ML071300544

E-Mail from S. Sandike of Entergy to Various, Regarding Assessment of Sr-90 Results in Fish/Inv

ML071300544
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	01/19/2007
From:	Sandike S Entergy Nuclear Operations
To:	James Adler, Burns T, Donahue P, Deborah Gray, Hinrichs G, Hollenbeck P, Quinn D, Sachatello R, Denise Wilson DAQ, Entergy Nuclear Operations, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
FOIA/PA-2007-0166, RG-1.109
Download: ML071300544 (4)

Text

~Jams reult Nggl-infis/mvPage As6~m fFS~9 1 From: "Sandike, Steven Richard" <SSandik@entergy.com>

To: "Burns, Thomas F" <tburnsl @entergy.com>, "Sachatello, Ronald"

<rsach90@entergy.com>, "Adler, Joseph J." <jadler@entergy.com>, "Hollenbeck, Peter"

<pholl9l @entergy.com>, "Quinn, Dennis M" <dquin9l @entergy.com>, <dquinn @daq-inc.com>, "Wilson, Daniel" <DWilson@entergy.com>, "Hinrichs, Gary H" <ghinric@entergy.com>, "Donahue, Patrick J"

<PDonahu@entergy.com>, "Gray, Dara F" <DGray@entergy.com>

Date: 01/19/2007 5:59:06 PM

Subject:

Assessment of Sr-90 results in fish/inv All... Dennis Quinn and I have evaluated the fish/inv analyses results with an eye toward a conservative evaluation of dose impact, assuming of course, the recent analytical results are valid. This assessment is by no means final, but this doc provides an initial determination of worst case dose impact, and what IPEC would have to be releasing to produce this kind of concentration in fish.

<<chm-07-002.pdf>>

Steve Sandike Effluents / RMS ENN Indian Point Energy Center Buchanan, NY 10511-0308 phone: 914-736-8455 fax: 914-734-6010 email: ssandik@entergy.com CONFIDENTIA Y NOTICE: This electronic mesage contains information which may be lega confidential and/or priviled and does not in any case represent a firm ERGY COMMOD9 bid or offer relating thereto which binds the sender o'out an addit al express written confirmation to that effect. ýnforý tion is intended solely for the individual or entity named abov Md access by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are iot e lt ded recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution, ore e of the con nts of this information is prohibited and ma unlawful. If you h e received this electronic transmission in or, please reply immedia to the sender that you have receive he message in error, and delet it. Thank you. Have a pleasant y.

CC: <jdn@nrc.gov>, <dwinslow@gza.com>, "Croulet, Donald K" <dcroule@entergy.com>,

<mbarvenik@ gza.com>

-'ý . - I

-Entergy Indian Point NPP Jan 17, 2007 IPEC-CHM-07-002 MEMORANDUM TO: T. BURNS -NEM SUPERVISOR FROM: S. SANDIKE - Sr. CHEMISTRY SPECIALIST

SUBJECT:

DOSE ASSESSMENTS FROM Sr-90 IN THE HUDSON RIVER FOR FISH AND INVERTEBRATES - JANUARY 2007 RESULTS This report summarizes some worst-case assessments of the Sr-90 identified in early reports of the fall, 2006 batch of REMP samples sent to Areva. I used the 24.5 pCi/kg value in white perch and the 13.9 pCi/kg value in blue crab to bound the dose assessment.

This simple evaluation does NOT account or discuss any of the finer elements of error propagation, critical level, environmental BKGD, constants for non-random error, or other improvements we are discussing with labs. It conservatively assumes all fish and crab identified in the recent lab results are consumed by humans at the RG1.109 consumption rate, and at the highest concentrations reported from this batch of samples. Furthermore, we are assuming that these initially reported concentrations are accurate.

With these bounding conditions, we can obtain annual doses as follows:

I Reg Guide 1.109 and ODCM Fish Inv human total percent Fish/Inv mrem/pCi usage usage doseOf Conc, ingestion factor factor expected, annual pCi/kg dose factor kg/yr kg/yr annually, limit mrem Adult 25/14 7.58E-03 21 5 4.41 44.1%

Teen 25/14 8.30E-03 16 3.8 3.68 36.8 %

Child 25 /14 1.70E-02 6.9 1.7 3.27 32.7 %

Infant 25 / 14 1.85E-02 0 0 0.00 n/a The dose and usage factors above, obtained from Reg Guide 1.109 are identical to those used in the IPEC ODCMs (we do NOT use site specific data for these values).

This evaluation indicates that should all edible aquatic food in this location be consumed at the rates identified in Regulatory Guide 1.109 (at the highest reported concentrations of Sr-90), the maximum individual annual dose would be about 4.4 mrem, or 44% of the annual bone dose (combining the fish and invertebrate dose contribution at this concentration).

If we evaluate ALL the Sr-90 released in liquid effluent from IPEC since 2000, and INCLUDE a conservative assessment of Ground Water's contribution, we can project the IPEC-induced worst case concentration in fish. From the annual effluent reports (Reg Guide 1.21) and the ODCM's Bio-Accumulation Factor for Sr-90, we can conservatively produce the following table:

- -- -~ -Annual AI ua Dilution 1 Diluted Sr-90 Routine year-.90:

GW Total Dic~~' oume concentration Fi lulaed

"  : a.:.*.: Determined. in water, aBl- exaculated Iun Curies Curies Dolutien for Ground outside IPEC faccurfisepectedg S2000! 4.00E-03 3.35E-04 4.34E-03 2.78E+12 2.21E+11 2.95-03 30 2001 5.00E-03 3.35E-04 5.34E-03 2.78E+12 2.21E+11 3.31 E-03 30 9.94E-02 2002 2.45E-03 3.35E-04 2.79E-03 2.78E+12 2.21E+11 2.40E-03 30 7.19E-02 2003 7.30E-03 3.35E-04 7.64E-03 2.78E+12 2.21E+11 4.14E-03 30 1.24E-O0i 2004 1.74E-02 3.35E-04 1.77E-02 2.78E+12 2.21E+11 7.77E-03 30 i.:.,33E'-0-1.

2005 6.42E-04 3.3.5E-04 9.77E-04 2.78E+I12 2.21E+11 1.75E-03 30 .5.24E -02' 2006. 3.80E-04 5.OOE-04 8.80E-04 2.78E+12 2.21 E+1 1 2.40E-03 30 7.20E-O2':

units curies curies' curies liters - ,liters pCilL per pci/kg:,

Note: 2006 data is estimated, but should be relatively accurate.

While we should NOT discount the value originally determined by Areva, this evaluation indicates that we must perform additional investigation in an attempt to validate and understand the 25 pCi/L recently identified at our control location in Roseton.

Even in a very conservative model, total IPEC effluent of Sr-90 would need to approach 1.9 curies in a year to produce this concentration in fish. This is over 100 times the highest annual total and higher than the last 7 years combined.

Certainly, a small amount of Strontium can build up in fish over many years. However, since the average age of Hudson Valley White Perch is 3-4 years (and a maximum of approximately 7 years 1), it is NOT reasonable to assume that IPEC is releasing Sr-90 several hundred times that of the combined conservative measurements without a single effluent or other REMP sample showing this concentration, or the accompanying gamma concentrations. Nonetheless, this scenario should be evaluated along with other, more reasonable possibilities, such as lab error and environmental background components.

Also attached is an independent evaluation from D. Quinn, itemizing dose from each species analyzed.

SS/ss cc: J. Adler P. Donahue D. Gray D. Wilson

1) Wong, Russell, NC State University, Zoology Dept, 2002; Cooper, 1939; Normandeau, 2007

Evaluation submitted by D. Quinn, of DAQ-inc, Jan 16, 2007 Evaluatinq2005 data from the annual effluent report:

Based on ODCM values and 2005 1.21 Report Data Total Sr-90 Released 6.40E-04 Ci Volume of Dilution Water 2.78E+12 flow (L)

Ci Sr-90 per L of water 2.30E-16 Ci - pCi conversion factor 1.OOE+12 Total Sr-90 Released 2.30E-04 pCi/L 30 BFI (pCi/Kg/pCi/L)

Calculated expected Sr9O in Fish 6.91 E-03 pCi/kg Dennis then evaluated the Strontium dose in ALL species from the last batch of sample results from Areva:

Dose from Sr-90 in Fish assuming RG 1.109 Parameters Sample Description pkgS-0 pCi/kg Sr.9C pCi/kg ......... UFOrgoe measured F Dfi Dose a Limit iit Percent Prcn infish MDC (kg/yr) (mrem/pCi) (mrem/yr) (mrern/yr) of Limit IP White Perch'- IP 06-575 18.8 9.0 21 7.58E-03 3.0 Bone 10.0 30%

IP Cat Fish - IP 06-577 -1.0 6.4 21 7.58E-03 ND Bone 10.0 N/A IP American Eel- IP 06-579 2.3 7.1 21 7.58E-03 ND Bone 10.0 N/A IP Sun Fish - IP 06-576 10.2 15.0 21 7.58E-03 ND Bone 10.0 NA IP Striped Bass- IP 06-578 4.2 8,5 21 7.58E-03 ND Bone 10.0 NA IP Blue Crab 580 4.5 5.7 5 7.58E-03 ND Bone 10.0 N/A Roseton White Perch - IP 06-581 24.5 8.7 21 7.58E-03 3.9 Bone 10.0 39%

Roseton Cat Fish - IP 06-583 2.4 7.6 21 7.58E-03 ND Bone 10.0 N/A Roseton American Eel - IP 06-585 3.5 4.3 21 7.58E-03 ND Bone 10.0 N/A Roseton Sun Fish IP 06-582 17.1 9.6 21 7.58E-03 2.7 Bone 10.0 27%

RosetonStriped Bass - IP 06-584 2.1 4.2 21 7.58E-03 ND Bone 10.0 N/A Roseton Blue Crab IP 06-582 13.6 11 5 7.58E-03 0.5 Bone 10.0 5%

UF = Usage Factor = 21 kgfyr for adult fish consumption, Unit 3ODCM, Part II,section 2.4.3, and from RG 1.109 Table E-5 Df= Dose conversion factor for nuclide i (inthis case, Sr-90) for adult (mrem/pCi ingested), RG 1.109, Table E-1 1,and U3 ODCM. Table 3-3a ND Not detectable J I- 1_ __-]- I N/A = Not applicable .j., orf*

-19e t.,nm~l~,, ,fo raT . E-I,1. .12& 3 Gg*

T,ý&.ft

&_R__,__lo Gude .TC9

--- !.___ ___ _ _ _ -_