ML19319D937

Preoperational Radiological Environ Monitoring & Preoperational Water Quality Monitoring Programs,1970-71

ML19319D937
Person / Time
Site:	Rancho Seco
Issue date:	12/31/1970
From:	LFE INDUSTRIAL SYSTEMS CORP. (FORMERLY LFE CORP.)
To:
References
NUDOCS 8003270613
Download: ML19319D937 (118)

Text

.

. ~. _

t. '

i.

..l' i

i (j{.

i 1

O_9.t]a 5

4 IRegulatery File Cy.~

RANCHO SECO NUC'. EAR GENERATING STATION

~ RESULTS OF

.PPIOPERATIONAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRORIEN-TAL MONITORING AND PFIOPERATIONAL WATER 4

- QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAMS 1970 - 1971 i

1 e

4 J

I J

e w

i.

E~

w 4

n a

O g..'.Wy' 4 L d

-, *w >

1 l

1 f.

4 r

I 8003gyg jl 3

-Q t

g..

lz'8x

> :3 185 ige

.Ob s

'xE eM>

C l

Ei s

,m s

J

)

C J

L E

3 M

C/

t E

Ie tZ t

W U)<

W Q

et$

2 3

Ctlo:

o cc

E RANCHO SECO PRE-OPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEY

+

First Report i

(4th Quarter 1970)

~

SACRALIENTO AIUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT.

Sacramento, California (Contract No. 3566) l TRAPELO/ WEST LFE CORPORATION I

2030. Wright Avenue Richmond, California 94804 i

G r

3

.r y

~y

1 4

1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page No.

I.

Introduction 1

1 II.

Sample Processing Summary a.

Air Filters 2

b.

Milk i

7 c.

Mud & Silt 8

d.

Soil 9

e.

TLD-Film Badge 10 f.

Animal Vegetation 11 g.

Runoff water 12 h.

Surface Water 13 1.

Well Water 16 III.

Comments 17 4

1 emme +

' i e

1mE i

6 e

.g i

d 6

4

. I.

INTRODUCTION TrapeloAVest'(formerly TracerlabAVest) at Richmond, California, has been analyzing environmental samples from the area surrounding the site of the Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station as part of the Sacramento hIunicipal Utility District pre-operational background radiological survey.

This report covers the sample collection and analysis for the fourth quarter of 1970 (Oct.1 - Dec. 31,1970). Samples were collected by SAIUD personnel or their agents. Sample analyses were performed in accordance with standard TrapeloAVest analytical procedures. Analytical results are reported in accordance with standard practices used by TrapeloAVest for reactor environmental monitoring programs.

, a 4

1 O

e i O 4

I

• ha 5

0 t

I L

i 6

i

\\

.m.

~

i-II. - SAMPl.E PROCESSING

SUMMARY

Sample Type AIR FILTER Sample History Analytical Results

- A""*Y Sample Number Collection Location Collection Date Analysis

( pCl/m g, t ').

a 5

RAA-1 Northwest of Site (6 ml i

10/14/70 Gross beta-gamma 0.11

• 0.01 R AA-2 10/21/70 0.09

• 0.01 4

RAA-3 10/28/70 0.18

• 0.01 RA A-4 11/4/70

0. 33

• 0. Ol

• R A A-5 11/11/70 0.05

• 0.01 RAA-G 11/18/70 0.23

• 0.01 RAA-7 11/2G/70

0. IG

• 0. 01 RAA-8 12/2/70

0. 0G

• 0. 01 RAA-9 12/10/70 O.04

• 0.01 RA A-10 12/16/70 0.13

• 0.01 RAA-11 12/23/70 0.03

• 0.04 RAA-12 h

12/30/70 y

O. 04 6 0. Ol' Quarterly Composite NorthwestofSite(6 ml '

4th Qtr.1970 Gross alpha 0.004

• 0.001 (RAA 1-12) -

Gamma scan No peaks

• See comments section page 17.

1

m

~ ~ ~ ~

t U

II. SAMPLE PROCESSING

SUMMARY

Sampic Type AIR FILTER l

4 Sample Histor/

Analytical Results Results - Accuracy.

Sample Number Collection Location Collection Date Analysis

('pCi/m. i a 1) 8 RAB-1 N.W.of Site-Sacra. (22 mi) 11/3/70 Gross Beta-Gamma' O.19 0.01

.j' RA B-21 11/11/70 0.10 i 0.01

• RAB-3 12/15/70 O.09

• 0.01.

RA U-4 y

12/29/70 y

O.05 0.01-l

' Quarterly Composite N.W.of Site-Sacra. (22 mi) 4th Qtr.1970 Gross Alpha 0.004

• 0.001' ca RAB 1 Gamma Scan No peaks 1

i 4

k i

4 g

l' 4

l'

• See comments secti m page 17.

4 i

M M

M ~.C~7 f"~ T n n.n C2' f"*~1 ' 7i T 1

5 i

b'

'l s

II. SAMPLE PROCESSING

SUMMARY

Sample Type AIR FILTER

Sample Ilistory -

Analytical Results

- Sample Number ResuIts - Accurnoy Collection Location Collection Date Analysis

( pCi/m* :

• a.1 )

RAC-1 S.W. of Site -1 il (17 m i) 10/27/70 Gross Beta-Gamma 0.10

• 0.01*'

RAC-2 11/3/70 0.21

• 0.01 RAC-3 11/10/70 0.05

• 0.01 g

RAC-4 11/17/70 0.08

• 0.01

• 11/25/70 0.1G

• 0. 01

- RAC-5 RAC-G 12/1/70

0. 0G

• 0. 01 e.

RAC-7 12/8/70 0.12 t O. 01

• RAC-8 12/15/70 0.11 i 0.01 RAC-0 12/23/70-O.04

• 0.01 RAC-10 y

12/29/70 y

O.05

• 0.01 Quarterly Composite S.W. of Site - Endl(17 ro ()

4th Qtr.1970 Gross 'A Ipha 0.004

• 0.001 RAC 1-10 Gamma Scan-No peaks

.p I

i i

l-

• See commen$a section page 17.

e A;

~~

~

II. SAMPLE PROCESSING

SUMMARY

Sample Type AIR FILTER Sample IIistory Analytical Results Results - Accuracy 1 Sample Number

. Collection Location Collection Date Analysts

( pCI/m8 aa 1)

RAD-1 South of Site d mi )

10/14/70 Gross Beta-Gamma 0.12

• 0.01*

RAD-2 10/23/70 0.09 0.01 RAD-3 10/24/70

0. 08 i 0. 01 o

RAD-4 10/30/70 0.24

• 0. 01

~

RAD-S 11/3/70 0.28

• 0. 01 e

R AD-G 11/12/70 0.07

• 0.01 en RAD-7 11/17/70 0.25

• 0.01 RAD-8 11/27/70

0. 07

• 0.01*

RAD-9 12/G/70 0.0G

• 0.01*

RAD-10 12/12/70 0.07

• 0.01 RAD-11 12/18/70 0.03 a 0.01 RAD-12 12/24/70 0.03 0.01 RAD-13 y

12/31/70 y

O. 0G

• 0. 01 Quarterly Composite South of Site d mi )

4th Qtr.1970 Gross Alpha O.003

• 0.001 RAD 1-13 Gamma Scan No peaks

• See comments sect on page 17.

-a s

4

!!. SAMPLE PROCESSING

SUMMARY

Sample Type AIR FILTER

. Sample liistory Analytical Results Results - Accuracy

. Sample Number Collection Location Co!!cetion Date Analysla 4

( pCl/m *a1) 8 RAE-1 E. of Site - Tone n1 mil 10/14/70 Gross Beta-Gamma 0.14 4 0.01*

- RAE-2 10/20/70

0. 02 a 0. 01

• RAE-3 10/2G/70 0.17

• 0.01

' RA E-4 11/4/70 0.21 i 0.01 RAE-5 11/11/70 0.08 0.01 RAE-G 11/18/70

0. 20 t 0. 01 RA E-7 11/25/70 0.05

• 0.01*

RAE-8 12/2/70 0.05

• 0.01 R A E-9 12/0/"0 0.07

• 0.01*

RAE-10 12/1G/70 0.09

• 0.01 RA E-11 12/23/70 0.02

• 0.01 RA E-12 y

12/30/70

0. 0G i 0. 01 y

Quarterly Composite E. of Site -Ione(11 ml]

4th Qtr.1970 Gross Alpha 0.004

• 0.'001, R'AE 1-12 3

Gamma Scan No peaks

• See comments secti,on page 17.

i

a D

!! SAMPIE PROCESSING

SUMMARY

Sample Type MILK Sample History Analytical Results Sample No.

Collection Date

' Gross $, y

• • K

K y Scan

Sr 181I 18?Cs aM hation

( nCi/L

• e * )

( nCi/L i a )

(pct /L t a 1 ) (pCi/gm Ca i a )

(pCl/L

• oA)

. ( PC1/L $ o :

3 3

RMP - A 1.2/_28/70 0 t 0.2 1.33

• 0.07 No Peaks 1.4 + 0.3 N.W. of Site ( 7 ml)

RMP-B-1 12/28/70

0. 4

• 0. 2 1.19

• 0.06 No Peaks

2. 0

• 0. 4 S.W. of Site ( 9 mi)

.a RMP-C-1 12/18/70 0

• 0. 2 1.15

• 0.06 No Peaks 1.4 + 0.3 W. of Site (10 mi)

RMF - A - 1 12/28/70 0*2 0*3 N.W. of Site ( 7 mi) s RMF-B-1 12/28/70 1

0*2 0*3 S. W. of Site ( 9 mi)

RMF-C-1 12/28/70 0*2 0*4 W. of site (10 mi) l (a) Calcium Analysis 1.17 gm Ca/L (b) Calcium Analysis 1.19 gm Ca/L (cj_Qalcium Ana p ts 1.07 tem Cn/L-i

~

a 11 SAMPLE PROCESSING

SUMMARY

Sample Type

_ MUD & SILT Sample IIistory Analytical Results Sample No.

Co!Iect 1 Date Gross a Gross S. 7 y Scan

Sr and Location (nC1/kg

• c )

( nCl/kg A c 1)

( nCt/kg + e )

( pC1/kg

• a )

1 l

l a

RMSA 10/14/70 0t 30 32 + 1 No peaks 24

• 3 Ground runoff RMSB - 1 10/14/70 0

• 28 20

• 1 No peaks 11 t 2 oo Plant effluent HMSC-1 11/1D/70 0

50 48

• 2 No peaks 1G

• 2 Site Reservoir

11 SAMPLE PROCESSING

SUMMARY

Sample Type SOIL Sample History Analytical Results I

Sampic No.

Collection Date.

Gross a Gross B. Y y Scan

• • Sr 2

1 l

and Location (nCi/kg a)

{ nCl/kg

• a * )

( nCi/kg t a )

( pCi/kg

• a )

RSA - 1 10/13/70 0* 26 41 t 2 No peaks 21 a 2 N. Boundary Fence RSB - 1 10/13/70 0* 36 44 + 2

- No peaks 19

• 3 eo S.E. Boundary Fence RSC - 1 10/13/70 0

• 41 34

• 2 No peaks 108

• 4

• S.W. Boundary Fence RSD - 1 10/13/70 0

27 45

• 2 No peaks 0*2 East Boundary Fenco RSE - 1 10/13/70 0* 30 35

• 2 No peaks 13

• 2 West Boundary Fence

• See comrients section page IE and 19.

II. SAMPLE PROCESSING

SUMMARY

Samp!c Type TLD - FILM B ADGE Sample History Results

• Beta (mrem)

Gamma (mrem)

Sample Number Col!cction Location Sposwe Period Film Film Badge Badge I' - 1 North perimeter fence 4th Quarter 1970 0*30 0 *30 0

• 10 0

• 10 2-1 East perimeter fence 3-1 West perimeter fence 4-1 Southwest perimeter fenc( 1 Southeast perimeter fence G-1 Visitor's center 7-1 Rt.104 cntrance 8-1 N.W. of Site (G mi )

9-1 N.W. of site-Sacra.(22mi) 10 - 1 S W. ofsite-Lodt (17 mi) 11 - 1 South of site (.I mi )

12 - 1 Eastofsite-lone (11 mi) 13 - 1 West hillk Station (10 mij 14 - 1 S.W.ofsite-Galt (11 mi)

Commanche 15 - 1 S.E.of site-pes. -(llmi)

IG - 1 West of site-Clay (1.5mi) 17 - 1 S.W.. Milk station (9 mi)

U V

V V

V Based on comparts m with controls located northwest of site in Sacramento - SMUD I:Idtr. (22 mi)

11 SAMPLE PROCESSING

SUMMARY

ANIMAL VEGETATION Sample Type Sample Ilistory -

Analytical Results I

Sampic Specie Collection Dates Gross a Gross B, y

'"K K

soSr

• 8 4

H y Scan

& No, and Location

( nCi/kg t a l)

{ nCi/kg t 08)

( nCi/kg i a * ) ( pCi/kg i a )

( nCi/kg_ t c'l ) (nCi/kg

• a-l R LVE - 1 11/10/70 34A 3 20 + 1 234 + 20 No peaks (Grass Mixture) W. milk station >{10m )

R LV F 11/10/70 41 + 3 17 + 1 144 + 7 No peaks

'C (Grass Mixture) N.W.milkstation(7m L)

RLVG - 1 11/19/70 25+ 4 26

• 1 245

• 14 No peaks (Grass Mixture) S.W. milkstation(Onl i)

J

• Sec corr.ment section page 12; and 19.

l

a 4

II SAMPl.E PROCESSING

SUMMARY

RUNOFF WATER -

Sample Type Sample IIistory Analytical Results Co!!ection Date Gross a Gross S, y

'*Sr-8H*

y Scan Sample No.

& Location

( pCl/L t a 1)

( pCl/L t a )

{ pCl/L

• g 1)

( nC1/L t a )

{ pCl/L a 01) l 1

RRWA - 1 1/8/71 0

• 0. 4 Ground Runoff gy,,,,,

9.4 4 0.5 No nenkc:

residue 3.0 *0.3 No peaks RRWB-1 1/8/71 0

• 0. 4 filtrate Piant effluent

3. 7

• 0. 3 No peaks residuc

2. 0

• 0. 3 No peaks RRWC - 1

• 1/8/71 0

• 0. 4 Mixed runoff-effluent OI

at Site Boundary

3. 0

• 0. 3 No peaks

3. 0

• 0. 3 Mo_pcaks filtrate residire filtrate residuc 1

.e-,,,,...,.-...,n...

in

b b.

!! SAMPLE PROCESSING

SUMMARY

Sample Type SURFACE WATER Sampfe IIistory Analytical Results Collection Date Gross a Gross S, y

Sr -

8H*

y Scan

. Sample No.

& Location

( pCi/L a a 1)

( pCl/L gl)

( pCl/L e a 1)

{ nCl/L g 1)

( pCl/L i a )

l R5WA - 1 10/20/70

0. 7

• 0. 5 nitrate Commanche Reservoir

1. 8

• 0. 2 No peaks residue

1. 0

• 0. 2 No peaks RSWA - 2 11/20/70 0.7

• 0.4 nitrate Ccmmanche Reservc ir 3.8

0. 3 residue

1. 8 t 0. 3 R5WA - 3 12/23/70 1.0

• 0.4 nitrate Commanche Reservc ir 2.3 + 0.2 residue 0.8 + 0.3 filtrate residue nitrate residue

.c,,,,,,.,,,,...,..e-,a

...,a

I 11 SAMPLE PROCESSING

SUMMARY

Sample Type SURFACE WATER Sample Ilistory Analytical Results 80 8

Co!!ection Date Gross a Gross S, y Sr-11

• y Scan Samp!c No.

& Location

( pCi/L

• a 1)

( pCi/L

• c )

( pC1/L

• a 1)

( nCi/L a a 1)

( pCl/L

• a )

1 1

RSWB - 1 10/20/70

0. 8

• 0. 4 filtrate Folsom Reservoir

0. 6

• 0. 2 No peaks residue

1. G t 0. 2 No peaks RSWD - 2 11/20/70

0. 9 t 0. 4

^

filtrate Folsom Reservoir 1.4

0. 2 residue

1. 5

• 0. 2 RSWB - 3 12/3/70

1. 3 t 0.4 filtrate Folsom Reservoir

2. 2

• 0. 2 residue

0. 8

• 0. 2 filtrate residue filtrate residue

II SAMPLE PROCESSING

SUMMARY

Sample Type SURFACE WATER Sample !!istory Analytical Results Collection Date Gross a Gross S, y

• Sr-II

• y Scan Sample No.

& Location

( pCi/L t a 1)

( pCl/L t 01)

( pCl/L 6 a 1)

{ nCl/L g 1)

( pCl/L t gl)

RSWC - 1

• 10/20/70

0. 9 0.4 Citrate Fire Pond

5. 6

• 0. 4 residue

4. 7 + 0. 4 RSWC - 2 11/10/70 0 i 0.4 5

filtrate SMUD Reservoir

5. 0 t 0. 4 No peaks

• residue

8. 4 + 0. 6 No peaks

• RSWC - 3 12/23/70 0 + 0. 4 filtrate SMUD Reservoir 5.1

• 0. 4 residue

3. 8

• 0. 4 filtrate residue filtrate residue

• See comments s ection patre 18 and 10.

)

1 n 'a a

o s

s s

S

'k k

k L

a a

a Y/

e e

e p

p p

!C o

o o

p N

N N

(

)

1 a

4 5

5 t

0 0

0 H L i

i a

/

'0 0

G E

C 0

n

(

s t

)

lu 1

se a

R r

• lac S

i L

t y

• /

la i

Y n

C R

A p

A

(

M M

- U

_ - S

)

G 1

N y a IS 4

3 4

- S E

B 0

0 0

CO s L R

s/

P ol 1

rC 2

5 E

L G p 6

2 5

- P

(

M A

S E

I l

)

I d

1 n

a g a

8 s

• 1 so L eg r/

a G

lC p

)

n p

i R

'(

m o

i E

5 t

T c

A L

(

s W

l e

g l

t e

s L.

a n

t D

w n

i l

k E

n 0

y 0

n n

e W

no m

i 7

a 7

i

/

r a

oi

/

e m

l t

1 t

ia t

7 C

0 D

n t c 0

i o

c o 2

S

/

2 u

eL

/

8 e

/

e o

c l

0 n

/

t 0

t F

e i

o&

O 1

i l

s 1

S e

1 y

S C

f r

e o

o.

p ts y

T j

W i

l c

c Ie f I

i ip p

m m

a a

S S

1 1

1 o

. N e

A B

C

..l p m

W W

W W

W W

a s

R R

R

.E i

i It

i l

4

!{ i

-III. COhtAIENTS 1.

Air Samples (a) Sampic RAA-4 was rained on. This could result in either a loss of activity through solubilization of the collected residue or an increase of activity due to particulates precipitated by the rain and makes the result suspect.

(b) Sample RAB-2, RAE-7 and RAE-9 were received torn. This could have resulted in a loss of activity and r6akes the results suspect.

3 (c) Samples RAC-1 and RAC-7 had collection volumes of 581 and 757 ft,

3 respectively. The normal volume for a 24-hour period is 1400 ft,

This data may not be representative of the entire period (i.e. the power may have been off for several hours.)

(d) Samp'le RAC-4 was received torn and with a small hole in the center.

This makes the reported data invalid.

(c) Sampic RAD-1 was received with the residue smeared. This could have resulted in a loss of activity and makes the results suspect.

(f) Sampic RAD-8 was collected for 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> instead of 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> and was received two weeks after collection instead of within the normal one-week period. For maximum sensitivity and accuracy, air filters should be counted as soon as possible 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> after the collection time. The 72 hour8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> delay is necessary to permit the daughter products of natural radon and thoron to decay. This extra time before count-ing makes the data questionable (in theory),as the extra time could e

have resulted in decay of some of the short half-life isotopes had they been there. - (Note: This is not likely in actual fact to have happened as no sources of short-lived activity would have been available at that time. Ilowever, under operational conditions, early detection of any acitvity release would not be possible nor the results indicative of the amount.) The 48-hour collection only means that comparison of this value with 24-hour values from other stations is not possible as levels between days may differ by a factor of 2, 3 or more according to en-vironmental conditions.

(g) Sample RAD-9 was collected for 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> instead of the normal 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />. The 48-hour collection only means that comparison of this value with 24-hour values from other stations is not possible as levels between days may differ by a factor of 2, 3 or more.

(b) Sample RAE-1 was received torn and with app oximately 15'?, of the sample missing. This makes the reported data invalid.

(i) Sample RAE-2 was mistakenly collected on a " plastic divider" used to separate the filters rather than on a filter. The results are not representative and should not be compared with previous or subsequent results.

17 l

m l,.

2. - Soll Samples 90 l

(a) The RSC-I soll sample had a' sign'dcantly higher Sr value than the other soll samples. The reason for this is not known. It is recom-j mended.that a second sample from this location be collected and analyzed to determine whether the DOSr level at this location is really different

-or some weapons fallout had resulted in an unusually high value for this sample.

3. - Animal Vegetation Samples 90 t

I (a)

Sr is routinely determined by counting and decaying the rac'iochemically j

' separated 90Y daughter of 90Sr. Long lived beta activity v as observed I

-during the 90Y decay of the 90Sr analysis for all three animal vegetation i

samples.

90 The long lived component was computed and subtracted from Y decay plot. Future analysis will include additional 90Y purification chemistry l-to ensure maximum sensitivity for low level sampling.

4.

Runoff Wa' er t

?

(a) Sample RRWC-1 was a one-gallon sample collected on 1/8/71.. The October - November composite sample for this station was lost. The results from this sample may not be representative for the original collection period and should be used in future comparisons only If -

later data evaluation shows it to be valid.

i, 5.

Surface Water.

I t -

f (a) Sample RSWC-1 was collected from the fire pond as the site reservoir

' la not yet built. This data will not be valid for later comparisons with

.the site reservo'r data.

(b) Sample RSWC-2 was analyzed by gamma spectroscopy (i.e. gamma scan) as it was the first sample collected at this station. (Note: Number 2 was

---used to' simplify data comparison at a later date.)

6.

Miscellaneous Information

.l (a) TheoI reported in the tables represents one stagani deviation due to counting statistics. The o 2 reported with the K values is an esti-t-

mate of the reproducibility of the replicate readings on the flame photo-

~

meter. The o.3 reported with the beta 40K values is a combination I

of o 1 and o2,

-(b) Measurements below the limit of detection are reported as zero.

90 131

'(c). All values reported for Sr and 1 have been decay corrected back

. to the day of sample collection.

18 v

= +

1 &

~

e w---+,

.%<.r-

,----=ce m-

--v

l

. (d) The mud and silt, soll and vegetation samp!cs are calculated on dry samp!c weight arxl not the weight of sampic as received to eliminate

. the effect of water content (a variabic) on the results.

1

~ The initial tritium analysis for all water sahiples resulted in variable num-(e) bers.' Subsequent recounts for most samples indicated non-reproducible count rates, apparently caused by a faulty photomultiplier tube in the scin-tillation counter. This was corrected and the samples recounted. The.

results obtained are in better agreement within themselves and between -

stations.

The tritium values for this quarter's sampling were determined by using 1 mi aliquot of the water distillate for analysis. Future samp-ling will use 3 ml aliquois of distillate to improve tritium detection levels in water samples to meet SAIUD requirements. The samples will also be counted several times as a quality control check for the scintillation counter to eliminate this from happening again.

l' i

e e

k 1

2

~

s.

i-!.

,i

'{

A i

~

i i

r 9

E.

e 10

-.... -.