Text

2004 Annual Environmental and Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports
	ML051260127
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	04/28/2005
From:	Bullard W; South Texas
To:	; Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
	NOC-AE-05001881, STI: 31878659
	Download: ML051260127 (57)
	v • d • e

Nuclear Operating Company SSooth ew ftcmqed drnk GewrifPnt Sblo PO Naox 29,d h Tc=s 7748)

April 28, 2005 NOC-AE-05001881 1 OCFR50.36b STI: 31878659 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 2004 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 2004 Annual Environmental and Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports:-

There are no commitments included in this report.

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 MK

Attachment:

2004 Annual Environmental and Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports.

NOC-AE-05001881 Page 2 4

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 State Health Services 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 David H. Jaffe U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Jack A. Fusco Michael A. Reed Texas Genco, LP C. A. Johnson AEP Texas Central Company C. Kirksey City of Austin Jon C. Wood Cox Smith Matthews J. J. Nesrsta R. K. Temple E. Alarcon City Public Service C. M. Canady City of Austin Electric Utility Department 721 Barton Springs Road Austin, TX 78704

bob :

1 I,.:

4 4

A II WI' V

- j

I I?i

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

NPF-76 & NPF-80 April 2005 Authored by:

/tvarrell Sherwood, Ph.D.

Supervisor Health Physics Division and Peg fton T.vis, J.-CM Staff Consultant Chemistry Division Technical Review:

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

William T. BuIjdrcfHP Manager Health Physics Division 2004 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 14 Environmental Conditions o Aquatic and Ecological Monitoring................................................ 4-1 o Water Quality Management...............................................

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

4-5 O Non-Radioactive Waste Management................................................ 4-7 O Chemical Control and Management............................................... 4-9 1

Environmental Protection Plan Status...............................................

4-9 Radiological Environmental Introduction and Summary...................

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

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

6-1 O Land Use Census................................................

6-10 O QualityAssurance...............................................

6-12 o Program Deviation...............................................

6-12 List of Tables X Table 1: Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program.............................................. 6-13 W

Table 2: Sample Media and Location Descriptions..............................

............... 6-15 W

Table 3: 2004 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Analysis Summary.............................................. 6-19 STP Nuclear Operating Company

2004 Environmental Report List of Figures Page Figure 4-1:

2004 Nonradioactive Waste Management...............

..................... 4-7 Figure 4-2:

2004 Nonradioactive Waste Generation.............

....................... 4-8 Figure 4-3:

Hazardous WVaste Generation Historical Comparison.4-9 Figure 6-1:

Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Designated Sample Location Map (Off Site).6-2 Figure 6-2:

Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Designated Sample Location Map (On Site).6-3 Figure 6-3:

Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Zone Location Map.6-4 Figure 6-4:

Historical Comparison of Average Quarterly BetaActivity.6-5 Figure6-5:

Environmental DosimeterComparisons.6-6 Figure 6-6:

Historical Comparison of Cobalt-58 and Cobalt-60 in Main Cooling Reservoir Sediment.6-7 Figure 6-7:

Calculated Cumulative Curies of Cobalt-60 in the Main Cooling Reservoir.6-8 Figure 6-8:

Historical Comparison of Tritium Added to and Remaining in the Main Cooling Reservoir.6-8 Figure 6-9:

Historical Comparison of Thtium Activity in Surface Water.6-9 Figure 6-10:

2004 Radiological Laboratory Quality Assurance Program Performance.6-11 ST lNuc,,;lcm-Opcr,-;timlts ('on

&xe~tt~v~ ~uhnuy

Executive Summary fThrport describes the environ-Q~mental monitoring programs, radio-logical and non-radiological, con-t de tted at the South Texas Project during 2004. Included in this re-port are the Environmental Protec-tion Plan Status, the results of the Radiological Environmental Moni-toring Program and the Land Use Census.

Radiation and radioactivity in the environment are constantly moni-tored within a 15-mile radius of the South Texas Project. Sampling lo-cations 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 influence 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 SouthTexasProject. Indicatorsta-tions 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 ar-eas close to the South Texas Project where any plant releases would be at the highest concentration.

Priorto initial operation ofthe South Texas Project, samples were col-lected and analyzed to determine the amount of radioactivity present in the area. These results are used as a "pre-operational baseline."

Results from the indicator stations are compared to both current con-trol sample results and the pre-op-erational baseline values to deter-Photo By: Barbara Carnley mine 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 environment frequently fall below the minimum detection capabilities of the state-of-the-art scien-tificinstruments. Samples withradiationlevelsthatcannotbedetected are below the Lower Limits of Detection. The United States Nuclear Regu-latory Conmmission requires that equipment used forradiological monitor-ing must be able to detect specified minimum limits for certain types of samples. This ensures thatradiation measurements are sufficiently sensi-tive to detect small changes in the environment. TheUnited States Nuclear Regulatory 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.

STP Nuclear Operating Conmpany 1.1

2004 Environmental Report Measurements made are divided into four categories orpathways based upon how the results may affect the public. Airborne, waterborne, ingestion and direct radiation are the four pathways that are sampled. Each

/pathwais described below.

The airborne pathway is sampled in areas around the South Texas Project by measuring radioactivity of iodine cannisters and particulate air filters. The 2004 airborne results were similar to pre-operational levels with only naturally occurring radioactive material unrelated to the operation of the South Texas Project detected.

,1t 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 in the Main Cooling Reservoir remained similar to past years and remained below United States NuclearRegulatory Commission reporting limits and within United States Environmental 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 in the reservoir sediment has decreased since 1992 because less Cobalt-60 has been added to the reservoirby plant effluents than has undergone radioactive decay.

rt The ingestion pathway includes broadleaf vegetation, agricultural products and food products.

Naturally occurring isotopes were detected at average environmental levels in the samples.

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

The direct exposure pathway measures environmental radiation doses using thermoluminescent 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 with no negative effect on the population or the environment. The exposure forpeople living in the area is maintained atless than one millirem peryear. Environmental programs at the site monitor known and pre-dictable relationships between the operation of the South Texas Projecti 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 regu-lations and guidelines. These pro-gramns are verified by the state of Texas through collection and analy-sis of samples and placement of the

.4_

state's thermolumninescent dosim-eters.

Photo By: Gwenna Kelton STP Nuclear Operating Company 1-2

Is

.I.

dM91i-vawujwa ed/1

Site and Area Description The 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 wasjointly owned by Texas Genco LP, AEP Texas Central Company, the City of Austin and the City of San Antonio in 2004. 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 Westing-house pressurized water reactors.

Unit 1 received a low-power testing license onAugust 21, 1987, obtained initial criticality on March 8,1988, and was declared commercially operational on August25,1988. Unit2received a low-power testing license on December 16, 1988, obtained initial criticality on March 12, 1989, and was declared commercially opera-tional on June 19, 1989. Both units together produce enough electricity to serve over a million homes as well as serving as the largest employer and source of revenue for Matagorda County.

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 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 produc-tion 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."

SECONDARY LOOP STEAM 3ENERA DR lATURBINT IN

_L u

SPUMP I

F ONESATE RESERVOIR (7000 ACRE LAKE) p PRIMARYLOOP CONTAINMENT WALL COOLING LOOP c4 2-1 CO f I

2004 Environmental Report 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 on the previous page.

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. 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 energy has one of the lowest impacts on the environ-ment. It's the most eco-efficient energy source because it pro-duces the most electricity in relation to its minimal environ-mental impact. In 2003, nuclear generation in the United States prevented 679.8 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, 3.36 million tons of sulfur dioxide and 1.24 million tons of nitrogen oxide from entering the earth's atmosphere. Nuclear power plants were responsible for nearly half of the total voluntary greenhouse gas emissions reductions reported by U.S.

companies in 2001. Additional information on nuclear energy and the environment can be found on the website maintained by the Nuclear Energy Institute at http://www.nei.org The Site 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 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 established 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 predominating. Local relief of the area is characterized by flat land, approximately 23 feet above sea level.

0i KE -1 16",

'

lid 74 Photo By: Barbara Carnley STP Nuclear Operating Company 2-2 6

rOOZD

Site and Area Description The Area 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 Matagorda Bays, Intracoastal Waterway and the Gulf of Mexico. Currently shrimp, oysters, crab and fin fishes such as catfish and striped bass are the predominant com-mercial fish in the county. Aquaculture farms con-tinue 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 Photo BY:

Barbara Carniley affords opportunity for recreational 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 Christnas Bird Count.

The climate of the 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, shiffing to north-northeast for short P'hioto Bi: Gite'lnlna Kelton intervals during the winter months.

Id SIP xNuI.;.i O perlnin (Omipamn 2-3

i z ".: ;iz

4,. I -,.

-

R

.r

.I,

v-Gto~

&iI JJnAdue14,v and Jfuinma

Non-Radiological Environmental Introduction and Summary e eSouthTexas Project is

.ommitted to the production of electricity in a safe, reliable, and Q-46economical manner using nu-clear energy. The station's programs, policies and business plan objectives also incorporate a commitment to environmental excellence and sound environ-mental management. The dedication of station personnel who develop, implement and monitor site environmental protection programs and compli-ance exemplify this commitment.

The station's commitment to-sound environmental management is illustrated by the following environ-mental successes in 2004:

t 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 consid-ered, including water quality, waste management and air quality compliance lt~ Station involvement in community efforts to increase public safety awareness, collect hazard-ous and non-hazardous waste for proper disposal and responsibly manage regional water resources.

Re-classification as a small-quantity generator based on the station's successful reduction of annual hazard-ous waste generation.

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

Photo By: Gwenna Kelfon

1 C9414 STP Nuclear Operating Company 3-1

s E

g l

-I r

a:A; l

l l

F:

l l

l

/

s A:

s 0

ct>vveav--

l eVAGONYw-

Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report 4/

Enm This section of the report desdribes the South Texas Project's non-radiological environmental program perfor-mance and environmental conditions from January 1 through December 31, 2004.

The STP Nuclear Operating Company environmental staff closely monitors environmental conditions and performance at the South Texas Project. Texas Genco LP provides support and technical assistance to the South Texas Project. In 2004, the Texas Commission on Environ-mental Quality conducted compliance inspections for onsite beneficial land application and potable water system operations at the station with no violations issued.

In 2002, the South Texas Project applied for recognition as a partner in the CLEAN TEXAS program administered by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. The state subsequently granted approval of the station's applica-tion. CLEAN TEXAS is a voluntary environmental leader-ship program comprised of industries, nonprofit groups, counties and other organizations with a common goal to protect the state air, water and land resources. As a partner in the CLEAN TEXAS program, the South Texas Project is commit-ted to meeting established environmental improvement Pironmental Conditions goals, maintaining and improving facility's compliance history.

internal programs and continuing The state's classification of the community environmental South Texas Project as a high outreach programs and projects.

performer was based on the In 2004, South Texas Project station's environmental perfor-co-sponsored and participated mance over the last five year in the Matagorda County period.

Partners in Safety Conference and the Matagorda County AQUATICANDECO-Household Hazardous Waste LOGICAL MONITORING Collection day. The station also supported various bird counts The location of the South and surveys sponsored by Texas Project falls within the federal and state agencies and Texas Land Resource Area volunteer organizations such as designation as coastal prairie the annual Audubon Christmas and can be divided into two Bird Count, the Great Texas broad ecological areas based on Birding Classic and Colonial topography, soils and vegetation.

Waterbird Survey.

The bottomland area is a swampy, marshy area that The Texas Commission on occupies approximately 1,700 Environmental Quality classified acres of the site near the Colo-the South Texas Project as a rado River. This area provides high performer in 2004 based on an important habitat for birds the station's above-average and other wildlife. A spoil environmental compliance impoundment constructed in record. Facilities, such as the 1972 by the United States Army South Texas Project, are classi-Corps of Engineers is included in fied by the state as a high this area. In addition, a 110-performer, average performer or acre wetland habitat area that poor performerbased on that attracts a variety of bird groups I

4 C%PW4 STP Nuclear Operating Company 4-1

2004 Environmental Report Photo By: Gwenna Kelton and other wildlife was estab-lished 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 environ-mental staff regularly monitor the site's environs for changing conditions. Ecological condi-tions onsite in 2004 remained generally unchanged and satis-factory.

In 1996, the South Texas Project and Houston Industries Incorporated initiated ajoint effort 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. The wetland project received the Ducks Unlimited Habitat Con-servation Award in 1996 and a United States Department of Agriculture 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.

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 a nesting pair of bald eagles, peregrine falcon, wood stork, white-faced ibis and white-tailed hawk. Addi-tional 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. A record 144 species were sited during the last annual Christmas Bird Count conducted at the South Texas Project. In 1998, a small number of black skimmers and least tems 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 perimeter of Kelly Lake.

U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologists estimate that approximately one-third of Texas' breeding adult Gull-billed Tern population, considered to be in decline, nest on the internal dikes of the Main Cooling Reservoir at the South Texas Project.

The South Texas Project continues to monitor important wildlife species to detect popu-lation changes. Informal obser-vations by station and Texas Genco LP 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 source of water year-round.

These natural resource areas, in concert with numerous addi-tional wetland and grassland areas, offer the key ingredients necessary to sustain the exten-sive wildlife population at the South Texas Project.

STP Nuclear Operating Company 4-2 th

Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT Water is an essential component in electricity produc-tion, and all electric utilities must comply with extensive federal, state and local water regulations.

These regulations govern virtu-ally every aspect of business operations at the South Texas Project. Water usage and wastewater treatment onsite are regulated under the Safe Drink-ing Water Act, the Federal Clean WaterAct and the Texas Water Quality Act. Collectively, these acts provide for the safeguarding of public drinking water supplies and maintaining the integrity of state and federal waters.

The South Texas Project uses both surface water and groundwater for station pur-poses. Groundwaterprovides onsite drinking water for station personnel, replenishes the Essential Cooling Pond, and is used for other industrial pur-poses onsite. Consistent with the station's environmental principles encouraging efficient water usage and conservation, ground-water usage is carefully managed to conserve this important resource. Groundwater pro-vided approximately two per-cent of the water utilized in 2004 by the South Texas Project.

Surface water from the Main Cooling Reservoir and the Essential Cooling Pond is used Photo By: Gwenna Kelton as cooling water for plant activities. Water from the Colorado River replenishes the Main Cooling Reservoir via intermittent pumping periods.

Surface water diverted to the Main Cooling Reservoir from the Colorado River accounted for approximately 98 percent of the water used at the South Texas Project in 2004. Based on the most current information available from the Texas Water Development Board, the South Texas Project typically accounts for approximately 25 percent of the combined ground and surface water usage in Matagorda County with the bulk of county water use being related to agriculture. Additional information regarding water use in Texas can be found on the website maintained by the Texas Water Development Board at http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/.

Most of the water used by the South Texas Project is needed to condense steam and provide cooling for plant gener-ating systems. 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 impounding 202,600 acre-feet of water at its maximum level. Reservoir makeup water is withdrawn intermnittently 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 authorize the South Texas Project to maintain these reservoirs, impound water diverted from the Colorado River, and to circulate, divert and use water from the reser-voirs for industrial purposes to 4

C-NP14 STP Nuclear Operating Company 4-3

2004 Environmental Report operate the plant. These permits also limit the rate of diversion from the Colorado River. The South Texas Project diverted 62,374 acre-feet from the Colorado River in 2004 for the Main Cooling Reservoirfill operations while preserving adequate freshwater flow conditions for downstream bay and estuarine ecosystems.

Existing federal and state water quality standards are implemented and enforced through the Texas Pollutant Discharge Elimination 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 Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program. Accord-ingly, federal and state require-ments were consolidated in November of 2000 into one wastewater 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 submitted to the Texas Commis-sion on Environmental Quality for wastewater discharges.' -

Reports identifying ground and surface water use are also submitted annually to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and Texas Water Devel-opment Board.

Wastewater generated at the South Texas Project is pro-cessed and discharged 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 reservoir in 2004. The station continued its outstanding waste-water discharge compliance performance record in 2004.

Station conditions did not require site aquatic monitoring studies be conducted in 2004 nor were any additional studies required by the United States Environmental Protection Agency or the State of Texas eitherby way of station dis-charge permits or otherwise.

Wastewater discharges met state and federal water quality stan-dards demonstrating a 100 percent compliance record for the year while conserving and maximizing efficient water usage at the station. '

In addition to the wastewater discharge permit program, the Federal Clean Water Act, as amended in 1987, requires permits for storm water dis-charges associated with indus-trial 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 Environmen-tal Protection 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 cover-age under 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 Permit with the United States Environ-mental Protection Agency in 1998. The Texas Natural Resource Conservation Com-mission 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 Photo By: Gwenna Kelton STP Nuclear Operating Company 4-4 folzD

Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report 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 design, construction, operation or maintenance that has a significant effect on the potential for the discharge of pollutants from the station.

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 1 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 emphasizes regional planning. Sixteen planning regions were created, each tasked to prepare a regional plan for the orderly develop-ment, management and conser-vation of water resources. The South Texas Project was chosen to represent the electric generat-ing utility interest for the water-planning region that encom-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 planning 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 identify strategies to meet future water supply demand projections for the region and update the existing plan accordingly. Addi-tional 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/.

The South Texas Project understands that the water resources of the state are a critical natural resource requiring careful management and conser-vation 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 MAN-AGEMENT Air emission sources at the South Texas Project fall under the scope of air pollution regula-tions promulgated under the Texas Clean Air Act and the Federal CleanAirAct and the numerous associated amend-ments. The purpose of these regulations is to protect air resources from pollution by controlling or abating air pollu-tion and emissions. Regulated emission sources at the South Texas Project include a fossil-fuel boiler, emergency diesel generators, fire-fighting training and other minor maintenance equipment and activities.

Fossil-Fueled Emission Sources Unlike conventional electrical generating stations, nuclear Photo By: Givenna Kelton 4

STP Nuclear Operating Company 4-5

2004 Environmental Report Photo By: Gwenna Kelton power plants do not bum 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 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 AirAct, the Federal Clean AirAct and numerous associ-ated amendments that protect air resources from pollution by controlling or abating air pollu-tion and emissions. The major regulated air emission sources at the South Texas Project 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. In March of 2004 during mainte-nance on the station's auxiliary boiler, stack emissions exceeded permitted opacity limits for a short duration. This excursion was anticipated and prior notification for this scheduled maintenance activity was submit-ted to and also subsequently reported as a deviation to the Texas Commission on Environ-mental Quality. In addition to the auxiliary steam boiler, a number of fossil-fueled diesel generators are located onsite.

These diesels are designed to provide emergency power to various plant systems or build-ings in the event of a loss of power. This equipment is not normally needed for daily operations and the station does not use it to produce electricity for distribution. Routine mainte-nance runs are conducted to ensure availability if needed and for equipment maintenance.

Title V Federal Operating Permit In 1990, amendments to the Federal Clean Air Act mandated Photo By.

Barbara Carnley STP Nuclear Operating Company 4-6 0%

ff-oz-D

Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report a new permitting program to clearly define applicable air quality requirements for affected facilities such as the South Texas Project. This program is com-monly known as the Title V Operating Permit Program and is administered by the state. The Texas Natural Resource Con-servation Commission (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 sources at the station in accor-dance with applicable permit and regulatory requirements.

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality revised the permit in July of 2003 to add applicable requirements regard-ing minor new source review authorizations. In accordance with the South Texas Project's Federal Operating Permit's reporting requirements, one deviation from penm-it conditions was reported to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality as discussed previously.

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 2004 Nonradioactive Waste Management South Texas Project Recycle 59.7o/

Incineration &

Fuel Blending 2.4%

Landfill 37.8%

Figure 4-1 definition, solid waste includes solid, semi-solid, liquid and gaseous waste material. The Texas Commission on Environ-mental Quality, which adminis-ters the Texas Solid Waste Disposal Act and also the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act program, is the primary agency regulating non-radioactive wastes gener-ated at the South Texas Project.

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality 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 Transportation.

The South Texas Project was re-classified with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality as a small quantity generator of industrial solid wastes in 2004 based on reduced annual hazardous waste generation quantities. Texas Commission 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 disposal activities are summa-rized and documented in a waste summary report for the South Texas Project that is submitted annually to the Texas Commis-sion on Environmental Quality.

Hazardous waste accumula-tion at the South Texas Project in 2004 was limited to a maxi-mum holding period of 180 C_ V4 4-7

2004 Environmental Report days. The Resource Conserva-tion and Recovery Act and Texas Solid Waste Disposal Act also require the use of proper storage and shipping containers, labels, manifests, reports, personnel training, a spill control plan and an accident contin-gency plan. Plant personnel routinely inspect areas through-out the site to ensure wastes are not stored or accumulated inappropriately.

Station policies and regula-tions encourage the recycling, recovery or re-use of waste when possible to reduce the amount of waste generated or disposed of in landfills. Ap-proximately 60 percent of the industrial non-radioactive waste generated in 2004 at the South Texas Project was recycled or processed for re-use. (Refer-ence Figure 4-1) The South Texas Project ships waste oil, grease, electrohydraulic fluid, adhesives, liquid paint and solvent for fuel blending and thermal energy recovery. Used oil, diesel fuels and antifreeze solutions are sent to a recycling vendor for re-processing.

Lead-acid batteries are re-turned, when possible, to the original manufacturer for recy-cling or are shipped to a regis-tered battery recycler, thereby reducing the volume of hazard-ous waste that might otherwise be generated. A site paper recycling program results in the collection of several tons of paper each year. In 2004, the station collected approximately 71 tons of paper for recycling.

Every ton of paper recycled saves approximately 17 trees, eliminates 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. Munici-pal-type trash is transported to the county landfill transfer station for appropriate 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 to re-classify as a small-quantity generator early 2004 Nonradioactive Waste Generation South Texas Project Non-Hazardous Waste I/

\\

Hazardous Waste wUsed Batteries 0.04 /°0.23%

Universal Waste 0.1/3%

Figure 4-2 4-8 0% d I

Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report Hazardous Waste Generation Historical Comparison South Texas Project 25 20 15 0

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 E Hazardous Waste from Cleanup of an Onsite Spill U Hazardous Waste Figure 4-3 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 generation where feasible remains an important goal at the station.

(Reference Figures 4-2 and 4-3)

CHEMICAL CONTROL AND MANAGEMENT In 2004, the station com-pleted and implemented the Integrated Spill Contingency Plan for the South Texas Project Electric Generating Station. This plan replaced the previous Oil and Hazardous Material Contingency Plan for the station. The Integrated Spill Contingency Plan con-solidates multiple federal and state requirements into one plan.

The plan is implemented through standard site operating proce-dures and guidelines. 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 evaluates chemicals and products proposed for use, which could come in contact with plant components. Site procedures address the evalua-tion, storage, use, spill control, and disposal requirements of chemicals. These guidelines assist in reducing wastes, ensure proper packaging for disposal and mitigate the consequences of inadvertent spillage.

The South Texas Project emphasizes 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. In April and August of 2004, the South Texas Project reported to state, federal and local agencies two small releases of lubricating oil from separate screenwash pumps of approximately half a pint and 1 quart respectively to the Reser-voir Makeup Pumping Facility forebay area. The releases were contained to the forebay area and no offsite release occurred.

Final cleanup of the area was completed on each occasion and the pumps were subsequently removed and modified to eliminate the need for lubricating oil. No other significant or consequential spills occurred in 2004.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN 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 reviews Environmental Protection Plan non-compli-ances identified by the plant in 2004 and the associated correc-tive actions taken to prevent their recurrence. Potential nonconformities are promptly addressed, as identified, to maintain operations in an envi-ronmentally acceptable manner.

The station uses its Corrective Action Program to document CM4_14 4-9

2004 Environmental Report these conditions and track corrective actions to completion.

Internal assessments, 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 environ-mental question. A proposed change, test or experiment is considered to present an unreviewed environmental questions if it concerns:

1) A matter that may result in a significant increase in any adverse environ-mental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement related to the Operation of South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2 (Docket Nos. 50-498 and 50-499), environmental impact appraisals, orin any decisions of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board; or,

2) A significant change in effluents orpowerlevel; or,

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

Events that require reports to federal, state or local agencies other than the Nuclear Regula-tory Commission such as those discussed earlier in this report are reported in accordance with the applicable reporting require-ments. TheNuclearRegulatory Commission is provided with a copy of any such report at the time it is submitted to the cogni-zant 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 Protection Plan. No such 30-day or other non-routine report of this type was required in 2004.

No unreviewed environ-mental questions were identified in 2004.

Ph0oto By: Givenna Kelton STP Nuclear Operating Company 4-10 6

rwoD_

t; I

6 Ss4C

., I I

8 e

-;, II

- I

-:1 '' -

. I,

7i 71

r -4wT ":-.,

X66w

Radiological Environmental Introduction and Summary

There were two items of interest identified by this program during 2004. A short description of them follows.

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 concentration was lower than 2003 but is probably due to the rain infiltration into the well and the concentration is 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 compared to the 360 millirems average annual radiation exposure to people in the United States from natural and medical sources.

EgV.

.n:

l sB ll Teamwork- :

I

;. 0§-

C %4 14 STP Nuclear Operating Company 5-1

ee:g7

Radiological Environmental PROGRAM DESCRIPTION The South Texas Project initiated a comprehensive pre-operational Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program in July 1985.

That program terminated on March 7, 1988, when the operational program was implemented. 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 environments. These samples are obtained to evaluate potential radiation exposure.

Sample types are based on established pathways and experience gained at other nuclear facilities. Sample locations were determined after considering site meteorology, Colorado River hydrology, local demography and land use. Sampling locations are furtherevaluated and modified according to field and analysis experience. Table I lists the minimum sampling locations and frequency of collection.

Sampling locations consist of indicator and control stations.

Indicator stations are locations on oroff the site that may be influenced by plant discharges during plant operation. Control stations are located beyond the measurable influence of the South Texas Project or any other nuclear facility.

Although most samples analyzed are accompanied 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 indicator 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 methods are used to implement the program. Figures 6-1 and 6-2 are maps that identify permanent sample stations. Descriptions of sample stations shown on Figures 6-1 and 6-2 are found in Table 2.

Table 2 also includes additional sampling locations and media types that may be used for additional information. Figure 6-3 illustrates the zones used when collection locations are not permanent sample stations.

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS AND TRENDS Environmental samples from areas surrounding the South Texas Project continue to indicate no significant radiological effects from plant operation. Analytical values from offsite indicator sample stations continue to trend with the control stations. Onsite indicator samples continued to increase or decrease in measured values as expected.

Average quarterly beta activity from three onsite indicator stations and a single control station for air particulate samples have been compared historically from 1988

=_'7 r-l MP",_

r-

=e b~m7-

-G o

X1117

=c Hi U5;

.. i,, _

A_

=ffi==

A_____9 04 C%4_14 S I I' II

( )lpL. r iIIL

( 'thnpIai>

6-1

2004 Environmental Report Designated Sample Locations Figure 6-1 6%Y 6-2 I

Radiological Environmental Designated Sample Locations (On Site Sample Locations)

REMP ON SITE SAMPLE LOCATIONS 2X SCALE Figure 6-2 4

C-7 1 4-%

6-3 c &

I

2004 Environmental Report Zone Location Map Figure 6-3 fv z1 6-4 1

Radiological Environmental through 2004 (see Figure 6-4). The average of the onsite indicators trend closely with the offsite control values. The comparison illustrates that plant operations are not having an impact on air particulate activity even at the Sensitive Indicator Stations (# 1, # 15, and # 16). These stations are located near the plant and are located downwind from the plant based on the prevailing wind direction. The beta activity measured in the air particulate samples is from natural radioactive material. As a routine part of the program, we perform gamma analysis on quarterly composites of the air particulate samples to determine 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 located at 43 sites. The natural direct gamma radiation varies according to location because of differences 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 measured at the plant since the fourth quarter of 1985 for three different types of stations. The Control Stations are greater than 10 miles from the site and are in the direction of the least prevailing winds (Stations #23 and #37). 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,

15 and # 16). The Indicator Stations are the remainder of the stations excluding Stations #38,40, and 42. The values plotted are the averages for all of the stations according to type. Figure 6-5 indicates changing conditions in the area of the individual stations. The average of the Control Stations is higher than the other stations because station #23 is in an area that has a slightly higher natural background radiation, probably due to the soil composition. The trends of Figure 6-5 clearly show that the power plants are not adding Historical Comparison of Average Quarterly Beta Activity from Indicator and Control Air Samples 1988 - 2004 ma) 0.035 0.030 0.025 0.020 0.010 -

E 0.005 o

0 0.000 00 00 O

ON 0

ON C

N cO ON ON ON ON g

o CD ON ON ON ON ON ONy ON ON ON ON ON ON 0

0

-Station

001, #015 & #016 Average of Onsite Indicators

-Station #037 Offsite Control Figure 6-4 to 6-5 coc

2004 Environmental Report to the direct radiation in the environment.

Bottom sediment samples are taken from the Main Cooling Reservoir 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 radioactive effluents. The amount of Cobalt-58 has decreased below levels that can be reliably detected.

The concentration of Cobalt-60 in the reservoir bottom sediment samples varies but is within the expected range. Figure 6-7 demonstrates the decline in the total amount of Cobalt-60 in the reservoir.

Cesium-137 was also measured in four of seven Main Cooling Reservoir bottom sediment samples and in one of three indicator station and one of two control station shoreline sediment samples on the Colorado River.

However, Cesium-137 was present in the environment before the operation of the South Texas Project and the sample concentrations were approximately equal to pre-operational values.

No other isotopes released from the plant were identified in the shoreline samples, which indicates that the plant was probably not the source of Cesium-137 in these samples. The Cesium-137 measured in the Main Cooling Reservoir does not suggest an increase due to plant operation.

Tritium is a radioactive isotope of hydrogen and is produced during plant operation. Tritium produced in the reactors is a part of the water molecule. Wastewater is treated to remove impurities before release, but tritium cannot be removed because it is chemically part of the water molecule. Some of the tritium is released into the atmosphere and the remainder is released into the Main Cooling Reservoir. The tritium escapes from the Main Cooling Reservoir by evaporation, movement into the shallow aquifer, and by percolation from the relief wells that are a part of the dike's stabilization system. Figure 6-8 shows the amount of tritium released to the Main Cooling Reservoir each year and the amount present during the last quarter of each year. This indicates that Environmental Dosimeter Comparisons 22 Average of Indicator Stations Average of Control Stations Sensitive Indicator Stations 20 18 4

16 o

14 12 Utnit #1 Criticality - 03/08/88 Unit 0t2 Criticality - 03/12/89 10 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Results by Quarter Figure 6-5

I

. I IC* -

6 f ia 6-6 0_Z D" I-

Radiological Environmental Historical Comparison of Cobalt-58 & Cobalt-60 in Main Cooling Reservoir Sediment 1986 - 2004 1800 S Station #215 : Cobalt-58 1600 Plant Discharge

Station#215: Cobalt-60 1400 Plant Discharge 19 Station #216: Cobalt-58 1200 Blowdown Structure 1

UStation #216: Cobalt-60 1000 -_Blowdown Structure 800

-The Cobalt-58 activity in the reservoir has decreased to

° 600 below levels that can be detected. Statistical variations 40 ltypical of material in a 400 lparticulate form are seen in 1996 & 1997 Cobalt-60 200 I

values. The inventory of l*

I I 1992 due to radioactive decay 1990 1

1988illand reduced liqu1d effluents.

1986 1987 1988 1989 1901991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Figure 6-6 Calculated Cumulative Curies of Cobalt-60 in the Main Cooling Reservoir W

3-V

Cobalt-60 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....

2004 Environmental Report Historical Comparison of Tritium Added to and Remaining in the Main Cooling Reservoir 1989 - 2004 4000 3500 -

3000 +

0 I

U1 2500 - -

2000 1500 1000 0

1989 1998 1991 1992 1993 1994 199S 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 M Thilum Rektled to t& Main Cooling Reservoir

Tridm Memied in te Main Cooling Resevor Figure 6-8 Historical Comparison of Tritium Activity in Surface Water 1988 - 2004 30000 i10000 5000 1

, Ie 91 l,

149 294 19W low 19W 14 i0 UGI In M0 i W c o Rierm Sample Uopscan of PI t (Oflsiet)

Q02 UIRiverSampleDownuaiofPlan(Offrite)

QOI

Weist Brmbl of Rixr (Onsita) #213

Litle Robbins Slough (Onsit)

212

East Btanch of Little Robbin Stough (Onsift)

211

Ditch NE of Main Cooling Rervois (Onwit)

229 O Main Cooling Reservoir lowomwn (Osite) #237 U Main Cooling Resevoir (Onsin)

216 Figure 6-9 th

I-ODc I I 6-8

Radiological Environmental almost half of the tritium is removed from the reservoir annually. One of the pathways tritium escapes from the reservoir is by evaporation.

Rainwater was collected during 2004 to determine if the tritium remained in the local area. Tritium was not found in any rain water samples.

The concentration of tritium in the Main Cooling Reservoir increased in 2004. Tritium enters the sloughs and ditches of the site as runoff from the relief wells that surround the reservoir. The tritium concentration in eight surface water sample points for 1988 through 2004 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 equilibrium with reservoir levels.

The average tritium concentration has increased in the sloughs and ditches 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 reservoir dike base during 1999. In 2004, the concentration decreased in this well which could be the result of rainwater seeping into the well. The concentration should rise and fall if it follows the trends observed in surface water samples onsite.

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 permitted. If a person ate forty pounds of fish a year from water that contained the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission reporting level (30,000 picoCuries per kilogram),

that person would receive less than one millirem. This is insignificant compared to the almost twenty millirem a year everyone receives from naturally occurring radioactive potassium in the body.

The current reservoir concentration is less than 1/3 of the reporting level.

Some samples are collected and analyzed in addition to those 2004 Radiological Laboratory Quality Assurance Program Performance 0"5% Difference W

5-10% Difference 10-15% Difference 78 Total Analyses Figure 6-10 4

CVlq 6-9 cl-?

2004 Environmental Report required by our licensing documents or internal procedures.

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

LAND USE CENSUS 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.

Photo By: Gwenna Kelton

~4~F,,SE zt2

5.

7 Selkirk

--I&

suirove w ~~ ~

~

FM 19-WNW

<a..

4'w2AhyBu'ckeye, a-.

'o~ndikRad.

V-carn Rod.ia N

M:.une1 Rach f;>

a--....

~

.a--.

"5-a (F

1 4 8

N STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-10 folzD

Radiological Environmental 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.

A Colorado River water from below the B ay City Dam has not been used to irrigate crops.

t 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.

4.

I,..

g i

o R~

IWAIS,'

all-'*

30 R@JS Two commercial fish farms continue to operate. One is two miles west of the plant nearFM 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.

Photo By: Gvvenna Kelton Photo By: Givenna Kelton to STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-11

2004 Environmental Report QUALITYASSURANCE Quality assurance encompasses planned and systematic actions to ensure that an item or facility will perform satisfactorily. Reviews, surveillance and audits have determined that the programs, procedures and personnel are adequate and do 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 inter-comparison programs. 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 taken in 2004.

PROGRAM DEVIATIONS Deviations from the sampling program must be acknowledged and explained in this report. During 2004 the following samples were not collected or were unacceptable for analysis:

t Six out of thirty-six required broadleaf vegetation samples were not collected due to seasonal unavailability in January and February.

Four out of two hundred and sixty air samples were not continuously collected for the full time interval due to power failures. However, all air particulate and air iodine samples met the LLD requirements and the results are included in Table 3.

4 v

.r

=

x As s

5

r

.?

A; e>\\.J_9

>e

=-Xe

_ i

4Ko-isz I n

.t tack -.a inch Ad If A_

it m t 4

j e

r i

^

s u

,

.

hi t

^

a,

^

wt

''- ''.'

i."': e :SotS'E"*

STP Nuclear Operating Company

.6-12 Photo By: Gvenna Kelton

Radiological Environmental The minimium Radiological Environmental Nlonitoring Program is presented in Table I. The table is organized by exposure pathway. Specific requirements like location, sampling method, collection frequency, and analyses are given for each pathwvay.

TABLE 1 RAkDIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM EXPOSURE: I)IRECT RAI)IATiON 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 l Frequency Frequency Exposure Media: TLD 16-Located in all 16 mcteorological sectors. 0.2* 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.

2-Control stations locatcd in areas of minimal wind direction (WSW,ENE). 10-16 miles.

The inncr ring of stations in the southern sectors arc located within I mile because of thc main cooling reservoir EXP'OSUREt: Ajl tIlttNI TOTAL SAMPLING STATIONS Samnplie NMedi a. NUnhber. Approsximate L cat...

in, and tDistantlce of RtoSut inc Sampling Nom inal Analysis Ntinimuim Sample Stat ions tront Containument.

Mode Cotllec ion TyPc Analysis Ficlqtency Frequency

£harrv;aLand LIaric-ulate li~temr I-Ioc-ated at tue cxclusion zioc. N. NNW. NW Sectors. I nile.

Co ct inuou.s -itpler Wceekly or moore lLdiojodi-ic Weekly opecrat~ ions treqe nctly if CALisLer:

l-Located in 11ay City. 14 miles, required by dust 1-131 loading 1-Control Station. located in a minimial wind direction (WSW). 10 ParficulaitC miles.

-SM2---

Grosss Bteta ti'olowing fiter Activity change Gamma-Quarterly Isotopic of comipoisite (by location) t~i'(s>)S;Jt~t4 veAljz]ttt()

t tI TOTAL SAMI'IN(

tSC;srArlltNSb Sa-ntlc Mcdia.

N-it n.--t And A<.f h, nmoff S-cpltcsc taic.

14.tinS.c irAg Nc.-ci nAnaly.i.

Minimutn s utji

s I-l1.-Ctd icc N1CRt., itc NICRt hli-dw-in slr-ctcMc.

.c..lt ncsctc s:cIt

- e MccItly Ct.ca-N1... thlyty Ovrc ccnti.-

Ict"cpiG lI-1t-tCAed Mtt-IVC Ilce sct. c 1C C c-tlc.. tdhI? hivc-r mcc i-lIccecccccI tcy Ie-i. ct (gj;ca il ccoct pl.cnt di-sic-rge "Cvctattc'i.

ccv.,il.clttC) 1'riit t.. I Quartefly l[-

I a *~tctcd ttcsvnsm rca,., Irccccc hi. cw tic cn dct all~icce ji~ cctcctc C, ctclwrallm dcclpliz l -

Ic >;-ccat

at secti c4Xi.

s

g.

d.cctcc icc tIhC s.tcllatt cs.' *q citr.

C ic.cb Qcca;rtestly c;.-cuumnc{-

Q~uarlterly l~iu Ih.tlll Col--]"

l

'~I'r it icc,,.1 16 6-13

2004 Environmental Report TABILE 1 RADIOL1OGICAIL ENVIRONMVENTAL, MONITORING PROGRAM EXPOSURE: WATERBORNE (CONTINUED)

Sample Media. Number And Approximate Location of Sample Stations Routine Sampling Nominal Analysis Minimum Mode Collection Type Analysis Frequency Frequency DrinkingzWter_

I-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 by Grab Semi-annually Gamma-Semi-annually plant discharge.

Isotopic I-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 Stations Routine Sampling Nominal Analysis

[

Minimum Mode Collection Type Analysis Frequency Frequency Milk Grab Semi-monthly Gamma-Semi-monthly when animals are Isotopic when animals are on pasture; and I-131 on pasture-monthly at other monthly at other times.

times.

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

Grab Monthly during Gamma-As collected growing season Isotopic

_Il Located in a minimal wind direction.

(When available) and l-131 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 Stations Routine Sampling Nominal Analysis Minimum Mode Collection Type Analysis Frequency Frequency Fish and Invertebrates (edible portions) 7 1-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 portions 1-Same or analogous species in area not influenced by STP.

l1-Same or analogous species in the MCR.

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

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.

STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-44 0%

f#_0ZD

Radiological Environmental m--

r-

.I

= _.

1 I.

1 Table 2 Sample Media and Location Description Al AIRBORNE RADIOIODINE L5 CABBAGE AP AIRBORNE PARTICULATE L6 COLLARD GREENS Bi RESIDENT DABBLER DUCK Ml BEEF MEAT B2 RESIDENT DIVER DUCK M2 POULTRY MEAT B3 MIGRATORY DABBLER DUCK M3 WILD SWINE B4 MIGRATORY DIVER DUCK N14 DOMESTIC SWINE B5 GOOSE M6 GAME DEER B6 DOVE M7 ALLIGATOR B7 QUAIL N18 RABBIT B8 PIGEON OY OYSTER CC CRUSTACEAN CRAB SO SOIL CS CRUSTACEAN SHRIMP S I SEDIMENT - SHORELINE DR DIRECT RADIATION S2 SEDIMENT - BOTTOM Fl FISH - PISCIVOROUS VB Ll, L2, L4, L5 or L6 F2 FISH - CRUSTACEAN & INSECT VP PASTURE GRASS FEED ERS__

F3 FISH - PLANKTIVORES & DETRITUS WD DRINKING WATER FEED ERS__

LI BANANA LEAVES WG GROUND WATER L2 CANA LEAVES WS SURFACE WATER L4 TURNIP GREENS WW RELIEF WELL WATER 4

CMwV4

.s I I' N

l I

( )'i 1

(

11i 111

2004 Environmental Report Table 2 Sample Media and Location Description MEDIA CODE STATION VECIOR LOCATION DESCRIPTION CODE (Approximate)

DR AI AP VB VP SO 001 I mile N FM 521 DR 002 Imile 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 DR AI 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 DRAI AP'B SO VP 015 1 mile NW FM 521 DR Al AP V7B SO VP 016 1 mile NNW FM 521 DR 017 6.5 miles N Buckeye - FM 1468 DR Al 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 STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-16 folzD

Radiological Environmental

=-_=:i '~.I

_7 Table 2 Sample Media and Location Dcscription NEI)IA COI)E STATI ON VECTOR LOCATION D)ESCRIPTION CODE (Approximate)

DR 024 4 miles SSE MCR Dike DR 025 4 miles S MCR Dike DR 026 4 miles SSW MCR Dike I)R 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 Crcck Road DR 032 3.5 miles NNW FM 1468 DR Al All SO 033 14 miles NNE Microwave Tower at end of Kilowatt Road in

___ Bay City I)R 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 1)1D Al AP VIB VP SO 037*

10 miles WSW Palacios CP&L Substation DR 038 10.5 miles NW CP&L Substation on TX 71 near Blessing T X 35 under High Voltage Power lines near DR Al AP s0 039 9 miles NW Tidehaven High School DR 040 4.5 miles SW Citrus Grove DR 041 2.0 miles ESE MCR Dike DR 042 8.5 miles W FM 459 at Tidehaven Intermediate School DR 043 4.5 miles SE Site boundary at blowdown outlet WS 209 2 miles ESE Kelly Lake VD 210 On Site Approved drinking water supply from STP WS S1 211 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 00

.1 I I' a,,; i -,I (

1

(

6 17

2004 Environmental Report Table 2 Sample Media and Location Description MEDIA CODE STATION VECTOR LOCATION DESCRIPTION CODE (Approximate)

WS Si 212 4 miles S Little Robbins Slough WS S1 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 OY 222

>10 miles West Matagorda Bay S

oWest bank of Colorado River downstream of

S S(1 or 2) 227 5-6 miles SE STP across from channel marker #22 WD 228*

14 miles NNE Le Tulle Park public water supply Drainage ditch north of the reservoir that WS Si 229 2-3 miles ESE empties 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(l or 2) WS 233 4.5 miles SE Colorado River where MCR blowdown S~l r 2 WS233

.5 ile SE 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 Colorado River upstream of Bay City Dam at WVS 243*

>10 miles N 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 farning area WG 251 4.0 miles SSE Test Well B4, upper aquifer F(1,2,or 3) CC S2 300 S.

STP Main Cooling Reservoir WW 701 4 miles S MCR Relief Well # 440 Quarterly composite of station #227 and/or Q alternate #233 2N/A Quarterly composite of station #243 and/or WS Q02 N/A alternate #242 MCR-STP Main Cooling Reservoir STP-South Texas Project Media codes typed in bold satisfy collection requirements described in Table 1.

Control Station

I - -

, ---

l-

-- -

Z --

-

, ,-

1-1 -

- --- I -

I 1-1 -I-

, K--- ---

STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-18 P6

Radiological Environmental 2004 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 tile sole purpose of reading ease. Only positive values are given in this table.

Media type is printed at tile top left of each table, and tile units of measurement are printed at the top right. The firstcolumiin lists tie type of radioactivity or specific radionuclide for whici each sample was analyzed. Tile second colunin gives the total number of analyses perfomied and the total number of noni-routine analyses for each indicated nuclide. (A noni-r-outine measuiremienit is a sample whose measured activity is greater than the reporting levels for Radioactivity Concenltrationis in Enviroimilenital Samples.)

The "LOWER LIMIITOFDETEC1TION" columini lists the noniral measuremienit sensitivities acilieved which were more sensitive than specified by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

A set of statistical parameters is listed for each raedionuclide in the remaining columns. The parameters contain infonrmaitioni fro the indlicaitor locations, the location hiavinlg the highest annual mean, and infor-mationi from the control stations. Some sample types do not have control stations. When this is the case, "no samples" is listed in the contr-ol location column. For each of these groups of data, the follow-illg is calculated:

The mean value of positive real values.

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 dosi meters wvere utilized each quarter for quality purposes. The minimiiumii number of other analyses required by Table I wvere supplemented in 2004 by six surface water samples, two groundwater samples, two drinking water samples, four rainwater samples anl one shoreline sedimelit sample. Fish and vegetation samples vary in numliber according to availability but also exceededtl the minimii umii number required by Table 1.

_T'Z MON.

m--

-e Po l'Of, By: Gi enna Ke lto~n i9'

.1

2004 Environmental Report TABLE 3 2004 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONNIENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Direct Radiation Units: MilliRocntgen/Standard Quarter ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH 110HEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE tNONROUTNE LIMIT OF MEAN (f)

LOCATION MEAN (0 l

MEAN (f)

MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Gamma 172/0 I.4Et0I( 1621 162)

ImileW I.9E+01(4 /44)

I.6E401( 10/ 10)

( 1.2E+01 - 2.0E401 )

(#013)

(1.8E+01 -2.0E+0 1)

( 13E+01 - 1.8E+01 )

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

TABLE 3 2004 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Airborne Radioiodine Units: PicoCuries per Cubic Meter ANALYSIS TOTALANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITTH IIIGIIEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE tNONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (1)'

LOCATION MEAN (l)-

MEAN (f)-

MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Iodinc-131 260t0 9.OE-03

-- ( 0/208)

--- ( 01 52)

(,) Number ofpositive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.

TABLE 3 2004 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Airborne Particulate Units: PicoCurics per Cubic Meter ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITII HIIGHIEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (f)

LOCATION MEAN (I)

MEAN (t0 MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE GrossBea 260/0 IAE-03 2.1E-02(2208/208) 14milesNNE 2.2E-02( 52/ 52) 2.OE-02( 52r 52)

(87E-03 -3.9E-02

(#033)

(8.7E 3.9E-02)

(8.8E-03 -3.7E-02)

Cesium-134 20/0 3.0E-04

-(

0116)

-(

01 4)

Cesium-137 2010 2.6E-04

-(

0/16)

_ ( 0/ 4)

Manganese-54 20/0 3.OE-04

-(

0 16)

-(

0 /4)

Iron-59 20/0 1.6E-04

-- ( 0/ 16)

_ ( 0/ 4)

Cobalt-58 20/0 4.2E-04

-t 0/ 16)

--- ( 0/ 4)

Cobalt-60 20/0 3.0E-04

- ( 0/16)

--- ( 0/ 4)

Zinc-65 20(0 7.OE-04

-(

0/ 16)

( 0 4)

Zirconium-95 20/0 7.9E-04

( 0/ 16)

( 01 4)

Niobium-95 2010 7.5E-04

-- ( 0/16)

-(

0/ 4)

Lanmhanum-140 20/0 4.OE-03

-- ( 0/ 16)

-(

0/ 4)

Barium-140 measurements Ittalmeaureentatspe___dlcatons

' )f Number of posilive measuremenls / 1otal measurements us specited loculions.

STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-20 4%

rwvD-

Radiological Environmental

'IABIL.E 3 2004 RAD)IOLOGICAIL 1.NVIONMENTAL RONIO(ItN(

I'R;RA.M ANALYSIS SUMMA..RY Mediu11m: Sull lace Watcr Un:is: PicoCurics per Kilogram VN.l YiIS IO I AL ANAIYSI N I

IV. HR INI)(AI (R It(

/

IHI INS IIA III IN)C H

.11 11HSr ANNU Al. MLAN (OHNTIE.ILO.(AI (INS I NAT NI NIII)IIHN 1 IISII l IA SI:.N 11' I (CA 1 ION IRI AN I1W EI AN (U-

%lII AS ISIItNI IS

)Id! IU IR) IN RAN&.I11 I IRMA II1 IN IRAN(;F R.AN(il II rg.(

12: 11 2 1 1012 1110 1 4!

XI I mk SSSE 961 *(13 1 4t 4)

I1

/

4 W. 4_I N 9 1 -

I 1 -)4 1 112161 (x

,1W1mII - I 11.1114 I (I.-fi I.l(I 42'Il 1D1 1

I

'2'1I

' I NIel.r.....I-54 42.'1 Io 21 11 II / 2 )

H-13 )

lf.,u m.s1 2

(4 -,H l

1 2 }

1 l

t N:is 4211 I

_1 7 1-II...

I c

2

.d.

0 1 ! 1 42

)

I h.01-.l

-2 1

I.1*1I

2)

... *-I1 21)04 RAIO42O11 C

1 R3 1,l I);A: 2 O9

.I.

(11/ 13 S

S~c..........

4 2;1.1) 1 1:1t11 II/29I 11113I MliO l.ll......

42:0 2.01100 II/

29,

3 1-3 I

(I11 13 )

I,: dI......... I 3

42:'(

21.0E.01)

--- ( 11 2 I')

.-- I (11 13)

I.I.rl

i. 147 U

M; InsIsNc ulcr l

I'0~;.

1.5001u 1m(11..3)...

1 0/

1.)

ln'INaII-39 es 26'(Hlcl~lcllllf 5.10.151 1 0/

13)

--- ( 0/

13)Zla 21104 RADIOLO

()GICAL Es.9t0 N,.SIE.N'-'0I. 13IONIT)ING

-OtA-A.NA3LYSIS

SUMMARY

Melditun: Drinkinlg W~ater Units: PicoCurics pcr Khilogrim WIAi.YSIS IOlIALANALN'SFS L(.KlAR INDlIC-ATOR I <XAI ION%

UX ATIOWITHI Ifl('ilEST ANNUAL IMCIAN CiONTROLl.OtCATIONS lYIII:

'NONROUIIINF I.LIMIT OF MEAN If)-

LOCATION MElAN (1)-

N1EAN Mn-NII:ASU.REMLIINS DI1 FlCil UN RAfEINI

-)RMATIO)N RANfie RANfil (i-ls Boea 2h'0 1.2E+(,0 26t.1(11) 131 13) 14 nidesNNE 3.013 #00 ( 13/

13) 3.o1-f (10(

13 / 13)

It sr 51 3 NE.3X1001 (r#22S) 1.....

.71-.100 - 46E 4() ( I I.,EI(10 - 4.1.E-00)

K5ICrgI5 261 2 4111.00

-- ( 0

)

--- ( 0/

43) 1tdlre 131 26/01 3.sr100 (I)1

13)

(

0/

13) tC~l 134 2h6 10 2t1 1

( )

1 3 ).....

--- ( 0/

13)

.mIn-9 137 2610 21.E%)10

--- ( 0/

13)

--- ( 0/

13 )

lanlIIIew-.54 2(' 0 I.sE I(j1

--- I (1/ 13

-)

( 0 / 13 )

Irwi-59 2 G'(1 S. I (1z

-- (..0/13)

(0 /13)I L~hbl~l-ig 2(dl Ill(0

-(

0/13 )...

I 0/

) 3 I C-.bIlt-w 241(

1 91:*00

...- I 0/ 13 )...

I 0/1 13)

Zhxc-h 26V 0

4. 11.00 0/13 )...

--. (

0/

13)

Zlrcno..... I-95 2h/ 0 3.31-00 (I

1.1/

1 0/

13)

Niobumi-Y1*5 2W 1) 2 2:-0(1 0 113) I...

... (

/

13) aihm--llull140-2(V 0 3.21i()0

... (111

( 0/

13)

BIuriunm 140 (I) NI IIIIHC (II pIlc-I IIeC.Islsrc C lia IIC oSIITCIIHCIIc, I SaIce lied ImmwllrIIs.

06 C

, 4-N I

P I'

1

I t

1

"',:1 I (

1 1, I I I 6-21

I i

i 2004 Environmental Report TABLE 3 2004 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONNIENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Sediment-Shoreline Units: PicoCurics per Kilogram dry weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (f-LOCATION MEAN (I-MEAN (f0 NIEASUREMEINTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesium-134 5/0 2.6E+01

,_ ( 0/

3)

( 0/ 2)

Cesium-137 5/0 2.1E401 2.5E+01 ( I/ 3) 6 miles SE 2.5E+01 ( 1 / 3)

I.8EE01 ( If 2)

(2.5E+01 -2.5E+01 )

(#227)

(2.5E+01 -2.5E+01 )

I.SE+01 - 1.8E+01 Manganesc-54 5/0 2.IEtO1

-_ ( 0/

3) 0/

2)

Iron-59 510 7.9E+01

--- ( 0/

3)

--- ( 0/ 2)

Cobalt-58 510 2.2E+0I

( 0/ 3)

(

0/ 2)

Cobalt-60 5/0 2.4E+01

--.- (

0/ 3)

( 0/ 2)

Zinc-65 5/0 5.212Ol

( 0/ 3)

-(

0/ 2)

Zirconium-95 5/0 4.513+01

_ ( 0/ 3)

( 0/ 2)

Niobium-95 5/0 4.0E+01

_ ( 0/

3)

--- ( 0/ 2)

Lanthanum-140 510 I.IE+02

( 0/ 3)

( 0t 2)

Barium-140

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

TABLE 3 2004 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Ground Water (On site test well)

Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATORLOCATIONS LOCATION WITII HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (f)-

LOCATION MEAN (1)-

MEAN ((1-MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Hydrogen-3 6/0 2.6E+02 5.9E+02 ( 5/

6) 3.8 miles S 5.9E+02 ( 5 / 6) no samples (2.8EtO2 -1.0E403)

(#235)

(2.8E+02 -1.OE+03 Iodine-131 6/0 9.01E+00

-(

0/

6 )

no samples Cesium-134 6/0 2.0E+00

-(

0/

6 )

no samples Cesium-137 6/0 I.9E+00

( 0/

6 )

o samples Manganese-54 6/0 1.9E+00

--- ( 0 / 6 )

no samples Iron-S9 6/0 5.2E+00

--- ( 0 / 6 )

no samples Cobalt-58 6/0 1.8E+00

( 0/

6) nosamples Coball-60 6/0 1.9E+00

( 0 / 6 )

no samples Zinc-65 6/0 4.5E+00

( 0/

6 )

no samples Zirconiurn-95 6/0 3.3E+00

( 0 / 6 )

no samples Niobium-95 6/0 2.5E+00

( 0/ 6) nosamples Lanthanum-140 6/0 4.6E+00

--- ( 0/

6) no samples Barium-140

(f) Number ofpositive measurements / total measuremenls at specified locations.

STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-22 ff_0Z

Radiological Environmental TABLE 3 2004 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Scdimcnt-Bottoni Units: PicoCurics per Kilogram dry weight ANALYSIS TOrAL ANALYSES LO)WLR INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH IhIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYIE

.NONROLrTINE LIMITOF MEAN If)'

LOCATION MEAN Il)

MEAN (r)-

MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Ccsiuim-134 710 3 OE-01

.. ( Ot 7) o samples Cesiuin-137 710 20)E1O0 9.8101(

41 7) 3 miks SSE

.81E101( 41 4) no1 samtlcs (3.7E101 I.SE-02 )

($1216) t3.7E'01 - I.SE1202)

Nfinginewe-54 7/0 23E101

( 0/

7) no samplles Iron-59 7/0 8 SE01

-- ( 0/ 7) no samplcs Coball-58 7/0 2.5Ei0I 0 / 7) no 00 samilcs CoI-alt-60 7/0 2.4E101 X.IEIOIC 4/

7) 3 miles SSE 8A.1IE.0(

4/

4) no samples (3 41E(01 - 1.5ErIO12

)

216)

( 3.417+01-1.5E102 )

Zinc-65 7/0 5.8E10

-- I 0 / 7) no samplcs Zirconiutn-95 7/0 5.2POb

-- ( 0/ 7) no samples Niobium-95 7/0 4.2EO*I

( 0/

7) nosamples Lanthanuni-140 7/0 I.E102

( 0 / 7 )

no samples Ilariuim 140 I 1) Nunilmr orpositive measurenlents / total mscasmirecmel at spec:Ified locations.

I'ABI.E 3 2004 RAI)IOIO)G(ICAI. ENVIR(ON.MIEN'I'AIl :()IONI'I'()RIN(; PROGRANM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Mclitnm: lanuana Leaves Units: i'icoCuries pcr Kilogram wet wight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSFS tO(%R INI)ICATOR tIICATIONS LOCATION WITI I hII1FST ANNUAL. MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS

'IYI:

NI IetO 10N I IS I I1I NI

(

MIAN I)-

1. )CA VION MEAN (Pn MEAN t()

MI ASIRIMIN'I

)

t: II ION RANGE INI tRMATION I(AN'It RANGEit)

.Xh 201 t 7 XF.-h 0n o:0 14 I O / h6l (es iC.n 134 2(1

.71*I(i

.-- (

U) 4 I

--- t° 6 )

Cemwn-137 20111 2.21.(01

--- I

0 141 0

6 )

!M..Ilg.Iaew-54 2(t 1 2.5'.1hl

-[HI I

14 I

-- I I/

6)

Ir.11m-5 2(11 1.01) 1...

I (I I

1 IU l d (1)

(..l is211 1

2.61 ()(I

.. I o: 14 I

... ( O 6)

('-hb,ilt-.,.

21V 0 4.:

ZE I (1

--- ( I IJ 1 I

.. -- ( i1 6 I hIle-i c

-2z111 7.q: Wo l

t ---

0 { 14 I W 6z I Zirc ni.IIIIII'5 2 1.1 I f.F I0(l

1) 14 I

( 0i 6 I Nlolurl-93

) 20!).(1-1l)

(1)1 I4..

14. I 0

6 I L~anlthavurn. 140

~

2z./f

)

J s

l1:1(f

--- (

14 IJ

6...

I.. 16 IlarlaIll 1401

(I) Nullmbur poSIIS c I rIeniSrc i..III5 I 1,11.11 IIto aIuIrclIeIIs ;It pecified I,1c4ils.

to S I P

\\'!,

1. 1 (

( i'lil.l6 6-23

2004 Environmental Report TABLE 3 2004 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Cana Leaves Units: PicoCuries er Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATORLOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INoNROUTINE LIMITOF MEAN (t)'

LOCATION MEAN (I)-

MEAN (f)-

MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE lodine-131 6/0 I.3E+OI

--- ( 01 4) l

-(

0/

2)

Cesium-134 610 2,IE+00

-.- ( 0t 4)

_ ( o0 2)

Cesium-137 6/0 I.7E+00

( 0/

4)

--- ( 0/

2)

Mangancse-54 610 2.0E+OO

_- ( 0/ 4)

--- ( 0/ 2)

Iron-59 6/0 9.7E+00

( 0/ 4)

-- ( 0/

2)

Cobalt-58 6/0 2.3Et00

( 0/ 4)

.O

( 0/ 2)

Cobalt-60 6/0 3.4E+00

/Of 4)

-(

01 2)

Zinc-65 6/0 6.1L'+00

..-- ( 0

4)

( 0/ 2)

Zirconium-95 6/0 4.0E+0O

--- ( 0/

4)

-(

0/ 2)

Niobium-95 6/0 2.8E+00

- ( 0/ 4) l

-(

0/ 2)

Lanthanum-140 6/0 4.8E+00

_- ( 0/ 4)

-(

0/

2)

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

TABLE 3 2004 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONNIENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS SUMMIARY Medium: Collard Greens Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER iNDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH IiIGIIEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN (f)-

LOCATION MEAN ()'

MEAN (f)-

MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE lodine-131 6/0 8.2E+00

--- ( 0/ 4)

-(

0/

2)

Cesium-134 6/0 1.2E00

,-- ( O/ 4)

( 0/ 2)

Cesium-137 6/0 9.8E-01

--- ( 0/ 4)

--- ( 0 2)

Manganese-54 6/0 I.IE+0O

-(

0/

4)

_- ( 0/ 2)

Iron-59 6/0 5.5E400 f

( 014)

( 0 2)

Cobalt-58 6/0 1.3E+00

-(

01 4)

-(

01 2)

Cobalt-60 6/0 1.9E+00

(

0

4) 0/2)

Zinc-65 6t0 3.4E+00

--- ( 0/ 4)

Of 2)

Zirconium-95 6/0 2.3E+00

--- ( 0/ 4)

( 0 2)

Niobium-95 6/0 1.7E+00

( 0/

4)

--- ( 0 2)

Lanthanum-140 6/0 2.7E400

_ ( 01 4)

( 0/ 2)

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

STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-24 PIZD

Radiological Environmental TABLE 3 2004 1ADI)IOIO)ICAI. ENVIR(ON.MIEN'rAI, MOI(NITORIING PROGRAMI ANALYSIS SUMIMIARY Medium: Fish - Piscivorous Units: PicoCurics r Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSI:S R.(

INIICA FOR L(Ki'A'IOKNS I (K'A I)N a 1111 IIltAl 11.ST ANNUAI. MEAN C(N1 K)L LOCA'I'IONS TYITE N(JNR()IUTINE I.IIITtIF MEAN ti, ItOCATION MEAN (f-MEAN If)-

ME.ASUREMENTS D)EIAC1I3)N RANil:

INFORMATION RANC;E RANGE Ccsicmu-134 9!tl 3 2[I0 (1(

5 )

11 4)

(Csiim.-137 9/0 3.0E.01 tl

.)

0/

4)

NMangaeisc-54 9/1) 31.0t1i0

/ 5)

-- I 0/

4)

Iron-59 Wo 9.5E'01 0/

5

-(

4)

Cobalt-58 9t0 3.2E101

( 1 5)

( 0/

4)

Cobalt-60 9!0 3.4E101 0/ 5)

.(

01 4)

Zinc-65 9!0 6.6E 1 5

5

( 0/ 4)

Zirconjtiu-95 9/0 5.SE't0 1

... 3 (/

5)

-- ( 0/ 4)

Nlobi1hi-95 9/(1 3.lE, ItI

( 0/ S.

--- ( 0/

4)

iatlithantu11. 1 4()

9'(1 7.51 01 (it

5)

--- 3 0/

4) aIr~i am-4140

() Nuimbcr 0t'po.ittvc ncalkrcilucnts I Imtali measuIrciltens at pecified IocatimiXs.

TABLE 3 2004 RAI)IOLOGICAL ENNVIRONM.IENT'AL.MONITOI )RING PROGRLAMI ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Cnstacean Shrimp Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL. ANALYESI:S LOaFR INI)lCATll)R ltIKAll/)NS I.O('A'cI(ON wI li IiIIIlsr ANNllAL MlIAN CONTRO)L I.OCATI)NS I YIE NI IN()(lOiINI ILIMII (

!,II:AN 0)

It Alit ION MIEAN (l-NMEAN (t)

%FIEASI ((3 MENIS D)l:lI.Cl ION RANGE INH)RNIA'I ION RANW-'

RANGil.

ICoium.i 134 Sl

.Eo*-

13)...

0 o 2)

Ccsiamn 137 5/0 2.7E'03

--- ( o/ 3)

I o1 2)

%Ianganoc-54 5/1I 2.7M(tI3 3I)

I 31/ 2)

Iron-l S-5t1 (

71 {l(

... (111! 3I)

( I1 2)

Cubalt-58 5/0 2.(1EiO0

( )/ 3)

( 11/ 2)

Cobalt-hO 5$1) 2.9EI01

( O/ 3

.. ()/

2)

Zintc-05 5tl iXSFNI

-- ( 0 1

--- ( O/ 2) htrctltm-9t5 5 0 4.7EI((l

.. 3 / 3 3---

(

1 2)

Ntobihii-95 5/ti 3OEOI

-- (

1) 0/ 2) tantharttim-140) 5!0 5.3E'01

( 11

3) 3

.3t 2)

(3) Nuimiber o1l... Iifi Ic atflcI1Is' ll)

IttcasuIcicinlets a3 Npecified IcatioN..

4 C-i q-N Ii' \\

P

.. 1.,, ( )3 I I I\\

6:25

2004 Environmental Report TABLE 3 2004 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium-Fish - Crnstacean & Insiect Feedpers UTnits: PirnCiries ner ilneram wet wisht ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITm HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMrTOF MEAN (fl-LOCATION MEAN (f)-

MEAN (f)-

MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesium-134 3/0 3.3E+01

-- t 0/ 3) nosamples Cesium-137 3/0 2.9E+01

--- ( 0/

3) nosamples Manganese-54 3/0 2.9E+01

( 0/ 3) nosamples Iron-59 3/0 1.0E+02 t 0/ 3) no samples Cobalt-58 3/0 3.2E+01

( 0/

3 )

no samples Cobalt-60 310 3.3E01

--- ( 0 / 3 )

no samples Zinc-65 3/0 6.8E+01

--- ( 0/

3 )

no samples Zirconium-95 3/ 0 5.8E+0

--- ( 0 / 3 )

no samples Niobium-95 3/0 4.OE+01

( 0 / 3 )

no samples Lanthanum-140 3/0 9.8E+0I

( 0 / 3 )

nosamples Banum-140 I

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

TABLE 3 2004 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Beef Meat Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE

/NONROUTINE LlMITOF MEAN (f)-

LOCATION MEAN (f)-

MEAN (f)-

MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesium-134 2t0 2.4E+01 t

01 2) no samples Cesium-137 2/0 2.2E+01

--- ( 0/ 2) no samples Manganese-54 210 2.3E+0I1

( 0/

2 )

no samples Iron-59 2/0 I.IE+02

-- ( 0/

2) nosamples Cobalt-58 210 2.9E+01

--- t 0/

2 )

no samples Cobalt-60 2/0 2.7E+01

--- ( 01 2) no samples Zinc-65 2/0 5.6E+0l

--- ( 0/

2) nosamples Zirconium-95 2/0 5.5E+01 0/

2) nosamples Niobium-95 2/0 4.6E+01 0/

2) no samples Lanlisanum-140 2V0 2.1E+02

-.. ( 01 2) nosamples Barium-140

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

STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-26 0%

iT

ML051260127

Text

Attachment:

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

Search