ML20052D894
| ML20052D894 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 04/28/1982 |
| From: | DUQUESNE LIGHT CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20052D888 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8205070287 | |
| Download: ML20052D894 (130) | |
Text
i i
I I
I l
1981 ANNUAL ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT RADIOLOGICAL - VOLUME #2 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMP & '
BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION AhT)
SHIPPINGPORT ATOMIC POWER STATION I .
I I
I I
8205070287 820428 PDR ADOCK 05000334 R PDR
i DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report ABSTRACT This report describes the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program conducted during 1981 in the vicinity of the Beaver Valley Power Station and the Shippingpo;t Atomic Power Station. The Radiological Environmental Program consists of on-site sampling of water and gaseous effluents and off-site monitoring of water, air, river sedin4er.ts , soils , food pathway samples, and radiation levels in the vicinit'y of the site. This report discusses the results of this monitoring during 1981.
I The environmental program outlined in the Beaver Valley Power Station Technical Specifications was followed throughout 1981.
There were no radioactive liquid effluents released from the Shippingport Atomic Power Station since radioactive liquids are prec.ssee ene re.cyc1.e within th. p1 ant systems.
g The results of this environmental monitoring program show that Shippingport Atomic Power Station and Beaver Valley Power Station I operations have not adversely affected the surrounding environment.
I 1
l I l I I
J DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY L 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report
[ TABLE OF CONTENTS
- s e Page Abstract----------------------------------------------------------- i r
L I. INTRODUCTION----------------------------------------------- 1 A. Scope and Objectives of the Program 1 B. Description of the Shippingport and Beaver Valley Site 2 !
II. RESULTS & CONCLUSIONS-------------------------------------- 6 III. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING CONSIDERATIONS-------------------- 8 A. Environmental Qaality Control Programs 8 B. Evaluation of the Quality Control (QC) Program Data 26 C. Standard Requirements and Limitations for Radiological 27 and Other Effluents D. Significant. Changes and Reporting Levels 27 IV. MONITORING EFFLUENTS--------------------------------------- 30 A. Monitoring of Liquid Effluents 30
[ 1. Effluent Treatment, Sampling, and Analytical Procedures 36
( 2. Results 37 B. Monitoring of Airborne Effluents 38
- 1. Description of Airborne Effluent Sources 38
- 2. Airborne Effluent Treatment and Sampling 43
- 3. Analytical Procedures for Sampling Airborne
( Effluents 47
- 4. , Results 50 C. Solid Waste Disposal 52
[-
DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPAW 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
I V. EWIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM Page A. Environmental Radioactivity Monitoring Program 54
- 1. Program Description 54
- 2. China's Nuclear Test Fallout 54
- 3. Summary of Results 74
- 4. Quality Control Program 74 B. Air Monitoring 80
- 1. Characterization of Air and Meteorology 80
- 2. Air Sampling Program and Analytical Techniques 80
- 3. Results and Conclusions 83
.I C. Monitoring of Sediments 86
- 1. Characterization of Stream Sediments 86
- 2. Sampling Program and Analytical Techniques 86
- 3. Results and Conclusions 88 1
D. Monitoring of Feedcrops and Foodcrops I 1. Characterization of Vegetation and Foodcrops 90 90 l
- 2. Sampling Program and Analytical Techniques 90
- 3. Results and Conclusions 92 E. Monitoring of Local Cow's Milk 93
- 1. Description - Milch Animal Locations 93 E 2. Sampling Program and Analytical Techniques 93
- 3. Results and Conclusions 96 I
I
_m-y
DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
I V. Page ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM (continued)
F. Environmental Radiation Monitoring 98
- 1. Description of Regional Background Radiation Levels'and Sources 98
- 2. Locations & Analytical Procedures 98
- 3. Results and Conclusions 103 G. Monitoring of Fish 105 I 1. Description 105
- 2. Sampling Program and Analytical Techniques 105
- 3. Results and Conclusions 105 H. Monitoring of Surface, Drinking, and Well Waters 107
- 1. Description of Water Sources 107
,5 2. Sampling Program and Analytical Techniques 107
- 3. Results and Conclusions 112 I. Estimates of Radiation Dose to Man 115
- 1. Pathways to Man - Beaver Valley Power Station 115
- a. Calculational Models - Beaver Valley 115 Power Station
- 2. Results of Calculated Radiation Dose 116 I to Man - Beaver Valley Power Station Liquid Releases
- 3. Airborne Pathway 119
.E
- 4. Conclusions - Beaver Valley Power Station 119 j
.m
- 5. Dose Pathways to Man - Shippingport Atomic 121 Power Station
- a. Calculational Model - Shippingport Atomic Power Station 121
- 6. Results and Conclusions - Shippingport Atomic Power Station 122 I 1v-
DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPAST L 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report LIST OF FIGURES Figure P No. Page 1.0 View of the Shippingport and Beaver Valley Site 3 1.1 Geographical Map - 40 Mile Radius 4 L
4.1 Liquid Discharge Points to Ohio River 31 y 4.2 Water Flow Schematic - Shippingport Atomic Power Station 32 l 4.3 Water Flow Schematic - Beaver Valley Power Station 33 5 4.4 Liquid Radwaste Systems - Shippingport Atomic Power Station 34 4.5 Liquid Radwaste Systems - Beaver Valley Power Station 35 P
4.6 Gaseous Waste Processing - Shippingport Atomic Power Station 40 4.7 Gaseous Waste Processing - Beaver Valley Power Station 42 4.8 Gaseous Release Points - Shippingport Atomic Power Station 44 and Beaver Valley Power Station 4.9 Solid Waste Disposal Diagram 53 5.B.1 Environmental Monitoring Locations - Air Sampling Stations 82 l 5.B.2 Concentrations of Gross Beta in Air Particulates 84 5.C.1 Environmental Monitoring Locations - Sediments 87 l 5.D.1 Environmental Monitoring Locations - Feederop and Fooderop 91 5.E.1 Dairy Farm Locations (August - September 1981 Survey) 94
- l. 5.E.2 Environmentai Monitoring Locations - Milk 95 5.F.1 Environmental Monitoring Locations - Radiation Monitoring 99 l 5.F.2 Environmental Monitoring Locations - Radiation Monitoring 100 t 5.F.3 5.F.4 Environmental Monitoring Locations - Radiation Monitoring Environmental Monitoring Locations - Radiation Monitoring 101 102 5.G.1 Environmental Monitoring Locations - Fish 106 I
1 5.n.1 Surface Water and Wells - Locations 110 I
l B
l E
1 I
i I
l
-V-
i DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY L 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report LIST OF TABLES Table Number Pm III.1 Quality Control Data - TLD Comparisons 10 . '
III.2 Quality Control Data - Water Split Samples 11 III.3 Quality Control Data - Split Samples - Miscellaneous 13 III.4 Quality Control Data - Spiked Samples 17 III.5 Quality Control Data - Spiked Samples 18
( III.6 III.7 Quality Control Data - Air Particulates and I-131 Quality Control Data - Milk and Water 19 24 III.8 Anomalous Measurements During 1981 29 IV.A.1 Effluent Treatment, Sampling and Aralytical Procedures 36 Shippingport Atomic Power Station IV.A.2 Effluent Treatment, Sampling and Analytical Procedures 36 Beaver Valley Power Station IV.A.3 Results - Liquid Effluents - Shippingport Atomic Power 37 Station IV.A.4 Results - Liquid Effluents - Beaver Valley Power Station 37 V.A.1 Environmental Monitoring Program Summary 55 l V.A.2
[ Environmental Data - Chinese Nuclear Test (10-16-80)
Fallout 60 l V.A.3 Environmental Monitoring Program Results (1981) 63 g V.A.4 Pre-Operational Monitoring Program Results (1974-1975) 75 L V.A.5 Typical LLDs for Gamma Spectrometry - DLC Contractor 79 V.I.1 Radiation Dose to Man - Beaver Valley Power Station - 117
{ V.I.2 Liquid Releases Radiation Dose to Man - Beaver Valley Power Station - 120 l Airborne Releases 1
[
[
[
-vi-f - .
SECTION I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report I. INTRODUCTION The 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report for the Beaver Valley Power Station and the Shippingport Atomic Power Station summarizes the radiological environmental program conducted by the Duquesne Light Company in 1931.
L The Duquesne Light Company operates the Shippingport Atomic Power Station for the United States Department of Energy and the Beaver Valley Power Station pressurized water reactor - Unit No. 1 as
[ part cf the Central Area Power Coordination group.
No. 2 Unit was under construction in 1981 cnd is scheduled to Beaver Valley start-up in 1986.
The Shippingport Atomic Power Station operated throughout 1981, with the gross electrical generation during the year of 397,516 megawatthours. The plant has been in operation utilizing a light water breeder reactor (LWBR) core since September 21, 1977.
The Shippingport Atomic Power Station was the first large-scale central station nuclear reactor in the United States. Since initial power generation in December 1957, operation of the pressurized water reactor at the Shippingport plant has supplied I power to the Duquesne Light Company system in addition to I
providing technology which has served as a basis for the development of pressurized water reactors in the nuclear industry.
l The highest average daily output generated at the Beaver Valley I
l Power Station during the year was 821 megawatts net in May, 1981.
The total gross electrical generation during the year was 5,023,100. megawatt-hours.
A. Scope and Objectives of the Program The environmental program consists of effluent and environmental monitoring for radioactivity. Liquid and gaseous effluents from the Beaver Valley Power Station and l gaseous effluents from the Shippingport Atomic Power Station I
l were collected, processad, sampled, and analyzed to ensure conformance with the applicable regulations and permits prior to their release to the environment. Environmental sampling I
and analyses. included air, water, milk, soil, vegetation, river sediments, fish, and ambient radiation levels in areas surroInding both plants.
E l
I l
I SECTION I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY I
1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report I. INTRODUCTION B. Description of the Shippingport and Beaver Valley Site The Shippingport Atomic Power Station and the Beaver Valley s Power Station are located on the south bank of the Ohio River in the Borough of Shippingport, 3eaver County, Pennsylvania, on a 486.8 acre tract of land which is owned by the Duquesne Light Company. Figure 1.0 is an artist's view of both stations. The site is approximately one mile from Midland, Pennsylvania; 5 miles from East Liverpool, Ohio; and 25 miles
{ ,
from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Figure 1.1 shows the site location in relation to the principal population centers.
[ Population density in the immediata vicinity of the site is relatively low. There are no residents within a 1/2 mile radius of either plant. The population within a 5 mile radius of the plant is approximately 18,000 and the only area -
within that radina of concentrated population is the Borough of Midland, Pennsylvania, with a population of approximately 4,300.
The site lies in a valley along the Ohio River. It extends from the river (elevation 665 feet above sea level) to a p ridge along the border south of the Shippingport and Beaver L Valley Power Stations at an elevation of 1,160 feet. Plant ground level at both stations is approximately 735 feet above sea level.
The two (2) stations are situated on the Ohio River at river mile 34.8, at a location on the New Cumberland Pool that is 3.3 river miles downstream from Montgomery Lock and Dam, and 19.4 miles upstream from New Cumberland Lock and Dam. The Pennsylvania-Ohio-West Virginia border is located 5.2 river miles downstream from the site. The river flow is regulated by a series of dams and reservoirs on the Beaver, Allegheny, Monongahela and Ohio Rivers and their tributaries. Flow ranges from a minimum of 5000 cubic feet per second (CFS) to a maximum of 100,000 CIS. The mean annual flow is approximately 25,000 CFS.
[ Water temperature of the Ohio River varies from 32*F to 84*F, L the minimum temperatures occur in January and/or February and maximum temperatures in July and August. Water quality in the Ohio River at the site location is affected primarily by the water quality of the Allegheny, Monongahela, and Beaver rivers.
. The climate of the area may be classified as humid continental. Annual precipitation is approximately 33 inches, typical yearly temperatures vary from approximately -
[ 3 F to 95 F with an annual average temperature of 52.8 F.
The predominant wind direction is typically from the southwest in summer and from the northwest in winter.
F __ - - - - -
W m m m m M M M m m m m m M W W M M
=
l 5 s
E i FIGURE 1.0 z I
H gg
- a0" ,f .m* '$5
.* q ,'% ~ . 1% '
. eh - p j ~ . N e~ 3 .,J rE* - .c.a:-
- 4. - .t s m ,
. . . - ~ .
,.g
]
- 5 +
- <:,. ~ @
ws --
e n
b Q. C i >* C l
( BEAVER VALLEY P.S .
SHIPPINGPORT P.S. l
.i E$
I
- SM w
} :4_g, e ~
~.
mn
. .._, o )[52-d k5 ,
b"M
- g.p< ; 88 am C r.qg,Eg_
- acn*
-=
g?d
- y. #
N O
l i
b
- s. , n
- W., "
.. .. .d' '
hy 4 f + w.., -
- ^ Y? i 1 ;, (n -
, v, g i < j 'i , - ,,,,, :. p.: m '
,- w: '
' 8: ' l f } f. ;jl.-
m f ,g c
w~ D
$ ,h VIEW OF THE BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION AND THE SHIPPINGPORT ATOMIC POWER STATION
u SECTION I FIGURE 1.1
?
DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report l
L YOUJGSTC*ny hT4 CASII.3 ,
/
- - p : , 3 ,_
3C Y l I _f e f3 g 3o 30R0 0F SHI?""fG?OL<
, Wj &. J1
'g./g f .
C.IQUI??A KINSING'CN
$l ! 51 a
A
[ nuTON;gs 2'
/un/ ]22~
'Insag//p
$3gyt/TT.? ? / f*1eIIIS? ORT ' ' -
4.
i 2
[ d .ASHINGTCN f c is 40 S
' ' # 40 wazztzsG .
l
\
Roads
.DVerS Q Ci:1as CECGRA?EICAI. MA? AND ?RINCl?AL CC.%'N!!!IS IN !.0-MII.I RADI'JS OF EI SHI??!NG?CRT A~CMIC ?CWER STA ICN AND T.I 3EAVER 7AL:.I? FC7El STATION
?!GURI 1.1 F
L
[ _ - - - - - - -
L y SECTION I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY t
1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report I. INTRODUCTION B. Description of the Shippingport and Beaver Valley Site (continued)
The design ratings and basic features of the Beaver Valley Power Station and the Shippingport Atomic Power Station are tabulated below:
Beaver Valley Shippingport F
Thermal & Elec. Rating - 2660 W 852 W 236.6 Wt 72 W e t e MW-Each Reactor Type of Reactor PWR PWR*
Number of Reactor 3 4 Coolant Loops Number of Steam Generators 3 - Vertical 4 - Ho'rizontal and Type Steam Used by Main Turbine Saturated Saturated Both stations utilize two (2) separate systems (primary and secondary) for transferring heat from the source (the ]
{ reactor) to the receiving component (turbine generator).
Because the two systems are isolated from each other, primary and secondary waters do not mix; therefore, radioactivity in the primary system water is normally isolated from the E secondary system. Reactor coolant in the primary system is pumped through the reactor core and steam generators by means g of reactor coolant pumps. Heat is given up from the primary L system to the secondary system in the steam generators, where steam is formed and delivered to the main unit turbine, which drives the electrical generator. The steam is condensed
{ after passing through the turbine, and returned to the steam generators to begin another steam / water cycle.
NOTE: MWt -
megawatts thermal I l
MWe -
megawatts electrical
- Light Water Breeder Core e
w r - -
SECTION II DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report l II. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS Plant operations at both the Beaver Valley Power Station and the Shippingport Atomic Power Station had no adverse effects l on the environment as a result of activities at either of the stations during 1981. Comparisons of pre-operational data with operational data indicates the ranges of values are in j good agreement for both periods of time. l l
The Beaver Valley Power Station and Shippingport Atomic Power j l Station operated throughout 1981. During the year, the I
i radioactive releases from both stations were below the limits of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I and applicable permits for each station. The releases at Beaver Valley Power Station did not exceed the limiting conditions identified in the Beaver Valley Power Station Operating License Technical Specifications.
I The environmental program for 1981 was the same as in 1980 except for several changes in dairy locations which were revised as required by the Beaver Valley Technical Specifications (Refer to Table V.A.1 for the 1981 I Radiological Monitoring Program outline).
The results of the 1981 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program are consistent with those of previous years. The only radioactivity above normal ambient levels in the environs other than world-wide fallout from Nuclear weapons I tests is noted in Table III.E. This radioactivity was only detected near the Beaver Valley Power Station discharge and resulted in negligible exposure to members of the public. A summary of the 1981 operational environmental data (ranges and means) for each sampling media is found in Table V.A.3.
A summary of preoperational (1974 - 1975) environmental data is found in Table V.A.4 During January - August, 1981, some media showed slight l increased radioactivity which is attributable to the fallout I
l radioactivity from the nuclear weapons test conducted by the Republic of China on October 16, 1980. The weapons testing fallout radioactivity observed was typical of weapons testing fallout observed nationally. The impact of fallout on some media analyses were sometimes delayed. For example, these tests contributed to the elevated levels of strontium in milk collected at several dairies later in the year. Since I
farming practices, pasture conditions, and the use of stored feed are variables, not all dairies exhibited the same results. Also, the milk production of several dairies is very limited resulting in wider variations since random 1
I 1
l l
SECTION II DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report II. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS (continued) fluctuations in a few cows are not averaged as in larger ,
herds. Some radionuclides from weapons tests, such as Cesium I and strontium, are longer lived than others and could be detected in spite of the variables that affect the radioactivity found in milk.
l Examination of effluents from the Shippingport Atomic Power E Station and the Beaver Valley Power Station and environmental media demonstrated compliance with regulations and Station Technical Specifications. While there were three (3) results jI during the year which exceeded the reporting levels of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, these analyses after evaluation were below limits identified in the Code of Federal Regulations or the Beaver Valley Technical Specificat. ions. They included three (3) surface water tritium values at the outfall of the Beaver Valley Power
,I Station and resulted from small quantities of tritium released from the Beaver Valley Power Station which were well below limits noted in 10CFR20. Shippingpert Atomic Power Station did not release any liquid radioactive effluents during 1981.
I s
I I
I I
- I
'I I
I I
l SECTION III DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report III. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING CONSIDERATIONS l
A. Environmental Quality Control Programs l The Quality Control (QC) Program used for the Beaver Valley -
Shippingport Environmental Radioactivity Monitoring Program consisted of seven (7) elements. It should be noted that the l comparisons made were at very low levels of radioactivity and I
j consequently, the activities at these levels are difficult to measure. However, acceptable correlation was achieved in most instances as outlined in the discusaions and tables which follow.
- 1. Radiation Monitoring (Duquesne Light Company (DLC)
Contractor Laboratory - DLC QC Laboratory - Independent Laboratory)
An independent program of external radiation monitoring was conducted by the QC Laboratory using lithium fluoride TLPs sharing the same location as the DLC Contractor Iaboratory TLDs and Independent Laboratory g TLDs. Surmary data of the QC Laboratory program is
'E Provided in Table III.l.
- Duplicate contractor TLD, QC TLD, Annual TLD, and j Independtnt Lab TLD and continuous integrating W monitoring by a Pressurized Ion Chamber (PIC) show generally good agreement and demonstrate acceptable I performance by the DLC Contractor Laboratory.
arithmetic mean of each laboratory agrees within t 5.3%
of the arithmetic mean of the three laboratories. This The is well within the precision of a typical TLD system.
- 2. Split Sample Program (DLC Contractor Laboratory - DLC QC Laboratory)
Samples of surface (river) water and drinking water were routinely split and analyzed by the DLC Contractor I Laboratory and the DLC QC Laboratory. In addition, samples of other media, such as milk, soil, sediment and feederop were also split with the DLC QC Laboratory 'a laboratory of the Department of Energy).
I A summary of results of split water samples is provided in Table III.2. A summary of milk, sediment, and I feed / food crop split samples is provided in Table III.3.
Some variation is expected due to small variations in duplicate samples, variations in analytical procedures, and in calibration, source type, etc.
,I I
g -e-
SECTION III DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY f 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report L
{ Some contractor and QC laboratory feed / food sample analyses were not in good agreement. A review of the contractor and QC laboratory sample preparation
[', procedures determined that differences could occur which L would account for the poor comparisons. Subsequently, a change has been made to the contractor procedure to have H the samples dried to a constant weight utilizing the L same technique as the QC laboratory.
Because of the overall uniformity of comparable results,
( it is concluded that the two laboratories are consistent and in agreement. ,
I
[ '
B
[
E
[
[ ..
Section III DUQUESNE LICHT COMPA:ff TABLE III.1 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report
, TABLE 111.1 QUALITT CONTROL RZSULTS TLD MONITORING d/Dav IST GUARTER 2ND OUARTER DLC DLC DLC QC Independent DLC DLC QC Independent DLC Location Contractot Lab tab #3 PDER FIC Contractor Lab Lab #3 PDER FIC No. (CaS0;tDv) (tiF) (CaSO, t h)
R 1 (CaSO.:Dv) (L1F) (CaSO th) (2) 1 10 0.17 0.19 0.19 0.24 0.26 II} 0.17 0.13 0.19 0.21 0.26 III 13 0.19 0.20 0.21 0.25 0.18 0.17 0.18 0.21 14 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.18 0.16 0.18 15 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.13 0.11 0.13 27 0.19 0.20 0.19 0.16 0.16 0.19 28 0.20 0.22 0.21 0.18 0.18 0.19 29 0.22 0.24 0.23 0.20 0.21 0.20 32 0.20 0.23 0.22 0.23 0.26 0.18 0.20 0.19 0.26 0.26 45 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.27 0.23 e e e 0.23 0.24 46 0.17 0.18 0.19 0.23 0.22 III 0.13 0.13 0.17 0.19 0.20 i 47 0.20 0.20 0.22 0.18 0.18 0.20 48 0.18 0.19 0.19 0.17 0.16 0.17 51 0.22 0.19 0.20 0.23 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.23 3RD QUARTER &TH 0 CARTER DLC DLC DLC QC Independent DLC DLC QC Independent DLC Location Contractor Lab Lab #3 PDER FIC Contractor Lab Lab f3 No.
PDER FIC (CaSO. Dv) (LiF) (CaSO. t Ts) 2 M (CaSO.:Dv) (LiF) (CaSO, th) (2) M 10 0.18 0.18 0.18 0.24 0.26 III 0.17 0.18 0.21 0.18 0.26 I' 13 0.20 0.21 0.20 0.25 0.19 0.20 0.24 0.18 14 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.17 0.19 0.20 15 0.16 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.13 0.19 27 0.19 '.!*
O 0.18 0.18 0.13 0.20 28 0.21 0.20 0.20 0.18 0.17 0.24 29 0.23 0.23 0.23 0.20 0.24 0.23 32 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.28 0.26 0.19 0.21 0.24 0.20 0.25 45 0.19 0.19 0.21 0.28 0.24 III 0.18 0.20 0.23 0.20 0.22 III 46 0.16 0.17
- 0.22 0.21 I} 0.16 0.18 0.20 0.18 0.21 III 47 0.20 0.21 0.22 0.19
- 0.24 0.17 0.17 48 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.20
$1 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.23 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.t3 l
(1) PIC Reading at Location 10 taken in DLC Substation in Shippinapart Soro. Location 45 taken at Kennedy's Corners. Location 46 taken at Industry Tire Shop.
(2) NRC results from Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources.
(3) In this coneotidated environmental program the pressurised ion chtsber (PIC) continuous monitor readings tend to be slightly higher than the TLD readings due to the differences in the inherent physics of each erstem. No compensatory measures have been taken to make both systeme agree exactly because both systeme were installed to monitor relative radiation levels rather than absolute levels. Each systes providee a reasonably accurate esasure of the absolute radiation levels.
- !l.D lost or stolen.
E 1
I 1
l l
Section III DUQUISNE LICHT CCMPANY TABLE III.2 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report (Page 1 of 2)
TABLE III.2 QUALIIT CONTROL REST ~TS I SPLIT SAMPLE ANALYSIS RESUI.TS g Comarison of Contractor and DLC-0C taba is DLC i
Contractor DLC - QC Media Lab (1) Lab (1)
I Analysis Samplint Period Units Surface Water Cross a January < 1.9 < 1.8 pCi/1 April < 2.0 4.2 + 2.6 pCill July 1 1.8 1 1.8 pC1/1 I Surface Water Cross 8 October January
< 1.1 6.3 + 1.3
< 1.3 6.1 + 4.2 pCi/1 pC1/1 April 5.2 + 1.5 8.7 + 2.1 pC1/1 I Surface Water Co-60 July October January 6.4 + 1.6 4.221.2
< 2.0 7.4 2 2.0 5.4 1.8
< 2.4 pCi/1 pC1/1 April < 2.0 < 3.5 pC1/1 I July October 13.0 i 2.0
< 4,4
[1,3 pC1/1 Surface Water Cs-134 January < 3.0 < 2.7 pC1/1 April < 3.0 < 4.3 pC1/1 July 1 3.0 g 3,o pC1/1 October 1 2.0 < 2.0 pCill I surface Water Cs-137 January April July
< 3.0
< 3.0 1 4.0
< 2.5
< 4.5 1 5.0 pC1/1 pCill pC1/1 I
October pC1/1 1 2.0 5 2.1 Surface Water Tritium ist Quarter 150 + 70 1 190 pC1/1 Composite 3rd Quarter 160 + 70 pC1/1 I -< 175 composite Suface Water Sr-99 2nd Quarter < 1.1 pC1/1 Composite
-< 0.69 4th Quarter i 1.8 I
L 0.71 pct /1 Composite Surface Water Sr-90 2nd Quarter f 0.33 -4 g,sa PCill Composite I Surface Water Co-60 (high 4th Quarter composite 2nd Quarter Composite 0.73 20.71 1 0.4 1 0.40
-< 2.1 pct /1 pCi/1 I
sensitivity analysis) 4th Quarter 1 0.7 1 4.1 Composite (1) 'Jacertainties are based on counting statistics and are specified at the 951 confidence interval.
I I
L Section III DUQUISNE LIGHT COMPANY Table III.2 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report (Page 2 of 2)
TABLE III.2 (Continued)
QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS SPLIT SAMPLE ANALTSIS RESULTS Comparison of Contractor and DLC-0C tabs t
DLC j
Contractor DLC - QC Media Analysis Samotins Period Lab (1) Lab (1) Units Drinking Water Cs-137 February
- 3.0 < 3.6 pC1/1
. May < 2.0 < 4.3 pC1/1 August i 3.0 1 4.1 PC1/1 j November i 2.0 i 5.0 pC1/1 Drinking Water Cs 134 February 1 3.0 1 3.5 pC1/1 May < 2.0 1 4.0 pC1/1 1 4.2 pC1/1 August i 3.0 November 1 2.0 pC1/1 1 4.7 Drinking water Co-60 February 1 3.0 1 8.6 pC1/1 May 1 2.0 pC1/1 13.2 August i 3.0 133 pC1/1 November 1 2.0 pC1/1 1 4.2
^
Drinking Water Crose a March t 0.46 1 1.6 pC1/1 June 1 1.5 pC1/1 L 0.46 August 1 0.55 1 1.7 pci/1 December 10.55 50.61 PCL/1 Drinking Water Cross 3 March 7.0 1 1.6 6.2 1 1.7 pC1/1 June 1.7 t 1.4 4,4 3 t,4 pC1/1 August 7.0 1 1.6 7.2 1 1.8 pC1/1 cecember 3.5 2 1.2 4.3 1 2.1 pC1/1 Drinking Water Tritium 2nd Quarte" pC1/1 230 1 80*.* 1 185 4th Quarter 230 2 70 2 160 pC1/1 Drinking Water Nb-95/Zr-95 February < 2.0 < 15.4* PC1/1 m
E (1) Uncertataties are based on counting statistics and are specified at the 95% confidence interval.
- Reanalysis. first analysis showed 15.7 + 7.4. which is similar to L.T. result of the second analysis.
- Reanalysis, first analysis showed 270 ~ 70, which is similar to the second analysis.
1 a
f 8 . __ _-_ -- _
I 1
l 1
I Section III DUQUISNE LIGHT COMPANT 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report TA31g III.3 (Page 1 of 2)
TABLE III.3 QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS SPLIT SAMPLE ANALYSIS RESULTS Conmarison of Contractor and DLC-0C Labe l DLC l Contractor DLC-QC Media Analysis Samplint Period Lab (1) Lab (1) Unita Milk I-131 3-17-81 i .16 1 0.37 pC1/1
- I " A'I Sr-89 3-17-81 1 1.4 1 3.7 pC1/1 I
Sr-90 3-17-81 0.711 45 2.58 3 2.50 pC1/1 Ca-134 3-17-81 1 2.0 14.9 pCi/1 Ca-137 3-17-81 1 2.0 14.7 pC1/1 i co-60 3-17-81 1 2.0 i 8.4 pC1/1 K-40 3-17-81 1480 1 150 1300 1 250 pC1/1 Milk I-131 6-16-81 ~< 0.09 < 0.35 pC1/1 I (Location 25) K-40 Cs-134 Cs-137 6-16-81 6-16-41 6-16-81 1260 t 130 1 3.0 1 3.0
[-
1 4.6 1 4.9 pC1/1 pci/1 pCi/1 I
Co-60 6-16-81 102 1 4.1 sci /1 Feed Se-7 6-16-81 2.35 1 0.38 0.62 1 0.12 pC1/gm Dry *
(Location 25)
I K-40 6-16-81 14.9 1 1.5 __ pCi/gm Dry Mn-54 6-16-81 0.04 1 0.037 - pci/gm Dry Nb-95/fr-95 6-16-il 0.83 + 0.083 0.34 1 0.05 pci/gm Dry
- I Ru-103 Ca-137 Ce-141 6-16-81 6-16-81 6-16-81 0.092 1 0.035 0.070 1 0.034 0.084 1 0.051 0.020 1 0.015 0.021 1 0.011 pci/gm Dry
- pct /g3 Dry
- pCi/gm Dry I Feed (Location 25)
Ce-144 Sr-90 6-16-81 4-22-81 to 6-16-81 0.86 + 0.13 0.10 2 0.012 0.21 + 0.08 0.22 2 0.07 pci/gm Dry
- pC1/gm Dry ee I Tood (Cabbage)
I-131 Be-7 K-40 9-8-41 9-8-81 9-8-81 1 0.0057 0.745 1 0.194 4.33 1 0.44 3,0.037 pct /gm Wet pC1/gm Wet pci/gm Wet
- e co-60 9-8-81 1 0.01 < 0.015 PC1/gm Wet I Ca-134 Ca-137 9-8-81 9-8-81 1 0.31 1 0.01 1 0.018 g 0.013 pCi/sm ~4et pC1/gm Wet (1) Uncertanties are based on counting stattatics and are specified at the 951 confidence interval. i e Analyses are not in good agreement. Refer to Section III.A.2. (Split Sample Program) for an explanation in the cause and the corrective action taken.
m ** Reanalyses, the first analyses results were 0.075 2 0.012 and 0.53 1 0.07 which are not in good agreement. l This was attributed to the dif ference in laboratory technique used to obtain constant weight prior to analysis.
- OLC OC lab Units are in pC1/n Pr.
Analyses not performed not required.
I -n.
L
[
Section III DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY TASLE 111.3 1981 Antve:. Radiological Environmental Report (Page 2 of 2)
[.
TABLE 111.3 QUALITY CONTROL RESL1.TS S? TIT SAMPLE ANALYSIS REST lLTS Comparison of Contractor and DLC-QC Labs i
[- Contractor DLC DLC-QC Media Analysis Samolina Period Lab ft) Lab (1) Units Food 1-131 9-21-81 1 0.0046 1 0.043 pC1/ga Wet **
IE***"*") Be-7 9-21-81 0.315 1 0.172 _ -- pct /ga Wet K-40 9-21-81 3.03 1 0.30 . pC1/ga Wet i Co-60 9-21-81 1 0.01 1 0.03 pC1/ga Wet Cs-134 9-21-81 1 0.01 g 0.033 pC1/gn Wet Ca-137 9-21-81 1 0.01 pC1/gm Wet 3 0.033
[ St-89 9-20-81 Milk 1 1.3 g 7.5
- PC1/1
$r-90 9-20-81 3.5 1 0.6 3,0 3,3 pC1/1 Co-60 9-20-81 < 2.0 f 4. 7 pCill Cs-134 9-20-81 1 2.0 < 5.0 pC1/1 Cs-137 9-20 -81 6.40 1 4.75 3,0 pC1/1 1-131
[ .
K-40 9- 20-8 1 9-10-81 1310.0 1 130.0 1 0 .12 s 0.27 pC1/1 pC1/1 Sediment Cr-A 10-22-81 17.0 1 8.0 s 30.0
- 9.0 pC1/gm Dry Cr-8 10-22-81 34.0 1 3.0 44 : 5.0 pCi/gm Dry U-235 10-22-81 .037 1 008 g 0,03 pCi/ga Dry
~~
U-234 10-22-81 0.69 0.17 0.87 0.07 pC1/ga Dry U-233 10-22 81 0.48 1 0.10 0.40 0,04 pC1/gu Dry Sr-89 10-22-81 1 0.17 1 1.2 *** PC 1/ga Dry Sr-90 10-22 41 0.048 1 0.046 1 0,09 pct /gn Dry
[ K-40 Cs-134 10-22-81 10-22-81 13.7 1 1.4 g 0.02
- - pC1/ga Dry i 5 0.16 pC1/ga Dry Cs-137 10-22-81 0.276 1 0.030 0.48 + 0.09 pCi/ga Dry Co 10-22-81 0.306 1 0.036 0.2310.17 pC1/gu Dry Be-7 10-22-81 g 0.1 - - pC1/ga Dry Ce-144 10-22-41 g 0.09 - - pC1/gs Dry Nb-95/2r-95 10-22-81 0.0498 1 0.0327 pct /ga Dry
[
Ra-226 10-22-81 1.97 1 0.20 - - pC1/ga Dry Th-228 10-22-81 1.20 1 0.12 - -
pC1/gm Dry Milk I-131 12-15-81 1 0.36 yCt/1 1 0.12 K-40 12-15-61 1050 2 300 - -
pct /1 CF134 12-13-81 g 3.0 15.0 pC1/1
-7 12-13-81 g 3.0 5 5.0 PCi/L 60 12-13-81 g 3.0 pC1/1 g 4,7 (t) - Uncertainties are based on counting statistics and are specified at the 952 confidence interval.
-* "he higher than normal Sr-59 MDC van due to a low chemical yield obtained as a result of the MaHS0) preservative present in the milk samples.
DLC OC lab Units are in pCL/ga cry Higher LLD than normal due to delay of sample in transit to the CC Lab
- - - Analysis not performed not required.
- W SECTION IZI DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report lI III. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING CONSIDERATIONS
'I routinely submitted to the Contractor Laboratory for analysis. Tables III.4 (water) and III.5 (milk) provide data from this portion of the QC program. The results I demonstrate that th contractor performed acceptably in the program.
- 4. Comparisons Samples I
of Similar (DLC Contractor Laboratory - DLC QC Laboratory)
Duplicate air particulate and charcoal filters I (radioiodine) samples were collected at Location #30 and compared during '.e year on a weekly basis. Comparison of particulate and charcoal samples alternated from week I to week. Duplicate monthly air particulate filters, composited from the weekly air particulate filters, were analyzed 6 month out cf the year for gamma activity.
Duplicate quarterly air particulate filters, composited I from the weekly air particulate filters, were analyzed for Sr-89 and Sr-90 activity for the second and third quarters of the year. Table III.6 provides data for this portion of the Q.C. program. The results show generally good agreement between the laboratories and demonstrate that the contractor performed acceptably in the program.
- 5. Contractor Internal QC Program The Contractor Laboratory maintained its own QC Program which included participation in the Environmental Protection Agency -
Environmental Monitoring Safety I
Laboratory (EPA - EMSL) Interlaboratory Cross Check Program. This cross check program indicated that the Contractor results were in agreement with EPA EMSL. DLC also audited the Contractor Laboratory and determined I that internal QC practices were in effect and that procedures and laboratory analytical techniques conformed to approved DLC procedures.
I I
I I
I l
SECTION III DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report
( 6. Special QC Program (DLC Contractor Laboratory -
Independent Laboratory - DLC QC Laboratory) j Milk and water samples were prepared quarterly by an l
Independent Laboratory. This included low level spiking I
l of specified nuclides. The prepared samples were split three ways and analyzed by the DLC-QC Laboratory and Independent Laboratory as well as the Contractor I
J Laboratory. A summary of results of this portion of the QC program is provided in Table III.7. The results show generally good agreement between the laboratories and I
demonstrate that the contractor performed acceptably in the program.
I 1
I I .
I I
I .
I I
I I
I --
1 Section III DUQUESNE LICHT CCNPANT TABLE III.4 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report I
TABLE III.4 e QUALITY CONTROL RESL*LTS ,
SPTKE SAMPLE ANALYSIS RESULTS l I
Sample Type DLC and Contractor DLC - QC Samole Date Ident. No. Analvsis tab (1) Lab (1) Units 3-1-81 53-39 Water Sr-89 4.8 1 4.2 5.2 1 1.4 pC1/1 Sr-90 3.1 + 1.0 4.4 1 1.1 pC1/1 5-20-81 53-40 Water: I-131 5.3 1 0.2 10.6 1 1.0 pC1/1 **
g Ca-137 30.6 1 4.9 36.7 t 8.1 pC1/1 Co-60 30.3 3 6.7 38.3 1 7.2 pci/1
'I 7-20-81 53-41 Waters Cross Alpha cross 3 eta 11 1 2 32 1 2 17
- 4 51 + 4 oC1/1 pC1/1
- I 10-l6-81 53-42 Water St-89 St-90 Co-60
< 2.5 10 2 1 35.6 5.6 4 0.85 11 2 1.L 38.0 2 4.2 pC1/1 pC1/1
,Cift Mn-54 44.6 2 4.7 35.0 : 4.3 pct /t I 11-25-81 53-43 Water C4-137 I-131 Co-60 Cs-137 15.8 5.0 0.67 + 0.22 36.9 + 6.1 17.0 2 3.7 0.60 2 0.55 37.0 : 3.4 pC1/1 pct /1 pC1/1 19.6 t 5.9 21.0 t 3.9 pC1/1 Mn-54 36.6 + 6. 3 39.0 2 3.9 pct /1 1-8-32 53-44 Water 3-3 1120 t 100 810 2 170 pCg /1..e
$3-45 Water Cross Alpha < 0.83 4 0.4 pC1/1
- Cross Beta 25 t 2 23 2 2.5 pC1/1 I
I I
I (1)
Uncertainties are based on counting statistics and are specified at the 95% confidence in erval.
The Cross Beta results were not in good agreement for this sample. The results of the analysis were I **
reviewed and no errors could be found. Other Gross Beta analysis shown in drinking and surface vatar samples have yielded gaod agreement between the laboratory results.
The t-l31 results were not in good agreement for this sample. 4 subsequent 53-40-1 spiked water sample which was to be used to verify the first result was delayed in transit to the contractor I ***
laboratory and thus could not be used for verification due to the short half Life of the isotope.
Movever, subsequent Laboratory I-l3L analyses have yielded good agreement.
The tritium results were not in good agreeme*t for this sample. Th results of the analysis were reviewed and no errors could be found. Other tritium analyses results shown in drinking and surface water results have yielded good agreement between the laboratories.
l
I I
I Section III DUQUESNE LICHT COMPANT 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report TABLE III.5 TABLE III.5 I
QUALITY CONTROL RESiLTS SPIKE SAMPLE ANALYSIS l I Sample Type and DLC Contractor DLC - QC Samole Date Ident. No. Analvsis Lab (1) Lab (1) Units 2-20-81 52-49 Milk: Sr-90 7.2 1 0.7 14.4 + 1.1 pCi/1
- I-131 19 t 1 22.6 1 4.1 pC1/1 pCi/1 I
Cs-137 51.4 1 7.2 47.S 1 S.6 5-25-81 52-50 Milk: 1-131 4.8 1 0.3 5.6 1 0.9 pC1/1 K-40 1230 1 120 -- pCi/1 I Ca-137 57.4 1 6.9 55.9 1 8.6 pCL/1 3-25-81 52-51 Milk Sr-89 11 1 3 13 + 2, pC1/1 St-90 5.7 1 0.8 6.6 1 1.5 pct /1 I-131 7.7 + 0.2 8.6 1 1.0 pC1/1 I 52-52 K-40 Ca-137 I-131 1210 t 120 44.1 1 7.0 Si 4.4 pCi/1 1-3-82 Milk 8.4 2 0.3 9.4 t 1.2 pCi/1 Ca-137 40.6 2 5.3 35 2 3.9 pC1/1 K-40 927 2 93 -- pC1/1 I
I I
I I (1) Uncertataties are based on counting statistics and are specified at the 951 confidence interval, e The Sr-90 results are not in good agreement. Refer to Section III.8 (Evaluation of the Quality Control I Program Data) for an explanation into the cause and the corrective action taken.
- - Analysis not performed not required.
I i
~
l I Section III DUQUESNE LICHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Ervironmental Report TABLE III.6 (Pase 1 of 5)
TABLE III.6 QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS AIR PARTIC"LATES AND CHARCOAL FI!!ER: COMPARABLE SAMPLES l
l Air Particulates Air Iodine pC1/Cu. Meter (Beta) pC1/Cu. Meter DLC DLC Contr actor I
Contractor DLC - QC DLC - QC Satmie Date Lab (1) Lab (1) Samole Nee Lab (1) Lab (1)
} 1/05/81 t? 0.18 + 0.01 0.081 + 0.004 e 1/12/81 to < 0.010 < 0.035 l 1/12/81 1/19/81 I 1/19/81 to 1/26/81 2/02/81 to 0.17 + 0.01
~
0.091 + 0.006
~
0.20 + 0.01
~
0.11 + 0.004
~
1/26/81 to 2/02/81 2/09/81 to
~
~
0.010 0.009
~
~
0.021 0.022 2/09/81 2/16/81 2/16/81 to 0.12 + 0.01 0.13 + 0.005 2/23/81 to < 0.008 < 0.019 2/23/81 3/02/81 3/03/81 to 0.12 + 0.01 0.15 + 0.006 3/9/81 to < 0.009 < 0.022 3/09/81 3/16/81 3/16/81 to 0.11 + 0.01 0.14 + 0.005 3/23/81 to < 0.009 < 0.022 3/23/81 3/30/81 3/30/81 to 0.35 + 0.01
~
0.34 + 0.008
~
4/06/81 to < 0.009 < 0.0046 4/06/81 4/13/81 4/13/81 to 0.25 + 0.01
~
0.29 + 0.007
~
4/20/81 to <
~ 0.009 ~
0.021 4/20/81 4/27/81 4/27/81 to 0.26 + 0.01 0.30 + 0.007 5/04/81 to 1 0.009 i 0.025 5/04/81 3/11/81 5/11/81 to 0.29 + 0.01 0.32 + 0.007 5/18/81 to < 0.010 < 0.023 I 5/18/81 5/26/81 to 6/01/81 0.16 + 0.01
~
0.16 + 0.006
~
5/26/81 6/01/81 to 6/08/81
~ 0.009 ~
4 0.020 I 6/08/81 to 6/15/81 6/22/81 to 0.15 + 0.01 0.15 '+ 0.01 0.15 + 0.005 0.16 + 0.006 6/15/81 to 6/22/81 6/29/81 to
< 0.009
< 0.009
< 0.021
< 0.017 6/29/81 7/06/81 7/06/81 to 0.17 + 0.01 0.18 + 0.006 7/13/81 to 1 0.010 < 0.014.
m 7/13/81 7/20/81 7/20/81 to 0.08 + 0.006
~
0.09 +~ 0.004 7/27/81 to ~
0.008 ~<
0.018 7/27/81 8/03/81 N 8/3/81 to 0.059 + 0.005 0.067 + 0.004 8/10/81 to < 0.009 < 0.021 8/10/81 8/17/81
, 8/11/81 to 0.061 + 0.005 0.083 + 0.004 8/24/81 to < 0.009 < 0.022 8/24/81 8/31/81 8/31/81 to 0.026 + 0.003 0.033 t 0.002 9/8/81 to 1 0.010 < 0.025
~
9/8/81 9/14/81 I 9/14/81 to 9/21/81 0.030 + 0.003
~ 0.031 2 0.003 7/21/81 to 9/26/81 1 0.009 ~, 0.028 I (1) "acertataties are based on countins statistics and are specified at the 951 confidence interval.
The Crosa 3 eta results are not in good agreement for this sarple. The results of the analysis were reviewed and no errors could be found. The contractor lab reanalyted the sample and duplicated tSe the ariaLnal result. Subsequent analyses have yielded good agreement between t5e laboratory results.
- _ . . - . -- . _ - _ _ _ _ - . _ - - _ _ - _ - ~ _ - _ - . _ --
l i
Section III DUQUES.1E LICHT COMPA.1T TABLE !!I.6 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report (Pase 2 of 5) l TASLE 111.6
-I 1
QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS AIR PARTICUIATES AND Of AJCOAL Fil.TER COMPARABt.E $AMPLES 1
Air Particulates Air todtne pci/Ca. Meter (seta) pC1/Cu. Meter
, DLC DLC l i Contractor DLC = QC Contractor DLC - QC Samole Date Lab (1) (ab (1) Sample Sete Lab (1) tab (1) 9/29/*1 to 0.020 s 0.003 0.031 0.003 10/$/81 to 1 0.009 -<~ 0.018 l q
10 /.'/ 81 10/12/81 I
10/12/81 to 0.034 0.004 0.038
- 0.003 10/19/51 to ~< 0.0s0 I
~< 0.021 10/19/S1 10/2f/81 10/26/81 to 0.023 2 0.003 0.029 2 0.00J 11/t/81 to <
~
0.009 ~< 0.020 11/2/81 11/9/81 11/9/81 to 0.014 2 0.004 0.039 0.003 11/16/81 to ~< 0.01 < 0.018
~
11/16/91 11/23/81 i 11/23/81 to 0.027 0.003 0.031 0.003 11/30/81 to ~< 0.01 ~< 0.019
) 11/30/81 12/7/81 12/7/81 to 0.019 0.003 0.022 2 0.002 12/14/81 to <
~< 0.01 ~ 0.018 12/14/81 12/21/81 l'
12/21/31 to 0.032 t 0.004 0.023 : 0.002 12/28/81 to -< 0.01 $ 0.021 12/23/91 1/4/82 l
i I
1 I
I I
i I
I I
- I i
l I
I I (1) Oncertataties are based on counting statistic; and are specified at the 95% confidence interval.
I 1
I _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ._ __
I 1
I Section !!! OCQUESNE LICHT COMPA2.T 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental poport TABLE 111.6 (Fase 3 of 5)
TABLE III.6 QUALITY CONTROL Allt PARTIC'lLATES (pC1/13)
DLC Contractor DLC - QC famole Date Nuclife Lab (1) Lab (1)
April Se-7 0.127 + 0.023 0.095 + 0.016 3/30/81 to 4/27/81 Settis 3/30/81 to 4/27/51 Teledyne Nb/Zr-95 0.069 0.007
- 3.150 2 0.006 Ru-103 0.028 1 0.003 0.020 1 0.003 Ru-106 0.022 + 0.018 0.019 0.009 Co-137 0.004 + 0.002 0.0015 + 0.0011 Co-144 0.064 + 0.010
, 0.056 : 0.005 Ce-141 0.016 0.003 --
E-40 0.030 + 0.029 --
Th-228 0.006 1 0.003 --
'une 6/01/81 to 6/29/81 settis Be-7 0.109 1 0.022 0.050 2 0.026 l 6/01/81 to 6/29/81 Taledyne 3b/It-95 0.048 2 0.005 0.052 2 0.C04 Ru-103 0.007 + 0.003
, 1 0.003 Ca-137 0.0035 1 0.0019 0.0C25 + 0.0015 Co-141 0.004 1 0.003 1 0.003 Co-144 0.061 1 0.015
, 0.11 0.02 6/29/31 to 8/3'81 Toledyni Mn-54 0.002 + 0.001 1 0.002 n/Zr-95 0.u29 1 0.003
- 0.053 2 0.004 Ru-103 0.003 1 0.002 1 0.003 Ru-106 0.040 0.019 iI e 0. 00 7
- Cs-137 0.0033 1 0.0018 0.004 1 0.002 Co-144 0.027
- 0.007
- 0.067 + 0.012 Others LLD LLD (1) Uncertainties are based on countina statistics and are saecift.J at tbe 951 confidence interval.
I
- Analyses are not in good agreement. Pefer to Section III.1. (rval.aatien of tne Quality Control Program Deta) for an explanation in the cause and the corrective action taken.
-- Analysts not performed nor required.
LLD Lower limit of detector.
I
[ 8ection !!! DUQUESNE LICHT COMPANY TABLE 111.6 1981 Amaual Radiological Environmental Report (Fase 4 of 3)
TABLE 111.6 QUALITY CONTROL AIR PARTIC M TES (DC1/e3 )
[ DLC Contractor DLC - QC Seeste Dats Nuclide tab (1) Let G)
[ Auguet
- /3/81 to 8/31/?1 Bettia 8/3/81 to 8/31/81 Teledyne 3e-7 Ce-144 0.164 2 0.022
- o,o,$ 3 o,oog g o.noe 0.011 2 0.004 D /Zr-95 g 0.002 e 0.013 2 0.002 Othere LLD LLD September 8/31/81 to 3/28/81 Settis Be-7 0.117 0.021 0.102 s 0.019 8/31/S1 to 9/li/41 Teledyne 4/Zr-95 3 0.001 0.003 2 0.002 Th-228 0.002 2 0.001 --
[. Povember 11/2/81 to 11/30/81 Settis Se-7 0.102 2 0.018 0.083
[
[
[
[
(1) Uncertainties are based on counting statistics and are specified at the 95: confidecce interval.
Analysis is not in good agreement. Refer to Section 111. E. (Evaluation of the Ouelity Control Program Data) for an explanation in the cause and corrective action taken.
-- Analvets not performed nor required.
L LLD lower limit of detecter.
[ I
e sectson III DUQUESNE LICHT CO.T ANY TABLE III.6 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report (Fase 5 of 5)
TABLE 111.6
. QUALITY CONTROL I AIR PARTIC L TE A.ND CHARCOAL TILTER - COMPARA8LE SAMPLES LOCATION M - (ect/eh DLC Contractor DLC - QC Saeole Date Nuclide tab (1) tab (1) 2nd Quarter Compoette 3/ 30/ 81 to 6/ 29 / 81 0.012 + 0.002 0.0096 + 0.0016 3r-89
$r-90 0.0016
- 3.0003 0.0020 + 0.0007 3rd Quarter Composite Air Tilter 5r-89 1 0.0026 3 0.0007
's-29-81 to 9-28-81 St-90 0.0005 + 0.00023
, 0.0011 0.0005 I
4 1
1 i
(1) Uncertainties are based on counting statistics and are specified at the 95 confidence interval.
I I
3
H Section III DUQ3SNE LIGHT CQt"PA:ff TABLE III.7 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report (Page 1 of 2)
TABLE III.7 QUALITY CONTROL DATA F
QC Sample Comparisons (All Analvtee in DC1/1)
Sample Type DLC and Indepethlent Contractor DLC - QC Sasmie Sate Ident. No. Analysts tab (1) Lab (1) Lab (1) 2-18-41 53-231 Water: 3r-90 16.1 + .5 14 1 1 14.2 + 1.4 y Co-60 21 1 7 20.7 + 5 28.0 + 8.5 j
Te-59 25 + 15 14.8 1 8.9* i 20 Cs-137 26 t 8 24.6 + 4.2 34.6 t 7.6 Ca-134 29 + 10
, 23.4 1 6.1 32.5 + 7.6 2 18-81 53-232 Water: H-3 1500 + 70 1500 t 110 1560 + 270*
l 5-13-81 53-233 Waters fr-89 4.9 +, .9 3.5 + 2.7 5.0 + 1.9 I
$r-90 15.7 + .4 11 + 1 16.4 1 1.5 **
Fe-59 50 + 20 42.1 + 12.6
, 37.9 t 7.6 Co-60 27 + 9 36.2 + 7.2 31.9 + 3.8 Ca-137 19 + 8 26.2 + 6.S 26.3 + 3.6 Cs-134 17 9 15.7 6.0 13.0 3.3 5-13-81 53-234 '.'a t e r : H-3 990 + 60 1070 + 90 730 1 270 I 9 16-81 53-235 Waters Sr-89 sr-90 Ma-54 to a 2 to :: 0.5 21 2 9 13.0 2 3.0 8.5 0.8 29.5 t 5.8 9.2 2 4.0 10.7 2 2.4 20.5 2 5.0 l
Co-60 12
- 8 17.0 2 5.9 11.0 2 5.5 I Ca-134 Cs-137 13 2 9 14 2 8 15.2 2 3.0 15.7
- 5.5 12.5 t 4.4 21.0 2 5.2 9-16-81 53-236 Water: E-3 1350 t 60- 1320 t 90.0 940 t 300 12-2-8L 53-237 Waters Sr-89 18 2 2 20 2 3.0 17.5 t 3.1
$r-90 21.5 2 0.6 20 1.0 21.4 2 2.3 Co-60 27 8 23.1 2 5.2 23.4 2 3.8 I I-131 Ca-134 Co-L37 g 50 18 9 28 2 8 17.1 2 4.8
- 2.L
- 4.7 39.4 2 5.6 14.3 2 2.2 12.1 2 2.9 30.7 2 3.3 12-2-31 53-238 Wa ter: M-3 1420 2 70 1410 2 100 1370 2 205 1
(1) Uncertainties are bases on counting statistics and are specified at the 953 confidence interval.
- Based on reanalyste as the first analysie. although in general agreement with the DLC Contractor Lab.
appeared to be biased low.
I ** The 3r-90 results are not in good agreement. Refer to SectP.i 21I.8. (Evoluation of the cuality Control Program Cata) for an explanation into the cause and the co* +ctive action takan.
l l -u-l
l-I 9ection III DUQUE5NE LI:lHT COMPANY TABLE III.7 1981 Annual Radiological Environnental Report (Page 2 of 2)
I TABLE 111.7 QUALITT CONTROL DATA QC Sample Comparisons (All Ansivses in DC1/l)
Sample Type DLC and Independent Contractor DLC - QC Samole Data Ident. No. Analysis Lab (1) Lab (1) Lab (1) 2-18-81 52-218 Milk: Sr-89 16 1 2 16 1 2* 133+23 Sr-90 15.7 + .4 14 + 1*,
12.0 + 1.5 I I-131 Ca-137 Ca-134 7.9 + .7 36 + 4 27 1 5 4.4 + 0.2*
27.2 + 4.6 30.1 1 6.6 4.7 1 0.6 32.6 + 10.3 38.3 1 8.5 5- 13-81 52-219 Milk: $r-89 lost i 1.3** 4.2 g 2.9
$r-90 lost 4.4 + 0.8ee 14.3 + 2.1 1-131 11.1 1.2 9.6 1 0.3 6.6 1 1.2 I 52-220 Cs-137 Ca-134 37 + 4 18 + 4 43.6 + 7.0 15.0 + 7.2 29.2 + 4.6 21.5 + 3.5 9-16 81 Milk: 3r-49 10 t 2 9.0 t 0.8 9.9 : 5.6 I Sr-90 I-131 Ca-134 9.3 2 0.6 14.5 2 1.0 21 2 5 8.2 13.0 2 1.0 28.4 2 6.2 2.9 10.1 2 3.3 14.7 t 3.0 21.0 2 10.3 I 12-2-81 57-221 ca.137 Milk: Sr-89 St-90 22 2 3 14 2 2 23.4 2 0.6 32.8 2 5.9 18 2 5 19 : 1 36.2 2 5.8 12.1 22.6 2 2.3 2.7 I
I-131 14.1 2 1.3 19 2 1 16.3 f. 1.2 Cs-134 . 20 2 5 20.8 5.8 21.4 3.7 Ca-137 3525 42.2 2 5.8 38.6 4.1 I
I E
I (1) (lncertainties are based on counting statistics and are specified at the 951 confidence interval.
I Peanalysis, first analysi, were not in good agreseent. Spiked saeples from first analysie had not been '
chemically stabilized. j
- The Sr 39 and Sr-90 results were not in good agreement. Refer to Section (Evaluation of the Quality Control Program Data) for an explanation into the cause aM the corrective action taken.
I I
1 SECTION III DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report III. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING CONSIDERATIONS
- 7. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Program The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) also conducted a surveillance program in the vicinity of the site.
Sampics of air, river water, drinking water, sediment, milk, vegetation, fish and radiation monitoring are included in their program. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania's radiological laboratory is utilized by
{ the NRC for analyzing these samples. Comparison of results also indicated agreement between the NRC Laboratory and the Duquesne Light Company Contractor laboratory.
B. Evaluation of the Quality Control (QC) Program Data I The split sample program indicates that the Contractor g laboratory is performing satisfactorily. In addition, three 3 (3) independent laboratories are used to supplement the l
regular program. Comparisons between the independent laboratories and the Contractor laboratory is acceptable, and I demonstrates a contractor.
satisfactory performance by the DLC I Some contractor and QC laboratory spiked radiostrontium analyses were not in good agreement. That was attributed to incomplete separation of calcium from strontium in the
{
Sr(NO3 ) Precipitation step of the radiostrontium procedure I
l and by incomplete mixing of the strontium carrier with the sample. An improved technique for more complete strontium separation from calcium and for longer strontium carrier I mixing time with the sample has been put into effect by the Contractor laboratory.
l Some contractor and QC laboratory duplicate monthly air B particulate filter samples were not in good agreement. A l review cf the contractor and QC laboratory sample preparation procedures determined that differences could occur which I would account for the poor comparisons. Subsequently, a change has been made to the contractor procedure to position the composite filter paper samples in front of the detector I in a progressive order of oldest to newest with the oldest sample being located closest to the detector, which is the l same technique utilized by the QC laboratory.
Based on all available Q.C. data and the data from the l Contractor's internal EPA Interlaboratory Cross Check Program, the Environmental Monitoring Program for 1981 is I acceptable with respect to both accuracy and measurement.
E l
l l - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
SECTION III DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY l 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report I
C. Standard Requirements and Limitations for Radiological and Other Effluents The Shippingport Atomic Power Station and B_eaver Valley Power Station are governed by rules and regulations of the Federal Government and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. Effluent releases at both stations are controlled to ensure that limits set by Federal or State governments are not exceeded.
In addition, self-imposed limits have been established to further limit discharges to the environment.
Shippingport Atomic Pcwer Station is operated in compliance with regulations and permits involving radioactive and other effluents. Limits noted in Department of Energy (DOE) Orders 5484.I and 5480.1, Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation las Commission (ORSANCO) Standards No. 1-70 and 2-70, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources -
Industrial Waste Permit #1832, and Environmental Protection g Agency (EPA) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System 3 (NPDES) Permit #PA-0001589, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources Industrial Waste Permit #0472205, and Pennsylvania Department Environmental Resources I
of Radioactive Gaseous Discharge Permit are observed and followed.
I Beaver Valley Power Station is subject to regulations which includ,e the Code of Federal Regulations 10 CFR, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources (PDER) Industrial Waste I Permit #0473211, Sewage Treatment Facilities Permit #0479403, Gaseous Discharge Permit #04-306-001, PA Code - Title 24, Part I, Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO) Standards No. 1-70 and 2-70, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit #0025615, and the Beaver Valley Power Station Technical Specifications.
D. Significant Changes and Reporting Levels I Stat'istically significant changes in radiological environmental monitoring results are defined as the median value (M) plus two (2) times the 95% confidence interval (N),
or ten (10) times the lower limit of detection (LLD) for each sampling media analyzed during the preoperational period 1972
- 1975. Analytical results for sampling media noted in the Beaver Valley Power Station Environmental Technical Specifications, which were greater than the statistically I significant values determined in the preoperational program (M + 2N or 10 x LLD), are values which require reporting as an anomalous measurement. This report is forwarded to the lI Nuclear Regulatory Commission within 10 (ten) days after the completion of a confirming analysis.
I I
l 1
SECTZON IZZ DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report D. Significant Changes and Reporting Levels (continued)
There were three (3) analytical results of environmental samples during 1981 which exceeded Beaver Valley Power Station reporting levels and are summarized in Table III.8.
The surface water tritium results were attributable to Beaver ,
Valley discharges; however, all releases were well below !
limits noted in 10 CFR 20. l I i
'I I
- g lI c
I I
I I
I
.I
- I
'I
-2e_
g
m' SECTION III DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY
. 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report
?
TABLE III.8 Anomalous Measurements
- During 1981 L
Environmental Site Reporting Level Found 7 Sample Date Media Location Level (Analyt. Results) ist Quarter Tritium in Surface 2A 1390 pC1/1 2290 pCi/l 1981 Water (1) k 2nd Quarter Tritium in Surface 2A 1390 pCi/l 3870 pCi/l 1981 Water (1)
I L 4th Quarter Tritium in Surface 2A 1390 pCi/1 1430 pCi/l 1981 Water (1)
NOTE (1): Attributable to BVPS releases. (There were no releases which exceeded effluent limits for tritium as identified in 10 CFR l 20).
l
- Measurements which exceed the reporting levels in the Beaver Valley Power Station Environmental Technical Specifications.
l I
1 I
1 l
1 I
1 I
1 I
L V
I SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report i
IV. MONITORING EFFLUENTS A. Monitoring of Liquid Effluento Description of Liquid Effluents at the Shippingport Atomic Power Station and the Beaver Valley Power Station.
I Most of the water required for the operation of the Beaver Valley and Shippingport stations is taken from the Ohio River, and returned to the river, used for makeup to variou:
plant systems, consumed by itation personnel, or discharged to a septic system. In addition. small amounts of well water and liquid effluents are discharged to the Ohio River using
{
discharge points shown in Figure 4.1. Figures 4.2 through !
4.5 are schematic diagrams of liquid flow paths for Shippingport and Beaver Valley respectively. The following four (4) tables summarize radioactive liauid effluents at both the Shippingport and Beaver Valley Power Stations:
Table IV.A.1 - Effluent Treatment, Sampling, and Analytical f Procedures - Shippingport Table IV.A.2 - Effluent Treatment, Sampling, and Analytical Procedures - Beaver Valley I
l Table IV.A.3 - Results of Liquid Effluent Discharges to the Environment - Shippingport I
I Table IV.A.4 - Results of Liquid Effluent Discharges to the Environment - Beaver Valley l
i l
B 1
I 1
B 1
B 1
B 1
l l
l 1 ----- - ----- -
SECTION IV FIGURE 4.1 DUQUESNE LIGiiT COMPANY 1981 Annual Padiological Environmental Report
- .t w na e ::
L . FIGURE 4.1 m
~sn ag:" . = . !
.. s g-542 das.~s g 4 .t sus O d'2 5 ; =
l gw :s a-* 586 = -
L at 29 0 gw.$1 49"=
3"HE =
o g
t EW38 at= e i E~ *~** 250 Ods" 5 ,
p m E~Eb E@3% w d t:
mesa m8==
- dE a
a s.2mwt a t ===- g ,
2 w,,,,,...,,,......,,..........,,,,,,,,,...........,.,,,...- , ..
5 PW/N /3/Od!>9tstf/Nf l (83/ lJU) M3VQUdff 39C7/ 3fW < .
- ii> > >um u mm u m mmm .m m um u mm u m m s um s , m w g i r n 5 a L 1 e e
=
{ =
g=
"k$
=v 9
i
) -
w =3*3 0
2 b
- f a55
, u - s:=
0 E%?
3 W5B ,
= Qum '
5 "
r (2 3 2 N -
- 5 a ;
--~
l L =- "m- = '
m Egg 0j Mu N 4 3- ~"s 4 a 5 =
dw 8 ..-a.-5F 'E"8 g g
-u o '= $
u M2 mH a i $
e9 !!91 ' \ .\ J 55 5
5 8Mg i
- iA t ~~ L 8c E
3 a / k' -
J*E { , d W it' = 5
-g ~ s %
s a
ne a 4, -
as- e a s#B >
, ed n
Y 3BE8
.mm-g-
+ E ~.,
- !
- 4 s
! e=
-e 5
a e
/! a
.e. - c
=
k t4
"~
n ag
- ?
J. g 22 ==
2 %
EE l El EE 'E '
tl;;
- c:
d" "I .
g "0 i d !
Ma -
k b u =ss
!!O a
_ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ ___ ^m
SECTION IV FIGURE 6.2 DUr.EESNE LIGHT CCfPANY 1981 Annual PadiolCgical Environmental Feport SECTION IV FIGURE 4.2 4 .
CAPPED TO L T"E^TED "'TER '* EVE"T 111AD TANK DISCHARCE PROCEbSE3 RADWASTF TO CHIO
[
i RACWASTg I
J { RIVER l
- PROCESSING SYSTD1 g
- b
[RADWASTE W REACTOR RECYCLE i
L-RECEIVING ,
TANKS J j
PLANT 3YSTDtS tF STSTEM u <
WATER ,
NEllTRALI-SOFTENERS.
ZER TANK q g
i FILTERS
[]
DEMI!3ER- WATER 4 l 8 OILER "
N*W ALI ERS , STORACE SYSTEM
[$
E5 a3 SERVICE * "d WATER O SYSTLM
- N SANITARY WATER -
SYSTEM l o j 1
CLF.ARWELf.
CLARIFIER m RECYCLE SYSTEM f DEWu R.P. AIR HAN0 LING %
k PtHPS LINITS ^
R. P. COMPONENT s
- C00 led 5 RIVER WATEX BOOSTER PLHP l
% T. P. C0:1?0NENT l %
' COOLERS l
I e
SHIPPI?*GPORT P.S.
s i PLAIN DNIT CONDE:<SER l SCREEN WASH CIRC. WATER PLHPS PLHPS
_- 70 FIRE PROTECTION SYSTDt 1 r FIRE PLHP TRAVELING ' DEBRIS SCREENS
' \ #L #'
STRAINER
= ~ ~ -
i' N-SHIPPINCPORT P.S. INTAKE ptog SHIPP .NGNRT P.S.
DISCHARCE WATER FLOW SCHEMATIC - ShIPPINGPORT ATCitIC PCWER STATION
__ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ ea
l r
SECTION IV FIGURE 4.3 i DUQUESNE LIGHT COFTANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report I sEc: Ion Tv FIGUPI 4,3 I
EVAPORATION LOSSES I ,
3EAVER VALLEY POWER STATION COOLING TOWER
?N37 C' ,
- r a -
l 2
~ i i /
I PRI:tARY ED SOCO:;3.CY
',33 m m a:a7 i n -
a -
CC:;0ENSER CXO'LCCCRS ED C!IILLERS n
I I WA;rg L
[ TR".'.!I:.0 S';57M I I l h gr wr 1P REACTOR 3ERVIC PLANT T,GtLER SA::T;axy t.A;;3 SYSTC S SYSYt;l SYSTOt I
SY3TD!
3 I ) 4 1f m yA37 w
an WASTE 74 '
gggg;yggg > PRCCCSS..~ _
SYSTDt i Sci;".N ST0.It AIEE I d i INTAKE j(
W-3a SY3TD1 e
PUMPS I i
I k ggx I AUX TEST m
AUX I
SCREEN I
EFFLUENTS WASH INTAKE PUMPS (
^ -
m --
~-
V "
[P I
7 V y BEA%ER BEAVER VALLEY BEAVER VALLEY BEAVER VALLEY SEAVIR VALLEY 3EAVER VALLEY BEAVER VALLEY VALLEY PCWER STATION PCWER STATION POWER STATION POWER STATION POWER STATION POWER STATION PCWER AUX.DISCRARGE AUX.DISCHARCE DISCRARGE (002) OISCHARCE (003) DISCHARC:: (001)
I (007) (006)
S-3,. . . , , ,
POWER STATIO:: i WATER FLOW SCHEMA;rc - BEAVER VALLEY PCWER STATICtJ DISCKARGE (004)
j l HacWM peV Uv>MOHHO2: H4 o o AmCA rH h Q H@cH hDCh QMO r(
)
e Mhp hh tr p Wg]M I
e r s-O O T I D H l I E
P PO O T" ). :
A T R C E GG NR I A PH
~ R L
I C T
PS L -
I I TR ED F NE G EF RT US A N N LNp e ER l
AK FAm cVE~
S EV I kT EN I A CT FRu ETp D PR R E
T L
I
\ E G-NN F AM l
iU NCL r OX O
- I EC Q_.
M E
T S
P M
U P S Y S M S Sg R EP y R E Ey Cg E
T F S E TM S Oy Y T SU N k S A AP A P W K NK W R E LNT7 T T Y AN S R TA AE A A
T I
N E
~ M E
I U CL LF PF E R E E 1 k
W E
V A US T SE G T LI I S SA S N L T O
W Y A I F C S H - F A 7 T L E
Cg N 0 A X I . O 1 EC NI I M T
S A
Eg Ng RN C A k D A
LE W 1I I N O EC H
" L Oo I c 1 F M 0
0 B D
I I " A C U U T& C S Q4 I - E I
+ " M t
H C
S F
E T
S A
L 4
- E W
O_ ,
T L
I F -
D I
N U OG I I k
U T F Q A I
L T S
P R M E U W P (
- R _ P E C
S O
O
\
lgS gK I
IN T
CSN B ,N A EAA gA NCWT PWT T
[OTAA A S P M
U
[ T O
N P
P G N
K O N A
T I
P P
I S H NE S I C Ak kU DS M E
N K T I N S A A Y R T S S D N S N E I R T S - P I K T A O N N YM A N S R T E I TU R R A A D C V M R RR A I. D OT T W U E O L E R I S E Y D D T T MT A D I C N T S C E .
T E N S C
(
! W Y A( M A M U C C I A Y U R S
FR I
L U D A L WK S D O E
k R E R P A N E E T 0 I S D O S R A G G C LV 1 NN T N P T G T R N P IU EI A OI S E M S &
NT CA I
A C U A MD NC
- ER I
D R R S R E T E H L U L r f OA
(
B DD D U N C C P S f S -
E V A AR S I M P A
- S N T I l A K M I k N t O lA LD ( K M A T P 0 D S N U P Et T N S U W C 1 A S PN l N* A A A L A N $ T T T A N(
- T C O CL A-N O N N H (*
OT IA E C T I l T NI C SI P T T N O C lA C N C E RN A S N N A N A S O C (k EU kA t P EO V E E O C E E O S PM E T V I N R C C S 1 k i
7 4
O_ I I lll!l l gF
SECTZON IV FIGURE 4.5 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1 m m _ 1 a.e m m e s. m _ _ e R., _
FIGURE 4.5 I
a 5-23 a
d L ag n
o 5
$'f i
b
- g. -
=
1 1.-
m a
- 5 g5 2 S :
9 3 0=
E ,
\/
q ,,
E i
!- e e
st res i--
E s !
I - -
1 t
( : i i i 5
E
- JN as
- 2. M
!- !l
=
gj I
f" _ -
-5 : =
ti r 33 !s a a
sg f i, ., 9_ :::
I i 4, ,
3 - n---- , er
!='
E
+ - - -
n I i
s < < s I -
a
~#" a }
=
2 :
3 I $35 g#" 3 x =
a=~
aa-
- s g 3, I .
5 n a o
d A iL 2 a 5 EE 5 E u a .:
a m
a g
5 I llgj
~
i!
I
SECTION IV TABLE IV.A.1 TABLE IV.A.2 DUQUESNE LICHT COMPANY L 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report E
TABLE IV.A.1
{ 1. Effluent Treatment. Samplino and Analytical Procedures - ShiccinQDort Treatment, Sampling Standard and/or Effluent Tvoe and/or Monitorino Analytical Procedures (a) Steam System Directed to radweste system if Secondary water is sampled for Blowdown radioactive. Normally directed any radioactive contamination.
to discharge channel where it A 1000 mi sample counted in a
~
is diluted by circulating cooling multichannel analyzer for 10 )
water. minutes for gross activity.
The counter can measure a minimum detectable activity (MDA) of 8.4 x 10'8 uC1/ml.
(b) Radioactive Collected, segregated and A 3000 m1 sample is counted for Waste Liquids processed as one of two types gross activity. The counter of liquid wastes: canmeasureaminimumdetgetable activity (MDA) of 5 x 10' uCi/ml.
a special waste b radioactive waste f Sample taken of batch before L processing to remove radio-activity and reuse in plant systems. See Figure 4.4.
TABLE IV.A.2
- 1. Effluent Treatment. Samplina and Analytical Procedures - Beaver Valley Treatment Sampling Standard and/or Effluent Type and/or Monitorina Analytical Procedures (a) Steam System Recycled or directed to Radweste If discharged, procedures adhere Blowdown System for discharge. to Technical Specifications.
2 (b) Radioactive Concentration of radioactive Procedures adhere to requirements Waste materials released in waste of Technical Specifications.
effluents shall not exceed values specified in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B. Table II for I unrestricted areas, and the L, ' Environmental Technical Specifications.
C E
)
i SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report TABLE IV.A.3
[ 2. Results: Shippingport Effluent Type Results for 1981 (a) Steam System The boilers were periodically blown down.
Blowdown The boilers are sampled prior to each blowdown.
( There was no radioactive liquid discharged in-1981.
(b) Radioactive
{ Waste Liquids Since Shippingport first went into operation in 1957, the total activity of liquid waste ,
discharged each year has decreased more or less continuously from a high of 0.53 Ci in
[- 1965 to a' low of less than 0.001 Ci in the years 1974, 1975, 1976, and 1977. There was no radioactive liquid discharged in 19/8,
( 1979, 1980, or 1981.
[
TABLE IV.A.4
- 2. "esults: Beaver Valley Effluent Type Results for 1981 (a) Steam System The Steam System Blowdown was recycled or Blowdown directed to the Radwaste System where it was (L monitored and discharged. No radioactivity was found in the water.
(b) Radioactive' Liquid effluents from the Beaver Valley Waste Liquids Power Station were released in accordance with conditions noted in the Environmental Technical Specifications. No limits were
{ exceeded. These values have been reported in the Beaver Valley Power Station Semiannual Effluent Reports for 1981.
[
r
i l
,I
~
SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environments 1 heport IV. MONITORING EFFLUENTS g
a B. Monitoring of Airborne Effluents
- 1. Description of Airborne Effluents / Sources
- a. Shippingport Atomic Power Station j* The potential source of airborne radioactivity associated with the Shippingport station is the radioactivity contained in the reactor coolant I system. This system contains the corrosion and wear products, activated impurities activated in reactor coolant, and small quantities of fission I products reactor originating coolant, from r.aturally occurring uranium impurity and could become airborne from sampling operations, and maintenance and overhaul operations which require I opening the system or working on contaminated components removed from the system.
radiological controls which have been developed Stringent J3 during 24 years of operations at Shippingport are exercised during these operations to prevent radioactivity from becoming airborne. Cobalt-60 is I
the nuclide of primary concern because of its long radioactive half-life and its concentration in reactor coolant. This radionuclide, present in the form of minute insoluble particles, could become
'I airborne during maintenance operations contaminated components removed from this system.
on However, strict radiological surveillance is I maintained including throughout continuous the operating monitoring of radioactivity in the operating spaces to ensurr plant, airborne that concentrations are less than the uncontrollen area limits specified in DOE Order 5484.1. In addition, air exhausted from potentially contaminated areas, such as decontamination and maintenance areas, is passed through high- i I efficiency particulate air filters. These filters l are routinely serviced, changed, and tested in- 1 I place.
l
.I I
I
l SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY l 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report I
l The principle environmental release point for the L Shippingport Atomic Power Station is the containment ventitation exhaust. This point is
& continuously monitored, and analyses are performed L on charcoat cartridges weekly for I-131 ana monthly for I-133 and I-135. Additionally weekly continuous air samples are obtained on fixed filter
[ papers which are analyzed weekly for gross beta, I
and composited monthly to identify gamma emitting isotopes. Composite of the particulate filters are also analyzed monthly for gross alpha determinations and quarterly for Sr-89 and Sr-90.
A monthly gas sample is also obtained and analyzed j for tritium.
I I
l I
t I
1 I
1 I
1 I
l I
~
i I
i I
I l
I I
L - -
r L SECTION IV FIGUP.2 4.6 f
DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report L SURGE TANMS :
REstN STCRAGE TA?;KS FLASH TANK SPRAY RECYCLE TANK =
GAS STRIPPER r 10N EXCHANGER ;
=
VENT GAS CCMPRESSCRS o <r o HYCRCGEN ANAL.YZER AND CATAt.YTIC f MYCROGEN L,
BURNER PRESSURE RECUC:NG r
VALVE V
VENT GAS m 4170 CU8tC Ff (STF) SURCE CRUM '-
o
{ GAS CECAY ORUMS L
133 CUSIC FT EACH (STP) 1P 1P 1P ip o
TEST TANKS -
CILUTICN CHEMICAI. WASTE TANKS -
FANS l l STACK GAS MCNITCRS
- TO STACM Shipping;crt Ata=le Pcver Statiers Caseous Itadicactive Vaste Processir.4 Systa=
l u '
r FIGURE 4.6 L [ - - - - - - - - - - - _
s SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY
( 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report IV. MONITORING EFFLUENTS -
{
- a. Shippingport Atomic Power Station (continued)
[ Reactor plant exhausts from the Decontamination Room, Sample Preparation Room, Laundry Room,
(. Radiochemistry Laboratory, Gaseous Waste System, and Compacting Station are continuously sampled with fixed filter samplers.
analyzed weekly for gross beta, and composited These samples are monthly to identify gamma emitting isotopes.
{
Processing of noble gases (predominantly short
( lived Xe-133) is accomplished by collecting and L storing the gases in Shippingport RWP vent gas system. After sampling and analysis, the gases are released when the storage tanks are full. Figure .
( 4.6 shows a schematic diagram of the gaseous wasta system in the radioactive waste disposal system at Shippingport.
- b. Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS)
The Beaver Valley Power Station identifies isotopes
( according to the Environmental Technical Specifications and Regulatory Guide 1.21. Prior to waste gas decay tank batch releases and containment
{ purge releases, an analysis of the principal gamma emitters include noble gases, iodines, and particulates. Figure 4.7 shows the gaseous radwaste system at Beaver Valley Power Station.
The environmental release points also require specific nuclide identification. These points
( include the Process Vent located on top of the Cooling Tower, the Ventilation Vent located on the top of the Auxiliary Building, and Supplementary
[ Leak Collection and Release System (SLCRS) Vent located on top of the Containment. These points are continuously ~ monitored. Principal gamma emitters and- tritium are analyzed on a monthly
[ basis. Analysis is cartridges for I-131, I-133, and I-135 that have also done on charcoal continuously sampled the gas stream for a week.
( Weekly continuous samples are also obtained on filter paper to identify the particulates gamma '
emitting isotopes. Composites of the particulate samples are analyzed monthly for gross
{ determinations and quarterly for Sr-89 and Sr-90.
alpha
[ [ _ - - - - - - -
SECIION IV FIGURE 4.7 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report B BEAVIA VALLEY FtWE1 STATIC 10 CAf t00$ RADICACTIVE WA$TE PkOctSSING ST3TLM 3
I l
5 c i 35 l:
O H e-3 5
- 3
- : g i ! u 3
I e ,
. U I
W
- W
= s-a r.. 3
/ 5 2 1 3 = I o 1 N h 6 I
i s
5 s,
a E
1 % .
N N
1 O E
e 3g
- E n
(
E 3
- () 5
=
s I y" 25 :
u 8 2
c o
E:
a g
1I -
35 4 d =
5 M
5 3: S S 3% E 5
l Y//- '/X !
98 E -
a c c d
d 2 :
I 5 Y w d
a g
. L iL n dL sL 3
e 4 i
l I I I
u d
t a
5 .
e I
g s
C 4
x 5
i I
, $ k I
> 5 m di
$r Jb 'P
- y
- I 5
- 5
= t !
2 5 u "
- . s :
SE cm 25 Q
= 5 i 2 1 e
ma .s 3 -
33
.v a v = c I
f I
' SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report I
l IV. MONITORING EFFLUENTS
- 2. Airborne Effluent Treatment and Sampling l
- a. Shippingport Atomic Power Station Gaseous wastes stripped from the reactor coolant at l
the Shippingport Station are circulated through a I
I hydrogen analyzer and catalytic hydrogen burner system where the hydrogen is removed. The gases are initially stored in a vent gas surge drum, and h subsequently compressed and transferred to one of 5 four gas storage drums. The decayed gases are l
l sampled prior to release. In addition, the exhaust i from containment I
l the efficiency particulate air filters and monitoring devices to prevent is equipped with high releases of radioactive particulates. Protective devices are utilized in the event of high airborne activity to automatically seal off the primary containment to l prevent an inadvertent release of radioactivity.
I l
Reactor plant exhausts from the Decontamination Room, Sample Preparation Room, Laundry Room, Radiochemistry Laboratory, and Compacting Station I are also equipped with high efficiency particulate air filters, and are continuously monitored for radioactive particulates by the use of fixed filter monitors. Exhausts from the Gaseous Waste System are filtered and sampled for radioactivity at the
, release point also. Continuous air monitors are I located within the containers, and other plant I
l areas to constantly monitor the condition of the air. A stack release diagram is shown in Figure 4.8 identifying ventilation and gaseous release points for the Shippingport Atomic Power Station.
- b. Beaver Valley Power Station I
I Radioactive gases enter the gaseous waste disposal system from the degasifier vent chiller of the boron recovery system, and are directed to the gaseous waste charcoal delay subsystem upstream of the overhead gas compressor where the gas is l chilled to condense most of the water vapor. Gases from the degasifier vent chillers contain primarily I
l hydrogen and water vapor.
nitrogen and traces of the radioisotopes xenon, A small amount of krypton, and lodine are also present in the gaseous effluent.
1 1
l - - - _ _ - - _
SECTION IV I DUQUESNE LIG11T COMPANY FIGURE 4.8 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report I SECTION IV DISCHARGE POINTS - CASECUS WASTES FIGURE 4.8 I
Ventilation Vent \
SLCRS Vent g
'I J
/
f /
/
b I Containment Ventilation Syste (Containment Air
, d r" V /
Nor= ally recirc.-not vented)
Auxiliary Building Ventilation Syste:u I
Exhausts Caseous wastas to Cooling Tower; Air Ejector I
CASEOUS RELEASE PODITS - BEAVER VALLEY PCUER STATION I
g.
Waste Disposal Building + Fuel Handling Building
-Service Bldg. Exhausts I \ '
/ 7'
/ (Filtered)
.1
-Concrete Enclosure d Emerg. Filtration Exhaust 1
4-- Ca s ecu s Wa s t e Ventilation Exhaust hiilt ered) ;
l Release (Filtered) Air Ejector 1
l I
CASECUS RELEASE PoniTS - SMI??!NCPCRT ATCMIC ?CUER S""ATICN FIGURE 4.8 l _
SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmtntal Rsport IV. MONITORING EFFLUENTS
- b. Beaver Valley Power Station (continued) p The overhead gas compressor directs the radioactive L gas stream to a gas surge tank. The system is designed to return most of the gas to the volume control tank in the Chemical and Volume Control
( System (CVC System).
periodically discharged from the surge tank to one A quantity of gas is of the three (3) decay tciks for eventual release
{ to the atmosphere via the process vent on top of the cooling tower. After the decay tanks are l sampled and authorization obtained for discharge, the flow of the waste gases from the decay tanks is recorded and rapidly diluted with about 1000 scfm of air in order to limit hydrogen concentration.
The gases are then combined with the containment vacuum system exhaust, aerated vents of the vent and drain system, and the main air ejector effluent. The mixture is then filtered through one f of the gaseous waste disposal filters, each of L which consists of a charcoal bed and a high efficiency filter. The filtered gases are then discharged by one of the gaseous waste disposal.
[ blowers to the atmosphere via the process vent on the top of the cooling tower. The radioactivity levels of the stream are monitored continuously.
{ Samples are also taken to determine the rate of activity released to the atmostphere. Should the radioactivity release concentration of the stream f go above the allowable setpoint, a signal from the k radiation monitor will stop all flow from the decay tanks.
During a shutdown period after the containment has been sampled and the activity levels determined, the containment may be purged through the
[, Supplementary Leak Collection Release System (SLCRS) Vent or, if the activity is low level, through the ventilation vent located on top of the Auxiliary Building.
[
[
L E .
SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmcatal Report l
I Areas in the Auxiliary Building subject to radioactive contamination are monitored for I radioactivity ventilation vent.
monitors aid prior in to These entaring individual the common radiation identifying any sources of g contaminated air. The ventilation vent is also
'3 monitored continuously and sampled periodically.
Upon a high radiation alarm, automatic dampers divert the system's exhaust air stream through one iI of the main filter banks in the supplementary leak collection and release system (SLCRS) and to the SLCRS Vent. Release points are shown in Figure 4.8 for the Beaver Valley Power Station.
I -
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I ;
l I '
1
(
)
I SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report IV. MONITORING EFFLUENTS i
l
- b. Beaver Valley Power Station (continued) l Each filter bank consists of roughing filters, charcoal filters, and pleated glass fiber type HEPA filters. The roughing filters remove large particulates to prevent excessive pressure drop l buildup on the cha coal and HEPA filters. The I
l charcoal filters are effective for radioactive iodine removal and the HEPA filters remove particulates and charcoal fines.
- 3. Analytical Procedures for Sampling Airborne Effluents
- a. Shippingport Atomic Power Station The following tabulates the gaseous sampling and analysis schedule:
Vent Gas Decay Tank Releases
~
Sampling Type Of Detectable Sample Type Frequency Activity Analysis Concentration Gas From Prior to Gamma Ray Spectrum 1 x 10-0 pCi/cc Decay Tank Discharge of Gas Sample
- Gas from Prior to H-3 2 x 10-7 pCi/cc Decay Tank Discharge Gas from Prior to C-14 1 x 10-7 pCi/cc Decay Tank Discharge I
- A gas sample of measured volume is counted in a multi-channel analyzer for 10 minutes for gross activity. The counter has a minimum detectable activity (MDA) of 1 x 10-8 pCi/cc for the predominant nuclide of Xe-133.
!I I
l I I
L r'
l
$fCT10N 17 DUQUESNE LICHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report I
IV. MONITORING EFFLUENTS
- 3. Analvtteal Procedures for Samoltar Airborne Effluents (continued)
Y h Air Exhausts Sampling Type of Samole Type Frecuenev Activitv Analysis Deetectable limits (1) Air from the Plant Ventilation Continuous Cross Camma 1.2 x 10-6 uC1/cc (Cas.
Exhaust Effluent Stream Channel 6 ORMS)*
5 x 10-10 y gg f,,
(Particulates Channel 12 ORMS)*
(2s P.rticulate Filter in Plant Continuous Cross Seta 1 x 10'I' LC1/cc Ventilation Efflueet Stream Weekly Sample (Particciate)
Particulate Filter in Plact Continuous Principle Gamma 1 x 10*I' uC1/cc Ventilation Effluent Stream Monthly Composite Particulace (Weekly if Gross Beta 1 1 x 10 13)
Particulate Filter.Jn Plant continuous Cross Alpha 2 x 10-15 sci /cc Ventilation Effluent Stream Monthly Particulate Particulate tai er in Plant continuous sr-89. Sr-90 5 x 10*I' uC1/m1 (Sr-89)
Ventilation Eff.uent Stream Quarterly 1 x 10*I' uci/e1 (Sr-90)
Particulate (3) (harcoal Cartriate en Plant' continuous . 1-131 1 x 10*I uC1/mi Ventilation Effluent Stream Weekly
. Charcoal Cartridge in Plant Monthly 1 133. 1-135 1 x 10*I3 pC1/ml (1-133)
, ventilation Effluent Streen Monthly 1 x 10' uC1/ml (1-135)
(4) Evacuated Bomb Sample In Monthly H 2 x 10' uC1/m1 Plant Ventilation Effluent ,
Strass (5) Particulate Filter in Reactor Continuous Cross Beta 1 x 10*I' uC1/cc Plant Exhaust from Decontami- Weekly Particulate
[. nation Room. Sample Preparation Room. Laundry Room. Radio-Chemistry Laboratory. Gaseoua Waste System, and Compacting Station.
Particulate filter in Reactor Continuous Principal Camma 1 x 10*I' uC1/cc Plant Exhaust from Decontani- Monthly Composite Particulate nation Room. Sample Preparation (Weekly if Cross Room. Laundry Room. Radio-
[ chemistry Laboratory, and Compacting Station.
Beta 1 1 x 10'13)
ORMS - Operational Radiation Monitoring 5, sten
= Although the ORMS Channels have no specific function as far as effluent monitoring and reporting is concerned. these two (2) channels are being listad for information purposes. It is also noted that these channels provide alars functions in the Main Control Room when levels of 1.2 x 10%
uC1/cc are reached on Channel 8. or 1 x 10-9 uC1/cc on Channel 12. Additionally, they shut the ventilation erstem butterfly valves when levels of 1.2 x 10** pCi/cc are reached on Channel 8 or 1 x 10-3 Wi/cc on Channel 12.
[
g
[ .
I I SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report IV. MONITORING EFF1.UENTS
- 3. Analytical procedures for Sampline Airborne Effluents (continued)
- b. Beaver Valley Power Station The following tabulates the gaseous sampling and analysis schedule:
I Gaseous Souret (1) Weste Gas Detay Tank Sampling Frequency
~
Type Of Activity Analysis Detectabic Concentrations (uC1/ml)a D
Each Tank Principal Gamma Emitters 10-4 Releases
.I H-3 10 (2) Containment Purge Eacn Purge Principal Gamma Emitters 104" Releases H-3 10
,b,c I (3) Environmental Release Points Monthly (Gas Samples)
Principal Gamma Esitters H-3 10
- 10
-6
~1 Weekly I-131 10 (Charcoal Sample)
Veekly I-133, I-135 -10 10
.I (Charcoal Sample)
Weekly Principal Ga:m:ia Emitters 10' (Particulates) (Ba-La-140, I-131, and others)
Monthly Gross s 10
.I Composite d
(Particulates)
Quarterly St- adSrM lb
'I Composite d (Particulates)
- Thc above detectability limits for activity analysis are based on technical feasibility and on the potential significance in the environment of the quantities released. For some nuclides, lower detection limits may be readily achievable, and when nuclides are measured below the stated limits, they should also be reported.
b
- I For certain mixtures of gamma emitters, it may not be possible to measure radionuclides at levels near their sensitivity limits when other nuclides are present in the sample at much higher levels. Under these circumstances, it will be more appropriate to calculate the levels of such radionuclides using observed ratios with those radionuclides which are measurable.
" Analyses shall also be performed following each refueling, startup, or similar operational occurrence which could alter the mixture of nuclides.
I To be representative of the asecage quantities and concentrations of radioactive materials in particulate form released in gaseous effluents, samples should be collected in proportion to the rate of flow of the effluent stream.
'I I .
L SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report IV. MONITORING EFFLUENTS
- 4. -Results F
L a. Shippingport Atomic Power Station p Analyses for the particulate airborne radioactivity L in the plant effluents indicated that the gross alpha and beta activity concentrations were at or very near the Lower Limit of Detection (LLD).
( Analytical results of charcoal filter samples showed that there were no instances of radiciodine concentrations above LLD.
Specific gamma analyses of weekly and monthly composite air filter samples were also performed.
Results showed naturally occurring radioactivity
[ typical of " background air" and nuclides attributable to worldwide fallout from nuclear weapons testing. During 1981, there were two
( instances where activity, attributable to plant operations, was measured.
[ In the first instance, Manganese 54 activity was measured in the Decontamination Room Ventilation Exhaust. The total amount of Mn-54 activity released was 0.00000000383 curies at a concentration of 1.60 x 10-15 p Ci/cc. In the seconii instance, Cobalt 60 activity was measured in the Sample Preparation Room Ventilation Exhaust.
( The total amount of C0-60 activity . released was 0.0000000371 curies at a concentration of 3.30 x 10-15 pCi/cc.
Radiostrontium analyses of quarterly composite air filter samples showed Sr-89 and Sr-90 concentrations in air which wereatornearghe
[. . minimum detectable concentratior.s of 5 x 10 pCi/ml, and 1 x 10-14 uCi/ml, respectively. The levels of Sr-89 and Sr-90 observed were extremely low and are typical of " background air"
[- radiostrontium levels. Also tritium and carbon-14 gaseous releases in the effluents were estimated
( based on analyses of primary coolant and found to L be below the predicted levels presented in the LWBR Program Environmental Impact Statement.
There were two (2) releases of gaseous radioactivity from the Shippingport Atomic Power Station during 1981. The total releases of gaseous
{ radioactivity from the Shippingport Atomic Power Station during 1981 were approximately 0.0002361 curies Xe-133 and 0.0000006 curies of Kr-85. These
{. ;
L F -
SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY L 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report F
L amounts of radioactivity released from the Shippingport Atomic Power Station during 1981 are
- extremely small and had a negligible effect on the
[_ environment as shown in Section V.6.
- b. Beaver Valley Power Station
' Gaseous effluents from the Beaver Valley Power Station were released in accordance wit.h conditions p noted in the Environmental Technical L Specifications. No limits were exceeded. These values have been reported in the Beaver Valley Power Station Semi-Annual Effluent Reports for 1981.
E E
E E
E-E E .
E M
l E
E
SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annuni Ridiologiccl Environ':ntal Rrport IV. MONITORING EFFLUENTS C. Solid Waste Disposal at the Shippingport and Beaver Valley
_- Power Stations During normal operations and periodic maintenance, Shippingport and Beaver Valley Power Station generated small quantities of radioactive solid waste materials such as evaporator concentrates, contaminated rags, paper, plastics, filters, spent ion-exchange resins, and miscellaneous tools and equipment. These were disposed of as solid radioactive L waste.
At Shippingport Atomic Power Station and the Beaver Valley Power Station, the compactable wastes were segregated and compressed in a 55 gallon compactor to minimize disposal volumes. The compressed waste, plus other drums of
{ noncompactable waste, were then shipped offsite for disposal at a site owned by the Department of Energy or a commercial radioactive material burial site licensed by the Nuclear r Regulatory Commission (NRC) or a state under agreement with I the NRC. No radioactive waste material was buried at the Shippingport or Beaver Valley Power Station site, j All containers used for packaging, transport, and disposal of radioactive materials met the requirements of the United States Department of Transportation and the Nuclear l Regulatory Commission. Shipments of fsite were made in accordance with Department of Transportation regulations.
Figure 4.9 depicts solid waste handling at the site.
l In 1981, the Shippingport plant disposed of a total of 5719 I
l cubic feet of radioactive solid waste having a radioactivity of about 120 curies. This included six (6) shipments of low level wastes and 14 shipments of ion total exchange resin.
l At Bea'ver Valley Power Station approximately 7,517.5 cubic l
feet of radioactive solid waste were shipped offsite in 1981.
The thirty-six (36) shipments contained a total activity of 92.9 curies.
l I
l Industrial solid wastes from both plants were collected in portable bins, and removed to an approved offsite burial ground. No burning or burial of wastes was conducted at either the Beaver Valley or Shippingport plant.
l l l l ___ _ ________
SECTION IV FIGURE 4.9 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report SECION IV SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL DIAGRAM FIGURE 4.9
[ WADIDACP/Is S0l.U) WASTE DISPOSAL Radioactive Wast.o % S tudge Ururnming = !
Disposal Evaporator Station c 4
- D h
% e
'OO O Q'O'O'~ -
Misc. Radicactive % Compactor and a y Solid Wastes Druuaning -Station g
Spent Radioactive p Resin
- Special Shipping Casks & Containers I 3
Q (
~
L CO"OcTO'O' g b
[
INDUSTRIAL SOLID WASTE DISPCSAL DIAGR'i E Water Filtered; crrh Filters dru=med----
T
<3 .4 9
{ Sludge From Water Treatment Plant and f
1
} ,
7=
Sewage Treat =ent
_ Plant (3VPS) C Trash Basket - Beaver Valley C Debris and Trash Hopper t Screenheuse Shippingport From Screenhcuse 3
, g I c :
~
_w
- m_ o-'
[ m 3
?
{
u Trash & Garbage Storage Bin it g
o FIGURE 4.9 -- CO M
~
I SECTION V - A DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING A. Environmental Radioactivity Monitoring Program l l
l
- 1. Program Description The program consists of monitoring water, air, soil, river bottoms, vegetation and foodcrops, cow's milk, ambient radiation levels in areas surrounding the site, and aquatic life as summarized in Table V.A.1. Further description of each portion of the program (Sampling I Methods of Sample Analysis, Discussion and Results) are included in parts V-B through V-I of this report.
V-B - Air Monitoring V-C - Sediments (Soil Monitoring is required every 3 years and was not required in 1981.)
I V-D - Vegetation and Foodcrops V-E - Cow's Milk V-F - Environmental Radiation Monitoring V-G - Fish V-H - Surface, Drinking and Well Waters V-I - Estimates of Radiation Dose to Man
- 2. China's Nuclear Test Fallout Several media monitored by this program showed increased radioactivity which is att ribu*_ab le to fallout from nuclear weapon tests performed by China on October 16, 1980. These are discussed in the summaries of media affected in Section V-B through V-H. Specific results I for samples collected during the months when fallout from this test increased activities above normal background levels are shown in Table V.A.2. A summary I of the background levels, are shown in Table V.A.2. A summary of the 1981 operational environmental data (ranges and means) for each sampling media is found in Table V.A.3.
I I -s4-
7 _O R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R R f TABl.E V.A.I $
co:SollDATED RADIOLOGICAL E::VIROINENTAL HO::ITORit'C PROCRAM fl
=
DLC Sanple Sanple Analysis I (b) >
Type of Sample Points Sanfl e Point Description Sanple frequency Preparation frequency Analysis
- 1. Air Particulate
- 13. . Continous Saupling Weekly Conposlie(d) Gross p. I'II-131 afid Radiolodine 30 Heier'sfaim Sh ppingport, PA. (5.5.)- with sanple collect-46.1 Industry, PA (Tire Co.) tion at least Monthly Composite (dT y -scan l 32 Midland, PA S.S.) weekly.
48(a) Weirton, W ((a) Quarterly Conposite(d) 51 Aliquippa, PA (S.S.) Sr-89, 90 41 East t.tverpool, Oil 27 Brunton's fanm 28 Shennan's farm -
290 Deave'r County llospital $
. . ~ . . _ - . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ ____ __ ._ _____ _ _ _ . _ . . _ _
g l
- 2. Direct quarterly (k)
Continous y-Dose k Radia tion 13 Heyer's Farm (TID) Annually "u l 46 Industry, PA (Church) E'Is 32 Hidland, PA (S.S.) %
48(a) Weirton, W (a) *Q 45.1 Raccoon Twp, PA Kennedy's Crnrs. 2 4 51 Aliquippa,PA(S.S.) EC b 47 East Liverpool, Oil u
Di C# EQ Di
'70 C#~ West. Byr. School ~BU" Quarterly (k)
Raccoon Park Continuous y-Dose U8 28 Sherman's farm 81 Southside School (TLD) Annually 4 il 71 Brighton Twp. School 82 Ilanover Municipal 01dg. lg 12 logan School 83 Mill Creek Rd g 25p Beaver County llospital 14 llookstown g 13 Potter Twp. School 84 llancock Co. Children llome -
74 Conn. Col-Center Twp. 85 Rts. 8 & 30 Intersection gs 75 ilolt Road 86 C. Liverpool Cahills llouse 76 Raccoon Twp. School 92 Georgetown Rd.
1 11 Green Garden Rd (Wayne's) 87 Calcutta Road 59 frons 88 Midland lleights i l
78 Raccoon Mun. Bldg. 89 Ohiov111e l 21 Brunton's farm 90 . fairview School 19 Rt. 18 & Rt. 151 10 Shippingport Boro, PA 15 Georgetown 45 Mt. Pleasant Church 46.1 Industry PA Ilre Co. 60 llaney's farm 91 Pine Gro',e Rd and Doyle Rd. 93 Sunset lillis, Midland 94 McClea;y Rd, Wilson 95 McCIcary Rd,llo111e Williams g
n 5.5. - Substation <
P
TeRLE V.A.I CtPNSOLTDATED RADioloCICAL ENVIQoNMENTot. HoNITORING PROGRAM (Continued) v.
DLC "
Sample Sanple Analysis
__ Type of_ Sample Points Sany.le_ Point, Description (b)
Sanple_ frequency._ __ Preparation frerptoncy _ _ _ Analysis O
<a
- 1. Surface 49.1 Arco Polymers (a) Intermittent flonthly Composite of Water 2.1 Gross s
- Downstream (llidland)Crucibic Conposite Sanples(J) Weekly Sanple (d) Gross = >
Collected Weekly 3 scan 3 Shippingport Atomic Power lleckly Grab QuarterlyCdqTosi te Co-60,II - ~
Station Discharge Sanples Only Sr-89, Sr-90 49(a) Hontgomery Dam (ifps tream) 2A Downstream DVPS Dutfall 5 [ast Liverpool (raw water) Daily Grab Sanple Only - Collected Weekly (j) e
!. Grou nbater 13 lleyer's I~ana e 14 llookstown, PA
- 15 Georgetown, PA g 11 Shippingport Boro Quarterly Quarterly y-scan, Gross a g
Gross a,11-3 "g
- 5. Drinking 4 Hidland, PA (Hidland Water) Intenni ttent(e) Weekly Conposite of y-scan, 1-131 RM Treatment Plant) Sanple Collected Weekly Daily lionthlySample (d) jd)
Coiposite 2S "N
& 5 East Liverpool, Oil (East QuarterlFConposite(d) Gross a Gross a -
It-3, To C ,~
~
6 ~0,' Sr-89,' ~90 RC
' Liverpool Water Tr?alment Plant) E9"
- 6. Shoreline 2A Downstream DVPS Outfall Semiannual Semlannual Sediment y - scan, Gross a k 3 Vicinity SAPS Discharge Gross a gh 49 Upstream Side of Montgomery Uranium isotopic g Sr-89, 90 "
Dam (a) 50 Upstream side of New Cumberland Dam y
... o
- 1. Hilt 25 Searight's Dairy Weekly I Weekly sanple from 61*
I-131 Allison Searight's only 62* Lyon Biweekly (g) Ulweekli-(~razingl g y - scan
~~
65* Belun When animals are ibnthly (Indoors) Sr-89, 90 66* Straight on pasture; 67*
l-131, Cs-137 Szatowski monthly at other 69* collins times. -- -- - - - - - - - -
27 firunton's Dalry (h) Honthly lionthly y - scan 29(a) Nicol's Dairy (h)
Sr-89, 90 I-131,_Cs-137 e
- Addltional datries required by Itnviromsental Technfral Specification 3.2.1.D.2. In adlition to Searight'n (Site 25), three dalries are selected when milk in available based on highest deposition factors. Sites 27 and 29A are required for the Shippingport program. b I
m n Fm. O m m m m I i rm O FR F L_J R FR FR FR FR VR F-TARI,E V.A.I CONSol.lDATED RADIGIJNIICAt. ENVIRONMENTAI. MONITCC13 I'ROGRAM M (co'nt inm J) O IRC <
Sample Sanple Analysis
_ _ Type p[. Sapple Points
- Sample. Point. _tkrsc rip.t ion. Sany.le_f r equency Pr epara tion Freq cncy____ Asialysis (b)
- 8. Fish 2 Vicinity of BVPS #1 Semlannual Conposite of edible y-scan on edible Station Discharge and parts by species (1) portions Shippingport Dis. Sta.
49(a) Upstream Side of Montgomery Dam
- 9. food Coops (Shipp.) 10 (Three locations within Annual at Couposite of each y-scan LGeorg.) 15 5 miles Selected by harvest if sanple species 1-131 on green (Indus.) 46 Conpany) available leafy vegetables y 48(a) _. _lleirton,. WV .______..______,_,_._g
- 10. feedstuff and 25 Searight Ho_nthly .Honthly__ _ _ nscan _ ,
_Simoner forage __, _ ___ _ . _ _ _ _ _'s Dairy farm _ _ _ _ _Quar.t_erly__________ _ . Qua r_ter_ly_ Conpos i te ___ r$
Sr-90 g r
- 11. Soil 13 Heyer's farm [very 3 years 12 Core Sanples y-scan g' g 30 Shippingport, Pa. (1982, 1935, etc.) 3" Deep (3" Dia. Sr-90 p j 46 Industry, Pa. at each location Gross (t g. h 32 (North of Site) Hidland (approx. 10' Gross a 48(a) Weirton, W. Va. radius) aM 51 Aliquippa, Pa. Uranium Isotopic gn
- p;
& 47 E. Liverpool, Oh.
u
' 27 Drunton's Dairy p ij !
______g.k 22 South of BVPS Site
29A Nichol's Dalry_
g .4 E
l 2
r, l
i )
et b
M
~
I L l
{ SECTION V - A DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report TABLE V.A.1 CONSOLIDATED RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM (Continued)
Notes:
(a) Control sample station: These are locations which are presumed to be outside the influence of plant effluents.
(b) Typical LLD's Gamma Spectrometry are shown in Table V.A.5.
l (c) In these cases a gamma isotopic analysis is done if the gross beta activity exceeds the reporting level of 0.53p Ci/m3, l
(d) Analysis composites are well mixed actual samples prepared of equal portions from each shorter term samples from each I location.
l (e) Composite samples are collected at intervals not exceeding 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />.
(f) Weekly milk sample from Searight's Dairy is analyzed for I-131 only.
(g) Milk samples are collected bi-weekly when animals are in pasture and monthly at other times. [ Assume April - October for grazing season (pasture).]
(h) The milk samples from Brunton's and Nicol's are collected once per month.
(i) The fish samples will contain whatever species are available.
If the available sample size permits, then the sample will be separated according to species and compositing will provide one sample of each species. If the available size is too small to make separation by species practical, then edible parts of all fish in the sample will be mixed to give one sample.
(j) Composite samples are collected at intervals not exceeding 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> at locations 49.1 and 2.1. Weekly grab samples are obtained at location 3, 49 and 2A. A weekly grab sample is also obtained from daily composited grab samples obtained by the water treatment plant operator at location 5. ,
l (k) Two (2) TLD's are collected quarterly and annually from each monitoring location. Several TLD's were lost or stolen during the year.
E -38
I I SECTICN V - A DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANT 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report Additional Notes:
-- Sample points correspond to site numbers shown on maps.
All Iodine I-131 analyses are performed within 40 hours4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br /> of sample collection if possible.
All Air samples are decayed for 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> before analyzing for i Gross Bata. I I
E I l I
I I
I 1
I I
I l
M@LM_GlMibiUge/Mut 1981 Anneal Radiological Environmental Report TABLE V.A.2 l
Environmental Data -- Chinese Nuclear Weapons Test (10/16/80) Fallout The Chinese nuclear weapons test on October 16, 1980 produced measurable and elevated levels of radioactivity in the atmosphere of the Eastern U.S.
l from the end of October 1980 through the end of September 1981. Since a
} 1arge number of camples were affected the listing below represents averages in many cases.
(pCi/m3)
SAlPLE 11EDIUt1 SAr.tPLING PERIOD GROSS BETA
- 1. Air Particulate 10 ctations 12/29/80-03/30/81 0.13 (a) 10 stations 03/30/81-06/29/81 0.24 (a) 10 stations 06/29/81-09/28/81 0.072 (a)
Sr-89 10 stations 12/29/80-03/30/81 0.011 10 stations 03/30/81-C6/29/81 0.014 01 station 06/29/81-09/28/81 0.0029 fin-54 01 occurrence (b) 12/29/80-03/30/81 C.00091 15 cccurrences 03/30/81-06/29/81 0.0021 05 occurIences '
06/29/81-09/28/81 0.0016 Zr-95/Nb-95 30 occurrences 12/29/60-03/30/81 0.047 30 occurrences 03/30/81-06/29/01 0.071 12 occurrences 06/29/81-09/29/81 0.019 Ru-103 30 cerucre m e 12.N) .'M_ n 70/61 0,019 30 occurrences 03/30/81-06/29/81 0.010 Om._ 0- s -m 0.0 m 1
I :
SECTION V - A DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY TABLE V.A.2 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report l
Ru-106 l 02 occurrences 12/29/80-03/30/81 0.015 19 occurrences 03/30/81-06/29/81 0.027 02 occurrences 06/29/81-09/28/81 0.013 01 occurrence 09/28/81-12/28/81 0.0089 Cs-137) (c) l 08 occurrences 12/29/80-03/30/81 0.0023 30 occurrences 03/30/81-06/29/81 0.0039 13 occurrences 06/29/81-09/28/81 0.0026 04 occurrences 09/28/81-12/28/81 0.0012 I Ce-141 (d) 30 occurrences 12/29/80-03/30/81 0.014 I 26 occurrences 03/30/81-06/29/81 0.011 04 uccurrences 06/29/81-09/28/81 0.0030 Ce-144 26 occurrences 12/29/80-03/30/81 0.022 30 occurrences 03/30/81-06/29/81 0.061 18 occurrences 06/29/81-09/28/81 0.022 01 occurrence 09/28/81-12/28/81 0.0041
- 2. Feed and Forage (pCi/g (dry)
Mn-54 02 occurrences 03/30/81-09/28/81 0.072 Zr-95/Nb-95 l 04 occurrences 03/30/81-09/28/81 4.3 Ru-103 l
02 occurrences 03/30/81-09/20/81 0.12 I
l
SECTION V - A TABLE V.A.2 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report Ru-106
! 01 occurrences 03/30/81-09/28/81 0.53 Ce-141 02 occurrences 03/30/81-09/28/81 0.10 Ce-144 04 occurrences 03/30/81-09/28/81 1.4 I 3. Milk (pCi/ liter)
Sr-89 15 occurrences 05/03/81-07/13/81 6.2 (a) In comparison the average gross beta activity in the third quarter of 1980 (before the nuclear test) and in the fourth quarter of 1981 (nearly a year after the nuclear test) was 0.028 and 0.027, respectively.
I (b) The word occurrence means monthly observation. For a quarter of year and with 10 stations, the maximum occurrences could be 30.
a I (c) There is a long term Cs-137 component due to atomspheric weapons test of past years. For example Cs-137 was observed 5 times out of a possible 30 in the third quarter of 1980.
(d) Similarly, Ce-141 was observed once in the third quarter of 1980.
I
~I I
I I
3 m M M M M W W W W M M M M M M M M M ll LNVIRONHLNTAL RADIOIDGICAL MON 11DRING PROGRAM SO4tARY g Name of Facility Duquesne 1.lght Company Docket No. 50-334 )
Location of racility Beaver, Pennsylvania Reporting Period Annual 1981 (County. State) >
Analysis G Iower Limit Number of Hedium or Pathway Total Number of All Indicator 1.ocations I.ocation with flighest Quar. Mean Control locations Non rout ine Sampled or Analysis Detection ** Hean (f) Name **Mean(f) **Mean(f) Repo rt ed (Unit of Heasurement) Performed (LLD) ** Range Distance G Directions ** Range **Hange Heasurements***
Weirton, WV #48 Air Particulates Cross (510) 2.5 117(510/510) Industry, Pa #46 121(51/51) 115(51/51) O and Radioloitine Beta (15-380) 2.0 miles -- NNE (17-380) (20-370)
(Il0'3 g<i/Cu. M.) r Sr-89 (40) 2 12(21/10) Beaver Co. Ilosp. #29B 17(2/4) 14(2/l) O h (2.9 18) 8 miles -- ENE (16-18) (12-16)
Sr-90 (40) 0.3 0.82(29/40) Weirton, WV #48 U.89(3/4) Same as O g (0.31-2.0) 20 miles -- SW (0.31-2.0) liigh Location "
u y c:
1-131 (515) 10 LLD -- -- -- -
- o. y o m o M
, Gamma (l20) _ { ga a u t.a Be-7 20 104(120/120) Fast Liverpool,0ll# 4 7 115(12/12) 101(12/12) o d I
(58-172) 6.5 miles - W (81-172) (71 - i 'l3) 9 n K-40 10 29(27/120) Weirton, WV #48 49(3/12) Same as o o g (13-94) 20 miles - SW (25-94) liigh 1.ncat inn E 4 0
Hn-54 0.8 2.l(20/120) Midland, PA #32 2.6(2/12) LLD 0 C (0.91-3.4) 0.9 mile - NNW (2.6-2.7) --
5 Zr-95/Nb-95 0.8 51(72/120) East Liverpool,0ll#47 68(7/12) 33(8/12) 0 3 (7.9-128) 6.5 miles - W (11.4-128) (8.1-66) N Ru-103 0.8 17(68/120) Brunton Dairy #27 19(6/12) 15(7/12) 0 (2.0-32) (6.9-30) (4.4-25)
Ru-106 8 26(21/120) Brunton Dairy #27 39(3/12) 23(3/12) 0 (8.9-54) (23- 54) (16-36)
- Nominal lower Limit of Detection (I.1J1)
Hean and range based upon detectable measurements only. Fraction of detectable measurements at specified locations is indicated in rarentheses(f) Y
- Nonroutine reported measurement s are defined in Regulatory Guide 4.8 (December 1975) and the Beaver V illey Power Stat ion Technical Specificat ions (Appendix B) ".,
r b
- vs ENVIRONMLNI'AL RADlotDGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM
SUMMARY
Name of Facility Duquesne Light Company Docket No. 50-334 E 4
location of Facility Beaver, Pennsylvania Reporting Period Annual 1981 ,
(County, State)
Analysis & Lower Limit Number of Medium or Pathway Total Number of All Indicator locations location with Highest Quar. Mean Control locations Nonroutine Sampled of Analysis Detection " Mean (f) Name **Mean(f) **Mean(f) Reported (Unit of Measurement) Performed (LLD) ** Range Distance & Directions ** Range " Range Mea su remen t s"
- Weirton, hV #48 Air Particulates Cs-137 0.6 3.2(55/120) East Liverpool,0ll847 4.2(5/12) 2.6(6-i2) O and Radiolodine (0.92-6.7) 6.5 miles -- W (2.7-6.7) (1.7-4.0)
(I10'3 pCl/Cu.M.) ~
(continued) Ce-141 1 12(60/120) Heyers Dairy #13 15(5/12) 11(6/12) 0 $
(2.5-10) 1.6 miles -- SW (9.3219) (3.6-15) "
Ce-144 3 38(74/120) Industry, PA #46 44(6/12) 33(8/12) 0 (4.1-97) 2.0 miles -- NNE (18-86) (9.0-64) {r Ra-226 10 19(1/120) Industry, PA 846 19(1/12) LID E 0 o, S 2.0 miles -- NNE -- --
o d Th-228 o N 1 2.9(14/120) Sherman Dairy #28 4.6(I/12) LID 0 % r*
s (0.41-5.8) -- --
0 M
$i Others d
Table V.A.5 LID -- -- -- -
{g 7 4 0
f B 4 3
E
?
?
Nominal lower I.init of Detection (LIF) g Mean and range baseil upon detectable measurements only. Fraction of detectable measurement s at specified locations is indicated in parentheses (f) g Nonroutine reported measurements are defined in Regulatory Guide 4.8 (December 1975) and the Beaver Valley Power Station Technical Specifications r*
(Appendix R) '"
M M M M M M M M M M O .O .O D .V nn ENVIRONMENTAL RADib.0CICAL MONITORING PROGRAM SINMARY o
Name of Facility Duquesne Light Company Docket No. 50-334 u
<=
Incation of facility Beaver, Pennsylvania Reporting Period Annual 1981 ,
(Omnry, State) ,
l l
Analysis 6 lower Limit Number of Hedita or Pathway Total Ninber of All Indicator Locations Location with liighest Quar. Mean Control locations Nontoutine Sampled of Analysis Detection ** Hean (f) Name **Mean(f) **Mean(f) Report ed (Unit of Measurement) Per formed (LLD) ** Range Distance 4 Directions ** Range ** Range Mea su res.cnt s* *
- Huntgomery Dam 849 Sediment Cross (8) 0.3 17(8/8) SAPS Discharge 803 20(2/2) 15(2/2) 0 g (pCl/g) Alpha (10-23) River Hile -- 34.8 (17-23) (14-16) g (dry)
Cross (8) 1.0 43(8/8) DVPS Discharge 802A 52(2/2) 38(2/2) O h
Beta (31-59) River Mile -- 35.0 (4 6-59) (31-45) g u
Sr-89 (8) 0.2 LLD - - - -
g hd Sr-90 (8) 0.05 0.061(5/8) DVPS Discharge 802A 0.098(1/2) 0.054(I/2) 0 o' El (0.018-0.098) River Mile -- 35.0 - -
{ g I
- O
@ U-233 and (8) 0.01 0.55(8/8) New Cumberland Dam 850 0.63(2/2) 0.45(2/2) o "h
[ 18-234 (0.34-0.80) River Hile -- 54.0 (0.46-0.80) (0.34-0.57) {g 18-235 (8) 0.01 0.025(8/8) SAPS Discharge 803 0.034(2/2) 0.018(1/2) 0 o $
River Mile - 34.8 (0.012-0.037) (0.030-0.037)(0.012-0.023) l u
4 U-238 (8) 0.01 0.39(8/8) New Cumberland Dam 850 0.42(2/2) 0.33(2/2) o E (0.25-0.51) River Mile -- 54.0 (u.33-0.51) (0.25-0.41) [
Camma (8) E Be-7 0.2 1.6(5/8) BVPS Discharge 802A 3.8(1/2) 0.8*(2/2) 0 N (0. 4 5-3. 8) River tille -- 35.0 - (0.45-1,3)
K-40 0.5 15(8/8) HVPS Discharge 802A 16(2/2) 14(2/2) 0 (12-20) River Mile -- 35.0 (13-20) (12-16)
Hn-54 0.03 0.08t(2/8) BVPS Discharge #02A 0.08t(2/2) 1.1.D 0 (0.072-0.091) River Mile -- 35.0 (0.072-0.091) l l
Nominal lower I.imit of Detect ion (LLD) $
Mean and range based upon detectable measurements only. I'raction of detectable measurement s at specified locations is indicated in parentheses (f) [
Nonrontine reported measurements are defined in Regula. tory Guide 4.8 (December 1975) and the Heaver Valley Power Station Technical Specificat ions ,*
(Appendix B) .
7 m
I
m m m m m m m m M m e m M M M M M M M sn M
O l'NVIR0tetLNI AL RADIO!OGICAL HONITORING PROGRAH St# NARY U v.
Name of Facility Duquesne 1.ight Company Docket No. 50-334 <
location of Facility Beaver, Pennsylvania Reporting Period Annual 1981 (County, State)
Analysis & lower I.init Number of Medium or Pathway Total Number of All Indicator Locations Location with flighest Quar. Mean Nonroutine Sampled Detection Control Locations ~
of Analysis ** Hean (f) Name **Mean(f) **Mean(f) Reported (thnit of Heasurement) Performed (LLD) ** Range Distance & Directions ** Range ** Range Measurements ***
Hontgomery Dam 849 Sediment Co-58 0.03 0.098(1/8) BVPS Discharge 802A (rCi/g) 0.098(1/2) LLD 0 River Mile -- 35.0 --
~
(dry)
(continued) Co-60 0.03 3 0.40(3/8) BVPS Discharge 802A .50(2/2) LLD 0 "
(0.1-0. 91) River Hile -- 35.0 (0.1 .91} g o
Zr-95/Nb-95 0.03 0.80 (7/8) DVPS Discharge 802A 1.l(2/2)
(0,050-2.0)
- 1. 2(2/2) - 0 k River Mile -- 35.0 (0. 4 4- 2. 0) (0.35-2.0) ,M Ru-103 0.02 0.30(4/8) BVPS Discharge 802A E. i!
0.55(t/2) 0.33(I/2) 0 g Q (0.078-0.55) River Hile -- 35.0 -- --
y M Cs-137 7- r-0.02 U.42(8/8)
(0.26-0.74)
BVPS Discharge 802A River Mlle -- 35.0 0.68(2/2)
(0.63-0.74) 0.33(2/2)
(0.32-0.31) 0 gg
~
g Ce-141 0.03 0.34(3/8) BVPS Discharge 802A 0.41(1/2) 0.35(1/2) 0 y I
(0.28-0.41) River Mlle -- 35.0 -- --
gp Ce-141 0.09 1.3(5/8) BVPS Discharge 802A 1.9(2/2) 0.70(2/2) 0 (0.31-2.4) River Hile -- 35.0 (1.5-2.4) (0.34-1.1) g Ra-226 0.1 2.7(8/8) New Cumberlanil Dam 850 3.5(2/2) 2.2(2/2) 0 >>
(1.9-4.2) River elite -- 54.0 (2. 8 -4. 2 ) (1.9-2.5) j Th-228 0.02 1.4(8/8) BVPS Discharge 802A 1.6(2/2) 1.4(2/2) 0 (l.2-1.9) River Mile -- 35.0 (1.4-1.9) (l.4-1.4)
Others Table V.A.5 f.lb -- -- -- -
Nominal Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) g Hean and range hased upon detectable measurements only. Fraction of detectable measurements at specified locations is indicated in parentheses (f) to
- Nonroutine reported measurements are defined in Regulatory Guide 4.8 (December 1975) and the Beaver Valley Power Station Technical Specifications N (Appendix B)
m M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M m
t'l ENVIRONMENTAL RADIGILGICAL HONt'80 RING PROGRAM SttplARY Name of Facility Duquesne I.ight Company Docket No. 50-334 8 de location of Facility Beaver, Pennsylvania Reporting Period Anr.ual 1931 :
(Coimty, State) >
Analysis f. Lower I.init Number of Medium or Pathway Total Number of All Indicator Locations Location with Highest Quar. Mean Control locations Nonroutine Sampled of Analysis Detection ** Hean (f) Name **Mean!f) *
- Mean ( f) Repo rt ed (Unit of Measurement) Performed (LLD) ** Range Distance f. Directions ** Range ** Range Measurements ***
Feed and Forage Sr-90 (6) 0.003 0.10(6/6) Scaright Dairy #25 - One Sample 0 -
(pCi/g) (0.0057-0.25) 2.4 miles -- SW location $
(d ry)
Camma (12) $
Be-7 0.3 4.l(8/12) -- -- -- 0 E (0.76-11) 5 K-40 0.5 18(12/12) -- -- 0 C.
n (7.4-35) o
'n u
a M Hn-54 0.01 0.072(2/12) -- -- --
0 % r*
(0.040-0.11) E N
I4 I Zr-95/Nb-95 0.02 1.0(4/12) -- -- -- 0 E ci
$I (0.32-2.3) {y o p; Ru-103 0.02 0.12(2/12) -- -- -- 0 3 4 (0.092-0.16) $
E Ru-106 0.2 0.53(1/12) -- -- -- 0 ~
g 1
Cs-137 0.03 0.12(5/12) -- -- --
0 %
(0.070-0.21)
Ce-141 0.03 0.10(2/12) -- -- --
0 (0.084-0.13)
Ce-144 0.1 1.4(4/12) -- -- --
0 (0.68-2.9)
Others Table V.A.5 LLD -- -- -- -
Nominal lower I.imit of Detecticn (LLD) N Mean and range based sy>on detectable measurements only. Fraction of detectable measurements at specified locations is indicated in parentheses (f) E Nonroutine reported measurement s are defined in Regulatory Guide 4.8 (December 1975) and the Beaver Valley Power Station Technical Specifications t
(Appendix B) p
.k d
m m m m m m m m m m m m W m -~
M-
- es o
DJVIROfNLNTAL R ADIOLOGICAL HONITORING PROGRAM SilFNARY Name of Facility 'Autge I.itht Company _ Docket No.
- 50-334_ <
location of Facility Beaver, Pennsylvania Reporting Period _Anmaal 1981 .
(County, State) >
Analysis 6 Lower Limit Number of Hedium or Pathway Total Number of All Indicator Locations Location with Highest Quar. Mean Control lecations Nonroutine Sampled of Analysis Detection ** Hean (f) Name " Mea n ( f) **Mean(f) Reported (Unit of Measurement) Performed (LLD) " Range Distance 6 Directions. **Rege ** Range Hessurements***
Weirton,WV #48 Food and Carden 1-131 0.006 1.1.D --
Crops (pCi/gn)
WiiT Weight Camma (13) e Be-7 0.3 0.33(4/I3) Shippingport , PA 810 0.53(2/3) 0.19(1/2) 0 $
(0.087-0.75) (0.32-0.75) -- --
I K-40 0.5 5.2(12/13) Industry, PA 846 8.2(3/4) 5.7(2/2) O E (2.1-14) (2.8-14) (3.5-7.9) O
- o O Cs-137 0.01 0.021(4/13) Georgetown PA 815 .025(3/4) 0.011(1/2) 0 $. y (0.011-0.039) (0.015-0.039) --
o w o N g others Table V.A. LLD -- -- -- -
g co se o I d a
il: 5 C
I E
Nominal tower Limit of Detection (LLD) N Hean and range based uten detectable measurements only. Fraction of detectable measurement s at specified locations is indicated in parentheses (f) '"
r*
- " Nonroutine reported measurements are defined la Regulatory Guide 4.8 (December 1975) and tlu Beaver Valley Power Station Technical Specifications t
(Appendix R) <
h d
O_ U _R O_ .C _ R _} l R R .R R . R C R_ C R R C ENVIRONHFNI AL RAD 10tDGICAL HONITORING PROGRAM SIDNARY O Hame of Facility IMquesne Light Company Decket No. 50-334 5 location of racility Beaver. Pennsylvania Reporting Period Annual 1981 ,
(County. State)
Analysis & Inwer Limit Number of Medium or Pathway Total Nember of All Indicator locations Location with liighest %iar. Mean Control Locations Nonroutine Sampled of Analysis Detection ** Hean (f) Name **Mean(T)- **Mean(f) Reported (llnit of Measurement) Performed (LLD) ** Range Distance 6 Directions ** Range ** Range Measurements ***
Brunton Dairy 827 Hilk 1-131 (140) 0.2 Lib -- -- -
(pCl/ liter) y Sr-89 (108) 2 5.61(15/108) Belan 865 9.4(4/8) Lib 0 g (1.7-17) (2.7-17) ~
Sr-90 (108) I 5.0(108/108) Collins 869 9.2(18/18) 3.l(14/I4) 0 o i
(0.71-14) (3.2-14) (2.0-3.8) h Camma (108) E K-4 0 100 1232(108/108)
(727-1900)
Collins #69 1572(18/18) 1310(14/14)
(1130-1900) (1000-1660)
O hh y M i
$ Cs-137 5 7,9 33/108) Brunton Dairy 827 9.8(2/14) Same as 0 N e (4. -19) (7.1-12) liigh location "
h Th-228 5 12(2/108) Allison Farm 861 16(1/15) LLD 0 h (8.3-16) --
{ 86 others Table V.A.5 LLD -- -- -- -
ii 5 g
E
?
2 I
Nominal Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) $
- Hean and range based ugen detectable measurements only. Fraction of detectable measurements at specified locations is indicated in parenthesest,f) p
- Nonroutine reported measurements are defined in Regulatory Guide 4.8 (Deceslier 1975) and the Reaver Valley Power Station Technical Specifications c (Appendix B) 4 w
E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E E en N
ENVIRONNI NTAL RADIOLOGICAL MnN!10 RING PR0s. RAM StStIARY **
o Name of Facility Dmjuesne I.itht Company Docket No. 50-334 'd 1
location of Facility Reaver, Pennsylvania Reporting Period Annual 1981 e (County, State)
Analysis & Lower Limit Number of Meditas or Pathway Total Number of All Indicator Locations laation with liithest Mean Control Locations Nonroutine Sampled of Analysis Detection ** Mean (f) Namo "Meani f) "Meanf f) Reported (Unit of Measurement) Performed (LLD) **Rance Distance 6 Directions " Range ** Range Measurements Weirton. WV #42 External Radiation y(171 qua r t er ly) 0.05 0.18(171/171) Calcutta, #R7 0.21(4/4) 0.17(4/4) 0 (mR/ day) (0.12-0.23) 7.0 miles - NW (O.20-0.22) --
0.05 G
y(42 annual) 0.18(42/42) llaney Farm 860 0.22(1/l) 0.18(t/I) 0 g (0.14-0.22) -- --
E e
"u E $
a a Fish Camma (6) Ik>nt gomery Damf 49 g g (pCi/g) K-40 0.5 3.0(6/6) BVPS Discharge 802A 3.2(3/3) 2.8(3/3) 0 y M
, (wet weight) (2.5-4.0) River Mile - 35.0 (2.5-4.0) (2.6-2.9) g g N
Cs-137 0.01 O E f 0.014(1/6) Skmtgomery Dam #49 0.014(1/3) Same as 0 -
River Mile -- 31.0 --
liigh location g n Others Table V.A.5 I.tD d 9 g f l d.
E L
F E
?,
U us Nominal lower Limit of Detect ion (I LD) r*
Mean and range based upon detectable seasurement s only. Fraction of detectable measurements at specified locations is indicated in parentheses (f) "
- " Nonroutine reported measurements are defincJ ir. Regulatory Guide 4.8 (December 1975) ankl the Reaver Valley Power Station Technical Specifications 4 (Appendix B) >
w 4 3
7 O O M M M M M M M M_ M_. M.. M .M M_ M V F un N
[NVIR0tNLNTAL RADIO!DGICAL HONITORING PROGRAM SU> NARY +4 "o
Name of Facility Duauesne Lightfonpany_ lecket No. 50-334 =
Locat ion of Facility Beaver, Pennsylvania Reporting Period Annual 1981 e (County, State)
Analysis 4 Lower Limit Number of Medium or Pathway Total Number of All Indicator Locations location with liighest Quar. Mean Control Locations Nonroutine Sampled of Analysis Det ec tion ** Hean (f) Name **Mean(f) **Mean(f) Reported (Unit of Measurement) Performed (1.LD) ** Range Distance & Directions ** Range ** Range Measurements ***
Montgomery Dan #49 Surface water - Cross (72) 2 LLD -- -- -- -
(pCl/ liter) Alpha Cross (72) I S.8(72/72) BVPS Discharge 802A 8.l(12/12) 6.l(12/12) 0 0; Beta (2.5-15) River Mile -- 35.0 (3.9 15) (3.7-8.3) **
Gamma (72)
Co-60 5 9.2(I/72) BVPS Discharge 802A h
9.2(1/12) --
0 E River Mile -- 35.0 -- -- **
u Th-228 5 16(2/72) BVPS Discharge 802A 19(1/12)
E E!
LLD 0 n; g
%J (13-19) River Nile -- 35.0 -- --
lL y pm O Pt
- Others Table V.A.5 LLD -- --
D3 p [
D E} e E n Sr-89 (24) 1.5 LLD -- -- -- -
hhy a
.B n Sr-90 (24) 0.5 0.61(2/24) BVPS Discharge 802A 0.73(1/4) LLD 0 $
(.5 .73) River Nile -- 35.0 --
pe Co-60 (24)(a) I 2.I(1/24) BVPS Discharge 802A 2.l(1/4) LI.D 0 River Mile -- 35.0 --
4 3
n Tritium (24) 80 460(24/24) BVPS Discharge 802A 1970(4/4) 150(4/4) 3 (80-3870) River Mile -- 35.0 q (270-3870) (80-190) .
(a) Co-60 analyzed by high sensitivity method.
Nominal Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) >
as
- Mean and range based upon detectable measurements only. Fraction of detectable measurements at specified locations is indicated in parentheses (f) N Nontoutine reported measurements are defined in Regulatory Guide 4.8 (December 1975) and the Beaver Valley I'ower Station Technical Specifications 4 (Appendix B) *
.# I u,
m m e m m m m m M M M M M M M M M un ENVIRotMENTAL RADIOIDGICAL HONITORING PROl; RAM StNMARY S e-a "o
Name of Facility __Duquesne Licht Company Docket No. 50-334 v n
location of Facility Reaver. Pennsylvania Peporting Period Annual 1981 .
(County. State)
Analysis G tower Limit Number of Medium or Pathway Total Number of All Indicator Locations Location with liighest Quar. Mean Control locations Nonroutine Sampled of Analysis Detection ** Hean (f) Fa.4e **Mean(f) Reported "Mean ( f)
(Unit of Meast:rement) Performed (LLD) " Range Distance 6 Directions. " Range " Range Mea suremen t s'
- Drinking Water 1-131 (104) 0.2 0.23(1/104) Hidland, Pa 804 0.23(1/52) -- -
(ICi/ liter) --
River Mlle -- 36.3 --
Cross (24) 0.6 LLD U
Alpha
-- ~~ -- -
g Cross (24)
Beta 1 4.9(24/21)
(1.7-7.3)
Hidland, Pa 801 River Mile -- 36.3 5.0(12/12)
(I.7 7,0) 0 l 'g Camma (104) lable V.A.5 f.l.D 5 E g g Sr-89 (8) 1.5 1,LD -- -- -- _
O E g n E C
( Sr-90 (8) 0.4 LID -- -- -- -
5 e*4 N g
' E 8 Co-60 (8)(a) I LID -- -- o 4
B 5 4 Tritium (8) 90 190(8/8) Hidlaixi, Pa 808 200(4/4) 0 k (130-270) River Hile -- 36.3 (130-270) g
?
E (a) 00-60 analyzed by high sensitivity method.
- *4 Nominal Lower 1.imit of Detection (LLD) $
"* Hean and range based upon detectable measurements only. I raction of detectable measurements at specified locations is indicated in parentheses (f) y Nonroutine reported measurements are defined in Regulatory Guide 4.8 (December 1975) and the Deaver Valley Power Station Technical Specifications (Appendix B) w C
m m m m m m m m m m m P9 ENVIROtNEN1'AL RADIOIDGICAL HONITORING l'ROGRAM StimRY n ,
+4 Name of Iacility Dwpiesne I.faht Company Docket No. 50-334 h Incation cf Facility _ Beaver. Pennsylvania Reportirg Period Annual 1981 <=
(County, State) '
Analysis G tower I.init Number of Hedium or Pathway Total Number of All Indicator locations Location _ with flighest Quar. Mean Control locations Nonroutine Sampled of Analysis Detection *
- Mean ( f) Name **Mean(f) *'Hean(f) Repo rt ed (thit of Measurement) Performed (LID) ** Range Distance G Directions ** Range ** Range Measurements ***
Georgetown. Pa #15 Ground Water Gross (16) 2 I I.D -- -- -- -
^'I (Fri/ liter) ~
e Cross (16) 1 2.6(15/16) Georgetown. P.*. #15 3.0(4/4) Same as 0 $
Beta (1.5-5.7) 4.6 miles -- WNW (1.b-5.7) liigh location Camma (16) g Th-228 5 25(1/16) Shippingport, iA fil 25(1/4) I.ID 0 f.
- 0. 8 mi l e -- Nti -- -- -
u Other Table V.A.5 f.LD 5 Ib R Q
, (90-300) 4.6 miles -- WNW (180-300) liigh Location R [
N
$ E" n,
a 8 4
o E5p O d.
r, E
ill' Nominal Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) b
- Mean and range based upon detectable reasurements only. Fraction of detectable measurements at specified locations is indicated in parentheses (f) N Nonroutine reported measurements are defined in Regulatory Guide 4.8 (December 1975) and the Beaver Valley Power Station Technical Specifications (Appendix B) 4 b
c,
SECTION V - A
[ DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report h V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING A. Environmental Radioactivity Monitoring Program (continued)
[- 3. Summary of Results All results of this monitoring program are summarized in
[- Table V.A.3. This table is prepared in the format specified by NRC Regulatory Guide 4.8 and in accordance with Beaver Valley Power Station Operating License, (Appendix B, Environmental Technical Specifications).
Summarizes of results of analysis of each media are discussed in Sections V-B through V-H and an assessment of radiation doses are found in Section V-I. Table V.A.4 summaries Beaver Valley Power Station pre-operational ranges for the various sampling media during the years 1974 and 1975. Comparisons of pre-operational
[ data with operational data indicate the ranges of values I
are in good agreement for both periods of time.
( In the few cases where activity was detected, some of the activity was directly attributable to. the October 1980 Chineae weapons test and the remaining detected
{ activities were near the lower limit of their detection (LLD) and are attributable to the normal statistical j
fluctuation near the LLD level.
The conclusion from all program data is that the operation of the Shippingport and leaver Valley Power Station has not resulted in any detectable changes to
{ the environment attributable to either station.
l 4 Quality Control Program l
[ The Quality Control Program implemented by Duquesne Light Company to assure reliable performance by contractor and the supporting QC data are presented and
[. discussed in Section III of this report. The lower limits of detection for various analysis for each media monitored by this program by the DLC Contractor
{ Laboratory are provided in Table V.A.S.
[
[
[
[-
T - - - _ --
SECTION V - A DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY TABLE V.A.4 1981 Annual Radiological EnvironmenCal Report (Page 1 of 4) l TABLE V. A.4 (Page 1 of 4) ~~
ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM
SUMMARY
l Name of Facility Shisetacar: Ac- *- Saver Station Ocekas No. Nee Aceticsble Na .4 of Fac:14:7 3eaver 7411ev ?cvar scacion Ocekac No. 50- m ucacion of Tac 111:7 Seaver. ?ennsvlrania Repor: int ?ari:d O I?74 - 1975 (C. sus:7. scace)
PRI-OPERAT'CNAT ??CCRA.M soc 1GT (COstrD 1974 - 1975)
Medium or Pacbray I.:ver Lis1:
Sampled Analysia and Total Number of All Indicator locati ns Cait of Measure =ent) of Analysis ?er d er ed Oe eeetien '
- 0 Mean. (M ?.aere Surface *Jacer Cross Alph.a (10) 0.3 0.75 /40 0.6 - 1.1 pCill Gross Psca (1:0) 3.6 4.4 1:o/120 2.3 - 11.4 Camma (1) 10 - 60 < I. 3 Trielu:n (1:1) 100 000 /1 1 120 - SCG Sr-40 (0) - -
Sr-90 (0) - -
I C-14 (0) - -
Drin. king vacar 1-13 1 (0) -
I PC1/1 Cross Alpt.a Gross 3sta (30)
(203) 0.3 0.6 0.5 3.3
'/50 08/208 0.4 - 0.3 2.3 - 6.4 Gena (0) - -
Tritiu:2 (211) 100 310 /211 1.30 - 1000 C-14 (0) - -
$r-49 (0) - -
Sr-90 (0) - -
Ground Vater Gross Alpha I pC1/1 Cross Seca (19)
(76) 0.3 0.6 2.9
< I.I.3 3/ 75I '} 1.3 - 3.0 Tritium (31) 100 440 /81 30 - 800 Camma (1) 10 - 60 < 12.3 I Air Particulates and Gaseous pC1/m3 Gross Alpha Gross 3eca (138)
(927) 0.001 0.006 0.003 0.07 33/133 927/927 0.002 - 0.C04 0.02 - 0.3:.
St-89 (0) -
Sr-90 (0) -
I-13 1 (816) 0.04 0.08 /
316 0.07 - 0.08 G4=ma (197)
- Nb-95 0.005 0.c4 /197 0.01 - 0.16 Su-106 0.010 0.04 0/197 0.02 - 0.09 Ca-141 0.010 0.02 /197 0.01 - 0.04 Ca-144 0.010 0.02 /197 0.01 - 0.04 l Others .. e *.::
l -e
'SECTION V - A DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY TABLE VeAe4 1981 Annual Radiological Environmsncel Rsport (Page 2 of 4)
TABLE V.A.4 (Page 2 of 4)
ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM SLTfARY
[ Mene of Facility Shissiersort Aesmie Fever Station Docket No. Not As,licable 3 ems of F e ty 3eaver Vallev Power scatzen ::ucket No. N -iJ.
Locatics of Tacility leaver. Pennsvivania leporting Period CT 1974 - 1975
[ (County, State)
PR2-OFEIATICNAL FRCCRAM SINMA2! (COMBINE 1974 - 1973)
[ ' Medium or Fachway Iower Limit Sampled Analysia and Total Number of All Indicator tocations (Unit of Measuremmet) of Analvets Performed Detection ID Mean. (f) Rlanse
[ Soil Grose Alpha (0) - -
PC1/s (dr7) 64 (Templace Samples) Gross 3eca (64) 1 12 /46 14 - 32 3r-49 (64) 0.25 0.4 /64 -
Sr-90 (64) 0.05 0.3 a /64 0.1 - 1.3 U-234,233,238 (0) - -
Gm (64)
E-40 63 1.3 13 /64 3 - 24 Cs-137 0.1 1.3 36/ 64 0.1 - 6,8 Co-144 d.3 1.1 /46 0.2 - 3 Zrsb-95 0.05 0.3 /64 0.1 - 2 Re-106 0.3 1.1 3/64 0.3 - 2 Others <In
[ Soil Cross Alpha (0) - -
PC1/g (dry)
(Cors Samples) Crose Beta (8) 1 21 8
/8 16 - 28
[ Sr-89 (8) 0.25 e U.s Sr-90 (8) 0.05 0.2 5,/ g,g, ,g,3 Gamma (s)
E-40
- 1.3 13 8/ 8 7 - 20 Ca-137 0.1 1.2 7/ 8 0.2 - 2.4 CMO 1 s 0.1 0.2 /8 -
Others <In
[
[
[
,76-( . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ __ _
-SECTION V - A DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY TABLE V.A.4
- 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report (Page 3 of 4)
~
TABLE V.A 4 (Page 3 of 4)
ENVIR0tafENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM SU10'M Y same of Tacility thfeet-r-ort At--ie P ver fenet s :ocsat so. 're t no tis ele same of Tacility leaver vallow Power sca nes Cocsat No. 30-)).
Mcation of Tacility sesver, ?e-msvivsnia Reporting ' eval CT '.97a - 1973
' (County, Stata)
T12-0T!2ATICMAL 71cC2 Art s=c*a2T(COc".:Z31976. - 1975) i w.a dium or Fachway taver Limit I
1asplad Analysis and Tacal sunber of All Indicator b eations
(**eit of weasure-ent) of Analvsts forf st-e4 Setection *:.3 wean. (f) hav e S w - ts Cross
- Alpha (0) -
[
pC1/g (dry) crosa 3 eta (33) 1 13 337 33 3 - 30 3r-90 (0) - -
U-134.233, 208 (0) - -
Camma (33) 13 33/33 2 - 30 3
E-40 1.5 13 /33 2 - 30 Ca-137 0.1 0.4 /33 0.1 - 0.6
'E Orsb-95 0.03 0.8 * /33 0.2 - 3.1 Ca-144 0.3 0.3 3/33 0.4 - 0.7 ta-106 0I 0.3 1.3 /33 1.3 - 1.3 Others e Ll.3 Toodstuff Camma (8) 8 E-40 1 33 /8 10 - $3 Ca-L37 0.1 0.2 1/8 -
1 tr5b-95 0.05 0.2 /8 -
I In-106 0I 1 0.3 0.4 /8 -
Others e 113 80 Teodstuff Crose lata (30) 0.05 19 /80 8 - 30 3r-49 (31) 0.0 3 0.2 33/81 0.04 - 0.93 St-90 (31) 0.003 0.4 8/ 11 0.02 - 0.31 Camma (81)
E-40 1 19 I'/81 3 - 46 Co-L37 0.1 0.3 6/81 0.2 - 1.6 Ce-144 0.3 1.3 3/81 0. 9 - 1. 6 tr5b-95 0.03 0.3 U/81 0.2 - 1.3 Ru-106 0I 0.3 1.4 /$1 0.6 - 2.3 others a 'a
SECTION V - A I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environs:ntal Report TABLE VeAe4 (Page 4 of 4)
TABLE V.A.4 (Page 4 of 4)
ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM
SUMMARY
Nana of Tacility Shiseistpo-: Atemic Pever festies Oceket No. Noe Aceticable Name cf Tacility 3eaver 7alle, Pever Station Ocekst No. 50-334 I4 cation of Tacility Seaver. Pe nsvivania Reportiss 14 vel CT 1974 - 1975 (County, Stata)
T11-OPZ2ATICMAL FPrG2AM SC01 ART (COM5INID 1974 - 1975) wa db= or Fachway Iower Limit Sampled Analysis and *otal Number of All 1sdicator Locations Cuit of Massurement) of Analvsis Perf erned Setection I.L3 Mean. (f) Ramee Milk I- 131 (91) 0.15 0.6 '/ 91 0.3 - 0.8 St-49 (134) 3 7 /134 6 - 11 3r-90 2 (134) 1 5.3 /134 1.5 - 12.3 Ganne (134)
Ca-137 II 10 13 /134 11 - 15 l others e LD External 224facien y - Monthly (399) 0.3 m2 0.20 3"/ 399 0.08 - 0.31 m2/ day 195 y - Quartarly (193) 0.3 32 0.20 /195 0.11 - 0.33 y - Annual 3 (48) 0.3 32 0.19 /43 0.11 - 0.30 I Tish PC1/8 (vet) crose 3eca (17) 0.01 1.9 1 /17 1.0 - 3.2 St-90 (17) 17 0.003 0.14 /17 0.02 - 0.50 I Camma (17) l K-40 0.3 2.4 /17 1.0 - 3.7 ca-137 0.08 1 0.03 /17 -
Other I
e 113 l
l 1
E l
i I
l 5
One outlier not included is mean. (Vater takas frca dried-o spring with high sedi=est J and potassium centant. Not censidered typical groundvatar sa. ple.)
, May include Zu-106, Zu-103, 3e-7.
1 -7e-
ilillll l. ill j Un3OHHOC t I' '- 48 > >od tr < .> v U:cO.g$ ggnU%gN
>$H
=
DC% $g0 $ o4E' $<rng Q#nWF N,3le
- U
)
t e
w 3 3 6 3 U h s g i /
Fi 5
0 0
1 7 5 4 3 3 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 1 4 6 6 Cp
(
U U
)
t y nt r eiJ mo D iS g d
S e&i
/
C 3
0 0
5 2 2 3 2 4 3 3 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 3 2 2 3 1
. 3 0 3
p
(
U .
s Y
n R
o i
U T E
M O
R i
f t
c a
T ) i Y C ny c N E or e A P id i U
g P S t S M s. g 0
- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O A t k 5
- 0 3 3 6 3 7 5 3 3 3 2 2 3 5 2 4 6 0 0 6 l C 5 t D e/ 1 2 6 a gi T
F A eC c
i l
A. C V p i
G V ( m I R !
c L E. O e l F T E B N A
- n S T o E s i U D t Q L a U L t D S L
A r C s e I
g e) w P , o Y
T am l /
P ui 5 6 6 6 6 6 y cC e i p 0 0 0 01 0 1 0 1 2 2 5 3 2 2 2 0 0 0 6 2 5 6 1 l t 2 2 l g
a a P '0 V 1
r( r i
e A v a
)
. e B
b a n L i r
o d e t . n csi aef rl e t pd nm
)
r oas C si e
l k ei l t l rt 0 0 0 3 3 6 3 8 5 3 0 S 4 4 43 4 6 4 0 6 0 0 0 C. l no I
D ai l
i i/ 3 6 4 1 3 6 1 (
MKiC nc t
E (
p i sie sd e t
lyeD t acf neo at E fJ e o
el v
ye et 0
mi l i vr 5 4 t ie e 9 M E
1 t w d - 3 6 b i 1 4 8 9 0 5 i s 0 0 i 1 2 4 3 3 3 3 3 6 7 -
a 1 4 4 4 2 2 6 8 t AAt co l 7 0 5 5 5 5 6 6 N 1 1 l 3 1 3 1 1 1 l 1 1 2 2 c - 4 - - - - - - / - - - 1 - 1 - - - / - - - -
u ic - r i oh e o n r u u g - c - 3 s s a e e a h J
t t E C t C I C 2 Z R R A 1 1 1 C C C h C C R 1 *
- E gUs ll
SECTION V - B DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING B. Air Monitoring
- 1. Characterization of Air and Meteorology The air in the vicinity of the site contains pollutants typical for an industrial area. Air flow is generally I, from the Southwest in summer and from the Northwest in the winter.
l
- 2. Air Sampling Program and Analytical Techniques i a. Program The air is sampled for gaseous radioiodine and radioactive particulates at each of ten (10) o f.>i-site air sampling stations. The locations of these stations are listed in Table V.A.1 and shown on a map in Figure 5.B.1.
Samples are collected at each of these stations by continuously drawing about one cubic foot per minute of atmosphere air through a glass fiber filter and through a charcoal cartridge. The former collects airborne particulates; the latter is for radioiodine sampling. Samples are collected for analysis on a weekly basis.
The charcoal la used in the weekly analysis of l airborne I-131. The filters are analyzed each week I for gross beta, monthly analysis by gamma spectrometry.
then composited by station for further composited in a quarterly sample from each They are station for Sr-89/90 analysis. In order to reduce interference from natural radon and thoron I radioactivities, all filters are allowed to decay for a few days after collection prior to counting for beta in a low background counting system.
l b. Procedury Gross Beta analysis is performed by placing the filter paper from the weekly air sample in a 2" x 1/4" planchet and counting it in a low background, gas flow proportional counter.
1 5
l 5
l I i _- - - - - - - _ -
SECTION V - B DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report
[ Gamma emitters are determined by stacking all the filter papers from each monitoring station collected during the month and scanning this composite on a lithium drifted germanium (Ge(Li))
gamma spectrometer.
Radiciodine (I-131) analysis is performed by a gamma scan of the charcoal in a weekly charcoal j cartridge. The activity is referenced to the mid-collection time.
SECTION V - B FIGURE 5.3.1 l DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPXTl I
1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report i I '
l FIGURE 5.B.1 ENVIRONMENTAL WOMTORING LOCATIONS- ;{g eppt{pg (gt;7{gg n - - - ,
AIR CAR!m mitres _ _
E ..,
13 ' '
I D 'S CA!RY F m . , l R 2l BRLIITCN's CAIRY fM
"**' $.a w ' 'Y ,'*
L k w 's carry - --
23
/ '
j 29B EEAWR Qxim HOSP!TA!. [* '%
- ~~
t' 30 SHIPP!NGPCRT3CR0 l f
32 .Mrouto DO h I : '\ - " " ~ ~
47 EAsi LIVERPOOL, 0110 28[f " j..~.. [-h e e i ..
~
4 WEIRTOi, WEST VIRGINIA 9 'd ,,,,, \
~
t' * #*"**'*y 51 A.IQUIPPA b \ /
s; I $
A$*,%b..)
i
,~'
"~~'
r.* ,-
.4 'n im c----
I ' 4g' ,.
% 1 *+ ve' , l' mh r
hamay : l9 ,
~
\ *, l 7.'. s
.[',- --
30 4 ~; '
/,' ' a- *
^*
f Y Y ./ ;- 1 .
c .,.. 8 d* ~ > .., .r,r
& o
.b - ,.)
%. , , ,,- r g , ,
}'
- s m ,% f ); E.
a j s / \\ * $1 M a%r ~r
\ g' % \\ '
l N'[* [
~
@ Dog .. ' -
I ,. _
--. /
a,f E
g-S g g -
{ /
/, <
i l
\
h O- saavam couwry \. d'* ' '
' I y g - . .-
. _,4 N
I ~N N
^
W.i u, 1 _@_ _ ~ ' s',. L La '
(~._ _ .- _J
'y ,, AIR S# FLIT STATIOS
%s FIG E 5. B .1
__. .n
l SECTION V - B DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report 1 V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING
- b. Procedures (continued)
Strontium-89 and Strontium-90 activities are I determined in quarterly composited air particulate filters. Stable strontium carrier is added to the sample and it is leached in nitric acid to bring I deposits filtered.
into solution. The mixture is then Half of the filtrate is taken for strontium analysis and is reduced in volume by evaporation. Strontium is precipitated as Sr(NO3 )2 I using fuming (90%) nitric acid. An iron (ferric hydroxide) scavenge is performed, followed addition of stable yttrium carrier and a 5 to 7 day by I period for yttrium ingrowth. Yttrium is then precipitated as hydroxide, is dissolved and re-precipitated as oxalate. The yttrium oxalate is mounted on a nylon ,'anchet and is counted in a low 8 level beta counter to infer strontium-90 activity.
Strontium-89 activity is determined by precipitating Src 3 from the sample after yttrium I separation. This precipitate is mounted on a nylon planchet and is covered with 80 mg/cm absorber for level beta counting.
- 3. Results and Conclusions A summary of data is presented in Tabic V.A.3.
- a. Airborne Radioactive Particulates A total of five hundred ten (510) weekly samples I from ten (10) locations was analyzed for gross beta (Ten samples were lost in transit). Results were comparable to previous years; however, there were II increases in January - August due to the test of a nuclear weapons device by China on 10-16-80.
Figure 5.B.2 illustrates the average concentration of gross beta in air particulates.
I
~
1 I
0
- 8 3-i
il1l if\
. gg v * .o t u
,2e"oz:<e
- t04 Ol 5$E EEsv0" 9s.;al[ NfA m
y e
c o
g m -
n/
v o
n u1 8 9
1 I y T
c o
A mS E T
A L
U C
I A
L\y
\
l e
s e
T R
A A a P u R A I
A \
N \
I x\ .
A n T n.
E B
- S S
O R m 1
8 9
- G 1
F O
S N
\ 1 N n.
- O I
A" v
- T A
R T
A a
- N V
E C
- N O
C a
r t
- E G
A A [
- R E
V A
a
. m
. A
<t e
e r
n m - -
1 1
/
f
/
s t u.
e m1 s
- mee * ,~ -
s$'
ll1 l\l
l 8 SECTION V - B DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING
- a. Airborne Radioactive Particulates (continued)
The weekly air particulate samples were composited to one hundred and twenty (120) monthly samples i which were analyzed by gamma spectrometry.
Naturally occurring Be-7 was present in every sample. Occasional . traces above detection levels of other nuclides were present. Some were natural, others were residual from previous and recent nuclear weapons tests. These are listed in the a summary Table V.A.2. Examination of effluent data from the Beaver Valley Power Station and the I Shippingport Atomic Power Station demonstrated that none of the slightly elevated results attributable to the operation of either power are station.
R A total of forty (40) quarterly samples were each analyzed for Sr-89, and Sr-90. Some re<11ts were I slightly elevated to those in previous years, which is attributed to the Chinese nuclear test.
I Based on the analytical results, the operation of Beaver Valley Power Station and Shippingport Atomic Power Station did not contribute to any increase in air particulate radioactivity during CY 1981.
- b. Radiciodine A total of five hundred and fifteen (515) weekly I charcoal filter samples were analyzed for I-131.
(Five samples were lost in transit.) No detectable concentrations were found at any locations.
Based on analytical results, the operation of Beaver Valley Power Station and Shippingport Atomic I Power Station did not contribute to any increase in airborne radiciodine during CY 1981.
I i
1 1
I 3 -e,.
l
I l SECTION V - C DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING l
C. Monitoring of Sediments and Soils (Soil Monitoring is required every 3 years and was not required in 1981.)
l l
- 1. Characterization of Stream Sediments l The stream sediments consist largely of sand and silt.
- 2. Sampling Program and Analytical Techniques l
l
- a. Program I
j I
River bottom sediments were collected quarterly above the Montgomery Dam in the vicinities of the Beaver Valley discharge and Shippingport discharge B
, and above the New Cumberland Dam. A Ponar or Eckman dredge is used to collect the sample. The I sampling locations are also listed in Table V.A.1 and are shown in Figure 5.C.1.
Bottom sediments are analyzed for gross alpha and I beta activity, strontium, and the gamma-emmitting radionuclides.
- b. Analytical Procedures Gross beta - sediments are analyzed for gross beta by mounting a 1 gram portion of dried sediment in a 8 -
2" planchet. The sample is counted in a low background, gas flow proportional counter. Self absorption corrections are made on the basis of sample weight.
Gross alpha activity of sediment is analyzed in the I same manner as gross beta except that the counter is set up to count only alpha.
Gamma analysis of sediment is performed in a 100 ml plastic bottle which is counted by a gamma spectrometer. ,
i 1
I l
I i
l SECTION V - C FIGURE 5.C.1 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report l'
FIGURE 5.C.1 ENVIRONMENTAI. MONITORING LOCATIONS- SHOE!.'E SE)ITES & SOIL
~ - - . - ,
E sgAnn CoubY 3, b 90F !T E! PITS b L d' l g7j -
- ~ ,, i
, . e_, . ., ,
2A m_ __.m , . .
3 Vici.a.ity SAPS OiscNirge - _\
l g, 7,
% ,,1. . .g iI 49 L)istran Side of .tntg:rery M % ,1 A.e I '
I , -
'g.
LT*trem Side of New j j-. .
50
~~
m j : --
l
_ a= 4 m 3 - '
'xm'W Y Poct?
13 M /er's fam g ;
Q^ .
22 S:sth of BVPS Sita
..j. - [.
1 27 3runton's Dal.f g - - -
,l ,,, m .r,.,,f,y ]
29A Nictcl's Dairy ::;;.
j / * ' --
30 32 Shi;pL'igport, PA g i N /
.tdlarri ~ . , pAram,4 ;
I 46 Irrhst:/, PA i .** .
47 48 E. :.iver;ool, m Weirten, N.'.'A.
e 4 %
e'
/
/
51 Aliquippa, PA o+= w//. -
I **c---.-.
.,,' M '.,, 1 ,. ,,,
g p' 's . # , :.3 1 ,
g . i
- tt s
- p. t, . ~h"*3 n -
f',' '\ ,
E $r O_30 >,' cM?= K ./ - i C.i
" / l' E
', f% ' #
0/. ( .
5i
- , ~. ,2 ;
e-#
-,~i /
w/
~~
i ,, L\\
wf l l ,
E f
4 W
W '- j.yafese,, geese /
/
Aw (" e.- I s e ,
I A
,y h
(1J ta.1 L .
wnSeNOTON ptAVER COUNTY COUNTT
\,
l l A
[';2
,O*
N' p t a
Jse/o W **4ons s 4 N
-- 4 l
%\
% ~. - 1
B SECTION V - C DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY l
l 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report B
V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 5
- b. Analytical Procedures (continued)
Strontium 89 and 90 are determined by radiochemistry. A weighed sample of sediment or soil is leached with Nitric Acid HNO . A stable carrier is added for determination of. recovery.
Strontium concentration and purification is ultimately realized by precipitations of strontium nitrate in fuming nitric acid. Additional hydroxide precipi'.ations and barium chromate separations are also used. The purified strontium is converted to a carbonate for weighing and counting. Samples are counted soon after separation (5 - 7 days is allowed for yttrium ingrowth). Activities are calculated on the basis of appropriate Sr-89 decay and Y-90. Separate I
j l
mounts covered with a 80 mg/cm 2 aluminum absorber are used for counting in a low background beta counter.
Uranium isotopic analysis of sediment samples were performed by alpha spectrometry after leaching and I isolation of the uranium by anion exchange chromatography plus mercury cathode electrolysis, then electroplated onto a planchet.
- 3. Results and Conclusions
- a. Results The results of sediment analysis are summarized in Table V.A.3.
There were no significant differences between these current levels and those previously detected in both upstream and downstream sediment samples.
1 I
l 1
I t
I 1
SECTION V - C DUQUESME LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING
- 3. Results and Conclusions (continued)
- a. Results (continued)
Uranium isotopic analyses were performed by alpha spectroscopy. The results suggest that only I naturally occurring U-234 and U-238 were present since the activities were nearly always the same in l each sample and the levels are within the expected I range of equilibrium, activity.
natural U-234 uranium and activities.
U-238 have the same In l
- b. Conclusion (
Other than a very small amount of Co-58, Co-60, and I
l Mn-54 at the outfall of Beaver Valley Station, the sediment analyses do not indicate any increased radioactivity attributable to Power Beaver I
j Valley Power Station. Since Shippingport Atomic Power Station did not release any radioactive liquid waste during 1981, it did not contribute to any changes in river sediment radioactivity. Small amounts of Cs-137 from weapons testing fallout was l found in all river sediment sampics including those t
upstream above Montgomery Dam which are unaffected i by plant effluents. I 1
l 1
l l
l 1
i E
1 1
I l
l B
SECTION V - D DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V. ENVIRONMENTAL h7NITORING D. Monitoring of Feederops and Foodcrops
- 1. Characterization of Vegetation and Foodcrops Accord!..g to a survey made in 1981, there were approximately 650 farms in Beaver County. The principle source of revenue for the farms was in dairy products which amounted to nearly $4,659,000.00. Revenues from I other farm products were as follows:
Crops $2,143,000.00 l Horticulture $ 551,000.00 I
I Meat Poultry
$1,274,000.00
$ 392,000.00 The percentage of crop land .' n Beaver County is I approximately 17%, pasture land - 6.5%,
47.8%, and other land uses - 28.7%.
forest land -
- 2. Sampling Program and Analytical Techniques l a. Program Representative samples of cattle feed are collected monthly from the nearest dairy (Searight). See Figure 5.D.1. Each sample is analyzed by gamma I
l spectrometry. The monthly samples are composited into a quarterly sample which is analyzed for Sr-90.
Foodcrops (vegetables) were collected at garden l locations during the summer of 1981. Cabbage and lettuce were obtained from Shippingport, PA, and I Weirton, WV. Cabbage, lettuce, and swiss chard were collected from Georgetown, PA, and cabbage, lettuce, and escarole were collected from Industry, l PA. All samples were analyzed for gamma emitters (including I-131 by gamma spectrometry).
l
- b. Procedures Gamma emitters, including I-131, are determined by scanning a dried, homogenized sample with the gamma spectrometry system. A Ge(Li) detector is utilized with this system.
l I Strontium 90 analysis for feedstuff is performed by a procedure similar to that described in V.C.2.
I l
l
h SECTION V - D FIGURE 5.D.1 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environ = ental Report 6 , #
(
s s_s f$
e e- _
I 'N k
I k7 p o 3 k\
zm r & e. 9 TNe lis Y
o (N 0 l- h kN
(
o E
w j
t
'o c3
@ p qc s
ts
's
!! B 1 E2 9 N. a -
/
n-
- "d
, l
/ is 8 I T E2 C sa e - 28
-=
b '
/ k&
9 U I /
l 's./
I 9
[ :-
, i 3 o
, hf-e i </
3 e
w M@s. 8 s*
L- ~
=
o q
' 'l *o
[ - 4 x
t - . 2 f A
2 :
( O E $
2 si i 3 o> , m a; (N
,'h t ,SEac YES s 28
> ux L
r #~~ saa
~E
E SECTION V - D DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report l V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING
- 3. Results and Conclusions I
A summary of results is provided in Table V.A.3. The predominant isotope detected was naturally occurring K-40 in both food and feed. Other activity is i attributable to residuals from previous nuclear weapons i tests or naturally occurring radionuclides. All results were consistent with (or lower than) those obtained in the pre-operational program. These data confirm that Shippingport Atomic Power Station and Beaver Valley I Power Station did not contribute to radioactivity in foods and feeds in the vicinity of the site.
I I
I I
I I
I I
lI
,I l
I I
l
L SECTION V - E DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING E. Monitoring of Local Cow's Milk
- 1. Description - Milch Animal Locations During the seasons that animals producing milk (milch animals) for human consumption are on pasture, samples of fresh milk are obtained from these animals at locations and frequencies noted in Table V.A.1. This
[ milk is analyzed for its radiciodine content calculated as Iodine-131. The analyses are performed within eight (8) days of sampling.
Detailed field surveys are performed during the grazing season to locate and enumerate milch animals within a five (5) mile radius of the site. Goat herd locations
[ out to fifteen (15) miles are identified. Survey data for the most recent survey conducted in August, 1981 is shown in Figure 5.E.1.
- 2. Sampling Program and Analvtical Techniques
- a. Program
{
Milk was collected from three (3) reference dairy farms within a 10-mile radius of the site.
Additional dairies, which represent the highest potential milk pathway for radiciodine based on milch animal surveys and meteorological data were
{ selected and sampled. These dairies are subject to change when more recent data (includ.ing census) indicate other locations are more appropriate. The f location of each is shown in Figure 5.E.2 and L described below.
Number
( of Milch Distance and Direction Collection Site Dairy Animals From Site Period 25 Searight 47 Cows 2.1 miles-south /sw. Jan. - Dec.
27 Brunton 80 Cows 7.3 miles-southeast Jan. - Dec.
29A Nichol 45 Cows 8.0 miles-northeast Jan. - Dec.
(L 61 62 Allison Lyon 40 Cows 3.2 miles-west /sw. Jan. - Dec.
26 Cows 3.3 miles-west /sw. Jan.-Mar-Sept.
65 Belan 3 Goats
- 3.5 miles-south /sw. May - Aug.
66 Straight 1 Cow
- 3.1 miles-south /se. Jan. - Feb.
Aug. - Dec.
67 Szatowski 2 Cows
- 4.3 miles-south April - July 69 Collins 13 Goats 3.6 miles-southeast Mar - Dec.
- Milk Usage - Home Only.
SECTION V-E FIGURE 5.E.1 f DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report
- - . - . _ - - - \
FIGURE 5. E. I COW & GOAT SURVEY - SUMMER, 1981
" ~ ~ " ~ ~
'l ; we exm . - 's (
)
g
'I IrM kN l
1
{-
We.~-
I
'% ., - :.-). .
- -( ,-
g' / t.. (
bgL
\ '%.h._N \ IM'mi,.; . - - g DN\
l dj!
- (> ._0.M, %(r e-h Vs A,.ds
/
gf' x "(
/ / .
\
j l
l
"'=*= s c : w w! .h.
fA I
g Q&
a w 2.. .
\
g y' Sih
^ h%,,
/ '\xj b
n s/
9 T g**i/- N/ 7 Q.
4.
g 0
I'"
N ,Mp'Y'I 3 -
s 5,e S ;g)-
'l!
ws-h.,Qf ,, , ,,
g -
.~. , x.,. -.. ,
,._ l
\ ---
O GOATS j
' %,s.4 S U M M E R 1981 l ,
Nc;
- COWS _ _ _ _
l
SECTION V -E FIGURE 5.E.2 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY L 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report I
t FIGURE 5.E.2 ENVIRONMENTAL. WONITOR!NG LOCATIONS- FIU(
N u*"D*E **
asAwn cadry ,I XIll } ,
W .
Stte Location "
pop ss '
"A M*v .
b N
th' .' ** ~ " ". .
25 Searight ~'
[
27 Brunton _..'~' ' ' I .,'
H 29A Nichol %-( ' I I['Ii L 61 Allison , , , , ,
q
- - - ~~
62 Lyon ** " .
65 Belan
{
% ') ,': '
I 66 i ~ 4/ WF 67 Straight Szatowski i 2'
T l-69 Collins @
,* s, ,e , k O i .-.-i
, i _ . 9, emst. '
X'~') .
- ~
a
~..- , ,
- w. a,;
v-p i
..c
,,g
._ M _
q ..-
4 sm y .
j i
s g .
n ~^*"'* .
-> ' r s ....
act , i < f 43-
-t- '
/ m*,'. n==~s
$f ~~ / i,
' / .:. / -
. .i
,, c, . / o O '"** 5 ~\ ' y !
o ,
({
- d*' * '
- I( ;~a_g, ._ i- 4
- c7 DeeIeg 4
/
f v \(27- , , _ , s, i
\1 ,
L g j e,s.,--.. /
z I ,
Ac - G I D<
c: >
5 m ' # l 5
g w saavan couurr \.g . Ass , -*
L g!' - -
--5 ' %.
( msweTon ceu m .
E N.
N, W.w-r L.,
\
+e 1 ,.. -' ,s i. w x na
\_# 4 *lly trGTI75
_% ,,,h
( IdE 5. E. 2 t
- L
SECTION V - E DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPAhY L 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING E. Monitoring of Local Cow's Milk (continued)
- a. Program (continued)
The sample from Searight Dairy was collected and analyzed weekly for radioiodine using a procedure with a high sensitivity. Samples from each of the other selected dairies were collected monthly when cows are indoors, and bi-weekly when cows are grazing. This monthly or bi-weekly sample is analyzed for Sr-89, Sr-90, gamma emitters including (
Cs-137 (by Spectrometry) and I-131 (high sensitivity analysis).
- b. Procedure Radiciodine (I-131) analysis in milk was normally W
performed using chemically prepared samples and l analyzed with a beta-gamma coincidence counting system.
Gamma emitters are determined by gamma spectrometry of a one liter Marinelli container of milk.
I Strontium analysis of milk is similar to that of other foods (refer to V.C.2) except that milk I
l samples are prepared by addition of Trichloracetic Acid (TCA) to produce a curd which is removed by filtration and discarded. An oxalate precipitate is ashed for counting.
- 3. Results and Canclusions A total of one hundred and forty (140) samples were analyzed for I-131 during 1981. All I-131 activities I in milk were below the minimum detectable level (0.3 pCi/1).
l A total of one hundred and eight (108) samples were analyzed by gamma spectrometry and for strontium.
I j
Cs-137, Sr-89 and Sr-90 levels were elevated as a result of the Chinese nuclear test in October 1980.
The It I
should be noted that in the case of these nuclides, the I
I levels did not increase immediately after the fallout from the October, 1980 test. These delays are typical due to the variables of farming practices, pasture I
conditions, and use of stored feed. For example, the uptake and subsequent inclusion of these radionuclides in the milk may not occur if pasture conditions are I
i excellent or supplemental feed, subjected to fallout exposure, are not required. Thus, the activity of these I
SECTION V - E DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANT 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report longer half-life isotopes in milk may not reach its peak level when the pasture is growing rapidly, but instead will occur as pasture conditions degenerate with the approach of hotter and/or dryer weather of the summer.
Because of the limited inventory of fallout activity deposited, these activity levels gradually return to normal. In addition to pasture conditions, herd size and milch animal type and breed result in variations from location to location. All available data support the conclusion that levels of radioactivity in milk are not attributable to either Beaver Valley Power Station or Shippingport Atomic Power Station.
I 1
I 1
I l
I 1
I 1
I I
1 l
I I
1 I - - - _ - - - - - - - - -
L.
I SECTION V - F DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING F. Environmental Radiation Monitoring I 1. Description of Regional Background Radiation Levels and Sources The terrain in the vicinity of the Shippingport and I Beaver Valley Power Station generally consists of rough hills with altitude variations of 300 to 400 feet. Most of the land is wooded.
I
- The principal geologic features of the region are nearly flat-lying sedimentary beds of the Pennsylvania Age.
Beds of limestone alternate with sandstone and shale I with abundant interbedded coal glacial deposits partially cover the older sedimentary layers. Pleistocene deposits in the northwest. Most of the region is I underlain by shale, sandstone, and some coal beds of the Conemaugh Formation. Outcrops of sandstone, shale, and limestone of the Allegheny Formation exist within the Ohio River Valley and along major tributary streams.
Based on surveys reported in previous annual reports, I exposure rates ranged from 5 to li pR/hr.
1981 indicated that background radiation ccntinued in this range.
Results for
- 2. Locations & Analytical Procedures Ambient external radiation levels at the site were I measured using thermoluminescent dosimeters There were three (3) types used in the Duquesne Light Company Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program.
(TLDs).
They are calcium sulphate dysprosium, 4 (Dy) in I
CaS teflon matrix, lithium fluoride (LiF), and thulium activated calcium sulfate (CaS 4 "")*
I The lithium fluoride TLDs were posted and analyzed by a laboratory of the Department of Energy (DOE) as an independent check of environmental radioactivity levels.
I The CaSO :Tm TLDs were used as a back-up and as a QC program. 4 The locations of the TLDs are shown in Figures 5.F.1 thru 4. Comparisons of TLD results are presented in Table III.1.
In 1977, 1978 and 1979, there were a total of thirteen (13) off-site environmental TLD locations. In 1980 and I 1981, the total of off-site TLD locations to forty-three (43) to comply requirements of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's with was increased the pending I version of the Specifications for PWR's.
standardized Effluent Technical l i 1>
SECTION V- F FIGURE 5.F.1 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPATf 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report
, A NCRTHWC5T QUACRANT I
\J/ Sreven Vau.cv Powe.n Srarios * '
, ..a --. u, a
\ l s.c m a yc. = ,
I d =1 *::Ur
\
s l
/
) - !! !! i 0,"' ::: \
u o
i:t::::"" (rs '
/
/
<;.;g;.;rt i a n mi.a s.s. ' "c i: :: =:t: - -
}- l h, t
- = :, ::-'
s p
l ni
_ _- _- _ __ _ _ _________ ____ a ____ _____ _ ___ A ___\_ al ,
/
\) /
+
yp3
/*
__.t-(
h ;
\
s
\
\
- 7-2 s .
!. ,\\ j w
\
.e N lj ~ .-
I 4 I
\\ ~
1 l
\ '
$ j-
_ :. ---__a, 2 J
/ / p u ,
/ N' L_ >
- s; '4 f
,/ %g 7' 9- \ \__. f d
'/l% -, __h e
[ f
. , '. ,i
' ' _%e p . ,' 1
% l
<---- [ \ *
)
l V-
/
se /----_' ~ , ., )
.-: w l. /
/\'M .. ,
E _.j t'b l 'm u.>- 'i.i%
W i i j . Q _** * * .l g
^
"/'_ .\ _
/ \
'\
i a,:
.,) '/ 1. w]i j y' s q~',- [\ '- 3 k -
r
/ , s a
,' )- --
I}\. l' Ns .n If l i , ,
..~.y% _ ,
I -
as N' v p
\ /
I :)r i
l i
40 g, _._ 'A '
~
1 y
i, 5
( \ J
,h,N / .,
5:'. ,7 \
o
- sr \
s@ Oj '. s
<s:
s 6
'i
, \ O*2 , < \ -
\ xx-~
\ / K5 i N/,f ,/
+ ,
L sectron v - r ricUas 5.r.2 g DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY L 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report
. - - N.CRTHEAST QUACRANT
[ l N ,, ,,
.,,,,,,--s-i is $U'JC-l*$5Uv i
\
z i 0"2...,"m
- . 4.-
.13.*. i t Q,,g h' , !$,,
2 $.. .$* . :.. En5.S.v"".".' . .
SR&pptA9 Port Post 2ffic.
{ L3
\ - u, - :
, a.. ::=2.
. _. =::s .., m.,/
s t
i
' t# 't 's ,
i
/ - I N. x
, /
_. ___ s..,'
y ii s
\
f'
.7 ..~. / /
j f* ,s- '
- h Q * ~
, , c...,
- ---- 1 i .
F- ',
.n. .,,, , Ny e 7
?~~_x~ l
/ %,
2
,! ~
l\,...
_ , 4
- ~ 3Y
-.\
f , ..
. i
, 91 . .1.~~~ ,- t i.' s 4
'[/
o gs~ m
'e s
~5f'- N > 9 g1 bm\~ , , 4 c
- y. % K
- n. .g . 3'q.
y'N-
~
~gd-, /,.
/
/
..s .. / - , - ,
rs,
. '\k
- '. h
,a'" ?'
~
t is 1
~.s. 32 o
\ W /
3c jf _
i N ,
s s v,. - '.
(Wfs id g> -
[s' s <
is s
' ' ~
g l \ c; -
() N'-'
s.- .
l .'
cA . , ,,, N '
[w -
, i L l ,- ,
'4 K. \ x, '.'A
~
e --
n ,- . a e '" \ \._N.'.
+
.x e N /
1 .
. %- ~
% w., i'* 's ,( .
/ I (b' (/
-100-
I SECTION V - F FIGURE 5.F.3 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environrental Report I
QN g R iMLp4 \ s,ff / g / )
, L I s ;ce Q 's
/
t e s "s c , l
,/
s , \./
m s' /
\'
.i
- \ t g ,3 is , "y ( '
g) l
/ '% J5W e
(-
g y.X'N :' Jg~:, /
E i
[\f]QN
~
,, T
- 'I s
a s
yu s
\
\
~
]
' ,b i ..
it
, . . . . . . . . . .,19
\
\ 4 !
., \ . - ',, ^ x q g s, 7%
1 3 s
/
\ j ,
g g \ *
<'~.
^
- ; N
\
g ._ .
f )
\l'\j ,! -
, . \
q n ._ 'V/
.s i
E %
', d p 'N L
k
& /-
3*etSr BLtG Locat t?M n .a .. w.
7'N g
I * ,
,;w 5 y! 4 N p[N ans :nur:a g
g.3 ' ..... g's, f- ,' { ( j 7
27 gig;e,1 5 'y 7
i !' It?IriIt. n1 I i
/
,/ '8 l?
B2 l' :%, L NS Adve r tunackpal 5133.
I 'N-3
- ~ -
- M "'"
SOUTHEAST QACRANT Srwt= V%cv Pewt.= $rario.4 I
g ---
B SECTION V - F FIGURE 5.F.4 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report I ^ ^ '
g "l H. / :
%x k b
- sD
- l )s ps/e g,' t, e
-/ y-g 47 ' ' "
j
(
g o, , ' >%/ .....
'x
\@
,, s ,e
.[ y' p / \
- u. / >
( . :,s , /
- y,f' fi ' ~
q yo
.x qyo, pq>..q a .. s
- 3. ~
ejs a- .
c, l
i
),@
t +
f ,'.k/
" /' & ,k x,"\'r c,'@ x.
l j 3
l -([ 'N I
,. 4u ) ,g v}
t
.N << -
\ i; .A.
E -
./ : '
l si ',,,,
i
- s. s
, s3 g L' /
L !
,j,
- ,/. y ,
- \
I ( 9 ~ % 3 -.\ y/ :
\
u _
/ . ......
E h's .
q/
i .
s
) 5 /
\
- ! /
I N,; /
/
/
/ @ ' ~;.-
g
)
m, w , .. f fl l \.
,,n ww .e =.,...
E e j a
- =
- =>::ue
=; u: -
p>
y
/ ,
-2
..... p;r -
- =
!! !! :=;M*" l I !!
u l'
- =:20'01:" "* . '
.I.N..r.:"Mi
..r "
,a -
i I
\
.., I \
$C0TWEST CipACRANT et.m % cv m c=srr,c-. '
L ,;,,,
h, % -
O ,
I I -102-
SECTION V - F DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING g
g 2. Locations & Analytical Procedures (continued)
The lithium fluoride (LiF) TLDs used for environmental purposes are pre-selected and annealed at least 5 working days prior to use. The radiation dose accumulated from the anneal date to the date of posting is accounted for utilizing background readings from five (5) TLD chips which are processed within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> of the posting date. The calibration of the TLD reader is performed within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> of processing the posted I environmental TLDs. The environmental TLDs are processed after retrieval and a background correction is made to account for the background radiation accumulated 1 from the date of retrieval to the date of processing.
The calcium sulfate (CaSO4 :Dy) TLDs were annealed shortly before placing the TLDs in their field I locations. The radiation dose accumulated in-transit between the field location and the laboratory was corrected by annealing control dosimeters shortly before I the field dosimeters were removed from the location, then shipping the freshly annealed control field dosimeters with the exposed field dosimeters to the laboratory for readout at the same time. All dosimeters were exposed in the field in a special environmental holder. The dosimetry system was calibrated by reading l
J calcium sulfate dosimeters which have been exposed in an accurately known gamma radiation field.
- 3. Results and Conclusions Data obtained with the contractor TLP (CaSO4 :Dy in teflon) during 1981 are summarized in Table V.A.3, and the quality control TLD results are listed in Table III.1.
The annual exposure rate of all off-site TLD's averaged I .18 mR/ day in 1981. As in previous years, there was some variation among locations and seasons as would be expected.
In 1981, ionizing radiation dose determinations averaged approximately 66 mR for the year. This is comparable to I previous years. There was no evidence of anomalies that could be attributed to the operation of either Beaver Valley Power Station or Shippingport Atomic Power Station. Three sets of TLDs of different types, i provided and analyzed by a separate laboratory, demonstrate good agreement and confirm that changes from each natural radiation levels, if any, are neglible.
I
-103-
I SECT 10N V - F DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANT 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report Lessons learned from the Three Mile Island incident indicated the need for more radiation monitors in all
.I sectors surrounding the plant. Engineering and procurement are in progress for 16 Reuter-Stokes Pressurized Ion Chamber environmental radiation monitors
!I to be used to circle the plant site, one in each of the 16 sectors. Installation of the monitors for system operation which was begun in 1981 will continue through 1982. Engineering is also in progress to upgrade and modify the BVPS meteorological system to meet requirements in U.S. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.23, Rev. 1, and U.S. NUREG-0654, Appendix 2. The Reuter Stokes radiation monitors and the upgraded meteorological system will be tied into a new computer network to help meet some of the requirements set forth in U.S. NRC I NUREG-0654 (Criteria for Preparational Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants) and U.S. NRC NUREG-
'I
. 0737 (TMI Action Plan Requirements). The complete meteorological system modifications and new computer network are still in the planning stage and a
'g preliminary operational date is currently scheduled for 3 December 1982.
I I
I-I I
I I
I --
- I SECTION V - G DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITGRING
. G. Monitoring of Fish
- 1. Description Fish collected near the site are generally scrap fish.
During 1981, fish collected for the radiological monitoring program included carp and catfish.
- 2. Sampling Program and Analytical Techniques
- a. Program Fish samples are collected semi-annually in the New Cumberland pool of the Ohio River at the Beaver Valley and Shippingport effluent discharge points and upstream of the Montgomery Dam. The edible portion of each different species caught is analyzed by gamma spectrometry. Fish sampling locations are shown in Figure 5.G.I.
- b. Procedure I
A sample is prepared in a standard tared 300 ml plastic bottle and scanned for gamma emitting nuclides with gamma spectrometry system whka utilizes a Ge(Li) detector.
- 3. Results and Conclusions g A summary of the results of the fish monitoring data is 3 provided in Table V.A.3. Four (4) fish were caught in June. Eight (8) more samples were caught in September.
Except for naturally occurring K-40, the only gamma emitter which was detected in any samples was a trace of Cs-137 in one sample. Cesium-137 is a long lived fission product and some residual activity persists from l
a previous weapons testing programs. This indicates that the operation of the Shippingport Atomic Power Station and the Beaver Valley Power Station has not resulted in radioactivity in fish in the Ohio River.
I I
I I -' '-
SECTION V - G .IGURE 5.G.1 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report
{
FIGURE 5.G.1 D
s s_ _ s, ceM -
( t I
.u yL s.s hN N
', fo
( h
- h O \
m c O m b k
[
t o o3 /Ru s
=
8 o
=5 a
E %c hh 'T s "
53
[
= sa ~
i 0 k
/ @ 5 !!
[ /
e
!!s !!
e =
5 E a
O w
[ .-
5 c- - '
~
/ n i / a
[ l N/
l 0 m 3
( o i a 3 J *
[ dr s
c I vP n
v 0
L_ ._ 4 p- o.,
t 4 x c
ec g
=
a/'
2
/
a m
i 3
o h $ = ir o 5
[ -
~ <
x a e :m e. 3
( ( S EN E
> n= '
$b b C u' $ \
s/&v'. . ..,8 S 32 L
.thi
.__R **
qrf- Q \ S % li.
E \. hk e ,. s ES" S o _
o _
l l SECTION V - H DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING l
H. Monitoring of Surface, Drinking, and Well Waters
- 1. Description of Water Sources The Ohio River is the main body of water in the area.
l It is used by both the Beaver Valley and Shippingport I plants for water make-"p and receiving plant liquid effluents. In addition, river water is used for cooling purposes at the Shippingport Atomic Power Station and l make-up for the cooling tower at the Beaver Valley Power Station.
Ohio River water is a source of water for some towns both upstream and downstream of the Beaver. Valley and Shippingport plant sites. It is used by several municipalities and industries downstream of the site.
g The nearest user of the Ohio River as a potable water
- g source is Midland Borough Municipal 'Jater Authority.
The intake of the treatment plant is approximately 1.5 miles downstream and on the opposite side of the river.
!I The next downstream users are East Liverpool, Ohio, and Chester, West Virginia, which are approximately 6 and 7 miles downstream, respectively. The heavy industries in I Midland, as well as others downstream use river water for cooling purposes. Some of these plants also have private treatment facilities for plant sanitary water.
Ground water occurs in large volumes in the gravel terraces which lie along the river, and diminishes considerably in the bedrock underlying the site. Normal well yields in the bedrock are less than 10 gallons per minute (gpm) with occasional wells yielding up to 60 gpm.
- 2. Sampling and Analytical Techniques
- a. Surface (Raw River) Water The sampling program of river water includes six (6) sampling points along the Ohio River. Raw water samples are normally collected at the East Liverpool (Ohio) Vater Treatment Plant [ River Mile 41.2] daily and composited into a monthly sample.
I Weekly grab samples are taken from the Ohio River at the following locations: Upstream of Montgomery Dam (River Mile 31.8]; at discharge from Shippingport Atomic Power Station [ River Mile
- I 34.8]; and near the discharge from the Beaver Valley Power Station [ River Mile 35.0]. Two automatic river water samplers are at the following locations: Upstream of Montgomery Dam (River Mile I -107-
SECTION V - H DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPAh'l 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report 29.6]; and at Crucible Steel's river water intake (River Mile 36.2]. The automatic sampler takes a l 20 m1 to 40 ml sample every 15 minutes and is !
collected on a weekly basis. The weekly grab samples and automatic water samples are composited into monthly samples from each location. In addition, a quarterly composite sample is prepared for each sample point.
The monthly composites are analyzed for gross alpha, gross beta, and gamma emitters. The
.g quarterly composites are analyzed for tritium (H-
'g 3), strontium 89 (Sr-89), strontium 90 (Sr-90), and cobalt 60 (Co-60) (high sensitivity).
Locations of each sample point are shown in Figure 5.H.l.
- b. Drinking Water (Public Supplies)
Drinking (treated) water is collected at both
.g Midland (PA) and East Liverpool (OH) Water Treating
'g Plants. An automatic sampler at each location collects 20-50 milliliters every 20 minutes. These intermittent samples are then composited into a weekly sample. The weekly sample from each location is analyzed by gamma spectrometry. The weekly samples are also analyzed for- radioiodine (I-131).
Monthly composites of the weekly samples are analyzed for gross alpha, gross beta, and by gamma I spectrometry. Quarterly composites are analyzed for H-3, Sr-89, Sr-90 and Co-60 (high sensitivity).
Locations of each sample point are shown in Figure 5.H.1.
I I .
I
-108-
I SECTION V - H DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report
- c. Ground Water Grab samples were collected each quarter from each of four (4) well locations (see Figure 5.H.1) within four (4) miles of the site. These locations are:
One (1) well at Shippingport, PA One (1) well at Meyer's Farm (Hookstown, PA)
One (1) well in Hookstown, PA One (1) well in Georgetown, PA Each groundwater sample is analyzed for gross alpha, gross beta, tritium, and by gamma spectrometry.
I .
I I
I I
I I
I u
-109-F
1l MmMosHOz<I 5 go.gmM C9d 06 I Mgc$"3 ".m.
~ $ Ng ~ ft ilo'sIg M0G UhH , gD' (Okt r m E j i
g
- s I
I, u m ^ It \ o J i r
o '" (, s M
A g r M D.
v h , "G o"
u '.-
S S L
a c
\ j R i
cE uW L
M n a.#'^ -
WTCO R
mR o 0 E oE M
n r g# AE FTI f
/
T A
W rAWT u 0 @ RS [ G N wE o
- I K
N aAFC M I R MR U m \ D L-S S
,_K g
$ gRE W A R
E T
AH T0 m
1 s
}
g T NT A C
- \
A E WC A
' y L F L R m ql J E U WS N o
/\
- D Q@ R m - N A
12 w
- L N D
/ ,
E M
m l
% +< -
m r QMy .
m L
%n w o
\
E.
R I
lA M
A r N l T D T A e ny O T
lA PM R
g n
o hy IP R
C I I DP NR OE R
t.
H O
G E
U R
T T P
R E
TF R
OY FR
,A M e p y
S F1 E
G I T TA AW T
N O
C N U A H
T A
W CI NA I D O
I I G R ALSL T M T F)R1.' P zy T S PS I N II E CETO O ES DRL ET0" iEP' RE 0 ! RA" g
I t
O STRP) I Et LA TAP
- SY .
'g, # ._ P I D SORRSnF PEE AWk" W
E ,N o
E INHNu M S G N
EGVTMLT NLNI AAOU DEI DV" NTL' TOT Wo y
L y t.
l P
A M
0BI LWE PO l I P fCPTWTOS AUI SASCP l
Tl i ARPRV R
IAaT" i
DRS" LATE L
E WI L.KO EOu Sc a
TA" u g S SCSE( UAB IM( E 1 WHc M E. T t
PN MI AO A
2235 1 10 992 4 5 1 345 44 1 1 1 n E SP 1
! T"v
?v u/
o o
in A
/
N E.
I P
M A
S R
E T
A W W R
t r
A R
t
/nh/ T S G T
O F E T,. A 7
O C C f
A I
K W
]
]
) r R E P
F K
t i
J L
L WV / HSU R D
t W
1 O
SECTION V - H DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING
- 2. Sampling and Analytical Techniques (continued)
- d. Procedure Gross alpha and gross beta activities are determined first by evaporating one liter of the I sample on a hotplate. The residue is mounted and dried on a 2-inch stainless steel planchet.
sample is counted in a low background, gas flow The proportional counter. Self-absorption corrections are made on the basis of sample weight.
Gamma analysis is performed on water rample by loading one liter of sample into a one liter marinelli container and counting on a Ge(Li) gamma spectrometry system.
Strontium-89 and 90 are determined on water samples by a procedure similar to that described in V.C.2 except that the leaching step is eliminated.
Cobalt-60 is determined with a sensitivity of 1 pCi/1 by evaporating 2 liters of sample on a I hotplate and transferring the residue to a 2-inch planchet. The planchet is counted on a Ge(Li) spectrometry system.
Tritium is determined in water sampics by converting 2 ml of the sample to hydrogen and counting the activity in a 1 liter low level gas counter which is operated in the proportional range in anti-coincidence mode.
I g -u1
SECTION V - H DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANT 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report I V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING
- 3. Results and Conclusions A summary of results of all analyses of water samples (surface, drinking, and ground) are provided by sample type and analysis in Table V.A.3. These are discussed below.
- a. Surface Water
. A total of seventy-two (72) samples were each analyzed for gross alpha, gross beta, and gamma activity. Twenty-four (24) quarterly composited samples were analyzed for tritium (H-3) and radiostrontium (Sr-89 and Sr-90) as well as a high sensitivity analysis for Co-60.
No alpha or Sr-89 were detected in surface water
.I during CY 1981. All beta activities were within normal range. Other than the naturally occurring radionuclide of TH-228 which was detected in two samples, the only other gamma emitter detected was Co-60 at 9.18 i 4.19 pCi/1 in a BVPS discharge sample composited for February. This is a very low-level activity and is less than 10% of the Environmental Technical Specification Reporting Level. The activity is attributed to an unusually high sediment content contained in the sample. See Section V.C.3, Monitoring of Sediments and Soils.
Co-60 was not detected in any other downstream surface water or drinking water sample during the same period of time.
The tritium levels in Beaver Valley Power Station outfall were elevated above preoperational levels during the first, second, and fourth quarters, but none of these data suggests detectable increases I
over preoperational levels downstream of the station. The tritium activity at the Beaver Valley Power Station outfall is consistent with station data of authorized radioactive discharges from Beaver Valley Power Station and were well within limits permitted by NRC license.
I
-112-
L y SECTION V - H DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY L ,
1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report I V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING L
- 3. Results and Conclusions (continued)
A trace amount of Sr-90 was detected in a fourth quarter downstream sample. The result of 0.73 y 0.71 pCi/ liter is only slightly above the minimum
[ detectable activity of 0.5 pCi/ liter. This positive result could not be attributed to station discharges. The result may be attributed to expected variability in the analyses results of very low levels of activity or to fallout from the Chinese nuclear test. ;
No detectable increase in radioactivity in the Ohio River can be attributed to Shippingport Atomic Power Station since it did not discharge
{ radioactive liquids during 1981.
- b. Drinking Water A total of twenty-four (24) samples were analyzed for gross alpha and gross beta. All results were within preoperational data ranges.
A total of eight (8) samples were analyzed for tritium (H-3), radiostrontium (Sr-89 and Sr-90),
detected.
No Sr-89, Sr-90, or Co-60 were The tritium data were within the preoperational range indicative of normal environmental levels.
A total of another one-hundred and four (104) samples were analyzed by gamma spectrometry. No
( gamma emitting radionuclides were detected by these analyses.
{ A total of one hundred and four (104) samples were analyzed for radioiodine (I-131) using a highly sensitive technique. A detectable level of I-131 p was measured in one (1) weekly sample collected on L July 21, 1981, at Midland. The result of 0.23 pCi/ liter for this sample is only slightly above the minimum detectable activity of 0.2 pCi/ liter.
[ This positive result could not be attributed to station discharges. The result may be attributed to expected variability in the analyses results .of very ]cw levels of activity. In addition, surface
{- water analysis for the same period did not indicate the presence of (I-131).
[
E
-113-F -
y SECTION V - H DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY
[ 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report
[ V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING L
- 3. Results and Conclusions (continued)
I L c. Well Water A total of sixteen (16) samples were each analyzed
[ for gross alpha, gross beta, tritium and by gamma spectrometry. No alpha activity was detected in any of the samples. The gross beta and tritium E data are within preoperational ranges. In one L . sample the naturally occurring gamma emitter thorium was detected.
- d. Summary The data from water analyses demonstrate that
{ neither Beaver Valley Power Station Shippingport Atomic Power Station contributed a nor significant increase of radioactivity in local
{ river, drinking or well waters. The few positive results which could be attributable to authorized releases from Beaver Valley Power Station are characteristic of the effluent.
[ These results confirm that the station assessments, prior to authorizing radioactive discharges, are adequate and that the environmental monitoring program is
{ sufficiently sensitive.
Further, the maximum detected activity attributable p to Beaver Valley Power Station was only a small L fraction (0.46%) of the concentrati'.n (averaged over a year) permitted by the Federal Regulations for water consumed by the public. The Ohio River
[ further reduced this concentration prior to its potential use by members of the public.
E
[
[
[
[
-114-F ,
L.,
~
l SECTION V - I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report
~
V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING u
I. Estimates of Radiation Dose to Man r
c 1. Pathways to Man - Beaver Valley Power Station r a. Calculational Models - Beaver Valley Power Station l
The radiation doses to man as a result of Beaver Valley operations were calculated for both gaseous I and liquid effluent pathways using NRC computer codes X0QD0Q2, GASPAR, and LADTAP. Dose factors listed in Beaver Valley Power Station Environmental p Technical Specifications were used to calculate L doses to maximum individuals from radioactive noble gases in discharge plumes. Beaver Valley effluent data, based on sample analysis in accordance with L the schedule set forth in Appendix B of the BVPS license, were used as the radionuclide activity input.
F L Each radionuclide contained in the semi-annual effluent report format of Regulatory Guide 1.21 was p considered. Certain radionuclides which were not L detected in the effluents were not included in dose calculations when the inventory of such nuclides available for discharge was judged to be
{ negligible. As a result, only noble gases, radioiodines, strontium, and tritium were included as source terms based on the lower detectable F limits of analysis (all sensitivities for analysis L at Beaver Valley were equal to or better than required by the Beaver Valley license).
( All gaseous effluent releases, including Auxiliary Building Ventilation, were included in dose assessments. The release activities are based on
{ laboratory analysis. When the activity of noble gas was below detection sensitivity, either the inventory based on its MDL or an appropriate but p conservative ratio to either measured activity of L Kr-85 or Xe-133 was used. Meteorological data collected by the Beaver Valley Power Station Meteorology System was used as input to X0QD0Q2
[ which in turn provided input for GASPAR. Except when more recent or specific data was available, all inputs were the same as used in the Beaver Valley Power Station Environmental Statements or in
{. Regulatory Guide 1.09. The airborne pathways evaluated were beta and gamma doses from noble gas p plumes inhalation, the " cow-milk child", and other L ingestion pathways.
E C
-115-F _ - - - - _ - - -
l t
SECTION V - I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY
{ 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report
[ V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING L
- a. Calculational Models - Beaver Valley Power Station (continued)
All potentially radioactive liquid effluents, including steam generator blowdown, are released by i
{ batch mode after analysis by gamma spectrometry using a GeLi detector. Each batch is diluted by j
I cooling tower blowdown water prior to discharge
{ into the Ohio River at the Beaver Valley Power Station outfall (River Mile 35.0) The actual data from these analyses are tabulated and used as the r radionuclide activity input ter= in LADTAP. The L maximum individual for liquid pathways is located at Midland. Except when more recent or specific data for the period is available, all other input
{ to LADTAP are obtained from the Beaver Valley Power Station Environmental Statement or Regulatory Guide 1.109. Pathways, which were evaluated, are
[ drinking water, fish consumption, shoreline L recreation, swimming, and boating.
- 2. Results of Calculated Radiation Dose to Man - Beaver
[ Valley Power Station Liquid Releases
- a. Liquid Pathway - Maximum Individual The doses which are calculated, based on the model presented above in V.I.1, are summarized and p compared to Beaver Valley Power Station license L limits below. An additional breakdown of these doses by pathway and organ is provided in Table V.I.l. For these calculations, a hypothetical
{ maximum individual (s) was located at Midland since this is the nearest location which significant exposure of a member of the public could
{ potentially occur.
E i
[
[
[ -116-F _ _ - --
M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M M TABLE V.I.1 um 1981 Radiation Dose to Maximum Individualamrem /yr. $
Beaver Valley Power Station - Liquid Releases d O
CRITICAL USAGE W110LE i PATIIWAY GROUP FACTOR SKIN ORGAN TIIYROID BONE BODY g Fish Consumption Adult 21 kg N/A 0.0409 0.00088 0.0254 0.0292 (Liver)
Drinking Water Infant 510 1 N/A 0.013 0.0178 0.00289 0.0104 (Liver)
G Shoreline Activities Teen 67 hr. 0.0019 -- -- --
0.0016 $
- s TOTAL MREM 0.0019 0.0476 0.0178 0.0335 0.0358 @
H CRITICAL (Teen) (Adult) (Infant) (Child) (Adult) es INDIVIDUAL (Liver) @' ,@
Se
,'. DOSE TO INDIVIDUALS DURING 1981 FROM NATURAL RADIATION EXPOSURE $M
~
a RC Ambient Gamma Radiation: 69 $@
m Radionuclides in Body : 18" QQ Global Fallout : 4" to TOTAL mrem 91 R
" Located at Midland Drinking Water Intake @'
b Child - Usage Factor 6.9 kg/yr.
h
" Adult - Usage Factor 730 1/yr.
Pre-operational average ambient gamma radiation g
- National Academy of Sciences, "The Effects on Populations of Exposure to Low Levels of E Ionizing Radiation", BEIR Report, 1972. <
s
SECTION V - I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING
{
- 2. Results of Calculated Radiation Dose to Man - Beaver Valley Power Station Liquid Releases (continued)
Actual Doses (mrem /yr.) -
Calculated Using Site Effluents Appendix I
- Analysis Dose - Calculated Using
( NRC Model Effluents Regulatory Limit Doses - NRC Staff Guidelines RM50-2 Appendix I
{ Calculated Report (Con- RM50-2 (Re. Ratio of (1.21 Re- servative Limit w/o Calculated ported Re- Non-accident Cost / Benefit Dose vs.
[ leases Doses) Analysis) Reg. Limit TOTAL BODY
[ Adult 0.0358 2.78 5.0 0.00716 Toen 0.0199 0.712 5.0 0.00398 Child 0.0134 Not Reported 5.0 0.00268
[. Infant 0.0104 Not Reported 5.0 0.00208 ANY ORGAN
[ 0.0476 Adult Not Reported 5.0 0.00952 (Liver)
Teen 0.045 Not Reported 0.009
{ (Liver) 5.0 Child 0.0439 Not Reported 5.0 0.00878 (Liver)
[ Infant 0.0178 Not Reported 5.0 0.0026 (Thyroid)
( Maximum Total Body Dose - Capsule Summary mrem 1981 Calculated 0.0358 Appendix I Estimated 2.78 Final Environmental Statement 0.112 Thyroid Dose - (Largest Expected Organ Dose)
( 1981 Calculated 0.0178 Final Environmental Statement 0.96
{
[
[
-118-
~
SECTION V - I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report I V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING I 2. Results of Calculated Radiation Dose to Man - Beaver Valley Power Station Liquid Releases (continued)
I b. Population Doses The 1981 calculated dose to the entire population I
of almost 4 million people within 50 miles of the plant was:
Largest Isotope Man-Millirem Contributors TOTAL BODY 79.9 H-3 70.8 mrem Co-60 3.5 mrem CS-137 3.2 mrem THYR 0iD 95.0 H-3 70.8 mrem I-131 22.6 mrem I The estimated quarterly dose in the NRC Final Environmental Statement is 104 Man-Millirem.
Calculated Dose is less than the background annual The I dose received by two (2) people of the 4 million people evaluated.
population is less The increased dose to this than 0.0001% of normal background dose already received.
- 3. Airborne Pathway - (Beaver Valley Power Station)
I The doses to the public for Beaver Valley Power Station airborne radioactive effluents during 1981 are provided in Table V.I.2. They include the contribution of all I pathways. Tritium is contribution to these doses.
the prinary radionuclide The data demonstrate compliance with 10CFR50, Appendix I design objective limits.
- 4. Conclusions - (Beaver Valley Power Station)
I The calculated doses to the public from the operation of Beaver Valley Power Station - Unit NO. 1 are below 10CFR50, Appendix I design objectives, and resulted in I only a small incremental dose to that which area residents already received as a result of natural background the doses constituted no meaningful risk to the public.
I I
-119- i
)
7 CM~
~
R R I (___J l l W T7 R R TR f~Ul f l f 1 .T (___J vs TABLE V.I.2 d e
Results of Calculated Radiation Dose to Man (1981) <
Beaver Valley Power Station - Airborne Radioactivity APPENDIX I* 50-MILE MAXIMUM EXPOSURE DESIGN OBJECTIVE PERCENT OF POPULATION DOSE g ORGAN INDIVIDUAL, mrem mrem APPENDIX I man rem oo a
6 TOTAL BODY 0.4081 5 8.16% 0 412 -
EE 1.43 R
o is SKIN 1.130 15 7.53% g en i h LUNG 0.413 -- --
0.44 h
? wR TIIYROID 2.922 -- --
0.922 ko a i5 !
E$
8 a
CD l
~
b N
H
SECTION V - I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY
{ 1981 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING
{
- 5. Dose Pathways to Man - Shippingport Atomic Power Station
[ The radiation doses to man as a result of operations at the Shippingport Atomic Power Station during 1981 were calculated for the liquid and gaseous effluent pathways.
{ There were no radioactive liquid discharges from the Shippingport Atomic Power Station during 1981.
{ Effluent monitoring at the Shippingport Station during 1981 has shown that the radioactivity releases were substantially below the Federal radioactivity concentration guides. The environmental monitoring
[ program has demonstrated that the radiation exposure to the general public from the Shippingport Station operations was too low to measure and could only be
{, estimated with the calculational models described below using measured or estimated effluent radioactivity data.
I
[ a. Calculational Models -
Shippingport Atomic Pcwer L Station The radiation doses to man from Shippingport Atomic h Power Station operations were estimated using calculational models recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection
{ (ICRP Publ. 2, 1959) and employ the general guidelines of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Regulatory Guide 1.109) established to maintain compliance with 10CFR50 Appendix I.
The air dose pathways considered were inhalation, immersion in gaseous and suspended particulate
( activity, and the ingestion of food and milk produced in the Shippingport vicinity. It was conservatively assumed that food products consumed
{ by the public were produced in the Shippingport area throughout CY 1981. The maximum potentially exposed individual for the air pathways was located at the site boundary. It was conservatively assumed that the maximum individual resides continually at the site boundary.
[ -
[
[ -121-T _ - - - - -
SECTION V - I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY l 1981 Annual Radiological Environm::ntal Report V. E_NVIRONMENTAL MONITORING l
- 5. Dose Pathways to Man - Shippingport Atomic Power Station (continued)
~
Modeling parameters and usage factors used in the pathway calculations were consistent with values recommended by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC Regulatory Guide 1.109 ) .. The population distribution within 50 miles of the site was based on census data as provided in the LWBR Program Environmental Impact Statement (ERDA 1541).
,I Furtherrore, the air pathway calculation employed site-specific meteorological and wind direction data. ,
- 6. Results and Conclusions -
Shippingport Atomic Power Station Evaluation of the radiation dose-to-man calculations for the airborne effluents show that the maximum annual radiation exposure potentially received by an individual l residing at the site boundary is less than 0.1 mrem.
5 The maximum dose to an individual is well below the 10CFR50 Appendix I dose limits. Furthermore, the radiation exposure to the entire population of 4 million persons within 50 miles of the Shippingport Station was less than 1 person-rem. This dose is negligible
- compared to the typical general use of more than 360,000
- person-rem received by all individuale from typical background radiation.
- 3 In conclusion, the radiation exposure received from the
!E Shippingport Station during CY 1981 by any member of the general public is a very small fraction of the background radiation and has, therefore, no significant effect on the general public.
I
-m-
- I ,
L DISTRIBUTION LIST United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (18 copies) p Attn: Mr. D. A. Chaney, Project Manager L Operating Reactors Branch No. 1 Division of Licensing c/o Document Control Desk
{ Washington, DC 20555 Mr. R. C. Haynes, (2 copies)
Regional Administrator
{. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 Mr. P. S. Duncan, Secretary Department of Environmental Resources
{ Commonwealth of Pennsylvania South Office Building Harrisburg, PA 17105 Mr. C.K. Gaddis, Manager United States Department of Energy p Pittsburgh Naval Reactors Office L Post Office Box 109 Pittsburgh, PA 15122-0109
{ Admiral K. R. McKee Deputy Assistant Secretary for Naval Reactors United States Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 Mr. D. E. Patterson, Acting Director Division of Operational and Environmental Safety l United States Department of Energy '
Washington, DC 20013
{ United States Department of Energy Headquarters Library Washington, DC 20013 United States Department of Energy Technical Information Center Post Office Box 62
( Oak Ridge, TN 37830 J.M. Arthur
{ Chairman of the Board Duquesne Light Company 435 Sixth Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15219 -
[
[
E -
r L
DISTRIBUTION LIST (continu;d)
S. G. Schaffer President Duquesne Light Company
{ 435 Sixth Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15219 .
J. J. Carey Vice President - Nuclear Duquesne Light Company
( P.O. Box 4 Shippingport, PA 15077
{ E. J. Woolever Vice President, Nuclear Construction Division p Duquesne Light Company L 435 Sixth Avenue j Pittsburgh, PA 15219
{ H. A. VanWassen Project Manager, Beaver Valley Power Station Duquesne Light Company
{ 435 Sixth Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15219 J. D. Sieber Manager, Nuclear Safety & Licensing Department Duquesne Light Company 435 Sixth Avenue
{ Pittsburgh, PA 15219 S. L. Pernick
[ Manager of Environmental Affairs L Duquesne Light Company 435 Sixth Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15219 C. E. Ewing Manager, Quality Assurance
{ Duquesne Light Company Beaver Valley Power Station P.O. Box 186 Shippingport, PA 15077 W. F. Wirth Director Radiological Safety Programs Duquesne Light Company Beaver Valley Power Station P.O. Box 4
[ Shippingport, PA 15077 1
l l . .. .. .
- - - - - -