### PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I Rev. 0

January 2015 

### APPENDIX I FILTERED VERSUS UNFILTERED LIQUID SAMPLE COMPARISON

### PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I Rev. 0

Janu ary 2015 I

- 1 

### EVALUATION OF THE EFFECTS OF LABORATORY FILTERING ON SAMPLE ACTIVITY Influent and effluent samples collected from CWT, ZLD, POTW

- I wastewater treatment facilities , and produced water from we ll sites were analyzed both pre

- and post

- filtering (samples are hereafter referred to as "unfiltered," and "filtered,” respectively). The filtering was o nly performed in the laboratory, and no samples were filtered p rior to reaching the laboratory
. Each pair of unfiltered/filtered results were then compared and evaluated to determine what effects, if any, filtering may have had on the activity. The following hierarchy was used to br eak down this comparison study:

 Facility type (CWT, ZLD, POTW

- I , and Pr oduction) ,  Sample type ( i nfluent or e ffluent ; note that produced water only had one sample type ) , and  Target analyte/nuclide (including: gross  , gross  , Ra

- 226, and Ra

- 228)
. This hierarchy yielded 27 unique target analyte groups in total. Each of the 27 groups were evaluated by considering the following metrics:

 Only detected data were considered for this evaluation. If one or both of the un filtered/filtered pair had a non

- detect (result less than MDC), then that sample pair was not included in the evaluation
.  The results from each unfiltered/filtered pair were checked for consistency by evaluating whether the error bars fr o m the pair overlap ped. If the error bars did overlap, the pair was said to be “consistent”; if the error bars did not overlap, the pair was said the be “discrepant.”  Each unfiltered/filtered pair was then evaluated by performing a relative percent difference (RPD) calculat ion. If the RPD was less than 35 percent, the pair was thought of as having passed a duplicate test for consistency; if the results were greater than 35 percent, the pair was thought of as having failed the duplicate check, which may indicate t hat the res ults are discrepant.  Each unfiltered/filtered pair was then evaluated by performing a duplicate error ratio (DER). If the DER was less than 1.42, the pair was thought of as having passed a duplicate test for consistency; if the results were greater than 1 .42, the pair was thought of as having failed the duplicate check, which may indicate that the results are discrepant.  Each unfiltered/filtered pair was also evaluated to determine which sample had the higher activity. A finding that either the filtered o r the unfiltered results exclusively or consistently had the higher activity would allow the conclusion that filtered had some effect. A finding that there was a mix of both filtered and unfiltered results that had higher activity indicated that there was no appreciable effect that filtering had on the samples.  Finally, for each unfiltered/filtered pair, each of the four analytes were reviewed against the above criteria to determine whether there was a sample

- specific correlation of the results. For examp le, if gross  and gross  were discrepant for a given sample pair, each of the remaining nuclides for that sample pair were checked to see if they were discrepant. A sample pair that was discrepant across all analytes would be considered a strong indication that filt ering had some effect on that specific sample pair. If the results yielded a mix of discrepant and consistent results across all analytes , then the conclusion may be that filtering had no discernible effect.

### PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I Rev. 0

Janu ary 2015 I

- 2 

### Results T able I - 1 is generally representative of the outcome of the evaluation that was observed in all sample groups (i.e., across all facilities and analytes ). Discussion Using T able I - 1 as an example, the evaluation leading to a conclusion is as follows:

 There were nine pairs usable for the eval uation
.  O f the nine pairs of usable data, there were three pairs of results that were consistent and six pairs of results that were discrepant.  Of the six discrepant pairs, there were four pairs in which the filtered result was higher than the unfiltered r esults, and two pair s in which the unfiltered result was higher than the filtered result. The conclusion from this evaluation is that there is no apparent trend or bias that filtering produces. This same evaluation was performed for each sample group and the conclusions are presented in Table I - 2
. The conclusions fall into the following categories:

 NC (No Conclusion)

– indicates that there were too few data points to make a conclusion.  NE (No Effect)

– indicates that there appears to be no consistent e ffect that filtered had on sample results.  UBH (Unfiltered Biased High)

– indicates that although there was a mix of data, there are significantly more unfiltered results that were higher than their unfiltered counterparts.  FBH (Filtered Biased High)

– ind icates that although there was a mix of data, there are significantly more filtered results that are higher than their unfiltered counterparts.  UCH (Unfiltered Correlates High)

– indicates that there appears to be a correlation between unfiltered results a nd greater activity.  FCH (Filtered Correlates High)

– indicates that there appears to be a correlation between filtered results and greater activity. There was no correlation found within any sample group. For the most part, there was either not enough d ata to evaluate or the data appeared to be mainly consistent with a distribution of results around the consistency. There were some indications that either the unfiltered results or the filtered results may have been biased higher. However, across differ ent sample groups this bias was not maintained for any analyte. The totals serve to provide a general synopsis of all the data. Sixty

- seven percent of the data pairs exhibit results that are consistent between the filtered and unfiltered analyses. Of th e remaining data, 20 percent of the pairs had unfiltered data that were more elevated than their

### PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I Rev. 0

Janu ary 2015 I

- 3 

### filtered counterpart, whereas only 13 percent of the pairs contained filtered results that were higher. Overall, the data seem to indicate that filtering may have a very small, if not negligible, effect. Considering that this effect, if it exists, resulted in a meaningful distribution of both sample activity increases and decreases, it is likely nuclide

- specific and/or facility

- specific. One final analysis wa s performed on the data which looked at all the results for a given sample pair to determine whether the effects of filtering were consistent for a given sample across all analytes. The results of this evaluation were inconclusive at best, indicating once again the filtering may have no consistently recognizable effect.

### PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I Rev. 0

Janu ary 2015 I

- 4



### Table I - 1 . Gross Alpha Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– CWT Effluent
Study ID Sample

Type Gross

Alpha Result (pCi/L) Gross

Alpha Error (pCi/L) Gross

Alpha MDC (pCi/ L) Results

Consistent (Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 06

- LQ

- 075 Unfiltered 13,700 1,800 1,420 Discrepant 35.8 1.11 Filtered WT

- 06

- LQ

- 076 Filtered 19,600 2,070 1,410 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 085 Filtered 22,800 1,470 595 Discrepant 18.6 0.965 Filtered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 086 Unfiltered 18,900 1,420 744 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 149 Filtered 13,300 1,820 2,020 Discrepant 69.4 2.48 Unfiltered WT

- 06

- LQ

- 150 Unfiltered 27,300 2,250 1040 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 151 Filtered 8.25 1.16 0.874 Discrepant 55.3 0.957 Filtered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 152 Unfiltered 4.68 1.51 1.95 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 153 Filtered 22,700 2,340 1,840 Discrepant 28.1 1.67 Filtered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 154 Unfiltered 17,100 2,470 2800 WT

- 11

- LQ

- 187 Filtered 5,520 1,490 1,830 Consistent 45.9 0.468 Filtered WT

- 11

- LQ

- 188 Unfiltered 3,460 1,680 2,510 WT

- 11

- LQ

- 221 Filtered 4,160 1,460 1,950 Consistent 7.125 0.064 Filtered WT

- 11

- LQ

- 222 Unfiltered 3,876 1,770 2,630 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 237 Filtered 40,700 2,780 1,270 Consistent 3.86 0.207 Unfiltered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 238 Unfiltered 42,300 2,800 131 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 245 Filtered 13,700 1,730 1,600 Discrepant 93.4 4.25 Unfiltered WT

- 06

- LQ

- 246 Unfiltered 37,600 2,290 879 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Concentration. RPD denotes Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).

### PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I Rev. 0

Janu ary 2015 I

- 5 

### Table I - 2 . Summary of Evaluation Data
Sample Group N umber of U sable P airs N umber of

Pairs with consistent results No. of

Discrepant Unfiltered Higher No. of

Discrepant F iltered H igher Conclusion Produced Water Gross Beta 6 5 1 0 NC/NE Produced Water Ra

- 226 5 5 0 0 NC/NE Produced Water Ra

- 228 6 5 0 1 NC/NE INFLUENT POTW

– I Gross Alpha 2 1 1 0 NC INFLUENT POTW

– I Gross Beta 3 2 0 1 NE INFLUENT POTW

- I Ra

- 226 6 4 1 1 NE INFLUENT POTW

- I Ra

- 228 6 3 2 1 N C/NE EFFLUENT POTW

- I Gross Beta 5 4 0 1 NC/NE EFFLUENT POTW

- I Ra

- 226 5 4 0 1 NE EFFLUENT POTW

- I Ra

- 228 2 1 1 0 NC/NE INFLUENT CWT G ross A lpha 10 7 2 1 NE INFLUENT CWT G ross B eta 21 12 7 2 NE /UBH INFLUENT CWT Ra

- 226 22 14 5 3 NE INFLUENT CWT Ra

- 228 20 13 6 1 NE /UBH EFFLUENT CWT G ross A lpha 10 3 3 4 NE EFFLUENT CWT G ross B eta 10 7 2 1 NE EFFLUENT CWT Ra

- 226 22 18 1 3 NE/FBH EFFLUENT CWT Ra

- 228 14 1 1 2 1 NE/UBH INFLUENT ZLD G ross A lpha 18 10 6 2 UBH INFLUENT ZLD G ross B eta 17 10 5 2 UBH INFLUENT ZLD Ra

- 226 25 17 4 4 NE INFLUENT ZLD Ra

- 228 23 17 5 1 NE/UBH EFFLUENT ZLD G ross A lpha 17 8 6 3 N E/UBH EFFLUENT ZLD G ross B eta 17 9 5 3 NE/UBH EFFLUENT ZLD Ra

- 226 20 16 1 3 NE/FBH EFFLUENT ZLD Ra

- 228 18 15 1 2 NE Totals 330 221 67 42 Notes: NC (No Conclusion)

– indicates that there were too f ew data points to make a conclusion. NE (No Effect)

– indicates that there appears to be no consistent effect that filtered had on sample results. UBH (Unfiltered Biased High)

– indicates that although there was a mix of data, there are significantly more unfiltered results that were higher than their unfiltered counterparts. FBH (Filtered Biased High)

– indicates that although there was a mix of data, there are significantly more filtered results that are higher than their unfiltered counterparts. UCH (Un filtered Correlates High)

– indicates that there appears to be a correlation between unfiltered results and greater activity. FCH (Filtered Correlates High)

– indicates that there appears to be a correlation between filtered results and greater activity.January 2015

I - 6 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 3 . Gross Alpha Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– Produced Water Study ID Sample

Type Gross Alpha

Result Gross Alpha

Error Gross Alpha

MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WP

- 09

- LQ

- 018 Filtered 8,780 1,470 1,33 0 Consistent 10.5 0.208 Unfiltered WP

- 09

- LQ

- 019 Unfiltered 9,760 1,840 2,040 WP

- 08

- LQ

- 020 Filtered 11,200 1,590 1,310 Consistent 1.12 0.025 Unfiltered WP

- 08

- LQ

- 021 Unfiltered 11,300 1,920 2,040 WP

- 21

- LQ

- 037 Unfiltered 10,700 1,700 1,740 Consist ent 6.38 0.149 Filtered WP

- 21

- LQ

- 038 Filtered 11,400 1,630 1,450 WP

- 04

- LQ

- 039 Unfiltered 30,000 2,600 1,860 Consistent 9.45 0.401 Filtered WP

- 04

- LQ

- 040 Filtered 33,000 2,670 1,820 WP

- 12

- LQ

- 041 Unfiltered 21,800 2,130 1,480 Consistent 18.9 0.636 Unfiltered WP

- 12

- LQ

- 042 Filtered 18,000 2,050 1,750 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD denotes Relative P ercent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 7 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 4 . Gross Beta Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– Produced Water Study ID Sample

Type Gross Beta

Result Gross Beta

Error Gross Beta

MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WP

- 09

- LQ

- 018 Filtered 3,040 604 849 Consistent 16.6 0.277 Filtered WP

- 09

- LQ

- 019 Unfiltered 2,570 608 881 WP

- 08

- LQ

- 020 Filtered 4,050 641 862 Consistent 21.4 0.446 Filtered WP

- 08

- LQ

- 021 Unfiltered 3,270 629 882 WP

- 16

- LQ

- 027 Unfiltered 1,140 627 997 Consistent 33.8 0.279 Filtered WP

- 16

- LQ

- 028 Filtered 1,610 575 876 WP

- 21

- LQ

- 037 Unfiltered 2,300 617 915 Consistent 37.9 0.614 Filter ed WP

- 21

- LQ

- 038 Filtered 3,370 645 904 WP

- 04

- LQ

- 039 Unfiltered 7,600 750 898 Consistent 5.67 0.199 Unfiltered WP

- 04

- LQ

- 040 Filtered 7,180 767 946 WP

- 12

- LQ

- 041 Unfiltered 6,810 750 923 Discrepant 51.0 1.43 Unfiltered WP

- 12

- LQ

- 042 Filtered 4,050 640 868 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD denotes Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are p otentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 8 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 5 . Ra - 226 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– Produced Water Study ID Sample

Type Ra - 226 Result Ra - 226 Error Ra - 226 MDC Results Consistent

(E rror Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WP

- 16

- LQ

- 027 Unfiltered 819 167 134 Consistent 3.60 0.064 Filtered WP

- 16

- LQ

- 028 Filtered 849 170 129 WP

- 20

- LQ

- 031 Unfiltered 145 44.0 57.0 Consistent 31.1 0.283 Unfiltered WP

- 20

- LQ

- 032 Filtered 106 55.0 84.0 WP

- 21

- LQ

- 033 Unfiltered 340 59 .0 68 .0 Consistent 15.2 0.605 Filtered WP

- 21

- LQ

- 034 Filtered 292 53.0 62.0 WP

- 21

- LQ

- 037 Unfiltered 6,300 113 436 Consistent 6.45 0.226 Filtered WP

- 21

- LQ

- 038 Filtered 6,720 941 627 WP

- 04

- LQ

- 039 Unfil tered 26,600 3,330 764 Consistent 9.86 0.295 Unfiltered WP

- 04

- LQ

- 040 Filtered 24,100 2,750 654 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum D etectable Activity. RPD denotes Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 9 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 6 . Ra - 228 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– Produced Water Study ID Sample

Type Ra - 228 Result Ra - 228 Error Ra - 228 MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WP

- 16

- LQ

- 027 Unfiltered 896 76.0 11.0 Consistent 5.15 0.219 Unfiltered WP

- 16

- LQ

- 028 Filtered 851 72.0 11.0 WP

- 1 9

- LQ

- 029 Unfiltered 26.0 8.00 10.0 Discrepant 51.4 0.717 Filtered WP

- 19

- LQ

- 030 Filtered 44.0 10.0 12.0 WP

- 20

- LQ

- 031 Unfiltered 42.0 6.00 6.00 Consistent 13.3 0.332 Filtered WP

- 20

- LQ

- 032 Filtered 48.0 7.00 6.00 WP

- 21

- LQ

- 033 Unfiltered 214 17.0 1 9.0 Consistent 1.89 0.17 Filtered WP

- 21

- LQ

- 034 Filtered 210 16.0 6.00 WP

- 21

- LQ

- 037 Unfiltered 941 110 48.0 Consistent 6.36 0.033 Unfiltered WP

- 21

- LQ

- 038 Filtered 883 885 28.0 WP

- 04

- LQ

- 039 Unfiltered 1,900 161 68.0 Consistent 2.13 0.084 Unfilter ed WP

- 04

- LQ

- 040 Filtered 1,860 182 55.0 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD denotes Relative Percent Differ ence (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 10 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 7 . Gross Alpha Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– POTW - I Influent Study ID Sample

Type Gross Alpha

Result G ross Alpha

Error Gross Alpha

MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 15

- LQ

- 183 Filtered 11.0 5.13 7.61 Discrepant 182 1.84 Unfiltered WT

- 15

- LQ

- 184 Unfiltered 240 124 160 WT

- 15

- LQ

- 225 Filtered 490 180 222 Consis tent 83.4 0.612 Unfiltered WT

- 15

- LQ

- 226 Unfiltered 1,190 556 788 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD denote s Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 11 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 8 . Gross Beta Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– POTW - I Influent Study ID Sample

T ype Gross

Beta Result Gross Beta

Error Gross Beta

MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 16

- LQ

- 077 Filtered 6.24 1.44 2.08 Consistent 18.3 0.373 Unfiltered WT

- 16

- LQ

- 078 Unfiltered 7.50 0.941 1.19 WT

- 16

- LQ

- 143 Filtered 11,300 1,540 1,980 Discrepant 200 3.72 Filtered WT

- 16

- LQ

- 144 Unfiltered 9.94 1.56 2.08 WT

- 16

- LQ

- 243 Filtered 6.75 1.85 2.73 Consistent 35.4 0.517 Unfiltered WT

- 16

- LQ

- 244 Unfiltered 9.64 2.18 3.20 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. C onclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD denotes Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ra tio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 12 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 9 . Ra - 226 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– POTW - I Influent Study ID Sample

Type Ra - 226 Result Ra - 226 Error Ra - 226 MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 17

- LQ

- 189 Filtered 131 41.0 60.0 Consistent 26.8 0.315 Filtered WT

- 17

- LQ

- 190 Unfiltered 100 29.0 45.0 WT

- 13

- LQ

- 211 Filtered 58.0 26.0 39.0 Consistent 49.4 0.421 Unfiltered WT

- 13

- LQ

- 212 Unfiltered 96.0 38.0 59.0 WT

- 14

- LQ

- 213 Filtered 82.0 32. 0 45.0 Consistent 37.6 0.415 Unfiltered WT

- 14

- LQ

- 214 Unfiltered 120 34.0 51.0 WT

- 15

- LQ

- 225 Filtered 255 60.0 81.0 Discrepant 61.0 0.695 Unfiltered WT

- 15

- LQ

- 226 Unfiltered 479 153 235 WT

- 16

- LQ

- 243 Filtered 66.0 22.0 33.0 Consistent 65.9 0.886 Un filtered WT

- 16

- LQ

- 244 Unfiltered 131 70.0 106 WT

- 12

- LQ

- 293 Filtered 100 32.0 42 .0 Discrepant 110 3.56 Filtered WT

- 12

- LQ

- 294 Unfiltered 345 61.0 58.0 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD denotes Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 13 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 1 0 . Ra - 228 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– POTW - I Influent Study ID Sample

Type Ra - 228 Result Ra - 228 Error Ra - 228 MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 15

- LQ

- 183 Filtered 103 28.0 36.0 Discrepant 72.8 1. 73 Filtered WT

- 15

- LQ

- 184 Unfiltered 48.0 15.0 17.0 WT

- 17

- LQ

- 189 Filtered 12.0 4.00 6.00 Consistent 15.4 0.180 Unfiltered WT

- 17

- LQ

- 190 Unfiltered 14.0 4.00 6.00 WT

- 14

- LQ

- 213 Filtered 10.0 4.00 5.00 Consistent 10.5 0.080 Filtered WT

- 14

- LQ

- 214 Un filtered 9.00 5.00 8.00 WT

- 17

- LQ

- 219 Filtered 20.0 7.00 10.0 Consistent 0.000 0.000 Unfiltered WT

- 17

- LQ

- 220 Unfiltered 20.0 7.00 10.0 WT

- 15

- LQ

- 225 Filtered 91.0 13.0 10.0 Discrepant 85.5 2.01 Unfiltered WT

- 15

- LQ

- 226 Unfiltered 227 32.0 31.0 WT

- 16

- LQ

- 243 Filtered 5.00 3.00 4.00 Discrepant 157 2.91 Unfiltered WT

- 16

- LQ

- 244 Unfiltered 41.0 12.0 16.0 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC den otes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD denotes Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 14 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 1 1 . Gross Beta Filtered/Unfiltered Co mparison

– POTW - I Effluent Study ID Sample

Type Gross

Beta Result Gross Beta

Error Gross Beta

MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 16

- LQ

- 079 Filtered 5.77 0.858 1.14 Consistent 21.5 0.415 Unfiltered WT

- 16

- LQ

- 080 Unfiltered 7.16 1.48 2.10 WT

- 16

- LQ

- 145 Filtered 11.3 1.89 2.64 Discrepant 37.7 0.760 Filtered WT

- 16

- LQ

- 146 Unfiltered 7.71 1.49 2.08 WT

- 12

- LQ

- 159 Filtered 10.6 2.79 4.08 Consistent 2.70 0.037 Unfiltered WT

- 12

- LQ

- 160 Unfiltered 10.9 2.88 4.23 WT

- 15

- LQ

- 185 Filtered 8.70 1.95 2.79 Consistent 9.84 0.309 Unfiltered WT

- 15

- LQ

- 186 Unfiltered 9.60 2.16 3.15 WT

- 16

- LQ

- 241 Filtered 10.7 1.63 2.18 Consistent 2.45 0.058 Filtered WT

- 16

- LQ

- 242 Unfiltered 10.5 1.59 2.13 Notes: All results in uni ts of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD denotes Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Dupl icate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 15 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 1 2 . Ra - 226 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– POTW - I Effluent Study ID Sample

Type Ra - 226 Result Ra - 226 Error Ra - 226 MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest R esult Matrix? WT

- 16

- LQ

- 079 Filtered 101 33.0 50.0 Consistent 32.2 0.232 Filtered WT

- 16

- LQ

- 080 Unfiltered 73.0 52.0 53.0 WT

- 17

- LQ

- 191 Filtered 144 36.0 53.0 Consistent 36.1 0.406 Filtered WT

- 17

- LQ

- 192 Unfiltered 100 42.0 65.0 WT

- 17

- LQ

- 217 Filte red 116 42.0 62.0 Consistent 29.4 0.250 Unfiltered WT

- 17

- LQ

- 218 Unfiltered 156 70.0 107 WT

- 16

- LQ

- 241 Filtered 335 59.0 54.0 Discrepant 103 1.65 Filtered WT

- 16

- LQ

- 242 Unfiltered 107 39.0 57.0 WT

- 12

- LQ

- 295 Filtered 77.0 43.0 67.0 Consistent 26.5 .358 Filtered WT

- 12

- LQ

- 296 Unfiltered 59.0 26.0 40.0 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD denotes Relative P ercent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 16 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 1 3 . Ra - 228 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– POTW - I Effluent Study ID Sample

Type Ra - 228 Result Ra - 228 Error Ra - 228 MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 17

- LQ

- 217 Filtered 12.0 5.00 8.00 Discrepant 97.9 0.971 Unfiltered WT

- 17

- LQ

- 218 Unfiltered 35.0 11.0 13.0 WT

- 15

- LQ

- 223 Filte red 25.0 5.00 6.00 Consistent 7.69 0.108 Unfiltered WT

- 15

- LQ

- 224 Unfiltered 27.0 8.00 9.00 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detec table Activity. RPD denotes Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 17 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 1 4 . Gross Alpha Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– CWT In fluent
Study ID Sample

Type Gross Alpha

Result Gross Alpha

Error Gross Alpha

MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 06

- LQ

- 073 Filtered 21,400 2,120 124 Consistent 18.5 0.657 Filtered WT

- 06

- LQ

- 074 Unfiltered 17,700 1,840 1,030 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 083 Filtered 6,100 926 796 Consistent 26.3 0.713 Unfiltered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 084 Unfiltered 8,000 947 590 WT

- 02

- LQ

- 113 Filtered 2,360 886 1,040 Discrepant 181 7.19 Unfiltered WT

- 02

- LQ

- 114 Unfiltered 47,100 3,050 1,240 WT

- 01

- LQ

- 117 Filtered 10,500 1,940 1,790 Consistent 22.2 0.856 Filtered WT

- 01

- LQ

- 118 Unfiltered 8,400 1,500 1,240 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 147 Filtered 23,500 2,160 1,260 Consistent 8.42 0.321 Unfiltered T

- 06

- LQ

- 148 Unfiltered 25,500 2,470 1,870 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 155 Filtered 22,200 2,550 2,630 Discrepant 22.2 0.825 Unfiltered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 156 Unfiltered 27,700 2,290 1,060 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 239 Filtered 28,400 2,030 962 Consistent 3.05 0.149 Filtered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 240 Unfiltered 27,600 2,100 1,400 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 247 Filtered 13,100 992 424 Discrepant 52.3 2.07 Filtered WT

- 06

- LQ

- 248 Unfiltered 7,700 912 671 WT

- 02

- LQ

- 277 Filtered 3,930 1,070 1,140 Consistent 7.20 0.095 Unfiltered WT

- 02

- LQ

- 278 Unfiltered 4,220 1,160 1,320 WT

- 01

- LQ

- 283 Filtered 3,940 1,080 1,160 Consistent 29.3 0.33 9 Filtered WT

- 01

- LQ

- 284 Unfiltered 2,940 1,070 1,330 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD denotes Relative P ercent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 18 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 15. Gross Beta Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– CWT Influent Study ID Sample

Type Gross

Beta Result Gross Beta

Error Gross Beta

MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 02

- LQ

- 019 Filtered 2,810 276 320 Discrepant 39.4 0.728 Filtered WT

- 02

- LQ

- 020 Unfiltered 1,890 588 879 WT

- 01

- LQ

- 025 Filtered 3,040 279 320 Discrepant 52.3 1.97 Unfiltered WT

- 01

- LQ

- 026 Unfiltered 1,780 575 863 WT

- 04

- LQ

- 033 Filtered 276 115 177 Discrepant 115 3.81 Unfiltered WT

- 04

- LQ

- 034 Unfiltered 1,030 161 214 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 073 Filtered 4,530 665 882 Discrepant 26.6 0.724 Unfiltere d WT

- 06

- LQ

- 074 Unfiltered 5,920 719 901 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 083 Filtered 1,570 534 811 Consistent 47.4 0.644 Unfiltered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 084 Unfiltered 2,550 563 803 WT

- 02

- LQ

- 113 Filtered 1,900 596 893 Discrepant 148 5.30 Unfiltered WT

- 02

- LQ

- 114 Unfiltered 12,80 0 866 884 WT

- 01

- LQ

- 117 Filtered 2,970 655 937 Consistent 14.7 0.501 Unfiltered WT

- 01

- LQ

- 118 Unfiltered 3,440 672 940 WT

- 03

- LQ

- 119 Filtered 99.7 123.519 202 Consistent 250 0.331 Filtered WT

- 03

- LQ

- 120 Unfiltered

- 11.0 118 199 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 147 Fi ltered 5,630 657 808 Consistent 5.58 0.173 Unfiltered T

- 06

- LQ

- 148 Unfiltered 5,950 686 847 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 155 Filtered 4,640 722 994 Discrepant 38.8 1.12 Unfiltered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 156 Unfiltered 6,870 721 866 WT

- 10

- LQ

- 163 Filtered 276 142 225 Consistent 30 .3 0.261 Unfiltered WT

- 10

- LQ

- 164 Unfiltered 375 131 198 WT

- 04

- LQ

- 167 Filtered 1,510 508 766 Consistent 28.3 0.258 Filtered WT

- 04

- LQ

- 168 Unfiltered 1,130 538 839 WT

- 09

- LQ

- 173 Filtered 1,360 542 830 Consistent 26.7 0.218 Filtered WT

- 09

- LQ

- 174 Un filtered 1,040 517 807January 2015

I - 19 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 15. Gross Beta Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– CWT Influent Study ID Sample

Type Gross

Beta Result Gross Beta

Error Gross Beta

MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 05

- LQ

- 199 Filtered 587 281 438 Consistent 0.762 0.006 Unfiltered WT

- 05

- LQ

- 200 Unfiltered 591 259 400 WT

- 04

- LQ

- 203 Filtered 250 512 846 Consistent 51.0 0.120 Unfiltered WT

- 04

- LQ

- 204 Unfiltered 421 516 842 WT

- 05

- LQ

- 205 Filtered

- 107 473 802 Discrepant 239 0.905 Unfiltered WT

- 05

- LQ

- 206 Unfiltered 1,200 561 874 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 239 Filtered 7,820 718 831 Discrepant 26.8 1.16 Unfiltered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 240 Unfiltered 10,200 785 845 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 247 Filtered 4,340 382 434 Discr epant 93.9 2.92 Filtered WT

- 06

- LQ

- 248 Unfiltered 1,570 299 417 WT

- 02

- LQ

- 277 Filtered 2,760 629 907 Consistent 50.5 0.671 Filtered WT

- 02

- LQ

- 278 Unfiltered 1,650 567 860 WT

- 01

- LQ

- 283 Filtered 1,950 596 894 Consistent 31.2 0.330 Filtered WT

- 01

- LQ

- 284 Unfiltered 1,420 558 857 WT

- 03

- LQ

- 285 Filtered

- 156 121 212 Consistent 153 0.396 Unfiltered WT

- 03

- LQ

- 286 Unfiltered

- 20.6 125 212 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four compar ison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD denotes Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 20 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 16. Ra - 226 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– CWT Influent Study ID Sample

Type Ra - 226 Result Ra - 226 Error Ra - 226 MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 02

- LQ

- 019 Filtered 1,650 199 251 Consistent 5.31 0.171 Unfiltered WT

- 02

- LQ

- 020 Unfiltered 1,740 180 207 WT

- 01

- LQ

- 025 Filtered 1,760 338 476 Consistent 20.7 0.439 Filtered WT

- 01

- LQ

- 026 Unfiltered 1,430 181 230 WT

- 04

- LQ

- 033 Filtered 175 70.0 111 Consistent 20.1 0.183 Unfiltered WT

- 04

- LQ

- 034 Unfiltered 214 83.0 13 0 WT

- 09

- LQ

- 047 Filtered 469 111 165 Discrepant 67.8 1.18 Unfiltered WT

- 09

- LQ

- 048 Unfiltered 950 176 249 WT

- 05

- LQ

- 059 Unfiltered 146 65.0 102 Discrepant 87.7 0.671 Unfiltered WT

- 05

- LQ

- 060 Filtered 57.0 19.0 24.0 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 073 Filtered 12,800 1,080 916 Consistent 4.80 0.183 Filtered WT

- 06

- LQ

- 074 Unfiltered 12,200 1,280 947 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 083 Filtered 7,150 560 381 Discrepant 18.8 0.880 Filtered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 084 Unfiltered 5,920 441 247 WT

- 02

- LQ

- 113 Filtered 1,660 177 210 Discrepant 74.5 1.58 Unfiltered WT

- 02

- LQ

- 114 Unfiltered 3,630 613 846 WT

- 01

- LQ

- 117 Filtered 2,810 375 477 Discrepant 154 3.29 Filtered WT

- 01

- LQ

- 118 Unfiltered 362 62.0 57.0 WT

- 03

- LQ

- 119 Filtered 121 64.0 100 Discrepant 92.0 1.04 Unfiltered WT

- 03

- LQ

- 120 Unfiltered 327 78.0 105 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 147 Filtered 11,300 855 494 Consistent 1.79 0.087 Filtered T

- 06

- LQ

- 148 Unfiltered 11,100 798 349 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 155 Filtered 14,100 985 425 Consistent 5.09 0.244 Filtered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 156 Unfiltered 13,400 1,080 692 WT

- 04

- LQ

- 1 67 Filtered 445 190 300 Consistent 1.78 0.020 Unfiltered WT

- 04

- LQ

- 168 Unfiltered 453 70.0 98.0January 2015

I - 21 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 16. Ra - 226 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– CWT Influent Study ID Sample

Type Ra - 226 Result Ra - 226 Error Ra - 226 MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 09

- LQ

- 173 Filtered 300 101 158 Consistent 41.9 0.469 Unfiltered WT

- 09

- LQ

- 174 Unfiltered 458 139 212 WT

- 05

- LQ

- 199 Filtered 118 58.0 90.0 Discrepant 123 2.06 Unfiltered WT

- 05

- LQ

- 200 Unfiltered 492 72.0 96.0 WT

- 04

- LQ

- 203 Filtered 216 44.0 64.0 Consistent 27.9 0.350 Unfiltered WT

- 04

- LQ

- 204 Unfiltered 286 92.0 141 WT

- 05

- LQ

- 205 Filtered 242 51.0 74.0 Consistent 1.67 0.058 Filtered WT

- 05

- LQ

- 20 6 Unfiltered 238 46.0 67.0 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 239 Filtered 7,080 1,230 285 Consistent 2.00 0.048 Filtered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 240 Unfiltered 6,940 815 261 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 247 Filtered 3,910 698 220 Consistent 9.50 0.187 Unfiltered WT

- 06

- LQ

- 248 Unfiltered 4,300 801 362 WT

- 02

- LQ

- 277 Filtered 1,770 265 231 Consistent 1.12 0.024 Unfiltered WT

- 02

- LQ

- 278 Unfiltered 1,790 340 239 WT

- 01

- LQ

- 283 Filtered 1,900 319 380 Consistent 4.30 0.081 Filtered WT

- 01

- LQ

- 284 Unfiltered 1,820 393 373 WT

- 03

- LQ

- 285 Filtered 126 38.0 49.0 Discrepant 62.5 0.806 Filtered WT

- 03

- LQ

- 286 Unfiltered 66.0 0.00 34.0 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD denotes Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 22 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 17. Ra - 228 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– CW T Influent Study ID Sample

Type Ra - 228 Result Ra - 228 Error Ra - 228 MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 02

- LQ

- 019 Filtered 747 67.0 20.0 Consistent 11.1 0.492 Unfiltered WT

- 02

- LQ

- 020 Unfiltered 835 62.0 13.0 WT

- 01

- LQ

- 025 Filtered 711 90.0 84.0 Consistent 4.00 0.142 Unfiltered WT

- 01

- LQ

- 026 Unfiltered 740 52.0 18.0 WT

- 04

- LQ

- 033 Filtered 172 19.0 15.0 Discrepant 28.4 0.975 Unfiltered WT

- 04

- LQ

- 034 Unfiltered 229 23.0 17.0 WT

- 09

- LQ

- 047 Filtered 247 26. 0 18.0 Discrepant 28.2 0.931 Unfiltered WT

- 09

- LQ

- 048 Unfiltered 328 36.0 31.0 WT

- 05

- LQ

- 059 Unfiltered 77.0 12.0 14.0 Consistent 31.6 0.495 Unfiltered WT

- 05

- LQ

- 060 Filtered 56.0 18.0 24.0 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 073 Filtered 1,100 107 113 Consistent 0.913 0.03 4 Filtered WT

- 06

- LQ

- 074 Unfiltered 1,090 105 107 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 083 Filtered 411 33.0 26.0 Consistent 11.3 0.511 Filtered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 084 Unfiltered 367 29.0 17.0 WT

- 02

- LQ

- 113 Filtered 913 68.0 14.0 Discrepant 71.1 2.97 Unfiltered WT

- 02

- LQ

- 114 Unfilter ed 1,920 159 116 WT

- 01

- LQ

- 117 Filtered 1,120 87.0 40.0 Discrepant 196 6.50 Filtered WT

- 01

- LQ

- 118 Unfiltered 11.0 0.000 10.0 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 147 Filtered 1,290 96.0 34.0 Consistent 3.95 0.194 Filtered T

- 06

- LQ

- 148 Unfiltered 1,240 90.0 25.0 WT

- 08

- L Q

- 155 Filtered 1,520 109 34.0 Consistent 0.000 0.000 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 156 Unfiltered 1,520 103 54.0 WT

- 04

- LQ

- 167 Filtered 392 46.0 32.0 Consistent 17.5 0.655 Unfiltered WT

- 04

- LQ

- 168 Unfiltered 467 36.0 13.0 WT

- 09

- LQ

- 173 Filtered 238 24.0 17.0 Consiste nt 6.96 0.236 Filtered WT

- 09

- LQ

- 174 Unfiltered 222 25.0 21.0January 2015

I - 23 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 17. Ra - 228 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– CW T Influent Study ID Sample

Type Ra - 228 Result Ra - 228 Error Ra - 228 MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 05

- LQ

- 199 Filtered 48.0 10.0 12.0 Discrepant 56.7 1.30 Unfiltered WT

- 05

- LQ

- 200 Unfiltered 86.0 11.0 12.0 WT

- 04

- LQ

- 203 Filtered 173 14.0 8.00 Discrepant 27.4 0.979 Unfiltered WT

- 04

- LQ

- 204 Unfiltered 228 25.0 18.0 WT

- 05

- LQ

- 205 Filtered 78.0 10.0 9.00 Discrepant 47.1 3.07 Unfiltered WT

- 05

- LQ

- 206 Unfiltered 126 12.0 8.00 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 239 Filtered 615 50.0 23.0 Consistent 1.29 0.061 Unfiltered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 240 Unfiltered 623 45.0 18 .0 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 247 Filtered 230 25.0 22.0 Consistent 8.33 0.261 Unfiltered WT

- 06

- LQ

- 248 Unfiltered 250 30.0 42.0 WT

- 02

- LQ

- 277 Filtered 962 83.0 20.0 Consistent 4.87 0.193 Unfiltered WT

- 02

- LQ

- 278 Unfiltered 1,010 96.0 21.0 WT

- 01

- LQ

- 283 Filtere d 961 101 35.0 Consistent 2.367 0.080 Unfiltered WT

- 01

- LQ

- 284 Unfiltered 984 106 52.0 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD denotes Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 24 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 18 . Gross Alpha Filtered/Unfiltered C omparison

– CWT Effluent
Study ID Sample

Type Gross Alpha

Result Gross Alpha

Error Gross Alpha

MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 09

- LQ

- 045 Unfiltered 0.260

- 0.560

- 1.00 Discrepant 203 0.239 Unfiltered WT

- 09

- LQ

- 046 Filtered

- 0.002

- 0.004

- 0.007 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 075 Unfiltered 13,700 1,800 1,420 Discrepant 35.8 1.11 Filtered WT

- 06

- LQ

- 076 Filtered 19,600 2,070 1,400 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 085 Filtered 22,800 1,470 595 Discrepant 18.6 0.965 Filtered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 086 Unfiltered 1 8,900 1,420 744 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 149 Filtered 13,300 1,820 2,020 Discrepant 69.4 2.48 Unfiltered WT

- 06

- LQ

- 150 Unfiltered 27,300 2,250 1,040 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 151 Filtered 8.25 1.16 0.874 Discrepant 55.3 0.957 Filtered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 152 Unfiltered 4.68 1.51 1.95 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 153 Filtered 22,700 2,340 1,840 Discrepant 28.1 1.64 Filtered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 154 Unfiltered 17,100 2,470 2,800 WT

- 11

- LQ

- 187 Filtered 5,520 1,490 1,830 Consistent 45.9 0.468 Filtered WT

- 11

- LQ

- 188 Unfiltered 3,460 1,680 2,510 WT

- 11

- LQ

- 221 Fil tered 4,160 1,460 1,950 Consistent 7.13 0.064 Filtered WT

- 11

- LQ

- 222 Unfiltered 3,900 1,770 2,630 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 237 Filtered 40,700 2,780 1,270 Consistent 3.86 0.207 Unfiltered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 238 Unfiltered 42,300 2,800 131 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 245 Filtered 13,700 1,7 30 1,600 Discrepant 93.4 4.25 Unfiltered WT

- 06

- LQ

- 246 Unfiltered 37,600 2,290 879 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Act ivity. RPD denotes Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 25 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 19 . Gross Beta Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– CWT Effluent
Stu dy ID Sample

Type Gross

Beta Result Gross Beta

Error Gross Beta

MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 06

- LQ

- 075 Unfiltered 3,770 667 924 Consistent 24.7 0.566 Filtered WT

- 06

- LQ

- 076 Filtered 4,840 692 917 WT

- 0 8

- LQ

- 085 Filtered 5,810 429 454 Discrepant 17.0 0.793 Filtered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 086 Unfiltered 4,900 398 434 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 149 Filtered 3,340 655 940 Discrepant 64.8 1.69 Unfiltered WT

- 06

- LQ

- 150 Unfiltered 6,530 706 857 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 151 Filtered 1.98 0.671 1.02 Consistent 54.6 0.308 Filtered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 152 Unfiltered 1.13 1.24 2.01 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 153 Filtered 4,570 66.6 876 Consistent 3.79 0.225 Filtered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 154 Unfiltered 4,440 754 1,060 WT

- 11

- LQ

- 187 Filtered 1,670 559 84 Consistent 16.9 0.159 Filtered WT

- 11

- LQ

- 188 Unfiltered 1,410 623 974 WT

- 05

- LQ

- 197 Filtered 608 275 426 Consistent 57.9 0.661 Filtered WT

- 05

- LQ

- 198 Unfiltered 335 308 500 WT

- 11

- LQ

- 221 Filtered 1,730 575 871 Consistent 27.1 0.246 Filtered WT

- 11

- LQ

- 222 Unfiltered 1,320 633 99 8 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 237 Filtered 12,100 826 849 Consistent 6.595 0.358 Unfiltered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 238 Unfiltered 12,900 832 824 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 245 Filtered 2,100 578 856 Discrepant 142.927 5.296 Unfiltered WT

- 06

- LQ

- 246 Unfiltered 12,600 834 842 Notes: All resul ts in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD denotes Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER den otes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 26 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 20. Ra - 226 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– CWT Effluent Study ID Sample

Type Ra - 226 Result Ra - 226 Error Ra - 226 MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Hi ghest Result Matrix? WT

- 02

- LQ

- 021 Filtered 113 47.0 74.0 Consistent 55.4 0.493 Filtered WT

- 02

- LQ

- 022 Unfiltered 64.0 19.0 29.0 WT

- 01

- LQ

- 023 Filtered 110 67.0 106 Consistent 5.61 0.036 Filtered WT

- 01

- LQ

- 024 Unfiltered 104 54.0 86.0 WT

- 03

- LQ

- 029 Filtered 23.0 36.0 0.000 Consistent 90.5 0.397 Unfiltered WT

- 03

- LQ

- 030 Unfiltered 61.0 33.0 52.0 WT

- 05

- LQ

- 057 Unfiltered 357 100 151 Consistent 49.7 0.599 Unfiltered WT

- 05

- LQ

- 058 Filtered 215 68.0 103 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 075 Unfiltered 12,100 1,060 980 C onsistent 0.000 0.000 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 076 Filtered 12,100 1,250 1,130 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 081 Filtered 84.0 311 48.0 Consistent 3.51 0.005 Unfiltered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 082 Unfiltered 87.0 23.0 34.0 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 085 Filtered 12,700 903 426 Discrepant 20.9 0.991 Filtered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 086 Unfiltered 10,300 844 577 WT

- 03

- LQ

- 121 Filtered 91.0 42.0 65.0 Consistent 32.3 0.233 Unfiltered WT

- 03

- LQ

- 122 Unfiltered 126 64.0 101 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 149 Filtered 11,200 1,020 602 Consistent 0.889 0.039 Unfiltered WT

- 06

- LQ

- 150 Unfiltered 11,3 00 839 463 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 153 Filtered 14,900 1,180 693 Consistent 3.95 0.184 Unfiltered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 154 Unfiltered 15,500 1,170 803 WT

- 04

- LQ

- 165 Filtered 104 60.0 95.0 Consistent 11.8 0.092 Unfiltered WT

- 04

- LQ

- 166 Unfiltered 117 40.0 63.0 WT

- 09

- LQ

- 175 Filtered 503 206 324 Consistent 31.3 0.327 Filtered WT

- 09

- LQ

- 176 Unfiltered 367 52.0 70.0 WT

- 11

- LQ

- 187 Filtered 1,700 209 264 Consistent 7.91 0.250 Unfiltered WT

- 11

- LQ

- 188 Unfiltered 1,840 194 227January 2015

I - 27 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 20. Ra - 226 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– CWT Effluent Study ID Sample

Type Ra - 226 Result Ra - 226 Error Ra - 226 MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Hi ghest Result Matrix? WT

- 05

- LQ

- 207 Filtered 181 63.0 97.0 Consis tent 28.0 0.310 Unfiltered WT

- 05

- LQ

- 208 Unfiltered 240 74.0 110 WT

- 11

- LQ

- 221 Filtered 2,090 305 228 Discrepant 34.8 0.812 Filtered WT

- 11

- LQ

- 222 Unfiltered 1,470 242 301 WT

- 09

- LQ

- 227 Filtered 273 54.0 68.0 Consistent 38.7 0.377 Unfiltered WT

- 09

- LQ

- 228 Unfiltered 404 169 264 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 237 Filtered 12,400 1,440 500 Consistent 2.39 0.007 Unfiltered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 238 Unfiltered 12,700 22,240 383 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 245 Filtered 8,360 1,490 533 Consistent 5.03 0.122 Filtered WT

- 06

- LQ

- 246 Unfiltered 7,950 835 257 WT

- 02

- LQ

- 279 Filtered 55.0 27.0 42.0 Consistent 65.0 0.634 Unfiltered WT

- 02

- LQ

- 280 Unfiltered 108 33.0 48.0 WT

- 01

- LQ

- 281 Filtered 287 87.0 116 Discrepant 86.3 0.853 Filtered WT

- 01

- LQ

- 282 Unfiltered 114 56.0 83.0 WT

- 03

- LQ

- 287 Filter ed 86.0 47.0 71.0 Discrepant 123 3.54 Unfiltered WT

- 03

- LQ

- 288 Unfiltered 362 62.0 57.0 WT

- 10

- LQ

- 291 Filtered 77.0 43.0 64.0 Consistent 75.0 0.977 Filtered WT

- 10

- LQ

- 292 Unfiltered 35.0 0.000 95.0 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD denotes Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alue s l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical). ND denotes a non

- detected result (result less than MDC).January 2015

I - 28 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 21. Ra - 228 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– CWT Effluent Study ID Sample

Type Ra - 228 Result Ra - 228 Error Ra - 228 MDC Results Consistent

(Error B ars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 04

- LQ

- 031 Filtered 37.0 5.00 5.00 Discrepant 77.7 1.72 Unfiltered WT

- 04

- LQ

- 032 Unfiltered 84.0 13.0 14.0 WT

- 05

- LQ

- 057 Unfiltered 133 19.0 18.0 Consistent 12.0 0.316 Unfiltered WT

- 05

- LQ

- 058 Filtered 11 8 15.0 13.0 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 075 Unfiltered 914 92.0 97.0 Consistent 4.18 0.134 Filtered WT

- 06

- LQ

- 076 Filtered 953 117 141 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 085 Filtered 110 81.0 39.0 Discrepant 157 3.92 Unfiltered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 086 Unfiltered 912 66.0 48.0 WT

- 06

- LQ

- 149 Filter ed 806 77.0 86.0 Consistent 7.18 0.314 Unfiltered WT

- 06

- LQ

- 150 Unfiltered 866 60.0 37.0 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 153 Filtered 1,300 90.0 55.0 Consistent 3.92 0.183 Filtered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 154 Unfiltered 1,250 106 80.0 WT

- 04

- LQ

- 165 Filtered 94.0 15.0 14.0 Consistent 17.5 0.478 Unfiltered WT

- 04

- LQ

- 166 Unfiltered 112 12.0 12.0 WT

- 09

- LQ

- 175 Filtered 319 44.0 40.0 Discrepant 32.8 1.91 Filtered WT

- 09

- LQ

- 176 Unfiltered 229 17.0 6.00 WT

- 11

- LQ

- 187 Filtered 943 74.0 19.0 Consistent 2.41 0.220 Unfiltered WT

- 11

- LQ

- 1 88 Unfiltered 966 74.0 14.0 WT

- 05

- LQ

- 207 Filtered 80.0 13.0 15.0 Consistent 13.9 0.308 Unfiltered WT

- 05

- LQ

- 208 Unfiltered 92.0 15.0 16.0 WT

- 11

- LQ

- 221 Filtered 976 93.0 18.0 Consistent 11.9 0.489 Unfiltered WT

- 11

- LQ

- 222 Unfiltered 1,100 90.0 53. 0 WT

- 09

- LQ

- 227 Filtered 164 13.0 6.00 Consistent 1.21 0.028 Unfiltered WT

- 09

- LQ

- 228 Unfiltered 166 34.0 40.0 WT

- 08

- LQ

- 237 Filtered 1,220 120 40.0 Consistent 1.65 0.065 Filtered WT

- 08

- LQ

- 238 Unfiltered 1,200 102 32.0January 2015

I - 29 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 21. Ra - 228 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– CWT Effluent Study ID Sample

Type Ra - 228 Result Ra - 228 Error Ra - 228 MDC Results Consistent

(Error B ars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 06

- LQ

- 245 Filtered 5 71 79.0 67.0 Consistent 8.78 0.278 Filtered WT

- 06

- LQ

- 246 Unfiltered 523 39.0 21.0 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Act ivity. RPD denotes Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 30 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 22. Gross Alpha Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– ZLD Influent
S tudy ID Sample

Type Gross Alpha

Result Gross Alpha

Error Gross Alpha

MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 24

- LQ

- 003 Filtered 3,630 641 525 Consistent 0.358 0.007 Unfiltered WT

- 24

- LQ

- 004 Unfiltered 3,640 705 692 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 013 Filtered 2,290 313 216 Consistent 19.3 0.476 Filtered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 014 Unfiltered 1,890 296 260 WT

- 20

- LQ

- 067 Unfiltered 16,200 1,940 1,210 Consistent 14.0 0.435 Filtered WT

- 20

- LQ

- 068 Filtered 18,700 2,100 1,340 WT

- 25

- LQ

- 089 Unfilte red 9,270 1,480 1,200 Consistent 3.82 0.086 Unfiltered WT

- 25

- LQ

- 090 Filtered 8,920 1,440 1,280 WT

- 24

- LQ

- 099 Filtered 2,300 362 318 Discrepant 38.3 1.01 Unfiltered WT

- 24

- LQ

- 100 Unfiltered 3,380 416 266 WT

- 22

- LQ

- 103 Filtered 30,800 2,190 892 Disc repant 51.7 2.95 Unfiltered WT

- 22

- LQ

- 104 Unfiltered 52,400 3,000 1,170 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 107 Filtered 3,420 658 566 Consistent 2.02 0.038 Unfiltered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 108 Unfiltered 3,490 683 651 WT

- 21

- LQ

- 125 Filtered 4,750 774 638 Discrepant 37.3 0.929 Unfilter ed WT

- 21

- LQ

- 126 Unfiltered 6,920 912 719 WT

- 25

- LQ

- 129 Filtered 2,290 494 494 Consistent 23.7 0.351 Filtered WT

- 25

- LQ

- 130 Unfiltered 1,810 503 623 WT

- 20

- LQ

- 137 Filtered 59,400 4,014 3,080 Discrepant 18.9 1.04 Filtered WT

- 20

- LQ

- 138 Unfiltered 49 ,200 2,989 1,050 WT

- 23

- LQ

- 181 Filtered 2,080 556 610 Consistent 46.5 0.576 Filtered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 182 Unfiltered 1,300 417 543 WT

- 19

- LQ

- 231 Filtered 4,770 450 233 Discrepant 52.3 1.70 Filtered WT

- 19

- LQ

- 232 Unfiltered 2,800 385 326 WT

- 25

- LQ

- 233 Filtered 3,220 509 448 Consistent 32.4 0.640 Unfiltered WT

- 25

- LQ

- 234 Unfiltered 4,470 853 1,070January 2015

I - 31 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 22. Gross Alpha Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– ZLD Influent
S tudy ID Sample

Type Gross Alpha

Result Gross Alpha

Error Gross Alpha

MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 20

- LQ

- 249 Filtered 36,000 2,230 1,680 Discrepant 83.9 5.47 Unfiltered WT

- 20

- LQ

- 250 Unfiltered 88,000 4,300 2,040 WT

- 23

- LQ

- 255 Filtered 497 180 22 1 Discrepant 76.9 1.11 Unfiltered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 256 Unfiltered 1,120 220 218 WT

- 21

- LQ

- 263 Filtered 17,100 1,770 1,190 Consistent 10.3 0.356 Unfiltered WT

- 21

- LQ

- 264 Unfiltered 18,900 1,960 1,620 WT

- 22

- LQ

- 271 Filtered 754 177 190 Discrepant 49.1 0.822 Unfiltered WT

- 22

- LQ

- 272 Unfiltered 1,240 247 280 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 275 Filtered 1,920 490 605 Consistent 9.64 0.117 Filtered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 276 Unfiltered 1,740 592 842 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evalu ating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD denotes Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identic al).January 2015

I - 32 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 23. Gross Beta Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– ZLD Influent Study ID Sample

Type Gross Beta

Result Gross Beta

Error Gross Beta

MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 24

- LQ

- 003 Filtered 1,530 314 442 Consistent 14.5 0.337 Filtered WT

- 24

- LQ

- 004 Unfiltered 1,320 3.09 448 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 013 Filtered 1,310 145 168 Discrepant 92.1 2.26 Filtered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 014 Unfiltered 485 118 172 WT

- 23

- LQ

- 035 Filtered 425 137 209 Discrepant 136 4.09 Unfiltered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 036 Unfiltered 2243.6 181 198 WT

- 20

- LQ

- 067 Unfiltered 6,060 746 938 Consistent 24.4 0.665 Unfiltered WT

- 20

- LQ

- 068 Filtered 4,740 681 900 WT

- 25

- LQ

- 089 Unfiltered 977 528 833 Consistent 5.72 0.039 Filtered WT

- 25

- LQ

- 090 Filtered 1,030 545 859 WT

- 24

- LQ

- 099 Filtered 395 140 214 Discrepant 65.8 0.941 Unfiltered WT

- 24

- LQ

- 100 Unfiltered 782 156 219 WT

- 22

- LQ

- 103 Filtered 3,730 376 445 Discrepant 102 4.53 Unfiltered WT

- 22

- LQ

- 104 Unfiltered 11,500 786 788 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 107 Filtered 893 281 421 Consistent 27.9 0.360 Unfiltered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 108 Unfiltered 1180 298 436 WT

- 21

- LQ

- 125 Filtered 1,340 296 425 Discrepant 56.4 1.18 Unfiltered WT

- 21

- LQ

- 126 Unfiltered 2,400 349 465 WT

- 25

- LQ

- 129 Filtered 396 245 388 Consistent 16.2 0.099 Unfilter ed WT

- 25

- LQ

- 130 Unfiltered 466 260 410 WT

- 20

- LQ

- 137 Filtered 10,700 918 1,080 Consistent 1.39 0.062 Filtered WT

- 20

- LQ

- 138 Unfiltered 10,600 807 863 WT

- 18

- LQ

- 141 Filtered 592 133 190 Consistent 30.6 0.551 Unfiltered WT

- 18

- LQ

- 142 Unfiltered 806 147 203 WT

- 23

- LQ

- 181 Filtered 492 257 403 Consistent 8.33 0.059 Unfiltered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 182 Unfiltered 535 262 410January 2015

I - 33 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 23. Gross Beta Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– ZLD Influent Study ID Sample

Type Gross Beta

Result Gross Beta

Error Gross Beta

MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 19

- LQ

- 231 Filtered 1,860 185 219 Discrepant 44.9 1.42 Filtered WT

- 19

- LQ

- 232 Unfiltered 1,180 160 208 WT

- 25

- LQ

- 233 Filtered 1, 320 284 405 Consistent 6.13 0.098 Unfiltered WT

- 25

- LQ

- 234 Unfiltered 1,400 326 481 WT

- 20

- LQ

- 249 Filtered 7,680 516 559 Discrepant 101 6.78 Unfiltered WT

- 20

- LQ

- 250 Unfiltered 23,400 1,060 874 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 275 Filtered 853 279 422 Consistent 28.8 0.2 68 Filtered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 276 Unfiltered 638 298 470 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD denotes Relative Percen t Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 34 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 24. Ra - 226 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– ZLD Influent Study ID Sample

Type Ra - 226 Result Ra - 22 6 Error Ra - 226 MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 24

- LQ

- 003 Filtered 2,580 256 283 Consistent 4.55 0.183 Unfiltered WT

- 24

- LQ

- 004 Unfiltered 2,700 214 174 WT

- 22

- LQ

- 005 Filtered 106 35.0 55.0 Discrepant 68.3 1.90 Unfiltered WT

- 22

- LQ

- 006 Unfiltered 216 46.0 66.0 WT

- 21

- LQ

- 009 Filtered 2,580 289 301 Consistent 16.0 0.612 Unfiltered WT

- 21

- LQ

- 010 Unfiltered 3,030 239 192 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 013 Filtered 1,390 180 235 Consistent 2.18 0.073 Filtered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 014 U nfiltered 1,360 110 87.0 WT

- 23

- LQ

- 035 Filtered 1,300 138 162 Consistent 1.55 0.034 Filtered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 036 Unfiltered 1,280 265 386 WT

- 19

- LQ

- 063 Unfiltered 1,470 329 495 Consistent 42.9 0.82 Unfiltered WT

- 19

- LQ

- 064 Filtered 950 542 873 WT

- 20

- LQ

- 067 Unfiltered 13,600 1,140 972 Consistent 2.99 0.134 Unfiltered WT

- 20

- LQ

- 068 Filtered 13,200 1,010 632 WT

- 18

- LQ

- 071 Unfiltered 1,310 262 361 Discrepant 130 1.91 Unfiltered WT

- 18

- LQ

- 072 Filtered 278 84.0 118 WT

- 25

- LQ

- 089 Unfiltered 6,870 56 1 477 Consistent 3.25 0.142 Unfiltered WT

- 25

- LQ

- 090 Filtered 6,650 554 489 WT

- 24

- LQ

- 099 Filtered 1,920 325 433 Consistent 8.96 0.215 Unfiltered WT

- 24

- LQ

- 100 Unfiltered 2,100 278 342 WT

- 22

- LQ

- 103 Filtered 16,300 1,650 1,040 Consistent 4.79 0.187 Unfiltered WT

- 22

- LQ

- 104 Unfiltered 17,100 1,430 1,205 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 107 Filtered 1,930 168 159 Consistent 18.8 0.697 Unfiltered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 108 Unfiltered 2,330 240 263 WT

- 21

- LQ

- 125 Filtered 3,360 340 360 Discrepant 24.7 0.769 Filtered WT

- 21

- LQ

- 126 U nfiltered 2,620 354 443January 2015

I - 35 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 24. Ra - 226 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– ZLD Influent Study ID Sample

Type Ra - 226 Result Ra - 22 6 Error Ra - 226 MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 25

- LQ

- 129 Filtered 2,100 186 181 Discrepant 29.5 1.00 Filtered WT

- 25

- LQ

- 130 Unfiltered 1,560 202 261 WT

- 19

- LQ

- 131 Filtered 131 44.0 67.0 Discrepant 196 5.22 Unfiltered WT

- 19

- LQ

- 132 Unfiltered 11,700 1,130 1,119 W T

- 20

- LQ

- 137 Filtered 6,690 470 713 Discrepant 188 6.96 Filtered WT

- 20

- LQ

- 138 Unfiltered 210 70.0 105 WT

- 23

- LQ

- 181 Filtered 564 106 150 Consistent 16.4 0.372 Unfiltered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 182 Unfiltered 665 89.0 117 WT

- 19

- LQ

- 231 Filtered 1,140 248 233 Con sistent 33.6 0.691 Unfiltered WT

- 19

- LQ

- 232 Unfiltered 1,600 232 303 WT

- 25

- LQ

- 233 Filtered 903 201 196 Discrepant 72.5 1.22 Unfiltered WT

- 25

- LQ

- 234 Unfiltered 1,930 378 252 WT

- 20

- LQ

- 249 Filtered 18,400 1,450 769 Consistent 10.9 0.304 Filtered W T

- 20

- LQ

- 250 Unfiltered 16,500 2,840 518 WT

- 23

- LQ

- 255 Filtered 226 60.0 71.0 Consistent 2.24 0.034 Filtered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 256 Unfiltered 221 45.0 56.0 WT

- 21

- LQ

- 263 Filtered 6,190 806 602 Consistent 5.80 0.133 Unfiltered WT

- 21

- LQ

- 264 Unfiltered 6,560 1,170 526 WT

- 24

- LQ

- 267 Filtered 832 232 351 Consistent 27.3 0.343 Filtered WT

- 24

- LQ

- 268 Unfiltered 632 186 239 WT

- 22

- LQ

- 271 Filtered 590 111 132 Consistent 23.9 0.313 Unfiltered WT

- 22

- LQ

- 272 Unfiltered 750 236 307 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 275 Filtered 1,4 10 203 138 Discrepant 31.1 0.810 Filtered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 276 Unfiltered 1,030 127 105 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activ ity. RPD denotes Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 36 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 25 . Ra - 228 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– ZLD Influent Study ID Sample

Type Ra - 228 Result Ra - 228 Error Ra - 228 MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 24

- LQ

- 003 Filtered 332 38.0 28.0 Discrepant 31.7 1.30 Unfiltered WT

- 24

- LQ

- 004 Unfiltered 457 31.0 13.0 WT

- 22

- LQ

- 005 Filtered 10.0 5.00 7.00 Consistent 33.3 0.625 Unfiltered WT

- 22

- LQ

- 006 Unfiltered 14.0 4.00 7.00 WT

- 21

- LQ

- 009 Filtered 338 34.0 35.0 Discrepant 23.7 0.994 Unfiltered WT

- 21

- LQ

- 010 Unfiltered 429 32.0 15.0 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 013 Filtered 203 23.0 22.0 Consistent 9.82 0.360 Filtered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 014 Unfiltered 184 14.0 7.00 WT

- 23

- LQ

- 035 Filtered 413 32.0 11.0 Consistent 5.65 0.219 Unfiltered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 036 Unfiltered 437 46.0 31.0 WT

- 19

- LQ

- 063 Unfiltered 777 75.0 60.0 Consistent 14.8 0.76 4 Filtered WT

- 19

- LQ

- 064 Filtered 901 114 118 WT

- 20

- LQ

- 067 Unfiltered 1,390 120 90.0 Consistent 0.000 0.000 WT

- 20

- LQ

- 068 Filtered 1,390 111 61.0 WT

- 25

- LQ

- 089 Unfiltered 628 48.0 37.0 Consistent 4.97 0.210 Filtered WT

- 25

- LQ

- 090 Filtered 660 61. 0 51.0 WT

- 24

- LQ

- 099 Filtered 153 40.0 55.0 Consistent 16.8 0.282 Unfiltered WT

- 24

- LQ

- 100 Unfiltered 181 31.0 39.0 WT

- 22

- LQ

- 103 Filtered 847 95.0 116 Consistent 6.40 0.238 Unfiltered WT

- 22

- LQ

- 104 Unfiltered 903 73.0 106 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 107 Filtere d 322 27.0 19.0 Consistent 12.8 0.499 Unfiltered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 108 Unfiltered 366 36.0 31.0 WT

- 21

- LQ

- 125 Filtered 515 47.0 42.0 Consistent 20.1 0.616 Filtered WT

- 21

- LQ

- 126 Unfiltered 421 62.0 71.0 WT

- 25

- LQ

- 129 Filtered 181 18.0 19.0 Discrepant 25.5 0.716 Filtered WT

- 25

- LQ

- 130 Unfiltered 140 23.0 29.0January 2015

I - 37 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 25 . Ra - 228 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– ZLD Influent Study ID Sample

Type Ra - 228 Result Ra - 228 Error Ra - 228 MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 19

- LQ

- 131 Filtered 13.0 5.00 7.00 Discrepant 195 4.62 Unfiltered WT

- 19

- LQ

- 132 Unfiltered 1,000 109 118 WT

- 23

- LQ

- 181 Filtered 94.0 16.0 17.0 Consistent 1.06 0.026 Unfiltered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 182 U nfiltered 95.0 11.0 12.0 WT

- 19

- LQ

- 231 Filtered 91.0 26.0 26.0 Consistent 11.6 0.139 Filtered WT

- 19

- LQ

- 232 Unfiltered 81.0 26.0 37.0 WT

- 25

- LQ

- 233 Filtered 127 20.0 22.0 Discrepant 44.2 1.09 Unfiltered WT

- 25

- LQ

- 234 Unfiltered 199 27.0 28.0 W T

- 20

- LQ

- 249 Filtered 1,410 50.0 74.0 Consistent 7.35 0.449 Filtered WT

- 20

- LQ

- 250 Unfiltered 1,310 102 37.0 WT

- 23

- LQ

- 255 Filtered 28.0 6.00 7.00 Discrepant 37.7 0.782 Unfiltered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 256 Unfiltered 41.0 6.00 7.00 WT

- 21

- LQ

- 263 Filtered 687 84 .0 66.0 Consistent 5.66 0.166 Unfiltered WT

- 21

- LQ

- 264 Unfiltered 727 90.0 75.0 WT

- 24

- LQ

- 267 Filtered 380 42.0 40.0 Consistent 2.08 0.071 Unfiltered WT

- 24

- LQ

- 268 Unfiltered 388 39.0 26.0 WT

- 22

- LQ

- 271 Filtered 51.0 12.0 15.0 Consistent 17.0 0.147 Filtered WT

- 22

- LQ

- 272 Unfiltered 43.0 25.0 38.0 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 275 Filtered 203 25.0 19.0 N/A 0.000 0.000 Unfiltered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 276 Unfiltered 203 18.0 13.0 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD denotes Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 38 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 26. Gross Alpha Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– ZLD Effluent Study ID Sample

Type Gross Alpha

Result Gross Alpha

Error Gross Alpha

MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 24

- LQ

- 001 Filtered 2,540 600 645 Consistent 7.94 0.122 Unfiltered WT

- 24

- LQ

- 002 Unfiltered 2,750 638 637 WT

- 21

- LQ

- 011 Filtered 6,830 1,240 1,030 Consistent 20.8 0.370 Filtered WT

- 21

- LQ

- 012 Unfiltered 5,540 1,270 1,260 WT

- 23

- LQ

- 037 Unfiltered 1,570 501 705 Consistent 5.57 0.141 Filtered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 038 Filtered 1,660 393 409 WT

- 23

- LQ

- 039 Unfiltered 4.94 2.19 2.92 Consistent 2.20 0.38 Filtered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 040 Filtered 5.05 1.84 2.14 WT

- 19

- LQ

- 061 Unfiltered

- 0.007

- 0.084

- 0.140 Discrepant 231 0.390 Filtered WT

- 19

- LQ

- 062 Fil tered 0.097

- 0.107

- 0.190 WT

- 20

- LQ

- 065 Unfiltered 14,500 1,810 1,380 Consistent 20.9 0.565 Unfiltered WT

- 20

- LQ

- 066 Filtered 11,800 1,680 1,400 WT

- 24

- LQ

- 101 Filtered 3,660 434 289 Consistent 19.3 0.606 Unfiltered WT

- 24

- LQ

- 102 Unfiltered 4,440 49 2 346 WT

- 22

- LQ

- 105 Filtered 5,0340 601 375 Discrepant 55.9 1.74 Unfiltered WT

- 22

- LQ

- 106 Unfiltered 8,940 975 568 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 109 Filtered 2,330 657 738 Consistent 1.95 0.027 Unfiltered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 110 Unfiltered 2,370 548 522 WT

- 21

- LQ

- 123 Filter ed 10,900 1,530 1,073 Discrepant 38.3 1.12 Unfiltered WT

- 21

- LQ

- 124 Unfiltered 16,000 1,785 1,060 WT

- 20

- LQ

- 135 Filtered 31,100 2,450 1,260 Discrepant 27.0 1.27 Unfiltered WT

- 20

- LQ

- 136 Unfiltered 40,900 3,030 1,900 WT

- 20

- LQ

- 251 Filtered 14,400 1, 570 980 Discrepant 99.2 4.34 Unfiltered WT

- 20

- LQ

- 252 Unfiltered 42,800 2,940 2,310 WT

- 23

- LQ

- 257 Filtered 23.6 4.97 5.08 Discrepant 129 1.67 Filtered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 258 Unfiltered 5.12 2.70 4.25January 2015

I - 39 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 26. Gross Alpha Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– ZLD Effluent Study ID Sample

Type Gross Alpha

Result Gross Alpha

Error Gross Alpha

MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 23

- LQ

- 259 Filtered 9,610 1,300 1,050 Discrepant 32.0 0.957 Unfiltered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 260 Unfiltered 13,300 1,460 852 WT

- 21

- LQ

- 261 Filtered 10,200 1,870 2,330 Consistent 24.7 0.612 Unfiltered WT

- 21

- LQ

- 262 Unfiltered 13,100 1,500 975 WT

- 22

- LQ

- 269 Filtered 2,690 721 986 Discrepant 62.1 1.28 Unfiltered WT

- 22

- LQ

- 270 Unfiltered 5,100 635 437 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 273 Filtered 21,400 2,060 1,304 Discrepant 199 5.30 Filtered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 274 Unfiltered 33.6 3.27 2.60 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the f our comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD denotes Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 40 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Tab le I - 27 . Gross Beta Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– ZLD Effluent Study ID Sample

Type Gross

Beta Result Gross Beta

Error Gross Beta

MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 22

- LQ

- 007 Filtered 284 127 199 Consistent 12.6 0.113 Unfiltered WT

- 22

- LQ

- 008 Unfiltered 322 116 460 WT

- 21

- LQ

- 011 Filtered 2,160 576 845 Consistent 15.7 0.199 Filtered WT

- 21

- LQ

- 012 Unfiltered 1,850 562 842 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 015 Filtered 7,660 323 252 Discrepant 66.9 5.41 F iltered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 016 Unfiltered 3,820 632 861 WT

- 23

- LQ

- 037 Unfiltered 358 140 218 Discrepant 50.8 1.31 Unfiltered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 038 Filtered 602 123 173 WT

- 19

- LQ

- 061 Unfiltered 92.6 10.3 12.6 Discrepant 37.1 0.927 Filtered WT

- 19

- LQ

- 062 Filtered 135 20.8 28.9 WT

- 20

- LQ

- 065 Unfiltered 3,540 604 823 Consistent 36.8 0.649 Unfiltered WT

- 20

- LQ

- 066 Filtered 2,440 620 911 WT

- 24

- LQ

- 101 Filtered 1,520 175 217 Consistent 15.6 0.470 Filtered WT

- 24

- LQ

- 102 Unfiltered 1,300 163 205 WT

- 22

- LQ

- 105 Fil tered 1,530 189 238 Consistent 6.01 0.184 Unfiltered WT

- 22

- LQ

- 106 Unfiltered 1,630 183 224 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 109 Filtered 1,080 309 458 Consistent 1.09 0.014 Filtered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 110 Unfiltered 1,060 307 456 WT

- 21

- LQ

- 123 Filtered 2,650 603 864 Discrepant 7 0.4 1.60 Unfiltered WT

- 21

- LQ

- 124 Unfiltered 5,530 695 879 WT

- 20

- LQ

- 135 Filtered 6,190 673 810 Discrepant 29.5 1.09 Unfiltered WT

- 20

- LQ

- 136 Unfiltered 8,340 750 851 WT

- 18

- LQ

- 139 Filtered 435 149 229 Consistent 27.3 0.345 Unfiltered WT

- 18

- LQ

- 140 Unfiltered 573 139 201 WT

- 20

- LQ

- 251 Filtered 4,110 634 851 Discrepant 109 4.51 Unfiltered WT

- 20

- LQ

- 252 Unfiltered 13,900 907 964January 2015

I - 41 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Tab le I - 27 . Gross Beta Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– ZLD Effluent Study ID Sample

Type Gross

Beta Result Gross Beta

Error Gross Beta

MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 23

- LQ

- 259 Filtered 3,210 594 824 Consistent 22.6 0.478 Unfiltered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 260 Unfiltered 4,030 643 867 WT

- 21

- LQ

- 261 Filtered 2,890 665 980 Consistent 32.8 0.631 Unfiltered WT

- 21

- LQ

- 262 Unfiltered 4,020 631 850 WT

- 22

- LQ

- 269 Filtered 515 301 480 Discrepant 84.0 0.909 Unfiltered WT

- 22

- LQ

- 270 Unfiltered 1,260 291 430 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 273 Filtered 8,700 769 87 6 Discrepant 47.2 1.87 Filtered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 274 Unfiltered 5,380 485 557 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD d enotes Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 42 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 28. Ra - 226 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– ZLD Effluent Study ID Sample

Type Ra - 226 Result Ra - 226 Error Ra - 226 MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 24

- LQ

- 001 Filtered 1,830 146 117 Consistent 10.9 0.344 Unfiltered WT

- 24

- LQ

- 002 Unfiltered 2,040 275 364 WT

- 22

- LQ

- 007 Filtered 418 9 9.0 137 Discrepant 86.8 1.25 Filtered WT

- 22

- LQ

- 008 Unfiltered 165 29.0 40.0 WT

- 21

- LQ

- 011 Filtered 3,470 281 214 Consistent 8.29 0.336 Unfiltered WT

- 21

- LQ

- 012 Unfiltered 3,770 359 388 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 015 Filtered 5,510 631 747 Consistent 0.364 0.014 Fi ltered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 016 Unfiltered 5,490 406 257 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 017 Filtered 7,750 926 1,039 Discrepant 21.6 0.721 Filtered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 018 Unfiltered 6,240 532 474 WT

- 23

- LQ

- 037 Unfiltered 531 102 148 Consistent 8.82 0.173 Filtered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 038 Filtered 58 0 102 143 WT

- 24

- LQ

- 101 Filtered 2,260 336 442 Consistent 9.28 0.253 Unfiltered WT

- 24

- LQ

- 102 Unfiltered 2,480 290 353 WT

- 22

- LQ

- 105 Filtered 3,280 375 444 Consistent 18.3 0.597 Filtered WT

- 22

- LQ

- 106 Unfiltered 2,730 283 324 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 109 Filt ered 1,630 238 323 Consistent 2.42 0.065 Unfiltered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 110 Unfiltered 1,670 203 255 WT

- 21

- LQ

- 123 Filtered 5,050 423 364 Consistent 1.38 0.059 Unfiltered WT

- 21

- LQ

- 124 Unfiltered 5,120 433 365 WT

- 25

- LQ

- 127 Filtered 163 47.0 72.0 Discrepant 115 1.43 Unfiltered WT

- 25

- LQ

- 128 Unfiltered 601 149 228 WT

- 20

- LQ

- 135 Filtered 12,500 925 482 Discrepant 155 5.89 Filtered WT

- 20

- LQ

- 136 Unfiltered 1,580 200 255 WT

- 23

- LQ

- 179 Filtered 587 134 199 Consistent 30.7 1.36 Unfiltered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 180 Unfi ltered 800 82.0 91.0January 2015

I - 43 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 28. Ra - 226 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– ZLD Effluent Study ID Sample

Type Ra - 226 Result Ra - 226 Error Ra - 226 MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 20

- LQ

- 251 Filtered 11,100 1,290 305 Consistent 6.96 0.165 Unfiltered WT

- 20

- LQ

- 252 Unfiltered 11,900 2,110 664 WT

- 18

- LQ

- 253 Filtered 94.0 30.0 42.0 Consistent 12.0 0.142 Unfiltered WT

- 18

- LQ

- 254 Unfiltered 106 31.0 43.0 WT

- 23

- LQ

- 259 Filtered 2,540 280 151 Consistent 3.86 0.092 Unfiltered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 260 Unfiltered 2,640 476 177 WT

- 21

- LQ

- 261 Filtered 4,690 544 369 Consistent 7.06 0.167 Filtered WT

- 21

- LQ

- 262 Unfiltered 4,370 812 411 WT

- 24

- LQ

- 265 Filtered 292 129 200 Consistent 0.342 0.003 Unfiltered WT

- 24

- LQ

- 266 Unfiltered 293 103 141 WT

- 22

- LQ

- 269 Filtered 2,310 383 366 Consistent 3.08 0.066 Filtered WT

- 22

- LQ

- 270 Unfiltered 2,240 379 387 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 273 Filtered 8,810 1,560 364 Consistent 9.02 0.227 Filt ered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 274 Unfiltered 8,050 687 535 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD denotes Relative Percent Dif ference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).January 2015

I - 44 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 29 . Ra - 228 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– ZLD Effluent Study ID Sample

Type R a - 228 Result Ra - 228 Error Ra - 228 MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 24

- LQ

- 001 Filtered 277 21.0 14.0 Consistent 2.93 0.109 Filtered WT

- 24

- LQ

- 002 Unfiltered 269 31.0 31.0 WT

- 21

- LQ

- 011 Filtered 503 39.0 17.0 Consistent 9.29 0.425 Unfiltered WT

- 21

- LQ

- 012 Unfiltered 552 44.0 30.0 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 015 Filtered 849 86.0 83.0 Consistent 3.02 0.124 Unfiltered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 016 Unfiltered 875 63.0 20.0 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 017 Filtered 1,480 140 140 Discrepant 17.6 0.731 Filtere d WT

- 07

- LQ

- 018 Unfiltered 1,240 92.0 36.0 WT

- 23

- LQ

- 037 Unfiltered 121 16.0 17.0 Consistent 8.62 0.225 Unfiltered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 038 Filtered 111 16.0 17.0 WT

- 20

- LQ

- 065 Unfiltered 1,090 91.0 63.0 Consistent 0.000 0.000 WT

- 20

- LQ

- 066 Filtered 1,090 10 9 107 WT

- 24

- LQ

- 101 Filtered 204 42.0 54.0 Discrepant 38.4 0.905 Unfiltered WT

- 24

- LQ

- 102 Unfiltered 301 35.0 36.0 WT

- 22

- LQ

- 105 Filtered 241 43.0 57.0 Consistent 3.67 0.093 Unfiltered WT

- 22

- LQ

- 106 Unfiltered 250 24.0 23.0 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 109 Filter ed 324 35.0 29.0 Consistent 1.87 0.068 Filtered WT

- 07

- LQ

- 110 Unfiltered 318 28.0 22.0 WT

- 21

- LQ

- 123 Filtered 750 66.0 47.0 Consistent 4.56 0.190 Unfiltered WT

- 21

- LQ

- 124 Unfiltered 785 67.0 43.0 WT

- 20

- LQ

- 135 Filtered 941 65.0 40.0 Discrepant 124 5.04 Filtered WT

- 20

- LQ

- 136 Unfiltered 221 33.0 43.0 WT

- 23

- LQ

- 179 Filtered 96.0 16.0 18.0 Consistent 12.7 0.670 Unfiltered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 180 Unfiltered 109 11.0 10.0 WT

- 20

- LQ

- 251 Filtered 910 65.0 25.0 Consistent 5.42 0.024 Filtered WT

- 20

- LQ

- 252 U nfiltered 862 1,032 70.0January 2015

I - 45 PA DEP TENORM Study Report

– Appendix I

Rev. 0 

### Table I - 29 . Ra - 228 Filtered/Unfiltered Comparison

– ZLD Effluent Study ID Sample

Type R a - 228 Result Ra - 228 Error Ra - 228 MDC Results Consistent

(Error Bars Overlap)? RPD DER Highest Result Matrix? WT

- 23

- LQ

- 259 Filtered 280 22.0 13.0 Consistent 9.52 0.401 Unfiltered WT

- 23

- LQ

- 260 Unfiltered 308 28.0 15.0 WT

- 21

- LQ

- 261 Filtered 725 63.0 46.0 Consistent 0.553 0.022 Filtered WT

- 21

- LQ

- 262 Unfiltered 721 66.0 36.0 WT

- 24

- LQ

- 265 Filtered 120 24.0 25.0 Consistent 16.2 0.312 Filtered WT

- 24

- LQ

- 266 Unfiltered 102 17.0 17.0 WT

- 22

- LQ

- 269 Filtered 163 34.0 41.0 Consistent 8.80 0.155 Unfiltered WT

- 22

- LQ

- 270 Unfiltered 178 36.0 45.0 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 273 Filtered 1,740 145 29.0 Consistent 0.000 0.000 WT

- 07

- LQ

- 274 Unfiltered 1,740 45.0 47.0 Notes: All results in units of pCi/L. Conclusion based on detected results only, by evaluating the four comparison metrics presented. MDC denotes Minimum Detectable Activity. RPD d enotes Relative Percent Difference (values less than 35% are potentially identical). DER denotes Duplicate Error Ratio ( v alues l ess than 1.42 are potentially identical).