ML051380059

Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report for 2004, Enclosure 3

ML051380059
Person / Time
Site:	Vogtle
Issue date:	05/11/2005
From:	Southern Nuclear Operating Co
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NL-05-0763
Download: ML051380059 (70)

Text

ENCLOSURE 3 Vogtle Electric Generating Plant Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report for 2004

VOGTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT FOR 2004 SOUTHERN A COMPANY Energy to Serve Your World'

TABLE OF CONTENTS Section and/or Title Subsection Page List of Figures ii List of Tables iii List of Acronyms iv 1.0 Introduction 1-1 2.0 REMP Description 2-1 3.0 Results Summary 3-1 4.0 Discussion of Results 4-1 4.1 Land Use Census and River Survey 4-5 4.2 Airborne 4-7 4.3 Direct Radiation 4-10 4.4 Milk 4-15 4.5 Vegetation 4-17 4.6 River Water 4-19 4.7 Drinking Water 4-22 4.8 Fish 4-28 4.9 Sediment 4-31 5.0 Interlaboratory Comparison Program (ICP) _ 5-1 6.0 Conclusions 6-1 i

LIST OF FIGURES Figure Number Title Page Figure 2-1 REMP Stations in the Plant Vicinity 2-10 Figure 2-2 REMP Control Stations for the Plant 2-11 Figure 2-3 REMP Indicator Drinking Water Stations 2-12 Figure 4.2-1 Average Weekly Gross Beta Air Concentration 4-8 Figure 4.3-1 Average Quarterly Exposure from Direct Radiation 4-11 Figure 4.3-2 Average Quarterly Exposure from Direct Radiation at Special Interest Areas 4-12 Figure 4.4-1 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Milk 4-15 Figure 4.5-1 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Vegetation 4-18 Figure 4.6-1 Average Annual H-3 Concentration in River Water 4-20 Figure 4.7-1 Average Monthly Gross Beta Concentration in Raw Drinking Water 4-23 Figure 4.7-2 Average Monthly Gross Beta Concentration in Finished Drinking Water 4-24 Figure 4.7-3 Average Annual H-3 Concentration in Raw Drinking Water 4-26 Figure 4.7-4 Average Annual H-3 Concentration in Finished Drinking Water 4-27 Figure 4.8-1 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Fish 4-29 Figure 4.9-1 Average Annual Be-7 Concentration in Sediment 4-32 Figure 4.9-2 Average Annual Co-58 Concentration in Sediment 4-33 Figure 4.9-3 Average Annual Co-60 Concentration in Sediment 4-34 Figure 4.9-4 Average Annual Cs- 137 Concentration in Sediment 4-35 ii

LIST OF TABLES Table Number Title Page Table 2-1 Summary Description of Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program 2-2 Table 2-2 Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations 2-7 Table 3-1 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Annual Summary 3-2 Table 4-1 Aeragem DQuatealy Exonentrations (MDC) 4-1 Table 4-2 Reporting Levels (RL) 4-2 Table 4-3 Deviations from Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program 4-4 Table 4.1-1 Land Use Census Results 4-5 Table 4.2-1 Average Weekly Gross Beta Air Concentration 4-8 Table 4.3-1 Average Quarterly Exposure from Direct Radiation 4-11 Table 4.3-2 Average Quarterly Exposure from Direct Radiation at Special Interest Areas 4-13 Table 4.4-1 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Milk 4-16 Table 4.5-1 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Vegetation 4-18 Table 4.6-1 Average Annual H-3 Concentration in River Water 4-21 Table 4.7-1 Average Monthly Gross Beta Concentration in Raw Drinking Water 4-23 Table 4.7-2 Average Monthly Gross Beta Concentration in Finished Drinking Water 4-24 Table 4.7-3 Average Annual H-3 Concentration in Raw Drinking Water 4-26 Table 4.7-4 Average Annual H-3 Concentration in Finished Drinking Water 4-27 Table 4.8-1 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Fish 4-30 Table 4.9-1 Average Annual Be-7 Concentration in Sediment 4-32 Table 4.9-2 Average Annual Co-58 Concentration in Sediment 4-33 Table 4.9-3 Average Annual Co-60 Concentration in Sediment 4-34 Table 4.9-4 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Sediment 4-35 Table 4.9-5 Additional Sediment Nuclide Concentrations 4-36 Table 5-1 Interlaboratory Comparison Program Results 5-3 iii

LIST OF ACRONYMS Acronyms presented in alphabetical order.

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

NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission ODCM Offsite Dose Calculation Manual Po Preoperation PWR Pressurized Water Reactor REMP Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program RL Reporting Level RM River Mile TLD Thermoluminescent Dosimeter TS Technical Specification VEGP Alvin W. Vogtle Electric Generating Plant iv

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) is conducted in accordance with Chapter 4 of the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM). The REMP activities for 2004 are reported herein in accordance with Technical Specification (TS) 5.6.2 and ODCM 7.1.

The objectives of the REMP are to:

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

2) Assess the radiological impact (if any) to the environment due to the operation of the Alvin W. Vogtle Electric Generating Plant (VEGP).

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

VEGP is owned by Georgia Power Company (GPC), Oglethorpe Power Corporation, the Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia, and the City of Dalton, Georgia. It is located on the southwest side of the Savannah River approximately 23 river miles upstream from the intersection of the Savannah River and U.S.

Highway 301. The site is in the eastern sector of Burke County, Georgia, and across the river from Barnwell County, South Carolina. The VEGP site is directly across the Savannah River from the Department of Energy Savannah River Site.

Unit 1, a Westinghouse Electric Corporation Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR),

with a licensed core thermal power of 3565 MegaWatts (MWt), received its operating license on January 16, 1987 and commercial operation started on May 31, 1987. Unit 2, also a Westinghouse PWR rated for 3565 MWt, received its operating license on February 9, 1989 and began commercial operation on May 19, 1989.

The pre-operational stage of the REMP began with initial sample collections in August of 1981. The transition from the pre-operational to the operational stage of the REMP occurred as Unit 1 reached initial criticality on March 9, 1987.

A description of the REMP is provided in Section 2 of this report. Maps showing the sampling stations are keyed to a table which indicates the direction and distance of each station from a point midway between the two reactors. Section 3 provides a summary of the results of the analyses of REMP samples for the year.

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

1-1

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

1. It details the sample types to be collected and the analyses to be performed in order to monitor the airborne, direct radiation, waterborne and ingestion pathways, and also delineates the collection and analysis frequencies. In addition, Table 2-1 references the locations of stations as described in ODCM Section 4.2 and in Table 2-2 of this report. The stations are also depicted on maps in Figures 2-1 through 2-3.

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

2-1

TABLE 2-1 (SHEET 1 of 5)

SUMMARY

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

1. Direct Radiation Thirty nine routine Quarterly Gamma dose, quarterly monitoring stations with two or more dosimeters placed as follows:

An inner ring of stations, one in each compass sector in the general area of the site boundary; An outer ring of stations, one in each compass sector at approximately 5 miles from the site; and Special interest areas, such as population centers, nearby recreation areas, and control stations.

2. Airborne Radioiodine and Samples from seven Continuous sampler operation Radioiodine canister: I-Particulates locations: with sample collection weekly, or 131 analysis, weekly.

more frequently if required by Five locations close to dust loading. Particulate sampler:

the site boundary in Gross beta analysis different sectors; following filter change and gamma isotopic A community having the analysis2 of composite highest calculated annual (by location), quarterly.

average ground level D/Q; and

(1 C" C C ( ( {~ C ( ( K( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( C( C C( ( (C (C C C C C C C (

TABLE 2-1 (SHEET 2 of 5)

SUMMARY

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

2. Airborne Radioiodine and A control location near Particulates (cont.) a population center at a distance of about 14 miles.

3. Waterborne _ _ _

One sample upriver. Composite sample over one Gamma isotopic month period4.analysis 2 , monthly.

Two samples Composite for tritium downriver. analysis, quarterly.

b. Drinking Two samples at each of Composite sample of river water I-131 analysis on each the two nearest water near the intake of each water sample when the dose treatment plants that treatment plant over two week calculated for the could be affected by period 4 when 1-131 analysis is consumption of the h> plant discharges. required for each sample; water is greater than 1 monthly composite otherwise; and mrem per year-5.

Two samples at a grab sample of finished water at Composite for gross control location. each water treatment plant every beta and gamma two weeks or monthly, as isotopic analysis 2 on appropriate. raw water, monthly.

Gross beta, gamma isotopic and I-131 analyses on grab sample of finished water, monthly. Composite for tritium analysis on raw and finished water, quarterly.

c. Sediment from Shoreline One sample from Semiannually Gamma isotopic downriver area with analysis2 , semiannually.

existing or potential recreational value.

( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( I ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (

TABLE 2-1 (SHEET 3 of 5)

SUMMARY

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

c. Sediment from Shoreline One sample from (cont.) upriver area with existing or potential recreational value.

4. Ingestion .... . . . . .. . . . .

-a. M-il-k'-'-'-'--'-'--""""""""""" ' ...............T'-w'o- samples from Biweekly Gamma isotopic milking animals 6 at analysis2,7 , biweekly.

control locations at a distance of about 10 miles or more.

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

b. Fish At least one sample of Semiannually Gamma 2isotopic any commercially or analysis on edible recreationally portions, semiannually.

important species near the plant discharge.

At least one sample of any commercially or recreationally important species in an area not influenced by plant discharges.

At least one sample of During the spring spawning Gamma isotopic any anadromous season. analysis' on edible species near the plant portions, annually.

discharge.

TABLE 2-1 (SHEET 4 of 5)

SUMMARY

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

c. Grass or Leafy Vegetation One sample from two Monthly during growing season. Gamma isotopic onsite locations near the analysis2 ' 7, monthly.

site boundary in different sectors.

One sample from a control location at a distance of about 17 miles.

t~J

TABLE 2-1 (SHEET 5 of 5)

SUMMARY

DESCRIPTION OF RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM Notes:

(1) Airborne particulate sample filters shall be analyzed for gross beta radioactivity 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> or more after sampling to allow for radon and thoron daughter decay. If gross beta activity in air particulate samples is greater than 10 times the yearly mean of control samples, gamma isotopic analysis shall be performed on the individual samples.

(2) Gamma isotopic analysis means the identification and quantification of gamma-emitting radionuclides that may be attributable to the effluents from the facility.

(3) Upriver sample is taken at a distance beyond significant influence of the discharge. Downriver samples are taken beyond but near the mixing zone.

(4) Composite sample aliquots shall be collected at time intervals that are very short (e.g., hourly) relative to the compositing period (e.g., monthly) to assure obtaining a representative sample.

(5) The dose shall be calculated for the maximum organ and age group, using the methodology and parameters in the ODCM.

0 (6) A milking animal is a cow or goat producing milk for human consumption.

(7) If the gamma isotopic analysis is not sensitive enough to meet the Minimum Detectable Concentration (MDC) for 1-13 1, a separate analysis for I-131 may be performed.

TABLE 2-2 (SHEET 1 of 3)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING LOCATIONS Station Station Descriptive Direction' Distance Sample Type Number Type Location (miles)_

1 Indicator River Bank N 1.1 Direct Rad.

2 Indicator River Bank NNE 0.8 Direct Rad.

3 Indicator Discharge Area NE 0.6 Airborne Rad.

3 Indicator River Bank NE 0.7 Direct Rad 4 Indicator River Bank ENE 0.8 Direct Rad.

5 Indicator River Bank E 1.0 Direct Rad.

6 Indicator Plant Wilson ESE 1.1 Direct Rad.

7 Indicator Simulator SE 1.7 Airborne Rad.

Building Direct Rad.

Vegetation 8 Indicator River Road SSE 1.1 Direct Rad.

9 Indicator River Road 5 1.1 Direct Rad.

10 Indicator Met Tower SSW 0.9 Airborne Rad.

10 Indicator River Road SSW 1.1 Direct Rad.

11 Indicator River Road SW 1.2 Direct Rad.

12 Indicator River Road WSW 1.2 Airborne Rad.

Direct Rad.

13 Indicator River Road W 1.3 Direct Rad.

14 Indicator River Road WNW 1.8 Direct Rad.

15 Indicator Hancock NW 1.5 Direct Rad.

Landing Road Vegetation 16 Indicator Hancock NNW 1.4 Airborne Rad.

Landing Road Direct Rad.

17 Other Sav. River Site N 5.4 Direct Rad.

(SRS), River Road 18 Other SRS, D Area NNE 5.0 Direct Rad.

19 Other SRS, Road NE 4.6 Direct Rad.

A.13 20 Other SRS, Road ENE 4.8 Direct Rad.

A. 13.1 21 Other SRS, Road E 5.3 Direct Rad.

A.17 22 Other River Bank ESE 5.2 Direct Rad.

23 Other River Road SE 4.6 Direct Rad.

24 Other Chance Road SSE 4.9 Direct Rad.

25 Other Chance Road S 5.2 Direct Rad.

near Highway 23 26 Other Highway 23 SSW 4.6 Direct Rad.

and Ebenezer Church Road 27 Other Highway 23 SW 4.7 Direct Rad.

opposite Boll Weevil Road 28 Other Thomas Road WSW 5.0 Direct Rad.

2-7

TABLE 2-2 (SHEET 2 of 3)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING LOCATIONS Station Station Descriptive Direction' Distance Sample Type Number Type Location (miles)'

29 Other Claxton-Lively W 5.1 Direct Rad.

Road 30 Other Nathaniel WNW 5.0 Direct Rad.

Howard Road 31 Other River Road at NW 5.0 Direct Rad.

Allen's Chapel Fork 32 Other River Bank NNW 4.7 Direct Rad.

35 Other Girard SSE 6.6 Airborne Rad.

Direct Rad.

36 Control GPC WSW 13.9 Airborne Rad.

Waynesboro Op. Direct Rad.

HQ 37 Control Substation WSW 16.7 Direct Rad Waynesboro, Vegetation GA 43 Other Employee's Rec. SW 2.2 Direct Rad.

Center 47 Control Oak Grove SE 10.4 Direct Rad.

Church 48 Control McBean NW 10.2 Direct Rad.

Cemetery 51 Control SGA School S 11.0 Direct Rad.

Sardis, GA 52 Control Oglethorpe SW 10.7 Direct Rad.

Substation; Alexander, GA 80 Control Augusta Water NNW 29.0 Drinking Treatment Plant Water2 81 Control Sav River N 2.5 Fish' Sediment 4 82 Control Sav River (RM NNE 0.8 River Water 151.2) 83 Indicator Sav River (RM ENE 0.8 River Water 150.4) Sediment 4 84 Other Sav River (RM ESE 1.6 River Water 149.5) 85 Indicator Sav River ESE 4.3 Fish3 87 Indicator Beaufort-Jasper SE 76 Drinking County Water Water 5 Treatment Plant 88 Indicator Cherokee Hill SSE 72 Drinking Water Treatment Water6 Plant, Port Wentworth, Ga 98 Control W.C. Dixon SE 9.8 Milk Dairy Control Boyceland Dairy W 20.9 Milk 100_ Control Coble Dairy WNW 16.2 Milk 2-8

TABLE 2-2 (SHEET 3 of 3)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING LOCATIONS Notes:

(1) Direction and distance are determined from a point midway between the two reactors.

(2) The intake for the Augusta Water Treatment Plant is located on the Augusta Canal. The entrance to the canal is at River Mile (RM) 207 on the Savannah River. The canal effectively parallels the river. The intake to the pumping station is about 4 miles down the canal.

(3) A 5 mile stretch of the river is generally needed to obtain adequate fish samples.

Samples are normally gathered between RM 153 and 158 for upriver collections and between RM 144 and 149.4 for downriver collections.

(4) Sediment is collected at locations with existing or potential recreational value. Because high water, shifting of the river bottom, or other reasons could cause a suitable location for sediment collections to become unavailable or unsuitable, a stretch of the river between RM 148.5 and 150.5 was designated for downriver collections while a stretch between RM 153 and 154 was designated for upriver collections. In practice, collections are normally made at RM 150.2 for downriver collections and RM 153.3 for upriver collections.

(5) The intake for the Beaufort-Jasper County Water Treatment Plant is located at the end of canal that begins at RM 39.3 on the Savannah River. This intake is about 16 miles by line of sight down the canal from its beginning on the Savannah River.

(6) The intake for the Cherokee Hill Water Treatment Plant is located on Abercorn Creek which is about one and a quarter creek miles from its mouth on the Savannah River at RM 29.

(7) Dairy operations ceased and milk sampling was discontinued at location 99 on September 3, 2003.

(8) Milk sample collection began at location 100 on September 30, 2003.

2-9

0 0

0 0

0 40 0

0 S

S 0

0 0

0 S

S 0

0 0

0 0

0 Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations Indicator Control Additional REMP Stations in the TLD A A A Plant Vicinity Other 0 S 0 TLD &Other 0 a O Figure 2-1 2-10 (CD

0 0

0 0

0 0

S 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations Indicator Control Additional REM P Control Stations TLD A A A for the Plant Other S S _

TLD & Other 0 e O Figure 2-2 2-11

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

S S

0 0

0 0

0 Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations 0 Indicator Control Additional REMP Indicator Drinking 01 nLD A A A Water Stations Other 0 0

• TLD & Other 6 @ O Figure 2-3 0

2-12

-G;

3.0 RESULTS

SUMMARY

In accordance with ODCM 7.1.2.1, the summarized and tabulated results for all of the regular samples collected for the year at the designated indicator and control stations are presented in Table 3-1. The format of Table 3-1 is similar to Table 3 of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Branch Technical Position, "An Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program", Revision 1, November 1979. Results for samples collected at locations other than indicator or control stations are discussed in Section 4 under the particular sample type.

As indicated in ODCM 7.1.2.1, the results for naturally occurring radionuclides that are also found in plant effluents must be reported along with man-made radionuclides. The radionuclide Be-7 which occurs abundantly in nature is found in some years in the plant's liquid and gaseous effluent. No other naturally occurring radionuclides are found in the plant's effluent releases. Therefore, the only radionuclides of interest in the REMP samples are the man-made radionuclides and Be-7, when it is detected in the effluent. Be-7 was not detected in plant effluents in 2004.

3-1

TABLE 3-1 (SHEET 1 of 8)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Docket Nos. 50-424 and 50-425 Burke County, Georgia Medium or Type and Minimum Indicator Location with the Highest Other Control Pathway Total Detectable Locations Annual Mean Stations (g) Locations Sampled Number of Concentration Mean (b), Mean (b), Mean (b),

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

Airborne Gross Beta 10 21.6 Station 36 22.8 21.4 22.8 Particulates 364 9.3-39.1 Waynesboro Op. 10.3-40.3 8.2-36.2 10.3-40.3 (fCi/m3) (260/260) Headquarters (52/52) (52/52) (52/52) 13.9 miles WSW Isotopic 28 Cs- 134 50 NDM (c) NDM NDM NDM Cs- 137 60 NDM NDM NDM NDM Airborne I- 131 70 NDM NDM NDM NDM Radioiodine 364 (fCi/m3)

Direct Gamma NA (d) 12.4 Station 20 15.4 12.4 12.2 Radiation Dose 9.9-16.9 SRS Rd. A.13.1 14.5-15.9 9.4-20.3 9.7-15.6 (mR/91 days) 160 (64/64) 4.8 miles ENE (4/4) (72/72) (24/24)

( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( 1\ ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (

TABLE 3-1 (SHEET 2 of 8)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Docket Nos. 50-424 and 50-425 Burke County, Georgia Medium or Type and Minimum Indicator Location with the Highest Other Control Pathway Total Detectable Locations Annual Mean Stations (g) Locations Sampled Number of Concentration Mean (b), M (b) Mean (b),

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

(Fraction)

Milk (pCi/1) Gamma Isotopic 52 Cs-134 15 NA NDM NA NDM Cs-137 18 NA NDM NA NDM Ba- 140 60 NA NDM NA NDM La- 140 15 ....._ NA ...... .............

...... NDM ...... ......__

................ NA

...... ....................................... NDM ....

1-131 1 NA NDM NA NDM 52 Vegetation Gamma (pCi/kg-wet) Isotopic 36 1-131 60 NDM NDM NA NDM Cs- 134 60 NDM NDM NA NDM s-37 80 3 Station 7 36.8 NA 19.7 15.7-57.1 Simulator Bldg. 15.7-57.1 19.7-19.7 (3/24) 1.7 miles SE (3/12) (1/12)

TABLE 3-1 (SHEET 3 of 8)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Docket Nos. 50-424 and 50-425 Burke County, Georgia Medium or Type and Minimum Indicator Location with the Highest Other Control Pathway Total Number Detectable Locations Annual Mean Stations (g) Locations Sampled of Analyses Concentration Mean (b), Mean (b),

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

(Fraction)

River Water Gamma (pCi/l) Isotopic 36 Be-7 124(e) NDM NDM NDM NDM Mn-54 15 NDM NDM NDM NDM Fe-59 30 NDM NDM NDM NDM Co-58 15 NDM NDM NDM NDM Co-60 15 NDM NDM NDM NDM Zn-65 30 NDM NDM NDM NDM Zr-95 30 NDM NDM NDM NDM Nb-95 15 NDM NDM NDM NDM I- 131 15 NDM NDM NDM NDM Cs- 134 15 NDM NDM NDM NDM Cs- 137 18 NDM NDM NDM NDM Ba- 140 60 NDM NDM NDM NDM La- 140 15 NDM NDM NDM NDM tim 30 269 Station 83 1269 743 351 12 647-2020 RM 150.4 647-2020 507-939 193-631 (4/4) 0.8 miles ENE (4/4) (3/4) (4/4)

C ( C C C C (

TABLE 3-1 (SHEET 4 of 8)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Docket Nos. 50-424 and 50-425 Burke County, Georgia Medium or Type and Total Minimum Indicator Location with the Highest Other Control Pathway Number of Detectable Locations Annual Mean Stations (g) Locations Sampled Analyses Concentration Mean (b), Mean (b),

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

(Fraction)

Water Near Gross Beta 4 4.06 Station 87 4.61 NA 2.39 Intakes to 36 1.84-11.38 Beaufort 1.84-11.38 1.28-3.16 Water (24/24) 76 miles SE (12/12) (12/12)

Treatment Plants (pCi/l)

Gamma Isotopic wJ.)

36 tJI Be-7 124(e) NDM NDM NA NDM Mn-54 15 NDM NDM NA NDM Fe-59 30 NDM NDM NA NDM Co-58 15 NDM NDM NA NDM Co-60 15 NDM NDM NA NDM Zn-65 30 NDM NDM NA NDM Zr-95 30 NDM NDM NA NDM Nb-95 15 NDM NDM NA NDM I- 131 (f) 15 NDM NDM NA NDM Cs-134 15 NDM NDM NA NDM Cs- 137 18 NDM NDM NA NDM Ba- 140 60 NDM NDM NA NDM La-140 15 NDM NDM NA NDM Tritium 3000 585 tation 87 593 NA 220 12 385-878 Beaufort 399-850 212-230 (8/8) 76 miles SE (4/4) (3/4)

( ( ( i C C TABLE 3-1 (SHEET 5 of 8)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Docket Nos. 50-424 and 50-425 Burke County, Georgia Medium or Type and Minimum Indicator Location with the Highest Other Control Pathway Total Detectable Locations Annual Mean Stations (g) Locations Sampled Number of Concentration Mean (b), M (b) Mean (b),

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

(Fraction)

Finished Water Gross Beta 4 2.36 Station 87 2.46 NA 1.92 at Water 36 0.94-3.99 Beaufort 0.94-3.99 1.17-2.63 Treatment (23/24) 76 miles SE (12/12) (11/12)

Plants (pCi/l)

Gamma Isotopic 36 Be-7 124(e) NDM NDM NA NDM Mn-54 15 NDM NDM NA NDM Fe-59 30 NDM NDM NA NDM Co-58 15 NDM NDM NA NDM Co-60 15 NDM NDM NA NDM Zn-65 30 NDM NDM NA NDM Zr-95 30 NDM NDM NA NDM Nb-95 15 NDM NDM NA NDM I-131 1 NDM NDM NA NDM Cs- 134 15 NDM NDM NA NDM Cs- 137 18 NDM NDM NA NDM Ba- 140 60 NDM NDM NA NDM La- 140 15 NDM _ _ _ __NDM NA_ NDM _

Tritium 2000 531 Station 87 587 NA 255 12 366-884 Beaufort 437-884 220-299 (7/8) 76 miles SE (4/4) (3/4)

( ( ( ( (" ( (, ( ( f, ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (

TABLE 3-1 (SHEET 6 of 8)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Docket Nos. 50-424 and 50-425 Burke County, Georgia Medium or Type and Minimum Indicator Location with the Highest Other Control Pathway Total Detectable Locations Annual Mean Stations (g) Locations Sampled Number of Concentration Mean (b), Mean (b),

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

(Fraction)

Anadromous Gamma Fish Isotopic (pCi/kg-wet) 1 Be-7 655(e) NDM NDM NA NA Mn-54 130 NDM NDM NA NA Fe-59 260 NDM NDM NA NA Co-58 130 NDM NDM NA NA Co-60 130 NDM NDM NA NA Zn-65 260 NDM NDM NA NA Cs- 134 130 NDM NDM NA NA Cs- 137 150 NDM NDM NA NA Fish Gamma (pCi/kg-wet) Isotopic 4

Be-7 655(e) NDM NDM NA NDM Mn-54 130 NDM NDM NA NDM Fe-59 260 NDM NDM NA NDM Co-58 130 NDM NDM NA NDM Co-60 130 NDM NDM NA NDM Zn-65 260 NDM NDM NA NDM Cs- 134 130 NDM _ , , NDM NA ,_NDM Cs-i37 150 56.4 Station 85 56.4 NA 26.0 53.3-59.4 4.3 miles ESE 53.3-59.4 17.8-34.2 (2/2) (2/2) (2/2)

TABLE 3-1 (SHEET 7 of 8)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Docket Nos. 50-424 and 50-425 Burke County, Georgia Medium or Type and Minimum Indicator Location with the Highest Other Control Pathway Total Number Detectable Locations Annual Mean Stations (g) Locations Sampled of Analyses Concentration Mean (b), Mean (b),

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

(Fraction)

Sediment Gamma (pCi/kg-dry) Isotopic 4

Be-7 655(e 309 Station 83 1309 NA 9 1970-1649 0.8 miles ENE 1970-1649 838-972 Co-60 70(e) ......... 7

..I........

77.)..

I..... Station .._..............

ato 833 77 NANDM 2_(

. ... 7.NA

-..... D 55-99 0.8 miles ENE 55-99 (2/2) (2/2).

Cs-134 150 ____NDM NDM NA NDM Cs-137 180 149 Station 83 149 NA 100 101-197 0.8 miles ENE 101-197 99-101 (2/2) (2/2) (2/2)

TABLE 3-1 (SHEET 8 of 8)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Docket Nos. 50-424 and 50-425 Burke County, Georgia Notes:

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

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

c. No Detectable Measurement(s).

d. Not Applicable.

e. The EL has determined that this value may be routinely attained under normal conditions. No value is provided in ODCM Table 4-3.

f. Item 3 of ODCM Table 4-1 implies that an 1-131 analysis is not required to be performed on water samples when the dose calculated from the consumption of water is less then 1 mrem per year. However, 1-131 analyses have been performed on the finished drinking water samples.

g. "Other" stations, as identified in the "Station Type" column of Table 2-2, are "Community" and/or "Special" stations.

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

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

The 2004 results were compared with past results, including those obtained during preoperation. As appropriate, results were compared with their Minimum Detectable Concentrations (MDC) and Reporting Levels (RL) which are listed in Tables 4-1 and 4-2 of this report, respectively. The required MDCs were achieved during laboratory sample analysis. Any anomalous results are explained within this report.

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

Table 4-1 Minimum Detectable Concentrations (MDC)

Analysis Water Airborne Fish Milk Grass or Sediment (pCi/1) Particulate (pCi/kg- (pCill) Leafy (pCi/kg) or Gases wet) Vegetation (fCi/m3) (pCi/kg-wet)

Gross Beta 4 10 H-3 2000 (a) X _

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

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

4-1

Table 4-2 Reporting Levels (RL)

Analysis Water Airborne Fish Milk (pCi/1) Grass or (pCill) Particulate (pCi/kg-wet) Leafy or Gases Vegetation (fCMm3) (pCi/kg-wet H-3 20,000 (a)

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

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

Atmospheric nuclear weapons tests from the mid 1940s through 1980 distributed man-made nuclides around the world. The most recent atmospheric tests in the 1970s and in 1980 had a significant impact upon the radiological concentrations found in the environment prior to and during preoperation, and the earlier years of operation. Some long lived radionuclides, such as Cs-137, continue to have some impact. A significant component of the Cs-137 which has often been found in various samples over the years (and continues to be found) is attributed to the nuclear weapons tests.

Data in this section has been modified to remove any obvious non-plant short term impacts. The specific short term impact data that has been removed includes: the nuclear atmospheric weapon test in the fall of 1980; abnormal releases from the Savannah River Site (SRS) during 1987 and 1991; and the Chernobyl incident in the spring of 1986.

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

Deviations from conducting the REMP as described in Table 2-1 are summarized in Table 4-3 along with their causes and resolutions. As discussed in Section 4.2, during 2004 there were no deviations which resulted in loss of data.

4-2

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

4-3

TABLE 4-3 DEVIATIONS FROM RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM COLLECTION AFFECTED DEVIATION CAUSE RESOLUTION PERIOD SAMPLES 12/29/03- Girard Air Filter Non-representative sample of Sample pump found not running. Air pump motor was serviced 01/06/04 and Air Cartridge airborne particulates. Lost approximately 79.2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> of and air sample station returned to Station 35 sampling time. operation.

02/03/04- Augusta Water Non-representative raw Malfunction of water sampling Amount of sample collected was 03/02/04 Treatment Plant drinking water sample equipment. adequate to run all analyses.

Raw Water collected. Water sampler was repaired and I__IIIreturned to service.

4th Quarter 2004 River Road TLD TLDs not in usual sample TLDs found on the ground at the TLDs replaced at normal sample I Station 14 place for entire quarter. end of the quarter. location.

4.1 Land Use Census and River Survey In accordance with ODCM 4.1.2, a land use census was conducted on November 09, 2004 to determine the locations of the nearest permanent residence, milk animal, and garden of greater than 500 square feet producing broad leaf vegetation, in each of the 16 compass sectors within a distance of 5 miles; the locations of the nearest beef cattle in each sector were also determined. A milk animal is a cow or goat producing milk for human consumption. Land within SRS was excluded from the census. The census results are tabulated in Table 4.1-1.

Table 4.1-1 LAND USE CENSUS RESULTS Distance in Miles to the Nearest Location in Each Sector SECTOR RESIDENCE MILK BEEF GARDEN ANIMAL CATTLE N None None None None NNE None None None None NE None None None None ENE None None None None E None None None None ESE 4.2 None None None SE 4.4 None 5.0 None SSE 4.6 None 4.6 None S 4.4 None None None SSW 4.7 None 4.5 None SW 2.7 None 4.9 None WSW 1.2 None 4.5 3.2 W 3.7 None 4.4 None WNW 1.8 None None 3.3 NW 1.6 None 1.9 4.1 NNW 1.5 None None None ODCM 4.1.2.2.1 requires a new controlling receptor to be identified, if the land use census identifies a location that yields a calculated receptor dose greater than the one in current use. It was determined that no change in the controlling receptor was required in 2004.

ODCM 4.1.2.2.2 requires that whenever the land use census identifies a location which yields a calculated dose (via the same ingestion pathway) 20% greater than that of a current indicator station, the new location must become a REMP station (if samples are available). None of the identified locations yielded a calculated 4-5

dose 20% greater than that for any of the current indicator stations. No milk animals were identified within five miles of the plant.

A survey of the Savannah River downstream of the plant for approximately 100 miles was conducted on September 21, 2004 to identify any withdrawal of water from the river for drinking or irrigation purposes. No such usage was identified.

These results were corroborated by checking with the Georgia Department of Natural Resources on October 1, 2004 and the South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control on September 23, 2004. Each of these agencies confirmed that no water withdrawal permits for drinking or irrigation purposes had been issued for this stretch of the Savannah River. The two water treatment plants used as indicator stations for drinking water are located farther downriver.

4-6

4.2 Airborne As specified in Table 2-1 and shown in Figures 2-1 through 2-3, airborne particulate filters and charcoal canisters are collected weekly at 5 indicator stations (Stations 3, 7, 10, 12 and 16) which encircle the plant at the site periphery, at a nearby community station (Station 35) approximately 7 miles from the plant, and at a control station (Station 36) which is approximately 14 miles from the plant. At each location, air is continuously drawn through a glass fiber filter to retain airborne particulate and an activated charcoal canister is placed in series with the filter to adsorb radioiodine.

Each particulate filter is counted for gross beta activity. A quarterly gamma isotopic analysis is performed on a composite of the air particulate filters for each station. Each charcoal canister is analyzed for I-131.

As provided in Table 3-1, the 2004 annual average weekly 3 gross beta activity was 21.6 fCi/m 3 for the indicator stations. It was 1.2 fCi/m less than the control station average of 22.8 fCi/m 3 for the year. This difference 3is not statistically discernible, since it is less than the calculated MDD of 2.3 fCi/m .

The 2004 annual average weekly gross beta activity at the Girard community station was 21.4 fCi/m 3 which was 1.4 fCi/m 3 less than the control station average.

This difference is not statistically discernible since it is less than the calculated MDD of 2.9 fCi/m3 .

The historical trending of the average weekly gross beta air concentrations for each year of operation and the preoperational period (September, 1981 to January, 1987) at the indicator, control and community stations is plotted in Figure 4.2-1 and listed in Table 4.2- 1. In general, there is close agreement between the results for the indicator, control and community stations. This close agreement supports the position that the plant is not contributing significantly to the gross beta concentrations in air.

4-7

0 0

0 Figure 4.2-1 Average Weekly Gross Beta Air Concentration 30 - l 0

0 0

0 is-E 0

Po 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 Year

-+-Indicator -UControl A-Community -MDC Table 4.2-1 0 Average Weekly Gross Beta Air Concentration 0 Period [Indicator (fCiIm3) 1 Control l Community

_ (fCi/m3) l (fCi/m3) 0 Pre-op 22.9 22.1 21.9 0 1987 26.3 23.6 22.3 1988 24.7 23.7 22.8 0 1989 19.1 18.2 18.8 0 1990 19.6 19.4 18.8 0 1991 19.3 19.2 18.6 1992 18.7 19.3 18.0 0 1993 21.2 21.4 20.3 1994 20.1 20.3 19.8 S 1995 21.1 20.7 20.7 1996 23.3 21.0 20.0 0 1997 20.6 20.6 19.0 1998 22.7 22.4 20.9 1999 22.5 21.9 22.2 2000 24.5 21.5 21.1 2001 22.4 22.0 22.7 2002 19.9 18.9 18.6 2003 19.4 20.5 18.3 2004 21.6 22.8 21.4 4-8 C-Ok

During 2004, no man-made radionuclides were detected from the gamma isotopic analysis of the quarterly composites of the air particulate filters. In 1987, Cs-137 of 1.7 fCi/m 3 . During was found in one indicator composite at a concentration pre-operation, Cs-137 was found in approximately 12% of the indicator composites and 14% of the control composites with average concentrations of 1.7 3 is 60 fCi/m 3 . Also, and 1.0 fCi/m , respectively. The MDC for airborne Cs-137 during pre-operation, Cs-134 was found in about 8% of the indicator composites at an average concentration of 1.2 fCi/m3. The MDC for Cs- 134 is 50 fCi/m3.

The naturally occurring radionuclide Be-7 is typically detected in all indicator and control station gamma isotopic analysis of the quarterly composites of the air particulate filters. In 2004, Be-7 was not identified in plant gaseous effluents therefore it is not included in the 2004 REMP summary table for the airborne pathway samples. Be-7 has been detected in gaseous effluents eight of the eighteen years of plant operation. However, there was not a statistically discernible difference between the indicator and control station Be-7 concentrations in air samples in any of the years.

Airborne 1-131 was not detected in any sample during 2004. During pre-operation, positive results were obtained only during the Chernobyl incident when concentrations as high as 182 fCi/m 3 were observed. The MDC and RL for airborne I- 131 are 70 and 900 fCi/m 3 , respectively.

Table 4-3 lists REMP deviations that occurred in 2004. There was one air sampling deviation. The first week of January, the air station at Girard was found not running due to a malfunction of the air sample pump motor. The sample results passed Chauvenet's Criterion and were retained in the air sample data base.

4-9

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

Two TLD stations are established in each of the 16 compass sectors, to form 2 concentric rings. The inner ring (Stations 1 through 16) is located near the plant perimeter as shown in Figure 2-1 and the outer ring (Stations 17 through 32) is located at a distance of approximately 5 miles from the plant as shown in Figure 2-2. The 16 stations forming the inner ring are designated as the indicator stations. The two ring configuration of stations was established in accordance with NRC Branch Technical Position "An Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program", Revision 1, November 1979. The 6 control stations (Stations 36, 37, 47, 48, 51 and 52) are located at distances greater than 10 miles from the plant as shown in Figure 2-2. Monitored special interest areas consist of the following: Station 35 at the town of Girard, and Station 43 at the employee recreational area. The TLD mean and range values presented in the "Other" column in Table 3-1 (page 1 of 8) includes the outer ring stations (stations 17 through 32) as well as stations 35 and 43.

As provided in Table 3-1 the average quarterly exposure measured at the indicator stations was 12.4 mR with a range of 9.9 to 16.9 mR. This average was 0.2 mR greater than the average quarterly exposure measured at the control stations (12.2 mR). This difference is not statistically discernible since it is less than the MDD of 0.9 mR. Over the operational history of the site, the annual average quarterly exposures shows a variation of no more than 0.7 mR difference between the indicator and control stations. The overall average quarterly exposure for the control stations during preoperation was 1.2 mR greater than that for the indicator stations.

The quarterly exposures acquired at the outer ring stations during 2004 ranged from 9.4 to 20.3 mR with an average of 12.3 mR which was 0.1 mR less than that for the control stations. However, this difference is not discernible since it is less than the MDD of 1.1 mR. For the entire period of operation, the annual average quarterly exposures at the outer ring stations vary by no more than 1.2 mR from those at the control stations. The overall average quarterly exposure for the outer ring stations during preoperation was 1.8 mR less than that for the control stations.

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

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

4-10

0 0

0 Figure 4.3-1 0

Average Quarterly Exposure from Direct Radiation 0 20 18-_z- __

0 16 .

14 12 0

0 0 0 0

0 Po 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 Year 0 I *Indicator -- Control A Outer Ring 0

0 Table 4.3-1 Average Quarterly Exposure from Direct Radiation 0

Period l Indicator [ Control Outer Ring l (mR) (mR) (mR) 0 Pre-op 15.3 16.5 14.7 1987 17.6 17.9 16.7 0 1988 16.8 16.1 16.0 1989 17.9 18.4 17.2 0 1990 16.9 16.6 16.3 0 1991 16.9 17.1 16.7 1992 12.3 0 1993 12.4 12.5 12.4 12.1 12.1 1994 12.3 12.1 11.9 1995 12.0 12.5 12.3 1996 12.3 12.2 12.3 1997 13.0 13.0 13.1 1998 12.3 12.7 12.4 1999 13.6 13.5 13.4 2000 13.5 13.6 13.5 2001 12.9 13.0 12.9 2002 12.8 12.9 12.6 2003 12.2 12.5 12.4 2004 12.4 12.2 12.3 4-11 C -0

S 0

The historical trending of the average quarterly exposures at the special interest areas for the same periods are provided in Figure 4.3-2 and listed in Table 4.3-2.

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

0 0

Figure 4.3-2 0

0 Average Quarterly Exposure from Direct Radiation at Special Interest Areas 0 25 0

0 0 £ 20 15 1-0 (a 10 0

5 0

0 Po 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 Year 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 S

0 I+ Hunting Cabin (Sta 33) -U- Girard (Sta 35) A Rec Center (Sta 43) 0 C.v6 4-12

Table 4.3-2 Average Quarterly Exposure from Direct Radiation at Special Interest Areas Period l Station 33 [ Station 35 1 Station 43 I (mR) I (mR) (mR)

Pre-op 16.6 15.1 15.3 1987 21.3 18.5 15.2 1988 19.7 18.1 14.8 X 1989 21.2 18.7 17.4 1990 16.8 18.9 16.2 1991 17.3 19.6 17.0 1992 12.8 13.5 12.0 1993 12.9 13.3 12.1 1994 12.6 13.6 12.0 1995 13.3 13.5 12.3 1996 13.0 13.6 12.1 1997 13.8 14.4 12.7 1998 13.5 13.7 12.5 1999 NA 14.5 12.7 2000 NA 14.8 13.1 2001 NA 14.0 12.6 2002 NA 14.0 12.1 2003 NA 14.1 12.2 2004 NA 14.2 11.7 The hunting cabin activities at Station 33 have been discontinued and, consequently, this location is no longer considered as an area of special interest.

Monitoring at this location was discontinued at the end of 1998.

There was one deviation from the REMP pertaining to measuring quarterly gamma doses during 2004. This deviation is listed in Table 4-3. At the 4 Quarter collection, Station 14 TLD packet was found on the ground. The data from the affected TLDs passed Chauvenet's Criterion and was retained in the C

direct radiation data base.

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

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

4-13

The readings for the following badges were deemed unacceptable since the standard deviation for each badge was greater than the self-imposed limit of 1.4:

First Quarter: None Second Quarter: None Third Quarter: 04B, 13A, and 25A Fourth Quarter: None However, for these cases when only one badge exceeded a standard deviation of 1.4, the companion badges were available and were used for determining the quarterly doses. The badges exceeding the self-imposed limit were visually inspected under a microscope and the glow curve and test results for the anneal data and the element correction factors were reviewed. No reason was evident for the high standard deviation.

4-14

0 0

4.4 Milk 0

In accordance with Tables 2-1 and 2-2, milk samples are collected biweekly from 0 two control locations, the W. C. Dixon Dairy (Station 98) and the Boyceland Dairy (Station 99). The Boyceland Dairy discontinued operations in 2003 and the last sample was collected on September 3, 2003. Coble Dairy (Station 100) was 0 added in late September as a replacement for Boyceland Dairy. Gamma isotopic 0 and I- 131 analyses are performed on each sample.

0 No indicator station (a location within 5 miles of the plant) for milk has been 0 available since April 1986. As discussed in Section 4.1, no milk animal was found during the 2004 land use census.

No man-made radionuclide was identified during the gamma isotopic analysis of the milk samples in 2004. The MDC and RL for Cs-137 in milk are 18 and 70 pCi/l, respectively. During preoperation and each year of operation through 1991, 0 Cs-137 was found in 2 to 6% of the samples at concentrations ranging from 5 to 27 pCi/l. During preoperation, Cs-134 was detected in one sample and in the first 0 year of operation, Zn-65 was detected in one sample. Figure 4.4-1 and Table 4.4-1 provide the historical trending of the Cs-137 concentration in milk.

0 Figure 4.4-1 0

Average Annual Cs-i 37 Concentration in M~ilk II 20- 1 1 1-0 18- -

16 W _--_- _ _ _ __

_.I i==4===

14 X -- t t 0 a.

c 0

C 0

0 12 10 8

j I-

~4

==

==

_- _ H H 6 -

Po 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 Year I--Indicator -U- Control - MDC 4-15

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

Pre-op 18.5 18 1987 0 10.4 1988 0 6.9 1989 0 7 1990 0 17 1991 0 14.2 1992 0 0 1993 0 0 1994 0 0 1995 0 0 1996 0 0 1997 0 0 1998 0 0 1999 0 0 2000 0 0 2001 0 0 2002 0 0 2003 0 0 2004 0 0 During 2004, 1-131 was not detected in any of the milk samples. Since operations began in 1987, 1-131 may have been detected in one sample in 1996 and two during 1990; however, its presence in these cases was questionable, due to large counting uncertainties. During preoperation, positive 1-131 results were found only during the Chernobyl incident with concentrations ranging from 0.53 to 5.07 pCi/l. The MDC and RL for I-131 in milk are 1 and 3 pCi/l, respectively.

4-16

4.5 Vegetation In accordance with Tables 2-1 and 2-2, grass samples are collected monthly at two indicator locations onsite near the site boundary (Stations 7 and 15) and at one control station located about 17 miles WSW from the plant (Station 37). Gamma isotopic analyses are performed on the samples. During 2004, three samples out of the 24 samples collected at the indicator stations were positive for the man-made radionuclide, Cs-137. The average of the two positive indicator samples was 36.8 pCi/kg-wet. One of the 12 samples collected at the control stations was positive for Cs-137 at a level of 19.7 pCi/kg-wet. The difference between the indicator and control stations was 17.1 pCi/kg-wet. An MDD could not be calculated because there was only one positive value at the control station. Using the modified Student's t-test, the difference between the average at the indicator stations and the single detectable sample at the control station was not statistically discernible.

Since Cs-137 is sometimes detected in environmental samples, as a result of atmospheric weapons testing and the Chernobyl incident, the historical trending of the average concentration of Cs- 137 at the indicator and control stations is provided in Figure 4.5-1 and listed in Table 4.5-1. No trend is recognized in this data. The MDC and RL for Cs-137 in vegetation samples are 80 and 2000 pCi/kg-wet, respectively. Cs-137 is the only man-made radionuclide that has been identified in vegetation samples during the operational history of the plant.

During preoperation, Cs-137 was found in approximately 60% of the samples from indicator stations and in approximately 20% of the samples from the control station. These percentages have generally decreased during operation.

The naturally occurring radionuclide Be-7 is typically detected in indicator and control station vegetation samples. Be-7 was not detected in gaseous effluents in 2004, therefore it is not included in the REMP summary table for the airborne pathway samples. Be-7 has been detected in gaseous effluents eight of the seventeen years of plant operation and is therefore of interest in the REMP program. However, the levels of Be-7 found in the REMP make no significant contribution to dose.

In May and June of 1986 during preoperation, as a consequence of the Chernobyl incident, I- 131 was found in nearly all the samples collected for a period of several weeks in the range of 200 to 500 pCi/kg-wet. The MDC and RL for 1-131 in vegetation are 60 and 100 pCi/kg-wet, respectively. Also during this time period, Co-60 was found in one of the samples at a concentration of 62.5 pCi/kg-wet.

There is no specified MDC or RL for Co-60 in vegetation.

4-17

0 Figure 4.5-1 0

0 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Vegetation 0 200 180 0 Z 160

& 140 0 ) 120 -I 0.

C 100 0

0 L 80 0 8) 60 0

() 40 0 20 0 0 Po 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 0 Year S -+-Indicator -- oControl MDC I 0

Table 4.5-1 0 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Vegetation 0

Year Indicator Control (pCi/kg-wet) (pCi/kg-wet)

S Pre-op 54.6 43.7 1987 24.4 61.5 0 1988 38.7 0.0 1989 9.7 0.0 1990 30.0 102.0 0 1991 35.3 62.4 1992 38.1 144.0 0 1993 46.4 34.1 0 1994 20.7 57.4 1995 57.8 179.0 0 1996 0 0 0 1997 0 32.6 1998 0 50.1 1999 37.2 0 2000 36.6 0 2001 0 0 2002 0 98.3 2003 24.5 0 2004 36.8 19.7 4-18 O"000

4.6 River Water Surface water from the Savannah River is obtained at three locations using automatic samplers. Small quantities are drawn at intervals not exceeding a few hours. The samples drawn are collected monthly; quarterly composites are produced from the monthly collections.

The collection points consist of a control location (Station 82) which is located about 0.4 miles upriver of the plant intake structure, an indicator location (Station

83) which is located about 0.4 miles downriver of the plant discharge structure, and a special location (Station 84) which is located approximately 1.3 miles downriver of the plant discharge structure. A statistically significant increase in the concentrations found in samples collected at the indicator station compared to those collected at the control station could be indicative of plant releases.

Concentrations found at the special station are more likely to represent the activity in the river as a whole, which might include plant releases combined with those from other sources along the river.

A gamma isotopic analysis is conducted on each monthly sample. As in all previous years, there were no gamma emitting radionuclides of interest detected in the 2004 river water samples.

Each quarterly composite is analyzed for tritium. As indicated in Table 3-1, the average concentration found at the indicator station was 1269 pCi/l which was 918 pCi/l greater than that found at the control station (351 pCi/1). This difference is not statistically discernible since it is less than the calculated MDD of 1061 pCi/l.

The MDC for tritium in river water is 3000 pCi/l and the RL is 30,000 pCi/l.

At the special river water sampling station, the results ranged from 507 pCi/l to 939 pCi/l with an average of 743 pCi/l. The decrease in tritium concentration between the indicator station and the special station is due to the additional dispersion over the 0.9 miles that separates the two stations. In the first two years of operation, the tritium concentration at the special station was somewhat greater than that at the indicator station. In recent years, the level at the special station has generally become less than the level at the indicator station.

The historical trending of the average tritium concentrations found at the special, indicator, and control stations along with the MDC for tritium is plotted on Figure 4.6-1. The data for the plot is listed in Table 4.6-1. Also included in the table are data from the calculated difference between the indicator and control stations; the MDD between the indicator and control stations; and the total curies of tritium released from the plant in liquid effluents.

The annual downriver survey of the Savannah River showed that river water is not being used for purposes of drinking or irrigation for at least 100 miles downriver (discussed in Section 4.1).

4-19

0 0

Figure 4.6-1 0

• Average Annual H-3 Concent ration in River Water 3500 I I I 0 13000 - a 2500e

_ I A I/

02000 00 I, - I/ \Z -

150 F-__Ag_

00 Po 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04

• Year 0 -Indicator -- Control -A Special MDC 0

0 0

0 0

0a 4+-/z

Table 4.6-1 Average Annual H-3 Concentration in River Water Year Special Indicator Control Difference MDD Annual Site (pCi/I) (pCi/l) (pCi/I) Between (pCill) Tritium Indicator and Released Control (Ci)

(pCi/l)

Pre-op 1900 650 665 -15 145 NA 1987 1411 680 524 156 416 321 1988 1430 843 427 416 271 390 1989 1268 1293 538 755 518 918 1990 1081 1142 392 750 766 1172 1991 1298 1299 828 471 626 1094 1992 929 1064 371 693 714 1481 1993 616 712 238 474 1526 761 1994 774 1258 257 1001 2009 1052 1995 699 597 236 361 766 968 1996 719 1187 387 800 2147 1637 1997 686 1547 254 1293 1566 1449 1998 640 1226 196 1030 1313 1669 1999 859 2005 389 1616 1079 1674 2000 885 1564 496 1068 1786 869 2001 931 2101 743 1358 1696 1492 2002 1280 2628 437 2190 1211 1566 2003 800 1376 399 977 1706 1932 2004 743 1269 351 918 1061 1212 4-21

4.7 Drinking Water Samples are collected at a control location (Station 80 - the Augusta Water Treatment Plant in Augusta, Georgia located about 56 river miles upriver), and at two indicator locations (Station 87 - the Beaufort-Jasper County Water Treatment Plant near Beaufort, South Carolina, 112 river miles downriver; and Station 88 -

the Cherokee Hill Water Treatment Plant near Port Wentworth, Georgia, 122 river miles downriver). These upriver and downriver distances in river miles are the distances from the plant to the point on the river where water is diverted to the intake for each of these water treatment plants.

Water samples are taken near the intake of each water treatment plant (raw drinking water) using automatic samplers that take periodical small aliquots from the stream. These composite samples are collected monthly along with a grab sample of the processed water coming from the treatment plants (finished drinking water). Quarterly composites are made from these monthly collections for both raw and processed river water. Gross beta and gamma isotopic analyses are performed on each of the monthly samples while tritium analysis is conducted on the quarterly composites. An I-131 analysis is not required to be conducted on these samples, since the dose calculated from the consumption of water is less than 1 mrem per year (see ODCM Table 4-1). However, an I-131 analysis is conducted on each of the monthly finished water grab samples, since a drinking water pathway exists.

Provided in Figures 4.7-1 and 4.7-2 and Tables 4.7-1 and 4.7-2, are the historical trends of the average gross beta concentrations found in the monthly collections of raw and finished drinking water.

For 2004, the indicator station average gross beta concentration in the raw drinking water was 4.06 pCi/l which was 1.67 pCi/l greater than the average gross beta concentration at the control station (2.39 pCi/1). This difference is statistically discernible, since it is greater than the MDD of 1.13 pCi/l. The required MDC for gross beta in water is 4.0 pCi/l which is approximately the average level seen at the indicator stations. There is no RL for gross beta in water.

For 2004, the indicator station average gross beta concentration in the finished drinking water was 2.36 pCi/l which was 0.44 pCi/l greater than the average gross beta concentration at the control station (1.92 pCi/l). This difference is less than the MDD of 0.69 pCi/l and not statistically discernible. The gross beta concentrations at the indicator stations ranged from 0.94 to 3.99 pCi/l while the concentrations at the control station ranged from 1.17 to 2.63 pCi/l.

Concentrations for the past few years are higher than gross beta results for finished drinking water during previous years of plant operation. However, these concentrations are only slightly higher than gross beta concentrations found during preoperation. Further, the concentration of 2.36 pCi/I is less than the required MDC of 4.0 pCi/l. There is no RL for gross beta in drinking water.

4-22

Figure 4.7-1 S

Average Monthly Gross Beta Concentration in Raw Drinking 0 Water 8-0 7-0 C

0 0 2 0

Po 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 Year l+Indicator -- Control MDC Table 4.7-1 0

0 Average Monthly Gross Beta Concentration in Raw Drinking Water Period Indicator Control

_ __ __ _ _ _ j(pC i/I) j(pC i/i)

Pre-op 2.70 1.90 1987 2.20 5.50 1988 2.67 3.04 0 1989 2.93 3.05 1990 2.53 2.55 0 1991 1992 2.83 2.73 3.08 2.70 0 1993 1994 3.17 3.51 2.83 3.47 0 1995 3.06 4.90 0 1996 5.83 3.02 1997 2.93 2.94 1998 3.31 2.58 1999 4.10 4.37 2000 4.52 3.59 2001 3.21 2.94 2002 3.09 2.61 2003 3.73 2.59 2004 4.06 2.39 4-23 c -ID

Figure 4.7-2 Average Monthly Gross Beta Concentration in Finished 0 Drinking Water 4.5 4

S rI 3.5 0

S 0

. 3

\K / / '\i I

0 C O 2.5 I

• 1-11

_w 2 C

a 1.5 C

I

'a ~I haev I 0 0 0

1 I FI I I I I I 2500 0

0 0. 2000 ----

500 0

0 0 0

Po 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 Year l +-Indicator Control MDC 0 Table 4.9-1 Average Annual Be-7 Concentration in Sediment 0 MDC=655 pCi/kg-dry Year Indicator 1 Control 0 l (pCi/kg-dry) l (pCi/kg-dry) 0 Pre-op 580 500 1987 987 543 1988 970 810 1989 1300 415 0 1990 465 545 1991 826 427 0 1992 2038 380 1993 711 902 0 1994 1203 964 1995 1865 1575 1996 1925 831 1997 1130 1028 1998 1396 1016 1999 662 769 2000 1526 3324 2001 1697 2614 2002 742 1254 2003 1150 903 2004 1309 905 4-32 CQ Ll

0 0

0 Figure 4.9-2 0

0 Average Annual Co-58 Concentration in Sediment 300_

0 0 p250--

L, 200 0 C10 0 10.-

0 0 0 C)50 - --

0 0 1-1 .. .. .. - - -

Po 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 Year l -Indicator -U-Control MDC Table 4.9-2 Average Annual Co-58 Concentration in Sediment S MDC=43 pCi/kg-dry 0 Year Indicator Control (p/kg-dry) A (pCi/kg-dry) 0 Pre-op 0 0 0 1987 0 0 1988 190 0 0 1989 135 0 1990 140 0 1991 0 0 1992 124 0 40 1993 0 0 1994 18.4 0 0 1995 42.4 0 1996 274 0 0 1997 0 0 1998 0 0 0 1999 0 0 0 2000 0 0 0 2001 0 0 2002 0 0 2003 0 0 2004 0 0 4-33 I-C(e

0 0

0 01 Figure 4.9-3 0 Average Annual Co-60 Concentration in Sediment 400 0 350-

-12s3001 T 1 I T I a T 0 2250 lI II1 0

Y.

0 0 r-20010 200l llu tf SX 0 50-F==

0 0 - - - P-- - - -

0 Po 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 Year 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 0 Indicator -UControl -MDC Table 4.9-3 0 Average Annual Co-60 Concentration in Sediment MDC=70 pCi/kg-dry 0

Year Indicator Control (pCi/kg-dry) j (pCi/kg-dry) 0 Pre-op 0 0 1987 0 0 0 1988 62 0 1989 46 0 1990 46 0 S 1991 113 0 0 1992 59.5 0 1993 65.9 0 1994 85.2 0 1995 267 0 1996 344 0 1997 86 0 1998 263 0 1999 49.5 0 2000 131.3 0 2001 0 0 2002 49.7 0 2003 146 0 2004 77 0 4-34 C-K

Figure 4.9-4 0 Average Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Sediment 0

0 0

0 . 400 C.,i 0.

C 300 0

0 0 -

Cu 200 0 0

c. -

S Po 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 Year 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04

- $-Indicator Control - MDC 0 -C-0 Table 4.9-4 Averag~e Annual Cs-137 Concentration in Sediment 0 MDC=180 pCi/kg Year 1 Indicator l Control 0 (pCi/kg) (pCi/kg)

Pre-op 320 150 0 1987 209 111 0 1988 175 175 1989 230 125 1990 155 140 1991 246 100 1992 259 ill 0 1993 345 115 1994 240 118 1995 357 123 1996 541 93 1997 184 98 1998 316 122 1999 197 97 2000 138 218 2001 252 118 2002 189 60 2003 171 90 2004 149 100 4-35

Table 4.9-5 Additional Sediment Nuclide Concentrations Nuclide YEAR l Indicator Control l MDC

_ l (pCi/kg-dry) j (pCi/kg-dry) l (pCi/kg-dry)

Mn-54 1988 22 0 1989 18 0 42 1994 32 0 1-131 1992 194 20 53 1994 51 41 4-36

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

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

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

The samples offered by Analytics and included in the EL analyses are gross beta and gamma isotopic analyses of an air filter; gamma isotopic analyses of milk samples; and gross beta, tritium and gamma isotopic analyses of water samples.

The accuracy of each result is measured by the normalized deviation, which is the ratio of the reported average less the known value to the total error. The total error is the square root of the sum of the squares of the uncertainties of the known value and of the reported average. The uncertainty of the known value includes all analytical uncertainties as reported by Analytics. The uncertainty of the reported average is the propagated error of the values in the reported average by the EL.

The precision of each result is measured by the coefficient of variation, which is defined as the standard deviation of the reported result divided by the reported average. An investigation is undertaken whenever the absolute value of the normalized deviation is greater than three or whenever the coefficient of variation is greater than 15% for all radionuclides other than Cr-51 and Fe-59. For Cr-51 and Fe-59, an investigation is undertaken when the coefficient of variation exceeds the values shown as follows:

Nuclide Concentration

• Total Sample Activity Percent Coefficient (pCi) of Variation Cr-51 <300 NA 25 Cr-51 NA >1000 25 Cr-51 >300 <1000 15 Fe-59 <80 NA 25 Fe-59 >80 NA 15

• For air filters, concentration units are pCi/filter. For all other media, concentration units are pCi/liter (pCi/A).

5-1

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

It may be seen from Table 5-1 that all 2004 results were acceptable for precision and accuracy. The activity for Fe-59 was trending with a positive bias. The analysis is performed by gamma spectroscopy and will be investigated in 2005.

5-2

( (

TABLE 5-1 (SHEET 1 of 3)

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

Analysis or l Date 1Reported Known [Standard [Uncertainty Percent Coef Normalized Radionuclide j Prepared JAverage I Value I Deviation EL Analytics (3S) of Variation j Deviation Gross Beta ] 09/16/04 l 55 l 53.6 [ 2.64 [ 0.90 7 9.00 0.22 GAMMA ISOTOPIC ANALYSIS OF AN AIR FILTER (pCi/filter)

Analysis or l Date 1Reported [Known [Standard [Uncertainty [Percent Coef l Normalized Radionuclide l Prepared l Average Value Deviation EL Analytics (3S) of Variation l Deviation Ce-141 09/16/04 180 190 2.97 2.11 3.70 -1.53 Co-58 09/16/04 69 71.9 1.85 0.80 5.60 -0.74 Co-60 09/16/04 90.2 95.2 2.19 1.06 4.58 -1.20 Cr-51 09/16/04 190.5 170 11.59 1.89 13.20 0.81 Cs- 134 09/16/04 65.4 73.3 3.88 0.81 7.40 -1.63 Cs- 137 09/16/04 165.5 163 2.53 1.81 3.96 0.38 Fe-59 09/16/04 76.9 69.5 0.69 0.77 6.42 1.50 Mn-54 09/16/04 142.1 138 2.49 1.53 4.20 0.69 Zn-65 09/16/04 142.7 136 5.22 1.51 6.28 0.75 GAMMA ISOTOPIC ANALYSIS OF A MILK SAMPLE (pCi/liter)

Analysis or 1 Date Reported 1Known l Standard  ! Uncertaintyl Percent Coef [Normalized Radionuclide l Prepared l Average IValue I Deviation EL Analytics (3S) l of Variation Deviation Ce-141 06/17/04 160 157 7.1 1.74 4.44 0.40 Co-58 06/17/04 48 46.2 4.52 0.51 9.41 0.39 Co-60 06/17/04 172 172 6.64 1.91 3.86 0.00 Cr-51 06/17/04 247 228 37.01 2.53 14.98 0.51 Cs-134 06/17/04 102 101 4.01 1.12 3.93 0.23 Cs-137 06/17/04 158 156 7.89 1.73 4.99 0.24

TABLE 5-1 (SHEET 2 of 3)

INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM RESULTS GAMMA ISOTOPIC ANALYSIS OF A MILK SAMPLE (pCi/liter)

Analysis or Date Reported Known Standard Uncertainty Percent Coef Normalized Radionuclide Prepared Average Value Deviation EL Analytics (3S) of Variation Deviation Fe-59 06/17/04 60 44.5 9.17 0.49 l 15.28 l 1.69 1-131 06/17/04 61 58.2 5.48 0.65 8.98 0.50 Mn-54 06/17/04 75 70.5 5.86 0.78 7.81 0.75 Zn-65 06/17/04 105 99.3 10.2 1.10 9.72 0.55 GROSS BETA ANALYSIS OF WATER SAMPLE (pCi/liter)

Analysis or Date Reported Known Standard Uncertainty Percent Coef Normalized Radionuclide Prepared Average Value Deviation EL Analytics (3S) of Variation Deviation Gross Beta 03/25/04 296 276 9.17 3.00 3.00 1.89 06/17/04 299 286 13.94 3.18 10.00 0.45 GAMMA ISOTOPIC ANALYSIS OF WATER SAMPLES (pCi/liter)

Analysis or 1Date l Reported l Known Standard Uncertainty l Percent Coef l Normalized Radionuclide Prepared Average I Value I Deviation EL Analytics (3S) l of Variation l Deviation Ce-141 03/25/04 83 85 6.2 1.00 7.47 -0.31 Co-58 03/25/04 116 112 6.72 1.33 5.79 0.57 Co-60 03/25/04 148 153 5.94 1.67 4.01 -0.78 Cr-51 03/25/04 369 326 37.5 3.67 9.47 1.85 Cs-134 1 03/25/04 l 92 l 90 l 4.21 1.001 4.57 0.45

( ( ( ( ( C ( ( C ( ( ( ( C C C ( C ( ( C C C ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( C ( C ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( (

TABLE 5-1 (SHEET 3 of 3)

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

Analysis or Date Reported Known Standard Uncertainty Percent Coef Normalized Radionuclide Prepared Average Value Deviation EL Analytics (3S) of Variation Deviation Cs-137 03/25/04 193 185 8.75 2.00 4.53 - 0.86 Fe-59 03/25/04 74 57 7.84 0.67 10.59 2.10 1-131 03/25/04 90 90 5.74 1.00 6.38 0.00 Mn-54 03/25/04 119 114 7.14 1.33 6.00 0.67 Zn-65 03/25/04 146 143 12.78 1.67 8.75 0.23 TRITIUM ANALYSIS OF WATER SAMPLES (pCi/liter)

Analysis or [Date [Reported [Known l Standard I Uncertainty lPercent Coef lNormalized Radionuclide [Prepared [Average I Value I Deviation EL I Analytics (3S) l of Variation Deviation H-3 [03/25/04 [ 44521 4700 140.32 100.00 6.00 -0.92

_ 06/17/04 j 11871 [ 11900 168.961 133.33 j 1.00j -0.13

6.0 CONCLUSION

S This report confirms the licensee's conformance with the requirements of Chapter 4 of the ODCM during 2004. It provides a summary and discussion of the results of the laboratory analyses for each type of sample.

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

In 2004, there were three instances in which the indicator station readings were greater than the control station readings. These instances are discussed in the following paragraphs.

Gross beta concentrations in raw drinking water were slightly higher at the indicator stations than at the control station. This difference was greater than the calculated MDD. As discussed in Section 4.7, the average value at the control stations was 4.06 pCi/l which is approximately at the required MDC (4.0 pCi/l) for gross beta in water. There is no reporting level for gross beta in water. Gross beta analysis is used to screen samples for beta activity and does not identify specific isotopes.

Tritium in raw drinking water was slightly higher at the indicator stations than at the control station. The average tritium at the indicator stations was 585 pCi/l and was statistically discernible from the control station average. This concentration could be attributed to plant effluents. The MDC and RL for tritium in drinking water are 2000 pCifl and 20,000 pCi/l, respectively. Although raw river water is not intended for human consumption, a potential dose from tritium in the drinking water pathway was calculated assuming that a person regularly consumed untreated water taken from the river near the intake to the water treatment plant.

Under these assumed circumstances, the potential dose to such an individual would be approximately 0.028 mRem in one year. This dose would be approximately 1% of the annual dose limit for the total body due to liquid effluents.

Cobalt-60 was identified in river sediment at the indicator station but not at the control station. The average activity found at the indicator station was 77 pCi/kg-dry and could be attributed to plant releases. The consequent total body dose to a member of the public expected to receive the highest dose was determined to be approximately 0.0035 mRem in one year or approximately 0.12% of the ODCM limit.

No discernible radiological impact upon the environment or the public as a consequence of plant discharges to the atmosphere and to the river was established for any other REMP samples.

6-1