ML021360536

Edwin I Hatch Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report for 2001

ML021360536
Person / Time
Site:	Hatch
Issue date:	05/07/2002
From:	Sumner H Southern Nuclear Operating Co
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
ENV-02-097, HL-6239
Download: ML021360536 (63)

Text

Lewis Sumner Southern Nuclear Vice President Operating Company, Inc.

Hatch Project Support 40 Inverness Parkway Post Office Box 1295 Birmingham, Alabama 35201 Tel 205.992.7279 Fax 205.992.0341 SOUTHERN COMPANY Energy to Serve Your Wo rldS May 7, 2002 Docket Numbers 50-321 HL-6239 50-366 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC. 20555 Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report for 2001 Ladies and Gentlemen:

In accordance with Plant Hatch Units 1 and 2 Technical Specifications, Section 5.6.2, Southern Nuclear Operating Company hereby submits the enclosed Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report for 2001.

If you have any questions in this regard, please contact this office at any time.

Respectfully submitted, H. L. Sumner, Jr.

HLS/JHD:ahl ENV-02-097

Enclosure:

Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report for 2001 cc: (See next page.)

U. S. Nuclear Regulator), Commission Page 2 ENV-02-097 cc: Southern Nuclear Operating Company P. H. Wells, General Manager - Nuclear Plant SNC Document Management (R-Type A02.001)

U. S. Nuclear Regulatorv Commission. Washinton, D. C.

L. N. Olshan, Project Manager - Hatch U. S. Nuclear Regulatorv Commission. Region II L. A. Reyes, Regional Administrator J. T. Munday, Senior Resident Inspector, Hatch State of Georgia J. L. Setser, Department of Natural Resources American Nuclear Insurers Mr. Robert A. Oliveira

EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT FOR 2001 SOUTHERNAN 4A COMPANY Energy to Serve Your World"'

TABLE OF CONTENTS Title and/or Section Subsection Page List of Figures ii List of Tables iii List of Acronyms iv 1.0 Introduction 1-1 2.0 REMP Description 2-1 3.0 Results Sununary 3-1 4.0 Discussion of Results 4-1 4.1 Land Use Census and River Survey 4-5 4.2 Airborne 4-7 4.3 Direct Radiation 4-12 4.4 Milk 4-18 4.5 Vegetation 4-22 4.6 River Water 4-25 4.7 Fish 4-28 4.8 Sediment 4-32 5.0 Interlaboratory Comparison Program (ICP) 5-1 6.0 Conclusions 6-1 i

LIST OF FIGURES Figure Number Title Page Figure 2-1 REMP Stations Near the Plant 2-7 Figure 2-2 REMP Stations Beyond Six Miles from the Plant 2-8 Figure 4.2-1 Average Weekly Gross Beta Air Concentration 4-7 Figure 4.2-2 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Air 4-9 Figure 4.3-1 Average Quarterly Exposure from Direct Radiation 4-13 Figure 4.3-2 Average Quarterly Exposure from Direct Radiation at Special Interest Areas 4-15 Figure 4.4-1 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Milk 4-18 Figure 4.4-2 Average Annual 1-131 Concentration in Milk 4-20 Figure 4.5-1 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Vegetation 4-23 Figure 4.6-1 Average Annual H-3 Concentration in River Water 4-26 Figure 4.7-1 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Fish 4-28 Figure 4.7-2 Average Annual Cs-134 Concentration in Fish 4-30 Figure 4.8-1 Average Annual Co-60 Concentration in Sediment 4-32 Figure 4.8-2 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Sediment 4-34 Figure 4.8-3 Average Annual Indicator Station Concentrations of Select Nuclides in Sediment 4-36 ii

LIST OF TABLES Table Number Title Page Table 2-1 Summary Description of Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program 2-2 Table 2-2 Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations 2-5 Table 3-1 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Annual Summary 3-2 Table 4-1 Minimum Detectable Concentrations (MDC) 4-1 Table 4-2 Reporting Levels (RL) 4-2 Table 4-3 Deviations from Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program 4-4 Table 4.1-1 Land Use Census Results 4-5 Table 4.2-1 Average Weekly Gross Beta Air Concentration 4-8 Table 4.2-2 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Air 4-10 Table 4.3-1 Average Quarterly Exposure from Direct Radiation 4-14 Table 4.3-2 Average Quarterly Exposure from Direct Radiation at Special Interest Areas 4-16 Table 4.4-1 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Milk 4-19 Table 4.4-2 Average Annual 1-131 Concentration in Milk 4-21 Table 4.5-1 Average Annual Cs- 137 Concentration in Vegetation 4-24 Table 4.6-1 Average Annual H-3 Concentration in River Water 4-27 Table 4.7-1 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Fish 4-29 Table 4.7-2 Average Annual Cs- 134 Concentration in Fish 4-31 Table 4.8-1 Average Annual Co-60 Concentration in Sediment 4-33 Table 4.8-2 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Sediment 4-35 Table 4.8-3 Sediment Nuclide Concentrations Other Than Co-60 &

Cs-137 4-37 Table 5-1 Interlaboratory Comparison Results 5-3 iii

LIST OF ACRONYMS Acronyms presented in alphabetical order.

Acronym Definition ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials CL Confidence Level EL Georgia Power Company Environmental Laboratory EPA Environmental Protection Agency GPC Georgia Power Company HNP Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant ICP Interlaboratory Comparison Program MDC Minimum Detectable Concentration MDD Minimum Detectable Difference NA Not Applicable NDM No Detectable Measurement(s)

NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission ODCM Offsite Dose Calculation Manual Po Preoperation REMP Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program RL Reporting Level TLD Thermoluminescent Dosimeter TS Technical Specification iv

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) is conducted in accordance with Chapter 4 of the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM).

REMP activities for 2001 are reported herein in accordance with Technical Specification (TS) 5.6.2 and ODCM 7.1.

The objectives of the REMP are to:

1) Determine the levels of radiation and the concentrations of radioactivity in the environs and;

2) Assess the radiological impact (if any) to the environment due to the operation of the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant (HNP).

The assessments include comparisons between the results of analyses of samples obtained at locations where radiological levels are not expected to be affected by plant operation (control stations) and at locations where radiological levels are more likely to be affected by plant operation (indicator stations), as well as comparisons between preoperational and operational sample results.

The preoperational stage of the REMP began with the establishment and activation of the environmental monitoring stations in January of 1972. The operational stage of the REMP began on September 12, 1974 with Unit 1 initial criticality.

A description of the REMP is provided in Section 2 of this report. An annual summary of the results of the analyses of REMP samples is provided in Section 3.

A discussion of the results, including assessments of any radiological impacts upon the environment, and the results of the land use census and the river survey, are provided in Section 4. The results of the Interlaboratory Comparison Program (ICP) are provided in Section 5. Conclusions are provided in Section 6.

1-1

2.0 REMP DESCRIPTION A summary description of the REMP is provided in Table 2-1. This table summarizes the program as it meets the requirements outlined in ODCM Table 4

1. It details the sample types to be collected and the analyses to be performed in order to monitor the airborne, direct radiation, waterborne and ingestion pathways, and also delineates the collection and analysis frequencies. The sampling locations (stations) specified by ODCM 4.2 are depicted on maps in Figures 2-1 and 2-2.

These maps are keyed to Table 2-2 which delineates the direction and distance of each station from the main stack.

REMP samples are collected by Georgia Power Company's (GPC) Environmental Laboratory (EL) personnel. The same lab performs all the laboratory analyses at their headquarters in Smyrna, Georgia.

2-1

TABLE 2-1 (SHEET 1 of 3)

SUMMARY

DESCRIPTION OF RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM Exposure Pathway Approximate Sampling and Type of Analysis and Frequency and/or Sample Number of Sample Collection Frequency Locations

1. Airborne 6 Continuous operation Radioiodine canister: 1-131 analysis, weekly.

Radioiodine and of the sampler with Particulates sample collection Particulate sampler: analyze for gross beta radioactivity not less weekly. than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> following filter change, weekly; perform gamma isotopic analysis on affected sample when gross beta activity is 10 times the yearly mean of control samples; and composite (by location) for gamma isotopic analysis, quarterly.

2. Direct Radiation 37 Quarterly Gamma dose, quarterly.

3... ... .......

Ingestion s"e ..... ........

Milk (a) 1 Biweekly Gamma isotopic and 1-131 analysis, biweekly.

i .....................................................................................

1..............................

I"........... I........

............. I..............................

Fish or Clams (b) 2 Semiannually Gamma isotopic analysis on edible portions, semiannually.

............ i .................................

I......................

i ..............................................

I ......................................................................................

Grass or Leafy 3 Monthly during Gamma isotopic analysis, monthly. (c)

Vegetation growing season.

4. Waterborne I ....................................

............... I..........................

.........1..............................

I............... ................................

Surface 2 Composite sample Gamma isotopic analysis, monthly. Composite (by location) for collected monthly. (d) tritium analysis, quarterly.

S ........................................

Ie..................

2I.....................................................................

Sediment Semiannually.. . .............. Gamma ............................

iisotopic o p c aanalysis, ly s ssemiannually. ea n.......................................

nl.....................

l.....................................................................

TABLE 2-1 (SHEET 2 of 3)

SUMMARY

DESCRIPTION OF RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM Exposure Pathway Approximate Sampling and Type of Analysis and Frequency and/or Sample Number of Sample Collection Frequency Locations Drinking Water One sample of river River water collected 1-131 analysis on each sample when biweekly collections are (e & f) water near the intake near the intake will be required. Gross beta and gamma isotopic analysis on each and one sample of a composite sample; sample; composite (by location) for tritium analysis, quarterly.

finished water from the finished water will each of one to three be a grab sample.

of the nearest water These samples will be supplies which could collected monthly be affected by HNP unless the calculated discharges. dose due to consumption of the water is greater than 1 mrem/year; then the collection will be biweekly. The collections may revert to monthly should the calculated doses become less than 1 mrem/year.

o I

TABLE 2-1 (SHEET 3 of 3)

SUMMARY

DESCRIPTION OF RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM Notes:

a. Up to three sampling locations within 5 miles and in different sectors will be used as available. In addition, one or more control locations beyond 10 miles will be used.

b. Commercially or recreationally important fish may be sampled. Clams may be sampled if difficulties are encountered in obtaining sufficient fish samples.

c. If gamma isotopic analysis is not sensitive enough to meet the Minimum Detectable Concentration (MDC), a separate analysis for 1-131 may be performed.

d. The composite samples shall be composed of a series of aliquots collected at intervals not exceeding a few hours.

e. If it is found that river water downstream of the plant is used for drinking, drinking water samples will be collected and analyzed as specified herein.

[-O

f. A survey shall be conducted annually at least 50 river miles downstream of the plant to identify those who use water from the Altamaha River for drinking.

TABLE 2-2 (SHEET 1 of 2)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING LOCATIONS Station Station Descriptive Location Direction Distance (a) Sample Type Number Type (a) (miles) 064 Other Roadside Park WNW 0.8 Direct Rad 101 Indicator Inner Ring N 1.9 Direct Rad 102 Indicator Inner Ring NNE 2.5 Direct Rad 103 Indicator Inner Ring NE 1.8 Airborne Rad Direct Rad 104 Indicator Inner Ring ENE 1.6 Direct Rad 105 Indicator Inner Ring E 3.7 Direct Rad 106 Indicator Inner Ring ESE 1.1 Direct Rad Vegetation 107 Indicator Inner Ring SE 1.2 Airborne Rad Direct Rad 108 Indicator Inner Ring SSE 1.6 Direct Rad 109 Indicator Inner Ring S 0.9 Direct Rad 110 Indicator Inner Ring SSW 1.0 Direct Rad 111 Indicator Inner Ring SW 0.9 Direct Rad 112 Indicator Inner Ring WSW 1.0 Airborne Rad Direct Rad Vegetation 113 Indicator Inner Ring W 1.1 Direct Rad 114 Indicator Inner Ring WNW 1.2 Direct Rad 115 Indicator Inner Ring NW 1.1 Direct Rad 116 Indicator Inner Ring NNW 1.6 Airborne Rad Direct Rad 170 Control Upstream WNW (c) River (b) 172 Indicator Downstream E (C) River (b) 201 Other Outer Ring N 5.0 Direct Rad 202 Other Outer Ring NNE 4.9 Direct Rad 203 Other Outer Ring NE 5.0 Direct Rad 204 Other Outer Ring ENE 5.0 Direct Rad 205 Other Outer Ring E 7.2 Direct Rad 206 Other Outer Ring ESE 4.8 Direct Rad 207 Other Outer Ring SE 4.3 Direct Rad 208 Other Outer Ring SSE 4.8 Direct Rad 209 Other Outer Ring S 4.4 Direct Rad 210 Other Outer Ring SSW 4.3 Direct Rad 211 Other Outer Ring SW 4.7 Direct Rad 212 Other Outer Ring WSW 4.4 Direct Rad 213 Other Outer Ring W 4.3 Direct Rad 214 Other Outer Ring WNW 5.4 Direct Rad 215 Other Outer Ring NW 4.4 Direct Rad 216 Other Outer Ring NNW 4.8 Direct Rad 301 Other Toombs Central School N 8.0 Direct Rad 304 Control State Prison ENE 11.2 Airborne Rad Direct Rad 304 Control State Prison ENE 10.3 Milk 309 Control Baxley S 10.0 Airborne Rad Substation Direct Rad 416 Control Emergency News NNW 21.0 Direct Rad Center Vegetation 2-5

TABLE 2-2 (SHEET 2 of 2)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING LOCATIONS Notes:

a. Direction and distance are determined from the main stack.

b. River (fish or clams, shoreline sediment, and surface water)

c. Station 170 is located approximately 0.6 river miles upstream of the intake structure for river water, 1.1 river miles for sediment and clams, and 1.5 river miles for fish.

Station 172 is located approximately 3.0 river miles downstream of the discharge structure for river water, sediment and clams, and 1.7 river miles for fish.

The locations from which river water and sediment may be taken can be sharply defined.

However, the sampling locations for clams often have to be extended over a wide area to obtain a sufficient quantity. High water adds to the difficulty in obtaining clam samples and may also make an otherwise suitable location for sediment sampling unavailable. A stretch of the river of a few miles or so is generally needed to obtain adequate fish samples. The mile locations given above represent approximations of the locations where samples are collected.

2-6

I A wN Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations Indicator Control Additional REMP Stations Near RD A A A the Plant Other 0 0 S T-o &other a a Figure 2-1 Coi 2-7

Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations Indicator Cotrol AM~o. REMP Stations Beyond Six TLD A A A Miles from the Plant Other 0 0 S TLD & Other a Figure 2-2 C02 2-8

3.0 RESULTS

SUMMARY

In accordance with ODCM 7.1.2.1, the summarized and tabulated results for all of the regular samples collected for the year at the designated indicator and control stations are presented in Table 3-1. The format of Table 3-1 is similar to Table 3 of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Branch Technical Position, "An Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program", Revision 1, November 1979. Since no naturally occurring radionuclides were found in the plant's effluent releases, only man-made radionuclides are reported as permitted by ODCM 7.1.2.1. Results for samples collected at locations other than control or indicator stations are discussed in Section 4 under the particular sample type.

3-1

TABLE 3-1 (SHEET 1 of 4)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366 Appling County, Georgia Medium or Type and Minimum Indicator Location with the Highest Control Pathway Total Number Detectable Locations Annual Mean Locations Sampled of Analyses Concentration Mean (b), Mean (b),

(Unit of Performed (MDC) (a) Range Name Distance Mean (b), Range Measurement) (Fraction) & Direction Range (Fraction) (Fraction)

Airborne Gross Beta 10 21.4 No. 103 21.8 21.0 Particulates 318 7-47 Indicator 11-35 9-45 Gamma Isotopic 24 Cs-134 50 NDM (c) NDM NDM Cs-137 60 NDM NDM NDM Airborne 1-131 70 NDM NDM NDM Radioiodine 318 (fCi/m3)

Direct Gamma Dose NA(d) 12.0 No. 214(e) 15.3 12.1 Radiation 75 8.9-16.0 Outer Ring 13.9 -16.7 9.9-13.9 (mR/91 days) (63/63) 5.4 miles, WNW (4/4) (12/12)

Milk Gamma (pCi/1) Isotopic 26 Cs-134 15 NA NDM NDM Cs-137 18 NA NDM NDM Ba-140 60 NA NDM NDM La- 140 15 NA NDM NDM 61-31 1 NA NDM NDM

__ __ _ __ _ 26 1 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

TABLE 3-1 (SHEET 2 of 4)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366 Appling County, Georgia Medium or Type and Minimum Indicator Location with the Highest Control Pathway Total Number Detectable Locations Annual Mean Locations Sampled of Analyses Concentration Mean (b), Mean (b),

(Unit of Performed (MDC) (a) Range Name Distance Mean (b), Range Measurement) (Fraction) & Direction Range (Fraction) (Fraction)

Vegetation Gamma (pCi/kg-wet) Isotopic 36 1-131 60 NDM NDM NDM Cs-134 60 NDM NDM NDM Cs-137 80 NDM NDM NDM River Water Gamma (pCi/1) Isotopic 24 Mn-54 15 NDM NDM NDM Fe-59 30 NDM NDM NDM Co-58 15 NDM NDM NDM Co-60 15 NDM NDM NDM Zn-65 30 NDM NDM NDM Zr-95 30 NDM NDM NDM Nb-95 15 NDM NDM NDM 1-131 15 (f) NDM NDM NDM Cs-134 15 NDM NDM NDM Cs-137 18 NDM NDM NDM Ba-140 60 NDM NDM NDM tirim....................

......... .....D .......... ... 1DM

..... ... ................... M I II....

3o o i 5..................... .........................

NDM NDM

TABLE 3-1 (SHEET 3 of 4)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366 Appling County, Georgia Medium or Type and Minimum Indicator Location with the Highest Control Pathway Total Number Detectable Locations Annual Mean Locations Sampled of Analyses Concentration Mean (b), Mean (b),

(Unit of Performed (MDC) (a) Range Name Distance Mean (b), Range Measurement) (Fraction) & Direction Range (Fraction) (Fraction)

Fish Gamma (pCi/kg-wet) Isotopic 8

Mn-54 130 NDM NDM NDM Fe-59 260 NDM NDM NDM Co-58 130 NDM NDM NDM Co-60 130 NDM NDM NDM Zn-65 260 NDM NDM NDM Cs-134 130 NDM NDM NDM Cs-137 150 20.8 No. 172 20.8 10.2 13.6-27.5 1.7 miles 13.6-27.5 9.3-11.9 (4/4) Downstream (4/4) (4/4)

Sediment Gamma (pCi/kg-dry) Isotopic 4

Cs-134 150 NDM NDM NDM Cs-137 180 68.7 No. 170 69.6 69.6 34.6-102.7 1.1 miles 49.3-89.9 49.3-89.9 (2/2) Upstream (2/2) (2/2)

TABLE 3-1 (SHEET 4 of 4)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366 Appling County, Georgia NOTATIONS

a. The MDC is defined in ODCM 10.1. Except as noted otherwise, the values listed in this column are the detection capabilities required by ODCM Table 4-3. The values listed in this column are a priori (before the fact) MDCs. In practice, the a posteriori (after the fact) MDCs are generally lower than the values listed. Any a posteriori MDC greater than the value listed in this column is discussed in Section 4.

b. Mean and range are based upon detectable measurements only. The fraction of all measurements at specified locations that are detectable is placed in parenthesis.

c. No Detectable Measurement(s).

d. Not Applicable.

e. This station is in the inner ring and is one of sixteen indicator stations.

f. If a drinking water pathway were to exist, a MDC of 1 pCi/1 would have been used (see Notation c of ODCM Table 4-3).

g. If a drinking water pathway were to exist, a MDC of 2000 pCi/I would have been used (see Notation b of ODCM Table 4-3).

4.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS Included in this section are evaluations of the laboratory results for the various sample types. Comparisons were made between the difference in mean values for pairs of station groups (e.g., indicator and control stations) and the calculated Minimum Detectable Difference (MDD) between these pairs at the 99%

Confidence Level (CL). The MDD was determined using the standard Student's t-test. A difference in the mean values which was less than the MDD was considered to be statistically indiscernible.

The 2001 results were compared with past results, including those obtained during preoperation. As appropriate, results were compared with their Minimum Detectable Concentrations (MDC) and Reporting Levels (RL) which are listed in Tables 4-1 and 4-2 of this report, respectively. The required MDCs were achieved during laboratory sample analyses. Any anomalous results are explained within this report.

Results of interest are graphed to show historical trends. The data points are tabulated and included in this report. The points plotted and provided in the tables represent mean values of only detectable results. Periods for which no detectable measurements (NDM) were observed or periods for which values were not applicable (e.g., milk indicator, etc.) are plotted as and listed in the tables as O's.

Table 4-1 Minimum Detectable Concentrations (MDC)

Analysis Water Airborne Fish Milk Grass or Sediment (pCi/l) Particulate (pCi/kg- (pCi/1) Leafy (pCi/kg or Gases wet) Vegetation dry)

(fCi/m3) (pCi/kg-wet)

Gross Beta 4 10 H-3 2000 (a)

Mn-54 15 130 Fe-59 30 260 Co-58 15 130 Co-60 15 130 Zn-65 30 260 Zr-95 30 Nb-95 15 1-131 1 (b) 70 1 60 Cs-134 15 50 130 15 60 150 Cs-137 18 60 150 18 80 180 Ba-140 60 60 La-140 15 15 (a) If no drinking water pathway exists, a value of 3000 pCi/1 may be used.

(b) If no drinking water pathway exists, a value of 15 pCi/l may be used.

4-1

Table 4-2 Reporting Levels (RL)

Analysis Water Airborne Fish Milk (pCi/I) Grass or Leafy (pCi/l) Particulate (pCi/kg-wet) Vegetation or Gases (pCi/kg-wet)

(fCi/m3)

H-3 20,000 (a)

Mn-54 1000 30,000 Fe-59 400 10,000 Co-58 1000 30,000 Co-60 300 10,000 Zn-65 300 20,000 Zr-95 400 Nb-95 700 1-131 2 (b) 900 3 100 Cs-134 30 10,000 1000 60 1000 Cs-137 50 20,000 2000 70 2000 Ba-140 200 300 La-140 100 400 (a) This is the 40 CFR 141 value for drinking water samples. If no drinking water pathway exists, a value of 30,000 maybe used.

(b) If no drinking water pathway exists, a value of 20 pCi/l may be used.

4-2

Atmospheric nuclear weapons tests from the mid 1940s through 1980 distributed man-made nuclides around the world. The most recent atmospheric tests in the 1970s and in 1980 had a significant impact upon the radiological concentrations found in the environment prior to and during preoperation, and the earlier years of operation. Some long lived radionuclides, such as Cs-137, continue to be detectable.

Significant upward trends also followed the Chernobyl incident which began on April 26, 1986.

In accordance with ODCM 4.1.1.2.1, deviations from the required sampling schedule are permitted, if samples are unobtainable due to hazardous conditions, unavailability, inclement weather, equipment malfunction or other just reasons.

Deviations from conducting the REMP as described in Table 2-1 are summarized in Table 4-3 along with their causes and resolutions. In 2001, only one deviation resulted in loss of data. As discussed in Section 4.3, both TLDs at Station 110 were damaged by a local brush fire during Quarter 1, resulting in unrecoverable data.

All results were tested for conformance to Chauvenet's criterion (G. D. Chase and J. L. Rabinowitz, Principles of Radioisotope Methodology, Burgess Publishing Company, 1962, pages 87-90) to identify values which differed from the mean of a set by a statistically significant amount. Identified outliers were investigated to determine the reason(s) for the difference. If equipment malfunction or other valid physical reasons were identified as causing the variation, the anomalous result was excluded from the data set as non-representative. No data were excluded exclusively for failing Chauvenet's criterion. Data exclusions are discussed in this section under the appropriate sample type.

4-3

TABLE 4-3 DEVIATIONS FROM RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM COLLECTION AFFECTED DEVIATION CAUSE RESOLUTION PERIOD SAMPLES 1st Quarter 2001 TLD Station Direct radiation exposure results TLD was burned in a localized The TLD was replaced.

110 for the first quarter were not brush fire.

obtained.

2nd Quarter 2001 Milk (ICP No milk sample was obtained Administrative error in that steps Arrangements made with Sample) from the vendor that supplies were not taken to assure that the vendor supplying ICP ICP samples for analysis milk sample would be supplied, samples that all appropriate samples will be furnished to EL for analyses.

4.1 Land Use Census and River Survey In accordance with ODCM 4.1.2, a land use census was conducted on November 12, 2001 and November 13 2001 to determine the locations of the nearest permanent residence and milk animal in each of the 16 compass sectors within a distance of 5 miles, and the locations of all milk animals within a distance of 3 miles. A milk animal is defined as a cow or goat producing milk for human consumption. The locations of beef cattle and of gardens greater than 500 square feet producing broad leaf vegetation were also included in the census. The census results are tabulated in the Table 4.1-1.

Table 4.1-1 LAND USE CENSUS RESULTS Distance in Miles to Nearest Location in Each Sector SECTOR RESIDENCE IMILK ANIMAL BEEF CATTLE GARDEN N 2.1 None None 2.9 NNE 2.9 None None 2.9 NE 3.3 None None 3.2 ENE 4.2 None 4.1 4.7 E None None None None ESE 3.8 None None None SE 1.8 None 2.3 2.2 SSE 2.0 None 2.2 2.1 S 1.0 None 2.3 2.3 SSW 1.1 None 2.0 2.2 SW 1.0 None 2.3 1.6 WSW 1.0 None 3.7 1.2 W 1.1 None 2.8 1.3 WNW 1.1 None None 1.6 NW 3.6 None 4.6 None NNW 1.8 4.8 4.4 1.9 4-5

ODCM 4.1.2.2.1 requires a new controlling receptor to be identified if the land use census identifies a location that yields a calculated receptor dose greater than the one in current use. No change in the controlling receptor was required as a result of the 2001 land use census. The current controlling receptor as described in ODCM Table 3-7 is a child in the WSW Sector at 1.2 miles ODCM 4.1.2.2.2 requires that whenever the land use census identifies a location which would yield a calculated dose (via the same ingestion pathway) 20% greater than that of a current indicator station, the new location must become a REMP station (if samples are available). The 2001 land use census did not identify a garden which yielded a calculated dose 20% greater than that for any of the current indicator stations for vegetation. One milk animal was found during the land use census, however a reliable supply of milk samples was not available from this location during 2001. The results of the census were corroborated by inquiries to the county extension agents in the 5 counties in the vicinity of the plant.

As required by Note f of Table 2-1, the annual survey of the Altamaha River for 50 miles downstream of the plant was conducted on September 17, 2001 to identify any withdrawal of river water for drinking purposes. No sources of withdrawal for drinking water were identified. One source of withdrawal for irrigation purposes was found at a location approximately three and three-quarter miles downstream of the plant discharge. Further investigation revealed that the water was being used for farm crop irrigation. Information obtained from the Georgia Department of Natural Resources on September 19, 2001 indicated that the identified withdrawal location for irrigation was the only surface water withdrawal permit for drinking purposes or irrigation that had been issued for this stretch of the Altamaha River.

Should it be determined that river water downstream of the plant is being used for drinking, the sampling and analysis requirements for drinking water found in Table 2-1 would be implemented.

4-6

4.2 Airborne As indicated in Table 2-2 and Figures 2-1 and 2-2, airborne particulates and airborne radioiodine are collected at 4 indicator stations (Nos. 103, 107, 112 and 116) which encircle the plant near the site periphery and at 2 control stations (Nos.

304 and 309) which are located approximately 10 miles from the main stack. At each location, air is continuously drawn through a glass fiber filter and a charcoal canister placed in series to collect airborne particulates and radioiodine. The filters and canisters are collected weekly and analyzed for gross beta and 1-131, respectively. A gamma isotopic analysis is performed quarterly on a composite of the filters for each station.

The 2001 annual average weeklygross beta concentration of 21.45 fCi/m3 for the indicator stations was 0.47 fCi!m greater than that for the control stations. This difference is not statistically discernible, since it is less than the calculated MDD of 1.87 fCi/m 3 . Figure 4.2-1 and Table 4.2-1 provide the historical trending of the average weekly gross beta concentrations in air. In general, there is close agreement between the results for the indicator and control stations. This close agreement supports the position that the plant is not contributing significantly to the gross beta concentration in air.

Figure 4.2-1 Average Weekly Gross Beta Air Concentration 300 250 2200 0

• z150 0

L) 50 50 Po 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 9Q 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 Year I- MDC UIndicator -ý-Control 4-7 C-0'3

Table 4.2-1 Average Weekly Gross Beta Air Concentration Year Indicator Control (fCi/m3) (fCi/m3)

Pre-op 140 140 1974 87 90 1975 85 90 1976 135 139 1977 239 247 1978 130 137 1979 38 39 1980 49 48 1981 191 203 1982 33 34 1983 31 30 1984 26 28 1985 22 21 1986 36 38 1987 23 22 1988 22.6 21.7 1989 18.4 17.8 1990 19.3 18.7 1991 18.1 18 1992 18.5 18.4 1993 20.4 20.7 1994 19.5 19.7 1995 21.7 21.7 1996 21.3 21.4 1997 20.3 20.7 1998 20.0 20.5 1999 21.3 21.3 2000 23.6 23.9 2001 21.5 21.0 4-8

During 2001, no man-made radionuclides were detected from the gamma isotopic analysis of the quarterly composites of the particulate air filters. During preoperation and during operation through 1986, a number of fission products and activation products were detected. These were generally attributed to the nuclear weapons tests and to the Chernobyl incident. On only one occasion since 1986, has a man-made radionuclide been detected in a quarterly composite. A small amount of Cs-137 (1.7 fCi/m3) was identified in the first quarter of 1991 at Station 304. The MDC and RL for Cs-137 in air are 60 and 20,000 fCi/m3, respectively.

The historical trending of the average annual concentrations of detectable Cs-137 from quarterly air filter composites is provided in Figure 4.2-2 and Table 4.2-2.

Figure 4.2-2 Average Annual Cs-I 37 Concentration in Air 60 ,

so 50 30 C.

o 20 - -

10----- -- ----

Po 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 9S 5 96 97 98 99 00 01 Year I--ndicator - Control MDC 4-9

Table 4.2-2 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration In Air Year Indicator Control (fCi/m3) (fCi/m3)

Pre-op 0 2.0 1974 1.5 2.0 1975 1.4 1.4 1976 0.6 0.7 1977 1.5 1.4 1978 2.3 2.6 1979 0.8 0.8 1980 0.4 0.6 1981 1.8 1.7 1982 0.5 0.6 1983 0.7 0 1984 0 0 1985 0.7 0 1986 8.1 9.6 1987 0 0 1988 0 0 1989 0 0 1990 0 0 1991 0 1.7 1992 0 0 1993 0 0 1994 0 0 1995 0 0 1996 0 0 1997 0 0 1998 0 0 1999 0 0 2000 0 0 2001 0 0 4-10

No airborne 1-131 was detected in the charcoal canisters in 2001. During 1976, 1977, and 1978, positive levels of 1-131 were found in nearly all of the samples collected for a period of a few weeks following atmospheric nuclear weapons tests.

Some of the concentrations were on the order of 70 fCi/m 3. In 1986, the same phenomenon occurred following the Chernobyl incident. The highest airborne 1-131 concentration found to date in an individual charcoal canister was 217 fCi/m 3 in 1977. The MDC and RL for airborne 1-131 are 70 fCi/m 3 and 900 fCi/m 3 , respectively.

Table 4-3 lists REMP deviations that occurred in 2001. No deviations affected air samples.

4-11

4.3 Direct Radiation Direct (external) radiation is measured with thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). Two Panasonic UD-814 TLD badges are placed at each station. Each badge contains three phosphors composed of calcium sulfate crystals (with thulium impurity). The gamma dose at each station is based upon the average readings of the phosphors from the two badges. The badges for each station are placed in thin plastic bags for protection from moisture while in the field. The badges are nominally exposed for periods of a quarter of a year (91 days). An inspection is performed near mid-quarter to assure that all badges are on-station and to replace any missing or damaged badges.

Two TLD stations are established in each of the 16 compass sectors around the plant to form 2 concentric rings, as seen in Figures 2-1 and 2-2. The two ring configuration of stations was established in 1980, in accordance with NRC Branch Technical Position "An Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program", Revision 1, 1979. With the exception of the East sector, the inner ring stations (Nos. 101 through 116) are located near the site boundary and the outer ring stations (Nos. 201 through 216) are located at distances of 4 to 5 miles from the plant. The stations in the East sector are a few miles farther out than the other stations in their respective rings due to large swamps making normal access extremely difficult. The 16 stations forming the inner ring are designated as the indicator stations. The 3 control stations (Nos. 304, 309 and 416) are located 10 miles or more from the plant. Stations 064 and 301 monitor special interest areas.

Station 064 is located at the onsite roadside park, while Station 301 is located near the Toombs Central School. Station 210, in the outer ring, is located near the Altamaha School (the only other nearby school).

As provided in Table 3-1, the average quarterly exposure of 11.97 mR measured at the indicator stations (inner ring) during 2001 was 0.12 mR less than the 12.09 mR measured at the control stations. This difference is not statistically discernible since it is less than the MDD of 1.2 mR.

The quarterly exposures acquired at the outer ring stations during 2001 ranged from 8.2 to 16.7 mR, with an average of 11.8 mR. The average for the outer ring stations was 0.3 mR less than the average for the control stations. Since the results for the outer ring stations and the control stations differ by less than the MDD of 1.39 mR, there is no discernible difference between outer ring and control station results for 2001.

The historical trending of the average quarterly exposures for the indicator inner ring, outer ring, and the control stations are plotted in Figure 4.3-1 and listed in Table 4.3-1. The decrease between 1991 and 1992 values is attributed to a change in TLDs from Teledyne to Panasonic. It should be noted however that the differences between indicator and control and outer ring values did not change.

The close agreement between the station groups supports the position that the plant is not contributing significantly to direct radiation in the environment.

4-12

Figure 4.3-1 Average Quarterly Exposure from Direct Radiation 20 0.

Po 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 Year

-- Indicator -- W- Contro -kOtrRn 4-13

Table 4.3-1 Average Quarterly Exposure from Direct Radiation Year Indicator (mR) Control (mR) Outer Ring (mR)

Pre-op 22.3 23 0 1974 23.2 25.6 0 1975 10.0 10.5 0 1976 8.18 6.9 0 1977 7.31 6.52 0 1978 6.67 6.01 0 1979 5.16 6.77 0 1980 4.44 5.04 4.42 1981 5.9 5.7 5.7 1982 12.3 12 11.3 1983 11.4 11.3 10.6 1984 13.3 12.9 11.9 1985 14.7 14.7 13.7 1986 15 14 14.5 1987 14.9 14.6 15.3 1988 15.0 14.7 15.2 1989 16.4 18.0 16.5 1990 14.9 13.9 14.7 1991 15.1 13.7 15.6 1992 11.9 10.9 12.3 1993 11.6 10.7 11.5 1994 11 10.7 11.2 1995 11.5 10.8 11.3 1996 11.6 11.3 11.6 1997 12.3 11.8 12.3 1998 12.1 12.3 12.3 1999 12.8 13.2 13.0 2000 13.6 13.3 13.3 2001 12.0 12.1 11.8 4-14

The historical trending of the average quarterly exposures at the special interest areas for the past 14 years is provided in Figure 4.3-2 and listed in Table 4.3-2.

These exposures are within the range of those acquired at the other stations. They too, show that the plant is not contributing significantly to direct radiation at the special interest areas.

Figure 4.3-2 Average Quarterly Exposure from Direct Radiation at Special Interest Areas 25 20

~15 E 0

00 1 50 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 Year

-Roadside Park (StU 064) -U--Toombs Central School (St 301) 4-15 CO0(

Table 4.3-2 Average Quarterly Exposure from Direct Radiation at Special Interest Areas Period Station 064 Station 301 (mR) (mR_

1986 14.6 15.1 1987 14.2 15.0 1988 14.9 15.3 1989 16.1 16.6 1990 15.1 14.4 1991 14.4 15.2 1992 11.1 11.5 1993 11.2 10.8 1994 10.4 10.7 1995 11.0 10.5 1996 11.7 11.0 1997 12.6 11.4 1998 12.4 11.8 1999 12.5 12.4 2000 13.3 12.6 2001 11.8 11.3 As seen in Table 4-3, there was one failure in obtaining a quarterly direct radiation exposure reading during 2001. At badge changeout, the badges at Station 110 were discovered to have been damaged, and rendered useless, by a localized fire.

The fire occurred between mid-quarter station inspection and the end of the quarter. Therefore, data were unavailable at Station 110 for the first quarter. The badges at this station were replaced at badge changeout to begin the second quarter.

The standard deviation for the quarterly result for each badge was subjected to a self imposed limit of 1.4. This limit is based upon the standard deviations obtained with the Panasonic UD-814 badges during 1992 and is calculated using a method developed by the American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM Special Technical Publication 15D, ASTM Manual on Presentation of Data and Control Chart Analysis, Fourth Revision, Philadelphia, PA, October 1976).

The limit serves as a flag to initiate an investigation. To be conservative, readings with a standard deviation greater than 1.4 are excluded from the data set since the high standard deviation is interpreted as an indication of unacceptable variation in 4-16

TLD response. In 2001, the following TLD results were excluded from the data set because their standard deviations were greater than 1.4:

First Quarter None Second Quarter 201A and 214B Third Quarter None Fourth Quarter None For these stations, only the reading of the companion badge at each location was used to determine the quarterly exposure.

During 2001, no direct radiation station experienced both badges having standard deviations above the self-imposed limit of 1.4. For those instances in which one badge at a station exhibited a standard deviation greater than 1.4, the other badge of the two-badge set was available to give a valid reading for the particular location.

4-17

4.4 Milk Milk samples are obtained biweekly from Station 304 (the state prison dairy) which is a control station located more than 10 miles from the plant. Gamma isotopic and 1-131 analyses are performed on each sample as specified in Tables 2 1 and 2-2. As discussed in Section 4.1-1, the land use census discovered that there is one milk animal located within 5 miles of the plant, but a reliable supply of milk samples from this location was not available in 2001. Since 1989, efforts to locate a reliable milk sample source within 5 miles of the plant have been unsuccessful.

During 2001, as in the previous 11 years, no man-made radionuclides were detected from the gamma isotopic analysis of the milk samples. Except for 1987, Cs-137 was found in some of the samples each year from 1978 (when this analysis became a requirement) through 1989. No other man-made radionuclides have been detected by this analysis.

The MDC and RL for Cs-137 in milk are 18 and 70 pCi/1, respectively. The historical trending of the average annual detectable Cs-137 concentration in milk is provided in Figure 4.4-1 and Table 4A-1.

Figure 4.4-1 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Milk 25 20

)

0.

10 0

Po 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 Year

-- 4-Indicator -U-Control - MDCI 4-18 C 00

Table 4.4-1 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Milk Year Indicator Control (pCi/I) (pCi/l)

Pre-op 19.9 19.4 1974 0 0 1975 0 0 1976 0 0 1977 0 0 1978 12.1 18.3 1979 16.1 13 1980 14.7 15.4 1981 12.57 10.2 1982 11.8 11 1983 12 7.2 1984 9.6 10.2 1985 9.14 5.35 1986 9.8 10 1987 0 0 1988 10.9 0 1989 8.6 7.9 1990 0 0 1991 0 0 1992 0 0 1993 0 0 1994 0 0 1995 0 0 1996 0 0 1997 0 0 1998 0 0 1999 0 0 2000 0 0 2001 0 0 4-19

During 2001 as in the previous 12 years, 1-131 was not detected in any of the milk samples. During preoperation, all readings were less than 2 pCi/I which was the allowed MDC at that time. Figure 4.4-2 and Table 4.4-2 provide the historical trending of the average annual detectable concentration of 1-131 in milk. In 1988, a single reading of 0.32 pCiAi, which was believed to have resulted from a procedural deficiency, was reported. The MDC and RL for 1-131 in milk are 1 and 3 pCi/1, respectively.

All the detectable results for Cs-137 and 1-131 are attributed to fallout from the nuclear weapons tests and the Chernobyl incident.

Figure 4.4-2 Average Annual 1-131 Concentration in Milk 16 --------------------------

14 12 --------------------------------

10 8

0

- - - -- ~ -

4 2

0 Po 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 Year I-*Indicator Control - MDC --- RL I 4-20 coý

Table 4.4-2 Average Annual 1-131 Concentration in Milk Year Indicator Control (PCi/l) (pCi/l)

Pre-op 0 0 1974 0.98 2.6 1975 0.3 0 1976 12.23 9.1 1977 14.61 4.08 1978 2.72 4.18 1979 0 0 1980 1.26 0.69 1981 0 0 1982 0 0 1983 0 0 1984 0 0 1985 0 0 1986 8.9 7.6 1987 0 0 1988 0 0.32 1989 0 0 1990 0 0 1991 0 0 1992 0 0 1993 0 0 1994 0 0 1995 0 0 1996 0 0 1997 0 0 1998 0 0 1999 0 0 2000 0 0 2001 0 0 4-21

4.5 Vegetation In accordance with Tables 2-1 and 2-2, grass samples are collected monthly from two indicator stations near the site boundary (Nos. 106 and 112) and at one control station located about 21 miles from the plant (No. 416). Gamma isotopic analyses are performed on each sample. Gamma isotopic analysis on vegetation samples began in 1978 when the analysis became a TS requirement.

The results presented in Table 3-1 show that no man-made radionuclides were detected during 2001. Since 1986, Cs-137 has been the only man-made radionuclide found in vegetation samples. The MDC and RL for Cs-137 in vegetation samples are 80 pCi/kg-wet and 2000 pCi/kg-wet, respectively. The occasional presence of Cs-137 in vegetation samples is attributed primarily to fallout from nuclear weapons tests and the Chernobyl incident.

Figure 4.5-1 and Table 4.5-1 provide the historical trending of the average annual detectable Cs-137 concentration found in vegetation. Since 1978, the Cs-137 concentration has been on a general decline.

4-22

Figure 4.5-1 4-23 cog

Table 4.5-1 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Vegetation Year Indicator Control (pCi/kg-wet) (pCi/kg-wet)

Pre-op 55 30 1974 0 0 1975 0 0 1976 0 0 1977 0 0 1978 112 1089 1979 59 695 1980 208 916 1981 182 152 1982 65 99 1983 95 211 1984 149 388 1985 60.9 113.3 1986 80 215 1987 60 428 1988 40.1 228.8 1989 37 0 1990 66.7 34.5 1991 34.1 36.1 1992 35.2 41.3 1993 24.7 45.8 1994 32.2 46.6 1995 49.8 47.6 1996 47.2 41.1 1997 48.4 54.9 1998 81.4 44.1 1999 26.9 0 2000 0 0 2001 0 0 4-24

4.6 River Water Surface water from the Altamaha River is obtained at an upstream location (Station 170) and at a downstream location (Station 172) using automatic samplers. Small quantities are drawn at intervals not exceeding a few hours. The samples drawn are collected monthly and quarterly composites are produced from the monthly collections.

As specified in Table 2-1, a gamma isotopic analysis is conducted on each monthly sample. No man-made radionuclides were detected during 2001. The only man made radionuclides previously detected are presented in the table below.

Year Quarter Station Radionuclide Level I T I(pCi/l) 1975 4th 172 Ce-141 78.2 1986 2nd 170 La-140 18.0 1986 2nd 172 Cs-137 12.0 1988 2nd 170 Cs-137 6.8 A tritium analysis is performed on the quarterly composite. Prior to 1986, positive results were usually found in each quarterly composite at levels generally ranging from 200 and 400 pCi/l. Subsequently, the number of positive results and their concentrations have diminished. In the 12 years since 1988, tritium has been detected in only about 20% of the samples. In 2001, no tritium was detected at the indicator or control stations.

The MDC and RL for tritium in river water are 3000 and 30,000 pCi/1, respectively. Figure 4.6-1 and Table 4.6-1 provide the historical trending of the annual average detectable tritium concentration in river water.

The annual 50 mile downstream survey of the Altamaha River to determine if river water is being withdrawn for drinking purposes is discussed in Section 4.1.

4-25

Figure 4.6-1 Average Annual H-3 Concentration in River Water 3500 "3000

• 2500 G

C 2000 CS150D 0 1000 Sooo e1000=

PO 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 Year

-Indicator -U- Control - MDC 4-26 C-AG

Table 4.6-1 Average Annual H-3 Concentration in River Water Year Indicator (pCYaf) Control J (pCi Pre-op 210 191 1974 230 205 1975 205 238 1976 165 153 1977 189 170 1978 224 193 1979 210 180 1980 358 218 1981 220 135 1982 165 220 1983 265 328 1984 437 327 1985 288 220 1986 242 206 1987 241 204 1988 220 0 1989 0 0 1990 139 0 1991 0 0 1992 0 0 1993 0 0 1994 0 0 1995 200 0 1996 144 147 1997 0 0 1998 0 0 1999 9 0 2000 209 0 2001 0 0 4-27

4.7 Fish Gamma isotopic analyses were performed on the edible portion of the fish samples collected at the river stations on April 23 and 24, and on October 8, 2001. The control station (No. 170) is located upstream of the plant while the indicator station (No. 172) is located downstream.

As shown in Table 3-1, Cs-137 was the only man-made radionuclide detected during 2001. The average concentration of 20.8 pCi/kg-wet at the indicator station was 10.6 pCi/kg-wet greater than that at the control station. This difference is statistically discernible since it is greater than the MDD of 9.2 pCi/kg-wet. Cs 137 in fish samples is attributed primarily to weapons testing and the Chernobyl incident. However, since indicator station results were discernibly greater than those at the control station, plant contributions cannot be ruled out. The dose to the total body of a member of the public from annual consumption of fish containing this concentration of Cs-137 would be 0.016 mremlyear, which is 0.5%

of the regulatory limit. The M)DC and RL for Cs-137 in fish are 150 and 2000 pCi/kg-wet, respectively.

The historical trending of the average annual detectable Cs-137 concentration in fish is provided in Figure 4.7-1 and Table 4.7-1.

Figure 4.7-1 indicates, in general, a decline in the Cs-137 levels after 1983. (Note:

From 1979 through 1982, clams were collected rather than fish.)

Figure 4.7-1 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Fish 1SO 140 -MI 120

=100 so 0.

C 0 Sr4y 20 0

P0 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 Year 1 -- ndicator --- Control - MDC I 4-28 C11

Table 4.7-1 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Fish Year Indicator Control (pCi/kg-wet) (pCi/kg-wet)

Pre-op 90 115 1974 134 61 1975 80.6 89.4 1976 73 88 1977 76 91 1978 88 47 1979 0 0 1980 0 0 1981 0 0 1982 0 0 1983 138.6 67.5 1984 84 53 1985 117 63.3 1986 79 44 1987 62 52 1988 77.8 33.3 1989 34.3 28.9 1990 26.7 24.2 1991 32.9 26.9 1992 41.6 28.8 1993 38.0 25.9 1994 23.8 20.7 1995 25.0 27.9 1996 20.4 18.0 1997 29.4 15.1 1998 26.1 17.7 1999 22.3 13.5 2000 17.9 25.3 2001 20.8 10.2 4-29

In the past, the only other man-made radionuclides detected in fish samples were Co-60 and Cs- 134. During preoperation, Co-60 was detected in one fish sample at a very low concentration. During the period of 1983 through 1988, Cs-134 was found in about half of the samples at concentrations of the same order of magnitude as those found for Cs-137. The Co-60 and Cs-134 levels found in these samples are attributed to the nuclear weapons tests and the Chernobyl incident.

Figure 4.7-2 and Table 4.7-2 show the historical trending of the annual average detectable concentration of Cs-I 34 in fish.

Figure 4.7-2 Average Annual Cs-134 Concentration in Fish 160 140---- -- -- -- -- -- -------

120 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

100 - - - - - - - - - I 8060 40 0

C / )'

2 0 ---

0 , ...

Po 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 Year

---

Indicator -- U-Control - MDC 4-30 CA-ýZ

Table 4.7-2 Average Annual Cs-134 Concentration in Fish Year Indicator Control (pCi/kg-wet) (pCi/kg-wet)

Pre-op 0 0 1974 0 0 1975 0 0 1976 0 0 1977 0 0 1978 0 0 1979 0 0 1980 0 0 1981 0 0 1982 0 0 1983 101.8 0 1984 35.8 26.3 1985 46.7 21.1 1986 29 0 1987 69 15 1988 21.7 6.9 1989 0 0 1990 0 0 1991 0 0 1992 0 0 1993 0 0 1994 0 0 1995 0 0 1996 0 0 1997 0 0 1998 0 0 1999 0 0 2000 0 0 2001 0 0 4-31

4.8 Sediment Sediment was collected along the shoreline of the Altamaha River on May 7 and November 5, 2001, at the upstream control station (No. 170) and the downstream indicator station (No. 172). A gamma isotopic analysis was performed on each sample.

Co-60 was found in one indicator station sample in 2001 at a value of 58.1 pCi/kg-dry. There were no positive results from the control station in 2001, so no MDD could be determined. With the exception of three years, Co-60 has been found at either an indicator or a control station every year since 1986. There is no RL or MDC assigned to Co-60 in sediment in ODCM Tables 4-2 and 4-3 (Tables 4-2 and 4-1 of this report). The MDC assigned by the EL for Co-60 in sediment is 70 pCi/kg-dry. The historical trending of the average annual detectable Co-60 concentration in sediment is provided in Figure 4.8-1 and Table 4.8-1.

Figure 4.8-1 4-32

Table 4.8-1 Average Annual Co-60 Concentration in Sediment Year Indicator Control (pCi/kg-dry) (pCi/kg-dry)

Pre-op 0 0 1974 0 0 1975 0 0 1976 0 0 1977 0 0 1978 0 0 1979 0 0 1980 0 0 1981 0 0 1982 0 0 1983 0 0 1984 0 0 1985 0 0 1986 108 33 1987 0 0 1988 67.8 0 1989 0 31 1990 33 19 1991 123.6 0 1992 81.4 0 1993 70.7 0 1994 218 0 1995 0 0 1996 118.5 0 1997 0 0 1998 79.4 0 1999 107.7 0 2000 70.0 0 2001 58.1 0 Co-60 was not detected in sediment samples near the plant until 1986, the year of the Chernobyl incident. However, because Co-60 has been detected in indicator station samples more often than in control station samples in recent years, some contribution from plant effluents cannot be ruled out. The potential dose from the Co-60 detected at the indicator station to the most limiting member of the public was calculated using the methodology and parameters of "Calculation of Annual Doses to Man From Routine Releases of Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance With 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I," NRC Regulatory Guide 1.109, Revision 1, October 1977. The total body dose to a member of the 4-33

public due to direct radiation from sediment was determined to be approximately 0.0027 mrem/yr. This dose is about 0.09% of the 3 mrem ODCM 2.1.3 limit for liquid releases from one unit. Although calculable, this dose is insignificant with respect to regulatory limits.

In 2001, Cs-137 was detected in both indicator and control station sediment samples. It has been found in over 95% of all of the sediment samples collected back through preoperation, and is generally attributed to the atmospheric nuclear weapons tests or to the Chernobyl incident. As shown in Table 3-1, the level of 68.7 pCi/kg-dry found at the indicator station was 0.9 pCi/kg-dry less than that found at the control station. However, this difference is not statistically discernible since it is less than the MDD of 265.6 pCi/kg-dry. The MDC for Cs 137 in sediment is 180 pCi/kg-dry. The historical trending of the average annual detectable Cs-137 concentration in sediment is provided in Figure 4.8-2 and Table 4.8-2.

Figure 4.8-2 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Sediment 1000 g00 -- -- - -- --

800 - - - - - - - - -

700 - - -- - - - - - -- -- - - - - -

600 00 700 - - - - - -

00 0 200 100 0

Po 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 Year

---

Indicator -U-Control - MDC 4-34 C0/4-

Table 4.8-2 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Sediment Year Indicator Control (pCi/kg-dry) (pCi/kg-dry)

Pre-op 170 270 1974 218 57 1975 330 615 1976 211 300 1977 364 200 1978 330 260 1979 0 310 1980 240 0 1981 590 110 1982 141 285 1983 384 365 1984 500 260 1985 76.5 269 1986 238 190 1987 59 39 1988 903 114 1989 56 62 1990 130.5 66 1991 43.1 54.5 1992 151 198.5 1993 113 115 1994 127 104 1995 52.3 80.6 1996 106 110 1997 186 137 1998 148.5 101.4 1999 92 111.8 2000 68.1 114.5 2001 68.7 69.6 4-35

Other man-made nuclides, besides Co-60 and Cs-137, were occasionally found in past years. Their presence was generally attributed to the nuclear weapons tests or to the Chemobyl incident, although plant releases were not ruled out. Mn-54, Co 58, and Zn-65, which have relatively short half-lives, are most likely a result of plant releases and have been plotted in Figure 4.8-3 along with their MDCs. All the man-made nuclides detected in sediment except for Co-60 and Cs-137 have been listed in Table 4.8-3. The Cs-134 MDC (150 pCi/kg-dry) is defined in ODCM Table 4-3 (Table 4-1 of this report). The MDCs for Mn-54 (42 pCi/kg dry) and Zn-65 (129 pCi/kg-dry) were determined by the EL since no values are provided in ODCM Table 4-3.

Figure 4.8-3 Average Annual Indicator Station Concentrations of Select Nuclides in Sediment 600 500 400 L) 300

.2 200

. 100 -----.4-

---

---- - I W K I \- I I-0 Po 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 " 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 Year

-*- Mn-54 --- Zn-65 CS-134 Mn-MDC -Zn-MDC -Cs-MDC 4-36 C-1

Table 4.8-3 Sediment Nuclide Concentrations Other Than Co-60 & Cs-137 Nuclide YEAR Indicator Control (pCi/kg-dry) (pCi/kg-dry)

Ce-141 1976 340 254 1977 141 Ce-144 Preop 720 1974 363 1975 342 389 1978 700 1981 1290 Co-58 1994 22.2 Cs-134 Preop 40 1981 280 1984 130 40 1986 132 1988 505 1990 31 Mn-54 1975 36.1 1986 28 26 1991 57.2 1996 77.7 Ru-103 1974 81 1976 158 1977 195 1981 220 Zn-65 1986 175 1988 136 1991 250.5 1992 83 1993 39.9 1994 332 Zr-95 Preop 180 1974 138 1976 427 170 1977 349 294 1978 220 230 1981 860 280 4-37

5.0 INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM In accordance with ODCM 4.1.3, the EL participates in an ICP which satisfies the requirements of Regulatory Guide 4.15, Revision 1, "Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring Programs (Normal Operations) - Effluent Streams and the Environment", February 1979. The guide indicates that the ICP is to be conducted with the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) Environmental Radioactivity Laboratory Intercomparison Studies (Cross-check) Program or an equivalent program, and that the ICP should include all of the determinations (sample medium/radionuclide combinations) that are offered by the EPA and included in the REMP.

The ICP is conducted by Analytics, Inc. of Atlanta, Georgia. Analytics has a documented QA (Quality Assurance) program and the capability to prepare QC (Quality Control) materials traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The ICP is a third party blind testing program which provides a means to ensure independent checks are performed on the accuracy and precision of the measurements of radioactive materials in environmental sample matrices.

Analytics supplies the crosscheck samples to the EL which performs the laboratory analyses in a normal manner. Each of the specified analyses is performed three times. The results are then sent to Analytics who performs an evaluation which may be helpful to the EL in the identification of instrument or procedural problems.

The samples offered by Analytics and included in the EL analyses are gross beta in air filters, gamma-emitting radionuclides in air filters, gamma-emitting radionuclides in milk, gross beta in water, tritium in water, and gamma-emitting radionuclides in water. Normally, all of these types of samples are supplied each year by Analytics and analyzed by EL. In 2001, milk was offered by Analytics but, due to administrative problems, was not supplied to EL for analysis. To prevent recurrence of this situation, EL has established a long-term agreement with Analytics that includes provisions for supplying to EL all of the sample types listed above.

The accuracy of each result is measured by the normalized deviation, which is the ratio of the reported average less the known value to the total error. The total error is the square root of the sum of the squares of the uncertainties of the known value and of the reported average. The uncertainty of the known value includes all analytical uncertainties (counting statistics, calibration uncertainties, chemical yield etc.). The uncertainty of the reported average is the standard deviation of the analysis results performed by the EL. The precision of each result is measured by the coefficient of variation, which is defined as the standard deviation divided by the reported average. An investigation is undertaken whenever the absolute value of the normalized deviation is greater than three or whenever the coefficient of variation is greater than 15% for all radionuclides other than Cr-51 and Fe-59. For Cr-51 and Fe-59, an investigation is undertaken when the coefficient of variation exceeds the values shown as follows:

5-1

Nuclide Concentration

• Total Sample Activity Percent Coefficient (pCi) of Variation Cr-51 <300 NA 25 Cr-51 NA >1000 25 Cr-51 >300 <1000 15 Fe-59 <80 NA 25 Fe-59 >80 NA 15 For air filters, concentration units are pCi/filter. For all other media, concentration units are pCi/liter.

As required by ODCM 4.1.3.3 and 7.1.2.3, a summary of the results of the EL's participation in the ICP is provided in Table 5-1 for: the gross beta analysis of an air filter; the gamma isotopic analysis of an air filter and water samples; and the tritium analysis of water samples. Delineated in this table for each of the media/analysis combinations, are: the specific radionuclides; Analytics' preparation dates; the known values with their uncertainties supplied by Analytics; the reported averages with their standard deviations; and the resultant normalized deviations and coefficients of variation expressed as a percentage.

It may be seen from Table 5-1 that all results were acceptable for precision, with one exception. The analysis of 1-131 in a water sample prepared on 06/14/2001, exceeded the coefficient of variation acceptance criterion of 15%. None of the analysis results exceeded the acceptance criteria for accuracy, which is a normalized deviation no greater than three. The outcome of the investigation into the result that failed to meet ICP acceptance criteria is provided in the following paragraph.

The precision deviation was from the determination of 1-131 in water by gamma spectroscopy. The precision result was outside the upper control limit. The high error of the gamma spectroscopy values was due to the low level of activity, approximately 14 pCi of 1-131, contained in the sample on the count date.

Although this level of activity is measurable by gamma spectroscopy as shown in the accuracy results, the low activity level will present high counting errors. This result was not due to sample processing nor analysis problems, therefore no further action will be necessary to address analytical problems. The cause of the low activity that resulted in the precision deviation was administrative in nature.

The water sample containing 1-131 was prepared by Analytics, but was not shipped to EL in a timely manner due to administrative problems. To reduce potential of recurrence of this problem, EL has established a long-term agreement with Analytics including provisions to assure that samples containing 1-131 are supplied to EL in a timely manner following preparation, including notification to EL prior to shipment for processing.

5-2

TABLE 5-1 (SHEET 1 of 2)

INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM RESULTS GROSS BETA ANALYSIS OF AN AIR FILTER (pCi/filter)

Analysis or Date Reported Known Standard Uncertainty of Percent Coef Normalized Radionuclide Prepared Average Value Deviation Known (3S) of Variation Deviation Gross Beta 12/06/01 1 114 106 3.71 1.67 3.25 1.97 GAMMA ISOTOPIC ANALYSIS OF AN AIR FILTER (pCi/filter)

Analysis or Date Reported Known Standard Uncertainty of Percent Coef Normalized Radionuclide Prepared Average I Value Deviation Known (3S) of Variation Deviation Ce-141 12/06/01 288 314 7.23 5.33 2.51 -2.89 Co-58 12/06/01 273 293 4.77 5 1.75 -2.89 Co-60 12/06/01 188 171 7.91 3 4.21 2.01 Cr-51 12/06/01 402 412 30.31 7 7.54 -0.32 Cs-134 12/06/01 166 165 4.61 2.67 2.77 0.19 Cs-137 12/06/01 266 263 8.70 4.33 3.27 0.31 Fe-59 12/06/01 74 75 7.45 1.33 10.07 -0.13 Mn-54 12/06/01 125 123 6.17 2 4.94 0.31 Zn-65 12/06/01 95 84 12.03 1.33 12.66 0.91 GROSS BETA ANALYSIS OF WATER SAMPLE (pCi/liter)

TABLE 5-1 (SHEET 2 of 2)

INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM RESULTS GAMMA ISOTOPIC ANALYSIS OF WATER SAMPLES (pCi/liter)

Analysis or Date Reported Known Standard Uncertainty of Percent Coef --Normalized Radionuclide Prepared Average Value Deviation Known (3S) of Variation Deviation Ce-141 03/22/01 91.0 94 8.22 1.67 9.04 -0.36 06/14/01 239.0 234 15.36 4.00 6.43 0.31 Co-58 03/22/01 51.5 48 5.40 0.67 10.39 0.73 06/14/01 113.0 139 8.70 2.33 7.70 -2.89 Co-60 03/22/01 152.0 147 6.42 2.33 4.22 0.73 06/14/01 201.0 194 7.65 3.33 3.80 0.84 Cr-51 03/22/01 242.0 242 41.31 4.00 17.07 0.00 06/14/01 327.0 322 64.26 5.33 19.65 0.08 Cs-134 03/22/01 115.0 129 13.25 2.00 11.52 -1.04 06/14/01 169.0 193 13.74 3.33 8.13 -1.70 Cs-137 03/22/01 99.0 102 7.33 1.67 7.40 -0.40 06/14/01 183.0 174 9.29 3.00 5.08 0.92 Fe-59 03/22/01 95.2 84 9.82 1.33 10.34 1.11 06/14/01 136.0 126 12.67 2.00 9.32 0.78 1-131 03/22/01 93.3 90 9.39 1.67 10.10 0.31 06/14/01 91.0 74 28.40 1.33 31.21 0.60 Mn-54 03/22/01 106.0 101 7.65 1.67 7.21 0.64 06/14/01 218.0 216 9.76 3.67 4.48 0.19 Zn-65 03/22/01 195.0 186 8.11 3.00 8.11 0.56 06/14/01 291.0 261 18.70 4.33 6.43 1.56 TRITIUM ANALYSIS OF WATER SAMPLES (pCi/liter)

6.0 CONCLUSION

S This report confirms the licensee's conformance with the requirements of Chapter 4 of the ODCM during 2001. It provides a summary and discussion of the results of the laboratory analyses for each type of sample.

All of the radiological levels were low and are generally trending downward.

In 2001, there were two instances where the indicator station readings were statistically discernible from the control station readings. These instances are discussed in the following paragraphs.

Cs- 137 was the only man-made radionuclide detected in fish samples during 2001.

The average concentration of 20.8 pCi/kg-wet at the indicator station was 10.6 pCi/kg-wet greater than that at the control station. This difference is statistically discernible since it is greater than the MDD of 9.2 pCi/kg-wet; however, it represents only 0.5% of the RL. Cs-137 in fish samples is attributed primarily to weapons testing and the Chernobyl incident. However, since indicator station results were discernibly greater than those at the control station, plant contributions cannot be ruled out.

Co-60 was found in one indicator station sediment sample in 2001 at a value of 58.1 pCi/kg-dry. There were no positive results from the control station in 2001, so no MDD could be determined. With the exception of three years, Co-60 has been found at either an indicator or a control station every year since 1986, the year of the Chernobyl incident. However, because Co-60 has been detected in indicator station samples more often than in control station samples in recent years and since no Co-60 was detected at the control station in 2001, some contribution from plant effluents cannot be ruled out. There is no RL assigned to Co-60 in sediment in ODCM Tables 4-2 (also Table 4-2 of this report), so no comparison of this concentration to RL can be made. However, as discussed in Section 4.8, potential dose due to this concentration of Co-60 in sediment is much less than 0.1% of the regulatory limit for a member of the public due to exposure associated with liquid effluent releases.

Although statistically discernible from background, the instances noted above reflect very small percentages of regulatory limits. No discernible radiological impact upon the environment or the public as a consequence of plant discharges to the atmosphere or to the river was established for any other REMP samples.

6-1