ML031250638

Annual Environmental and Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports

ML031250638
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	04/29/2003
From:	Gerry Powell South Texas
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NOC-AE-03001524, STI: 31602148
Download: ML031250638 (59)

Text

Nuclear Operating Company South 7Zerav' Pioscct Lhxrc 6,cnituid SwszPom POV Sax 28$'

Pyrdimrwoli Tht'a; 7,'48&

April 29, 2003 NOC-AE-03001524 10CFR50.36b STI: 31602148 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 South Texas Project Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. STN 50-498, STN 50-499 2002 Annual Environmental and Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports Pursuant to the South Texas Project (STP) Unit I Operating License NPF-76, Unit 2 Operating License NPF-80 Appendix B, Environmental Protection Plan (Nonradiological), and Technical Specification 6.9.1.3, attached are the 2002 Annual Environmental and Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports.

If you have any questions, please contact J. D. Sherwood at (361) 972-8766 or me at (361) 972-7566.

G.T. Powell

Manager, Health Physics MKJ

Attachment:

2002 Annual Environmental and Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports.

O:WP\\NL\\NRC-AP\\RREP-2003\\03001524

NOC-AE-03001524 Page 2 cc:

(paper copy)

(electronic copy)

Ellis W. Merschoff Regional Administrator, Region IV U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400 Arlington, Texas 76011-8064 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 Richard A. Ratliff Bureau of Radiation Control Texas Department of Health 1100 West 49th Street Austin, TX 78756-3189 Cornelius F. O'Keefe U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. O. Box 289, Mail Code: MNI16 Wadsworth, TX 77483 A. H. Gutterman, Esquire Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP L. D. Blaylock City Public Service Mohan C. Thadani U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission R. L. Balcom Texas Genco, LP A. Ramirez City of Austin C. A. Johnson AEP Texas Central Company Jon C. Wood Matthews & Branscomb C. M. Canady City of Austin Electric Utility Department 721 Barton Springs Road Austin, TX 78704

• Attachment not included with electronic copies O:WP\\NL\\NRC-AP\\RREP-2003\\03001524

III I .1

'lI

A I

i.

2 I

i

Completed in accordance with Technical Specifications for United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission License Nos.

NPF-76 & NPF-80 April 2003 Authored by:

J. arrell Sberw Ph.D.

(Sprvisor Health Physics Division and Peggy n Travi.D,6 CHMM Staff Consultant Chemistry Division Technical Review:

7 7

nard M. Earls, Ph.D., CHP Health Physicist Health Physics Division Approved by:

Gerald T. Powell Manager Health Physics Division 2002 Annual Environmental Operating Report SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT ELECTRIC GENERATING STATION

Table of Contents Page Executive Summary.............................................

1-1 Site and Area Description..............................................

2-1 Non-Radiological Environmental Introduction and Summary.............................................. 3-1 Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report..............

............................... 4-1 W Environmental Conditions o Aquatic and Ecological Monitoring.............................................. 4-1 O Water Quality Management.............................................

4-3 O AirQualityManagement.............................................

4-6 o Non-Radioactive Waste Management............................................. 4-7 O Chemical Control and Management.............................................

4-9 X Environmental Protection Plan Status.............................................

4-10 Radiological Environmental Introduction and Summary....................

.......................... 5-1 Radiological Environmental Operating Report............................................. 6-1 O Program Description..............................................

6-1 O Analysis of Results and Trends.............................................

6-5 O Land Use Census.............................................

6-9 o Quality Assurance..............................................

6-10 O Program Deviation..............................................

6-11 List of Tables XI Table 1: Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program............................................ 6-12 Table 2: Sample Media and Location Descriptions...........................................

6-14 p Table 3: 2002 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Analysis Summary............................................ 6-19 STP Nuclear Operating Company

2002 Environmental Report Page List of Figures Figure 4-1:

Figure 4-2:

Figure 4-3:

Figure 4-4:

Figure 4-5:

Figure 4-6:

Figure 6-1:

Figure 6-2:

Figure 6-3:

Figure 6-4:

Figure 6-5:

Figure 6-6:

Figure 6-7:

Figure 6-8:

Figure 6-9:

Figure 6-10:

1997 Matagorda County Groundwater Pumpage....................................

4-3 Historical Groundwater Usage....................................

4-3 2002 Water Use Sources....................................

4-4 2002 Nonradioactive Waste Management................

.................... 4-8 2002 Nonradioactive Waste Generation..............

...................... 4-8 Hazardous Waste Generation Historical Comparison....................................

4-9 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Designated Sample Location Map (Off Site).................................. 6-2 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Designated Sample Location Map (On Site)................................... 6-3 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Zone Location Map....................................

6-4 Historical Comparison of Average Quarterly Beta Activity....................................

6-5 Environmental Dosimeter Comparisons.............

....................... 6-6 Historical Comparison of Cobalt-58 and Cobalt-60 in Main Cooling Reservoir Sediment...........

......................... 6-7 Calculated Cumulative Curies of Cobalt-60 in the Main Cooling Reservoir....................................

6-8 Historical Comparison of Tritium Added to and Remaining in the Main Cooling Reservoir........................

............ 6-8 Historical Comparison ofTritium Activity in Surface Water....................................

6-9 2002 Radiological Laboratory Quality Assurance Program Performance....................................

6-11 STP Nuclear Operating Company fnk

Pip

Executive Summary

.o his report describes the environmental y

xr

_monitoring programs, radiological and non-radiological, conducted at the South Texas Project during 2002. Included in this report are the Environmental Protection Plan Status, the results of the Radiological Environmen-tal Monitoring Program and the Land Use Census.

Radiation and radioactivity in the environment are constantly monitored within a 15-mile radius ofthe South Texas Project. Sam-pling locations are selected using weather, land use and water use information. Two types of sam-pling locations are used. The first type, control stations, are located in areas that are beyond measur-able influence of the South Texas Project or any other nuclear facil-ity. The sample results from these stations are used to explain radia-tion from sources other than the South Texas Project. Indicator stations are the second type of sta-tions. The samples from these sta-tions measure any radiation con-tributed to the environment by the project. Indicator stations are lo-cated in areas close to the South Texas Project where any plant releases would be at the highest concentration.

Prior to initial operation ofthe South Texas Project, samples were collected and analyzed to determine the amount ofradioac-tivity present in the area. These results are used as a "pre-opera-tional baseline." Results from the indicator stations are compared to both current control sample re-sults and the pre-operational baseline values to determine if changes in radioactivity levels are attributable to station operations or other causes such as previous nuclear weapons testing programs and natural variations.

Radioactivity levels in the South Texas Project's environ-ment frequently fall below the minimum detection capabilities of the state-of-the-art scientific in-struments. Samples with radiation levels that cannot be detected are below the Lower Limits of Detec-tion. The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission requires that equipment used for radiologi-cal monitoring must be able to detect specified minimum limits for certain types ofsamples. This en-sures that radiation measurements are sufficiently sensitive to detect small changes in the environment.

The United States Nuclear Regu-latory Commission also has a re-quired "reporting level." Licensed nuclear facilities must prepare a special report and increase their sampling if any measured radia-tion level is equal to or greater than this reporting level. No sample from the South Texas Project has ever reached or exceeded a re-porting level.

Measurements made are di-vided into four categories or path-ways based upon how the results.

may affect the public. Airborne, waterborne, ingestion and direct 0§ (Z:1
"_WWQ)

STP Nuclear Operating Company

2002 Environmental Report radiation are the four pathways that are sampled. Each pathway is described below.

l The airborne pathway is sampled in areas around the South Texas Project by mea-suring radioactivity of iodine and particulate air filters. The 2002 airborne results were similar to pre-operational levels with only naturally oc-curring radioactive material unrelated to the operation of the South Texas Project de-tected.

b The waterbome pathway in-cludes samples taken from surface water, ground water and drinking water. Also in-cluded in this path are sedi-ment samples taken from the Main Cooling Reservoir and the Colorado River. Tritium was the only man-made iso-tope consistently detected in water samples and was mea-sured in the shallow aquifer, the Main Cooling Reservoir and other bodies of water onsite. The average tritium level changed very little in the Main Cooling Reservoir over the past year and re-mained below United States Nuclear Regulatory Com-mission reporting limits and within United States Environ-mental Protection Agency drinking water standards.

Sediment samples from the Main Cooling Reservoir continue to show traces of plant-related isotopes. The amount of plant-related iso-topes found in reservoirbot-tom sediment samples has decreased since 1992 be-cause less Cobalt-60 has been added to the reservoir by plant effluents than has un-dergone radioactive decay.

The Cobalt-60 appears to have stabilized following a major decrease four years ago.

Offsite sediment samples continue to show no radioactivity from the South Texas Project. This indicates that the station produces no detectable effect offsite from this pathway.

b The ingestion pathway in-cludes broadleafvegetation, agricultural products and food products. Naturally occurring isotopes were de-tected at average environ-mental levels in the samples.

Man-made isotopes found in the samples were consistent with values found in pre-op-erational samples.

The direct exposure pathway measures environmental ra-diation doses using thermolu-minescent dosimeters.

These results are consistent with the readings from pre-vious years and continue to show no effect from plant operations.

The South Texas Project continues to operate with no nega-tive effect on the population or the environment. The exposure for people living in the area is main-tained at less than one millirem per year. Environmental programs at the site monitor known and pre-dictable relationships between the operation of the South Texas Project and the surrounding area.

These monitoring programs verify that the operation of the South Texas Project has no detectable impact offsite and is well within state and federal regulations and guidelines. These programs are verified by the state of Texas through collection and analysis of samples and placement of the state's thermoluminescent dosim-eters.

Photo By': Gwenna Kelton STP Nuclear Operating Company 6

9

,,

q

he South Texas Project is located on 12,220 acres in Matagorda County, Texas, approximately 15 miles southwest of Bay City along the west bank of the Colorado River. The South Texas Project isjointly owned by Texas Genco, LP, AEP Texas Central Company, the City of Austin and the City of San Antonio. Until late 1997, the Houston Lighting & Power Com-pany was the designated Project Manager for the owners. In No-vember of 1997, the STP Nuclear Operating Company assumed operational control of the South Texas Project and responsibility for implementation of all environ-mental programs.

The South Texas Project has two 1,250 megawatt-electric Westinghouse pressurized water reactors. The thermal output was subsequently uprated by 1.4 per-cent increasing electrical output.

Unit I received a low-power test-ing license on August 21, 1987, obtained initial criticality on March 8, 1988, and was declared com-mercially operational on August 25, 1988. Unit 2 received a low-power testing license on Decem-ber 16, 1988, obtained initial criti-cality on March 12, 1989, and was declared commercially op-erational on June 19, 1989. Both units together produce enough electricity to serve over a million homes.

• How the South Texas Project Works Fossil-fueled and nuclear-powered steam generating plants operate on the same principle.

Fuel is used to produce heat to convert water into high-pressure steam.

The steam is directed through a turbine to turn a gen-erator. In a fossil fuel plant, burn-ing coal, lignite, oil or natural gas in a boiler produces the heat. In a nuclear plant, the reactor replaces the boiler and the "fissioning" or splitting of uranium atoms inside the reactor produces the heat.

The fuel for a nuclear reactor is uranium. It is formed into cylin-drical ceramic pellets, each about the size ofthe end of your little fin-ger. One pellet has the energy po-tential of about a ton of coal. Mil-lions of these pellets are stacked in fuel rods that are arranged into assemblies that make up the core of the reactor. The use of ura-nium allows us to conserve natu-ral gas, oil and coal and to avoid the associated production of greenhouse gases.

PWIMARYLOOP WALL COOLING LOOP 46 C_ 1, Cor

2002 Environmental Report A reactor starts operating when control rods in the core are withdrawn and fission begins. The fuel rods heat water circulating in sealed, stainless steel piping that passes through large heat ex-changers called steam generators.

The water in the reactor is pres-surized to prevent boiling. This is why the South Texas Project's reactors are called "pressurized water reactors."

This hot, pressurized water heats a separate supply of water in the steam generators to pro-duce steam that is directed through the blades of a turbine generator to produce electricity. The steam is then fed to a condenser where a separate supply of cooling wa-ter from the reservoir turns it back into water that is then pumped back to the steam generator for reuse. A diagram of the plant water systems is shown on the previous page.

In addition to its safety sys-tems, the South Texas Project has manybuilt-in physical barriers that would prevent the release of ra-dioactive materials in the unlikely event of an accident. The most visible ones are the 200-foot-tall, domed containment buildings with steel-reinforced walls four feet thick. Inside each of these mas-sive structures, two more concrete walls provide another 11 feet of shielding. The reactor vessel itself has steel walls six inches thick, and the fuel pellets inside it are sheathed in hardened metal tubes.

Late in 1998 and again in 2001, in a continuation of strong business and industry support for nuclear energy, the International Chamber of Commerce recom-mended that delegates at the United Nations negotiations on global climate change include nuclear energy as an option for meeting increased electricity de-mand while avoiding greenhouse gas emissions. The International Chamber of Commerce's support reaffirms the significant carbon reductions achieved by nuclear energy in many countries. Nuclear power plants produce approxi-mately 20 percent ofthe nation's electricity while saving the equiva-lent of approximately 164 million metric tons of carbon, as well as 2.4 million tons of nitrogen oxide emissions and 5.1 million tons of sulfur dioxide, from entering the earth's atmosphere annually.

Photo By: Gwenna Kelton STP Nuclear Operating Company 6

9 X,
D

Site and Area Description The Site Sixty-five ofthe entire 12,220 acres at the South Texas Project are occupied by the two power plants. Plant facilities include a 7,000-acre main cooling reservoir and a 47-acre essential cooling pond. Many smaller bodies of water onsite include wetlands, Kelly Lake, drainage ditches, sloughs and depressions. Much ofthe land east ofthe cooling res-ervoir is leased for cattle grazing.

Approximately 1,700 acres re-main in a more natural state as a lowland habitat. A 110-acre wet-land habitat area was established in 1996 on previously unused land located northeast of the power plants. The area surrounding the South Texas Project is character-ized by coastal plain with farmland and pasture predominating. Local relief of the area is characterized by flat land, approximately 23 feet above sea level.

The Area The economic base for this area primarily is agricultural re-lated. Most of the land near the site is used for the production of five major agricultural products:

beef, rice, grain sorghum, soy-beans and cotton. In addition to the agriculture industry, there is commercial fishing in the lower Colorado River, East and West Matagorda Bays, Intracoastal Waterway and the Gulf of Mexico. Currently shrimp, oys-ters, and crab are the predomi-Photo By: Gwenna Kelton nant commercial fish while fin fishes have been commercially less important in recent years.

Although the surrounding area is heavily cultivated, significant amounts of woodlands, thicket, brush, fields, marsh and open wa-ter exist to support wildlife. The area lies in the southern region of the central flyway and is host to an abundance of migratory birds.

The local estuary environments provide the necessary habitat for a variety of fish types to complete their life cycles. The area also af-fords opportunity for recreational hunting and fishing.

The South Texas Project is home to many species of animals.

Our inhabitants include American alligators, a family of osprey, bald eagles and several hundred deer.

In winter, literally hundreds of thousands of waterfowl, princi-pally migratory geese as well as white pelicans and the common tern, have found that the plant's 7,000-acre cooling reservoir pro-vides a good resting place during their migrations. The station also established a man-made wetland habitat in 1996 that attracts an in-creasing diversity ofmigratory fowl and other wildlife. Since 1997, the 15-mile-wide area that in-cludes the South Texas Project has had the highest number of bird species nationwide in the National Audubon Society's annual Christ-mas Bird Count.

The climate of the region is subtropical maritime, with conti-nental influence. It is character-ized by short, mild winters and long, hot and humid summers.

Rainfall is usually abundant throughout the year with an annual average of approximately forty-two inches. The prevailing wind direction is from the south-southeast, shifting to north-north-east for short intervals during the winter months.

0§ e

A STP Nuclear Operating Company

.f eel 9ei01

Non-Radiological Environmental Introduction and Summary I -,

he South Texas Project is committed to the

/

production of electricity in a safe, reliable, and economical manner using nuclear energy. The station's programs, policies and business plan objectives also in-corporate a commitment to envi-ronmental excellence and sound environmental management. The dedication of station personnel who develop, implement and monitor site environmental pro-tection programs and compliance exemplify this commitment.

The station's commitment to sound environmental management is illustrated by the following en-vironmental successes in 2002:

4 Classified as a high performer by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality based on the station's above-aver-age environmental compliance record Approved by the Texas Com-mission on Environmental Quality as a member of the state's CLEAN TEXAS pro-gram encompass the integration of sound environmental practices into our daily operational and business decisions. The people at the South Texas Project understand the need to balance economic, operational and environmental is-sues for the benefit of the station and the public. The South Texas Project understands that we must hold ourselves to the highest prin-ciples of responsibility for our en-vironmental and station activities.

6 Continued reductions in non-radiological waste generation.

Everyone has a responsibility to protect the environment. Comi mitment to environmental respon sibility is an integral component o the South Texas Project operat ing policy. This responsibility reaches further than mere compli.

ance with laws and regulations tc 1

I.

STP Nuclear Operating Company

Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report Envi his section of the report describes the South Texas Project's non-radiological envi-ronmental program performance and environmental conditions from January 1 through December 31, 2002. The STP Nuclear Operat-ing Company environmental staff closely monitors environmental conditions and performance at the South Texas Project. Reliant Re-sources, Inc. provided support and technical assistance to the South Texas Project. In 2002, the Texas Natural Resource Conser-vation Commission also con-ducted a beneficial land applica-tion inspection and a stormwater permit inspection at the station.

No discrepancies were found. On September 1, 2002, the Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission (TNRCC) formally changed its name to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) as required by state legislation.

In 2002, the South Texas Project applied for recognition as a partner in the CLEAN TEXAS program administered by the Texas Commission on Environ-mental Quality. The state subse-quently granted approval of the station's application. CLEAN TEXAS is a voluntary environ-mental leadership program com-prised of industries, nonprofit groups, counties and other orga-nizations with a common goal to protect the state air, water and ironnien tal Conditions land resources. As a partner in the CLEAN TEXAS program, the South Texas Project is committed to meeting established environ-mental improvement goals, main-taining and improving intemal pro-grams and continuing community environmental outreach programs and projects.

In November 2002, the Texas Commission on Environ-mental Quality classified the South Texas Project as a high performer based on the station's above-av-erage environmental compliance record. Facilities, such as the South Texas Project, are classi-fied by the state as a high per-former, average performer or poor performer based on that facility's compliance history. The state's classification of the South Texas Project as a high performer was based on the station's environ-mental performance over the last five year period.

AQUATIC AND ECOLOGI-CAL MONITORING The location of the South Texas Project falls within the Texas Land Resource Area designation as coastal prairie and can be di-vided into two broad ecological areas based on topography, soils and vegetation. The bottomland area is a swampy, marshy area that occupies approximately 1,700 acres of the site near the Colorado River. This area pro-vides an important habitat forbirds and other wildlife. A spoil im-poundment constructed in 1972 by the United States Army Corps of Engineers is included in this area. In addition, a 110-acre wetland habitat area that attracts a variety of bird groups and other wildlife was established in 1996 on previously unused land located northeast of the power plants.

The remaining area of the site of-fers diverse habitats for mammals 0§ STP Nuclear Operating Company

2002 Environmental Report Photo By: Gwenna Kelton and several types of birds. The South Texas Project environmen-tal staff regularly monitor the site's environs for changing conditions.

Ecological conditions onsite in 2002 remained generally un-changed and satisfactory.

In 1996, the South Texas Project and Houston Industries Incorporated initiated ajoint ef-fort with Ducks Unlimited, Texas Parks and Wildlife, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, and the United States Department of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service to establish a 110-acre wetland habitat for migratory waterfowl at the station.

This habitat area immediately at-tracted a variety of bird species and other wildlife and has contin-ued to support an increasing di-versity of plants and animals. The wetland project received the Ducks Unlimited Habitat Conser-vation Award in 1996 and a United States Department of Ag-riculture Conservation Award in 1999forhabitatpreservation. An observation trail adjacent to the wetland habitat allows easy ac-cess and viewing by visitors.

The South Texas Project and the wetland habitat project are located on the state-sponsored Great Texas Coastal Birding Trail that spans the entire Texas Gulf Coast from Brownsville to the Louisiana border. Several bird species listed on the state and fed-eral threatened or endangered species lists have been observed at the wetland habitat and else-where onsite. These include the bald eagle, peregrine falcon, wood stork, white-faced ibis, wood ibis and white-tailed hawk.

Additional migratory and resident bird species have been observed during informal surveys of the site's diverse natural and man-made habitats.

The South Texas Project continues to provide vital habitat for more than 125 different spe-cies of wintering and resident birds, including the common tern and white pelicans. In 1998, a small number of black skimmers and least terns established nests on a remote parking lot at the sta-tion. Special precautions were taken to protect the nesting area and a small, but growing popula-tion of both species has continued to return each year to the site. In-tensive bird nesting continues throughout the lowland habitat, particularly in a heron rookery around the perimeter of Kelly Lake. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologists estimate that over half ofTexas' breeding adult Gull-billed Tern population nest on the internal dikes of the Main Cooling Reservoir. TheU. S. Fish and Wildlife Service considers nesting of Gull-billed Terns in Texas uncommon.

The South Texas Project continues to monitor important wildlife species to detect popula-tion changes. In January of 2002, the station commissioned a fish population study of the station's 46.9-acre Essential Cooling Pond. Two distinct populations of fish, sheepshead minnows and sailfin mollies, were found to be present, although, neither species were found to be overpopulated.

Recommendations from this study were captured under the station's Corrective Action Program and incorporated into station proce-dures and practices to prevent fish from congregating in the pond's intake structure where they could potentially impact station opera-tions. (Inspection ReportNo.01-010) Informal observations by station and Reliant Resources, Inc. personnel continue to indicate STP Nuclear Operating Company fo-o-k17DI-2

1997 Matagorda County Groundwater Pumpage (Texas Water Development Board)

• Municipal I

• Manufacturing

_ Steam-Electric

• Mining 10%

• Irrigation O Livestock Figure 4-1 for station personnel, replenishes the Essential Cooling Pond, and is used for other industrial pur-poses onsite. Surface water from the Main Cooling Reservoir and the Essential Cooling Pond is used as cooling water for plant activi-ties. Water from the Colorado River replenishes the Main Cool-ing Reservoir via intermittent pumping periods. Surface water diverted to the Main Cooling Res-ervoir from the Colorado River accounted for approximately 97 percent of the water used at the South Texas Project in 2002.

Figure 4-1 illustrates the various users of groundwater sources in Matagorda County in 1997 based on the most current information distributed by the Texas Water Development Board.

At that time, the South Texas Project accounted for only 10 percent ofthe county's groundwa-ter usage. Consistent with station environmental principles encour-aging efficient water usage and conservation, the station has care-that the site provides high-quality habitat in which a wide range of animals live. The site also contin-ues to attract extensive wildlife populations, offering a refuge for resident species as well as sea-sonal migrants. The lowland habi-tat located between the Colorado River and the east bank of the Main Cooling Reservoir offers a significant source of water year-round. These natural resource areas, in concert with numerous additional wetland and grassland areas, offer the key ingredients necessary to sustain the extensive wildlife population at the South Texas Project.

WATER QUALITY MAN-AGEMENT Water is an essential compo-nent in electricity production, and all electric utilities must comply with extensive federal, state and local water regulations. These regulations govern virtually every aspect of business operations at the South Texas Project. Water usage and wastewater treatment onsite are regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Federal Clean Water Act and the Texas Water Quality Act. Collectively, these acts provide for the safe-guarding of public drinking water supplies and maintaining the integ-rity of state and federal waters.

The South Texas Project uses both surface water and groundwater for station purposes. Groundwa-ter provides onsite drinking water Historical Groundwater Usage South Texas Project 1 400 1350

~O 1 300 Z.

1250 1 200 1M 1150 e

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Year Figure 4-2 to CO

_i ' /2002 -En arnn~r fully managed its groundwater us-age over the last five years in or-der to conserve this important re-source. Station groundwater us-age in 2002 remained consistent with previous years. (Reference Figure 4-2) Groundwater usage only accounted for approximately three percent ofthe water utilized in 2002 by the South Texas Project. (Reference Figure 4-3)

Most of the water used by the South Texas Project is needed to condense steam and provide cooling for plant generating sys-tems. The majority of this water is drawn from and returned to the station's Main Cooling Reservoir.

The Main Cooling Reservoir is a 7,000-acre, above grade, off-channel reservoir capable of im-pounding 202,600 acre-feet of water at its maximum level. Res-ervoir makeup water is withdrawn intermittently from the adjacent Colorado River. In addition, the Essential Cooling Pond, a 46.9-acre, below grade, off-channel reservoir that supplies water to cool crucial plant components is capable of impounding 388 acre-feet of water. Various water rights permits, contractual agreements and compliance documents autho-rize the South Texas Project to maintain these reservoirs, impound water diverted from the Colorado River, and to circulate, divert and use water from the reservoirs for industrial purposes to operate the plant. These permits also limit the rate of diversion from the Colo-rado River. The South Texas Project diverted 42,168 acre-feet from the Colorado River in 2002 for the Main Cooling Reservoir fill operations while preserving ad-equate freshwater flow conditions for downstream bay and estuarine environments.

Existing federal and state water quality standards are imple-mented and enforced through the Texas Pollutant Discharge Elimi-nation System (TPDES) permit program to restore and maintain the state's waters. In 1998, the State of Texas assumed authority to administer and implement the federal National Pollutant Dis-charge Elimination System (NPDES) program. Accordingly, federal and state requirements were consolidated in November of 2000 into one wastewater dis-charge permit for the station un-der the TPDES permit program.

Under this permit program, the South Texas Project monitors, records and reports the types and quantities of pollutants from wastewater discharges to ensure that we meet or exceed the strin-gent levels set in the permit. A monthly monitoring report is sub-mitted to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality for wastewater discharges. Reports identifying ground and surface water use are also submitted to the Texas Commission on Envi-ronmental Quality and Texas Water Development Board.

The South Texas Project understands that the water re-sources of the state are a critical natural resource requiring care-ful management and conservation to preserve water quality and availability. Accordingly, the sta-tion in 1998 began to actively participate in statewide water planning initiatives, including the Lower Colorado Regional Wa-ter Planning Group, that also seek to achieve these goals. The South Texas Project continues to ex-plore and support efforts focus-2002 Water Use Sources South Texas Project Surface Water 97%

Groundwater 3%

Figure 4-3 C_ G __2
1 0%

fo- 0-
1, k
D4

Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report Photo By: Gwenna Kelton ter discharges met state and fed-eral water quality standards dem-onstrating a 100 percent compli-ance record for the year while conserving and maximizing effi-cient water usage at the station.

In addition to the wastewa-ter discharge permit program, the Federal Clean Water Act, as amended in 1987, requires per-mits for storm water discharges associated with industrial activity.

The South Texas Project Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, implemented since October of 1993, ensures that potential pol-lution sources at the site are evalu-ated, and that appropriate mea-sures are selected and imple-mented to prevent or control the discharge of pollutants in storm water runoff. In September of 1998, the United States Environ-mental Protection Agency modi-fied the storm water permit pro-ing on the efficient use of water resources and reduction of water waste.

Wastewater generated at the South Texas Project is processed and discharged to the onsite Main Cooling Reservoir to be re-used by the station as cooling water for plant systems. No water was re-leased from the reservoir in 2002.

The station continued its outstand-ing wastewater discharge compli-ance performance record in 2002.

Station conditions did not require site aquatic monitoring studies be conducted in 2002 nor were any additional studies required by the United States Environmental Agency or the State of Texas ei-ther by way of station discharge permits or otherwise. Wastewa-Photo By:

Givenna Kelton (ZI
14 %

STP Nuclear Operating Company

2002 Environmental Report gram to require facilities, such as the South Texas Project, permit-ted under the baseline general per-mit to obtain permit coverage un-der a multi-sector general storm water permit. Accordingly, the station filed a Notice of Intent for transfer from the General Permit to the Multi-Sector General Per-mit with the United States Envi-ronmental Protection Agency in 1998. The Texas Natural Re-source Conservation Commission issued a TPDES Multi-Sector General Permit in August of 2001.

The station filed a Notice of In-tent in November of 2001 to ob-tain coverage under the state per-mit and the station's Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan was modified accordingly to reflect these changes. This plan is a working document that is revised whenever there is a change in de-sign, construction, operation or maintenance that has a significant effect on the potential for the dis-charge of pollutants from the sta-tion.

Following a severe drought in 1996, the Texas Legislature rec-ognized the need to address a wide range of state water resource management issues. In 1997, the Texas Senate drafted legislation known as Senate Bill I to address these issues and to develop a comprehensive state water policy.

Towards this end, this legislation required that the Texas Water Development Board create a statewide water plan that empha-sizes regional planning. Sixteen planning regions were created, each tasked to prepare a regional plan for the orderly development, management and conserv'ation of water resources. The South Texas Project was chosen to represent the electric generating utility inter-est for the water-planning region that encompasses the lower Colo-rado River Basin. Plans subse-quently submitted by each plan-ning region were incorporated into a State Water Plan in the year 2001. The South Texas Project continues to actively participate in the Lower Colorado Regional Water Planning Group in the cur-rent planning cycle that will result in an update of the existing plan by 2006. Additional information regarding regional water planning in Texas can be found on the website maintained by the Texas Water Development Board at http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/.

AIR QUALITY MANAGE-MENT Air emission sources at the South Texas Project fall under the scope of air pollution regulations promulgated under the Texas Clean Air Act and the Federal Clean Air Act and the numerous associated amendments. The pur-pose ofthese regulations is to pro-tect air resources from pollution by controlling or abating air pol-lution and emissions. Regulated emission sources at the South Texas Project include a fossil-fuel boiler, emergency diesel genera-tors, fire-fighting training and other minor maintenance activities.

Fossil-Fueled Emission Sources Unlike conventional electri-cal generating stations, nuclear power plants do not burn petro-leum fuel. Therefore, the South Texas Project produces virtually no greenhouse gases or other air pollutants that are the typical by-products of industrial production processes. The use of emissions-free nuclear power is a significant contributor to the preservation of our community's clean air re-sources. The South Texas Project uses small amounts of fossil fuel for backup and emergency equip-ment. Air emission sources at the South Texas Project fall under the scope of air pollution regulations promulgated under the Texas Clean Air Act, the Federal Clean Air Act and numerous associated amendments that protect air re-sources from pollution by control-ling or abating air pollution and emissions. The major regulated air emission sources at the South Texas Project include one fossil-fueled boiler and various emer-gency diesel generators.

The South Texas Project has one oil-fired auxiliary steam boiler available to furnish steam for deaerator startup, turbine gland seals and radioactive liquid waste processing when steam is not available from the nuclear steam supply system. In addition to the auxiliary steam boiler, a number of fossil-fueled diesel generators are located onsite. These diesels are designed to provide emergency 6

from K
"D STP Nuclear Operating Company

Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report Photo By: Gvenna Kelton power to various plant systems or buildings in the event of a loss of power. This equipment is not nor-mally needed for daily operations and the station does not use it to produce electricity for distribution.

Routine maintenance nis are con-ducted to ensure availability if needed and for equipment main-tenance.

Fire-Fighting Activities The South Texas Project conducts onsite training of selected employees on proper fire-fighting techniques. Most onsite instruc-tion consists of training on the proper use of a fire extinguisher.

Advance notification offirefighting training sessions is provided to the Matagorda County Environmen-tal Services and the Texas Com-mission on Environmental Quality as required by state regulation.

Title V Federal Operating Permit In 1990, amendments to the Federal Clean Air Act mandated a new permitting program to clearly define applicable air qual-ity requirements for affected facili-ties such as the South Texas Project. This program is com-monly known as the Title V Op-erating Permit Program and is ad-ministered by the state. The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission issued a Federal Operating Permit in January of 2000 for the South Texas Project granting authority to operate iden-tified emission units at the station in accordance with applicable per-mit and regulatory requirements.

In accordance with the South Texas Project's Federal Operat-ing Permit's reporting require-ments, the station reported one minor deviation that occurred in 2002. InNovember of 2002 dur-ing operation ofthe station's Aux-iliary Boiler, flue gas excess oxy-gen levels intermittently fluctuated above the permit-established range for manual operations. The excess flue gas oxygen range es-tablished in the permit is a control parameter for operation of the Auxiliary Boiler. The condition was corrected and no emission limits were exceeded.

\\

NON-RADIOACTIVE M'

WASTE MIANAGENIENT Solid waste management procedures for hazardous and non-hazardous wastes generated at the South Texas Project ensure that wastes are properly dispositioned in accordance with applicable federal, state and local environmental and health regula-tions. By regulatory definition, solid waste includes solid, semi-solid, liquid and gaseous waste material. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, which administers the Texas Solid Waste Disposal Act and also the federal Resource Conservation and Re-covery Act program, is the pri-mary agency regulating non-ra-dioactive wastes generated at the South Texas Project. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality also regulates the collec-tion, handling, storage and dis-posal of solid wastes, including hazardous wastes. The transpor-tation of waste materials is regu-lated by the United States Depart-ment of Transportation.

The South Texas Project is registered with the Texas Com-mission on Environmental Quality as a large quantity generator of industrial solid wastes, including hazardous wastes. Texas Com-mission on Environmental Quality regulations require that industrial solid wastes generated at the South Texas Project be identified to the Commission and these are listed in the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Notice of Registration for the South Texas Project. The registration is revised whenever there is a change in waste management practices at the site. Waste handling and dis-posal activities are summarized and documented in a waste sum-mary report for the South Texas C4-7*v- (-4--W4 STP Nuclear Operating Company

Project that is submitted annually to the Texas Commission on En-vironmental Quality.

Hazardous waste accumula-tion at the South Texas Project is limited to a maximum holding pe-riod of 90 days. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act and Texas Solid Waste Disposal Act also require the use of proper storage and shipping containers, labels, manifests, reports, person-nel training, a spill control plan and an accident contingency plan.

Plant personnel routinely inspect areas throughout the site to ensure wastes are not stored or accumu-lated inappropriately.

Station policies and regula-tions encourage the recycling, re-covery or re-use of waste when possible to reduce the amount of waste generated or disposed of in landfills. Approximately 73 per-cent ofthe industrial non-radioac-tive waste generated at the South Texas Project was recycled or processed for re-use in 2002.

(Reference Figure 4-4) The South Texas Project ships waste oil, grease, electrohydraulic fluid, sealants, adhesives, liquid paint and solvent for fuel blending and thermal energy recovery. Used oil, diesel fuels and antifreeze so-lutions are sent to a recycling ven-dor for re-processing. Lead-acid batteries are returned, when pos-sible, to the original manufacturer for recycling or are shipped to a registered battery recycler, thereby reducing the volume of hazardous waste that might otherwise be gen-2002 Nonradioactive Waste Management South Texas Project Recycle Incineration &

Fuel Blending 8.4%

Landfill 18.4%

Figure 4-4 erated. A site paper recycling pro-gram results in the collection of several tons of paper each year.

In 2002, the station collected ap-proximately 40 tons of paper for recycling. Every ton ofpaper re-cycled saves approximately 17 trees, eliminates approximately three cubic yards of landfill mate-rial and saves enough energy to power the average home for six months. The station continues to explore new areas where recy-cling may be expanded or initi-ated.

Non-radioactive solid waste that cannot be shipped for recy-cling is shipped for disposal. Mu-nicipal-type trash is transported to the county landfill transfer station for appropriate disposition. Con-2002 Nonradioactive Waste Generation South Texas Project Non-Hazardous Waste 94.0%

Universal Waste 0.8%

Hazardous Waste 1.3%

Used Batteries 3.9%

Figure 4-5 Cod" k

Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report struction-related non-combus-tible, inert debris, if generated, is placed in the onsite landfill. Waste minimization and source reduction efforts by employees allowed the South Texas Project to achieve approximately a 12 percent reduc-tion in normal hazardous waste generated at the site during 2002.

The volume of hazardous waste generated at the station is suffi-ciently low to allow the station to seek re-classification as a small-quantity generator. This option will continue to be evaluated in the following year. Hazardous waste accounts for only a small portion of the waste generated at the South Texas Project; however, minimization and reduction ofhaz-ardous waste generation where feasible remains an important goal at the station. (Reference Figures 4-5 and 4-6)

CHEMICAL CONTROL AND MANAGEMENT The South Texas Project uses standard operating procedures, policies and programs to minimize proper packaging for disposal and the generation of waste materials, mitigate the consequences of in-control chemical usage and pre-advertent spillage.

vent spills.

The South Texas Project also evaluates chemicals and products proposed for use, which could come in contact with plant com-ponents. Site procedures address the evaluation, storage, use, spill control, and disposal requirements of chemicals. These guidelines as-sist in reducing wastes, ensure The South Texas Project emphasizes awareness training for spill prevention and maintains sta-tion readiness to respond should a spill occur. Spill response team members receive annual refresher training in hazardous material in-cident response. No significant or consequential spills occurred in 2002.

Hazardous Waste Generation Historical Comparison South Texas Project 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

[iHazardous Waste from Cleanup of an Onsite Spill I Hazardous Waste Figure 4-6 e4 STP Nuclear Operating Company

2002 Environmental Report Environmental Protection Plain Status The South Texas Project's Environmental Protection Plan was issued in March of 1989 to provide for the protection of non-radiological environmental values during operation of the South Texas Project. This report re-views Environmental Protection Plan non-compliances identified by the plant in 2002 and the as-sociated corrective actions taken to prevent their recurrence. Po-tential nonconformities are promptly addressed, as identified, to maintain operations in an envi-ronmentally acceptable manner.

The station uses its Corrective Ac-tion Program to document these conditions and track corrective actions to completion. Internal assessments, reviews and inspec-tions are also used to document plant compliance.

This report also reviews non-routine reports submitted by plant personnel and any activities that involved a potentially significant unreviewed environmental ques-tion. A proposed change, test or experiment is considered to present an unreviewed environ-mental questions if it concerns:

1) A matter that may result in a significant increase in any adverse environmen-tal impact previously evaluated in the Final En-vironmental Statement re-lated to the Operation of South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2 (Docket Nos. 50-498 and 50-499), environmental im-pact appraisals, or in any decisions of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board; or,

2) A significant change in ef-fluents orpower level; or,

3) A matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in the documents specified in (1) above, that may have a significant adverse en-vironmental impact.

No unreviewed environmen-tal questions were identified in 2002.

Events that require reports to federal, state or local agencies other than the Nuclear Regulatory Commission such as the Auxiliary Boiler deviation discussed earlier in this report are reported in ac-cordance with the applicable re-porting requirements.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is provided with a copy of any such report at the time it is sub-mitted to the cognizant agency. If a non-routine event occurs and a report is not required by another agency, then a 30-day report to the Nuclear Regulatory Commis-sion is required by the Environ-mental Protection Plan. No such 30-day or other non-routine re-port of this type was required in 2002.

ft STP Nuclear Operating Company

I $kto

I Radiological Environmental Introduction and Summarv here wvere two items of in-erest identified by this pro-gram during 2002. A short tion of them follows.

4 Cobalt-60 levels in reservoir bottom sediment samples vary but remain within the expected range. The amount of Cobalt-60 in the Main Cooling Reser-voir appears to have stabilized following a decrease four years ago.

Photo by: Ed Conaway Low level tritium was moni-tored in shallow aquifer ground water samples. The shallow well was located within ap-proximately seventy-five yards of the Main Cooling Reservoir dike base. The concentration is essentially unchanged and remained less than in the Main Cooling Reservoir.

Operation of the South Texas Project continues to have no de-tectable radiological impact offsite.

Samples analyzed from the off-site sampling stations continue to show no radiological contribution from plant operation. The radiological doses received by the general pub-lic from plant operations were less than one millirem which is insignifi-cant when compared to the 360 mil-lirems average annual radiation exposure to people in the United States from natural and medical sources.

Photo By: Givenna Kelton 4

Z_

STP Nuclear Operating Company Ii

il-,
i-,71

:e.

6
.-I I

 %,

V I.-

I Radiological Environmental Operating Report PROGRAM DESCRIPTION The South Texas Project ini-tiated a comprehensive pre-op-erational Radiological Environ-mental Monitoring Program in July 1985. That program terminated on March 7, 1988, when the op-erational program was imple-mented. The pre-operational monitoring program data forms the baseline against which operational changes are measured.

Critical pathway analysis re-quires that samples be taken from water, air, and land environments.

These samples are obtained to evaluate potential radiation expo-sure. Sample types are based on established pathways and experi-ence gained at other nuclear fa-cilities. Sample locations were determined after considering site meteorology, Colorado River hy-drology, local demography and land use. Sampling locations are further evaluated and modified according to field and analysis experience. Table I lists the mini-mum sampling locations and fre-quency of collection.

Sampling locations consist of indicator and control stations. In-dicator stations are locations on or off the site that may be influ-enced by plant discharges during plant operation. Control stations are located beyond the measur-able influence ofthe South Texas Project or any other nuclear facil-ity. Although most samples ana-lyzed are accompanied by a con-trol sample, it should be noted that this practice is not always possible or meaningful with all sample types. Fluctuations in the concen-tration ofradionuclides and direct radiation exposure at indicator sta-tions are evaluated in relation to historical data and against the con-trol stations. Indicator stations are compared with characteristics identified during the pre-opera-tional program to monitor for ra-diological effects from plant op-eration.

Several sample identification methods are used to implement the program. Figures 6-1 and 6-2 are maps that identify perma-nent sample stations. Descriptions of sample stations shown on Fig-ures 6-1 and 6-2 are found in Table 2. Table 2 also includes ad-ditional sampling locations and media types that may be used for C!DAWq STP Nuclear Operating Company

I Designated Sample Locations iS E-00140DW0 Figure 6-1 C c$)

~&.a(1v~~)&tci L LLirflht DeXsi t Sampl{> LocaI rons Designated Sample Locations N

S (On Site Sample Locations)

Figure 6-2 to

N 4"s S

2002 if~s 4

___l _

_llent_

Retport Zone Location Map The zone station number is determined in the following manner:

• The first character of the station number is 'Z' to identify it as a zone station.

• The second character is the direction coordinate numbers 1-8.

• The third character is the distance from site numbers 1-6.

Figure 6-3 QQ7

2,,> "

,I tt' g 0,t)m/-;<

QZ0 tt t t

additional information. Figure 6-3 illustrates the zones used when collection locations are not per-manent sample stations.

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS AND TRENDS 4

Environmental samples from areas surrounding the South Texas Project continue to indicate no sig-nificant radiological effects from plant operation. Analytical values from offsite indicator sample sta-tions continue to trend with the control stations. Onsite indicator samples continued to increase or decrease in measured values at their expected rates.

Average quarterly beta activ-ity from three onsite indicator sta-tions and a single control station for air particulate samples have been compared historically from 1988 through 2002 (see Figure 6-4). The average of the onsite indicators trends closely with the offsite control values. The com-parison illustrates thatplant opera-tions are not having an impact on air particulate activity even at the Sensitive Indicator Stations (#1,

1. 15, and #16). These stations are located near the plant and are lo-cated downwind from the plant based on the prevailing wind di-rection. The beta activity mea-sured in the air particulate samples is from natural radioactive mate-rial. As a routine part of the pro-gram, we perform gamma analy-sis on quarterly composites ofthe air particulate samples to deter-mine if any activity is from the South Texas Project. The gamma analysis revealed that it was all natural radioactivity.

Direct gamma radiation is monitored in the environment by thermoluminescent dosimeters lo-cated at 43 sites. The natural di-rect gamma radiation varies ac-cording to location because of dif-ferences in the natural radioactive materials in the soil, its moisture content and the vegetation cover.

Figure 6-5 compares the amount of direct gamma radiation mea-Historical Comparison of Average Quarterly Beta Activity from Indicator and Control Air Samples 1988 - 2002 0.035 t

__0.025 Eh 0.02 0.01 2

C CE 0

.0 0.0 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

-Station #001, #015 & #016 Average of Onsite Indicators Station #037 Offsite Control Figure 6-4 to 1;
6-1
O*

%)

cotr

,2}

2 Ui C

123

.2 i_ c s

>o Si z -'k k
I z k,, l-r The Sensitive Indicator Stations are in the directions that the wind blows most often and are one mile from the power plants on Farm-to-Market Road 521 (Stations #1,

1. 15 and #16). The Indicator Sta-tions are the remainder of the sta-tions excluding Stations #38, 40, and 42 which are of general inter-est stations and not required. The values plotted are the averages for no By: Gwenna Kelton all of the stations according to plant since the fourth type. Figure 6-5 indicates the di-985 for three differ-rect radiation exposure rates in the stations. The Con-area ofthe individual stations. The of aregreater than Io average ofthe Control Stations is the site and are in the higher than the other stations be-

[ the least prevailing cause station #23 is in an area that of

-- e least phas a slightly higher natural back-ground radiation, probably due to the soil composition. The trends of Figure 6-5 clearly show that the power plants are not adding to the direct radiation in the environment.

Bottom sediment samples are taken from the Main Cooling Res-ervoir each year. Figure 6-6 shows the positive results from two plant-produced radioactive materials, Cobalt-58 and Cobalt-

60. The Cobalt-58 and Cobalt-60 inventory in the reservoir has decreased since 1992 because of equipment installed to reduce ra-dioactive effluents. The amount of Cobalt-58 has decreased be-low levels that can be reliably de-Phc sured at the quarter of I ent types cl trol Station miles from direction c winds (StaLiOnS T hU atiU to.3 1).

Environmental Dosimeter Comparisons 22

-Aerage of Indica,.r Sto iO's

-Aerage

.r Control Stations Sena sitle lad roto Stalions 20 0

I Ci 16 o 14 12 Unit #1 Criticality - 03/08/88 Unit #2 Criticality -03112/89 l0

'985 1989 1987 19898 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Results by Quarter Figure 6-5 CcQ.

Radidpcratng Repori' ti a

ft Operatingf Rteiport tected. The concentration of Co-balt-60 in the reservoir bottom sediment samples varies but is within the expected range. Fig-ure 6-7 demonstrates the decline in the total amount of Cobalt-60 in the reservoir.

Cesium-137 was also mea-sured in one oftwo Main Cooling Reservoir bottom sediment samples and in one of three indi-cator and one control station shoreline sediment samples on the Colorado River. However, Ce-sium-137 was present in the en-vironment before the operation of the South Texas Project and the sample concentrations were ap-proximately equal to pre-opera-tional values. No other isotopes released from the plant were iden-tified in the shoreline samples, which indicates that the plant was probably not the source of Ce-sium-137inthesesamples. The Cesium-137 measured in the Main Cooling Reservoir does not suggest an increase due to plant operation.

Tritium is a radioactive iso-tope of hydrogen and is produced during plant operation. Tritium produced in the reactors is a part ofthe water molecule. Wastewa-ter is treated to remove impurities before release, but tritium cannot be removed because it is chemi-cally part of the water molecule.

Some of the tritium is released into the atmosphere and the remain-der is released into the Main Cool-ing Reservoir. The tritium escapes from the Main Cooling Reservoir by evaporation and by percola-tion from the reliefwells that are a part of the dike's stabilization sys-tem. Figure 6-8 shows the amount of tritium released to the Main Cooling Reservoir each year and the amount present dur-ing the last quarter of each year.

This indicates that almost half of the tritium is removed from the reservoir annually. The majority of the tritium escapes from the reservoir by evaporation because the flow from the relief wells is in-sufficient to account for the tritium removed. Rainwater was col-lected during 2002 to determine if the tritium remained in the local Historical Comparison of Cobalt-58 & Cobalt-60 in Main Cooling Reservoir Sediment 1986 - 2002 1800 Station #215 1600 Cohalt-58 Plant Discharge

-Station

1. 215 1400 CoISIt-60 Plant E

Discharge 1200

= -l H l000 The Coalft-SR activity in the Ireservoirhas decreased to I

~below levels that can he 800 IIdetected.

Statistical variations typical ofatserial in a 0

600 particulate form, are seen in 1996 & 1997 Cobalt-60 Ivalues The inventoy of 400 Cohalt-60 has decreased since 1992 due to radioactive decay and reduced liquid effluents.

200 0

1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Figure 6-6 Z
"

-1I I

C e'

21

-1i

2002 En Lri X3.I Re px a

ort Calculated Cumulative Curies of Cobalt-60 in the M ain Cooling Reservoir C..

1919

990, I9 9

20020 01 2 002 ASSU M PTIONS I Radioactive decay Is the only nveehtimn for removal fomh ihe M in Cooling Reservoir.

2. The initiI Ime for calculatng t

h erev siting radioacvy iys Juy I of he year re-eaed I

Figure 6-7 area. Tritium was not found in any rain water samples.

The concentration oftritrum in the Main Cooling Reservoir changed very little in 2002 as ex-pected. Tritium enters the sloughs and ditches of the site as runoff from the relief wells that surround the reservoir. The tritium concen-tration in eight surface water sample points for 1988 through 2002 is shown in Figure 6-9. The specific sample point locations can be found in Table 2. Tritium levels in the onsite sloughs and ditches have increased and are expected to continue increasing until they are near equilibriunmwith reservoir lev-els. The tritium concentration has increased in the sloughs and ditches through 2002 because it takes several years for water to move from the reservoir to the relief'wells.

Tritium was identified in a shallow (ten to thirty feet deep) aquifer test well approximately seventy-five yards south of the Historical Com parison of Tritium Added to and Rem aining in the M a in Cooling Reservoir 1989 -2002 400(1 500(1 R i011 9 89 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 199$

1999 2000 2001 2002

• TvIlan RIto-,Id to the Min

-,ooling ReMeTvo

• itiu M Casr-d in dh iM a(n Ivo o Ravavnoir Figure 6-8 C") \\

Pits

4 ')e-Xratuxm

==vort Historical Comparison of Tritium Activity in Surface Water 1988 - 2002 M00(10 i

~t>>I_

2000000 00,00,0 S-op1O U pFol-o, orfPlatO Offoil) 1(002 H ker So pie, Do..-streo.o 1>+ P Ioot OIffolico 0 0.I1 HF~oII(0rjotlo ILItole Jhbi,.,S~tseph~o l~noigo (20

• 01eh.:

Rotbb

..C000..,

Reoer'oir CMooe E

p l

(>,

Bi-'og l

I R orreol h

2o 1Mdowo iOoitol 4237 M in to1o Io Reseroi.oiio}

(

2) 0l Figure 6-9 reservoir dike base during 1999.

In 2002, the concentration ap-peared to stabilize and is a frac-tion ofthe concentration oftritium in the reservoir.

The drinking water onsite is pumped from deep aquifer wells and is tested quarterly to verify tritium is not present. The waters in the reservoir and other surface bodies of water onsite are not used as drinking water. The only way tritium could be introduced into humans is by eating fish from the reservoir, which is not pennit-ted. If a person ate forty pounds of fish a year from water that con-tained the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission reporting level (30,000 picoCuries per ki-logram), thatperson wouldreceive less than one millirem. This is in-significant compared to the almost twenty millirem a year everyone receives from naturally occurring radioactive potassium in the body.

The current reservoir concentra-tion is approximately 1/3 the re-porting level.

Some samples are collected and analyzed in addition to those required by our licensing docu-ments or internal procedures.

These samples are obtained to give additional assurance that the public and the environment are protected from any adverse ef-fects from the plant. These samples include wildlife, pasture grass, sediment samples, rain wa-ter, water samples from various ditches and sloughs onsite, and air samples near communities or other areas of interest. The re-sults ofthese analyses indicate that there is no detectable radiological effect on the environment by plant operation.

LAND USE CENSUSi The Annual Land Use Cen-sus is performed to determine if any changes have occurred in the location of residents and the use ofthe land within five miles ofthe South Texas Project generating units. The information is used to determine whether any changes are needed in the Radiological En-vironmental Monitoring Program.

The census is performed by con-tacting area residents and local government agencies that provide the information. The results ofthe survey indicated that no changes were required.

In addition, a survey is per-formned to verify the nearest resi-dents within five miles ofthe South Texas Project generating units in each of 16 sectors. The nine sec-tors that have residents within five miles and the distance to the near-h Q3MV94 C1 7

2002 Environmental Report est residence in each sector are listed below.

The following items of interest were noted during the census A 110-acre wetland prairie project continues to provide a habitat for migratory birds and waterfowl. The habitat is located northeast of the power plants and is easily ac-cessible to the public.

l Colorado River water from below the Bay City Dam has notbeen used to irrigate crops.

l No commercial dairy oper-ates in Matagorda County and there is no agricultural milk source within the five-mile Zone.

lb There were no identified com-mercial vegetable farms lo-cated within the five-mile Zone.

isfactorily.

Quality audits and indepen-dent technical reviews help to de-A commercial fish farm con-termine areas that need attention tinues to operate 2 miles west and re-evaluation. Areas that need of the plant near FM 521. In attention are addressed in accor-addition, another commercial dance with the station's Correc-fish farm has begun operation tive Action Program.

five miles southwest of the plant. The water supply for The measurement capabilities the ponds is not affected by ofthe Radiological Laboratory are the operations of the STP demonstratedbyparticipating in power plants.

inter-laboratory measurement as-surance programs. These pro-QUALITY ASSURANCE grams provide samples that are similar in matrix and size to those Quality assurance encom-measured for the Radiological passes planned and systematic Environmental Monitoring Pro-tinns tn ensiire thait an item or gram.

facility will perform satisfactorily.

Reviews, surveillance and audits have determined that the pro-grams, procedures and personnel are adequate and do perform sat-Figure 6-10 summarizes the results ofthese inter-comparison programs. Analyses consisted of radiochemical measurements and Nearest Residents Seto i. i:c Locat.,

z

'gion3 S5E-3.5

-Selkirk Islan3 d

.SW. {-.-v-

-i Citruss Gro eK

- WSW

=

.- x. -.

25.

Fi; i2l<W j

W

'4tEN e5 7

FM-=1-09.5>'H xH AAL S N,

4.

Oi Moii-droasdGbe WNW A-35h Runnls Ranch (F168)

N 35

-Runellsni

.. (FM 1468 STP Nuclear Operating Company Took" -D10

i~a}~

v Xa EX+

9SA (Ier n

rlt ty 2002 Radiological Laboratory Quality Assurance Program Performance 0-5% Difference 5-10% Difference 10-15% Difference 78 Total Analyses Figure 6-1 0 measurement of direct radiation through the use ofthermolumines-cent dosimeters. In addition, ap-proximately twenty percent of the analyses made are quality control samples that consist of duplicate, split and blind samples.

Radiochemical measurements must meet sensitivity requirements at the lower level of detection for environmental samples. These stringent requirements were met in all samples taken in 2002.

PROGRAM DEVIATIONS Deviations from the sampling program must be acknowledged and explained in this report. Dur-ing 2002 the following samples were not collected or were unac-ceptable for analysis:

due to seasonal unavailability (January, February and March).

lb Seven out of thirty-six re-quired broadleaf vegetation samples were not collected Photo By: Gwenna Kelton 4

C' -b

2002 Environmental Report The minimum Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program is presented in Table 1. The table is organized by exposure pathway. Specific requirements like location, sampling method, collection frequency and analyses are given for each pathway.

Table 1 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program EXPOSURE: DIRECT RADIATION 4Q TOTAL SAMPLING STATIONS Sample Media. Number, Approximate Location and Distance of Routine Sampling Sampling and Analysis Minimum Sample Stations from Containment.

Mode Collection Type Analysis Frequency Frequency Exposure Media: TLD 16-Located In all 16 meteorological sectors, 0.21 to 4 miles.

Continuously Quarterly Gamma dose Quarterly 16-Located In all 16 meteorological sectors, 2 to 7 miles.

§- Located In special Interest areas (e.g. school, population centers), within 14 miles.

a Control stations located In areas of minimal wind direction (WSW,ENE), 10-16 miles.

The Inner ring of stations In the southern sectors are located within I mile because of the main cooling reservoir EXPOSURE: AIRBORNE D TOTAL SAMPLING STATIONS Sample Media, Number. Approximate Location, and Distance of Routine Sampling Nominal Analysis Minimum Sample Stations from Containment.

Mode Collection Type Analysis Frequency Frequency Charcoal and Particulate Filters a-Located at the exclusion zone, N, NNW. NW Sectors, 1 mile.

Continuous Weekly or Rsdiolodine Weekly sampler more caniste 1-Located In Bay City, 14 miles.

operations fr1-11t

- Control Station, located In a minimal wind direction (WSW),

required by Particulate 10 miles.

dust loading SamDler:

Gross Beta Following Activity filter change Gamma-Quarterly Isotopic of composite (by location)

EXPOSURE: WATERBORNE 2 TOTAL SAMPLING STATIONS Sample Media, Number And Approximate Location of Sample Routine Sampling Nominal Analysis Minimum Stations Mode Collection Type Analysis Frequency

. Frequency Surface.

I-Located In MCR at the MCR blowdown structure.

Composite sample Monthly Gamma-Monthly Over a I month Isotopic 1-Located above the site on the Colorado River not Influenced period (grab If by plant discharge (control).

not available)

Tritium Quarterly J-Located downstream from blow down entrance Into the Composite Colorado River.

Ground 1-Located at well down gradient In the shallow aquifer.

Grab Quarterly Gamma-Quarterly Isotopic &

Tritium STP Nuclear Operating Company

Radiological Environmental Operating Report Table 1 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program EXPOSURE: WATERBORNE (CONTINUED)

Sample Media, Number And Approximate Location of Sample Routine Sampling Nominal Analysis Minimum Stations Mode Collection Type Analysis Frequency Frequency Drinking Water 1-Located on site.

Grab Monthly Gross Beta Monthly

& Gamma-1-Located at a control station.

Isotopic Tritium Quarterly Sediment Composites 1-Located above the site on the Colorado River, not influenced Grab Semi-annually Gamma-Semi-annually by plant discharge.

Isotopic 1-Located downstream from blowdown entrance into the Colorado River.

1-Located in MCR.

No municipal water systems are affected by STP. This sample taken from deep aquifer supplying drinking water to employees while at work.

EXPOSURE: INGESTION 7 TOTAL SAMPLING STATIONS Sample Media, Number And Approximate Location of Sample Routine Sampling Nominal Analysis Minimum Stations Mode Collection Type Analysis Frequency Frequency Milk Grab Semi-monthly Gamma-Semi-monthly when animals Isotopic when animals are on and 1-131 are on pasture; pasture; monthly at monthly at Broadleaf Vegetation-other times.

other times.

2-Located at the exclusion zone, N. NW, or NNW sectors.

Grab Gamma-1-Located in a minimal wind direction.

Monthly during Isotopic As collected growing season and 1-131 (When available)

Limited source of sample in vicinity of the South Texas Project. (Attempts will be made to obtain samples when available.)

Three different kinds of broadleaf vegetation are to be collected over the growing season, not each collection period EXPOSURE: INGESTION (continued)

Sample Media. NumberAnd Approximate Location of Sample Routine Sampling Nominal Analysis Minimum Stations Mode Collection Type Analysis ll Frequency Frequency Fish and Invertebrates (edible gortions) l-Representing commercially or recreational important species Grab Sample semi-Gamma-As collected in vicinity of STP that maybe influenced by plant operation.

annually Isotopic on edible 1-Same or analogous species In area not Influenced by STP.

portions l-Same or analogous species In the MCR.

Agricultural Products Grab At time of Gamma-As collected harvest Isotopic Analysis In Domestic Meat edible portion 1-Represents domestic stock fed on crops grown exclusively Grab Gamma-As collected within 10 miles of the plant.

Annually Isotopic No sample stations have been Identified In the vicinity of the site. Presently no agricultural land Is Irrgated by water Into which liquid plant wastes will be discharged. Agricultural products will be considered If these conditions change.

ISTP Nuclear Operating Company

2002 Environmental Report Table 2 Sample Media and Location Descriptions AIRBORNE RADIOIODINE AIRBORNE PARTICULATE RESIDENT DABBLER DUCK RESIDENT DIVER DUCK MIGRATORY DABBLER DUCK MIGRATORY DIVER DUCK GOOSE DOVE QUAIL PIGEON CRUSTACEAN CRAB CRUSTACEAN SHRIMP DIRECT RADIATION FISH - PISCIVOROUS FISH - CRUSTACEAN & INSECT FEEDERS CABBAGE COLLARD GREENS BEEF MEAT POULTRY MEAT WILD SWINE DOMESTIC SWINE EGGS GAME DEER ALLIGATOR RABBIT OYSTER SOIL SEDIMENT - SHORELINE SEDIMENT-BOTTOM PASTURE GRASS DRINKING WATER GROUND WATER SURFACE WATER RELIEF WELL WATER 0- FISH - PLANTIVORES & DETRITUS -

FEEDERS

. BANANA LEAVES, CANA LEAVES TURNIP GREENS STP Nuclear Operating Company roO+~

Radiological Environmental Operating Report Table 2 Sample Media and Location Descriptions MEDIA CODE STATION VECTOR LOCATION DESCRIPTION CODE (Approximate) l DR Al AP VB VP SO 001 1 mile N FM 521 DR 002 1 mile NNE FM 521 DR 003 1 mile NE FM 521 DR 004 1 mile ENE FM 521 DR 005 1 mile E STP Visitor Center on FM 521 DRAI AP SO 006 3.5 miles ESE Site near Reservoir Makeup Pumping Facility DR 007 3.5 miles SE MCR Dike DR 008 0.25 mile SSE MCR Dike DR 009 0.25 mile S MCR Dike DR 010 0.25 mile SSW MCR Dike DR 011 0.5 mile SW MCR Dike DR 012 1.5 mile WSW MCR Dike DR 013 1.5 mile W FM 521 DR 014 1.5 mile WNW FM 521 DRAIAPVB SOVP 015 1 mile NW FM 521 DRAIAPVB SOVP 016 1 mile NNW FM 521 DR 017 6.5 miles N Buckeye - FM 1468 DRAI AP SO 018 5.5 miles NNE Celanese Plant - FM 3057 DR 019 5.5 miles NE FM 2668 DR 020 5 miles ENE FM 2668 & FM 2078 DR 021 5 miles E FM 521& FM 2668 DR 022 7 miles E Equistar Chemical Plant DR 023

• 16 miles ENE Intersection of FM 521 and FM 2540 MCR-STP Main Cooling Reservoir STP-South Texas Project Media codes typed in bold satisfy collection requirements described in Table 1.

• Control Station I

94 STP Nuclear Operating Company

2002 Environmental Report Table 2 Sample Media and Location Descriptions MEDIA CODE STATION VECTOR LOCATION DESCRIPTION CODE (Approximate) l DR 024 4 miles SSE MCR Dike DR 025 4 miles S MCR Dike DR 026 4 miles SSW MCR Dike DR 027 2.5 miles SW MCR Dike DR 028 5 miles WSW FM 1095 & Ellis Road DR SO 029 4.5 miles W FM 1095 DR 030 6 miles WNW Tres Palacios Oaks, FM 2853 DR 031 5.5 miles NW Wilson Creek Road DR 032 3.5 miles NNW FM 1468 DR Al AP S0 033 14 miles NNE Microwave Tower at end of Kilowatt Road in Bay DRAlAPSO 033 14_milesNNE city DR 034 7.5 miles ENE Wadsworth Water Supply Pump Station DR Al AP SO 035 8.5 miles SSE Matagorda DR 036 9 miles WSW College Port DR Al AP VB VP SO 037*

10 miles WSW Palacios CP&L Substation DR 038 10.5 miles NW CP&L Substation on TX 71 near Blessing DRAlAPSO 039 9 miles NW TX 35 under High Voltage Power lines near DRAI P SOTidehaven High School DR 040 4.5 miles SW Citrus Grove DR 041 2.0 miles ESE MCR Dike DR 042 8.5 miles NW FM 459 at Tidehaven Intermediate School DR 043 4.5 miles SE Site boundary at blowdown outlet WS 209 2 miles ESE Kelly Lake WD 210 On Site Approved drinking water supply from STP WVS 51211

.3.5 miles S Site, E. Branch Little Robbins Slough MCR-STP Main Cooling Reservoir STP-South Texas Project Media codes typed in bold satisfy collection requirements described in Table 1.

• Control Station STP Nuclear Operating Company f-k%

Radiological Environmental Operating Report Table 2 Sample Media and Location Descriptions MEDIA CODE STATION VECTOR LOCATION DESCRIPTION CODE (Approximate)

WS Si 212 4 miles S Little Robbins Slough Ws Si 213 4 miles SE West Branch Colorado River F (1,2, or 3) CC 214 2.5 miles SE MCR at Makeup Water Discharge S2 215 0.5 mile SW MCR at Circulating Water Discharge WS S2 216 3.5 miles SSE MCR at blowdown structure F (1, 2, or 3) CC CS 222

>10 miles West Matagorda Bay WS S(1 or 2) 227 5-6 miles SE West bank of Colorado River downstream of STP across from channel marker #22 WD 228*

14 miles NNE Le Tulle Park public water supply Drainage ditch north of the reservoir that empties WS S1 229 2-3 miles ESE into Colorado River upstream of the reservoir makeup pumping facility S~l r 2)230 3.5 ilesESE Colorado River at point where drainage ditch 5(1 or 2) 230 3.5 miles ESE

(#229) empties into it S(1 or 2) WS 233 4.5 miles SE Colorado River where MCR blowdown discharge channel empties into it.

WG 235 3.8 miles S Well B-3 directly south from MCR B8 236 N/A STP Protected Area WS 237 3.7 miles SSE Blowdown discharge channel from MCR S(1 or 2) WS 242*

>10 miles N Colorado River where it intersects Highway 35 WS 243

>10 miles N Colorado River upstream of Bay City Dam at the Lower Colorado River Authority pumping station WS 247

<1 mile E Essential Cooling Pond F(1,2, or 3) 249*

N/A Control sample purchased from a local retailer SO 250 0.75 miles NW Sewage sludge land farming area F(1,2,or 3) CC S2 300 S

STP Main Cooling Reservoir WW 701 4 miles S MCR Relief Well # 440 Ws Q01 N/A Quarterly composite of station #227 and/or WS Q02 N/A altermate #233 Ws Q0 N/AQuarterly composite of station #243 and/or ELS I

NAaltermate #242 MCR-STP Main Cooling Reservoir STP-South Texas Project Media codes typed in bold satisfy collection requirements described in Table 1.

• Control Station STP Nuclear Operating Company

2002 Environmental Report 2002 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Analysis Summary An analysis summary for all ofthe required samples is given in Table 3. The table has been formatted to resemble a United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission industry standard. Modifications have been made for the sole purpose of reading ease. Only positive values are given in this table.

Media type is printed at the top left of each table, and the units of measurement are printed at the top right. The first column lists the type of radioactivity or specific radionuclide for which each sample was analyzed. The second column gives the total number of analyses performed and the total number of non-routine analyses for each indicated nuclide. (A non-routine measurement is a sample whose measured activity is greater than the reporting levels for Radioactivity Concentrations in Environmental Samples.)

The "LOWER LIMIT OF DETECTION" column lists the normal measurement sensitivities achieved which were more sensitive than specified by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

A set of statistical parameters is listed for each radionuclide in the remaining columns. The parameters contain information from the indicator locations, the location having the highest annual mean, and infor-mation from the control stations. Some sample types do not have control stations. When this is the case, "no samples" is listed in the control location column. For each of these groups of data, the follow-ing is calculated:

Photo By:

Gwenna Kelton STP Nuclear Operating Company I4

Radiological Environmental Operating Report b The mean value of positive real values.

The number of positive real measurements / the total number of analyses.

4 The lowest and highest values for the analysis.

The data placed in the table are from the samples listed in Table

1. Additional thermoluminescent dosimeters were utilized each quarter for quality purposes.

The minimum number of other analyses required by Table 1 were supplemented in 2002 by four surface water samples, three groundwater samples, three drinking water samples, four rainwater samples and one shoreline sediment sample. Fish, vegetation, and wildlife samples vary in number according to availability but also exceeded the minimum number required by Table 1.

§n i s

?

sn x

v u

s w-,<

. Ott...

< F s

i R -

s i

x s s

a v

i

.4 P

h S-f 0

A

.4, t

E, 0

Z

.s 4

7' j

i t

7, -d, 8 -

i 0

b e

X ff'-'

2 E

N D

?

S z

t r

5' e



wo s

s f

;

V E

X

i.

\\,

A

, dE _

s t

e 4



0 r

2 w

i f

1 h

=,

s S

i t

0 t9o

.s



r-s

.

= <

sw



X iiii>_

.

1; t

=-

t Z

x

i.

o" H

R

)

'?

=,

f S

<'4

\\

I j

W t

N' t

0-b:

.'s q

e-i g

J t

t

_r,.

6

.>.

s; NS v

M s

t

-¢ s

d<

w f

t c-l-e+ t-Wr 'E\\.. st-..'S'S-

' 'i i, XW t

E ^ t i. 4* g > 4 c > < v  <o t" t -

. t ¢- j: >

s

' X "

R - i v

=s;

_{

.,...t; e,5<

t o_

t j

r j

s N

O P

u



S



g t

+



Q

^

t

• tl.

?

2',.

9.

e

=J

.J; f

F

¢

> ! < e9 t:

1 t 0 S i

}

,2 C,

s, F

?

z 7

f-i s

• X _' oS S ' ' ' F _ H.T 'i :._.-i c

t-t; E

¢ 2

z 5

f F

e j

i j

0

-s 4

s

• n

.i 0

t:

t

,9; N

-t 0

4 ' _-,

4( s:_- i t.

j

,.t s -

, :x4: -

, ;_ f _*e 9

il&-<'t gWSj

¢.'.'>-j e:x=-';<>.

-_efes t

S, ta kS1i<;A;<,,S$,S E

,%..t,.

__,__L__,->

g Photo By.

Gwenna Kelton TABLE 3 2002 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMIENTAL AIONITORING PROGRAMI ANALYSIS SUMIMIARY M-fl-: Dli-rt Radiation Units: Milliroentgen/Standard Quarter ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (f)-

LOCATION MEAN (t)

MEAN (f)-

MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE I

RANGE Gamma 17310 1.4E+OI ( 165t 165 )

I mile W 1

.8E+OI ( 4/4) 1.5E+0I ( 8/

8)

( I.E+01 - 1.9E1+OI )

(#O13 (1.8E+0I - 1.9E+01)

( 1.3E+01 -1.75+01

)

(f) Number of positive measurements / SotaI measurements at specified locations.

TABLE 3 2002 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMIENTAL IONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Airborne Radioiodine Units: Picocuries per Cubic Meter ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (f)-

LOCATION MEAN (f)

MEAN (f)l MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Iodine-131 265/0 8.9E-03

--- ( 0/212)

-r

.(

01 53)

• (0 Number of positive measurements I total measurements at specified locations.

e9l--0-4-14 STP Nuclear Operating Company

- 2002 Environmental Report TABLE 3 2002 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Airborne Particulate Units: Picocuries per Cubic Meter ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (t)

LOCATION MEAN (I)

MEAN (f)

MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Gross Beta 26510 I.5E-03 2.6E-02 ( 212 /212) 10 miles WSW 2.6E-02 ( 53 /53) 2.6E-02 (531 53)

(7.4AE-03 -5.1E-02 )

(#037)

(8.5E 5.2E-02)

(8.5E-03 -5.2E-02 Cesium-134 20/0 2.8E-04

--- ( 0 /16)

( 0/

4)

Cesium-137 2010 2.5E-04

.(

0/

16)

--- ( 0/

4)

Manganese-54 20/0 3.IE-04

• -. ( 0 / t6)

-- ( 0 1 4)

Iron-59 20/0 1.7E-04

--- ( 0

16)

--- ( 0/ 4)

Cobalt-58 2010 4.5E-04

--- ( 0

16)

--- ( 01 4)

Cobalt-60 2010 3.OE-04

--- ( 01 16)

--- ( 01 4)

Zinc-65 20/0 6.7E-04

--- ( 0 /16)

--- ( 0/

4)

Zirconium-95 20/0 8.3E-04

--- ( 0

16)

--- ( 01 4)

Niobium-55 20/0 8.2E-04

--- ( 0 116)

--- ( 01 4)

Lanthanum-140 20/0 5.3E-03

--- ( 01 16)

--- ( 01 4)

Barium-140 (O) Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.

2002 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Surface Water Units:

icoCuries per Kilogram ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE (NONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (t-LOCATION MEAN (t' MEAN (f' MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Hydrogen-3 1210 2.6E+02 I.OE+04 ( 41/

)

3 miles SSE I.OE+04 ( 4/

4)

--- ( 01 4)

(9.8E+03 I.IE+04)

(6216)

(9.8E+03 - 1.1E+04)

Iodine-131 40/0 8.4E+00

--- ( 01 26)

--- ( 0 / 14)

Cesium-134 40/0 2.0E+00

--- ( 0/ 26)

--- (

14)

Cesium-137 4010 1.9E+00

--- ( 0/ 26)

--- ( 0 1 14)

Manganese-54 4010 1.8E+00

• -- ( 0/ 26)

- ( 0/ 14)

Iron-59 40/0 5.7E+00

• - ( 01 26)

--- ( 0 /14)

Cobalt-58 40/0 2.0E+00

--- ( 0

26)

--- ( 0/ 14)

Cobalt-60 4010 1.9E+00

--- ( 01 26)

--- ( 01 14)

Zinc-65 4010 3.9E+00

--- ( 0

26)

( 0 /14)

Zirconium-95 4010 3.5E+00

--- ( 0/ 26)

( 0/ 14)

Niobium-95 4010 2.4E+00

--- ( 01 26)

--- ( 0/ 14)

Lantbanum-140 40/0 3.5E+00

--- ( 01 26)

.. ( 0/

14 Barium-140 I

(I) Number ofpositive measurements I total measurements at specified locations.

is from 11 -

2 STP Nuclear Operating Company

Radiological Environmental Operating Report TABLE 3 2002 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMIENTAL MNIONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS SUMNMIIIARY Medium: Drinking Water Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMITOF MEAN (f-LOCATION MEAN (f)'

MEAN f)

MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Gross Beta 26/0 1.2E+00 3.8E+00 ( 1l/ 13)

On Site 3.8E+00(

It/

13) 3.4E+00(

12/13) 2.7E400 -

5.7E+00)

(#210)

( 2.7E+00 -

5.7E+00)

( 2.7E+00 - 4.0E+00 Hydrogen-3 8/0 2.6E+02

(

0/

4

(

0 /

4) lodine-131 27/0 5.413+00

--- (

0/

14) 0/

13)

Cesium-134 27/0 2.013+00

--- (

0/

14)

(

0/

13)

Cesium-137 27/0 1.9E+00

( 01 14

--- (

01 13)

Manganese-54 2710 1.SE+00

(

0/

14)

(

01 13)

Iron-59 2710 5.7E+00

(

0/

14)

(

0/

13)

Cobalt-58 27/0 2.0E+00

-(

0/

14)

( 01 13)

Cobalt-60 27/0 1.9E+00

(

0/

14)

--- (

0/

13)

Zinc-65 27/0 3.9E+00

--- (

0/

14)

(

0/

13)

Zirconium-95 27/0 3.5E+00

(

0/14)

--- (

0/

13)

Niobium-95 27/0 2.4E+00

(

0 / 14)

(

01 13)

Lanthanum-I 40 27/0 3.5E+00 Barium-140 I

(fl Number of positive measurements/ totn measurements at specified locations.

TABLE 3 2002 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS SUMMIlARY Medium: Ground Water (On site test well)

Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE

/NONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (f' LOCATION MEAN (I)-

MEAN (r)'

MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Hydrogen-3 7/0 2.6E+02 1.9E+03 (

7/

7) 3.8 miles S 1.9E+03 (

71 7) no samples 1.8E+03 - 2.0E+03 )

(#235)

( 1.8E+03 - 2.0E+03 Iodine-131 7/0 8.4E+00

--- ( 0/

7) no samples Cesium-134 7/0 2.0E1+00

( 0/

7) no samples Cesium-137 7/0 1.9E+00

( 01 7) no samples Manganese-54 710 I.8E+00

( 01

7) no samples Iron-59 7/0 5.71+00

--- ( 0 7 )

no samples Cobalt-5 7/ 0 2.0E+00

(

0 i 7 )---

no samples Cobalt-60 7/0 1.91+00

(

0/

7 )

no samples Zinc-65 7/0 3.90+00

( 0 /

7 )

no samples Zireonium-95 7/0 3.5E+00

--- (

0 /

7 no samples Niobium-95 7/0 2.42+00

--- (

0/

7) no samples Lanthanum-140 7/0 3.5E+00

_-(

0/

7) no samples

'ariUM-140 I

I I(t) Number of positive measurements / olal measurements at specified locationsn.

0§ STP Nuclear Operating Company

2002 Environmental Report TABLE 3 2002 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Rain Water Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE

/NONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (f)

LOCATION MEAN (I)-

MEAN (f)-

MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Hydrogen-3 410 2.6E+02

--- ( 0/ 4) no samples Iodine-131 41.0

--- (

01 4) no samples Cesium-134 410 2.OE+00

--- ( 01 4) no samples Cesium-137 410 1.9E+00

--- ( 0/

4) no samples Manganese-54 410 1.8E+00

.- ( 0/ 4) no samples Iron-59 410 5.7E+00

--- ( 0 / 4) no samples Cobalt-58 410 2.OE+00

--- ( 0 / 4 no samples Cobalt-60 410 1.9E+00

--- ( 0 1 4) no samples Zinc-65 410 3.9E+00

--- ( 0 / 4) no samples Zirconium-95 410 3.5E+00

--- ( 0/

4) no samples Niobium-95 410 2.4E+00

--- ( 0/

4) no samples Lanthanum-140 410

( 01 4) no samples Barium-140

• (D Number of positive measurements/ Itotal measurements at specified locations.

TABLE 3 2002 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Sediment-Shoreline Units: Picocuries er Kilogram dry weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (f)'

LOCATION MEAN (t)

MEAN ()*

MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesium.134 5/0

--- ( 0/ 3)

.. ( 0/ 2)

Cesium-137 5/0 3.4E+01 ( 1/ 3) 6 miles SE 3.4E+01 ( 11 3) 3.1E+0I ( 11 2) 3.4E+01 - 3.4E+01 )

(#227)

( 3.4E+01 - 3.4E+01 )

( 3.IE+01 - 3.IE+01 Mlanganese-54 5/0 I.5E+01

( 0/ 3)

--- ( 0/ 2)

Iron-59 510 8.IE+01

.-- ( 01 3)

--- ( 0/

2)

Cobalt-58 510 2.3E+01

--- ( 0/

3) 0 1 2)

Cobalt-60 510 1.3E+01

... ( 0/ 3)

--- ( 0 / 2)

Zinc-65 510 4.9E+01

-.. ( 0/

3)

--- ( 0/

2)

Zirconium-95 510 5.0E+0I

.- ( 01 3)

( 0/

2)

Niobium-95 510 4.6E+01

--- ( 01 3)

( 01 2)

Lanthanum-140 510 1.9E+02

--- ( 01 3)

--- ( 01 2)

Barium-140 i (I) Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.

STP Nuclear Operating Company too's

0"
-2

Radiological Environmental Operating Report TABLE 3 2002 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Sediment-Bottom Units: Picocuries er Kilogram dry weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMITOF MEAN (I' LOCATION MEAN (I)

MEAN (f)-

MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesium-134 2/0

--- ( 0/

2) no samples Cesium-137 210 7.8E+01 ( I/ 2)

I mile SW 7.8E+01 ( I/

2) no samples

( 7.8E+01 - 7.8E+01 )

(#215)

( 7.8E+01 - 7.8E+01 Manganese-54 210 I.5E+01

( 0/

2) no samples Iron-59 2/0 8.IE+01

... ( 0/

2 no samples Cobalt-58 210 2.3E+01

... ( 0 2

0..

no samples Cobalt-60 2/0 1.3E+01 4.3E+01 ( I / 2)

I mile SW 4.3E+01 (

I / 2) no samples

( 4.3E+01 - 4.3E+01 )

(#215)

( 4.3E+01 - 4.3E+0I1 Zinc-65 2/0 4.9E+01 0 / 2) no samples Zirconium-95 2/0 5.0E+01 01 2 )---

no samples Niobium-95 210 4.6E+01

--- ( 01 2) no samples Lanthanum-140 210 I.9E+02

--- ( 01 2 )

no samples Barium-140 (f) Number ofpositive measurements / tola measurements at specified locations.

TABLE 3 2002 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS SUNMIARY Mediurn Banana Leaves Units: Picocuries per Kiogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WFIH I UGIIEST ANNUAL NEAN CONTROL LOCATtONS TYPE INONROUTINE LDMIf OF MEAN (f)*

LOCATION MEAN (t)'

MEAN (f)

ME R

NTS DETECtION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE kodine-131 19/0 1.4E+01

( 0 /13)

-(

0/ 6)

Cesiusm-134 19/0 22E+O0

(

/ 13)

-(

0/ 6)

Ccsiurr,137 19/0 1.8E+O0

-(

O/ 13)

-(

O/ 6)

Manganese-54 19/0 2.OE+00

( O/ 13)

-(

O/ 6)

Iron-59 1910 9.7E+00

( O/ 13)

-(

O/ 6)

Cobalt-58 19/0 2.3E+0

( O/ 13)

-(

O/ 6)

Cobalt-60 19/0 3.4E+00

- (0

13)

/

-( 0 6)

Zinc-65 19/0 63E+OO

-(

O

13)

-(

O/ 6)

Zisrcoium-95 19/0 4.1E+O0

(

/ 13)

(

0 6)

Niobiun-95 19/0 2.9E+O0

(

/ 13)

-(

O/ 6)

Lnantnanum-140 19/0 4.9E+O0

(

/ 13)

-(

0/ 6)

B3asiurr140

• (f) Nunber orpositive rnssavnrrnts / total rrxasuensts at specified locations.

eol__04_
4 STP Nuclear Operating Company

2002 Environmental Report TABLE 3 2002 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Cana Leaves Units: Picocuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION wrry HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE

/NONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (f)

LOCATION MEAN (f)-

MEAN (f)-

MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Iodine-131 1910 8.6E+00

( 0/

13)

- ( 0/ 6)

Cesium-134 1910 1.7E+00

( 0/

13)

_ ( 0/

6)

Cesium-137 19/0 1.4E+00

( 0/

13)

( 0/

6)

Manganese-54 19/0 1.5E+00

( 0/

13)

( 0/

6)

Iron-59 19/0 7.3E+00

_ ( 0/

13)

__ ( 0/

6)

Cobalt-58 19/0 1.8E+00

( 0/

13)

_ ( 0/

6)

Cobalt-60 19/0 2.6E+00

( 0/

13)

__ ( 0/

6)

Zinc-65 19/0 4.8E+00

--- ( 0/

13)

-(

0/

6)

Zirconium-95 19/0 3.1E+00

__ ( 0/ 13)

( 0/

6)

Niobium-95 19/0 2.2E+00

( 0/ 13)

( 0/

6)

Lanthanum-140 19/0 3.6E+00

_ ( 0/ 13)

__ ( 0/

6)

Barium-140

• (f) Number of positive measurements I total measurements at specified locations.

TABLE 3 2002 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Collard Greens Units: Picocuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE

/NONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (f)

LOCATION MEAN ()-

MEAN (f)0 MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Iodine-131 3/0 5.9E+00

-(

0/

2)

-(

0/

1)

Cesium-134 3/0 1.I E+00

-(

0/ 2)

-(

0/

1)

Cesium-137 3/0 9.3E-01

-(0/

2)

-(0/

1)

Manganese-54 3/0 1.OE+00

( 0/

2)

-(

0/

1)

Iron-59 3/0 5.1E+00

-(

0/2) 2

(

0/

1)

Cobalt-58 3/0 1.2E+00

-(

0/

2)

( 0/

1)

Cobalt-60 310 1.8E+00

-(

0/ 2)

_ (

0/

1)

Zinc-65 3/0 3.2E+00

-(

0 2 2 )

-(

0/

I)

Zirconium-95 310 2.1E+00

-(0/

2)

(0/

I)

Niobium-95 3/0 1.5E+00

-(

0/

2)

( 0/ 1 )

Lanthanum-140 310 23E+00

-(

0/

2)

-(0 I)

Barium-140

• (f) Number of positive measurements I total measurements at specified locations.

ff -I STP Nuclear Operating Company

Radiological Environmental Operating Report TABLE 3 2002 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMIENTAL IONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS SUNMARY Medium: Piscivorous - Fish Units: Picocuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMITOF MEAN (f)-

LOCATION MEAN (f)

MEAN (f)-

MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesium-134 4/0 3.2E+01

-(

0/ 2)

_ ( 0/ 2)

Cesium-137 4/0 28E+01

-(

0/

2)

( 0/

2)

Manganese-54 410 3.OE+1O

( 0/

2) 0 2)

Iron-59 410 9.7E+01

-- (

0/

2)

-(

0/

2)

Cobalt-58 410 3.1E+01

( 0/

2)

-(

0/

2)

Cobalt-60 410 3.2E+01

( 0/

2)

-(

0/

2)

Zinc-65 410 6.8E+01

( 01 2)

( 0/

2)

Zirconium-95 4/0 5.8E+01

( 0/

2) 0 2)

Niobium-95 410 4.IE+01

--- ( 01 2) 0 2)

Lanthanum-140 410 9.8E+01

( 0/

2) 0 2)

Barium-140

• (f) Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.

TABLE 3 2002 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAi ANALYSIS SUNINMARY Mediumt Crustacean Shrimnp Units: Picocuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITHI HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE

/NONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (f)'

LOCATION MEAN ()-

MEAN (f)-

MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesiunm-134 5/0 3.2E+01

-(

0/

3)

( 0/

2)

Cesiuni-137 5/0 3.OE+01

-(

0/

3)

( 0/

2)

Manganese-54 5/0 3.IE+01

-(

0/

3)

( 0/

2)

Iron-59 5/0 8.5E+01

-(

0/

3)

(

0 2)

Cobalt-58 5/0 3.OE+01

-(

01 3)

( 0/

2)

Cobalt-60 50 3.3E+01

-(

01 3)

__ ( 0/

2)

Zinc-65 510 6.8E+01

-(

0/ 3)

_ ( 0/

2)

Zirconium-95 510 5.IE+01

-(

01 3)

(

0/ 2)

Niobiurn-95 510 3.3E+01

-(

0/

3)

( 0/

2)

Lanthanurn-140 510 4.9E+01

-(

0

3)

( 0/

2)

Barium,140

• (f) Number of positive measuretents / total measurements at specified locations.

(V
404 %)

STP Nuclear Operating Company

2002 Environmental Report TABLE 3 2002 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Beef Meat Units: Picocuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WIT HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMITOF MEAN (f)

LOCATION MEAN (f)

MEAN (f)-

MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesium-134 110 3.5E+01

_ ( 0/

1) no samples Cesium-137 1/0 3.4E+01

__ ( 0/

1) no samples Manganese-54 1/0 3.5E+01

( 0/ 1) no samples Iron-59 1/0 1.2E+02

( 0/

1) no samples Cobalt-58 1/0 3.8E+01

-(

0 / I )

no samples Cobalt-60 1/0 3.2E+Ot I

( 01 1 )

no samples Zinc-65 1/0 6.9E+01

_ ( 0/

I) no samples Zirconium-95 1/0 6.6E+0

-I(

0/ 1) no samples Niobium-95 1/0 5.IE+01

( 0/

1) no samples Lanthanum-140 110 1.3E+02

_ ( 0/ 1) no samples Barium-140 (f) Number of positive measurements I total measurements at specified locations.

TABLE 3 2002 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Rabbit Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMITOF MEAN (f)

LOCATION MEAN (f)

MEAN (f)-

MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesium-134 10 3.OE+01

--- ( 0/

1) no samples Cesium-137 1/0 2.5E+01

( 0/ 1) nosamples Manganese-54 I/O 3.IE+01

-- ( 0 1

no samples Iron-59 1/0 1.5E+02

-- ( 0/ 1) no samples Cobalt-58 110 3.7E+01

( 0/

1)

I no samples Cobalt-60 1/0 3-5E+01

_ ( 0 / I) no samples Zinc-65 1/0 6.8E+01

-(

0 / I) no samples Zirconium-95 I/

7.OE+01

-(

0/

1)

I no samples Niobium-95 1/0 6.3E+01

_ ( 0/

1) no samples Lanthanum-140 1/0 3.7E+02

( 0/

1) no samples Barium-140 I (f) Number of positive measurements I total measurements at specified locations.

STP Nuclear Operating Company

Radiological Environmental Operating Report TABLE 3 2002 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS SUMM11WARY Medium: Resident Dabbler Duck Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE

/NONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (f)-

LOCATION MEAN (f)-

MEAN ()-

MEASUREMENTS DETECTiON RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesium-134 2/0 3.8E+01

-- ( 0/ 2) nosamples Cesium-137 2/0 3.2E+01

--- ( 0/

2) no samples Manganese-54 2/0 3.4E+01

--- ( 0/

2 )

no samples Iron-59 2/0 1.4E+02

-(

0 / 2 )

no samples Cobalt-58 2/0 4.5E+01

-(

0/

2) no samples Cobalt-60 2/0 3.6E+0

-I(

0/

2) no samples Zinc-65 2/ 0 8.0E+01

-(

0 / 2) no samples Zirconium-95 2/0 8.5E+01

-- ( 0 / 2) no samples Niobium-95 2/0 7.1E+01

-- ( 0/

2) no samples Lanthanum-140 2/0 3.3E+02

-(

0 / 2) no samples Barium-140 I _

(f) Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.

TABLE 3 2002 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Goose Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITI HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (f)

LOCATION MEAN (f)-

MEAN ()-

MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesium-134 1/0 2.3E+01

--- ( 0/

1) no samples Cesium-137 I/0 1.8E+01

--- ( 0/

I )

no samples Manganese-54 1/ 0 2.2E+01

- ( 0 /

I )

no samples Iron-59 1/ 0 I. I E+02

_ ( 0 /

I )

no samples Cobalt-58 I/0 2.9E+01

_ ( 0/ 1 )

no samples Cobalt-60 I/0 2.3E+01

_ ( 0/

1 )

no samples Zinc-65 1/

5.OE+01

-(

011 )

no samples Zirconium-95 1/ 0 5.4E+01

_ ( 0 /

I )

no samples Niobium-95 I/0 4.9E+01

( 0/

1 )

no samples Lanthanum-140 1/0 33E+02

( 0/

1 )

no samples Barium-140 I

II II

• (f) Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.

0 Q-1,"P14"I STP Nuclear Operating Company

2002 Environmental Report TABLE 3 2002 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Pigeon Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMITOF MEAN ()

LOCATION MEAN (f)-

MEAN (t-MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesium-134 1/0 2.3E+01

( 0/

1) no samples Cesium-137 110 1.9E+01

( 0/

1) no samples Manganese-54 1/0 2.1E+01

( 0/ 1 )

no samples Iron-59 1/0 I.IE+02

( 0 /

)

no samples Cobalt-58 1/0 2.8E+01

-(

0/

I) no samples Cobalt-60 1/0 2.3E+01

( 0/ 1) no samples Zinc-65 1/0 5.3E+01

-(

0/

1 )

no samples Zirconium-95 1/0 5.4E+0I

-(

0/

I) no samples Niobium-95 1/0 4.8E+01

-(

0/)

I no samples Lanthanum-140 1/0 2.8E+02

( 0/

1) no samples Barium-140 I

• (f) Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.

STP Nuclear Operating Company

I-EI