ML18009A496
ML18009A496 | |
Person / Time | |
---|---|
Site: | Harris ![]() |
Issue date: | 12/31/1989 |
From: | Shearin R CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
To: | |
Shared Package | |
ML18009A495 | List: |
References | |
NUDOCS 9005010099 | |
Download: ML18009A496 (94) | |
Text
1989 HARRIS NUCLEAR PROJECT CAROLINA POWER 5 LIGHT COMPANY 90050i0099 900426 it I
PDR ADOCK 05000400 IL R
PDC I
Harris Energy 8 Environmental Center Carolina Power E Light Company New Hill, North Carolina RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT FOR THE HARRIS NUCLEAR PROJECT JANUARY 1 THROUGH OECEMBER 31, 1989 Reviewed by:
Rona d L.
S carin Project Specialist - Health Physics Approved by:
J.
A. Padgett Manag
- Health Physics Services
TABLE OF CONTENTS
~Pa e able of Contents...................................................
T L t f F 4.
C' st of Figures
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
L t
~st of Tables..................................................
1 11 1V 1.0 UMMARY........................................................
S 2.0 GENERAL INFORMATION............................................
2-1 2.1 Plant and Location...................................----
2.2 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program............
2-1 2-2 3.0 INTERPRETATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS................................
3-1 3 ~ 1 Aire ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
3.2 Drinking Water................
3 ~ 3 Fisho
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
3.4 Surface Water................
3.5 Groundwater...................
3.6 Mi 1 k o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
3.7 Bottom Sediment...............
3.8 Shoreline Sediment............
3.9 Food Crops....................
3.10 External Radiation Exposure...
3.11 Comparison with Preoperational Operational Data..............
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
19 and 88
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ 0 ~
~ ~ ~ \\ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ t ~ ~ \\
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
3-1 3-1 3-2 3-2 3-3 3-3 3-4 3-4 3-4 3-5 3-5 4.0 MISSED SAMPLES AND ANALYSES.......................
4-1 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 Air Cartridge and Air Particulate...........
Shoreline Sediment..........................
Groundwater.................................
Thermoluminescent Dosimeters (TLD)..........
~ ~ ~ ~ 0 ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ 1 ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
4-1 4-1 4-1 4-1 5.0 LAND-USE CENSUS...............................
5-1 5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4 Introductson..........................
Requirements..........................
Methods e ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Results...............................
~ ~
0 ~
~ ~
5-1 5-1 5-1 5-2 6.0 ANALYTICALPROCEDURES...............
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
6-1 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4 6.5 6.6 6.7 roc s Gro s Beta T t
'4 ritlumo ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
~ ~ ~ ~ t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~
Iodine-131....................
Gamma Spectrometry............
Thermoluminescent Dosimetry...
EPA Laboratory Intercomparison Lower Limits of Detection.....
~
~
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
~ ~
~
~
~ ~ ~
~
~
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ 0 ~ ~
~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Program
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
4 ~
~ ~
~ 0
~ ~
6-1 6-1 6-1 6-2 6-2 6-3 6-4
LIST OF FIGURES
~Ft ure Title
~Pa e 2-1 Harris Nuclear Project Radiological Environmental Sampling Points...........................................
2-2 Harris Nuclear Project Radiological Environmental Sampling Points...........................................
2-3 Harris Nuclear Project Radiological Environmental S ampling Points...........................................
2-4 Legend for Figures 2-1, 2-2, and 2-3......................
Air Particulate Samples - Gross Beta Activity 2-9 2-10 2-11 2-12 3-1 3-2 3-3 3-4 3-5 3-6 Location Location Location Location Location Location
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
1 2 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
4 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~
26 ~ ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
47 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
3-9 3-10 3-11 3-12 3-13 3-14 3-7 3-8 Drinking Water Samples Gross Beta Activity ocation 40o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ e e ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
L L
0 ocatlon 51.............................
3-15 3-16 3-9 3-10 Drinking Water Samples - Tritium Activity Location 40......
Location 51......
3-17 3-18 3-11 3-12 Surface Water Samples - Gross Beta Activity Location 26......
Location 40......
3-19 3-20 Surface Water Samples
- Tritium Activity 3-13 3-14 3-15 3-16 3-17 Location Location Location Location Location 26 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
26S.....
40 ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~
41S.....
52S.....
3-21 3-22 3-23 3-24 3-25
~Fi ure 3-18 3-19 3-20 3-21 Title Milk Samples - I-131 Activity L
0 ocatson 5...........................
Location 19......................;...
Location 42..........................
Location 43..........................
~Pa e 3-26 3-27 3-28 3-29 Bottom Sediment Samples Gamma Activity 3-22 L
e ocatson 52..........................................
3-30 3-23 TLD Averages for Inner and Outer Rings....................
3-31
,111
0
LIST OF TABLES Title
~Pa e l-l Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Data S ummaryt ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o
~ o ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~
1-2 2-1 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program................
2-4 5-1 5-2 Distance to the Nearest Special Locations from the Harris Nuclear Project (miles)...................................
Meat Animal Type at Nearest Location to the Harris Nuclear Project by Sector.........................................
5-4 5-5 6-1 Typical Lower Limits of Detection (a priori) Ge(Li)
Gamma Spectrometry.................................................
6-5
1.0 SU%AERY This report presents the results of the Radiological Environmental Moni-toring Program conducted during 1989 for the Harris Nuclear Project (HNP).
The program was conducted in accordance with Technical Specifica-tion 4.12.1, the Off-Site Dose Calculation
- Manual, and applicable pro-cedures.
Over 1,000 samples from 11 environmental media types were analyzed during the year.
No detectable radioactivity (or activity which did not differ significantly from the corresponding control) was observed in 1,508 of 1,574 analyses or 96 percent of the tests.
Radioactivity in environmental samples which could be attributed to plant operations in 1989 is as follows:
Environmental Media Radi onuc1 ide Highest Average Activity and Occurrence Maximum Individual Dose mrem r
Harris Lake Surface Water H-3 No dose calculated.
6,190 pCi/1 (36/36)
No ingestion pathway.
Fish H-3 (see above)
.01 mrem HNP Drinking Water H-3 2,250 pCi/1 (10/12)
.058 (T.B.)
Harris Lake Bottom Sediment Mn-54 Co-57 Co-58 Co-60 Cs-137 4.2E+0 pCi/g
- 1. 29E-1 2.02E+0
- 1. 30E+1
- 2. 55E-1 (4/4)
(4/4)
(4/4)
(4/4)
(4/4)
No dose calculated.
Water shielding eliminates dose at surface.
- Overall, the radiological environmental data indicates that HNP opera-tions in 1989 had no significant impact on the environment or public health and safety.
A statistical summary of all the data gathered in 1989 has been compiled in Table 1-1.
No nonroutine measurements were reported during the year.
1-1
1-1 RAD I OLOG I CAL ENV I RONMENTAL HONITOR I NG PROGRAM DATA
SUMMARY
Harris Nuclear Project Wake County, North Carolina Docket Number:
STN 50-400 Calendar Year:
1989 Medium or Pathway Sampled or Measured (Unit of Heasurement)
Type and Total No, of Measurements Performed Typical Lower Limit of Detection (LLD)(1)
AII Indicator Locations Mean Ran e
- Name, Distance, and Direction Mean(2)
Ran e
Location w/Hl hest Annual Mean Control Locations Mean(2)
Ran e
Air Cartridge (pCi/m ) 131 310(3)
B.OE-3 All less than LLD All less than LLD All less than LLD Air Particulate (pCi/m )
Gross Beta 310'3'
~3E-3 I ~41E-2 (258/258) 3,92E 3,35E-2 Visitor's Center 1.65E-2 (6/6) 2.6 mlles ENE 1.21E-2.- 2.40E-2 1,31E-2 (52/52) 4 ~40E-3 2,78E-2 Gamma 25 Refer to All less than LLD Table 6-1 All less than LLD All less than LLD Drinking Water (pcl/I) 1-131 156 4,0E-I All less than LLD All less than LLD AII less than LLD Gross Beta 36 2,0EiO 3,87E+0 (24/24) 2,21E+0 - 5,42E<0 Lillington 4 ~ 14EOQ (12/12)
Cape Fear River 2.55E<0 - 5.2IE<0 17 miles SSE 4 ~ 15EOO (12/12) 2,46EtO - 5,07EtO Gamma Refer to All less than LLD All less than LLD Table 6-1 All less than LLD Tritium 36(5) 1,2E+3 2,25E+3 (10/24) 1,61E+3 - 3 66E+3 SHNPP site 0.1 mlle SSW 2,25E03 (IO/12) 1.6IE~3 - 3.66E+3 All less than LLD Fish Bottom-Feeders (pCi/g wet)
Free-Swimmers (pCi/g wet)
Gamma Gamma Refer to All less than LLD Table 6-1 AII less than LLD All less than LLD All less than LLD All less than LLD All less than LLD
TABLE (cont.)
RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM DATA
SUMMARY
Harris Nuclear Pro)ect Wake County, North Carolina Docket Number:
STN 50-400 Calendar Year:
1989 Medium or Pathway Sampled or Measured (Unit of Measurement)
Type and Total No. of Measurements Performed Typical Lower Limit of Detection (LLD)")
All Indicator Locations Mean(2)
Ran e
- Name, Distance, and Direction Mean(2)
Ran e
Location w/Hi hest Annual Mean Control Locations Mean(
Ran e
Food Crop(
(pCi/g wet)
Gamma 38 1,3E-2 1.90 E-2 Single value L ~ L ~ Goodwin Farm 1,90E-2 Single value All less than LLD Groundwater (pCi/I)
Cs-137 Gamma 15 Refer to All less than LLD Table 6-1 1,7 miles NNW All less than LLD All less than LLD Tritium 15 1,2E+3 All less than LLD All less than LLD All less than LLD Milk (pCi/I )
1-131 96 4,0E-I 4,91E-OI Single value Maple Knol I Da iry 4,91E-Ol 7.5 miles SSE Single value 5.22E-01 Single value Gamma 96 Bottom Sediments Gamma Refer to All less than LLD Table 6.1 All less than LLD All less than LLD (pCi/g dry)
Mn-54 Co-57 5E-2 2,8E-2 4,2E<00 (4/4) 8,95E-I -
I ~ IOE+I 1,28E-1 (4/4) 1,41E 3'9E-I Harris Lake 3,8 mi S
Harris Lake 3,8 mi S
4,20E IOO 8,95E-I - I ~ IOE+1 1,28E-I (4/4)
I ~41E 3'9E-I No control No control Co-58 Co-60 Cs-137 3.6E-2 3.6E-2 3 9E-2 2.02E+00 (4/4)
Harris Lake 4,58E-I - 5.05E+00 3.8 miles S
I ~30E+I (4/4)
Harris Lake I ~ 39E+00 - 3.35Et01 3.8 miles S
2 '5E-01 (4/4)
Harris Lake 4,06E-02 5.08E-OI 3.8 miles S
2,02E+00 (4/4) 4 ~58E-I - 5,05E+00 I ~ 30E+ I (4/4 )
I 39E+00 - 3,35E<01 2 '5E-01 (4/4) 4 06E 5,08E-OI No control No control No control
TABLE -I (cont.)
RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM DATA
SUMMARY
Harris Nuclear Project Wake County, North Carolina Docket Number:
STN 50-400 Calendar Year:
1989 Medium or Pathway Sampled or Measured (Unit of Measurement)
Type and Total No. of Measurements Performed Typical Lower Limit of Detection (LI.D)('>
All Indicator Locations Mean Ran e
- Name, Distance, and Direction Mean Ran e
Location w/Hl hest Annual Mean Control Locations Mean(2>
Ran e
Shoreline Sediments (pCI/g dry)
Surface Water (pCi/I)
Gamma 1-131 104 3 OE-I All less than LLD Refer to All less than LLD Table 6.1 All less than LLD No control All less than LLD All less than LLD Gross Beta 2,0E~O 36 4,21E+00 (36/36) 2,26Et00 - 6 '5E+00 Harris Lake Spillway 4,6 miles S
4,29E+00'(12/12) 4 ~ 15E+00 (12/12) 2,26E+00 6 '5E<00 2,46E<00 - 5,07E+00 Gamma 36 Refer to All less than LLD Table 6-1 All less than LLD All less than LLD Tritium 48(5) (7) 1.2E+3 5,48E+3 (36/36) 3,28E+3 - 7 '3E>3 Harris Lake 3.8 miles S
6 ~ 19E+3 (4/4) 4 '5E+3 I ~ 14E+4 All less than LLD Direct Radiation (mR/week)
TLD 164'3>
I mR 9,57E-I (160/160) 7,00E-I -
I ~ 4E<00 Int SR1149 and 1.33E+00 (3/3) 8,75E-OI USI 4 '
miles NE 1,20E>00 I 40E>00 8,00E-I I,OOE+00
NOTATIONS FOR TABLE 1-1 1.
The lower limit of detection is given by the following general equation:
.4.66 s
LLD =
E.
V. 2.22 Y. exp (-x t )
i e Where:
= Lower limit of detection in pCi per unit volume or mass sb
= (N/tb)
= Standard deviation of the background (cpm) 1/2 N
= Background count rate (cpm) tb
= Background count time (min)
E
= Counting efficiency (counts per disintegration)
V
= Volume or mass of sample 2.22
= Conversion factor (dpm/pCi)
Y
= Fractional chemical yield, when applicable
= Radioactive decay constant for the ith nuclide te
= Elapsed time between sample collection and counting See Table 6-1 for listing of LLD values for the gamma spectrometry system.
This expression is not used for direct radiation measurements.
2.
Mean and range are based on detectable measurements only.
The fractions of all samples with detectable activities at specific locations are indicated in parentheses.
3.
Refer to Section 4, Missing Samples and Analyses.
1-5
4.
Sottom sediment sampling is not required by the technical specifications but monthly samples were collected to better characterize the radiologi-cal characteristics of Harris Lake.
5.
Although quarterly composite samples are
- required, monthly composite samples are used to provide more frequent and sensitive analyses.
6.
Food crops consisted of cabbage, turnip greens, mustard
- greens, cucum-bers, broccoli, tomatoes,
- collards, and lettuce.
7.
Lake surface waters are only required to be analyzed for tritium quarterly but additional sampling and analyses were performed monthly.
These additional analyses were designed to better characterize the impact of plant operations on Harris Lake.
1-6
2.0 GENERAL INFORMATION This Section (1) describes the pertinent characteristics of the plant and its environs; (2) provides the details of the monitoring program including sample locations, types, frequencies, and analyses; and (3) presents maps showing the distribution of sampling sites around the plant.
2.1 Plant and Location The Harris Nuclear Project (HNP) is a pressurized water reactor designed to produce 860 MWe (net).
Criticality was initially achieved on January 3,
1987.
The HNP site is located in the extreme southwest corner of Wake County, North
- Carolina, and the southeast corner of Chatham
- County, North Carolina.
The plant is approximately 16 miles southwest of Raleigh and approximately 15 miles northeast of Sanford.
This location is on the northwest shore of Harris Lake which is a
4000-acre reservoir created by the impoundment of Buckhorn Creek.
The reservoir provides process and cooling tower makeup water for the plant and also serves as the receiving body for liquid effluents such as yard
- runoff, cooling tower
- blowdown, and radioactive waste processing system.
The main dam for the reservoir is approximately 4.5 miles south of the plant.
The spillway at the dam flows into Buckhorn Creek which, after flowing south for approximately 2 miles, enters the Cape Fear River.
There are no industrial or residential structures on CPEL property.
- However, Carolina Power E
Light cooperates with various state agencies to provide public access for boating, fishing, hunting, and other recreational uses which are not inconsistent with the primary purpose of the lands and waters.
As
- such, some recreational facilities, such as boat ramps and access
- areas, are located on station property for public use.
The majority of the land within 5 miles of the site is wooded with a scatter-ing of fields and residential properties.
Much of the land is used for timber and pulpwood production.
Agricultural activities occur on a limited basis within this area including two operating commercial dairies.
89HNPEV2 (PRM) 2-1
The population within 10 miles of the plant is, for the most part, considered rural.
Towns in thi s area with notab1 e popul ations include
- Apex, Ho 1 ly
- Springs, and Fuquay-Varina (see Figure 2-1).
Within a 50-mile radius of the plant, much of the land is devoted to agri-cultural activity.
Major crops include tobacco and soybeans and corn for grain.
Livestock production includes
- hogs, beef,
- poultry, and dairy prod-ucts.
Commercial fish and shellfish catches from waters within 50 miles of the station discharge are negligible.
Recreational fishing is popular in this range of the plant.
Since there are no estuarine or saltwater bodies, sport-fishing is confined to freshwater
- streams, rivers, private ponds, and impound-ments such as Harris Lake and Jordan Lake.
2.2 Radiolo ical Environmental Monitorin Pro ram The purposes of the HNP Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program are to:
Provide an evaluation of the environmental impact of releases of radioactive materials from the plant.
Measure any accumulation of radioactivity in the environment and to assess trends.
Oetect unanticipated pathways for the transport of radionuclides through the environment.
The following locations are designed as Control Locations for the respective measurements and are intended to indicate conditions away from HNP influence:
Pittsboro
> 12 miles WNW NW or NNW (Sample Station 5)
Airborne Particulate (filter) Samples Charcoal Cartridge Samples Airborne I-131 Thermoluminescent Oosimeter Area Monitors Milk Samples Food Products 89HNPEV2 (PRM) 2-2
Ca e Fear Steam Electric Plant 6.1 Miles WSW (Sample Station 38)
Surface Water. Samples Orinking Water Samples Upstream of the Buckhorn Oam on the Cape Fear RiverSite Varies in This Locale (Sample Station 45)
Fish Samples The current radiological environmental monitoring program is detailed in Table 2-1 and has been based on plant Technical Specification 4.12. 1.
Harris Lake bottom sediment
- sampling, although not a requirement, is a component of the program.
Figures 2-1, 2-2, and 2-3 show the environmental monitoring locations.
89HHPEV2 (PRM) 2-3
TABLE 2-1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM HARRIS NUCLEAR PROJECT Ex osure Pathw Sampling Point>
and Descri tion Sa lin Fre uenc Typical Sample Size Sa le Anal sis Air Cartridge (AC)
Air Particulate (AP) 1--2.5 miles N
2--1.5 miles NNE 32.6 miles ENE 7 4--3.2 miles NNE 5--> 12 miles NW-Pittsboro (Control) 26--4.6 miles S
47--3.4 miles SSW 7 1--2.5 miles N
2--1.5 miles NNE 3--2.6 miles ENE 4--3.2 miles NNE 5--> 12 miles NW-Pittsboro (Control) 26--4.6 miles S
473.4 miles SSW Continuous operating sampler with sample collection at least once per 7 days or as required by dust loading Conti nuou s oper at ing sampler with sample collection at least once per 7 days or as required by dust loading Weekly Weekly quarterly Composite 30,000 cu ft (900 cu m)
I-131 (charcoal cartridge) 30,000 cu ft Gross Beta (900 cu m)
Gamma Isotopic Sediment from Shoreline (SS)
Bottom Sediment (SD) 26--4.6 miles S
41--3.8 miles S
52--3.8 miles S
Semi annua 1 ly Semiannually 500 g
500 g
Gamma Isotopic Gamma Isotopic
0
TABLE 2-1 (continued)
Ex osure Pathw Drinking water (OW}
Groundwater (GW)
Fish (FH)
Food Products (FC)
Milk (MK)
Surface Water (SW)
Sampling Point>
and Descri tion 38--6.1 miles WSW (Control) 3 4017 miles SSE--Li 1 1 i ng ton 510.1 mile SSW HNP Site 39--0.7 mile SSW 44--Site varies within Harris Lake 45Site varies in Cape Fear Riv~r above Buckhorn Oam (Control) 43--2.2 miles NGoodwin's Dairy 54--1.7 miles NNEWilkins or Morris 55--1.7 miles NNWL.L. Goodwin 5--> 12 miles WNW, NW,3or NNW-Pittsboro (Control) 42--7.5 miles SSE Maple Knoll Dairy 19--4.6 miles NNEOlive's Dairy 43--2.2 miles NGoodwin's Dairy 5--> 12 mi le~
NWStrowd '
Dairy (Control }
26--4.6 miles S
38--6.1 miles WSW (Control) 40--17 mi les SSE--Lillington Sa lin Fre uenc Weekly Monthly Composite quarterly Semiannually Monthly during growing season when milk sampling is not performed Semimonthly when animals on pasture Weekly Monthly Composite Typical Sample Size 8 liters 8 liters 1 kg each Free-Swimmers Bottom-Feeders 500 g
8 liters 8 liters Sa le Anal'sis I-131 Gamma Isotopic Tritium Gross Beta Gamma Isotopic Gamma Isotopic on edible portion for each Gamma Isotopic I-131 Gamma Isotopic I-131 Gamma Isotopic Tritium Gross Beta
TABLE 2-1 (continued)
Ex osure Pathw Sampling Point>
and Descri tion Sa lin Fre uenc Typical Sample Size Sa le Anal sis Direct Radiation Monitors (TLO)
TLOs 1--2.5 miles N
2--1.5 miles NHE 3--2.6 miles ENE 4--3.2 miles NNE 5--> 12 miles NW-Pittsboro (Control) 6--0.9 mile ENE 7--0.8 mile E
8--0.7 mile ESE 9--2.3 miles SE 10--2.2 miles SSE 11;-0.7 mile S
12--0.8 mile SSW 13--0.7 mile SW 14--1.1 miles W
15--1.8 miles W
16--1.7 miles WNW 17--1.4 miles NW 181.3 miles NNW 19--4.9 miles NHE 20--4.7 miles NE 21--4.8 miles ENE 22--4.6 miles E
23--5.0 miles ESE 24--4.7 miles SE 25--4.8 miles SSE 26--4.6 miles S
27--4.8 miles SSW 28--4.8 miles SW Continuous measurement with an integrated readout at least once per quarter Hot Applicable Gamma Dose
TABLE 2-1 (continued)
Ex osure Pathw Sampling Point1 and Descri tion Sa lin Fre uenc Typical Sample Size Sa le AnaT sis 29--5.6 miles WSW 305.1 miles W
314.5 miles WNW 32--6.4 miles NW 33--4.4 miles NNW 34--8.6 miles NE--Apex 35--6.9 miles EHolly Springs 36--11.2 miles E
37--9.7 miles ESE Fuquay-Varina 484.5 miles N
49--2.6 miles NE 50--2.8 miles ESE 53--5.5 miles NW Continuous measurement with an integrated readout at least once per quarter Not applicable Gamma Dose
NOTES TO TABLE 2-1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM 1.
Sample locations are shown on Figures 2-1, 2-2, and 2-3.
2.
Particulate samples will be analyzed for gross beta radioactivity 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> or more following filter change to allow for radon and thoron daughter decay.
If gross beta activity, is greater than ten times the yearly mean of the control sample station activity, a
gamma isotopic analysis wi 11 be performed on the individual samples.
3.
Control sample stations (or background stations) are located in areas that are unaffected by plant operations.
All other sample stations that have the potential to be affected by radioactive emissions from plant oper-ations are considered indicator stations.
4.
Gamma isotopic analysis means the identification and quantitation of gamma-emitting radionuclides that may be attributable to the effluents from the plant operations.
5.
Composite samples will be collected with equipment which is capable of
~
~
~
~
collecting an aliquot at time intervals which are very short (e.g.,
every 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />) relative to the compositing period (e.g., monthly).
6.
The dose will be calculated for the maximum organ and age group using the methodology contained in Regulatory Guide 1.109, Rev.
1, and the actual parameters particular to the site.
7.
A reanalysis of plant meteorological data indicated a
new air sampling location was needed in the SSW sector.
Air Sampling Station 47 was added to the program on February 13,
- 1989, and Air Sampling Station 3
was deactivated and deleted from the program.
8.
Weekly I-131 analyses are not required for surface water samples.
How-ever, water samples collected at Locations 38 (Control) and 40 serve also as drinking water samples.
I-131 analyses are performed on samples from these two locations.
89HNPEV2 (PRM) 2-8
~
~
/
FIGURE 2-1 HARRIS NUCLEAR PROSPECT RAOIOLOGICALENVlRONMENTALSAMPLING POINTS
<<1
, ON
~tt
~I
~ e
~t
~
~
'p
~
Ooor Q- /
I
~ I
~
t ~ t@
3 0
/,.'
~
C, He'e
/
1
't OO 'l e
t ~
I
~
el
~r ',~
1 g~'ll Y
~t t
~
.Oo Nt r
g ~
~
/
IH r
~
~4
~tt
/
~
/,:,.;,
'I 8
11 ~
~
~ ee 21 Oe~
tet
~p
~I 11 pt
/
j.,
r
~
10 14 ILS IIAOI (i i
j
~I o
tel
~
tt I
~ ~
o O<<oooo t IO I
11
~ <<et I
to ~
24r -'~
r e
37 otr
~ ~
~OI
~ ~
"~It ~
V I
ol I
~I I ee 2
~I C'SNOWI/
tttH'4n rt I'Lt/
'<<HI /
~ ~
42
~OI
~
CNINNtt
~HO
~N t ~
loN OON lolt
~tt tett
~ ~
~
~
~
~
t ~t ~
~OI Ht
~
~ ~
~ ~
'to
~Itt INSthT
'.T'i; 40 I',I,tjItt I
. ~
CIK tt
~
~
IjLLllVG10
//
".7
~tt~
'oto II ONO
'tto e
~It I
t OIO t ~ ~
OHI
~ ~
HI W I 4A,. (
2-9
>i(tHQ5tt(t SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT ENVIRONMENTALRADIOLOGICALSAMPLING POINTS o'(I(((
h(Ll, I
I
'(
20 4
i I
~Ot(aa(.
49
'l ~ ~ '\\
Oi MhhT OA(($
17 16
~tI
~a(
14
~w 51 16 12 QQJQON IOUNOAhY I
I t
I
'll rico Qi
((Abhor @Age 47 52 41 26
{
{
~
g~J 11(l 25~ir y
0
( ~ 5
~Q 2-10
F(GUAE 24 HARRlS NUCLEAR PROJECT RAOIOLOGlCALENVIRONMENTALSAMPLlNG POlNTS
~I
~N
/
oo
.-- -~3.
(
N
'I
~ ~
~N rtraoy a
~ stl
~'
'tol~
~sl
~II tw
<<\\
'ot C<<
I
~
~
~
/
4
~
~ tVoot I ~
~tot I
st rt~r~
ts est
~IJ
~ tits
/s
~r
~t C.r
~II sol I~ '
, ~ I II ~
5 Fi I
I sos t r I
~
~ <<<<,
I soot 1 c
'tlt
~
~t
~It s
l
.P
~/
~
ts I
~lt
~ I C<<
toeeost<<~ <<
~sn 4 osF
,ot
~H Os<> /
~
<>o
'Vl
~
',,r
~I
/
~/".
i
.s'I I'Vl,
~
s
'I
,ss
~
I
~
/'
lt t
,J'o "
,,4 roo
'r'to's
'I II ~ r IV
\\
II ~
C~ Crt>>
o n>>
lWy IIAOtIA' ntvv a sn
~tt otl s
~It
~on
~ V 4 ' I~
~
~a s'"
~ to
\\
ov
~
II>>
r t
~oo
~tt i
N
~I~
~
~. ~ <<r I ~
~s ~
~ ~
~st
~
~
~
~ <<
~N i<<N o>>
~n
~
osl Oaya>>
Itt
~tQ
)8 s
~
' n s oot l
I ~
~
'>>1 C
I ~
I tt
~ ~
I r
~I
~.I
~
~
Ilt ~
I I
>>>>It Decl 30 s 'j' I
( stol
//
Y Io
/
38 I!g 28 I>>
~Not
~ ~ ~~
e>>n s (
IIts~
s ttt g
,~r",
45 r
~
( a NV>>
~
~It
~
I V
CL
~to I r ~
sn
~ ~
'I>>I
~'
t
~sst
~,I
, ~
~
4 C
t'tantttti/
rnilgp rc I.'Ity s ~
stl
<>
I I~
~ ~
I
~
~
w,,/
i /
~
'I
's
~I, 2-11
e Figure 2-4 LEGEND FOR FIGURES 2-1, 2-2, 2-3 I
2 3
4 5
6 7
8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 2-2 2"2 2-2 2-2 2-2) 2-3 2-2 2-2 2-2 2-2 2-2 2-2 2-2 2-2 2-2 2-2 2-2 2-2 2-2 2-1 2-1, 2-2 2-1 2-1 23 2-1 24 2-1 25 2-1, 2-2 STATION REFER TO REMER
) IEERE AP, AC, TL AP, AC, TL AP, AC, TL AP, AC, TL AP, AC, MK, FC, TL TL TL TL TL TL TL TL TL TL TL TL TL TL MK, TL TL TL TL TL TL TL STATION REM)R 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 REFER TO F I GURE 2-1) 2-2 2-2, 2-3 2-2, 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-3 2-11 2-3 2-1 2-1 2-1 2-1 2-1 2-3 2-2 2-1 2"2 2-1 2-2 2"2 2-3 2-2 2-1 2"2 2-2 2-2 2-2 2-3 2-2 2-2
~
SW SS TL TL TL TL TL TL TL TL TL TL TL TL SW)
OW GW SW, OW SS MK MK, FC FH FH AP, AC TL TL TL DW SO TL FC FC TL AC AP SO FC FH GW MK SW DW TL SS Air Cartridge Air Particulate Bottom Sediment Food Crop Fish Groundwater Milk Surface Water Drinking Water TLO Shoreline Sediment 89HNPEV2 (PRM) 2-12
3.0 INTERPRETATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS 3.1 Air All 310 air cartridge samples from indicator and control locations had I-131 activities which were less than the LLD (see Table 6-1).
Gross beta activity was detectable in all airborne particulate samples from the five indicator locations.
The 258 samples had an average concentration of 1.41E-02 pCi/m.
Similar gross beta activities were observed at the control location in Pittsboro which had an average concentration of 1.31E-02 pCi/m in 52 samples.
No gamma activity was detected on quarterly composite filter samples from either the indicator or control locations.
Figures 3-1 through 3-6 provide a graphic representation of the gross beta activity at indicator locations compared to the control location for the period January-December 1989.
3.2
~ski
~
~
Neither the drinking water samples collected at the HNP and the Lillington Municipal water supply nor the control samples collected from the Cape Fear River above Buckhorn Oam contained detectable I-131 activity during 1989.
Figures 3-7 and 3-8 provide a graphic representation of the gross beta activ-ity during 1989 for Locations 40 (Lillington) and 51 (HNP site).
The solid line is the indicator location, while the broken line is the control location at the Cape Fear Plant.
The average monthly gross beta concentrations at the indicator and control locations were similar with activities of 3.87 and 4.15 pCi/1, respectively.
Analyses for gamma-emitting radionuclides indicated all concentrations were less that the lower limit of detection for drinking water.
Table 6-1 contains typical LLO values for gamma-emitting radionuclides in drinking water.
89HNPEV3 (PRM) 3-1
Tritium activities in drinking water at the HNP, which is drawn from Harris
- Lake, ranged from 1,610 to 3,660 pCi/l.
The average activity in 1989 was 2,250 pCi/l.
No tritium activity was detected in the Lillington municipal water supply or the control station samples.
The total body dose to occupationally exposed personnel at SHNPP from the ingestion of 2,250 pCi/1 of tritium in drinking water during the year was calculated using the USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.109, Equation A-1.
The total body dose is estimated to be 5.8E-2 mrem for 1989.
Figures 3-9 and 3-10 present the tritium activities at the sample locations versus the control values.
3.3 Fish Analyses for gamma-emitting radionuclides in four samples of bottom-feeding fish (catfish) and in eight samples of free-swimming species (sunfish and largemouth bass) from the indicator
- location, Harris Lake and the control location on the Cape Fear River above Buckhorn
- Oam, revealed no detectable gamma activity in 1989 (see Table 6-1).
3.4 Surface Mater Surface water samples were collected and analyzed weekly for I-131.
Water samples collected during 1989 contained no detectable I-131 (LLD 4E-1 pCi/1).
Average gross beta concentrations at the indicator and control locations were 4.2 pCi/1 and 4.2 pCi/1, respectively.
Figures 3-11 and 3-12 provide a graphic representation of the gross beta activity in surface water during 1989 for Locations 26 (Harris Lake) and 40 (Lillington).
The solid line is the indicator location, while the broken line is the control location.
89HNPEV3 (PRM) 3-2
c~ 0
Surface water samples were analyzed for gamma-emitting radionucl ides and tritium.
All concentrations of man-made gamma emitters were less than the lower limit of detection.
Tritium activity was detectable in Harris Lake surface water at an annual average of 5.48E+3 pCi/1.
This value included an additional 24 samples taken in Harris Lake.
No tritium activity above the LLO of 1.2E+3 pCi/1 was detected in surface water downstream at Lillington or the Cape Fear River control location.
Figures 3-13 through 3-17 present the tritium activities in surface water during 1989 (see Table 6-1).
3.5 Groundwater Groundwater samples are collected on site at HNP and analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides and tritium.
Concentrations of radionuclides were all less than the lower limit of detection.
3.6 Milk I-131 was detected in one sample of the 72 indicator milk samples.
The sample was collected from the Maple Knoll Dairy 7.5 miles SSE of the Harris Plant and assayed at 0.49 pCi/liter, a value slightly above lower limit of detection for that radionuclide.
A single value for I-131 was also detected in one sample from the control dairy out of 24 samples.
This control milk sample assayed at 0.53 pCi/liter, again only slightly above the detection limits of the analyti-cal system.
Due to the presence of this radionuclide in both an indicator station and a control station and at the values near the detection limits of the
- system, no significance is attached to these analyses other than that of statistical variation of background.
With 0.49 pCi/liter of I-131 present in one twenty-fourth of the annual intake of a
maximum exposed member of the public (an infant), it would deliver a thyroid dose of less than
- 0. 1 mrem.
Such a
dose itself is considered insignificant.
No other gamma-emitting radionuclides of plant origin were detected during the year.
"Figures 3-18 to 3-21 contain information on the I-131 activities.
89HNPEV3 (PRM) 3-3
3.7 Bottom Sediment Sampling of bottom sediment is not a requirement of the plant technical spe-cifications;
- however, samples are collected near the discharge of the cooling tower blowdown pipe in order to observe an indicator of plant liquid dis-charges.
In 1989 four samples were collected.
Activation products of cobalt and manganese were detected in each sample.
Cesium-137 was also observed in each sample.
The annual mean values for the predominant nuclides were Co-57 (0.1 pCi/g),
Co-58 (2 pCi/g),
Co-60 (13.0 pCi/g),
Mn-54 (4.2 pCi/g),
and Cs-137 (0.3 pCi/g).
Figure 3-22 presents the results of quarterly analyses.
3.8 Shoreline Sediment Shoreline sediment samples were collected monthly (1) opposite the discharge structure and (2) near the spillway on the main dam in 1989.
All samples contained less than detectable limits for gamma-emitting radionuclides (see
~
~
Table 6-1).
3.9
~Food Cro s Even though the mi lk sampl ing program was performed for three indicator dairies and one control dairy, food product samples were collected for his-torical data.
The eight crops sampled during the growing season included
- lettuce, cabbage, collards, broccoli, tur'nips, mustard
- greens, cucumbers, and tomatoes.
Gamma spectrometry analysis of food crops from indicator locations indicated the presence of Cs-137 at a
concentration of 1.9E-02 pCi/g in 1
of 20 samples.
This is slightly above the typical LLD for Cs-137 of 1.3E-2 pCi/g.
Since Cs-137 is frequently found in the environment from worldwide fallout at these concentrations, it is not necessarily associated with plant effluents.
Consumption of this concentration in the adult diet for one year would deliver no more than 0.2 mrem.
89HHPEV3 (PRM) 3-4
3.10 External Radiation Ex osure Thermoluminescent dosimeters were used to monitor ambient radiation exposures in the environs.
The average weekly dose rate from the indicator locations was 1.0 mrem/wk and 0.9 mrem/wk from the control location.
The highest indi-cator location 4.7 miles from the plant averaged only 0.5 mR/wk more than the control.
This difference is likely associated with local and/or geological differences and unrelated to plant activities since the dose rates are similar to their preoperational levels.
Comparison of the weekly dose rates for TLDs within three miles (inner ring) of the plant with those at approximately five miles (outer ring) is presented in Figure 3-23 and shows no differences.
3.11 Co arison With Prep erational and 1988 0 erational Data The environmental impact of plant operations during 1989 can be gauged by comparisons with the preoperational and 1988 data.
Since much of the data involves activities
< LLD, they neither require nor lend themselves to rigor-ous statistical treatment.
The conclusion and comparative statements are based on inspection and judgment.
Air Sam les No I-131 was detectable in air samples during
- 1987, 1988, or 1989.
In 1986, I-131 was present in samples for a
six-week period following the Chernobyl incident of April 26, 1986.
The activities during that period averaged 9E-2 pCi/m with a
maximum reading of 2E-1 pCi/m In 1985 all charcoal 3
3 cartridge activities were less than LLD (2E-2 pCi/m ).
Gross beta activities on quarterly composite air filters during 1989 were unchanged from 1988 and the preoperational levels of approximately 1.4E-2 pCi/m.
89HNPEV3 (PRM) 3-5
Orinkin Water I-131 activity which was detectable by radiochemical analyses in 1986 due to Chernobyl fallout returned to the LLO levels seen in 1985 and 1988
(< 3E-1 pCi/1) and remained at less than detectable levels in 1989.
Gamma and gross beta activities in 1989 were basically unchanged from 1985 to 1988.
In 1989 as in 1988 and
- 1987, no tritium was detectable in the Lillington Municipal Water Supply.
The tritium activity in HNP drinking water,
- however, was detectable in 10 of 12 monthly composite samples at an average level of 2,250 pCi/1.
Fish In 1986 evidence of fallout Cs-137 and Cs-134 was present in fish from the control location; in 1987, only Cs-137 was present in both control and Harris Lake fish; and in 1988, a trace of Mn-54 was detected in a single fish sample from Harris Lake.
In 1989 all gamma-emitting radionuclides not attributable to natural sources were less than detectable.
Surface Water Samples are taken from Harris Lake and the Cape Fear River at Lillington.
I-131 activities were less than LLO (< 4E-1 pCi/1) in 1989 and 1988 at both locations which represented a reduction from 1986 samples obtained during the Chernobyl incident.
Average gross beta activity in 1985-1989 was essentially unchanged over this period.
Tritium activity in Harris Lake increased measurably from preoperational levels of less than LLO (1.2E+3 pCi/1) activities to an average level of 3.3E+3 pCi/1 in 1987 to a level of 4.82E+3 pCi/1 in 1988 and to a level of 5.5E+3 pCi/liter in 1989.
Since the surface water H-3 activity affects the activity in fish, it is estimated that the dose to the maximum exposed indi-vidual from tritium in these fish is about
- 1. 1E-2 mrem/yr.
89HNPEV3 (PRM) 3-6
Groundwater No tritium or gamma emitter activity has been observed in groundwater over the period 1985-1989.
Milk During 1989 two samples were assayed with detectable concentrations of I-131; one from Sample Point 42 and one from the control station.
The location, levels of concentration, and related low release values for this radionuclide indicate that these analyses are likely statistical artifacts of measurement and not indicative of any significant increasing trend.
During the calendar years of 1987 and
- 1988, no detectable activity of this radionuclide was observed.
During 1989 no other gamma-emitting radionuclides other than naturally occur-ring were detected.
Previously in 1987 and 1988, occasional concentrations of Cs-137 had been observed.
Bottom Sediment Sediment samples collected from the lake bottom in the vicinity of the plant liquid discharge structure had shown low Cs-137 activities in the preopera-tional period 1985-1986.
During 1987 additional fission and activation prod-ucts were detected beginning in July.
The principal constituents were Co-58,
'I 60, and Mn-54.
In 1989 nearly all species present had decreased from their 1988 levels.
The direct public health implications of activity in the sedi-ment are negligible by virtue of their location.
Shoreline Sediment The shoreline across from the plant discharge structure had shown no man-made gamma activity in 1985; fresh fission product activity (Cs-134/137) in 1986; in 1987, an apparent twofold increase in Cs-137 activity along with the pres-ence of two additional
- nuclides, Co-58 and Mn-54, at levels approximately twice their LLOs
(< 3.3E-2 pCi/g).
In 1988 lower shoreline deposits of all 89HNPEV3 (PRM) 3-7
three nuclides were observed.
In 1989 these radionuclides were at less than detectable concentrations;
- thus, no increase in shoreline activity was observed in 1989 as a result of plant operations.
~Food Cro s
Cs-137 was detected in 1 of 20 samples at 1.9E-2 pCi/g in 1989.
No detectable gamma activity was observed in broadleaf vegetation from indicator locations in 1988 or 1987.
Crops from the control location had detectable Cs-137 activ-ity in both years but none in 1989.
The single value for Cs-137 is consistent with the values which occurred in control samples in previous-years.
TLD The 41 TLO locations surrounding the plant showed virtually no change in the average weekly ambient beta-gamma environment from 1985 through 1989.
The location with the maximum reading in 1989 was 4.7 miles NE of the plant and was different than the maximum location of 1987 and 1988 (Fuquay-Varina
~
~
~
~
~
~
9.7 miles ESE).
No significance is attributed to this change in the location of maximum dose.
89HNPEV3 (PRN) 3-8
CPKL ENVHO L SlSVHLLANCE GROSS 0
.TIVITYFOR AIR PARTIC
.ATE SAMPI.ES Pl ANT=IINPP SAMPI.E POINT=0001
- 0. 15 P
C I
P E
R
~C U
M E
T E
R 0,10 0.05 0 00.
JAN89 IMAI789 MAY89 JUL89 SAMPLE DATES SL'I'89 NOV89 JAN90 SOLID LINE I'OR SAMI'LE 'SIAI'ION Bl<OKE.N LINt. I-OR CON IROL S IAIIOW I 'RE-OI 'VERAGE.-0.02 ISO IOI'IC ANALYSIS l<E.C}UIRLDAUOVt. 0.10
CP8 L ENV80 L SLRVHLLANCE GROSS OF ACTIVITYFOR AIR PARTICUI.ATI:SAMPLLS PI.ANT=IINPP SAMPI.E POINT=0002
- 0. 15 P
C
- 0. 10 P
E R
i C c U M
E 0.05 E
R n
5
~
/
<+iJ 0.00 JAN89 MAR89 MAY89 JUL89 SAMPLE DATES SLI 89 NOV89 JAN90 SOLID LINE. FOR SAMI'LE. SlAIION UIPOKE.N LINE. I elk CON'IDOL S IAIION I'RE.-OI'VE.RAGE. = 0.02 ISO IOI'IC AtlALYSIS l<t UUII<E.O ALIOVE, 0.10
CPLL ENV8 L SLBVHLLANCE GROSS 0 CTIVITVFOR AIR PARTICUI.ATE SAMPI ES PLANT=IINPP SAMPLE POINT=0003
- 0. 15 P
C, I
P E
R iC U
M E
T R
- 0. 10 0
05 hrj Qo QQ C
lb 0.00.
JAN89 MAR89 MAY89 JUL89 SAMPLE DATES
>SEP89 NOV89 JAN90 SOLID LINE I.OR SAMPLE S(ATION Ul<OVE.N LINE. I"OR CON I ROL S'IAIION I'RE-Ol'VIRACt.-O.OZ Ii>O IOI'IC ANALYSIS REQUII<E.D AUOVE, 0. I 0
CP8L ENNR L SLRVHLLANCE GROSS RE CTIVITYFOR AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLES Pl ANT=IINPP SAMPI.E POINT=0004 0
I5 P
C I
0,10 P
E R
I C
M E
0.05-E R
n 0,00-JAN89 MAI48 9 MAY89 JUL89 SAMPLE DATES SLI 89 NOV89 JAN90 SOLID LINE FOfk SAMI'LE STA1ION Uf<OKLN LlhlE f'R CON1ROL S IAIIOhl I'kf -Of 'VEh'ACE. -0.0" ISO I (>I'I( ANALYSIS l<E.UUIRE.U AUOVt. 0. I 0
CPKL ENMBO L SLRVHLLANCE
(>ROSS 0 ACTIVITYF OR AIR PARTICULATLSAMPLES PLANT=IINPP SAMPI.E POINT=0026
- 0. 15 P
C I
0,10 P
E R
~
C
~U M
E 0.05 E
R n
0 00.
JAN89 MAH89 MAY89
'UL89 SAMPLE DATES SCP89 NOV89 JAN90 SOLID LINE FOR SAMPLE S1AIION EIROKEN LINE. I.OR CON'IROL S IAIIOII I'RE-OI'VE.RAOE. -0.02 ISO IOI'IC ANALYSIS l<E(3UIRLD AUOVE. 0.10
CPaL ENVa AL StaVBLLAex GROSS ACTIVITYFOR AIR PARTICUI.ATE SAMPLES PLANT=IINPP SAMPLE POINT=0047
- a. I5 P
C I
P E
R I
4
- 0. 10 M
E 0.05 E
R o.ao-JAN89 MAR89 MAY89 JUL89 SAMPLE DATES SLI'89 NOV89 JAN90 SOLID LINE I.OR SAMPLE STATION BROKE.N LINE f'R CONTROL S fAIION I HE-OI'VERAGE-D.D2 ISO I VI 'IC ANALYSIS Rh.QUII<E.D ABOVE 0.10
CP8L ENVB L SlSVBLLANCE GROSS I3.
CTIVITVD'OR DRINKING WATCR SAMPI.CS PI.ANT=IINPP SAMPI. C POINT=0040 la. 00 9.00 8.00 7,00 C
I 6.00 P
E 5.aa I
IVl I
4.00 T
E R
a.aa
/
/
2.00 I.an 0.00 JAN89 MAH89 MAY89 JUL89 SAMPLE DATES SI I 89 NOV89 JAN90 SOLID LINt. I.OI< SAMI LE SIAfION BROKEN LINF I.OI< CONl f<OL 'SIAIION f'ME-OliAVFRA(;E,-4.84
CPB L ENVR AL SlNVHLLANCE GROSS CTIVITY I OR DRINKiNG TER SAMPI.I' Pl.ANT=IINPP SAMPLL POINT=005 I IO. 00 9.00 8.00 P
C I
7.00.
6.00 P
E 5.00 L
~.00-T E
R 3.00 2
00 1.00 0.00 JAN89 MAR89 MAY89 JUL89 SAMPLE DATES SLP89 NOV89 JAN90 SOLIO LINE, F'Ok SAMI~LE: S1'A1ION UROKE.N Lit'ILOkCON'IROL S IAII()tI Vl<E.'-Ol'VE.RAIL=-<.8<
CPB L ENVSQ L SlRVHLLANCE TRITIU TIVITY I OR DRINKING VIATCR SAMPLES PI.ANT=I INPP SAMPLE POINT=0010 7500.00 6oaa.oo P
C
~500 oa P
E R
V aaoo.oo T
E R
1500.00 0.00 JAN89 MAIR 89 MAY89 JUL89 SAMPLE DATE Sf;V89 NOV89 JAN90 SOLID LINt. I'OR SAMI'Lt. S IAllON UHOKt.N LINL I.OI< (.'ON IROL SIAIION
')AMI'Il I)AIA MAY OVLI<I.AY CONI ICOL DAIA
CPBL ENY80 AL SlSYBLLANCE TRITlu TIVITVI OR DRINKING WATER SAMPI.FS PLANT=IINPP SAMPI.C POINT=0051 7500,00 6aao.aa P
C 4500.00 P
E
~R l~L
>000.00 T
E R
I50000 0 00.
JANJ89 MAR89 MAV89 JUL89 SAMPLE DATE SLI'89 NOV69 JAN90 SOLID LINE FOIP SAMI'LE. SIAIION Ul(OKE.N LINE. I-'OR CON [HOL S IA I ION SAMI'Lt L)AIAMAV OVERLAY (:ONlliOLl)AIA
CPBL ENVlB AL SLRVHLLANCE GROSS DLTAACTIVITYFOR SURI ACE WATLR SAMPI.ES PLANT=IINPP SAMPI. I POINT=0026 IO 00 9
00 8.00 7
00 C
l 6.00 4.00-P E
S.00-I I
T E
R a.oo 2,00 I. 00 0.00 JAN89 MAR89 MAY89 JUL89 SAMPLE DATES NOV89 JAN90 SOLID LINE. FOR SAMI'LE S'IATION Ul<OKE.N LINE I.OIP CONTROL S IAI ION VHL-OI'VE.HAOE.=-S.bb
CPAL ENNB AL SLRVHLLANCE ORGSS ACTIVITYFOR SURFACF NATFR SAMPLFS PLANT=IINPP SAMPLE POINT=OOOO Ia.oo 9.00 8,00 7.00 C
I 6.oa P
E 5.no ItM~ L I
4.oo-T E
R a.oo 2.00-I 00 0.,00 JAN89 MAI489 MAY89 JUL89 SAMPLE DATES SLP89 NOV89 JAN90 SOLID LINE. I OH SAMI'LE SIAIIUN BlcOKE.N LINE. f Of< CONI fkOL SIAIION I 'RE. Ol'VE.RACE. 3.bz
CP8 L ENV80 AL SlSVHLLANCE TRITlljM CTIVITYF'R SURI ACE WATER SAMPLES Pl ANT=IINPP SAMPLE POINT=0026 7500.00 8000.00 P
C
~500.00 P
E R
L I
aaoa OO-T E
R 1500,00 0 00.
JAN89 MAlh89 MAY89 JUL89 SAMPLE DATE SLP89 NQV89 JAN90 SOLIO LINE, f'R SAMPLE SIAIION BROKE.N LINE I'OR CON'll<OL S IA'IIOII HAMI'LLl)AIAMAY OVERLAY COI'IIHOL OAIA
GPKL ENVlB L StSVHLLANCE TRITIU TIVITYI OR SURI ACE WATER SAMPI ES PI.ANT=IINPP SAMPLE POINT=026S 7500.00 6000.00 P
G 4500.00 P
E R
L I
F000.00 T
E R
1500.00 0 00.
JAN89 MAA89 MAY89 JUL89 SAMPLE OATE NOV89 JAN90 SOLID LINE I.OR SAMPLE S1ATION UI<OKLN LINE. I.OI< CONll<OL 5 IAIION SAMI'LL llAIAMAY OVh.HLAY CVNII
- >ON oteOKFN LINI= vote CON'IteoL SIA>>ON HAMI'Lt. tiAIAMAY OVI. IeLAY CONlleOL DAIA
CPBL ENVN L SLRVHLLANCE TRITIu
.rlVITVFOR SURfACE VIATER SAMPI.ES PI.ANT=IINPP SAMPI.L. POINT=04 I S 7500.00 6ooa.oo P
C
~500.00 P
E
~ R I~L oooo.oo T
E R
1500.00 o.ao JAN89 MAII89 MAY89 JUL89 SAMPLE DATE SCPB9 NOV89 JAN90 SOLID LINE F'R SAM( LE 'SI'AIION UHOKEN LINE. I-OR CONIROL S IAIION HAMI'l.LL>AIA MAY OVI. HLAY CON)ROL L)AIA
GPLI ENVIB I SÃlVHlj.ANCE TRITIU IYITYf OR SURFACF WATER SAMPLFS PI.ANT=IINPP SAMPLE POINT=052S
>500 ao enoa.oo P
C 1500.00 P
E R
L I
oooo,oo T
E R
1500.00 0 00.
JAN89 MAI089 MAY89 JUL89 SAMPLE OATE S CI'89 NOV89 JAN90 SOLID LINE FOR SAMPLE. SfATION BROKEN LINE. I OR CON IROL S fAIION
'HAMI'lI. I)AIAMAY OVI;RI.AY OONIROL L)AIA
GPIL ENVlAO L SlHVHLLANCE IODINE ACTIVITYF OR MII.K SAMPLES PLANT=IINPP POINT=0005
- 10. na 9.00.
- 1. 00 0=00 JAN89 MAI489 MAY89 JUL89 SAMPLE DATE SL.P89 NOV89 JAN90 SYMBOL ~
- 10. 00 9 00.
- 30. 00
- 20. nn
- 10. 00 t.
- 1. 6oaa M
- 1. 2000 R
- 0. 6000-E K
- however, in December high water placed the shoreline for.Position 41 in an area of dense growth thereby invalidating the sampling area.
- survey, or by con-sulting local agricultural authorities.
- Moncure, Cokesbury, Fuquay-Varina, Merry Oaks, New Hill, and Apex quadrangle maps were used.
- garden, milk animal (cow or goat),
- hogs, or fowl) was located by inspection of fields and residential lots and by interviews with residents within the five-mile radius.
- Barns, small
- sheds, and pasture-like fields were observed as indicators of grazing livestock.
- home, a neighbor was interviewed to obtain the desired information.
- goat, garden and meat animal in each of the 16 compass sectors.
- dried, weighed, and then analyzed in a
- dressed, and placed in a Marinelli beaker for analy-sis
- eter, the instrument is checked through use of an internal constant light 89HNPEY6 (PRM) 6-2
- 1989, 55 analyses were completed on 21 samples representing 3 major environmental media (water, milk, air filters).
Background
Alpha/Beta Counting System.
The LLD for air particulates is approximately 1.3E-3 pCi/m3 for HNP samples.
Air particulate samples are mounted in 2-inch stainless steel planchets and counted directly.
Gross beta activity in drinking and surface waters is determined by evapo-rating 1 liter of the sample and counting a
planchet on a
Tennelec Low-Background Alpha/Beta Counting System for 50 minutes.
Typical LLD for gross beta is 1.96 E+0 pCi/1.
6.2 Tritium Liquid samples requiring tritium analysis are first distilled.
Five milli-liters of the distillate are mixed with ten milliliters of liquid scintilla-tion cocktail and counted in a liquid scintillation counter for 50 minutes.
The LLD is approximately 1200 pCi/l.
6.3 Iodine-131 Iodine-131 airborne concentrations are analyzed by the Ge(Li) gamma spectrome-try systems.
The cartridges are placed on the detector and each charcoal cartridge is counted individually with an approximate LLD of SE-3 pCi/m Iodine-131 in milk and drinking water is determined either by radiochemical or instrumental methods.
Analysis involves the use of anion-exchange resins and either direct gamma analysis of the resin with a
sodium iodine (Nal) well-detector or sodium hypochloride elution of the resin and organic extraction, followed by precipitation as silver iodine.
The precipitate is collected on a tared filter, dried, and counted on a
low-background beta counter.
The LLO using the NaI detector is approximately 0.5 pCi/1 for milk and 0.7 pCi/1 for water.
The LLD using the radiochemical separation and beta counting is approximately 0.4 pCi/1 for both milk and water.
89HNPEV6 (PRM) 6-1
6.4 Gama S ectrometr Ge Li Gamma spectrum analysis utilizes Germanium or Ge(Li) detectors with thin aluminum windows housed in steel and lead shields.
The analyzer system is the Nuclear Data 6685.
Table 6-1 summarizes LLO values derived from instrument sensitivity based upon a blank sample background.
Air particulate filter quarterly composites are placed in a Petri dish and analyzed directly.
Liquid samples, except milk, are boiled down to a small volume, transferred to a 250-ml polypropylene beaker with lid, and analyzed directly.
One liter milk samples are analyzed in a Marinelli beaker.
Shoreline and bottom sediments are
Marinelli beaker.
Food crop samples are weighed wet and analyzed in a Marinelli beaker.
Fish samples are cleaned,
~
6.5 Thermoluminescent Oosimetr Each area monitoring station includes a
TLO packet, which is a polyethylene bag containing three calcium sulfate phosphors contained in a Panasonic UD-814 badge.
The TLD is lighttight and the bag is weather-resistant.
Oosimeters are machine-annealed before field placement.
Following exposure in the field, each dosimeter is read utilizing a Panasonic TLD reader.
This instrument integrates the light photons emitted from traps as the dosimeter is heated above 150'C.
The photons from the lower-energy traps are automatically eliminated through a preheat cycle.
Calibration is checked regularly using dosimeters irradiated to known doses.
Prior to the measurement of each dosim-
source as a
secondary standard.
The minimum sensitivity of the dosimeters used is approximately 1 mR.
I The exposure reported is corrected for exposure received in transit and during storage through the use of control dosimeters.
6.6 EPA Laborator Interco arison Pro ram The Radiochemistry Laboratory at the Harris Energy 8
Environmental Center in New Hill, North Carolina, provides radioanalytical services for CPRL's nuclear plant environmental surveillance programs.
The laboratory is a participant in the EPA cross-check program and uses its performance in this program as a
major determinant of the accuracy and precision of its analytical results.
Ouring
Oata on the known activities and the normalized standard deviations for the 55 analyses have been received from EPA.
A comparison of the average of our reported values with the EPA known activity and its normalized standard deviation is provided below:
Standard Oeviation From Known Activit Percent of Anal ses 1 standard deviation
< 2 standard deviation
< 3 standard deviation 67 85 98 A gross alpha analysis of a water sample received in November 1989 fell out-side the 3a limit.
Preliminary examination of the problem suggests that the counter alpha efficiency at low self-absorption weights may be incorrect.
New self-absorption curve will be prepared.
0 89HNPEV6 (PRM) 6-3
6.7 Lower Limits of Detection All samples analyzed met the LLD required by Technical Specification 4. 12. 1 and Table 4.12.1-1.
Typical "a priori" LLO values for the samples analyzed are listed in Table 6-1.
89HNPEV6 (PRM) 6-4
e Table 6-1 Typical Lower Limits of Detection (a priori)
Ge(Li)
Gamma Spectrometry Surface Hater Groundwater Sam les Isotope Cr-51 Mn-54 Co-58 Co-60 Zn-65 Nb-95 Zr-95 I-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 La-140 Other Expected Gamma Emitters (LLD) 19 pCi/1 3
3 3
4 5
3 7(1) 3 3
7 1-79 Isotope Cs-134 Cs-137 La-140 Air Particulates (quarterly Composite)
(LLD) 0.001 pCi/m 0.001 0.006 Other Expected Gamma Emitters 0.001-0.017 89HNPEV6 (PRM)
Isotope Cr-51 Mn-54 Co-58 Co-60 I-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 La-140 Other Expected Gamma Emitters Milk (LLD) 27 pCi/1 4
4 4(1) 5 5
5 1-95 Isotope Cr-51 Mn-54 Co-57 Co-58 Fe-59 Co-60 Nb-95 Zr-95 Cs-134 Cs-137 Other Expected Gamma Emitters Sediment (LLD) 263 pCi/kg 50 28 36 69 36 52 90 61 39 28-618 Isotope Cr-51 Mn-54 Co-58 Co-60 Zn-65 I-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 Other Expected Gamma Emitters Fish (LLO) 174 pCi/kg 13 32 38 62 28 33 29 13-668 89HNPEV6 (PRM) 6-6
I
Isotope Food Products and Ve etation (LLD)
Cr-51 Mn-54 Co-58 Co-60 I-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 Other Expected Gamma Emitters 105 pCi/kg 15 17 18 12 16 13 8-310
( )Radiochemistry procedures are used routinely to reduce the LLD for I-131 less than 1 pCi/1.
See paragraph 6.3 on page 6-1.
89HNPEV6 (PRM) 6-7
r