ML20082T739
| ML20082T739 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1992 |
| From: | WOLF CREEK NUCLEAR OPERATING CORP. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20082T694 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9505040151 | |
| Download: ML20082T739 (19) | |
Text
,..
~
r l
e-I NTRODUCTION The 1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report for Wolf Creek Generating Staten (WCGS) covers the period from January 1 through December 31,1992. WCGS is located in Coffey County, Kansas, approximately five miles northeast of Burlington, Kansas.
Fuel loading comrrenced at WCGS on March 12, 1985. The opersbonal phase of the Radiological i
Environmental Monitoring Program began on May 22,1985 with initial criticality and the first detectable l
quantities of radioactivity were reported in plant effluents in June 1985.
l This report contains a hy'uun of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) _
conducted by Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation (WCNOC), results of sample analyses performed by Teledyne isotopes, a discussion of monitoring program results, a h vuon of revisions j
to and deviations from the program, and comments on the results of the Environmental Protecton Agency (EPA) Interlaboratory Comparison Program. Individual sample results and a summary of t
results in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Branch Technical Position specified format are i
included as appendices to the report.
l i
No radiological effects of plant operations were detected in airbome particulate and radioiodine filters,
-i fish, irrigated crops, milk, ground water, or drinking water.
l l
Cs-137.was detected on one broadleaf vegetation sample during 1992. The data suggest that the l
l activity did not originate from WCGS operations. Cs-137 was also detected in one fish sample l
obtained from Wolf Creek Cooling Lake (WCCL) during 1992. The fish sample is discussed further in l
Secten II, Discussion of Results.
l During 1992, activation products were detected in aquatic plants and algae, surface water, shoreline l
i I
soil, and bottom sediment samples.
No measurable impact on human exposure due to plant operation was seen for the year.
.i
-l i
l i
I t
I 9505040151 950426 l
PDR ADOCK 05000482 R
)
1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Wolf Creek Generating Station Page 1 of 51 REV 4/95
L PROGRAM DESCRIPTION Radiological environmental samples were collected according to the schedule in Sechon 5.0 and Table l
5-1 of the WCGS Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM). All samples were collected by WCNOC's Environmental Management and Radiological Services Groups. The samples were processed and analyzed by Teledyne isotopes of Westwood, New Jersey. Table 1 lists sampling pathways and frequencies of sampling and analysis. Table 2 lists each sample location's distance and direction from the plant. Samples in addition to those required by the WCGS ODCM were obtained in conjunction with the Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) and to monitor additional parameters.
The following is a description of the sampling and analysis program by individual pathways. Deviations are permitted from the required sampling schedule if specimens are not attainable due to hazardout conditions, seasonable unavailability, malfunction of automatic sampling equipment, and other legitimate reasons. Deviations from the routine sampling schedule and other problems encountered during the year are described in Section IV, Program Deviations.
A. Airborne:
Low volume air sampling pumps continuously collected particulate and radioiodine samples on 47 mm glass fiber filters and charcoal canisters, respectively. Weekly, the filters and charcoal canisters are changed out, labeled, and then shipped to Teledyne isotopes for analysis. The volume of air sampled was calculated from the average of initial and final flow rates and the total time of collection. Each pump is equipped with a time totalizer that is checked weekly against the elapsed time.
Gross beta analysis of the air particulate samples were performed approximately 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> post collection to allow the radon and thoron daughter products to decay, Each filter was mounted on a stainless steel planchette and counted on an automatic alpha-beta counter.
Weekly air particulate filters were combined into quarterly composites for each location and analyzed for gamma emitting isotopes on a Ge(Li) detector.
Charcoal canisters were routinely counted in groups of five to determine the presence or absence of I.
131. Positive indication of I-131 would have resulted in analysis of each individual charcoal canister.
Air Samples were collected from the three sectors with the highest ground level deposition constants (D/Q), the community of New Strawn, and a control location. Distances and directions to sampling locations from the plant site are listed in Table 2; locations are shown in Figure 1 (nearby locations) and Figure 5 (distant locations).
B. Direct Radiation:
The thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) used during 1992 were provided by Teledyne Isotopes.
The TLDs consisted of rectangular Teflon wafers impregnated with CaSO4:Dy. Prior to placement in the field, the dosimeters were annealed for at least one hour at 250 to 260 degrees Centigrade. The TLDs are then placed in polyethylene pouches and holders containing 0.093 inch thick copper shields to filter out low energy radiation. Freshly annealed dosimeters were exchanged with exposed dosimeters and the exposed dosimeters are shipped to Teledyne isotopes for analysis. Four freshly annealed TLDs are shipped as controls with the exposed TLDs to record any exposure received in transit.
1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Wolf Creek Generating Station Page 2 of 51 REV 4/95
gamma isotopic analyses were performed on each sample. The control location is illustrated on Figure 5.
Broadleaf vegetation samples were collected monthly during the growing season from four gardens.
The three indicator gardens (two regular and one attemate) were identified in the 1991 Land Use Census as having the highest historical D/Q constants (Figure 4). In addition, a control garden was sampled (Figure 5). Gamma isotopic analysis was performed on all samples.
Irrigated crops (soybeans and com) were also sampled. Three samples were obtained from cropland downstream of the confluence of Wolf Creek Cooling Lake effluents and the Neosho River (indicator) and two samples were obtained upstream (control). However, due to high rainfall amounts in the region during 1992, no irrigation from the Neosho river occurred during 1992. The samples were still obtained to serve as baseline data and to continue contact with local landowners. Gamma isotopic analysis was performed on each sample.
Fish are sampled from the tail waters of JRR (control) and from Wolf Creek Cooling Lake semiannually for gamma isotopic analysis (Figure 4). Several recreationally important species and rough species are sampled. Gamma isotopic analysis is performed on boneless meat portions of the fish.
Game animals and fowl are sampled annually in the immediate vicinity of the plant and at a control location that is remote from the site. Gamma isotopic analysis is performed on boneless meat portions of the game.
All sampling locations listed in this section are outlined in Table 2.
1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Wolf Creek Generating Station Page 4 of 51 REV 4/95
i H. Discussion of Results Analysis results for all pathways are summarized in Appendix A using the format described in NRC Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position, Revision 1, November 1979. Results for individual samples are listed in Appendix B.
In this section, results are discussed by pathway and analysis type. Operational results are related to controls, preoperational data, sources of radioactivity, ara effluent releases when applicable. Trends or seasonal effects are discussed. Tables 1 through 16 illustrate results of interest for 1992.
Associated errors for positive results may be obtained in Appendix B.
A. Airborne Results of the weekly gross beta analysis are summarized in Table 3.
Figure 6 illustrates a plot of weekly gross beta indicator to control (1/C) ratios for 1992. The 1992 average indicator to control ratio was 107%. Figure 8 illustrates a historical plot of the gross beta 1/C ratios and includes a smoothed average trend. Although the smoothed average has a very slight increasing trend, the Gross Beta values for the time period are consistent with expected background and suggest that the slightly increasing 1/C ratios are a result of changing environmental conditions.
For instance, Figure 7 illustrates a slightly decreasing trend for location 40 (airbome sample control location) since 1989. Decreasing control values would tend to increase the 1/C ratio over time. In addition, no radioiodine has been detected since 1989. Therefore, the slight increase in gross beta 1/C ratios is due to a slight decrease in control location gross beta values over time and is not due to plant operations. It is also interesting to note that the smoothed plot (Figure 7) shows a definite seasonal cyclic trend in which gross beta values peak in the winter months (December or January) and decrease to a low point in the spring months (May or June).
Figure 9 illustrates a historical plot of average weekly indicator and control gross beta values during plant operations.
Table 4 summarizes the gamma analyses of 1992 airbome particulate filter quarterly composites. The table shows that only natural radioisotopes Be-7 and K-40 were detected.
No effects of plant operation were seen via air samples during 1992.
B. Direct RadiatiOD 1992 quarterly gamma exposures for each location are summarized in Tables 5 and 6. Values are normalized to a standard 90 day quarter. Figure 10 shows the nearsite TLD data expressed as a l
percentage of the control data. Results from TLDs located near the plant site (<3 miles distant) have been combined into quarterly averages. Note that nearsite TLD locations have historically trended higher than the control locations both prior to and after WCGS became operational. Figure 11 shows the historical quarterly average values expressed in mrem / std 90 day quarter for both nearsite and controllocations.
In addition, Figure 12 illustrates a comparison of wind frequency data to TLD exposure data for 1992.
All TLD data for each sector was averaged for the year..
No correlation between wind frequency / direction and TLD exposures is apparent from the data.
1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Wolf Creek Generating Station Page 5 of 51 REV 4/95
~
4 No changes to area gamma exposure rates as a result of plant operations were identified.
C. Waterbome:
(1) Drinking Water:
j Results of drinking wa+.er gamma isotopic analyses are summarized in Table 7.
No tritium was detected in drinking water samples during 1992. Figure 15 illustrates the historical drinking water gross beta data through 1992. The composite sample for May 2 through June 6 had elevated gross beta results. The indicator and control location both displayed elevated values suggesting that the elevated values are not related to plant operations. No cause has been identified. No other nuclides were identified during 1992.
No av.ivity due to plant operations were evident in drinking water samples during 1992.
1 (2) Surface Water:
Surface water data is summarized in Table 8.
Potassium-40 and tritium were the only nuclides identified in surface water samples during 1992. Figure 13 illustrates smoothed tritium data for Wolf Creek Cooling Lake (WCCL) from startup in May 1985 through 1992 for locations DC and SP and the cumulative curies of tritium released to WCCL. Tritium values have been declining recently and the declining trend may be due to high precipitation during 1992. Significant discharge from WCCL occurred during 1992 as a result of precipitation. The increased precipitation allowed some dilution or replacement (with nontritiated water) of the tritiated water inventory in WCCL. The region had experienced a prolonged drought during the previous 2 to 3 years. Little discharge from WCCL occurred during the dry period. Note that the tritium levels are well below the 20,000 pCi/ liter reporting limit for drinking water sources and the 30,000 pCi/ liter limit for other water sources. Figure 14 illustrates the same smoothed tritium data for WCCL except quarterly tritium effluent discharges are plotted. A possible correlation between quarterly discharge levels and lake levels could be inferred from the data. Future data may shed further light on the possible correlation.
(3) Ground Water:
i No gamma emitters or tritium were detected in ground water samples during 1992. A summary of results is included in Table 9.
(4) Shoreline Sediment:
Naturally occurring nuclides Ra-226, Th-228, and K-40 were detected in shoreline sediment samples during 1992. Co-60 was detected in samples obtained from the discharge cove (DC). The cobalt activity is attributable to plant operations. Cs-137 activity was detected in two samples from the discharge cove and in a control sample from John Redmond Reservoir. Since Cs-134 was not detected, the activity is probably due primarily to fallout. (Cs-134 has a shorter half-life than Cs-137, and it would be expected that Cs-134 would be present if this activity was derived from a newly produced fission product.) Analysis results are summarized in Table 11.
D. Inaestion:
(1) Milk:
No indicator locations for milk were available for sampling during 1992 (see Program Deviation section for explanation). A control sample was routinely obtained for analysis. All milk samples analyzed contained K-40 at levels consistent with preoperational data. The yearly average K-40 concentration was 1358 pCi/ liter. Table 15 summarizes milk analysis results for 1992.
l j
1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Wolf Creek Generating Station Page 6 of 51 REV 4/95
No other gamma emitters were detected.
(2) Food and Garden Crops:
Gamma analyses of broadleaf vegetation samples during 1992 revealed naturally occurring gamma j
emitters Be-7, K-40 and Th-228.
Cs-137 was detected in one broadleaf vegetation sample during 1992 at 12 pCi/kg. The sample was obtained July 28 at location R-1. This amount of Cs-137 is attributed to fallout. The range of fallout Cs-137 detected during preoperational studies was 13.1 to 47.8 pCi/kg. In addition, no Cs-137 was detected in airbome effluents from WCGS during the second or third quarters of 1992. No Cs-134 (half-life = 2.05 years) was detected and its presence wouki aido be expected if the Cs-137 (half-life =
30.2 years) were due to plant operations. Due to the relatively short half-life of Cs-134 one would expect Cs-134 to be present if the source was nearby, whereas Cs-134 would decay away if the I
source is relatively distant or if a significant amount of time has passed since its release. Broadleaf vegetation results are summarized in Table 13.
No additional gamma emitters were detected in breedicaf vegetation samples during the remainder of the year.
Crop samples were obtained from lands normally iq$ated by the Neosho river below the outfall of WCCL. However, due to adequate precipitation during :992, no irrigation was needed. The samples were still obtained to continue Wolf Creek's relationship with local landowners and to continue to l
establish baseline values. Results of crop analyses are sumnearized in Table 14.
No nuclides were detected which were attributable to plant operab0ns.
(3) Fish:
Analysis results are illustrated in Table 16. Naturally occurring K-40 was detected in all fish samples.
l Cs-137 was detected in a catfish sample obtained April 7 at 19 pCi/ kilogram (wet weight). Fallout Cs-I 137 also is regularly detected in bottom sediment samples from both WCCL and JRR (control). (See discussion of bottom sediment sample results in the Special Samples portion of the report.) A portion of the Cs-137 activity detected in WCCL bottom sediments is probably attributable to Cs-137 fallout and a portion may be due to plant operations. Catfish species are predominantly bottom dwellers and feeders and would be a good candidate species for uptake of activity that has settled out in sediments.
Although fallout Cs-137 may have contributed to the Cs-137 accumulation in the fish, the Cs-137 activity is assumed to be attributable to plant operations for the dose calculation below.
A dose calculation ftr a hypothetical individual yields an annual dose of 0.045 mrem from the measured value for Cr 137. (Assuming 16 kg per year ingestion rate from Regulatory Guide 1.109, g
critical age group = teen, critical organ = liver). Currently, WCCL is closed to the public for recreational fishing and therefore no known pathway to man currently exists.
No other radionuclides were detected in fish during the year.
1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report
?!olf Creek Generating Station Page 7 of 51 REV 4/95
l 3-l l
1 E. Special Samples (not taquired by the M ODCM)-
(1) Game Animals and Birds:
j l
Naturally occuning K40 was detected in all game animal and bird samples in concentratens 1
consistent with preoperatonal levels.
i No other ra1ionuclides were detected and no effects of plant operations were detected in this pathway.
i
- (2) Bottom Sediment:
Table 12 shows gamma ernetters detected during 1992 in bottom sediment samples. Sampling i'
locatons include the Ultimate Heat S;nk (UHS), DC, and JRR. Natural nuclides detected include K-40, Ra-226, and Th-228.
Several other nuclides were detected in bottom sediment samples. A porton of the Cs-137 actnnty detected in WCCL bottom sediments is probably attributable to fallout and a porton is due to plant l
operation since Cs-134 was detected in both DC samples The Cs-137 levels ara only slightly higher than those reported prior to WCGS cntcality and therefore a major porton of the activity is due to l
fallout.
i However, the Mn-54 and Co-60 activity shown in the table ert attnbuted to ' lant operabons and are i
p regularly identified in plant ef!Iuents.
_j i
(3) AquaticVegetation:
l l
Table 10 shows gamma emitters detected during 1992 in aquatic plant samples Be-7 and K40 were
.j detected in all samples collected Ra-226 and Th-228 were identified in some of the samples Algae j
samples proved to accumulate the most detectable activity. Mn-54 Co-58, Co 60, Cs-134, and l
Cs-137 were all detected in at least one of the two algae samples and some were detected in other aquatic plant samples t
I i
i l
l l
1 i
1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Wolf Creek Generating Station Page 8 of 61 REV 4/95
i TABLE 2 SAMPLE LOCATION NUMBERS, DISTANCES (Miles), AND DIRECTIONS Location Distance
/
Locahon Distance i
Locahon Distance
/
Number Direction Number Direction Number Direction TLD and Air Particulates and Radioiodines 1
1.4/N 15 4.5/ESE 29 2.6/SSW 2
2.7/N 16 4.2/E 30 2.2/W
.l l
3 3.0/NNE 17 3.6/SE 31 3.0/WNW 4
4.0/NNE 18 3.2/SSE 32 3.2/WNW f
5 4.0/NE 19 4.0/SSE 33 3.7/WNW
{
6 4.4/ENE 20 3.3/S 34 4.0/N W 7
1.9/NE 21 3.8/S 35 4.6/NNW 8
1.6/NNE 22 4.1/SSW 36 4.2/N 9
2.0/ENE 23 4.5/S W 37 2.1/NNW 10 2.4/ENE 24 4.1/WSW 38 1.2/NW i
11 1.6/E 25 3.6/W 39 13.0/N l
l 12 1.8/ESE 26 2.6/WSW 40
>15.0/WNW 13 1.5/SE 27 2.1/SW 41 0.8/NNW 14 2.6/SE 28 2.8/S W 42 0.8/SSE l
l Ground water Drinking water Surfa water B-12 2.2/NNE BW-15 3.9/S W MUSH 3.6/W C-10 2.8/W LW-40
>10.0/SSE DC 0.6/WNW I
C-49 2.9/S W SP 2.9/S D-65 3.9/S Milk Broadleaf vegetation irrigated Crops S-3
>15.0/WNW A-1 1.4/N NR-U1 4.2/SW R-1 2.1/NNW NR-D1
>10.0/S G-1 1.6/SE NR-D2
>10.0/S S-4
>15.0/WNW Fish Shoreline and Bottom Aquatic Vegetation /
Sediments Algae WCCL 0.6/WNW DC 0.6/WNW DC 0.6/WNW JRR 4/W JRR 4/W UHS 0.6/E Game Birds and Animab WCCL GeneralVicinity Hartford
>15.0!WNW 1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Wolf Creek Generating Station Page 20 of 51 REV 4/95
TABLE 3 1992 Airborne Particulate Gross Beta Analyses (pCi / cubic meter, analysis error reported in Appendix B)
DATE Location WEEK Beginning Ending 2
3 32 37 40 1
12/30/91 1/7/92 0.032 0.031 0.036 0.037 0.035 2
1/7/92 1/14/92 0.024 0.026 0.026 0.024 0.022 3
1/14/92 1/21/92 0.022 0.025 0.027 0.025 0.022 f
4 1/21/92 1/28/92 0.023 0.019 0.024 0.021 0.020 5
1/28/92 2/4/92 0.030 0.028 0.028 0.034 0.027 6
2/4/92 2/11/92 0.016 0.018 0.018 0.021 0.021 7
2/11/92 2/18/92 0.023 0.021 0.019 0.021 0.020 8
2/18/92 2/25/92 0.037 0.029 0.036 0.029 0.028 9
2/25/92 3/3/92 0.026 0.023 0.024 0.025 0.021 10 3/3/92 3/10/92 0.025 0.019 0.023 0.021 0.019 l
11 3/10/92 3/17/92 0.023 0.022 0.024 0.021 0.022 12 3/17/92 3/24/92 0.025 0.018 0.020 0.020 0.023 13 3/24/92 3/31/92 0.023 0.018 0.022 0.022 0.020 14 3/31/92 4/7/92 0.025 0.019 0.022 0.022 0.018 i
15 4/7/92 4/14/92 0.028 0.025 0.026 0.028 0.020 16 4/14/92 4/21/92 0.023 0.020 0.021 0.023 0.019 17 4/21/92 4/28l92 0.023 0.014 0.016 0.019 0.019 18 4/28/92 5/5/92 0.023 0.017 0.022 0.021 0.022 l
19 5/5/92 5/12/92 0.019 0 013 0.018 0.016 0.019 20 5/12/92 5/19/92 0.021 123 0.026 0.022 0.020 21 5/19/92 5/26/92 0.014 0.013 0.011 0.013 0.013 22 5/26/92 6/2/92 0.024 0.017 0.027 0.026 0.025 23 6/2/92 6/9/92 0.021 0.021 0.022 0.020 0.015 24 6/9/92 6/16/92 0.021 0.015 0.021 0.017 0.019 25 6/16/92 6/23/92 0.021 0.017 0.021 0.017 0.017 26 6/23/92 6/30/92 0.024 0.025 0.027 0.025 0.027 27 6/30/92 7/7/92 0.016 0.010 0.019 0.021 0.021 28 7/7/92 7/14/92 0.023 0.021 0.022 0.021 0.024 l
1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Wolf Creek Generating Station Page 21 of 51 REV 4/95
f a
TABLE 3 (cont'd) 1992 Airborne Particulate Gross Beta Analyses (pCi / cubic meter, analysis error reported in Appendix B) r DATE Location WEEK Beginning Ending 2
3 32 37 40 29 7/14/92 7/21/92 0.017 0.018 0.020 0.017 0.019 L
30 7/21/92 7/28/92 0.017 0.019 0.015 0.019 0.018 31 7/28/92 8/4/92 0.026 0.026 0.022 0.026 0.025 32 8/4/92 8/11/92 0.022 0.025 0.023 0.025 0.023 l
33 8/11/92 8/18/92 0.021 0.019 0.024 0.022 0.023 34 8/18/92 8/25/92 0.046 0.021 0.041 0.042 0.040 35 8/25/92 9/1/92 0.029 0.023 0.025 0.026 0.022 36 9/1/92 9/8/92 0.027 0.022 0.022 0.027 0.023 37 9/8/92 9/15/92 0.024 0.015 0.018 0.021 0.015 l
38 9/15/92 9/22/92 0.029 0.018 0.023 0.026 0.021 39 9/22/92 9/29/92 0.018 0.017 0.022 0.023 0.015 40 9/29/92 10/6/92 0.032 0.026 0.037 0.045 0.036 41 10/6/92 10/12/92 0.023 0.023 0.033 0.038 0.030 42 10/12/92 10/20/92 0.024 0.020 0.027 0.030 0.024 43 10/20/92 10/27/92 0.027 0.035 0.040 0.042 0.023 44 10/27/92 11/3/92 0.016 0.017 0.020 0.021 0.021 45 11/3/92 11/10/92 0.023 0.020 0.023 0.024 0.020 46 11/10/92 11/17/92 0.029 0.027 0.023 0.027 0.028 47 11/17/92 11/24/92 0.022 0.023 0.020 0.025 0.020 48 11/24/92 12/1/92 0.036 0.03F 0.037 0.040 0.037 l
49 12/1/92 12/8/92 0.015 0.018 0.021 0.022 0.018 50 12/8/92 12/15/92 0.024 0.023 0.022 0.024 0.023 l
51 12/15/92 12/22/92 0.045 0.050 0.045 0.044 0.039 52 12/22/92 12/29/92 0.030 0.027 0.030 0.033 0.027 1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Wolf Creek Generating Station Page 22 of 51 REV 4/95
TABLE 4 Airborne Particulate Quarterly Composite Gamma Isotopic Analyses (pCil cubic meter, analysis error reported in Appendix B)
LOC YEAR QTR BE-7 K-40 1-131 CS-134 CS-137 2
1992 1
0.0564
<0.02 <
0.003 <
0.0006 < 0.0005 2
1992 2
0.0953
<0.009 <
0.003 <
0.0005 < 0.0005 2
1992 3
0.0859
<0.007 <
0.002 <
0.0004 < 0.0004 2
199
4 0.0486
<0.009 <
0.002 <
0.0005 < 0.0006 3
1992 1
0.0432
<0.01 <
0.003 <
0.0005 < 0.0007 3
1992 2
0.0591 0.0319 <
0.002 <
0.0005 < 0.0005 3
1992 3
0.076
<0.01 <
0.002 <
0.0004 < 0.0005 3
1992 4
0.0448
<0.02 <
0.002 <
0.0005 < 0.0005 32 1992 1
0.0601 0.00827 <
0.003 <
0.0005 < 0.0007 32 1992 2
0.0847
<0.009 <
0.002 <
0.0005 < 0.0004 32 1992 3
0.0925
<0.01 <
0.002 <
0.0005 < 0.0007 32 1992 4
0.0602
<0.02 <
0.003 <
0.0006 < 0.0006 37 1992 1
0.0558
<0.02 <
0.004 <
0.0007 < 0.0007 37 1992 2
0.0904 0.009 <
0.002 <
0.0005 < 0.0004 37 1992 3
0.0802 0.00585 <
0.002 <
0.0004 < 0.0005 37 1992 4
0.0771
<0.007 <
0.002 <
0.0004 < 0.0003 40 1992 1
0.0528
<0.009 <
0.003 <
0.0005 < 0.0005 40 1992 2
0.075
<0.007 <
0.002 <
0.0004 < 0.0003 40 1992 3
0.0745
<0.02 <
0.002 <
0.0007 < 0.0006 40 1992 4
0.049
<0.01 <
0.002 <
0.0005 < 0.0004 i
r 1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Wolf Creek Generating Station Page 23 of 51 REV 4/95
1 j
TABLE 7 1992 Drinking Water Radiological Analyses (pCilliter, analysis error reported in Appendix B)
R SAMPLE COLLECTION 89 3
g g
g g
i g
4 3
4 4
START DATE g
g O
o g
u o
in/92 BW15 8.4
<3
<7
<3
<4
.d
<3
< 0.2
<4
<4
<4 2/4/92 BW15 8.9
<3
<7
<3
<4
<8
<3
< 0.1
<4
<4
<4 3/3/92 BW15 7.7
<3
<7
<3
<3
<7
<4
< 0.1
<4
<4
<4 4/7/92 BW15 7.7
<4
<7
<3
<3 48
<4
< 0.4
<4
<4
<5 5/5/92 BW15 5.6
<4
<8
<4
<4
<8
<4
< 0.7
<4
<4
<5 6/2/92 BW15 15
<3
<6
<3
<3
<8
<3
< 0.7
<4
<4
<4 7/7/92 BW15 6.9
<3
<7
<3
<3
<8
<4
< 0.1
<4
<4
<6 8/4/92 BW15 7.4
<2
<6
<3
<3
<5
<3
< 0.5
<3
<4
<5 9/1/92 BW15 6.9
<4
<9
<5
<5
< 10
<5
<1
<5
<5
<6 i
10/6/92 BW15 4.9
<4
<7
<3
<4
<8
<4
< 0.5 44
<4
<7 11/3/92 BW15 6.8
<3
<6
<3
<3
<6
<3
< 0.5
<3
<3
<3 12/1/92 BW15 7.9
<3
<6
<3
<3
<7
<4
< 0.1
<3
<3
<6
- 1/7/92 LW40 8.5
<3
<7
<3
<3
<7
<3
< 0.3
<4
<4
<4 l
1/7/92 LW40 5.7
<3
<6
<3
<3
<6
<3
< 0.4
<3
<4
<4 2/4/92 LW40 5.9
<4
<9
<4
<4
<9
<4
< 0.1
<5
<5
<5 j
3/3/92 LW40 5.6
<3
<6
<3
<4
<7
<3
< 0.1
<4
<4
<4
- 3/3/92 LW40 4.8
<3
<7
<3
<3
<8
<3
<1
<3
<4
<4 l
4/7/92 LW40 6
<3
<7
<3
<4
<7 44
< 0.5
<4
<4
<4 5/5/92 LW40 5.8
<5
< 10
<5
<5
< 10
<5
< 0.9
<5
<5
<6 6/2/92 LW40 18
<4
<9
<4
<4
<9
<4
< 0.6
<5
<5
<5 7/7/92 LW40 6.9
<5
< 10
<5
<6
< 10
<5
< 0.2
<5
<6
<9 8/4/92 LW40 6.1
<3
<6
<3
<3
<6
<3
< 0.6
<3
<4
<6 9/1/92 LW40 8.6
<3
<7
<3
<4
<7
<3
<1
<3
<5
<6 10/6/92 LW40 6.6
<3
<7
<3
<3
<6
<3
< 0.5
<3
<3
<4 11/3/92 LW40 5.4
<3
<5
<2
<3
<6
<3
< 0.5
<3
<a
<4 12/1/92 LW40 13
<4
<7
<4
<4
<7
<4
< 0.1
<4
<4
<6
- Duplicate Analysis l
1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Wolf Creek Generating Station Page 26 of 51 REV 4/95
a p.
i TABLE 8 1992 Surface Water Radiological Analyses (pCilliter, analysis error reported in Appendix B)
DC 1/21/92 7300
<3
<6
<3
<3
<6
<3
<6
<3
<3
<4 l
DC 2/18/92 6900
<4
<9
<5
<5
< 10
<5
<9
<5
<5
<7 DC 3/17/92 7800
<3
<6
<3
<3
<6
<3
<5
<3
<3
<4 DC 4/21/92 7600
<4
<8
<4
<4
<8
<4
<7
<4
<4
<7 I
DC 5/19/92 6900
<3
<7
<3
<3
<8
<3
<5-
<4
<4
<4 DC 6/23/92 6600
<3
<7
<3
<4
<7
<3
<7
<4
<4
<6 j
j DC 7/21/92 6000
<3
<7
<4
<4
<7
<4
<7
<4
<4
<6 DC 8/18/92 5900
<4
< 10
<4
<5
< 10
<5
< 10
<5
<5
<9 DC 9/15/92 6100
<3
<8
<3
<4
<7
<4
<9
<4
<4
<B I
DC 10/20/92 6400
<5
< 10
<4
<5
< 10
<5
< 10
<5
<5
-<6 DC 11/17/92 6000
<3
<6
<3
<3
<6
<3
<3
<3
<3
<3 DC 12/15/92 6000
<3
<6
<3
<3
<6
<3
<7
<3
<3
<6 MUSH 1/21/92
< 600
<3
<E
<3
<4
<6
<6
<3
<3
<4 l
MUSH
- 1/21/92
<600
<3
<6
<3
<3
<6
<3
<7
<3
<3
<4 MUSH 2/18/92
< 600
<4
<8
<4
<4
<9
<4
<6
<4
<4
<5 l
MUSH 3/17/92
<400
<4
<7
<3
<4
<8
<4
<6
<4
<4
<5 MUSH 4/21/92
< 600
<3
<7
<3
<3
<7
<4
<8
<3
<4
<6 l
MUSH 5/19/92
< 600
<3
<6
<3
<3
<6
<3
<5
<3
<4
<4 MUSH 6/23/92
< 200
<3
<8
<4
<4
<7
<4
< 10
<4
<5
<9 l
MUSH 7/21/92
< 600
<3
<7
<3
<3
<6
<3
<6
<3
<5
<5 MUSH 8/18/92
< 700
<4
<8
<3
<4
<7
<4
<9
<4
<4
<7 MUSH 9/15/92
< 600
<3
<7
<3
<3
<7
<3
<8
<3
<4
<7 I
MUSH 10/20/92
< 700
<3
<7
<3
<3
<7
<3
<7
<3
<4
<7 MUSH 11/17/92
<400
<2
<5
<2
<3
<5
<3
<4
<3
<3
<3 i
MUSH 12/15/92
<400
<2
<6
<2
<3
<5
<3
<6
<3
<3 SP 1/21/92 7200
<4
<8
<4
<4
<8
<4
<8
<4
<5
<5 SP 2/18/92 7200
<4
<7
<4
<4
<8
<4
<7
<4
<4
<5 SP 3/17/92 7000
<3
<7
<3
<4
<7
<4
<6
<4
<4
<5 SP 4/21/92 7900
<3
<8
<4
<4
<7
<4
<8
<4
<4
<6 SP 5/19/92 7000
<4
<9
<4
<4
<9
<4
<7
<5
<5
<5 i
SP 6/23/92 6900
<3
<8
<4
<3
<8
<4
<7
<4
<4
<5 SP 7/21/92 5500
<3
<6
<3
<3
$7
<3
<5
<3
<3
<4 SP 8/18/92 5800
<3
<8
<4
<4
<8
<4
<9
<4
<4
<7 SP 9/15/92 5900
<3
<6
<3
<3
<7
<3
<8
<3
<4
<6 SP' 9/15/92 5900
<4
<B
<4
<3
<7
<4
< 10
<4
<4
<7 I
SP 10/20/92 7100
<4
<8
<3
<4
<8
<4
<7
<4
<5
<6 SP 11/17/92 6500
<3
<7
<3
<4
<7
<3
<4
<4
<4
<4 SP 12/15/92 6700
<3
<6
<3
< 3-
<6
<3
<7
<3
<3
<6
- Duplicate Analysis l
1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Wolf Creek Generating Station Page 27 of 51 REY 4/95
TABLE 9 1992 Ground Water Radiological Analyses (pCl / liter, analysis error reported in Appendix B) l o
g X
5 3
o m
LOCATION DATE 2
i 6
8 f
o o
i
-y g
g a
m o
o g
812 18-Feb-92
< 200
<3
< 6
< 3
< 3
< 6
< 3
< 0.1
<3
< 4
< 3 B12 19-May-92
< 100 < 4
< 8
< 4
< 4
< 8
< 4
< 0.1
< 4
< 4
< 4 B12 18-Aug-92
< 200 < 3
< 7
< 3
< 4
< 8
< 4
< 0.2
< 4
< 4
< 6 B12 17-Nov-92
< 100 < 3
< 6
< 3
< 3
< 6
< 3
< 0.2
< 3
< 3
< 4 C10 18-Feb-92
< 200 < 2
< 5
< 2
< 2
< 5
< 3
< 0.1
< 3
< 3
< 3 C10 19-May-92
< 100 < 6
< 10
< 6
< 7
< 10 < 7
< 0.1
< 7
< 7
< 9 C10 18-Aug-92
< 200 < 3
< 8
< 3
< 3
< 8
< 4
< 0.2
< 4
< 4
< 8 C10 17-Nov-92
< 100 < 3
< 6
< 3
< 4
< 7
< 4
< 0.2
< 4
< 4
< 5 l
C49 18-Feb-92
< 200 < 10
< 20
< 10
< 10 < 20 < 10
< 0.2
< 10
< 10
< 10 C49D*
18-Feb-92
< 200 < 10
< 20
< 10
< 10 < 20 < 10
< 0.2
< 10 < 10
< 10 C49 19-May-92
< 100 < 3
< 6
< 3
< 3
< 6
< 3
< 0.1
< 3
< 4
< 5 C49 18-Aug-92
< 200 < 3
< 8
< 4
< 4
< 7
< 4
< 0.2
< 4
< 4
< 8 C49 17-Nov-92
< 100 < 3
< 7
< 3
< 4
< 8
< 4
< 0.2
< 4
< 4
< 5 D65 18-Feb-92
< 200 < 2
< E
< 2
< 3
< 6
< 3
< 0.1
< 3
< 4
< 4 D65 19-May-92
< 100 < 3
< 7
< 3
< 4
< 7
< 3
< 0.2
< 4
< 4
< 5 D65 18-Aug-92
< 200 < 3
< 7
< 3
< 4
< 6
< 3
< 0.1
< 3
< 4
< 6 D65 17-Nov-92
< 100 < 3
< 6
< 3
< 3
< 7
< 3
< 0.2
< 3
< 3
< 4
- Duplicate Analysis J
TABLE 10 1992 Aquatic Plants Radiological Analyses (pCil g, wet analysis error reported in Appendix B) m o
X 5
N N
s o
^'"
7'"E s
3 g
g g
g g
j 14-Apr-92 DC CATTAll 0.190 3.180 < 0.03
< 0.01
<0.01
< 0.01
< 0,01
< 0.01
< 0.3
< 0.02 19-May-92 DC ALGAE 0.850 1.720 < 0.02 0.015 0.022 0.261 0.050 0.078 0.487 0.155 23-Jun-92 DC AM. LOT 0.433 3.550 < 0.02 < 0.006 < 0.007 <0.007 < 0.008 < 0.007 < 0.100 <0.010 25-Aug-92 DC ALGAE 0.193 1.210 < 0.008 0.006 0.038 0.068 < 0.005 0.013
< 0.07 0.032 22-Sep-92 DC ALT PNDWEED 0.241 1.910 < 0.02 < 0.007 0.015 0.040
<0.008 < 0.008 0.232
< 0.01 i
l 1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Wolf Creek Generating Station Page 28 of 51 REV 4/95
4 TABLE 11 1992 Shoreline Sediment Radiological Analyses (pCil kg dry, analysis error reported in Appendix B) 5 N
o E
I N
N N
LOCATION DATE s
6 o
2 5
9 E
l I
6 o
o o
o e
DC 14-Apr-92
< 300 11,150
< 80
< 40 95
< 50 56 2,700 1,190 4
DC*
< 400 8,530
< 80
< 30
< 60
< 50
< 50 1,590 924 DC 22-Sep-92
< 400 9,550
< 80
< 30 86
< SO 74 1,750 1,030 l
JRR 14-Apr-92
< 400 9,630
< 90
< 40
< 40
< SO 190 1,690 1,250 JRR 22-Sep-92
< 400 9,920
< 90
< 40
< 40
< 60
< 40 3,620 1,510
- Duplicate Ana!ysis l
1 TABLE 12 1992 Bottom Sediment Radiological Analyses (pCil kg dry, analysis error reported in Appendix B) 3 3
3 X
N 2
2 s
a LOCATION DATE s
T 7
T 4
4 I'
E' 8'
8 8
a g
g
=
=
DC 6/23/92
< 400 10,200 53
< 100
< 50 825 244 526 1,610 1,170 DC 9/22/92
< 400 9,500
< 50
< 100
< 40 910 239 483 2,800 1,160 JRR 7/6/92
< 300 17,200
< 30
< 80
< 30
< 30
< SO 223 3,170 1,4'#
JRR 9/22/92
< 400 16,400
< 40
< 90
< 40
< 40
< 50 222 2,020 1,230 l
JRR*
7/6/92
< 400 18,500
< 40
< 90
< 40
< 40
- 10/26/92
< 400 12,300
< 40
< 80
< 30 87
< 40 329 2,250 1,160
)
UHS 10/26/92
< 400 11,800
< 40
< 90
< 30 84
< 50 350 2,390 1,140 j
i l
i
- Duphcate Analysis 1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Wolf Creek Generating Station Page 29 of 51 i
REV 4/95 i
i
- - - m
1 l
d TABLE 13 1992 Broadleaf Vegetation Radiological Analyses (pCil kg, wet, analysis error reported in Appendix B)
DATE TYPE LOC b
I h
2 s
e E
a
=
=
23-Jun~92 SWISS CHARD A-1 298 4,240
<8
< 10
<8
<8
< 100
< 10
{
28-Juk92 SWISS CHARD A-1 935 3,250
<7
< 10
<7
<7
< 100
. 10 25-Au9-92 SWISS CHARD A-1 364 2,900
< 10
< 10
<10
< 10
< 200
< 20 f
22-Sep-92 SWISS CHARD A-1 486 2,450
< 10
< 30
<9
< 10
< 200
< 20
[
27-Oct-92 SWISS CHARD A-1 590 2,950
< 10
< 20
< 10
< 10
< 200
< 20 24 Nov-92 SWISS CHARD A-1 561 1,960
< 10
< 20
< 10
< 10
< 200
< 20 27-May-92 LETTUCE G-1 126 5.010
< 10
< 20
< 10
< 10
< 200
< 20 i
I 23-Jun-92 CABBAGE G-1 421 3,710
<9
< 20
<8
<8
< 200
< 20 28-Jub92 CABBAGE G-1 1,330 3,130
<8
< 10
<8
<9
< 100
< 10 26-May-92 LETTUCE R-1 313 3,930
< 20
< 20
<10
< 10
< 200
< 20 24-Jun-92 LETTUCE R-1 165 5,250
<8
< 10
<8
<8
< 100
< 10 i
28-Juk92 CABBAGE R-1 2,100 5,690
<6
< 10
<6 12
< 100 30 i
26-May-92 LETTUCE S-4 167 4,170
< 10
< 20
< 10
< 10
< 200
< 20 24-Jun-92 CABBAGE S-4 303 3,080
< 10
< 20
<10
< 10
< 200
< 20 28-Jub92 CABBAGE S-4 910 3,420
< 10
< 20
< 10
< 10
< 300
< 30 25-Aug-92 CABBAGE S-4 1,260 2,610
< 10
< 20
< 10
< 10
< 300
< 20 22-Sep-92 SPINACH S-4 333 9,820
< 20
< 40
< 10
< 20
< 200
< 20 TABLE 14 1992 Irrigated Crops Radiological Analyses (pCl / kg, analysis t<rror reported in Appendix B)
DATE TYPE LOC b
h a
U 8
E E
04-Nov-92 SOYBEAN NRD1
< 70 17,500
<8
< 20
<8
<8
< 100
< 10 08-Oct-92 CORN NRD2
< 50 3,160
<7
< 20
<6
<5
< 100
< 10 08-Oct 92 SOYBEAN NRD2
< 6C 16,100
<7
< 30
<6
<6
< 100
<9 16-Oct-92 CORN NRU1
< 50 2,930
<6
< 20
<5
<5
< 90
<9 16-Oct-92 SOYBEAN NRU1 66 16.000
<6
< 20
<6
<6
< 90
<9 20-Oct-92 SOYBEAN At 499 11,100
< 20
< 40
< 20
< 20
< 300
< 30 Soybeans obtained from A1 by special roouest of KDHE 1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Wolf Creek Generating Station Pags 30 of 51 REV 4/95
I
. TABLE 15 1932 Milk Radiological Analyses (pCilliter, analysis error reported in Appendix B)
TYPE DATE l131 K-40 S-137 W -1 @
ERROR l
COW 1/14/92
< 0.2 1,240
+/- 120
<4
<4
<6 l
COW 2/11/92
< 0.2 1,210
+/- 120
<4
<4
<4 COW 3/10/92
< 0.2 1,210
+/- 120
<3
<4
<4 COW 4/14/92
< 0.2 1,180
+/- 120
<4
<4
<7 i
COW 4/14/92*
< 0.4 1,050
+/- 100
<5
<5
<9 COW 4//28/92
< 0.1 1.360
+/- 140
<4
<4
<5 COW 5/12/92
< 0.5 1,300
+/- 130
<4
<4
<4 COW 5/12/92*
< 0.4 1,360
+/- 140
<5
<5
<5 COW 5/27/92
< 0.2 1,330
+/- 130
<4
<4
<4 l
COW r/27/92*
< 0.3 1,280
+/- 130
<4
<5
<4 j
COW 6/9/92
< 0.3 1,280
+/- 130
<4
<4
<7 COW 6/23/92
< 0.2 1,480
+/- 150
<4
<4
<5 l
COW 7/14/92
< 0.1 1,350
+/- 130
<4
<4
<6 COW 7/28/92
< 0.2 1,380
+/- 140
<4
<4
<5 COW 8/11/92
< 0.1 1,300
+/- 130
<3
<4
<4 COW 8/26/92
< 0.1 1,320
+/- 130
<3
<3
<5 COW 9/8/92
< 0.2 1,340
+/- 130
<4
<4
<6 COW 9/22/92
< 0.2 2,000
+/- 200
<7
<6
<8 COW 10/13/92
< 0.2 1,360
+/- 140
<4
<4
<5 COW 10/27/92
<02 1,410
+/- 140
<4
<4
<5 COW 11/10/92
< 0.2 1,390
+/- 140
<4
<5
<5 COW 11/24/92
< 0.4 1,410
+/- 140
<4
<4
<5 COW 12/8/92
< 0.2 1,310
+/- 130
<4
<4
<5
- Duplicate Analysis 1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Wolf Creek Generating Station Page 31 of 51 REV 4/95
J g
TABLE 16 1992 Fish Radiological Analyses (pCII kg wet, analysis error reported in Appendix B)
I DATE SPECIES Location I
I E
8 E
3 3
E o
07-Apr-92 COMMON CARP WCCL 2,340
< 30
< 70
< 30
< 30
< 60
< 30
< 30
< 60 07-Apr-92 CHANNEL CAT WCCL 3,700
< 20
< 40
< 20
< 20
< 30
< 20 19
< 30 i
07-Apr-92 BLACK CRAPPIE WCCL 2,920
< 20
< 40
< 20
< 20
< 40
< 20
< 20
< 30 I
07-Apr-92 WHITE CRAPPIE WCCL 3,370
< 10
< 40
< 20
< 20
< 40
< 20
< 20
< 30 07-Apr-92 WHITE CRAPPIE
- WCCL 3,360
< 10
< 40
< 20
< 20
< 30
< 20
< 20
. < 20 27-May-92 CARP JRR 3,190
< 40
< 100
< 40
< 40
< 100
< 40.
< 40 -
< 60 27-May-92 CATFISH JRR 3,710
< 30
< 60
< 30
< 30
< 50
< 30
< 30
< 50 14-Oct-92 CARP WCCL 2,500
< 30
< 70
< 30
< 30
< 60
< 30
< 40
< 50 14-Oct-92 WIPER WCCL 3,290
< 30
< 60
< 30
< 30
< 60
< 30
< 40
< SO 28-Oct-92 WHITE CRAPPIE JRR 3,860
< 30
< 70
< 20
< 30
< 60
< 30
< 30
< 60 i
284ct-92 LM BASS JRR 3.860
< 20
< 50
< 20
< 30
< 70
< 20
< 20
< 30 l
2&Oct-92 BUFFALO JRR 3,640
< 20
< 50
< 30
< 20
< 50
< 20
< 30
< 40 28-Oct-92 WHITE CRAPPIE
- JRR 3,510
< 20
< 60
< 30
< 30
< 60
< 30
< 30
< 40
- Duplicate Analysis i
e t
l l
1 i
e i
e l
1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Wolf Creek Generating Station Page 32 of 51 REV 4/95 i
- ,. L. ~,.
EG
- WOR,F CREEK NUCLEAR OPERA'I1NG CORPORATION
~$
EXPOSURE PA'IllWAY -1NOEST10N n>
PISH 2@
(pCL/GM WET)
~
aM STA*I1ON NUMBER NR Sa5E CG w0 DA'IE COLIECIED:
10/28 10/28 10/28 10/28*
WHTIE CRAPPIE IBMTH BASS SMMTH BUFFALO WHITE CRAPPIE em EE GAMMA SPECTRUM ANALYSIS:
2-8 BE-7 LT. 3.
E-01 LT.2.
E-01 LT.2.
E-OI LT.3.
E-01 K-40 3.86*0.48 E 00 3.86to.46 E 00 3.6410.41 E 00 3.5110.44E 00 LT. 3.
E-02 LT.2.
E-02 LT.2.
E-02 LT. 2..
E-02 h
MN-54 CO-58 LT.2.
E-02 LT. 2.
E-02 LT.3.
E-02 LT. 3.
E-02
~
O FE-59 LT. 7.
E-02 LT. 5.
E-02 LT. 5.
E-02 LT. 6.
'E-02 l'
LT. 3.
E-02 LT. 3.
E-02 LT.2.
E-02 LT. 3.
E-02
}
CO-60 C ZN-65 LT. 6.
E-02 LT. 7.
E-02 LT. 5.
E-02 LT. 6.
E 02 5
NB-95/ZR-95 LT. 3.
E-02 LT.3.
E-02 LT.2.
E-02 LT. 3.
E-02 x
RU-103 LT.4.
E-02 LT. 3.
E-02 LT.3.
E-02 LT.3.
E-02 LT. 2.
E-01 LT. 2.
E-01 L T. 2.'
E-01 LT.2.
E $
RU-106 3
1-131 LT. 8.
E-02 L T. 6.
E-02 LT.7.
E-02 LT. I.
E-03 CS-134 LT.3.
E-02 LT. 2.
E-02 LT.2.
E-C; LT. 3.
E-02 CS-137 LT. 3.
E-02 LT. 2.
E-02 LT.3.
E-02 LT. 3.
E-02 IA-140/BA-140 LT. 6.
E-02 LT. 6.
E-02 L.T. 4.
E-02 LT.7.
E-02 CE-141 LT. 6.
E-02 LT.3.
E-02 LT. 5.
E LT. 5.
E-02 CE-144 LT.2.
E-01 LT. 1.
E-01,
LT.2.
E-OI LT. 2.
E-01.
RA-226 LT. 6.
E-Ol LT. 4.
E-01 LT. 5.
E-01 LT. 5.
E-01 TH-228 LT. 6.
E-02 LT 3.
E-02 LT.4.
E-02 LT. 4.
E-02 5d2
- WW
>a D OU mx to %
5
- Deplicate Analysis