Text

2016 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report
	ML17135A292
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee
Issue date:	05/11/2017
From:	Chappell C; Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee
To:	; Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
	BVY 17-016
	Download: ML17135A292 (106)
	v • d • e

~Entergy Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC Vermont Yankee 320 Governor Hunt Rd.

Vernon, VT 05354 (802) 257-7711 Coley C. Chappell

Manager, Design and Programs BVY 17-016 May 11, 2017 ATTN: Document Control Desk

'U.S. N.udlear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

SUBJECT:

2016 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Docket No. 50'-271 License No. DPR-28

Dear Sir or Madam:

in* accordance with Vermont Yankee Technical Specification 6.6.E, enclosed is a copy of the 2016 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report. This report contains a summary and analysis of the radiological environmental data collected for the calendar year 2016.

There are no new regulatory commitments contained in this submittal.

Should you have any questions or require additional information concerning this submittal, please contact me at (802) 451-3374.

Sincerely,

~ . .. I

Enclosure:

Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report - Year 2016 cc listing (next page)

BVY 17-016 /Page 2 of 2 cc: Mr. Daniel H. Dorman, Region 1 Administrator U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 2100 Renaissance Blvd, Suite 100 King of Prussia, PA 19406-2713 Mr. Jack D. Parrott, Senior Project Manager Off ice of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Mail Stop T-8F5

,Washington, DC 20555 Ms. June Tierney, Commissioner Vermont Department of Public Service 112 State Street - Drawer 20 Montpelier, Vermont 05602-2601 Vermont Department of Health Division of Radiological Health Attn: Bill Irwin P.O. Box70 Burlington, VT 05402-0070 Massachusetts Department of Public Health Jack Priest, Director Radiation Control Program 529 Main Street, Suite 1M2A Charlestown, MA 02129 Augustinus Ong, Administrator Department of Health and Human Services Radiological Health Section 29 Hazen Drive Concord, NH 03301-6504 John Giarrusso Director of Nuclear Preparedness Massachusetts Emergency Management Agency 400 Worcester Road Framingham, MA 01702-5399 Tony Honnellio Radiation Program Manager, Health and Safety Coordinator EPA, New England, Region 1 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100 (OSRR02-2)

Boston, MA 02109

ENTERGY-VERMONTYANKEE Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT Year 2016

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 1

2. BACKGROUND RADIOACTIVITY ......................................................................................... 2 2.1 Naturally Occurring Background Radioactivity ................................................................. 2 2.2 Man-Made Background Radioactivity ............................................................................... .3

3. GENERAL PLANT AND SITE INFORMATION .................................................................... .4

4. PROGRAM DESIGN .................................................................................................................. 5 4.1 Monitoring Zones ................................................................................................................ 6 4.2 Pathways Monitored ........................................................................................................... 6 4.3 Descriptions of Monitoring Programs ................................................................................. 7 5 RADIOLOGICAL DATA

SUMMARY

TABLES ................................................................... 24

6. ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS .................................................................. .42 6.1 Sampling Program Deviations ......................................................................................... 42 6.2 Comparison of Achieved LLDs with Requirements ....................................................... .43

6.3 Comparison of Results with Reporting Levels ............................................................... .44 6.4 Changes in Sampling Locations ....................................................................................... 44 6.5 Data Analysis by Media Type .......................................................................................... 44

7. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM .................................................................................... 79 7.1 Environmental Dosimetry Company Laboratory ............................................................. 79 7.2 Teledyne Brown Engineering-Environmental Services (TBE-ES) Laboratory ............... 93

8. LAND USE CENSUS ..................................................................................................... :......... 97

9.

SUMMARY

.............................................................................................................................. 99

10. REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 100

LIST OF TABLES Table 4.1 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program .................................. 10 4.2 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Locations (Non-TLD) ............................................................................. 12 4.3 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Locations (TLD) ..................................................................................... 14 4.4 Environmental Lower Limit of Detection (LLD)

Sensitivity Requirements ........................................................................ 16 4.5 Reporting Levels for Radioactivity Concentrations in Environmental Samples ...................................................................... 17 5.1 Radiological Environmental Program Summary .................................... 26 5.2 Environmental TLD Data Summary ....................................................... 39 5.3 Environmental TLD Measurements ........................................................ 40 6.1 Summary of Air Compressor Condensate and Manhole Water Tritium Concentrations ................................................ .49 8.1 Land Use Census Locations ................................................... 98 ii

LIST OF FIGURES 4.1 Environmental Sampling Locations in Close Proximity to the Plant... ................................................................. 18 4.2 Environmental Sampling Locations Within 5 Kilometers of Plant.. ................................................ ,.................... 19 4.3 Environmental Sampling Locations.

Greater than 5 Kilometers from Plant... ....................................................... 20 4.4 TLD Locations in Close Proximity to the Plant ......................................................... ~ ......................................... 21 4.5 TLD Locations Within 5 Kilometers of Plant ........................................................................................................ 22 4.6 TLD Locations Greater than 5 Kilometers from Plant .................................................................................................... 23 6.1- 6.27 Environmental Program Trend Graphs ....................................................... 53 iii

1. INTRODUCTION This report summarizes the findings of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) conducted by Entergy-Vermont Yankee in the vicinity of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VYNPS) in Vernon, Vermont during the calendar year 2016. The analyses of samples collected indicated that no plant-generated radioactive material was found in any location off site. In all cases, the possible radiological impact was negligible with respect to exposure from natural background radiation. In no case did the detected levels exceed the most restrictive federal regulatory or plant license limits for radionuclides in the environment. Measured values were several .orders of magnitude below reportable levels listed in Table 4.5 of this report. Except for sample deviations listed in Section 6.1, all other samples were collected and analyzed as required by the program.

This report is submitted annually in compliance with plant Technical Specification 6.6.E. The remainder of this report is organized as follows:

Section 2: Provides an introductory explanation of background radioactivity and radiation detected in the plant environs.

Section 3: Provides a brief description of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Sta_tion site and its environs.

Section 4: Provides a description of the overall REMP- program design. Included is a summary of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VYNPS) Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) requirements for REMP sampling, tables listing all locations sampled or monitored in 2016 with compass sectors and distances from the plant, and maps showing each REMP location. Tables listing Lower Limit of Detection requirements and Reporting Levels are also included.

Section 5: Consists of the summarized data as required by the VYNPS ODCM. The tables are in a format similar to that specified by the NRC Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position on Environmental Monitoring (Reference 1). Also included is a summary of the 201,6 environmental TLD measurements.

Section 6: Provides the results of the 2016 monitoring program. The performance of the program in meeting regulatory requirements as given in the ODCM is discussed, and the data acquired during the year are analyzed.

Section 7: Provides an overview of the Quality Assurance programs used at Environmental Dosimetry Company and Teledyne Brown Engineering.

Section 8: Summarizes the requirements and the results of the 2016 Land Use Census.

Section 9: Gives a summary of the 2016 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program.

1

2. BACKGROUND RADIOACTIVITY Radiation or radioactivity potentially detected in the Vermont Yankee enviromnent can be grouped into three categories. The first is "naturally-occurring" radiation and radioactivity. The second is "man-made" radioactivity from sources other than the Vermont Yankee plant. The third potential source of radioactivity is due to emissions from the Vermont Yankee plant. For the purposes of the Vermont Yankee REMP, the first two categories are classified as "background" radiation, and are the subject of discussion in this section of the report. The third category is the one that the REMP is designed to detect and evaluate.

2.1 Naturally Occurring Background Radioactivity Natural radiation and radioactivity in the enviromnent, which provide the major source of human radiation exposure, may be subdivided into three separate categories: "primordial radioactivity,"

"cosmogenic radioactivity" and "cosmic radiation." "Primordial radioactivity" is made up of those radionuclides that were created with the universe and that have a sufficiently long half-life to be still present on the earth. Included in this category are the newly-formed "daughter" radionuclides descending from these onginal elements. A few of the more important radionuclides in this category are Uranium-238 (U-238), Thorium-232 (Th-232), Rubidium-87 (Rb-87), Potassium-40 (K-40), Radium-226 (Ra-226), and Radon-222 (Rn-222). Uranium-238 and Thorium-232 are readily detected in soil and rock, whether through direct field measurements or through laboratory analysis of samples. Radium-226 in the earth can find its way from the soil into ground water, and is often detectable there. Radon-222 is one of the components of natural background in air, and its daughter products are detectable on air sampling filters.

Potassium-40 comprises about 0.01 percent of all natural potassium in the earth, and is consequently detectable in most biological substances, including the human body. There are many more primordial radionuclides found in the enviromnent in addition to the major ones discussed above (Reference 2).

The second sub-category of naturally-occurring radiation and radioactivity is "cosmogenic radioactivity."

This is produced through the nuclear interaction of high energy cosmic radiation with elements in the earth's atmosphere, and to a much lesser degree, in the earth's crust. These radioactive elements are then incorporated into the entire geosphere and atmosphere, including the earth's soil, surface rock, biosphere, sediments, ocean floors, polar ice and atmosphere. The major radionuclides in this category are Carbon-14 (C-14), Hydrogen-3 (H-3 or Tritium), Sodium-22 (Na-22), and Beryllium-7 (Be-7). Beryllium-7 is the one most readily detected, and is found on air sampling filters and occasionally in biological media (Reference 2).

2

The third sub-category of naturally-occurring radiation and radioactivity is "cosmic radiation." This consists of high energy atomic and sub-atomic particles of extra-terrestrial origin and the secondary particles and radiation that are produced through their interaction in the earth's atmosphere. The majority of this radiation comes from outside of our solar system, and to a lesser degree from the sun. We are protected from most of this radiation by the earth's atmosphere, which absorbs the radiation.

Consequently, one can see that with increasing elevation one would be exposed to more cosmic radiation as a direct result of a thinner layer of air for protection ..This "direct radiation" is detected in the field with gamma spectroscopy equipment, high pressure ion chambers and thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs).

2.2 Man-Made Background Radioactivity The second source of "background" radioactivity in the Vermont Yankee environment is from "man-made" sources not related to the power plant. The most recent contributor (prior to year 2011) to this category was the fallout from the Chernobyl accident in April of 1986, which was detected in the Vermont Yankee environment and other parts of the world. Some smaller amounts of radioactivity were detected in the environment following the Fukushima Daiichi plants accidents in March 2011. A much greater contributor to this category, however, has been fallout from atmospheric nuclear weapons testi.

Tests were conducted from 1945 through 1980 by the United States, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, China and France, with the large majority of testing occurring during the periods 1954-1958 and 1961-1962. (A test ban treaty was signed in 1963 by the United States, Soviet Union and United Kingdom, but not by France and China.) Atmospheric testing was conducted by the People's Republic of China as recently as October 1980. Much of the fallout detected today is due to this explosion and the last large scale test performed in November of 1976 (Reference 3).

The radioactivity produced by these detonations was deposited worldwide. The amount of fallout deposited in any given area is dependent on many factors, such as the explosive yield of the device, the latitude and altitude of the detonation, the season in which it occurred, and the timing of subsequent rainfall which washes fallout from the troposphere (Reference 4). Most of this fallout has decayed into stable elements, but the residual radioactivity is still readily detectable in environmental samples worldwide. The two predominant radionuclides are Cesium-137 (Cs-137) and Strontium-90 (Sr-90). They are found in soil and in vegetation, and since cows and goats graze large areas of vegetation, these radionuclides are also often detected in milk.

Other potential "man-made sources of environmental "background" radioactivity include other nuclear power plants, coal-fired power plants, national defense installations, hospitals, research laboratories and 3

industry. These, collectively, are insignificant on a global scale when compared to the sources discussed above (natural and fallout).

3. GENERAL PLANT AND SITE INFORMATION The Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station is located in the town of Vernon, Vermont in Windham County. The 130-acre site is on the west shore of the Connecticut River, immediately upstream of the Vernon Hydroelectric Station. The plant site is bounded on the north, south and west by privately-owned land and on the east by the Connecticut River. The surrounding area is generall~ rural and lightly populated, and the topography is flat or gently rolling on the valley floor.

Construction of the single unit 540 megawatt BWR (Boiling Water Reactor) plant began in 1967. The pre-operational Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program, designed to measure environmental radiation and radioactivity levels in the area prior to station operation, began in 1970. Commercial operation began on November 30, 1972. An Extended Power Uprate, conducted in 2006, resulted in the generation capacity increasing to 650 megawatts electric.

A decision was made in 2013 to permanently shut down and decommission Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station at the end of 2014. The last day of power operation occurred on December 29, 2014.

4

4. PROGRAM DESIGN The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) for the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VYNPS) was designed with specific objectives in mind. These are:

To provide an early indication of the appearance or accumulation of any radioactive material in the environment caused by the operation of the station.

To provide assurance to regulatory agencies and the public that the station's environmental impact is known and within anticipated limits.

To verify the adequacy and proper functioning of station effluent controls and monitoring systems.

To provide standby monitoring capability for rapid assessment of risk to the general public in the event of unanticipated or accidental releases of radioactive material.

The program was initiated in 1970, approximately two years before the plant began commercial operation. It has been in operation continuously since that time, with improvements made periodically over those years.

The current program is designed to meet the intent of NRC Regulatory Guide 4.1, Programs for Monitoring Radioactivity in the Environs of Nuclear Power Plants; NRC Regulatory Guide 4.8, Environmental Technical Specifications for Nuclear Power Plants; the NRC Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position of November 1979, An Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program; and NRC NUREG-0473, Radiological Ejjluent Technical Specifications for BWRs. The environmental TLD program has been designed and tested around NRC Regulatory Guide 4.13, Performance, Testing and Procedural Specifications for Thermoluminescence Dosimetry: Environmental Applications. The quality assurance program is designed around the guidance given in NRC Regulatory Guide 4.15, Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring Programs (Normal Operations) - Ejjluent Streams and the Environment.

The sampling requirements of the REMP are given in the Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual Table 3.5.1 and are summarized in Table 4.1 of this report. The identification of the required sampling locations is given in the Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM), Chapter 7. These sampling and monitoring locations are shown graphically on the maps in Figures 4.1through4.6 of this report.

5

The Vermont Yankee Chemistry Department conducts the radiological environmental monitoring program and collects all airborne, terrestrial and ground water samples. VYNPS maintains a contract with Normandeau Associates to collect all fish, river water and river sediment samples. In 2016, analytical measurements of environmental samples were performed at Teledyne Brown Engineering Laboratory in Knoxville, Tennessee. TLD badges are posted and retrieved by the V ~rmont Yankee Chemistry Department, and were analyzed by Environmental Dosimetry Company in Sterling, Massachusetts.

4.1 Monitoring Zones The REMP is designed to allow comparison of levels of radioactivity in samples from the area possibly influenced by the plant to levels found in areas not influenced by the plant. Monitoring locations within the first zone are called "indicators." Those within the second zone are called "controls." The distinction between the two zones, depending on the type of sample or sample pathway, is based on one or more of several factors, such as site meteorological history, meteorological dispersion calculations, relative direction from the plant, river flow, and distance. Analysis of survey data from the two zones aids in determining if there is a significant difference between the two areas. It can also help in differentiating between radioactivity and radiation due to plant releases and that due to other fluctuations in the environment, such as atmospheric nuclear weapons test fallout or seasonal variations in the natural background.

4.2 Pathways Monitored Four pathway categories are monitored by the REMP. They are the airborne, waterborne, ingestion and direct radiation pathways. Each of these four categories is monitored by the collection of one or more sample media, which are listed below, and are described in more detail in this section:

Airborne Pathway Air Particulate Sampling Charcoal Cartridge (Radio iodine) Sampling Waterborne Pathways River Water Sampling Ground Water Sampling

. Sediment Sampling Ingestion Pathways Milk Sampling Silage Sampling Mixed Grass Sampling Fish Sampling Direct Radiation Pathway TLD Monitoring 6

4.3 Descriptions of Monitoring Programs 4.3.1 Air Sampling Continuous air samplers were installed at seven locations until 8/4/2015 when sample collection was discontinued at one station not required by the VY ODCM. At the beginning of 2016, six air sample stations were part of the program. One station was removed in March 2016 (ODCM Rev 36) because it was a non-required control sample and with the plant in permanent shut down, it was removed from the REMP. In December 2016, two more air sample stations were removed from service with the release of ODCM Rev 37. Currently there are two indicator stations and one control. Data from all samples collected i1;1 2016 are included in this report. The sampling pumps at these locations operate continuously at a flow rate of approximately one cubic foot per minute. Airborne particulates are collected by passing air through a 50 mm glass-fiber filter. A dry gas meter is incorporated into the sampling stream to measure the total volume of air sampled in a given interval. The entire system is housed in a weatherproof structure. The filters are collected on a weekly frequency and, to allow for the decay of radon daughter products, the analysis for gross beta radioactivity is delayed for more than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months . The weekly filters are composited by location at the environmental laboratory for a quarterly gamma spectroscopy analysis.

If the gross-beta activity on an air particulate sample is greater than ten times the yearly mean of the control samples, ODCM Table 3.5.1, Note c, requires a gamma isotopic analysis on the sample.

4.3.2 Charcoal Cartridge (Radioiodine) Sampling Continuous air samplers are installed at seven locations until 8/4/2015 when sample collection was discontinued at one station not required by the VY ODCM. One station was removed in March 2016 (ODCM Rev 36) because it was a non-required control sample and with the plant in permanent shut down, it was removed from the REMP. In December 2016 all charcoal filters were removed from sample stations with the release of ODCM Rev 37. With the radioactive decay of I-131, there is no longer a credible source of radioiodines generated by NYNPS. Data is shown in this report for all sample collected in 2016. The sampling pumps at these locations operate continuously at a flow rate of approximately one cubic foot per minute. A 60 cc TEDA-impregnated charcoal cartridge is located downstream of the air particulate filter described in Section 4.3.1 above. A dry gas meter is incorporated into the sampling stream to measure the total volume of air sampled in a given interval. The entire system is housed in a weatherproof structure. Until iodine sampling was discontinued by ODCM Rev 37 in December 2016, these cartridges are collected and analyzed weekly for I-131.

4.3.3 River Water Sampling An automatic compositing sampler is maintained at the downstream sampling location by the Vermont 7

river water to the sampler. The sampler is controlled by a timer that collects a frequent aliquot of river water. An additional grab sample is collected monthly at the upstream control location. Each sample is analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. Although not required by the VYNPS ODCM, a gross-beta analysis is also performed on each sample. The monthly composite and grab samples are composited by location by the contracted environmental laboratory for a quarterly tritium (H-3) analysis.

4.3.4 Ground Water (Deep Well Potable Water) Sampling Grab samples are collected quarterly from up to four indicator locations and one control location. Only one indicator and one control are required by the VYNPS ODCM. Each sample is analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides and H-3. Although not required by the VYNPS ODCM, a gross-beta analysis is also performed on each sample.

4.3.5 Sediment Sampling River sediment grab samples are collected semiannually from the downriver location and at the North Storm Drain Outfall by Normandeau Associates. Each sample is analyzed at an offsite environmental laboratory for gamma-emitting radionuclides.

4.3.6 Milk Sampling When milk animals are identified as being on pasture feed (May through October), milk samples are collected twice per month from that location. Throughout the rest of the year, and for the full year where animals are not on pasture, milk samples are collected on a monthly schedule. Two locations are chosen as a result of the annual Land Use Census, based on meteorological dispersion calculations and proximity to the plant. The third location is a control, which is located sufficiently far away from the plant to be outside any potential plant influence. Other samples may be collected from locations of interest.

Immediately after collection, each milk sample is refrigerated and then shipped to the contracted environmental laboratory. Each sample is analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. A separate low-level I-131 analysis is performed to meet the Lower Limit of Detection requirements in the ODCM.

Although not required by the ODCM, Sr-89 and Sr-90 analyses are also performed on quarterly composited samples. Milk sample collection was ceased in December 2016. Radioactive decay has removed I-131 from plant inventory. Data is shown in this report for all sample collected in 2016.

4.3.7 Silage (Chopped Corn or Grass) Sampling Silage samples are collected at the milk sampling location at the time of harvest, if available. The silage from each location is shipped to the contracted environmental laboratory where it is analyzed for gamma-8

from each location is shipped to the contracted environmental laboratory where it is analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. Although not required by the ODCM, the silage samples are analyzed for low-level I-131. In December 2016 (ODCM Rev 37) this sample frequency was changed from annual to quarterly. Samples collected after 2016 will be analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides, but will not be analyzed for I-131 due to radioactive decay.

4.3.8 Mixed Grass Sampling

\

At each air sampling station, a mixed grass sample is collected quarterly, when available. Enough grass is clipped to provide the minimal sample weight needed to achieve the required Lower Limit of Detection (LLD). The mixed grass samples are analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. Until iodine sampling was discontinued by ODCM Rev 37 in December 2016, the grass samples were analyzed for low-level I-131. This analysis was not required by the ODCM, but had been performed for a number of years.

4.3.9 Fish Sampling Fish samples are collected semiannually at two Connecticut River locations (upstream of the plant and in the Vernon Pond) by Normandeau Associates. The samples are frozen and delivered to the environmental laboratory where the edible and inedible portions are separately analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides.

4.3.10 TLD Monitoring Direct gamma radiation exposure is continuously monitored with the use of thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). Specifically, Panasonic UD-801AS1 and UD-814AS1 calcium sulfate dosimeters are used, with a total of five elements in place at each monitoring location. Each pair of dosimeters is sealed in a plastic bag, which is in tum housed in a plastic screen cylinder. This cylinder is attached to an object such as a fence or utility pole.

A total of 40 stations are required by the ODCM. Of these, 24 must be read out quarterly, while those from the remaining 16 incident response (outer ring) stations need only be de-dosed (annealed) quarterly, unless an ODCM gaseous release limit was exceeded during the period. Although not required by the ODCM, the TLDs from the 16 outer ring stations are read out quarterly along with the other stations' TLDs. In addition to the TLDs required by the ODCM, more than thirteen are typically posted at or near the site boundary. The plant staff posts and retrieves all TLDs, while the contracted environmental laboratory (Environmental Dosimetry Company) provides processing.

9

TABLE4.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM (as required by ODCM Table 3.5.1)*

Collection Analvsis Exposure Pathway and/or Number of Routine Analysis Collection

'Sample Media Sample Sampling Analysis Frequency Frequency Locations Mode Type

1. Direct Radiation (TLDs) 40 Continuous Quarterly Gamma dose; Outer Each TLD Ring - de-dose only, unless gaseous release Control was exceeded

2. Airborne (Particulates 5 Continuous Weekly Particulate Sample:

and Radioiodine) Gross Beta Each Sample Gamma Isotopic Quarterly Composite (by location)

Radioiodine Canister: Each Sample 1-131

3. Waterborne

a. Surface water 2 Downstream. Monthly Gamma Isotopic Each Sample Automatic Tritium (H-3) Quarterly Composite composite Upstream: grab

b. Ground water 3 Grab Quarterly Gamma Isotopic Each Sample Tritium (H-3) Each Sample

c. Shoreline Sediment 2 Downstream: grab Semiannually Gamma Isotopic Each Sample N. Storm Drain

' Outfall: grab

See ODCM Table 3.5.1 for complete footnotes.

10

TABLE 4.1, cont.

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM (as required by ODCM Table 3.5.1)*

Exposure Pathway Collection Analysis and/or Nominal Sample Media Nominal'-

Number of Routine Sampling Analysis Analysis Collection Sample Mode Type Frequency Frequency Locations

4. Ingestion

a. Milk 3 Grab Monthly Gamma Isotopic Each sample (Semimonthly 1-131 Each sample when on pasture) 2 Grab Semiannually Gamma Isotopic on Each sample

b. Fish edible portions

c. Vegetation Grass sample 1 at each air Grab Quarterly when Gamma Isotopic Each sample sampling available station

\

Silage sample 1 at each milk Grab At harvest Gamma Isotopic Each sample sampling station

See ODCM Table 3.5.1 for complete footnotes.

11

TABLE4.2 RADIOLOGICAL ENVJRONMENTAL MONITORING LOCATIONS (NON-TLD) IN 2016 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION Distance Direction Exposure Station From Plant From Pathway Code Station Description Zone(a) Stack (km) Plant I. Airborne AP/CF-11 River Sta. No. 3.3 I 1.9 SSE AP/CF-12 N. Hinsdale, NH I 3.6 NNW AP/CF-13 Hinsdale Substation I 3.1 E

-AP/CF-14 Northfield, MA I 11.6 SSE AP/CF-15 Tyler Hill Road I 3.1 WNW AP/CF-21 . Spofford Lake c 16.4 NNE

2. Waterborne

a. Surface WR-11 River Sta. No. 3.3 I 1.9 SSE WR-21 Rt.9 Bridge c 11.8 NNW

b. Ground WG-11 Main Plant Well I 0.2 On-site WG-12 Vernon Green Well I 2.1 SSE WG-14 Plant Support Bldg (PSB) Well I 0.3 On-site WG-15 Southwest Well I 0.3 On-site WT-14 Test Well 201 I On-site WT-16 Test Well 202 I On-site WT-17 Test Well 203 I On-site WT-18 Test Well 204 I On-site WG-22 Copeland Well c 13.7 N

c. Sediment SE-11 Shoreline Downriver I 0.6 SSE SE-12 North Storm Drain Outfall I 0.1 E 12

TABLE 4.2, cont.

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING LOCATIONS (NON-TLD) IN 2016 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION Distance Direction Exposure Station From Plant From Pathway Code Station DescriQtion Zone<*) Stack(km) Plant Stack

3. Ingestion

a. Milk TM-11 MillerFarm I 0.8 w TM-18 Blodgett Farm I 3.6 SE TM-22 Franklin Farm c 9.7 WSW

b. Fish FH-11 Vernon Pond I 0.6(b) SSE FH-21 Rt.9 Bridge c 11.8 NNW

c. Mixed Grass TG-11 River Sta. No. 3.3 I 1.9 SSE TG-12 N. Hinsdale, NH I 3.6 NNW TG-13 Hinsdale Substation I 3.1 E TG-14 Northfield, MA I 11.6 SSE TG-15 Tyler Hill Rd. I 3.1 WNW TG-21 Spofford Lake c 16.4 NNE TG-40 Gov. Hunt House I On-site d .. Silage TC-11 Miller Farm I 0.8 w TC-18 Blodgett Farm I 3.6 SE TC-20 Dunklee Farm (Vem-Mont)1*) c 5.2 s TC-22 Franklin Farm c 9.7 WSW (a) I= Indicator Stations; C = Control Stations (b) Fish samples are collected anywhere in Vernon Pond, which is adjacent to the plant (see Figure 4.1).

(c) deleted (d) deleted (e) deleted 13

TABLE4.3 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING LOCATIONS (TLD) IN 2016 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION Distance Direction Station From Plant From Code Station Descrigtion Zone(a) (km) (d) Plant(d)

DR-1 River Sta. No. 3.3 I 1.6 SSE DR-2 N. Hinsdale, NH I 3.9 NNW DR-3 Hinsdale Substation I 3.0 E DR-4 Northfield, MA c 11.3 SSE DR-5 Spofford Lake c 16.5 NNE DR-6 Vernon School I 0.52 WSW DR-7 Site Boundary(c) SB 0.28 w DR-8 Site Boundary SB 0.25 SSW DR-9 Inner Ring I 1.7 N DR-10 Outer Ring 0 4.5 N DR-11 Inner Ring I 1.6 NNE DR-12 Outer Ring 0 3.6 NNE DR-13 InnerRing I 1.2 NE DR-14 Outer Ring 0 3.9 NE DR-15 Inner Ring I 1.5 ENE DR-16 Outer Ring 0 2.8 ENE DR-17 Inner Ring I 1.2 E DR-18 Outer Ring 0 3.0 E DR-19 Inner Ring I 3.7 ESE DR-20 Outer Ring 0 5.3 ESE DR-21 Inner Ring I 1.8 SE DR-22 Outer Ring 0 3.3 SE DR-23 Inner Ring I 2.0 SSE DR-24 Outer Ring 0 3.9 SSE DR-25 Inner Ring I 1.9 s DR-26 Outer Ring 0 3.8 s DR-27 Inner Ring I 1.1 SSW DR-28 Outer Ring 0 2.2 SSW DR-29 Inner Ring I 0.9 SW DR-30 Outer Ring 0 2.4 SW 14

TABLE 4.3, cont.

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING LOCATIONS (TLD) IN 2016 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION Distance Direction Station From Plant From Code Station DescriQtion Zone(a) (km)<d) Plant(d)

DR-31 Inner Ring I 0.71 WSW DR-32 Outer Ring 0 5.1 WSW DR-33 Inner Ring I 0.66 WNW DR-34 Outer Ring 0 4.6 w DR-35 Inner Ring I 1.3 WNW DR-36 Outer Ring 0 4.4 WNW DR-37 Inner Ring I 2.8 NW DR-38 Outer Ring 0 7.3 NW DR-39 Inner Ring I 3.1 NNW DR-40 Outer Ring 0 5.0 NNW DR-41CbJ Site Boundary SB 0.38 SSW DR-42Cbl Site Boundary SB 0.59 s DR-43 (bl Site Boundary SB 0.44 SSE DR-44Cbl Site Boundary SB 0.19 SE DR-45 (bl Site Boundary SB 0.12 NE DR-46Cbl Site Boundary SB 0.28 NNW DR-47Cbl Site Boundary SB 0.50 NNW DR-48 (bl Site Boundary SB 0.82 NW DR-49Cbl Site Boundary SB 0.55 WNW DR-50Cbl Gov. Hunt House I 0.35 SSW DR-51 (b) Site Boundary SB 0.26 w DR-52 (bl Site Boundary SB 0.24 SW DR-53 (bl Site Boundary SB 0.21 WSW (a) I= Inner Ring TLD; 0 =Outer Ring Incident Response TLD; C =Control TLD; SB =Site Boundary TLD.

(b) This location is not considered a requirement of ODCM Table 3 .5 .1.

(c) DR-7 satisfies ODCM Table 3.5.1 for an inner ring direct radiation monitoring location. However, it is averaged as a Site Boundary TLD due to its close proximity to the plant.

(d) Distance and direction is relative to the center of the Turbine Building for direct radiation monitors.

15

TABLE4.4 ENVIRONMENTAL LOWER LIMIT OF DETECTION (LLD) SENSITIVITY REQUIREMENTS Airborne Particulates Sediment Water or Gases Fish Milk Vegetation (pCi/Kg-Analysis (pCi/l) (pCi/m3) (pCi/Kg) (pCi/l) (pCi/Kg) dry)

Gross-Beta 4 0.01 H-3 2000<*)

Mn-54 15 130 Fe-59 30 260 Co-58,60 15 130 Zn-65 30 260 Zr-Nb-95 15 I-131 1(b) 0.07 1 60 Cs-134 15 0.05 130 15 60 150 Cs-137 18 0.06 150 18 80 180 Ba-La-140 15 15 (a) Ifno drinking water pathway exists, a value of3000 picocuries/liter may be used.

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

See ODCM Table 4.5. l for additional explanatory footnotes.

16

TABLE4.5 REPORTING LEVELS FOR RADIOACTIVITY CONCENTRATIONS IN ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLES Airborne Particulates or Gases Fish Milk Food Product Sediment Analysis Water (pCi/m3) . (pCi/Kg) (pCi/l) (pCi/Kg) (pCi/Kg-dry)

(pCi/l)

H-3 20 ooo(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-Nb-95 400 I-131 ic) 0.9 3 100 Cs-134 30 10 1000 60 1000 Cs-137 50 20 2000 70 2000 Ba-La-140 200 300 (a) Reporting Level for drinking water pathways. For non-drinking water, a value of 30,000 pCi/liter may be used.

(b) Deleted (c) If no drinking water pathway exists, a value of 20 pico curies/liter may be used.

See ODCM Table 3.5.2 for additional explanatory footnotes.

17

WSW SW SE Miles 0 _] -2 Figure 4.1 Environmental Sampling Locations In Close Proximity to Plant 18

f /

\ ./

f N

_, I

./

/ J\,

IJ

'( \\'

'\

i

/

~/

i

,/

/

-==. - - *

{

Miles \

MM I \l \

0 .2' .4 .6 .8 ~\

!' 'i l

Figure 4.2 Environmental Sampling Locations Within 5 Km of Plant 19

N i

'E

~ ........ -.'-.

1 ,,, .*

"*** ~

....... I

-;'.~

1' t

f

~ ......_,,,.~- - ** * -~ _ .. ~

\. VT

\

I

' /

S 'N ~.. . _

I

\

Miles 0 2 3 4 Figure 4.3 Environmental Sampling Locations Greater than 5 Km from Plant 20

\ 7

)rv'

{A\

(1

_.-* a i I

.*\,\

1 ( \

\\ \ \ i

\ NE \

. *~ \ ~

"\ \

I I

- ..--sW Miles 0 .1 .2 Figure 4.4 Thermoluminescent Dosimeter Locations In Close Proximity. to Plant 21

I \I

~~_,-~ i

'j i

\ (

) i *

( . _t2 ._J. *-o -~,;~... ~-.~~- -

I ' N6

",NW**:::1 ** .. ,

\1x~\

-* \

I .i

/\ Nf!

.~

\X' l\J\'(I /

l\. *.,

W;

.,.. .... ,.. -~ ...

l

--- ~

,. ,8\X 1

\

~'r'Ur 1\ ,./

~w

.ix l.--.-,,-.~\\ ~~

il

- -\ *.

~ \.!.

\

/ - .......... .. \.'> * -- -

- -*~-~

(\.,.* , *'µ _,,,.

\ ..

\

'. ~

0 .2 Miles

.4 .6 .8 :- -- ...

>Jr~

\ \

\-.!..\

=- -a=r: .. szrr:c ~ --

Figure 4.5 Thermoluminescent Dosimeter Locations Within 5 Km of Plant 22

N I

/

z ..::::zz M:::z:::,_

VT . /

\

, \

.i

/

." /

I *

~

Miles 0 2 3 4 Figure 4.6 Thermoluminescent Dosimeter Locations Greater than 5 Km from Plant 23

5. RADIOLOGICAL DATA

SUMMARY

TABLES This section summarizes the analytical results of the environmental samples that were collected during 2016. These results, shown in Table 5.1, are presented in a format similar to that prescribed in the NRC's Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position on Environmental Monitoring (Reference 1). The results are ordered by sample media type and then by radionuclide. The units for each media type are also given.

In 2016, Vermont Yankee contracted with one laboratory for primary analyses of the environmental samples. A second laboratory was available, if needed to cross-check the first laboratory for selected samples and to analyze other samples for hard-to-detect radionuclides (such as Strontium-89 and 90).

The left-most column of Table 5 .1 contains the radionuclide of interest, the total number of analyses for that radionuclide in 2016 and the number of measurements which exceeded the Reporting Levels found in Table 3.5.2 of the VYNPS Off-site Dose Calculation Manual. The latter are classified as "Non-routine" measurements. The second column lists the required Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) for those radionuclides that have detection capability requirements as specified in the ODCM Table 4.5.1. The absence of a value in this column indicates that no LLD is specified in the ODCM for that radionuclide in that media. The target LLD for any analysis is typically 50 percent of the most restrictive required LLD.

Occasionally the required LLD may not be met. This may be due to malfunctions in sampling equipment or lack of sufficient sample quantity which would then result in low sample volume. Delays in analysis at the laboratory could also be a factor. Such cases, if and when they should occur, would be addressed in Section 6.2.

For each radionuclide and media type, the remaining three columns summarize the data for the following categories of monitoring locations: (1) the Indicator stations, which are within the range of influence of the plant and which could be affected by its operation; (2) the Control stations, which are beyond the influence of the plant; and (3) the station which had the highest mean concentration during 2016 for that radionuclide. Direct radiation monitoring stations (using TLDs) are grouped into Inner Ring, Outer ring, Site Boundary and Control.

In each of these columns, for each radionuclide, the following statistical values are given:

. The mean value of all concentrations, including those results that are less than the a posteriori LLD for that analysis.

The minimum and maximum concentration, including those results that are less than the a posteriori LLD. In previous years, data less than the a posteriori LLD were converted to zero for purposes of 24 L

reporting the means and ranges.

The "Number Detected" is the number of positive measurements. A measurement is considered positive when the concentration is greater than three times the standard deviation in the concentration and greater than or equal to the a posteriori LLD (Minimum Detectable Concentration or MDC).

The "Total Analyzed" for each column is also given.

Each single radioactivity measurement datum in this report is based on a single measurement of a sample.

Any concentration below the a posteriori LLD for its analysis is averaged with those values above the a posteriori LLD to determine the average of the results. Likewise, the values are reported in ranges even though they are below the a posteriori LLD. To be consistent with normal data review practices used by Vermont Yankee, a "positive measurement" is considered to be one whose concentration is greater than three times its associated standard deviation, is greater than or equal to the a posteriori LLD and satisfies the analytical laboratory's criteria for identification.

The radionuclides reported in this section represent those that: 1) had an LLD requirement in Table 4.5.l of the ODCM, or a Reporting Level listed in Table 3.5.2 of the ODCM, or 2) had a positive measurement of radioactivity, whether it was naturally-occurring or man-made; or 3) were of special interest for any other reason. The radionuclides routinely analyzed and reported by the environmental laboratory (in a gamma spectroscopy analysis) were: Th-232, Ba/La-140, Be-7, Co-58, Co-60, Cs-134, Cs-137, Fe-59, K-40, Mn-54, Zn-65 and Zr-95.

Data from direct radiation measurements made by TLDs are provided in Table 5.2. The complete listing of quarterly TLD data is provided in Table 5.3.

25

Radiological Environmental Program Summary 2016 Radiological Environmental Operating Report Vermont Yankee Table 5.1:

Sample Medium: Air Particulate (AP)

Sample Medium: Charcoal Cartridge (CF)

Sample Medium: River Water (WR)

Sample Medium: Ground Water (WG)

Sample Medium: Sediment (SE)

Sample Medium: Test Well (WT)

Sample Medium: Milk (TM)

Sample Medium: Silage (TC)

Sample Medium: Mixed Grass (TG)

Sample Medium: Fish (FH) 26

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2016 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: REPORTING 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT PERIOD: INDICATOR 2016 CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS AIR PARTICULATES GR-B 268 0.01 0.0128 0.0122 0.0132 12 INDICATOR 0 (PCl/M 3) (2141215) (53153) (53153) N. HINSDALE, NH

( 0.00461 0.0233) ( 0.004410.0212) ( 0.006310.0195) 3.61 NNW OF SITE GAMMA 21 BE-7 NIA 0.1199 0.0890 0.1681 15 INDICATOR 0 (17/17) (414) (111) TYLER HILL ROAD (4J

( 0.06731 0.1708) ( 0.068810.1097) ( 0.1681) 3.14 KM WNW OF SITE K-40 NIA 0.0340 0.0405 0.0457 14 INDICATOR 0 (0117) (014) (014) NORTHFIELD, MA(9l

(< 0.01171< 0.0503) (< 0.03041< 0.0610) (< 0.04031< 0.0503) 11.61 KM SSE OF SITE CS-134 0.05 0.0024 0.0027 0.0027 21CONTROL 0 (0/17) (014) (014) SPOFFORD LAKE (9> .

(< 0.00161< 0.0036) (< 0.00181< 0.0040) (< 0.00181< 0.0040) 16.36 KM NNE OF SITE CS-137 0.06 0.0021 0.0023 0.0026 14 INDICATOR 0 (0117) (014) (014) NORTHFIELD, MA(9J

(< 0.00121< 0.0032) (< 0.00161< 0.0029) (< 0.00221< 0.0032) 11.61 KM SSE OF SITE RA-226 NIA 0.0363 0.0410 0.0435 14 INDICATOR 0 (0117) (014) (014) NORTHFIELD, MA( 9J

(< 0.02331< 0.0579) (< 0.02871< 0.0490) (< 0.02901< 0.0579) 11.61 KM SSE OF SITE AC-228 NIA- 0.0093 0.0096 0.0115 13 INDICATOR 0 (0117) (014) (014) HINSDALE SUBSTATION

(< 0.00551< 0.0170) (< 0.0061/< 0.0127) (< 0.00701< 0.0170) 3.05 KM E OF SITE TH-228 NIA 0.0033 0.0036 0.0039 14 INDICATOR 0 (0117) (014) (014) NORTHFIELD, MA(9l

(< 0.00211< 0.0051) (< 0.00221< 0.0044) (< 0.00291< 0.0051) 11.61 KM SSE OF SITE AIR IODINE GAMMA 256 (PCl/M 3) 1-131 0.07 0.024 0.0246 0.0253 15 INDICATOR 0 (01207) (0149) (0111) TYLER HILL ROAD (4J

(< 0.00291< 0.0397) (< 0.00581< 0.0389) (< 0.01251< 0.0370) 3.14 KM WNW OF SITE 27

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2016 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: REPORTING 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT PERIOD: INDICATOR 2016 CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS RIVER WATER GR-B 24 4 1.828 1.738 1.828 11 INDICATOR 0 (PC I/LITER) (4/12) (4/12) (4/12) RIVER STATION NO. 3-3

( 1.380/ 3.020) (< 1.480/ 2.200) ( 1.380/ 3.020) 1.88 KM DOWNRIVER OF SITE H-3 24 3000 577 575 577 11 INDICATOR 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RIVER STATION NO. 3-3

(<45 l/<715) (<444/<702) (<451/<715) 1.88 KM DOWNRIVER OF SITE GAMMA 24 MN-54 15 1.709 1.881 1.881 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE (9>

(< 0.677/< 3.213) (< 0.873/< 3.415) (< 0.873/< 3.415) 11.83 KM UPRIVER OF SITE C0-58 15 - 1.843 2.136 2.136 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE (9>

(< 0.702/< 3.388) (< 0.887/< 4.557) (< 0.887/< 4.557) 11.83 KM UPRIVER OF SITE FE-59 30 4.279 4.588 4.588 ' 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE <9>

(< 1.593/< 8.606) (<2.164/<10.81) (< 2.164/<10.81) 11.83 KM UPRIVER OF SITE C0-60 15 1.817 1.940 1.940 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE <9>

(< 0.485/< 4.172) (< 0.905/< 3.153) (< 0.905/< 3.153) 11.83 KM UPRIVER OF SITE ZN-65 30 3.734 3.964 3.964 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE (9>

(< 1.253/< 9 .198) (< 1.734/< 7.238) (< 1.734/< 7.238) 11.83 KM UPRIVER OF SITE ZR-95 15 3.487 3.693 3.693 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE (9>

(< 1.309/< 6.895) (< 1.737/< 7.426) (< 1.737/< 7.426) 11.83 KM UPRIVER OF SITE 1-131 15 12.241 14.482 14.482 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE (9>

(< 2.149/<84.07) (< 4.671/<107) (< 4.671/<107) 11.83 KM UPRIVER OF SITE 28

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2016 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: REPORTING 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT PERIOD: INDICATOR 2016 CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS RIVER WATER (cont'd) CS-I34 15 1.683 1.832 1.832 2ICONTROL 0 (PC I/LITER) (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE <9>

(< 0.527/< 3.623) (< 0.802/< 3.265) (< 0.802/< 3.265) 11.83 KM UPRIVER OF SITE CS-137 18 1.904 1.996 1.996 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE <9>

(< 0.574/< 4.436) (< 0.869/< 3.659) (< 0.869/< 3.659) 11.83 KM UPRIVER OF SITE BA/LA-140 I5 5.610 6.442 6.442 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE <9>

(< 1.499/<27.37) (< 3.266/<32.76) (< 3.266/<32.76) 11.83 KM UPRIVER OF SITE RA-226 NIA 45.713 53.879 53.879 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (1/12) (1/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE <9>

(<18.54/<88.51) (<18.08/165.6) (<I8.08/I65.6) I 1.83 KM UPRIVER OF SITE GROUND WATER GR-B 17 4 5.06 2.46 7.75 14 INDICATOR 0 (PC I/LITER) (13/13) (2/4) (1/i) PLANT SUPPORT BLDG WELL <4>

( 2.83/ 7.75) (< 1.33/ 4.18) (7.75) 0.27 KM ON-SITE H-3 17 2000 637 629 657 14 INDICATOR 0 (0/13) (0/4) (0/1) PLANT SUPPORT BLDG WELL <4>

(<550/<713) (<549/<703) (<657) 0.27 KM ON-SITE I-I31 13 0.513 0.440 0.527 15 INDICATOR 0 (0/10) (0/3) (0/3) SOUTHWEST WELL

(< 0.406/< 0. 700) (< 0.404/< 0.511) (< 0.436/< 0. 700) 0.3 KM ON-SITE GAMMA 17 MN-54 15 2.043 1.678 2.923 14 INDICATOR 0 (0/13) (0/4) (0/1) PLANT SUPPORT BLDG WELL <4>

(< 0.602/< 3.626) (< 0.311/< 3.396) (< 2.923) 0.27 KM ON-SITE C0-58 15 2.114 1.809 3.049 14 INDICATOR 0 (0/13) (0/4) (011) PLANT SUPPORT BLDG WELL <4 >

(< 0.702/< 3.659) (< 0.411/< 3.429) (< 3.049) 0.27 KM ON-SITE 29

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2016 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: REPORTING 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT PERIOD: INDICATOR 2016 CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS GROUND WATER (cont'd) FE-59 30 4.542 4.01 6.213 14 INDICATOR 0 (PC I/LITER) (0113) (014) (Oil) 4 PLANT SUPPORT BLDG WELL < >

(< 2.0221< 8.024) (< 0.9501< 7.404) (< 6.213) 0.27 KM ON-SITE C0-60 15 2.060 1.677 3.418 14 INDICATOR 0 (0113) (014) (Oil) PLANT SUPPORT BLDG WELL<'>

(< 0.5471< 3.629) (< 0.2761< 3.348) (< 3.418) 0.27 KM ON-SITE ZN-65 30 4.247 3.535 6.762 14 INDICATOR 0 (0113) (014) (Oil) PLANT SUPPORT BLDG WELL <4>

(< 1.0931< 7.630) (< 0.5851< 7.012) (< 6.762) 0.27 KM ON-SITE ZR-95 15 3.794 3.245 5.611 14 INDICATOR 0 (0113) (014) (Oil) 4 PLANT SUPPORT BLDG WELL < >

(< 1.3171< 6.746) (< 0.7271< 6.167) (< 5.611) 0.27 KM ON-SITE CS-134 15 1.915 1.689 2.735 14 INDICATOR 0 (0113) (014) (Oil) PLANT SUPPORT BLDG WELL <4 > .

(< 0.5321< 3.238) (< 0.281/< 3.429) (< 2.735) 0.27 KM ON-SITE CS-137 18 2.11 1.797 3.220 14 INDICATOR 0 (0113) (014) (Oil) PLANT SUPPORT BLDG WELL <4>

(< 0.5651< 3.808) (< 0.3021< 3.651) (< 3.220) 0.27 KM ON-SITE BA/LA-140 15 5.675 5.701 6.243 15 INDICATOR 0 (0113) (014) (014) SOUTHWEST WELL

(< 2.9711< 9.147) (< 3.5311<10.05) (< 3.2141< 9.147) 0.3 KM ON-SITE RA-226 NIA 53.978 40.413 63.04 14 INDICATOR 0 (0113) (014) (Oil) PLANT SUPPORT BLDG WELL <4>

(<12.751<99.62) (< 6.5031<86.46) (<63.04) 0.27 KM ON-SITE SEDIMENT GAMMA 36 (PCI/KG DRY) BE-7 NIA 947.72 987.8 1135.5 22 CONTROL 0 (0130) (016) (012) N. STORM DRAIN OUTFALL U-1

(<575.61<1264) (<6 l 61<1263) (<10081<1263) 0.13 KM E OF SITE 30

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2016 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: REPORTING 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT PERIOD: INDICATOR 2016 CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS SEDIMENT (cont'd) K-40 NIA I9146.33 18I71.67 23930 23 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/KG DRY) (30130) (616) (212) N. STORM DRAIN OUTFALL U-2 (8610126870) (I0950/24980) (20990126870) 0.13 KM E OF SITE MN-54 NIA 76.61 80.44 100.14 19 INDICATOR 0 (0130) (016) (012) N. STORM DRAIN OUTFALL T-3

(<50.371<122.9) (<551<108.4) (<77.371<122.9) 0.13 KM E OF SITE C0-60 NIA 71.06 75.6 95.05 22 CONTROL 0 (0130) (016) (012) N. STORM DRAIN OUTFALL U-1

(<45.651<107.6) (<40. 7I<104.4) (<92.921<97.17) 0.13 KM E OF SITE ZN-65 NIA 169.11 173.74 211.35 22 CONTROL 0 (0130) (016) (012) N. STORM DRAIN OUTFALL U-1

(<127.31<2 l 8.2) (<98.331<212.8) (<209.91<2 l 2.8) 0.13 KM E OF SITE NB-95 NIA 116.62 120.93 146 19 INDICATOR 0 (0130) - (016) (012) N. STORM DRAIN OUTFALL T-3

(<65.661<188.2) (<75.461<167.2) (<103.81<188.2) 0.13 KM E OF SITE CS-134 150 64.5 66.96 73.76 22 CONTROL 0 (0130) (016) (012) N. STORM DRAIN OUTFALL U-1

(<48.891<74. 7) (<5 I.171<74.05) (<73.461<74.05) O.I3 KM E OF SITE

.CS-137 180 122.61 116.72 232.96 35 INDICATOR 0 (17130) (316) (112) N. STORM DRAIN OUTFALL W-4

(<64.561380.1) (<60.961190.8) (<85.81/380.1) 0.13 KM E OF SITE BNLA-140 NIA 817.21 770 1328.8 19 INDICATOR 0 (0130) (016) (012) N. STORM DRAIN OUTFALL T-3

(<196.11<2326) (<170.71<1568) (<331.61<2326) 0.13 KM E OF SITE RA-226 NIA 2234.53 2629.33 3731 23 INDICATOR 0 (18130) (516) (212) N. STORM DRAIN OUTFALL U-2

(< 106314078) (<145814212) (33 8414078) 0.13 KM E OF SITE 31

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2016 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: REPORTING 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT PERIOD: INDICATOR 2016 CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS SEDIMENT (cont'd) AC-228 NIA 2437.7 2352.05 3974 I2 INDICATOR 0 (25130) (516) (212) 3 (PCI/KG DRY) NORTH STORM DRAIN OUTFALL < >

(<232.614552) (<I 74.313679) (339614552) 0.13 KM E OF SITE TH-228 NIA 1488.89 1596.87 2026 24 CONTROL 0 (30130) (616) (212) N. STORM DRAIN OUTFALL U-3 (766.912120) (948.212113) (193912113) 0.13 KM E OF SITE TH-232 NIA 1306.21 1207.43 1706.5 12 INDICATOR 0 (30130) (616) (212) NORTH STORM DRAIN OUTFALL <3>

(568.611746) (725.511761) (169411719) 0.13 KM E OF SITE U-238 NIA 8089.2 8501 11716 19 INDICATOR 0 (0130) (016) (012) N. STORM DRAIN OUTFALL T-3

(<52931<14230) (<63041<101 IO) (<92021<14230) 0.13 KM E OF SITE TEST WELLS GR-B 16 4 6.1 NIA 7.0 14 INDICATOR 0 (PCIILITER) (16116)- (414) TEST WELL 201 (Nuclear Energy Institute ( 2.8/13.2) ( 3.0113.2) ON-SITE Groundwater Protection Initiative Samples) H-3 16 3000 607 NIA 619 18 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (014) TEST WELL 204

. (<5061<728) (<5091<726) ON-SITE GAMMA 16 K-40 NIA 19.3 NIA 26.7 17 INDICATOR 0 (1116) (114) TEST WELL 203

(< 5.9150) (<13.2150) ON SITE MN-54 15 1.3 NIA !;5 18 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (014) TEST WELL 204

(< 0.81< 2.2) (< 0.81< 2.2) ON-SITE C0-58 15 1.4 NIA 1.5 18 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (014). TEST WELL 204

(< 0.81< 2.3) (< 0.81< 2.3) ON-SITE 32

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2016 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: REPORTING 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, YT PERIOD: INDICATOR 2016 CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES WWERLIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS TEST WELLS (cont'd) FE-59 30 3.2 NIA 3.4 18 INDICATOR 0 (PCllLITER) (0116) (014) TEST WELL 204 (Nuclear Energy Institute (< 1.91< 5.0) (< 1.91< 5.0) ON-SITE Groundwater Protection Initiative Samples) C0-60 15 1.3 NIA 1.5 18 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (014) TEST WELL 204

(< 0.81< 2.3) (< 0.81< 2.3) ON-SITE NB-95 15 1.5 NIA 1.7 18 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (014) TEST WELL 204

(< 0.91< 2.5) (< 0.91< 2.5) ON-SITE 1-131 15 5.7 NIA 6.0 16 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (014) TEST WELL 202

(< 3.71< 7.5) (< 4.11< 7.1) ON SITE CS-134 15 1.3 NIA 1.4 - 18 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (014) TEST WELL 204

(< 0.71< 2.1) (< 0.71< 2.1) ON-SITE CS-137 18 1.4 NIA 1.5 18 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (014) TEST WELL 204

(< 0.81< 2.3) (< 0.81< 2.3) ON-SITE BNLA-140 15 3.6 NIA 3.7 16 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (014) TEST WELL 202

(< 2.31< 5.0) (< 2.71< 4.3) ON SITE MILK 1-131 51 0.356 0.347 0.375 11 INDICATOR 0 (PCllLITER) (0134) (0117) (0117) MILLER FARM

(< 0.151/< 0.478) (< 0.1401< 0.481) (< 0.1511< 0.478) 0.82 KM W OF SITE SR-89 12 10 7.09 7.74 7.74 22 CONTROL 0 (018) (014) (014) FRANKLIN FARM <9>

(< 4.271< 8.74) (< 6.371< 9.58) (< 6.371< 9.58) 9.73 KM WSW OF SITE 33

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2016 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: REPORTING 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT PERIOD: INDICATOR 2016 CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS MILK (cont'd) SR-90 12 2 0.87 1.58 1.58 22 CONTROL 0 (PCI/LITER) (0/8) (3/4) (3/4) FRANKLIN FARM C9J

(< 0.20/< I. 76) (< 0.28/ 2.25) (< 0.28/ 2.25) 9.73 KM WSW OF SITE GAMMA 51 BE-7 NIA 43.96 43.6 44.9 18 INDICATOR 0 (0/34) (0/17) (0/17) BLODGETT FARM

(<20.0I/<60.09) (<26.04/<55.27) (<30.2/<60.09) 3.60 KM SE OF SITE K-40 NIA 1306.03 1311.88 1311.88 22 CONTROL 0 (34/34) (17/17) (17/17) FRANKLIN FARM c9J (I 146/1431) (I 126/1438) (1126/1438) 9.73 KM WSW OF SITE CS-134 15 4.93 4.85 5.08 18 INDICATOR 0 (0/34) (0/17) (0/17) BLODGETT FARM

(< 2.39/< 7.47) (< 2.98/< 6.21) (< 3.42/< 7.47) 3.60 KM SE OF SITE CS-137 18 5.48 6.15 6.15 22 CONTROL 0 (0/34) (0117) (0/17) FRANKLIN FARM C9>

(< 2.69/< 8.62) (< 3.93/< 8.42) (< 3.93/< 8.42) 9.73 KM WSW OF SITE BNLA-140 15 6.18 6.14 6.32 18 INDICATOR 0 (0/34) (0/17) (0/17) BLODGETT FARM

(< 2.52/< 7.47) (< 3.55/< 7.39) (< 4.26/< 7.47) 3.60 KM SE OF SITE RA-226 NIA 127.67 132.79 133.79 18 INDICATOR 0 (0/34) (0/17) (0/17) BLODGETT FARM

(<63.49/<212.4) (<73.93/

(<I 7.8/<23.5) (<29.5) (<29.5) 9.73 KM WSW OF SITE GAMMA BE-7 NIA 1618.35 333.6 2421 18 INDICATOR 0 (2/2) (1/1) (I/I) BLODGETT FARM (815.7/2421) (333.6) (2421) 3.60 KM SE OF SITE 34

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2016 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: REPORTING 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT PERIOD: INDICATOR 2016 CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS SILAGE' (cont'd) K-40 NIA 5002 13770 13770 22 CONTROL 0 (PCI/KG WET) (212) (1/1) (I/I) FRANKLIN FARM <9J (455915445) (13770) (13770) 9.73 KM WSW OF SITE CS-134 60 9.31 21.89 21.89 22 CONTROL 0 (0/2) (Oil) (Oii) FRANKLIN FARM <9J

(< 6.291<12.33) (<21.89) (<21.89) 9.73 KM WSW OF SITE CS-137 80 10.53 24.05 24.05 22 CONTROL 0 (012) (Oil) (Oil) FRANKLIN FARM <9>

(< 7.071<13.99) (<24.05) (<24.05) 9.73 KM WSW OF SITE AC-228 NIA 46.84 95.71 95.71 22 CONTROL 0 (0/2) (011) (Oil) FRANKLIN FARM <9>

(<31.361<62.3 l) (<95.71) (<95.71) 9.73 KM WSW OF SITE TH-228 NIA 17.62 42.49 42.49 22 CONTROL 0 (012) (Oii) (Oii) FRANKLIN FARM <9>

(<11.661<23.58) (<42.49) (<42.49) 9.73 KM WSW OF SITE MIXED GRASS GAMMA 15 (PCI/KG WET) BE-7 NIA 1641.02 1888.83 2220.23 12 INDICATOR 0 (8112) (2/3) (313) N. HINSDALE, NH

(<185.413735) (<264.512949) (892.713735) 3.61 KM NNW OF SITE K-40 NIA 5772.08 5543.67 7529 11 INDICATOR 0 (12/12) (313) (313) RIVER STATION N0.3-3 (199518311) (450216880) (6829/8311) 1.88 KM SSE OF SITE 1-131 60 39.08 41.07 44.64 11 INDICATOR 0 (0/12) (0/3) (0/3) RIVER STATION N0.3-3

(<29.18/<48.83) (<32.69/<48.66) (<39.27/<48.83) 1.88 KM SSE OF SITE CS-134 60 24.59 25.89 27.17 II INDICATOR 0 (0/12) (0/3) (0/3) RIVER STATION N0.3-3

(<18.21<29.6) (<24/<26.95) (<25.121<28.76) 1.88 KM SSE OF SITE 35

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2016 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: REPORTING 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT PERIOD: INDICATOR 2016 CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS MIXED GRASS (cont'd) CS-137 80 27.32 26.6 32.21 11 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/KG WET) (0112) (013) (013) RIVER STATION N0.3-3

(<I9.311<34) (<26.161<27.34) (<31.051<34) 1.88 KM SSE OF SITE RA-226 NIA 582.08 623.2 685.73 13 INDICATOR 0 (OII2) (013) (013) HINSDALE SUBSTATION

(<360.41<728.2) (<586.11<693.4) (<615.91<728.2) 3.05 KM E OF SITE AC-228 NIA 111.08 101.61 123.5 11 INDICATOR 0 (0112) (013) (013) RIVER STATION N0.3-3

(<75.131<132.9) (<84.231<1l2.9) (<114.51<132.9) 1.88 KM SSE OF SITE TH-228 NIA 47.91 47.98 52.91 13 INDICATOR 0

\ (1112) (013) (013) HINSDALE SUBSTATION

(<31.99173.9) (<38.271<54.04) (<52.351<53.22) 3.05 KM E OF SITE FISH GAMMA (PCI/KG WET) K-40 NIA 2799.75 2674.75 2799.75 .11 INDICATOR 0 (414) (414) (414) VERNON POND (229613181) (235713 196) (229613181) (6)

MN-54 130 45.318 40.823 45.318 11 INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERNON POND

(<37.121<60.32) (<35.821<45.26) (<3 7.121<60.32) (6)

C0-58 130 52.32 55.795 55.795 21CONTROL 0 (014) (014) (014). RT. 9 BRIDGE <9>

(<43.771<62.95) (<53.091<58.52) (<53.091<58.52) 11.83 KM UPRIVER OF SITE FE-59 260 123.7 95.48 123.7 11 INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERNON POND

(<1201<126.5) (<48.021<113.7) (<1201<126.5) (6)

C0-60 130 41.625 41.413 41.625 11 INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERNON POND

(<34.281<49.91) (<38.051<49.74) (<34.281<49.91) (6) 36

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2016 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: REPORTING 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT PERIOD: INDICATOR 2016 CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS FISH (cont'd) ZN-65 260 104.703 84.435 104.703 11 INDICATOR 0 (PCl/KG WET) (014) (014) (014) VERNON POND

(<87.211<120.3) (<65.71/<93.13) (<87.211<120.3) (6)

CS-134 130 46.413 45.503 46.413 11 INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERNON POND

(<36.661<60.25) (<38.341<50.29) (<36.661<60.25) (6)

CS-137 150 45.88 45.16 45.88 11 INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERNON POND

(<41.711<50.81) (<37.311<51.4) (<41.71/<50.81) (6)

H-3 4 NIA 225 139 225 11 INDICATOR 0 (012) (012) (012) VERNON POND

(<1941<256) (<961<183) (<1941<256) (6)

AM-241 8 NIA 3.604 2.857 3.604 11 INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERNON POND

. (< 1.3491<9.185) (< l.5241<3.476) (< 1.3491<9. l 85) (6)

CM-242 NIA l.239 l.818 l.818 21CONTROL 0 (014) (014) (014) RT. 9 BRIDGE <9J

(< 0.3211< 3.321) (< 0.3351< 3.332) (< 0.3351< 3.332) 11.83 KM UPRIVER OF SITE CM-2431244 8 NIA 4.93 3.107 4.93 11 INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERNON POND

(< 1.4631<13.49) (< 1.31<5.576) (< l.4631<13.49) (6)

FE-55 7 NIA 1156.48 1322.33 1322.33 21CONTROL 0 (014) (013) (013) RT. 9 BRIDGE <9>

(<586.31<1955) (<10351<18 l 8) (<10351<18 l 8) 11.83 KM UPRIVER OF SITE PU-238 NIA 3.073 5.368 5.368 21CONTROL 0 (014) (014) (014) RT. 9 BRIDGE <9>

(< 0.9931<6.269) (<2.1661<10.33) (<2.1661<10.33) 11.83 KM UPRIVER OF SITE 37

~)

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2016 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: REPORTING 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT PERIOD: INDICATOR 2016 CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS FISH (cont'd) PU-2391240 NIA 2.546 4.562 4.563 2ICONTROL 0 (PCI/KG WET) (014) (014) (014) RT. 9 BRIDGE l9l

(< l.5461< 3.62) (< 2.0921<9.347) (< 2.0921<9.347) I 1.83 KM UPRIVER OF SITE PU-241 NIA 3I9.5 357 357 21CONTROL 0 (014) (014) (014) RT. 9 BRIDGE l9l

(<I 881<408) (<1441<543) (<1441<543) 11 ~83 KM UPRIVER OF SITE PU-242 NIA 2.6975 2.363 2.6975 II INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERNON POND

(< I.7I91< 2.893) . (< l.25II< 3.116) (< 1.7191< 2.893) (6)

SR-89 NIA 70.95 90 90 21CONTROL 0 (014) (014) (014) RT. 9 BRIDGE <9>

(<25.71<126) (<22.71<155) (<22.71<155) 11.83 KM UPRIVER OF SITE SR-90 NIA 31.043 44.873 44.873 21CONTROL 0 (214) (214) (214) RT. 9 BRIDGE <9>

(< 5.970159.6) (< 6.690186.1) (< 6.690186.1) 11.83 KM UPRIVER OF SITE DIRECT RADIATION TLD-QUARTERLY 210 NIA 6.8 6.5 12.7 DR-45 INDICATOR 0 (MILLI-ROENTGENIQTR.) (2021202) (818) (414) SITE BOUNDARY (5113) (617) (11113) 0.12 KM NE OF SITE 38

TABLE 5.2 ENVIRONMENTAL TLD DATA

SUMMARY

VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, VERNON, VT (JANUARY* DECEMBER 2016)

OFFSITE STATION INNER RING TLD OUTER RING TLD WITH HIGHEST MEAN CONTROL TLDs MEAN* MEAN* STA.NO./ MEAN* MEAN*

RANGE* RANGE* RANGE* RANGE*

(NO. MEASUREMENTS)** (NO. MEASUREMENTS)** (NO. MEASUREMENTS)** (NO. MEASUREMENTS)**

6.60 .:!: 0.33 6.70 +/- 0.32 DR14 7.58 +/- 0.35 6.49 +/- 0.33 5.74 to 7.95 5.26 to 8.28 5.26 to 8.28 6.06 to 7.13 75 67 4 8 SITE BOUNDARY TLD WITH HIGHEST MEAN SITE BOUNDARY TLD STA.NO./ MEAN* MEAN*

RANGE* RANGE*

(NO. MEASUREMENTS)** (NO. MEASUREMENTS)**

DR45 12.66 +/- 0.00 7.09 +/- 0.37 13.11 to 11.39 5.77 to 13.37 4 60 Units are in micro-R per hour.

Each "measurement" is typically based on quarterly readings from five TLD elements.

39

TABLE 5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL TLD MEASUREMENTS J 2016 (Micro-R per Hour)

ANNUAL Sta. 1ST QUARTER 2ND QUARTER 3RD QUARTER 4TH QUARTER AVE.

No. Description EXP. S.D. EXP. S.D. EXP. S.D. EXP. S.D. EXP.

DR-01 River Sta. No. 3.3 5.88 +/- 0.29 5.74 +/- 0.21 6.35 +/- 0.29 5.76 +/- 0.41 5.9 DR-02 N Hinsdale, NH 6.59 +/- 0.33 7.00 +/- 0.26 7.44 +/- 0.39 6.84 +/- 0.32 7.0 DR-03 Hinsdale Substation 7.24 +/- 0.29 7.19 +/- 0.36 7.74 +/- 0.36 . 6.80 +/- 0.38 7.2 DR-04 Northfield, MA 6.18 +/- 0.22 6.06 +/- 0.34 6.51 +/- 0.40 6.15 +/- 0.44 6.2 DR-05 Spofford Lake, NH 6.58 +/- 0.22 6.70 +/- 0.27 7.13 +/- 0.35 6.60 +/- 0.39 6.8 DR-06 Vernon School 6.25 +/- 0.40 6.57 +/- 0.26 7.04 +/- 0.40 6.41 +/- 0.34 6.6 DR-07 Site Boundary 6.37 +/- 0.25 6.76 +/- 0.60 7.20 +/- 0.39 6.60 +/- 0.32 6.7 DR-08 Site Boundary 6.28 +/- 0.27 6.61 +/- 0.27 7.26 +/- 0.40 6.42 +/- 0.44 6.6 DR-09 Inner Ring 6.10 +/- 0.20 6.26 +/- 0.26 6.83 +/- 0.32 6.06 +/- 0.42 6.3 DR-10 Outer Ring 5.26 +/- 0.17 5.51 +/- 0.27 5.97 +/- 0.29 5.6 DR-11 Inner Ring 5.89 +/- 0.24 5.86 +/- 0.28 6.28 +/- 0.34 5.87 +/- 0.34 6.0 DR-12 Outer Ring 5.56 +/- 0.25 5.69 +/- 0.28 6.19 +/- 0.32 5.67 +/- 0.32 5.8 DR-13 Inner Ring 6.50 +/- *o.35 6.37 +/- 0.26 7.24 +/- 0.37 6.43 +/- 0.34 6.6 DR-14 Outer Ring 7.41 +/- 0.28 7.45 +/- 0.32 8.15 +/- 0.35 7.29 +/- 0.45 7.6 DR-15 Inner Ring 6.66 +/- 0.12 6.48 +/- 0.26 7.07 +/- 0.34 6.30 +/- 0.34 6.6 DR-16 Outer Ring 7.06 +/- 0.29 6.88 +/- 0.29 7.51 +/- 0.33 7.00 +/- 0.34 7.1 DR-17 Inner Ring 6.24 +/- 0.22 5:90 +/- 0.31 6.73 +/- 0.31 6.15 +/- 0.35 6.3 DR-18 Outer Ring 6.38 +/- 0.27 6.54 +/- 0.30 7.13 +/- 0.33 6.39 +/- 0.29 6.6 DR-19 Inner Ring 7.03 +/- 0.32 7.33 +/- 0.39 7.95 +/- 0.72 7.25 +/- 0.44 7.4 DR-20 Outer Ring 6.79 +/- 0.23 6.95 +/- 0.36 7.59 +/- 0.45 6.81 +/- 0.38 7.0 DR-21 Inner Ring 6.29 +/- 0.25 6.68 +/- 0.30 7.13 +/- 0.37 6.44 +/- 0.36 6.6 DR-22 Outer Ring 6.43 +/- 0.19 6.79 +/- 0.37 7.06 +/- 0.33 6.72 +/- 0.33 6.8 DR-23 Inner Ring 5.91 +/- 0.38 5.91 +/- 0.33 6.49 +/- 0.33 5.93 +/- 0.34 6.1 DR-24 Outer Ring 5.65 +/- 0.19 5.71 +/- 0.20 6.29 +/- 0.35 5.76 +/- 0.28 5.9 DR-25 Inner Ring 5.92 +/- 0.24 6.23 +/- 0.25 6.78 +/- 0.38 6.15 +/- 0.33 6.3 DR-26 Outer Ring 6.36 +/- 0.24 6.79 +/- 0.31 7.61 +/- 0.41 6.43 +/- 0.38 6.8 DR-27 Inner Ring 6.19 +/- 0.20 6.26 +/- 0.23 6.91 +/- 0.31 6.21 +/- 0.37 6.4 DR-28 Outer Ring 6.34 +/- 0.32 6.42 +/- 0.31 7.26 +/- 0.41 6.46 +/- 0.45 6.6 DR-29 Inner Ring 6.40 +/- 0.36 6.45 +/- 0.37 7.13 +/- 0.37 6.70 +/- 0.34 6.7 DR-30 Outer Ring 6.05 +/- 0.21 6.31 +/- 0.26 7.39 +/- 0.33 6.25 +/- 0.31 6.5 DR-31 Inner Ring 6.22 +/- 0.24 6.58 +/- 0.37 7.25 +/- 0.39 6.25 +/- 0.34 6.6 DR-32 Outer Ring 6.08 +/- 0.30 6.34 +/- 0.23 7.26 +/- 0.36 6.56 +/- 0.44 6.6 DR-33 Inner Ring 6.61 +/- 0.28 7.60 +/- 0.52 6.71 +/- 0.36 7.0 DR-34 Outer Ring 6.54 +/- 0.31 6.81 +/- 0.30 7.55 +/- 0.40 6.83 +/- 0.33 6.9 DR-35 Inner Ring 6.07 +/- 0.33 6.14 +/- 0.34 7.10 +/- 0.36 6.41 +/- 0.36 6.4 DR-36 Outer Ring 7.08 +/- 0.24 7.28 +/- 0.45 8.28 +/- 0.40 7.57 +/- 0.45 7.6 DR-37 Inner Ring 6.33 +/- 0.22 6.63 +/- 0.27 7.27 +/- 0.42 6.59 +/- 0.51 6.7 DR-38 Outer Ring 6.68 +/- 0.38 7.00 +/- 0.25 7.53 +/- 0.37 6.71 +/- 0.31 7.0 DR-39 Inner Ring 6.55 +/- 0.37 6.75 +/- 0.30 7.38 +/- 0.32 6.44 +/- 0.36 6.8 DR-40 Outer Ring 6.47 +/- 0.22 6.53 +/- 0.33 7.03 +/- 0.32 6.39 +/- 0.38 6.6 Note: Blank spaces indicate missing TLDs 40

TABLE 5.3 (cont.)

ENVIRONMENTAL TLD MEASUREMENTS 2016 (Micro-R per Hour)

ANNUAL Sta. 1STQUARTER 2ND QUARTER 3RD QUARTER 4TH QUARTER AVE.

No. Description EXP.

DR-07 Site Boundary 6.37 +/- 0.25 6.76 +/- 0.60 7.20 +/- 0.39 6.60 +/- 0.32 6.7 DR-08 Site Boundary 6.28 +/- 0.27 6.61 +/- 0.27 7.26 +/- 0.40 6.42 +/- 0.44 6.6 DR-41 Site Boundary 6.60 +/- 0.21 6.51 +/- 0.24 7.47 +/- 0.47 6.55 +/- 0.35 6.8 DR-42 Site Boundary 6.01 +/- 0.19 6.72 +/- 0.30 7.35 +/- 0.32 6.79 +/- 0.47 6.7 DR-43 Site Boundary 6.34 +/- 0.21 6.97 +/- 0.50 7.19 +/- 0.40 6.73 +/- 0.39 6.8 DR-44 Site Boundary 6.04 +/- 0.22 5.96 +/- 0.24 5.95 +/- 0.33 5.77 +/- 0.31 5.9 DR-45 Site Boundary 11.39 +/- 0.50 13.37 +/- 1.06 13.11 +/- 0.93 12.77 +/- 0.66 12.7 DR-46 Site Boundary 6.64 +/- 0.44 6.62 +/- 0.37 7.18 +/- 0.31 6.35 +/- 0.37 6.7 DR-47 Site Boundary 7.11 +/- 0.25 7.17 +/- 0.27 8.44 +/- 0.49 7.37 +/- 0.43 7.5 DR-48 Site Boundary 5.79 +/- 0.36 6.07 +/- 0.31 6.83 +/- 0.39 6.09 +/- 0.33 6.2 DR-49 Site Boundary 6.00 +/- 0.23 6.44 +/- 0.29 6.65 +/- 0.34 6.18 +/- 0.40 6.3 DR-50 Governor Hunt House 6.15 +/- 0.20 6.41 +/- 0.31 6.96 +/- 0.36 6.53 +/- 0.30 6.5 DR-51 Site Boundary 6.61 +/- 0.31 6.97 +/- 0.38 7.25 +/- 0.36 6.85 +/- 0.38 6.9 DR-52 Site Boundary 6.23 +/- 0.37 6.83 +/- 0.29 7.31 +/- 0.36 6.80 +/- 0.47 6.8 DR-53 Site Boundary 6.85 +/- 0.22 7.13 +/- 0.32 7.43 +/- 0.39 7.34 +/- 0.43 7.2 41

6. ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS 6.1 Sampling Program Deviations Off-site Dose Calculation Manual Control 3.5.1 allows for deviations "if specimens are unobtainable due to hazardous conditions, seasonal unavailability, malfunction of automatic sampling equipment and other legitimate reasons." In 2016, eight deviations were noted in the REMP. These deviations did not compromise the program's effectiveness and are considered typical with respect to what is normally anticipated for any radiological environmental program. The specific deviations for 2016 were:

a) The stack tritium gas meter (FI-17-158) failed. The stack tritium meter measures flow through the stack tritium sampling apparatus and is in continuous use. The meter is checked periodically during routine sample activity at the stack base and was in service on 1/25/2016 during the previous sample collection. The failed meter was replaced when the condition was discovered and sufficient run time was recorded to estimate total flow through the sample system at the next sample collection. (CR-VTY-2016-00186, 2/10/2016) b) The REMP fish samples collected in the April collection batch were delivered to offsite labs for analysis (vendor for VY and State of Vermont Department of Health). Both sets of fish arrived at the offsite lab after sitting over the weekend. In the case of the vendor lab, the courier did not deliver the package in a timely manner, thinking the lab was closed the driver left without dropping off the package. In the case of the state lab, the shipping address changed, but the lab neglected to inform VY staff, and the old address was used for the delivery. All new samples for both labs were collected. (CR-VTY-2016-00548, 6/02/2016) c) Environmental Air Sampling Station #21 (APCF-21, Spofford) was found to have a variance between the timer and clock time of approximately three hours during weekly sample collection. The local utility was able to confirm a short (~3 hour) power interruption to this station occurred during the week. This power interruption did not adversely affect sample collection. (CR-VTY-2016-00577, 6/14/2016) d) The stack tritium sample pump (SRS-P-3) failed. This was found during weekly sampling activities for the stack filters. A new pump was installed and total flow through the system was sufficient to allow for stack tritium collection and analysis as scheduled. This pump is a run-to-fail component and spares are staged to minimize sampling interruption. (CR-VTY-2016-00662, 7/11/2016) e) Environmental Air Sampling Station #11 (APCF-11, River Station) was found out of service during weekly sampling. A fuse was found to have blown, and following filter exchange and installation of a new fuse, the station was returned to service. Due to the low volume of air passed through the filter, the required LLD for Gross Beta analysis was not met for this sample. (CR-VTY-2016-00754, 8/16/2016) f) Environmental Air Sampling Station #14 (APCF-14, Northfield) was found out of service during weekly sampling. The air sample pumped failed an:d was replaced. This pump is a run-to-fail component and spares are staged to minimize sampling interruption. Sample volume was sufficient to achieve required analysis limits. (CR-VTY-2016-00755, 8/16/2016) 42

g) Environmental Air Sampling Station #14 (APCF-14, Northfield) was found out of service during weekly sampling. Effort was made by the technician to replace the pump, but a new pump did not work after installation. The local utility was contacted and power to the station had been shut off by request of VY personnel. This station was misidentified as an E-Plan siren that was no longer required. The utility restored power to the sample station and sample volumes for both weeks affected were sufficient to meet required limits. (CR-VTY-2016-00881, 10/5/2016) h) Environmental Air Sampling Station #21 (APCF-21, Spofford) was found to have a variance between the timer and clock time of approximately two hours during weekly sample collection. The local utility was able to confirm a short (~2 hour) power interruption to this station occurred during the week. This power interruption did not adversely affect sample collection. (CR-VTY-2016-00974, 111112016) i) Air sample station outages during 2016 are reflected in the air sample collection time percentages listed below.

AP/CF# 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter 11 100.0% 99.7% 94.3% *99_0%

12 100.0% 100.0% 99.0% 98.9%

13 100.0% 100.0% 98.9% 98.6%

14 100.0% 99.9% 99.0% 90.0%

15 100.0% NIA NIA NIA 21 100.0% 99.9% 99.0% 98.8%

6.2 Comparison of Achieved LLDs with Requirements Table 4.5.1 of the VYNPS ODCM (also shown in Table 4.4 of this report) gives the required Lower Limits of Detection (LLDs) for environmental sample analyses. On occasion, an LLD is not achievable due to a situation such as a low sample volume caused by sampling equipment malfunction or limited sample availability. In such a case, ODCM 10.2 requires a discussion of the situation. At the contracted environmental laboratory, the target LLD for the majority of analyses is 50 percent of the most restrictive required LLD. Expressed differently, the typical sensitivities achieved for each analysis are at least 2 times greater than that required by the VYNPS ODCM.

For each analysis having an LLD requirement in ODCM Table 4.5.1, the a posteriori (after the fact) LLD

. calculated for that analysis was compared with the required LLD. During 2016, two samples were unable to meet the detection limit. One air particulate sample was unable to meet the detection limit due to a low volume. A ground water sample was unable to me the detection limit for BaLa-140 and I-131 due to the age of the sample at the time of analysis. All other sample analyses performed for the REMP program achieved an a posteriori LLD less than the corresponding LLD requirement.

43

6.3 Comparison of Results with Reporting Levels ODCM Section 10.3.4 requires written notification to the NRC within 30 days of receipt of an analysis result whenever a Reporting Level in ODCM Table 3.5.2 is exceeded. Reporting Levels are the environmental concentrations that relate to the ALARA design dose objectives of 10 CPR 50, Appendix I.

Environmental concentrations are averaged over the calendar quarters for the purposes of this comparison. The Reporting Levels are intended to apply only to measured levels of radioactivity due to plant effluents. During 2016, no analytical result exceeded a corresponding reporting level requirement in Table 3.5.2 of the ODCM.

6.4 Changes in Sampling Locations

The Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual Section 10.2 states that if "new environmental sampling locations are identified in accordance with Control 3.5.2, the new locations shall be identified in the next Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report." There were no required sampling location changes due to the Land Use Census conducted in 2016.

Milk collection from Dunklee farm (Vern-Mont Farm in Vernon) commenced in April, 2010 at the request of the farm owner. After the shutdown of Vermont Yankee, sampling from this location was terminated in August 2015. All milk sampling was terminated by the implementation of ODCM Rev 37 in December 2016 due to the decay of radioiodines following shutdown.

6.5 Data Analysis by Media Type The 2016 REMP data for each media type is discussed below. Whenever a specific measurement result is presented, it is. given as the concentration in the units of the sample (volume or weight). An analysis is considered to yield a "detectable measurement' when the concentration exceeds three times the standard deviation for that analysis and is greater than or equal to the Minimum Detectable Concentration (MDC) for the analysis. With respect to data plots, all net concentrations are plotted as reported, without regard to whether the value is "detectable" or "non-detectable." fu previous years, values that were less than the MDC were converted to zero.

44

6.5.1 Airborne Pathways 6.5.1.1 Air Particulates (AP)

The periodic air particulate filters from each of the six sampling sites were analyzed for gross-beta radioactivity. At the end of each quarter, the filters from each sampling site were composited for a gamma analysis. The results of the air particulate sampling program are shown in Table 5.1 and Figures 6.1 through 6.7.

Gross beta activity was detected in all but one of the air particulate filters that were analyzed. As shown in Figure 6.1, there is no significant difference between the quarterly average concentrations at the indicator (near-plant) stations and the control (distant from plant) stations. Notable in Figure 6.1 is a distinct annual cycle, with the minimum concentration in the fourth quarter, and the maximum concentration in the third quarter.

Figures 6.2 through 6.6 show the weekly gross beta concentration at each air particulate sampling location compared to the control air particulate sampling *location at AP-21 (Spofford Lake, NH). Small differences are evident and expected between individual sampling locations. Figure 6.2 clearly demonstrates the distinct annual cycle, with the minimum concentration in the fourth quarter, and the maximum concentration in the second quarter. It can be seen that the gross-beta measurements on air particulate filters fluctuate significantly over the course of a year. The measurements from control station AP-21 vary similarly, indicating that these fluctuations are due to regional changes in naturally-occurring airborne radioactive materials, and not due to Vermont Yankee operations.

There was one naturally-occurring gamma-emitting radionuclides detected on the air particulate filters during this reporting period. Be-7, a naturally-occurring cosmogenic radionuclide, was detected in all of the 21 filter sets analyzed.

6.5.1.2 Charcoal Cartridges (CF)

Charcoal cartridges from each of the six air sampling sites were analyzed for I-131 each time they were collected. The results of these analyses are summarized in Table 5.1. As in previous years, no I-131 attributable to the operation of Entergy Vermont Yankee was detected in any charcoal cartridge.

45

6.5.2 Waterborne Pathways 6.5.2.1 River Water (WR)

Aliquots of river water were automatically collected periodically from the Connecticut River downstream from the plant discharge area and hydro station, location WR-11. Monthly grab samples were also collected at the upstream control location, also on the Connecticut River, location WR-21. The composited samples at WR-11 were collected monthly and sent along with the WR-21 grab samples to the contracted environmental laboratory for analysis. Table 5.1 shows that gross-beta measurements were positive in four out of 12 indicator samples as would be expected due to naturally-occurring radionuclides in the water. Gross-beta was detected in four of the 12 control samples. As seen in Figure 6.8, the mean concentration of the indicator locations was similar to the mean concentration at the control location in 2016.

For each sampling site, the monthly samples were composited into quarterly samples for H-3 (Tritium) analyses. None of the samples contained detectable quantities ofH-3.

Radium-226 was detected in one of the 12 control samples. No other gamma-emitting radionuclides were detected.

6.5.2.2 Ground Water - Potable Drinking Water (WG)

Quarterly ground water (deep wells supplying drinking water to the plant and selected offsite locations) samples were collected from four indicator locations (only one is required by VYNPS ODCM) and one control location during 2016. In 1999, WG-14 (PSB Well) another on-site well location was added to the program. In July 2012, WG-15 (Southwest Well) was added to the ODCM as a quarterly sample location. Table 5.1 and Figure 6.9 show that gross-beta measurements were positive in 13 out of 13 indicator samples and in two out of four control samples. The beta activity is due to naturally-occurring radionuclides in the water. The levels at all sampling locations were consistent with those detected in previous years. No gamma-emitting radionuclides or tritium were detected in any of the samples.

6.5.2.3 Sediment (SE)

Semi-annual river sediment grab samples were collected from two indicator locations during 2016. The North Storm Drain Outfall location (SE-12) is an area where up to 40 different locations can be sampled within a 20 ft by 140 ft area. In 2016, 15 locations were sampled at SE-12 during each of the semi-annual collections. Two samples were collected at SE-11 during the year. Be-7 was not detected in any of the 46

36 samples analyzed. As would be expected, naturally-occurring Potassium-40 (K-40) was detected in all of the samples. Co-60 was not detected in any of the samples. Radium-226 (Ra-226) was detected in 23 of 35 samples. Actinium-228 (Ac-228) was detected in 30 of 36 samples. Thorium-228 (Th-228) was detected in all of the samples analyzed. Thorium-232 (Th-232) was detected in all 36 samples analyzed.

Uranium-238 (U-238) was not detected in any of the 35 samples. Cesium-137 (Cs-137) was detected in 17 out of 30 of the indicator samples and three of the six control samples. The levels of Cs-13 7 measured were consistent with what has been measured in the previous several years and with those detected at other New England locations. Also see section 6.5.2.6 for more information.

6.5.2.4 Test Wells (WT)

During 1996, sampling was initiated at test wells around the outer edges of an area in the south portion of the VYNPS site where septic sludge is spread. This sampling continued through 2016. The test well results are summarized in Table 5.1 under the media category, Test Well (WT). In 2016, four samples were taken at each of the four locations and all were analyzed for gamma isotopic, gross beta and H-3 activity.

Prior to the gross beta analysis, each sample was filtered through a 0.45 rmcron Gelman Tuffryn membrane filter. Gross beta activity was detected in all 16 samples collected with levels ranging from 2.8 to 8.5 pCi/kg. Naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in one of the 16 samples analyzed. No other radionuclides were detected, 6.5.2.5 Storm Drain System The presence of plant-generated radionuclides in the onsite storm drain system has been identified in previous years at Vermont Yankee (VY). As a consequence, a 50.59 evaluation of radioactive materials discharged via the storm drain system was performed in 1998. This assessment was in response to Information and Enforcement Bulletin No. 80-10 and NRC Information Notice No. 91-40. The evaluation demonstrated that the total curies released via the VYNPS storm drain system are not sufficient to result in a significant dose (i.e. dose does not exceed 10% of the technical specification objective of 0.3 rnillirem per year to the total body, and 1.0 rnillirem per year to the target organ for the maximally exposed receptor). Water in the onsite storm drain system was routinely sampled throughout 2016 at the south storm drain .. These samples were analyzed for tritium; no tritium was detected in any sample.

Tritium was used as a marker and samples that had detectable levels of tritium would be analyzed for gamma emitters after tritium detection; no gamma analyses were performed on storm drain samples in 2016.

47

In 1998, an additional dose assessment was performed that incorporated all of the 1998 storm drain system analytical results (including both sediment and water). The dose assessment was performed using the maximum measured concentration of radionuclides in 1998, and a conservative estimate of the volume of sediment and water discharged via the storm drain system. The results of this dose assessment are estimates of the total body and maximum organ dose equaling 3.2% and 1.6% of the correspon9ing Technical Specification dose limits respectively. Therefore, there was no significant dose impact from plant-related radionuclides in the storm drain system in 1998. The sampling conducted in 2016 indicates that the presence of radionuclides in the storm drain system has not changed significantly. Therefore, the storm drain system remains an insignificant impact to dose. The VYNPS staff will continue to monitor the presence of plant related radionuclides in the storm drain system.

6.5.2.6 Air Compressor Condensate and Manhole Sampling Results The presence of tritium in station air compressor condensate and manholes (Storm Drain System) has been identified since 1995 (ER_95-0704). An evaluation has been performed (S.R.1592) which states

" .. .leakage of tritium found in the storm drains (manholes) to ground water beneath the site will be transported by natural ground water gradient to the Connecticut River. However, at the current measured concentrations and postulated leak rate from the storm drains, the offsite dose impact is not significant

(<2.4E-5 mrem/year)." Data provided in Table 6.1 will be filed under the requirements of 10CFR50.75(g) and is presented here in response to ER_95-0704_04 commitments. Because of revisions in the security arrangements at the plant site, there was no water available for collection in Manholes 11 H, 13 and 8 during 2016.

48

Table 6.1 Summary of Air Compressor Condensate and Manhole Water Tritium Concentrations*

Sample No. Mean Range Location Detected** ( microcuries/ml ) (microcuries/ml)

Air Compressor 0/6 None Detected <1.6E <1. 7E-06 Condensate Manhole llH 0/0 No Sample Available No Sample Available Manhole 13 0/0 No Sample Available No Sample Available Manhole 8 0/0 No Sample Available No Sample Available

Reported per ER_950704_04.

- The fraction of sample analyses yielding detectable measurements 6.5.2. 7 Groundwater Monitoring Wells Samples Results (WS)

Leakage from primary system piping between the Augmented Off Gas (AOG) Building and the Turbine Building was identified early in 2010. A large pool of subsurface water became contaminated with tritium as a result of this leak. A large number of new groundwater sample wells were installed and a significant effort was mounted to find the leak and fix it. Presently, mitigation efforts have resulted in the extraction of more than 300,000 gallons of trititated water from this subsurface pool. Dose calculations have been performed assuming that this underground plume of contaminated water is moving towards and into the Connecticut River. The dose impacts and other details ofthis event are provided in the year 2016 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report.

6.5.3 Ingestion Pathways 6.5.3.1 Milk (TM)

Milk samples from cows at several local farms were collected monthly during 2016. Twice-per-month collections were made during the "pasture season" since the milking cows or goats were identified as being fed pasture grass during that time. Each sample was analyzed for I-131 and other gamma-emitting radionuclides. Quarterly composites (by location) were analyzed for Sr-89 and Sr-90.

As expected, naturally-occurring K-40 was detected in all samples. Also expected was Sr-90. Sr-90 was not detected in the 8 indicator samples but was detected in three of the four control samples. Although Sr-90 is a by-product of nuclear power plant operations, the levels detected in milk are consistent with that expected from worldwide fallout from nuclear weapons tests, and to a much lesser degree from fallout from the Chernobyl incident. The Sr-90 levels shown in Table 5.1 and Figure 6.11 are consistent with 49

those detected at other New England farms participating in other plant environmental monitoring programs.

I This radionuclid,e and Cs-137 are present throughout the natural environment as a result of atmospheric nuclear weapons testing that started primarily in the late 1950's and continued through 1980.

They are found in soil and vegetation, as well as anything that feeds upon vegetation, directly or indirectly. The detection of Cs-137 in environmental milk samples is expected and has been detected in previous years. Cs-137 was not detected in any of the 51 samples in 2016. See Figure 6.10. It should be noted here that most of the Cs-137 concentrations and many of the Sr-90 concentrations shown on Figures 6.10 and 6.11, respectively, are considered "not detectable." All values have been plotted, regardless of whether they were considered statistically significant or not. As shown in these figures, the levels are also consistent with those detected in previous years near the VYNPS plant. There is also little actual difference in concentrations between farms. As in previous years, no I-131 attributable to the operation of Entergy Vermont Yankee was detected in any milk sample. Naturally occurring Ra-226 was not detected in any of the 51 samples analyzed ..

6.5.3.2 Silage (TC)

A silage sample was collected from each of the required milk sampling stations during October. Each of these was analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides and I-131. As expected with all biological media, naturally-occurring Be-7 and K-40 was detected in all 3 samples analyzed. No Cs-137 or I-131 was detected in any sample.

6.5.3.3 Mixed Grass (TG)

Mixed grass samples were collected at each of the air sampling stations during three of the four quarters of 2016. As expected with all biological media, naturally-occurring Be-7 was detected in 10 of the 15 samples. Naturally-occurring K-40 was detected in all samples. Cesium-137 was not detected in any of the samples.

6.5.3.4 Fish (FH)

Semiannual samples of fish were collected from two locations in both spring and fall of 2016 for the VY REMP. Several species may be collected such as Walleye, Small Mouth Bass, Large Mouth Bass, Yellow Perch, White Perch, and Rock Bass. The edible portions of each of these were analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. As expected in biological matter, naturally-occurring. K-40 was detected in all eight samples. In addition to the analysis of edible portions, the inedible portions were also analyzed.

These fish were also analyzed for H-3, Am-241, Cm-242, Cm-243/244, Fe-55, Ni-63, Pul.238, Pu-239/240, Pu-241, Pu-242, Sr-89 and Sr-90.

50

Strontium 90 was detected in some of the inedible portions (bones, guts and skin are included in the

'inedible' portion). This is the seventh year in the VY REMP program that fish has been analyzed for Hard-to-Detects such as Strontium-90. The results were compared to studies done in the Hudson River by New York State officials and it was concluded that the Strontium-90 detected is a result of weapons-testing era fallout to the environment and not from nuclear power plant releases.

As shown in Table 5.1, Cs-137 was not detected in this year's samples. It should be noted that the majority of the Cs-137 concentrations plotted in Figure 6.12 are considered "not detectable." All values were plotted regardless of whether they were considered statistically significant or not. The Cs-137 levels plotted for 2014 and previous years are typical of concentrations attributable to global nuclear weapons testing fallout.

6.5.4 Direct Radiation Pathway Direct radiation was continuously measured at 53 locations surrounding the Vermont Yankee plant with the use of thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs).

In 1999, DR-53 was added on the site boundary. The TLDs are collected every calendar quarter for readout at the environmental laboratory. In December 2016, this site boundary TLD was changed to DR-53-A which is located on the west fence line of the property. The complete summary of data may be found in Table 5.3.

From Tables 5.2 and 5.3 and Figure 6.13, it can be seen that the Inner and Outer Ring TLD mean exposure rates were not significantly different in 2016. This indicates no significant overall increase in direct radiation exposure rates in the plant vicinity. It can also be seen from these tables that the Control TLD mean exposure rate was not significantly different than that at the Inner and Outer Rings. Figure 6.13 also shows an annual cycle at both indicator and control locations. The lowest point of the cycle occurs usually during the winter months. This is due primarily to the attenuating effect of the snow cover on radon emissions and on direct irradiation by naturally-occurring radionuclides in the soil. Differing amounts of these naturally-occurring radionuclides in the underlying soil, rock or nearby building materials result in different radiation levels between one field site and another Upon examining Figure 6J 7, as well as Table 5.2, it is evident that in recent years, station DR-45 had a higher average exposure rate than any other station. This location is on-site, and the higher exposure rates are due to plant operations and activities in the immediate vicinity of this TLD. There is no significant dose potential to the surrounding population or any real individual from these sources since they are located on the back side of the plant site, between the facility and the river. The same can be said for station DR-46, which has shown higher exposure rates in previous years.

51

Environmental Program Trend Graphs 2016 Radiological Environmental Operating Report Vermont Yankee Graphs:

6.1 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (Average Concentrations) 6.2 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (11) 6.3 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (12) 6.4- Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (13) 6.5 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (14) 6.6 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (15)

6. 7 - Deleted 6.8 - Gross Beta Measurement on River Water (Average Concentrations) 6.9 - Gross Beta Measurement on Ground Water (Average Concentrations) 6.10 - Cesium-137 in Milk (Annual Average Concentrations) 6.11 - Strontium 90 in Milk (Annual Average Concentrations) 6.12- Cesium-137 in Fish (Annual Average Concentrations) 6.13 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring, Outer Ring, and Control TLDS 6.14- Exposure Rate at Indicator TLDS, DROl-03 6.15- Exposure Rate at Indicator TLDS, DR 06,50 6.16 - Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLDS, DR 07 - 08, 41 - 42 6.17 - Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLDS, DR 43-46 6.18 -Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLDS, DR 47-49, 51-53 6.19-Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDS, DR 09-15(odd) 6.20- Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDS, DR-17-23 (odd) 6.21 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDS,DR 25-31 (odd) 6.22- Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDS, DR 33-39 (odd) 6.23 -Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDS, DR 10 - 16 (even) 6.24 - Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDS, DR 18-24 (even) 6.25 - Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDS, DR 26-32 (even) 6.26 - Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDS, DR 34-40 (even) 6.27 -Exposure Rate at Control TLDS, DR 04-05 52

Figure 6.1' - Gross Beta easurements on Air Part* curate Filters - Qu arterly Average Concentrations 0.08 .

0.07

0. 6

a; 0.05 11

~

E

(,)

~ 0 .04 1 l Q

uQ. I 0~03 .

0.02 O.Q1 0 ..L-~~~~~~~~....,-~~~..------.~----.-~--.,.-~-,--~...-~~~~-...~~~-,--~...-~..------.~-.-~-.-~~~~-

1992 19931994 1995 199619971998 1999 2000 2001 2 02 07 2008 2009 2010 201 1 20122013 2014 015 2016 Year

-+- Indicator- Stations

Control Sdalion 53

3 2

1:

0 49 48 47 46

,5 44 3

42 I 41

~ I 40

~

u. I 39 1 I 38 GI' I 37 1i 36

i ea.

.r.J I 35 34 33

.... .I 32 31 ~

ac: I 30 ~ I f

=

-e0 1,11, cQI>

f 29 28 27 ll 26 ~ !'\

l'i I>>' 25 ~

J' I 24 0 Ii Ill>

f'ii, di<

I 23 22 21 N

I

.~

1; mi

"' 20 19 et:.

Ill> 18 ~

Cit 17 Cl>

0, 16 I f I

15 N 14 u;'

GI' . 13 12

J CD 11 u:: 10

~~lri IX)

C!

(.0 C!

U'l C! ~

M 0

N 0

0 0

c:i ci ci

.1e1ow :>1qo:>nod

53

'52 1

50 9

8 47 6

45 44 43 2

41 U'I

.""di...

40 J

j 39 it I 38 I 41' di l 37

~

J 0 l l I

36 35 t::

0..

I I

I 3

33

.._ 32

((

e:

0 I 31 ...

30 ~

29 ~

...c:

Iii I 28 ~

l 41 c

I l 1

27 ;Ill!

26 .:i 25 :

I Ill r:s 41 II I I

24 ~

23 ~

22 21 t

m l l 1

20 19 C"~

~

Iii U'I 2 Il l l

HI 17 16 t

(!) 1I 15 I

j 1

II

(')

<.O I.! 13 Gi 12

J

! 11 D>>

u. I l 10 9

8 7

6 5

4 3

.2 1

0

<<> ..... <Cl II')

(!;

..., N .... 0 CJ 0 0 ~ 0 Q C>

ci cl d 0 ci 0 ci c:i

*1ow ~q nono, LI')

LI')

Figure 6.4 -Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate* Filters O.OB 0.06

..__ 0.05 e

0

a::I 0_04 ---

0 0

a.

0.03 0.02 0.01 0 - ' '

o ~ Nw * ~m~~w ~~~--~~~-- NNNNNNNNNNWWWWWWWWWW ****** * *** ~~~~

o ~ Nw * ~m~~~o - N~ * ~m~~~o - Nw * ~~~~IDO ~ N~ * ~m~~~o ~ N~

2016 Week Number

- - AP-13 Hinsdale Substalion - - - A.P-21 Spofford lake 56

53 52 51 50 49 48 47 46 ct 5 44 43 42 41 l!? 40

-au:

QI 39 38 37

.E 36 35 3

e

J u 3 33 IVI D.. 32 31

~

Ci 30 .ct c 29 e

- i 0

Ill 28 c 27 ell 26 C>

E 2 ~

QI i;;. 24 ~ ~

J Ill 23 ::;; i

~ 22

E D

21 20 I...

Cil ' 19 ~

m 18 <

ill' in e

n 16 t 0 15 14 LO u) 13 12

...:J QI 11 ca, 10

u. 9 8

7

6 5

4 3

2 1

0 co CD V'l I") N 0

~

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 d Q d 0 d d d d Jl,lJeul ~ qn anod

r - --- --- - -- -

45 44 43 42 41 11'1 I I

~ 40 di

l I 3 u:

I 38 QI ~ 37 ...'j Ill

~ ' r 36

s i

11 0 35

~e

'l ' 34

~

ll.

... i I

I I

33 32 -

IJ)

"'I

~

ac 1 31 ...

30 :8

'I 0 29 E I

11'1 I

I 28 ~

cQI I 27 .llC I l 26 ~

E 25 3:

I!

J I 24 ~

23 ~

IJ Ill IO QI I ------f' 22 a;"'

__::a 21 20 m 19 Ill tll

...0

(!)

I I

I

' ,/'

18 17 16 15 1 I I

I 1

ll

(/) I I

u> 13 1

I

,_QI

J I 12 11 Q

10 LL I I I

9 8

1 6

5 4

3 2

1 0

CXI 0

....0 U>

0 0 ~

0 t'j 0

C>

0 c> ci ci d d d d 0 HJIOW :>iqn:JJl:)d 00 lfl

Figure 6.8 - Gross Be a easurements on River Water Semi-Annual Average Concen rafon 4.00 3.50 I ii l

r 3.00 2.50

~ 200 uQ.

. 0

1. 0 0.50

0. 0 Year

Figure 6.9 - Gross eeta easurements on Ground Water Semi -Annual Average Concentrations 11.0 -.-----------------~-----------------------.

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

7.

~ 60

-~

s

~5-40 3.0 2.

1.0 0.

~ 1?!~

'\

60

Figure 6.10 - Cesium 137 in ilk-Annual Average Concentration 1 .0 90 6.0

.0 6.0

~

5.0

~

40 3.0

__o 0

COii) --

Figure 6.11 - Strontium 90 in ilk - Annual Averge Concentrations dJ) 35 3.0 5

J 2.0 0

0.

1.5

.0 OS

.0 cf!Jt;j

'W-1

Figure 6.12 - Cesium 137 in Fish - Annual Average Concentrations 80.0 IA 70_0 I

l \

60.0 I \

I I 50.0 I \

I j

I OI

?! 40.0 I

(,)

a..

30.0 20.0 10.0 0 . 0 +------------------,----r----,---~--...---~----------------~------...---------------------~--<

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20*11 2-012 2013 2014 20 15 2016 Year

FH-2 1 Rt. 9 Elrt:<lge I) 63

Figure 6.13 - Average Exposure Rate at Inner Ri g Outer Ring a d Co roll TLD,s 9 .0-.-----------------------------------------------------~--~----------------~--~-------

8.5 -+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 8.0 -+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 7.S-+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1

; 7.0

O

~ 6.5 a:*

e

.'!::! 6 0 + -- -W--- ---1,

~ .

5.

4.S -+----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 4.

1997 1998 1999 20 0 2 01 20 2 2 03 20 2 05 20 6 2 07 20 8 2 09 010 2 11 2012 2 13 20 14 2 5 016

!Retrieval Da e

__ , Ring 64

Figure 6.1 posure Rate :it Indicator TL.Ds. DR1 4 10.

9.5 9.0 8.

8.D

~ 7.S

.c;

...iii*

Q. 7.

q:

e* 6.5

.~

e 5.

5.

4.S 4.

1999 2000 005 20015 009 :01 0 2011 201 2015 2016 R.e

.3 Uon 65

Fiaure 6.15 .. Expo Rate ;Jt ilndieator TLOs. OR"'6 & DR*SO 10 D *--------------------------------~--.......--------------------------------------------------

9.S 9.0 8 . 5-t--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~

0

.c l

5.5 5.0 .JI--~~~~~~~~~~~~~--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ .....~~~

.5 00 2001 :oo 03 200 2007 ::!008 :?009 20 10 :o "012 ::?013 2014 2015 20 16 Retrieval Date Sdlool 66

Figur-e *&.1*6 ... Expos*u re R 3te ~t Site Bou nd3ry T LOs DR-7. 8, 41 & * ~

1 10 ~* ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-

9

I 8

O

8.

a::

U 2 1 6

5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + t - -

1997 1998 1999 2000 2 00 1 008 20 09 2010 2 01 1 2012 2013 20 14 20 15 :!016 Retrieval Date

~ *c*

67 I

1 gur ; .11 E o-1 1998 999 000 01 200? 2003 2006 "007 ., 09 2010 "'0 ., .,013 20 4 6 68

Figure 6.1 8 -Exp os.ure Rate a s *te Boundary TLDs DR-47-49 & 51 -53 12 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.

1

... 9

~

0

.c:

3. 8

~

e d

~ 7 - ----'l=--1-lllf-+-_ _ _ __ -Hh, 'F---.+ ---IJ.U.l~....\+-~- .......~-l-+-4-lr-f-I *,

l *. , .. ,, "

6

-V --i\_*i~ I ; *~ \~ - --*~ / I 11

- '1 / \' I 5 ~--------- _______ ,,

. II 1,,11.- - - - - 1 4

1997 19 98 1999 2 0 20 0'1 2 0 2 2 03 2 04 2 5 2 006 2 07 20 B 2 09 20 0 20 1 2 0 *1 2 3 20 14 2 015 2 6 Retriev al Oa e

-+- DR-4 7 ite Boundary - - - OR-48 Site Boondary DR-49 Stte- Boundary ~ R-51 Slte< .B tu:Ktly -If- R-52.SJIE BcUIWnl - - - DR-53 s* e Boondary 69

'Fig e 6.19 - Exposure 1 - e* a ner ing T s DR:-9, 11, 13 & 1 a

200 001 200 .., 07 201 .,01 013 Re *eval D e OR DR*

70

Figure 6.2 * - Exposure Rate at rnner in TL -1 19, 21 ' 23'

I 0

.c 4 J.------------------------.,..a--.,.--------.------------.------------.--------------------

199 1998 999 20 Retrieval Date

-23 r R.

71

Fig 6.21 - Exposu e - ate at In r *ng TL s - 5. 2 29 31 9 ~------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.

.s T

.5 4 _._____________~----------------------------------------------------------------------------~----~~~----~~~-------------------------'

997 Retriev I ate 72

Fiaure* 6.22

Exposure Rate at I r Ring TLDs !DR-3*3, 9 10 g - - - - - - - - - - - - ---- - - - -~- - -- . - ~- - ~- ~-~---------~----

a +-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~---~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--!

I 0

1 Q

k 6

II s -1 ,. 1. .*---------------1---.. .

4 997 '0 0 008 2009 2010 2011 2 01 2 201 3 2014 :W1 5 2016 Retriev al Date OR-33 ll'lflE!r Rrlg -~~ ':nner Ring 73

Figure 6._3 - Exp sure 'Ra _e t Ou er Ring 0

9 u

19 7 998 001 20 e ...009 20 o 20 1 20 2 20 3 20 _o 1s _o 6 e 1e al Din -

74

Fi ure 6.2 - posure a ea _Ou er Ri _g T _es D -1

2 2 2

.5 Re *eval te 75

F1gu e 6,. 5 - Exposure 1R ate a O ter 1gT s a.s 4.

ro

- - - DR-76

- 1 Figure 6.26 -Exposure Rate at Outer Ri g T Os DR-34, 36 38 & 40 1 5.5 + - - - - - - - - - --1------t 1-------------+f---H-----------..---- v ~----

5 +--------------&~-----------------------~---~

4!..5 +--------------'<------------------------------!

4 1997 1998 1999 20 0 20 1 2 02 2003 20 04 2 0<5 20 6 20 07 2008 20 9 2 0 201 1 2012 2 13 20 14 20 5 2 16 Retrieva I Date

--+- DR-34 Outer Ring - '"36 Outer Ring DR-38 Outer Ring 77

Figure 6.27 - Ex;po sure Rate a Control T Ds DR-4 & 5 1 1 g

8.5 7 _5 -

Ci. 6 .5 +-->~c--H---il 11::

e i 6 5_5 5

4 1997 1998 1999 20 0 20 1 2 02 20 3 20 04 200S 20 6 20 07 2 00 2009 2010 2 01 1 2012 2 13 2 014 20 15 2 16 Retriev a I Date 78

7.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAMS 7.1 ENVIRONMENTAL DOSIMETRY COMPANY ENVIRONMENTAL DOSIMETRY COMPANY ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE STATUS REPORT January - December 2016 Prepared By: Date:

I Approved By: Date: 0 ~-/I -:_;--

Environmental Dosimetry Company 10 Ashton Lane Sterling, MA 01564 79

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................................... 81 EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

...........................................................................: .............................. 82 I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 83 A. QC Program ...................................................................................................... 83 B. QA Program ....................................................................................................... 83

11. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA ................................................................. 83 A. Acceptance Criteria for Internal Evaluations ...................................................... 83 B. QC Investigation Criteria and Result Reporting .................................................. 85 C. Reporting of Environmental Dosimetry Results to EDC Customers ................... 85 111. DATA

SUMMARY

FOR ISSUANCE PERIOD JANUARY-DECEMBER 2016 ................ 85 A. General Discussion ............................................................................................ 85 B. Result Trending ................................................................................................. 86 IV. STATUS OF EDC CONDITION REPORTS (CR) .......................................................... 86 V. STATUS OF AUDITS/ASSESSMENTS ......................................................................... 86 A. Internal .............................................................................................................. 86 B. External ............................................................................................................. 86 VI. PROCEDURES AND MANUALS REVISED DURING JANUARY - DECEMBER 2016 .. 86 VII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................ 86 VIII. REFERENCES ............................................ :................................................................. 86

. APPENDIX A DOSIMETRY QUALITY CONTROL TRENDING GRAPHS 88 80

LIST OF TABLES

1. Percentage of Individual Analyses Which Passed EDC Internal Criteria, January - December 2016 87

2. Mean Dosimeter Analyses (n=6), January - December 2016 87

3. Summary of Independent QC Results for 2016 87 81

EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

Routine quality control (QC) testing was performed for dosimeters issued by the Environmental Dosimetry Company (EDC) .

During this annual period, 100% (72/72) of the individual dosimeters, evaluated against the EDC internal performance acceptance criteria (high-energy photons only), met the criterion for accuracy and 100% (72/72) met the criterion for precision (Table 1). In addition, 100% (12/12) of the dosimeter sets evaluated against the internal tolerance limits met EDC acceptance criteria (Table 2) and 100% (6/6) of independent testing passed the performance criteria (Table 3). Trending graphs, which evaluate performance statistic for high-energy photon irradiations and co-located stations are given in Appendix A.

One internal assessment was performed in 2016. There were no findings.

_..)

82

I. INTRODUCTION The TLD systems at the Environmental Dosimetry Company (EDC) are calibrated and operated to ensure consistent and accurate evaluation of TLDs. The quality of the dosimetric results reported to EDC clients is ensured by in-house performance testing and independent performance testing by EDC clients, and both internal and client directed program assessments.

The purpose of the dosimetry quality assurance program is to provide performance documentation of the routine processing of EDC dosimeters. Performance testing provides a statistical measure of the bias and precision of dosimetry processing against a reliable standard, which in turn points out any trends or performance changes. Two programs are used:

A. QC Program Dosimetry quality control tests are performed on EDC Panasonic 814 Environmental dosimeters. These tests include: (1) the in-house testing program coordinated by the EDC QA Officer and (2) independent test perform by EDC clients. In-house test are performed using six pairs of 814 dosimeters, a pair is reported as an individual result and six pairs are reported as the mean result.

Results of these tests are described in this report.

Excluded from this report are instrumentation checks. Although instrumentation checks represent an important aspect of the quality assurance program, they are not included as process checks in this report. Instrumentation checks represent between 5-10% of the TLDs processed.

B. QA Program An internal assessment of dosimetry activities is conducted annually by the Quality Assurance Officer (Reference 1). The purpose of the assessment is to review protedures, results, materials or components to identify opportunities to improve or enhance processes and/or services.

II. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA A. Acceptance Criteria for Internal Evaluations

1. Bias For each dosimeter tested, the measure of bias is the percent deviation of the reported result relative to the delivered exposure. The percent deviation relative to the delivered exposure is calculated as follows:

where:

H; = the corresponding reported exposure for the i1h dosimeter (i.e., the reported exposure)

Hi = the exposure delivered to the i1h irradiated dosimeter (i.e., the delivered exposure) 83

2. Mean Bias For each group of test dosimeters, the mean bias is the average percent deviation of the reported r~sult relative to the delivered exposure. The mean percent deviation relative. to the delivered exposure is calculated as follows:

where:

H; = the corresponding reported exposure for the i1h dosimeter (i.e., the reported exposure)

Hi = the exposure delivered to the i1h irradiated test dosimeter (i.e., the delivered exposure) n = the number of dosimeters in the test group

3. Precision For a group of test dosimeters irradiated to a given exposure, the measure of precision is the percent deviation of individual results relative to the mean reported exposure. At least two values are required for the determination of precision. The measure of precision for the i1h dosimeter is:

where:

H; = the reported exposure for the i1h dosimeter (i.e., the reported exposure)

H= the mean reported exposure; i.e., R= l:H;(~J n = the number of dosimeters in the test group

4. EDC Internal Tolerance Limits All evaluation criteria are taken from the "EDC Quality System Manual,"

(Reference 2). These criteria are only applied to individual test dosimeters irradiated with high-energy photons (Cs-137) and are as follows for Panasonic Environmental dosimeters: +/- 15% for bias and +/-

12.8% for precision.

84

B. QC Investigation Criteria ~nd Result Reporting EDC Quality System Manual (Reference 2) specifies when an investigation is required due to a QC analysis that has failed the EDC bias criteria. The criteria are as follows:

1. No investigation is necessary when an individual QC result falls outside the QC performance criteria for accuracy.

2. Investigations are initiated when the mean of a QC processing batch is outside the performance criterion for bias.

C. Reporting of Environmental Dosimetry Results to EDC Customers

1. All results are to be reported in a timely fashion.

2. If the QA Officer determines that an investigation is required for a process, the results shall be issued as normal. If the QC results, prompting the investigation, have a mean bias from the known of greater than +/-20%, the results shall be issued with a note indicating that they may be updated in the future, pending resolution of a QA issue.

3. Environmental,dosimetry results do not require updating if the investigation has shown that the mean bias between the original results and the corrected results, based on applicable correction factors from the investigation, does not exceed +/-20%.

Ill. DATA

SUMMARY

FOR ISSUANCE PERIOD JANUARY-DECEMBER 2016 A. General Discussion Results of performance tests conducted are summarized and discussed in the following sections. Summaries of the performance tests for the reporting period are given in Tables 1 through 3 and Figures 1 through 4.

Table 1 provides a summary of individual dosimeter results evaluated against the EDC internal acceptance criteria for high-energy photons only. During this period, 100% (72/72) of the individual dosimeters, evaluated against these criteria met the tolerance limits for accuracy and 100% (72/72) met the criterion for precision.

A graphical interpretation is provided in Figures 1 and 2.

Table 2 provides the Bias + Standard deviation results for each group (N=6) of dosimeters evaluated against the internal tolerance criteria. Overall, 100%

(12/12) of the dosimeter sets evaluated against the internal tolerance performance criteria met these* criteria. A graphical interpretation is provided in Figure 3.

Table 3 presents the independent blind spike results for dosimeters processed during this annual period. All results passed the performance acceptance criterion. Figure 4 is a graphical interpretation of Seabrook Station blind co-located station results.

85

B. Result Trending One of the main benefits of performing quality control tests on a routine basis is to identify trends or performance changes. The results of the Panasonic environmental dosimeter performance tests are presented in Appendix A. The results are evaluated against each of the performance criteria listed in Section II, namely: individual dosimeter accuracy, individual dosimeter precision, and mean bias.

All of the results presented in Appendix A are plotted sequentially by processing date.

IV. STATUS OF EDC CONDITION REPORTS (CR)

No condition reports were issued during this annual period.

V. STATUS OF AUDITS/ASSESSMENTS A. Internal EDC Internal Quality Assurance Assessment was conducted during the fourth quarter 2016. There were no findings identified.

B. External None.

VI. PROCEDURES AND MANUALS REVISED DURING JANUARY- DECEMBER 2016 Several procedures were reissued with no changes as part of the 5 year review cycle.

VII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The quality control evaluations continue to indicate the dosimetry processing programs at the EDC satisfy the criteria specified in the Quality System Manual. The EDC demonstrated the ability to meet all applicable acceptance criteria.

VIII. REFERENCES

1. EDC Quality Control and Audit Assessment Schedule, 2016.

2. EDC Manual 1, Quality System Manual, Rev. 3, August 1, 2012.

86 I

L_

TABLE 1 PERCENTAGE OF INDIVIDUAL DOSIMETERS THAT PASSED EDC INTERNAL CRITERIA JANUARY - DECEMBER 2015<1>* <2>

Dosimeter Type.

Nuh:iber *: *. % Pass'E~cFPreci~fon * *.:

Tested Crit~ffia Panasonic Environmental 72 100 100 1

( )This table summarizes results of tests conducted by EDC.

(Z)Environmental dosimeter results are free in air.

TABLE 2 MEAN DOSIMETER ANALYSES (N=6)

JANUARY - DECEMBER 2015< 1), <2 >

Standard . ~T::olerance

1~~:' P.r<?.ces~.* ~ate ::. ' ;.:. : Ei.IJ. . . C?su~~~L;,evei¥:, ;. *N,le~. .11: Bl~~.-_.\%* :;H!>eviatiC>ti :, , e:1~imit:+1~ .,,,.,

. . >, % .: . . **~:. 15%*~*

4/22/2016 40 3.5 0.7 Pass 4/29/2016 80 1.8 0.7 Pass 5/10/2016 70 1.8 1.8 Pass 7/25/2016 33 2.4 1.5 Pass 8/2/2016 56 2.4 1.6 Pass 8/2/2016 123 0.7 1.4 Pass 10/25/2016 28 2.9 1.0 Pass 10/29/2016 93 3.2 1.8 Pass 11/6/2016 61 0.0 1.6 Pass 1/30/2017 39 1.4 2.5 Pass 1/31/2017 76 2.2 1.3 Pass 1/31 /2017 101 -1.7 1.5 Pass 1

( lThis table summarizes results of tests conducted by EDC for TLDs issued in 2016.

(ZlEnvironmental dosimeter results are free in air.

TABLE 3

SUMMARY

OF INDEPENDENT DOSIMETER TESTING JANUARY - DECEMBER 2015< 1 >. <2 >

" Issuance Period

<. ' """*. "' .., sfanClard ., P'ass I Fail Client . Mean BJ as % * ;

D~viation%

1st Qtr. 2016 Millstone -0.2 1.0 Pass 2nd Qtr.2016 Millstone -3.4 3.0 Pass 2nd Qtr.2016 Seabrook 1.8 0.8 Pass 3m Qtr. 2016 Millstone 3.0 2.4 Pass 4tn Qtr.2016 Millstone .0.9 3.9 Pass 4th Qtr.2016 Seabrook -0.2 0.7 Pass 1

( lperformance criteria are +/- 30%.

(Z)Blind spike irradiations using Cs-137 87

APPENDIX A DOSIMETRY QUALITY CONTROL TRENDING GRAPHS ISSUE PERIOD JANAURY - DECEMBER 2016 88

INDIVIDUAL ACCURACY ENVIRONMENTAL FIGURE 1

~!k-~.mi-- -___ _:_--------=- --=-- - - -=- --==------- -=-=------------------------

12 10 8

6 *

4~

2*

oJTar et= 0

0

(/)

(

ii)

2 * *** * *** *

-4 '

6

B

10

12-

14

16-

~~~~----------------------------------------------------------------

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ !; & !; & ~

~ ~ ~& ~~ ~ ~ & & & & & ~ !;

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ '1~' $ $ A.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "i~ "i~ "I~ "Y~

~ ~ ~ "i "i PROCESSING DATE 89

INDIVIDUALPRECISIONENVIRONMENTAL FIGURE2 16 --

14

12.m:r-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - -- - ---- - - - - -- - - - - --- - - - - - - -- - - - -- - - - -

12 10 8

6 4

z 2

0

- *** * * *

tl 0 0

(/) ** .o 0 0

0 0 t II *

- - ** *,o 0 *2 *

0 0

0 00

~ -4

Cl

'$. -6

8

r £!'___________________________________________________________

10

16* I I I I I I I

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

f] f] f] f] f] f] f] f] f] f] f] f] f] f] f] f] f] f]

& ~ ~

&~ ~

~ ~

~

fl. r:;. r:;. r:;. fl. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~

N

~ ~ ~

tV

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~

~

"'i

~

"'i

~

"'i >.;~

PROCESSINGDATE 90 I

MEANACCURACYENVIRONMENTAL FIGURE 3

~:Jocr:u.mr----------------------------------------------------------

12 10 8

6 4

0 0

2 0_Target= O

(/)

~

al

-2 *

'/. -4

-6

-8

-10

-12

-14 LQ =-15.00!

I I I I I I I I I I

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ § ~ ~ § ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ t;; N- ~ ~ fl. ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ....,~ "'i~ ....,~

~ ~

"y PROCESSINGDATE 91 L_

SEABROOK CO-LOCATE ACCURACY FIGURE4 22 -

20 ~1rl0'.lm-----~-------------------------------------

18 16-14 12 10-8

6

4-2- * * * * * *

(I)

Ta~*O * *

< 0 iii *

~

0 -2 * *

-4 *

0

-6 * *

-8

-10

-12

-14

-16

-18

-20 ,!f!.!...:. ~-------------------------------------------

20 EXPECTED FIELD EXPOSURE (mR/STO. QUARTER) 92

7.2 Teledyne Brown Engineering Laboratory- Environmental Services (TBE-ES) 7.2.1 Operational Quality Control Scope 7.2.1.1 Inter-laboratory The TBE-ES Laboratory QC Program is designed to monitor the quality of analytical processing associated with environmental, effluent (10CFR Part 50), and waste characterization (10CFR Part

61) samples.

Quality Control of environmental radioanalyses involves the internal process control program and independent third party programs administered by Analytics, Inc and Environmental Resource Associates (ERA).

TBE-ES participates in the Quality Assessment Program (QAP) administered by the Department of Energy (DOE) Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP). The MAPEP is a set of performance evaluation samples (e.g. water, soil, air filters, etc.) designed to evaluate the ability and quality of analytical facilities performing sample measurements which contain hazardous and radioactive (mixed) analytes.

Quality Control for radioanalyses during this reporting period was divided among internal process check samples, third party process checks prepared by Analytics, Inc. (which was submitted by users or secured directly by TBE-ES for QC purposes), ERA, and DOE's MAPEP.

7.2.1.2 Intra-laboratory The internal Quality Control program is designed to include QC functions such as instrumentation checks (to ensure proper instrument response), blank samples (to which no analyte radioactivity has been added), instrumentation backgrounds, duplicates, as well as overall staff qualification analyses and process controls. Both process control and qualification analyses samples seek to mimic the media type of those samples submitted for analyses by the various laboratory clients.

These process controls (or process checks) are either actual samples submitted in duplicate in order to evaluate the accuracy of laboratory measurements, or blank samples which have been "spiked" with a known quantity of a radioisotope that is of interest to laboratory clients. These QC samples, which represent either "single" or "double-blind" unknowns, are intended to evaluate the entire radiochemical and radiometric process.

To provide direction and consistency in administering the quality assurance program, TBE-ES has developed and follows an annual quality control and audit assessment schedule. The plan describes the scheduled frequency and scope of Quality Assurance and Control considered necessary for an adequate QA/QC program conducted throughout the year. The magnitude of the process control program combines both internal and external sources targeted at 5% of the routine sample analysis load.

7.2.1.3 QA Program (Internal and External Audits)

During each reporting period at least one internal assessment is conducted in accordance with the pre-established TBE-ES Quality Control and Audit Assessment Schedule. In addition, the laboratory may be audited by prospective customers during a pre-contract audit, and/or by existing clients who wish to conduct periodic audits in accordance with their contractual 93

arrangements. The Nuclear Utilities Procurement Issues Committee (NUPIC) conducts audits of TBE-ES as a function of a Utilities Radiological Environment Measurement Program (REMP).

TBE-ES Laboratory-Knoxville has successfully completed the Energy Solutions (NIAC audit),

State of Tennessee, Nuclear Utility Procurement Issues Committee (NUPC), New York State and Department of Health's Environmental Laboratory Approval Program (NELAP) audits. These audits were each a comprehensive review of TBE-ES's Quality and Technical programs used to assess the laboratory's ability to produce accurate and defensible data. No significant deficiencies, which would adversely impact data quality, were identified during any of these audits. Administrative findings identified during these inspections are usually addressed promptly, according to client specifications.

7.2.2 Analytical Services Quality Control Synopsis 7.2.2.1 Results Summary 7.2.2.1.1 Environmental Services Quality Control During this annual reporting period, twenty-three nuclides associated with six media types were analyzed by means of the laboratory's internal process control, Analytics, ERA and DOE quality control programs. Media types representative of client company analyses performed during this reporting period were selected. The results for these programs are presented in Tables 7.2.

Below is a synopsis of the media types evaluated:

Air Filter Charcoal (Air Iodine)

Milk Soil Vegetation Water 7.2.2.1.2 Analytics Environmental Cross-Check Program Thirteen nuclides were evaluated during this reporting period. Iron-55 in water was added to the Analytics program and removed from the DOE MAPEP program in 2010 due to the low level ofFe-55 activity in the MAPEP samples. All but one of the environmental analyses performed were within the acceptable criteria.

Teledyne Brown Engineering's Analytics' March 2016 milk Sr-90 result of 15 +/- .125 pCi/L was higher than the known value of 11.4 pCi/L with a ratio of 1.32. The upper ratio of 1.30 (acceptable with warning) was exceeded. After an extensive review of the data it is believed the technician did not rinse the filtering apparatus properly and some cross contamination from one of the internal laboratory spike samples may have been transferred to the analytics sample. We feel the issue is specific to the March 2016 Analytics sample. NCR 16-26 94

Teledyne Brown Engineering's Analytics' December 2016 milk Sr-90 sample result of 14.7 +/- .26 pCi/L was higher than the known value of 10 pCi/L with a ratio of 1.47. The upper ratio of 1.30 (acceptable with warning) was exceeded. The technician entered the wrong aliquot into the LIMS system. To achieve a lower error term TBE uses a larger aliquot of l.2L (Normally we use .6L for client samples). If the technician had entered an aliquot of l .2L into the LIMS system, the result would have been 12.2 pCi/L, which would have been considered acceptable. NCR 16-35 7.2.2.1.3 Summary of Participation in the Department of Energy (DOE) Monitoring Program TBE-ES participated in the semi annual Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP) for liquid, air particulate, soil, and vegetation analyses (MAPEP-Series 30 and 31). During this reporting period, 15 nuclides were evaluated. All but one of the environmental analyses performed were within the acceptable criteria.

Teledyne Brown Engineering's MAPEP March 2016 air particulate cross check sample is now being provided to TBE by Analytics. MAPEP's policy is to evaluate as failed non reported nuclides that were reported in the previous study. Since the Sr-90 was reported in the previous MAPEP study but not in this study MAPEP evaluated the Sr-90 for Soil as failed. NCR 16-14. No Vermont Yankee samples were affected by this failure.

The MAPEP March 2016 Sr-90 in vegetation was evaluated as failing a false positive test. In reviewing the data that was reported vs the data in LIMS, it was found that the error was incorrectly reported as 0.023 rather than the correct value of 0.230. If the value had been reported with the activity and correct uncertainty of0.301+/-0.230, MAPEP would have evaluated the result as acceptable. NCR 16-14. No Vermont Yankee samples were affected by this failure.

7.2.2.1.5 Summary of participation in the ERA Program During this reporting period, 12 nuclides were analyzed under ERA criteria. Gross alpha in an air particulate by digestion method was added to the ERA program in May 2010.

All except one of the environmental analytical results were acceptable.

Teledyne Brown Engineering's ERA November 2016 sample for H-3 in water was evaluated as failing. A result of918 pCi/L was reported incorrectly due to a data entry issue. If the correct value of 9180 had been reported, ERA would have evaluated the result as acceptable. NCR 16-34. No Vermont Yankee samples were affected by this failure.

7.2.2.2 Intra-Laboratory Process Control Program The TBE-ES Laboratory's internal process control program evaluated 6804 individual samples.

95

7.2.2.2.1 Spikes/Matrix Spikes All of the 1604 environmental spikes were analyzed with statistically appropriate activity reported for each spike.

7.2.2.2.2 Analytical Blanks During this reporting period, all of the 1591 envirdnmental analytical blanks analyzed

reported less than MDC.

7.2.2.2.3 Duplicates Total All of the 3609 duplicate sets analyzed were within acceptable limits.

7.2.2.2.4 Non-Conformance Reports There were 4 non-conformance reports issued for this reporting period. No ENNVY data was impacted by the non-conformance in each of these cases.

96

8. Land Use Census The Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Off-site Dose Calculation Manual 3/4.5.2 requires that a Land Use Census be conducted annually between the dates of June 1 and October 1. The census identifies the locations of the nearest milk animal and the nearest residence in each of the 16 meteorological sectors within a distance of five miles of the plant. The census also identifies the nearest milk animal (within three miles of the plant) to the point of predicted highest annual average D/Q (deposition factor for dry deposition of elemental radionuclides and other particulates) value due to elevated releases from the plant stack in each of the three major meteorological sectors. The 2016 Land Use Census was conducted in the summer of2016 in accordance with the ODCM.

Following the collection of field data and in compliance with Off-site Dose.Calculation Manual (ODCM)

Section 10.1, a dosimetric analysis would be performed to compare the census locations to the "critical receptor" identified in the ODCM. This critical receptor is the location that is used in the Method 1 screening dose calculations found in the ODCM (i.e. the dose calculations done in compliance with ODCM Surveillance 4.3.3). If a census location has a 20% greater potential dose than that of the critical receptor, this fact must be announced in the annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report for that period. A re-evaluation of the critical receptor would also be done at that time. No changes in the census data from year 2008 occurred in the 2016 census; therefore no revisions of the 2008 calculations were required.

Pursuant to ODCM 3.5.2.a, a dosimetric analysis would be performed, using site specific meteorological data, to determine which milk animal locations would provide the optimal sampling locations. If any location had experienced a 20% greater potential dose commitment than at a currently sampled location, the new location would be added to the routine environmental sampling program in replacement of the location with the lowest calculated dose (which is eliminated from the program). The 2016 Land Use Census did not identify any locations, meeting the criteria of ODCM Table 3.5.1, with a greater potential dose commitment than at currently sampled locations. No changes to the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) were required based on the Land Use Census.

The results of the 2016 Land Use Census are included in this report in compliance with ODCM 4.5.2 and ODCM 10.2. The locations identified during the census may be found in Table 8.1.

97

TABLE 8.1 2016 LAND USE CENSUS LOCATIONS*

SECTOR NEAREST RESIDENCE NEAREST MILK ANIMAL Km(Mi) Km (Mi)

N 1.4 (0.9) ----

NNE 1.4 (0.9) 5.5 (3.4) Cows NE 1.3 (0.8) ----

ENE 1.0 (0.6) ----

E 0.9 (0.6) ----

ESE 1.9 (1.2) ----

SE 2.0 (1.2) 7.1 (4.4) Cows SSE 2.1 (1.3) ----

s 0.6 (0.4) 3.6 (2.2) Cows**

SSW 0.8 (0.5) ----

SW 0.4 (0.3) ----

WSW 0.5 (0.3) 9.7 (6.0) Cows w 0.6 (0.4) 0.8 (0.5) Cows WNW 1.1 (0.7) ----

NW 2.3 (1.4) ----

NNW 1.7 (1.1) ----

Sectors and distances are relative to the plant stack as determined by a Global Positioning System survey conducted in 1997.

- Location of nearest milk animal within 3 miles of the plant to the point of predicted highest annual average D/Q value in each of the three major meteorological sectors.

98

9.

SUMMARY

During 2016 as in previous years during plant operation, a program was conducted to assess the levels of radiation or radioactivity in the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station environment. Over 900 samples were collected (including TLDs) over the course of the year, with a total of over 2,000 radionuclide or exposure rate analyses performed. The samples included groundwater, river water, sediment, fish, milk, silage, mixed grass, storm drain sediment, and storm drain water. In addition to these samples, the air surrounding the plant was sampled continuously and the radiation levels were measured continuously with environmental TLDs.

Three of the objectives of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) are:

To provide an early indication of the appearance or accumulation of any radioactive material in the environment caused by the operation of the station.

To provide assurance to regulatory agencies and the public that the station's environmental impact is known and within anticipated limits.

To verify the adequacy and proper functioning of station effluent controls and monitoring systems ..

Low levels of radioactivity from three sources (discussed below) were detected in samples collected off-site as a part of the radiological environmental monitoring program. Most samples had measurable levels of naturally-occurring K-40, Be-7, Th-232 or radon daughter products. These are the most common of the naturally-occurring radionuclides.

Samples of sediment contained fallout radioactivity such as Cs-137 from atmospheric nuclear weapons tests conducted primarily from the late 1950s through 1980.

Tritium, at concentrations significantly higher than background levels, was detected in on-site groundwater monitoring wells installed in 2007 and in 2010 in response to industry events and the discovery of primary system leakage from underground Augmented Off Gas (AOG) System condensate return piping into the subsurface groundwater pool under the plant site. The leakage from this piping was terminated in early February, 2010. Extensive sampling and analysis was performed on groundwater samples and other media throughout all of year 2016. Steps to remediate the contamination of the subsurface groundwater layer under the plant site were terminated in December 2014. Additional 99

assessment of the dose contribution of radioactive waterborne releases from this event is provided in the 2016 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report.

10. REFERENCES

1. USNRC Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position, "An Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program," Revision 1, November 1979.

2. NCRP Report No. 94, Exposure of the Population in the United States and Canada from Natural Background Radiation, National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, 1987.

3. Ionizing Radiation: Sources and Biological Effects, United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR), 1982 Report to the General Assembly.

4. Kathren, Ronald L., Radioactivity and the Environment - Sources, Distribution, and Surveillance, Harwood Academic Publishers, New York, 1984.

5. Till, John E. and Robert H. Meyer, ed., Radiological Assessment - A Textbook on Environmental Dose Analysis, NUREG/CR-3332, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.,

1983.

6. NUREG/CR-3130, Influence of Leach Rate and Other Parameters on Groundwater Migration, February 1983.

7. Vermont Yankee Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM), Revision 38, February 2, 2017.

100

BVY 17-016, 2016 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report

Contents

Text

SUBJECT:

Dear Sir or Madam:

Enclosure:

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

BVY 17-016, 2016 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report

Text

SUBJECT:

Dear Sir or Madam:

Enclosure:

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

Search