Text

2005 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report
	ML061380470
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png
Issue date:	05/15/2006
From:	Devincentis J; Entergy Nuclear Northeast, Entergy Nuclear Operations
To:	; Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
	BVY 06-047
	Download: ML061380470 (113)
	v • d • e

Entergy Nuclear Northeast Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

Vermont Yankee

- Entergy P.O. Box 0500 185 Old Ferry Road Brattleboro, VT 05302-0500 Tel 802 257 5271 May 15, 2006 BVY 06-047 ATTN: Document Control Desk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

Subject:

Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station License No. DPR-28 (Docket No. 50-271) 2005 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report In accordance with Vermont Yankee Technical Specification 6.6.E, attached is a copy of the 2005 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report. This report contains a summary and analysis of the radiological environmental data collected for the calendar year 2005.

There are no new regulatory commitments contained in this submittal We trust that the information provided is adequate; however, should you have questions or require additional information, please contact me at (802) 258-4236.

Sincerely, Manager, Licensing Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Attachment (1) cc: USNRC Region 1 Administrator USNRC Resident Inspector - VYNPS USNRC Project Manager - VYNPS Vermont Department of Public Service Vermont Division of Occupational and Radiological Health ADD'S

Docket No. 50-271 BVY 06-047 Attachment 1 Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station 2005 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report

ENTERGY - VERMONT YANKEE Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT Year 2005 Preparation coordinated by- &

-Step n P. 7kibrowskYy &Chem l ist (NUC)

Reviewed by:

Stephen C.cAvoy, hemistry Supervisor Date Approved for Distribution: 5 Samuel A.Wender IV, Chemistry Superintendent ate

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ........... 1

2. BACKGROUND RADIOACTIVITY .. 2 2.1 Naturally Occurring Background Radioactivity .2 2.2 Man-Made Background Radioactivity .3

3. GENERAL PLANT AND SITE INFORMATION .4

4. PROGRAM DESIGN .. 5 4.1 Monitoring Zones .6 4.2 Pathways Monitored .6 4.3 Descriptions of Monitoring Programs .7 5 RADIOLOGICAL DATA

SUMMARY

TABLES .24

6. ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS . .43 6.1 Sampling Program Deviations .43 6.2 Comparison of Achieved LLDs with Requirements .44 6.3 Comparison of Results with Reporting Levels .44 6.4 Changes in Sampling Locations .45 6.5 Data Analysis by Media Type .45

7. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM .. 82 7.1 AREVA Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory .82 7.2 Teledyne Brown Engineering-Environmental Services (TBE-ES) Laboratory .83 7.3 Entergy James A. Fitzpatrick Environmental Laboratory (JAFEL) .86

8. LAND USE CENSUS .104

9. SUMR.0

9. SUFE REN S..............................................1....................................................................... 106

10. REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 107

LIST OF TABLES Table Title Page 4.1 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program ................................. 10 4.2 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Locations (Non-TLD) .12 4.3 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Locations (TLD) .14 4.4 Environmental Lower Limit of Detection (LLD)

Sensitivity Requirements .16 4.5 Reporting Levels for Radioactivity Concentrations in Environmental Samples ........................................ 17 5.1 Radiological Environmental Program Summary ..................................... 26 5.2 Environmental TLD Data Summary ........................................ 40 5.3 Environmental TLD Measurements ........................................ 41 6.1 Summary of Storm Drain System Sediment Sample Analyses ............... 49 6.2 Summary of Storm Drain System Water Sample Analyses .................... 50 6.3 Summary of Air Compressor Condensate and Manhole Water Tritium Concentrations ................................ 50 7.1.3.4 JAFEL Error Resolution vs. Ratio of Agreement ................................ 88 7-1 JAFEL Interlaboratory Intercomparison Program ........................... 90 8.1 Land Use Census Locations ................................ 105 ii

LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title Page 4.1 Environmental Sampling Locations in Close Proximity to the Plant ........................ 18 4.2 Environmental Sampling Locations Within 5 Kilometers of Plant.................. 19 4.3 Environmental Sampling Locations.

Greater than 5 Kilometers from Plant ....................... 20 4.4 TLD Locations in Close Proximity to the Plant ..... 21 4.5 TLD Locations Within 5 Kilometers of Plant ... 22 4.6 TLD Locations Greater than 5 Kilometers from Plant .23 6.1-6.27 Environmental Program Trend Graphs .55 iii

1. INTRODUCTION This report summarizes the findings of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) conducted by Entergy-Vermont Yankee in the vicinity of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VYNPS) in Vernon, Vermont during the calendar year 2005. It is submitted annually in compliance with plant Technical Specification 6.6.E. The remainder of this report is organized as follows:

Section 2: Provides an introductory explanation to the background radioactivity and radiation that is detected in the plant environs.

Section 3: Provides a brief description of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station site and its environs.

Section 4: Provides a description of the overall REMP program design. Included is a summary of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VYNPS) Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) requirements for REMP sampling, tables listing all locations sampled or monitored in 2005 with compass sectors and distances from the plant, and maps showing each REMP location. Tables listing Lower Limit of Detection requirements and Reporting Levels are also included.

Section 5: Consists of the summarized data as required by the VYNPS ODCM. The tables are in a format similar to that specified by the NRC Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position on Environmental Monitoring (Reference 1). Also included is a summary of the 2005 environmental TLD measurements.

Section 6: Provides the results of the 2005 monitoring program. The performance of the program in meeting regulatory requirements as given in the ODCM is discussed, and the data acquired during the year are analyzed.

Section 7: Provides an overview of the Quality Assurance programs used at AREVA Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory, Teledyne Brown Engineering and Entergy James A. Fitzpatrick's Environmental Laboratory. Included are the laboratory's results of the Analytics Intercomparison Program.

Section 8: Summarizes the requirements and the results of the 2005 Land Use Census.

Section 9: Gives a summary of the 2005 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program.

I

2. BACKGROUND RADIOACTiViTY Radiation or radioactivity potentially detected in the Vermont Yankee environment can be grouped into three categories. The first is "naturally-occurring' radiation and radioactivity. The second is "man-made" radioactivity from sources other than the Vermont Yankee plant. The third potential source of radioactivity is due to emissions from the Vermont Yankee plant. For the purposes of the Vermont Yankee REMP, the first two categories are classified as "background" radiation, and are the subject of discussion in this section of the report. The third category is the one that the REMP is designed to detect and evaluate.

2.1 Naturally Occurring Background Radioactivity Natural radiation and radioactivity in the environment, which provide the major source of human radiation exposure, may be subdivided into three separate categories: "primordial radioactivity,"

"cosmogenic radioactivity" and "cosmic radiation." "Primordial radioactivity" is made up of those radionuclides that were created with the universe and that have a sufficiently long half-life to be still present on the earth. Included in this category are the radionuclides that these elements have decayed into.

A few of the more important radionuclides in this category are Uranium-238 (U-238), Thorium-232 (Th-232), Rubidium-87 (Rb-87), Potassium-40 (K-40), Radium-226 (Ra-226), and Radon-222 (Rn-222).

Uranium-238 and Thorium-232 are readily detected in soil and rock, whether through direct field measurements or through laboratory analysis of samples. Radium-226 in the earth can find its way from the soil into ground water, and is often detectable there. Radon-222 is one of the components of natural background in air, and its daughter products are detectable on air sampling filters. Potassium-40 comprises about 0.01 percent of all natural potassium in the earth, and is consequently detectable in most biological substances, including the human body. There are many more primordial radionuclides found in the environment in addition to the major ones discussed above (Reference 2).

The second sub-category of naturally-occurring radiation and radioactivity is "Cosmogenic radioactivity.

This is produced through the nuclear interaction of high energy cosmic radiation -with elements in the earth's atmosphere, and to a much lesser degree, in the earth's crust. These radioactive elements are then incorporated into the entire geosphere and atmosphere, including the earth's soil, surface rock, biosphere, sediments, ocean floors, polar ice and atmosphere. The major radionuclides in this category are Carbon-14 (C-14), Hydrogen-3 (H-3 or Tritium), Sodium-22 (Na-22), and Beryllium-7 (Be-7). Beryllium-7 is the one most readily detected, and is found on air sampling filters and occasionally in biological media (Reference 2).

2

The third sub-category of naturally-occurring radiation and radioactivity is "cosmic radiation." This consists of high energy atomic and sub-atomic particles of extra-terrestrial origin and the secondary particles and radiation that are produced through their interaction in the earth's atmosphere. The majority of this radiation comes from outside of our solar system, and to a lesser degree from the sun. We are protected from most of this radiation by the earth's atmosphere, which absorbs the radiation.

Consequently, one can see that with increasing elevation one would be exposed to more cosmic radiation as a direct result of a thinner layer of air for protection. This "direct radiation" is detected in the field with gamma spectroscopy equipment, high pressure ion chambers and thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs).

2.2 Man-Made Background Radioactivity The second source of "background" radioactivity in the Vermont Yankee environment is from "man-made" sources not related to the power plant. The most recent contributor to this category was the fallout from the Chernobyl accident in April of 1986, which was detected in the Vermont Yankee environment and other parts of the world. A much greater contributor to this category, however, has been fallout from atmospheric nuclear weapons tests. Tests were conducted from 1945 through 1980 by the United States, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, China and France, with the large majority of testing occurring during the periods 1954-1958 and 1961-1962. (A test ban treaty was signed in 1963 by the United States, Soviet Union and United Kingdom, but not by France and China.) Atmospheric testing was conducted by the People's Republic of China as recently as October 1980. Much of the fallout detected today is due to this explosion and the last large scale one, done in November of 1976 (Reference 3).

The radioactivity produced by these detonations was deposited worldwide. The amount of fallout deposited in any given area is dependent on many factors, such as the explosive yield of the device, the latitude and altitude of the detonation, the season in which it occurred, and the timing of subsequent rainfall which washes fallout from the troposphere (Reference 4). Most of this fallout has decayed into stable elements, but the residual radioactivity is still readily detectable in environmental samples worldwide. The two predominant radionuclides are Cesiuml37 (Cs-137) and Strontium-90 (Sr-90). They are found in soil and in vegetation, and since cows and goats graze large areas of vegetation, these radionuclides are also readily detected in milk.

Other potential "man-made"' sources of environmental "background" radioactivity include other nuclear power plants, coal-fired power plants, national defense installations, hospitals, research laboratories and industry. These collectively are insignificant on a global scale when compared to the sources discussed above (natural and fallout).

3

3. GENERAL PLANT AND SITE INFORMATION Vernon, Vermont in Windham The Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station is located in the town of immediately upstream of the County. The 130-acre site is on the west shore of the Connecticut River, and west by privately-owned Vernon Hydroelectric Station. The plant site is bounded on the north, south is generally rural and lightly land, and on the east by the Connecticut River. The surrounding area populated, and the topography is flat or gently rolling on the valley floor.

plant began in 1967. The pre-Construction of the single 540 megawatt BWR (Boiling Water Reactor) to measure environmental operational Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program, designed began in 1970. Commercial radiation and radioactivity levels in the area prior to station operation, operation began on November 30, 1972.

4

4. PROGRAM DESIGN The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) for the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VYNPS) was designed with specific objectives in mind. These are:

To provide an early indication of the appearance or accumulation of any radioactive material in the environment caused by the operation of the station.

To provide assurance to regulatory agencies and the public that the station's environmental impact is known and within anticipated limits.

To verify the adequacy and proper functioning of station effluent controls and monitoring systems.

To provide standby monitoring capability for rapid assessment of risk to the general public in the event of unanticipated or accidental releases of radioactive material.

The program was initiated in 1970, approximately two years before the plant began commercial operation. It has been in operation continuously since that time, with improvements made periodically over those years.

The current program is designed to meet the intent of NRC Regulatory Guide 4.1, Programsfor Monitoring Radioactivity in the Environs of Nuclear Power Plants; NRC Regulatory Guide 4.8, Environmental Technical Specificationsfor Nuclear Power Plants; the NRC Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position of November 1979, An Acceptable Radfological Environmental Monitoring Program; and NRC NUREG-0473, Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications for BWRs. The environmental TLD program has been designed and tested around NRC Regulatory Guide 4.13, Performance, Testing and ProceduralSpecificationsfor Thermoluminescence Dosimetry: Environmental Applications. The quality assurance program is designed around the guidance given in NRC Regulatory Guide 4.15, Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring Programs (Normal Operations) - Effluent Streams and the Environment.

The sampling requirements of the REMP are given in the Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual Table 3.5.1 and are summarized in Table 4.1 of this report. The identification of the required sampling locations is given in the Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM), Chapter 7. These sampling and monitoring locations are shown graphically on the maps in Figures 4.1 through 4.6 of this report.

5

The Vermont Yankee Chemistry Department conducts the radiological environmental monitoring program and collects all airborne, terrestrial and ground water samples. VYNPS maintains a contract with Normandeau Associates to collect all fish, river water and river sediment samples. In 2005, analytical measurements of environmental samples were performed at the Entergy James A. Fitzpatrick Environmental Laboratory in Fulton, New York. TLD badges are posted and retrieved by Vermont Yankee Chemistry Department staff, and are analyzed by the AREVA Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory in Marlborough, Massachusetts.

4.1 Monitoring Zones The REMP is designed to allow comparison of levels of radioactivity in samples from the area possibly influenced by the plant to levels found in areas not influenced by the plant. Monitoring locations within the first zone are called "indicators*" Those within the second zone are called "controls." The distinction between the two zones, depending on the type of sample or sample pathway, is based on one or more of several factors, such as site meteorological history, meteorological dispersion calculations, relative direction from the plant, river flow, and distance. Analysis of survey data from the two zones aids in determining if there is a significant difference between the two areas. It can also help in differentiating between radioactivity and radiation due to plant releases and that due to other fluctuations in the environment, such as atmospheric nuclear weapons test fallout or seasonal variations in the natural background.

4.2 Pathways Monitored Four pathway categories are monitored by the REMP. They are the airborne, waterborne, ingestion and direct radiation pathways. Each of these four categories is monitored by the collection of one or more sample media, which are listed below, and are described in more detail in this section:

Airborne Pathway Air Particulate Sampling Charcoal Cartridge (Radioiodine) Sampling Waterborne Pathways River Water Sampling Ground Water Sampling Sediment Sampling Ingestion Pathways Milk Sampling Silage Sampling Mixed Grass Sampling Fish Sampling 6

Direct Radiation Pathway TLD Monitoring 43 Descriptions of Monitoring Programs 43.1 Air Sampling Continuous air samplers are installed at seven locations. (Five are required by the VYNPS ODCM.) The sampling pumps at these locations operate continuously at a flow rate of approximately one cubic foot per minute. Airborne particulates are collected by passing air through a 50 mm glass-fiber filter. A dry gas meter is incorporated into the sampling stream to measure the total volume of air sampled in a given interval. The entire system is housed in a weatherproof structure. The filters were collected on a weekly frequency and to allow for the decay of radon daughter products, the analysis for gross beta radioactivity is delayed for more than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months . The weekly filters were composited by location at the environmental laboratory for a quarterly gamma spectroscopy analysis.

If the gross-beta activity on an air particulate sample is greater than ten times the yearly mean of the control samples, ODCM Table 3.5.1, Note c, requires a gamma isotopic analysis on the sample.

Whenever the main plant stack effluent release rate of 1-131 is equal to or greater than 0.1 ,tCi/sec, weekly air particulate collection from the plant stack is required by ODCM Table 3.5.1, Note h.

4.3.2 Charcoal Cartridge (Radioiodine) Sampling Continuous air samplers are installed at seven locations. (Five are required by the ODCM Table 3.5.1.)

The sampling pumps at these locations operate continuously at a flow rate of approximately one cubic foot per minute. A 60 cc TEDA-impregnated charcoal cartridge is located downstream of the air particulate filter described in Section 4.3.1 above. A dry gas meter is incorporated into the sampling stream to measure the total volume of air sampled in a given interval. The entire system is housed in a weatherproof structure. These cartridges are collected and analyzed weekly for I-131.

Whenever the main plant stack effluent release rate of 1-131 is equal to or greater than 0.1 ttCi/sec, weekly charcoal cartridge collection is required, pursuant to ODCM Table 3.5.1, Nofe h.

4.3.3 River Water Sampling An automatic compositing sampler is maintained at the downstream sampling location by the Vermont Yankee Chemistry Department staff. Normandeau Associates personnel maintain the pump that delivers river water to the sampler. The sampler is controlled by a timer that collects a frequent aliquot of river water. An additional grab sample is collected monthly at the upstream control location. Each sample is 7

analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. Although not required by the VYNPS ODCM, a gross-beta analysis is also performed on each sample. The monthly composite and grab samples are composited by location by the contracted environmental laboratory for a quarterly tritium (H-3) analysis.

4.3.4 Ground Water Sampling Grab samples are collected quarterly from four indicator locations and one control location. Only one indicator and one control are required by the VYNPS ODCM. Each sample is analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides and H-3. Although not required by the VYNPS ODCM, a gross-beta analysis is also performed on each sample.

4.3.5 Sediment Sampling River sediment grab samples are collected semiannually from the downriver location and at the North Storm Drain Outfall by Normandeau Associates. Each sample is analyzed at the contracted environmental laboratory for gamma-emitting radionuclides.

4.3.6 Milk Sampling When milk animals are identified as being on pasture feed (May through October), milk samples are collected twice per month from that location. Throughout the rest of the year, and for the full year where animals are not on pasture, milk samples are collected on a monthly schedule. Three locations are chosen as a result of the annual Land Use Census, based on meteorological dispersion calculations. The fourth location is a control, which is located sufficiently far away from the plant to be outside any potential influence from it. Other samples may be collected from locations of interest.

Immediately after collection, each milk sample is refrigerated and then shipped to the contracted environmental laboratory. Each sample is analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. A separate low-level I-131 analysis is performed to meet the Lower Limit of Detection requirements in the ODCM.

Although not required by the ODCM, Sr-89 and Sr-90 analyses are also performed on quarterly composited samples.

43.7 Silage Sampling Silage samples are collected at the milk sampling location at the time of harvest, if available. The silage from each location is shipped to the contracted environmental laboratory where it is analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. Although not required by the ODCM, the silage samples are analyzed for low-level I-13 1.

8

4.3.8 Mixed Grass Sampling At each air sampling station, a mixed grass sample is collected quarterly, when available. Enough grass is clipped to provide the minimal sample weight needed to achieve the required Lower Limit of Detection (LLD). The mixed grass samples are analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. Although not required by the ODCM, the grass samples are analyzed for low-level 1-13 1.

4.3.9 Fish Sampling Fish samples are collected semiannually at two locations (upstream of the plant and in Vernon Pond) by Normandeau Associates. The samples are frozen and delivered to the environmental laboratory where the edible portions are analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides.

4.3.10 TLD Monitoring Direct gamma radiation exposure is continuously monitored with the use of thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). Specifically, Panasonic UD-801ASI and UD-814AS1 calcium sulfate dosimeters are used, with a total of five elements in place at each monitoring location. Each pair of dosimeters is sealed in a plastic bag, which is in turn housed in a plastic screen cylinder. This cylinder is attached to an object such as a fence or utility pole.

A total of 40 stations are required by the ODCM. Of these, 24 must be read out quarterly, while those from the remaining 16 incident response (outer ring) stations need only be de-dosed (annealed) quarterly, unless an ODCM gaseous release Control was exceeded during the period. Although not required by the ODCM, the TLIDs from the 16 outer ring stations are read out quarterly along with the other stations' TLDs. In addition to the TLDs required by the ODCM, thirteen more are typically posted at or near the site boundary. The plant staff posts and retrieves all TLDs, while the contracted environmental laboratory (AREVA Framatome) processes them.

9

TABLE 4.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM (as required by ODCM Table 3.5.1)*

ExosrePahwyCollection Anal sis and/or Number of Routine Collection Analysis Sample Media Sample Sampling Frequency Analysis Frequency Locations Mode Tp

1. Direct Radiation (TLDs) 40 Continuous Quarterly Gamma dose; Outer Each TLD Ring - dc-dose only, unless gaseous release Control was exceeded

2. Airborne (Particulates S Continuous Weekly Particulate Sample:

and Radioiodine) Gross Beta Each Sample Gamma Isotopic Quarterly Composite (by location)

Radioiodine Canister: Each Sample 1-131

3. Waterborne

a. Surface water 2 Downstream. Monthly Gamma Isotopic Each Sample Automatic Tritium (H-3) Quarterly Composite composite Upstream: grab

b. Ground water 2 Grab Quarterly Gamma Isotopic Each Sample Tritium (H-3) Each Sample

c. Shoreline Sediment 2 Downstream: grab Semiannually Gamma Isotopic Each Sample N. Storm Drain Outfall: grab

Sce ODCM Table 3.5.1 for complete footnotes.

10

TABLE 4.1, cont.

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM (as required by ODCM Table 3.5.1)*

Exposure Pathway Collection Anal ysis and/or NomtinalNoia ample Number of Routine Sampling Collection Analysis Analysis Sample Mode FeunyType Frequency LocationsFrqec

4. Ingestion a Milk 4 Grab Monthly Gamma Isotopic Each sample (Semimonthly 1-131 Each sample when on pasture)

b. Fish 2 Grab Semiannually Gamma Isotopic on Each sample edible portions

c. Vegetation Grass sample I at each air Grab Quarterly when Gamma Isotopic Each sample sampling available station Silage sample 1 at each milk Grab At harvest Gamma Isotopic Each sample sampling station

See ODCM Table 3.5.1 for complete footnotes.

11

TABLE 412 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING LOCATIONS (NON-TLD) IN 2005 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION Distance Direction Exposure Station From Plant From Pathway Code Station Description Zone(') Stack (km) Plant I. Airborne AP/CF-1 1 River Sta. No. 3.3 I 1.9 SSE AP/CF-12 N. Hinsdale, NH I 3.6 NNW AP/CF-13 Hinsdale Substation 1 3.1 E AP/CF-14 Northfield, MA 1 11.6 SSE AP/CF-15 Tyler Hill Road 1 3.1 WNW AP/CF-21 Spofford Lake C 16.4 NNE AP/CF-40 Gov. Hunt House I .. On-site

2. Waterborne

a. Surface WR-11 River Sta. No. 3.3 I 1.9 SSE WR-21 Rt.9 Bridge C 11.8 NNW

b. Ground WG-11 Plant Well I 0.2 On-site WG-12 Vernon Nursing Well I 2.1 SSE WG-13 COB Well I 0.3 On-site WG-14 Plant Support Bldg (PSB) Well I 0.3 On-site WT-14 Test Well 201 I On-site WT-16 Test Well 202 I On-site WT-17 Test Well 203 I On-site WT-18 Test Well 204 I On-site WG-22 Skibniowsky Well C 13.7 N

c. Sediment SE-Il Shoreline Downriver I 0.6 SSE SE-12 North Storm Drain Outfall I 0.1 E 12

TABLE 4.2, cont RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING LOCATIONS (NON-TLD) IN 2005 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION Distance Direction Exposure Station From Plant From Pathwav Code Station Description Zone(a) Stack(kmn) Plant Stack

3. Ingestion

a. Milk TM-Il Miller Farm I 0.8 W TM-14 Brown Farm I 2.2 S TM-18 Blodgett Farm I 3.6 SE TM-22 Franklin Farm I 9.7 WSW TM-24 County Farm C 21.6 N TM-25 Downey-Spencer I 6.9 W

b. Fish FH-Il Vernon Pond I 0.6@) SSE FH-21 Rt.9 Bridge C 11.8 NNW

c. Mixed Grass TG-11 River Sta. No. 3.3 I 1.9 SSE TG-12 N. Hinsdale, NH I 3.6 NNW TG-13 Hinsdale Substation I 3.1 E TG-14 Northfield, MA 1 11.6 SSE TG-15 Tyler Hill Rd. I 3.1 WNW TG-21 Spofford Lake C 16.4 NNE TG-40 Gov. Hunt House I On-site

d. Silage TC-11 Miller Farm I 0.8 W TC-14 Brown Farm I 2.2 S TC-18 Blodgett Farm I 3.6 SE TC-22 Franklin Farm I 9.7 WSW TC-24 County Farm C 21.6 N TC-25 Downey-Spencer I 6.9 W TC-26 Cheney Hill Farm I 7.5 WNW (a) I = Indicator Stations; C - Control Stations (b) Fish samples are collected anywhere in Vernon Pond, which is adjacent to the plant (see Figure 4.1).

13

TABLE 4.3 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING LOCATIONS (TLD) IN 2005 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION Distance Direction Station From Plant From Code Station Description Zoner)om Plante DR-I River Sta. No. 3.3 I 1.6 SSE DR-2 N. Hinsdale, NH I 3.9 NNW DR-3 Hinsdale Substation I 3.0 E DR-4 Northfield, MA C 11.3 SSE DR-5 Spofford Lake C 16.5 NNE DR-6 Vernon School I 0.52 WSW DR-7 Site Boundary(c) SB 0.28 W DR-8 Site Boundary SB 0.25 SSW DR-9 Inner Ring I 1.7 N DR-10 Outer Ring 0 4.5 N DR-il Inner Ring I 1.6 NNE DR-12 Outer Ring 0 3.6 NNE DR-13 InnerRing I 1.2 NE DR-14 Outer Ring 0 3.9 NE DR-15 Inner Ring I 1.5 ENE DR-16 Outer Ring 0 2.8 ENE DR-17 Inner Ring I 1.2 E DR-18 Outer Ring 0 3.0 E DR-19 Inner Ring 1 3.7 ESE DR-20 Outer Ring 0 5.3 ESE DR-21 Inner Ring I 1.8 SE DR-22 Outer Ring 0 3.3 SE DR-23 Inner Ring I 2.0 SSE DR-24 Outer Ring 0 3.9 SSE DR-25 Inner Ring I 1.9 S DR-26 Outer Ring 0 3.8 S DR-27 Inner Ring I 1.1 SSW DR-28 Outer Ring 0 2.2 SSW DR-29 Inner Ring I 0.9 SW DR-30 Outer Ring 0 2.4 SW 14

TABLE 43, cont.

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING LOCATIONS (T1D) IN 2005 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION Distance Direction Station From Plant From Code Station Description Zone(a) (kmr Plant(d)

DR-31 Inner Ring I 0.71 wsw DR-32 Outer Ring 0 5.1 WSW DR-33 Inner Ring I 0.66 WNW DR-34 Outer Ring 0 4.6 W DR-35 Inner Ring I 1.3 WNW DR-36 Outer Ring 0 4.4 WNW DR-37 Inner Ring 2.8 NW DR-38 Outer Ring 0 7.3 NW DR-39 Inner Ring I 3.1 NNW DR-40 Outer Ring 0 5.0 NNW DR-41(b) Site Boundary SB 0.38 SSW DR-42 ° Site Boundary SB 0.59 S DR-43 (b) Site Boundary SB 0.44 SSE DR-44°b Site Boundary SB 0.19 SE DR-45 0) Site Boundary SB 0.12 NE DR-46 (b) Site Boundary SB 0.28 NNW DR-47@) Site Boundary SB 0.50 NNW DR-48 (b) Site Boundary SB 0.82 NW DR-49 0') Site Boundary SB 0.55 WNW DR-50 °') Gov. Hunt House I 0.35 SSW DR-51 (b) Site Boundary SB 0.26 W DR-52 (b) Site Boundary SB 0.24 SW DR-53 (b) Site Boundary SB 0.21 WSW (a) I - Inner Ring TLD; 0 Outer Ring Incident Response TLD; C =Control TLD; SB =Site Boundary TLD.

(b) This location is not considered a requirement of ODCM Table 3.5.1.

(c) DR-7 satisfies ODCM Table 3.5.1 for an inner ring direct radiation monitoring location. However, it is averaged as a Site Boundary TLD due to its close proximity to the plant.

(d) Distance and direction is relative to the center of the Turbine Building for direct radiation monitors.

15

TABLE 4A ENVIRONMENTAL LOWER LIMIT OF DETECTION (LLD) SENSITIVITY REQUIREMENTS Airborne Particulates Sediment Water or Gases Fish Milk Vegetation (pCi/Kg -

Analysis (pCi/i) (pCim 3) (pCi/Kg) (pCii) (pCi/Kg) dry)

Gross-Beta 4 0.01 H-3 3000 Mn-54 15 130 Fe-59 30 260 Co-58,60 15 130 7Zn-65 30 260 Zr-Nb-95 15 1-131 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 See ODCM Table 4.5.1 for explanatory footnotes 16

TABLE 4.5 REPORTING LEVELS FOR RADIOACTIVITY CONCENTRATIONS IN ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLES Airborne Particulates or Gases Fish Milk Food Product Sediment Analysis Water (pCi/) (pCi/m 3) (pCi/Kg) (pCi/I) (pCi/Kg) (pCi/Kg-dry)

H-3 20,000')

Mn-54 1000 X 30,000 Fe-59 400 10,000 Co-S8 1000 30,000 Co-60 300 10,000 3000X)

Zn-65 300 20,000 Zr-Nb-95 400 1-131 0.9 3 100 Cs-134 30 10 1000 60 1000 Cs-137 50 20 2000 70 2000 Ba-La-140 s200 300 (a) Reporting Level for drinking water pathways. For non-drinking water, a value of 30,000 pCi/liter may be used.

(b)Reporting Level for grab samples taken at the North Storm Drain Outfall only.

See ODCM Table 3.5.2 for additional explanatory footnotes.

17

Figure4-1 EnvironmentalSampling Locations in Close Proximity to the Plant 18

Figure4-2 onvirozmentarSampling Locadons Frithin Km ofPlant 19

Figure4-3 EnvironmentalSaMPlingLocadons Greaterthan S Km from Pant 20

Figure 44 TLD Locations in Close Proximity to the Plant 21

FNgure 4-5 TLD Locations Within S Kim of Plant 22

1Fgure 4-6 27D Locations GreaterThan 5 Kimfrom Plant 23

5. RADIOLOGICAL DATA

SUMMARY

TABLES This section summarizes the analytical results of the environmental samples that were collected during 2005. These results, shown in Table 5.1, are presented in a format similar to that prescribed in the NRC's Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position on Environmental Monitoring (Reference 1). The results are ordered by sample media type and then by radionuclide. The units for each media type are also given.

In 2005, Vermont Yankee utilized one laboratory for primary analyses of the environmental samples. A second laboratory was used to cross-check the first laboratory for selected samples.

The left-most column of Table 5.1 contains the radionuclide of interest, the total number of analyses for that radionuclide in 2005 and the number of measurements which exceeded the Reporting Levels found in Table 3.5.2 of the VYNPS Off-site Dose Calculation Manual. The latter are classified as "Non-routine" measurements. The second column lists the required Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) for those radionuclides that have detection capability requirements as specified in the ODCM Table 4.5.1. The absence of a value in this column indicates that no LLD is specified in the ODCM for that radionuclide in that media. The target LLD for any analysis is typically 50 percent of the most restrictive required LLD.

Occasionally the required LLD may not be met. This may be due to malfunctions in sampling equipment or lack of sufficient sample quantity which would then result in low sample volume. Such cases, if and when they occur, are addressed in Section 6.2.

For each radionuclide and media type, the remaining three columns summarize the data for the following categories of monitoring locations: (1) the Indicator stations, which are within the range of influence of the plant and which could be affected by its operation; (2) the Control stations, which are beyond the influence of the plant; and (3) the station which had the highest mean concentration during 2005 for that radionuclide. Direct radiation monitoring stations (using TLDs) are grouped into Inner Ring, Outer ring, Site Boundary and Control.

In each of these columns, for each radionuclide, the following statistical values are given:

The mean value of all concentrations, including those results that are less than the a posteriori LLD for that analysis.

The minimum and maximum concentration, including those results that are less than the a posteriori LLD. In previous years, data less than the aposterioriLLD were converted to zero for purposes of reporting the means and ranges.

24

The "Number Detected" is the number of positive measurements. A measurement is considered positive when the concentration is greater than three times the standard deviation in the concentration and greater than or equal to the aposterioriLLD (Minimum Detectable Concentration or MDC).

The "Total Analyzed" for each column is also given.

Each single radioactivity measurement datum in this report is based on a single measurement of a sample.

Any concentration below the aposterioriLLD for its analysis is averaged with those values above the a posterioriLLD to determine the average of the results. Likewise, the values are reported in ranges even though they are below the aposterioriLLD. To be consistent with normal data review practices used by Vermont Yankee, a "positive measurement" is considered to be one whose concentration is greater than three times its associated standard deviation, is greater than or equal to the aposterioriLLD and satisfies the analytical laboratory's criteria for identification.

The radionuclides reported in this section represent those that: 1) had an LLD requirement in Table 4.5.1 of the ODCM, or a Reporting Level listed in Table 3.5.2 of the ODCM, or 2) had a positive measurement of radioactivity, whether it was naturally-occurring or man-made; or 3) were of special interest for any other reason. The radionuclides that were routinely analyzed and reported by the environmental laboratory (in a gamma spectroscopy analysis) were: Th-232, Ba/La-140, Be-7, Co-58, Co-60, Cs-134, Cs-137, Fe-59, K-40, Mn-54, Zn-65 and Zr-95.

Data from direct radiation measurements made by TLDs are provided in Table 5.2. The complete listing of quarterly TLD data is provided in Table 5.3.

25

Radiological Environmental Program Summary 2005 Radiological Environmental Operating Report Entergy-Vermont Yankee Table 5.1:

Sample Medium: Air Particulate (AP)

Sample Medium: Charcoal Cartridge (CF)

Sample Medium: River Water (WR)

Sample Medium: Ground Water (WG)

Sample Medium: Sediment (SE)

Sample Medium: Test Well (WT)

Sample Medium: Milk (TM)

Sample Medium: Silage (TC)

Sample Medium: Mixed Grass (TG)

Sample Medium: Fish (FH) 26

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2005 Name of Facilty VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKETNUMBER: 50271 Locntion of Facity: VERNON, VT REPORTINGPERIOD: 2005 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION # NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND DIRECTION REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LID) MEASUREMENTS AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA 364 0.01 0.0137 0.0130 0.0149 11 INDICATOR 0 (PCCU.MEME) (312/312) (52/52) (52/52) RIVER STA. NO. 3.3 (0.0012/0.0354) (0.0021/0.0275) (0.0041/0.0354) 1.9 MILES SSE OF SITE GAMMA 28 BE-7 N/A 0.0889 0.0893 0.1022 13 INDICATOR 0 (24/24) (4/4) (4/4) HINSDALE SUBSTATION (0.0519/0.1420) (0.0570M0.1100) (0.0746/0.1420) 3.1 MILES E OF SITE LAO N/A 0.0292 0.0433 0.0491 II INDICATOR 0 (124) (1/4) (114) RIVER STA. NO. 3.3

(<0.0085/0.0769) (<0.0085/0.0993) (<0.0364/0.0769) 1.9 MILES SSE OF SITE C~S-134 0.05 0.0038 0.0034 0.0098 14 INDICATOR 0 (0o24) (0/4) (0/4) NORTHFIELD, MA

(<0.0008/<0.0317) (<0.0027/<0.0041) (<0.0023/<0.0317) 11.6 MILES SSE OF SITE C~S-137 0.06 0.0023 0.0022 0.0028 15 INDICATOR 0 (0/24) (0/4) (0/4) TYLER HILL ROAD

(<0.0008/<0.0037) (<0.0020/<0.0025) (<0.0026/<0.0031) 3.1 MILES WNW OF SITE RA-226 N/A 0.0295 0.0307 0.0318 II INDICATOR (0/24) (0/4) (0/4) RIVER STATION NO. 3.3

(<0.0194/<0.0380) (<0.0183/<0.0375) (<0.0293/<0.0355) 1.9 MILES SSE OF SITE ACITH-228 N/A 0.0084 0.0105 0.0105 21 CONTROL 0 (0/24) (0/4) (0/4) SPOFFORD LAKE

(<0.0029/40.0137) (<0.0060/<0.0161) (<0.0060/<0.0161) 16.4 MILES NNE OF SITE AIR IODINE 1-131 364 0.07 0.0353 0.0368 0.0382 40 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/CU.METER) (0/312) (0/52) (0/52) GOV. HUNT HOUSE

(<0.0072/<0.0633) (<0.0105/<0.0651) (<0.01 17/<0.0630) ON-SITE 27 FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F)

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2005 Name of FsfIftry VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 5s271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2005 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDnUMOR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBEROF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LMT (F) (F) (F) NAME , NONROUTINE (UNTOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETCION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND DIRECTION REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) MEASUREMENTS RIVER WATER GROSS BETA 24 4 1.60 1.88 I.S8 21 CONTROL 0 (PC/LITER) (1212) (12/12) (12/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE (0.5902.40) (0.700/3.54) (0.700/3.54) I 1.S MILES NNW OF SITE TRlIIUM S 3000 428 428 428 11 INDICATOR 0 (0/4) (0/4) (0/4) RIVER STATION NO. 3.3

(<412/<458) (<412/<458) (<412/<458) 1.9 MILES SSE OF SITE 21 CONTROL 0 RT. 9 BRIDGE 1.8 MILES NNW OF SITE GAMMA 24 MN-54 15 2.99 5.51 5.51 21 CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE

(<1.38/<3.96) (<2.97/<7.91) (<2.97/<7.91) 11.8 MILES NNW OF SITE CO-58 15 3.39 5.59 5.59 21 CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE

(<1.621<4.78) (<2.93/a.59) (<2.93/a.59) 1.8 MILES NNW OF SITE FE-59 30 9.84 14.1 14.1 21 CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE

(<4.82/<13.3) (<7.92/<20.6) (<7.92/<20.6) I 1.8 MILES NNW OF SITE CO-60 15 3.16 5.58 5.58 21 CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE

(<1.31/<4.98) (<2.51/4.99) (<2.51/a. I 1.8 MILES NNW OF SITE ZN-65 30 6.55 13.3 13.3 21 CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE

(<2.78U<9.32) (<5.091<19.1) (<5.09/<19.1) I 1.8 MILES NNW OF SITE 28 FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED INPARENTHESES (F)

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2005 Name of Facllity: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facilltt: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD, 2005 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH MGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUMOR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRD MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBEROF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND DIRECTION REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) MEASUREMENTS ZR-95 15 5.92 9.48 9.48 21 CONTROL 0 (0112) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE

(<3.03)<7.97) (<4.711<14.6) (<4.71/<14.6) 11.8 MILES NNW OF SITE 1-131 is 12.2 7.36 12.2 11 INDICATOR 0 (012) (0/12) (012) RIVER STATION NO. 3.3 (4.14/<14.9) (<4.63/<13.3) (48.14/<14.9) 1.9 MILES SSE OF SITE CS-134 15 2.88 5.77 5.77 21 CONTROL 0 (012) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE

(<1.36/<4.27) (<2.50W<10.2) (<2.50/<10.2) 11.8 MILES NNW OF SITE CS-137 18 2.95 5.43 5.43 21 CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE

(<1. 17/<3.76) (<2A5/-<.35) (<2A5.4.35) I 1.8 MILES NNW OF SITE BA4-A-140 15 9.38 8.22 9.38 11 INDICATOR 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RIVER STATION NO. 3.3

(<7.04/<11.8) (<4.92/<13.4) (<7.04/<11.8) 1.9 MILES SSE OF SITE RA226 N/A 99.8 112 112 21 CONTROL 0 (12/12) (4/12) (4/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE (45.4/139) (<59.2/<182) (<59.2/<182) 11.8 MILES NNW OF SITE GROUND WATER GROSS BETA 20 4 3.38 1.54 4.84 13 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/LITER) (16/16) (4/4) (4/4) COB WELL (0.487/6.62) (0.970/1.85) (4.58/5.43) 0.3 MILES ON-SITE TRITIUM 20 3000 422 422 422 11* INDICATOR 0 (016) (0/4) (0/4) PLANT WELL

(<405/<462) (<405/<462) (<405/<462) 0.2 MILES ON-SITE 29

Stations 12, 13, 14 and 22 have the same average. Only Station 11 is reported.

FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F)

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2005 Name of Facilty: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facfltyo VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2005 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH mIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION # NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWERLIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND DIRECTION REPORTED MEASUREMENT) Pi)) MEASUREMENTS 1-131 20 1 0.490 0.470 0.542 11 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4) PLANT WELL

(-0.293"4.832) (<0.337/4.757) (<0.362/<0.832) 0.2 MILES ON-SITE GAMMA 20 MN-54 15 6.37 6.90 6.90 22 CONTROL 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4) SKMNIOWSKY WELL

(<2.42<l1.4) (<4.88/<9.31) (<4.88/<9.31) 13.7 MILES N OF SITE 15 6.12 6.95 7.43 I1 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4) PLANT WELL

(<2.61/<12.5) (<4.561<9.17) (<2.640<125) 0.2 MILES ON-SITE FE-59 30 16.3 16.7 17A II INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4) PLANT WELL

(<5.97/<26.4) (<10.2/<20A) (<5.971<26.4) 0.2 MILES ON-SITE C0460 15 7.09 7.50 7.50 22 CONTROL 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4) SKIBNIOWSKY WELL

(<2.271<9.72) (<3.411<10.4) (<3.411<10A4) 13.7 MILES N OF SITE ZN-65 30 9.82 9.33 10.5 14 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4) PLANT SUPPORT BLDG WELL

(<.991<16A) (<6.69/<11.4) (<5.61/<16.4) 0.3 MILES ONSITE ZR-95 15 11.0 9.86 12.0 12 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4) VERNON NURSING WELL

(<4.481<14.9) (<7.201<12.2) (<7.34/<14.3) 2.1 MILES SSE OF SITE CS-134 15 5.68 7.02 7.02 22 CONTROL 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4) SKIBNIOWSKY WELL

(<1.63/<8.65) (<4AO4<8.76) (<4.40/<8.76) 13.7 MILES N OF SITE 30 FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F)

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2005 Name of Facitr. VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKETNUMBER: 50-271 Location of Fadclity VERNON, VT REPORTINGPERIOD: 20M INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPESOF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBEROF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWERLIMT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNTOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OFDETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND DIRECTION REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (AD) MEASUREMENTS CS-137 IS 5.25 5.76 6.58 13 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (0/4) (0/4) COB WELL

(<2A71<10.9) (<2.81/<1.60) (<3.431<9.70) 0.3 MILES ON-SITE BA-LA.140 15 9.24 8.40 9.78 12 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (014) (014) VERNON NURSING WELL

(<3.88/<14.7) (<5.611<14.0) (<5 .911<12.4) 2.1 MILES SSE OF SITE RA226 N/A 171 183 198 12 INDICATOR 0 (4/16) (1/4) (014) VERNON NURSING WELL

(<791<250) (1471<216) (<114/<250) 2.1 MILES SSE OF SITE SEDIMENT GAMMA 32 (PCI/KG DRY) BE-7 NIA 581 434 739 18 INDICATOR 0 (1/30) (0/2) (1/2) NORTH STORM DRAIN OUTFALL

(<257(867) (<421/<447) (<611/867) 0.1 MILES E OF SITE K-40 NIA 15069 13950 18250 13 INDICATOR 0 (30130) (2/2) (2/2) NORTH STORM DRAIN OUTFALL (8320/18500) (11700116200) (18000/18500) 0.1 MILES E OF SITE MN-54 N/A 58.9 47.2 73.7 30 INDICATOR 0 (0130) (0/2) (0/2) NORTH STORM DRAIN OUTFALL

(<6.3/<91.4) (<43.4/<51.0) (<71.91<75.4) 0.1 MILES E OF SITE CO-60 NWA 55.5 45.1 73.9 12 INDICATOR 0 (0130) (0/2) (0/2) NORTH STORM DRAIN OUTFALL

(<18.61<87.6) (<44.81<45.4) (<60.8/<87.0) 0.1 MILES E OF SITE NB-95 NIA 70.0 56.0 93.6 30 INDICATOR 0 (0/30) (0/2) (0/2) NORTH STORM DRAIN OUTFALL

(<26.71<109) (<50.11<61.9) (<86.2/<101) 0.1 MILES E OF SITE 31 FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F)

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2005 Name of Fnelltr. VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Fadiity. VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2005 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH IHIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBEROF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBEROF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWERLIMT (F (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OFDETCTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND DIRECTION REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) MEASUREMENTS CS-134 150 46.9 36.7 58.7 30 INDICATOR 0 (0/30) (012) (0/2) NORTH STORM DRAIN OUTFALL

(-*0.1t<71.7) (<34.01<39.4) (<58.3/<59.1) 0.1 MILES E OF SITE I C~S.137 180 130 83.7 179 24 INDICATOR 0 (26130) CM2) (2/2) NORTH STORM DRAIN OUTFALL

(<39.6/256) (79.418S.0) (161/197) 0.1 MILES E OF SITE BA-LA-140 N/A 191 120 257 23 INDICATOR 0 (0/30) (012) (on) NORTH STORM DRAIN OUTFALL

(<512/<346) (<108/<132) (<168/<346) 0.1 MILES E OF SITE RA-226 NA 1799 1775 2890 12 INDICATOR 0 (21/30) (2/2) (212) NORTH STORM DRAIN OUTFALL

(<691/3490) (1680/1870) (2290/3490) 0.1 MILES E OF SITE 2890 22 INDICATOR 0 (2/2) NORTH STORM DRAIN OUTFALL (2750/3030) 0.1 MILES E OF SITE AC-228 N/A 1807 1625 3365 23 INDICATOR 0 (24/30) (212) (2/2) NORTH STORM DRAIN OUTFALL (s5.2/3920) (1450/1800) (2810/3920) 0.1 MILES E OF SITE TH-228 N/A 1979 1592 2440 19 INDICATOR 0 (30/30) (2/2) (2/2) NORTH STORM DRAIN OUTFALL (469/3660) (944/2240) (1240/3640) 0.1 MILES E OF SITE TH-232 N/A 989 963 1170 36 INDICATOR 0 (30/30) (2/2) (2/2) NORTH STORM DRAIN OUTFALL (384/1240) (905/1020) (1110/1230) 0.1 MILES E OF SITE 32 FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED INPARENTHESES (F)

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2005 Name of Fa-Dfty VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKETNUMBER: 50-271 Loaton of Faeility: VERNON, VT REPORTINGPERIOD: 2M0 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WTr mGnEsT ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION # NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWERLIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND DIRECTION REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) MEASUREMENTS U-238 N/A 6199 4915 7800 22 INDICATOR 0 (0/30) (0/2) (on) NORTH STORM DRAIN OUTFALL

(<25001<10400) (<42901<5540) (<7400/C<8200) 0.1 MILES E OF SITE TESTWELLS GROSS BETA 8 4 16.2 N/A 30.0 14 INDICATOR 0 (PCI'LITER) (818) (2/2) TEST WELL 201 (7.90/30.0) (29.9/30.0) ON-SITE TRITIUM 8 3000 229 N/A 234 17 INDICATOR 0 (0/8) (0/2) TEST WELL 203

(<217/<246) (<2211<246) ON-SITE GAMMA 8 K.40 N/A 66.1 N/A 92.5 18 INDICATOR 0 (1/8) (1/2) TEST WELL 204

- (<19.3/125) (<60.0/125) ON-SITE MN-54 15 3.49 N/A 4.02 16 INDICATOR 0 (0/8) (on) TEST WELL 202

(<1.86k<5.14) (-C.90/<5.14) ON-SITE CO-58 15 3.26 N/A 4.37 16 INDICATOR 0 (0/8) (0/2) TEST WELL 202

(<1.98/<6.01) (<2.721<6.01) ON-SITE FE-59 30 6.23 N/A 7.44 16 INDICATOR 0 (0/8) (0/2) TEST WELL 202

(<3.62/<8.65) (<6.221<8.65) ON-SITE CO-60 15 3.94 NIA 4.93 14 INDICATOR 0 (0/8) (0/2) TEST WELL 201

(<1.93/<7.12) (<2.73/<7.12) ON-SITE 33 FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F)

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2005 Name of Facflity VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKETNUMBERI 50-271 Location of Facetr. VERNON, VT REPORTINGPERIOD: 005 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WTH MGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION # NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETEMON RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND DIRECTION REPORTED MEASUREMEN D) MEASUREMENTS NB-95 is 3.26 N/A 4.19 16 INDICATOR 0 (0/8) (0/2) TEST WELL 202

(<1.871<5.22) ON-SITE 1-131 15 5.86 N/A 664 16 INDICATOR 0 (0M (0/2) TEST WELL 202

(<4.2W<6.85) (<6.43/<6.85) ON-SITE CS-134 15 3.14 N/A 3.70 16 INDICATOR 0 (0/8) (0o2) TEST WELL 202

(<1.65/<4.74) (<2.651<4.74) ON-SITE CS-137 18 3.62 N/A 4.13 16 INDICATOR 0 (08 (0/2) TEST WELL 202

(<1.81/<5.41) (<3.09/<5.17) ON-SITE BA-LA-140 15 5.13 N/A 6.24 16 INDICATOR 0 (0/8) (0/2) TEST WELL 202

(<3.23/<7.15) (<5.32/<7.15) ON-SITE MILK 1-131 113 0.538 0.488 0.670 25 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/LITER) (0/95) (0/18) (0/5) DOWNEY-SPENCER FARM

(<0.273/<0.832) (<0.341/<0.758) (<0.529/<0.832) 6.9 MILES W OF SITE SR-89 26 N/A 4.63 4.08 7.04 25 INDICATOR 0 (0/22) (0/4) (0/2) DOWNEY-SPENCER

(<2.80/<7.11) (<3.01/<5.16) (<6.96/<7.11) 6.9 MILES W OF SITE SR-90 26 N/A 1.41 1.34 3.35 25 INDICATOR 0 (12/22) (2/4) (2n2) DOWNEY-SPENCER

(<0.795/3.47) (<0.723/1.95) (3.2213.47) 6.9 MILES W OF SITE 34 FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F)

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2005 Name of Fnefffty- VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of FacltY: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2005 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH MGHBEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAIN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLEDI ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND DIRECTION REPORTED MEASUREMENT) MEASUREMENTS GAMMA - 113 BE-7 tVA 59.2 53.8 64.1

25 INDICATOR 0 (0/95) (015 DOWNEY-SPENCER

(<27.71<97.8) (<33.4/<84.3) (<47.0/<1.5) 6.9 MILES W OF SITE K-40 N/A 1587 1557 1984 25 INDICATOR 0 (94/95) (18118) (5/5) DOWNEY-SPENCER (1330/2060) (141011800) (1840/2060) 6.9 MILES W OF SITE CS-134 is 7.41 7.03 8.19 II INDICATOR 0 (0195) (0/18) (0/18) MILLER FARM

(<2.83/<13.6) (<3A6/<11.3) (<5.78/<11.1) 0.8 MILES W OF SITE CS-137 1 7.67 7.58 8.36 22 INDICATOR 0 (1/95) (0/18) (0/18) FRANKLIN FARM

(<4.23/<14.3) (00<1.~l1.1) (<4.93/<13.4) 9.7 MILES WSW OF SITE BA-LA140 15 10.5 7.98 16.0 11 INDICATOR 0 (0/18) (0/18) MILLER FARM

(<4.36/<114) (<3.00/<12.7) (<5.86/<1 14) 0.8 MILES W OF SITE RA-226 N/A 151 142 167 25 INDICATOR 0 (33/95) (10/18) (2/5) DOWNEY-SPENCER (72.0/<228) (<21.7/242) (97.4/<210) 6.9 MILES W OF SITE AC-TH228 N/A 29.9 27.8 32.7 11 INDICATOR 0 (0/95) (0/18) (0/18) MILLER FARM

(<15.8/<61.6) (<17.9/<44.2) (<20.01<46.3) 0.8 MILES W OF SITE SILAGE 1-131 5 60 37.5 17.4 44.1 22 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/KG) (0/4) (0/1) (0/1) FRANKLIN FARM

(<30.6/<44.1) N/A N/A 9.7 MILES WSW OF SITE 35 FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED INPARENTHESES (F)

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THEVERMONT YANKEENUCLEARPOWERPLANT,2005 Name of Fadl~r VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKETNUMBER: 50.271 Loation of Facflty: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2005 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WIT!! MGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUMOR TYPES OF NUMBEROF REQUIRE) MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBEROF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWERUIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCEANDDIRECTION REPORTED MEASUREMEM (LLD) MEASUREMENTS GAMMA 5 BE-7 N/A 910 358 1870 22 INDICATOR 0 (414) (1/1) (Ill) FRANKLIN FARM (360/1870) N/A N/A 9.7 MILES WSW OF SITE C-40 N/A 10803 3770 21600 22 INDICATOR 0 (4/4) (1/1) (1/1) FRANKLIN FARM (3530/21600) N/A N/A 9.7 MILES WSW OF SITE CS-134 60 47.0 33.3 55.3 22 INDICATOR 0 (0/4) (0/1) (0/1) FRANKLIN FARM

(<33.1/<55.3) NIA N/A 9.7 MILES WSW OF SITE CS-137 80 44.3 26.0 55.8 18 INDICATOR 0 (0/4) (0/1) (0/1) BLODGETT FARM

' (<30.5/<55.8) N/A N/A 3.6 MILES SE OF SITE RA-226 N/A 870 430 1410 22 INDICATOR 0 (1/4) (0/1) (1/1) FRANKLIN FARM

(<519/1410) N/A N/A 9.7 MILES WSW OF SITE AC-TH228 N/A 159 79.2 200 18 INDICATOR 0 (1/4) (0/1) (0/1) BLODGETT FARM

(<95/<200) N/A N/A 3.6 MILES SE OF SITE I

MIXED GRASS 1-131 21 60 36.2 32.9 38.9 12 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/KG) (0/18) (0/3) (0/3) N. HINSDALE, NH

(<20.5/<57.2) (<30.0/<36.2) (<24.31<47.6) 3.6 MILES NNW OF SITE GAMMA 21 BE-7 N/A 1992 1870 2677 12 INDICATOR 0 (17/18) (2/3) (3/3) N. HINSDALE, NH (I l4/380) (<326/4870) (194s38o) 3.6 MILES NNW OF SITE 36 S FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F)

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2005 Name of Faellty: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DIOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 LoAtion of Facilty: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2005 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITIH MGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION # NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER IJMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DTECION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND DIRECTION REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) MEASUREMENTS K-40 N/A 6434 6310 7420 14 INDICATOR 0 (is/I) (3/3) (3/3) NORTHFIELD, MA (31209230) (4960/7530) (6720/8740) 11.6 MILES SSE OF SITE CS.134 60 32.1 29.1 38.8 13 INDICATOR 0 (0/18) (0/3) (03) HINSDALE SUBSTATION

(<18.4/<52.4) (<14.2<37.0) (<29.4/<50.4) 3.1 MILES EOF SITE CS-137 80 27.0 28A 31.0 12 INDICATOR 0 (0/18) (0/3) (on) N. HINSDALE, NH

(<13.7/<44.4) (<19.3/<33.9) (<21.3/<43.1) 3.6 MILES NNW OF SITE RA-226 N/A 553 473 704 12 INDICATOR 0 (6/18) (2/3) (1/3) N. HINSDALE, NH (286/1250) (285/584) (<416/1250) 3.6 MILES NNW OF SITE AC-T11228 N/A 111 114 149 14 INDICATOR 0 (2/18) (1/3) (0/3) NORTHFIELD, MA (57.9/<207) (68.21<137) (<1 121<207) 11.6 MILES SSE OF SITE FISH GAMMA 4 N/A (PCI/KG) K-40 4660 5190 5190 21 CONTROL 0 (2/2) (2/2) (2/2) RT. 9 BRIDGE (3830/5490) (4820/5560) (4820/5560) 11.8 MILES NNW OF SITE MN-54 130 66.4 57.5 66A II INDICATOR 0 (0/2) (0/2) (0/2) VERNON POND

(<65.61<67.2) (<53.7/<61.2) (<65.61<67.2) 0.6 MILES SSE OF SITE CO-58 130 60.0 57.2 60.0 II INDICATOR 0 (0/2) (0/2) (0/2) VERNON POND

(<52.41<67.5) (<50.7/<63.6) (<52.4/<67.5) 0.6 MILES SSE OF SITE 37 FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F)

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2005 Name of Fdlity: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Faellty: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2005 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION # NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE ANDDIRECTION REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) MEASUREMENTS FE.59 260 174 187 187 21 CONTROL 0 (012) (0W2) (0/2) RT. 9 BRIDGE

(<163/<184) (<1681<206) (<1681<206) 11.8 MILES NNW OF SITE CO-60 130 62.3 68.6 68.6 21 CONTROL 0 (0/2) (0/2) (0/2) RT. 9 BRIDGE

(<55.7/<68.9) (<60.91<76.3) (<60.9/<76.3) 11.8 MILES NNW OF SITE 260 133 159 159 21 CONTROL 0 (0/2) (0/2) (0/2) RT. 9 BRIDGE

(<1301<136) (<157t<161) (<1571<161) 11.8 MILES NNW OF SITE CS-134 130 64.7 51.4 64.7 II INDICATOR 0 (0/2) (0/2) (0/2) VERNON POND

(<60.8/<68.5) (<48.1/<54.6) (<60.8/<68.5) 0.6 MILES SSE OF SITE CS-137 ISO 57.6 73.3 73.3 21 CONTROL 0 (0/2) (0/2) (0/2) RT. 9 BRIDGE

(<56.7/<58.5) (<63.2a<83.3) (<63.21<83.3) 11.8 MILES NNW OF SITE DIRECT RADIATION TLD-QUARTERLY 160 N/A 6.7 6.3 8.1 DR-O8 INDICATOR 0 (MILLl-ROENTGEN/STD.MO. (152/152) (8/8) (4/4) SITE BOUNDARY (5.14/8.17) (5.90t6.78) (7.98/8.17) 0.25 MILES SSW OF SITE 38

,, FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED INPARENTHESES (F)

Environmental TLD Data 2005 Radiological Environmental Operating Report Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Vernon, Vermont Tables:

5.2 - Data Summary 5.3 - Measurements 39

TABLE 5.2 ENVIRONMENTAL TLD DATA

SUMMARY

VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, VERNON, VT (JANUARY - DECEMBER 2005)

OFFSITE STATION INNER RING TLD OUTER RING TLD WITH HIGHEST MEAN CONTROL TLDs MEAN* MEAN* STA.NO MEAN* MEAN*

RANGE* RANGE' RANGE* RANGE' (NO. MEASUREMENTS" (NO. MEASUREMENTS)" (NO. MEASUREMENTS)" (NO. MEASUREMENTS)"

6.6

0.4 6.7

0.4 DR-36 7.5

0.5 6.3

0.33 6.0 to 7.5 5.8 to 7.6 7.1 to 7.9 6.1 to 6.5 72 64 4 8 SITE BOUNDARY TLD WITH HIGHEST MEAN SITE BOUNDARY TLD STA.NO. MEAN' MEAN' RANGE* RANGE*

(NO. MEASUREMENTS)* (NO. MEASUREMENTS)"

DR-45 13.6 +/- 0.82 8.2 t 0.4 10.89 to 15.34 6.4 to 13.6 4 56

Units are In micro-R per hour.

I Each 'measurement' Is based typically on quarterly readings from five TLD elements.

40

TABLE 5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL TLD MEASUREMENTS 2005 (Micro-R per Hour)

ANNUAL Sta. 1ST QUARTER 2ND QUARTER 3RD QUARTER 4TH QUARTER AVE.

ES:P. fXP JP. P, SD EP S.D EXP.

No. Descriotion DR-01 River Sta. No. 3.3 6.20

0.25 6.01

0.62 5.75

0.34 6.18

0.32 6.0 DR-02 N Hinsdale, NH 6.39

0.24 6.65

0.47 6.23

0.29 6.74

0.30 6.5 DR-03 Hinsdale Substation 7.18

0.30 7.40 f 0.48 7.26

0.48 7.98

0.36 7.5 DR-04 Northfield, MA 6.10

0.25 5.90

OA9 5.96 t 0.28 6.60

0.27 6.1 DR-05 Spofford Lake, NH 6.56

0.30 6.56 t 0.41 6.15

0.27 6.78

0.34 6.5 DR-06 Vernon School 6.52

0.21 6.45

0.32 6.52

0.26 6.96 t 0.30 6.6 DR-07 Site Boundary 7.31

0.38 7.72

0.47 7.69

0.44 7.93 +/- 0.36 7.7 DR-08 Site Boundary 8.16

0.33 8.14

0.29 8.17

0.48 7.98 +/- 0.48 8.1 DR-09 Inner Ring 6.10

0.38 6.04

0.54 5.86

0.23 6.42

0.33 6.1 DR-10 Outer Ring 5.49

027 5.34

0.33 5.14

0.29 6.04 +/- 0.25 5.5 DR-11 Inner Ring 5.94

0.24 5.86

0.38 5.78

0.27 6.45

0.31 6.0 DR-12 Outer Ring 5.61

0.17 5.64

0.38 5.85 +/- 0.35 6.20 +/- 0.36 5.8 DR-13 Inner Ring 6.47 f 0.24 6.44 t 0.44 621

0.26 6.85

0.37 6.5 DR-14 Outer Ring 7.11

028 7.32

0.57 7.43

0.48 7.58 t 0.26 7.4 DR-15 Iner Ring 6.94 0.29 6.47

0.45 6.62 t 0.36 7.08

0.27 6.8 DR-16 Outer Ring 7.24 t 021 6.72

0.56 6.76

0.28 7.46 * .0.34 7.0 DR-17 Inner Ring 6.41 t 0.31 6.07

0.52 6.19 t 0.32 6.58

0.42 6.3 DR-18 Outer Ring 6.79

0.64 6.13

0.34 6.44

0.24 7.19

0.30 6.6 DR-19 Inner Ring 6.86

0.31 7.09

0.46 7.08

0.34 7.69

0.36 72 DR-20 Outer Ring 7.62

0.83 7.18

0.43 726

0.46 7.94

0.27 7.5 DR-21 Inner Ring 628

0.35 6.49

0.27 6.39

0.28 6.85

0.26 6.5 DR-22 Outer Ring 6.85 t 025 6.24

022 6.49

0.37 7.16

0.36 6.7 DR-23 Inner Ring 6.89 t 021 5.77

0.55 5.95

0.34 6.46 t 0.46 6.2 DR-24 Outer Ring 5.95

0.37 5.56

0.33 5.51

0.35 6.22

0.32 5.8 DR-25 Inner Ring 6.69 t 0.24 6.54

0A2 6.31

0.29 6.92

0.42 6.6 DR-26 Outer Ring 5.88

0.20 7.13

0.43 6.54

0.24 7.20

0.26 6.7 DR-27 Inner Ring 6.21

0.31 6.68

0.38 629

0.24 7.13

0.35 6.6 DR-28 Outer Ring 5.92 0.22 6.59 +/- 0.38 6.22 : 0.30 7.13

0.38 6.5 DR-29 Inner Ring 6.69 +/- 0.31 7.60

0.32 6.56

0.38 7.30

0.41 7.0 DR-30 Outer Ring 6.00

0.29 6.69

0.33 6.20

0.39 6.91

0.36 6.5 DR-31 Inner Ring 6.41 t 027 6.93

0.34 6.60

0.30 7.04

0.43 6.8 DR-32 Outer Ring 7.29

0.92 6.33

0.26 6.34

0.33 6.74

0.37 6.7 DR-33 Inner Ring 6.59 +/- 025 6.91

OA5 6.62 t 0.31 7.23

OA7 6.8 DR-34 Outer Ring 6.61 +/- 0.52 7.09

0.27 6.72 f 0.34 7.24

0.26 6.9 DR-35 Inner Ring 6.36

031 6.76

0.30 6.34

0.39 7.04

0.53 6.6 DR-36 Outer Ring 7.11

0.38 7.74

0.50 7A0

0.34 7.85

0.60 7.5 DR-37 Inner Ring 6.25 0.22 6.71

0.38 627

0.35 6.78

0.37 6.5 DR-38 Outer Ring 6.86

0.25 7.55

0.39 6.94 f 0.30 7.52

0.43 72 DR-39 Inner Ring 6.35

023 6.84

026 6A1 f 0.39 6.90 t 0.41 6.6 DR-40 Outer Ring 6.58 +/- 0.33 6.80

0.38 6.16

0.27 6.95

0.32 6.6 41

TABLE 5.3 (cont)

ENVIRONMENTAL TLD MEASUREMENTS 2005 (Micro-R per Hour)

ANNUAL Sta. 1ST QUARTER 2ND QUARTER 3RD QUARTER 4TH QUARTER AVE.

No. Description EM -EXP. S.D. EXP. S.D. EXP. S.D. EXP.

DR-41 Site Boundary 6.72 i 0.20 7.21

0.23 6.74

0.25 7.38 i 0.39 7.0 DR-42 Site Boundary 6.22 t 0.46 7.17 1 0.28 6.73 I 0.33 7.14 +/- 0.32 6.8 DR-43 Site Boundary 6.88

0.26 7.43 f 0.48 7.30 1 0.31 7.67 +/- 0.48 7.3 DR-44 Site Boundary 9.09 i 0.46 8.63 1 0.41 7.71 i 0.34 8.36 i 0.40 8.5 DR-45 Site Boundary 15.34 f 0.84 12.72 1 1.03 10.89

0.48 15.31

0.92 13.6 DR-46 SKe Boundary 8.54 f 0.33 9.23 i 0.33 8.25 i 0.28 8.98

0.40 8.8 DR-47 SKe Boundary 7.46 1 0.31 8.11I 0.27 7.54

0.37 7.92

0.35 7.8 DR-48 Site Boundary 6.18 i 0.26 7.39 f 0.35 6.88 f 0.45 7.25

0.38 6.9 DR-49 Site Boundary 6.05 f 0.22 6.64 1 0.30 6.16 f 0.21 6.59 +/- 0.34 6.4 DR-50 Governor Hunt House 6.54 t 0.38 6.85 1 0.40 6.89 t 0.39 '7.10 +/- 0.42 6.9 DR-51 Ste Boundary 7.05

0.36 8.56 f 0.29 8.01 k 0.28 7.90 f 0.45 7.9 DR-52 Site Boundary 8.86 f 0.27 9.48

0.63 9.06 1 0.40 8.95 f 0.46 9.1 DR-53 Site Boundary 8.47 t 0.60 10.10 f 0.37 9.27 t 0.39 9.67 +/- 0.76 9.4 42

6. ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS 6.1 Sampling Program Deviations Off-site Dose Calculation Manual Control 3.5.1 allows for deviations "if specimens are unobtainable due to hazardous conditions, seasonal unavailability, malfunction of automatic sampling equipment and other legitimate reasons." In 2005, six deviations were noted in the REMP. These deviations did not compromise the program's effectiveness and are considered typical with respect to what is normally anticipated for any radiological environmental program. The specific deviations for 2005 were:

a) Failure of the Downstream River Station River Water Composite sampler (Station #WR-I 1) to collect river water samples was discovered on January 20e, 2005. The composite sampler inlet line had been left out of the water reservoir during a sample collection of river water. The inlet line was restored to the water reservoir and the system returned to normal sampling. Training was conducted for the technician who left the inlet line out of the reservoir. This failure was documented in CR-VTY-2005-00214.

b) Failure of an air sample station to collect the expected air sample volume at the Northfield Station (AP/CF 14) was discovered during the weekly air sample collection on July 20", 2005. The station timer indicated 139.9 hours1.041667e-4 days 0.0025 hours 1.488095e-5 weeks 3.4245e-6 months of sample collection whereas the expected period was 168 hours0.00194 days 0.0467 hours 2.777778e-4 weeks 6.3924e-5 months . The sample station was operating normally at the beginning and end of the collection period. The resultant volume was calculated to be approximately 60 cubic meters less than expected during this period. A series of local power outages (perhaps for local line maintenance) was suspected but was unable to be confirmed during discussions with Western Mass Electric Company spokespersons. No further abnormal sample volumes were observed at this station for the remainder of the year. This sample collection deviation was documented in CR-VTY-2005-02 181.

c) The River water supply pump for the Downstream River Water Composite Sampler (Station #WR-

11) was found to be out of service on August 23rd, 2005 during a routine inspection of the sample station. A faulty capacitor in the power panel for the pump was determined to be the cause of the failure. The capacitor was replaced and the pump was restored to normal function. This event was documented in CR-VTY-2005-02490.

d) Reduced sampler run time was discovered on October 12th, 2005 at two air sample stations (AP/CF

12 - North Hinsdale and AP/CF #13 - Hinsdale Substation) located in Hinsdale, New Hampshire.

Each station timer indicated approximately 2.9 hours1.041667e-4 days 0.0025 hours 1.488095e-5 weeks 3.4245e-6 months less than the 168 hour0.00194 days 0.0467 hours 2.777778e-4 weeks 6.3924e-5 months week. This resulted in an imperceptible reduction in air sample volumes during the collection period. No single event could be determined as the cause of this reduced sampler run time. This event was documented in CR-VTY-2005-02988.

e) Loss of continuous sample collection was discovered on October 19", 2005 at the Hinsdale Substation (AP/CF #13). A fuse had blown and rendered the air sample station out of service.

Approximately 16 hours1.851852e-4 days 0.00444 hours 2.645503e-5 weeks 6.088e-6 months of sample collection time was lost (approximately 10% of the expected 43

sample volume). The fuse was replaced and the station returned to service. This failure was documented in CR-VTY-2005-03061.

f) The River Water Composite Sample was unavailable from December 20 'h through December 28'h, 2005 while the submersible pump was taken out of service for calibration of the co-located temperature monitors. During this period, compensatory grab samples were collected to provide some degree of sampling of the Downstream River location. This event is documented in CR-VTY-2005-04151.

g) Air sample station outages are reflected in the air sample collection time percentages listed below.

AP/CF # 1"Quarter 2 ad Quarter 3rd Quarter 4 th Quarter 11 100% 100% 100% 100%

12 100% 100% 100% 99.9%

13 100% 100% 100% 99.1%

14 100% 100% 98.7% 100%

15 100% 100% 100% 100%

21 _ 100% 100% 100% 100%

40 100% 100% 100% 100%

6.2 Comparison of Achieved LLDs with Requirements Table 4.5.1 of the VYNPS ODCM (also shown in Table 4.4 of this report) gives the required Lower Limits of Detection (LLDs) for environmental sample analyses. On occasion, an LLD is not achievable due to a situation such as a low sample volume caused by sampling equipment malfunction or limited sample availability. In such a case, ODCM 10.2 requires a discussion of the situation. At the contracted environmental laboratory, the target LLD for the majority of analyses is 50 percent of the most restrictive required LLD. Expressed differently, the typical sensitivities achieved for each analysis are at least 2 times greater than that required by the VYNPS ODCM.

For each analysis having an LLD requirement in ODCM Table 4.5.1, the aposteriori(after the fact) LLD calculated for that analysis was compared with the required LLD. During 2005, all sample analyses performed for the REMP program achieved an a posterioriLLD less than the corresponding LLD requirement.

6.3 Comparison of Results with Reporting Levels ODCM Section 10.3.4 requires written notification to the NRC within 30 days of receipt of an analysis result whenever a Reporting Level in ODCM Table 3.5.2 is exceeded. Reporting Levels are the 44

environmental concentrations that relate to the ALARA design dose objectives of 10 CFR 50, Appendix I.

Environmental concentrations are averaged over the calendar quarters for the purposes of this comparison. The Reporting Levels are intended to apply only to measured levels of radioactivity due to plant effluents. During 2005, no analytical result exceeded a corresponding reporting level requirement in Table 3.5.2 of the ODCM.

6.4 Changes in Sampling Locations The Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual Section 10.2 states that if "new environmental sampling locations are identified in accordance with Control 3.5.2, the new locations shall be identified in the next Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report." There were no required sampling location changes due to the Land Use Census conducted in 2005.

This year Entergy-Vermont Yankee is continuing to add data from the on-site air sampling station, AP/CF 40, at the Governor Hunt House. This location has been used continuously as a demonstration since early in the program, but the data had not previously been included in this report.

6.5 Data Analysis by Media Type The 2005 REMP data for each media type is discussed below. Whenever a specific measurement result is presented, it is given as the concentration in the units of the sample (volume or weight). An analysis is considered to yield a "detectable measurement' when the concentration exceeds the critical level for that analysis and is greater than or equal to the Minimum Detectable Concentration (MDC) for the analysis.

With respect to data plots, all net concentrations are plotted as reported, without regard to whether the value is "detectable" or "non-detectable." In previous years, we had converted values that were less than the MDC to zero.

6.5.1 Airborne Pathways 6.5.1.1 Air Particulates (AP)

The periodic air particulate filters from each of the seven sampling sites were analyzed for gross-beta radioactivity. At the end of each quarter, the filters from each sampling site were composited for a gamma analysis. The results of the air particulate sampling program are shown in Table 5.1 and Figures 6.1 through 6.7. This is the fifth year that the results for the on-site air particulate station, Gov. Hunt (AP-40) have been included.

45

Gross beta activity was detected in all air particulate filters that were analyzed. As shown in Figure 6.1, there is no significant difference between the quarterly average concentrations at the indicator (near-plant) stations and the control (distant from plant) stations. Notable in Figure 6.1 is a distinct annual cycle, with the minimum concentration in the second quarter, and the maximum concentration in the first quarter.

Figures 6.2 through 6.7 show the weekly gross beta concentration at each air particulate sampling location compared to the control air particulate sampling location at AP-21 (Spofford Lake, NH). Small differences are evident and expected between individual sampling locations. Figure 6.2 clearly demonstrates the distinct annual cycle, with the minimum concentration in the second quarter, and the maximum concentration in the first quarter. It can be seen that the gross-beta measurements on air particulate filters fluctuate significantly over the course of a year. The measurements from control station AP-2 I vary similarly, indicating that these fluctuations are due to regional changes in naturally-occurring airborne radioactive materials, and not due to Vermont Yankee operations.

There were two naturally-occurring gammna-emitting radionuclides detected on the air particulate filters during this reporting period. Be-7, a naturally-occurring cosmogenic radionuclide, was detected on 28 of 28 filter sets analyzed. K-40 was detected on only two out of 28 analyzed. Ra-226 and Ac/Th-228 were not detected in the 28 filter sets analyzed.

6.5.1.2 Charcoal Cartridges (CF)

Charcoal cartridges from each of the seven air sampling sites were analyzed for I-131 each time they were collected. The results of these analyses are summarized in Table 5.1. As in previous years, no 1-131 was detected in any charcoal cartridge. This is the fifth year that the results for the on-site air iodine sampling station, Governor Hunt House (CF-40) have been included.

6.5.2 Waterborne Pathways 6.5.2.1 River Water (WR)

Aliquots of river water were automatically collected periodically from the Connecticut River downstream from the plant discharge area and hydro station, location WR-1 1, with the exception of the two events of short duration when the sampling equipment was out of service (see Section 6.1). Monthly grab samples were also collected at the upstream control location, also on the Connecticut River, location WR-2 1. The composited samples at WR- II were collected monthly and sent along with the WR-21 grab samples to the contracted environmental laboratory for analysis. Table 5.1 shows that gross-beta measurements were 46

positive in five out of 12 indicator samples and 12 out of 12 control samples, as would be expected, due to naturally-occurring radionuclides in the water. As seen in Figure 6.8, the mean concentration of the indicator locations was similar to the mean concentration at the control location in 2005.

For each sampling site, the monthly samples were composited into quarterly samples for H-3 (Tritium) analyses. None of the samples contained detectable quantities of H-3.

6.5.2.2 Ground Water (WG)

Quarterly ground water (deep wells supplying drinking water to the plant and selected offsite locations) samples were collected from four indicator locations (only one is required by VYNPS ODCM) and one control location during 2005. WG-13 (COB Well), an on-site well location, has been routinely sampled since the second half of 1996. In 1999, WG-14 (PBS Well) another on-site well location was added to the program. Table 5.1 and Figure 6.9 show that gross-beta measurements were positive in 16 out of 16 indicator samples and in 4 out of 4 control samples. The beta activity is due to naturally-occurring radionuclides in the water. The levels at all sampling locations, including the higher levels at station WG-11, were consistent with those detected in previous years. Naturally occurring Ra-226 was also detected in five samples and is naturally-occurring. No other gamma-emitting radionuclides or tritium were detected in any of the samples.

6.5.2.3 Sediment (SE)

Semi-annual river sediment grab samples were collected from two indicator locations during 2005. The North Storm Drain Outfall location (SE-12) is an area where up to 40 different locations can be sampled within a 20 ft by 140 ft area. In 2005, IS locations were sampled at SE-12 during each of the semi-annual collections. Two samples were collected at SE-ll during the year. Be-7 was detected in 1 of 32 samples analyzed. As would be expected, naturally-occurring Potassium40 (K40) was detected in all of the samples. Radium-226 (Ra-226) was detected in 23 of 32 samples. Actinium-228 was detected in 26 of 32 samples. Thorium-228 (Th-228) was detected in the 32 samples analyzed. Thorium-232 (Th-232) was detected in 32 samples analyzed. Cesium-137 (Cs-137) was detected in 26 out of 30 of the indicator samples and two out of two control samples. The levels of Cs-137 measured at both locations were consistent with what has been measured in the previous several years and with thlose detected at other New England locations. Cobalt-60 (Co-60) was not detected this year.

6.5.2.4 Test Wells (WT)

During 1996, sampling was initiated at test wells around the outer edges of an area in the south portion of the VYNPS site where septic sludge is spread. This sampling continued through 2005. The test well 47

locations are shown on Figure 4.1 and the results are summarized in Table 5.1 under the media category, Test Well (WT). In 2005, two samples were taken at each of the four locations and all were analyzed for gamma isotopic, gross beta and H-3 activity.

Prior to the gross beta analysis, each sample was filtered through a 0.45 micron Gelman Tuffiyn membrane filter. Gross beta activity was detected in all 8 samples collected with levels ranging from 8 to 30 pCi/lkg. K-40 was also detected in I of the 8 samples. No other radionuclides were detected.

6.5.2.5 Storm Drain System The presence of plant-related radionuclides in the onsite storm drain system has been identified in previous years at Entergy-Vermont Yankee. As a consequence, a 50.59 evaluation of radioactive materials discharged via the storm drain system was performed in 1998. This assessment was in response to I&E Information and Enforcement Bulletin No. 80-10 and NRC Information Notice No. 91-40. The evaluation demonstrated that the total curies released via the VYNPS storm drain system are not sufficient to result in a significant dose (i.e. dose does not exceed 10% of the technical specification objective of 0.3 millirem per year to the total body, and 1.0 millirem per year to the target organ for the maximally exposed receptor). Water and sediment in the onsite storm drain system was routinely sampled throughout 2005 at various points. The results of this sampling are summarized below.

Sediment samples were taken from the storm drain system at onsite manhole locations in 2005 for a total of 21 samples. All samples were analyzed for gamma emitting isotopes. Table 6-1 summarizes the analytical results of the sediment samples. The naturally-occurring isotope Ra-226 was found in 13 of 21 samples as expected. The highest detected concentration for all plant- related radionuclides that were detected in sediment samples was found in sample SE-95, which is also designated by the plant as Manhole 12.

Water samples were taken from the storm drain system at various access points in 2005 including Manholes MH-8, MH-l 1H, MH-12A, MH-13, and MH-14. Table 6-2 summarizes the analytical results of water samples from the storm drain system in 2005. Naturally-occurring Ra-226 was detected in 15 of the samples. Low levels of gross beta activity were detected in all samples analyzed at concentrations that are typical of any environmental water sample. Tritium (H-3) was not detected in the 24 samples analyzed.

In 1998, an additional dose assessment was performed that incorporated all of the 1998 storm drain system analytical results (including both sediment and water). The dose assessment was performed using the maximum measured concentration of radionuclides in 1998, and a conservative estimate of the volume of sediment and water discharged via the storm drain system. The results of this dose assessment are estimates of the total body and maximum organ dose equaling 3.2% and 1.6% of the corresponding 48

Technical Specification dose limits respectively. Therefore, there was no significant dose impact from plant-related radionuclides in the storm drain system in 1998. The sampling conducted in 2005 indicates that the presence of radionuclides in the storm drain system has not changed significantly. Therefore, the storm drain system remains an insignificant impact to dose. The VYNPS staff will continue to monitor the presence of plant related radionuclides in the storm drain system.

Table 6.1 Summary of Storm Drain System Sediment Sample Analyses*

Isotope No. Detected** Mean Range Station With Highest (pCi/kg) (pCi/kg) Detected Concentration Ra-226 13/21 1.4 E 3 (0.89 - 2.02) E 3 MH-12 (SE-95) 1-131 0121 1.0E3 NA MH-12 (SE-95)

Cs-134 0/21 3.9 E 1 NA MH-12A (SE-92)

Cs-137 2/21 2.7E I (1.9-3.4)E I MH-12A (SE-92)

Zr-95 0121 8.3 E 1 NA MH-12 (SE-95)

Co-58 0/21 4.6 E I NA MH-12 (SE-95)

Mn-54 0/21 5.1 E 1 NA MH-12 (SE-95)

Zn-65 0/21 1.01E2 NA MH-12 (SE-95)

Fe-59 0/21 1.3 E2 NA MH-12 (SE-95)

Co-60 9/21 2.9 E 2 (1.0 - 8.5) E 2 MH-12 (SE-95)

Ba/La-140 MI2 2.1 E2 NA MH-12 (SE-95)

Radionuclides that were not detected in any sample are not listed t*The fraction of sample analyses yielding detectable measurements (i.e. >3 standard deviations).

The mean and the range are determined only from the samples where activity was >3 standard deviations.

49

Table 6.2 Summary of Storm Drain System Water Sample Analyses*

Isotope No. Detected ** Mean Range Station With Highest KU___L) (pCi/L) Detected Concentration Gross Beta 24/24 4.1 E 0 (1.7 - 7,7) E 0 MH-12A (WW-12)

H-3 0/24 4.2 E 2 NA MH-12A (WW-12)

Ra-226 15/24 1.2 E 2 (0.53 - 3.2) E 2 MH-12A (WW-12) 1-131 0/24 9.1 E0 NA MH-14 (WW-10)

Cs-134 0/24 4.0 E 0 NA MH-12A (WW-12)

Cs-137 0/24 4.7 E 0 NA MH-12A (WW-12)

Zr-95 0/24 8.0 E 0 NA MH-12A (WW-12)

Co-58 0/24 4.5 E 0 NA MH-12A (WW-12)

Mn-54 0/24 4.4 E 0 NA MH-12A (WW-12)

Zn-65 0/24 1.0 E 1 NA MH-12A (WW-12)

Fe-95 0/24 1.2 E 1 NA MH-12A (WW-12)

Co-60 0/24 4.9 E 0 NA MH-12A (WW-12)

BCoA6140 0/24 6.5 E 0 NA MH-12A (WW-12)

Radionuclides that were not detected in any sample are not listed

" The fraction of sample analyses yielding detectable measurements (i.e. >3 standard deviations).

6.5.2.6 Air Compressor Condensate and Manhole Sampling Results The presence of tritium in station air compressor condensate and manholes (Storm Drain System) has been identified since 1995 (ER 95-0704). An evaluation has been performed (S.R.1592) which states

"...leakage of tritium found in the storm drains (manholes) to ground water beneath the site will be transported by natural ground water gradient to the Connecticut River. However, at the current measured concentrations and postulated leak rate from the storm drains, the offsite dose impact is not significant

(<2.4E-5 mremnyear)." Data provided in Table 6.3 will be filed under the requirements of IOCFR50.75(g) and is presented here in response to ER_95-0704_04 commitments.

Table 6.3 Summary of Air Compressor Condensate and Manhole Water Tritium Concentrations*

Sample Location No. Mean Range Detected** (microcuries/ml) (microcuries/ml)

Air Compressor Condensate 9/9 2.84E-05 (0.53- 8.80) E-5 Manhole I1H 2/11 1.66E-6 (0.71 - 7.78) E6 Manhole 13 2/13 8.03 E-7 (0.72 - 1.18) E-6 Manhole 8 -0/1 None Detected None Detected Manhole 14 0/48 None Detected None Detected

Reported per ER_950704_04.

- The fraction of sample analyses yielding detectable measurements 50

6.5.3 Ingestion Pathways 6.5.3.1 Milk (TM)

Milk samples from cows or goats at several local farms were collected monthly during 2005. Twice-per-month collections were made during the "pasture season" since the milking cows or goats were identified as being fed pasture grass during that time. Each sample was analyzed for 1-131 and other gamma-emitting radionuclides. Quarterly composites (by location) were analyzed for Sr-89 and Sr-90.

As expected, naturally-occurring K-40 was detected in all samples. Also expected was Sr-90. Sr-90 was detected in 12 out of 22 indicator samples and 2 out of 4 control samples. Although Sr-90 is a by-product of nuclear power plant operations, the levels detected in milk are consistent with that expected from worldwide fallout from nuclear weapons tests, and to a much lesser degree from fallout from the Chernobyl incident. The Sr-90 levels shown in Table 5.1 and Figure 6.11 are consistent with those detected at other New England farms participating in other plant environmental monitoring programs.

This radionuclide and Cs-137 are present throughout the natural environment as a result of atmospheric nuclear weapons testing that started primarily in the late 1950's and continued through 1980. They are found in soil and vegetation, as well as anything that feeds upon vegetation, directly or indirectly. The detection of Cs-137 in environmental milk samples is expected and has been detected in previous years.

Cs-137 was detected in I of 113 samples in 2005. See Figure 6.10. It should be noted here that most of the Cs-137 concentrations and many of the Sr-90 concentrations shown on Figures 6.10 and 6.11, respectively, are considered "not detectable." All values have been plotted, regardless of whether they were considered statistically significant or not. As shown in these figures, the levels are also consistent with those detected in previous years near the VYNPS plant. There is also little actual difference in concentrations between farms.

6.5.3.2 Silage (TC)

A silage sample was collected from each of the required milk sampling stations during October. Each of these was analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides and I-131. As expected with all biological media, naturally-occurring Be-7 and K-40 were detected in all samples. Naturally-occurring Ra-226 and Ac-Th-228 were also detected in I of the 5 samples. Cs-137 was not detected in any of the five samples. No I-131 was detected in any sample.

6.5.3.3 Mixed Grass (TG)

Mixed grass samples were collected at each of the air sampling stations on three occasions during 2005.

As expected with all biological media, naturally-occurring Be-7 was detected in 19 of the 21 samples.

Naturally-occurring K-40 was detected in all samples. Naturally-occurring Ra-226 was detected in 8 of 51

the 21 samples and naturally occurring Ac-228 was detected in three samples. Cs-137 was not in any of the samples.

6.5.3.4 Fish (FI)

Semiannual samples of fish were collected from two locations in the Spring and Fall of 2005. Several species are collected such as Walleye, Small Mouth Bass, Large Mouth Bass, Yellow Perch, White Perch, and Rock Bass. The edible portions of each of these were analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. As expected in biological matter, naturally-occurring K-40 was detected in all samples.

As shown in Table 5.1, Cs-137 was not detected in this year's samples. It should be noted that most of the Cs-137 concentrations plotted in Figure 6.12 are considered "not detectable." All values were plotted regardless of whether they were considered statistically significant or not. The Cs-137 levels plotted for 2005 and previous years are typical of concentrations attributable to global nuclear weapons testing fallout.

No other radionuclides were detected.

6.5.4 Direct Radiation Pathway Direct radiation was continuously measured at 53 locations surrounding the Vermont Yankee plant with the use of thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs).

In 1999, DR-53 was added on the site boundary. The TLDs are collected every calendar quarter for readout at the environmental laboratory. The complete summary of data may be found in Table 5.3.

From Tables 5.2 and 5.3 and Figure 6.13, it can be seen that the Inner and Outer Ring TLD mean exposure rates were not significantly different in 2005 compared to 2004 results. This indicates no significant overall increase in direct radiation exposure rates in the plant vicinity. It can also be seen from these tables that the Control TLD mean exposure rate was not significantly different than that at the Inner and Outer Rings. Figure 6.13 also shows an annual cycle at both indicator and control locations. The lowest point of the cycle occurs during the winter months. This is due primarily to the attenuating effect of the snow cover on radon emissions and on direct irradiation by naturally-occurring radionuclides in the soil. Differing amounts of these naturally-occurring radionuclides in the underlying soil, rock or nearby building materials result in different radiation levels between one field site and another.

52

Upon examining Figure 6.17, as well as Table 5.2, it is evident that in recent years, station DR-45 had a higher average exposure rate than any other station. This location is on-site, and the higher exposure rates are due to plant operations and activities in the immediate vicinity of this TLD. There is no significant dose potential to the surrounding population or any real individual from these sources since they are located on the back side of the plant site, between the facility and the river. The same can be said for station DR-46, which has shown higher exposure rates in previous years.

53

Environmental Program Trend Graphs 2005 Radiological Environmental Operating Report Entergy-Vermont Yankee Graphs:

6.1 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (Average Concentrations) 6.2 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (11) 6.3 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (12) 6.4 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (13) 6.5 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (14) 6.6 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (15) 6.7 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (40) 6.8 - Gross Beta Measurement on River Water (Average Concentrations) 6.9 - Gross Beta Measurement on Ground Water (Average Concentrations) 6.10 - Cesium-137 in Milk (Annual Average Concentrations) 6.11 - Strontium 90 in Milk (Annual Average Concentrations) 6.12 - Cesium-137 in Fish (Annual Average Concentrations) 6.13 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring, Outer Ring, and Control TLDS 6.14 - Exposure Rate at Indicator TLDS, DR01-03 6.15 - Exposure Rate at Indicator TLDS, DR 06 and 50 6.16 - Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLDS, DR 07 - 08,41 - 42 6.17- Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLDS, DR 43-46 6.18 - Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLDS, DR 47-49, 51-53 6.19 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDS, DR 09-15(odd) 6.20 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDS, DR-17-23 (odd) 6.21 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDSDR 25-31 (odd) 6.22 --Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDS, DR 33-39 (odd) 6.23 - Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDS, DR 10 - 16 (even) 6.24 - Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDS, DR 18-24 (even) 6.25 - Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDS, DR 26-32 (even) 6.26 - Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDS, DR 34-40 (even) 6.27 - Exposure Rate at Control TLDS, DR 04-05 54

Figure 6.1 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters - Quarterly Average Concentrations 0.041 U.UJ30 0.03

, 0.025 iE 0

X 0.02

'0

0. 0.015 0.01 0.005 ;

0 I I I I I 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Year

-.. Indicator Stos t*-U-S ontolJ t 55

Figure 6.2 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters 0.04

f f : . :E Su: : . .: a; [?E a: :R t; : 0: X T;:XE: ) C : T:: 0 u . TT: :: :;: f E S X R A S \ t u 4 5 t f D g \ \ \

i 0 X L S: C; f \2 \ : ; . X .; i X 0 , f X f X X g V r .

S 2 S4 : : : V :?: A::A: D V:: :: : i ;uf ;: i ff St,0SiV\00000000. 0 00CuS:00Si00 t;.j00000000.d0.00f,000000000000000::000.000000000000000Q':XAVS duthAS 0P00000000:0't000 S00000 f 00::0X00X 400 fffff CiSt; C0000020 0 0.035 000teey te ti? 0 tti f e id:: X tHAdi e; C e fth.e id A#: Si;; feSS+dHe#i? HAdi?;; AX e AkAX 0 g 8 D CX ft. S f tU;0 . 2 E000 iS00\: : X f f ftSC:04V?0 X X.? $ 01,\40 y :: S f; S d? Stf f SSaV:)Q ClAd t? iX f -: f f tE ViSE ffX;E X X SS 0 X 0 aS ; - 0f ;0 f E di: i; t0, 0 W:; - U f S j ff d0000tE; 0 :d S V @

\00-00:500 00D'V:0:f: 0 - 000X:$'S;fff:XiV0\d 0 0 :00 0:fffff0 :0f, - 000 tEVad X ;ff0000000:f:00000000 000:S l 0000000:0 0 t 00: iD00000000;0::

-0::0000f0:S;0;,:AV;:XU t0000000000:

ffffff f tS f$:;t

fEA; 0 p) X Cfff -E, 0 VX A$S; f 00 0 fff: S :S} l. 0$i;S . tti ,00 Di: AiD)0 f ;00009:D S 00X tV f dU A? fffFfu;,4.0 ;f ;. : t AX0 A: f 0: 0 ffEX d: fF W;00.:; WS :0?.y; .l 0: -XEtf 0.03 :fee l i;:#:0 0 ?fi:\:f? W: i.VE i

- i;e? e-: 5iff:# -;

A:

ASi ii t?:f f aiLu:

H: t.A#;:

0 tS X.ESteiS?000\fAd l C. AG L A ;

i;

fEASEAt0: 050 S tf aS?faN; 0-idS. AD;S

-#;LL;;; A A:;;

000 00z0000 X ff; f04324; L: ;; -- :

Wd f;d fStS X 0500i.

t--L-i-- 4 S S S.S f::ff f t;;; -; -

X tE ffld000 iS .S#.;;;

f A adX S ,04;;

f0St 0V

42 4 ;L;: .;

I tSED:00: a;0000;0 000000futt00Xff tS \f: t000itSta; AS f 0 X0ySAV30-00nI : ffff :ft?0;:0000 ;:V fffA00 0 ::klf:00 ff::Attla000f AXX :S fffA0000\00AGu:0000 040ff f:00f f ;S00 0 aged0 tt 4 00 f fff dZ 0 f ,; bA;E ft. WS X f tEA :. \ : \ S Q X b; 5 i (, I f u ( 2 09 0 l A S 0 0dSaS 0V VS X f i i; z \V t 0 X : X 00; :E 0 : \ : t; 00'V;00-00S .. SEVsiV?;X0000:fe; 0;E;?f ;0 ;ff00:f:;fiVff :; :1, ;SX 0SES: ACaS :00iV000S;00 aSatd0;0,0$Xtad ........................................................ f ff 00020:S0000:;dd:00SES:V0,00-;,000:ffaiV;SS 000f, t0.0SX A:;f:: :0Ct:t 0.025 -- r00-ititt:;00:Itit: f-t; ie-:e t: feTEte-i:- g i-F ffedCediA- fred 0AS-0005-f#fWe i#e'--E A;i'S;055000UALAi#80ifE---805ARy;;L;iS-'dA4Q# 004:#X:

E w 11 n 0.02 4-U a.

0.015 0.01

7V777 tS0 t0itt. '1/

.I't. >QR'

' -X :14 &L:H

!YI0;1 11 J/ j\S wt'Va\iE VAIW" M -A,:

~ it'000lVp'.X1-:0:: \ 00 I';-::\'ig\03 t

/i\ X

( ?

,M 1i ', , II 1 I I 0.005 I I ji n K 1111111 Ys 2005 Week Number

4- A P-iI River11 : 0 $ Statio 0 -U--A P 2 S H La keNH :

56

Figure 6.3 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters 0.03 0.025 At

~~IAA7 K/,KLIA

A 0.02 W~*"VA I 0

0.015 I V ij 41f XiI II 1-I I- -J II1;11 I j t I I J

f U 14 I V I'I I\\Z

~ wIV

'1 S-- I &~J 1 - z I

0UJ 0.005 4

1' I

LivA I I j i

i 0

2005 Week Number

-.-- A orth-iZ inhd e IUAp ~1 $00 0*~r L ake NH I 57

Figure 6.4 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters 0.03 0.025 i E

0.

0.02

" 0.015 0.01 14 II j " ;

f AIj IfA 11 I , !", II I -;:

I I I/vI\Iv Zj IN 717v 71J II 11 Al

]

I I

0.005 I r WV j 0

2005 Week Number

-*- -AP-13 kkA"2 po6rd L keN 58

Figure 6.5 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters 0.03

().025-0.02 A L 0.015 -__

0.01 21 1

i 0.005 i i

f i

I j

n Q

2005 Week Number 59

Figure 6.6 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters 0.03 -_

0.025 0.02----

0.015 o 0.01 0.005 0

2005 Week Number 60

Figure 6.7 - Gross Beta Measurements of Air Particulate Filters 0.03 0.025 I __ __

I-1 E

0.02 z 0.015 I I-j j, II UV ,

I Ap I-,

I

)e

?1IX1 II I I II J 17 U ;, I A

iJA:

~~:, L

0. ,Jj, 1, I I jj i 1,V 11, i

I I 4 i F T :

0.01

, j U

~~VX1J'7

\1 j~

o 005 2005 Week Number

-4P- 40~ nrHn os Ioe-4-A P- Ip ff r L ak e~NH~

61

Figure 6.8 - Gross Beta Measurements on River Water Semi-Annual Average Concentration 4

3.5 3

Vt 2.5 0 2 (3

1.5 I

0.5 0

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year 0-F-WR-1 R etat ("bWon" U W I Rt9 Brdge (3-8) 62

Figure 6.9 - Gross Beta Measurements on Ground Water Semi-Annual Average Concentrations 10.0 9.0 8.0-6.0

aj5.0 4.0 2.0 0.0 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year Gel-w-W-12Veno

-1lat tgrfn Wll WG622 Ie

-*-W13 COB VWe-IEWG-14 Eninern Bu~idin 63

Figure 6.10 - Cesium 137 in Milk - Annual Average Concentration 10.0 4

9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0

0. 5.0 4.0 3.0 MDA 2.0 MDA MDA MDA 1.0 7MA77 MDA I

0.0 I _-_-n. - -01 N :=m

--- II -I.Momr- i 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year

--- TMI Mper () -- TM-14 Bro( T:16 Meadow (cow)

Farm (cow)4 Couy Farm (contro -*-TM-22 Fra+in (cow) 64

Figure 6.11 - Strontium 90 in Milk - Annual Averge Concentrations 4.0 3.5 3.0 I WAA ZN"M I-2.5 2.0 7- A I\ /\/--

LI

-J

-W-1.5 1.0 0.5 ;11 , 7w ; v I n

0.0 I I I I I I 1992 1993 199.4 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year

- . - T 4 - IU P#A A~sr4c8owwV (c w) M-1 Fa m( ow) - *- T M- Co n Farm (contr o)

- *2 - r i I M a m(cow ) - T M 2 Do n y S e c r ( at) - - M2 h n y Hl TQ Spe ci al Far m 65

Figure 6.12 - Cesium 137 in Fish - Annual Average Concentrations 40.0 35.0 30.0 25.0 i20.0 15.0 10.0 5.0 MDA 0.0 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Year

- rn

. nF o- d I V H- 1 Rt. 9 Bridge (Conro)I 66

Figure 6.13 - Average Exposure Rate at Inner Ring, Outer Ring and Control TLDs 8.0 7.5-7 .0 -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

5 6.5 0

2*5*

4.5-4.0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Retrieval Date

--onrl UIne Ring Oute Ring 67

Figure 6.14 - Exposure Rate at Indicator TLDs, DROI-03 9.0 .

f f

f a \ ,

8.5 _ 0 i t ; : C . ; d' j ; f

\ : i

\ \ ; E : ;

8.0 _ ; ; _ ; :- ; L f . , =_ 0 7.5

& 7.0 0

S \

_- 777

\

ES\r :: : :-:

EvA F-2 0

FE6.0 4Ž§L~ 1~ ~ ~I I~ \/;

_ ~

I 5.5 I V1\vy I I':0 f -l , 1: - D. 0 Y : ;SX I I 1; 0

W UI 0:: 14 : V 5.0 4.5 4.0 I I I

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Retrieval Date

- DR1 River Station No. 3.3 : _ DR-02 Noth Hlnsda, NH DR-03 Hinsdale Substation 68

Figure 6.15 - Exposure Rate at Indicator TLDs, DR06 & DR-50 8.0 I I i I I I i 7.5 i A 7.0

, 6.5 0

b.

FL 6.0

%J ,,I W I 1111 xm f;: a ga in I

1U to '

, I 1w 1111 VI - '"';

2 0: V J X 5.5 5.0 I I : f .: :Vf ;: V 0

4.5 4.0 I I I 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Retrieval Date R-Os Venon Sh l -U-ORS Gv Hk kH ouse 69

Figure 6.16 - Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLDs DR07, 08, 41 & 42 9

8.5 I

9 A I-L \ 7

- il 'k _ . ; ... . . S . o _

::0/'SE::AS00 :s 00 /V:X t: ili: wN s CS,003

. . : :1 d\X \ V E iX : : H\) l atS:d: 0 MLLiwffi 8 I 7,,-

luXfAt: t f:^Ve 00.f/.:004ifff.800002 i:

'r - I I 7.5 .0t5DF t 0 0 f t M t: 0 S\

'-8;IAW l: : :/ ::\l 113 A\l [ ? I

&6.-

II V

/2\ : / \.;iM :. ; 00E ft:.R S ,\.**:: f ¢:

/ \ ;'/ f\* C ArEff \,' \ft1Xf1 :D :

0 7 1 t; Te A/ 05\ 0 7 bA}w AtAXiU;; : F C 6.5

\

\/

/ XfL: 0 1 00200X$zE,: f f X

L

-Y-- Z i: ;X: y:1 X f \0: ,?

c:01 :11001 f ,04-1;

\

iVa:;E dX

/V I- III II

. - I 44 I X 1; \ I 2 6 V e

Y I 1 :1 I

lb -I V

V V"7 I

5.5 5

4.5 4

2 1995 1996 I

1997 1998 I

1999 2000 I

II 2001

-r 2002 V

I 2003 2004 2005 2006 Retrieval Date

-4 0Steundary DR-41 Sit.e na -*- DR-42 Site Bonary 1 70

Figure 6.17 - Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLDs - DR43 thru 46 19 18-17 -_ __ _

16 -_ _ _

15

~1 3 -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

10 9 P 8

7 6

5 4

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Retrieval Date I* R4 ieBuday mD 4St Ounar DR45 Steonar -n-* Dk~-4 Site Bounar 71

Figure 6.18 - Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLI~s DR47-49 & 51-53 10 9lo N.

0 I

7'1 i

4-, I 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Retrieval Date

-~*-OP-*

52-Sit OSBound ry B undar iteSite 72

Figure 6.19 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDs DRO9, 11, 13 & 15 9 :

1

. : , l C C ,

C E l . i

)

X . 0 X a: y :

$ _ \ : : 0

:S : : Te : S :: E : u : R E

. f :

f ^ : : 0 : t

V v \ IfI \ 0 - : \ : X '

S : : S X : 11 0 - D 0 i: ; f : : f :; X I 8 . :

7 7 ......

7 0

1 :1:

f

- Buff-l..;

a

t :fF t: t :b#!eSe f Hi f: f f 8 Q ; t; t \ :; i: ; 1 tI',,I seA a v At I f 5

4 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Retrieval Date 0DR-9nner Ring UD R-IlnnerfRn DR-13J ner Ring

DR-15 Inner Ring

. _ i 73

Figure 6.20 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLI~s DRI 7, 19, 21 & 23 9

8 I

0 I'

U~aAI1 7 A1 I

I.

w I % ~1,~7 t i

a6 W- 1M-,~ " RU "~~I - .. I-1" 5

4 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Retrieval Date

- R I . Il nn r i n *- f t 1 I n e DR-21 I nne Ri n 2 n r Rn I~fR 74

Figure 6.21 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDs DR25, 27, 29 & 31 9 \ y \ . ?

E E S f

0 i: 0 : 0X f

\ S : \ \ X f F: S S ,

8.5 t idN f ? t#:XeA ,0 fffttre,00 3' S:# :f.t: P .. f iA, ; . : A ,.it; ;;.f.;i .... id 0 fe L t .f . _:A;: L: i; - ........ :-.-; ;; . i; AS-i;; -;;iD; $; 0 AL; i i

aD: 00: :S ff00 ffX :. d0:000 0 ' s ; ,;SX ff DS . t; dAVi\; t; 0 : : : I

00 \: E i: 0 :: rT E : u i i 8 5 S j 5 ik ::0 #7::.^ 7;; i: : i -0505_ v; $: ::; ;= 4 < _ 0 00 0 j 0 t;; f; 00 0 0 if I I ; I I I 11 - I I 7-5 : t : - -- e : a e fl . _ :: Z; .: . 8l 7

j6 I'!-

I I

)i ` in, II i Al IN I w

-1 I 5.5 I I H ;

5 4.5 I 4 I I I I 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Retreval Date

_DR2 5*tnn~ Ring UD R-2 7 Inner R f DR4-2 ngRn Ring 75

Figure 6.22 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDs DR33, 35, 37 & 39 9 zb.

f : \:: :I 0 : ,0 f 0 00 dS: 0

\ :i : : .

8.5 I \ I q

8 7.5

. 7 0

a..

! 6.5 117-

.6

~ ~ I~~ I 5.5 00

\ SS70 Xti 4'S ';40 0 t4: ff: SS00000 f 0:00:000 ' \ D'V;

'077DVE j f WE \

0 ff000 0 f f dSA00:ff idS:

00 77 T 7 N 'g'-'D ff f; $S0 Xt; ESk'0; 0 Xff:0:; X .; f

'77 t; 0 000000 C00 5 7727 77 Cr ---

fi 0 ffff 0 X0 V0 0 Q t '

f: S 0

'y f

W:7 At fffffE0000000 t;f

S El t#fi ti fA X dSWlSt000:

fff y t t :' 8 tle ta0E

$ 0 C- '-tttt j W100 0B

'fj 4'A;^" 7'#;Lt D00;:

ff :

ff

---'-f f ;

't t

0 0

\: fX ff A ieC'

S 0

-n d:S 5 : S . - C- ie"'d :e ,: 8 i A: ;.-'#? ' # .e i+. e :! .d i: i :_ A ' :di#0 A : S t;fi; aq : :: HA # u A ad f: .::, . ,;: :. 4 i A:; A:f-; . E i s ; ^ ', : - D , e ,:

ddDa'V$400 .t \ f:S 0 . Cudd 000;f) i:00: ff 0'S 0030 tt 0 tAV: :; SS.0000 If iD? : f02 0 S0? aX 0' f: aX f t?000 EV; . : : : t00 ;;fff f fX f f X,000 f 0 X ff; 0 $ f 0f\ 0 B XS ff f V f X Q4.CP 1 : i: -, ;V:; fi; :#L: ._: .A, ... :._: . P:#:4eL:.; _;fa50 : !,;L i . AS; .. \ :: diV.;. : i:; LL i: L L i; .......... ff L L .... -- f:fLf: A ' i 4 i I I I 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Retrieval Date

_-- R-33D Inner Ring -_ DRi Inner ORing Inner Ring -- DR-39 lnner Ring 76

Figure 6.23 - Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDs DRIO0, 12, 14 & 16 9

8.5 8

7.5 b..

z 0

7 C

1 6.5 it III t II bg-I I g 11t , 11 ii.

A " !L; 'A. AAi /M R I

-A LI 19 X Z7747 777 II n I V --

10% ,&

5.5 Ii ;% I I Jw I. e* NA TA" IX A 171 Z! tU&\

kVO I\ /N///THAI/,,

V 7V/\

{T ti \ fft t#/ ~A ~1 I fV hlttlr7 5 NI 4.5 4

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Retrieval Date RngR- O te 0 -1 O te RngDR-U4 Outer Ring -*-DR-1 6 Outer Ring 77

Figure 6.24 - Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDs DR18, 20, 22 & 24 9

8.5 8

A T-¶r>\At1 5.

7.5 I 7

TIIILX

- II0 \ I~eIX ;91X ::00l0 I \ II;00>Y0;; K\g00 LL1JŽLA!ii W. 00ILM A

0 S- 6.5 4

AAl >\/

A I; V

N/

A0-0-aW AI/

II kI 1

1L:\I

~ I F aI kfr VL4:

':, NYA

_ 6 I \X I I I tII XAI ' t00\ L III 5.5 V\ i';I VV M 5

, I A--

4.5 A

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Retrieval Date DR-I erRng U D-2 0Ouer DR- OuterRing DR-OuteRig 78

Figure 6.25 - Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDs DR26, 28, 30 & 32 8

7.5-0

&65 5-4.5-4 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Retrieval Date

---D Rin-26 ute-U-DR-8 Ouer ing R-3 Outer Ring A*DR-32 Outer Ring 79

Figure 6.26 - Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDs DR 34, 36, 38 & 40 10 9.5 9 I 8.5 AAf-q t 8

II Z' I*

A V; I VV ; :o \ I

,\::/ \ t~I\

I X

-,0\Xf A

I\ Vo JPI

/;P7I- 11itAfu 4 o 7.5 X

0 Ir 7

.0 o 6.5 vim 77 I I 'X

'. X/ I II X

ff I II j : V I

6 Ai w V 5.5 I II a,

1tINI I YIN.

W X

D.

I H

11:

f -

\/

1< I I 5 I INI 4.5 I 4

1995 1996 I

1997 I

1998 I

1999 I

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Retrieval Date I DR-34 Outer Rfn U DR,3 Outer RhgV m38 Outer Ring "-* DR-40 Outer Ring

_JI 80

Figure 6.27 - Exposure Rate at Control TLI~s DR04 & 05 9

8.5-8 7.5-165 62 5.5 4.5 4

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Retrieval Date

Nottifeld,~RA DR4 -bD405 Spofor Lake, NH 81

7. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM 7.1 AREVA Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory TLD Quality Assurance Program The quality assurance program at the AREVA Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory (AFANPEL) steps of the measurement process, including the collection, measurement and reporting of data, as well as the record keeping of the final results. Quality control, as part of the quality assurance program, provides a means to control and measure the characteristics of the measurement equipment and processes, relative to established requirements.

The AFANPEL employs a comprehensive quality assurance program designed to monitor the quality of analytical processing to ensure reliable environmental monitoring data. The program includes the use of controlled procedures for all work activities, a nonconformance and corrective action tracking system, systematic internal audits, audits by external groups, a laboratory quality control program, and a staff training program. Monitoring programs include the Intralaboratory Quality Control Program administered by the Laboratory QA Officer (used in conjunction with the National Institute of Standards and Technology Measurement Assurance Program, NIST MAP) and a third party cross check program administered by Analytics, Inc. Together these programs are targeted to supply QC/QA sources at 5% of the client sample analysis load. In addition a blind duplicate program is conducted through client environmental monitoring programs.

Performance documentation of the routine processing of the Panasonic environmental TLDs (thermoluminescent dosimeter) program at the AFANPEL is provided by the dosimetry quality assurance testing program. This program includes independent third party performance testing by Battelle Pacific Northwest Labs and internal performance testing conducted by the Laboratory QA Officer. Under these programs, sets of six dosimeters are irradiated to ANSI specified testing criteria and submitted for processing to the Dosimetry Services Section as "unknowns". The bias and precision of TLD processing is measured against this standard and is used to indicate trends and changes in performance.

Instrumentation checks, although routinely performed by the Dosimetry Services Group and representing between 5-10% of the TLDs processed, are not presented in this report because they do not represent a true process check sample since the exposures are known to the processor.

Ninety-six performance tests were conducted in 2005 by AFANPEL and the third party tester. These tests were made on 16 separate sets of 6 dosimeters. All of the 16 TLD test sets passed the mean bias criteria of +20.1%. Of the ninety-six individual measurements, 100% of the dosimeter evaluations met the AFANPEL Internal Acceptance Criteria for bias (*20.1%) and precision (i12.8%). Third Party QC results are summarized below.

82

Percentage of Individual Analyses that passed AFANPEL Internal Criteria Dosimeter Type Number % Passed Bias Criteria % Passed Precision Tested I Criteria Panasonic Environmental 96 100 100 Summary of Third Party Testing Dosimeter Type Exposure Period *ANSI Category l % (Bias : SD)

Panasonic Environmental Q4/2004 II, high energy - 8.2 +/- 2.5

"_l Q1/2005 II, high energy 0.1 : 1.6

_ _I Q2/2005 II, high energy 4.4 1 1.6 I Q3/2005 II, high energy -1.0 : 1.2

American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Performance Statistic as referenced in the Dosimetry Services Semi-Annual QA Status Report.

Note: Results are expressed as the delivered exposure for environmental TLD. ANSI HPS N13.29-1995 (Draft)

Category 11, High energy photons (Cs-137 or Co.60).

7.2 Teledyne Brown Engineering -Environmental Services (TBE-ES) Laboratory 7.2.1 Operational Quality Control Scope 7.2.1.1 Inter-laboratory The TBE-ES Laboratory QC Program is designed to monitor the quality of analytical processing associated with environmental, effluent (10CFR Part 50), and waste characterization (10CFR Part

61) samples.

Quality Control of environmental radioanalyses involves the internal process control program and independent third party programs administered by Analytics, Inc and Environmental Resource Associates (ERA).

TBE-ES participates in the Quality Assessment Program (QAP) administered by the Department of Energy (DOE) Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP). The MAPEP is a set of performance evaluation samples (e.g. water, soil, air filters, etc.) designed to evaluate the ability and quality of analytical facilities performing sample measurements which contain hazardous and radioactive (mixed) analytes.

Quality Control for radioanalyses during this reporting period was divided among internal process check samples, third party process checks prepared by Analytics, Inc. (which was submitted by users or secured directly by TBE-ES for QC purposes), ERA, and DOE's MAPEP.

7.2.1.2 Intra-laboratory The internal Quality Control program is designed to include QC functions such as instrumentation checks (to ensure proper instrument response), blank samples (to which no analyte radioactivity has been added), instrumentation backgrounds, duplicates, as well as overall 83

staff qualification analyses and process controls. Both process control and qualification analyses samples seek to mimic the media type of those samples submitted for analyses by the various .

laboratory clients. These process controls (or process checks) are either actual samples submitted in duplicate in order to evaluate the accuracy of laboratory measurements, or blank samples which have been "spiked" with a known quantity of a radioisotope that is of interest to laboratory clients. These QC samples, which represent either "single" or "double-blind" unknowns, are intended to evaluate the entire radiochemical and radiometric process.

To provide direction and consistency in administering the quality assurance program, TBE-ES has developed and follows an annual quality control and audit assessment schedule. The plan describes the scheduled frequency and scope of Quality Assurance and Control considered necessary for an adequate QA/QC program conducted throughout the year. The magnitude of the process control program combines both internal and external sources targeted at 5% of the routine sample analysis load.

7.2.1.3 QA Program (Internal and External Audits)

During each reporting period at least one internal assessment is conducted in accordance with the pre-established TBE-ES Quality Control and Audit Assessment Schedule. In addition, the laboratory may be audited by prospective customers during a pre-contract audit, and/or by existing clients who wish to conduct periodic audits in accordance with their contractual arrangements. The Nuclear Utilities Procurement Issues Committee (NUPIC) conducts audits of TBE-ES as a function of a Utilities Radiological Environment Measurement Program (REMP).

TBE-ES Laboratory-Knoxville has successfully completed the TOXCO and NUPIC audits.

These audits were each a comprehensive review of TBE-ES's Quality and Technical programs used to assess the laboratory's ability to produce accurate and defensible data. No significant deficiencies, which would adversely impact data quality, were identified during any of these audits. Administrative findings identified during these inspections are usually addressed promptly, according to client specifications.

7.2.2 Analytical Services Quality Control Synopsis 7.2.2.1 Results Summary 7.2.2.1.1 Environmental Services Quality Control During this annual reporting period, twenty-five nuclides associated with six media types were analyzed by means of the laboratory's internal process control, Analytics, ERA and DOE quality control programs. Media types representative of client company analyses performed during this reporting period were selected. . Below is a synopsis of the media types evaluated:

Air Filter

Charcoal (Air Iodine)

Milk

Soil

Vegetation

Water 84

7.2.2.1.2 Analytics Environmental Cross-Check Program Thirteen nuclides were evaluated during this reporting period. All but one of the 24 environmental analyses performed were within the acceptable criteria. In one sample, low Iron-59 activity resulted in poor accuracy. The air particulate had not been placed in a petri dish before being gamma counted. When placed in a petri dish, the Iron-59 activity would have been acceptable as evidenced by the 4h quarter 2005 air particulate recount data. No further action was required.

7.2.2.1.3 Summary of Participation in the Department of Energy (DOE) Monitoring Program TBE-ES participated in the semi annual Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP) for liquid, air particulate, soil, and vegetation analyses (MAPEP-Series 13 and Series 14). During this reporting period, 19 nuclides were evaluated. All but one of the 25 environmental analyses performed were within the acceptable criteria. In one sample, too small an aliquot resulted in a large uncertainty and a high activity. When reanalyzed with a larger aliquot, the result of96.4 Becquerel per liter (BqIL) agreed with the known activity of 82.9 Bq/L. No further action was required.

A low bias in Strontium-90 activity in MAPEP soil is attributed to a problem with the resin in pre-packed columns provided by Eichrom. The laboratory will no longer use pre-packed columns. No further action was required.

7.2.2.1.5 Summary of participation in the ERA Program During this reporting period, 11 nuclides were analyzed under ERA criteria. All but one of the 22 environmental analytical results were acceptable. In one sample, failure to use the absorber when counting the Sr-89 mount resulted in a Sr-89 activity three times greater than the know activity. When recounted with the absorber, the correct result of 41.5 Pico Curies per Liter (pCi/L) compared well to the known activity of 45.9 pCi/L.

No further action was required.

7.2.2.2 Intra-Laboratory Process Control Program The TBE-ES Laboratorys internal process control program evaluated 1899 individual samples.

7.2.2.2.1 Spikes All 811 environmental spikes were analyzed with statistically appropriate activity reported for each spike.

7.2.2.2.2 Analytical Blanks During this- reporting period, all but 16 of the 811 environmental analytical blanks analyzed reported less than MDC. The activity detected for the 16 blanks is indistinguishable from natural background.

7.2.2.2.3 Duplicates All 277 duplicate sets analyzed were within acceptable limits.

85

7.2.2.2.4 Non-Conformance Reports There were 13 non-conformance reports issued for this reporting period. No ENNVY data was impacted by the non-conformance in each of these cases.

7.3 Entergy -James A. Fitzpatrick Environmental Laboratory (JAFEL) 7.3.1 QA/QC Program 7.3.1.1 Program Description The Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM), Part 1,Section 5.3 requires that the licensee participate in an Interlaboratory Comparison Program. The Interlaboratory Comparison Program shall include sample media for which samples are routinely collected and for which comparison samples are commercially available. Participation in an Interlaboratory Comparison Program ensures that independent checks on the precision and accuracy of the measurement of radioactive material in the environmental samples are performed as part ofthe Quality Assurance Program for environmental monitoring. To fulfill the requirement for an Interlaboratory Comparison Program, the JAFEL has engaged the services of two independent laboratories to provide quality assurance comparison samples. The two laboratories are Analytics, Incorporated in Atlanta, Georgia and the U.S. Department of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in Gaithersburg, Maryland.

Analytics supplies sample media as blind sample spikes, which contain certified levels of radioactivity unknown to the analysis laboratory. These samples are prepared and analyzed using standard laboratory procedures. The results are submitted to Analytics, which issues a statistical summary report. The JAFEL uses predetermined acceptance criteria methodology for evaluating the laboratory's performance for Analytic's sample results.

In addition to the Analytics Program, the JAFEL participates in the NET/NIST Measurement Assurance Program. In 1987, the nuclear industry established a Measurement Assurance Program at the National Bureau of Standards (now the National Institute of Standards and Technology) to provide sponsoring nuclear utilities an independent verification, traceable to NIST, of their capability to make accurate measurements of radioactivity, as described in NRC Regulatory Guide 4.15. The program includes distribution to sponsoring utilities, approximately six times a year. The samples are prepared by NIST to present specific challenges to participating laboratories. For 2005, the two mixed gamma samples analyzed tested the ability of the JAFEL to accurately account for coincidence summing from Cs-134. NIST supplies sample media as blind sample spikes. These samples are prepared and analyzed by the JAFEL and the results are submitted to the Entergy representative, who uses predetermined acceptance criteria methodology for evaluating the laboratory's performance. The performance results along with the NIST Report of Test (Certifies what ctivities are present in the sample) are forwarded to the laboratory.

86

7.3.1.2 Program Schedule SAMPLE LABORATORY SAMPLE PROVIDER MEDIA ANALYSIS ANALYTICS Water Gross Beta I Water Tritium I Water I-131 2 Water Mixed Gamma 3 Air Gross Beta 2 Air I-131 2 Air Mixed Gamma 3 Milk I-131 2 Milk Mixed Gamma 2 soil Mixed Gamma 1 Vegetation Mixed Gamma 1 TOTAL SAMPLE INVENTORY 20 7.3.1.3 Acceptance Criteria Each sample result is evaluated to determine the accuracy and precision of the laboratory's analysis result. The sample evaluation method is discussed below.

73.1A Sample Results Evaluation Samples provided by Analytics and NIST are evaluated using what is specified as the NRC method.

This method is based on the calculation of the ratio of results reported by the participating laboratory (QC result) to the Vendor Laboratory Known value (reference result).

An JAFEL analytical result is evaluated using the following calculation:

The value for the error resolution is calculated.

The error resolution = Reference Result Reference Results Enror Using the appropriate row under the Error Resolution column in Table 8.3.1 below, a corresponding Ratio of Agreement interval is given.

87

The value for the ratio is then calculated.

Ratio = OC Result of Agreement Reference Result If the value falls within the agreement interval, the result is acceptable.

TABLE 7.13A ERROR RESOLUTION RATIO OF AGREEMENT

<3 0.4-2.5 3.1 to 7.5 0.5-2.0 7.6 to 15.5 0.6-1.66 15.6 to 50.5 0.75-1.33 50.6 to 200 0.8-1.25

>200 0.85-1.18 This acceptance test is generally referred to as the "NRC" method. The acceptance criteria is contained in Procedure DVP-04.01 and was taken from the Criteria of Comparing Analytical Results (USNRC) and Bevington, P.R., Data Reduction and Error Analysis for the Physical Sciences, McGraw-Hill, New York, (1969). The NRC method generally results in an acceptance range of approximately + 25% of the Known value when applied to sample results from the Analytics and NIST. Interlaboratory Comparison Program. This method is

.used as the procedurally required assessment method and requires the generation of a nonconformity report when results are unacceptable.

7.3.1.5 Program Results Summary The Interlaboratory Comparison Program numerical results are provided on Table 8-1.

7.3.1.6 Analytics QA Samples Results Eighteen QA blind spike samples were analyzed as part of Analytics 2005 Interlaboratory Comparison Program. The following sample media were evaluated as part of the comparison program.

Air Charcoal Cartridge: 1-131

Air Particulate Filter: Mixed Gamma Emitters, Gross Beta

Water I-131, Mixed Gamma Emitters, Tritium, Gross Beta Soil: Mixed Gamma Emitters

Milk: 1-131,MixedGammaEmitters

Vegetation: Mixed Gamma Emitters 88

The JAFEL performed 79 individual analyses on the eighteen QA samples. Of the 79 analyses performed, 79 were in agreement using the NRC acceptance criteria for a 100%

agreement ratio.

There were no non-conformities in the 2005 program.

7.3.2 NIST QA Samples Results In 2005, JAFEL participated in the NET/NIST Measurement Assurance Program. Two QA blind spike samples were analyzed. The following sample media were evaluated as part of the comparison program.

Air Particulate Filter: Mixed Gamma Emitters

Water. Mixed Gamma Emitters The JAFEL performed 10 individual analyses on the two QA samples. Of the 10 analyses performed, 10 were in agreement using the NRC acceptance criteria for a 100% agreement ratio.

There were no non-conformities in the 2005 program.

89

7.3.3 Numerical Results Tables "I TABLE 7-1 INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gross Beta of Ai rticulate Filters (pCi er_

JAF ENV REFERENCE RATIO DATE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF RESULT (1) LAB* (2) (3) 6/9/05 E-4583- AIR 142.4 +/- 1.8 05 pCi/filter GROSS 146.6 +/- 1.8 0BETA 145.2 1.8 138.0 +/- 2.3 1.05 A Mean= 144.7 +/- 1.0 12/8/05 E-4824- AIR 202.8 +/- 3.0 05 pCi/filter GROSS 204.7 +/- 3.0 186.0 +/- 3.1 1.10 A BETA 206.5 +/- 3.0

_Mean = 204.7 +/- 1.7 (1) Results reported as activity* 1 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity :1 sigma.

(3) Ratio = Reported/Analytics (See Section 7.3).

(*) Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.

(A) Evaluation Results, Acceptable.

TABLE 7-1 (Continued)

INTERLAB ORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Tritium Analysis Water (pCi/liter)

JAF ENV REFERENCE RATIO DATE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF RESULT (1) LAB* (2) (3) 3/17/05 E-4487- WATER 6073 +/- 176 p05 Ci/liter H-3 5982 + 175 6040 +/- 200 0.99 A

_________ _ __ ____ ____M ean = 5962 +/-+ 101 _ _ _ _ _ _

(1) Results reported as activity +1 sigma. Sample anallyzed by JAF Environmental Laboratory (2) Results reported as activity +/-I sigma.

(3) Ratio = Reported/Analytics (See Section 7.3).

(*) Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.

(A) Evaluation Results, Acceptable.

90

TABLE 7-1 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Iod Analysis of Water, Air and Milk JAF ENV REFERENCE RATIO DATE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF RESULT (1) LAB* (2) (3) 3/17/05 E-4488- WATER 59.4 h 1.8 05 pCi/liter I131** 63.3 4 2.4 65.9 4 1.1 0.95 A 64.6 1.8 Mean 62.4 1.1 6/9/05 E-4586- AIR 102.0 + 5.6 05 pCi/cc 1-131 98.7 4.8 92.5 + 1.5 1.04 A Mean= 96.3 h 2.9 6/9/05 E-4584- MILK 80.4 h 2.2 05 pCiffiter 1-131$* 81.9 2.4 86.9

1.5 0.93 A 81.3 2.7 Mean 81.2 + 1.4 9/15/05 E-4716- AIR 65.2 + 4.0 05 pCi/cc 58.6 4.7 1-131 66.7 3.6 63.4 1 1.1 1.00 A Mean 63.5 : 2.4 9/15/05 E-4713- WATER 77.0 d 1.6 05 pCiIfiter 1-131** 0 2.0 78.2 i 1.3 0.98 A Mean= 76.9

1.1 9/15/05 E-4715- MILK 86.4 +/- 1.7 05 pCi1fiter I-131** 906 19 94-3

1.6 0.92 A 84.6 *1.8

. . Mean 87.2

1.0 (1) Results reported as activity I1signa.

(2) Results reported as activity I sigma.

(3) Ratio = Reported/Analytics (See Section7.3).

(*) Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.

(*) Result determined by Resin Extraction/Gamma Spectral Analysis.

(A) Evaluation Results, Acceptable.

91

TABLE 7-1 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis Water (nCifliter)

JAF I ENVREFERENCE RATIO DATE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF RESULT (1) LAB* (2) (3) 3/17/05 E-4488- - WATER 222.0 k 11.4 05 pCi/liter 248.0 + 11.8 221 4 3.7 1.06 A Ce-141 236.0 +/- 9.4 Mean= 235.3 +/- 6.3 278.0 4 53.9 Cr-51 295.0 + 48.7 322 + 5.4 0.86 A 262.0 J38.5 Mean = 278.3 +/- 27.4 128.0 4 9.6 Cs-134 113.0 +/- 14.6 134 + 2.2 0.94 A 138.0 + 6.8 Mean = 126.3 1 6.2 . -

112.0 + 8.0 Cs-137 121.0

7.9 125

2.1 0.97 A 130.0 + 6.3 Mean = 121.0 +/- 4.3 157.0

9.2 Mn-54 162.0

9.0 154 +/- 2.6 1.05 A 164.0 *7.0 Mean= 161.0 4.9 106.0

10.0 Fe-59 114.0

9.6 107

1.8 1.07 A 122.0 *7.1 Mean = 114.0

5.2 184.0

16.4 Zn-65 179.0

11.5 191 + 3.2 0.99 A Mean 188.7

8.6 .

136.0 4 6.6 Co-60 131.0

6 139 +/- 2.3 0.99 A 144.0

4.9

___ __ __ M ean 137.0

3.5 _ _ _ _ _ _

117.0 4 8.2 120.0 8.0 Co-58 111 1.9 1.05 A 112.0 4 5.8 Mean = 116.3 4 4.3 (I) Results reported as activity E1 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity *lsigma.

(3) Ratio = Reported/Analytics (See Section 7.3).

(*) Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.

(A) Evaluation Results, Acceptable.

92

TABLE 7-1 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis Water (pCi/liter)

JAF jIJJ 1ENV . (1 REFERENCE RATIO DATE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF RESULT (1) LAB* (2) (3) 9/15/05 E-4713 WATER 292.0 4.4

1 pCi/liter 284.0 9.0 Ce-141 282 +/- 4.7 1.03 A 296.0 4.1 Mean= 290.7 3.6 395.0 + 18.2 Cr-51 4110 38.1 408 + 6.8 0.98 A 397.0 d 16.2 Mean = 401.0 + 15.1 152.0 + 3.3 Cs-134 153.0 62.9 148 + 2.5 1.03 A Mean 152.3 + 2.6 234.0 i 3.7 Cs-137 235.0 7.2 235 + 3.9 0.99 A 231.0 k 3.5 Mean = 233.3 + 2.9 119.0 : 2.8 Mn-54 1180 5 1 1.9 1.07 A 118.0 2.7 Mean= 118.3 L 2.3 74.7 + 3.1 Fe-59 77.0 63.2 74 : 1.2 1.05 A Mean 77.8 + 2.5 158.0 f 5.3 160.0 + 11.0 Zn-65 160 +/- 5 149 + 2.5 1.08 A Mean 160.3 +/- 4.4 201.0 : 2.7 Co-60 202.0 5 202 : 3.4 0.99 A 198.0 f 2.6 Mean 200.3 ': 2.2 ____

71.6 2.5 81.0 4.6 Co-S8 77 4 1.3 1.00 A 79.2 2.5 Mean - 77.3 d 1.9 (1) Results reported as activity4-1 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity I1sigma.

(3) Ratio = Reported/Analytics (See Section 7.3).

(*) Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.

(A) Evaluation Results, Acceptable.

93

TABLE 7-1 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Air Particulate Filters (pCi/filter)

IJAF ENV REFERENCE RATIO DATE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF RESULT (1) LAB* (2) (3) 3/17/05 E-4489- FILTER 160.0 :L 6.0 05 pCi/filter ' 151.0 + 5.4 Ce-141 155 +/- 2.6 1.01 A 160.0 + 4.8 Mean = 157.0 + 3.1 268.0 + 30.8 Cr-51 2590 + 29.6 226 + 3.8 1.22 A 302.0 +/- 23.5 Mean = 276.3 i 16.3 107.0 + 7.0 Cs-134 102 7.1 93.9 1.6 1.08 A 102.0 5.4 Mean = 101.2 + 3.8 91.1 + 5.6 Cs-137 88.2 5 87.6 1.5 1.05 A 96.5 4.5 Mean- 91.9 i 3.1 115.0 A 6.6 Mn-54 126.0 7.1 108 + 1.8 1.10 A Mean= 119.0 + 3.7 79.8 i 7.9 Fe-59 94.2 i 6.8 75.0 +/- 1.3 1.17 A Mean = 87.7

4.6 150.0 + 12.5 Zn-65 162.0 100 134 i 2.2 1.15 A 151.0,

10.0 Mean 154.3

7.1 95.2 + 5.0 106.0 + 5.6 Co-60 96.6 + 4.0 97.1 4 1.6 1.02 A Mean 99.3 i 2.8 73.2

5.8 82.6 + 6.6 Co-58 77.8

1.3 1.01 A 80.1 + 4.9 Mean = 78.6

3.4 (1) Results reported as activity:1l sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity il sigma.

(3) Ratio = Reported/Analytics (See Section 7.3).

(*) Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.

(A) Evaluation Results, Acceptable.

94

TABLE 7-1 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Air Particulate Filters (pCi/liter)

IJAFI ENV REFERENCE RATIO DATE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF RESULT (1) LAB* (2) (3) 9/15/05 E-4714- FILTER 174.0 4.8

'05 pCi/liter 173.0 4.8 Ce-141 187.0 5.8 165 + 2.8 1.07 A 170.0 4.4 Mean 176.0 2.5 239.0 4 22.1 246.0 4 22.3 Cr-51 230.0 4 24.5 239 +/- 4.0 0.99 A 232.0 4 20.7 Mean 236.8 4 11.2 90.4 4: 5.2 93.2 4 5.2 Cs-134 110.0 X 6.6 86.3 4 1.4 1.10 A 84.7 4: 4.9 Mean = 94.6 : 2.8 143.0 i 5.7 144.0

5.5 Cs-137 139.0 +/- 6.6 138 4 2.3 1.04 A 150.0 4 5.3 Mean 144.0 4 2.9 75.0 4 4.4 65.4 4 4.4 Mn-54 82.9 4 5.6 65.0 4 1.1 1.19 A 84.9 4 4.5 Mean 77.1 4 2.4 50.6

5.2 45.2 4 4.9 Fe-59 53.4 4: 5.8 43.0 4 0.7 1.17 A 51.2 4 4.9 Mean= 50.1 2.6 93.6

9.3 110.0 : 9.0 Zn-65 118.0 4 10.8 87.2 4 1.5 1.19 A 93.3 4 8.5 Mean 103.7 i 4.7 119.0 4 4.5 113.0 44.5 Co-60 133.0 4 5.8 118 4 2.0 1.01 A 114.0 + 4.3 Mean 119.8 4: 2.4 47.8 i: 3.9 44.3 4+ 3.9 Co-58 39.1 4 4.5 44.7 + 0.8 1.00 A

-47.3

3.8 Mean 44.6 4: 2.0 (1) Results reported as activity +1 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity :1 sigma.

(3) Ratio = Reported/Analytics (See Section 7.3).

(*) Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.

(A) Evaluation Results, Acceptable 95

TABLE 7-1 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis Milk (pCi/liter)

DATE ENV ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF RESULT (1)

I REFERENCE LAB* (2)

RATIO (3) 6/9/05 E-4584- MILK 85.9 + 8.64 05 pCi/liter 112.0 +/- 10.6 1.09 A Ce-141 92.4 + 1.5 105.0 +/- 7.9 Mean= 101.0 + 5.3 224.0 + 48.4 Cr-51 298.0 + 61.1 303 +/- 5.1 0.96 A 350.0 +/- 45.5 Mean= 290.7 + 30.1 83.0 6.9 Cs-134 91.5 +/- 9.8 95 +/- 1.6 0.95 A 97.5 1 7.3 Mean = 90.7 + 4.7 174.0 i 9.8 Cs-137 178.0 i 10.9 189 +/- 3.2 0.93 A 175.0

8.5 Mean = 175.7

5.7 128.0

8.5 Mn-54 101.0 9.8 125 +/- 2.1 0.94 A 124.0 i 7.8 Mean 117.7

5.0 49.5 10.1 Fe-59 71.3

11.9 63.9 1.1 0.96 A 63.5

8.3

__ __ Mean 61.4 +/- 5.9 _ _

121.0 +/- 16.6 Zn-65 170.0 +/- 20.7 155

2.6 1.01 A 179.0 +/- 15.6 Mean = 156.7 i 10.3 142.0

7.0 Co-60 128.0 4 8.3 145

2.4 0.92 A 130.0 i 6.4 Mean = 133.3 I 4.2 (1) Results reported as activity *1 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity +/-1 sigma.

(3) Ratio = Reported/Analytics (See Section 7.3).

(*) Sample provided by Analytics, Inc 96 (A) Evaluation Results, Acceptable

TABLE 7-1 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis Milk (pCWiiter)

DATE JAF111 ENV ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF RESULT (1)

I REFERENCE LAB* (2)

RATIO (3) 9/15/05 E-4715- MILK 232.0 : 4.9 05 pCi/liter 241.0 +/- 8.1 Ce-141 233 + 3.9 1.02 A 237.0 + 7.6 Mean = 236.7 + 4.1 326.0 +/- 21.0 Cr-51 344.0 35.9 338 + 5.7 0.97 A 314.0 31.4 Mean = 328.0 + 17.4 .

130.0 +/- 3.7 Cs-134 126.0 + 5.7 122 4 2.0 1.03 A Mean 125.3 + 2.9 187.0 + 4.0 Cs-137 198.0 + 7.0 195 + 3.2 0.99 A 194.0 6.3 Mean= 193.0 : 3.4 97.2 +/- 3.3 Mn-54 102.0 +/- 5.6 92.0 + 1.5 1.09 A 102.0 +/- 5.1 Mean 100.4 :t 2.8 65.0 +/-1 3.7 Fe-59 49.9 +/- 6.3 61.0 d 1.0 1.00 A Mean- 61.1 +/- 3.1 124.0 +/- 6.3 Zn-65 147.0 +/- 12.3 123 +/- 2.1 1.07 A Mean = 130.7 +/- 5.6 159.0 +/- 3.2 163.0 ~z5.3 Co-60 169.0 i 5.0 167 +/- 2.8 0.98 A Mean 163.7

2.6 _

55.2 d: 2.8 62.6 + 5.0 Co-58 63.4 + 1.1 0.94 A 61.8 + 4.5 Mean - 9.9 4 2.4 (1) Results reported as activity 1 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity *1 sigma.

(3) Ratio = Reported/Analytics (See Section 73).

(*) Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.

(A) Evaluation Results, Acceptable.

97

TABLE 7-1 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis Vezetation (pCi/eram)

JAF ENV REFERENCE RATIO DATE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JURSULT (1) LAB* (2) (3) 6/9/OS E-4587- VEGETATION 0.179 + 0.012 05 pCi/gram 0.160 + 0.012 Ce-141 0.193 + 0.012 0.174 4 0.003 1.02 A 0.180 + 0.015 Mean = 0.178 0.009 0.600 + 0.087 0.464 + 0.075 Cr-51 0.470 + 0.059 0.569 +/- 0.010 0.95 A 0.638 + 0.118 Mean 0.543

0.058 0.232 f 0.013 0.213 b 0.013 Cs-134 0.197 + 0.010 0.179 +/- 0.003 1.17 A 0.195 + 0.006 Mean 0.209 + 0.007 0.370 d 0.015 0.340 +/- 0.015 Cs-137 0.341 +/- 0.012 0.355 + 0.006 0.97 A 0.326 : 0.007 Mean 0.344 : 0.008 0.243 + 0.014 0.227 + 0.014 Mn-54 0.238 k 0.011 0.235 + 0.004 1.00 A 0.235 f 0.006 Mean = 0.236 + 0.008 0.123 : 0.015 0.112 0.016 Fe-59 0.139 -0,012 0.120 + 0.002 1.04 A 0.123

0.014 Mean= 0.124 s 0.009 0.275 : 0.023 0.280

0,029 -

Zn-65 0.301 + 0.019 0.292 i 0.005 1.00 A 0.317

0.013

_ Mean= 0.293

0.014 0.273 k 0.011 0.252 4* 0.011 Co-60 0.267 4 0.009 0.272 + 0.005 I 0.98 A 0.271 4 0.005 Mean = 0.266

0.006 (1) Results reported as activity *1 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity 4bl sigma.

(3) Ratio = Reported/Analytics (See Section 7.3).

(*) Sample provided by Analytics, Inc. 98 (A) Evaluation Results, Acceptable.

TABLE 7-1 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis Soil (pCi/gram)

JAF ENV ANALYSI REFERENCE RATIO DATE ID NO. MEDIUM S JAF RESULT (1) LAB* (2) (3) 6/9/05 E-4585- SOIL 0.203 + 0.02 05 pCi/gram 0.157 +/- 0.02 Ce-141 0.190 +/- 0.02 0.182 +/- 0.003 0.95 A 0.171 i 0.03 Mean= 0.173 + 0.01 0.356 I 0.10 0.593 + 0.12 Cr-SI 0.697 + 0.13 0.596 +/- 0.010 1.08 A 0.640 + 0.19 Mean 0.643

0.09 0.160

0.01 0.204

0.01 Cs-134 0.193

0.01 0.187 + 0.003 1.03 A 0.182

0.00 Mean 0.193 I 0.00 0.449

0.02 0.480

0.02 Cs-137 0.479

0.02 0.474

0.008 1.01 A 0.473

0.01 Mean = 0.477 i 0.01 0.256 i 0.01 0.255

0.01 Mn-54 0.223

0.02 0.246

0.004 0.98 A 0.244 4 0.00 Mean 0.241 +/- 0.01 0.109

0.02 0.104 4- 0.02 Fe-59 0.131 + 0.03 0.126

0.002 1.01 A 0.157 + 0.03 Mean= 0.127 + 0.01 0.320 +/- 0.03 0.360

0.03 Zn-65 0.374 4 0.04 0.305 4 0.005 1.15 A 0.320

0.01 Mean= 0.351

0.01 0.277 4 0.01 0.266

0.01 Co-60 0.279 4 0.01 0.285

0.005 0.96 A 0.274 + 0.00 Mean = 0.273 41: 0.00 (1) Results reported as activity *I sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity 41 sigma.

(3) Ratio = Reported/Analytics (See Section 73).

(V) Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.

(A) Evaluation Results, Acceptable.

99

TABLE 7-1 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gross Beta Analysis of Water (pCi/ml)

JAF ENV REFERENCE RATIO DATE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF RESULT (1) LAB* (2) (3) 11/11/05 A19773- WATER GROSS 1908 f 2 05 pCi/ml BETA 1687 + 2 1908 + 2 1830 + 46 0.98 A 1706 + 2 Mean= 1802 12 (1) Results reported as activity *1 sigma.

(2) Results reported as activity 41 sigma.

(3) Ratio = Reported/known

(*) Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.

(A) Evaluation Results, Acceptable.

100

TABLE 7-1 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of NIST Filter and Water Samples JAF ENV ID REFERENCE DATE NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF RESULT (1) LAB* (2) RATIO (3) 8/2005 1801- FILTER Ce-141 1.86E5 + 791 20 pCi/filter 1.85E5 d 887 1.96E5 1 2176 0.96 A 1.96E5 785 19E 16 09 Mean = 1.89E5 f 475 Ba-133 5.25E4 4 277 5.36E4 4 300 5.95E4 + 619 0.89 A Mean = 5.27E4 :t 162 Cs-134 2.90E4 + 230 2.30E4 + 226 2.79E4 + 254 0.97 A 2.95E4 224 Mean= 2.72E4 h 131 Fe-59 1.99E5 + 1140 1.94E5 + 1460 1.87E5 +/- 1982 1.06 A 2.03E5 4 1110 Mean 1.99E5 +/- 720 Zn-65 9.59E4 +/- 686 9.76E4 +/- 878 9.02E4 +/- 1344 1.06 A 9.76E4 +/-664 Mean 9.55E4 +/- 432 8/2005 1800- WATER Ce-141 1.48E5 +/- 752 10 pCitg ,147E5 : 686 1.48E5 +/- 1125 0.99 A 1.47E5 *845 Mean 1.47E5

441 _

Ba-133 4.17E4 4 193 4.22E4

188 4.41E4 +/- 291 0.96 A Mean 4.22E4 +/- 120 Cs-134 2.69E4

170 274E4 166 2.62E4 4 115 1.03 A 2.74E4 *208 Mean= 2.71E4

105 Fe-59 1.21E5 : 685 1.22E5 : 687 1.18E5

814 1.03 A 1.22E5 4* 871 Mean 1.22E5

435 Zn-65 6.16E4 : 426 612E4

423 5.91E4

745 1.04 A 6.13E4 4* 535 Mean = 6.14E4 +/- 268 (1) Results reported as activity +/-1 sigma.

101

(1) Results reported as activity d2 sigma (total propagated uncertainty).

(3) Ratio = Reported/NIST (see Section 7.3).

(*) Sample provided by NIST.

(A) Evaluation Results, Acceptable.

102

7.

3.4 REFERENCES

7.3.4.1 Radioactivity and Radiochemistry, The Counting Room: Special Edition. 1994 Caretaker Publications, Atlanta, Georgia.

New 7.3.4.2 Data Reduction and Error Analysis for the Physical Sciences. Bevington P.R., McGraw Hill, York (1969).3 103

8. Land Use Census The Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Off-site Dose Calculation Manual 3/4.5.2 requires that a Land Use Census be conducted annually between the dates of June I and October 1. The census identifies the locations of the nearest milk animal and the nearest residence in each of the 16 meteorological sectors within a distance of five miles of the plant. The census also identifies the nearest milk animal (within three miles of the plant) to the point of predicted highest annual average DIQ (deposition factor for dry deposition of elemental radionuclides and other particulates) value due to elevated releases from the plant stack in each of the three major meteorological sectors. The 2005 Land Use Census was conducted in the summer of 2005 in accordance with the ODCM.

Following the collection of field data and in compliance with Off-site Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM)

Section 10.1, a dosimetric analysis is performed to compare the census locations to the "critical receptor" identified in the ODCM. This critical receptor is the location that is used in the Method I screening dose calculations found in the ODCM (i.e. the dose calculations done in compliance with ODCM Surveillance 4.3.3). If a census location has a 20% greater potential dose than that of the critical receptor, this fact must be announced in the annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report for that period. A re-evaluation of the critical receptor would also be done at that time. No changes in the census from year 2001 occurred for the 2005 census, therefore no revisions of the 2001 calculations were required.

Pursuant to ODCM 3.5.2.a, a dosimetric analysis would be performed, using site specific meteorological data, to determine which milk animal locations would provide the optimal sampling locations. If any location had experienced a 20% greater potential dose commitment than at a currently sampled location, the new location would be added to the routine environmental sampling program in replacement of the location with the lowest calculated dose (which is eliminated from the program). The 2005 Land Use Census did not identify any locations, meeting the criteria of ODCM Table 3.5.1, with a greater potential dose commitment than at currently sampled locations. No changes to the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) were required based on the Land Use Census.

The results of the 2005 Land Use Census are included in this report in compliance with ODCM 4.5.2 and ODCM 10.2. The locations identified during the census may be found in Table 8.1.

104

TABLE 8.1 2005 LAND USE CENSUS LOCATIONS*

SECTOR NEAREST RESIDENCE NEAREST MILK ANIMAL Km (Mi) Km (Mi)

N 1.5 (0.9)

NNE 1.4(0.9) 5.5 (3.4) Cows NE 1.3 (0.8)

ENE 1.0(0.6)

E 0.9 (0.6)

ESE 2.8 (1.8)

SE 2.0 (1.2) 3.6 (2.2) Cows**

SSE 2.1(1.3) _

S 0.5 (0.3) 2.2 (1.4) Cows**

SSW 0.5 (0.3)

SW 0.4 (0.3) 8.2 (5.1) Cows WSW 0.5 (0.3) _

W 0.6(0.4) 0.8 (0.5) Cows WNW 1.1 (0.7) 7.5 (4.7) Cows NW 2.6 (1.6) __

NNW 2.6(1.6)

Sectors and distances are relative to the plant stack as determined by a Global Positioning System survey conducted in 1997.

- Location of nearest milk animal within 3 miles of the plant to the point of predicted highest annual average D/Q value in each of the three major meteorological sectors.

105

9.

SUMMARY

During 2005 as in all previous years of plant operation, a program was conducted to assess the levels of radiation or radioactivity in the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station environment. Over 800 samples were collected (including TLDs) over the course of the year, with a total of over 2700 radionuclide or exposure rate analyses performed. The samples included ground water, river water, sediment, fish, milk, silage, mixed grass, storm drain sediment, and storm drain water. In addition to these samples, the air surrounding the plant was sampled continuously and the radiation levels were measured continuously with environmental TLDs.

Three of the objectives of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) are:

To provide an early indication of the appearance or accumulation of any radioactive material in the environment caused by the operation of the station.

To provide assurance to regulatory agencies and the public that the station's environmental impact is known and within anticipated limits.

To verify the adequacy and proper functioning of station effluent controls and monitoring systems. .

Low levels of radioactivity from three sources (discussed below) were detected in samples collected off-site as a part of the radiological environmental monitoring program. Most samples had measurable levels of naturally-occurring K-40, Be-7, Th-232 or radon daughter products. These are the most common of the naturally-occurring radionuclides.

Samples of milk and sediment contained fallout radioactivity such as Cs-137 and Sr-90 from atmospheric nuclear weapons tests conducted primarily fiom the late 1950s through 1980.

Several sediment samples from onsite locations (from the plant storm drain system) had low levels of radioactivity resulting from emissions from the Vermont Yankee plant. In all cases, the possible radiological impact was negligible with respect to exposure from natural background radiation. In no case did the detected levels exceed the most restrictive federal regulatory or plant license limits for radionuclides in the environment. Measured values were several orders of magnitude below reportable levels listed in Table 4.5.

106

10. REFERENCES

1. USNRC Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position, "An Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program," Revision 1,November 1979.

2. NCRP Report No. 94, Exposure of the Population in the United States and Canadafrom Natural BackgroundRadiation, National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, 1987.

3. Ionizing Radiation: Sources and BiologicalEffects, United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR), 1982 Report to the General Assembly.

4. Kathren, Ronald L., Radioactivity and the Environment - Sources, Distribution, and Surveillance, Harwood Academic Publishers, New York, 1984.

5. Till, John E. and Robert H. Meyer, ed., RadiologicalAssessment - A Textbook on Environmental Dose Analysis, NUREG/CR-3332, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.,

1983.

6. NUREG/CR-3130, Influence of Leach Rate and Other Parameterson Groundwater Migration, February 1983.

107

BVY 06-047, 2005 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report

Contents

Text

Subject:

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

3.4 REFERENCES

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

BVY 06-047, 2005 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report

Text

Subject:

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

3.4 REFERENCES

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

Search