ML20084H701
| ML20084H701 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1983 |
| From: | Sieber J DUQUESNE LIGHT CO. |
| To: | Tam P Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| ND1MSL:3228, NUDOCS 8405080162 | |
| Download: ML20084H701 (126) | |
Text
i l
I 1983 ANNUAL ENVIRON!! ENTAL REPORT RADIOLOGICAL - VOLUSIE #2 DUQUESNE LIGHT C0!!PANY BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION AND SHIPPINGPORT AT0!!IC POWER STATION l
l l
l
/
84050S0162 831231 i
PDR ADGCK 05000334 R
)
(O
DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report ABSTRACT This report describes the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program conducted during 1983 in the vicinity of the Beaver Valley Power Station and the Shippingport 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 sediments, soils, food pathway samples, and radiation levels in the vicinity of the site. This report discusses the results of this monitoring during 1983.
The environmental program outlined in the Beaver Valley Power Station Technical Specifications was followed throughout 1983.
The results of this environmental monitoring program show that Shippingport Atomic Power Station and Beaver Valley Power Station operations have not adversely affected the surrounding i
i environment.
f f
1 I
i
-i-t
i l
DUQUESNE LIGHT C0}!PANY i
1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report TABLE OF CONTENTS I
l Page Abstract------------------------------------------------------------
i I.
INTRODUCTION-----------------------------------------------
1 A.
Scope and Objectives of the Program 2
i B.
Description of the Shippingport and Beaver Valley Site 2
II.
RE S U LTS & CO NC LUS I O N S - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
7 III. ENVIRON!! ENTAL !!ONITORING CONSIDERATIONS--------------------
9 A.
Environmental Quality Centrol Programs 9
B.
Evaluation of the Quality Control (QC) Program Data 26 C.
Standard Requirements and Limitations for Radiological and Other Effluents 26 D.
Reporting Levels 27 IV.
310NITORING EFFLUENTS---------------------------------------
28 A.
?!cnitoring of Liquid Effluents 28 1.
Effluent Treatment, Sampling, and Analytical Procedures 34 2.
Results 35 B.
?!onitoring of Airborne Effluents 36 1.
Description of Airborne Effluent Sources 36 1
2.
Airborne Effluent Treatment and Sampling 41
\\
)
3.
Analytical Procedures for Sampling Airborne Effluents 45 4
Results 48 C.
Solid Waste Disposal 50
-ii-
l-1 DCQUESNE LIGHT COBIPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
V.
ENVIRON!! ENTAL !!0NITORING PROGRAh!
Page A.
Environmental Radioactivity ?!onitoring Program 52 1.
Program Description 52 l
i 2.
Summary of Results 68 3.
Quality Control Program 68 l
B.
Air !!onitoring 74
(
1.
Characterization of Air an.1 ?!eteorology 74 2.
Air Sampling Program and Analytical Techniques 74 3.
Results and Conclusions 77 C.
f!onitoring of Sediments 80 1.
Characterization of Stream Sediments 80 2.
Sampling Program and Analytical Techniques 80 3.
Results and Conclusions 82 D.
!!onitoring of Feedcrops and Foodcrops 84 1.
Characterization of Vegetation and Foodcrops 84 2.
Sampling Program and Analytical Techniques 84 3.
Results and Conclusions 86 E.
!!onitoring of Local Cow's !! ilk.
87 1.
Description - !!ilch Animal Locations 87 l
2.
Sampling Program and Analytical Techniques f7 L
3.
Results and Conclusions 91 f
)
-iii-
DUQUESNE LIGHT C0!!PANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)
V.
ENVIRON >! ENTAL ?!ONITORING PROGRAh! (continued) h F.
Environmental Radiation ?!onitoring 92 1.
Description of Regional Background Radiation Levels and Sources 92 I
2.
Locations & Analytical Procedures 92 3.
Results and Conclusions 97 G.
?!onitoring of Fish 99 1.
Description 99 2.
Sampling Program and Analytical Techniques 99 3.
Results and Conclusions 99 H.
?!onitoring of Surface, Drinking, and Well Waters 101 1.
Description of Water Sources 101 2.
Sampling Program and Analytical Techniques 101 3.
Results and Conclusions 103 L
I.
Estimates of Radiation Dose to !!an 108 1.
Pathways to !!an - Beaver Valley Power Station 108 f
Calculational !!odels - Beaver Valley a.
f Power Station 103 2.
Results of Calculated Radiation Dose to Man - Beaver Valley Power Station Liquid Releases 109
{
3.
Airborne Pathway 112 4
Conclusions - Beaver Valley Power Station 112 3.
Dose Pathways to !!an - Shippingport Atcmic Power Station 114 6.
Results and Conclusions - Shippingport Atomic Power Station 113
-iv-
DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report LIST OF FIGURES Figure No.
Page 1.0 View of the Shippingport and Beaver Valley Site 4
1.1 Geographical Map - 40 Mile Radius 5
)
4.1 Liquid Discharge Points to Ohio River 29
)
4.2 Water Flow Schematic - Shippingport Atomic Power Station 30 4.3 Water Flow Schematic - Beaver Valley Power Station 31 4.4 Liquid Radwaste Systems - Shippingport Atomic Power Station 32 l
4.5 Liquid Radwaste Systems - Beaver Valley Power Station 33 4.6 Gaseous Waste Processing - Shippingport Atomic Power Station 38 4.7 Gaseous Waste Processing - Beaver Valley Power Station 40 1
4.8 Gaseous Release Points - Shippingport Atomic Power Station and Beaver Valley Power Station 42 4.9 Solid Waste Disposal Diagram 51 5.B.1 Environmental Monitoring Locations - Air Sampling Stations 76 3.B.2 Concentrations of Gross Beta in Air Particulates 78 L
5.C.1 Environmental Monitoring Locations - Sediments 81 5.D.1 Environmental Monitoring Locations - Feedcrop and Foodcrop 85 l
(
5.E.1 Dairy Farm Locations (August - September 1983 Survey) 89
)
5.E.2 Environmental Monitoring Locations - Milk 90 5.F.1 Environmental Monitoring Locations - Radiation Monitoring 93 5.F.2 Environmental Monitoring Locations - Radiation Monitoring 94 5.F.3 Environmental Monitoring Locations - Radiation Monitoring 95 5.F.4 Environmental Monitoring Locations - Radiation Monitoring 96 5.G.1 Environmental Menitoring Locations - Fish 100 l
5.H.1 Surface Water and Wells - Locations 104 1
(
l
.y.
k
)
l DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report LIST OF TABLES t.
Table Number Page III.1 Quality Control Data - TLD Comparisons 11 III.2 Quality Control Data - Water Split Samples 12 III.3 Quality Control Data - Split Samples - Miscellaneous 14 f
III.4 Quality Control Data - Spiked Samples 18 y
/
III.5 Quality Control Data - Spiked Samples 19 III.6 Quality Control Data - Air Particulates and I-131 20 l
)
III.7 Quality Control Data - Milk and Water 24 l
IV.A.1 Effluent Treatment, Sampling and Analytical Procedures Shippingport Atomic Power Station 34 f
IV.A.2 Effluent Treatment, Sampling and Analytical j
Procedures Beaver Valley Power Station 34 i
IV.A.3 Results - Liquid Effluents - Shippingport Atomic Power Station 35 IV.A.4 Results - Liquid Effluents - Beaver Valley Power Station 35 L
V.A.1 Environmental Monitoring Program Summary 53 V.A.2 Environmental Monitoring Program Results (1983) 58 V.A.3 Pre-Operational Monitoring Program Results (1974-1975) 69 V.A.4 Typical LLDs for Gamma Spectrometry - DLC Contractor 73 j
V.I.1 Radiation Dose to Man - Beaver Valley Power Station - Liquid Releases 110 V.I.2 Radiation Dose to Man - Beaver Valley Power Station - Airborne Releases 113
)
L
(
l t
-vi-
SECTION I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report I.
INTRODUCTION The 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report for the Beaver Valley Power Station and the Shippingport Atemic Power Station summarizes the radiological environmental program conducted by the Duquesne Light Company in 1983.
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 of the Central Area Power Coordination
)
group.
Beaver Valley No. 2 Unit was under construction in 1983 and is scheduled to start-up in 1986.
The Shippingport Atomic Power Station was permanently i
shutdown on October 1, 1982. During 1983 the Shippingport Atomic Power Station nuclear reactor core was disassembled for shipment off-site for disposal.
k The Shippingport Atomic Power Station was the first large-
)
scale central station nuclear reactor in the United States.
Since initial pcwer generation in December 1957, operation of f
the pressurized water reactor at the Shippingport plant has t
supplied power to the Duquesne Light Company system in addition to providing technology which has served as a basis
{
for the development of pressurized water reactors in the
)
nuclear industry. The plant utilized a Light Water Breeder Reactor (LWBR) core from September 21, 1977 until final shutdown on October 1, 1982, pioneering light water breeder l
technology.
The highest average daily output generated at the Beaver Valley Power Station during the year was 817 megawatts not in
- April, 1933.
The total gross electrical generation during the year was 4,916,300 megawatt-hours.
1 l
6 -
i SECTION I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report I.
INTRODUCTION 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 the Shippingport Atomic Power Station were collected,
(
processed, sampled, and analyzed to ensure conformance with the applicable regulations and permits prior to their release-to the environment.
Environmental sampling and analyses included air, water, milk, soil, vegetation, river sediments, fish, and ambient radiation IcVels in areas surrounding both plants.
B.
Description of the Shippingport and Beaver Valley Site The Shippingport Atomic Power Station and the Beaver Valley
)
Power Station are located on the south bank of the Ohio River in the Borough of Shippingport, Beaver County, Pennsylvania, on a 486.8 acre tract of land which is cwned by the Duquesne Light Company.
Figure 1.0 is an artist's view of both j
stations. The site is approximately one alle from Midland, t
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 immediate vicinity of the site is relatively low.
There are no residents within a 1/2 mile radius of ei,ther plant.
The population within a 5 mile radius of the plant is approximately 18,000 and the only area within that radius 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 l
ridge along the border south of the Shippingport and Beaver Valley Power Stations at an elevation of 1,160 feet.
Plant ground level at both stations is approximately 735 feet above i
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.
Flew ranges from a minimum of 5000 cubic feet per secand (CFS) to 4
4 a maximum of 100,000 CFS.
The mean annual.
flow is approximately 25,000 CFS.
i SECTION I DUQUESNE LIGHT C0!!PANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report I.
INTRODUCTION I
B.
Description of the Shippingport and Beaver Valley Site (continued)
Water temperature of the Ohio River varies from 32 F to 84 F, the minimum temperatures occur in January and/or February and maximum temperatures in July and August. Water quality ih I
the Ohio River at the site location is affected primarily by I
the water quality of the Allegheny, >!onongahela, and Beaver rivers.
i 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.
)
i l
)
i 3
=
w temmetama1eTel,7c'eMv'15%e1aegert v
y 8
E 5-M l
2 i
E
~
b h
i E
f
?.
i
?
g o
)
'4 s
l g
g 1
=
~
e z
's
\\,
y r 1 g
}.
l s
'l j
t
,,g.p..
~~] /
w,.
u
SECTION I FIGURE 1.1 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report I h J
M recycsr.g l
4
- ce, cx32,2
\\
h ALLI.UICI g
n'
}
As~
\\
3J_~r
~
+%
i 8
f so-
)
30R0 0F 30 I
snipp ntcyc'-
ur4 A
g g4, CQUI2PA ESSING.ON I
Ih,
'I a
51
)
log ///
A PItfiitaca /H:
i I
1.2#
. nT,c:t,'/f//
,/
22 %
u.
Me nI570RT i
$ 34~,g e rg m
/
)
S 2
.Asun:cicN F
4o, I
lJ
/
4e re.zz:.nto e
Roads I
Rivers l
Q Cities t
E
=
b ' N.M C 2YO..*C*.2.0 (CIT [) 1"(($ [ I $C_',J,*[,3 [ [*]$ (( 5,";
=
i:i ??':!O?CRT A!CM;; ?c*r:.2 3 A ::N.ua -- I 3EA;zz ;,c;,;, pc,;;I 3;;;;;;;
r:st?.: 1.1
_3-
SECTION I DUQUESNE LIGHT CO?!PANY 1983 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 Thermal & Elec. Rating - 2660 >N 835 ?N 236.6 BN 72 IN t
e g
e
!N-Each Reactor C)
Type of Reactor PWR PWR Number of Reactor 3
4 Coolant Loops t
Number of Steam Generators 3 - Vertical 4 - Horizontal 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 secondary system.
Reactor coolant in the primary system is pumped through the reactor core and steam generators by means of reactor coolant pumps. Heat is given up from the primary 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:
!N megawatts thermal t
!N megawatts electrical e
(1) The Shippingport Atomic Power Station was not operated during 1983.
(2) Light Water Breeder Core 6
SECTION II DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report II.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS i
Plant operations at both the Beaver Valley Power Station and the Shippingport Atomic Power Station had no adverse effects on the environment as a result of activities at either of the stations during 1983. Comparisons of pre-operational data with operational data indicates the ranges of values are in good agreement for both periods of time, i
The Beaver. Valley Power Station operated throughout 1983, while the Shippingport Atomic Power Station was shutdown and defueled throughout 1983. During the year, the 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 Statian did not exceed i
the limiting conditions identified in the Beaver Valley Power Station Operating License Technical Specifications.
3 The environmental program for 1983 was the same as in 1982 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 1983 Radiclogical Monitoring Program Outline).
The results of the 1983 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program are consistent with those of previous years.
The I
only radioactivity above normal ambient levels in the f
environs other than world-wide fallout from Nuclear weapons L
tests was detected near the Beaver Valley Power Station discharge and resulted in negligible exposure to members of the public. A summary of the 1983 operational environmental data (ranges and means) for each sampling media is found in i
Table V.A.2.
A su= mary of preoperational (1974 - 1975) i environmental data is found in Table V.A.3.
The Beaver Valley Power Station Technical Specifications require sampling of three (3) dairies which have the highest calculated milk pathway potential and one large local dairy.
The three dairies are determined from calculations based on the meteorological data and the latest milch animal survey.
However, these dafries are frequently small, consisting of as few as one cow or goat.
The availability of milk from single cow dairies and revisions due to updated calculations and surveys result in sampling of several additional dairies during the year in different sampling periods.
SECTION II DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report II.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS (continued)
In addition, the Environmental Monitoring Program includes two larger dairies in order to provide continuity in the sampling / analyses program and a control location. Samples from each of these dairies are obtained each month in addition to the four dairies required by the Environmental Technical Specifications. During some sampling periods, one or all of the additional dairies could be among the required dairies. The collection periods associated with each of the locations are provided in the detailed summary of the milk monitoring program of this report (Section V-E).
Examination of effluents from the Shippingport Atomic Power Station and the Beaver Valley Power Station and environmental media demonstrated compliance with regulations and Station Technical Specifications.
-S-
SECTION III DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report III. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING CONSIDERATIONS I
A.
Environmental Quality Control Programs 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 comparisons made were at very low levels of radioactivity and consequently, the activities at these levels are difficult to measure. However, acceptable correlation was achieved in most instances as outlined in the discussions and tables which follow.
1.
Radiation Monitoring (Duquesne Light Company (DLC)
Contractor Laboratory - DLC QC Laboratory - Indeoendent Laboratory)
An independent program of external radiation monitoring was conducted by the QC Laboratory using lithium I
fluoride TLDs sharing the same location as the DLC Contractor Laboratory TLDs and Independent Laboratory TLDs.
Summary data of the QC Laboratory program is provided in Table III.1.
Duplicate contractor TLD, QC TLD, Annual TLD, and Independent Lab TLD and continuous integrating monitoring by a Pressurized Ion Chamber (PIC) show generally good agreement and demonstrate acceptable performance by the DLC Contractor Laboratory.
The arithmetic mean of each laboratory agrees within t 5?. of the arithmetic mean of the three laboratories. This is well within the precision of a typical TLD system.
I 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 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).
A summary of results of split water samples is provided in Table III.2.
A summary of milk, sediment and 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.
9
SECTION III DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report III. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING CONSIDERATIONS A.
Environmental Quality Control Programs (continued) 2.
Split Sample Program (DLC Contractor Laboratory - DLC QC Laboratory (continued)
Because of the overall uniformity of comparable results,
[
it is concluded that the two laboratories are consistent i
and in agreement.
I i
5 l
l l
/
l i [
SIction III CUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY TABLE III.1 1933 Annual Radiological Environmental Report TABLE III.1 QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS TLD MONITORING mR/ Day 1ST CUARTER 2ND OUARTi.
DLC DLC CLC QC Independent DLC CLC QC Independent DLC Location Contractor Lab Lab 83 PDER PIC Contractor lab Lab #3 PCER PIC No.
(CaSO.:Dy)
(LiF)
(CaSO.:Tm)
(2) 21 (CaSO.:0y)
(LiF)
- CaSO.:Tm)
(2)
(?)
N}
10 0.13 0.22 0.21 0.26 0.21 0.17 0.19 0.19 0.27 0.21 13 0.1o 0.22 0.22 0.27 0.16 0.13 0. le 0.29 14 0.17 0.22 0.00 0.19 15 0.14 0.1o 0.13 0.22.
0.13 0.13 0.16 0.27 27 0.18 0.217 0.20 0.16 0.16 0.13 28 0.19 0.23 0.20 0.17 0.20 0.20 29 0.20 0.28 0.25 0.20 0.23 0.22 32 0.20 0.27 0.24 0.23 0.24 0.18 0.20 0.22 0.23 0.24 U}
45 0.13 0.24 0.23 0.29 0.26 0.19 0.21 0.20 0.29 0.250)
(
A 0.10 0.20 9.20 0.23 0.19 ( L )
0.13 0.13 0.17 0.27 0.19 ' ll
.7 0.1r s.Ja 0.23 0.l>
0.21 0.21 M
0. Jt'
).24 0.20 0.13 0.id 1.20 il 0.19 0.21 0.24 0.25 0.17 0.19 0.13 0.30 3RD 00ARTER ATH OUARTER DLC DLC contractor ***
CLC DLC contraeter"*
CLC CC Independent OLC CLC QC Independent CLC Location Contractor Lab lad d3 PCER PIC Contractor Lao Lab (3 POER PIC
- t o.
(CaSO.:0y)
(LiF)
(CaSO.:Tm)
(2)
Q),
(CaSO.;Cy)
(LiF)
(CaSO. Tm)
(2)
Ej, 10 0.13 0.16 0.19 0.23 0.260I' 0*22 0.03'I#
0.16 0.23 0.19 0*
L3 0.17 0.17
- 0. ;o 0.25 0.16 0.17 0 17 1:.
0.15 0.13 0.13 0.16 0.20 0.21 b
13 0.la 0.12 0.13 0.21 g,t3 o,t; o,t; 0.21 27 Q.13 0.1o 0.17 0.16 0.18 0.19 28 0.19 0.19 0.18 0.17 0.21 0.20 29 0.21 0.22 0.20 0.18 0.23 0.21 32 0.20 0.19 0.19 0.23 0.16 0.21 0.20 0.19 43 0.19 0.13 0.17 0.26 0.230) 0.17 0.19 0.20 0.25 0.230) 46 0.13 0.15 0.17 0,22 0.19W 0.15 0.17 0.14 0.22 0.19(1) 47 0.21 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.21 43 0.18 0.16 0.17 0.20 0.19 0.20 51 0.21 0.19 0.18 0.26 0.19 0.20 0.19 0.27 t
-0)
PIC Reading at Location 10 taken in DLC Substation in Shippingport Boro. Location 45 taken at Kennedy's Corners. Location 40 taken at Industry Tire Shop.
(2)
NRC re*
rs from Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources.
(3)
In this consolidated environmental program the pressurized ion chamber (PIC) continuous monitor readings tend to be slightly higher than the TLD readings due to the differences in the inherent physics of esen system. No compensaccry ateasares have been taken to take both systems agree exactly because both systems were installed to monitor relative radiati n levels rather than absolate levels. Each system provides a reasonably accurate measure af the absolute radiation levels.
TLD missing from its u sted locatior Station is out of service 3rd and 4th warter *nce;;endent La' oratory swipment taken over by contractor 140.
c Section !!I
- C ES?iE L W T CC
- Git 4Y TA;LE III.2 1903 Annual Radiological Environmental Roport (Page 1 of 2)
TABLE III.2 CUALITY CONTROL RESULTS SPLIT SAMPLE ANALYSIS RESULTS Cercarisen of Centrictor and DLC.cc L3bs DLC Contractor OLC. CC Media Analysis Samlinq p**4cd Lab (1)
Lab (1)
Units Surface Water Gross Alpha January 2.6 t 1.3 2.9 2 2.5 pC1/1 April 5 0.71 g 1.0 pC L/1 July 5 1.1 g 1.2 pC1/1 Oct:ber 5 1.4 f 1.4 pC1/1 Surface Water Gross 5 a January 11 2 9.0 2 2.2 pCi/l April 7.72 1.5 4.S 2 1.7 pClil July 3.0 t 1.2 3.02 1.7 pC1/1 October 6.62 1.4 5.9 2 2.5 pCill Surface Wate'r co-60 January
< 2.0
$ 4.2 pCi/1 April 3 2.0 5 3.7 pC1/1 July g 3.0 g, 3.9 pCi/l Jctober e L.0
- 3.7 pCL/1 surfa
- a ater ma-L3+
Janu 2r?
< 2.0
- 3.0 pCill April s 3.0 g 4.4 pCL/1 hLy i 2.0
$ 4.5 pC L/1 October i 1.J
{ 4.2 pC1/1 Surface Water Ca.137 January g 3.0
$ 5.0 PCill April
- 3.0 g 4.7 pC1/1 July
- g 3.0 3 4.7 pC1/1 P L/1 C
3.7 Octaber
< 2.0 P ill brf ace Nater Tritium
'st harter 1030 t 100 900 2 320 C
Campo site 3rd quarter 2290 t 140
- $io 290 pCill j
Composite surface Water
$r.49 2nd quarter
< l.1
< 0. h 7C1/1 Cexpo site 4th Quarter g 1.2 3 3.0 pCill Campasite Surface Water Sr 90 2nd Quarter 1 0.29 1 0.36 pC L/1 Comoosite pC1/1 th Quarter Campesite
~# 0.32 1 0.48
)
Surface Water Co.60 2nd Quarter
< l.0
""e 3.6 pC1/1 (high Campo sit e
~
sensitivity enalysis) seh Quarter g 0.5 3 4,9 pC1/1 Compo s ite (1)
Uncertainties are based en,cunting statisti:s and are specified at the 95 c mfiden:e level.
4 sec2 ion III 0000E1NE LIGHT COMPANY TABLE III.2 19c3 Anrual Radiological Eneironmen2al Report (Page 2 of 2)
~~
TABLE !!!.2 (Continued)
QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS SPLIT SAMPLE ANALY$!S RESUt.TS Comearison of Contr1cter and Ot.C-CC Labs OLC contractor CLC - OC M ia Analysis Samolino P*riod Lab 0 )
Lab D)
Un MS Drinking Water C s-13 7 February
< 2.0 5 3.0 pC1/1 May g 3.0 g 3.0 pC1/1 August s 2.0 1 5.4 pC1/1 November s 2.0 5 3.0 pel/t 3rinking Water Co-L34 February s 2.0 s 3.0 pel/L my 3 3.0 s 3.0 pC1/1 August g 2.0
-; 3.3 pci/t November s 2.0 5 3.0 pC1/1 Drinhing W4ter Co-40 February g 2.0 s 4.8 pCi/ t ny g 3.0
- 4.0 pct /1 August g 2.0
- a.6 7Ct/t November g 2.0 pC1/;
Drinhing Water Crose Alpha Mrch g 0.39 s 1.0 pCi/1 June
< 0.43
, 1.6 pC1/1 August 5 0.86 g L.6 pCi/1 hve mbe r s 0.46 g 1.9 pct /l Drink'nt W4ter Grose Beta mrch 4.1 2 1.2 6.1 2.0 pC1/1 June 3.0 2 0.9 2.6 2 1.7 pC1/L Autust 4.1 2 1..
6.2 1.7 PCill Novemeer 3.7 1 1.4 3.7 2 L.3 PCill Drinning Vater 2ritias
- n3 Quarter 270 t 80 1 200 pc t/1 4th Quarter g 70 g 170 pCL/1 t
(i)
Uncert a titie s are ';ased on unt ing statist *cs and are erecifiel it the W.
- nfidence interval.
13 -
Section III OUOUII';I LICHT COMPANY TASLE III.3 1993 Annual Radiological Environmental Report (Page 1 of 2)
TABLE !!I.3 CUALITY CONTROL RESULTS Spl,!T SAVPI_E ANALYSIS DESULTS Concarisen of centracter vd CLC-CC Laes OLC C:ntractor OLC - CC Media Analysis Samplinq Period Lab (1)
Lab (1)
Units
- tilk 1-in 3-29-33
< 0.13
< 0.3
- C L'.
(La64ttan 23)
I-131 6-21-63 1 0.03 s 0.25 pCili K-40 6-21-43 1260 130 pCL/1 Cs-134 6-21-43 g 3.0 3.1 pet /l Cs-137 6-21-43 g 3.0
- ..)
, c t/l Ca40 6-21 43 g 3.0 g 4.3 pct /1 Feed K-40 6-21-d3 12.3 ; 1.2 pCi/gm Dry (Lacation 25)
Cae0 6-21-43 g 0.01 g 0.0 48 pCi/gm Dry Co-134 6-21-d3 g 0.0L g 0.050 pCi/gm Dry Cs-137 6-21-63 g 0.02 g 0.072 pCilgm Ory Th-123 4-21-43 0.09 : 0.0i pcb am 2ry 1
N2 sr-+0 4-l-43 0 '23
- 9. ' M
.;. : 1..;
i c t/c-d e
'L:.4tL a 15)
Tua 1-131 9-l-43 g ].co) pct /m %et (Cub 44e)
').!-4 3 1.33 20.19 pC1/;m 'let
( Luc a t tan 10)
Ca-90 9-l-43 e 0.00 '.
0 il SC L/ m 'Je t Cs-134 941-43 c 0.003 1 0.12 pC1/t9 Wet C4-137
)-l-4 3 g 0.J0 3
- 0.'3 OCl/sm %et rua f-i.43
- C1/. W t (ivise
- hards 1-131 3-i-33 0.1e 3 2 0.w.
Pull,m Yet slacattan 10) g,;a 9,g,43 g,
g pct /gn Wet Ga*+)
9-t-33 e q,gg3 y 3,t; dC*/ 2*C
~
~
?Cl/ m Wet C4-134 9-t 4 3 g i. y, -.
- 3.. o. 3
?
- 4' **'
C8*l37 7-1-43 0.12
- 0.007 g 0.12 (1)
Uncertainties tre baseJ en ecunting stattatics mJ. ire specified at the 95*. confidence level.
Analyses not perforseJ nor re v ired.
l
- l 's
Section !!!
DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY TABLE III.3 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report (Page 2 of 2)
TABLE III.3 (Continued)
QUALITY CONTROL RESULTS SPLIT SAMPLE ANALYSIS RESULTS Comparison of Contractor and DLC-0C Labs DLC Contractor OLC - QC Media Analysis Samplina Period Lab (1)
Lab (1)
Units
. Sediment Cross Alpha 10-25-83 14 2 7 12 2 6.5 pCi/gm Dry (Location 3)
Gross Beta 10-25-83 29 2 3 29 2 7.8 pC1/gm Dry U-235 10-25-83 0.015 2 0.004 0.23 2 0.06 pC1/gm Dry i
U-234 10-25-83 0.83 2 0.08 0.80 2 0.13 pC1/gm Dry U-238 10-25-83 0.62 2 0.06 0.53 2 0.10 pCi/sm Dry Sr-89 10-25-83 i0.14 f0.22 PCi/sm Dry Sr-90 10-25-83 0.041 2 0.025
{ 0.11 pCi/gm Dry K-40 10-25-83 15.7 2 1.6 pC1/gm Dry Co-60 10-25-83 0.239 2 0.07 0.30 2 0.21 pCi/gm Dry Ca-134 10-25-83 5 0.03 4,0.16 pC1/gm Dry Cs-137 10-25-83 0.497 2 0.065 0.42 2 0.097 pCi/gm Dry Ra-226 10-25-83 2.78 t 1.01 pC1/gm Dry Th-228 10-25-83 1.56 2 0.16 pCi/gm Dry Milk Sr-89 12-11-83 y.1.0 f 0.92 pC1/1 (Location 25)
Sr-90 12-11-83 1.4 2 0.5 2.4 2 0.78-PC1/1 Co-60 12-11-83
$ 2.0 f 4.4 pCi/1 l
Cs-134 12-11-83 i 3.0
$ 5.0 PC1/1 l
Cs-137 12-11-83 g 2.0 f 5.0 pC1/1 K-40 12-11-83 1270 2 130 pC1/1 I-131 12-11-83 (0.24 f 0.28 pC1/1 l
(1)
Uncertainties are based on counting statistics and are specified at the 95% confidence level.
Analyses not performed nor required.
l J
SECTION III DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report A.
Environmental Quality Control Programs (continued) 3.
DLC QC Laboratory Program Spiked samples prepared by DLC QC Laboratory were reutinely 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 overall results demonstrate that the contractor performed acceptably in the program.
4.
Comparisons of Similar Samnles (DLC Contractor Laboratory - DLC QC Laboratory)
Duplicate air particulate and charcoal filters (radiciodine) samples were callected at Location #30 and compared during the year on a weekly basis. Comparison of particulate and charcoal samples alternated from week to week.
Duplicate monthly air particulate filters, composited from the weekly air particulate filters, were analyzed 6 months out of the year for gamma activity.
Duplicate quarterly air particulate filters, composited from the weekly air particulate filters, were analyzed for Sr-89 and Sr-90 activity for the first and third quarters of the year.
Table III.6 provides data for this portion of the QC 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 cwn QC Program which included participation in the Environmental Protection Agency Environmental Monitoring Safety Laboratory (EPA EMSL)
Interlaboratory Cross Check Program.
This cross check program indicated that the Contractor results were in agreement with EPS EMSL.
DLC also audited the Contractor Laboratory and determined that internal QC practices were in effect and that procedures and laboratory analytical techniques conformed to approved DLC procedures.
-le-
I SECTION III DUQUESSE LIGliT CO:!PANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report A.
Environmental Ouality Control Programs (continued) 6.
Special QC Program (DLC Contractor Laboratory Independent Laboratory - DLC QC Laboratory)
Milk and water samples were prepared quarterly by an Independent Laboratory. This included low level spiking 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 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 demonstrate that the contractor performed acceptably in the program.
4 4
i f
[
i !
1
Section !!!
OUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY TABLE !!!.4 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental R: port TABLE !!!.4 OUALITY CONTROL RESULTS SP!KE SAMPLE ANALYSIS RESULTS Sample Type OL and Contractor DLC - OC Samole Date Ident. No.
Analysis Lab (1)
Lab (1)
Units 4-1-d3 53-32 Water: St-49 6.6 e 1.6 5.8 2 1.3 pCL/1 St-90 g 0.4 3 0.4 pct /1 4 1-43 53-52 Water t-131 13 e 2 12 e pcgft Cr-31 25.3 e 5.2 27.0 t 6.0 3gf t Ca-134 26 16.9 19 27 pggft Ce-144
$3.2 3 4L.3 66 t4 pcgj t 7-29*83 33 54 Water Cross Alpha 8.6 21.4 12 2 1.7 pegjt Cross Beta 23 2
- e 41 2 2.8 pC t/l 9-1-43 53-55 W4 tert $r-49 g LLD
- 11 2 2.4 pC t/1 S r-r0 6.3 9.)*
15 t 1,9 m;t/1 Co-Si 35.7 e 4.7 3g e9 peg /;
Co-60 14.0 t '.a
- 6 r e.g
, ti.
10-20-43 33-56 Water: I-131 20 t L 26 2'. 3 pct /t Co-Si L19 12 99 t 9.6 pct /t Co-A J 37.1 1 5.1 54 e d.3 pC t/ t Ce-144 232 t 29 170 t 64 pct /t H3 20$0 t 130 20c0 t 210 0C1/;
1*24-44
$3-57 Watert Cross Alpha 2.5 2 0.9a*
- 3 2 3.7 PCill Gross Beta 32 e 2
+0 t 2.+
r^ 1/1 2-t3 94
$3-A W.it e r
$r-49 7.9 2 L.7 11
- 1.8 Ni/l 3r-70 1121 1.2 2 1.e pct /t 1
53-8 Watert.ir-49 21 2 3 22t23
?CL/l
$r-90 23 2 1 21 2 2.1 7Cl!!
$3-C Watert tr-49 31 t 2 30 1 3.3 PCill
$r-90 Mi2 M i 2.4 F L/1 C
i
' ncertainttee are based on c>inting st atistles ani tre taectfiel 4t t:.e M *, 13nfidence level.
(1)
C LLJ Lower limit of fetectst.
- Fotir >f five opthed supies are is ue t 44ree ent.
" 'h11e these samples. ire net in m 1 44re cent with tre N411ty Contr11 Lacaratary. the bntrtetst '.4h rit:ry did 44ree with nine ETA Intere m artsen L uoritarv results tsnatn4 fr a 10 rGt/1 ts 153 SCL/t.
. !s.
$3c21on III DU0tESNE LIGHT COMPANY TABLE !!!.5 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report TABLE !!!.5 QUALITY CONTRCL RESULTS SPIXE SAMPLE ANALYSIS Sample Type CLC and Contractor OLC - OC Satole Oste Ident. No.
Analysis Lab (1)
Lab (1)
Unitt 1-l7-43 32-57
- tika sc-39 s 3.0 7.4 2 3.2 pC1/1 sr-A 6.6 2 0.9 6.3 2 3.3 pC1/1 Mn-34 42.1 2 6.5 41 2 7 pC1/1 cs-134 13.2 2 7 1126 pC1/1 C5-137 29.1 2 6 3129 ggjg 1-131 4.3 20.3 6.3 2 1.2 pct /t 6-4-43 52-55 Mita t-131 10 t 1 7.6
- 1.0 pC t/1 Fe-$9 3L
- 10.8 29 2 18 pct /1 C4-134
$3 3.3 43
- 11 pcgft 10-20-43
$2-60 Milk: 1-131 8.3 2 1.5 12 2 1.4 pct /1 Mn-54 40.5 t 4.4 39 1 11 pC1/1 Co-so 33.6 5.1 26
- 8.6 pct /t Cs-137 7 1 7; 59 9
pC1/L l
(1)
Uncett41nties are based on e nnting stattatics an1 are erecified at tre 451 eenttjence 'evwt.
Section !!!
CUQUES!.E LIGHT OCMFA!4y TABLE I!!.6 1953 Annual Radiological Environenental Report (Page 1 of 4)
TABLE !!!.6 CUALITY CCNTROL RESULTS AIR PARTICULATES AND CHARCCAL FILTER: CCMPARABLE SAMPLES Air Part.iculates Air toitre pC1/Cu. Meter (Beta) pct /ca. Meter OLC DLC Contractor CLC CC Contractor OLC - CC Sample Date Lao (1)
Ob (1)
Samole Cate ub i1) 1.ab (1)
{l-0.022 2 0.003 0.030 2 0.003 1/10/83 to S 0.01 c.027 o-1-17 43 t 3 to 0.013 t 0.003 0.013 2 0,00:
1 24-43 to g),gG9 e 0.027 g 4 1-11-43 1
-43 to 0.013 2 0.003 0.023 2 0.003 2-7-43 to g 0.01
< 0.017 2 14-43 2 14-43 to 0.022 2 0.004.
0.037 2 0.003 2-22-43'to e,*0.01
-0.017 2 21-43 2-28-43 2 25-4 3 ra 0.023 2 0.003 0.029 0.003 3-7-43 to
< 0.01 0.021 J
3-7-43 3-14-43 i
4 j
3-14-43 to 0.009 0.003 0.014 2 0.002 3-21-43 to C 4.11 0 0.013 3-21-43 3 23 43 1
5-23-4 3 ta J.312 t J.JJ.
0.022 2 0.002 4- -13 ta C 9.0 W t 0.013 4-4-s3 4-t !-4 3 j
4-11 43 to 0.011 t 0.003 0.013 2 0.003 4-18 43 to e,0.009 s 0.012 4 18-43
.-23-43 4
4 4 23-43 to 0.017 t 0.J03 0.023 t 0.002 3-2-43 to
- 0.01 e,0.010 1
3-2-43 3-9-43 i
3-4-4) to 0.111 : 0.003 0.0t9 t 0.002 3-16-43 to 5 0.003
! 0.011 3 h-43 3-23-d3 3-23 43 to 0.010 t 0.003 0.013 : 0.002 3-31 43 to e 0.]t c 1.014
~
~
3-11-4 1 4-e-43 1
i 4
1 4
' ' f L "' '
8
- 4 '
h h detAbdkkNI lIO I $ $8 d 'f 0 E W\\ $ h 4 btJCLh isd A 4t0 W4 $LidJ i t!8 '
5
. lQ -
_ - ~. __
5:ction III CUOUESNE LIGHT CO.T ANY TABLE III.6 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report (Page 2 of 4)
TABLE III.6 (Continued)
CUALITY CONTROL RESULTS AIR PARTICULATES aND CHARCCAL FILTER: COMPARABLE SAMPLES Air ParticJlatts Air Icdire pCi/Ca. Meter (seta)
DC1/Ca. Meter DLC OLC Contractor OLC - CC Contractor OLC - CC Sa-Die Oste Lab (1)
Lab f1)
Samele Date Lab (1)
Lab (1) 4-n-43 to 0.023 2 0.004 0.030 t 0.002 e-13-D to 6-13 43 6 21-43
~0.01
~< 0.013 s
n-21-4 3 to 0.013 : 0.004 0.025 t 0.003 6-27-43 t2
= O.009
< 0.015
>-2*-13 7-3-il 7-5-93 to 0.014 2 0.004 0.019 t 0.002 7-11-43 ta
-< 0.009
(- 0.0 t3 7 11 43 7-;d-d3 7-14-4 3 to 0.017 2 0.003 0.024 2 0.002 7-25-43 to 4.'0.01
~4 0.015 7-23-d3 s-L-d3
~
3-L-43 to 0.023 2 0.003 0.0 32 : 0.003 4-4-43 to g 0.01 6 0.022 3-4-33 6-13-43 4-;5-43 t 0,033 2 0,q0' 0.d42 2 0.a03 1-;2-43.'
).11 0.016 r.
4 2-13
.1-3 1-11-43 :
0.12'i 1.:10 3 J.0 b
-).a );
-t3 tm
~ 4.);
~ ).);i
)-9-4j
)-12-5)
A-12-43 ta 0.0;9 ! 0.003 0.029 t 0.002 y-t9 43 ta
- 4.0; 3-tv 43 9-3-43
-, 0,010
'l-29-4 3 to 0.034 2 0.004 0.0-220.003 13-3-43 ta
- 3.JL
., 0.012
- 0-1-43 10-10 -43 10-10-43 ta a,119 ; 0,003 0.022 2 0.002 10-;7-H ta
~< 0.0L
~< 0.016 10-i7 43 10-;3-43 i0-2a-93 to 0.qt3 0,003 0.Ji/ t 0.002 ts-3L-33 ta
$ J.0dd 1 0.020
- 0-31-13 L;-7-13
!! 7-H t2 Lill : 1.113
'.02* t 1. M 2 11-l'-H ta
,0.103
,0.023 11 1.-43 11-L-43
- ' H ta
).12 7 : 0. ;U-
..)37 : 0.003 Li-29-1] ta
, hZi L.
'$.U 12-3-iJ
~ ).0;3 L2 $.43 to 0.027 2 0.003 0.024 1 3.002 L2 13 -4 3 to 12-13-43 L2-13-43
-< 3.007
~ 0.029 4
f L.;-l'l-il t a 0.020 t 0.003 0.;21 2 0.002 12-2* 43 t3
< ).]09
.. a.311
'.2-27-43 1-3 (.
(1)
';%stt s tat te s 4re b a sed
'1 + intiad stattatica and tre erecified at be ) $ 1 0 37 f l ie.h e i* t e tt*11.
21 -
SCction III 000UESNE LIGHT CCMPANY TABLE III.6 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report (Pcge 3 of 4)
TABLE III.S OUALITY CCNTROL 3
AIR DARTICULATES (cci/m )
DLC Contractor DLC - OC Samole Date Nuclide Lab (1)
Lab (1)
January (1/3/83 to 1/31/83)
Be-7 0.057 r 0.013 0.051 : 0.011 Others LLD LLD hrch (2/23/83 to 3/38/334 Be-7 0.032 : 0.027 0.066 : 0.011 Others LLD LLO
%Y (5/2/93 to 5/31/83)
Be-7 0.102 0.021 0.075 : 0.014 Others LLD LLD luly h/27/33 to 3/1/33)
Se-7 0.145 t 0.020
').100 : 0.)02 K-40 0.027 : 0. ') l ;
LLD i'thers LLD LL3 5eptember H/27/33 ta 1/26/33)
Se-7 0.;13 : -0.327 0.0%
0.015 0thees LL3 LLD
?! oven::e r
.t31.33 % ils ; 3 /.! 3 )
',m - 7 0.09+
- 0.22
- 0. h ) 2 0.v04
'c'ers LLD LL3
- a (L)
'Jacertainties are based e7 2n t i". 4 etat tatics -and are spe tfied it t~c.e 13. c'nfidence Laterval, LLD Le dr limit af 4ete:ter. _..-
I 50ct9on III DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY TABLE III.6 1983 Annual Radiological Enttronmental Report (Page 6 of 4)
.)
TABLE III.6 QUALITY CONTROL AIR PARTICULATE AND CHARC0AL FILTER 3)CMPARA8LE SAMPLES C
j LOCATION 30 - foci /m
'l j
DLC Contractor OLC - CC
{
Sample Date Nuclidq Lab (1)
Lab (1) 1st quarter Composite St-89
< 0.0009
< 0.00029 e
12/27/83 to 3/23/83 Sr-90 0.0003 0.00014 l
3rd Quarter Composite St-89
< 0.0004 1 0.0015 I
6/27/83 to 9/26/83 Sr-90 g 0.0001 5 0.00015 1
1 E
f 1
4 i
1 4
l 1
l 8
i k
i a
W 4
}
(1)
Uncertainties are based on counting statistics and are specified at the 93% confidence internl.
}
I
.i j
-n-E
~
I Section !!!
DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY TABLE III.7 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report (Pagle 1 of 2) i-
-TABLE III.7 QUALITY CONTROL DATA i
QC Sample Comparisons (All Analyses in DCi/l)
Sample Type DLC 1
and Independent Contractor DLC - QC
{
Sample Date Ident. No.
Analyses Lab (1)
Lab (1)
Lab (1) i 2-16-83 53-247 Water Sr-90 14.6 2 0.6 15 2 1 15 2 2 l
1-131 16.1 2 0.3 13 2 1 13 2 2
{
co-60 18 2 8 21.926.7 18 2 6 Cs-134 22 2 8 19.4 2 6.9 16 2 6 i
Cs-137 2528 18.5 2 5.8 24 2 6 2-16-83 53-248 Water: H-3 1170 2 60 1160 2 100 1320 1 330 5-25-83 53-249 Water: Sr-90 22.4 2 0.6 20 2 1 21 2 1.3 i
I-131 23.3 2 1.4 2121 13 2 1.3 Mn-54 38 2 5 29.8 2 4 29 2 8.6 Cs-134 15 2 4 16.524.1 19 2 11 l
Cs-137 16 2 3 19.624.4 19 2 8.2 5-25-83 53-250 Water: H-3 580 2 70 630 2 80 560 2 250 8-17-83 53-251 Water: Sr-90 11.8 2 0.5 14 2 1*
10 2 0.8 l
1-131 13.5 2 0.8 16 2 1 17 2 2.1 Cs-137 30 2 8 34.1 2 8.1 31 2 7.8 i
i 8-17-83 53-252 Water: X-3 1750 2 60 1890 2 130 1600 2 270 11-30-83 53-253 Water: Sr-89 12 2 LLD LLD Sr-90 26.7 2 6 27.0 2 1.0 2425.4 1-131 19 2 8 8.0 2 0.4 11 2 1.5 Co-60 30 2 5 28.9 2 4.8 35 2 7.8 Cs-134 2024 16.124.1 15 2 8.0 Cs-137 2224 23.9 2 5.0 22 2 8.4 i
11-30-83 53-254 Water: H-3 1500 2 200 1450 2 100 1630 2 290 t
i I
i 5
4 e
Based on reanalysis, the first analysis, although in general agreement with the QC Lab appeared to be biased high.
?
j (1)
Uncertainties are based on counting statistics and are specified at the 95% confidence interval.
LLD Lever Limit of Detector.
.-.... - ~ _. -. -
_ _ =.
1 I
5:ction !!I DUQUESNE LIGHT CCMPANY TABLE III.7 l
1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report
(.Page 2 of 2) i TABLE III.7 CUALITY CONTROL DATA i
OC Sample Comparisons (All Analyses in eC1/l) j Sample Type DLC and Independent Contractor OLC - OC Sample Date Ident. No.
Analyses Lab (1)
Lab (1)
Lab (1) 2 83 52-226 Milk: St-89 9 2 11 : 1 9.2 : 2.3 i
Sr-90 18.6 2 0.5 18 1
18 2 i
I-131 16.1 0.3 12 : 1 13 e 2 l
Cs-134 17 6 12.5 6.3 11 2 6
}
Cs-137 20 2 6 21.6 : 6.5 2127 5-25-83 52-227 Milk: Se-89 6: 2 5.6 : 1.8 5.7 2.9 4
l St-90 10.4 0.5 8.6 2 0.8 9.2 1.5 1-131
.11.4 1.3 12 1
11 1.6 Cs-134 11 : 6 11 0.2 8.0 e 7.4 1
1 Cs-137 2124 22.2 3.1 22 9.6 8-17-83 52-228 Milk Sr-89 14 2 2 16 : 2 27 11 Sr-90 21.6 : 0.5 13 : 1 14 ; 2,7 l
4 1-131 7: 0.7 3.3 2 0.2 7.4 1.0 I
Cs-134 40 5 34 2 3.1 25 : 9.0 l
C4-137 48.: $
46.6 9.2 39 : 8,4 j
11-30-93 52-229 Milk: I-131 27 6 23.0 10 22 2.3 Cs-134 13
- 4 7.5 4.1 13 4.6 Cs-137 13 4 13.0 2 3.8 11 8.2
)
i i
4
?
a f
I' J
1 4
i i
I 1
i i
I i
i 1
i 1
i (1)
Cncertainties are based on counting statistics and are myocified at the 9tt ccntilence interval.
. 25 -
SECTION III DUQUESNE LIGIIT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report 7.
Nuclear Regulatory Commisssion (NRC) Program The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) also conducted a surveillance program in the vicinity of the site.
Samples 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 l
The split sample program indicates that the Contractor laboratory is performing satisfactorily.
In addition, three (3) independent laboratories are used to supplement the regular program.
Comparisons between the independent laboratories and the Contractor laboratory is acceptable, and demonstrates a satisfactory performance by the DLC contractor.
Based on all available QC data and the data from the Cont racto r 's internal EPA Interlaboratory Crors Check
- Program, the Environmental Monitoring Program for 1983 is acceptable with respect to both accuracy and measurement.
C.
Standard Requirements and Limitations for Radiological and t
Other Effluents The Shippingport Atomic Power Station and Beaver Valley Pcwer 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 govarnments are not exceeded.
In addition, self-imposed limits have been established to further limit discharges to the environment.
j Shippingport Atomic Power Station is operated in compliance with regulations and permits involving radioactive and other effluents.
Limits noted in Department of Energy (DOE) Orders 5484.1 and 5430.1, Ohio River Valley Water Sanitation Commission (ORSANCO)
Standards No.
1-70 and 2-70, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources Industrial Wasto Permit it1832, and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES)
Permit r PA 0001589, Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources Industrial Waste Permie n0472205, and Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources Radioact'.ve Gaseous Discharge Permit are observed and fallowed.
-2n-
SECTION III DUQUESNK LIGHT CO.'!PANY
)
2 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report C.
Standard Requirements' and Limitations for Radiological and Other Effluents (continued)
Beaver Valley Power Station is subject to regulations which include the Code of Federal Regulations 10 CFR (Energy),
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources (PDER)
Industrial Waste 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 (NPDES) Permit #0025613, and the Beaver Valley Power Station Technical Specifications.
I D.
Reporting Levels J
A report is required to be submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission when the level of radioactivity in an environmental sampling medium exceeds the limits specified in the Beaver Valley Power Station Technical Specifications when averaged over any calendar quarter. Also, when more than one of the radionuclides are detected in the sampling medium, this report shall be submitted if:
1 Concentration (1), Concentration (2),
.2 1.0 Limit Level (1)
Limit Level (2)
There were no analytical results of environmental samples during 1983 which exceeded Beaver Valley Power Station reporting levels.
l d
N SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report IV.
MONITORING EFFLUENTS A.
Monitoring of Liouid Effluents Description of Liquid Effluents at the Shippingport Atomic Power Station and the Beaver Valley Power Station.
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 various plant systems, consumed by station personnel, or discharged
]
to a septic system.
In addition, small amounts of well water and liquid effluents are discharged to the Ohio River using 4
discharge points shown in Figure 4.1.
Figures 4.2 through I
4.5 are schematic diagrams of liquid flow paths for Shippingport and Beaver Valley respectively. The following four (4) tables summarize radioactive liquid effluents at both the Shippingport and Beaver Valley Power Stations:
Table IV.A.1 - Effluent Treatment, Sampling, and Analytical Procedures - Shippingport 4
Table IV.A.2 - Effluent Treatment, Sampling, and Analytical Procedures - Beaver Valley
~
Table IV. A.3 - Results of Liquid Effluent Discharges to the Environment - Shippingport
=
Table IV.A.4 - Results of Liquid Effluent Discharges to the Environment - Beaver Valley i,
-m-.,-
.-w,i y
,-.y
_m,
__-y-_.,_
-__,w
)
f,I) t4 O
P3 H
O Z
omo m VER ~
l{l','%""*y"*"*
l G
~
BtAVER VAI.IIT P.S.
BVPS COOLING TWER BVPS AUXILIARY RIVta SIVAGE TREATMENT &
EMERG. OVEkFIDJ k
WATER INTAKE STklN:, _
ST(*M SENER OUTFALL Olf! FALL (004) k SHIPP!!CPORT AldMIC P.S.
(003)
Q INTAKE STRUCTURE BVPS INTAKE AUX. RIVER WATER 00 IlfrAKE STktil:TURE fu t PritC h*1 A10Mir P.S.
33 Mh 1"l TEST LINE OFFIEENT y
PUhr (007) b I41 stitA ke,t S i k t:clI:k F 1(g7 BVPS 302 HOUS E **g 5
O D I S( Hr kt t 51 kiR 11tk F y
f BVPS AUXILIARY R IVt.k h
EtAVER VAliFT P.S.
\\
4 b
(Dall) g" SHIPPIhGPORT
~
WATER INTAKE STkUC.
SCREENWASH & STRAINik f[
~g COOLING TOW ER t
SVPS AUXILIARY int'AKE O U3 k\\
f m
STRUCTURE SEDINENT PuND o
--VP ys 301
{ $[
gil U$to ouRINc Cons 1Ria:-
oo s
t TION OF STRtlCTURt: (u05) p g h
M 3
C " "**"
3 jillPPING h*T AlOMIC P.S.
h f
b yg g
o a
s t
g
< o BEAVER VALIEY POWER STATION H*
- I8YP'I h {g$
HO i
I 3
b b
5 :
a REACTOk CONTAINHElff
$ k [
rt s
u Ca 4
i * :
- o 9
fD 1
d
- d L
O d
NOTES:
{
{
101 - CitEMICAL WASTE SUhP
{
]
301 - CLARIFIER BIIMDWN fn 302 - SENAGE TREATMENT E
s 5
{
L N
H O
C d
r4 R IVER INTAKE AND DISCHARCE IN ORIO RIVt u
[
FIGURE 4.1 SHIPPINCPORT & BEAVER VAUEY PW ER STATIONS
r l
l SECTION IV FIGURE 4.2
(
DUQUISC LIG1T C2 Mil 1983 Annual Ibdiological E:wiremental Peport SECTIoN IV FIGURE 4.2 O
TRLtTED WATER
!!IAD TANK PROCESSED RADWASTF RADWASTE PROCESSING fI SYSTDt
%r w,
i RADWASTE REACTOM I
RECYCI,E RECEIVINC P! ANT
%F STS m TANKS j
SYSTEMS 1r W.tTER m
tiEUTRALI-SOFTENERS ZER TAtK a
FILTERS
[h u4 DF211t;CR-WATER d
BOILER g,,
-=
ALIZERS STORACE SYSTEM u5 Ed
$3 SLRVICE
- d UATER O
SYSTEM b
SANITARY WATER SYSTEM i
4 n
i
=
=
CLEARVEI.L RECYCI.E SYSTEM DMM pmpS __
R.P. AIR HANDLI:lG UNITS DEEPVEI.L u R. P. C0Y.PO:iENT s
COCLEBS l
RIVER WATER l
T. P. C0!!PONENT l
s l
l COOLERS I
6 SHIPPINCPORT P.S.
j PLtIN DNIT CONDC:dSER l j
7 SCREEN WASH CIRC. WATER PLhPS PLHPS T.) FIRE PROTEC:' ION SYSTDi 7
FIRE PUMP 1 r TRAVELING DESKIS
\\
SCREE:is STPAINER m
OHIO RI'/CR n
3-SHIPPIt:CPORT P.S. INTAKE (FLOW C KCE WATER FLOW SCHE.'IATIC - ShIPPINGPC:IT ATO.* TIC PCWER STATIO!1 l
SECTION IV FIGURE 4.3 i
DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY l
1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report SECTIon IV pg,gpg y l
l EVAPORATION LOSSES I
B::AVOR VALLEY POWER STATION COOLING TOWER r
CVER*
pt:73 y TLOV.7 f_*
s
{
l s
'sL
~\\
l i 2RI'tGY A :D
'3,',,
S;03::;.CY
^
C., s,
J r..
.o p
3g
' g
\\2:L'C;0CRS CC:.T, ENS ER A:O C1:1LLERS db WATER 7
TRCl.TII.C SYSTDi I
I 4P 1P REACTOR SERVIC:
PLANT EO ILFP.
SA::ITARY
- AT R
(
SYSTCIS SYSTI;1 SYST;t SYSTE::
l t
m m
if l
mr r
) \\
RA02ASTE gggy337-gggg.y,y Q
PRCC;SS...o l
SY.iTO!
l I
<T.2:
f sci;:'N
AI=I WACH d b L
SYSTEM j
INTAKE PL'MPS t
l I
I w
l AUX AUX e
ACX IEST SCREEN i
EFFLUENTS WASH l
- TAgg j (2 3
M l
- ~
~
~_.
[
Y y
y q
1p BE ER 3EAV R VALLEY SEAVER VALI.EY BEAVER VALLEY BEAVCR VALLET 3EAVER VALLEY 3EAVER VALLEY VALLEY POWER STATICN PCWER STATION PCWER STA!!0N POWER STATIO:;
'7.iER STA!!;::
peggg 3 37;g3 POWER ACL OISCHARGE AUX. DISCHARGE DISCHARGE (G02) OI5C:LCCE (003)
OI5C:-LGG; (001)
INTAKE STA. AUL (007)
(CC6) 3EAVER VALLEY h.
I:;TAKE PCWER STAIION WATER FLOW SCHEMATIC - SEAVER \\* ALLEY PCWER STAT!Oli OISCEARC; (004) -
,!l ll
,!'l t
i tMOHHO:: HC aaWM pek n
2 dEC4A r"
tC gm
hg g WQ O j" M
y gt8 Wg
]
rC m U.,
re R
gE V
7
,I gH k
ETL
~
I TR F
NE EF US N
LNP A K FAM EN FRU LA ETP CT R
E L
\\
G-T E
I NN F
li1 AH 1
NC1 OX 0 I EC P
H.t UN TS P
SM Y
S S
R SK E
E EN T
R F
CA S
E S
OT Y
T N
H S
A A
P W
K R
E NK T
T Y
AN S
k TA A
A T
W T
E R
I CE M
R E E
N kT i
E E T V
T L I
A US iU-L I T
S SA S
A b
Y t
I F C
O S
F A
7 TL CS N
0 A
E XN L O I
EC T,
EM A R D
NI U
RN C LE W
OO tEI I
A I M A
NL R
F H H
I C 0
D EC L
0 B
l I
A C
U i
T&
C S
tQ4 I
E I.
+
M S
T I 4 E
R S
H E
A
- E C
T W
M L
N U 7
D O G I
I I I F
U T F Q
A
]*
i S
I.
1 P
N M
E U
W P
(P R
E C
]
I TS H
ES U
lEs 0
[NCWT
[
WT I
(
(
- VTK K
g 1
EN M
NI SN N
A OTAA A
I A
I T
A P _
M U
P P
ar K
i N
P t
A P
T I
S H
NE S
I G AR RU DS H.t N K T
I N
S A A Y
R T S
S D
N S N
E I
K T S
- P I
K T A O N N
YM A
N S R T E
I S D 0 T W t
L O E E N
L E
1 Y D D T T H T S C E T E N S C WT D
I M i C c I
A Y U n l
K A CO IA fir E
k P A N E t
1 l
W Y
AO D A t
V K S
D.
0 S
k Fk L
E 0
I S
D 0 S R A G G a
. V 1
NN T N P 1 G 1 k
N P t
! I E
A OI S
I E h S 6 A
I fM D
L NT R
CA I
A G U 1
E ll P S e N NC 0
t N D R N
b R.
F N G C t
T S
M P A OA h
DD D
U t
1V A A I
A K n l
A H
S N T
S -
l' H
P h I
Nhl 1
t S
U W C I
O D S N u P t 0 I
LD 0 K M A 1 i
T 1
H N N A s t
A A A.
l A
A NO H
1 O L -
k S I'
O N
N u D I
Ol O
(
C t
O
(
iS C
Si P T T
N I"
e A
tA 6
r I
A t
N C H
t t
A t
h
- O C t
E
(
(oH P
t )N A S N N A N A
d S
P I t
1 V
I k R C f.
U s l
M V
t t
S i k
~
- ~
7 i
l j
g f
I
,l
1l I
lll l
ll'l,lljt S M OH H O 2'*
/
0 NHOCWM n.
t t
t 3CD mgM MH g OO C
aNe WWA [ gO0M)(N MD4N
(
WW WttOOt D
D r
0 n
3ak {
O T
N k I t A T a AD W
w M
DN E
F F T
$C S
S Y
E M S
R C A E
OE I
W R T T
O PS S
T A
u w
Q W
G d
N G D
I D I
L W L
O E O
O S
C IR j -
C DNAT TSE T
O
]
T K
1 MW*
M N
D EL I
A E
l t
T LC T
Y S
C
=
E E
T R
w r
=
3
=
y M
E T
c S
L E E
S Y
E V T
V E.
S R E
t A O 8
g b
W T lg y
W l
A I
g I
o IU F E
E D k
[
H t
y 0
R R
Q A T
T I
V L
L
~ -
L E I
I 4
~
F F
3 g
L
~ - ~
3 YE I.
L E
(
,g sI g
V A
L l
j R
A I
o g
f T g E
n V
A P
E S
[
[
RO TA Y
R N
E K
D D
N N
S N
E A
K D
U C
T h
lES A
A uTK I
M L
T I A A E
IN QSN A
A LWT l
k S
D m"
Z O
h)
S
)
N I
T A
A I
D IN t
s N
M A
A g
T w
s S
N t
i r
N O
h 1
M E
I
(
g L
N u
M t
s A
i a
lB H
S I
l WW i
}l(
l ll
l TABLE IV.A.1 TABLE IV.A.2 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report TABLE IV.A.1 1.
Effluent Treatment, Samoling and Analytical Procedures - Shiroincoort Treatment. Sampling Standard and/or Effluent Tyce and/or Monitorina Analytical Procedures (a) Steam System Directed to radwaste system if Secondary water is sampled for Blowcown radioactive. tiormally directed any radioactive contamination.
to discharge channel where it A 1000 ml 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-g aci/ml.
(b) Radicactive Collected, segregated and A 3000 mi sample is counted for Waste Liquids processed as one of two types gross grrn activity. 2 e counter of liquid wastes:
can measure a minimum detectable activity (MDA) of 4 x 10' i.C 1/ml.
(a) special waste Also, a 100ml sample is evaccrated (b) radioactive waste aM counted for g:Oss beta activity.
Sis counter can -easure a mini.um y
Sample taken of batch before detactable ac-ivity CW of 1 x 10 uCi/nl.
processing to remove radio-activity and reuse in plant systems. See Figure 4.4.
TABLE IV.A.2 1.
Effluent Treatment, Samoling and Analytical Procedures - Beaver Valley Treatment, Samoling Standard and/or Effluent Tyoe and/or Monitorinq Analytical Procedures (1) Steam System Recyclea or directed to Radwaste if distnarged, procedures adhere Bicwdown System for discnarge.
to Technical Specifications.
(b) Radioactive Cancentration of radioactive P-ocedures adhere to requirements Waste T.aterials released in waste of Technical Specifications.
j ef fluents shall not exceed values s;ecified in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B. Table !! for unrestricted areas, and the Environmental Tecnnical Specifications.
f _
l 1
i SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report TABLE IV.A.3 i
t j
2.
Results: Shippingport Effluent Type Results for 1983 i
(a) Steam System Because of final plant shutdown on October 1, Blowdown 1982, there were no boiler blowdowns during 1983.
i
)
(b) Radioactive Since Shippingport first went into operation i
Waste Liquids in 1957, the total activity of liquid waste discharged each year has decreased more or less continuously. For example, radioactivity exclusive of tritium decreased 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 1978, j
1979, 1980, 1981, or 1982, i
I Discharging of radioactive liquid waste resumed in 1983, with a total activity, exclusive of Tritium, of less than 0.0001 Ci being released.
r l
The total Tritium released was approximately j
0.672 C1 t
i TABLE IV.A.4 l.
2.
Results: Seaver Valley l_
Effluent Type Results for 1983 i,
(a) Steam System The Steam System Blowdown was recycled or Blowdown directed to the Radwaste System where it was monitored and discharged in accordance with i
conditions noted in the Environmental Technical Specifications
[
(b) Radioactive Liquid effluents from the Beaver Valley Waste Liquids Power Station were released in accordance i
with conditions noted in the Environmental Technical Specifications. No limits were
)
exceeded. These values have been reported l
in the Beaver Valley Power Station Semiannual
{
Effluent Reports for 1983.
I 1 - - - - - - - - -
L SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environ =ontal Report IV.
MONITORING EFFLUENTS i
B.
Monitoring of Airborne Effluents i
I 1.
Description of Airborne Effluent Sources 1
a.
Shippingport Atomic Power Station The potential source of airborne radioactivity associated with the Shippingport station is the radioactivity contained in the reactor coolant and canal systems. These systems contain the activated corrosion and wear products, activated impurities in reactor coolant, and small quantities of fission products originating from naturally occurring uranium impurity.
This material could become airborne from reactor coolant and canal sampling operations, defueling operation, maintenance and overhaul operations, or working on contaminated components removed from these systems.
Stringent radiological controls which have been developed during 26 years of operations at Shippingport are exercised during these operations to prevent radioactivity from becoming airborne. Cobalt-60 is 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 airborne during operations on contaminated components removed from these systems.
- However, strict radiological surveillance is maintained throughout the
- plant, including continuous monitoring of airborne radioactivity in the operating spaces to ensure that concentrations are less than the uncontrolled 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-efficiency particulate air filters.
These filters are routinely serviced, changed, and tested in place.
SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report The principle environmental release points for the Shippingport Atomic Power Station are the 4
containment ventilation exhaust and the Radioactive
'n'aste Processing System exhaust. These points are continuously monitored, and analyses are performed on charcoal cartridges weekly for I-131 and 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, 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 for tritium for each release point. i
l SECTION IV FIGURE 4.6 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report SUAGE TANWS RESIN STCMCE fa MS FLASH T/.?44 SPRAY RECYCLE TANK 1
GAS STRIPPER T
VENT CAS i
CCMPRESSCRS HYCRCGEN ANALY2ER AND CAYRYTIC HYCRCCEN SURNER PRESSURE REDUC;NG VALVE
~
VENT GAS 4870 CU9tc FT (STP)
SURGE CRUM GAS CECAY CRUMS I 133 CU8tc FT EACH (STF) o ir TEST TANKS CtLUTICN CHEMICAL WASTE TANXS FANS Ion ExChangerc l
l STACX GAS MCNITCRS
-- TO STACX Shi;;1::g;ert A::=1: P:ver Stati:n Osseous Fadicactive *.'aste Pr:cessi.4 Syste:
FIGURE 4.6.
SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report IV.
MONITORING EFFLUENTS t
a.
Shippingport Atomic Power Station (continued)
Reactor plant exhausts from the Decontamination Room, Sample Preparation
- Room, Radiochemistry Laboratcry, Gaseous Waste System, Compacting Station, and Decontamination Waste Drain Receiver Tank are continuously sampled with fixed filter samplers. These samples are analyzed weekly for gross beta, and composited monthly to identify gamma emitting isotopes.
Processing of noble gases (predominantly short lived Xe-133) is accomplished by collecting and storing the gases in Shippingport RWP vent gas system. After sampling and analysis, the gases are 1
released when the storage tanks are full. Figure t
4.6 shows a schematic diagram of the gaseous waste system in the radioactive waste disposal system at Shippingport.
b.
Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS)
The Beaver Valley Power Station identifies isotopes f
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 is performed.
The principle gamma emitters include noble
- gases, iodines, and particulates.
Figure 4.7 shows the gaseous radwaste system at Beaver Valley Power Station.
The environmental gaseous 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 also done on charcoal cartridges for I-131, I-133, and I-135 that have continuously sampled the gas stream for a week.
Weekly continuous samples are also obtained on filter paper to identify particulate gamma emitting isotopes.
Composites of the particulate samples are analyzed monthly for gross alpha determinations and monthly for Sr-89 and Sr-90.
i 1 1
5 r,
y.,
_y...,,. _ _. -.. _. - _.,. _,. - -,, _ _. ~.. _. _.
CMO1-eHO4' d
1 2
~
- HO3W c.N
/
r C
dEmMf.M" M pQ Oo* p n
4O0W $ ocNg EaWOHO"r g m3:<
o
$aH Wmyo1 P
45eN
?f,,* $ ;aQ$O.*0QgN gh 7P.
~
I M*
+
- h C
tiR Lt 0w 0o T.
CT R
EH O
L P
S H
T j
A T
R O
0 T
R E
5 E
E S
T T
E L
L R
I I
F F
F M
E E
O D
R C
P S
AC c
KN A
o T
x E
G c
s R
T n
U t
c a
g e
jA r
5 D
n L
o B
L M
4 0
E C
f R
0 b
- A 1
I C
G j
N I
E tE Y
>^
3 C
AE 3
O CN g
R EA h
g P
DT t
l E
i ET B
L TE S
I A
L F
E W
B E
E T
L S A IV A
R O
E I
T U
C C
T C A
L I
R o
A I
T H
F R 7
i D
C A
4 J
L P I
j T
A F
AK CE O
E 5
EA C
C' J
I fA R
LT A
E H
IF S
C AC
[
\\'\\
-\\
s
.\\
'k\\ \\',-
0N a
f A
1 I
1 k
Y se a
A E t
CM P
EA DT V
T C
t S
F t
R E
l I
A L
V I
R H
r f
C V
k e
i v
A l.
b g
ey
-gw W
f fa S
F t
P s
FE E
r p
C IE I
H P'
A l
k t
I tr P
o F
l t
g 4
I IH
't.
u' S
A w
A c
t g
M' i
J F
l T
I m
V R
l
- 1 A
DD i
l M
?
R k
W d
A l
(
M A
I.
c V
N' l
l E
1 N
C iT A
hj I
P l
l A
s 4
N I 7 1
A f
m t
> p L
T l
i L
N F
T g
$r C
S L
p O,
Cg O
W e
a A,
E S(
g
].
,i 1
.il!{
l ij
, i
,I; lil; i
ll
=--_-.
SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report i
IV.
MONITORING EFFLUENTS 2.
Airborne Effluent Treatment and Samuling a.
Shippingport Atomic Power Station l
Gaseous wastes stripped from the reactor coolant at the Shippingport Station are circulated through a hydrogen analyzer and catalytic hydrogen burner l
system where the hydrogen is removed.
The gases are initially stored in a vent gas surge drum, and subsequently compressed and transferred to one of four gas storage drums.
The decayed gases are sampled prior to release.
In addition, the exhaust from the containment is equipped with high i
efficiency particulate air filters and monitoring devices to prevent releases
.of radioactive particulates. Protective devices are utilized in
{
the event of high airborne activity to automatically seal off the primary containment to prevent an inadvertent release of radioactivity.
Reactor plant exhausts from the Decontamination
- Room, Sample Preparation Room, Radiochemistry Laboratory, Compacting Station, and Decontamination-Waste Drain Receiver Tank are also equipped with high efficiency particulate air filters, and are l
continuously monitored for radioactive particulates by the use of fixed filter menitors. Exhausts from the Gaseous Waste System are filtered and sampled for radioactivity at the release point also.
Continuous air monitors are located within the containers, and other plant areas to constantly monitor the condition of the air. A stack release diagram is shown in Figure 4.8 identifying 4
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 chilled to condense most of the water vapor. Gases from the degasifier vent chillers contain primarily 1
hydrogen and water vapor.
A small amount of
{
nitrogen and traces of the radioisotopes xenon, krypton, cobalt, cesium, manganese and iodine are also present in the gaseous effluent.
i 2
}
i I 1
SECTION IV FIGURE 4.8 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report SECIICN IV DISCHARGE POI?.'TS - CASECUS WASTES Ventilation Vent k
SLCRS Vent g
1
/
I
/
/
C V
/
Containment Ventilation System (Centainment Air Normally recirc.-not vented)
Auxiliary Building Ventilation System Exhausts Gaseous wastes to Cooling Tcuer; Air Ejector CASECUS RELEASE POT'!TS - EEAVER VALLEY PCWER STATICN Waste Disposal Building
+ Fuel Handling Building
-Service 31dg. EAausts
'='
(Filt ered)
,/
-Concrete Enclosure 1
- Emerg. Filtration Exhaust 4-Ca s ecu s Wa s t e
" Ventilation Exhause (Filtered) ;
Release (Filtered)
Air Ejector CASECf?S *ELEASE ?OT?:TS - guippt;;gpeg; A7 cure ymgg 37A7tc3 FIGURE 4.3 -_.
i i
SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIG!IT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report IV.
MONITORING EFFLUENTS b.
Beaver Valley Power Station (continued) i The overhead gas compressor directs the radioactive 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).
A quantity of gas is periodically discharged from the surge tank to one of the three (3) decay tanks for eventual release to the atmosphere via the process vent on top of the cooling tower.
After the decay tanks are sampled and authorization obtained for discharge, the flow of the waste gases from the decay tanks (2 scfm) is recorded and rapidly diluted with about 1000 scfm of air in order to limit hydrogen s
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 of the gaseous waste disposal filters, each of which consists of a charcoal bed and a high efficiency filter. The filtered gases are then discharged by one of the gaseous waste disposal i
blowers to the atmosphere via the process vent on the top of the cooling tower. The radioactivity levelsmof 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 go above the allowable setpoint, a signal from the 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 Ventilation Vent located on top of the Auxiliary Building or the Supplementary Leak Collection and Release System (SLCRS) Vent located on top of the Reactor Containment Building or the Process Vent located on top of the Cooling Tower.
i I
l-
! 1 i
SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT C0}!PANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report Areas in the Auxiliary Building subject to radioactive contamination are monitored for radioactivity prior to entering the common ventilation vent.
These individual radiation monitors aid in identifying any sources of contaminated air. The ventilation vent is also monitored continuously and sampled periodically.
Upon a high activity alarm, automatic dampers divert the system's exhaust air stream through one 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.
l l
l l
l l
1 __
T SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report IV.
MONITORING EFFLUENTS b.
Beaver Valley Power Station (continued)
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 buildup on the charcoal and HEPA filters. The 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 Gaama Ray Spectrum 3 x 10-/
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 3 x 10-7 pCi/cc for l
the predominant nuclide of Xe-133.
l
. ~
DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY' SECTION IV 1963 Annual Radiological Environmental Report IV.
MONITORING EFF1.t'E':TS Analvtical Procedures for Sameling Airborne Effluents (continued) 3.
Air Exhausts Sampling Type of Sample Type Frequency Activity Analysis Doctectable Limits (1) Air from the Plant Ventilation Continuous Gross Gamma 1.2 x 10 uCi/cc (Cas, Channel 8 ORMS)*
Exhaust Effluent Stream
-10 5 x 10 uci/cc (Particulate 1 Channel 12 ORMS)*
(2) Particulate Filter in Plant Continuous Gross Beta 1 x 10 uC1/cc ventilation Effluent Stream Weekly Sample (Particulate)
.g3 and Gaseous Waste System Exhaust Particulate filter in Plant Continuous Principle Gamma 1 x 10 uC1/cc Ventilation Effluent Stream Monthly Composite Particulate and Gaseous Vaste System Exhaust (Weekly if Gross Beta i i x 10~13) 2 x 10'L3 uCi/cc Particulate Filter in Plant Continuous Cross Alpha Ventilation Effluent Stream Monthly Particulate
.g4 and Caseous Weste System Exhaust Particulate Filter in Plant Continuous Sr-89. Sr-90
$ x 10 uCi/al (Sr-89)
Ventilation Effluent Stream Quarterly 1 x 10" ' uCi/ml (Sr-90) and Gaseous Waste System Exhaust Particulate I
1 x 10'I uci/ml (3) Charcoal Cartridge in Plant Continuous I-131 f
Ventilation Effluent Stream Weekly
.g3 and Gaseous Weste Systes Exhaust I-133. I-135 1 x 10 uC1/a1 (I-133)
Charcoal Cartridge in Plant Monthly Ventilation Effluent Stream Monthly 1 x 10 uC1/ml (I-135'
~
and Gaseous Waste System Exhaust (4) Evacuated Bomb Sample In Monthly H
2 x 10 uC1/ml Plant Ventilation Effluent Stream and Caseous Waste System Exhaust 1 x 10' ' 41/cc (5) Particulate Filter in Reactor Continuous Cross Beta Plant Exhaust from Decontami-Weekly Particulate nation Room. Sample Preparation Room. Radiochemistry 1.aboratory.
Compactine Station, and Decon-tamination Waste Drain Receiver Tank.
3 Particulate filter in Reactor Continu'ous Principal Gama 1 x 10 41/cc Plant Exhaust from Decontami-Monthly Composite Particulate nation Room. Sample Preparation (Weekly if Gross
~
Beta 1 1 x 10 13)
Room. Radiochemistry 1.aboratory.
Compacting Station. and Decon-tanination '.*aste Drain Receiver Tank.
ORMS - Operational Radiation Monitoring System
- Although the CRMS Channels have no specific function as far as effluent monitoring and reperting It is also ncted channels are being listed for infer-atien eurposes.
is cencerned, these two (2) these channels pr: vide alar-functi:ns,in the Main Centrol Pcce when leve's of ?.! x 10
that 41/cc are reached en Channel 9. or. x 10-9 uC1/c: an Channel 12.
Additi:nalu. ner s=t the ventilation system butterfly valves vnen levela of 1.2 x 10~' *C1/ e are rea:ned en Oanne; 5 or 1 x 10**
41/ c on Channel 1;.
SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report IV.
MONITORING EFFLUENTS 3.
Analytical Procedures for Sampling Airborne Effluents (continued) b.
Beaver Valley Power Station The following tabulates the gaseous sampling and analysis schedule Detectable Gaseous Sampling Type Of Concentrations Source Frequency Activity Analysis (uCi/ml)a D
(1) Wasta Cas Decay Tank Each Tank Principal Gamma Emitters 10-4 Releases 6
(2) Containment Purge Each Purge
' Principal Camma Emitters 10-4C Releases
-6 H-3 10
,b,e (3) En*ironmental Release Monthly Principal Gamma Emitters 10-*
Points (Gas Samples)
-6 H-3 10
-12 Weekly I-131 10 (Charcoal Sample)
-10 Weekly,
I-133 I-135 10 (Charcoal Sample)
~ll Weekly Principal Gamma Emitters 10 (Particulates)
(Ba 'a-140, I-131, and others)
-l^'
Monthly r ss a M
d Composite (Particulates)
-l^'
Quarterly Sr-and St-M M
d Composite (Particulates)
- The above detectability limits for activity analysis are based on technical feasibility and o the potential significance in the environment of the quantities released. For so=e nuclider lower detection limits may be readily achievable, and when nuclides are measured below the stated limits, they should also be reported.
b 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 measur:.
- Analyses shall also be performed following each refueling, startup, or similar operational occurrence which could alter the mixture of nuclides.
d To be representative of the average quantities and concentrations of radioactive materials...
particulate form released in gaseous effluents, samples should be collected in proportion tv the rate of flow of the effluent stream.
_ 47 _
SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report IV.
MONITORING EFFLUENTS 4.
Results a.
Shippingport Atomic Power Station Analyses for the particulate airborne radioactivity 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 1983, there were six (6) instances where activity attributable to plant operations was measured.
In each of these instances, Cobalt-60 activity was measured in the Decontamination Room Waste Receiver Exhaust.
The total amount of Cobalt-60 activity released was 0.000000008330 Ci with concentrations ranging from 2.10 x 10-15 Ci/cc to 1.51 x 10-13pCi/cc/
These concentrations are all well below Federal limits.
Radiostrontium analyses at,aarterly composite air filter samples showed Sr-89 and Sr-90 concentrations in air which were at or near the minimum detectable concentrations of 5 x 10 -14 pCi/ml, and 1 x 10 -14 pCi/ml, respectively. The levels of Sr-89 and Sr-90 observed were extremely low and are typical of
" background air" radiostrontium levels. Also, Carbon-14 activities in gaseous effluent releases were estimated based on analysis of primary coolant and analysis of Radioactive Waste Processing System vent gas and tritium activities in gaseous effluents were estimated based on canal water tritium levels.
These activity levels were consistent with past reported levels considering plant operations during 1983.
There were five (5) releases of gaseous radioactivity from the Shippingport Atomic Pcwer Station during 1983.
The total gaseous radioactivity released from the Shippingport Atomic
- _ _. _. _ =
SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report Power Station during 1983 was approximately 0.0000205 curies of Xe-133.
The amount of radioactivity released from the Shippingport Atomic Power Station during 1983 was extremely small and had a negligible effect on the environment as shown in Section V.I.6.
I b.
Beaver Valley Power Station i
Gaseous effluents from the Beaver Valley Power Station were released in accordance with conditions noted in the Environmental Technical f
Specifications. No limits were exceeded.
These i
values have been reported in the Beaver Valley Power Station Semi-Annual Effluent Reports for 1983.
j 1
i i-k i
t i
i 1
l i
i i
1
-:.9 -
I 1
,,__..,,..___.m_,.,m,-,
.,,.___,.y
_-,._._,g.__._..-___.__~,
,,--...,_,___,_.....m._
f SECTION IV DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report IV.
MONITORING EFFLUENTS C.
Solid Waste Discosal at the Shirpingport and Beaver Vallev Power Stations i
During the Shippingport Atomic Power Station defueling efforts and Beaver Valley Power Station normal operations and i
periodic maintenance, small quantities of solid radioactive waste materials were generated 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 waste.
At Shippingport Atomic Power Station and the Beaver Valley Power Station, the compactable wastes were segregated and compressed in a 55 gallon drum 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 Regulatory Commission (SRC) or a state under agreement with the NRC.
No radioactive waste material was buried at the Shippingport or Beaver Valley Power Station site.
l All containers used for packaging, transport, and disposal of radioactive materials met the requirements of the United States Department of Transportation and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Shipments of fsite were made in accordance with Department of Transportation regulations.
Figure 4.9 depicts solid waste handling at the site.
In 1983, the Shippingport plant disposed of a total of 14,130.5 cubic feet of radioactive solid waste having a total radioactivity of about 15.334 curies. This included twenty 4
(20) shipments of low level wastes.
At Beaver Valley Power Station approximately 7,417 cubic feet of radioactive solid waste was shipped offsite in 1983. The actual burial volume of solid waste is slightly higher due to container size (8127 cubic feet). The thirty (30) shipments contained a total activity of 475.1 curies.
Industrial solid wastes from both plants were collected in j
portable bins, and removed to an approved o f fsite burial ground.
No burning or burial of wastes was conducted at either the Beaver Valley or Shippingport plant.
i h
1
' i I
SECTION IV FIGURE 4.9 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report SECTICN IV SOLD WASTE DISPCSAL DIACRAM FIGLJRE 4,9 RADIOMN'IVE SOI.0) WASTE DISPOSAL Misc. Radioactive Compactor and Solid Wastes Drumming Station
]
5
'~
C
- 00 00 1
Radioactive Waste Sludge Solidify-3 Discosal Evannrator ino Station m
?
>o
~-Q g
Spent Radioactive Special Shipping o
Resin Casks & Containers
(
7 00' ryfo o-g INDUSTRIAL SOLE WASTE DISPOSAL DIACRAM i
Water Filtered;
/= ?"ZL Filt ers drummed----
1 4
3 g
m Sludge From Water
- (
)
Treatment Plant and o,
Sewage Treatment OO'
'O n' >_;
I Plant (BVPS) 8 i
w Trash Basket - Beaver Valley Debris and Trash Hopper c Screenhouse Shippingport 3
l From Screenhouse j
I c
'O O G
0
~
m
- ">c d
Trash & Carbage Storage Bin CL[
.c FIGURE 4.9 l
SECTION V - A DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING A.
Environmental Radioactivity Monitoring Program 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 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 and Soils Monitoring 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 i
i l
l' I
i-I L
1 l
- - ~ _.
.. - _. ~.. _
TABLE V.A.1 CONSOLIDATED RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENIAL MONiiORING PROGRAM d8 DtC Sample Sample Analysis Type of Sample Points Sector Miles Sample Point Description Sample Frequency Preparation Frequency Analysis (b)
IdI Gross Beta. ICI I-1 31 Air Particulate 13.
11 1.6 Meyer's Farm Continuous Sampling Weekly Composite and Radiolodine 30 4
0.6 Shippingport, PA. (S.S.)
with sample collec-46.1 3
2.4 Industry, PA 4 Tire Co.)
tion at least Monthly Composite (d)
Gamma -scan weekly 32 15 0.8 Midland, PA ('i.S.)
48(a) 10 16.5 Weirton, WV (s)
Quarterly Composite (d) 51 5
8.0 Aliquippa, PA (S.S.)
Sr-89,90 47 14 4.8 East Liverpool, 011 27 7
6.2 Brunton's Farm g
28 1
8.7 Sherman's Farm 3
298 3
8.1 Beaver County llospital 3s
=
2.
Direr.t 30 4
0.6 Shippingport, PA (S.S.)
Continuous Quarterly (k)
~
gg)
Radiation 13 14 1.6 Meyer's Farm (TLD)
Annually Gamma-Dose F 8 46 3
2.5 Industry,PA(Church)
S 8 32.
15 0.8 Midland, PA (S.S.)
o, C
48 (a) 10 10.5 Weirton, WV (a) 3 5 f
1 8
45.1 6
,,, 2 0 '
Raccoon Twp, PA Kennedy's Crnts'.
g r-u 51 5
8.0
,fAliquippa, PA (S.S.)
M 47 14 46 / fast Liveipool, OH, ~ ~,
'i
,, b' m
a 70 1
3.6 West. Byr. School 3
n "f
y g 80 9
8.4 Raccoon Park
'3 3.9 h thside. School 81 9.
f 82 9
7.1
' %.a.et-Municipal Bldg.
2 5 83 10
- 4. 5, Mill Creek Rd 3
I4
.11,_'
. 2. 5 Hvokstown 84j
' 1i } / e - R.5 Nncon Co. Children Home t"
, 85 12f 5.8 Ris, 8 & 30 Intersection
'f g
,f 86 13
- d. t E. Liverpool Cahills House
'f y
92 f*
J.0 Georgetown Rd.
87 14
'10 I Calcutta.Poad
/
88 15
- 31 fidland Heights f
89 15 f.1
.UH> villa
, 16
- f. 2,f fairview School 90 10 4
- 0. 8 Shippingport Boro, PA 47 5
/,2 Mt. Pleasant Church
/-
<. ~
60 '
13 3.'.'
.'tancy's Far m
~
91 16 1.3 Sunset flills, Midland 55 10 2.4 McCleary Rd,lloille Williams r
W
- ,.w
- C U
S.S. - Substation m
s w
4
. _... ~.. -.. _ -
TABLE V.A.)
j CONSOLIDATED RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM y,
(Continued) h
~
Dt C S
i Sample Sample Analysts g
.c Type of Sample Points Sector Miles Sample Point Description Sample frequency Preparation Frequency Analysis 2.
Direct 28 1
8.7 Sherman's Farm Continuous Quarterly Gaasne-Dose Radiation 71 2
5.6 Brighton Twp. School (TLD)
Annually (Continued) 12 3
3.2 togan School 298 3
8.1 Beaver Count y Hospital 73 4
2.2 Potter Twp. School 74 6.8 Comm. Col-Center Twp.
15 5
4.3 Holt Rnad i
76 6
3.8 Raccoon Twp. School 77 6
5.8 Green Garden P.d (W.tyne's) 59 7
1.1 frons 3
j 78 7
2.3 Raccoon Mun. Oldq.
27 7
6.2 Brunton's Farm F
79 8
4.6 Rt. 18 & Rt. 151 E
15 14 3.3 Georgetown 46.I 3
2.1 Industry PA Tire Co.
8 m
l 91 2
3.7 Pine Grove Rd and Doyle Rd E g 94 8
2.4 McCleary Rd, Wilson
& Q
)
g"
=m vJ. Surface 49.1 4
5.0 Arco Polymers (a)
Intermittent knthly Composite of Gross Beta E ;;
e Water 2.1 14 1.3 Downstream (Midland) Crucible Composite Samples (j) Weekly Sample (d)
Gross Alpha g
s Collected Weekly Gasona-scan 7
3 13 0.2 Shippingport Atomic Power Weekly' Grab Quarterly Composite Co-66, H-3 1 g n
Station Discharqe Samples Only Sr-89, Sr-90 3 g 49 (a) 3 3.2 Montgomery Dam j $
(Upstream) s 2A 13 0.2 Downstream BVPS Outfall 0
5 14 4.8 East Liverpool (raw water)
Daily Grab Sample
~
t Only - Collected Weekly (J)
F 1
^
33 I
4.
Groundwater 13 11 1.6 Meyer's Farm j
14 11 2.6 Hookstown, PA 15 15 3.3 Georgetown, PA i
11 3
0.8 Shippinqport Boro Quarterly Quarterly Gannua-scan, Gross Beta, Gross Alpha, j
5.
Drinking 4
14 1.3 Midlanit, PA (flidiand Water Intermittent W9ekly Composite of Gassna-scan, 1-131 h
j Treatment Plant)
Sample Collected DailySample_id)
F.
j Weekly MonthlyComposit.e{d)
Gross Alpha, Gross Beta 1
5 14 4.8 Fast t tver pool, OH (Last Quarterly Composite (d)
Liverpool Water treatment 2
Plant)
I
)
I l
i 1
u.
TABLE V.A.1 E
CONSOLIDATED RADIOiOGICAL ENVIRONilENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM E3
( Cont inued )
DtC Sample Sample Analysis Type of Sample Points Sector Miles Sample Point Description Sample Frequency Preparation Frequency Analysis (b) 6.
Shorelino 2A 13 0.2 Downstream DVPS Outfall Semiannual Semiannual Gamma-scan, Gross Beta Sediment Gross Alpha 3
13 0.2 Vicinity SAPS Discharge Uranium Isotopic 49 3
3.2 Upstream Side of Montgomery Sr-89, 90 Dam (a) 50 13 8.2 Upstream side of New Cumberland Dam 7.
Miln 25 10 2.1 Searight's Dairy Weekly Weekly sample from I-131 Searight's only 3
61*
12 3.2 Allison Biweekly (g) 5 WeekI H grazing)
Gansna-scan
'd 69*
7 3.6 Collins When animals are Monthly (indoors)
Sr-89, 90 y
96(a) 10 10.3 Windsheimer on pasture; I-131 Cs-137 E
98*
5 2.9 foxall monthly at other 100*
I4 2.8 Doughty times.
g m
27 7
6.2 Brunton's Dairy (h)
Monthly Monthly Gamma-scan Sr-89, 90 Eg 29(a) 3 8.3 Nicol's Dairy (h)
"2 8.
Fish 2A 13 0.2 Vicinity of BVPS #1 Semiannual Composite of edible Gamma-scan on edible t
Station Discharge and parts by species (1) portions 0h u
Shippiagport Dis. Sta.
~$
u 49(a) 3 4.7 Upstream Side of G' n Montgomr ry Dam io4
,SE 9.
food Crops (Shipp.) 10 4
0.8 (three locations within Annual at Composite of each Gamma-scan jl (Georg.) 15 14 3.3 5 miles Selected by harvest if sample species 1-131 on green (indus.) 46 3
2.5 Company) available leafy vegetables 4a(a) 10 16.5 Weirton, Wif m
- 10. Feedstuff and 25 10 2.1 Searight 's Dairy Farm Mon _thly Monthly Gamma-scan Q
Summer Forage Quarterfy Quarterly Composite Sr'90
~
- 11. soil 13 11 1.6 Meyer's farm Every 3 years 12 Core Samples Gamma-scan 30 4
0.6 Shippingport, Pa.
(1982,1985,etc.)
3" Deep (3" Dia.
Sr-90 46 1
?.6 Industry, Pa.
at each location Gross Beta 32 15 0.8 (North of Site) Midland (approx. 10' Gross Alpha 48(a) 10 16.5 Weirton, W. Va.
radius)
Uranium Isotopic 51 5
8.0 Aliquippa, Pa.
47 14 4.8 E. Liveipool, Oh.
2/
7 6.2 Bsunton's Dairy 22 8
0.3 South ni BVPS Site 29A 3
41. 3 Nichul's Dairy w
- Additional dairies required by Invironmental Technical Specif ication 3.2 l.D.2.
In addition to Searight's (Site 25), three dairies are selected E
when milk is available based on highest deposition factors. Sites 27 and 294 are required for the Shippingport program.
w
SECTION V - A DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report TABLE V.A.1 I
CONSOLIDATED RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM (Continued) i l
Notes:
(a) Control sample station:
These are locations which are presumed to be outside the influence of plant effluents.
[
(b) Typical LLD's for Gamma Spectrometry are shown in Table V.A.4 (c) In these cases a gamma isotopic analysis is done if the gross beta activ' exceeds the reporting level of 0.53pci/m3, (d) Analysis composites are well mixed actual samples prepared of equal portions from each shorter term samples from each L
location.
(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).]
Brunton's and N' col's are collected (h) The milk samples from i
once per month.
j (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 l
the water treatment plant operator at location 5.
(k) Two (2) TLD's are collected quarterly and annua 11y from each monitoring location.
i J
1 1
1 SECTION V - A DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY
)
1983 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 Gross Beta...
ENUIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM
SUMMARY
Name of f acility Duquesne Light Company Docket No. 50-334 en Pennsylvania Reporting Period Annual 1%3 Location of f acility Beaver [ County, State) y O
Analysis and Lower Limit Amber of Z
Nedium or Pathway Total hunber of All Indicator tocations Location with Highest Quar. Mean Control locations Nonroutine Simpled of Analysis Detection
- F Mean (f)
Name
- Mean(f) **Mean (f)
Reported
{ Unit of Measurement) Performed (LLD)
- Range Distance and Directions ** Range
- Range Measurements ***
i Weirton,WV W>
l No. 48 W
Air Particulate Gross (520) 2.5 18(520/520)
Sherman Dairy No. 28 19(52/52) 18(52/52) 0 y
i and Radiotodine Beta (6.1-44)
(8.3-44)
(6.9-38)
A (X10-3pC1/Cu. M.)
Sr-89(40) 2 LLD 4r Sr-90 (40) 0.1 0.13(3/40)
Sherman Dairy No. 28 0.15(1/12) 0.12(1/12) 0 (0.12-0.15) g
- p. c:
D o tn Gamma (120)
Be-7 20 96(120/120)
Sherman Dairy No. 28 104(12/12) 98(12/12) 0 o
(31-151)
(67-151)
(49-147)
$[o i
K-40 10 31(23/120)
Industry, Pa No. 46 70(2/12) 23(1/12) 0 u
(12-87) 2.0 miles - NNE (54-87) y$
$O Ra-226 10 13(1/120)
Beaver Co. H. No. 298 13(1/12)
LLD 0
o-8 miles--ENE D!D Others Table V.A. 4 LLD D M 4
a W
2 a
1 H
~ ~ WnIn'il tower Limit of Detection (LLD)
- N Mean and range based upon detectable measurements only. Fraction of detectable seasurenents at specified locations is indicated in parentheses (f)
Nonroutine reported neasurements are defined in Regulatory Guide 4.8 (Decenter 1975) and the Beaver Valley rower Station Technical Specifications (Appendix B) y
.~
I l
ENUIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MUNITORING PROGRAM Suf 2 MARY Name of f acility Duquesne light Company Docket f40.
50-3 %
us tocation of f acility Beaver Pennsylvania Reporting Period Annual 1983 M
ounty,St7el O
H Analysis and Lower Limit Nunber of O
Medium or Pathway Tot al Nurber of All Indicator locationis location with liljhest Quar. Mean Control locations Nonroutine 4
Sanpled of Analysis Det ect ion
- F8ean(f)
Name
- *Me anTf )~*WL-(l )
Reported (Unit of Measureviierit) Performed (LtD)
- Range Distance and Directions ** Range
- Range Measurements ***
I Montgomery 7 am p
No. 49 e
5ediment Gross (8) 0.3 17(8/8)
Montgomery Dan No. 49 22(2/2)
Sane as 0
(pCl/9)
Alpha (9.7-34)
River Mlle -- 31.0 (9.7-34) liigh Location (dry weight) h Gross (H) 1.0 30(8/8)
SAPS Discharge No. 03 33(2/2) 27(2/2) 0 u
Beta (23-38)
River Mile --34.8 (29-38)
(23-31)
H Sr-89 (8) 0.2 LLD
$ec Sr-90 (8) 0.04 0.076(5/8)
Montgomery Dan No. 49 0.099(1/2)
Sarie as 0
(0.041-0.11) -
River Mile -- 31.0 liigh Location om e v1 Garmna (8)
SN Be-7 0.2 0.51(3/8)
BVPS Discharge No. 02 0.69(1/2) 0.32(1/2) 0 N
(0.32-0.69)
River Mile -- 35.0 H@
mH u
K-40 0.5 12(8/8)
SAPS Discharge No. 03 13(2/2) 12(2/2) 0 yn (8.9-16)
River Mile -- 34.8 (11-16)
(11-14)
,c3 Co-60 0.03 0.44(4/8)
BVPS Discharge No. 02 0.65(2/2)
LLD 0
,h (0.22-0.88)
River. Mile -- 35.0 (0.42-0.88)
O Cs-137 0.02 0.33(8/8)
SAPS Discharge No. 03 0.40(2/2) 0.28(2/2) 0 g
j (0.19-0.50)
River Mile -- 34.8 (0.31-0.50) (0.26-0.29)
H Ra-226 0.1 2.3(8/8)
BVPS Olscharge No. 02 3.0(2/2) 2.2(2/2) 0 (1.4-4.1)
River Mile -- 35.0 (1.9-4.1)
(2.1-2.3)
~8 r1 Th-228 0.02 1.3(8/8)
BVPS Discharge No. 02 1.7(2/2) 1.2(2/2) 0 (1.0-1.8)
River Mile -- 35.0 (1.6-1.8)
(1.1-1.2) g Hg Nominal Lower Limit of Detection (LLD)
Mean and range based upon detectable measurements only. fraction of detectable measurements at specified locations is indicated in parentheses (f)
Nonroutine reported measurements'are defined in Regulatory Guide 4.8 (Decenber 1975) and the Beaver Valley Power Station Technical Specifications (Appendix B) l
- n
.i
=.
~
ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM SUfe%RY Name of Facility Duquesne Light Company Docktt No. 50-334 0
Location of Facility Beaver, Pennsylvania Reporting Period Annual 1983 H
(County, State)
Analysis and Lower Limit Number of 4
Medium or Pathway Total Number of All Indicator Locations Location with Highest Quar. Mean Control Locations Monroutine i
Sampled of Analysis Det ect ion
- Mean (f)
Name
- Me3n (f) **Mean (f)
Reported (Unit of Measurement) Performed (LLD)
- Range Distance and Directions ** Range
- Range Measurements ***
p Montgomery Dam
)
No. 49 m
Sediment Others Table V.A. 4 LLD to l
(pCi/g)
(dry weight)
U-233(8) 0.01 0.63(8/8)
BVPS Discha19e No. 2A 0.71(2/2) 0.51(2/2) 0 (continued) and (0.38-0.90)
River Mile -- 34.8 (0.54-0.90)
(0.48-0.55)
U-234 mc U-235(8) 0.01 0.020(8/8)
N.Cunberland Dam No. 50 0.026(2/2) 0.017(2/2) 0 (0.011-0.040)
River Mile - 54.0 (0.011-0.0401 (0.013-0.020)
$ec:
l U-238 (8) 0.01 0.31(8/8)
SAPS Disdurge No. 3 0.50(2/2) 0.37(2/2) o M
(0.033-0.62)
River Mile - 34.8 (0.38-0.62)
(0.35-0.38) o$
ao m I
o r*
8 hO
- p i
p1 H ko Y?
4 BP
- k c
5
~
E a
l l'
y H
e Nominal Lower Limit of Detection (LLD)
Mean and range based upon detectable measurements only. Fraction of detectable measurements at specified locations is indicated in parentheses (f) 1 Nonroutine reported measurements are defined in Regulatory Guide 4.8 (December 1975) and the Beaver Valley Power Station Technical Specifications l
(Appendix B) p to
tcCh $M 'tHOMH nO@ pd H MM :<* N y
uM o:4 < ' >
n re$ $DhH gmc. O $ 9pmH ggHyaE atmW 3^m )t O 1 t a
0 r
'r
)
f(s n so ei st ea hc s
ti t
nf e
n ei f n laem ae e
rc oit 0
O 0
O -
O -
0 -
pp rut r S
eo;u n
b ros il mnpa a
uoee dc NNRM ti t n ah cc s
ie n
dT o
n i
e in t
l i
o a) pr si ct u o it o (
at a
e st l
st ng a
nS l
an ec o
o ea no ir rMR Ol t e tT **
aw nC*
lop co o
)
y f
de 3
n (
el 8
a e
il 9
e ng f a 1
M an iV ca i
c
.V k er l
a r**
pe u
a*
sv n
u a
Y n
Q s
t e W H A
n aB t
3 d
s io 5
t 4
2 se l
o e
t i
h y
t h l
0 U
nt fl s_
A ii to e
r g
t e
i r
nd P
H sin yW r a R
g h
t rS u
G o.
n t
s)
O N
i i
d i
n a -
a5 R
t w
a D
e7 P
t r
s m9 e
o n
e t e 1
G k
p I
c e
io c
hl e
N en R
D a at igi l
er o
R t
na m
b r
ab O-c7i s
a4 t n T
o e
ca I
l D
52 ec N
t e U
eD M
y d(
n L
a s
f8 A
p C
9 ia) n o
e a
nl io
)
)
4 I
s 0
n G
C
- lab, cJ
)2
)91
)a
)9 oe t
)
)
I h
O v
a 0
20
)
20 id L
t
)
1 2
1 ti O
y ot 4.
10 13 b - /
2 -
aG 2
2)
/0 1
/0 c u D
ig sy
/0 tG nt 4 -
/ -
/2 (s
1 (1
r A
L nn e
(0 65 2 -
$1
(
rH g M3 F y R
t u taAa o
i 52 (4.
(13 40 2
0 r
e P o er 1
0 b
00 7
00 D
o L
n 00
- 7. (0 24 L
.t L
A n
1(
0(
0 -
0(
L ya
,(
c-k T
e r~
i' a 0(
0 ll N
u e
d*
nu L
q v
n M
u a
I og e N
D e
sR O
B l
I t
y l
t R
y nn A
ei E
i l
4 t d V
i t
N l
i ni A.
r e c i un a
c i
n af t
V si f
a f
m o
3 e
ee f
i i) 0 3
3 5
l
) md o
f L
tD 0
3 5
0 0
0 b
D o
f cL a
ee l
e roel 0
0 0
0 0
0 T
ll r m n e
Dj t
(ba a
i o
o w
e a
N nt s t
l oct a
ien c
drs tt e o
nei
)
cem L
ab sd
)
2 ed e n ye 4
1 t
r sal n
(
(
enu is no 0
a 3
2 2
r pa Nan 1
6 8
s Dos ylAf 9
n7 0
1 2
2 e
f ue n-4 h
o m
l a r
atf e r
ae s
a h
t d
nooP S
GB K
C R
T O
t ed AT i se t
imat
)
br L
o n
e p) e rgeB y
m enr a
wa x
e w
r e
orei h
u g
t nd t
s a
din a
a r
)
nt e P
e o
t laaup dM f
h n
op re nrA olf d
ig inan (
po n) e aeo aut agw NMN hSi
/
ii y d
n nl r e
U epd M
(
f((
~
~
I g8 il1:il 5:i]j1}
- j]ii l!{
,j I!
1l11 ;s
- i.
- l I
l
_m
_ __ _ _, _ _.. ~. - - -
tn etn i
fNVIR0fMENTAl RA010 LOGICAL MONiiORING PROGRAM SUH1ARY N
I O
i
'A Name of f acility Duquesne Light Company Docket No.
50-334 i
Location of f acility ~ Beaver, Pennsylvania Reporting Period Annual 1983 7 County, State) p i
Analysis and Lower Limit Number of 1
Medium or Pathway Total Nuuber of All Indicator locations location with liighest Quar. Mean Control Locations Nonroutine Sanpled of Analysis Detection
- fteaRT}
Name
- Mean (f)
- Mean [f)
R@ ort ed
~
(Unit of Measurement) Performed (ilD)
- Hange
~ Distance armi Directions ** Range
- Range Measurements ***
r l
Weir ( E WV ~ C 4'8 N
a w
food and Garden I-131 (6) 0.006 LLD i
Crops (pCl/ )
k 9
(wet weight) h Gmuna (8) p Be-7 0.3 0.17(1/8)
Shippingport PA Na.10 0.17(1/2)
LLD H
O g
j K-40 0.5 4.6(8/8)
Weirton WV No. 48 5.9(3/3)
Smie as 0
$E I
(1.9-12) 20 miles - SW
( 3.4-12 )
High Location y
i o trl t
Cs-137 0.01 0.020(1/8)
Georegatown PA No. 15 0.020(1/1)
LLD 0
00 tn 4.6 miles -- t:W p
Others Table V.A. 4 ILD 0
"[
hb I
kd m
nn i
O O
$k t
c etm M
$o O
N 1
i
- l tzs l
Nominal Lower Limit of Detection (LtD) 4 a
Mean and range based upon detectatale measurements only. fraction of detectable measurements at specified locations,is indicated in parentheses (f)
}
Nonroutine reported measurements are defined in Regulatory Guide 4.8 (SEPTEMBER 1975) and the Beaver Valley Power Station Technical Specifications j
(Appendix B)
{
to i
k i
[
J
ENVIRONMENfAL RADIOLOGICAL MCDITORING PROGRAM $UPNARY g
n Name of f acility Duquesne L ight Company Docket No. _50-334
%o Location of f acility Beaver,founty. State)
Pennsylvania Reporting Period Annual 1983 04
(
8 3-Analysis and Lower Limit Nunter of Ndium er Pothway.
Total Nunter of All Indicator locations
~ Location with Highest Quar. Nan Control Locations Nonroutine Sanpled of Analysis Detection
- Mean (f)
Nane
- Mean (f) **%an (f)
Reported
~
g (thit of Measurunent) Performed (llD)
- Range Distance and Directions ** Range
- Range N asurements***
e C
Brunton Dairy w"
No. 27 Milk 1-131 (153)
LLO f
(pC1/t) u Sr-89 (123)
@w Sr-90 (123) 4.6(123/123)
Collins No. 69 10.l(19/19) 0 (0.43-18.0)
(3.9-18.0)
Ets A. c Gamaa (124)
K-40 1340(124/124)
Foxall No. 98 1710(8/8) 1330(12/12) 0 g
(686-2060)
(1270-2060)
(1070-1530) oo -a eM Cs-137 7.4(16/124)
Nichols No. 294 10.9(1/12)-
LLD 0
0t*
(4.0-13.6)
Hg M :n Others Table ir.A 4 LLD QH R8 8is P
O&
S, e
?
?
3 No6ainal Lower Limit of Detection (L10)
Nan and range based upon detectable measurements only. Fraction of detectable measurements at specified locations is indicated in parentheses (f)
- Nonroutine reported measuremer.ts are defined in Regulatory Guide 4.8 (December 1975) and the Beaver Valley Power Station Technical Specifications (Appendia B) gg t*
M h*
N
ENVIRONMENTAL RAal0 LOGICAL MON 110 RING PROGRAlt SuhMARY g
M Name of Facility Duquesne Light Con:pany Docket No. 50-3 M Q
H tocation of Facility Beaver, County,Statel Pennsylvania Reporting Period Annual 1983 O
(
1 Analysis and Lower Limit Numiser of Medium or Pathway Total Nunteer of All Indicator locations location with highest (}uar. Mean Control tocations Nonroutine Sampled of Analysis Detection
- Mean (l)
Name 7*(e M f) 7 ean (f)
Reported 5
~
M junit of Measuren.ent) Per formed (ttD)
- Range Distance and Directions ** Range
- Range Measureinent s* *
- 00 Weirton.WV l
i No. 48 y
l 0
i f aternal Radiation (175) 0.05 0.18(175/115)
No. 87 0.20(4/4) 0.19(4/4)
O c
(mR/ day)
(quarterly)
(0.12-0.22)
(0.19-0.21)(0.18-0.20)
(44 annual) 0.05 0.17(44/44)
No. 88 0.20(1/l) 0.18(1/1) 0 f e, (0.13-0.20) oc o$
mz m t-*
!?ii S
k8 i
Montgomery D m l
No. 49 f ish Ganima (8) gg p4 (pCi/g)
K-40 0.5 2.l(8/8)
Montgomery D a No. 49 2.2(3/3)
Same as O
rr (wet weight)
(0.43-3.2)
River Mile -- 31.0 (0.62-3.0) High Location Cs-137 0.01 0.039(1/8)
BVPS Discharge No. 02A 0.039(1/2) LLD 0
g River Mile -- 35.0 n3 l
o others Table V.A.4 LLD N
e H
Ntaminal tower Limit of Detection (ttD) b Mean and range based upon detectable measurenents only. fraction of detectable measureuents at specified locations is indicated in parentheses (f) r*
M
- Nanroutine reported measurements are defined in Regulatory Guide 4.8 (December 1975) and the Beaver Valley Power Station Technical Specifications (Appendia B) 4 U~
o
ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLCSICAL MONITORihG PRCSRAM Sutt1ARY O
i
)
Nar a of f acility Duquesne Light Company Docket No.
50-3 M s
o Penns Ivania Reporting Period Annual 1983 tocation of f acility Beaver (Couiit State) l 1
l Analysis and Lower Limit Number of Medium or Pathway Total Nunt>er of All Indicator tocations location with liighest_ quar. Mean Control tocations Nonroutine
]
54ngsled of Analysis Detection
- '~Mean (f)
Name
~**Mean (f) ' hean (f}
Reported i
junit of Measuronent) Pertnrmed (tLD)
- Range Distance and Directioqs ** Range
- R ange Measurements ***
e
}
Montgomery D m No. 49 8
1 4
Surf ace Water uross (72) 2 9.l(1/72)
Arco Po'lymers No. 49.1 9.l(1/12)
LLD (pCi/l)
Alpha y
W Gross (72) 1 5.3(11/72)
BVPS Discharge No. 02A 6.7(12/12) 5.2(12/12)
O H
Bet a (1.2-15)
River Mile -- 35.0 (3.9-11)
(3.6-6.9)
Ets i
l Ganna (72)
Table V.A. 4 LLD M
Oc I
Sr-89 (24) 2 LLD 00 st Sr-90(24) 0.5 LLD QM ue l
l (120-24100)
River Mile -- 35.0 (920-24100)
(130-290) yH Tritium (24) 100 2900(20/24)
BVPS Discharge No. 02A 11100(4/4) 190(4/4) 0 8
ro et o Ok a
w
'a (a) 00-60 analyzed by high sensitivity method.
O" Nominal lower Limit of Detection (LLD)
Hean and range based upon detectable measurements only. Fraction of detectable measurements at specified locations is indicated in parentheses (f)
Nonroutine reported measurements are defined in Regulatory Guide 4.8 (December 1975) and the Beaver Valley Power Station Technical Specifications g
(Appendix B) g t~
M to
3
.+
- e i
i cmn4g <
I es n
"c :M$m
- eOmH mo6D4 Hg.M <. N e
c tt i
g o
eo" g ACh @ gotS gpe mpk M @ $ Ar46 o OOnt t
tm' r
)
f(s n so ei st s
ea t
hc n
ti e
nf edm ei f nee rc oit r ae t ru pp ruos 0
0 -
0 -
S eopa n
bree il mnRM a
io NN dc ei t n ah cc s-ie n
dT o
n i) in tf o
a[
si c
e it ong a
l an st ea nS lMk o
o**
ir r*
- t e t
aw n
co o
oP C
)
l
)
)8
)
)
de y
f 14 2) 3 n (
5 10
)0 8
a e
/0
/
41 ilel 9
e ng 3 -
29
/2 fa 1
M an (3
1 -
2 -
iV ea 42
( 7, (0
c
.MH 30 5.1 07 er la r~i
- 21 pe u
a*
0(
4(
2(
sv n
u~
a Y
n Q s t e R
A t~
i e
se n
aB A
o i
11 d
t s
r o
m t
t h 43 i
3_
4 J.
3 e
S i
6 nt r
ac ll 5
P ig e
.M 0
0 4
0 md 0
e i i o o
o ra
.A 3
en A
l D
t N
i i
d ae e7 4
a.
g h
N -
N -
N -
u R
s) n t
n a5 H
t w
a ae ae P
t r
Pl Pl Pl m9 e o n
e i
i i
1 G
k p
i c
dM dH dM e
I D
a et lar lar b e, o
N c
e n
n n
n 0
c n s iidv iiv lar l r o
R t
a H
e e
e a J d
d T
o ai iiv t u ce ND MR MR MR ec I
l N
t e
)
y eD hF n
d(
a L
g a is~
f8 A
u i) n o
o n e C!
C o
4 IaR n
E v
t^
oe c'l a
id t
t t
h
))
ti 0
g s ot 1 8
)
cu eir lT
- n. y 04 4)
)
aG 1
i 0
1 20
)0 r
A t
rt rne
/0
/
89 f y N
e P u oaj 3 -
49
/3 r
n o
t e 3
2 -
6 -
o iaHh (30 t
s
,C 42 (4
l D
00 ya (0
.t c
D l.
D u
l L
01 A
e l
g r7 i
u e
1 1
t i
ll v
d*
0(
1 4(
l L
L
(
2(
nu l
t a
a n
og t
t.
- i.
h' e
I e
t~
sH l
RI t
y l
t y
nn A
ei V
i t
m 4
N l
i ed re L
t l
A.
af a i t
un c
i n V
d c
si f
a i o o
ee m
f f
L i) e h
) md tD t
D o
fo rf ct 2
6 l
5 5
0 e
L ee b
e eoet n
0 m
Ll r uo 0
0 1
i 1
0 1
1 (ba n
w tj e
y a
o i
f i
L D
t nt s t
i oct a
v i en c
drs
)
i tt e o
r ei
)
)
a
)
t cen i
r L
aa sd 3
)
)
3
(
8 ede s
i tiye 0
4 4
0
)
)
)
(
s t
r a
1 2
2 1
8 8
8 n
enu m
stl m
e Dos i Nar
(
(
(
(
(
(
(
s no u
s pa yl A f 1
sa s
a 9
0 0 i
f ue a
r 3
sh sa n
8 9
6 i
h o m latf e 1
op ot t
e r-g d
r o
r i
t ed nooP rl re AT 1
GA CB C
S S
C T
h imat se y
i br jn b
L o
ep) e d
r ge8 y
s e
enr a
(
z wa x
w r
y orei h
u r
l L
nd t
s e
a din a
a t
n nt e P
e a
a laaup dM W
n op re 0
inrA ol f g
6 man (
yo in) oeo t
0 NMN mr
/
0 uaM 6k. i id C
)
rp a
e M p D(
(
e m*
_ ii;
!ljI j i j i'
,i1l iI! j l i,
!j
!s !!1I4 i) iIlj',
I 1
t
Us
[NVIRONfitNIAL. RADidt(NICAL ft) nil 0 RING PROGRAM SUNNARY H
Nme of f acility huesne ligg Cuapany Doctet (4u.
50-3 M l2:
Location of f acility haver, Pennsylvania Reporting Period Annual 1983 (County, State) 4 i
Analysis and Lower Limit Nasber of Medium or Pathway Total Nunt,er et Als Indicator locations
~ Location with flictiest Quar. Mean Control Locations horoutine Sanpled of Analysis Detection
- Heanlfl Nme
- TMean (f)7Ne3iiTT)
Reported e
y jtkattofHeasurement) Performed (LID)
- *R asige Distance and Directions ** Range
- Range Measurements ***
oD g
Georgetown, Pa. No. 15 k
Ground Wat er Gross (16) 2, LLD 5
3 (pCi/ liter)
Alpha e
Gross (16) 1 3.0(16/16) tioot stown Pa. No.14 4.3(4/4) 2.4(4/4) 0 Bet a (1.0-5.8) 3 e6tles -- W5W (3.4-5.8)
(1.4-3.6) g g
Gansaa (16)
Table V.A.4 LLD HC Og Tritium (16) 90 170(13/16)
Shippingport Pa (40. 11 190(4/4) 140(4/4) 0 04 m O tM (90-260) 0.8 a.ile -- f.E (110-260)
(90-190) bM
!?E i
o kd O O[4 a$
Da H
2 a
Hb ikmainal Lower Limit of Detection (110) a b
Hean and range based upon detectable measurements only.
knruutine reported antasurements are defined in Regulatory Guide 4.8 (December 1975) arkt the Beaver Valley Power Sta y
(Appendia B) ha
SECTION V - A DUQUESNE LIGHT CO.'!PANY 1983 Anhual. Radiological Environmental Report V.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING A.
Environmental Radioactivity Monitoring Program (continued) 2.
Summary of Results All results of this monitoring program are summarized in Table V.A.2.
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).
Summaries 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.3 summarizes 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 are in good agreement for both periods of time.
In a few cases where activity was detected, some of the activity was attributable to previous nuclear weapons tests and the remaining detected activities were near the lower limit of their detection (LLD) and are attributable to the normal statistical fluctuation near the LLD level.
The conclusion from all program data is that the operation of the Shippingport and Beaver Valley Power Station has not resulted in any detectable changes to the environment attributable to either station.
3.
Quality Control Program The Quality Control Program implemented by Duquesne Light Company to assure reliable performance by the DLC contractor and the supporting QC data are presented and discussed in Section III of this report.
Tho 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.4.
-eS-
SECTION V - A DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY TABLE V. A.3 1983 Annual Radiological Environm:ntal Rsport (Page 1 of 4)
TABLE V.A.3 (Page 1 of 4)
ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM
SUMMARY
Name of Tacility $hi;et.s t; ort 4tes.ie ?-ver Statten Oceket No.
Not A:slicable
' fans of Fac m ty 3eaver 't4dev ?werstatus :ocket No.
5 0-n =
locatica of Tacility 94 aver. ? e.svivtsia Re;orti g Teried 0" !?** - 19*$
Waunty, acates F1Z4PSATIOMAL PRCM Toes _GY (CM3t'C 1974 - 1975) 1edia or Fathway I-wer Limit Sempted Analysis and Total Number of All Indicator 14 cations Malt of w r rement) of Aa*Weis Performed Oetection 112 Mean. (f)
?*a*=
Surfaae flater Crose Alpha (40) 0.3 0.73 3/40 0.6 - 1.1 U
Grose 3eca (1:0) 0.6 4.4
/120 2.3 - 11.4 Gm (1) 10 - 60
< 1:2 0/121 120 - SCO Triti m (121) 100 300 3r-49 (0) sr-90 (0)
C-14 (0) i Desaking unter
- -131 (0)
Cross Alpha (30) 0.3 0.6
'/ 0 0.4 - 0.8 3
- 08/208 2.3 - 6.4 l
Grose Beta (208) 0.6 3.8 Ceema (0) 100 310
/111 130 - 1000 Tritium (211)
C-14 (0) r.
$r-49 (0) 3r-90 (0)
Cround Water Cross Alpha (19) 0.3 e l'.J PC1/1 3/ 73 *I 1.3 - 5.0 I
Crose 3 eta
(*6) 3.6
- 3 I
Tritiwe
($1) 100 440
/31 80 - 300 1
Comma (1) 10 - 60
< Ila 3/133 0.002 - 0.0'4 Air Particulates Crose Alpha (138) 0.001 0.003 and Gueous I /927 0.02 - 0.
PC1/m3 Grose 3 eta (917) 0.006 0.07
$r-49 (0)
Sr-90 (0)
- -131
($16) 0.04 0.03
- /916 0.07 - 0.08 "m
(19*)
- fb-93 0.00$
0.0a I/*97 0.01 - 3.;t O f,7 3,;;, ),;.
h-L:$
0.010 0.04 t
04-L41 0.010 0.0
/197 0.01 - 0.
Co-Le4 0.010 0.02
/137 3.01 - 0.J-others
- *.:.0
SECTION V - A DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY TABLE VeA.3 1983 Annual Radiological Environstntal Report (Page 2 of 4)
TABLE V. A.3 (Page 2 of 4)
ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRMI SU.TfARY Name of Facility ?hiset r ers Aermie ? ser seseien Occket No.
Noe Ass 11e251e Name of Fa" ' cy 3eaver Vallev Power :stae::n Occiet No.
- c I,ocation of Facility Seaver. Pennsvivania Reporting Period CT 1974 - 1975 (County State)
FRE-OPERATICMAL PROGRAM SUMMA 2T ( m INED 1974 - 1973)
Medius or Fathuay Iower Limit sampled Analysia and Total 5 umber of All Indicator locations Cait of h ement) of Analysis Performed Detectica I.ID Mean. (f) Yanne Seil Cross Alpha (0) pC1/3 (dry) 64/4 14 - 32 (Tamplace Samples)
Groes Beta (64) 1 22 6
1 3r-49
(%)
0.25 0.4
/%
N /64 0.1 - 1.3 St-90 (64) 0.03 0.3 a U-234,233,238 (0)
Camma (64) 63 E-40 1.3 13
/%
3 - 24 Ca-137 0.1 1.5 36/%
0.1 - 6,8 I/4 0.2 - 3 Co-144 0.3 1.1 6
U ZrNb-95 0.03 0.3
/64 0.1 - 2 3/4 0.3 - 2 En-104 0.3 1.1 6
Others
< I?J Soil Gross Alpha (0)
PC1/3 (dry) 8 (Core samples)
Groes Beta (8) 1 21
/8 16 - 28 St-49 (8) 0.23
< I:s 3/8 0.08 - t.
$r-90 (8) 0.05 0.2 Camma (8)
E-40 1.3 13
/8 7 - 20 7/
Ca-137 0.1 1.2 S
0.2 - 7 1
CMO 0.1 0.2
/8 Others
< ILD.-_ _ _
SECTION V - A DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY TABLE W. A.3 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report (Page 3 of 4)
TABLE V. A.3 (Page 3 of 4)
ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM
SUMMARY
3ame of Tacility Shi-st-e-er? Atnie h er erstim.ocket so.
?*e e A-- i ssswie Name of Faca.Lity saaver vallev Power Statiss l:oczet No.
5 0- H-Location of Facility Beaver. Pennevivania Repor*.ing level CT 1974 - 1973 (County, State)
FRE-OPERATIONAL PROGRAK Sce' AT(COMBINED 1974 - 1973)
A Mediaan or Facmumy fm er Limit Sampled analysis and Total Smher of All 7adfrator locations (Unit of weasurement) of Analvsts Perfmed
- eteetten 'a wean. (f1 Ranae sediments Cross Alpha (0)
PC1/g (dry) 33j Grose seca (33) 1 13 33 3 - 30 3r-90 (0)
U-134,133, 233 (0)
Gamma (33) 13 33/33 2 - 30 33 1-40 1.3 13
/33 2 - 30 Cs-L37 0.1 0.4
/33 0.1 - 0.6 25b-95 0.03 0.8
/33 0.2 - 3.2 Co-144 0.3 0.3
/33 0.4 - 0.7 0) 3 3a-106 0.3 1.3
/33 1.3 - 1.3 Others etu Foodocuff Camma (3) 8 E-40 1
33
/8 10 - 33 1
Ca-137 0.1 0.2
/8 1
- r5b-93 0.03 3.2
/S 0) te-LQ6 0.3 0.3
/4 Othere e ti:
50 Feedstuff Grose 3 eta (30) 0.05 19
/50 5 - 30 PC1/5 (dry)
- 3,/81 0.04 - 0.93 St-49 (81) 0.023 3.2 I8/ 81 0.02 - 0.31 3r-90 (81) 0.005 0.4 Gamma (31)
../81 3 - 46 E-40 1
19 6
Cs-137 0.1 0.3
/81 0.2 - 1.6 3
Co-L44 0.3 1.3
/81 0.9 - 2.6 h Nb-95 0.C3 3.3 ' ** /11 0.3 - 1.3 N
- Elli 3.5 - 3.3 Ru-i36 0.3 1.4 Othere
<:D SECTION V - A DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY TABLE VeA.3 1983 Annu:,1 Radiological Environm:ntal Rzport (Page 4 of 4)
TABLE V.A.3 (Page 4 of 4)
ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM SLTfARY None of Facility Sh1Seistport Atemic Pever Station Occket No.
Not Aeol1*able Name of Facility 3eaver va.11ev Pewer Staties Oceket No.
5 0-3 3 t.
Locacias of Facility 3eaver, Pe==sviva=1a Reporti g 14 vel CT 1974 - 1975 (County State)
FRE-4FEIATIONAL PRCG2AM SUMMART (COMBINED 1974 - 1973) w i = or Fachuey teuer Limit Sampled Analysis and Total Number of All Indicator locacicas (Unit of Measurement) of Analvsis Perforsed Detection II.D wean. (f) Ranae Milk I-131 (91) 0.25 0.6
/91 0.3 - 0.3 St-89 (134) 3 7
'/134 6 - 11
$r-90 (134) 1 5.3
- /134,1.3 - 12.0 Gasme (134) 18 Ca-137 10 13
/134 11 - 16
- Others e 12.3 Estarsal Radiatica y - Monthly (399) 0.5 at
- 0.20 3I'/399 0.08 - 0.31 mR/ day y - Quarterly (195) 0.5 a&
- 0.20 * /195 0.11 - 0.30 y - Annual (48) 0.3 mE
- 0.19
/48 0.11 - 0.70 Fish Cross Beta (17) 0.01 1.9 13/17 1.0 - 3.2 pC1/g (wet) g7/7 0.02 - 0.*C Sr-90 (17) 0.005 0.14 1
Gamma (17)
E-40 0.3 2.4
/17 1.0 - 3..
Other e LLD I
i i
l LLD in units of MK = lower and of useful integrated exposure detectability range for a passive radiation detector ( M ).
I*'
One outlier not included is maan.
(* tater cuan frem dried-up spring with high sediment and pocasetus content. Not considered t7pical groundwater sample.)
N May include Ru-LC6 Ru-103, 3.-7.
n_
~. - -
.. ~ _ _-. ~ - _.
SECTION V - A TABLE V e A.4 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY Annual Radiological Environmental Report i
J M
l tie Q
I 3
m e m 4 m
., m m m ~ ~ m m, 4 4
e.
- o. e o.
o.
o.
o.
o.
o.
o.
o.
2 o.
o.
e.
o.
o.
o.
e.
o.
e.
4 o.
f.a. %
O C C C O O O C C C C C Q Q C C C C O O O O e
=e i
I i
J t
f 1
.i 3
l m
u.e
>s e.
i c
w ills '
r m ~
e.
m ~,,, m et
.e
~ -
et,, ~
e.
m m
q
= US te O. e.
O.
C.
C.
C.
Q.
C C.
Q Q.
'2 C.
C.
o.
o.
O.
C.
C.
O.
==. M.
C.
C.
Q q
d c et -
O C C C C C C C iJ C C C C C C C C C O O M
d t
8 W.
.)
U i
- g
e l
O 4
m 2
C.e M
C D.
'yJ a
b Q b ys
-n u
w ce se O e O C O C O C C O C O O C C C C C C C C O C,
j te m o C e9 sq 4 m 5 m m m e ~ es m m ee w 4 o o 4 O
==
et 4
=
4 u
o
- > a.
.a
)
4 0
2 f*
i a
4 5
O C
M W
W g
i d
e3 m
a Ca3
- C ra 2:
E-*
Ut
^
j V3 CaJ
)
w
^
g n
u
-h Om B
a ed9 3
'l
- 3 4.c
-.e a c.
c 1
o y
- s =
m 4 4
4 4 4 m.
3 l
W9 d d
-e d== en m
o o o ce a m ** es en d o'
C' 4 es e a==
1 A
N ee==
==
l e
64 4 1
18 c
i Os O.ie 6.
i 4
l
..k.e W
U a
J g
J m
g3
.1 1
.2 4
4 o
u r
ed
- g
- e
'A.e 1
- WN 4
to me y
'i y f7 o1m 4
6e vA-ih w
v "= d5
=
sv i
.=se=
C C O m M 4 9 40 W M C e 9
- 9 9 4 9 C 4 O C C G 1 e 1%
m 4 w m
a m 4 =
w u
3* 3 ee
.B 'A g
.8 eQ i
N WM 4
'e.8G 63 e l
,e
'** O &
R s
J m
- n u I
5" i
e
. > w i
d
- P es.*. W to e 1
g 3
i j
M *(.3 e-
.3 25 M*
'd
- m
.3 as H*
1 ** ** **
- 4 C
.e s**
g me
=e s) @ O
=.4 5
C.,
A, A,
m, m,
4, 4 2,
=O.==,==, M =,*
- d
- 8
+
=
,. e
- d.
w o
o a w = 3....
4 4
9 9 2,v a. v. u v v v = v v = m e.
e.
.x a 4 - - -
1 A
4
^,
.- - n n _ _.-.,.,,.g-e
,-,.,n
__.-.n n
_.,,_n-._,
i i
SECTION V - B DUQUESNE LIGHT CO:!PANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V.
ENVIRON'! ENTAL 710NITORING B.
Air !!onitoring 1.
Characterization of Air and >!eteorology The air in the vicinity of the site contains pollutants typical for an industrial area. Air flow is generally from the Southwest in summer and from the Northwest in the winter.
2.
Air Sampling Program and Analytical Techniques a.
Program The air is sampled for gaseous radioiodine and radioactive particulates at each of ten (10) off-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 is used in the weekly analysis of airborne 1-131.
The filters are analyzed each week for gross beta, then composited by station for monthly analysis by gamma spectrometry.
They are further composited in a quarterly sample from each station for Sr-89/90 analysis.
In order to reduce interference from natural radon and thoron radioactivitins, all filters are allowed to decay for a few days after collection prior to counting for beta in a Icw background counting system.
b.
Procedures Gross Beta analysis is performed by placing the filter paper from the weekly air sample in a ;" x 1/4" planchet and counting it in a low background, gas flow proportional counter.
SECTION V - B DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report b.
Procedures (continued)
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 cartridge.
The activity is referenced to the mid-collection time.
SECTION V - B FIGURE 5.B.1 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report 1
FIGURE 5.B.1
)
1 ENVIRGdWENTAL. MONITORING LOCATIONS-qq 3llpg,*g g7[rjg N
u====a c= wry AIR %'RIT, STATICfS f
l
[
"^*
SIL_HL L'uIn 13 tr m 's cAtav F e L
27 Patmas's DAIRY Fe
" M'-
/
4 28 Sems's DA!RY
- **N 228 eem -,rm
.r~- -
m ssippincecRrseno I
) (. :.
n x,n, sr.:
s M
a treusrw 47 EAST LimPm., 041o
- j. ['
M WEIRTOi, W CT VIRGIN!A
- hy
/,f 51 A.rQUIPPA O
N i
\\
h p"
)
....., c^ 3, yp g------.-
ua.n, G A
l
- 9.%
Q
-A, w aw.
1
/<
\\
hY l
_)Y.
l" h** ',
~
- ~~
c.,
- .K., '
l 3
0 Ii l
,.s J l
o g
~~A3,'
" W}
reen
\\'
_/
/
h
[
I
\\(
l Y&z..'
et I
w s
1 w-.. /
2 1 h'
l A-d'e l
s n
/
t
\\
t j
g vsa couwry y
y m #eNSTON COUWry
\\,
j N
s I.s
's N
W.1& %..
m
,1st _ ~
s....
~.
d,
.. s%
'~ ---
?
1 SECTION V - B DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report l
V.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING b.
Procedures (continued)
Strontium-89 and Strontium-90 activities are determined in quarterly composited air particulate j
filters.
Stable strontium carrier is added to the 4
sample and it is leached in nitric acid to bring deposits into solution.
The mixture is then filtered.
Half of the filtrate is taken for
)
strontium analysis and is reduced in volume by evaporation.
Strontium is precipitated as j
Sr(NO3)2 using fuming (90?.) nitric acid. An iron (ferric hydroxide) scavenge is performed, followed i
{
by addition of stable yttrium carrier and a 5 to 7 4
day period for yttrium ingrowth. Yttrium is then
]
precipitated as hydroxide, is dissolved and re-precipitated as oxalate. The yttrium oxalate is i
mounted on a nylon planchet and is counted in a low level beta counter to infer strontium-90 activity, y
j Strontium-89 activity is determined by
)
precipitating SrC0 fr m the sample after yttrium 3
separation. This precipitate is mounted on a nylon i
planchet and is covered with 80 mg/cm2 aluminum i
absorber for level beta counting.
3.
Results and Conclusions l
A summary of data is presented in Table V.A.2.
a.
Airborne Radioactive Particulates A total of five hundred twenty (520) weekly samples from ten (10) locations were analyzed for gross beta.
Results were comparable to previous years.
Figure 5.B.2 illustrates the average concentration of gross beta in air particulates.
m R
AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS OF GROSS BETA IN AIR PARTICULATES -- 1983 d
e 2
i I
8 m
_7 -
. o s _.
g m
E
\\f Arx x/
J~ ;lE s
v v'-
/
2M Re 3
as o.ex eg i
)
_l gs u
<n i
n.
p-g O
g $
. ces --
I:
~
if l} ---
l M
. coi -
o JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 1988 m
'u
-- =
4 2
SECTION V - B DUQUESNE LIGWF COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 3.
Airborne Radioactive Particulates (continued)
The weekly air particulate samples were composited to one hundred and twenty (120) monthly samples which were analyzed by gamma spectrometry.
Naturally occurring Be-7 was present in every sample.
Occasional traces above detection levels y
of other nuclides were present. Some were natural, I
others were residual from previous nuclear weapons i
tests.
These are listed in the summary Table V.A.2.
Examination of effluent data from the Beaver Valley Power Station and the Shippingport Atomic Power Station demonstrated that none of the slightly elevated results are attributable to the operation of either power station.
1{
A total of forty (40) quarterly samples were each analyzed for Sr-89, and Sr-90.
}
Based on the analytical results, the operation of j
Beaver Valley Power Station and Shippingport Atomic Power Station did not contribute to any increase in j
air particulate radioactivity during CY 1983.
b.
Radiciodine l
4 A total of five hundred and twenty (520) weekly j
charcoal filter samples were analyzed for I-131.
i No detectable concentrations were found at any locations.
i Based on analytical results, the operation of j
Beaver Valley Power Station and Shippingport Atemic
~
Power Station did not contribute to any increase in airborne radioicdine during CY 1983.
l 4
i i
1 i
t i
1
)
l ;
I i
--,n,--
~. -,. _ -., - - -,,.
.-n
_nn.-,.n-
--,-,n,.
SECTION V - C DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING C.
Monitoring of Sediments and Soils (Soil Monitoring is required every 3 years and was not required in 1983.)
1.
Characterization of Stream Sediments The stream sediments consist largely of sand and silt.
Soil samples may vary from sand and silt to a heavy clay with variable amounts of organic material.
2.
Sampling Program and Analytical Techniques a.
Program River bottom sediments were collected semi-annually above the Montgomery Dam in the vicinities of the Beaver Valley discharge and Shippingport discharge and above the New Cumberland Dam.
A Ponar or Eckman dredge is used to collect the sample. The sampling locations are also listed in Table V.A.1 and are shown in Figure 5.C.1.
Bottom sediments are aralyzed for gross alpha and beta activity, strontium, uranium, and the gamma-emmitting radionuclides.
b.
Analytical Procedures Gross beta - sediments and soils are analyzed for gross beta by mounting a 1 gram portion of dried sediment in a 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 or soil is analyzed in the same manner as gross beta except that the counter is set up to count only alpha.
Gamma analysis of sediment or soil is performed in a 100 ml plastic bottle which is counted by a gamma spectrometer.
SECTION V - C FIGURE 5.C.1 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report SEDIHFNTS AND S O T I. S FIGURE 5.C.1 ENVIRONMENTAL IdONITORING LOCATIONS-
$'6'E eg,T,73 g e t N
uwweesamm I
90E'E EITITS hs
- h. g
-]
I EE,
.n' 2A watreri swS ot_enu i
3 Vicinity SAPS Ciar.r.arge
\\
l b,..
49 Upstrari Side of :trtgav.ry
.s
,, I..
I l
f't.j 50 treart side of w N L=2
- g,.
l f z CH L3 tieyer's (im l
4 l
22 South of BWS Site
). '
(,
- 7 artaten's : airy 29A Nichol's Cair/
9
.j
= w,,,
i 30 Shi;pingprt, PA j%
/,/
%. '9,,'
32 MLiLarri I
46 Ittfustry, PA A
g 47 E. Liwerprmi, 01 4
\\"
/
48 Weirton, W.YA.
I
- s. e '
51 A11gul;pa, PA mew #e i
g*,[,
,[
..c...
1 M'
"'I g
A i
..t,
n
_ f.nr~.'. no.
/'
t "y
4 M
/
,9tyte I
/
_,,l,
i,u '
(
? ar<<, f
/ '*,5't'
.\\
s d
,y ho 0
Q h f*_.
, s'
~
3
\\s y
(,/,
e f
n jpdeseordene /
g
.L> _\\(,//
~~-
g g
d y
t, v
s.,
s nw ecom 5
\\
\\
h '
7N s,
-4 b
w.,sL' u.
%j N
<N O
t 9
9 4
l-t 2, Jsere GF Mons
%="*
\\.
4 4',
,, 4 },,
SECTION V - C DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environment'al Report V.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING b.
Analytical Procedures (continued)
Strontium 89 and 90 are determined by radiochemistry. A weighed sample of sediment or soil is leached with Nitric Acid IINO. 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 precipitations 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 mounts covered with a 80 mg/cm aluminum absorber are used for counting in a low background beta counter.
Uranium isotopic analysis of sediment and soil samples were performed by alpha spectrometry.after leaching and isolation of the uranium by an ion 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.2.
There were no significant differences between these current levels and those previously detected in both upstream and downstream sediment samples.
SECTION V - C DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 3.
Results and Conclusions (continued) a.
Results (continued)
Uranium isotcpic analyses were performed by alpha spectroscopy.
The results.suggest that only naturally occurring U-234 and U-238 were present since the activities were nearly always the same in each sample and the levels are within t?e expected 4
range of natural uranium activities.
In equilibrium, U-234 and U-238 have the same activity.
b.
Conclusion Other than trace amounts of Co-60 which have been detected since 1977, the sediment analyses do not indicate any radioactivity attributable to Beaver Valley Power Station and Shippingport Atomic Power Station liquid discharge. Small amounts of Cs-137 from weapons testing fallout was found in all river sediment samples including those upstreca above Montgomery Dam which are unaffected by plant effluents.
a
. _ - _ _ _. _ _.- _,_ _ __~_.
SECTION V - D DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPASY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING D.
Monitoring of Feedcrops and Foodcrocs 1.
Characterization of Vegetation and Foodcrops According 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 other farm products were as follows:
Crops
$2,143,000.00 Horticulture S 551,000.00 Meat
$1,274,000.00 Poultry S 392,000.00 The percentage of crop land in Beaver County is approximately 17*., pasture land - 6.S*.,
forest land 47.8*4, and other land uses - 28. 7*..
2.
Samoling Program and Analytical Techniones a.
Program Representative samples of cattle feed are collected monthly from the nearest dairy (Searight).
See l
Figure 3.D.1.
Each sample is analyzed by gamma spectrometry. _The monthly samples are composited into a quarterly sample which is analyzed for Sr-90.
Foodcrops (vegetables) were collected at garden locations during the summer of 1983.
Leafy
'.e.,
cabbage, spinach, and lettuce vegetables.
i were obtained from Shippingport, Georgetown,
- Industry, PA, and from Weirton, WV.
All samples were analyzed for gamma emitters (including I-131 by gamma spectrometry).
b.
Procedures Gamma emitters, including I-131, are determined by j
scanning a dried, homogenized sample with the gamma spectrometry system. A Ge(Li) detector is utilized with this system.
Strontium 90 analysis for feedstuff is performed by
(
a procedure similar to that described in V.C.2.
n E
/f FIGURE 5.D.1 S
4 Mourn onray.Da>-1 t
e
{f,,
Greaers f
l amo' 1
- -}
gf jWk t.-
,s I
.Bo.eo 08 \\
l h
N/PPINGPORY H
- g. &EowiCrowAt 4_
It'Er noOL.
e
$b i*
\\
l g
./
g lt15 Ga,-dea' l
3 is
/
)
t
,wssrl c'>
,,uu,ygnu,,
g a,s.,.
p eV"TW4
(
p- /
[0 I
K RCACYoR N
s5'/ 7-E,
p if s
g' g P:
N
/
R 4 T
N.f E
Noorsrows i.q;aq>:.
g L
4 V) - Vegetable Garden rt h-Searly,iit'sDairyFarm a
Feederop H
feeofero l
ENVIRONMENTAL,MONITORINGPROGRAM FEEDCROP AND FOODCROP 1.0 CATIONS w
FIGUE 5.D.1 6
SECTION V - D DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 3.
Results and Conclusions A summary of results is provided in Table V.A.2.
The predominant isotope detected was naturally occurring K-40 in both food and feed.
Other activity is attributable to residuals from previous nuclear weapons 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 Power Station did not contribute to radioactivity in
, foods and feeds in the vicinity of the site.
-Se-
I SECTION V - E DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 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 f
locations and frequencies noted in Table V.A.1.
This; milk is analyzed for its radiofodine 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 anfmals within a r
five (5) mile radius of the site. Goat herd locations 1
out to fifteen (15) miles are identified.
Survey data i
for the most recent survey conducted in July, 1982 is j
shown in Figure 5.E.1.
2.
Sampling Program and Analytical Techniones a
j a.
Program Milk was collected frcm three (3) reference dairy i
farms within a 10-mile radius of the site and from one (1) control location outside of the 10-mile radius. Additional dairies, which represent the highest potential milk pathway for radioicdine based on milch animal surveys and meteorological data were selected and sampled. These dairies are subject to change when more recent data (including census) indicate other locations are more appropriate. The location of each is shown in Figure 5.E.2 and described below.
t i
Number
{
of Milch Distance and Direction Collection Site Dairy Animals From Site Period 1
25 Searight al Cows 2.1 miles-south /sw.
Jan. - Dec.
27 Brunton 105 Cows 7.3 miles-southeast Jan. - Dec.
29A Nichol 55 Cows 8.0 miles-northeast Jan. - Dec.
96 Windsheimer 50 Cows 10.3 miles-south /sw.
Jan. - Dec.
61 Allison 33 Cows 3.2 miles-west /sw.
Jan.-June,Dec.
69 Collins 9 Goats, 1 Cow
- 3.6 miles-southeast Feb. - Dec.
l ?
SECTION V - E DUQUESNE LIGHT C0?!PANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report Number of !!ilch Distance and Direction Collection Site Dairy Animals From Site Period 98 Foxall (Hammond) 2 Goats
- 2.9 miles-east July - Nov.
100 Doughty 1 Cow
- 2.8 miles-west /nw.
April - Dec.
- !! ilk Usage - Home Only.
O
-SS-
i I
SECTION V - E DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY FIGURE 5.E.1 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report j
FIGURE 5.E.1 ENVIRONMENTAL MON &TCQiNG l.CCATIONS-Cow and Goat Survey i
N n"*oc* **1 j
/
t.v.
l
]
-; ;r -i. s
- m... A- -u=
~.
~~
- ~lKs\\....y W.Q1 s..j
\\--
g@
-Q t
-I L.-e.g.
a i
~ - -
i a
\\,..
m. _.t..
~p 1
yl s
i N a(
/
O
.I t
,.L -
/
l i,..s..rd.
_.. i
's,
- 7. -
_-s,',_
-l s
c,r
.s l
t i <-
x
,,... ; -./'...-
I [.c.,
g y,
s.<%
l I
/
N's -
s,
's N
. O
- ,g
,.]
6
~%
r-
\\ s'
./., o~
--c.',i,)
J',.;
N.
A s
O
. uQ s
. t i
..r y
w
'" ~. '
N'
~
- t. W.-
'.'v
'N a
s.
s
(,
m
}
4.,
n s.
.A a
./,/
't
.s asc..m...
//
- 3
,~
. c. - - ~.m. /
'~
,M===
\\
4 y.-- h./.T --,*.
i
/.
-n
- A. i.s.q[, " " <
.c
. M,
~
g s
. c'.
[..
,'gfs:I'
'\\ l
\\
_'-(
.. T'f\\
~
l p a,Q
\\
L
- .\\
n-
..Nm= E*
,x.1,CT 'el :-
. g-I o:M i
e i
-ti
\\
1 5, -.a f
-l
. ; ; ~ /.
I -
i '9 t
u I: :
tr l' e'
w
- ~,
g I.
g i y(
..,,7, j
,; y.e y;,;,j y,,3
+
i
-..J a
~ ',
~
1 ( Q 'l c yr
s*
o \\
~ ~ ' -
'.a
/
i;,
~
I.
/
a g, g o., /s t e
/
\\ -
y* /*
s b. e2..
O
/
/
'- g
\\
p T
,i c
.u..
p.
s/ N
\\,/
s 4\\
s.
s.
\\m
- h+ ~/, ~,
4
.. Mm w-1 /
/
~
s',
'C. E 7, g 'c %. _. Y
/
7 ui -
l@ -
J
\\
A
./ g, ~.
/
s s-----
'./ g
_ 6m
_gi 7
^*r=
/
s
-1/
/
a.
u ta 3: -
i
'a
- .sedeTost I
-t... - V.
causeTY e
i k
'g g
\\,
\\.,
i, s I
s i
l
~~
i io i
-o
.a Wei b,
l
\\
3
, a. a
.r... a n,,.,
s c.
~
O GOATS
- w.,%
9 COWS SUMMER 1983 i
SECT 10U V - E FIGURE 5.E.2 DUQUESNE LIGHT C0:2ANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environ = ental Report FIGURE 5.E.2 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING LOCATIONS-
"IZ N
u=eca amm j
sue cous 1,
i
~
MILK Q-,
l
\\
Site Location i
kw
- /s e er -en wa,
,s, 1
h {-
25 Searight s
/
(I
[
27 Brunton p.,
~~'~~t..,..
1 29A Nicol NJ J
l-dkI 61' Allison f'
I.' 3, 69 Collins M**-
h i
3 '1, yf 96 Windshieser j
98 Foxall T-100 Doughty l [-
f.
t
' ' ~
Q d
'.7,...,
^" "**"s 6
/,
8 i
h; i.,
d.
)
wie l
.. i ~,...n.. -
c-----
d l'
1
's. J lq
-h*
l beef e%
d 1
-,?.,
1 o
- ~...
- ' g 4' j
}I
'/
\\
.-n.n r
l
- ,, A -7 ed mi
- M 00
/
(
- /
L-J
~~
a, -* \\
g,' [Q L v 1
L.-
/
. s e
i o
3) 6
/'
l 1
43 l
/
+
,~
\\.
\\\\ '
.w w-
\\
f f
5
}
brJs***/**** /.
I 2
g h
h j
Ec.
suvsa coum I
4
' 's s
h w,,$'y.
o a
a 3
4 s..i. cv x es 4,
-- w%
- 9_0 - -
_ _ ~ _ _
SECTION V - E DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY l
1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING E.
Monitoring of Local Cow's Milk (continued) a.
Program (continued) i The sample from Searight Dairy was collected and analyzed weekly for radiciodine 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 l
sensitivity analysis).
b.
Procedure Radiciodine (I-131) analysis in milk was normally performed using chemically prepared samples and analyzed with a beta gamma coincidence counting system.
Gamma emitters are determined by gamma spectrometry of a one liter Marinelli container of milk.
Strontium analysis of milk is similar to that of other foods (refer to V.C.2) except.that milk samples are prepared by addition of Trichloracetic Acid (TCA) to produce a curd which is removed by filtration and discarded. An oxalate precipitate l
is ashed for counting.
3.
Results and Conclusions A total of one hundred and fifty-two (152) samples were analyzed for I-131 during 1983. All I-131 activities in milk were below the minimum detectable level (0.3 pCi/1).
l A total of one hundred and twenty-three (123) samples were analyzed by gamma spectrometry and for strontium.
l-Both the Cs-137 and Sr-90 levels were within the normally expected range. The higher levels # rom China's i
nuclear tests which were experienced in other years were l
absent this year. Such tests were not performed during 1983.
Based on analytical results, the operation of Beaver Valley Power Station and Shippingport Atomic Power Station did not contribute to any increase in airborne radioiodine in CY 1983. i i
t i
ve-
-e,--~,
,,~ ~ -, - -
,.-------------e,----
g,,,w, r,
,r--
n-r-----,-e
-e---
n-.-,p-,m97-
-w--nv qq
,--,,yy n
SECTION V - F DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V.
ENVIRON'tENTAL MONITORING F.
Environmental Radiation Monitoring 1.
Description of Regional Background Radiation Levels and Sources The terrain in the vicinity of the Shippingport and Beaver Valley Power Station generally consists of rough hills with altitude variations of 300 to 400 feet.
Most of the land is wooded.
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 with abundant interbedded coal layers.
Pleistocene glacial deposits partially cover the older sedimentary deposits in the northwest.
Most of the region is 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, exposure rates ranged from 6 to 12 pR/hr. Results for 1983 indicated that background radiation continued in this range.
2.
Locations & Analvtical Procedures Ambient external radiation levels at the site were measured using thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs).
There were three (3) types used in the Duquesne Light Company Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program.
They are calcium sulphate dysprosium, CaSO4 (D ) in Y
j teflon matrix, lithium fluoride (LiF), and thulium activated calcium sulfate (CaSO :Tm).
4 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.
The CaSO :Tm TLDs were used as a back-up and as a QC 4
program.
In 1983 there were a total of forty-four (44) off-site environmental TLD locations. The locations of the TLDs are shown in Figures 3.F.1 thru 4 Comparisons of TLD results are presented in Table III.l. _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _.._
SECTION V - F FIGURE 5.F.1 l
DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report 1
i O NCRTHWEST QUADRANT I
W areven ve Poe Srarios
=
x #-,e is
\\
..e n sie.
- ,x.u,
7-s a.m......,
t
.a.
m.v..
zu,,
u i.o a,.. 1 u
p-a
==::r N
/
\\
9*,.u: a->
In ME 32 d;and 5
. a,m.=.
- 3.,..
i%
a
- ., an a.
e uI r.im.
a se-1
'O ft z il.
__-_____-1,.____
_________,,___L
[
I c'
I N>
6
~,
7_. -
y
\\,
N j
j,
\\j o
/
N i
l N.,
x i
y
-m i
i
~
s e o
\\
-c'
"~
f+
l
,~
s.....
x.
- o. -
t*
w,p
=\\,,kg
,/-
\\
A 4
3'_
C
/
/
~ ~ % ',r, i
s.
- h 87 '
N i
'x e
. ' s'
\\\\,
Kh
/
_ _ g._
j s,
/
m ----- '
.; L-s
~~'
x.
l
..'/.s
/
d.
. c-
, c
-)
'. /. + '-
u%..' x'
~-L ' ^
. )::. '
/:. W
. -%,.gs.
N-v 7
- 2
,, /
t.......
. ^
', y[
,, f' 3
y,...w d l
l * >/
e n
a.- -
I@>
,v.i;? Q
$.,f'
$l I
RM Ef mg i
N A%.w?,1. -)
l
'i...,
/
(
1 i
.s
.g
,.\\....
_' M f/ \\/
\\,
\\
s y,,
\\
\\
G
,3p X
iil T\\ %@g'/ ,
I
\\
'N s*8. 4 MD
/
\\
,.v
/
8 A
Q t
.j hsw(=*4 7
< x x
SECTION V - F FIGURE 5eF.2 DUQUESNE LIGHT CCI'PAI;Y 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report l
-r--
w~ -,_
~
l I'
.~,=,
,, e me m.,
\\
i ii i:::" ** :"
J 9L ptee Grove 6 DowLe 2
2
'l seteataa ta Saaaal 7
.6.1 Industry ITire Co. 3
?
46 Industry (Churcht I
/
1 72 f.cean School
/
\\
1 295 teaver County Hosp.
s g
6 13 S M t ppinspor t Post Of fice
'S!?C"Sie'n$ot "ca:e.. aenee, m.if i.
s.
y\\
j--
t c., m e.
I l
s'
- CS u
..s.,:e. -.
e..,:-
T
') /
' [ E"M j\\
,s
\\
2-(
x j.-..
s........ -
s Ig
/
\\.
/
~
. /
Q
\\
'\\ /
\\
c s
4,
\\
30 N7 7 - s
/
.'\\,
N f
/
^
y, j
4 l
&s '\\1 mf, '.' _,_.~
/
~~
n n.
',/',
i +-A-
. N@** ea.-
'm $
'/
i s,
i \\
N - ____ _.
/
m.-
'x
[
\\
/
l b.f. -5 b k yi\\ j', f n
~
~ &
~ ~.d
~<
m sI.-
~
/
g f
.A
>N a
\\ & (*lg s
s w
9-
/
,* /
=: y C;
-T)' 4A
>l,.
\\
~-
~.
s 31
~. a
.j'\\
j N-VN,o N%
i s g W s'y' N
>> w,
Te l
(g 3
3 n,
.s 1
r
)
.J I
, f v
~
~
- 9.,,.
N'.
5 2
/
.,d ts
/J g
4,f g
. x x4
\\
\\
g it.
\\
,N[ A
,w f C M(, '
j g
- \\;,
l SECTION V - F FIGURE 5.F.3 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report 9
,/
,/
\\
~
E s
~l1,__
. ~. -
/
m f,\\
. ;. k -
l 4
\\
+
sf
< a
/
,,\\
../
) Y
/
p
\\%
. (?,,,.
\\
8 s
.e
..*w,
~f i
j N-r '
'r' k ',
/
j ar 13
-g%d i
g 4
./.\\ c, q,
-p
~
+
,e v
x se ex e
s
.sg % ses e s
s s
si l
'V
(
s,.
A',
x.
3 l
\\
Q
.~
\\ ~'.
f'.,/
\\
g
[
/
-, y s
s h,e'
,)
i i,
. /" mE
.Y L
\\
9 c~s
/,
\\.,
('
i l
j, s
s
__-g_
______ ~
(
$s j
3
~h
/
\\
/
\\
.....h....) M t
s
/_
/
~ g T.
ys
..s-.
rl:
. L
's s
~
\\
(
'y
)
s,/ Q
\\
e
. m...
/
y \\q,/ -
+
~
o
'.\\s,/
.s i
i
(
~
3
- e(/'d,,.'
,V c
e m
0 i
w' ser si..
_,.n,,
e-Ii-b...r;;;;
/
t-- o
.N s
\\
- s. -
s
.s n..a.es aurco K
..u...--'s
?\\
l 4-
.':::::" C.,:,m,.e,.1 t
i
- r..n me
,7
$9 tren's rars
'S Raceoca gunsetpal 3134.
do s
r N
.c es R
8
'9 Ft. ' t and Pt. '31 El d
enool
$2 Hanover gun 1C &pel 5122.
N G_.'3 W TH W T M CR W
+
-. ~
se
....e :- s.~
s
-~
3 __
SECTION V - F FIGURE 5.F.4 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY
)
1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report 3
u 4
n a
f
/g m
N I
/
M C
L
/
N p.8. ? '
jgt C'
7 s,
l s. n....
<N N-[.
,, /.....
\\e',
e
\\' '
Ns N,,
2 sg
.s w
,ss
(
l N
3'L#
-s
,j c
w 1
-(
?
MAD d
! \\,
a *
- ek k
M~
,,\\*
/
6 rw M-[p -
s
'1B
\\
\\
\\ k
{
\\
y,
^
\\
- ;A'
/
l
)
l,(
a x
~
\\
's, r
- x t
/
x
./
[
I
~
's 83 y
\\<
t o
a
%x-
- s s
1
/
c -
C
.a 34 1
j h
g)'r- %
mV
./
4
\\ '-
1 h
-r.,,,,
7
'i,'s Y
- J:' e.-
/
fT..
,, e a
== =rrer.
II
/.
A m
..... w -r N
c a
.3
,,u C,...
e s
LJ ll
,eC;eary Row I
1; 13 wever's Firs 11 14 Moometown 11 to Mancoca Children's Horn.
'A a
R 3
L3 GE
- t. Liverpoo Honey's Tar,t 13 SJ to 500mwCT @ACAANT Q
V
+
2., e,.m ty % c. :.....
w.d - Na D,gf g7gy/ _
(
SECTION V - F DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 1
2.
Locations & Analvtical Procedures (continued)
~
fluoride (LiF) TLDs used for environmental The lithium i
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 by utilising background readings from five (5) TLD chips in conjunction with an average background correction factor.
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 environmental TLDs. The environmental TLDs 4
are processed after retrieval and a
background -
l correction is made to account for the background -
radiation accumulated 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 I
corrected by annealing control dosimeters shortly before the field dosimeters were removed from the field
- location, then shipping the freshly annealed control dosimeters with the exposed field dosimeters to the 4
laboratory for readout at the same time. All dosimeters were exposed in the field in a special environmental I
holder.
The dosimetry system was calibrated by reading calcium sulfate dosimeters which have been exposed in an accurately known gamma radiation field.
i i
3.
Results and Conclusions Data obtained with the contractor TLD (CaSO :Dy in 4
teflon) during 1983 are summarized in Table V.A.2, and i
the quality control TLD results are listed in Table III.1.
t The annual exposure rate of all off-site TLD's averaged O.17 mR/ day in 1983. As in previous years, there was some variation among locations and seasons as would be expected.
t i
I i
a -
4 i
=
SECTION V - F DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report 3.
Results and Conclusions (continued)
In 1983, ionizing radiation dose determinations averaged approximately 62 mR for the year. This is comparable to 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, each provided and analyzed by a separate laboratory, demonstrate good agreement and confirm that changes from j
natural radiation levels, if any, are neglible.
l Lessons learned from the Three Mile Island incident
]
indicated the need for more radiation monitors in all l
sectors surrounding the plant.
Sixteen (16) Reuter-Stokes Pressurized Ion Chamber environmental radiation monitors were installed in 1982, one in each of the 16 sectors.
Installation of the central processing controller into the Emergency Response Facility was expected to be completed in 1983 but is now expected to be completed in 1984 which will permit the monitors to be read out at a central location. 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 l
new computer network to help meet some of the requirements set forth in U.S. NRC NUREG-0654 (Criteria for Preparational Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear j
Power Plants) and U.S. NRC NUREG-0737 (TMI Action Plan
[
Requirements).
The complete meteorological system i
modifications and new computer network which were scheduled to be operational by December 1983 are now expected to be operational by the end of the fourth BVPS i
- 1 refueling outage.
I -
l t.
l 5
.--c-r.
,e m--,-------.__.,,y.-
..m-.
gar-,mw w.--w--+wv-
--+-+v-,---m---
.e=-
wr
- emmwwr,
-a,------ww1
-e---wwevi c-
SECTION V - G DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING l
G.
Monitoring of Fish 1.
Description Fish collected near the site are generally scrap fish.
During 1983, fish collected for the radiological monitoring program included carp, catfish, crappie bass, gizzard shad and bass.
2.
Samoling Program and Analytical Technicues a.
Program Fish sampics 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.1.
b.
Procedure A sample is prepared in a standard tared 300 ml plastic bottle and scanned for gamma emitting nuclides with gamma spectrometry system which utilizes a Ge(L1) detector.
3.
Results and Conclusions A summary of the results of the fish monitoring data is provided in Table V.A.2.
Five (5) fish were caught in April.
Seven (7) more samples were caught in October.
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 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..-.. _ _. -
o U@$ P ". ~
M0 o*
ei$m C8" g b f
hgfy;n?m E!yeWko i
mh$'
L A@j B
w 1
%o
(
,f k
I Y
ca
/
m a'
M 2(
m A
o oG R
)/
s G
nv g
n O
S oa o
R N
B. p
/.. n i
P O
g p
t I
a o
fJ
~'g a
G T
r 1
c N
A
't >
c o
I C
L R
O O
L g
T O
j n
I G
i N
N D
l O
I N
N p
M L
E m
P x
G a
L M
E S
A A
L T
S h
N t
a s
E l
i i
M S
F N
I h
O F
~
R j
N I
s It V
3 N
E i
/%
1 G.
=
s
.L y
o 5
1 r
h<o ER s
U G
x
~
IF o
F 8 N
o
\\
i
]g
_t "w
o r
r N
c A
e s
I wo m
n N
P a
o D
c A
y y
q V
ee r
1 t
L O
l g e
Y
'l Y
T aa g
I l r mo S
A Vh O
~
N 0,
rs o
t C
c n
r I
ei M
N vD L
E l
a P
i no a
en m
S e
I i
p F
rt r
?\\
A aa s
t
.i' N
1et ip I
S l
1
'g s'Y9 y' / ER (eGT O
S A
H 2
9 I
4 f
3
. 9 f'
/WV o
8'
,l1 fljl{
SECTION V - H DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 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.
It is used by both the Beaver Valley and Shippingport plants for water make-up and receiving plant liquid effluents.
In addition, river water is used for cooling purposes at the Shippingport Atomic Power Station and 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 pl, ant sites.
It is used by several municipalities and industries downstream of the site, i
The nearest user of the Ohio River as a potable water l
source is Midland Borough Municipal Water Authority.
l The intake of the treatment plant is approximately 1.5 miles downstream and on the opposite side of the river.
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 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 oteurs in large volumes in the gravel i
terraces which lie along the river, and diminishes l
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.
l 2.
Sampling and Analytical Technicues a.
Surface (Raw River) Water I
The sampling program of river water includes six (6) sampling points along the Ohio River.
Raw i
water samples are normally collected at the East Liverpool (Ohio) Water Treatment Plant [ River Mile 41.2] daily and composited into a monthly sample.
Weekly grab samples are taken from the Ohio River at the following locations: Upstream of Mcntgomery Dam [ River Mile 31.8];
at discharge from Shippingpert Atomic Power Station [ River Mile 34.8); and near the discharge from the Seever Valley Power Station [ River Mile 35.0].
Two automatic river water samplers are at the following
-101-1
,m,
-.._,,..m,
,,,,,,,,c,.-,,-_,,,r-,,,.,,,,,,.-,-,,..,r,,---,
,-r,--
SECTION V - H DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report locations:
Upstream of Montgomery Dam (River Mile 29.6]; and at Crucible Steel's river water intake
[ River Mile 36.2].
The automatic sampler takes a 20 m1 to 40 m1 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 quarterly composites are analyzed for tritium (H-3), strontium 89 (Sr-89), strontium 90 (Sr-90), and cobalb 60 (Co-60) (high sensitivity).
Locations of each sample point are shown in Figure 5.H.1.
b.
Drinking Water (Public Supplies)
Drinking (treated) water is collected at both Midland (PA) and East Liverpool (OH) Water Treating 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 radiciodine (I-131).
Monthly composites of the weekly samples are analyzed for gross alpha, gross beta, and by gamma 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.
-102-
SECTION V - H DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 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.
9
-103-
i m
l Mn H
I H
O v.
L MournoncaY DAM
'hl F- ~~ -l
,Q
=
l
- _ _ _1 A
4 6
g e*
{Qt>
Ollio s
3 l
Y*
MIDLAMD t
~
ggl0 l
O s'
ir f
.B o n o O.c
\\
E DS' l
Q', Geongerowns O
O//PMGPoRY,\\
h7oot.
i o
N i
l
./
ifR G)2'l is
+
mg
~.
n
/
e
?M h
i w Ts gyggyzypy,g
/
gg V/h?GN/A
/
r./
I K
M i
K REACYOR
$8
~
3/rr
- E6 S
x SAMP1E O g gg hk 9 TYPE OF SAM 1lE Pu!NT S AMPl.!!k; PolNT DESCRIPTION SUkFACE WAltu 2A STATION DISCHARGE
\\
e h
f c
2.1 OkUCIblE STEEL
\\' j-Q n
3 SHIPPItk; PORT STATION DISCHARGE Og h
5 EAST LIVIIPOOL WATER PLANT (PAW WATkR)
W 49.1 AECO POLYMERS h
49 UPSTREMI SIDE MuNTCOMFRY DAM o
h M
2.0 BVPS uuTFAl.L SThuCTUkE g
OOKSMMM b
DHINKIN; WAT! k 4
MIDIRiD WATER PLANT (TkEATED WATtR)
/
@ WELL WATER 5
EAST LIVEkroul WATER PIXiT (TREATED WATER)
SURFACE WATER & DRINKING WATER
[
WEu. WAn u it i WEu. IN SHIPP W SORT, PA 13 WEIL AT MEYERS DAIRY FARM O
14 Ha n
- S TuWN, PA C
15 a.LuRL E10WN, PA N
ENWRONMENTAL. Mawromum Srsrioss LOCATIONS - SURFACE WAIER, a WELLS y'
x
SECTION V - H DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report i
V.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING l
2.
Sampling and Analytical Techniques (continued) d.
Procedure i
Gross alpha and gross beta activities are determined first by evaporating one liter of the sample on a hotplate. The residue is mounted and dried on a 2-inch stainless steel planchet.
The sample is counted in a low background, gas flow proportional counter. Self-absorption corrections i
are made on the basis of sample weight.
Gamma analysis is performed on water sample by 3
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 pC1/1 by evaporating 2 liters of sample en a 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 samples by converting 2 ml of the sample to hydrogen and j
counting the activity in a 1 liter low level gas counter which is operated in the proportional range in anti-coincidence mode.
3.
Results and Conclusions j
A summary of results of all analyses of water samples i
(surface, drinking, and ground) are provided by sample i
type and analysis in Table V.A.2.
These are discussed j
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 j-samples were analyzed for tritium (H-3) and radiostrontium (Sr-89 and Sr-90) as well as a high j
sensitivity analysis for Co-60.
-105-
SECTION V - H DUQUESNE LIGHT C0t!PANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V.
ENVIRON 5! ENTAL ?!ONITORING 3.
Results and Conclusions (continued)
No Sr-90, Sr-89, Co-60, or gamma emitters were detected in surface water during CY 1983.
All alpha and beta activities were within normal range.
The tritium levels in Beaver Valley Power Station and Shippingport Atomic Power Station outfall were elevated above preoperational levels in 1983, but none of these data suggests detectable increases over preoperational levels downstream of the station. The tritium activity is consistent with station data of autnorized radioactive discharges and were well within limits permitted by NRC and NR license.
b.
Drinking Water A total of twenty-four (24) samples were analyzed for gross alpha and gross beta. All rasults were within a normal range.
A total of eight (8) samples were analyzed for tritium (H-3), radiostrontium (Sr-89 and Sr-90),
No Sr-89, Sr-90, or Co-60 were detected.
The tritium data were within the preoperational range indicative of normal environmental levels.
A total of another one-hundred and three (103) samples were analyzed by gamma spectrometry.
No gamma emitting radionuclides were detected by these analyses.
4 i
e 4
k i
i I
-106-4
SECTION V - H DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 3.
Results and Conclusions (continued)
A total of one hundred and four (104) samples were analyzed for radiciodine (I-131) using a highly sensitive technique.
Trace levels of I-131 were measured in three (3) weekly sarples collected at Midland.
The results were slightly above the minimum detectable activity of 0.2 pCi/ liter.
The positive results could not be attributed to station discharges.
The results may be attributed to expected variability in the analyses results of very low levels of activity.
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 data are within preoperational ranges.
d.
Summary The data from water analyses demonstrate that neither Beaver Valley Power Station nor Shippingpert Atomic Power, Station contributed a 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 and Shippingport Atomic 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, which was attributable to Beaver Valley Power Station, was caly a small fraction (0.32%) of the concentration (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.
-107-w w
SECTION V - I DUQUESNE LIGIIT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING I.
Estimates of Radiation Dose to Man 1.
Pathways to Man - Beaver Valley Power Station a.
Calculational Models - Beaver Valley Power Station The radiation doses to man as a result of Beaver Valley operations were calculated for both gaseous and liquid effluent pathways using NRC computer codes X0QD0Q2, GASPAR, and LADTAP.
Dose factors listed in Beaver Valley Power Station Environmental Technical Specifications were used to calculate doses to maximum individuals frem radioactive noble gases in discharge plumes. Beaver Valley effluent data, based on sample analysis in accordance with the schedule set forth in Appendix B of the BVPS license, were used as the radionuclide activity input.
Each radionuclide contained in the semi-annual effluent report format of Regulatory Guide 1.21 was considered.
Certain radionuclides which were not 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, radiciodines, strontium, and tritium were included as source terms based on the lower detectable limits of analysis (all sensitivities for analysis 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 conservative ratio to either measured activity of Kr-85 or Xe-133 was used.
Meteorological data collected by the Beaver Valley Power Staticn 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 1.109.
The airborne pathways evaluated were beta and gamma doses from nobl3 gas plumes inhalation, the " cow-milk child", and other ingestion pathways.
-10S-
_~
i SECTION V - I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Esport s
V.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING a.
Calculational Models - Beaver Valley Power Station (continued) s s
All
.potentially radioactive liquid effluents, "
4 including steam generator blowdown, are released by batch mode after analysis by gamma spectrometry using a GeLi detector. Each batch.,is diluted by 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 pad used as -the radionuclide activity input term in LADTAP. The maximum individual for liquid pathways is located at Midland.
Except when nore recent or specific i
data for the period is available, all other input 1 -
to LADTAP are obtained from the Beaver Valley Power Station Environmental Statement ur Regulatory Guide 1.109.
- Pathways, which, vere evaluated, are drinking
- water, fish consumption, shoreline s'
recreation, swimming, and boating.
j 2.
Results of Calculated Radiation Dose to Man - Beaver
,)
Valley Power Station Liquid Releases 3
a.
Liquid Pathway - Maximum Individual i
The doses which are calculated,' based on the model presented above in V.I.1, are summarized and compared to Beaver Valley Power Station license 1
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 j
potentially occur.
4 I
l 4
4 i
i i
-109-
Radiation Dose to Maxirum Individual", urem/yr.
Beaver Valley Power Station - Liquid Releases CRITICAL USAGE W110LE PATilWAY GROUP FACTOR SKIN ORGAN THYROID BONE BODY b
Fish Consumption Adult 21.0 kg N/A 0.0604 0.00227 0.0197 0.0276 m
(Liver) g Drinking Water" Infant 510 1 N/A 0.0558 0.0696 0.00197 0.0535 (Liver) e Shoreline Activities Teen 67 hr 0.00062 0.00057 s
5 co TOTAL MREM 0.00062 0.0702 0.0696 0.0254 0.0613 CRITICAL (Teen)
(Adult)
(Infant)
(Child)
(Adult) f INDIVIDUAL (Liver) g "E
Ff?
DOSE TO INDIVIDUALS DURING 1983 FROM NATURAL RADIATION EXPOSURE SE E-. $
8~
o f
Ambient Gamma Radiation:
69 pg d
oo r Radionuclides in Body 18" Eo Global Fallout 4
N$
h TOTAL mrem 91 f,
". Located at. Midland Drinking Water Intake f.
b N
Child - Usage Factor 6.9 kg/yr.
- Adult - Usage Factor 730 1/yr.
d Pre-operational average ambient gamma radiation g
b
" National Academy of Sciences, "The Effects on Populations of Exposure to Low Levels of y
Ionizing Radiation", BEIR Report, 1972.
s
SECTION V - I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report i-i V.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING i
2.
Results of Calculated Radiation Dose to Man - Beaver Vallev Power Station Liauid Releases (continued)
Actual Doses (mrem /yr.)
Calculated Using Site Effluents Appendix I
- Analysis Dose - Calculated Using NRC Model Effluents Regulatory Limit Doses - h7C Staff Guidelines RM50-2 1
l Appendix I l
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 s
TOTAL BODY Adult 0.0613 2.78 5.0 0.01226 Teen 0.0341 0.712 5.0 0.00682 Child 0.0416 Not Reported 5.0 0.00832 Infant 0.0535 Not Reported 5.0 0.01070 ANY ORGAN Adult 0.0702 Not Reported 5.0 0.01404 (Liver)
Teen 0.0551 Not Reported 5.0 0.01102 (L,1ver)
Child 0.0676 Not Reported 5.0 0.01352 (Liver)
Infant-0.0696 Not Reported 5.0 0.01392 (Thyrcid)
Maximum Total Body Dose - Caosule Summary mrem 1983 Calculated 0.0613 p
Appendix I Estimated 2.78 l
Final Environmental Statement 0.112 I
Thyroid Dose - (Largest Expected Organ Dose) 1983 Calculated 0.0702 Final Environmental Statement 0.96
-111-
.,,.,,,.n, e,,
~.-__n-.,-,,,_.,.--.n,,
,,y m.,
a-.rw
-e,
~,.
,,,n_,,-
SECTION V - I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 2.
Results of Calculated Radiation Dose to Man - Beaver Valley Power Station Liquid Releases (continued) b.
Population Doses t
The 1983 calculated dose to the entire population of almost 4 million people within 50 miles of the plant was:
Largest Isotope i
Man-Millirem Contributors TOTAL BODY 398.0 H3 392 mrem Cs134 3.03 mrem Cs137 1.81 mrem 4
i THYROID 437.0 H
392 mrem If31 42.9 mrem
.3.
Airborne Pathway - (Beaver Valley Power Station)
The doses to the public for Beaver Valley Power Station airborne radioactive effluents during 1983 are provided i
in Table V.I.2.
They include the contribution of all pathways.
Tritium is the primary radionuclide contribution to these doses.
The data demonstrate compliance with 10CFR50, Appendix I design objective limits.
4 Conclusions - (Beaver Valley Power Station)
Based upon the estimated dose to individuals from the i
natural background radiation exposure in Table V.I.1.,
the incremental increase in total body dose to the 50-mile population (4 million people), from the operation of Beaver Valley Power Station - Unit No. 1, is less than 0.0002% of the annual background.
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 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 J,,
the public.
-112-
gOaz#'"
E9.Evm es9a O6Dd i
$" $o5" FloeSr0w Ei olaoE" 8n H$ rM < M'"
i
- i E
S O
D E
m 8
LN e 5
2 1
IOr 9
7 4
1 MI 4
2 1
- Tn 0Aa 0
0 0
4 5L m U
PO P
FI O
X TI 6
2 ND 8
7 EN CE 0
t
)
i 3
v 8
i 9
t 1
c
(
ao n
i a
d M
a R
E o
V t
e I
n
- T e
r IC s
o E
o b
XJ D
r I B i
DO m 5
5 2
n A
N e
1 I.
o ENr i
PG m V
t PI a
n AS E
i o
E L
d i
D B
a t
A R
a T
t d
S e
t r
a e
l w
u o
E m c
P R e l
U r a
y O m C
e S
l P,
f l
XL o
a EA 8
6 V
U 2
8 1
s MD 4
0 4
8 t
r UI 0
0 8
1 l
e MV u
v I I 0
0 0
2 s
a XD e
e AN R
B MI I
x i
dnep p
N A
A G
R Y
0 O
D 5
O n
B D
F C
I L
O O
A N
G R
I T
I N
Yl O
K U
i T
S L
T
'. u' 4
- j
- ]Ilii4 i!
{j i:'I I?
! 4
.; i:
l.
SECTION V - I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report V.
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING l
5.
Dose Pathways to Man - Shippingport Atomic Power Station i
The radiation doses to man as a result of operations at the Shippingport Atomic Power Station during 1983 were calculated for gaseous effluent pathways and liquid effluent pathways.
Effluent monitoring at the Shippingport Station during
-1983 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 form the Shippingport Station operations was too low to measure and could only be estimated with the calculational model described below l
using measured or estimated effluent radioactivity data.
]
a.
Calcualtional Models - Shippingport Atomic Power Station The radiation doses to man from Shippingport Atomic Power Station operations were estimated using calculational models recommended by the International Commission on Radiological Protection 1
(ICRP Publ.
2, 1959) and employ the general guidelines of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Regulator Guide 1.109) established to maintain compliance with 10CFR50~ Appendix I.
The air does 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 1983. 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.
The maxirp;m potentially exposed individual for liquid pathways was located at Midland, PA.
The liquid dose pathways considered were drinking
- water, fish consumption, shoreline recreation, swimming and boating.
i i
-114-i h
I e
.-n
,n+,,,
_.,,..n.
,,.-..,.-,,,,.,,n...,_.nu
.n.-.--,..
-,y, n._
.ym-m.-.,
-..-mune,.e...--
1 i
SECTION V - I DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental Report 5.
Dose Pathwnys to Man - Shippingport Atomic Power Station j
(continued) j Modeling parameters and usage factors used in the pathway calculations were consistent with values i
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 Furthermore, the air pathway calculation employed site-specific meteorological and wind direction data.
6.
Results and Conclusions - Shippingport Atomic Power Station I
Evaluation of the radiation dose-to-man calculations for the effluents show that the maximum annual radiation 4
exposure potentially received by an individual residing at the site boundary is less than 0.1 mrem.
The maximum dose to an individual is well belcw the 10CFR50 Appendix I dose limits. Furthermore, the radiation exposure to the entire population of 4 million persons with 30 miles of the Shippingport Station was less than 1 person-rem.
This dose is negligible compared to the typical general use of approximately 360,000 person-rem received by all individuals from typical background radiation.
In conclusion, the radiation exposure received from the Shippingport Station during CY 1983 by any member of the general public is a very small fraction of the background radiation and has, therefore, no significant i
effect on the general public.
t 4
f i
I
,-115-
c i
DISTRIBUTION LIST i
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (18 copies)
Attn:
Mr. Peter Tam, Project Manager Operating Reactors Branch No. 1 Division of Licensing i
c/o Document Control Desk
{
Washington, DC 20555 United Sectes Nuclear Regulatory Commission (2 copies)
Office of Inspection and Enforcement Attn:
Dr. Thomas E. Merley, Regional Administrator 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, PA 19406 Mr. Nicholas DeBenedictis, Secretary Department of Environmental Resources Commonwealth of Pennsylvania 9th Floor, Fulton Building Third and Locust Streets Box 2063
^
Harrisburg, PA 17120 3
Mr. C. K. Gaddis, Manager Pittsburgh Naval Reactors Office 4
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, Director Division of Operational and Environmental Safety United States Department of Energy j
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 Mr. J. G. Yusko Department of Environmental Resources Bureau of Radiation Protection 121 South Highland Avenue Pittsburgh, PA 15206 i
.m.._
_ _. _~ -_.
DISTRIBUTION LIST (continued)
J.M. Arthur, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer One Oxford Centre 301 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15279 h
J. J. Carey Vice President - Nuclear Duquesne Light Company P.O. Box 4 Shippingport, PA 15077 1
E. J. k'oolever Vice President, Nuclear Construction Division Duquesne Light Company One Oxford Centre 301 Grant Street Pittsburgh, PA 15279 1'
F. A. Cavalier Project Manager, Beaver Valley Power Station Duquesne Light Company One Oxford Centre 301 Grant Street j
Pittsburgh, PA 15279 J. D. Sieber Manager, Nuclear Safety & Licensing Department P.O. Box 4 7
~
Shippingport, PA 15077 T. D. Jones Manager, Nuclear Operations Duquesne Light Company P.O. Box 4 Shippingport, PA 15077 S. L. Pernick j
Manager of Environmental Affairs
}
Duquesne Light Company One Oxford Centre 301 Grant Street j
Pittsburgh, PA 15279 C. E. Ewing Manager Quality Assurance Duquesne Light Company l
Beaver Valley Power Station i
P.O. Box 186 Shippingport, PA 15077 i
J i
4
--g-mv-w---
y.,e-w..---.--
.-.-,g,
-.,y.w.w c.~c-__-,-,,,,www,-ec wwe m,m.,-,
,e,,.c-
%,,,we-,,
- - _.,---e-re w -
+,m.r-w
DISTRIBLTION LIST (continued)
W. F. Wirth Director Radiological Safety Programs Duquesne Light Company Beaver Valley Power Station P.O. Box 4 Shippingport, PA 15077 1
I
?
O
.1dVA
'Al?
Telephone (412) 393-6000 Nuclear Division P. O. Box 4 Shippingport, PA 15077-0004 April 30, 1984 NDlMSL:3228 1983 Annual Environmental Report Radiological - Volume #2 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. Peter Tam, Project Manager Operating Reactors Branch No. 1 Division of Licensing c/o Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555
Reference:
Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1 Docket No. 50-334
Dear Mr. Tam:
Enclosed are eighteen (18) copies of the 1983 Annual Environmental Report Radiological - Volume 2, for the Beaver Valley Power Station.
The number of copies provided your office is in accordance with the distribution noted in Regulatory Guide 10.1.
Very truly yours, 0
J S.
. U. Sieber, Manager Nuclear Safety and Licensing JWM/lih Enclosure
+