ML18151A151

Radiological Environ Operating Rept, Jan-Dec 1995.

ML18151A151
Person / Time
Site:	Surry
Issue date:	12/31/1995
From:	Noce C TELEDYNE BROWN ENGINEERING CO., VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.)
To:
Shared Package
ML18151A152	List: ML18151A151 ML18153A612
References
NUDOCS 9605060138
Download: ML18151A151 (121)

Text

..9J- 2f'/)

1. o/9(;

Surry Power Station 1995Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report VIRGINIA POWER

~TELEDYNE BROWN ENGINEERING Environmental Services 50 VAA BUREN AVENUE P.O. BOX 1235 WESlWOOD. NEW JERSEY 07675-1235 (201) 664-7070 FAX (201) 664-5566 April 16, 1996 Mr. Doug Noce Virginia Power Company Surry Power Station PO Box 315 End of Route 650 Surry, VA 23883

Dear Mr. Noce:

Enclosed are two bound copies of the final 1995 anuual REMP report. I have incorporated the revisions requested by Mr. Carl Tarantino. The required number of copies will be sent in a few days by UPS.

Sincerely,

~- ~~

C a ~ A. Mendola Technical Assistant r> \ .:

,, .'I\ .,..,, *., ....

CAM cc: Mr. Carl Tarantino

• -;f! .:: . *,::

\ ' ;~ '

• ~

Virginia Electric and Power Company Surry Power Station Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program January 1, 1995 to December 31, 1995 Prepared by VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY and

'l,;~.

TELEDYNE BROWN ENGINEERING

--9605060138 960/J-26

~- -------- ----------------1 PDR ADOCK 05000280 R PDR

-* Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Surry Power Station 1995 Prepared by:

Reviewed by:

David K. Miller Supervisor Radiological Engineering Approved by:

Dean L. Erickson Superintendent Radiological Protection

- 2

Table of Contents Section Title Page Preface .................................................................................................. 7 Executive Summary ................................................................................... 8 I. Introduction ................................................................................... 9 II. Nuclear Power and The Environment: In Perspective .................................. 12 III. Sampling and Analysis Program .......................................................... 25 IV. Program Exceptions ......................................................................... 37 V. Summary and Discussion of 1995 Analytical Results ................................. .38 A. Airborne Exposure Pathway ........................................................ 38

1. Air Iodine/Air Particulates .................................................... 38 B. Waterborne Exposure Pathway .................................................... .40

1. River Water ..................................................................... 40

2. Well Water ...................................................................... 41 C. Aquatic Exposure Pathway ......................................................... .43

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

2. Shoreline Sediment ............................................................ 43 D. Ingestion Exposure Pathway ....................................................... .46

1. Milk .............................................................................. 46

2. Aquatic Biota ................................................................... 46

3. Food Products .................................................................. 48 E. Direct Radiation Exposure Pathway ............................................... .49

1. TLD Dosimeters ................................................................ 49 VI. Conclusion ................................................................................... 51 3

Table of Contents (Cont)

Section Title Page VIL References .................................................................................... 54 VIII. Appendices ................................................................................... 55 Appendix A - Radiological Environmental Monitoring ................................. 55 Program Annual Summary Tables - 1995 Appendix B - Data Tables .................................................................. 59 Appendix C - Land Use Census - 1995 .................................................. 76 Appendix D - Synopsis of Analytical Procedures ....................................... 77

• Appendix E - EPA Interlaboratory Comparison Program .............................. 87 List of Trending Graphs

1. Gross Beta in Air Particulates .............................................................. 39

2. Tritium in River Water ...................................................................... 39

3. Tritium in Well Water. ...................................................................... 42

4. Cobalt-58 in Silt ............................................................................. 42

5. Cobalt-60 in Silt ............................................................................. 44

6. Cesium-134 in Silt ..........................................................................44

7. Cesium-137 in Silt .......................................................................... 45

8. Cobalt-58 1n Clams .......................................................................... 45

9. Cobalt-60 1n Clams .......................................................................... 47

10. Cesium-137 in Clams ....................................................................... 47

11. Direct Radiation Measurements-TLD Results ............................................ 50 4

L

Table of Contents (Cont)

List of Figures Figure Title Page

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

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

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

4. GammaRay .................................................................................. 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. Reactor Vessel with Fuel Assemblies, Rods, and Fuel Pellets ........................ 20

11. Fission: A Chain Reaction ................................................................. 21

12. PWR System Diagram .................. *.................................................... 22

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

14. Surry Radiological Monitoring Locations ................................................ 29 5

List of Tables Table Page

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

2. Radiological Sampling Station Distance and Direction from Unit l ................................................................................... 26*

3. Surry Power Station Sample Analysis Program ......................................... 34 Appendix B Tables B-1 Iodine-131 Concentration in Filtered Air .................................................59 B-2 Gross Beta Concentration in Air Particulates ............................................ 61 B-3 Gamma Emitters Concentration in Quarter Air Particulates ............................................................................... 63 B-4 Gamma Emitter and Tritium Concentration in River Water .......... ~ ................. 65 B-5 Gamma Emitter and Tritium Concentration in

. River Water - State Split Samples ............................. ." ........................... 66 B-6 Gamma Emitter and Tritium Concentration in Well Water ................................................................................... 67 B-7 Gamma Emitter Concentrations in Silt. ................................................. : .68 B-8 Gamma Emitter Concentrations Shoreline Sediment. ......................................................................... 68 B-9 Gamma Emitter, Strontium-89, and.Strontium-90

.Concentration in Milk ....................................................................... 69 B-10 Gamma Emitter Concentration in Clams .................. ~ ............................... 71 B-11 . Gamma Emitter Concentration in Oysters ................................................ 72 B-12 Gamma Emitter Concentration in Crabs .................................................. 73 B-13 Gamma Emitter Concentration in Fish ...................................... : ............. 73 B-14 Gamma Emitter Concentration in Vegetation ............................................. 73 B-15 Direct Radiation Measurements - Quarterly TLD Results Set 1 ........................ 74 B-16 Direct Radiation Measurements - Quarterly TLD Results Set 2 ........................ 75 6

Preface This report is submitted as required by Technical Specification 6.6.B.2, 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 1995 Surry Nuclear Power Station Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP). Radioactivity levels from January- 1 through December 31, 1995 in air, water, silt, shoreline sediment, milk, aquatic biota, focx:l products, vegetation, and direct exposure pathways have been analyzed, evaluated, and summarized. The REMP is designed to confirrn 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 focx:l pathway chains.

Radiation and radioactivity in the environment is constantly 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 Brown Engineering provides sample analyses for various radioisotopes as appro-priate 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 Limits 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. TI1e 1995 results were very similar to previous years. There was no notable increase in natural products and no detections of fission products or other man-made isotopes in the airborne particulate media during the year.

• 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 1995 was only 2.1% 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-60. During the preoperational period, there were no man-made isotopes detected for this pathway. Man-made isotopes have accumulated. Gamma-emitting isotope concentrations in 1995, 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.

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

Iodine-131 was not detected in any 1995 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 average for tl1e previous five years.

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

During 1995, as in previous years, operation of the Surry Nuclear Power Station created no adverse environmental affects or health hazards. The maximum dose calculated for tl1e hypothetical individual at the Surry Power Station site boundary due to liquid and gaseous effluents released from the site during 1995 was 0.11 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 tl1e Surry Nuclear Power Station.

9

L Introduction

• The operational Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) conducted for the year 1995 for Surry Power Station is provided in this report. The results of measurements and analyses of data obtained from samples collected from January 1, 1995 through December 31 , 1995 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 (10 CFR 50.34a) require that nuclear power plants be designed, constructed, and operated to keep levels of radioactive material in effluents to unrestricted areas As Low As is 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 Virginia Power's Station Administrative Procedure VPAP-2103, Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM).

C. 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 to 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 pre-operational data is compared to data collected during the operational phase to assist in evaluating any radiological impact of plant operations.

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 Surry Power Station's ODCM. These concentrations are based upon the annual dose commitment recommended by 10 CFR 50, 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 1991 and satisfies the following objectives of the program:

• 1. Provides 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.

10

2. To supplement the radiological effluent monitoring program by verifying that

• radioactive effluents are within allowable limits .

3. To identify changes of radioactivity in the environment.

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

• 11

IL Nuclear Power And The Environment:

In Perspective Coal oil, natural gas, nucle,u- power, and hydropower have all been used to run the nation 's electric generating statio ns. Each method , however, has its drawbacks. Coal-fired power can damage the enviro nment during the mining process, or by airborne discharges such as fl y-ash and chemicals which contribute to acid rain. Oil and natural gas are costly because of their limited upply. Few suitable sites for hydropower exi t, and building the large dams necessa1y to produce Hydropower has a significant impact o n the environment.

udear energy p rovides an alternate source of energy which is readily available . The operation of nuclear p ower tation has a very small impact on the environment. In fact, hundreds of acres adjoining urry Power Station are a state waterfowl refuge, and Lake Anna, next to North Anna Power Statio n, is a well-known fishing ite with a tate park on its bore.

In order to mo re fully understand t.l'li unique energy source, background information about basic radiation characteri tic , ri k as essment, reactor operation , effluent control, environmental monitoring, and radioactive waste is provided in tl'lis section .

Fundanrentals IbeAtom Eve1ything we encounter is made of atoms. Atoms are the malle t parts of an element that till have all the chemical properties of tl1at element. At tl1e center of an atom is a nucleu s. The nucleu con ists 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 p ositive charge, while the ne utron ha no charge, it is electrically neutral. Figure 1 presents a simple diagram of an atom .

..-----:.__ Protons ~

Positive Charge Nucleus Neutrons Neutral Charge

• KC565 Isotopes Figure 1. Atomic Structure Th numb r of proton in tl1 atom of any pecific element is al . a the , arne. For xampl ,

I aJ\h drogen atoms hav on proton wh r asaUoxyg n atoms hav eight proton.. UnJik proton. ,

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 I

Symbols I

Number of Protons Number of Neutrons Uranium-235 23,u 92 143 Uranium-236 I 236u 92 144 Uranium-237 237U I 92 145

' 238u Uranium-238 I 92 146 Uranium-239 I

239U 92 147 Uranium-240 I 240u 92 148 I

Table 1. Uranium Isotopes RadiationandRadioactwiry Rad'ionuclides

• ormally, 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 .

.Rad'ioactive 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

Afte r 5 years, 50% o f its radioactivity is gone , and afte r 10 years, 75% has decayed away. Radioactive ha lf-lives vary fro m millio nths o f a second to millio ns o f yea rs.

l~tclioacti,*e ato ms may d ecay directly to a stable state o r may undergo a series o f decay stages.

During the decay p rocess, several da ughte r produ cts may be fom1ed which eventually transfonn into stable ato ms . atu ra ll y occun-ing radium-226, fo r example, has 10 successive daug hte r p rod ucts (including ra do n ) resulting finall y w ith lead-206 as a stable fo m1.

Types Of Radiation Two typ es of ra diatio n a re cons id-e r cl in the nu clear industry, p artic ulate and e lectromagne tic. Pa rtic ulate radia-tio n m ay co m e fro m the nucle us o f an ato m in the form o f an ejecte d alpha p a1ticle. As sh own in Fig ure 2, alpha p articles con sists o f two p roto ns to-gethe r w ith two ne utro n . 2 Protrons

} 2 Neutrons Al pha p a rticles h ave a very limite d KC566 ability to p en e tra te m att r. A piece of p ap er w ill sto p all alpha radia tio n fro m Figure 2. Alpha Particle sources outside the b ody are n o t con -

• s ide re d to be a radia tio n h a zard .

Figure 3 hows h ow the be ta par-ticle is like an e lectro n tha t has been e jecte d fro m the nu cleus of an ato m .

kin o r a thin p iece of a luminum w ill sto p beta radiatio n. Exp os ure to beta ra diatio n can be a ha za rd to the sk in o r le ns o f the eye . Because o f the ir limite d ab ility to p e n etra te the bo d y, beta and a lpha radiatio n a re a hea lth concern KC567 prima ril y if swallowed o r inha led where they m ight ca u e inte rna l rad ia- Figure 3. Beta Particle tio n exposure .

Gamma rays are li ke X-rays. except that they co me from the nucleus of ~tn atom \\'hil e X-rays com<.: from th<.: d c-tron rings ( Figure 1) .

Ganuna rays cin pl'nctrate deep in to the body and thus gi,*e a ** \\'ho! -body" radiation dose . Several in ches of con-crete or lead wil l s top both ganm1a and X-rays . Figure 5 shm\'s the approximate KCS68 penetrating ability of \'arious types of Figure 4. Gamma Ray rad iation .

14

o. = Alpha

~ = Beta y= Gamma Radioactive Material Paper Alum inum 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 Figure 5. The Penetrating Ability of Various Types of Radiation Quantities And Units Of Radioactive Measurement Several quantities and units are used to de cribe 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 thou andth of a rem (Figure 6). Federal standards limit exposme for an individual member of the public to 500 millirem annually. This annual limit does not include the average 300 millirem received from natural sou rces and approximately 60 milli..rem from medical applications.

1 millimeter 1 millirem 11 111111111111111111p11111111p111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 Metric ru ler not shown to scale Just as 1000 milimeters *---------------------

equals 1 meter ---------------------*

1000 millirem equals 1 rem KC561A Figure 6. Unit Comparison 15

Activity is the n umber of nuclei in

• a sample char disintegrate (decay) ev-a e1y second. Each time nucleus disin-tegrates , radiation is emitted as de-picted in Figu re 7. The unit of activity is the Curie. A Curie ( Ci) is the amou nt

~-~ --

~

of radioactive material which decays ..- --

at a rate of 37 billion atoms per sec- ,,.. --

ond. Smaller units of the Curie are ,,.. --

,,.. -- ~ 1coc;e often used. Two conm1on units are the ,, --

microCurie (uCi), one millionth of a c.-"°"'

Curie, and the picoCurie (pCi), one LiJ trillionth of a Curie. A Curie is a 10 Tons of Thorium -232 1 Gram of Radium-226 (rad iation source) (radiation source) m easurement of radioactivity, not a One gram of radium-226 and 1O tons of thorium-232 quantity of material. The amount of are both approximately 1 Curie. KC569 material nece sary to mak e one Curie varies. For example, one gram of ra- Figure 7. The Curie, a Measurement of Activity dium-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

• The average annua l dose equivalent to persons in the United States from background and man-made sources is shown in Figure 8.

Background Radiation Radiation is not a new creation of the nuclear power industry; it is a natural occurrence on the earth. Ma nkind 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. Ali of the e common sources of radiation contribute to the natu ral background radia tion that we are expo ed to each day .

The earth is constantly sho\ ered by a steady stream of high energy gamma rays . These rays come from space and are knm n as cosmic radiation. Our atmosphere hields out most of this radiation , but everyone still receive

• about 20 to 50 millirem each year from this source. At high altirudes. the air is thinner and pro\'id es less protection from cosmic radiation . Beca use of this.

reople li\'ing at higher altitudes or e\*en flying in an airplane are exposed to more radiation.

lbdioacti\*e atoms commonly found in the atmosphere as ;1 result of cosmic ray interactions include heryllium-7. carhon- l-1. tritium . and sodium-22 .

Other natural sources of radiation include radio nuclides naturally found in so il. ,,*ater. food.

building materials and e,*e n people. People have always been radioactive . in part because t11 c:irbon found in our bodies is a mixture of all Gtrbon isorop , both non-radioactive and radioactive. Approxin1ately C\ o-thirds of the whole bod d > e from natural *ources i contributed by radon gas . Abou t o ne-third of the na tural ly occuring externa l terr stria! a nd inte rna l w ho le hody radiation do. e is anrihutahle ro a naturn ll radioactive isor pe of potassium , potassium - ,

16

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 to bacco. Small doses are received from consumer products such as television, smoke ala1ms, and fettilizers. 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%)

J"""--- Occupational (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 55.6%

Radon and Radon Daughters 200.00 Cosmic Rays 27.00 Cosmo~enic 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. MO 20814 KC563 Figure 8. Average Annual Dose Equivalent To Persons In The U.S. From Various Radiation Sources 17 I_

Effects Of Radiation

• Studies 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 of low 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 Risks 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 som people feel that their demands for energy should be met on an e,sse ntially risk-fr e basis. Attention is focus don safeguarding the public, de ve loping a reali tic asse sment of the risks and placing them in perspective.

Because you Gu111ot see feel, taste, hear, or smell radiation, it is often a source of concern.

We have the same lack of senso1y perception for things such as radio waves, carbon monoxide,

,md small concentrations of numerous cancer causing substances. Although these risks are just as real as the risk_ a sociated with radiation , they have not generated the same degree of concern as radiation.

Most risks are " ith us throughout our li es, and their effect 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 wherea 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

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 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 g Measurements. 30 Dec 1987, Bethesda, MD 20814 KC562 Figure 9. Estimated Average Days Of Life Expectancy Lost Due To Various Health Risks Th Ameri a n Can cer Society e ti.mates that about 30 percent of all Americans will elev lop ca ncer at some time in the ir lives from all possibl ca use. . o. in a group o f 10.000 people it is exr cctecl th:H 3.000 o f the m " *ill cle,*elor c 111cer. If each pe rson " *ere to recei,*e a racli:ttio n exposure o f o ne re m in ~tdd itio n to n~llur:t! h:tckground ra diatio n. the n it is ex pected th:tt tlrn. 'L' more may de,*elop c tncL*r d uring their life time. Thi:-- iJKre:tses the risk fro m 50 pe rcent to 50.03 1x *rcL'nl. He nce. the risks o f radiation exposure are small \\"hen co mp:trec.l ro the risks of e,*e rycb y life .

Th e compa1ison s sho uld give o u some idea f the ri-k i.Iw Iv din activities tha t o u are familiar with. Th y gi, e a ba i. for judging ,vl1.:u moking. eating, r dri ing a car could mean to o ur h alth and . at ty. Ev ry ne know. that l~ is full of ri:k: . If ou have the basis fo r judgme nt. yo u ca n decide what to do or what not to clo .

19

Nuclear Reactor operation Electricity in the United tares is being produced using fossil fuel, uranium, or falling water.

A fo sil-fueled power station burns coal, oil or natural gas in a boiler to produce energy. Nuclear power statio n use uranium fuel and the heat produced from the fission process to make energy.

In both cases, they heat and boil water to p roduce steam. The steam is used to drive a turbine which turns a generato r and produces electricity.

Nuclear Fuel ranium ( ) i the basic ingredient in nuclear fuel, consi ting of U-235 and U-238 atoms.

atural uranium contains less than o ne percent U-235 when it is mined . Commercial nuclear power plant use fuel with a U-235 content of approximately three percent. The process used to increa e the U-235 concentration is known as enrichment.

Reactor operation After enri hment the uranium fuel is chemically changed to uranium dioxide, a dry black powder. This powder i compressed into mall ceramic pellets. Ead1 fuel pellet is abo ut 3/ 4 ind1es long and 3/ 8 ind1e 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 u ed to fill each rod. A total of 204 fuel rod make a ingle fuel assembly. Virginia Power nuclear reactors contains 157 fuel

• assemblie (Figure 10).

Reactor Vessel Fuel Rod Control Rods Water Level Coolant Outlet Nozzle Coolant Inlet Nozzle Fuel Rod Assembly Fuel Pellet Fuel Rod Assemblies Thermal Shield Core Support MT424 Figure 1O. Reactor Vessel With Fuel Assemblies, Rods, and Fuel Pellets 20

Fissw11.

uclear energy is produced by a process called fiss ion. Fi sion occurs in a reactor when uranium i split into fragments producing heat and releas-ing neutrons. The e n utrons trike other uranium atoms, causing them to plit (fission and rel a e more heat and neutrons. This i called a d1ain reaction (Figure 11 and i controlled by the use of reactor control rods.

e Heavy Atom o Free Neutron

• Fission Fragment w, Heat Control rods are an essential part Figure 11. Fission: A Chain Reaction of the nuclear reactor. Control rods contain cadmium, indium and il er metals which absorb and control the amount of neutrons produced in the reactor. The control rods act to slo down or stop the diain reaction. A chain reaction cannot cur when the control rod are in erted complete! into the core. When the control rods are withdrawn, the diain reaction begins and heat i gen rated .

Design & operatw,i

• urry Po er tat.ion and North Anna Po er ration use a Pre urized Water Reactor (PWR) tern to generate electricity. There are two complete and independent PWR y terns on-site at both urry and North Anna Power tat.ions. These are referred to as nit-1 and Unit-2.

The reactor cor i in idea large tee! container called the Reactor Pre sure e e l. The reactor core i al a) urrounded b v. ater. The fi ioning of the uranium fuel make the fuel rods get hot. The hot fuel r d h at the water, which erve a a coolant that came away heat.

In a pressurized water reactor heat is moved from place to place b moving ater the reactor's coolant. The water flow in do ed loops. A (primary

• ater mo e through the core it gets very hot (605°F) but because it is under u h high pres ure, 2235 pound per square inch (p i) it doe n 't boil. The hot water then flow to the team gen rator. The team generator is a heat exchanger. Reactor coolant pa e through it but doe n't mix with the team generator e ondary) ater. In tead heat from the primary water i transferr d through thousands of tube to the cooler , e onda1 \\*at r. The water in th t am g nerator i uncl r much I s pre sur , and the heat boils the secondary \Yater to steam . At Virgtnia Electti and Po\\'er stations. each unit has 3 steam generators.

The steam is pip d to a ste,un rurbm that rums an electric generator. The exhausted steam from th turbine is o I d and converted back to water in a conden

• r. Th conden er is also a h at changer: in it h at pa fr m the *t am to a third loop ohvat r. In urry* case the Jame River p id th third 1 p ~vat r. t orth Anna Power tati n third I p ~ ater is from Lak Anna . 111e team rum a k to liquid and i pump d ba k to the earn g n rat r. Figur 12 L a diagram of typi a.I nuclear r act r *t ms.

21

- High Pressure Safety Injection System (Emergency Core Cooling)

- Low Pressure Safety Injection System (Emergency Core Cooling)

- Containment Spray System

- Main Steam System Reactor Containment Bu ilding - Reactor Cooling System (Primary Cooling System)

- Condenser Cooling System

- Main Feedwater System

- Auxiliary Feed Water System Venblation Release Stack Turbine Building

! " Radiation Monitor Pressunz Electrical Power Auxiliary Building Relief Tan To Transmission System Charcoal Filter Relue[mg Waler Storage Containment Tank Spray Pump Boron Injection Tank

• Contaumumt Containment Sump Figure 12. PWR System Diagram KC560 u lear power plant are designed to prev nt the e cape of larg quantiti s of radiation and radioactive ubstance . Two principle are u ed . First, thick hea \A.all ar u ed as hielding to ab orb radiation and prevent it e cape. econd trong. airtight ",all called ontairunent are u to prevent the e ape of radioactive material .

TI1 reactor pre ur e sel and the contairun nt building that hou e it are normously trong Figur 13). trong nough. in fact. to ,vith tand a direct hit from a j t airlin r. The reactor ore li s \,ithin a sealed pressur ve, sel. Like all bo ilers its \\'a.IL must he \*e ry , trong I 'a u e the -~ ater i.nsicle must he ke i,t undl'r hig h i,ressure . The re:,ctor pressun:: \'essel in a nuclear pO\\*er rlant is e\*en hea,*it:r th:,n :m ordinary ste:1m ho iler h1.:cause of the need to mi.ni.mi ze the c hance of ruptun. * :tnd releas1...* of :my r.,dioactin* mate ri:tl..... The reactor pressure \'1...'ssel is made from a st:1inless stee l alloy ( to 8 inc hes thic k.

Ar und the rea 'tor pr ssur ves. I i a thick c n r l :vall.. This wall *tcL a shielding p tc :1ing w rkers b ' ab o rbing radiati n r ulting from t1 nu 1 r hain r action . ext an irtight 1/2 in h t I Jin r . urr und th nt int ri r of th ontainment. If th v . 1 o r an of th prima1 piping : l oukl hr *1k. th e. aping steam would I th Jin r.

22

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

• - -- - - -- - 126 Feet - - -- - --

Figure 13. Containment Schematic Finally, the building's re inforced concrete outer wall i 4 1/ 2 feet thick tap ring to 2 1/ 2 feet at the top f the dome. It is designed to act as h.ielding and is al o intended to with tand natural and man-made events like earthquakes and even the direct impact from a large commercial j t aircraft.

operating the Reactor Safely Accidents The most serious :1ccident rhar cou ld h:tppl.:'n in :1 nuclear po ,Ycr pbnt inn>h*es m *e rheati.ng in the nucl ':t r reactor core . Such an accident \\'ould result fro m a loss-of-coolant accident or LO A.

During a LOCA, primary coolant \\'Ould no longe r ci.rculat through the reacto r -ore to remov'

• heat. irculation could h lost if a combin*ttion of pip s hur, t, fo r x~1mple . Cone ivabl y, a dry, overheate I r acto r core could melt th.rough th pr ssure ves. e l.

23

I 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 are inserted in the core and chemicals are injected into the coolant to stop the nuclear reaction. 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 ate 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 Regulatory Commission (NRC).

Safety Statistics Job safety is another measure of assurance that the station is being properly operated. Surry Power Station attained 6,000,000 man hours without a lost time accident and is continuing that record into 1996. North Anna has attained over 4,000,000 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. Sampling Program

1. Table 1 summarizes the sampling program for Surry Power Station during 1995.

The Radiological Monitoring Locations, Figure 14, denote the air sample and TLD stations for VEPCO and the State of Virginia. Sample locations are color coded to designate sample types shown in the Surry Emergency Plan maps.

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 Brown Engineering located in Westwood, New Jersey.

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

B. Analysis Program

1. Table 2 summarizes the analysis program conducted by Teledyne Brown Engineering for Surry Power Station during 1995.

25

e TABLE 1 (Page 1 of 3)

SURRY - 1995 .,

RADIOLOGICAL SAMPLING STATION DISTANCE AND DIRECTION FROM UNIT NO. l Distance Collection 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 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 90° 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 East (17) 0.57 E 90° Quarterly Site Boundary N

O'I Station Intake (18) 1.23 ESE 113° Quarterly Site Boundary Hog Island Reserve (19) 1.94 NNE 26° 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 7: Quarterly Apx. 5 mile Williamsburg (30) 7.8 N (J' 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

e TABLE 1 (Page 2 of 3)

SURRY - 1995 ~

RADIOLOGICAL SAMPLING STATION DISTANCE AND DIRECTION FROM UNIT NO. I Distance Collection Sample Media Location Station Miles Direction Degrees Frequency Remarks Environmental Water Plant (33) 4.8 NE 41° Quarterly Apx. 5 mile TLD's(Cont.) Dow (34) 5.1 ENE 7Cf Quarterly Apx. 5 mile Lee Hall (35) 7.1 ENE 73° Quarterly Population Center co-location Goose Island (36) 5.0 E 88° Quarterly Apx. 5 mile Fort Eustis (37) 4.8 ESE 107° Quarterly Apx. 5 mile 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. 5 mile co-location Air Charcoal Surry Station (SS) .37 NNE 15° Weekly Site boundary location with and Particulate HighestD/Q Hog Island Reserve (HIR) 2.0 NNE 26° Weekly Co-location N Bacons Castle (BC) 4.5 SSW 202° Weekly

-...J Alliance (ALL) 5.1 WSW 248° Weekly Co-location Colonial Parkway (CP) 3.7 NNW 330° Weekly Dow Chemical (DOW) 5.1 ENE 7Cf 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 Surry Station Discharge 0.17 NW 325° Monthly Scotland Wharf 5.0 WNW 285° Monthly Well Water Surry Station Quarterly Onsite*

Hog Island Reserve 2.0 NNE 270 Quarterly Shoreline Hog Island Reserve 0.8 N 5' Semi-Annually Sediment

e TABLE I (Page 3 of 3)

SURRY - 1995 RADI0LOG1CAL SAMPUNG STATION DISTANCE AND DIRECTION FROM UNIT NO. I Distance Collection Sample Media Location Miles Direction Degrees Frequency Remarks Silt Chickahominy River 11.2 WNW 300° Semi-Annually Control Location Surry Station Intake 1.9 ESE 770 Semi-Annually Hog Island Point 2.4 NE 52° Semi-Annually Point of Shoals 6.4 SSE 157° Semi-Annually Surry Station Discharge 0.5 NNW 341° Semi-Annually Milk Epps 4.8 SSW 201° Monthly State Split Colonial Parkway 3.7 NNW 337° Monthly Judkins 6.2 SSW 211° Monthly Williams 22.5 s 182° Monthly Control Location Oysters Point of Shoals 6.4 SSE 157° Bi-Monthly Newport News 12.0 SE 140° Bi-Monthly Kingsmill 2.9 NE 43° Bi-Monthly Mulberry Point 4.9 EESE 125° Bi-Monthly N

OJ Clams Chickahominy River 11.2 WNW 300° Bi-Monthly Control Location Surry Station Discharge 1.3 NNW 341° Bi-Monthly State Split Hog Island Point 2.4 NE 52° Bi-Monthly Lawnes Creek 2.4 SE 131° Bi-Monthly Fish Surry Station Discharge 0.6 NW 312° Semi-Annually Crops Brock's Farm 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 3.2 s 185° Annually State Split

N

\D ESE

/

SW Legend

• Air Sampling Stations

• TLD Sampling State Env1ronmental Morn torrng Sites State TLD Sites s,te Boundary

..'.+.* 4%/*

Figure . ~~* . ...f!YJ8adiological

(/)

< Mob1i *:* ralocations

"'t;, . .. ~* *. :-:~* .  :*tl:.:....

)>

Surry Emergency Plan Map e Air Sampling Stations e Nearest Residents e TLD Sampling e Nearest Farm Animals e Nearest Garden e 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 perm1ss1on of ADC w

0 CB3308

e 28

,.:}

. ' I

?

11 I I I

~ SHMEREi

• i

/ '  !\ *( I I

.\

\

(IO)

• • -"\*

\

T S@ f, . Original 1991 by ADC of Alexandria . Inc .. 6440 General Green Way, Alexandria , VA 22312. USED WI TH PER MISSION . No other reproduction may be made without the written permission of ADC C83309

'F w

w N

\614)

' , *" I CB3310

Surry Emergency Plan Map e Air Samp ling Stations e Nearest Residents e TLD Sampling e Nearest Farm Animals e Nearest Garden Aquatic Samples Ong,nal ,., 1991 by AOC of Alexandria Inc . 6440 General Green Way, Ale xandria , VA 22312 USED WITH PERMISSION . No other reproduction may be made without the w11tten perm,ss,on of ADC .

r WNW~~

w w

w~s)

.- G'ro ~*s

/

CB3307A

TABLE 2 e, SURRY POWER STATION SAMPLE ANALYSIS PROGRAM SAMPLE MEDIA FREQUENCY ANALYSIS LLD* REPORT UNITS Thermoluminescent Quarterly Gamma Dose 2.0 mR/std.month Dosimetry (TLD)

Air Iodine Weekly I-131 0.07 pCi/m3 Air Particulate Weekly Gross Beta 0.01 pCi/m3 Quarterly (a) Gamma Isotopic pCi/m3 Cs-134 0.05

. Cs-137 0.06 River Water Quarterly Tritium (H-3) 2000 pCi/1 composite of monthly sample Monthly and 1-131 10 pCi/1 Bi-monthly Gamma Isotopic Mn-54 15 Fe-59 30 Co-58 15 Co-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 (H-3) 2000 pCi/1 1-131 1 Gamma Isotopic Mn-54 15 Fe-59 30 Co-58 15 Co-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.

34

TABLE 2 (Cont.)

SURRY POWER STATION SAMPLE ANALYSIS PROGRAM SAMPLE MEDIA FREQUENCY ANALYSIS LLD* 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 Semi-Annual Gamma Isotopic pCi/kg-wet Mn-54 130 Fe-59 260 Co-58 130 Co-60 130 Zn-65 260 Cs-134 130 Cs-137 150 Clams Semi-Annual Gamma Isotopic pCi/kg-wet Mn-54 130 Fe-59 260 Co-58 130 Co-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-58 130 Co-60 130 Zn-65 260 Cs-134 130 Cs-137 150 Footnotes located at end of table.

35

TABLE 2 (Cont.)

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

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

LLDs indicate those levels that the environmental samples should be analyzed to, in accordance with the Surry Radiological Environmental Program. Actual analysis of the samples by Teledyne Brown e (a)

Engineering may be lower than those listed.

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

36

Appendix B REMP Exceptions For Scheduled Sampling And Analysis During 1995 - Surry Location Description Date of Sampling Reasons(s) for Loss/Exception 04 Direct RadiationffLD First Quarter TLD missing II 18 Second Quarter TLDmissing 25 II Second Quarter TLD missing 35 " Second Quarter TLD missing 26 II Second Quarter TLDmissing e

37

V. Summary and Discussion - 1995 Analytical Results Data from the radiological analyses of environmental media collected during 1995 are tabulated and discussed below. The procedures and specifications followed in the laboratory for these analyses are as required in the Teledyne Brown Engineering Quality Assurance Manual and are explained in the Teledyne Brown Engineering Analytical Procedures. A synopsis of analytical procedures used for the environmental samples is provided in Appendix D. In addition to internal quality control measures performed by Teledyne, the laboratory also participates in the Environmental Protection Agency's lnterlaboratory Comparison Program. Participation in this program ensures that independent checks on the precision and accuracy of the measurements of radioactive material in environmental samples are performed. The results of the EPA Interlaboratory Comparison are provided in Appendix E.

Radiological analyses of environmental media characteristically approach and frequently fall below the detection limits of state-of-the-art measurement methods. The "less than" values in the data tables were calculated for each specific analysis and are dependent on sample size, detector efficiency, length of counting time, chemical yield, when appropriate, and the radioactive decay factor from time of counting to time of collection. Teledyne Brown Engineering's analytical methods meet the Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) requirements given in Table 2 of the USNRC Branch Technical Position of Radiological Monitoring Exceptable Program (November 1979, Revision 1) and the ODCM.

The following is a discussion and summary of the results of the environmental measurements taken during the 1995 reporting period.

A.. 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.

38

TRE-NOJNG GRAPH - 1: GROSS. BET A tN AIR PARTICULATES 1.0E+O~

f (a) t .OE-1 0

8.

~ "1 .0E-2 3

1 i

1.0E-3+-----.----.---....---,-----,----,---..-----.----,----,-----,,-----..

1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993. 1994 1995 (a) Chernobyl

• Indicator

• Control - - +- Avg-Pre Op - -A - Required LLD's TRENDING GRAPH - 2: TRITIUM IN RI VER WATER 100000-r----------------------------------,

....c:-

(/J 0

8_

<U 10000

• le-1000

-a5 6

a..

68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 Surry Discharge

• Scotland Wharf - - + - Avg-Pre Op - -A: - Required LLO's 39

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.

Quarterly averages are consistent with background radioactivity levels. The gross beta concentrations observed indicate a steady trend compared to levels found during the previous eight 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 in 1986, airborne gross beta results have trended at stable levels.

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-7 and potassium-40. Beryllium-7 is continuously produced in the upper atmosphere by cosmic radiation. Potassium-40 is naturally present in foods , building materials and soil.

B. 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. 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 three of the twenty-four samples with an average concentration of 89.8 pCi/liter.

40

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 1 of the 8 quarterly composite samples with a concentration of 230 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 collects water samples from the station discharge and a control site located upstream of the power station at 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 tritium concentration of 653 pCi/liter. There were no measurements of tritium at the control location. Scotland Wharf is taken as a weekly grab sample. Station discharge is sampled by a composite sampler and collected weekly. Monthly composite samples are prepared for gamma and iodine-131 analysis and quarterly composites are prepared for tritium analysis.

Trending graph #2 provides 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 two 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 or naturally occurring isotopes. 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 samples. Preoperational samples were not analyzed for tritium.

41

TRENDf-NG GRAPH - 3.: TRITlUM IN WELL WATER 1000 I

....~

J U) 100 0

8_

<ll

-"""a5 10 R

1186 7 /86 1187 7187 1188 7188 1/89 7189 1 /90 7 !90 1 /91 7191 1 /92 7192 1193 719.3 1194 7 /9.4 1195 719.5

- Station-BC _._ Station-H!R Station-JMTN --+- Statio.n-SS - +- Required LLO's Station BC and JMTN has been e!irrilnated due to program change 12/1 t94 .

e TRENDING GRAPH -4: COBALT-SB IN SEDIMENT SILT

~.

I \

I \

I \

0 i \

/ I 4 8.

~

\

/\

72 74 76 78 BO 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 e _.,_ Hog Island ~ Stanonlntake. Station Discharge During the preoperationa! period, cabalt-58 was not detected in the samples analyzed.

42

C. 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 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 five locations both upstream and downstream 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 the concentrations of man made and naturally occurring gamma emitters be tracked and trended. Preoperational analyses indicates that there were no man made radioisotopes present in this pathway.

Cobalt-60 and cesium-137 average levels indicate a decrease in concentration when compared to last year and the previous 8 year trend.

The concentration of man made 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 an~ recreational uses. A sample was taken in February and August at Hog Island Point. 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 43

TRENDING GRAPH - 5: COBALT-60 IN SILT 10000

,,~

J (I) 1000 .

i I\

I

</'\,.

0 7

8.

(1) 100 ***

~

~

O>

~

G 0.

10 1 -+----r--.---.----,--,----,--.-----.--..-.....---.--.....-.....--...--,---,----,.--,----,-----,,-------.----1 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94

_._ Hog 1.sl.and _._ Station Intake Station Discharge During the preoperational period, cobalt-60 was not detected in the s.rnples analyzed.

TRENDING GRAPH -6: CESIUM-134 IN SILT 100

~

1I 1000~

~

w

}

1

~

0 10 8.

Q) 100~

> ~

~

~

~ -l

-~

0 0) 10J

0. =f

~

• I 1 I 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 D-..Jring the preoperational period, cesium-134 was not detected in the samples analyzed.

--- Hog Isl.and __,.._ Station Intake

• Station Discharge 44

TRENDfNG GRAPH - 7: CESIUM-137 IN SILT 10000 j e

j

~ 2:- I

' I -------+

~1000~

> 1

~ j u .I

-;;; j

~ j l G- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [}

1 I

72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94

-II- HQ9 Island _._ Station Intake aio,, Station Discharge - +* Avg-Pre Op -B Required LLD's e TRENDlNG GRAPH - 8: COBALT-58 IN CLAMS 0

8..

~

0)

~

10 *:.

0 0..

1 -+--.----,---~--r--r--r----,---r---r--r--r----r-~--r--,--,---,---,----,--,--r--1 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 During the preoperational period, cobalt-58 was not detected in the samples analyzed.

- Control-Chickahominy _._ Surry Discharge

• Hog Island -+ Required LLO's 45

the detection of gamma emitting radioisotopes. This years analysis along with last years results indicates that no radioisotopes attributable to the operation of the power station have been detected.

Two naturally occurring radioisotopes were measured in both samples. Potassium-40, and thorium-228 show a steady trend over the recent past.

D. 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.

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

Preoperational data shows that cesium-137 was detected in this pathway. This may be attributable to weapons fallout. Cesium-137 was not detected during 1995.

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 is slightly lower than the previous year. It should be noted that 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.

46

'fRENDtNG GRAPH -9; COBALT-60 IN CLAMS

~ 100 (J)

I 8

a}

10

1. -+--.----,--...----,---,----,--.---,....--.--,----.---,----,---,----,--.--.---.--...----,---,-----;

74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94

- Control-Chickahominy _._ Surry Discharge Hog Island -+ Re.quired LLD's Outing the preoperational period , cobalt-60 was not detected in the. samples analyzed .

TRENDING GRAPH -10: CESIUM-137 IN CLAMS 1000 3

f 1

1001 1 ~ - - R-~ * ~ - - --------£]

j 8

a}

> ,J *--------------------=---=.. . . . .-..~ ..

3 j

i 1

1 -t---,.----,--.---,--..---,--..---,--.----,---,.---.---,,---.---,---,---,,--......---,,---.--.---1.

74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94

-a- Control-Chickahominy - iir;c Hog Island -8 Re.quired LLO's

--- Surry Discharge. -+ Avg Pre. Op 47

Clams were analyzed from four different locations. The results of the analyses are presented in Table B-10. As expected, naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in all of the 13 samples. Potassium-40 is a naturally occurring radioisotope and is not a component of station effluent.

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 four different locations. The results of the analyses are presented in Table B-11. As expected, naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in all of the seven samples. The current average level of potassium-40 is comparable to the preoperational average. There were no gamma emitting radioisotopes 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 this analysis is 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 effluent. No other gamma emitting radioisotopes were detected in this sample. This is consistent with preoperational data and data collected during the past several 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-l 3. As expected naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in all samples. No other gamma emitting radioisotopes were detected in these samples. This is consistent with data collected during the past several years.

Food Products and Vegetation Food products and vegetation samples were collected from five 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 than the previous five year average. Potassium-40 is a naturally occurring radioisotope and is not a component of station effluent. Naturally occurring beryllium-7 was detected in one of 48

the six samples. The concentration of radioactivity found in the samples this year is comparable to last year and may be attributable to world wide fallout.

E. 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; additional TLDs serve as controls. 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.

49

TRENDING GRAPH -11: OfRECT RAOfATfON MEASREMENTS TLO RESULTS t:

l

([)

0

(.)

a.

<ll

.J;

~

a 10 "E

Cl!

'O re (Q

a:

E 1980 1993 1994 1983 198-4 1985 1986 198? 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

......... Site Boundary -e- 5Mile 50

VI. CONCLUSIONS The results of the 1995 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 in Appendix A.

Airborne Exposure Pathway Air particulate gross beta concentrations of all the indicator locations for 1995 trend well with the control location. The gross beta concentrations indicate a steady trend when compared to the levels found during the previous years. Gamma isotopic analysis of the 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 one of the eight samples with an average concentration of 230 pCi/liter. 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 no significant 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 51

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.

Iodine-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-13 7 was not detected in any samples. The concentration of strontium-90 in this years analysis, 2.03 pCi/liter, measured slightly lower than the previous year. Strontium-90 is not a part of station effluent, but rather a product of weapons fallout.

Aquatic Biota Clams and Oysters As expected, naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in all of the clam and oyster samples. A review of the previous 6 years indicates the potassium in clams and oysters is at average environmental levels. There were no other gamma emitting radioisotopes 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 1995. There were no radioisotopes attributable to the operation of the power station found in any sample.

52

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

Beryllium-7 was detected in one of the six samples collected and analyzed.

Cesium-137 was not observed in food samples during 1995. This radioisotope may be attributable to world wide fallout. The concentration of radioactivity found in samples this year is comparable to last year.

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

The direct radiation exposure that may be attributed to the station operation is 0.4 mR/standard month (0.012 mR/day). This exposure is not considered significant when compared to the United States average background radiation levels of 360 mRem/year (0.98 mRem/day).

53

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.

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

54 L

APPENDIX A RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

TABLES - 1995

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM

SUMMARY

Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 Docket No. 5-280-281 Page 1 of 4 All Indicator Control Non-Medium or Analysis Locations Location with HiRhest Mean Location routine Pathway Total LLD* Aepomd Sampled Type No. Mean Name llsmnce Mean Mean 11/&lsue-(Unit) RanRe Directial RanRe RanRe rnents Air Iodine 1-131 424 007 -0/371) NIA -(0/53) 0 pCi/m3}

Air Iodine Gross 424 10 17.7(371/371). BC 4.5mi 19. 7(53/53) 17.6(53/53) o*

Particulate (4.1-57) SSW (6.8-57) . (7.4-31)

(1e-03 pCi/m3)

Gamma 32 Be-7 32 - 133(28/28) BC 4.5 mi 145(4/4). 133(4/4) 0 (84.6-176) SSW (124-157) (106-151)

K-40 32 130 8.08(8/28) HIR 2.0 mi 29.5(1/4) 58.9(1/4) 0 (2.80-29.5) NNE River Gamma 24 Water (a)

(pCi/liter) K-40 24 - 134(1/12} SD 12.0 mi 134(1/12) 67.8(2/12) 0 NW (62:8-72.7}

H-3 8. 230(1/4) SD 12.0 mi 230(1/4) -(0/4) 0 NW River Gamma 24 Water (b)

(pCi/liter) K-40 24 - 79.1 (3/12) SD 0.17mi 79.1 (3/12) 53.4(2/12) 0 State Split (72.5-90.9) NW . (72.5-90.9) (43.6-63.2)

H-3 8 - 653(4/4) SD 0.17mi 653(4/4) -(0.4) 0 (340-950) NW (340-950)

. Well Gamma 8

• Water (pCi/liter)

K-40 8 -(0/8) NIA -(0/0) 0 H-3 8 -(0/8) N/A -(0/0) 0

• 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.

(a) Analyses for monthly and bi-monthly samples are listed in Table B-4.

(b) Monthly State Split analyses presented in Table B-5.

55

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM

SUMMARY

Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 Docket No. 5-280-281 Page 2 of 4 All Indicator Control Non-Medium or Analvsis Locations Location with Highest Mean Location routine Pathway Total LLD* Fepored Sampled Type No. Mean Name Distance Mean Mean M!asll'e-(Unit) Ranae llrection Range Ranae . menls Silt Gamma 10 (pCi/kg dry)

Be-7 10 752(5/8) POS 6.4 mi SSE 889(2/2) -(0/2) 0 (450-1200) (577-1200)

K-40 10 14200(8/8) POS 6.4 mi SSE 16450(2/2) 16400(2/2) 0 (10800-17000) (15400-17500) (15300-17500)

Co-60 10 103(6/8) HIP 2.4 mi NE 111(1/2) -(0/2) 0 (81.6-117)

Cs-134 10 -(0/8) -(0/2) 0 Cs-137 10 347(8/8) SD 0.17mi 451 (2/2) 386(2/2) 0 (222-483) tffl (418-483) (378-393)

Ra-226 10 1883(7/8) SD 0.17mi 2820(1/2) 2560(2/2) 0 (1310-2820) tffl (2490-2630)

Th-228 10 1062(8/8) CHIC 11.2 mi 1265(2/2) 1265(2/2) 0 (735-1210) WNW (1180-1350) (1180-1350)

Shoreline Gamma 2 Sediment (pCi/kg dry)

Be-7 2 -(0/2) -(0/0) 0 K-40 2 6110(2/2) HIR 0.8mi N 6110(2/2) -(0/0) 0 (5840-6380} (5840-6380)

Ra-226 2 -(2/2) -(0/0) 0 Th-228 2 52.4(1/2) HIR 0.8mi N 52.4(1/2) -(0/0) 0

-

• 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.

56

~

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM

SUMMARY

Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 Docket No. 5-280-281 Page 3 of 4 All Indicator Control fol-Medium or Analysis Locations Location with Highest Mean Location routine Pathway Total LLD* Repored Sampled Type No. Mean Name Distlnce Mean Mean Meas1.1e-(Unit) Range Directial Range Range menls Milk Gamma 48 (pCi/liter)

K-40 48 1334(36/36) Williams 1367(12/12) 1367(12/12) 0 (1130-1870) 22.5 mi S (1250-1560) (1250-1560) 1-131 48 1 -(0/36) N/A (0/12) 0 Sr-89 8 -(0/8) N/A -(0/0) 0 Sr-90 8 2.04(8/8) CP 3.7miNNW

• 2.80(4/4) -(0/0) 0 (0.92-3.1) (2.3-3.1)

Clams Gamma 13 (pCi/kg wet) Spec K-40 477(10/10) HIP 2.4 mi NE 573(2/2) 409(3/3) 0 (191-618) (528-618) (297-512)

Oysters Gamma 7 (pCi/kg wet) Spec K-40 530(7/7) DWSL 643(1/1) -(0/0) 0 (281-809)

Crabs Gamma 1 (pCi/kg wet) Spec K-40 1 2130(1/1) SD 0.6 mi NW 2130(1/1) -(0/0) 0

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

57

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING -PROGRAM

SUMMARY

e Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 Docket No. 5-280-281 Page 4 of 4 All Indicator Control Non-Medium or Analysis Locations Location with Highest Mean Location routine Pathway Total LLD* AeporECI Sampled Type No. Mean Name l:lstance Mean Mean Meast.re-(Unit) Range Directial Range Rane1e menls Fish Gamma 4 (pCi/kg wet) Spec K-40 4 918(4/4) SD 0.6 mi NW 918(4/4) -(0/0) 0 (270-1610) (270-1610)

Direct Gamma 332 2 5.22(316/316) STA-38 16.5 mi 7.01 (8/8) 4.80(16/16) 0 Radiation (3.3-7.6) ESE (6.0-7.6) (3.8-5.4)

TLDs (mR/

std. month)

Vegetation Gamma 6 (pCi/kg wet) Spec Be-7 6 337(1/6) Carter's 337(1/1) -(0/0) 0 Garden K-40 6 5963(6/6) Slade's 13500(1 /1) -(0/0) 0 (3310-13500) Garden

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

58

e APPENDIX B DATA TABLES

TABLE B-1: IODINE-131 CONCENTRATION IN FILTERED AIR e Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 pCiJm3 +/- 2 Sigma Page 1 of2 COLLECTION STATIONS DATE ss HIR BC ALL CP DOW FE NN JANUARY 12/28/94-01 /04/95 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 < .01 < .01 < .01 < .01 01/04/95-01/10/95 <.01 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 01/10/95-01/17/95 <.01 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 01/17/95-01/24/95 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.01 <.01 <.02 < .01 01 /24/95-01 /31 /95 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.01 EEBRUARY 01 /31 /95-02/07/95 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.01 02/07/95-02/14/95 <.01 < .01 < .01 < .02 (a) <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 02/14/95-02/21 /95 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 < .01 <.01 <.01 < .01 02/21 /95-02/28/95 <.01 < .01 <.01 < .01 < .01 < .01 < .01 <.01 MARCH 02/28/95-03/07/95 <.01 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 e 03/07/95-03/14/95 03/14/95-03/21 /95 03/21 /95-03/28/95

<.02

<.01

< .01

<.02

< .01

< .01

<.02

<.01

<.01

<.02

<.02

<.01

< .01

<.008

<.01

<.01

<.008

<.01

< .01

<.008

<.01

< .01

<.008

<.01 APRIL 03/28/95-04/04/95 <.01 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 04/04/95-04/11/95 < .01 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 04/11 /95-04/18/95 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 04/18/95-04/25/95 < .01 < .01 <.01 < .01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 04/25/95-05/02/95 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 MAY 05/02/95-05/10/95 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 05/10/95-05/16/95 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 05/16/95-05/23/95 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 05/23/95-05/30/95 <.01 < .01 <.01 < .01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 JUNE 05/30/95-06/06/95 <.01 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 06/06/95-06/13/95 < .01 < .01 <.01 < .01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 06/13/95-06/20/95 <.009 <.009 <.009 <.009 <.008 <.008 <.008 <.008 06/20/95-06/27/95 < .01 < .01

<.01 < .01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 (a) Blown fuse; low sample volume.

59

TABLE 8-1: IODINE-131 CONCENTRATION IN FILTERED AIR Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 pCiJm3 +/- 2 Sigma Page2 of2 COLLECTION STATIONS DATE ss HIR BC ALL CP DOW FE NN JULY 06/27/95-07/04/95 <.01 < .01 < .01 < .01 <.01 < .01 < .01 <.01 07/04/95-07/11/95 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.009 <.009 <.009 <.009 07/11/95-07/18/95 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.03 <.02 <.02 <.02 07/18/95-07/25/95 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 < .01 <.01 < .01 <.01 07/25/95-08/01 /95 < .01 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 AUGUST 08/01 /95-08/08/95 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 < .01 <.01 < .01 < .01 08/08/95-08/15/95 < .01 < .01 < .01 <.01 < .01 < .01 < .01 < .01 08/15/95-08/22/95 < .01 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 08/22/95-08/29/95 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.01 < .01 <.01 < .01 SEPTEMBER 08/29/95-09/05/95 <.02 < .01 < .01 < .01 < .02 <.02 <.02 <.02 09/05/95-09/12/95 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 < .02 <.02 <.02 <.02

- 09/12/95-09/19/95 09/19/95-09/26/95 09/26/95-10/03/95 OCTOBER

<.02

<.01

<.01

<.02

< .01

< .01

<.02

<.01

<.01

<.03

< .04 (a)

<.01

< .01

<.02

<.01

<.01

<.02

< .01

< .01

<.02

< .01

<.01

<.02

<.01 10/03/95-1 0/10/95 <.02 < .01 <.01 <.01 < .01 <.01 < .01 <.01 10/10/95-10/17/95 . <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 10/17/95-10/24/95 <.02 < .02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 10/24/95-10/31/95 <.01 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 NOVEMBER 10/31 /95-11/07/95 <.009 <.009 <.009 <.009 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.01 11 /07/95-11 /13/95 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.01 <.01 < .01 < .01 11/13/95-11/21/95 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 11/21/95-11/28/95 <.02 < .02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 DECEMBER 11 /28/95-12/06/95 <.01 < .01 <.03 < .01 < .01 < .01 < .01 < .01 12/06/95-12/13/95 < .01 < .01 <.01 < .01 <.01 <.01 < .01 < .01 12/13/95-12/19/95 <.02 < .01 <.02 <.02 < .01 <.02 <.02 <.02 12/19/95-12/26/95 <.01 < .01 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.01 < .01 < .01 12/26/95-01 /02/96 < .01 < .01 <.01 < .01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02

- (a) Low sample volume.

60

TABLE B-2: GROSS BETA CONCENTRATION IN AIR PARTICULATES e Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 1.0 e-03 pCi/m3 +/- 2 Sigma Page 1 of 2 STATIONS COLLECTION ss HIR BC ALL CP DOW FE NN Average DATE +/-2Si ma JANUARY - 1995 12/28-01/04 18+/- 2 19+/- 2 20+/- 2 20+/- 2 19+/- 2 19+/- 2 20+/- 2 18+/- 2 19+/- 2 01/04-01/10 19+/- 2 21 +/- 2 25+/- 2 22+/- 2 22+/- 2 20+/- 2 22+/- 2 23+/- 2 .22+/- 4 01/10-01/17 21 +/- 2 17+/- 2 21 +/- 2 22+/- 2 20+/- 2 17+/- 2 19+/- 2 18+/- 2 19+/- 4 01/17-01/24 8.7+/- 1.5 10+/- 2 12+/- 2 12+/- 2 11 +/- 2 11 +/- 2 7.3+/- 1.8 12+/- 2 11 +/- 4.

01/24-01/31 15+/- 2 17+/- 2 18+/- 2 16+/- 2 15+/- 2 15+/- 2 16+/- 2 14+/- 2 16+/- 3 FEBRUARY 01/31-02/07 19+/- 2 19+/- 2 21 +/- 2 21 +/- 2 20+/- 2 18+/- 2 20+/- 2 19+/- 2 20+/- 2 02/07-02/1 4 19+/- 2 24+/- 2 20+/- 2 36+/- 3 (a) 23+/- 2 13+/- 2 22+/- 2 23+/- 2 23+/-13 02/14-02/21 16+/- 2 17+/- 2 20+/- 2 19+/- 2 17+/- 2 18+/- 2 18+/- 2 16+/- 2 18+/- 3 02/21 -02/28 13+/- 2 15+/- 2 14+/- 2 16+/- 2 15+/- 2 14+/- 2 16+/- 2 16+/- 2 15+/- 2 MARCH 02/28-03/07 13+/- 2 17+/- 2 19+/- 2 18+/- 2 17+/- 2 16+/- 2 18+/- 2 15+/- 2 17+/- 4 03/07-03/14 22+/- 2 22+/- 2 26+/- 2 26+/- 2 22+/- 2 22+/- 2 26+/- 2 21 +/- 2 23+/- 4 03/14-03/21 20+/- 2 20+/- 2 22+/- 2 33+/- 3 21 +/- 2 20+/- 2 20+/- 2 22+/- 2 22+/- 9 03/21-03/28 16+/- 2 14+/- 2 16+/- 2 17+/- 2 17+/- 2 15+/- 2 17+/- 2 15+/- 2 16+/- 2 atr. Avg. 17+/- 8 18+/- 7 20+/- 8 21 +/-14 18+/- 7 17+/- 6 19+/- 9 18+/- 7 19+/- 3

+/-2 s.d.

APRIL 03/28-04/04 18+/- 2 15+/- 2 20+/- 2 15 +/- 2 19+/- 2 18+/- 2 17+/- 2 17+/- 2 17+/- 4 04/04-04/11 20+/- 2 21 +/- 2 25+/- 2 22+/- 2 18+/- 2 21 +/- 2 22+/- 2 20+/- 2 21 +/- 4 04/11-04/18 14+/- 2 13+/- 2 17+/- 2 15+/- 2 16+/- 2 14+/- 2 15+/- 2 15+/- 2 15+/- 2 04/18-04/25 15+/- 2 15+/- 2 19+/- 2 17+/- 2 16+/- 2 15+/- 2 14+/- 2 17+/- 2 16+/- 3 04/25-05/02 15+/- 2 12+/- 2 17+/- 2 15+/- 2 15+/- 2 8.4+/- 1.4 16+/- 2 13+/- 2 14+/- 5 MAY 05/02-05/10 15+/- 2 14+/- 2 17+/- 2 13+/- 2 15+/- 2 15+/- 2 13+/- 2 13+/- 1 14+/- 3 05/10-05/16 12+/- 2 13+/- 2 15+/- 2 12+/- 2 12+/- 2 11 +/- 2 12+/- 2 12+/- 2 12+/- 2 05/16-05/23 1~+/- 2 20+/- 2 22+/- 2 15+/- 2 16+/- 2 18+/- 2 18+/- 2 13+/- 2 18+/- 6 05/23-05/30 16+/- 2 18+/- 2 18+/- 2 15+/- 2 17+/- 2 15+/- 2 16+/- 2 15+/- 2 16+/- 3 JUNE 05/30-06/06 11 +/- 2 12+/- 2 13+/- 2 11 +/- 2 10+/- 2 12+/- 2 12+/- 2 13+/- 2 12+/- 2 06/06-06/13 14+/- 2 16+/- 2 16+/- 2 12+/- 2 14+/- 2 14+/- 2 16+/- 2 17+/- 2 15+/- 3 06/13-06/20 14+/- 2 14+/- 2 16+/- 2 13+/- 2 12+/- 2 13+/- 2 13+/- 2 14+/- 2 14+/- 2 06/20-06/27 10+/- 1 10+/- 1 9.1 +/- 1.4 12+/- 2 11 +/- 2 11 +/- 2 9.9+/- 1.5 13+/- 2 11 +/- 3 atr. Avg. 15+/- 6 15+/- 6 17+/- 8 14+/- 6 15+/- 6 14+/- 7 15+/- 6 15+/- 5 15+/- 2

+/-2 s.d.

- (a) Blown fuse; low sample volume.

61

TABLE 8-2: GROSS BETA CONCENTRATION IN AIR PARTICULATES Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County,-Virginia - 1995 1.0 e-03 pCiJm3 +/- 2 Sigma Page 2 of 2 STATIONS COLLECTION ss HIR BC ALL CP DOW FE NN Average DATE +2Siama JULY 06/27-07/04 13 +/- 2 12 +/- 2 16+/- 2 12+/- 2 13+/- 2 12+/- 2 13+/- 2 13+/- 2 13 +/- 3 07/04-07/11 19 +/- 2 16 +/- 2 17+/- 2 16+/- 2 18+/- 2 18+/- 2 17+/- 2 17+/- 2 17 +/- 2 07/11-07/18 23+/- 2 21 +/- 2 24+/- 2 18 +/- 2 22+/- 2 20+/- 2 19+/- 2 20+/- 2 21 +/- 4 07/18-07/25 20+/- 2 22+/- 2 22+/- 2 20+/- 2 19+/- 2 22+/- 2 22+/- 2 22+/- 2 21 +/- 3 07/25-08/01 19 +/- 2 20+/- 2 21 +/- 2 17+/- 2 18+/- 2 20+/- 2 18+/- 2 19+/- 2 19 +/- 3 AUGUST 08/01-08/08 12 +/- 2 13 +/- 2 15 +/- 2 14+/- 2 12+/- 2 14+/- 2 14+/- 2 14+/- 2 14 +/- 2 08/08-08/15 17 +/- 2 16 +/- 2 19 +/- 2 15+/- 2 16+/- 2 15+/- 2 16+/- 2 15 +/- 2 16+/- 3 08/15-08/22 12 +/- 2 19 +/- 2 20+/- 2 17+/- 2 21 +/- 2 18+/- 2 20+/- 2 17 +/- 2 18+/- 6 08/22-08/29 14+/- 2 15 +/- 2 17 +/- 2 14+/- 2 17+/- 2 15 +/- 2 15 +/- 2 16 +/- 2 15 +/- 2 SEPTEMBER 08/29-09/05 22+/- 2 24+/- 2 24+/- 2 22+/- 2 27+/- 2 22+/- 2 21 +/- 2 23+/- 2 23+/- 4 09/05-09/12 17 +/- 2 17 +/- 2 20+/- 2 17+/- 2 19+/- 2 19+/- 2 17+/- 2 17 +/- 2 18 +/- 3 09/12-09/19 20+/- 2 20+/- 2 21 +/- 2 23+/- 3 20+/- 2 17+/- 2 17+/- 2 20+/- 2 20+/- 4 09/19-09/26 13 +/- 2 14+/- 2 15 +/- 2 22 +/- 9 (a) 14+/- 2 14+/- 2 13 +/- 2 14+/- 2 15 +/- 6 09/26-1 0/03 25+/- 2 27+/- 2 30+/- 2 28+/- 2 28+/- 2 25+/- 2 27+/- 2 27+/- 2 27+/- 3 Qtr. Avg. 18+/- 9 18+/- 9 20+/- 8 18+/- 9 19 +/- 9 18+/- 7 18+/- 8 18+/- 8 18+/- 8

+/-2 s.d.

OCTOBER 10/03-10/10 7.0+/-1.4 4.1 +/- 1.2 6.8 +/- 1.4 6.0 +/- 1.4 5.2 +/- 1.3 7.8+/- 1.3 4.8 +/- 1.3 7.4 +/- 1.4 6.1 +/- 2.7.

10/10-10/17 20+/- 2 19 +/- 2 22+/- 2 21 +/- 2 22+/- 2 18+/- 2 20+/- 2 22+/- 2 21 +/- 3 10/17-10/24 14+/- 2 15 +/- 2 20+/- 2 19 +/- 2 19+/- 2 14+/- 2 17 +/- 2 18 +/- 2 17+/- 5 10/24-10/31 16+/- 2 15 +/- 2 17+/- 2 17+/- 2 16+/- 2 16+/- 2 16 +/- 2 17+/- 2 16 +/- 1 NOVEMBER 10/31-11 /07 18+/- 2 21 +/- 2 23+/- 2 20+/- 2 20+/- 2 19+/- 2 20+/- 2 20+/- 2 20+/- 3 11/07-11/13 16 +/- 2 19 +/- 2 19 +/- 2 16 +/- 2 18+/- 2 17 +/- 2 17 +/- 2 18+/- 2 18 +/- 2 11/13-11/21 17 +/- 2 20+/- 2 19 +/- 2 19 +/- 2 20+/- 2 17+/- 2 18 +/- 2 20+/- 2 19+/- 3 11/21-11/28 23+/- 2 22 +/- 2 28+/- 2 23+/- 2 24+/- 2 24+/- 2 22+/- 2 25+/- 2 24+/- 4 DECEMBER 11 /28-12/06 20+/- 2 23+/- 2 57 +/- 5 (a) 23+/- 2 22+/- 2 21 +/- 2 23+/- 2 22+/- 2 26+/-25 12/06-12/13 23 +/- 2 24+/- 2 23+/- 2 26+/- 2 25+/- 2 21 +/- 2 24+/- 2 25+/- 2 24+/- 3 12/13-12/19 26+/- 2 27+/- 2 25+/- 2 26+/- 2 27+/- 2 26+/- 3 30+/- 3 31 +/- 3 27+/- 4 12/19-12/26 12 +/- 2 13 +/- 2 11 +/- 2 13 +/- 2 12 +/- 2 11 +/- 2 15 +/- 2 12+/- 2 12 +/- 3 12/26-01 /02 14 +/- 2 17+/- 2 15 +/- 2 16+/- 2 18+/- 2 15+/- 2 16 +/- 2 18 +/- 2 16 +/- 3 Quarter Avg. 17+/-10 18 +/-12 22+/-24 19 +/-11 19 +/-11 17+/-10 19 +/-12 20+/-12 19 +/-13

- +/-2s.d.

Annual Avg.

+/-2 s.d.

(a) 17+/- 8 Low sample volume.

17+/- 9 20+/-14 18 +/-11 18+/- 9 17+/- 8 18+/- 9 18+/- 9 18 +/-10 62

TABLE 8-3: GAMMA EMITTER* CONCENTRATION IN QUARTERLY AIR PARTICULATES Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 1.0 e-03 pCi/m3 +/- 2 Sigma Page 1 of 2 First Second Third Fourth Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter Average Station Nuclide 12/28-03/28 03/28-06/27 06/27-10/03 10/03-01/02 +2s.d.

STA-SS Be-7 136+/- 14 138+/- 14 134+/- 13 123 +/- 12 133+/- 13 K-40 < 10 <4 <6 <5 Co-60 < 0.4 < 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.4 Cs-134 < 0.4 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.3 Cs-137 < 0.4 < 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.2 Th-228 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.3 < 0.5 STA-HIR Be-7 148 +/- 15 149 +/- 15 142 +/- 14 96.7+/- 9.7 134+/- 50 K-40 <5 <5 <6 29.5 +/- 3.9 29.5+/- 3.9 Co-60 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 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 < 0.5 < 0.3 < 0.4 STA-BC Be-7 143+/- 14 157 +/- 16 155 +/- 16 124+/- 12 145+/- 30 K-40 <7 <7 3.66 +/- 1.51 <5 3.66+/- 1.51 Co-60 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 Cs-134 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.2 Cs-137 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 Th-228 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.3 < 0.5 STA-ALL Be-7 176+/- 18 119+/- 12 137+/- 14 97.4 +/- 9.7 132 +/- 67 K-40 <5 6.86+/- 2.34 <8 4.01 +/- 2.03 5.44+/- 4.0 Co-60 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 Cs-134 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.2 Cs-137 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 Th-228 < 0.6 < 0.4 < 0.5 < 0.4 STA-CP Be-7 145 +/- 14 144 +/- 14 148+/- 15 105+/- 10 136+/- 41 K-40 <4 <5 <6 <4 Co-60 < 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 Cs-134 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.2 Cs-137 < 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 Th-228 < 0.5 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.3

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

63

TABLE B-3: GAMMA EMITTER* CONCENTRATION IN QUARTERLY AIR PARTICULATES Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 1.0 e-03 pCi/m3 +/- 2 Sigma Page 2 of 2 First Second Third Fourth Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter Average Station Nuclide 12/28-03/28 03/28-06/27 06/27-10/03 10/03-01 /02 +/-2s.d.

STA-DOW Be-7 129 +/- 13 121 +/- 12 139+/- 14 99.4+/- 9.9 122 +/- 34 K-40 <4 10.6+/- 2.4 <6 <8 10.6+/- 2.4 Co-60 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.3 Cs-134 < 0.2 < 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.3 Cs-137 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.3 Th-228 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.4 < 0.4 STA-FE Be-7 145 +/- 15 163+/- 16 138+/- 14 84.6+/- 8.5 133+/- 67 K-40 2.91 +/- 1.66 4.27+/- 1.97 2.80+/- 1.23 <4 3.33+/- 1.6 Co-60 < 0.2 < 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.2 Cs-134 < 0.2 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.2 Cs-137 < 0.2 < 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.3 Th-228 < 0.3 < 0.5 < 0.3 < 0.3 STA-NN Be-7 145 +/- 14 130 +/- 13 151 +/- 15 106+/- 11 133+/- 40 K-40 <8 <4 5.89+/- 2.03 < 10 5.89+/- 2.03 Co-60 < 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.3 < 0.4 Cs-134 < 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.4 < 0.4 Cs-137 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.4 Th-228 < 0.4 < 0.3 < 0.5 < 0.6

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

64

TABLE 8-4: GAMMA EMITTER*AND TRITIUM CONCENTRATIONS IN RIVER WATER Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 pCi/1 +/- 2 Sigma Page 1 of 1 Collection Station Date Be-7 K-40 1-131 Cs-137 Ba-140 La-140 Th-228 H-3 SD 01/31 <20 <40 < 0.1 <3 <7 <3 <4 <200 SW 01/31 < 30 <60 < 0.1 <3 <9 <3 <5 <200 SD 02/28 <30 < 100 < 0.09 <4 < 10 <4 <6 SW 02/28 <30 < 60 < 0.1 <4 <9 <3 <6 SD 03/28 <30 <70 < 0.2 <4 <10 <6 <8 SW 03/28 <30 <60 < 0.2 <4 <8 <4 <6 SD 04/25 <30 < 100 < 0.2 <4 < 10 <4 <6 < 200 SW 04/25 <30 < 90 < 0.2 <4 < 10 <4 <5 <200.

SD 05/30 < 30 < 90 < 0.2 <4 <10 <5 <7 SW 05/30 < 30 < 80 < 0.3 <4 < 10 <5 <7 SD 06/27 <30 <50 < 0.2 <4 < 10 <6 <6 SW 06/27 <30 < 100 < 0.2 <4 < 10 <5 <5 SD 07/31 < 20 < 50 < 0.3 <4 <7 <3 <6 230 +/- 130 SW 07/31 <20 <40 < 0.3 <4 <7 <3 <5 <200 SD 08/29 <30 134 +/- 31 < 0.2 <3 <9 <4 <6 SW 08/29 <30 62.8 +/- 24.4 < 0.2 <3 <9 <4 <7 SD 09/26 <30 < 100 < 0.4 <4 <9 <3 <5 SW 09/26 <30 72.7+/- 24.9 < 0.4 <4 <10 <4 <7 SD 10/31 < 30 < 60 <4 <4 <8 <4 <6 <200 SW 10/31 < 30 < 60 <4 <3 < 10 <4 <6 < 200 SD 11/28 <30 <60 < 0.2 <4 <10 <5 <6 SW 11/28 <30 <70 < 0.3 <4 < 10 <7 <9 SD 12/26 <30 < 100 < 0.2 <4 <10 <4 <6 SW 12/26 <30 < 50 < 0.2 <3 <9 <4 <6 Average+/- 89.8+/-77.1 230 +/- 130 2 s.d.

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

65

\,

TABLE 8-5 GAMMA EMITTER* AND TRITIUM CONCENTRATIONS IN RIVER WATER State-Split Samples Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 pCi/1 +/- 2 Sigma 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 < 10 <7 <6 <300 Feb. 02/28 <.20 <50 < 0.5 <3 <8 <3 <6 Mar. 03/31 <30 <40 <1 <4 <20 <9 <5 Apr. 04/30 <40 <90 < 0.5 <5 <20 <6 <9 <200 May 05/31 <40 < 100 < 0.7 <4 <30 <10 <7 Jun. 06/30 <30 <70 < 0.5 <3 <20 <8 <5 Jul. 07/31 <30 <50 < 0.4 <4 <10 <6 <5 <200 Aug. 08/31 <30 63.2+/-21.2 <1 <3 <30 <10 <5 Sep. 09/30 <30 43.6 +/-23.4 < 0.5 <3 <20 <9 <7 Oct. 10/31 <40 < 100 < 0.3 <5 <20 <9 <7 <200 Nov. 11/30 <40 <90 <1 <3 <30 < 10 <5 Dec. 12/31 <40 <90 < 0.9 <4 <20 <9 <6

- Average+/- 2 s.d. 53.4+/-27.7 S~URRY~DIS.JSD)

Jan. 01/31 <30 <60 <1 <4 <20 <7 <6 950 +/- 150 Feb. 02/28 <30 <60 < 0.6 <3 <9 <4 <6 Mar. 03/31 <30 <80 <1 <3 <20 <10 <5 Apr. 04/30 <40 <90 <2 <4 <20 <6 <8 590 +/- 170 May 05/31 <30 <50 < 0.7 <4 <20 <10 <5 Jun. 06/30 <40 <70 < 0.6 <4 <30 < 10 <6 Jul. 07/31 <30 <50 < 0.3 <4 < 10 <7 <6 340+/- 120 Aug. 08/31 <30 73.8+/-25.7 <1 <3 <30 <10 <6 Sep. 09/30 <50 72.5+/-32.5 < 0.6 <4 <40 <10 <8 Oct. 10/31 <50 <90 < 0.3 <5 <20 <9 <10 730+/- 140 Nov. 11/30 <30 <50 <1 <3 <20 <10 <5 Dec. 12/31 <30 90.9+/-28.0 <1 <4 <20 <10 <8 Average+/- 2 s.d. 79.1 +/- 20.5 653+/-511

-

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

66

TABLE 8-6: GAMMA EMITTER* AND TRITIUM CONCENTRATIONS IN WELL WATER Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 pCi/1 +/- 2 Sigma 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 03/22 HIR <30 <70 < 0.2 <4 <10 <4 <6 <200 03/22 ss <40 < 100 < 0.2 <5 < 10 <5 <7 <200 SECOND QUARTER 06/20 HIR <30 <50 < 0.2 <4 <10 <5 <7 < 200 06/20 ss <30 <50 < 0.2 <4 < 10 <5 <7 <200 THIRD QUARTER 09/26 HIR <30 <50 < 0.3 <4 <9 <4 <6 <200 09/26 ss <30 <60 < 0.3 <4 <10 <4 <8 <200 e FOURTH QUARTER 12/19 HIR <30 <90 < 0.3 <3 <10 <4 <5 <200 12/19 ss <20 <40 < 0.3 <2 <7 <3 <5 < 200

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

67

TABLE 8-7: GAMMA EMITTER*CONCENTRATIONS IN SILT Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 pCi/kg (dry) +/- 2 Sigma Page 1 of 1 Station CHIC HIP POS SD SI Coll. Date 03/14 03/08 03/14 03/08 03/08 Be-7 <600 779+/-330 1200+/- 280 <600 <400 K-40 15300 +/- 1500 14900+/- 1500 17500+/- 1800 15600 +/- 1600 10800 +/- 1100 Mn-54 <50 <40 <40 <50 <40 Co-58 <50 <40 <30 <50 <30 Co-60 <60 111 +/-32 115+/-33 96.0+/-37.8 <40 Cs-134 <50 <50 <40 <60 <40 Cs-137 393+/-52 246+/-40 423+/-42 418+/-59 222+/-30 Ra-226 2490+/-800 1310+/-560 2040+/-580 < 1000 1340+/-440 Th-228 1180+/- 120 1180 +/- 120 1090+/- 110 1040+/- 100 961 +/-96 CHIC HIP POS SD SI Average Coll. Date 09/21 09/21 09/21 09/21 09/21 +2s.d.

Be-7 <400 755+/-368 577+/-229 <500 450+/-253 752+/-569 e K-40 Mn-54 Co-58 17500 +/- 1800

<50

<40 12600 +/- 1300

<40

<40 15400+/- 1500

<30

<30 15500+/- 1500

<40

<50 11300+/-1100 14640+/-4674

<40

<40 Co-60 <60 <50 81.6+/-26.5 117+/-37 98.8+/-36.6 103+/-27 Cs-134 <60 <50 <40 <60 <40 Cs-137 378+/-52 322+/-50 394+/-39 483+/-59 265+/-46 354+/- 173 Ra-226 2630+/- 740 2090+/-630 1780 +/- 550 2820+/-830 1800+/- 540 2033+/- 1075 Th-228 1350+/- 130 1210+/- 120 1140+/-110 1140+/- 110 735+/-74 0- 1103 +/- 331 TABLE 8-8: GAMMA EMITTER*CONCENTRATIONS IN SHORELINE SEDIMENT Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 pCi/kg (dry)+/- 2 Sigma Page 1 of 1 Station HIR HIR Average Collection Date 02/14 08/22 +2s.d.

Be-7 <200 < 100 K-40 6380+/- 640 5840+/-580 6110+/-764 Co-60 <20 <20 Cs-134 <20 <20 Cs-137 <20 <20

- Ra-226 Th-228

<400

<40

<300 52.4 +/- 17.2 All gamma emitters other than those listed were< LLD.

52.4+/- 17.2 68

TABLE S;.9: GAMMA EMITTER* STRONTIUM-89, AND STRONTIUM-90 CONCENTRATIONS IN MILK Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 pCi/1 +/- 2 Sigma Page 1 of2 NUCLIDE EPPS CP WMS JDKS JANUARY Sr-89 <2 <1 Sr-90 1.7+/- 0.2 2.9+/- 0.2 K-40 1330+/- 130 1340+/- 130 1250+/- 120 1310 +/- 130 Cs-137 <4 <4 <5 <4 1-131 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.4 < 0.2 FEBRUARY K-40 1360+/- 140 1360 +/- 140 1360+/- 140 1280 +/- 130 Cs-137 <4 <4 <4 <4 1-131 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.3 < 0.3 MARCH K-40 1400+/- 140 1330 +/- 130 1350+/- 140 1290 +/- 130 Cs-137 <4 <5 <4 <4 1-131 < 0.1 < 0.2 < 0.2 <0.2 APRIL Sr-89 <1 <2 Sr-90 0.92 +/- 0.18 2.3+/- 0.2 K-40 1270+/- 130 1240+/- 120 1350+/- 130 1400+/- 140 Cs-137 <4 <4 <5 <4 1-131 < 0.4 <0.3 < 0.3 < 0.2 MAY K-40 1270 +/- 130 1300 +/- 130 1300+/- 130 1250+/- 130 Cs-137 <7 <4 <4 <4 1-131 < 0.3 <0.2 < 0.2 <0.3 JUNE K-40 1340+/- 130 1130+/- 110 1380 +/- 140 1360+/- 140 Cs-137 <4 <5 <4 <4 1-131 < 0.3 < 0.5 < 0.2 < 0.2

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

69

TABLE 8-9: GAMMA EMITTER* STRONTIUM-89, AND STRONTIUM-90 CONCENTRATIONS IN MILK Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 pCi/1 +/- 2 Sigma Page 2 of 2 NUCLIDE EPPS CP WMS JDKS JULY Sr-89 <1 <2 Sr-90 0.98 +/- 0.21 3.1 +/- 0.5 K-40 1430 +/- 140 1200+/- 120 1340 +/- 130 1330 +/-130 Cs-137 <4 <4 <4 <4 1-131 < 0.2 < 0.1 < 0.2 < 0.2 AUGUST K-40 1350 +/- 140 1870 +/- 190 1310 +/- 130 1440 +/- 140 Cs-137 <4 <4 <4 <5 1-131 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.2 SEPTEMBER K-40 1420 +/- 140 1390 +/- 140 1370 +/- 140 1360 +/- 140 Cs-137 <5 <4 <5 <5 1-131 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.2 OCTOBER Sr-89 <2 <2 Sr-90 1.5 +/- 0.2 2.9 +/- 0.2 K-40 1400 +/- 140 1310 +/- 130 1410 +/- 140 1290 +/- 130 Cs-137 <4 <4 <5 <4 1-131 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.2 NOVEMBER K-40 1390 +/- 140 1240 +/- 120 1420 +/- 140 1210 +/- 120 Cs-137 <5 <5 <5 <4 1-131 < 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.1 DECEMBER K-40 1180 +/- 120 1330 +/- 130 1560 +/- 160 1330 +/- 130 Cs-137 <4 <3 <4 <4 1-131 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.1

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

70

TABLE B-10: GAMMA EMITTER* CONCENTRATION IN CLAMS Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 pCi/kg (wet) +/- 2 Sigma Page 1 of 1 Station Date Type Be-7 K-40 Co-58 Co-60 Cs-137 Ra-226 Th-228 CHIC 03/14/95 Clams < 100 418+/- 109 < 10 < 10 <10 < 300 <30 03/27/95 Clams < 100 512 +/- 137 <20 <10 <20 < 300 <20 09/21/95 Clams < 100 297+/- 113 <10 <10 <10 <300 <20 SD 03/08/95 Clams < 200 601 +/- 131 < 10 < 10 <10 <300 <30 03/27/95 (a) Clams < 100 512+/- 137 <20 <10 <20 < 300 <20 07/05/95 (a) Clams < 200 499+/- 147 <20 <20 <20 <300 <30 08/30/95 (a) Clams <90 574+/- 97 <9 <9 <10 <200 <20 09/21/95 Clams < 100 483+/- 141 < 10 <20 <10 <400 <30 10/31/95 (a) Clams < 200 252 +/- 141 <20 <20 <20 < 300 <30 03/08/95 Clams < 200 528+/- 115 < 10 < 10 <20 <300 <30 09/21/95 Clams < 100 618+/- 128 <20 <20 <20 < 300 <20 03/14/94 Clams < 100 191 +/- 102 < 10 < 10 < 10 <300 <30 09/21/95 Clams < 100 512+/- 105 < 10 < 10 <20 <300 <20 Average+/- 2 s.d. 461 +/- 269

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

(a) State Split samples.

71

TABLE 8-11: GAMMA EMITTER* CONCENTRATION IN OYSTERS Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 pCi/kg (wet) +/- 2 Sigma Page 1 of 1 Station DATE TYPE Be-7 K-40 Co-58 Co-60 Cs-137 Ra-226 Th-228 03/28/95 (a) Oysters <200 501 +/- 147 < 10 <20 <20 <400 <40 08/30/95 (a) Oysters < 100 477+/- 91 < 10 <10 < 10 <200 <20 10/31/95 (a) Oysters <200 672+/- 140 <20 <20 <20 <300 <30 MP 03/14/95 Oysters < 100 281 +/- 101 < 10 <10 <10 <200 <20 09/21/95 - Oysters < 100 809 +/- 120 < 10 <10 <20 <200 <20 e* BUOY 03/14/95 Oysters < 100 325+/- 78 < 10 < 10 < 10 <200 <20 DWSL 09/27/95 Oysters <200 643+/- 150 <20 <20 <20 <400 <30 Average +/- 2 s.d. 530+/- 382

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

(a) State Split 72

TABLE B-12: GAMMA EMITTER*CONCENTRATION IN CRABS Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 pCi/kg (wet) +/- 2 Sigma Page 1 of 1 Station Date T e Be-7 K-40 Co-58 Co-60 Cs-137 Ra-226 Th-228 SD 06/06/95 Crabs < 100 2130 +/- 210 , < 10 < 10 < 10 <200 <20 TABLE B-13 GAMMA EMITTER* CONCENTRATION IN FISH Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 pCi/kg (wet) +/- 2 Sigma Page 1 of 1 Collection Sample Date Station T e K-40 Co-58 Cs-134 Cs-137 04/12/95 SD Catfish 270+/- 93 < 10 < 10 <20 04/12/95 SD White Perch 891 +/- 190 <30 <30 <30 10/25/95 SD Catfish 1610 +/- 180 <20 <20 <20 10/25/95 SD White Perch 899+/- 174 <20 < 20 <20 Average+/- 2 s.d. 918+/- 1095 TABLE B-14: GAMMA EMITTER*CONCENTRATION IN *VEGETATION Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 pCi/kg (wet) +/- 2 Sigma Page 1 of 1 Sample Collection Station T e Date Be-7 K-40 1-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 Spratley (a) Kale 04/18/95. < 100 3730+/- 370 <4 < 10 <10 Lucas (a) Kale 04/18/95 <200 5220 +/- 520 <3 <20 <20 Carter (a} Horse Radish 08/08/95 337+/- 187 3480 +/- 350 <8 <30 <30 Brocks (a) Peanuts 10/17/95 < 100 6540 +/- 650 < 20 <20 <20 Brocks (a) Corn 10/17/95 < 50 3310 +/- 330 <7 <6 <6 Slades (a} Soybeans 12/14/95 < 50 13500 +/- 1300 <8 <7 <7 Average+/- 2 s.d. 337 +/- 187 5963 +/- 7791

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

(a) State split samples.

73

TABLE 8-15 DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENTS -- QUARTERLY TLD RESULTS Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 mR/month +/- 2 Sigma - Set 1 - 098 Page 1 of 1 Station First Second Third Fourth Average Number Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter +/-2s.d.

02 6.2+/- 0.2 6.7+/-0.2 5.9+/-0.2 6.7+/-0.2 6.4 +/- 0.8 03 6.2 +/- 0.1 6.8+/- 0.0 5.8+/-0.3 7.1 +/-0.2 6.5 +/- 1.2 04 (a) 5.4+/- 0.2 4.9+/- 0.2 6.1 +/- 0.4 5.5 +/- 1.2 05 5.4 +/- 0.3 6.1 +/- 0.1 5.4+/- 0.2 6.5+/-0.2 5.9 +/- 1.1 06 5.6+/-0.8 6.1 +/- 0.1 5.5 +/- 0.1 6.2+/-0.3 5.9+/-0.7 07 4.6 +/-0.2 5.4 +/- 0.1 4.9 +/- 0.1 5.7 +/- 0.1 5.2 +/- 1.0 08 4.8 +/- 0.1 5.5+/-0.2 5.3+/-0.2 5.8+/-0.2 5.4 +/- 0.8 09 5.1 +/- 0.2 5.5+/- 0.0 5.2+/- 0.7 5.7+/- 0.2 5.4 +/- 0.6 10 4.5 +/- 0.2 5.2+/- 0.0 5.2+/- 0.4 5.8+/- 0.2 5.2 +/- 1.1 11 4.8 +/- 0.3 5.5 +/- 0.1 5.3 +/- 0.1 5.8 +/- 0.1 5.4 +/- 0.8 12 5.2 +/- 0.4 5.6+/-0.7 5.1 +/- 0.2 5.8 +/- 0.1 5.4 +/- 0.7 13 5.0+/-0.3 5.6 +/- 0.4 5.3+/- 0.2 6.0 +/- 0.1 5.5+/- 0.9 14 5.6 +/- 0.3 6.1 +/- 0.3 5.5 +/- 0.4 6.4 +/- 0.1 5.9.+/- 0.8 15 4.6 +/- 0.1 5.4 +/- 0.2 4.9+/-0.2 5.3 +/- 0.1 5.1 +/-0.7 16 4.6 +/-0.3 5.2+/-0.6 5.1 +/-0.2 6.2+/-0.6 5.3 +/- 1.3 17 4.4 +/- 0.1 4.9+/- 0.0 4.9 +/- 0.1 5.0 +/- 0.1 4.8 +/-0.5 18 3.9 +/- 0.5 (a) 3.6 +/- 0.1 4.3+/-0.2 3.9+/-0.7 19 4.8 +/- 0.5 5.0 +/- 0.1 4.1 +/- 0.5 5.2+/-0.2 4.8 +/- 1.0 20 4.0 +/- 0.1 4.9+/-0.1 4.2 +/-0.3 4.8 +/- 0.1 4.5 +/-0.9 21 4.4 +/- 0.3 5.2 +/- 0.2 4.3 +/- 0.1 5.0 +/- 0.1 4.7+/- 0.9 22 4.0 +/- 0.1 4.7 +/- 0.4 4.0+/-0.3 5.1 +/-0.9 4.5 +/- 1.1 23 4.9 +/- 0.3 5.7+/- 0.7 4.8 +/-0.2 5.5+/-0.3 5.2 +/-0.9 24 4.4 +/- 0.2 5.3+/-0.2 4.2+/- 0.2 5.1 +/- 0.1 4.8 +/- 1.1 25 4.7+/-0.1 (a) 4.5 +/- 0.1 5.5 +/- 0.1 4.9+/- 1.1 26 3.8 +/- 0.1 5.0+/- 0.2 4.0+/-0.3 4.9 +/- 0.1 4.4 +/- 1.2 27 4.0 +/- 0.2 4.9 +/- 0.1 4.4+/-0.2 5.0 +/- 0.1 4.6+/- 0.9 28 4.0 +/- 0.1 5.1+/-0.1 4.2+/-0.3 5.0+/-0.3 4.6 +/- 1.1 29 3.5 +/- 0.2 4.6 +/- 0.1 3.9 +/- 0.1 4.4+/- 0.2 4.1 +/- 1.0 30 3.9 +/- 0.1 4.7 +/- 0.1 4.3+/- 0.2 4.8+/-0.2 4.4 +/- 0.8 31 3.3+/- 0.2 4.3 +/- 0.1 3.9+/- 0.0 4.4 +/- 0.1 4.0 +/- 1.0 32 4.0 +/- 0.1 5.0+/- 0.3 4.2+/- 0.2 4.6 +/- 0.1

• 4.5 +/- 0.9 33 4.7 +/- 0.1 5.6+/- 0.0 4.9 +/- 0.4 5.6+/- 0.2 5.2 +/-0.9 34 4.6 +/- 0.2 5.4 +/- 0.4 5.1 +/- 0.5 5.7+/- 0.2 5.2+/-0.9 35 5.1 +/- 0.4 (a) 4.9 +/- 0.1 5.6+/- 0.2 5.2+/-0.7 36 5.4 +/- 0.2 5.9+/- 0.2 5.1 +/- 0.7 6.3+/-0.2 5.7 +/- 1.1 37 4.5 +/- 0.1 5.0+/-0.9 4.7+/- 0.5 5.4 +/- 0.0 4.9+/-0.8 38 6.7+/- 0.0 7.4 +/- 0.3 6.0+/- 0.2 7.2+/- 0.3 6.8 +/- 1.2 39 4.7 +/-0.6 5.1 +/- 0.0 4.3 +/- 0.1 5.2 +/- 0.1 4.8 +/-0.8 40 3.8 +/- 0.1 4.7+/- 0.2 4.4 +/- 0.1 5.3+/- 0.2 4.6 +/- 1.2 41 5.9 +/- 0.3 6.8+/- 0.3 5.7+/-0.2 6.1 +/- 0.1 6.1 +/- 1.0 42 4.3+/- 0.2 5.1 +/-0.3 4.2 +/- 1.2 5.1 +/- 0.1 4.7 +/- 1.0

. 43 4.1 +/- 0.3 5.2+/- 0.2 4.6+/-0.3 5.2 +/- 0.1 4.8 +/- 1.1 Average 4.7 +/- 1.5 5.4+/- 1.3 4.8 +/- 1.2 5.5 +/- 1.5 5.1 +/- 0.9

+/-2s.d.

(a) TLD missing 74

TABLE 8-16: DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENTS -- QUARTERLY TLD RESULTS Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1995 mR/month +/- 2 Sigma - Set 2 - 099 Page 1 of 1 Station First Second Third Fourth Average Number Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter +/-2 s.d.

02 6.1 +/- 0.3 6.9+/- 0.2 6.1 +/-0.3 6.7+/-0.6 6.5 +/- 0.8 03 6.5 +/- 0.3 7.0+/- 0.6 6.0+/-0.1 6.9 +/- 0.1 6.6 +/- 0.9 04 6.0 +/- 0.3 6.0 +/- 0.4 5.0 +/- 0.1 6.3+/-0.2 5.8 +/- 1.1 05 5.5 +/- 0.3 6.9 +/- 1.2 5.6+/-0.2 6.7+/- 0.3 6.2 +/- 1.5 06 5.6 +/- 0.9 6.3+/-0.2 5.5 +/- 0.1 6.3 +/- 0.1 5.9 +/- 0.9 07 5.1 +/- 0.2 5.2 +/- 0.5 5.2+/-0.3 5.8+/- 0.2 5.3+/- 0.6 08 5.3 +/-0.2 5.7+/- 0.2 5.9+/- 0.8 5.8 +/- 0.1 5.7+/- 0.5 09 5.3 +/- 0.2 5.8 +/- 0.1 5.2 +/- 0.1 5.7+/-0.2 5.5 +/- 0.6 10 5.1 +/- 0.2 5.6+/- 0.2 5.3+/- 0.2 5.7+/- 0.0 5.4 +/- 0.6 11 5.2 +/- 0.2 5.6+/-0.3 5.5 +/- 0.1 5.6 +/- 0.1 5.5 +/- 0.4 12 5.4 +/- 0.1 6.0 +/- 0.4 5.4 +/- 0.3 5.7+/-0.1 5.6+/-0.6 13 5.8 +/- 0.1 6.0+/- 0.2 5.5 +/- 0.1 6.1 +/- 0.2 5.9+/-0.5 14 5.8 +/- 0.3 6.2 +/- 0.0 5.7+/- 0.3 6.2 +/- 0.1 6.0+/-0.5 15 5.1 +/- 0.1 5.4 +/- 0.2 . 4.9+/- 0.3 5.5 +/- 0.1 5.2 +/- 0.6 16 5.7 +/- 0.3 5.7+/- 0.2 5.2 +/- 0.4 5.7+/- 0.3 5.6 +/- 0.5 17 4.6 +/- 0.2 5.0 +/- 0.4 5.1 +/- 0.4 5.1 +/-0.2 5.0 +/- 0.5 18 4.2 +/- 0.6 4.4 +/- 0.1 4.1 +/- 0.3 4.5 +/-0.0 4.3 +/- 0.4 19 4.9 +/- 0.3 5.1 +/-0.2 4.5 +/- 0.1 5.2 +/- 0.2 4.9 +/- 0.6 20 4.5 +/- 0.2 4.8+/- 0.0 4.5 +/- 0.1 4.9 +/- 0.2 4.7 +/- 0.4 21 4.9 +/- 0.3 5.5+/- 0.2 4.4+/- 0.2 5.3+/- 0.3 5.0 +/- 1.0 22 4.4 +/- 0.2 5.0+/- 0.2 4.2+/-0.0 4.8 +/- 0.1 4.6 +/-0.7 23 5.6 +/- 0.2 5.7+/-0.1 5.1 +/- 0.2 5.8+/- 0.2 5.6 +/- 0.6 24 5.0 +/- 0.7 4.9 +/-0.2 4.6 +/- 0.4 5.2 +/- 0.1 4.9 +/- 0.5 25 5.5 +/- 0.1 5.6 +/- 0.2 4.9+/- 0.2 5.7+/-0.1 5.4 +/- 0.7 26 4.2 +/- 0.2 (a) 4.4 +/- 0.1 4.9+/- 0.0 4.5+/- 0.7 27 4.5 +/-0.3 5.1 +/- 0.3 4.5 +/- 0.4 5.0 +/- 0.1 4.8 +/-0.6 28 4.6 +/- 0.1 5.1 +/- 0.1 4.5 +/- 0.1 5.3 +/- 0.1 4.9 +/- 0.8 29 3.8 +/- 0.1 4.8 +/- 0.4 3.9+/- 0.3 4.5 +/- 0.1 4.3 +/- 1.0 30 4.4 +/- 0.1 4.8+/-0.1 4.4 +/- 0.1 5.0 +/-0.2 4.7+/- 0.6 31 3.9 +/- 0.1 4.3 +/- 0.1 4.1 +/- 0.7 4.4 +/- 0.1 4.2 +/- 0.4 32 4.4 +/- 0.3 5.3+/- 0.0 4.6 +/- 0.1 4.7+/- 0.3 4.8 +/- 0.8 33 5.3+/- 0.8 5.6 +/- 0.4 5.0+/- 0.3 5.5 +/- 0.2 5.4 +/- 0.5 34 5.6 +/- 0.8 5.9 +/- 0.8 4.4 +/- 1.8 5.7+/-0.1 5.4 +/- 1.4 35 5.5 +/- 0.4 6.4 +/- 0.8 5.2 +/- 0.1 5.8+/-0.1 5.7+/-1.0 36 5.7+/-0.1 6.3+/- 0.2 5.2 +/- 1.2 6.8 +/- 1.1 6.0 +/- 1.4 37 4.8 +/-0.2 5.3+/- 0.2 5.1 +/- 0.5 5.6 +/- 0.1 5.2 +/- 0.7 38 7.6+/-1.1 7.6 +/- 0.4 6.0+/-2.2 7.6 +/- 0.3 7.2 +/- 1.6 39 4.8 +/- 0.1 5.3+/- 0.2 4.6+/- 0.2 5.4 +/- 0.2 5.0 +/-0.8 40 4.5 +/- 0.1 4.8 +/- 0.4 4.5+/- 0.2 5.4 +/- 0.3 4.8 +/- 0.8 41 6.1 +/- 0.1 6.9 +/- 0.1 4.9+/- 2.1 6.5 +/- 0.2 6.1 +/- 1.7 42 4.8 +/- 0.1 4.5 +/- 1.3 4.7+/- 0.3 5.2 +/- 0.3 4.8 +/- 0.6 43 4.9 +/- 0.1 5.5 +/- 0.3 4.4 +/- 0.1 5.2+/-0.2 5.0 +/- 0.9 Average 5.2 +/- 1.5 5.6 +/- 1.5 4.9 +/- 1.1 5.6 +/- 1.4 5.3 +/- 0.7

+/-2s.d.

(a) TLD missing 75

APPENDIX C LAND USE CENSUS - 1995 J

LAND USE CENSUS*

Suny Nuclear Power Station, Suny County, Virginia January 1 to December 31, 1995 Page 1 of 1 Nearest Nearest Nearest Nearest

• Sector Direction Resident Garden** Cow Goat A N 4.12@8° (a) (a) (a)

B NNE 1.90@ 34° 1.90@ 34° (a) (a)

C NE 4.80@ 35° 4.91@ 56° (a) (a)

D ENE 4.91@ 56° (a) (a)

E E (a) (a) (a) (a)

F ESE (a) (a) (a) (a)

G SE (a) (a) (a) (a)

H SSE 4.75@ 152° 5.0@ 160° (a) (a)

J s 1.69@ 182° 1.90@ 189° (a) (a)

K SSW 1.87@ 193° 1.87@ 193° 4.84@ 201 ° (a)

L SW 2.28@ 222° 3.65@ 2.24° (a) (a)

M WSW 2.82@ 243° 3.57@ 2.46° (a) (a)

N w 3.15@ 260° 4.14@ 2.69° (a) (a) p WNW 4.79@ 281° (a) (a) (a)

Q NW 4.84@ 319° (a) (a) (a)

R NNW 3.73@ 339° 4.89@ 340° 3.65@ 337° (a)

(a)

Locations shown by statute miles and degree heading relative to true north from radius center.

Area greater than 50 m2, containing broad leaf vegetation.

None 76

APPENDIX D SYNOPSIS OF ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES

ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES SYNOPSIS e 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 Brown Engineering and include those recommended by the USNRC Branch Technical Position, Rev. 1, November 1979.

ANALYSIS TITLE PAGE Gross Beta Analysis of Samples ......................................................................... 78 Airborne Particulates .............................................................................. 78 Analysis of Samples for Tritium (Liquid Scintillation) ................................................ 79 Analysis of Samples for Strontium-89 and -90 ......................................................... 80 Total Water ......................................................... *...... : .......................... 80 Milk ................................................................................ _................. 80'.

Soil and Sediment ................................................................................. 80 Organic Solids ............................................. .- ..................................... _.. 81 Air Particulates .......................................................... .-.......................... 81 Analysis of Samples for Iodine-131 ..................................................................... 83 Milk or Water ........................ ; ............................................................. 83 Gamma Spectrometry of Samples ......................................................... '. .............. 84 Milk and Water .................................................................................... 84 Dried Solids other than Soils and Sediment ............................................. ; ...... 84 Fish ................................................................... ; ............................. 84 Soils and Sediments ............................................................................... 84 Charcoal Cartridges (Air Iodine) ................................................................ 84 Airborne Particulates .............................................................................. 84 Environmental Dosimetry ........ : ...........................................*............................. 86 77

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 (pCifm3) = ((SIT) - (B/t))/(2.22 VE)

TWO SIGMA ERROR (pCifm3) = 2((S!f2) + (B/t2))1f2/(2.22 VE)

LLD (pCifm3) = 4.66 (Bl/2)/(2.22 VE t) where:

s = Gross counts of sample including blank B = Counts of blank E = Counting efficiency T = Number of minutes sample was counted t = Number of minutes blank was counted V = Sample aliquot size (cubic meters) 78

ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES FOR TRITIUM (Liquid Scintillation)

Ten milliliters of water are mixed with 10 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/l:

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

TWO SIGMA ERROR = 2((N + B)/At)1f2/ (2.22 VE)

LLD = 4.66 (B/At)1/2/(2.22 VE) where: N = the gross cpm of the sample B = the background of the detector in cpm 2.22 = conversion factor changing dpm to pCi .

V = volume of the sample in ml E = efficiency of the detector At = counting time for the sample 79

ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES FOR STRONTIUM-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 bariuin 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 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.

80

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 pre-cipitated 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 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(N03)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 10 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-B A)/(2.22 VYs DFsR-89 EsR-89) 1WO SIGMA ERROR Sr-89 = 2((N/Dt+Bc+B A)/At) 1121(2.22 V Ys DFsR-89 EsR-89)

LLD Sr-89 = 4.66((Bc+BA)/At)ll2/(2.22 V YS DFsR-89 EsR-89)

RESULT Sr-90 = (N/At - B)/(2.22 VY 1 Y2 DF IF E) 1WO SIGMA ERROR Sr-90 = 2((N/At+ B)/At) 112/(2.22 V YI Y2 DF E IF))

LLD Sr-90 = 4.66(B/At)ll2/(2.22 VY 1 Y2 IF DF E) 81 J

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 Y-90 BA = 0.016 (K) + (K) Ey/abs) (IGy_90)

Ys = chemical yield of strontium DF SR-89 = decay factor from the mid collection date to the counting date for SR-89 EsR-89 = efficiency of the counter for SR-89 with the 80 mg/cm.sq.

aluminum absorber K = (NLit - Bc)Y _9of<EY-90 IFy _90 DFy_90y 1)

DFy_90) = the decay factor for Y-90 from the "milk" time to the mid count time Ey_90 = efficiency of the counter for Y-90 IFY-90 = ingrowth factor for Y-90 from scavenge time to milking time IGY-90 = the ingrowth factor for Y-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 EY/abs = the efficiency of counting Y-90 through a No. 6 absorber B = background rate of counter (cpm)

Y1 = chemical yield of yttrium Y2 = chemical yield of strontium DF = decay factor of yttrium from the radiochemical milking time to the mid count time E = efficiency of the counter for Y-90 IF = ingrowth factor for Y-90 from scavenge time to the radio-chemical milking time 82

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 pCifl:

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

TWO SIGMA ERROR == 2((N/At+B)/At)ll2t(2.22 EVY DF)

LLD == == 4.66(B/At)ll2 t(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 I-131, corrected for self absorption effects by the formula E == Es(exp-0.0061M)/(exp-0.0061Ms)

Es == efficiency of the counter determined from an I-131 standard mount Ms == mass of Pd1 2 on the standard mount, mg M == mass of PDI2 on the sample mount, mg e

83

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.

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) 84

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-B)/(2.22 t EV F DF)

TWO SIGMA ERROR = 2(S+B)l/2/(2.22 tE V FDF)

LLD = 4.66(B)112t(2.22 t EV F DF) where: s = Area, in counts, of sample peak and background (region of spectrum of interest)

B = 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 = dpm/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)

DF = decay factor from the mid-collection date to the counting date 85

ENVIRONMENTAL DOSIMETRY Teledyne Brown Engineering uses a CaS04:Dy thermoluminescent dosimeter (1LD) 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 NRC 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 Brown Engineering 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 = D = (D 1+D2+D3+D4,)/4 TWO SIGMA ERROR = 2((D1-D)2+(Di-D)2+(D3-D)2+(D4-D)2)/3)1/2 WHERE: D1 = the net mR of area 1 of the 1LD, and similarly for D2, D3, and D4 DI = I 1 KJR 1 -A I1 = 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 1LDs D = the average net mR of all 4 areas of the TLD.

86

APPENDIX E EPA INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM

i

• - EPA lnterlaboratory Comparison Program Teledyne Brown Engineering 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 the 1995 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.

87

VEPCO - SURRY EPA INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM 1995 (Page 1 of 2)

EPA Date TI Mailed Date EPA EPA TI Norm Dev. **Warning Preparation Re suits Issued Results Media Nuclide Results(a) Results(b) (Known)(c) ***Action 01/13/95 03/24/95 04/21/95 Water Sr-89 20.0 +/- 5.0 19.00 +/- 2.65 -0.35 Sr-90 15.0 +/- 5.0 14.00 +/- 0.00 -0.35 01/27/95 03/24/95 03/24/95 Water Gr-Alpha 5.0 +/- 5.0 5.00 +/- 1.00 0.00 Gr-Beta 5.0 +/- 5.0 6.00 +/- 1.00 0.35 02/03/95 03/20/95 04/21/95 Water I-131 100.0 +/- 10.0 88.33 +/- 2.31 -2.02 * * (d) 02/10/95 04/07/95 05/23/95 Water Ra-226 19.1 +/- 2.9 20.67 +/- 0.58 0.94 Ra-228 20.0 +/- 5.0 18.67 +/- 0.58 -0.46 03/10/95 04/06/95 05/19/95 Water H-3 7435.0 +/- 744.0 7066.67 +/- 115.4 7 -0.86 03/17/95 05/12/95 06/05/95 Water Pu-239 11.1 +/- 1.1 10.33 +/- 0.58 -1.21 04/18/95 06/30/95 08/18/95 Water Gr-Beta 86.6 +/- 10.0 80.33 +/- 2.52 -1.09 Sr-89 20.0 +/- 5.0 20.67 +/- 1.15 0.23 co Sr-90 15.0 +/- 5.0 14.67 +/- 0.58 -0.12 co Co-60 29.0 +/- 5.0 31.67 +/- 2.08 0.92 Cs-134 20.0 +/- 5.0 19.67 +/- 1.73 -0.12 Cs-137 11.0 +/- 5.0 11.67 +/- 1.53 0.23 Gr-Alpha 47.5 +/- 11.9 39.67 +/- 2.52 -1.14 Ra-226 14.9 +/- 2.2 15.67 +/- 0.58 0.60 Ra-228 15.8 +/- 4.0 13.00 +/- 1.73 -1.21 06/09/95 08/09/95 02/26/96 Water Co-60 40.0 +/- 5.0 42.33 +/- 2.52 0.81 Zn-65 76.0 +/- 8.0 82.33 +/- 3.51 1.37 Cs-134 50.0 +/- 5.0 46.67 +/- 2.08 -1.15 Cs-137 35.0 +/- 5.0 37.67 +/- 1.15 0.92 Ba-133 79.0 +/- 8.0 74.33 +/- 2.08 -1.01 06/16/95 08/09/95 09/05/95 Water Ra-226 14.8 +/- 2.2 15.00 +/- 0.00 0.16 Ra-228 15.0 +/- 3.8 14.00 +/- 0.00 -0.46 07/14/95 08/09/95 09/05/95 Water Sr-89 20.0 +/- 5.0 18.33 +/- 1.53 -0.58 Sr-90 8.0 +/- 5.0 8.0 +/- 0.00 0.00 07/21/95 08/18/95 09/27/95 Water Gr-Alpha 27.5 +/- 6.9 18.33 +/- 1.53 -2.30 * * (e)

Gr-Beta 19.4 +/- 5.0 19.33 +/- 1.53 -0.02 08/04/95 09/01/95 09/29/95 Water H-3 4872.0 +/- 487.0 4866.67 +/- 152. 75 -0.02 Footnotes at end of table.

VEPCO - SURRY EPA INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM 1995 (Page 2 of 2)

EPA Date TI Mailed Date EPA EPA TI Norm Dev. **Warning Preparation Re suits Issued! Results Media Nuclide Results(a) Results(b) (Known) ***Action 08/25/95 10/21/95 02/29/96 Air Filter Gr-Alpha 25.0 +/- 6.3 23.67 +/- 1.53 -0.37 Gr-Beta 86.6 +/- 10.0 84.67 +/- 1.53 -0.33 Sr-90 30.0 +/- 5.0 25.33 +/- 0.58 -1.62 Cs-137 25.0 +/- 5.0 27.00 +/- 1.00 0.69 09/15/95 11/10/95 02/26/96 Water Ra-226 24.8 +/- 3.7 27.33 +/- 1.15 1.19 Ra-228 20.0 +/- 5.0 14.67 +/- 0.58 -1.85 09/29/95 11/28/95 02/29/96 Milk Sr-89 20.0 +/- 5.0 23.33 +/- 3.06 1.15 Sr-90 15.00 +/- 5.0 16.33 +/- 0.58 0.46 1-131 99.0 +/- 10.0 103.33 +/- 5.77 0.75 Cs-137 50.0 +/- 5.0 54.67 +/- 2.52 1.62 Total K 1654.0 +/- 83.0 1683.33 +/- 136.50 0.61 10/06/95 11/10/95 02/26/96 Water 1-131 148.0 +/- 15.0 150.00 +/- 0.00 0.23 10/27/95 12/01/95 03/04/96 Water Gr-Alpha 51.2 +/- 12.8 37.00 +/- 3.00 -1.92 co Gr-Beta 24.8 +/- 5.0 25.33 +/- 1.53 0.18 I.D Footnotes:

(a) Average+/- experimental sigma.

(b) Expected laboratory precision (1 sigma, 1 determination)

(c) Normalized deviation from the known.

(d) The normalized deviation marginally exceeded the warning level and an apparent trend In. the results appeared. The cause was a probable high bias In the beta counting efficiency.

Check source control charts did not indicate any changes in the counting equipment, so the 1-131 calibration was suspected. New 1-131 calibrations were performed July 3 through 6, 1995 after receiving a new standard from the EPA. The intercompartson sample data sheets were recalculated with the new efficiencies and the average result was In excellent agreement with the EPA (96 pCi/1 versus the EPA value of 100 pCl/1). The discrepancy in the 1-131 efficiency between the current calibration and the previous one (aside from the uncertainty in the standard) appears to be an abnormally low yield In the preparation of the standard for the older calibration which created a high bias In the counter efficiencies.

The bias was less than ten percent, therefore further corrective action or revision of previously reported data is deemed not necessary.

(e) The mineral salt content of the water used by the EPA to prepare the samples has been shown to vary substantially throughout the year. Absorption curves to account for mount weight may vary from the true absorption characteristics of a specific sample. Previous results do not Indicate a trend toward "out of control" for gross alpha/beta analysis and the normalized deviation from the grand average Is only -0.36. The normalized deviation from the known for TBE-ES does not exceed three standard deviation and Internal spikes have been In control. No corrective action is planned at this time.

e EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM GROSS ALPHA IN AIR PARTICULATES (pg. 1 of 1) 60 40 CJ Q.

I..O 0

iii 0

I- 20 a

0

-20 +---r--..---.----.----,----,,---r--.,.-.....---r-~---.----.----.-----T----,r--r--.,.--,--~~---.----.----.----,-r---r---r--~

1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 I a Tl +/- 3 Sigma o EPA+/- 3 Sigma

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

140 120 100 a ua. 80 ia 0

ID I-

....... 60 40 i Hi i 20 0 ----~-------~-----------.----------------------~-~----

1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Ia Tl +/- 3 Sigma o EPA+/-~ Sigma

e EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM STRONTIUM-90 IN AIR PARTICULATES (pg. 1 of 1) 80 70 60 50 I

40 uC.

30 i

j ii i i Jf,1 ij i j i\ t~ . 1~ j iii

~ 0 20

"' I-

~

10 2

0

-10 1------~--------~---.---------.-------.---.--..---.-..--..--..----.....----~

1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Ia Tl +/- 3 Sigma o EPA+/- 3 Sigma

e EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM CESIUM-137 IN AIR PARTICULATES (pg. 1 of 1) 60 40 (J

C.

I..O w -

iv 0

I- 20 0

H

+-~--r---r----r-----r-..---.r--r---r---r--~~--r-~---r--.--..-.-~-r---r----r---r---r-~--r--T~---.r----1 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 I a Tl +/- ~ Sigma o EPA+/- 3 Sigma

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

80 60 I

Cl) 40 a

\D

~

0 a D.

20 0 O 0

"--------.-----..------------.----..----..------.....------.-------.-----....------t 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Ia Tl +/- 3 Sigma o EPA+/- 3 Sigma

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

80 60 I

Cl) 40 D ID

.i:,. -

0 C.

D 20 0 0 0 f-......--.---T---.---r----.--,......-....--T-......--r--r----r--r----.-......-....--.---T--r--r---r--r----.---....--.-----.---1 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 I c Tl +/- 3 Sigma o EPA+/- 3 Sigma

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

Cl)

I.Cl *-

u i []

in 1I! h ~ i U1 C. 20 []

~

0 f

+----r---r---r----.---.---.---.---.----,,----.----.---..-,---..--..---.-.....--.----.----,---,..---.--""T""--.----r----r--.---,---.r---1 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 I c Tl +/- 3 Sigma o EPA+/- 3 Sigma

e EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM POTASSIUM-40 IN MILK (pg. 1 of 1) 2400 2200 2000 1800 (I) 1600

(.J C. 1400 1200 1000 800 600 -+---.----,.---.~.,.........-.----.----,............,,--.......-~-r----,............,,--.......-..........-r---r............~...--..........-r---r............,--.,..............----,-___,.--,,~...--t 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 I a Tl +/- 3 Sigma o EPA+/- 3 Sigma

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

140 120 100 80 Cl)

ID

-..J

(.J 60 Il l I C.

40

~!

20

[]

jg ~

Cb 0 0

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

1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 I a Tl +/- 3 Sigma o EPA +/- 3 Sigma

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

80 60 U) co C1I 0

C. 40 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Ic Tl +/- 3 Sigma o EPA +/-:3 Sigma

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM GROSS ALPHA IN WATER (pg. 1 of 1) 180-r---------------------------.

160 140 120 100 CII 80 I

I.O I.O CJ II

a. 60 40 . ~

20 0

1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 I c Tl +/- 3 Sigma o EPA+/-3Sigma I

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

... 140 I-'

G) 120 0 0 0

C. 100 80

-20 i - - - - - - - - - - - - , . . - - - - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 4 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 I c Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA+/- 3 sigma I

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

140

...a,

• -u a

a C)

...... Cl.

100 2

60 p w1 f !~ f rf~ 2

~

id tl"~l1ij1t~a1 tf if ~ I1 I F~

C 20 a a

~ IJ~I~

-20 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 la Tl+/- 3 Sigma 0 EPA+/- 3 Sigma I

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM TRITIUM IN WATER (pg. 1 of 2) 4000 3000

~

Q) 2000 I-'

0 0 0.

N 1000 0

-1000 1------------.------------,,-------------------1 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 I c Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA +/-3 sigma

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

Cl) 8000 0

w u

0.

6000 Ci 4000 fJ j r 2000 0

ii 1 rr 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 IC Tl+/- 3 Sigma o EPA+/- 3 Sigma

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM IODINE-131 IN WATER (pg. 1 of 1) 180 160 140 120 100

!l []

~

I-'

0

~

...CII

• -(.J a.

80 60

~

t

~

I ~

f 40 20

~

II I D 0

-20 4--....-....-...--...--...--...--...--...--...--...--...--...--......-......-...--......-...--...--...-...----------~

1981 1982 1983 1984 1'985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1c Tl +/- 3 Sigma o EPA+/-3Sigma I

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM COBAL T-60 IN WATER (pg 1 of 2) 100 r----------------------------------,

80 60 Q)

I-'

C) tn -0 40 C.

20 0

a 0 0 0 a

lH i f

-20 1-------~-------y----""T"'"""'---""""""T""----..------.......,......------<1 1981 1982 1983 1984 1.985 1986 1987 1988 I a Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA +/-3 sigma

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM COBALT-60 IN WATER (pg. 2 of 2) 80 60

~ a I tI CIJ 40 It I I--'

0

• -(.)

O"I a. a

~

~

20 I i:i Ci 2 0

-20+---.------,---,-...---.----.---,-~-,-------,.-~~--r---r-~~---.---r-..--~--.----~

1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 I a Tl +/- 3 Sigma o EPA+/- 3 Sigma

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM CESIUM-134 IN WATER (pg. 1 of 2) 100 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

80 60

...a.,

0

--.J 0

c..

40 20

}]

I D

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 PROGRAM CESIUM-134 IN WATER (pg. 2 of 2) 100 . . . . . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,

80 60 I~

Cl) 40

+'

l 1--'

C) f~

OJ ()

a.

f l

20

~ r 0

~

a 2 ~ a

--.---.--......-----.---,---..--......---.---.---.-..--......---..---.---.-...-------..---.----,-t 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Ia Tl +/- 3 Sigma o EPA+/- 3 Sigma I

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

... 40 I-'

-0 Cl) 0 l.D C.

20 0 1 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 I CJ Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA +/-3 sigma

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM CESIUM-137 IN WATER (pg. 2 of 2) 120 -r----------------------------------,

100 BO I 60 CII 0

0 40 Q.

20 0

I I Q

~ Q

~ i

-20 +--.........----.-----r--..........----.----....--.--..........-------.-....----------.----------,.---1 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 I c Tl +/- 3 Sigma o EPA+/- 3 Sigma

e EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM STRONTIUM-89 IN WATER (pg. 1 of 2) 100 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .

80 60 a,

~ I i I-'

I-'

I-'

0 40 C.

20 0

i

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

e

. EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM STRONTIUM-89 IN WATER (pg. 2 of 2) 70 60 50 40 a,

30 I-'

I-'

N 0

C. 20 10 0

-10

-20+-...--..---..........___,.~--r--r---r----r-........--r--""T-..---..........~~--r--r---r------.--r--...--...---...---,----,.~--r---.--4 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 I a Tl +/- 3 Sigma o EPA+/- 3 Sigma

I EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM STRONTIUM-90 IN WATER (pg. 1 of 1) 70 60 50 40

...C1I 30 w

u 20 Q.

10 0

-10

+ - - r - - - r - - - . - - - . - - - . - - - . - - - . - - - . - - - . - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . , , . - ~ ~ ~ . . - - - , - r - - r - - r - - r - - r - - r - - r - - - , r - - - , , - - f 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Ia Tl +/- 3 Sigma o EPA+/- 3 Sigma