Text

Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report
	ML13133A051
Person / Time
Site:	FitzPatrick
Issue date:	05/15/2013
From:	Adner C M; Entergy Nuclear Northeast, Entergy Nuclear Operations
To:	; Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Document Control Desk
References
	JAFP-13-0067
	Download: ML13133A051 (174)
	v • d • e

JAFP-13-0067 May 15,2013 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Entergy Nuclear Northeast Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. James A. FitzPatrick NPP P.O. B ox 110 Ly com in g , NY 1 3093 Tel 3 1 5-342-3840 Chris M. Adner Li ce n s ing Manager

Subject:

2012 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Docket No. 50-333 License No. DPR-59

Dear Sir or Madam:

This letter transmits the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant's (JAF) Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report, for the period of January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2012. This document is submitted in accordance with the Reporting Requirements of the Technical Specifications, Section 5.6.2, and Appendix H of the Technical Requirements Manual, "Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM)", Part 1, Section 6.1 , Annual Radiological Environmental Operat i ng Report. There are no commitments contained in this letter. If you have any questions concerning the enclosed report, please contact Bernie Landers, Chemistry Manager (acting), at {315) 349-6995.

Chris M. Adner Licensing Manager CA/BUjo

Enclosure:

2012 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report cc: Next Page JAFP-13-0067 Page 2 of 2 cc:

Mr. William Dean

Regional Administrator, Region I U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 2100 Renaissance Boulevard, Suite 100 King of Prussia, PA 19406-2713

Resident Inspector's Office U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant P.O. Box 136

Lycoming, NY 13093

Mr. Mohan Thadani, Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch I-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Supervisor, Town of Scriba Route 8, Box 382

Oswego, NY 13126

James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2012

ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT January 1, 20 12 - December 31, 20 12 for JAMES A. FITZ PATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT ENTERGY NUCLEAR FITZ PATRICK , LLC ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS , I NC. Facility Operating License No. DPR-59 Docket N o. 50-333 i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 PURPOSE ................................

................................

..............................

1-1

2.0 INTRODUCTION

................................

.................

2-1 2.1 Program History

................................

........ 2-1 2.2 Site Description

................................

......... 2-2 2.3 Program Objectives

................................

... 2-2 3.0 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

................................

3-1 3.1 Sample Collection Methodology

................................

...............

3-6 3.2 Analyses Performed

................................

. 3-1 2 3.3 Sample Locations

................................

..... 3-12 3.4 Land Use Census

................................

..... 3-2 6 3.5 Changes to the REMP Program ................................

................................

..............

3-2 6 3.6 Deviation and Exceptions to the Program

................................

...............................

3-2 6 3.7 Statistical Methodology

................................

...........................

3-28 3.8 Compliance with Required Lower Limits of Detection (L LD) ..............................

3-31 3.9 Regulatory Limits

................................

.... 3-33 4.0 SAMPLE

SUMMARY

TABLES IN BRANCH TECHNICAL POSITION FORMAT

................................

...........

4-1 5.0 DATA EVALUATION AND DISCUSSION

................................

...... 5-1 5.1 Aquatic Program

................................

........ 5-6 5.2 Terrestrial Program

................................

.. 5-1 4 5.3 Conclusion

................................

...............

5-3 3 5.4 References

................................

................

5-3 4 6.0 REPORT PERIOD ANALYTICAL RESULTS TABLES

................................

..................

6-1 7.0 HISTORICAL DATA TABLES

................................

...........................

7-1 8.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE/QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM

................................

........ 8-1 8.1 Program Description

................................

.. 8-1 8.2 Program Schedule

................................

...... 8-2 8.3 Acceptance Criteria

................................

... 8-2 8.4 Program Results Summary

................................

........................

8-4 8.5 References

................................

................

8-22 9.0 GRAPHICAL PRESENTATIONS

................................

.......................

9-1 ii LIST OF TABLES Page Table 3.0-1 Required Sample Collection and Analysis

................................

...............................

3-2 Table 3.3-1 Environmental Sample Locations

................................

...........

3-14 Table 3.8-1 Required Detection Capabilities for Environmental Sample Analysis Lower Limit of Detection (LLD)

................................

...........

3-32 Table 4.0-1 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Annual Summary

.....................

4-2 Table 6-1 Concentrations of Gamma Emitters in Shoreline Sediment Samples

...................

6-2 Table 6-2 Concentrations of Gamma Emitters in Fish Samples Fitz Patrick ................................

................................

...........

6-3 Nine Mile Point

................................

... 6-4 Oswego Harbor

................................

... 6-5 Table 6-3 Concentrations of Tritium in Surface Water Samples Quarterly Composite Samples

................................

.................

6-6 Table 6-4 Concentrations of Gamma Emitters in Surface Water Samples Oswego Steam Station

................................

........................

6-7 Oswego City Water

................................

.............................

6-8 Fitz Patrick ................................

................................

...........

6-9 Nine Mile Point Unit 1

................................

......................

6-10 Nine Mile Point Unit 2

................................

......................

6-11 Table 6-5 Environmental Airborne Particulate Samples Gross Beta Activity Offsite Sample Locations (Jan-Jun) ................................

................................

6-12 (Jul-Dec) ................................

................................

6-13 Table 6-6 Environmental Airborne Particulate Samples Gross Beta Activity Onsite Sample Locations (Jan-Jun) ................................

................................

6-14 (Jul-Dec) ................................

................................

6-15 Table 6-7 Environmental Charcoal Cartridge Samples I-131 Activity Offsite Sample Locations (Jan-Jun) ................................

................................

6-16 (Jul-Dec) ................................

................................

6-17 Tabl e 6-8 Environmental Charcoal Cartridge Samples I-131 Activity Onsite Sample Locations (Jan-Jun) ................................

................................

6-18 (Jul-Dec) ................................

................................

6-19 iii LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

Page Table 6-9 Concentrations of Gamma Emitters in Quarterly Composites of JAF/NMPNS Site Air Particulate Samples Offsite Sample Locations

- 1 st & 2 nd Qtr s ................................

......................

6-20 3 rd & 4 th Qtr s ................................

......................

6-21 Onsite Sample Locations

- 1 st & 2 nd Qtr s ................................

......................

6-22 3 rd & 4 th Qtr s ................................

......................

6-23 Table 6-10 Direct Radiation Measurement Results

................................

.. 6-24 Table 6-11 Concentrations of Iodine

-131 and Gamma Emitters in Milk Sample Location No.

55 ................................

................................

...................

6-26 Sample Location No.

77 (Control)

................................

.. 6-27 Table 6-12 Concentrations of Gamma Emitters in Food Products

................................

...... 6-28 Table 6-13 Milk Animal Census

................................

..........................

6-29 Table 6-14 Residence Census

................................

...............................

6-3 0 Historical Environmental Sample Data Table 7-1 Shoreline Sediment Control ................................

................................

.... 7-2 Table 7-2 Indicator ................................

................................

.. 7-3 Table 7-3 Fish Control ................................

................................

.... 7-4 Table 7-4 Indicator ................................

................................

.. 7-5 Table 7-5 Surface Water Control ................................

................................

.... 7-6 Table 7-6 Indicator ................................

................................

.. 7-7 Table 7-7 Surface Water Tritium Control ................................

................................

.... 7-8 Table 7-8 Indicator ................................

................................

.. 7-9 Table 7-9 Air Particulate Gross Beta Control ................................

................................

.. 7-10 Table 7-10 Indicator ................................

................................

7-11 Table 7-11 Air Particulates Control ................................

................................

.. 7-1 2 Table 7-12 Indicator ................................

................................

7-13 iv LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

Page Historical Environmental Sample Data (Continued)

Table 7-13 Air Radioiodine Control ................................

................................

.. 7-1 4 Table 7-14 Indicator ................................

................................

7-15 Table 7-15 Environmental TLD Control ................................

................................

.. 7-16 Table 7-16 Site Boundary

................................

........................

7-17 Table 7-17 Offsite Sectors

................................

.......................

7-18 Table 7-18 Special Interest

................................

......................

7-19 Table 7-19 Onsite Indicator

................................

.....................

7-20 Table 7-20 Offsite Indicator

................................

....................

7-21 Table 7-21 Milk Control ................................

................................

.. 7-2 2 Table 7-22 Indicator ................................

................................

7-23 Table 7-23 Food Products Control ................................

................................

.. 7-24 Table 7-24 Indicator ................................

................................

7-25 Table 8-1 Interlaboratory Intercomparison Program Gross Beta Analysis of Air Particulate Filter

................................

.......................

8-6 Tritium Analysis of Water

................................

...................

8-7 Gross Beta Analysis of Water

................................

..............

8-8 I-131 Gamma Analysis of Air Charcoal

................................

..............................

8-9 Gamma Analysis of Water

................................

.................

8-10 Gamma Analysis of Milk

................................

...................

8-14 Gamma Analysis of Air Particulate Filter

................................

..........................

8-17 Gamma Analysis of Soil

................................

....................

8-19 Gamma Analysis of Vegetation

................................

......... 8-20 v LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 3.3

-1 New York State Map ................................

................................

...............................

3-19 Figure 3.3

-2 Off-Site Environmental Station and TLD Location s Map................................

...... 3-20 Figure 3.3

-3 Onsite Environmental Station and TLD Location s Map ................................

........ 3-21 Figure 3.3

-4 Milk and Surface Water Sample Locations Map

................................

....................

3-22 Figure 3.3

-5 Nearest Residence, Food Product, Fish and Shoreline Sediment Sample Location s Map ................................

................................

...........................

3-23 Figure 3.3

-6 Nearest Residence Locations Map

................................

..........

3-24 Figure 3.3

-7 On-Site Ground Water Monitoring Wells Map

................................

......................

3-25 Figure 9.1 Graph - Fish (Cs-137) ................................

................................

9-2 Figure 9.2 Graph - Surface Water

- Tritium ................................

................................

...............

9-3 Figure 9.3 Graph - Air Particulate Filter Gross Beta, Annual

................................

....................

9-4 Figure 9.4 Graph - Air Particulate Filter Gross Beta, Weeks 1-26 ................................

............

9-5 Figure 9.5 Graph - Air Particulate Filter Gross Beta, Weeks 27

-52 ................................

..........

9-6 Figure 9.6 Graph - Air Particulate Filter Composite Co

-60 ................................

.......................

9-7 Figure 9.7 Graph - Air Particulate Filter Composite Cs-137 ................................

.....................

9-8 Figure 9.8 Graph - Air Charcoal I-131 ................................

................................

.......................

9-9 Figure 9.9 Graph - Milk C s-137................................

................................

9-10 Figure 9.10 Graph - Milk I-131 ................................

................................

... 9-11 Figure 9.11 Graph - TLD Data ................................

................................

.... 9-12 1 - 1 1.0 PURPOSE The Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report is published in accordance with the James A. Fit zPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM), Part I, Section 6.1. The ODCM requires that the results from the annual Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) be provided to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission by May 15 th of each year.

This report describes the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP), the implementation of the program, and the results obtained as required by the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM). The report also contains the analytical results tables, data evaluation, dose assessment, and data trends for each environmental sample media. Also included are results of the land use census, historical data

, and the Environmental Laboratory's performance in the Quality Assurance Intercomparison.

The REMP is a comprehensive surveillance program, which is implemented to assess the impact of site operations on the environment and compliance with 10CFR20 , 40CFR190 and 10CFR72. Samples are collected from the aquatic and terrestrial pathways applicable to the site. The aquatic pathways include Lake Ontario fish, surface waters and lakeshore sediment. The terrestrial pathways include airborne particulate and radioiodine, milk, food products and direct radiation.

During 2012 there were 1887 analyses performed on environmental media collected as part of the REMP. These results demonstrated that there is no significant or measurable radiological impact from the operation of the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant

. The 2012 results for all pathways sampled are consistent with the previous five

-year historical results and exhibit ed no adverse trends.

In summary, the analytical results from the 201 2 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program demonstrate that the routine operation at the James A. FitzPatrick site had no significant or measurable radiological impact on the environment. The program continue s to demonstrate that the dose to a member of the public

, as a result of the operation of the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant

, remain s significantly below the federally required dose limits specified in 10CFR20 , 40CFR190 and 10CFR72

.

2-1

2.0 INTRODUCTION

The James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant is owned and operated by Entergy Nuclear FitzPatrick, LLC (ENF), Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (ENO). This report is submitted in accordance with Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, Part I, Section 6.1. This report covers the calendar year 201 2. 2.1 PROGRAM HISTORY Environmental monitoring at the Nine Mile Point site has been ongoing since 1964. The program includes five years of pre

-operational data, which was conducted prior to any reactor operations. In 1968, the Niagara Mohawk Power Company began the required pre

-operational environmental site testing program. This pre

-operational data serves as a reference point to compare later data obtained during reactor operation. In 1969, the Nine Mile Point Unit 1 reactor, a 628 megawatt electric (MWe) Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) began full power operation. In 1975, the James A.

FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant, owned and operated at that time by the New York Power Authority, began full power operation.

The FitzPatrick plant, an 8 9 2 MWe (rated) BWR, occupies the east sector of the Nine Mile Point site, approximately 0.57 miles east of Nine Mile Point Unit 1. In 1988, the Nine Mile Point Unit 2 reactor also owned and operated by Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC, began full power operation. This 1363 MW e BWR is located between the Nine Mile Point Unit 1 and FitzPatrick sites.

In 1985, the individual Plant Effluent Technical Specifications were standardized to the generic Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications, much of which was common to the two reactors, and subsequently Nine Mile Point Unit 2. Subsequent Technical Specification amendments relocated the REMP requirements to the ODCM for all three plants. Data generated by the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) is shared, but each utility reviews and publishes their own annual report. On November 21, 200 0 the ownership and operation of the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant was transferred from the New York Power Authority to Entergy Nuclear FitzPatrick, LLC and Entergy Nuclear Operations

, Inc. The Facility Operating License No. DPR

-59 and Docket No. 50

-333 remained the same. On November 7, 2001, the ownership of the Nine Mile Point Unit I and II facilities was transferred to Constellation Energy Nuclear Group. These facilities are operated by Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, LLC.

In summary, three Boiling Water Reactors, which together generate 2883 MWe, have operated collectively at the Nine Mile Point site since 1988. A large database of environmental results from the exposure pathways have been collected and analyzed to evaluate the potential impact from reactor operations.

2-2 2.2 SITE DESCRIPTION The Nine Mile Point site is located on the southeast shore of Lake Ontario in the town of Scriba, approximately 6.2 miles northeast of the city of Oswego. The nearest metropolitan area is located approximately 36 miles southeast of the site. The James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant and support buildings occupy a small shoreline portion of the 70 2 acre Entergy site, which is partially wooded. The land, soil of glacier deposits, rises gently from the lake in all directions. Oswego County is a rural environment, with about 1 5% of the land devoted to agriculture.

2.3 PROGRAM

OBJECTIVES The objectives of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) are to: 1. Measure and evaluate the effects of plant operation on the environs and to verify the effectiveness of the controls on radioactive material sources.

2. Monitor natural radiation levels in the environs of the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant site.

3. Demonstrate compliance with the requirements of applicable federal regulatory agencies, including Technical Specifications and the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual.

3-1 3.0 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION To achieve the objectives listed in Section 2.3, an extensive sampling and analysis program is conducted every year. The James A

. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAFNPP) Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) consists of sampling and analysis of various media that include:

Air Fish Food Products Milk Shoreline Sediment Surface Waters In addition, direct radiation measurements are performed using thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). These sampling programs are outlined in Table 3.0

-1. The JAF REMP sampling locations are selected and verified by an annual Land Use Census. The accuracy and precision of the program is assured by participation in an Interlaboratory Comparison Quality Assurance Program (IC QAP).

Sample collections for the radiological program are accomplished by a dedicated site environmental staff from both the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Stations (NMP NS) and James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAFNPP). The site staff is assisted by a contracted environmental engineering company, EA Engineering, Science and Technology, Inc. (EA).

3-2 TABLE 3.0-1 REQUIRED SAMPLE COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Exposure Pathway and/or Sample Number of Samples (a) and Locations Sampling and Collection Frequency (a) Type and Frequen cy of Analysis AIRBORNE Radioiodine and Particulates

Samples from 5 locations:

a. 3 Samples from offsite locations in different sectors of the highest calculated site average D/Q (based on all licensed site reactors)

b. 1 sample from the vicinity of a community having the highest calculated site average D/Q (based on all licensed site reactors)

c. 1 sample from a control location 9 to 20 miles distant and in the least prevalent wind direction(d)

Continuous sample operation with sample collection weekly or as required by dust loading , whichever is more frequent Radioiodine Canisters

Analyze weekly for I-131 Particulate Samples

Gross beta radioactivity following filter change (b), composite (by location

) for gamma isotopic(c) quarterl y (as a minimum)

Direct Radiation(e) 32 stations with two or more dosimeters placed as follows:

a. An inner ring of stations in the general area of the Site Boundary

b. An outer ring in the 4 to 5 mile range from the site with a station in each of the land based sectors.

There are 16 land based sectors in the inner ring, and 8 land based sectors in the outer ring c. The balance of the stations (8) are placed in special interest areas such as population centers, nearby residences, schools, and in 2 or 3 areas to serve as control stations

Quarterly Gamma dose monthly or quarterly 3-3 TABLE 3.0-1 (Continued)

REQUIRED SAMPLE COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Exposure Pathway and/or Sample Number of Samples (a) and Locations Sampling and Collection Frequency (a) Type and Frequency of Analysis WATERBORNE Surface (f)

a. 1 sample upstream(d) b. 1 sample from the site's most downstream cooling water intake

Composite sample over a one month period(g) Gamma isotopic analysis monthly. Composite for Tritium analysis quarterly(c) Sediment from Shoreline 1 sample from a downstream area with existing or potential recreational value Twice per year Gamma isotopic analysis semi-annually(c) INGESTION Milk

a. Samples from mil ch animals in 3 locations within 3.5 miles distant having the highest calculated site average D/Q. If there

are none, then 1 sample from milch animals in each of 3 areas 3.5 to 5.0 miles distant having the highest calculated site average D/Q (based on all licensed site reactors)(h) b. 1 sample from mil ch animals at a control location (9 to 20 miles distant and in a less prevalent wind direction)(d) Twice per month, April through December (samples will be collected in January through March if I

-131 is detected in November and December of the preceding year)

Gamma isotopic and I-131 analysis twice per month when milch animals are on pasture (April through December); monthly (January through March), if required(c) 3-4 TABLE 3.0-1 (Continued)

REQUIRED SAMPLE COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Exposure Pathway and/or Sample Number of Samples (a) and Locations Sampling and Collection Frequency (a) Type and Frequency of Analysis Fish a. 1 sample of each of 2 commercially or recreationally important species in the vicinity of a site discharge point

b. 1 sample of each of 2 species (same as in a. above or of a species with similar feeding habits) from an area at least 5 miles distant from the site(d) Twice per year Gamma isotopic(c) analysis of edible portions.

Food Products

a. In lieu of the garden census as specified in Part 1, Section 5.2, samples of at least 3 different kinds of broad leaf vegetation (such as vegetable s) grown nearest each of two different offsite locations of highest predicted site average D/Q (based on all licensed site Reactors) One (1) sample of each of the similar broad leaf vegetation grown at least 9.3 miles distant in a least prevalent wind direction sector(d) Once during harvest season Gamma isotopic(c) analysis of edible portions. (Isotopic to include I-131) 3-5 NOTES FOR TABLE 3.0

-1 (a) It is recognized that, at times, it may not be possible or practical to obtain samples of the media of choice at the most desired location or time. In these instances suitable alternative media and locations may be chosen for the particular pathway in question. Actual locations (distance and directions) from the site shall be provided in the Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report. Calculated site averaged D/Q values and meteorological parameters are based on historical data (specified in the ODCM) for all licensed site reactors.

(b) Particulate sample filters should be analyzed for gross beta 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months or more after sampling to allow for radon and thoron daughter decay. If gross beta activity in air particulate samples is greater than 10 times a historical yearly mean of control samples, gamma isotopic analysis shall be performed on the individual samples.

(c) Gamma isotopic analysis means the identification and quantification of gamma emitting radionuclides that may be attributable to the effluents from the plant. (d) The purpose of these samples is to obtain background information. If it is not practical to establish control locations in accordance with the distance and wind direction criteria, other sites which provide valid background data may be substituted.

(e) One or more instruments, such as a pressurized ion chamber, for measuring and recording dose rate continuously may be used in place of, or in addition to, integrating dosimeters. For the purpose of this table, a thermoluminescent dosimeter may be considered to be one phosphor and two or more phosphors in a packet may be considered as two or more dosimeters. Film badges shall not be used for measuring direct radiation.

(f) The "upstream sample" shall be taken at a distance beyond significant influence of the discharge. The "downstream sample" shall be taken in an area beyond, but near, the mixing zone, if practical.

(g) Composite samples should be collected with equipment (or equivalent) which is capable of collecting an aliquo it at time intervals which are very short (e.g., hourly) relative to the compositing period (e.g., monthly) in order to ensure that a representative sample is obtained.

(h) A milk sampling location, as required in Table 5.1

-1 is defined as a location having at least 10 milking cows present at a designated milk sample location. It has been found from past experience, and as a result of conferring with local farmers, that a minimum of 10 milking cows is necessary to guarantee an adequate supply of milk twice per month for analytical purposes. Locations with less than 10 milking cows are usually utilized for breeding purposes which eliminates a stable supply of milk for samples as a result of suckling calves and periods when the adult animals are dry. In the event that 3 milk sample locations cannot meet the requirement for 10 milking cows, then a sample location having less than 10 milking cows can be used if an adequate supply of milk can reasonably and reliably be obtained based on communications with the farmer.

3-6 3.1 SAMPLE COLLECTION METHODOLOGY

3.1.1 SHORELINE

SEDIMENTS Shoreline sediment is collected at one area of existing or potential recrea tional value. One sample is also collected from a location beyond the influence of the site. Samples are collected as surface scrapings to a depth of approximately one inch. The samples are placed in plastic bags, sealed and shipped to the lab for analysis. Sediment samples are analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides

. Shoreline sediment sample locations are shown in Section 3.3, Figure 3.3

-5. 3.1.2 FISH Samples of available fish species that are commercially or recreationally important to Lake Ontario; such as Brown Trout, Chinook Salmon, Smallmouth Bass, and Walleye, are collected twice per year, once in the spring and again in the fall. Indicator samples are collected from a combination of the two onsite sample transects located offshore from the site. One set of control samples are collected at an offsite sample transect located offshore 8-10 miles west of the site. Available species are selected using the following guidelines:

1. A minimum of two species that are commercially or recreationally important are to be collected from each sample location. Samples selected are limited to edible and/or sport species when available.

2. Samples are composed of the edible portion only.

Selected fish samples are frozen immediately after collection and segregated by species and location. Samples are shipped frozen in insulated containers for analysis. Edible portions of each sample are analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides.

Fish collection locations are shown in Section 3.3, Figure 3.3

-5.

3.1.3 SURFACE

WATER Surface water samples are taken from the respective inlet canals of the James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAFNPP) and NRG's Oswego Steam Station.

The JAFNPP facility draws water from Lake Ontario on a continuous basis. This is used for the "downstream" or indicator sampling point for the Nine Mile Point site. The Oswego Steam Station inlet canal removes water from Lake Ontario at a point approximately 7.6 miles west of the site. This "upstream" location is considered a control location because of the distance from the site

, as well as the result of the lake current patterns and current patterns from the Oswego River located nearby.

3-7 Samples from the JAFNPP facility are composited from automatic sampling equipment which discharges into a compositing tank or bottles. Samples are collected monthly from the compositor and analyzed for gamma emitters. Samples from the Oswego Steam Station are also obtained using automatic sampling equipment and collected in a holding tank. Representative samples from this location are obtained weekly and are composited to form a monthly composite sample. The monthly samples are analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides.

A portion of the monthly sample from each of the locations is saved and composited to form quarterly composite samples, which are analyzed for tritium.

In addition to the sample results for the JAFNPP and Oswego Steam Station collection sites, data is presented for the Nine Mile Point Unit 1 and Unit 2 facility inlet canal samples and from the City of Oswego drinking water supply. The latter three locations are not required by the ODCM. These locations are optional sample points, which are collected and analyzed to enhance the surface water sampling program. Monthly composite samples from these three locations are analyzed for gamma emitting nuclides

, and quarterly composite samples are analyzed for tritium.

Surface water sample locations are shown in Section 3.3 on Figure 3.3

-4. 3.1.4 AIR PARTICULATE / IODINE The air sampling stations required by the ODCM are located in the general area of the site boundary. The sampling stations are sited within a distance of 0.2 miles of the site boundary in sectors with the highest calculated deposition factor (D/Q) based on historical meteorological data. These stations (R

-1, R-2, and R-3) are located in the E, ESE, and SE sectors as measured from the center of the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit 2 Reactor Building. The ODCM also require s that a fourth air sampling station be located in the vicinity of a year

-round community. This station is located in the SE sector at a distance of 1.8 miles and is designated as Station R-4. A fifth station required by the ODCM is a control location designated as Station R

-5. Station R

-5 is located 16.2 miles from the site in the NE meteorological sector.

In addition to the five ODCM required locations, there are ten additional sampling stations. Six of these sampling stations are located within the site boundary and are designated as Onsite Stations D1, G, H, I, J, and K. These locations are within the site boundary of the NMPNS and JAFNPP. One air sampling station is located offsi te in the southwest sector in the vicinity of the City of Oswego and is designated as Station G Offsite. Three remaining air sampling stations are located in the ESE, SSE, and S SW sectors and range in distance from 7.1 to 9.0 miles. These are designated as Offsite Stations D2, E and F respectively.

3-8 Each station collects airborne particulates using glass fiber filters (47 millimeter diameter) and radioiodine using charcoal cartridges (2x1 inch). The samplers run continuously and the charcoal cartridges and particulate filters are changed on a weekly basis. Sample volume is determined by use of calibrated gas flow meters located at the sample discharge. Gross beta analysis is performed on each particulate filter. Charcoal cartridges are analyzed for radioiodine using gamma spectral analysis.

The particulate filters are composited quarterly by location and analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides.

Air sampling station locations are shown in Section 3.3, Figures 3.3

-2 and 3.3-3. 3.1.5 TLD (DIRECT RADIATION)

Thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) are used to measure direct radiation (gamma dose) in the environment. Environmental TLDs are supplied and processed quarterly by the AREVA NP Environmental Laboratory. The laboratory utilizes a Panasonic based system using UD-814 dosimeters, which are constructed of rectangular teflon wafers impregnated with 25% CaSO 4:Dy phosphor. Each dosimeter contains three calcium sulfate elements and one lithium borate element.

1. Environmental TLDs Environmental TLDs are placed in five different geographical regions around site to evaluate effects of direct radiation as a result of plant operations. The following is a description of the five TLD geographical categories used in the NMPNS and JAFNPP Environmental Monitoring Program and the TLDs that make up each region:

TLD Geographical Category Description Onsite TLDs placed at various locations within the site boundary, with three exceptions, are not required by the ODCM. (TLD locations comprising this group are: 3, 4, 5, 6, 7*, 18*, 23*, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 39, 47, 103, 106 and 107)

Site Boundary An inner ring of TLDs placed in the general area of the site boundary in each of the sixteen meteorological sectors. This category is required by the ODCM. (TLD locations comprising this group are:

7*, 18*, 23*, 75*, 76*, 77*, 78*, 79*, 80*, 81*, 82*, 83*, 84*, 85*, 86*, and 87*)

3-9 TLD Geographical Category Description Offsite An outer ring of TLDs placed 4 to 5 miles from the site in each of the 8 land based meteorological sectors. This category is required by the ODCM. (TLD locations comprising this group are 88*, 89*, 90*, 91*, 92*, 93*, 94*, and 95*) Special Interest TLDs placed in special interest areas of high population density and use. These TLDs are located at or near large industrial sites, schools, or nearby towns or communities. This category is required by the ODCM. (TLD locations comprising this group are: 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 15*, 19, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56*, 58*, 96*, 97*, 98 , 99, 100, 101, 102, 108, and 109) Control TLDs placed in areas beyond significant influence of the site and plant operations. These TLDs are located to the SW, S and NE of the site at distances of 12.6 to 24.7 miles. This category is also required by the ODCM.

(TLD locations comprising this group are 8*, 14*, 49*, 111, 113)

TLD location required by the ODCM Although the ODCM require s a total of 3 2 TLD stations

environmental TLDs are also placed at additional locations not required by the ODCM, within the Onsite, Special Interest and Control TLD categories to supplement the ODCM required Direct Radiation readings. Two dosimeters are placed at each TLD monitoring location. The TLDs are sealed in polyethylene packages to ensure dosimeter integrity and placed in open webbed plastic holders and attached to supporting structures, such as utility poles.

Environmental TLD locations are shown in Section 3.3, Figures 3.3

-2 and 3.3-3.

3-10 2. Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI)

In order to provide adequate spent fuel storage capacity at the FitzPatrick plant, Entergy constructed an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) onsite. On April 25, 2002, the ISFSI facility was placed in service.

TLDs are used to monitor direct radiation levels in the vicinity of the ISFSI facility. Twelve TLD locations were established around the ISFSI pad on the perimeter fence.

Six additional TLD locations are located at varying distances from the pad to determine dose rates at points of interest relative to the storage area and are designated as optional locations. Background data was collected starting in October

, 2000 at eight of the TLD locations on the perimeter fence. The remaining locations were established in October

2001. Two dosimeters are placed at each TLD monitoring location. The TLDs are sealed in polyethylene packages to ensure dosimeter integrity and placed in the field using a supporting structure such as a fence or other immovable object.

ISFSI TLD locations are shown in Section 3.3, Table 3.3.1. 3.1.6 MILK Milk samples are routinely collected from farms during the sampling year.

These farms include one indicator location and one control location. Samples are normally collected April through December of the sample year. If plant related radionuclides are detected in samples in November and December of the previous year, milk collections are continued into the following year starting in January. If plant related radionuclides are not detected in the November and December samples, then milk collections do not commence until April of the following sampling year. Milk samples were not collected in January through March of 201 2 as there were no positive detections of plant related radionuclides in samples collected during November and December o f 20 11.

The ODCM also requires that a sample be collected from a control location nine to twenty miles from the site and in a less prevalent wind direction. This location is in the south sector at a distance of 16 miles and serves as the control location

.

Milk samples are collected in polyethylene bottles from a bulk storage tank at each sampled farm. Before the sample is drawn, the tank contents are agitated to assure a homogenous mixture of milk and butter fat. The samples are chilled, preserved

, and shipped fresh to the analytical laboratory within thirty

-six hours of collection in insulated shipping containers.

The milk sample locations are shown in Section 3.3, Figure 3.3

-4. (Refer to Section 3.3, Table 3.3-1 for location designation and descriptions.)

3-11 3.1.7 FOOD PRODUCTS (VEGETATION)

Food products are collected once per year during the late summer harvest season. A minimum of three different kinds of broad leaf vegetation (edible or inedible) are collected from two different indicator garden locations. Sample locations are selected from available gardens identified in the annual census that have the highest estimated deposition values (D/Q) based on historical site meteorological data. Control samples are also collected from available locations greater than 9.3 miles distan ce from the site in a less prevalent wind direction. Control samples are of the same or similar type of vegetation when available.

Food product samples are analyzed for gamma emitters using gamma isotopic analysis.

Food product locations are shown in Section 3.3, Figure 3.3

-5. 3.1.8 GROUND WATER MONITORING PROGRAM The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Ground Water Protection Initiative was established to determine the potential impact Nuclear Power Plants may have on the surrounding environment due to unplanned releases of radioactive liquids. Under NEI 07

-07, Industry Ground Water Protection Initiative Final Guidance Document, August 2007, ground water monitoring is accomplished through sampling of the water table around the plant and analyzing it for gamma emitters and tritium. In November of 2007, JAF drilled 5 ground water wells along the north edge of the property next to the lake. Starting in March 2010, 16 additional monitoring wells were drilled in the area of the reactor building and nearby SSC's (see Section 3.3, Figure 3.3

-7).

Samples obtained from these wells are analyzed on a quarterly basis to determine gamma emitters and tritium concentrations. Ground water samples are analyzed for gamma emitters using gamma isotopic analysis and tritium using liquid scintillation detector

.

Ground water results are documented in the Annual Radiological Effluent Release Report for 2012.

3-12 3.2 ANALYSES PERFORMED Environmental sample analyses are performed at the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAFNPP) Environmental Laboratory or by a contract laboratory. The following analys es were performed: 1. Air Particulate Filter

- Gross Beta

2. Air Particulate Filter Composites

- Gamma Spectral Analysis

3. Airborne Radioiodine

- Gamma Spectral Analysis 4. Direct Radiation using Thermoluminescent Dosimeters (TLDs)

- Analyses performed by a contractor laboratory

- Stanford Dosimetry LLC.

5. Fish - Gamma Spectral Analysis

6. Food Products (vegetation)

- Gamma Spectral Analysis

7. Milk - Gamma Spectral Analysis and I-131 8. Shoreline Sediment

- Gamma Spectral Analysis

9. Special Samples (soil, food, bottom sediment, etc.)

- Gamma Spectral Analysis

10. Surface Water Monthly Composites

- Gamma Spectral Analysis, I

-131 11. Surface Water Quarterly Composite

- Tritium 12. Ground Water Quarterly Samples

- Tritium 3.3 SAMPLE LOCATIONS Section 3.3 provides maps illustrating sample locations. Sample locations referenced as letters and numbers on the report period data tables are consistent with designations plotted on the maps.

This section also contains an environmental sample location reference table (Table 3.3

-1). This table contains the following information:

1. Sample Medium

2. Location Designation, (this column contains the key for the sample location and is consistent with the designation on the sample location maps and on the sample results data tables)

3. Location Description

4. Degrees and Distance of the sample location from the site

3-13 3.3.1 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 3.3

-1 New York State Map Figure 3.3

-2 Off-Site Environmental Station and TLD Locations Map Figure 3.3

-3 Onsite Environmental Station and TLD Locations Map Figure 3.3

-4 Milk and Surface Water Sample Locations Map Figure 3.3

-5 Nearest Residence, Food Product, Fish and Shoreline Sediment Sample Locations Map

Figure 3.3

-6 Nearest Residence Locations Map Figure 3.3

-7 On-Site Ground Water Monitoring Wells Map

3 - 14 TABLE 3.3-1 ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE LOCATIONS SAMPLE MEDIUM MAP DESIGNATION FIGURE NUMBER LOCATION DESCRIPTION DEGREES & DISTANCE (1) & (2) Shoreline Sediment 05* Figure 3.3

-5 Sunset Bay 8 4º at 1.2 miles 06 Figure 3.3

-5 Langs Beach, Control 232° at 4.8 miles Fish 02* Figure 3.3

-5 Nine Mile Point Transect 290° at 0.4 miles 03* Figure 3.3

-5 FitzPatrick Transect 62° at 0.8 miles 00* Figure 3.3

-5 Oswego Transect 23 7° at 5.9 miles Surface Water 03* Figure 3.3

-4 FitzPatrick Inlet 5 3° at 0.6 miles 08* Figure 3.3

-4 Oswego Steam Station Inlet 23 7° at 7.6 miles 09 Figure 3.3

-4 NMP Unit 1 Inlet 319° at 0.3 miles 10 Figure 3.3

-4 Oswego City Water 240° at 7.8 miles 11 Figure 3.3

-4 NMP Unit 2 Inlet (Split intake with two locations) 336° at 0.3 miles 353° at 0.3 miles Air Radioiodine and R-1* Figure 3.3

-2 R-1 Station, Nine Mile Point Road 92° at 1.8 miles Particulate s R-2* Figure 3.3

-3 R-2 Station, Lake Road 10 7° at 1.1 miles R-3* Figure 3.3

-3 R-3 Station, Co. Rt. 29 13 3° at 1.4 miles R-4* Figure 3.3

-3 R-4 Station, Village of Lycoming, Co. Rt. 29 145° at 1.8 miles R-5* Figure 3.3

-2 R-5 Station, Montario Point Rd. 42° at 16.2 miles D-1 Figure 3.3

-3 D1 Onsite Station 7 3° at 0.3 miles G Figure 3.3

-3 G Onsite Station 24 4° at 0.7 miles H Figure 3.3

-3 H Onsite Station 7 4° at 0.8 miles I Figure 3.3

-3 I Onsite Station 9 6° at 0.8 miles J Figure 3.3-3 J Onsite Station 1 10° at 0.9 miles K Figure 3.3

-3 K Onsite Station 13 3° at 0.5 miles G Figure 3.3

-2 G Offsite Station, Saint Paul Street 226° at 5.4 miles D-2 Figure 3.3

-2 D2 Offsite Station, Rt. 64 118° at 9.0 miles E Figure 3.3

-2 E Offsite Station, Rt. 4 162° at 7.1 miles F Figure 3.3

-2 F Offsite Station, Dutch Ridge Road 192° at 7.7 miles (1) Degrees and distance based on Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Reactor Centerline rounded to the nearest 1/10 of a mile.

(2) Degrees and Distances updated by Global Positioning System (GPS) in 2006.

Sample location required by ODCM

3 - 15 TABLE 3.3-1 (Continued)

ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE LOCATIONS SAMPLE MEDIUM MAP DESIGNATION FIGURE NUMBER LOCATION DESCRIPTION DEGREES & DISTANCE (1) & (2) Thermoluminescent 3 Figure 3.3

-3 D1 Onsite 7 1° at 0.3 miles Dosimeters (TLD) 4 Figure 3.3

-3 D2 Onsite 14 3° at 0.4 miles (Continued) 5 Figure 3.3

-3 E Onsite 180° at 0.3 miles 6 Figure 3.3

-3 F Onsite 213° at 0.5 miles 7* Figure 3.3

-3 G Onsite 24 5° at 0.7 miles 8* Figure 3.3

-2 R-5 Offsite Control 42° at 16.2 miles 9 Figure 3.3

-2 D1 Offsite

- State Route 3 80° at 11.4 miles 10 Figure 3.3

-2 D2 Offsite 118° at 9.0 miles 11 Figure 3.3

-2 E Offsite 162° at 7.1 miles 12 Figure 3.3

-2 F- Offsite 192° at 7.6 miles 13 Figure 3.3

-2 G Offsite 226° at 5.4 miles 14* Figure 3.3

-2 DeMass Rd., SW Oswego

- Control 227° at 12.5 miles 15* Figure 3.3

-2 Pole 66, W. Boundary

- Bible Camp 2 40° at 0.9 miles 18* Figure 3.3

-3 Energy Info. Center - Lamp Post, SW 26 8° at 0.4 miles 19 Figure 3.3

-2 East Boundary

- JAF, Pole 9 83° at 1.4 miles 23* Figure 3.3

-3 H Onsite 7 3° at 0.8 miles 24 Figure 3.3

-3 I Onsite 9 5° at 0.8 miles 25 Figure 3.3

-3 J Onsite 109° at 0.9 miles 26 Figure 3.3-3 K Onsite 13 2° at 0.5 miles 27 Figure 3.3

-3 N. Fence, N. of Switchyard, JAF 60° at 0.4 miles 28 Figure 3.3

-3 N. Light Pole,N. of Screenhouse, JAF 68° at 0.5 miles 29 Figure 3.3

-3 N. Fence, N. of W. Side 65° at 0.5 miles 30 Figure 3.3-3 N. Fence, (NW) JAF 57° at 0.4 miles 31 Figure 3.3

-3 N. Fence, (NW) NMP

-1 27 9° at 0.2 miles 39 Figure 3.3

-3 N. Fence, Rad. Waste

-NMP-1 29 8° at 0.2 miles 47 Figure 3.3

-3 N. Fence, (NE) JAF 69° at 0.6 miles 49* Figure 3.3

-2 Phoenix, N Y-Control 168° at 19.7 miles 51 Figure 3.3

-2 Liberty & Bronson Sts., E of OSS 234° at 7.3 miles 52 Figure 3.3

-2 E. 12th & Cayuga Sts., Oswego School 227° at 5.9 miles 53 Figure 3.3

-2 Broadwell & Chestnut Sts. Fulton H.S.

183° at 13.7 miles (1) Degrees and distance based on Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Reactor Centerline rounded to the nearest 1/10 of a mile.

(2) Degrees and Distances updated by Global Positioning System (GPS) in 2006.

Sample location required by ODCM

3 - 16 TABLE 3.3-1 (Continued)

ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE LOCATIONS SAMPLE MEDIUM MAP DESIGNATION FIGURE NUMBER LOCATION DESCRIPTION DEGREES & DISTANCE (1) & (2) Thermoluminescent 54 Figure 3.3

-2 Mexico High School 115° at 9.4 miles Dosimeters (TLD) 55 Figure 3.3

-2 Gas Substation Co. Rt. 5-Pulaski 75° at 13.0 miles (Continued) 56* Figure 3.3

-2 Rt. 104-New Haven Sch. (SE Corner) 124° at 5.2 miles 58* Figure 3.3

-2 Co Rt. 1A-Novelis (E. of E. Entrance Rd.)

222° at 3.0 miles 75* Figure 3.3

-3 Unit 2, N. Fence, N. of Reactor Bldg. 35 4° at 0.1 miles 76* Figure 3.3

-3 Unit 2, N. Fence, N. of Change House 2 5° at 0.1 miles 77* Figure 3.3

-3 Unit 2, N. Fence, N. of Pipe Bldg.

3 6° at 0.2 miles 78* Figure 3.3

-3 JAF. E. of E. Old Lay Down Area 8 5° at 1.0 miles 79* Figure 3.3

-3 Co. Rt. 29, Pole #63, 0.2 mi. S. of Lake Rd.

12 0° at 1.2 miles 80* Figure 3.3

-3 Co. Rt. 29, Pole #54, 0.7 mi. S. of Lake Rd.

13 6° at 1.5 miles 81* Figure 3.3

-3 Miner Rd., Pole #16, 0.5 mi. W. of Rt. 29 1 59° at 1.6 miles 82* Figure 3.3

-3 Miner Rd., Pole # 1

-1/2, 1.1 mi. W. of Rt. 29 180° at 1.6 miles 83* Figure 3.3

-3 Lakeview Rd., Tree 0.45 mi. N. of Miner Rd.

203° at 1.2 miles 84* Figure 3.3

-2 Lakeview Rd., N., Pole #6117, 200ft. N. of Lake Rd.

22 6° at 1.1 miles 85* Figure 3.3

-3 Unit 1, N. Fence, N. of W. Side of Screen House 2 9 2° at 0.2 miles 86* Figure 3.3

-3 Unit 2, N. Fence, N of W. Side of Screen House 3 1 1° at 0.1 miles 87* Figure 3.3

-3 Unit 2, N. Fence, N. of E. Side of Screen House 33 3° at 0.1 miles 88* Figure 3.3

-2 Hickory Grove Rd., Pole #2, 0.6 mi. N. of Rt. 1 97° at 4.5 miles 89* Figure 3.3

-2 Leavitt Rd., Pole #16, 0.4 mi. S. of Rt.1 112° at 4.3 miles 90* Figure 3.3

-2 Rt. 104, Pole #300, 150 ft. E. of Keefe Rd.

135° at 4.2 miles 91* Figure 3.3

-2 Rt 51A, Pole #59, 0.8 mi. W. of Rt. 51 157° at 4.9 miles 92* Figure 3.3

-2 Maiden Lane Rd., Power Pole, 0.6 mi. S. of Rt. 104 183° at 4.4 miles 93* Figure 3.3

-2 Rt. 53 Pole 1

-1, 120 ft. S. of Rt. 104 206° at 4.4 miles 94* Figure 3.3

-2 Rt. 1, Pole #82, 250 ft. E. of Kocher Rd. (Co. Rt. 63) 224° at 4.4 miles 95* Figure 3.3

-2 Novelis W access Rd., Joe Fultz Blvd, Pole #21 239° at 3.7 miles 96* Figure 3.3

-2 Creamery Rd., 0.3 mi. S. of Middle Rd., Pole 1-1/2 199° at 3.6 miles 97* Figure 3.3

-3 Rt. 29, Pole #50, 200ft. N. of Miner Rd.

145° at 1.8 miles 98 Figure 3.3

-2 Lake Rd., Pole #145, 0.15 mi. E. of Rt 29 10 2° at 1.2 miles (1) Degrees and distance based on Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Reactor Centerline rounded to the nearest 1/10 of a mile.

(2) Degrees and Distances updated by Global Positioning System (GPS) in 2006.

Sample location required by ODCM

3 - 17 TABLE 3.3-1 (Continued)

ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE LOCATIONS SAMPLE MEDIUM MAP DESIGNATION FIGURE NUMBER LOCATION DESCRIPTION DEGREES & DISTANCE (1) & (2) Thermoluminescent 99 Figure 3.3

-2 NMP Rd., 0.4 mi. N. of Lake Rd., Env. Station R1 92° at 1.8 miles Dosimeters (TLD) 100 Figure 3.3

-3 Rt. 29 & Lake Rd., Env. Station R2 106° at 1.1 miles (Continued) 101 Figure 3.3

-3 Rt. 29, 0.7 mi. S. of Lake Rd., Env. Station R3 13 3° at 1.4 miles 102 Figure 3.3

-2 EOF/Env. Lab, Rt 176, E. Driveway, Lamp Post 175° at 11.9 miles 103 Figure 3.3

-3 EIC, East Garage Rd., Lamp Post 268° at 0.4 mil es 104 Figure 3.3

-2 Parkhurst Rd., Pole #23, 0.1 mi. S. of Lake rd.

102° at 1.4 miles 105 Figure 3.3

-3 Lake view Rd. Pole #36, 0.5 mi. S. of Lake Rd.

199° at 1.4 miles 106 Figure 3.3

-3 Shoreline Cove, W. of NMP

-1, Tree on W. Edge 27 4° at 0.3 miles 107 Figure 3.3

-3 Shoreline Cove, W. of NMP

-1, 30 ft SSW of #106 27 3° at 0.3 miles 108 Figure 3.3

-3 Lake Rd., Pole #142, 300 ft E. of Rt. 29 S.

105° at 1.1 miles 109 Figure 3.3

-3 Tree North of Lake Rd., 300 ft E. of Rt. 29 N 104° at 1.1 mil es 111 Figure 3.3

-2 Control, State Route 38, Sterling NY 214° at 21.8 miles 112 Figure 3.3

-2 EOF/Env. Lab, Oswego County Airport 175° at 11.9 miles 113 Figure 3.3

-2 Control, Baldwinsville, NY 178° at 24.7miles Cow's Milk 55 Figure 3.3

-4 Indicator Location 97° at 8.7 miles 77* Figure 3.3

-4 Control Location 190° at 1 6.0 miles Food Products 48** Figure 3.3

-5 Indicator Location

- Kronenbitter 8 3° at 1.5 miles 133** Figure 3.3

-5 Indicator Location

- Culeton 8 3° at 1.6 mile s 144* Figure 3.3

-5 Indicator Location

- Whaley 1 39° at 1.6 miles 484* Figure 3.3

-5 Indicator Location

- O'Connor 1 32° at 1.4 miles C2* Figure 3.3

-5 Control Location

- Flack 222° at 15.4 miles Nearest Residence (NMP) Based on NMP Unit 2 Centerline - Refer to Figure 3.3

-5 Nearest Residence (JAF)

Based on JAF Centerline

- Refer to Figure 3.3

-6 (1) Degrees and distance based on Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Reactor Centerline (2) Degrees and Distances updated by Global Positioning System (GPS) i n 2006.

Sample location required by ODCM

- Optional sample

3 - 18 TABLE 3.3-1 (Continued)

ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE LOCATIONS SAMPLE MEDIUM LOCATION DESIGNATION FIGURE NUMBER LOCATION DESCRIPTION Thermoluminescent Dosimeters (TLD) I-1* ISFSI West Fence, South End of Storage Pad I-2* ISFSI West Fence, Center of Storage Pad I-3* ISFSI West Fence, North End of Storage Pad I-4* ISFSI North Fence, West End of Storage Pad I-5* ISFSI North Fence, Center of Storage Pad I-6* ISFSI North Fence, East End of Storage Pad I-7* ISFSI East Fence, North End of Storage Pad I-8* ISFSI East Fence, Center of Storage Pad I-9* ISFSI East Fence, South End of Storage Pad I-10* ISFSI South Fence, East End of Storage Pad I-11* ISFSI South Fence, Center of Storage Pad I-12* ISFSI South Fence, West End of Storage Pad I-13H ISFSI Building and Grounds Garage, East of Pad I-14H ISFSI Tree ~100 yards South of Pad I-15H ISFSI Transmission Line Tower South of Pad at East /West Access Road I-16H ISFSI Perimeter Fence ~100 yards West of Pad on Pad Centerline I-17H ISFSI North Fence of Main Switch Yard on Pad Centerline I-18H ISFSI North Inner Perimeter Fence at Lake Shore on Pad Centerline Ground Water Monitoring MW-1A Figure 3.3

-7 Southwest of Reactor Building Monitoring Wells MW-1B Figure 3.3

-7 Southwest of Reactor Building MW-2A Figure 3.3

-7 Northwest of Reactor Building MW-2B Figure 3.3

-7 Northwest of Reactor Building MW-3A Figure 3.3

-7 Northwest of Reactor Building MW-3B Figure 3.3

-7 Northwest of Reactor Building MW-4A Figure 3.3

-7 Northeast of Reactor Building MW-4B Figure 3.3

-7 Northeast of Reactor Building MW-5 Figure 3.3

-7 North west edge of property MW-6 Figure 3.3

-7 North / North west edge of property MW-7 Figure 3.3

-7 North edge of property MW-8 Figure 3.3

-7 North / North east edge of property MW-9 Figure 3.3

-7 North east edge of property MW-10A Figure 3.3

-7 Southeast of Reactor Building MW-10B Figure 3.3

-7 Southeast of Reactor Building MW-13 Figure 3.3

-7 West of Reactor Building MW-14 Figure 3.3

-7 East of Reactor Building MW-15 Figure 3.3

-7 South of Reactor Building MW-16 Figure 3.3

-7 Northwest of Reactor Building MW-CST(A) Figure 3.3

-7 West of Reactor Building MW-CST(B) Figure 3.3

-7 West of Reactor Building

Sample location required by ODCM H indicates Optional TLD location

BUFFALO BUFFALO ROCHESTER ROCHESTER SYRACUSE SYRACUSE UTICA UTICA ALBANY ALBANY 135 MI.135 MI.3 8 M I.3 8 M I.2 3 0 M I.2 3 0 M I.CANADA CANADA PENNSYLVANIA PENNSYLVANIA NEW JERSEY NEW JERSEY CONNECTICUT CONNECTICUT MASSACHUSETTS MASSACHUSETTS VERMONT VERMONT NEW YORK CITY NEW YORK CITY LAKE ONTARIO LAKE ONTARIO FIGURE 3.3-1 FIGURE 3.3-1 NEW YORK STA TE MAP NEW YORK STA TE MAP NEW Y ORK NEW Y ORK NINE MILE POINT SITE:

Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit - 1 Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit - 2 James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant NINE MILE POINT SITE:

Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit - 1 Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit - 2 James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant 3-19 3-19 FIGURE 3.3-2 OFF-SITE ENVIRONMENTAL STATION AND TLD LOCATIONS KEY: 0 TLD LOCATION ENVIRONMENTAL STATION Oswego County New York SCALE IN MILES 0 2 3 4 5 lws\M 213.75° ISS WI J "' 3-20 Lake Ontario IENEI 123.75° 146.25° ONSITE ENVIRONMENTAL STATION AND TLD LOCATIONS KEY: ENVIRONMENTAL STATIONS TLD LOCATIONS Transmission Lines Main Switch Yard 90° E 270° W S 0°N 180°11.25°33.75°56.25°78.75°101.25°123.75°146.25°168.75°191.25°213.75°236.25°258.75°281.25°303.75°348.75°NNE NE ENE ESE SE SSE SSW SW WSW WNW NW NNW Entergy Nuclear Northeast Constellation Nuclear Unit 1 Unit 2 James. A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant 9 Mile Point Nuclear Station MET Tower 1 Mile Radius 0.5 Mile Radius Sunset Bay Boat Launch Breakwall Lycoming Lake Ontario Site Map Miles S w i t c h y a r d Training Center M i n e r R o a d L a k e v i e w R o a d R t e.1 A B i b l e C a m p P a r k h u r s t R o a d C o.R t e.2 9 S u n s e t B a y R o a d S u n s e t P a r k R o a d L a k e R o a d R a i l r o a d Shooting Range Laydown Area Training Center Cooling Tower Security Checkpoint Security Checkpoint 326.25°18 7 103 107 106 31 85 39 86 87 75 76 77 30 27 29 28 47 23 3 78 24 25 109 100 108 26 4 5 6 79 101 80 97 81 82 105 83 84 G R4 R3 R2 J I H D1 K 3-21 FIGURE 3.3-4 MILK AND SURFACE WATER SAMPLE LOCATIONS KEY: 0 SURFACE WATER LOCATION 6,. MILK SAMPLE LOCATION Oswego County New York SCALE IN MILES 0 2 3 4 5 lwswl 213.75° ISS WI 3-22 Lake Ontario 168.75° 123.75° ISSEI FIGURE 3.3-5 NEAREST RESIDENCE, FOOD PRODUCT FISH, AND SHORELINE SEDIMENT SAMPLE LOCATIONS KEY: Q FISH FOOD PRODUCT D SHORELINE NEAREST RESIDENCE SEDIMENT 0 (Based on NMP-Unit 2 Center1ine)

Oswego County New York SCALE IN MILES 0 2 3 4 5 lwsW1 ISS WI 3-23 Lake Ontario 168.75° 146.25° ISSEI N N LAKE ONTARIO LAKE ONTARIO OSWEGO COUNTY OSWEGO COUNTY NEW YORK NEW YORK A A C C D D E E F F G G H H NEAREST RESIDENC E KEY: NEAREST RESIDENCE LOCATIONS FIGURE 3.3-6 LOCA TIONS - JA F 1 MI. 1.5 MI. 2 MI. BASED ON JAF CENTERLINE B B 1 1 1A 1A 29 29 29 29 1 1 104 104 L a k e V i e w R d.L a k e V i e w R d.B a y S h o r e D r.B a y S h o r e D r.S h o r e O a k s D r.S h o r e O a k s D r.P a r k h u r s t R d.P a r k h u r s t R d.N i n e M i l e P o i n t R d.N i n e M i l e P o i n t R d.D e n n i s R d.D e n n i s R d.Miner Rd.

Miner Rd.Lycoming Lycoming North North Scriba Scriba Lake Rd.

Lake Rd.Sunset Bay Rd.

Sunset Bay Rd.

JAF Site JAF Site NMP Site NMP Site W W E E Woolson Rd.

Woolson Rd.

K e e f e R d.K e e f e R d.Middle Rd.

Middle Rd.

C lif f R d.C lif f R d.B ib le C am p B ib le C am p C r e a m e r y R d.C r e a m e r y R d.S S C C R R I I B B A A N N E E W W H H A A V V E E N N Scale of M iles 0 0 1 1 0 78.75 0 101.25 0 123.75 0 146.25 0 168.75 0 191.25 0 213.75 0 236.25 0 258.75 E E ESE ESE SE SE SSE SSE S S SSW SSW SW SW WSW WSW 3-24 3-24 LAKE ONTARIO MW-5 D 0 Entergy Nuclear Northeast 0 James A. FitzPabick NPP ,..---------, 1 ){ FIGURE 3.3-7 JAF ON-SITE GROUND WATER MONITORING WELLS -Monitoring Well Location B&G MW-9 Power Plant Warehouse D 0 Training 1111111111 YARDS 0 50 100 150 200 SCALE 3-25 250 300 3 - 26 3.4 LAND USE CENSUS The ODCM requires that a milch animal census and a residence census be conducted annually out to a distance of five miles. Milch animals are defined as any animal that is routinely used to provide milk for human consumption.

The milch animal census is an estimation of the number of cows and goats within an approximate ten mile radius of the Nine Mile Point site. The census is done once per year in the summer. It is conducted by sending questionnaires to previous milch animal owners, and by road surveys to locate any possible new owners. In the event that questionnaires are not answered, the owners are contacted by telephone or in person. The Oswego County Cooperative Extension Service was also contacted to provide any additional information. The residence census is conducted each year to identify the closest residence in each of the 22.5 degree meteorological sectors out to a distance of five miles. A residence, for the purposes of this census, is a residence that is occupied on a part time basis (such as a summer camp), or on a full time, year round basis. Several of the site meteorological sectors are over Lake Ontario, therefore, there are only eight sectors over land where residences are located within five miles.

In addition to the milch animal and residence census, a garden census is performed. The census is conducted each year to identify the gardens near the site that are to be used for the collection of food product samples. The results of the garden census are not provided in this report. The results are used only to identify appropriate sample locations. The garden census is not required by the ODCM if broadleaf vegetation sampling and analysis are performed.

3.5 CHANGES

TO THE REMP PROGRAM There were no changes to the 201 2 sampling program.

3.6 DEVIATION

AND EXCEPTIONS TO THE PROGRAM The noted exceptions to the 2012 sample program address only those samples or monitoring requirements which are required by the ODCM , Part I, Table 5.1

-1. This section satisfies the reporting requirements of ODCM, Part I, Section 5.1.1.c.1.

3.6.1 ODCM Program Deviations The following are deviations from the program specified by the ODCM:

1. Loss of power to environmental air sample stations R1 and R2 Offsite for approximately 1.5 hours5.787037e-5 days 0.00139 hours 8.267196e-6 weeks 1.9025e-6 months during the week of 03/27/12 to 04/03/12. The air sample stations were found operating during normal weekly sample change outs. Sample volumes for the period were acceptable.

3 - 27 2. Loss of power to environmental air sample stations R5 Offsite for 2 hours2.314815e-5 days 5.555556e-4 hours 3.306878e-6 weeks 7.61e-7 months , 30 minutes on 7/10/12. The air sample station was found operating during normal weekly sample change outs. Sample volume for the period was acceptable.

3. Loss of power 2 times in the last 14 days for R

-5 offsite environmental air sample station. Total out of service time was 5.8 hours9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months . The air sample station was found operating during normal weekly change out. Sample volume for the period was acceptable.

4. Loss of power to environmental air sample station R5 Offsite for 2.4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months between 8/14/12 and 8/21/12. The air sample station was found operating during normal weekly sample change outs. Sample volume for the period w as acceptable.

5. Loss of power to environmental air sample station s R1, R2, R3, and R4 Offsite found during weekly surveillances. R1 and R2 were lost for 12 hours1.388889e-4 days 0.00333 hours 1.984127e-5 weeks 4.566e-6 months each and R3 and R4 were lost for 3 hours3.472222e-5 days 8.333333e-4 hours 4.960317e-6 weeks 1.1415e-6 months each during the sample period from 10/23/12 to 10/30/12. This was evident from the lack of time on the pump integrators.

Perceived cause was loss of power from hurricane Sandy. Sample volume for th e

period was acceptable.

3.6.2 Air Sampling Station Operability Assessment The ODCM required air sampling program consists of 5 individual sampling locations.

The collective operable time period for the air monitoring stations was 43,87 6 hours6.944444e-5 days 0.00167 hours 9.920635e-6 weeks 2.283e-6 months out of a possible 43,920 hours0.0106 days 0.256 hours 0.00152 weeks 3.5006e-4 months . The air sampling availability factor for the report period was 99.9%.

3 - 28 3.7 STATISTICAL METHODOLOGY There are a number of statistical calculation methodologies used in evaluating the data from the environmental monitoring program. These methodologies include determination of standard deviation, the mean and associated error for the mean

, and the lower limit of detection (LLD).

3.7.1 ESTIMATION

OF THE MEAN AND STANDARD DEVIATION The mean (X) and standard deviation (s) were used in the reduction of the data generated by the sampling and analysis of the various media in the JAFNPP Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP). The following equations were utilized to compute the mean (X) and the standard deviation (s): 1. Mean N X X i n i1 Where, X = estimate of the mean i = individual sample N, n = total number of samples with positive indications X i = value for sample i above the lower limit of detection.

3 - 29 2. Standard Deviation 2/1)1 (2)(1N X i X n i s Where, X = mean for the values of X s = standard deviation for the sample population

3.7.2 ESTIMATION

OF THE MEAN & THE ESTIMATED ERROR FOR THE MEAN In accordance with program policy, when the initial count indicates the presence of a plant related radionuclide(s) in a sample, two recounts of the sample may be required. When a radionuclide is positively identified in two or more counts, the analytical result for the radionuclide is reported as the mean of the positive detections and the associated propagated error for that mean. In cases where more than one positive sample result exists, the mean of the sample results and the estimated error for the mean are reported in the Annual Report.

The following equations were utilized to estimate the mean (X) and the associated propagated error.

1. Mean N X X i n i1 Where, X = estimate of the mean i = individual sample N,n = total number of samples with positive indications X i = value for sample i above the lower limit of detection

3 - 30 2. Error of the Mean (Reference 18) 2/1 1)(2

n i ERRORMEANERROR N Where, ERROR MEAN

= propagated error i = individual sample ERROR = 1 sigma* error of the individual analysis N, n = number of samples with positive indications

Sigma () Sigma is the Greek letter used to represent the mathematical term Standard Deviation. Standard Deviation is a measure of dispersion from the arithmetic mean of a set of numbers.

3.7.3 LOWER

LIMIT OF DETECTION (LLD)

The LLD is the predetermined concentration or activity level used to establish a detection limit for the analytical procedures.

The LLDs are specified by the ODCM for radionuclides in specific media and are determined by taking into account the overall measurement methods. The equation used to calculate the LLD is: )(exp)()22.2 ()()(66.4 t Y V E S LLD b Where: LLD = the a priori lower limit of detection, as defined above (in picocuries per unit mass or volume) S b = the standard deviation of the background counting rate or of the counting rate of a blank sample, as appropriate (in counts per minute)

E = the counting efficiency (in counts per disintegration)

V = the sample size (in units of mass or volume) 2.22 = the number of disintegrations per minute per picocurie

3 - 31 Y = the fractional radiochemical yield (when applicabl e) = the radioactive decay constant for the particular radionuclide t = the elapsed time between sample collection (or end of the sample collection period) and time of counting The ODCM LLD formula assumes that:

1. The counting times for the sample and background are equal

2. T he count rate of the background is approximately equal to the count rate of the sample In the ODCM program, LLDs are used to ensure that minimum acceptable detection capabilities are met with specified statistical confidence levels (95% detection probability with 5% probability of a false negative). Table 3.8

-1 lists the ODCM program required LLDs for specific media and radionuclides as specified by the NRC. The LLDs actually achieved are routinely lower than those specified by the ODCM.

3.8 COMPLIANCE

WITH REQUIRED LOWER LIMITS OF DETECTION (LLD)

ODCM, Part 1, Table 5.1

-3 specifies the detection capabilities for environmental sample analysis (see report Table 3.8-1). ODCM, Part 1, Section 6.1 require s that a discussion of all analyses for which the required LLDs specified were not routinely achieved be included in the Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report. Section 3.8 is provided pursuant to this requirement.

3.8.1 All sample analyses performed in 2012 as required by the ODCM, achieved the Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) as specified by ODCM, Part 1, Table 5.1

-3. See report Table 3.8-1 for required LLD values.

3 - 32 TABLE 3.8-1 REQUIRED DETECTION CAPABILITIES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE ANALYSIS LOWER LIMIT OF DETECTION (LLD)

Analysis Water (pCi/l) Airborne Particulate or Gases (pCi/m 3) Fish (pCi/kg, wet)

Milk (pCi/l) Food Products (pCi/kg, wet)

Sediment (pCi/kg, dry)

Gross Beta 4 0.01 H-3 3000 (a) Mn-54 15 130 Fe-59 30 260 Co-58, Co-60 15 130 Zn-65 30 260 Zr-95, Nb-95 15 I-131 15 (a) 0.07 1 60 Cs-134 15 0.05 130 15 60 150 Cs-137 18 0.06 150 18 80 180 Ba/La-140 15 15 (a) No drinking water pathway exists at the Nine Mile Point site under normal operating conditions due to the direction and distance of the nearest drinking water intake. Therefore, an LLD value of 3,000 pCi/liter is used for H

-3 and an LLD value of 15 pCi/liter is used for I

-131.

3 - 33 3.9 REGULATORY LIMITS Two federal agencies, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Environmental Protection Agency, have responsibility for regulations promulgated for protecting the public from radiation and radioactivity beyond the site boundary.

3.9.1 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC):

The NRC , in 10 CFR 20.1301

, limits the levels of radiation in unrestricted areas resulting from the possession or use of radioactive materials such that they limit any individual to a dose of:

less than or equal to 100 mrem per year to the total body In addition to this dose limit, the NRC has established design objectives for nuclear plant licensees. Conformance to these guidelines ensures that nuclear power reactor effluents are maintained as far below the legal limits as is reasonably achievable.

The NRC , in 10CFR 50, Appendix I, establishes design objectives for the dose to a member of the general public from radioactive material in liquid effluents released to unrestricted areas to be limited to:

less than or equal to 3 mrem per year to the total body or less than or equal to 10 mrem per year to any organ The air dose due to release of Noble gases in gaseous effluents is restricted to:

less than or equal to 10 mrad per year for gamma radiation or less than or equal to 20 mrad per year for beta radiation The dose to a member of the general public from Iodine-131, tritium, and all particulate radionuclide's with half-lives greater than 8 days in gaseous effluents is limited to:

less than or equal to 15 mrem per year to any organ The NRC , in 10CFR72.104(a)

, establishes criteria for radioactive materials in effluents and direct radiation from an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI).

3 - 34 During normal operations and anticipated occurrences, the annual dose equivalent to any real individual who is located beyond the controlled area must not exceed:

25 mrem per year to the total body 75 mrem per year to the thyroid and 25 mrem per year to any other organ as a result of :

1. Planned discharges of radioactive material, radon and its decay products excepted , to the environment

2. Direct radiation from ISFSI

3. Any other radiation from fuel cycle operation in the region

3.9.2 Environmental

Protection Agency (EPA)

The EPA , in 40CFR190.10

, Subpart B, sets forth the environmental standards for the uranium fuel cycle. During normal operation, the annual dose to any member of the public from the entire uranium fuel cycle shall be limited to:

less than or equal to 25 mrem per year to the total body less than or equal to 75 mrem per year to the thyroid and less than or equal to 25 mrem per year to any other organ

4 - 1 4.0 SAMPLE

SUMMARY

TABLES IN BRANCH TECHNICAL POSITION FORMAT All sample data is summarized in table form. The tables are titled "Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Annual Summary" and use the following format as specified in the NRC Branch Technical Position:

Column 1. Sample Medium

2. Type and Number of Analyses Performed

3. Required Lower Limits of Detection (LLD), see Section 3.8, Table 3.8

-1. This wording indicates that inclusive data is based on 4.66 S b (sigma) of background (See Section 3.7). 4. The mean and range of the positive measured values of the indicator locations.

5. The mean, range, and location of the highest indicator annual mean. Location designations are keyed to Table 3.3

-1 in Section 3.3.

6. The mean and range of the positive measured values of the control locations.

7. The number of non

-routine reports sent to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

NOTE: Only positive measured values are used in statistical calculations.

4 - 2 TABLE 4.0-1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NO. 50

-333 OSWEGO COUNTY, STATE OF NEW YORK, JANUARY

- DECEMBER 2012* MEDIUM (UNITS)

TYPE AND NUMBER OF ANALYSES*

LLD(a) INDICATOR LOCATIONS:

MEAN (f) / RANGE LOCATION (b) OF HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN: LOCATION & MEAN (f) / RANGE CONTROL LOCATION: MEAN (f) / RANGE NUMBER OF NON-ROUTINE REPORTS Shoreline Sediment (pCi/kg-dry) Gamma-Spectrum Analysis (GSA) (4): Cs-134 Cs-137 150 180 <LLD <LLD

<LLD <LLD

<LLD <LLD 0 0 Fish (pCi/kg-wet) GSA (18): (h) Mn-54 Fe-59 Co-58 Co-60 Zn-65 Cs-134 Cs-137 130 260 130 130 260 130 150 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 - 3 TABLE 4.0-1 (continued)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NO. 50

-333 OSWEGO COUNTY, STATE OF NEW YORK, JANUARY

- DECEMBER 2012* MEDIUM (UNITS)

TYPE AND NUMBER OF ANALYSES*

LLD(a) INDICATOR LOCATIONS:

MEAN (f) / RANGE LOCATION (b) OF HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN: LOCATION & MEAN (f) / RANGE CONTROL LOCATION: MEAN (f) / RANGE NUMBER OF NON-ROUTINE REPORTS Surface Water (pCi/liter)

H-3 (8): H-3 GSA (24): Mn-54 Fe-59 C o-58 Co-60 Zn-65 Zr-95 Nb-95 I-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 Ba/La-140 3000(c) 15 30 15 15 30 15 15 15(c) 15 18 15

<LLD

<LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

<LLD

<LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LL D <LLD <LLD <LLD

<LLD

<LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 - 4 TABLE 4.0-1 (continued)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

JAMES A. FITZPATRICK NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NO. 50

-333 OSWEGO COUNTY, STATE OF NEW YORK, JANUARY

- DECEMBER 2012* MEDIUM (UNITS)

TYPE AND NUMBER OF ANALYSES*

LLD(a) INDICATOR LOCATIONS:

MEAN (f) / RANGE LOCATION (b) OF HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN: LOCATION & MEAN (f) / RANGE CONTROL LOCATION: MEAN (f) / RANGE NUMBER OF NON-ROUTINE REPORTS TLD (mrem per standard month)

Gamma Dose (140) (d) 4.8 (120/120) (i) 3.4 - 10.6 TLD #85 (g):

10.2 (4/4) 0.2 miles at 292 o 9.8 - 10.6 4.0 (20/20) (i) 3.6 - 5.0 0 Air Particulates (pCi/m 3) Gross Beta (260): I-131 (260): GSA (20): Cs-134 Cs-137 0.01 0.07 0.05 0.06 0.01 6 (2 08/2 08) 0.00 4 - 0.0 3 1 <LLD <LLD <LLD R-3 0.01 6 (5 2/5 2) 1.4 miles at 1 33 o 0.00 4 - 0.0 29 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.01 6 (5 2/5 2) 0.00 5 - 0.0 25 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 0 0 0 Milk (pCi/liter)

GSA (36): (e) (h) Cs-134 Cs-137 Ba/La-140 I-131 (36): I-131 15 18 15 1 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 0 0 0 Food Products (pCi/kg-wet) GSA (16): (h) I-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 60 60 80 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 0 0 4 - 5 TABLE NOTES

* = Data for Table 4.0

-1 is based on ODCM required samples only

. (a) = LLD values as required by the ODCM. LLD units are specified in the medium column.

(b) = Location is distance in miles and direction in compass degrees based on NMP

-2 reactor center

-line rounded to the nearest 1/10 mile. Units in this column are specified in medium column.

(c) = The ODCM specifies an I-131 and tritium LLD value for surface water analysis (non

-drinking water) of 15 pCi/liter and 3000 pCi/liter respectively.

(d) = The ODCM do es not specify a particular LLD value to environmental TLDs.

(e) = The ODCM criteria for indicator milk sample locations include locations within 5.0 miles of the site. There are no milk sample locations within 5.0 miles of the site. Therefore, the only sample location required by the ODCM is the control location. There was one optional location for 2012.

(f) = Fraction of number of detectable measurements to total number of measurements. Mean and range results are based on detectable measurements only.

(g) = This dose is not representative of doses to a member of the public since this area is located near the north shoreline which is in close proximity to the generating facility and is not accessible to members of the public (See Section 5.2.4, TLDs).

(h) = Data includes results from optional samples in addition to samples required by the ODCM.

(i) = Indicator TLD locations are: #7, 15, 18, 23, 56, 58, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96

, 97 and 98. Control TLDs are all TLDs located beyond the influence of the site (TLD #:

8, 14, 49 , 111, and 113).

5 - 1 5.0 DATA EVALUATION AND DISCUSSION Introduction Each year the results of the annual Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) are evaluated considering plant operations at the site, the natural processes in the environment, and the archive of historical environmental radiological data. A number of factors are considered in the course of evaluating and interpreting the annual environmental radiological data. This interpretation can be made using several methods including trend analysis, population dose estimates, risk estimates to the general population based on significance of environmental concentrations, effectiveness of plant effluent controls, and specific research areas. The report not only presents the data collected during the 2012 sample program but also assesses the significance of radionuclides detected in the environment. It is important to note that detection of a radionuclide is not, of itself, an indication of environmental significance. Evaluation of the impact of the radionuclide in terms of potential increased dose to man, in relation to natural background, is necessary to determine the true significance of any detection.

Units of Measure Some of the units of measure used in this report are explained below.

Radioactivity is the number of atoms in a material that decay per unit of time. Each time an atom decays, radiation is emitted. The curie (Ci) is the unit used to describe the activity of a material and indicates the rate at which the atoms are decaying. One curie of activity indicates the decay of 37 billion atoms per second.

Smaller units of the curie are used in this report. Two common units are the microcurie (uCi), which is one millionth (0.000001) of a curie, and the picocurie (pCi), which is one trillionth (0.000000000001) of a curie. The picocurie (pCi) is the unit of radiation that is routinely used in this report. The mass, or weight, of radioactive material that would result in one curie of activity depends on the disintegration rate or half

-life. For example, one gram of radium

-226 contains one curie of activity, but it would require about 1.5 million grams of natural uranium to equal one curie. Radium

-226 is more radioactive than natural uranium on a weight or mass basis.

Dose/Dose to Man The dose or dose equivalent, simply put, is the amount of ionizing energy deposited or absorbed in living tissue. The amount of energy deposited or ionization caused is dependent on the type of radiation. For example, alpha radiation can cause dense localized ionization that can be up to 20 times the amount of ionization for the same energy imparted as from gamma or x

-rays. Therefore, a quality factor must be applied to account for the different ionizing capabilities of various types of radiation. When the quality factor is multiplied by the absorbed dose, the result is the dose equivalent, which is an estimate of the possible biological damage resulting from exposure to any type of ionizing radiation. The dose equivalent is measured in rem (roentgen equivalent man).

In terms of environmental radiation, the rem is a large unit. Therefore, a smaller unit, the millirem (mrem) is often used. One millirem (mrem) is equal to 0.001 of a rem.

5 - 2 The term "dose to man" refers to the dose or dose equivalent that is received by members of the general public at or beyond the site boundary. The dose is calculated based on concentrations of radioactive material measured in the environment. The primary pathways that contribute to the dose to man are; the inhalation pathway, the ingestion pathway, and direct radiation.

Discussion In the United States, a person's average annual radiation dose is 620 mrem. About half that amount comes from naturally occurring radionuclides. Radon and thoron gases account for two

-

thirds of this exposure, while cosmic, terrestrial, and internal radiation account for the remainder. The other half comes from manmade sources and is mostly from diagnostic medical procedures.

The pie chart below shows a breakdown of radiation sources that contribute to the average annual U.S. radiation dose of 620 mrem. Nearly three

-fourths of this dose is split between radon/thoron gas (naturally occurring) and diagnostic medical procedures (manmade).

Sources of Radiation Exposure in the United StatesSource: NCRP Report No. 160 (2009)Industrial &Occupational<0.1%Terrestrial (soil) 3%ConsumerProducts 2%Cosmic (space) 5%Internal 5%Nuclear Medicine 12%Medical Procedures 36%Radon and Thoron 37% Natural Sources - 50% ~310 millirem (0.31 rem) Manmade Sources - 50% ~310 millirem (0.31 rem)

5 - 3 There are three separate groups of radionuclides that were measured in the environment and analyzed for the 2012 sampling program.

1. The first of these groups consists of the radionuclides that are naturally occurring. The environment contains a significant inventory of naturally occurring radioactive elements.

The components of natural or background radiation include the decay of radioactive elements in the earth's crust, a steady stream of high

-energy particles from space called cosmic radiation and naturally

-occurring radioactive isotopes in the human body like potassium-40.

A number of naturally occurring radionuclides are present in the environment. These are expected to be present in many of the environmental samples collected in the vicinity of the Nine Mile Point Site. Some of the radionuclides normally present include:

Tritium, present as a result of the interaction of cosmic radiation with the upper atmosphere Beryllium-7, present as a result of the interaction of cosmic radiation with the upper atmosphere Potassium-40 and Radium-226, naturally occurring radionuclides found in the human body and throughout the environment

Beryllium-7 and potassium

-40 are especially common in REMP samples. Since they are naturally occurring and are abundant, positive results for these radionuclides are reported in some cases in Section 6.0 of this report. Comparisons of program samples to naturally occurring radiation are made throughout this section to help put program results into perspective and to aid the reader in determining what, if any, significant impact is demonstrated by the REMP results.

2. The second group consists of radionuclides that may be detected in the environment as a result of the detonation of thermonuclear devices in the earth's atmosphere. Atmospheric nuclear testing during the early 1950's produced a measurable inventory of radionuclides presently found in the lower atmosphere

, as well as in ecological systems. In 1963

, an Atmospheric Test Ban Treaty was signed. Since the treaty, the global inventory of manmade radioactivity in the environment has been greatly reduced through the decay of short lived radionuclides and the removal of radionuclides from the food chain by such natural processes as weathering and sedimentation. This process is referred to in this report as ecological cycling. Since 1963, several atmospheric weapons tests have been conducted by the People's Republic of China and underground weapons testing by India, Pakistan & North Korea. In some cases, the usual radionuclides associated with nuclear detonations were detected for several months following the test, and then after a peak detection period, diminished to a point where most could not be detected. Although reduced in frequency, atmospheric testing continued into the 1980's. The resulting fallout or deposition from these most recent tests has influenced the background radiation in the vicinity of the site and was evident in many of the sample media analyzed over the years.

Fallout radionuclides from nuclear weapons testing included Cesium

-137 and Strontium

-90. The highest weapons testing concentrations were noted in samples collected for the 1981 REMP. Cs

-137 was the major byproduct of this testing and is still occasionally detected in a few select number of environmental media.

5 - 4 3. The third group consists of radionuclides that may be detected in the environment are related to nuclear power technology. These radionuclides are the byproduct of the operation of light water reactors. These byproduct radionuclides are the same as those produced in atmospheric weapons testing

, found in the Chernobyl and Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station fallout. This commonality makes a determination of the source of these radionuclides that may be detected in environmental samples difficult to determine. During 2012, there were no plant

-related radionuclides detected in the REMP sampling.

A number of factors must be considered in performing radiological sample data evaluation and interpretation. The evaluation is made using several approaches including trend analysis and dose to man. An attempt has been made not only to report the data collected during 2012, but also to assess the significance of the radionuclides detected in the environment as compared to naturally occurring and manmade radiation sources. It is important to note that detected concentrations of radionuclides in the local environment as a result of man's technology are very small and are of no or little significance from an environmental or dose to man perspective.

The 2009 per capita average dose was determined to be 620 mrem per year from all sources, as noted in National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement (NCRP) Report No. 160. This average dose includes such exposure sources as industrial & occupational, consumer products, terrestrial, cosmic, internal, nuclear medicine, medical procedures, radon and thoron. The 2009 per capita dose rate due to naturally occurring sources was 310 mrem per year. The per capita radiation dose from nuclear power production nationwide is less than one mrem per year.

The naturally occurring gamma radiation in the environs of the Nine Mile Point site, resulting from radionuclides in the atmosphere and in the ground, accounts for approximately 50 mrem per year. This dose is a result of radionuclides of cosmic origin (for example, Be-7) and of primordial origin (Ra

-226, K-40, and Th

-232). A dose of 50 mrem per year, as a background dose, is significantly greater than any possible doses as a result of routine operations at the site during 2012.

The results of each sample medium are discussed in detail in Sections 5.1 and 5.2. This includes a summary of the results, the estimated environmental impact, a detailed review of any relevant findings with a dose to man estimate where appropriate, and an analysis of possible long

-term a nd short-term trends.

During routine implementation of the REMP, additional or optional environmental pathway media are sampled and analyzed. These samples are obtained to:

Expand the area covered by the program beyond that required by the ODCM

Provide more comprehensive monitoring than is currently required

Monitor the secondary dose to man pathways

Maintain the analytical data base established when the plants began commercial operation

5 - 5 The optional samples that are collected will vary from year to year. In addition to the optional sample media, additional locations are sampled and analyzed for those pathways required by the ODCM. These additional sample locations are obtained to ensure that a variety of environmental pathways are monitored in a comprehensive manner. Data from additional sample locations that are associated with the required ODCM sample media are included in the data presentation and evaluation. When additional locations are included, the use of this data is specifically noted in Sections 5.1 and 5.2.

Section 6.0 contains the analytical results for the sample media addressed in the report. Tables are provided for each required sample medium analyzed during the 2012 program.

Section 7.0, titled Historical Data, contains statistics from previous years' environmental sampling. The process of determining the impact of plant operation on the environment includes the evaluation of past analytical data to determine if trends are changing or developing. As state

-of-the-art detection capabilities improve, data comparison is difficult in some cases. For example, Lower Limits of Detections (LLDs) have improved significantly since 1969 due to technological advances in laboratory procedures and analytical equipment.

5 - 6 5.1 AQUATIC PROGRAM The aquatic program consists of samples collected from three environmental pathways. These pathways are:

Shoreline Sediment Fish Surface Waters Section 6.0, Tables 6

-1 through 6

-4 present the analytical results for the aquatic samples collected for the 2012 sampling period.

5.1.1 SHORELINE

SEDIMENT RESULTS A. Results Summary Shoreline sediment samples were obtained in April and November of 2012 at one offsite control location (Lang's Beach located near Oswego Harbor) and at one indicator location (Sunset Bay) which is an area east of the site considered to have recreational value.

A total of four sediment samples were collected for the 2012 sample program, two indicator and two control. These results continue to show a downward trend over the last 10 years.

Cs-137 was not detected in samples collected from the Sunset Bay indicator location and the Lang's Beach control location during 2012. The one naturally

-occurring radionuclide detected was K

-40 and was not related to plant operations. No other plant

-related radionuclides were detected in the 2012 shoreline sediment samples.

The following is a graph of the average Cs

-137 concentration in shoreline sediment samples over 18 years. This graph illustrates a general downward trend in the Cs

-137 concentrations since 199 4.

5 - 7 00.050.10.150.20.25 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012pCi/gram (dry)Shoreline Sediment Cs

-137CONTROLINDICATORControl< LLD ValueIndicator <LLD Value B. Data Evaluation and Discussion Shoreline sediment samples are routinely collected twice per year from the shoreline of Lake Ontario. Samples are collected from one indicator location (Sunset Bay), and one control location (Lang's Beach). Samples were collected from both the indicator and control locations in April and November 2012. The results of these sample collections are presented in Section 6.0, Table 6

-1, "Concentrations of Gamma Emitters in Shoreline Sediment Samples

- 2012". Potassium-40 (K-40) was the only significant radionuclide detected in the sediment samples.

C. Dose Evaluation The calculated potential whole body and skin doses which may result from the measured Cs

-137 concentrations in previous years are extremely small and are insignificant when compared to natural background doses.

The radiological impact of Cs

-137 measured in the shoreline sediment can be evaluated on the basis of dose to man. In the case of shoreline sediments, the critical pathway is direct radiation to the whole body and skin. Using the parameters provided in Regulatory Guide 1.109, the potential dose to man in mrem per year can be calculated. The following regulatory guide values were used in calculating the dose to man: A teenager spends 67 hours7.75463e-4 days 0.0186 hours 1.107804e-4 weeks 2.54935e-5 months per year at the beach area or on the shoreline, The sediment has a mass of 40 kg/m2 (dry) to a depth of 2.5 cm, The shoreline width factor is 0.3, and The maximum 2012 LLD concentration of <0.086 pCi/g (dry).

5 - 8 Using these conservative parameters, the potential dose to the maximum exposed individual (teenager) would be 0.000 29 mrem/year to the whole body and 0.

000 34 mrem/year to the skin. This calculated dose is very small and is insignificant when compared to the natural background annual exposure of approximately 50 mrem as measured by control TLDs in the vicinity of the site.

D. Data Trends Cs-137 was not detected at the indicator and control sample locations for 201 1 as well as 2012. The previous five years of data show that Cs-137 was only measured in 2007 at the indicator location. Over the five year period, C s-137 was only measured in the October, 2007 sample. Cesium-137 was not detected in the indicator location samples in 2008 to 2011. Cesium-137 was not detected in the control location samples over this same five year period.

The general absence of Cs

-137 in the control samples from 2001 to 2007 is attributed to the differences in the sediment types between the two sample locations. Few shoreline regions west of the site contain fine sediment and/or sand which would be representative of the indicator location. It is difficult to obtain control samples that are comparable in physical and chemical characteristics to the indicator samples. Other factors, which include changing lake level and shoreline erosion, further complicate attempts at consistency in shoreline sediment sampling.

The previous ten year data trend for indicator shoreline samples showed a n overall downward trend in concentration measured at the indicator sample locations. Over the previous ten year period of 2002 through 201 1, mean concentrations at the indicator location ranged from a maximum of 0.

08 pCi/g (dry) in 2005 to a minimum of 0.04 pCi/g (dry) measured in 2004 and again in 200 7. C s-137 was not detected at the indicator location for 2008 through 2012. This continues to support the long term decreasing trend in Cs

-137 concentration in shoreline sediment samples. Cesium

-137 was not detected in the control samples collected over the previous ten years.

Shoreline sediment sampling at the indicator location commenced in 1985. Prior to 1985, no data was available for long term trend analysis.

Section 7.0, Tables 7

-1 and 7-2 illustrate historical environmental data for shoreline sediment samples.

5 - 9 5.1.2 FISH SAMPLE RESULTS A. Results Summary A total of 18 fish samples were collected for the 2012 sample program. Species collected were: Brown Trout, Chinook Salmon, Smallmouth Bass, and Walleye. The analytical results for the 2012 fish samples showed no detectable concentration of radionuclide that would be attributable to plant operations at the site or past atmospheric weapons testing. Since 2003 no Cs

-137 has been measured in fish samples. Over the previous 20 years prior to 2003, Cs

-137 has been detected at a combination of both the indicator and/or control locations. (Refer to Tables 7

-3 and 7-4). These low levels of Cs

-137 represented no significant dose to man or impact on the environment.

The 2012 fish sample results demonstrate that plant operations at the Nine Mile Point Site have no measurable radiological environmental impact on the upper levels of the Lake Ontario food chain. The 2012 results are consistent with previous year's results in that they continue to support the general long-term downward trend in fish Cs

-137 concentrations over the last 2 5 years. Cs

-137 was not detected in fish samples collected in 200 3 to 201 2 from indicator locations. The period of 2000 through 201 2 as a group are the lowest results measured since the beginning of the Site Environmental Monitoring Program in 1969.

B. Data Evaluation and Discussion Fish collections were made utilizing gill nets at one location greater than five miles from the site (Oswego Harbor area) and at two locations in the vicinity of the lake discharges for the NMPNS and the JAFNPP facilities. The Oswego Harbor samples served as control samples while the NMPNS and JAFNPP samples served as indicator samples. All samples were analyzed for gamma emitters. Section 6.0, Table 6-2 shows individual results for all the samples collected in 201 2 in units of pCi/g (wet).

The spring fish collection was made up of 9 individual samples representing three separate species. Brown Trout, Smallmouth Bass, and Walleye were collected.

The total fall fish collection was comprised of 9 individual samples representing three individual species. Brown Trout, Chinook Salmon, and Smallmouth Bass were collected.

Cs-137 was not detected in any of the fish species collected for the 2012 sample program.

5 - 10 C. Dose Evaluation Fish represent the highest level in the aquatic food chain and have the potential to be a contributor to the dose to man from the operations at the site. The lack of detectable concentrations of plant

-related radionuclides in the 2012 fish samples demonstrates that there is no attributable dose to man from operations at the site through the aquatic pathway. Some Lake Ontario fish species may be considered an important food source due to the local sport fishing industry. Therefore, these fish are an integral part of the human food chain.

D. Data Trends The Cs-137 data for fish samples over the previous five years (200 7 through 2011) show that the number of positive detections has decreased over this period relative to historical data. There were no positive detections of Cs

-137 over the previous five year period at the indicator locations. The graph below illustrates the mean control and indicator Cs

-137 concentrations for 2012 and the previous fifteen years. 00.0050.010.0150.020.025 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012pCi/gram (wet)ANNUAL MEAN CONCENTRATIONFISH Cs-137INDICATORCONTROLINDICATOR <LLD VALUECONTROL <LLD VALUE The data trend shows a consistent level of Cs

-137 measured in fish between 199 6 and 1998. After 1998, the number of positive detections drops off as noted in the five year trend. The 1995 through 2012 results, as a group, are the lowest Cs

-137 concentrations measured over the existence of the sample program.

The general long

-term decreasing trend for Cs

-137, illustrated in the graph below, is most probably a result of the cesium becoming unavailable to the ecosystem due to ion exchange with soils and sediments and radiological decay. The concentrations of Cs-137 detected in fish since 1976 are considered to be the result of weapons testing fallout. The general downward trend in concentrations will continue as a function of additional ecological cycling and radiological decay.

5 - 11 00.250.50.75 11.251.519751976197719781979198019811982198319841985198619871988198919901991199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012pCi/gram (wet)ANNUAL MEAN CONCENTRATIONFISH Cs-137INDICATORCONTROLINDICATOR <LLD VALUECONTROL <LLD VALUE Section 7.0, Tables 7

-3 and 7-4 show historical environmental sample data for fish.

5.1.3 SURFACE

WATER (LAKE)

A. Results Summary The ODCM requires that monthly surface water samples be taken from the respective inlet water supplies of the JAFNPP and NRG Energy's Oswego Steam Station. In conjunction with the required samples, three additional Lake Ontario surface water locations are sampled and analyzed. These additional locations are the Oswego City Water Intake, the NMP1 Intake and the NMP2 Intake. Gamma spectral analysis was performed on 24 monthly composite samples from the ODCM locations and on 36 monthly composite samples collected from the additional sample locations. The results of the gamma spectral analyses showed that only naturally

-occurring radionuclides were detected in the 60 samples from the five locations collected for the 2012 Sampling Program. The two naturally

-occurring radionuclide detected were K

-40 and Ra-226 and were not related to plant operations. Monthly composite samples showed no presence of plant

-related gamma emitting isotopes in the waters of Lake Ontario as a result of plant operations.

The monthly surface water samples are composited on a quarterly basis and are analyzed for tritium. A total of 20 samples were analyzed for tritium as part of the 2012 REMP program. The results for the 2012 samples showed no positive detection of tritium.

5 - 12 B. Data Evaluation and Discussion Gamma spectral analysis was performed on monthly composite samples from five Lake Ontario sampling locations. No plant

-related radionuclides were detected in 2012 samples. This is consistent with historical data, which has not shown the presence of plant-related radionuclides in surface water samples.

Tritium samples are quarterly samples that are a composite of the applicable monthly samples for a given location. Tritium samples analyzed for the 2012 sample program were analyzed to an instrument detection level of at least 500 pCi/l.

The tritium results for the JAFNPP inlet canal samples contained no positive detections. The 2012 results had LLD values that ranged from <

367 pCi/l to <

4 0 0 pCi/l. The ODCM Control location (Oswego Steam Station inlet canal) results showed no positive detections and the sample results had LLD values in the range of <367 pCi/l to <

4 00 pCi/l. Tritium was not detected in any of the twelve optional Lake Ontario samples collected in the 2012 program.

The Oswego City Water inlet is sampled to monitor drinking water quality and is representative of a control location due to its distance from the site. The city water inlet is located 7.8 miles west of the site in an "upstream" direction based on the current patterns in the lake.

The following is a summary of LLD results for the 2012 sample program:

Sample Locati on Tritium Concentration pCi/liter Minimum Maximum Mean (Annual)

JAF Inlet (Indicator)*

<3 67 <400 <37 9 Oswego Steam Inlet (Control)*

<367 <400 <38 0 NMP #1 Inlet

<375 <4 00 <3 86 NMP #2 Inlet

<367 <400 <38 0 Oswego City Water Supply

<367 <400 <380

Sample location required by ODCM The above LLD values are below the ODCM required LLD value of 3000 pCi/l.

Analytical results for surface water samples are found in Section 6.0, Tables 6

-3 throug h 6-4. C. Dose Evaluation The radiological impact to members of the public from low levels of tritium in water is insignificant. This can be illustrated by calculating a dose to the whole body and maximum organ using the maximum LLD value and Regulatory Guide 1.109 methodology. Based on a water ingestion rate of 510 liters/yr and a maximum LLD concentration of 40 0 pCi/l, the calculated dose would be less than 0.0 4 1 mrem to the child whole body and less than 0.0 4 1 mrem to the child liver (critical age group/organ).

5 - 13 D. Data Trends There are no data trends for gamma emitters such as Cs

-137 and Co

-60 as historically these radionuclides have not been detected in lake water samples.

Tritium results for the 2012 lake water samples were consistent with results from the previous five years for both the indicator and control locations.

The mean 2012 tritium concentrations were <

380 pCi/l for the control and <379 pCi/l for the indicator location. For the previous five years, there were no positive detections for the indicator and control locations

. This previous five year data set is consistent with long term tritium results measured at the site. The indicator data from the previous ten year period, 200 1 through 20 10 , are representative of natural variations in environmental tritium concentrations with no significant levels of tritium measured. The 1999 mean control value of 365 pCi/l is the highest concentration measured since 1987 and is within the variability of results measured over the life of the program. The ten year historical results are consistent between the control and indicator locations with no large variation in the measured results.

The following graph illustrates the concentrations of tritium measured in Lake Ontario over the previous 20 years at both an indicator and control location. Prior to 1985, the Oswego City Water Supply results were used as control location data as this location closely approximates the Oswego Steam Station, the current control location. There is no existing preoperational data for comparison to recent data.

0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012pCi/lSurface Water

-TritiumINDICATORCONTROLINDICATOR <LLD VALUECONTROL <LLD VALUE 1975-1984: Oswego City Water Control Site 1985-2012: Oswego Steam Station Control Site Historical data for Surface Water Tritium is presented in Section 7.0, Tables 7

-7 and 7-8.

5 - 14 5.2 TERRESTRIAL PROGRAM The terrestrial program consists of samples collected from four environmental pathways. These pathways are:

Airborne particulate and radioiodine, Direct Radiation, Milk, and Food Products

Section 6.0, Tables 6

-5 through 6

-12 present the analytical results for the terrestrial samples collected for the 2012 reporting period.

5.2.1 AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA A. Results Summary Weekly air samples were collected and analyzed for particulate gross beta activity. For the 2012 program, a total of 5 2 samples were collected from control location R

-5 and 2 08 samples were collected from indicator locations R

-1, R-2, R-3, and R-4. These five locations are required by the ODCM. Additional air sampling locations are maintained and are discussed in Section 5.2.1.B below. The mean gross beta concentration for samples collected from the control location (R

-5) in 2012 was 0.01 6 pCi/m 3. The mean gross beta concentration for the samples collected from the indicator locations (R

-1, R-2, R-3, and R-4) in 2012 was 0.01 6 pCi/m 3. The consistency between the indicator and control mean values, demonstrates that there are no increased airborne radioactivity levels in the general vicinity of the site from plant effluents. B. Data Evaluation and Discussion The air monitoring system consists of fifteen sample locations, six onsite and nine offsite. Each location is sampled weekly for particulate gross beta activity. A total of 780 samples were collected and analyzed as part of the 2012 program. Five of the nine offsite locations are required by the ODCM. These locations are designated as R

-1, R-2, R-3, R-4, and R-5. R-5 is a control location required by the ODCM and is located beyond any local influence from the site. In addition, optional offsite and onsite air sample locations are maintained from which weekly samples are collected. The optional offsite locations are designated as D

-2, E, F and G. The optional onsite locations are designated as D

-1, G, H, I, J and K.

5 - 15 Gross beta analysis requires that the samples be counted no sooner than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months after collection. This allows for the decay of short half

-life naturally

-occurring radionuclides, thereby increasing the sensitivity of the analysis for plant

-related radionuclides.

Section 6.0, Tables 6

-5 and 6-6 present the weekly gross beta activity results for samples collected from the offsite and onsite locations.

The mean annual gross beta indicator concentrations for the ODCM indicator stations (R-1, R-2, R-3 and R-4) was 0.01 6 pCi/m 3. The offsite ODCM control station (R

-5) annual mean gross beta concentration was 0.01 6 pCi/m 3. The minimum, maximum and average gross beta results for sample locations required by the ODCM were as follows: Location Concentration pCi/m 3 Minimum Maximum Mean R-1 0.00 5 0.0 3 1 0.0 16 R-2 0.00 5 0.0 28 0.01 6 R-3 0.00 4 0.0 29 0.01 6 R-4 0.00 5 0.0 27 0.01 6 R-5 (control) 0.00 5 0.0 25 0.01 6 R1 - R4 Indicator Stations Min 0.00 4 Max 0.0 3 1 Mean 0.01 6 5 - 16 The mean weekly gross beta concentrations measured in 2012 are illustrated in the following graphs:

0.0000.0050.0100.0150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0400.0450.050 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26pCi/m3Week No.INDICATORCONTROLAir Particulate Gross Beta 0.0000.0050.0100.0150.0200.0250.0300.0350.0400.0450.050 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52pCi/m3Week No.INDICATORCONTROLAir Particulate Gross Beta The fluctuations observed in the gross beta activity over the year can be attributed to changes in the environment, especially seasonal changes. The concentrations of naturally-occurring radionuclides in the lower levels of the atmosphere directly above the land are affected by time

-related processes such as wind direction, precipitation, snow cover, soil temperature and soil moisture content.

5 - 17 C. Dose Evaluation Dose calculations are not performed based on gross beta concentrations. Dose to man as a result of radioactivity in air is calculated using the specific radionuclide and the associated dose factor. See Section 5.2.2.C for dose calculations from air concentrations. The dose received by man from air gross beta concentration is a component of the natural background.

D. Data Trends With the exception of the 1986 sample data, which was affected by the Chernobyl accident, the general trend in air particulate gross beta activity has been one of decreasing activity since 1981, when the mean control value was 0.165 pCi/m

3. The 1981 samples were affected by fallout from a Chinese atmospheric nuclear test which was carried out in 1980.

The mean gross beta concentration measured in 19 69 to 2012 are illustrated in the following graph:

0.0000.0500.1000.1500.2000.2500.3000.3500.400 1969 1975 1976 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012pCi/m3Air Particulate Filter

-Gross BetaINDICATORCONTROLChernobyl accident The trend for the previous five years represents a base line concentration or natural background level for gross beta concentrations. This trend is stable with minor fluctuations due to natural variations. The change in concentrations over the period of 200 2 through 2012 is very small. This is illustrated by the following graph.

5 - 18 0.0000.0050.0100.0150.0200.0250.030 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012pCi/m3Air Particulate Filter

-Gross BetaINDICATORCONTROL The mean annual gross beta concentration at the control station (R

-5) has remained steady with a narrow range of 0.01 4 pCi/m3 to 0.019 pCi/m

3. The mean annual concentrations for the indicator stations for this same time period were similar to the control and ranged from a minimum of 0.01 5 pCi/m 3 to a maximum mean of 0.019 pCi/m 3 in 2005.

Historical data of air particulate gross beta activity are presented in Section 7.0, Tables 7-9 and 7-10. 5.2.2 QUARTERLY PARTICULATE COMPOSITES (GAMMA EMITTERS)

A. Results Summary Fifteen air monitoring stations are maintained around the Nine Mile Point Site. Five of the 15 air monitoring stations are required by the ODCM and are located offsite near the site boundary and offsite as a control location. Ten additional air sampling stations are also maintained as part of the sampling program. Together, these fifteen continuous air sampling stations make up a comprehensive environmental monitoring network for measuring radioactive air particulate concentrations in the environs of the site. Annually, the air monitoring stations provide 780 individual air particulate samples which are assembled by location into 60 quarterly composite samples. The quarterly composites are analyzed using gamma spectroscopy.

No plant-related gamma emitting radionuclides were detected in any of the air particulate filter samples collected during 2012. The gamma analysis results for the quarterly composite samples routinely showed positive detections of Be

-7, K-40, and Ra

-226. Each of these radionuclides is naturally occurring.

5 - 19 B. Data Evaluation Discussion A total of fifteen air sampling stations are in continuous operation and located both onsite and in the offsite sectors surrounding the Nine Mile Point Site. Five of the fifteen monitoring stations are required by the ODCM and the remaining ten are optional to provide an effective monitoring network. Composite air filter samples are assembled for each of the fifteen sampling locations. Each of the weekly air particulate filters collected for the quarter is assembled by location to form quarterly composite samples. The quarterly composite samples required by the ODCM are composite samples assembled for R

-1, R-2, R-3, R-4 and R-5. Other sample locations not required by the ODCM, for which analytical results have been provided, include six onsite locations and four offsite locations. The analytical results for the 60 air particulate filter composites in 2012 showed no detectable activity of plant related radionuclides.

The results of the quarterly composite samples are presented in Section 6.0, Table 6

-9. C. Dose Evaluation The calculated dose as a result of plant effluents is not evaluated due to the fact that no plant related radionuclides were detected in 2012. The monthly air particulate sampling program demonstrated no offsite dose to man from this pathway as a result of operations of the plants located at the Nine Mile Point Site (NMP). D. Data Trends No plant related radionuclides were detected during 2012 at the offsite air monitoring locations.

The ten year database of air particulate composite analysis shows that there is no buildup or routine presence of plant related radionuclides in particulate form in the atmosphere around the site. Historically Co

-60 was detected in each of the years from 1977 through 1984 at both the indicator and control locations, with the exception of 1980 when Co

-60 was not detected at the control location. The presence of Co

-60 in the air samples collected during these years was the result of atmospheric weapons testing. Co

-60 was again detected in an offsite 2000 indicator sample and was the only positive detection of Co

-60 since 1984. The detection of Co

-60 in the one 2000 sample was an isolated event associated with effluents from the NMP1 facility. There have been no subsequent measurable concentrations of Co

-60 in the environment surrounding the NMP site.

5 - 20 Historical data shows that Cs

-137 is the fission product radionuclide most frequently detected in the air particulate filter composites. Cs

-137 was detected in each of the years from 1977 through 1983 at both the control and indicator sampling locations. The presence of Cs

-137 in the air samples collected during these years was the result of atmospheric weapons testing. Cs

-137 was again detected in 1986 as a result of the Chernobyl accident. Since 1986 there have been no detections of Cs

-137 in the environment surrounding the NMP site.

After 1986, no plant related or fallout radionuclides were detected in any of the offsite air particulate composite samples with the exception of the isolated detection of Co

-60 in 2000 in a single sample. A review of the past five year's data for air particulate filter composites indicates no plant related radiological impact on the environment. All previous historical positive detections of fission product radionuclides were associated with atmospheric weapons testing or the Chernobyl accident, with the exception of the 2000 detection noted above.

Historical data for air particulate results are presented in Section 7.0, Tables 7

-11 and 7-12. 5.2.3 AIRBORNE RADIOIODINE (I

-131) A. Results Summary Iodine-131 was not detected in any of the 780 samples analyzed for the 2012 program. B. Data Evaluation and Discussion Airborne radioiodine (I

-131) is monitored at the fifteen air sampling stations also used to collect air particulate samples. There are nine offsite locations, five of which are required by the ODCM. The offsite locations required by the ODCM are designated as R-1, R-2, R-3, R-4 and R-5. R-5 is a control station located beyond any local influence from the plant. Ten air sampling locations are also maintained in addition to those required by the ODCM. Six of these stations D

-1, G, H, I, J and K are located onsite.

D-2, E, F and G are the optional stations located offsite. Samples are collected using activated charcoal cartridges. They are analyzed weekly for I-131. The analytical data for radioiodine are presented in Section 6.0, Tables 6

-7 and 6-8. C. Dose Evaluation The calculated dose as a result of I

-131 was not detected during 2012. The I

-131 sampling program demonstrated no offsite dose to man from this pathway as a result of operation of the plants located at Nine Mile Point.

5 - 21 D. Data Trends In 2011, I

-131 was detected at all 15 sampling locations over a three week period. The positive detections were the result of the Fukushima event.

Prior to then, there has been no positive detection of I

-131 in air samples collected from 2002 to 2010.

During the 2011 air sampling program, airborne radioiodine was detected in 15 of the 260 weekly samples collected at the five sampling stations required by the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM). I

-131 was detected at both the indicator and control stations during the weeks of March 29, April 5, and April 12. The measurable concentrations of I

-131 are attributed to fallout from the Fukushima Daiichi event that occurred on March 11, 2011 and not operations at the site.

Observed detectable concentrations of I

-131 ranged from 0.021 to 0.11 pCi/m 3 for the indicator stations, and 0.034 to 0.093 pCi/m 3 for the control station.

During the 2011 air sampling program, I-131 was also detected in 30 of the 515 weekly samples collected from the ten optional sampling stations. The positive detections of I

-131 were observed during the same weeks of March and April as noted above for the ODCM required stations. These measurable concentrations of I

-131 are also attributed to fallout from the Fukushima Daiichi event. Observed detectable concentrations of I

-131 ranged from 0.025 to 0.111 pCi/m 3 for the ten optional onsite and offsite stations.

I-131 has previously been detected in samples collected in 1986 and 1987. The 1986 detection of I

-131 was the result of the Chernobyl accident and the 1987 detection was the result of plant operations.

Iodine-131 has been detected in samples collected from the onsite indicator locations during 1980 to 1983 and 1986 to 1987. The mean concentrations ranged from 0.013 pCi/m 3 in 1980 to a maximum of 0.119 pCi/m 3 in 1986. The maximum mean indicator I-131 concentration of 0.119 pCi/m 3 was the result of the Chernobyl accident. I

-131 was detected in a total of 75 weekly samples collected during the 1986 sample program. The 1986 measured concentrations ranged from a minimum of 0.023 pCi/m 3 to a maximum of 0.36 pCi/m

3. Each positive detection of I

-131 in samples collected in 1986 was the direct result of the Chernobyl Nuclear accident.

I-131 has been detected in the past at control locations. Control samples collected during 1976 had a mean I

-131 concentration of 0.60 pCi/m

3. During 1977 this mean decreased to 0.32 pCi/m 3, and further decreased by a factor of ten to 0.03 pCi/m 3 in 1978. I-131 was not detected in samples collected from the control location during 1979 - 1981 and 1983 to 1985. I

-131 was detected once at the control location during 1982 at a concentration of 0.039 pCi/m

3. Historical data for I

-131 are presented in Section 7.0, Tables 7

-13 and 7-14.

5 - 22 5.2.4 DIRECT RADIATION THERMOLUMINESCENT DOSIMETERS (TLD)

A. Results Summary Thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) are used to measure direct radiation (gamma dose) in the environment. As part of the 2012 environmental monitoring program, TLDs were placed at a total of 72 different environmental TLD locations (32 required by the ODCM and 40 optional locations). These TLDs were placed, collected and read each quarter of 2012. As a result of placing two TLDs at each location, the results presented in this report are the average of two TLD readings obtained for a given location. The TLDs were placed in the following five geographical locations around the site boundary: Onsite (areas within the site boundary, includes TLD #s 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 23, 24, 25, 26; TLD #s 18, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 39, 47, 103, 106, 107 are excluded)

Site Boundary (area of the site boundary in each of the 16 meteorological sectors: Only includes TLD results that are not affected by radwaste building direct shine, includes TLD #s 7, 18, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84; TLD #s: 23, 75, 76, 77, 85, 86, 87 are excluded)

Offsite Sector (area four to five miles from the site in each of the eight land based meteorological sectors, includes TLD #s: 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95)

Special Interest (areas of high population density, includes TLD #s 15, 56, 58, 96, 97) Control (areas beyond significant influence of the site, includes TLD #s 8, 14, 49) All geographical locations are required by the ODCM with the exception of the Onsite area which was optional. Description of the five geograpical categories and the designation of specific TLD locations that make up each category is presented in Section 3.1.5, TLD (Direct Radiation) of this report.

A summary of the 2012 dose rates for each of the five geographical locations is as follows: Geographic Category Dose in mrem per standard month Min Max Mean Onsite (Optional) 3.5 1 1.8 4.9 Site Boundary (Inner Ring)

3.6 4.8 4.1 Offsite Sectors (Outer Ring)

3.5 4.6 4.0 Special Interest

3.4 4.7 4.0 Control

3.6 5.0 4.2

Geographical locations required by the ODCM

5 - 23 Comparison of annual mean dose rates associated with each geographical location indicate that there is no statistical difference in annual dose as a function of distance from the site boundary. The measured annual dose rate at the nearest resident to the site was consistent with the dose rates measured at the site boundary and control locations.

The results for the Site Boundary, Offsite Sectors and Special Interest (Offsite) were well within expected normal variation when compared to the Control TLD results.

The results for the 2012 environmental TLD monitoring program indicate that there was no significant increase in dose rates as a result of operations at the site. The Hydrogen Water Chemistry system and the Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) in use at the Fitzpatrick plant and NMPNS did not measurably increase the ambient radiation exposure rate beyond the site boundary.

B. Data Evaluation and Discussion Direct Radiation (Gamma Dose) measurements were taken at 72 different environmental locations during 2012, 32 of which are required by the ODCM. These locations are grouped into five geographical location categories for evaluation of results. The five categories include: Onsite, Site Boundary, Offsite Sector, Special Interest and Control locations. All categories are required by the ODCM with the exception of the Onsite TLDs. Onsite TLDs are placed at various locations within the site boundary to provide additional information on direct radiation levels at and around the NMP1, NMP2 and JAFNPP facilities.

Onsite TLD results ranged from 3.

5 to 11.8 mrem per standard month resulting in an average dose rate of 4.9 mrem per standard month in 2012.

Site Boundary TLD results ranged from 3.6 to 10.6 mrem per standard month resulting in an average dose of 5.5 mrem per standard month in 2012. This range included all TLDs placed in each of the 16 meteorological sectors in the general area of the site boundary. The highest dose rate measured at a location required by the ODCM was

10.6 mrem per s tandard month. This TLD, (TLD 85) represents the site boundary maximum dose and is located in the WNW sector along the lakeshore in close proximity to the Nine Mile Point 1 plant. The TLD locations along the lakeshore close to the plants (TLD #s 23 , 75, 76, 77, 85, 86 and 87) are influenced by radwaste buildings and radwaste shipping activities. These locations and are not accessible to members of the public and the TLD results for these areas are not representative of dose rates measured at the remaining site boundary locations.

Offsite Sector TLDs, required by the ODCM, located 4 to 5 miles from the site in each of the 8 land based meteorological sectors ranged from 3.

5 to 4.6 mrem per standard month with an average dose rate of 4.0 mrem per standard month.

5 - 24 Special Interest TLDs from all locations ranged from 3.4 to 4.7 mrem per standard month with a 2012 annual average dose rate of 4.0 mrem per standard month.

The Control TLD group required by the ODCM utilizes locations positioned well beyond the site.

201 2 C o ntrol TLD results ranged from 3.6 to 5.0 mrem per standard month with an annual average dose rate of 4.2 mrem per standard month.

TLD analysis results are presented in Section 6.0, Table 6

-10. C. Dose Evaluation 2012 annual mean dose rates for each geographic location required by the ODCM (excluding TLD #s 23, 75, 76, 77, 85, 86, 87) are as follows:

Site Boundary:

4.1 mrem per standard month (TLD #s: 7,18, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84)

Offsite Sectors:

4.0 mrem per standard month (TLD #s: 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95)

Special Interest:

4.0 mrem per standard month (TLD #s: 15, 56, 58, 96, 97)

Control: 4.2 mrem per standard month (TLD #s 8, 14, 49)

The measured mean dose rate in the proximity of the closest resident was 4.

4 mrem per standard month (TLD #s: 108, 109) which is consistent with the control measurements of

4.2 mrem per standard month.

The mean annual dose for each of the geographic location categories demonstrates that there is no statistical difference in the annual dose as a function of distance from the site.

The TLD program verifies that operations at the site do not measurably contribute to the levels of direct radiation present in the offsite environment.

D. Data Trends A comparison of historical TLD results can be made using the different geographical categories of measurement locations. These include Site Boundary TLDs located in each of the 16 meteorological sectors, TLDs located offsite in each land based sector at a distance of 4 to 5 miles from the site, TLDs located at special interest areas and TLDs located at control locations. Site Boundary, Offsite Sector and Special Interest TLD locations became effective in 1985; therefore, trends for these results can only be evaluated from 1985 to the present.

5 - 25 The following graph illustrates TLD results for the Control, Site Boundary, Offsite Sectors and Special Interest groups from 199 7 through 2012: 0.01.02.03.04.05.06.0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012mRem/Standard MonthTLD Data -Yearly MeanControlSite BoundaryOffsiteSpecials TLDs located at the site boundary averaged 4.1 mrem per standard month during 2012 (Site Boundary average results do not include TLDs influenced by radwaste buildings and radwaste shipping activities: TLDs 23, 75, 76, 77, 85, 86, 87). This result is consistent with the previous five year average of 4.

0 mrem per standard month.

Offsite Sector TLDs averaged 4.0 mrem per standard month during 2012. This result is also consistent with the previous five year average of 4.

0 mrem per standard month for offsite sectors.

Special Interest TLD locations averaged 4.0 mrem per standard month during 2012 which is consistent with the previous five year average of 4.0 mrem per standard month. The last group of TLD locations required by the ODCM is the Control Group. This group utilized TLD locations positioned well beyond the site.

2012 control results from all Control TLDs averaged 4.2 mrem per standard month, consistent with the previous five year average of 4.

2 mrem per standard month. The 2012 TLD program results, when compared to the previous ten years, showed no significant trends relative to increased dose rates in the environment.

5 - 26 5.2.5 MILK A. Results Summary A total of 36 milk samples were collected during the 2012 program and analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides using gamma spectroscopy. In addition, each sample undergoes an iodine extraction procedure to determine the presence of Iodine

-131 (I-131). I-131, a possible plant related radionuclide, is measured to evaluate the cow/milk dose pathway to man. I

-131 was not detected in any of the 36 milk samples collected in 2012 from the two milk sample locations.

Gamma spectral analyses of the milk samples showed only naturally occurring radionuclides, such a s K-40, were detected in milk samples collected during 2012. K-40 was detected in all indicator and control samples. K

-40 is a naturally occurring radionuclide and is found in many environmental sample media.

The 2012 results demonstrate that routine operations of the Nine Mile Point Site resulted in no measurable contribution to the dose to the public from the cow/milk pathway. B. Sampling Overview Milk samples were collected from one indicator location and one control location. The ODCM requires that three sample locations be within five miles of the site. Based on the milk animal census, there were no adequate milk sample locations within five miles of the site in 2012. Samples were collected from two farms located beyond the five

-mile requirement to ensure the continued monitoring of this important pathway. The indicator location was located 8.8 miles from the site. The control samples were collected from a farm located 16.0 miles from the site and in a low frequency wind sector (upwind). The geographic location of each sample location is listed below:

Location No.

Direction From Site Distance (Miles) 55 E 8.8 77 (Control)

SSW 16.0 Indicator location #55 and Control location #77 were sampled from April through December.

Sampling occurs during the first and second half of each month. Samples were not required to be collected during January through March of 2012 as a result of I-131 not having been detected in samples collected during November and December of 2011, as stipulated in the ODCM.

5 - 27 C. Data Evaluation and Discussion Each milk sample is analyzed for gamma emitters using gamma spectral analysis. The I-131 analysis is performed using resin extraction followed by spectral analysis for each sample. I

-131 and gamma analysis results for milk samples collected during 2012 are provided in Section 6.0, Table 6

-11. Iodine-131 was not detected in any indicator or control milk samples analyzed during 2012. All I-131 milk results were reported as Lower Limits of Detection (LLD). No plant-related radionuclides were detected in any milk sample collected in 2012. K-40 was the most abundant radionuclide detected, and found in every indicator and control sample collected. K

-40 is a naturally

-occurring radionuclide and is found in many of the environmental media samples. Cs

-137 was not detected in any indicator or control milk sample collected in 2012. D. Dose Evaluation The calculated dose as a result of plant effluents is not evaluated due to the fact that no plant related radionuclides were detected

. The dose to man from naturally occurring concentrations of K

-40 in milk and other environmental media can be calculated. This calculation illustrates that the dose received due to exposure from plant effluents is negligible compared to the dose received from naturally occurring radionuclides. Significant levels of K

-40 have been measured in environmental samples. A 70 kilogram (154 pound) adult contains approximately 0.1 microcuries of K

-40 as a result of normal life functions (inhalation, consumption, etc.). The dose to bone tissue is about 20 mrem per year as a result of internal deposition of naturally

-occurring K

-40. E. Data Trends Man-made radionuclides are not routinely detected in milk samples. In the past twenty years, Cs-137 was only detected in 1986, 1987, and 1988. The mean Cs

-137 indicator activities for those years were 8.6, 7.4 and 10.0 pCi/liter, respectively. I

-131 was measured in two milk samples collected in 1997 from a single sample location, having a mean concentration of 0.

35 pCi/liter and was of undetermined origin. The previous detection was in 1986 with a mean concentration of 13.6 pCi/liter. The 1986 activity was a result of the Chernobyl accident.

The comparison of 2012 data to historical results over the operating life of the plants shows that Cs

-137 and I-131 levels in milk have decreased significantly since 1988.

Historical data of milk sample results for Cs

-137 and I-131 are presented in Section 7.0, Tables 7-21 and 7-22.

5 - 28 5.2.6 FOOD PRODUCTS (VEGETATION)

A. Results Summary There were no plant

-related radionuclides detected in the 16 food product samples collected and analyzed for the 2012 program. Detectable levels of naturally occurring K

-40 were measured in the control and most of the indicator samples collected for the 2 012 program. Be

-7 a naturally

-occurring radionuclide, was also detected intermittently in samples collected in 2012. These results are consistent with the levels measured in 2011 and previous years.

The results of the 2012 sampling program demonstrate that there is no measurable impact on the dose to the public from the garden pathway as a result of plant operations.

B. Data Analysis and Discussion Food product samples were collected from four indicator locations and one control location. The indicator locations are represented by nearby gardens in areas of highest D/Q (deposition factor) values based on historical meteorology and an annual garden census. The control location was a garden 15 miles away in a predominately upwind direction.

Food product samples collected during 2012 did not include any varieties considered to be an edible broadleaf vegetable

s. Non-edible vegetation consisting of cabbage, corn leaves, grape leaves, horseradish leaves, rhubarb leaves, squash leaves, and tomatoes were collected for the 2012 program. The leaves of these plants were sampled as representative of broadleaf vegetation which is a measurement of radionuclide deposition. Samples were collected during the late summer/fall harvest season. Each sample was analyzed for gamma emitters using gamma spectroscopy.

At least one sample from each garden location was analyzed for Carbon

-14.

The analysis of food product samples collected during 2012 did not detect any plant

-related radionuclides. Results for the past five years also demonstrate that there is no buildup of plant

-related radionuclides in the garden food products grown in areas close to the site.

Naturally-occurring Be

-7, K-40, Ra-226 and AcTh

-228 were detected in food product samples. The results for natural ly-occurring radionuclides are consistent with the data of prior years.

Analytical results for food products are found in Section 6.0, Table 6

-12.

5 - 29 C. Dose Evaluation The calculated dose as a result of plant effluents is not evaluated due to the fact that no plant-related radionuclides were detected. The food product sampling program demonstrated no measurable offsite dose to man from this pathway as a result of operations of the plants located at Nine Mile Point.

D. Data Trends Food product/vegetation sample results for the last five years demonstrate that there is no chronic deposition or buildup of plant

-related radionuclides in the garden food products in the environs near the site.

The last positive indication was for Cs

-137 which was detected at one indicator location in 1999 with a concentration of 0.007 pCi/g (wet).

Historically, Cs

-137 had been detected in ten separate years since 1976 ranging from a maximum mean concentration of 0.047 pCi/g (wet) in 1985 to a minimum of 0.00 4 pCi/g (wet) in 19

80. The trend for Cs

-137 is a general reduction in concentration to non detectable levels in samples collected during the 2000 through 2012 sample programs. Historical data of food product results are presented in Section 7.0, Tables 7

-23 and 7-24. 5.2.7 LAND USE CENSUS RESULTS A. Results Summary The ODCM requires that an annual land use census be performed to identify potential new locations for milk sampling and for calculating the dose to man from plant effluents. In 2012, a milk animal census, a nearest resident census and a garden survey were performed.

The results of the closest residence census conducted in 2012 required no change to Fitzpatrick ODCM

's closest resident location.

A garden census, not required by the ODCM, is performed to identify appropriate garden sampling locations and dose calculation receptors. Garden samples were collected from a number of locations identified in the census as active for 2012. See Table 3.3-1 for 2012 sampling locations.

5 - 30 B. Data Evaluation and Discussion A land use census is conducted each year to determine the utilization of land in the vicinity of the Nine Mile Point site. The land use census consists of two types of surveys. A milk animal census is conducted to identify all milk animals within a distance of 10 miles from the site. The census, covering areas out to a distance of 10 miles exceeds the 5 mile distance required by the ODCM. A resident census is conducted and is designed to identify the nearest resident in each meteorological sector out to a distance of 5 miles.

The milk animal census is an estimation of the number of cows and goats within an approximate 10 mile radius of the Nine Mile Point Site. The annual census is conducted during the first half of the grazing season by sending questionnaires t o previous milk animal owners and also by road surveys to locate any possible new locations. In the event the questionnaires are not answered, the owners are contacted by telephone or in person. The local county agricultural extension service is also contacted as an additional source of information concerning new milk animal locations in the vicinity of the site.

The number of milk animals located within an approximate 10 mile radius of the site was estimated to be 278 cows and no goat s based on the 201 2 land use census. The number of cows has decreased by 74 when compared to the 20 1 1 census. The results of the milk animal census are found in Section 6.0, Table 6

-13.

The second type of census conducted is a residence census. The census is conducted in order to identify the closest residence within 5 miles in each of the 22.5 degree land

-based meteorological sectors. There are only eight sectors over land where residences are located within 5 miles. The water sectors include: N, NNE, NE, ENE, W, WNW, NW and NNW. The results of the residence census, showing the applicable sectors and direction and distance of each of the nearest residence, are found in Section 6.0, Table 6-14. There were no changes identified in the 201 2 census for the closest resident in the land based meteorological sectors. The nearest resident locations are illustrated in Section 3.3, Figure 3.3

-5.

5 - 31 5.2.8 DIRECT RADIATION, THERMOLUMINESCENT DOSIMETERS (TLD)

Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI)

A. Results Summary Thermoluminescent Dosimeters (TLDs) are used to measure direct radiation (gamma dose) in the localized environment of the ISFSI pad. Eighteen TLD locations are in place around the perimeter of the ISFSI pad. TLDs were placed at these locations prior to loading the first storage casks for baseline dose rate determination in the general area of the pad.

On April 25, 2002, the ISFSI facility was placed in service with the installation of the first storage cask on the pad. Two subsequent storage casks were moved to the storage facility on May 8, 2002 and May 21, 2002. A second series of six storage casks were added to the storage facility starting on September 6, 2005. The sixth and last cask in this series was placed in the storage facility on November 12, 2005 bringing the total number of casks in storage to nine.

During the Fall of 201 0, 6 casks were safely loaded and stored on the storage pad bringing the total number of casks in storage to fifteen. The tenth cask was moved to the storage facility on July 14 , 2010 and the fifteenth cask was moved to the storage facility on October 5, 2010.

The increase in dose rate is limited to the general area of the storage facility. The implementation and loading of the ISFSI project has resulted in no increase in dose at the site boundary or to the public. The analysis of offsite doses from direct radiation measurements, presented in Section 5.2.4 of this report, concludes that there is no significant difference in annual dose to the public at or beyond the site boundary. The measured annual dose rate at the nearest residence to the site was consistent with the dose rates measured at the site boundary and the offsite control locations. The results for the Site Boundary, Offsite Sectors, and Special Interest (offsite) were well within expected normal variation when compared to the Control TLD results. The results for the 201 2 environmental TLD monitoring program indicate that there is no significant increase in dose rates as a result of operations at the site. The use of hydrogen injection and the implementation of the Independent Spent Fuel Stora ge Installation (ISFSI) at the FitzPatrick plant did not measurably increase the ambient radiation exposure rate at or beyond the site boundary. The lack of a dose rate increase at or beyond the site boundary is consistent with design calculations performed to evaluate compliance with 10 CFR72.104(a).

The measured results of the 2012 TLD monitoring program demonstrate compliance with the offsite dose limits to members of the public specified in 40CFR190 and 10CFR72.104(a).

5 - 32 B. Program Design An array of eight TLD locations was established around the perimeter of the ISFSI pad 18 months prior to facility usage. Six months prior to the facility becoming operational, an additional 10 TLD locations were established at areas of interest on the facility perimeter. These preoperational TLDs were used for baseline dose rate determination. The TLDs are placed, collected and read each quarter. Two dosimeters are placed at each location and the average of the two dosimeters is reported. The quarterly results are compared to baseline data to assess the contribution to ambient dose rates in the vicinity of the storage facility from casks as they are placed on the storage pad.

C. Dose Evaluation A maximum dose rate of 23.2 mrem per standard month above the baseline dose rate was measured at the south perimeter fence. The lowest measured dose rate of 2012 was 5.5 mrem per standard month above the baseline dose rate and was also measured at the east perimeter fence.

An evaluation of Site Boundary TLDs and Control TLDs results for 2012 shows that there is no increase in dose rate at or beyond the site boundary. A detailed discussion of this evaluation is found in Section 5.2.4. The Environmental TLD results for this period show no significant difference in control and site boundary dose rates compared to 2011. 2012 DOSE IN MREM PER STANDARD MONTH Minimum Maximum Mean Site Boundary 3.6 4.8 4.1 Control 3.6 5.0 4.2 5 - 33

5.3 CONCLUSION

The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) is an ongoing program implemented to measure and document the radiological impact of JAFNPP operations on the local environment. The program is designed to detect and evaluate small changes in the radiological environment surrounding the site. Environmental media representing food sources consumed at the higher levels of the food chain, such as fish, food products and milk, are part of a comprehensive sampling program. Results of all samples are reviewed closely to determine any possible impact to the environment or to man. In addition, program results are evaluated for possible short

-term and long-term historical trends.

The federal government has established dose limits to protect the public from radiation and radioactivity. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) specifies a whole body dose limit of 100 mrem/yr to be received by the maximum exposed member of the general public. This limit is set forth in Section 1301, Part 20, Title 10 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (10CFR20). The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) limits the annual whole body dose to 25 mrem/yr, which is specified in Section 10, Part 190, Title 40, of the Code of Federal Regulations (40CFR190). Radiation exposure to members of the public, calculated based on the results of the REMP, is extremely small. The dose to members of the public from operations at the Nine Mile Point site, based on environmental measurement and calculations made from effluent releases, is determined to be a fraction of limits set forth by the NRC and EPA.

The REMP continues to demonstrate that the effluents from the site to the environment contribute no significant or even measurable radiation exposures to the general public as confirmed by the

sampling and analysis of environmental media from recognized environmental pathways. Based on TLD results there was no measurable increase in radiation levels beyond the site boundary as a result of the hydrogen water chemistry and ISFSI programs. Environmental radiation levels measured at the nearest residence are at the background level based on control station TLD results. The only measurable radiological impact on the environment continues to be the result of atmospheric weapons testing conducted in the early 1980

's , the 1986 accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant, and the March 11, 2011 accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station.

The REMP did not detect any plant

-related radionuclide in the sample media collected during 2012. Dose from man

-made sources in the environment is very small when compared to the dose originating from naturally

-occurring sources of radioactivity.

Radiation from naturally

-occurring radionuclides such as K

-40 and Ra-226 contributed the vast majority of the total annual dose to members of the general public. The dose to members of the public, resulting from plant operations, is extremely small in comparison to the dose contribution from natural background levels and sources other than the plants. The whole body dose in Oswego County due to natural sources is approximately 50 mrem per individual per year as demonstrated by control environmental TLDs. The fraction of the annual dose to man, attributable to site operation, remains insignificant.

Based upon the overall results of the 2012 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program, it can be concluded that the levels and variation of radioactivity in the environment samples were consistent with background levels that effluents from the site to the environment contribute no significant or even measurable radiation exposures to the general public.

5 - 34

5.4 REFERENCES

1. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.109, Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I, March 1976.

2. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.109, Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I, October 1977 (Revision 1).

3. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 4.8, Environmental Technical Specifications for Nuclear Power Plants, December, 1975.

4. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Branch Technical Position to Regulatory Guide 4.8, An Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program, Revision 1, November 1979.

5. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), Environmental Radiation Measurements, NCRP Report No. 50, 1975.

6. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), Natural Background Radiation in the United States, NCRP Report No. 45, 1975.

7. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), Cesium-137 from the Environment to Man: Metabolism and Dose, NCRP Report No. 52, 1977.

8. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurments (NCRP), Radiation Exposure from Consumer Products and Miscellaneous Sources, NCRP Report No. 56, 1977.

9. International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP), Radionuclide Release into the Environment: Assessment of Doses to Man, ICRP Publication 29, 1979.

10. Glasstone, Samuel and Jordan, Walter H., Nuclear Power and Its Environmental Effects, First Edition, American Nuclear Society, La Grange Park, Ill., 1980.

11. Schleien, Bernar

d. The Health Physics and Radiological Health Handbook. Scinta, Inc., Silver Spring, Maryland, 1992.

12. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Preparedness and Response in Radiation Accidents, National Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Ro ckville, Maryland 20857, August 1983.

13. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurments (NCRP), Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States, NCRP Report No. 93, 1987.

14. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), Exposure of the Population in the United States and Canada from National Background Radiation, NCRP Report No. 94, 1987

. 15. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP), Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States, NCRP Report No. 160, 2009

. 16. Institute of Nuclear Power Operations, Special Report on the Nuclear Accident at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Station, INPO 11-005, November 2011.

6 - 1 6.0 REPORT PERIOD ANALYTICAL RESULTS TABLES Environmental sample data is summarized in table format. Tables are provided for select sample media and contain data based on actual values obtained over the year. These values are comprised of both positive values and LLD (Lower Limit of Detection) values where applicable.

The LLD is the smallest concentration of radioactive material in a sample that will be detected with 95% probability and with 5% probability of falsely concluding that a blank observation represents a "real" signal (see Section 3.7.3 for detailed explanation).

When the initial count of a sample indicates the presence of radioactivity, two recounts are normally performed. When a radionuclide is positively identified in two or more counts, the analytical results for that radionuclide are reported as the mean of the positive detections and the associated error for that mean (see Section 3.7.2 for methodology).

Many of the tables are footnoted with the term "Plant Related Radionuclides". Plant Related Radionuclides are radionuclides that are produced in the reactor

as a result of plant operation

, either through the activation or fission process.

6 - 2 Others f04/26/12 21560 +/- 1077< 86.9< 67.4< 85.8< 251.1< LLD11/06/12 20110 +/- 1103< 99.5< 79.7< 84.1< 300.4< LLD04/26/12 9028 +/- 734< 63.9< 50.4< 48.1< 251.4< LLD11/06/12 10430 +/- 655< 68.4< 37.0< 57.3< 170.8< LLDTABLE 6-1CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN SHORELINE SEDIMENT SAMPLES - 2012Results in Units of pCi/kg (dry) +/- 1 SigmaCs-137 Zn-65GAMMA EMITTERS

Sample required by the ODCM*** Corresponds to sample location noted on Figure 3.3-5 f Plant related radionuclidesCollection DateSample Location ***K-40Lang's Beach(06, Control) Sunset Bay (05) *Co-60Cs-134 6 - 3 Others f5/15/2012BROWN TROUT 3693 +/- 385 < 43 < 43 < 109 < 47 < 31 < 33 < 84< LLD5/15/2012SMALL MOUTH BASS 4989 +/- 404 < 43 < 42 < 109 < 41 < 44 < 33 < 98< LLD5/15/2012WALLEYE 4825 +/- 439 < 58 < 54 < 190 < 52 < 52 < 44 < 137< LLD9/13/2012BROWN TROUT 4215 +/- 342 < 40 < 44 < 119 < 37 < 48 < 34 < 115< LLD9/13/2012SMALL MOUTH BASS 5031 +/- 394 < 38 < 37 < 120 < 37 < 31 < 39 < 99< LLD9/13/2012CHINOOK SALMON 5738 +/- 461 < 45 < 42 < 132 < 44 < 52 < 44 < 129< LLDDateDescriptionTABLE 6-2CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN FISH SAMPLES - 2012Results in Units of pCi/kg (wet) +/- 1 SigmaFITZPATRICK * (03)***Co-58Mn-54

Sample required by the ODCM*** Corresponds to sample location noted on Figure 3.3-5 f Plant related radionuclidesCs-137Cs-134Zn-65GAMMA EMITTERSK-40Fe-59Co-60 6 - 4 Others f5/15/2012BROWN TROUT 3636 +/- 401 < 34 < 48 < 177 < 48 < 46 < 40 < 93< LLD5/15/2012SMALL MOUTH BASS 4102 +/- 386 < 44 < 52 < 133 < 45 < 37 < 34 < 82< LLD5/15/2012 WALLEYE 4597 +/- 414 < 51 < 59 < 135 < 43 < 47 < 45 < 93< LLD9/13/2012BROWN TROUT 5797 +/- 472 < 53 < 54 < 158 < 50 < 45 < 45 < 139< LLD9/13/2012SMALL MOUTH BASS 4013 +/- 378 < 37 < 44 < 104 < 44 < 45 < 45 < 95< LLD9/13/2012CHINOOK SALMON 4356 +/- 398 < 45 < 42 < 125 < 38 < 41 < 41 < 111< LLDK-40Mn-54GAMMA EMITTERSCONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN FISH SAMPLES - 2012DateZn-65

Sample required by the ODCM*** Corresponds to sample location noted on Figure 3.3-5 f Plant related radionuclidesCo-58Results in Units of pCi/kg (wet) +/- 1 SigmaTABLE 6-2 (Continued)NINE MILE POINT * (02)***DescriptionCs-137Fe-59Co-60Cs-134 6 - 5 Others f5/15/2012 BROWN TROUT 5961 +/- 508 < 56 < 71 < 222 < 52 < 64 < 59 < 145< LLD5/15/2012SMALL MOUTH BASS 4540 +/- 383 < 35 < 37 < 133 < 42 < 38 < 36 < 111< LLD5/17/2012WALLEYE 4408 +/- 400 < 41 < 48 < 126 < 51 < 52 < 39 < 100< LLD9/13/2012 BROWN TROUT 4357 +/- 369 < 28 < 32 < 108 < 45 < 35 < 38 < 88< LLD9/13/2012SMALLMOUTH BASS 3491 +/- 313 < 33 < 44 < 94 < 48 < 50 < 35 < 97< LLD9/13/2012CHINOOK SALMON 3219 +/- 356 < 43 < 35 < 114 < 53 < 34 < 28 < 96< LLD

Sample required by the ODCM*** Corresponds to sample location noted on Figure 3.3-5 f Plant related radionuclidesTABLE 6-2 (Continued)K-40CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN FISH SAMPLES - 2012DateResults in Units of pCi/kg (wet) +/- 1 SigmaMn-54OSWEGO HARBOR (CONTROL) * (00)***DescriptionCs-137Zn-65Co-58Fe-59Co-60Cs-134GAMMA EMITTERS

6 - 6 STATION CODEPERIODTRITIUMFirst Quarter12/28/1103/28/12< 400FITZPATRICK*Second Quarter03/28/1206/27/12< 367(03, INLET)***Third Quarter06/27/1209/28/12< 372Fourth Quarter09/28/1201/02/13< 376First Quarter12/30/1103/30/12< 400OSWEGO STEAM STATION*Second Quarter03/30/1206/29/12< 367(08, CONTROL)***Third Quarter06/29/1209/28/12< 375Fourth Quarter09/28/1201/04/13< 376First Quarter12/30/1103/30/12< 400NINE MILE POINT UNIT 1**Second Quarter03/30/1206/29/12< 392(09, INLET)***Third Quarter06/29/1209/28/12< 375Fourth Quarter09/28/1201/04/13< 376First Quarter12/30/1103/30/12< 400NINE MILE POINT UNIT 2**Second Quarter03/30/1206/29/12< 367(11, INLET)***Third Quarter06/29/1209/28/12< 375Fourth Quarter09/28/1201/04/13< 376First Quarter12/30/1103/30/12< 400OSWEGO CITY WATER**Second Quarter03/30/1206/29/12< 367(10)***Third Quarter06/29/1209/28/12< 375Fourth Quarter09/28/1201/04/13< 376

Sample location required by ODCM ** Optional Sample location

- - Corresponds to sample location noted on Figure 3.3-4DATETABLE 6-3CONCENTRATIONS OF TRITIUM IN SURFACE WATER SAMPLES - 2012(QUARTERLY COMPOSITE SAMPLES)Results in Units of pCi/l +/- 1 Sigma

6 - 7 DateNUCLIDEI-131< 0.89< 0.88< 0.99< 0.83< 0.95< 0.95Cs-134< 3.33< 2.18< 2.39< 3.06< 2.16< 4.61Cs-137< 2.78< 3.65< 3.08< 2.52< 2.80< 3.56Zr-95< 5.06< 6.84< 6.61< 5.23< 6.43< 8.62Nb-95< 3.27< 4.72< 4.91< 3.55< 3.95< 5.47Co-58< 3.06< 4.13< 4.14< 3.00< 3.25< 4.78Mn-54< 2.89< 4.19< 3.11< 2.74< 2.81< 3.38Fe-59< 7.48< 11.4< 11.7< 9.68< 10.1< 12.5Zn-65< 6.15< 8.28< 8.74< 6.52< 7.18< 10.2Co-60< 3.22< 3.59< 3.90< 2.53< 3.26< 3.57K-40 116.6 +/- 13.5 229.1 +/- 21.0 237.0 +/- 21.0 142.3 +/- 15.4< 33.8 290.8 +/- 23.9Ba/La-140< 7.13< 10.7< 11.1< 7.18< 10.5< 12.4DateNUCLIDEI-131< 0.91< 0.56< 0.46< 0.84< 0.65< 0.81Cs-134< 2.81< 1.95< 2.71< 2.40< 4.31< 2.32Cs-137< 2.73< 3.02< 3.71< 2.94< 3.59< 2.99Zr-95< 5.67< 5.54< 7.89< 7.39< 7.96< 5.04Nb-95< 3.83< 3.98< 5.37< 5.53< 5.06< 4.03Co-58< 2.91< 3.21< 4.70< 4.57< 4.73< 3.22Mn-54< 2.68< 3.00< 3.59< 3.54< 3.92< 2.89Fe-59< 9.54< 9.59< 12.3< 12.0< 12.7< 7.99Zn-65< 5.75< 6.87< 9.30< 10.0< 9.63< 4.02Co-60< 2.34< 2.62< 4.03< 3.98< 4.11< 2.53K-40 119.5 +/- 12.9 114.5 +/- 14.2 306.4 +/- 24.5 204.4 +/- 21.3 279.1 +/- 23.4 136.1 +/- 14.8Ba/La-140< 8.12< 8.60< 12.3< 14.2< 11.8< 9.43

Sample Location required by ODCM*** Corresponds to sample location noted on Figure 3.3-411/30/20121/4/20131/27/20123/2/20128/3/20128/31/20129/28/201211/2/20123/30/20124/27/20126/1/20126/29/2012CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN SURFACE WATER SAMPLES - 2012Results in Units of pCi/liter +/- 1 SigmaOSWEGO STEAM STATION * (08, CONTROL)***TABLE 6-4

6 - 8 DateNUCLIDEI-131< 13.7< 12.0< 9.47< 12.4< 12.9< 10.8Cs-134< 2.57< 3.61< 1.84< 2.52< 1.97< 2.81Cs-137< 3.76< 2.50< 2.64< 3.76< 2.78< 2.40Zr-95< 7.67< 5.67< 5.56< 8.53< 5.52< 6.01Nb-95< 5.09< 3.85< 3.80< 4.95< 3.89< 3.36Co-58< 4.10< 3.34< 3.29< 4.26< 3.72< 2.97Mn-54< 3.37< 3.27< 2.74< 3.77< 2.94< 2.34Fe-59< 12.7< 11.2< 7.93< 12.1< 9.05< 9.50Zn-65< 7.68< 6.98< 6.19< 10.5< 6.67< 6.05Co-60< 3.48< 3.10< 2.93< 4.44< 2.33< 2.60K-40 264.8 +/- 22.4< 33.1 174.8 +/- 15.1 337.9 +/- 24.8 103.3 +/- 13.3 117.7 +/- 13.9Ba/La-140< 13.2< 11.2< 7.1< 11.3< 10.3< 7.89DateNUCLIDEI-131< 11.1< 14.7< 14.2< 11.9< 10.4< 11.1Cs-134< 1.73< 2.34< 3.33< 1.93< 1.91< 1.96Cs-137< 2.33< 3.85< 3.08< 2.52< 2.88< 2.56Zr-95< 4.25< 6.79< 5.81< 4.64< 5.06< 5.06Nb-95< 3.34< 4.90< 4.36< 3.33< 3.13< 3.59Co-58< 2.63< 4.50< 3.17< 3.02< 2.95< 3.36Mn-54< 2.40< 3.32< 3.41< 2.80< 2.44< 2.34Fe-59< 7.74< 13.1< 10.3< 7.47< 7.04< 7.17Zn-65< 5.38< 8.75< 4.01< 6.10< 6.59< 3.90Co-60< 2.26< 3.93< 3.13< 2.84< 2.47< 2.44K-40 20.9 +/- 8.5 288.8 +/- 22.4 377.3 +/- 21.5 179.4 +/- 15.1 178.5 +/- 14.2 194.2 +/- 15.0Ba/La-140< 7.21< 11.2< 8.81< 9.14< 7.68< 8.93

Sample Location required by ODCM*** Corresponds to sample location noted on Figure 3.3-46/1/20126/29/2012CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN SURFACE WATER SAMPLES - 2012Results in Units of pCi/liter +/- 1 SigmaOSWEGO CITY WATER** (10)***TABLE 6-4 (continued)11/30/20121/4/20131/27/20123/2/20128/3/20128/31/20129/28/201211/2/20123/30/20124/27/2012 6 - 9 DateNUCLIDEI-131< 0.58< 0.63< 0.65< 0.56< 0.51< 0.71Cs-134< 3.51< 3.60< 2.09< 2.27< 3.88< 1.98Cs-137< 3.15< 3.85< 2.80< 2.70< 3.06< 3.09Zr-95< 5.96< 6.67< 5.53< 5.66< 6.00< 6.13Nb-95< 3.91< 4.69< 3.40< 3.44< 2.93< 3.63Co-58< 3.25< 3.35< 3.60< 3.09< 2.99< 3.31Mn-54< 3.15< 3.05< 3.17< 2.45< 3.05< 2.36Fe-59< 10.3< 10.9< 8.14< 8.84< 10.7< 8.69Zn-65< 9.20< 8.24< 6.58< 6.92< 6.87< 7.66Co-60< 3.15< 3.57< 3.08< 2.86< 3.09< 2.97K-40 94.2 +/- 15.6 101.5 +/- 15.9 45.9 +/- 12.5< 28.2< 29.9< 30.9Ba/La-140< 7.37< 6.38< 5.71< 6.70< 6.81< 6.53DateNUCLIDEI-131< 0.59< 0.48< 0.55< 0.65< 0.63< 0.65Cs-134< 4.97< 3.85< 1.99< 2.01< 2.06< 3.45Cs-137< 3.61< 3.36< 2.97< 3.16< 2.68< 3.02Zr-95< 7.98< 5.75< 6.29< 5.73< 5.37< 6.70Nb-95< 6.05< 4.17< 3.99< 3.82< 3.52< 4.24Co-58< 3.57< 3.67< 3.18< 3.35< 3.16< 3.74Mn-54< 3.36< 3.14< 2.76< 3.22< 2.92< 3.33Fe-59< 16.6< 11.2< 8.28< 7.81< 8.61< 10.3Zn-65< 5.22< 8.26< 3.61< 4.40< 7.18< 8.48Co-60< 3.84< 2.74< 2.91< 2.80< 2.86< 2.99K-40< 49.6 79.2 +/- 15.1 41.0 +/- 11.2< 28.2 34.3 +/- 9.8 208.2 +/- 18.4Ba/La-140< 10.6< 7.37< 6.18< 7.65< 5.73< 7.34

Sample Location required by ODCM*** Corresponds to sample location noted on Figure 3.3-43/28/20124/28/2012CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN SURFACE WATER SAMPLES - 2012Results in Units of pCi/liter +/- 1 SigmaFITZPATRICK* (03, INLET)***TABLE 6-4 (continued)5/30/20126/27/201211/27/20121/2/20131/31/20122/29/20127/31/20128/31/20129/28/201210/31/2012

6 - 10 DateNUCLIDEI-131< 9.27< 9.30< 10.2< 8.35< 10.8< 12.9Cs-134< 1.77< 1.56< 3.48< 2.49< 2.93< 3.48Cs-137< 2.16< 2.39< 2.44< 2.77< 2.86< 2.60Zr-95< 4.67< 4.85< 5.70< 5.20< 5.67< 6.10Nb-95< 3.06< 2.97< 3.40< 3.56< 3.39< 4.37Co-58< 2.68< 2.49< 3.24< 2.86< 3.00< 3.54Mn-54< 2.25< 2.44< 2.99< 2.45< 2.47< 2.89Fe-59< 6.41< 7.90< 10.1< 6.54< 8.25< 9.55Zn-65< 5.59< 5.10< 7.30< 6.34< 3.62< 7.07Co-60< 2.41< 2.26< 4.05< 2.67< 2.60< 3.68K-40 22.2 +/- 8.5 35.7 +/- 10.0 34.2 +/- 12.3 121.7 +/- 13.3 84.2 +/- 13.1 67.3 +/- 13.6Ba/La-140< 5.78< 6.60< 9.69< 7.63< 7.18< 12.3DateNUCLIDEI-131< 11.8< 10.7< 10.4< 13.6< 11.6< 11.6Cs-134< 1.93< 1.69< 1.62< 2.46< 2.00< 3.42Cs-137< 2.61< 2.09< 2.39< 2.44< 2.83< 2.80Zr-95< 4.98< 4.47< 5.27< 6.65< 5.84< 5.49Nb-95< 3.31< 3.06< 3.27< 4.06< 3.30< 3.78Co-58< 2.83< 2.91< 2.57< 3.30< 3.22< 3.34Mn-54< 3.08< 2.44< 2.58< 3.16< 2.67< 2.73Fe-59< 8.74< 6.63< 6.04< 8.83< 11.2< 9.84Zn-65< 3.98< 2.45< 5.09< 3.99< 7.23< 6.77Co-60< 2.21< 2.47< 2.45< 3.18< 2.56< 3.26K-40 164.4 +/- 13.7 42.6 +/- 9.0 52.5 +/- 9.0< 37.2< 29.2 42.6 +/- 12.7Ba/La-140< 7.83< 5.81< 6.02< 10.6< 9.98< 10.5 ** Optional Sample Location*** Corresponds to sample location noted on Figure 3.3-46/1/20126/29/201211/30/20121/4/20131/27/20123/2/20128/3/20128/31/20129/28/201211/2/20123/30/20124/27/2012CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN SURFACE WATER SAMPLES - 2012Results in Units of pCi/liter +/- 1 SigmaNINE MILE POINT UNIT 1 ** (09, INLET)***TABLE 6-4 (Continued)

6 - 11 DateNUCLIDEI-131< 9.73< 10.2< 12.8< 8.08< 12.0< 13.0Cs-134< 1.67< 1.76< 4.26< 1.70< 2.09< 2.01Cs-137< 2.59< 2.38< 3.64< 2.26< 2.97< 2.69Zr-95< 5.08< 5.89< 7.40< 4.65< 5.56< 5.25Nb-95< 3.48< 3.54< 5.00< 2.93< 3.72< 3.51Co-58< 3.05< 3.06< 3.97< 2.41< 3.50< 3.02Mn-54< 2.57< 2.84< 3.49< 2.25< 3.08< 2.47Fe-59< 8.36< 7.19< 12.5< 6.82< 8.56< 8.24Zn-65< 7.02< 5.91< 9.07< 5.37< 6.11< 3.78Co-60< 2.71< 2.30< 4.51< 2.32< 2.62< 3.03K-40 102.8 +/- 12.9 83.3 +/- 12.1 232.8 +/- 23.5 33.3 +/- 9.9 175.6 +/- 16.1 216.1 +/- 15.3Ba/La-140< 7.46< 7.75< 11.9< 5.92< 7.59< 8.77DateNUCLIDEI-131< 11.4< 11.8< 12.3< 11.6< 10.1< 14.6Cs-134< 1.72< 2.16< 3.23< 1.73< 1.67< 2.41Cs-137< 2.33< 2.66< 2.73< 2.06< 2.45< 3.12Zr-95< 4.91< 5.59< 5.02< 4.49< 4.93< 7.87Nb-95< 2.53< 4.30< 3.57< 3.40< 2.55< 5.94Co-58< 2.94< 3.06< 3.43< 2.75< 3.11< 4.23Mn-54< 2.52< 3.04< 2.75< 2.19< 2.54< 3.38Fe-59< 6.64< 11.4< 8.24< 7.37< 5.76< 12.7Zn-65< 2.95< 6.95< 7.01< 5.45< 3.04< 9.49Co-60< 2.53< 3.18< 3.11< 2.23< 2.80< 3.75K-40 26.7 +/- 8.6 76.0 +/- 14.0 113.4 +/- 14.3 31.0 +/- 8.6 30.0 +/- 8.2 217.7 +/- 20.1Ba/La-140< 7.26< 8.70< 7.52< 7.58< 6.82< 12.0 ** Optional Sample Location*** Corresponds to sample location noted on Figure 3.3-46/1/20126/29/201211/30/20121/4/20131/27/20123/2/20128/3/20128/31/20129/28/201211/2/20123/30/20124/27/2012CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN SURFACE WATER SAMPLES - 2012Results in Units of pCi/liter +/- 1 SigmaNINE MILE POINT UNIT 2 ** (11, INLET)***TABLE 6-4 (Continued)

6 - 12 Week End Date01/04/120.018+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.020+/-0.0010.017+/-0.00101/10/120.019+/-0.0020.019+/-0.0020.020+/-0.0020.021+/-0.0020.022+/-0.0020.018+/-0.0020.021+/-0.0020.020+/-0.0020.022+/-0.00201/17/120.011+/-0.0010.011+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.010+/-0.0010.014+/-0.00101/24/120.011+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.015+/-0.00101/31/120.015+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.011+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.013+/-0.00102/07/120.015+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.021+/-0.00102/14/120.012+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.014+/-0.00102/21/120.019+/-0.0010.020+/-0.0010.021+/-0.0010.022+/-0.0010.020+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.023+/-0.0020.018+/-0.0010.033+/-0.00202/28/120.015+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.014+/-0.00103/06/120.014+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.011+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.015+/-0.00103/13/120.017+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.020+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.019+/-0.00103/20/120.019+/-0.0010.020+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.021+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.021+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.020+/-0.00103/27/120.014+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.017+/-0.00104/03/120.015+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.019+/-0.00104/10/120.017+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.015+/-0.00104/17/120.015+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.010+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.014+/-0.00104/24/120.011+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.010+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.009+/-0.0010.008+/-0.0010.011+/-0.00105/01/120.014+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.014+/-0.00105/08/120.014+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.015+/-0.00105/15/120.018+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.016+/-0.00105/22/120.015+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.011+/-0.00105/30/120.015+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.018+/-0.00106/05/120.008+/-0.0010.009+/-0.0010.008+/-0.0010.010+/-0.0010.008+/-0.0010.008+/-0.0010.007+/-0.0010.007+/-0.0010.006+/-0.00106/12/120.014+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.019+/-0.00106/19/120.013+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.011+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.010+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.010+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.012+/-0.00106/26/120.013+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.015+/-0.001

Sample location required by ODCM ** Optional sample locationG **R-5 *D-2 **E **F **TABLE 6-5ENVIRONMENTAL AIRBORNE PARTICULATE SAMPLES - OFFSITE SAMPLE LOCATIONS - 2012GROSS BETA ACTIVITY pCi/ m 3 +/- 1 SigmaR-1 *R-2 *R-3 *R-4

6 - 13 Week End Date07/03/120.017+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.020+/-0.00107/10/120.013+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.017+/-0.00107/17/120.021+/-0.0010.023+/-0.0020.022+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.023+/-0.0020.023+/-0.0020.025+/-0.0020.020+/-0.0010.025+/-0.00207/24/120.020+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.020+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.020+/-0.00107/31/120.016+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.015+/-0.00108/07/120.021+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.022+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.018+/-0.00108/14/120.015+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.016+/-0.00108/21/120.016+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.017+/-0.00108/28/120.026+/-0.0020.023+/-0.0020.024+/-0.0020.023+/-0.0020.024+/-0.0020.024+/-0.0020.025+/-0.0020.027+/-0.0020.025+/-0.00209/05/120.017+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.019+/-0.00109/11/120.020+/-0.0020.018+/-0.0020.018+/-0.0020.019+/-0.0020.020+/-0.0020.016+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0020.018+/-0.0020.023+/-0.00209/18/120.022+/-0.0020.022+/-0.0020.020+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.021+/-0.0010.020+/-0.0010.020+/-0.0010.020+/-0.00109/25/120.012+/-0.0010.008+/-0.0010.011+/-0.0010.009+/-0.0010.009+/-0.0010.010+/-0.0010.011+/-0.0010.011+/-0.0010.010+/-0.00110/02/120.015+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.012+/-0.00110/09/120.019+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.021+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.020+/-0.00110/16/120.015+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.015+/-0.00110/23/120.017+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.016+/-0.00110/30/120.022+/-0.0020.019+/-0.0010.020+/-0.0010.022+/-0.0020.018+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.022+/-0.0020.018+/-0.0010.018+/-0.00111/06/120.005+/-0.0010.005+/-0.0010.004+/-0.0010.005+/-0.0010.005+/-0.0010.006+/-0.0010.006+/-0.0010.007+/-0.0010.004+/-0.00111/13/120.024+/-0.0010.023+/-0.0020.024+/-0.0020.027+/-0.0020.025+/-0.0020.026+/-0.0020.026+/-0.0020.025+/-0.0020.027+/-0.00211/20/120.022+/-0.0020.023+/-0.0020.023+/-0.0020.020+/-0.0010.023+/-0.0020.024+/-0.0020.024+/-0.0020.022+/-0.0010.025+/-0.00211/28/120.021+/-0.0010.024+/-0.0010.027+/-0.0020.022+/-0.0010.021+/-0.0010.022+/-0.0010.021+/-0.0010.026+/-0.0020.026+/-0.00212/04/120.031+/-0.0020.028+/-0.0020.029+/-0.0020.027+/-0.0020.025+/-0.0020.024+/-0.0020.026+/-0.0020.029+/-0.0020.025+/-0.00212/11/120.011+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.011+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.010+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.012+/-0.00112/18/120.017+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.021+/-0.0010.020+/-0.0010.022+/-0.00212/26/120.016+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.014+/-0.001

Sample location required by ODCM ** Optional sample locationE **F **TABLE 6-5 (Continued)ENVIRONMENTAL AIRBORNE PARTICULATE SAMPLES - OFFSITE SAMPLE LOCATIONS - 2012GROSS BETA ACTIVITY pCi/ m 3 +/- 1 SigmaR-1 *R-2 *R-3 *R-4 *G **R-5 *D-2 **

6 - 14 Week EndDate01/03/120.018+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.014+/-0.00101/09/120.022+/-0.0020.021+/-0.0020.021+/-0.0020.023+/-0.0020.022+/-0.0020.025+/-0.00201/16/120.013+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.011+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.011+/-0.0010.014+/-0.00101/23/120.015+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.011+/-0.0010.016+/-0.00101/30/120.016+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.019+/-0.00102/06/120.018+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.015+/-0.00102/13/120.018+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.016+/-0.00102/20/120.020+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.018+/-0.00102/27/120.017+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.013+/-0.00103/05/120.017+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.017+/-0.00103/12/120.020+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.019+/-0.00103/19/120.021+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.020+/-0.0010.023+/-0.0020.018+/-0.0010.019+/-0.00103/26/120.014+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.017+/-0.00104/02/120.018+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.016+/-0.00104/09/120.017+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.016+/-0.00104/16/120.014+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.011+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.014+/-0.00104/23/120.013+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.012+/-0.00104/30/120.012+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.012+/-0.00105/07/120.017+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.015+/-0.00105/14/120.018+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.015+/-0.00105/21/120.015+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.015+/-0.00105/29/120.015+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.015+/-0.00106/04/120.013+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.011+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.012+/-0.00106/11/120.014+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.013+/-0.00106/18/120.014+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.015+/-0.00106/25/120.016+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.014+/-0.001 ** Optional sample locationD-1 **G **H **I **TABLE 6-6ENVIRONMENTAL AIRBORNE PARTICULATE SAMPLES - ONSITE SAMPLE LOCATIONS - 2012GROSS BETA ACTIVITY pCi/ m3 +/- 1 SigmaJ **K **

6 - 15 Week EndDate07/02/120.018+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.015+/-0.00107/09/120.013+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.013+/-0.00107/16/120.021+/-0.0010.020+/-0.0010.005+/-0.0010.020+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.021+/-0.00107/23/120.018+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.014+/-0.00107/30/120.020+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.016+/-0.00108/06/120.025+/-0.0020.020+/-0.0010.021+/-0.0010.022+/-0.0020.021+/-0.0010.023+/-0.00208/13/120.014+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.016+/-0.00108/20/120.016+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.017+/-0.00108/27/120.024+/-0.0020.020+/-0.0010.023+/-0.0020.026+/-0.0020.023+/-0.0020.023+/-0.00109/04/120.020+/-0.0010.020+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.018+/-0.00109/10/120.018+/-0.0020.018+/-0.0020.017+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0020.016+/-0.00109/17/120.018+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.020+/-0.0010.020+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.017+/-0.00109/24/120.015+/-0.0010.011+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.013+/-0.00110/01/120.016+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.014+/-0.00110/08/120.022+/-0.0020.017+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.019+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.017+/-0.00110/15/120.012+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.017+/-0.00110/22/120.013+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.015+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.013+/-0.00110/29/120.022+/-0.0020.021+/-0.0010.021+/-0.0010.021+/-0.0010.025+/-0.0020.021+/-0.00111/05/120.005+/-0.0010.005+/-0.0010.006+/-0.0010.005+/-0.0010.003+/-0.0010.006+/-0.00111/12/120.024+/-0.0020.025+/-0.0020.023+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.024+/-0.0020.026+/-0.00211/19/120.025+/-0.0020.020+/-0.0010.021+/-0.0010.020+/-0.0010.022+/-0.0010.020+/-0.00111/26/120.028+/-0.0020.027+/-0.0020.027+/-0.0020.028+/-0.0020.030+/-0.0020.030+/-0.00212/03/120.024+/-0.0020.028+/-0.0020.021+/-0.0010.022+/-0.0020.023+/-0.0020.022+/-0.00212/10/120.017+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.016+/-0.0010.014+/-0.0010.017+/-0.0010.017+/-0.00112/17/120.022+/-0.0010.018+/-0.0010.020+/-0.0010.020+/-0.0010.020+/-0.0010.020+/-0.00112/26/120.015+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.013+/-0.0010.012+/-0.0010.013+/-0.001 ** Optional sample locationTABLE 6-6 (Continued)ENVIRONMENTAL AIRBORNE PARTICULATE SAMPLES - ONSITE SAMPLE LOCATIONS - 2012GROSS BETA ACTIVITY pCi/ m3 +/- 1 SigmaJ **K **D-1 **G **H **I **

6 - 16 Week EndDate01/04/12 < 0.017 < 0.013 < 0.022 < 0.017 < 0.021 < 0.012 < 0.018 < 0.023 < 0.02201/10/12 < 0.024 < 0.021 < 0.022 < 0.022 < 0.020 < 0.024 < 0.023 < 0.018 < 0.01701/17/12 < 0.014 < 0.017 < 0.014 < 0.022 < 0.018 < 0.024 < 0.019 < 0.013 < 0.01001/24/12 < 0.025 < 0.017 < 0.016 < 0.019 < 0.026 < 0.019 < 0.020 < 0.020 < 0.01201/31/12 < 0.017 < 0.017 < 0.016 < 0.015 < 0.019 < 0.021 < 0.021 < 0.015 < 0.01002/07/12 < 0.018 < 0.019 < 0.013 < 0.019 < 0.018 < 0.022 < 0.012 < 0.017 < 0.01802/14/12 < 0.020 < 0.016 < 0.015 < 0.019 < 0.020 < 0.014 < 0.014 < 0.024 < 0.01202/21/12 < 0.019 < 0.015 < 0.017 < 0.015 < 0.020 < 0.018 < 0.017 < 0.020 < 0.01402/28/12 < 0.019 < 0.016 < 0.020 < 0.023 < 0.020 < 0.027 < 0.023 < 0.015 < 0.01003/06/12 < 0.018 < 0.016 < 0.020 < 0.021 < 0.017 < 0.020 < 0.021 < 0.016 < 0.00903/13/12 < 0.025 < 0.015 < 0.014 < 0.016 < 0.014 < 0.023 < 0.021 < 0.019 < 0.02203/20/12 < 0.019 < 0.016 < 0.010 < 0.016 < 0.025 < 0.022 < 0.021 < 0.026 < 0.02103/27/12 < 0.018 < 0.010 < 0.021 < 0.030 < 0.019 < 0.015 < 0.015 < 0.019 < 0.02304/03/12 < 0.023 < 0.016 < 0.016 < 0.016 < 0.026 < 0.021 < 0.018 < 0.019 < 0.01604/10/12 < 0.018 < 0.015 < 0.020 < 0.019 < 0.016 < 0.018 < 0.021 < 0.019 < 0.02004/17/12 < 0.015 < 0.018 < 0.020 < 0.018 < 0.020 < 0.028 < 0.026 < 0.014 < 0.01504/24/12 < 0.018 < 0.016 < 0.019 < 0.019 < 0.013 < 0.024 < 0.017 < 0.012 < 0.02205/01/12 < 0.021 < 0.020 < 0.014 < 0.020 < 0.019 < 0.018 < 0.013 < 0.012 < 0.02305/08/12 < 0.012 < 0.020 < 0.021 < 0.018 < 0.017 < 0.014 < 0.015 < 0.020 < 0.01805/15/12 < 0.014 < 0.003 < 0.012 < 0.020 < 0.019 < 0.014 < 0.023 < 0.020 < 0.01205/22/12 < 0.017 < 0.021 < 0.022 < 0.011 < 0.020 < 0.017 < 0.015 < 0.018 < 0.01605/30/12 < 0.014 < 0.018 < 0.015 < 0.012 < 0.016 < 0.014 < 0.012 < 0.018 < 0.01706/05/12 < 0.025 < 0.020 < 0.015 < 0.014 < 0.020 < 0.026 < 0.023 < 0.018 < 0.02606/12/12 < 0.019 < 0.019 < 0.019 < 0.021 < 0.020 < 0.018 < 0.021 < 0.021 < 0.02306/19/12 < 0.020 < 0.016 < 0.015 < 0.020 < 0.023 < 0.019 < 0.021 < 0.019 < 0.02006/26/12 < 0.020 < 0.015 < 0.014 < 0.021 < 0.018 < 0.017 < 0.017 < 0.017 < 0.021

ODCM Required Sample Location ** Optional Sample LocationD-2 **F **E **TABLE 6-7 ENVIRONMENTAL CHARCOAL CARTRIDGE SAMPLES - OFFSITE SAMPLE LOCATIONS - 2012I-131 ACTIVITY pCi/ m3 +/- 1 SigmaR-1 *R-2 *R-3 *R-4 *R-5 *G **

6 - 17 Week EndDate07/03/12 < 0.017 < 0.020 < 0.017 < 0.014 < 0.018 < 0.020 < 0.015 < 0.009 < 0.02007/10/12 < 0.019 < 0.017 < 0.016 < 0.021 < 0.023 < 0.016 < 0.012 < 0.019 < 0.02007/17/12 < 0.024 < 0.021 < 0.014 < 0.019 < 0.019 < 0.019 < 0.026 < 0.014 < 0.02307/24/12 < 0.015 < 0.017 < 0.016 < 0.015 < 0.016 < 0.014 < 0.020 < 0.021 < 0.01107/31/12 < 0.016 < 0.024 < 0.020 < 0.019 < 0.023 < 0.019 < 0.023 < 0.017 < 0.02108/07/12 < 0.016 < 0.004 < 0.014 < 0.015 < 0.021 < 0.018 < 0.017 < 0.019 < 0.01508/14/12 < 0.019 < 0.015 < 0.015 < 0.014 < 0.022 < 0.023 < 0.014 < 0.016 < 0.01808/21/12 < 0.020 < 0.012 < 0.016 < 0.018 < 0.017 < 0.023 < 0.018 < 0.015 < 0.01008/28/12 < 0.021 < 0.018 < 0.020 < 0.020 < 0.015 < 0.015 < 0.020 < 0.014 < 0.01409/05/12 < 0.023 < 0.014 < 0.014 < 0.018 < 0.024 < 0.018 < 0.020 < 0.019 < 0.01209/11/12 < 0.023 < 0.020 < 0.013 < 0.021 < 0.014 < 0.023 < 0.020 < 0.020 < 0.01409/18/12 < 0.022 < 0.015 < 0.012 < 0.009 < 0.018 < 0.024 < 0.016 < 0.022 < 0.01509/25/12 < 0.018 < 0.020 < 0.018 < 0.023 < 0.014 < 0.019 < 0.016 < 0.015 < 0.01510/02/12 < 0.013 < 0.018 < 0.025 < 0.019 < 0.016 < 0.017 < 0.020 < 0.017 < 0.01810/09/12 < 0.020 < 0.016 < 0.022 < 0.021 < 0.021 < 0.019 < 0.021 < 0.026 < 0.01710/16/12 < 0.015 < 0.012 < 0.019 < 0.015 < 0.024 < 0.021 < 0.012 < 0.017 < 0.01310/23/12 < 0.018 < 0.019 < 0.020 < 0.017 < 0.021 < 0.016 < 0.026 < 0.017 < 0.02410/30/12 < 0.025 < 0.028 < 0.019 < 0.019 < 0.024 < 0.021 < 0.021 < 0.020 < 0.01811/06/12 < 0.026 < 0.017 < 0.018 < 0.014 < 0.021 < 0.022 < 0.016 < 0.017 < 0.02211/13/12 < 0.018 < 0.019 < 0.021 < 0.020 < 0.021 < 0.014 < 0.015 < 0.021 < 0.02411/20/12 < 0.021 < 0.017 < 0.015 < 0.020 < 0.024 < 0.016 < 0.020 < 0.019 < 0.02111/28/12 < 0.013 < 0.017 < 0.018 < 0.015 < 0.019 < 0.016 < 0.020 < 0.017 < 0.02112/04/12 < 0.022 < 0.021 < 0.019 < 0.026 < 0.022 < 0.025 < 0.018 < 0.020 < 0.02212/11/12 < 0.020 < 0.016 < 0.021 < 0.017 < 0.021 < 0.019 < 0.016 < 0.013 < 0.01612/18/12 < 0.018 < 0.018 < 0.022 < 0.026 < 0.010 < 0.010 < 0.018 < 0.018 < 0.01612/26/12 < 0.019 < 0.016 < 0.015 < 0.018 < 0.015 < 0.019 < 0.016 < 0.017 < 0.019

ODCM Required Sample Location ** Optional Sample LocationTABLE 6-7 (Continued)ENVIRONMENTAL CHARCOAL CARTRIDGE SAMPLES - OFFSITE SAMPLE LOCATIONS - 2012I-131 ACTIVITY pCi/ m3 +/- 1 SigmaR-1 *R-2 *R-3 *R-4 *R-5 *G **D-2 **F **E **

6 - 18 Week EndDate01/03/12 < 0.024 < 0.025 < 0.021 < 0.019 < 0.024 < 0.02001/09/12 < 0.026 < 0.028 < 0.016 < 0.026 < 0.022 < 0.01701/16/12 < 0.022 < 0.016 < 0.012 < 0.021 < 0.020 < 0.01901/23/12 < 0.018 < 0.016 < 0.017 < 0.022 < 0.011 < 0.02401/30/12 < 0.015 < 0.017 < 0.016 < 0.015 < 0.018 < 0.02102/06/12 < 0.019 < 0.020 < 0.014 < 0.015 < 0.015 < 0.01502/13/12 < 0.021 < 0.010 < 0.014 < 0.020 < 0.023 < 0.02202/20/12 < 0.021 < 0.013 < 0.019 < 0.022 < 0.027 < 0.03002/27/12 < 0.013 < 0.015 < 0.014 < 0.015 < 0.022 < 0.02103/05/12 < 0.025 < 0.015 < 0.021 < 0.019 < 0.020 < 0.02003/12/12 < 0.022 < 0.022 < 0.018 < 0.024 < 0.019 < 0.02203/19/12 < 0.021 < 0.019 < 0.019 < 0.021 < 0.020 < 0.02303/26/12 < 0.020 < 0.014 < 0.022 < 0.016 < 0.012 < 0.02104/02/12 < 0.017 < 0.015 < 0.010 < 0.019 < 0.014 < 0.02404/09/12 < 0.019 < 0.019 < 0.016 < 0.020 < 0.020 < 0.02104/16/12 < 0.019 < 0.017 < 0.018 < 0.019 < 0.020 < 0.01904/23/12 < 0.016 < 0.021 < 0.022 < 0.018 < 0.027 < 0.02304/30/12 < 0.016 < 0.019 < 0.029 < 0.016 < 0.020 < 0.02005/07/12 < 0.017 < 0.021 < 0.023 < 0.024 < 0.018 < 0.01905/14/12 < 0.011 < 0.017 < 0.018 < 0.017 < 0.026 < 0.02005/21/12 < 0.020 < 0.013 < 0.025 < 0.016 < 0.016 < 0.02105/29/12 < 0.013 < 0.018 < 0.020 < 0.017 < 0.022 < 0.01606/04/12 < 0.015 < 0.016 < 0.024 < 0.028 < 0.019 < 0.01906/11/12 < 0.016 < 0.016 < 0.015 < 0.018 < 0.018 < 0.02006/18/12 < 0.024 < 0.018 < 0.023 < 0.020 < 0.026 < 0.01606/25/12 < 0.018 < 0.015 < 0.014 < 0.022 < 0.022 < 0.018 ** Optional Sample LocationTABLE 6-8ENVIRONMENTAL CHARCOAL CARTRIDGE SAMPLES - ONSITE SAMPLE LOCATIONS - 2012I-131 ACTIVITY pCi/ m 3 +/- 1 SigmaD-1 **G **H **I **J **K **

6 - 19 Week EndDate07/02/12 < 0.018 < 0.012 < 0.017 < 0.018 < 0.017 < 0.01207/09/12 < 0.024 < 0.016 < 0.012 < 0.019 < 0.021 < 0.01907/16/12 < 0.017 < 0.023 < 0.013 < 0.020 < 0.015 < 0.02007/23/12 < 0.026 < 0.024 < 0.022 < 0.020 < 0.024 < 0.02207/30/12 < 0.018 < 0.010 < 0.019 < 0.021 < 0.019 < 0.01208/06/12 < 0.013 < 0.012 < 0.015 < 0.022 < 0.023 < 0.01708/13/12 < 0.022 < 0.014 < 0.019 < 0.021 < 0.021 < 0.01908/20/12 < 0.016 < 0.018 < 0.019 < 0.012 < 0.019 < 0.01908/27/12 < 0.022 < 0.017 < 0.017 < 0.014 < 0.026 < 0.01509/04/12 < 0.009 < 0.020 < 0.020 < 0.019 < 0.019 < 0.01509/10/12 < 0.018 < 0.016 < 0.014 < 0.024 < 0.024 < 0.02509/17/12 < 0.017 < 0.015 < 0.020 < 0.027 < 0.014 < 0.01509/24/12 < 0.021 < 0.020 < 0.015 < 0.015 < 0.020 < 0.02110/01/12 < 0.022 < 0.024 < 0.028 < 0.018 < 0.021 < 0.01910/08/12 < 0.016 < 0.015 < 0.018 < 0.022 < 0.020 < 0.02310/15/12 < 0.019 < 0.016 < 0.011 < 0.018 < 0.021 < 0.01810/22/12 < 0.019 < 0.021 < 0.020 < 0.021 < 0.023 < 0.02010/29/12 < 0.022 < 0.016 < 0.017 < 0.021 < 0.015 < 0.01811/05/12 < 0.019 < 0.022 < 0.022 < 0.029 < 0.019 < 0.02811/12/12 < 0.028 < 0.011 < 0.023 < 0.014 < 0.021 < 0.02811/19/12 < 0.025 < 0.023 < 0.023 < 0.019 < 0.013 < 0.02311/26/12 < 0.018 < 0.023 < 0.019 < 0.016 < 0.020 < 0.02112/03/12 < 0.019 < 0.010 < 0.015 < 0.023 < 0.021 < 0.02212/10/12 < 0.015 < 0.019 < 0.026 < 0.015 < 0.015 < 0.02012/17/12 < 0.019 < 0.018 < 0.023 < 0.025 < 0.020 < 0.01712/26/12 < 0.015 < 0.015 < 0.016 < 0.017 < 0.017 < 0.015 ** Optional sample locationJ **K **D-1 **G **TABLE 6-8 (Continued)ENVIRONMENTAL CHARCOAL CARTRIDGE SAMPLES - ONSITE SAMPLE LOCATIONS - 2012I-131 ACTIVITY pCi/ m 3 +/- 1 SigmaH **I **

6 - 20 Be-779.8 +/- 11.790.6 +/- 10.780.2 +/- 10.297.8 +/- 12.4106.1 +/- 12.9104.6 +/- 11.2115.5 +/- 13.2100.9 +/- 11.773.4 +/- 10.7Cs-134 <1.8 <2.0 <1.7 <2.7 <1.7 <1.3 <1.9 <1.9 <1.2Cs-137 <0.7 <1.1 <0.7 <1.2 <0.8 <1.3 <1.4 <0.9 <0.9Zr-95 <4.1 <3.7 <0.9 <3.4 <4.5 <4.1 <4.4 <3.3 <3.1Nb-95 <2.8 <3.0 <2.0 <3.2 <2.6 <3.6 <3.6 <0.6 <0.7Co-58 <1.9 <2.7 <2.3 <1.9 <2.1 <1.1 <1.6 <2.3 <1.4Mn-54 <1.7 <1.9 <0.4 <1.9 <1.8 <1.0 <1.5 <1.6 <1.2Zn-65 <5.0 <3.2 <3.4 <2.9 <1.0 <3.9 <4.7 <2.8 <3.3Co-60 <2.4 <2.1 <1.9 <0.6 <1.5 <1.5 <2.2 <1.8 <1.5K-4048.6 +/- 9.4 <11.9 <24.5 <25.136.5 +/- 8.6 <15.222.2 +/- 8.3 <15.2 <5.2Be-7116.5 +/- 13.1132.6 +/- 13.2144.2 +/- 14.4137.6 +/- 13.2136.6 +/- 13.7118.4 +/- 12.3141.0 +/- 14.7121.4 +/- 12.3105.9 +/- 12.3Cs-134 <1.6 <1.7 <2.4 <1.3 <1.2 <1.9 <1.8 <1.5 <1.8Cs-137 <1.2 <1.2 <1.5 <1.1 <0.7 <0.7 <1.6 <0.9 <0.9Zr-95 <3.0 <2.6 <4.0 <2.9 <3.0 <3.0 <3.4 <3.3 <3.0Nb-95 <0.7 <2.5 <3.6 <2.7 <2.9 <2.5 <2.2 <0.6 <2.5Co-58 <2.0 <1.2 <2.8 <1.4 <1.7 <1.6 <1.9 <1.4 <1.4Mn-54 <1.4 <1.3 <0.4 <1.2 <1.2 <1.3 <1.6 <1.0 <1.2Zn-65 <2.6 <4.4 <1.0 <3.0 <1.0 <3.1 <3.7 <3.0 <2.6Co-60 <1.5 <1.7 <1.6 <1.2 <1.5 <1.2 <2.0 <1.1 <0.5K-40 <21.7 <12.342.0 +/- 10.0 <15.2 <5.2 <12.336.2 +/- 10.4 <15.0 <21.7

ODCM Required Sample Loction** Optional Sample LocationOFFSITE SAMPLE LOCATIONS - 1ST QTR 2012OFFSITE SAMPLE LOCATIONS - 2ND QTR 2012E **F **G **E **F **G **TABLE 6-9 CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN QUARTERLY COMPOSITESOF JAF/NMPNS SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 2012Results in Units of 10E-3 pCi/ m 3 +/- 1 SigmaD-2 **R-1 *R-2 *R-3 *R-4 *R-5 *R-3 *R-4 *R-5 *NuclideNuclideR-1 *R-2 *D-2 **

6 - 21 Be-7101.6 +/- 11.4128.2 +/- 13.1103.0 +/- 12.184.1 +/- 12.8113.7 +/- 13.3108.4 +/- 13.0102.7 +/- 13.592.6 +/- 11.6108.6 +/- 12.0Cs-134 <1.8 <0.9 <1.4 <1.7 <2.1 <2.2 <1.9 <1.9 <1.8Cs-137 <1.0 <0.7 <1.2 <1.8 <1.4 <1.5 <1.7 <1.8 <1.5Zr-95 <3.0 <3.0 <3.4 <4.4 <6.3 <3.9 <2.7 <3.6 <3.9Nb-95 <3.0 <2.0 <2.1 <3.6 <4.0 <2.5 <2.8 <3.3 <3.0Co-58 <1.8 <1.7 <1.2 <1.5 <2.4 <1.8 <2.6 <2.1 <1.8Mn-54 <0.3 <1.2 <0.3 <1.0 <1.6 <1.5 <2.0 <1.6 <1.9Zn-65 <2.5 <4.3 <2.4 <2.9 <3.9 <4.3 <4.4 <3.8 <3.0Co-60 <1.5 <1.8 <0.5 <2.6 <2.2 <1.4 <2.1 <1.4 <1.2K-40 <4.6 <18.4 <4.5 <16.6 <18.7 <11.950.9 +/- 11.0 <14.6 <15.1 Be-768.0 +/- 9.463.3 +/- 9.351.5 +/- 9.954.1 +/- 9.876.6 +/- 10.250.7 +/- 9.742.5 +/- 8.164.7 +/- 10.844.9 +/- 9.3Cs-134 <1.8 <1.9 <1.7 <1.9 <2.3 <1.2 <1.9 <2.1 <1.8Cs-137 <0.9 <1.2 <1.5 <1.6 <1.4 <1.0 <0.9 <1.7 <1.2Zr-95 <3.0 <2.6 <4.0 <4.4 <2.8 <0.9 <3.7 <2.7 <3.0Nb-95 <2.0 <3.6 <3.3 <2.5 <3.6 <2.5 <3.0 <2.2 <2.5Co-58 <2.0 <1.8 <3.2 <2.5 <1.2 <1.7 <2.0 <2.5 <2.2Mn-54 <1.2 <1.4 <1.9 <1.4 <0.3 <1.0 <0.9 <1.7 <1.3Zn-65 <2.6 <4.3 <4.2 <4.9 <3.9 <2.6 <3.1 <5.9 <4.3Co-60 <1.4 <1.5 <1.6 <1.4 <0.4 <1.4 <1.2 <1.6 <1.1K-40 <5.1 <4.4 <16.539.5 +/- 9.0 <14.8 <5.1 <4.5 <16.5 <19.2

ODCM Required Sample Loction** Optional Sample LocationNuclideR-1 *R-2 *R-3 *R-3 *R-4 *R-5 *D-2 **R-4 *R-5 *D-2 **E **F **G **E **F **G **OFFSITE SAMPLE LOCATIONS - 4TH QTR 2012NuclideR-1 *R-2 *OF JAF/NMPNS SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 2012Results in Units of 10E-3 pCi/ m 3 +/- 1 SigmaOFFSITE SAMPLE LOCATIONS - 3RD QTR 2012TABLE 6-9 (Continued)CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN QUARTERLY COMPOSITES

6 - 22 Be-7 82.3 +/- 11.4 90.4 +/- 10.8 81.2 +/- 10.3 97.9 +/- 12.4 104.1 +/- 13.0 78.3 +/- 10.5Cs-134<2.1<1.3<1.2<1.7<2.2<1.6Cs-137<1.3<1.1<0.7<1.2<0.8<1.3Zr-95<3.4<2.9<3.1<5.0<3.8<3.7Nb-95<3.2<2.8<3.6<3.7<3.8<2.7Co-58<2.7<1.7<1.4<2.8<2.4<1.4Mn-54<1.8<1.7<1.6<1.6<0.4<1.4Zn-65<4.1<4.0<4.7<4.9<2.7<2.3Co-60<2.1<1.5<0.5<1.6<1.9<1.1K-40 34.8 +/- 8.7<17.7<14.8<17.0<19.0<14.9Be-7 105.5 +/- 11.6 114.9 +/- 12.2 101.1 +/- 11.8 132.4 +/- 14.7 133.9 +/- 13.3 123.0 +/- 12.8Cs-134<1.2<1.2<1.3<2.2<1.2<1.0Cs-137<1.3<1.5<1.6<1.0<1.1<0.7Zr-95<3.5<3.3<2.7<4.5<4.1<3.2Nb-95<2.0<2.8<2.5<2.9<3.1<2.6Co-58<2.0<1.4<2.1<0.5<2.1<1.4Mn-54<1.0<1.4<1.4<1.5<1.3<1.3Zn-65<3.3<3.0<2.5<5.7<3.5<2.3Co-60<1.4<1.8<1.2<2.9<0.5<1.6K-40<18.5<11.9<15.7<16.8<5.4<4.3** Optional Sample LocationNuclideD-1 **G **H **I **J **K **D-1 **G **H **ONSITE SAMPLE LOCATIONS - 2ND QTR 2012I **J **K **NuclideTABLE 6-9 (Continued)CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN QUARTERLY COMPOSITESOF JAF/NMPNS SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 2012Results in Units of 10E-3 pCi/ m 3 +/- 1 SigmaONSITE SAMPLE LOCATIONS - 1ST QTR 2012

6 - 23 Be-7 114.8 +/- 13.3 105.8 +/- 11.4 95.2 +/- 13.0 120.5 +/- 13.7 113.6 +/- 12.8 102.2 +/- 11.3Cs-134<1.5<1.7<2.7<1.7<2.5<1.7Cs-137<0.9<0.9<1.0<1.4<1.1<1.2Zr-95<2.4<3.7<4.4<5.2<2.7<2.4Nb-95<2.0<3.0<2.8<3.4<3.1<2.5Co-58<2.4<1.6<1.5<2.4<2.1<0.5Mn-54<1.0<1.7<1.4<1.9<1.6<1.0Zn-65<3.3<3.6<5.2<5.0<4.4<1.0Co-60<0.5<1.2<0.5<2.4<1.7<2.1K-40<14.4<12.2<21.2<18.6<15.4<18.2Be-7 67.1 +/- 10.0 47.4 +/- 8.5 61.4 +/- 10.4 66.3 +/- 9.9 56.7 +/- 9.0 72.8 +/- 9.8Cs-134<1.4<1.3<2.1<1.8<1.6<1.8Cs-137<0.7<0.7<1.6<1.3<1.3<0.8Zr-95<3.0<3.4<4.8<2.1<2.8<3.2Nb-95<2.5<3.0<4.3<2.1<3.3<2.7Co-58<2.4<1.6<2.2<2.3<2.0<2.0Mn-54<1.2<1.1<1.7<1.4<1.4<1.4Zn-65<3.2<3.6<5.1<3.9<3.5<3.1Co-60<1.4<1.2<2.0<1.8<1.5<2.2K-40<5.1<12.1<16.2<22.2<14.4<14.6** Optional Sample LocationONSITE SAMPLE LOCATIONS - 4TH QTR 2012NuclideD-1 **G **H **I **J **K **Results in Units of 10E-3 pCi/ m 3 +/- 1 SigmaONSITE SAMPLE LOCATIONS - 3RD QTR 2012NuclideD-1 **G **H **I **J **K **TABLE 6-9 (Continued)CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN QUARTERLY COMPOSITESOF JAF/NMPNS SITE AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 2012

6 - 24 LOCATION NUMBER 3D1 Onsite10.42+/-0.4311.79+/-0.579.31+/-0.389.85+/-0.42 69°at0.2 miles 4D2 Onsite4.45+/-0.254.15+/-0.244.44+/-0.194.38+/-0.28 140°at0.4 miles 5E Onsite4.38+/-0.284.06+/-0.234.70+/-0.214.25+/-0.18 175°at0.4 miles 6F Onsite3.58+/-0.143.48+/-0.234.17+/-0.223.72+/-0.16 210°at0.5 miles 7*G Onsite3.85+/-0.143.55+/-0.234.02+/-0.263.74+/-0.21 250°at0.7 miles 8*R-5 Offsite Control4.89+/-0.224.36+/-0.264.97+/-0.264.62+/-0.19 42°at16.4 miles 9D1 Offsite4.07+/-0.293.65+/-0.234.17+/-0.283.99+/-0.25 80°at11.4 miles 10D2 Offsite3.86+/-0.153.58+/-0.203.96+/-0.174.01+/-0.23 117°at9.0 miles 11E Offsite4.02+/-0.203.61+/-0.244.28+/-0.284.04+/-0.19 160°at7.2 miles 12F- Offsite4.12+/-0.193.66+/-0.244.28+/-0.204.11+/-0.20 190°at7.7 miles 13G Offsite4.09+/-0.213.77+/-0.294.27+/-0.233.93+/-0.23 225°at5.3 miles 14*DeMass Rd SW Oswego - Control4.11+/-0.183.58+/-0.194.33+/-0.273.90+/-0.18 226°at12.6 miles 15*Pole 66 W Boundary - Bible Camp3.64+/-0.153.39+/-0.213.84+/-0.173.73+/-0.24 237°at0.9 miles 18*Energy Info Center - Lamp Post SW4.27+/-0.204.06+/-0.224.81+/-0.254.31+/-0.21 265°at0.4 miles 19East Boundary - JAF Pole 94.57+/-0.213.78+/-0.234.65+/-0.304.45+/-0.20 81°at1.3 miles 23*H Onsite4.98+/-0.214.74+/-0.324.92+/-0.215.00+/-0.32 70°at0.8 miles 24I Onsite4.29+/-0.193.89+/-0.234.37+/-0.234.30+/-0.17 98°at0.8 miles 25J Onsite4.34+/-0.233.83+/-0.304.29+/-0.194.20+/-0.27 110°at0.9 miles 26K Onsite4.19+/-0.183.65+/-0.284.29+/-0.214.17+/-0.22 132°at0.5 miles 27N Fence N of Switchyard JAF17.61+/-1.1619.42+/-1.2216.51+/-0.6313.36+/-0.84 60°at0.4 miles 28N Light Pole N of Screenhouse JAF19.08+/-0.8620.58+/-1.0217.52+/-0.7318.12+/-0.86 68°at0.5 miles 29N Fence N of W Side19.21+/-1.4924.29+/-1.8717.76+/-0.8616.24+/-0.55 65°at0.5 miles 30N Fence (NW) JAF9.97+/-0.6512.19+/-1.049.69+/-0.508.78+/-0.37 57°at0.4 miles 31N Fence (NW) NMP-17.29+/-0.307.00+/-0.407.00+/-0.287.47+/-0.44 276°at0.2 miles 39N Fence Rad Waste-NMP-111.11+/-0.4710.91+/-0.5811.52+/-1.1611.95+/-0.53 292°at0.2 miles 47N Fence (NE) JAF6.02+/-0.386.82+/-0.385.84+/-0.305.77+/-0.27 69°at0.6 miles 49*Phoenix NY-Control3.73+/-0.183.61+/-0.233.86+/-0.183.95+/-0.16 163°at19.8 miles 51Liberty & Bronson Sts E of OSS4.20+/-0.293.97+/-0.264.30+/-0.244.32+/-0.25 233°at7.4 miles 52E 12th & Cayuga Sts Oswego School3.64+/-0.263.69+/-0.243.94+/-0.174.02+/-0.24 227°at5.8 miles 53Broadwell & Chestnut Sts Fulton HS4.05+/-0.104.11+/-0.284.49+/-0.214.33+/-0.25 183°at13.7 miles 54Liberty St & Co Rt 16 Mexico HS3.78+/-0.263.76+/-0.233.79+/-0.264.06+/-0.26 115°at9.3 miles 55Gas Substation Co Rt 5-Pulaski3.92+/-0.213.83+/-0.214.07+/-0.304.18+/-0.19 75°at13.0 miles 56*Rt 104-New Haven Sch (SE Corner)3.90+/-0.263.77+/-0.233.92+/-0.254.05+/-0.19 123°at5.3 miles 58*Co Rt 1A-Alcan (E of E Entrance Rd)4.39+/-0.214.32+/-0.284.18+/-0.234.71+/-0.20 220°at3.1 miles 75*Unit 2 N Fence N of Reactor Bldg7.12+/-0.376.67+/-0.397.54+/-0.307.85+/-0.35 5°at0.1 miles 76*Unit 2 N Fence N of Change House5.39+/-0.195.14+/-0.395.66+/-0.276.11+/-0.24 25°at0.1 miles 77*Unit 2 N Fence N of Pipe Bldg6.22+/-0.266.22+/-0.306.24+/-0.306.82+/-0.27 45°at0.2 milesTABLE 6-10DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENT RESULTS - 2012Results in Units of mrem/std. Month +/- 1 Sigma FIRST QUARTER SECOND QUARTER THIRD QUARTER FOURTH QUARTER DEGREES & DISTANCE (1(1) Direction and distance based on NMP-2 reactor centerline.

TLD required by ODCM

6 - 25 LOCATION NUMBER 78*JAF E of E Old Lay Down Area4.34+/-0.184.27+/-0.254.48+/-0.224.56+/-0.20 90°at1.0 miles 79*Co Rt 29 Pole #63 02 mi S of Lake Rd3.92+/-0.203.87+/-0.224.15+/-0.264.17+/-0.21 115°at1.1 miles 80*Co Rt 29 Pole #54 07 mi S of Lake Rd4.55+/-0.214.02+/-0.224.23+/-0.214.22+/-0.19 133°at1.4 miles 81*Miner Rd Pole #16 05 mi W of Rt 294.05+/-0.173.79+/-0.234.04+/-0.194.20+/-0.19 159°at1.6 miles 82*Miner Rd Pole # 1-1/2 11 mi W of Rt 294.05+/-0.163.84+/-0.434.09+/-0.264.06+/-0.24 181°at1.6 miles 83*Lakeview Rd Tree 045 mi N of Miner Rd3.65+/-0.223.67+/-0.244.16+/-0.244.00+/-0.19 200°at1.2 miles 84*Lakeview Rd N Pole #6117 200ft N of Lake Rd3.98+/-0.203.89+/-0.214.28+/-0.264.28+/-0.25 225°at1.1 miles 85*Unit 1 N Fence N of W Side of Screen House9.81+/-0.5010.22+/-0.5710.08+/-0.5110.56+/-0.48 294°at0.2 miles 86*Unit 2 N Fence N of W Side of Screen House7.45+/-0.357.23+/-0.468.28+/-0.498.81+/-0.50 315°at0.1 miles 87*Unit 2 N Fence N of E Side of Screen House7.73+/-0.287.20+/-0.398.24+/-0.429.16+/-0.37 341°at0.1 miles 88*Hickory Grove Rd Pole #2 06 mi N of Rt 14.14+/-0.223.79+/-0.223.87+/-0.204.19+/-0.28 97°at4.5 miles 89*Leavitt Rd Pole #16 04 mi S of Rt14.33+/-0.254.15+/-0.234.42+/-0.224.64+/-0.25 111°at4.1 miles 90*Rt 104 Pole #300 150 ft E of Keefe Rd4.01+/-0.213.73+/-0.203.99+/-0.224.09+/-0.18 135°at4.2 miles 91*Rt 51A Pole #59 08 mi W of Rt 513.83+/-0.183.70+/-0.303.83+/-0.184.17+/-0.25 156°at4.8 miles 92*Maiden Lane Rd Power Pole 06 mi S of Rt 1044.47+/-0.194.25+/-0.224.45+/-0.204.64+/-0.23 183°at4.4 miles 93*Rt 53 Pole 1-1 120 ft S of Rt 1044.04+/-0.253.95+/-0.263.99+/-0.214.46+/-0.25 205°at4.4 miles 94*Rt 1 Pole #82 250 ft E of Kocher Rd (Co Rt 63)3.81+/-0.173.54+/-0.223.64+/-0.184.01+/-0.19 223°at4.7 miles 95*Alcan W access Rd Joe Fultz Blvd Pole #213.66+/-0.173.53+/-0.203.61+/-0.193.82+/-0.21 237°at4.1 miles 96*Creamery Rd 03 mi S of Middle Rd Pole 1-1/23.92+/-0.273.96+/-0.233.82+/-0.164.08+/-0.16 199°at3.6 miles 97*Rt 29 Pole #50 200ft N of Miner Rd4.23+/-0.303.90+/-0.213.85+/-0.224.17+/-0.22 143°at1.8 miles 98Lake Rd Pole #145 0.15 mi E of Rt 294.15+/-0.213.99+/-0.234.21+/-0.264.37+/-0.22 101°at1.2 miles 99NMP Rd 04 mi N of Lake Rd Env Station R14.38+/-0.294.16+/-0.254.25+/-0.214.53+/-0.23 88°at1.8 miles 100Rt 29 & Lake Rd Env Station R24.32+/-0.174.11+/-0.234.12+/-0.194.41+/-0.19 104°at1.1 miles 101Rt 29 07 mi S of Lake Rd Env Station R33.88+/-0.253.65+/-0.203.90+/-0.184.07+/-0.21 132°at1.5 miles 102EOF/Env Lab Rt 176 E Driveway Lamp Post4.30+/-0.273.77+/-0.214.23+/-0.194.19+/-0.18 175°at11.9 miles 103EIC East Garage Rd Lamp Post4.61+/-0.234.46+/-0.234.46+/-0.264.81+/-0.20 267°at0.4 miles 104Parkhurst Rd Pole #23 01 mi S of Lake rd4.47+/-0.253.91+/-0.243.88+/-0.184.37+/-0.22 102°at1.4 miles 105Lake view Rd Pole #36 05 mi S of Lake Rd4.41+/-0.234.09+/-0.234.15+/-0.184.35+/-0.21 198°at1.4 miles 106Shoreline Cove W of NMP-1 Tree on W Edge5.14+/-0.305.00+/-0.295.28+/-0.255.44+/-0.24 274°at0.3 miles 107Shoreline Cove W of NMP-1 30 ft SSW of #1065.17+/-0.314.66+/-0.345.78+/-0.685.09+/-0.26 272°at0.3 miles 108Lake Rd Pole #142 300 ft E of Rt 29 S4.70+/-0.174.18+/-0.233.99+/-0.224.49+/-0.19 104°at1.1 miles 109Tree North of Lake Rd 300 ft E of Rt 29 N4.80+/-0.174.06+/-0.224.23+/-0.214.55+/-0.23 103°at1.1 miles 111State Route 38 Sterling NY - Control4.17+/-0.193.77+/-0.233.87+/-0.223.89+/-0.22 166°at26.4 miles 112EOF/Env Lab Oswego County Airport4.58+/-0.483.85+/-0.233.91+/-0.184.12+/-0.25 175°at11.9 miles 113Baldwinsville NY - Control4.02+/-0.213.66+/-0.243.65+/-0.203.95+/-0.16 214°at21.8 miles(1) Direction and distance based on NMP-2 reactor centerline.

TLD required by ODCMResults in Units of mrem/std. Month +/- 1 Sigma FIRST QUARTER SECOND QUARTER THIRD QUARTER FOURTH QUARTER DEGREES & DISTANCE (1TABLE 6-10 (Continued)DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENT RESULTS - 2012

6 - 26 DateOthers f04/10/12< 0.604< 9.61< 7.47 1477 +/- 93.4< 9.71<LLD04/23/12< 0.694< 7.90< 8.75 1374 +/- 78.1< 7.43<LLD05/07/12< 0.968< 6.54< 7.43 1372 +/- 78.6< 9.36<LLD05/21/12< 0.555< 5.01< 5.75 1630 +/- 86.0< 4.87<LLD06/04/12< 0.831< 8.10< 7.47 1414 +/- 92.1< 13.98<LLD06/18/12< 0.802< 6.81< 7.43 1553 +/- 81.1< 6.53<LLD07/09/12< 0.632< 7.19< 7.57 1555 +/- 82.2< 5.97<LLD07/23/12< 0.580< 6.54< 5.15 1669 +/- 83.7< 5.32<LLD08/06/12< 0.771< 9.41< 7.47 1487 +/- 94.4< 6.81<LLD08/20/12< 0.602< 5.80< 5.37 1505 +/- 81.2< 5.30<LLD09/10/12< 0.623< 7.43< 6.32 1598 +/- 82.2< 6.99<LLD09/24/12< 0.880< 4.25< 5.47 1496 +/- 69.3< 5.35<LLD10/08/12< 0.864< 4.66< 7.30 1586 +/- 84.5< 7.87<LLD10/22/12< 0.759< 7.13< 8.79 1799 +/- 106.8< 11.06<LLD11/05/12< 0.669< 3.87< 6.23 1511 +/- 68.9< 6.07<LLD11/19/12< 0.698< 7.43< 7.64 1515 +/- 83.6< 8.28<LLD12/03/12< 0.790< 7.61< 7.65 1496 +/- 94.9< 9.73<LLD12/17/12< 0.910< 8.06< 6.58 1603 +/- 85.6< 7.90<LLD

Sample Location is required by the ODCM. ** Sample Location is Optional*** Corresponds to sample location noted on Figure 3.3-4 f Plant related radionuclidesCONCENTRATIONS OF IODINE-131 AND GAMMA EMITTERS IN MILK - 2012Results in Units of pCi/liter +/- 1 SigmaSample Location ** No. 55 ***TABLE 6-11I-131Cs-134Cs-137Ba/La-140K-40 6 - 27 DateOthers f04/10/12< 0.720< 8.36< 6.18 1578 +/- 84.7< 6.86<LLD04/23/12< 0.662< 7.77< 5.77 1529 +/- 70.1< 4.08<LLD05/07/12< 0.822< 3.87< 6.32 1761 +/- 74.4< 5.40<LLD05/21/12< 0.619< 7.43< 6.49 1672 +/- 85.0< 5.95<LLD06/04/12< 0.773< 6.25< 5.96 1788 +/- 87.2< 4.58<LLD06/18/12< 0.705< 11.73< 8.18 1869 +/- 106.6< 11.05<LLD07/09/12< 0.789< 3.57< 5.05 1678 +/- 72.4< 5.74<LLD07/23/12< 0.741< 4.04< 5.96 1561 +/- 70.9< 6.93<LLD08/06/12< 0.634< 6.11< 6.98 1623 +/- 83.1< 8.61<LLD08/20/12< 0.783< 4.89< 8.84 1791 +/- 89.7< 7.35<LLD09/10/12< 0.773< 3.38< 5.67 1492 +/- 69.5< 4.99<LLD09/24/12< 0.795< 5.46< 8.18 1790 +/- 103.9< 5.96<LLD10/08/12< 0.647< 4.63< 5.96 1398 +/- 66.7< 5.73<LLD10/22/12< 0.797< 3.98< 4.93 1382 +/- 67.1< 5.37<LLD11/05/12< 0.746< 4.94< 5.56 1455 +/- 73.8< 5.95<LLD11/19/12< 0.733< 3.69< 5.16 1675 +/- 73.6< 4.07<LLD12/03/12< 0.795< 3.98< 4.58 1664 +/- 72.5< 5.39<LLD12/17/12< 0.662< 8.78< 6.65 1575 +/- 98.6< 8.91<LLD

Sample Location is required by the ODCM. ** Sample Location is Optional*** Corresponds to sample location noted on Figure 3.3-4 f Plant related radionuclidesBa/La-140K-40I-131Cs-134Cs-137CONCENTRATIONS OF IODINE-131 AND GAMMA EMITTERS IN MILK - 2012Results in Units of pCi/liter +/- 1 SigmaSample Location

No. 77 (Control) ***TABLE 6-11(Continued) 6 - 28 Location ***DateDescriptionC-14Others f09/06/12HORSERADISH LEAVES 553 +/- 63.6 4957 +/- 187 < 23.6 < 13.1 < 17.0 < 48.9ff < LLD09/06/12SQUASH LEAVES 1226 +/- 57.3 2496 +/- 109 < 15.2 < 8.64 < 10.5 < 32.3< 1210< LLD09/06/12TOMATOES<56.6 2421 +/- 101 < 10.5 < 5.35 < 6.10 < 25.9ff < LLD09/06/12RHUBARB LEAVES 444<35.6 4202 +/- 116 < 14.3 < 7.16 < 9.28 < 14.9ff < LLDLocation ***DateDescriptionC-14Others f09/06/12KALE<125.7<224 < 22.8 < 11.8 < 14.8 < 21.5ff < LLD09/06/12ZUCCHINI 1085 +/- 58.5 3890 +/- 140 < 15.1 < 9.76 < 11.5 < 33.2< 966< LLD09/06/12TOMATOES<66.4 3355 +/- 122 < 12.6 < 6.78 < 9.45 < 30.3ff < LLD09/06/12RHUBARB LEAVES 171 +/- 22.4 2925 +/- 89.8 < 10.0 < 5.38 < 6.25 < 16.7ff < LLDLocation ***DateDescriptionC-14Others f09/06/12CORN LEAVES 1410 +/- 91.9 5246 +/- 210 < 30.9 < 16.4 < 20.3 < 53.8ff < LLD09/06/12SQUASH LEAVES 1090 +/- 54.0 2481 +/- 107 < 12.0 < 12.3 < 9.6 < 24.0ff < LLD09/06/12TOMATOES < 54.5 2377 +/- 83.8 < 8.59 < 5.38 < 7.30 < 20.9ff < LLD09/06/12CABBAGE 402< 55.2 4066 +/- 166 < 20.0 < 11.90 < 14.70 < 46.6< 963< LLDLocation ***DateDescriptionC-14Others f09/06/12GRAPE LEAVES 801 +/- 55.0 3454 +/- 138 < 17.6 < 14.3 < 13.7 < 20.6< 1110< LLD09/06/12TOMATOES<64.9 3588 +/- 103 < 10.9 < 6.2 < 7.8 < 13.1ff < LLDLocation ***DateDescriptionC-14Others f09/06/12CABBAGE 137 +/- 53.5 3332 +/- 172 < 24.4 < 14.1 < 18.0 < 27.9< 1030< LLD09/06/12TOMATOES<99.2 2893 +/- 127 < 17.2 < 9.0 < 12.5 < 30.8ff < LLD

Sample Location Required by the ODCM ** Sample location is Optional*** Corresponds to Sample Location noted on Figure 3.3-5 f Plant Related Radionuclides ff C-14 analysis not perfomed on this sample.Zn-65Be-7K-40Cs-134Cs-137Cs-134K-40Cs-137I-131Cs-134Cs-137I-131TABLE 6-12 Cs-137Zn-65I-131Cs-134Zn-65Zn-65K-40Be-7K-40I-131Cs-134Results in Units of pCi/kg (wet) +/- 1 sigma 484**O'ConnorBe-7K-40CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN FOOD PRODUCTS - 2012Be-7Zn-65 48**Kronenbitter 133*CuletonC2*Flack 144*WhaleyBe-7I-131Cs-137 6 - 29 TABLE 6-13 MILK ANIMAL CENSUS 20 1 2 Town or Area(a) Location Designation(1) Degrees(2) Distance(2) (Miles) Number of Milk Animals (Cows) New Haven 9 64 78 98° 108° 128° 4.8 7.8 8.0 40 35 0 Mexico 14 60 55* 21 72 125° 91° 97° 112° 100° 9.1 9.5 8.8 10.4 9.6 5 2 0 5 3 0 38 Granb y (Control) 77** 190° 16.0 60 MILKING ANIMAL TOTALS:

278 (including control locations)

MILKING ANIMAL TOTALS:

218 (excluding control locations)

NOTES:

Milk sample location

- Milk sample control location (1) Reference Figure 3.

3-4 (2) Degrees and distance are based on NMP

-2 Reactor Building centerline (a) Census performed out to a distance of approximately 10 miles

6 - 30 TABLE 6-14 RESIDENCE CENSUS 2012 Meteorological Sector Location Map Location(1) Direction(2) Distance(2) N * - - - NNE * - - - NE * - - - ENE * - - - E 80 Sunset Bay Road A 83° 1.04 miles ESE 161 Lake Road B 116° 0.70 miles SE 1216 County Route 29 C 143° 1.07 miles SSE 1146 County Route 29 D 152° 1.29 miles S 268 Miner Road E 173° 1.59 miles SSW 210 Lakeview Road F 213° 1.65 miles SW 319 Lakeview Road G 230° 1.45 miles WSW Bayshore Drive H 242° 1.81 miles W * - - - WNW * - - - NW * - - - NNW * - - - NOTES:

This meteorological sector is over Lake Ontario. There is no residence within five miles (1) Corresponds to Figure 3.3

-6 (2) Direction and distance are based on JAF Reactor Building centerline

7 - 1 7.0 HISTORICAL DATA TABLES Sample Statistics from Previous Environmental Sampling The mean, minimum value and maximum value were calculated for selected sample mediums and isotopes.

Special Considerations:

1. Sample data listed as 1969 was taken from the NINE MILE POINT, PREOPERATION SURVEY, 1969 and ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT FOR NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION, NOVEMBER, 1970.

2. Sample results listed as 1974 and 1975 were taken from the respective Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports for Nine Mile Point Unit 1 Nuclear Station. Sample results listed as 198 6 through the current year were taken from the respective James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports.

3. Only measured values were used for statistical calculations.

4. The term MDL was used prior to 1979 to represent the concept of Lower Limit of Detection (LLD). MDL = Minimum Detectable Level.

7 - 2 TABLE 7-1 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA SHORELINE SEDIMENT Results in pCi/g (dry)

LOCATION: CONTROL

Isotope Cs-134 Cs-137 Co-60 Year Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Mean 1969f ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1974f ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 197 5f ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1986 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.027 0.027 0.027 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1997 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1998 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1999 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2000 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2001 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2002 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 200 3 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2004 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2005 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2006 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2007 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2008 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2009 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 20 10 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 20 1 1 <L LD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 20 1 2 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

Langs Beach

- beyond influence of the site in a westerly direction.

- No data. Sample not required until new technical specifications implemented in 1985.

f 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

7 - 3 TABLE 7-2 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA SHORELINE SEDIMENT Results in pCi/g (dry)

LOCATION: INDICATOR

Isotope Cs-134 Cs-137 Co-60 Year Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Mean 1969f ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1974f ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 197 5f ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** 1986 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LL D <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.25 0.32 0.29 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.28 0.30 0.29 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.12 0.14 0.13 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.12 0.14 0.13 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.18 0.46 0.32 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.06 0.37 0.22 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.14 0.15 0.15 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.15 0.17 0.16 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1997 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.11 0.17 0.14 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1998 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.06 0.06 0.06 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1999 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.06 0.10 0.08 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2000 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.06 0.07 0.06 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2001 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.06 0.07 0.07 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2002 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.05 0.05 0.05 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2003 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.04 0.05 0.05 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2004 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.04 0.04 0.04 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2005 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.06 0.09 0.08 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2006 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.06 0.06 0.06 <LLD <LLD <LLD 200 7 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.0 4 0.0 4 0.0 4 <L LD <LLD <LLD 2008 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2009 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2010 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 201 1 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 20 1 2 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <L LD <LLD <LLD

Sunset Beach

- closest offsite location with recreational value.

- No data. Sample not required until new technical specifications implemented in 1985.

f 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

7 - 4 TABLE 7-3 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA FISH Results in pCi/g (wet)

LOCATION: CONTROL

Isotope Cs-137 Year Min. Max. Mean 1969f No Data No Data No Data 1974f 0.94 0.94 0.94 197 5f <MDL <MDL <MDL 1986 0.021 0.032 0.025 1987 0.017 0.040 0.031 1988 0.023 0.053 0.034 1989 0.028 0.043 0.034 1990 0.033 0.079 0.045 1991 0.021 0.034 0.029 1992 0.019 0.026 0.022 1993 0.030 0.036 0.033 1994 0.014 0.031 0.022 1995 0.017 0.023 0.019 1996 0.01 8 0.022 0.020 1997 0.012 0.030 0.021 1998 0.013 0.013 0.013 1999 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2000 0.021 0.021 0.021 2001 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2002 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2003 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2004 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2005 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2006 <LLD <LLD <LLD 200 7 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2 008 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2009 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2010 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2011 <LLD <LLD <LLD 20 1 2 <LLD <LLD <LLD

Control location was at an area beyond the influence of the site (westerly direction).

f 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

7 - 5 TABLE 7-4 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA FISH Results in pCi/g (wet)

LOCATION: INDICATOR * (NMP/JAF)

Isotope Cs-137 Year Min. Max. Mean 1969f 0.01 0.13 0.06 1974f 0.08 4.40 0.57 197 5f 1.10 1.70 1.38 1986 0.009 0.051 0.028 1987 0.024 0.063 0.033 1988 0.022 0.054 0.032 1989 0.020 0.044 0.034 1990 0.027 0.093 0.040 1991 0.018 0.045 0.029 1992 0.014 0.030 0.024 1993 0.018 0.035 0.028 1994 0.015 0.023 0.019 1995 0.016 0.022 0.019 1996 0.016 0.025 0.020 1997 0.014 0.023 0.018 1998 0.021 0.021 0.021 1999 0.018 0.021 0.020 2000 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2001 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2002 0.016 0.016 0.016 2003 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2004 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2005 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2006 <LLD <LLD <LLD 200 7 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2008 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2009 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2010 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2011 <LLD <LLD <LLD 20 1 2 <LLD <LLD <LLD

Indicator locations are in the general area of the NMP

-1 and J.A. FitzPatrick cooling water discharge structures.

f 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

7 - 6 TABLE 7-5 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA SURFACE WATER Results in pCi/liter LOCATION: CONTROL f Isotope Cs-137 Co-60 Ye ar Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Mean 1969ff * * * * *

1974ff * * * * *

197 5ff * * * * *

1986 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1990 <LLD <LLD <LL D <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1997 <LLD <LLD <LLD <L LD <LLD <LLD 1998 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1999 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2000 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2001 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2002 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2003 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2004 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2005 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2006 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 200 7 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2008 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2009 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2010 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2011 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 20 1 2 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

No gamma analysis performed (not required).

f Location was the City of Oswego Water Supply for 1969

-1984 and the Oswego Steam Station inlet canal for 1985

-Present. ff 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

7 - 7 TABLE 7-6 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA SURFACE WATER Results in pCi/liter LOCATION: INDICATOR f Isotope Cs-137 Co-60 Year Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Mean 1 969ff * * * * *

1974ff * * * * *

197 5ff * * * * *

1986 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 <LLD <LLD <L LD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1997 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1998 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1999 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2000 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2001 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2002 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 200 3 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2004 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2005 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2006 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 200 7 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2008 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2009 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2010 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2011 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 20 1 2 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

No gamma analysis performed (not required).

f Indicator location was the NMP 1 Inlet Canal for the period 1969

-1973, and the JAF Inlet Canal for 1 974-Present. ff 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

7 - 8 TABLE 7-7 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA SURFACE WATER TRITIUM Results in pCi/liter LOCATION: CONTROL

Isotope Tritium Year Min. Max. Mean 1969f No Data No Data No Data 1974f <MDL <MDL <MDL 1 97 5f 311 414 362 1986 250 550 373 1987 140 270 210 1988 240 460 320 1989 143 217 186 1990 260 320 290 1991 180 200 190 1992 190 310 243 1993 160 230 188 1994 250 250 250 1995 230 230 230 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1997 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1998 190 190 190 1999 220 510 365 2000 196 237 212 2001 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2002 <LLD <LLD <LLD 200 3 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2004 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2005 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2006 <LLD <LLD <LLD 200 7 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2008 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2009 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2010 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2011 <LL D <LLD <LLD 20 1 2 <LLD <LLD <LLD

Control location is the City of Oswego, drinking water for 1969

-1984 and the Oswego Steam Station inlet canal for 1985

-Present. f 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

7 - 9 TABLE 7-8 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA SURFACE WATER TRITIUM Results in pCi/liter LOCATION: INDICATOR

Isotope Tritium Year Min. Max. Mean 1969f No Data No Data No Data 1974f 380 500 440 197 5f 124 482 335 1986 260 500 380 1987 160 410 322 1988 430 480 460 1989 135 288 225 1990 220 290 250 1991 250 390 310 1992 240 300 273 1993 200 280 242 1994 180 260 220 1995 320 320 320 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1997 160 160 160 1998 190 190 190 1999 1 80 270 233 2000 161 198 185 2001 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2002 297 297 297 2003 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2004 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2005 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2006 <LLD <LLD <LLD 200 7 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2008 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2009 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2010 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2011 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2012 <LLD <LLD <LLD

Indicator location was the NMP

-1 Inlet Canal during the period 1969

-1973, and the JAF Inlet Canal for 1974

-Present. f 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

7 - 10 TABLE 7-9 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA Results in pCi/m 3 LOCATION: CONTROL

Isotope Gross Beta Year Min. Max. Mean 1969f 0.130 0.540 0.334 1974f 0.001 0.808 0.121 197 5f 0.008 0.294 0.085 19 86 0.008 0.272 0.039 1987 0.009 0.037 0.021 1988 0.008 0.039 0.018 1989 0.007 0.039 0.017 1990 0.003 0.027 0.013 1991 0.007 0.028 0.014 1992 0.006 0.020 0.012 1993 0.007 0.022 0.013 1994 0.008 0.025 0.015 1995 0.006 0.023 0.014 1996 0.008 0.023 0.014 1997 0.006 0.025 0.013 1998 0.004 0.034 0.014 1999 0.010 0.032 0.017 2000 0.006 0.027 0.015 2001 0.006 0.034 0.016 2002 0.008 0.027 0.016 2003 0.004 0.032 0.015 2004 0.008 0.032 0.016 2005 0.008 0.034 0.019 2006 0.007 0.033 0.016 200 7 0.008 0.028 0.016 2008 0.007 0.0 31 0.01 5 2009 0.007 0.030 0.016 2010 0.004 0.026 0.014 2011 0.00 8 0.0 34 0.01 8 20 1 2 0.00 5 0.0 25 0.01 6

Locations used for 1977

-1984 were C offsite, D1 offsite, D2 offsite , E offsite, F offsite, and G offsite. Control location R-5 offsite was used for 1986

-Present (formerly C offsite location).

f 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

7 - 11 TABLE 7-10 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA Results in pCi/m 3 LOCATION: INDICATOR

Isotope Gross Beta Year Min. Max. Mean 1969f 0.130 0.520 0.320 1974f 0.003 0.885 0.058 197 5f 0.001 0.456 0.067 1986 0.007 0.289 0.039 1987 0.009 0.040 0.021 1988 0.007 0.040 0.018 1989 0.007 0.041 0.017 1990 0.006 0.023 0.014 1991 0.006 0.033 0.015 1992 0.005 0.024 0.013 1993 0.005 0.023 0.014 1994 0.006 0.024 0.015 1995 0.004 0.031 0.014 1996 0.006 0.025 0.013 1997 0.001 0.018 0.010 1998 0.002 0.040 0.015 1999 0.009 0.039 0.017 2000 0.005 0.033 0.015 2001 0.004 0.037 0.016 2002 0.006 0.026 0.016 2003 0.005 0.035 0.015 2004 0.003 0.036 0.016 2005 0.007 0.041 0.019 2006 0.005 0.035 0.015 2007 0.007 0.028 0.016 2008 0.00 4 0.0 30 0.016 2009 0.006 0.032 0.016 201 0 0.005 0.030 0.015 2011 0.00 7 0.03 4 0.01 8 20 1 2 0.00 4 0.03 1 0.01 6

Locations used for 1969

-1973 were D1 onsite, D2 onsite , E onsite, F onsite and G onsite. Locations used for 1974

-1984 were D1 onsite, D2 onsite , E onsite, F onsite, G onsite, H onsite , I onsite, J onsite and K onsite, as applicable. 1986

- Present: locations were R-1 offsite , R-2 offsite , R-3 offsite, and R-4 offsite. f 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

7 - 12 TABLE 7-1 1 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA AIR PARTICULATES Results in pCi/m 3 LOCATION: CONTROL **

Isotope Cs-137 Co-60 Year Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Mean 1969f * * * * *

1974f * * * * *

197 5f * * * * *

1986 0.0075 0.0311 0.0193 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1997 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1998 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1999 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2000 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2001 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2002 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 200 3 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2004 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2005 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2006 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 200 7 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2008 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2009 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2010 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2011 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 20 1 2 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

No data available (not required prior to 1977).

- Locations included composites of offsite air monitoring locations for 1977

-1984. Sample location included only R

-5 air monitoring location for 1985

-Present. f 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

7 - 13 TABLE 7-1 2 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA AIR PARTICULATES Results in pCi/m 3 LOCATION: INDICATOR **

Isotope Cs-137 Co-60 Year Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Mean 1969f * * * * *

1974f * * * * *

197 5f * * * * *

1986 0.0069 0.0364 0.0183 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1997 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1998 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1999 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2000 <LL D <LLD <LLD 0.0048 0.0048 0.0048 2001 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2002 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 200 3 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2004 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2005 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2006 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 200 7 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2008 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2009 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2010 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2011 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 20 1 2 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

No data available (not required prior to 1977). ** Locations included composites of onsite air monitoring locations for 1977

-1984. Sample locations included R

-1 through R

-4 air monitoring locations for 1985

-Present. f 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

7 - 14 TABLE 7-1 3 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA AIR RADIOIODINE Results in pCi/m 3 LOCATION: CONTROL

Isotope Iodine-131 Year Min. Max. Mean 1969f ** ** ** 1974f ** ** ** 1975f <MDL <MDL <MDL 1 986 0.041 0.332 0.151 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1997 <LLD <LLD <LLD 19 98 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1999 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2000 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2001 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2002 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2003 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2004 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2005 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2006 <LLD <LLD <LLD 200 7 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2008 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2009 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2010 <LLD <LLD <LLD 20 1 1 0.034 0.093 0.055 2012 <LLD <LLD <LLD

Locations D1 offsite, D2 offsite, E offsite, F offsite and G offsite used for 1976

-1984. Location R

-5 offsite used for 1985

-Present. ** No results

- I-131 analysis not required.

f 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

Iodine concentrations attributed to fallout from Fukushima accident.

7 - 15 TABLE 7-14 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA AIR RADIOIODIN E Results in pCi/m 3 LOCATION: INDICATOR

Isotope Iodine-131 Year Min. Max. Mean 1969f ** ** ** 1974f ** ** ** 1975f 0.25 0.30 0.28 1986 0.023 0.360 0.119 1987 0.011 0.018 0.014 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1 991 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1997 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1998 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1999 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2000 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2001 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2002 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2003 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2004 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2005 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2006 <LLD <LLD <LLD 200 7 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2008 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2009 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2010 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2011 0.021 0.11 0.055 2012 <LLD <LLD <LLD

Locations used for 1976

-1984 were D1 onsite, D2 onsite, E onsite, F onsite, G onsite, H onsite, I onsite, J onsite and K onsite, as applicable. Locations used for 1985

- Present, were R

-1 offsite, R

-2 offsite, R

-3 offsite, and R

-4 offsite.

- No results. I

-131 analysis not required.

f 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

Iodine concentrations attributed to fallout from Fukushima accident.

7 - 16 TABLE 7-15 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA ENVIRONMENTAL TLD Results in mrem/standard month LOCATION: CONTROL **

Year Min. Max. Mean Preopf 1974f 1975f 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 200 7 20 08 2009 2010 2011 2012 (1) 2.7 4.8 3.2 4.0 3.3 3.3 3.8 3.5 3.8 4.9 4.7 5.3 (5.5)*

4.6 (4.6)*

4.4 (4.8)*

2.9 (2.9)*

3.7 (3.7)*

3.8 (3.8)*

2.6 (2.6)*

3.4 (3.4)*

3.1 (3.1)*

3.4 (3.4)*

3.7 (3.9)*

3.7 (3.7)*

3.6 (3.7)*

3.7 (3.7)*

3.6 (3.9)*

3.4 (3.4)* 3.4 (3.4)*

3.3 (3.3)*

3.3 (3.4)*

3.3 (3.3)*

3.2 (3.2)* 3.3 (3.3)* 3.2 (3.2)*

2.8 (2.8)*

2.6 (2.6)*

3.6 (3.6)*

(1) 8.9 6.0 7.2 8.0 4.7 5.7 5.8 5.9 6.1 7.2 8.2 7.5 (7.2)*

6.6 (5.8)*

6.8 (6.8)*

6.4 (5.6)*

6.0 (5.9)*

5.4 (5.3)*

5.0 (4.7)*

5.6 (5.2)*

5.0 (4.6)* 5.7 (4.9)*

5.6 (5.6)*

6.2 (5.2)*

5.6 (4.8)*

7.1 (4.7)*

7.3 (5.5)*

5.4 (5.0)*

5.5 (5.2)*

5.5 (4.8)*

5.9 (5.9)*

5.1 (4.5)*

5.3 (5.3)*

5.8 (5.8)* 5.1 (5.1)* 4.8 (4.8)*

4.6 (4.6)*

5.5 (5.5)*

5.0 (5.0)*

(1) 5.6 5.5 5.4 5.3 4.3 4.7 4.9 4.8 5.1 5.8 6.2 6.3 (6.3)* 5.4 (5.2)*

5.6 (5.4)*

4.7 (4.6)*

4.8 (4.6)*

4.5 (4.3)*

4.1 (3.9)*

4.4 (4.3)*

4.1 (3.9)*

4.4 (4.2)*

4.3 (4.2)*

4.7 (4.6)*

4.4 (4.2)*

4.6 (4.4)*

4.7 (4.3)*

4.4 (4.4)*

4.3 (4.1)*

4.2 (4.2)*

4.3 (4.5)*

4.1 (4.0)*

4.1 (4.3)*

4.4 (4.6)* 4.1 (4.3)* 3.9 (4.0)*

3.9 (3.9)*

4.0 (4.1)*

4.0 (4.2)*

Data in parentheses is RETS control data and is determined using TLDs #8, 14 and 49

. ** TLD #8 and 14 established 1974, TLD #49 established 1980, TLD #111 established 1988, TLD #113 established 1991.

(1) Data not available. f 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for JAFNPP.

7 - 17 TABLE 7-16 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA ENVIRONMENTAL TLD Results in mrem per standard month LOCATION: SITE BOUND ARY ** Year Min. Max. Mean Preopf * *

1974f * *

197 5f * *

1986 5.4 6.8 5.9 1987 4.7 5.9 5.3 1988 5.0 6.1 5.4 1989 4.5 5.2 4.8 1990 4.5 5.4 4.8 1991 4.3 5.5 4.8 1992 3.7 4.6 4.2 1993 3.8 4.8 4.3 1994 2.8 4.9 4.0 1995 3.5 5.1 4.4 1 996 3.2 5.3 4.1 1997 3.5 5.9 4.6 1998 3.7 5.1 4.4 1999 3.3 7.5 4.7 2000 3.6 6.8 4.5 2001 3.6 5.3 4.5 2002 3.5 5.1 4.3 2003 3.2 4.9 4.3 2004 3.3 6.4 4.4 2005 3.4 4.8 4.2 2006 3.5 4.7 4.1 200 7 3.2 5.4 4.3 2008 3.2 4.8 4.0 2009 3.1 4.5 3.9 2010 3.3 4.3 3.9 20 11 3.1 5.3 4.1 2012 3.6 4.8 4.1

Data not available (not required prior to 1985).

TLD #23, 75, 76, 77, 85, 86 and 87 are in close proximity to operational buildings along the north boundary. This boundary is the lakeshore and is considered to be generally not accessible to the public. These locations are not used in the site boundary dose determination.

f 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

- TLD's used for statistics: 7, 18, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83 & 84.

7 - 18 TABLE 7-1 7 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA ENVIRONMENTAL TLD Results in mrem per standard month LOCATION: OFFSITE SECTORS **

Year Min. Max. Mean Preopf * *

1974f * *

197 5f * *

1986 4.6 8.6 6.0 1987 4.3 6.0 5.2 1988 3.8 7.0 5.3 1989 2.5 6.8 4.9 1990 3.6 6.3 4.7 1991 3.6 5.8 4.7 1992 2.9 5.0 4.1 1993 3.4 6.3 4.5 1994 3.0 5.1 4.0 1995 3.2 5.2 4.3 1996 3.2 5.3 4.2 1997 3.5 5.8 4.4 1998 3.5 5.0 4.2 1999 3.6 5.6 4.4 2000 3.4 6.6 4.5 2001 3.6 5.4 4.4 2002 3.1 5.3 4.2 2003 3.4 4.8 4.1 2004 3.2 6.7 4.4 2005 3.2 4.7 4.0 2006 3.3 4.4 4.0 2007 3.1 5.1 4.2 2008 3.2 4.5 3.8 2009 3.3 4.5 3.9 2010 3.0 4.4 3.9 20 11 3.0 5.3 4.0 2012 3.5 4.6 4.0

Data not available (not required prior to 1985).

- Includes TLD numbers 88, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94 and 95.

f 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

7 - 19 TABLE 7-1 8 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA ENVIRONMENTAL TLD Results in mrem per standard month LOCATION: SPECIAL INTEREST **

Year Min. Max. Mean Preopf * *

1974f * *

197 5f * *

1986 4.8 8.2 6.1 1987 3.5 6.0 5.1 1988 3.9 6.6 5.3 1989 2.1 6.4 4.9 1990 3.2 6.3 4.8 1991 2.9 5.6 4.4 1992 3.0 4.8 4.1 1993 3.2 5.8 4.5 1994 2.9 4.8 4.1 1995 3.6 4.8 4.2 1996 3.2 5.1 4.2 1997 3.5 6.2 4.6 1998 3.7 5.6 4.4 1999 3.6 7.1 4.6 2000 3.6 7.3 4.7 2001 3.8 5.4 4.4 2002 3.5 5.5 4.2 2003 3.4 5.5 4.3 2004 3.0 5.9 4.2 20 05 3.4 5.1 4.1 2006 3.5 5.3 4.1 2007 3.0 5.8 4.3 2008 3.1 5.1 4.0 2009 3.1 4.5 3.8 2010 3.2 4.7 3.9 20 11 2.9 4.9 4.0 2012 3.4 4.7 4.0

Data not available (not required prior to 1985).

- Include TLD numbers 15, 56, 58, 96, 97 and 98. f 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

7 - 20 TABLE 7-19 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA ENVIRONMENTAL TLD Results in mrem per standard month LOCATION: ONSITE INDICATOR **

Year Min. Max. Mean Preopf * *

1974f 3.1 10.6 5.7 197 5f 4.6 16.0 7.3 1986 4.7 16.1 7.0 1987 4.0 11.4 5.8 1988 4.4 11.9 6.0 1989 2.7 13.1 6.0 1990 3.6 12.9 5.5 1991 3.2 11.6 5.4 1992 3.2 5.6 4.3 1993 3.1 13.6 5.2 1994 2.8 14.3 5.1 1995 3.5 28.6 6.2 1996 3.1 32.6 6.4 1997 3.5 28.8 8.1 1998 3.6 28.8 6.2 1999 3.3 28.4 6.6 2000 3.7 16.5 5.6 2001 3.8 14.5 5.6 2002 3.5 13.6 5.3 2003 3.2 12.9 5.3 2004 3.3 13.2 5.4 2005 3.4 14.1 5.4 2006 3.5 14.4 5.3 200 7 3.2 14.8 5.6 2008 3.2 13.8 5.2 2009 3.1 13.6 4.9 2010 3.3 13.3 4.8 20 11 3.1 13.0 5.1 2012 3.5 11.8 4.9

No data available.

- Includes TLD numbers 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 (1970

- 1973). Includes TLD numbers 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 23, 24, 25 and 26 (1974

- Present). f 1969 data is considered to be pre-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

7 - 21 TABLE 7-20 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA ENVIRONMENTAL TLD Results in mrem per standard month LOCATION: OFFSITE INDICATOR **

Year Min. Max. Mean Preopf * *

1974f 2.4 8.9 5.3 197 5f 4.5 7.1 5.5 1986 5.0 7.6 6.1 1987 4.4 6.6 5.2 1988 4.2 6.6 5.4 1989 2.8 6.4 4.6 1990 3.8 6.1 4.8 1991 3.4 5.8 4.5 1992 3.1 5.2 4.1 1993 3.2 5.7 5.0 1994 3.0 5.1 4.1 1995 3.9 5.7 4.4 1996 3.3 5.5 4.1 1997 3.7 6.2 4.7 1998 3.9 5.6 4.5 1999 3.8 7.1 4.6 2000 3.8 7.3 4.6 2001 3.7 5.9 4.6 2002 3.6 5.5 4.4 2003 3.1 5.5 4.4 2004 3.2 6.5 4.5 2005 3.6 5.1 4.2 2006 3.9 5.3 4.2 200 7 3.4 4.9 4.3 2008 3.3 4.5 4.0 2009 3.3 4.1 3.8 2010 3.5 4.0 3.7 20 11 3.2 4.8 4.0 2012 3.6 4.3 4.0

No data available.

- Includes TLD numbers 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13.

f 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

7 - 22 TABLE 7-21 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA MILK Results in pCi/liter LOCATION: CONTROL **

Isotope Cs-137 I-131 Year Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Mean 1969f * * * * *

1974f * * * * *

197 5f * * * * *

1986 5.3 12.4 8.4 0.8 29.0 13.6 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LL D <LLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <L LD 1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1997 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1998 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1999 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2000 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2001 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2002 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2003 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2004 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2005 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2006 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 200 7 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2008 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2009 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2010 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2011 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 20 1 2 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

No data available (sample not required).

- Location used was an available milk sample location in a least prevalent wind direction greater than ten miles from the site.

f 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

7 - 23 TABLE 7-22 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA MILK Results in pCi/liter LOCATION: INDICATOR Isotope Cs-137 I-131 Year Min. Max. Mean Min. Max. Mean 1969f * * * * *

1974f 1.6 39 10.5 0.70 2.00 1.23 197 5f 6.0 22 16 0.01 2.99 0.37 1986 6.1 11.1 8.6 0.3 30.0 5.2 1987 5.5 9.4 7.4 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 10.0 10.0 10.0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1997 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0.25 0.44 0.35 1998 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 1999 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2000 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2001 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2002 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2003 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2004 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2005 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2006 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2007 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2008 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2009 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2010 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 2011 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD 20 1 2 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD

No data available (sample not required).

f 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre-operational for the JAFNPP.

7 - 24 TABLE 7-23 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA FOOD PRODUCTS Results in pCi/g (wet)

LOCATION: CONTROL

Isotope Cs-137 Year Min. Max. Mean 1969f ** ** ** 1974f ** ** ** 197 5f ** ** ** 1986 <LLD <LLD <LLD 198 7 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1989 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 0.008 0.008 0.008 1994 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1995 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1997 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1998 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1999 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2000 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2001 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2002 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2003 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2004 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2005 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2006 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2007 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2008 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2009 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2010 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2011 <LL D <LLD <LLD 20 1 2 <LLD <LLD <LLD

Locations was an available food product sample location in a least prevalent wind direction greater than ten miles from the site. ** No data available (control samples not required).

f 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

7 - 25 TABLE 7-2 4 HISTORICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE DATA FOOD PRODUCTS Results in pCi/g (wet)

LOCATION: INDICATOR

Isotope Cs-137 Year Min. Max. Mean 1969f ** ** ** 1974f 0.04 0.34 0.142 197 5f <MDL <MDL <MDL 1986 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1987 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1988 0.008 0.008 0.008 1989 0.011 0.011 0.011 1990 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1991 0.039 0.039 0.039 1992 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1993 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1994 0.006 0.012 0.010 19 95 0.011 0.012 0.012 1996 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1997 0.013 0.013 0.013 1998 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1999 0.007 0.007 0.007 2000 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2001 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2002 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2003 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2004 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2005 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2006 <LLD <LLD <LL D 2007 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2008 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2009 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2010 <LLD <LLD <LLD 2011 <LLD <LLD <LLD 20 1 2 <LLD <LLD <LLD

Indicator locations were available downwind locations within ten miles of the site and with high deposition potential.

- No data available (control samples not required).

f 1969 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the site. 1974 and 1975 data is considered to be pre

-operational for the JAFNPP.

8-1 8.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE / QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM

8.1 PROGRAM

DESCRIPTION The Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM), Part 1, Section 5.3 requires that the licensee participate in an Interlaboratory Comparison Program. The Interlaboratory Comparison Program shall include sample media for which samples are routinely collected and for which comparison samples are commercially available. Participation in an Interlaboratory Comparison Program ensures that independent checks on the precision and accuracy of the measurement of radioactive material in the environmental samples are performed as part of the Quality Assurance Program for environmental monitoring. To fulfill the requirement for an Interlaboratory Comparison Program, the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAF) Environmental Laboratory has engaged the services of Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Incorporated in Atlanta, Georgia.

Eckert & Ziegler Analytics supplies sample media as blind sample spikes, which contain certified levels of radioactivity unknown to the analysis laboratory. These samples are prepared and analyzed by the JAF Environmental Laboratory using standard laboratory procedures. Eckert & Ziegler Analytics issues a statistical summary report of the results. The JAF Environmental Laboratory uses predetermined acceptance criteria methodology for evaluating the laboratory's performance.

The JAF Environmental Laboratory also analyzes laboratory blanks. The analysis of laboratory blanks provides a means to detect and measure radioactive contamination of analytical samples. The analysis of analytical blanks also provides information on the adequacy of background subtraction. Laboratory blank results are analyzed using control charts.

8-2 8.2 PROGRAM SCHEDULE SAMPLE MEDIA LABORATORY ANALYSIS SAMPLE PROVIDER ECKERT & ZIEGLER ANALYTICS Water Gross Beta 3 Water Tritium 5 Water I-131 3 Water Mixed Gamma 4 Air Gross Beta 3 Air I-131 4 Air Mixed Gamma 2 Milk I-131 3 Milk Mixed Gamma 3 Soil Mixed Gamma 1 Vegetation Mixed Gamma 2 TOTAL SAMPLE INVENTORY 33 8.3 ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA Each sample result is evaluated to determine the accuracy and precision of the laboratory's analysis result. The sample evaluation method is discussed below.

8.3.1 SAMPLE

RESULTS EVALUATION Samples provided by Eckert & Ziegler Analytics are evaluated using what is specified as the NRC method. This method is based on the calculation of the ratio of results reported by the participating laboratory (QC result) to the Vendor Laboratory Known value (reference result).

8-3 An Environmental Laboratory analytical result is evaluated using the following calculation:

The value for the error resolution is calculated.

The error resolution = Reference Result

Reference Results Error (1 sigma)

Using the appropriate row under the Error Resolution column in Table 8.3.1 below, a corresponding Ratio of Agreement interval is given.

The value for the ratio is then calculated.

Ratio

= QC Result

of Agreement Reference Result If the value falls within the agreement interval, the result is acceptable.

TABLE 8.3.1 ERROR RESOLUTION RATIO OF AGREEMENT < 4 No Comparison 4 to 7 0.5 to 2.0 8 to 15 0.6 to 1.66 16 to 50 0.75 to 1.33 51 to 200 0.8 to 1.25 >200 0.85 to 1.18 This acceptance test is generally referred to as the "NRC" method. The acceptance criteria are contained in Procedure EN-CY-102, Laboratory Analytical Quality Control. The NRC method generally results in an acceptance range of approximately +/- 25% of the Known value when applied to sample results from the Eckert & Ziegler Analytics Interlaboratory Comparison Program. This method is used as the procedurally required assessment method and requires the generation of a deviation from QA/QC program report when results are unacceptable.

8-4 8.4 PROGRAM RESULTS

SUMMARY

The Interlaboratory Comparison Program numerical results are provided on Table 8-1.

8.4.1 ECKERT

& ZIEGLER ANALYTICS QA SAMPLES RESULTS Thirty-three QA blind spike samples were analyzed as part of Eckert & Ziegler Analytics 2012 Interlaboratory Comparison Program. The following sample media were evaluated as part of the comparison program.

Air Charcoal Cartridge: I-131 Air Particulate Filter: Mixed Gamma Emitters, Gross Beta Water: I-131, Mixed Gamma Emitters, Tritium, Gross Beta Soil: Mixed Gamma Emitters Milk: I-131, Mixed Gamma Emitters Vegetation: Mixed Gamma Emitters The JAF Environmental Laboratory performed 135 individual analyses on the 33 QA samples. Of the 135 analyses performed, 133 were in agreement using the NRC acceptance criteria for a 98.5 % agreement ratio. The two (2) analyses not in agreement are discussed below. There were two (2) non-conformities in the 2012 program.

Eckert & Ziegler Analytics Sample E-10086, Water Gross Beta Corrective Action No. CR-JAF-2012-05041 The JAF Environmental Lab result for the Eckert & Ziegler Analytics QA sample E-10086, water gross beta, was not in agreement with the known value. JAF reported an average value of 87.4 pCi/L when the known value was 285 pCi/L.

Three aliquots of the sample were prepared and 3 results were generated along with the mean which was reported. The sampling volume was not adjusted for the 3 aliquots. The incorrect sample volume was used to calculate the activity.

The volume used in the calculation of the activity was incorrectly entered as 0.5 L when the correct volume should have been 0.166 L. If the correct volume had been used, the activity would have been 87.4

3 = 262.2 pCi/L. The corrected activity would then have been in agreement with the known value.

Guidance was added to the Lab Policy Manual for calculating gross beta concentrations when more than 1 aliquot of the sample is taken.

8-5 Eckert & Ziegler Analytics Sample E-10274, Water Gross Beta Corrective Action No. CR-JAF-2013-00770 The JAF Environmental Lab result for the Eckert & Ziegler Analytics QA sample E-10274, water gross beta, was not in agreement with the known value. JAF reported an average value of 190.6 pCi/L when the known value was 251 pCi/L. The error resolution is 59.7 which equates to a ratio of agreement of 0.8 to 1.25. The JAF / known value was 0.76. The sample was analyzed on another instrument with an average result of 187.9 pCi/L.

The vendor was contacted and suggested recommendations have been examined and have not accounted for the discrepancy in the result.

JAF's result performed on the previous Eckert & Ziegler water gross beta sample was in excellent agreement with the known value.

8-6 TABLE 8-1 INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gross Beta Analysis of Air Particulate Filter DATE SAMPLE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF ELAB RESULTS pCi +/-1 sigma REFERENCE LAB* pCi +/-1 sigma RATIO (1) 06/14/2012 E10151 FILTER GROSS BETA 64 +/- 1.0 61 +/- 1.01 1.07 A 66 +/- 1.0 64 +/- 1.0 Mean = 65 +/- 0.6 12/06/2012 E10362 FILTER GROSS BETA 71 +/- 0.9 66 +/- 1.09 1.06 A 68 +/- 0.9 70 +/- 0.9 Mean = 70 +/- 0.5 06/14/2012 E10189 FILTER GROSS BETA 93 +/- 1.2 84 +/- 1.40 1.10 A 94 +/- 1.2 89 +/- 1.1 Mean = 92 +/- 0.7 (1) Ratio = Reported/Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc.

A=Acceptable

Sample provided by Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc.

U=Unacceptable

8-7 TABLE 8-1 (Continued) INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Tritium Analysis of Water DATE SAMPLE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF ELAB RESULTS pCi/liter +/-1 sigma REFERENCE LAB* pCi/liter +/-1 sigma RATIO (1) 03/15/2012 E10083 WATER H-3 5601 +/- 169.0 4990 +/- 83.40 1.08 A 5215 +/- 166.0 5352 +/- 167.0 Mean = 5389 +/- 96.6 06/14/2012 E10150 WATER H-3 1001 +/- 121.0 964 +/- 16.10 1.07 A 1040 +/- 121.0 1066 +/- 122.0 Mean = 1036 +/- 70.1 09/13/2012 E10269 WATER H-3 918 +/- 124.0 960 +/- 16.00 0.95 A 901 +/- 124.0 915 +/- 125.0 Mean = 911 +/- 71.8 12/06/2012 E10321 WATER H-3 12011 +/- 209.0 12100 +/- 202.00 0.99 A 11938 +/- 211.0 11994 +/- 211.0 Mean = 11981 +/- 121.4 12/06/2012 E10322 WATER H-3 12023 +/- 210.0 12100 +/- 202.00 0.99 A 12054 +/- 212.0 12004 +/- 212.0 Mean = 12027 +/- 122.0 (1) Ratio = Reported/Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc.

A=Acceptable

Sample provided by Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc.

U=Unacceptable

8-8 03/15/2012E10086WATER 90+/-1.4 88+/-1.4 84+/-1.3 Mean =87+/-0.806/14/2012E10156WATER257+/-2.5255+/-2.5257+/-2.5Mean =256+/-1.409/13/2012E10274WATER192+/-2.0191+/-2.0189+/-2.0Mean =191+/-1.2(1) Ratio = Reported/Analytics.A=Acceptable* Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.U=Unacceptable UGROSS BETA 2854.8INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAMGROSS BETARATIO (1)TABLE 8-1 (Continued)4.6 273ANALYSIS 0.31+/-JAF ELAB RESULTSpCi/liter +/-1 sigma

+/-MEDIUM+/-Gross Beta Analysis of WaterDATESAMPLE ID NO.REFERENCE LAB*0.94A 0.76 U4.2GROSS BETA 251 8-9 TABLE 8-1 (Continued) INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM I-131 Gamma Analysis of Air Charcoal DATE SAMPLE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF ELAB RESULTS pCi +/-1 sigma REFERENCE LAB* pCi +/-1 sigma RATIO (1) 03/15/2012 E10013 AIR I-131 90 +/- 3.7 94.1 +/- 1.57 0.96 A 90 +/- 3.8 90 +/- 3.3 Mean = 90 +/- 2.1 06/14/2012 E10154 AIR I-131 94 +/- 2.6 97.0 +/- 1.62 0.94 A 92 +/- 4.4 90 +/- 2.5 89 +/- 3.2 Mean = 91 +/- 1.6 09/13/2012 E10267 AIR I-131 96 +/- 2.6 97.1 +/- 1.62 0.98 A 94 +/- 2.7 96 +/- 2.9 Mean = 95 +/- 1.6 09/13/2012 E10273 AIR I-131 102 +/- 2.8 96.8 +/- 1.62 1.05 A 101 +/- 2.7 101 +/- 2.6 Mean = 101 +/- 1.5 (1) Ratio = Reported/Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc.

A=Acceptable

Sample provided by Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc.

U=Unacceptable

8-10 TABLE 8-1 (Continued) INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Water DATE SAMPLE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF ELAB RESULTS pCi/liter +/-1 sigma REFERENCE LAB* pCi/liter +/-1 sigma RATIO (1) 3/15/2012 E10084 WATER Ce-141 198 +/- 9.1 184 +/- 3.07 1.06 A 196 +/- 8.2 186 +/- 8.9 197 +/- 8.2 Mean = 194 +/- 4.3 Cr-51 189 +/- 49.2 309 +/- 5.16 0.91 A 257 +/- 39.7 362 +/- 68.1 319 +/- 42.0 Mean = 282 +/- 25.5 Cs-134 102 +/- 7.1 106 +/- 1.77 0.95 A 98 +/- 5.8 100 +/- 2.6 104 +/- 5.4 Mean = 101 +/- 2.7 Cs-137 103 +/- 3.9 113 +/- 1.88 0.98 A 111 +/- 3.1 116 +/- 1.5 115 +/- 2.9 Mean = 111 +/- 1.5 Co-58 95 +/- 4.4 93 +/- 1.56 1.03 A 92 +/- 3.6 97 +/- 2.4 100 +/- 3.4 Mean = 96 +/- 1.8 Mn-54 148 +/- 4.6 138 +/- 2.31 1.10 A 148 +/- 3.7 157 +/- 1.9 155 +/- 3.6 Mean = 152 +/- 1.8 Fe-59 118 +/- 7.4 119 +/- 1.99 1.06 A 130 +/- 5.8 131 +/- 4.8 125 +/- 5.2 Mean = 126 +/- 3.0 Zn-65 232 +/- 9.5 235 +/- 3.93 1.06 A 250 +/- 7.5 257 +/- 3.8 262 +/- 6.9 Mean = 250 +/- 3.6 Co-60 209 +/- 3.9 197 +/- 3.29 1.05 A 207 +/- 3.1 209 +/- 1.4 203 +/- 2.8 Mean = 207 +/- 1.5 (1) Ratio = Reported/Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc.

A=Acceptable

Sample provided by Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc.

U=Unacceptable

8-11 TABLE 8-1 (Continued) INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Water DATE SAMPLE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF ELAB RESULTS pCi/liter +/-1 sigma REFERENCE LAB* pCi/liter +/-1 sigma RATIO (1) 6/14/2012 E10188 WATER Ce-141 110 +/- 8.3 112 +/- 1.87 1.01 A 121 +/- 9.6 118 +/- 8.3 115 +/- 9.3 100 +/- 10.0 Mean = 113 +/- 4.1 Cr-51 515 +/- 40.9 548 +/- 9.14 1.00 A 564 +/- 50.5 532 +/- 41.1 553 +/- 46.3 588 +/- 52.7 Mean = 550 +/- 20.8 Cs-134 223 +/- 12.0 238 +/- 3.97 0.95 A 217 +/- 14.9 231 +/- 10.4 225 +/- 12.8 234 +/- 14.0 Mean = 226 +/- 5.8 Cs-137 281 +/- 7.1 289 +/- 4.82 0.98 A 277 +/- 8.6 298 +/- 6.4 273 +/- 7.3 282 +/- 8.4 Mean = 282 +/- 3.4 Co-58 118 +/- 5.8 126 +/- 2.10 1.00 A 123 +/- 6.9 131 +/- 5.0 132 +/- 5.8 127 +/- 6.4 Mean = 126 +/- 2.7 Mn-54 1 82 +/- 6.4 180 +/- 3.01 1.03 A 177 +/- 7.5 200 +/- 5.7 184 +/- 6.6 182 +/- 7.4 Mean = 185 +/- 3.0 Fe-59 192 +/- 8.3 174 +/- 2.91 1.09 A 188 +/- 10.0 190 +/- 7.0 197 +/- 8.5 179 +/- 9.8 Mean = 189 +/- 3.9 Zn-65 312 +/- 13.0 272 +/- 4.54 1.12 A 317 +/- 15.7 293 +/- 10.8 308 +/- 13.2 298 +/- 15.2 Mean = 306 +/- 6.1 Co-60 4 85 +/- 7.2 484 +/- 8.09 1.01 A 488 +/- 8.6 493 +/- 6.3 491 +/- 7.5 486 +/- 8.5 Mean = 489 +/- 3.8 I-131 116 +/- 10.5 99 +/- 1.66 0.93 A 82 +/- 12.2 101 +/- 10.2 85 +/- 11.5 78 +/- 12.8 Mean = 93 +/- 5.7 I-131** 112 +/- 4.9 99 +/- 1.66 1.15 A 118 +/- 4.6 114 +/- 1.3 Mean = 115 +/- 2.3 (1) Ratio = Reported/Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc.

A=Acceptable

Sample provided by Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc. U=Unacceptable ** Result determined by Resin Extraction/Gamma Spectral Analysis.

8-12 TABLE 8-1 (Continued) INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Water DATE SAMPLE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF ELAB RESULTS pCi/liter +/-1 sigma REFERENCE LAB* pCi/liter +/-1 sigma RATIO (1) 9/13/2012 E10270 WATER Ce-141 166 +/- 6.2 159 +/- 2.65 1.04 A 167 +/- 7.1 170 +/- 6.5 159 +/- 7.7 Mean = 166 +/- 3.4 Cr-51 269 +/- 26.5 241 +/- 4.02 1.12 A 286 +/- 31.2 300 +/- 27.6 225 +/- 32.6 Mean = 270 +/- 14.8 Cs-134 107 +/- 7.6 105 +/- 1.76 0.98 A 106 +/- 9.9 101 +/- 8.4 96 +/- 10.8 Mean = 102 +/- 4.6 Cs-137 169 +/- 4.9 169 +/- 2.82 0.98 A 158 +/- 6.7 175 +/- 5.6 159 +/- 6.5 Mean = 165 +/- 3.0 Co-58 95 +/- 3.8 98 +/- 1.63 1.00 A 102 +/- 5.7 99 +/- 4.4 95 +/- 5.7 Mean = 98 +/- 2.5 Mn-54 196 +/- 5.3 190 +/- 3.17 1.04 A 208 +/- 7.1 195 +/- 6.0 194 +/- 7.2 Mean = 198 +/- 3.2 Fe-59 160 +/- 5.4 147 +/- 2.46 1.11 A 161 +/- 7.7 167 +/- 6.5 166 +/- 7.9 Mean = 164 +/- 3.5 Zn-65 187 +/- 8.3 187 +/- 3.12 0.98 A 191 +/- 11.2 191 +/- 9.6 166 +/- 11.4 Mean = 184 +/- 5.1 Co-60 148 +/- 3.5 147 +/- 2.46 1.05 A 170 +/- 5.2 154 +/- 4.2 148 +/- 5.0 Mean = 155 +/- 2.2 I-131 61.4 +/- 3.6 63 +/- 1.06 1.07 A 69.2 +/- 5.0 66.2 +/- 4.0 72.3 +/- 5.4 Mean = 67.3 +/- 2.3 I-131** 68 +/- 0.9 63 +/- 1.06 1.08 A 68 +/- 0.9 69 +/- 0.9 Mean = 68 +/- 0.5 (1) Ratio = Reported/Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc. A=Acceptable

Sample provided by Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc. U=Unacceptable ** Result determined by Resin Extraction/Gamma Spectral Analysis.

8-13 TABLE 8-1 (Continued) INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Water DATE SAMPLE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF ELAB RESULTS pCi/liter +/-1 sigma REFERENCE LAB* pCi/liter +/-1 sigma RATIO (1) 12/6/2012 E10320 WATER Ce-141 51 +/- 6.0 53 +/- 0.89 0.92 A 54 +/- 5.8 43 +/- 7.2 47 +/- 6.2 Mean = 49 +/- 3.2 Cr-51 379 +/- 33.0 362 +/- 6.05 0.96 A 382 +/- 34.5 321 +/- 38.3 311 +/- 35.3 Mean = 348 +/- 17.7 Cs-134 172 +/- 9.2 173 +/- 2.88 0.96 A 159 +/- 9.8 150 +/- 12.4 180 +/- 10.8 Mean = 165 +/- 5.3 Cs-137 121 +/- 4.3 122 +/- 2.03 0.99 A 118 +/- 4.5 120 +/- 5.7 122 +/- 5.1 Mean = 120 +/- 2.5 Co-58 107 +/- 4.1 103 +/- 1.72 0.98 A 99 +/- 4.6 95 +/- 5.5 103 +/- 4.8 Mean = 101 +/- 2.4 Mn-54 134 +/- 4.7 121 +/- 2.01 1.06 A 134 +/- 4.9 120 +/- 6.0 127 +/- 5.3 Mean = 129 +/- 2.6 Fe-59 119 +/- 5.4 121 +/- 2.01 1.00 A 131 +/- 6.1 109 +/- 7.5 123 +/- 6.8 Mean = 121 +/- 3.2 Zn-65 205 +/- 8.9 194 +/- 3.24 1.03 A 201 +/- 9.3 200 +/- 12.2 197 +/- 10.5 Mean = 201 +/- 5.2 Co-60 185 +/- 3.9 177 +/- 2.96 1.05 A 182 +/- 4.2 183 +/- 5.3 193 +/- 4.0 Mean = 186 +/- 2.2 I-131 82.8 +/- 8.1 73 +/- 1.21 1.05 A 75.0 +/- 8.1 74.3 +/- 10.4 75.8 +/- 9.3 Mean = 77.0 +/- 4.5 I-131** 85 +/- 1.6 73 +/- 1.21 1.12 A 86 +/- 1.8 75 +/- 2.5 81 +/- 2.2 Mean = 81 +/- 1.0 (1) Ratio = Reported/Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc. A=Acceptable

Sample provided by Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc. U=Unacceptable ** Result determined by Resin Extraction/Gamma Spectral Analysis.

8-14 TABLE 8-1 (Continued) INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Milk DATE SAMPLE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF ELAB RESULTS pCi/liter +/-1 sigma REFERENCE LAB* pCi/liter +/-1 sigma RATIO (1) 3/15/2012 E10014 MILK Ce-141 250 +/- 10.6 260 +/- 4.34 0.98 A 272 +/- 9.0 255 +/- 10.1 243 +/- 10.5 Mean = 255 +/- 5.0 Cr-51 390 +/- 43.3 436 +/- 7.28 1.01 A 495 +/- 42.2 364 +/- 48.9 514 +/- 49.7 Mean = 441 +/- 23.1 Cs-134 134 +/- 8.1 149 +/- 2.50 0.91 A 142 +/- 11.2 129 +/- 14.0 140 +/- 13.5 Mean = 136 +/- 6.0 Cs-137 157 +/- 7.7 159 +/- 2.66 0.95 A 153 +/- 6.0 157 +/- 7.7 140 +/- 6.9 Mean = 152 +/- 3.6 Co-58 133 +/- 7.8 132 +/- 2.20 0.97 A 130 +/- 6.0 127 +/- 7.8 122 +/- 8.0 Mean = 128 +/- 3.7 Mn-54 204 +/- 8.8 195 +/- 3.26 1.06 A 214 +/- 7.1 206 +/- 8.6 203 +/- 8.5 Mean = 207 +/- 4.1 Fe-59 182 +/- 11.5 168 +/- 2.81 1.04 A 192 +/- 9.1 161 +/- 11.0 163 +/- 10.9 Mean = 175 +/- 5.3 Zn-65 312 +/- 18.4 333 +/- 5.56 0.97 A 326 +/- 14.4 320 +/- 18.0 329 +/- 17.7 Mean = 322 +/- 8.6 Co-60 273 +/- 7.8 279 +/- 4.65 0.99 A 279 +/- 6.1 278 +/- 7.6 273 +/- 7.4 Mean = 276 +/- 3.6 I-131 107 +/- 13.8 93 +/- 1.54 1.12 A 97.2 +/- 10.2 90.9 +/- 13.1 120 +/- 13.7 Mean = 104 +/- 6.4 I-131** 120 +/- 7.1 93 +/- 1.54 1.25 A 125 +/- 6.5 105 +/- 7.6 112 +/- 7.1 Mean = 116 +/- 3.5 (1) Ratio = Reported/Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc. A=Acceptable

Sample provided by Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc. U=Unacceptable ** Result determined by Resin Extraction/Gamma Spectral Analysis.

8-15 TABLE 8-1 (Continued) INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Milk DATE SAMPLE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF ELAB RESULTS pCi/liter +/-1 sigma REFERENCE LAB* pCi/liter +/-1 sigma RATIO (1) 6/14/2012 E10152 MILK Ce-141 81 +/- 5.7 82 +/- 1.37 0.97 A 83 +/- 6.4 75 +/- 7.8 81 +/- 7.1 Mean = 80 +/- 3.4 Cr-51 429 +/- 31.4 402 +/- 6.71 1.04 A 411 +/- 30.8 417 +/- 38.5 414 +/- 45.0 Mean = 418 +/- 18.4 Cs-134 166 +/- 6.0 174 +/- 2.91 0.94 A 164 +/- 11.0 163 +/- 12.7 159 +/- 6.5 Mean = 163 +/- 4.7 Cs-137 203 +/- 6.2 212 +/- 3.54 0.95 A 203 +/- 6.5 198 +/- 7.1 202 +/- 6.4 Mean = 202 +/- 3.3 Co-58 93 +/- 4.7 92 +/- 1.54 0.98 A 92 +/- 4.5 90 +/- 5.9 88 +/- 5.6 Mean = 91 +/- 2.6 Mn-54 140 +/- 5.5 132 +/- 2.21 1.04 A 129 +/- 5.6 135 +/- 6.5 144 +/- 6.0 Mean = 137 +/- 3.0 Fe-59 130 +/- 6.4 128 +/- 2.13 1.05 A 127 +/- 6.6 142 +/- 8.0 137 +/- 7.7 Mean = 134 +/- 3.6 Zn-65 207 +/- 10.7 199 +/- 3.33 1.02 A 192 +/- 11.0 207 +/- 12.7 208 +/- 11.5 Mean = 204 +/- 5.8 Co-60 370 +/- 6.3 355 +/- 5.93 1.02 A 364 +/- 6.4 356 +/- 7.3 365 +/- 6.5 Mean = 364 +/- 3.3 I-131 102 +/- 4.4 100 +/- 1.66 0.95 A 100 +/- 4.6 88.4 +/- 6.4 89.9 +/- 10.7 Mean = 95.1 +/- 3.5 I-131** 118 +/- 5.0 100 +/- 1.66 1.08 A 99 +/- 5.2 104 +/- 2.2 109 +/- 1.5 Mean = 108 +/- 1.9 (1) Ratio = Reported/Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc. A=Acceptable

Sample provided by Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc. U=Unacceptable ** Result determined by Resin Extraction/Gamma Spectral Analysis.

8-16 TABLE 8-1 (Continued) INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Milk DATE SAMPLE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF ELAB RESULTS pCi/liter +/-1 sigma REFERENCE LAB* pCi/liter +/-1 sigma RATIO (1) 9/13/2012 E10272 MILK Ce-141 159 +/- 7.5 164 +/- 2.73 0.99 A 174 +/- 7.2 154 +/- 8.1 164 +/- 6.7 Mean = 163 +/- 3.7 Cr-51 284 +/- 33.2 248 +/- 4.14 1.03 A 258 +/- 28.3 218 +/- 33.2 263 +/- 26.0 Mean = 256 +/- 15.2 Cs-134 99 +/- 9.5 108 +/- 1.81 0.94 A 101 +/- 9.3 105 +/- 10.4 100 +/- 7.4 Mean = 101 +/- 4.6 Cs-137 149 +/- 6.3 174 +/- 2.91 0.92 A 161 +/- 5.8 159 +/- 6.4 173 +/- 5.0 Mean = 161 +/- 3.0 Co-58 104 +/- 5.5 100 +/- 1.68 1.06 A 100 +/- 4.7 102 +/- 5.6 116 +/- 4.2 Mean = 106 +/- 2.5 Mn-54 201 +/- 7.1 196 +/- 3.27 1.02 A 193 +/- 6.2 197 +/- 7.3 211 +/- 5.5 Mean = 201 +/- 3.3 Fe-59 157 +/- 7.9 152 +/- 2.53 1.06 A 163 +/- 6.7 154 +/- 7.8 168 +/- 5.7 Mean = 161 +/- 3.5 Zn-65 186 +/- 12.4 192 +/- 3.21 1.06 A 213 +/- 10.5 220 +/- 11.5 198 +/- 8.8 Mean = 204 +/- 5.4 Co-60 155 +/- 5.0 152 +/- 2.53 1.02 A 150 +/- 4.3 160 +/- 5.0 157 +/- 3.6 Mean = 156 +/- 2.3 I-131 95.2 +/- 5.4 100 +/- 1.66 0.96 A 95.4 +/- 4.5 94.1 +/- 5.3 99.3 +/- 4.2 Mean = 96.0 +/- 2.4 I-131** 106 +/- 1.1 100 +/- 1.66 1.06 A 108 +/- 1.3 102 +/- 1.2 105 +/- 0.7 Mean = 105 +/- 0.5 (1) Ratio = Reported/Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc. A=Acceptable

Sample provided by Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc. U=Unacceptable ** Result determined by Resin Extraction/Gamma Spectral Analysis.

8-17 TABLE 8-1 (Continued) INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Air Particulate Filter DATE SAMPLE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF ELAB RESULTS pCi +/-1 sigma REFERENCE LAB* pCi +/-1 sigma RATIO (1) 3/15/2012 E10085 FILTER Ce-141 198 +/- 7.0 184 +/- 3.07 1.05 A 198 +/- 6.5 186 +/- 6.3 Mean = 194 +/- 3.8 Cr-51 276 +/- 39.3 308 +/- 5.14 1.00 A 355 +/- 41.1 292 +/- 36.9 Mean = 308 +/- 22.6 Cs-134 85 +/- 7.9 106 +/- 1.76 0.86 A 98 +/- 8.5 89 +/- 7.9 Mean = 91 +/- 4.7 Cs-137 118 +/- 3.9 112 +/- 1.88 1.03 A 118 +/- 4.3 110 +/- 4.0 Mean = 115 +/- 2.3 Co-58 95 +/- 4.8 93 +/- 1.56 1.06 A 105 +/- 5.8 96 +/- 4.8 Mean = 99 +/- 3.0 Mn-54 163 +/- 4.9 138 +/- 2.30 1.13 A 155 +/- 5.4 148 +/- 5.1 Mean = 155 +/- 3.0 Fe-59 132 +/- 7.4 119 +/- 1.98 1.10 A 130 +/- 9.1 130 +/- 8.4 Mean = 131 +/- 4.8 Zn-65 260 +/- 10.1 235 +/- 3.92 1.15 A 280 +/- 12.0 272 +/- 11.0 Mean = 271 +/- 6.4 Co-60 201 +/- 4.1 197 +/- 3.28 1.04 A 210 +/- 4.8 206 +/- 4.6 Mean = 206 +/- 2.6 (1) Ratio = Reported/Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc.

A=Acceptable

Sample provided by Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc.

U=Unacceptable

8-18 TABLE 8-1 (Continued) INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Air Particulate Filter DATE SAMPLE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF ELAB RESULTS pCi +/-1 sigma REFERENCE LAB* pCi +/-1 sigma RATIO (1) 9/13/2012 E10271 FILTER Ce-141 135 +/- 3.2 132 +/- 2.20 1.03 A 136 +/- 3.0 134 +/- 3.2 141 +/- 3.5 Mean = 137 +/- 1.6 Cr-51 223 +/- 14.7 200 +/- 3.33 1.05 A 195 +/- 14.2 212 +/- 16.2 206 +/- 16.2 Mean = 209 +/- 7.7 Cs-134 83 +/- 7.5 87 +/- 1.45 0.94 A 78 +/- 7.0 89 +/- 7.7 77 +/- 7.0 Mean = 82 +/- 3.6 Cs-137 139 +/- 4.2 140 +/- 2.34 1.01 A 139 +/- 4.1 140 +/- 4.6 145 +/- 4.2 Mean = 141 +/- 2.1 Co-58 86 +/- 3.7 81 +/- 1.35 1.08 A 92 +/- 3.7 87 +/- 4.0 84 +/- 3.5 Mean = 87 +/- 1.9 Mn-54 172 +/- 5.0 157 +/- 2.63 1.07 A 167 +/- 4.6 168 +/- 5.1 168 +/- 4.6 Mean = 169 +/- 2.4 Fe-59 149 +/- 5.6 122 +/- 2.04 1.15 A 146 +/- 5.1 135 +/- 5.6 133 +/- 5.0 Mean = 141 +/- 2.7 Zn-65 171 +/- 8.3 155 +/- 2.59 1.10 A 175 +/- 8.0 173 +/- 8.7 164 +/- 7.6 Mean = 171 +/- 4.1 Co-60 126 +/- 3.6 122 +/- 2.04 1.03 A 124 +/- 3.3 126 +/- 3.7 128 +/- 3.2 Mean = 126 +/- 1.7 (1) Ratio = Reported/Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc. A=Acceptable

Sample provided by Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc. U=Unacceptable ** Result determined by Resin Extraction/Gamma Spectral Analysis.

8-19 TABLE 8-1 (Continued) INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Soil DATE SAMPLE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF ELAB RESULTS pCi /g+/-1 sigma REFERENCE LAB* pCi/g +/-1 sigma RATIO (1) 6/14/2012 E10153 SOIL Ce-141 0.161 +/- 0.021 0.137 +/- 0.002 1.19 A 0.169 +/- 0.021 0.165 +/- 0.022 0.156 +/- 0.019 Mean = 0.163 +/- 0.010 Cr-51 0.717 +/- 0.106 0.671 +/- 0.011 0.97 A 0.699 +/- 0.110 0.599 +/- 0.111 0.600 +/- 0.124 Mean = 0.654 +/- 0.056 Cs-134 0.286 +/- 0.032 0.292 +/- 0.005 0.97 A 0.283 +/- 0.036 0.269 +/- 0.029 0.292 +/- 0.035 Mean = 0.283 +/- 0.017 Cs-137 0.434 +/- 0.021 0.441 +/- 0.007 0.97 A 0.426 +/- 0.023 0.437 +/- 0.019 0.413 +/- 0.021 Mean = 0.428 +/- 0.010 Co-58 0.137 +/- 0.016 0.154 +/- 0.003 0.96 A 0.166 +/- 0.018 0.143 +/- 0.015 0.145 +/- 0.018 Mean = 0.148 +/- 0.008 Mn-54 0.206 +/- 0.017 0.221 +/- 0.004 0.94 A 0.201 +/- 0.020 0.230 +/- 0.017 0.198 +/- 0.018 Mean = 0.209 +/- 0.009 Fe-59 0.268 +/- 0.022 0.213 +/- 0.004 1.14 A 0.255 +/- 0.026 0.209 +/- 0.023 0.237 +/- 0.026 Mean = 0.242 +/- 0.012 Zn-65 0.332 +/- 0.031 0.333 +/- 0.006 0.97 A 0.331 +/- 0.035 0.282 +/- 0.029 0.342 +/- 0.033 Mean = 0.322 +/- 0.016 Co-60 0.588 +/- 0.018 0.594 +/- 0.010 0.98 A 0.568 +/- 0.020 0.617 +/- 0.018 0.549 +/- 0.019 Mean = 0.581 +/- 0.009 (1) Ratio = Reported/Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc.

A=Acceptable

Sample provided by Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc.

U=Unacceptable

8-20 TABLE 8-1 (Continued) INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Vegetation DATE SAMPLE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF ELAB RESULTS pCi/g +/-1 sigma REFERENCE LAB* pCi/g +/-1 sigma RATIO (1) 6/14/2012 E10155 VEG Ce-141 0.195 +/- 0.013 0.204 +/- 0.003 0.95 A 0.195 +/- 0.014 0.191 +/- 0.012 0.196 +/- 0.014 Mean = 0.194 +/- 0.007 Cr-51 0.926 +/- 0.076 0.996 +/- 0.017 0.96 A 0.902 +/- 0.082 1.040 +/- 0.071 0.943 +/- 0.087 Mean = 0.953 +/- 0.040 Cs-134 0.363 +/- 0.030 0.432 +/- 0.007 0.89 A 0.402 +/- 0.034 0.397 +/- 0.028 0.379 +/- 0.027 Mean = 0.385 +/- 0.015 Cs-137 0.476 +/- 0.016 0.525 +/- 0.009 0.91 A 0.470 +/- 0.019 0.472 +/- 0.016 0.487 +/- 0.014 Mean = 0.476 +/- 0.008 Co-58 0.222 +/- 0.013 0.229 +/- 0.004 1.02 A 0.251 +/- 0.015 0.236 +/- 0.012 0.221 +/- 0.012 Mean = 0.233 +/- 0.006 Mn-54 0.323 +/- 0.014 0.328 +/- 0.005 0.96 A 0.317 +/- 0.017 0.295 +/- 0.014 0.323 +/- 0.013 Mean = 0.315 +/- 0.007 Fe-59 0.325 +/- 0.018 0.317 +/- 0.005 1.01 A 0.323 +/- 0.021 0.330 +/- 0.018 0.303 +/- 0.016 Mean = 0.320 +/- 0.009 Zn-65 0.451 +/- 0.029 0.494 +/- 0.008 1.01 A 0.486 +/- 0.036 0.536 +/- 0.030 0.513 +/- 0.027 Mean = 0.497 +/- 0.015 Co-60 0.832 +/- 0.017 0.881 +/- 0.015 0.95 A 0.861 +/- 0.020 0.831 +/- 0.016 0.815 +/- 0.014 Mean = 0.835 +/- 0.008 (1) Ratio = Reported/Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc.

A=Acceptable

Sample provided by Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc.

U=Unacceptable

8-21 TABLE 8-1 (Continued) INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Vegetation DATE SAMPLE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF ELAB RESULTS pCi/g +/-1 sigma REFERENCE LAB* pCi/g +/-1 sigma RATIO (1) 9/13/2012 E10268 VEG Ce-141 0.388 +/- 0.017 0.385 +/- 0.006 1.00 A 0.404 +/- 0.018 0.368 +/- 0.015 Mean = 0.387 +/- 0.010 Cr-51 0.625 +/- 0.075 0.583 +/- 0.010 1.02 A 0.576 +/- 0.083 0.584 +/- 0.067 Mean = 0.595 +/- 0.043 Cs-134 0.262 +/- 0.029 0.255 +/- 0.004 1.00 A 0.258 +/- 0.033 0.243 +/- 0.025 Mean = 0.254 +/- 0.017 Cs-137 0.456 +/- 0.019 0.410 +/- 0.007 1.13 A 0.486 +/- 0.020 0.447 +/- 0.015 Mean = 0.463 +/- 0.010 Co-58 0.232 +/- 0.014 0.236 +/- 0.004 1.01 A 0.252 +/- 0.016 0.230 +/- 0.012 Mean = 0.238 +/- 0.008 Mn-54 0.497 +/- 0.020 0.460 +/- 0.008 1.08 A 0.491 +/- 0.021 0.496 +/- 0.016 Mean = 0.495 +/- 0.011 Fe-59 0.385 +/- 0.023 0.357 +/- 0.006 1.08 A 0.389 +/- 0.024 0.384 +/- 0.017 Mean = 0.386 +/- 0.012 Zn-65 0.464 +/- 0.033 0.452 +/- 0.008 1.02 A 0.451 +/- 0.034 0.471 +/- 0.026 Mean = 0.462 +/- 0.018 Co-60 0.389 +/- 0.015 0.357 +/- 0.006 1.07 A 0.392 +/- 0.016 0.368 +/- 0.011 Mean = 0.383 +/- 0.008 (1) Ratio = Reported/Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc.

A=Acceptable

Sample provided by Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc.

U=Unacceptable

8-22

8.5 REFERENCES

8.5.1 Radioactivity

and Radiochemistry, The Counting Room: Special Edition, 1994 Caretaker Publications, Atlanta, Georgia.

8.5.2 Data Reduction and Error Analysis for the Physical Sciences, Bevington P.R., McGraw Hill, New York (1969).

9 - 1 9.0 GRAPHICAL PRESENTATIONS This section includes graphic representation of selected sample results.

For graphic representation, results reported LLD are considered to be at the " Zero" level of activity.

Sample location results specified as " Indicator" an d " Control" on the graphs can be referenced back to Section 3.3 for specific locations

.

9 - 2 00.010.020.030.040.050.06199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012pCi/gram (wet)James A. FitzPatrick N.P.P. Fish Cs-137Figure 9.1INDICATORCONTROLINDICATOR <LLD VALUECONTROL <LLD VALUE 9 - 3 050100150200250300350400199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012pCi/lJames A. FitzPatrick N.P.P. Surface Water

-TritiumFigure 9.2INDICATORCONTROLINDICATOR <LLD VALUECONTROL <LLD VALUE 9 - 4 00.0050.010.0150.020.0251986198719881989199019911997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012pCi/m 3James A. FitzPatrick N.P.P.Air Particulate Filter

-Gross BetaFigure 9.3INDICATORCONTROL 9 - 5 0.0020.0070.0120.0170.0220.0270.032 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 91011121314151617181920212223242526pCi/m 3Week No.James A. FitzPatrick N.P.P.Air Particulate Filter

-Gross BetaFigure 9.4INDICATORCONTROL 9 - 6 0.0020.0070.0120.0170.0220.0270.0322728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849505152pCi/m 3Week No.James A. FitzPatrick N.P.P.Air Particulate Filter

-Gross BetaFigure 9.5INDICATORCONTROL 9 - 7 00.0010.0020.0030.0040.0050.006199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012pCi/m 3James A. FitzPatrick N.P.P. Air Particulate Filter Composite Co

-60Figure 9.6INDICATORCONTROLINDICATOR <LLD VALUECONTROL <LLD VALUE 9 - 8 0.010.01050.0110.01150.012199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012pCi/m 3James A. FitzPatrick N.P.P.Air Particulate Filter Composite Cs

-137Figure 9.7INDICATORCONTROLINDICATOR <LLD VALUECONTROL <LLD VALUE 9 - 9 00.10.20.3199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012pCi/m 3James A. FitzPatrick N.P.P.Air Charcoal I

-131Figure 9.8INDICATORCONTROLINDICATOR <LLD VALUECONTROL <LLD VALUE

.FukushimaAccident 9 - 10 00.20.40.60.8 11.2199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012pCi/lJames A. FitzPatrick N.P.P. Milk Cs-137Figure 9.9INDICATORCONTROLINDICATOR <LLD VALUECONTROL <LLD VALUE 9 - 11 00.050.10.150.20.250.30.350.4199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012pCi/lJames A. FitzPatrick N.P.P. Milk I-131Figure 9.10INDICATORCONTROLINDICATOR <LLD VALUECONTROL <LLD VALUE 9 - 12 0.01.02.03.04.05.06.07.0199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012mRem/Standard MonthJames A. FitzPatrick N.P.P.TLD DataFigure 9.11ControlSite BoundaryOffsiteSpecials

JAFP-13-0067, Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report

Contents

Text

Subject:

Dear Sir or Madam:

Enclosure:

2.0 INTRODUCTION

SUMMARY

2.0 INTRODUCTION

2.3 PROGRAM

3.1.1 SHORELINE

3.1.3 SURFACE

3.5 CHANGES

3.6 DEVIATION

3.7.1 ESTIMATION

3.7.2 ESTIMATION

3.7.3 LOWER

3.8 COMPLIANCE

3.9.2 Environmental

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

5.1.1 SHORELINE

5.1.3 SURFACE

5.3 CONCLUSION

5.4 REFERENCES

8.1 PROGRAM

8.3.1 SAMPLE

SUMMARY

8.4.1 ECKERT

8.5 REFERENCES

8.5.1 Radioactivity

Navigation menu

JAFP-13-0067, Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report

Text

Subject:

Dear Sir or Madam:

Enclosure:

2.0 INTRODUCTION

SUMMARY

2.0 INTRODUCTION

2.3 PROGRAM

3.1.1 SHORELINE

3.1.3 SURFACE

3.5 CHANGES

3.6 DEVIATION

3.7.1 ESTIMATION

3.7.2 ESTIMATION

3.7.3 LOWER

3.8 COMPLIANCE

3.9.2 Environmental

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

5.1.1 SHORELINE

5.1.3 SURFACE

5.3 CONCLUSION

5.4 REFERENCES

8.1 PROGRAM

8.3.1 SAMPLE

SUMMARY

8.4.1 ECKERT

8.5 REFERENCES

8.5.1 Radioactivity

Navigation menu

Search