ML18151A148

1993 Annual Radiological Environ Operating Rept. W/940425 Ltr

ML18151A148
Person / Time
Site:	Surry
Issue date:	12/31/1993
From:	Biron M, Bowling M, Noce C VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.)
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
94-257, NUDOCS 9405040248
Download: ML18151A148 (122)

Text

...

e VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23261 April 25, 1994 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Serial No.94-257 Attention: Document Control Desk NURPC Washington, D. C. 20555 Docket Nos. 50-280 50-281 License Nos. DPR-32 DPR-37 Gentlemen:

VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY SURRY POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT Attached is the 1993 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report for Surry Power Station which fulfills the reporting requirements of Surry Technical Specification 6.6.8.2.

Very truly yours,

/¥A~

M. L. Bowling, Manager Nuclear Licensing and Programs Attachment cc: U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 101 Marietta Street, N. W.

Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30323 Mr. M. W. Branch NRC Senior Resident Inspector

_Surry Power Station Commissioner Department of Radiological Health Room 104A 1500 East Main Street Richmond, Virginia 23219

__fj_<"}1:o__ ..__~ - - - - - . - -- . -----~_-*---- - \

• ~ 9405040248 931231** f

.PDR ADOCK 05000280 *** .1

• __._*R. PDR /

Virginia Electric and Power Company Surry Power Station Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program January 1, 1993 to December 31, 1993

• i Prepared by VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY and TELEDYNE ISOTOPES 1

• Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Surry Power Station January 1, 1993 to December 31, 1993 Prepared by:

C. D. Noe diological Engineering Reviewed by: ~d Mark A. Biron Supervisor Radiological Engineering di~

• • Approved by:

Dean L. Erickson Superintendent Radiological Protection

• 2

Table of Contents

• Section Title Page Preface .................................................................................................. 7 Executive Summary ................................................................................... 8 I. Introduction .................................................................................. 10 II. Nuclear Power and The Environment: In Perspective.................................. 12 III. Sampling and Analysis Program .......................................................... 25 IV.

• Program Exceptions ......................................................................... 38 V. Summary and Discussion Of 1993 Analytical Results ................................. .39 A. Airborne Exposure Pathway ....................................................... .40

1. Air Iodine/Air Particulates ................................................... .40 B. Waterborne Exposure Pathway .................................................... .42

1. RiverWater ..................................................................... 42

2. Well Water ......................................................................43

• C.

D.

Aquatic Exposure Pathway ......................................................... .43

1. Silt ............................................................................... 43

2. Shoreline Sediment ............................................................ 45 Ingestion Exposure Pathway ....................................................... .48

1. Milk .............................................................................. 48

2. Fish .............................................................................. 48

3. Food Products .................................................................. 50 E. Direct Radiation Exposure Pathway ................................................ 51

1. TLD Dosimeters ................................................................ 51 VI. Conclusion ................................................................................... 53*

• 3

Table of Contents (Cont)

• Section VII.

VIII.

Title Page References .................................................................................... 56 Appendices ................................................................................... 57 Appendix A - Radiological Environmental Monitoring ................................. 57 Program Annual Summary Tables - 1993 Appendix B -Data Tables .................................................................. 61 Appendix C - Land Use Census - 1993 ..................................................79 Appendix D - Synopsis of Analytical Procedures ....................................... 80 Appendix E - EPA Interlaboratory Comparison Program .............................. 90 List of Trending Graphs

1. Gross Beta in Air Particulates ............................................................. .41

2. Tritium in River Water ...................................................................... 41

3. Tritium in Well Water ...................................................... ~ ................ 44

4. Cobalt-58 in Silt ............................................................................. 44

5. Cobalt-60 in Silt ............................................................................. 46

6. Cesium-134 in Silt .......................................................................... 46

7. Cesium-137 in Silt .......................................................................... 47

8. Cobalt-58 in Clams .......................................................................... 47

9. Co balt-60 in Clams ............................................................*.............. 49

10. Cesium-137 in Clams ....................................................................... 49

11. Direct Radiation Measurements-TLD Results ............................... ; ............ 52

• 4

Table of Contents (Cont)

• Figure List of Figures Title Page

1. Atomic Structure ......_....................................................................... 12

2. Alpha Particle ................................................................................ 14

3. Beta Particle .................................................................................. 14

4. Gamma Ray .................................................................................. 14

5. The Penetrating Ability of Various Types of Radiation ................................. 15

6. Unit Comparison ............................................................................ 15

7. The Curie, a Measurement of Activity .................................................... 16

8. Average Annual Dose Equivalent to Persons in the U.S.

From Various Radiation Sources .......................................................... 17

9. Estimated Average Days of Life Expectancy Lost Due to Various Health Risks ....................................................................... 19

• 10.

11.

12.

Reactor Vessel with Fuel Assemblies, Rods, and Fuel Pellets ........................ 20 Fission: A Chain Reaction ................................................................. 21 PWR System Diagram ...................................................................... 22

13. Containment Schematic ............................................................... '...... 23

14. Surry Radiological Monitoring Locations ................................................ 30

• 5

i I

List of Tables Table Page

1. Uranium Isotopes ........................................................................... 13

2. Radiological Sampling Station Distance and Direction from Unit 1................................................................................... 26

3. Surry Power Station Sample Analysis Program ......................................... 35

4. Gross Beta Analysis Summary ........................................................... .40 Appendix B Tables B-1 lodine-131 Concentration in Filtered Air ................................................. 61 B-2 Gross Beta Concentration in Air Particulates ............................................ 63 B-3 Gamma Emitters Concentration in Quarter Air Particulates ............................................................................... 65 B-4 Gamma Emitter and Tritium Concentration in River Water ...... , ...................... 67 B-5 Gamma Emitter and Tritium Concentration in River Water- State Split Samples ......................................................... 69 B-6 Gamma Emitter and Tritium Concentration in Well Water ................................................................................... 70 B-7 Gamma Emitter Concentrations in Silt.. ..................................................71 B-8 Gamma Emitter Concentrations in Shoreline Sediment. ......................................................................... 71 B-9 Gamma Emitter, Strontium-89, and Strontium-90 Concentration in Milk ....................................................................... 72 B-10 Gamma Emitter Concentration in Clams ..................................................74 B-11 Gamma Emitter Concentration in Oysters ................................................ 75 B-12 Gamma Emitter Concentration in Crabs ..................................................76 B-13 Gamma Emitter Concentration in Fish .....................................................76 B-14 Ga~ma Emitter Concentration in Vegetation .............................................76 B-15 Direct Radiation Measurements - Quarterly TLD Results Set 1 ........................ 77

• B-16 Direct Radiation Measurements - Quarterly TLD Results Set 2 ........................ 78 6

Preface

• This report is submitted as required by Technical Specification 6.6.B.1, Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report for Surry, Units 1 and 2, Virginia Electric and Power Company Docket Nos. 50-280 and 50-281 .

7

Executive Summary This document is a detailed report of the 19<)3 Surry Nuclear Power Station Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP). Radioactivity levels from January 1 through December 31, 19<)3 in air, water, silt, shoreline sediment, milk, aquatic biota, food products, vegetation, and direct exposure pathways have been analyzed, evaluated, and summarized. The REMP is designed to ensure that radiological effluent releases are As Low As is Reasonably Achievable (AI.ARA), no undue environmental effects occur, and the health and safety of the public is protected. The program also detects any unexpected environmental processes which could allow radioactive accumulations in the environment or food pathway chains.

Radiation and radioactivity in the environment is con-stantly monitored within a 25 mile radius of the station Virginia Power also collects samples within this area. A number of sampling locations for each medium were selected using available meteorological, land use, and water use data.

Two types of samples are taken. The first type, control samples, are collected from areas that are beyond measurable influence of Surry Nuclear Power Station or any other nuclear facility. These samples are used as reference data. Normal background radiation levels, or radiation present due to causes other than Surry Power Station, can thus be compared to the environment surrounding the nuclear power station. Indicator samples are the second sample type obtained. These samples show how much radiation is contributed to the environment by the plant. Indicator samples are taken from areas close to the station where any plant contribution will be at the highest concentration.

Prior to station operation, samples were collected and analysed to determine the amount of radioactivity present in the area. The resulting values are used as a "pre-operational baseline."

Analysis results from the indicator samples are compared to both current control sample values and the pre-operational baseline to determine if changes in radioactivity levels are attributable to station operations, other causes such as the Chernobyl accident, or natural variation Teledyne Isotopes provides sample analyses for various radioisotopes as appropriate for each sample media. Participation in the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Interlaboratory Comparison Program provides an independent check of sample measurement precision and accuracy. Typically, radioactivity levels in the environment are so low that analysis values frequently fall below the minimum detection limits of state-of-the-art measurement methods.

Because of this, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) requires that equipment used for radiological environmental monitoring must be able to detect specified minimum Lower Llmits of Detection (LLD). This ensures that analyses are as accurate as possible. Samples with extremely low levels of radiation which cannot be detected are therefore reported as being below the LLD.

The NRC also mandates a "reporting level." licensed nuclear facilities must report any releases equal to or greater than this reporting level. Environmental radiation levels are sometimes referred to as a percent of the reporting level.

8

Analytical results are divided into five categories based on exposure pathways: Airborne, waterborne, aquatic, ingestion, and direct radiation. Each of these pathways is described below:

• The airborne exposure pathway includes airborne iodine and airborne particulates. The 19')3 airborne results were very similar to previous years and to preoperational levels. No increase was noted and there were no detections of fission products or other man-made isotopes in the airborne particulate media during 19')3.

• The waterborne exposure pathway includes well water and river water. No river water samples indicated the presence of radioisotopes except tritium and naturally occurring potassium The average tritium activity in 19')3 was less than l .OOA> of the NRC reporting level. No man-made isotopes were detected in well water. This trend is consistent throughout the operational monitoring program

• The aquatic exposure pathway includes silt and shoreline sediment samples. Silt contained some cesium-137 and cobalt--00. During the preoperational period, there were no man-made isotopes detected for this pathway. Man-made isotopes have accumulated. Gamma-emitting isotope concentrations in 19')3, however, indicate a decreasing trend compared to the previous five year period. Shoreline sediment, which may provide a direct exposure pathway, contained no man-made isotopes. Naturally occurring isotopes detected in 19')3 sediment samples revealed a steady trend over the recent past.

• The ingestion exposure pathway includes milk, aquatic biota, and food product samples.

Iodine-131 was not detected in any 19')3 milk samples and has not been detected in milk

• prior to or since the 1986 Chernobyl accident. Strontium-90, attributable to past atmospheric nuclear weapons testing, was detected at levels slightly lower than the previous year. Naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected at average environmental levels.

The aquatic biota exposure pathway includes samples taken from localized populations of crabs, fish, clams, and oysters. Naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in each of the aquatic biota samples at average environmental levels. Vegetation samples revealed naturally occurring potassium-40 and beryllium-7 at levels which are lower than the previous five year average.

• The direct exposure pathway measures environmental radiation doses by use of thermoluminescent dosimeters (TIDs). 1LD results have indicated a steady trend and compares well with the last five years of data.

During 19')3, as in previous years, operation of the Surry Nuclear Power Station created no adverse environmental affects or health hazards. The maximum dose calculated for the hypothetical individual at the Surry Power Station site lx>undary due to liquid and gaseous effluents released from the site during 19')3 was 0.01 millirem For reference this dose may be compared to the 360 millirem average annual exposure to every person in the United States from natural and man-made sources. Natural sources in the environment provide approximately 82% of radiation exposure to man while Nuclear Power contributes less than 0.1%. These results demonstrate not only compliance with federal and state regulations, but also demonstrate the adequacy of radioactive effluent control at the Surry Nuclear Power Station.

9

I. Introduction

• The operational Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) conducted for the year 1993 for the Surry Power Station is provided in this report. The results of measurements and analyses of data obtained from samples collected from January 1, 1992 through December 31, 1993 are summarized.

A. The Surry Power Station of Virginia Electric and Power Company is located on the Gravel Neck peninsula adjacent to the James River, approximately 25 miles upstream of the Chesapeake Bay. The site consists of two units, each with pressurized water reactor (PWR) nuclear steam supply system and turbine generator furnished by Westinghouse Electric Corporation. Each unit is designed with a gross electrical output of 822.6 megawatts electric (MWe). Unit 1 achieved commercial operation on December 22, 1972, and Unit 2 on May 1, 1973.

B. The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) regulations (10CFR50.34a) require that nuclear power plants be designed, constructed, and operated to keep levels of radioactive material in effluents to unrestricted areas as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA). To ensure these criteria are met, the operating license for Surry Power Station includes Technical Specifications which address the release of radioactive effluents. Inplant monitoring is used to ensure that these release limits are not exceeded. As a precaution against unexpected or undefined environmental processes which might allow undue accumulation of radioactivity in the environment, a program for monitoring the plant environs is also included in Surry

• • C.

Power Station Technical Specifications.

Virginia Electric and Power Company is responsible for collecting the various indicator and control environmental samples. Teledyne Isotopes is responsible for sample analysis and submitting reports of radioanalyses. The results are used to determine if changes in radioactivity levels could be attributable to station operations.

Measured values are compared with control levels, which vary with time due to such external events as cosmic ray bombardment, weapons test fallout, and seasonal variations of naturally occurring isotopes. Data collected prior to the plant operation is used to indicate the degree of natural variation to be expected. This preoperational data is compared with data collected during the operational phase to assist in evaluating any radiological impact of the plant operation.

D. Occasional samples of environmental media show the presence of man-made isotopes.

As a method of referencing the measured radionuclide concentrations in the sample media to a dose consequence to man, the data is compared to the reporting level concentrations listed in the USNRC Regulatory Guide 4.8 and Table 4.9-4 of Surry Power Station's Technical Specifications. These concentrations are based upon the annual dose commitment recommended by 10CFR50, Appendix I, to meet the criterion of "As Low As Is Reasonably Achievable".

E. This report documents the results of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program for 1993 and satisfies the following objectives of the program:

1. To provide measurements of radiation and of radioactive materials in those exposure pathways and for those radionuclides that lead to the highest potential radiation exposure of the maximum exposed members of the public resulting from the station operation.

IO

2. To supplement the radiological effluent monitoring program by verifying that radioactive effluents are within allowable limits.

3. To identify changes of radioactivity mthe environment.

4. To verify that the plant operations have no detrimental effect on the health and safety of the public .

11

e IL Nuclear Power And The Environment*

• In Perspective Coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear power, and hydropower have all been used to run the nation's electric generating stations. Each method, however, has its drawbacks. Coal-fired power can damage the environment during the mining process, or by airborne discharges such as fly-ashand chemicals which contribute to acid rain.. Oil and natural gas are costly because of their limited supply. Few suitable sites for hydropower exist, and building the large dams necessary to produce Hydropower has a significant impact on the environment.

Nuclear energy provides an alternate source of energy which is readily available. The operation of nuclear power stations has a very small impact on the environment. In fact, hundreds of acres adjoining Surry Power Station are a state waterfowl refuge, and Lake Anna, next to North Anna Power Station, is a well-known fishing site with a state park on its shore.

In order to more fully understand this unique energy source, background information about basic radiation characteristics, risk assessment, reactor operation, effluent control, environmental monitoring, and radioactive waste is provided in this section.

Fundamentals 1beAtom Everything we encounter is made of atoms. Atoms are the smallest parts of an element that still have all the chemical properties of that element. At the center of an atom is a nucleus. The nucleus consists of neutrons and protons. Electrons move in an orbit around the nucleus and are negatively charged. Protons and neutrons are nearly identical in size and weight, and each is about 2000 times heavier than an electron. The proton, however, has a positive charge, while the neutron has no charge, it is electrically neutral. Figure 1 presents a simple diagram of an atom.

___.-: Protons =£ Positive Charge Nucleus 0 Neutrons Neutral Charge

• KC565 Isotop es The number of protons in the atom of any specific element is always the same. For example, all hydrogen atoms have one proton whereas all oxygen atoms have eight protons. Unlike protons, 12

- the number of neutrons in the nucleus of an element may vary. Atoms with the same number of protons, but a different number of neutrons, are called isotopes. Table 1 lists the isotopes of

• uranium.

Isotopes Symbols 23su Number of Protons Number ofNeutrons Uranium-235 92 143 Uranium-236 236u 92 144 Uranium-237 237U 92 145 Uranium-238 233u 92 146 Uranium-239 239U 92 147 Uranium-240 240u 92 148 Table 1. Uraniwn Isotopes RadiationandRadioactwity Radianuclides Normally, the parts of an atom are in a balanced or stable state. A small percentage of atoms naturally contain excess energy and therefore are not stable atoms. If the nucleus of an atom contains excess energy, it may be called a radioactive atom, a radioisotope, or radionuclide. The excess energy is usually due to an imbalance in the number of electrons, protons, and/ or neutrons which make up the atom.

Radionuclides can be naturally occurring, such as uranium-238, thorium-232 and potassium-40, or man-made, such as iodine-131, cesium-137, and cobalt-60.

Radioactive Decay Radioactive atoms attempt to reach a stable (non-radioactive) state through a process known as radioactive decay. Radioactive decay is the release of energy from the atom through the emission of particulate and/or electromagnetic radiation. Particulate radiation may be in the form of electrically charged particles such as alpha (2 protons plus 2 neutrons) or beta particles (1 electron),

or may be electrically neutral, such as neutrons. Part of the electromagnetic spectrum consists of gamma rays and X-rays which are similar to light and microwaves, but have a much higher energy.

Half-Life A radioactive half-life is the amount of time required for a radioactive substance to lose half of its activity through the process of radioactive decay. Cobalt-60 has a half-life of about 5 years.

13

e After 5 years, 50% ofits radioactivity is gone, and after 10 years, 75% has decayed away. Radioactive half-lives vary from millionths of a second to millions of years .

Radioactive atoms may decay directly to a stable state or may undergo a series of decay stages.

During the decay process, several daughter products may be formed which eventually transform into stable atoms. Naturally occurring radium-226, for example, has 10 successive daughter products (including radon) resulting finally with lead-206 as a stable form.

Types OfRadiation Two types of radiation are considered in the nuclear industry, particulate and electromagnetic. Particulate radiation may come from the nucleus of an atom in the form of an ejected alpha particle.

Alpha particles consists of two protons together with two neutrons.

Alpha particles have a very limited ability to penetrate matter. A piece of KC566 paper will stop all alpha radiation. For this reason, alpha radiation from sources out-side the body are not considered to be a radiation hazard.

A beta particle is like an electron that has been ejected from the nucleus of an atom. Skin or a thin piece of aluminum 8 '-+> *.**.,:-,: ..

will stop beta radiation. Exposure to beta

• • <::;::\:e,l 1~~~\~~~ Y~~~~~~m;e~~)+

radiation can be a hazard to the skin or lens of the eye. Because of their limited J 1 Protron (in nucleus) ability to penetrate the body, beta and KC567 alpha radiation are a health concern primarily if alpha or beta emitters are swallowed or inhaled where they might cause internal radiation exposure. Gamma rays are like X-rays, except that they come from the nucleus of an atom while X-rays come from the electron rings.

Gamma rays can penetrate deep into the body and thus give a "whole-body" radiation dose. Several inches of concrete KC568 or lead will stop both gamma and X-rays. .* '*.. .*.. ** *:. F]igure 4~-.Gamma Ray-' :_: -: *_. *.:*_:* * *.

Figure 5 shows the approximate penetrat-ing ability of various types of radiation.

14

e a.= Alpha 13 = Beta y = Gamma Radioactive Material Paper Aluminum Concrete As radiation travels, it collides with other atoms and loses energy. Alpha particles can be stopped by a sheet of paper, beta particles by a thin sheet of aluminum , and gamma radiation by several inches of concrete or lead.

KC564

-.: .*L :,;.:'(.:)*--: : : :. J.Rg~ti:1:

~. *_. *::. tf:'ie. .ij~nfltratirig_

• uin~:nr Madous gges:o.t_"Badiatinn:

.*\. ,\:.:. :* :/* *; :- -:

Quantities And Units Of Radioactive Measurement Several quantities and units are used to describe radioactivity and its effects. In the following sections two terms, rem and activity, will be used to describe amounts of radiation.

Rem measures the potential effect of radiation exposure on human cells. Small doses are counted in millirem. Each millirem is equal to one thousandth of a rem. Federal standards limit exposure for an individual member of the public to 100 millirem annually, compared with the average 300 millirem received from natural sources and approximately 60 millirem from medical applications.

n 1 inch 1 millirem Just as Twelve inches equals one foot 1000 millirem eq uals 1 rem KC561

' *. .-*... ':'- :. **. \ *. *. *;: ::*,;,*:"<_.:. Figure*. s.-* unitGomparison . *_.**.* .._:_ .*:._ ..:: . -:-*:* ****:*:.*

. . . ~

15

- Activity is the number of nuclei in a

• sample that disintegrate (decay) every second. Each time a nucleus disinte-grates, radiation is emitted. The unit of activity is the curie. A Curie (Ci) is the amount of radioactive material which

~~ "

v v ,.

i,-1-"

v v

I-"

I-"

I-"

I-"

I-"

I-"

~

decays at a rate of 37 billion atoms per "'1--" I-"

v I-"

second. Smaller units of the Curie are i,- 1-"

...... ~

I-"

~ 1Curie

"'1--"

often used. Two common units are the i-- ... ,.

i-- ... ,.

microCurie (uCi), one millionth of a ~ ... "

Curie, and the picoCurie (pCi), one Li'.l 1O Tons of Thorium-232 1 Gram of Radium-226 trillionth of a Curie. A Curie is a mea- (radiation sou rce) (radiation source) surement of radioactivity, not a quan- One gram of rad ium-226 and 10 tons of thorium -232 tity of material. The amount of material are both approximately 1 Curie. KC569 necessary to make one Curie varies. For example, one gram of radium-226 is one Curie of radioactivity, but it would take 9,170,000 grams (about 10 tons) of thorium-232 to obtain one Curie.

Sources Of Radiation Background Radiation Radiation is not a new creation of the nuclear power industry; it is a natural occurrence on the earth. Mankind has always lived with radiation and always will. Every second of our lives, over 7,000 atoms undergo radioactive decay in the body of the average adult. Radioactivity exists naturally in the soil, water, air and space. All of these common sources of radiation contribute to the natural background radiation that we are exposed to each day.

The earth is constantly showered by a steady stream of high energy gamma rays. These rays come from space and are known as cosmic radiation. Our atmosphere shields out most of this radiation, but everyone still receives about 20 to 50 millirem each year from this source. At high altitudes, the air is thinner and provides less protection from cosmic radiation. Because of this, people living at higher altitudes or even flying in an airplane are exposed to more radiation.

Radioactive atoms commonly found in the atmosphere as a result of cosmic ray interactions include beryllium-7, carbon-14, tritium, and sodium-22.

Other natural sources of radiation include radionuclides naturally found in soil, water, food, building materials and even people. People have always been radioactive, in part because the carbon found in our bodies is a mixture of all carbon isotopes, both non-radioactive and radioactive. Approximately two-thirds of the whole body dose from natural sources is contributed by Radon gas. About one-third of the naturally occuring external terrestrial and internal whole body radiation dose is attributable to a naturally radioactive isotope of potassium, potassium--40.

16

e Man-Made

• In addition to naturally occurring radiation, people are also exposed to man-made radiation.

The largest sources of these exposures are from medical X-rays, fluoroscopic examinations, radioactive drugs, and tobacco. Small doses are received from consumer products such as television, smoke alarms, and fertilizers. Very small doses result from the production of nuclear power. Fallout from nuclear weapons tests is another source of man-made exposure . Fallout radionuclides include strontium-90, cesium-137, carbon-14, and tritium.

Man-Made Sources Nuclear Power (0.1%)

Miscellaneous (0.1%)

~ - - Occupati onal (1.4%)

Man-Made Medical Natural And Man-Made Sources Diagnostic X-Rays 39.00 Other Medical 14.00 Consumer Products 5.00 to 13.00 Occupational 0.90

' Miscellaneous Environmental 0.06 Nuclear Power 0.05 Natural Background Radon and Radon Daughters 200.00 Cosmic Rays 27.00 Cosmogenic Radiation 1.00 Terrestrial Radiation 28.00 Internal Radiation 40.00 Total 360.00 MREM Per Year NCRP Report No. 93, "Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States,* 30 Dec 1987, Bethesda, MD 20814 KC563 Dose Equivalent mo*Persons ,*n ffihe . . ..*:... .* .*:

.* **. *.-: ..'.:. F'igurie 8/ Average Annual

• . *. . . *: * .. *. . *, .: . U.S., F;rom Vari~us Radiation ~.ourc;es*** *. . * * :*. **.. * * * ...* .* **..

17

e Effects Of Radiation

• Stud ies The effects of ionizing radiation on human health have been under study for more than eighty years. Scientists have obtained valuable knowledge through the study of laboratory animals that were exposed to radiation under controlled conditions. It has proven difficult, however, to relate the biological effects of irradiated laboratory animals to the potential health effects on humans.

Because of this, human populations irradiated under various circumstances have been studied in great depth. These groups include:

• Survivors of the atomic bomb.

• Persons undergoing medical radiation treatment.

• Radium dial painters during World War I who ingested large amounts of radioactivity by "tipping" the paint brushes with their lips.

• Uranium miners, who inhaled large amounts of radioactive dust while mining pitchblende (uranium ore).

• Early radiologists, who accumulated large doses of radiation from early X-ray equipment while being unaware of the potential hazards.

' Analysis of these groups has increased our knowledge of health effects resulting from large radiation doses. Less is known about the effects oflow doses of radiation. To be on the conservative side, we assume that health effects occur proportionally to those observed following a large dose of radiation . That is, if one dose of radiation causes an effect, then half the dose will cause half the effect. Radiation scientists agree that this assumption overestimates the risks associated with low level radiation exposure . The effects predicted in this manner have not been actually observed in individuals exposed to low level radiation.

Health R isks Since the actual effects of exposure to low level radiation are difficult to measure, scientists often refer to the possible risk involved. The problem is one of evaluating alternatives, of comparing risks and weighing them against benefits. People make decisions involving risks every day, such as deciding whether to wear seat belts or smoke cigarettes. Risks are a part of everyday life . The question is to determine how great the risks are.

We accept the inevitability of automobile accidents. Building safer cars or wearing seat belts will reduce the risk of injury. You could choose to not drive to be even safer, but pedestrians and bicyclists are also injured by cars. Reducing the risk of injury from automobiles to zero requires moving to a place where there are no automobiles.

' 18

- While accepting the many daily risks of living, some people feel that their demands for energy should be met on an essentially risk-free basis. Attention is focused on safeguarding the public,

• developing a realistic assessment of the risks, and placing them in perspective.

Because you cannot see, feel, taste, hear, or smell radiation, it is often a source of concern. We have the same lack of sensory perception for things such as radio waves, carbon monoxide, and small concentrations of numerous cancer causing substances. Although these risks are just as real as the risks associated with radiation, they have not generated the same degree of concern as radiation.

Most risks are with us throughout our lives, and their effects can be added up over a lifetime to obtain a total effect on our life span. The typical life span for an American woman is now 76 years, whereas men average 71 years of age. Figure 9 shows a number of different factors that decreased our average life expectancy.

Days Activity 2500

1. Smoking 1 Pack of Cigarettes a Day

2. Being 20% Overweight 2000 3. Construction I

4. Agriculture 1500 5. Auto Accidents

6. Avg Alcohol Consumption per Person

7. Home Accidents 1000

8. All Industry Hazards

9. Radiation Dose of 6.5 Millirem per 500 Year for 30 Years NCRP Report No. 95, "Radiation Exposure of the U.S.

Population from Consumer Products and Miscellaneous 0 Sources,

• National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, 30 Dec 1987, Bethesda, MD 20814 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 KC562

.: :,: *: .*.* : *. :. :..*: :: '* Eigur~ .9:-:'* es~i~ate-d Avera~e .Pays .Sf .Uife:E~pectan~¥ .most ':.:*:*:.; ..:.* . *.. : **.: ::. .

• *; * .. *:*: '.:. ,.: . :*.* ...*>**:;:-- .: :*:.Due .Jn..:V.anous.lieal~li_: Bf~~s. :*: . . .-*.-.:. ::.-. :*,. :* ;., . . :*: .. * .._.:* : . :.

The American Cancer Society estimates that about 30 percent of all Americans will develop cancer at some time in their lives from all possible causes. So, in a group of 10,000 people it is expected that 3,000 of them will develop cancer. If each person were to receive a radiation exposure of one rem in addition to natural background radiation, then it is expected that three more may develop cancer during their lifetime. This increases the risk from 30 percent to 30.03 percent.

Hence, the risks of radiation exposure are small when compared to the risks of everyday life .

These comparisons should give you some idea of the risk involved in activities that you are familiar with. They give a basis for judging what smoking, eating, or driving a car could mean to your health and safety. Everyone knows that life is full of risks. If you have the basis for judgment, you can decide what to do or what not to do.

' 19

- Nuclear Reactor operation

• Electricity in the United States is being produced using fossil fuel, uranium, or falling water.

A fossil-fueled power station bums coal, oil or natural gas in a boiler to produce energy. Nuclear power stations use uranium fuel and the heat produced from the fission process to make energy.

In both cases, they heat and boil water to produce steam. The steam is used to drive a turbine which turns a generator and produces electricity.

N uclear Fuel Uranium (U) is the basic ingredient in nuclear fuel, consisting of U-235 and U-238 atoms.

Natural uranium contains less than one percent U-235 when it is mined . Commercial nuclear power plants use fuel with a U-235 content of approximately three percent. The process used to increase the U-235 concentration is known as enrichment.

Reactor operation After enrichment, the uranium fuel is chemically changed to uranium dioxide, a dry black powder. This powder is compressed into small ceramic pellets. Each fuel pellet is about 3/ 4 inches long and 3/ 8 inches in diameter. The pellets are placed into 12 foot long metal tubes made of zirconium alloy to make a fuel rod. About five pounds of pellets are used to fill each rod. A total I of 204 fuel rods make a single fuel assembly. Virginia Power nuclear reactors contains 157 fuel assemblies (Figure 10).

Reactor Vessel Fuel Rod Control Rods Coolant Outlet Noule Coolant Inlet Nou le Fuel Rod Assembly Fuel Pellet Fuel Rod Assemblies Thermal Shield Core Support MT424

' ........ '*: ..:., <Figure.,,o~:Reabt(?r \l~ssel With Buel.~ssembli,es~*.a~ds, and Fuet:_'P~llets *.*.: .'. *.......... .

• * * * ** * ,I' ** * ** -~* * * ,; *

• 20

- Fission

• Nuclear energy is produced by a process called fission. Fission occurs in a reactor when uranium is split into fragments producing heat and releas-ing neutrons. These neutrons strike other uranium atoms, causing them to split (fission) and release more heat and neutrons. This is called a chain reaction (Figure 11) and is controlled 4lt HeavyAtom o Free Neutron by the use of reactor control rods.

• Fission Fragment ,w,.,.. Heat Control rods are an essential part of *;:* .. _::"";i..ifigure°!UC Eission:.:- JfChain Reaction*.::-< \5-;

the nuclear reactor. Control rods con-tain cadmium, indium, and silver metals which absorb and control the amount of neutrons produced in the reactor. The control rods act to slow down or stop the chain reaction. A chain reaction cannot occur when the control rods are inserted completely into the core. When the control rods are withdrawn , the chain reaction begins and heat is generated.

Design & operation I Surry Power Station and North Anna Power Station use a Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) system to generate electricity. There are two complete and independent PWR systems on-site at both Surry and North Anna Power Stations. These are referred to as Unit-1 and Unit-2.

The reactor core is inside a large steel container called the Reactor Pressure Vessel. The reactor core is always surrounded by water. The fissioning of the uranium fuel makes the fuel rods get hot. The hot fuel rods heat the water, which seives as a coolant that carries away heat.

In a pressurized water reactor, heat is moved from place to place by moving water, the reactor's coolant. The water flows in closed loops. As (primary) water moves through the core it gets very ho t (605°F), but because it is under such high pressure , 2235 pounds p er square inch (psi), it doesn't boil. The hot water then flows to the steam generator. The steam generator is a heat exchanger. Reactor coolant passes through it but doesn't mix with the steam generator (secondary) water. Instead, heat from the primary water is transferred through thousands of tubes to the cooler secondary water. The water in the steam generator is under much less pressure, and the heat boils the secondary water to steam. At Virginia Electric and Power stations, each unit has 3 steam generators.

The steam is piped to a steam turbine that turns an electric generator. The exhausted steam from the turbine is cooled and converted back to water in a condenser. The condenser is also a heat exchanger; in it heat passes from the steam to a third loop of water. In Surry's case the James River provides the third loop water. At North Anna Power Station third loop water is from Lake Anna. The steam turns back to liquid and is pumped back to the steam generator. Figure 12 is

' a diagram of typical nuclear reactor systems.

21

- - High Pressure Safety Injectio n System (Emergency Core Cooling)

- Low Pressure Safety Injection System (Emergency Core Cooling)

- Containment Spray System

- Main Steam System Reactor Containment Building - Reactor Cooling System (Primary Cooling System)

.*.,.,.,.,*.*.,>>.*., Condenser Cooling System

- Main Feedwater System

- Auxiliary Feed Water System Ventilation Turbine Building Release Stack Pressuriz Electrical Power Auxiliary Building Relief Tan To Transmission System Charcoal Filter Containment Spray Pump ** ke Or River Containment Sump KC560

• .:. *: /*.:. :*:**--**: *,: *..:.'_": .. *; ..:*. *.: ::** **.. :'.: :., .:**. *::: lt'~ ***: ..,... ~ . **..'

nnto*s** : .. '.*'. *... :. .- . . : .... :. : .*'.*.*. **.:: .. : .* :'°':_: .. *.. .>.;* ..:.;:_.

._r1gure ,12* .n:vvn .. yste~ Q1agrtilm ..... ., ...... : ..:. ... * .. *: :.: . . *:

• ,, , , , ,. , , .* . . . . .* ,.* ..% ***** , * * ** ,.  :., , : * , ,. ** , * ., -; *** : * *z . :"* . . . , ,. , . . , , , ,

Containment Nuclear power plants are designed to prevent the escape of large quantities of radiation and radioactive substances. Two principles are used . First, thick, heavy walls are used as shielding to absorb radiation and prevent its escape. Second, strong, airtight walls called containment, are used to prevent the escape of radioactive materials.

The reactor pressure vessel and the containment building that houses it are enormously strong (Figure 13). Strong enough, in fact, to withstand a direct hit from a 707 jetliner. The reactor core lies within a sealed pressure vessel. Like all boilers its walls must be very strong because the water inside must be kept under high pressure. The reactor pressure vessel in a nuclear power plant is even heavier than an ordinary steam boiler because of the need to minimize the chance of rupture and release of any radioactive materials. The reactor pressure vessel is made from a stainless steel alloy 6 to 8 inches thick.

Around the reactor pressure vessel is a thick concrete wall. This wall acts as shielding, protecting workers by absorbing radiation resulting from the nuclear chain reaction. Next an airtight 1/ 2 inch steel liner surrounds the entire interior of the containment. If the reactor pressure

' vessel or any of the primary piping should break, the escaping steam would be trapped inside the liner.

22

e 2 1/2 Feet Thick Concrete

- - - 1 / 2 Inch Steel Liner

- -- 3/8 Inch Steel Liner 4 1/2 Feet Thick Concrete 185 Feet 122 Feet 1-Liner 1O Feet Thick Concrete 1-,ce------- 126 Feet - -- -----;~-

Finally, the building's reinforced concrete outer wall is 4 1/ 2 feet thick tapering to 2 1/ 2 feet at the top of the dome . It is designed to act as shielding and is also intended to withstand natural and man-made events like earthquakes and even the direct impact from a large commercial jet aircraft.

operating the Reactor Safely Acciderds The most serious accident that could happen in a nuclear power plant involves overheating in the nuclear reactor core . Such an accident would result from a loss-of-coolant accident or LOCA.

During a LOCA, primary coolant would no longer circulate through the reactor core to remove heat.

Circulation could be lost if a combination of pipes burst, for example. Conceivably, a dry, overheated reactor core could melt through the pressure vessel.

23

e The reactor itself is designed to respond automatically to such an emergency. Operators are also trained to make corrections for any system failure. The automatic and operator responses have two goals: to prevent damage to the reactor, and prevent the release of radiation. Shutting the reactor down is relatively easy. Control rods drop in and chemical to stop the nuclear reaction are injected into the coolant. Losing the coolant itself tends to stop the chain reaction because the coolant is needed to keep the nuclear chain reaction going. Within 10 seconds of shutdown, the amount of heat is less than 5 percent of the amount produced at full power and within 15 minutes, less than 1 percent.

To carry heat away during an accident, all reactors have Emergency Core Cooling Systems (ECCS). The ECCS consists of primary and back-up pumps and reservoirs of coolant that operate separately from those that normally circulate through the system. A nuclear reactor has many different back-up safety systems designed so that if one fails another is always available.

Workers There are many different jobs at a nuclear power plant and they are filled by people with diverse backgrounds. All employees are initially trained and then retrained annually by the company.

Virginia Power's Training centers are fully accredited by the National Academy for Nuclear Training and the Institute for Nuclear Power Operations. The operators are tested and certified by the United States Nuclear Regulatoiy Commission (NRC).

I Safety Statistics Job safety is another measure of assurance that the station is being properly operated. Surry Power Station attained 1,480,484 man hours without a lost time accident and is continuing that record into 1994. North Anna Power Station has attained over 2,000,000 man hours without a lost time accident.

Summary

• Nuclear energy provides an alternate source of energy which is readily available. The operation of a nuclear power station has a very small impact on the environment.

• Radiation is not a new creation of the nuclear power industry; it is a natural occurrence on the earth. Mankind has always lived with radiation and always will. Radioactivity exists naturally in the soil, water, air and space. All these common sources of radiation contribute to the natural background radiation to which we are exposed.

• In addition to naturally occurring radiation and radioactivity, people are also exposed to man-made radiation. Very small doses result from the production of nuclear power.

• Nuclear power plants are designed to prevent the escape of radiation and radioactive substances.

'

• A nuclear reactor has many different back-up safety systems designed so that if one fails another is available.

24

III. SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PROGRAM

• A. Samplina: Proa:ram

1. Table 1 summarizes the sampling program for Surry Power Station during 1993.

The symbols on this table refer to the sample locations shown on Figures 1 through

3. Figure 1 indicates the locations of the land based samples while Figure 2 shows the locations of the river based samples. The small triangles in Figure 3 designate the position of environmental thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) at the site boundary.

2. For routine TLD measurements, two dosimeters made of CaS04:Dy in a teflon card are deployed at each sampling location. Several TLDs are co-located with NRC and Commonwealth of Virginia direct radiation recording devices. These are indicted as "co-location" samples .

• 3. In addition to the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program required by Surry Technical Specifications, Virginia Electric and Power Company splits samples with the Commonwealth of Virginia. All samples listed in Table 1 are collected by Vepco personnel except for those labeled state split. All samples are shipped to Teledyne Isotopes in Westwood, New Jersey.

4. All samples listed in Table 1 are taken at indicator locations except those labeled "control".

B. Analysis Proa:ram

1. Table 2 summarizes the analysis program conducted by Teledyne Isotopes for Surry Power Station during 1993 .

25

TABLE 2 (Page 1 of 4)

SURRY -1993 RADIOLOGICAL SAMPLING STATION DISTANCE AND DIRECTION FROM UNIT NO. 1 Distance Collect10n Sample Media Location Station Miles Direction Degrees Frequency Remarks Environmental Control (00) Quarterly Onsite*

(TLD's) West North West (02)

• 0.17 WNW 292° Quarterly Site Boundary Surry Station Discharge (03) 0.6 NW 309° Quarterly Site Boundary b North North West (04) 0.4 NNW 330° Quarterly Site Boundary North (05) 0.33 N 357° Quarterly Site Boundary North North East (06) 0.28 NNE 22° Quarterly Site Boundary North East (07) 0.31 NE 45° Quarterly Site Boundary East North East (08) 0.43 ENE 680 Quarterly Site Boundary East (Exclusion) (09) 0.31 E W' Quarterly Onsite West (10) 0.40 w 270° Quarterly Site Boundary West South West (11) 0.45 WSW 250° Quarterly Site Boundary South West (12) 0.30 SW 225° Quarterly Site Boundary South South West (13) 0.43 SSW 203° Quarterly Site Boundary South (14) 0.48 s 180° Quarterly Site Boundary South South East (15) 0.74 SSE 157° Quarterly Site Boundary South East (16) 1.00 SE 135° Quarterly Site Boundary N

en East (17) 0.57 E W' Quarterly Site Boundary Station Intake (18) 1.23 ESE 113° Quarterly Site Boundary Hog Island Reserve (19) 1.94 NNE 260 Quarterly Near Resident, co-location Bacons Castle (20) 4.45 SSW 202° Quarterly Apx. 5 mile co-location Route 633 (21) 3.5 SW 224° Quarterly Apx. 5 mile Alliance (22) 5.1 WSW 248° Quarterly Apx. 5 mile co-location Surry (23) 8.0 WSW 250° Quarterly Population Center Route 636 and 637 (24) 4.0 w 270° Quarterly Apx. 5 mile Scotland Wharf (25) 5.0 WNW 285° Quarterly Apx. 5 mile co-location Jamestown (26) 6.3 NW 310° Quarterly Apx. 5 mile co-location Colonial Parkway (27) 3.7 NNW 330° Quarterly Apx. 5 mile Route 617 and 618 (28) 5.2 NNW 3400 Quarterly Apx. 5 mile Kingsmill (29) 4.8 N Z' Quarterly Apx. 5 mile Williamsburg (30) 7.8 N CJ' Quarterly Population Center co-location Kingsmill North (31) 5.6 NNE 14° Quarterly Apx. 5 mile Budweiser (32) 5.7 NNE 270 Quarterly Population Center

• TLD stored in a lead shield in environmental building

TABLE 2 (Page 2 of 4)

SURRY-1993 RADIOLOGICAL SAMPLING STATION DISTANCE AND DIRECTION FROM UNIT NO. 1 Distance Collection Sample Media Location Station Miles Direction Degrees Frequency Remarks Environmental Water Plant (33) 4.8 NE 41° Quarterly Apx. Smile TLD's(Cont.) Dow (34) 5.1 ENE 7(]' Quarterly Apx. 5 mile Lee Hall (35) 7.1 ENE 73°

• Quarterly Population Center co-location bi. Goose Island (36) 5.0 E 880 Quarterly Apx. 5 mile Fort Eustis (37) 4.8 ESE 107° Quarterly Apx. Smile co-location Newport News (38) 16.5 ESE 102° Quarterly Population Center James River Bridge (39) 14.8 SSE 147° Quarterly Control Location Benn's Church (40) 14.5 s 175° Quarterly Control Location Smithfield (41) 11.5 s 176° Quarterly Population Center Rushmere (42) 5.2 SSE 156° Quarterly Apx. 5 mile Rt. 628 (43) 5.0 s 177° Quarterly Apx. Smile co-location Air Charcoal Surry Station (SS) .37 NNE 15° Weeldy Site boundary location with and Particulate HighestD/Q N Hog Island Reserve (HIR) 2.0 NNE 26° Weekly Co-location

-....J D Bacons Castle (BC) 4.5 SSW 202° Weekly Alliance (ALL) 5.1 WSW 248° Weekly Co-location Colonial Parkway (CP) 3.7 NNW 330° Weekly Dow Chemical (DOW) 5.1 ENE 7(]' Weekly Fort Eustis (FE) 4.8 ESE 107° Weekly Newport News (NN) 16.5 ESE 122° Weekly Control Location River Water Surry Discharge 0.17 NW 325° Monthly State Split Scotland Wharf 5.0 WNW 285° Monthly Control Location/State Split w Surry Station Intake 1.9 ESE 770 Bi-monthly Hog Island Point 2.4 NE 52° Bi-monthly Newport News 12.0 SE 1400 Bi-monthly Chickahominy River 11.2 WNW 3000 Bi-monthly Control Location Surry Station Discharge 0.17 NW 325° Monthly Scotland Wharf 5.0 WNW 285° _Monthly

TABLE 2 (Page 3 of 4)

SURRY -1993 RADIOLOGICAL SAMPLING STATION ..

DISTANCE AND DIRECTION FROM UNIT NO. 1 Distance Collection Sample Media Location Miles Direction Degrees Frequency Remarks Well Water Surry Station Quarterly Onsite*

Hog Island Reserve 2.0 NNE 27° Quarterly w Bacons Castle 4.5 SSW 203° Quarterly Jamestown 6.3 NW 3090 Quarterly Shoreline Hog Island Reserve 0.8 N 50 Semi-Annually Sediment Burwell's Bay 7.76 SSE 167° Semi-Annually SD Silt Chickahominy River 11.2 WNW 3000 Semi-Annually Control Location Surry Station Intake 1.9 ESE 77° Semi-Annually s Hog Island Point 2.4 NE 52° Semi-Annually Point of Shoals 6.4 SSE 157° Semi-Annually Newport News 12.0 SE 140° Semi-Annually CX) Surry Station Discharge 0.5 NNW 341° Semi-Annually Milk Lee Hall (a) 7.1 ENE 640 Monthly State Split Epps 4.8 SSW 201° Monthly State Split A Colonial Parkway 3.7 NNW 337° Monthly Judkins 6.2 SSW 211° Monthly Williams 22.5 s 182° Monthly Control Location Oysters Deep Water Shoals 3.9 ESE 105° Bi-Monthly Point of Shoals 6.4 SSE 157° Bi-Monthly 0 Rock Landing Shoals 7.8 SE 140° Bi-Monthly State Split Newport News 12.0 SE 140° Bi-Monthly Clams. Chickahominy River 11.2 WNW 3000 Bi-Monthly Control Location Surry Station Discharge 1.3 NNW 341° Bi-Monthly State Split C Hog Island Point 2.4 NE 52° Bi-Monthly Jamestown 5.1 WNW 3000 Bi-Monthly Lawnes Creek 2.4 SE 131° Bi-Monthly

• Well water sample taken onsite at Surry Environmental Building (a) Lee Hall dairy station became unavailable 09/92. Replacement sample is not required.

TABLE 2 (Page 4 of 4)

SURRY -1993 RADIOLOGICAL SAMPLING STATION DISTANCE AND DIRECTION FROM UNIT NO. 1 Distance Collection Sample Media Location Miles Direction Degrees Frequency Remarks Crabs Suny Station Discharge 0.6 NW 312° Annually CR Fish Suny Station Discharge 0.6 NW 312° Semi-Annually F

Crops Brock's Fann 3.8 s 188° Annually State Split (Corn,Peanuts) Slade's Farm 2.4 s 177° Annually State Split Soybeans) Spratley's Garden 3.2 s 185° Annually State Split (Cabbage,Kale) Pool's Garden 2.3 s 182° Annually State Split Carter's Grove Garden 4.8 NE 56° Annually State Split Stone's Garden Annually State Split Luca's Garden Annually State Split/Control Loe.

(Chester, Va.)

Spratley's Garden (a) 3.2 s 185° Annually State Split N

I.O (a) Spratley's Garden replaced Poole's Garden on 6/23/92.

E ESE SW Legend Air Sampling Stati ons TLD Sampling State Environmental Monitoring Sites

• State TLD Sites Site Boundary Figure 14. Surry Radiological Monitoring Locations 30

Surry Emergency Plan Map e Air Sampling Stations 8 Nearest Residents e TLD Sampling e Nearest Farm Animals e Nearest Garden Aquatic Samples Original © 1991 by ADC of Alexandria , Inc., 6440 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA 22312. USED WITH PERMISSION . No other reproduction may be made without the written permission of ADC.

~,,

CB3308 I ________ -

,,,,.SE

~ ~ ~ ~,-.0-rig-in-al_Cl_ 1-99_1_b_y A

_ D_C_o_f A

- le- x-a n-dr-ia-. l-nc-..-644 G-en-er-al- G-re-en

_W_ a_y_, _ _ _ __,

Alexandria , VA 22312 . USED W ITH PERMISSION . No other reproduction may be made w~hout the written perm ission of ADC .

CB3309

w CB331 0

N,u

-ee -

Surry Emergency Plan Map Air Sampling Stations -

W TLD Sampling Nearest Residents W Nearest Farm Animals w~

.~ * :

-~- \\ <?

• \\~ *f ,

Nearest Garden Aquatic Samples ~ . *. \l '!,.,;.

-Original

-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -..... ~

C 1991 by ADC of Al exandria, Inc., 6440 General Green Way, 7;l( ""

• ~ arhur/1/.1/rt NW Alexandria, VA 22312. USED WITH PERMISS IO N. No other reproduction

• c_ 1_n_.*:ct;:.-~::*... *.. NE*!!;-~*.

may be made wtthout the written permission of ADC.

Btf'~/!

Har f ~/

na.-f'F (.j Iy.

.,J r .I.'

.c'~(',- . ,;~

, : Qs) -* . ~~f~ ~ *" . \~

,./ WNW~

'~

r,h

• t'-4,.

• ,~*',~\#~i *. -: . ..

fi-f'

,,.

f' .,

• JOH,~

1.1 ~

W r1soi,( II

.J/

\ .

'\ *

• j *.

. / -----'--

C/ro J..'.f

~**

CB3307

TABLE 3

• SAMPLE MEDIA SURRY POWER STATION SAMPLE ANALYSIS PROGRAM FREQUENCY ANALYSIS LLD!l} REPORT UNITS Thermoluminescent Quarterly Gamma Dose 1.5 mR/month Dosimetry (TLD)

Air Iodine Weekly I-131 0.07 pCi/m3 Air Particulate Weekly Gross Beta 0.01 pCi/m3 Quarterly (2 ) Gamma Isotopic pCi/m3 Cs-134 0.05 Cs-137 0.06 River Water Quarterly Tritium 2000 pCi/1 composite of monthly sample Monthly and I-131 10 pCi/1 Bi-monthly Gamma Isotopic Mn-54 15 Fe-59 30 Co-58, 60 15 Zn-65 30 Zr-95 30 Nb-95 15 Cs-134 15 Cs-137 18 Ba-140 60 La-140 15 Well Water Quarterly Tritium 2000 pCi/1 I-131 1 Gamma Isotopic Mn-54 15 Fe-59 30 Co-58, 60 15 Zn-65 30 Zr-95 30 Nb-95 15 Cs-134 15 Cs-137 18 Ba-140 60 La-140 15

• Footnotes located at end of table.

35

TABLE 3 (Cont.)

• SURRY POWER STATION SAMPLE ANALYSIS PROGRAM SAMPLE MEDIA FREQUENCY ANALYSIS LLD(l) REPORT UNITS Shoreline Sediment Semi-Annual Gamma Isotopic pCi/kg-dry Cs-134 150 Cs-137 180 Silt Semi-Annual Gamma Isotopic pCi/kg-dry Cs-134 150 Cs-137 180 Milk Monthly I-131 1 pCi/1 Gamma Isotopic Cs-134 15 Cs-137 18 Ba-140 60 La-140 15 Oyster Bi-Monthly Gamma Isotopic pCi/kg-wet

• Mn-54 Fe-59 Co-58, 60 Zn-65 Cs-134 Cs-137 130 260 130 260 130 150 Clams Bi-Monthly Gamma Isotopic pCi/kg-wet Mn-54 130 Fe-59 260 Co-58, 60 130 Zn-65 260 Cs-134 130 Cs-137 150 Crabs Annually Gamma Isotopic pCi/kg-wet Mn-54 130 Fe-59 260 Co-58, 60 130 Zn-65 260 Cs-134 130 Cs-137 150

• Footnotes located at end of table.

36

TABLE 3 (Cont.)

SURRY POWER STATION SAMPLE ANALYSIS PROGRAM SAMPLE MEDIA FREQUENCY ANALYSIS LLD(l) REPORT UNITS Fish Semi-Annual Gamma Isotopic pCi/k:g-wet Mn-54 130 Fe-59 260 Co-58, 60 130 Zn-65 260 Cs-134 130 Cs-137 150 Crops Annually Gamma Isotopic pCi/k:g-wet 1-131 60 Cs-134 60 Cs-137 80 Footnotes:

This table is not a complete listing of nuclides which can be detected and reported. Other peaks that are measurable and identifiable, together with the above nuclides, shall also be identified and reported.

(1) LLDs indicate those levels that the environmental samples should be analyzed to, in accordance with

• (2) the Surry Radiological Environmental Program. Actual analysis of the samples by Teledyne Isotopes may be lower than those listed.

• Quarterly composites of each location's weekly air particulate samples are analyzed for gamma emitters.

37

REMP EXCEPTIONS FOR SCHEDULED Ill. PROGRAM EXCEPTIONS The REMP program exceptions for 1993 are presented in this section. All samples were obtained as required by the REMP.

Each monitoring location has two thermoluminescent dosimeters (1LDs). One of these locations had one TI.D missing. The second TI.D was available for accountability, thus satisfying all monitoring requirements. Based on the 1993 occurrences, no further action is necessary .

38

V. Summary and Discussion - 1993 Analytical Results Definitions Below are listed definitions of words and phrases for some of the common terms used in the following sections.

Average Activity: The arithmetic mean of detected radioactivity for all samples within a sampled parameter.

Impact: Defines the influence on people.

Isotope: The radioactive element identified in a sampled pathway.

Lower Limit of Detection (LW): The smallest amount of radioactivity that can be detected by analysis instrumentation and is statistically significant above background level.

The NRC provides Surry Power Station with LLD's that we must achieve using our analysis equipment. Many times the results of an analysis is reported as below LLD and this may sound like a contradiction. However, the LLD being referred to js the Technical Specification

• (NRC required) LLD and not the actual instrument LLD. The technology in the analytical field is advancing rapidly and the LLD's achieved by current state-of-the-art equipment is in many cases lower values than those required by the NRC.

Pathway: Routes by which people may become exposed to man made and naturally occurring radioactivity. In this report, VEPCO and the State of Virginia sample and analyze components of many pathways; for example: air samples are obtained to analyze the exposure through the inhalation pathway and fish and other marine species are analyzed for exposure through the ingestion pathway.

Reporting Level Concentration: A method of referencing the measured radionuclide concentrations in sample media to a dose consequence. Reporting level concentrations are listed in the NRC Regulatory Guide 4.8. These concentrations are based upon 25% of the annual dose commitment required by 10CFR50, Appendix I, to meet the criterion "As Low As Reasonably Achievable".

Trend: Steady, rising or falling based on the same sampled parameter from preoperational data and previous years.

39

Analytical Results Below is a discussion by pathway of the 1993 analytical results.

Airborne Exposure Pathway Airborne Radioiodine Charcoal cartridges are used to collect airborne radioiodine. Once a week, the samples are collected and analyzed. The results are presented in Table B-1. All results are below the lower limit of detection with no positive activity detected. These results are similar to preoperational data and the results of samples taken prior to and after the 1986 accident in the Soviet Union at Chernobyl.

Airborne Gross Beta Results of the weekly gross beta analysis are presented in Table B-2. A review of Table B-2 indicates that results from the station indicator compare favorably to the control location in Newport News; briefly summarized in Table 5 .

• Table 4 Gross Beta Analysis Summary Quarterly Average Quarterly Average Calendar Quarter All Locations Control Station 1st 14pCifm3 15 pCifm3 2nd 14pCifm3 14 pCifm3 3rd 21pCifm3 20pCifm3 4th 19 pCifm3 18 pCifm3 Quarterly averages are consistent with background radioactivity levels. The gross beta concentrations observed indicate a steady trend compared to levels found during the previous 7 years. Gross beta activity found during the preoperational and early operating period of Surry were higher because of nuclear weapons testing. During the past two decades nearly 740 nuclear weapons have been tested worldwide. In 1985 weapons testing ceased, and with the exception of the Chernobyl accident, airborne gross beta results have trended at stable levels .

40

TRENDING GRAPH-1: GROSS BETA IN AIR PARTICULATES 1.0 E + O - , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,

(a) 1.OE-1

©I 0

8.

~

I 1.0E-2 C')

~

0 a.

1.0E-3-+----~----.---~----.---~-----.------.....----.......----1 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 (a) Chernobyl

_._ Indicator _._ Control -

• Avg-Pre Op -O Required LLD's

• TRENDING GRAPH - 2: TRITIUM IN RIVER WATER 100000....--------------------------------~

...~

, 10000 (I) 0 8.

(I>

I (I> () - ----------------------- ------ ~

0a. 1000 100 +---.---.----,,---.---~~---.-...---.----.---,---,-...---.----,-~-.--.....----.---,----,,---,--~~---.~

68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92

-a- Surry Discharge __,.._ Scotland Wharf Required LLD's 41

Airborne Gamma Isotopic Air particulate filters are analyzed for isotopes that are gamma emitters. The results of the composite analysis are listed in Table B-3. No gamma emitting radioactivity attributable to the power station was detected. However, natural background radioactivity was detected in many of the samples. The two isotopes that were identified are beryllium-? and potassium-40. Beryllium-?

is continuously produced in the upper atmosphere by cosmic radiation. Potassium-40 is naturally present in foods, building materials and soil.

WATERBORNE EXPOSURE PATHWAY River Water The analysis results for the James River water sampling program are presented in Table B-

4. Samples of James River water are collected as monthly grab samples at both Surry Discharge and Scotland Wharf and Bi-monthly grab samples at Hog Island Point, Newport News, Chickahominy River and Surry Intake. All samples are analyzed by gamma spectroscopy and for

• iodine-131 by a radiochemical procedure. These samples are also composited and analyzed for tritium on a quarterly basis.

Naturally occurring potassium-40 was measured in 18 samples with an average concentration of 115 pCi/liter.

All samples were analyzed for gamma emitting radioisotopes. With the exception of naturally occurring potassium-40 no other gamma emitters were detected. In particular, no iodine-131 was detected. This trend is consistent with previous years.

Tritium was measured in 6 of 24 quarterly composite samples. The average tritium concentration was 245 pCi/liter. Preoperational data for tritium indicated levels of activity considerably higher than current levels due in part to atmospheric weapons testing. The State of Virginia samples water from the station discharge and a control site located up stream of the station Scotland Wharf. These samples are taken as part of the State Split Sample Program and analyzed independently. The results are presented in Table B-5. River water from the station discharge measured a concentration of 665 pCi/liter, however tritium was not measured at the control

• location. Scotland Wharf is taken as a weekly grab sample. Station discharge is sampled by a 42

composite sampler and collected weekly. Monthly composite samples are prepared for gamma and iodine-131 analysis and quarterly composites are prepared for tritium analysis.

In addition to the VEPCO monthly grab sample and the State Split composite sample, a VEPCO station discharge composite sampler was placed in service in May of 1989. A tritium composite from this sampler was analyzed monthly and then composited for quarterly analysis.

The average tritium concentration for 1993 was 560 pCi/liter.

The trend graphs provide a comparison of tritium concentration measured in the downstream sample (Surry Station Discharge) and in the upstream control location (Scotland Wharf). As expected, the Surry discharge samples indicated higher levels of tritium than the control location. The water in the discharge canal is further diluted by the river water beyond the discharge structure. The average tritium concentration in grab samples taken downstream of the station indicate good comparison to the State Split control concentration.

Well Water Well water is not considered to be affected by station operations because there are no

• • discharges made to this pathway. However, Surry does monitor well water and analyzes water samples from four indicator locations. The results of these sample analysis are presented in Table B-6.

These samples were analyzed by gamma spectroscopy and indicated that there were no man made radioisotopes present. Naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in one sample with a concentration of 114 pCi/liter. Preoperational samples were only analyzed for gross alpha and gross beta. Gamma emitting isotopes have not been detected within the recent past and this trend is consistent throughout the operational monitoring program.

All well water samples were analyzed for tritium. No tritium was detected in any of the control or indicator samples. Preoperational samples were not analyzed for tritium however, this years results indicate a decrease from previous operating data AQUATIC EXPOSURE PATHWAY Silt

• Silt samples were taken to evaluate any buildup of radionuclides in the environment due to the operation of the power station. The radioactivity in silt is a result of precipitation of 43

TRENDING GRAPH - 3: TRITIUM IN WELL WATER 10000~----------------------------------,

1000

~

(I) 100 0

8.

CD

> I CD

!=

10 0

0.

1/86 7/86 1/87 7/87 1/88 7/88 1/89 7/89 1/90 7/90 1/91 7/91 1/92 7/92 1/93 7/93

. --- Station-BC

~ Station-HIR -.- Station-JMTN -e- Station-SS - ._ Required LLD's TRENDING GRAPH-4: COBALT-58 IN SEDIMENT SILT

~ 100 0

8.

~

1 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 During the preoperational period cobalt-58 was not measured.

..... Hog Island -+- Station Intake __.. Station Discharge -+- Average LLD 44

radionuclides in the waste discharges and the subsequent dispersion of the material by the river current Sampling this pathway provides a good indication of the dispersion effects of effluents to the river. Buildup of radionuclides in silt could indirectly lead to increasing radioactivity levels in clams, oysters and fish.

Silt samples are collected from six locations both up stream and down stream of the power station. These samples are analyzed for gamma emitting radioisotopes. The results of these analyses are presented in Table B-7.

The NRC does not assign reporting levels to radioisotopes measured in this pathway.

However, Surry's operating license requires that we track and trend the concentrations of man made and naturally occurring gamma emitters. Preoperational analyses indicates that there were no man made radioisotopes present in this pathway.

Cobalt-58, cobalt-60, cesium-134 and cesium-137 average levels indicate a decrease in concentration when compared to last year and the previous 8 year trend. In fact, cobalt-58 and cesium-134 were not detected during 1993.

The concentration of manmade radioisotopes in silt is projected to decrease. Surry Power Station currently has in service a Radioactive Waste Treatment Facility which employs state of the art technologies to reduce the volume and activity of liquid effluents and reduce the impact on the environment. This facility went into operation in September of 1991.

Shoreline Sediment Unlike river bottom silt, shoreline sediment may provide a direct dose to humans. Buildup of radioisotopes along the shoreline may provide a source of direct exposure for those using the area for commercial and recreational uses. Samples were taken in February and August at Hog Island Point and at Burwell's Bay. The samples were analyzed by gamma spectroscopy and the results are presented in Table B-8.

This exposure pathway was not selected for analysis during the preoperational years.

Nevertheless, samples analyzed over the past 7 years from this pathway indicate a steady trend in the detection of gamma radioisotopes. This years analysis along with last years results indicates that no radioisotopes attributable to the operation of the power station have been detected.

Naturally occurring radioisotopes were measured in several of the samples. Potassium-40,

• thorium-228 and radium-226 show a steady trend over the recent past.

45

TRENDING GRAPH - 5: COBALT-60 IN SILT 10000

J (J) 0 1000

~

8.

(I)

-~

g, 100 0)

~

0c..

10 1 -+--...----.---.----.--.--...--.--~--.-....---.---.--.....--....--.----.--.....--....--.--.---1 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 During the preoperational period cobalt-60 was not measured.

-II- Hog Island _._ Station Intake Station Discharge - +- Average LLD

• TRENDING GRAPH-6: CESIUM-134 IN SILT

~

J (J) 0

8. 100

• 4/ -----_._ _ _ _. - - .

1+---.--,--,----,--.,---,--......----,--,---,---,--,----,--.....--,---.----,--,--,----,--..----1 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 During the preoperational period cesium-134 was not measured .

• -a- Hog Island ----e- Station Intake .-.- Station Discharge - + Required LLD's 46

TRENDING GRAPH-7: CESIUM-137 IN SILT 10000-.-------------------------------------,

(/)

0 8.

~ 1000

-~

g, 0)

.I!::

0 0.

100-+--..--.---,--,---,---,--.-~-,--.---,--,--,--..--,---,--,---,---,--,--,----1 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 During the preoperational period cesium-137 was not measured.

- Hog Island _._ Station Intake _....,. Station Discharge - + Required LLD's

• TRENDING GRAPH - 8: COBALT-58 IN CLAMS 1000~------------------------------------,

~

.... 100

(/)

0 8.

~

i 10 0

0.

, -+--...--..----,r--.---.---,--...-----,--.---.---,--...-----,---,.--..--~--,--,---,---1 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 During the preoperational period cobalt-58 was not measured.

Control-Chickahominy _._ Surry Discharge ............. Hog Island -+ Average LLD 47

INGESTION EXPOSURE PATHWAY Milk Milk samples are an important indicator for measuring the affect of radioactive iodine, and other radioisotopes in airborne releases. The dose consequence to man is from both a direct and indirect exposure pathway. The direct exposure pathway is from the inhalation of radioactive material. The indirect exposure pathway is from the grass-cow-milk pathway. In this pathway radioactive material is deposited on the plants which is then consumed by the dairy animals. The radioactive material is in turn passed on to man via the milk. The results of iodine-131 and other gamma analysis of milk are presented in Table B-9.

lodine-131 has not been detected in milk prior to and since the 1986 accident at Chernobyl in the Soviet Union.

Preoperational data shows that cesium-137 was detected in this pathway. The average activity over the past six years is consistent with the preoperational data. Cesium-137 was not detected during 1993 .

Naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in all samples analyzed. The preoperational monitoring program did not analyze for this radioisotope.

Strontium-90 was detected in all of the 8 samples collected in participation with the State Split Program. Preoperational data shows levels 5 times higher than present values. This years analysis shows a slight decrease when compared to the previous year. Note: Strontium-90 is not a part of station effluents but rather a product of weapons fallout.

Aquatic Biota All plants and animals have the ability to concentrate certain chemicals. Radioisotopes display the same chemical properties as their non-radioactive counter part. VEPCO samples various aquatic biota to determine the accumulation of radioisotopes in the environment. The results of the sampling program for this pathway are detailed below.

Clams were analyzed from 5 different locations. The results of the analyses are presented in Table B-10. As expected, naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in all 22 samples .

• Potassium-40 is a naturally occurring radioisotope and is not a component of station effluent.

48

TRENDING GRAPH - 9: COBALT-60 IN CLAMS

~

51()()

en I 8

i 10 1 ----,-----,,----,--...--r---r---.---,-----,,----,--...--,----..---,---,-----,,----,---,--r----t 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92

- Control-Chickahomi ny _.,_ Surry Discharge -ia- Hog Island -+ Required LLD's

• During the preoperational period cobalt-60 was not measured.

TRENDING GRAPH-10: CESIUM-137 IN CLAMS 1000......------------------------------------~

~

100 en I 8

i

> I Cl

~

0

a. 10

, --,----,---,----r---..-......---r---r-...---,----,----,----,,---,---,----,--,---,----,--1 74 76 Control-Chickahominy 78 80 82 Surry Discharge 84

-ia--

86 Hog Island 88

-+

90 92 Required LLD's 49

No other gamma emitting radioisotopes were detected. The trend of gamma emitting radioisotopes in clams over the recent past continues to decrease and is well below the lower limits of detection. This marked decrease coincides with the extensive steam generator replacement project completed in 1982.

Oysters were analyzed from 3 different locations. The results of the analyses are presented in Table B-11. As expected, naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in 21 of the 23 samples. The current average level of potassium-40 is comparable to the preoperational average.

Except for one measurement of thorium-228, no other gamma emitting radioisotopes were detected in any samples. This is consistent with preoperational data and data collected since the 1986 accident at Chernobyl in the Soviet Union.

A crab sample was collected in June from the discharge canal of the station and analyzed by gamma spectroscopy. The results of the analyses are presented in Table B-12. As expected naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected. Potassium-40 is a naturally occurring radioisotope and is not a component of station effh1ent. No other gamma emitting radioisotopes were detected in this sample. This is consistent with preoperational data and data collected during the past eight years .

Two fish samples were collected in April and two in October from the station discharge canal and analyzed by gamma spectroscopy. The results of the analyses are presented in Table B-

13. A~ expected naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in all samples. Cesium-137 was not observed in any of th~ fish samples. The trend in cesium-137 in fish shows a decrease when compared to the previous seven years.

Food Products and Vegetation Food products and vegetation samples were collected from four different locations and analyzed by gamma spectroscopy. The results of the analyses are presented in Table B-14. As expected naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in all samples. The average concentration was lower thap the previous five year average. Potassium-40 is a naturally occurring radioisotope and is not a component of station effluent. Naturally occurring beryllium-1 was detected in three of the nine .samples. The concentration of radioactivity found in the samples this year is comparable to last year and may be attributable to world wide fallout 50

DIRECT RADIATION EXPOSURE PATHWAY A thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) is an inorganic crystal used to detect ambient radiation. TLDs are placed in two concentric rings around the station; one at the site boundary and the other at approximately 5 miles from the station. TLDs are also placed in special interest areas such as population areas and nearby residences. Several additional TLDs serve as controls and these TLDs measure ambient radiation. Ambient radiation comes from naturally occurring radioisotopes in the air and soil, radiation from cosmic origin, fallout from nuclear weapons testing, station effluents and direct radiation from the station.

The results of the analyses are presented in Table B-15 and B-16. Control and indicator averages indicate a steady trend in ambient radiation levels and compares well with the last five years of data.

51

TRENDING GRAPH - 11: DIRECT RADIATION MEASREMENTS TLD RESULTS I:

en I

0 (J

Q.

Q)

> I

~

6 10

~

"E cu "C

f6

{ii a:

E

• --- Site Boundary -e- 5 Mile Boundary 52

VI. CONCLUSIONS The results of the 1993 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program for Surry Nuclear Power Station have been presented. The following sections present conclusions for each pathway individually followed by a program summary.

Airborne Exposure Pathway Air particulate gross beta concentrations of all the indicator locations for 1993 trend well with the control location. The gross beta concentrations indicate a steady trend when compared to the levels found during the previous 7 years. Gamma isotopic analysis of µie particulate samples identified natural background radioactivity. No radioactivity attributable to the operation of the power station were identified.

Waterborne Exposure Pathway All river water samples were analyzed for gamma emitting radioisotopes. With the exception of. naturally occurring potassium-40 no other gamma emitters were detected. In particular, no iodine-131 was detected.

Tritium activity was measured in two samples with an average concentration of 245 pCi/liter. This value is less than the average for the past five years. This concentration is less than 1.0% of the Reporting Level Concentration of 30,000 pCi/liter. Because there is no supply of drinking water or water used for crop irrigation, there is an insignificant dose consequence to the public from this pathway. Research of the preoperational data for tritium indicates levels of activity considerably higher than current levels due to atmospheric weapons testing.

Well Water Well water samples were analyzed and indicated that there were no man made radioisotopes present.

Silt The NRC does not assign reporting levels to radioisotopes measured in this pathway. The average levels of man made radioisotopes in silt indicate a decrease in concentration when compared to the previous 8 year trend. In September 1991 Surry Power Station put into service a 53

Radioactive Waste Treatment facility which reduces the activity of liquid effluents released to the environment.

Shoreline Sediment Only naturally occurring radioisotopes were detected at concentrations equivalent to normal background activities. There were no radioisotopes attributable to the_ operation of the power station found in any sample.

Milk Milk samples are an important indicator for measuring the affect of radioactive iodine and radioisotopes in airborne releases.

lodine-131 was not measured in any of the 48 milk samples. Naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected at a slight decrease in average concentration when compared to the average of the previous year.

Cesium-137 was not detected in any samples. The concentration of strontium-90 in this

• years analysis, 2.15 pCi/liter indicate a slight decrease when compared to the previous year.

However, strontium-90 is not a part of station effluent, but rather a product of weapons fallout.

Aquatic Biota Clams, Oysters and Crabs As expected, naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in an' of the clam samples, 21 of the 23 oyster samples and in the crab sample. A review of the pervious 6 years indicates the potassium in clams and oysters is at average environmental levels. Except for one measurement of thorium-228 in oysters, there were no other gamma emitting radioisotopes were detected in any of the samples. This trend is consistent with preoperational data.

Fish As expected, naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in all four samples.

Cesium-137 was not observed in any fish samples during 1993, nor were any other gamma

• emitting radioisotopes detected in any of the samples.

54

Food Products and Vegetation As expected, naturally occurring potassium-40 was measured in all nine samples.

Beryllium-7 was detected in three of the eight samples collected and analyzed.

Cesium-137 was not observed in food samples during 1993. The concentration of radioactivity found in samples this year is comparable to last year and may be attributable to world wide fallout.

Direct Radiation Exposure Pathway Control and indicator averages indicate a decreasing trend in ambient radiation levels. This years levels are slightly less than the previous five years.

The direct radiation exposure that may be attributed to the station operation is 0.5 mR/standard month (0.016 mR/day). This exposure is not significant when compared to the United States average background radiation levels of 360 mRem/year (0.98 mRem/day) .

55

VII. REFERENCES

1. DOE/NE-0072, "Nuclear Energy and Electricity, The Harnessed Atom," US Dept of Energy, 1986.

2. Eichholz, G., "Environmental Aspects of Nuclear Power," Lewis Publishers, Inc., 1985.

3. Eisenbud, M., "Environmental Radioactivity," Academy Press, Inc., Orlando, Fl, 1987.

4. Fitzgibbon, W., "Energy Skill Builders, Nuclear Reactor," Enterprise for Education, Inc.,

1987.

5. Glasstone, S., and Jordan, W., "Nuclear Power and its Environmental Effects," American Nuclear Society, 1982.

6. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Report No. 39, "Basic Radiation Protection Criteria," Washington, D.C., January 1971.

7. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Report No. 45, "Natural Background Radiation in the United States," Washington, D.C., November 1975.

8. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Report No. 95, "Radiation Exposure of the U.S. Population from Consumer Products and Miscellaneous Sources,"

Washington, D.C., December 1987 .

• 9. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Report No. 93, "Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States," Washington, D.C., December 1987.

10. NUREG 0472, "Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications for PWRs", Rev. 3, March 1982.

11. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.109, Rev. 1, "Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance with 10CFR50, Appendix I", October, 1977.

12. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Guide 4.8 "Environmental Technical Specifications for Nuclear Power Plants", December, 1975.

13. USNRC Branch Technical Position, "Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program", Rev. 1, November 1979.

14. VEPCO, Station Administrative Procedure, VPAP-2103, Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, Rev 0, May 31, 1990.

15. Virginia Electric and Power Company, Surry Power Station Technical Specifications, Units 1 and 2 .

56

• APPENDIX A RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

TABLES - 1993

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM

SUMMARY

Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 Docket No. 5-280-281 January 1 to December 31, 1993 Page 1 of 4 All Indicator Control ~

Medium or Analvsls Locations Location with Hlahest Mean Location raJine Pathway Total ILLD1 Repomd Sampled Type No. Mean Name Dls1an:e Mean Mean ~

(Unit) Range [lrectlon Range Ranae mel1S Air Iodine 1-131 416 007 -0/364) NIA -(0/52) 0 pCVrn3)

Air Iodine Gross 416 10 17.0(364/364) CP 3.7mi (17.7(52/52) 16.6(52/52) 0 Particulate (6.8-71) NW (8.1-60) (7.5-27)

(1e-03 pCi/rn3)

Gamma 32 Be-7 32 131(28/28) ALL 5.1 mi 147(4/4) 132(4/4) 0 (87.1-173) WSW (130-169) (113-151)

K-40 32 130 5.79(3/28) BC 4.5 mi 9.05(1/4) 5.14(2/4) 0 (3.58-9.05) SSW (3.57-6. 71)

• River Water2 (pCi/liter)

Gamma K-40 48 48 - 115(18/42)

(54.9-244)

NN 12.0 mi SE 179(4/6)

(54.9-244)

-(0/6) 0 H-3 24 - 245(6/20) HIP 2.4 mi 310(2/4) -(0/4) 0 (160-360) NE (260-360)

River Gamma 24 Water3 (pCVliter) K-40 24 - 107(5/12) SD 0.17 mi 107(5/12) 59.6(1/12) 0 State Split (57.9-148) NW (57.9-148)

H-3 8 - 665(4/4) SD 0.17 mi 665(4/4) -(0/4) 0 (420-880) NW (420-800)

Well Gamma 16 Water (pCVliter)

K-40 16 114(1/16) HIR 114(1/16) NONE 0 H-3 16 -(0/16) NIA NONE 0

• LLD is the Lower Limit of Detection as defined and required in USNRC Branch Technical Position on an Acceptable 1

Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program, Revision 1, November 1979.

2 Analyses for monthly and bi-monthly samples are listed in Table B-4.

3 Monthly State Split analyses presented in Table B-5.

57

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM

SUMMARY

e Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 Docket No. 5-280-281 January 1 to December 31, 1993 Page 2 of 4 All Indicator control f'.bl-Medium or Analvsls Locations Location with Hlahest Mean Location routine Pathway Total LLD1 Repomd Sampled Type No. Mean Name Dislarx:e Mean Mean 11/msul&-

(Unit) . Ranae Directial Range Ranae ments Sitt Gamma 12 (pCi/kg dry)

Be-7 12 1228(8/10) POS 6.4 mi SSE 1742(2/2) 739(1/2) 0 (662-2500) (983-2500)

K-40 12 15820( 10/10) POS 6.4 mi SSE 17500(2/2) 15650(2/2) 0 (13400-17800) (17200-17800) (15200-16100)

Co-60 12 197(8/10) SD 0.17 mi NW 205(2/2) 115(1/2) 0 (150-238) (172-238)

Cs-134 12 -(0/10) -(0/2) 0 Cs-137 12 471(10/10) SI 1.9 mi ESE 568(2/2) 398(2/2) 0 (243-610) (526-610) (365-431)

Ra-226 12 1874(9/10) CHIC 11.2 mi WNW 3120(2/2) 3120(2/2) 0 (1340-2510) (2860-3380) (2860-3380)

Th-228 12 1173(10/10) POS 6.4 mi SSE 1355(2/2) 1350(2/2) 0 (884-1380) (1330-1380) (1310-1390)

Shoreline Gamma 4 Sediment (pCi/kg dry)

K-40 4 4990(4/4) HIR 0.8mi N 7385(2/2) NONE 0 (2540-7700) (7070-7700)

Ra-226 4 633(1/4) BB 7.76 mi SSE 633(1/2) NONE 0 Th-228 4 81.1(3/4) BB 7.76 mi SSE 84.1 (2/2) NONE 0 (57.1-111) (57.1-111)

• 1 LLD is the Lower Limit of Detection as defined and required in USNRC Branch Technical Position on an Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program, Revision 1, November 1979.

58

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM

SUMMARY

Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 Docket No. 5-280-281 January 1 to December 31, 1993 Page 3 of 4 All Indicator Control  !'bl-Medium or Analvsls Locations Location with Hlahest Mean Location roulne Pathway Total LLD1 ~

Sampled Type No. Mean Name Dis1an:e Mean Mean M!8slse-(Unit) Ranae Direction Ranae Ranae mer1S Milk Gamma 48 (pCi/liter)

K-40 48 1362(36/36) EPPS 0.8 mi N 1388(12/12) 1358(12/12) 0 (1220-1910) (1240-1910) (1170-1420) 1-131 48 1 -(0/36) N/A (0/12) 0 Sr-89 8 -(0/8) N/A NONE 0 Sr-90 8 2.15(8/8) CP 3.7miNNW 2.65(4/4) NONE 0 (1.2-3.6) (1.4-3.6)

Clams Gamma 22 (pCi/kg wet) Spec

• Oysters (pCi/kg wet)

K-40 Gamma 23 Spec K-40 433(17/17)

(243-682) 488(21/23)

(225-1290)

JMTN 5.1 mi WNW 597(2/2)

POS 6.4 mi SSE (571-623) 560(10/11)

(235-1290) 395(5/5)

(314-594)

NONE 0

0 Th-228 178(1/23) POS 6.4 mi SSE 178(1/10) NONE 0 Crabs Gamma

• 1 (pCi/kg wet) Spec K-40 1 2490(1/1) SD 0.6 mi NW 2490(1/1) NONE 0 Fish Gamma 4 (pCi/kg wet) Spec K-40 1 1790(4/4) SD 0.6 mi NW 1790(4/4) NONE 0 (1410-2010) (1410-2010)

• 1 LLD is the Lower Limit of Detection as defined and required in USNRC Branch Technical Position on an Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program, Revision 1, November 1979.

59

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM

SUMMARY

Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 Docket No. 5-280-281 January 1 to December 31, 1993 Page 4 of 4 All Indicator control ~

Medium or Analysis Locations Location with Hlahest Mean Location raJlne Pathway Total LLD1 Repomd Sampled Type No. Mean Name Disance Mean Mean lllmst.l'e-(Unit) Ranae Direction Ranae Ranae mens Direct Gamma 335 2 6.07(319/319) STA-38 16.5 mi 8.16(8/8) 5.53(16/16) 0 Radiation (4.1-11.1) ESE (6.7-11.1) (4.1-8.2)

TLDs (mR/

std. month)

Vegetation Gamma 9 (pCi/kg wet) Spec Be-7 9 233(3/8) Slades 402(1/3) -(0/1) 0 (93.8-402) Garden K-40 9 6408(8/8) Brocks 6953(3/3) 5160(1/1) 0 (2450-14800) Garden (2460-13300)

• 1 LLD is the Lower Limit of Detection as defined and required in USNRC Branch Technical Position on an Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program, Revision 1, November 1979.

60

• APPENDIX B DATA TABLES

TABLE B-1: IODINE-131 CONCENTRATION IN FILTERED AIR

• COLLECTION DATE Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 pCifm3 +/- 2 Sigma ss HIR January 1 to December 31, 1993 BC STATIONS ALL CP DOW Page 1 of 2 FE NN JANUARY 12/29/92-01 /05/93 <.009 <.008 <.009 <.009 <.01 < .01 <.01 < .01 01 /05/93-01 /12/93 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.01 < .01 <.01 < .01 01 /12/93-01 /19/93 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.03 <.03 <.03 <.03 01/19/93-01/26/93 <.01 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.007 <.007 <.007 <.007 01 /26/93-02/02/93 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 FEBRUARY 02/02/93-02/09/93 <.01 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 02/09/93-02/17/93 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 02/17/93-02/23/93 < .01 < .01 < .009 <.009 <.03 <.03 <.03 <.03 02/23/93-03/02/93 <.01 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 MARCH 03/02/93-03/09/93 <.05 <.05 <.05 <.05 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 03/09/93-03/16/93 <.01 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 03/16/93-03/23/93 <.01 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.008 <.008 <.008 <.008 03/23/93-03/30/93 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.01 APRIL 03/30/93-04/06/93 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 04/06/93-04/13/93 <.009 <.009 < .009 <.009 <.01 < .01 <.01 < .01 04/13/93-04/20/93 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 < .01 <.01 < .01 < .01 04/20/93-04/27/93 <.01 < .01 < .01 <.02 <.01 <.01 < .01 <.01 04/27/93-05/04/93 <.01 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.01 < .01 < .01 MAY 05/04/93-05/11/93 <.01 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 05/11 /93-05/ 18/93 <.01 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.01 < .01 < .01 < .01 05/18/93-05/25/93 <.02 < .02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 05/25/93-06/01 /93 <.01 < .01 < .01 <.01 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.01 JUNE 06/01 /93-06/08/93 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 < .01 < .01 < .01 06/08/93-06/15/93 <.007 <.007 <.007 <.007 <.01 < .01 < .01 <.01 06/15/93-06/23/93 <.01 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 06/23/93-06/29/93 <.008 <.008 <.008 <.008 < .01 < .01 <.01 < .01 61

TABLE 8-1: IODINE-131 CONCENTRATION IN FILTERED AIR

• COLLECTION DATE Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 pCVm3 +/- 2 Sigma ss HIR January 1 to December 31, 1993 BC STATIONS ALL a> DOW Page 2 of 2 FE NN JULY 06/29/93-07/06/93 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.01 < .01 <.01 <.01 07/06/93-07/13/93 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.01 < .01 < .04 (a) < .01 07/13/93-07/20/93 <.009 <.009 <.009 <.009 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 07/20/93-07/27/93 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 < .04 (a) < .01 <.01 <.01 07/27/93-08/03/93 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.009 <.009 <.009 <.009 AUGUST 08/03/93-08/1 0/93 <.01 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.02 <.01 <.01 <.01 08/10/93-08/17/93 <.01 < .02 (b) <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 08/17/93-08/24/93 <.01 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 08/24/93-08/30/93 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02

.S..EPTEMBER 08/30/93-09/07/93 <.02 < .01 <.01 <.02 <.04 <.01 <.01 <.01 09/07/93-09/14/93 <.02 <.01 <.02 <.01 <.01 <.01 < .01 <.01 09/14/93-09/22/93 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.007 <.02 <.007 <.007 09/22/93-09/28/93 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 OCTOBER 09/28/93-1 0/06/93 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 10/06/93-10/12/93 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 10/12/93-10/19/93 <.01 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.01 < .01 <.01 <.01 10/19/93-10/26/93 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 10/26/93-11 /02/93 <.02 < .01 < .01. <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 NOVEMBER 11 /02/93-11 /09/93 <.009 <.009 <.009 <.009 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 11/09/93-11/17/93 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 11/17/93-11/23/93 < .03 . <.03 <.03 <.03 <.03 <.03 <.03 <.03 11 /23/93-11 /30/93 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.008 <.008 <.008 <.008 DECEMBER 11/30/93-12/07/93 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 12/07/93-12/14/93 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 12/14/93-12/21/93 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 12/21 /93-12/28/93 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 (a) Low sample volume.

(b) Low run time; cause unknown.

62

TABLE B-2: GROSS BETA CONCENTRATION IN AIR PARTICULATES

• COLLECTION DATE ss Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 1.0 e-03 pCifm3 +/- 2 Sigma HIR January 1 to December 31, 1993 BC STATIONS ALL CP DOW FE Page 1 of 2 NN Average

+2 Siama JANUARY - 1993 12/29-01 /05 9.1 +/- 1.4 12+/- 2 10+/- 1 11 +/- 1 10+/- 1 11 +/- 2 11 +/- 1 11 +/- 2 11 +/- 2 01/05-01/12 11 +/- 1 15+/- 2 14+/- 2 13+/- 2 11 +/- 2 14+/- 2 14+/- 2 13+/- 2 13+/- 3 01/12-01/19 17+/- 2 21 +/- 2 23+/- 2 20+/- 2 20+/- 2 19+/- 2 24+/- 2 20+/- 2 21 +/- 4 01 /19-01 /26 7.4+/- 1.7 11 +/- 2 12+/- 2 9.1 +/- 1.8 9.4+/- 1.8 11 +/- 2 15+/- 2 11 +/- 2 11 +/- 5 01 /26-02/02 15+/- 2 17+/- 2 17+/- 2 18+/- 2 14+/- 2 15+/- 2 17+/- 2 12+/- 2 16+/- 4 FEBRUARY 02/02-02/09 14+/- 2 16+/- 2 17+/- 2 18+/- 2 15+/- 2 14+/- 2 18+/- 2 18+/- 2 16+/- 4 02/09-02/17 10+/- 1 14+/- 2 14+/- 2 15+/- 2 12+/- 1 11 +/- 1 12+/- 2 14+/- 2 13+/- 4 02/17-02/23 17+/- 2 20+/- 2 20+/- 2 21 +/- 2 21 +/- 2 16+/- 2 17+/- 2 21 +/- 2 19+/- 4 02/23-03/02 18+/- 2 17+/- 2 18+/- 2 22+/- 2 17+/- 2 19+/- 2 20+/- 2 20+/- 2 19+/- 4 MARCH 03/02-03/09 12+/- 2 13+/- 2 13+/- 2 13+/- 2 13+/- 2 9.6+/- 1.4 12+/- 2 12+/- 2 12+/- 2 03/09-03/16 8.8+/- 1.4 12+/- 2 14+/- 2 10+/- 1 10+/- 1 13+/- 2 14+/- 2 15+/- 2 12+/- 5

• 03/16-03/23 16+/- 2 18+/- 2 20+/- 2 18+/- 2 17+/- 2 17+/- 2 17+/- 2 15+/- 2 17+/- 3 03/23-03/30 7.7+/- 1.4 6.9+/- 1.3 7.7+/- 1.4 7.9+/- 1.4 8.1 +/- 1.4 7.0+/- 1.3 7.3+/- 1.3 7.5+/- 1.4 7.5+/- 0.8 Qtr. Avg. 13+/- 8 15+/- 8 15+/- 9 15+/-10 14+/- 8 14+/- 7 15+/- 9 15+/- 8 14+/- 2

+/-2s.d.

APRIL 03/30-04/06 9.5+/- 1.7 9.0+/- 1.7 9.2+/- 1.7 10+/- 2 11 +/- 2 8.2+/- 1.6 9.1 +/- 1.7 8.6+/- 1.6 9.3+/- 1.7 04/06-04/13 10+/- 2 6.8+/- 1.5 16+/- 2 10+/- 2 8.8+/- 1.7 9.5+/- 1.7 10+/- 2 11 +/- 2 10+/- 5 04/13-04/20 13+/- 2 8.2+/- 1.3 12+/- 2 13+/- 2 11 +/- 1 12+/- 2 12+/- 2 13+/- 2 12+/- 3 04/20-04/27 15+/- 2 14+/- 2 17+/- 2 21 +/- 2 15+/- 2 15+/- 2 16+/- 2 16+/- 2 16+/- 4 04/27-05/04 15+/- 2 17+/- 2 15+/- 2 16+/- 2 15+/- 2 17+/- 2 14+/- 2 17+/- 2 16+/- 2 MAY 05/04-05/11 12+/- 2 11 +/- 2 13+/- 2 14+/- 2 14+/- 2 11 +/- 2 10+/- 1 11 +/- 2 12+/- 3 05/11-05/18 16+/- 2 16+/- 2 15+/- 2 16+/- 2 15+/- 2 14+/- 2 15+/- 2 17+/- 2 16+/- 2 05/18-05/25 13+/- 2 14+/- 2 13+/- 2 16+/- 2 12+/- 2 17+/- 2 15+/- 2 13+/- 2 14+/- 4 05/25-06/01 14+/- 2 13+/- 2 15+/- 2 16+/- 2 12+/- 2 11 +/- 1 13+/- 2 14+/- 2 14+/- 3 JUNE 06/01-06/08 11 +/- 2 11 +/- 2 11 +/- 2 11 +/- 2 12+/- 2 10+/- 2 12+/- 2 11 +/- 2 11 +/- 1 06/08-06/15 15+/- 2 13+/- 2 15+/- 2 14+/- 2 16+/- 2 13+/- 2 15+/- 2 16+/- 2 15+/- 2 06/15-06/23 18+/- 2 16+/- 2 17+/- 2 18+/- 2 16+/- 2 16+/- 2 19+/- 2 16+/- 2 17+/- 2 06/23-06/29 16+/- 2 15+/- 2 16+/- 2 17+/- 2 14+/- 2 13+/- 2 17+/- 2 12+/- 2 15+/- 4 Qtr. Avg. 14+/- 5 13+/- 6 14+/- 5 15+/- 6 13+/- 5 13+/- 6 14+/- 6 14+/- 6 14+/- 1

+/-2s.d.

63

TABLE 8-2: GROSS BETA CONCENTRATION IN AIR PARTICULATES

- 1.0 e-03 pCifm3 COLLECTION DATE ss Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993

+/- 2 Sigma HIR January 1 to December 31, 1993 BC ALL STATIONS CP DOW FE Page 2 of 2 NN Average

+/-2 Siama JULY 06/29-07/06 18+/- 2 19+/- 2 16+/- 2 19+/- 2 18+/- 2 20+/- 2 20+/- 2 21 +/- 2 19+/- 3 07/06-07/13 26+/- 2 23+/- 2 23+/- 2 22+/- 2 24+/- 2 23+/- 2 71 +/- 6 (a) 27+/- 2 30+/-33 07/13-07/20 16+/- 2 15+/- 2 15+/- 2 15+/- 2 15+/- 2 17+/- 2 15+/- 2 16+/- 2 16+/- 2 07/20-07/27 17+/- 2 17+/- 2 18+/- 2 17+/- 2 60+/- 7 (a) 19+/- 2 17+/- 2 18+/- 2 23+/-30 07/27-08/03 20+/- 2 19+/- 2 17+/- 2 20+/- 2 18+/- 2 19+/- 2 19+/- 2 21 +/- 2 19+/- 2 AUGUST 08/03-08/1 0 17+/- 2 15+/- 2 16+/- 2 18+/- 2 36+/- 4 15+/- 2 17+/- 2 16+/- 2 19+/-14 08/1 0-08/17 20+/- 2 26+/- 3 (b) 27+/- 2 23+/- 2 21 +/- 2 21 +/- 2 21 +/- 2 23+/- 2 23+/- 5 08/17-08/24 18+/- 2 19+/- 2 19+/- 2 20+/- 2 18+/- 2 18+/- 2 18+/- 2 21 +/- 2 19+/- 2 08/24-08/30 26+/- 2 27+/- 2 23+/- 2 23+/- 2 25+/- 2 29+/- 3 25+/- 2 24+/- 2 25+/- 4 SEPTEMBER 08/30-09/07 21 +/- 2 17+/- 2 22+/- 2 23+/- 2 44+/- 5 15+/- 2 17+/- 2 16+/- 2 22+/-19 09/07-09/14 19+/- 2 19+/- 2 21 +/- 2 19+/- 2 17+/- 2 18+/- 2 18+/- 2 23+/- 2 19+/- 4

• 09/14-09/22 16+/- 2 19+/- 2 15+/- 2 22+/- 2 16+/- 2 18+/- 2 17+/- 2 14+/- 2 17+/- 5 09/22-09/28 21 +/- 2 23+/- 2 18+/- 2 20+/- 2 20+/- 2 20+/- 2 21 +/- 2 20+/- 2 20+/- 3 Qtr. Avg. 20+/- 7 20+/- 8 19+/- 7_ 20+/- 5 25+/-27 19+/- 7 23+/-29 20+/- 8 21 +/- 4

+/-2s.d.

OCTOBER 09/28-1 0/06 18+/- 2 17+/- 2 17+/- 2 17+/- 2 16+/- 2 18+/- 2 21 +/- 2 17+/- 2 18+/- 3 10/06-1 0/12 14+/- 2 15+/- 2 15+/- 2 14+/- 2 13+/- 2 15+/- 2 13+/- 2 12+/- 2 14+/- 2 10/12-10/19 22+/- 2 26+/- 2 19+/- 2 21 +/- 2 26+/- 2 23+/- 2 22+/- 2 20+/- 2 22+/- 5 10/19-10/26 17+/- 2 17+/- 2 17+/- 2 18+/- 2 12+/- 2 16+/- 2 17+/- 2 18+/- 2 16+/- 4 10/26-11 /02 15+/- 2 16+/- 2 18+/- 2 18+/- 2 15+/- 2 16+/- 2 17+/- 2 15+/- 2 16+/- 3 MOVEMBER 11/02-11/09 17+/- 2 19+/- 2 18+/- 2 17+/- 2 18+/- 2 16+/- 2 17+/- 2 15+/- 2 17+/- 3 11/09-11/17 27+/- 2 22+/- 2 28+/- 2 24+/- 2 22+/- 2 7.2+/- 1.4 22+/- 2 22+/- 2 22+/-13 11/17-11/23 22+/- 2 20+/- 2 22+/- 2 21 +/- 2 21 +/- 2 21 +/- 2 20+/- 2 19+/- 2 21 +/- 2 11/23-11/30 21 +/- 2 24+/- 2 19+/- 2 18+/- 2 19+/- 2 23+/- 2 16+/- 2 17+/- 2 20+/- 6 DECEMBER 11/30-12/07 23+/- 2 19+/- 2 19+/- 2 20+/- 2 20+/- 2 18+/- 2 23+/- 2 19+/- 2 20+/- 4 12/07-12/14 29+/- 2 23+/- 2 26+/- 2 25+/- 2 21 +/- 2 25+/- 2 24+/- 2 26+/- 2 25+/- 5 12/14-12/21 16+/- 2 14+/- 2 16+/- 2 17+/- 2 15+/- 2 16+/- 2 15+/- 2 17+/- 2 16+/- 2 12/21-12/28 22+/- 2 18+/- 2 19+/- 2 22+/- 2 22+/- 2 13+/- 2 21 +/- 2 21 +/- 2 20+/- 6 Quarter Avg. 20+/- 9 19+/- 7 19+/- 8 19+/- 6 18+/- 8 17+/-10 19+/- 7 18+/- 7 19+/- 2

+/-2s.d.

Annual Avg. 17+/-10 17+/- 9 17+/- 8 17+/- 8 18+/-17 16+/- 9 18+/-17 17+/- 9 17+/-12

+/-2s.d.

(a) Low sample volume.

(b) Low run time; cause unknown.

64

TABLE 8-3: GAMMA EMITTER1 CONCENTRATION IN QUARTERLY AIR PARTICULATES Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 1.0 e-03 pCVm3 +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1993 Page 1 of 2 First Second Third Fourth Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter Average Station Nuclide 12/28-03/30 03/30-06/29 06/29-09/28 09/28-12/28 +2s.d.

STA-SS Be-7 87.1 +/- 8.7 130+/- 13 138+/- 14 133 +/- 13 122 +/- 47 K-40 <10 <5 <7 <5 Co-60 < 0.4 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 Cs-134 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 Cs-137 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.3 < 0.3 Th-228 < 0.4 < 0.5 < 0.4 < 0.5 STA-HIR Be-7 128 +/- 13 133+/- 13 156+/- 16 118 +/- 12 134 +/- 32 K-40 <5 <8 <10 <8 Co-60 < 0.4 < 0.2 < 0.4 < 0.3 Cs-134 < 0.2 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 Cs-137 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 Th-228 < 0.5 < 0.4 < 0.5 < 0.4 STA-BC Be-7 108 +/- 11 122 +/- 12 153 +/- 15 120 +/- 12 126 +/- 38 K-40 9.05+/- 2.68 <10 <4 <10 9.05+/-2.68 Co-60 < 0.3 <0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 Cs-134 < 0.3 <0.4 < 0.2 < 0.3 Cs-137 < 0.3 <0.3 < 0.2 < 0.3 Th-228 < 0.5 <0.5 < 0.4 < 0.4 STA-ALL Be-7 133 +/- 13 154+/- 15 169+/-17 130 +/- 13 147 +/- 37 K-40 <6 <4 <5 <4 Co-60 < 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.3 < 0.2 Cs-134 < 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.3 < 0.2 Cs-137 < 0.2 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.2 Th-228 < 0.5 < 0.4 < 0.6 < 0.4 STA-CP Be-7 109 +/- 11 133 +/- 13 173 +/- 17 110+/-11 131 +/- 60 K-40 <4 <8 <6 3.58 +/- 3.8 3.58 +/- 3.8 Co-60 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 Cs-134 < 0.2 <0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 Cs-137 < 0.2 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 Th-228 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.5 < 0.3

• 1 All gamma emitters other than those listed were <LLD.

65

TABLE B-3: GAMMA EMITTER1 CONCENTRATION IN QUARTERLY AIR PARTICULATES Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 1.0 e-03 pCifm3 +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1993 Page 2 of 2 First Second Third Fourth Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter Average Station Nuclide 12/28-03/30 03/30-06/29 06/29-09/28 09/28-12/28 +/-2s.d.

STA-DOW Be-7 116+/- 12 140+/- 14 145 +/- 15 113 +/- 11 129 +/- 33 K-40 <7 4.66+/- 2.32 <6 <6 4.66+/- 2.32 Co-60 < 0.3 <0.3 <0.4 < 0.2 Cs-134 < 0.3 <0.3 <0.3 < 0.3 Cs-137 < 0.4 <0.3 <0.4 < 0.3 Th-228 < 0.8 <0.5 <0.7 < 0.5 STA-FE Be-7 111 +/- 11 138 +/- 14 146+/- 15 127+/- 13 131 +/-30 K-40 <6 <4 <9 <5 Co-60 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.2 Cs-134 < 0.3 <0.2 <0.4 < 0.3 Cs-137 < 0.4 <0.2 <0.3 < 0.3 Th-228 < 0.5 <0.4 <0.5 < 0.4 STA-NN Be-7 119+/- 12 143+/- 14 151 +/- 15 113 +/- 11 132+/- 37 K-40 <6 <6 3.57+/- 1.99 6.71 +/- 2.60 5.14+/-4.44 Co-60 < 0.3 <0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 Cs-134 < 0.3 <0.4 < 0.3 < 0.3 Cs-137 < 0.4 <0.3 < 0.4 < 0.3 Th-228 < 0.4 <0.7 <0.5 < 0.4

• 1 All gamma emitters other than those listed were <LLD.

66

TABLE B-4: GAMMA EMITTER1 AND TRITIUM CONCENTRATIONS IN RIVER e pCi/1 +/- 2 Sigma WATER Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 January 1 to December 31, 1993 Page 1 of 2 Collection Station Date Be-7 K-40 1-131 Cs-137 Ba-140 La-140 Th-228 H-3 JANUARY-1993 CHIC 01/21 <30 <90 < 0.2 <3 <10 <5 <6 < 100 HIP 01/21 <30 <50 <0.3 <3 < 10 <4 <6 260+/- 100 NN 01/21 <20 54.9+/- 22.0 <0.3 <3 < 10 <4 <4 < 100 SD 01/21 <30 <80 < 0.2 <3 <10 <6 <5 < 100 SI 01/21 <20 <50 < 0.2 <4 <10 <5 <5 < 100 SW 01/21 <30 <40 < 0.2 <4 <10 <5 <5 < 100 SD 02/17 <30 109+/- 32 < 0.2 <3 <20 <8 <6 SW 02/17 <30 <50 < 0.1 <3 < 10 <6 <6 CHIC 03/22 <30 <40 < 0.2 <3 <9 <4 <5 HIP 03/22 <20 <40 < 0.2 <2 <7 <3 <5 NN 03/22 <20 <70 < 0.2 <3 <8 <3 <4 SD 03/22 <30 <80 < 0.2 <3 < 10 <4 <6 SI 03/22 <20 <60 < 0.2 <3 <8 <3 <4 SW 03/22 <30 <50 < 0.1 <3 <9 <4 <6 SD 04/20 <30 <60 < 0.3 <5 <10 <5 <6 SW 04/20 <30 <60 < 0.2 <5 <10 <5 <6 CHIC 05/25 <30 <60 < 0.1 <5 <10 <6 <6 <200 HIP 05/25 <30 <50 < 0.2 <5 < 10 <6 <6 <200 NN 05/25 <30 < 100 < 0.2 <4 <10 <6 <7 <200 SD 05/25 <30 <60 < 0.1 <4 <10 <6 <7 280 +/- 120 SI 05/25 <40 < 100 < 0.1 <4 < 10 <6 <7 <200 SW 05/25 <30 <70 < 0.1 <4 <10 <6 <8 <200 SD 06/23 <40 < 100 < 0.2 <5 <20 <.7 <7 SW 06/23 <30 <50 < 0.2 <4 <10 <5 <6 67

TABLE 8-4: .GAMMA EMITTER1 AND TRITIUM CONCENTRATIONS IN RIVER WATER Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 pCVI +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1993 Page 2 of2 Collectlon Station Date Be-7 K-40 1-131 Cs-137 Ba-140 La-140 Th-228 H-3 CHIC 07/27 <30 <70 <0.2 <4 <20 <6 <8 <200 HIP 07/26 <40 72.2+/-30.2 <0.3 <4 <20 <7 <7 <200 NN 07/26 <30 215 +/-36 <0.4 <4 <10 <6 <7 <200 SD 07/26 <30 80.9+/-25.8 <0.3 <4 <10 <6 <6 <200 SI 07/26 <30 105 +/-30 <0.3 <4 <10 <6 <6 <200 SW 07/27 <40 < 100 <0.2 <5 <20 <7 <8 <200 SD 08/17 <20 145+/- 24 <0.3 <3 <10 <5 <5 SW 08/17 <30 <80 <0.2 <3 <10 <5 <6 CHIC 09/16 <30 < 100 <0.3 <3 <20 <8 <6 HIP 09/16 <30 107+/- 35 <0.3 <3 <20 < 10 <6 NN 09/16 <30 204+/- 31 < 0.3 <3 <20 <8 <6 SD 09/16 <40 94.5+/- 32.2 <0.3 <4 <20 <10 <7 SI 09/16 <40 87.2+/- 38.5 <0.4 <4 <30 <10 <7 SW 09/16 <30 86.0+/- 23.2 <0.3 <3 <20 <8 <6 SD 10/19 <40 146+/- 36 <0.2 <4 <20 <8 <8 SW 10/19 <40 73.6 +/-30.6 <0.2 <5 <20 < 10 <9 CHIC 11/23 <30 <50 <0.2 <4 <20 <8 <6 < 200 HIP 11/23 <30 88.2+/-23.3 <0.2 <3 <20 <7 <6 360 +/- 110 NN 11/23 <40 244+/- 39 <0.2 <4 <20 <9 <7 160 +/- 100 SD 11/23 <40 <70 <0.2 <4 <20 <8 <7 <200 SI 11/23 <40 72.2+/- 30.2 <0.2 <4 <20 <10 <9 240+/- 110 SW 11/23 <30 <70 <0.2 <3 <20 <7 <5 170 +/- 110 SD 12/21 <30 84.1 +/- 28.1 <0.2 <4 <10 <5 <5 SW 12/21 <40 < 100 <0.1 <5 <20 <7 <7 Average+/- 115+/- 109 245 +/- 148 2 s.d.

• 1 All gamma emitters other than those listed were < LLD.

68

TABLE B-5 GAMMA EMITTER1 AND TRITIUM CONCENTRATIONS IN RIVER WATER State-Spilt Samples Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 pCi/1 +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1993 Page 1 of 1 Collection Station Date Be-7 K-40 1-131 Cs-137 Ba-140 La-140 Th-228 H-3 SCOTLAND WH. (SW)

Jan. 01/31 <30 <50 <1 <3 <20 <8 <5 < 200 Feb. 02/28 <30 <50 <1 <3 <20 <6 <6 Mar. 03/31 <30 <50 <1 <3 <20 <8 <6 Apr. 04/30 <50 < 100 <1 <5 <30 <10 <8 < 200 May 05/31 <40 <60 <0.5 <5 <30 <10 <7 Jun. 06/30 <30 <50 <0.7 <3 <20 <9 <6 Jul. 07/31 <30 <50 <0.8 <3 <20 <6 <5 < 100 Aug. 08/31 <30 <70 <0.6 <3 <20 <10 <7 Sep. 09/30 <30 59.6+/- 17.8 < 0.7 <2 <20 <8 <5 Oct. 10/31 <30 <60 < 0.5 <3 <30 <1 <7 < 200 Nov. 11/30 <30 <50 <0.3 <4 <10 <6 <6 Dec. 12/31 <20 <40 < 0.5 <2 <10 <5 <5 Average+/- 2 s.d. 59.6+/-17.8

• SURRY DIS. (SD}

Jan.

Feb.

01/31 02/28

<40

<30

<50 57.9 +/-30.1

<1

<1

<3

<3

<20

<20

<9

<8

<6

<6 790 +/- 140 Mar. 03/31 <30 <50 <1 <3 <20 <9 <5 Apr. 04/30 <30 <90 <1 <4 <20 <9 <6 420 +/- 140 May 05/31 <40 <70 <0.6 <4 <30 <10 <9 Jun. 06/30 <40 <60 <0.6 <4 <30 <10 <6 Jul. 07/31 <30 120 +/- 33 <0.5 <3 <20 <9 <6 650 +/- 120 Aug. 08/31 <30 102 +/- 27 <0.7 <3 <20 <10 <6 Sep. 09/30 <30 109 +/- 26 <0.7 <3 <30 <10 <6 Oct. 10/31 <40 148 +/- 26 < 0.4 <3 <30 <10 <6 800 +/- 120 Nov. 11/30 <40 < 100 < 0.4 <5 <20 <7 <7 Dec. 12/31 <30 <50 < 0.4 <3 <20 <7 <5 Average+/- 2 s.d. 107+/- 65 665+/-354

• 1 All gamma emitters other than those listed were <LLD.

69

e TABLE 8-6: GAMMA EMIITER1 AND TRITIUM CONCENTRATIONS IN WELL WATER Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 pCi/1 +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1993 Page 1 of 1 Collection Date Station Be-7 K-40 1-131 Cs-137 Ba-140 La-140 Th-228 H-3 FIRST QUARTER 03/23 BC <20 <50 < 0.1 <4 <8 <4 <5 < 100 03/16 HIR <30 <60 < 0.09 <4 <10 <5 <7 < 100 03/16 JMTN <30 <70 < 0.1 <3 <10 <5 <5 < 100 03/16 ss <30 <90 < 0.1 <4 <10 <4 <5 < 100 SECOND QUARTER 06/23 BC <20 <50 < 0.2 <4 <10 <4 <6 <200 06/23 HIR <30 < 100 < 0.2 <4 <10 <6 <6 <200 06/23 JMTN <30 <90 < 0.2 <3 <10 <5 <6 <200 06/23 ss <30 <60 < 0.2 <4 <10 <5 <7 <200 THIRD QUARTER 09/28 BC <30 <60 < 0.1 <5 <10 <5 <6 <200 09/28 HIR <40 114+/-34 < 0.1 <5 <20 <7 <8 <200 09/28 JMTN <30 < 100 < 0.2 <4 <10 <5 <7 <200 09/28 ss <30 <50 < 0.1 <4 <10 <4 <6 <200 FOURTH QUARTER 12/28 BC <30 <90 < 0.3 <3 <10 <5 <6 < 100 12/28 HIR <30 <50 < 0.3 <4 <10 <6 <7 < 100 12/28 JMTN <30 <70 < 0.4 <3 <10 <4 <5 < 100 12/28 ss <40 < 100 < 0.3 <5 <20 <7 <7 < 100 Average 114+/- 34

+/-2s.d.

• 1 All gamma emitters other than those listed were< LID.

70

TABLE 8-7: GAMMA EMITTER1 CONCENTRATIONS IN SILT Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 pCi/kg (dry)+/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1993 Page 1 of 1 Station CHIC HIP NN POS SD SI Coll. Date 03/22 03/22 03/22 03/22 03/22 03/22 Be-7 739+/- 364 < 400 662 +/- 246 2500 +/- 490 802 +/- 295 967 +/- 318 K-40 16100+/- 1600 14300 +/- 1400 16700 +/- 1700 17800 +/- 1800 13400 +/- 1300 16400 +/- 1600 Mn-54 <50 <40 <40 <50 <40 <40 Co-58 <50 <40 <40 <50 <40 <40 Co-60 115 +/- 46 218 +/- 43 <50 199 +/- 60 172+/-44 227+/-40 Cs-134 <60 <50 <50 <70 <50 <40 Cs-137 365+/-59 528+/-53 243+/-38 554+/-72 437+/-44 610 +/- 61 Ra-226 2860+/-870 1670 +/- 610 1340 +/- 520 2370+/-840 1900 +/- 640 2510 +/- 580 Th-228 1310+/-130 1220+/- 120 1000+/-540 1380+/- 140 968+/-97 1150 +/- 120

!coll. Date 09/16 09/16 09/16 09/16 09/16 09/16 Avg + 2 s. d.l

• Be-7 < 800 1020 +/- 550 < 500 983 +/- 504 1530 +/- 600 1360 +/- 730 1174 +/- 1143 K-40 15200 +/- 1500 16800 +/- 1700 16700 +/- 1700 17200 +/- 1700 15000 +/- 1500 13900 +/- 1400 15792 +/- 2806 Mn-54 <60 <50 <40 <60 <60 <60 Co-58 <80 <70 <40 <60 <60 '<80 Co-60 <80 190 +/- 50 <40 150 +/- 48 238 +/-62 182 +/-57 188 +/- 78 Cs-134 <70 <60 <40 <70 <70 <80 Cs-137 431 +/-64 493+/- 64 264+/-35 500+/-70 556+/-70 526 +/-74 459+/-232 Ra-226 3380+/-840 1910+/-710 1580 +/- 520 1890 +/- 810 1700 +/- 800 <2000 2101 +/- 1228 Th-228 1390 +/- 140 1330+/- 130 884+/-88 1330 +/- 130 1260 +/- 130 1210 +/- 120 1203 +/- 338 TABLE 8-8: GAMMA EMITTER1 CONCENTRATIONS IN SHORELINE SEDIMENT Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 pCi/kg (dry)+/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1993 Page 1 of 1 Station HIR Burwell's HIR Burwell's Average Collection Date 02/23 02/23 08/24 08/24 +/- 2 s.d.

Be-7 <200 <200 <200 < 100 K-40 7070 +/- 710 2650+/-340 7700+/-770 2540+/-280 4990+/-5556 Co-60 <20 < 20 <20 <20 Cs-134 <20 < 20 <20 <20 Cs-137 <20 <20 <20 <20 Ra-226 <300 <400 <300 633+/-308 633+/- 308 Th-228 <40 111 +/- 23 75.1 +/- 22.0 57.1 +/- 19.1 81.1 +/- 54.9 1 All gamma emitters other than those listed-were< LLD.

71

TABLE 8~9: GAMMA EMITTER1, STRONTIUM-89, AND STRONTIUM-90 CONCENTRATIONS IN MILK Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 pCVkg (wet) +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1993 Page 1 of 2 NUCLIDE EPPS CP WMS JDKS JAHUABY:

Sr-89. <2 <1 Sr-90 1.6+/- 0.2 1.4+/-0.2 K-40 1510 +/- 150 1400+/- 140 1400+/- 140 1250 +/- 120 Cs-137 <5 <4 <4 <5 1-131 . <0.2 < 0.1 < 0.2 < 0.1 FEBBUABY:

K-40 1310 +/- 130 1440+/- 140 1170 +/- 120 1380+/- 140 Cs-137 <5 <5 <4 <4 1-131 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.2 MABCH K-40 1460+/- 150 1410+/- 140 1350+/- 140 1360+/- 140 Cs-137 <4 <4

<5 <3 1-131 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.2 Ae.BIL Sr-89 <2 <1 Sr-90 2.5+/- 0.3 3.6+/-0.3 K-40 1310 +/- 130 1280 +/- 130 1410 +/- 140 1380 +/- 140 Cs-137 <4 <5 <5 <5 1-131 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.3 < 0.2 MAY K-40 1320 +/- 130 1300 +/- 130 1420+/- 140 1400 +/- 140 Cs-137 <5 <4 <3 <5 1-131 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2

.JU.NE K-40 1260 +/- 130 1330 +/- 130 1410 +/- 140 1490 +/- 150 Cs-137 <5 <4 <5 <4 1-131 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.1 < 0.2

• 1 All gamma emitters other than those listed were < LLD.

72

TABLE B-9: GAMMA EMITTER1, STRONTIUM-89, AND STRONTIUM-90 CONCENTRATIONS IN MILK Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 pCi/kg (wet) +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1993 Page 2 of 2 NUCLIDE EPPS CP WMS JDKS JULY Sr-89 <1 <2 Sr-90 1.2 +/- 0.2 3.0+/-0.3 K-40 1330 +/- 130 1250 +/- 130 1410+/- 140 1390+/- 140 Cs-137 <4 <4 <5 <4 1-131 < 0.2 <0.3 < 0.2 < 0.2 AUGUST K-40 1380 +/- 140 1320 +/- 130 1410+/- 140 1450+/- 150 Cs-137 <4 <5 <5 <5 1-131 < 0.3 <0.3 < 0.5 < 0.3 SEPTEMBER K-40 1910 +/- 190 1290+/- 130 1260+/- 130 1380 +/- 140 Cs-137 <4 <4 <4 <4

• 1-131 OCTOBER Sr-89 Sr-90

< 0.2

<1 1.3 +/- 0.2

< 0.2

<2 2.6+/-0.2

< 0.1 < 0.2 K-40 1240+/- 120 1340 +/- 130 1270 +/- 130 1360 +/- 136 Cs-137 <4 <4 <5 <6 1-131 < 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 NOVEMBER K-40 1270 +/- 130 1280 +/- 130 1390+/- 140 1280 +/- 130 Cs-137 <5 <4 <3 <5 1-131 < 0.2 <0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 DECEMBER K-40 1360 +/- 140 1390 +/- 140 1400+/- 140 1220 +/- 120 Cs-137 <4 <4 <5 <4 1-131 < 0.1 <0.1 < 0.2 < 0.2

• 1 All gamma emitters other than those listed were < LLD.

73

TABLE 8-10: GAMMA EMITTER1 CONCENTRATION IN CLAMS e Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 pCi/kg (wet) +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1993 Page 1 of 1 Station Date Type Be-7 K-40 Co-58 Co-60 Cs-137 Ra-226 Th-228 CHIC 01/21/93 Clams < 100 <300 <10 <10 <10 <200 <20 03/22/93 Clams < 100 322+/- 112 <10 <10 <10 <300 <30 05/25/93 Clams < 100 594 +/- 103 <10 <10 <10 <200 <20 07/27/93 Clams < 100 409 +/- 105 <10 <10 <10 <200 <20 09/16/93 Clams <200 314+/- 110 <20 <10 <10 <300 <30 11/23/93 Clams < 100 336+/-91 <10 <10 < 10 <200 <20 JMTN 01/21/93 Clams <200 <400 <20 <10 <10 <200 <20 03/22/93 Clams < 100 571 +/- 106 <10 <10 <10 <200 <20 05/25/93 Clams <200 <400 <20 <20 <20 <300 <30 07/27/93 Clams < 100 <400 <10 <10 <10 <200 <20 09/16/93 Clams <200 <400 <20 <10 <20 <200 <30 11/23/93 Clams <200 623 +/- 106 <20 <10 <10 <200 <20 SD 01/21/93 Clams < 100 <300 <10 <10 <10 <200 <10 03/24/93 Clams <200 243+/-78 <10 <20 <20 <400 <40 05/04/93 Clams <200 378 +/- 102 <20 <10 < 10 <400 <30 06/29/93 Clams < 100 378+/- 105 <10 <10 < 10 <200 <20 08/30/93 Clams <300 250+/-99 <20 <10 <20 <300 <20 10/27/93 Clams <200 399+/-95 <20 <10 < 10 <200 <20 HIP 01/21/93 Clams <200 <300 <10 <10 <10 <200 <20 03/22/93 Clams < 100 265+/-84 <10 <10 <10 <200 <20 05/24/93 Clams <200 363+/- 119 <20 <10 <20 <400 <30 07/26/93 Clams <200 425 +/- 102 <20 <10 <10 <200 <20 09/16/93 Clams <200 682 +/- 103 <10 <10 <10 <200 <20 11/23/93 Clams < 100 559+/-97 <10 <10 <20 <200 <20 LC 01/21/93 Clams <200 332+/-95 <20 <10 <10 <300 <30 03/22/93 Clams < 100 <400 <10 <10 <10 <200 <20 05/24/93 Clams <200 357+/- 107 <10 <10 <20 <300 <30 07/26/93 Clams < 100 509+/-94 <10 <9 < 10 <200 <20 09/16/93 Clams <200 489+/-111 <10 <10 <10 <200 <20

• 11/23/93 Clams Average+/- 2 s.d.

1

< 100 537+/-86 424+/-254

<10 All gamma emitters other than those listed were <LLD.

<10 <9 <200 <20 74

TABLE B-11: GAMMA EMITTER1 CONCENTRATION IN OYSTERS It Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 pCi/kg (wet) +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31 , 1993 Page 1 of 1 Station DATE TYPE. Be-7 K-40 Co-58 Co-60 Cs-137 Ra-226 Th-228 RLS 01/21/93 Oysters <200 253+/- 122 <20 <20 <20 <300 <20 03/22/93 Oysters < 100 287+/- 121 <10 <10 <10 <300 <30 05/24/93 Oysters <200 521 +/- 137 <20 <10 <10 <400 <40 07/26/93 Oysters <200 645 +/- 129 <10 <10 <10 <300 <20 09/16/93 Oysters <200 379+/-*99 <20 <10 <10 <200 <20 11/23/93 Oysters < 100 612+/-93 <10 <10 <10 <200 <20 DWS 01/21/93 Oysters <200 388+/- 119 <20 <10 <10 <300 <30 03/22/93 Oysters < 100 377+/- 108 <10 <10 <10 <300 <30 05/24/93 Oysters <200 <300 <20 <10 <20 <300 <30 07/26/93 Oysters < 100 678 +/- 120 <10 <10 <10 <300 <30 09/16/93 Oysters <200 395+/-89 <20 <10 <10 <200 <20 11/23/93 Oysters < 100 225+/-80 <10 <10 <10 <200 <20 POS 01/21/93 Oysters <200 256+/-92 <10 <10 <10 <200 <20 01121/932 Oysters <200 507+/- 112 <20 <10 <20 <200 <20 03/22/93 Oysters < 100 364+/-90 <10 <10 <10 <200 <20 03/25/932 Oysters < 100

• 377+/- 109 <10 <10 <10 <300 <20 05/05/932 Oysters <200 255+/- 109 <20 <10 <20 <300 178+/-22 05/24/93 Oysters <200 235+/-*81 <20 <10 <20 <300 <30 07/01/93 Oysters <200 851 +/- 133 <20 <20 <20 <300 <30 07/26/93 Oysters < 100 <300 <10 <10 <10 <200 <20 09/16/93 Oysters <200 1290+/- 160 <20 <10 <10 <300 <30 10/28/932 Oysters <200 717+/- 97 <20 <10 <10 <200 <20 11/23/93 Oysters <200 746+/- 125 <20 <10 <10 <300 <30 Average+/- 2 s.d. 488+/-502 178+/-22

• 1 2

All gamma emitters other than those listed were <LLD.

State split samples.

75

TABLE B-12: GAMMA EMITTER1 CONCENTRATION IN CRABS Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 pCVkg (wet) +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1993 Page 1 of 1 station Date T e Be-7 K-40 Co-58 Co-60 Cs-137 Ra-226 Th-228 SD.

06/15/93 Crabs <300 2490+/-250 <20 <10 <10 <300 <30 TABLE 8-13: GAMMA EMITTER1 CONCENTRATION IN FISH Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 pCVkg (wet) +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1993 Page 1 of 1 Collection Sample Date Station T e K-40 Co-58 Cs-134 Cs-137 04/13/93 SD Catfish 1810 +/- 200 <20 <20 <20 04/13/93 SD White Perch 1930+/- 250 <30 <30 <30 10/13/93 SD Catfish 2010+/-230 <20 <20 <20 10/13/93 SD White Perch 1410+/-250 <30 <20 <20 Average +/- 2 s.d. 1790+/- 533 TABLE B-14: GAMMA EMITTER1 CONCENTRATION IN VEGETATION Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 pCVkg (wet) +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1993 Page 1 of 1 Sample Collection Station T e Date Be-7 K-40 1-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 Spratley2 Collard 04/13 93.8+/-53.6 3870+/-390 <10 <9 <9 Lucas 2 Kale 04/20 < 100 5160 +/- 520 <30 <20 <20 Carter2 Collard 07/08 202 +/- 104 3240+/-320 <40 <10 <10 Brocks Com 10/27 <40 2450+/-240 <20 <5 <5 Brocks 2 Peanuts 10/27 <60 6040 +/- 600 <20 <7 <7 Slades2 Corn 11/02 <50 2460+/-250 <10 <6 <6 Slades Peanuts 11/08 402+/-92 5100 +/- 510 <30 <10 <10 S1ades2 Soybeans 11/23 <50 13300 +/- 1300 <10 <6 <6 Brocks Soybeans 11/23 <60 14800 +/- 1500 <10 <7 <7

• Average +/- 2 s.d.

1 2

233 +/-313 All gamma emitters other than those listed were < LLD.

State split samples.

6269 +/- 9189 76

TABLE B-15: DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENTS-QUARTERLY TLD RESULTS Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 mR/month +/- 2 Sigma - Set 1 - 098 January 1 to December 31, 1993 Page 1 of 1 Station First Second Third Fourth Average Number Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter +/-2S.d.

02 6.2+/-0.3 6.3+/- 0.2 6.5+/-0.4 5.6+/-0.8 6.2+/- 0.8 03 6.2+/-0.5 9.4+/- 1.0 6.8+/-0.3 6.5+/- 0.2 7.2+/- 2.9 04 5.3 +/- 0.4 5.5+/- 0.4 5.7+/-0.5 5.3 +/- 0.1 5.5 +/- 0.4 05 5.0+/-0.2 5.4+/- 0.4 (a) 8.4+/- 2.9 6.3+/-3.7 06 5.5+/-0.3 5.8+/- 0.3 6.1 +/-0.4 5.9+/- 0.3 5.8+/- 0.5 07 5.1 +/-0.2 7.1 +/- 0.7 5.7+/-0.3 6.8+/-0.3 6.2+/- 1.9 08 5.2+/-0.2 5.5+/- 0.4 5.4+/-0.8 5.9+/- 0.3 5.5+/- 0.6 09 5.3 +/-0.3 7.3+/- 1.2 5.7+/-0.5 6.5+/- 0.8 6.2 +/- 1.8 10 4.9 +/-0.6 5.4+/-0.2 5.7+/-0.2 5.6+/- 1.6 5.4+/- 0.7 11 5.2+/-0.4 9.0+/- 1.2 5.6+/- 0.2 4.8 +/- 2.1 6.2+/-3.9 12 5.2 +/- 1.0 8.3+/- 1.7 5.7+/-0.2 6.7+/- 0.2 6.5+/-2.7 13 5.5 +/- 0.4 9.1 +/- 1.4 6.0+/-0.3 7.0+/- 0.7 6.9+/-3.2 14 6.5+/- 0.7 10.1+/-1.4 6.2+/-0.4 7.7+/- 0.2 7.6+/-3.5 15 5.2+/-0.2 6.2+/-0.7 5.4 +/- 0.4 6.3 +/- 0.1 5.8+/- 1.1 16 5.4+/-0.4 7.6+/-0.3 5.7+/-0.2 6.6+/- 0.5 6.3+/-2.0 17 5.2 +/- 0.4 6.7+/- 1.8 5.1 +/-0.3 5.0+/- 0.3 5.5 +/- 1.6 18 4.3+/- 0.1 5.7+/- 0.6 4.2+/-0.3 4.1 +/- 0.3 4.6+/- 1.5 19 5.2+/-0.3 7.5+/- 1.1 4.8+/-0.4 5.5 +/- 1.0 5.8+/-2.4

• 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 4.9+/-0.5 5.3 +/- 0.4 4.9+/-0.3 6.0+/-0.7 5.1 +/- 0.3 5.5+/-0.2 5.0 +/-0.4 7.4+/-2.3 6.5+/- 0.9 7.7+/- 0.8 7.5+/-0.9 4.9+/-0.2 5.4+/- 0.2 6.2+/-0.8 4.4 +/- 0.1 5.1 +/-0.3 4.5+/-0.2 5.1 +/- 0.4 5.0+/-0.3 5.1 +/-0.3 4.7+/- 0.4 5.8+/- 0.6 6.2+/-0.6 5.5+/- 0.5 7.9 +/- 1.8 5.9+/- 0.5 6.0+/- 0.1 4.6+/- 0.1 5.6+/-2.6 5.8 +/- 1.4 5.7+/-2.9 6.6+/-2.6 5.2+/- 0.9 5.5+/- 0.7 5.1 +/- 1.5 27 4.4+/-0.5 4.9+/-0.5 4.5+/-0.3 5.5+/- 0.2 4.8 +/- 1.0 28 5.4 +/- 0.3 8.6+/-1.7 5.2+/-0.3 6.1 +/- 0.5 6.3 +/- 3.1 29 4.8 +/- 0.1 7.4+/- 1.5 4.5 +/- 0.1 5.8+/- 0.3 5.6+/-2.6 30 5.0+/-0.2 8.1 +/- 0.9 4.7+/-0.3 5.1 +/- 1.0 5.7+/-3.2 31 4.8+/-0.2 7.0+/- 0.6 4.6+/-0.2 5.5+/- 0.4 5.5+/-2.2 32 5.2+/-0.3 8.2+/-2.6 4.9 +/- 0.4 4.5 +/- 0.4 5.7+/-3.4 33 5._8+/-0.7 7.0+/- 1.4 5.6+/-0.2 6.7 +/- 0.1 6.3 +/- 1.4 34 5.9 +/- 0.1 8.3+/- 1.5 5.5 +/- 0.4 6.4 +/- 1.0 6.5+/- 2.5 35 6.3+/-0.3 9.1 +/- 3.5 5.6+/-0.2 6.9+/- 0.8 7.0+/-3.0 36 6.5+/-0.3 8.5 +/- 1.1 6.2+/-0.2 6.0 +/- 0.4 6.8+/- 2.3 37 5.8+/-0.2 10.3 +/- 1.1 5.4 +/- 0.1 5.3+/- 0.2 6.7+/-4.8 38 7.5+/-0.2 11.1 +/- 1.9 7.8+/-0.3 8.6+/- 1.7 8.8+/-3.3 39 5.5+/-0.2 8.2+/- 1.0 5.3+/- 0.4 6.2+/- 0.3 6.3+/-2.6 40 4.6+/-0.6 4.4+/- 0.2 4.1 +/- 0.4 5.9 +/- 1.3 4.8+/- 1.6 41 6.2+/-0.4 5.5+/- 0.3 5.5+/-0.2 7.1 +/- 1.5 6.1 +/- 1.5 42 5.3 +/- 0.1 7.8+/- 1.9 5.1 +/- 0.8 6.8+/- 0.5 6.3+/- 2.6 43 5.3+/-0.2 9.6+/- 1.6 5.0 +/- 0.4 4.7+/-1.7 6.2+/-4.6 Average 5.4 +/- 1.2 7.3+/-3.2 5.4 +/- 1.5 6.1 +/- 2.0 6.0 +/- 1.8

+/-2S.d .

• (a) TLD missing; cause not known.

77

TABLE B-16: .DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENTS - QUARTERLY TLD RESULTS Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1993 mR/month +/- 2 Sigma - Set 2 - 099 January 1 to December 31, 1993 Page 1 of 1 Station First Second Third Fourth Average Number Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter +2s.d.

02 6.2+/-0.5 7.4+/- 1.0 6.8 +/- 0.1 8.3 +/- 0.1 7.2 +/- 1.8 03 6.6+/-0.5 8.3+/- 0.8 6.5+/-0.2 7.5 +/-0.4 7.2+/- 1.7 04 5.7+/- 0.4 6.6+/- 1.0 5.6+/-0.2 7.7 +/- 1.9 6.4+/-2.0 05 5.2+/-0.3 5.4+/- 0.2 5.5+/-0.3 6.9 +/- 0.5 (a) 5.8 +/- 1.6 06 5.8+/-0.5 7.5+/-0.4 6.0+/-0.7 7.3+/-2.0 6.7+/- 1.7 07 5.3+/-0.4 7.0+/-0.7 5.6+/-0.3 6.7+/-0.9 6.2+/- 1.7 08 5.2+/-0.3 8.1 +/- 1.0 5.6+/-0.2 6.7 +/- 0.4 (b) 6.4+/-2.6 09 5.6+/-0.2 7.9+/- 1.8 5.5+/-0.3 6.2 +/- 1.3 6.3+/-2.2 10 5.2 +/-0.4 7.0+/-1.0 5.6+/-0.4 7.1 +/- 0.4 6.2+/- 1.9 11 5.3+/-0.2 6.8+/- 1.3 5.8+/-0.4 6.9+/- 0.1 6.2+/- 1.6 12 5.5+/-0.2 6.6+/- 1.7 5.7+/-0.1 7.2+/-0.6 6.3+/- 1.6 13 5.7+/- 0.4 7.5+/- 0.9 6.0+/-0.2 7.0+/-0.3 6.6+/- 1.7 14 5.9 +/- 0.4 8.0+/- 1.8 6.2 +/- 0.4 7.3+/-0.5 6.9+/- 1.9 15 5.1 +/- 0.4 7.4+/- 1.9 5.3+/-0.2 6.3+/- 0.4 6.0 +/- 2.1 16 5.4+/- 0.2 7.6+/- 1.9 5.7+/-0.4 6.5+/-0.8 6.3+/-2.0 17 4.8+/-0.4 7.8+/- 1.4 5.2+/-0.6 6.6+/-0.8 6.1 +/- 2.7 18 4.3+/-0.3 4.6+/- 1.9 4.3 +/-0.1 5.5+/-0.2 4.7+/- 1.1 19 5.2+/-0.2 5.7+/- 1.2 4.9 +/- 0.1 6.3+/-0.5 5.5 +/- 1.2 20 4.6+/-0.4 6.0+/- 1.3 4.8+/-0.2 5.9 +/- 1.0 5.3+/-1.5 21 5.3+/-0.5 6.7+/-0.9 5.0+/-0.2 5.7+/-1.0 5.7+/-1.5 22 4.9+/-0.3 5.8+/-0.6 4.4+/-0.3 5.9+/-0.3 5.3 +/- 1.4 23 5.8+/-0.3 6.1 +/- 2.8 5.6+/- 0.4 6.9+/-0.5 6.1 +/- 1.1 24 5.3 +/- 0.4 5.1 +/- 0.3 5.0+/-0.2 6.0+/-0.7 5.4+/- 0.9 25 5.5 +/- 0.1 6.8+/- 1.0 4.9+/-0.3 6.6+/-0.3 6.0+/-1.8 26 5.0+/-0.3 6.5 +/- 1.4 4.5+/-0.6 4.5+/-0.2 5.1 +/- 1.9 27 4.8+/-0.4 7.1+/-1.1 4.3+/-0.2 5.5+/-0.6 5.4+/- 2.4 28 5.7+/-0.6 6.7+/- 0.8 5.1 +/-0.2 6.2+/-0.3 5.9 +/- 1.4 29 4.5+/-0.3 6.1 +/- 0.9 4.3 +/-.0.1 5.2+/-0.3 5.0 +/- 1.6 30 5.0+/-0.3 6.7+/-0.8 4.5 +/-0.1 5.6+/- 1.2 5.5 +/- 1.9 31 4.6+/-0.3 6.6+/- 1.0 4.2+/-0.5 6.1 +/- 2.0 5.4+/-2.3 32 5.0 +/-0.4 6.3+/-0.6 4.8+/-0.2 5.9 +/- 0.4 5.5 +/- 1.4 33 5.8+/-0.4 6.6+/- 1.0 5.2+/-0.3 6.6+/-0.8 6.1 +/- 1.4 34 5.7+/-0.2 7.0+/-0.7 4.9+/-0.2 6.4+/-0.3 6.0 +/- 1.8 35 6.1 +/- 0.4 6.8+/- 0.8 5.4+/- 0.1 7.1 +/-0.7 6.4 +/- 1.5 36 6.5+/-0.5 7.9+/- 0.7 5.6+/-0.3 7.2+/-0.6 6.8+/-2.0 37 5.6+/-0.5 7.6+/- 2.7 5.1 +/- 0.1 6.6+/- 1.0 6.2+/-2.2 38 7.4+/- 0.2 8.4+/- 1.0 6.7+/-0.4 7.8 +/- 1.1 7.6+/- 1.4 39 5.4+/-0.4 6.8+/- 1.1 4.8+/-0.2 4.9 +/- 0.1 5.5+/- 1.8 40 4.5+/-0.4 6.0+/-0.2 3.9+/-0.2 5.4+/- 0.5 5.0+/- 1.9 41 6.1 +/-0.4 10.9 +/- 1.9 5.3+/-0.5 6.6+/-0.3 7.2+/-5.0 42 5.8+/-1.7 8.4+/- 1.6 5.2+/-0.3 6.3+/-0.6 6.4+/-2.8 43 5.3+/-0.3 6.9+/-0.5 4.9 +/- 0.1 5.9+/-0.2 5.8+/- 1.7 Average 5.4 +/- 1.2 7.0 +/- 2.1 5.2 +/- 1.3 6.4 +/- 1.6 6.0+/- 1.6

+/-2s.d.

• (a)

(b)

Original TLD missing; replacement placed from 11/19/93 to 01/07/94.

Replacement TLD exposed from 11/19/93 to 01/07/94.

78

• APPENDIX C LAND USE CENSUS - 1993

LAND USE CENSUSl Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia January 1 to December 31, 1993 Page 1 of 1 Nearest Nearest Nearest Nearest Sector Direction Resident Garden2 Cow Goat A N 4.12@ 8° * *

• B NNE 1.90@ 34° 1.90@ 34° *

• C NE 4.80@ 35° . 4.91@ 56° *

• D ENE 4.91@ 56° *

• E E * * *

• F ESE * * *

• G SE * * *

• H SSE 4.75@ 152° 5.0@ 160° *

• J s 1.69@ 182° 1.90@ 189° *

• K SSW 1.87@ 193° 4.84@ 201°

• L SW 2.28@ 222° 3.6fr@ 2.24° * *

• M N

p Q

WSW w

WNW NW 2.82@ 243° 3.15@ 260° 4.79@ 281° 4.84@ 319° 3.57@ 2.46° 4.14@ 2.69° R NNW 3.73@ 339° 4.89@ 340° 3.65@ 337° *

• None 1 Locations shown by statute miles and degree heading relative to true north from radius center.

2 Area greater than 50 m2, containing broad leaf vegetation.

79

• APPENDIX D SYNOPSIS OF ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES

ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES SYNOPSIS Appendix D is a synopsis of the analytical procedures performed on samples collected for the Surry Power Station's Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program. All analyses have been mutually agreed upon by VEPCO and Teledyne Isotopes and include those recommended by the USNRC Branch Technical Position, Rev. 1, November 1979.

ANALYSIS TITLE PAGE Gross Beta Analysis of Samples ......................................................................... 81 Airborne Particulates ............................................................................... 81 Analysis of Samples for Tritium (Liquid Scintillation) ................................................ 82 Analysis of Samples for Strontiurn-89 and -90 ......................................................... 83 Total Water ......................................................................................... 83 Milk ................................................................................................. 83 Soil and Sediment ................................................................................. 83 Organic Solids ..................................................................................... 84

• Air Particulates ..................................................................................... 84 Analysis of Samples for Iodine-131 ..................................................................... 86 Milk or Water ...................................................................................... 86 Gamma Spectrometry of Samples ........................................................................ 87 Milk and Water .................................................................................... 87 Dried Solids other than Soils and Sediment. ................................................... 87 Fish ................................................................................................. 87 Soils and Sediments ............................................................................... 87

• Charcoal Cartridges (Air Iodine) ................................................................ 87 Airborne Particulates .............................................................................. 88 Environmental Dosimetry ..................... *............................................................ 89 80

GROSS BETA ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES

• Air Particulates After a delay of five or more days, allowing for the radon-222 and radon-220 (thoron) daughter products to decay, the filters are counted in a gas-flow proportional counter. An unused air particulate filter, supplied by the customer, is counted as the blank ..

Calculations of the results, the two sigma error and the lower limit of detection (LLD):

RESULT (pCi/m3) = ((SIT) - (8/t))/(2.22 V E)

TWO SIGMA ERROR (pCi/m3) = 2((SJT2) + (B/t2))1/2/(2.22 VE)

LLD (pCi/m3) = 4.66 (81/2)/(2.22 V E t) where:

S = Gross counts of sample including blank B = Counts of blank

• E T

t V

=

=

=

=

Counting efficiency Number of minutes sample was counted Number of minutes blank was counted Sample aliquot size (cubic meters) 81

ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES FOR TRITIUM (Liquid Scintillation)

Water Ten milliliters of water are mixed with 1O ml of a liquid scintillation "cocktail" and then the mixture is counted in an automatic liquid scintillator.

Calculation of the results, the two sigma error and the lower limit detection (LLD) in pCi/1:

RESULT = (N-8)/(2.22 V E)

TWO SIGMA ERROR = 2((N + 8)/At)112/ (2.22 VE)

LLD = 4.66 (8/At)112/(2.22 VE) where: N = the gross cpm of the sample 8 = the background of the detector in cpm

• 2.22 V

E At

=

=

=

=

conversion factor changing dpm to pCi volume of the sample in ml efficiency of the detector counting time for the sample 82

ANAL YSJS OF SAMPLES FOR STRONTJUM-89 AND -90 Water Stable strontium carrier is added to 1 liter of sample and the volume is reduced by evaporation. Strontium is precipitated as Sr(N03) 2 using nitric acid. A barium scavenge and an iron (ferric hydroxide) scavenge are performed followed by addition of stable yttrium carrier and a minimum of 5 day period for yttrium ingrowth. Yttrium is then precipitated as hydroxide, dissolved and re-precipitated as oxalate. The yttrium oxalate is mounted on a nylon planchette and is counted in a low level beta counter to infer Sr-90 activity. Strontium-89 activity is determined by precipitating SrC03 from the sample after yttrium separation. This precipitate is mounted on a nylon planchette and is covered with an 80 mg/cm2 aluminum absorber for low level beta counting.

Milk Stable strontium carrier is added to 1 liter of sample and the sample is first evaporated, then ashed in a muffle furnace. The ash is dissolved and strontium is precipitated as phosphate, then is dissolved and precipitated as SrN03 using fuming

• (90%) nitric acid. A barium chromate scavenge and* an iron (ferric hydroxide) scavenge are then performed. Stable yttrium carrier is added and the sample is allowed to stand for a minimum of 5 days for yttrium ingrowth. Yttrium is then precipitated as hydroxide, dissolved and re-precipitated as oxalate. The yttrium oxalate is mounted on a nylon planchette and is counted in a low level beta counter to infer Sr-90 activity. Strontium-89 is determined by precipitating SrC03 from the sample after yttrium separation. This precipitate is mounted on a nylon planchette and is covered with an 80 mg/cm2 aluminum absorber for low level beta counting.

Soil and Sediment The sample is first dried under heat lamps and an aliquot is taken. Stable strontium carrier is added and the sample is leached in hydrachloric acid. The mixture is filtered and strontium is precipitated from the liquid portion as phosphate. Strontium is precipitated as Sr(N03)2 using fuming (90& nitric acid. A barium chromate scavenge and an iron (ferric hydroxide) scavenge are then performed. Stable yttrium carrier is added and the sample is allowed to stand for a minimum of 5 days for yttrium ingrowth. Yttrium is then precipitated as hydroxide, dissolved and re-precipitated as

• oxalate. The yttrium oxalate is mounted on a nylon planchette and is counted in a low level beta counter to infer Sr-90 activity. Strontium-89 activity is determined by pre-83

cipitating Srco 3 from the sample after yttrium separation. This precipitate is mounted on a nylon planchette and is covered with an 80 mg/cm2 aluminum absorber for low level beta counting.

Organic Solids A wet portion of the sample is dried and then ashed in a muffle furnace. Stable strontium carrier is added and the ash is leached in hydrochloric acid. The sample is filtered and strontium is precipitated from the liquid portion as phosphate. Strontium is precipitated as Sr(N03 ) using fuming (90%) nitric acid. An iron (ferric hydroxide) scavenge is performed, followed by addition of stable yttrium carrier and a minimum of 5 days period for yttrium ingrowth. Yttrium is then precipitated as hydroxide, dissolved and re-precipitated as oxalate. The yttrium oxalate is mounted on a nylon planchette and is counted in a low level beta counter to infer strontium-90 activity. Strontium-89 activity is determined by precipitating SrCo3 from the sample after yttrium separation.

This precipitate is mounted on a nylon planchette and is covered with an 80 mg/cm2 aluminum absorber for low level beta counting.

Air Particulates Stable strontium carrier is added to the sample and it is leached in nitric acid to bring deposits into solution. The mixture is then filtered and the filtrate is reduced in volume by evaporation. Strontium is precipitated as Sr(N0 3 )2 using fuming (90%)

nitric acid. A barium scavenge is used to remove some interfering species. An iron (ferric hydroxide) scavenge is performed, followed by addition of stable yttrium carrier and a 7 to 1O day period for yttrium ingrowth. Yttrium is then precipitated as hydroxide, dissolved and re-precipitated as oxalate. The yttrium oxalate is mounted on a nylon planchette and is counted in a low level beta counter to infer strontium-90 activity.

Strontium-89 activity is determined by precipitating SrC03 from the sample after yttrium separation. This precipitate is mounted on a nylon planchette and is covered with 80 mg/cm2 aluminum absorber for low level beta counting.

Calculations of the results, two sigma errors and lower limits of detection (LLD) are expressed in activity of pCi/volume or pCi/mass:

RESULT Sr-89 = (N/Dt-Bc-BA)/(2.22 VY s DFsR-89 EsR-89)

• TWO SIGMA ERROR Sr-89 = 2((N/Dt+Bc+BA)/At) 1121(2.22 VY S DFsR-89 EsR-89) 84

LLD Sr-89 = 4.66((Bc+BA)/At)1/2/(2.22 V YS DFsR-89 EsR-89)

RESULT Sr-90 = (N/At - B)/(2.22 VY 1 Y2 DF IF E)

TWO SIGMA ERROR Sr-90 = 2((N/At+B)/At) 1/2/(2.22 VY 1 Y2 DF E IF))

LLD Sr-90 = 4.66(B/At)1!2/(2.22 VY1 Y2 IF DF E)

WHERE: N = total counts from sample (counts)

Lit = counting time for sample (min)

Be = background rate of counter (cpm) using absorber configuration 2.22 = dpm/pCi V = volume or weight of sample analyzed BA = background addition from Sr-90 and ingrowth of V-90 BA = 0.016 (K) + (K) Ev1abs) (IGv-90)

Vs = chemical yield of strontium OF SR-89 = decay factor from the mid collection date to ~he counting date for SR-89 EsR-89 = efficien~y of the counter for SR-89 with the 80 mg/cm.sq.

aluminum absorber K = (Ntit- Bc)v-9d(Ev-9o IFV-90 OFv-90V1) 0Fy_90) = the decay factor for V-90 from the "milk" time to the mid count time Ev-so = efficiency of the counter for V-90 IFv-so = ingrowth factor for V-90 from scavenge time to milking time IGy_go = the ingrowth factor for V-90 into the strontium mount from the "milk" time to the mid count time 0.016 = the efficiency of measuring SR-90 through a No. 6 absorber EV/abs = the efficiency of counting V-90 through a No. 6 absorber B = background rate of counter (cpm)

V1 = chemical yield of yttrium V2 = chemical yield of strontium OF = decay factor of yttrium from the radiochemical milking time to the mid count time E = efficiency of the counter for V-90 IF = ingrowth factor for V-90 from scavenge time to the radio-chemical milking time 85

lI ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES FOR IODINE-131 Milk or Water Two liters of sample are first equilibrated with stable iodide carrier. A batch treatment with anion exchange resin is used to remove iodine from the sample. The iodine is then stripped from the resin with sodium hypochlorite solution, is reduced with hydroxylamine hydrochloride and is extracted into carbon tetrachloride as free iodine. It is then back-extracted as iodide into sodium bisulfite solution and is precipitated as palladium iodide. The sodium bisulfite solution and is precipitated as palladium iodide. The precipitate is weighed for chemical yield and is mounted on a nylon planchette for low level beta counting. The chemical yield is corrected by measuring the stable iodide content of the milk or the water with a specific ion electrode.

Calculations of results, two sigma error and the lower limit of detection (LLD) in pCi/1:

RESULT = (N/At-B)/(2.22 EVY DF)

TWO SIGMA ERROR = 2((N/At+B}/At) 112/(2.22 EVY DF)

LLD = =4.66(8/At} 112/(2.22 EVY DF) where: N = total counts from sample (counts)

At = counting time for sample (min)

B = background rate of counter (cpm) 2.22 = dpm/pCi V = volume or weight of sample analyzed y = chemical yield of the mount or sample counted DF = decay factor from the collection to the counting date E = efficiency of the counter for 1-131, corrected for self absorption effects by the formula E = Es(exp-0.0061 M)/(exp-0.0061 Ms)

Es = efficiency of the counter determined from an 1-131 standard mount Ms = mass of Pd1 2 on the standard mount, mg

• M = mass of PDl 2 on the sample mount, mg 86

. GAMMA SPECTROMETRY OF SAMPLES Milk and Water A 1.0 liter Marinelli beaker is filled with a representative aliquot of the sample.

The sample is then counted for approximately 1000 minutes with a shielded Ge(Li) detector coupled to a mini-computer-based data acquisition system which performs pulse height analysis.

Dried Solids Other Than Soils and Sediments A large quantity of the sample is dried at a low temperature, less than 100°c.

As much as possible (up to the total sample) is loaded into a tared 1-liter Marinelli and weighed. The sample is then counted for approximately 1000 minutes with a shielded Ge(Li) detector coupled to a mini-computer-based data acquisition system which performs pulse height analysis.

Fish As much as possible (up to the total sample) of the edible portion of the sample

• is loaded into a tared Marinelli and weighed. The sample is then counted for approximately 1000 minutes with a shielded Ge(Li) detector. coupled to a mini-computer-based data acquisition system which performs pulse height analysis.

Soils and Sediments Soils and sediments are dried at a low temperature, less than 100°C. The soil or sediment is loaded fully into a tared, standard 300 cc container and weighed. The sample is then counted for approximately six hours with a shielded Ge(Li) detector coupled to a mini-computer"'.based data acquisition system which performs pulse height and analysis.

Charcoal Cartridges (Air Iodine)

Charcoal cartridges are counted up to five at a time, with one positioned on the face of a Ge(Li) detector and up to four on the side of the Ge(Li) detector. Each Ge(Li) detector is calibrated for both positions. The detection limit for 1-131 of each charcoal cartridge can be determined (assuming no positive 1-131) uniquely from the volume of air which passed through it. In the event 1-131 is observed in the initial counting of a

• set, each charcoal cartridge is then counted separately, positioned on the face of the detector.

87

Air Particulate The thirteen airborne particulate filters for a quarterly composite for each field station are aligned one in front of another and then counted for at least six hours with a shielded Ge(Li) detector coupled to a mini-computer-based data acquisition system which performs pulse height analysis.

A mini-computer software program defines peaks by certain changes in the slope of the spectrum. The program also compares the energy of each peak with a library of peaks for isotope identification and then performs the radioactivity calculation using the appropriate fractional gamma ray abundance, half life, detector efficiency, and net counts in the peak region. The calculation of results, two sigma error and the lower limit of detection (LLD) in pCi/volume of pCi/mass:

RESULT = (S-8)/(2.22 t E V F DF)

TWO SIGMA ERROR = 2(S+B) 1/2/(2.22 t EV F DF)

LLD = 4.66(8) 1/2/(2.22 t EV F DF) where:* s = Area, in counts, of sample peak and background (region of spectrum of interest) 8 = Background area, in. counts, under sample peak, determined by a linear interpolation of the representative backgrounds on either side of the peak t = length of time in minutes the sample was counted 2.22 = dprn/pCi E = detector efficiency for energy of interest and geometry of sample V = sample aliquot size (liters, cubic meters, kilograms, or grams)

F = fractional gamma abundance (specific for each emitted gamma)

OF = decay factor from the mid-collection date to the counting date 88

ENVIRONMENTAL DOSIMETRY Teledyne Isotopes uses a CaS0 4:Dy thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) which the company manufactures. This material has a high light output, negligible thermally induced signal loss (fading), and negligible self dosing. The energy response curve (as well as all other features) satisfies NRG Reg. Guide 4.13. Transit doses are accounted for by use of separate TLDs.

Following the field exposure period the TLDs are placed in a Teledyne Isotopes Model 8300. One fourth of the rectangular TLD is heated at a time and the measured light emission (luminescence) is recorded. The TLD is then annealed and exposed to a known Cs-137 dose; each area is then read again. This provides a calibration of each area of each TLD after every field use. The transit controls are read in the same manner.

Calculations of results and the two sigma error in net milliRoentgen (mR):

RESULT = 0 = (0 1+02+03 +0 ~/4 TWO SIGMA ERROR = 2( (0 1-0)2+(0 -o)2+(03-o)2+(04 -o)2)/3) 1/2 2

• WHERE: 01 01 11

=

=

=

- the net mR of area 1 of the TLO, and similarly for 02, 03, and 04 11 K/R 1 -A the instrument reading of the field dose in area 1 K = the known exposure by the Cs-137 source R1 = the instrument reading due to the Cs-137 dose on area 1 A = average dose in mR, calculated in similar manner as above, of the transit control TLOs 0 = the average net mR of all 4 areas of the TLO.

89

• APPENDIX E EPA INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM

EPA Interlaboratory Comparison Program Teledyne Isotopes participates in the US EPA Interlaboratory Comparison Program to the fullest extent possible. That is, we participate in the program for all radioactive isotopes prepared and at the maximum frequency of availability. In this section trending graphs (since 1981) and the 1993 data summary tables are presented for isotopes in the various sample media applicable to the Surry Power Station's Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program. The footnotes of the table discuss investigations of problems encountered in a few cases and the steps taken to prevent reoccurrence .

90

VEPCO - SURRY EPA INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM 1993 (Page l of 2)

EPA Date 11 Malled Date EPA EPA Tl NonnDev. **warning Preparation Results Issued Results Media Nuclide Results(a) Results(b) (Known) ***Action 01/15/93 03/23/93 04/26/93 Water Sr-89 15.0 +/- 5.0 12.67 +/- 1.15 -0.81 Sr-90 10.0 +/- 5.0 8.33 +/- 1.15 -0.58 01/29/93 02/22/93 05/10/93 Water Gr-Alpha 34.0 +/- 9.0 17.33 +/- 1.15 -3.21 *** (c)

Gr-Beta 44.0 +/- 5.0 52.00 +/- 1.00 2.77 ** (d) 02/05/93 03/04/93 04/20/93 Water 1-131 100.0 +/- 10.0 106.67 +/- 5.77 1.15 03/05/93 04/30/93 06/10/93 Water Ra-226 9.8 +/- 1.5 7.67 +/- 0.12 -2.46 ** (e)

Ra-228 18.5 +/- 4.6 19.33 +/- 2.31 0.31 04/20/93 07/02/93 08/16/93 Water Gr-Beta 177.0 +/- 27.0 150.0 +/- 0.00 -1.73 Sr-89 41.0 +/- 5.0 35.33 +/- 1.53 -1.96 Sr-90 29.0 +/- 5.0 27.33 +/- 0.58 -0.58 Co-60 39.0 +/- 5.0 40.67 +/- 3.51 0.58 Cs-134 27.0 +/- 5.0 23.67 +/- 1.53 -1.15 Cs-137 32.0 +/- 5.0 34.33 +/- 2.08 0.81 Gr-Alpha 95.0 +/- 24.0 94.33 +/- 1.15 -0.05 I.O Ra-226 24.9 +/- 3.7 19.00 +/- 1.00 -2.76 ** (e)

...... Ra-228 19.0 +/- 4.8 18.33 +/- 0.58 -0.24 06/04/93 07/02/93 8/16/93 Water H-3 9844.0 +/- 984.0 9366.67 +/- 152.75 -0.84 06/11/93 07/23/93 08/27/93 Water Co-60 15.0 +/- 5.0 16.33 +/- 1.53 0.46 Zn-65 103.0 +/- 10.0 121.33 +/- 2.08 3.18 *** (f)

Ru-106 119.0 +/- 12.0 106.33 +/- 15.89 -1.83 Cs-134 5.0 +/- 5.0 5.67 +/- 0.58 0.23 Cs-137 5.0 +/- 5.0 6.67 +/- 0.58 0.58 Ba-133 99.0 +/- 10.0 104.33 +/- 9.29 0.92 07/16/93 09/14/93 12/02/93 Water Sr-89 34.0 +/- 5.0 31.67 +/- 2.52 -0.81 Sr-90 25.0 +/- 5.0 24.00 +/- 0.00 -0.35 07/23/93 08/20/93 10/23/93 Water Gr-Alpha 15.0 +/- 5.0 18.67 +/- 2.08 1.27 Gr-Beta 43.0 +/- 6.9 42.67 +/- 2.52 -0.08 08/27/93 11/05/93 12/28/93 Air Filter Gr-Alpha 19.0 +/- 5.0 17.0 +/- 0.00 -0.69 Gr-Beta 47.0 +/- 5.0 49.00 +/- 1.73 0.69 Sr-90 19.0 +/- 5.0 17.67 +/- 0.58 -0.46 Cs-137 9.0 +/- 5.0 9.67 +/- 0.58 0.23

• Footnotes located at end of table.

'i

VEPCO - SURRY EPA INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM 1993 (Page 2 of 2)

EPA Date TI Malled Date EPA EPA Tl Norm Dev. **warning Preparation Re suits Issued Results Media Nuclide Results(a) Results(b) (Known) ***Action 09/09/93 11/12/93 12/21/93 Water Ra-226 14.9 +/- 2.2 15.33 +/- 0.58 0.34 Ra-228 20.4 +/- 5.1 20.67 +/- 1.15 0.09 09/24/93 11/24/93 01/24/94 Milk Sr-89 30.0 +/- 5.0 35.67 +/- 3.51 1.96 Sr-90 25.00 +/- 5.0 24.00 +/- 1.73 -0.35 1-131 120.0 +/- 12.0 126.67 +/- 5.77 0.96 Cs-137 49.0 +/- 5.0 50.67 +/- 1.15 0.58 K 1679.0 +/- 84.0 1620.00 +/- 17.32 -1.22 10/08/93 11/10/93 12/23/93 Water 1-131 117.0 +/- 12.0 103.33 +/- 5.77 -1.97 10/29/93 11/02/93 01/17/94 Water Gr-Alpha 20.0 +/- 5.0 20.33 +/- 2.08 0.12 Gr-Beta 15.0 +/- 5.0 15.67 +/- 2.08 0.23 11/05/93 11/02/93 01/17/94 Water H-3 7398.0 +/- 740.0 6900.00 +/- 100.00 -1.17 11/02/93 12/23/93 02/14/93 Water Co-60 30.0 +/- 5.0 28.67 +/- 2.89 -0.46 I.O Zn-65 150.0 +/- 15.0 152.00 +/- 9.17 0.23 N Ru-106 201.0 +/- 20.0 177.33 +/- 5.51 -2.05 ** (g)

Cs-134 59.0 +/- 5.0 53.33 +/- 4.93 -1.96 Cs-137 40.0 +/- 5.0 41.33 +/- 3.06 0.46 Ba-133 79.0 +/- 8.0 69.33 +/- 3.06 -2.09 ** (g)

Footnotes*

(a) Average +/- experimental sigma.

(b) Expected laboratory precision (1 sigma. 1 determtnatlon)

(cl The EPA switched from Am-241 to Th-230 alpha spike. We caltbrated with Th-230, using sodium nitrate to generate a self-absorption curve. The EPA water, however has minerals which have greater self-absorption that the sodium nitrate matrix. The EPA has agreed to send us a gallon of their water which we can use to prepare a self-absorption curve with Th-230.

(d) By oversight, we did not use the special self-absorptlon curve which we had previously denved using EPA water and Cs-137 standard. We will use the EPA curve in the future.

We may also re-denve this curve using a water sample which the EPA has agreed to send us. *

(e) The counttng data and backgrounds were vertfted. Possibly some efficiencies used were erroneously high, causing low values. A less ltkely cause ts an error tn dtlutlon. New Ra-226 standards wt1l be prepared. Closer monitoring of out of control efficiencies will be done and extra care tn preparation of the sample will be maintained.

(f) The calculations were checked and found to be correct The results of s1x gamma emtttlng isotopes were reported to the EPA. The results of four were within 1 normalized deviation; a fifth, within 2 normalized deviations. Only the Zn-65 average was outside the control limits. There ts no obvious reason why one isotope should be outside the control limits, whtle five other isotopes were wtthtn control limits.

(g) An tnvestlgatlon ts being conducted: results will be available shortly.

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM GROSS ALPHA IN AIR PARTICULATES (pg. 1 of 1) 60 (J

C. 40

-cu 0

t-I.O w 20 IJ 0

-20 1---r---.----y--,----r---,-~-..----r--"""T'"--T"-..----r---,-~-..----r---r----Y--..----r---,-~-..----r----t 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 a Tl +/- 3 Sigma o EPA +/- 3 Sigma j

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM GROSS BETA IN AIR PARTICULATES (pg. 1 of 1) 160 . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,

140 120 (J 100 D D..

0 f-60 40 20 0 1----...---,,---.---r--.---r---r--r---r---r--~-r---r---r---r--~-r---r---r---r---r---r---r---r--T"'-1 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994

• 8/25/89 EPA test invalid.

j c Tl +/- 3 Sigma o EPA+/- 3 Sigma j

• EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM STRONTIUM-90 IN AIR PARTICULATES (pg. 1 of 1) 60 ua. 40

!0 I-I.O Ul 20 0

-20 t - - . . . . . . - - - r - - - - . - - - - - r - - , - - r - - - - , - ~ - - - . - . - - - r - - - - r - - - , - - - - . - - - - r - r - - - ~ - - r - - - r - ~ - - - , . - - , - - _ - , - - - - t 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 c Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA+/- 3 sigma I

__ _J

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM CESIUM-137 IN AIR PARTICULATES (pg. 1 of 1) 60 0

C. 40

\.0 O"I

-a, 0

t-20 l

0 n

-20 1---r--~--T""--.-..---r--~--.---.---r--~--r----r-.---r--~--T""--,-..---r---.----r---.-..---r----t 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 c Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA+/- 3 sigma j

• EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM STRONTIUM-89 IN MILK (pg. 1 of 1) 100 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .

80 Cl) 60 I

\D (J

C.

40 D

C 1 ~

-....J Ci 20 JI 0 0

~

-20 1--.......--------.---~-..----,.-.---.......---..----.---.......----------...--~-------,.----.---,----.---~--t 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 Ic Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA +/-3 sigma I

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM STRONTIUM-90 IN MILK (pg. 1 of 1) 60 Cl) 40 I

0 i

I.O C.

co CJ 20 iu , Hi h ~

1 CJ 0

i

-20 1e----------------------------------------..----------------------------~

1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 I CJ Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA +/-3 sigma I I

i

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM POTASSIUM-40 IN MILK (pg. 1 of 1) 2400 2200 GI 2000

- 1800 0 1600 a.

1400 1200 1000 800 600 t--......---------.~"T"'"""........---r~...--......----.----,,...........---T"""----r~...--....---.-.........,...........--.........---.-~...--....---.----,,...........---t 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 I c Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA +/-3 sigma I

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM IODINE-131 IN MILK (pg. 1 of 1) 160 140 I

120

... 100 a,

(J Q.

80 0

0 60 40 Ii ,i I j 20 0

C 0

D I a 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 I c Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA +/-3 sigma I

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM CESIUM-137 IN MILK (pg. 1 of 1) 100 . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -....

80 0

Cl) a.

60 i

t,-0 0

t,-0 40 20 o------------------.-------....---.----r--...--....---.----.--...----.------.-----

1901 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 j c Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA +/-3 sigma I

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM GROSS ALPHA IN WATER (pg. 1 of 1) 180 160 140 120

...CD

-- 100 0

D.

80

...... Cl I

0 N

60 40 20 I lht~lrf ~HWa 1 t12

                             !                                    ~I            .                             ~

0 hi~i 1987 1988 1989 2 1990 1991 1992 1993

              -20 t------.------.-----.---r--........-........------------....---........-.......----.----.-----,---1 1984     1985      1986                                                                            1994 Ic    Tl +/- 3 Sigma    o  EPA+/- 3 Sigma    I

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM GROSS BETA IN WATER (pg. 2 of 2) 220 180

     ~

a, IJ

   -    140 u

C. I-' 0 100 w

         -20 i------------------.-----.......-------.....------..---------4 1986    1987    1988      1989         1990      1991       1992 1993    1994 I CJ Tl +/- 3 sigma    o EPA +/- 3 sigma I

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM GROSS BETA IN WATER (pg. 1 of 2) 220 200 180 160

         ... 140 G) 120 I-'

0 0 D. 100 +" BO

              -201---------,....----.....---...----------.....----.....----,,-----r-----t 1981        1982             1983           1984          1985          1986.

I D Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA+/- 3 sigma I

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM TRITIUM IN WATER (pg. 2 of 2) 14000 12000 Q) 10000 0 Q. 8000 I-' 0

                                          ~

u, 6000 Cl 4000 ti f f if tr t 2000 0 iI la t 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 I D Tl +/-3 Sigma o EPA +/- 3 Sigma I

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM TRITIUM IN WATER (pg. 1 of 2) 4000 3000 I Cl) 2000 u0. I-' 0 en 1000 0

          -10001---~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~----,~~~~~~~~-,--~~~~~~~--1 1981      1982                 1983                1984 1985 c Tl +/-3sigma    o EPA +/-3 sigma

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM IODINE-131 IN WATER 160 140 120 Q) CJ C. 100 80 -1 IC II I-' 60 0 u1i tl -....J 40 20 0 l ~Q { m IJJ i a

               -20 1981 1982 1983  1984  1985    1986  1987  1988    1989   1990 1991 1992 1993  1994 c  Tl+/- 3 sigma   o  EPA +/-3 sigma  I

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM COBALT-GO IN WATER (pg. 2 of 2) 100 . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . 80

     ... 60
   --Q)
   *--                                                                        t I
   *-0 I

~. 0 OJ Q. 40 20 i C II ~ Ii:i i:i 0

          +-------~-----T--.....---~--.....---~--.....----,----T"'""----,---1 1988         1989        1990           1991              1992      1993 1994 c  Tl +/- 3 sigma   o  EPA +/-3 sigma   I

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM COBALT-GO IN WATER (pg 1 of 2) 100 . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , 80 60 CD 1--'

     -0        40 0         ll.

<.D 20 0 D 0 0 D 0 lH ~ f

               -20 ~----------r-----..----------~----------------..-------------~-------,-----------------t 1986      1987         1988 1981         1982        1983         1984        1985 I D Tl +/- 3 sigma   o  EPA +/-3 sigma

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM CESIUM-134 IN WATER (pg. 2 of 2) 100 - , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , 80

            ... 60
           -Q) 0 I

C. 40

                                ~

0 20 ~ f ~. f C I~

                         ~                                       ~                     C 0

1----~-----------------------------~--- 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 c Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA +/-3 sigma I

1 EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM CESIUM-134 IN WATER (pg. 1 of 2) 100 , - - , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , BO G) 60 I-' I-'

    - 0 40 I-'     C.

l! 20 I C 0 f I

             -20 t--------------.. . . . .---------r-----------.. . . . .----------------...-----------t 1981       1982      1983             1984     1985              1986       1987       1988 I  c  Tl +/- 3 sigma  o   EPA +/-3 sigma

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAIVI CESIUM-137 IN WATER {pg. 2 of 2) 120 . . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - , 100 BO a, 60 N u C. 40 20 I I I~ i 0 Ci

                                    '                        ~  !:!
                                                                       ~    ~
           '-------.....----,,--------.-------.-------.---.--------1 1988           1989         1990              1991            1992  1993    1994 I c   Tl +/- 3 sigma    o  EPA +/-3 sigma  I

• EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM CESIUM-137 IN WATER (pg. 1 of 2) 60

           ...ID 40 0

a. w 20 0 1

                 -20 ~------------~...........-----------------------------------------------------------------~-------------............---------------------1 1981           1982                       1983                  1984                 1985                  1986                          1987 I  c   Tl +/- 3 sigma          o   EPA +/-3 sigma

• EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM STRONTIUM-89 IN WATER (pg. 2 of 2) 60

          .....                                                                        Ii q

Cl) 40 0 C. 2 t i ~ 20 Iii t 2 i

                                                                                                ~

0 1 2 C

                -20 1----.--....---.---....---.---.--....---.----.--~"--"T---r--,---"--"T---r--,------t 1985     1986      1987      1988       1989      1990     1991        1992   1993  1994 l c  Tl +/- 3 Sigma   o  EPA +/- 3 Sigma j

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM STRONTIUM-89 IN WATER (pg. 1 of 2) 100 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - BO 60 a,

      ---     40

...... 0 <.n a. 1I J 20 0 I i -I

              -20 1-------------------y---------..-----------t 1981             1982                   1983                1984       1985 I D Tl +/- 3 sigma      o EPA +/-3 sigma

e EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM STRONTIUM-90 IN WATER (pg. 1 of 1) 60 a, 40

      --0 C.

C"I 20 0

           -20 1----------"'"""'T"---.-~-----.-------,.---.-...--....--.....---.-----,.----...-----..--4 1981  1982   1983  1984  1985   1986     1987 1988   1989    1990   1991   1992   1993 1994 I c  Tl +/- 3 sigma   o EPA +/-3 sigma  j}}