Text

2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Radiological Environmental Operating Reports
	ML061240128
Person / Time
Site:	Fermi
Issue date:	04/28/2006
From:	Cobb D; DTE Energy
To:	; Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
	FOIA/PA-2010-0209, NRC-06-0031
	Download: ML061240128 (349)
	v • d • e

{{#Wiki_filter:Donald K. Cobb Assistant Vice President. Nuclear Generation Fermi 2 6400 North Dixie Hwy:, Newport, Ml 4816S Tel: 734.586.5201 Fax: 734.586.4172 DTE Energy April 28, 2006 NRC-06-0031 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk Washington D C 20555-0001

References:

1) Fermi 2 NRC Docket No. 50-341 NRC License No. NPF-43

2) Appendix A, Facility Operating License No.

NPF-43, Technical Specifications 5.6.2 and 5.6.3

Subject:

Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Radiological Environmental Operating Reports The 2005 Annual Radiological Effluent Release and Radiological Environmental Operating Reports for Fermi 2 are enclosed. This combined report is being transmitted in accordance with Reference 2 and Regulatory Guide 1.21, Revision 1. The enclosed report covers the period from January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2005. Should you have any questions regarding this report, please contact Mr. Dan Craine, General Supervisor, Radiological Engineering at (734) 586-1516. Sincerely Enclosure cc: w/Enclosure D. H. Jaffe T. J. Kozak NRC Resident Office Regional Administrator, Region m Supervisor, Electric Operators, Michigan Public Service Commission

Appendix A Sampling Locations

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport DirectRadiation Sample Locations Table A-1 Meteorological Distance Station Sector/Azimuth from Reactor Collection Number (Degrees) (Approx.) Description Frequency Type TI NE/380 1.3 mi. Estral Beach, Pole on Q I Lakeshore 23 Poles S of Lakeview. (Special Area) T2 NNE/22o 1.2 mi. Pole at termination of Q I Brancheau St. (Special Area) T3 N/90 1.1 mi. Pole, NW comer of Swan Q I Boat Club fence. (Special Area) T4 NNW/3370 0.6 mi. Site boundary and Toll Rd. Q I on Site fence by API #2. T5 NW/3130 0.6 mi. Site boundary and Toll Rd. Q I on Site fence by API #3. T6 WNW/2940 0.6 mi. On Site fence at south end Q I of N. Bullet Rd. T7 W/2700 14.0 mi. Pole, at Michigan Gas Q C substation on N. Custer Rd., 0.66 miles west of Doty Rd. T8 NW/3050 1.9 mi. Pole on Post Rd. near NE Q I corner of Dixie Hwy. and Post Rd. T9 NNW/334 0 1.5 mi. Pole, NW comer of Q I Trombley and Swan View Rd. TIO N/60 2.1 mi. Pole, S side of Massarant- Q I 2 poles W of Chinavare. I = Indicator C = Control 0 = On-site Q = Quarterly A-1

Fermi2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport Direct RadiationSample Locations (Table A-l continued) Meteorological Distance Station Sector/Azimuth from Reactor Collection Number (Degrees) (Approx.) Description Frequency Type Tll NNE/230 6.2 mi. Pole, NE corner of Q I Milliman and Jefferson. T12 NNE/290 6.3 mi. Pointe Mouille Game Area Q I Field Office, Pole near tree, N area of parking lot. T13 N/3560 4.1 mi. Labo and Dixie Hwy. Pole Q I on SW corner with light. T14 NNW/3370 4.4 mi. Labo and Brandon Pole on Q I SE corner near RR. T15 NW/315 0 3.9 mi. Pole, behind building at the Q I corner of Swan Creek and Mill St. T16 WNW/283C 4.9 mi. Pole, SE comer of War and Q I Post Rd. T17 W/2710 4.9mi. Pole,NEcomerofNadeau Q I and Laprad near mobile home park. T18 WSW/247 0 4.8 mi. Pole, NE corner of Mentel Q I and Hurd Rd. T19 SW/236 0 5.2 mi. Fermi siren pole on Q I Waterworks Rd. NE corner of intersection - Sterling State Park Rd. Entrance Drive/Waterworks. T20 WSW/2570 2.7 mi. Pole, S side of Williams Q I Rd, 9 poles W of Dixie Hwy. (Special Area) T21 WSW/2390 2.7 mi. Pole, N side of Pearl at Q I Parkview Woodland Beach. (Special Area) I= Indicator C = Control 0 = On-site Q = Quarterly A-2

Fermi2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReporf DirectRadiation Sample Locations (Table A-I continued) Meteorological Distance Station SectorlAzimuth from Reactor Collection Number (Degrees) (Approx.) Description Frequency Type T22 S/1720 1.2 mi. Pole, N side of Pointe Aux Q I Peaux 2 poles W of Long - Site Boundary. T23 SSW11950 1.1 nmi. Pole, S side of Pointe Aux Q I Peaux I pole W of Huron next to Vent Pipe - Site Boundary. T24 SW/225° 1.2 mi. Fermi Gate along Pointe Q I Aux Peaux Rd. on fence wire W of gate Site Boundary. T25 WSW/252 0 1.4 mi. Pole, Toll Rd. - 12 poles S Q I of Fermi Drive. T26 WSW1259° 1.1 mi. Pole, Toll Rd. - 6 poles S Q I of Fermi Drive. T27 SW1225° 6.8 mi. Pole, NE corner of Q I McMillan and East Front St. (Special Area) T28 SW/2290 10.7 mi. Pole, SE corner of Mortar Q C Creek and LaPlaisance. T29 WSW/237 0 10.3 mi. Pole, E side of S Dixie, I Q C pole S of Albain. T30 WSW/247 0 7.8 mi. Pole, St. Mary's Park Q I corner of Elm and Monroe St. (Special Area) T31 WSW1255° 9.6 mi. Ist pole W of entrance Q C drive Milton "Pat" Munson Recreational Reserve on North Custer Rd. I = Indicator C = Control 0 = On-site Q = Quarterly A-3

Fermi2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmental OperatingReport DirectRadiationSample Locations (Table A-l continued) Meteorological Distance Station Sector/Azimuth from Reactor Collection Number (Degrees) (Approx.) Description Frequency Type T32 WNW/295° 10.3 mi. Pole, corner of Stony Creek Q I and Finzel Rd. T33 NW/317° 9.2 mi. Pole, W side of Grafton Q I Rd. I pole N of Ash and Grafton intersection. T34 NNW/338 0 9.7 mi. Pole, W side of Port Creek, Q I I pole S of Will-Carleton Rd. T35 N/3590 6.9 mi. Pole, S Side of S Huron Q I River Dr. across from Race St. (Special Area) T36 N1358° 9.1 mi. Pole, NE corner of Q I Gibraltar and Cahill Rd. T37 NNE/21° 9.8 mi. Pole, S corner of Adams Q I and Gibraltar across from Humbug Marina. T38 WNW/294° 1.7 mi. Residence - 6594 N. Dixie Q I Hwy. T39* S/1760 0.3 mi. SE corner of Protected Q 0 Area Fence (PAF). T40* S/1700 0.3 mi. Midway along OBA - PAF. Q 0 T41* SSE/161° 0.2 mi. Midway between OBA and Q 0 Shield Wall on PAF. T42* SSE/149 0 0.2 mi. Midway along Shield Wall Q 0 on PAF. T43* SE1131° 0.1 mi. Midway between Shield Q 0 Wall and Aux Boilers on PAF. T44* ESE11090 0.1 mi. Opposite OSSF door on Q 0 PAF.

* = Onsite TLD I = Indicator          C = Control              0 = On-site               Q = Quarterly A-4

Fermi2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport Direct RadiationSample Locations (Table A-I continued) Station Collection Meteorological Distance Station Sector/Azimuth from Reactor Collection Number (Degrees) (Approx.) Description Frequency Type T45* E/860 0. I mi. NE Corner of PAF. Q 0 T46* ENE/670 0.2 mi. NE side of barge slip on Q 0 fence. T47* S/1850 0.1 mi. South of Turbine Bldg. Q 0 rollup door on PAF. T48* SW/235 0 0.2 mi. 30 ft. from corner of AAP Q 0 on PAF. T49 WSW/251 0 1.1 mi. Corner of Site Boundary Q I fence north of NOC along Critical Path Rd. T50 W/270 0 0.9 mi. Site Boundary fence near Q I main gate by the south Bullet Street sign. T51 N/30 0.4 mi. Site Boundary fence north Q 0 of north Cooling Tower. T52 NNE/200 0.4 mi. Site Boundary fence at the Q 0 corner of Arson and Tower. T53* NE/55 0 0.2 mi. Site Boundary fence east of Q 0 South Cooling Tower. T54* S/1 890 0.3 mi. Pole next to Fermi 2 Q 0 Visitors Center. T55 WSW/251 0 3.3 mi. Pole, north side of Nadeau Q I Rd. across from Sodt Elementary School Marquee. T56 WSW/2560 2.9 mi. Pole, entrance to Jefferson Q I Middle School on Stony Creek Rd.

* = Onsite TLD I = Indicator            C = Control              0 = On-site                Q = Quarterly A-5

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmental Operating Report DirectRadiation Sample Locations (Table A-l continued) Meteorological Distance Station Sector/Azimuth from Reactor Collection Number (Degrees) (Approx.) Description Frequency Type T57 W/260 0 2.7 mi. Pole, north side of Q I Williams Rd. across from Jefferson High School entrance. T58 WSW/249 0 4.9 mi. Pole west of Hurd Q I Elementary School Marquee. T59 NW/325 0 2.6 mi. Pole north of St. Charles Q I Church entrance on Dixie Hwy. T60 NNW/341° 2.5 mi. 1st pole north of North Q I Elementary School entrance on Dixie Hwy. T61 W/2680 10.1 mi. Pole, SW corner of Stewart Q I and Raisinville Rd. T62 SW/232 0 9.7 mi. Pole, NE corner of Albain Q I and Hull Rd. T63 WSW1245° 9.6 mi. Pole, NE corner of Dunbar Q I and Telegraph Rd. T64* WNW/286° 0.2 mi. West of switchgear yard on Q 0 PAF. T65* NW1322 0 0.1 mi. PAF switchgear yard area Q 0 NW of RHR complex. T66* NE150° 0.1 mi. Behind Bldg. 42 on PAF. Q 0 T67* NNW/338 0 0.2 mi. Site Boundary fence West Q 0 of South Cooling Tower.

* = Onsite TLD I= Indicator            C = Control              0 = On-site                Q = Quarterly A-6

Fermi2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport Air Particulateand Air Iodine Sample Locations Table A-2 Meteorological Distance Station Sector/Azimuth from Reactor Collection Number (Degrees) (Approx.) Description Frequency Type API-I NEJ39 0 1.4 mi. Estral Beach Pole on W I Lakeshore, 18 Poles S of Lakeview (Nearest Community with highest X/Q). API-2 NNW/337 0 0.6 mi. Site Boundary and Toll W I Road, on Site Fence by T4. API-3 NW/3130 0.6 mi. Site Boundary and Toll W I Road, on Site Fence by T-5. API-4 W/2700 14.0 mi. Pole, at Michigan Gas W C substation on N. Custer Rd., 0.66 miles west of Doty Rd. API-5 S/1880 1.2 mi. Pole, N corner of Pointe W I Aux Peaux and Dewey Rd. I = Indicator C = Control W = Weekly Milk Sample Locations Table A-3 Meteorological Distance Station Sector/Azimuth from Reactor Collection Number (Degrees) (Approx.) Description Frequency Type M-2 NW/3190 5.4 mi. Reaume Farm - 2705 E M-SM I Labo. M-8 WNW/2890 9.9 mi. Calder Dairy - 9334 Finzel M-SM C Rd. I = Indicator C = Control M = Monthly SM = Semimonthly A-7

Fermi2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport Garden Sample Locations Table A-4 Meteorological Distance Station Sector/Azimuth from Reactor Collection Number (Degrees) (Approx.) Description Frequency Type FP-l NNE/210 3.8 mi. 9501 Turnpike Highway. M I FP-9 W/261 10.9 mi. 4074 North Custer Road. M C I = Indicator C = Control M = Monthly (when available) Drinking Water Sample Locations Table A-5 Meteorological Distance Station Sector/Azimuth from Reactor Collection Number (Degrees) (Approx.) Description Frequency Type DW-1 S/1740 1.1 mi. Monroe Water Station N M I Side of Pointe Aux Peaux 1/2 Block W of Long Rd. DW-2 N/80 18.5 mi. Detroit Water Station M C 14700 Moran Rd, Allen Park. I =Indicator C = Control M = Monthly A-8

Fermi2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmental OperatingReport Surface Water Sample Locations Table A-6 Meteorological Distance Station Sector/Azimuth from Reactor Collection Number (Degrees) (Approx.) Description Frequency Type SW-2 NNE/200 11.7 mi. DECo's Trenton Channel M C Power Plant Intake Structure (Screenhouse #1). SW-3 SSE/160 0 0.2 mi. DECO's Fermi 2 General M I Service Water Intake Structure. I = Indicator C = Control M = Monthly GroundwaterSample Locations Table A-7 Meteorological Distance Station Sector/Azimuth from Reactor Collection Number (Degrees) (Approx.) Description Frequency Type GW-l S/175 0 0.4 mi. Approx.00 ft W of Lake Q I Erie, EF-I Parking lot near gas fired peakers. GW-2 SSW/2080 1.0 mi. 4 ft S of Pointe Aux Peaux Q I (PAP) Rd. Fence 427 ft W of where PAP crosses over Stoney Point's Western Dike. GW-3 SW/226 0 l.Omi. 143ftWofPAPRd.Gate, Q I 62 ft N of PAP Rd. Fence. GW-4 WNW/299 0 0.6 mi. 42 ft S of Langton Rd, 8 ft Q C E of Toll Rd. Fence. I = Indicator C = Control Q = Quarterly A-9

Fermi2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport Sediment Sample Locations Table A-8 Meteorological Distance Station Sector/Azimuth from Reactor Collection Number (Degrees) (Approx.) Description Frequency Type S-l SSE/165 0 0.9 mi. Pointe Aux Peaux, SA I Shoreline to 500 ft offshore sighting directly to Land Base Water Tower. S-2 E181° 0.2 mi. Fermi 2 Discharge, approx. SA I 200 ft offshore. S-3 NE/39° 1.1 mi. Estral Beach, approx. 200 SA I ft offshore, off North shoreline where Swan Creek and Lake Erie meet. S-4 WSW/241 0 3.0 mi. Indian Trails Community SA I Beach. S-5 NNE/200 11.7 mi. DECo's Trenton Channel SA C Power Plant intake area. I = Indicator C = Control SA = Semiannually Fish Sample Locations Table A-9 Meteorological Distance Station Sector/Azimuth from Reactor Collection Number (Degrees) (Approx.) Description Frequency Type F-l NNE/31° 9.5 mi. Near Celeron Island. SA C F-2 E1860 0.4 mi. Fermi 2 Discharge (approx. SA I 1200 ft offshore). F-3 SW/2270 3.5 mi. Brest Bay. SA C I = Indicator C = Control SA = Semiannually A-10

MAP - 1 SAMPLING LOCATIONS N BY STATION NUMBER WITHIN 1 MILE LEGEND

T- DIRECT RADIATION o API- AIR PARTICULATES/AIR IODINE A S- SEDIMENTS DW/SW- DRINKING WATER/SURFACE WATER

[OGW- GROUND WATER D M- MILK C 0.5 X FP- FOOD PRODUCTS

F- FISH SCAE IN MILTS egos0

MAP - 2 SAMPLING LOCATIONS N BY STATION NUMBER (1 To 5 MILES) LEGEND N C T- DIRECT RADIATION o API- AIR PARTICULATES/AIR IODINE A S- SEDIMENTS DW/SW- DRINKING WATER/SURFACE WATER X GW- GROUND WATER o M- MILK 0 1 X FP- FOOD PRODUCTS O F- FISH SCALE IN MILES C-o 5

MAP - 3 SAMPLING LOCATIONS N BY STATION NUMBER (GREATER THAN 5 MILES) LEGEND S T- DIRECT RADIATION 0 API- AIR PARTICULATES OR AIR IODINE A S- SEDIMENTS DW/SW- DRINKING WATER/SURFACE WATER 1-IQ GW- GROUND WATER 5 0 5 10 M- MILK HE FP- FOOD PRODUCTS F- FISH SCALE IN MILES C ob

Appendix B Environmental Data Summary

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmental OperatingReport Table B-I Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Summary Name of Facility: Enrico Fermi Unit 2 Docket No.: 50-341 Reporting Period: January - December 2005 Location of Facility: 30 miles southeast of Detroit, Michigan (Frenchtown Township) Lction Hige gli Sa TType and Annua Mean AnMicator Control N be of (U1it) 'Number of, Locatlonsa Locations Non-routine-; Aayi _____ Mean and Rae Location Mean and Range~ -Mean and Ramg Result s Direct Radiation Gamma (TLD) 1.0 14.1 (178/178) T-49 (Indicator) 18.5 (4/4) 13.7 (16/16) None mR/std qtr 194 9.6 to 20.1 15.4 to 20.1 10.5 to 15.1 Airborne Gross Beta 257 1.OOE-2 2.57E-2 (205/205) API-4 (Control) 3.03E-2 (52/52) 3.03E-2 (52/52) None Particulates 7.20E-3 to 5.46E-2 8.1OE-3 to 3.27E-1 8.1OE-3 to 3.27E-I pCi/cu. m. Gamma Spec. 20 Be-7 N/A 9.69E-2 (15/16) API-5 (Indicator) 1.04E-1 (4/4) 9.80E-2 (3/4) None 7.50E-2 to 1.21E-1 8.40E-2 to 1.18E-1 8.30E-2 to 1.14E-I K-40 N/A <MDA <MDA None Mn-54 N/A <MDA <MDA None Co-58 N/A <MDA <MDA None Fe-59 N/A <MDA <MDA None Co-60 N/A <MDA cMDA None Zn-65 N/A <MDA cMDA None Zr-95 N/A <MDA cMDA None Ru-103 N/A cMDA cMDA None Ru-106 N/A <MDA <MDA None Cs- 134 5.OOE-2 cMDA <MDA None Cs-137 6.OOE-2 <MDA <MDA None Ba-140 N/A <MDA <MDA None La-140 N/A cMDA cMDA None Ce-141 N/A <MDA <MDA None Ce-144 N/A cMDA <MDA None Airborne Iodine 1-131 257 7.00E-2 <MDA cMDA None pCi/cu. m. B-I

Fermi2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmental OperatingReport Table B-1 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Summary (cont.) Name of Facility: Enrico Fermi Unit 2 Docket No.: 50-341 Reporting Period: January - December 2005 Location of Facility: 30 miles southeast of Detroit, Michigan (Frenchtown Township) __ -- t0Locationwith Highest'

  'SampleType              TyAd                                 Indicator                    ',0AnnualMean                           Control           Nmb of (Units)            Numberof,                            Locations                                                            Locations'        Nn-routine

__ _ _ Analysis LLD Mean and Range -Ltocation, Mean and Range Mean and Ranne Results Milk 1-131 36 I.OOE+O <MDA <MDA None pCiQ Sr-89 36 N/A <MDA <MDA None Sr-90 N/A 2.55E+0 (2/18) M-2 (Indicator) 2.55E+0 (2/18) 1.35E+0 (1/18) None 2.06E1+0 to 3.04E+0 2.06E+0 to 3.04E+O Gamma Spec. 36 Be-7 N/A <MDA <MDA None K-40 N/A 1.42E+3 (18/18) M-2 (Indicator) 1.42E+3 (18/18) 1.41E+3 (18/18) None 1.27E+3 to 1.56E+3 1.27E+3 to 1.56E+3 1.31E+3 to 1.56E+3 Mn-54 N/A <MDA <MDA None Co-58 N/A <MDA <MDA None Fe-59 N/A <MDA <MDA None Co-60 N/A <MDA <MDA None Zn-65 N/A <MDA <MDA None Zr-95 N/A <MDA <MDA None Ru-103 N/A <MDA <MDA None Ru-106 N/A <MDA <MDA None Cs-134 I.50E+I <MDA <MDA None Cs- 137 1.80E+1 <MDA <MDA None Ba-140 1.50E+1 <MDA <MDA None La-140 I.50E+I <MDA <MDA None Ce-141 N/A <MDA <MDA None Ce-144 N/A <MDA <MDA None Vegetation 1-131 12 6.OOE+I <MDA <MDA None pCi/kg wet Gamma Spec. 12 Be-7 N/A <MDA 5.70E+2 (1/6) None K-40 N/A 2.72E+3 (6/6) FP-9 (Control) 3.34E+3 (6/6) 3.34E+3 (6/6) None I_1.14E+3 to 3.88E+3 I 1.74E+3 to 4.41E+3 1.74E+3 to 4.41E+3 B-2

Fermi2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport Table B-I Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Summary (cont.) Name of Facility: Enrico Fermi Unit 2 Docket No.: 50-341 Reporting Period: January - December 2005 Location of Facility: 30 miles southeast of Detroit, Michigan (Frenchtown Township) Sample Type Type and Indicator Annual Mean Contl iber of (Unitus) imber of Locations Locations Non-rotie _ Analysis LLD Mean and Range Location Mean and Range e an R Results Vegetation Mn-54 N/A <MDA <MDA None (cont.) Co-58 N/A <MDA <MDA None pCi/kg wet Fe-59 N/A <MDA <MDA None Co-60 N/A <MDA cMDA None Zn-65 N/A cMDA <MDA None Zr-95 N/A <MDA cMDA None Ru-103 N/A <MDA <MDA None Ru-106 N/A <MDA <MDA None Cs-134 6.OOE+1 <MDA <MDA None Cs-137 8.OOE+ I cMDA <MDA None Ba-140 N/A cMDA cMDA None La-140 N/A cMDA cMDA None Ce-141 N/A cMDA <MDA None Ce-144 N/A <MDA <MDA None Drinking Water Gross Beta 24 4.OOE+0 3.84E+0 (6/12) DW-2 (Control) 5.IOE+O (1/12) 5.lOE+O (1/12) None pCi/ 2.82E+0 to 5.30E+O Sr-89 24 N/A <MDA <MDA None Sr-90 N/A cMDA <MDA None Gamma Spec. 24 Be-7 N/A cMDA <MDA None K-40 N/A <MDA cMDA None Cr-S 1 N/A <MDA <MDA None Mn-54 I.50E+I <MDA <MDA None Co-58 1.50E+I cMDA <MDA None Fe-59 3.OOE+l <MDA <MDA None Co-60 I.50E+I <MDA <MDA None Zn-65 3.OOE+l cMDA <MDA None Zr-95 1.50E+1 <MDA cMDA None B-3

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport Table B-I Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Summary (cont.) Name of Facility: Enrico Fermi Unit 2 Docket No.: 50-341 Reporting Period: January - December 2005 Location of Facility: 30 miles southeast of Detroit, Michigan (Frenchtown Township)

       ;e-T               Type and                             Indicator                      Annual Mean                        Control           Number of (UnitA)            Number of                            Locations                                                        Locations         Non-routine Analysisf           LLD         -Mean and Range           Location        --Mean and Rangei     f Mean and Range          Results..

Drinking Water Ru-103 N/A <MDA <MDA None (cont.) pCi/l Ru-106 N/A <MDA <MDA None Cs-134 I.50E+Il <MDA <MDA None Cs-137 1.80E+1 cMDA cMDA None Ba-140 1.50E+l cMDA <MDA None La-140 I.50E+l <MDA <MDA None Ce-141 N/A <MDA <MDA None Ce-144 N/A <MDA <MDA None H-3 8 2.OOE+3 <MDA <MDA None Surface Water Sr-89 24 N/A <MDA <MDA None pCi/i Sr-90 N/A <MDA cMDA None Gamma Spec. 24 Be-7 N/A cMDA cMDA None K-40 N/A <MDA SW-2(Control) 9.1OE+1 (1/12) 9.1OE+1 (1/12) None Cr-SI N/A <MDA <MDA None Mn-54 1.50E+1 <MDA <MDA None Co-58 1.50E+l <MDA cMDA None Fe-59 3.OOE+l cMDA <MDA None Co-60 1.50E+1 <MDA <MDA None Zn-65 3.OOE+l cMDA cMDA None Zr-95 I .50E+l <MDA <MDA None Ru-103 N/A <MDA cMDA None Ru-106 N/A cMDA <MDA None Cs-134 I.50E+l MDA cMDA None Cs-137 1.80E+I <MDA cMDA None Ba-140 I.50E+1 cMDA <MDA None La-140 1.50E+lIMDA <MDA None Ce-141 N/A <MDA <MDA None B-4

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport Table B-i Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Summary (cont.) Name of Facility: Enrico Fermi Unit 2 Docket No.: 50-341 Reporting Period: January - December 2005 Location of Facility: 30 miles southeast of Detroit, Michigan (Frenchtown Township) Location with 1411068t SatpIe Type Type and Indicator Annua Mean Control :of' Nmer (Units) Numberof Locationsg Loations o-routine ___________ Analysis LL D , Mean and ng Location Mean and Range Resuts LLMeanandRange Surface Water Ce-144 N/A <MDA <MDA None (cont.) pCiJI H-3 8 2.OOE+3 <MDA <MDA None Groundwater Gamma Spec. 16 pCi/i Be-7 N/A <MDA <MDA None K-40 N/A <MDA <MDA None Cr-51 N/A <MDA <MDA None Mn-54 1.5OE+l <MDA <MDA None Co-58 1.501E+1 <MDA <MDA None Fe-59 3.00E+1 <MDA <MDA None Co-60 1.50E+l <MDA <MDA None Zn-65 3.OOE+I <MDA <MDA None Zr-95 1.50E+I <MDA <MDA None Ru-103 N/A <MDA <MDA None Ru-106 N/A <MDA <MDA None Cs- 134 I.SOE+I <MADA <MDA None Cs-137 1.80E+l <MDA <MDA None Ba-140 I.SOE+l <MDA <MDA None La- 140 1.50E+I <MDA <MDA None Ce-141 N/A <MDA <MDA None Ce-144 N/A <MDA <MDA None H-3 16 2.OOE+3 <MDA <MDA None Sediment Sr-89 10 N/A <MDA <MDA pCi/kg dry Sr-90 N/A <MDA <MDA None Gamma Spec. 10 Be-7 N/A <MDA <MDA None K-40 N/A 1.20E+4 (8/8) S-4 (Indicator) 1.38E+4 (2/2) 1.1 IE+4 (2/2) 9.68E+3 to 1.75E1+4 1.OIE+4 to 1.75E+4 1.02E+4 to l.19E+4 None B-5

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport Table B-I Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Summary (cont.) Name of Facility: Enrico Fermi Unit 2 Docket No.: 50-341 Reporting Period: January - December 2005 Location of Facility: 30 miles southeast of Detroit, Michigan (Frenchtown Township)

                                                -                         *Local                o with-' ighest ASample Type          Type and-                            Indicator                      Annual Mean                        Control            Numberof (Tnits)           Number of                             Locatikns                                                        Locations          Non-routie'

_ Analysis LLD Mean and Range Location Mean and Range Mean and Rangea, Results Sediment (cont.) Mn-54 N/A <MDA <MDA None pCilkg dry Co-58 N/A <MDA <MDA None Fe-59 N/A <MDA <MDA None Co-60 N/A <MDA <MDA None Zn-65 N/A <MDA <MDA None Zr-95 N/A <MDA <MDA None Ru-103 N/A <MDA <MDA None Ru-106 N/A <MDA <MDA None Cs-134 1.50E+2 <MDA <MDA None Cs-137 1.80E+2 1.39E+2 (1/8) S-3 (Indicator) 1.39E+2 (1/2) 8.85E+l (2/2) None 7.90E+1 to 9.80E+1 Ba-140 N/A <MDA <MDA None La-140 N/A <MDA <MDA None Ce-141 N/A <MDA <MDA None Ce-144 N/A <MDA <MDA None Fish Sr-89 27 N/A <MDA <MDA None pCi/kg wet Sr-90 N/A <MDA <MDA None Gamma Spec. 27 Be-7 N/A <MDA <MDA None K-40 N/A 2.65E+3 (11/11) F-I (Control) 2.89E+3 (7/7) 2.82E+3 (16/16) None 2.02E+3 to 3.50E+3 2.37E+3 to 3.56E+3 1.80E+3 to 3.56E+3 Mn-54 1.30E+2 <MDA <MDA None Co-58 1.30E+2 <MDA <MDA None Fe-59 2.60E+2 <MDA <MDA None Co-60 1.30E+2 <MDA <MDA None Zn-65 2.60E+2 <MDA <MDA None B-6

Fermi2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport Table B-1 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Summary (cont.) Name of Facility: Enrico Fermi Unit 2 Docket No.: 50-341 Reporting Period: January - December 2005 Location of Facility: 30 miles southeast of Detroit, Michigan (Frenchtown Township) LocaiowithffiHgfi~est Sample Type Typeand Indicator AnnualMean Control Nuimbe of (Units) Number of Locations Locations Noln-routine Analysis LLD Mean and Range Location Mean and Range Mean and Range Rsu ts. Zr-95 N/A <MDA <MDA None Fish (cont.) Ru-103 N/A <MDA <MDA None pCi/kg wet Ru-106 N/A <MDA <MDA None Cs-134 1.30E+2 <MDA <MDA None Cs- 137 1.50E+2 <MDA <MDA None Ba-140 N/A <MDA <MDA None La-140 N/A <MDA <MDA None Ce-141 N/A <MDA <MDA None Ce-144 N/A <MDA <MDA None Direct Radiation mean and range values are based on off-site TLDs LLD = Fermi 2 ODCM LLD: nominal lower limit of detection based on 4.66 sigma error for background sample.

   <MDA = Less than the lab's minimum detectable activity which is less than the LLD.

Mean and range based upon detectable measurements only. Fraction of detectable measurements at specified locations is indicated in parentheses (F). Locations are specified by Fermi 2 code and are described in Appendix A Sampling Locations. Non-routine results are those which are reportable according to Fermi 2 ODCM control 3.12.1. Note: Other nuclides were considered in analysis results, but only those identifiable were reported in addition to ODCM listed nuclides. B-7

Appendix C Environmental Data Tables

Fermi2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERMI 2 TLD ANALYSIS (mR/Std Qtr) ISTATION ] ,FIRST,.,,., 7 SEON J1 lTHI FOURTH NUMBE1R j QUAURTRX j QUARTER QUARTER QUARTER T-1 10.98 12.91 12.80 14.47 T-2 10.71 13.59 12.95 15.59 T-3 9.55 11.09 10.83 12.07 T-4 11.10 13.80 13.89 14.97 T-5 11.78 15.72 14.20 16.21 T-6 11.64 14.01 14.26 15.62 T-7 10.46 14.05 13.08 14.21 T-8 13.06 15.35 14.70 16.81 T-9 11.39 14.35 13.75 15.12 T-10 12.13 14.89 14.88 16.08 T-1 1 10.88 14.23 12.49 14.84 T-12 10.77 12.52 12.08 13.57 T-13 13.03 16.15 15.93 15.88 T-14 13.44 16.30 15.75 16.61 T-15 10.89 13.39 12.16 14.15 T-16 15.11 19.93 17.79 18.47 T-17 11.46 13.61 12.46 13.88 T-18 12.12 14.47 13.62 15.19 T-19 13.14 16.12 15.66 16.18 T-20 13.87 16.14 15.42 16.01 T-21 10.98 13.94 16.21 13.22 T-22 12.42 14.04 13.64 15.98 T-23 11.20 13.83 13.66 14.54 T-24 10.55 13.41 12.18 15.05 T-25 14.05 17.06 15.88 17.35 T-26 14.21 18.11 16.93 16.78 T-27 10.35 11.64 10.89 12.96 T-28 11.97 14.66 13.92 15.11 T-29 12.90 14.71 13.85 14.51 T-30 11.38 (a) 15.37 13.50 T-31 11.92 14.76 13.82 14.69 T-32 12.93 15.34 14.63 15.41 T-33 10.29 12.86 12.26 13.97 T-34 10.45 12.59 12.39 14.29 T-35 11.56 13.32 12.66 13.49 T-36 11.63 14.57 13.13 14.34 T-37 12.55 15.13 14.36 15.05 T-38 13.51 16.09 15.31 15.91 T-39 42.35 45.16 52.43 53.26 T-40 33.77 35.66 39.19 40.70 TA41 65.38 70.97 76.69 78.37 T-42 64.52 66.28 69.99 75.76 T-43 72.01 73.30 69.96 81.30 T-44 62.31 70.13 74.87 86.82 T-45 40.22 44.52 46.69 46.58 T-46 32.36 36.35 37.68 37.78 T-47 67.18 72.62 69.64 84.55 C-l

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERMI 2 TLD ANALYSIS (CONT.) (mR/Std Qtr) STATION FIRST SECOND T FOURTH NUMBER QUARTER QUARTER QUARTER T-48 32.82 37.30 38.62 34.94 T-49 15.44 19.92 18.41 20.07 T-50 12.99 15.61 14.31 15.37 T-51 9.45 11.32 10.11 12.78 T-52 12.42 14.16 13.67 16.40 T-53 21.27 23.22 24.02 25.31 T-54 13.74 16.48 14.18 18.33 T-55 13.22 16.09 14.22 16.35 T-56 12.11 14.48 (a) 15.07 T-57 14.72 17.65 16.05 18.40 T-58 11.35 13.80 11.70 13.95 T-59 11.47 13.33 11.81 13.48 T-60 13.15 15.46 13.68 16.76 T-61 13.94 15.77 13.98 16.49 T-62 12.96 16.56 14.82 17.08 T-63 12.74 13.31 11.31 14.21 T-64 18.23 19.67 19.06 23.75 T-65 19.71 23.50 22.13 25.09 T-66 103.71 112.95 130.31 144.98 T-67 15.32 17.30 16.77 19.67 (a) TLD missing, see Appendix D - Program Execution. C-2

Fermi2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadloZgical Environmental Operatiing Report FERMI 2 AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA (pCi/cubic meter) API-I FIRST QUARTER

 -Date        .:        :T;  Activity1     i2 1/4/2005!      4.73E-02   +/-  2.80E-03 1/12/2005         3.06E-02   +1   2.20E-03 1/18/2005         2.78E-02   +1-  2.80E-03 1/26/2005         2.80E-02   +1-  2.40E-03 2/1/2005        2.42E-02   +1-  2.70E-03 2/8/2005        4.18E-02        2.70E-03 2/15/2005         1.94E-02   +1- 12.50E-03 2/22/2005n        3.24E-02   +- 2.70E-03 3/1/2005        2.42E-02   +l/ 2.60E-03 3t/8/2005       2.42E-02        2.30E-03 3/5/2005          2.25E-02   + jI2.30E-03 3/22/2005         2.20E-02   +/- 12.50E-03 3/29/2005 I1-.86E-02       12.50E-03 API-1 SECOND QUARTER Date,                     Activity 4/5/2005        2.03E-02  +1- 2.40E-03 4/12/2005           1.90E-02 +/- 2.soE-03 4/19/2005          2.36E-02  +/- 2.30E-03 4/26/2005         2.20E-02  +/- 2.40E-03 5/3/2005        1.36E-02  +/- 2.30E-03 5/10/2005         2.68E-02   +/- 2.40E-03 5/17/2005         2.03E-02  +/- 2.40E-03 5/24/2005          1.79E-02  +/- 2.40E-03 5/31/2005         1.1sE-02  +/- 2.30E-03 6n/2005         1.91E-02  +/- 2.50E-03 6/14/2005         2.33E-02  +/- 2.soE-03 6/21/2005          8.80E-03  +/- 2.IOE-03 6/28/2005          3.52E-02  +1- 2.40E-03 C-3

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEflezant Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERMI 2 AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA (pCi/cubic meter) API-1 TERD QUARTER Datel l 0 Acitiyi 7/5/20051 2.35E-021 + 2.30E-03 7/12/2005 2.06E-021 M 2.50E-03 7/19/2005 2.39E-02 +1 2.40E-03 7/262005 2.90E-02 + 2.40E-03 8/2/0051 (a) 8/9/2005 3.85E-02 / 2.60E-03 8/16/20051 3.23E-02 +1-2.40E-03 8/23/2005 2.43E-02 +1 2.80E-03 8/30/20051 2.71E-02 + 2.40E-03 9/6/2005; 1.91E-02 +/ 2.20E-03 9/13/2005 3.35E-02 +/- 2.70E-03 9/20/2005! 2.83E-02 +- 2.70E-03 9/27/2005 3.31E-02 +1 2.40E-03 API-1 FOURTH QUARTER D9at^ I00 7Activity . 10/4/20051 3.22E-02 +1 2.40E-03 10/11/2005 2.35E-02+, 2.20E-03 1018/2005 1.79E-02 +- 2.20E-03 10/25/20051 1.21E-02 +1 2.10E-03 ll/l/2005 2.32E-02 +1 2.30E-03 11/8/2005 3.15E-02 +/ 2.50E-03 11/15/2005 2.85E-02 +1 2.50E-03 11/22/2005 2.36E-02 +1 2.50E-03 11/29/2005 2.10E-02 +/- 2.30E-03 12/6/2005 2.79E-02 +1 2.50E-03 12/13/2005 4.00E-02 +/- 2.80E-03 12/20/2005 3.48E-02 +/-_2.80E-03 12/27/2005 5.1sE-02 +- 3.OOE-03 (a) Sample not collected; see Appendix D, Program Execution. C-4

Fermi2- 2005Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERMI 2 AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA (pCi/cubic meter) API-2 FIRST QUARTER Datev8C-j.I ~ i 0 I] 1/4/2005 3.59E-02 [2.70E-03 1/12/20051 2.28E-02 +1 2.10E-03 1/18/2005 j 2.38E-02 +/- 2.70E-03 1/26/20051 2.21E-02 +/ 2.30E-03 2/1/2005 2.22E-02 +1 2.50E-03 2/8/20051 3.07E-02 12.60E-03 2/15/20051 2.15E-02 +1- 02.50E-03 2/22/2005 3.10E-02 +1 2.70E-03 3/1/2005i 2.76E-02 +1 2.60E-03 3/8/2005l 2.18E-02 +1 2.30E-03 3/15/2005 1.95E-02l +1- 2.30E-03 3/12=005i 2.09E-02t +1- 2.40E-03 3/29/2005 1.62E-02 +1 2.40E-03 API-2 SECOND QUARTER XDate Act:vit 415/20051 2.02E-02 +1 2.40E-03 4/12/2005 2.15E-02 +1 2.50E-03 4/19/2005 2.20E-02 +1 2.30E-03 4/26/2005 2.01E-02 +1 2.40E-03 5/3/2005 1.67E-02 +1 2.30E-03 5/10/2005 2.86E-02 +/- 2.40E-03 5/17/2005 1.98E-02 +1 2.30E-03 5/24/2005 1.54E-02 +- 2.40E-03 5/31/2005 1.79E-02 2.40E-03 6f/2005 2.32E-02 +1- 2.50E-03 6/14/2005 2.35E-02 +/- 12.50E-03 6/21/2005 7.20E-03 2.1OE-03 6/28/2005 3.65E-02 +2.50E03 C-5

Fermni2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmental OperatingReport FERMI 2 AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA (pCi/cubic meter) API-2 THIRD QUARTER Date ivi 7/5/2005 2.21E-02 +/- 2.20E-03 7/12+2005. 2.56E-02 2.50E-03 7/19/2005 2.81E-02 +/ 2.40E-03 7/2612005_O 2.37E-02 +/- 2.30E-03 8/2/20051 1.89E-02 2.20E-03 8/9/2005 j 3.65E-02 +1/ 2.50E-03 8/16/20051 3.42E-02 +/ 2.50E-03 8/23/20051 2.42E-02 +/ 2.80E-03 8/30/2005 2.61E-02 +/ 2.30E-03 9/6/2005 2.03E-02 +1- 2.20E-03 9/13/20S i 3.67E-02 +/ 2.70E-03 9/20/2005 3.16E-02j ---- 2.60E-03 9/27/2005; 3.20E-02 +1 2.40E-03 API-2 FOURTH QUARTER Date AI y ^ _7Z 10/4/2005 3.45E-02 +f 2.40E-03 10/11/2005 2.73E-02 +J 2.20E-03 10/18/2005 1.66E-02 +/ 2.20E-03 10/25/2005 1.50E-02 +1 2.20E-03 11/1/2005 2.41E-02 + 2.30E-03 11/8/2005 (a) 11/15/2005 2.52E-02 _ 2.40E-03 11/22/2005 2.40E-02 +- 2.50E-03 11/29/2005 2.31E-02 +/ 2.40E-03 12/6/2005 2.35E-02 +/ 2.40E-03 12/13/2005 3.83E-02 +/ 2.70E-03 12/20/2005 3.36E-02 +1 2.80E-03 12/27/2005 4.95E-02 12. 3 (a) Sample not collected; see Appendix D, Program Execution. C-6

Fermi2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmental OperatingReport FERMI 2 AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA (pCi/cubic meter) API-3 FIRST QUARTER

D~ate: 70. Acivit:i::W 1/4/2005 i3.62E-02 +1- 12.70E-03 1/12/2005~ 2.28E-021 1 12. 1OE-03 1/18/2005; 2.52E-02 +/- 12.70E-03 1/26/2005 2.52E-02 +1- 12.40E-03 2/1/2005 1.85E-02 2.50E-03 2/8/2005 3.51E-02 +J 2.60E-03 2/15/2005 1.72E-02 +/ 2.50E-03 2/22/2005 2.71E-02 +1 2.70E-03 3/1/2005 2.64E-02 2.60E-03 3/8/2005i 2.32E-02 +1 2.30E-03 3/15/20051 2.22E-02 +/- 2.30E-03 3/22/2005 i 2.24E-02 +1 2.50E-03 3/29/20051 1.76E-02 +/ 2.40E-03 API-3 SECOND QUARTER

[0 fDate j ,,li t00' Acivity Sf00 4/5/2005 2.08E-02 +/ 2.40E-03 4/12/2005 _ 1.63E-02 +/ 2.40E-03 4/19/2005 2.75E-02 _ _ 2.40E-03 4/26/2005 2.07E-02 +/ 2.40E-03 5/3/2005 1.45E-02 +/ 2.30E-03 5/10/2005! 2.70E-02 +/ 2.40E-03 5/17/2005 i 1.93E-02 +/ 2.30E-03 5/24/2005 2.07E-02 +/ 2.50E-03 5/31/2005 1.54E-02 _ _-2.40E-03 6/7/2005 2.1OE-02 +/ 2.50E-03 6/14/2005 2.19E-02 +/ 2.50E-03 6/21/2005 7.20E-03 +/ 2.1OE-03 6/28/2005 3.76E-02 +/- 2.50E-03 C-7

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERNI 2 AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA (pCilcubic meter) API-3 THIRD QUARTER Date j Acti;ty 7/5/20051 2.38E-021 i/- 12.30E-03 7/12/2005 2.16E-02 +1- 2.50E-03 7/1912005 2.33E-02 +1- 2.40E-03 7/26/2005+ 2.74E-02 1 2.30E-03 8//2005 2.06E-02 +1- 12.20E-03 8/9/2005 3.39E-02 +1- 2.50E-03 8/16/2005 3.17E-02 +/- 12.40E-03 8/23/2005 2.34E-02 +1- 2.80E-03 8/30/2005 2.69E-02 +1 2.40E-03 9/6/2005 2.48E-02 +1 2.30E-03 9/1312005 3.59E-02 +J 2.70E-03 9/20/2005 3.42E-02 12.70E-03 9/27/2005 3.27E-02 +/- 2.40E-03 API-3 FOURTH QUARTER Iate - j0: 10/4/2005 I iIc t 3.12E-02 +J cit2.40E-03 10/11/2005 2.14E-02 + 2.20E-03 10/18/2005 2.02E-02 +/ 2.30E-03 10/25/2005 1.34E-02 +1 2.1OE-03 11/1/2005 2.06E-02 +/ 2.30E-03 11/8/2005 3.30E-02 +/- 2.50E-03 11/15/2005 2.80E-02 +/ 2.50E-03 11/22/2005 2.29E-02 +1 2.50E-03 11/29/2005 2.35E-02 +/ 2.40E-03 12/6/2005 2.26E-02 + 2.40E-03 12/13/2005 4.19E-02 +J 2.80E-03 12/20/2005 3.10E-02 +J 2.70E-03 12/27/2005 4.95E-02 +1 2.90E-03 C-8

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annuol RadioactiveEffluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERMI 2 AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA (pCi/cubic meter) API-4 FIRST QUARTER 1/4/20051 4.42E-02 +1- 2.90E-03 1/12/2005! 2.13E-02 +1- 12.OOE-03 1/1 812005 2.43E-02 +1 2.70E-03 1/2612005 2.53E-02 +1 2.30E-03 2/1/2005 2.1SE-02 +1- 2.60E-03 21812005; 3.46E-02 +1 2.60E-03 2/15/2005, 2.07E-02 +/- 2.50E-03 2/22/2005 2.84E-02 +1 2.70E-03 3/112005i 2.50E-02 +1 2.60E-03 3/8/2005 2.14E-02 +- 2.20E-03 3/15/2005 1.77E-02 +1 2.20E-03 312212005 2.08E-02 +1 2.40E-03 312912005i 1.25E-02 +1 Z.30E-03 API-4 SECOND QUARTER Date -Activ:ty 4/5/2005 1.97E-02 +1 2.40E-03 4/1212005 2.05E-02 +1- 2.40E-03 4/19/2005 2.51E-02 +1 2.40E-03 4/26n2005 1.83E-02 +1 2.30E-03 5/3/2005 1.21E-02 4/- 2.30E-03 5/10/2005 2.93E-02 +/ 2.50E-03 5/1712005 2.06E-02 +1 2.40E-03 5/2412005 1.89E-02 +/ 2.40E-03 5/3112005 1.44E-02 +1 2.30E-03 6t7/2005 2.15E-02 +- 2.50E-03 6/14/2005 2.30E-02 +/ 2.50E-03 6/21/2005 8.1OE-03 +1 2.1OE-03 6/28/2005 3.57E-02 +1 2.50E-03 C-9

Fermi2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERMI 2 AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA (pCi/cubic meter) API-4 THIRD QUARTER Date I Activity 7/512005 2.24E-02 +/- 2.30E-03 7/12/2005 2.48E-02 + 2.50E-03 7/1912005 2.56E-02 +/ 2.40E-03 7/2612005 2.09E-02 +1- 2.20E-03 81212005 2.16E-02 +/ 2.20E-03 81912005 3.60E-02 + 2.60E-03 8/16/2005 3.16E-02 +/ 2.40E-03 8/2312005 2.29E-02 +1 2.80E-03 813012005. 2.47E-02 +/ 2.30E-03 9/6/2005 2.31E-02 +1 2.30E-03 9/13/2005 3.66E-02 +- 2.70E-03 9120/2005 2.99E-02 +1 2.60E-03 912712005 2.66E-02 +1- 2.30E-03 API-4 FOURTH QUARTER Date Activit 10/4/2005 3.27E-01 +1- 2.40E-03 10/11/20051 2.43E-02 +1 2.20E-03 10/1812005 1.78E-02 +t 2.30E-03 10/25/2005 J 1.54E-02 +1 2.20E-03 11/11/2005 2.31E-02 +/ 2.30E-03 11/812005 3.20E-02 +/ 2.50E-03 11/1512005 2.46E-02 _ 2.40E-03 11/2212005 2.33E-02 +1 2.50E-03 11/29/2005f 2.38E-02 +1 2.40E-03 12/6/2005 1.54E-02 +1 2.30E-03 12/13/2005 3.68E-02 +1 2.70E-03 12120/2005. 3.50E-02 +1 2.80E-03 12/27/2005 4.38E-02 +/ 2.80E-03 C-10

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERMI 2 AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA (pCi/cubic meter) API-5 FIRST QUARTER I0 ate[ i A tiv tvJ 1/4/2005 5.44E-02 +- 13.OOE-03 1/12/2005 3.41E-02 +1- 2.20E-03 1/18/2005 3.21E-02 +1- 2.90E-03 1/26/2005: 3.7 1E-02 2.50E-03 2/1/2005 275E-02 +1- 2.70E-03 2/8/2005! 5.46E-02 A.soE-o3 4I 2/15/2005 2.75E-02 +1- 2.70E-03 2/22/2005 3.31E-02 +1- 2.80E-03 3/1/2005 I 2.50E-02 2.60E-03 3/8/2005 2.84E-02 +- 2.40E-03 3/15/2005 2.33E-02 +1- 2.30E-03 3/22/2005 1.76E-02 +1- 2.40E-03 312912005 1.53E-02 2.40E-03 API-5 SECOND QUARTER Dat7e : ' Activity 4/5/2005 1.72E-02 +1- 2.30E-03 4/1212005 1.84E-02 +1- 2.40E-03 4/19/2005 1.91E-02 +I- 2.20E-03 4/26/2005 2.03E-02 +I- 2.30E-03 5/3/2005 1.34E-02 +1- 2.30E-03 5/10/2005 2.79E-02 +1- 2.40E-03 5/17/2005 2.11 E-02 +1- 2.40E-03 5/24/2005 2.01E-02 +1- 2.40E-03 5/31/2005 1.39E-02 +- 2.40E-03 6/7n2005 2.26E-02 +1- 2.50E-03 6/14/2005 2.59E-02 +1- 2.60E-03 6121/2005 7.90E-03 2.10E-03 6128/2005 4.01E-02 +1- 2.soE-03 C-lI

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmental OperatingReport FERMI 2 AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA (pCi/cubic meter) API-5 THIRD QUARTER I Date I Ac Ui t : 7/52005 2.57E-02 2.30E-03 7/12/2005 2.06E-02 +1 2.50E-03 7/19/2005 2._3E-02 +/- 2.30E-03 7/26/2005 2.39E-02 +1- 2.30E-03 8/2005+ 2.08E-02 2.20E-03 8/9/2005 3.05E-02 + 2.40E-03 8/16/2005 (a) 8/23/2005 2.14E-02 +1 2.80E-03 8/30/2005 2.33E-02 + 2.30E-03 9/6/2005 1.77E-02 + 2.10E-03 9/13/2005 3.18E-02 +1 2.70E-03 9/20/2005- 2.43E-02 - 2.60E-03 9/27/2005 2.96E-02 +/- 2.30E-03 API-5 FOURTH QUARTER lDat 10 f Actiit 10/4/2005 3.31E-02 +/- 12.40E-03 10/11/2005 2.42E-02 +1- 2.20E-03 10/18/2005 1.94E-02 2.30E-03 10/25/2005 1.43E-02 +1 2.20E-03 11/1/2005 2.16E-02 +1 2.30E-03 11/8/2005 3.52E-02 +1 2.SOE-03 11/15/2005 2.59E-02 +1 2.50E-03 11/22/2005 2.71E-02 +12.60E-03 11/29/2005 2.25E-02 +/ 2.40E-03 12/6/2005 2.18E t2.40E-03 12/13/2005 4.27E-02 +1- 12.80E-03 _121202005 3.42E-02 +/- 12.80E-03 12/27/2005 4.89E-02 +1-T2.90E-03 (a) Sample not collected; see Appendix D, Program Execution. C-12

Fermi2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERMI 2 AIR IODINE - 131 (pCi/cubic meter) API-1 FIRST QUARTER DL l fcutiVity 1/4/2005 <14.30E-02 1/12/2005 <il4.40E-02 1/18/20051 <15.20E-02 1/26/20051 < 4.20E-02 2/1/2005[ <14.70E-02 2/8/2005 < 13.90E-02 2/15/2005 <14.80E-02 2/22/2005 < I5.E-02 3/1/2005 <14.60E-02 3/8/2005 <14.20E-02 3/15/2005 <I 4.40E-02 3/22/2005 <4.60E-02 3/29/2005 <3.40E-02 API-1 SECOND QUARTER

     ~ ~1 Date            AetIvity 4/5/2005       <14.30E-02 4/12/2005       < 4.00E-02 4/19/2005       < 5.60E-02 4/26/2005       < 5.30E-02 5/3/2005       < 3.90E-02 5/10/2005       < 3.70E-02 5/17/2005       < 3.60E-02 5/24/2005       < 4.80E-02 5/31/2005       < 3.20E-02 6/7/2005      < 3.90E-02 6/14/2005       < 4.50E-02 6/21/2005       < 390E-02 6/8/2005        <5.40E-02 C-13

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERPM 2 AIR IODINE - 131 (pCilcubic meter) API-1 THIRD QUARTER [ Date jS

Aivty0 j 7/512005 < I2.70E-02 7/1212005 < 4.60E-02 7/19t205 < 3.50E-02 7n26/2005 < 5.40E-02 81212005 1 (a) 8/9/2005 < 4.90E-02 8/16/2005 < 3.90E-02 812312005 <1 2.50E-02 8/3012005 < 3.60E-02 9/612005 < 4.20E-02 9/13/2005 < 4.OOE-02 9/2012005 < 5.40E-02 sn27noos5 <!4.0E-API-i FOURTH QUARTER tEDate t1 Activit;:

10/4/2005 < 3.60E-02 10/1112005 < 5.40E-02 10/18/2005 < 4.60E-02 1012512005 < 4.50E-02 I/l/12005 < 3.50E-02 11/8120 < 3.70E-02 11/15120051 < 4.20E-02 11/22/2005 < 3.90E-02 11/2912005 < 4.30E-02 1216/2005 < 4.40E-02 12/132005 < 4.00E-02 12/2012005 < 4.80E-02 12/2712005 < 4.80E-02 (a) Sample not collected; see Appendix D, Program Execution. C-14

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Radiological Environmental Operating Report FER1NH 2 AIR IODINE - 131 (pCi/cubic meter) API-2 FIRST QUARTER 1/4/2005 < 14.20E-02 1/12/2005 <4.30E-02 1/18/2005 <470E-02 1/26/2005 < 2.90E-02 2/1/2005 < 3.80E-02 2/8/2005 < 14.20E-02 2/15/2005 < 5.20E-02 2122/20051 < 14.30E-02 3/1/2005 < l4.40E-02 3/8/2005 < l4.40E-02 3/1512005 <14.1OE-02 3/22/2005 < 4.80E-02 3/29/051 <13.40E-02 API-2 SECOND QUARTER

.g-Date     0     WAcstiv                 -

4/5/2005 < 4.70E-02 4/12/2005 < 3.90E-02 4/19/2005 < 4.30E-02 4/26/20051 < 3.20E-02 5/3/2005 < 4.00E-02 5/10/2005 < 4.50E-02 5/17/2005 < 5.20E-02 5/24/2005 < 5.70E-02 5/31/2005 < 4.40E-02 6//2005 < 4.20E-02 6/14/2005 < 4.40E-02 6/21/2005 < 4.80E-02 6/28/2005 < 4.1OE-02 C-15

Fermi2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERXII 2 AIR IODINE - 131 (pCi/cubic meter) API-2 THIRD QUARTER 1 Date 01:Activit 7/5/2005 < 3.20E-02 7/12/2005 < 4.90E-02 7/19/2005 <13.30E-02 7/26/2005 < 4.80E-02 8/2/2005 <l5.IOE-02 8/9/2005 < 3.70E-02 8/16/2005 < 4.OOE-02 8/23/2005 < 3.40E-02

                                        /30/2005       < 3.60E-02 9/6/2005       < 4.40E-02 9/13/2005       < 4.30E-02 9/20/2005       < 5.OOE-02 9/27/2005       < 4.20E-02 API-2 FOURTH QUARTER Date      Fl      Ai 10/4/2005       < 13.90E-02 10/11/2005       <14.90E-02 10/18/2005       <4.40E-02 o2snoos5        < 5.10E-02 11/1/20051      < 3.40E-02 11/8/20051             (a) 11/15/20051      < 4.60E-02 11/22/20051      < 4.50E-02 11/29/2005       < 4.50E-02 12/6/2005       < 4.80E-02 12/13/2005       < 4.00E-02 12/20/2005.     <4.60E-02 12/27/2005       < 4.60E-02 (a) Sample not collected; see Appendix D, Program Execution.

C-16

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Radiological Environmental Operating Report FERMI 2 AIR IODINE - 131 (pCi/cubic meter) API-3 FIRST QUARTER hi:iiDate i l]EActivity 1/4/2005 <14.10E-02 1/12/2005 < 14.80E-02 1/18/2005 < 4.90E-02 1/26/2005 <14.00E-02 2/1/2005 < 4.10E-02 2/8/2005 < i4.OE-02 2/15/2005 < 4.60E-02 2/22/2005 < 3.40E-02 3/1/2005 < 4.50E-02 3/8/2005 < j3.60E-02 3/15/2005 < 14.OOE-02 3/22/2005 < i5. 1OE-02 3/29/2005 <13.60E-02 API-3 SECOND QUARTER Dh Fate

             , 7i.,;Activlity 4/5/2005       <  4.10E-02 4/12/2005        <  3.80E-02 4/19/2005        <  4.60E-02 4/26/2005        <  3.80E-02 5/3/2005       <  3.80E-02 5/10/2005        <  4.60E-02 5/17/2005        <  4.10E-02 5/24/2005        <  4.60E-02 5/31/2005        <  4.90E-02 6/7/2005       <  4.50E-02 6/14/2005        <  4.00E-02 6/21/2005        <  4.30E-02 6/28/2005        <  3.90E-02 C-17

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Radiological Environmental Operating Report FERNll 2 AIR IODINE - 131 (pCi/cubic meter) API-3 THIRD QUARTER Date j 1Activitifl : 7/5/20051 <13.1OE-02 7/1212005 <i 4.90E-02 7/19/2005 <12.80E-02 7/26/2005 <i 5.70E-02 8/2/2005 <I 6.60E-02 8/912005 < I4.40E-02 8/16/2005 <s3.90E-02 8n23n2005 < 3.90E-02 8/30/2005 < 4.20E-02 9/612005 < 5.OOE-02 9/13/2005 < 3.80E-02 9/2012005 <j5.1OE-02 9127/2005 <3.60E-02 API-3 FOURTH QUARTER Dativity J 1 10/4OOt< 4.60E-02 10/1112005 < 6.30E-02 10/1812005 < 5.50E-02 10/2512005 < 4.40E-02 11/112005 < 4.20E-02 11/8/2005 < 3.70E-02 11/1512005 < 4.90E-02 1112212005 < 3.80E-02 1112912005 < 5.OOE-02 12/612005 < 3.80E-02 1211312005 < 3.70E-02 12120/2005 <14.30E-02 12/27/2005 < 4.30E-02 C-18

Fermi2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmental OperatingReport FERMI 2 AIR IODINE - 131 (pCi/cubic meter) API-4 FIRST QUARTER r:Dste X ; Activity 1/4/2005 < i 4.20E-02 1/12/2005 < 13.80E-02 1/18s2005 t6.40E-02 1/26/2005 < 13.60E-02 2/1/2005 < 14.30E-02 2/8/2005 < 13 80E-02 2/15/2005 <s14.OE-02 2/22/2005 < 14.80E-02 3/1/2005 < 14.30E-02 3/8/2005 <14.30E-02 3/15/2005 < 4.1OE-02 3/22/2005 <I5.60E-02 3/29/2005 < 2.70E-02 3 API-4 SECOND QUARTER DIateS:0: .Activ ] 4/5/2005 < 4.60E-02 4/12/005 < 3.70E-02 4/19/2005 < 5.00E-02 4/26/20051 < 3.70E-02 5/3/2005 < 3.10E-02 5/10/2005 < 4.20E-02 5/17/2005 < 5.30E-02 5/24/2005 < 5.30E-02 5/31/2005 < 4.50E-02 6/7/2005 < 5.OOE-02 6/142005 < 4.80E-02 6/21/2005 < 5.00E-02 6/28/2005 < 4.60E-02 C-19

Fermi2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmental OperatingReport FERMI 2 AIR IODINE - 131 (pCi/cubic meter) API-4 THIRD QUARTER Date ActivitYUF 7/5/2005 < 12.50E-02 7/12/2005 < I4.60E-02 7/19/2005 < 12.50E-02 7/26/2005 <14.80E-02 812/2005 < 6.80E-02 8/9/2005 <1 3.20E-02 8/16/2005 < 3.70E-02 8/23/2005 < 3.50E-02 8/30/2005 <i 3.70E-02 9/6/2005 < 3.80E-02 9/13/2005 < 14.50E-02 9/20/2005 < 13.80E-02 9/27/20051 <14.40E-02 API-4 FOURTH QUARTER Date AAcii 10/4/20051 < 4.80E-02 10/11/2005 < 4.70E-02 10/18/20051 < 4.60E-02 10/25/2005 < 4.30E-02 11/1/2005 < 4.OOE-02 11/8/2005 < 4.10E-02 1i/15/2005 < 4.50E-02 1122/2005j _<3.90E-02 11/29/2005 < 4.30E-02 12/6/2005 <4.90E-02 12/13/2005 < 4.50E-02 12/20/2005 < 3.70E-02 12/27/2005 < 3.70E-02 C-20

Fermi2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERMI 2 AIR IODINE - 131 (pCi/cubic meter) API-5 FIRST QUARTER [Date Activity 11412005 < 14.30E-02 1/12/2005 < 14.70E-02 1/18/2005 < 5.OOE-02 1/26/2005 c< 4.OOE-02 2/1/2005 < 4.20E-02 2/8/2005 <I 6.30E-02 2/15/2005 < 14.30E-02 2/22/2005 < 3.30E-02 3/1/2005 <14.1OE-02 3/8/2005 < 3.60E-02 3/15/2005 <14.50E-02 3/22/2005 <6.50E-02 3/29/2005 <14.20E-02 API-5 SECOND QUARTER

   )Date          Actiity      l 4/5/2005      < 4.10E-02 4/12/2005       < 3.70E-02 4/19/2005       < 4.60E-02 4/26/2005       < 4.80E-02 5/3/2005      < 3.30E-02 5/1012005       < 3.90E-02 5/17/2005       < 3.90E-02 5/24/2005       < 5.OOE-02 5/31/2005       < 4.30E-02 6n2005        < 3.80E-02 6/14/2005       < 4.90E-02 6/21/2005       < 3.80E-02 6/28/2005       < 5.40E-02 C-21

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERMI 2 AIR IODINE - 131 (pCi/cubic meter) API-5 THIRD QUARTER Date Activi 7/5/2005 < 3.1OE-02 7/12/2005

                                     . .... . .       ._       < 3.20E-02_

7/19/2005 < 3.80E-02 7/26/2005 < 4.30E-02 8/2/2005 <L5.SOE-02 8/9/2005 < 4.1OE-02 8/16/2005 (a) 8/23/20051 <13 1OE-02 8/30/2005 < 4.1OE-02 9/6/2005 < 4.50E-02 9/13/2005 < 3.90E-02 9/20/2005 <I5.OOE-02 9/27/2005n <4.60E-02 API-5 FOURTH QUARTER Date A4tivity!-~ 10/4/2005 < 4.OOE-02 10/11/2005 <14.70E-02 10/18/2005 < 4.70E-02 10/25/2005 < 5. OE-02 1Il/2005 <14.1OE-02 11/8/2005 < 3.1OE-02 11/15/2005 < 4.80E-02 11/22/2005 < 3.50E-02 11/29/2005 < 4.OOE-02 12/6/2005 < 4.00E-02 12/13/2005 < 4.30E-02 12/20/2005 < 4.40E-02 12/27/2005 < 4.40E-02 (a) Sample not collected; see Appendix D, Program Execution. C-22

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Radiological Environmental Operating Report FERMI 2 AIR PARTICULATE QUARTERLY COMPOSITE ANALYSIS API-1 (indicator) (pCi/cubic meter) Nuclide l FirstQuarter ; I - i SecondQuarter ] Be-7 1.-15E-O +/- I1.70E-02 I 7.60E-02 +1- 2.40E-02 K-40 <i 2.70E-021 ;_ < 4.10E-02 _ Mn-54 < 5.70E-02' I <1 8.70E-02 _ I Co-58 <; 2.20E-03 ! < 2.20E-03 Fe-59 < 3.OOE-03! T < 4.1OE-03 I I Co-60 < I.IOE-02 ! < 1.20E-02 Zn-65 < 1.80E-031 ! < 7.70E-04 Zr-95 < 7.70E-03 l < 5.40E-03 _ Ru-103 < 6.30E-031 i _ <! 7.40E-031 Ru-106 < 3.60E-03l __- _l < 8.20E-03 Cs-134 < 1.50E-021 2.20E-02 Cs-137 I 1.90E-031 2.70E-03 Ba-140 <I 2.1OE-031 1 < 2.60E-03 La-140 < 4.OOE-02 _ <_ 9.OOE-02 Ce-141 < 4.60E-021 < LOOE-O1 _ Ce-144 < 5.70E-031 l < 1.OOE-02 _ API-i (indicator) (pCi/cubic meter) Nulide Third Quarter l(a FourthbQuarter i Be-7 1.-19E-OI I/- 12.30E-02 _ 7.50E-02 +/- 2.20E-02 K-40 <L 4.30E-021 1 2.80E-02 1 Mn-54 < 8.50E-021 ! < 8.80E-02 ____ Co-58 < 3.60E-03 < 2.90E-03 I Fe-59 < 4.50E-031 < 4.30E-03 Co-60 < 1.20E-021 < 9.80E-03 Zn-65 < 3.1OE-03 j < 4.30E-03 Zr-95 < 8.30E-03 ! <I 7.70E-03 I Ru-103 < 9.50E-03 < 4.90E-03 Ru-106 < 7.70E-03 < LOOE-02 Cs-134 < 2.90E-02 < 3.OOE-02 L_...._ Cs-137 < 3.20E-03 < 3.60E-03 Ba-140 < 3.50E-031 I < 3.20E-03 La-140 < 5.90E-02i 1 < 1.1OE-Oi 1 - Ce-141 < 6.80E-02 _ 1.30E-01 Ce-144 < 1.40E-021 l < 1.30E-02 (a) See Appendix D, Program Execution. C-23

Fermi2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmental OperatingReport FERMI 2 AIR PARTICULATE QUARTERLY COMPOSITE ANALYSIS API-2 (indicator) (pCi/cubic meter) [Nuclide Pr1Quarter is I 1l 1 1Second aieiaei Be-7 7.90E-021 +/- 1.70E-02 1.OOE-O1 +/ 2.OOE-02 K-40 <' 3.OOE-021 _ _ < 4.50E-02 Mn-54 < 5.40E-02J < 9.70E-02 _ Co-58 <_ 1.80E-031 . < 3.20E-03 Fe-59 < 3.30E-03 1 < 3.20E-03 Co-60 < 3.70E-031 < 3.40E-03 Zn-65 < 6.40E-041 < 2.80E-03 Zr-95 40E03 _ < 8.20E-03 Ru-103 <; 4.90E-031 < 8.70E-03 Ru-106 < 5.70E-031 < 8.50E-03 Cs-134 < 2.10E-021 < 2.OOE-02 Cs-137 <L 2.0E-03 _ _ < 3.40E-03 Ba-140 <1 1.80E-03 < 2.30E-03

                         <I 4.70E-02                       <   8.10E-02 _

Ce-141 < 5.40E-02 < 9.30E-02 _ Ce-144 < 5.50E-031 < 9.60E-03 API-2 (indicator) (pCi/cubic meter) Nuclide i Third Quarter (a) FourtheO I Be-7 I 7.90E-02 +l- 12.00E-02 8.40E-02 +1- 2.20E-02 K-40 < 3.50E-02 < 3.70E-02 _ Mn-54 <1 1.OOE-01 < 1.LOE-01 _ Co-58 < 3.10E-03 < 3.60E-03 Fe-59 <* 5.90E-031 < 5.10E-03 _ Co-60 < 1.3E- < 2.30E-02 _ Zn-65 <; 3.70E-031 < 3.1OE-03 Zr-95 I 7.OOE-03 < 9.60E-03 _ Ru-103 < 4.70E-031 < 1.I OE-02 _ Ru-106 <. 8.80E-031 < 9.40E-03 Cs-134 < 3.40E-021 < 2.90E-02 _ Cs-137 < 3.50E-031 1 < 2.40E-03 Ba-140 < 3.30E-031 _ I 2.OOE-03 _ La-140 < 8.OOE-021 < 2.80E-02 Ce-141__ < 9.20E-02 - < _ - _2E-2 Ce-144 < 1.20E-021 < 1.50E-02 (a) See Appendix D, Program Execution. C-24

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERMI 2 AIR PARTICULATE QUARTERLY COMPOSITE ANALYSIS API-3 (indicator) (pCi/cubic meter) uclide j Frst Quarter Second Quarter Be-7 1.07E-01 +/- 1.60E-02 8.10E-02 +/- l1.80E-02 K-40 < 2.50E-02 < 3.70E-02 Mn-54 < 4.50E-021 < 8.90E-02 Co-58 < 2.70E-03j l < 2.40E-03 Fe-59 <1 2.30E-03 l < 3.70E-03 _ Co-60 < 1.5OE-02l <1 1.30E-02 _ Zn-65 < 2.1OE-031 l < 2.20E-03 _ Zr95 < 6.30E-03 < 5.40E-03 _ Ru-103 <, 6.90E-03 < 7.40E-03 _ Ru-106 < 3.40E-03 I < 5.40E-03 Cs-134 c 1.8OE-02 T < 2.40E-02 _ Cs-137 < 5.10E-04 i < 2.90E-03 _ Ba-140 La-140 Ce-141

              < 2.20E-03
              <1 4.60E-021
              <c 5.30E-02 1               < 1.40E-03
                                                < 7.OOE-02
                                                < 8.OOE-02 Ce-14   4     <I  5.20E-0                       <_1.20E-03           __120E02_ _

API-3 (indicator) (pCi/cubic meter) Nucide Thiirdftiart ^ -Fo Quarter Be-7 1.21E-01 +/- 12.30E-02 <1 7.1OE-02 _ K-40 < 4.40E-02 i < 2.80E-02 Mn-54 < 9.60E-02 < 8.40E-02 Co-58 < 2.60E-031 I <I 2.70E-03 i Fe-59 < 3.70E-03* <I 5.40E-03 Co-60 < 9.10E-03l l l < 1.40E-02 Zn-65 < 3.70E-03 J l < 4.OOE-03 Zr-95 6.30E-03 < 8.30E-03 Ru-103 < 8.80E-03 < 1.1OE-02 Ru-106 < 8.40E-03 < 8.20E-03 Cs-134 < 2.50E-02j l 3 < 3.OOE-02 _ Cs-137 <I 1.60E-031 l_ l < 2.50E-03 l Ba-140 <I 3.30E-03 1 _ 1 < 2.10E-03 1 La-140 <i 8.90E-02 _ _ l < 7.10E-02 _ Ce-141 -< 1.O°E-_01 _ < 8.10E-02 Ce-144 < 1.1OE-02 l< 3 .20E-02_ C-25

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Radiological Environmental Operating Report FERMI 2 AIR PARTICULATE QUARTERLY COMPOSITE ANALYSIS API-4 (control) (pCi/cubic meter) [Nuclde IAn qar Iecd 2 arter Be-7 9.70E-021 +- 1.60E-02 1 8.30E-02 +1 2.20E-02 K-40 <! 3.60E-021 i_ _ < 4.1OE-02 Mn-54 <1 6.OOE-02l _ < 6.30E-02 Co-58 <i 2.1OE-031 < 2.20E-03 Fe-59 <i 3.00E-031 _ < 2.50E-03 Co-60 <I 1.50E-02 _ < 1.50E-02 _- Zn-65 < 3.40E-031 _-__ < 2.80E-03 Zr-95 <l 3.80E-031 I < 6.20E-03 Ru-103 <I 9.80E-03 T < 7.40E-03 Ru-106 < 4.60E-03 _ _ < 7.90E-03 Cs-134 <1 2.60E-02 _ < 2.60=-02 Cs-137 <l 1.90E-031 _ < 2.50E-03 _ Ba-140 <! 2.20E-031 - I < 2.30E-03 La-140 < 3.60E-021 -_ I < 8.10E-02 Ce-141 < 4.20E-021__-__ < 9.30E-02 _1 _ Ce-144 < 6.20E-03 ____ < 1.20E-02= API-4 (control) (pCilcubic meter) INugide Third Quarter _ Fourth Quarer Be-7 1.14E-OIl +l- 12.30E-02 < 4.90E-02 I K-40 < 4.20E-02 _ _ < 2.80E-02 _ Mn-54 <: 8.40E-021 _ < I.IOE-O1 Co-58 < 2.90E-031 _____ < 3.30E-03 _ lFe-59 < 3.20E-031 , l < 4.30E-03 Co-60 < 1.50E-021 I _ < 2.10E-02 Zn-65 < 2.80E-031 I _ I < 2.80E-031 Zr-95 < 7.60E-031 < 1.OOE-02 Ru-103 <i 8.80E-031 _____ < 7.IOE-03 Ru-106 <, 6.60E-031 _ __ ' < 8.20E-03 Cs-134 <I 3.1OE-021 _ < 3.20E-02 __- Cs-137 <I2.30E-031 _____ < 2.OOE-03______ Ba-140 <l2.70E3-03 I!< 2.60E-03 La-140 < 5.40E-02 l< 7.0E-02 _ Ce-141 <1 6.20E-02 < _8.10E-02

           <I I.IOE-02        -          _           <  1.30E-02 C-26

Fermi2 - 2005Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmental OperatingReport FERMI 2 AIR PARTICULATE QUARTERLY COMPOSITE ANALYSIS API-5 (Indicator) (pCi/cubic meter) Nd__ l __ _ _irsu _ _I SecondQuarter I Be-7 1.04E-01l +I- '1.80E-02 I __ 1.18E-01 +/- 2.30E-02 K-40 <. 3.20E-02, j_ i < 3.40E-02 Mn-54 < 3.90E-021 , < 8.90E-02 Co-58 < 1.80E-031 1.90E-03.. e..,.. . . ....... .. ...... .............. ... Fe-59 < 3.60E-03,1 < 4.10E-03 Co-60 < 2.OOE-021 _j _I < 1.70E-02 Zn-65 < 4.50E-031 _ < 7.70E-04 _ Zr-95 < 6.70E-031 _ <I 8.10E-03 _ Ru-103 < 7.50E-031 ._ < 9.80E-03 Ru-106 < 4.IOE-031 - __ _ <I 5.90E-03 Cs-134 < 1.80E-02! j, <1 2.40E-02 _ Cs-137 < 2.30E-031 ' , <i l.90E-03 Ba-140 2.20E-03 __< L 2.60E-03 --- La-140 < 1.60E-021 i _ < 6.90E-02 Ce-141 < 1.90E-02 l < 8.OOE-02 _ Ce-<4 5.20E-031 < 1.E-02 API-5 (Indicator) (pCi/cubic meter) Nuclide I l, ird Quarter (a) 'Fourth Quarter Be-7 I lIlE-Ol, +/- ,2.30E-02 I I8.40E-02 +/- 2.20E-02 K-40 < 4.1OE-02 i < 3.1 OE-02 Mn-54 < 1.OOE-01 < 1.OOE-01 Co-58 4.40E-03< 1.60E-03 _ Fe-59 < 5.60E-03, , <, 7.20E-03 Co-60 <, 1.80E-021 1 < 2.1 OE-021 Zn-65 <I 2.40E < 2.20E-03 Zr-95 <, 6.80E-03 i < 7.1OE-03 _ Ru-103 < 7.30E-03 i < 9.20E-03 _ Ru-106 <I 8.20E-03, < 7.70E-03 Cs-134 <i 3.10E-02 < 3.20E-02 _ Cs-137 < 2.10E-031 < 2.70E-03 Ba-140 <I 3.OOE-031 < 2.40E-03 La-140 < 7.50E 02 < 1.IOE-01 Ce-141 <, 8.60E-02 ! < 1.30E-01 Ce-144 .30E-02 C 1.20E-02 =- ------ (a) See Appendix D, Program Execution. C-27

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERMI 2 MILK ANALYSIS M-2 (Indicator) (pCi/liter) Nuclide 20-JAN _______ 24-FlB 24-MAR 1-131 l< 8.50E-01 = < 5.60E-01 I <1 5.70E-O1 I Sr-89 < 5.90E+00 < 7.90E+00 l< 5.60E3+00 I Sr-90 1< 1.60E1+00 _ < 1.70E+00 < 1.50E+00 _ Be-7 < 4.OOE+01 < 8.60E+01 _ _ < 5.0E0e+_1 K-40 1.50E+03 +1- 5.40E+01 1.47E+03 +/- 1.20E+02 _ 1.27E+03 +1- 6.1OE+Ol Mn-54 < 4.90E3+00 < I.1OE+01 _ < 6.40E+O0 Co-58 < 4.90E+00 < 1.I OE+01 OI < 6.OOE+O0 lFe-59 < 1.90E+01 < 4.10E+01 < 2.10E+OIl Co 4 O 5.50E+001

                    <                               < 1.40<+01                              < 6.50E+OO iZn-65               <   1.30E+01                    < 3.20E+01                              < 2.60E+Ol1

',Zr-95 < 9.10E+00 _ < 1.90E+01 _ < 1.00E+0O _

'Ru-103             < 5.30E+00                      <   1.20_+<1                            < 6.40E+O0 _

IRu-106 < 4.20E+01 < 1.20E+021 < 5.40E+01 __ ICs-134 < 4.40E+00 - < 1.20E+01 1 < 6.50E+O0O Cs-137 < 4.90E+00 < 1.OOE+OI301 < 5.70E+OO_ IBa-140 < 9.20E+O0O < 1.IOE+01 1 < 1.20E+01 La-140 < I.1OE+01 _ < 1.20E+01 i < 1.40E+OI Ce-141 < 7.30E+00 < 1.50E+01 < 8.90E+00 _

!Ce-144             <I 2.40E+01                     <     .40E+O                            < 2.90E+OI           __

Nudide l 21-APR _ 12-MAY 26-Y _____ 1-131 1 < 9.80E-01 < 9.20E-01 < 9.30E-O1 I Sr-89 < 8.20E+00 < 6.40E+00 < 4.60E+01 _ Sr-90 < 1.90E-00 < 1.70E+00 < 1.50E+O00 Be-7 < 7.OOE+I01 < 5.60E01 < 6.50E+O0 K-40 J 1.34E+03 +/- 9.50E+01 1.36E+03l +1- 7.10E+01 1.49E+03 +/- 6.70E+O1 Mn-54 j< 1.IOE+ 01_I < 7.70E+00 < 2.2013i01 o-58 ....... 1.20E+01 - < 7.20E+00 ---------- - -- ----- 8.1E+ ------- iFe-59 < 3.00E+01 _ < 2.00E+01 < 1.70E+O1

!Co-60           1 < 1.lOE+OI         I             <   8.20E+001                           < 1.20E+O1I Zn-65              < 2.80E+01I1                    <   1.70E+01 i                          < 7.OOE+OO_

Zr-95 < 2.00E-fOi < 1.200E+01 _ < 5.10E+01O

u-103 J< 1.IE+0 I < 8.OOE+00 < 7.1_E+O

                    <   8.20E+01                    <   6.20EA1                             < 6.50E+O gEs-134          i  <   1.20E+01                    <1  7.00E+Oi                            < 1.20E+OII Cs-137             <   1.1O+I                      <   6.60E+00                            < 1.40EI1            _ __

Ba-140 < 1.20E+O1 I< 1.1E+01 < 9.10E+OOl La-140 < 1.40E+01 I < 1.30E+01l < 2.90E+01I ICe-141 I < 1.40E+O1 < 1.70E+01 < 9.30E-OI.,

 !Ce-144           <5.60E+1I                        < 3.50E+0 I                             < 4.60E+O1 C-28

Fermi2- 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmental OperatingReport FERMI 2 NMLK ANALYSIS M-2 (Indicator) (pCi/liter) lNucide : 9-JUN 23-JUN 1 7-JUL ____ 1-131 < 8.50E-01 < 7.70E-01l <1 6.70E-OI I Sr-89 < 4.80E+01 _ < 8.40E+OO < 8.60E+OO __ ,Sr-90 2.06E+00 +1- 4.OOE-01 < 1.70E+OO 3.04E+OO +I/- 5.20E-1 iBe-7 < 6.30E+OC < 5.60E+01 <[ 3.60E+OI - IK-40 _ 1.39E+03 +/- 6.70E+01 1.47E+03 +I 7.OOE+01 1.34E+03 +I- 5.20E+O1 Mn-54 < 1.70E+01 < 7.10E+00 < 5.40E+0 _ !Co-58 < 8.30E+00 < 6.30E+00, 5.OOE+O _ _ Fe-59 < 1.40E+01 _ < 2.20E+O1 < 1.60E+01 ICo-60 < 1.1OE+OI < 6l7E+00 <I 5.60E+OO_ Zn-65 <L 6.20E+00 < 1.60E+01l <, 1.20E+O I ___ Zr-95 <I 5.10E+01 < 1.1OE+01 < 7.80E+OO __ Ru-103 <l 7.60E+ 00 < 7.30E-O <1 4.80E+OO 1 Ru-106 < 5.80E+00 < 5.80E+_1 < 4.70E+! _ Cs-134 < 1.1OE+O1 < 5.9OE+00! < 4.90E+OO I Cs-137 < 1.30E+01 < 6.30E+OO < 4.90E+' t Ba-140 < 8.60E+00 < 1.20E+01j < 8.60E+OO l La-140 < 2.90E+01 < 1.40E+01 <, 9.90E+OO T Ce-141 < 8.50E-01 < 9.OOE+00, <, 6.80E+OO , [Ce-144 < 4.80E+01 < 31lOE+01O

                                              -------------------                    <. 2.40E+O..........--i                      -

Nclide 21 -JUL I II -AUG j 25-AUG I1-131 I< 7.30E-01 I~ <1 9.OOE-01 II <1 7.60E-O1IIJ___ Sr-89 < 8.20E+00, - < 8.70E+00 3.90E+OI _____ ISr-90 < 1.50E+00, ___ < 1.80E+OO <1 1.50E+OO , IBe-7 < 3.10E+01 < 3.30E+01 < 4.30E+OOi

           -K40 1.40E+031 +/- l4.30E+O1     -      1.42E+03 +/-       5.30E+O1          1.42E+03l +I- 5.30E+O1 LMn-54        <  3.90E+00             --   I---5----

5.10E+00 ...... 10_1<1.80E+O1 ICo-58 < 3.90E+OO < 4.70E+00l l 3 <, 6.20E+oo Fe-59 < 1.30E+01 < 1.60E+01 l_ ,_<3

                                                                                     < 1.20E+Ol lII co-60        <  4.40E+00-i                    < 6.80E+00       _                  1 < 8.60E+OO Zn-65        <  1.OOE+O1                      < 1.30E+O1       _ ____                < 5.OOE+OOi                                    f IZr-95        <  7.20E+00O                     <    7.30E+00______                    <I 4.40E+O I                  __I___

RU-103 < 4.l1E-OOEf < 5.30E+OOl I_ < 4.90E+OO l Ru-106 < 3.50E+01 < 4.40E+01 1_3 < 4.40E+00 I Cs-134 < 3.80E+001 1 < 5.OOE+001 1 <' 8.00E+OO _ __ Cs-137 < 4.1OE+00__ < 4.90E+O00 < .0E0 Ba-140 < 8.30E+00- < 7.8Ej0 <1 6.40E+001 La-140 < 9.50E+_0 < ________ <1 2.30E+01 _ Ce-141 < 5.70E+O0 l l < 5.20E+001 <1 7.60E-0 1 _____ tCe-144 l <1 1.70E+01 < 2.20E+01 I <1 3.90E+01l C-29

Fermi2- 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmental OperatingReport FERMI 2 MILK ANALYSIS M-2 (Indicator) (pCifliter) lNuclide lSEP 1 22-SEP ________ 13OTC II-131 < 8.10E-01 _ < 6.70E-01 I < 4.90E-O1 I iSr-89 < 8.1OE+OO < 4.50E+00 I < 6.60E+OO ISr-90 < 1.60E+OO < 1.70E+00 = < 1.60E+OO= Be-7 < 6.10E+01 < 6.20E+01 < 6.90E+O1 K-40 1.34E+03 +/- 37.OOE+01 1.48E+03 +/- 8.20E+01 _ 1.35E+03 +/- 6.80E+O1 iMn-54 < 7.30E+ O < 7.50E+O0 < 7.20E+OO Co-58 < 7.90E+00 < 8.20E+00 < 7.30E+OO ITe-S9 < 2.30E+01 < 2.80E+01 < 1.60E+O1 ICo-60 < 8.60E1+00 < 9.10E+00 < 8.40E+O0 Zn-65 < 1.90E+01 < 2.10E+01 _ < 1.80E+O1 Zr-95 < 1.20E__0_1 _ < 1.70E+_1 < 1.20E+O1 !Ru-103 < 8.80E+00 < 9.80E+00 < 7.90E+OO IRu-106 < 6.40E+01 = < 6.40E-+O1 = < 6.40E+OI Cs-134 < 8.4_E__00 < 7.50E+00 < 6.80E+OOE Cs-137 < 6.10E+0 < 7.60E4oo _ < 6.60E+-OO Ba-140 <1 1.20E+01 < L30E+01 - < 9.20E+OO ILa-140 I <3 1.30E+O1 < I.50E+O- < 1.1OE+O1 Ce-141 <I 1.20lE+O1 <30E+O1

                                              =                            =          < 1.OOE+O1 OCe-14                                               <. 4.10E+Ol                       < 3.40E+01_

Nuclide 27-ocT 7 17-NOV [15-DEC I 131 < 7.30E-01 <I3 7.60E-01l <1 8.60E-O1l 'Sr-89 < 9.00E+00 < 4.70E+01l < 6.40E+OO ,Sr-90 < 1.70E+00 < 1.50E3+0 < 1.60E+00 Be-7 < 6.70E+01 < 5.90E3+OO < 3.90E+01

            -K1.56E+03           +/- 8.20E+01           1.49E+03 i/- 6.80E+01             1.50E+03 +/- 6.30E+O1

,Mn-54 <l 8.30E+00 <3 1.30E+01 I < 6.10E+OO Co-58 <I 8.70E+OOI < 8.10E+OO < 5.70E+OO Fe-59 < 2.1OE+O I < 1.60E+01 < 1.40E+01 Co-60 <I 8.40E+00 < 1.1OE+01 3 < 7.OOE+OOl

!Zn-65        <      1.80E+01__                      <  6.30E-i-OO                    <   1.40E+01______

Zr-95 < 1.60E+01 l_ _ < 5.40E+O I < 1.IOE+O1 Ru-103 I < 9.80E+003 1 < 6.90E+OOi < 5.80E+OO Ru-106 < 7.60E+01 _ _ l < 6.10E+003 < 4.70E+01 Cs-134 < 9.OOE+OO - < 1.1_OE+O1 < 6.50E---- ICs-137 < 7.1OE+00 < 1.30E+013 < 5.OOE+OOl iBa-140 < 1.IOE+O1 < 8.20E+00 < 1.IOE+O1 !La-140 < 1.30E+01 J _ < 2.90E+O1 < 1.20E+O1

 ,e-141       < 1.IOE-OI                             <   7.6013-1                     < 5.90E+OO1

!Ce-144 < 4.10E+01 < 4.70E+-.1 2 I C-30

Fermi 2 -2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Radiological Environmental Operating Report FERNH 2 MILK ANALYSIS M-8 (Control) (pCiffiter) 20-JAN 24-FEB -J24-MAR____ 1-131 <183E-01I I < 8.20E-01 <1 5.50E-0IV ____ Sr-89 <1 4.30E+00O < 6.90E+OO0 I <1 6.90E+OO I____

                 <  1.OE+O0           I<                        1.6013+00                           I___<1 1.60E-.OO            _____

iBe-7 <14.20E+01 IK-40 1.38E+03 +-15.50E+01 Co-58 <1 5.20E+00 Fe-59 <i 1.90E+01 Co-60 <i 5.80E+OO0- Zn-65 < 1.30E+01 Zr-95 < 8.90E-i00 Ru-103 < 5.20E+001 IRu-106 < 4.0+l< ICs-134 < 5.20E+00O ICs-137 < 5.401E+001 Ba-140 < 9.80E+0O0 La-140 <~1.1OE-i-Ol ICe-141 <I 1.1OE-i-11 Ce-144 . 2.30E+011 1I-131 < 6.80E-01 S 89< 8.OOE+00 Sr-90 < 1.80E1gOO Be-7 < 5.601E+01 IK-40 - 1.311E+03 Zn-65 < 1.701E+01 La10 < 1.40E+01 ICe-141 < 9.80E+OO00 rCe- T< 3.3-0E-i-O1 C-3 1 -< 4.601E+01 j<_.0+ __1 .44E1i-03 +/- 5.80E-01OI I 1.42E+03 +1 6.40E+01 Mn-54 < <I 6.70E+OOf I.0+O__<61E+O__-___ ____ _____ < 6.301E+00 ______ <I 6.30E+00 ____ I< 1.601E+01 ______I<1 1.60E+OlI ____ < 6.20E-iOO ____ <1 8.30E+OO0 ____ I< 1.501E+01 <1.60E+01j I___ < 1.OOE+01 <j 1. IOEi-OlI ___ < 6.70E+00______ <j 6.E+00Z ____ 5.1OE+01 __i<} 5OE+Ol I ____ < 5.90E+00IO 6.01+00 ____ < 5.IOE+00__ <I 6.50E-iOO ____ _____ < 1.IOE1+O __ .+i I___ < 1.20E1+01 _____ <I 1.50E+01 ____ _ _ _ _ < 6.70E+00 _ _ __ _ < 8.70E+OO0_ __ __ ___ < 2.90E+01 ____ 1-MAY _____26-MAY ___ < 9.301E-01 <1___ 7_______ <___ 8______ < ____ ____ ____ ____ < 1.801E+OO j< 1.50E+OOZ ___ < 5.20E+0l < 6.10E+O1 ____ i-I- 6.70E-iO I_ 1.44E3+03 +1- 7.OOE+01 1.36E+03I +/- 7.60E+01 IMn-54 < 6.OOE-e0OO < 6.20E1i-OO < 8.50E+00 Co-58 I ~ 7.401E+00 O----- ------ < -6.90E-iO 0900----------- - + 0 Fe-59 < .0+1 ____ < 1.901E+01 < 2.30E+01 Co-60 <I 6.50E+00 < 7.20E+00 < 7.70E+OO0 ____ < 1.90E3+01 __< 2.OOE+O r-5 < 1.20E+01 ____ < 1.30E+O1I < 1.30E+O JRu-103 < 7.60E+00 < 7.90E+00 <1 9.OOE+00O Ru-10~6 < 5.40E+01 < 5.80E-t01 < 7.80E+01I Cs-134 < 7.40E+00 < 7.301E+00 < 8.101E+OO Cs-137 < 6. 1OE+00 < 6.30E+00 __ _ <__ ____ < 1.201E+01 _<I 1.20E+01I ___ ___ < 1.OOE+01 _<I 1.90E+O1I__ ___ ____ < 3.60E-g01 ______ c4IEOI __

Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERNM 2 MILK ANALYSIS M-8 (Control) (pCilliter) Nuclide [9-JUN 26-JLIN 17-U 11-131 < 9.40E-01 < 7.90E-01 I < 7.50E-O1 I Sr-89 < 8.90E+00 < 7.40E+00 < 8.80E3+OOI Sr-90 < 1.70E+00 _ < 1.40E+00 < 1.70E+OO _ iBe-7 < 5.OOE+01 I < 5.80E+01 < 5.OOE+O1 K-40 1.53E+03 +/- 17.40E+O1 1.32E+03 +/- 7.30E+01 1.45E+03 +/- 7.80E+O1 IMn-54 < 7.OOE+OO I < 7.60E+00 < 7.10E+OO !Co-58 < 6.70E1+001 I < 7.50E+00 _ < 7.50E+OO Fe-59 < 2.20E1+01 < 1.90E+01l < 2.60E3+OI1 ICo-60 < 5.70E+00 < 8.90E+00l < 9.10E+OO Zn-65 < I.90E1+01 < 1.80E+01 < 1.90E+O1 _ Zr-95 < 1.40E+01 _ < 1.30E+01 _ < 1.30E+O1 Ru-103 < 7.40E+O_ < 7.60E+00 < 7.50E+OO _ iRu-106 < 5.40E+O1 < 5.70E+01 < 5.40E+O1 _ 134 <! 7.80=1-0 < 7.60E+00 < 6.80E+OO _ Cs-137 < 6.80E+00 < 6.80E+00 < 7.20E+OOl lBa-140 < 1.30E+01 < 1.30E+01 < 1.30E+O1 La-140 < 1.40E+01 < 1.50E+O1 < 1.50E+O1 ICe-141 < 7.001Ei00 < 9.60E+W < 9.lOE+00 fCei4 < 3.10E+01 I_t < 3.20E+01 _ < 3.10E+OI l Nucide 1 - 21-IJUL 1i-AUGl 2$-AUG _____ I-131 < 7.30E-01 _ < 9.00E-O1 1 <1 I_ 5.30E-O1 I _Sr-89 , < 8.50E1+00l ,, < 8.90E+00 l_ '<', 7.20E+OO - Sr-90 < 1.60E+00l l _ l < 1.80E+00, <1 1.60E+OOl I_ _ IBe-7 1<I 3.2013+01I <I 4.30E3+01 ' <1 3.10E+OI II 1K-40 ie- I1 1.48E+031I.0++- !4.80E+O1 , ,j 1.41E1+03

.0+1 +/- .O+O 6.10E-+O1 .__,_,I 3.
1.35E+03 +/- 4.10E+O1 jMn-54 < 5.OOE+OO < 5.10E+OOj <1 3.50E3+OOl l_ Co-58_ < 4.80E+OO < 5.80E+OO < 3.70E+OO ___ IFe-59 < 1.40E+01 < 2.30E+01 - < 1.40E+O1 l l__ lCo-60 <_ 5.60E+001 1_ 1 <, 8.20E+00 < 5.30E+OOI _I Zn-65 < 1.OOE+O1' < 1.20E+01 < 8.90E+OO j Zr-95 < 7.60E+OO- __ l < 1.OOE+O1 ____ l <l 6.70E+OOl l
,Ru-103 < 4.50E+OO, < 5.60E+00l __ l < 4.20E+OO l_
Ru-106 < 3.70E+01 I_ I < 5.30E+01 1_ 1 < 3.30E+Ol1 I_ I Cs-134 < 5.OOE+OO, , < 5.60E+00 < 3.50E+OO; l__ Cs-137 < 3.90E3+OO < 5.50lE+OO < 3.70E+OOl l Ba-140 < 9.30E+OOl < 1.OOE+O1 <l 8.90E+OO l ILa-140 < 1.11OE+01 <_ 1.20E+O,1 < 1.OOE+o1 I Ce-141 < 3.90E+O, < 7.60E+00 <1 6.30E+OOI ,_I Ce-144 <l 2.OOE+O1 ,<, < 2.60E+01, ll < 1.70E+O1 l_l__ C-32
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effkuent Release and Radiological Environmental Operating Report FER1Mf 2 MILK ANALYSIS M-8 (Control) (pCi/liter) [Nucidc ]8-SEP ___2SE-__ 13-OCT___ 1-131 < 8.80E-01 < 5.90E-01 <1 4.30E-01: ___ Sr-89 < 7.50E+00O < 9.10E+OO 7.30E+OO ____ _______ < 1.50E+OO0 I < 1.70E+00 <1 1.60E-iOO ____ Le7 <6.80E+O10670--1 <1 4.80E+01 K-40 1.38E+03 +1- 7.40E+01 __1.46E+03 +i/- 7.80E-i01 1 1.56E-e031 -i-- 6.OOE+011 Co-58 < 8.60E+00 <1 6.40E+OO <_ Co-58 < 7.60E+00 < 7.40E+00 1 - <i 6.20E+OO ____ Fe-59 < 2.40E+01 j < 2.40E1i-O1 < 1.30E+01! ___ ICo-60 <1.1OE+01 ____< 8.601E+00 _ < 7.20E+00O Zn-65 < 3.40E+01 j____< 1.90E+01 _ < 1.SOE+01I Zr-95 < 1.60E+01 <~ 1.20E+Olj_ < 1.00EE-O1[ Ru-103 < 8.OOE+00 ____ < 7.20E+00______ <~ 6.30E+OO0 ____ Ru-106 <~6.50E+01 _____< 6.701E+01 __<I 5.40E+01 ____ Cs-134 <J 7.20E+00 ____ < 8.20E+OO______ < 5.60E-e0Oi ____ Cs-137 <8.OOE+00 < 8.60E+OO_0 <~ 5.20E-0i-O
<I
____ ____0 ___ Ba-140 1.IOE+O1I < 1.20E+01 ____ _<~ 1.OOE+01i ___ La-140 <_ 1.30E+01 .0+l_ I___ __ <I .0+1! I___ ICe-141 <1 1.30E+01 _____< 1.1IOE+O I_ ____ <I 9.40E+00 _____ Ce-144 <39EO__< 4. 1OE+O1 ~___ < 2.90E+O ___
'NuclideI2 2 ____17-NOV _ __j15-DEC ___
11-131 < 8.20E-01 <1 7.50E3-01 I_____<1 8.60E-01I j ___ LSr-89 < 8.20E+00 <1 4.40E+01l <1___ 6 I90______ {Sr-90 < 1.60E+00 1.35E+00 +/- 6.OOE-01 <1 1.70E+0O0 ____ Be-7 < 3.60E-i-1 < 5.50E+OO______ < 3.OOE+OlI t_ ______ K_401.35E+03 +1- 5.40E+01 1.35E3+03 +1- 6.OOE+01 1.40E+03I +/- 4.OOE+01 Mn _ _ _ _ _ _ < 5_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 0__ C-8 < 5.60E+00 < 8.80E+O1_______ < 3.70E+OO ____ FFe-59 Co-60
--- 58---
E 1.20E+01 6.10E+OO
< 8. 0 + < 1.40E-i01 < 9.10E-e0O 3----
0.E...O..... 9.70E+OO
< 4.50E+OO0 _____
n-65 < 1.30E+01 < 5.70E-g0O 8.90E+001 5 < 9.801E+00 < 4.80E-i01 _____ <I 6.70E+oo0 _____ Ru-103 < 5.50E+00 < 5.40E+00__ <1 4.10E+oo0 ____ Ru-106 < 4.40E+01 < 5.30E+00 <1 2.70E-i01l ___ Cs-134 < 5.70E+001 < 1.OOE+01 __I____ < 3.60E+0O0 ____ Cs-137 < 4.20E+001 < 1.20E+01 ______ < 2.90E3+00 ____ Ba-140 < 8.90E+OOJ < 7.60E+OO0 < 8.30E+00 _____ La-140 < 1.OOE+01 j< 2.50E+01l _ ___ <1 9.50E2+00 ____
.C-141 < 6.40E4g-00J <1 7.50E-01 __<1 5.6E400'O ____
[~-14 <, 1.90E+FOI I I___<1 4.40E3+01 _____ <I 1.50E+OW ____ C-33
Fermi2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERM 2 VEGETABLE ANALYSIS FP-1 (Indicator) (pCi/kg wet) Nuclide 28-JUL age 28M 28-iUL Red Cabbage I1-131 < 3.10E+01 < 3.60E+01 < 3.40E+01 __ _ !Be-7 < 1.90E+02 _ < 2.1OE+02 _ < 1.70E+02 _ K-40 1.14E+03 +1- 1.60E+02 3.78E+03 +1- 2.80E+02 2.56E+03 +1- 1.70E+02 Mn-54 2.30E+02 < 2.50E+02 < 2.O0E+02_ Co-58 < 2.40E+ 01 < 2.60E+01 _ < 1.70E+01! Fe<59 <1 240E+01 < 2.90E+01 < 2.30E+OI Co-60 < 9.70E+01 _ < 9.20E+01 _ < 5.80E+OI I Zn-65 < 2.80E+O1 < 3.70E+OII < 2.20E+01I !Zr-95 < 6.60E+01 < 7.90E-O I _I_ < 5.10E+OI IRu-103 < 4.20E+01 < 4.90E+01j < 3.50E+OI 'Ru-106 < 2.70E+01 _ < 2.50E+I01 _ < 1.90E+O1 _ ICs-134 < 2.10E+02 _ < 2.30E+02 << 1.80E+02 I jCs-137 < 2.20E+01 = _ < 2.60E+01 < 2.40E+O1_ 'Ba-140 < 4.90EE01 < 2.90E+01 < 2.10E+01 La-140 <I 5.60E+01 < 4.50E+01 < 3.10E+O1 Ce-141 _ 3.20E+01 _ < 5.20E+01 =< 3.60E+O1 iCe-14 J .E _ _ __ < 3.40E+01 __< 4.20E+O1 FP-1 (Indicator) (pCi/kg wet) Nuclide 30-AUG Broccoli -. 30-AUG Cabba l j 30-AUG Collards 1-131 <4.30E+01 -< 3.40E+1 I < 3.90E+02 Be-7 <3.1E+02 l < 3.20E+02 l < 4.60E+02 l XK40 2.27E+031 +1- 2.70E+02 2.67E+03 +1- 3.OOE+02 1 3.88E+03 +1 '/-3.90E+02 IMn-54 < 3.40E+021 1 < 5.10E+02 < 3.60E+01 ifCo-58 <, 3.20E+01 <, 3.40E+01 < 5.50E+01
. E+ I ,Fe-59 4.80E+01 l
_ _ <1 4.OOE+O1 l _l i_ 1.50E+02< I_ iCo-60 < 1.60E+02 < 1.30E+02 < 5.80E+OI I Zn-65 < 3.70E+01 2 < 9.70E+<I Zr-95 < 9.1OE+01 < 9.80E+O1 <1 7.80E+OII ___ Ru-103 < 6.30E+O1 < 8.60E+o1 < 4.80E+O1l Ru-106 < 3.10E+01 _ < 4.30E+O1 < 3.40E+02j Cs-134 < 3.I1OE+02 1 < 3.90E+02 < 4.80E+01 I I Cs-137 < 3.80E+1 _< 4.OOE+O1 < 5.60E+O1 IBa-140 < 2.70E+01 _ _ < 3.90E+O1 'l021.60E, ILa-140 < 1.1OE+02 _ < 1.30E+02 l_ l < 1.80E+02 ICe-141 < 1.20E+02 i___ < l.SOE+02 l_ _ < 7.10E+01 I-14 < 4.60E+O I < 2.30E+02 _ __ C-34
Fermi2- 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERMU 2 VEGETABLE ANALYSIS FP-9 (Control) (pCi/kg wet) Nuc2ide 28-JUL Cabbae 28-JUL Collards 28-JUL Red Cabbage 1-131 < 3.40E+OI _ < 3.50+01 <1 3.70E+01 _ 'Be-7 < 1.80E+02 < 3.50E+02 t <i 2.20E+02l t K-40 3.16E+03 +/- 1.90E+02 - 3.49E+03; +/- *2.20E+02 3.1 5E+03 +1- _______
-n5 2.20E+02 - ~ < 2.801E+02 2.520E0E-02 *Mn54_< 02--
Co-58 < 2.10E+O _ < 3.10E+OI _ I IFe-59 < 2.10E+O I < 2.90E+01 <1 2.70E+01 Co-60 < 6.30E+01 < 9.70E+OI <I 1.IOE+02 ___ __I Zn-65 < 2.10E+01 < 3.50E+I01 < 4.10E+OI I lr-95 < 8.90E+01 < 5.50E+01 _ < 7.20E+01II Ru-103 < 3.10E+0I < 2.90E+01 _ <4.90E+01 Ru-106 <3 1.90E+01 < 3.00E+02 _< 2.60E+01 ICs-134 <I 1.80E+02 < 3.OOE+01 < 2.40E+02; ICs-137 <I 2.OOE+O1 < 3.1OE+01I <_ 2.90E+I01
@3a-140 <I 2.10E+01 _ < 5.10E+O1 _ < 3.OOE+011 ____ !La-140 <1 3.40E+01 < 5.80E+01I I < 5.5SE+01 <I 3.90E+01 < 1.30E+021 I <I 6.40E1+O I _I I
____ I l44 <I 3.OOE+01 < 3.50E+OI <I 3.80E FP-9 (Control) (pCi/kg wet) Nuclide 30-AUG Cabage l 30-AUG Collards l 30-AUG HorseRadish 1i-131 I<I 3.8E I I__I< 4.30E+01I ___- <I 3.40E3+01 Be-7 <! 4.60E+02 < 3.80E+02 JI 5.70E1+02 +/- 11.50E1+02 K-40 l 1.74E+03 +1-j3.20E+02 4.1 IE+03 +1- l3.40E+02 4.41E+03' +1- 13.40E+02
'Mn-54 1<I 4.80E+021 <I 4.50E+021 I <1 4.7013+021 I Fco-58 < 4.50E+01 < 2.80E+01 _ I I<1 4.20E+01 l ___ I Fe-59 < 4.10E+011 < 4.40E+01 I I <1 4.OOE+01 I _
C2o-60 I< 1.90E+02 < 6.80E-iO1 _____ < 1.301E+02 ____ IZn-65 I < 5.80E+01_ < 5-40+0 I < 4.30E+01 __ Zr-95 I < 1.I OE+02 < 9.60E+01 l _ l <I 9.00E+01 j -! IRu-103 < 9.40E+01 < 7.90E+01 I_ I < 5.50E+01_ ____ IRu-106 < 7.70E+01 < 4.40E+01 1 1 < 4.1 E+01 1__ 1
-Cs134 < 2.70E+02 < 3.50E+02F < 3.60E+021 -
ICs-137 < 4.80E+01 < 3.60E+01 < 3.30E+01 ___ Ba-140 1< <I4.90E+011 < 3.80E+01 < 4.1OE+01 La-140 < 1.0OE+02 < 1.1OE-02 < 8.70E+01 1_ _ Ce-141 <1 1.20E+020 - _ _ <1 1.30E1+02 < I.OOE+02l _ Ce-144 I <1 7.90E+01 I I I <1 7.10E+01 l ___ l <l 6.60E+01 l F C-35
Fermi 2 -2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Radilokgical Environmental Operating Report FERMI 2 DRINKING WATER ANALYSIS DW-1I (Indicator) (pCiffiter) Nuclide 26-JAN ____I22-FEB 29-A IGR-B 3.101E+001 +/-- 1.OOE+00O 4.40E+00O +I- I1.E-40O <1 3.OOE-i0O ISr-89 j< 6.10E+O0j < 7.60E+OO-- <1 5.60E+OO0 ISr-90 I< 1.70E+001 < 1.90E+00 < 1.80E+00 IBe-7 <3.50E+01 < 3.50E+01 < 4.60E+01[ IK-40 < 7.10E+01 < 7.60E+01 j< 5.60E+01[ 'Mn-54 < 4.50E+00 < 4.70E+OO0 < 4.10E+OO0 ICo-58 < 3.80E+00 < 5.50E+O00 < 4.90E+00[ I e - - - - - ---- - - . -<-l--3-E-O ----- --.----------------------- ICo-60 < 5.OOE+00 < 5.OOE+00~ < 0E0 -. 2n-65 < 9.20E-i0O < l.20E+01 <___1.30E+Ol______ !Zr-95 iRu-103 7.60E-i0O 4.20E+00
< 5.80E+00 '4E0 OO0E+01 <I 670E+00 IAu-106 < 3.90E+01 ____ < 4.50E+01I <1 4.70E+01______
iCs-134 !S 3.80E3+00 <___5.10E+00 ____ < 4.90E-,OO______ Cs-137 < 4.40E+00 _ ___< 4.70E+00 <1 3.70E+OO0 Ba-140 < 6.60E+00 [ ___ < 7.30E+OO0 <1 1.IOE+01f ___ ILa-140 j< 7.60E+00 < 8.40E+OO0 <1 1.20E+01~ J<
Ce-141 < 6.OOE+00 - < .3OE+OO<__9_______
Ce-144 j<T 2.1OE+0O1 __ __ <, 2.60E+OjI ___ <1 3.OOE+01I ____ Nuclide [-26-APR 125-MA"Y 12-U _ IGR-B < 3.10E+OO0I < 3.50E+OO <1 3.OOE+OO______ Sr-89 < 5.30E+001__ < 7.90E+00 <1 8.30E+OO_______ ISe-9 < 1.70E+001 <____1.60E+0 < 1.80E+00__ Be-7 < 5.30E+01 - < 4.40E+01 < 5.90E+01 IK-40 < 9.80E+01 <1 7.40E-i01 < 9.70E+01 ______ iMn-54 < 6.OOE+00O 5.70E-i0O < 7.OOE+OO0_ CoS8 < 6.30E+00 <{ 6.30E+O00 < 7.30E1+OO_ IFe-59 < 1.90E-s01 <1 1.80E+01 ____ <1 2.20E+01 Co-60 I< 7.80E-001O< 5.90E+00 < 8.40E+00 iZn-65 < 1.60E+01 <_71.20E-i01 < 1.70E+01I iZr-95 < I1.20E-,01 ______ < 8.40E+OO < 1 .40E+01I IAu-103 < 7.80E+00 < 5.30E+OO _____ < 8.90E+00 JRu-106 < 7.OOE+01 _______< 3.90E+01 < 6.90E+01 ICs-134 <_ 7.10E+00O < 5.50E+00 < 8.10E+00 ICs-137 < 7.OOE-i0O <1 4.60E+00 < 7.20E+OO______ IBa-140 < 9.70E+00 ____ < 1.20E+01 < 1.30E+013~_ iCe-141 < 9.70E+00 ____ < 7.50E+00 < 1.IOE+01j lCe-144 < 3.80E+01 <~ 2.10E+01 ~ <______0 C-36
Fermi2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperating Report FERMI 2 DRINKING WATER ANALYSIS DW-1 (Indicator) (pCi/liter) lNuclide J - 26-JUL 30-AUG SEP _ _ GR-B < 2.90E+00 4.20E+00 +- 1.1OE+00 I< 3.OOE+00_ Sr-89 < 5.80E+00 , < 7.60E < 7.90E+00O iSr-90 < I.50E+00, < .60E+O< 1.60E+O Be-7 < 2.90E+01 < 4.30E+O1 i < 4.6E+01 K-40 < 5.90E+01 < 1.OOE-i021 < 7.80E+0OjI ___ IMn-54 <i 3.5OE+00 ___5_10E <_ < 5.30E+O0 _ iCo-58 <1 3.30E+0O < 5.90E+O <f 50 0 Fe-59 <. 9.20E+OO < 1.50E+01 _ <_1 .60E+OII Co-60 <} 3.70E+00 < 5.90E+00, , <1 6.30E+00 __ Zn-65 <1 8.1OE+O0 < 1.1OE+01 < 1.1IOE+0I__ Zr-95 < 6.50E+00 < 9.20E+00t < 8.60E+00 Ru-103 < 3.90E+O0 = < 5.60E+00, < 5.50E+00' i_ _ Ru-106 < 3.60E+01 < 4.70E+O1 < 5.40E+01 Cs-134 < 3.60E+oo = < 5.90E+00 = <f 5.60E+OO0 ----- l Cs-137 < 3.20E+00 < 4.50E+00 <1 5.20E+OO0_ Ba-140 < 4.60E+OOf < 1.20E+O1 < 1.1OE-OI = _ La-140 < 5.30E+001 < 1.40E+O1 <i 1.20E+O1 I _ f Ce-141 <1 5.80E+001 <IE<' 7.60E-00 _ _ Ce-144 <1 2.OOE+01 I I < 2.40E+M I _II I <, 2.70E+01 1 Ndd 25-CT29-NOV __ 210-DEC GR-B2.82E+O00 -e/- 17.30E-01 __5.30E+001 -i-- 1.1IOE+00 I3.20E-i00t +/- I1.OOE+00 Sr-89 < 7.60E+00 <1 8.30E+00' 1__ < 7.30E+00 ,_ _ Sr-90 < 1.40E+O0 < 1.70E+OO-< I .L7E+[-I Be-7 lB- --<l---- 3.20E+01 ----l------T-----------------I-- < 3.80E-i01j
------ I---- ____ <1 6.60E+01 ______
K-40 < 6.20E+01 ____ I < 8.OOE+01 <1 1.OOE+02! , Mn-54 < 3.60E+O0 < 4.50E+00 < 8.OOE+00 __ Co-58 < 3.70E+00 < 4.70E+O0 < 9.OOE+00! 5Fe-59 < 8.90E+O0 <1 I.OOE+O1 __ I <j 2.1 E+01 l_ _ Co-60 < 4.30E+00 ___ < 4.60E+00 <1 7.30E+O00 ___ iZn-65 < 8.30E+00 < 1.1OE+01 <j 1.90E-Oji _ j LZr-95 < 6.90E+0 < 8.60E+00 <1 1.50EO I IRu-103 < 4.40E+00 < 5.30E+00 1 ,< 1.IOE+OljI Ru-106 < 3.60E-i01 ____ < 4.40E+01 < 6.90E+01 [Cs- 134 < 3.80E+O0 ____ < 500OE+001 < 8.30E+00] ____ ,Cs-137 < 3.90E+00 l_ _ < 5.20E+O0 <jI 6.40E+0O0 __ ; IBa-140 < 8.90E+00 l <_ 7.80E+00 l I<1 1.20E+o1J ,1 _ ! La-140 < I 1.00E+01 < 9.OOE+O0l <, 1.40E+_1-Ol Ce-141 < 5.80E+00 1_ 1 <,' 6.70E+O0 1_ 1_<I 1.30E+01 l _1 _ 1 iCe-144 I----- I--.--.---....-- <1 1.80E+Ol1 -- 4.30E+01 L 4 l,
--4 1 --.... '1 3.80E-iO1J C-37
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmental OperatingReport FERMI 2 DRINKING WATER ANALYSIS DW-2 (Control) (pCiAiter) Nuclide 26-iAN __ 22-E 9MAR__ IGR-B <c 2.80E+OO < 3.10E+OO < 3.00E+OOI ISr-89 <l 6.30E+00 I < 9.30E+OO _ < 5.50E+00 !Sr-90 < 1.70E+00 < 1.60E+00 _ < 1.80E+OO Be-7 c< 4.30E+O1 < 4.70E+01 < 3.90E+Ol1 K-40 <I 7.10E+OI <c 8.70E+O1 < 6.60E+OI .N0-54 < 4.3OE+00 _ < 4.40E+OO_ iCo-58 < 4.60E+OO- < 6.40E+00 _ < _4.70E+O_
Fe-59 < 1.20E+OI < 2.10E+O1_ < 1.50E+O1
!Co-60 < 5.20E+00 < 8.60E+00 < 5.20E+OO !Zn-65 < 1.1OE+O1 < 1.60E+OI, < 1.1OE+O1I ,Zr-95 < 8.30E+00 __ _ 1.40E+OI < 8.80E3+OO IRu-103 < 5.1OE+OO < 7.80E+00, < 6.20E+OO _ Ru-106 < 4.00E+O1 < 5.30E+01 - < 4.10Ee+1Ol ICs-134 < 5.50E+OO I < 8.30E+OO < 4.80E+00 ICs-137 < 4.10E+00 -, < 6.30E+OO _ _ < 4.20E+OO __ IBa-140 < 7.80E+OO - <, 1.lOE+OlI < 1.30E+O1 ILa-140 < 8.90E+OO _I_ < 1.20E+O1 < 1.50E+O1I 1Ce141 < 7.20E+OO I < 9.70E+00 J l <j 6.80E_ _ _ 2.e0E+O1I__<1 _______ < 3.41E+1 II.I < 2.30.+ Nucide 26-APR 777;31-MAY 28-JUN _ iGR-B I < 3.30E1OO, -0 <1 2.90E+00 <1 2.90E+OO i r < 5.1rEOO0 <1 7.70E+00 3 __l < 8.60E+OO Sr-90 j_---- - - -
<1 1.70E+OO --- - - - -- - - --- -- i-- - 4-i---- - ---- ....... -t- - < 1.5OE+OO1 '-------- 7-- - ----- T-- < - 1.90E+00___ ~ -~~
1Be-7 < 5.70E+O1 I _ < 4.50E+O1 I < 4.80E+O1 XK-40 <i 9.60E+01 __l < 9.60E+OP l < 7.30E+Ol j iMn-54 I <I 5.90E+OO < 6.30E+_ < 5.40E+OOI Co5 < 6.60E+OO < 6.00E+00 < 5.60E1+OO Fe-59 <I 1.70E+O1 l < 2.00E+O1 I < 1.60E+O1I ICo-60 <I 7.1OE+00 < 8.20E+00I < 6.20E+003 __ 3 Zn-65 <F c1.20E+.O1 l .<L 1.40E+o1J < 1.30E+01 I Zr-95 < 1.1OE+Ol1 I_ I < 8.90E+00 < 7.20E+OOI __ I iRu-103 < 6.20E+001 < 6.80E+OO < 5.90E+OOI lRu-106 < 6.OOE+01 __< 5.70E-i01 <___4__ 1+ Cs-134 < 7.30E1OO3 < 5.70E1+0l < 4.90E+0
.Cs-137 < 7.00E+00;1 < 5.90E+0oo 1_ I < 5.70E+oo !Ba-140 < 1.20E+O1 < 1.1OE+O1 I < 1.30E+O1 I I ILa-140 <1 1.40E+OI1 < 1.30E+O1 <3 1.50E+O1 ___
ICe-141 <1 1.1 < 7.40E+O I <1 8.20E+00 _ lCe-144 <1,,, 3.30E+01 .11 2.80E+O1 '
-I--1 2.80+1L C-38
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERMI 2 DRINKING WATER ANALYSIS DW-2 (Control) (pCi/liter) Nuclide ] 26-JUL 30-AUG ' 27-SEP _ IGR-B < 2.80E+00 _ _ < 2.90E+00! < 3.OOE-00 Sr-89 < 6.80E+-O I < 7.80E+0 <I 7.50EtO _ lSr-90 < 1.80E+O0 < 1.80E+O0O <1 1.50E+00 !Be-7 < 4.40E+01 < 4.70E+OIj __ <1 4.10E+01 _ K-40 6.80E+01 < 7.10E+01 ___ _ < 1.OOE+02 _ __ IMn-54 <f 4.70E+00 < 5.40E+0O __ _ < 6.60E+OO J _ Co-58 << 5.40E+ O 5.80E+00 < 5.80E+OO Fe-59 < 1.40E+01 _ < 1.60E+ I_ < 1.80E+01 __ Co-60 < 6.70E+00 I < 5.60E+00, <1 6.50E+O0 _____ Zn 65 < 1.30E+01 < 1.20E+01 <1 8.20E+O0 I Z < 9.OOE+00 < 9.IOE+00I < 1.1OE+01 lRu-103 < 5.70E-00 <1 5.90E+0O_ < 6.40E+0C __ IRu-106 <j 4.50E+01 _< 4.80E+O <1 5.50E+01 _ _ ICs-134 < 6.00E+00 _ < 5.90E+OO _ < 6.60E+00 _I_! Cs-137 < 4.30E+00 < 6.50E+ _ < 6.40E+00I Ba-140 << 9.90E+00 < 1.O0E+1I <1 9.30E+00 La-140 < 1..IOE+OII 1.20Et+0 I _it < 1.OE+0 _ ICe-141 <I 7.401+00 < I8.60E+00i < 4.901E+00 Ce-1G j 2.60E+01 < 2.90E+fI <1 2.90E+01 Nuchd6e ' 25-OCTr 77 '29-NOV _____I 28-DEC IGR-B I < 2.90E+001 - 5.10E+00 +1- 1.IOE+00 <O 2.90E+00 Sr-89 < 3.OOE+0O _ _ < 7.40E+OOI ___ <1 7.80E+00 Sr-90 < 5.30E+01 < < 1158<E+0f00 Be-7 < 3.50E+001 l l < 4.40E+01 _____ < 4.10E+1I l___ IK-40 < 3.80E+00 < 6.OOE+O1 _______j <- 7.1OE+0lI ,,_ Mn-54I < 7.70E+O00 <1 5.30E+OO _ ___< 5.OOE+00 Co-58 < 4.20E+00 l < 4.90E+0O01 < 5.20E+00 _ Fe-59 < 8.70E+O0 <1 1.lOE+O I I < 1.1OE+0O _______ Co-60 < 6.90E+00 < 4.50E+003 _____ 5.401E+001 _____ Zn-65 < 4.10E+00 < 1.40E+O I __ 1.60E+01I
<I ___
Zr-95 < 3.30E+O1 __ l <__9.1OE+00" <L 9.10E+-l00 _ ....l Ru-103 < 3.50E+001 [____ < 5.20E+001 6.30Eoo
<____ji ____
Ru-106 < 3.50E+00 l,____ < 5.10E+Ol1 < 4.80E+01 l_ _ Cs- 134 < 6.40E-i00 ____ < 5.60E+00i < 5_______ ____ Cs-137 < 7.30E+00 < 4.80E+00 5.20E+O0 _ _ Ba-140 < 6.20E+00 <l 1.00E+O1 1< i.ilOE+01I La-140 < 2.OOE+01 l_ __ i < 1.20E+01 < _.30E+OIl _ _ Ce-141 < 2.90E+00 <I 8.20E+00 < 9.10E+00 [ Ce-14 <3.OOE+j <1 260E+01 < 2.70E+O; C-39
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERMI 2 SURFACE WATER ANALYSIS SW-2 (Control) (pCi/liter) Nuclide 26-JAN l_____ 22-E _______ 29-MAR _ ISr-89 _ _ _ I__ < _ 7.60E+0o________ I I <_ 8.50E+00 I 5.60E+00
< r______ _ T___-- L -____
'sr-9o < 1.50E O _ 1.70E+00 < 1.80E+00 IBe-7 < 4.40E+01 I < 2.40E+01 _ < 4.60E+01 K-40 < 7.80E+01 I < 4.60E+01 < 6.40E+01 IMn-54 < 4.80E+0 _ < 3.10E+00 < 5.20E+00O ICo-58 < 5.70E+00 _ < 3.I1OE+00 < 5.50E+OO Fe-59 < 1.60E+0 <- 8.40E+00 < 1.90E+OI ! 'Co-60 < 5.1OE+00 - < 3.20E+00 =<_ _ 6.1OE+00 - Zn-65 < 1.30E+0I < 1.OOE+01 _ < 9.50E+00 Zr-95 < 7.90E+00 < 5.60E+0O < 9.90E+00 Ru-103 < 5.60E+00 ___ < 3.60E+0O < 6.40E+0O _ IRu-106 1< 4.70E+01 I < 2.80E+01 - < 4.80E+01 _ FCs-134 <c 5.40E+00 < 3.20E+00 , < 5.90E+0O ICs-137 <74.50E+OC _ < 2.80E+00 < 5.30E+00 Ba 140 <I 9.30E+00 < 4.70E+OO < 1.20 l La-140 <', 1.IOE+O1 < 5.40E+00 ___ , <I 1.40E+O1I _ ICe-141 <I 8.20E+00 _ < 3.90E+OO E+00
<1 _
Ce-144 <I2.70E+i01 I < 1.70E+0I I 2.80E+O1I Nuclide 26-APR, 1 31-MAY i 28-UN _____ !Sr-89 < 5.40E+00, I <1 8.60E+00 I I <1 8.40E+OO Sr-90 < 1.70E+00 -I <1 1.50E1+00 <1 1.80E+00 j
!Be-7 < 4.90E+01 <I 3.601E+01 < 4.70E+O1
'K-40 < 9.20E+OI <1 690E+01 - < 89 +0 _____ MnIr-54 < 7.80E+OO - - < 4.40E+00 < 5.80E+00 I_ I Co-58 < 6.40E+00 <l 4.80E+00 < 6.30E+00 l lFe-59 < 2.10E+01 < 1.20E+01 < 2.001_+01 Co-60 J_< 8.30E+00 I < 4.90E+00 < 7.00E+00 l_ _ Zn-65 I < 1.80E+0O l1 < 1.OOE+OI < 1.40E+0I Zr-95 < 1.30E+0I I < 9.20E+OO < 1.20E+0lI MRu-103 I < 6.70E+00 <
< 5.50E+OO, < 7.20E+00l ,Ru-106 < 7.00E+O13- < 4.20E+O I < 5.40E+O1 l__
ICs-134 <I 6.70E-i-00 - < 4.90E+00i <1 5.70E-,00[ _____ Cs17 <7.60E-i-00-___ < 4.60E+0OI < 6.80E-I001 IBa-140 _J< 1.30E+01 < 7.40E+o0o0 < 1.20E+O1I ILa-140 < 1.40E+0I <t 8.50E+00 < 1.40E+01 l_1, Ce-141 < 1.OOE+0 II <I 7.50E+OO I} < 1.OOE+01I l __ _ <S 3.30Ei0,I- - < ,I 3.30E+01I C-40
Ferni2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERMI 2 SURFACE WATER ANALYSIS SW-2 (Control) (pCi/liter) [;Nucide ( 26-JUL i 7_ 7_7 30-AU5G 27-SEP I Sr-89 < 5.70E+00 < 7.20E+00_ <j 7.20E+00a _ ISr-90 .< 1 .501E+00- < 1.60E+00 I <j 1.80E+O0O l R~e-7 ~ 43.601E+Ol < 3.70E+01j <1 4OE+01] ____ XK-40 < 6.70E+I01 < 7.60E+Ol <l 9 ________ Mn-54 < 4.40E+001 < 4.50E+00 _ -< CBOF0 _0 1Co-58 < 3.80E+00 _ < 4.80E+0< 5.60E+O0' ! Fe-59 < 1.20E+OI < 1.50E+01 < I.50E+OI I ICo-60 < 4.30E+00 _ < 5.40E+00 1 <l 6.70E+OO Zn-65 i < l.lIOE+O I l<11001 < .20E+Oll Zr-95 < 7.40E+00 < 8.60E+O0 _ < 9.70E+O0j Ru-103 < 4.40E+00 < 5.00E+00 _ < 6.30E+00 Ru-106 <4.OOE+01 < 4.80E+01 _< 5.50E+ __0_____ Cs-134 < 4.80E+00 _ < 4.60E+O0 - <I 5.40E+O0O !Cs-137 < 4.401i001 < 5.20E+00 <_ 5.9013O01 IBa-140 I <I 8.20E+00 <O l.lOE11+Olj j4 .10E+Oi La-140 < 9.40E+00 < l.30E-O1 < 1.30E+O_ Ce-141 < 6.10E +U00 < 6.30E+001 _ __ < 8.20E+00i I Ce-14 j<1 2.20E1O11 I < 2.30E+0 _ <1 2.70E+01 Nuclide ] 25-OCIl 30-NOV 1 20-DEC _____ ISr-89 I < 5.OOE-01ll <1 6.60E+00 I__ <I 8.20E+00 l 1 8.60E+01
<Sr-90 < 1.30E+0O _ < l.80E+00:
IBe-7 <I 6.10E+O0 < 5.OOE+0l l ____ <1 4.60E+01 l K-40 1 <I 5.40E+00 < 8.40E+0l 9.10E+O1l +1- 1.90E+01 t -- ------ tMn-54 <1 1.30E+01 < 5.60E+i00 L I <1 6.90E+0 ! ICo-58 < 5.60E+0O0 l0l < 5.40E1+-00 < 5.90E+00L IFe-59 <I 1.30E++01 < l.OOE+01 _l _ <I 1.20E, O 1Co-60 < 9.90E+00 < 5.20E+00 < 6.90E+00: lZn-65 < 6.10E-O0 < 1.80E+01 <I 1.40,E+0 _ !Zr-95 < 4.60E+01 < 1.20E+01I <1 9.70E+00. ___ _Ru-103 l< 5.30E+00 <, 6.90E+00! <1 7.10E+00 _ Ru<106 < 5.40E+00 - < 5.30E+01 _____ < 5.90E+OI __l __ ICs- 134 < 1.201E+01 < 6.90E+O00 < 7.00E-.00 ____ Cs-137 < 1.40E+0l1 1< 5.90E+00 ___ <4 6.00E+00, ___ IBa-140 < 7.50E3+00 ____ < 1.OOE+01 '
<_ 1.2013s-OI ____
La-140 < 2.70E+01 l ____ < 1.20E+01 <1 1.40E+01 II__ Ce-141 < 5.OOE+01 l_ _ <1 8.10E+ l300 < 8.60E+Oj* Ce-14 < 8.60E+01 1I1 <1 2.90E+01 <1 3.00E+OI! C41
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOpeyting Report FERMI 2 SURFACE WATER ANALYSIS SW-3 (Indicator) (pCi/liter) INucide 26-JAN 22-FEBR J 29-MAR Sr-89 < 8.70E+OO < 6.60E+OOI ___I _ < 5.80E+OOI -I __ Sr-90 < < 1.80E+00 _ < 1.90E+OO !Be-7 <! 4.10E+01 < 2.70E+01 < 4.20E+O1I i-40 < 7.80E+O1 _< 4.70E+011 < 5.80E+01 Mn-54 < 5.1OE+OO < 3.10E+00 < 4.20E+OOI ICo-58 < 5.60E+00 < 3.20E+00 < 4.50E+00J iFe-59 < 1.30E+O1 _ < 7.50E+00 < 1.70E+01 _ !Co-60 < 5.20E+00 < 3.50E+OO < 5.20E+O_ 'Zn-65 < 1.50E+O1 I = < 7.1OE+OO < 6.8<E4_ Zr-95 < 8.90E+00_ < 5.30E+OO < 8.30E+OO !Ru-103 < 6.70E+00 < 3.30E+00 < 6.1OE+OOI 'Ru-106 < 5.90E+01 < 2.90E+01 < 3.70E+OII !Cs-134 < 5.9OE+400 < 3.1OE-+OO < 4.4<E-00 ,Cs-137 < 4.80E+4, I < 3.30E+4O < 5.60E ool Ba-140 < 9.80E+ < 5.OOE+OO < 1.1OE+011 iLa-140 < -+ < 5.80E-+OO < 1.30E+O1I ___ Ce-141 <! 8.50E+OO I 4.40E+0J 8.30E+Ol ICe-144 < 2.90E+01 lI_ < 1.70E+O1 I_<1 2.50E-OjI I Nucide 26-APR _ 3 1-MAY ii : 28-JUN 1 Sr-89 <i 5.60E+-00l l < 8.10E+0 1 <1 7.60E+OOI Sr-90 <, 1.80E+O , < 1.60E+00 < 1.60E+OOI Be-7 <I 6.40E+01 I< 3.50E+0-1 ____ < 5.20E+O1 _ K-40 < 1.20E+02 - < 5.90E+O1 < 8.OOE+O1 Mn-54 < 7.9OE+OO- I- < 4.40E+00 I < 4.90E+OO Co-58 <! 8.50E+OO l < 4.30E+00 <1 5.30E+OO I Fe-59 <i170E-61t < 1.IOE+O1 < 1.50E+O1 Co-60 < 8.20E+OE4_ _ < 5.OOE+oo < 5.90E+oo
,Zn-65 < 1.60E-FO1 l_ < 1.IOE+O1 < 1.IOE+O1
Zr-95 < 1.30E-+O1 l ___ < 7.50E+OO <j 1.OOE+O Ie Ru-103 8.1 OE4-00i < 4.80E+001 < 5.20E+OOI Ru-106 < 6.90E+O1 l_ _ < 3.80E+O1 <- 5.601 l Cs-134 < 7.90E+-00l < 4.70E+OO < 5.60E+OO Cs-137 < 9.]OE+00O ___ < 4.40E+OO , < 5.70E+4__
,Ba-140 < 1.20E+01 _ _ _ < 7.20E+OOE 1 < 1.30E+01 !La-140 < 1.30E+o1 I <'I 8.20E+ool i_ i < 1.50E+O4 I...... ,Ce-141 < 1.20E+OI '1 < 9.20E+00l I _ < 7.70E+O0 l__
Ce-4 <J 4.50E+1 < 2.30E +1 I C-42
Fermi 2 -2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Radiological Environmental Operating Report FERMI 2 SURFACE WATER ANALYSIS SW-3 (Indicator) (pCi/liter) Nuclide 26-JUL ___ 30-AUG ____27-SEP ___ Sr-89
!Sr-90 IBe-7 1<_< <_ 5.90E+001 1.50E-f00 3.50E+0 I j<
7.60E+00 1.60E+00 7.40E+01i j<~ 6.E+00 _<1 1.50E+00 i j <_____50E+01 IK-40 < 7.20E+01I < 9.70E+01I ____ < 8.50E+0 lj____ iMn-54 < 4.60E+001 < 7.50E+O00! ____ < 5.70E+06 !Co-58 < 4.70E+00~ ___ < 7.60E+00 _ _- < 6.30E+0 ____ ITe-59 <j 1.60E+01 c.50E+01
< 1EO~
l~o-60 < 5.40E+00 < 5.8OE+100~ < 6.70E+00 ____ Zn-65 <I 9.90E+00 I < 1.70E+0-1 I <~ 1.50E+01 I____ 'Zr-95 <~ 8.50E+O <1 1.IOE+O1 <1 1.20E-i01I ___ Ru-103 <I 5.20E+O0 I____ < 7.90E+00 ~ <1 6.30E+00 _____ Ru-106 <I 3.30E+01 j____ < 6.30E+01~ <I 4.30E+01 ____ iCs- 134 <I 4.60E-I00 < 6.40E+00I 6.20E+00 ____ Cs17 <4.20E+00 < 7.OOE+00T I____ <I 6.50E+00, ___ IBa-140 I<1 8.70E+00 - ___ < 1.20E+01 _____j<1.1OE+01i ____ JLa-140 < I.OOE+01 I ____ < 1.40E-i01 -___ <1 1.30E+01I ____ ie11 < 6.74E0 < 1.1OE-i01 __ _ <1 7.40E+001 ___ [~e144 < 2.1OE+0T1 __ _ _ _ _ _ < 3.80E-+01j jL __ _ _ <1 2.801+I {__ _ _ Nuclide -. 25-OCT _ __-. 29-NOV 20-DEC ___ ISr-89 < 8.40E+001- <1 6.30E+0O0 _____ <1 7.50E+00 I____ ISr-90 < I .60E+0O0 ____ < 1.20E+00O <1 1.70E+00, I___ Be-7 < 3.OOE+01 ___ < 5.OOE-t-0I < 5.OOE+01I ___ K-40 < 6.30E-+01t < 1.IOE+021 < 8.60E+Ol] Mn-54 < 3.90E+001 < 7.70E+00O1 < 5.90E+00 ____ ICo-58 < 4.OOE+O00 < 6.70E+001 <j 7.OOE+00. ___ ITe-59 < 8.80E+00 < 1.50E+Ol01 .0EOi 1co-606 4.50E-i-0 <___7.4E40E0~ ___ <I 5.60E-i-00' ______ Zn-65 <I 7.70E+00 < 1.70E+01j <~ 1.40E+Ol_______ Zr-95 <F 6.90E-e0I ____ < 1.20E+01 ________E____ !Ru-103 <I 4.20E+O00 <1 9.60E+00 <I 5.90E-i-00 ____ IRu-106 < 3.70E+01 ____ < 6.70E+01 __j<1 4.80E+01 ____ iCs-134 < 3 70E+00, ____ < 8.60E+00 ______I <1 6.00E+004 ___ !Csi137 <3.90E+00l < 7.OOE+00 <1j 5.40E____ iBa-140 <8.50E+00 1< l.1OE+0l _ O+Ol ____ La_____ < 9.80E+00 I____ < 1.30E+0l1_ ____ <1 1.40E+0lI ___ ICe-141 I < 5.80E+00 ____ <1 1.20E+0l ___ I <1 6.90E+00 ____ Cel < 2.OOE+0I <1 3.70E+Ol ____ I25E-.-0 I __ C-43
Fermi2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERMI 2 DRINKING AND SURFACE WATER QUARTERLY COMPOSITE SAMPLES Tritium (pCi/liter) Station Qua r t eSwond _______ IDW-1 < 1.I OE+03 ( < 1.20E+03 DW-2 < 1.IOE+03! !_ - <I 1.20E+03 !SW-2 < 1.1OE+03 <1 1.20E+03
!SW-3 < I.IOE+03 _ __ <1 1.20E+03 _
Station f :-outib f:ter J Q rir DW-1 <~ 1.40E-i01 ___ < 1.40E+03 JD- 0 1.40E+O3 _ IDW-2 <i 1.40E+031 < 1.40E+03 SSW-2 __< 1.20E+O3 ____ < E.40E+O-3 iSW-3 <! 1.20E+03 <I 1.40E+03 C-44
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Radiological Environmental Operling Report FERMI 2 GROUNDWATER ANALYSIS GW-I (Indicator) (pCiAiter) Nuclide i Quarteri j First SecondQuarter Be-7 < 5.70E+01 l _l < 5.OOE+Ol l K-40 i < 8.20E+O1I < 9.50E+O1 I Mn-54 j <i 6.60E+00 _ < 6.20E+OO Co-58 <I 6.OOE+0D_ < 6.30E+ 00 _ Fe-59 <1 1.70EU 01 < 1.90E+O1 _ Co-60 < 7.OOE+00 __ < 6.OOE+OO Zn-65 1 < 1.30E+O1I j < 1.40E+O1 Zr-95 I< 9.40E+OI0_ < 1.1OE+O1 _ Ru-103a < 7.20+0O I < 7.10E 001 Ru-106 <i 4.20E+O1 i_ - < 5.30E+O1 _ Cs-134 I <i 6.30E+OO' < 6.10E+OO Cs-137 ! <i 6.30E+oo: < 7.30E+OO _ Ba-140 ! < 1.30E+O1 < 1.20E+O1 La-140 i < 1.50E+01 < 1.40E+O1 Ce-141 <! 9.30E+00 < 8.90E+OO Ce-144 <I 3.30E+OI I < 3.30E+O1 H-3 <I 1.OOE-+03 I < 1.30E+03 _ Nuclide f ThirdQiarter f Fourth Qarter Be-7 I <i 4.40E+O1 ,i ____ < 4.50E+O1 K-40 <! 8.40E+01__
< < 8.50E+O1 Mn-54 [ <i 5.OOE+OO, i < 5.60E+OO Co-58 <I 5.30E+OO j < 5.40E+OO Fe-59 <! 1.50E+O1 - , < 1.40E+O1 Co-60 <I 6.20E+OO, J < 6.80E+OO Zn-65 <i 1.20E+O1 < 1.30E+O1 Zr-95 <I 9.60E+OO, ! i < 9.90E+OO Ru-103 ! <j 5.50E+OO, _ < 6.20E+OO, Ru-106 [ <! 4.70E+O1 I ___ ! < 5.90E+O1 l _l Cs-134 <I 4.60E+OO I , < 6.10E+OO,0 Cs-137 <I 6.20E+OOI __ i < 6.10E+OOI I Ba-140 <j 9.50E+00 _ I < 1.30E+O1 La-140 <I 1.1OE+O11 ____ < 1.50E+01______
Ce-141 <i 7.60E+OO __ < 7.90E+0oo I Ce-144 I <1 2.70E+O1 __ _ i < 2.70E+1I _______ H-3 < 1.40E+03 _ 3 C-45
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Radiological Environmental Operating Report FERMI 2 GROUNDWATER ANALYSIS GW-2 (Indicator) (pCilliter) Nuclide FirstQuarter F r uater Be-7 <I 6.30E+01! I < 5.40E+01 X-40 7.90E+1 <1 8.80E+01 IMn-54 < 6.40E+001 <! 7.30E+00_- Co-58 < 6.40E+00 -< 6.90E+00 Fe-59 < 2.40E+01 ___<_ I.IOE+O1 Co-60 < 6.30E+00_ <1 6.20E+00 IZn-65 <I~~~1.50 1.20E+01 0 ._ - ----------
<I.- 1.60E+01
'Zr-95 < 1 0 _ < I.OOE+OI Ru-103 <i 7.70E-i-O <1 8.30E+00______ iRu-106 <6.+O1 _- <1 6.50E+01 _ fCs-34 < 5.30E+_00 _ < 6.40E+00 1 < 8 70E+0 < 5.60E+O0 _ !Ba-140 < 1 1.OE+OI __ _ _ < 1.20E+01
< 1.40E+01 _
Ce-141 < 970E+O_ < 9.60E+00 _ Ce-1 < 3.20E+01 _ __ < 3.20E1+01 jH-3 < 1.00E+03 <1 1.50E+03 _ Nuclide l_____j' Fourth Qlrter IBe-7 I <1 4.00E-i+O1 I ____ <1 4.80E1+01 ___ K-40 < 7.60E-+01 <1<8.50E1+01 Mn-54 < 4.90E+OOZ <_ 5.20E+00 Co-5O8 <+ 5.70E+___ < 6.OOE+00 ______. 5.0+0 ____
!Fe-59 < 1.30E+01 i _____ < 1.40E+01 _ < 5.20E+00_
_Co-60 < 5.40E+ _ Zn-65 < I. IE+O1 ,__ < 2.30E+01_ Zr-95 <, 1.OOE+OII _! _ , < 1.OOE+O1 Ru-103 < 4.60E+O_ < 6.50E+00 _ RU-106 < 4.20E+01 I < 5.20E+01 Cys1 <' S.1O+00_ < 6.10E+00 _ Cs-137 < 4.60E+00! ,_ I < 5.10E+00 Ba-140 << 1.20E+01, 1< 1.1OE+OI1 ILa-140 < 1.30E+01' ------- < 1.30E+01 Ce-141 <i 6.60E+OO _ I < 1.1OE+O1 lCe-144 < 2.OOE+01 I l < 2.90E+01 I1-3 < 1.40E+03 _ < 1.50E+03 = C-46
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Rekease and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERMI 2 GROUNDWATER ANALYSIS GW-3 (Indicator) (pCi/liter) lNuclide 3 First Quarer Second Quarter jBe-7 < 4.20E+01 1 1 < 2.I0E+O1 I K-40 t -7OE:1! < 3_70E_01 Mn-54 I <1 4.70E+0=0 I _ < 2.30E+OO_ Co-58 <c 5.60E+00 l <1 2.50E+OO' Fe-591.40+01:7.40E+OOi Co-60 < 5.70E+00 d 2.40E+OO_ Z65 I<_____v. ___-__.1.30E+0-1 I -------------- - r------ -<I 5.20E+00
--t-- __ ___ --_____ ___ --
Zr-95 < 5.80E+-,OO .
<i 4.40E+OO _
Ru-103;u10 ,, <. 5.70E+00_ 5.70E......OO. _ _.._ __ ____ <, 2.80E+OO _ __.__._ E __________ Ru-106 < 4.20E+OI i _ < 2.30E+O1 Cs-134 <' 5.80E+OO _ < 2.40E+OO _ Cs-137 1 < 3.70E+00 _ < 2.60E+OO I lBa-140 < 1.30E+01 l < 5.70E3+OOI La-140 < 1.40E+01 I _I _ < 6.60E+OO _ - Ce-141 1 <1 8.10E+OO[ < 4.1OE+00O Ce-144 ' <, 2.40E+01 [ , < 1.30E+OI, ,I _ tH-3 I J 1.OOE+031 [ ____ <1 1.30E+031 I____ [Nuclide Third Foaurerh Qhuarter Be-7 < 4.90E+01 I , <I 5.20E+O1 K-40 i < 9.10E+Ol 1r - <t 9.90E+O1 I Mn-54 ,< 5.60E+OO < 5.70E+O _ Co-58 ,< 5.60E+00, , <I 6.10E+OO-Fe-59 ,< 2.OOE+O1 I < 1.40E+O1 Co-60 l < 8.30E+OO _ Zn-65 I < 1.50E+OI < 1.60E+OI _ _ Zr-95 < 1.20E+01I ___ < 1.30E+O0it Ru-103 <1 6.20E+00, 1 , < 7.1OE+OO! Ru-106 j <1 5.70E+01lI < 5.40E+OI} Cs-134 <I 6.20E+00 < 7.60E+oo'A Cs-137 <I 5.80E+00 __<1_5_10E+__ Ba-140 <<, 1.20E+0 I 1__+ i <I 1.20E+OI La-140 < 1.40E+01,I l <I 1.40E+O I Ce-141 Ce-14
<1 7.50E+001 <1 2.80E+O0I ] <' 8.80E+OOl
_ _ 1__ 3.OOE+O1I H-03 <I 1.40E+03 ___ _ C-47
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Radiological EnvironmentalOperating Report FERMI 2 GROUNDWATER ANALYSIS GW-4 (Control) (pCi/liter) Nuclide F;rst Qu -r econder Be-7 '< 4.40E+O I ___ I < 4.90E+Ol1 IK-40 <: 5.20E+O1 ___ < 8.40E+O1 Mn-54 < 4.30E+00_ < 4.90E+OO _ ICo-58 <. 5.30E+OO _ < 7.00E+OO Fe-59 < 1.60E+O1I ! ___ < 1.60E+O1 Co[-60 <! 5.OOE+O0 !_ _ <1 5.20E+OO I Zn-65 f~n-65 <~ l.IOE+01
, < IOE+O~t .<I ,,,j ,,,,,,.,,...j ISEO__.........
1.50E-i01 Zr-95 < 8.80E+0 __ <1 8.90E+OO iRu-103 <I 6.70E+O0 ___ < 6.30E+0O Au-106 < 4.70E+01 !_ ! < 5.10E+O1 ICs-134 <! 4.50E+OOI < 6.10E+OO !Cs-137 <I 3.30E+OOi < 6.30E+OO IBa-140 <1 1.30E+OI1 < 1.30E+O1 _ La-140 <i 1.50E+01 I < 1.50E+O1 _ JCe-141 <I 9.20E+OO < 9.40E+0O Ce-1a44 < 3.00E+O1 ! ____ < 3.10E+O1 IH-3 W _ < 1.60E+03 Nuclide l Third Qt [ Fourth _ rter IBe-7 I < 6.50E+I0 I < 4.40E+O1 K-40 <I 9.70E+O1 - < 7.OOE+OI Mn-54 < 5.90E+O0: < 5.20E+0O _ Co-58 < 7.1013i00: < 4.40E+OO ______ Fe-59 < 1.90E+01 ____ < 1.30E+OI1 Co-60 < 6.50E+OO;: < 5.30E+O0 Zn-65 < 2.00E+O1 < 1.80E+01 Zr-95 < 1.20E+O1 < 1.OOE+01 _ Ru-103 < 8. 1OE+OO < 5.00E+OO_ Ru-106 < 6.20E+O1 _! <1 5.00E-+O1 Cs-134 < 7. 1OE+00 <I 5.60E+O0O Cs-137 < 6.20E+0 < 5.20E+OO _ Ba-140 <I 1.30E+O1, < 1.30E+O1 iLa-140 <1 1.40E+O_ < 1.50E+OI _ _ Ce-141 <i
<1 I1OE+O1 < 8.80E+OO_
Ce-144 < 3 501+01 < 3.OOE+O1 U3 < 140E+03 < 1.50E+03 _ C-48
Fermi2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and Radiological Environmental OperatingReport FERMI 2 SEDIMENT ANALYSIS S-1 (Indicator) (pCi/kg dry) Nuclide' l9- 98-NOV Y _ __ I____ ~Sr-89 <~ 2.90E+021 ____ <1 1.60E+02J Sr-90 I < 2.90E+02 I <I 1.70E+02 I Be-7 < 3.60E+02 l < 2.70E+02 K-40 1 1.36E+04 +/-I4.60E+02 1.22E+04 +1- 4.1OE+02 Mn-54 < 3.OOE+ ____ < 2.60E+1 fCo-58 < 4.30E+013 i < 3.70E+01 fFe-59 < 1.40E+02_ < 1lOE+02 tCo-60 < 3.50E+01 < 3.70E+01 ___ -------- ~Zn-65 <9.70E+01 <1.40E+02 ____ 3Zr-95 i < 7.30E+01, , < 7.10E+01 Ru-103 < 4.60E+01 i , _ <1 3.90E+01 Ru-106 2.30E0 I 2.OE+02 _ Cs-134 <: 2.10E+01 f _I < 2.20E+01 _ Cs-137 <i 2.30E+01, , <1 2.70E+01 ______ Ba-140 I < 1.20E+03! I_ < 5.70E+02 La-140 <; 5.60E+02 ____ <1 3.30E4+02 ___ !Ce-141 <. 8.40E+01I ___ <~ 5.50E+O01- _ __ !Ce-144 <~ 1.3OEO0_____ <11E+021______ S-2 (Indicator) (pCi/kg dry) Nuclide 18-MAY ______ l 8-NOV f Sr-89 <, 2.70E+02 1I, < 2.70E+02, Sr-90 i<1 2.50E+02 ____ < 2.60E+021 ____ Be-7 <! 2.20E+02 ____ < 5.50E+021 K-40 ! 9.68E+03 +1- l2.20E+O2 1.04E+04 +/- 4.90E+02 Mn-54 <1 1.80E+011 <f 5.20E+01 Co-58 <II 2.80E+01 < 6.00E+01 _ Fe-59 I <I 7.60E+01_f _ f < 1.60E+02 Co-60 < 1.8E+01 < 5.50E+01 Zn-65 1 < 9.50E+01 f< 2.50E+02 Zr-95 , <f 4.20E+O I f_ < 1.OOE+02 Ru-103 , <f 3.70E+011 <_ 9.OOE+-01_ tRu-106 <I 1.30E+02f <_ 4.30E+02 Cs-134 -{ 1.60E___ <I 3.90E+01
<I 1.80E+01 < 4.40E+01 IBa-140 <I 8.20E+021 [ <I 1.20E+03 La-140 <1 3.60E+021 [<____ 6.30E+02 ______
~Ce-141 <1 1.50E-t021 ____ < 1.30E+02 ______ Ce-144 1 1.2E02 [ <1 2.60E+02ii_ C-49
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERMI 2 SEDIMENT ANALYSIS S-3 (Indicator) (pCi/kg dry) Nuclide j 17-MAY 77 I8-NOV _ 'Sr-89 < 2.20E+02- _ < 2.70E+02 Sr-90 <I 2.10E+02 < 2.70E+02 _e-7 < 8.1E+02 8.12.90E+02 K-40 1.06E+04 +/- 4.20E+02 1.23E+04 +/- 7.30E+02 Mn-54 < 2.70E+01 _ < 5.70E+O1 Co-58 < 4.60E+01 1 < 8.50E+O1 Fe-59 I <i_1.3_E+02 < 2.20E+02 _ [Co-60 < 3.20E+01 1 < 7.90E+O1 tZn-65 9.40E+01 - <
<< 3.60E+02 Zr-95 <i 7.60E+01-1i < 1.90E+02 !Ru-103 <. 4.70E+01 -_ < 9.80E+O1 !Ru-106 < 2.1OE+02 < 6.80E+02 _
ICs-134 < 1.80E+O1 __i _ ,_ < 6.OOE+O1 Cs-137 <j 2.20E+O1I 1.39E+02 +1- 2.90E+C1 Ba-140 1. IOE+03 < 2.10E+03 _ ILa-140 < 1.90E+03, ' < 1.1OE+03 C _ _ 2.10E+02 _ iCe-1 < 1.20E_ 02 < 3.80E+02 _ S-4 (Indicator) (pCi/kg dry) NucIide 1_______{ 1UN 19-OC _______ 1Sr-89 <I 2.60E+02, _ <, 2.70E+02 _ LSr-90 I <1 2.40E+02, ,_ , <1 2.50E+02 I IBe-7 <i 3.20E+02, ,_ , < 8.10E+02 K-40 1.O1E+-04, +i- 4.30E+02 1.75E+04 +/ 6.10E+02 M 54 < 2.90E=01 _ < 5.30E+C1 l2o-58 <. 4.OOE+01 I_ < 9.20E+O1 = IFe-59 < 1.1OE+02, ,_ < 2.60E+02 fCo-60 < 3.50E+O1 - - < 6.60E+O1
'Zn-65 < 1.50E+02 _ < 2.60E+021 1Zr-95 < 7.30E+01 _I < 1.70E+02 Ru-103 <1 4.00E+01 , < 1.40E+02 Ru-106 < 2.50E+021 ,_ , < 4.90E+02 3 0E+021 _1 < 6.10E+O1 _ ,Cs-137 , < 2.90E+O1 , < 4.70E+O1 'Ba-140 < 6.30E+02 , < 1.40E+03 jLa-140 < 2.60E+02 < 1.60E+03 lCe-141 I < 7.30E+01 , < 2.80E+02 ,Ce-144 <, 1.70E+02, < 3.80E+ 2 C-50
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Radiological Environmental Operating Report FERMI 2 SEDIMENT ANALYSIS S-5 (Control) (pCi/kg dry) Nuclide i 17-MAY iii_-8-NOV _ Sr-89 <1 2.60E+02 1 l <1 2.70E+02_ Sr-90 < 2.30E+02i __ ! < 2.50E+02 Be-7 <i 4.80E+02 I! < 6.60E+02 i IK-40 1.02E- - 4.40102 L1.19E+04 +/- 15.30E+02 Mn-54 < 3.90E+01 ' < 4.60E+01 i Co-58 < 5.70E+01 < 7.80E+01 I IFe-59 < 1.40E+02 ! <I 2.00E+02 ICo-60 <: 3.30E+01F ___ <1 5.10E+01I jZn-65 <I 2.10E+021 I i <g 2.40E+02 !Zr-95 < 8.90E+01 l _Ti <1 1.30E+02 _ IRu-103 <i 6.90E+01 i < 8.70E+011 Ru-106 < 2.70E+02l i <i 4.20E+02 Cs-134 < 2.90E+01 i ___ i <t 4.20E+O1 _ Cs-137 7.90E+01 1.801301 _ 9.80E+01 +/- 2.OOE+01 Ba-140 ! < 1.70E+03i j_ i < 1.50E+03 ii La-140 <i 7.40E+02i I i < 7.90E+02 _ Ce-141 <I 1.30E+02i i_ _ < 1.90E+021 1
!Ce-144 < 1.901E+021 1 8 2 C-5 1
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Efinent Release and Radiological Environmental Operating Report FERMI 2 FISH ANALYSIS F-I (Control) (pCi/kg wet) Nuclide' 17-MAY RockBass 17-MAY Wa leye 17-MAY White Bass Sr-89 <i 1.60E+02 I < 2.20E+02 < 2.30E+02 I Sr-90 <1 2.1OE+02__ < 1.50E+02 _ < 2.30E+02 _ Be-7 <I 6.70E+02 _ < 3.30E+02 __< 2.90E+02 K-40 3.09E+03 +1- 4.40E+02 3.56E+03 +1I 2.90E+02 2.37E+03 +/- 3.20E+02 Mn-54 <1 7.80E+01 < 2.90E+0 < 4.OOE+01 _ Co-58 < 8.20E+01 < 2.70E+01 < 3.50E+01 Fe-59 < 2.60E+02 < 1.IOE+02 O < 1.30E+02 __ Co-60 < 8.80E+01 < 3.40E+01 _ < 5.10E+O1 _ Zn-65 i < 2.OOE+02 < 9.10E+01 _ < 1.OOE+021I Zr-95 tc< 1.40E+02 < 5.60E+O1 i < 6.90E+O1 i IRu-103 < 7.70E+01 3.40E+01_ _< < 4.50E+O1 __ Ru-106 < 7.1OE+02 < 2.70E+02 < 3.50E+02 _ ,Cs-134 < 8.30E+01 < 3.90E+01 < 4.80E+O01 ,Cs-137 < 7.50E+01 l < 3.60E+01 < 3.40E+O1 l _ _ Ba-140 < 2.30E+021 _< 8.90E+O1 __ < 1.IOE+02 l __ ILa-140 < 2.60E+02 1 <- I.OOE+021_ < 1.30E+02 1_ 1
< 5.70E+I < 6.20E+1 1 1 iCe-141 < 3.30E+021 l <1 I.50E+2 _< 1.90E+021 Nuclide 17-MAY White Perch [ 17-MAY YelowPerch V. 5 OCT Sucker iSr-89 <I 2.80E+021 I__ <1 1.90E+021 I <1 2.70E+02 Sr-90 <I 2.60E+02l <I 1.80E+02i _ I__< 2.50E+02, ____
Be-7 < 4.60E+02l <1 3.30E+02i < 5.OOE+02 j K-40 2.39E+03 - i4.20E+02 2.8E+O 3 +/- 3.OOE+02 2.88E+031 +1- 1.90E+02 Mn-54 1 < 7.10E+O1i < 4.40E+OI i _II <I 3.20E+01 __I
.co-58 i < 6.60E+O1 j _j _ i < 3.10E+01i i_ I <I 5.10E+OI _i _I Te-59 <I 2.50E-t021 ___ < 1.60E+02 ____[< 1.70E+021 Co-60 < 6.50E+01 <j 4.50E+O1I - j <_ 3.00E+0I ____ j Zn-65 1 IOE+02j i <I 8.10E+01 i < 6.90E+011 1_ 1
'Zr-95 < 1.30E+02 <t 6.40E+O1 l ____ <_9.50E+O13 l j
.Ru-103 l < 6.60E+O1I j< 4.40E+I [< 8.80E+_1 iRu-106 < 7.OOE+021 < 3.70E+021 _< 3. 1OE+02 1 i ICs-134 < 6.30E+01 < 4.10E+011 1<< 3.OOE+01 j I !Cs-137 1 < 7.30E+O I i _ii_<I 3.90E+01 i _I _ I_<I 2.80E+01 1 1 Ba-140 <. 2.OOE+02, __ < 1.IOE+ _< _______
La- 140 <! 2.30E+021 1.30E+021 <I 2.30E-t031 l l l -$ ICe- 41 c1 9.90E+OI1l < 6.00E+0,
<I 1.20E+021 l l ICe-144 C<a 3.OOE+021 < =1.66EE+02i <I 1.20E+021 C-52
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport FERMI 2 FISH ANALYSIS F-1 (Control) (pCi/kg wet) Nuclide 5-OCT -Walleye Sr-89 < 2.50E+021
,Sr-90 < 2.30E+02 _
_ 8.70E+02 _ _ IK-40 3.15E+031 +/- 4.30E+02 Mn-54 < 5.70EO I Co-58 < 1.OOE+021 Fe-59 < 2.50E+02 [ Co-60 < 6.OOE+01 Zn-65 < 1.50E+02 __ Zr-95 < 1.80E_+02 Ru-103 < 1.60E+02 _ Ru-106 < 5.90E+021 Cs-134 < 5.60E+11 i-Cs-137 < 4.10E+01 1 _ Ba-140 < 3.60E+03 La-140 < 4.20E+03 Ce-141 < 2.60E+02 Ce-144 < 2.60E+02_ C-53
Fermi 2 -2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Radiological Environmental Operating Report FE RMI 2 FISH ANALYSIS F-2 (Indicator) (pCi/kg wet) INuclide 18-MAY Catfish L 18-MAY Qulbc 8MAY Sucker !Sr-89 <I 1.50E+021 <1___2.30E3+021 <1 2.20E+021 I___ Sr-90 <~2.80E+021 2.30E3+021 < 1.70E+021 ____ 3.80E4-021 <1 2.80E+O01 < 3.1OE+021 'Be-7 < f ____ ___ iK-40 .3+3+-3IE0 .2+3+-2.70E1+02 3.47E+031 +/- 3.40E3+02 .Mn-54 <1 5_____0 <1________<_ 2.90E+O01-1Co-58 .0 I 1< <1 3.70E+Oi I - < 4.OOE-i01 Fe-59 I <i 1.50E3+02 __ __ _ <1 l.1OE+021 <1 .60E+02 i~-0 - < 3.901E+01 _____< 4.80E+01I < 4.70E3+Ol Zn-65 < 1.40E+02 -< 7.30OE+01[ < 8.10OE+Olj
'Zr-95 < 6.20E+O1I < 6.10E+01 ~ < 8.60E-i0OlI ____
Ru13 < 4.70E+01 ____ < 4.50E3+Ol -<L 4.OOE+Ol0 ____
Ru-106 < 3.20E4-02f < 2.50E3+02 < 3.60E+021
'Cs-134 < 4.30E+01O < 3OOE+01 < 3.70E-i01J Cs-137 I< 4.10E+0 iI ____ < 3.10E+01 1 <I 3.70E+01 Ba-140 I <1 8.80E-IO[_____106E01 <i .0+2 ____
Ila-140 j< 1.OOE+021 <____ 1.80E-0i-2 <1 1.501E+02 ICe-141 < 5.70+O __ <_ 4.90E+O1I ___ < 6.20E+01 Ce-144 < I.50+0j __<__ j .1OE+02 ____ <1 1.60E+02 _____ Nuclide 18-MAY Walleye J 18-MAY WhiteBass I 18-MAY White Perch 4 Sr-89 <I 1.60E+021 ____ I <1 2.20E+021 <1 I____ 2.60E+021 I Sr-9 <I ___________19E+21 ____
< 1.90 <____1.50E+02' <____1.90E____
iBe-7 <I 3.70E+02 I_____<~ 3.50E+02, <1___330E+02 ____ IK-40 I3.15E+031 +/--'3.90E+02 2.39E+031 +/- 2.40E+02 2.06E+031 +/-12-0E
,Mn-54 <I 3.50E+01 <' 3.1E0-1I _ .OEOj 2.0-,0 'Co-58 < 5.70E3+01 ____ < 3.30E+01 <-3.30E+01______
iCo-60 Ie5 1<< I1.60E+02i 4.90E-i-1 ____ < 8.50E+01
<2.90E+01I <120E+02L < 3.80E+01' !Zn-65 < 1.1OE-i02 < 8.40E+01I ____ < 8.20E+O1______
Z95 <i 7.501E+01I1 < 7.40E+OiI < 6.801E+01I __
'Ru-103 <~ 5.60E+01 ~ < 0+OJ1< 4.20E-t01I 'Ru-106 < 4.00OE+02 j~ .0+2 __ _<1 2.90E+02 ____
iCs-134 1<_5.10E+01 ~ <____3.10E+O11 <____2.60E+O1 ___ __-17 4 .9 0E13t0 <1 2.701E+OI <1 3.60E+01 ____ 1Ba-140 I< 1.20E+02, < 1.IOE-i-2 _____< 1.1OE+02 ____ U~-140 I < 1.40E+02 L < 1.30E+02 <____1.30E+02 ____ Ce11<6OEiOj ____ < 5.90E+O1I ___~ 6.50E-i01 ____ iCe-144 I<~ 1.901E+021 ____ <1 1.70E3+021 ____ 5 .0+2 ___ C-54
Fermi 2 -2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Radiological Environmental Operating Report FERMI 2 FISH ANALYSIS F-2 (Indicator) (pCi/kg wet) I uie J 18-MAY Yellow ~Perh 6-&OCT Bluegi 6-OCT Drum Sr-89 I<I 2.30E+021 I < 2.60E-i021 ____ <1 2.70E-t02i _____
Sr-90 2.30E-i02 J< 2.40E+021 ____ <1 2.70E+02' ___
IBe- < 5.40E+02 _____ < 4.70E+021 <' 6.90E+02' j____ IK-40 3.0 +031-43E0 2.02403 .70E+02 2.28E+O3~ + 2.60E+O2 iMn-54 < 5.40E+01 < 3.50E+Ol __ < 5.10E-t-Ol ___ Co-58 < 7.30E+0l ____ < 5.30E+0l < 8.90E+0-OI j____ Fe-59 <1 2.40E+e02 _____________2- < <I 2.40E+i02 1 ____ Co-60 <1 8.20E+Ol < 2.90E+OlI__ <I 4.30E+0lI LZn-65 <~1.30E+02 < l.OOE+021 I <1 1.70E+O21 ___
-r95 __ <_____ I <1 1.50E+O2 I<~ 6.50E+0Ol_1 I Ru-103 ____ <1 9.10E+O1 <I 1.40E+021 ___
Ru-106 <~ 5.70E+02i ___ < 3.00E+O21 <I 4.90E+O21 I___ ____ Cs___34 <~ 6.70E+01 <3.10E+,-11 <____4.80E+OlI ___
Cs-137 < 6.30E+Ol _____ < 2.60E+01 ____ < 5.00E+0OI I ___
Ba-140 <~ 2.20E+O0__ < 1.50E+031 ___ <~ 2.40E+03j ___ La-140 j<I 2.50E+02 _____ < 1.70E+031 I___<I 2.80E4+03! ____ Ce-141 <1 9.IO E+O I_ ____ < 1.80E+021 ____ <I 2.10E+02' j Ce-l1442.0E0 < 1.40E+021 ____ <~2.20E4+02 j____
~Nuqide 6-OCT wa iye j- OCT. White Bass ~Sr-89 I <1 2.30E+021 ____ <I 2.70E+02 I Sr9 <I 2.OOE+021 _____ <1 2.90E-i02-Be-7 i <I 6.30E+021 ____ <1 4.90E+02 Ki-40 ~I 3.09E-e03 1- 2.70E+02 3.01E-i03 +/ j.30E+02 ~Mn-54 j<I 3.OOE+01~ <1 3.40E+O1 ICo-58 I<I1 6.70E+Ol _____ <1 5.20E+01-F5 <1 2.50E-e021 1.80E+02__
tCo-60 1
<1 4.20E+Ol1 - < 4.OOE+01 Zn-65 < 9.90E+01i _ __ < 9.OOE+01 !z-5 < 1.20E+02i _ ___ < 9.60E+01 !Ru-103 < 1.40E+02i <____9.30E+O1 Ru-106 < 3.80E+021 ___ <I 2.30E+02 I Cs-134 <I 3.20E+Ol1 _____ < .0+1______
Cs-137 <r 3.10E+01i <1 3.20E+O01 Ba-140 <I 4.30E+03i ____ <~ 1.90E-.03 La-140 < 4.90E+03E ___ <~ 2.20E+03 Ce-141 < 2.OOE+02' 1.50E+02__
'Ce-144 i 1.60E+-021 _ _ <1_1.30E+02 C-55
Fermi2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and Radioloical Environmental OperatingReport FERM 2 FISH ANALYSIS F-3 (Control) (pCi/kg wet) Nuclide 1 1-JUN Catfish 1-JUN Sucker 1-JUN Wale, Sr-89 j< 9.90E-t-OI < 1.1OE.021 < 2.80E+02l Sr-90 < 2.60E-+ 02 _ < 1.1OE+021 < 2.60E+02 Be-7 'K-_0 Mn-54 4.80E+02 4.20E+01 I 1.80E+03 +t- 12.80E+02
< 6.10E+02 3.29E+ < 6.00E+011 f +/- 3.70E+02 < 4.30E+02 3.05E+031 +t- 3.60E+02 < 4.iOE+Oil ICo-58 <I 4.40E+01 I < 6.90E+01 < 6.50E+OI I
!Fe-59 <' 2.OOE+02 I < 2.50E+02j < 2.30E+021 !Co-60 <I 4.80E1+01 __ < 5.90E+01l < 4.80E+OI iZn-65 <, 8.90E+O1 _ < 1.50E+02 < 1.1OE+021 12r-95 < 9.70Ei+01 < 1.40E+02 < 7.60E+01I Ru-103 < 5.90E+01 j < 8.30E+01 _< 5.20E+OI l Ru-106 , < 3.60E+02 < 5.40E02[ < 3.40E+02 ICs-134 < 4.80E+I1 < 5.80E+Ol < 3.70E+01 iCs.137 <1 3.501E+01 __ _ < 6.40E+0 1 1< 3.30E+O1I Ba-140 < 3.50E+02 <I 4.20E+02I < 2.80E+02 _ ILa-140 <I 4.OOE+02 I < 4.80E+02 < 3.30E+02 ICe-141 < 8.90E+O1 _____ < 1.30E+02 <1 7.20E+O1 _ Ce-144 < 1.80E+02 - < 2.70E-2 I <1 1.50E+02 I_ INuclide 1-JN White Bass 1- JUN Vhte Perch [ 7-OCT Catfish Sr-89 < 1.30E+02 < 2.80E+02 2.70E+02 Sr-90 < 1.30E+02 <I 1.70E+02' < 2.60E-02 IBe-7 < 6.70E-02 < 6.40E+02 < 7.30E:02 2.68E+03 +/- 4.4013i02 2.59E-03 +/- 3.80E+02 2.85E+03 +/- 3.60E+02 Mn-54 < 4.40E+01 < 5.OOE+01 < 6.40E+O1 _ _ __ Co-58 < 6.50E+01 < 6.60E+01 < 9.50E1O1+0 Fe-59 < 2.30E+02 1 < 1.90E1+02 < 2.1OE1302_ iCo-60 l < 5.10E+01 - < 5.1OE+O1 < 6.OOE+Ol_ Zn-65 < 1.60E+02 < I.30E+02 < 1.80E+02 'Zr-95 1 < 1.20E+02 < 1.20E+02 < 1.20E+02
~Ru-103 < 8.10E+01 < 5.70E-i01 ______ < 1.80E+02 ____
Ru-106 < 5.OOE+02 < 4.00E+02 < 5.40E+02 ,Cs-134 < 5.10E+01 < 5.1OE+O1 < 5.50E+O1I _ 2.60E+01 < 5.60E+O1Il < 4.60E+O01 _ _ Ba-140 < 2.70E+02 < 8.30E+OIt _ __ < 2.40E+03 _ _ La-140 < 3.10E+02 l l < 9.60E+Ol <1 2.70E+03 _ _ l ,Ce-141 < 1.1OE+02 _ __ <1 8.40E+01 1_ 1I <1 2.60E+021 1 _ _ ,Ce-144 < 2.20E+02 _ __ <1 2.OOE+02,1 _ I_ <1 2.50E+02 L __ _ C-56
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and Radiological EnvironmentalOperatingReport FERMI 2 FISH ANALYSIS F-3 (Control) (pCi/kg wet) [Nuclide j 7-OCT Drum 7-OCT Walle y j 7-OCT White Bass Sr-89 I <' 2.60E+02 _<_ c 2.30E+021 I I < 2.80E+02: 1 Sr-90 <i 2.40E+02 < 2.10E+021 _ < 2.50E+02 Be-7 < 7.50E+02 < 6.OOE+02 ; < 6. +0 !K-40 2.81E+03 +/- 3.10E+02 2.88E+03' +1- 2.20E+02 2.85E+03 +/- 2.1 OE+02 IMn< 4.50E+01, < 2.90E+01 < 3.80E+O1 _ lCo-58 < 7.70E+01 ' < 5.50E+OII < 6.10E+01_ Fe-59 < 2.60E+02 < 1.70E+02! <, 2.20E+02i KCo-60 <I 4.80E+01 < 3.OOE+01 , <! 3.50E+O1 4 Zn-65 < 1.20E+02 < 8.10E+011 _ <' 1 50E+021 _ Zr-95 < 1.40E+02 1 _ < 1.IOE+02 <, 120E+02l , IRUIO3 < 1.IOE+02 < 1.20E+02 I <1 1.OOE+02 _ Ru-106 < 3.90E+02 I < 3.00E+02 <1 3.50E+02 4 Cs-134 < 3.90E+01 , < 2.70E+O15I < 3.70E+O1 I Cs-137 < 3.50E+01 I < 2.50E+OI _ < 360E+01 Ba-140 <l 1.90E+03 . < 2.40E+03 <1 2.OOE+031
< 2.20E+031 < 2.80E+03 , <1 2.30E+03 4 La-140 Ce-141 < 2.OOE+02 [ < 1.80E+021
__ <1 1.70E+02 4
!Ce-144 <I 2.20E+021 < 1.60E+02! ___ <1 1.70E+02! ___
C-57
Appendix D Environmental Program Execution
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport EnvironmentalProgramExecution On occasions, samples cannot be collected. This can be due to a variety of events, such as equipment malfunction, loss of electrical power, severe weather conditions, or vandalism. In 2005, missed samples were a result of missing two field TLDs and loss of electrical power or malfunction of air sampling equipment. The following sections list all missed samples, changes and corrective actions taken during 2005. These missed samples did not have a significant impact on the execution of the REMP. DirectRadiation Monitoring All TLDs are placed in the field in inconspicuous locations to minimize the loss of TLDs due to vandalism. During 2005, two hundred sixty-eight (268) ThDs were placed in the field for the REMP program and all but two TLDs were collected and processed. There were no changes to the Direct Radiation Monitoring program during 2005.
T-56 was found missing during the third quarter collection and was replaced with the next quarter's TLD.

T-30 was found missing during the second quarter collection and was replaced with the next quarter's TLD.
Atmospheric Monitoring During 2005, two hundred sixty (260) air samples were placed in the field, all but three particulate filters and charcoal filters were collected and processed. There were no changes to the Atmospheric Monitoring program during 2005.
API-I filters collected on 8/2/2005 were not counted due to low volume as a result of a GFI circuit trip. For this reason, the third quarter composite sample for this location is considered to be less than representative.

API-2 filters collected on 11/8/2005 were not counted due to low volume caused by loose fuse. The fuse was replaced and sampling equipment was restored to operation.
For this reason, the fourth quarter composite sample for this location is considered to be less than representative.
API-5 filters collected on 8/16/2005 were not counted due to low volume caused by a blown fuse. The fuse was replaced and sampling equipment was restored to operation. For this reason, the third quarter composite sample for this location is considered to be less than representative.
D-1
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport TerrestrialMonitoring During 2005, all scheduled terrestrial monitoring samples were collected. There were no changes to the Terrestrial Monitoring program during 2005. Milk Sampling All scheduled milk samples were collected in 2005. GardenSampling All scheduled garden samples were collected in 2005. GroundwaterSampling All scheduled groundwater samples were collected in 2005. Aquatic Monitoring During 2005, all scheduled aquatic monitoring samples were collected. There were no changes to the Aquatic Monitoring program during 2005. Drinking Water Sampling All scheduled drinking water samples were collected in 2005. Surface Water Sampling All scheduled surface water samples were collected in 2005. Sediment Sampling All scheduled sediment samples were collected in 2005. Fish Sampling All scheduled fish samples were collected in 2005. D-2
Appendix E Effluent and Radwaste Data
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmental OperatingReport Regulatory Limits for Radioactive Effluents The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) limits on liquid and gaseous effluents are incorporated into the Fermi 2 Offsite Dose Calculation Manual. These limits prescribe the maximum doses and dose rates due to radioactive effluents resulting from normal operation of Fermi 2. These limits are described in the following sections. A. Gaseous Effluents I. Dose rate due to radioactivity released in gaseous effluents to areas at and beyond the site boundary shall be limited to the following: a) Noble gases Less than or equal to 500 mrem/year to the total body. Less than or equal to 3000 mrem/year to the skin. b) Iodine-131, iodine-133, tritium, and for all radionuclides in particulate form with half lives greater than 8 days Less than or equal to 1500 mrem/year to any organ. IH. Air dose due to noble gases to areas at and beyond the site boundary shall be limited to the following: a) Less than or equal to 5 mrad for gamma radiation Less than or equal to 10 mrad for beta radiation
- During any calendar quarter b) Less than or equal to 10 mrad for gamma radiation Less than or equal to 20 mrad for beta radiation - During any calendar year Ill. Dose to a member of the public from iodine-13 1, iodine- 133, tritium, and all radionuclides in particulate form with half lives greater than 8 days in gaseous effluents released to areas at and beyond the site boundary shall be limited to the following:
E-1
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Radiological Environmental Operating Report a) Less than or equal to 7.5 mrem to any organ
- During any calendar quarter b) Less than or equal to 15 mrem to any organ - During any calendar year Note: The calculated site boundary dose rates for Fermi 2 are based on identification of individual isotopes and on use of dose factors specific to each identified isotope or a highly conservative dose factor. Average energy values are not used in these calculations, and therefore need not be reported.
B. Liquid Effluents I. The concentration of radioactive material released in liquid effluents to unrestricted areas shall be limited to ten times the concentrations specified in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 20 (Standards for Protection Against Radiation), Appendix B, Table 2, Column 2 for radionuclides other than dissolved or entrained noble gases, as required by the Fermi 2 Offsite Dose Calculation Manual. For dissolved or entrained noble gases, the concentration shall be limited to 2E-4 (.0002) microcuries/ml total activity. This limit is based on the Xe-135 air submersion dose limit converted to an equivalent concentration in water as discussed in the International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) Publication 2. II. The dose or dose commitment to a member of the public from radioactive materials in liquid effluents released to unrestricted areas shall be limited to the following: a) Less than or equal to 1.5 mrem to the total body Less than or equal to 5 mrem to any organ
- During any calendar quarter b) Less than or equal to 3 mrem to the total body Less than or equal to 10 mrem to any organ - During any calendar year E-2
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Radiological Environmental Operating Report Measurements and Approximations of Total Activity in Radioactive Effluents As required by NRC Regulatory Guide 1.21, this section describes the methods used to measure the total radioactivity in effluent releases and to estimate the overall errors associated with these measurements. The effluent monitoring systems are described in Chapter 11.4 of the Fermi 2 Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR). A. Gaseous Effluents
1. Fission and Activation Gases Samples are obtained from each of the six plant radiation monitors which continuously monitor the five ventilation exhaust points. The fission and activation gases are quantified by gamma spectroscopy analysis of periodic samples.
The summary values reported are the sums of all fission and activation gases quantified at all monitored release points.
11. Radiolodines Samples are obtained from each of the six plant radiation monitors which continuously monitor the five ventilation exhaust points. The radioiodines are entrained on charcoal and then quantified by gamma spectroscopy analysis.
For each sample, the duration of sampling and continuous flow rate through the charcoal are used in determining the concentration of radioiodines. From the flow rate of the ventilation system, a rate of release can be determined. The summary values reported are the sums of all radioiodines quantified at all continuously monitored release points. E-3
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual RadioactiveEffuent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport 1Il. Particulates Samples are obtained from each of the six plant effluent radiation monitors which continuously monitor the five ventilation exhaust points. The particulates are collected on a filter and then quantified by gamma spectroscopy analysis. For each sample, the duration of sampling and continuous flow rate through the filter are used in determining the concentration of particulates. From the flow rate of the ventilation system, a rate of release can be determined. Quarterly, the filters from each ventilation release point are composited and then radiochemically separated and analyzed for strontium (Sr)-89/90 using various analytical methods. The summary values reported are the sums of all particulates quantified at all monitored release points. IV. Tritium Samples are obtained from each of the six plant effluent radiation monitors which continuously monitor the five ventilation exhaust points. The sample is passed through a bottle containing water and the tritium is "washed" out to the collecting water. Portions of the collecting water are analyzed for tritium using liquid scintillation counting techniques. For each sample, the duration of sample and sample flow rate is used to determine the concentration. From the flow rate of the ventilation system, a release rate can be determined. The summary values reported are the sums of all tritium quantified at all monitored release points. E-4
Fermi2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport V. Gross Alpha The gaseous particulate filters from the six plant effluent radiation monitors are stored for one week to allow for decay of naturally occurring alpha emitters. These filters are then analyzed for gross alpha radioactivity by gas proportional counting, and any such radioactivity found is assumed to be plant related. The quantity of alpha emitters released can then be determined from sample flow rate, sample duration, and stack flow rate. The summary values reported are the sums of all alpha emitters quantified at all monitored release points. B. Liquid Effluents The liquid radwaste processing system and the liquid effluent monitoring system are described in the Fermi 2 UFSAR. Fermi 2 released no radioactive liquid effluents in 2005. C. Statistical Measurement Uncertainties The statistical uncertainty of the measurements in this section has been calculated and summarized in the following table: Measurement Type Sample Type One Sigma Uncertainty Fission and Activation Gaseous 30% Gases Radioiodines Gaseous 17% Particulates Gaseous 16% Tritium Gaseous 25% Gross Alpha Gaseous 16% Gaseous Releases by Individual Nuclide Values in the following tables which are preceded by the "less than" symbol represent the lower limit of detection (LLD) in units of microcuries per cubic centimeter (j+/-Ci/cc) for individual samples, and indicate that the nuclide in question was not detected in gaseous effluent samples in the indicated quarter of 2005. For quantities of gross alpha radioactivity and tritium in gaseous effluents, see Tables 3 and 4 on page 13 of this report. E-5
Fermi2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmental OperatingReport A. Particulate Radionuclides (Curies) 1 1 A 1I Cr-51 1.24E-05 <4.0E-13 <4.0E-13 <4.0E-13 Mn-54 <5.4E-14 4.70E-05 2.57E-06 2.3 1E-06 Co-58 2.03E-06 3.57E-05 3.76E-06 <3.OE-14 Co-60 1.77E-06 3.3 1E-05 5.76E-06 8.42E-06 Zn-65 <9.7E-14 4.77E-06 <9.7E-14 <9.7E-14 Zn-69m <4.4E-13 2.08E-05 <4.4E-13 <4.4E-13 Tc-99m <l.lE-12 l.O9E-04 <l.lE-12 <l.lE-12 Ba-139 1.20E-01 1.06E-01 1.04E-01 1.07E-O1 La-140 1.20E-04 2.31E-04 1.28E-04 1.96E-04 Ba-140 4.14E-05 7.90E-05 6.57E-05 5.35E-05 Y-91m 9.66E-03 1.1 lE-02 1.35E-02 9.92E-03 Sr-91 6.86E-04 7.79E-05 2.65E-04 6.04E-05 Rb-89 1.19E-01 9.69E-02 7.89E-02 4.79E-02 Cs-138 5.93E-02 5.98E-02 5.66E-02 6.76E-02 As-76 3.01E-03 7.3 1E-03 2.69E-03 6.06E-03 Br-82 <4.7E-13 1.96E-05 <4.7E-13 1.29E-05 Sr-89 6.32E-05 6.03E-05 4.82E-05 5.21E-05 Sr-90 <1.5E-14 <1.5E-14 1.21E-06 <1.5E-14 Cs-134 <5.2E-14 <5.2E-14 <5.2E-14 <5.2E-14 Cs-137 <8.4E-14 <8.4E-14 <8.4E-14 <8.4E-14 Ce-141 <l.lE-13 <l.lE-13 <l.lE-13 <l.lE-13 Ce-143 <4.6E-13 <4.6E-13 <4.6E-13 <4.6E-13 Ce-144 <3.7E3-13 <3.7E-13 <3.7E-13 <3.7E3-13 Total 3.12E-01 2.82E-01 2.56E-01 2.39E-01 B. Noble Gases
' 0 0 S ..
Xe-133 <8.9E-08 <8.9E-08 <8.9E-08 <8.9E-08 Xe-135 <2.3E-08 <2.3E-08 <2.3E-08 <2.3E-08 Xe-135m <2.2E-08 <2.2E-08 <2.2E-08 <2.2E-08 Xe-138 <1.2E-07 <1.2E-07 <1.2E-07 <1.2E-07 Total <2.5E-07 <2.5E-07 <2.5E-07 <2.5E-07 E-6
Fermi2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport C. Radioiodines (Curies)
%T,9 . . . INN0U01 . .11Jo1mi 1-131 3.64E-04 4.83E-04 3.95E-04 4.42E-04 I-132 2.69E-03 3.OOE-03 2.68E-03 2.05E-03 I-133 2.45E-03 3.40E-03 3.1 IE-03 3.24E-03 I-134 8.06E-04 4.36E-03 3.47E-03 6.18E-04 1-135 3.30E-03 4.3 IE-03 3.29E-03 1.66E-03 Total 9.61E-03 1.56E-02 1.29E-02 8.O1E-03 Shipments of Radwaste Fermi 2 complies with the extensive federal regulations which govern radioactive waste shipments. Radioactive solid waste shipments from the Fermi 2 site consist of waste generated during water treatment, radioactive trash, irradiated components, etc. Shipment destinations are either licensed burial sites or intermediate processing facilities. Waste shipped to intermediate processing facilities is shipped directly from these facilities to licensed burial sites after processing. The following tables contain estimates of major nuclide composition, by class of waste, of Fermi 2 solid radwaste received at the Barnwell, SC, burial facility or at the Envirocare, UT, facility in 2005.
a. Spent resins, sludges, etc. Waste in this category in 2005 was Class A waste and consisted of spent resins and sludges. It was initially shipped in either High Integrity Containers or Polyethylene Liners, within shielded transportation casks, either directly to the Barnwell, SC, burial facility or to an intermediate processor.
Waste sent directly to the Barnwell disposal facility was dewatered prior to shipment. Waste sent to the intermediate processor was processed by incineration, after which it was forwarded for disposal to the Envirocare, UT, facility or to the Barnwell Waste Management Facility. All quantities were determined by measurement. E-7
Ferni2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive EBfuent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport Class A Resin: Radionuclide Activity (mCi) Percent of Total Activity Ag-11im 1.81 E+02 0.04 Am-241 1.58E-02 <0.01 Ba-140 1.89E-01 <0.01 C-14 2.43E+03 0.53 Ce-1 44 2.42E+01 0.01 Cm-242 4.22E-03 <0.01 Cm-243 6.94E-02 <0.01 Cm-244 6.78E-02 <0.01 Co-58 5.85E+02 0.13 Co-60 2.05E+05 44.4 Cr-51 1.01 E+02 0.02 Cs-134 5.74E+00 <0.01 Cs-137 1.84E+03 0.4 Fe-55 1.94E+05 41.93 Fe-59 2.84E+01 0.01 H-3 3.53E+02 0.08 1-129 (LLD) 6.05E-01 NA 1-131 3.63E-02 <0.01 La-140 1.46E-01 <0.01 Mn-54 2.92E+04 6.33 Nb-95 2.OOE-01 <0.01 Ni-63 8.21 E+03 1.78 Pu-238 1.08E-01 <0.01 Pu-239 1.95E-02 <0.01 Pu-240 1.95E-02 <0.01 Pu-241 2.80E+00 <0.01 Sb-124 1.88E+00 <0.01 Sr-89 4.27E+01 0.01 Sr-90 5.52E+01 0.01 Tc-99 (LLD) 3.OOE-01 NA Zn-65 2.OOE+04 4.34 Zr-95 6.88E-02 <0.01 Total 4.62E+05 100.0 E-8
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Radiological Environmental Operating Report
2. Class B Resin: None shipped

3. Class C Resin: None shipped

b. Dry compressible waste, contaminated equipment, etc. Waste in this category in 2005 was shipped in strong tight containers, and was classified as dry active waste (DAW). All waste in this category was Class A waste. The DAW was compacted or incinerated by an intermediate processor. After incineration, some of the residue from this waste was solidified in concrete. All quantities were determined by measurement.
Radionuclide Activity (mCi) Percent of Total Activity C-14 1.23E+02 16.88 Co-58 2.50E+00 0.34 Co-60 1.07E+02 14.78 Cr-51 9.08E+00 1.25 Cs-1 37 6.60E-02 0.01 Fe-55 3.37E+02 46.29 Fe-59 7.54E-01 0.10 H-3 4.78E+01 6.57 1-129 9.96E+00 1.37 Mn-54 3.16E+01 4.35 Ni-63 2.69E+00 0.37 Sb-1 24 3.99E-02 0.01 Tc-99 4.63E+01 6.37 Zn-65 9.54E+00 1.31 Total 7.27E+02 100.0
c. Irradiated components, control rods, etc. No waste in this category was shipped.

d. Other No waste in this category was shipped to a disposal site.
E-9
Appendix F Interlaboratory Comparison Data Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory's Quality Assurance Programs
Fermi2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and RadiologicalEnvironmentalOperatingReport InterlboratoryComparisonProgramfor 2005 In an interlaboratory comparison program, participant laboratories receive from a commerce source, environmental samples of known activity concentration for analysis. After the samples have been analyzed by the laboratory, the manufacturer of the sample reports the known activity concentration of the samples to the laboratory. The laboratory compares its results to the reported concentrations to determine any significant deviations, investigates such deviations if found, and initiates corrective action if necessary. Participation in this program provides assurance that the contract laboratory is capable of meeting accepted criteria for radioactivity analysis. Included in this Appendix are the Semi-Annual Status Reports covering the Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory's Quality Assurance Programs for the first and second halves of 2005. F-1
A AR EVA August 31, 2005 EL 097/05 TO: Distribution FROM: J. M. Raimondi
SUBJECT:
Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Analytical Service Semi-Annual QualityAssurance Status Report (January - June 2005) Attached is the Semi-Annual Status Report covering the Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory's (E-LAB) Quality Assurance Programs comprising radiological environmental, Part 50/61, and bioassay analytical services for the first half of 2005. For the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP):
99.5% of 552 individual QC analyses evaluated during this semiannual period met E-LAB acceptance criteria for bias, while

100% of 317 QC analyses met the Laboratory QC acceptance criteria for precision.
To provide a perspective of the overall environmental quality program since its inception in 1977:
96.7% of the 17,751 environmental QC analyses processed in the past 28 years met acceptance criteria for bias, whereas,

99.4% of 15,580 QC samples evaluated for precision met Laboratory criteria for this performance category.
DOE program participation (MAPEP) resulted in 31 of 33 mean results evaluated as in "Agreemenr with the acceptance criteria. DOE data is not included in the above values. The Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory (ID# 11823) maintained accreditation for six radiological analytes in the Potable water and Non-Potable water categories from the State of New York Department of Health under the National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP). A total of 9 Proficiency Test results were all rated mAcceptable," this period. For Part 50/Part 61 processing during the first half of 2005:
98.3% of the 119 Part 50/61 individual analyses evaluated for bias

100% of the 111 analyses evaluated for precision met E-LAB acceptance criteria.
To provide a perspective of the overall Part 50/61 sample quality program since 1988:
94.1% of the 4139 Part 50/61 QC analyses met the acceptance criteria for bias and

99.2% of the 3981 Part 50/61 00 samples met the Laboratory criteria for precision.
J. M. Raimondi Manager, Environmental Laboratory CAS/cas ATTACHMENTS
Distribution Page 2 EL 097/05 August 31, 2005 Distribution R. Abrams - FP & L M. Alphonso - FENOC/Perry P. Stokes - Entergy/Grand Gulf V. Ballestrini - Dominion/Millstone R. Tolbert - Entergy/Grand Gulf J. Bamette - Texas Utilities/Comanche Peak T. Vandermay - Detroit Edison/Fermi II J. Breeden - Dominion/North Anna V. Withee - MY Document Control S. Bromstrup - FP&L/St. Lucie J. Bundick - Indiana Michigan/D. C. Cook D. Burnett - Entergy/River Bend A. Castagnacci - FENOC/Beaver Valley K. Comisky - CY J. Cruickshank - Ameren UE/ Callaway J. Doroski - Dominion/Millstone J. D'Souza - PSEG B. Eakin - Dominion/Millstone R. Edwards - FENOC/Davis-Besse E. Floyd - Texas Utilities Comanche Peak R. Gasper - RG&E/Ginna B. Gorman - Entergy/Fitzpatrick S. Grondahl - Dominion/Millstone W. Hamblin - Entergy/Fitzpatrick N. Hansen - Southern California Edison G. Harper- Framatome ANP P. Harris - Dominion/Surry F. Hickey - PPL Susquehanna B. Hilt - Dominion/Surry A. Hoomick, Jr. - PSEG/Hope Creek J. Homsby - Entergy/Waterford G. Jones - Rochester Electric/Ginna P. Lashley - FENOC/Perry T. Lashley - Detroit Edison/Fermi II T. Lonnett - FENOC/Beaver Valley P. McNulty - Entergy/Pilgrim G. Mendoza - FP&LiTurkey Point E. Mercer - MY D. Montt - Rowe R. Moore - FENOC/Beaver Valley J. Pennington - Entergy Operations, Inc. D. Perkins - FP&USeabrook H. Riley - PPL Susquehanna D. Robinson - FP&L/Seabrook F. Sabadini - Framatome ANP QA M. Sanger - Framatome ANP QA K. Sejkora - Entergy/Pilgrim S. Skibniowski - Entergy/ Vermont Yankee P. Sobottke - Indiana Michigan/D. C. Cook G. Stephenson - Entergy/ANO
A AR EVA _ SEMIANNU IAL QUALITY ASSURANCE S,TATUS REPORT _ January-, June 2005 QUALIY0ASSURAN CE TRENDING ANALYSIS 100 40 - 20 ---- - - - -4 20 i - - -- * - - - - - - - - --
-60
-80 - 00 AM A SEPI DV I wjv~ - -- rm - - - .AMATOME ANP, INC.
UIRONMENTAL LABORATORY Research Drive stborough, MA 01 581-3913 Tele phone: (508) 898-9970 Fax::(508) 836-9815
AR EVA FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ANALYTICAL SERVICES SEMI-ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE STATUS REPORT JANUARY-JUNE 2005 EL 097105 I') Prepared By. Z7, Date: Lj z-k A - Reviewed By. kL-- -3 Ok-A jc,-,
=:: :.
Date: & 3 i /0 Approved By. N Date: -_q___/_____ Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory 29 Research Drive Westborough, MA 01581-3913
TABLE OF CONTENTS Paoe
. INTRODUCTION ................................................. 1 A. Quality Control Program Scope ................................................ 1
1. Inter-laboratory and Third Party ........................................... ......... 1

2. Intra-laboratory ............................................... 2 B. Quality Assurance Program (Internal and External Audits) ................................ 2 II. Performance Evaluation Criteria ................................................ 3 A. Acceptance Criteria .............. 3

1. Internal Process Control Samples ......... ......................... 3

2. Backgrounds...........................................................................................5

3. Blanks ................................. 5

4. NRC Resolution Criteria ................... 5

5. DOE Evaluation Criteria ................. 5

6. ANSI 13.30 Relative Bias Criteria for Bioassay .................................. 6 B. QC Investigation Criteria and Result Reporting ............................................... 6

1. QC Investigation Criteria ............................................... 6

2. Reporting of Analytical Results to Laboratory Customers ............. ......... 7

3. Self-Assessment Program ............................................... 7 Ill. ANALYTICAL SERVICES QUALITY CONTROL SYNOPSIS ........................................ 7 A. Result Summary ............................................ 7

1. Radiological Environmental Services Quality Control ............................. 7

2. Part 50/61 Quality Control ........................................... 10

3. Bioassay Quality Control ........................................... 12 B. Status of Condition Reports (CR) ........................................... 12 C. Status of Audits/Assessments ........................................... 12

1. Internal ........................................... 12

2. External................................................................................................. 12 IV. UPDATED PROCEDURES ISSUED DURING JANUARY-JUNE 2005 ....................... 13 V. REFERENCES .................................................. 13 F:AADMIN\CORRESMEL 097-05 -ii-
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) APPENDIX A INTER/INTRA-LABORATORY, ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING: ANALYTICS, DOE, ERA AND NIST QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM RESULTS APPENDIX B EFFLUENT MONITORING AND WASTE CHARACTERIZATION QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS (10CFR PART 50/61) APPENDIX C BIOASSAY QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM RESULTS ATTACHMENT 1 RESULTS OF THE BLIND DUPLICATE PROGRAM F:\ADMINMCORRESkEL 097-05 _jjj_
LIST OF TABLES
1. Analytics Environmental Crosscheck Program Results by Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Acceptance Criteria, Media and Measurement Categories, January-June 2005

2. Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Analytics Environmental Cross-Check Program Performance Evaluation

3. NIST MAP Analysis Results by Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Acceptance Criteria, Media and Measurement Categories, January-June 2005

4. Summary of Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Traceability Results, January-June 2005

5. Environmental Measurements Laboratory Quality Assessment Program

6. Department of Energy Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program

7. Environmental Resource Associates Proficiency Test Results Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory

8. Intra-laboratory Environmental Process Control Results by Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Acceptance Criteria, Media and Measurement Categories, January-June 2005

9. QC Charcoal Activity Screening Results

10. Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory, Environmental Intra-Laboratory and Inter-Laboratory Data Summary, Bias and Precision by Media, January-June 2005

11. Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory, Environmental Intra-Laboratory and Inter-Laboratory Data Summary, Bias and Precision by Analysis Type, January-June 2005

12. Environmental Bias and Precision by Year

13. Analytics Radiochemistry Crosscheck Results by Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Acceptance Criteria, Media and Measurement Categories, January-June 2005

14. Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Analytics Radiochemistry Cross-Check Performance Evaluation

15. NIST MAP Analysis Results by Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory, Acceptance Criteria, Media and Measurement Categories, January-June 2005

16. Summary of Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Part 50/61 Traceability Results, January-June 2005

17. Intra-laboratory Part 50/61 Process Control Results Breakdown by Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory, Acceptance Criteria, Media and Measurement Categories, January-June 2005 FA~ADMINZcORRESNEL 097-05 -v
-iv-
LIST OF TABLES
18. Part 50/61 Analysis Results Breakdown by Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory, Acceptance Criteria, Media and Measurement Categories, January-June 2005

19. Part 50/61 Bias and Precision by Year

20. Bioassay Analysis Results Breakdown By Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Acceptance Criteria, Media, and Measurement Categories, January-June 2005

21. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) Bioassay Thyroid Radioiodine Intercomparison Project (TRIP)

22. Condition Report (CR) Status, January-June 2005

23. Updated Instrumentation Group/Analytical Services Section Procedures Issued During January-June 2005 F:UADMINMCORRESTEL 097-05
I. INTRODUCTION This report covers the Quality Assurance (QA) Program for the Analytical Services function of the Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory (E-LAB) for the first half (January-June) of 2005. Due to the broad scope of QC inter-comparison programs in which the E-LAB participates, the report consolidates wherever possible, text and results into three service categories: Radiological Environmental Monitoring, Part 50/61, and Bioassay. This report includes:
intralaboratory QC results analyzed during the reporting period,

interlaboratory QC results, analyzed prior to the reporting period, for which "known values" were not previously available, and

interlaboratory QC results, analyzed during the reporting period, for which "known values" were available.
Any other inter-laboratory QC results will be included in the next semi-annual report. Manual 100, Revision 8 (Reference 1) became effective on September 10, 2004. The text of this report reflects the latest revision of this manual, as do the trending graphs and any data evaluations performed after the September 10, 2004 date. Any data evaluations performed prior to September 1O, however, were conducted in accordance with Manual 100, Revision 7. A. Quality Control Program Scope
1. Inter-laboratory and Third Party The Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory QC Program is designed to monitor the quality of analytical processing associated with environmental, bioassay, effluent (10CFR Part 50), and waste (10CFR Part 61) sample analysis.
Inter-laboratory and third party quality control programs for environmental radioanalyses include: the Environmental Crosscheck Program, administered by Analytics, Inc., the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Measurement Assurance Program (MAP), the Environmental Resource Associates (ERA) Proficiency Test (PT) Program, the Department of Energy (DOE) Quality Assessment Program (QAP), and the Mixed Analyte performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP). The QAP program administered by the (DOE) Environmental Measurements Laboratory (EML) was suspended by the Department of Homeland Security early in 2004. The MAPEP program is administered by the Radiological and Environmental Sciences Laboratory (RESL) and consists of four media (water, vegetation, soil, and air filters) submitted twice each year. The MAPEP samples are designed to evaluate the ability and quality of analytical facilities performing sample measurements F:ADMINMCORRES\EL 097-05 1 _
that contain hazardous and radioactive (mixed) analytes. The ERA PT program consists of radionuclides in water submitted twice per year. This program is used to maintain certification with the National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP). The certification is necessary to perform analysis for projects that must meet EPA regulations for the Clean Water Act (CWA), Resource Conservation & Recovery Act (RCRA), or the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). Inter-laboratory and third party quality control for Part 50/61 radioanalyses, is provided by the Radiochemistry Crosscheck Program, administered by Analytics, Inc. and the NIST MAP.
2. Intra-laboratory The internal Quality Control program is designed to include QC functions such as instrumentation checks (to insure proper instrument response),
blank samples (to which no analyte radioactivity has been added), instrumentation backgrounds, duplicates, as well as overall staff qualification analyses and process controls. Both process control and qualification analyses samples seek to mimic the media type of those samples submitted for analysis by the various laboratory clients. These process controls (or process checks) are either actual samples submitted in duplicate in order to evaluate the precision of laboratory measurements, or blank samples which have been "spiked" with a known quantity of a radioisotope that is of interest to Laboratory clients. These QC samples, which represent either "single" or ndouble blind" unknowns, are intended to evaluate the entire radiochemical and radiometric process. To provide a sense of direction and consistency in administering the quality control program, E-LAB has developed and follows an annual quality control and audit assessment schedule (Reference 2). The plan, which is approved on or before January 15h of each year and reviewed for adequacy at monthly LQARC meetings, describes the scheduled frequency and scope of Quality Assurance and Control actions considered necessary for an adequate program. The magnitude of the process control program combines both internal and external sources targeted at 5% of the routine sample analysis load. B. Quality Assurance Program (Internal and External Audits) During each semi-annual reporting period at least one internal assessment is conducted in accordance with the pre-established E-LAB Quality Control and Audit Assessment Schedule. In addition, the Laboratory may be audited by prospective customers during a pre-contract audit, and/or by existing clients who wish to conduct periodic audits in accordance with their contractual arrangements. A National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP) audit is performed every two years as part of maintaining certification to perform EPA-related analyses. F:\ADMINMCORRES\EL 097-05 II. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA A. Acceptance Criteria E-LAB has adopted a QC acceptance protocol based upon two performance models:
For those inter-laboratory programs that already have established performance criteria (i.e., DOE MAPEP, ERA, and TRIP), the Laboratory will utilize the criteria for the specific program.

For inter-laboratory or third party QC programs that have no preset acceptance criteria (e.g. the Analytics Crosscheck Programs, NIST MAP),
results will be evaluated in accordance with E-LAB internal acceptance criteria.
1. Internal Process Control Samples Internal Process Control (PC) results are evaluated in accordance with two separate E-LAB acceptance criteria. A full discussion of the analytical services acceptance criteria can be found in Reference 1. The first criterion concerns bias, which is defined as the deviation of any one result from the known value. The second criterion concerns precision, which deals with the ability of the measurement to be faithfully replicated by comparison of an individual result with the mean of all results for a given sample set. Quality control deviations falling outside the Laboratory acceptance criteria are discussed in the appendices.
(a) Bias For each analytical measurement tested, the bias is the percent deviation of the reported result relative to the expected value (value of the spike known by comparison with or derivation from a standard reference material). The percent deviation relative to the known is calculated as follows: (H.'- HI)) Hi where: Hi' = the value of the it measurement in a category being tested Hi = the actual quantity in the test sample as defined by the spike The Laboratory internal criterion for bias is that an analysis is considered in agreement if the value is within +/-15% of the known value. If this condition is not met, the two-sigma range about the analyzed value is established. If the known value falls within the specified range, the analysis is considered in agreement. F:UADMIN\CORRESEL 097-05 Deviations from this general criterion, for specific radionuclides, are given in Tables 1 and 13 and Reference 1. E-LAB acceptance criteria are applied when the sample concentration is 10 or more times the method MDC. Otherwise, the 'known value" and associated uncertainty are compared to the measured result and uncertainty using a two-tailed standard statistical test at the 95% confidence level. (b) Precision For a group of test measurements containing a given spiked level, the precision is the percent deviation of individual results relative to the mean reported measurement. At least two values are required for the determination of precision. The percent deviation relative to the mean reported measurement is calculated as follows: (Hi'-H100 where: H.= the reported measurement for the ith analytical measurement H = the mean analytical measurement
= (1) n = the number of samples in the test group The Laboratory criterion for precision is that an analysis is considered in agreement if the individual value is within +/-15% of the mean value. If this condition is not met, the two-sigma range about the analyzed value is established. If the mean value falls within the specified range, the analysis is considered in agreement. In the case of duplicate or replicate analyses where there is no "known" value, the two-sigma range is established for each duplicate analysis (three-sigma range for replicates) for each analysis. If the ranges overlap, the analyses are considered in agreement for precision.
Deviations from this general criterion, for specific radionuclides, are given in Tables 1 and 13 and Reference 1. F:UADMINMCORRES\EL 097-05 (c) Mean Bias For each group of analytical measurements tested, the mean bias is the percent deviation of the mean reported result relative to the expected value. The mean percent deviation relative to the expected value is calculated as follows: (R- Hi ) 01000 where: H = the mean analytical measurement Hi = the actual quantity in the test sample as defined by the spike
2. Backgrounds As discussed in Reference 1, backgrounds represent the ambient signal response, recorded by measuring instruments, which is independent of radioactivity contributed by the radionuclides being measured in the sample. Backgrounds will not normally contain any three-sigma statistically positive activity of the target parameters. The background signal is subtracted from the sample's signal.

3. Blanks Wherever possible equivalent media for preparing laboratory processing blanks will be used. Synthetic matrices may be used for bioassay if equivalency is proven.

4. NRC Resolution Criteria Some Laboratory clients use the NRC Resolution Criteria to evaluate double blind Part 50 performance. NRC Resolution Criteria are based on an empirical relationship that combines prior experience and the accuracy needs of the program. As "Resolution" increases, the acceptability of one's measurement becomes more selective. Conversely, as "Resolution" decreases, agreement levels are widened to account for the increase in uncertainty.

5. DOE Evaluation Criteria The Radiological & Environmental Sciences Laboratory (RESL) inter-comparison program, MAPEP defines three levels of performance:
Acceptable (flag = "A"), Acceptable with Warning (flag = AW"), and Not Acceptable (flag = "N"). Performance is considered acceptable for a mean with a bias <20% of the reference value for the analyte. Performance is acceptable with warning for a mean result bias of >20% but <30% of the reference value. If the bias is greater than 30% the F:IADMINMCORRES\EL 097405 results are deemed not acceptable.
6. ANSI 13.30 Relative Bias Criteria for Bioassay The relative bias statistic is defined for the ith measurement in a category with respect to the expected value (value of the spike known by comparison with or derivation from a standard reference material) is defined as:
= (Al - Aa)
Where: A = the value of the ith measurement in a category being tested Aai = the actual quantity in the test sample, as defined by the spike Inorder to avoid the expense of a large number of replicates at each radioactivity level in each category, the relative bias Br is calculated from the individual relative biases Bd and defined as I (- N ) Where: N is the number of test samples measured by an individual service laboratory in a given test category. For testing purposes Br shall be within -0.25 to +0.50 B. QC Investigation Criteria and Result Reporting
1. QC Investigation Criteria Summarized below are the investigation criteria applied to QC analyses that failed E-LAB bias criteria. The Condition Report process tracks investigation results.
(a) No investigation is necessary when an individual QC result falls outside the QC performance criteria for bias. (b) Investigations shall be initiated when the mean of a QC process batch or the mean of three consecutive individual QC processes is outside the performance criterion for bias. (c) An investigation shall be initiated when the trending of at least 12 consecutive results for a given process indicates that the mean bias from the known is greater than 60% of the bias performance criterion. F:\ADMINMCORRESNEL 097-05
2. Reporting of Analytical Results to Laboratory Customers A similar set of guidelines was developed, applicable to reporting of results. The guidelines are as follows:
If an investigation is required for a process (normally after consecutive QC process check failures), and if the QC results requiring the investigation have a mean bias from the known of greater than +/- (applicable E-LAB bias criterion +5%) for environmental and bioassay processing and +/- (applicable E-LAB bias criterion +10%) for Part 50/61 processing, then the LQARC shall meet to determine the disposition of client results.
3. Self-Assessment Program In accordance with Reference 1, E-LAB has established a Self-Assessment policy where all Laboratory staff members are strongly encouraged to continually evaluate laboratory activities for quality enhancements, cost savings, and time savings.
Ill. ANALYTICAL SERVICES QUALITY CONTROL SYNOPSIS A. Result Summary Two-year (2004-2005) trending graphs are provided in Appendices A-C of this report to give temporal perspective regarding possible trends or bias. In the event an analysis does not meet E-LAB performance criteria, the individual analysis sheet(s), in addition to a brief explanation, are included to augment the graph. It should be noted that DOE and ERA samples are evaluated against criteria specific to the DOE samples. Therefore, only sample results which fell in the "Warning" or Non-Agreement" categories will be addressed in the Appendices. If any questions arise regarding previous analyses, please refer to the semi-annual status report corresponding to the sample analysis date. In all cases an analysis sheet is available for each individual analysis to back-up the data presented on the graph.
1. Radiological Environmental Services Quality Control During this semi-annual reporting period, thirty-two nuclides associated with media types were analyzed by means of the Laboratory's internal process control, DOE, NIST, ERA and Analytics quality control programs.
Media types representative of client company analyses performed during this reporting period were selected. Presented below is a synopsis of the media types evaluated. Air Filter Sediment/soil Charcoal (Air Iodine) Vegetation Milk Water F:NADMINUCORRE5MEL 097-05 (a) Analytics Environmental Cross Check Program During this semi-annual period the Analytics Cross Check Program provided 169 individual environmental analyses for bias and 169 for precision evaluation (Table 1). Of the 169 analyses evaluated for bias, 98.2% (166/169) of all results fell within E-LAB acceptance criteria. Of the 169 analyses evaluated for precision, 100% (169/169) came within E-LAB tolerance limits. Appendix A graphically summarizes the results by two-year trending graphs. Table 2 provides a report of the Laboratory's participation in the Analytics' cross check program for the fourth quarter of 2004 and first quarter of 2005. Using the Laboratory's internal acceptance criteria as the basis of evaluation, 55 of 57 of mean results came within agreement criteria. The two failures, gross alpha on an air filter and Fe-59 on an air filter, are discussed in Table 22 as CR 05-10 and CR 05-11, respectively. (b) National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Measurement Assurance Program (MAP) The E-LAB has been a participant in the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)/National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Measurements Assurance Program since June of 1987. Continued participation is documented by dated Reports of Traceability issued for particular radionuclides, which indicate the deviation of the participant's reported value for a given measurement technique from that measured and certified by the NIST. During this reporting period there were five NIST MAP samples consisting of a total of 9 radionuclides and 53 measurements performed. Detailed information on Environmental NIST MAP data is provided in Tables 3 and 4. All of the 53 measurements met the E-LAB acceptance criteria and 6 of 18 mean results met the administrative limit of +/-5% for traceability. (c) Summary of Participation in the Department of Energy (DOE) Monitoring Programs The EML has suspended the DOEQAP program (Table 5) as of early 2004. During this semi-annual reporting period, a combination of four different media types and fifteen different nuclides were analyzed by means of the DOE Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP, Table 6). Of the thirty-three mean analyses evaluated, all but two were in Agreement.' Two results, Am-241 in vegetation and Ni-63 in water, were rated as "Waming." See Table 22 for more detail on the results. (d) Environmental Resource Associates (ERA) Proficiency Test (PT) F:AADMIMCORRESIEL 097-05 Program During this semi-annual period, a total of 9 mean results (n=3) were evaluated by ERA. Using the evaluation criteria set by NELAP, 100% (9/9) of the radionuclides were in 'Agreement." Appendix A graphically summarized the results by two-year trending graphs. Table 7 provides a report of the Laboratory's participation in the PT program. The Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory (Lab ID# 11823) maintained NELAP accreditation from the New York State Department of Health through the Environmental Laboratory Approval Program for the following methods for both potable and non-potable waters: Gross Alpha, Method EPA 900.0 Gross Beta, Method EPA 900.0 Iodine-131, Method ASTM D4785-88 Photon Emitters, Method EPA 901.1 Radioactive Cesium, Method EPA 901.1 Tritium, Method EPA 906.0 (e) Intra-Laboratory Process Control Program The Environmental Laboratory internal process control program evaluated 337 individual analyses for bias and 103 analyses for precision. Trending graphs associated with the performance results for this program are given in Appendix A, and the results are summarized in Table 8. Of the 337 internal process control analyses evaluated for bias, 100% met Laboratory acceptance criteria. Also, 100% of the 103 results for precision were found to be acceptable. Table 9 lists QC samples used to qualitatively screen calibrated geometry air charcoals for activity above the Minimum Detectable Concentration (MDC). All 69 QC charcoals evaluated during this semi-annual period reported positive activity as expected. The bias data for each individual measurement is presented in Table 9. (f) Analytical Blanks During this semi-annual reporting period, none of the 127 environmental analytical blanks analyzed reported positive activity, greater than three (3) times the standard deviation. (g) Blind Duplicate Results Blind duplicate results for 2005 are presented in Attachment 1. Based upon the summary evaluation, 99.5% of all paired FXADMINMCORRES\EL 097-05 _9_
measurements met the acceptance criteria. This data is not included in the summary tables (Tables 10-12). (h) Overall Data Summary for the Reporting Period January-June 2005 The compilation of intra- and inter-laboratory comparison data by analyzed matrix for this reporting period is summarized in Table 10. Table 11 presents the same data grouped according to analysis type. In either case, the cumulative bias for the three programs evaluated to internal E-LAB performance criteria shows 99.5% of the 552 individual results were observed to fall within the E-LAB bias acceptance criteria, while 100% of the 317 analyses passed the acceptance criteria for precision. (i) Summary of Environmental Quality Control Results by Year The historical summary of the E-LAB process control program performance for the environmental monitoring function is provided in Table 12. For the first half of 2005, 99.5% of the analyses fell within the E-LAB acceptance criteria for bias as compared to a historical percentage of 96.7. Similarly, 100% of the analyses evaluated for precision met the E-LAB acceptance criteria as compared to 99.4% of analyses for the 28-year operating history.
2. Part 50/61 Quality Control During this semi-annual reporting period, eighteen nuclides were analyzed by means of the Laboratory's internal process control, National Institute for Standards and Technology Measurement Assurance Program (NIST MAP) measurements of Part 50/61 radionuclides, and the Analytics Radiochemistry Crosscheck Program.
(a) Analytics Radiochemistry Cross Check Program During this semi-annual period the Analytics Cross Check Program provided 9 individual analyses to be evaluated for bias and precision (Table 13). Of the 9 analyses, 100% fell within the E-LAB acceptance criteria for bias and 100% for precision. Appendix B graphically summarizes the results by two-year trending graphs. Table 14 provides a report of the Laboratory's participation in the Analytics' cross check program for the first half of 2005. Using the Laboratory's internal acceptance criteria as the basis of evaluation, all 3 results passed the agreement criteria. The second quarter data was submitted for evaluation but results have not yet been received. F:UADMIN\CORRESEL 097-05 _
(b) NIST Measurement Assurance Program (MAP) There were 48 NIST MAP process control analyses evaluated for both bias and precision during the first half of 2005 in the Part 50/61 area. Of these, 100% (48/48) met the E-LAB acceptance criteria for bias and for precision (Table 15). Table 16 summarizes the percent deviation of the E-LAB's mean measurements from the NIST reported known values for each source standard. Of the 18 mean results evaluated, all 18 were within E-LAB performance criteria for bias and precision. Six of the eighteen mean measurements met the target traceability criteria of +/-5%. (c) Intra-Laboratory Process Check Program There were 62 internal Laboratory QC process control analyses evaluated for bias and 54 for precision during the first half of 2005 in the Part 50/61 area. Of these, 96.8% (60/62) met the E-LAB acceptance criteria for bias. A total of 100% (54/54) Part 50/61 process control samples met E-LAB acceptance criteria for precision (Table 17). (d) Analytical Blanks During this semi-annual reporting period, one of the 257 Part 50/61 analytical blanks analyzed reported positive activity greater than three (3)times the standard deviation. The single failure was for a Ni-63 blank. All of the client samples analyzed in this batch were reprocessed with a new blank. (e) Overall Data Summary for the Reporting Period January-June 2005 The compilation of intra- and inter-laboratory comparison data by analyzed matrix for this reporting period is summarized in Table 18. The cumulative bias shows 98.3% (117/119) of the individual results fell within E-LAB acceptance criteria for bias. A total of 100% (111/111) of the results met Laboratory precision criteria. (f) Summary of Part 50/61 Quality Control Results by Year The historical E-LAB summary of process control performance for the Part 50/61 monitoring program is provided in Table 19. For the first half of 2005, 98.3% of the QC analyses fell within E-LAB acceptance criteria for bias as compared to the seventeen year historical percentage of 94.1. For precision, 100% of the results met the precision acceptance criteria as compared to 99.2% historically. F:UADMIN\CORRES\EL 097-05
3. Bioassay Quality Control There were no bioassay QC analyses performed during this semi-annual period as indicated in Table 20.
For the past several years, the E-LAB has participated in the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) Thyroid Radioiodine Intercomparison Project (TRIP). This program allows laboratories and facilities to self-assess their performance for in-vivo measurements of radioiodine isotopes in the thyroid. The LLNL established the intercomparison project to provide participating facilities with an independent means of evaluating their thyroid radio-iodine measurement using the IAEAIANSI thyroid calibration neck phantom and well characterized NIST-traceable isotopes for 1-125 and 1-131. As shown in Table 21, the TRIP 1204 test was successfully completed in the first half of 2005. B. Status of Condition Reports (CR) Table 22 provides a synopsis of CR activity for sample processing during the first half of 2005. Thirteen items were closed while fourteen were opened during this reporting period. A total of four CRs remain open, one of which is older than 6 months due to supplier problems. C. Status of Audits/Assessments
1. Internal QA Assessment 05-01, SE-LAB Annual Management Review' The NELAP-required annual review of 2004 activities was conducted.
The review included policies/procedures, audits, corrective actions, customer feedback, interlaboratory comparisons, and training. No findings were issued as a result of the annual review. QA Assessment 05-02, 'REMP Processing" The assessment was conducted to verify that processing controls for REMP samples are being effectively implemented by the personnel responsible. Personnel observed processing samples are qualified to perform their activities. They were found to be knowledgeable of the processing rules and client-specific considerations. Equipment used in the processing/analyses was calibrated and QC checked as required by the QA program. Improvement in laboratory cleanliness and 1-131 (LL) processing was observed.
2. External There were no external audits conducted during this semi-annual period.
F:UADMIMCORRES\EL 097-05 IV. UPDATED PROCEDURES ISSUED DURING JANUARY-JUNE 2005 A list of Analytical Services Section procedures, which were updated during this semi-annual period, is included in Table 23. V. REFERENCES
1. Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Manual 100 'Laboratory Quality Assurance Plan", Revision 8, September 10, 2004.

2. Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory 2005 Quality Control and Audit Assessment Schedule.
F:AADMINUCORRES\EL 097-05 TABLE I ANALYTICS ENVIRONMENTAL CROSSCHECK PROGRAM RESULTS BY FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA, MEDIA, AND MEASUREMENT CATEGORIES JANUARY-JUNE 2005 Bias Criteria (1) Precision Criteria (2) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 I. Air Particulate Alpha 1 2 1 2 6 0 0 Beta 3 13 0 0 2 0 0 0 Gamma 10 8 8 l 1 l 27 l 0 0 0 Sr-89 I1002 0 Sr-90 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 il. Milk Gamma 47 12 1 0 l 55 3 2 0 Iodine (LL) 6 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 Sr-89 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 Sr-90 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 ill. Water X _ _ Alpha 2 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 Beta 2 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 Gamma 18 11 1 0 28 2 0 0 H-3 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 Iodine (LL) 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 Sr-89 2 2 2 0 6 0 0 0 Sr-90 1 2 3 0 2 2 2 0 Total Number In Range: 99 45 22 3 157 8 4 0 Percentage of Total Processed: 58.6 26.6 13.0 1.8 92.9 4.7 2.4 0.0 Sum of Analyses: 169 169 (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (1) (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (2)
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding F:\ADMIN\CORRESTEL 097-05 -Al-
TABLE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESS CONTROL ANALYSIS RESULTS BY FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA, MEDIA AND MEASUREMENT CATEGORIES JANUARY-JUNE 2005 (Continued) (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category 1 = >0 and <5 2 = >5 and <10 3 = >10 and <15 (or within 2 sigma of known, see Reference 1) For Gross Alpha and Beta In water 3 = >10 and <25 (or within 2 sigma of known) I For Sr-89/90 mixtures 3 = >10 and <25 (or within 2 sigma of known)I For Alpha Spectrometry*, 3 = >10 and <20 (or within 2 sigma of known) For Uranium-Total, Pu-241, Zn-65 on an air filter 3 = >10 and <20 (or within 2 sigma of known) 4 = Outside criteria (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category 1 = >0 and <5 2 = >5 and <10 3 = >10 and <15 (orwithin 2 sigma of mean, see Reference 1). Exceptions as above. 4 = Outside criteria
Isotopic Uranium (U-234, 235, 238)
Isotopic Thorium (Th-230, 232) Np-237 Am-241 /Cm-242, 243/244 Pu-alpha (Pu-238, 239, 240) Ra-226
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding.
F:\ADMINMCORRESNEL 097-05 -A2-
TABLE 2 FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ANALYTICS ENVIRONMENTAL CROSS CHECK PROGRAM PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Ratio Sample Quarter/ Sample Reported Known E-LABI Number Year Media Nuclide Units Value Value Analytics Evaluation E4380-162 4thl2004 Water H-3 pCi/L 8327 8060 1.03 Agreement E4381-162 4th/2004 Filter Sr-89 pei 87.7 92.3 0.95 Agreement E4381-162 4thl2004 Filter Sr-90 p2i 8.78 10.6 0.83 Agreement E4382-162 4thl2004 Filter Gross Alpha pei 24.9 29.5 0.84 Non-Agreement E4382-162 4thl2004 Filter Gross Beta p.i 223 204 1.09 Agreement E4383-162 4th/2004 Filter Ce-141 pei 75.6 80.3 0.94 Agreement E4383-162 4thl2004 Filter Cr-51 pei 201 189 1.06 Agreement E4383-162 4thl2004 Filter Cs-134 pei 82.4 84.7 0.97 Agreement E4383-162 4th/2004 Filter Cs-137 pei 68.8 62.9 1.09 Agreement E4383-162 4th/2004 Filter Co-58 pei 75.3 72.9 1.03 Agreement E4383-162 4th/2004 Filter Mn-54 pei 76.3 67.7 1.13 Agreement E4383-162 4th/2004 Filter Fe-59 p2i 69.8 60.5 1.15 Non-Agreement E4383-162 4th/2004 Filter Zn-65 pei 109 97.7 1.12 Agreement E4383-162 4thl2004 Filter Co-60 pCi 85.1 87.1 0.98 Agreement E4384-162 4thl2004 Milk 1-131 LL pCi/L 64.2 66.7 0.96 Agreement E4384-162 4th/2004 Milk 1-131 p 69.0 66.7 1.03 Agreement E4384-162 4th/2004 Milk Ce-141 pCi/L 154 155 0.99 Agreement E4384-162 4th/2004 Milk Cr-51 pCi/L 385 379 1.02 Agreement E4384-162 4th/2004 Milk Cs-134 pCi/L 167 170 0.98 Agreement E4384-162 4th/2004 Milk Cs-137 pCi/L 132 126 1.05 Agreement E4384-162 4th/2004 Milk Co-58 pCi/L 147 146 1.01 Agreement E4384-162 4th/2004 Milk Mn-54 pCi/L 144 136 1.06 Agreement E4384-162 4th/2004 Milk Fe-59 pCi/L 129 121 1.07 Agreement E4384-162 4th/2004 Milk Zn-65 pCi/L 197 196 1.01 Agreement E4383-162 4th/2004 Milk Co-60 pCi/L 177 175 1.01 Agreement E4412-162 4th/2004 Water Sr-89 pCi/L 90.9 98.1 0.93 Agreement E4412-162 4th/2004 Water Sr-90 pCi/L 9.33 11.3 0.83 Agreement F:UADMINMCORRES\EL 097-05 -A3-
TABLE 2 (Continued) FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ANALYTICS RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CROSS-CHECK PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Ratio Sample Quarter/ Sample Reported Known E-LAB/ Number Year Media Nuclide Units Value Value Analytics Evaluation E4459-162 1st12005 Water Gross Alpha pCi/L 39.9 40.8 0.98 Agreement E4459-162 1stU2005 Water Gross Beta pCi/L 279 292 0.96 Agreement E4460-162 1stU2005 Water 1-1 31 LL pCi/L 66.2 65.9 1.00 Agreement E4460-162 1stU2005 Water 1-131 pCi/L 69.3 65.9 1.05 Aqreement E4460-162 1stU2005 Water Ce-141 pCi/L 219 221 0.99 Agreement E4460-162 1stU2005 Water Cr-51 pCi/L 346 322 1.07 Agreement E4460-162 1stV2005 Water Cs-134 pC!iL 130 134 0.97 Agreement E4460-162 1stU2005 Water Cs-137 pCi/L 127 125 1.01 Agreement E4460-162 1stU2005 Water Co-58 pCi/L 108 111 0.97 Agreement E4460-162 1st/2005 Water Mn-54 pCi/L 160 154 1.04 Agreement E4460-162 1st/2005 Water Fe-59 pCilL 114 107 1.07 Agreement E4460-162 1tsV2005 Water Zn-65 pCi/L 192 1991 1.01 Agreement E4460-162 1st/2005 Water Co-60 pCi/L 138 139 1.00 Agreement E4461-162 1stV2005 Water Sr-89 pCi/L 94.6 103 0.92 Agreement E4461-162 1stV2005 Water Sr-90 pCi/L 15.6 17.2 0.90 Agreement E4462-162 1st12005 Filter Gross Alpha pCi 20.8 21.9 0.95 Agreement E4462-162 1tsV2005 Filter Gross Beta pCi 162 157 1.04 Agreement E4463-162 ltsV2005 Milk 1-13LL pCi/L 91.2 92.3 0.99 Agreement E4463-162 1tsV2005 Milk 1-131 pCiL 95.9 92.3 1.04 Agreement E4463-162 1sV2005 Milk Ce-141 pCi/L 229 229 1.00 Agreement E4463-162 1tsV2005 Milk Cr-51 pCi/L 334 334 1.00 Agreement E4463-162 1tsV2005 Milk Cs-134 pCi/L 137 139 0.99 Agreement E4463-162 1st2005 Milk Cs-137 pCi/L 133 130 1.03 Agreement E4463-162 1sV2005 Milk Co-58 pCi/L 118 115 1.02 Agreement E4463-162 1stV2005 Milk Mn-54 pCi/L 166 160 1.04 Agreement E4463-162 1sV2005 Milk Fe-59 pCi/L 117 111 1.05 Agreement E4463-162 1st2005 Milk Zn-65 pCi/L 203 198 1.03 Agreement E4463-162 1st2005 Milk Co-60 pCi/L 145 144 1.01 Agreement E4464-162 I sV2005 Milk Sr-89 pCi/L 93.8 107 0.88 Agreement E4464-162 1sU2005 Milk Sr-90 pCi/L 16.1 17.9 0.90 Agreement F:RADMINZCORRESMEL 097-05 -A4-
TABLE 3 NIST MAP ANALYSIS RESULTS BY FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA, MEDIA, AND MEASUREMENT CATEGORIES JANUARY-JUNE 2005 Bias Criteria (1) Precision Criteria (2) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 I. Water Amn-241 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 Cm-244 0 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 Fe-55 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 Gamma 4 14 0 0 18 0 0 0 H-3 9 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 1-131(LL) 2 2 1 0 3 2 0 0 Ni-63 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 0 Pu-239 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 Pu-241 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 Tc-99 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 Total Number In Range: 21 22 10 0 50 3 0 0 Percentage of Total Processed: 39.6 41.5 18.9 0.0 94.3 5.7 0.0 0.0 Sum of Analyses: 53 53 (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (1) (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (2)
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding F:AADMIN\CORRES\EL 097-05 -A5-
TABLE 4
SUMMARY
OF FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY (NIST) TRACEABILITY RESULTS JANUARY-JUNE, 2005 NIST Reference E-LAB Mean Percent Standard Date of Measurement Deviation From Number Standard Radionuclide Matrix Technique NIST 1707-12 30-Aug-04 Tc-99 Liquid Liquid Scintillation Counter #2 -1.91 1720-04 10-Nov-04 Am-241 Liquid Alpha Spectroscopy Units #33, 34, 35 -10.85 1720-04 10-Nov-04 Cm-244 Liquid Alpha Spectroscopy Units #33, 34, 35 -9.46 1720-04 10-Nov-04 Pu-239 Liquid Alpha Spectroscopy Units #33, 34, 35 -15.99 1720-04 10-Nov-04 Pu-241 Liquid Liquid Scintillation Counter #2 -1.97 1743-05 10-Jan-05 H-3 Liquid Liquid Scintillation Counter #2 1.87 1743-05 10-Jan-05 Fe-55 Liquid Liquid Scintillation Counter #2 10.74 1743-05 10-Jan-05 Ni-63 Liquid Liquid Scintillation Counter #2 -9.72 1751-02 2-Mar-05 H-3 Liquid Liquid Scintillation Counter #4 2.56 1751-02 2-Mar-05 1-131(LL) Liquid Beta-Gamma Coincidence Unit #1 -5.59 1751-02 2-Mar-05 1-131 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #2 -6.41 1751-02 2-Mar-05 1-131 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #4 -5.31 1751-02 2-Mar-05 1-131 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #5 -5.31 1751-05 2-Mar-05 H-3 Liquid Liquid Scintillation Counter #4 3.06 1751-05 2-Mar-05 1-131(LL) Liquid Beta-Gamma Coincidence Unit #2 -8.61 1751-05 2-Mar-05 1-131 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #2 -8.42 1751-05 2-Mar-05 1-131 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #4 -5.59 1751-05 2-Mar-05 1-131 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #5 -4.67 Data on NIST MAP program is repeated in Table 16 for Part 50/61 QC data. F:NADMINMCORRESTEL 097-05 -A6-
TABLE 5 ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENTS LABORATORY QUALITY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM REPORTED EML REPORTED MATRDX) RADIO- MEAN VALUE REPORTED VALUE EML TO KNOWN UNITS NUCLIDE BqIUnIts ERROR Bq!Unlts ERROR RATIO EVALUATION EML has notified the industry that QAP 60 (March 2004) was the final set of samples to be issued. Further information may be found on the EML website, URL http:/lwww.eml.doe.gov/qapl F:MADMINMCORRESTEL 097-05 -A7-
TABLE 6 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY MIXED ANALYTE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PROGRAM REPORTED MAPEP MATRIXJ REFERENCE RADIO- MEAN VALUE VALUE UNITS DATE NUCLIDE BqIUnits Bq/Units % Bias EVALUATION Filter (Bqffilter) 1-Jan-05 Cs-134 3.525 3.51 0.4 Agreement Filter (Bq/filter) 1-Jan-05 Cs-137 2.367 2.26 4.7 Agreement Filter (Bglfilter) 1-Jan-05 Co-57 5.11 4.92 3.9 Agreement Filter (Bq/filter) 1-Jan-05 Co-60 3.084 3.03 1.8 Agreement Filter (Bq/filter) 1-Jan-05 Mn-54 3.468 3.33 4.1 Agreement Filter (B3gfilter) 1-Jan-05 Sr-90 1.1915 1.35 -11.7 Agreement Filter (Bq/filter) 1-Jan-05 Zn-65 3.45 3.14 9.9 Agreement Soil (Bq/kg) 1-Jan-05 Arm-241 97.1 109 -10.9 Agreement Soil (Bq/kg) 1-Jan-05 Cs-1 34 764 759 0.7 Agreement Soil (Bq/kg) 1-Jan-05 Cs-137 316 315 0.3 Agreement Soil (Bq/kg) 1-Jan-05 Co-57 245 242 1.2 Agreement Soil (Bq/kg) 1-Jan-05 Co-60 215 212 1.4 Agreement Soil (Bq/kg) 1-Jan-05 Mn-54 511 485 5.4 Agreement Soil (Bq/kg) 1-Jan-05 Pu-238 0.755+/-0.30 0.48 N/A (1) Agreement Soil (Bq/kg) 1-Jan-05 Pu-239/240 89 89.5 -0.6 Agreement Soil (Bq/kg) 1-Jan-05 K-40 631 604 4.5 Agreement Soil (Bq/kg) 1-Jan-05 U-233/234 55.5 62.5 -11.2 Agreement Soil (Bqlkg) 1-Jan-05 U-238 229.1 249 -8.0 Agreement Soil (Bqlkg) 1-Jan-05 Zn-65 857 810 5.8 Agreement Vegetation (Bq/sample) 1-Jan-05 Am-241 0.1097 0.145 -24.3 Warning (2) Vegetation (Bq/sample) 1-Jan-05 Pu-238 0.18815 0.224 -16.0 Agreement Vegetation (Bq/sample) 1-Jan-05 Pu-239/240 0.00235+/-.0008 0.0006 N/A(3) Agreement Vegetation (Bq/sample) 1-Jan-05 Sr-90 1.495 1.65 -9.4 Agreement Water (Bq/L) 1-Jan-05 Cs-134 118.4 127 -6.8 Agreement Water (BqlL) 1-Jan-05 Cs-137 399.7 332 -9.7 Agreement Water (Bq/L) 1-Jan-05 Co-57 211.7 227 -6.7 Agreement Water (BqlL) 1-Jan-05 Co-60 235.6 251 -6.1 Agreement Water (Bq/L) 1-Jan-05 H-3 303.3 280 8.3 Agreement Water (Bq/L) 1-Jan-05 Fe-55 82.2 75.9 8.3 Agreement Water (Bq/L) 1-Jan-05 Mn-54 305.9 331 -7.6 Agreement Water (Bq/L) 1-Jan-05 Ni-63 1.45+/-1.4 9 N/A Warning (4) Water (Bq/L) 1-Jan-05 Sr-90 0.216+/-0.093 False Positive Test N/A Agreement Water (Bq/L) 1-Jan-5 Zn-65 488.7 496 -1.5 Agreement (1) - Pu-238 reported as non-positive, acceptable sensitivity test result. (2) - CR 05-13 Issued to evaluate the negative bias for Am-241. (3) - Pu-239/240 reported as non-positive, acceptable sensitivity test result. (4) - CR 05-14 Issued to evaluate the false negative result on the sensitivity test. F:AADMIN\CORRESNEL 097-05 -A8-
TABLE 7 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ASSOCIATES PROFICIENCY TEST RESULTS FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ERA REPORTED ERA ERA ERA LOT #1 MATRW RADIO- MEAN VALUE VALUE CONTROL WARNING REF. DATE UNITS NUCLIDE pCIIL pCIIL LIMITS LIMITS EVALUATION RAD-61 May 2005 Water pCi/L Gross Alpha 38.9 37.0 21.0-53.0 26.3-47.7 Agreement RAD-61 May 2005 Water pCi/L Gross Beta 37.8 34.2 25.5-42.9 28.4-40.0 Agreement RAD-61 May 2005 Water pCi/L Tritium 24100 24400 20200-28600 21600-27200 Agreement RAD-61 May 2005 Water pCi/L Ba-133 88.9 88.4 73.1-104 78.2-98.6 Agreement RAD-61 May 2005 Water pCi/L Cs-134 76.9 78.6 69.9-87.3 72.8-84.4 Agreement RAD-61 May 2005 Water pCi/L Cs-137 204 201 184-218 189-213 Agreement RAD-61 May 2005 Water pCi/L Co-60 38.4 37.0 28.3-45.7 31.2-42.8 Agreement RAD-61 May 2005 Water pCi/L Zn-65 121 118 97.6-138 104-132 Agreement RAD-61 May 2005 Water pCi/L 1-131 15.1 15.5 10.3-20.7 12.0-19.0 Agreement F:\ADMIN\CORRESkEL 097-05 -A9-
TABLE 8 INTRA-LABORATORY ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESS CONTROL RESULTS BY FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA, MEDIA, AND MEASUREMENT CATEGORIES JANUARY-JUNE 2005 Bias Criteria (1) Precision Criteria (2), (3) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 I. Air Particulate Beta 124 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gamma - 11.Air Charcoal Gamma-Quantitative 2 l 2 l 0 0 Gamma - Screening 55 11 3 0 III. Milk Gamma Iodine (LL) JJ - ____r - - I Sr-89 4 1 5 0 0010 0 Sr-90 5 1 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 IV. SoilISed. _ _ Am-241 - _____ _ _ _ Gamma - _ _ _ Pu-239 V. Water Am-241 2 0 8 0 2 0 8 0 C-14 2 3 3 0 0 0 8 0 Fe-55 1 3 3 0 0 0 4 0 Gross Alpha 8 3 7 0 0 0 6 0 Gross Beta 6 15 1 0 6 0 0 0 Gamma 3 5 0 0 0 0 8 0 Iodine (LL) - - - - - l Ni-63 3 1 2 0 0 0 4 0 Pu-238 1 5 0 0 0 0 6 0 Pu-241 0 5 3 0 0 0 8 0 Sr-90 2 0 4 0 0 0 6 0 Tritium 11 8 0 0 15 2 2 0 Tc-99 4 1 2 0 0 0 8 0 Total Number 233 68 36 0 33 2 68 0 In Range: _ _ _ _ _ _ Percentage of 69.1 20.2 10.7 0.0 32.0 1.9 66.0 0.0 Total Processed: Sum of Analyses: 337 103 (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (1) (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (2) (3) Most Precision data generated from non-positive client samples for specific contractual evaluation
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding F:\ADMIN\CORRES\EL 097-05 -A10-
TABLE 9 QC CHARCOAL ACTMTY SCREENING RESULTS SPIKE FILTER ANALYSIS ACT. NUMBER LSN TYPE DATE REPORTED % BIAS 69484162-D 8644-01 SAIC-1 5-Jan-O5 YES -2.91 8656-01 SAIC-1 7-Jan-05 YES 4.76 8673-01 SAIC-1 14-Jan-05 YES 3.17 8694-0_ 1 SAlC- 17-Jan-05 YES 3.75 8705-01 SAIC-1 20-Jan-05 YES 5.64 8777-01 SAIC-1 28-Jan-05 YES 1.49 69484162-F 8644-02 SAIC-2 5-Jan-05 YES 4.49 8656-02 SAIC-2 7-Jan-05 YES 2.28 8673-02 SAIC-2 14-Jan-05 YES 3.82 8694-02 SAIC-2 17-Jan-05 YES 3.11 8705-02 SAIC-2 20-Jan-05 YES 11.45 8771-02 SAIC-2 28-Jan-05 YES 3.13 69484162-E 8644-03 SA2C 5-Jan-05 YES -9.32 8656-03 SA2C 7-Jan-05 YES -4.11 8673-03 SA2C 14-Jan-05 YES -2.48 8694-03 SA2C 17-Jan-05 YES -6.34 8705-03 SA2C 20-Jan-05 YES -4.71 8771-03 SA2C 28-Jan-05 YES -5.88 69837162-B 8801-01 SAIC-1 4-Feb-05 YES 5.30 8811-01 SAIC-1 8-Feb-05 YES 1.29 8857-01 SAIC-1 24-Feb-05 YES -3.36 8894-01 SAIC-1 1-Mar-05 YES 0.40 8919-01 SAIC-1 8-Mar-05 YES 3.29 8945-01 SAIC-1 16-Mar-05 YES -0.58 8991-01 SAIC-1 28-Mar-05 YES -12.64 9014-01 SAIC-1 31-Mar-05 YES -7.31 69837162-D 8801-02 SAIC-2 4-Feb-05 YES 1.77 8811-02 SAIC-2 8-Feb-05 YES -0.99 8857-02 SAIC-2 24-Feb-05 YES -1.95 8894-02 SAIC-2 1-Mar-05 YES 0.59 8919-02 SAIC-2 8-Mar-05 YES 0.11 8945-02 SAIC-2 16-Mar-05 YES -0.64 8991-02 SAIC-2 24-Mar-05 YES -0.11 9014-02 SAIC-2 1-Apr-05 YES -6.80 69837162-C 8801-03 SA2C 4-Feb-05 YES 3.02 8811-03 SA2C 8-Feb-05 YES -0.59 8857-03 SA2C 24-Feb-05 YES -4.44 8894-03 SA2C 1-Mar-05 YES 0.71 8919-03 SA2C 8-Mar-05 YES 6.03 8945-03 SA2C 16-Mar-05 YES -1.76 8991-03 SA2C 25-Mar-05 YES 2.34 9014-03 SA2C 29-Mar-05 YES -1.55 F:MADMINMCORRESTEL 097-05 -All-
TABLE 9 (continued) QC CHARCOAL ACTIVITY SCREENING RESULTS SPIKE FILTER ANALYSIS ACT. NUMBER LSN TYPE DATE REPORTED %BIAS 70218162-C 9081-01 SAIC-1 12-Apr-05 YES 4.18 9133-01 SAIC-1 22-Apr-05 YES -0.83 9171-01 SAIC-1 29-Apr-05 YES -1.57 9208-01 SAIC-1 3-May-05 YES -3.85 9240-01 SAIC-1 11-May-05 YES -4.99 9271-01 SAIC-1 19-May-05 YES -4.91 9299-01 SAIC-1 27-May-05 YES -8.94 9329-01 SAIC-1 2-Jun-05 YES -3.42 70860162-C 9478-01 SAIC-1 28-Jun-05 YES -0.72 70218162-E 9081-02 SAIC-2 12-Apr-05 YES 2.74 9133-02 SAIC-2 21 -Apr-05 YES 5.02 9171-02 SAIC-2 29-Apr-05 YES 5.99 9208-02 SAIC-2 3-May-05 YES 2.64 9240-02 SAIC-2 11-May-05 YES 4.22 9271-02 SAIC-2 19-May-05 YES 0.28 9299-02 SAIC-2 27-May-05 YES -1.40 9329-02 SAIC-2 2-Jun-05 YES 0.67 70860162-E 9478-02 SAIC-2 28-Jun-05 YES 2.28 70218162-D 9081-03 SA2C 12-Apr-05 YES -0.31 9136-03 SA2C 25-Apr-05 YES -1.19 9171-03 SA2C 29-Apr-05 YES -3.64 9208-03 SA2C 3-May-05 YES -0.73 9240-03 SA2C 11-May-05 YES -1.46 9271-03 SA2C 19-May-05 YES 30.69 9299-03 SA2C 27-May-05 YES -1.14 9329-03 SA2C 2-Jun-05 YES -0.74 70860162-D 9478-03 SA2C 28-Jun-05 YES -0.35 F:AADMIN\CORRES\EL 097-05 -A12-
TABLE 10 FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ENVIRONMENTAL INTRA-LABORATORY AND INTER-LABORATORY DATA
SUMMARY
BIAS AND PRECISION BY MEDIA JANUARY-JUNE 2005 Bias Criteria (1) Precision Criteria (2), (3) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 I. Air Filter Gross Alpha 1 2 1 2 6 0 0 0 Gross Beta 127 8 0 0 6 0 0 0 Gamma 10 8 8 1 27 0 0 0 Sr_89 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 Sr-90 0 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 II. Charcoal Gamma-Quantitative 2 T 2 °0 l O O 0 Gamma-Screening 55 11 3 0 ° ° r1 III. Milk Gamma 47 12 1 0 55 3 2 0 Iodine (LL) 6 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 Sr-89 4 2 2 0 8 ] 00 Sr-90 5 1 2 0 8 0 0 0 IV. SolUSediment Am-24i 0 0 A 01 0 0 ° _oIo o 0 Io 0 Gamma 0 0 1010 _ _0 V. Water Am-241 2 1 10 0 5 0 8 0 C-14 2 3 3 0 0 0 8 0 Cm-244 0 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 Fe-55 1 4 5 0 3 0 4 0 Gross Alpha 10 4 7 0 3 0 6 0 Gross Beta 8 16 1 0 8 1 0 0 Gamma 25 30 1 0 46 2 8 0 Iodine (LL) 5 2 1 0 6 2 0 0 Ni-63 3 3 3 0 2 1 4 0 Pu-238 1 5 0 0 0 0 6 0 Pu-239 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 Pu-241 3 5 3 0 3 0 8 0 Sr_89 2 2 2 0 6 0 0 0 Sr-90 3 2 7 0 2 2 8 0 Tritium 23 8 0 0 27 2 2 0 Tc-99 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 Total Number In 349 134 66 3 240 13 64 0 Range: Percentage of 63.2 24.3 12.0 0.5 75.7 4.1 20.2 0.0 Total Processed: Sum of Analyses: 552 317 (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (1) (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (2) (3) Most Precision data generated from non-positive client samples for specific contractual evaluation
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding.
Totals summarize Internal PCs, NIST MAP, and Analytics Cross Check programs F:UADMIN\CORRES\EL 097-05 -A13-
F:UADMINMCORRES\EL 097-05 -A14-TABLE 11 FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ENVIRONMENTAL INTRA-LABORATORY AND INTER-LABORATORY DATA
SUMMARY
BIAS AND PRECISION BY ANALYSIS TYPE JANUARY-JUNE 2005 Bias Criteria (1) Precision Criteria (2), (3) 1 2 3 1 4 1 2 3 4
l. Gross Alpha Air Filterl 1 2 l 1 2 l 6 l 0 0 0 Waterl 10 1 4 1 7 1 0 1 3 1 0 1 6 0 II. Amn-241, Cm-244 Waterl 2 T 3 1 11 ° 0 8 1 0 T 8 ° 0
III. C-14 Waterl 2 1 3 1 3 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 8 1 0 [V. Fe-55 Water 1 4 5 0 3 0 4 0 V. Gross Beta Air Filter7 127 7 8 7 0 0 l 6 l 0 l 0 7 0 Waterl 8 T 16 1 1 1 0 1 8 1 1 0 r 0 VI. Gamma Air Filter 10 8 8 1 27 0 0 0 Charcoal-Quantitative 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Charcoal-Screening 55 11 3 0 0 0 0 0 Milk 47 12 1 0 55 3 2 0 Water 25 30 1 0 46 2 8 0 Vil. Iodine (LL) Milkj 6 T 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 Waterl 5 T 2 1 1 1 0 1 6 1 2 r 0 0 Vill. NI-63 Waterl 3 1 3 1 3 1 0 1 2 1 1 1 4 1 0 iX Pu-238, Pu-239 Waterl 1 5 1 3 1 0 1 3 1 0 1 6 1 0 X. Pu-241 Water7 3 1 5 7 3 1 0 1 3 1 0 1 8 1 0 Xl. Sr-89 Air Filter r1 0 2 0 0 0 Mil2 4 2 2 8 0 0 0 Water 2 2 0 6 0 0 1 0 Xll. Sr-g9 Air Filter 0 2 0 2 0 0 Milk 5 1 _2 0 8 0 0 0 Water 3 2 7 0 2 2 8 0 XIII. Tritium Waterl 23 r 8 ° 0 ° 0 27 1 2 1 2 r 0 XIV. Tc-99 Water 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 Total Numberin 349 134 66 3 240 13 64 0 Range: I Percentage of 63.2 24.3 12.0 0.5 75.7 4.1 20.2 0.0 Total Processed: Surn of Analyses: 552 317 (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (1) (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (2) (3) Most Precision data generated from non-positive client samples for specific contractual evaluation Total may not equal 100 due to rounding. Totals summarize Internal PCs, NIST MAP, and Analytics Cross Check programs F-.\ADMlN\CORRES\EL 097-05 -A15-
TABLE 12 ENVIRONMENTAL BIAS AND PRECISION BY YEAR Percent Bias Percent Precision Deviation from Known Deviation from Mean Bias Criteria* (1) Precision CrIteria' (2) Outside Outside Criteria %Within Criteria %Within Year 1 2 3 4 Criteria 1 2 3 4 Criteria 2005 349 134 66 3 99.5 240 13 64 0 100.0 2004 405 130 91 6 99.1 204 27 191 2 99.5 2003 572 182 74 13 98.5 354 55 106 1 99.8 2002 619 170 74 7 99.2 411 44 16 3 99.4 2001 383 115 80 22 96.3 330 45 19 2 99.5 2000 368 143 63 18 97.0 342 70 36 1 99.8 1999 323 100 44 13 97.3 301 46 10 2 99.4 1998 375 100 21 7 98.6 355 56 21 4 99.1 1997 351 118 46 11 97.9 306 46 11 0 100.0 1996 616 187 104 24 97.4 696 71 33 3 99.6 1995 291 75 37 12 97.1 200 43 24 0 100.0 1994 359 116 54 14 97.4 265 61 10 i 99.7 1993 262 121 60 29 93.9 227 59 26 1 99.7 1992 438 206 84 21 97.2 656 112 29 1 99.9 1991 504 174 92 19 97.6 710 82 30 4 99.5 1990 519 153 56 34 95.5 644 97 20 2 99.7 1989 448 171 70 28 96.1 599 76 35 4 99.4 1988 425 141 66 22 96.6 536 76 20 1 99.8 1987 450 187 65 27 96.3 623 80 15 3 99.6 1986 558 185 70 27 96.8 700 82 33 0 100.0 1985 449 177 92 25 96.6 561 93 28 0 100.0 1984 479 254 104 31 96A 699 127 24 0 100.0 1983 475 211 108 36 95.7 639 113 46 4 99.5 1982 341 109 135 30 95.1 496 112 135 12 98.4 1981 175 116 152 29 93.9 286 72 46 1 99.8 1980 160 115 167 37 92.3 335 96 59 1 99.8 1979 80 51 68 20 90.9 230 73 51 16 95.7 1978 112 90 40 20 92.4 259 73 29 14 96.3 1977 28 18 12 8 87.9 75 39 5 7 94.4 Total # 10,914 4,049 2,195 593 96.7 12,279 2,039 1,172 90 99.4 in Range:
% of all 61.5 22.8 12.4 3.3 78.8 13.1 7.5 0.6 Analyses in Range*
Total Number 17,751 15,580
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding.
(1) Deviation Categories 1-3 as noted in Table 1, Footnote (1) (2) Deviation Categories 1-3 as noted in Table 1, Footnote (2) F:\ADMINNCORRES\EL 097-05 -A16-
TABLE 13 ANALYTICS RADIOCHEMISTRY CROSSCHECK PROGRAM RESULTS BY FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA, MEDIA, AND MEASUREMENT CATEGORIES JANUARY-JUNE 2005 Bias Criteria (1) Precision Criteria (2) 1 21 3 4 1 2 1 1 4 I. Water Fe-55 2 1 0 0 0 2 1 0 Sr-89 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 Sr-9g 0 2 1 0 1 2 0 0 Tota Number in 3 5 1 0 2 6 1 0 Range: _ _ I__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I__ _ _ _ _ Percentage of 33.3 55.6 11.1 0.0 22.2 66.7 11.1 0.0 Total Processed: Sum of Analyses: 9 9 (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category as noted in Table 12, Footnote (1) (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category as noted in Table 12, Footnote (2)
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding F:UADMINMCORRESkEL 097-05 -A17-
TABLE 13 PART 50/61 PROCESS CONTROL ANALYSIS RESULTS BY FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA, MEDIA AND MEASUREMENT CATEGORIES JANUARY-JUNE 2005 (Continued) (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category I = >0 and <5 2 = >5 and <10 3 = >10 and <15 (or within 2 sigma of known, see Reference 1) For Gross Alpha and Beta In water, 3 = >10 and <25 (orwHthin 2 sigma of known) For Alpha Spectrometry*, 3 = >10 and <20 (or wi thin 2 sigma of known) For Uranium-Total, Pu-241, Zn-65 on an air filter, C-14, 3 = >10 and *20 (or wit:hin 2 sigma of known) 4 = Outside criteria (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category 1 = >0 and <5 2 = >5 and <10 3 = >10 and <15 (or within 2 sigma of mean, see Reference 1) 4 = Outside criteria
Isotopic Uranium (U-234, 235, 238)
Isotopic Thorium (Th-230, 232) Np-237 Am-241/Cm-242, 243/244 Pu-alpha (Pu-238, 239, 240) Ra-226
** Total may not equal 100 due to rounding.
F:AADMIN\CORRESEL 097-05 -A18-
TABLE 14 FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ANALYTICS RADIOCHEMISTRY CROSS-CHECK PERFORMANCE EVALUATION _ ____l_Mean Ratio Sample Quarter/ Sample l___l_Reported Known E-LABI Number Year Media Nuclide Units Value Value Analytics Evaluation A17776-162 1stl2005 Liquid Fe-55 uC/cc 2.06E-04 2.12E-04 0.97 Agreement A17777-162 1st/2005 Liquid Sr-89 uCi/cc 1.62E-03 1.63E-03 0.99 Agreement A17777-162 1stl2005 Liquid Sr-90 uCi/cc 1.84E-04 2.06E-04 0.89 Agreement A18125-162 2nd/2005 Liquid Fe-55 uCi/cc 1.38E-03 A18126-162 2ndt2005 Liquid Sr-89 uCi/cc 1.04E-03 A18126-162 2ndt2005 Liquid Sr-90 uCi/cc 9.14E-04
- Results submitted to Analytics, pending final report issuance.
F:AADMIN\CORRESMEL 097-05 -Al19-
TABLE 15 NIST MAP ANALYSIS RESULTS BY FRAMiATOME ANP ENViRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA, MEDIA, AND MEASUREMENT CATEGORIES JANUARY-JUNE 2005 Bias Criteria (1) Precision Criteria (2) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 I. Water . . . Arn-241 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 Cm-244 0 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 Fe-55 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 Gamma 4 14 0 0 18 0 0 0 H-3 9 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 Ni-63 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 0 Pu-239 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 Pu-241 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 Tc-99 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 Total Number In Range: 19 20 9 0 47 1 0 0 Percentage of Total Processed: 39.6 41.7 18.8 0.0 97.9 2.1 0.0 0.0 Sum of Analyses: 48 48 (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (1) (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (2)
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding F:AADMINICORRESTEL 097-05 -A20-
TABLE 16
SUMMARY
OF FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY (NIST) TRACEABILITY RESULTS JANUARY-JUNE 2005 NIST Reference E-LAB Mean Percent Standard Date of Measurement Deviation From Number Standard Radionuclide Matrix Technique NIST 1707-12 30-Aug-04 Tc-99 Liquid Liquid Scintillation Counter #2 -1.91 1720-04 10-Nov-04 Am-241 Liquid Alpha Spectroscopy Units #33, 34, 35 -10.85 1720-04 10-Nov-04 Cm-244 Liquid Alpha Spectroscopy Units #33, 34, 35 -9.46 1720-04 10-Nov-04 Pu-239 Liquid Alpha Spectroscopy Units #33, 34, 35 -15.99 1720-04 10-Nov-04 Pu-241 Liquid Liquid Scintillation Counter #2 -1.97 1743-05 10-Jan-05 H-3 Liquid Liquid Scintillation Counter #2 1.87 1743-05 10-Jan-05 Fe-55 Liquid Liquid Scintillation Counter #2 10.74 1743-05 10-Jan-05 Ni-63 Liquid Liquid Scintillation Counter #2 -9.72 1751-02 2-Mar-05 H-3 Liquid Liquid Scintillation Counter #4 2.56 1751-02 2-Mar-05 1-131 (LL) Liquid Beta-Gamma Coincidence Unit #1 -5.59 1751-02 2-Mar-05 1-131 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #2 -6.41 1751-02 2-Mar-05 1-131 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #4 -5.31 1751-02 2-Mar-05 1-131 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #5 -5.31 1751-05 2-Mar-05 H-3 Liquid Liquid Scintillation Counter #4 3.06 1751-05 2-Mar-05 1-131 (LL) Liquid Beta-Gamma Coincidence Unit #2 -8.61 1751-05 2-Mar-05 1-131 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #2 -8.42 1751-05 2-Mar-05 _ 1-131 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #4 -5.59 1751-05 2-Mar-05 1-131 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #5 -4.67 Data on NIST MAP program is repeated in Table 4 for Environmental QC data. F:AADMIM\CORRESNEL 097-05 -A21-
TABLE 17 INTRA-LABORATORY PART 50/61 PROCESS CONTROL RESULTS BREAKDOWN BY FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA, MEDIA AND MEASUREMENT CATEGORIES JANUARY-JUNE 2005 Bias Criteria (1) Precision Criteria (2) 1 T 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 I. Filter Alpha l l l l _ l A rn-241 _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Fe-55 Gamma Sr-89 S r-90 1_ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ il. Liquid Alpha 2 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 Am-241 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 Beta 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C-14 1 1 1 0 0 1 2 0 Cm-24314 2 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 Fe-55 0 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 Gamma 10 2 0 0 12 0 0 0 H-3 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 1-129 0 0 1 2 2 1 0 0 Ni-63 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 Np-237 2 2 2 0 2 4 0 0 Pu-238 2 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 Pu-241 4 2 0 0 5 1 0 0 Sr-89 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 Sr-90 0 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 Tc-99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total Number 29 17 14 2 45 7 2 0 in Range: Percentage of 46.8 274 22.6 3.2 83.3 13.0 3.7 0.0 Total Processed: Sum of Analyses: 62 54 (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category as noted in Table 13, Footnote (1) (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category as noted in Table 13, Footnote (2)
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding.
F:\ADMINICORRES\EL 097-05 -A22-
TABLE 18 PART 50161 ANALYSIS RESULTS BREAKDOWN BY FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA, MEDIA AND MEASUREMENT CATEGORIES JANUARY-JUNE 2005 Bias Criteria (1) Precision Criteria (2) 1 l 2 l -3 l- 4 1 1 l 2 l 3 l 4 L. Filter _ _ _ Alpha Am-241 Fe-55 G am m a__ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ Sr-89 = = Sr-90 I II. Liquid Alpha 2 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 Am-241 0 2 4 0 6 0 0 0 Beta 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C-14 1 1 1 0 0 1 2 0 Cm-24314 2 3 1 0 6 0 0 0 Fe-55 2 4 3 0 6 2 1 0 Gamma 14 16 0 0 30 0 0 0 H-3 12 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 1-129 0 0 1 2 2 1 0 0 Ni-63 0 3 3 0 5 1 0 0 Np-237 2 2 2 0 2 4 0 0 Pu-238 2 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 Pu-239 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 Pu-241 7 2 0 0 8 1 0 0 Sr-89 4 2 0 0 4 2 0 0 Sr-90 0 4 2 0 4 2 0 0 Tc-99 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 Total Number 51 42 24 2 94 14 3 0 In Range: I.I Percentage of 42.9 35.3 20.2 1.7 84.7 12.6 2.7 0.0 Total Processed: Sum of Analyses: 119 111 (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category as noted in Table 13, Footnote (1) (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category as noted in Table 13, Footnote (2)
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding.

Totals summarize Internal PCs, NIST MAP, and Analytics Cross Check programs F:AADMUN\CORRESMEL 097-05 -A23-
TABLE 19 PART 50161 BIAS AND PRECISION BY YEAR (1) Percent Bias Percent Precision Deviation from Known Deviation from Mean Bias Criteria (2) Precision Criteria (2) Outside Outside Criteria % Within Criteria % Within Year 1 2 3 4 Criteria 1 2 3 4 Criteria 2005 51 42 24 2 98.3 94 14 3 0 100.0 2004 73 45 36 9 94.5 140 10 1 0 100.0 2003 144 91 51 9 96.9 249 18 2 0 100.0 2002 215 94 49 8 97.8 300 24 5 2 99A 2001 159 90 46 24 92.5 238 46 6 0 100.0 2000 151 72 28 23 91.6 220 38 16 4 98.6 1999 111 59 14 7 96.3 168 13 5 2 98.9 1998 90 68 24 7 96.3 160 22 7 0 100.0 1997 99 43 33 8 95.6 168 13 2 0 100.0 1996 194 80 33 17 94.8 285 31 8 0 100.0 1995 112 47 35 7 96.5 173 15 4 0 100.0 1994 125 39 25 5 97.4 158 22 5 1 99.5 1993 154 51 32 17 93.3 208 34 7 0 100.0 1992 116 86 38 7 97.2 207 27 5 0 100.0 1991 126 77 53 35 88.0 223 28 10 5 98.1 1990 116 65 31 21 91.0 199 35 6 0 100.0 1989 73 71 51 26 88.2 152 40 24 8 96.4 1988 30 19 13 13 82.7 43 13 6 9 87.3 R 2,139 1,139 616 245 94.1 3,385 443 122 31 99.2 Total in Range: ____ %Aof all 51.7 27.5 14.9 5.9 85.0 11.1 3.1 0.8 alyses In Range' Sum of Analyses_ 4,139 3,981
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding.
(1) This breakdown excludes the 71 verification analyses associated with the startup of this area of the Laboratory during 1988-89. (2) Deviation Categories 1-4 as noted in Table 13, Footnote (1) F:\ADMINZCORRESIEL 097-05 -A24-
TABLE 20 BIOASSAY ANALYSIS RESULTS BREAKDOWN BY FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA, MEDIA AND MEASUREMENT CATEGORIES JANUARY-JUNE 2005 Bias Criteria (1) Precision Criteria (2) I 2 3 j 4 1 2 3 4 I. Urine (3) _ _ _ _ G am ma _ _ _ _ _ _ J_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ H-3 Total Number in Range: 0 l 0 0 0 0 0 l Percentage of 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Processed*: Sum of Analyses: 0 0 (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category as noted in Table 13, Footnote (1) (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category as noted in Table 13, Footnote (2) (3) There were no internal or external bioassay QC samples analyzed during this period.
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding FA\ADMIN\CORRES\EL 097-05 -A25-
TABLE 21 LAWRENCE U V NATlNAL LABORATORY (LtLL) BICMSSAYTIHYROID RADIOIODINE NER6OOMPARSON PROJECT (TRIP) LI ALLNLNS RPRTED R TED OCEF1ED CERTIFED 1330 RADIO- VALUE UNCEITAINTY VALLE l INARIY BIAS BIAS TRIP ID NUCIDE (dpm) (dpn) (dprn (d4ij Y Ce _ CRITERIA 12D4 1-125 1.39E+06 221E+05 1.03E+06 3.09E+04 35.0 PASS 1204 1-131 8.11E'06 8.92E+05 7.82E+06 2.35E405 3.7 PASS F:\ADMIN\CORRESMEL 097-05 -A26-
TABLE 22 CONDITION REPORT (CR) STATUS (JANUARY-JUNE 2005) (OPEN) (CLOSED) INITIATION CLOSE-OUT CR1V DATE DATE DESCRIPTION STATUS AS OF 06130104 Internal process checks for 1-129 for Testing indicates that a bias exists with either the 1-129 source or the the first and second quarters of 2004 gamma spectroscopy detector calibration. A new NIST source was recently had positive biases greater than the received. Recalibration of the gamnna spectroscopy detector is pending acceptance limit. creation of the calibrated geometry. CR 04-18 30-Nov-04 Chemist was trained to the appropriate information. Additional Read & Sign Read & Sign training not completed training forms were not completed as required. These have now been for a new chemist completed. The training procedure is being revised specifically for the indoctrination training of new employees. CR 04-21 15-Dec-04 9-Mar-05 Three weaknesses noted In Safety All personnel have been retrained to the OSHA requirement for flushing Manual compliance (eyewash eyewashes. The hazardous chemical list has been reviewed and updated. flushing, NFPA labels missing on Chemical labeling has been verified. A revision to the requirements for chemicals, hazardous chemical list labeling is in progress. needs updated). CR 04-24 15-Dec-04 6-Jun-05 acon upd ate LIMS accounts for remaining plants in corporation were corrected. Samples account updated mistakenly. Should were reanalyzed in attempt to meet required MDCx. Procedures were have been only one plant in the updated to require independent check on LIMS account updates. CR 05-01 11-Jan-05 20-Jan-05 rpo Sample receipt failed to utilize LIMS templates end did not enter hold for Tritium environmental composite composite statement. Sample was disposed of prior to successful nionmenfthreal Mu compoieleti~on ps of composite. Personnel have been retrained to use templates sample missing one of three samples. for sample log-in and disposal is not being conducted until completion of all CR 05-02 24-Jan-05 7-Feb-05 quarterly composites. t sManagement failed to properly control sample processing status during Vegetation samples for e-131(LL) employee transitions. Additional resources were added to process to ensure failed to meet cient required MDC completion of all in -house samples. Chemists have been counseled on values, tracking sample status and vegetation processing. CR 05-03 24-Jan -05 7-Feb-O _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ LIMS fields for several samples Sample reports were corrected and re-issued or re-analyzed. Training was improperly fore smplet s given the chemistry staff on proper data entry into LIMS. Training procedure 2 an5 Mar-0 improperly completed. was revised to add specific line item on data entry. CR 054 Final data review was not conducted as usual since the employee ERA gamma (Co-60) Profiency Test responsible was away from the office. Personnel responsible were sample failed due to data entry error. counseled to ensure data review of third party test data is conducted as CR 05-05 30-Jan-05 2-Mar-05 required. The ICP and chemists were tested successfully on iron recovery analysis Fe-55 Part 50/61 QC sample failed techniques. A new Fe-55 calibration for the liquid scintillation counter was with negative bias. put in place using a new primary NIST traceable standard. CR closure CR 05-06 15-Feb-05 pending. FM~DMINNCORRIESTIL 097-05 A7
-A27-
TABLE 22 (continued) CONDITION REPORT (CR) STATUS (JANUARY-JUNE 2005) (OPEN) (CLOSED) INITIATION CLOSE-OUT CR # DATE DATE DESCRIPTION STATUS AS OF 06130104 Chemist made a transcription error when recording the sample volume. The Sr-89/90 QC failed due to incorrect corrected volume resulted in acceptable results for both Sr-89 and Sr-90. sample volume used. All personnel were reminded of the need for self-checking when entering CR 05-07 2-Mar-05 17-Mar-05 data. The procedure was revised to incorporate stronger precautions concerning False positive report of tritium in soil. the potential for radon daughter contamination bleed through. The sample CR 05-08 23-Mar-05 13-Apr-05 was reanalyzed to obtain a valid tritium result. Charcoal cardge sample volume The backup sample receipt technician failed to property 'roll-back or correct daramlntred in LIMS. the sample volume entered in LIMS. Staff performing LIMS data entry has CR 05-09 25-Mar-05 1-Jun-05 been retrained to proper error correction steps. Bias of -15.5% with limit of 15%. Sample recounted with no change. 1st Analytics 4th quarter 2004 air quarter 2005 AP counted by GPC (20.8 pCi. -5.0% bias), gamnna particulate gross alpha QC failure. spectroscopy (24.3 pCi, +11% bias), and known (21.9 pCi). Contacting Analytics on AP prep details to determine cause of bias shift from one CR 05-10 30-Mar-05 quarter to the next. lyfics 4th quarter 2004 air Bias of +15.3% with limit of 15%. Geometry of AP for QC sample and Analyticsl4th qurer5 2004ilre normal samples was evaluated. Calibration will be adjusted to addresa QCC CR 05-11 30-Mar 2-Jun icula Fe-59 C failure differences from calibration geometry. Secondary Fe-55 source found Source container was found to have been inadvertently contaminated. CR 05-12 2-Ma 5 28-Ju145 contaminated. Source and spike samples were disposed. MAPEP prepared vegetation is a fine, dry powdery material, unlike true MAPEP An-241 in vegetation environmental vegetation samples. Some losses were experienced during Waming. transfer for gamma counting. Handling precautions are being added to CR 05-13 24-May-05 worksheet templates for MAPEP vegetation samples. MAPEP Ni-63 in water False No apparent cause identified for false negative result. Four samples of MAPEP Ni--in0water Falseiv lower activities were analyzed concurrently and all passed the acceptance CR 05-14 24-May-05 28-Jul-05 egae. criteria. FA~ADMINMCORRES\EL 097-05 A8
-A28-
TABLE 23 UPDATED INSTRUMENTATION GROUP/ANALYTICAL SERVICES SECTION PROCEDURES ISSUED DURING JANUARY-JUNE 2005 PROC. TITLE REV. APPROVAL EFFECTIVE NUMBER DATE DATE 304 Environmental Sample Compositing 0 02/02/05 02/02/05 Preparation and Analysis of 320 Environmental Water and 2 20/5 0/10 Soil/Sediment/Sludge Samples for Gross 22 02/01/05 02/01/05 Alpha and/or Gross Beta Radioactivity The Sequential Determination of 55Fe, 63Ni, 59,LSr, 241Am 242Cm, 2431244 Cm and 365 238 pu, 2391240Pu, 241pU in Environmental 13 03/17/05 03/27/05 and Bioassay Matrices The Determination of Tritium in 373 Environmental, Bioassay, and Plant 2 04/13/05 04/13/05 Effluent Samples Using the Micro Distillation Apparatus The Determination Of Gamma-Ray 450 Emitting Radionuclides Using The Seeker 17 02/24/05 02/25/05 Gamma Spectroscopy Software Operation and Calibration of the 512 Reuter-Stokes Pressurized Ion Chamber 6 05/16/05 05/16/05 (PIC) 682 Integration of a New Client into LIMS 1 01/20/05 01/20/05 683 Integration of a New Product into LIMS 1 01/17/05 01/17/05 Laboratory Training and Qualification 12 03/01/05 03/01/05 750 Guideline Intengm 06/14/05 06/14/05 ____________________________Chancie 760 Chemical and Reagent Control 13 04/15/05 04/15/05 Suggested Sample Collection, 1102 Preservation and Submittal Procedures 4 03/04/05 03/11/05 For 10 CFR 50/61 Sample Analysis The Determination of Isotopic Americium, 1136 Curium, Plutonium, and Neptunium in 10 03/17/05 03/17/05 10CFR50 and 10CFR61 Media 1137 The Determination of Cerium-144 in 10 7 03/04/05 03/11/05 CFR 61 Matrices The Determination of Niobium-94 in 10 1190 CFR 61 Media Using Anion Exchange 3 03/04/05 03/11/05 Chromatography and Gamma Spectrometry F:AADMIN\CORRES\EL 097-05 A-28
APPENDIX A INTER/INTRA-LABORATORY, ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING ANALYTICS, DOE, ERA AND NIST QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM RESULTS F:HADMINMCORRES\EL 097-05
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP GROSS ALPHA AIR PARTICULATE RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 z 60 o 40 Z Upper Contro Lirnit (+25.0%) 20 o 0 O
-20 it -r - - - - - -Loier- ntri~l DmRr-il275,01A - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
U-40 X -60
-80 1 00 I I I - I I I I I I I I I I I I I A, a WR Aff w AM a u S cT u M FEBIN UR Ma AN a S vT (C ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
INTRALABORATORY CROSS CHECK ANALYSIS SHEET SAMPLE TYPE: PARTICULATE FILTER ISSUANCE DATE: 03/29/2005 REF. DATE: 12/09/2004 LAS SAMPLE NOt 855701 ANAL DATE: 12/16/2004 LAS SAMPLE NO: 855702 ANAL DATE: 17./ILU/l9Q4 LAS SAMPLE NO: E55703 ANAL DATE: 12116/2004 UNITSs pCi/Filter NUCLIDE RESULT 1 RESULT 2 RESULT 3 MEAN KNOWN X X X VALUE DIFF.1 DIFF.2 DIFF.3 Alphs ( 246 a SIE!01 ( 246
5)E-01 ( Z56 t 5)E-01 29.50C 00 *16.40* -16.60* -13.40 X DIFF FROM NEANs 24.94E 00 -1.10 *1.40 2.50 Beta Z
( 2420 1O)E-01 C 2422
10)E-01 c 2433

10)E-01 22.20E 01 9.00 9.10 9.60 X DIFF FROM MEAN: Z4.25E 01 -0.20 -0.10 0.30 Mean of three analyses of Analytics air filter for Gross Alpha (bias = -15.5%) exceeded the *15% bias limit. CR 05-10 was Initiated to investigate the failure.
ALL RESULTS PASSED CA PERFORMANCE CRITERIA EXCEPT THOSE NOTED WITH AN ASTERISK
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP GROSS ALPHA WATER RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 z 0 40 z 20 0 a U-F
-20 -40 -60 -80 -i00 JA FE WARAM MAYAP1 J A (
SEP xi E MM Ne FAEB MAY INJ W SR OClT0 E ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
YR BATCH 24 QC CROSS CHECK ANALYSIS SHEET SAMPLE TYPE: WATER ISSUANCE DATE: 02/17/2005 REF. DATE: 03/05/2004 LAS SAMPLE NO: 850302 ANAL DATE: 01/04/2 71(5f 1/ UNITS: pCI/L NUCLIDE RESULT 1 RESULT 2 RESULT 3 HEAN KNOWN X X X VALUE OIFF.1 DIIF.2 DIFF.3 Alphs ( 403 t 60)E-O1 55.40E oe -Vr.30 seta ( 615
44)E-01 59.60E 00 3.70 Internal spike for Gross Alpha in water was analyzed according to specific client protocol. Sample activity was <1 0 times the MDC and the result met the client's QC criteria of 80%.
ALL RESULTS PASSED OA PERFORMANCE CRITERIA EXCEPT THOSE NOTED WITH AN ASTERISK
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP GROSS ALPHA RESULT BIAS 100 80 z 60 0 40 z 20 By-0 0 LL
-20 LL 11 -40 -60 -80 Y ANALYTC! -100 A ffB MR AM MAdAN A U O oLA: NOVe FEBW PA MAYi Al KG U OCTI e CM ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Am-241 RESULT BIAS 100 . .I .I .I .I .I .I .I .I I I I . I . I . I . I . I. I. .I .I .I I I I 80-z 60 0 40 z 20 --- - Upper Control Limit (20.0X) - - - - - - - - _ 0 ci 0
A.@' 40. *

II * ** *, 0
-20 C - -tid-LKC-2O-- D~)- ------------ - 4---
LL I~ 010
-60
ERA
*po -80 A MST V ANALYTIC' I I I I I I I I I I I I I L I I I I I I I I -100 UUC AI fEa w M4R a iN a a S a I H a E " a M M a m P XT aJ ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
YR BATCH 25 OC CROSS CHECK ANALYSIS SHEET SAKPLE TYPE: WATER ISSUANCE DATES 03/03/2005 REF. DATE: 08/28/2004 LAB SAMPLE NOi 871806 ANAL DATE: 02/23/2005 UNITS: pCl/L NUCLIDE RESULT 1 RESULT 2 RESULT 3 MEAN KNOuWN X X VALUE OIFF.1 DIFF.2 DIFF.3 AM-241 ( 498
10O9B01 64,10! 00 -22.40 Internal spike for Am-241 in water was analyzed according to specific client protocol. The result met the client's QC criteria of :30%.
ALL RESULTS PASSED CA PERFORMANCE CRITERIA EXCEPT THOSE NOTED WITH AN ASTERISK
ISSUANCE DATEs 05/09/2005 SAMPLE TYPE: VEGETATION REF. DATE: 01/01/2005 LAS SAMPLE NO: 858902 ANAL PAT!s 04/18/2005 I UNITS: BqJSAMPLE UUCLIDE RESULT 1 RESULT 2 RESULT 3 MEAN KNOVN X X X VALUE DIFF.1 DIFF.2 Doir.3 Am-241 t 1097
44)E-04 1.4SE-01 *24.30*
Single analysis of MAPEP vegetation sample for Am-241 (bias=-24.3%) exceeded the *20% MAPEP bias limit. CR 05-13 was Initiated to investigate the failure. ALL RESULTS PASSED GA PERFORMANCE CRITERIA EXCEPT THOSE NOTED WITH AN ASTERISK
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Ba-133 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I III z 80 60 II 0 40 z 20 - Upr Contrd Lirnil_-(+16.0X) 0 0 T-I L--wer ControI LImrt (-1 5.0) - - - - - - - - LL
-20
(-- -to K CD
-60 + ERA *PO -80 A 9ST V ANALYTIC' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -100 1 I I Al FFMi R WMAY IN JItt 1G ST OCT FM W A NR WY ItLP 1N OCITa [C ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA RESULT BIAS 100 80 z 60 o Z 40_ Upper Control umn (+18OX) 00 20__ 07
-20 Lower Control Limit (-15.0X)
U-0 ER
-80 ANST A ANALYTIP2 - 100 l 0DOE Jl0 FMS W MR MFY 1H 11 AG KP 0; OC# R NA IIM AMR MlY l AUJ SE OCMT OEC Nl ANALYSIS PERIOD 2002-2003
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP BETA (NON-AP) RESULT BIAS 100 i I I II I I I II I I I q0 z 60 0 40 Up Contrad Linmt+25 z 20 ------ -~ -N-- -------------
-v- ---t- -v-0 0 +/- M+ - -~.
_ _ _
~ ~~~ ower "o-ntrio Lir-1 Ui-2#1t - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
LL
-40 l~~~ ~ ~~l l l l l# l l l 0N -60
ERA A MST
-80 'VANALYTO . . .
DOEV
-100 . . . . .. . .
ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP 0-14 RESULT BIAS 100 80 z 60 0 40 z 20 0 0 L- -20 U-) -.1A0
-60 -80 -100 JANF3 R APRAY a al LY SEAS1 PER O 2 00 -Y2 0 0 a 1 E ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Cd-109 RESULT BIAS 100 I. .I I. .I .I .I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l 801 z 601 0 401 z Upper Control Limit (+16.0X) 20k 0 0 LL
-20 Lower Control Limit (-15.0X)
F-1 -40
-60 k
ERA ePc
-80 A NST V ANALYTIC
[1 - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I,
-100 ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Ce-141 RESULT BIAS 100 .I .I .I .I I . .I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 80 z 60 0 40 z y 20 - Upe, Contrd Lii (+15.0X) Irm+
.4p V!
t a 0 0 4
-20 Lower Contro Limit l-16.0X)
LL lLI r-i
-40
ŽNO
-60
ERA
*PC -80 A NIST V ANALYTICI I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -100 -~~ - _ UUt YN FEBU^,R RMY M A kG SP 0T tf CE A FE M f MY IM IA U SP OT 0 CE ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP CHARCOAL RESULT BIAS 100 80 z 60 40 0 20 m w 0 LL -20 U-
-40 -60 --80 -1100 ANALYSIS PERIOD 2002-2003
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Co-57 RESULT BIAS
.00 - I Uo e I I I I IIIIII 80 z 60 3 40 7
\" 20 -Upper Con~trol Limit (.15O0X) C0 U-
- Lower contrd Llrril (-160X )
LL-2 0 - 11 U-
-60
ERA
*PC -80 A NST Y ANALYTIE I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
-100
DOE ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Co-58 RESULT BIAS 100 7 I i I I I I I I I I I I I I T I I I I 80I 601 z 0 401 z 20 - Upper_- _ Control LWrIt _-(+16.0X) 0 0.
-20 - LOwer Contro Linmit (-15.0- -I LL -40 -60 _
ERA
*PC -80k -_ A NST V ANALYTKCt I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I .- i00 0 DOE A F IN AR MY LK it kG SEPOC Nl EC 0 RA WM AM9WI 1N A It 5P X iOTEi ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Co-60 RESULT BIAS 100 -I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 z 60 0 40 z 20 - Upper Control Limil (t 15.0%) 400 0 0 C *'wW. f9 ~*..-fwP crr
-20 - -- Le-- Conro Limit (-16.0X)
LL
-40 -60 *ERA *PC -80 _ A NOST V ANALYTO!
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
-100 S DOE A fB "WIR fa 0 lh Ja u J3 A ' 0T 10/ EC A a UU W i Ma a A SEP OT aMJ C ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2C04-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Cr-51 RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 z 0 40 z V 20 I Upper ODnIlr L mt (+15.0%) 0 0 Lc 20 _ Lower Cntnd Limit (- 16.0X)- n-0L -40
-60
ERA
*PC -80 A NIST V ANALYTIC' -100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L I 1 I - DOE71 JM FEB MR AM WAYMJf It G SEP CI MNYHE A FEB MR 5 WY I J i OCT I MC ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Cs-134 RESULT BIAS 100 - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I Ir 80 z 60 0 40 z 20 - Upper Control Limit (+15 0X) v 4_ 0 0 -~ Lu I* #t *4 ' 4; * ' v 4 +W UT- -20 _ Low Conlrd Uimit (-15.0%) LL
-40 -60
ERA
*PC -80 A NIST Y ANALYTICt I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L[ L -100 _ nrse fEI MM Mf MAYIN L ALYS SE I O TY1 WI FEB W200f4 lRY iI ll0 t SP OCT?OVOE ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Cs-137 RESULT BIAS 100 I I FI I I I I 80 60 o 40 V 20 Uppe ntrol Unit (+1.0%) 0cc oC -9 -
.6 ;4
L 2 0 - - -- Lt Control Linil (-150X)- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
LL c) -40
-60o _ ERA *PC -80 ANST V ANALYTO -100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I DOE 1N J[ RG ANMAY S PERIOD[C 20 04M M 040N5F U UP OC ac ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Fe-55 RESULT BIAS 100 80I 7 60 I. 40 z< 0 Uoper Cantro L rit (+15.0%) c)2O . 00 Lb 0 LL - - onro T~C .% 2 0 U-1640 X60)
*pC -80H A NST T ANALYTI I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I----. I I I I I -100 .~~~~~~ x]'
FEB MAY AI aJI a wP T LG E H MA Maw i a a 9 v uE ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Fe-59 RESULT BIAS 100 _ I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 60 z 0 40 zy 20 upper Contrd Limit ( 15 0X) U
+ _-- - - - - - - - - -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - - - - - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
4 p 0 0 IL Lower Conitrditm- 1.6-X)
-20 -
II LF-
-40 0
o
-60
ERA
*PO -80 -_ A NIST . Iw ANAILYTICI - 1 Lo I I I I I I I I I I I I I. I I I I I I I I I LO E A FEB IN W U WA KG P OCT 1( A FEB VARA BAYA It Ml SP OCT NY C ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
INTRALABORATORY CROSS CHECK ANALYSIS SHEET SAMPLE TYPE: PARTICULATE FILTER ISSUANCE DATEs 03/30/2005 REF. DATE: 12/0912004 LAB SAMPLE NOI 855704 ANAL DATEI 12/16/2004 I LAB SAMPLE NO: 855705 ANAL DATE: 1221/2004 wI LAS SAMPLE NO: 855706 ANAL DATE: 12/22/2004 UNITS: pCi/Filter NUCLIDE RESULT 1 RESULT 2 RESULT 3 MEAN KMX . X VALUE DIFF.1 DIFF.2 DIFF.3 Cs-137 t 688 a 9)E-01 C 702
10)E-01 C 673

10)0-01 62.90E 00 9.30 11.70 7.00 X DIFF FROM MEAN: 68.76E 00 0.00 2.10 -2.10 Fe-59 ( 696 i 13)E-O1 ( 707

14)E-01 ( 690 a 14)E-01 60.50E 00 15.00 16.90 14.00 X 01FF FROM MEAN: 69.771 00 -0.20 1.30 -1.10 Mn-54 C 759

10)E-01 ( 763 2 11)E-01 C 766 s 11)E-01 67.70E 00 12.10 12.70 13.10
% 01FF FROM MEAis 76.27E 00 -0.50 0.00 0.40 Zn-65 i 1069 a 20)E-01 ( 1100 2 21)E-01 ( 1111 a 21)E-01 97.70! 00 9.40 12.60 13.70 X DIFF FROM MEAN: 10.93E 01 -2.20 0.60 1.60 Mean of three analyses of Analytics air filter for Fe-59 (bias = +15.3%) exceeded the *15% bias limit. CR 05-11 was Initiated to investigate the failure.
ALL RESULTS PASSED OA PERFORMANCE CRITERIA EXCEPT THOSE NOTED UITH AN ASTERISK
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP H-3 RESULT BIAS
-;00 I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8C -
z 60 0 40 _ z 20 - UDper Ctrd Lnit (+150%)
- a -
C1) 04 s - - 4;-
- i AL *%4~-
9 rZ P I a r,0 !vto ' Is _ _ W LL
-20 P ---- Loer Control Limit (-160X) l-LL \OX -60 F *ERA -80 _ A NMST Y ANALYTIC' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -100 -~ ~~~~~~~~~ ------- - -DOE I*
A FEB MAPA WAY A MAGSEP CT O JA FEBIN MR MAYi Al AG VP T (EI ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP 1-131 LOW LEVEL RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80k z 60k 0 40 _-X z 20- ControlUN(-(+15.0X}
+ A 0 u 1* -VI 'r - 1: 0* - --- I LL Lower Controd Limit (-160X) -20 -
IL I-) -40k
-60k -_ # ERA *PC -80 -_ A NIST T ANALYTOC I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -100 ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP l-131 (Gamma) RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 z 0 40 z 20 0 20 T-
-20 LL lL LL0 -40 -60 -80 -100 A a N ar a Na L PE R HYI a 0 0A4 w 0a05a a ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP K-40 RESULT BIAS 100 I Ue I I (+I I I I I I I I I I I I I I F-80 z 60 0 40 z 20 - Upper Control Limit (+160X) V F0 Ir 07r 0 I-
-20 - - -- Lower Control Limit (-1OX)
LL LL
-40 r-) -60 _
ERA
*PC -80H A NIST V ANALYTC' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t It I I I I I I -100
DOE Ad FEBM wRMN JJ1 U NR le M rEB MiI M1CM UNB I NC P o1T SEPP tt H{
ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Mn-54 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -I I 1 I I I I I 80 K 60C z 0 40 k z Y 20 - Upper Control Limit- (+1O50X) 0 0 11
-20 P-- Lower Conlrrd Llmit (-15%)-
LL
-40K r' -601 *ERA *PC -80K A MST , ANALYTIC' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -100 , w.. DO -V_;
JAM FEM W 0 WY AU ALT J. A gP Nli [DE , FM B WY 1L A l SE OCTN I ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Ni-63 RESULT BIAS 100 II I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8C z 60 3 40 z \ 20 - Upwer Cortro Lirnit (15.OX)0- _ _ _ I_- F_-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - __ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 0 * . * - w Lo---* C'a 3/420 11 ----- -Lower Control LmIt (-ibOX) t II °-60 *ERA
*PO -80 _ A MST VA ANALYTIC -_100 L L I I I L I I I IL I LI I I I [ I- I I _ vr
_V OE AN FE MM AM WY IN JJ. U SR OCT W (EC A FM MAR A W1 A A P 0P (T OC M ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
YR BATCH 27 QC CROSS CHECK ANALYSI SNEET SAMPLE TYPE: WATER ISSUANCE DATMI 06/09/20 REF. DATE: 03/29/2005 LAS SANPLE NO: 902402 ANAL DATE: 04 26/2005 UNITS: pCi/L NUCLIDE RESULT I RESULT Z RESULT 3 MEAN KNOWN X X X VALUE DIFF.1 DIFF.2 OIFF.3 Ni-63 (121
12)E 00 15.99 01 -24.J0 Internal spike for NI-83 in water was analyzed according to specific client protocol. Sample activity was c1 0 limes the MOO and the result met the client's QC criteria of +/-60%.
ALL RESULTS PASSED QA PERFORMANCE CRITERIA EXCEPT THOSE NOTED WITH AN ASTERISK
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Pu-238 RESULT BIAS 1I (n i I IIII I I I I I I I I-80 z 60 0 40 z _ - - Upper Control Limit (+20.0%) y 20 0 0 w - OW 0 0 LL I-I
-20 --- olontrd DRnh (C-2D.dX)- -- - - - - -- - -
LL C-) -40 \-0 -60 *ERA
*PC --80. A NIST Y ANALYTIC:
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
-leo *1 I I I I I I S DOE 14il FEB AR APR AY I N OC SP CTJ I OEC MH FEBMAP AI MY AI 11 P G%P OCT 110 ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Pu-239 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I so z 60 0 40 z Control Limit (+20.OX) 20 -Upper 0 0 LL -20 - - - - - Lower Zotrd OmR1n200) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - m\1\ LL
-40 n -60
ERA
*PC -80 A NIST V ANALYTIC I I -100 I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
DOE A FEBMARA I Y 111 11 NJ SF S O II E Ai FEB MM AM MY 11 11 & Ot E ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Pu-241 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 z 60 0 40 z 20 -ppo t (20.0%)- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I 0 s 04 0 0 6 a .0 0 S 11 __ - _- _Imft I2D-
-20 - -_- - -_- - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - --
L-U-) -40
-60 *Pc -80 A NST v LYTO -100 I I I I I I I I1 I I I- L -I I I We A FB AR N MO IN JI ME SEP OT SI MO A EB MA M VAY AM IL G SR CT W [
ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Ra-228 BY GAMMA RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 z 60 0I 40 z 20 - Upper Crontro Limit (+15.0%) 0 p 1;1
-20 _ Lrowr Contro Limit (- e6.OX) -40 o -60 *PO NST -80 A v ANALYTICI I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I -gm -100 IA FaB M a wMAI t AL S" C 1 EI a I JAVl FA 0 MAY DI1 al a SE OC a tEC ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Sr-89 (COMBINED WITH Sr-90) RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I - - 80 z 60 0 40 z ... _ . r Contrd LkimJ L26.&O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V 20 07 a
-20 !1I. - - ourto 6~~~ ?intr UC-~
(23.dX) F-) OX1
-40 -60 -_*ER5A *po -80 -_ A NIST V ANALYTIC' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I I -100 I I I .WI-Ah ; W U AM MAYJU A U SEP OIT NOVR A FEB W 0 VAY A Jt KP J OCT C ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Sr-90 (COMBINED WITH Sr-89) RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 1 z 60 0 40 7 T- _ _ _ Uo q Qtr_ Lijn K §XV - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 20 IT, . 0 0 _. cr ll..
-20k - - - - - - L-oviefantoid Dri~il r2B5x)- - - - - - - - - - -- - -
w) LL
-40 -601 *PC -80 k A NST T ANALYTIC' -100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I xr FEB FD W AM MAYM A A S T ? E A FE M* AP MAY It A SP OC 0 [C ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Sr-90 RESULT BIAS 100 I lI I I 1 11 I1 1 ii 1 i 1 il- 1 1 g 80 60 z 0 40 z 20 Upper Corntrol Limri (+15.0X) 0 0 m 9* Ll U-
-20 LoeLCnr LmiC-1.OX }0 U-HU 0- -40 o0 -60 -i
ERA OPn
-80 -_ A NIST VA ANALYTC' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -100 _ sr u DOE JI FEB1R AM WAYANIIL ML OCI Ml MC A41 FEB MARAM WY I A SU MIt 1H ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
YR BATCH 26 QC CROSS CHECK ANALYSIS SHEET SAMPLE TYPE: WATER ISSUANCE DATEs 05/24/2005 REF. DATEt 03/29/2005 LAS SAMPLE NO: 99202 ANAL DATE: 04/20/2005 UNITS: pCi/L NUCLIDE RLSULT 1 RESULT 2 RESULT 3 HEAN KNN X VAYWE DIFF.1 DIFF.2 DIFF.3 Sr-90 4426 t 33)1-01 36.30! 00 17.40 Internal spike for Sr-9O Inwater was analyzed according to specific client protocol. Sample activity was <10 times the MDC and the result met the client's QC criteria of f25%. The result was within 2 sigma of the known value. ALL RESULTS PASSED GA PERFORMANCE CRITERIA EXCEPT THOSE NOTED WITH AN ASTERISK
YR BATCH 26 QC CROSS CHECK ANALYSIS SHEET SAMPLE TYPE: WATER ISSUANCE DATEs 05/24/2005 REF. DATE: 03/15/2005 LAS SAMPLE NO: 899207 ANAL DATE: 04/20/2005 UNITS: pCi/L NUCLIDE RESULT 1 RESULT 2 RESULT 3 MEAN KNOWN X X X VALUE DIFF.1 DIFF.2 DIFF.3 5r-90 ( 486 a 30)E-O1 39.90E 00 21.80 Internal spike for Sr-90 in water was analyzed according to specific client protocol. Sample activity was <10 times the MDC and the result met the client's QC criteria of *25%. ALL RESULTS PASSED OA PERFORMANCE CRITERIA EXCEPT THOSE NOTED WITH AN ASTERISK
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Tc-99 RESULT BIAS 100 80 z 60 4Q 0 z 20 0 0
-20 LL -40 -60 -80 -100 X FE LOAAM WY A a MC W 1 KW E A FM e 0 WAYa a a ' EOC ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP U-234 RESULT BIAS 100 I I i I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 8C z 60 1 0 40 k z 2 0 20K _ _ -_- _ _ _ LUnit_ (+200%) er_ Control _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 Ir
-20 - - - - -Lor-Oo -l - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
LL U-) U-60 *ERA
*PC -80 A NIST V ANALYTIGI
_I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I
-100 *UIJLk&
JA FEB PA W IY A It i BP OCT A FE M A wy W A ti F OC61 tC M ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP U-238 RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 z 0 40 z 20 0 0 M LL
-20 U
,a--
-40 -60 -80 100 M fyM P MAYa a a M V v E m FEB UeW AP ii A AM SP OC HE ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Zn-65 RESULT BIAS 100 i I I I I I I IIII I I I I I I I I I 80 60 z 0 40 z 20 - Upper Contrd Limit (+16.0X) 4ah 0 0: F F.
-_ ;_ 4 -20 - - Low- Contro Limit (-15.0X)
LL I-L
-40 -60 -_ EIRA *PC 80 A NST V ANALYTIC 1 J_ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -100 I I I *DOE A'I FE I/A N MAYDUI l 1 SE; WI 0 DEC AI FEB YiM R W a A k al SEPO01 N Mc ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
APPENDIX B EFFLUENT MONITORING AND WASTE CHARACTERIZATION QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS (IOCFR PART 50161) FAADMN\CORESXEL 097-05
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALvSIS PART 50/61 GROSS ALPHA RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 z 0 40 z 20 0 0 T- -20 LL
-40 -60 -80 -100 A FEBW AM J)N IL kG SP OCT tEC
[EC 8 WFEBM AY LN )I SA S OCI M TI ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Am-241 RESULT BIAS 1 0 0I II I I I I , I I I I I I I 80 60 z 3: 0 40 20 Upper Control Limlt (+20.0O_ V 20 O0 t 2 0_.. -- --- LL Lowe Control Limit (-20.0X) L -40 60 A NIT V ANALYTOS
-80 *PC 4 OTHER - 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I A Fm WA NR VAY JU JJ A[G S)P CC] [MC A FEBWI AYWV A J A UE s 1 0 MC ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Beta RESULT BIAS 100 1 i- I I I I I I I I I1 I I-- III I I I I I I 80 z 60 7 0 40 Upper Cointrol Llmit (+25.0%) z: 20 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 2 0 L Uy-
-20 L- o-ntrio EKiiC25 Ot)
LL LL
-40 0N) -60 *PC -80 A NIST V ANALYTICS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -100 AA FPE AM SEP Xl EC OA FEI2UW0R04APR -20 A0 5AY J1 A SP X 10 M ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 C-14 RESULT BIAS 100 --- i I- I I I I I I I I I I I I I i I - I-1 80 60 z 0 40 z 20 Upo Control Limit (+20.0X) 2. _1_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 0
-20 Lower Co~nirl (-200X) : - - -- - - - - - - -
LL L-LL
-40 -60 A NIST V ANALYTICS -80 *PC A OTHMR I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -100 1AN FE A PR MAYA I JUL AM P 0CT NO [V C )1 FEBMARPfB MAY IJ lt U [I IP NJ IC ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
PART 50/61 CROSS CHECK ANALYSIS SHEET SAMPLE TYPE: LIQUID ISSUANCE DATE: 02/15/2005 REF. DATE: 11/01/2004 LAB SAMPLE NOt Z22528 ANAL DATE: 01/ZO/2005 LAB SAMPLE NO: Z229 ANAL DATE: 01/20/2005 LAB SAMPLE NO: 222530 ANAL DATE: 01/20/2005 UNITS: uCi/a NUCLIDE RESULT 1 RESUT 2 RESULT 3 MEAN KNOWN X X X VALUE DIFF.1 DIFF.2 DIFF.3 H( t ff4 224)E-05 ( 97' a 25)-05 C 955
24)1-05 99.40CE04 -4.00 0.30 -3.90 X DIFF FROM MEAN: 96.57E-04 -1.50 2.90 -1.40 C 14 C 323

24)t-04 t 292

21)E-04 C 214

16)E-04 29.99E-03 7.70 -2.60 -28.60*
X DIF PFROM MANs 27.631-03 16.90 5.70 -22.60' Tc-"9 t 266 s 18)E-06 C 269 2 19)E-06 C 297
2O)E-D6 29.32E-05 -9.30 -8.30 1.30 X DIFF FROM MEAN: 27.73E-05 -4.10 -3.00 7.10 1-129 ( 240 t 14)E-06 ( 266

16)E-06 C 248

15)1-06 21. 13E-05 13.60 25.90* 17.0*
X DIFF FROM M4EAN: 25.13E-05 -4.50 5.80 *1.30 One analysis of Internal Pt for C-14 In liquid had a bias that exceeded the *20% Internal acceptance limit. No CR was generated as the mean of three analyses was -7.9%, well within the acceptaoce limit. ALL RESULTS PASSED QA PERF0ONANCE CRITERIA EXCEPT THOSE NOTED UITH AN ASTERISK
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Cd-109 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I 80 _ 60 _ z 0 40 _ z 20 _ UppeuConlro LUmil (+1605) 0 AA. [-
-20 F--- L-owrControd ULIt-t (-15.-X)
LL 11'I -40 _
-60 _ A NST V ANALYTICS -80 r *oPC 4 OTHER I - I I I I! -100 I I I I - I I I I L - 1 I I I - I I W FB W M AM WY A1 LI k SE' Cr M M P OCT EC IO FEB AM MAY IL G SU OCT101 [C ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANAI YSIS PART 50/61 Cm-243/244 RESULT BIAS 100 I 1 - -T I I I I I I I 11 I I I I .1 I r- I I I I 80 60 z 40 0 Upper Control Urri (+20.0%) z 20 a a \11 0 45 a: w
u- -20 Lower CIntrIIrni t-200X) 11 lL
-40 n
NO\
-60 A NIST V ANALYTICS -80 *PC 4 OTHER I I IIII I I I I I ! -100 I I I I I I __ _ _ _ _ _ _ I__ I__
A FB FM I AY JUI 1L I4 S EPT tl 1MOFEBWi M01 . eMV AU5 1 9P C) *1 OEC ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANA. YS!S PART 50/61 Co-57 RESULT BIAS 100 IIIIIIIIIII I I I II 80 60 z 0 40 Uoper Control Limit (41 5.0X) z 20 0 0 _A._______________
.A,& W-V, e LL -20 Lowe Control Lirit (- 15.OX) -1 -40 _ -60 A NIST Y ANALYTICS -80 *PC 4 CTHER I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -100 I I I A AJ ~i V1 HC N FAi WU A' MAYA .1 U AL S:P 3JI IEC ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004 -2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Co-60 RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 z 0 40 z 20 Upper Conrol Limit (+15.0X) A11 9 0 0 . LL
-20 Lower Contro Limit (-150%)
LL w' -40
-60 A NST V ANALYTfCS -80 *PC 4 OTHER I I I I I I I I -100 A PB WR f MAYAI AW VP OT 0 DC $11 FMBW AM. WY AH AL M P 001 [IC ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Cs-134 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 60 z 0 40 Upper Conlrol LlmIt (+15.0X) zy 20 -_ -_ - _ -_ - _ -, _ _ _ _ _ l _- - - _ _ _ 0 0 LL -20 Lower Control Limit (-16.0X) u-LL LL11
-40 -60 *PC -80 A NEST V ANAI YTIGS I I I I I I I -100 _ ,
1NW M W SEP U V BE A E W A MY J1 AM SP OCT'M E ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Cs-137 RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 z 0 40 z 20 0 0 cc
-20 LL 11 -40 8NO -60 A NST v ANALYTSS -80 *PC 4 OTHER -100 AA YSSP I eI 2 004 2I00 a ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALvSIS PART 50/61 Fe-55 RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 z 0 40 z 20 0 0
-20 LL U-aU- -40 -60 -80 -100 AN Y IS PR E[ 2004N 2005 J a . f 2 O Lv ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANA YSiS PART 50/61 Fe-59 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I i I I I I I 80 60 z 0 40 z Upper Control Umit (+I15.0x) Y 20 0 0 L.L -20 Lower Control Limit (- 15.0X) U-
-40 XK 0 -60 -80 I - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -l00 I I I I FEBWIAR I YAN U. AWM ST OCTtO TECA FIB WI APRMAYA J MC 8?
U OCI 'pi DE' ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-200'5
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 H-3 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 60 z 0 40 z 20 Uppo Control Limit (+15.0) 0i9 0 0 4 0 0 LL -20 Lowr Control Lirrlt (-1 5.0XI LL
-40 0-0 r -60 A NiST ' ANALYTICS -80 K *PC 4 OTHER I I I I I I I I I I -100 II I I I I I I I I I I I A^NF WA E APR I MY A W PE1RI O A DCE20 0 4 - 2 0A 5 COT ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 1-129 RESULT BIAS 100 I I 1 I_ I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 60 _ z 40 0 z Upper Control Limit +185.0) I 20 II- - - - - - - - - 0 CE 0 LL -20 Lower Control Lirygt (-6.0X) LL -40 No oXo
-60 A NIST V ANALYTICS -80 *PC 4 O-HER I I I I I -100 I I I I I II I II I I 1I I I JAN fEB WR Ml lAY IN J AUCSEPOCT DEC RA FEB MIN APRUAY aI J.1 U SP'I X1 tV IFC ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
PART 50/61 CROSS CHECK ANALYSIS SHEET SAMPLE TYPE: LIQUID ISSUANCE DATE. 02/15/2005 REF. DATEt 11/01/2004 LAB SAMPLE NO: Z22528 ANAL DATEs 01/2012005 LAB SAMPLE NO: Z22529 ANAL DATE: 01/20/2005 LAB SAMPLE NO: ZZ2530 ANAL DATSt 01/20/2005 UNITSt uClI/ NUCLIDE RESULT 1 RESULT 2 RESULT 3 MEAN KNOWN VALUE DIFF.1 DIFF.2 DIFF.3 H-3 C "54 t 204)-05 C V97t 23)1-05 C 955
24)t-05 99.40E-04 -4.00 0.30 -3.90 X PlFF FROM MEANt 96.87E-04 1.50 2.90 -1.40 C. 14 C 323

24)E-04 ( 292 2 21)f-04 C 214

16)1-04 29.99E-03 7.70 -2.60 -28.60*
X D1FF FROM MEAN: 27.63E-03 16.90 5.70 -22.60' Tc-99 C 266 t 18)E-06 C 269 a 19)E-06 C 297 t 20)E-06 29.32E-05 -9.30 -8.30 1.30 X 01FF FROM MEAN: 27.731-05 -4.10 -3.00 7.10 1-129 ( 240 i 14)E-06 C 266 t 16)E-06 C 248 2 15)E-06 21.131-05 13.60 25.90* 17.40* X DIFF FROM M!AN: 25.13E-05 -4.50 5.80 -1.30 Two analyses of internal PC for 1-129 in liquid had biases that exceeded the '15% Internal acceptance limit. CR 04-18, generated In 2004, Is tracking corrective actions for the 1-129 failure. ALL RESULTS PASSED QA PERFORMANCE CRITERIA EXCEPT THOSE NOTED WITH AN ASTERISK
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALVSIS PART 50/61 1-131 (Gamma) RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I i I I I I I I I I I I -1 1 1 80 60 z 0 40 Upper Control Lirnit (e15.0) z 20 --__ _ _ _ - - _ - - _ - - _ - _ _ _ -_ - -_ - -_ - -_ - _ _ _ _- - _- - _- - _- _ _ _ _ _ 0 0 s
LL
-20 Lower Contro Lirnit (-1502)
LL U- -40
-60 A NIST V ANALYTICS -80 *PC 4 OTHER I I I I I I I I I I I I -100 A FE B NA AY UM 11 M1 OCT 1 DEC Jl FEB MA UR IMY IN :M E P (Cl O[S N
ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Mn-54 RESULT BIAS 100 i I I I Ii I IrI I I I 1 80 60 z 3: 40 0 20 Upper Contro( Lirit. (+15.0%) o 20
-20 Lower Contrd Limt (-15.0%)
L- -60 _ A NIST Y ANALVTICS
-80 _ pc A OTHER -10 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Il l l t A MIR AJPRAY JIt JlL ICI S NW 1 JMO W fEB B V AIR t J1 Jl
tiX [E ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Ni-63 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I Ii I II II I I I I 80 60 z 0 40 z Uper Controd LUnit (+16.0X) y- 20 -_ - _ _ _ _ _- _ _- _ _- _ _- _ _- _ _- _ _- _ _- _ _- _ _- _ _- _ _- _ _- _ _- _ _- _ _- _ _- _ _- _ _- _ _- _ _- 0 C 5 0Lm fIL
-20 Lower Control Lknft (-150%)
LL lL) -40 C]O"
-60 A 1IST V ANALVT8S -80 *PC AOTHER I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ..I I I I -100 AN FEBWRC R U Jll J1 i SP OCTNMA U Fi WR RA: l.SM A0 JU. Al SfP ^ M0 OEC ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Np-237 RESULT BIAS 10 0 I ,I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II 80 _ 60 - z 0 40 z -) ) L - --- Upper Contd'l Limit (+200 ) V I0 0 0 0 0 a: Uy-
-20 Lower Control Umit (-200%)
LL 1-
-40 0N1 -60 A NIST T ANALYTICS -80 *PC A OTHER -100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I JW FEB MAt ARP Y J ? [C 11L US SIP OCT MY A F FAM R MY 2` A M1 k CI OCT tC ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Pu-238 RESULT BIAS 100 I I 1- I - 1I I I I I I II I 1 1' I I I I I I 80 60 z 40 0 z 20 Upper Control UrNt (+200X) 0 a a A a 0 I If L- -20 Low-or Control Limit (-200X) LL
-40 -60 A NOST T ANALYTICS -80 OPC 4 OTHER I I I I I I I 1I I I I I I I I I -100 A FM W AIR 11AY& L MJ1SMP01 NJY (EC A1 FEBMAR A WY IN It AiY SIP OCT T RC ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Pu-239 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I 80 60 z 40 0 z Uppw Cointral UrN~t(+20.0%) 20-- o 0 I1 -20 Lower C-nrd- L- (-200X) - - - LL -40
-60 _ A ANrT T ANALYTIS -80 _ *PC 4 OTHER 0 0I I I I I I I I I I I A FEBW APRMY M 1L ALESP 1 J1 H A A My A AU SEPOCT ' CEO ANALYSIS PERIOD 200t-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Pu-241 RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 z 40 0 z 20 ry-0 0
-20 lL LL U- -40 -60 NST ANALYTICS -80 IPC OTHER -100 NA SEP BMMu MYEH MA D FB2 0 M 20 1N RIOar 2 A 5ATs Ee ccl E a AG ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Sr-89 RESULT BIAS 100 I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -I I I I 80 60 z 40 0 z Uppe Conitrol Limit (#15O%) V 20
-e . - .1, --
0 0
Low-- - - T m - qif 4-r I LL -20 Lower Cont!i Lirnil (-16.0X)
Ll- -40 11) CX
-60 A NIST T ANALYTCS -80 *PC - OTHER I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -100 A FEB 1 AM MAY JI k1 S XOT [ A FXM A WV lJ t1 A SP' OCTt C ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2C05
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Sr-90 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I . I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. .I .I .I .I . .I . I I I I I 80 z 60 0 40 z 20 -- - - Upper CorIral UrNit (+15.0%) I 0 0 8 41
-W Ir VIe -20 Lower Cont m (-150%)
LL FL -40 0 N
-1 A NIT -60 V ANALYTICS -80 *PC 4 O'HER I I I I I I. 1 -100 I I I I I I I I I B M AIPRMAY FEB 1 SRPOC I IDC AN FEBMA AN VAY MJ I X SP OCC' ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2C05
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Tc-99 RESULT BIAS 100 I IIIIII I I I III T I I I 1 80 60 z 0 40 z 20 LUper Control Limit (+150X) 0 0 ffi L 41,( LL -20 Lower Control Limil C-iSOX0) LL LL
-40 -60 A NIST Y ANALYTICS -80 *PC -4 OT-ER -100 I - II I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I A Ff MMRANl WP IN I1 U SEPOC1 1N MC A FEB WARWR WV lW i .UA At P O ND CEC ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
APPENDIX C BIOASSAY QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM RESULTS F:MADMINMCORES\EL 097-05
There are no charts for the bioassay quality control program for this semi-annual report period. F:\ADMIN\CORES\EL 097-05
ATTACHMENT I RESULTS OF THE LABORATORY BLIND DUPLICATE PROGRAM F:AADMIN\CORESMEL 097-05 ATTACHMENT 1
AP AtR E=VA August 3, 2005 EL 096/05 Distribution
Subject:
First Half of 2005, Blind Duplicate Program Results The Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory (E-LAB) participates in a Blind Duplicate Program administered by the participating utility companies. For the first half of calendar year 2005, 99.5% of the paired sample measurement results were within the program's criteria for acceptance. The Blind Duplicate Program began in 1979 as a cooperative effort among the participating companies. Samples are collected and split inthe field and submitted to the E-LAB for analysis. The E-LAB Quality Assurance Officer verifies and reports the program results to the participants. The results are evaluated against the E-LAB acceptance criterion established in Reference 1,which states that a paired measurement is in agreement if the individual values are within tI5%of the mean value. If this condition is not met, atwo-sigma range is established for each of the results, which are in agreement if the two ranges oveilap. Table I summarized the types of media submitted as part of the Blind Duplicate Program by each participant for a total of I11 paired samples. Table 2 presents the results of the Blind Duplicate Program by analysis type for each participating company. For the first half of 2005 program, 99.5% of the paired measurements met the acceptance criteria as specified in Reference 1. The number of paired measurements falling outside the acceptance criteria is listed before the dash (jJ)in each company column. For example, the number 1/2 should be interpreted as I paired measurements out of 2 falling outside the acceptance criteria. Totals are presented for each participating company as well as for the entire program. REFERENCES
1. Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Manua I oaoyQaiyAssurance Plan,' Revision 8, September 10, 2004.
Christopher Slf(elton Quality Assurance Officer Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory CAS/cas Attachment Distribution: J. Raimondri J. Pelczar N. Panzarino E. Mercer (MY) D.Perkins (SB 02-12) M. Strum D. Montt (YR) E. Moreno FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY: 29 Research Drive. Westborough, MA 01 581 -3913 Phone: 508 898-9970 Fax: 508 838-9815 www.us~frarmatorne-anp.corn
EL 096/05 August 3, 2005 Table 1 Summary of Paired Samples Submitted January through June 2005 Sample Yankee Maine Seabrook Total Media Atomic Yankee Station Water 2 3 4 9 Algae 0 0 1 1 Mussel 0 0 1 1 Total 2 3 6 11 Table 2 Summary of Paired Measurements Analyzed January through June 2005(1) Analysis Yankee Maine Seabrook Total Type Atomic Yankee Station Gamma__ __ 0/52 0/52 0/104 0/208 Gross Beta 1/2 0/0 0/0 1/2 Tritium 0/2 0/1 0/2 0/5 Total 1/56 0153 0/106 1/215 (1)The number of measurements that fail to meet the acceptance criteria is shown before the slash. (2)The gamma numbers represent the total radionuclide measurements in a gamma isotopic analysis.
A AREVA February 10, 2006 EL 027/06 TO: Distribution FROM: J. M. Raimondi
SUBJECT:
Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Analytical Service Semi-Annual Quality Assurance Status Report (July - December 2005) Attached is the SemiAnnual Status Report covering the Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory's (E-LAB) Quality Assurance Programs comprising radiological environmental, Part 50/61, and bioassay analytical services for the second half of 2005. For the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP):
100% of 520 individual QC analyses evaluated during this semi-annual period met E-LAB acceptance criteria for bias, while

100% of 530 QC analyses met the Laboratory QC acceptance criteria for precision.
To provide a perspective of the overall environmental quality program since its inception in 1977:
96.8% of the 18,943 environmental QC analyses processed in the past 29 years met acceptance criteria for bias, whereas,

99.5% of 16,549 QC samples evaluated for precision met Laboratory criteria for this performance category.
DOE program participation (MAPEP) resulted in 35 of 35 mean results evaluated as in OAgreement" with the acceptance cnteria. DOE data is not included in the above values. The Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory (ID# 11823) maintained accreditation for six radiological analytes in the Potable water and Non-Potable water categories from the State of New York Department of Health under the National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP). A total of 9 Proficiency Test results were all rated "Acceptable," this period. For Part 50/Part 61 processing during the second half of 2005:
100% of the 149 Part 50/61 individual analyses evaluated for bias, and

100% of the 144 analyses evaluated for precision met E-LAB acceptance criteria.
To provide a perspective of the overall Part 50/61 sample quality program since 1988:
94.4% of the 4483 Part 50/61 QC analyses met the acceptance criteria for bias and 99.3% of the 4287 Part 50/61 QC samples met the Laboiatory criteria for precision.
kL-- M. Raimondi Manager, Environmental Laboratory CAS/cas ATTACHMENTS
Distribution Page 2 EL 027/06 February 10, 2006 Distribution R. Tolbert - Entergy/Grand Gulf T. Vandermay - Detroit Edison/Fermi II R. Abrams - FP & L B. Vaughn - Texas Utilities/Comanche Peak M. Alphonso - FENOC/Perry V. Withee - MY Document Control J. Amato - Entergy/Waterford C. Wohlgamuth - Indiana Michigan/D. C. Cook G. Babineau - Rowe V. Ballestrini - Dominion/Millstone J. Barnette - Texas Utilities/Comanche Peak P. Blount - Dominion/Surry J. Breeden - Dominion/North Anna S. Bromstrup - FP&USt. Lucie J. Bundick - Indiana Michigan/D. C. Cook D. Burnett - Entergy/River Bend A. Castagnacci - FENOC/Beaver Valley K. Comisky - CY J. Cruickshank - Ameren UE/ Callaway J. Doroski - Dominion/Millstone J. D'Souza - PSEG B. Eakin - Dominion/Millstone R. Edwards - FENOC/Davis-Besse B. Gorman - Entergy/Fitzpatrick W. Hamblin - Entergy/Fitzpatrick N. Hansen - Southern California Edison G. Harper- Framatome ANP P. Harris - Dominion/Surry F. Hickey - PPL Susquehanna A. Hoomick, Jr. - PSEG/Hope Creek G. Jones -Constellation/Ginna P. Lashley - FENOC/Perry T. Lashley - Detroit Edison/Fermi II T. Lonnett - FENOC/Beaver Valley C. Medenciy - Wolf Creek G. Mendoza - FP&L/Turkey Point E. Mercer - MY J. Pennington - Entergy Operations, Inc. D. Perkins - FP&USeabrook J. Ratchen - FENOC/Davis-Besse H. Riley - PPL Susquehanna D. Robinson - FP&USeabrook F. Sabadini - Framatome ANP M. Sanger - Framatome ANP K. Sejkora - Entergy/Pilgrim S. Skibniowski - Entergy/ Vermont Yankee P. Sobottke - Indiana Michigan/D. C. Cook G. Stephenson - Entergy/ANO P. Stokes - Entergy/Grand Gulf M. Strum - Framatome ANP M. Thomhill - Constellation/Nine Mile Point S. Tipsword - Dominion/North Anna
A AR EVA ANALYTICAL SERVICES SEMIANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE STATUS REPORT July - December 2005 QUALITYASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS
. .r--' - -
1004 i . . . a . . . a I

i I I I I J i 1016101 1 E 01 i 1 1 10 tJ {; 10 [ I i 80 60 t000 ii;' ; 0'f t;;: 4 i ' 0 : ti tX D t0'400 ';titu:fE,;y't i'Lt f7000 fLS' : i10 Ct_
E f: E i: i y d . > 0 d 20 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ T _ _ _ , ..... ! _ _ v _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
'0 ; 0; , . . £ -20:7 L : y l 0 't: f ' 000 D 4 0 i] '
:?:2: . ii ' '
-40 i , ::: E
S

:
f ; :, ' fi; t ': 'S < , ,:
:.t: l'; : ']
--60 i: i'0 ' S0S0 :E 1 C;iV;'S tt E'00 -80
AN FIB AMAA IYJUtL AUGSEP OCTNOVEC JO FEBWUJAPf Y AM ALAUG SEPOCTo I FRAMATOME ANP, INC.
ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY 29 Research Drive Westborough, MA 01581-3913 Telephone: (508) 898-9970 Fax: (508) 836-9815
At AR EVA FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ANALYTICAL SERVICES SEMI-ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE STATUS REPORT JULY-DECEMBER 2005 EL 027/06 Prepared By: Date: _ _5 / _ _,a 6 Approved By: Date: i4 i4° Nl-.) Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory 29 Research Drive Westborough, MA 01581-3913
TABLE OF CONTENTS Paae
. INTRODUCTION ................................................... 1 A. Quality Control Program Scope .................................................. 1
1. Inter-laboratory and Third Party .................................................. 1

2. Intra-laboratory ..................................................2 B. Quality Assurance Program (Internal and External Audits) ................................ 2 II. Performance Evaluation Criteria ..................................................3 A. Acceptance Criteria ........ 3.................................

1. Internal Process Control Samples ........................ 3

2. Backgrounds...........................................................................................5

3. Blanks.....................................................................................................5

4. NRC Resolution Criteria ........................ 5

5. DOE Evaluation Criteria ......................... 5 B. QC Investigation Criteria and Result Reporting ................................................. 6

1. QC Investigation Criteria ................................................. 6

2. Reporting of Analytical Results to Laboratory Customers ............ .......... 6

3. Self-Assessment Program ................................................. 6 Ill. ANALYTICAL SERVICES QUALITY CONTROL SYNOPSIS ........................................ 7 A. Result Summary ............................................. 7

1. Radiological Environmental Services Quality Control ............................. 7

2. Part 50/61 Quality Control ............................................ 10

3. Bioassay Quality Control ............................................ 11 B. Status of Condition Reports (CR) ............................................ 11 C. Status of Audits/Assessments ............................................ 12

1. Internal.................................................................................................. 12

2. External................................................................................................. 12 IV. UPDATED PROCEDURES ISSUED DURING JULY-DECEMBER 2005 .................... 12 V. REFERENCES ..................................................... 12 F:AADMINUCORRES\EL 027-06 -ii-
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) APPENDIX A INTER/INTRA-LABORATORY, ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING: ANALYTICS, DOE, ERA AND NIST QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM RESULTS APPENDIX B EFFLUENT MONITORING AND WASTE CHARACTERIZATION QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS (10CFR PART 50/61) APPENDIX C BIOASSAY QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM RESULTS ATTACHMENT 1 RESULTS OF THE BLIND DUPLICATE PROGRAM F:UADMIN\CORRES\EL 027-06 _jjj_
LIST OF TABLES
1. Analytics Environmental Crosscheck Program Results by Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Acceptance Criteria, Media and Measurement Categories, July-December 2005

2. Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Analytics Environmental Cross-Check Program Performance Evaluation

3. NIST Environmental Analysis Results by Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Acceptance Criteria, Media and Measurement Categories, July-December 2005

4. Summary of Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Traceability Results, July-December 2005

5. Environmental Measurements Laboratory Quality Assessment Program

6. Department of Energy Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP-05-14)

7. Environmental Resource Associates Proficiency Test Results Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory

8. Intra-laboratory Environmental Process Control Results by Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Acceptance Criteria, Media and Measurement Categories, July-December 2005

9. QC Charcoal Activity Screening Results

10. Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory, Environmental Intra-Laboratory and Inter-Laboratory Data Summary, Bias and Precision by Media, July-December 2005

11. Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory, Environmental Intra-Laboratory and Inter-Laboratory Data Summary, Bias and Precision by Analysis Type, July-December 2005

12. Environmental Bias and Precision by Year

13. Analytics Radiochemistry Crosscheck Results by Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Acceptance Criteria, Media and Measurement Categories, July-December 2005

14. Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Analytics Radiochemistry Cross-Check Performance Evaluation

15. NIST Part 50/61 Analysis Results Breakdown by Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory, Acceptance Criteria, Media and Measurement Categories, July-December 2005

16. Summary of Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory, National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), Part 50/61 Traceability Results, July-December 2005

17. Intra-laboratory Part 50/61 Process Control Results Breakdown by Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory, Acceptance Criteria, Media and Measurement Categories, July-December 2005 F:AADMINMCORRESEL 027-06 -iv-
LIST OF TABLES
18. Part 50/61 Analysis Results Breakdown by Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory, Acceptance Criteria, Media and Measurement Categories, July-December 2005

19. Part 50/61 Bias and Precision by Year

20. Bioassay Analysis Results Breakdown By Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Acceptance Criteria, Media, and Measurement Categories, July-December 2005

21. Condition Report (CR) Status, July-December 2005

22. Updated Instrumentation/Analytical Procedures Issued During July-December 2005 F:AADMIN\CORRES\EL 027-06
I. INTRODUCTION This report covers the Quality Assurance (QA) Program for the Analytical Services function of the Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory (E-LAB) for the second half (July-December) of 2005. Due to the broad scope of QC inter-comparison programs in which the E-LAB participates, the report consolidates wherever possible, text and results into three service categories: Radiological Environmental Monitoring, Part 50/61, and Bioassay. This report includes:
intralaboratory QC results analyzed during the reporting period,

interlaboratory QC results, analyzed prior to the reporting period, for which
'known values" were not previously available, and
interlaboratory QC results, analyzed during the reporting period, for which "known values" were available.
Any other inter-laboratory QC results will be included in the next semi-annual report. Manual 100, Revision 9 (Reference 1) became effective on November 16, 2005. The text of this report reflects the latest revision of this manual, as do the trending graphs and any data evaluations performed after the effective date. Any data evaluations performed prior, however, were conducted in accordance with Manual 100, Revision 8. A. Quality Control Program Scope
1. Inter-laboratory and Third Party The Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory QC Program is designed to monitor the quality of analytical processing associated with environmental, bioassay, effluent (10CFR Part 50), and waste (10CFR Part 61) sample analysis.
Inter-laboratory and third party quality control programs for environmental radioanalyses include: the Environmental Crosscheck Program, administered by Analytics, Inc., the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Measurement Assurance Program (MAP), the Environmental Resource Associates (ERA) Proficiency Test (PT) Program, the Department of Energy (DOE) Mixed Analyte performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP). The QAP program administered by the (DOE) Environmental Measurements Laboratory (EML) was suspended by the Department of Homeland Security following the results of QAP 60 (contained in the first half 2004 report). The MAPEP program is administered by the Radiological and Environmental Sciences Laboratory (RESL) and consists of four media (water, soil, vegetation, and air filter) submitted twice each year. The MAPEP samples are designed to evaluate the ability and quality of analytical facilities performing sample measurements that contain hazardous and radioactive (mixed) analytes. The ERA PT F:AADMIN\CORRES\EL 027-06 program consists of radionuclides in water submitted twice per year. This program is used to maintain certification with the National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP). The certification is necessary to perform analysis for projects that must meet EPA regulations for the Clean Water Act (CWA), Resource Conservation & Recovery Act (RCRA), or the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA). Inter-laboratory and third party quality control for Part 50/61 radioanalyses, is provided by the Radiochemistry Crosscheck Program, administered by Analytics, Inc. and the NIST MAP.
2. Intra-laboratory The internal Quality Control program is designed to include QC functions such as instrumentation checks (to insure proper instrument response),
blank samples (to which no analyte radioactivity has been added), instrumentation backgrounds, duplicates, as well as overall staff qualification analyses and process controls. Both process control and qualification analyses samples seek to mimic the media type of those samples submitted for analysis by the various laboratory clients. These process controls (or process checks) are either actual samples submitted in duplicate in order to evaluate the precision of laboratory measurements, or blank samples which have been "spiked' with a known quantity of a radioisotope that is of interest to Laboratory clients. These QC samples, which represent either "single" or "double blind' unknowns, are intended to evaluate the entire radiochemical and radiometric process. To provide a sense of direction and consistency in administering the quality control program, E-LAB has developed and follows an annual quality control and audit assessment schedule (Reference 2). The plan, which is approved on or before January 15th of each year and reviewed for adequacy at monthly LQARC meetings, describes the scheduled frequency and scope of Quality Assurance and Control actions considered necessary for an adequate program. The magnitude of the process control program combines both internal and external sources targeted at 5% of the routine sample analysis load. B. Quality Assurance Program (Internal and External Audits) During each semi-annual reporting period at least one internal assessment is conducted in accordance with the pre-established E-LAB Quality Control and Audit Assessment Schedule. In addition, the Laboratory may be audited by prospective customers during a pre-contract audit, and/or by existing clients who wish to conduct periodic audits in accordance with their contractual arrangements. A National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program (NELAP) audit is performed every two years as part of maintaining certification to perform EPA-related analyses. F:AADMIN\CORRES\EL 027-06 II. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA A. Acceptance Criteria The E-LAB has adopted a QC acceptance protocol based upon two performance models:
For those inter-laboratory programs that already have established performance criteria (i.e., MAPEP and ERA), the Laboratory will utilize the criteria for the specific program.

For inter-laboratory or third party QC programs that have no preset acceptance criteria (e.g. the Analytics Crosscheck Programs, NIST MAP),
results will be evaluated in accordance with E-LAB internal acceptance criteria.
1. Internal Process Control Samples Internal Process Control (PC) results are evaluated in accordance with two separate E-LAB acceptance criteria. A full discussion of the analytical services acceptance criteria can be found in Reference 1. The first criterion concerns bias, which is defined as the deviation of any one result from the known value. The second criterion concerns precision, which deals with the ability of the measurement to be faithfully replicated by comparison of an individual result with the mean of all results for a given sample set. Quality control deviations falling outside the Laboratory acceptance criteria are discussed in the appendices.
(a) Bias For each analytical measurement tested, the bias is the percent deviation of the reported result relative to the expected value (value of the spike known by comparison with or derivation from a standard reference material). The percent deviation relative to the known is calculated as follows: (H.- Hi) 100 Hi where: Hi' = the value of the it measurement in a category being tested Hi = the actual quantity in the test sample as defined by the spike The Laboratory internal criterion for bias is that an analysis is considered in agreement if the value is within +/-15% of the known value. If this condition is not met, the two-sigma range about the analyzed value is established. If the known value falls within the specified range, the analysis is considered in agreement. FAADMIN\CORRE5\EL 027-06 Deviations from this general criterion, for specific radionuclides, are given in Tables 1 and 13 and Reference 1. E-LAB acceptance criteria are applied when the sample concentration is 10 or more times the method MDC. Otherwise, the "known value' and associated uncertainty are compared to the measured result and uncertainty using a two-tailed standard statistical test at the 95% confidence level. (b) Precision For a group of test measurements containing a given spiked level, the precision is the percent deviation of individual results relative to the mean reported measurement. At least two values are required for the determination of precision. The percent deviation relative to the mean reported measurement is calculated as follows: (H.' - H 100 FH) where: H.' = the reported measurement for the ith analytical measurement H = the mean analytical measurement
= ZHt(1) n = the number of samples in the test group The Laboratory criterion for precision is that an analysis is considered in agreement if the individual value is within +/-15% of the mean value. If this condition is not met, the two-sigma range about the analyzed value is established. If the mean value falls within the specified range, the analysis is considered in agreement. In the case of duplicate or replicate analyses where there is no "known" value, the two-sigma range is established for each duplicate analysis (three-sigma range for replicates) for each analysis. If the ranges overlap, the analyses are considered in agreement for precision.
Deviations from this general criterion, for specific radionuclides, are given in Tables 1 and 13 and Reference 1. F:1/4ADMIN\CORRE5\EL 027-06 (c) Mean Bias For each group of analytical measurements tested, the mean bias is the percent deviation of the mean reported result relative to the expected value. The mean percent deviation relative to the expected value is calculated as follows: where: H = the mean analytical measurement Hi = the actual quantity in the test sample as defined by the spike
2. Backgrounds As discussed in Reference 1, backgrounds represent the ambient signal response, recorded by measuring instruments, which is independent of radioactivity contributed by the radionuclides being measured in the sample. Backgrounds will not normally contain any three-sigma statistically positive activity of the target parameters. The background signal is subtracted from the sample's signal.

3. Blanks Wherever possible equivalent media for preparing laboratory processing blanks will be used. Synthetic matrices may be used for bioassay if equivalency is proven.

4. NRC Resolution Criteria Some Laboratory clients use the NRC Resolution Criteria to evaluate double blind Part 50 performance. NRC Resolution Criteria are based on an empirical relationship that combines prior experience and the accuracy needs of the program. As "Resolution" increases, the acceptability of one's measurement becomes more selective. Conversely, as "Resolutions decreases, agreement levels are widened to account for the increase in uncertainty.

5. DOE Evaluation Criteria (a) The Environmental Measurements Laboratory (EML) test program (DOEQAP) was cancelled by the Department of Energy in 2004.
A future test program may become available if deemed necessary by the Department of Homeland Security. (b) The Radiological & Environmental Sciences Laboratory (RESL) inter-comparison program, MAPEP, defines three levels of F:UADMINICORRE5\EL 027-06 performance: Acceptable (flag = "A"), Acceptable with Warning (flag = "W"), and Not Acceptable (flag = "N"). Performance is considered acceptable for a mean with a bias <20% of the reference value for the analyte. Performance is acceptable with warning for a mean result bias of >20% but <30% of the reference value. If the bias is greater than 30% the results are deemed not acceptable. B. QC Investigation Criteria and Result Reporting
1. QC Investigation Criteria Summarized below are the investigation criteria applied to QC analyses that failed E-LAB bias criteria. The Condition Report process tracks investigation results.
(c) No investigation is necessary when an individual QC result falls outside the QC performance criteria for bias. (d) Investigations shall be initiated when the mean of a QC process batch or the mean of three consecutive individual QC processes is outside the performance criterion for bias. (e) An investigation shall be initiated when the trending of at least 12 consecutive results for a given process indicates that the mean bias from the known is greater than 60% of the bias performance criterion.
2. Reporting of Analytical Results to Laboratory Customers A similar set of guidelines was developed, applicable to reporting of results. The guidelines are as follows:
If an investigation is required for a process (normally after consecutive QC process check failures), and if the QC results requiring the investigation have a mean bias from the known of greater than +/- (applicable E-LAB bias criterion +5%) for environmental and bioassay processing and +/- (applicable E-LAB bias criterion +10%) for Part 50/61 processing, then the LQARC shall meet to determine the disposition of client results.
3. Self-Assessment Program In accordance with Reference 1, E-LAB has established a Self-Assessment policy where all Laboratory staff members are strongly encouraged to continually evaluate laboratory activities for quality enhancements, cost savings, and time savings.
F:AADMIN\CORRESMEL 027-06 -6o-
Ill. ANALYTICAL SERVICES QUALITY CONTROL SYNOPSIS A. Result Summary Two-year (2004-2005) trending graphs are provided in Appendices A-C of this report to give temporal perspective regarding possible trends or bias. In the event an analysis does not meet E-LAB performance criteria, the individual analysis sheet(s), in addition to a brief explanation, are included to augment the graph. It should be noted that DOE and ERA samples are evaluated against criteria specific to the DOE samples. Therefore, only sample results which fell in the "Warning" or Non-Agreement" categories will be addressed in the Appendices. If any questions arise regarding previous analyses, please refer to the semi-annual status report corresponding to the sample analysis date. In all cases an analysis sheet is available for each individual analysis to back-up the data presented on the graph.
1. Radiological Environmental Services Quality Control During this semi-annual reporting period, twenty-eight nuclides associated with media types were analyzed by means of the Laboratory's internal process control, DOE, NIST, ERA and Analytics quality control programs. Media types representative of client company analyses performed during this reporting period were selected. Presented below is a synopsis of the media types evaluated.
Air Filter Sediment/soil Charcoal (Air Iodine) Water Milk (a) Analytics Environmental Cross Check Program During this semi-annual period the Analytics Cross Check Program provided 158 individual environmental analyses for bias and 157 for precision evaluation (Table 1). Of the 158 analyses evaluated for bias, 100% (158/158) of all results fell within E-LAB acceptance criteria. Of the 157 analyses evaluated for precision, 100% (157/157) came within E-LAB tolerance limits. Appendix A graphically summarizes the results by two-year trending graphs. Table 2 provides a report of the Laboratory's participation in the Analytics' cross check program for the second and third quarters of 2005. Using the Laboratory's internal acceptance criteria as the basis of evaluation, all 54 of mean results came within agreement criteria. (b) National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Measurement Assurance Program (MAP) The E-LAB has been a participant in the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI)/National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Measurements Assurance Program since June of 1987. Continued participation is documented by dated Reports of F:UADMIN\CORREM\EL 027-06 Traceability issued for particular radionuclides, which indicate the deviation of the participant's reported value for a given measurement technique from that measured and certified by the NIST. During this reporting period there were two NIST MAP samples received. The water sample consisted of 5 radionuclides and 30 measurements performed. The filter sample consisted of 5 radionuclides and 30 measurements performed. Detailed information on Environmental NIST MAP data is provided in Tables 3 and 4. All of the 60 measurements met the E-LAB acceptance criteria and all 20 mean results met the administrative goal of +/-5%. NIST traceability certificates will be issued for all detector/nuclide combinations. (c) Summary of Participation in the Department of Energy (DOE) Monitoring Programs During this semi-annual reporting period, a combination of four different media types and fifteen different radionuclides were analyzed for the semi-annual Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP-05-14, Table 6). All of the 35 mean results were evaluated as "Acceptable." One of the 35 tests was an acceptable false positive test for Pu-238 in vegetation. (d) Environmental Resource Associates (ERA) Proficiency Test (PT) Program During this semi-annual period, a total of 9 mean results (n=3) were evaluated by ERA. Using the evaluation criteria set by NELAP, 100% (9/9) of the radionuclides were in 'Agreement." Appendix A graphically summarized the results by two-year trending graphs. Table 7 provides a report of the Laboratory's participation in the PT program. The Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory (Lab ID# 11823) maintained NELAP accreditation from the New York State Department of Health through the Environmental Laboratory Approval Program for the following methods for both potable and non-potable waters: Gross Alpha, Method EPA 900.0 Gross Beta, Method EPA 900.0 Iodine-131, Method ASTM D4785-88 Photon Emitters, Method EPA 901.1 Radioactive Cesium, Method EPA 901.1 Tritium, Method EPA 906.0 F:UADMIN\CORRES\EL 027-06 (e) Intra-Laboratory Process Control Program The Environmental Laboratory internal process control program evaluated 302 individual analyses for bias and 313 analyses for precision. Trending graphs associated with the performance results for this program are given in Appendix A, and the results are summarized in Table 8. Of the 302 internal process control analyses evaluated for bias, 100% met Laboratory acceptance criteria. Also, 100% of the 313 results for precision were found to be acceptable. Table 9 lists QC samples used to qualitatively screen calibrated geometry air charcoals for activity above the Minimum Detectable Concentration (MDC). All 66 QC charcoals evaluated during this semi-annual period reported positive activity as expected. All of the QC charcoal measurements had <15% bias when compared to an independent activity verification. The bias data for each individual measurement is presented in Table 9. (f) Analytical Blanks During this semi-annual reporting period, two of the 65 environmental analytical blanks analyzed reported positive activity, greater than three (3) times the standard deviation. The two blanks, both gross beta measurements, were just slightly above the limit. All client samples affected were re-processed with an acceptable analytical blank. (g) Instrumentation Backgrounds None of the instrumentation backgrounds processed between July-December 2005 reported activity that was above the three standard deviation investigation level. (h) Blind Duplicate Results Blind duplicate results for 2005 are presented in Attachment 1. Based upon the summary evaluation, 99.5% of all paired measurements met the acceptance criteria. This data is not included in the summary tables (Tables 10-12). Duplicate analyses were also performed on 29 sets of samples during this period. The sample media consisted of water, milk, soil, vegetation (terrestrial and aquatic), food, fish and other seafoods. All of the results are included in summary tables 10 through 12. (i) Overall Data Summary for the Reporting Period July-December 2005 The compilation of intra- and inter-laboratory comparison data by analyzed matrix for this reporting period is summarized in Table 10. Table 11 presents the same data grouped according to F:UADMINMCORRESEL 027-06 _9_
analysis type. In either case, the cumulative bias for the three programs evaluated to internal E-LAB performance criteria shows 100% of the 520 individual results were observed to fall within the E-LAB bias acceptance criteria, while 100% of the 530 analyses passed the acceptance criteria for precision. (I) Summary of Environmental Quality Control Results by Year The historical summary of the E-LAB process control program performance for the environmental monitoring function is provided in Table 12. For the second half of 2005, 100% of the analyses fell within the E-LAB acceptance criteria for bias as compared to a historical percentage of 96.8. Similarly, 100% of the analyses evaluated for precision met the E-LAB acceptance criteria as compared to 99.5% of analyses for the 28-year operating history.
2. Part 50/61 Quality Control During this semi-annual reporting period, twenty nuclides were analyzed by means of the Laboratory's internal process control, National Institute for Standards and Technology Measurement Assurance Program (NIST MAP) measurements of Part 50/61 radionuclides, and the Analytics Radiochemistry Crosscheck Program.
(a) Analytics Radiochemistry Cross Check Program During this semi-annual period the Analytics Cross Check Program provided 30 individual analyses to be evaluated for bias and precision (Table 13). Of the 30 analyses, 100% fell within the E-LAB acceptance criteria for bias and 100% for precision. Appendix B graphically summarizes the results by two-year trending graphs. Table 14 provides a report of the Laboratory's participation in the Analytics' cross check program for the second half of 2005. Using the Laboratory's internal acceptance criteria as the basis of evaluation, all 10 mean results passed the agreement criteria. (b) NIST Measurement Assurance Program (MAP) During this reporting period there were two NIST MAP samples received. The water sample consisted of 5 radionuclides and 30 measurements performed. The filter sample consisted of 5 radionuclides and 30 measurements performed. Detailed information on NIST MAP data is provided in Tables 15 and 16. All of the 60 measurements met the E-LAB acceptance criteria and all 20 mean results met the administrative goal of +/-5%. NIST traceability certificates will be issued for all detector/nuclide combinations. F:\ADMINMCORRES\EL 027-06 (c) Intra-Laboratory Process Check Program There were 59 internal Laboratory QC process control analyses evaluated for bias and 54 for precision during the second half of 2005 in the Part 50/61 area. Of these, 100% (59/59) met the E-LAB acceptance criteria for bias. A total of 100% (54/54) Part 50/61 process control samples met E-LAB acceptance criteria for precision (Table 17). (d) Analytical Blanks During this semi-annual reporting period, one of the 160 Part 50/61 analytical blanks analyzed reported positive activity greater than three (3)times the standard deviation. The single failure was a Ni-63 blank. All affected client samples were re-processed for Ni-63 with a new analytical blank. (e) Instrumentation Backgrounds One hundred percent (100%) of the instrumentation backgrounds processed between July-December 2005 reported activity that was below the three standard deviation investigation level. (f) Overall Data Summary for the Reporting Period July-December 2005 The compilation of intra- and inter-laboratory comparison data by analyzed matrix for this reporting period is summarized in Table 18. The cumulative bias shows 100% (149/149) of the individual results fell within E-LAB acceptance criteria for bias. A total of 100% (144/144) of the results met Laboratory precision criteria. (g) Summary of Part 50/61 Quality Control Results by Year The historical E-LAB summary of process control performance for the Part 50/61 monitoring program is provided in Table 19. For the calendar year 2005, 99.3% of the QC analyses fell within E-LAB acceptance criteria for bias as compared to the sixteen year historical percentage of 94.4. For precision, 100% of the results met the precision acceptance criteria as compared to 99.3% historically.
3. Bioassay Quality Control There were no bioassay QC analyses performed during this semi-annual period as indicated in Table 20.
B. Status of Condition Reports (CR) Table 21 provides a synopsis of CR activity for sample processing during the second half of 2005. Seven items were closed and eight were opened during this F:UADMINlCORRESIEL 027-06 reporting period. As of December 31, 2005, a total of six CRs remain open, one of which is older than 6 months. This CR (05-10) was written for a QC failure performed quarterly. Three subsequent QC samples have been successfully completed since the failure in late 2004. Closure of the CR is pending response from the QC supplier. C. Status of Audits/Assessments
1. Internal Corporate QA Audit 05-37 Framatome ANP Quality Assurance audited the E-LAB during the period December 6-9, 2005. The audit scope included verification of compliance with the applicable quality requirements of the Laboratory QA, Safety, and Condition Report manuals. A total of two findings were issued and are summarized as CRs 05-20 and 05-21 in Table 22.

2. External There were no external audits conducted during this semi-annual period.
IV. UPDATED PROCEDURES ISSUED DURING JULY-DECEMBER 2005 A list of Analytical Services Section procedures, which were updated during this semi-annual period, is included in Table 22. V. REFERENCES
1. Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Manual 100 "Laboratory Quality Assurance Plan", Revision 9, November 16, 2005.

2. Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory 2005 Quality Control and Audit Assessment Schedule.
F:AADMINUCORRES\EL 027-06 TABLE I ANALYTICS ENVIRONMENTAL CROSSCHECK PROGRAM RESULTS BY FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA, MEDIA, AND MEASUREMENT CATEGORIES JULY-DECEMBER 2005 Bias Criteria (1) Precision Criteria (2) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
1. Air Particulate 1 Alpha 5 1 0 0 6 7 0 0 0 Beta 3 3 0 0 6 7 0 0 0 Gamma 14 5 8 0 25 l 1 1 0 Sr-89 2 0 0 0 2 L 0 I 0 0 Sr-90 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 II. Charcoal Gamma 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ill.Milk Gamma 36 15 9 0 45 9 6 0 Iodine (L) 5 1 0 0 6 0 0 0 Sr-89 0 2 1 0 1 1 1 0 Sr-90 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 IV. Water ___
Alpha 2 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 Beta 1 2 0 0 3 0 0 0 Gamma 16 11 3 0 26 4 0 0 H-3 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 Iodine (LL) 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 Sr-89 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Sr-90__ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ Total Number In Range: 92 43 23 0 129 18 10 0 Percentage of Total Processed: 58.2 27.2 14.6 0.0 82.2 11.5 6.4 0.0 Sum of Analyses: 158 157 (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (1) (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (2)
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding FXADMINMCORRES\EL 027- 06 -Al -
TABLE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESS CONTROL ANALYSIS RESULTS BY FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA, MEDIA AND MEASUREMENT CATEGORIES JULY-DECEMBER 2005 (Continued) (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category 1 = >0 and <5 2 = >5 and <10 3 = >10 and <15 (or within 2 sigma of known, see Reference 1) For Gross Alpha and Beta In water 3 = >10 and <25 (or within 2 sigma of known) For Sr-89/90 mixtures 3 = >10 and <25 (or within 2 sigma of known) For Alpha Spectrometry*, 3 = >10 and <20 (or within 2 sigma of known) For Uranium-Total, Pu-241, Zn-65 on an air filter 3 = >10 and <20 (or within 2 sigma of known) 4 = Outside criteria (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category 1 = >0 and <5 2 = >5 and <10 3 = >10 and <15 (or within 2 sigma of mean, see Reference 1). Exceptions as above. 4 = Outside criteria
Isotopic Uranium (U-234, 235, 238)
Isotopic Thorium (Th-230, 232) Np-237 Am-24 1/Cm-242, 243/244 Pu-alpha (Pu-238, 239, 240) Ra-226
** Total may not equal 100 due to rounding.
F:UADMINMCORRES\EL 027-06 -A2-
TABLE 2 FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ANALYTICS ENVIRONMENTAL CROSS CHECK PROGRAM PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Ratio Sample Quarter/ Sample Reported Known E-LABi Number Year Media Nuclide Units Value Value Analytics Evaluation E4599-1 62 2nd/2005 Water H-3 pCiUL 9060 9100 1.00 Agreement E4600-162 2nd/2005 Filter Gross Alpha PCi 31.9 30.9 1.03 Aareement E4600-162 2nd/2005 Filter Gross Beta pCi 125 127 0.99 Agreement E4601-162 2ndl2005 Filter Ce-141 pCi/L 59.3 58.9 1.01 Agreement E4601-162 2nd/2005 Filter Cr-51 pCVL 207 193 1.07 Agreement E4601-162 2nd/2005 Filter Cs-134 pCiL _ 59.1 60.6 0.98 Agreement E4601-162 2nd/2005 Filter Cs-137 pCilL 131 120 1.09 Agreement E4601-162 2nd/2005 Filter Co-58 pCi/L 3.55 3.4 1.04 Agreement E4601-162 2nd/2005 Filter Mn-54 pCi/L 88.6 79.7 1.11 Agreement E4601-162 2nd/2005 Filter Fe-59 pCi/L 40.1 40.7 0.99 Agreement E4601-162 2nd/2005 Filter Zn-65 pCi/L 112 98.8 1.13 Agreement E4601-162 2nd/2005 Filter Co-60 pCi/L 89.4 92.3 0.97 Agreement E4602-162 2nd/2005 Filter Sr-89 pCi/L 90.5 97.5 0.93 Agreement E4602-162 2nd/2005 Filter Sr-90 pCi/L 13.0 12.6 1.03 Agreement E4603-162 2ndl2005 Milk I-131LL pCi/L 85.7 86.9 0.99 Aqreement E4603-162 2nd/2005 Milk 1-131 pCi/L 86.8 86.9 1.00 Agreement E4603-162 2nd/2005 Milk Ce-141 pCML 96.3 92.4 1.04 Agreement E4603-162 2nd/2005 Milk Cr-51 pCiUL 295 303 0.98 Agreement E4603-162 2nd/2005 Milk Cs-1 34 pCiUL 87.7 95 0.92 Agreement E4603-162 2nd/2005 Milk Cs-137 pCiUL 186 189 0.98 Agreement E4603-162 2nd/2005 Milk Co-58 pCi/L 5.83 5.30 1.10 Agreement E4603-162 2nd/2005 Milk Mn-54 pCilL 124 125 0.99 Agreement E4603-162 2nd/2005 Milk Fe-59 pCi/L 67 63.9 1.05 Agreement E4603-162 2nd/2005 Milk Zn-65 pCilL 149 155 0.96 Agreement E4603-162 2nd/2005 Milk Co-60 pCi/L 138 145 0.96 Agreement F:AADMINMCORRES\EL 027-06 -A3-
TABLE 2 (Continued) FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ANALYTICS RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL CROSS-CHECK PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Ratio Sample Quarterl Sample Reported Known E-LABi Number Year Media Nuclide Units Value Value Analytics Evaluation E4686-162 3rd/2005 Water Gross Alpha pCi/L 42.3 41.6 1.02 Agreement E4686-162 3rd/2005 Water Gross Beta pCi/L 128.5 123 1.05 Agreement E4687-162 3rd/2005 Water 1-131 LL pCi/L 78.3 78.2 1.00 Agreement E4687-162 3rd/2005 Water 1-131 pCi/L 77.2 78.2 0.99 Agreement E4687-162 3rd/2005 Water Ce-141 pCi/L 276.4 282 0.98 Agreement E4687-162 3rd/2005 Water Cr-51 pCi/L 353.7 408 0.87 Agreement E4687-162 3rd/2005 Water Cs-1 34 pCi/L 137.3 148 0.93 Agreement E4687-162 3rd/2005 Water Cs-137 pCil/L 231.1 235 0.98 Agreement E4687-162 3rd/2005 Water Co-58 pCilL 72.5 77.0 0.94 Agreement E4687-162 3rd/2005 Water Mn-54 pCilL 113.2 111 1.02 Agreement E4687-162 3rd/2005 Water Fe-59 pCi/L 74.7 74.0 1.01 Agreement E4687-162 3rd/2005 Water Zn-65 pCilL 152.3 149 1.02 Agreement E4687-162 3rd/2005 Water Co-60 pCi/L 192.1 202 0.95 Agreement E4688-162 3rd/2005 Charcoal 1-131 pCi 61.0 62.7 0.97 Agreement E4689-162 3rd/2005 Filter Gross Alpha pCi 39.3 38.0 1.04 Agreement E4689-162 3rd/2005 Filter Gross Beta pCi 120.8 112 1.08 Agreement E4690-162 3rd/2005 Milk 1-131 LL pCi/L 99.0 94.3 1.05 Agreement E4690-162 3rd/2005 Milk 1-131 pCi/L 90.0 94.3 0.95 Agreement E4690-162 3rd/2005 Milk Ce-141 pCi/L 228.5 233 0.98 Agreement E4690-162 3rd/2005 Milk Cr-51 pCi/L 306.3 338 0.91 Agreement E4690-162 3rd/2005 Milk Cs-1 34 pCi/L 118.3 122 0.97 Agreement E4690-162 3rd/2005 Milk Cs-137 pCi/L 196.5 195 1.01 Agreement E4690-162 3rdl2005 Milk Co-58 pCi/L 64.0 63.4 1.01 Agreement E4690-162 3rd/2005 Milk Mn-54 pCi/L 94.7 92.0 1.03 Agreement E4690-162 3rd/2005 Milk Fe-59 pCi/L 63.3 61.0 1.04 Agreement E4690-162 3rd/2005 Milk Zn-65 pCi/L 121.7 123 0.90 Agreement E4690-162 3rd/2005 Milk Co-60 pCil/L 165.2 167 0.99 Agreement E4691-162 3rd/2005 Milk Sr-89 pCi/L 139.6 146 0.96 Agreement E4691-162 3rd/2005 Milk Sr-90 pCi/L 10.8 11.5 0.94 Agreement F:\ADMINACORRESVEL 027-06 -A4-
TABLE 3 NIST MAP ANALYSIS RESULTS BY FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA, MEDIA, AND MEASUREMENT CATEGORIES JULY-DECEMBER 2005 Bias Criteria (1) Precision Criteria (2)
- 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 I. Water Gamma 30 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 II. Filter Gamma 30 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 Total Number in Range:
Percentage of Total Processed: 60 100.0 0 0.0 1 0 0.0 0 0.0 60 100.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 0 0.0 _Sum of Analyses: 60 60 (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (1) (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (2)
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding F:AADMIN\CORRES\EL 027-06 -A5-
TABLE 4
SUMMARY
OF FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY (NIST) TRACEABILITY RESULTS JULY-DECEMBER, 2005 NIST Reference E-LAB Mean Percent Standard Date of Measurement Deviation From Number Standard Radionuclide Matrix Technique NIST 1800-4 1-Aug-05 Fe-59 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #2 -0.55 1800-4 1-Aug-05 Zn-65 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #2 -0.55 1800-4 1-Aug-05 Ba-1 33 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #2 -0.61 1800-4 1-Aug-05 Cs-1 34 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #2 -3.99 1800-4 1-Aug-05 Ce-141 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #2 -2.69 1800-4 1-Aug-05 Fe-59 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #5 0.76 1800-4 1-Aug-05 Zn-65 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #5 -0.96 1800-4 1-Aug-05 Ba-1 33 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #5 1.96 1800-4 1-Aug-05 Cs-134 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #5 -1.31 1800-4 1-Aug-05 Ce-141 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #5 -2.87 1801-5 1-Aug-05 Fe-59 Filter Gamma Spectroscopy #2 1.26 1801-5 1-Aug-05 Zn-65 Filter Gamma Spectroscopy #2 1.35 1801-5 1-Aug-05 Ba-1 33 Filter Gamma Spectroscopy #2 -0.81 1801-5 1-Aug-05 Cs-1 34 Filter Gamma Spectroscopy #2 -2.91 1801-5 1-Aug-05 Ce-141 Filter Gamma Spectroscopy #2 2.96 1801-5 1-Aug-05 Fe-59 Filter Gamma Spectroscopy #4 1.65 1801-5 1-Aug-05 Zn-65 Filter Gamma Spectroscopy #4 -0.21 1801-5 1-Aug-05 Ba-1 33 Filter Gamma Spectroscopy #4 -0.45 1801-5 1-Aug-05 Cs-1 34 Filter Gamma Spectrosco #4 -3.10 1801-5 1-Aug-05 Ce-141 Filter Gamma Spectroscopy #4 -0.69 Data on NIST MAP program is repeated in Table 16 for Part 50/61 QC data. FXADMINMCORRES\EL 027-06 -A6-
TABLE 5 ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENTS LABORATORY QUALITY ASSESSMENT PROGRAM REPORTED EML REPORTED MATRDX1 RADIO- MEAN VALUE REPORTED VALUE EML TO KNOWN UNITS NUCLIDE BqIUnits ERROR Bq/Units ERROR RATIO EVALUATION EML has notified the industry that QAP 60 (March 2004) was the final set of samples to be issued. Further information may be found on the EML website, URL http:/lwww.eml.doe.gov/qap/ F:\ADMINMCORRESTEL 027-06 -A7-
TABLE 6 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY MIXED ANALYTE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PROGRAM (MAPEP-05-14) MATRIX) REFERENCE RADIO- E-LAB MAPEP BIAS UNITS DATE NUCLIDE MEAN VALUE VALUE % Evaluation Filter (Bg total) 1-Jul-05 Am-241 0.1359 0.158 -14.0 Agreement Filter (Bg total) 1-Jul-05 Cs-134 3.828 3.85 -0.6 Agreement Filter (Bg total) 1-Jul-05 Cs-1 37 3.396 3.23 5.1 Agreement Filter (Bq total) 1-Jul-5 Co-57 6.506 6.2 4.9 Agreement Filter (Bq total) 1-Jul-5 Co-60 2.924 2.85 2.6 Agreement Filter (Bg total) 1-Jul-5 Mn-54 4.55 4.37 4.1 Agreement Filter (Bg total) 1-Jul-05 Pu-238 0.1059 0.0969 9.3 Agreement Filter (Bqtotal) 1-Jul-05 Pu-239/240 0..096 0.0898 6.9 Agreement Filter (Bq total) 1-Jul-05 Sr-90 2.037 2.25 -9.5 Agreement Filter (Bq total) 1-Jul-05 Zn-65 4.81 4.33 11.1 Agreement Soil (Bq/kg) 1-Jul-05 Cs-134 594 568 4.6 Agreement Soil (Bq/kg) 1-Jul-05 Cs-1 37 468 439 6.6 Agreement Soil (Bq/kg) 1-Jul-05 Co-57 546 524 4.2 Agreement Soil (Bq/kg) 1-Jul-05 Co-60 300 287 4.4 Agreement Soil (Bqlkg) 1-Ju1-5 Mn-54 475 439 8.2 Agreement Soil (Bq/kg) 1-Jul-05 K-40 650 604 7.6 Agreement Soil (Bq/kg) 1-Jul-05 Sr-90 663 757 -12.4 Agreement Soil (Bq/kg) 1-Jul-05 Zn-65 881 823 7.0 Agreement Vegetation (Bq total) 1-Jul-05 Am-241 0.251 0.23 -10.8 Agreement Vegetation (Bg total) 1-Jul-05 Pu-238 0.00111+/-0.00054 False Postive Test N/A Agreement Vegetation (Bg total) 1-Jul-05 Pu-239/240 0.1675 0.164 2.1 Agreement Vegetation (Bq total) 1-Jul-05 Sr-90 2.28 2.42 -5.8 Agreement Water (Bq/L) 1-Jul-5 Am-241 1.849 2.23 -17.1 Agreement Water (BqJL) 1-Jul-05 Cs-1 34 160.7 167 -3.8 Agreement Water (Bq/L) 1-Jul-05 Cs-1 37 306 333 -8.1 Agreement Water (Bq/L) 1-Jul-05 Co-57 257 272 -5.6 Agreement Water (Bq/L) 1-Jul-05 Co-60 248 261 -4.8 Agreement Water (Bq/L) 1-Jul-05 H-3 571 527 8.3 Agreement Water (Bq/L) 1-Jul-05 Fe-55 208 196 6.0 Agreement Water (Bq/L) 1-Jul-05 Mn-54 392 418 -6.3 Agreement Water (Bq/L) 1-Jul-05 Ni-63 93.5 100 -6.5 Agreement Water (Bq/L) 1-Jul-05 Pu-238 1.659 1.91 -13.1 Agreement Water (Bq/L) 1-Jul-05 Pu-239/240 2.305 2.75 -16.2 Agreement Water (Bq/L) 1-Jul-05 Tc-99 60.8 66.5 -8.6 Agreement Water (Bq/L) 1-Jul-05 Zn-65 326 330 -1.2 Agreement F:UADMINMCORRES\EL 027-06
-A8-
TABLE 7 ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ASSOCIATES PROFICIENCY TEST RESULTS FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ERA REPORTED ERA ERA ERA LOT #1 MATRIX RADIO- MEAN VALUE VALUE CONTROL WARNING REF. DATE UNITS NUCLIDE pCiIL pCiL LIMITS LIMITS EVALUATION RAD-63 November 2005 Water pCi/L Gross Alpha 23.3 23.3 13.2-33.4 16.6-30.0 Agreement RAD-63 November 2005 Water pCi/L Gross Beta 36.6 39.1 30.4-47.8 33.3-44.9 Agreement RAD-63 November 2005 Water pCi/L Tritium 12200 12200 10100-14300 10800-13600 Agreement RAD-63 November 2005 Water pCi/L Ba-1 33 27.5 31.2 22.5-39.9 25.4-37.0 Agreement RAD-63 November 2005 Water pCi/L Cs-1 34 33.5 33.9 25.2-42.6 28.1-39.7 Agreement RAD-63 November 2005 Water pCiiL Cs-137 26.5 28.3 19.6-37.0 22.5-34.1 Agreement RAD-63 November 2005 Water pCi/L Co-60 82.5 84.1 75.4-92.8 78.3-89.9 Agreement RAD-63 November 2005 Water pCi/L Zn-65 102 105 86.8-123 92.9-117 Agreement RAD-63 November 2005 Water pCi/L 1-131 17.1 17.4 12.2-22.6 13.9-20.9 Agreement F:\ADMIN\CORRES\EL 027-06 -A9-
TABLE 8 INTRA-LABORATORY ENVIRONMENTAL PROCESS CONTROL RESULTS BY FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA, MEDIA, AND MEASUREMENT CATEGORIES JULY-DECEMBER 2005 Bias Criteria (1) Precision Criteria (2), (3) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 I. Air Particulate Beta 106 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 It. Air Charcoal Gamma-Quantitative I 0 0 0 0 0 0 Gamma - Screening 43 22 1 0 0 0 0 0 III. Milk Gamma 3 0 0 0 7 2 12 0 IV. Water Am-241 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 Fe-55 1 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 Gross Alpha 4 1 5 0 2 0 0 0 Gross Beta 12 4 1 0 2 0 0 0 Gamma 5 1 0 0 6 0 10 0 Ni-63 0 2 1 0 2 0 0 0 Pu-238 2 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 Sr-90 2 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 Tritium 3 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 Tc-99 1 0 2 0 2 0 0 V. Soll/Concrete Am-241 4 1 5 0 2 0 0 0 C-14 0 2 4 0 2 0 4 0 Fe-55 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 Gamma 10 0 1 0 10 2 22 0 NI-63 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 Pu-238 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 Pu-241 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 Sr-90 3 4 0 0 0 0 6 0 Tritium 5 3 0 0 4 0 4 0 Tc-99 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 VL. VegetationlFood Gamma 0 0 0 0 118 12 60 0 Total Number 209 65 28 0 165 20 128 0 In Range: . l ll__l_ Percentage of 69.2 21.5 9.3 0.0 52.7 6.4 40.9 0.0 Total Processed: l lllll Sum of Analyses: 302 313 (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (1) (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (2) (3) Most Precision data generated from non-positive client samples for specific contractual evaluation
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding FNADMINUCORRES\EL 027-06 -A10-
TABLE 9 QC CHARCOAL ACTIVITY SCREENING RESULTS SPIKE FILTER ANALYSIS ACT. NUMBER LSN TYPE DATE REPORTED % BIAS 70218162-C L9329-01 SAIC-1 2-Jun-05 YES -3.42 70218162-D L9329-03 SA2C 2-Jun-05 YES -0.74 70218162-E L9329-02 SAIC-2 2-Jun-05 YES 0.67 70860162-C L9478-01 SAIC-1 28-Jun-05 YES -0.72 L9515-01 SAIC-1 6-Jul-05 YES 3.95 L9552-01 SAIC-1 11-Jul-05 YES 3.52 L9584-01 SAIC-1 18-Jul-05 YES 0.62 L9626-01 SAIC-1 24-Aug-05 YES 2.77 L9661-01 SAIC-1 3-Aug-05 YES 3.54 L9696-01 SAIC-1 8-Aug-05 YES 4.29 L9737-01 SAIC-1 15-Aug-05 YES 4.07 7086162-D L9478-03 SA2C 28-Jun-05 YES -0.35 L9515-03 SA2C 6-Jul-05 YES 0.52 L9552-03 SA2C 11-Jul-05 YES -0.43 L9584-03 SA2C 18-Jul-05 YES 1.26 L9626-03 SA2C 24-Aug-05 YES -4.72 L9661-03 SA2C 3-Aug-05 YES -3.73 L9696-03 SA2C 8-Aug-05 YES -8.00 L9737-03 SA2C 15-Aug-05 YES -6.94 70860162-E L9478-02 SAIC-2 28-Jun-05 YES 2.28 L9515-02 SAIC-2 6-Jul-05 YES 0.48 L9552-02 SAIC-2 11-Jul-05 YES 2.22 L9584-02 SAIC-2 18-Jul-05 YES -5.30 L9626-02 SAIC-2 24-Aug-05 YES 2.14 L9661-02 SAIC-2 3-Aug-05 YES 3.80 L9696-02 SAIC-2 8-Aug-05 YES 6.17 _ _ L9737-02 SAIC-2 15-Aug-05 YES 6.70 70860162-M L9771-01 SAIC-1 24-Aug-05 YES 3.50 L9804-01 SAIC-1 30-Aug-05 YES 7.18 L9832-01 SAIC-1 7-Sep-05 YES 3.20 70860162-N L9771-02 SAIC-2 24-Aug-05 YES 2.09 L9804-02 SAIC-2 30-Aug-05 YES 3.17 _L9832-02 SAIC-2 7-Sep-05 YES 1.88 70860162-0 L9771-03 SA2C 24-Aug-05 YES 3.23 L9804-03 SA2C 30-Aug-05 YES 1.38 L9832-03 SA2C 7-Sep-05 YES 1.45 F:UADMINMCORRES\EL 027-06 -All-
TABLE 9 (continued) QC CHARCOAL ACTIVITY SCREENING RESULTS SPIKE FILTER ANALYSIS ACT. NUMBER LSN TYPE DATE REPORTED % BIAS 71346162-G LI 0036-01 SAIC-1 19-Oct-05 YES 6.86 LI 0083-01 SAIC-1 25-Oct-05 YES 6.46 LI 0118-01 SAIC-1 2-Nov-05 YES 0.65 L10151-01 SAIC-1 8-Nov-05 YES 3.56 L10173-01 SAIC-1 15-Nov-05 YES 6.28 L10200-01 SAIC-1 22-Nov-05 YES 5.12 LI 0226-01 SAIC-1 30-Nov-05 YES 5.11 LI 0254-01 SAIC-1 6-Dec-05 YES 4.25 71346162-H L10036-03 SA2C 19-Oct-05 YES -0.15 LI 0083-03 SA2C 25-Oct-05 YES 1.54 L10118-03 SA2C 2-Nov-05 YES -0.14 L10151-03 SA2C 8-Nov-05 YES 0.22 Li 01 73-03 SA2C 15-Nov-05 YES 3.45 L10200-03 SA2C 22-Nov-05 YES -0.17 L10226-03 SA2C 30-Nov-05 YES -5.25 L10254-03 SA2C 6-Dec-05 YES 5.69 71346162-I L10036-02 SAIC-2 19-Oct-05 YES 6.94 L10083-02 SAIC-2 25-Oct-05 YES 7.69 L10118-02 SAIC-2 2-Nov-05 YES 6.69 L10151-02 SAIC-2 8-Nov-05 YES 5.64 L10173-02 SAIC-2 15-Nov-05 YES 7.17 LI 0200-02 SAIC-2 22-Nov-05 YES 9.48 LI 0226-02 SAIC-2 30-Nov-05 YES 11.07 LI 0254-02 SAIC-2 6-Dec-05 YES 5.63 71909162-B L10284-01 SAIC-1 16-Dec-05 YES 3.59 Li 0310-01 SAIC-1 21 -Dec-05 YES 5.37 71909162-C L10284-03 SA2C 16-Dec-05 YES -4.36 L10310-03 SA2C 21-Dec-05 YES -7.51 71909162-D L10284-02 SAIC-2 16-Dec-05 YES 2.56 L10310-02 SAIC-2 21-Dec-05 YES 4.31 FAADMINMCORRES\EL 027-06 -A12-
TABLE 10 FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ENVIRONMENTAL INTRA-LABORATORY AND INTER-LABORATORY DATA
SUMMARY
BIAS AND PRECISION BY MEDIA JUNE-DECEMBER 2005 Bias Criteria (1) Precision Criteria (2), (3) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 L. Air Filter Gross Alpha 5 1 0 0 6 0 0 0 Gross Beta 109 22 0 0 6 0 0 0 Gamma 44 5 8 0 55 1 1 0 Sr-89 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 Sr-90 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 II. Charcoal Gamma-Quantitative 2 1 O 0 0 0 O Gamma-Screening 43 22 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 Ill. Milk Gamma 39 15 9 l 0 52 11 18 0 Iodine (LL) 5 1 0 0 6 0 0 0 Sr-89 0 2 1 0 1 1 1 0 Sr-90 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 IV. Soil/Concrete Am-241 4 1 5 0 2 0 0 0 C-14 0 2 4 0 2 0 4 0 Fe-55 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 Gamma 10 0 1 0 10 2 22 0 Ni-63 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 Pu-238 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 Pu-241 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 Sr-90 3 4 0 0 0 0 6 0 Tritium 5 3 0 0 4 0 4 0 Tc-99 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 V. Water Am-241 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 Fe-55 1 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 Gross Alpha 6 2 5 0 5 0 0 0 Gross Beta 13 6 1 0 5 0 0 0 Gamma 51 12 3 0 62 4 10 0 Iodine (LL) 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 Ni-63 0 2 1 0 2 0 0 0 Pu-238 2 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 Sr-90 2 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 Tritium 6 0 0 0 5 0 2 0 Tc-99 1 0 2 0 2 0 1 0 0 VI. Vegetation/Food . . Total Number In Range: Percentage of Gamma 0 361 69.4 0 108 20.8 j _ 0 51 9.8 0 0 0.0 118 354 66.8 12 38 7.2 l 60 138 26.0 c1 0 __0 0 0.0 Total Processed: Sum of Analyses: 520 530 (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (1) (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (2) (3) Most Precision data generated from non-positive client samples for specific contractual evaluation
' Total may not equal 100 due to rounding. - Totals summarize Internal PCs, NIST MAP, and Analytics Cross Check programs F:UADMINZCORRESNEL 027-06 -A13-
TABLE 11 FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ENVIRONMENTAL INTRA-LABORATORY AND INTER-LABORATORY DATA
SUMMARY
BIAS AND PRECISION BY ANALYSIS TYPE JULY-DECEMBER 2005 Bias Criteria (1) Precision Criteria (2), (3) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 I. Gross Alpha Air Filter 5 1 0 0 6 0 0 0 Water 6 2 5 0 5 0 0 0 II. Am-241 Soll/Concrete 4 1 5 0 2 0 0 0 Water 2 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 III. C-14 Soil/Concrete 0 2 4 0 2 0 4 0 IV. Fe-55 SolUConcrete 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 Water 1 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 V. Gross Beta Air Fllterl 109 22 0 0 6 0 0 0 Water 13 6 1 1 1 0 1 5 1 0 1 0 1 0 Vl. Gamma Air Filter 44 5 8 0 55 1 1 0 Charcoal-Quantitative 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Charcoal-Screening 43 22 1 0 0 0 0 0 Milk 39 15 9 0 52 11 18 0 Soil/Concrete 10 0 1 0 10 2 22 0 Vegetation/Food 0 0 0 0 118 12 60 0 Water 51 12 3 0 62 4 10 0 VII. Iodine (LL) Milk 3 0 0 0 3 l 0 0 0 Water 5 1 0 0 6 l 0 0 0 Vil. Ni-63 Soil/Concrete 0 1 1 0 l 0 l 2 0 0 Water 0 2 1 0 l 2 l 0 0 0 IX. Pu-238 Soll/Concrete 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 Water 2 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 X. Pu-241 Soll/Concrete 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 Xi. Sr-89 Air Filter 2 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 Milk 0 2 1 0 1 1 1 0 Xl. Sr-90 Air Filter 1 1 0 0 l 0 2 0 0 Milk 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 Soil/Concrete 3 4 0 0 0 0 6 0 Water 2 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 XIII. Tritium Soll/Concrete 5 3 0 0 4 0 4 0 Water 6 0 0 0 5 0 2 0 XIV. Tc-99 Soil/Concrete 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 0 Water 1 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 Total Number In Range: 361 '108 51 0 354 38 138 0
% of Total Processed: 69.4 20.8 9.8 0.0 66.8 7.2 26.0 0.0 Sum of Analyses: 520 530 (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (1)
(2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (2) (3) Most Precision data generated from non-positive client samples for specific contractual evaluation
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding.

Totals summarize Internal PCs, NIST MAP, and Analytics Cross Check programs F:\ADMlN\CORRES\EL 027-06 -A14-
TABLE 12 ENVIRONMENTAL BIAS AND PRECISION BY YEAR Percent Bias Percent Precision Deviation from Known Deviation from Mean Bias Criteria* (1) Precision Criteria* (2) Outside Outside Criteria % Within Criteria % Within Year 1 2 3 4 Criteria 1 2 3 4 Criteria 2005 710 242 117 3 99.7 594 51 202 0 100.0 2004 849 273 172 10 99.2 439 60 362 2 99.8 2003 572 182 74 13 98.5 354 55 106 i 99.8 2002 619 170 74 7 99.2 411 44 16 3 99.4 2001 383 115 80 22 96.3 330 45 19 2 99.5 2000 368 143 63 18 97.0 342 70 36 1 99.8 1999 323 100 44 13 97.3 301 46 10 2 99.4 1998 375 100 21 7 98.6 355 56 21 4 99.1 1997 351 118 46 11 97.9 306 46 11 0 100.0 1996 616 187 104 24 97.4 696 71 33 3 99.6 1995 291 75 37 12 97.1 200 43 24 0 100.0 1994 359 116 54 14 97.4 265 61 10 1 99.7 1993 262 121 60 29 93.9 227 59 26 1 99.7 1992 438 206 84 21 97.2 656 112 29 1 99.9 1991 504 174 92 19 97.6 710 82 30 4 99.5 1990 519 153 56 34 95.5 644 97 20 2 99.7 1989 448 171 70 28 96.1 599 76 35 4 99.4 1988 425 141 66 22 96.6 536 76 20 1 99.8 1987 450 187 65 27 96.3 623 80 15 3 99.6 1986 558 185 70 27 96.8 700 82 33 0 100.0 1985 449 177 92 25 96.6 561 93 28 0 100.0 1984 479 254 104 31 96.4 699 127 24 0 100.0 1983 475 211 108 36 95.7 639 113 46 4 99.5 1982 341 109 135 30 95.1 496 112 135 12 98.4 1981 175 116 152 29 93.9 286 72 46 1 99.8 1980 160 115 167 37 92.3 335 96 59 1 99.8 1979 80 51 68 20 90.9 230 73 51 16 95.7 1978 112 90 40 20 92.4 259 73 29 14 96.3 1977 28 18 12 8 87.9 75 39 5 7 94.4 Total # 11,719 4,300 2,327 597 96.8 12,868 2,110 1,481 90 99.5 in Range:
% of all 61.9 22.7 12.3 3.2 77.8 12.8 8.9 0.5 Analyses in Range*
Total Number 18,943 16,549
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding.
(1) Deviation Categories 1-3 as noted inTable 1, Footnote (1) (2) Deviation Categories 1-3 as noted in Table 1, Footnote (2) F:\ADMINkCORRESNEL 027-06 -Al 5-
TABLE 13 ANALYTICS RADIOCHEMISTRY CROSSCHECK PROGRAM RESULTS BY FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA, MEDIA, AND MEASUREMENT CATEGORIES JULY-DECEMBER 2005 Bias Criteria (1) l Precision Criteria (2) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
1. Water Fe-55 2 6 4 0 7 4 1 0 Sr-89 6 2 1 0 7 2 0 0 Sr-90 5 2 2 0 6 3 0 0 Total Number in 13 10 7 0 20 9 1 0 Range: IlI_ I I II Percentage of 43.3 33.3 23.3 0.0 66.7 30.0 3.3 0.0 Total Processed:
Sum of Analyses: 30 30 (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category as noted in Table 12, Footnote (1) (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category as noted in Table 12, Footnote (2)
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding F:AADMIN\CORRESTEL 027-06 -A16-
TABLE 13 PART 50/61 PROCESS CONTROL ANALYSIS RESULTS BY FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA, MEDIA AND MEASUREMENT CATEGORIES JULY-DECEMBER 2005 (Continued) (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category 1 = >0 and <5 2 = >5 and <10 3 = >10 and <15 (or within 2 sigma of known, see Reference 1) For Gross Alpha and Beta In water, 3 = >10 and <25 (or wi chin 2 sigma of known) For Alpha Spectrometry*, 3 = >10 and <20 (or wil:hin 2 sigma of known) For Uranium-Total, Pu-241, Zn-65 on an air filter, C-14, 3 = >10 and <20 (or wil '6hin 2 sigma of known) 4 = Outside criteria (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category 1 = >0 and <5 2=>5and<10 3 = >10 and <15 (or within 2 sigma of mean, see Reference 1) 4 = Outside criteria
Isotopic Uranium (U-234, 235, 238)
Isotopic Thorium (Th-230, 232) Np-237 Am-241Cm-242, 243/244 Pu-alpha (Pu-238, 239, 240) Ra-226
** Total may not equal 100 due to rounding.
F:AADMINMCORRES\EL 027-06 -A17-
TABLE 14 FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ANALYTICS RADIOCHEMISTRY CROSS-CHECK PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Mean Ratio Sample Quarter/ Sample Reported Known E-LABI Number Year Media Nuclide Units Value Value Analytics Evaluation A19215-162 2nd/2005 Liquid Fe-55 uCilcc 1.38E-03 1.34E-03 1.03 Agreement A19216-162 2nd/2005 Liquid Sr-89 uCi/cc 1.04E-03 1.08E-03 0.96 Agreement Al 9216-162 2nd/2005 Liquid Sr-90 uCi/cc 9.14E-05 9.63E-05 0.95 Agreement A19666-162 2nd/2005 Liquid Fe-55 uCUcc 2.44E-04 2.34E-04 1.04 Agreement
A19539-162 3rd/2005 Liquid Fe-55 uCi/cc 1.23E-04 1.17E-04 1.05 Agreement A19540-162 3rd/2005 Liquid Sr-89 uCi/cc 3.62E-03 3.71 E-03 0.98 Agreement A19540-162 3rd/2005 Liquid Sr-90 uCi/cc 1.99E-04 2.01 E-04 0.99 Agreement A19843-162 4th/2005 Liquid Fe-55 uCi/cc 1.30E-04 1.16E-04 1.12 Agreement A19844-162 4th/2005 Liquid Sr-89 uCi/cc 3.38E03 3.69E-03 0.92 Agreement A19844-162 4th/2005 Liquid Sr-90 uCi/cc 1.88E-04 2.06E-04 0.91 Agreement

- Special Fe-55 sample for CR 05-16 investigation F:\ADMlN\CORRESXEL 027-06 -A18-
TABLE 15 NIST MAP ANALYSIS RESULTS BREAKDOWN BY FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA, MEDIA AND MEASUREMENT CATEGORIES JULY-DECEMBER 2005 Bias Criteria (1) Precision Criteria (2) 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 I. Water Gamma 30 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 II. Filter Gamma 30 0 0 0 30 0 0 0 Total Number in Range: 60 0 0 0 60 0 0 0 Percentage of Total Processed: 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 100.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Sum of Analyses: 60 60 (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category as noted in Table 1, Footnote (1) (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category as noted inTable 1, Footnote (2)
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding F:UADMINMCORRES\EL 027-06 -A19-
TABLE 16
SUMMARY
OF FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY (NIST) TRACEABILITY RESULTS JULY-DECEMBER, 2005 NIST Reference E-LAB Mean Percent Standard Date of Measurement Deviation From Number Standard Radionuclide Matrix Technique NIST 1800-4 1-Aug-05 Fe-59 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #2 -0.55 1800-4 1-Aug-05 Zn-65 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #2 -0.55 1800-4 1-Aug-05 Ba-1 33 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #2 -0.61 1800-4 1-Aug-05 Cs-1 34 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #2 -3.99 1800-4 1-Aug-05 Ce-141 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #2 -2.69 1800-4 1-Aug-05 Fe-59 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #5 0.76 1800-4 1-Aug-05 Zn-65 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #5 -0.96 1800-4 1-Aug-05 Ba-133 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #5 1.96 1800-4 1-Aug-05 Cs-134 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #5 -1.31 1800-4 1-Aug-05 Ce-141 Liquid Gamma Spectroscopy #5 -2.87 1801-5 1-Aug-05 Fe-59 Filter Gamma Spectroscopy #2 1.26 1801-5 1-Aug-05 Zn-65 Filter Gamma Spectroscopy #2 1.35 1801-5 1-Aug-05 Ba-133 Filter Gamma Spectroscopy #2 -0.81 1801-5 1-Auq-05 Cs-1 34 Filter Gamma Spectroscopy #2 -2.91 1801-5 1-Aug-05 Ce-141 Filter Gamma Spectroscopy #2 2.96 1801-5 1-Aug-05 Fe-59 Filter Gamma Spectroscopy #4 1.65 1801-5 1-Aug-05 Zn-65 Filter Gamma S pectroscopy #4 -0.21 1801-5 1-Aug-05 Ba-133 Filter Gamma Spectroscopy #4 -0.45 1801-5 1-Aug-05 Cs-1 34 Filter Gamma Spectroscopy #4 -3.10 1801-5 1-Aug-05 Ce-141 Filter Gamma Spectroscopy -0.69 Data on NIST MAP program is repeated in Table 4 for Environmental QC data. F:AADMIN\CORRES\EL 027-06 -A20-
TABLE 17 INTRA-LABORATORY PART 50161 PROCESS CONTROL RESULTS BREAKDOWN BY FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA, MEDIA AND MEASUREMENT CATEGORIES JULY-DECEMBER 2005 Bias Criteria (1) Precision Criteria (2) 1 2 3 4 i1 - 2 3 4 I. Solid _ _l_ ___ C-141 0 1 0 r0 0 I 0 0 H-3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 II. Liquid . Alpha 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Am-241 0 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 Beta 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C-14 0 1 5 0 6 0 0 0 Cm-24314 0 2 1 0 3 0 0 0
- Fe-55 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 0 Gamma 5 1 0 0 6 0 0 0 H-3 6 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 1-129 5 0 1 0 4 2 0 0 Ni-63 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 Np-237 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pu-238 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 Pu-241 2 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 Sr-89 1 2 0 0 3 0 0 0 Sr-90 0 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 Tc-99 2 2 2 0 6 0 0 0 Total Number 29 16 14 0 50 4 0 0 In Range:
Percentage of 49.2 27.1 23.7 0.0 92.6 7.4 0.0 0.0 Total Processed: Sum of Analyses: 59 54 (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category as noted in Table 13, Footnote (1) (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category as noted in Table 13, Footnote (2)
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding.
F:AADMIN\CORRES\EL 027-06 -A21 -
TABLE 18 PART 50161 ANALYSIS RESULTS BREAKDOWN BY FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA, MEDIA AND MEASUREMENT CATEGORIES JULY-DECEMBER 2005 Bias Criteria (1) Precision Criteria (2) 1 21 3 1 4 11 2 1 314 I. Filter Gammal 30 0 0 0 30 0 0 11.Soil/Concrete C-141 0 l O l 1 0 0 0 0 0 H-3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 II. Liquid Alpha 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Am-241 0 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 Beta 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C-14 0 1 5 0 6 0 0 0 Cm-243/I4 0 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 Fe-55 2 7 6 0 10 4 1 0 Gamma 35 1 0 0 36 0 0 0 H-3 6 0 0 0 6 0 0 0 1-129 5 0 1 0 4 2 0 0 Ni-63 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 Np-237 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Pu-238 3 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 Pu-241 2 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 Sr-89 7 4 1 0 10 2 0 0 Sr-90 5 4 3 0 9 3 0 0 Tc-99 2 2 2 0 6 0 0 0 Total Number 102 26 21 0 130 13 1 0 in Range: Percentage of 68.5 17.4 14.1 0.0 90.3 9.0 0.7 0.0 Total Processed: Sum of Analyses: 149 144 (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category as noted in Table 13, Footnote (1) (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category as noted in Table 13, Footnote (2)
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding.
** Totals summarize Internal PCs, NIST MAP, and Analytics Cross Check programs F:\ADM1N\CORRES\EL 027-06 -A22-
TABLE 19 PART 50/61 BIAS AND PRECISION BY YEAR (1) Percent Bias Percent Precision Deviation from Known Deviation from Mean Bias Criteria (2) Precision Criteria (2) Outside Outside Criteria % Within Criteria % Within Year 1 2 3 4 Criteria 1 2 3 4 Criteria 2005 173 68 45 2 99.3 224 27 4 0 100.0 2004 157 110 54 17 95.0 286 23 4 0 100.0 2003 144 91 51 9 96.9 249 18 2 0 100.0 2002 215 94 49 a 97.8 300 24 5 2 99.4 2001 159 90 46 24 92.5 238 46 6 0 100.0 2000 151 72 28 23 91.6 220 38 16 4 98.6 1999 111 59 14 7 96.3 168 13 5 2 98.9 1998 90 68 24 7 96.3 160 22 7 0 100.0 1997 99 43 33 8 95.6 168 13 2 0 100.0 1996 194 80 33 17 94.8 285 31 8 0 100.0 1995 112 47 35 7 96.5 173 15 4 0 100.0 1994 125 39 25 5 97.4 158 22 5 1 99.5 1993 154 51 32 17 93.3 208 34 7 0 100.0 1992 116 86 38 7 97.2 207 27 5 0 100.0 1991 126 77 53 35 58.0 223 28 10 5 98.1 1990 116 65 31 21 91.0 199 35 6 0 100.0 1989 73 71 51 26 88.2 152 40 24 8 96.4 1988 30 19 13 13 82.7 43 13 6 9 87.3 Total 4 2,345 1,230 655 253 94.4 3,661 469 126 31 99.3 In Range: % of all 52.3 27.4 14.6 5.6 85.4 10.9 2.9 0.7 Analyses in Range' Sum of Analyses 4,483 4,287
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding.
(1) This breakdown excludes the 71 verification analyses associated with the startup of this area of the Laboratory during 1988-89. (2)Deviation Categories 1-4 as noted in Table 13, Footnote (1) F:MIDMIN\CORRESIEL 027-06 -A23-
TABLE 20 BIOASSAY ANALYSIS RESULTS BREAKDOWN BY FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA, MEDIA AND MEASUREMENT CATEGORIES JULY - DECEMBER 2005 Bias Criteria (1) Precision Criteria (2) 1 1 2 3 4 1 i 2 1 3 i 4
1. Urine (3) _
Gamma H-3 Total Number In Range: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Percentage of 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Total Processed*: Sum of Analyses: 0 0 (1) Percent Bias by Deviation Category as noted in Table 13, Footnote (1) (2) Percent Precision by Deviation Category as noted in Table 13, Footnote (2) (3) There were no internal or external bioassay QC samples analyzed during this period.
Total may not equal 100 due to rounding F:\ADMIN\CORRES\EL 027-06 -A24-
TABLE 21 CONDITION REPORT (CR) STATUS (JULY - DECEMBER 2005) (OPEN) (CLOSED) INITITION CLOSE-OUT CR# DATE DATE DESCRIPTION STATUS AS OF 12131105 Internal process checks for 1-129 for Testing indicated that a bias exists with the gamma spectroscopy detector the first and second quarters of 2004 calibration. A new NIST source, backordered, was received on 6120105. had positive biases greater than the Recalibration of the gamma spectroscopy detector completed on 9129105. CR 04-18 30-Nov-04 29-Sep-05 acceptance limit. Efficiency change appears to correct the historical postiive trend. Fe-5 Pat smpl faled 5161QC The ICP and chemists were tested successfully on iron recovery analysis with negative bias5 techniques. A new Fe-55 calibration for the liquid scintillation counter was CR 05h6 1 28-Juta5 e-feba5 put in place using a new primary NIST traceable standard. Bias of -15.5% with limit of 15%. Sample recounted with no change. 1st Analytics 4th quarter 2004 air quarter 2005 AP counted by GPC (20.8 pCi. -5.0% bias), gamma particulate gross alpha QC failure. spectroscopy (24.3 pCi, +11% bias), and known (21.9 pCi). Contacting Analytics on AP prep details to determine cause of bias shift from one CR 05-10 30-Mar-05 quarter to the next. MAPEP prepared vegetation is a fine, dry powdery material, unlike true MAPEP Am-241 in vegetation environmental vegetation samples. Some losses were experienced during Warning. transfer for gamma counting. Handling precautions are being added to worksheet templates for MAPEP vegetation samples. CR 05-13 24-May-5 28-Sep 5 ______________ ____________________________ MAPEP Ni-63 in water False No apparent cause identified for false negative result. Four samples of lowe Negative. activities were analyzed concurrently and all passed the acceptance criteria. CR 05-14 24-May-5 28-Jul-5 Staff training was conducted for chain-of-custody, sample receipt, sample custody fosm could not be located. handling, sample storage, and sample disposal. Potential problems that CR 05-15 22-Aug-05 22-Dec05 may have caused loss of cabbage sample were included in the training. F:ADMIN'CORRES~EL 027-06 A5
-A25-
TABLE 21 (continued) CONDITION REPORT (CR) STATUS (JULY -DECEMBER 2005) (OPEN) (CLOSED) INITIATION CLOSE-OUT CR1 DATE DATE DESCRIPTION STATUS AS OF 12131105 Anaytis Prt 0 F-552ndquaterAnalytics identified a previously unknown Fe-55 contaminant in one of the skalytileParetaFe-5 criteuarter radionuclides used to create the Part 50 QC sample. New samples were CR 05-16 22-Aug-05 28-Sep-05 spike failed acceptance critena. submitted and successfully analyzed. Part 61 filter sample mistaken for Part Sample was stored in a non-standard location and processing chemist failed 50 filter - preparation caused loss of to fully verify the required analyses. Personnel involved were counseled alkaline fraction (H-3, C-14. Tc-99, I- concerning verification of processing protocol and review of sample CR 05-17 31-Au-0 2-Nov-05 129). worksheets prior to performing sample preparation. Sample submission form contained incorrect analysis code (gamma vice Analytics charcoal QC samples not charcoal gamma) causing delay in processing. Personnel have been processed expeditiously s etrained on completing documentation and questioning unusual submittals. i . The status review report has been updated to ensure weekly review of all CR 05-18 23-Nov-05 sample status. Sample volumes have been corrected and OC results passes acceptance Part 50 Sr-89/90 QC failed due to criteria. Use of personal notebooks has been eliminated. All documentation incorrect sample volume entered into is recorded directly on controlled worksheets. Procedures are being revised spreadsheet. to include this precaution. Chemist's notebook has been reviewed for similar CR 05-19 23-Nov-05 problems. Pipet daily iC logs list incorrect Limits were listed in rounded form, causing potential unidentified failures. acceptance limits. The maximum error was identified as cl%. OC logs have been updated and CR 05-20 12-Dec-05 acemists have been retrained on correct format of QC limits values. Procedure Read & Sign training not Procedure training has been completed. Individuals had documented completed for 2 chemists. qualifications for the 2 procedures identified. Closure pending verification of CR 05-21 12-Dec-05 cmltdfr2heisprobable cause investigation. Several radiation protection records Departure of Radiation Safety Officer (RSO) prior to audit caused inability of were unable to be located during new RSO to locate several records. Search of files for these records is in CR 05-22 22-Dec-05 annual audit. process. F:UADMIN\CORRESMEL 027-06 -A26-
TABLE 22 UPDATED INSTRUMENTATION/ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES ISSUED DURING JULY-DECEMBER 2005 TITLE REVISION EFFECTIVE NUMBER DATE Suggested Sample Collection 15 11/18/05 Procedures for Environmental Media The Determination of Iodine-131 in Environmental Media Using Anion 26 08/03/05 Exchange Chromatography The Determination of Tritium in Environmental, Bioassay, and Plant 3 09/13/05 Effluent Samples Using the Micro Distillation Apparatus Operation of the Ortec Maestro Multichannel Analyzer (MCA) Emulation 2 08/22/05 Software System Operation of the Portable Gamma Spectrometry System for Emergency 14 07/15/05
Response
Standardization and Verification of 17 11/23/05 Carriers Laboratory Training and Qualification 13 09/13/05 Guideline F:ADMIN\CORRES\EL 027-06 A-29
APPENDIX A INTER/INTRA-LABORATORY, ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING ANALYTICS, DOE, ERA AND NIST QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM RESULTS F:AADMINUCORRES\EL 027-06
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP GROSS ALPHA AIR PARTICULATE RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 z 60 0 40 Upper Control Limit (+26.0%) z 20 0 0 . _ [i-
-20 -L --- over Cactio DRiC2-5.(5%) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
LL
-40 -60
ERA opC
-80 A NIST V ANALYTICS -100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I - An, uUC Al F MA IN A W 11 AM EP OCT NO V E ON FMBMARA M MAJWY AL 3 (E NOI O OC ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP GROSS ALPHA WATER RESULT BIAS 100 80 z 60 0 40 z 20 0 0 LL -20 Li 8U-
-40 -60 -80 -100 A FEBWARAP aYY IL AL SP 0 1 NY LE E A FEB W AP WAYM It RC S OCT EO ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
YR BATCH 28 QC CROSS CHECK ANALYSIS SHEET SAMPLE TYPE: WATER ISSUANCE DATE: 01/30/2006 REF. DATE: 03129/2005 LAS SAMPLE NO: 1020902 ANAL DATE:. 12/2112005 UNITS: pCf/L . NUCLIDE RESULT I RESULT 2 RESULT 3 MEAN KNOWN X % % VALUE DIFF.1 DIFF.2 DIFF.3
.. .33 _ * . ........ . ... 3.........................30............
Alpha ( 333 t 46)E-01 49.20E 00 -32.30 0eta ( 584
41)E-01 59.80E 00 -2.30 Internal spike for Gross Alpha In water was analyzed according to specific client protocol. The known value was less than 10 times the method MDC. The result met the client's QC acceptance criteria.
ALL RESULTS PASSED -A PERFORMANCE CRITERIA EXCEPT.THOSE NOTED WITH AN ASTERISK
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP GROSS ALPHA RESULT BIAS 100 80 z 60 3: 0 40 z 20 0 0 [T-
-20 LL 11 -40 -60 -80 -100 EA W AY a ai A C T c i XA M A Eff B W 9i U O (
ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Am-241 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I II 80 _ z 60 _ 0 40 _ z 20 k- Upper Control ULmit (+2.0-X) _ _ v p 0 0 *0 ffi * :* 0* 'a *
-20
0 0 3
- -- -- 0j~troI1m[lra 00%)--------------------------- ---
LL P- -40 _
-60 _ -
ERA
*pC -80 A "_ST V ANALYTCS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -100 I PDOE .IW FEB MI aFR WAa a ai SEP v T t: RN FEBa 0 aYw a a a w N Ht ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Ba-133 RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 0 40 z 20 0 0 IL
-20 LL 11- -40 -60 FERA -80 I ANALYTICS -100 FB MIAR RN~4 i MAYJS iia LTV S PER OAR FI2004 MAYJ1 W P N E ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I 80 z 60 o 40 Z UpUpe Control Limit (+15.0%) 20 _-_ o0 LL Lower Control Limit (-15.0%) L 60 -*ERA
*PC -80 ANIST A ANALYTICS -100 0DOE XN AR a IN a M a a a v 0 a Y ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP BETA (NON-AP) RESULT BIAS 100 80 z 60 0 40 20 0 0 GE U-
-20 U-U- -40 -60 -80 -100 FEBW MR 8 MAY IN A AM a OCT NW E A FEB MAPR MAY aI JE AM 9 0HJ E ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP C-14 RESULT BIAS 10 0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 z 60 o 40 Upper Control Limit (+20.0%) o 0 LL _20 tr --- --- Contrcd Uf (-20.0%) LL -40 X -60 _ *ERA
*PC A NIST T ANALYTICS -1 00 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I IDOE IIN FEBWAI~Pi MAYJI NJ1IIUG SEPOCTNW E JN FEBMANNM llY 1N JU NJ) SEP(E l OEC ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
YR QC BATCH 1 CROSS CHECK ANALYSIS SHEET SAMPLE TYPE: CONCRETE ISSUANCE DATE: 09/19/2005 REF. DATE: 09/08/2005 LAB SAMPLE NO: X23959 ANAL DATE: 09/14/2005 UNITS: UCi/q NUCLIDE RESULT 1 RESULT 2 RESULT 3 HEAN KNOWN X % X VALUE DIFF.1 DIFF.2 DIFF.3 C-14 ( 459 t 37)E-08 65.OOE-07 -29.40 Matrix spike for C-14 in concrete was analyzed according to specific client protocol. The result met the client's QC acceptance criteria. ALL RESULTS PASSED QA PERFORMANCE CRITERIA EXCEPT THOSE NOTED WITH AN ASTERISK
YR QC BATCH 2 CROSS CHECK ANALYSIS SHEET SAMPLE TYPE: CONCRETE ISSUANCE DATE: 09/19/2005 REF. DATE: 09/08/2005 LAB SAMPLE NO: X23995 ANAL DATE: 09/15/2005 UNITS: uCi/g NUCLIDE . RESULT 1 RESULT 2 RESULT 3 MEAN KNOWN X % X VALUE DIFF.1 DIFF.2 DIFF.3 C-14 ( 442
38)E-08 56.OOE-07 -21.10 Matrix spike for C-14 in concrete was analyzed according to specific client protocol. The result met the clients QC acceptance criteria.
ALL RESULTS PASSED QA PERFORMANCE CRITERIA EXCEPT THOSE NOTED WITH AN ASTERISK
YR QC BATCH 3 CROSS CHECK ANALYSIS SHEET SAMPLE TYPE: CONCRETE ISSUANCE DATE: 09/20/2005 REF. DATE: 09/08/2005 LAB SAMPLE NO: X23999 ANAL DATE: 09/16/2005 UNITS: uCi/g NUCLIDE RESULT 1 RESULT 2 RESULT 3 MEAN KNOWN X X X VALUE DIFF.1 DIFF.2 DIFF.3 C-14 ( 495 f 48)E-08 71.OOE-07 -30.30 Matrix spike for C-14 in concrete was analyzed according to specific client protocol. The result met the client's QC acceptance criteria. ALL RESULTS PASSED QA PERFORMANCE CRITERIA EXCEPT THOSE NOTED WITH AN ASTERISK
- ..- - - - . - - - ..- rI.- I-- II - - - - - -
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Cd-109 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I 80I z1 601 0 401 Upper Control Limit (+15.0%) z 200 0 0 LL -20 _ Lower Control Limit (-15.0%) U-) Li-1 -40 _
-60 _
ERA OPn
-80 1- A NIST V ANALYTICS -100 I I I
I I
. I . I I . I I . I . I I . I. I I. I I. I. I .I .I I
DOE A fB RMAYA M i A N W C I FB W M A Y M J 4 P VI EE ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Ce-141 RESULT BIAS 100 I I II I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I i 80 [ z 60 I 0 40 20 - Upper Control Limit (+15.0%) _ __ __ __ __ __Ir_ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .9 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ z\011 0. UT- I 4 Vr
-20 _ Lower Control Umit (-16.0%)
LL LL Ci -40 _ 0-0
-60
ERA
*PC -80 A MST T ANALYTICS -100 II I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 1 A FEB MwAR MAYIN n aG i a P 1 a H A a" aY INa a a 0 a 1 EC ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Co-57 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I T I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 - z 60 ¢ 40 0 - Upper Control Limit (+15.0X) a: 20 \" d&I&lk4 4 [i- I Lowsr Contrdol mt(-i O-) -- - - - - - - -- - _ LL I 40 t-60 _ *ERA
-801 _ MST I ANALYTICS
-100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ S_ A w IDOEf. JANFE MR MAYA JK SEi NOV A FE B W M MAY M A M SP OC NOV11 ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Co-58 RESULT BIAS 100 .I .I .I .I .I I. I. .I .I .I .I .I .I .I .I .I ... I II
.I .I .I .I .I 80 z 601 0 40 _
20 - r Contrfo Limit (+16.0X) t-cz
-20 _ Lower Corntrd LImit (-1 5.0X)
LL
-40 _ -601 -I. ERA opc -80 _ A MST v ANALYTICS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -100 9 DOE A FEB MARAP WAY I L AG OCT NDV 1 A FEB MARAPRMAYM It U P OTI I11 ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
INTRALABORATORY CROSS CHECK ANALYSIS SHEET SAMPLE TYPE: MILK ISSUANCE DATE: 10/11/2005 REF. DATE: 06/09/2005 LAB SAMPLE NO: 941001 ANAL DATE.: 06/20/2005 LAB SAMPLE NO: 941002 ANAL DATE: 06/21/2005 LAS SAMPLE NO: 941003 ANAL DATE: 06/21/2005 UNITS: pCi/L
...... .......... __.... ... I.... ............. _._........... ............ ......................... ........ I............... .... ...... ........ .......... ..,..............................
NUCLIDE RESULT 1 RESULT 2 RESULT 3 MEAN KNoWN X % X VALUE DIFF.1 DIFF.2 DIFF.3 Co-So C 64
18)E-01 C 38

13)E-01 C 73

20)E-01 53.00E-01 20.80 -28.30 37.70 X DIFF FROM MEAN: 58.33E-Oi 9.7U. -34.90 25.10 All three measurements of Analytics spike for Co-58 in milk exceeded the 15% bias limit, however, the mean of the three measurements was
+10.1% and each analysis result the 2-sigma uncertainty ranige overlapped the known. The spike level of the sample was well below 10 times the method MDC. ALL-RESULTS PASSED QA PERFORMANCE CRITERIA EXCEPT THOSE NOTED WITH AN ASTERISK
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Co-60 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I III 80 z 60 0 40 z V 20 - Upper Control Limit_- (+ 15.0%) A- A* + 0 - _-'W 4
- -r U-PLf" 4*
Ff-LL
-20 _ Lower Contro UmIt (-156.0%)
1-L-
-40 _ -60 _
ERA
*PC -80 _ A MST T ANALYTICS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -100
DOE AI FEB M FR MY AR kIl At AU BP O H ECN RE1 W F MAYM BAP It EP OC MG ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Cr-51 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 1-z 60 - 0 40 1 z 20 I ~ Upper Control Lknlit (+15.0%) _e _--- -- - --- - "I' l 9,~~ 0 I -T V lL I-I
-20 - Lower Corntrd Umit (-16.0%) - -
LL
-401 U- -60!
ERA
*PC -80 A NST V ANALYTICS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _ nm) -100 JA FE MI N F MAY1N lt NJRS OCTN E L4N FAI W A MM 1NJJY lt SEPOCT0 ((C ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
INTRALANORATORY CROSS. CHECK-ANALYSIS SHEET SAMPLE TYPE: MILK ISSUANCE DATE: 02/08/2006 REF. DATE: 09/15/2005 LAB SAMPLE.NO 988901 ANAL DATE: 0923/2005 LAB.SAMPLE:' NO: 988902 ANAL DATE: 09123/2005 LAB SAMPLE MO: 988903 ANAL DATE: 09/23/2005 UNITS: pCI/L
--- - - - - - - - - - - - - -- I . . . . . . . . . . . . ......-.-.... . ..... ... . . . . . ..
t- -.-- . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . NUCLIDE RESULT 1 RESULT 2 RESULT 3 MEAN KNOWN X x X VALUE DIFF.1 DIFF.2 DIFF.3 Ce-141 ( 2246 +/- 36)E-01 ( 2325 f 36)E-01 t 2284
39)E-01 23.30E 01. -3.60 -0.20 -2.00 X DIFF FRO4 MEAN: 22.85E. 01 -1.70 1.80 0.00
( 669 S 221E-01 ( 618 s 27)E-01 C 632 t 25)E-01 63.40E 00 5.50 -2.50 -0.30
% DIFF FROM MEAN: 63.97E 00 4.60 -3.40 -1.20 Co-60 ( 1625 t 26)E-01 C 1668 t 30)E-01 ( 1662
30)E-01 16.70E 01, -2.70 -0.10 -0.50 X DIFF FROM MEAN: 16.52E 01 -1.60 1.00 0.60 Cr-51 ( 273 18)E 00 ( 312 t 18)E 00 C 334 t 19)E 00 33.80E 01 -19.20* -7.70 -1.20
% DIFF FROM MEAN: 30.63E 01 -10.90 1.80 9.00 Analytics spike for Cr-51 in milk exceeded the 15% bias limit and the 2-sigma range;'however, the mean bias of the three measurements was
-9.4%. The known value was less than 10 times the method MDC. ALL RESULTS PASSED QA PERFORMANCE CRITERIA EXCEPT THOSE NOTED WITH AN ASTERISK
INTRALABORATORY CROSS CHECK ANALYSIS SHEET SAMPLE TYPE: WATER ISSUANCE DATE: 02/08/2006 REF. DATE: 09/15/2005 LAB SAMPLE NO: 988801 ANAL DATE: 09/2412005 LAB SAMPLE NO: 988802 ANAL DATE: 09/24/2005. LAB SAMPLE NO: 98J803 ANAL DATE: 09/24Z005 UNITS: pCi/L NUCLlbE RESULT I RESULT 2 RESULT 3 MEAN 'KNOWN % % X VALUE DIFF.1 DIFF.2 DIFF.3
........ .............. .. .... .... ~.......... .. ........ .... .... . ..... ..... ........ ........... ........................ .... . .. ... ... ..... .................
Ce-141 t 2762
38)E-01 22750 i 39)E-01 C 2780

41)E-01 28.20E 01 -2.10 -2.50 -1.40
% DIFF FROM MEAN: 27.64E 01 -0.10 -0.50 0.60 Co-58 t 748
23)E-01 C 713 t 28)E-01 C 713

26)E-01 77.OOE 00 -2.90 -7.40 -7.40 X DIFF FROM MEAN: 72.47E 00 3.20 -1.60 -1.60 Co-60 (1932 t 27)E-01 ( 1883 t 30)E-01 C 1949 I 31)E-01 20.20E .01 -4.40 -6.80 -3.50
% DIFF FROM MEAN: 19.21E 01 0.60 -2.00 1.40 Cr-51 t 361 +/- 18)E 00 ( 345 t 18)E 00 C 349 t 19)E 00 40.80E 01 -10.00 -15.40* -14.50 % 01FF FROM MEAN: 35.37E 01 3.80 -2.50 -1.30 Cs-134 C 1354
30)E-01 (1409 t 34)E-01 .(1356 t 35)E-01 14.80E 01 -8.50 -4.80 -8.40
% DIFF FROM MEAN: 13.73E 01 -1.40 2.60 -1.20 Analytics spike for Cr-51 In water exceeded the 15% bias limit and the 2-sigma range, however, the mean bias of the three measurements was -13.3%. The known value was less than 10 times the method MDC.
ALL RESULTS PASSED QA PERFORMANCE CRITERIA EXCEPT THOSE NOTED WITH AN ASTERISK
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Cs-134 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 1 z 60 I 0 401 z 20 Upper Control Lk-lt (+16.0%) CE 4vJ 0 11 F-cri ,* r .t 4 . lL -20 _- Lower Contrdo LUmit(-16.0%) 11 LL -40k
-60 _
ERA
*PC -80 A NIST V ANALYTICS -100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
DOE AN F M MY M J U P I 0 E A B MA AM MY M It AM P 1I 01 M ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Cs-137 RESULT BIAS 100 80 z 60 0i> 40 z 20 0 0 LL
-20 LL lL -40 C] -60 -80 -100 A E MA KWV MA J JI M~ 0AN J E MM Aff W MA i i 0ML 9P 0 I ( [
ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Fe-55 RESULT BIAS 100 I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I- l I 80 k z 60 0 40 v 20 - Upper Control Limit (+15.0X)
& 5 00 .,0- * * * *. I ' .3. -* -* ntr Umi (-1M~-i5.0X)-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
11 E-40 t-60 -
ERA
-80k A MST v ANALYTK3S II II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
-100 0 DOE M FEBM NEA MAY A AiM f OCT E I FEBMM 0 MAYa aI M SP OC 0 E ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Fe-59 RESULT BIAS 100 I 1I I I I I I I I I I I I I~ I I 1 I I I I 80 k z 60 - 7' 0 40 1 z 20 -I -- Upper Contrd Limit (+16.0%) I Ir -V_ 0 0 LL -20 L--er Crantrc Limit (-15.0%) 11 LL
-40 _ -60k
ERA
*PC A HST V ANALYTKCS -100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -ncrwr JAN FEBWI APRtMAYJN J. AM SEP C1 NOVE0 AJ FEB WI NAMWAL Y IN lM SEPOCTNOV110 ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP H-3 RESULT BIAS 100 80 z 60 0 40 z3: 20 0 0 LL
-20 LL C] -40 -60 -80 -100 JANFlM WAR M NAY 11 A U ST OCT NY E A FB i MAY 1a aA SE NT N E ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP CHARCOAL RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I - - I I I I I I I I I l -l 80 _ z 60 _ 0 40 _ z 20 -_ -_ - -_ - Upper Contrd Llmit (+15.0%)
* *
9 9 0 0 U.w - -
11
-20 _ -L-w- Corntro ULmit (-16.0%)
LL L\
-40 1- -60 _- - + ERA GPC -80 _ A NST Y ANALYTICS I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -100 JA FEBkR APR)A JM Al N SP 0I NY 1 JANFEB M APR MY IN It ME 0P 0 Q C[TE ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP 1-131 (Gamma) RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I II III I I 1 1 80 F z 60 F 0 40[ zv 20 - Upper Control Linit (+15.0%)
- - - -z -
0 04 W, ._ 11
-20 Lo~wer Contrd UmIt (-150%)
LL Lu) -40 _
-60 _
ERA
*PC -80 _ A NIST V ANALYTICS -100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I JAN FEBMARAPRMAYJIN IA ALGSEPOCTNOV [R A FE WR APR MY 1 11 NIG S OCTNN OEC ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP 1-131 LOW LEVEL RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I IITITITITIITIII 80 1 z 60 1 0 40I z 20 _ T _ _Up ontroI itmlt (+15.0%) V app - - - - - - -- - - - - - 0 0 Low Um4I (-15.)
-IF I Uy-LL -20 LowN~ Control UmHt (-16.0X) ---- - -1 -40k -601
ERA
*pC -80 _ A "ST V ANALYTICS I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -100 ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP K-40 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1I1- _1_1 80i 60 z 0 40 z 20 - Uppeu Conirod Udrit (+15.0%) 11 -- __--- - - t - ---------- V 4* 0C: 0 Fi
-20 I Lower Contrd Umit (-16.0%)
U-) -40
-60
ERA
*PPC -80 A "ST V ANALYTICS I I I I I I I I I I I I I -100 I I I I I I I I I A DOE A FEBUR RAMAYIN It Af SEP0X1 N OV H 4 FEB MARAM MY IN AL N 0 OCT I H ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Mn-54 RESULT BIAS 100 1 1 1 1 1 1 1II 1 1I I I I -1 I- I -- 80 60 z 0 40 z 20 - Upper Control Llrnlt (+15.0%) WI 4 a T > _- 0 0 I * ' 4
-20 - Lower Contil Limit (-15.0%)
LL U-) -40
-60 -_i ERA *PC -80 _ -_ A MST V ANALYTICS -100 I I I I I I* I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I [ DOE JAN FEBkW APRWAYIN A A BP OCT NJ HE JA FEB WM APR fMY IN A1 A SEPOCTNYA LD ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Ni-63 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I T I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80k z 60 3: 40 v 20 - iUper Control Limit (+16.0%) 0 0 t
w r-Lw- 2 0 - Control Limit (-15.0X)
LL
-40 0-60
ERA OPn
-80 A "ST v ANALYTICS
-100 I I I I I I I
~ I ,~~~~~~~~~
I I
~ I I ~ I I I . ,,...W DO V:FVVl_
I FE IN MR MAY0J M P IT N I A W AR MAYIN Jl SP O CT 0 [E ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Pu-238 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 _ z 60 _ 0 40 _ zy 20 Uppsr Control Limit (+200%) 0 0 - 0. 0
-20 - - - Lo- ContrRil FOmTI F20.OMF - - - - -
m LL 11 -40 _
-60 _
ERA
*PC -80 _ A NST V ANALYTICS -100 I , I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
DOE IW FE MRW M W JNAG S OC V EG FEB WMARA MAY 'At Ri SE OCT L EC ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Pu-239 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I-I-- I I I-I I I II III 80 z 60 0 40 z Upper Control Lldt (+20Q0%) 20 v 0 0 11
-20 LorverControl [all F-20.0%)--
11 LL U-U- -40
-60
ERA
*PC -80 A "ST VAANALYTICS I I I I I I -100 I I I I I I I I I II I I I I I I , "I.nDOE ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Pu-241 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 z 60 _ 0 40 _ z 20 - uppeontridt +2.%)- - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - LL 0 0 £ s
- - -- Low -Ctu d 11 -20 -- U rndL-2 0.QZ) - - -- - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - - -- - -
LL
-40 _
0-
-60 _
opo
-80 _ A NST , ANALYTIS I I I I I I. I. -100 .
I I I. I. I. I. I I I . I. I. I. I I I _fiW W --- A FEB W MR WAYJi Ai A SEPOCTNOYEECA FEB W A MAYA MJ1 P OT N I ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Ra-228 BY GAMMA RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 60 0 40 z 20 - _ _ _ _ _ _Upper _ _ Control _ _ _Limit _ _(+15.0%) 0 0 p UT-
-20 I- - Lower Crontrod Limit (-15.0X)
L.L ONN
-40 -60 ePC -80 A NIST v ANALYTICS -100 I I I I - I I _ W AN FMI W M MY AI IN J Jl 9' OCT A FIM WDE AMFIM4R1 AYS E 3 0P CT N E
ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Sr-89 (COMBINED WITH Sr-90) RESULT BIAS 100 80 z 60 0 40 z3: 20 0 0 c1 LL
-20 LL -40 -60 -80 -100 A FEBW M MWAY IN A G ' OCTNW G A FM B AM MY aL J SO' OCT [E ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Sr-90 RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 0 40 20 0 0
-20 LL U-) -40 ONNO -60 -80 -100 aM F9 A MAY WR AtO IN a AI SP VN fl DE F AM MAYIr JN a JJ3 OCT [
EEC ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Sr-90 (COMBINED WITH Sr-89) RESULT BIAS 1 0 0I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 z 60 o 40
-- - - ppm Control Limit (+25.0) 20 o 0 -206o - - - - -- - - - - - - - -2105 -L-L - L-Wer-Control Oril (-25.01) -- - - - - - - - - - - -M- - - - - - - - - - - -40 0 -60 *ERA *PC -80 A "ST V ANALYTICS 1M LA Af MYJ0I W0 E J 0~~4 ~ Mi R W J~I i E 1 [
0 OE ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Tc-99 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I-] I I I I 80 1 z 60 k 0 40 T 20 - Upper Control Limit (+16.0%) z 0 - I 0 I wo m m _s A
0 0
_ __ _ _ _ ;i_ _ _ _ LL Lowe
-20 --- -- 0 o~eI o (0 11 I1-I -40 _
OPC
-80 A NST v ANALYTICS -100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I _m A Ff IU P WY M U AM T 0 A W MAW IL J T( 0 E ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP U-234 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I , I I I11 i I I - I I 80 z 60 0 40 z
-Upper Control Limit (+20.0%)
V 20 0 0 cc LL LL
-20 L--oer tC-ntro 1Omt U-20.6O)---
1-
-40 -60 -
ERA
*PC -80 -_ A NIST v ANALYTiCS I I -100 I I i I I I I I I I II I I I I I I I II vuc ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP U-238 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 80 . 60 0 40 z 20 Upper Control Llmit (+20.0%) 0 0 Ui-
-20 IU-U- -40 -60
ERA
*PC -80 A NIST v ANALYTICS -100 i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I
DOE AN FEl lA MR MAY N J1L KG SEPOCTfJ N FEB WMA lOE IE AIMMAYJ Jl IIG SEPOCT N71 MEG ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS REMP Zn-65 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I II I I I I- I- I
- I I I I I
I I I I I I 80 z 601 0 40f z 20 Upper Control Limit (+15.0%)
- -.Y.._----- -- -- 4 ------ 4--- - - -----
PII _-
IV, 0 -4 z~ 4-! 4 cc r +r~
-20 _l- Lower Control Limit (-15.0X) u- -40 _ -60k
ERA
*PC -80 _ -_ A MST V ANALYTICS -100 I I I I I 1 II I I I I I I I I I I I I I S DOE AN FEBWAR AM MAYAN iLM SEP OcT E DEC iA FEBMA MR WY IN It A SEPOCT0 Mc ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
APPENDIX B EFFLUENT MONITORING AND WASTE CHARACTERIZATION QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS (IOCFR PART 50/61) F:AADMINMCORES\EL 027-06
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 GROSS ALPHA RESULT BIAS 100 80 60
4 40 0
V 20 9 0 9 LL -2 0 - - - - - -_ o r -m tra Urn (-2.0%) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-40 - -60 A NIT V ANALYTCS -80 *pc 4 OTER -100 L 1 1 1 1 1 1 14Nff U A R ~ tfF EP dM4 N 1 JYXBJN MA aL a g T ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Am-241 RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 z 0 40 z 20 0 0 y-
-20 LL -40 -60 A NIST v ANALYTICS -80 opC 4 OTHER -100 AI N a R a BY a n EX2 0 B P E RIOD 0 X- Y a ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
-.-....------.-I---..- -------*--
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Ba-133 RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 40 0 20 0 f-F -20
-40 -60 -80 -100 AW. FEB APRWAYJAWat AW S OCT EC JA FEBMARAPRMAYEI A A eM OCT0 HC ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 GROSS BETA RESULT BIAS 100 . .~ ~. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 60 z 0 40 z ~rupm- yhtr V 20 olnTm ('*Z6.0%) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- 0 0 LL -20 -- Lnjontrd USl 25.O1) LL u-
-40 O-0'1\ -60 __ _ _ _ Ir I!ng Iri
_ _ I2.) _ _ _ _ -- - _ _ - _- _I -- ------ A NIST V ANALYTICS
-80 *PC 4 OTHER -100 A F a M a1 JiH aii Ma Maa IN a L R aT 13 SP v ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 C-14 RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 z 0 40 z 20 0 LE
-20 LL U-11O -40 -60 -80 -100 M lE WR AM WY W AW a 3 ST g A FE W A MAY M X OCT a aI 1EV ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005 -I---,---,-,--""----,---------",,----------
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Cd-109 RESULT BIAS 100 I . ~.I ~.I .I I I I . I ,. I . I . I . I . .I .I . . I
., I I . I I I
80 60 z 0 40 Upper Control Limit (+16.0%) 20 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _7 0 0 LL -20 Lower Control Umit (-15.0%) LL
-40 -60 A NIST V ANALYTICS -80 *PC 4 OTFER -100 I - I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I a&a a a II sa MW 1OC 0CJ FAa A IaY 1 ll af 0CT ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Ce-141 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 60 z 40 Uper Control Llmh (+16.0%) 20 0 0 LL -20 Lower Con trdoLimit (- 16.0%) U-) 011, -40 _
-60 _ -I A MST V ANALYTICS -80 _ *PC 4 OTHER I I I -100 I I I I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I A FEB MAPIR MAYIN AL AUG P OCTNOVCECA FEB MA PR MAYN Ii XUG ccr 0 ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Cm-243/244 RESULT BIAS 100 I. . . . I . I . I . I . I . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 60 z0 40 Upper Control Limit (+20.0%) z 20 011 0
-20 C ControlLimit (-20.0%) -Lower LL LJ. -40 -60 IA "ST v ANALYTICS -80 _ *PC
_ 4 OTHER
-100 A FEB MR aN aY Ja i aWa v v E AJ aB w aY i0 a a v T 1 ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Co-57 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I 80 60 z 0 40 z 20 -_ - _ _ _ _ LOpW Control Umit (+15.0) 0 0 Uy- -20 F- -Lower Control Limit (-15.0%)
-40 0
o0N
-60 -_ A NIST V ANALYTICS -80 *PC 4 OTHER I I I I I I I -100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I A FE WB I M MAYJIN1L N SP X1 N E FEB 8 AM MAYIN aL k V STI E ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Co-60 RESULT BIAS 100 T I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 B 60 F z 0 40 k z 20 Upper Control Limit (+15.0%) 0 0 4l U 16 It s - LL -20 Lower Control Limit (-15.0%) LL U- -40 _
-60 _ A NIST V ANALYTICS *PC 4 OTHER -100 II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I AIN WF a U4a WX 1N lt a a IAN aE M a W a a ai P Cu a E ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Cs-134 RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 z T7 40 0 z 20 011 0
-20 I-LL -40 -60 -80 -100 AJea w Ma AN a Y JJ4Ia E.A ECB A a BY a a ' v (R ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005 I
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Cs-137 RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 z 71 0 40 z 20 0 0 LL -20 LL 11 011"
-40 -60 A "ST v ANALYTICS -80 *PC 4 OTHER -100 FE MNaa Y a a a ff0 m A EBa N a I a a a v T 0E ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Fe-55 RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 zB7 0 40 20 0 0 rL U-
-20 -11 r-) -40 -60 -80 -100 MN a a MAYaN SI1 U4 aOI (XT E A B w a aE 0P T N EaC ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Fe-59 RESULT BIAS 100 T I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 60 z 0 40 z 20 - _ - _ _ _ _ Upper Control Lkltt (+16.0%) s 0 0 r:
-20 Lower Control Umit (-1560%)
LL
-40 0
o~
-60 A "ST v ANALYTICS -80 *PC t4OTHER -100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I AAY W M J AE i 0 ML cC FH MAl MAR MAY&H I AG OI TQ1 LE ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 H-3 RESULT BIAS 100 I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I TI Ti 80 601 z 0 40I Upper Control Limit (+15.0%) 20! 0 0 A& 41 UT-
-20 Lower Ccntrc UmiM (-15.0X)
LA-
-40 -60 A NST T ANALYTICS -80 PC 4 OTHER -100 AN FEB UtR IF AY 1N 11 Mfl SP (ICT taf E J I HIN FEA MARMA MAY AIG SEPCOTHH HE ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 1-129 RESULT BIAS 100 . .I .I .I .I .I .I I. .I .I I. I. .I .I .I .I .I . .I .I .I I. I. I 80 _ 60 _ z 0 40 z 20 Upper Controlf _16.0_) _ 0 0 0 [L 20
Lower Control Llmit (-1b.0%)
I1
R -40 _
-60 _ A "ST V ANALYTICS -80 _ *PC 4 OTHER -100 I I I I - I I I I I I I I I I lI I I I I 1 A FM I UA~ N AL YSS PGERIO 2 0 0 4 MAY 2 0 0 5A CT 0 R ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 1-131 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 k 60 k z 0 40 1 z 202 0__ _ _ _ _Upper _ _ Control _ _ (+15.0X) _ _ _ Limit _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _- 0 0 A
Uf-
-20 Lower Control Limit (-15.0%)
LL
-40 _ -60 _ A NIST V ANALYTICS -80 _ *PC 4 OTHER -100 I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I A a WIN NY aA 1 Elt HIWSEP JA aEB w a a A SE l E ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Mn-54 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I -- I I I I - 1 -- I - 1- I - I - I 80 60 _ z 0 40 _ z 2 02 0__ _ _ _ _Upper _ _ Contral _ _ _ Limit _ _ (+_15.0X) 0 0 A S UT-20 F Lower Control LImit (- 15.0%) U-) -40 _ U-0
-60 _ -iA N*ST V ANALYTICS -80 _ *PC 4 OTHER I -100 I I I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I A FEBWJ^APRMAYM At AU SEPocr N E JANFEBU M MA MR Y N IL 6D P OCT tOI CE ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Ni-63 RESULT BIAS 100 . .I .I .I .I .I .I .I .I .I .I .I .I .I .I I. I. .I .I .I .I .I .I I 80 60 z 40 z 20 Upper Control L__nt (_ 15_.0%) m 0 0 0 1W - L C V 1
,r
-20 Lower Ccnitrod Ulmt (-15.0%)
LL
-40 U- -60 A ST V ANALYTICS -80 *PC 4 OTHER -100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I A FEB IM AMffiMAY I J Mo S OCT NOYCE AN FEB IM Rf MAY 1N Al NSP OCT 0 CM ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Np-237 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 80 1 60 - z 0 40 1 z 20 - Upper Control Umit (+20.0%) 0
0 0 . S ffi 2 w1 -20 - Loer Contr-o Limit (-20-X)
LL LL
-40 k -60 P A NIST V ANALYTCS -80 1 -_ PC 4 OTHER -100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I JA FEa UR aN lal IN Ja a AU P CCTN0 [EC VW FEA Ma RINfa MwA1N J1 AUGS (El N0 ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Pu-238 RESULT BIAS 100 I I I I I I I I I 1 1 1 T I 80 60 z 40 0 Upper Control Limit (+200) z 20 0
a A a 0 I IF LL -20 -- L-Wer Contrd Llm;t (-20.o%)
LL 1-6U-
-40 -60 A NST V ANALYTICS -80 *pC 4 OTHER -100 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I A F MARAM MAYAN It SE 1 CTM I A FEB MARAP MAYIN A AW ' OT 0 IEG ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Pu-239 RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 T7 03: 40 20 0 0
-20 LL -40 'ox -60
A MST V ANALYTICS
-80 . PC 4 OTHER -100 A FE MAR " M Ja &L US a OC r WE A E aFE R aT MY a A afl P m1 E0 ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005 ,-.- .. - .1~-
I--.~-1-t
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Pu-241 RESULT BIAS 100 -I I - I I I I T- I - I I I I I I I I I- I I I1 1 1 80 60 z 0 40 z . . . . pper Control UmRt (+20.0X) v 20 - - i - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - 0 0 it 0 It 3w A, U, U Ur- I
-20 Lower Controd UmHt (-20.0%) -
LL I-
-40 -60 A NIST T ANALYTICS -80 *PC 4 OTHER -100 I I I I I III I I I I I I I I I I I I I I A FEB ffi MVAY IL M SP OCf NOY L A FEB A AM MAYJ IL Ms 0 OcT m CE ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Sr-89 RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 z 0 40 z 20 Upper Control LIT~t (+16.0X) 311 Ir" 19 It 0 0
-20 Lowr ContriLimit (-15.0X)
LL II U- -40
-60 _A "ST V ANALYTICS -80 *PC 4 OTHER I I I I I I I I -100 I I I I I I l I I I I I I I I PN FEB MARAR MAYIN IL M P OC 1 MV J4 FEBME A FA MAY J4 a 0 1C [EC E
ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Sr-90 RESULT BIAS 100 -I I I I I I I 80 1 60 1 z 40F 0 z Upper Control Llmit (+16.0%) 20 a W I 9 0 0 -r LL -20 Lm - ( Lower Controilimit (-16.0%) u-LL Ln -40 _ cX
-601 A MST V ANALYTICS -801 *PC 4 OTHER I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I -100 PN F I IAY W M IN l tR AUB SEIN H? MCEC PFMR S8l VI J JIO ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Tc-99 RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 z0B7 40 3: z 20 075 0 Uy-lL- -20 LL
11) -40 C]\
-60 -80 -100 FEBW APR E EAY M JUL AU SEPITI 0 E A FEB A WY I0 AL Ma a OCT? E ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
2004-2005 QUALITY ASSURANCE TRENDING ANALYSIS PART 50/61 Zn-65 RESULT BIAS 100 80 60 z 40 0 20 0 Uf-
-20 LiL -40 -60 *ANIST V ANALYTICS -80 -PC -100 FMB VI MAY1 Al RN P CO 4 OM A FEB WR NW MAYJDJIL S OPX3T E 0 ANALYSIS PERIOD 2004-2005
APPENDIX C BIOASSAY QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM RESULTS F:UADMIN\CORES\EL 027-06
There are no charts for the bioassay quality control program for this semi-annual report period. F:%ADMIN\CORESYEL 027-06
ATTACHMENT I RESULTS OF THE LABORATORY BLIND DUPLICATE PROGRAM F:AADMINMCORES\EL 027-06 ATTACHMENT 1
A ARE VA February 2, 2006 EL 023/06 Distribution
Subject:
Second Half of 2005, Blind Duplicate Program Results The Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory (E-LAB) participates in a Blind Duplicate Program administered by the participating utility companies. For the second half of calendar year 2005, 99.5% of the paired sample measurement results were within the program's criteria for acceptance. The Blind Duplicate Program began in 1979 as a cooperative effort among the participating companies. Samples are collected and split in the field and submitted to the E-LAB for analysis. The E-LAB Quality Assurance Officer verifies and reports the program results to the participants. The results are evaluated against the E-LAB acceptance criterion established in Reference 1,which states that a paired measurement is in agreement if the individual values are within +/-15% of the mean value. If this condition is not met, a two-sigma range is established for each of the results, which are in agreement if the two ranges overlap. Table I summarized the types of media submitted as part of the Blind Duplicate Program by each participant for a total of 21 paired samples. Table 2 presents the results of the Blind Duplicate Program by analysis type for each participating company. For the second half of 2005 program, 99.5% of the paired measurements met the acceptance criteria as specified in Reference 1. The number of paired measurements falling outside the acceptance criteria is listed before the dash (__ in each company column. For example, the number 1/2 should be interpreted as 1 paired measurement out of 2 falling outside the acceptance criteria. Totals are presented for each participating company as well as for the entire program. REFERENCES
1. Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Manual 100, 'Laoratory Quality Assurance Plan," Revision 9, November 16,2005.
pher SVIton Quality Assurance Officer Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory CAS/cas Attachment Distribution: J. Raimondi J. Pelczar M. Strum E. Mercer (MY) D. Perkins (SB 02-12) D. Montt (YR) E. Moreno FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY: 29 Research Drive, Westborough, MA 01581-3913 Phone: 508 573-6650 Fax: 508 573-880 wwwusiramatome-anp.com
EL 023/06 February 2, 2006 Table I Summary of Paired Samples Submitted July through December 2005 Sample Yankee Maine Seabrook Total Media Atomic Yankee Station Ground Water 2 0 0 2 Surface Water 3 4 8 15 Algae 0 0 2 2 Mussel 0 0 2 2 Total 5 4 12 21 Table 2 Summary of Paired Measurements Analyzed July through December 2005(1) Analysis Yankee Maine Seabrook Total Type Atomic Yankee Station Gamma(2) 1/130 0152 0/208 1/390 Gross Beta 1/5 0/0 0/0 1/5 Tritium 0/5 012 014 0/11 Total 2/140 0/54 0/212 2/406 (1)The number of measurements that fail to meet the acceptance criteria is shown before the slash. (2)The gamma numbers represent the total radionuclide measurements in a gamma isotopic analysis.
Appendix G Meteorological Data
Fermi 2 - 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Radiological Environmental Operating Report In accordance with Section 5.9.1.8 of the Fermi 2 Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM), a summary file of required meteorological data for 2005 is retained on site and available upon request. G-1}}

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=NRC-06-0031,_2005_Annual_Radioactive_Effluent_Release_and_Radiological_Environmental_Operating_Reports&oldid=2665156"

NRC-06-0031, 2005 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release and Radiological Environmental Operating Reports

Contents

Text

References:

Subject:

SUBJECT:

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Subject:

SUBJECT:

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Response

Subject:

Navigation menu