CY-06-063, 2005 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report

2005 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report

ML061290175
Person / Time
Site:	Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png
Issue date:	05/01/2006
From:	Gerard van Noordennen Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co
To:	Document Control Desk, NRC/FSME
References
CY-06-063
Download: ML061290175 (185)

Text

CONNEClCUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY HADDAM NECK PLANT C 362 INJUN HOLLOW ROAD EASTHAMPTON, CT 06424-3099 MAY -1 2006 Docket No. 50-213 CY-06-063 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Haddam Neck Plant Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report In accordance with the requirements of Section 2.6.1 of Appendix C of the Quality Assurance Program (QAP) for the Haddam Neck Plant (HNP) and the Radiological Effluent Monitoring and Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, an implementing document of the QAP, an electronic and a hard copy of the Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report are enclosed.

If you should have any questions regarding this submittal, please contact me at (860) 267-3938.

Sincerely, Gerard P. van Noordennen Date Director of Nuclear Safety/Regulatory Affairs

Enclosure:

Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report cc: S. J. Collins, NRC Region I Administrator T. B. Smith, NRC Project Manager, Haddam Neck Plant M. T Miller, Chief, Decommissioning, NRC Region I E. L. Wilds, Jr., Director, CT DEP Monitoring and Radiation Division M. Rosenstein, US EPA, Region 1 Ktq3Sa I

ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING JS0t aTor

' IF  !$B REPORT HADDAM NECK STATION RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM JANUARY 1, 2005 - DECEMBER 31,2005 DOCKET NO. 50-213 LICENSE NO. DPR-61 CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY Haddam, Connecticut

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 1.0 EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) for the Haddam Neck Plant was continued for the period January through December 2005, in compliance with the Connecticut Yankee Quality Assurance Program (CYQAP) and the Radiological Effluent Monitoring and Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual (REMODCM). This annual report was prepared by the Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company (CYAPCO). Sample collection and preparation activities were performed by Normandeau Associates and CYAPCO personnel. Laboratory analyses were performed by Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory (FANPEL), a subsidiary of AREVA and CYAPCO. A major transition with the REMP occurred on March 31, 2005 when all of the spent nuclear fuel and greater than class C (GTCC) material was removed from the Spent Fuel Pool and was placed in the Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI). This coupled with the significant radiological source term reduction allowed a number of changes to be made with the REMP. These changes are reflected within this report.

Thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) were used to measure direct gamma exposure in the vicinity of the station and as far away as 12.5 miles. Radiochemical and radiological counting analyses of samples were performed to detect the presence of any station related radioactivity. In the second quarter of 2003, additional sampling locations associated with the onsite ISFSI were selected for the purpose of collecting baseline background information prior to the transfer of spent fuel from the main plant to the ISFSI. The first ISFSI canister containing Greater Than Class C (GTCC) material was placed on the storage pad in April 2004. Over the following eleven months the remainder of the canisters with spent fuel and GTCC were transferred to the storage pad. ISFSI TLDs located in the area around the site boundary showed no significant change in exposure rate in 2005 over the baseline measurements.

Samples included air particulates collected on filters, well water, river water, river bottom sediment, bottom sediment from wetlands near the ISFSI, shellfish and fish. In evaluating the results of these analyses it is necessary to consider the variability of natural and man-made sources of radioactivity, distribution in the environment and uptake in environmental media. This variability is dependent on many factors including station release rates, past spatial variability of radioactive fallout from nuclear weapons tests and on-going redistribution of fallout, contribution from cosmogenic radioactivity, and ground water dynamics. Any one of these factors could cause significant variations in measured levels of radioactivity. Therefore, these factors need to be considered in order to properly explain any variations in radiation detected and to distinguish between natural and station related radioactivity.

Changes with the sampling requirements for air particulates collected on filters, broad leaf vegetation, fruits/vegetables and well water were made during 2005 to reflect the significant radioactive source term reduction. These changes were implemented on March 31, 2005 after the completion of the Spent Fuel Transfer Project.

Haddam Neck was permanently shutdown in 1996. Activities in 2005 at the Haddam Neck station were focused on completing the transfer of spent fuel, site decontamination and facility decommissioning.

Even though the station is no longer generating power, decommissioning activities include the processing and discharge of liquids containing radioactivity. Monitoring continues for any release of liquid. The levels of radioactivity released post-operation are significantly lower than released during plant operation. The radiological monitoring of the environment through this program will continue to assure the health and safety of the public and workers are maintained at all times.

I

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005

2.0 INTRODUCTION

2.1 General Plant Site Information The Connecticut Yankee plant is located in the town of Haddam, Middlesex County, Connecticut, at a point 22 miles south-southeast of Hartford, Connecticut; 25 miles northeast of New Haven, Connecticut; and 16 miles north of Long Island Sound. The site consists of approximately 525 acres and is situated on the east bank of the Connecticut River at an area known as Haddam Neck. The elevation of the site property varies from 10 to 300 feet above sea level, with the area occupied by plant facilities ranging between 10 and 21 feet above sea level. The minimum distance from the reactor containment to the site boundary is approximately 1700 feet.

The plant was designed as a single unit pressurized water reactor which sustained its initial chain reaction in July 1967, with commercial operation beginning in January 1968 and a gross power output of 590 Mw (e). After 28 years of operation, the CY Board of Directors voted in 1996 to permanently close and decommission the power plant. Following two years of planning and preparation, actual decommissioning began in 1998 and continued during 2005 for the period covered by this radiological environmental monitoring report.

2.2 Program Design The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program for the Haddam Neck Station was designed with specific objectives.

• To provide an early indication of the appearance or accumulation of any radioactive material in the environment caused by Haddam Neck Station activities.

• To provide assurance to-regulatory agencies and the public that the environmental impact for the Haddam Neck Station is known and within anticipated limits.

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

These objectives continue to be in force throughout the decommissioning activities at the Haddam Neck Station site. Due to the permanent shutdown status of the plant and the relatively low quantities of radioactive material now on the site, some of the objectives have shifted in degree of importance from the past and continue to change as decommissioning progresses.

The radiological environmental monitoring program continued without modification following the plant shutdown in 1996. The program scope was reduced in 2000 and again in 2005 primarily to reflect the significant reduction of radionuclide source. The onsite radionuclide inventory continues to decrease yearly with shipments of waste to off-site facilities and radioactive decay. The completion of the Fuel Transfer Project has resulted in a significant reduction of available source term that could interact with the environment.

The program was developed to meet the intent of the NRC Regulatory Guide 4.1, Programs for Monitoring Radioactivity in the Environs of Nuclear Power Plants; NRC Regulatory Guide 4.8, Environmental Technical Specifications for Nuclear Power Plants; the NRC Branch Technical Position of November 1979, An Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program; and NRC NUREG-0472, Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications for PWRs.

The environmental TLD program was developed using NRC Regulatory Guide 4.13, Performance, Testing and Procedural Specifications for Thermoluminescence Dosimetry: Environmental 2

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 Applications. The quality assurance program was designed using 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 REMODCM are given in Table E-1 of the ODCM and Table 2.1 of this report. The identification of the required sampling locations is given in Appendix G of the ODCM and Table 2.2 of this report. The monitoring locations are shown graphically in Figures 2.1 and 2.2.

2.3 Monitoring Zones The REMP is designed to allow comparison of levels of radioactivity in samples from the area potentially influenced by the plant to levels found in areas not influenced by the plant. The first area monitoring locations are designated as indicators and the second area monitoring locations are designated as controls. The distinction between the two areas, for a particular pathway, is based on relative direction from the plant, river flow, and distance. Analysis of survey data from the two areas is used to differentiate between radiation due to plant activities and other sources such as atmospheric nuclear weapons test fallout or seasonal variations in the natural background.

2.4 Pathways Monitored Four pathway categories; airborne, waterborne, ingestion, and direct radiation were formally monitored by the REMP. Most of these categories were monitored in 2005 by the collection of one or more sample types listed and described below. Some of these samples were eliminated in March of 2005 with the program reductions discussed above.

Airborne Pathway: Air Particulate Sampling Waterborne Pathway: River Water Well Water Sediment Sampling*

ISFSI Sediment* and Water Sampling Ingestion Pathway: Fruits and Vegetable Sampling*

Fish and Shellfish Sampling Broadleaf Vegetation*

Milk Sampling (when required and if available)*

Direct Radiation: TLD Monitoring ISFSI TLD Monitoring

• Sampling requirements changed during 2005 2.5 Descriptions of Monitoring Pathways Sample types and frequency of analysis are given in Table 2.1. The sample locations are listed in Table 2.2 and shown in Figure 2.1 and Figure 2.2. The program as described in this report includes both required samples as specified in the REMODCM ahd any extra samples.i 2.5.1 Air Sampling Continuous air samplers were installed at five locations as required by thy REMO CM until they were permanently shutoff on April 1 8th 2005. The sampling requirement for ar particulate as eliminated on March 31, 2005 with the completion of the Fuel Transfer Project. The sa nnlinb p pat ,.J these locations operated continuously at a flow rate of approximately one cubic foot per minute. Airborne particulates were collected by passing air through a 47-mm glass-fiber filter. A dry gas meter was incorporated into the sampling stream to measure the total volume of air sampled in a given interval.

The filters were collected biweekly, and to allow for the decay of radon daughter products, they are 3

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 held at least 100 hours0.00116 days <br />0.0278 hours <br />1.653439e-4 weeks <br />3.805e-5 months <br /> before being analyzed for gross-beta radioactivity (indicated as GR-B in the data tables). The biweekly filters were combined by location at the FANPEL for a quarterly gamma spectroscopy analysis.

2.6.2 River Water Sampling River water samples are collected from two sampling locations, an indicator and control station. An automatic composite sampler is located at the indicator sampling station (28-1) collecting an equal volume of water every hour. A grab sample is collected once every two weeks at the control sampling station, 30-C. Approval to relocate station 30-C approximately one mile upriver was granted in April and the station is renamed 30-A-C for samples collected from May 2005 on. When CYAPCO elected to self-perform REMP sampling beginning in July 2005, each biweekly river sample was analyzed for gamma emitting nuclides and tritium in lieu of compositing.

2.5.3 Well Water Sampling Well water samples were collected during the first quarter of 2005 from one onsite well and one off-site well. Gamma isotopic and tritium analyses were performed on each. The sampling requirement for well water was eliminated on March 31, 2005 with the completion of the Fuel Transfer Project and the elimination of the use of the associated wells.

2.5.4 Sediment Sampling Shoreline sediment samples were formerly collected semiannually from three locations, one near the plant discharge, one downstream and one control station, upstream from the plant. This sampling requirement was changed to annually due to the limited number of discharges and to ensure one additional sample will be taken upon the completion of the Spent Fuel Pool draindown and discharge.

A grab sample is collected from each location; dried at the FANPEL and analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides.

The June Monthly REMP Activities Report FANPEL provided to CYAPCO indicated that sediment samples were collected June 7th - June 9 th 2005. However, FANPEL can not locate the analysis record for these samples at this time. No Sediment data is available to report at this time. A supplemental report will be submitted if the data records are found.

2.5.5 Milk Sampling Milk sampling is no longer a requirement of the REMODCM unless indicated by the annual Land Use Census and dose calculations. The sampling requirement for milk was eliminated on March 31, 2005 with the completion of the Fuel Transfer Project.

2.5.6 Fish Sampling Fish samples were formerly collected semiannually from three river locations, two indicator stations from the vicinity of the intake and discharge and one control station north of the plant. This sampling requirement was changed to annually due to the limited number of discharges and to ensure one additional sample will be taken upon the completion of the Spent Fuel Pool drain down and discharge.

The species typically collected are bullheads, perch and /or catfish. The edible portions of the fish are analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides.

2.5.7 Shellfish Sampling Shellfish samples were formerly collected semiannually from two river locations. This sampling requirement was changed to annually due to the limited number of discharges and to ensure one additional sample will be taken upon the completion of the Spent Fuel Pool draindown and discharge.

The shellfish is shucked and the muscle portions are analyzed by gamma isotopic analysis.

4

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 2.5.8 Food Product Sampling Food products were formerly collected from two locations near the beginning of the growing season and at the end of the season. The samples were either tuberous vegetables, aboveground vegetables, or fruit. The sampling requirement was formerly one sample collected from a location within 10 miles of the plant and the other from a location beyond 10 miles. The samples were analyzed by gamma isotopic analysis. The sampling requirement for food sampling was eliminated on March 31, 2005 with the completion of the Fuel Transfer Project. Elimination of this sampling requirement preceded the start of the harvest season. Therefore, no food product samples were collected in 2005.

2.5.9 Broad Leaf Vegetation Leafy vegetation was formerly collected from three locations, one on-site, one at the site boundary and one at a control location. During 2004, broad leaf vegetation was also collected from an extra sampling location, 41-X, that is beyond the minimum requirement of the REMP. These samples were formerly collected monthly during the growing season from April to December. The sampling requirement for broad leaf vegetation was eliminated on March 31, 2005 with the completion of the Fuel Transfer Project. Elimination of this sampling requirement preceded the start of the growing season. Therefore, no broad leaf vegetation samples were collected in 2005.

2.5.10 ISFSI Sediment and Water Sampling In the second quarter of 2003, seven additional sampling locations (five indicator locations and two extra locations) associated with the placement on-site of an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) were selected for the purpose of collecting baseline background information prior to the transfer of spent fuel from the main plant to the ISFSI. The first ISFSI canister containing Greater Than Class C (GTCC) material was placed on the storage pad on April 20, 2004. All of the Fuel and GTCC canisters were transferred to the ISFSI by March 31, 2005.

The new sample locations are specific to the ISFSI and are beyond the standard REMP that has been in operation over the life of the power plant's license. ISFSI sediment samples were collected from two locations, one at nearby wetland location and one near the ISFSI pad (not required by the REMODCM) on June 7 th - June 9th 2005. Normally, a grab sample is taken from each location; then dried and analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. The June 2005 Monthly REMP Activities Report FANPEL provided to CYAPCO indicated that sediment samples were collected June 7th - June 9 th, 2005, however, FANPEL can not locate the analysis records for these samples at this time. Therefore, there is presently no sediment data available to report.

The sampling requirement was changed to annually for all sediment sample locations when the REMP sampling frequency was changed due to the limited number of remaining discharges.

Water samples were collected during the first and second quarter of 2005. During the third quarter of 2005, the wetlands area was dry. Gamma isotopic and tritium analysis were performed on water samples collected during the first and second quarter.

This sample point was eliminated from the ISFSI REMP in 2005.

2.5.11 TLD Monitoring Direct gamma radiation exposure is continuously monitored with the use of Panasonic UD-801AS1 thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). TLDs are posted at fourteen REMODCM required locations and at nine extra locations. The extra locations are mainly within the site boundary and are not part of the REMP. Their function is to monitor the potential impact of on-site activities such as the movement or storage of decommissioned components on site boundary exposure rates.

5

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 2.5.12 ISFSI TLD Monitoring In the second quarter of 2003, seven additional sampling locations (five indicator locations and two extra locations) associated with the placement on-site of an ISFSI were selected for the purpose of collecting baseline background information prior to the transfer of spent fuel from the main plant to the ISFSI. The baseline background collection period ended on April 20, 2004 with the transfer of the first ISFSI canister to the designated storage location. The new sample locations are specific to the ISFSI and are beyond the standard REMP that has been in operation over the life of the power plant's license. New quarterly TLD locations were located in the area surrounding the facility at distances that approximated the site boundary to support future determinations that direct and scatter dose from ISFSI operations remain in compliance with offsite dose limits to the public.

6

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 Table 2.1- Required Sampling Frequency & Type of Analysis (REMODCM Table E-1)

Exposure Number of Sampling & Collection Pathway and/or Locations Frequency Type of Analysis Sample la. Gamma Exposure 14 Quarterly Gamma Dose - Quarterly

- Environmental TLD lb.. Gamma Exposure 5 Quarterly Gamma Dose - Quarterly

- ISFSI TLD 5 Continuous sampler - Gross Beta - Biweekly

2. Airborne Particulate

• biweekly filter change Gamma Isotopic - Quarterly on composite (by location), and on individual filter if gross beta is greater than 10 times the mean of the biweekly control station's gross beta results 2 One sample near middle Gamma Isotopic on each sample 3a.. Vegetation - Fruits and Vegetables * & one near end of growing season 3 Monthly during growing Gamma Isotopic on each sample 3b. Vegetation - Broad Leaf Vegetation

• season (April -

December)

4. Milk

• 4 Monthly, if required Gamma Isotopic on each sample - Monthly Sr-89 and Sr Quarterly

5. Well Water

• 2 Quarterly Gamma Isotopic and Tritium on each composite

6. Bottom Sediment

• 3 Semiannually Gamma Isotopic

7. ISFSI Sediment

• 2 Quarterly Gamma Isotopic

8. River Water 2 Quarterly Sample - Gamma Isotopic and Tritium - Quarterly Indicator is continuous composite; Background is composite of grab Ii I samples collected biweekly I]

9. ISFSI Water # 2 Quarterly Gamma Isotopic and Tritium

10. Fish (edible 3 Semiannual Gamma Isotopic- Semiannual portion) -

bullheads and, when available, perch or other edible fish *

11. Shellfish

• 2 Semiannual Gamma Isotopic - Semiannual

1. Not a Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program required sample.

• Sample requirements changed during the year as previously indicated.

7

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 2.0 Table 2.2 - Environmental Monitoring Program Sampling Types and Locations Exposure Pathway Location Location Name Distance From Direction (Sample Type Number1 Release Poine From (miles) ReleasePoine Designation)

Airborne

a. Filter (AP)* 5-l On-site-Injun Hollow Rd. 0.4 NW 6-1 On-site-Substation 0.5 NE 7-1 Haddam 1.8 SE 9-l Higganum 4.3 WNW 13-C North Madison 12.5 SW

b. Vegetation *(TV) 6-1 On-site-Substation 0.5 NE 18-I Site Boundary 0.4 NW 13-C North Madison 12.5 SW Waterbome

a. River (WR) 28-I CT River-E. Haddam Bridge 1.8 SE 30-C CT River - Middletown 9.0 NW

b. Well Water *(WW) 15-I On-site Wells 0.5 ESE 16-C Well-State Highway Dept. E. 2.8 SE Haddam

c. Bottom Sediment 28-I CT River-E. Haddam Bridge 1.8 SE

• (SE) 29-I Vicinity of Discharge Within 0.3 Miles 30-C CT River - Middletown 9.0 NW ISFSI

a. Bottom Sediment *(IF) 57-IF Dibble Creek Sediment 0.1 SE Sample 58-IF ISFSI Pad Enclosure Soil 0.0 N/A Sample

b. ISFSI Water *(WG) 57-IF Dibble Creek Water Sample 0.1 SE 58-IF ISFSI Drain Pipe Outflow 0.0 N/A Ingestion

a. Fruits & Vegetables 17-C Beyond 10 Miles Beyond 10 miles SW

• (TF) 25-I Within 10 Miles Within 10 miles NW

b. Fish *(FH) 26-I CT River-Near Intake 1.0 WNW 29-I Vicinity of Discharge Within 0.3 miles 30-C CT River - Middletown 7.6 NW

c. Shellfish *(SF) 27-C CT River-Higganum Light 4.0 WNW 31-l Mouth of Salmon River 0.8 ESE

' I=lndicator C=Control IF=ISFSI 2 The release points are the stack for terrestrial locations and the end of the discharge canal for aquatic locations.

• Sample requirements changed during the year as previously indicated.

8

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 Table 2.2 - Environmental Monitoring Program Sampling Types and Locations (continued)

Exposure Pathway Location Location Name Distance From Direction (Sample Type Number 1 Release Poine From Release (miles) Point2 Designation)

Direct Radiation TLD 1-I On-site - Mouth of Discharge 1.1 ESE Canal 2-1 Haddam-Park Rd. 0.8 S 3-I Haddam-Jail Hill Rd. 0.8 WSW 4-1 Haddam-Ranger Rd. 1.8 SW 5-I On-site-Injun Hollow Rd. 0.4 NW 6-1 On-site-Substation 0.5 NE 7-I Haddam 1.8 SE 8-I East Haddam 3.1 ESE 9-I Higganum 4.3 WNW 10-I Hurd Park Rd. 2.8 NNW 11-C Middletown 9.0 NW 12-C Deep River 7.1 SSE 13-C North Madison 12.5 SW 14-C Colchester 10.5 NE 40-X Near Intake Structure 0.1 SSW 41-X Picnic Area 0.3 WNW 42-X Environmental Trail 0.1 NW 43-X Moodus - Rts 149 & 151 2.5 ENE 44-X Shailerville, Horton Rd. 1.0 SE 45-X Old Waste Gas Sphere Fence 0.1 E 46-X Discharge Canal Fence 0.2 SE 47-X Visitor Info Center 0.1 WNW 48-X Onsite Met Tower Shack 0.4 WSW 52-IF Schmidt Cemetery Onsite 0.5 NNE 53-IF ISFSI Haul Route Onsite 0.2 SSW 54-IF Rt. 149 Salmon River 1.0 ESE 55-IF HV Tower NW of Pad 0.4 NW 56-IF Borrow Pit On-Site 0.2 E 1 l=Indicator C=Control X=Extra (not part of REMP) IF=ISFSI Indicator 2 The release points are the stack for terrestrial locations and the end of the discharge canal for aquatic locations 9

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 Table 2.3 - Environmental Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) Sensitivity Requirements (REMODCM Table E-3)

I Airborne

nMrD'4

-5tig EH 15 1301s Co-60 15 130 150 Zn-65 30 260 Cs-134 15 0.05 130 15 60 150 Cs-137 18 0.06 150 18 80 180 Table 2.4 - Reporting Levels for Radioactivity Concentrations in Environmental Samples (REMODCM Table E-2)

PISi I at Fish ~ MI' (piI pJ/gwt) 4C  ! (p~~k1We Shellfish:

arass pllklwt H-3 20000 __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Mn-54 1000 _ _ _ __ 30000 __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 140000 Co-60 300 __ _ _ _ _ 10000 __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 50000 Zn-65 300 __ _ _ _ _ 20000 __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 80000 Cs-1 34 30 10 1000 60 1000 5000 Cs-I 37 50 20 2000 70 2000 8000 10

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 Figure 2.1 - Haddam Neck Sampling Locations 11

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 Figure 2.2 - Haddam Neck SamplingLocations 12

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 2.6 Samples Collected During 2005 The following table summarizes the number of samples of each type collected during the 2005 reporting period:

Gamma Exposure 88 39 16 33 environmental TLD ISFSI TLD 35 35 12 10 Air Particulate* 40 32 8 Fish* 6 4 2 Bottom Sediment* Data not available - -

at this time.

Shellfish* 2 1 1 ISFSI Sediment* Data not available - -

at this time.

River Water 32 16 16 Well Water* 3 1 2 Total All Types 206 128 57 43

• Sample requirements changed during the year as previously indicated.

13

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 3.0 RADIOLOGICAL DATA

SUMMARY

TABLES This section summarizes the analytical results of the environmental samples that were collected during 2005. These results, shown in Table 3.1, 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 for the pathways described in Section 2.3. The units for each media type are also given. Table 3.2 provides the same information for TLD direct radiation measurements.

The left-most column 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 2.5. The latter are classified as "Non-routine" measurements. The second column lists the required Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) for those radionuclides, which have detection capability requirements specified in Table 2.4. The absence of a value in this column indicates that no LLD is specified in the REMODCM for that radionuclide in that media. The target LLD for any analysis performed is typically 30-40 percent of the most restrictive required LLD.

For each media type and radionuclide, 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 conceivably be affected by plant activities; (2) the station which had the highest mean concentration during 2005, and (3) the Control stations, which are beyond the influence of the plant. Direct radiation monitoring stations (using TLDs) are grouped into Indicator and Control stations.

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

• The mean value of all concentrations including negative values and values that are not considered "detectable".

• The lowest and highest concentration.

• The number of detectable measurements divided by the total number of measurements.

A sample is considered to yield a "detectable measurement" when the concentration exceeds three times its associated standard deviation. The standard deviation on each measurement represents only the random uncertainty associated with the radioactive decay process (counting statistics), and not the propagation of all possible uncertainties in the analytical procedure.

The radionuclides reported in this section represent those that: 1) had a Reporting Level listed in Table E-2 of the REMODCM or, a LLD requirement in Table E-3 of the REMODCM or 2) had a positive measurement of radioactivity, whether it was naturally-occurring or man-made; or 3) were of specific interest for any other reason. The radionuclides that are routinely analyzed and reported by the FANPEL in a gamma spectroscopy analysis are: Ac/Th-228, Ag-108m, Ag-11 Om, Ba-140, Be-7, Ce-141, Ce-144, Co-57, Co-58, Co-60, Cr-51, Cs-134, Cs-137, Fe-59,1-131, K-40, La-140, Mn-54, Nb-95, Ru-1 03, Ru-1 06, Sb-1 24, Sb-1 25, Se-75, Zn-65 and Zr-95. The radionuclides that are routinely analyzed and reported by CYAPCO in a gamma spectroscopy analysis are: Co-58, Co-60, Cs-134, Cs-137, Mn-54 and Zn-65. In no instance did a radionuclide that is not shown in Table 3.1 appear as a "detectable measurement" during 2005.

Data from direct radiation measurements made by TLDs are provided in Table 3.2 in a format essentially the same as above. The complete listing of quarterly TLD data is provided in Table 3.3.

14

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 Table 3.1 Radiological Environmental Program Summary Connecticut Yankee Nuclear Power Co., Haddam Neck Station (January - December 2005)

MEDIUM: Air Particulates (AP) UNITS: DCI/cubic meter Indicator Stations Station With Highest Mean Control Stations Radionuclides Mean Station Mean Mean (No. Analyses) Required Range Range Range Non-Routine* LLD No. Detected- No. Detected- No. Detected" GR-B (40) 0.01 2.6E -2 07 2.71 -2 2.5E -2 (0) ( 9.2 - 28.3)E -3 ( 1.1 - 2.8)1 -2 ( 1.0 - 2.3)E -2 (32/ 32) (8/ 8) (8/ 8)

Mn-54 (10) -2.4E -4 07 4.8E -4 3.5E -4 (0) (-2.4 - 8)E -4 ( 1.6 - 8)E -4 ( 2.9 - 4)E -2 (0/ 8) (0/ 2) (0/ 2)

Zn-65 (10) 1.3E -3 09 3.5E -3 2.5E -4 (0) (-6 - 75)E -4 ( 75)E -4 (-2.2 - 2.7)E -3 (0/ 8) (0/ 2) (0/ 2)

Co-6O (10) -5.6E -4 07 1.4E -3 2.1E -3 (0) (-6.8 - 2.8)E -4 ( 2.8)E -3 (7.5 - 35)E -4 (0/ 8) (0/ 2) (0/ 2)

Cs-134 (10) 0.05 6.2E -4 07 2.01 -3 -1.6E -4 (0) (-1.0 - 32)E -4 ( 7.9 - 9.0)E -4 (-13 - 9.8)1 -4 (0/ 8) (0/ 2) (0/ 2)

Cs-1 37 (10) 0.06 5.1E -4 07 2.2E -3 -8.0E -4 (0) ( -80 - 4.2)E -3 ( 2.0 - 4.2)E -3 (-20 - 4)1 -4 (0/ 8) (0/ 2) (0/ 2)

I Non-Routine refers to radionuclides that exceeded the Reporting Levels in ODCM Table E-2 "The fraction of sample analyses yielding detectable measurements (i.e. >3 standard deviations) is shown in parentheses.

15

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 Table 3.1 Radiological Environmental Program Summary Connecticut Yankee Nuclear Power Co., Haddam Neck Station (January - December 2005)

MEDIUM: Fish (FH) UNITS: DCI/ka Indicator Stations Station With Highest Mean Control Stations Radionuclides Mean Station Mean Mean (No. Analyses) Required Range Range Range Non-Routine* LLD No. Detected No. Detected- No. Detected Mn-54 (6) 130 9.81 -1 264I(BF) 1.2E 1 -5.5E 0 (0) ( -4.1 - 11.5)E 0 n/a (one sample taken) (- 1.1-0)1 1 (0/ 4) (0/ 1) (0/ 2)

Co-58 (6) 6.3E 0 26-1(PF) 1.5E 1 -3.0E 0 (0) ( -8.4 - 15.3)E 0 n/a (one sample taken) -3.6 - -2.3)E 0 (0/ 4) (0/ 1) (0/ 2)

Fe-59 (6) -91 0 26-1(PF) 2.3E 1 -4E 0 (0) ( -12.9 - 2.3)E 1 n/a (one sample taken) -1.3 - 3.7)E 1 (0/ 4) (0/ 1) (0/ 2)

Co-60 (6) 130 -2.5 E 0 26-1(BF) 6.7E 0 2.3E 0 (0) ( -10.6 - 6.7)E 0 n/a (one sample taken) ( 1.2 - 3.4)E 0 (0/ 4) (0/ 1) (0/ 2)

Zn-65 (6) 260 -9.8 E 1 26-1(PF) 2.3E 1 -3.5E 0 (0) ( -3.8 - 2.3)E 1 n/a (one sample taken) ( O)E 0 (0/ 4) (0/ 1) (0/ 2)

Cs-134 (6) 130 -7.5E 0 264(PF) 1.1E 1 2.7E 0 (0) -3.1 - 1.1)E 1 n/a (one sample taken) ( 1.0 - 4.4)E 0 (0/ 4) (0/ 1) (0/ 2)

Cs-137 (6) 150 2.9E 1 29-1(PF) 4.5E 1 1.5E 1 (0) ( 2.2 - 4.5)E 1 n/a (one sample taken) ( 6.8 - 23)E 0 (1/ 4) (0/ 1) (1/ 2)

• Non-Routine refers to radionuclides that exceeded the Reporting Levels in ODCM Table E-2

• • The fraction of sample analyses yielding detectable measurements (i.e. >3 standard deviations) is shown in parentheses.

16

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 Table 3.1 Radiological Environmental Program Summary Connecticut Yankee Nuclear Power Co., Haddam Neck Station (January - December 2005)

MEDIUM: Sediment (SE) UNITS: pCi/kp dry Indicator Stations Station With Highest Mean Control Stations Radionuclides Mean Station Mean Mean (No. Analyses) Required Range Range Range Non-Routine* LLD No. Detected- No. Detected' No. Detected**

Data Not Available 17

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 Table 3.1 Radiological Environmental Program Summary Connecticut Yankee Nuclear Power Co., Haddam Neck Station (January - December 2005)

MEDIUM: Shell Fish (SF) UNITS: oCIlkq wet Indicator Stations Station With Highest Mean Control Station Radionuclides Mean Station Mean Mean (No. Analyses) FRequired Range Range Range Non-Routine* LLD No. Detected* No. Detected* No. Detected*

Mn-54 (2) 130 -2.01 0 n/a (One Station) 1.52 1 (0) n/a (One Station) n/a (One Station)

(0/ 1) (0/ 1)

Co-58 (2) 7.0E 0 n/a (One Station) 1.1E 1 (0) n/a (One Station) n/a (One Station)

(0/ 1) (0/ 1)

Fe-59 (2) -1.3E 2 n/a (One Station) 3.72 1 (0) n/a (One Station) n/a (One Station)

(0/ 1) (0/ 1)

Co-60 (2) 130 4.OE 0 n/a (One Station) -8.0E 0 (0) n/a (One Station) n/a (One Station)

(0/ 1) (0/ 1)

Zn-65 (2) 260 -2.3 1 n/a (One Station) 1.12 1 (0) n/a (One Station) n/a (One Station)

(0/ 1) (0/ 1)

Zr-95 (2) 4.3E 1 n/a (One Station) 1.52 1 (0) n/a (One Station) n/a (One Station)

(0/ 1) (0/ 1) 1-131 (2) 1.3Z 2 n/a (One Station) 1.02 2 (0) n/a (One Station) n/a (One Station)

(0/ 1) (0/ 1)

Cs-134 (2) 130 1.7E 1 n/a (One Station) 1.0E 1 (0) n/a (One Station) n/a (One Station)

(0/ 1) (0/ 2)

Cs-137 (2) 150 -1.2Z 1 n/a (One Station) 3.7E 0 (0) n/a (One Station) n/a (One Station)

(0/ 1) (0/ 1)

• Non-Routine refers to radionuclides that exceeded the Reporting Levels in ODCM Table E-2

• • The fraction of sample analyses yielding detectable measurements (i.e. 23 standard deviations) is shown in parentheses.

i 18

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 Table 3.1 Radiological Environmental Program Summary Connecticut Yankee Nuclear Power Co., Haddam Neck Station (January - December 2005)

MEDIUM: ISFSI Sediment (SI) UNITS: pCiIka dry Indicator Stations Station With Highest Mean Control Stations Radionuclides Mean Station Mean Mean (No. Analyses) Required Range Range Range Non-Routine* LLD No. Detected* No. Detected* No. Detected**

Data Not Available.

19

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 Table 3.1 Radiological Environmental Program Summary Connecticut Yankee Nuclear Power Co., Haddam Neck Station (January - Sampling Discontinued after 2nd Quarter of 2006))

MEDIUM: ISFSI Water {WI) UNITS: pCI/liter Indicator Stations Station With Highest Mean Control Stations Radionuclides Mean Station Mean Mean (No. Analyses) Required Range Range Range Non-Routine* LLD No. Detected- No. Detected No. Detected-H-3 (2) 2000 5.5E 2 57 N/A (One Sample Location) NO DATA (0) ( 3.2 - 7.8)E 2 (0/ 2)

Mn-54 (2) 15 -4.1E 0 57 N/A (One Sample Location) NO DATA (0) ( -1.3 - -6.9)E 0 (0/ 2)

Co-58 (2) -2.61 0 57 N/A (One Sample Location) NO DATA (0) ( -0.9 - -4.3)E 0 (0/ 2)

Fe-59 (2) -1.06E 1 57 N/A (One Sample Location) NO DATA (0) ( -9.2 - -12)E 0 (0/ 2)

Co-60 (2) 15 1.6E 0 57 N/A (One Sample Location) NO DATA (0) ( 0.1 - 3.0)E 0 (0/ 2)

Zn-65 (2) 30 0.25E 0 57 N/A (One Sample Location) NO DATA (0) ( 1.5)E 0 (0/ 2)

Zr-95 (2) 1.1E 0 57 N/A (One Sample Location) NO DATA (0) ( -0.2 - 2.4)E 0 (0/ 2) 1-131 (2) -0.93 0 57 N/A (One Sample Location) NO DATA (0) ( -3.2 - 1.5)E 0 (0/ 2)

Cs-134 (2) 15 3.4E 0 67 N/A (One Sample Location) NO DATA (0) ( 3.3 - 3.5)E 0 (0/ 2)

Cs-137 (2) 18 -0.6E 0 57 N/A (One Sample Location) NO DATA (0) ( -0.7 - -0.5)E 0 (0/ 2)

Ba-140 (2) 6.0E 0 57 N/A (One Sample Location) NO DATA (0) ( 2.3 - 9.6)E 0 (0/ 2)

• Non-Routine refers to radionuclides that exceeded the Reporting Levels In ODCM Table E-2

• • The fraction of sample analyses yielding detectable measurements (i.e. >3 standard deviations) is shown in parentheses.

20

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 Table 3.1 Radiological Environmental Program Summary Connecticut Yankee Nuclear Power Co., Haddam Neck Station (January - December 2005)

MEDIUM: River Water (WR) UNITS: pCi/lliter Indicator Stations Station Indicator Stations Control Stations Actual Values (1 Iridicator - -LLD Values Actual Values s Radionuclides Mean Station) Mean Mean (No. Analyses) Required Range Range Range Non-Routine* LLD No. Detected* No. Detected** No. Detected*

H-3 (15) 2000 -2.0E 2 28 1.11 3 9.0E 1 (0) -7.2 - -0.3)E 1 ( 1140 - 1310)E 0 -2.2 - 4.0)E 2 (0/ 2) (0/ 13) (0/ 2)

Mn-54 (15) 15 1.1 0 28 4.4E 0 1.5E 0 (0) -0.1 - 2.3)E 0 ( 3.1 - 7.4)E 0 ( 0.3 - -2.8)E 0 (0/ 2) (0/ 13) (0/ 2)

Co-58 (15) 1.1E 0 28 4.11 0 2.0E-1 (0) -0.8 - 2.9)E 0 ( 3.3 - 6.5)E 0 ( -0.5 - 0.8)E 0 (0/ 2) (0/ 13) (0/ 2)

Fe-59 (15) 2.6E 0 28 No Data 2.0E 0 (0) 2.3 - 2.6)1E 0 ( -0.6 - 3.4)1E 0 (0/ 2) (0/ 2)

Co-60 (15) 15 0.8E 0 28 1.2E 0 -6.0E -1 (0) 0.0 - 1.5)E 0 I 9.2 - 15)E 0 ( -1.8 - 0.6)E 0 (0/ 2) (0/ 13) (O/ 2)

Zn-65 (15) 30 0.7E 0 28 1.0E 1 -3.4E 0 (0) -1.7 - 3.0)E 0 ( 3.5 - 17)E 0 -6.7 - -O.1)E 0 (0/ 2) (0/ 13) (0/ 2)

Zr-95 (15) -2.3E 0 28 No Data -O.1E 0 (0) ( -0.7 - -3.9)E 0 0.1 - 0.1)E 0 (0/ 2) (0/ 2) 1-131 (15) 1.1E 1 28 NO Data -7.31 0 (0) ( -3.2 - 24)1 0 ( -2.8)E 0 (0/ 2) (0/ 2)

Cs-134 (15) 15 -0.5E 0 28 4.1E 0 -5E -1 (0) ( -- 0.9 - O.O)E 0 ( 2.6 - 6.5)E 0 ( -1.6 - 0.5)E 0 (0/ 2) (0/ 13) (0/ 2)

Cs-137 (15) 18 0.4E 0 30 1.1 1 0.71 0 (0) ( -0.2 - 1.O)E 0 ( 5.8 - 15)E 0 ( 0.3 - 1.2)E 0 (0/ 2) (0/ 13) (0/ 2)

Ba-140 (15) 1.6E 0 28 No Data 1.4E 0 (0) ( 1.1 - 2.0)E 0 I 1.3- 1.4)E 0 (0/ 2) (0/ 2)

• Non-Routine refers to radionuclides that exceeded the Reporting Levels in ODCM Table E-2

• • The fraction of sample analyses yielding detectable measurements (i.e. >3 standard deviations) is shown in parentheses.

21

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 Table 3.1 Radiological Environmental Program Summary Connecticut Yankee Nuclear Power Co., Haddam Neck Station (January - June 2005 Site Wells Shutdown June 3, 2005)

MEDIUM: Well Water (WW) UNITS: PCI/liter Indicator Stations Station With Highest Mean Control Stations Radionuclides Mean Station Mean Mean (No. Analyses) Required Range Range Range Non-Routine* LLD No. Detected- No. Detected- No. Detected-H-3 (3) 2000 5.3E 2 15 n/a (One Sample) 3.51 2 (0) n/a (One Sample) -8 - 78)E 1 (0/ 1) (0/ 2)

Mn-54 (3) 15 0.4E 0 15 n/a (One Sample) -0.71 0 (0) n/a (One Sample) -2.3 - 1.0)E 0 (0/ 1) (0/ 2)

Co-58 (3) -2.9E -0 15 n/a (One Sample) -3.7E 0 (0) n/a (One Sample) -0.5 - 6.9)E 0 (0/ 1) (0/ 2)

Fe-59 (3) -1.3E 0 15 n/a (One Sample) -7.9E 0 (0) n/a (One Sample) -8.7 - -7.0)E 0 (0/ 1) (0/ 2)

Co-80 (3) 15 -4.3E 0 15 n/a (One Sample) -0.9E 0 (0) n/a (One Sample) -1.7 - 0.0)1 0 (0/ 1) (0/ 2)

Zn-65 (3) 30 -1.01 1 15 n/a (One Sample) 8.4E 0 (0) n/a (One Sample) - 0.0 - 16.8)E 0 (0/ 1) (0/ 2)

Zr-95 (3) 0.2E 0 15 n/a (One Sample) 3.2E 0 (0) n/a (One Sample) - 2.7 - -3.7)E 0 (0/ 1) (0/ 2) 1-131 (3) -7.7E 1 15 n/a (One Sample) -1.11 0 (0) n/a (One Sample) -4.0 - 1.8)E 0 (0/ 1) (0/ 2)

Cs-134 (3) 15 -0.8E 0 15 n/a (One Sample) -4.5E 0 (0) n/a (One Sample) ( 4.4 - -4.6)E 0 (0/ 1) (0/ 2)

Cs-137 (3) 18 3.3E 0 15 n/a (One Sample) -1.8E 0 (0) n/a (One Sample) -2.5 - -1.1)1 0 (0/ 1) (0/ 2)

Ba-140 (5) 1.7E 0 15 n/a (One Sample) 0.75E 0 (0) n/a (One Sample) 4 - 5.5)E 0 (0/ 1) ) (0/ 2)

• Non-Routine refers to radionuclides that exceeded the Reporting Levels in ODCM Table E-2 "The fraction of sample analyses yielding detectable measurements (i.e. >3 standard deviations) is shown in parentheses.

22

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 Table 3.2 Environmental TLD Measurements 2005 ENVIRONMENTAL TLD DATA

SUMMARY

CONNECTICUT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION (JANUARY - DECEMBER 2005)

(uR/hr)

INDICATOR TLDs CONTROL TLDS HIGHEST MEAN (14- EXTRA TLDS ISFSI TLDS C)

MEAN MEAN MEAN MEAN RANGE RANGE RANGE MEAN RANGE (NO.

(NO. MEASUREMENTS)* (NO. MEASUREMENTS)* RANGE (NO. MEASUREMENTS)* MEASUREMENTS)-

(NO. MEASUREMENTS)*

6.4 +/- 0.4 6.3 i 0.4 7.6 +/- 0.4 7.5 +/- 1.0 24.8 +/- 1.1 4.6 - 7.8 4.7 - 8.2 6.3 - 8.2 5.0 - 12.4 5.6 - 131.6 39 16 4 33 27

• Each "measurement" is based typically on quarterly readings from five TLD elements. Units are micro-R per hour.

23

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 Table 3.3 ENVIRONMENTAL TLD MEASUREMENTS 2005 (Micro-R per hour)

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

No. Description EXP. S.D. EXP. S. EXP. S.D. EXP. .D EXP.

Onsite Disharge Can 5.64 t 026 0 +/- 0 6.31 +/- 0.37 6.44 +/- 0.35 6.13 CY-1-I CY-2-l Haddam Park Road 5.13 +/- 0.51 5.87 +/- 0.3 6.42 +/- 0.34 6.28 +/- 0.35 5.93 Haddam Jail Hill Rd. 5.43 +/- 0.27 6.37 +/- 0.33 6.86 +/- 0.52 6.89 +/- 0.42 6.39 CY-3-l Haddam Ranger Road 4.63 +/- 0.36 5.35 +/- 0.39 6.03 +/- 0.48 6.00 +/- 0.33 5.50 CY-4-l Onsite Injun Hol Rd. 5.80 ^ 0.23 6.46 +/- 0.20 7.30 +/- 0.49 7.33 t 0.48 6.72 CY-5-l Onsite Substation 5.50 +/- 0.26 5.85 +/- 0.28 6.55 +/- 0.44 6.88 +/- 0.45 6.20 CY-6-1 Haddam 6.31 +/- 0.28 7.51 +/- 0.23 7.29 +/- 0.63 7.41 +/- 0.39 7.13 CY-7-l East Haddam 5.34 +/- 0.43 6.31 +/- 0.36 6.74 +/- 0.45 7.08 +/- 0.47 6.37 CY-8-l Higganum 5.48 +/- 0.22 6.39 +/- 0.19 6.52 +/- 0.54 7.15 +/- 0.43 6.39 CY-9-1 Hurd Park Road 5.98 +/- 0.30 6.66 +/- 0.23 6.81 +/- 0.33 7.79 +/- 0.45 6.81 CY-10-1 Middletown 5.08 +/- 0.31 5.52 +/- 0.20 5.49 +/- 0.58 6.04 +/- 0.44 5.53 CY-1 1-C Deep River 5.63 t 0.33 6.33 +/- 0.28 6.83 +/- 0.45 6.76 +/- 0.37 6.39 CY-12-C North Madison 4.77 +/- 0.23 5.44 +/- 0.40 5.93 +/- 0.41 6.16 +/- 0.48 5.56 CY-13-C Colchester 6.34 +/- 0.36 7.88 +/- 0.30 7.97 +/- 0.60 8.23 +/- 0.48 7.61 CY-14-C CY-40-X Near Intake Structur^ 5.35 +/- 0.27 5.60 +/- 0.22 (lost) 0 +/- 0 6.95 +/- 0.56 5.97 Picnic area 5.02 t 0.27 5.54 +/- 0.18 6.27 +/- 0.36 6.38 +/- 0.43 5.80 CY-41-X Environmental Trail 7.21 +/- 0.38 7.78 +/- 0.36 8.11 +/- 0.49 8.71 +/- 0.58 7.95 CY-42-X 6.54 +/- 0.46 7.27 +/- 0.22 7.79 +/- 0.41 7.59 +/- 0.42 7.30 CY-43-X Moodus-Rts 149&151 Shailerville Horton Rd. 5.63 +/- 0.37 6.32 +/- 0.24 6.78 +/- 0.39 6.88 +/- 0.39 6.40 CY-44-X Old Waste Gas Sphere 9.00 +/- 0.57 9.94 +/- 0.37 10.08 +/- 0.70 8.81 +/- 0.55 9.46 CY-45-X Discharge Canal Fen 10.08 +/- 0.44 12.44 +/- 0.39 10.27 +/- 0.74 9.78 +/- 0.66 10.64 CY-46-X Visitor Info Center 5.74 +/- 0.34 6.27 +/- 0.22 6.85 +/- 0.35 6.88 +/- 0.4 6.44 CY-47-X Met Shack (lost) 0 +/- 0 (lost) 0 +/- 0 7.21 +/- 0.39 6.70 +/- 0.47 6.96 CY-48-X ISFSI Pad SE End Fen 131.64 +/- 5.23 130.07

• 3.72 130.44 +/- 5.83 118.2

• 5.54 127.59 CY-50-X ISFSI Monitoring ST 6.03 +/- 0.23 6.43 +/- 0.33 7.46 +/- 0.44 6.90 +/- 0.54 6.71 CY-51-X Schmidt Cemetery CY-52-IF Onsite^ 5.60 +/- 0.25 6.18 +/- 0.23 7.17 +/- 0.44 6.56 +/- 0.38 6.38 ISFSI Haul Route CY-53-IF Onsite* 6.16 +/- 0.36 7.06 +/- 0.54 7.53 +/- 0.41 7.69 +/- 0.52 7.11 CY-54-IF RT 149 Salmon River** 7.23 +/- 0.56 (lost)0 +/- 0 6.98 +/- 0.51 6.82 +/- 0.40 7.01 HV Tower NW of Pad^ 5.97 0.24 7.88 0.80 7.86 0.76 7.45 0.45 7.29 CY-55-IF CY-56-IF Borrow Pit Onsite^ 5.99 0.22 6.96 0.29 7.13 0.55 7.04 0.45 6.78 Extra TLD locations not required by the REMODCM ISFSI TLD Locations 24

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 4.0 ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS 4.1 Sampling Program Deviations The Radiological Effluent Monitoring Manual (REMM) states in Section E.1 that the environmental sampling and analysis program shall be conducted as specified in Table E-1 for locations shown in Appendix G of the ODCM. Deviations are permitted from the required sampling schedule if specimens are unobtainable due to hazardous conditions, seasonal unavailability, malfunction of automatic sampling equipment or other legitimate reasons. If specimens are unobtainable due to sampling equipment malfunction, every effort shall be made to complete corrective action prior to the end of the next sampling period.

All deviations from the sampling schedule shall be documented in the Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report pursuant to Section F.1 of the REMM. The following deviations are noted for the 2005 sampling program:

A river water composite sample was collected from Station 28-I on April 4 . The composite sample was found to be only half full indicating that the system did not operate continuously during the sampling period. A sample was taken of the water that had been collected.

During the change out of the TLDs for the first quarter, one could not be retrieved.

Station 48-X was apparently removed during demolition activities on the Met Shack.

This was replaced with another TLD in the same general location.

During the change out of the TLDs for the second quarter, three TLDs could not be retrieved. The TLD at location 1 could not be retrieved due to high water in the access road way. This was retrieved during the second quarter collection activities. The second TLD was the TLD located at Station 48-X, apparently removed during demolition activities in the area near the Met Shack. The third TLD that could not be retrieved was 54-IF.

During the change out of the TLDs for the third quarter, one TLD could not be retrieved.

Station 40-X was apparently removed during demolition preparation activities for the Intake Structure. This was replaced with another TLD in the same general location. All other TLD locations were evaluated to ensure there were no similar conditions that existed.

The river water composite sample at Station 28-I was not collecting a sample on September 28 due to a problem with the ISCO sampler and subsequently was identified as being caused by a short circuit in the battery system. This was corrected by obtaining subcontractor support and replacing one of the batteries. The system was returned to service on September 3 0th at 12:29.

The river water composite sample at Station 28-1 was not collecting a sample on December 12 due to what apparently was a frozen line. This was initially corrected by 25

Haddain Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 The bi-weekly river sample at station 30-A-C, dated 7/25/05, was not analyzed for gamma emitting isotopes. Personnel error as a result of personal extenuating circumstances was the contributing factor for all required analyses not performed. Tritium analysis was performed on the sample.

Analysis results for sediment samples collected on June 7 hthru June 9h can not be located at this time.

Narrative from the June Monthly Report from FANAPL to CYAPCO indicates sediment was sampled from Station 28-I, 29-I, 30-C on June 7 h thru June 9h and that ISFSI sediment was sampled from station 57-IF and 58-IF on June 8h. FANPEL notified CYAPCO that the analysis report for these sediment samples can not be located at this time.

The following is a list of the missed samples from 2005. The details of these samples are included in the previous section, Section 4.1; Sampling Program Deviations.

Media Station LSN End Date Sediment 28-I L9418-01 06/09/05 29-I L9418-02 06/09/05 30-C L9418-03 06/09/05 57-IF L9418-04 06/09/05 58-IF L9418-05 06/09/05 TLD 48-X 03/31/05 1-I 06/30/05 48-X 06/30/06 54-IF 06/30/06 40-X 09/30/06 26

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 adding water to the sample line and was addressed by a more permanent solution of weighing down the line as it entered the river.

The river water composite sample tube at Station 28-1 was found leaking on Ioccasion with only a minimal loss of sample was indicated. This sample line will be changed out periodically to minimize the potential for recurrence of the problem.

The bi-weekly river sample at station 30-A-C, dated 7/25/05, was not analyzed for gamma emitting isotopes. Personnel error as a result of personal extenuating circumstances was the contributing factor for all required analyses not performed.

Tritium analysis was performed on the sample.

Analysis results for sediment samples collected on June 7th thru June 9th can not be located at this time. Narrative from the June Monthly Report from FANAPL to CYAPCO indicates sediment was sampled from Station 28-1, 29-I, 30-C on June 7th thru June 9' and that ISFSI sediment was sampled from station 57-IF and 58-IF on June 8t".

FANPEL notified CYAPCO that the analysis report for these sediment samples can not be located at this time.

The following is a list of the missed samples from 2005. The details of these samples are included in the previous section, Section 4.1; Sampling Program Deviations.

Media Station LSN End Date Sediment 28-I L9418-01 06/09/05 29-1 L9418-02 06/09/05 30-C L9418-03 06/09/05 57-IF L9418-04 06/09/05 58-IF L9418-05 06/09/05 TLD 48-X 03/31/05 1-I_ 06/30/05 48-X 06/30/06 54-IF 06/30/06 40-X 09/30/06 26

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 4.2 Comparison of Achieved LLD with Requirements Table E-3 of the REMODCM (Table 2.3 in this report) lists the required Lower Limits of Detection (LLDs) for routine environmental sample analyses. On occasion, an LLD is not achieved due to situations such as a low sample volume. In such a case, the REMODCM requires the identification and discussion of the contributing factors in the Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report.

At the FANPEL, the target LLD for any analysis is typically 30-40 percent of the most restrictive required LLD. Expressed differently, the typical sensitivities achieved for each analysis are at least 2.5 to 3 times better than that required by the REMODCM.

For each analysis having an LLD requirement, the a posteriori or after the fact LLD (or minimum detectable concentration-MDC) calculated for that analysis was compared with the required a priori LLD. More than 150 analyses were performed with a specified LLD requirement for 2005. All the samples analyzed met the required detection limits.

4.3 Results Compared Against Reporting Levels The REMODCM Section E requires the written notification to the NRC within 30 days whenever a Reporting Level in ODCM Table E-2 is exceeded (Table 2.4 in this report). Reporting Levels are the environmental concentrations that relate to the ALARA design dose objectives of 10 CFR 50, Appendix

1. It should be noted that environmental concentrations are averaged over calendar quarters for the purposes of this comparison, and that Reporting Levels apply only to measured levels of radioactivity due to plant effluents. During 2005, no Reporting Levels were exceeded.

4.4 Data Analysis by Media Type The 2005 REMP data for each media type are discussed below categorized by pathway. Graphical plots of monitoring data are also shown in Figures 4.1 to 4.11. With respect to data plots, all values are plotted, whether they are "detectable" or "non-detectable."

27

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 4.4.1 Air Particulate Gross Beta Radioactivity Air particulates were collected until April 2005 on glass fiber filters bi-weekly at four indicator locations and one control location, and analyzed for gross beta radioactivity. Gamma isotopic analyses are performed on the quarterly composites of each location.

As shown in Figure 4.1, there is no significant difference between the average gross beta concentration at the indicator stations and the control station. Notable in the graph is the distinct annual cycle.

Figure 4.1 Control Stations 19 --b Indicator Stations Revised for2005 Report Gmss Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (Quarterly Averages) 0.07 - 0.07 0.06 - 0.06 O.o- - 0.05 E 0.04 - 0.04 3 0.03 0.03

, 0.02 0.02 0.0.01 0.01 0 0 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 28

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 Figure 4.2 shows the biweekly gross beta concentrations at each sampling location required by the ODCM along with the control station in North Madison. The gross beta concentration is seen to fluctuate over the year due to seasonal changes in the naturally occurring airborne radioactivity. The gross beta concentrations at the indicator stations are similar to the control station and fluctuate in the same manner.

Figure 4.2 Revised for 2005 Report Connecticut Yankee Ruwming 12 Month Bi-Weekly Air Particulate Gross Beta Analysis Results

_~~II77

~ I_ I ---r~r-~,*-

+-

Stabkn 5 Staon 6g SaX 13 4

Y.

.1

__ __ _ _ - ~k /

1 1

V V ..i

% I,- 111 6-- 11-1' _' __'16 __+ 1P_1? 11111 -Q-11 _?'  % "O", 11/_1 "/-" 1% 1?_11 /4 -111 'P' '_" 41 74 111 Sanriie Reference Date (2004- 2005)

The quarterly composites of the bi-weekly air particulate filters are also analyzed for gamma radioactivity. The results, shown in Tables 3.1, indicate the presence of naturally occurring Be-7, which is produced by cosmic processes. No positive results were observed for all the other isotopes.

4.4.2 River Water River water composite samples were collected biweekly during 2005. The composites were analyzed for gamma radionuclides and H-3. No gamma emitting radionuclides or H-3 were detected in 2005.

4.4.3 Well Water In 2005, samples of water from the onsite wells (location 15) and control station (location 16) were sampled during the first quarter of 2005. The onsite wells previously sampled were taken out of service in June 2005. The on-site wells had in the past indicated the presence of station related H-3.

The H-3 is believed to result from the wells proximity to an area influenced by the water in the discharge canal and the ability of H-3 to migrate. In recent years it was discovered that there was a leak in the Refueling Water Storage Tank (RWST) that migrated to the ground water. This tank was subsequently drained and demolished. Debris from the RWST Tank demolition, including the sub-surface pedestal has been removed from the CYAPCO site and the sub-surface soils in the area of the tank farm have been remediated. As a part of the decommissioning process, a series of groundwater monitoring wells were installed. The results of the ground water monitoring evaluation can be found in 29

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 the "Malcolm Pirnie Ground Water Monitoring Report for Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company, Final Report, September 1999" and subsequent Ground Water Monitoring Reports A downward trend has been observed in the H-3 concentration from the onsite wells since cycle 17 in 1992 due to the replacement of stainless-steel clad fuel with zircaloy clad fuel. The levels of H-3 observed since permanent shutdown in July 1996 represent residual levels of tritium that remain in station process liquids and/or groundwater from beneath the site that are gradually dropping to natural background levels. For 2005, no H-3 was detected in either the indicator or the control stations.

Figure 4.3 shows the H-3 concentration in CY on-site wells since 1988. The concentrations plotted for the only sample in 2005 represent statistically non-positive H-3 concentrations.

Figure 4.3 H-3 Levels in On-site Wells 7000 -

- pCi/I 6000-6 - -:K- non-positive 5000-4000 i

' 3000-Q 2000 -

1000-0*

% )

-1000

-2000 . ................................................................

1Q88 IQ89 IQ90 IQ91 IQ92 IQ93 IQ94 IQ95 IQ96 IQ97 IQ98 IQ99 IQOO IQO0IQ02 IQ03 IQ04 IQ05 Year 30

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 4.4.4 Bottom Sediment The REMODCM was changed in 2005 and sample frequency for sediment was reduced from semiannual to annual. Five grab samples of river bottom and ISFSI related sediments were collected on June 7th - June 9th; however FANPEL was unable to locate the analysis results. Sediment sampling is now performed and/or directed by CYAPCO and the final sediment sample of the CYAPCO REMP Program is scheduled to be collected in June 2006. Data from previous sampling events is included below. Figure 4.4 shows that historically, Cs-1 37 has been detected at both the control and indicator locations indicating that the likely source is weapons fallout. One of the samples collected at the indicator station in the vicinity of the discharge also contained Co-60. The level of Co-60 measured in 2004 is bounded by concentrations observed in previous years as shown in Figure 4.5. No other indications of station related radioactivity were observed in this sample media. Naturally occurring K-40 and Th-232 were also detected in all of the samples.

Figure 4.4 CS-137 IN SEDIMENT 2000 -

Station 28 2000

- Station 29

-t - Station 30

- Station 28 Positive Analysis 1500 -

+ Station 29 Positive Analysis 1500 l - - Station 30 Positive Analysis 1000 -

1000 500 -500 0

0

-500

-500 Mar-98 Sep-98 Mar-99 Sep-99 Mar-00 Sep-00 Mar-01 Sep-0I Mar-02 Sep-02 Mar-03 Sep-03 Mar-04 Sep-04 31

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 Figure 4.5 CO-60 IN SEDIMENT 2000 2000 1500 1500 1000 1000 cL 500 500 0

0

-500 ,

II- ,

, , -500 Mar-97 Sep-97 Mar-98 Sep-98 Mar-99 Sep-99 Mar-00 Sep-00 Mar-01 Sep-01 Mar-02 Sep-02 Mar-03 Sep-03 Mar-04 Sep-04 4.4.5 Fruits and Vegetables These samples were no longer required to be collected after the completion of the Fuel Transfer Project. The Fuel Transfer Project was complete prior to the onset of the harvest season; therefore no fruits and vegetables were collected and analyzed in 2005.

4.4.6 Broad Leaf Vegetation These samples were no longer required to be collected after the completion of the Fuel Transfer Project. The fuel transfer project was complete prior to the onset of the growing season; therefore no broad leaf vegetation samples were collected and analyzed in 2005.

4.4.7 Shellfish Shellfish samples were collected annually from two locations. Naturally occurring K-40 was detected two control samples. No other gamma emitting radionuclides were detected in the samples. in 4.4.8 Fish Multiple fish samples were collected annually at three locations. The species collected in 2005 were perch, bullheads and catfish. Cs-1 37 and K-40 were detected in the samples from indicator stations and all control station samples with the exception there was no Cs-137 detected in the bottom feeder fish sample from the control sample location. Only two of the predator fish samples had a Cs-137 concentration greater than 3 times the 1 sigma counting uncertainty and both of those samples below the measured MDC. were 32

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 4.4.9 Gamma Exposure Rate Direct radiation is continuously measured at 14 locations surrounding Haddam Neck Station and at nine extra on-site locations with thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). The extra on-site locations are not part of the REMP but are used to monitor the impact of on-site decommissioning activities on the site boundary doses. All TLDs are collected quarterly for readout at the FANPEL.

Tables 3.2 and 3.3 show the mean exposure rates for the Indicator and Control categories do not vary significantly in 2005. As shown in Figure 4.6, there is a distinct 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 radionuclides in the underlying soil, rock or nearby building materials result in different radiation levels between one field site and another.

Figure 4.6 Revised for 2005 Report Average Exposure Rate at Indicator, Control and Extra TLDs 10.00 - Indicators 9.00 Micro- per Hour 8.00L 7.00-6.00-5.00 ,

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Figure 4.7 shows the exposure rate at all the Indicator TLD locations. There was a slight overall increase in average exposure rate during the latter part of 2005. CYAPCO began self performing REMP field work in July 2005. It is suspected that onsite storage during the time between TLD shipment arrival and TLD dissemination may account for the slight increase. In 2000, the TLDs (Victoreen glass bulb CaF 2(Mn)) which had historically been used to measure direct radioactivity around Connecticut Yankee for over 20 years were replaced with Panasonic model UD-804 AS1 TLD.

The changeover occurred in February of 2000. The Victoreen glass bulb type TLDs were subject to inherent self-irradiation which was experimentally measured for each dosimeter. This correction for field dosimeters averaged approximately 1 pR/hr. In general, the new Panasonic monthly dosimeters show an average decrease in measured exposure rate by -20% compared to the historical average determined by the Victoreen monthly dosimeters.

33

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 Figure 4.8 shows the exposure rate at the nine Extra TLD locations used to monitor more closely on-site decommissioning activities. TLD #46X showed an increase in exposure rate during 2005. This TLD is located on the north canal fence. Over the course of decommissioning, radioactive material storage area locations frequently changed. During 2005, #46X was located near a large radioactive materials storage area. An increased exposure rate was observed at on-site location #45-X throughout the 2000 and into 2002. This increase was noted toward the end of 1999, coincident with the removal of the steam generators and pressurizer from containment. These components were temporarily stored in the Southeast corner of the Industrial Area 700 feet from location #45-X. The increase in exposure rate due to these components is a localized effect and does not affect an increase in exposure beyond the owner controlled area. The steam generators, reactor head and pressurizer were shipped off site between the second and fourth quarter of 2002. TLD measurements throughout the year demonstrate the general variations in background radiation between the various on-site and off-site locations and include gamma exposure from all sources of radioactivity.

34

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 Figure 4.8 Revised for 2005 Report Exposure Rate at Extra TLD Locations 16- - 40x -41x +42x -

/ (43x w44x +45x 14 1 46x - 47x 48x 0

o 12 101 28 6

4 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 35

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 4.4.10 ISFSI Gamma Exposure Rate In the second quarter of 2003, additional sampling locations associated with the placement on-site of an Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) were selected for the purpose of collecting baseline background information prior to the transfer of spent fuel from the main plant to the ISFSI.

These new locations are specific to the ISFSI and are beyond the standard REMP that has been in operation over the life of the power plant's license. New quarterly TLD locations were located in the area surrounding the facility at distances that approximated the site boundary to support future determinations that direct and scatter dose from ISFSI operations remain in compliance with offsite dose limits to the public.

In addition, two locations associated with a hypothetical water pathway were selected for sediment and water sample collections to help confirm that ISFSI operations will have no impact on the wetlands.

Figure 4.9 shows the CS-1 37 levels that exist at both ISFSI sediment locations. Table 3.1 shows that no plant-related nuclides were identified in any of these samples.

Figures 4.9 and 4.10 compare the 2005 ISFSI TLD results with the baseline measurements taken before the first ISFSI canister was placed on the storage facility on April 20, 2004. The initial increase in TLD exposure rate is obviously due to placing fuel and GTCC casks on the ISFSI Pad. The slight decline in TLD exposure rate during 2005 appears to reflect the radioactive decay of the spent fuel and the GTCC material stored on the pad.

Figure 4.9 Revised for 2005 Report Average Exposure Rates at 1SFSI TLDs 50.0 - l ISFSI TLDs 45.0 40.0 1st Loaded Fuel Cask on 35.0 - ISFSI pad (April 20, 2004) o 30.0 25.0 -

% 20.0-i2 ~ 15.0-5.0 0.0 50 4R$ p w& w d 4ig  %< 2 i 36

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 Figure 4.10 Revised for 2005 Report 10.00 Exposure Rate at ISFSI TLD Locations

- 52x 9.50- x 1st Loaded Fuel Cask 9.00 - on the ISFSI Pad

• 54x, 8.50 (April 20, 2004) *- 55x

-- 56x 8.00 -

~.7.50-7.00-6.50 6.00 5.50-5.00 I

/ o oG& 3{ sR v 0 W As f Fg 37

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 5.0 OFF-SITE DOSE EQUIVALENT COMMITMENTS The purpose of this section is to evaluate off-site dose consequences (dose equivalent commitments) associated with the stations' radioactive liquid and airborne effluents. The method utilizes Regulatory Guide 1.109 / REMODCM models and actual measurements of the concentrations of radioactivity in environmental media to compute the dose consequences resulting from the consumption of these foods.

The standards for the maximum dose to an individual of the general public, taken from 40CFR1 90, is 25 mRem to the whole body, 75 mRem to the thyroid and 25 mRem to any other organ. These standards are a fraction of the average USA background radiation of 300 mRem per year given in NCRP94.

Historically, Cs-137 (mostly from weapons fallout) was identified in the bottom sediment in the area of the plant discharge. Although some may be attributable to plant related operations in past years, these samples represent a pathway that is not involved with a significant exposure to the public. Cs-137 was detected in Predator fish caught from Indicator Stations 29-I and 30-C. The Cs-1 37 activity for these two samples was above the measured MDC. The measured MDC on these samples was approximately 5 times lower than the required MDC of 150 pCi/L. While CsI37 is an isotope associated with Plant activities, the Cs-1 37 concentrations detected in the fish most likely came from Cs1 37 present in the sediment from weapons fallout as the measured concentrations of Cs-1 37 in the control sample and one of the indicator fish were nearly identical. The Cs-1 37 activity measured in the fish samples does not represent a significant ingestion pathway from (fish, shellfish, water) for 2005.

38

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 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 Canada from Natural Background Radiation, National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, 1987.

3. Ionizing Radiation: Sources and Biological Effects, 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. NRC Generic Letter 89-01,

Subject:

Implementation of Programmatic Controls for Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications in the Administrative Controls Section of the Technical Specifications and the Relocation of Procedural Details of RETS to the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual or to the Process Control Program, dated January 31, 1989.

39

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 APPENDIX A LAND USE CENSUS FOR 2005 A-1

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 2005 Land Use Census Assessment Due to the current status of the Decommissioning Project, the Land Use Census is not expected to change in a manner that would affect the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program. The most recent Land Use Census will remain in effect until superseded. During the course of the Decommissioning Project an updated Land Use Census can be obtained at any time as requested or needed. The results of the current applicable Land Use Census are included in this report in compliance with REMODCM Section E-2. The locations identified during the Census are listed in Table A-1. In2004, Normandeau Associates conducted the Land Use Census and verified the distance and direction for all residence with a portable Global Positioning System (GPS). Pursuant to REMODCM Section E-2, any sampling changes resulting from the Land Use Census must be noted in this report. No changes with the REMP were needed based on this Land Use Census.

TABLE A.1 LAND USE CENSUS LOCATIONS N 1.18 NNE 1.74 NE 1.69 ENE 1.75 E 2.12 ESE 2.75 SE 1.34 SSE 1.20 5 1.04 SSW 0.93 SW 1.03 WSW 1.22.

W 1.40 WNW 0.64 ;

NW 1.09 NNW 1.55 A-2

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 APPENDIX B Quality Assurance Program B-1

CYAPCO Analytical Laboratory QA and Cross Check Program Oualitv Assurance Proeram CYAPCO employs a quality assurance program designed 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, laboratory quality control and staff training. CYAPCO on-site counting laboratory participates in a 3rd party performance evaluation (PE) program administered by Analytics, Inc on a semi-annual basis. River water samples after July 1st 2005 were analyzed by CYAPCO in the on-site laboratory under the site's Laboratory Quality Assurance Program.

Third Party Cross Check Program CYAPCO onsite lab participates in a third party cross check program managed by Analytics Inc. to satisfy the requirements of the REMODCM. Unknown spiked samples are processed on a semi-annual basis to evaluate CYAPCO lab performance. The semi-annual cross check results are summarized in Table B. 1. Replicate samples were analyzed on multiple detector systems and the average results and standard error on the mean were reported to Analytics. CYAPCO acceptance criteria for these measurements are summarized in Table B.2., according to the requirements of the split sample program.

When results fall outside of the acceptance criteria, appropriate, corrective measures are taken. As can be seen in Table B. 1 on the next page, all results are within the acceptance (i.e. Agreement) criteria.

Table B. i i Cross Check Results Summary Nuclide HNP Value Known Inown Resolution Comparison Value HNP:KnownReouin Cmasn Media: Air Particulate Filter, Analytics # Al 19946-191, Units (pCi total)

Ce-141 6.58E-02 6.10E-02 1.08 20 AGREEMENT Cr-51 6.22E-02 5.82E-02 1.07 20 AGREEMENT Cs-134 1t26E-02 1.37E-02 0.92 20 AGREEMENT Cs-137 3.22E-02 2.90E-02 1.11 20 AGREEMENT Co-58 1.71E-02 1.55E-02 1.11 20 AGREEMENT Mn-54 2.93E-02 2.48E-02 1.18 20 AGREEMENT Fe-59 2.17E-02 1.92E-02 1.13 20 AGREEMENT Zn-65 3.11 E-02 2.55E-02 1.22 20 AGREEMENT Co-60 1.87E-02 1.71E-02 1.10 20 AGREEMENT Media: Soil, Analytics # Al 19946-191, Units (pCi/g)

Ce-141 4.49E-05 4.22E-05 1.06 20 AGREEMENT Cr-51 4.31 E-05 4.03E-05 1.07 20 AGREEMENT Cs-134 9.33E-06 9.49E-06 0.98 20 AGREEMENT Cs-137 2.16E-05 2.01 E-05 1.07 20 AGREEMENT Co-58 1.15E-05 1.07E-05 1.07 20 AGREEMENT Mn-54 1.94E-05 1.71 E-05 1.13 20 AGREEMENT Fe-59 1.50E-05 1.33E-05 1.13 20 AGREEMENT Zn-65 2.02E-05 1.76E-05 1.15 20 AGREEMENT Co-60 1.27E-05 1.1 8E-05 1.07 20 AGREEMENT Table B.1: Cross Check Acceptance Criteria Resolution Agreement Range 4-7 -0.5-2.0 8- 15 0.6- 1.66 16 - 50 0.75 - 1.33 .

51 - 200 0.80-1.25., ;

> 200 0.85 - 1.18

AR EVA September 6, 2005 EL 108105 TO: Distribution FROM: J. M. Raimondi

SUBJECT:

Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Dosimetry Services Semi-Annual Quality Assurance Status Report (January - June 2005)

Attached for your information and review is the Semi-Annual Status Report covering the Framatomie ANP Environmental Laboratory's (E-LAB) Quality Assurance Programs for environmental, extremity, and personnel dosimetry processing for the first half of 2005. During this semi-annual period, 99.0% (297/300) of the individual dosimeters. evaluated against the E-LAB internal performance criteria (high-energy photons only), met the criterion for accuracy and 99.0% (297/300) met the criterion for precision. In addition, 100% (118/118) of the dosimeter sets evaluated against the internal tolerance limits met these criteria.

If you have any questions please contact Christopher Shelton (508) 898-9970 ext. 2500 or myself at (508) 898-9970 ext. 2522.

• M. Raimondi Manager, Environmental Laboratory CAS/cas Attachment DISTRIBUTION D. Montt - CYIYR Plant G. Babineau - YR Plant E. Mercer - MY Plant R. Burkland - FANP Richland N. Hansen - Southern California Edison G. Harper - FANP Reg. Compliance W. Cash - Seabrook M. Strum - FANP Rad. Engineering D. Perkins - Seabrook M. Sanger - FANP Quality Eng.

R. Thurlow- Seabrook F Sabadini - FANP Quality Eng.

M. Morgan - VY Plant J. Geyster -VY Plant FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY: 29 Research Orive, Westborough, MA 01581-3913 Phone: 508 89-970 Fax: 508 836-9815 www.us.framatome-anp.com

AREVA DOSIMETRY SERVICES SEMI*ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE STATUS REPORT January - June 2005 C MAFAA T(kAI A KIM IKI f I XIIIF I %v EV v Ir I 'm I ,I I 'MI a ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY 29 Research Drive Westborough, MA 01581-3913 Telephone: (508) 898-9970 Fax: (508) 836-9815

AR EVA FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY DOSIMETRY SERVICES SEMI-ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE STATUS REPORT January-June 2005 EL 108/05 Prepared By: Date: g/S(%

Ke.

Reviewed By: 0L&d Date: 9/17/2005 Approved By: Date: q fza*

k Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory 29 Research Drive Westborough, MA 01581-3913

TABLE OF CONTENTS Paae LIST OF TABLES ... ............... iv EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

................. v I. INTRODUCTION . . .

A. QC Program ..

B. QA Program ..

II. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA . . . 2 A. Performance Statistics .. 2

1. Bias .2

2. Precision .2

3. American National Standards Institute Performance Statistics . 3 B. Tolerance Limits .. 4

1. E-LAB Internal Limits .4

2. Internal Tolerance Limits .4

3. American National Standards Institute Tolerance Level (L) . 4 C. QC Investigation Criteria .5 D. Reporting of-Analytical-Results .. 5 III. DATA

SUMMARY

FOR REPORTING PERIOD JANUARY-JUNE 2005 .. 5 A. General Discussion .. 5 B. Result Trending .. 6

1. Panasonic Whole Body Dosimeters .6

2. Extremity Dosimeters .7

3. Panasonic Environmental Dosimeters .7 IV. STATUS OF E-LAB CONDITION REPORTS (CR) . . . 8 V. STATUS OF AUDITS/ASSESSMENTS . . . 8 A. Internal .. 8 B. External ........ 8 F:corres\EL 108-05.doc -ii-

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

Paae VI. UPDATED PROCEDURES ISSUED DURING JANUARY-JUNE 2005 ............................ 8 VIl. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ..................................................... 8 Vil. REFERENCES ..................................................... 8 APPENDIX A DOSIMETRY QUALITY CONTROL TRENDING GRAPHS APPENDIX B NVLAP CERTIFICATE OF ACCREDITATION AND SCOPE OF ACCREDITATION

_j..

F:\corres\EL 108-05.doc

LIST OF TABLES Page

1. Summary of The Number of Dosimeters Processed, Independent Performance Tests and Percent QC January-June 2005 9

2. Percentage of Individual Analyses Which Passed E-LAB Internal Criteria, January-June 2005 10

3. Percentage of Mean Analyses (n=6) Which Passed Tolerance Criteria, January-June 2005 11

4. Summary of Third Party QC Results for Fourth Quarter 2004 and First Quarter 2005 (NVLAP Required Categories) 12-13

5. Summary of Third Party QC Results for Fourth Quarter 2004 and First Quarter 2005 (NVLAP Non-Required Categories) 14-15

6. Updated Dosimetry Services Procedures Issued During January-June 2005 16 F:\corres\EL 108-05.doc -iv-

EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

Routine quality control (QC) testing was performed for each type of dosimeter issued by the Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory (E-LAB) Dosimetry Services Section. The dosimeter types included Panasonic 808 and 814 whole body dosimeters, combination Panasonic 808/814 neutron dosimeters, extremity dosimeters, and Panasonic environmental dosimeters. QC dosimeters were irradiated in-house as well as by a third party. All testing methods used by the accredited third-party tester conform to ANSI N13.11-2001 (Reference 1) or ANSI N13.32-1 995 (Reference 2).

The Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory processed quality control dosimeters that represented over two percent of the nearly thirteen thousand client dosimeters processed during this semi-annual period. The QC percentage for each dosimeter type is listed in Table I. During this semi-annual period,. 99.0% (297/300) of the individual dosimeters, evaluated against the E-LAB internal performance criteria (high-energy photons only), met the criterion for accuracy and 99.0% (297/300) met the criterion for precision (Table 2). In addition, 100% (118/118) of the dosimeter sets evaluated against the internal tolerance limits met these criteria (Table 3).

Tables 4 and 5 list the third party testing results for this semi-annual period. Trending graphs, which evaluate each dosimeter type, dose depth and performance statistic for High-Energy photon irradiations are given in Appendix A.

NVLAP Certificate of Accreditation and Scope of Accreditation documents for the E-LAB are included in Appendix B.

F:\corres\EL 108-05.doc

I. INTRODUCTION The TLD systems at the Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory (E-LAB) are calibrated and operated to ensure consistent and accurate evaluation of TLDs. The quality of the dosimetric results reported to E-LAB clients is ensured by the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP) for dosimetry processing, independent third-party performance testing by Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories, in-plant performance testing, and in-house performance testing by the QA Officer and the Dosimetry Services Section.

Standard test methods for in-plant testing of Panasonic whole body and extremity dosimeters are described in the E-LAB report entitled "In-Plant External Dosimetry Quality Assurance Testing Program" (Reference 3). This protocol provides standard test methods that may be used at plant sites utilizing E-LAB dosimeters. The plants have developed their own dosimetry test procedures modeled after Reference 3.

The purpose of the dosimetry quality assurance program is to provide performance documentation of the routine processing of E-LAB dosimeters. This testing provides a statistical measure of the bias and precision of the processing against a reliable standard, which in turn points out any trends or performance changes. Two programs are used:

A. QC Program Independent outside dosimetry quality control tests are performed on E-LAB Panasonic 808 and 814 whole body dosimeters, combination Panasonic 808/814 neutron dosimeters, extremity, and Panasonic environmental dosimeters. Tests include: (1)third-party testing, (2)the in-plant testing program conducted by various users of E-LAB dosimetry, and (3)the in-house testing program conducted by the E-LAB QA Officer. This testing ensures that dosimeters are irradiated to each ANSI testing category at least once every two years, and submitted as "unknowns" to the Dosimetry Services Section for processing (Reference 1). Additionally, each dosimeter type is tested for photon mixtures quarterly.

Excluded from this report are instrumentation checks conducted by the Dosimetry Services Section. Although instrumentation checks represent an important aspect of the quality assurance program, they are not included as process checks because the doses are known by the processors.

Instrumentation checks represent between 5-10% of the TLDs processed. In addition, internal quality control tests, periodically performed by the Dosimetry Services Section, and client initiated quality control tests are not included in this report.

B. QA Program An internal assessment of Dosimetry Services Section activities is conducted annually by the Laboratory Quality Assurance Officer (Reference 4). The purpose of the assessment is to review analytical procedures, results, materials or components that may indicate opportunities to improve or enhance processes and/or services.

F:\corres\EL 108-05.doc II. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA A. Performance Statistics All evaluation criteria are taken from the "Dosimetry Services Section Quality System Manual", Reference 5.

1. Bias

a. For each dosimeter tested, the measure of bias is the percent deviation of the reported result relative to the delivered dose. The percent deviation relative to the delivered dose is calculated as follows:

(H'- Hi) 100 H

where:

H' = the corresponding reported dose for the ith dosimeter (i.e., the reported dose)

Hi = the dose delivered to the ith irradiated dosimeter (i.e., the delivered dose)

b. For each group of test dosimeters, the mean bias is the average percent deviation of the reported result relative to the delivered dose. The mean percent deviation relative to the delivered dose is calculated as follows:

((Hi'-Hi)Joo(1J where:

H' = the corresponding reported dose for the ith dosimeter (i.e., the reported dose)

H. = the dose delivered to the ith irradiated test dosimeter (i.e., the delivered dose) n = the number of dosimeters in the test group

2. Precision For a group of test dosimeters irradiated to a given dose, the measure of precision is the percent deviation of individual results relative to the mean reported dose. At least two values are required for the determination of precision. The measure of precision for the ith dosimeter is:

F:%corresEL 108-05.doc

(((H>

' ))100 where:

H' = the reported dose for the ith dosimeter (i.e., the reported dose)

H = the mean reported dose; i.e., H=

n = the number of dosimeters in the test group

3. American National Standards Institute Performance Statistics The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) provides a method of characterizing the performance of protection dosimetry in "Personnel Dosimetry Performance - Criteria for Testing" (Reference 1).

a. The performance in a given test category is considered adequate if for the shallow and/or deep dose equivalents (or the absorbed dose):

I BI+S<L where:

B = the bias of the performance quotient S = the standard deviation of the performance quotient L = the tolerance level

b. The bias of the values of the performance quotient, P is set equal to the average of these values:

B =p-where:

The performance quotient, Pi, for the ith dosimeter is defined as:

[H' - Hi]

Hi and:

H' = the corresponding reported dose equivalent for the ith dosimeter (i.e., the reported dose) ,II Hi = the dose delivered to the ith irradiated dosimeter (i.e., the delivered dose)

F:\corres\EL 108-05.doc

c. The standard deviation of the values of the performance quotient, Pi, is:

S = (nI[)

where:

n-1 represents the unbiased sample population, where the summation is performed over all n values of Pi for a particular test in a given radiation category, and for a particular phantom depth (shallow or deep).

B. Tolerance Limits

1. E-LAB Internal Limits Tolerance limits for bias and precision applied to in-house and accredited third party testing were adopted on November 13, 1987.

These criteria are only applied to individual test dosimeters irradiated with high-energy photons (Cs-1 37 or Co-60) and are as follows:

Dosimeter Type I Tolerance Limits I Bias I Precision l Panasonic Whole Body +/- 18.5% +/- 16.1%

Extremity +/- 32.6% +/- 27.2%

Panasonic Environmental +/- 20.1% +/- 12.8%

The results of dosimeters evaluated against these criteria are summarized in Table 2. Trending graphs for a particular badge type or depth can be found in Appendix A.

2. internal Tolerance Limits Further performance testing control limits were added in 1998 to evaluate the sum of bias and precision values for all irradiation categories, not just for high-energy photons. A +/-30% tolerance limit was applied to the sum of the bias and precision values for all whole body and environmental dosimeters, while a +/-50% tolerance limit was applied for extremity dosimeters. Dosimeters processed during this semi annual period were evaluated against these criteria and the results are shown in Table 3 and Appendix A.

3. American National Standards Institute Tolerance Level (L)

The tolerance level, L, given in Reference 1, is: (a) 0.3 in the accident category I; and (b) 0.4 in the protection categories 11through VI. ANSI F:corresNEL 108-05.doc N13.11-2001 (Reference 1) includes additional limits on the Performance Quotient Limit (PQL) for Categories II, IV,and V for deep and shallow depths and Category IlIl for shallow depth only. This criterion requires that no more than one of fifteen dosimeters tested in each category may have a bias that exceeds the tolerance level (L).

C. QC Investigation Criteria E-LAB Manual 120 (Reference 5) specifies the investigative criteria applied to a QC analysis that has failed the E-LAB bias criteria. The criteria are as follows:

1. No investigation is necessary when an individual QC result falls outside the QC performance criteria for accuracy.

2. Investigations are initiated when the mean of a QC processing batch is outside the performance criterion for bias.

3. An investigation is initiated when the trending of at least twelve consecutive processing QC batches for a given process (specific depth dose or dosimeter type) indicates that the mean bias from the known is greater than 60% of the applicable performance criterion.

D. Reporting of Analytical Results The following guidelines were developed, applicable to reporting of results:

1. All results are to be reported in a timely fashion.

2. If the QA Officer determines that an investigation is required for a process, the results shall be issued as normal. If the QC results, prompting the investigation, have a mean bias from the known of greater than +/-20% for environmental dosimetry and greater than +/-30% for personnel dosimetry, the results shall be issued with a note indicating that they may be updated in the future, pending resolution of a QA issue.

3. Environmental dosimetry results do not require updating if the investigation has shown that the mean bias between the original results and the corrected results, based on applicable correction factors from the investigation, does not exceed +/-20%.

4. Personnel dosimetry results do not require updating if the investigation has shown that the mean bias between the original results and the corrected results, based on applicable correction factors from the investigation, does not exceed +/-30%.

Ill. DATA

SUMMARY

FOR REPORTING PERIOD JANUARY-JUNE 2005 A. General Discussion Inthe sections that follow, the results of performance tests conducted for each type of dosimeter are summarized and discussed. Summaries of the performance tests for the reporting period are given in Tables 2 through 5 and Figures 1 through 31. Results are presented only for performance tests conducted under well-characterized conditions. Where appropriate, results are F:\corres\EL 108-05.doc reported for three depths (7 mg/cm 2 , 300 mg/cm 2, and 1000 mg/cm 2) and plotted over the six-month period January-June 2005.

Table 2 provides a summary of individual dosimeter results evaluated against the E-LAB internal acceptance criteria for high-energy photons only (category IV).

During this semi-annual period, 99.0% (297/300) of the individual dosimeters, evaluated against these criteria met the tolerance limits for accuracy and 99.0%

(297/300) met the criterion for precision.

Table 3 provides a summary of the IBI + S results for each group (N=6) of dosimeters evaluated against the internal tolerance criteria. The data in Table 3 is tabulated by badge type and applies to all ANSI required and non-required categories (see Tables 4 and 5) with the exception of the Category V.A.

evaluation at the eye depth (300 mg/cm2). Overall, 100% (118/118) of the dosimeter sets evaluated against the internal tolerance performance criteria met these criteria.

Tables 4 and 5 present the third party testing results for dosimeters processed during this semi-annual period. Irradiation times occurred during the fourth quarter of 2004 and first quarter of 2005. The results have been separated into NVLAP required categories (Table 4) and non-required tests (Table 5). The environmental TLDs have been included with the non-required group.

B. Result Trending

1. Panasonic Whole Body Dosimeters One of the main benefits of performing quality control tests on a routine basis is to point out trends or performance changes. Trends or changes are best illustrated in the form of trending graphs where performance is tracked over time. The results of performance tests of Panasonic 808 and 814 whole body dosimeters are presented in Figures 1 through 24 for Category IV irradiations. The results are evaluated against each of the performance criteria listed in Section II, namely: individual dosimeter bias, individual dosimeter precision, and IBI + S. Results are also evaluated for mean bias in accordance with the investigation criteria given in Section II.C.

All of the results presented in Figures 1 through 24 are fade corrected to the irradiation date and plotted sequentially by processing date. This allows assessment of performance without the confounding effect of the variation in number of days between readout and irradiation. Therefore, the results include any bias produced by the fade algorithm.

If fade is not corrected to the date of irradiation, the possibility of a bias due to signal fading exists. When the Dosimetry Services Section processes a TLD, the software calculates a fade correction using one half the number of days between the processing date and the anneal date.

The use of the midpoint for fade correction can bias the results of performance tests of TLDs irradiated at either the beginning or end of a wear period. Results for performance tests conducted near the beginning of the period will be biased low and those irradiated near the end of a period will be biased high, assuming there are no other system biases.

F:\corres\EL 108-05.doc In some cases (i.e., when TLDs are irradiated at the end of the wear period and fade corrected to the midpoint) the results of the performance test may fall outside of the control limits even though the system is performing correctly. Therefore, to allow the assessment of performance test results without the TLD signal confounding the data, all Panasonic 808 and 814 test results presented in the tables have been fade corrected to the actual date of irradiation.

Figures 1 through 3 depict the individual bias of each of 54 Panasonic 808 dosimeters, evaluated at three different depths, and plotted sequentially according to processing date. The failure rate was 0% (0/54) for the shallow, eye, and deep depths. The failure rate for individual precision was 0% for the shallow, eye, and deep depths (Figures 4-6).

The failure rate for the mean bias was 0%for all three depths (Figures 7-9). Finally, Figures 10-12 depict the IBI + S statistic for each group of 808 dosimeters at each depth. All test sets (9 at each depth) met the internal tolerance criteria of IBI+S < 0.3.

Figures 13 through 15 depict the individual bias of each of 138 Panasonic 814 dosimeters, evaluated at three different depths, versus the date of processing. The failure rate was 0.7% (1/150) for the shallow, eye and deep depths. The failure rate for individual precision was 0% for the shallow and eye depth and 0.7% (1/150) for the deep depth (Figures 16-18). The failure rate for mean bias at all three depths (Figures 19-21) was 0%. As shown in Figures 22-24, 100% of the 25 814 test sets, evaluated at each depth, met the internal tolerance criteria of IBI+S < 0.3.

2. Extremity Dosimeters Extremity results plotted in Figures 25 -28 are for performance tests conducted at the E-LAB and an accredited third-party testing organization. For all individual extremity TLDs, evaluated during this semi-annual period, 0% (0/48) failed the E-LAB limit for bias of +/- 32.6%

(Figure 25). The failure rate was 4.2% (2/48) for precision (tolerance limit of 27.2%) as shown in Figure 26. None of the 8 TLD test sets (n=6) were outside the mean bias limit as shown in Figure 27. For the same reporting period, 100% of the 8 extremity QC test sets met the internal tolerance criteria for bias and precision (IB1+ S, Figure 28).

3. Panasonic Environmental Dosimeters The trending results of performance tests of Panasonic environmental dosimeters are presented in Figures 29-31. For individual Panasonic environmental TLDs, 100% of the 48 tests came within the E-LAB bias and precision tolerance limits (Figures 29 and 30). All 8 Panasonic environmental TLD test sets (mean bias, n=6) were reported within the internal tolerance criteria for bias (Figure 31).

F:%corres\EL 108-05.doc IV. STATUS OF E-LAB CONDITION REPORTS (CR)

During this semi-annual period there were no E-LAB Condition Reports (CR) issued to the Dosimetry Services Section. There are no remaining open action items.

V. STATUS OF AUDITS/ASSESSMENTS A. Internal There were no internal audits conducted in the Dosimetry area during the first half of 2005. The annual internal dosimetry audit is scheduled for the third quarter of 2005.

B. External There were no external audits conducted in the Dosimetry area during the first half of 2005. The biennial NVLAP audit is scheduled for the second half of 2005.

VI. UPDATED PROCEDURES ISSUED DURING JANUARY-JUNE 2005 A list of Dosimetry Services Section procedures, which were updated during this semi-annual period, is included in Table 6.

VII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Inter and intra-laboratory quality control evaluations continue to indicate the whole body, environmental, and extremity dosimetry processing programs at the E-LAB satisfy the criteria specified in the Dosimetry QA Manual. The E-LAB demonstrated the ability to meet all applicable acceptance criteria with a frequency of greater than 99%.

Vil. REFERENCES

1. American National Standard for Dosimetry - Personnel Dosimetry Performance Criteria for Testing, ANSI N1 3.11-2001, American National Standards Institute, Inc., 1430 Broadway, New York, New York 10018.

2. American National Standard for Performance Testing of Extremity Dosimeters, ANSI N13.32-1995, Health Physics Society, 1313 Dolley Madison Blvd.,

Suite 402, McLean, VA 22101.

3. "In-Plant External Dosimetry Quality Assurance Testing Program," E-LAB, Revision 2, December 1986.

4. Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Quality Control and Audit Assessment Schedule, 2005.

5. E-LAB Manual No.120, Dosimetry Services Section Quality System Manual, Rev 9, June 10, 2004.

F:\corres\EL 108-05.doc TABLE I

SUMMARY

OF NUMBER OF DOSIMETERS PROCESSED, INDEPENDENT PERFORMANCE TESTS AND PERCENT QC January-June 2005 Dosimeter Type Number Number  % QC I

______ ___ ____ ___ __ ___ __ ___ __ Processed Tested _ _ _

Panasonic 808 Whole Body 0 54 N/A Panasonic 814 Whole Body 9545 150 1.57 Panasonic 808/814 Neutron Dosimeters 721 0 0.00 Extremity 490 48 9.80 Panasonic Environmental 2038 48 2.36 TOTAL 12,794 300 2.34 F:\corres\EL 108-05.doc _9_

TABLE 2 PERCENTAGE OF INDIVIDUAL ANALYSES WHICH PASSED E-LAB INTERNAL CRITERIA January-June 2005 (1)

Shallow (7mg/cm ) Eye (300 mglcm2 ) Deep (1000 mg/cm2 )

% Passed  % Passed  % Passed  % Passed  % Passed  % Passed

. Number of Bias Precision Bias Precision Bias Precision Dosimeter Type Dosimeters Tolerance Tolerance Tolerance Tolerance Tolerance Tolerance Limit'2) Limitf) Limit'2) Limit(3) Limit(2) Lirnif3)

Panasonic 808 54 100 100 100 100 100 100 Panasonic 814 150 99.3 100 99.3 100 99.3 99.3 Whole Body _____

Extremity 48 100 95.8 No test No test No test No test Eanvironmeta 48100 100 Panaoi 48 (free in air) (free in air) No test No test No test No test (1 This table summarizes results of all depths for performance tests conducted by E-LAB and the Third-party tester for High Energy Photons.

CONTROL LIMITS FOR E-LAB DOSIMETRY PERFORMANCE TESTS -

APPLICABLE TO INDIViDUAL TEST DOSIMETERS IRRADIATED TO HIGH ENERGY PHOTONS Tolerance Limits Dosimeter Type Bia Bias I Precision Panasonic Whole Body +/-18.5% +/-16.1%

Extremity +/-32.6% +/- 27.2%

Panasonic Environmental +/-20.1% +/-12.8%

(2) The percent deviation of individual results from the delivered dose is used to measure bias.

(3) The percent deviation of individual results from the mean reported dose is used to measure precision.

F:Xcorres\EL 108-05.doc -1 0-

TABLE 3 PERCENTAGE OF MEAN ANALYSES (N=6) WHICH PASSED TOLERANCE CRITERIA January-June 2005 (1)

Shallow (7 mg/cm2) Eye (300 mglcm2 ) Deep (1000 mg/cm)

Nmeof  % Passed Nmeof  % Passed Nmeof  % Passed Dosimeter Type Number of Toeac ~uluatr~flTlrne Number of Toleranced

_________________ Limit(2 ) vlain Limnit!2 ) vlain Limit!2 )

Panasonic 808 Whole 9 100 9 100 9 100 Body _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _

Panasonic 814 Whole 25 100 25 100 25 100 Body Panasonic 808/814 0(3) 100 (3) ' 100 0(3) 100 Neutron Dosimeter Extremity 8 100 N/A No test N/A No test Panasonic -4 8 100 N/A No test N/A No test

. Environrnental_. _ _ ....... ........ :

(1) This table summarizes results of all depths for performance tests conducted by E-LAB and the Third-party tester.

(2) The mean percent deviation of individual results from the delivered dose is used to determine the bias. The standard deviation of the individual results relative to the mean bias is added to this value to determine the overall performance

([BI+S).

(3)

Category VIII has two sets of results at the udeep" depth, (neutron component and neutron/photon mixtures).

(4)

Environmental dosimeter results are free in air.

F:\corresIEL 108-05.doc TABLE 4

SUMMARY

OF THIRD PARTY QC RESULTS FOR FOURTH QUARTER 2004 AND FIRST QUARTER 2005 (NVLAP Required Categories) 2 2 Shallow (7 mg/cm ) (2) Deep (1000 mg/cm ) (2)

Dosimeter Exposure NVLAP  %(3,4)

Type Period Category°) Bias% (3,4) Biasd 3'4 +

Std. Dev.% IBINBI

+S +/- Std. +S Dev.%

808 (6) L.A N/A N/A _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

808 Q4/2004 II.A 7.0 +/- 2.3 0.093 2.8 +/- 1.6 0.045 808 Q1/2005 II.A 3.5 +/- 4.9 0.084 1.6 +/- 5.5 0.070 808 (6) IIL.A N/A N/A 808 (6) IV.A 808 (6) V.AB 814 (6) L.A N/A N/A 814 Q4/2004 II.A 1.0 +/-4.4 0.054 1.8 +/-4.7 0.065 814 Q1/2005 II.A -3.4 +/- 2.9 0.063 -3.2 +/- 2.6 0.058 814 III.A N/A N/A 814 IVA 814 (6) V.AB 808/814 (6) VI.CB N/A N/A 808/814 (6) VI.CB(5) N/A N/A 808/814 (6) Vl.CB N/A N/A 808/814 (6) Vl.CB(5) N/A N/A Extremity Q4/2004 IV.A -18.0 +/- 12.2 0.302 N/A N/A Extremity Q1/2005 IV.A -3.4 +/- 8.4 0.118 N/A N/A Extremity (6) IV.B N/A N/A Extremity (6) IV.B_ N/A N/A Extremity (6) V.C N/A N/A Extremity (6) V.D N/A N/A F:\corres\EL 108-05.doc TABLE 4

SUMMARY

OF THIRD PARTY QC RESULTS FOR FOURTH QUARTER 2004 AND FIRST QUARTER 2005 (NVLAP Required Categories)

(continued)

(1) 808/814/808+814 NVLAP Category Key:

L.A = Accident, Photons, General IL.A = Photons, General III.A = Betas, General IV.A = Photon Mixtures, General V.AB = Beta/Photon Mixtures VI.CB = Neutron/Photon mixtures Extremity NVLAP Category Key:

IV.A = High Energy Photons (Cs-137)

IV.B = High Energy Photons (Co-60)

V.C = Beta Particles, General (Sr/Y-90, TI-204)

VL.D = Beta Particles, Slab Uranium (2) Reported results are fade corrected to the date of irradiation for all dosimeter types other than extremity and environmental.

(3) The bias (B) is calculated as the mean of the percent deviations of individual results from the delivered dose.

(4) The standard deviation (S) is calculated from the deviation of individual biases from the mean bias.

(5) Category VI.CB Neutron component only (6) These categories were not tested during this semi-annual period.

F:\correskEL 108-05.doc TABLE 5

SUMMARY

OF THIRD PARTY QC RESULTS FOR FOURTH QUARTER 2004 AND FIRST QUARTER 2005 (NVLAP Non-Required Categories) 2 2 Shallow (7 2 Mglcm ) (2) Eye (300 mg/cm ) ( )

Dosimeter Exposure NVLAP Bias% 3'4 Bias% (3,4)

Type Period Category +/-+/- Std. IBI +S +/- Std. BI +S (8) Dev.% Dev.%

808 L.A 808 Q4/2004 II.A N/A N/A 3.8 +/- 1.8 0.057 808 Q1/2005 II.A N/A N/A 2.3 +/- 4.6 0.069 808 (8) III.A 808 (8) IV.A N/A N/A 808 (8) V.AB N/A N/A 814 L.A 814 Q4/2004 II.A N/A N/A 1.0 +/-4.4 0.054 814 Q1/2005 II.A N/A N/A -4.0 +/- 2.6 0.067 814 III.A 814 IV.A N/A N/A 814 (8) V.AB N/A N/A o 808/814 (8) VI.CB 808/814 (8) VI.CB(5 ) N/A N/A N/A N/A 808/814 (8) VI.CB 808/814 .8 VI.CB(5) N/A N/A N/A N/A Environ.( 6 ) Q4/2004 IV 8.2 +/- 2.5 0.107 N/A N/A Environ.(6) Q1/2005 IV 0.1 +/- 1.6 0.017 N/A N/A F:\corres\EL 108-05.doc TABLE 5

SUMMARY

OF THIRD PARTY QC RESULTS FOR FOURTH QUARTER 2004 AND FIRST QUARTER 2005 (NVLAP Non-Required Categories)

(continued)

(1) 808/814/808+814 NVLAP Category Key:

L.A = Accident, Photons, General I.A = Photons, General III.A = Betas, General IV.A = Photon Mixtures, General V.AB = Beta/Photon Mixtures VI.CB = Neutron/Photon mixtures Extremity NVLAP Category Key:

IV.A = High Energy Photons (Cs-137)

IV.B = High Energy Photons (Co-60)

V.C = Beta Particles, General (SrNY-90, TI-204)

VI.D = Beta Particles, Slab Uranium (2) Reported results are fade corrected to the date of irradiation for all dosimeter types other than extremity and environmental.

(3) The bias (B) is calculated as the mean of the percent deviations of individual results from the delivered dose.

(4) The standard deviation (S) is calculated from the deviation of individual biases from the mean bias.

(5) Category VI.CB Neutron component only.

(6) Results are expressed as the delivered exposure (not dose) for environmental TLDs.

(7) Internal acceptance criteria for this test are currently being evaluated.

(8) These categories were not tested during this semi-annual period.

F:\corresEL 108-05.doc TABLE 6 UPDATED INSTRUMENTATION GROUP DOSIMETRY SERVICES SECTION PROCEDURES ISSUED DURING JANUARY-JUNE 2005 Procedure Title Revision Date Number Number Laboratory Training and Qualification 12 03/01/05 Guideline Change 06/14/05 F:\corres\EL 108-05.doc APPENDIX A DOSIMETRY QUALITY CONTROL TRENDING GRAPHS JANUARY-JUNE 2005 F:%corres\EL 108-05.doc

APPENDIX A DOSIMETRY QUALITY CONTROL TRENDING GRAPHS January-June 2005 LIST OF FIGURES

1. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Bias at the Shallow Depth Dose

2. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Bias at the Eye Depth Dose

3. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Bias at the Deep Depth Dose

4. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Precision at the Shallow Depth Dose

5. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Precision at the Eye Depth Dose

6. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Precision at the Deep Depth Dose

7. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias at the Shallow Depth Dose

8. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias at the Eye Depth Dose

9. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias at the Deep Depth Dose

10. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias Plus Standard Deviation (B+S) at the Shallow Depth Dose

11. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias Plus Standard Deviation (B+S) at the Eye Depth Dose

12. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias Plus Standard Deviation (B+S) at the Deep Depth Dose

13. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Bias at the Shallow Depth Dose

14. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Bias at the Eye Depth Dose

15. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Bias at the Deep Depth Dose

16. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Precision at the Shallow Depth Dose

17. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Precision at the Eye Depth Dose

18. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Precision at the Deep Depth Dose

19. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias at the Shallow Depth Dose

20. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias at the Eye Depth Dose

21. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias at the Deep Depth Dose

22. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias Plus Standard Deviation (B+S) at the Shallow Depth Dose F:\corresXEL 108-05.doc A-1

APPENDIX A DOSIMETRY QUALITY CONTROL TRENDING GRAPHS January-June 2005

23. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias Plus Standard Deviation (B+S) at the Eye Depth Dose

24. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias Plus Standard Deviation (B+S) at the Deep Depth Dose

25. Extremity Category IV (High-Energy Photons) Individual Bias at the Shallow Depth Dose

26. Extremity Category IV (High-Energy Photons) Individual Precision at the Shallow Depth Dose

27. Extremity Category IV (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias at the Shallow Depth Dose

28. Extremity Category IV (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias Plus Standard Deviation (B+S) at the Shallow Depth Dose

29. Environmental TLDs Individual Bias Cs-137

30. Environmental TLDs Precision Cs-137

31. Environmental TLDs Mean Bias Cs-1 37 F:\corres\EL 108-05.doc A-2

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 1 Process Statistics 808 Cat 11 Individual Bias @ the Shallow Depth Dose 25.0 , I Total: 54 Rows: All Mean: 6.120 20.0 Median: 6.500 Std Dev: 3.346 15.0 Act % out of TL: 0.00 10.0 5.0 m 0.0

-5.0

-10.0

-15.0

-20.0

-25.0 Irradiation Facility F:AcorresEL 108-05.doc A-3

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 2 Process Statistics 808 Cat 11 Individual Bias @ the Eye Depth Dose 25.0 T Total: 54 Rows: All Mean: 4.070 20.0 Median: 4.100 Std Dev: 3.882 15.0 Act % out of TL: 0.00 10.0 5.0 co (u

wY 0.0 mO

-5.0

-10.0

-15.0

-20.0

-25.0 Irradiation Facility F:coorreskEL 108-05.doc A-4

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 3 Process Statistics 808 Cat 11 Individual Bias @ the Deep Depth Dose 25.0 -

Total: 54 Rows: All Mean: 2.120 20.0 Median: 2.250 Std Dev: 3.989 15.0 Act % out of TL: 0.00 10.0 5.0 U,

0.0

-5.0

-10.0

-15.0

-20.0

-25.0 Irradiation Facility F:corresXEL 108"5.doc A-5

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 4 Process Statistics 808 Cat 11 Precision @ the Shallow Depth Dose 20.0 Total: 54 Rows: All Mean: -0.002 15.0 Median: 0.250 Std Dev: 2.974 Act %out of TL: 0.00 10.0 5.0 C

0 0.0 .00 EL

-5.0

-10.0

-15.0

-20.0 Irradiation Facility F:corresXEL 108-05.doc Ax6

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 5 Process Statistics 808 Cat 11 Precision @ the Eye Depth Dose 20.0 Total: 54 Rows: All Mean: -0.002 15.0 Median: 0.050 Std Dev: 3.482 Act % out of TL: 0.00 10.0 5.0 C

0.0 0~

-5.0

-10.0

-15.0

-20.0 Irradiation Facility F:corresXEL 108-05.doc A-7

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 6 Process Statistics 808 Cat 11 Precision @ the Deep Depth Dose 20.0 Total: 54 Rows: All Mean: 0.002 Median: 15.0 0.000 Std Dev: 3.576 Act % out of TL: 0.00 10.0 5.0 C

.05 0.0 0)

(-

-5.0

-10.0

-15.0

-20.0 mm m amm cMrflcf m n-J*--m mm c :5 _jj tj

-j tj

-j 5~uS ru5 u<<~u www1~11 u g tu< <

tC~

mwmw uJ uJ~ 1 wwwwwww w w cn cn r

M Irradiation Facility F:\corresXEL 1 08-05.doc A-8

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 7 Process Statistics 808 Cat 11 Mean Bias @ the Shallow Depth Dose 20 -

Total: 9 Rows: All 18 - _ _ - UTL=18.50 Mean: 6.122 16 Median: 6.400 Std Dev: 1.228 14-Act % out of TL: 0.00 12 -

9 7-5-

3-en (a

1 Target=0.00

-3

-5 7-7

-9 Chart Point Label: Value:

-16

_ _ _ _ LTL=-18.50

-20 A ELAB ELAB ELAB ELAB IBATTELLE ELAB BATTELLE ELAB ELAB Irradiation Facility F:\correskEL 1 08-05.doc A-9

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 8 Process Statistics 808 Cat 11 Mean Bias @ the Eye Dose Depth Total: 9 RoWs: All 18 Mean: 4.078 16 Median: 3.900 Std Dev: 1.513 14 Act % out of TL: 0.00 12 9

7 5

3 1

m

-1

-3

-5

-7

-9 Chart Point -12 Label: -14 Value:

-16

-18

-20 ELAB ELAB ELAB ELAB BATTELLE ELAB BATTELLE ELAB ELAB Irradiation Facility F:\corresXEL 108-05.doc A-10

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 9 Process Statistics 808 Cat 11 Mean Bias @ the Deep Depth Dose 20 ___

4USL=18.50 Total: 9 Rows: All 10 -

Mean: 2.133 16 -

Median: 1.700 Std Dev: 1.687 14 -

Act % out of TL: 0.00 12 -

9-7-

5-3-

U) 1-m Target=O.00

-1 -

-9 -

-12 -

-165

-18

_ _ _LSL=-1 8.50

-20 ELAB ELAB ELAB ELAB BATTELLE ELAB BATTELLE ELAB ELAE I Irradiation Facility F:\corres\EL 108-05.doc A-11

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 10 808 Cat 11 Mean Bias+Std Dev. (jB1+S) @ the Shallow Depth Dose 0.35 .

Total: 9 Rows: All Mean: 0.095 Median: 0.096 0.30 -I--- - -IUTL=0.30 Std Dev: 0.010 Act% outofTL: 0.00 0.25 -

0.20 -

+

0.15 -

0.10 -

0.05 0.00 Target=0.00 ELAB ELAB ELAB ELAB BATTELLiTLIO4O0 ELABI BATTELLE ELAB ELAB Irradiation Facility F:\corres\EL 108-05.doc A-12

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 11 808 Cat 11 Mean Bias + Std Dev. (IBI+S) @ the Eye Depth Dose 0.35 -

Total: 9 Rows: All Mean:

Median:

Std Dev:

0.078 0.079 0.020 0.30 - -_ - - - _- - -- _ - -_ _-

_ -UTL=0.30 Act % out of TL: 0.00 0.25 -

0.20 -

CO

+

0.15 -

0.10 -

0.05 -

0.00 - Target=0.00 ELAB ELAB ELAB ELAB BATTELLFTL=O.00 ELAB BATTELLE ELAB ELAB Irradiation Facility F:corresXEL 108-05.doc A-13

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 12 808 Cat 11 Mean Bias + Std Dev. (IBI+S) @ the Deep Depth Dose 0.35 , I Total: 9 Rows: All Mean: 0.059 Median: 0.052 0.30 - USL=0.30 Std Dev: 0.023 Act % out of TL: 0.00 0.25 -

0.20 -

Un co,

+

0.15-0.10 -

0.05 -

0.00 lTarget=0.00 I I I I I I ELAB ELAB ELAB ELAB BATUELL SL1=O.OO ELAB BATTELLE ELAB ELAB Irradiation Facility F:McorreskEL 108-05.doc A-14

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 13 Process Statistics 814 Cat II Individual Bias @ the Shallow Depth Dose 30.0 r Total: 150 Rows: All Mean: 3.015 25.0 Median: 3.550 Std Dev: 5.577 20.0 Act % out of TL: 0.67 15.0 10.0 5.0 iU 0.0

-5.0

-10.0

-15.0

-20.0

-25.0 WWWIWWWW mmmmmmm 5WWWWWWW 5 5 5 !55 5 WWWWWWWWWWWWWWI

£0 Irradiation Facility F:corres\EL 108-05.doc A-15

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 14 Process Statistics 814 Cat II Individual Bias @ the Eye Depth Dose 30.0 1r I Total: 150 Rows: All Mean: 2.547 25.0 Median: 2.950 Std Dev: 5.699 20.0 Act % out of TL: 0.67 15.0 10.0 o 5.0 (I) m 0.0

-5.0

-10.0

-15.0

-20.0

-25.0 5 -i5Hf 5 5i 5 d5 5i55 n5 WWWIWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWI 5 F5 ait 5 5 y5 5 5 5u 5L m

Irradiation Facility F:Acorrs\EL 108-05.doc A-16

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 15 Process Statistics 814 Cat II Individual Bias @ the Deep Depth Dose 30.0-,

Total: 150 Rows: All Mean: 0.345 25.0 Median: -0.050 Std Dev: 6.186 20.0 Act % out of TL: 0.67 15.0 10.0 a) 5.0 0.0

-5.0

-10.0

-15.0

-20.0

-25.0 mmm-immmmmmmmmmmm mammm LO S OU L LU mmmmm3333i' LI 5 5 U LOUJ ww1wWwwwwwwwwww wwwwwwwm Irradiation Facility F:Rcorres\EL 108-05.doc A-17

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 16 Process Statistics 814 Cat II Precision @ the Shallow Depth Dose 20.0 Total: 150 Rows: All Mean: 0.001 Median: 15.0 0.300 Std Dev: 3.343 Act % out of TL: 0.00 10.0 5.0 C

0 U) 0.0 .00 a-

-5.0

-10.0

-15.0

-20.0 Irradiation Facility F:\corres\EL 108-05.doc A-18

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 17 Process Statistics 814 Cat II Precision @ the Eye Depth Dose 20.0 Total: 150 Rows: All Mean: -0.003 Median: -0.250 15.0 Std Dev: 3.551 Act % out of TL: 0.00 10.0 5.0

._0 I.-

.0 0.0 Q1

-5.0

-10.0

-15.0

-20.0 rfl -J WWWrWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW WW1 1~

Irradiation Facility F:corresXEL 108-05.doc A-19

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 18 Process Statistics 814 Cat II Precision @ the Deep Depth Dose 20.0 Total: 150 Rows: All Mean: 0.001 15.0 Median: -0.400 Std Dev: 4.199 Act % out of TL: 0.67 10.0 5.0 C

.20 Co 0.0 a)

L..

EL

-5.0

-10.0

-15.0

-20.0 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I m

WWWWWWWWXUWUWSWUWWWWWW~lWWWWWW mwwwwwww Irradiation Facility F:\corres\EL 108-05.doc A-20

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 19 Process Statistics 814 Cat II Mean Bias @ the Shallow Depth Dose 20 -

Total: 25 Rows: All 18 - __ _ - UT Mean: 3.016 16 Median: 4.400 14 Std Dev: 4.436 Act % out of TL: 0.00 12 9

7-5 3-U) I __ _

Ta Ca

-31

-5

-12

-9

-16

-18 - __ __ _ LT Irradiation Facility F:\corres\EL 108-05.doc A-21

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 20 Process Statistics 814 Cat II Mean Bias @ the Eye Depth Dose 20 18 USL=1 8.50 16 14 12 9

7 5

3 a) 1

-i ---

x AT-rn+-fn al s4e:-v.vv nn

-1

-3

-5

-7

-9

-12

-14

-16

-18 LSL=-1 8.50

-20 I~ Il b Ib I~

cncnrll ll I

I Iu m -J

-j UjwL w LUwwww w w U] wwwwwwwwwww _

_L m

Irradiation Facility F:AcorreskEL 108-5.doc A-22

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 21 Process Statistics 814 Cat II Mean Bias @ the Deep Depth Dose 20 -

Total: 25 UTL=1 8.50 Rows: All 18 -

Mean: 0.344 16 -

Median: 1.200 14 -

Std Dev: 4.535 At%out of TL: 0.00 12 -

9-7-

5 -

co m

3-1-

v \tA Target=0.00

-12 -

-14 -

-16 -

-18 -

LTL=-1 8.50

- . .- - -. .- . . . I I I I I I -1I (6 r I - -

mmm mmmmm-www~C 1w 11 w _j w w wwwwwww w 5ww5S5 u w w5u5XX 5 5l m m Irradiation Facility F:corresXEL 108-05.doc A-23

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 22 814 Cat II Mean Bias+Std Dev (IBI+S) @ the Shallow Depth Dose

---, 0.35 , I Total: 25 Rows: All Mean: 0.083 Median: 0.076 0.30 - - - -_ - -IUTL=0.30 Std Dev: 0.032 Act % out of TL: 0.00 0.25 -

C) 0.20 -

m 0.15 -

0.10 -

0.05 -

0.00- JTarget=O.O0

_jmmmm m m ,

m en LTL=0.00 36 U U6 1 1 1 1 1 I~ I63 I6~

551 5 US m u5j 3 3 w LU3 jww r LU L5U S m wwwwwwww5 mD Irradiation Facility F:kcorres\EL 108-05.doc A-24

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 23 I314 Cat II Mean Bias + Std Dev. (IBI+S) @ the Eye Depth Dose 0.35 ,

Total: 25 Rows: All Mean: 0.081 Median: 0.073 0.30 - UTL=0.30 Std Dev: 0.034 Range: 0.16 Act % out of TL: 0.00 0.25 -

0.20 -

C+O 0.15 -

0.10 -

0.05 -

Target=0.00 33 33Uw5I(636m l33l 0.00 - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Q C6 0 C C m I6 I ~I LTL=0.00 56 3 11 w 11 w 11w 11 5 UwUs 52 w 1w m UJ~ 5 m

us w w~ w1 1 m cn Irradiation Facility F:\correskEL 108-05.doc A-25

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOQ January-June 2005 FIGURE 24 814 Cat II Mean Bias + Std Dev. (IBI+S) @ the Deep Depth Dose

s 0.35 r

• Total: 25 Rows: All Mean: 0.079 Median: 0.067 0.30 - --- -UTL=0.30 Std Dev: 0.037 Act % out of TL: 0.00 0.25 -

CO 0.20 q

+

m 0.15 -

0.10 -

0.05 -

0.00 J. JTarget=0.00 m LTL=o.00 wwww o w w mm 5 Us w w us us wwwwwwww Irradiation Facility F:\correskEL 108-05.doc A-26

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 25 Statistics Extremity Cat IV Individual Bias @ the Shallow Depth Dose 40.0.

Total: 48 1 Rows: All Mean: -1.550 30.0 Median: -1.950 Std Dev: 13.668 Act %out of TL: 0.00 20.0 10.0 m) m 0.0

-10.0

-20.0

-30.0

-40.0

-j -j

-j W W W

-j

-j -i r9 r m1 Us w

mm LU~ LU3 IEEE J CD U] M mm 111U Wjw-iwl -w Irradiation Facility F:XcorreskEL 108-05.doc A-27

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 26 Process Statistics Extremity Cat IV Precision @ the Shallow Depth Dose 40.0 -

Total: 48 Rows: All Mean: -0.006 30.0 Median: -1.200 Std Dev: 11.325 Act %out of TL: 4.17 20.0 10.0 l co 0.0 m

-10.0

-20.0

-30.0

-40.0 Irradiation Facility F:\corresAEL 108-05.doc A-28

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 27 Process Statistics Extremity Cat IV Mean Bias @ the Shallow Depth Dose 40.0 T I Total: 8 Rows: All Mean: -1.562 Median: -1.000 30.0 Std Dev: 8.482 Act % out of TL: 0.00 20.0 10.0 uw

.M 0.0 m

-10.0

-20.0

-30.0 40.0 BATTELLE ELAB ELAB ELAB ELAB ELAB ELAB BATTELLE Irradiation Facility F:McorresEL 108-05.doc A-29

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 28 Extremity Cat IV Mean Bias + Std Dev. (IBI+S) @ the Shallow Depth Dose

_ 0.55  ;

Total:

Rows: All 05 Mean: 0.1 1rQ0.50 ___ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __- IUTL=0.50 Median: 0.'122 Std Dev: 0.1

)86 0.45 -

Act % out of TL: aK.00 0.40 0.35-0.30-co 0.25-co 0.20-0.15-0.10-0.05-0.00- Target=0.00 LTL=0.00

-0.05 BATTELLE ELAB ELAB ELAB ELAB ELAB ELAB BATTELLE Irradiation Facility FAcorres\EL 108-05.doc A-30

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005.

FIGURE 29 Process Statistics Environmental TLDs Individual Bias Cs-137 25.0 Total: 48 Rows: All Mean: 3.867 20.0 -[-- - - - - - - - - --USL=20.10 Median: 2.450 Std Dev: 3.678 15.0 -

Act % out of SL: 0.00 10.0-5.0 -

0)

(D 0.0 A rAW>%.'m Target=0.00

-5.0 U

-10.0

-15.0

-20.0 LSL=-20.1 0

-25.0 I I I I en ww w m w ww3 I LU m15 5 :5 5 5 :5 S dU iu

¢ t: t ,. w w w 5 ws eneeneeneenm LUe I t

[j uj Lu Lu Uj t iu II km9 M<

Irradiation Facility F:RcokresIEL 108-05.doc A-31

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 30 Process Statistics Environmental TLDs Precision Cs-137 15.0 Total: 48 Rows: All 12.5 Mean: 0.006 Median: 0.500 Std Dev: 1.493 10.0 Act % out of SL: 0.00 7.5 5.0 2.5 CO 0) 0.0

-i

-2.5

-5.0

-7.5

-10.0

-12.5

-15.0 Irradiation Facility F:\corres\EL 108-05.doc A-32

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD January-June 2005 FIGURE 31 Process Statistics Environmental TLDs Mean Bias Cs-1 37 25.0 Total: 8 Rows: All Mean: 3.875 20.0 Median: 3.000 Std Dev: 3.525 Act % out of TL: 0.00 15.0 10.0 5.0 a) a)

(U 0.0 M

-5.0

-10.0

-15.0

-20.0

-25.0 BATTELLE ELAB ELAB ELAB ELAB ELAB ELAB BATTELLE Irradiation Facility F:\corresIEL 108-05.doc A-33

APPENDIX B NVLAP CERTIFICATE OF ACCREDITATION AND SCOPE OF ACCREDITATION

United States Department of Commerce National Institute of Standards and Technology mNlm ISOIIEC 17025:1999

-k ISO 9002:1994 Certificate of Accreditation C,4 FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY WESTBOROUGH, MA is recognized by the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program for satisfactory compliance with criteria set forth in NIST Handbook 150:2001, all requirements of 150/fEC 17025:1999, and relevant requirements of ISO 9002:1994.

Accreditation is awarded for specific services, listed on the Scope of Accreditation, for:

IONIZING RADIATION DOSIMETRY September 30, 2005 Effective through For the National Institute of Standards and Technology NVLAP Lab Code: 100524-0 NVLAP-01C (06-01)

National Institute National Voluntary of Standards and Technology 1; Laboratory Accreditation Program ISO/IEC 17025:1999 ISO 9002:1994 Scope of ALccreditation Page: 1 of 1 IONIZING RADIATION DOSIMETRY NVLAP LAB CODE 100524-0 FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY 29 Research Drive Westborough, MA 01581-3913 Mr. Jeffrey M. Raimondi Phone: 508-898-9970 x2539 Fax: 508-836-9815 E-Mail: Jeffrey.Raimondi@Framatome-ANP.com Scope ofAccreditation:

This facility has been evaluated and deemed competent to process the radiation dosimeters listed below through employing Panasonic automatic reader model TJD-710A for whole body dosimeters and a Thermo Electron Rialto XT or Toledo extremity dosimeter reader.

This facility is accredited to process the following dosimeters by virtue of actual demonstration of compliance with ANSI BPS N13.11-2001 and ANSI BPS N13.32-1995 through testing.

Panasonic TLD model UD-808 in a ISA model 830U holder for ANSI-N13.11-2001 categories IA, HA, MA, IVA, VAB.

Panasonic TLD model 814-AS4 in a ISA model 830U holder for ANSI-N13.11-2001 categories IA, HA, IRA, IVA, VAB.

Panasonic dual TLD models UD808 and UD814 in a ISA model 830U holder for ANSI-N13.11-2001 category VICB.

Thermo Electron (formerly Bicron-NE) extremity TLD mode 869/A/2B in a ring tape holder for BPS ANSI 13.32 (NIST Handbook 150-4, table 2) categories IVA, IVB, VC, and VD.

September 30, 2005 Effective through

' ilP. n od o For the National Institute of Standards and Technology NVLAP-01S 106-01)

AR EVA March 8, 2006 EL 028/06 TO: Distribution FROM: J. M. Raimondi

SUBJECT:

Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Dosimetry Services Semi-Annual Quality Assurance Status Report (July-December 2005)

Attached for your information and review is the Semi-Annual Status Report covering the Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory's (E-LAB) Quality Assurance Programs for environmental, extremity, and personnel dosimetry processing for the second half of 2005.

During this semi-annual period, 100% (270/270) of the individual dosimeters, evaluated against the E-LAB internal performance criteria (high-energy photons only), met the criterion for accuracy and 99.6% (269/270) met the criterion for precision. In addition, 100% (111/111) of the dosimeter sets evaluated against the internal tolerance limits met these criteria.

If you have any questions please contact Christopher Shelton (508) 573-6663 or myself at (508) 573-6651.

'77FA. Raimondi Manager, Environmental Laboratory CAS/cas Attachment DISTRIBUTION G Babineau - YR Plant R. Burkland - FANP Richland E. Mercer - MY Plant G Harper - Framatome ANP N. Hansen - Southern California Edison M. Strum - Framatome ANP W. Cash - FPL/Seabrook M. Sanger - Framatome ANP D. Perkins - FPUSeabrook F. Sabadini - Framatome ANP R. Thurlow - FPL/Seabrook M. Morgan - Entergy/VY J. Geyster - Entergy/VY K. Comisky - CY

ML

'AR EVA DOSIMETRY SERVICES SEMIANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE STATUS REPORT July - December 2005: -

,, MA - 5 i Telephone: (508) 573-66 50

^ ~Fax: (508) 573-6680:

AR EVA FRAMATOME ANP ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY DOSIMETRY SERVICES SEMI-ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE STATUS REPORT July-December 2005 EL 028106 I

Prepared By: 1 Date:

Reviewed By: Date: /x / _c at Approved By:

!t77Nlc7 0d~ Date-: jtfi Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory 29 Research Drive Westborough, MA 01581-3913

TABLE OF CONTENTS Pace LIST OF TABLES ................... iv EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

.................... v I. INTRODUCTION . . . I A. QC Program .1 B. QA Program ..

II. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA . . .

A. Performance Statistics ..

1. Bias .2

2. Precision .2

3. American National Standards Institute Performance Statistics . 3 B. Tolerance Limits .. 4

1. E-LAB Internal Limits .4

2. Internal Tolerance Limits .4

3. American National Standards Institute Tolerance Level (L) . 4 C. QC Investigation Criteria .5 D. Reporting of Analytical Results .. 5 III. DATA

SUMMARY

FOR REPORTING PERIOD JULY-DECEMBER 2005 .. 5 A. General Discussion .. 5 B. Result Trending .. 6

1. Panasonic Whole Body Dosimeters .6

2. Extremity Dosimeters .7

3. Panasonic Environmental Dosimeters .7 C. NVLAP Biennial Testing .. 7 IV. STATUS OF E-LAB CONDITION REPORTS (CR) . . . 8 F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc -ii-

TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

Paae V. STATUS OF AUDITS/ASSESSMENTS .................................................... 8 A. Internal ..................................................... 8 B. External ..................................................... 8 VI. UPDATED PROCEDURES ISSUED DURING JULY-DECEMBER 2005 ......................... 9 VII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................... 9 Vil. REFERENCES ...................................................... 9 APPENDIX A DOSIMETRY QUALITY CONTROL TRENDING GRAPHS APPENDIX B NVLAP CERTIFICATE OF ACCREDITATION, SCOPE OF ACCREDITATION AND BIENNIAL TESTING RESULTS F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc _j Jo_

LIST OF TABLES Pa-ge

1. Percentage of Individual Analyses Which Passed E-LAB Internal Criteria, July-December 2005 10

2. Percentage of Mean Analyses (n=6) Which Passed Tolerance Criteria, July-December 2005 11

3. Summary of Third Party QC Results for Second and Third Quarter 2005 (NVLAP Required Categories) 12-13

4. Summary of Third Party QC Results for Second and Third Quarter 2005 (NVLAP Non-Required Categories) 14-15

5. Updated Dosimetry Services Procedures Issued During July-December 2005 16 F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc -iv-

EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

Routine quality control (QC) testing was performed for each type of dosimeter issued by the Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory (E-LAB) Dosimetry Services. The dosimeter types included Panasonic 808 and 814 whole body dosi meters, combination Panasonic 808/814 neutron dosimeters, extremity dosimeters, and Panasonic environmental dosimeters. QC dosimeters were irradiated in-house as well as by a third party. All testing methods used by the accredited third-party tester conform to ANSI N1 3.11-2001 (Reference 1) or ANSI N13.32-1995 (Reference 2).

During this semi-annual period, 100% (270/270) of the individual dosimeters, evaluated against the E-LAB internal performance criteria (high-energy photons only), met the criterion for accuracy and 99.6% (269/270) met the criterion for precision (Table 1). In addition, 100%

(111/111) of the dosimeter sets evaluated against the internal tolerance limits met these criteria (Table 2). Tables 3 and 4 list the third party testing results for this semi-annual period.

Trending graphs, which evaluate each dosimeter type, dose depth and performance statistic for high-energy photon irradiations are given in Appendix A.

Appendix B contains the current Certificate of Accreditation, Scope of Accreditation, and Biennial NVLAP Test Results. The E-LAB (NVLAP ID 100524) evaluated the necessity of maintaining NVLAP-accreditation for its extremity dosimetry. Due to the continued rising certification costs and the lack of regulatory mandate, the E-LAB decided to permit the NVLAP certification for extremity dosimetry to lapse as of January 2006.

F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc

I. INTRODUCTION The TLD systems at the Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory (E-LAB, NVLAP Code 100524) are calibrated and operated to ensure consistent and accurate evaluation of TLDs. The quality of the dosimetric results reported to E-LAB clients is ensured by the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP) for dosimetry processing, independent third-party performance testing by Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories, in-plant performance testing, and in-house performance testing by the QA Officer and Dosimetry Services.

Standard test methods for in-plant testing of Panasonic whole body and extremity dosimeters are described in the E-LAB report entitled "In-Plant External Dosimetry Quality Assurance Testing Program" (Reference 3). This protocol provides standard test methods that may be used at plant sites utilizing E-LAB dosimeters. The plants have developed their own dosimetry test procedures modeled after Reference 3.

The purpose of the dosimetry quality assurance program isto provide performance documentation of the routine processing of E-LAB dosimeters. This testing provides a statistical measure of the bias and precision of the processing against a reliable standard, which in turn points out any trends or performance changes. Two programs are used:

A. QC Program Independent outside dosimetry quality control tests are performed on E-LAB Panasonic 808 and 814 whole body dosimeters, combination Panasonic 808/814 neutron dosimeters, extremity, and Panasonic environmental dosimeters. Tests include: (1)third-party testing, (2) the in-plant testing program conducted by various users of E-LAB dosimetry, and (3) the in-house testing program conducted by the E-LAB QA Officer. Each dosimeter type (excluding combination dosimeters) is tested for photon mixtures quarterly.

Excluded from this report are instrumentation checks conducted by Dosimetry Services. Although instrumentation checks represent an important aspect of the quality assurance program, they are not included as process checks because the doses are known by the processors. Instrumentation checks represent between 5-10% of the TLDs processed. In addition, client initiated quality control tests are not included in this report.

B. QA Program An internal assessment of Dosimetry Services activities is conducted annually by the Laboratory Quality Assurance Officer (Reference 4). The purpose of the assessment is to review analytical procedures, results, materials or components that may indicate opportunities to improve or enhance processes and/or services.

II. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA A. Performance Statistics All evaluation criteria are taken from the "Dosimetry Services Quality System Manual," Reference 5.

F:Xcorres\EL 028-06.doc

1. Bias

a. For each dosimeter tested, the measure of bias is the percent deviation of the reported result relative to the delivered dose. The percent deviation relative to the delivered dose is calculated as follows:

(H- H 1 00 Hi where:

H' = the corresponding reported dose for the ith dosimeter (i.e., the reported dose)

Hi = the dose delivered to the ith irradiated dosimeter (i.e., the delivered dose)

b. For each group of test dosim eters, the mean bias is the average percent deviation of the reported result relative to the delivered.

dose. The mean percent deviation relative to the delivered dose is calculated as follows:

((HI -Hi)J1001) where:

H. = the corresponding reported dose for the ith dosimeter (i.e., the reported dose)

H. = the dose delivered to the ith irradiated test dosimeter (i.e., the delivered dose) n = the number of dosimeters in the test group

2. Precision For a group of test dosimeters irradiated to a given dose, the measure of precision is the percent deviation of individual results relative to the mean reported dose. At least two values are required for the determination of precision. The measure of precision for the ith dosimeter is:

((H; - R)0 fl 100 where:

H' = the reported dose for the ith dosimeter (i.e., the reported dose)

F:\corres'EL 028-06.doc H = the mean reported dose; i.e., H=H' n = the number of dosimeters in the test group

3. American National Standards Institute Performance Statistics The American National Standards Institute (ANSI) provides a method of characterizing the performance of protection dosimetry in "Personnel Dosimetry Performance - Criteria for Testing" (Reference 1).

a. The performance in a given test category is considered adequate if for the shallow and/or deep dose equivalents (or the absorbed dose):

I BI + S < L where:

B = the bias of the performance quotient S = the standard deviation of the performance quotient L = thetolerance level

b. The bias of the values of the performance quotient, P is set equal to the average of these values:

B =P=(ii(PF) where:

The performance quotient, Pi, for the ith dosimeter is defined as:

P [H. - Hi]

Hi and:

H' = the corresponding reported dose equivalent for the ith dosimeter (i.e., the reported dose)

Hi = the dose delivered to the ith irradiated dosimeter (i.e., the delivered dose)

c. The standard deviation of the values of the performance quotient, Pi, is:

S l n1 F:Xcorres\EL 028-06.doc where:

n-1 represents the unbiased sam pie population, where the summation is performed over all n values of Pi for a particular test in a given radiation category, and for a particular phantom depth (shallow or deep).

B. Tolerance Limits

1. E-LAB Internal Limits Tolerance limits for bias and precision applied to in-house and accredited third party testing were adopted on Novem ber 13,1987.

These criteria are only applied to individual test dosimeters irradiated with high-energy photons (Cs-1 37 or Co-60) and are as follows:

Dosimeter Type I Tolerance Limits I Bias I Precision Panasonic Whole Body

• 18.5%

• 16.1%

Extremity i 32.6% i 27.2%

Panasonic Environmental +/-20.1% +/- 12.8%

The results of dosimeters evaluated against these criteria are summarized in Table 1. Trending graphs for a particular badge type or depth can be found in Appendix A.

2. Internal Tolerance Limits Further performance testing control limits were added in 1998 to evaluate the sum of bias and precision values for all irradiation categories, not just for high-energy photons. A +/-30% tolerance limit was applied to the sum of the bias and precision values for all whole body and environmental dosimeters, while a +/-50% tolerance limit was applied for extremity dosimeters. Dosimeters processed during this semi-annual period were evaluated against these criteria and the results are shown in Table 2 and Appendix A.

3. American National Standards Institute Tolerance Level (L)

The tolerance level, L, given in Reference 1, is: (a) 0.3 in the accident category I; and (b) 0.4 in the protection categories 11through VI. ANSI N13.11-2001 (Reference 1) includes additional limits on the Performance Quotient Limit (PQL) for Categories II, IV,and V for deep and shallow depths and Category IlIl for shallow depth only. This criterion requires that no more than one of fifteen dosim eters tested in each category may have a bias that exceeds the tolerance level (L).

F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc C. QC Investigation Criteria E-LAB Manual 120 (Reference 5) specifies the investigative criteria applied to a QC analysis that has failed the E-LAB bias criteria. The criteria are as follows:

1. No investigation is necessary when an individual QC result falls outside the QC performance criteria for accuracy.

2. Investigations are initiated when the mean of a QC processing batch is outside the performance criterion for bias.

D. Reporting of Analytical Results The following guidelines were developed, applicable to reporting of results:

1. All results are to be reported in a timely fashion.

2. If the QA Officer determines that an investigation is required for a process, the results shall be issued as normal. If the QC results, prompting the investigation, have a mean bias from the known of greater than *20% for environmental dosimetry and greater than +/-30% for personnel dosimetry, the results shall be issued with a note indicating that they may be updated in the future, pending resolution of a QA issue.

3. Environmental dosimetry results do not require updating if the investigation has shown that the mean bias between the ori ginal results and the corrected results, based on applicable correction factors from the investigation, does not exceed +/-20%.

4. Personnel dosimetry results do not require updating if the investigation has shown that the mean bias between the original results and the corrected results, based on applicable correction factors from the investigation, does not exceed +/-30%.

III. DATA

SUMMARY

FOR REPORTING PERIOD JULY-DECEMBER 2005 A. General Discussion In the sections that follow, the results of performance tests conducted for each type of dosimeter are summarized and discussed. Summaries of the performance tests for the reporting period are given in Tables 1 through 4 and Figures 1 through 31. Results are presented only for performance tests conducted under well-characterized conditions. Where appropriate, results are reported for three depths (7 mg/cm 2, 300 mg/cm 2, and 1000 mg/cm2 ) and plotted for the six-month period July-December 2005.

Table 1 provides a summary of individual dosimeter results evaluated against the E-LAB internal acceptance criteria for high-energy photons only. During this semi-annual period, 100% (270/270) of the individual dosimeters, evaluated against these criteria met the tolerance limits for accuracy and 99.6% (269/270) met the criterion for precision.

Table 2 provides a summary of the IBI + S results for each group (N=6) of dosimeters evaluated against the internal tolerance criteria. The data in Table 2 F:Xcorres\EL 028-06.doc istabulated by badge type and applies to all ANSI-required and non-required categories (see Tables 3 and 4) with the exception of the Category V.A.

evaluation at the eye depth ( 300 mg/cm 2 ). Overall, 100% (111/1 11) of the dosimeter sets evaluated against the internal tolerance performance criteria met these criteria.

Tables 3 and 4 present the third party testing results for dosimeters processed during this semi-annual period. Irradiation times occurred during the second and third quarters or 2005. The results have been separated into NVLAP required categories (Table 3) and non-required tests (Table 4). The environmental TLDs have been included with the non-required group.

B. Result Trending

1. Panasonic Whole Body Dosimeters One of the main benefits of performing quality control tests on a routine basis is to point out trends or performance changes. Trends or changes are best illustrated in the form of trending graphs where performance is tracked over time. The results of performance tests of Panasonic 808 and 814 whole body dos imeters are presented in Figures 1 through 24 for Category II irradiations. The results are evaluated agains t each of the performance criteria listed in Section II, namely: individual dosimeter bias, individual dosimeter precision, and IBI + S. Results are also evaluated for mean bias in accordance with the investigation criteria given in Section II.C.

All of the results presented in Figures 1 through 24 are fade corrected to the irradiation date and plotted sequentially by processing date. This allows assessment of performance without the confounding effect of the variation in number of days between readout and irradiation. Therefore, the results include any bias produced by the fade algorithm.

If fade is not corrected to the date of irradiation, the possibility of a bias due to signal fading exists. When Dosimetry Services processes a TLD, the software calculates a fade correction using one half the number of days between the processing date and the anneal date. The use of the midpoint for fade correction can bias the results of performance tests of TLDs irradiated at either the beginning or end of a wear period. Results for performance tests conducted near the beginni ng of the period will be biased low and those irradiated near the end of a period will be biased high, assuming there are no other system biases.

In some cases (i.e., when TLDs are irradiated at the end of the wear period and fade corrected to the midpoint) the results of the performance test may fall outside of the control limits even though the system is performing correctly. Therefore, to allow the assessment of performance test results without the TLD signal confounding the data, all Panas onic 808 and 814 test results presented in the tables have been fade cor rected to the actual date of irradiation.

Figures 1 through 3 depict the individual bias of each of 48 Panasonic 808 dosimeters, evaluated at three different depths, and plotted F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc sequentially according to processing date. The failure rate was 0% (0/48) for the shallow, eye and deep depths (Figures 1-3). The failure rate for individual precision was 0% (0/48) for the shallow, eye, and deep depths (Figures 4-6). The failure rate for the mean bias was 0%(0/8) for all three depths (Figures 7-9). Finally, Figures 10-12 depict the IBI + S statistic for each group of 808 dosimeters at each depth. All test sets (8 at each depth) met the internal tolerance criteria of lB1+S < 0.3.

Figures 13 through 15 depict the individual bias of each of 156 Panasonic 814 dosimeters, evaluated at three different depths, versus the date of processing. The failure rate was 0% (0/1 50) for the shallow, eye and deep depths. The failure rate for individual precision was 0% (0/1 50) for the shallow, eye, and deep depths (Figures 16-18). The failure rate for mean bias at all three depths (Figures 19-21) was 0%. As shown in Figures 22-24, 100% of the 25 814 test sets, evaluated at each depth, met the internal tolerance criteria of IBI+S < 0.3.

2. Extremity Dosimeters Extremity results plotted in Figures 25 -28 are for performance tests conducted at the E-LAB and an accredited third-party testing organization. For all individual extremity TLDs, evaluated during this semi-annual period, 0% (0/24) failed the E-LAB limit for bias of +/-32.6%

(Figure 25). The failure rate was 4.2% (1/24) for precision (tolerance limit

+/-27.2%) as shown in Figure 26. None of the 4 TLD test sets (n=6) were outside the mean bias limit as shown in Figure 27. For the same reporting period, 100% of the 4 extremity QC test sets met the internal tolerance criteria for bias and precision (IBI + S, Figure 28).

3. Panasonic Environmental Dosimeters The trending results of performance tests of Panasonic environmental dosimeters are presented in Figures 29-31. For individual Panasonic environmental TLDs, 100% of the 48 tests came within the E-LAB bias and precision tolerance limits (Figures 29 and 30). All 8 Panasonic environmental TLD test sets (mean bias, n=6) were reported within the internal tolerance criteria for bias (Figure 31).

C. NVLAP Biennial Testing NVLAP testing was conducted during this period for the 808, 814 and combination (808+814) badges. All of the tested badges/categories were successfully completed. The summary results for the tests are included in Appendix B along with the current versions of the NVLAP Certificate of Accreditation and Scope of Accreditation. Testing of the extremity dosimeters was not performed since the E-LAB has decided to terminate NVLAP accreditation of these badges due to the r ising cost of the accreditation coupled with the lack of a regulatory requirement for accreditation.

F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc _7_

IV. STATUS OF E-LAB CONDITION REPORTS (CR)

During this semi-annual period there were no E-LAB Condition Reports (CR) issued for dosimetry processing activities. There are no open action items.

V. STATUS OF AUDITS/ASSESSMENTS A. Internal The annual internal audit conducted in the Dosimetry area occurred between September 22, 2005 and Nove mber 4, 2005. The audit was conducted to verify that the Dosimetry Quality Manual is effectively implementing the requirements of NIST Handbook 140, 2001 Edition, and NIS T Handbook 150-4, 1994 Edition.

The audit concluded that routine processing and QC activities are being performed as required. The audit also noted that the transition to-a new dosimetry Technical Director was accomplished in accordance with NVLAP rules.

The auditor noted that th e E-LAB management has decided to discontinu e NVLAP certification for extremity dosimetry in 2006. No findings were issued.

B. External The NVLAP biennial audit was conducted November 21-22, 2005. The on-site audit reviewed the previous audit's findings and considered them all to be closed.

The NVLAP auditor identified a total of 6 findings, one nonconformity and five comments, summarized below.

Finding Description Action/Status Revise QA Manual, brochures, reports COMPLETED- Updated brochures Nonconformity to ensure use of NVLAP temsmo sand reports, revised QA Manual 120

1. 1 in accordance with General and rpt, January 17 2006) 2 Accreditation Criteria, Annex A. (Rev.11, January 17, 2006).

Comment #1 Update QA Manual to clarify Technical COMPLETED - included in QA Manual Director and Supervisor responsibilities. 120, Rev. I1, January 17, 2006 Provide notification to customers of COMPLETED - included in QA Manual Comment #2 upcoming change of extremity 120, Rev. 1 1, January 17, 2006 dosimeter change of certification. 10 e.1,Jnay1,20 Formalize customer feedback into QA COMPLETED - included in QA Manual Comment #3 Manual. 120, Rev. 11, January 17, 2006 Add clarifying information in QA Manual COMPLETED - included in QA Manual on nonconformity programs. 120, Rev. 11, January 17, 2006 Add details to QA Manual on annual COMPLETED - included in QA Manual Comment #5 management review. 120, Rev. 1 1,January 17, 2006 F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc VI. UPDATED PROCEDURES ISSUED DURING JULY-DECEMBER 2005 A list of Dosimetry Services Section procedures, which were updated during this semi-annual period, is included in Table 5.

VII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS Inter and intra-laboratory quality control evaluations continue to indicate the whole body, environmental, and extremity dosimetry processing programs at the E-LAB satisfy the criteria specified in the Dosimetry QA Manual. The E-LAB demonstrated the ability to meet all applicable acceptance criteria with a frequency of greater than 99%.

VIII. REFERENCES

1. American National Standard for Dosimetry - Personnel Dosimetry Performance Criteria for Testing, ANSI N13.11-2001, American National Standards Institute,.

Inc., 1430 Broadway, New York, New York 10018.

2. American National Standard for Performance Testing of Extremity Dosimeters, ANSI N13.32-1995, Health Physics Society, 1313 Dolley Madison Blvd.,

Suite 402, McLean, VA 22101.

3. "In-Plant External Dosimetry Quality Assurance Testing Program," E-LAB, Revision 2, December 1986.

4. Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Quality Control and Audit Assessment Schedule, 2005.

5. E-LAB Manual No.120, Dosimetry Services Quality System Manual, Rev. 10, October 24, 2005.

F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc _9_

TABLE 1 PERCENTAGE OF INDIVIDUAL ANALYSES WHICH PASSED E-LAB INTERNAL CRITERIA July-December 2005(1)

Shallow (7 mglcm2 ) Eye (300 mglcm2 ) Deep (1000 mglcm 2 )

% Passed  % Passed  % Passed  % Passed  % Passed  % Passed Number of Bias Precision Bias Precision Bias Precision Dosimeter Type Dosimeters Tolerance Tolerance Tolerance Tolerance Tolerance Tolerance Limitf) Limlf) (3} Limit() Limiterimt2) Limit()

Panasonic 808 48 100 100 100 100 100 100 Whole Body Whole Body 150 100 100 100 100 100 100 Extremity 24 100 96.7 N/A NIA N/A N/A Panasonic 100 N/AN/A N/AN/A Environmental 48eeinar)100 i ar (1) This table summarizes results of all depths for performance tests conducted by E-LAB and the Third-party tester for High Energy Photons.

CONTROL LIMITS FOR E-LAB DOSIMETRY PERFORMANCE TESTS -

APPLICABLE TO INDIVIDUAL TEST DOSIMETERS IRRADIATED TO HIGH ENERGY PHOTONS Dosimeter Type Tolerance Limits Bias Precision Panasonic Whole Body

• 18.5%

• 16.1%

Extremity

• 32.6%

• 27.2%

Panasonic Environmental I 20.1% -. 12.8%

(2) The percent deviation of individual results from the delivered dose is used to measure bias.

(3) The percent deviation of individual results from the mean reported dose is used to measure precision.

F:corres1EL 028-08.doc -1 0-

TABLE 2 PERCENTAGE OF MEAN ANALYSES (N=6) WHICH PASSED TOLERANCE CRITERIA July-December 2005 (1)

Shallow (7 mglcm 2) Eye (300 mglcm 2) Deep (1000 mglcm 2)

Number Of  % Passed Number of %Passed Number of %Passed Dosimeter Type Tolerance Tolerance Tolerance Evaluations Limiti2 Evaluations Limiti2 Evaluations Limif22 Panasonic 808 Whole 8 100 8 100 8 100 Body Panasonic 814 Whole 25 100 25 100 25 100 Body Panasonic 808/814 0(3) 100 (3)100 0(3) 100 Neutron Dosimeter Extremity 4 100 N/A N/A N/A N/A Panasonic Environmental 4 ) 8 100 N/A N/A N/A N/A (1) This table summarizes results of all depths for performance tests conducted by E-LAB and the Third-party tester.

(2)

The mean percent deviation of individual results from the delivered dose is used to determine the bias. The standard deviation of the individual results relative to the mean bias is added to this value to determine the overall performance (IBI+S).

(3)

Category Vill has two sets of results at the "deep" depth, (neutron component and neutron/photon mixtures).

(4)

Environmental dosimeter results are free in air.

FAcorres\EL 028-06.doc TABLE 3

SUMMARY

OF THIRD PARTY QC RESULTS FOR SECOND AND THIRD QUARTERS 2005 (NVLAP Required Categories) 2 Shallow (7 2 mg/cm ) (2) Deep (1000 mg/cm ) (2)

Dosimeter Exposure NVLAP 3,4 Bias%(3,4)

Type Period CategoryV) Bias% (3) 11S +/-iSt. 4 1 S Std. Dev.% +/-Std. II 808 (6) L.A N/A N/A 808 Q2/2005 IL.A 2.5 i 2.5 0.050 -4.1 i 3.1 0.073 808 Q3/2005 II.A 11.6 0.8 0.123 9.3 2.7 0.120 808 (6) III.A N/A N/A 808 (6) IV.A 808 (6) V.AB 814 (6) L.A N/A N/A 814 0Q2/2005 IL.A 0.7 +/- 6.6 0.072 -13.6 +/- 2.6 0.162 814 Q3/2005 II.A 7.3 +/- 2.8 0.101 3.8 +/- 2.6 0.064 814 (6) III.A N/A N/A 814 (6) IV.A 814 (6) V.AB 808/814 (6) VI.CB N/A N/A 808/814 (6) Vl.CB(5) N/A N/A 808/814 (6) VI.CB N/A N/A 808/814 (6) VI.CB(5) N/A N/A Extremity 02/2005 IV.A -22.7 +/- 9.0 0.318 N/A N/A Extremity Q3/2005 IV.A -3.9 +/- 19.5 0.233 N/A N/A Extremity (6) IV.B N/A N/A Extremity (6) IV.B N/A N/A Extremity (6) V.C N/A N/A Extremity (6) V.D N/A N/A F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc TABLE 3

SUMMARY

OF THIRD PARTY QC RESULTS FOR SECOND AND THIRD QUARTERS 2005 (NVLAP Required Categories)

(continued)

(1) 808/814/808+814 NVLAP Category Key:

L.A = Accident, Photons, General I.A = Photons, General III.A = Betas, General IV.A = Photon Mixtures, General V.AB = Beta/Photon Mixtures VI.CB = Neutron/Photon mixtures Extremity NVLAP Category Key:

IV.A = High Energy Photons (Cs-137)

IV.B = High Energy Photons (Co-60)

V.C = Beta Particles, General (Sr/Y-90, Tl-204)

VI.D = Beta Particles, Slab Uranium (2) Reported results are fade corrected to the date of irradiation for all dosimeter types other than extremity and environmental.

(3) The bias (B) is calculated as the mean of the percent deviations of individual results from the delivered dose.

(4) The standard deviation (S) is calculated from the deviation of individual biases from the mean bias.

(5) Category VI.CB Neutron component only (6) These categories were not tested during this semi-annual period.

F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc TABLE 4

SUMMARY

OF THIRD PARTY QC RESULTS FOR SECOND AND THIRD QUARTERS 2005 (NVLAP Non-Required Categories)

Shallow (7 2 mg/cm ) (2) Eye (300 mg/cm )

2 (2)

Dosimeter Exposure NVLAP Bias% (3,4) Bias% (3'4)

Type Period Category( ) +/- Std. IBI +S +/- Std. IBI +S Dev.% Dev.%

808 L.A 808 Q2/2005 IL.A N/A N/A -0.3 i 1.9 0.022 808 Q3/2005 ILA N/A N/A 9.8 1.6 0.1 14 808 (8) III.A 808 (8) IV.A N/A N/A 808 (8) V.AB N/A N/A (7) 814 (8) L.A 814 Q2/2005 II.A N/A N/A -9.1 +/-3.2 0.124 814 Q3/2005 II.A N/A N/A 6.3 i 2.8 0.091 814 (8) III.A 814 (8) IV.A N/A N/A 814 (8) V.AB N/A N/A (7) 808/814 (8) VI.CB 808/814 (8) VI.CB(5) N/A N/A N/A N/A 808/814 (8) VI.CB 808/814 (8) VI.CB(5) N/A N/A N/A N/A Environ.(6) Q2/2005 II 4.4 +/- 1.6 0.060 N/A N/A Environ.(6) Q3/2005 II -1.0 +/- 1.2 0.022 N/A N/A F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc TABLE 4

SUMMARY

OF THIRD PARTY QC RESULTS FOR SECOND AND THIRD QUARTERS 2005 (NVLAP Non-Required Categories)

(continued)

(1) 808/814/808+814 NVLAP Category Key:

L.A = Accident, Photons, General lI.A = Photons, General III.A = Betas, General IV.A = Photon Mixtures, General V.AB = Beta/Photon Mixtures VI.CB = Neutron/Photon mixtures Extremity NVLAP Category Key:

IV.A = High Energy Photons (Cs-137)

IV.B = High Energy Photons (Co-60)

V.C = Beta Particles, General (Sr/Y-90, TI-204)

VI.D = Beta Particles, Slab Uranium (2) Reported results are fade corrected to the date of irradiation for all dosimeter types other than extremity and environmental.

(3) The bias (B) is calculated as the mean of the percent deviations of individual results from the delivered dose.

(4) The standard deviation (S) is calculated from the deviation of individual biases from the mean bias.

(5) Category VI.CB Neutron component only.

(6) Results are expressed as the delivered exposure (not dose) for environmental TLDs.

(7) Internal acceptance criteria for this test are currently being evaluated.

(8) These categories were not tested during this semi-annual period.

F:kcorres\EL 028-06.doc TABLE 5 UPDATED INSTRUMENTATION GROUP DOSIMETRY SERVICES PROCEDURES ISSUED DURING JULY-DECEMBER 2005 No Dosimetry Processing Procedures were revised during this reporting period.

F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc APPENDIX A DOSIMETRY QUALITY CONTROL TRENDING GRAPHS JULY-DECEMBER 2005 F:IcorresEL 028-06.doc

APPENDIX A DOSIMETRY QUALITY CONTROL TRENDING GRAPHS July-December 2005 LIST OF FIGURES

1. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Bias at the Shallow Depth Dose

2. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Bias at the Eye Depth Dose

3. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Bias at the Deep Depth Dose

4. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Precision at the Shallow Depth Dose

5. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Precision at the Eye Depth Dose

6. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Precision at the Deep Depth Dose

7. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias at the Shallow Depth Dose

8. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias at the Eye Depth Dose.

9. 808 Category II.(High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias at the Deep Depth Dose

10. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias Plus Standard Deviation (B+S) at the Shallow Depth Dose

11. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias Plus Standard Deviation (B+S) at the Eye Depth Dose

12. 808 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias Plus Standard Deviation (B+S) at the Deep Depth Dose

13. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Bias at the Shallow Depth Dose

14. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Bias at the Eye Depth Dose

15. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Bias at the Deep Depth Dose

16. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Precision at the Shallow Depth Dose

17. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Precision at the Eye Depth Dose

18. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Individual Precision at the Deep Depth Dose

19. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias at the Shallow Depth Dose

20. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias at the Eye Depth Dose

21. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias at the Deep Depth Dose

22. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias Plus Standard Deviation (B+S) at the Shallow Depth Dose F:Xcorres\EL 028-06.doc A-1

APPENDIX A DOSIMETRY QUALITY CONTROL TRENDING GRAPHS July-December 2005

23. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias Plus Standard Deviation (B+S) at the Eye Depth Dose

24. 814 Category II (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias Plus Standard Deviation (B+S) at the Deep Depth Dose

25. Extremity Category IV (High-Energy Photons) Individual Bias at the Shallow Depth Dose

26. Extremity Category IV (High-Energy Photons) Individual Precision at the Shallow Depth Dose

27. Extremity Category IV (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias at the Shallow Depth Dose

28. Extremity Category IV (High-Energy Photons) Mean Bias Plus Standard Deviation (B+S) at the Shallow Depth Dose

29. Environmental TLDs Individual Bias Cs-137

30. Environmental TLDs Precision Cs-137

31. Environmental TLDs Mean Bias Cs-137 F:Xcorres\EL 028-06.doc A-2

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 1 Process Statistics 808 Cat 11 Individual Bias @ the Shallow Depth Dose 25.0.

Total: 48 Rows: All 20.0 Mean: 7.656 - - --IUTL=1 8.50 Median: 7.700 Std Dev: 3.551 15.0

t % out of TL: 0.00 10.0 5.0 n

Cu 0.0 Target=0.00 m

-5.0 -

-10.0 -

-15.0.

-ILTL=-1 8.50

-20.0 -

-25.0 5 m m 5:55 5 55 .. .

w 5 w w 5 w w111 I .I .# .I m5355555

. J -Ji. 5bm C m lb m w w wi U L LUuwL I~

-j I

-J tr: :1 tr r mrnrw Irradiation Facility F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc A-3

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 2 -

Process Statistics 808 Cat 11 Individual Bias @ the Eye Depth Dose 25.0 .

Total: 48 Rows: All 20.0 -

Mean: 4.433 Median: 4.500 Std Dev: 4.396 15.0 A t% out of TL: 0.00 10.0 \

5.0 (m

0.0

-5.0

-10.0

-15.0

-20.0

-25.0 Irradiation Facility F:XcorreskEL 028-06.doc A-4

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 3 Process Statistics 808 Cat 11 Individual Bias @ the Deep Depth Dose 25.0 -

Total: 48 Rows: All Mean: 1.621 20.0-

_ _ __ ___ ____- UTL=1 Median: 2.050 Std Dev: 5.464 15.0 -

Al t% out of TL: 0.00 10.0 X 5.0 7% . AfJ fn am m 0.0

-5.0

-10.0

-15.0

-20.0

-25.0 Irradiation Facility F:Xcorres\EL 028-06.doc A-5

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 4 Process Statistics 808 Cat 11 Precision @ the Shallow Depth Dose 20.0 - -

Total: 48 Rows: All Mean: 0.002 15.0 Median: -0.050 Std Dev: 2.296 A t %out of TL: 0.00 10.0 5.0 0

._i 0.0 0l

-5.0

-10.0

-15.0

-20.0 Irradiation Facility F:correskEL 028-06.doc A-6

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 5 Process Statistics 808 Cat 11 Precision @ the Eye Depth Dose 20.0 Total: 48 Rows: All Mean: 0.000 15.0-

- -IUTL=16.10 Median: 0.100 Std Dev: 3.176 t % out of TL: 0.00 10.0.

NAA 5.0 -

Ca.0 ARX-I

-vv

.5 0.0 _ \ TAA An nn VI V

- 11 S \w I S 11 1 __§_rnAtll I1111l alut:l-v.uu IL)

EL.

-5.0 -

V 11'VvVV I -10.0 -

-15.0 -

- - - -ILTL=-16.10

-20.0 I I I (b lb & m m m wwwJ m5u: m~ u-1Wju]J u. 5555555 w71 -Iw -Iw m wwwl~ 1 555 u~ u1 'IN JWW ui J_

W w:

w uJ S J uu u i11 u u1 t1u m m Irradiation Facility F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc A-.7

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 6 Process Statistics 808 Cat 11 Precision N the Deep Depth Dose 20.0 Total: 48 Rows: All Mean: 0.000 - -- - -UTL=16.10 15.0 -

Median: -0.050 Std Dev: 3.403 A( t % out of TL: 0.00 10.0-5.0 -

,TA A N N/I

.70 0

2!

13-0.0-

-5.0-I M TF a Il I ILOv v.

KAN-nn r---#-n,.VW

-1 0.0-

-15.0-

- _- -LTL=-16.10

-20.0- I6 &

roclcwwwMMcD LU I Ul Ul I I I ILI LU UJ I Ll Ll 11 Ul ILI 1 ww1 5 I IN w wL Iu wUwwwwwwwww w w w 6 6 6 ai- m-m - wwwwm mm Irradiation Faci F:\corns\EL 028-06.doc A-8

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 7 Process Statistics 808 Cat 11 Mean Bias @ the Shallow Depth E)ose Total:l 20 , I Total: -

18 - _- - --- _- - UTL=18.50 Rows: Anl -

Mean: 7.775 16-Median: 7.800 Std Dev: 2.474 14 -

A lt %out of TL: 0.00 12 -

9-7-

5-3-

to (a

1-mn Target=0.00

-1

-g -

-12 -

-14 -

-16 -

-18 -

-_- -_- _ LTL=-18.50

-20 ELAB ELAB ELAB ELAEBATTELLEELAB ELAEBATTELLE Irradiation Facility F:correskEL 028-06.doc A-9

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 8 Process Statistics 808 Cat 11 Mean Bias @ the Eye Dose Depth 20-18 - -UTL=18.50 16 14 12-9-

7 5

3-m I

-1 Trgeto0.0C

-7

-9

-18 _ _ _ LTL=-1 8.50I

-20 ELAB ELAB ELAB ELAEBATTELLEELAB ELAEBATTELLE Irradiation Facility F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc A-10

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 9 Process Statistics 808 Cat 11 Mean Bias @ the Deep Depth Dose 20 ,

Total: 8 Rows: All 18I USL=18.50 Mean: 2.338 Median: 2.000 Std Dev: 3.943 14 A :t% outof TL: 0.00 12 9-7-

5 3-(a 1-Co Target=0.00 Mr -12 -

-14 -

-16 -

-18 -

___ _ ___ I LSL=-1 8.50

-20 ELAB ELAB ELAB ELAEBATTELLEELAB ELABBATTELLE Irradiabon Facility F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc A-11

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 10 808 Cat 11 Mean Bias+Std Dev. (IBI+S) 0.35 ,-

c the Shallow Depth Dose Total: 8 Rows: All Mean: 0.106 Median: 0.103 0.30 -I--

Std Dev: 0.014 - -_

- -- UTL=0.30 A -t % out of TL: 0.00 0.25 -

0.20 -

CO co 0.15 -

0.10 0.05 0.00 I I II I I I JTarget=O.00 I I L =0°° ELAB ELAB ELAB ELAEBATTELLEELAB ELAEBATTELLETL.OO Irradiation Facility F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc A-12

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 11 808 Cat 11 Mean Bias + Std Dev. (IBI+S) @ the Eye Depth Dose

, 0.35 l Total: 8 Rows: All Mean: 0.083 Median: 0.084 0.30-Std Dev: 0.018 - - UTL=0.30 A At % out of TL: 0.00 0.25-0.20 -

CO n

0.15-0.10 0.05 I1 JTargeto0.00 0.00 .I I I I TL ° °° ELAB3 ELAB3 ELAB EL'AEATTELLEELAB ELAEBAWELL~T.OO Irradiation Facility F:\corresXEL 028-06.doc A-13

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 12 808 Cat 11 Mean Bias + Std Dev. (IBI+S) @ the Deep Depth Dose 0.35, -:

Total: 8 Rows: All Mean: 0.072 Median: 0.062 0.30 4-Std Dev: - -_ - - - - - _-- -- USL=0.30 0.031 A At % out of TL: 0.00 0.25 0.20-CO

+

0.15 0.10 -

0.05-0.00 _Target=0.00 ELAB ELAB ELAB ELABBATTELLEELAB ELAEBATTELLiSL °O°° Irradiation Facility F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc A-14

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 13 Process Statistics 814 Cat 11 Individual Bias @ the Shallow Depth Dose 25.0 - -

Total: 150 Rows: All Mean: 3.494 20.0 -

Median: 4.250 Std Dev: 5.690 15.0 A t % out of TL: 0.00 10.0 -

5.0 -

Fo

.W 0.0-g WWWW WWWWWWWWWWWWXXWWWWWt m m Irradiation Facility F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc A-15

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 14 Process Statistics 814 Cat II Individual Bias @ the Eye Depth Dose Total: 150 Rows: All Mean: 3.011 Median: 3.250 Std Dev: 5.625 Al At %out of TL: 0.00 CU m

WWWW WWWW WWWWWWWWWWL Irradiation Facility F:\cofes1EL 028-06.doc A-16

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 15 Process Statistics 814 Cat II Individual Bias @ the Deep Depth Dose 25.0 1 1 Total: 150 Rows: All Mean: 0.981 Median: 1.600 Std Dev: 5.400 A t% out of TL: 0.00 a)

JIW Ic I om-jcWWWWWWWWLWWUJ mm nc mcmm W WL mm mm LWWWWWWWWWWWW~Im Irradiation Facility F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc A-17

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 16 Process Statistics 814 Cat II Precision @ the Shallow Depth Dose 20.0-Total: 150 Rows: All Mean: 0.001 :16.10 Median: -0.200 Std Dev: 2.472 A ,t% out of TL: 0.00 r-0 a_

I-o 0~

CL

.TL=-16.10 WW wWWI WWWWWWW WWWW W W W~WW Irradiation Facility F:AcorreskEL 028-06.doc A-18

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 17 Process Statistics 814 Cat II Precision @ the Eye Depth Dose 20.0 ,

Total: 150 Rows: All Mean: -0.003 Median: -0.150 Std Dev: 2.594 A t % out of TL: 0.00 0

a) 0~

4ww: 4:wwwwwwwwwww Irradiation Facility F:Xcorres\EL 028-06.doc A-19

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 18 Process Statistics 814 Cat II Precision @ the Deep Depth Dose Total: 150 Rows: All Mean: 0.005 Median: 0.000 Std Dev: 3.539 A ;t % out of TL: 0.00 a

0 CL.

wwwj~wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww ww W 1 W WW W W WW W W WW W W Irradiation Facility F:Xcorres\EL 028-06.doc A-20

APPENDIXA - a QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 19 Process Statistics 814 Cat II Mean Bias @ the Shallov i Depth Dose 20 Total: 25 . _ _ _

Rows: All 18 Mean: 3.668 16 Median: 4.100 14 Std Dev: 5.003 12 A toutofTL: 0.00 9 g

7-5-

3 1,

C" _ _ _

Irradiation Facility F:XcorreskEL 028-O6.doc A-21

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 20 Process Statistics 814 Cat II Mean Bias @ the Eye Depth Dose 20 Total: 25 USL=18.50 18 Rows: All Mean: 2.812 16 Median: 4.100 14 Std Dev: 5.416 12 A t% out of SL: 0.00 9 7

A*-I\

5 3

CO ciD 1 Target=0.00

-1

-3 v v

-5

-7

-9

-12 N

-14

-16

-18 LSL=-1 8.50

-20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

1 J IU U I I I I L I wwwwwwww WWWwWW 5%555 5 '-J ai wwwww

£0 Irradiation Facility F:\corres1EL 028-06.doc A-22

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 21 Process Statistics 814 Cat II Mean Bias @ the Deep Depth Dose Total: 25 Rows: All 18 - __- _ _ _- __- - - UTL .=18.50 Mean: 0.568 16 -

Median: 1.600 14 Std Dev: 5.000 12 A t %out of TL: 0.00 9-7-

5-3-

CO) 1-en mo -1 - N As Target=0.00

-7 -

-12 -

-14 -

-16 -

-18 -

LTL=-1 8.50

-20 I I I I I I I I I I I II I I wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww a F<

Irradiation Facility F:corres1EL 028M6.doc A-23

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 22 814 Cat II3 5Mean Bias+Std Dev (IBI+S) @ the Shallow Depth Dose

0. T Total: 25 Rows: All Mean: 0.080 Median: 0.076 0.30 -[--- - - I_ - - IUTL=0.30 Std Dev: 0.032 t % out of TL: 0.00 0.25 -

-0.15 1 0.10 -

0.05 -

iTarget=0.00 0.00*

'wmmeaflm m m6 m m m m I m m 1 LTL=0.00 w55w5555w W lU L uJJww uJ UlU w JI w55ww555 UUl iWW W

Irradiation Facility F:\corresXEL 028-06.doc A-24

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 23 814 Cat 11 Mean Bias + Std Dev. (IBI+S) @0 the Eye Depth Dose Total: 25 10.35 .

Rows: All Mean: 0.080 0.30 - - - UTL=0.30 Median: 0.077 Std Dev: 0.033 Range: 0.14 A( t %out of TL: 0.00 0.25 -

l U.ZU

-0.15 -

0.10 -

0.05 -

0.00* ITarget=0.00 1 1 1 1 1 I 11 CO L lU COC k W L0.00 T

-m uwwwwwww WLLJWWWW wwwwwwwwww~

Irradiation Facility F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc A-25

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 24 814 Cat 11 Mean Bias + Std Dev. (IBj+S) @ the Deep Depth Dose

- ~ 0.35 -rI Total: 25 Rows: All Mean: 0.073 Median: 0.069 Std Dev: 0.031 t %out of TL: 0.00 CO

+f WWWW4JWWWW uwwwwwwwwww r

Irradiation Facility F:\coreskEL 028-06.doc A-26

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 25 Statistics Extremity Cat IV Individual Bias @ the Shallow Depth Dose 40.0-Total: 24 Rows: All Mean: -7.646 300 Median: -8.250 Std Dev: 12.951 A at %out of TL: 0.00 A Ca (a

-I-j-j-j-jMMMMMMMMmM

-i-i 555 55 5 555 5

-i r:J=rrWWWWWWWWWW LU Lu Lu W LU M999M Irradiation Facility F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc A-27

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 26 Process Statistics Extremity Cat IV Precision @ the Shallow Depth Dose 4qu.u.

Total: 24 Rows: All Mean: -0.008 30.0 -

Median: -0.400 Std Dev: 11.895 UTL=27.20 A t% out of TL: 4.17 20.0-U) m 10.0 0.0 .

s (\ I I AVV> \ I I l l g I \ l I g .

Target=0.00 V i'V

-10.0-

-20.0 -

- - _- -_ -- - - ILTL=-27.20

-30.0 -

-40.0 I. I. I. I. I. *. . . . . . . . . . .I . . . . . .... ..................

3 i i i ii I I I . I I I . I I I U0c lmcD0 l0D M MM

@ri-7iiiiii333

- -- u uuMMw w w% w:w 1w LULU LUrUU 26 t 2U Irradiation Facility F:corres\EL 028-06.doc A-28

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 27 Process Statistics Extremity 40 Cat IV Mean Bias @ the Shallow Depth Dose

.0

- - - - - - - - -UTL=32.60 30.0 -

20.0 -

10.0 -

Cu WU 0.0 Target=0.00 mn

-10.0-

-20.0 -

-30.0 -

-__ - --- - -ILTL=-32.60

-40.0 BATTELLE ELAB ELAB BATTELLE Irradiation Facility F:XcorreskEL 028-06.doc A-29

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 28 Extremity Cat IV Mean Bias + Std Dev. (IBI+S) @ the Shallow Depth Dose 0.55 Total: 4 Rows: All Mean: 0.186 0.50- _ - - -_ _- - - UTL=0.50 Median: 0.178 Std Dev: 0.077 0.45 -

A lt % out of TL: 0.00 0.40 -

0.35 -

0.30 -

CD

+ 0.25 -

ma 0.20 -

0.15 -

0.10-0.05 0.00 Target-0.00 LTL=0.00

-0.05 I l I

BATTELLE ELAB ELAB BATTELLE Irradiation Facility F:corres1EL 028-09.doc A-30

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 29 Process Statistics Environmental TLDs Individual Bias Cs-137 25.0 ,

Total: 48 Rows: All Mean: 1.292 20.0 Median: 0.700 Std Dev: 3.112 15.0 A t % out of SL: 0.00 10.0 5.0 w

a) 0.0

-5.0

-10.0

-15.0

-20.0

-25.0

-j -i

-j -j -i

-i to M

5 C Cw w w w w w w w -i -

ww3 wwwwwww mmcn-M9 Irradiation Facility F:\corres\EL 028-06.doc A-31

APPENDIXA QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 30 Process Statistics Environmental TLDs Precision Cs-137 15.0 Total: 48 Rows: All Mean: 0.002 Median: -0.050 Std Dev: 1.439 A t %out of SL: 0.00 aO) ci)

5 5 wwwwwwwww MMMMMMM-j-j-j jj -j M M 5 5 5 555 5LUi -i wwwwwwwr

: r-LU Luuj LU Lu Lu Lu 9 M 9 Irradiation Facility F:Xcorres\EL 028-06.doc A-32

APPENDIX A QC TESTING DATA FOR THE SEMI-ANNUAL PERIOD July-December 2005 FIGURE 31 Process Statistics Environmental TLDs Mean Bias Cs-137 25.0 Total: 8 Rows: All Mean: 1.287 20.0- --- - - - - - - -- - -]UTL=20.10 Median: 0.100 Std Dev: 2.910 A ,t % out of TL: 0.00 15.0-10.0-5.0-am 0.0 /11- N' Target=0.00

-5.0 -

-10.0-

-15.0

-20.0 -- _ - - - ---- -__LTL=-20.10

-25.CI,- I I I I I I I I BATTELLEELAB ELAB ELAB ELAB ELAB ELAEBATTELLE Irradiation Facility F:\corresEL 028-06.doc A-33

APPENDIX B NVLAP CERTIFICATE OF ACCREDITATION, SCOPE OF ACCREDITATION, AND BIENNIAL TESTING RESULTS

oNational Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program 0UI O SCOPE OF ACCREDITATION TO ISO/IEC 17025:1999 Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory 29 Research Drive Westborough, MA 01581-3913 Mr. Jeffrey M. Raimondi Phone: 508-898-9970 x2539 Fax: 508-836-9815 E-Mail: Jeffrey.Raimondi@Framatome-ANP.com URL: http://www.us.firamatome-anp.com NVLAP LAB CODE 100524-0 IONIZING RADIATION DOSIMETRY Scope ofAccreditation:

This facility has been evaluated and deemed competent to process the radiation dosimeters listed below through employing Panasonic automatic reader model UD-710A for whole body dosimeters and a Thermo Electron Rialto XT or Toledo extremity dosimeter reader.

This facility is accredited to process the following dosimeters by virtue of actual demonstration of compliance with ANSI HPS N13.11-2001 and ANSI HPS N13.32-1995 through testing.

Panasonic TLD model UD-808 in a ISA model 830U holder for ANSI-NI 3.11-2001 categories IA, IIA, MA, IVA, VAB.

Panasonic TLD model 814-AS4 in a ISA model 830U holder for ANSI-Nl 3.11-2001 categories IA, DIA, MA, IVA, VAB.

Panasonic dual TLD models UD808 and UD814 in a ISA model 830U holder for ANSI-N13.11-2001 category VICB.

Thermo Electron (formerly Bicron-NE) extremity TLD mode 869/A/2B in a ring tape holder for HPS ANSI 13.32 (NIST Handbook 150-4, table 2) categories IVA, IVB, VC, and VD.

2005-10-01 through 2006-09-30 Effectve dates Forthe No a)JstiuteafStndardsed Technology Page 1 of 1 NVLAP-O1S (REV. 2005-05-19)

United States Department of Commerce National Institute of Standards and Technology Certificate of Accreditation to ISO/IEC 17025:1999 NVLAP LAB CODE: 100524-0 Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory Westborough, MA is recognized by the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program for conformance with cniteria set forth in NIST Handbook 150:2001 and all requirements of ISO/IEC Guide 17025:1999.

Accreditation is granted for specific services, listed on the Scope of Accreditation, for IONIZING RADIATION DOSIMETRY 2005-10-01 though 2006-09-30 Xe Effective dates -For the Natol of Standards -andTechnology NVLAP-01C (REV. 2005-05-10)

NATIONAL VOLUNTARY LABORATORY ACCREDITATION PROGRAM PERSONNEL DOSIMETRY PERFORMANCE TESTING I

SUMMARY

OF STATISTICAL RESULTS I PROCESSOR NAME: Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory PROCESSOR CODE: 100524 B DOSIMETER DESCRIPTION: PANASONIC UD-808AS/ISA83OU TEST RESULTS FOR QUARTER: 200504 TESTING'STATUS: RENEWAL TYPE OF DOSIMETER WHOLEBODY REPORT PRINTED: 31 January 2006 SHALLOW DEPTI DEEP DEPTH CATEGORY B S IBI+S L B S IBIj+S L IA NO TEST -0.027 0.055 0.082 0.30 IB NO TEST IC NO TEST IIA -0.001 0.029 0.030 0.40 -0.012 0.059 0.071 0.40 IIBI 1IC nIDI lIIA -0.056 0.074 0.129 0.40 NO TEST TB NO TEST mc NO TEST IVA 0.076 0.073 0.149 0.40 0.070 0.085 0.155 0.40 IVB IVC V -0.097 0.075 0.172 0.40 -0.008 0.038 0.046 0.40 VT - TOTAL-GEN NO TEST VI - NEUTRON NO TEST VI -TOTAL-MOD NO TEST VI -NEUTRON NO TEST

• • • • • PROCESSOR DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN THIS CATEGORY

NATIONAL VOLUNTARY LABORATORY ACCREDITATION PROGRAM PERSONNEL DOSIMETRY PERFORMANCE TESTING I .

SUMMARY

OF PASS/FAIL RESULTS I PROCESSOR NAME: Framnatome ANP Environmental Laboratory PROCESSOR CODE: 100524 B DOSIMETER DESCRIPTION: PANASONIC UD-808AS/ISA830U TEST RESULTS FOR QUARTER: 200504 TESTING STATUS: RENEWAL TYPE OF DOSIMETER: WHOLEBODY REPORT PRINTED: 31 January2006 CATEGORY IA ACCIDENTS, PHOTONS GENERAL PASS CATEGORY IB ACCIDENTS, PHOTONS CESIUM CATEGORY IC ACCIDENTS, PHOTONS M150 *P**

CATEGORY IIA PHOTONS, GENERAL PASS CATEGORY JIB PHOTONS, HIGH E CATEGORY IIC PHOTONS, MEDIUM E CATEGORY 1D PHOTONS, NARROW SPECTRUM CATEGORY IIIA BETAS, GENERAL PASS CATEGORY fIB BETAS, HIGH E CATEGORY EIC BETAS, LOW E CATEGORY IVA PHOTON MIXTURES, GENERAL + HIGH E PASS CATEGORY IVB PHOTON MIXTURES, MEDIUM E + HIGH E CATEGORY IVC PHOTON MIXTURES, NARROW SPECTRUM + HIGH E CATEGORY V BETA/PHOTON MIXTURES PASS CATEGORY VI GENERAL OR BARE NEUTRON/PHOTON MIXTURES CATEGORY VI - MOD MODERATED NEUTRON/PHOTON MIXTURES

• • • • • PROCESSOR DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN THIS CATEGORY

100524-B RESULTS -- 2005 - 04 O CategoryResults -Accident Protection

- l 0.50 0.45-0.40-0.35

'Z. 0 30 Il o0 5 z 0.20 -

U) 0.15 -

0.10.~Y 0.05 0.00.

-0.50 -0.40 __ -0.30 -0.20 -0.10 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 BIAS

NATIONAL VOLUNTARY LABORATORY ACCREDITATION PROGRAM PERSONNEL DOSIMETRY PERFORMANCE TESTING I.

SUMMARY

OF STATISTICAL RESULTS PROCESSOR NAME: Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory PROCESSOR CODE: 100524 C DOSIMETER DESCRIPTION: PANASONIC UD-814AS4/ISA 830U TEST RESULTS FOR QUARTER: 200504 TESTING STATUS: RENEWAL N TYPE OF DOSIMETER. WHOLEBODY REPORT PRINTED: 31 Januaty 2006 SHALLOW DEPTH DEEP DEPTH CATEGORY B S IBI+S L B S IBI+S L IA NO TEST -0.036 0.033 0.069 0.30 IB NO TEST IC NO TEST HA 0.051 0.054 0.105 0.40 0.028 0.073 0.101 0.40 IIB nC, HD MIlA 0.030 0.075 0.105 0.40 NO TEST TBI NO TEST Bic NO TEST IVA 0.121 0.071 0.192 0.40 0.098 0.097 0.195 0.40 IVB ***

• IVC V 0.034 0.047 0.080 0.40 0.035 0.048 0.083 0.40 VI - TOTAL-GEN NO TEST VI - NEUTRON NO TEST VI- TOTAL-MOD NO TEST VI - NEUTRON NO TEST

• • • PROCESSOR DID NOT PARTICIPATE INTHIS CATEGORY

NATIONAL VOLUNTARY LABORATORY ACCREDITATION PROGRAM PERSONNEL DOSIMETRY PERFORMANCE TESTING

SUMMARY

OF PASS/FAIL RESULTS I PROCESSOR NAME: Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory PROCESSOR CODE: 100524 C DOSIMETER DESCRIPTION: PANASONIC UD-814AS4/1SA 830U TEST RESULTS FOR QUARTER: 200504 TESTING STATUS: RENEWAL TYPE OF DOSIMETER: WHOLEBODY REPORT PRINTED: 31 January 2006 CATEGORY IA ACCIDENTS, PHOTONS GENERAL PASS CATEGORY 1B ACCIDENTS, PHOTONS CESIUM * ***

• CATEGORY IC ACCIDENTS, PHOTONS M150 CATEGORY IIA PHOTONS, GENERAL PASS CATEGORY IEB PHOTONS, HIGH E CATEGORY TIC PHOTONS, MEDIUM E CATEGORY II) PHOTONS, NARROW SPECTRUM CATEGORY IIIA BETAS, GENERAL PASS CATEGORY IHB BETAS, HIGH E CATEGORY IHIC BETAS, LOW E CATEGORY IVA PHOTON MIXTURES, GENERAL + HIGH E PASS CATEGORY IVB PHOTON MIXTURES, MEDIUM E + HIGH E *e***

CATEGORY IVC PHOTON MIXTURES, NARROW SPECTRUM + HIGH E CATEGORY V BETA/PHOTON MIXTURES PASS CATEGORY VI GENERAL OR BARE NEUTRON/PHOTON MIXTURES CATEGORY VI - MOD MODERATED NEUTRON/PHOTON MIXTURES

• • • • • PROCESSOR DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN THIS CATEGORY

100524-C RESULTS -2005 - 04

[ CategoryResults -Accident - Protection_ 7 0.50 -

045 O 0.25 2 0.20 l:

0.15 V 0.250 0 .0

-0.40 -0.30 -0.20 -0.10 - 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 BIAS

NATIONAL VOLUNTARY LABORATORY ACCREDITATION PROGRAM PERSONNEL DOSIMETRY PERFORMANCE TESTING I

SUMMARY

OF STATISTICAL RESULTS I PROCESSOR NAME: Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory PROCESSOR CODE: 100524 D DOSIMETER DESCRIPTION: PANASONIC DUAL 808AS & 814AS4/ISA83OU TEST RESULTS FOR QUARTER: 200504 TESTING STATUS: RENEWAL TYPE OF DOSIMETER: WHOLEBODY REPORT PRINTED: 01 February 2006 SHALLOW DEPTH DEEP DEPTH CATEGORY B S IBI + S L B S IBI+S L IA NO TEST IB NO TEST IC NO TEST ILA B .

IIC IIDI IIIA NO TEST IIIB NO TEST IIC NO TEST IVA IVB lVC V

VI - TOTAL-GEN NO TEST VI - NEUTRON NO TEST VI - TOTAL-MOD NO TEST -0.010 0.030 0.040 0.40 VI-NEUTRON NO TEST -0.058 0.081 0.139 0.40

• • • • • PROCESSOR DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN THIS CATEGORY

NATIONAL VOLUNTARY LABORATORY ACCREDITATION PROGRAM PERSONNEL DOSIMETRY PERFORMANCE TESTING

SUMMARY

OF PASS/FAIL RESULTS l PROCESSOR NAME: Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory PROCESSOR CODE: 100524 D DOSIMETER DESCRIPTION: PANASONIC DUAL 808AS & 814AS4/ISA83OU TEST RESULTS FOR QUARTER: 200504

!TESTING STATUS: RENEWAL TYPE OF DOSIMETER. WHOLEBODY REPORT PRINTED: 01 February 2006 CATEGORY IA ACCIDENTS, PHOTONS GENERAL CATEGORY lB ACCIDENTS, PHOTONS CESIUM CATEGORY IC ACCIDENTS, PHOTONS M150 CATEGORY IIA PHOTONS, GENERAL CATEGORY IIB PHOTONS, HIGH E CATEGORY IIC PHOTONS, MEDIUM E CATEGORY IID PHOTONS, NARROW SPECTRUM * ** *

• CATEGORY I11A BETAS, GENERAL **

CATEGORY US BETAS, HIGH E CATEGORY IIIC BETAS, LOW E CATEGORY IVA PHOTON MIXTURES, GENERAL + HIGH E CATEGORY IVB PHOTON MIXTURES, MEDIUM E + HIGH E * ** S CATEGORYIVC PHOTON MIXTURES, NARROW SPECTRUM + HIGH E CATEGORY V BETA/PHOTON MIXTURES CATEGORY VI GENERAL OR BARE NEUTRON/PHOTON MIXTURES CATEGORY VI - MOD MODERATED NEUTRON/PHOTON MIXTURES PASS

• • • • • PROCESSOR DID NOT PARTICIPATE IN THIS CATEGORY

100524-D RESULTS -2005 - 04 L ° CategoryResufts -Accident - Protection 0.50 0.45 0.40 0.35 z

o

'030 o 0.25

- 0.20 I<-

0) 0.15 0.10 0.05 -

0.00

-0.50 -0.40 -0.30 -0.20 -0.10 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 BIAS

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 APPENDIX C Summary of 2005 REMP Data C-1

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 STATIO NUCLID CONC .STD.DEV. MDC TYPE N LSN DATE E (pCi/m3) (pCi/m3) (pCi/m3).

AIR PARTICULATE AP 5 L868 GROSS BETA 2.61 E-2 2.1e-3 .4.0e-3 01 1/10/2005 AP 5 L8782-01 1/24/2005 GROSS BETA 2.14E-2 2.0e-3 4.5e-3 AP 5 L8817-01 2V07/2005 GROSS BETA 2.28E-2 1.9e-3 3.7e-3 AP 5 -L8881- GROSS BETA 1.82E-2 1.8e-3 3.8e-3 01 2122/2005 AP 5 L8924-01 3/07/2005 GROSS BETA 1.97E-2 2.0e-3 4.6e-3 AP 5 L9006-01 3/22/2005 GROSS BETA 1.96E-2 1.7e-3 3.5e-3 AP 5 L9063-01 4/04/2005 GROSS BETA 9.70E-3 1.6e-3 4.0e-3 AP 5 L9140-01 4/18/2005 GROSS BETA 1.75E-2 1.9e-3 4.6e-3 AP 5 L9091-01 4/4/05 Mn-54 -2.4E-04 7.2e-4 3.0e-3 AP 5 L9557-01 4/18/05 Mn-54 -2.3E-03 2.5e-3 1.Oe-2 AP 5 L9091-01 4/4/05 Co-58 -9.OE-04 1.0e-3 4.6e-3 AP 5 L9557-01 4/18/05 Co-58 -3.1E-03 5.0e-3 2.0e-2 AP 5 L9091-01 4/4/05 Fe-59 O.OE+00 3.0e-3 1.3e-2 AP 5 L9557-01 4/18/05 Fe-59 O.OE+00 2.0e-2 7.7e-2 AP 5 L9091-01 4/4/05 Co-60 -6.2E-04 - 7.6e-4 3.6e-3 AP 5 L9557-01 4/18/05 Co-60 -1.OE-04 2.3e-3 8.9e-3 AP 5 L9091-01 4/4/05 Zn-65 O.OE+00 1.7e-3 7.1e-3 AP 5 L9557-01 4/18/05 Zn-65 5.5E-03 4.8e-3 1.6e-2 AP 5 L9091-01 4/4/05 Zr-95 3.4E-03 1.9e-3 5.8e-3 AP 5 L9557-01 4/18/05 Zr-95 2.4E-02 1.1e-2 4.6e-2 AP 5 L9091-01 4/4/05 1-131 1.4E-02 2.6e-2 9.6e-2 AP 5 L9557-01 4/18/05 1-131 -2.5E+01 20 75 AP 5 L9091-01 4/4/05 Cs-134 1.4E-03 7.8e-4 2.4e-3 AP 5 L9557-01 4/18/05 Cs-134 9.OE-04 2.2e-3 8.2e-3 AP 5 L9091-01 4/4/05 Cs-137 O.OE+00 1.2e-3 4.2e-3 AP 5 L9557-01 4/18/05 Cs-137 -4.OE-04 2.5e-3 9.1e-3 AP 5 L9091-01 4/4/05 Ba-140 O.OE+00 1.2e-2 5.2e-2 AP 5 L9557-01 4/18/05 Ba-140 O.OE+00 7.8e-1 3.1 AP 6 L868 GROSS BETA 2.49E-2 2.1e-3 4.1e-3 02 1/10/2005 AP 6 L8782-02 1/24/2005 GROSS BETA 2.38E-2 2.1e-3 4.6e-3 AP 6 L8817-02 2/07/2005 GROSS BETA 1.94E-2 1.8e-3 3.8e-3 AP 6 -L8881- GROSS BETA 1.54E-2 1.7e-3 3.8e-3 02 2/22/2005 AP 6 L8924-02 3/07/2005 GROSS BETA 1.87E-2 2.0e-3 4.7e-3 AP 6 L9006-02 3/22/2005 GROSS BETA 1.94E-2 1.8e-3 3.5e-3 AP 6 L9063-02 4/04/2005 GROSS BETA 9.20E-3 1.6e-3 4.1e-3 AP 6 L9140-02 4/18/2005 GROSS BETA 1.61 E-2 1.9e-3 4.6e-3 AP 6 L9091-02 4/4/05 Mn-54 7.4E-04 7.7E4 2.7E-3 AP 6 L9557-02 4/18/05 Mn-54 -1.5E-03 2.1 E-3 8.6E-3 AP 6 L9091-02 4/4/05 Co-58 1.6E-03 1.OE-3 3.3E-3 AP 6 L9557-02 4/18/05 Co-58 -1.0E-04 5.5E-3 2.1 E-2 AP 6 L9091-02 4/4/05 Fe-59 1.1E-03 2.9E-3 1.2E-2 AP 6 L9557-02 4/18/05 Fe-59 -1.2E-02 2.OE-2 8.OE-2 AP 6 L9091-02 4/4/05 Co-60 1.3E-03 9.2E-4 3.1E-3 AP 6 L9557-02 4/18/05 Co-60 -6.OE-04 2.2E-3 8.9E-3 AP 6 L9091-02 4/4/05 Zn-65 6.OE-04 2.OE-3 7.8E-3 AP 6 L9557-02 4/18/05 Zn-65 1.1E-03 5.OE-3 1.9E-2 AP 6 L9091-02 4/4/05 Zr-95 -4.OE-04 2.2E-3 9.OE-3 AP 6 L9557-02 4/18/05 Zr-95 -7.9E-03 8.7E-3 3.1E-2 AP 6 L9091-02 4/4/05 1-131 1.OE-02 2.7E-2 1.OE-1 AP 6 L9557-02 4/18/05 1-131 -6.OE+00 18 67 AP 6 L9091-02 4/4/05 Cs-134 -1.7E-03 7.8E-4 3.8E-3 AP 6 L9557-02 4/18/05 Cs-134 -1.OE-04 2.3E-3 8.7E-3 AP 6 L9091-02 4/4/05 Cs-1 37 2.OE-04 1.2E-3 4.4E-3 AP 6 L9557-02 4/18/05 Cs-137 2.OE-04 2.2E-3 8.1E-3 AP 6 L9091-02 4/4/05 Ba-140 -5.OE-03 1.1E-2 5.2E-2 AP 6 L9557-02 4/18/05 Ba-140 O.OE+00 7.5E-1 2.9 AP 7 L868 GROSS BETA 2.58E-2 2.1E-3 3.8E-3 03 1/10/2005 AP 7 L8782-03 1/24/2005 GROSS BETA 2.46E-2 2.OE-3 4.3E-3 AP 7 L8817-03 2/07/2005 GROSS BETA 2.14E-2 1.8E-3 3.6E-3 C-2

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 AP 7 -L8881- GROSS BETA 1.98E-2 1.7E-3 3.6E-3 03 2V22/2005 AP 7 L8924-03 3/07/2005 GROSS BETA 2.18E-2 2.OE-3 4.4E-3 AP 7 L9006-03 3/22/2005 GROSS BETA 1.91E-2 1.7E-3 3.4E-3 AP 7 L9063-03 4/04/2005 GROSS BETA 1.13E-2 1.8E-3 4.7E-3 AP 7 L9140-03 4/18/2005 GROSS BETA 1.79E-2 1.9E-3 4.4E-3 AP 7 L9091-03 4/4/05 Mn-54 1.6E-04 7.6E-4 3.OE-3 AP 7 L9557-03 4/18/05 Mn-54 8.OE-04 2.1 E-3 7.8E-3 AP 7 L9091-03 4/4/05 Co-58 1.OE-04 1.1E-3 4.5E-3 AP 7 L9557-03 4/18/05 Co-58 5.9E-03 4.8E-3 1.6E-2 AP 7 L9091-03 4/4/05 Fe-59 2.1 E-03 3.6E-3 1.4E-2 AP 7 L9557-03 4/18/05 Fe-59 -4.4E-02 2.OE-2 8.7E-2 AP 7 L9091-03 4/4/05 Co-60 -1.OE-04 7.5E-4 3.3E-3 AP 7 L9557-03 4/18/05 Co-60 2.8E-03 2.5E-3 8.5E-3 AP 7 L9091-03 4/4/05 Zn-65 -2.OE-03 1.3E-3 7.OE-3 AP 7 L9557-03 4/18/05 Zn-65 -2.1 E-03 5.4E-3 2.1E-2 AP 7 L9091-03 4/4/05 Zr-95 2.6E-03 2.2E-3 7.4E-3 AP 7 L9557-03 4/18/05 Zr-95 -6.4E-03 8.8E-3 3.1E-2 AP 7 L9091-03 4/4/05 1-131 4.3E-02 2.4E-2 7.5E-2 AP 7 L9557-03 4/18/05 1-131 -8.OE+00 17 63 AP 7 L9091-03 4/4/05 Cs-134 7.9E-04 5.1E-4 1.6E-3 AP 7 L9557-03 4/18/05 Cs-134 3.2E-03 2.OE-3 6.6E-3 AP 7 L9091-03 4/4/05 Cs-137 2.OE-04 1.1E-3 4.1E-3 AP 7 L9557-03 4/18/05 Cs-137 4.2E-03 2.OE-3 6.2E-3 AP 7 L9091-03 4/4/05 Ba-140 1.9E-02 9.6E-3 1.3E-2 AP 7 L9557-03 4/18/05 Ba-140 1.2E+00 7.IE-1 2.2 AP 9 L868 GROSS BETA 2.83E-2 2.4E-3 4.7E-3 04 1/10/2005 AP 9 L868 GROSS BETA 2.22E-2 2.2E-3 5.2E-3 04 1/24/2005 AP 9 L8782-04 2/07/2005 GROSS BETA 2.03E-2 2.OE-3 4.3E-3 AP 9 L8817-04 2/22/2005 GROSS BETA 1.83E-2 1.9E-3 4.4E-3 AP 9 -L8881- GROSS BETA 2.04E-2 2.2E-3 5.3E-3 04 3/07/2005 AP 9 L8924-04 3/22/2005 GROSS BETA 1.66E-2 1.8E-3 4.OE-3 AP 9 L9006-04 4/04/2005 GROSS BETA 9.40E-3 1.7E-3 4.7E-3 AP 9 L9063-04 4/18/2005 GROSS BETA 1.62E-2 2.1E-3 5.2E-3 AP 9 L9091-04 4/4/05 Mn-54 2.1 E-04 9.5E-4 3.7E-3 AP 9 L9557-04 4/18/05 Mn-54 2.OE-04 3.1E-3 1.1E-2 AP 9 L9091-04 4/4/05 Co-58 2.5E-03 1.4E-3 4.4E-3 AP 9 L9557-04 4/18/05 Co-58 -6.OE-03 6.1E-3 2.4E-2 AP 9 L9091-04 4/4/05 Fe-59 -1.2E-03 4.1E-3 1.8E-2 AP 9 L9557-04 4/18/05 Fe-59 -4.OE-03 2.3E-2 8.8E-2 AP 9 L9091-04 4/4/05 Co-60 -3.OE-04 1.3E-3 5.2E-3 AP 9 L9557-04 4/18/05 Co-60 -6.8E-03 3.OE-3 1.3E-2 AP 9 L9091-04 4/4/05 Zn-65 -6.OE-04 1.7E-3 7.6E-3 AP 9 L9557-04 4/18/05 Zn-65 7.5E-03 6.6E-3 2.3E-2 AP 9 L9091-04 4/4/05 Zr-95 -9.OE-04 1.7E-3 7.9E-3 AP 9 L9557-04 4/18/05 Zr-95 1.3E-02 9.OE-3 3.9E-2 AP 9 L9091-04 4/4/05 1-131 -3.2E-02 3.OE-2 1.3E-1 AP 9 L9557-04 4/18/05 1-131 1.OE+01 20 70 AP 9 L9091-04 4/4/05 Cs-134 2.OE-04 1.1E-3 4.1E-3 AP 9 L9557-04 4/18/05 Cs-134 3.OE-04 2.7E-3 9.9E-3 AP 9 L9091-04 4/4/05 Cs-i 37 5.OE-04 1.3E-3 4.8E-3 AP 9 L9557-04 4/18/05 Cs-137 -8.OE-04 2.7E-3 1.OE-2 AP 9 L9091-04 4/4/05 Ba-140 -1.7E-02 1.5E-2 7.5E-2 AP 9 L9557-04 4/18/05 Ba-140 4.1 E-01 7.6E-1 2.9 AP 13 L868 1/10/2005 GROSS BETA 2.16E 2.OE-3 4.1E-3 05 AP 13 L868 1/24/2005 GROSS BETA 2.30E-2 2.OE-3 4.1E-3 05 AP 13 L8782-05 2/07/2005 GROSS BETA 2.25E-2 1.9E-3 3.7E-3 AP 13 L8817-05 2/22/2005 GROSS BETA 1.77E-2 1.8E-3 3.8E-3 AP 13 -L8881- 3/07/2005 GROSS BETA 2.01 E-2 2.OE-3 4.7E-3 05 AP 13 L8924-05 3/22/2005 GROSS BETA 1.86E-2 1.7E-3 3.5E-3 AP 13 L9006-05 4/04/2005 GROSS BETA 1.OOE-2 1.6E-3 4.1E-3 AP 13 L9063-05 4/18/2005 GROSS BETA 1.81E-2 1.9E-3 4.6E-3 AP 9 L9091-05 4/4/05 Mn-54 2.9E-04 5.9E-4 2.3E-3 AP 9 L9557-05 4/18/05 Mn-54 4.OE-04 2.1E-3 7.9E-3 C-3

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 AP 9 L9091-05 4/4/05 Co-58 -9.OE-04 1.0E-3 4.7E-3 AP 9 L9557-05 4/18/05 Co-58 -1.8E-03 4.5E-3 1.8E-2 AP 9 L9091-05 4/4/05 Fe-59 4.3E-03 4.1E-3 1.4E-2 AP 9 L9557-05 4/18/05 Fe-59 1.9E-02 1.8E-2 6.1 E-2 AP 9 L9091-05 4/4/05 Co-60 7.5E-04 9.9E-4 3.6E-3 AP 9 L9557-05 4/18/05 Co-60 3.SE-03 2.4E-3 8.OE-3 AP 9 L9091-05 4/4/05 Zn-65 2.7E-03 1.8E-3 5.9E-3 AP 9 L9557-05 4/18/05 Zn-65 -2.2E-03 4.7E-3 1.9E-2 AP 9 L9091-05 4/4/05 Zr-95 1.4E-03 2.3E-3 8.4E-3 AP 9 L9557-05 4/18/05 Zr-95 -4.OE-04 8.2E-3 3.2E-2 AP 9 L9091-05 4/4/05 1-131 -1.6E-02 2.8E-2 1.1E-1 AP 9 L9557-05 4/18/05 1-131 -2.8E+01 19 74 AP 9 L9091-05 4/4/05 Cs-134 9.8E-04 7.3E-4 2.4E-3 AP 9 L9557-05 4/18/05 Cs-1 34 -1.3E-03 2.2E-3 8.7E-3 AP 9 L9091-05 4/4/05 Cs-137 -2.OE-03 1.2E-3 5.OE-3 AP 9 L9557-05 4/18/05 Cs-1 37 4.OE-04 2.1E-3 7.5E-3 AP 9 L9091-05 4/4/05 Ba-140 O.OE+00 1.4E-2 5.9E-2 AP 9 L9557-05 4/18/05 Ba-140 1.8E-01 6.OE-1 2.4 FISH FH-BF 26 L9416-02 6/7/05 Mn-54 11.50 6.6 21 FH-BF 26 L9416-02 6/7/05 Co-58 4.80 9.5 34 FH-BF 26 L9416-02 6/7/05 Fe-59 -33.00 39 150 FH-BF 26 L9416-02 6/7/05 Co-60 6.70 6.8 24 FH-BF 26 L9416-02 6/7/05 Zn-65 -38.00 17 73 FH-BF 26 L9416-02 6/7/05 Zr-95 -16.00 17 66 FH-BF 26 L9416-02 6/7/05 1-131 78.00 87 300 FH-BF 26 L9416-02 6/7/05 Cs-134 -11.60 6.8 29 FH-BF 26 L9416-02 6/7/05 Cs-137 21.50 8.7 27 FH-BF 26 L9416-02 6/7/05 Ba-140 -37.00 45 200 FH-PF 26 L941 6-01 6/7/05 Mn-54 -2.00 7.7 28 FH-PF 26 L9416-01 6/7/05 Co-58 15.30 8.9 29 FH-PF 26 L9416-01 617/05 Fe-59 23.00 25 89 FH-PF 26 L9416-01 6/7/05 Co-60 -6.30 6.9 28 FH-PF 26 L9416-01 6/7/05 Zn-65 23.00 19 63 FH-PF 26 L9416-01 6/7/05 Zr-95 -16.00 14 56 FH-PF 26 L9416-01 6/7/05 1-131 230.00 150 480 FH-PF 26 L9416-01 6/7/05 Cs-134 11.00 7 26 FH-PF 26 L9416-01 6/7/05 Cs-137 25.00 10 32 FH-PF 26 L9416-01 6/7/05 Ba-140 -43.00 55 220 FISH FH-BF 29 L9416-05 6/7/05 Mn-54 -1.50 6.1 22 FH-BF 29 L9416-05 6/7/05 Co-58 13.30 7.5 24 FH-BF 29 L9416-05 6/7/05 Fe-59 -2.00 25 92 FH-BF 29 L9416-05 6/7/05 Co-60 0.00 6.6 24 FH-BF 29 L9416-05 6/7/05 Zn-65 -8.00 15 55 FH-BF 29 L9416-O5 6/7/05 Zr-95 -3.00 13 50 FH-BF 29 L9416-05 6/7/O5 1-131 -30.00 120 440 FH-BF 29 L9416-05 6/7/O5 Cs-134 1.60 6.6 23 FH-BF 29 L9416-05 6/7/05 Cs-137 26.00 9.3 29 FH-BF 29 L9416-05 6/7/05 Ba-140 0.00 39 150 FH-PF 29 L9416-04 6/7/05 Mn-54 -4.10 6.8 27 FH-PF 29 L9416-04 6/7/05 Co-58 -8.40 8.9 36 FH-PF 29 L9416-04 6/7/05 Fe-59 -24.00 34 140 FH-PF 29 L9416-04 6/7/OS Co-60 -10.60 6.8 31 FH-PF 29 L9416-04 6/7/05 Zn-65 -16.00 19 75 FH-PF 29 L9416-04 6/7/05 Zr-95 -13.00 17 68 FH-PF 29 L9416-04 6/7/05 1-131 250.00 150 480 FH-PF 29 L9416-04 6/7/05 Cs-134 -31.00 8.8 33 FH-PF 29 L9416-04 6/7/05 Cs-137 45.00 12 32 FH-PF 29 L9416-04 6/7/05 Ba-140 -14.00 53 220 FISH FH-BF 30 L9416-07 6/7/05 Mn-54 0.00 7.3 2.7 FH-BF 30 L9416-07 6/7/05 Co-58 -2.30 8.3 31 FH-BF 30 L9416-07 6/7/05 Fe-59 -13.00 28 110 FH-BF 30 L9416-07 6/7/05 Co-60 1.20 6.2 23 C4

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 FH-BF 30 L9416-07 6/7/05 Zn-65 0.00 17 62 FH-BF 30 L9416-07 6f7/05 Zr-95 33.00 16 51 FH-BF 30 L9416-07 6/7/05 1-131 -70.00 120 460 FH-BF 30 L9416-07 6/7/05 Cs-1 34 1.00 7.2 26 FH-BF 30 L9416-07 6m7/05 Cs-137 6.80 5.9 20 FH-BF 30 L9416-07 6/7/05 Ba-140 -36.00 36 160 FH-PF 30 L9416-06 6/7/05 Mn-54 -11.00 5.8 23 FH-PF 30 L9416-06 6/7/05 Co-58 -3.60 7 26 FH-PF 30 L9416-06 6/7/05 Fe-59 11.00 25 230 FH-PF 30 L9416-06 6/7/05 Co-60 3.40 5.2 19 FH-PF 30 L9416-06 6/7/05 Zn-65 -7.00 14 53 FH-PF 30 L9416-06 6/7/05 Zr-95 -14.00 13 49 FH-PF 30 L9416-06 6/7/05 1-131 30.00 120 410 FH-PF 30 L9416-06 6/7/05 Cs-134 4.40 6.4 22 FH-PF 30 L9416-06 6/7/05 Cs-1 37 23.00 7.5 23 FH-PF 30 L9416-06 6/7/05 Ba-140 18.00 41 150 SEDIMENT SHELLFISH SF 27 L9416-03 6/7/05 Mn-54 15.00 12 42 SF 27 L9416-03 6/7/05 Co-58 11.00 19 73 SF 27 L9416-03 6/7/05 Fe-59 37.00 53 210 SF 27 L9416-03 6/7/05 Co-60 -8.00 14 69 SF 27 L9416-03 6/7/05 Zn-65 11.00 19 79 SF 27 L9416-03 6/7/05 Zr-95 15.00 23 89 SF 27 L9416-03 6/7/05 1-131 100.00 140 510 SF 27 L9416-03 6/7/05 Cs-134 10.00 16 59 SF 27 L9416-03 6/7/05 Cs-1 37 3.70 9.8 40 SF 27 L9416-03 6/7/05 Ba-140 0.00 61 280 SHELLFISH SF 31 L9416-08 6/7/05 Mn-54 -2.00 11 49 SF 31 L9416-08 6/7/05 Co-58 7.00 14 55 SF 31 L9416-08 6/7/05 Fe-59 -129.00 66 340 SF 31 L9416-08 6/7/05 Co-60 4.00 18 73 SF 31 L9416-08 6/7/05 Zn-65 -23.00 32 150 SF 31 L9416-08 6/7/05 Zr-95 43.00 32 110 SF 31 L9416-08 6/7/05 1-131 130.00 150 520 SF 31 L9416-08 6/7/05 Cs-134 17.00 16 58 SF 31 L9416-08 6/7/05 Cs-137 -12.00 14 62 SF 31 L9416-08 6/7/05 Ba-140 -102.00 76 410 ISFSI WATER WI 57 L9066-03 4/4/2005 H-3 780 310 950 WI 57 L9501-02 6/27/2005 H-3 320 400 1300 WI 57 L9066-03 4i4/2005 Mn-54 -1.3 2.3 10 WI 57 L9501-02 6/27/2005 Mn-54 -6.9 3.2 14 WI 57 L9066-03 4/4/2005 Co-58 -4.3 2.9 14 WI 57 L9501-02 6/27/2005 Co-58 -0.9 2.9 11 WI 57 L9066-03 4/4/2005 Fe-59 -12 7.4 39 WI 57 L9501-02 6/27/2005 Fe-59 -9.2 7.3 34 WI 57 L9066-03 4/4/2005 Co-60 3 I 3.6 13 WI 57 L9501-02 6/27/2005 Co-60 -0.1 3.6 14 WI 57 L9066-03 4/4/2005 Zn-65 -2 4.4 21 WI 57 L9501-02 6/27/2005 Zn-65 1.5 6.9 26 WI 57 L9066-03 4/4/2005 Zr-95 2.4 3.7 14 WI 57 L9501-02 6/27/2005 Zr-95 -0.2 6.1 23 WI 57 L9066-03 4/4/2005 1-131 1.5 4.1 16 WI 57 L9501-02 6/27/2005 1-131 -3.2 5.2 20 WI 57 L9066-03 4/4/2005 Cs-1 34 3.3 2.2 6.9 WI 57 L9501-02 6/27/2005 Cs-134 3.5 2.6 8.6 WI 57 L9066-03 4/4/2005 Cs-1 37 -0.7 2.9 12 WI 57 L9501-02 6/27/2005 Cs-1 37 -0.5 3.2 12 WI 57 L9066-03 4/4/2005 Ba-140 2.3 3.5 15 WI 57 L9501-02 6/27/2005 Ba-140 9.6 6 19 RIVER WATER WR 28 L9098-01 4/4/2005 H-3 270 300 950 C-5

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 WR 28 L9588-01 6/27/2005 H-3 -310 380 1200 WR 28 7/11/2005 H-3 <1280

• WR 28 7/25/2005 H-3 <1140

• WR 28 8/8/2005 H-3 <1160

• WR 28 8/22/2005 H-3 <1340

• WR 28 9/6/2005 H-3 <1150

• WR 28 9/19/2005 H-3 <1180

• WR 28 10/3/2005 H-3 <1220 WR 28 10/17/2005 H-3 <1270 WR 28 10/31/2005 H-3 <1220 WR 28 11/14/2005 H-3 <1240

• WR 28 11/28/2005 H-3 <1310 WR 28 12/12/2005 H-3 <1270

• WR 28 1/1/2005 H-3 <1190 WR 28 L9098-01 4/4/2005 Mn-54 2.3 1.5 4.9 WR 28 L9588-01 6/27/2005 Mn-54 -0.1 .89 3.2 WR 28 7/11/2005 Mn-54 <5.335

• WR 28 7/25/2005 Mn-54 <5.248 WR 28 8/8/2005 Mn-54 <7.411

• WR 28 8/22/2005 Mn-54 <5.947

• WR 28 9/6/2005 Mn-54 <4.397

• WR 28 9/19/2005 Mn-54 <3.103

• WR 28 10/3/2005 Mn-54 <4.622

• WR 28 10/17/2005 Mn-54 <4.009

• WR 28 10/31/2005 Mn-54 <4.963

• WR 28 11/14/2005 Mn-54 <3.871

• WR 28 11/28/2005 Mn-54 <3.576

• WR 28 12/12/2005 Mn-54 <4.456

• WR 28 1/1/2005 Mn-54 <5.173 WR 28 L9098-01 4/4/2005 Co-58 2.90 1.8 5.9 WR 28 L9588-01 6/27/2005 Co-58 -0.74 .89 3.4 WR 28 7/11/2005 Co-58 <3.298

• WR 28 7/25/2005 Co-58 <3.532 a WR 28 8/8/2005 Co-58 <4.770

• WR 28 8/22/2005 Co-58 <4.478

• WR 28 9/6/2005 Co-58 <3.476 WR 28 9/19/2005 Co-58 <3.444 WR 28 10/3/2005 Co-58 <6.003

• WR 28 10/17/2005 Co-58 <4.907 WR 28 10/31/2005 Co-58 <6.538 WR 28 11/14/2005 Co-58 <3.784 WR 28 11/28/2005 Co-58 <4.405 WR 28 12/12/2005 Co-58 <5.216 WR 28 1/1/2005 Co-58 <3.897

• WR 28 L9098-01 4/4/2005 Fe-59 2.30 5.1 20 WR 28 L9588-01 6/27/2005 Fe-59 2.90 3.5 12 WR 28 L9098-01 4/4/2005 Co-60 1.50 1.8 6.6 WR 28 L9588-01 6/27/2005 Co-60 0.00 .81 3 WR 28 7/11/2005 Co-60 <14.08 WR 28 7/25/2005 Co-60 <13.84

• WR 28 8/8/2005 Co-60 <14.62

• WR 28 8/22/2005 Co-60 <15.03 WR 28 9/6/2005 Co-60 <14.56

• WR 28 9/19/2005 Co-60 <13.11

• WR 28 10/3/2005 Co-60 <10.80

• WR 28 10/17/2005 Co-60 <12.47 WR 28 10/31/2005 Co-60 <9.228

• WR 28 11/14/2005 Co-60 <12.67

• WR 28 11/28/2005 Co-60 <12.08

• WR 28 12/12/2005 Co-60 <14.01

• WR 28 1/1/2005 Co-60 <13.29

• WR 28 L9098-01 4/4/2005 Zn-65 3.00 2.7 9.4 WR 28 L9588-01 6/27/2005 Zn-65 -1.70 1.8 6.9 WR 28 7/11/2005 Zn-65 <7.948

• WR 28 7/25/2005 Zn-65 <15.50

• WR 28 8/8/2005 Zn-65 <16.82

• WR 28 8/22/2005 Zn-65 <17.16 a WR 28 9/6/2005 Zn-65 <8.902

• WR 28 9/19/2005 Zn-65 <6.771 a WR 28 10/3/2005 Zn-65 <12.00

• WR 28 10/17/2005 Zn-65 <3.535

• WR 28 10/31/2005 Zn-65 <11.6

• WR 28 11/14/2005 Zn-65 <14.42

• WR 28 11/28/2005 Zn-65 <11.74

• WR 28 12/12/2005 Zn-65 <12.6

• C-6

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 WR 28 1/1/2005 Zn-65 <5.597

• WR 28 L9098-01 4/4/2005 Zr-95 -3.90 2.8 13 WR 28 L9588-01 6/27/2005 Zr-95 -0.70 1.8 6.6 WR 28 L9098-01 4/4/2005 1-131 -3.20 3.8 15 WR 28 L9588-01 6/27/2005 1-131 24.10 9 28 WR 28 L9098-01 4/4/2005 Cs-134 0.00 1.6 6.5 WR 28 L9588-01 6/27/2005 Cs-1 34 -0.91 .74 2.9 WR 28 7/11/2005 Cs-1 34 <3.678 WR 28 7/25/2005 Cs-1 34 <3.609 WR 28 8/8/2005 Cs-134 <4.525 WR 28 8/22/2005 Cs-134 <5.651 WR 28 9/6/2005 Cs-134 <4.363 WR 28 9/19/2005 Cs-134 <2.564 WR 28 10/3/2005 Cs-1 34 <6.505 WR 28 10/17/2005 Cs-134 <4.428 WR 28 10/31/2005 Cs-134 <4.388

• WR 28 11/14/2005 Cs-134 <4.969

• WR 28 11/28/2005 Cs-134 <3.276

• WR 28 12/12/2005 Cs-134 <4.168

• WR 28' 1/1/2005 Cs-134 <5.261

• WR 28 L9098-01 4/4/2005 Cs-137 1.00 1.8 6.7 WR 28 L9588-01 6/27/2005 Cs-137 -0.18 .84 3 WR 28 7/11/2005 Cs-1 37 <9.807

• WR 28 7/25/2005 Cs-137 <12.46 WR 28 8/8/2005 Cs-137 <11.51 WR 28 8/22/2005 Cs-137 <12.52 WR 28 9/6/2005 Cs-137 <11.98 WR 28 9/19/2005 Cs-137 <5.754 WR 28 10/3/2005 Cs-137 <13.63 WR 28 10/17/2005 Cs-137 <14.69 WR 28 10/31/2005 Cs-137 <13.83 WR 28 11/14/2005 Cs-137 <13.61 WR 28 11/28/2005 Cs-137 <12.37 WR 28 12/12/2005 Cs-137 <12.97 WR 28 1/1/2005 Cs-137 <11.93 WR 28 L9098-01 4/4/2005 Ba-140 1.10 3.7 14 WR 28 L9588-01 6/27/2005 Ba-140 2.00 4.3 15 RIVER WATER WR 30 L9098-02 4/4/2005 H-3 400 300 950 WR 30 L9588-02 6/27/2005 H-3 -220 370 1200 WR 30 7/11/2005 H-3 <1280 WR 30 7/25/2005 H-3 <1160

• WR 30 8/8/2005 H-3 <1260

• WR 30 8/22/2005 H-3 <1340 WR 30 9/6/2005 H-3 <1140

• WR 30 9/19/2005 H-3 <1190 WR 30 10/3/2005 H-3 <1190

• WR 30 10/17/2005 H-3 <1240

• WR 30 10/31/2005 H-3 <1220

• WR 30 11/14/2005 H-3 <1240 WR 30 11/28/2005 H-3 <1210 WR 30 12/12/2005 H-3 <1270

• WR 30 1/1/2005 H-3 <1180

• WR 30 L9098-02 4/4/2005 Mn-54 2.8 1.6 5.2 WR 30 L9588-02 6/27/2005 Mn-54 0.27 .7 2.4 WR 30 7/11/2005 Mn-54 <5.792 WR 30 7/25/2005 Mn-54 *Missed WR 30 8/8/2005 Mn-54 <2.319 WR 30 8/22/2005 Mn-54 <4.906 WR 30 9/6/2005 Mn-54 <5.242 WR 30 9/19/2005 Mn-54 <3.933

• WR 30 10/3/2005 Mn-54 <4.93 WR 30 10/17/2005 Mn-54 <3.473 WR 30 10/31/2005 Mn-54 <1.451 WR 30 11/14/2005 Mn-54 <4.165 WR 30 11/28/2005 Mn-54 <4.813 WR 30 12/12/2005 Mn-54 <1.449 WR 30 1/1/2005 Mn-54 <4.605

• WR 30 L9098-02 4/4/2005 Co-58 -0.50 1.8 7.3 WR 30 L9588-02 6/27/2005 Co-58 0.84 .84 2.9 WR 30 7/11/2005 Co-58 <5.084 WR 30 7/25/2005 Co-58 spec C-7

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 WR 30 8/8/2005 Co-58 <6.596 WR 30 8/22/2005 Co-58 <5.415 WR 30 9/6/2005 Co-58 <4.905 WR 30 9/19/2005 Co-58 <4.884 WR 30 10/3/2005 Co-58 <1.437 WR 30 10/17/2005 Co-58 <6.011

• WR 30 10/31/2005 Co-58 <3.643

• WR 30 11/14/2005 Co-58 <6.408 WR 30 11/28/2005 Co-58 <5.958 WR 30 12/12/2005 Co-58 <4.894 WR 30 1/1/2005 Co-58 <2.782

• WR 30 L9098-02 4/4/2005 Fe-59 3.40 5.4 20 WR 30 L9588-02 6/27/2005 Fe-59 0.60 2.3 8.1 WR 30 L9098-02 4/4/2005 Co-60 -1.80 2.2 9.7 WR 30 L9588-02 6/27/2005 Co-60 0.62 .67 2.3 WR 30 7/11/2005 Co-60 <14.29 WR 30 7/25/2005 Co-60 wntten

• WR 30 8/8/2005 Co-60 <14.21 WR 30 8/22/2005 Co-60 <13.95 WR 30 9/6/2005 Co-60 <14.05 WR 30 9/19/2005 Co-60 <12.42 WR 30 10/3/2005 Co-60 <13.46

• WR 30 10/17/2005 Co-60 <13.76

• WR 30 10/31/2005 Co-60 <11.54 WR 30 11/14/2005 Co-60 <13.77 WR 30 11/28/2005 Co-60 <12.00 WR 30 12/12/2005 Co-60 <12.50 WR 30 1/1/2005 Co-60 <14.66

• WR 30 L9098-02 4/4/2005 Zn-65 -6.70 3.9 19 WR 30 L9588-02 6/27/2005 Zn-65 -0.10 1.4 5.1 WR 30 7/11/2005 Zn-65 <10.04 WR 30 7/25/2005 Zn-65 WR 30 8/8/2005 Zn-65 <15.76 WR 30 8/22/2005 Zn-65 <10.51 WR 30 9/6/2005 Zn-65 <12.07 WR 30 9/19/2005 Zn-65 <9.595 WR 30 10/3/2005 Zn-65 <10.62 WR 30 10/17/2005 Zn-65 <3.534 WR 30 10/31/2005 Zn-65 <11.26 WR 30 11/14/2005 Zn-65 <2.901

• WR 30 11/28/2005 Zn-65 <12.07

• WR 30 12/12/2005 Zn-65 <3.535

• WR 30 1/1/2005 Zn-65 <8.175

• WR 30 L9098-02 4/4/2005 Zr-95 0.10 2.9 12 WR 30 L9588-02 6/27/2005 Zr-95 0.10 1.4 4.9 WR 30 L9098-02 4/4/2005 1-131 -2.80 3.9 16 WR 30 L9588-02 6/27/2005 1-131 -11.70 7.5 27 WR 30 L9098-02 4/4/2005 Cs-134 -1.60 2 8.5 WR 30 L9588-02 6/27/2005 Cs-134 0.52 .71 2.5 WR 30 7/11/2005 Cs-134 <3.845

• WR 30 7/25/2005 Cs-134

• WR 30 8/8/2005 Cs-134 <5.893 WR 30 8/22/2005 Cs-134 <5.038 WR 30 9/6/2005 Cs-134 <4.058

• WR 30 9/19/2005 Cs-134 <4.184

• WR 30 10/3/2005 Cs-134 <5.261 WR 30 10/17/2005 Cs-1 34 <3.749

• WR 30 10/31/2005 Cs-134 <5.07 WR 30 11/14/2005 Cs-134 <5.21

• WR 30 11/28/2005 Cs-134 <5.849 WR 30 12/12/2005 Cs-134 <5.555 WR 30 1/1/2005 Cs-134 <4.402 WR 30 L9098-02 4/4/2005 Cs-137 1.20 1.5 5.4 WR 30 L9588-02 6/27/2005 Cs-137 0.27 .64 2.2 WR 30 7/11/2005 Cs-137 <11.32

• WR 30 7/25/2005 Cs-1 37 WR 30 8/8/2005 Cs-137 <12.37 WR 30 8/22/2005 Cs-137 <12.62

• WR 30 9/6/2005 Cs-137 <14.97

• WR 30 9/19/2005 Cs-137 <13.30 WR 30 10/3/2005 Cs-1 37 <11.82 WR 30 10/17/2005 Cs-137 <13.21

• WR 30 10/31/2005 Cs-137 <13.60

• WR 30 11/14/2005 Cs-137 <11.85

• WR 30 11/28/2005 Cs-137 <13.03

• C-8

Haddam Neck Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2005 WR 12/12/2005 Cs-137 <10.63 WR 1/1/2005 Cs-I 37 <12.36 WR L9098-02 4/4/2005 Ba-140 1.40 2.1 8.7 WR L9588-02 6/27/2005 Ba-140 1.30 3.2 11 WELL WATER WW L9066-01 4/4/2005 H-3 530 310 950 WW L9066-01 4/4/2005 Mn-54 0.4 2 8.1 WW L9066-01 4/4/2005 Co-58 -2.9 1.9 9.8 WW L9066-01 4/4/2005 Fe-59 -1.3 7.6 33 WW L9066-01 4/4/2005 Co-60 -4.3 2.2 12 WW L9066-01 4/4/2005 Zn-65 -10.1 5.3 27 ww L9066-01 4/4/2005 Zr-95 0.2 4.4 18 WW L9066-01 4/4/2005 1-131 -7.7 5.6 23 WW L9066-01 4/4/2005 Cs-134 -0.8 2.4 10 WW L9066-01 4/4/2005 Cs-137 3.3 2.7 9.2 WW L9066-01 4/4/2005 Ba-140 1.7 3.9 16 WELL WATER WW L9066-02 4/4/2005 H-3 780 310 950 wW L9501-01 6/27/2005 H-3 -80.00 370 1200 WW L9066-02 4/4/2005 Mn-54 1.0 2.8 11 Ww L9501-01 6/27/2005 Mn-54 -2.30 2.4 9.2 WW L9066-02 4/4/2005 Co-58 -6.9 3.5 15 WW L9501-01 6/27/2005 Co-58 -0.50 2 7.8 WW L9066-02 4/4/2005 Fe-59 -7 9.0 39 WW L9501 -01 6/27/2005 Fe-59 -8.70 6.5 28 Ww L9066-02 4/4/2005 Co-60 -1.7 3.4 14 WW L9501-01 6/27/2005 Co-60 0.00 2.2 8.6 WW L9066-02 4/4/2005 Zn-65 0 5.8 23 WW L9501-01 6/27/2005 Zn-65 16.80 8.8 28 Ww L9066-02 4/4/2005 Zr-95 3.7 5.9 21 Ww L9501-01 6/27/2005 Zr-95 2.70 3.7 13 Ww L9066-02 4/4/2005 1-131 -4 5.7 22 WW L9501-01 6/27/2005 1-131 1.80 4.9 17 Ww L9066-02 4/4/2005 Cs-134 4.6 3.3 11 WW L9501-01 6/27/2005 Cs-134 4.40 2.6 8.4 WW L9066-02 4/4/2005 Cs-137 -1.1 2.8 11 WW L9501 -01 2.5 9.7 6/27/2005 Cs-137 -2.50 WW L9066-02 4/4/2005 Ba-140 -4 4.0 20 Ww L9501-01 6/27/2005 Ba-140 5.50 4.1 14

• MDC reported as concentration C-9