ML041280247
| ML041280247 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 04/29/2004 |
| From: | Bullard W South Texas |
| To: | Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NOC-AE-04001719, STI: 31739784 | |
| Download: ML041280247 (49) | |
Text
Nuclear Operating Company South Teas JI'h EkdicP Gncnatfn9 Statko P..0.
289 ldsmhdh, Tx-7748' April 29, 2004 NOC-AE-04001719 10CFR50.36b STI: 31739784 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 2003 Annual Environmental and Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports Pursuant to the South Texas Project (STP) Unit 1 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 2003 Annual Environmental and Annual Radiological Enviromnental Operating Reports.
If you have any questions, please contact J. D. Sherwood at (361) 972-8766 or me at (361) 972-7130.
W. T. Bullard
- Manager, Health Physics MKJ
Attachment:
2003 Annual Environmental and Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports.
O:WP\\NL\\NRC-AP\\RREP-2003\\04001719
NOC-AE-0400 1719 Page 2 cc:
(paper copy)
(electronic copy)
Bruce S. Mallett 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 Jeffrey Cruz U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P. 0. Box 289, Mail Code: MN1 16 Wadsworth, TX 77483
-'A. H. Gutterman, Esquire Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP L. D. Blaylock
-City Public Service Michael K. Jaffe 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 O:WP\\NL\\NRC-AP\\RREP-2003\\0400 17 19
L F
Ali-]
.000.
a
.L
2...
I
.0m..
.
0
0=¶
-
1
'00' 0000 k -
0
0
.00400 00
0 0000000
00 '?
a-.
-
-%j--______
-. a-.
0.Ž-
-
0.
0
-*----
0
Completed inAccordance with Tech Spec ifidcations 5,
,~Ui Al-tUted States Nfclddr Repulatory Commission g
bM V;~oLU rio-i Lense Nos.'.
-zZuIP..6 &NF8 A.
1;20*'
f`
Au~hoed~~b ~n JU4_u~eiodmr i1 M
Lf X
fl lI I
t J
o 1.rl.
.jj%-
&VE iit nje
'y t
I 1 ~z; -tSouthu~exas.P'roject Elbctric Generatiffg Station_
r a-.i A
- r.
.#%c
.3
.4~$
~ t~4*t
~
~
r 4~~~
A*4
~s.Ctr W-
~
r
I Table of Contents A 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 Environmental Conditions
- Aquatic and Ecological Monitoring...................................................
4-1
- Water Quality Management...................................................
4-2
- Air Quality Management....................................................
4-4....
- Non-Radioactive Waste Management...................................................
4-4 Chemical Control and Management......................
............................. 4-5 Environmental Protection Plan Status................................................... 4-6 Radiological Environmental Introduction and Summary............................................... 5-1 Radiological Environmental Operating Report...................................................
6-1
- Program Description....................................................
6-1 6
- Analysis of Results and Trends................................................... 6-1
- Land Use Census...................................................
6-9 Quality Assurance...................................................
6-8
- Program Deviation...................................................
6-10 List of Tables Table 1: Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program..............
.............. 6-11 Table 2: Sample Media and Location Descriptions......................................... 6-13 Table 3: 2003 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Analysis Summary...................................................
6-18 STP rNclear Operating Company
-2003 Environmental Report List of Figures Figure 4-1:
Figure 4-2:
Figure 4-3:
Figure 6-1:
Figure 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:
Page 2003 Nonradioactive Waste Manag'e'ment................................. 4-5 2003 Nonradioactive Waste Generation.................................... 4-6 Hazardous Waste Generation Historical Comparison....................................
4-6 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 EnVirohnmental Monitoring Program Zone Location Map....................................
6-4 Historical Comparison ofAverage 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.................................
6-7 Historical Comparison of Tritium Added to And Remaining in the Main Cooling Reservoir.........................
6-8 Historical Compapsonhof Tritium Activity In Surface Water
................................. 6-8 2003 Radiological Laboratory Quality; Assurance Program Performance.................................
6-10 STP Xrclear Operating Comripany ii
I I
L il i
mmkm"AXA
I I Executive Summary d
- o I T
his report describes the environmental moni-toring programs, radio-logical and non-radio-logical, conducted at the South Texas Project during 2003. In-cluded in this report are the Environmental Protection Plan Status, the results of the Radio-logical Environmental Monitoring Program and the Land Use Census.
Radiation and radioactivity in the environment are constantly monitored within a 15-mile radius of the South Texas Project.
Sampling locations are selected using weather, land use and water use information.
Two types of sampling locations are used. The first type, control stations, are located in areas that are beyond measurable in-fluence of the South Texas Project or any other nuclear facility.
The sample results from these stations are used to explain radiation from sources other than the South Texas Project.
Indicator stations are the second type of stations. The samples from these stations measure any radiation contributed to the environment by the project.
Indicator stations are located in areas close to the South Texas Project where any plant releases would be at the highest concen-tration.
Prior to initial operation of the South Texas Project, samples were collected and analyzed to determine the amount of ra-dioactivity present in the area.
These results are used as a "pre-operational baseline." Results from the indicator stations are compared to both current control sample results and the pre-operational baseline values to determine if changes in radioactivity levels are attributable to station opera-tions or other causes such as previous nuclear weapons testing programs and natural variations.
Radioactivity levels in the South Texas Project's environment frequently fall below the min-imum detection capabilities of the state-of-the-art scientific instruments. Samples with ra-diation levels that cannot be detected are below the Lower Limits of Detection. The United States Nuclear Regulatory Com-mission requires that equipment used for radiological monitoring must be able to detect specified minimum limits for certain types of samples. This ensures that radiation measurements are suf-ficiently sensitive to detect small changes in the environment.
The United States Nuclear Reg-ulatory Commission also has a required "reporting level."
Licensed nuclear facilities must prepare a special report and increase their sampling if any measured radiation level is equal to or greater than this reporting level. No sample from the South Texas Project has ever reached or exceeded a reporting level.
STPeVNuclear Operating Company 1 -1
CZ-Executive Summary Measurements made are divided into four categories or pathways based upon how the results may affect the public. Airborne, waterborne, ingestion and direct radiation are the four pathways that are sampled. Each pathway is described below.
The airborne pathway is sampled in areas around the South Texas Project by measuring radioactivity of iodine and particulate air filters. The 2003 airborne results were similar to preoperational levels with only naturally occurring radioactive material unrelated to the operation of the South Texas Project detected.
o The waterborne pathway includes samples taken from surface water, ground water and drinking water. Also included in this'path are sediment samples taken from the Main Cooling Reservoir and the Colorado River. Tritium was the only man-made isotope consistently detected in water samples and was measured in the shallow aquifer, the Main Cooling Reservoir and other bodies of water onsite. The average tritium level decreased in the Main Cooling Reservoir over the past year and remained below United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission reporting limits and within United States En-vironmental 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 isotopes found in reservoir bottom sediment samples has decreased since 1992 because less Cobalt-60 has been added to the reservoir by plant effluents than has undergone radioactive decay. 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.
o The ingestion pathway includes broadleaf vegetation, agricultural products and food products. Naturally occurring isotopes were detected at average environmental levels in the samples.
o The direct exposure pathway measures environmental radiation doses using thermo-luminescent dosimeters. These results are consistent with the readings from previous years and continue to show no effect from plant operations.
The South Texas Project continues to operate without a negative effect on the population or the environment. The exposure for people living in the area is maintained at less than one millirem per year. Environmental programs at the site monitor known and predictable 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 dosimeters.
STP Nuclear Operating Company 1 -2
Site Area Description Thhe 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 is jointly 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 Company was the designated Project Manager for the owners. In November of 1997, the STP Nuclear Operating Company assumed operational control of the South Texas Project and responsibility for implementation of all environmental programs.
The South Texas Project has two 1,250 megawatt-electric Westinghouse pressurized water reactors. Unit I received a low-power testing license on August 21, 1987, obtained initial criticality on March 8, 1988, and was declared commercially operational on August 25, 1988. Unit 2 received a low-power testing license on December 16, 1988, obtained initial criticality on March 12, 1989, and was declared commercially operational on June 19, 1989. Both units together produce enough electricity to serve over a million homes.
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 generator. In a fossil fuel plant, burning 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 cylindrical ceramic pellets, each about the size of the end of your little finger. One pellet has the energy potential of about a ton of coal.
Millions of these pellets are stacked in fuel rods that are arranged into assemblies that make up the core of the reactor.
The use of uranium allows us to conserve natural gas, oil and coal and to avoid the associated production of greenhouse gases.
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 exchangers called steam generators.
The water in the reactor is pressurized 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 produce 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 water 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 below. In addition to its safety systems, the South Texas Project has many built-in physical barriers that would prevent the release of radioactive materials in the unlikely event of an accident.
SECONDARY LOOP
~~1 TURBINE.V lL-GENERATOR IA CIRCULATING P
PUMP CONTAINMENT PRIMARY LOOP WALL COOLING LOOP STP Nuclear Operating Company 2 -1
-2 003 En vironmnental Report The most visible ones are the 200-foot-tall, domed containment buildings with steel-reinforced walls four feet thick. Inside each of these massive 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.
Nuclear power plants produce approximately 20 percent of the nation's electricity while saving the equivalent 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. Between 1973 and 2001, nuclear generation in the United States prevented the emission of approximately 2.97 billion tons of carbon, 35.6 million tons of nitrogen oxide and 70.3 million tons of sulfur dioxide.
wetlands, Kelly Lake, drainage ditches, sloughs and depressions. Much of the land east of the cooling reservoir is leased for cattle grazing. Approximately 1,700 acres remain in a more natural state as a lowland habitat. A 110-acre wetland habitat area was establish-ed in 1996 on previously unused land located northeast of the power plants.
The area surrounding the South Texas Project is characterized by coastal plain with farmland and pasture pre-dominating. Local relief of the area is characterized by flat land, approximately 23 feet above sea level are beginning to be developed in the area with the main crop being catfish.
Although the surrounding area is heavily cultivated, significant amounts of woodlands, thicket, brush, fields, marsh and open water 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 affords opportunity for recrea-tional hunting and fishing.
The South Texas Project is home to many species of animals. Inhabitants include American alligators, ospreys, bald eagles and several hundred deer.
In winter, literally hundreds of thousands of waterfowl, principally migratory geese as well as white pelicans and the common tern, have found that the plant's 7,000-acre cooling reservoir provides a good resting place during their migrations. The station also established a man-made wetland habitat in 1996 that attracts an increasing diversity of migratory fowl and other wildlife. Since 1997, the 15-mile-wide area that includes the South Texas Project has had the highest number of bird species nationwide in the National Audubon Society's annual Christmas Bird Count.
The climate ofthe region is subtropical maritime, with continental influence.
It is characterized 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-northeast for short intervals during the winter months.
1 i-; W; Ad--
T ire I.
~ ---
,Zp, The economic base for this area primarily is agricultural related. Most of the land near the site is used for the production of five major agricultural products: beef, rice, grain sorghum, soybeans and cotton. In addition to the agriculture industry, there is commercial fishing in the lower Colorado River, East and West Mata-gorda Bays,'Intracoastal Waterway and the Gulf of Mexico. Currently shrimp, oysters, crab and fin fishes such as catfish and striped bass are the predominant commercial fish in the county. The Aquaculture farms Sixty-five of the 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 STP Nuclear Operating Company 2 -2
,,T,(,
4-
I I Non-Radiological Environmental-Itrrozductionl and Sunmary he South Tex-as Project is committed to the production of electricity in a safe, reliable, and economi-cal manner using nuc-lear energy. The station's programs, policies and business plan objectives also incorporate a com-mitment to environmen-tal excellence and sound environmental man-agement. The dedica-tion of station personnel who develop, imple-ment and monitor site environmental protec-tion programs and com-pliance exemplify this commitment.
The station's commitment to sound environmental management is illustrated by the following environmental successes in 2003:
o Continued classification as a high performer by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality based on the station's above-average environmental compliance record in all areas considered, including water quality, waste management and air quality compliance o Station involvement in community efforts to increase public safety awareness, collect hazardous and non-hazardous waste for proper disposal and responsibly manage regional water resources Continued reductions in non-radiological waste generation at the station.
Everyone has a responsibility to protect the environment. Commitment to environmental responsibility is an integral component of the South Texas Project operating policy. This responsibility reaches further than mere compliance with laws and regulations to 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 issues for the benefit of the station and the public. The South Texas Project understands that we must hold ourselves to the highest principles of responsibility for our environmental and station activities.
STP Nuclear Operating Company 3 -1
- Baxter, w
v"A vl, n-l W:,4
!Je Mt R
Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report his section of the-report ri
-ties -.and other organizations: with
,,i',, describesthe South Texas t'a common' goal to prtect the state P,] roject',snon-radiological~' air,'wateran'd aiand resources-s a" Te e
ment pam partner in'the CLEAN TEXAS program,'
perform' ance and environ
-the'South Texas Prject is committed
.1.>.-:
. -.-i---K.
-;t*-.
rS^~,->
5insSS h 1Q
'nme tal conditions f
rom January. 1
.to meeting cstablished env1rVnmentalI
'ltrough December 1 2003 Theimprovement goals, maint
.S TPNuc 1 er Op erati ng Company improving internal programs and conung
'environmenta1 staffcloselyzmonitors communlityenvironmental outreach environmental conditions and per programs.anrid projects.
In.2003 formiance'at the South Texas Proj ect SouthTexkasProjectvolunteers participated
-Reliaiit Resources, lInc -'1provides in the atagorda-County Communiity-
.support'.and technical hassistance.
SafetyAwareness dayand the Matagord.
to the'South Texas'Project.'-In;2003,'.c.County Househoid Ha'zado'us'ate§
.the Texas Commission on Environ$;§Co11letin
-mental Quality condu~icted a wastewater "-, ",-The Tekas Commission on Environ-disc argepermitcompliance,in-.'.>mental-Quiaiity.-classified the Soiuthn i-peCtl n at the stati on No 'di s -Texas Projc in 2003 as a high performer crepancies were foiund.-X-z
' based onfthe station s above-average 4 In 2002,the South Texas Projectj Menvironmental compliance record applieddfor recog'nition as a-partner iFaciitiessuch as the So'uth.Texas in the CLEAN TEXAS program ad7 "IProject are clssified y the state
-ministered by the Texas Commission '.>as a high performer, average performer on Environmental -Quality.-- -The :,-- orpoorperformer based on that facility s
.:tate 'sub seq-uentlygranted approval, compliancehistory.The state's classification
.of the station's application..: CLEANT--6f the-South-TexasiProject as'a hight
.TEXAS i u
a voluntaryenvirohnmental.'P-perforier.was based on the station's l adershipuprogram compris e of 1.environmental peformance overthe indinstriesononprofit groups, coun->e -last fV earpdi16dj' Photo by: Gwenna Kelton AQUATIC AND ECOLOGICAL MONITORING he location of the South
' Texas Project falls within the Texas Land Resource Area designation as coastal prairie and can be divided
- into two broad ecological areas based on topography, soils and vegetation.
The bottomland area is a swampy, marshy area that occupies approx-imately 1,700 acres of the site near the Colorado River. This area provides an important habitat for birds and other wildlife. A spoil impoundment 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 offers diverse habitats for mammals and several types of birds. -- The South Texas Project-environmental staff regularly monitor the site's environs for changing conditions:-.Ecological conditions
-onsite in 2003-remained generally unchanged'and satisfactory.
In 1996,;the SouthfTexasProject and Houston Industries Incorporated initiated a joint effort with Ducks Unlimited, Texas Parks and Wildlife,
'the United'States Fish and Wildlife Service, and theUnited States De-partment of Agriculture Natural Re-sources Conservation Service to es-tablish a
'10-acre-wetland habitat for migratory waterfowl at the station.
The wetland pr6ject received the Ducks Unlimited Habitat'Conservation Award in:1996 and a United States Department ofAgriculture Conservation
'Award in 1999 for habitat preservation.
This habitat area immediately attracted a variety of bird species-and other wildlife and has continued to support an increasing diversity of plants and animals. An observation trail adjacent to the wetland habitat allows easy access and viewing by visitors.
The South Texas Project is 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 federal threatened or endangered species lists have been observed at the wetland habitat and elsewhere onsite. These include the bald eagle, peregrine falcon, wood stork, white-faced ibis, wood ibis and white-tailed hawk.
STP Nuclear Operating Company 4-1
-2OO3'Environmental Report Additional migratory and resident bird species such as a variety of ducks, geese, turkey and pheasant 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 species 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 station. Special precautions were taken to protect the nesting area and a small, but growing population of both species has continued to return each year to the site. Intensive bird nesting continues throughout the lowland habitat; particularly-in a heron'rookery around the periimeter of Kelly Lake. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologists estimate that over half of Texas' breeding adult Gull-billed Tern population nest on the internal dikes of the Main Cooling Reservoir. The U. 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 population changes. Informal observations by station and Reliant Resources, Inc. personnel continue to indicate that the site provides high-quality habitat in which a wide range of animals live. The site continues to attract extensive wildlife populations, offering a refuge for resident species as well as seasonal migrants. The lowland habitat located between the Colorado River and the east bank of the Main Cooling Reservoir offers a significant sourceof 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 pop-ulation at the South Texas Project.
Water Quality Management J!Water is an essential Cooling Reservoir.The Main Cooling in! electricity ~production, and -'all 2' Reservoir is a 7,000-acre above g eltric ;utilities must complywith off-channel reseryoir capableo ht t._}A 4
A' 'ii
_-i.
- 'n
--lo V
.=t.' <'i*'e:
kte~sive federal,^
state and Jocals tpounding 202,600 acre-feet of water water'regulations. Theseregulations Sati-ts maximum'level. Reservoir govern virtually every aspect of9bu- 'makeup water is withdrawn inter-ines' op'rations atthe Sodth T-xas th ehdjacent'Colorado Te~,,,.,,,, 2w r'2#"i '-! '.'4..... "' "
m "T
sJ;
' Ji S..,:
- 1
?..
i 1 -
Project Water usage and-wastev'ati IaRiver tIn ldditiontheEssential treatment onsite are regulated iindet ;Cooling:Po'id;a ia-46.9.7adre,-eldoT th Safe Drinkin'g.Water Actjthe grade'off-channelr servo su Federal'Clean WaterAct and the Texas plies water~to cool'ruciM lanit com-u.,.a e H
f <;<XSi.--i;<b..-+
Water Quality, ActCollectively' ponents:'is -cabi ofimponding these acts provide for the safeguardig-388 acre-feet f ae Various 'water of6:public' drinking iwater supplies rights permits, contractual agreements a ndmaintaining the integrity of state and conpliance locuments autho q
-- ;,A>
i.S,,
v 2-1-'-j,? t\\,-
." ^; g<.
and federal waters :!-The South Texas Urizethe'South'exas Project to main'T roject uses both surface water and tam these reservoirs; impound water groundwater f or st-atio purpose s
dm qn ivert?
.r-ithedado Riv e r roundwater provides onsite drinkingocand to irculatedivert and use water water for station personnel, replenishes from :the res ervoiirsfor-industrial theiEssential Cooling Pond, and is.- purposes to operate the plant <.These' sed for other industrial purposes permits dlso'limit the rate of diversionP disite 'Surface water,,from the Main'. Sfrom the 'Colorado t Rive'r. -- l;,;a;xJ Cooling R-servoir and the Essental Existiii federal and water1 ooing Pond is used.,s:-6lng nqualityiitnd v
9 for-plant activities.Watr and enforced through the Texas Pollutant fothCooao River~ replnish Dcar r~iiatiofSyte (PDS the-Main Cooling;'Reservoir via permit program torestore andini ntermittent pumping petiods.; S a
tam s
s In,1,99 SlMost'~of 'thr.-water'used. byhe 'the State.fof Y6,a'.assumedjauth1 Sot iTxs,,Piodject sis nqee~'ded~-o'~rity 't-oadmrinister &i'~ip-rnnt ondense steamifandeerovide cooling the. fedefal NationaJPollutaIt'Di forlplant generating 'sysfen~i&. The ;.charge Eliiniiiatin Systeni(NPDES) ii'ajbrity of thiswater is drawnfrom'--.. program. :Accordingly,'federal an'd iiid~returned toihthestton's 'Maim-state requiren'ents'were'coisolidated
'4.'
STP Nuclear Operating Company 4 -2
I R Non-Radiological Environmental w prail Rpr in November of 2000 into one waste-water discharge permit for the station under 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 stringent levels set in the permit.
A monthly monitoring report is submitt-ed to the Texas Commission on Environ-mental Quality for wastewater dis-charges. Reports identifying ground and surface water use are also submitted annually to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and Texas Water Development Board.
Wastewater generated at the South Texas Project is processed and dis-charged to the onsite Main Cooling Reservoir to be re-used by the station as cooling water for plant systems.
No water was released from the re-servoir in 2003. The station con-tinued its outstanding wastewater discharge compliance performance record in 2003. Station conditions did not require site aquatic monitoring studies be conducted in 2003 nor were any additional studies required by the United States Environmental Protection Agency or the State of Texas either by way of station dis-charge permits or otherwise. Wastewater discharges met state and federal water quality standards demonstrating a 100 per-cent compliance record for the year while conserving and maximizing efficient water usage at the station.
No discrepancies were noted in the wastewater discharge permit compliance inspection conducted by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality at the station in 2003.
In addition to the wastewater discharge permit program, the Federal Clean WaterAct, as amended in 1987, requires permits for storm water dis-charges associated with industrial activity. The South Texas Project Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan, implemented in October of 1993, ensures that potential pollution sources at the site are evaluated, and that appropriate measures are selected and implemented to prevent or control the discharge of pollutants in storm water runoff. In September of 1998, the United States Environmental Pro-tection Agency modified the storm water permit program to require facilities, such as the South Texas Project, permitted under the baseline general permit to obtain permit coverage under a multisector general storm water permit.
Accordingly, the station filed a Notice of Intent for transfer from the Gener-al Permit to the Multi-Sector General Permit with the United States Environ-mental Protection Agency in 1998.
The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Commission issued a TPDES Multi-Sector General Permit in August of 2001.
The station filed a Notice of Intent in November of 2001 to obtain coverage under the state permit and the station's Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan was modified accord-ingly to reflect these changes. This plan is a working document that is revised whenever there is a change in design, construction, operation or maintenance that has a significant effect on the potential for the discharge of pollutants from the station.
In order to regulate storm water pollution resulting from construction activities, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality further requires authorization of storm water discharges from construction activities that entail the disturbance of one or more acres of land. Accordingly, a separate Storm Water Pollution Prevention plan was developed for the construction of a three-lane vehicle pull offarea with an additional overflow parking area along the main plant access road that commenced in November of 2003.
Following a severe drought in 1996, the Texas Legislature recognized 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 emphasiz-es regional planning. Sixteen plan-ning regions were created, each task-ed to prepare a regional plan for the orderly development, manage-ment and conservation of water re-sources. The South Texas Project was chosen to represent the electric generating utility interest for the water-planning region that encom-STP Nuclear Operating Company 4 -3
2003 Environmental Report passes the lower Colorado River Basin.
Plans subsequently submitted by each planning region were incorporated into a State Water Plan in the year 2001. However, water resource plann-ing is a continuous process and the Regional and State water plans must be updated every five years. The South Texas Project continues to actively participate in the Lower Colorado Regional Water Planning Group to update the existing-plan by 2006. Additional information regarding regional water planning in Texas can be found on the website maintained by the Texas Water Develop-ment Board at http://www.twdb.state.-
tx.us/or at regionk.org.
The South Texas Project understands that the water resources of the state are a critical natural resource requiring careful management and conservation to preserve water quality and availability.
Accordingly, the station continues to explore and support efforts focusing on the efficient use of water resources and reduction of water waste.
Air Quality Management 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 purpose of these regulations is to protect air resources from pollution by controlling or abating air pollution and emissions. Regulated emission sources at the South Texas Project include a fossil-fuel boiler, emergency diesel generators, fire-fighting train-ing and other minor maintenance equipment and activities.
Fossil-Fueled Emission Sources Unlike conventional electrical generating stations, nuclear power plants do not burn petroleum 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 resources.
The South Texas Project uses small Air Quality-Management amounts of fossil fuel for backup and emergency equipment. 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 amend-ments that protect air resources from pollution by controlling or abating air pollution an'd emissions. 'The major regulated air emission sources at the South Texas. Prject include one fossil-fueled boiler and various emergency 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. On two occasions in March of 2003 during operation of the station's auxiliary boiler, flue gas excess oxygen levels intermittently fluctuated above the permit established range for manual operations. The excess flue gas oxygen range establish-ed in the permit is a control parameter for operation of the auxiliary boiler.
The condition-was corrected and no emission limits were exceeded. Correc-tive actions were taken to prevent occurrence. These permit condition deviations were subsequently reported to the Texas Commission on Environmen-tal Quality. In addition to the auxiliary steam boiler, a number of fossil-fuel-ed diesel generators are located onsite.
These diesels are designed to pro-vide emergency power to various plant systems-or buildings in the event of a loss of power. This equip-ment is not normally needed for daily operations and the station does not use it to produce electricity for distribu-tion. Routine maintenance runs are conducted to ensure availability if needed and for equipment mainte-nance.
Fire-Fighting Activities The South Texas Project conducts onsite training of selected employees on proper fire-fighting techniques.
Most onsite instruction consists of training on the proper use of a fire extinguisher. Advance notification of firefighting training sessions is provided to the Matagorda County Environmental Services and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.
On five occasions, onsite fire extinguisher training was conducted for short periods on days not identified in the associated open burn notifications. These permit condition deviations were subsequently' reported to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.
Title V Federal Operating Permit In 1990, amendments to the Federal Clean Air Act mandated a new per-mitting program to clearly define applicable air quality requirements for affected facilities such as the South Texas Project. This program is commonly known as the Title V Operating Permit Program and is ad-ministered by the state. The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Com-mission (now known as the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality) issued a Federal Operating Permit in January of 2000 for the South Texas Project granting authority to operate identified emission units at the station in accordance with applicable permit and regulatory requirements. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality revised the permit in July of 2003 to add applicable requirements regarding minor new source review authoriza-tions. In accordance with the South Texas Project's Federal Operating Permit's reporting requirements, those deviations from permit conditions discussed previously were reported to the Texas Commission on Environ-mental Quality.
Non-Radioactive Waste Management 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 regulations.
By regulatory definition, solid waste includes solid, semi-solid, liquid and gaseous waste material.
The Texas Commission on Environmental STP Nuclear Operating Company 4 -4
Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report 2003 Nonradioactive Waste Management South Texas Project Recycle 76.0%
Incineration &
Fuel Blending 4.8%
Landfill 19.2%
tion of several tons of paper each year. In 2003, the station collected approximately 36 tons of paper for recycling. Every ton of paper recycled saves approximately 17 trees, el-iminates approximately three cubic yards of landfill material and saves enough energy to power the average home for six months. The station continues to explore new areas where recycling may be expanded or initiated.
Non-radioactive solid waste that cannot be shipped for recycling is shipped for disposal. Municipal-type trash is transported to the county landfill transfer station for appro-priate disposition.
Construction-related non-combustible, 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 an 8 1 percent reduction in normal hazardous waste generated at the site during 2003.
The volume of hazardous waste gen-erated at the station was sufficiently low in 2003 to allow the station to re-classify as a small-quantity generator early in 2004. Hazardous waste accounts for only a small portion of the waste generated at the South Texas Project; however, minimization and reduction of hazardous waste generated where feasible remains an important goal at the station.
(Reference Figures 4-2 and 4-3 )
Figure 4-1 Quality, which administers the Texas Solid Waste Disposal Act and also the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act program, is the primary agency regulating non-radioac-tive wastes generated at the South Texas Project. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality also regulates the collection, handling, storage and disposal of solid wastes, including hazardous wastes. The transportation of waste materials is regulated by the United States Department of Trans-portation.
The South Texas Project was register-ed with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality as a large quantity generator of industrial solid wastes in 2003, including hazardous wastes. Texas Commission on Environ-mental Quality regulations require that indust-rial 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 Regis-tration for the South Texas Project.
The registration is revised whenever there is a change in waste management practices at the site. Waste handling and disposal activities are summarized and documented in a waste summary report for the South Texas Project that is submitted annually to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.
Hazardous waste accumulation at the South Texas Project in 2003 was limited to a maximum holding period 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, mani-fests, reports, personnel 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 accumulated inappropriately.
Station policies and regulations encourage the recycling, recovery or reuse of waste when possible to reduce the amount of waste generated or disposed of in landfills. Approxi-mately 76 percent of the industrial non-radioactive waste generated at the South Texas Project was recycled or processed for re-use in 2003. (Ref-erence Figure 4-1) The South Texas Project ships waste oil, grease, electro-hydraulic fluid, adhesives, liquid paint and solvent for fuel blending and thermal energy recovery. Used oil, diesel fuels and antifreeze solu-tions are sent to a recycling vendor for reprocessing. Lead-acid batteries are returned, when possible, to the original manufacturer for recycling or are shipped to a registered battery recycler, thereby reducing the volume of hazardous waste that might other-wise be generated. A site paper re-cycling program results in the collec-STP Nuclear Operating Company 4 -5
'% 2003 Environmental Report Chemical Control Management The South Texas Project uses standard operating procedures, policies and programs to minimize the generation of waste materials, control chemical usage and prevent spills.
The South Texas Project also evaluat-es chemicals and products proposed for use, which could come in contact with plant components. Site procedur-es address the evaluation, storage, use, spill control, and disposal require-ments of chemicals. These guidelines assist in reducing wastes, ensure proper packaging for disposal and mitigate the consequences of inadvertent spillage.
The South Texas Project empha-sizes awareness training for spill prevention and maintains station readiness to respond should a spill occur. Spill response team members receive annual refresher training in hazardous material incident response.
No significant or consequential spills occurred in 2003.
Environmental Protection Plan Status The South Texas Project's Environ-mental Protection Plan was issued in March of 1989 to provide for the protection of non-radiological environ-mental values during operation of the South Texas Project. This report reviews Environmental Protection Plan non-compliances identified by the plant in 2003 and the associated corrective actions taken to prevent their recurrence. Potential nonconfor-mities are promptly addressed, as identified, to maintain operations in an environmentally acceptable manner. The station uses its Correc-tive Action Program to document these conditions and track corrective actions to completion. Internal assess-ments, reviews and inspections 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 question.
A proposed change, test or experi-ment is considered to present an 2003 Nonradioactive Waste Generation South Texas Project Non-Hazardous Waste 96.2%
Universal Waste 0.6%
Hazardous Waste Used Batteries 0.2%
3.0%
Figure 4-2 Hazardous Waste Generation Historical Comparison South Texas Project 25 20 1015 lo5 0
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 O Hazardous Waste from Cleanup of an Onsite Spill
- Hazardous Waste Figue 4-3 unreviewed environmental questions if it concerns:
I)
A matter that may result in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement related to the Operation of South Texas Project, Units I and 2 (Docket Nos. 50-498 and 50-499), environmental impact appraisals, or in any decisions of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board; or,
- 2) A significant change in eff-luents or power level; or,
- 3) A matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in the documents specified in (1) above, that may have a significant adverse environmental impact.
No unreviewed environmental questions were identified in 2003.
Events that require reports to federal, state or local agencies other than the Nuclear Regulatory Commission such as the Title V Operating Permit program deviations discussed earlier in this report are reported in accord-ance with the applicable reporting requirements. The Nuclear Regula-tory Commission is provided with a copy of any such report at the time it is submitted 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 Commission is required by the Environmental Protec-tion Plan. No such 30-day or other non-routine report of this type was required in 2003.
STP Nuclear Operating Company
U
Radiological Environmental I-ntroduction and Summary here were two items of interest identifie'd by this program during 2003. A short Tdescription of them follows.
O Cobalt-60 levels in reservoir bottom sediment samples vary but remain within the expected range. The amount-of Cobalt-60 in the Main Cooling Reservoir has decreased because of additional equipment installed to reduce radioactive effluents.
- Low level tritium was monitored in shallow aquifer ground water samples.
The shallow. well was located within approximately seventy-five yards of the Main Cooling Reservoir dike base. The positive values, measured since 1999, increased during the year, as anticipated; but remained less' than in the Main Cooling Reservoir.
Operation of the South Texas Project continues to have no detectable 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 public from plant operations were less than one millirem which is insignificant when comparedito the 360 millirems average annual radiation exposure to people in the United States from natural and medical sources.
STP Nuclear Operating Company 5 -1
71-1
Radiologica tEnvironmental IOperating Report he South Texas Project initiat-.
-ed a comprehensive preopera-tional Radiological Environ-fl mental Monitoring Program S
in July 1985. That program terminated on March 7, 1988, when the operational program was implement-.
ed. The pre-operational monitoring program data forms the baseline against which operational changes are measured.
Critical pathway analysis requires that samples be taken from water, air, and land environ-ments. These samples are obtained to evaluate -
potential radiation exposure. -Sample types are based on established pathways and experience gain-ed at other nuclear facilities. Sample locations were deter-mined after consider-ing site meteorology, Colorado Riverhydro-logylocaldemography andlanduse. Sampling locations are furthere evaluated and modifi-ed according to field and analysis exper-ience. Table i lists Program: Des~cription the minimum sampling locations and frequency oficollection.
Sampling locations consist of indicator and control stations. Indicator stations are locations'on or off the site that may be infliuenc'ed by plant discharges during plant operation. Control stations are located beyond the measurable influencexof thie-South Texas Project or'any other nuclear facility. Although most samples analyzed are accompani-ed by a control sample, it should be noted that this practice is not always possible or meaningful with all sample types. Fluctuations in the concentration of radionuclides and direct radiation exposure at in-dicator stations are evaluated in relation to historical data and against the control stations. Indicator stations are compared with characteristics identified during the pre-operational program to monitor for radiological effects from plant operation. Several sample'identification l methods are used to
'implement the pro-gram. Figures 6-1 and 6-2 are maps that identify permanent sample stations. Des-cripions of sample stations shown onFigure 6-1 and 6-2 are found in Table 2. Table 2 also includes addicc tional sampling loc-ations and media types that may be used for additional informa-tion. Figure 6-3 illu-strates the zones used when collection loca--
tions are not perma-nent sample stations.
ni flflybbUITVULbUUL iiUU
- . nvironmental saiples-from.comparisonillustratesthatplantoperationiV scent dosirneters located at 43 sites
-i.-areas surrounding th Sotth
- arenothavinganimpactonairparticulate& The'natural direct gamma latlo n
Texas roject5iniiet6mhlcate activity even at the Sensitie Indicato varesaccording to location because no1significant radiobogicaleffectsjStations
(#1s,#1'5,- and#16).The-se,ofdiffer6ncesinthenaturalradioactive o'into'rto.-Anaiyticais,,t'at'ic'ns' are'elo'c-at'e'd:'nea'r thse pla~nCtifa~ilin1~t-osu
'valti&frd'offsite indicator sample ->.and are located downwind fromfthe content and the :vetaifoncover.
.:.r 1;4sam
- ,~
I t d' I
R.
,D fe
- l.
- =.;-.i a~hyge5-f..- *t
.. ;tidw;cov.
siatonsd ontinue to trend!wlth jthe D %:Fplani e on`t epgura6-5; icoiparesi
_th etamount
,control stations.,Ons iti indicator Fdirectidh>nThe betahativity-measured
.of directgamma 'adiaiion measure dsaipl
's-?iitinueidto ;w'c're' 'o in'thKeairjparticulate sap ples isfrm t the plant in6ethe o'urt 'quarteri edcres'e iifinmeasu'red v liiesttleir natuAl taaioivehaterialSs f
8 'fothre&'ifferen pes expadtedrra a d i o a c 6f
-J nt'typesire exp cte a r a te s
-prfh rta We t
9otions:
inTh-e' Control
-hStation's]
Av--eeragerquartery beta activityprform gamma analysis on quarterly aregreater than miles fr e
from three onsite indicator stations composites of the airparticulate samples -',,site and are in the idrection 'of the anda singlecontroilstation foraair t'odeterm'in if'an a6ctivity is from leastprevailingwinds (Stations 23 particulate samples have been compared "the South S
Texas Proj ect The gamma and #37),The Sensitive In historically from 1988 through 2003' 1-analysis revealedthat it was all natural -Stations are in the 'directions that (see'Figur'e 6-4)'Te average of radioactivity the wnd blows most often'andlare the onsite indicatorstre'nds-closely Directga7 radiatiois monitore on mi e fromerplants onw with th offsite control vhiue'sThe in the environmentiby thermolumine ii-Fam mto' 'Market Road 521 (Stations j-,;,b.^.i~e oro v
.?!
i.--ti 6 -1 STPNuclear:Operating Company
'2003 Environmental Report Designated Sample Locations
'44.
,i
-b
_,X~
L I
I A*
Figure 6-1 STP Nuclear Operating Company 6 -2
Radiological Environmental d)erating Report Designated Sample Locations (On Site Sample Locations)
Figure 6-2 STP Nuclear Operating Company 6 -3
a 2003 Environmental Report Zone Location Map N
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 STP Nuclear Operating Company 6 -4
Radiological Environmental Operating Report Analysis of Results and Trends (Continued from page 6-1)
Historical Comparison of Average Quarterly Beta Activity from Indicator and Control Air Samples 1988 - 2003 0.03500 0.03000 AA
- 050 1
A A t
0.02500-A t
0.02000 -
A m
0.01500 U3 0.01000 0.00500
~
L-_
ro 0.00000 1988 1991 1994 1997 2000 2003
-Station
- 001, #015 & #016 Average of Onsite Indicators
-Station
- 037 Offsite Control Figure 6-4 STP Nuclear Operating Company 6 -5
=>->2003 Environmental Report Environmental Dosimeter Comparisons 22
-Average of Indicator Stations Average of Control Stations Sensitive Indicator Stations 20 18 16 o
14
~12 Unit #1 Criticality - 03/08/88 Unit #2 Criticality - 03/12/89 10 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Results by Quarter Figure 6-5 STP Nuclear Operating Company 6 -6
Radiological Environmental aperauing Report Historical Comparison of Cobalt-58 & Cobalt-60 in Main Cooling Reservoir Sediment 1986 - 2003 1800 Station #215:
1600 Cobalt-58 Plant Discharge 1400 Station #215:
Cobalt-60 Plant a
Discharge 1200 en s
hThe Cobalt-58 activity in the reservoir has decreased to
- c' 800
-_____b_
below levels that can be detected. Statistical variations typical of material in a a
600 particulate form are seen in 1996 & 1997 Cobalt-60 values. The inventory of 400 Cobalt-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 2003 Figure 6-6 Calculated Cumulative Curies of Cobalt-60 in the Main Cooling Reservoir
3t60 ASSUMPTIONS:
- 1. Radioactive decay is the only mechanism for removal from the Main Cooling Reservoir.
- 2. The initial time for calculating the remaining radioactivity is July I of the year released.
Figure 6-7 6 -7 STP Nuclear Operating Company
i 2003 Environmental Report Historical Comparison of Tritium Added to and Remaining in the Main Cooling Reservoir 1989 - 2003 4000 3500 3000 2500 C
1500 1000 500 0
1989 1990 1991 1"92 1993 1994 1995 196 1997 198 199 2000 2001 2002 2003 UTritium Released to the Main Cooling Reservoir
- Tritium Measured in the Main Cooling Reservoir Figure 6-8 Historical Comparison of Tritium Activity in Surface Water 1988 - 2003 30000 E
0 E W
- 19&
I-25000 20000 15000 10000 5000-1908 1989 199 1991 9W2 1993 1994 1995 I96 W97 999 1999 2099 2001 2902 2003 r
E River Sam.ple Upstream of Plant (Offsite) #Q02
- West Branch of River (Onsite) #213
- East Branch of Little Robbins Slough (Onsite) #211 llMain Cooling Reservoir Blowdown (Onsite) #237
- River Sample Downstream of Plant (Offsite) #QO I
- Little Robbins Slough (Onsite) #212 I Ditch NE of Main Cooling Reservoir (Onsite) #229
- Main Coolina Reservoir (Onsite) #216 Figure 6-9 STP Nuclear Operating Company 6 -8
Radiological Environmmental 3p7 tratig Report T
The Annual Land Use Census is performed to determine if any changes have occurred in the location of residents and the use of the land within five miles of the South Texas Project generating units. The information is used to determine whether any changes are needed in the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program.
The census is performed by contacting area residents and local government agencies that provide the information.
The results of the survey indicated that no changes were required.
In addition, a survey is performed to verify the nearest residents within five miles of the South Texas Project generating units in each of 16 sectors.
The nine sectors that have residents within five miles and the distance to the nearest residence in each sector are listed below.
Nearest Residentsn Sector Distance Location ap p r E
a r m iles)
ESE-3.561i SE W 3-.
5
~--SelkirkIsland e
SWrk
-~ 45
-- CitruGrve~
WSW 25
-=
_W 45 F4i095.
V1NW44
~
_4.0 AsbyBucke -Road NW 4.Mondrik R6Sid =Z NWSW--;'
R Ru 1ls`Ranch (FM 1468)
The following items of interest were noted du-ring the census 1
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 accessible to the public.
- Colorado River water from below the Bay City Dam has not been used to irrigate crops.
No commercial dairy operates in Matagorda County and there is no agricultural milk source within the five-mile Zone.'
There were no identified commercial vegetable farms located within the five-mile Zone.
1 Two commercial fish farms continue to operate. One-is two miles west of the plant near FM 521 and the second is five miles southwest of the 'plant. The water supply for the ponds is not affected by the operation of the STP power plants.
Quality Assurance Quality assurance encompasses planned and systematic actions to ensure that an item or facility will perform satisfactorily. Reviews, surveil-lance and'iudits' have determined that the prograams, procedures and personnel perform satisfactorily.
Quality; audits and independent technical reviews help to determine areas that'need attention and re-evaluation. Areas that need attention are addressed-in accordance with the station's Corrective Action Program.
The measurement capabilities of the Radiological-Laboratory are demonstrated by participating in inter-laboratory measurement assurance programs. These programs provide samples that are similar in matrix and size to those measured for the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program.
Figure 6-10 summarizes the results of these intercomparison pro-grams. Analyses consisted of radiochem-ical measurements and'measurement of direct radiation through the use of thermoluminescent dosimeters.
In addition, approximately 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 presented in this report.
STP Nuclear Operating Company 6 -9
2003 Environmental Report 2003 Radiological Laboratory Quality Assurance Program Performance 0-5% Difference 5-10% Difference 10-15% Difference 83 Total Analyses Figure 6-10 Program Deviations Deviations from the sampling pro-gram must be acknowledged and ex-plained in this report. During 2003 the following samples were not collect-ed or were unacceptable for analysis:
Three out of thirty-six required broadleaf vegetation samples were not collected due to seasonal unavailability in February.
Fourteen out of two hundred and sixty air samples were not con-tinuously collected for the full time interval due to equipment and power failures. However, all but two air particulate and one air iodine samples met the LLD requirements and the results are included in Table 3.
STP Nuclear Operating Company 6 -10
I Radiological Environmentaliwraing 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 40 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, 0.2* to 4 miles.
Continuously Quarterly Gamma dose Quarterly 16-Located in all 16 meteorological sectors, 2 to 7 miles.
6-Located in special interest areas (e.g. school, population centers), within 14 miles.
2-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 1 mile because of the main cooling reservoir EXPOSURE: AIRBORNE 5 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 3-Located at the exclusion zone, N, NNW, NW Sectors, 1 mile.
Continuous Weekly or Radioiodine Weekly sampler more Canister:
1-Located in Bay City, 14 miles.
operations frequently if 1-131 1-Control Station, located in a minimal wind direction (WSW),
required by Particulate 10 miles.
dust loading SamDler:
Gross Beta Following Activity filter change Gamnma-Quarterly Isotopic of composite (by location)
EXPOSURE: WATERBORNE 9 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 1 month Isotopic
.1-Located above the site on the Colorado River not Influenced period (grab if by plant discharge (control).
not available)
Tritium Quarterly
.- 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 6 -11
02003 Environmental Report Table I 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 Drinkina 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 K
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 Veaetation 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 durng 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, Number And Approximate Location of Sample Routine Sampling Nominal Analysis Minimum Stations Mode Collection Type Analysis Frequency Frequency Fish and Invertebrates (edible portions) 1-Representing commercially or recreational Important species Grab Sample semi-Gamma-As collected In vicinity of STP that maybe Influenced by plant operation.
Is c
annually Isoopicon edible J-Same or analogous species In area not Influenced by STP.
portions
- Same or analogous species In the MCR.
i Agricultural Products Grab At time of Gamma-As collected havestIsotopic
-harvest 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 Irrigated by water Into which liquid plant wastes will be discharged. Agricultural products will be considered If these conditions change.
S TP Nuclear Operating Company 6 -12
Radiological Environmental Operaling Report Table 2 Sample Media and Location Description AI AIRBORNE RADIOIODINE
-L5 CABBAGE AP -AIRBORNE PARTICULATE L6 COLL RDGREENS-Bf 1RESIDENT DABBLER DUCK--
M BEEF MEAT.;
B2 RESIDENT DIVER'DUCK M2 POULTRY MEAT, B3 MIGRATORY-DABBLER-DUC.
M3, WILD SWINE 1B4 MIGRATORY DIVER DUCK M4' DOMESTIC SWINE
'B5 GOOSE M5 EGGS B6'- DOVE M6 GAME DEER B..QUAIL M7 ALLIGA
-B8 PIGEON,'. t r
i M8 RABBIT,,
CC CRUSTACEAN CROY
'OYSTER'..
CS CRUSTACEAN SHRIMP..'
-SOSOIL DR fDIRECT RADIATION;,
S 1 SEDIMENT - SHORELINE-F1'- FISH -.PISCIVOROUS S2 SEDIMENT.-BOTTOMa=-a -
l 5 -
.'9
. ~ --
.=
., ~- -
FISH-CRUSTACEAN & iNSECT-F2 PASTUREGRS FEEDERS 4-----
F3 FISH "PLANTIVORES & DETRITUS.
W DR N WTER FEEDERS.--
LI BANANA LEAVES WG GROUND WAR L2 CANA LEAVES WS SURFACE.WATER.-
L4 TURNIP GREENS WW RELIEF WELL-WATER l~~I G E N L ;-t0. -f-- -<->f=<;AI:
- ..;;4~,,n 6 -13 STP Nuclear Operating Company
_6-2OO0 3. En viron nme ntal1 R ep ort Table 2 Sample Media and Location Description MEDIA CODE STATION i,.VECTOR:
LOCATION DESCRIPTION CODE (Apprximate)
~1miieN FM21 R002 imileNNE FM 52 1 DR~
003,-
imileNE-
- FMS21, DR.004 4A !ril'N~~
FM 521 DR005 1
mieE STPVisitor Center onFM 521 DR Al AP SO 06 3.5 fiiilesESE
-Site near, Reservoir Makeup PumigFclt DR 00 1SilsE MCR Dike DR 008 0.5iijeSE MCRIDik DR
~
009_,. ~~0.25inile S ~kMCR Dk DR
~
010 MO.25 i1e&SSW
-MCR:Dike~
DR 011 0.5 16~eSW
`MCR Dike.
R02 1.5 mile WSWj
- MCR~Dike.,z,,
R
'1 u-.mileW F
521 014:-l4 A1.5mfile WNW
-FM52l1-6,.e---
DR AlAP.VBSO VP
- '-015 Miie M 521,_
DAlIAP VBSOV
-ilfilile NNW" FM 521 DR-07 6.5 mie Bucky-M16 DRAIP
.018 16.5ieNNEc CelaniesePlant-FM[3057.
DR K
19 5.5 milesNE Ž~
FM2668 DR 020
-5 miesEE FM2668&FM2078~'_,,-__
DR021 5ieE.
~FM 521&FM2668 DR'-022,7 mslesE0_2 quistar Chemiical Plant DR 23
- 1 ei1s fN
>Itreto oFM 521 and FM 24 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 6 -14
Radio logical Environmental tiraug Report ITable 2 Media and Location Description Sample MEDIA CODE STATION VETRLCIODSRPIN
____________CODE (Apiomae DR
.024 4 Miles SSE~ MCR Dike DR 054mieS MCRI~ike~
DR 026 4fmiles SSW_.-
MCR Dike DR
.~.027, 2.5Mifle SW~:i MCR Dike DR:02 5 Miles.WSW FM 1095 & lisRa DR S0 02
.5mileks W -I FM 1095 DR00 6iles WNW--
Tres Palacios Oas FM 285-3 DR
-,031
.5miesNWZ ison reek oad-DR
~032
- 3.5 rnilesNNW FM 1468 DR AlAPSO 03 14 miles NNE Microwave Tower at end of Kilowatt Road in BayC DR 34 7.5mles ENE Wadsworth Water Suppl Pum Station>
->035 8.5 mil es SSE Magrd DR 036 9 ie S<
olge Port DR Al AP VB VP SO 037*
10 miles WS Palacios CP&L Substation-DR 038~
_10.5 ml, NW~ CP&L Substation on TX71narBesg DR T P O
39 9 mfles NW rTX 35 under High Voltage Power lines near DR040
`4.5 miles SW, Citrus rv DR 041 2.0 miiiis-ESE MCR Dike DR042 85mlsNW.-
FM 459 at Tidhve nermnedite School DR 43 4.5 mifes SE Sie bonarit blowdownf outlet Ws 209 2 Miles ESE Kelly Lake WD 10 n Site.
Appovddrikn water supplyfo T
WSS12113.5 miles S-Sie, EBranch Little Robbins Slouigh MCR-STP Main Cooling Reservoir STP-South Texas Project Media codes typed in bold satisfy collection requi~rements described in Table 1.
- Control Station 6-15 STP Nuclear Operating Company
-2003Enviro'nmental Report Table 2 Sample Media and.LoCation Description MEDIA CODE STATION iECTOR LOCATION DESCRIPTION CODE (Appoiae Ws Si 212
_4 mile'S~ Little Robbins Slough WSS 213' 4mniuies E E;
West BranchColdrado River FI (12,or 3) CC:
~
24 2.5 -miles SE MCR at Makeup Water Discharge S2 250 ieS MCR a-t Circulating Water Dischare WS S2
~
216`
-3.milesSSE MCR at blowdown structure-F(19 2, or 3) CC CS QY 222
>0mls WtMagoda a
Wetban of Colorado Rver dwtreamoST WS S(l or 2)22 5-6mieS arss frmchainel marke #22 WD 228*
- 14 miles NNE_
LieTulle Park public water supply 1 Drainage ditch north of the reservoir thatlempties into:
WsSi 229
- 2 3 miles ESE Colorado River upstream of the reservoir makeup,~-
___ pumping facility S~i Colorado River at point where drainage ditch (#229)
~
or 2 230 35 Smiles ESE emteinot SCI 2WS 23 Y 4mileSE -
Colorado River where MCR blowdown discharge or,
-~channel emptiies into it.
WG235
`3 8mile S:I Well B-3 directly south fromn MCR B8 236 N/ASTP Protected Area.
WS'___
237 3.7 miles SSE Blowdown discharge channel from MCR 5(1 or 2) WS242
`>10milesN-Colorado River where it intersects Highway 35 WS
~
-~Colorado River upstream of Bay City Dam at the, 24 ne
~
Lower Colorado River Authority pumping station-Ws
-247
<1mile E~
Essential Cooling Pond F(1,2, or 3) 249*
dNA ontrol sample purchased from a local retailer SO 250
-0.75 mile NWiz Sewag sludge land fa rmigae (1,2,or 3) CC 2300
- ~5:i
__STP Main Cooling Reservoir, WW701
>4ilesi-z-MCR ReliefWell#4 WS QO N/AJ~~IQuarterly composite of station #227 and/or altermate WS Q02N/A~~
Quarterly composite of station #243'and/or altermate:
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 6 -16
I I Radiological Environmental i 37raung Report 2003 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Analysis Summary An analysis summary for all of the 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 types are 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 information 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 following is calculated:
m The mean value of positive real values.
I The number of positive real measurements / the total number of analyses.
- 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 2003 by four surface water samples, two groundwater samples, one drinking water sample, four rainwater samples and one shoreline sediment sample. Fish, vegetation, and wildlife samples vary in number according to availability but normally exceeded the minimum number required by Table 1.
TABLE 3 2003 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS
SUMMARY
Medium: Direct Radiation Units: Milliroentgen/Standard Quarter ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE
/NONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (f)
LOCATION MEAN (f) l MEAN (f)'
MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Gamma 174/0 1.4E+01 ( 165/ 165)
I mile W 1.8E+01 (5/5) 1.6E+0I ( 9/ 9) l(.2E+01 - 2.OE+- IO)
(#013)
(1.7E+01 -2.0E1+01)
(1.4E+01-1.8E+01)
- (0 Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.
TABLE 3 2003 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 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
/NONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (0*
LOCATION MEAN (f)-
MEAN (0' MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Iodine-131 259/0 8.5E-03
-- ( 0/207)
-- ( 0/ 52)
- (f) Number ofpositive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.
STP Nuclear Operating Company 6 -17
_-2003 Environmental Report TABLE 3 2003 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 (f)*
LOCATION MEAN (f)*
MEAN (f)'
MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE GrossBeta 258/0 1.5E-03 2.3E-02(206/206) 14 milesNNE 2.4E-02( 52/ 52) 2.3E-02( 52/ 52) 7.4E 6.1E-02)
(#033)
(7.4E 5.7E-02)
(7.5E 6.4E-02)
Cesium-134 20/0 3.4E-03
( Of16)
Of
( 0/
4)
Cesium-137 20/0 3.0E-04
(
0/ 16)
O f
(
0/
4)
Manganese-54 20/0 3.3E-04 0/16)
O f
(
0/
4)
Iron-59 20/0 I.SE-04
_- ( 0/l6) f-
-(
0/
4)
Cobalt-58 20/0 4.8E-04
. ( 01 16)
O
(
0/
4)
Cobalt-60 20/ 0 3.4E-04 Of
( 0/16)
-(
01 4)
Zinc-65 20/0 7.7E-04
_. ( 0/16)
O
_ ( 0/
4)
Zirconium-95 20/0 9.2E-04
_ ( 0/16) f-(
0 4)
Niobium-95 20/0 8.4E-04
-(
0/116)
O f-( 0/
4)
Lanthanum-140 20/0 4.4E-03
( 0/16)
O f-( 0/
4)
Barium-140 (f) Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.
TABLE 3
- 2003 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS
SUMMARY
Medium: Surface Water Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (f)*
LOCATION MEAN (f)-
MEAN (f)*
MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Hydrogen-3 12/0 1.7E+02 9.9E03( 4/
- 8) 3milesSSE 9.9E03( 4/
- 4)
O(
0 4)
(8.1 E03 - 1.1 E04)
(#216)
(8.1E03 - 1.1E04)
Iodine-131 40/0 4.5E+00
-(
0/ 27)
-(
0/
13)
Cesium-134 40/0 1.7E+00 O-(
0/27):
( 0/13)
Cesium-137 40/0 1.6E+00
( 0/27)
( 0/13)
Manganese-54 40/0 1.5E+00
( 0/27)
O f
-(
0 13)
Iron-59 40/0 4.9E+00
( 0/27)
O f
( 0 13)
Cobalt-58 40/ 0 1.6E+00
( 0/27)
( 0/13)
Cobalt-60 40/0 1.6E+00 (0 1 27)
O f
-(0/13)
Zinc-65 40/0 3.3E+00
'-(
0/27) i
-(
013)
Zirconium-95 40/0 2.9E+00
( 0/27)-
-(
0/ 13)
Niobium-95 40/0 1.9E+00
'-( 0127) -
( 0/13)
Lanthanum-140 40/0 3.8E+00 O(
0
- 27) f-( 0 13)
Barium-140
'mr
____maumn totalmeasurementsatspecifiedlocations.
- (f) Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.
STP Nuclear Operating Company 6 -18
I I Radiological lEnvironmental OfPerating Report TABLE 3 2003 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS
SUMMARY
Medium: Drinking Water Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (O-LOCATION MEAN (f).
MEAN (f)'
MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE GrossBeta 2510 2.0E+00 3.4E00( 91 13) 14milesNNE 3.4E00( 121 12) 3.4E00( 12/ 12)
(2.5EOO - 4.6E00)
(#228)
(2.4E00 - 4.4E00)
(2.4E00 - 4.4E00)
Hydrogen-3 8/0 2.6E+02
-(
0/ 4)
_ ( 01 4)
Iodine-131 25/0 3.3E+00
_ ( 0/13)
( 0/
12)
Cesium-134 25/0 2.OE+00
_ ( 0/
- 13)
( 0/12)
Cesium-137 25/0 I.8E+00
_ ( 0/13)
( 0/ 12)
Manganese-54 25/0 1.8E+00
_ ( 0/ 13)
( 0/ 12)
Iron-59 25/0 5.OE+00
_ ( 0/
- 13)
_ ( 0/ 12)
Cobalt-58 25/0 1.8E+00
_ ( 0/
- 13)
_ ( 0/ 12)
Cobalt-60 2510 1.9E+00
_ ( 0/13)
( 0 12)
Zinc-65 25/0 3.8E+00
_ ( 01 13)
_ ( 0 12)
Zirconium-95 25/0 3.2E+00
_ ( 0/
- 13)
-(
0 12)
Niobium-95 25/0 2.IE+00
_ ( 0/ 13)
( 0/ 12)
Lanthanum-140 25/0 3.2E+00
_ ( 0/
- 13)
( 0/ 12)
Barium-140 (f) Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.
TABLE 3 2003 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS
SUMMARY
Medium: Sediment-Shoreline Units: Picocuries per Kilogram dry weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITHI HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE
/NONROUTINE LIMITOF MEAN (fI LOCATION MEAN (f)
MEAN (f)-
MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesium-134 5/0 2.0E+01
( 0/
- 3) 0/
2)
Cesium-137 510 1.2E+01 2.0E01(
I/
- 3) 6 miles SE 2.OEO1(
I/ 3)
( 01 2)
(2.OEO I - 2.OEO
)
(#227)
(2.OEO I - 2.OEO I Manganese-54 510 1.6E+01
-(
0/ 3)
_ ( 0/ 2)
Iron-59 510 7.9E+0I
_ ( 0/ 3)
_ ( 0/ 2)
Cobalt-58 510 I.9E+0I
( 0/
- 3)
_ ( 01 2)
Cobalt-60 510 I.9E+0I
_- ( 0/
- 3)
( 0/ 2)
Zinc-65 5/0 4.OE+01
-(
0/ 3)
( 0/
2)
Zirconium-95 5/0 4.IE+01
-(
0/
- 3)
( 01 2)
Niobium-95 5/0 4.OE+01
_ ( 0/
- 3)
( 0/
2)
Lanthanun-140 5/0 1.8E+02
-(
0/
- 3)
( 0/
2)
Barium-140 (f) Number o0 positive measurements I total measurements at specifed Iocations.
STP Nuclear Operating Company 6 -19
-w2003 Environmental[Report TABLE 3 2003 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS
SUMMARY
Medium: Rain Water Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram ANALYSIS TOTALANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (1)*
LOCATION MEAN (f)-
MEAN (ft' MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Hydrogen-3 310 2.5E+02
( O/ 3) no samples Iodine-131 410 4.5E+00
_ ( 01 4) no samples Cesium-134 410 I.9E+00
-(
01 4) no samples Ccsium-137 410 1.8E+00
( 0t 4) nosamples Manganese-54 4/0 1.7E+00
(-(-01
- 4) nosamples Iron-59 410 4.7E+00
-(
01 4) nosamples Cobalt-58 410 1.8E+00
-(
01 4) no samples Cobalt-60 4/0 1.8E+00 O(
0
- 4) no samples Zinc-65 4/0 3.6E+00
-(
0
- 4) no samples Zirconium-95 4/0 3.3E+00
-(
0 1 4 )
no samples Niobium-95 4/0 2.OE+00
-(
01 4) no samples Lanthanum-140 4/0 3.7E+00
-(
01 4) nosamples Barium-140 i
(f) Number of positive measurements I total measurements at specified locations.
TABLE 3 2003 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS
SUMMARY
Medium: Ground Water (On site test well)
Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCAnON WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMITOF MEAN (f),
LOCATION MEAN (f)*
MEAN (f)
MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE
-INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Hydrogen-3 6/0 2.6E+02 1.2E03 ( 6/ 6)-
3.8 miles S 12E03( 6/ 6) no samples
(.0E02 - l.8E03)
(#235)
(8.0E02 -1.8E03)
Iodine-131 6/0 4.1E+00
-(
01 6) nosamples Cesium-134 6/0 1.9E+00
-(
0l 6) nosamples Cesium-137 6/0 1.7E+O0
-(
0/-6) no samples Manganese-54 610 1.7E+00
-(
0/ 6) no samples Iron-59 610 4.9E+00
-(
01 6) no samples Cobalt-58 6/0 1.7E+00 O(
0
- 6) no samples Cobalt-60 6/0 1.7E+00 O(
0
- 6) no samples Zinc-65 6/0 3.5E+00
-(
0l 6) no samples Zirconium-95 6/0 3.1E+00
- ( 0/,6)
)%
no samples Niobium-95 6/0 2.OE+00
_ ( 0/ 6) no samples Lanthanum-140 6/0 3.5E+00
_ ( 01 6) no samples Barium-140 (f) Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.
STP Nuclear Operating Company 6 -20
I I Radiological Environmental -Operautig Report TABLE 3 2003 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS
SUMMARY
Mediumn: Sediment-Bottom Units: Picocuries per Kilogram dry weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WIMh HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE
/NONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (1)*
LOCATION MEAN (f)-
MEAN (f)
MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesium-134 2/ 0 2.9E+01
( 0/
- 2) no samples Cesium-13 7 210 2.9E+0I1 4.0E01 ( I/ 2)
I mile SW 4.0E01(
I / 2) no samples (4.0E01 - 4.0E01)
(#215)
(4.OEOI-4.OEO I Manganese-54 2V0 2.2E+01
_ ( 0/
- 2) no samples Iron-59 2V0 8.IE+01
_ ( 0/
- 2) no samples Cobalt-58 2/0 2.4E+Ol I.
( 0/
- 2) nosamples Cobalt-60 2/0 I.9E+01 2.5E01 ( 2/
- 2) 1 mile SW 2.5E01 ( 2/
- 2) no samples (2.2E01-2.9E01 )
(#215)
(2.2E01 - 2.9E01 )
Zinc-65 2/0 4.9E1+0 1
( 01 2) no samples Zirconium-95 2/0 5.1E+01
__ ( 0/
- 2) no samples Niobiuma-95 2/0 4.4E+01
-(
0/
- 2) nosamples Lanthanum-140 2/0 1.3E+02
-(
0/
- 2) no samples Barium -140 (f) Number of positive measurements I total measurements at specified locations.
TABLE 3 2003 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS
SUMMARY
Medium: Banana Leaves Units: Picocuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE
/NONROUTINE LIMITOF MEAN (f LOCATION MEAN (0-MEAN (f)
MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Iodine-131 220 1.2E+01
_ ( 0/ 15)
_. ( 0/ 7)
Cesium-134 22/0 1.6E+00
(
/I15)
-- ( 0/
7)
Cesium-137 22/0 1.3E+00
( 0/ 15)
-(
0/
7)
Manganese-54 22/0 1.5E+00
( 01 15)
_-( 01 7)
Iron-59 22/0 76E+00
( 01 15)
( 0/
7)
Cobalt-58 22/0 1.8E+00
( 0/15)
( 0/ 7)
Cobalt-60 22V0 2.5E+00
_ j 0115)
(
0/
7)
Zinc-65 22/0 4.7E+00
(
0/
- 15)
_.(
0/
7)
Zirronium-95 22V0 3.2E4+00
__ ( 0/15)
-(
0/
7)
Niobium-95 2210 2.3E+00
__ ( 0/I1)
_-- ( 0/
7)
Lanthanum. 140 22V0 4.4E+00
__ ( 0115)
_- ( 0/
7)
Barium-140
- (f) Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.
STP Nuclear Operating Company 6 -21
a2003 Environmental Report TABLE 3 2003 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS
SUMMARY
Medium: Cana Leaves
._Units:
Picocuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE tNONROUTINE LIMITOF MEAN (f)*
LOCATION MEAN (0, MEAN (f' MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Iodine-131 9/0 9.5E+00
_ (0,6),
( 0/ 3)
Cesium-134 9/0 2.8E+00
- _ ( 0t6)
__ ( o/ 3)
Cesium-137 9/0 2.3E+00
-(0t
- 6)
__( 0/ 3)
Manganese-54 9/0 2.6E+O0
( 0/6),
( 0/ 3)
Iron-59 9/0 1.2E+0I
-(0/.6)
-(
0/3)
Cobalt-58 9/0 2.9E+-0
-(
0t 6)
- f.
-(
0t 3)
Cobalt-60 9/0 4.5E+00
-(
0/ 6)
( 0/ 3)
Zinc-65 9/0 8.0E+00
-(0/
- 6)
Of (0/
3)
Zirconium-95 9/0 4.9E+00
-(
0/
- 6)
( 0/ 3)
Niobium-95 9/0 3.4E4-00
( 0/ 6),,
( 0/ 3)
Lanthanum-140 9/0 4.6E+00
( 0/ 6) 0/ 3)
Barium-140
- (f Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.
- ~.TABLE 3 2003 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS
SUMMARY
Medium: Collard Greens
._,_._-,___-___Units:Picocuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS OTAL ANALYSE' LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE
/NONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (f)
LOCATION MEAN (f)
MEAN (f)'
IMEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Iodine-131 3/0 I.4E+0I
-- (j0/ 2)
(
0/
1)
Cesium-134 3/0 92E-01
-.- (,0/ 2)
-(
0/ 1)
Cesium-137 310 7.7E-01
( ° 2)
Of
_17 1)
Manganesc-54 3/0 8.8E-01
_. (.0! 2)
Of(
0/ 1)
Iron-59 3/0 4.9E+00
_(0/
- 2)
-_--(
0/1)
Cobalt-58 3/0 I.IE+00
( 0/2)
-- (0/
1)
Cobalt-60 3/0 1.5E+00
(,0/
- 2)
_ -(0° 1)
Zinc-65 3/0 2.7E+00 (0/
- 2) 0./
1)
Zirconium-95 3/0 2.0E+O0
__ ( 0/12)
( 0/ 1)
Niobium-95 3/0 1.6E+00
- ( 01 2)
( 0/ 1)
Lanthanum-140 3/0 3.7E+00
--- (0
- 2)
_ ( 0/ 1)
Barium-140
- (f) Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.
STP Nuclear Operating Company 6 -22
I N Radiological Environmental 3erating Report TABLE 3 2003 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS SUIMIARY Medium: Piscivorous -Fishh Units: Picocuries er Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTALANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHESTANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE
'NONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (0-LOCATION MEAN (f)-
MEAN (t)-
MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesium-134 610 2.4E+01
__ ( 01 4)
( 01 2)
Cesium-137 6/0 2.3E+01
_ ( 0/ 4)
( 0/ 2)
Manganese-54 6/0 2.3E+01
-- ( 0/ 4)
_ ( 0/ 2)
Iron-59 6/0 8.0E+01
(
0/
- 4)
(
0/2)
Cobalt-58 610 25E+01
(
0
- 4)
( 0/2)
Cobalt-60 610 2.7E+0I
-(
0
- 4)
( 0/ 2)
Zinc-65 6/0 5.3E+01
-(
0/ 4)
-(
01 2)
Zirconium-95 6/0 4.6E+01
__ ( 0/ 4)
-(
01 2)
Niobium-95 6/ 0 3.2E+01
__ ( 0/ 4)
( 0/ 2)
Lanthanum-140 6/0 8.3E+01
( 0/ 4)
_ ( 0/ 2)
Barium-140
- (f Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.
TABLE 3 2003 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS
SUMMARY
Medium: Crustacean Shrimp Units: Picocuries r Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE
/NONROUTINE LIMITOF MEAN (f)
LOCATION MEAN (f MEANtO MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesium-134 7/0 3.1E+01
(
0/
- 4)
( 0/3)
Cesium-137 7/0 2.8E+01
_ ( 0/
- 4)
( 0/ 3)
Manganese-54 7/0 2.7E+01
-(
01 4)
( 0/ 3)
Iron-59 7/0 8.3E+01
-(
0/
- 4)
( 0/ 3)
Cobalt-58 7/0 2.7E+01
-(
0/ 4)
( 0/
3)
Cobalt-60 710 3.0E+01
_ ( 0/ 4)
( 0/
3)
Zinc-65 7/0 6.0E+01
_ ( 01 4)
( 01 3)
Zirconium-95 7/0 5.0E+01
_ ( 0/
- 4)
( 0/ 3)
Niobium-95 7/0 3.2E+0I
_ ( 0!
- 4)
( 01 3)
Lanthanum-140 7/0 5.9E+01
-(
0/
- 4)
( 0/
3)
Barium-140
- (f) Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.
STP Nuclear Operating Company 6 -23
11 -