Indian Point, Units 1, 2 and 3, Annual Radiological ... · CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC. INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION UNITS 1, 2, AND 3 ... activity profile

1992RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL

OPERATING REPORT

INDIAN POINTNUCLEAR POWER PLANTS

January 1 through December 31, 1992

0-W,e-p

©

NEW YORK POWER AUTHORITYCONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK

ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT

NEW YORK POWER AUTHORITYCONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC.

INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING STATIONUNITS 1, 2, AND 3

January 1 - December 31, 1992

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

1.0..-........ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1-1

2.0 ........ INTRODUCTION 2-1

2.1 .......... Site Description 2-1

2.2 .......... Program Background 2-1

2.3 .......... Program Objectives 2-1

3.0 .......... PROGRAM DESCRIPTION 3-1

3.1 .......... Sample Collection 3-1

3.2 .......... Sample Analysis 3-1

3.3 ......... Sample Collection and Analysis Methodology 3-1

3.3.1 .... Direct Radiation 3-13.3.2 .... Air Particulates and Radioiodine 3-23.3.3 .... Hudson River Water 3-23.3.4 .... Drinking Water 3-23.3.5 .... Hudson River Shoreline Soil 3-23.3.6 .... Broad Leaf Vegetation 3-23.3.7 .... Fish and Invertebrates 3-33.3.8 .... Hudson River Aquatic Vegetation 3-33.3.9 .... Hudson River Bottom Sediment 3-33.3.10 .... Precipitation 3-33.3.11 .... Soil 3-33.3.12 .... Land Use Census 3-3

3.4 .......... Statistical Methodology 3-4

3.4.1 .... Lower Limit of Detection andCritical Value 3-4

3.4.2 .... Determination of Meanand Propagated Error 3-5

3.4.3 .... Table Statistics 3-63.4.4 .... Evaluation of TLD Data 3-7

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

DISCUSIONPacte4.0 .......... RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4-1

4.1 .......... Direct Radiation 4-3

4.2 .......... Airborne Particulates and Radioiodine 4-4

4.3 .......... Hudson River Water 4-5

4.4 .......... Drinking Water 4-6

4.5 .......... Hudson River Shoreline Soil 4-6

4.6 .......... Broad Leaf Vegetation 4-7

4.7 ........... Fish and Invertebrates 4-7

4.8 ......... Additional Media Sampling 4-8

4.9 ........... Land Use Census 4-8

4.10 ....... Conclusion 4-9

5.0 .......... QUALITY ASSURANCE 5-1

6.0 .......... REFERENCES 6-1

APPENDICES:

A. ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS A-1

B. RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM B-1RESULTS SUMMARY

C. HISTORICAL TRENDS C-1

D. EPA INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM D-1

ii

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE TITLE Pag

A-I Environmental Sample Station Locations(Within Two Miles) A-2

A-2 Environmental Sample Station Locations(Greater Than Two Miles) A-3

C-i Direct Radiation, 1982 to 1992 C-3

C-2 Radionuclides in Air-Gross Beta,. 1982 to 1992 C-5

C-3 Hudson River Water - Tritium, 1982 to 1992 C-7

C-4 Drinking Water - Tritium, 1982 to 1992 C-9

C-5 Radionuclides in Shoreline Soils, 1982 to 1992 C-lI

C-6 Broadleaf Vegetation Cs-137, 1982 to 1992 C-13

C-7 Fish/Invertebrates Cs-137, 1982 to 1992 C-15

iii

LIST OF TABLES

I TABLE TITLE Page

A-I Sampling Station Locations A-4A-2 Lower Limit of Detection Capabilities for Environmental

Sample Analysis A-9

B-I Summary of Sampling Deviations, 1992 B-2N B-la 1992 Air Sampling Deviations B-3B-lb 1992 TLD Deviations B-3B-2 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Annual

Summary, 1992 B-4B-3 Direct Radiation, Quarterly Data, 1992 B-9B-4 Direct Radiation, Normalized Data, 1992 B-10B-5 Direct Radiation, Annual Average Dose, 1992 B-IlB-6 Gross Beta Activity in Airborne Particulate Samples,

1992 B-12B-7 Concentrations of Gamma Emitters in Quarterly

Composites, 1992 B-14B-8 1-131 Activity in Charcoal Cartridge Samples, 1992 B-19B-9. Concentrations of Gamma Emitters in Hudson River

Water Samples, 1992 B-21S B-10 Concentrations of Tritium in Hudson River Water

Samples, 1992 B-23B-Il Concentrations of Gamma Emitters in Drinking Water

Samples, 1992 B-24* -12 Concentrations of Tritium in Drinking Water

Samples, 1992 B-26

B-13 Concentrations of Gamma Emitters in Shoreline SoilSamples, 1992 B-27

B-14 Concentrations of Gamma Emitters in BroadleafVegetation, 1992 B-28

B-15 Concentrations of Gamma Emitters in Fish andInvertebrate Samples, 1992 B-34

B-16 Annual Summary, Non-RETS Sample Results, 1992 B-36B-17 Milch Animal Census, 1992 B-37B-18 Land Use Census, 1992 B-38

C-1 Direct Radiation Annual Summary, 1982 to 1992 C-2I C-2 Radionuclides in Air, 1982 to 1992 C-4C-3 Radionuclides in Hudson River Water, 1982 to 1992 C-6C-4 Radionuclides in Drinking Water, 1982 to 1992 C-8I C-5 Radionuclides in Shoreline Soils, 1982 to 1992 C-10C-6 Radionuclides in Broad Leaf Vegetation 1982 to 1992 C-12C-7 Radionuclides in Fish and Invertebrates, 1982 to 1992 C-14

D-I USEPA Environmental Radioactivity LaboratoryIntercomparison Study Program, 1992 D-2

iv

SECTION I

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report contains adescription and results of the 1992 Radiological EnvironmentalMonitoring Program (REMP) for the Indian Point site. The IndianPoint site consists of Units 1, 2 and 3. Units 1 and 2 are ownedby the Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Unit 3 by the NewYork Power Authority.

The REMP is used to measure direct radiation, as well as theairborne and waterborne pathways to the, environment. Directradiation pathways include radiation from buildings and structuresof the plant, airborne material that might be released from theplant, cosmic radiation, and the naturally occurring radioactivematerials in soil, air and water. Analysis of ThermoluminescentDosimeters (TLD) used to measure direct radiation showed noindication of increased radiation levels resulting from plantoperation.

The airborne pathway includes measurements of air, precipitation,drinking water and broad leaf vegetation samples. The 1992 air-borne pathway measurements indicated that there was no increasingtrend of radioactivity attributable to the Indian Point Station.

The waterborne pathway consists of Hudson River water, fish andinvertebrates, and shoreline sediment. Measurements of the mediacomprising the waterborne pathway provided results consistent withhistorical averages.

Overall, concentrations of nuclides detected in the vicinity ofIndian Point were well within historical background ranges for theentire year.

This report contains a description of the REMP and the conduct ofthat program as required by the Radiological EnvironmentalTechnical Specifications (RETS). It also contains summaries of theresults of the 1992 program and discussions of those resultsincluding trend analyses, potential impact on the environment, landuse census and interlaboratory comparisons.

During 1992 a total of 1213 RETS samples were collected. A summaryof the numbers of samples collected is presented in Table B-1. Theactual sampling frequency in 1992 was higher than required, due tothe inclusion of additional (non-RETS) sample locations and media.

In summary, the measured concentrations of radionuclides in theenvironment surrounding Indian Point are not increasing as a resultof releases of radioactive materials from Units 1, 2, and 3. Theconcentrations present in 1992 were within the historic backgroundranges (i.e. environmental levels resulting from natural and pastanthropogenic sources) for the detected radionuclides; anycalculated doses would be primarily attributable to backgroundradiation. Consequently, the operation of the plants in 1992 didnot, result in any meaningful dose to the population abovebackground levels.

1-1

SECTION 2

INTRODUCTION

* 2.O INTRODUCTION

2.1 Site Description

I The Indian Point site occupies 239 acres on the east bank ofthe Hudson River on a point of land at Mile Point 42.6. Thesite is located in the Village of Buchanan, WestchesterCounty, New York. Three nuclear reactors, Indian Point UnitNos. 1, 2 and 3, and associated buildings occupy 35 acres nearthe southern end of the site. Unit 1 has been retired as agenerating facility; Units 2 and 3 are owned and operated byCon Edison and New York Power Authority, respectively.

2.2 ProQram Background

Environmental monitoring and surveillance have been conductedat Indian Point since 1958, four years prior to the start-upof Unit 1. The pre-operational program was designed andimplemented to determine the background radioactivity and tomeasure the variations in activity levels from natural andother sources in the vicinity, as well as fallout from nuclearweapons tests. Thus, as used in this report, backgroundlevels consist of those resulting from both natural andanthropogenic sources of environmental radioactivity.Accumulation of this background data permits the detection andassessment of environmental activity attributable to plantoperations.

Ie 2.3 ProQram Objectives

The current environmental monitoring program is designed toI meet two primary objectives:

1. To enable the identification and quantification ofchanges in the radioactivity of the area, and

2. To verify projected and anticipated radionuclide concen-trations in the environment from releases of radioactivematerials from the site.

In order to identify changes in activity, the environmentalsampling schedule requires that analyses be conducted forspecific environmental media on a regular basis. The radio-activity profile of the environment is established andmonitored through routine evaluation of the analytical resultsobtained.

Environmental sample locations are designated for thecollection of environmental media for analysis. These samplelocations are divided into indicator and control locations.

IQ

2-1

Indicator locations are established near the site, where thepresence of environmental radioactivity of plant origin ismost -likely to be detected. Control locations are establishedfurther away (and upwind/ upstream, where applicable) from thesite, where the level would not be affected by plantdischarges. The use of indicator and control locationsenables the identification of potential sources of detectedradioactivity, thus meeting one of the program objectives.

Verification of expected radionuclide concentrations resultingfrom effluent releases from the site is another programobjective. Verifying projected concentrations through theREMP is difficult since the environmental concentrationsresulting from plant releases are normally too small to bedetected. Since effluent releases in 1992 were kept to thelowest level practicable, predictive models for plant releasesindicate that the resultant environmental concentrationsshould be virtually undetectable. Residual radioactivity fromatmospheric bomb tests and naturally occurring radioactivitywere the predominant sources of radioactivity in the samplescollected. Their presence makes the detection of thepredicted low level concentrations due to plant operationsdifficult. Nonetheless, analysis of the data verified thatplant effluents resulted in environmental levels far belowregulatory limits and of no health significance.

1.

III

III,

2-2

SECTION 3

PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

3.0 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION

W In order to achieve the objectives of the REMP and ensurecompliance with the Radiological Environmental TechnicalSpecifications (RETS), sampling and analysis of environmental mediaare performed as outlined in Table A-1 and described in section 3.3below.

I 3.1 Sample Collection

Collection of environmental samples for the entire IndianPoint Site is performed by Con Edison Nuclear EnvironmentalMonitoring personnel.

Assistance in the collection of fish and invertebrate sampleswas provided by a contracted environmental vendor, NormandeauAssociates.

I 3.2 Sample Analysis

The analysis of Indian Point environmental samples isperformed by two laboratories: the New York Power Authority'sRadiological Environmental lab in Fulton, New York; and acommercial analytical laboratory, Teledyne Isotopes, Inc. ofWestwood, New Jersey. The NYPA lab at Fulton analyzes allsamples except TLDs, which are processed by Teledyne. Inaddition, the spiked samples used as part of the analyticalQuality Assurance Program are prepared by SAIC, Inc. (nowScientech).

3.3 Sample Collection and Analysis Methodologv

I 3.3.1 Direct Radiation

Direct gamma radiation is measured using integrating calciumsulfate thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs), which providecumulative measurements of background radiation (e.g., totalintegrated exposures) for a given period. Two TLD holders areposted at each of various locations within a 1 and 5 mile(1.6 - 8 km) radius of the site. Their locations include twosites in each of the 16 compass sectors, comprising two ringsof TLD's.

The inner ring is located near the site boundary; the outerring is located 4.2-6.4 miles (6.7-10.2 km) from the site.Additional TLD's are located at Roseton (20 miles north) as acontrol and at seven other locations of special interest.TLD's are collected and evaluated on a quarterly basis (i.e.,I• mrem per quarter).

3-1

3.3.2 Air Particulates and Radioiodine

Air samples are taken at nine locations varying in distancefrom 0.25 to 20 miles (.4 to 32 km) from the plant. Theselocations represent 1 control and 8 indicator locations. Theair samples are collected continuously by means of fixed airparticulate filters followed by in-line charcoal cartridges,both of which are changed on a weekly basis. The filter andcartridge samples are analyzed weekly for gross beta andradioiodine, respectively. In addition, gamma spectroscopy isperformed on quarterly composites of the air particulatefilters.

3.3.3 Hudson River Water

Hudson River water samples are collected continuously from theintake structure (control location) and the discharge canal(indicator location), both of which are located on-site. Thesampling apparatus used takes a composite sample, and ensuresthat representative samples are obtained. On a bi-weeklybasis, approximately 4-liter samples are taken at the inletand discharge from 5-gallon composite containers. Theseweekly river water samples are composited for monthly gammaspectroscopy analysis (GSA), and quarterly for tritiumanalysis and GSA.

3.3.4 Drinking Water

Samples of drinking water are collected from the Camp FieldReservoir (3.5 miles NE). These samples are eachapproximately 4 liters. They are obtained monthly and areanalyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides and 1-131; they arealso composited quarterly and analyzed for tritium.

3.3.5 Hudson River Shoreline Soil

Shoreline soil samples are collected at 3 indicator and 2control locations along the Hudson River. They areapproximately 2 kg grab samples, obtained where available.These samples are collected during the spring and summer andanalyzed by gamma spectroscopy analysis.

3.3.6 Broad Leaf Vegetation

Broad leaf vegetation samples are collected from 3 locations.They are collected monthly when available and analyzed forgamma-emitting radionuclides and radioiodine. These samplesconsist of at least 1 kg of leafy vegetation and are used inassessment of the food product and milk ingestion pathways.

3-2

3.3.7 Fish and Invertebrates

Various fish and invertebrate samples are obtained from theHudsOn River at locations upstream and downstream of the plantdischarge. These samples are taken in the spring and falldepending upon their availability. The edible portions offish and invertebrates collected are analyzed by gammaspectroscopy.

3.3.8 Hudson River Aauatic VeQetation (Non-RETS)

During the spring and summer, aquatic vegetation samples arecollected from the Hudson River at 3 locations. At eachlocation samples of Potomogeton perfoliatus and Mvriophvlliumverticullatum are obtained when available. These samples areanalyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides and 1-131.

3.3.9 Hudson River Bottom Sediment (Non-RETS)

Bottom sediment and benthos are sampled at four locationsalong the Hudson River, once each spring and summer. Thesesamples are obtained using a Peterson grab sampler or similarinstrument. Gamma spectroscopy analyses are performed onthese bottom sediment samples.

3.3.10 Precipitation (Non-RETS)

Precipitation samples are continuously collected at oneindicator and one control location. They are collected insample bottles designed to hinder evaporation. They arecomposited quarterly and analyzed for gamma-emittingradionuclides and tritium.

3.3.11 Soil (Non-RETS)

Soil samples are collected from one control and 2 indicatorlocations. They are approximately 2 kg in size and consist ofabout twenty 2-inch deep cores. Gamma spectroscopy analysesare performed on the soil samples.

3.3.12 Land Use Census

Each year a land use census consisting of milch animal andresidence surveys is conducted to determine the currentutilization of land within 5 miles (8 km) of the site. Thesesurveys are used to determine whether there are changes inexisting conditions which warrant changing the samplingprogram.

The milch animal census is used to identify animals producingmilk for human consumption within 5 miles (8 km) of IndianPoint. It consists of a visual field survey of the areaswhere a high probability of milch animals exists andconfirmation through personnel who deal with farm animals,such as veterinarians, feed suppliers and dairy associations.

3-3

Although there are presently no animals producing milk forhuman consumption within 5 miles (8 km) of the site, thecensus is performed to determine if the milk sampling programneeds to be conducted.

A residence census is also performed to identify the nearestresidence(s) to the site in each of the 16 sectors surroundingIndian Point. Sampling of vegetation at the site boundary isperformed in lieu of the garden census as per TechnicalSpecifications.

3.4 Statistical Methodology

There are a number of statistical calculation methodologiesused in evaluation of data from the Indian Point REMP. Thesemethods include determination of Lower Limit of Detection(LLD) and Critical Level (CL), and estimation of the mean andthe associated propagated error.

3.4.1 Lower Limit of Detection and Critical Level

The LLD is a predetermined concentration or activity levelused to establish a detection limit for the analyticalprocedures.

The LLD's are specified by the Nuclear Regulatory Commissionfor each radionuclide in specific media, and are determined bytaking into account overall measurement methods. The equationused to calculate the LLD is: LLD = 4.66 K Sb,

where, Sb is the standard deviation in thebackground counting rate and K consistsof variables which account for suchparameters as:

" Instrument characteristics (e.g.,efficiency)

- Sample size- Counting time- Media density (self-absorption)- Radioactive decay- Chemical yield

In the RETS program, LLD's are used to ensure thatminimum acceptable detection capabilities are metwith specified statistical confidence levels (95%detection probability with 5% probability of a falsenegative). Table A-2 presents the RETS programrequired LLDs for specific media and radionuclidesas specified by the NRC. The LLDs actually achievedare usually much lower since the "required LLD's"represent the maximum allowed.

3-4

Because LLDs are utilized to determine detection limits, theycannot be used to determine whether or not the sample resultsare to be considered positive. For that purpose, the CriticalLeve: (CL) determination is utilized.

The CL is defined as that net sample counting rate which hasa probability (p) of being exceeded when the actual sampleactivity is zero (e.g., when counting background only). It isdetermined using the following equation.

CL = kp Sb (1 + tbts) 0.5 in cpm, where

CL = Critical Levelkp = 1.645 (corresponds to a 95% confidence level)Sb ( Rb/tb) (cpm) = standard deviation of the

background count rate (RP)tb = background count time (min)ts= sample count time (min)

For the REMP, net sample results which are less than the CLvalue are considered not detected, and the CL value isreported as the "less than" value. Values above the CL areconsidered positively detected radioactivity in theenvironmental media of interest (with a 5% chance of falsepositive).

3.4.2 Determination of Mean and PropaQated Error

In accordance with program policy, recounts of samples areoften performed. When the initial count reveals the presenceof radioactivity, which is not naturally occurring, at a valuegreater than the CL, two recounts are performed to verify thepositive results. The recounts are not performed on airsamples with positive results from gross beta analysis, sincethe results are always positive and not in question. When aradionuclide is positively identified in two or more counts,the analytical result for the radionuclide is reported as themean of the positive detections and the associated propagatederror for that mean. In cases where more than one sampleresult is available, the mean of the sample results and theestimated error for the mean are reported in the AnnualReport.

3-5

lie The mean (X) and propagated error (PE) are calculated using.the following equations:

N

X = XiN

where X = meanXi = value of each individual observationN = number of observations

I PE = ~P(ERRi) 2N

where PE = propagated error of the mean at 2 sigma,ERRi = 2 sigma error of the individual analysis,

N = number of observations

3.4.3 Table Statistics

The averages shown in the summary table (Table B-2) are theaverages of the positive values in accordance with the NRC'sBranch Technical Position (BTP) to Regulatory Guide 4.8(Reference 16). Samples with "<" values are not included inthe averages.

It should be noted that this statistic for the mean using onlypositive values tends to strongly bias the averages high,particularly when only a few of the data are measurablypositive. Most of the REMP data show few positive values,thus the corresponding means are biased high. Exceptions tothis include direct radiation measured by TLDs and gross betaradioactivity in air, which show positive monitoring resultsthroughout the year.

In the data tables (Tables B-6 through B-15), values shown arebased on'the CL value. If a radionuclide was detected at orabove the CL value in two or more counts, the mean and errorare calculated as per Section 3.4.2, and reported in the datatable. Values listed as "<" in the data tables are the CLvalues for that sample. If multiple counts were performed ona sample and a radionuclide's values are "<CL" each time, themost conservative (i.e., largest) critical level is reported

__ in the data table.

3-6

The historical data tables contain the annual averages of thepositive values for each year. The historical average andhistorical standard deviation, as shown, are calculated usingonly-the positive values presented for 1982 through 1991.1992 average values are included in these historic tables forpurposes of comparison.

3.4.4 Evaluation of TLD Data

The monitoring of direct radiation by TLDs each quarterresults in the generation of 160 data points. In order toevaluate the data it is normalized and then examined fordeviations. The method used is outlined below.

The average dose for each quarter is calculated using thequarterly results from each of the 40 TLD locations. Usingthe dose from the fourth quarter of the previous year, a fivequarter average is then determined. The difference betweenthe five quarter average and each quarter's average dose isapplied to each data point within that quarter. The resultantnormalized data, consisting of 160 adjusted or normalized datapoints, take seasonal variations in direct radiation intoaccount. Finally, the annual average, deviation and percentdeviation are calculated for each location using thenormalized data. An acceptance limit of a 10% deviation isapplied to identify outliers or anomalies.

3-7

SECTION 4

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

4.0 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

w The 1992 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) wasconducted in accordance with the Radiological Environmental TechnicalSpecifications (RETS). The RETS contain requirements for the numberand distribution of sampling locations, the types of samples to becollected, and the types of analyses to be performed for measurementof radioactivity.

The REMP at Indian Point includes measurements of radioactivity levelsi in the following environmental pathways.

Hudson River watershoreline soilfish and invertebratesaquatic vegetation (Non-RETS)sediments (Non-RETS)

Airborne Particulates and RadioiodinePrecipitation (Non-RETS)Drinking WaterTerrestrial Broad Leaf VegetationSoil (Non-RETS)Direct Gamma Radiation

An annual land use and milch animal census is also part of the* REMP.

I In order to evaluate the contribution of plant operations toenvironmental radioactivity levels, other man-made and natural sourcesof environmental radioactivity, as well as the aggregate of pastmonitoring data, must be considered. It is notmerely the detectionof a radionuclide but the evaluation of the location, magnitude,source and history of its detection which determines its significance.Therefore, we have reported the data collected in 1992 and assessedthe significance of the findings, herein.

A summary of the results of the 1992 REMP is presented in Table B-2.I This table presents the mean and range of all positive resultsobtained for each of the media sampled at RETS indicator and controllocations. Discussions of these results and their evaluations areprovided below.

The radionuclides detected in the atmosphere in 1992 can be groupedinto three categories: (1) naturally occurring radionuclides; (2)radionuclides resulting from weapons testing and other nonplantrelated, anthropogenic sources; and (3) radionuclides that could be

* related to plant operations.

4-1

The environment contains a broad inventory of naturally occurringradionuclides; i.e., cosmic ray induced (Be-7, H-3) or geologicallyderived (Ra-226, Th-228, K-40). These radionuclides constitute themajority of the background radiation source and thus account for amajority of the annual background dose detected. Since the detectedconcentrations of these radionuclides were consistent at indicator andcontrol locations, and unrelated to plant operations (except for H-3),their presence is noted only in the data tables, and will not bediscussed further.

In addition to the naturally occurring radionuclides discussed above,H-3 (which may result from man's activities as well as from naturaloccurrence), Cs-134, Cs-137, and Co-60 were detected at abovebackground levels in various media in the vicinity of Indian Point.The sources and significance of the presence of these radionuclides

are described in the following sections.

The second group of radionuclides detected in 1992 consists of thoseresulting from past weapons testing in the earth's atmosphere. Suchtesting in the 1950's and 1960's resulted in a significant atmosphericradionuclide inventory which, in turn, contributed significantly tothe concentrations in the lower atmosphere and ecological systems.Although reduced in frequency, atmospheric weapons testing continueduntil 1980. The resultant radionuclide inventory, although diminish-ing with time (i.e., through decay, deposition and sedimentation,etc.), remains detectable.

.• In 1992, the detected rad~ionuclide(s) attributable to past atmosphericweapons testing consisted of Cs-137 and H-3 in some media. The levels

detected were consistent with the decreasing levels of radionuclidesresulting from weapons tests measured over the past ten years.Another reason for attributing Cs-137's presence in some media toweapons testing was the absence of the power reactor related short-lived Cs-134 as described below.

The final group of radionuclides detected through the 1992 REMPcomprise those which may be attributable to current plant operations.During 1992, H-3 and Cs-137 Cs-134, and Co-60 were the onlypotentially plant-related radionuclides detected in some of the RETSand non-RETS samples.

H-3 may be present in the local environment due to either naturaloccurrence, other man-made sources, or as a result of plantoperations. The H-3 detected in 1992 appears to have resulted from acombination of sources. There was no H-3 detected at concentrationsI] above the required LLD, in 1992.

4-2

Cs-137 and Cs-134 are both produced in fission reactors and wereintroduced into the environment from the accident at Chernobyl, butonly Cs-137 is found in weapons test debris. Since Cs-134 has. asignificantly shorter half-life, significant detected concentrationsof Cs-137 attributable to plant operations (e.g., recent releases),should be accompanied by Cs-134. An absence of such corroborating Cs-134 concentrations in samples would indicate that the presence of Cs-137 in these samples is not distinguishable from the existingbackground and should be attributed primarily to weapons testing andresidual concentrations; i.e., not to recent plant operations.

I Co-58 and Co-60 are activation/corrosion products also related toplant operations. They are produced by neutron activation of reactorcore internal components. As Co-58 has a much shorter half-life, it'sabsence "dates" the presence of Co-60 as residual from past releases.Thus, the Co-60 detected in the samples should not be attributed torecent plant operations.

In the following sections, a summary of the results of the 1992 REMPare presented by medium, and the significance of any positive findingsdiscussed. It should be noted that naturally occurring radionuclidesare omitted from the summary table and further discussion.

4.1 Direct Radiation

In 1992, the TLD program produced a consistent picture of ambientradiation levels in the vicinity of the Indian Point Station. Asummary of the annual TLD data is provided in Table B-2.

Results of the quarterly measurements for 1992 are presented inTables B-3 to B-5. Table B-3 contains a listing of the 1992quarterly dose readings for each location, as well as thereadings for the fourth quarterof 1991. Quarterly averages, andthe five quarter averages are also provided. The quarterly dosefor each location, normalized for seasonal variations as perSection 3.4.4, is presented in Table B-4. Calculated, normalizedannual average dose, standard deviation and percent standarddeviation are shown for each location in Table B-5.

As illustrated in Table B-5, the percent standard deviation ofthe quarterly dose readings was > 10% at thirteen locations.Investigation into these anomalies revealed that the TLD atlocation DR-37 was relocated after being vandalized during thefirst quarter. For the remaining locations, the reason(s) forthe deviations are not apparent but nearly all of the anomalousreadings occurred during the third quarter. This may indicate anerror during the TLD processing or reading. The anomalousreading were all present for only one quarter each, i.e., they donot represent a trend. Therefore, the results of the directradiation monitoring program did not indicate any anomalies

- requiring further investigation.

4-3

In addition, annual averages for previous years werecalculated and compared with the 1992 average. Asindicated in Table C-1 and Figure C-l, there was noobservable increase in ambient radiation levels overthe years of 1982 - 1992, and the 1992 values fallwithin the historic ranges for inner ring, outer ring,and control locations.

4.2 Airborne Particulates and Radioiodine

An annual summary of the results of the 1992 air particulatefilter and charcoal cartridge analyses is presented in Table B-2.As shown, there were no radionuclides detected in the air whichwould be attributable to plant operations in 1992.

The results of the analyses of weekly air particulate filtersamples for gross beta activity are presented in Table B-6, andthe results of the gamma spectroscopic analyses of the quarterlycomposites of these samples in Table B-7.

Gross beta activity was found in air particulate samplesthroughout the year, at all indicator and control locations. Theactivities detected were consistent for all locations, with nosignificant change in gross beta activity in any sample. Gammaspectroscopic analyses of the quarterly composites revealed thatonly naturally-occurring radionuclides were present at detectablelevels.

The mean annual concentrations in air particulates for the past10 years are presented in Table C-2. From this table andFigure C-2, it can be seen that the average gross betaconcentration was consistent with historical levels. Consistentwith the trend of decreasing ambient Cs-137 concentrations inrecent years (Figure C-3), Cs-137 has not been detected since1987.

The charcoal cartridge analytical results are presented inTable B-8.3 There was no 1-131 detected above the LLD(0.07 pCi/rn) in the charcoal cartridge samples, which isconsistent with historical trends.

From the data it can be seen that no air particulateradioactivity attributable to the operation of Indian Point wasdetected in 1992.

4-4

4.3 Hudson River Water

A summary of the radionuclides detected in the Hudson River wateris contained in Table B-2. Data resulting from analysis ofmonthly Hudson River water samples for gamma emitters, and H-3analysis of quarterly composites are presented in Tables B-9 andB-10, respectively.

In addition to naturally occurring radionuclides, the onlyradionuclide detected in the Hudson River water in 1992 wastritium, whose presence may be attributed to plant operations.Tritium was detected at the plant inlet at 170 pCi/t during thefirst quarter, and it was detected in the discharge canal inconcentrations ranging from 310 to 750 pCi/t. All of thedetected H-3 concentrations were far below (• 50%) the requiredLLD of 3000 pCi/t.

The highest concentration of H-3, detected during the firstquarter (750 pCi/t) is not indicative of a significant increasein H-3 discharges from Indian Point. The greatest concentrationsof tritium detected in the discharge canal also occurred duringthe first quarters of 1990 and 1991. Therefore, seasonal tritiumconcentrations in river water will be closely monitored todetermine if a long-term trend emerges. The relativeinsignificance of this value notwithstanding, it was evaluated interms of [maximum] potential dose.

Using the guidelines set forth in the Offsite Dose CalculationManual (Reference 24), it was conservatively calculated that the"maximum exposed individual", an adult, would receive a dose of0.002 mrem/year, given the assumptions outlined below. Theinsignificance of this dose becomes readily apparent when it iscompared to the annual average dose from natural background of300 mrem (Reference 22). This also indicates that the operationof Indian Point in 1992 did not result in any adverseradiological impact on the Hudson River waters.

The conservativeness of the assumptions used in the dosecalculations also reinforce the insignificance of the potentialdosimetric impact. The major assumptions are: all fish andinvertebrates eaten in 1992 came from waters with 750 pCiH-3/liter; the maximum exposed individual is an adult whoconsumed 21 kg of fish and 5 kg of invertebrate; and genericbioaccumulation factors for fish are representative. In light ofthese assumptions, the potential dosimetric impact of0.002 mrem/year dwindles to insignificance.

Data on radionuclides detected in Hudson River water over thepast ten years is summarized in Table C-3. From this table andFigure C-3, it can be seen that the H-3 detected in the dischargecanal, as well as the absence of detectable Cs-137 wereconsistent with the historical data trends.

4-5

4.4 DrinkinQ Water

The annual program summary table (Table B-2) contains a summaryof the 1992 drinking water sample analysis results. Results ofthe gamma spectroscopic analysis of the monthly drinking watersamples are in Table B-li; results of tritium analysis ofquarterly composites are in Table B-12.

Tritium was the only radionuclide detected in any of the drinkingwater samples which could potentially be attributed to plantoperations. It was detected in drinking water samples during thefirst two quarters of 1992, at an average concentration of 145pCi/1. This level (which is <10% of the required LLD) isinsignificant, as illustrated in the following evaluation of[maximum] potential dose.

Using the dose conversion factor provided in Regulatory Guide1.109 (Reference 8), the conservative estimate of potential doseto the maximum exposed individual - a child - would be 0.02 mremper year. This estimate assumes that the maximum exposedindividual's entire annual intake of water consisted of waterwith an average tritium concentration of 145 pCi/t. Whencompared to'the annual average dose from natural background of300 mrem (Reference 22), the insignificance of the potentialdosimetric impact of the drinking water tritium is readilyapparent.

A summary and illustration of historic trends of H-3 in drinkingwater are provided in Table C-4 and Figure C-4, respectively.From them it can be seen that the very low-level presence ofdetectable H-3 in drinking water is consistent with the historictrend. Thus, examination of the data indicates that currentoperation of Indian Point did not have a radiological impact ondrinking water.

4.5 Hudson River Shoreline Soil

A summary of the radionuclide concentrations detected in theshoreline soil samples is contained in Table B-2; Table B-13contains the results of the gamma spectroscopic analyses of thesesamples.

As shown, Cs-134 and Cs-137 were the only potential reactorproducts detected in shoreline soils in 1992. Cs-134 wasdetected at two indicator locations at an average concentrationof 56 pCi/kg. Cs-137 was detected at indicator and controllocations; it was found in eight of the ten samples with theaverage indicator and control location concentrations of207 pCi/kg and 433 pCi/kg, respectively.

In samples where Cs-137 was detected, the accompanying presenceof Cs-134 would tend to date the radioactivity as resulting fromrecent plant operations. Although the relatively higherindicator (i.e., downstream) location concentrations may beattributable to past plant operations, the absence of Cs-134 in

4-6

all but one sample indicates that most of the Cs-137 in thesamples was not due to recent plant operations.

The above-normal average Cs-137 control concentration of433 pCi/kg is due to the one sample with 620 pCi/kg taken atManitou Inlet. In 1991 one sample from this location alsocontained an above average Cs-137 concentration. This mayindicate the beginning of a trend of increased Cs-137 levelsupstream of the site and will continue to be monitored. Theabsence of detectable Cs-134 at this location indicates that theCs-137 is not attributable to recent plant operations.

The Cs-137 values at indicator locations and the absence ofCs-134 from most samples were consistent with the historicalvalues, as shown in Table C-5 and Figure C-5. Although theaverage control location concentration of Cs-137 is notconsistent with the historic average, it is due to a singleanomalous result and not indicative of a trend. Thus, thedetection of Cs-137 and Cs-134 in shoreline soils is not anindication of increasing radioactivity levels due to operation ofthe Indian Point station in 1992.

4.6 Broadleaf Vegetation

Table B-2 contains a summary of the broadleaf vegetation sampleanalysis results; data from analysis of the 1992 samples ispresented in Table B-14. Analysis of broadleaf vegetationsamples revealed the presence of low concentrations of Cs-137,Cs-134 and Co-60 in the samples.

Cs-137 and Cs-134 were found in indicator location samples ataverage concentrations of 28 and 16 pCi/kg, respectively. Sinceneither was detected at control locations, it would seem thatthey could be attributed to site operations. Since they were notboth present at the same locations, however, their presenceshould not be attributed to recent plant operations.

Co-60 was detected in one control location sample at 14 pCi/kg.It's absence from indicator locations, as well as the absence ofany accompanying Co-58, indicates that it should not beattributed to plant operations.

Table C-6 contains a summary, and Figure C-6 an illustration, ofthe broadleaf vegetation analysis results for the past 10 years.The presence of low levels of Cs-137, Cs-134 and Co-60, in 1992is consistent with the sporadic detection of relatively lowconcentrations for the past ten years.

4.7 Fish and Invertebrates

A summary of the fish and invertebrate sample analysis results ispresented in Table B-2; Table B-15 contains the results of theanalysis of the 1992 samples. There were no potential reactorproducts detected in fish and invertebrate samples in 1992.

4-7

A summary of historical fish and invertebrate analytical data ispresented in Table C-7 and illustrated in Figure C-7. From thisit can be seen that the absence of any radionuclides attributableto piant operations is consistent with historical trends ofdecreasing levels findings and that plant operations in 1992 didnot contribute to activity levels in fish and invertebrate of theHudson River.

4.8 Additional Media Sampling

Although not required by the RETS, sampling and analysis wereperformed on aquatic vegetation, Hudson River sediment, soil andprecipitation samples. A summary of the analytical resultsobtained is presented in Table B-16. As shown by these data theradionuclides detected were consistent with their respectivehistoric levels. Since these samples were not required by theRETS, individual data tables and graphs are not presented for thedata.

Cs-137 was the only radionuclide detected in the aquaticvegetation samples from indicator and control locations ataverage concentrations of 15 pCi/kg and 13.5 pCi/kg,respectively. Cs-137 was also detected in two of four indicatorsoil samples at a concentration of 34 pCi/kg. These values arewell within the respective historic ranges.

Co-60, Cs-134 and Cs-137 were all detected in bottom sedimentsamples; Co-60 was only found at indicator locations, while Cs-134 and Cs-137 were found at both indicator and controllocations.

The Co-60 was detected in four of six indicator location samplesat an average concentration 397 pCi/kg. The absence of Co-58 inthese samples, combined with the Co-60's concentration beingconsistent with historical data, indicates that the Co-60 shouldnot be attributed to plant operations in 1992.

Cs-134 and Cs-137 were present at both indicator and controllocations. The average concentrations for each were within theirrespective historic ranges and, thus, are not indicative of anenvironmental impact resulting from recent plant operations.Thus the non-RETS sample data corroborates the RETS sample datain determining that the operation of the Indian Point station in1992 did not have an adverse radiological impact on theenvironment.

4.9 Land Use Census

A census was performed in the vicinity of Indian Point in 1992.This census consisted of a milch animal and a residence census.Results of this census are presented in Tables B-17 and B-18.

During the milch animal census, the total number of potentialmilch animals decreased (from 12 to 11) and the number of milkersremained constant at 3. There were no animals producing milk for

4-8

human consumption found within 5 miles (8 km) of the plant. Thesecond part of this census revealed that the nearest residencesare located 0.4 miles (.64 km) ESE-and 0.4 miles (.64 km) SE ofthe Plant.

It should be noted that sampling of vegetation at the siteboundary is performed in lieu of the garden census, as permittedby the RETS.

4.10 Conclusion

The REMP is conducted each year to determine the radiologicalimpact of Indian Point operations on the environment. Thepreceding discussions of the results of the 1992 REMP reveal thatthere was no appreciable (i.e., measurable) impact on theenvironment due to operations at the station. Examination of thehistorical data indicates an overall decreasing trend inradionuclide concentrations in the various media sampled andanalyzed.

The results of the 1992 REMP also revealed that the impact on theenvironment of fallout from previous atmospheric weapons testingcontinues to represent the greatest long-term radiologicalenvironmental impact from anthropogenic sources. The background(i.e., non-plant related) radiation contribution to overall dosesto man is much moresignificant than that associated with normalplant operations, as demonstrated by the relative contributionsof the different sources to the environmental radionuclideconcentrations.

4-9

SECTION 5

OUALITY ASSURANCEli

5.0 OUALITY ASSURANCE

The quality assurance program of the REMP consists of operations(i.e., day-to-day) activities as well as routine inspections andaudits.

The operational quality assurance activities are:

- Submission for analysis of duplicate (split) samples to theradioanalytical contractor to verify reproducibility (precision)of results, and

- Submission for analysis of environmental samples spiked withknown levels of radioactivity to the radioanalyticalcontractor to verify accuracy of results.

In addition, annual reviews of the program are conducted by New YorkPower Authority and Consolidated Edison personnel and include:

- Audit of all Indian Point and radioanalytical contractorprocedures related to the Radiological Environmental MonitoringProgram by NYPA Quality Assurance (QA) and Consolidated EdisonNuclear Power Quality Assurance (NPQA) personnel.

- Assessment of the radioanalytical contractor's performance inthe Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) InterlaboratoryComparison Study (Appendix D).

- Audit of Indian Point sample collections and radioanalyticallaboratory techniques by QA personnel and NPQA personnel.

Conduct of the quality assurance program in 1992 ensured that samplingand analysis of environmental media at Indian Point were conducted inaccordance with quality assurance requirements specified in RegulatoryGuide 4.15 (Reference 12) and internal procedures (Reference 2).Performance of an annual audit demonstrated this compliance.

The quality assurance programs of the New York Power Authority'sRadiological Environmental Laboratory and Teledyne Isotopesdemonstrates that all requirements specified in 1OCFR Part 50 AppendixB and Regulatory Guide 4.15 are achieved. In addition, the Authoritylaboratory's performance in the EPA Interlaboratory Comparison Studywas satisfactory; 41 out of 42 measurements were in agreement (seeAppendix D).

In summary, the quality assurance program conducted in conjunctionwith the Indian Point Environmental Monitoring Program included auditsand evaluations of in-house and contractor procedures, work functions,and quality assurance programs. Review of the 1992 quality assuranceprogram indicated that the Radiological Environmental MonitoringProgram was performed in accordance with the Radiological EffluentTechnical Specifications.

5-1

SECTION 6

6.0 REFERENCES

1. "Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications" for Indian PointNuclear Generating Stations 1, 2, and 3.

2. Consolidated Edison Company of N.Y. Technical ServicesDepartment, Nuclear Environmental Monitoring Procedures, IndianPoint Station.

3. Environmental Analytical Procedures, Teledyne Isotopes, Inc.,50 Van Buren Avenue, Westwood, New Jersey, 07675.

4. Consolidated Edison Company of New York, "Nuclear EnvironmentalMonitoring Sample and Analysis Schedule", Technical ServicesProcedure, Rev. 4, 11/06/91. (TS 5.101).

5. U.S Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Regulatory Guide 4.8,"Environmental Technical Specifications for Nuclear PowerPlants", December 1975.

6. Eisenbud, M., Environmental Radioactivity, Academic Press,New York, 1987.

7. Glasstone, S., and W. H. Jordan, Nuclear Power and ItsEnvironmental Effects, American Nuclear Society, La GrangePark, IL, 1980.

8. "Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases ofReactor Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance with10 CFR 50, Appendix I", U.S. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.109,Revision 1, 1977.

9. Cohen N., and Eisenbud M., "Radiological Studies of the HudsonRiver, Progress Report", Institute of Environmental Medicine,New York University Medical Center, December 1983.

10. Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Technical ServicesProcedure, "Quality Control Program", Rev. 4, 9/4/90. (TS-5.121)

11. "Quality Assurance Manual Environmental Analysis Department",Teledyne Isotopes, Westwood, N.J.

12. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Regulatory Guide 4.15,Revision 1 "Quality Assurance for Radiological MonitoringPrograms (Normal Operations) - Effluent Streams and theEnvironment", February 1979.

13. J. W. Poston, "Cesium-137 and Other Man-Made Radionuclides inthe Hudson River: A Review of the Available Literature",Applied Physical Technology, Inc., report to NYPA,September 1977.

6-1

14. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report EPC-520/1 80-012,"Upgrading Environmental Radiation Data", August 1980.

15. Andrews, Howard L. and Lapp, Ralph E. Nuclear RadiationPhysics, Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey,1972.

16. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Branch Technical Position toRegulatory Guide 4.8, "An Acceptable Radiological EnvironmentalMonitoring Program", November 1979.

17. Eichholz, Geoffrey G., Environmental Aspects of Nuclear Power,Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsea, Michigan, 1985.

18. Kelly, J. J. (Ed.), Effluent and Environmental RadiationSurveillance, ASTM STP #698, Philadelphia, PA, 1978.

19. New York Power Authority, James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear PowerPlant, Radiological and Environmental Services DepartmentEnvironmental Surveillance Procedures.

20. Knol1, Glenn F., Radiation Detection and Measurement. firstedition, John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1979.

21. Dixon, Wilfred J., Introduction to Statistical Analysis, thirdedition, McGraw-Hill Inc., 1969.

22. National Council on Radiation Protection. NCRP Report No.94,"Exposure of the Population in the United States and Canada fromNatural Background Radiation", December 1987.

23. National Council on Radiation Protection. NCRP Report No. 62,"Tritium in the Environment", March 1979.

24. New York Power Authority. Offsite Dose Calculation Manual forIndian Point 3, Revision 7, December 1992.

6-2

I

I.IIIIIIII.IIIIIIII.I

APPENDIX A

ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS

APPENDIX A

ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS REQUIREMENTS

Environmental media are sampled at the locations specified in Table A-I andshown in Figures A-I and A-2. The samples are analyzed according tocriteria established in the Radiological Effluent Technical Specification(RETS). These RETS requirements include: methods of sample collection;types of sample analysis; minimum sample size required; and minimumdetectable concentrations which must be attained for each medium, sample,or analysis type.

The required lower limits of detection for Indian Point sample analysis arepresented in Table A-2.

In addition to the sampling outlined in Table A-i, there is anenvironmental surveillance requirement that an annual land use and milchanimal census be performed in accordance with RETS. The number andlocation of animals producing milk for human consumption must be determinedwithin eight kilometers of the r2lant. Also, the nearest residence and thenearest garden greater than 50 m size producing broad leaf vegetation mustbe identified.

A-I

Figure A-1

Environmental Sample Station Locations (within 2 miles)

* Ic-2

on& -

slan D1 A

N

1 1 Mile

S- Waterborne Surface Wai

KEY. 0C - Direct Radiation Sample Location DR#[] - Airborne Sample Location A#

S- Direct Radiation/Airborne

*** - Broadleaf Vegetation Ic#

S-Shoreline Sediment Wc#

Ib # - Fish and Invertebrae

A- 2

Figure A-2

Environmental Sample Station Locations (greater than 2 miles)

DR-40Ib-2 Beacon-Newburgh BridgeA 5/

fc-3N Dutchess County

Putnam County

Orn ® Br g 3 2®

Bear Mountain Bridge

( / .%

a

*IndianPoint

~Hudson 3 G

River

2

d County Westchester CountyRocklan °

p ....5 Miles Tappan Zee

Bridge

Q - Direct Radiation Sample Location DR#

- Direct Radiation/Airborne

S- Shoreline Sediment Wc#

M** - Broadleaf Vegetation Ic#

O - Waterborne, Drinking, WB#

lb # Fish and Invertebrat

A-3

MAnTr A-1 INDIAN POINT STATION SAMPLING STATION LOCATIONS.Lt1LJLJA.~ £1 .L

SamplingStation

RETSSampleDesignation

3

4

5

6

7

8

Location/Distances

Service Building,Onsite - 0.4 MI SSE

Algonquin Gas Line,0.25 MI - SW

NYU Tower0.8 MI SSW

Camp Smith,2.5 MI - NNE

Camp Field Reservoir,.3.5 MI - NE

New Croton Reservoir,7 MI - ESE

Inlet pipe into plants,NW

Discharge Canal,Onsite - SW

Water Meter House,Onsite - SE

Off Verplanck,1.5 MI - SSW

Cortlandt Yacht Club,1.6 MI S

DR-08

A-1A-I

A-4A-4DR-10N.A.Ic-i

N.A.Ic-2

Wb-1

N.A.

Wa-1

Wa-2

DR-7

N.A.

N.A.

N.A.

DR-38

Sample Types

Direct Gamma

Air ParticulateRadioiodine

Air ParticulateRadioiodineDirect GammaSoilBroadleafVegetation

SoilBroadleafVegetation

Drinking Water

Drinking Water

HRa Water

HRa Water

Direct Gamma

HRa AquaticVegetationHRa ShorelineSoilHRa BottomSediment

Direct Gamma

9

10

14

17

20

A-4

TABLE A-I CONTINUED

SamplingStation Location/Distances

22 Lovett, 1.5 MI - WSW

23 Roseton, 20 MI - N

25 Where available

27 Croton Pt., 6.4 MI - SSE

28 Lent's Cove, 0.5 MI - ENE

29 Grassy Pt., 3.3 MI - SSW

33 Hamilton St., SS, 3 MI-NE

34 Southeast Corner,Onsite - S

35 Bleakley & BroadwayOnsite - E

38 Furnace Dock, 3.5 MI - SE

44 Peekskill Gas Holder Bldg.1.7 MI NE

50 Manitou Inlet, 4.5 MI-NNW

53 White Beach, 0.9 MI - SW

RETSSampleDesignation

N.AN.A.

N.A.A-5A-5DR-40Ic-3N.A.Ib-2

Ib-i

N.A.N.A.DR-24

N.A.DR-4

N.A.N.A.DR-39

DR-33.

DR-9

DR-5

DR-34

N.A.N.A.N.A.

Wc-2

Wc-lDR-11

Sample Types

Air ParticulateRadioiodine

Precipitation, b

Air Particulate, b

Radioiodine, b

Direct Gamma, b

Broadleaf VegetationSoilFish/Invertebrates

Fish/Invertebrates

Air ParticulateRadioiodineDirect Gamma

HR' Shoreline SoilDirect Gamma


Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

PrecipitationAir ParticulateRadioiodine

HRa Shoreline Soilb

HRa Shoreline SoilDirect Gamma

A-5

A

TABLE A-1 C!ONTTNT7PDTABLE A-i CONTTIJTWfl

SamplingStation

RETSSampleDesignationLocation/Distances

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

64

66

67

69

71

72

73

74

Verplanck 1.3 MI-SSW

Cortlandt SanitationGarage,2 MI - N

Rt. 9D Garrison, 5 MI-N

Old Pemart Avenue Pole1.8 MI - NNE

Gallows Hill Road CH G&MPole #66640P, 5 MI - NNE

Lower South St. & Bay St.NYT Pole #W56, 1.3 MI - NE

Westbrook Drive Pole #CP2,5 MI - NE

Pine Road, Cortlandt SchoolParking Lot, 4.8 MI - ENE

Croton Avenue - CortlandtPole #NYT-A, 5 MI - E

Colabaugh Pond RoadCortlandt Pole #30,5 MI - ESE

Mt. Airy & Windsor RoadPole #W-66-2-40, 5 MI - SE

Warren Ave - Haverstraw,4.8 MI - S

Railroad Avenue & 9WHaverstraw, 4.6 MI - SSW

Willow Grove Rd. &Birch Dr. 5 MI - SW

Gays Hill Road S,1.5 MI - WSW

DR-37

A-3A-3DR-I

DR-17

DR-2

DR-18

DR-36

DR-19

DR-20

DR-21

DR-22

DR-23

DR-25

DR-26

DR-27

DR-12

Sample Types

Direct Gamma


Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

A-6

TABLE A-I

SamplingStation

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

88

89

90

91

CONTINUEDRETSSample

Location/Distances Designation

Palisades Parkway DR-282 MI S of Exit 185 MI - WSW

Gays Hill Road N, DR-131.2 MI W,

Palisades Parkway,. DR-291.2 MI S of Gas Station4.2 MI - W

Rt. 9W (across from R/S #14) DR-14Pole #0&R 233, 1.2 MI - WNW

Anthony Wayne Park, DR-304.5 MI - WNW

RT. 9W South of Ayers Road DR-15Pole #NYT 255, 1 MI - NW

Palisades Parkway Lake DR-31Welch Exit, 4.7 MI - NW

Ayers Road DR-160.9 MI - NNW

Rt. 9W Fort Montgomery DR-32Pole #142, 4.8 MI - NNW

Cold Spring, 10.8 MI - N N.A.

N.A.

N.A.

Amicus Reservoir N.A.

Sector 6 Reuter Stokes Pole, DR-60.5 MI - ESE

Highland Avenue & Sprout DR-35Brook Rd (near rock cut)3 Mi - NNE

Charles Point, 0.8 MI - NE DR-3

Burnwell Gas Co.,0.8 MI-ENE A-2

A-2N.A.

Sample Types

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

HR" AquaticVegetationbHR' ShorelineSoilbHRa Bottom

Sedimentb

Variousb

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma

Direct Gamma


A-7

i

IIiIIIn.

IIiiI

i@

TARTLE A-i (C)WTTNTTFDTABLE A-1 CONTINURD

(a) HR = Hudson River

(b) Control Station

N.A. = Not Applicable

A-8

M M M M M- M M ---- M M M

A-2

FOR ENVIRONMENTALLOWER LIMIT OF DETECTION (LLD) CAPABILITIES SAMPLE ANALYSIS (a) (b)

Water Airborne ParticuLate Fish Milk Food Products SedimentAnalysis (pCi/0) or Gas (pCi/m 3) (pCi/kg, wet) (pci/t) (pCi/kg, wet) (pCi/kg, dry)

gross beta 1 0.01

H-3 2000(c)

Mn-S4 15 130

Fe-59 30 260

Co-58, 60 15 130

Zn-65 30 260

Zr-Nb-95 15

1-131 1(d) 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

b

c

d

This List does not mean that only these nuclides are to be considered. Other identifiable peaks shall also be analyzed and reported in the Annual RadiologicalEnvironmental Operating Report.

Required detection capabilities for thermoluminescent dosimeters used for environmental measurements are given in Regulatory Guide 4.13.

LLD for drinking water samples. If no drinking water pathway exists, a value of 3000 pCi/I may be used.

LLD for drinking water samples. If no drinking water pathway exists, a value of 15 pCi/I may be used.

APPENDIX B

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM RESULTS SUMMARY

APPENDIX B

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM RESULTS SUMMARY

B.1 1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Summary

Environmental monitoring data are summarized and presented in tabularform by media type. The results of the program as outlined in TableA-I are summarized in tabular form in Table B-2. The format of thesesummary tables conforms to the reporting requirements of the RETS andNRC Regulatory Guide 4.8 (Reference 5). In addition, the data obtainedfrom the analysis of the RETS samples are provided in Tables B-3 throughB-15.

Gamma spectroscopy analysis was performed for the followingradionuclides: Be-7, K-40, Mn-54, Co-58, Co-60, Fe-59, Zn-65, Zr-95,Ru-103, Ru-106, 1-131, Cs-134, Cs-137, Ba-140, Ce-141, Ce-144, Ra-226and Th-228. Radiochemical (1-131) and tritium analyses were performedfor specific media and locations as required in the RETS.

B.2 Land Use Census

In accordance with Sections 4.11B of the Con Ed RETS and 2.8.A of theNYPA RETS, a land use census was conducted to identify the nearest milchanimal and the nearest residence. The results of the milch animal andland use census are presented in Tables B-17 and B-18, respectively. Inlieu of identifying and sampling the nearest garden of greater than 50m,at least three kinds of broad leaf vegetation were sampledz(jresultsýare.presented in Table B-14). .. - .

B.3 Sampling Deviations To

During 1992, environmental sampling was performed for a total of 10media types (6 RETS required and 4 other) and for direct radiation. Atotal of 1238 samples (> 98%) were collected and analyzed for theprogram; a total of 1213 or >98% of the RETS required samples werecollected and analyzed. Sampling deviations are summarized in Table B-1; discussions on the reasons for the deviations are provided in TableB-la for air samples and B-lb for TLDs...

In the fall of 1992, a review revealed that, due to updatedmeteorological monitoring data, some sampling stations were no longerlocated within the sectors with the highest D/Qs and therefore thevegetation samples were not collected in the highest D/Q sector (for IP3met data changes). Deviations were evaluated and it was determined thatthere was no impact on theresults -of this program. - New 'samplingstations located in the sectors with the highest calculated D/Qs werethen selected for implementation in 1993.

B.4 Analytical Deviations - - -

During 1992, all analytical requirements (e-g., :lower limits:ofdetection) were met or exceeded. Thus, no analytical deviationsoccurred in the 1992 REMP Program.

B-I

TABLE B-I

SUMMARY OF SAMPLING DEVIATIONS 1992BSUMMARY'OF SAMPLING DEVIATIONS 1992

Media

Particulatesin Air

Charcoal Filter

TotalScheduled

Samples

468

Number ofDeviations

8

SamplingEfficiency %

98.3

Reason forEach Deviation

SeeTable Bla

468

159a

8

5

98.3

96.9

SeeTable Bla

SeeTable Blb

TLD

Hudson RiverWater

Drinking Water

Shoreline Soil

• oadleafetation

Fish & Invertebrate

24

12

10

63

9

0

0

0

0

0

100

100

100

100

100

TOTALS:

Non-RETS Samples

Acuatic Vegetation

Hudson River Sediment

Soil

Precipitation

OVERALL TOTALS:

1213 21

6

8

3

8

0

0

0

0

98.3

100

100

100

100

1238 21 98.3

a - This value representssample.

each of the two TLDs at each location as a single

B-2

TABLE B-la

1992 AIR SAMPLING DEVIATIONS

Station Week Ending Problem/Resolution

#91-Burnwell#91-Burnwell

#57 Cortland

#22 Lovett

#5 NYU Tower

#57 Cortland

#27 Croton Point

01/07/9212/22/92

07/07/92

09/21/92

09/28/92

09/28/92

12/15/9212/22/92

Power source is also used fortruck engine electric heaters in verycold weather. This overloads andtrips breaker. Reset breaker.

Operator error caused failure tocollect sample that week.

Loss of power due to a breaker trip(cause not known). Reset breaker.

Power was discovered off. Turnedpower back on and no recurrence.

GFI circuit tripped. Reset.

Lines down due to storm. Powerrestored week of 12/28/92.

TABLE B-ib

1992 TLD Deviations

TLD Location Ouarter Problem

DR-37 ist quarter TLD missing, due to vandalism

B-3

M M M mm m m m m m M MM M M M -

TABKE B-2

INDIAN POINT

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL SUMMARY - 1992

TLD(mrem perstandradquarter)

GammaDose (155):

N/A 12.8 (159/160)7.8 - 18.9

No. 59-Old Pemart Ave. 17.0 (4/4)1.8 mi. @ 340 15.8- 18.9

13.1 (4/4)11.6 - 13.9

0

4 4 I 1 1.

AirParticulatesandRadioiodine(pCi/m')

G. B. (460):

1-131(460):

GSA (36):

Cs-134

0.01

0.07

0.05

0.06

0.015 (408/408)0.006 - 0.028

<LLD

<LLD

No. 57-Cortlandt 0.016 (50/50)2.0 mi. @ 5° 0.008 - 0.025

<LLD

<LLD

0.015 (52/52)0.007 - 0.025

<LLD

<LLD

0

0

0

0Cs-137 <LLD <LLD <LLD

U I I b

.m m m- m - -- -m-.._ -

TABLE B- (CONTINUED) 0

INDIAN POINT


Surface(Hudson River)WaterpCi/liter

H-3 (8):

GSA (24):

Mn-54

Co-58

Fe-59

Co-60

Zn-65

Zr/Nb-95

1-131

Cs-134

Cs-137

Ba/La-140

3000

15

15

30

15

30

15

15

15

18

15

437 (3/4)250 - 750

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

No. 10-Discharge Canal 437 (3/4)On-site @ 229" 250 - 750

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

170 (1/4)170

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

U I a I

j

---- --- ---------- --

TABLE B- 2 (CONTINUED)

INDIAN POINT


DrinkingWaterpCi/li ter

G.B. (12):

H-3 (4):

GSA (12):

Mn-54

Co-58

Fe-59

Co-60

Zn-65

Zr/Nb-95

1-131

Cs-134

Cs-137

Ba/La-140

4

2000

15

15

30

15

30

15

1

15

18

15

2.10 (12/12)0.98 - 2.83

145 (2/4)120 - 170

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

No. 7 Camp Field 2.10 (12/12)0.98 - 2.83

No. 7 Camp Field 145 (2/4)120 170

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

NONE

NONE

NONE

NONE

NONE

NONE

NONE

NONE

NONE

NONE

NONE

NONE

I I~I I I I

= M = Mm = M-mm = M = M M M = M m=

TABLE B-'"(CONTINUED)

INDIAN POINT


ShorelineSoil(pCi/kg-dry)

GSA (10):

Cs-134

Cs-137

150

180

56 (4/6)31 - 77

207 (6/6)36 - 442

No. 28 Lent's Cove 75 (2/2)0.5 mi. 72 -. 77

No. 17 Verplanck 398 (2/2)1.5 mi. @ 201* 353 - 442

<LLD

433 (2/4)245 ,- 620

0

0

*1 I. I

BroadleafVegetation(pCi/kg-wet)

GSA (63):

1-131

Co-60

Cs-134

Cs-137

60

N/A

60

80

<LLD

<LLD

16 (1/42)

28 (6/42)13 - 77

<LLD

No. 23 Roseton 14 (1/21)20.0 mi. @ 3500

(Control Location)

No. 5 NYU 16 (1/42)1.0 mi. @ 201°

No. 5 NYU 77 (1/21)1.0 mi. @ 2010

<LLD

14 (1/21)

<LLD

<LLD

0

0

0

0

I. I F

Fish andInvertebrates(pCi/kg-wet)

GSA (9):

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

<LID

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

0

0

0

0

0

0

0I I I

INDIAN POINT

1992

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAMANNUAL SUMMARY TABLE NOTES

Data for the Annual Summary Tables is based on RETS required sampleswith the exception of Air Samples which includes RETS and Non-RETSlocations.

N/A Not applicable.

(a) = Fraction of detectable measurement to total measurement.

(b) = Location is distance in miles and direction in compass degrees.

G.B. = Gross Beta Analysis.

GSA = Gamma Spectral Analysis.

B-8

TABLE B-3

DIRECT RADIATION, QUARTERLY DATA (MR) - 1992

DR-01DR-02DR-03DR-04DR-05DR-06DR-07DR-08DR-09DR-1ODR-11DR-12DR-13DR-14DR-15DR-16DR-17DR-18

2019

_21

DR-22DR-23DR-24DR-25DR-26DR-27DR-28DR-29DR-30DR-31DR-32DR-33DR-34DR-35DR-36DR-37DR-38DR-39DR-40

NNNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNWNNNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNWNESENNENESSWSSSWN

IZ.b12.312.711.812.012.914.411.010.512.29.1

14.617.712.211.113.011.912.014.213.414.211.313.011.811.112.812.1

A16.414.715.612.614.111.910.913.7

A10.113.113.8

13.818.912.411.713.412.814.011.210.912.110.313.616.714.112.313.212.913.917.215.113.510.713.411.810.412.611.614.316.115.015.912.013.213.713.713.9

A9.9

13.513.4

11.816.811.812.312.312.613.910.110.011.59.9

12.816.211.611.712.811.612.211.711.011.69.9

10.911.512.611.111.212.715.414.615.311.313.312.913.511.911.410.612.613.6

11.u15.811.7

9.810.514.212.9

9.29.4

10.67.8

16.118.914.514.515.110.910.912.113.315.113.314.5

9.413.314.713.915.418.916.818.613.711.410.215.511.5

9.68.5

11.611.6

Ii.U16.411.411.913.012.714.614.010.912.210.513.116.312.112.013.611.912.913.913.414.311.812.511.011.112.411.812.915.514.315.711.813.012.513.413.510.010.513.613.9

1Z.4416.0412.0011.5012.2413.0413.9611.1010.3411.729.52

14.0417.1612.9012.3213.5411.8412.3813.8213.2413.7411.4012.8611.1011.7012.7212.1213.8316.4615.0816.2212.2813.0012.2413.4012.9010.339.92

12.8813.26

AVERAGEDEVIATION.ANNUAL AVERAGE

12.81.7

12.7

13.31.9

12.3 12.91.6 2.9

FIVE QUARTER AVERAGE

12.91.5

12.81

a I I

A - No Data, TLD Missing

B-9

TABLE B-4

DIRECT RADIATION, NORMALIZED DATA (MR) - 1992

DR-01DR-02DR-03DR-04DR-05DR-06DR-07DR-08DR-09DR-10DR-11DR-12DR-13DR-14DR-15DR-16DR-17DR-18

R- 19R-20R-21

DR-22DR-23DR-24DR-25DR-26DR-27DR-28DR-29DR-30DR-31DR-32DR-33DR-34DR-35DR-36DR-37DR-38DR-39DR-40

NNNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNMNNWNNNENEENEEESESESSESSSWSWWSWWWNWNWNNWNESENNENESSWSSSWN

13.3118.4111.9111.2112.9112.3113.5110.7110.4111.619.81

13.1116.2113.6111.8112.7112.4113.4116.7114.6113.0110.2112.9111.319.91

12.1111.1113.8115.6114.5115.4111.5112.7113.2113.2113.41

A9.41

13.0112.91

12.3117.3112.3112.8112.8113.1114.4110.6110.5112.0110.4113.3116.7112.1112.2113.3112.1112.7112.2111.5112.1110.4111.4112.0113.1111.6111.7113.2115.9115.1115.8111.8113.8113.4114.0112.4111.9111. 1113.1114.11

10.9115.7111.619.71

10.4114.1112.819.119.31

10.517.71

16.0118.8114.4114.4115.0110.8110.8112.0113.2115.0113.2114.419.31

13.2114.6113.8115.3118.8116.7118.5113.6111.3110.1115.4111.419.518.41

11.5111.51

12.9116.3111.3111.8112.9112.6114.5113.9110.8112.1110.4113.0116.2112.0111.9113.5111.8112.8113.8113.3114.2111.7112.4110.9111.0112.3111.7112.8115.4114.2115.6111.7112.9112.4113.3113.419.91

10.4113.5113.81

i

IMF- No data, TLD Missing

B-10

TABLE B-5

DIRECT RADIATION, ANNUAL AVERAGE DATA (MR) - 1992

ID# SECTOR DOS DEVIATION % DEVIA

DR-01 N 12.36 1.05 8.5DR-02 NNE 16.94 1.18 7.0DR-03 NE 11.79 0.43 3.6DR-04 ENE 11.39 1.30 11.4DR-05 E 12.26 1.23 10.0DR-06 ESE 13.04 0.79 6.1DR-07 SE 13.81 0.80 5.8DR-08 SSE 11.09 2.02 18.2DR-09 S 10.26 0.66 6.4DR-IO SSW 11.56 0.73 6.3DR-11 SW 9.59 1.28 13.3DR-12 WSW 13.86 1.44 10.4DR-13 W 16.99 1.24 7.3DR-14 WNW 13.04 1.18 9.0DR-15 NM 12.59 1.23 9.8DR-16 NNW 13.64 0.98 7.2DR-17 N 11.79 0.69 5.9DR-18 NNE 12.44 1.13 9.1DR-19 NE 13.69 2.17 15.9ýDR-20 ENE 13.16 1.27 9.7DR-21 E 13.59 1.28 9.4DR-22 ESE 11.39 1.39 12.2DR-23 SE 12.79 1.25 9.8DR-24 SSE 10.89 1.14 10.5DR-25 S 11.81 1.62 13.7DR-26 SSW 12.66 1.33 10.5DR-27 SW 12.09 1.18 9.8DR-28 WSW 13.79 1.10 8.0DR-29 W 16.44 1.60 9.7DR-30 WNW 15.14 1.11 7.3DR-31 NW 16.34 1.46 8.9DR-32 NNW 12.16 0.97 8.0DR-33 NE 12.69 1.03 8.1DR-34 SE 12.29 1.51 12.3DR-35 NNE 13.99 1.01 7.2DR-36 NE 12.66 0.96 7.6DR-37 SSW 10.44 1.29 12.4DR-38 S 9.84 1.18 12.0DR-39 SSW 12.79 0.88 6.9DR-40 N 13.09 1.17 8.9

B-11

1 1 - m - m - -1 -1 ---- " - --- 1

TA B-6

GROSS BETA ACTIVITY IN AIRBORNE PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1992Results in Units of pCi/m 3 ± 1 Sigma

Locati on

92/01/0792/01/1492/01/2292/01/2892/02/0492/02/1292/02/1992/02/2592/03/0392/03/1092/03/1792/03/2492/03/3192/04/0792/04/1492/04/2192/04/2892/05/0592/05/1292/05/1992/05/2792/06/0292/06/0992/06/1692/06/2392/06/30

0.012±0.0010.017±0.0020.017±0.0010.018±0.0020.021±0.0020.014±0.0010.021±0.0020.013±0.0020.014±0.0010.015±0.0010.016±0.0010.018±0.0020.016±0.0010.011±0.0010.015±0.0010.009±0.0010.010±0.0010.013±0.0010.009±0.0010.010±0.0010.015±0.0010.009±0.0010.007±0.0010.017±0.0020.011±0.0010.015±0.001

0.014±0.0010.017±0.0020.016±0.0010.019±0.0020.021±0.0020.015±0.0010.020±0.0020.014±0.0020.013±0.0010.013±0.0010.013±0.0010.016±0.0010.017±0.0020.013±0.0010.014±0.0010.011±0.0010.009±0.0010.014±0.0010.008±0.0010.013±0.0010.016±0.0010.008±0.0010.006±0.0010.016±0.0020.010±0.0010.014±0.001

0.014±0.0020.018±0.0020.019±0.0010.018±0.0020.021±0.0020.014±0.0010.021±0.0020.012±0.0020.015±0.0010.016±0.0010.014±0.0010.016±0.0010.015±0.0010.015±0.0020.014±0.0010.010±0.0010.012±0.0010.012±0.0010.007±7.0010.009±0.0010.016±0.0010.010±0.0010.008±0.0010.015±0.0020.012±0.0010.014±0.001

0.014±0.0010. 020±0.0020.016±0.0010.017±0.0020.021±0.0020.012±0.0010.0 19±0.0020.017±0.0020.015±0.0010.012±0.0010.014±0.0010.016±0.0020.015±0.0020.013±0.0010.015±0.0020.010±0.0010.009±0.0010.012±0.0010.007±0.0010.010±0.0010.017±0.0010.011±0.0020.008±0.0010.013±0.0020.015±0.0020.017±0.002

0.016±0.0010.015±0.0010.017±0.0020.020±0.0020.013±0.0010.019±0.0020.012±0.0020.017±0.0010.013±0.0010.016±0.0010.015±0.0010.014±0.0010.014±0.0010.012±0.0010.011±0.0010.009±0.0010.012±0.0010.007±0.0010.011±0.0010.016±0.0010.009±0.0010.009±0.001

0.016±0.0020.012±0.0010.012±0.001

0.015±0.0020.020±0.0020.019±0.0010.016±0.0020.023±0.0020.012±0.0010.021±0.0020.012±0.0020.012±0.0010.014±0.0010.020±0.0020.018±0.0020.015±0.0010.015±0.0020.018±0.0020.012±0.0010.013±0.0010.013±0.0010.011±0.0010.011±0.0010.018±0.0010.012±0.0020.010±0.0020.013±0.0020.011±0.0010.019±0.002

0.017±0.0010.017±0.0010.016±0.0010.017±0.0020.022±0.0020.014±0.0010.020±0.0020.015±0.0020.015±0.0010.013±0.0010.018±0.0010.015±0.0010.016±0.0010.015±0.0010.017±0.0020.009±0.0010.010±0.0010.015±0.0010.011±0.0010.011±0.0010.020±0.0020.009±0.0010.010±0.0010.016±0.0020.012±0.0010.017±0.002

0.017±0.0020.023±0.0020.018±0.0010.019±0.0020.024±0.0020.012±0.0010.023±0.0020.018±0.0020.015±0.0010.014±0.0010.017±0.0010.016±0.0020.015±0.0010.015±0.0010.016±0.0020.007±0.0010.011±0.0010.014±0.0010.011±0.0010.008±0.0010.018±0.0020.011±0.0020.011±0.0010.013±0.0020.011±0.0010.017±0.002

0.014±0.0010.025±0.0020.023±0.0020.020±0.0020.023±0.0020.014±0.0010.020±0.0020.016±0.0020.014±0.0010.013±0.0010.020±0.0020.017±0.0020.017±0.0020.015±0.0010.017±0.0020.010±0.0010.013±0.0010.015±0.0010.011±0.0010.009±0.0010.019±0.0010.012±0.0020.011±0.0010.015±0.0020.011±0.0010.022±0.002

* Pump Not Operational/No Sample

------ m - --m --m -------- m mm

TABLE B' CONTINUED)

GROSS BETA ACTIVITY IN AIRBORNE PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1992Results in Units of pCi/m 3 ± 1 Sigma

Location

92/07/0792/07/1492/07/2192/07/2892/08/0492/08/1192/08/1892/08/2492/08/3192/09/0892/09/1492/09/2192/09/2892/10/0592/10/1392/10/1992/10/2692/11/0392/11/0992/11/1692/11/2392/12/0192/12/0892/12/1592/12/2292/12/28

0.013±0.0010.017±0.0020.015±0.0010.017±0.0020.013±0.0010.014±0.0010.013±0.0010.013±0.0010.023±0.0020.016±0.0010.012±0.0010.024±0.0020.011±0.0010.022±0.0020.016±0.0010.020±0.0020.014±0.0010.015±0.0010.009±0.0010.018±0.0020.016±0.0010.012±0.0010.018±0.0020.011±0.0010.017±0.0020.026±0.002

0.014±0.0020.014±0.0010.015±0.0010.013±0.0010.014±0.0010.017±0.0020.011±0.0010.014±0.0020.020±0.0020.015±0.0010.014±0.0020.022±0.002

0.016±0.0020.015±0.0010.022±0.0020.016±0.0010.017±0.0010.009±0.0010.013±0.0010.014±0.0010.012±0.0010.016±0.0010.011±0.0010.015±0.0010.026±0.002

0.011±0.0010.013±0.0010.015±0.0010.016±0.0020.011±0.0010.016±0.0010.012±0.0010.011±0.0010.019±0.0020.015±0.0010.014±0.0020.021±0.0020.008±0.0010.020±0.0020.018±0.0020.021±0.0020.015±0.0010.014±0.0010.006±0.0010.014±0.0010.016±0.0020.012±0.0010.018±0.001

0.019±0.001

0.012±0.0010.012±0.0010.014±0.0010.014±0.0010.014±0.0010.015±0.0020.013±0.0010.015±0.0020.021±0.0020.016±0.0010.013±0.0020.024±0.0020.011±0.0010.021±0.0020.017±0.0010.023±0.0020.014±0.0010.013±0.0010.009±0.0010.018±0.0020.019±0.0020.015±0.0010.017±0.0020.016±0.0020.017±0.0020.025±0.002

0.014±0.0010.013±0.0010.012±0.0010.015±0.0010.013±0.0010.016±0.0020.013±0.0010.015±0.0020.017±0.0010.017±0.0010.013±0.0020.025±0.0020.009±0.0010.018±0.0020.016±0.0010.019±0.0020.015±0.0010.014±0.0010.008±0.0010.018±0.0020.020±0.0020.015±0.0010.013±0.0010.014±0.001

0.021±0.002

0.011±0.0020.015±0.0020.017±0.0020.013±0.0010.016±0.0020.013±0.0010.010±0.0010.016±0.0020.020±0.0020.013±0.0010.015±0.0020.016±0.0020.019±0.0020.015±0.0010.020±0.0020.014±0.0010.014±0.0010.008±0.0010.014±0.0010.012±0.0010.010±0.001

0.022±0.0020.011±0.0010.018±0.0020.024±0.002

0.012±0.0010.016±0.0020.016±0.0010.014±0.0010.014±0.0010.015±0.0010.010±0.0010.020±0.0020.020±0.0020.016±0.0020.018±0.0020.023±0.0020.013±0.0010.016±0.0020.016±0.0010.024±0.0020.014±0.0010.012±0.0010.007±0.0010.016±0.0010.018±0.0010.008±0.0010.025±0.0020.012±0.0010.017±0.0020.019±0.001

0.012±0.0010.016±0.0020.020±0.0020.014±0.0010.006±0.0010.016±0.0020.012±0.0010.020±0.0020.020±0.0020.016±0.0020.020±0.0020.027±0.0020.010±0.0010.019±0.0020.017±0.0010.023±0.0020.017±0.0020.014±0.0010.008±0.0010.016±0.0020.017±0.0010.007±0.0010.021±0.0020.013±0.0010.016±0.0020.028±0.002

0.021±0.0020.020±0.0020.016±0.0010.016±0. 0010.016±0.002

0.012±0.0010.019±0.0020.021±0.0020.017±0.0020.019±0.0020.022±0.0020.012±0.0010.016±0.0010.0122±0.0020.016±0.0020.017±0.0010.008±0.0010.015±0.0010.014±0.001

0.008±0.0010.023±0.0020.012±0.0010.019±0.0020.025±0.002

* Pump Not Operational/No Sample

mm m m m - - m m m - - --- --- m mTA B-7

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN QUARTERLY COMPOSITESOF AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES - 1992

RPpqiltz in llnits nf I1"3 nrilm3 + I Sia(Ma

Be-7K-40Mn-54Co-58Co-60Zr!-95Ru-103Cs-134Cs-137Ce-141Ce-144Ra-226Ac/Th-228Others

96±317±2<0.33<0.43<0.62<0.93<0.58<0.29<0.28<0.60<1.19<3.7<1.3<CL

124±811±4<0.40<0.50<0.49<0.93<0.53<0.40<0.19<0.73<1.57

11.3±3.8<0.6<CL

130±911±4<0.33<0.54<0.46<0.78<0.71<0.50<0.37<0.85<1.76<4.7<1.1<CL

70±7<5<0.63<0.63<0.44<1.34<0.59<0.39<0.38<0.77<1.46<4.3<1.1<CL

#5 - NYUBe-7K-40Mn-54Co-58Co-60Zr-95Ru-103Cs-134Cs-137Ce-141Ce-144Ra-226Ac/Th-228Others

95±518±3<0.33<0.44<0.32<0.86<0.54<0.29<0.25<0.55<1.06<3.5<0.9<CL

108±821±5<0.47<0.62<0.47<1.23<0.67<0.44<0.34<0.80<1.50<5.1<1.2<CL

118±625±4<0.31<0.58<0.56<0.95<0.63<0.44<0.28<0.73<1.25

9.2±3.9<1.3<CL

84±715±3<0.16<0.34<0.45<0.78<0.52<0.32<0.28<0.59<1.04<3.8<1.2<CL

= m = = m = m nm -- m m m = m = m n mTABLE CONTINUED)


Ppcziijltq in I1nit-, nf iC 3 nri/m _N i

Be-7K-40Mn-54Co-58Co-60Zr-95Ru-103Cs-134Cs-137Ce-141Ce-144Ra-226Ac/Th-228Others

87±525±4<0.37<0.51<0.37<0.87<0.48<0.29<0.26<0.58<1.20<3.9<1.3<CL

123±812±5<0.33<0.62<0.56<0.87<0.55<0.38<0.41<0.78<1.51

11.4±5.5<1.8<CL

122±1132±7<0.44<0.99<1.04<1.64<1.12<0.60<0.67<1.23<2.38<7.2<2.3<CL

80±8141±9<0.59<0.94<0.51<1.40<1.10<0.49<0.48<1.44<2.65

14.4±7.5<1.9<CL

123 - ROSETON*Be-7K-40Mn-54Co-58Co-60Zr-95Ru-103Cs-134Cs-137Ce- 14 1Ce-144Ra-226Ac/Th-228Others

108±38±1

<0.34<0.38<0.42<0.85<0.56<0.31<0.26<0.61<1.13

8. 1±2.2<1.1<CL

129±723±4<0.40<0.44<0.36<0.68<0.58<0.37<0.36<0.79<1.39

14.7±3.4<1.1<CL

128±9<2<0.33<0.58<0.47<0.88<0.61<0.44<0.32<0.62<1.11

5. 2±2.9<1.4<CL

65±7117±8<0.60<0.79<0.48<1.-39<1.05<0.54<0.48<1.20<2.37<7.3

6.5±1.6<CL

* Control Location

m m -m-m m m m m m m- mmm m m m m

TABLE B ONTINUED)


Pp,,iiltc-~ in 11nit-, nf 1(- nri /M3 + 1 q i


109±6<3<0.21<0.40<0.45<0.98<0.50<0.28<0.24<0.61<1.15<4.0<1.0<CL

130±831±5<0.44<0.34<0.41<0.81<0.55<0.48<0.33<0.79<1.54<5.2<1.2<CL

131±818±4<0.61<0.55<0.64<0.98<0.89<0.40<0.35<0.93<1.47

9.7±4.0<1.8<CL

75±8132±9<0.71<0.99<0.64<1.31<1.15<0.44<0.52<1.58<2.70<8.8

3.3±1.7<CL

#29 - GRASSY POINT


107±612±3<0.35<0.35<0.38<0.54<0.38<0.29<0.25<0.45<0.86<2.9<1.2<CL

125±920±5<0.42<0.86<0.59<1.25<0.87<0.42<0.46<0.88<1.53

7.0±4. 1<1.7<CL

126±812±3<0.35<0.46<0.41<1.36<0.61<0.47<0.33<0.89<1.54

11.5±4.1<1.1<CL

81±7<5<0.24<0.51<0.41<0.85<0.51<0.31<0.34<0.55<1.06<3.4<1.5<CL

- rn - -- -- ----- r n- n-- - -TABLE B 'CONTINUED)


RPpiilt, in Ilnit- nf 1()- 3 nri/M3 + 1 Siama


102±520±4<0.33<0.46<0.32<0.90<0.56<0.29<0.26<0.60<1.15

7.9±3.3<1.0<CL

118±818±5<0. 50<0. 40<0. 63<0. 71<0. 78<0. 46<0. 44<0.83< 1.54<5.2<2. 1<CL

133±1123±6<0.60<0.66<0.37<1.50<1.08<0.48<0.46<1.01<1.85<6.2<1.9<CL

83±711±4<0.36<0.72<0.61<0.77<0.64<0.37<0.30<0.86<1.56

12.1±3.8<1.7<CL

#57 - CORTLANDT


101±519±3<0.35<0.56<0.42<0.91<0.51<0.34<0.30<0.54<1.05

6.6±3.0<1.1<CL

124±833±5<0.39<0.38<0.37<1.02<0.63<0.47<0.29<0.85<1.50<4.9<1.2<CL

167±1438±8<0.98<1.16<0.62<2.09<1.14<0.76<0.57<1.51<2.56<8.6<2.8<CL

78±7<3<0.37<0.45<0.37<0.90<0.62<0.44<0.31<0.74<1.29

8.5±3.8<1.1<CL

m= m- =- = = =-n m =- M = M M M nTABLE B ONTINUED)


Results in Units of 10.' pCi/m 3 ± 1 Sigma

#91 - BURNWELL


106±79±3

<0.31<0.34<0.41<0.67<0.54<0.32<0.28<0.47<0.96

7. 7±3 .0<1.0<CL

122±89±5

<0.32<0.50<0.33<1.16<0.40<0.25<0.23<0.51<0.96

4.2±2.9<1.8<CL

114±12<7<0.35<0.77<0.67<1.21<0.80<0.51<0.43<0.76<1.48

15.9±5.3<1.8<CL

88±76±4

<0.44<0.60<0.53<1.01<0.62<0.42<0.31<0.54<1.06<3.6<0.5<CL

= M-m =-- =- M = -= = M = M M =M

1w TAB WB-8 W

1-131 ACTIVITY IN CHARCOAL CARTRIDGE SAMPLES - 1992Results in Units of pCi/m 3 ± 1 Sigma

Location

92/01/07 <0.027 <0.027 <0.028 <0.020 * <0.022 <0.023 <0.021 <0.02192/01/14 <0.020 <0.032 <0.024 <0.021 <0.025 <0.025 <0.024 <0.022 <0.03292/01/22 <0.015 <0.030 <0.014 <0.026 <0.021 <0.026 <0.017 <0.025 <0.01692/01/28 <0.027 <0.020 <0.036 <0.030 <0.022 <0.025 <0.012 <0.021 <0.02392/02/04 <0.027 <0.017 <0.024 <0.027 <0.024 <0.022 <0.015 <0.021 <0.02192/02/12 <0.020 <0.022 <0.022~ <0.025 <0.023 <0.018 <0.019 <0.019 <0.01892/02/19 <0.020 <0.028 <0.020 <0.020 <0.025 <0.022 <0.022 <0.029 <0.01892/02/25 <0.026 <0.040 <0.032 <0.036 <0.032 <0.032 <0.024 <0.023 <0.03192/03/03 <0.029 <0.018 <0.029 <0.020 <0.031 <0.025 <0.031 <0.021 <0.02092/03/10 <0.024 <0.022 <0.025 <0.025 <0.021 <0.024 <0.015 <0.025 <0.02692/03/17 <0.026 <0.022 <0.025 <0.033 <0.024 <0.026 <0.024 <0.023 <0.03192/03/24 <0.028 <0.019 <0.016 <0.026 <0.021 <0.025 <0.021 <0.020 <0.02292/03/31 <0.021 <0.028 <0.021 <0.035 <0.023 <0.023 <0.024 <0.021 <0.02392/04/07 <0.015 <0.026 <0.022 <0.021 <0.027 <0.024 <0.027 <0.011 <0.02692/04/14 <0.021 <0.027 <0.022 <0.015 <0.028 <0.024 <0.023 <0.029 <0.02892/04/21 <0.023 <0.027 <0.018 <0.035 <0.024 <0.022 <0.017 <0.020 <0.02392/04/28 <0.026 <0.033 <0.034 <0.036 <0.028 <0.032 <0.020 <0.028 <0.02492/05/05 <0.021 <0.030 <0.023 <0.023 <0.028 <0.022 <0.022 <0.030 <0.02192/05/12 <0.020 <0.024 <0.021 <0.038 <0.033 <0.023 <0.019 <0.023 <0.02492/05/19 <0.027 <0.022 <0.034 <0.023 <0.021 <0.027 <0.021 <0.028 <0.02592/05/27 <0.032 <0.021 <0.020 <0.028 <0.028 <0.017 <0.018 <0.033 <0.02292/06/02 <0.020 <0.026 <0.031 <0.031 <0.022 <0.030 <0.026 <0.024 <0.02892/06/09 <0.021 <0.023 <0.031 <0.027 <0.024 <0.032 <0.032 <0.028 <0.02192/06/16 <0.023 <0.025 <0.031 <0.029 <0.024 <0.034 <0.022 <0.027 <0.02392/06/23 <0.021 <0.033 <0.036 <0.023 <0.031 <0.034 <0.025 <0.035 <0.03192/06/30 <0.028 <0.023 <0.039 <0.030 <0.018 <0.036 <0.028 <0.026 <0.034

* Pump Not Operational

M M-mm - -M - - -- M-- -M MM

TABLE B-8"(CONTINUED)

1-131 ACTIVITY IN CHARCOAL CARTRIDGE SAMPLES - 1992Results in Units of pCi/m 3 ± 1 Sigma

Location

92/07/07 <0.024 <0.039 <0.029 <0.023 <0.034 <0.030 <0.029 <0.024 *92/07/14 <0.040 <0.029 <0.033 <0.030 <0.029 <0.025 <0.026 <0.019 <0.03792/07/21 <0.026 <0.020 <0.028 <0.022 <0.019 <0.034 <0.023 <0.041 <0.02292/07/28 <0.017 <0.038 <0.029 <0.023 <0.035 <0.030 <0.022 <0.030 <0.02892/08/04 <0.025 <0.021 <0.035 <0.026 <0.025 <0.029 <0.033 <0.020 <0.01792/08/11 <0.020 <0.025 <0.023 <0.027 <0.024 <0.032 <0.026 <0.034 <0.02392/08/18 <0.024 <0.029 <0.026 <0.030 <0.023 <0.021 <0.023 <0.032 <0.03092/08/24 <0.027 <0.022 <0.023 <0.026 <0.030 <0.020 <0.020 <0.028 <0.02292/08/31 <0.029 <0.022 <0.031 <0.021 <0.020 <0.036 <0.019 <0.019 <0.02792/09/08 <0.027 <0.022 <0.031 <0.026 <0.034 <0.025 <0.033 <0.028 <0.02892/09/14 <0.031 <0.029 <0.024 <0.027 <0.032 <0.029 <0.024 <0.021 <0.02192/09/21 <0.029 <0.026 <0.025 <0.025 <0.028 * <0.022 <0.025 <0.02692/09/28 <0.015 * <0.022 <0.023 <0.029 <0.022 <0.019 <0.027 *92/10/05 <0.026 <0.029 <0.025 <0.031 <0.024 <0.024 <0.044 <0.022 <0.02792/10/13 <0.024 <0.025 <0.026 <0.020 <0.019 <0.029 <0.021 <0.021 <0.02292/10/19 <0.029 <0.030 <0.032 <0.035 <0.025 <0.030 <0.021 <0.035 <0.02992/10/26 <0.022 <0.035 <0.029 <0.024 <0.027 <0.040 <0.026 <0.023 <0.02192/11/03 <0.024 <0.018 <0.023 <0.023 <0.021 <0.028 <0.025 <0.028 <0.01992/11/09 <0.040 <0.043 <0.029 <0.032 <0.036 <0.030 <0.026 <0.025 <0.02892/11/16 <0.026 <0.023 <0.027 <0.024 <0.027 <0.023 <0.025 <0.022 <0.03192/11/23 <0.026 <0.020 <0.035 <0.026 <0.026 <0.037 <0.022 <0.018 <0.02292/12/01 <0.032 <0.027 <0.026 <0.027 <0.018 <0.036 <0.020 <0.049 <0.04292/12/08 <0.021 <0.022 <0.022 <0.023 <0.019 <0.020 <0.027 <0.017 <0.02192/12/15 <0.017 <0.023 * <0.024 <0.018 <0.021 <0.022 <0.027 <0.02092/12/22 <0.028 <0.038 * <0.027 * <0.051 <0.025 <0.042 <0.04992/12/28 <0.023 <0.026 <0.026 <0.032 <0.020 <0.009 <0.017 <0.017 <0.020

* Pump Not Operational

=I=- M m m m M m-m M M M m m M- -

T B-9CONCENTRATIONS OFGAMMA EMITTERS -fHUPS9•• RIVER WATER SAMPLES - 1992

Be-7K-40Mn-54Co-58Fe-59Co-60Zn-65Zr-951-131Cs-134Cs-137Ba/La-140Ra-226Ac/Th-228Others

<10.1237±12

<1.09<1.18<2.94<1.23<2.63<2.29<4.40<1.21<1.08<3.42<20

7.1±2.6<CL

< 10. 2247 ±12

<1.06<1.27<2.71<1. 18<2.73<2.17<4.36<1. 18<1. 11<3.0878±18

5. 2±2. 7<CL

<9.6222±12<1.14<1.23<2.86<1.23<2.85<2.20<3.45<1.02<1.10<3.1468±20<3.9<CL

<8.461±8<0.84<1.00<2.17<1.00<1.95<1.81<2.87<0.92<0.86<3.1782±15<2.8<CL

<10.4233±11

<1.07<1.22<2.97<1.13<2.76<2.21<4.06<1.04<1.06<3.5976±18

9.2±2.8<CL

<10.9240±12

<1.09<1.31<3.07<1.20<2.64<2.35<5.98<1.22<1.19<4.24

131±186.7±3.3

<CL1 #10 - HUDSON RIVER DISCHARGE


<8.667±8<0.93<1.12<2.66<1.24<2.43<1.94<3.02<0.90<0.77<3.5083±13<3.2<CL

<8.682±8<0.95<1.04<2.66<1.16<2.08<1.99<2.88<0.86<0.83<3.2691±17<3.3<CL

<8.256±9<0.95<1.11<2.73<1.23<2.56<1.95<2.99<1.06<0.94<3.7268±13<3.6<CL

<9.5175±6<0.91<1.13<2.59<1.12<2.54<1.96<4.39<1.13<1.00<3.9177±9

6.2±1.7<CL

<9.257±5<0.99<1.12<2.82<1.28<2.48<1.99<4.23<1.07<0.98<4.0881±10<4.1<CL

<9.576±9<1.01<1.12<2.82<1.21<2.63<2.22<5.62<1.09<0.99<5.1495±18<3.4<CL

Control Location

----- - - --n ---- mm m-n - - -

TABLE CONTINUED)

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN HUDSqN RIVER WATER SAMPLES - 1992PpiiItil - in llnitf nf n i/1 + 1 SinmA


<10.5219±12

<0.99<1.24<3.03<1.30<2.88<2.14<4.40<1.15<1.04<3.83

104±206.5±2.9

<CL

<8.983±9<0.96<1.14<2.27<1.17<2.33<1.95<3.46<1.16<0.98<3.7483±16<3.3<CL

<11. 610 10± 18

<1.26<1.42<2. 98<1.26<3. 17<2. 17<4.84<1. 13<1.06<3.83

137 ±2026.5t3.1

<CL

<10.7985±15

<1.08<1.31<2.86<1.16<2.81<1.96<7.41<1.01<0.92<5.0683±18

29.5±2.9<CL

<8.956±9<1.02<1.09<2.61<1.14<2.48<1.89<3.19<1.07<0.89<3.21

107±18<3.4<CL

<11.9946±17

<.1.18<1.41<3.03<1.33<3.09<2.13<5.30<1.12<1.04<3.60

123±2123.3±3.1

<CL#10 - HUDSON RIVER DISCHARGE


<16.1116±7<1.49<2.04<4.75

<2.31<4.32<3.59<6.81<1.84<1.59<6.5995±11

6.0±2.1<CL

<9.0190±11<0.98<1.23<2.88<1.15<2.77<2.21<4.03<1.11<1.04<3.4772±16<3.6<CL

<9.067±9<0.90<1.10<2.49<1.14<2.23<1.97<4.85<1.10<0.96<4.1376±16<3.4

<CL

<8.673±8<0.82<1.13<2.61<1.01<2.15<1.86<7.23<0.88<0.84<5.39

105±13<2.9

<CL

<7.757±10<0.86<1.11<2.51<1.16<2.47<1.79<2.97<1.06<0.88<3.46

119±11<3.5<CL

<8.464±9<0.94<1.15<2.96<1.13<2.70<1.89<4.67<1.03<0.99<4.5349±16

9.2±2.6<CL

IControl Location

TABLE B-10

CONCENTRATIONS OF TRITIUM IN HUDSON RIVER WATER SAMPLES(QUARTERLY COMPOSITE SAMPLES)

1992

Results in Units of pCi/1 ±1 Sigma

#9 - HUDSON RIVER INLET*

First QuarterSecond QuarterThird QuarterFourth Quarter

01/01/92 to04/01/92 to07/01/92 to10/01/92 to

03/31/9206/30/9210/01/9212/31/92

170 ± 100<100<100<100

#10 - HUDSON RIVER DISCHARGE

First Quarter 01/01/92 to 03/31/92 750± 130Second Quarter 04/01/92 to 06/30/92 <100Third Quarter 07/01/92 to 10/01/92 250±90Fourth Quarter 10/01/92 to 12/31/92 310±90

* Control Location

I0I.B-23

TAB-110GROSS BETA ACTIVITY AND

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN DRINKING WATER SAMPLES - 1992

Results in Units of pCi/l ± 1 Sigma

- - - m m m - - - - -m - - - - -

TABLE B-11 (CONTINUED)

GROSS BETA ACTIVITY AND

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN DRINKING WATER SAMPLES - 1992

Results in Units of pCi/l ± 1 Sigma

TABLE B-12

CONCENTRATIONS OF TRITIUM IN DRINKING WATER SAMPLES(QUARTERLY COMPOSITE SAMPLES)

1992

Results in Units of pCi/1 ±1 Sigma

First QuarterSecond QuarterThird QuarterFourth Quarter

17 - CAMP FIELD RESERVOIR

01/13/92 to 03/09/92 120± 7004/20/92 to 06/08/92 170 ± 80

07/10/92 to 09/08/92 <100

10/19/92 to 12/15/92 <100

B-26

- - m - --- m - -- m - -----

TABE 'rB-13CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN SHORELINE SOIL SAMPLES - 1992

Results in Units of nCi/ka (drv) + 1 Siama

#17 - VERPLANCKAc/Th-228

06/12/92 17,000±328 <29 45±14 442±16 1,180±281 605±45Ac/Th-228

09/22/92 15,000±290 <29 31±13 353±14 1,170±172 409±41#28 - LENT'S COVE

Ac/Th-22806/03/92 13,300±471 <73 77±23 130±26 3,790±470 1,470±101

Ac/Th-22809/22/92 11,600±430 <42 72±26 246±24 3,380±403 1320±93

#50 - MANNITOU INLET*Ac/Th-228

06/03/92 20,300±514 <54 <59 620±27 2,830±363 1,200±135Ac/Th-228

09/22/92 9,020±384 <57 <42 245±22 2,250±361 793±81

#53 - WHITE BEACHAc/Th-228

06/03/92 10,200±277 <23 <29 36±9 608±145 117±41Ac/Th-228

09/22/92 10,000±259 <21 <17 36±8 1,050±156_ 97±38

#84 - COLD SPRING*Ac/Th-228

06/03/92 37,900±848 <40 <36 <25 1,000±386 475±92Ac/Th-228

09/22/92 29,700±336 <37 <34 <42 1,160±336 638±71* Control Locations

M M M --- - --- M -M-- - -I

TABLT'B-14

CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN BROADLEAF VEGETATION - 1992

Results in Units of pCi/kg (wet) 1 1 Sigma

#5 NYU

05/26/92 Mother Wort 91±44 4,650±158 <9.6 <18.3 <9.9 <8.2 <6.9 345±58 <CLBriar 448±48 7,450±211 <10.2 <24.0 <13.5 <7.8 <9.4 <119 <CL

Ac/Th-228Clover 216±38 4,340±113 <11.8 <30.8 <18.0 <14.9 77.4±5.7 477±77 42±13

06/15/92 Briar 340±34 4,430±117 <5.0 <12.5 <7.0 <4.5 <5.0 244±64 <CLMilkweed 172±25 5,690±97 <10.0 <21.3 <12.1 <8.9 <9.1 381±51 <CLBoisenberry 243±46 5,540±147 <15.4 <35.8 <20.4 <13.4 <15.2 478±113 <CL

07/20/92 Milkweed 238±70 6,210±241 <12.4 <34.8 <19.4 <15.1 <12.3 241±123 <CLBriar 928±55 8,120±199 <10.5 <21.4 <11.0 <9.4 <7.7 350±104 <CLGrape 255±55 6,660±201 <9.5 <24.1 <11.8 <10.3 <8.2 513±113 <CL

08/10/92 Sorrell 906±46 5,030±130 <7.1 <15.2 <7.6 <7.2 <6.7 428±94 <CLAc/Th-288

Milkweed 575±47 4,730±151 <6.7 <16.9 <9.1 <7.6 <6.0 419±91 33±19Wild Grape 946±99 6,120±257 <15.4 <35.0 <21.2 <17.6 <16.0 508±176 <CL

09/15/92 Milkweed 1270±74 6,940±209 <12.6 <29.8 <13.0 <12.6 <9.5 547±110 <CLSumac 759±57 7,010±177 <8.3 <22.1 <8.2 <9.2 <8.0 227±103 <CL

Ac/Th-228Boisenberry <68 5,090±167 <10.3 <28.3 <12.5 <9.8 <9.0 <113 43±22

- - M -Mm M = M fm M = M M = M

TABLE B-14"tCONTINUED)


Results in Units of pCi/kg (wet) ± 1 Sigma

#5 - NYU

10/13/92 Creeper

MilkweedWild Grape

1,590±89

1,020±571,170±59

5,680±220

9,920±1694,360±154

<13.7 <27.8 <16.1

<9.7<11.2

<12.8

<8.1<8.9

Ac/Th-228<11.7 626±92 78±35

Ac/Th-228<7.7 270±117 145±25<8.9 343±82 <CL

<8.6<8.6

<17.2<21.0

11/10/92 Milkweed 2,370±107 7,830±264 <12.9 <30.5 <15.2 <13.7 <13.5 503±170 <CLBoxwood 1,490±75 7,660±197 <11.2 <25.9 <11.8 <9.4 <7.8 318±111 <CL

Ac/Th-228Creeper 811±46 9,090±106 <10.8 <24.0 <10.1 15.6±5.5 <8.3 485±91 212±18

M = -M M M M m- M - M M t m M = m m

TABLE B-IWF(CONTINUED)



#6 - CAMP SMITH

05/26/92 Mother Wort 113±21 4 580±87 <9.1 <20.6 <11.2 <7.9 <8.0 404±50 <CLAc/Th-228

Briar 251±27 5,290±125 <4.2 <12.4 <6.3 <4.4 <3.8 164±57 29±11Milkweed <80 4,330±202 <11.9 <29.5 <15.7 <9.7 <12.0 248±144 <CL

06/15/92 Briar 156±31 6,620±171 <8.8 <19.2 <8.3 <7.0 <6.3 312±58 <CLMilkweed <89 4,780±228 <14.5 <34.8 <16.3 <11.3 <12.1 382±132 <CLSorrell1 660±39 6,350±124 <13.4 <29.0 <15.0 <11.5 20.9±4.6 466±69 <CL

07/21/92 Sumac 105±62 5,290±204 <13.3 <27.0 <15.2 <13.4 <11.7 447±119 <CLAc/Th-228

Sorrell1 <47.3 3,760±82 <8.1 <16.8 <8.6 <6.9 21.1±3.6 243±52 37±12Ac/Th-228

Briar 278±28 6,710±128 <4.7 <12.0 <6.0 <5.4 <5.0 119±66 22±13

Ac/Th-22808/10/92 Sorrell 1,060±99 6,580±283 <18.3 <41.1 <26.2 <18.4 <17.0 395±186 81±41

Milkweed 955±72 4,670±182 <11.7 <25.9 <13.2 <11.4 <10.2 472±95 <CLBriar 943±46 6,060±142 <5.7 <15.0 <6.7 <6.5 <6.0 238±92 <CL

- m - m - - m - m --- m-- - -

TABLE B-1Iq (CONTINUED)



#6 - CAMP SMITH

09/15/92 Milkweed 561±81 5,090±201 <13.7 <35.8 <15.1 <13.0 <11.5 384±127 <CLAc/Th-228

Sorrell 960±81 5,780±216 <15.0 <28.3 <16.1 <14.1 <12.5 742±139 93±33Ac/Th-228

Briar 257±28 7,120±121 <9.2 <24.0 <9.9 <8.3 <7.1 276±55 25±11

Ac/Th-22810/13/92 Weed 1,270±38 5,440±103 <10.6 <22.7 <12.3 <9.0 15.8±3.6 395±58 44±14

Ac/Th-228Sorrell 1,660±39 7,410±91 <8.4 <21.8 <11.1 <10.2 17.6±3.5 841±71 204±14Briar 1,130t44 4,960±120 <4.6 <14.0 <7.5 <5.4 <4.8 317±57 <CL

Ac/Th-228

11/09/92 Sorrell 2,210±91 5,790±199 <9.2 <23.6 <12.9 <10.3 <8.3 543±126 74±29Ac/Th-228

Briar 1,380±40 8,570±100 <9.0 <19.7 <9.3 <7.9 12.6±4.4 426±60 102±13 .Ac/Th-228

Creeper 978±78 7,560±239 <12.0 <31.2 <15.3 <14.8 <11.8 649±158 82±36

m mm mm- - - m m- - m- - m - n-m.




#23 -ROSETON*

05/27/92 Clover 213±28 2,700±98 '5.3 <10.7 <6.4 <5.3 <5.5 342±73 <CLBriar 342±30 5,900±111 <11.6 '26.1 '15.4 <8.9 '10.8 254±65 <CLMilkweed 244±31 4,270±81 '7.7 '17.3 14.4±3.5 <6.9 <7.4 381±48 <CL

Ac/Th-22806/16/92 Briar 330±50 8,970±205 <8.3 <23.6 <9.6 <7.5 '9.4 519±106 32±19

°Milkweed <92 5,640±250 <15.5 '31.4 <18.6 <11.2 <12.6 266±127 <CLSorrell 208±38 3,690±130 '5.7 '14.3 <6.2 '6.2 '5.5 213±77 <CL

07/21/92 Milkweed 382±33 5,220±113 '10.6 '23.3 <14.9 <11.9 '10.1 307±65 <CLAc/Th-228

Briar 360±37 5,570±146 '4.9 '13.6 <6.7 '5.9 <5.0 190±50 29±16Ac/Th-228

Sorrell 684±52 3,760±131 <7.0 <17.7 <8.2 '7.5 <7.5 <111 32±15

08/11/92 Sorrell 419±22 4,870±81 <8.1 <17.7 <9.0 <7.9 <7.0 316±43 <CLMilkweed 513±40 4,410±128 '6.5 <14.1 <7.5 <6.9 <5.8 393±49 <CL

Ac/Th-228Briar 1,740±67 6,950±169 '8.1 <18.1 <8.6 '9.0 '8.3 490±117 35±19

* Control Location

M m m M M M m M M - - -- --= M = = =




* Control Location

m n-- - - - mn m - - -' m - - m •

TARBB-15CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN FISH AND INVERTEBRATE SAMPLES

1992


05/29/92

06/04/92

06/18/92

09/25/92

White Perch

Herring

Catfish

Blue Crabs

3,020±197

4,380±250

4,120±300

8,840±234

<13.4

<19.6

<20.2

<13.9

#23 - ROSETON

<17.6 <57.4

<27.3 <57.5

<24.4 <73.2

<16.6 <33.3

<15.4

<16.8

<25.4

<15.4

<35.0

<39.6

<58.5

<39.1

<14.1

<15.8

<25.4

<13.6

<12.8

<15.1

<20.4

<12.7

Ra-226518±198

Ra-226707±204

Ra-226

12 10±286

Ra-226724±234

Ac/Th-228233±42

---- -- m-m-- -- ,m


CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN FISH AND INVERTEBRATE SAMPLES1992


#25 - INDIAN POINT HUDSON RIVER

<19.5 <24.8 <59.5 <21.506/05/92

06/10/92

08/27/92

09/24/92

09/24/92

Blue Crabs

White Perch

Perch/Catfish

Eels

Perch

3,880±240

4,340±298

2,700±212

3,530±235

4,360±293

<19.6

<16.4

<16.5

<21.5

<24.8

<22.3

<21.4

<23.4

<65.4

<71.6

<36.8

<52.8

<25.7

<20.9

<14.6

<25.8

Ra-226<39.1 <18.4 <15.8 515±216

Ac/Th-228118±40

<55.6 <22.9 <18.4 <CL

Ra-226<39.4 <18.3 <16.7 1,100±213

Ra-226<37.5 <16.6 <14.8 451±211

Ra-226<51.2 <19.3 <20.1 415±203

- -n - m-m -m-m m m - -- m -m

TAB 9MB-16

ANNUAL SUMMARY, NON-RETS SAMPLE RESULTS - 1992

(units)

Aquat i cVegetation(pCi /kg-wet) Cs-137 100 15.0 18.8 11.2 2 3 13.5 13.5 13.5 1 3 82 29

BottomSediment(pCi/kg-dry)

Co-60

Cs-134

Cs-137

None

150

180

397

55.4

1220

1230

61.0

4190

65.0

49.8

151

4

2

6

6

6

6

ND

29.7

410

ND

29.7

410

ND

29.7

410

0 2

2

2

321

316

1695

227

28(A)

946

Soil(pCi/kg-dry)

Cs-137 180 34.0 40.0 28.0 2 2 ND ND ND 0 1 471

Precipitation(pCi/L)

H-3 2000 ND ND ND 0 4 ND ND ND 0 4 317 331

A - Was only detected at control location once, 1988.

B - No difference made between indicator and control locations for historical data.

* - Average of positive values for 1978 - 1989 (no data for 1985 - 1986).

TABLE B-17

MILCH ANIMAL CENSUS, 1992

DIRECTIONFROM

INDIAN POINTDISTANCE

(MILE)NO. OFANIMALS SPECIES

NNW 5.0 11 (Milkers)* and(Non Milkers)

* Milk produced by these goats is not used for humanconsumption.

NOTE:

B-37

I.

SECTOR

1 -N

2 -NNE

3 - NE

4 - ENE

5 -E

6 - ESE

7 - SE

8 - SSE

9 -S

10 - SSW

11 - SW

12 - WSW

13 - W

14 - WNW

15 - NW

16 - NNW

MILE

1.14

1.95

1.21

1.0

0.47

0.39

0.73

0.73

0.71

0.97

1.80

1.36

1.21

1.09

1.04

0.98

TABLE B-18

LAND USE CENSUS, 1992

LOCATION OF NEAREST RESIDENCE

Ayers Road, Jones Point

St. Mary's School Peekskill

South Street, Peekskill

South Street, Peekskill

Bleakley Ave., Buchanan

Broadway, Buchanan

Westchester Ave., Buchanan

Westchester Ave., Buchanan

Broadway.' Verplanck

St. Patricks Rectory, Verplanck

Elm Ave, Tomkins Cove

Gays Hill Rd., Tomkins Cove

Gays Hill Rd., Tomkins Cove

Route 9W, Tomkins Cove

Route 9W, Tomkins Cove

Jones Point

B-38

I.II

IO

APPENDIX C

HISTORICAL TRENDS

APPENDIX C

HISTORICAL TRENDS

Historical data for various radionuclides and media are presented both intabular form and in graphical form to facilitate the comparison of 1992 datawith historical values. Comparison to other data from outside sources ispresented as available. Although other samples were taken and analyzed,values were only tabulated and plotted where positive indications werepresent.

C-1

TABLE C-1

TEN YEAR HISTORICAL DATA

DIRECT RADIATION ANNUAL SUMMARY

1982 TO 1992

I 1982*

1983*

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

15

15

15

15

14

14

14

14

13

12

13

13

14

15

14

14

13

13

13

13

16

16

16

16

18

15

14

14

14

14

* Prior to 1984 only 21 of the existing 40 TLD locations were in use.

C-2

= -m = = - - m - = = =--M m m m = =

DIRECT RADIATION1982-1992

Figure C-1

mREM/qtr20

15

10

011982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992

1983 1985 1987 1989 1991

-- INNER RING 1 OUTER RING * CONTROL

TABLE C-2


RADIONUCLIDES IN AIR

1982 TO 1992

pCi/m3

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989*

1990*

1991*

0.03

0.02

0.02

0.02

0.03

0.02

0.02

0.02

0.02

0.02

0.04

0.02

0.02

0.02

0.03

0.03

0.02

0.02

0.02

0.02

0.07

0.01

<LLD

<LLD

0.06

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

0.07

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD......99 2........*.........

HISTORICAL ........ ....... ..........AVERA ....E 0.0 0.02.. 0.05 0.07........HISTOR........I.....AL...

STD. DE. 0.00.0.007..03.N/

<LLD indicates no positive values detected above the sample lowerlimit of detection.* 1989, 1990, 1991 and 1992 include RETS and Non-RETS indicator

locations.

C-4

mm m- m m Mm mm m m mmmm m m mm

RADIONUCLIDES IN AIR-GROSS BETA1982-1992

Figure C-2

pCi/m30.05

0.04 H

LLD

0.03 -

0",0.02 H

0.01 ý

01982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992

1983 1985 1987 1989 1991

=INDICATOR M CONTROL

TABLE C-3


RADIONUCLIDES IN HUDSON RIVER WATERINLET AND DISCHARGE

1982 TO 1992

pCi/l

YERTRITIUM Cs-J.37

INLET jDISCHARGE j INLET DISCHAR

1982 120 500 <LLD 6.1

1983 260 820 4.2 4.4

1984 <LLD 540 <LLD <LLD

1985 <LLD 900 <LLD <LLD

1986 <LLD <LLD <LLD 8.0

1987 280 700 <LLD <LLD

1988 220 820 <LLD <LLD

1989 240 320 <LLD <LLD

1990 <LLD 630 <LLD <LLD

1991 439 656 <LLD <LLD

<LLD indicates no positive values detected above the sample lowerlimit of detection.

C-6

m mm nm nm mn mn nm mm mm- m

- - -- I--HUDSON RIVER WATER-TRITIUM

1982-1992

Figure C-3

4pCi/L (Thousands)

* ' LLD -NO POSITIVE DETECTION

LLD

-4

2

01981982

a ..................*1 * * * I - *Ei

II

I

w

*1 if1984 1986 1988 1990 1992

1983 1985 1987 1989 1991

= INLET M DISCHARGE

TABLE C-4


RADIONUCLIDES IN DRINKING WATERCAMP FIELD RESERVOIR

1982 TO 1992

pCi/l

YEAR .TRITIUM C-137 ...

1982 190 <LLD

1983 122 6

1984 178 <LLD

1985 (a) <LLD <LLD

1986 <LLD <LLD

1987 280 <LLD

1988 375 <LLD

1989 263 <LLD

1990 <LLD <LLD

1991 <LLD <LLD

1992 <LLD <LLD

HISTORICALAVERAGE 235 6

HISTORICALSTD. DEV. 90 N/A

(a) Includes Roseton data


N/A - Not Applicable

C-8

= = = = m m = -- -- -I '- - - ----- I

DRINKING WATER-TRITIUM1982-1992

Figure C-4

pCi/L (Thousands)3

2.5

2

1.5

1

0.5

0

* ( LLD -NO POSITIVE DETECTION

LLD

*" * *

M m - I I

1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 19921983 1985 1987 1989 1991

= CAMP FIELD RESEVOIR

TABLE C-5


RADIONUCLIDES IN SHORELINE SOILS

1982 TO 1992

pCi/kg (dry)

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

70

24

34

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

30

91

<LLD

48

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

49

47

<LLD

<LLD

420

439

286

166

253

99

61

123

150

202

140

197

142

278

212

121

116

116

89

313

HISTORICALAVERAGE

HISTORICALSTD. DEV.

50

26

48 220

129

172

1 75I I I I


C-10

m m m- - m - I m -mmm - = = =

RADIONUCLIDES IN SHORELINE SOILS1982-1992

Figure C-5

pCi/Kg(DRY)500

400

300

200

100

0

I-

1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 19921983 1985 1987 1989 1991

m Cs-134 MCs-137

INDICATOR SAMPLES

TABLE C-6


RADIONUCLIDES IN BROAD LEAF VEGETATION (a)

1982 TO 1992

pCi/kg (wet)

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

<LLD

17

<LLD

98

30

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

26

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

37

<LLD

21

<LLD

<LLD

21

HISTORICALAVERAGE

HISTORICALSTD. DEV.

43

37

26

9I a

(a) Leafy green vegetable prior to 1984.


C-12

m m m m m m m m m - - - --- m

BROAD LEAF VEGETATION Cs-1371982-1992

Figure C-6

pCi/kg(WET)120

100

80

60

40

20

0

!-

I-.

1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 19921983 1985 1987 1989 1991

INDICATOR M CONTROL

TABLE C-7


RADIONUCLIDES IN FISH AND INVERTERBRATES

1982 TO 1992

pCi/kg (wet)

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

1987

1988

1989

1990

1991

36

43

33

32

12

<LLD

<LLD

36

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

19

24

24

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

<LLD

1992 <LLD <LLD

HISTORICALAVERAGE 32 22

HISTORICALSTD. DEV. 11 3


C-14

---- -- - - --- - -- - -

FISH/INVERTEBRATES Cs-1371982-1992

Figure 0-7

pCi/Kg(wet)200

175

150

125

100

75

50

25

0

I-C-,,

1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 19921983 1985 1987 1989 1991

m INDICATOR M CONTROL

APPENDIX D

EPA INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM

APPENDIX D

EPA INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM

The New York Power Authority's James A. Fitzpatrick NPP EnvironmentalLaboratory participates in the EPA Interlaboratory Comparison program.Samples of various media containing known activities of radionuclides weresent from the EPA to participating laboratories for analyses. Results of theanalyses were compared to the EPA known values.

In 1992, samples of environmental media were provided and appropriateanalyses were performed as indicated in Table D-1.

EPA reports interlaboratory results in term of normalized deviations from aknown EPA value. Interlaboratory results are considered acceptable, by theEPA, if the laboratory's normalized deviation for a sample is less than 3 orgreater than minus 3. The Laboratory's performance in this program wasacceptable; results within 3 normalized deviations were obtained for 41 ofthe 42 tests.

The one test for which the NDKV was unacceptable was part of the analysis ofthe concentrations of six radionuclides in one water sample. In this sample,

e NDKV for Ru-106 was -4.3, while the NDKVs for the remaining 5dionuclides were all acceptable. This nonconformity was found to result

Prom an inaccuracy in the gamma yield factor for the 622 keV photon peak usedto calculate the Ru-106 activity. The yield factor was revised by applyinga correction factor.

D-1

TABLE D-1

USEPA ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY LABORATORY

INTERCOMPARISON STUDY PROGRAM

GROSS BETA ANALYSIS OF AIR PARTICULATE FILTERS (PCI/FILTER)GROSS BETA ANALYSIS OF WATER (PCI/LITER)

01/92 QA 92-005 WATER GB 30±1(3)30±131±1

30±5 0.12

03/92 QA 92-025 FILTER GB 42±0.9(3) 41±5 0.8144±0.944I0.9

04/92 QA 92-033 WATER GB 110±2(3)113±2109±2

140±21 -2.42

4 4 4 I I 4

05/92 QA 92-035 WATER GB 44±0.6(3)45±0.645±0.6

44±5 0.23

08/92 QA 92-097 FILTER GB 73±1(3) 69±10 0.6975±171±1

09/92 QA 92-110 WATER GB 47±1(3) 50±5.0 -0.6948±249±1

10/92 QA 92-122 WATER GB 39±2(3) 53±10 -1.5646±247±2

D-2

TABLE D-1 (CONTINUED)



TRITIUM ANALYSIS OF WATER (PCI/LITER)

02/92 QA 92-017 WATER H-3 8318±275(3)7985±2718372±275

8000±300(4)7600±3007600±300

7904±790 0.70

7904±790 -0.37

4 I I 9 I

06/92 1 QA 92-064 WATER H-3 2222±198(3)2266±1992293±199

2200±200(4)2200±2002200±200

2125±347

2125±347

0.68

0.37

10/92 QA 92-123 WATER H-3 5650±117(3) 5962±596 -1.185554±1165467±116

5800±200(4) 5962±596 -0.475900±2005700±200

D-3




IODINE ANALYSIS OF WATER (PCI/LITER) AND MILK (PCI/LITER)

02/92 QA 92-019 WATER 1-131 54±2(3)52±158±1

54±3(4)58±454±4

59±6 -1.25

59±6 -1.10

04/92 QA 92-034 MILK 1-131 75±2 (3)

66±11(4)79±1989±14

78±8

78±8

-0.58

-0.04

08/92 QA 92-098 WATER 1-131 43±1(3) 45±6 -0.5843±143±1

37±1(4) 45±6 -0.7746±244±1

09/92 QA 92-111 MILK 1-131 87±10(3)96±1888±4

89±20 (4)120±10120±10

100±10

100±10

-1.67

1.67

- I I I I I -

D-4


1. USEPA ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY LABORATORYINTERCOMPARISON STUDY PROGRAM

GAMMA ANALYSIS OF MILK, WATER (PCI/LITER)AND AIR PARTICULATE FILTERS (PCI/FILTER)

02/92 QA 92-018 WATER Co-60

Zn-65

Ru-106

Cs-134

Cs-137

Ba-133

38±2(s)37±337±2

145±6 (3)139±9136±6

160±14 (3)153±27147±17

25±1(3)28±227±1

48±2(3)47±349±2

66±3(3)76±473±3

40±5

148±15

203±20

31±5

49±5

76±8

-0.92

-0.92

-4.30

-1.50

-0.35

-0.94

03/92 QA 92-025 FILTER Cs-137 11±2(3) 10±5 0.6913±212±1

04/92 QA 92-033 WATER Co-60

Cs-134

Cs-137

61±2(3)55±256±2

21±1 (3)21±222±1

23±2 (3)23±219±2

56±5

24±5

22±5

0.46

-0.92

-0.12

I a i I I

D-5



INTERCOMPARISON STUDY PROGRAMGAMMA ANALYSIS OF MILK, WATER (PCI/LITER)AND AIR PARTICULATE FILTERS (PCI/FILTER)

D-6



INTERCOMPARISON STUDY PROGRAMGAMMA ANALYSIS OF MILK, WATER (PCI/LITER)AND AIR PARTICULATE FILTERS (PCI/FILTER)

09/92 QA 92-111 MILK Cs-137 14±3kIl)14±415±3

22±4(4)17±312±3

15±5

15±5

-0.23

0.75

1* I

.10/92 QA 92-121 WATER Co-60

Zn-65

Ru-106

Cs-134

Cs-137

Ba-133

8±1(3)10±110±1

148±6 (3)157 ±5154±4

179±16 (3)182±9180±9

10±5

148±15

175±18

8±5

8±5

74±7

-0.23

0.58

0.51

0.00

-0.35

0.08

7±1(3)6±0.5

11±0.6

6±1(3)7±0.98±1

733 (3)74±276±2

- I a i a m I -

D-7




GAMMA ANALYSIS OF MILK, WATER (PCI/LITER)AND AIR PARTICULATE FILTERS (PCI/FILTER)

10/92 QA 92-122 WATER Co-60

Cs-134

Cs-137

17±1(3)13±113±1

3.6±0.9 (3)5.0±0.84.4±0.7

7.4±1.3(3)9.2±1.66.4±1.2

15±5

5±5

8±5

-0.23

-0.23

-0.23

Ei i I I

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

Results reported as activity ± the error (I sigma).

Results reported as activity ± the standard deviation of the error.

Analyzed at the site Environmental Laboratory.

Analyzed at a vendor laboratory.

NDKV is the Normalized Deviation from Known Value as determined by theEPA. Values within the range of +3 and -3 indicate acceptableresults.

D-8

Documents

Indian Point, Units 1, 2 and 3, Annual Radiological ... · CONSOLIDATED EDISON COMPANY OF NEW YORK, INC. INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION UNITS 1, 2, AND 3 ... activity profile