
g ~ AVERAGE VALUE
TREND UALUE 8.5 _
8 _
7.5 -
7 _ .
6.5 _
~~~~~'
M -- - ------------~~~~----~~~~~~~~~~~~
6 _ --------
G
/ 5.5 _.
L 5 -
4.5 ..
4 _
3.5 _
3 _
2.5 _
2 _
1.5 _
i I i UPSTREAM INTAKE DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM
, F.N.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURVEILLANCE MAY-DEC,1978 j MANGANESE
- 150 .
145 _
140 _ AVERAGE VALUE 135 _ ---- TREND UALUE 130 _
125 _
120 _
115 _
110 _ '-- - --
U .
g 105 _ .
/ 100 _ " ~ - - - - - . . . . . . . . . . _- -_- . ._. _ _ _ ' " "
L 9g _ ..."'"~~~~.......___
90 _
85 _
80 _
75 _
70 _
65 _
60 _
55 _
50 I I UPSTREAM INTAKE DISCHARGE DOUNSTREAM O
b
[ \ -*
1 F.N.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURVEILLANCE MAY-DEC,1978 MAGNESIUM.
1.5 1.45 _
i.4 _ AVERAGE VALUE 1.35 _ ----- TREND UALUE 1.3 _
1.25 _
1.2 _ '
1.15 _ -
1,t _ ......................._ _...................,.....,...,.,,,,,,__, ,_,,,,,,,
M g 1.05 -
/ 1_
l 0.95 _
0.9 _
0.85 _
0.8 _
O.75 _
0.7 _
0.65 _
0.6 .
0.55 _
0.5 .
I I
UPSTREAM INTAKE DISCHARGE DOUNSTREAM 4
m
s-.
t i
i F.H.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURVEILLANCE MAY-DEC,1978 IRON 2
. 1*9 ~
- AVERAGE VALUE
! 1.8 _ -'"- TREND VALUE 1.7 -
1.6 -
1.5 _
1.4 _
M G 1.3 _
/
L 1.2 _
1.1 _
1 _
0.9 _
0.8 _
0.7 -
0.6 _
0.5
- I UPSTREAM ' INTAKE DISCHARGE DOUNSTREAM i
(
l f
O. -
F.N.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURVEILLANCE MAY-DEC,1978 S0DIUM 10 9.5 -
9 - AVERAGE VALUE
TREND UALUE 8.5 -
8_ ............................
? _
6.5 _
M 6-G
/ 5.5 .
L 5_
4.5 -
4-3.5 _
3_
2.5 _
2_
1.5 _
~
1 , ,'
UPSTREAM INTAKE DISCHARGE DOUNSTREAM
p
-~
s i
F.N.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURVEILLANCE MAY-DEC,1978 POTASSIUM.
2 1.95 -
1.9 _ AVERAGE VALUE 1.85 _. -"--TREND UALUE 1.8 _
1.75 _ ------------ ---
1.7 _
1.65 _ -
1.6 - -
M G 1.55 _
/ 1.5 _
l 1.45 _
1.4 _
1.35 _
1.3 _
1.25 _
1.2 -
1.15 _
i.1 _
1.05 _
i i i UPSTREAM INTAKE DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM
n -.. - -
x F.H.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURUEILLANCE MAY-DEC,1978 CHLORIDE 10 '
i 9.5 -
9- --- AVERAGE VALUE TREND UALUE i
8.5 - ;
8-7.5 _
7.
G.5 .
n 6_ ~-------------------------------
g .........
/ 5.5 _
l 5_
4.5 _
4_
3.5 _
3_
2.5 _
2-1.5 .
1_ i i I UPSTREAM INTAKE DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM t
P' x
F.N.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURUEILLANCE MAY-DEC,1978 SILICA 10 9.5 - l t
9_
8.5 .. .......... .........................................
7.5 - i 7- t 6.5 - ,
U 6-g i
/ 5.5 _
l 5_
4.5 -
4_
3.5 _
3_
- ~
2_ ---- AVERAGE TREND UALUE VALUE 1.5 _
1
, i UPSTREAM INTAKE DISCHARGE D0!JNSTREAM
p _
F.H.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURUEILLANCE MAY-DEC,1978 TURBIDITY 20 19.5 _
19 _ AVERAGE VALUE 18.5 _
-"~ ~ TREND UALUE 18 _
17.5 _
17 _
16.5 _
16 _
J 15.5 -
T U
15 -
14.5 _
14 _
13.5 _
13 _.-......................... ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,
12 _
11.5 ..
11' _ .
10.5 _
10 I I UPSTREAM INTAKE DISCHARGE DOUNSTREAM I i
l t
O APPEf! DIX III Trend Analysis for Three Point Analysis I
- i I
m 9
n _
1 F.N.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURVEILLANCE 12/77-12/78 TEMPERATURE 25 24 _
AVERAGE VALUE .
23 - ---- TREND UALUE 22 _
21 -
D i E 20 _
G 19 -
C ~ ~ " " - " - - " " " " " - " " " " - " " " " " " " " " " - " " " - " """-""
E 18 -
17 -
h I 16 -
U S 15 _
14 -
13 _
12 _
11 _
10 ,
I '
UPSTREAM DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM 4
o .-
l F.H.P. Il0H-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURVEILLANCE 12/77-12/78 DISSOLVED OXYGEN 10 9.5 .
9_ ,,_ ,....___ ___,,_,,.........,__,...._ ......................._ __,_ _,,.
8.5 _
- 8.
7.5 -
7_ .
6.5 - -
M g
g_
/ 5.5 -
b 5-4.5 _
4_
3.5 - AVERAGE UALUE 3_ ""- TREND UALUE 2.5 _
2_
i.5 _
i UPSTREAM DISCHARCE DOUNSTREAM
! p ..
F.H.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURUEILLANCE 12/77-12/78 I pH 14
'l 13.5 -
12 5 - ---- AVERAGE UALUE ja TREND UALUE 11.5 _
, g 11 -
T 10.5 _
A 10 _
N 9.5 _
D 9-A 8.5 _
R 8_
D 7.5 _
y_ _
U G.5 _
N 6_
I 5.5 _
T 5_
S 4.5 _
4_
3.5 _
3_
2.5 _
2_
1.5 _ .
1 ..
I UPSTREAM DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM s
I k
- l
,n -
1 F.H.P. HON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURVEILLANCE 12/77-f2/78 TOTAL DISSOLVED SOLIDS 75 -
72.5 _
70 _ AVElif.GE VALUE 67.5 _ ---- TREt@ UALUE i 65 _
62.5 -
60 _
57.5 _%, ~
55 - - -...
52.5 _ '"""- -
, 50 - .....
~ ' " "
L 47.5 _ -
l 45 _
42.5 -
40 _
37.5 -
35 _ '
32.5 _
30 . ,
27.5 _ j 25 .
i I
UPSTREAM DISCHARGE DOUNSTREAM
o .
F.N.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURUEILLANCE 12/77-12/78 BOR0H -
i 150 145 _
140 _ AVERAGE VALUE 135 _ ---- TREND UALUE 130 -
125 .
120 _
115 _
110 -
U G 105 _
/ 100 _ . . . . . " " - .... ~ ' "
L 95 _ -
90 _ ....... , ,,
85 _ -.....
80 _
75 _
70 _
65 _
60 _
55 _
50 1
UPSTREAM DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM
p _
F.H.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURUEILLANCE 12/77-12/78 TOTAL PHOSPHORUS 0.1 _
.095 . .
.09 _ AVERAGE VALUE
.085 _ -"-" TREND UALUE
.08 _
.075 _
.07 _
,065 _
~
.06 _
- - ~ ~ ~ " " " " " - " " " " " - - - - ~~~~" " " "'
' " " - " " " ~ ~ - - -
$ .055 .
/ .05 _ .
L .045 _
.04 _
.035 _
.03 _
.025 _ -
.02 _
.015 _
.01 _
.005 _
0 i
UPSTREAM DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM l
A . 3 F.tl.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURUEILLANCE 12/77-12/78 SULFATE 10 9.5 .
9- AVERAGE VALUE '
TREND UALUE 8.5 _ ~
8.
. , 7.5 _
l 7-
~ ~~
- 6.5 _ ---
M 6-G
/ 5.5 .
L
- 5. .
4.5 _
4_
3.5 _
3_
2.5 _
2_
1.5 _
i -
1 UPSTREAM DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM
, 1 i
m ,N
/ .,
F.H.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEF 1ICAL SURUEILLANCE 12/77-12/78 AMMONIA -
.06
.055 _
.05 _' ' ' ' ' ~ ~ ~ - - ............
.045 -
.04 - .
n .035 _
G
/ .03 _
L
.025 -
.02 _
.015 _
.01 _
.005 -
AVERAGE UALUE
"*" TREND UALUE O
I UPSTREAM DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM
O 7 F.H.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURUEILLANCE 12/77-18/78 NITROGEN-NITRATE 1.
0.95 _
0.9 _ AVERAGE UALUE 0.85 - ---- TREND UALUE !
0.8 .
0.75 _
0.7 _
0.65 -
l 0.6 _
M g 0.55 _ .
/ 0.5 _ i L 0.45 _ !
0.35 .. !
0.3 _
0.25 _
0.2 _
0.15 _ l 0.1 _ i
.05 _
0 I ,
UPSTREAM DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM -
O
I r
i 1 F.H.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURUEILLANCE 12/77-12/78 CALCIUM '
! 10 I I i
9.5 _
9- AVERAGE VALUE
TREND UALUE 8 . 5 _.
8-7.5 -
E 7- *
' ~
n g_
e ..........................__ -.........
/ 5.5 -
L 5-
. 4.5 -
3.5 -
3-2.5 _
2-1.5 _
i i
UPSTREAM DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM s
, i t
p m F.H.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURUEILLANCE 12/77-12/78 MANGANESE 150 145 _
140 _ --"
AVERAGE VALUE 135 _ TREND UALUE 130 _
125 _ i 120 _ !
115 _
110 _ i U
G 105 _
/ 100 _
L 95 _
90 _ .
85 -
e-----**
. ,______.........--------------.----------------- ~- i I
75 _
70 -
65 _ l 60 _ l 55 _
4, 50 i
UPSTREAM DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM '
\
p F.H.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURVEILLANCE 12/77-12/78 MAGNESIUM' i.5 -
1.45 _
l 1.4 _ AVERAGE VALUE 1.35 _ ---- TREND UALUE 1.3 - ,
1.25 _ l 1.2 _
1.15 -
i*1 ~
M G 1.05 _ .,,,,, .____ - - - -- -- ------ ......------------- W
/ 1_
L 0.95 _
0.9 .
- 0.85 _
0.8 _
0.75 _
0.7 _
0.65 _
~
0.6 _
0.55 _
0.5 -
' i' UPSTREAM DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM
. 1
,o - ^
F.H.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURUEILLANCE 12/77-12/78 IRON 2_
i.9 _
AVERAGE UALUE 1.8 _ ---- TREND UALUE t
1.7 .
1.6 -
1.5 - -----------
1.4 _
G 1.3 _
, /
L 1.2 -
1.1 -
- i _
O.9 _
0.8 _
0.7 _
0.6 _
0.5 I
UPSTREAM DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM 1
f
O s F.N.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURUEILLANCE 12/77-12/78 S0DIUM -
10 9.5 -
9- ---- AVERAGE VALUE TREND UALUE 8.5 _
8-7.5 _
7 --- ----- ------------------- - ---
6.5 _ -
N 6-G
/ 5.5 _
b 5-4.5 _
4_
3.5 _
3_
2.5 -
2_
1.5 _
1 I
UPSTREAM DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM
, f 6
- p. -
l j F.H.P. HON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURVEILLANCE 12/77-12/78 i POTASSIUM 2
1.95 _
1.9 _ AVERAGE VALUE 1.85 _ "-" TREND UALUE 1.8 _
- " " " " ~ "
i.75 _ .....--------------
3,y _ ...........
1.65 -
1.6 _
M g 1.55 _
/ 1.5 _
l 1.45 _
1.4 _
1.35 _
1.3 _
1.25 _
1.2 _
1.15 -
1.1 _
1.05 _
1 -
1 UPSTREAM DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM t
i 4
i' F.H.P. NON-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURVEILLANCE 12/77-12/78 CHLORIDE -
10 9.5 -
! 9- AUERAGE VALUE
TREND UALUE l 8.5 -
8-7.5 _
7_ .
6.5 _ -
1 M 6-G .
/ 5.5 _ --------- --
- t -...................,_,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,_
4.5 -
4_
3.5 -
3_
2.5 _
2_
! 1. 5 ..
i_
i UPSTREAM DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM .
t i
i
r> -
i
,m F.H.P. NOH-RADIOLOGICAL CHEMICAL SURUEILLANCE 12/77-12/78 SILICA
- 10 _
j 9.5 _
9.
l 8.5 _ ...........- ................................................. . __.........
8_ .
7.5 -
7-i 6.5 _
M 6-G
/ 5.5 _
E 5_
4.5 _
4-3.5 _
3- AVERAGE VALUE 2.5 _ "-" TREND UALUE ,
2_
1.5 -
i i
UPSTREAM DISCHARGE DOWNSTREAM