ML20041F705
| ML20041F705 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Kewaunee  |
| Issue date: | 02/26/1982 |
| From: | WISCONSIN PUBLIC SERVICE CORP. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20041F704 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8203170316 | |
| Download: ML20041F705 (110) | |
Text
4
.O KEWAUNEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANJ k
ANNUAL OPER ATING REPORT
'981 O
WISCONSIN PUBLIC- SERVICE CORPORATION WISCONSIN POWER a LIGHT COMPANY M A DISON GAS 8 ELECTRIC COMPANY O
/
p ( 0 [ !
ERRATA SHEET FOR KEWAUNEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT ANNUAL OPERATING REPORT 1981 Page 5, last paragraph should read:
On March 21, during performance of scheduled bi-weekly CRDM exercising, CRDM power supply fuses blew resulting in a reactor / turbine trip. The unit was l retur.ed to full load on March 23.
- Page 6, at very top of page delete the fragmented sentence.
- Page 23, first paragraph, delete:
"and the deaerated drains tank liquid volume and vent" Page 23, third paragraph, second line, change:
" sump" to " basement" -
- Page 27, first paragraph, seventh line, change:
"will be" to "has been"
- Page 31, second paragraph, change:
"(EIB 79-01B)" to (IEB 79-01B)"
- Page 36, first paragraph second line, change:
l " report" to " repair"
- Page 38, second paragraph, ninth line, change:
"is being" to "has been"
- Page 43, first line, change:
"thrity-two" to ." thirty-two" 4
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No.
1.0 Introduction 2 2.0 Summary of Operating Experience 4 3.0 Plant Modificationg Tests 16 and Experiments 4.0 Licensee Event Reports 26 5.0 Fuel Inspection Report 43 6.0 Challenges and Failures of 44 Pressurizer Safety and Relief
() Valves 7.0 Steam Generator Tube Inspection 45 8.0 Personnel Exposure and Monitoring 46 9.0 Environmental Monitoring 50 10.0 Report on Radiological Monitoring 54 l
i i-l
/m U
1 i
r-
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant is a pressurized water reactor licensed at 1650 MWt. It is located in Kewaunee County along Lake Michigan's northeast Wisconsin shoreline and is jointly owned by Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, Wisconsin Power- and Light Company and Madison Gas and- Electric Company. The nuclear steam supply system was purchased from-Westinghouse Electric -Corporation and is rated for a 1721.4 MWt output. The turbine-generator was .also-purchased from Westinghouse and is rated .at 540 MWe net. The architect / engineer was Pioneer Service and Engineering (PSE) from Chicago.
O The Kewaunee Nuclear- Power Plant ' achieved initial criticality on March.7, 1974. Initial power generation was reached April 8, 1974, and the plant was declared commercial n June 16, 1974. Since being declared commercial, Kewaunee has generated 27,952,400 MW hours-of electricity as of December- 31, 1981, with a net-plant capacity factor of 75.2% (using net DER).
1.1 Highlichts During the year, the Kewaunee Nuclear Plant was
-base loaded. The unit was- operated- at 83.4%
capacity factor (using net MDC) with a gross efficiency of 32.7% The unit- and reactor 2
7-availability was 86.7% and 87.7% respectively.
Table 2.1 is a compilation of the monthly summaries of the ope.:ating data, Table 2.2 contains the yearly and total summaries of the.
operating data, and Figure 1.1 provides a histogram of the average daily electrical output of the Kewaunee Plant for 1981.
On April-20, the unit was removed from service for refueling number six. Thirty-two fresh assemblies were loaded for cycle VII. The unit was returned to service June 6.
O 1
i f
I
{
4
- (:) >
3 l
t i
w- r ,e-,-,, y ., r-.-r y-m--, ..- ----- , -,-ww- r~e,,cm.w,,--~w,-,-,-m,.--,--+,--.mcw,w,.-.-.-r,-.,,-w-.m ----,,-w,-wer* eve---*+ + - ~ ' c,- e
2.0
SUMMARY
OF OPERATING EXPERIENCE January On January 21, speed control was lost to Heater Drain-Pump 1B. Unit load was reduced to 485 MW for repairs.
The unit was returned to full load on-January 21.
PLANT SHUTDOWNS: There were no plant shutdowns during the month of January.
Fe,bruary On February 1, load was reduced to 490 MW for Heater Drain Pump maintenance. The nnit was returned to full load on the same day.
On February 11, load was reduced to 225 MW for-
,_ condenser water box tube inspection. The unit was s- returned to full load on February 12.
On February 14, load was reduced to 500 MW for substation transformer maintenance. The unit was returned to full load on the same day.
On February 27,. load was reduced to 490 MW for Heater Drain Pump maintenance. The unit was returned to full load on the same day.
On February 28, the plant tripped on a steam / feed. flow mismatch and steam generator low level when an instrument air line to a feedwater regulating valve 4
F ruptured and the valve closed. Tae unit was returned
-O to service on the same day.
PLANT SHUTDOWNS: Feb. 28, forced shutdown-3.1 hrs.
An air line joint failure resulted in a loss of control air to a feedwater regulating valve which then failed shut. The reactor tripped on steam flow / feed flow mismatch coincident with low steam generator level.
March On March 2, the unit was returned to full load after the' trip'on February 28.
On March 12, load was reduced to 490 MW for heater O drain pump maintenance. The unit was returned to full load on the same day.
On March 21, during performance of scheduled bi-weekly CRDM exercising, CRDM power ' supply fuses blew resulting in a reactor / turbine trip. The unit was returned to PLANT SHUTDOWNS: March 21, forced shutdown-24.5 hrs.
During performance of scheduled bi-weekly CRDM exercising, CRDM power supply fuses blew resulting in a reactor / turbine trip. End-of-life conditions delayed restart until the post-trip Xenon transient was passed.
S
T
,, full load on March 23.
('v')
April On April 20, the unit was shutdown for refueling.
On April 30, the reactor cavity was being filled in preparation for fuel movement.
PLANT SHUTDCWNS: Apr. 20, scheduled shutdown-243.0 hrs.
Commenced Cycle VI-VII Re fue li.ng Outage.
May On May 1, the fuel shuffle was started.
On May 9, the fuel shuffle was completed.
/~N t t
\/ On May 10, The annual diesel generator blackout test was performed.
On May 25, the Reactor Coolant System was filled and vented but had to be drained again when reactor coolant pump 1A seal leakoff flow could not be established.
On May 30, the Reactor Coolant System was again filled and vented; a pressurizer bubble was then established and the plant was taken to hot shutdown conditions.
On May 31, the Reactor Coolant System integrity test
- was satisfactorily completed.
s-6 l l
l l
l I
fs PLANT SHUTDOWNS: May 1, scheduled shutdown-744.0 hrs.
( )
\'/ Continued Cycle VI-VII Refueling Outage.
June on June 3, initial criticality for Cycle VII was achieved and zero power physics testing started.
On June 4, zero power physics testing was completed.
On June 6, the unit was rsturned to service and power escalated for the turbr ie overspeed testing. The turbine /reac*.or was manually tripped when a turbine coupling bolt had loosened. The unit was returned to
,f g service on June 6.
(s_-)
On June 7, the unit was removed from service for turbine overspeed and torsional testing. The unit was returned to service on June 7.
On June 12, the monthly turbine stop valve operability check was completed.
On June 15, the unit was at full load.
On June 21 and 23, unit load was decreased to check for leakage in condenser tubes.
s PLANT SHUTDOWNS: June 1, scheduled shutdown-129.7 hrs.
(v) 7
The Cycle VI-VII Refueling Outage was
'A
\/ ) concluded on 6/6/81 at 0044 hours5.092593e-4 days <br />0.0122 hours <br />7.275132e-5 weeks <br />1.6742e-5 months <br />.
June 6, forced shutdown-19.7 hrs.
The turbine was manually tripped when a high-pitched noise was emitted from the area of a turbine bearing. Since power was above 10% the reactor ripped automatically when the turbine was tripped. The noise was caused by a loose turbine shaft coupling nut rubbing against the housing.
June 7, scheduled shutdown-7.0 hrs.
A short outage was taken to perform the scheduled turbine overspeed and torsion tests.
July On July 4, the unit load was decreased for the monthly turbine stop valve test.
On July 3, 10, 14, and 15, load was decreased for maintenance on heater drain pump 1B.
l On July 20, unit load was decreased to 80% because the l
i l
f- circulating water dicharge temperature was approaching V'
I 8 i
the Technical Specification limit of 860F. A Technical Specification change was received on July 21 and the unit was returned to full load.
PLANT SHUTDOWNS: There were no plant shutdowns during the month of July.
August On August 9, the monthly turbine stop valve test was completed.
PLANT Sif0TDOWNS: There were no plant shutdowns during the month of August.
September On September 5, unit load was reduced for performance of test procedure RT-lO, Power Defect Measurement, was started.
N./
On September 7, test procedure RT-10 was completed and the monthly turbine stop valve test was jerformed. The unit was then returned to full load.
PLANT SHUTDOWNS: There were no plant shutdowns during the month of September.
October On October 3, the unit load was reduced to 225 MW to check for condenser leakage. The monthly turbine stop valve test was completed during the power reduction.
The unit was returned to full load on October 4.
On October 31, the unit load was reduced to 225 MW to x
9
check for cor. denser leakage. The November turbine stop valve test was also completed during the power reduction. .
PLANT SHUTDOWNS: There were no plant shutdowns during the month of October.
November On November 1, the unit was returned to full load after a condenser Isak check was completed.
On November 214 the unit load wat reduced to 225 MW to-check for condenser leakage. The turbine stop valve operability test was completed during the power reduction. The unit was returned to full load on November 21.
-O PLANT SHUTDOWNS: There were no plant shutdowns during the month of November.
December On December 26, the unit load was reduced to 390 MW to l perform the monthly turbine stop valve operability thst. The unit returned to full load on December 26.
On December 27, turbine control valve Nc. 2 failed open and unit load was reduced to 390 MW to permit corrective maintenance. The unit ~ was returned to full load on December 27.
PLANT SHUTDOWNS: There were ne plant shutdowns during the month of December.
1 Nj 10
J 4
t 4
2 t
I l
L 1, 600 - . ., ,. .,. , ... .... :. ..
. J.. ....
....a. . a. . ,. . . t. ..
. _-t . _ .. . _.... ... _ . .. .. . . _ .. _.... .... . . . _ .. . .. _. ... t, .. . . _-_ .. _ . _ . .. .,.. _. _. . . _ _...
. .. t,. .
._ ....... _ _ ... .4. _..., _. . . . . . ,......_
....m.
. .. . . . ~ .,, . . . . . . , - . ....
, 4 . ., .
.i. . 7. ...
i .. . .
, . t. . .
_.. . - . . . . .._.. ....._ - .. .. 4~. ... . ... .
., .. i .
... . t.. . i. .
.2,.
i.,
.., c. ,
..._.. .2 ... .... .
.- _... _.. t... .. L .- ,..... _ . ....... . . -. . _ .. . t. .... _- .........-. .. _... ... ... .. .-
. -r
- - - + - - - - + - - -
W
<*-' r ! w-st > ;
.7'+ f- -. - - - - - N. Mi-
.. . .q. . . r". If".. - ,
1, mtr t. I.. i. ..
500 -
1, a, .,
... . . ...,. . t .-. .
j ,-
~..l.... ,. +.. , . . - , ... ..
. n. . . ..
6..
... . . . . . , . _ . _, . .. ,. . , . . . 1
.e.... . , . - . ..A.. . . .
.. . .+w 4- . , . . .4. _4..... .
.. g., . . q. . . , . , . _.
.p4 ... .
.2 . . .
,I...
44 ..
-). --6
{. ..4
. .. _ g
.I .6 . j 4. ,
- . e
.4 T t
...,. .y,. ,.
] ,
,6 "
4,
. g
.. . , .4-
.e. . .
. .,...<., .. ,}.,
4.... 6 ...- + . .. 4 4
+.
i 4 ...
... . .. 9 4 ... ,_- 4 ...
,.I.-
.6, ...
, .4. .
6+
4' a
.+
.. -4 i e. ,.ls. g. . . .
{ ,t
.4 , ! , t ..
...e
- , }. 4 . . a -
..,e.... . - . ....h,.. .. 4j .
...4 . 4 ,.
,,.e.
W .. ..4
. ~.. .. . ..
..,4.. .t.... .., .. .- + 9, .~.
.. . .+.o .... .. .. +. ..
4.... .
. - . 4... . + . . . - . , . . . .
r.-,
I g+
9
- e. .,a..
.49.
u.., , , . .J.
4.
... ,..- ; . 4
.+.4
.i 4
4:
9
- a. ".{. {.. ., .,.. . ..+.
- g. ,
6 21 .. .
eies.- - .
.(
. .4. , ,. , . . , e , ... S. .t.. , , ,
i
.e ,9 . 6 6
,..4 , 4 4(i t ..
- ,.1 , ,. _ . . . . 4..+ . . .. .4L 3. g ., . '
9 . ..
. .........- -....... .i . . ...-.. . .
, .......- . - . . ... ,.. +
...- +, .<
. . n, 4 . .
5..w
+. .
... .. 4.,. .
+...
6...
- a. a -
. . +. , . . . . .+ . . . ,.. .
.~.. . ...
a,.-
,=.
. . ....i.. . ,. .
g 4.. . ... .
.. ,4,, ... . . .
. ~ . - .
-9. .- . 4.4 . ,4 .l. + s
- ,e.- f.
.,4,.
,.4& ,.{,
.....&.. . . .. ., -, _ . . . .. ~. ,* .m e. ...-g. 6.
. .....+.
. ..+ , , +.
A" 6+ A
.. .,6, .p.- -
..'..,. .{.-
. . , .. . . + .. .e..
, . 4,... . , . .
. --...-]... 4. e.. .
.,.,.. - , . , .. .,.i , .
i p. . + _ . .. .
. ... -- .. . . g.
. +j4. .. .
..l..,~~.
e ,
4
) ,- + 4
..4. .l. .g,
..1
,.9- +
,6 .
y.. .p.
..,s.
, ,4, ,..
4 . ,
,1_ . .
... . .,, , .,. .cI ... .i .T ... . , .... ,, ., .,. .. ... , . . . . .
.. .... .. ,.. . ,.... . . , ... , ..t ..,
p .... ..
.. . 17 .
y ....m. .4
. + ...,
+ .
- & . g .
A.
4,., +.. ....6.
a.
.. . . ., T..
- 4. ~
..,.e4
, ...+
t 3
e., ..,. 9. . .,. . .
,a.5. . 6 +
. .. . . .4.. .a*+.++
e
. 4 . ... .. .4 . 9. . 4- + 4 3 -
4 g 3 0 0 eme.am
~ ~
i . . .
e*
. - * * +.'- * .
.7 ,-- oe~ . * - .
t
- *f .t.
- p. . 't,,, .
. ... 4..... . - ,..,... . ' ' ' .,.. .. ,4 . i+ .
, . a+ .
- . "'. , '. .. .' _. *,,4 . . . t. * * $ .-
... .,.... . .+
....q.. ,,, g 4
.4...+. . ... =.. . .. .. , .
-..4 ...
4 . .
5.,
).
'd . ,e.
e 4
+. .
4
...4.+.......oe..
.. + ,. .
.e
.,. o ...4 e
c .
. . .,, . .4.. . e +
l
,. s.. . . . -
+*
1..
,3 ..
5.., .t,.
. t . . 4. +.
.4
.. +6 4
. -- 6 ..,.
..- ..... - . . .q.i A.,.. ..
,. . s, ).. . .4, . ..4 .,i ,...
j.
++. . . .
. . 4.
.1... . . - ..
.9 .m
.]' ...v ........+ ..
^1 4.
..)
. 4.,.
. : 6. . .
. . +. . ,
...,.. .t l
.l .
. +
E. . . . .. . t._....
. t'-
.. e .. , *
.e- .,....
4....
...+4.,...
.t +..... ...
.. ..4 .,
. 4
_.. _... ..._a... . ..e
,... . ., . ..... . . . _ ...a. . _ ..
.y.... ....I.
a.,
. ... .......o.. .. .._......
1,
. - 9.
a .. . . ..
4,
.+
. , ,. f .t . . . .. . . . . !. . . .. .. ..
1
. ,...d..
.t...
.t,_., .4 .. . . . . .
4
..I. , .
,l..,..
.. 4...
. ... .... .! .. . t . ., .
.. .. .- 9 _....
- i. .,.. 4, .
. _ 9. _... .-4_ _ . . ..
i .4
... _ . . ... _... 9 _... .r..
... _ . ... . .. . r.
1 m...... . .. . . . . . .
.t..- ...
........ . t. ., .
- a. .,.,-
e.
g.-..... ,... _.
.a. .
. ,t
+.e.
_.._. 4
.. a. . .
, .t.
4
, t.
).
.. .o 4
. ... . . . .. L .-
- t. ... . .
, ., . . ... .i.
.. .t. ..
L_. . ._... ...
........ . .. . ... ...t... ..
. ... _.... .. . .. .~... ..._. ....t. . . _ . . . . .. ........
.i .
4 . . .
.. _ . ~ .
... . . . ~ . = ... .. a4 ....
i, . .. ... ... .. . . .
.... t. .. ... .. . .
. ~.
. ..t...
100 -
. J.. ..
... t. ,
. ... .... .m
.. .m....... . .... . .t.. .. .. _... _._..L... . -..,... .a . .. . . .
. . . . ..t _.. . -..
. t. .
. L. . . . .
- t. . .. ..
. .. t..
. t. . ...
. , . . . . .. _ ..o I...
.n. t.
.i...
. .. .... ,.. . a.. ..
.o
.t. . . , .
.c . .... . ,
. ..t . . ..
.. r
...,u..
...... L.
.._ . . . . ..- .t,..... . . . . ... . . _ . _ .._... ..
o... ..
_....t
.... ....T...
~ . .
. ....4. .t . _t...
..., s . ~ . ..u....
... . . L. r. . . . ..,
.. t.. . ...i-...-..-.
. .. ~ . . ....
=
.t.
. t. .
.. . . ...t. .
..r
. t... .t O_
i l JANUARY FEBRUARY MARCH APRIL MAY JUNE w -
, 1981 _
J 1
Figure 1-1 (Page 1 of 2) KEWAUNEE POWER HISTORY i i
s i AVER AGE DAILY MWE -NET
, _ _ _ . - ._ _ _ . ~- . . _ - . -- . -.. . - _ _ . _ .- - _ _ _ - - _ _
2 1
r
^
\ .
,i 4
i, 600 - .
t.
_. . ,. t,.
j , ,, ,g 7_...
l , g
_ . _ ....,.. + .
...;: ,,4. _ . . ,
! . . ...... ;t i' .1 ; .t- . ,
r ; t
_ _'. u , . . i ; :). :_
.t_' _. _.. ' ._ . .. ., ..
. _ i n _ .]+ ... -
_,._. . _. _...__4.__.
- :+-,..
1 . .:. :t
. . :l: ... ....t.. _. . _ , .t .. :!: :;: i : :)
. _ . ._.. . . . . _. 1 ' _. ...:.NL. . ...... .
. . _ .. . , ... . r ' .. _ ..._._.._i. .. ' . _
m i
500 -
g l
. ...PN a,
4 -: ^f ' '
ts r m._u).-nrAnV le
.t:.
a -
' C' ,
4.
h.
4 . . .
t + . ., .,. . , .. .
,. ).
.e
.a., , . ,. . ,._.
4
, .# . . _ .. .....- _. 4...
8 ..
...fip.
- t, t i I i
, . . . 6 . g
. .l. . ,.
, , j +t l
.g.
. 4 _.s, _. .,,_ ., .. . ._.,. . , , , ,.
._. .. ..e. . .,
.e.+ --
+
_ . w_
4 ..
. . . _ _ . . _ , . . . .. . u.
4 p..
i ,
3 I, . . a .. I 4 4 e
,,.. .t-.. , - -
.' - .=
. e 4 . .. . .
.). ., ,
..,.-.6.,.. .. , 4-
- 4 *
,.64 6 .p. .. .a + ., .l. . . f. ., . . , .
. ._ }, ._ . -.
. ;e ~~; .;. j
. -.t.
- t. -
t, .,- ..1. . .
4 . .. ... I.. . , .. .. . . . .
400 - . ,
. . g...
a a 4
6
. i .. ., . .
,. , . . 4,. . 4., _...
. .. _. . . . . , . ..... ...l .. .... . , . . ... . . ... . . +
.. .+. +. _ . ...
. . ~.J.
.-4..,. . . . .. . ._.
.. .. , . f, _
. , . . 4 .. .
- n. . . . . t. ...,~..
. +., . . .
.g .
.,. . 9, . ,
, .9 .
, i
...,., i .. . . . . ...
., 6 .
.._-._.1
- _..t.._.
g...
. .. . : 4. . .
.+& _, ... ..
. . . 4. - .,~. ,. ,.
.l--
p ; -
..,s ,. ,
e , .
.-e. .j
. g. , .. 1 .
.{.
- i;; %. .;n n
- n J 4.n1.. ! . u. .;__ ; n.
~. ..; t, t. . .;-...l u. .:. L .;;. p ;;_.. _.;; a 1
. . un 4. :. .n.
L.;; .
,e,. t. ... ..
. . . . a. . .i t, u .,.
a,n_ ;;;n. ..
j g~ ~-t.
l '+- .g' +t '
~
l
' '* - -' -l*
- 3 4. .
- r. B 300 - .. ,
. +. ' ,. .",'. ., , . . ,
ra .... .t..,..
4, .. t.. ,. . .4
. i . . ..,
.~....
7... ... g . .
- g. ..
. 3_, ...
. .o ..g.. ,
,1.
. ... .. ... . .t. .
.. f .,,.
_.. l.. .. _. . . _ . .
.... ._. ... .. .+ ,
.m
. . -... _..,..._. ---_w .. . .... .... . . - ...
. ~ _ _.,
.Is
,l ., .. , . . . . .
4, . .!. , .
. .. .. .t
. . _ ..t......
._.._....._.._.t. ._ .....,. .
.. . .4 _ . . . . . _ _ . .. . , . _. ... _ . . . . .. .. .. . . . _ ..t . . . , . _ _. .._ . . _ t. _. . . . _ . . ._ . . .+
. . a. . . . _ _ _
+
. . o.. ,
.+
- t. ... .
.t. .,.
4
.t 200 - . . .. . .
. . .t. ..
., . .... . ..4 ,.....
,t 4 .
..t... .!.
._._ . .. .. ... . . .. .t3;_..
g...
_. .3 7
. .. y ,._.._... . _ . . .. .. ... . ...i._... g .q,. .
..g.... .
.g . _. . ..
t..
.l;. .,, .
.i . .
_ . f. .
.t...
.. . .. . . ...-- . . . .J. . , ,,
.+. ..... . . _.....4 __ _t.
. _ . . . _ .. ..._+ .. _.
i :: : .'
+
- * .p
.:t..
.g,
- p.. -
".. .._ : !". t .- t.
1 : t.
,... y
- r. ..
.. . ..y .... . ... . . .. . .
.,..o..
..p . . - . ...... ..y -.' g -
...gy . _..p..
9... .
- p. ... . .
3 ,
m.!. .t.
. ': : .g. j.
i t: .t'
' ~ * ' + "
- !: . m .
- '
- ' :3. . :
_. . n '
- .;: t:
- o. ,,. .. ..
... t... ,
_. .......t.a.
..t. . . . _ ..._..L.... _ . .t. ._... . . ...., .... _ . ...
.. ... t.
.t
.. ..L_.... _ . ...
. t. _. . . .
.. ..,. . .. 1 . .. .
.. .. . . _ . . _. ..e.__.
... .. .. _ . o
._....t.
. . . t_....
. L, .
.... . ~ .
4
.t.. . ..... , I . .-
- t. .... . . +.
. . . i.+ . . ..,.
. .4,
.4
._., _. 4 ...
_. .., ....a_.... .~ _ . . .. . .
...a.-.
! .. . . - . . . . - ~ . . ...
t... . .. 6 .. .
.a. , . . , e ..
+ . . .
.2,
.t. ..
, .t.
O-i' J U LY AUGUST SEPTEMBER OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER I . 1981 5 Figure 1-1 (Page 2 of 2)
KEWAUNEE POWER HISTORY AVER AGE D AILY M WE -NET
. . _ . _ _ . . _ -._. _..._... .._. ~.-. . _ __,_. _ _. -. _. _.. _ ._ _ __ _ _. .m._. _ _ _ , _ _ _
. ~ . _
O O O TABLE 2.1 (Page 1 of 2)
ELECTRICAL. POWER GENERATION DATA (1981)
MONTHLY i
January February March April May June Hours RX was critical 744.0 670.2 727.5 477.4 0.0 643.2.
RX Reserve Shutdown Hours 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0-Ilours Generator On-Line 744.0 668.9 719.5 476.0 0.0 573.3
- Unit Reserve Shutdown Hours 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Gross Thermal Energy Generated (MWH) 1,'223,429 1,077,953 1,136,912- 777,154 0 777,459 4
Gross Elec. Energy Generated (MWil) 402,700 353,200 373,600 254,900 0 253,900-Net Elec. Energy Generated (MWII) 385,002 336,946 355,650 242,623 0 239,913 3
RX Service Factor 100.0 99.7 97.8 66.4 0.0 89.3 i RX Availability Factor 100.0 99.7- 97.8 '66.4 0.0 89.3 i
Unit Service Factor 100.0' 99.5 96.7 66.2 0.0 79.6 Unit Availability Factor 100.O 99.5 96.7 66.2 0.0 79.6
)
Unit Capacity Factor (using MDC net) 99.1 96.1 91~.6 64.6 0.0 63.8 l _ Unit Capacity Factor (using DER net) 96.7 93.7 89.'4 63.1 0.0 62.3 Unit Forced Outage Rate 0.0 0.5 3.3 0.0 0.0- 3.3
- Hours in Month 744 672 744 719 744 -720 Het MDC (Mwe) 522 522 522 522 522 522 f 13 L _ _ _ _ _ _ , _
I s.) V (v )
TABLE 2.1 (Page 2 of 2)
ELECTRICAL POWER GENERATION DATA (1981)
MONTHLY July August September October November December 744.0 744.0 720.0 745.0 720.0 744.0 llours RX was critical RX Reserve Shutdown Hours 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 744.0 744.0 720.0 745.0 720.0 744.0 llours Generator On-Line Unit Reserve Shutdown flours 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Gross Thermal Energy Generated (MWH) 1,204,230 1,222,464 1,161,892 1,170,754 1,148,183 1,219,280 Gross Elec. Energy Generated (MWH) 393,200 396,700 376,200 380,600 373,900 399,300 377,672 357,807 361,948 356,118 381,432 Net Elec. Energy Generated (MWH) 374,176 RX Service Factor 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 RX Availability Factor 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Unit Service Factor 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Unit Availability Factor 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Unit Capacity Factor (using MDC net) 98.8 99.7 97.6 94.9 96.6 100.1 94.0 94.9 92.9 90.8 92.5 95.8 Unit Capacity Factor (using DER net)
Unit Forced Outage Rate 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 744 744 720 745 720 744 llours in Month 509 509 509 512 512 512 Net MDC (Mwe) 14
TABLE 2.2 O' ELECTRICAL POWER GENERATION DATA 1981 YEAR CUMULATIVE Hours RX was critical 7,679.3 56,001.9 RX Reserve Shutdown Hours 0.0 2,330.5 Hours Generator On-Line 7,597.9 54,806.8 Unit Reserve Shutdown Hours 0.0 10.0 Gross Thermal Energy Genert sa 3 MWH 12,119,710 84,806,934 Gross Electrical Energy Gen. MWH 3,958,200 27,952,400 s Net. Elec. Energy Generated MWH 3,769,287 26,600,257
) RX Service Factor 87.7 84.7 RX Availability Factor 87.7 88.2 Unit Service Factor 86.7 82.9 Unit Availability Factor 86.7 82.9 Unit Capacity Factor (using MDC Net) 83.4 76.9 Unit Capacity Factor (using DER Net) 80.4 75.2 Unit Forced Outage Rate 0.6 4.8 Hours in Reporting Period 8,760 66,145
( \
%. /
15
4 3.0 PLANT MODIFICATIONS, TESTS AND EXPERIMENTS This section is provided in accordance with the requirements of Part 50.59 (b) to title 10, Code of Federal Regulations (10CFR50.59(b)). This regulation allows licensees to make changes in the facility as described in the Safety Analysis Report, make changes in procedurea as described.in ~ the Safety Analysis Report, and conduct tests and experiments not described in the Safety Analysis Report without prior NRC approval provided the change, test or experiment does not involve a change in the Technical Specifications or an unreviewed safety question. 10CFR50.59(b) requires
, that such changes be reported on an annual basis.
3.1 PLANT MOD 1FICATIONS, 10CFR50.59 There were no modifications during 1981 which 4
introduced an unreviewed safety question and, therefore, prior NRC approval was not required.
The following summary of modifications includes these significant modifications completed during 1981 and not previously reported. Many of these modifications'are not soecifically required to be reported by 10CFR50.59(b) since they do not constitute a change in the facility "as described 1
in the Safety Analysis Report", however, they are considered to be of significance, warranting O
f 16
_ . . ~ -
mention in this report.
Turbine A new low pressore rotor was installed in LP-2 cylinder-location to allow for refurbishment of the original LP-2 rotor. This will provide a means for-interchangability of LP rotors, thus allowing greater flexibility 'in future inspections, maintenance and operation.
Summary of Safety Evaluation:
The new LP rotor is of similar . design as the original rotor, although~it is more massive'than the original. However, improvements _have been gs made which decrease the' probability 'of a- disc
- Q) failure. Westinghouse has performed an etraluation which shows that the probability of missile generation is sufficiently low such that-there is
~
no decrease in the public health and safety due to this installation and use of the new rotor.
Diesel Generator _. Mechanical Control circuitry for the safeguards diesel generator air start system was modified to provide for more comprehensive testing and increased _ starting reliability. The modification was completed on D/G 1A during the 1981 refueling and will be completed on D/G 1B during the 1982 refueling. (DCR 882)
O-17
, Summary of Safety Evaluation:
k
'- This modification enhancea the dependability of
'che air start system.
Communications Systems Safeguards power was supplied to all Gaitronics by connecting them to the emergency lighting panels, EMP 1 through 4. (DCR 896)
Summary of Safety Evaluation:
This will enable communication necessary to run the plant during a blackout. It will also provide for the operation of the site evacuation alarm and the fire alarm under blackout conditions.
g- Auxiliary Building Ventilation LJ The Syent Fuel Pool Sweep System fan controls were modified to require both exhaust fans to be running before the supply fan can be started.
Summary of Safety Evaluation:
The supply fan has greater capacity than a single exhaust fan so this modification prevents an oversupply situation.
Chemical and Volume Control A program was inetituted to continually upgrade the Boric Acid Heat Tracing circuits. As problem areas are identified the existing Electro-Wrap will be replaced with the new Auto-Trace heat tracing. Heat tracing s control circuits will be modified such that temperature
'w]
18
7- inputs will come from the coldest thermocouple in each circuit. This will enhance temperature control. (DCR 1032)
Summary __ Safety Evaluation:
This program provides a method to continually upgrade the system.
480V Supply and Distribution The fill li mit for safeguard control cable trays was raised from 40% to 50%. The old limit of 40% was set conservatively during plant construction.
Summary of Safety Evaluation:
An evaluation of the cables actually installed in the tray along with the expected loads showed
(~x that the fill limit can be raised to 50% without
~
jeopardizing the safety of the plant.
Miscellaneous Drains and Sumps Valve MD(R)-137 (WD 40-1) (Refueling Cavity Drain to Containment Sump "A") was changed from normally closed to normally open during plant operation.
Summary of Safety Evaluaticn:
Operation of the Internal Containment Spray System post LOCA would result in a considerable quantity of water collecting in the refueling cavity. With MD(R)-137 open this water will be allowed to mix with water in the containment sumps from the RCS, accumulators and RWST. Since r s, the caustic solution for pH control is added via i
( ';
19
Containment Spray this will result in better pH I .s'l
\'l control during the recirculation cooling mode.
TMI Modifications Additional modifications for NRC recommendations resulting from the accident at Three Mile Island were completed during 1981. Final check-outs, system testing and procedure preparation is already complete for some of the modifications and will be completed in early 1982 for the remainder.
These TMI Modifications are as follows:
Auxiliary Feedwater System The auxiliary feedwater flow transmitters were 7-replaced with OA type 1 transmitters. (DCR 839)
()
Radiation Monitoring System High level area monitors were provided in containment and the auxiliary building to aid in assessing post-accident conditions in areas of the plant. High level effluent monitors were provided for auxiliary building and containment vent and area monitors were permanently installed adjacent to the main steam lines to aid in the assessment of radioactive releases from the plant. (DCR 841)
Reactor Coolant System A remotely operated reactor vessel head / pressurizer vent system was installed. This will allow venting the reactor vessel or the pressurizer to the
~S L]
20
pressurizer relief tank or to the containment 7-r a
\#
atmosphere. (DCR 842)
Primary Sampling A new sample panel with extensive shielding and remote valve operating capability was provided to allow sampling primary coolant when very high activity levels are present. There are multiple sample points, in-line analysis capability and provisions for drawing samples within shielded containers. (DCR 844)
Buildings A building was constructed immediately adjacent to the north side of the existing plant structure with access to the plant. This building contains special
'~'
ventilation provisions and power supplies and houses the Technical Support Center (TSC) and the Radiological Analysis Facility (RAF). The TSC contains information displays for accident analysis.
The RAF provides a well-shielded area for counting F
low-level air samples, performing liquid sample analysis and serves as a post-accident health physics operations center. This building will also house the future Plant Process Computer System.
(DCR 843, 847 and 900)
Structures Lead shielding was installed on the shield shelf
-~ss from H/7 to J/7 and lead shield curtains were (a
21
! suspended from the shield shelf in the. charging pump room.- This was done to allow personnel access to i
electrical panels for the operation / repair of breakers in a post-accident. situation. (DCR 995)
A shield wall was installed at the foot of the stairway at .H/7 - 586' level to provide shielding for MCC-1-52E. A concrete shield wall was installed in front of and south of MCC-1-62E. This was done to provide shielding from containment spray pumps and piping for post-accident personne1' access to panels for operat' ion / repair of breakers. (DCR 996 and 997) 480V Supply and Distribution A new Motor Control Center was added; north of MCC 1-52B to' provide spare starters and spaces- to.
replace those used for- TMI modifications. To allow personnel access for post-accident operation / repair the vital breakers from MCC-1-62E were moved to a new Motor Control Center located north of MCC-1-62E and the vital breakers from MCC-1-62B were moved to a new Motor Control Center located outside the welding shop at GW/4. (DCR 998, 1003 and 1037)
Chemical and Volume Control System Piping and valves were added to allow bypassing the l e td ow' ,. , reactor coolant, seal water injection and seal water return filters. This would be used O
22
1 i
post-accident to prevent excessive buildup .of high level radioactivity on the filte s. (DCR 893)
Piping and valves were added to provide capability to reroute the volume control. tank. vent and the deaerated drains. tank liquid volume and vent to the containment building. This allows for containing highly radioactive gases and liquids in structures designed to contain such materials. (DCR 871)
Miscellaneous Drains & Sumps- and Waste Disposal System Piping, valves and pumps were added to . provide capability to reroute the RHR pump pit. sump pumps discharge to the deaerated drains- tank and. to reroute the deaerated drains _ tank pumps discharge to the Containment Building. This allows for containing highly radioactive liquids in structures designed to contain such materials.~ (DCR's 869 and 870)
Residual Heat Removal A wide range level indication system was installed to monitor the reactor building sump water level.
(DCR 877)
Reactor Building Ventilation Redundant hydrogen analyzers were installed to provide capability for monitoring containment atmosphere hydrogen concentration. (DCR 881) 23
i
- Sumnary of Safety Evaluation These modifications-provide additional or more reliable information and improved operational flexibility for dealing with a post-accident situation.
3.2 TESTS AND EXPERIMENTS, 10CFR50.59 Power Coefficient Test A power coefficient test was ' performed from September 5 through September-7, 1981. The test was performed at approximately 85% of- . full power equilibrium conditions.
The power coefficient test developed by. WPS
.O consists of naking-small changes (5%) in reactor power at nearly constant reactor temperature.
Corresponding small changes in reactor temperature are made at nearly constant power.
Core power level is controlled by use of the turbine governor valve position, and temperature is controlled through- the use of the center control rod cluster.
Summary o_f Safety Evaluation:
The safety evaluation performed included analyses of core peaking factors expected during the test and a shutdown margin 24
I evaluation to assure that O Technical G Specification limits are maintained. In I addition, an engineering evaluation of the impact on plant parameters and systems was completed resulting in a written test procedure l which was reviewed and approved by the Plant 1 Operations Review Committee (PORC).
a O
25
?.0 LICENSEE EVENT REPORTS 4
O This section is a summary of the 39 Licensee Event-Reports (LER) submitted to the NRC in 1981 in i accordance with the requirements of Technical Specifications. None of- the LER's in 1981 posed a threat to plant operation or public safety.
LER 81-01 During testing of containment fan coil (F/C)' service water low flow alarm, the discharge valve on IB F/C unit would not open on demand. The failure of the motor operator has been attributed to a loo.e torque adjustment switch. The valve was manually opened to place the F/C unit back in service. The switch was ,
adjusted and the valve operator. was satisfactorily tested within the seven day time limit.
LER 81-02 While testing 1B Diesel Generator (D/G) operability to
{
5 allow removal of 1A D/G from service, 1B D/G failed to start. Water in the air supply prevented the air start motors from engaging properly. A design change is in progress to install air driers in the D/G Tir start system.
LER 81-03 During testing of valve CC400B (Component cooling water inlet to 1B residual heat exchanger) following the reinstallation of the motor operator, the supply thermal overloads tripped. The motor operator failure l {~}
' 26 i
,s has been attributed to a wiring error by a plant
( )
'~#
electrician, which resulted in the thermal overloads tripping. The wiring fault was identified and corrected, and the valve / operator tested satisfactorily. The procedure was reviewed with the electrician.
LER 81-04 RHR pump 1B was taken out of service for routine maintenance before demonstrating the operability of lA RHR pump. The failure to test the operability of the redundant train in accordance with the Technical Specifications was the result of an oversight by licensed operations personnel. The general applicabilities of the Technical Specifications will be
'u reviewed with the subject personnel.
LER 81-05 During an administrative review of the Kewaunee Technical Specifications an apparent discrepancy between T.S.4.4.a.4 and Surveillance Procedure SP-56-088 (Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test) was discovered. The apparent discrepancy was originally reported as an observed inadequacy in the implementation of procedural controls (T.S.6.9.2.b.(3)). However, further review of the pertinent documents concluded the test sequence used (Plant Surveillance Procedure SP-56-088) is in gS agreement with Kewaunee Technical Specifications and
'\_)
27
10CFR50 Appendix- J. The difference in. interpretation
' O'~ was the result of indistinct wording in T.S.4.4.a.4. A revision of the subject Kewaunee Technical Specification will be . submitted to the NRC to clarify 3
the wording.
LER 81-06 When attempting to recirculate the "B" boric. acid.(BA) storage tank prior to sampling, 1B BA transfer pump motor tripped on overload. 'Mie pump motor trip on i overload has been attributed to BA crystallization in Pump volute during periods of non-use. Additional heat tracing has been added. The pump enclosures for both BA' transfer pumps are scheduled . for. re-insulation
~g- during the upcoming refueling outage.
LER 81-07 I
With the facility at 100% indicated power and normal
! operation, 1B2 service water pump failed to- start.
I during routine testing. A relay which energizes the i closing coil was found defective. The relay was j replaced and operability restored within the time l limits of T.S.3.3.d.2.A.
i
. LER 81-08 With the facility at 100% indicated power and normal
- operations, leak repair procedures on valve SI-2A i i 3
(safety injection pump suction from boric acid tanks) revealed significant boric acid corrosion of the
- body-to-bonnet bolts. The corroded bolts were caused
(
1 28 i
i 4
)
.,--, . . _ . . . - , _ . - - . , - . . _ . , , . , ~ , - - . . . . - . - _ _ . . - , , _ , . - . . - -
l 1
by boric acid induced corrosion. The leak has been 1 attributed to deteriorated stem packing. The affected
~ bolts were replaced. Bolts on the redundant ; safety related valves in this line were replaced as' a
! Preventive measure, even though. no evidence of-i deterioration was found. Investigation is in progress to determine what ' future actions -are 'necessary.
LER 81-09 During startup operations following a reactor trip, with the reactor at hot shutdown, the condensate water i storage tank (CST) level went below the Technical
, Specification limit. Normal CST water usage during.
1
! Plant startup caused the CST. level to go-below the i
l Technical Specification limit. The make-up water j system output was increased _and the CST- level was
! returned to normal.
i.
l LER 81-10 With the facility at 100% indicated power and normal l operation, a non-radioactive-liquid was discharged from
- the waste neutralizing tank to the service water
!' pre-treatment lagoon. Calculations indicated total solids would have increased to 2.895 mg/l _if the i discharge had been to the Condenser Cooling System.
This is in excess of the 2.0 mg/l increase allowable by i
! ETS 2.2.2 and is reportable per ETS 5.2.e. The high solids content of the liquid waste discharge is the the
~
result of an error, by lab personnel, in l
29
g3 calculation of allowable discharge rates. The subject procedure has been reviewed with the lab personnel.
The intent of ETS 2.2.2 (to limit the total annual solids discharge to Lake Michigan) was not violated since the waste neutralizing tank does not discharge directly to the lake. A proposed Technical Specification has been submitted to the NRC for approval to delete Appendix B (the Environmental Technical Specifications) since the state of Wisconsin has the authority to regulate non-radioactive discharges from the Kewaunee plant.
LER 81-11 During testing of the motor-driven auxiliary faedwater (AFW) pumps, 1B AFW pump
(-}
\_/
indication revealed a circuit breaker that did not respond to actuation signals. The failure of the breaker to respond has been jointly attributed to contact failure on the control switch, and loose mounting bolts on the auxiliary switch on the breaker. The control switch was replaced, the mounting bolts on the auxiliary switch tightened, and the AFW pump returned to service within acceptable time limits.
LER 81-12 During testing of RHR check valves, containment spray (ICS) pump 1B auxiliary coolant motor valve breaker tripped on overload. Contactor misalignment resulted in only one phase being energized which caused the
(~N, valve motor breaker to trip on overload. The contactor
(-)
30 m _
Was aligned / adjusted, operability tested satisfactory, t
\-) and the "B" train of containment spray returned to service within Technical Specification time limits.
LER 81-13 During local leak rate testing, with the facility shutdown (400 psig, 3500F), leakage was indicated in the piping connecting containment sump B to RHR pump 1B. The leakage did not exceed Anpendix J limits.
Investigation revealed a cracked. root weld on vent valve SI-353B. Inspection of the cracked weld showed poor weld penetration. A sharp blow, of unknown origin, to the vent line is believed to have caused the crack. Repairs, consisting of grinding out the cracked weld and re-welding the joint, were done during the 7-s
(' refueling outage.
LER 81-14 During surveillance testing of the pressurizer level channels, the level transmitter to channel LT 427 was found out of specification, low. Redundant channels were within specification and would have provided the trip function within Technical Specification tolerances. The Barton level' transmitters fall within the scope of the equipment qualification program (EIB 79-01B) and will be changed out as part of the long term upgrade of transmitters.
LER 81-15 Surveillance testing during refueling shutdown
(-s) 31
indicated that one steam flow transmitter was- out of-O calibration resulting in Hi Steam Flow and Hi-Hi Steam Flow trip settings less conservative than Technical Specification requirements. Instrumentation drift of the Barton Steam Flow Transmitter caused it to be in an out of calibration condition. The transmitter was-recalibrated and returned to service. A records review of the safety related Barton transmitters was conducted to identify calibration drift characteristics. Where 1
operational restrictions allow additional conservatism, I the setpoints had previously been changed. The drift cannot be accurately predicted. These transmitte;:s are presently within. the scope of the equipment qualification program (IEB 79-01B) and will be changed-O^ out as part of the long term upgrade of transmitters.
LER 81-16 4 During refueling operation, surveillance testing indicated that two RCS flow transmitters in loop A were out of calibration such that their low flow -reactor trip settings (2/3 logic) were a maximum 0.37% below the TS required setpoint. Reactor trip would have occurred well above the limiting trip point assumed in the FSAR. The reactor was shutdown at the time of discovery. Instrument drift of the Foxboro flow transmitters caused them to be out of calibration. The transmitters were recalibrated with no indication of i
further problems.
)
i 32
7- LER 81-17
(_) During the performance of surveillance testing it was discovered that two pressurizer pressure transmitters had drifted, causing the high pressure reactor trip setpoint for those transmitters to be 1 psig and 5.6 psig above Technical Specification limits respectively.
The remaining channel was within Technical Specification limits. If required the high pressure reactor trip would not have occurred within the limits of Technical Specification T.S.2.3.a.2.A. The cause of both instruments being out of specification was determined to be instrument drift. Both instruments were recalibrated and brought within specifications. A
-)
bl document review has shown these instruments to be reliable in the past, indicating . that this may be an isolated incident.
LER 81-18 During the refueling outage, surveillance testing indicated that one of three pressurizer pressure transmitters was out of calibration such that its low-pressure safety injection and its low-pressure reactor trip would have occurred 12.62% lower and 12.67% lower than their respective Technical Specification limits. The remaining two channels were operable within specified limits and would have initiated safety injection or a reactor trip as required. Instrument drift appears to have caused the
(~]/
33
transmitter to be out of calibration. A 13% drift
(_.
would have caused a 100 psig difference in pressure readings in the control room. This would have exceeded the maximum allowed difference between transmitters permitted by our daily surveillance check. A review of the daily logs showed that 100 psig difference did not exist during operations. The direct cause of the drift cannot be identified, but we speculate that the shutdown to refueling conditions was indirectly responsible. The sensing lines were flushed, the amplifier replaced, and the transmitter recalibrated.
LER 81-19 During the refueling outage, Surveillance fs Procedure-060, Portable Radiation Survey Instrument
( )
%~/ Checks, was not performed for the month of May as required. SP-060 was overlooked due to the reassignment of HP personnel for in-plant coverage of jobs during the refueling shutdown. All portable radiation survey instruments were source checked during June. The importance of meeting SP-060 requirements was reviewed with the HP supervisor.
LER 81-20 During startup operations following the refueling shutdown, the level in the condensate water storage tank (CST) went below the Technical Specification limit. Normal CST water usage during plant startup and g- turbine testing, coincident with domineralizer N) 34
L
, regeneration, caused;the CST level to go below the Technical Specification limit. A Technical Specification proposed revision has been submitted (2-20-81), ,and is now under NRC review, to permit the CST level 'to drop below 75,000 gallons during plant startup.
LER 81-21 During steady state operation at 754 power, it was noted that IWV 3300 of the 1974 ASME Code (In-Service Testing of Valves) was not satisfied. IWV 3300 was not i
satisfied due to an oversight in the implementing procedures. The valves were checked at the next-
- opportunity. An addition to Surveillance Procedure 1
55-167-9 has been approved to incorporate these
^ ~
i inspection requirements.
LER 81-22
-During steady state operation Surveillance Procedure-073, Spent Fuel Pool Boron Sampling, was not performed ~ within the allotted time frame. The oversight in the surveillance requirement was due to a temporary work load increase on the chemistry staff.
The SFP boron sample was taken and analyzed immediately
, upon the discovery of the oversight. Technical Specification surveillance requirements have b e e.-
reviewed with the responsible supervisor to prevent -
future occurrences.
i LER 81-23 35
P Dur.4.ng steady state operation, BA transfer pump 1A was isolated to report valve CVC-lll88. The pump was placed back in service within allowable Technical ,
Specificatior, limits. CVC-11188 is an instrument i isolation valve and was found to have a leaking diaphragn and a corroded bonnet. A new bonnet assembly was installed on the valve.
LER 81-24 During steady full power operation on 7-30-81, low Boric Acid heat tracing temperatures (1100 F) were detected on the section of piping between the BA tanks and the SI pumps. The low BA temperature was caused by the removal of insulation from the BA heat tracing circuits without recirculation flow heing established to prevent Boric Acid Crystallization. The insulation was reinstalled and temperatures in the piping section were monitored to verify a return to normal temperature. A flow path was confirmed by obtaining recirculation flow through this piping section. The <
importance of proper communications when performing maintenance on heat tracing circuits and other safety-related systems hss been discussed with Operations and Maintenance.
LER 81-25 Surveillance testing during steady state operation indicated that one containment pressure transmitter was out of calibration such that the SI high containment t 36
i ,
> 1 pressuresetpointwasklessconservativethanrequired O by Technical ' Specifications. The cause of this incident was Nttributed to instrument drift of the Foxboro pressuhe transmitter. The transmitter was recalibrated and returned to service.
LER 81-26 ISI testing of the auxiliary feedwater pumps was not performed within 7 days after reaching a 350 F prinary temperature. Misinterpretation of Section XI of the ASME Code resulted in the establishment of a surveillance period greater than allowed by this code.
The pumps were promptly tested and procedures SP 05-104 and 105 have been revised to comply with the code.
LER 81-27 During a routine plant tour, the auxiliary operator noted excess shaft leakage on IB boric acid (HA) transfer pump. The leakage was attributed to a corroded pipe plug in the BA pump housing. The pipe plug was replaced with a stainless plug -shich . will prevent future occurences.
LER 81-28 During surveillance testing of valve CC 400B (component cooling water inlet to 1H residual heat exchanger) the supply breaker overloads tripped. The failure of the motor operator has been attributed to worn gears in the operator which resulted in the breaker overloads tripping. With the worn gears replaced the O
37
valve / operator tested satisfactorily.
D LER 81-29 During surveillance testing on the Shield Building Vent System (SBV), check damper SBV-3A failed to open resulting in the inability of the system to perform per design, although a measurable vacuum in the annulus could still be established and maintained. The failure of SBV-3A has been attributed to a hydraulic oil leak resulting from the pump seals wearing out. With the loss of oil pressure the valve was rendered inoperable and failed closed. The pump was replaced and the valve tested satisfactorily.
LER 8_l-30 The Surveillance Procedure (SP-24-121) was found to O incorrectly measure the Shield Building Vent System (SBV) exhaust flow from the annulus. The surveillance procedure was written based on a preoperational testing procedure which was intended to demonstrate original design criteria. System alignment for the preoperational test was temporarily modified and the same procedure is not valid for normal operations. SP 24-121 is being revised to demonstrate total system operability and to detect any system degradation.
LER 81-31 Sampling and analysis of the Chemical and Volume Control System (CVCS) baron recycle monitor tank 1A indicated the tank contained 13 Ci of tritium activity.
38
The tritium content in the Reactor Coolant System and the boric acid evaporator distillate had increased.
Provisions were made to immediately transfer part of the liquid *o CVCS monitor tank 1B to prevent any inadvertent release of greater than 10 Ci to the environment.
LER 81-32 With the facility at 45% indicated power and normal operation, a nonradioactive liquid was discharged fron i
1 the waste neutralizing tank to the service water pretreatment lagoon. Calculations indicated total solids would have increased to 2.754 mg/l if the discharge had been to the Condenser System. This is in excess of the 2.0 mg/l increase limits of ETS 2.2.2 and
(^}
%.)
is reportable per ETS 5.2.e. The high solids content of the liquid waste discharge is the result of an error, by plant personnel, in the calculation of allowable discharge rates. The error has been reviewed with the plant personnel involved. The discharge of the waste neutralizing tank is directed to a settling basin (s) whose overflow returns to the circulating water system. For purposes of this event no dilution / settling is assumed and consequently ETS 2.2.2 may have been violated; however, the intent of ETS 2.2.2 (to limit the total annual solids discharge to Lake Michigan) was not violated. A proposed Technical Specification has been submitted to the NRC for (a~N
' 39
approval to delete Appendix B (the Environmental l ,
Technical Specifications) since the State of Wisconsin is the authority regulating non-radioactive discharges i from the Kewaunee Plant under the NPDES program.
i LER 81-33
)
j Diesel Generator 1B was removed from service for j maintenance while component cooling water heat exchanger 1A was out of service. Thus both trains of cooling via the component cooling water heat exchangers would have been unavailable if a loss of off-site power-
} coincident with a LOCA would have occured. Emergency Diesel Generator la was removed from service for maintenance activities.
Later in the shift, service
) water to the 1A component cooling heat exchanger was isolated and the supply MOV breaker opened.
Discussions were held with the operating crew I concerning the importance of maintaining redundant equipment in an operable condition.
- LER 81-34 l- During normal operations, at 100% indicated power, 1B l zone SV fan started automatically. The solenoid l failed, in the closed (safe) position due to a burned
, out coil, automatically starting the fan and opening the damper. The coil was replaced and the system i
l tested operable within Technical Specification time ;
limits. Due to repeated failures of this coil, a
', . design change has been initiated for changeout to a 40 1
. _ . ~ .. _ ,,,-._ m__ -_ _ _,___ ..._ _ . . - . - _ _
more reliable component.
LER 81-35 Sampling and analysis of the Chemical and Volume Control System (CVCS) monitor tank 1A indicated a total tritium activity in excess of the 10 Ci Technical Specifications limit. The tank level selpoint was decreased, following the previous occurrence, but not enough to prevent the recurrence. Provisions were made to immediately transfer part of the liquid to monitor tank 1B and the A and B waste cor.densate tanks. A temporary change has been implemented to further reduce the tank level setpoint.
LER 81-36 During the motor-driven auxiliary feedwater (MDAFW) pump surveillance test the MDAFW pump lube oil pump continued to run when MDAFW pump 1A was stopped. This would not have prevented the operation of the AFW 1
pumps. Excessive wear and misalignment of the auxiliary switch linkage mechanism allowed the auxiliary switch to remain closed after the breaker has I
opened. Short term corrective action was to replace the worn parts. The manufacturer is being consulted to determine long term corrective actions necessary.
LER 81-37 During normal operations, an intermittent deviation in staam flow indication, between similar channels, was observed. An electronic failure in a circuit board in Cf 41
the transmitter was the cause of faulty indication.
73 N_Y The transinitter was repaired (circuit board replaced) and returned to service.
LER 81-38 During surveillance testing on the Shield Building Vent System (SBV), check damper SBV-10A failed shut. The operator failure was the result of a ruptured diaphragm which separatee the motor from the oil reservoir. The motor was replaced, tested satisfactory, and the system returned to service.
LER 81-39 During normal operation, a leaking wold (cracked weld) on the discharge side of 1C charging pump relief valve g~g (CVC-101C) was discovered during routine inspection.
b The weld fatigue, and subsequent cracking has been attributed to vibrations and pulsations in the associated piping. The pipe section was replaced. The new welds and piping were hydro-tested satisfactory. A design change is in progress to add suction stabilizers to the charging pump suction headers.
O G
42 f
- 5.0 FUEL INSPECTION REPGRT During Refueling #6, thrity-two (32) fresh Region I assemblies were loaded for Cycle VII. Startup physics testing was performed and the results reported in the Cycle VII Physics Report.
The irradia.ted fuel inspection was performed with an underwater TV camera. All peripheral fuel rods were
, examined using half face scans. A total of sixteen assemblies were inspected. Representative assemblies i from Regions C, D, E, F, G, and II were chosen.
A heavy buildup of crud was noted on all fuel burned s more than one cycle. Very little fuel rod bow was observed. A few rodlets were touching the bottom nozzle on Regions C, D, E, and F fuel. All rodlets were touching the bottom nozzle on Region G fuel. Some indications of the banboo phenomenon was seen on Regions C, D, E, and F fuel. Deformation of the hold down springs was not noted.
Overall condition of the fuel was excellent with no evidence of fuel cladding degradation on the peripheral fuel rods examined. Complete video tapes were made of all exaninations.
I 43
3
)
t 6.0 CHALLENGES AND FAILURES O_F F PRP.SSURIZER SAFETY AND j RELIEF VALVES
! There were no challenges or failures of pressurizer 1
i safety or relief valves during 1981.
1 1
I r l
5 I
1 L L
f 4
1 O
! I
.l I.
l l
{
1 l
O 44
3 7.0 STEAM GENERATOR TUBE INSPECT 70N J
7.1 Eddy Current Testing There was no eddy current testing performed on steam generator tubes during 1981.
The next scheduled eddy current testing, in accordance with the Kewaunee Inservice Inspection Program, will be during the 1983 refueling outage.
7.2 Sludge Lancing Tubesheet cleaning was performed on both steam generators during the Kewaunee Nuclear Plant outage in April, 1981, using the full V
recirculation method in accordance with Westinghouse Procedure MRS 2.2.2 GEN-9.
Lancing began on April 26, 1981, after all water balance reasurements were completed. Steam Generator "A" was completed during the night shift of April 26, 1981. The equipment was then moved to Steam Generator "B" and lancing was completed on "B" generator on April 28, 1981.
x>
1 45 i
I n f
i l 8.0 _ERSONNEL P EXPOSURE AND MONITORING REPORT I O Persuant to 10CFR Part 20 Sections 407(b)(1)(1) and 407(b)(2) the following tabulation of the number of individuals receiving exposures within specified ranges I
f and the total number of personnel for whom monitoring l 1 ,
I was provided is shown on the following table.
o h
I -
i 4
i l
)
- I 4
I
!e I.
1 l
4 1
l l
l 1
l l
l 4
9 I 46
d i
I l
i
, 1981 l
PII.NT STAFF AND VISITORS I I i I
I
! Exp. Range (mR) No. of Personnel '
! No Measurable 212 i
) ( 100 141 100 - 249 71 !
, I 250 - 499 79 l 500 - 749 37 I i
750 - 999 25 ,
1000 - 1999 28 O 2000 - 2999 2 l Grand Total 595 l
l l
t I r, i
! O 47 ;
i
-. -- _.- - - - - . - -- . . -- . . . . . . - . ~ _ - - . .- .
b l
I l )
! REPORT OF OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE DATA (
0 The following tabulation of nunbers of personnel t
l I
exposure and man-rem received by work and job function I
! l is shown on the attached table in accordance with (
! Section 6.4.1.h of the Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant '
i Technical Specification.
]
, I
! I i
l t
8 F
i I O
! 1 4
i i
I i 1 i
l !
i a
s I I t
1 1
48 i
i 4
_ - - _ _ a mmm_. .__. . _ - _ . . . . _ _ . _ . .
N W
E O
e m 3 m W HE Cecom Mosm @ @OOOO @cOOM cOOOO M UN OmneO Nehmm "@OOO #OOO@
peOOO @* emo 1 9 40 Ce cos eO=mc NPOOO P OOOO @POOO M E N T .T A e a e o e e e e o e o e WNOom N0000 eMOOO *Meme e e e o e e e o e e e e o e e o
@ HQ 00000 MODNO mNOOO *OOOO e o e e e e e e e e e P E
- e COOOO e@OOO f*ONO g
e CW m de 2
UA b O O 3 1 r 1
m w me N 8 M
>E b F C0003
' mcOO@ 00000 * @OOOO EYMM s HM OMOON OOOOR WmOO*
&OOOO OOOVO COOOO Ne"OOm nnt MOOOO 20006 OOOOO
@@Oos fNOON 9
3 O IMM MO e e e e e e e e e e o e e e o 7e "e O O O*
e e e C0000 e e e e e NOCOO 9NCO3 &
I' 00000 MOOOO C0000 eOOOO e e e e o e e e e e e E ar' ee 4 C0000 MOOOO WOOOO P OP DE My N H+
U M
D M b EW OsOmN NONe@ 00000 @emmo OmwCO UW MOOmW ms@N* COOTO ecchw m@cre Omee b =
A MW MWO*N ONOOO 60000 MecOO OmOOO mmemm O O 'HO e e e e e OMOON @MeOO cmOwo @come n o e e e e o e e o e e o e e o e e e e e 9 da OmO=O memOO C0000 00000 ONwCO o e o e e NOOOO e e o e e e HA @cmec N m Le ME e m O M W M M H
A M a
- r. & W e O HM O J - U te k e 40 ONQ*N X p s PeeMN @MOCO m@OaM ONOOO WNOOO h a e n N @ e mme@h e M W NNQ e emwe e e: 2 e N 0
a 8: !w m WOUm M mo O P er a w a 4 m a i M E O
%
- M O O WW
" AuVM A 4%M > C"OON me OOe O0000 m-OON 7 wo 4
O w e e"OOO @"OOO emOOm @
a,v Ma v w @ h O k'C Hb a e m 3M M M W M N O W m M n C m u wh M & $
M m EM h O O Al= W > NMOOM MMO"m CONeo NHmNN meOOO p l mtH Q
- mee m P e WOONN mNNe o m m E!< a er @rmee O
@ W rHA N
= m z Mr e E M e O E
M s
! o O I M m D M O H E a O *
> 0 M a a m W H M N a a a a a O w U m M w W W w m
a a a a m H
W a
D a
N naa a saa a maa a Awa a Aaa a maa a maa m
OWW M UMW ElW OWW W OEW M a a = mwMmm weaMax OeaMe4 W eMMan OWW b OWN N OMM D O M ENmAR U Awmd2 raMaa maMm= maMem 0 m m a M 2WF A A U SWmam ENmFM ENEMM AWmd 4 W
caWoD m o r.W u O N zkt#O E vzwOO Ozwoo OmWoo
.O O MahMM 4 MamMM U EmMM OzwCO m H q M 20 mm amo um W O M MEAMM sc 0]MmAMM M*AMM M a m M t3 e P NMMWW WWMMwW E wMMWW Em E
.W.W M M W W mm mim o MiMMMWW mm mo mm WMMWW 20 mm e E u 4 H W m W De m M ACUbh WMMWW U M 2 m W 'kmVWE WM M MM E WM H mmUhb M WM M'k m O h b M WM kmVhh MM bhukh e O 4 E (g M & t/) be f.9 M W & (#1 De (9 WM E h h4 U paa W U M 4 M be (9 M he W A M De (5 W WbM>f3 W Am M De O M b M De O 3-km2 U >mA M U MmA Q U Mam U kmA O Nm2 e O m dezOM E *OTOM W a t? m u M E AOmOM O mO=OM 4
E O m ammNMm wmAMm U d P. h M m WR &MM LS EOmOM zumOM M e m O m a M M MM E dW4ME E WFNMM W EhME O M 4 3 O M HZhW MW M WHZDM MW w EM MW w AM MW A AM MW M EM HW EM MW H s A H W 4Hmm
> WH2hW W WHM>N WHEbW a, W l e % > W WHEbW '
M Hepmz mP4HER M HMHmm M HwHER D E U NFmaWM H@maWM W6EmaWM WH4H&E a HMHmm O U AmaWM D2gaWM d
H dmMW4GO MbW&WDM D)4W W At3 CW4WDE MMW4AO Eld b M D 2 W MWW40 A d&WMM HJm.aWM MMk 4NO WMW<&O g amdWM H MWe&O 3
4 M 'hIMiC O m M W 444WDE WfdLWD2 O'*&MDE m l m.EQEMW MlE Q 2&M W 4/5 E R = M N 2lC Q E M W mir. Q 23 M W H E Q T. M W U t
g f
i 1
49
g- 9.0 ENVIRONMENTAL TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS (APPENDIX B)
'~
This section employs the subsection numbering consistant with the specific subject covered in l
Appendix B. '
2.1 Thermal Section 2.1 of Appendix B to the Kewaunee Technical Specifications was deleted by Amendment 35, July 24, 1981. No report is required.
2.2 Chemicals 2.2.1 Chlorination of the Circulating Water System
("s The circulating water system has not been chlorinated during this period of reporting.
2.2.2 Suspended and Dissolved Solids The neutralizing tank has been discharging to the lagoon.
t v
50
l
{
l r~ 2.2.3 Treatment Chemicals b) The total amount of raw chemicals used during the calendar year was as follows:
Totals
- 1. Primary System
- a. Boric Acid 6,700 lbs.
- b. Hydrazine 1.5 gal.
- c. Lithium 7 Hydroxide O lbs.
- 2. Secondary System
- a. Hydrazine 765.64 gal.
- 3. Pre-Treatment System
- a. Ferric Sulfate 14,350 lbs.
- b. Lime O lbs.
- c. Polyelectrolyte 269.07 lbs.
- d. Sodium Hypochlorite (15%) 1,465 gal.
- e. Sodium Sulfite 626.5 lbs.
- 4. Demineralizer System
rT b. Sulfuric Acid 453,375 lbs.
- 5. Potable Water Softeners
- a. Salt (NaC1) 39,200 lbs.
- a. Sodium Tiypochlorite 0 gal.
- 7. Component Cooling System
- a. Chromates O lbs.
C'i V
51
2.2.4 Miscellaneous Discharge p-The pil and total suspended solids before dilution of the condenser hotwell, turbine building sump, water softening unit and pretreatment system lagoon are characterized as follows:
- 1. CONDENSER llOTWELL pli Suspended Solids mg/L Total 511oh Low Ave High Low Ave SS Lhr. Gallons Jan -- -- -- -~ -- --
Feb -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Mar 6.8 6.0 6.4 3.0 2.0 2.5 .95 84,375 Apr 7.3 7.3 7.3 -- ~~ -- -- 64,687 May -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Jun 6.4 6.4 6.4 2.9 2.9 2.9 1.2 50,625 Jul -- -- -- -- -- --
Aug -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
Sep -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
s Oct -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
) Nov Dec
- 2. TURBINE BUILDING SUMPS p!I Suspended Solids mg/L Total liigh Low Ave Ilich Low Ave SS Lbs. Gallons Jan 7.9 C6 C 9.7 1.4 T.J 'J71. F 1,095,010 Feb 8.6 6.2 7.0 33.5 2.9 8.6 64.60 886,400 Mar 9.0 6.0 7.3 30.3 3.3 8.3 77.82 1,221,380 Apr 9.0 3.6 7.8 36.6 2.2 11.1 114.64 1,369,960 May 8.2 7.1 7.7 36647 1.6 1201.0 295.86 810,400 Jun 10.2 3.6 7.7 65.1 0.90 9.4 132.72 1,931,860 Jul 8.0 3.3 7.5 11.4 1.2 12.1 44.31 1,592,680 Aug 8.0 6.9 7.5 6.6 1.0 3.1 43.21 1,621,900 Sep 8.6 6.0 7.5 13.8 <.05 3.6 67.90 2,322,370 Oct 8.1 6.8 7.7 29.0 1.2 10.0 313.72 3,731,750 Nov 8.4 7.5 6.2 88.5 2.5 12.2 221.78 2,297,470 Dec 9.0 7.5 8.0 69.0 3.4 15.3 298.51 2,335,710 f~\,
G 52
.I
- 3. WATER SOFTENING UNIT pH s spended solids mc/L Total High Low Ave High Low Ave SS Lbs. Gallons Jan 6.9 6.8 6.8 30.1 23.0 26.5 1.06 4,800 Feb 7.1 6.8 6.9 26.2 6.4 19.3 1.16 7,200 Mar 7.8 7.3 7.5 21.7 8.6 15.4 1.85 14,400 Apr 7.7 7.4 7.6 26.1 1.1 11.0 1.30 14,400 May 7.9 7.4 7.7 13.4 3.6 8.1 . 1.62 16,800 Jun 7.6 7.5 7.5 15.3 0.88i 7 .'8 ' , 0 .~ 4 6 7,200 Jul 7.8 6.9 7.2 23.1 7.4 15 2 1.52 12,000 Aug 7.4 7.0 7.2 20.4 9.0 , 1,4.2' O.86 7,200 Sep 7.4 7.2 7.3 22.0 14.2- 17.6 1.06 7,200 Oct 8.0 7.0 7.4 15.2 5.6 10.4- 0.84 9,600 Nov 8.5 7.1 7.7 24.7 11.9 16.9 1.35 9,600 Dec 8.0 7.6 7.7 36.4 9.1 18.5 1.11 7,200
- 4. PRETREATMENT SYSTEM LAGOON pH Suspended Solids mc/L Total High Low Ave High Lov Ave SS Lbs. Gallons Jan 7.7 7.3 7.5 13.8 3.9 6.7 52.91 974,469 Feb 7.8 7.1 7.3 14.3 3.4 6.7 46.74 848,252 Mar 7.8 6.2 7.4 24.2 3.9 8.9 68.56 926,192 Apr 8.0 6.8 7.5 15.6 2.2 5.7 32.85 659,862 r~s May 8.6 6.9 7.8 17.9 0.8 4.1 37.70 392,628
(_) Jun Jul 8.7 8.4 6.5 7.3 7.9 7.9 13.0 11.2 0.5 2.7 6.4 6.5 44.53 46.74 387,711 877,794 Aug 8.1 7.4 7.8 15.0 1.3 6.1 39.90 804,141 Sep 8.5 7.3 7.8 50.5 <.05 4.7 30.20 790,173 Oct 9.0 7.4 8.1 9.7 1.4 4.4 28.66 827,059 Nov 8.2 7.7 7.6 6.9 1.2 3.1 18.03 707,566 Dec 8.9 7.5 8.1 38.7 2.1 6.2 40.79 739,567 4.0 Environnental Surveillance & Special Studies 4.1 De-Icing Operation Operation of the de-icing punp during the reporting period.
Inlet Temperature F Date On Off Maximum Minimum 1-1 to 3-23 00:01 11:40 54.0 31.0 12-8 to 12-31 10:40 24:00 46.6 31.3 p
%)
53
. _ - - _ _ . _ _ - _ ~ _ _- - - - - . . . . - - - . ~ . . - . ~ . . . _ _ _ _ . __._ _ -_
1 i
i i
10.0 RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM O Attached is the report from flazelton Environmental Sciences Corporation on the Radiological Monitoring Program for Kewaunee Nuclear Plant for 1981.
4 i
1 I
J ;
I
,i i
i l
1 l
I 1
i r i I l ;
i I i
i k
1 !
4 l
I I '
I i
Ii !
i j
! i i 54 !
) i l
i.
l
_ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~___ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ . _ _ . . . . . _ ,
- - __ . _ . -. - -- - - - - --.-- . - -.- - - -- - - . - - -- - - - - ~
.. - --,- -..~.
l 4
]
$ HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES l . A OtVISION OF HAZLETON LABOAATOAIES AMERICA. INC.
] 1500 F54CNTAGE AGAO NORTHOAO X twNOIS 600G3. U S A REPORT TO j WISCONSIN PUBLIC SERVICE CORPORATION f WISCONSIN POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY .
j MADIS0N GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY j RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM FOR '
THE XEWAUNEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT
! KEWAUNEE, WISCONSIN 4-
['
!, ANNUAL REPORT - PART I 1
SUMMARY
AND INTERPRETATION January - December 1981 h HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES PROJECT N0. 8002-100
?
4 PREPARED AND SUBMITTED BY HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES CORPORATION l
i l
Report Approved by: C Tld &#,
i L. G. Huhtiner, M. S.
l . Director, Nuclear Sciences
- i a e
!'O
, 11 February 1982 PHONi 1312) Sfi+3 0 700 o if'Lf w PO (4<16sai Alf1,NE)HVI i
l HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES O
PREFACE The staff members of the Nuclear Sciences Department of Hazleton Environmen-tal Sciences, a Division of Hazleton Laboratories /cerica, Inc. (HES), were responsible for the acquisition of data presented in this report. Assistance in sample collection was provided by the Field Operations Department, HES, and by Wisconsin Public Service Corporation personnel.
The report was prepared by C. R. Ma rucut , Section Supervisor, ur. der the direction of L. G. Huebner, Director, Nuclear Sciences. She was assisted in report preparation by L. Nicia, Group Leader, and other staff members of the Nuclear Sciences Department (HES).
O O
ii
HAZLETON ENV?RONMENTAL CCIENCED j TABLE OF CONTENTS i
Page P re f a c e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 j List of Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . iv i
t List of Tables ........................ v i
j
1.0 INTRODUCTION
......................... 1 2.0
SUMMARY
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 3.0 RADIOLOGICAL SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM ............... 3 3.1 Methodology ....................... 3 I
3.1.1 The Air Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2
3.1.2 The Terrestrial Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
, 3.1.3 The Aquatic Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
! 3.1. 4 - Program Execution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.2 Results and Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 l
!~
3.2.1 The Effect of Chinese Atmospheric Nuclear Detonation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.2.2 The Ai r Envi ro nment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.2.3 The Terrestrial Envi ronment. . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 3.2.4 The Aquatic Envi ronment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 i
! 4.0 FIGURES AND TABLES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 i
5.0 REFERENCES
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 APPENDICES
\
A. Chrosscheck Program Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1 B. Statistical Notations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-1 C. Maximum Permissible Concentrations of Radioactivity in i- Air and Water above Natural Background in Unrestricted Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C-1 l
Ps_J iii
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES i
O LIST OF FIGURES flo. Caption Page 4-1 Sampling locations, Kewaunee fluclear Power Plant . ...... 17 1
O O
iv
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL CCCNC.]']
LIST OF TABLES fio. Title Pace 4.1 Sampling locations, Kewaunee fluclear Power Plant . ........ 18 4.2 Type and f requency of coll ection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 4.3 Sampl e codes used i n Tabl e 4.2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 4.4 Sampling Summary . . . ...................... 21 4.5 Environmental Radiological Monitoring Program Summary. . . . . . . 22 In addition, the following tables are in the Appendix:
Appendix A A-1 Crosscheck program results, milk and water samples, 1975-81. . . . A-3 A-2 Crosscheck program results, thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD's). . A-9 Appendix C
,-)
C-1 Maximum permissable concentrations of radioactivity in air and water above natural background in unrestricted areas . . . C-2 O j u./ /
l -
v
HAZLETON CNVIRONMZNTAL CCENCZ:3 (V)
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant is a 540 megawatt pressurized water reactor located on the Wisconsin shore of Lake Michigan in Kewaunee County. The Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant became critical on March 7, 1974. Initial power generation was achieved on April 8,1974, and the Plart was declared commer-cial on June 16, 1974. This report summarizes the environmental operation data collected during the period January - Decembe,1981.
(,)
Wisconsin Public Service Corporation, an operating company for the Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant, assumes the responsibility for the environmental program at the Plant and any questions relating to this subject should be directed to them.
,ry 1
i i
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL CCGNC'33 0
2.0
SUMMARY
Results of sample analyses during the period January - December 1981 are summarized in Table 4.5. Radionuclide concentrations measured at indicator locations are compared with levels measured at control locations and in preoperational studies. The comparisons indicate background-level radioacti-vities in all samples collected with the following exceptions:
- 1. Annual mean gross beta activity in airborne particulates was approxi-mately four times higher than in 1980, the highest being in April and the second quarter. Trace amounts of short-lived fission products, such as niobium-95, zirconium-95, ruthenium-103, ruthenium-106, and cerium-144 were detected in some of the air particulate, grass, soil, and aquatic
. vegetations samples. The elevated gross beta activity in airborne h3 particulates and presence of short-lived fission products in other samples is attributable to the fallout from the Chinese nuclear test conducted 16 October, 1980.
- 2. Trace amounts of cobalt-58 were detected in two of ten periphyton samples and in two of twenty bottom sediment samples. Presence of this isotope in these samples is probably plant related.
- 3. Three water samples collected at the discharge (K-1d) on February 2, March 2, and April 1,1981 had tritium levels of 31,600 pCi/1, 9880 pCi/l and 1,600 pCi/l above the background level of 280 pCi/1. One water sample collected at Two Creeks Park (K-14) on February 2,1981 had tritium level of 430 pCi/l above background level. The elevated levels in samples collected at the discharge are attributable to the Kewaunee Nuclear Plant operation, but constitute 1.05% or less of the maximum permissible concentration of 3,000,000 pCi/l established in the 10 CFR 20 Document. The source of the elevated level in the sample. collected at K-14 is not clear since this location is equidistant from the Kewaunee
- and Point Beach Nuclear Plants, either one of which, or both, could have been the source of the elevated tritium level.
O 2
. __ m . . _ _ -- ._. . . .
J HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCEO O
- 3.0 RADIOLOGICAL SURVEILLANCE PROGRAM Following is a description of the Radiological Surveillance Program and its 4
execution.
3.1 Methodology l
The sampling locations are shown in Figure 4-1. Table 4.1 describes the -
i locations, lists for each its direction and distance from the reactor, j and indicates which are indicator and which are control locations.
5 The sampling program , monitors the air, terrestrial, and aquatic envi-l y ronments. The types of samples collected at each location and the frequency of collections are presented in Table 4.2 using sample codes defined in Table 4.3. Below, the collections and analyses that comprise l the program are described. Finally, the execution of the . program in the current reporting year is discussed.
1 3.1.1 The Air Program The airborne particulate samples are collected on 47 mm diameter membrane filters of 0.8 micron porosity at a volumetric rate of approximately one cubic foot per minute. The filters are col-lected weekly from six locations (K-1f, K-2, K-7, K-8, K-15, and '
K-16), and dispatched by mail- to Hazleton Environmental Sciences for radiometric' analysis. 'The material on the filter is counted for gross alpha and beta activity approximately five days after receipt to allow for decay of na+urally-occurring short-lived radionuclides.
Quarterly composites from each sampling location are analyzed for gamma-emitting isotopes by Ge(Li) detector. _;
The integrated gamma-ray background is. measured at air sampling locations (K-1f, K-2, K-7, K-8, K-15, and K-16) and at four milk sampling locations (K-3 through K-6) with ion chambers and' thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD's). Ian chambers are placed in duplicate and read monthly. CaF2 : Mn bulb TLD's are exchanged
- quarterly and annually.
4 f
O 4
3 f; s
,. . . ~ , . , _ , . _ _ . - . _ . _ . . _ _ _
- _ . - . u, , , - - ,
HAZLGTON ENVIRONMENTAL CCIENCEO
(\ \
/
Charcoal filters are located at l ocations K-1f, K-2, K-7, K-8, K-15, and K-16. The filters are changed bi-weekly and analyzed for iodine-131 immediately after arrival at the laboratory.
Monthly composites of precipitation samples collected at K-11 are analyzed for tritium activity by liquid scintillation technique.
3.1.2 The Terrestrial Program Milk samples are collected weekly (one gallon from each location) from May through October and monthly (two gallons from each location) during the rest of the year from four herds that graze within four miles of the reactor site (K-4, K-5, K-12, and K-19) and from two herds that graze between four and ten miles from the reactor site (K-3 and K-6). The milk samples are analyzed for iodine-131, strontium-89 and -90, cesium-137, barium-140, potas-sium-40, calcium, and stable potassium.
One-gallon water samples are collected qua rterly from four off-site wells located at K-10, K-11, K-12, and V,-13. Monthly one-gallon water samples are collected from two on-site wells
(( >) located at K-19 and K-lh.
The gross alpha and beta activities are determined on the total residue of each water sample. The concentration of potassium-40 is calculated from total potassium, which is determined by flame photometry on all samples. The tritium levels in quarterly composites of monthly on-site samples from K-19 are determined by liquid scintillation technique.
Quarterly composites of monthly grab samples of water from one on-site well (K-1 )9 are analyzed for strontium-89 and strontium-90.
Domestic meat samples (chickens) are obtained annually (in the third quarter) at locations K-17, K-20, K-24, and K-25.
The flesh is separated from the bones, ashed, and analyzed for gross alpha and gross beta activities and gamma scanned.
Eggs are collected quarterly at Location K-17. The samples are gamma scanned and analyzed for gross alpha, gross beta, strontium-89, and strontium-90 activities.
N,l 4
l 1
l HAZLETON ENVIRONM2NTAL CCIONCEO l l
l Vegetable samples (5 varieties) are collected at locations K-17 and K-18, 'ano two varieties of grain, if available, at location -
K-23. The samples are gamma scanned and analyzed for gross alpha, gross beta, strontium-89, and . strontium-90 activities.
Grass samples are collected during the second, third and fourth quarters from two on-site locations (K-lb and K-1f) and from six dairy fams (K-3, K-4, K-5, K-6, K-12, and K-19).
The samples are gamma scanned and analyzed for gross alpha, gross ,
beta, strontium-89, and ' strontium-90 activities. During the' first quarter cattle feed'is collected from the same six dairy farms, and the same analyses are performed.
( i.
Soil samples are collected twice a year on-site at K-1f an'd from the six c6 fry farms (K-3, K-4, K-5, K-6, K-12, and K-19). 1 The rinples;are gamma scanned and analyzed for gross alpha, '
gross beta,nstrontium-89, and strontium-90 activities.
E
! 3.1.3 The Aquatic Proaram
[
~
One-gallon water samples are,taken monthly from three locations i
i on Lake Michisan: 1) at the point where the condenser water is-discharged into Lake' Michigan (K-Id); 2) at Two Creeks Park (K-14') located 2.5 rJ1es south of the reactor site; and 3) at the Rostok water if ntake (K-9) located 11.5 miles north of..the
%" + reactor site. 'Addttionally, one-gallon water samples are taken a monthly froc+ three c' reeks that pass through the . site (K-la, VN '
K-lb, and K-le) Samples from North and Middle Creeks :(K-la, K-lb) are collected near the' mouth of each creek. Samples from the South Creek (K-le) are (.ollected about ten feet downstream
!' from th'e point wher'e the outflows from the two drain pipes meet.
4 1 . s
- . ~
The water samples arh analyzed for gross alpha and gross
- . beta activity in the total residue, dissolved solids, and >
!4 suspended solids. . The' concentration 'of potassium-40. is' calcu-lated from total pottss'1um, whi,ch is determined by flame
- photometry. . The tritiunLactivity .in the Lake Michigan samples .
l l4 4 is determined by a liouid scintillation technique. Quarterly
!** composites of. monthly grab samples from Lake Michigan are also -
T .i analyzed for strontium-89 and stFontium-90.
'+
- y -
4 -
!h ,
. Fish samples (2 < species) are collected in the second, third,
- j. ,
C O, and fourth quarters at Location K-Id. The flesh is separated
' t from the bones, ashed, and analyzed for gross alpha and gross l '
beta activity, and gamma scanned. Ashed bone samples are
. f- s 5
% c. <
- < ), 1-l ./ %* .
(- 1"
.. --_: - , _.AL-- . . - - , - - - -
HAZLOTON GNVIRONMZNTAL CCl2NCO3 analyzed for gross alpha, gross beta, strontium-89 and stron-tium-90 activities.
Bottom organisms are collected in the second, third and fourth quarters from the discharge canal area (K-1d), Rostok water intake (K-9), and Two ~ Creeks Park (K-14). Samples are analyzed for gross alpha and gross beta activities and are also gamma scanned if available in sufficient quantity.
Slime samples are collected during the second and third quar-ters from three Lake Michigan locations (K-1d, K-9, and K-14),
and from three creek locations (K-la, K-lb, and K-le), if available. The samples are analyzed for gross alpha and gross i beta activities. If the quantity is sufficient, they are also gamma scanned and analyzed for strontium -89 and strontium-90 activities.
Bottom sediments are collected four times a year from five locations . (K-1c, K-1d, K-lj , K-9, and K-14). The samples are analyzed for gross alpha and gross beta _ activities and for strontium-89 and strontium-90. Each sample is also gamma scanned. Since it is known that the measured radioactivity per j unit mass of sediment increases with decreasing particle size, the sampling procedure is designed to assure collection of very
, fine particles.
]_ 3.1.4 Program Execution Program execution is summarized in Table 4.4. The program was executed as described in the preceding sections with the following exceptions:
(1)- There were no air particulate-data for Location K-15
- for the collection periods ending 3-30-81, 5-04-81, and 8-10-81, because of pump malfunction.
(2) There were no air particulate datum for Location K-16 for the collection period ending 5-04-81 because the sample was lost in the mail.
(3) There were no air particulate and iodine-131 data for Location K-16 for the collection period ending 6-08-81 because they were lost in the mail.
l 6 9
a
= .. . --
HAZLOTON CNVI AONMENTAL CCIENCZ3
/m (v) (4) There was no air particulate datum for Location K-16 for the collection period ending 6-29-81 because the collector was out of town an1 did not exchange the filter paper.
(5) One of the two ion chambers at location K-16 for the month of January could not be read because the chamber read full scale.
(6) Both of the two ion chambers at locations K-5 (July), K-7 (July), K-3 (July), K-6 (July), K-15 (July) and K-16 (July and August) could not be read because the chambers read full scale.
(7) No precipitation was collected in November because there was no rain during that month.
(8) No buckwheat was collected at location K-23 because it was not grown there in 1981.
,- (9) No gamma-spectroscopic data could be obtained on all (m) nine bottom organism samples. Attempts were made to collect bottom organisms during each sampling period but the population of bottom organisms at the sampling loca-tions is very sparse and it was not possible to collect samples of sufficient quantity for gamma-spectroscopic analysis.
3.2 Results and Discussion The results for the reporting period January to December 1981 are presented in summa ry form in Table 4.5. For each type of analysis of each sampled medium, this table shows the annual mean and range for all indicator locations and for all control locations. The loca-tion eith the highest annual mean and the results for this location are also given.
The discussion of the results has been divided into three broad cate-l gories: the air, terrestrial, and aquatic environments. Within each I category , samples will be discussed in the order listed in Table 4.4.
l Any discussion of previous environmental data for the Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant refa s to data collected by Hazleton Environmental Sciences, NALCO Environmental Sciences, or Industrial BIO-TEST Laboratories, Inc.
- o 1 7 1
HAZLETON CNVIMNMENTAl. SCIZNCE3 n
v The tabulated results of all measurements made in 1981 are not included in this section, although references to these results will be made in the discussion. The complete tabulation of the 1981 results is con-tained in Part II of the 1981 annual report on the Radiological Moni-toring Program for the Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant.
3.2.1 The Effect of Chinese Atomspheric Nuclear Detonation There were no reported atmospheric nuclear tests in 1981. The last reported test was conducted by the People's Republic of China on 16 October 1980. The reported yield was in the 200 kiloton to 1 megaton range.
The most pronounced effect of this test was on the gross beta levels in airborne particulates. The annual mean gross beta activity was about four times higher than in 1980. The highest activity was reached in the month of April and in the second quarter and then by the end of 1981 declined steadily to the level observed in 1980. Also, the pressence of fission pro-ducts, such as niobium-95, zirconium-95, cerium-141 and -144, strontium -89 and -90, and cesium-137 in some of the sampled media is attributable to the most recent (16 October 1980) and previous tests in the atmosphere.
3.2.2 The Air Environment For air particulates, both gross alpha and gross beta measure-ments yielded annual means that were nearly identical for the indicator and control locations. The annual mean activity for both alpha and beta in 1981 were'about four times higher than in 1980. The increase in the activity is attributable to the fallout from the test conducted 16 October 1980. The highest annual means for both gross alpha and gross beta, were measured at control location K-16, 26 miles NW of the station.
Gross alpha and beta activities at all locations were also analyzed by months and quarters. Gross alpha activity fluctuat-ed erratically and increased steadily to the highest level during the fourth quarter. The highest averages for gross beta were for the month of April and the second quarter. The elevat-ed activity was due to a spring peak, which has been observed almost annualy (1976 and 1979 were exceptions) for many years (Wilson et al., 1969). The spring peak has been attributed to fallout of nuclides from the stratosphere (Gold et al.,1964).
It was more pronounced in 1981 because of the addition of the radioactive debris from the latest nuclear test.
8
~ _ . _ . _ .. . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . . _ . _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ . _
HAZLETON CNVIRONM2NTAL CCCNCE3 Gamma spectroscopic analysis of quarterly composites of air particulate filters yielded similar results for indicator and control locations. Beryllium-7 which is produced continously in the upper atmosphere by cosmic radiation (Arnold and Al-Salih,
- 1955) was' detected in two of twenty-four samples. Trace amounts of niobium-95, zirconium-95, ruthenium-103, and cerium-144 were detected in some samples during the first and second quarters.
Presence of these isotopes in the atmosphere is attributable to the fallout from the most recent test conducted 16 October 1980. There was no indication of a station.effect of the data.
All other gamma-emmitting isotopes were below their respective -
LLD limits.
Bi-monthly levels of airborne iodine-131 gere below the lower' limit of detection (LLD) of 0.01 pCi/m at all locations.
Thus, .there is no indication of an effect of the plant operation on the local air environment.
Ambient gamma radiation was monitored by ion chambers:and TLD's-at eleven locations: four indicator and seven control.
j For the ion chambers at the indicator locations, the radiation .
exposure averaged (6.410.6)1mR/30 days, while the control locations averaged (6.6 0.6) mR/30 days. In both cases, the .
range was approximately 50% of the mean. The two means may be considered to be in agreement since their difference is smaller
- than the sum of their estimated uncertainties. The locations
. with the highest identical annual means (7.3 0.7) mR/30 days were the control locations K-3, 6.0 miles N of the plant and K-8
- 5 miles WSW-of the plant. Since these locations are so distant from the plant and since they typically yielded the highest monthly ion-chamber readings during the 1973 pre-operational study, the high results are not attr.ibutable to the plant
- operation. ,
1 The quarterly TLDs at the indicator locations measured a mean
- dose equivalent of (61.228.4) mrem /365 days, in agreement with the mean at the control locations of (63.127.8) mrem /365 days, and were slightly lower than the means obtained in 1979 (69.3-l and 73.1 mrem /365 days, respectively), and in 1980 (72.0 and j 1 Unless otherwise indicated, uncertainties of average values are standard deviations of the individual measurements over the period averaged. Uncer-tainties of- individual measurements represent probable counting errors at the 95% confidence level.
4 9 J
HAZLETON ENVIRONMINTAL CCIENCES 75.8 mrem /365 days, respectively). The quarterly measurements agreed with the annual measurements which were (52.411.7) inrem/365 days, for the indicator and (60.6 8.5) mrem /365 days .
for the control locations. All of these values are slightly lower than the United States average value of 78 mrem / year due to natural background radiation (National Council on-Radiation Protection and Measurements,1975). The highest means for the quarterly and annual TLDs were 72.5 and 73.7 mrem /365 days and occurred at control location K-8.
Precipitation was monitored only at an indicator location, K-11.
The tritium level ranged from 150 -to 420 pCi/l and averaged 250 pC1/l. The range and average is similar to that found in the 1980 and in the 1973 pre-operational study and is therefore not attributed to plant operation.
3.2.3 The Terrestrial Environment Of the 192 analyses for iodine-131 in milk all were below the LLD level of 0.5.pCi/1.
Strontium-89 activity was below the . LLD level of 2.6 pCi/1. in-all samples.
Strontium-90 was found in all sampl es. The mean values were essentially identical for all indicator and control locations (2.6 and 2.1 pCi/l, respectively).
Barium-140 activity was below the LLD of 12 pCi/l 'in all sam-
~
ples. Cesium-137 activity was also below the LLD of 10 pCi/1 in all samples.
Potassium-40 results averaged slightly higher at the indicator
~
than at the control locations and were essentially identical to the levels observed in 1978, 1979, and 1980. None of the:
differences among the means are statistically significant.
Due to the chemical similarities between strontium and calcium, and cesium and potassium, organisms tend to deposit cesium 137 in the soft tissue and muscle and strontium-89 . id -90 in the bones. Consequently, the ratios of strontium-90 activity to the weight of calcium in milk and cesium-137 activity to the weight of potassium in milk were monitored in order to detect potential O
10
HAZLETON GNVIRONM2NTAL CCGNC3G O environmental accumulation of these radionuclides. No statisti-cally significant variations in the ratios were observed. The measured concentrations of stable potassium and calcium are in agreement with previously determined values of 1.50 0.21 g/l and 1.16 0.08 g/1, respectively (National Center for Radiological Health,1968).
Gross alpha activity in well water averaged 3.7 pCi/1 and 4.3 pCi/1 in the indicator and control samples, respectively.
Gross beta activity in well water was 2.0 pCi/l'in samples from the control location. The mean value for all indicator locations was 3.0 pC1/1 and was identical or nearly identical to. the values observed in 1977, 1978, 1979, and 1980 (3.3 pCi/1, 3.4 pCi/1, 3.0 pCi/1, 3.0 pCi/1, respectively).
Tritium activity in the on-site well (K-lg) was below the LLD of 100 pCi/1 in all samples.
The activities of strontium-89 and strontium-90 in well water were below detection limits.
Potassium-40 levels were quite low (under 3.0 pCi/1), in ~ agree-ment with the previously measured values.
In meat samples (chickens), gross alpha activity was below the LLD of 0.048 pCi/g wet weight in all samples. Gross beta activities averaged 2.61 pCi/g wet weight for indicator loca-tions and 2.76 pCi/g wet weight at the control locations.
Strontium-89 and strontium-90 activity was below the LLD levels of 0.009 and 0.003 pCi/g wet weight, respectively, in all samples. Gamma-spectroscopic analysis showed that most of the beta activity was due to naturally occurring potassium-40.' All other gamma-emi_tting isotopes were below their respective LLD limits.
In egg samples, the gross alpha activity was below the LLD of 0.031 pCi/9 wet weight in all samples. ' Gross beta activity averaged 1.32 pCi/g wet weight, about equal to the activity of the naturally occurring potassium-40 observed in the samples (1.01 pCi/g). The levels of strontium-89 and all other gamma-emitting isotopes were below their respective LLD's. Strontium-90 was detected in one out of four samples and was 0.004 pC1/g wet weight.
11
1 HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL CCIENCED l
In vegetables, alpha activities were below the LLD of 0.042 pCi/g wet weight in all samples. Gross beta activity was slightly higher at the control location than at the indicator location 'and was due primarily to the potassium-40 activity.
Strontium-89 activity was .below the LLD of 0.010 pCi/g wet
, ; weight in all but two samples. The detected' activity was 0.025 pCi/g wet - weight and 0.030 pCi/9 wet weight- in indicator and control samples, respectively. Strontium-90 activity was nearly identical at both the indicator and control locations -(0.009-pCi/g wet weight and 0.011 pCi/g wet weight, respectively). All' i other gamma-emitting isotopes were below their respective LLD levels. The sample of oats was of similar composition but the activity was slightly higher due to the lower water content of the grain in comparison with the vegetables.
In grass, gross alpha activity was below the LLD level of 0.22 pCi/g wet weight in all samples. Gross ' beta activity was slightly higher at control locations (8.54 pCi/g wet - weight) than at the indicator locations (6.89 pCi/g wet weight) and in both cases was predominantly due to naturally occurring potas-sium-40 and beryllium-7. Trace amounts of niobium-95, zirconium
-95, and cerium-144 were detected in some samples. All other gamma-emitting isotopes were below their respective- LLD's.
Strontium-89 was detected in fourteen of twenty-four samples and averaged 0.256 pCi/g wet weight at indicator and 0.165:pCi/g wet weight at control locations. Strontium-90 activity was detected
~
in all samples and was nearly identical at both control and indicator locations (0.059 and 0.064 pCi/g wet weight, respec-tively). Presence of radiostrontium and gamma-emitting fission products in some of the samples is attributable to the fallout from the nuclear test.
For cattlefeed, the mean gross alpha activity at indicator locations was barely above the LLD level of 0.13 pCi/g wet weight (0.16 pCi/g) and below the -LLD level at control loca-tions. Mean gross beta activity was higher at indicator loca-tions (8.55 pCi/g wet weight) than at control locations (3.85
! pCi/g wet weight). The highest gross beta level was in the sample from indicator location K-4 (13.35 pCi/g wet weight), and l reflected the high potassium-40 level (6.78 pCi/g wet weight)
- observed in the sample. The pattern was similar to that' observed i in 1978, 1979, and 1980. Strontium-89 levels were 0.05 and 0.01 pCi/g wet weight at indicator and control locations, respec-l tively. Strontium-90 activity was higher at the indicator locations than at the control locations (0.084 and 0.030 pCi/g wet weight, respectively). The presence of the radiostrontium is attributable to the fallout from the previous nuclear test.
All other gamma-emitting isotopes were below their respective LLD levels.
O j 12
. - - . _ _ . _ _ _ _ , , _ _ . . ~ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ __ .. ____ _
HAZLOTON GNVIRONMENTAL CCl2NCCD No significant differences were found between indicator and control values for soil samples. The difference of 1.0 pC1/g dry weight in mean gross alpha activity between indicator locations and control locations is not statistically significant because the counting uncertainties of the ~ individual measure-
. ments are typically 3-5 pCi/g dry weight. Mean gross beta
! levels were nearly identical at both indicator and control locations (26.8 and 25.7 pCi/g dry weight, respectively), and is primarily due to the potassium-40 activity. Strontium-89 was detected in ten of fourteen samples and the mean activity of the control locations was higher by a factor of two than at
-indicator locations. Trace amounts of short-lived fission products, niobium-95 and ruthenium-106 were detected in a few samples. Presence of strontium-89 and short-lived fission gamma emmitters is attributable to the fallout from the nuclear test conducted 16 October 1980. Strontium-90 was detected in all samples and was higher at control locations than at indicator locations (0.141 and 0.097 pCi/g dry weight, respectively).
Cesium -137 was detected in all samples and was nearly identical at both control and indicator locations (0.55 and 0.50 pC1/g dry weight, respectively). All other gamma-emitting isotopes were below their respective LLD's. The levels of detected activities were very similar to those observed in 1979 and 1980.
O 3.2.4 The Aquatic Environment U
.In surface water, the gross alpha activity in suspended solids was detected in three of seventy-two samples and averaged 3.8 pCi/l at indicator locations and 2.2 pCf/l at control locations.
In dissolved solids gross alpha activity was below the LLD of 9.6 pCi/l in all samples.
Mean gross beta activity in suspended solids was below the LLD of 1.4 pCi/l at the control location-and was 3.8 pC1/1 at indicator locations. Mean gross beta activity in' dissolved solids was higher by almost a factor of two at indicator loca-
! tions (5.1 pCi/l) as compared to the control-location (2.7 pCi/1) and was nearly identical to the activities observed in 1978 (5.4 and 2.7 pCi/1),1979 (5.7 and 2.7 pCi/1), and 1980 (5.1 and 2.7 pCi/l). The control sample is the Lake Michigan water which varies very little in activity during the year, while indicator samples include two creek locations (K-la and K-le) which are much higher in activities and exhibit large month-to-month variations in gross beta activities.. The K-la creek drains its water from the surrounding fields which are heavily fertilized and K-le creek draws its water mainly from the Sewage Treatment Pond No. 1. In general, gross beta activ-
- ity levels were high when potassiun-40 levels were' high and low when potassium-40 levels were low indicating that the fluctua-13 I
HAZLETON ENVIRONM2NTAL CCl2NCE O tions in beta activity were due to variations in potassium-40
! concentrations and not to plant operation. The fact that similar fluctuations at these locations were observed in the 1973 preoperation01 study supports this assessment.
Annual mean tritium activity was higher at the indicator loca-tions than at the control locations (5150 and 280 pCi/l, respec-i tively). The elrvated mean activity at the indicator-locations was primarily dua to the activity in four samples as compared to i the mean activ'.ty level of 280 pCi/1 in Lake Michigan: three collected at discharge - on 2 February 1981 (31,880 pCi/1)', 2 March 1981 (10,160 pCi/l) and 1 April 1981 (1880 pCi/l) and one collected at K-14 on 2 February 1981 (710 pCi/1). The elevated l annual mean of 8920 pCi/l (or 8640.pCi/l above background level) in the discharge water is attributable to the -plant operation but constitutes less than 0.29% of the maximum permissible concentration of 3,000,000 pCi/l -established in the -10 CFR- 20 The highest level of 31,000 pCi/l .above background Document.
level detected in the sample collected 2 March 1981 constitutes 1.05% of the pennissible level. The source of elevated tritium level observed at K-14 is not clear. The location is about
, equidistant from both Kewaunee and Point Beach nuclear plants, i either one of which, or both, could have been the source of the elevated tritium level.
Strontium-89 activity was below the LLD of 1.6 pCi/l in all i samples. Strontium-90 activity was detected in one sample 2
(K-1d) and was barely above the LLD level of 1.9 'pCi/l (2.2 l
pCi/1).
In fish samples, gross alpha activity was below detection limits
- in all muscle and bone fractions. In muscle, gross beta activ-ity was primarily due to potassium-40 activity. The average beta activity of 2.26 pCi/g wet weight was near the minimum of the 1973 range of 2.26 to 3.62 pCi/g wet weight. The cesium-137 activity in muscle averaged 0.15 pCi/g wet weight and was nearly identical to the level observed in 1979 and 1980 (0.12 pCi/g wet 4
weight in both years). . The strontium-89 level in bones was
- below the LLD of 0.14 pCi/g wet weight in all but two samples (average 0.38 pCi/l wet weight) while strontium-90 averaged 0.32 pC1/g wet weight. This activity was near the lower limit of the 1973 ' range of 0.40 to 1.09 pCi/g dry weight and was similar to the level found in 1980 (0.31 pCi/g wet weight).
Only small amounts of bottom organisms were collected, resulting in rather high LLDs. Gross alpha levels were below the LLD of >
p 6.1 pCi/g dry weight in all samples. Gross beta activity was y also below the LLD level of 8.4 pCi/g dry weight in all samples.
14
HAZLOTON ENVIRONMIENTAL CCIENC2'3 The quantities of bottom organisms ecllected were insufficient for gamma-spectral analysis.
In periphyton (slime) samples, gross alpha activity was below the LLD of 0.87 pCi/g wet weight at control locations and was 1.71 pCi/g wet weight at indicator locations. Mean gross beta activity was twice as high at indicator locations than at control locations (3.67 versus 1.78 pCi/gwet weight). The higher value was primarily due to one high activity sample collected from the creek on site (K-le) which originates at the sewage treatment ponds. Strontium-89 activity was below the LLD level of 0.21 pCi/g wet weight in all samples. Strontium-90 levels were slightly higher at control locations than at indic-ator locations, 0.095 versus 0.070 pCi/g wet weight. Trace amounts of fission products, e.g. niobium-95, zirconium-95, and cerium-144 were detected in several samples. Presence of these isotopes is attributable to the fallout from the latest nuclear test conducted 16 October 1980. Trace ameunts of cobalt-58 were detected in two of ten samples. Presence of this isotope in slime is probably plant related. All other gamma-emitting isotopes were below their respective LLDs.
- In bottom sediment samples, gross alpha levels were below the (m)
LLD of 4.6 pCi/g dry weight in all samples.
The mean gross beta activity was slightly higher at control locations than at the indicator location (8.59 and 7.68 pCi/g dry weight, respectively) and was due mostly to potassium-40.
The difference is not statistically significant.
The mean cesiua-137 level at indicator locations (0.23 pCi/g dry weight) was approximately twice the level observed at the control location (0.14 pCi/g dry weight) and as similar or identical to the levels observed in 1979 (0.17 and 0.08 pCi/g dry weight, respectively) and in 1980 (0.24 and 0.14 pCi/g dry weight, respectively). Strontium-89 and strontium-90 levels were below their respective LLDs (0.029 and 0.017 pCi/g dry weight, respectively) in all samples. Trace amount of cobalt-58 was detected in two out of twelve bottom sediment samples col-lected near the condenser discharge. Presence of trace amount of this activation product in bottom sediments is probably plant related.
p U
15
. - _ . . - J - _
HA2LETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES O
4.0 FIGURES AtlD TABLES O
O 16
HAZLOTON CNVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES I
ll
'q K- 9 '
(EWAUNEE e NUCLEAR POWER PLANT g.
Kewounee
+ 42
, , East Kron um j -
K-3 e K-15 IE I6 Mie[(K-16)
K-24 % l. A KE k2h ^: . MICHIG A N Stangelville / lI
/ \/ K-21 K-4. ;
@ K- 5
- _ *4_
Q g V-20..-
q v
3 / /
- 9 K-19
- '/ /
w K-IO 1 b K-17 y,'
I a
& K-1 e
j g s
'o JK-23 iSITE y Pg K-1 l
l Kewounce Co.
K-22O . / 2
/1 (K-25 K-12 disc,h Mills \ y .
s Monitowoc Co. M 7 U "
. = i K-8 K-6 K-7 .
i y -
'
- K-14 y i CI$ks <K-13,.
T Q ',
XK-18 k2) ,
A
! '+,
t 1 ~
SCALE IN MILES l M l 0 1 2 3 4 I (V .
Figure 4-1. Sampling locations, Kewaunee fluclear Power Plant.
l 17 l
l
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES
/m Table 4.1 Sampling locations, Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant.
x ,i
)
Olstance (miles)b Code Type 3 and Sector Location K-1 Onsite la I 0.62 N North Creek Ib I 0.12 N Middle Creek Ic ! 0.10 N 500' north of condenser discharge ld I 0.10 E Condenser discharge le ! 0.12 S South Creek If I 0.12 S Meteorological tower lg I 0.CE W South Well lh I 0.12 NW North Well lj ! 0.10 5 500' south of condenser discharge K-2 C 9.5 NNE WPS Operations building in Kewaunee K-3 C 6.0 N Lyle and John Siegmund fam, Route 1, Kewaunee K-4 I 3.0 N Dan Stangel f am, Route 1. Kewaunee K-5 1 3.5 NNW Ed Papiham f am, Route 1 Kewaunee K-6c C 6.5 WSW Leonard Berres fam, Route 1, Denmark K-7 1 2.75 SSW Earl Bruemmer fam, Route 3. Two Rivers K-8 C 5.0 WSW Saint Mary's Church, Tisch Mills K-9 C 11.5 NNE Rostok Water Intake for Green Bay, Wisconsin two miles north of Kewaunee K-10 1 1.5 NNE Turner fam, Kewaunee site K-11 I 1.0 NW Harlan Ihlenfeld f am K-12 I 1.5 WSW Lecaptain fam, one mile west of site K-13 C 3.0 SSW Two Creeks general store K-14 1 2.5 S Two Creeks Park, 2 5 Miles south of site K-15 C 9.25 NW Gas Substation, 1.5 miles north of Stangelville K-16 C 26 NW WPS Division Office Building, Green Bay, Wisconsin K-17 I 4.25 W Jansky f arm, Route 1, Kewaunee
/9
- K-1B C 7.0 SSW Schmidt's Food Stand, Route 163 (3.5 miles south of "BB") s K-19 I 1.75 NNE Wayne Paral fam, Route 1 Kewaunee K-20 I 2.5 N Carl Struck fam, Route 1, Kewaunee K-21d I 3.25 NNW Bill Hardtke fam, Route 1, Kewaunee K-22e C 6.25 WSW Alvin Zahorik fam, Route 1, Denmark K-23 I 0.5 W 0.5 miles west of plant, Kewaunee Site K-24 I 5.45 N Fectum fam, Route 1, Kewaunee K-25 C 2.75 WSW Wotachek fam, Route 1, Denmark a
I = indicator; C = control C
Distances are measured from reactor stack.
The K-6 sampling location was changed on October 27, 1980, because the operator of Berres Fam retired. Berres farm has been replaced by Novitski Fam, located d
0.2 miles west of Berres Fam.
Replaced by K-24 in September 1978.
- Replaced by K-25 in September 1979.
18
HAZLETON ENVIFIONMENTAL SCIENCES
,3
, Table 4.2. Type and frequency of collection.
x_ -
)
Frequency location Wey L Bi-weekly Monthly Qua rte rly Semi-annually Annually K-1 K-la SW SL K-lb SW GR3 SL K-lc BSb K-Id SW BSb goa rga St K-le SW SL K-If AP Al RC GRd TLD 50 TLD K-Ig WW K-lh WW K-lj BSb K-2 AP A! RC TLD TLD K-3 RC MIc cga TLD CFd 50 TLD K-4 RC MIC GRa TLD CFd 50 TLD K-5 RC MIc cga TLD CFd 50 TLD K-6 RC MIc GR8 TLD CFd 50 TLD K-7 AP AI RC TLD TLD K-8 AP Al RC TLD TLD K-9 SW BSb B0a SL K-10 WW K-11 PR WW K-12 MIc GRa CFd ww so K-13 WW K-14 SW BSb Boa SL K-15 AP A! RC TLD TLD K-16 AP Al RC TLD TLD K-17 EG DM VE K-18 VE K-19 MIc GRa CFd 50 7- s* K-20 DM i K-21e DM (j K-22f DM K-23 GRN K-24 DM K-25 DM a Three times a year, 2nd ( April, May, June), 3rd (July, Aug, Sept), and 4th (Oct, Nov, Dec) quarters.
C To be col!ected in May, July, Sept, Nov.
d M nthly from November through April; weekly from May through October.
First (January, February, March) quarter only.
- Replaced by K-24 in September 1978.
Replaced by K-25 in September 1979.
i i
l 1
/ 's t /
\ LJ l
19 l
1 i
i j
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL CCIENCES i
()
i Table 4.3. Sample codes used in Table 4.2. I 1
i-Code Description 4
l AP Airborne Partiuclate i
A
! AI Airborne Iodine.
RC Rdaiation Chamber i TLD Thermoluminescent Dosimeter
- PR Precipitation MI Milk WW Well Water DM Domestic Meat EG Eggs VE Vegetables
];
j GRN Grain j GR Grass CF Cattlefeed 50 Soil SW Surface Water FI Fish B0 Bottom Organisms i SL Slime l
, BS Bottom Sediments i~
l i
t 4
4 20-1
- i. - _ , . - . . . . - _ . - , _ _ _ . - _ ~ . _ . . _ , . . _ . - . _ , _ , _ _ _ _ _ , . - . - _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . . - - . ..,. _ ._
4 1
l 3
HAZLETON ENVIR'JNMENTAL CCl2NCEO LO Table 4.4. Sampling summary, January - December 1981.
i j
i Collection Number of Number of
! Sample Type and Number of Samples Samples Type Frequency a Locations Collected Missed Rema rks
- _ Air Environment Airborne particulates C/W -6 306 6 See text p.6
' Airborne iodine C/BW 6 159 3- See text p.6-1 Ion chambers 'C/M 10 240 0
- TLD's C/Q. 10 44 0 9
C/A 10 -11 0 Precipitation C/M 1 11 1 See text p.7 i Terrestrial Environment i Milk (May-Oct) G/W 6 156- 0 I
(Nov-Apr) G/M 6 36 0 i Well water G/M 2 24~ 0 G/Q 4 16 0
.; Domestic meat G/A 4 4 0
' Eggs G/Q 1 4 ~0 Vegetables-5 varieties G/A 2 6 0
! Grai n-oats G/A 1. 1 0 i
-buckwheat G/A 1 0 1 See text p.7 Grass G/TA 8 24 0 i Cattle Feed G/A 6 6 0 l Soil G/SA 7 14 0
. Aquatic Environment -
{ Surface water G/M 6 72 0
. Fish-2 varieties G/TA 1 6 0 t
Bottom organisms G/TA 3 9_ 0 4
Slime G/SA 6 12 0 l Bottom sediments G/FA 5 20 0
)
a
- Type of collection is coded as follows
- C/= continuous; G/= grab. Frequency is coded i as folows: /W= weekly; /M= monthly; /Q= quarterly; /SA= semi-annually; /TA=three times
- per year; /FA=four times per year; /A= annually; /BW=bi-weekly.
1 .
{
i i
O 1
j 21
.. ~
- O O O Table 4.5 Environmental Radiological Monitoring Program Summary.
Name of facility Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant Docket No. 50-305 Location of facility kewaunee County, Wisconsin ~
Reporting Period January-December 1981 (County,StateT Indicator Location with Highest Control Sample Type and Locationg Annual Mean Locations Number of Type Number of Mean(F) Mean(F) Mean(F) Non-routine (Units) Analysesa LLDb Rangec location'f Range Range Resultse Airborne GA 306f 0.002 0.0043 (14/104) K-16, Green Bay 0.0060 (20/49) 0.0050 (39/202) 0 Particulates (0.0021-0.010) 26 mi NW (0.0030-0.0129) (0.0022 0.0129)
(pCi/m3)
GB 3069 0.004 0.045(84/104) K-16, Green Bay 0.070(49/49) 0.040 (148/202) 0
, (0.005-0.265) 26 mi NW (0.005-0.267) (0.005-0.267) l
< G5 24 I
Be-7 0.060 (LLD K-16, Green Bay 0.16 (2/4) 0.16(2/16) 0 N 26 mi NW (0.071-0.16) (0.071-0.16) f" m
Nb-95 0.046 0.025 (4/8) K-16, Green Bay 0.048 (2/4) 0.031 (8/16) 0 4 4
(0.013-0.036) 26 mi NW (0.026-0.071) (0.012-0.071)
Zr-95 0.011 0.020 (1/8) K-16, Green Bay 0.028 (2/4) 0.023(3/4) O m 26 mi NW (0.015-0.040) (0.014-0.040) Z U Ru-103 0.0095 -(LLO K-16, Green Bay 0.018 (2/4) 0.016 (3/16) 0 g 26 mi NW (0.014-0.021) (3.013-0.021) g Ru-106 0.022 (LLD - - -
'O 2
.E Cs-137 0.0023 '<LLD - - -
O m Z
Ce-141 0.0087 (LLD - - -
O g Ce-144 0.018 <tLD K-16, Green Bay 0.058(1/4) 0.058(1/16) 0 26 mi NW W D
Airborne I-131 159 0.01 (LLD - -
(LLD 0. iii lodine Z' (pCi/m3 ) 0
-m Ion Chamber Gamma 240 1.0 '6.4 (92/92) K-3, Siegmund Farm 7.3(22/22) 6.6 (133/148) 0 W~
(mR/30 days). (4.8-10.2) 6.0 mi N (6.3-9.9) (5.2-9.9)
K-8, St Mary's Church 7.3(22/22) 5.0 mi WSW (6.3-9.1)
TLD-Qua rterly Gamma 44 5 15.3 (16/16) K-7, Bruemmer Farm 18.1 (4/4) 15.8 (28/28) 0 (mrein/91 days) (9.9-20. 7) 2.75 mi SSW (15.2-20.7) (11.3-21.5)
K-8, St Mary's Church 18.1 (4/4) 5.0 mi WSW Tt o-Qua rterly Gamma 11 5 61.2 (4/4) K-8, St Mary's Church 12.5 (1/1) 63.2 (7/7) 'O
(.nrem/365 days) (52.1-72.3) . 5.0 mi WSW -
(55.3-72.5)
TLD-Annual Gamma 11 .5 52.4 (4/4) . K-8, St Mary's Church 73.7 (1/1) 60.6 (7/7) 0 (mrem /365 days) (43.5-69.7) 5.0 mi WSW -
(47.5-73.7)
p ,a, v) f ~.
v)
( i '
LJ d
Table 4.5 (Continued)
Name of facility rewaunee Nuclear Power Plant Indicator Location with Highest Control Sampl e Type and Locationg Arnual Mean locations Number of Type Number of Mean(F) Pean (F) Mean(F) Non-routine (Units) Analysesa LLDb Rangec locationd Range Range Resultse Precipitation H-3 11 100 250(10/11) K-11, Ihlerfeld farm 250(10/11) None 0 (pci/1) (150-420) 1.0 mi NW (150-420)
Milk 1-131 192 0.5 <tLD - -
<LLD 0 (pCi/1)
Sr-89 72 2.6 <LLD - - -
0 I
Sr-90 72 0.5 2.6 (48/48) K-12, Lecaptain Fam 2.9 (12/12) 2.1 (24/24) 0 >
(1.3-5.9) 1.5 mi WSW (1.3-5.9) (0.7-3.8) y CS 72 h O
K-40 50 1300(48/48) K-3, Siegmund Fam 1320 (12/12) 1260 (24/24) 0 g (1140-1510) 6.0 mi N (1150-1540) (1150-1540) m Cs-137 10 (LLD - -
(L LD 0 2 N Ba-140 12 (LLD - - <tLD 0 3
" O (g/1) K-stable 72 0.5 1.47 (48/48) K-4, Stangel Farm 1.52 (12/12) 1.49 (24/24) 0 g (0.69-1.72) 3.0 mi N (1.29-1.72) (1.31-1.65) g N
(g/1) Ca 72 0.5 1.2 (48/48) K-6, Novitsky Farm 1.4 (12/12) 1.3 (24/24) 0 (0.7-2.0) 0.2 mi W (1.0-2.6) (0.9-2.C) 2 Well Water GA 40 2.8 3.7 (2/36) K-lh, North Well 4.3 (11/12) 2.2 (3/4) 0 r-(pCi/1) (3.0-4.3) Onsite, 0.12 mi NW (2. L ' 1. 0) (1.8-2.5) g CB 40 1.3 3.6 (30/36) K-lh, North Well 4.3 (11/12) 2.2 (3/4) 0 O Onsite, 0.12 mi NW (2.3-11.0) (1.8-2.5) m (1.5-11.0) Z H- 3 4 100 <LLD - - None 0 Q
0.10 K-lh, North Well 2.5 (12/12) 1.4 (4/4) 0 0 K-40 40 2.0 (36/36)
(flame) (1.2-2.7) Onsite, 0.12 mi NW (2.3-2.1) (1.3-1.5)
Sr-89 4 2.5 (LLD - - None O Sr-90 4 2.0 (LLD - - None 0
~
3 C) V U Table 4.5 (Continued)
- iame of facility Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant Indicator locatien with Highest Control Sample Ty;.e and Locationg Annual Mean Locations humber of Type Nunter of Mean(F) Mean(I) Mean(f) Non-routine (Units) Analysesa LLDb Rangec locationd Range Range Resultse Domestic Meat GA 4 0.048 (LLD - -
(LLD 0 (chickens)
(pci/g wet) GB 4 1.0 2.61 (3/3) K-24, Fectum Fam, 2.76 (1/1) 2.76(1/1) 0 (2.33-2.76) 5.45 mi N - -
K-25, Wotachek Fam, 2.25 mi WSW Sr-89 4 0.009 <t LD - -
(LLD 0 f
N GS 4 r m
Be-7 0.30 <LLD - - (LLD 0 -4 0
K-40 0.5 2.38(3/3) K-20, Struck Fam 2.70 (1/1) 2.38 (1/1) 0 2 (2.26-2.70) 2.5 mi W - -
m N Nb-95 0.059 <tLD - -
<LLD 0 E O
Ru-103 0.048 <LLD - -
(LLD 0 2 Ru-106 0.18 <tLD - -
<LLD 0 m 2
Cs-134 0.021 (LLD <LLD 0 g
Cs-137 0.023 <LLD - -
<LLD 0 r m
Ce-141 0.086 <LLD - -
(LLD 0 0 m
Ce-144 0.13 <LLD - -
<L L D 0 2 Eggs GA 4 0.031 (LLD n
None 0 m (pCi/g wet) m GB 4 0.01 1.32 (4/4) K-17 Jansky Fam 1.32 (4/4) None 0 (1.23-1.52) 4.25 mi W (1.23-1.52)
Sr-89 4 0.006 (LLD - -
None O Sr-90 4 0.003 0.004 (1/4) K-17, Jansky Fam 0.004 (1/4) None 0
- 4.25 mi W -
GS 4 Be-7 0.17 (LLD - -
None 0 K-40 0.01 1.01 (4/4) K-17. Jansky Fam 1.01 (4/4) None 0 (0.79-1.20) 4.25 mi W (0.79-1.20)
i
,. ,3 , ~ .
li , 1 ( / .
] \ ] N 1
I !
Table 4.5 (Continued)
Name of facility rewaunce Nuclear Pcwer alant Indicator Location with Highest Control Type and Annual Pean _ locations Number of Sample Type Number of Locaticg)
Mean(f Mean(f) Mean(f) Non-routine Analyses a Ltob Loc a t j en'! RanSe RanSe Resultse I (Unit sj RanSec 0.020 (LLD - None 0
! Eggs Nb-95 -
l (pC1/g wet)
Zr-95 0.044 <tLD - - None O tcont'd)
Ra-103 0.061 (LLD - - None O Ru-106 0.13 <LLD - - None O Cs-134 0.018 <LLD - - None 0 I Cs-137 0.012 (LLD - -
None O N f*
Ce-141 0.037 <tLD - - None 0 h 0
Ce-144 0.072 <tLD - - None 0 g 0.012 (LLD - <LLD 0 m
/egetables CA 6 -
2 (pCi/g wet) 0 <
y GB 6 1.0 2.29 (1/1) K-18, Schmidt's food 2.37 (5/5) 2.37 (5/5) w -
Stand (1.33-4.17) (1.33-4.17) 3 7.0 mi SSW g Sr-89 6 0.010 0.025 (1/1) K-18, Schmidt's Food 0.011 (3/5) 0.030 (1/5) 0
- Stand - -
0.003 K-18, Schmidt's f ood 0.011 (3/5) 0.011 (3/5) 0 2 Sr-90 6 0.009 (1/1)
- Stand (0.004-0.023) (0.004-0.023) %
7.0 mi SSW g-1 til 6
GS 9
0.35 (LLD - <tLD 0 m Be-7 -
2
! 0 K-18, Schmidt's food 2.31 (4/5) 2.31 (4/5) 0 l K-40 0.74 2.11 (1/1) A
- Stand (1.39-3.78) (1.39-3.78) W l 7.0 mi SSW 4
a 1 i Nb-95 0.055 <LLD - - <tLD 0 0.070 (LLD - <LLD 0 Zr-95 -
0.065 <LLD - <LLD 0 Ru-103 -
0.24 <tLD - <LLD 0 Ru-106 -
0.035 <LLO
- <LLD 0 Cs-137 -
Ce-141 0.12 (LLD - - (LLD 0 Ce-144 0.14 (LLD - - (LLD 0 l_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ __ _ _ _ _ _
.~ .__. -- . . _ . . . . - - - _ . . - . . - - - - . . _ . _ -. _ - . _ . . - - _ - . . -
O O O Table 4.5 (Continued)
Name of facility Kewau_ nee Nuclear Power Plant .
Indicator Lccation with Highest Control Sampl e Type and Locationg Annual Mean Locations Number of Type Nrter of Mean(F) Mearil) Mean(F) Non-routine (Units) Analysesa Llgb Rangec locationd Rance Rage Resultse Grain - Cats GA 1 0.01 0.36(1/1) K-23. Kewaunee Site 0.36 (1/1) None 0 i (pCi/g wet) - 0.5 mi W -
GB 1 0.1 6.46 (1/1) K-23, Kewaunee Site 6.46 (1/1) None 0 j
0.5 mi W -
' Sr-89 1 0.01 0.36 (1/1) K-23. Kewaunee Site 0.36 (1/1) None 0
- 0.5 mi W -
I D
Sr-90 1 0.01 0.084 (1/1) K , Kewaunee Site 0.084 (1/1) None 0
-4 GS 1 O
Be-7 0.58 (LLD - - None 0 m
! K-40 0.1 6.22 (1/1) K-23, Kewaunee Site 6.22 (1/1) None 0 2 l N -
0.5 mi W -
4 m 3 i Ab-95 0.098 (LLD - -
None 0 0 2
Zr-95 0.11 <LLD - - None 0 g
Ru-103 0.095 <LLD - -
None 0 m Z
Ru-106 0.41 (LLD None 0 h
1 e Cs-137 0.057 <tLD - -
None 0 g j
l Ce-141 0.20 (LLD - -
None 0 0
- m
$ Ce-144 0.36 <LLD - -
None 0 2 1 O l Cattlefeed GA C 0.13 0.16 (2/4) K-4 Stangel Fam 0.22(1/1) <tLD 0 m i j (pti/g wet) (0.10-0.022) 3.0 mi N - @
GB 6 0.2 8.55 (4/4) K-4. Stangel Fam 13.35 (1/1) 3.85 (2/2) 0 i (3.65-13.35) 3.0 mi N -
(3.43-4.26)
Sr-89 6 0.005 0.050 (3/4) K-4, Stangel Farm 0.070 (1/1) 0.01 (1.2) 0 j (0.030-0.070) 3.0 mi N - -
i i
i 1
1 l
l
l ,
i J
Table 4.5 (Continued) i Na m of facility Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant
] Indicator Location with Highest Control j Sa ple Type and Locationg Annual Mean Locations hunber of Ty pe haler of Mean(F) Mean{F} Mean(F) Non-roatine j j units) Analysesa LLDb RangeC Locationd Range Range Resultse 4
Sr-90 6 0.01 0.084 (4/4) K-19, Paral f am 0.14 (1/1) 0.030 (2/2) 0 j Cat tle feed (pci/g wet) (0.016-0.14) 1.75 mi NNE -
(0.027-0.033)
(cont'd) i GS 6 1
Ee-7 0.12 (LLD - - <tLD 0 j ,
K 40 1.0 4.38 (4/4) K-4, Stangel Fam 6.78 (1/1) 2.07 (2/2) 0 I i f D (2.07-6.78) 3.0 mi N -
(1.94-2.20) l N
Nb-95 0.017 (LLD - - <tLO O
{
f Zr-95 0.021 <tLD - - <tLD 0 h Ru-103 0.017 <tLD - - <tLD 0
' A I Ru-106 0.095 <tLD - - (LLD 0 2 N
W Cs-134 0.012 (LLD - - <LLD 0 3 0
Cs-137 0.013 <LLD - - <LLD 0 2 Ce-141 0.029 <LLD - - <LLD 0 Ce-144 0.079 <LLD - - (LLD 0 2 Grass GA 24 0.22 (LLD - - (LLD 0 g-f (pCi/g wet) 4 GB 24 1.0 6.89 (18/18) K-6, Novitsky Fam 8.54 (3/3) 7.54 (6/6) 0 (5.12-12.33) 6.5 mi W5W (7.33-9.70) (6.10-9.70) --
A
! Sr-89 24 0.022 0.256 (11/18) K-If. Met. Tower 0.602 (2/3) 0.17 (3/6) 0 2 0.12 mi N (0.204-1.00) (0.12-0.22) O
! (0.052-1.00) m 0.01 K-Ib, Middle Creek 0.107 (3/3) 0.059 (C/61 0 0 Sr-90 24 0.064 (18/18)
(0.012-0.162) Onsite, 0.12 mi N (0.083-0.146) ( 0.033-0.13 ~ )
l 1
GS 24
] i 1
i Ee-7 1.1 3.91 (4/18) K-lb, Middle Creek 6.74 (1/3) 1.0 (1/6) 0
! (2.15-6.74) Onsite, 0.12 mi N -
! K-40 0.1 5.2 (18/18) K-5, Pap 1 ham Fam 7.32 (3/3) 5.4 (6/6) 0 1 (2.38-9.40) 3.5 mi NNW (5.60-9.40) (3.90-7.40)
! k 1
i l
-- ~- -_~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
~ ._. _ __ _ _ . . - _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . . . _ . _ _
l (m pm ,,
'"T ble 4.5 (Continued)
- haue cf facility Kewaunee Nuclear Pcwer Plant Imitator Location with Highest Control Sample Type and locatieng Annual Mean
~ ~ ~
Locations hunber of Type N d er of Mean(f) Mean[I F ~ Mean(F) Non-routine Anall sesa LLDb Locationd Range Range Resultse (Units) PanseC r2rass Nb-95 0.22 0.37 (8/18) K-6. Novitsky f arm 0.65 (1/3) 0.40 (2/60 0 ,
f (pCi/g dry) (0.21-0.46) 6.5 mi WSW - -
I (cont'd)
! Zr-95 0.24 0.23 (6/18) K-6, Novitsky farm 0.35(1/3) 0.35 (1/6) 0 (0.20-0.25) 6.5 mi W5W - -
Ru-103 0.23 <LLD - - <tLD 0 Ru-106 0.74 <LLD - - <LLD 0 I D
Cs-137 0.098 (LLD - - <tLD 0 f !
Ce-141 0.47 <tLD - - <tLD 0 h O
Ce-144 0.70 1.74 (2/18) K-19, Paral Fam 260 (1/3) <LLD 0 g q
(0.87-2.6) 1./5 mi raE -
m Soil GA 14 3.7 7.3(9/10) K-5, Paplham Fam 9.5(2/2) 8.3(4/4) 0 2 (pct /g dry) (2.6-12.7) 1.5 mi WSW (5.6-12.7) (1.0-9.8? $
D
. GB 14 1.4 26.8 (9/10) K-12. Lecaptain Fam 32.4 (2/2) 25.7(4.4) 0 0 j g (15.2-34.4) 1.5 mi WSW (30.5-34.4) (23.6-29.8) Z ;
g 1' m 0 Sr-89 14 0.016 0.043 (6/10) K-3, Sieg und Fam 0.087(2/2) 0.087 (4/4) g
! (0.030-0.053) 6.0 mi N (0.061-0.113) (0.061-0.113) 7 6
j Sr-90 14 0.05 0.097(10/10) K-6, N0vitsky Fam 0.164 (2/2) 0.141 (4/4) O p 6.5 mi WSW (0.156-0.171) (0.097-0.171) g- !
(0.035-0.166) 14 G5 9
0 A Be-7 0.79 2.3 (1/10) K-19. Paral Fam 2.3(1/2) (LLD 1.75 mi NNE - 2 n
K-12, Lecaptain Fam 0 K-40 1.4 28.3(10/10) 32.5 (2/2) 28.0 (4/4) 0 O !
(15.1-34.0) 1.5 mi W5W (32.2-32.7) (23.8-30.8) d Nb-95 0.12 0.29 (4/10) K-4, Stangel Fam 0.38 (1/2) 0.25 (2/4) 0 (0.23-0.38) 3.0 mi N -
(0.19-0.30)
Zr-95 0.91 <LLD - - (LLD 0 ;
Ru-103 0.13 (LLD - - <LLO O Ru-106 0.45 0.88 (1/10) K-If, Met. Tower 0.88 (1/10) <tLD 0
- 0.12 mi S -
- Cs-137 0.10 0.50 (10/10) K-4, Stangel Fam 0.57 (2/2) 0.55 (4/4) 0 (0.24-0.78) 3.0 mi N (0.55-0.78) (0.48-0.69)
Ce-141 0.28 (LLD - - (LLD 0 Ce-144 0.47 <tLD - - (LLD 0
f !0 (
/ 'w]
N, )
Table 4.5 (Contirmed)
Na-te of facility Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant Control Indicator Location with Highest Sample Type and Locatieng Annjal Mean Locations Number of
~ ~ -
~~KWT Mean(f) Non-routine i Type Nunber of Mean(F)
_(Unit t ) Analysesa LL0b Ranjec locatiend Rance Range _Resultse Surface Water GA(SS) 72 0.7 3.8 (2/60) K-le, South Creek, 5.1 (1/12) 2.2 (1/12) 0 (pC1/1) (3.8-5.1) Onsite, 0.12 mi 5 -
72 9.6 <tLD - - <LLD 0 GA(DS) 72 9.8 <LLD - - <LLD 0 GA(TR)
GB(SS) 72 1.4 3.8 (3/60) K-le, South Creek , 7.3 (1/12) (LLO O (1.8-7.3) Onsite, 0.12 mi S -
"E i D
GB(DS) 72 0.4 4.3 (60/60) K-la, North Creek, 8.8(12/12) 2.7 (12/12) 0 N (1.2-17.2) Onsite, 0.62 mi N (1.2-17.2) (2.3-3.3)
GB(TR) 72 1.0 5.1 (60/60)
(1.4-17.2)
K-la, North Creek, Onsite, 0.62 mi N 9.2 (12/12) 2.4-17.2) 2.8 (12/12)
(2.3-3.8) 0
[7 H-3 36 250 5150 (9/24) K-Id, Condenser dis- 8920 (5/12) 280 (2/12) O m l ',280-280) Z (260-31880) charge, Onsite (260-31880) l
. 0.10 mi E <
i N Sr-89 12 1.6 <LLD - - <tLD 0 Z
Sr-90 12 1.9 2.2 (1/8) K-Id, Condenser Dis- 2.2 (1/8) (LLD 0 f - charge, Onsite - E j
0.10 tr,i E m
l Z 2
j K-40 72 0.5 3.3(60/60) K-la. North Creek 7.6 (12/12) 1.2 (12/12) 0
- (flame) (1.0-16.0) Onsite, 0.62 mi N (1.8-16.0) (1.0-1.3) g.
0.67 <tLD - None 0 0 l Fish-Muscle GA 6 -
j (pci/g wet) 0 GB 6 1.0 1.63 (6/6) K-ld, Condenser Dis- 1.63 (6/C) None 0 m
)
(1.03-2.85) charge, Onsite (1.03-2.85) Z j O 0.10 mi E
\
+
m 10 1 GS 6 Ee-7 0.26 <tLD - - None 0 K-40 1.05 2.26 (6.6) K-Id, Condenser Dis- 2.26 (6/6) None O f' (1.11-3.29) charge, Onsite (1.11-3.29)
] 0.10 mi E Nb-95 0.040 <LLD - -
None 0 Zr-95 0.046 <LLD - - None 0 I
-- - - . - . - - - _ . __~ . . . - _ - . - - _ __. . - _ _ - - . - . . - _ _ . _ - . _.
- p. l (0 I ,,l Table 4.5 (Continued)
Name of f acility Kt.eaunce Nuclear Power Plant Indicator Location with Highest Control Sample Type and Locationg Annual Mean Locations Number of t Type Number of Mean(F) P R F) Mean(F) Non-routine Analysesa LLDb panSec locationd Range Range Resultse
_ (U_ nits) fish-Mascle Ru-103 0.038 <tLD - - None 0 i (pCi/g wet)
Ru-106 0.19 <LLD - - None 0 j (Cont *d)
Cs-137 0.02 0.15 (6/6) K-Id, Condenser Dis- 0.15 (6/6) None 0 l charge, Cnsite (0.052-0.240) (0.052-0.240) i 0.10 mi E I
j Ce-141 0.062 (LLD - - None 0 I
i D
- Ce-144 0.11 <LLD - - None O
' N
! 0.68 (LLD - Nane 0 I !
Fish-Bones GA 6 -
(pCi/g wet) h GB 6 0.7 2.14 (6/6) K-ld, Condenser Dis- 2.14 (6/6) hone 0 g (0.71-3.75) charge. Onsite (0.71-3.75) 7 ,
0.10 mi E m
Sr-89 6 0.14 0.38 (2/6) K-Id Ccndenser Dis- 0.38 (2/C) None 0 2 (0.23-0.53) charge Onsite (0.23-0.53) $
w 0.10 mi E I} l O
Sr-90 6 0.01 0.32 (6/6) K-Id Condenser Dis- 0.32 (6/6) None 0 g
! (0.19-0.46) charge, Onsite (0.19-0.46) g 0.10 mi E g Bcttom GA 9 6.1 (LLD - - <tLD 0 2 i
i Organisms f (EC1/g dry) 9 8.4 (LLD -
<LLD 0 g-j GB -
l Peri phyton GA 12 0.87 1.71 (4/10) K-le, South Creek , 2.5 (1/2) (LLD 0 (slime) (0.97-2.50) Onsite, 0.12 mi S - -
A i (pCi/g wet) i GS 12 0.50 3.67 (10/'0 K-le, South Creek, 6.26 (2/2) 1.78 (2/2) 0 2 (1.76-10.76 Onsite, 0.12 mi S (1.76-10.76) (1.12-2.43) O m
Sr-89 12 0.21 <LLD - -
(LLD 0 0 Sr-90 12 0.01 0.070 (10/10) K-le, South Creek, 0.129 (2/2) 0.095 (2/2) 0 (0.013-0.162) Onsite, 0.12 mi 5 (0.096-0.162) (0.060-0.13)
GS 12 Be-7 1.37 6.95 (1/10) K-le, South Creek, 6.95 (1/2) (LLD 0
- Onsite, 0.12 mi S -
4 K-40 0.63 2.15 (10/10) K-la , fiorth Creek , 2.39 (2/2) 3.27 (1/2) 0 (0.78-3.39) Onsite, 0.62 mi N (1.44-3.39) -
i I
l,
. _ ~ _ ______ _ __ . _ _ _ _ _ ... _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . . . - _ __._ _ _
I f ~y p
! }
i ! j t i i
%) s./ Lj j Table 4.5 (Continued)
] N.sme of facility Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant 3
Indicator Location with highest Control Sampl e Type and Locationg Annual Mean Locations Number of Type Nurter of Mean(F) MeanUJ Mean(F) Non-routine (Unitsl Analyses 8 LLDb pangec locationd Range Range Results' Periphyton Mn-54 0.078 (LLD - -
(LLD 0 (Slime)
, (pci/g wet) Co-58 0.17 0.21 (2/10) K-14, Two Creeks 0.23 (1/2) <LLD 0 i (Cont'd) (0.18-0.23) Pa rk , 2. 5 mi S -
<LLD 0 i
i Nb-95 0.30 0.79 (8/10) K-1d, Condenser Dis- 1.15 (2/2) <LLD 0 j (0.25-1.88) charge, Onsite (0.42-1.88) I 0.10 mi E D
! N Zr-95 0.27 0.64 (5/10) K-1d, Condenser Dis- 0.81 (2/2) (LLD 0 F (0.31-1.09) charge, Onsite (0.52-1.09) 0.10 mi E O Ru-103 0.23 (LLD - - <LLD 0 4 4 m l Ru-106 0.69 (LLD - - <LLD 0 2 d <
d Cs-134 0.096 <LLD - -
<LLD 0 j (LLD 0
I Ce-141 0.46 <LLD - - (LLD 0 5 i
m Ce-144 0.43 1.64 (1/10) K-le, South Creek , 1.64 (1/2) (LLD 0 2
- Onsite, 0.12 mi S -
y I Bottom CA 20 4.6 (LLD - -
<tLD 0 U
I S(diment s f (pC1/g dry) GB 20 1.4 7.68 (16/16) K-lj, 500' S of Dis- 8.93 (4/4) 8.59 (4/4) 0 9 (4.75-11.11) charge, Onsite (7.0-11.11) (5.79-10.67) m ,
j O.10 mi N 2
1 4 0
i Sr-89 20 0.029 <LLD
- ' - (LLD 0 m Ul I Sr-90 20 0.017 s<LLD - - <LLD 0 t x ,
c5 2c c s .
3 K-40 1.4 8.61 (16/16) K-Ic, 500* N of Dis- 9.37(4/4) 7.94 (4/4) 0 (5.15-10.81) charge, Onsite
(7.910.61) (7.36-9.92) 0.10 mi N Co-58 0.051g 0.16 (2/16) ' K-lj, 500' S of Dis- 0.21.(1/4) (LLD 0 (0.11-0.21) charge, Onsite s.
, 0.10 mi S l s I ,
sx N ,
3 N A
._-.y._. . - - . _ - .- - -
9- 7 ,
i
-.' e
, s ,s .
- .g s \ ' ' ~
x-s .
,. ~~-
.y
\
i x w s .. t A w
~ .
7
, A
,i i Table 4.5 (Continued) l Name of facility Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant j Jndicator Location with Highest Control
(. Locatio9s Number of Q, , sample Type and g( Lilationg Annual Mean _
Mean(F) Non-routire
's' Ty pe Neber of Mean(F) Mean(F) tialygs a LLDb Ranjec locationd Range Rance Resultse ;
! _ {Qnits) f
\
I % ~ <tLD - (LLD 0 I '
0.0dh 4 P.ottom -Co-4 ' >
1s Sediments {. 0 N
<tLD !
1 ^
l (pCi/g dry) Cs-134 0.041-- '4 (L: f; - -
I -
- -(Con't) !
l Cs-137' , 0.N} 0.23 (13/16) K-14. Two Creeks 0.78 (1/4) 0.14 (2/4) O h j s .(0.12-0.78) Park , 2.5 mi 5 -
(0.069 0.70) O Z !
w N O 3GA = gross alpha, G3 = gross beta, GS = gamma spectroscopy SS = suspended solids, DS = dissolved solids, TR = total residue. 2 bLlD = nominal Icwer limit of detection based on 3 sigma counting errer for background sample.
CMean based upon detectable measurements only. Fraction of detectable measurements at specified locations is indicated in <
jt y pare 7 theses (F) 3 dLocations are specified by station code (Table 4.1), distance (miles) and direction relative to reactor site. O eNonroutine results are those which exceed ten times the control station value. If no control station value is availabic 2 the result is considered nonroutine if it exceeds ten times the pre-operational value for the location, g IFive higher LLD values and three (3) higher values resulting f rom pump malfunction and uncertain volume have been excluded g from determination of LLD and of the mean. 2 ,
9Two (2) higher LLD values and five (5) higher values resulting from pump malfunction and uncertain volume have been excluded from determination of LLD and the mean.
r i Ul i O ,
- m !
Z n
m i UI 4
I
'l 4
J j
A l
1
i (,'
, , }4 s
HAZLOTON CNVIRONMENTAL CCCNCCO
(
\, i;S 1 .5
5.0 REFERENCES
, 7 ,
5 , \
Arnold,' J. R. fand . ti. A. Al-Salih. 1955.' Beryllium-7 produced by cosmic r?ys. Science 121: 451-453. ,
Eh e hud, M. '1W3. Environmental Radioat ivity, McGrs. Flill, New York, New York, pp.'213, 275, and 276. ,
Gold, S. , H. ih ; Bark hau, B. Shlein, and B. Kahn, 1964. Measurement of Natbi 31?y Mcurring Radionuclides in Air, in the Natural Radiation Envi ronment , University of Chicago Press, Chicago, Illinois, 369-382.
L Hazleton , Enyirpomental Sciences,1979. Annual Report. Radiological Monitor-p ing Propam for the Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant, Kewaunee, Wisconsin,
<y Fjnal Report - Part II, Octa Tabulations and Analysis, January -
December 1,978.
_y N . 19E0. _ A.1naal . Report. Radiological Monitoring Program for
> the Kewaunee Nuc?cre Power Plant, Kewnnee; Wnconsin, Final Report -
Part II, Data T/Sulations ind Analysis, January - December 1979.
'- . 1981. Annual Repurt. Radiological; Monitoring Program for
. the Kewaunee Nucleer Power Plant, Kewaunce, Wisconsin, Final Report -
Part II, Data Tabulations and Analysis, January - December 1980.
. 1982. Annual Repo rt . Radiological Monitoring Program for the Kewaunce Nucleat Power. Plant, Kewaunec, Wisconsin, Final Report -
Pert II, Data Tabulations and Analysis, January - December 1981.
\ Industrial 3IO-TEST Laboratories, I nc. 1'3 74. An tual Report. Pre-operational Radf alogical Monitoring Program for the Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant,
'Kewaunce, Wisconsin. January - december 1973.
i _. 1975. Semi-annual Report. Radiological Monitoring Program for the Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant, Kewaunee, Wisconsin. January -
June 1975.
NALC0 Environmental Sciences. 1977. Annual Report. Radiological Monitoring Program for the Kewaunee Nuclehr Power Plant, Kewaunee, Wisconsin,
.lanuary - December 1976.
9 33 i
l 1 !
l H AZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES l . 1978. Annual Report. Radiological Monitoring Program for the Kewaunee Nuclear Power Plant, Kewaunee, Wisconsin, Final
) Report -
Part II, Data Tabulations and Analysis, January -
December ,
l 1977. ,
t .
I National Center for Radiological Health. 1968. Section 1. Milk surveil-l lance. Radiological Health Data Rep., December 9:730-746. t 1
I National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. 1975. Natural .
i Radiation Background in the United States. NCRP Report No. 45.
i Solon, L. R. , W. M. Lowder, A. Shambron, and H. Blatz. 1960. Investigations l of Natural Environmental Radiation. Science. 131: 903-906. !
- Wilson, D. W. , G. M. Wa rd , and J. E. Johnson, 1969. In Environmental Con-l tamination by Radioactive Materials, International Atomic Energy '
Agency, p. 125.
) i i
t l
l l
O t
i I
r i l O 34 i
1 w-,-m,-~ ----,_-gm me_,- - - , - - - - -- - , _ - , , ,, ,
l I
l HAZLETON ENVI ACNMENTAL SCIENCES
!O 1
t 1
i i
l .
1 1 I
I l
l l
l l l I
l 4
l 1
i j Appendix A i
2 Crosscheck Program Results !
l '
i 1
l I
e :
, {
i I l I l
l l .
f I
(
l O
I A-1 I
i I
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL CCCNCEO o.
Appendix A Crosscheck Procram Results The Nuclear Sciences Department of Hazleton Environmental Sciences has parti-cipated in ir.terlaboratory comparison (crosscheck) programs since the formula-tion of its quality control program in December 1971. These programs are operated by agencies which supply envi ronment al-type samples (e.g., milk or water) containing concent rations of radionuclides known to the issuing agency but not to participant laboratories. The purpose of such a program is to provide an independer'. check on the laboratory's analytical procedures and to alert it to any possiole problems.
Participant laboratories measure the concentrations of specified radionuclides and report them to the issuing agency. Several months later, the agency reports the known values to the participant laboratories and specifies control limits. Results consistently higher or lower than the known values or outside the control limits indicate a need to check the instruments or procedures used.
The results in Table A-1 were obtained through participation in the environ-mental sample crosscheck program for milk and water samples during the period <
1975 through December 1981. This program has been conducted by the U. 5.
Environmental Protection Agency Intercomparison and Calibration Section, Quality Assurance B ranch, Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, Las Vegas, Nevada.
The results in Table A-2 were obtained for thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD's) during the period 1976,1977,1979,1980, and 1981 through participation in the Second. Third, Fourth, and Fifth International Intercomparison of Environmental Dosimeters under the sponsorships listed in Table A-2.
I l ~
\
l v
A-2 l
l
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL GClENCED Ds/ Table A-1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's crosscheck program, comparison of EPA and Hazleton ES results for milk and water samples, 1975 through 1980a,
_ Concentration in pCi/lb Lab Sample Date HES Result EPA Result Code Type Coll. .
Analysis 2 c 3 , n=1 d STM-40 Milk Jan. 1975 Sr-89 <2 0 15 Sr-90 73 2.5 75 11.4 1-131 99 4.2 101 15.3 Cs-137 76 0.0 75 15 Ba-140 <3.7 0 15.0 K(ng/1 ) 1470 5.6 1510 228 STW-45 Water Apr. 1975 Cr-51 <14 0 Co-60 421 6 425 63.9 Zn-65 487 6 497 74.7 Ru-106 505 16 497 74.7 Cs-134 38523 400260.0 Cs-137 468 3 450 67.5
~ STW-47 Water Jun. 1975 H-3 1459114* 1499 1002 STW-48 Water Jun. 1975 H-3 2404 34 2204 1044 STW-49 Water Jun. 1975 Cr-51 <14 0 Co-60 344 1 350 53 Zn-65 33025 327249 Ru-106 315 7 325 49 Cs-134 291 1 304146 Cs-137 38722 378 57 STW-53 Water Aug. 1975 H-3 3317164 320021083 STW-54 Water Aug. 1975 Cr-51 223 11 225 38 Co-60 305 1 307 46 Zn-65 289 3 281 42 Ru-106 346t5 279 57 Cs-134 238 1 256 38 Cs-137 29222 307 46 STW-58 Water Oct. 1975 H-3 1283280 1203 988 STM-61 Milk Nov. 1975 Sr-90 68.9 2.1 74.6 11.2 I-131 64.6 3.8 75 15 Cs-137 75.6 20 75 15 Ba-140 <3.7 0 K(Mg/1) 1435 57 1549 233
[
A-3
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL CCl~JNCEO
\- ' Table A-1. (continued)
Concentration in pCi/1_b Lab Sample Date HES Result EPA Result Code Type Coll. Analysis 22 c 3 , n=1d STW-63 Water Dec. 1975 H-3 1034 39 1002 972 STW-64 Water Dec. 1975 Cr-51 <14 0 Co-60 221 1 203 30.5 Zn-65 215 6 201 30.2 Ru-106 171 9 181 27.2 Cs-134 198 2 202 30.3 Cs-137 152 4 151222.7 s
STW-68 Water Feb. 1976 H-3 1124 31 1080t978 STW-78 Water Jun. 1976 H-3 2500244 2502 1056 STW-84 Water Aug. 1976 H-3 3097 21 3100 1080 STM-86 Milk Sep. 1975 Sr-89 2922.0 45 15
~3 Sr-90 30 1.0 30 4.5
, ,/ I-131 10028.6 120 18 Ba-140 50 10.1 85 15 Cs-137 17 1.5 20 15 K(mg/1) -
1540 231 STM-91 Milk Nov. 1976 I-131 8320.6 85 15 Ba-140 <4 0 Cs-137 12 1.7 11 15 K(mg/1) 1443231 1510 228 STW-93 Water Dec. 1976 Cr-51 105 15 104 15 Co-60 <4 0 Zn-65 97 4 102 15 Ru-106 87 3 99 15 Cs-134 85 4 93 15 i
Cs-137 10314 101 15 STW-94 Water Dec. 1976 H-3 2537 15 230021049 STM-97 Milk Ma r. 1977 I-131 5522.5 51 15 Ba-140 <6 0 Cs-137 34 1 29 15 K(mg/1) 1520 35 1550 233
,, STW-101 Water Apr. 1977 H-3 1690 62 1760 1023 l (_-)
A-4 i
_ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ - __..____m.__ _ _ _
i i !
I
, HAZLETON ENVIACNMENTAL SCIENCES
! l
- O Table A-1 l
l (continued) l i I I
} _ Concentration in pCi/l b ,
1 Lab Sample Date HES Result EPA Resule l Code Type Coll. Analysis 22 oc 23 o , n=10 ;
1 I
i STM-130 Milk May 1977 Sr-89 38 2.6 44:15 ;
i Sr-90 12 2.1 10:4.5 !
I-131 59 2.1 50 15 l t
Ba-140 53:4.4 72 15 i Cs-137 14 1.2 10:15
<(mg/1) 1533:21 15G0123i STW-105 Water Jun. 1977 Cr-51 <14 0 l l Co-60 29 1 29:15 !
i Zn-65 74:7 74:15 j Ru-106 6428 62215 l
- Cs-134 41
- 1 44:15 '
l Cs-137 35:3 35:15 i I
j STW-107 Water Jun. 1977 Ra-226 4.720.3 5.1:2.42
- i m STW-113 Water Aug. 1977 Sr-89 13:0e 14:15 j (v) Sr-90 10:2e 10:4.5 r
- STW-116 Water Sep.1977 Gross Alpha 1226 10 15 !
i Gross Beta 32 6 30 15
! STW-118 Water Oct. 1977 H-3 1475229 1650:1017 i
STW-119 Water Oct. 1977 Cr-51 132 14 153:24 !
! Co-60 39 2 38 15 Zn-65 51:5 53215 Ru-106 63 6 74:15 Cs-134 30:3 30 15 Cs-137 26:1 25 15 STW-136 Water Feb. 1978 H-3 1690 270 168021020 STW-137 Water Feb. 1978 Cr-51 <27 0 Co-60 36:2 34:15 Zn-65 32 4 29:15 ;
Ru-106 41 2 36 15 i Cs-134 47:2 52 15 l Cs-137 <2 0 i
O A-5 j
- _ - - . - _ . _ =
_ _ _ _ _ - - _ - _ . . _ . - - _ _ - - _ . - . - - _._ - _ __- . . . . - - - = - . - - -
HAZLETON ENVI AONMENTAL SCIENCES l V j Table A-1. (continued) 1 l
Concentration in oCi/l b Lab Sample Date HES Result EPA Result
{ Code Type Coll. Analysis 22 o c 23 a , n=1d l
i STW-1389 Water Ma r. 1978 Ra-226 5.4 0.1 5.5 0.6 i Ra-228 NAf 16.7 2.5 i
STW-150 Water Apr. 1978 H-3 1250:220 2220:1047 STW-151 Water Ap r. 1978 Gross Alpha 20 1 20:15 Gross Beta 56:4 59:15 Sr-89 19:2 21 15 i Sr-90 8:1 1024.5 4
Ra-226 NAf -
Ra-228 NAf -
H-3 112 12 0 i Co-60 19 3 20:15 I Cs-134 16 1 15:15 Cs-137 <2 0
(^')
\/
STM-152 MiIk Apr.1978 Sr-89 85:4 101:15 Sr-90 8:1 9:4.5
- 1-131 78 1 82 15 l
Cs-137 29:3 23il5 Ba-140 <11 0 i K(mg/1) 1503290 1500 225 STW-154g Water May 1978 Gross Alpha 12 1 13:15 Gross Beta 21 4 18 15 STW-1579 Water Jun. 1978 Ra-226 4.021.0 3.7 0.6 l Ra-228 NAf 5.6:0.8 STJ-1599 Water Jul. 1978 Gross Alpha 19 3 22 6 Gross Beta 28:3 30 5 STW-162 Water Aug. 1978 H-3 1161:38 1230 990 l
- STJ-165g Water Sep. 1978 Gross Alpha 4:1 5:5 <
l Gross Beta 13 1 10:5
\
U A-6
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES I
%)
Table A-1 (continued)
Concentration in pCi/l b Lab Sample Date HES Result EPA Result Code Type Coll. Analysis 2cc :3 o, n=1d ST4-167 Water Oct. 1978 Gross Alpha 1922 19:15 Gross Beta 36:2 34:15 Sr-89 9:1 10:15 Sr-90 4:0 5:2.4 Ra-226 5.5:0.3 5.0:2.4 Ra-228 NAf 5.422.4 Cs-134 10 1 10:15 Cs-137 15 1 13:15 STW-170 Eater Dec. 1978 Ra-226 11.520.6 9.2 1.4 Ra-228 NAlefld 8.9 4.5 STW-172 Water Jan. 1979 Sr-89 1122 14:15 Sr-90 5:2 6 4.5 STW-175 Water Feb. 1979 H-3 1344 115 12802993 7x b STW-176 Water Feb. 1979 Cr-51 <22 0 Co-60 10 2 9:15 Zn-65 26:5 21:15 Rn-106 <16 0 Cs-134 82 6:15 Cs-137 15:2 12 15 STW-178 Water Ma r.1979 Gros:: Alpha 6.323 10:15 Gross Beta 1524 16:15 STW-1959 Water Aug. 1979 Gross Alpha 6.3:1.2 5:5 Gross Beta 42.7:7.0 40 4 STW-193 Water Sep. 1979 Sr-89 5.0 1.2 3.0 1.5 Sr-90 25.0:2.7 28.0 4.5 STW-196 Water Oct. 1979 Cr-51 135 5.0 113 18 Co-60 7.021.0 65 Cs-134 7.320.6 7:15 Cs-137 12.7 1.2 11 15 STW-198 Water Oct. 1979 H-3 1710:140 1560:1111 A-7
{
HA2LETON ENVIAONMENTAL SCIENCES
(-
Table A-1. (continued)
Concentration in pCi/l b Lab Sample Date HES Result EPA Result Code Type Coll. Analysis 22 oc 23 c, n=1d STW-199 Water Oct. 1979 Gross Alpha 16.0 3.6 21:15 Gross Beta- 36.3 1.2 49:15 Sr-89 10.720.6 12:15 Sr-90 5.720.6 7:15 Ra-226 11.1:0.3 11:5 Ra-228 1.6 0.7 0 Co-60 35.0:1.0 33:15 Cs-134 50.7 2.3 56:15 Cs-137 <3 0 STW-206 Water Jan. 1980 Gross Alpha 19.0:2.0 30.0:8.0 Gross Beta 48.0 2.0 45.025.0 STW-208 Water Jan. 1980 Sr-89 6.121.2 10.0:0.5 Sr-90 23.9:1.1 25.5:1.5 7-s), STW-209 Water Feb. 1980 Cr-51 112 14 101:5.0 g
Co-60 12.7:2.3 11 5.0 Zn-65 29.7 2.3 25:5.0 Ru-106 71.7:1.5 51 5 Cs-134 12.022.0 10:5.0 Cs-137 30.0:2.7 30:5.0 STW-210 Water Feb. 1980 H-3 18002120 1750 340 STW-211 Water March 1980 Ra-226 15.7 0.2 16.0 2.4 Ra-228 3.5:0.3 2.6:0.4 STW-215 Water April 1980 Gross Alpha NAf 98.0:24.5 Gross Beta NAf 100.0 5.0 Sr-89 3.7 0.6 4 5.0 Sr-90 <1.0 0.001:0.1 Ra-226 NAf 16.0:2.4 Ra-228 NAf 21.3 3.2 Co-60 10.0:1.0 625 Cs-134 14.0 1.0 825 Cs-137 21.7 1.5 1825 STM-217 Milk May 1980 Sr-89 4.4 2.69 55 Sr-90 10.0:1.0 12 1.5 STW-221 Water June 1980 Ra-226 2.0:0.0 1.7:0.8
-~
Ra-??S 1.6:0.1 1.7 0.8 kJ A-8
HAZLETON ENVlFIONMENTAL SCIENCEO Table A-1. (continued) .
Concentration in pCi/lb Lab Sample Date HES Result EPA Result Code Type Coll. Analysis 2 c 3 , n=1d STW-223 Water July 1980 Gross Alpha 31:3.0 38 5.0 Gross Beta 4424 35:5.0 STW-224 Water July 1980 Cs-137 33.9 0.4 35 5.0 Ba-140 <12 0 K-40 1350 60 1550 78 I-131 <5.0 0 STW-225 Water Aug. 1980 H-3 1280 50 1210 329 STW-226 Water Sept. 1980 Sr-89 22 1.2 24 8.6 Sr-90 12 0.6 15 2.6 STW-228 Water Sept. 1980 Gross Alpha NAf 32.0 8.0 Gross Beta 22.520.0 21.0 5.0
- STW-231 Water Oct. 1980 Sr-89 17.0 1.7 23 8.6
(/
\_- Sr-90 1.67 0.6 -
I-131 18 8.6 Cs-137 26 1.0 21 8.6 Ba-140 <39 0 K-40 1310 100 1700 85 STW-235 Water Dec. 1980 H-3 2420230 2240 604 STW-237 Water Jan. 1981 Sr-89 13.0 1.0 16 8.7 Sr 90 24.0 0.6 34 2.9 STM-239 Milk Jan. 1981 Sr-89 <210 0 Sr-90 15.7 2.6 20 3.0 I-131 30.9 4.8 26 10.0 Cs-137 46.9 2.9 43 9.0 Ba-140 <21 0 K-40 1330 53 1550 134 STW-240 Water Jan. 1981 Gross alpha 7.3 2.0 9 5.0 Cross beta 41.0 3.1 44 5.0 STW-243 Wa'.er Mar. 1981 Ra-226 3.5 0.06 3.4 0.5 Ra-228 6.5 2.3 7.3 1.1
, (U A-9 l
1
1 1
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE 3
() Table A-1. (continued)
Concentration in pCi/lb Lab Sample Date HES Result EPA Result Code Type Coll. Analysis 2 c 3 , n=1d STW-245 Water Apr. 1981 H-3 3210 115 2710 355 STW-249 Water May 1981 Sr-89 51 3.6 36 8.7 Sr-90 22.7 0.6 22 2.6 1
- STW-251 Water May 1981 Gross alpha 24.0 5.29 21 5.25 i
Gross beta 16.1 1.9 14 5.0 STW-252 Water Jun. 1981 H-3 2140 95 1950 596 STW-255 Water Jul. 1981 Gross alpha 20 1.5 22 9.5 t Gross beta 13.0 2.0 15 8.7- l l STW-259 Water Sep. 1981 Sr-89 16.1 1.0 23 5
- Sr-90 10.3 0.9 11 1.5 STW-265 Water Oct. 1981 Gross alpha 71.2 19.1 80 20 Gross beta 123.3 16.6 111i5.6
-O Sr-89 Sr-90 14.9 2.0.
13.1 1.7 21 5 14.4 1.5 Ra-226 13.0 2.0 12.7 1.9 l STW-267 Water Nov. 1981 Gross alpha 15.7 4.3 4
Gross beta 7.3 0.9 '
STW-269 Water Dec. 1981 H-3 2516 181 2700 355
/
2 aResults obtained by the Nuclear Sciences Department of Hazleton Environ-
, mental Sciences as a participant in the environmental sample crosscheck program operated by the Intercomparison and Calibration Section, Quality Assurance Branch, Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory, U.S.
j Environmental Protection Agency, (EPA), Las Vegas, Nevada.
b All results are in pCi/1, except for elemental potassium (K) data which -
I are in mg/1.
cunless otherwise indicated, the HES results given as the mean 12 standard deviations for three determinations.
d VSEPA results are presented as the known values control limits of 3
. for n=1.
i
'Mean i 2 standard deviations of two determinations, f
j NA = Not analyzed.
9 Analyzed but not reported to the EPA. '
l ,
A-10
. . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . ~ . _ ~ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
p n
%- s' Table A-2. Crosscheck program results, thennoluminescent dosimeters (TLD's).
rR Lab TLD liazl eton Average 2 2crd Code Type Measurement Result Known (all 224- Value participants) 2nd International Intercomparisonb 115-2b CaFg:Mn Gamma-Fiel d 17.0 1.9 17.lc 16.427.7 h Bulb N Gamma-Lab 20.8 4.1 21.3c 18.8 7.6 In
-4 3rd International Intercomparisone O
m 115-3e CaF7:Mn Gamma-Fiel d 30.713.2 34.924.8f 31.513.0 2 Bulb $
Gamma-Lab 89.616.4 91.7114.6f 86.2224.0 I 9 O 4th International Intercomparison9 Z g
m 115-49 CaFg:Mn Gamma-Field 14.111.1 14.1 1.4f 16.09.0 Z Bulb $
Gamma-Lab (Low) 9.3 1.3 12.212.4f 12.0 7.6 r-M Gamma-Lab (iiigh) 40.4 1.4 45.8 9.2f 43.9 13.2 y Sth International Intercomparisonh 2 n
m ll5-SAh "
CaFg:Mn Gamma-Field 31.4 1.8 30.0 6.0i 30.2214.6 Bulb Gamma-Lab 77.4 5.8 75.2r7.6i 75.8240.4 at beginning Gamma-Lab 96.625.8 88 418.8i 90.7 31.2 at the end
I>Nm oZ mZ5EZIyy>r $EZQm i d
)
r 3v
( 2 c
1 t
s n
a 6 4 2
h l
t af r e
g d
t e
s d a l r 1 p el i 1
leo e i r l e 4 0 3 l b R e a b gac y m p a(i 1 4 2 a e F m r t 2 8 7 3
hi et .k o h a e r h ma t od h v a 0 5 t s r
caO r y h n c 0 .l y aa A p 3 7 9 ye ngyss b d n bv oobau I s o 6 n i i r p7 eu xo 9 a i 7 t x 7U d 7T n 9 ae d 9 ee9 i 1 T e 1 e zh1 ,t 0 z h i t nn f 8 , i ft r foo o 9 n r o unot c 1 o . u
,1 I f si s r t ys 6 8 l o s rug e f sgs i i egeon m oure R 6 7 8 rh rnml l m ne i m loer wu 0 2 pt pi m s u l l np 4 Al t u , u s ol a d ass l
a ,E d na 0 5 8 .ne ep an n fsf e KV 3 7 8 si I l ti nx o i aot n acies nx a od c ri Ti d i et r i ei etd r e T ne ttl pref a t d ep acb oat op c ef mo nuu pc m u t ot idP y uyo d c ry nn l sdt c n uyal nof s e ni r o .dt ps eco uiose csnieu t orcrt aosD o esl uo en sxcr b d ro eo nt svi iari re e . n eth eT rvSi t rene t ei .t eec notUh e ,t nun n rmS ob e t mneU ,o ot 8 4 7
hi t se camel ihf i om c tl g sti ek 1 oh st o ossh rg eu - 4 7 1 fDt nl o D uot on 3/. l s6 1 o i l Df r lod f Yi s (u l ze2 laR1 3
0 3
1 1
8 4
5 8
san ld nt a on sa u
nbtt o l
yah n oos l l t
a ,la owu nsthf n l e
ie , o nl p eant o t mk sd eas n v xel
,s anr ioo i eme rnnl y l r emaki oT nerr vrY ai o b r oioa f
ei parc i f r Y p d vw ntiid voic m ne l ob vl e n viwo dEf conb n Eynl ec r r Eui tEbf r l g
af , es P mr fi u e d ok ttf osfP ,t n n r nl of e ro yn t d i
n d
n ano i u ot ne f ri n n t oY sn e ovnoo l e ss eeol d sio t e e e bi b i w h rso insl ah m i ag ae 2re t i os rUiort e F L e Lh af l f rh a a roo r - - b - t i p f oac peahbf u a a a m ,
o pS s mh pcao s m mt mt no) sm n a m ma ma rnoeo ot mSL c a a a acL erS c o r oochi rf ceso i
f G G G mea sirtt eorht s tG nt e a .t et nn
)
en( oatdirnht eo hI . pi nnveI t nymp d t yssvI aeb e l I b es u l ra e dml a r n s a o x yd l y a ael duy i
0 i nt eb ardh nf aesb i t 0 nir oat d norco a
nra n 1 s et o ,drot eaiad ntii s4 e icooed o e p vab nndt rnoal t n 1
n C Dp Fi
( L y ih i
naoinaoainb aol ruh pan grLt n anbt i
TT LC e snt rasd eP rst n tt yueseL et e ne 2 luI nt el e2 lotnl t 2z nftdet iI onnme s f
,d I a2r I and A h eda n uhl o B rnS se doest ohore e S o a u n ri u s rothi u l e -
bcd xl aitl euhf avl b bd 5 a ao 1 aeneaehaarocid na lSaTVr lliVpFSFI i E,1V rC T LC 1 ab cd C f 9 h 34N
l HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES O
l APPENDIX B STATISTICAL NOTATIONS O
O B-1
HA2LETON CNVIRONM2NTAL CCICNC3G Statistical Notations
- 1. Single Measurement:
Each single measurement is reported as x + s where x = value of the measurement s=2 counting uncertainty.(corresponding to the 95%
confidence level).
In cases where the activity is found to be below the lower limit of detection it is reported as
'L where L = lo'wer limit of detection based on 3 counting uncertainty for a background sample.
- 2. Computation of Means and Standard Deviations A. The mean, x, and standard deviation, s, of a set of n numbers, x, . x1, ...xn are defined as follows:
x= Ix s= VE I*-*I2 n-1 B. Monthly and quarterly means are calculated using all detectable results.
C. Annual means and standard: deviations are calculated using only those results which are above the highest lower limit'of cetection (LLD).
D. If all but one of the values are less than the. highest'LLD, the single value, x, and the ascociated two sigma error are reported.
E. If'the standard deviation is zero, the mean value, E, and the largest two sigma error are reported.
B-2
HAZLETON ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES F. If all values are less than the highest LLD, no value is reported.
G. All numbers are rounded upwards if the last digit is five or greater.
t I
l
> l l
l l
l I
l i
3-3 l
. . , . . . - - - , - - - , , - , - . . . - - - - - . . . . . - , . - . , . . . - . - . _ . , . . _ . - ...--.-.---,-.n.-.._ . . - , . . , . . . _ _ . - - , - . - - - , . . - - - - , . , _ . .
.._ = _ . - - . . . _ - . _ _ - - _ -- .- ..-. . . . - - _ _ . . . - . - . _ .
l HAZLETON ENVI AONMENTAL SCIENCES APPENDIX C 1
MAXIMUM PERMISSIBLE CONCENTRATIONS OF RADI0 ACTIVITY IN AIR AND WATER ABOVE NATURAL BACKGROUND IN UNRESTRICTED AREAS 1
l O
! l I
I I
i 1
0
! C-1
, , , . _ . -,_-,,_om. - _ , .- _---.. , _ -- - - ~ ,,. ,m,_
HAZLOTON CNVIRONMENTAL CCIENC~_ 0 O Table C-1. Maximum permissible concentrations of radioactivity in ai and water above natural background in unrestricted areas.5 Air Water Gross alpha 3 pCi/m Strontium-89 3,000 pCi/l Gross beta 100 pCi/m Strontium-90 300 pC1/1 b 3 Idoine-131 0.14 pCi/m Cesium-137 20,000 pCi/l Barium-140 20,000 pCi/l Iodine-131 300 pCi/l c
Postassium-40 3,000 pCi/l Gross alpha 30 pCi/l Gross beta 100 pCi/l 6
Tritium 3 x 10 pCi/l 7-a Taken from Code of Federal Regulations Title 10, Part 20. Table II and appropriate footnotes. Concentrations may be averaged over a period not b greater than one year.
From 10 CFR 20 but adjusted by a factor of 700 to reduce the dose resulting c
from the air-grass-cow-milk-child pathway.
A natural radionuclide.
()
C-2
_ _ _ _ _ -