ML20095K056
| ML20095K056 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee  |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1991 |
| From: | YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20095K052 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9205040294 | |
| Download: ML20095K056 (90) | |
Text
, . _ . . _ _ .. .
I l
-l VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION l ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT
[
!' - January - December 1991 t_pril 1992 1
Prepared by:
- lankee Atomic Electric Company Environmental Engineering Department 580 Main Street Bolton, Massachusetts 01740 9205040294 920429 PDR ADOCK 05000271 R PDR
TABLE OF CONTENTS Pare TABLE OF CONTENTS ...,.................................... ... 11 LIST OF TABLES .. ... ............. . . . .... .... .. ...... 111 LIST OF FIGURES ............ ... ... .. ... . ... ........ .... IV 1
- 1. INTRODUCTION ... ... . .... .. .. . . .... . .
- 2. NATURALLY OCCURRING AND BACKGROUND RADIOACTIVITY ... . . . . 3
- 3. GENERAL PIANT AND SITE INPORMATION . . ... .. .. .. . 6
- 4. PROGRAM DESIGN . ......... .. . . . . .... . , . . 7
- 5. RADIOLOGICAL DATA SUPS.ARY TABLES ... . . .. . .. . . 27
- 6. ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS .. . .. , . 40
- 7. 74 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM .. . .. . . . ... .. . ..
- 8. LAND USE CENSUS . . . .... ... ..... . .... . . . 81
- 9.
SUMMARY
.... ...... .. .... . . ....... .. .. . 83
- 10. REFERENCES ...... ......... . . . . .... .. .. . . ,. . 84
l LT8T OF TABLE Toble Title Lage 4.1 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program ,.... ..... 13 4.2 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Locations (Non-TLD) .... . . ......... . . . .. . 15 4.3 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Locations (TLD) .. ....... .... .. . .......... . . 17 4.4 Environmental Lower Limit of Detection (LLD)
Sensitivity Requirements ... . .. . . . 19 4.5 Reporting Levels for Radioactivity Concentrations in Environmental Samples . .. .. ... ... . .. . 20 5.1 Environmental Radiological Program Summary .. . 29 a
5.2 Environmental TLD Data Summary .. ... ... . . . .. 37 5.3 Summary of 1991 Environmental TLD Measurements . .. 38 7.1 Summary of Process Control Analysis Results . 77 7.2 Summary of EPA Intercomparison Analysis Results . . . 78 7.3 Summary of Blind Duplicate Samples Submitted . . ..... . 79 7.4 Summary of Blind Duplicate Results .. . . . . ... . 80 8.1 1991 Land Use Census Locations . . ... .., . . 82
-111-
LIST _OF FIGUREE Fi rure Title Page 4.1 Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations in Close Proximity to Plant ...................... ....... 21 4.2 Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations Within 5 Kilometers of Plant ............................. 22 6.3 Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations Greater than 5 Kilometers from Plant ...... . . ......... 23 4.4 TLD Monitoring Locations in Close Proximity to Plant ......... .. .... .. . ... .... . .. .... ..... 24 4.5 TLD Monitoring Locations Within 5 Kilometers of Plant ......... .................. ... . .. .. 25 4.6 TLD Monitoring Locations Greater than 5 Kilometers from Plant ............. ........... . ..... ....... . . 26 6.1 Gross-Beta Measuremente of Air Particulate Filters ...... 49 6.2 Gross-Beta Measurements of Air Particulate Filters . . .. 50
.6.3 Gross Beta Measurements on River Water .... ......... . 51 6.4 Gross Beta Measurements on Ground Vater ..... . . 52 6.5 Cesium-137 in Milk ..... ........ ........ . . . .. 53 6.6 Cesium-137 in Milk . ................... ... . . .. 54 6.7 Strontium-90 in Milk ............... ..... . ..... ... .. 55
-iv-
s, LIST OF FIGURES (continued)
Figure Title Pare 6.8 Strontium-90 in Milk ................................. .. 56 6.9 Cesium-137 in Mixed Crasses .... ....................... 57 6.10 Cesium-137 in Mixed Crasses ........ ........ . ... ..... 58 6.11 Cesium 137 in Fish . ........ .... ..... . . ........ 59 I 6.12 Exposure Rate at Indicator TLDs, DR 01-03 ... . .. 60 6.13 Exposure Rate at Indicator TLDs, D3 04, 06, 50 .. ..... 61 6.14 Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLDs , DR 07-08, 41-42 .. . 62
-6.15 Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLDs, DR 43-46 .. ..... .. 63 6.16 Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLDs, DR 47 49, 51 . .... 64 6.17 Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDs, DR 09-15 (odd) . ... 65 6.18. Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDs, DR 17-23 (odd) ....... 66 6.19 Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDs, DR 25-31 (odd) ....... 67 6.20 Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDs, DR 33-39 (odd) . .. . 68
-6.21 . Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDs, DR 10-16 (even) .. . . 69 6.22 Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDs, DR 18-24 (even),.. .. . 70 6.23 Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDs, DR 26 32 (even)... .. . 71 6.24 Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDs, DR 34-40 (even)........ 72
-5.25 Exposure Rate at Control TLD, DR-05 . . . . . . . . ..... .... 73
-v-
i
- 1. IFTRODUCTION l i
This report summarizes the findin5s of the Radiological Environmental )
Monitoring Program (REMP) conducted by Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation in the vicinity of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station in Vernon, Vermont during the calendar year 1991. It is submitted annually in compliance with plant Technical Specification 6.7.C.3.
The remainder of this report is organized as follows:
Section 2: Provides an introductory explanation to the background radioactivity and radiation that is detected in the Vermont Yankee environs.
Section 3: Provides a brief description of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station site and its environs.
Section 4: Provides a description of the overall REMP program design.
Included is a summary of the Radiological Effluent Technical Specification Requirements for REMP sampling, tables listing all locations sampled or monitored (by'TLD) in 1991 with compass sectors and distances from the plant, and maps showing the location of each of the sampling and TLD monitoring locations. Tables listing Lower Limit of Detection requirements and Reporting Levels are also included.
Section 5: Consists of the summarized data as required by VYNPS Technical Specifications. The tables are in the format specified by the NRC Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position on Environmental Monitoring (Reference 1). Also included is a summary of the environmental TLD measurements for 1991.
Section 6: Provides the results of the 1991 monitoring program. The performance of the program in meeting regulatory requirements as given in the Technical Specifications is discussed, and the data acquired during the year are analyzed.
Section 7: Provides an overview of the Quality Assurance programs used at the Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratory. As required by Technical Specifications, the results of the EPA Intercomparison Program are given.
Section 8: Summarizes the requirements and the results of the 1991 Land Use Census.
, , .-. . . . . . ~. .= -
Section_9: Gives an overall suunary of the results of the 1991 Radiological Environrnental Monitoring Program, i
l
- 2. Naturally occurrina antijia_n-Made Backgraynd RangAc_tiy_ily Radiation or radioactivity potentially detected in the Vermont Yankee i
- environment can be grouped into three categories. The first is " naturally-occurring" radiation and radioactivity. The second is " man-made" radioactivity from sources other than the Vermont Yankee plant. The third potential source of radioac,tivity is due to emissior s from the Vermont Yankee plant. For the purposes of the Vermont Yankee REMP, the first two categories are classified as " background" radiation, and are the subject of discussion in this section of the report. The third category is the one that the REMP is designed to detect and evaluate.
2.1 Faturally Occurring Backtround Radioactivity Natural radiation and radioactivity in the environment, which provide tne major source of human radiation exposure, may be subdivided into three separate sub-categories: " primordial radioactivity", "cosmogenic radiesetivity" and " cosmic radiation" " Primordial radioactivitv" is made up of those radionu:lides that were created with the universe ano that have a sufficiently long half-life to be still present on the earth. Included in this category are the radionuclides that these elements have decayed into. A few of the more important radionuclides in this category are Uranium-238 (U-238), Thorium-22S (Th-228), Rubidium 87 (Rb-87), Potassium-40 (R-40), Radium-226 (Ra-226), and Radon-222 (Rn-222). Uranium-238 and Thorium-228 are readily detected ir soil and rock, whether through direct field measurements or through laboratory analysis of samples. Radium-226 in the earth can find its way from the soil into ground water, and is often detectable there. Radon 222 is one of the components of natural background in the air we breath, and its daughter products are detectable on air sampling filters. Potassium-40 comprises about 0,01 percent of all natural potassium in the earth, and is consequently detectable in most biological substances, including the human body. There are many more primordial radionuclides found in the environment in addition to the maj or ones discussed above (Reference 2).
The second sub-category of naturally-occurring radiation and radioactivity is "cosmorenic radioactivity" This is produced through the nuclear interaction of high energy cosmic radiation with elements in the earth's atmatphere, and to a much lesser degree in the earth's crust. These radioactive elements are then incorporated into the entire geosphere and atmosphere, including the earth's soil, surface rock, biosphere, sediments, ocean floors, polar ice and atmosphere. The major radionuclides in this
_ ._ . . - . _ ._ . - . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ - _ . _ . _ . . . . _ . _=-
.l category are Carbon 14 (C-14), Hydrogen 3 (H-3 or Tritium), Sodium 22_(Na.
22),_and Beryllium 7-(Be-7). Bery111um 7 is the one most readily detected, _ ,
- and is-found on air sampling filters and occasionally in biological media i
- (Reference 2). l
-The third sub-category of naturally-occurring radiation and radioactivity is " cosmic radiation". This consists of primary energetic particles of extra-terrestrial origin and the secondary particles and radiation that are produced _through their interaction in the earth's atmosphere. The primary radiation comes mostly from outside of our solar system, and to a lesser degree from the sun. We are protected from most of this radiation by the earth's atmosphere, which absorbs the radiation. Consequently, one can see that with increasing elevation one would be exposed to more cosmic tradiation as a direct result of a thinner layer of air for protection.
This " direct radiation" is detected in the field with gamma spectroscopy equipment, high pressure ion chambers and thermoluminescent dosimeters L (TLDs).
2.2 dan-Made Backcround Radioactivity I-The second source of " background" radioactivity in the Vermont Yankee environment is from " man-made" sources not related to the power plant. The i
most recent contributor to this category was the fallout from the Chernobyl L
accident in April of 1986, which was detected in the Vermont Yankee l environment and much of the world. A much greater contributor to this category, however, has been fallout from atmospheric nuclear weapons tests.
Tests were conducted from 1945 through 1980 by the United States, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, China and France, with the large majority of testing occurring during the periods 1954-1958 and 1961-1962. (A test ban treaty was signed in 1963 by the United States, Soviet-Union and United Kingdom, but not by France and China.) The most recent test, conducted by the People's' Republic of China, occurred in October of 1980. Much of the
-fallout detected today is due to this explosion and the=last large scale one, done in November of 1976 (Reference 3).
! _The radioactivity produced-by these detonations was deposited worldwide.
The. amount of-fallout deposited in any given area is dependent on many factors,-such-as the explosive yield of the device, the latitude-and cititude of the detonation, the season in which it occurred, and the timing I
- j. of subsequent rainfall which washes fallout out of the tropospheric portion
- .( Reference 4). Most of this fallout has decayed into stable elements, but l
the-residual radioactivity is still readily detectable in environmental .
4
samples worldwide. The two predominant radionuclides are Cesium 137 (Cs-137) and Strontium-90 (Sr 90). They are found in soil and in vegetation, and due to the ability of cows and goats to effectively concentrate radioactivity in milk through grazing of large areas of vegetation, these radionuclides are also readily detected in milk.
Other potential " man made" sources of environmental " background" radioactivity include other nuclear power plants, coal-fired power plants, national defense installations, hospitals, research laboratories and industry. These collectively are insignificant on a global scale when compared to the sources discussed above (natural and fallout).
- 3. gIl{EEhL PLANT AND BITE INFORMATION The Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station is located in the town of Vernon, Vermont in Windham County. The 130 acre site is on the west shore of the Connecticut River, immediately upstream of the Vernon Hydroelectric Station. The land is bounded on the north, south and west by privately-owned land, and on the east by the Connecticut River.
Construction began on the single 540 megawatt BWR (Bolling Vater Reactor) plant in 1967. Commercial operation beSan on November 30, 1972. The pre-operational Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program, designed to measure environmental radiation and radioactivity levels in the area prior to station operation, began in 1970.
- 4. PROGRAM DEBJSN i
The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) for the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VYNPS) was designed with specific objectives in mind. These are:
- To provide an early indication of the appearance or accumulation of l any radioactive material in the environment caused by the operation !
of the station.
- To provide assarance to tugulatory agencies and the public that the station's environmental impact is known and within anticipated limits.
- To verify the adequacy and proper functioning of station effluent controls and monitoring systems.
- To provide standby monitoring capability for rapid assessment of risk to the general public in the event of unanticipated or accidental releases of radioactive material.
The program was initiated in 1970, approximately two years bufore the plant began commercial operation in 1972. It has been in operation continuously since that time, with improvements made periedically over those years.
The current program is designed to meet the intent of NRC Regulatory Guide 4.1, Progroes for Monitorine Radioactivity in the Environs of Nuclear Power Plants, NRC Regulatory Guide 4.8, Environmental Technical Specifications for Nuclear Power Plants, the NRC Branch Technical Position c4 November 1979 entitled An Accentable Radiolonical Environmental Monitorins Program, as well as NRC NUREG-0473, Radiolonical Effluent Technical Specifications for BWh's. The environmental TLD program has been designed and tested around NRC Regulatory Guide 4.13, Performance. Testinc and Procedural Soecifications for Thermoluminescence Dosimetry: Environmental Aeolications. The quality assurance program is designed around the
. guidance given in NRC Regulatory cuide 4.15, Qyality Assurance for Egdiological Monitorine Prorrams (Normal Onerations) - Effluent Streams anc Ihe Environment.
The minimal sampling requirements of the REMP are given in Technical Specification 3.9.C, which is summarized in Table 4.1 of this report. The identification of the required sampling locations is given in the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM), Chapter 4. The complete list of locations
used during 1991 is given in Tables 4,2 and 4.3 of this report. These sampling and monitoring-locations are shown graphically on the maps in Figures 4.1'through 4.6.
The Vermont Yankee Chemistry Department conducts the radiological environmental monitoring program. They collect all terrestrial samples (airborne and ingestion pathways), and contract with Aquatec. Inc. to collect all waterborne samples. All TLD badges are posted and retr 1eved by the Vermont Yankee Chemistry Department, and are read out by the Yankee Atomic ' Enviror, mental Laboratory.
4.1 d2.nitorinc zones
-The REMP is designed to allow comparison of levels of radioactivity in samples-from the area possibly influenced by the plant to levels found in areas not influenced by the plant. The first area is called Zone 1, and its monitoring locations are called " indicators." The second area is called Zone 2, and its monitoring locations are called " controls." The distinction between the two zones, depending on the type.of sample or
- sample pathway, is based on one or more of several factors, such as site meteorological history, meteorological dispersion calculations, relative direction from the' plant, river flow, and distance. Analysis of survey data from the.two zones aids in determining if there is a significant difference between the two areas. It can also help in differentiating between _ radioactivity or_ radiation due to plant releases and that due to other fluctuations in the environment, such as atmospheric nuclear weapons test fallout o. seasonal variations in the natural background. 1 l
4.2 Pathways Monitored Four pathway categories are monitored by the REMP. They are the Airborne, Waterborne, Ingestion and Direct-Radiation Pathways. Each of these four categories is monitored by the co11cetion of one or more sample media,_
which are listed _below, and are described in more detail in this section:
Airborne Pathway Air Particulate Sampling Charcoal' Cartridge (Radioiodine) Sampling
. Waterborne Pathways River Water Sampling Cround Water Sampling 8
. _ . . ., __ . . _ _ .. - . ~. - _ _ . . _ .
fSediment Sampling' Ingestion Pathways Milk Sampling l.
Silage-Sampling Mixed Grass Sampling
-Fish Sampling Direct Radiation Pathway-TLD Monitoring I
1 I
1 I
l J
A
.s E
9..
. . ._ . . ~ . .~ -~ _. ~ . _ ~ . - . .. - . . .
l l
- 4. 3. Descriotions of Monitoring Programs ,
4.3.1 Air Samoling Continuous air samplers are installed at six locations. (Five are requircJ
- by VYNPS Technical Specifications.) The sampling pumps at these locations operate continuously at a flow rate of approximately one cubic foot per minute. Airborne particulates are collected by passing air through a 47 mm '
glass-fiber filter. A dry Sas meter is incorporated into the sampling stream to measure the total volume of air sampled in a given interval. The entire system is housed in a weatherproof structure. The filters are collected biweekly, and to allow for the decay of radon daughter products, they are held-for at least 100 hours0.00116 days <br />0.0278 hours <br />1.653439e-4 weeks <br />3.805e-5 months <br /> at the Laboratory before being analyzed for gross-beta radioactivity (indicated as CR-B in the data tables). -The biweekly filters are composited (by location) at the Laboratory for a quarterly gamma spectroscopy analysis.
If'the gross-beta activity on an air particulate sample is greater than ten times the yearly mean of the control samples,-Technical- Specification 3.9,C requires a gamma isotopic analysis on the individual sample. Whenever the main plant stack effluent release rate of I-131 is equal to or greater than 0.1 uCi/sec, weekly air particulate is required, pursuant to Technical Specification 3.9.C.
4.3.2 Charcoal Cartridre (Radiciodine) Sampline.
Continuous air samplers are installed at six locations. (Five are required by Technical Specifications.) The sampling pumps at these locations operate continuously at a flow-rate of approximaiely one cubic foot per minute. A"60.cc-TEDA impregnated charcoal cartridge is located downstream of the air. particulate filter described above. A dry gas meter is incorporated into the sampling stream to measure the total volume of air sampled in a given_ interval. The entire system is housed in a weatherproof structure. These cartridges are collected and analyzed biweekly for I-131.
Whenever the main plant stack effluent release rate of 1-131 is equal to or-greater than 0.1 uci/sec, weekly charcoal cartridge sampling is requirsa, pursuant to Technical Specification 3.9.C.
4.3.3 , River Vater Samoling An automati4 compositing sampler is maintained at the downstream sampling
-location by-Aquatec. Inc. The sampler is controlled by a timer that
~
- collects an aliquot of river water at least every two hours. An additional grab sample is collected monthly at the upstream control location. .All river water samples are preserved with hcl and NaHS03 , or HNO3 , to prevent the plate out of radionuclides on the container walls. Each sample is analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides. Although not required by VYNPS
~
Technical Specifications, a gross-beta analysis is performed on each sample. The monthly composites or grabs are composited again (by location) at the Laboratory for a quarterly H-3 analysis.
4.3.4- Cround Vater SamoliDE Grab samples are collected quarterly from two indicator and one centrol location. -(Only one indicator and one centrol_is required by VYNPS Technical Specifications.) All ground water samples are preserved with hcl and NaHS0 3 , or HNO3 , to prevent the plate out of radionuclides on ae
. container walls. 'Each sample was analyzed for gamma-emittir.g radi nuclides
- and H-3. Although not required by VYNPS Technical Specifications, a gross-beta analysis is also performed on each sample,
, 4.3.5 Erdiment Samoling
-Sediment grab samples are collected semiannually-fcsm two locations by Aquatec, Inc. 'At the downriver shoreline, station SE-11, one grab is collected. At the North Storm Drain Outfall, station SE-12, multiple grab samples are collected. Each sample is analyzed at the Laboratory for gamma emitting radionuclides.
4.3.6 -dilk Samuline When milk. animals are identified as being on pasture _ feed, milk samples are
, collected tvice-per month from that location. Throughout the rest of the year, and for the ft.'l year where animals are not-on pasture, w lk samples i
are collected on a monthly schedule. Three locations are chosen as a result of the annua 1 Eland Use Cencus, based on meteorological dispersion calculations. The fourth location is a contrnl, which is located sufficiently far away from the plant to be outside any potential influence 11-
from it. Other samples are typically collected from locations of interest.
Immediately__after collection, each pilk sample is preserved with an
. appropriate amount of formaldehyde. Methimazole is also added to prevent protein binding of any radioiodine. Each sample is analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. Following a chemical _ separation, a separate low-level I-131_ analysis is performed to meet the Lower Limit of Detection
-requirements in the Technical Specifications. Although not required by I Technical Specifications, Sr-89 and Sr 90 analyses are also performed on quarterly composited samples.
4.3.7 Silare Sampling At each milk sampling location, a silage sample is collected at the time of
' harvest, if available, One sample is shipped to the laboratory without preservative, where it is analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. I Although not required by Technical Specifications, a separate silar,e . unple -l 1s pressrved with NaOH, and is then shipped to the' Laboratory for a separate I-131 analysis.
4.3.8 Mixed Grass Samnling At each. air sampling station, a mixed grass sample is collected quarterly, .
when available. Enough grass is clipped to provide the minimal sample weight needed to achieve the required Lower Limits of Detection. One sample is shipped to the Laboratory without preservative, where it is analyzed for gamma-emitting-radionuclides. Although_not required by Technical' Specifications, a separate-grass sample is preserved with Na0H, and is then shipped to the Laboratory for a separate I-131 analysis.
4.3,9 Fish Sacoling Fish samples are collected semiannually at two locations (upstream of the plant and in Vernon Pond) by Aquatec,-Inc. The species typically collected
-are yellow perch, smallmouth bass and largemouth bass. The fish samples are frozen and delivered to the Laboratory where the edible portions are analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides.
4.3,10 TLD Monitoring Direct gamma radiation-exposure _was continuously monitored with the use of
-thermoluminescent dosteaters (TLDs). Specifically, Panasonic UD 801AS1 and UD-814AS1-calcium sulfate dosimeters were used, with a total of five elements in place at each monitoring location. Each pair of. dosimeters is sealed in a plastic bag, which is in turn housed in a plastic-rcreened container. This container is attached to an-object such as a fence or utility pols. _A total of 40_ stations are required by Technical l Specifications. Of these, 24 muct be read out quarterly, while those from-
- the rema.ning_16 incident response (outer ring) stations _need only be de.
dosed (annealed) quarterly, unless a gaseous release LCO was exceeded during the period. Although not required by Technical Specifications, the
_ ETLDs from the 16 outer ring stations are read out quarterly along with the j other stations's TLDs. In addition to the TLDs required by Technical l Specifications, eleven more are~ typically posted at or near the Site Boundary. The plant staff posts.and retrieves all TLDs, while the Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratory processes them, i
1 I
i k'
y k
1
TABLE 4.1 Radiological Dwirorummtat seanitorfrgi Program (as regsf red ty Tech. Spec. Table 3.9.3)*
Collection Analysis Exposure Pathway Analysis Analysis 3 'hy, Ntater of Routins Sanpting totiectIon Type Frequency Samie Locations Mode Fregsency
- 1. Direct andletion (TLDs) 40 Continuous- Quarterly Cacena; Outer ting - Each TLD de-dose only, unless gaseous release LCO was exceeded
- 2. Airborne (Particulates 5 Cont inuws Semipontnty Particulate Sarpte!
and Radioiodine) Gross Beta Each sanple Gama Isotopic Quarterly Composite (by location) i Radiolodine f
Cenister:
1-131 Each ranple
- 3. Waterborne
- a. Surface Water 2 Do w tream: Monthly ce rns isotopic a Each Samte Automatic Tritita (M-3) Querterly Cogosite conposi te.
Upstream: grab.
Grab overterly Gaams isotopic c'ach sa gte
- b. Ground Vater 2 frit te (M-3) i Each sa mle
- c. Shoreline sediment 2 Grab Upstream: Semiamual t y. Gama Isotopic Each Samte u.'*orm Drein Outfatt:
As specified in ODryt.
1 l
l
~
L----__ i .
~
-=
. : n.
2 l iv ,
i 1
s iTaaLE 4.1; -
=
- (cmtinued) "
Radiotoelcol Erstfrermentet Mmiterleg Progran
. (as rurpird tr/ Yoch. Spec. Taete 3.9.3)*
a Cotlection Anetysfe-Exposure Pathway - -
and/or
' s g te M ela Neminet NJuber of Dutine tiominst Analysl$ ' AnetysIs '.
sample tocations- 'Somting , Collection- Type. Frequency Mode Fregency
- 4. Ingestion
- s. Mitk .4 Grab Monthly Game isotopic- Each sagte -
"(Semimonthly 1-131 Each sample when on pasture)
- b. Fish 2- Gr sh .. semiannuetty Game Isetopic on. Each sanu21e edible portions
'c. Vegetation
- Grass sample 1 et each air Grab. Quarterly when Game Isotopic Each sagte sa @ ling station available '
-1 et each milk
' $ltage sagte Grab At hervest Game isotopic Each sagte samling station
- See Technicet Specification Tebte 3.9.3 for comtete footretes.
4 4
t
TABLE 4.2 Radiological Environmental Monitoring locations (non-TLD) in 1991 Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Distance From Direction
' Exposure Station Plant From Pathway Code Station DescIiptien Zone' OM Plant
- 1. Airborne AP/CF-11 River Sta. No. 3.3 1 1.9 SSE ,
AP/CF-12 N. Hinsdale, NH. 1 3.6 NNW I AP/CF-13 Hinsdale Substation 1 3.1 E
-AP/CF 14 Northfield, MA 1 11.3 SSE AP/CF-15 Tyler Hill Road 1 3.2 Wru AP/CF-21 Spofford Lake 2 16.1 NNE
- 2. Waterborne
- e. Surface- WR-11 River Sta. No. 3.3 1 1.9 Down-river VR 21 Rt. 9 Bridge 2 12.8 Up-river
-b. Ground VG-11 Plant Well 1 -- On-site VG-12 Vernon Nursing Vell 1 2.0 SSE VG-21~ Brattleboro CC 2 12.1 NNW VG-22 Skibniowsky Well 2 14.3 N
- 3. Ingestion
- a. Milk- TM Miller Farm 1 0.8 WNW TM-12 Dominick 1 5.2 E TM-13 Newton Farm 1 5.1 SSE
'IM-14 Brown Farm 1 2.1 S TM-15 Cayland Farm 1 4.7 WNV/tN TM-16 Tall Oaks 1 4.7 V!=
TM-17 Caines Fars 1 8.2 SW TM-19 -Mitchell 1 4.0 NNE TM-20 Ranney Farm 2 17.0 N TM-24 County Farm 2 -22.5 N e
i
-TABLE 4.2 (continued)-
Radiological Environmental Monitoring Locations (non-TLD) in 1991 Vermont Yankee Nuclear Powe! Station Distance From Direction Exposure : Station Plant From Pathway Cpde Station Descrintion InDg * (km) Plaur
- 3. Ingestion, (continued)
- b. Fish FH-11 Vernon Pond 1 -- **
FH-21 Rt. 9 Bridge 2 12.8 Upriver
- c. Mixed TG-11 River Sta. No. 3.3 1 1.9 SSE Grass TG-12 N. Hinsdale, NH 1 3.6 NNW TG-13 Hinsdale Substation 1 3.1 E TG-14 Northfield, MA 1 11.3 SSE TG-15 Tyler Hill Rd. 1 3.2 WNW TG-21 Spofford Lake 2 16.1 NNE
- c. Silage TC-11 Miller Farm 1 0.8 WNW TC-12 Dominick 1 5.2 E TC-13 Newton Farm 1 5.1 SSE TC-14 Brown Farm 1 2.1 S TC-15 Gayland Farm 1 4.7 VNW/NW TC County Farm 2 22.5 N
- 1 - Indicator Stations; 2 - Control Stations C* Fish samples are collected anywhere ir Vernon Pond, which is adjacent to the plant (see Figure 4,1).
TABLE 4.3 !
l Radiological Environmental Honitoring Locations (TLD) in 'Jol Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Distance Station From Plant Direction Code Station Descriotion Z2ng (km) From Plant DR-1 -River Sta. No. 3.3 I 1.6 SSE DR-2 N, Hinsdale, NH I 3.9 NNW DR-3 Hinsdale Substation I 3.0 E DR-4 Northfield, MA 2 11.0 SSE DR-5 Spofford Lake 2 16.3 NNE DR-6 .Vernon School I 0.46 WSW DR-7 Site Boundary SB 0.27 W DR-8 Site Boundary SB 0.25 SW DR Inner Ring I 2.1 N DR 10 Outer Ring 0 4.6 N DR-11 Inner Ring I 2.0 NNE DR-12 Outer Ring 0 3.6 NNE DR-13 Inner Ring I I.4 NE DR-14 Outer Ring 0 4.3 NE DR-15 Inner Ring I 1.4 ENE DR . Outer Ring O 2.9 ENE 1.2
~
DR-17 Inner Ring I E DR-18 Ou'er Ring 0 3.0 E DR-19 Inner Ring I 3.5 ESE DR-20 Outer Ring 0 5,3 ESE DR-21 Inner Ring I L8 SE DR-22 Outer Ring 0 3,2 SE DR-23 Inner Ring I 1.8 SSE DR-24 Outer Ring 0 3.9 SSE DR-25 Inner Ring I 2,0 S DR-26 Outer Ring O 3.7 S DR-27 Inner Ring _I 1.0 SSW DR-26~ Outer Ring 0 2.2 SSW DR-29 Inner Ring I '0.7 WSW DR-30 Outer Ring O 2.3 SW TABLE 4.3 (continued)
Radiological Environmental Monitoring locations (TLD) in 1991 Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Distance Station From Plant Direction Code Station Description Zone * (km) From Plant DR-31 -Inner Ring 1 0.8 W DR-32 Outer Ring 0 5.0 WSW j DR-33 Inner Ring I 0.9 VNW j DR-34 Outer Ring Road 0 4.9 W l DR-35 Inner Ring I 1.4 WNV l DR-36 Outer Ring 0 4.7 VtN I DR-37 Inner Ring I 3.0 NW DR-38 Outer Ring 0 7.7 IN DR-39 -Inner Ring I 3.2 NNV DR-40 Outer Ring 0 5.8 NIN DL-41** Site Boundary SB 0.38 SSU DR-42** Site Boundary SB 0.60 S DR-43** Site Boendary SB 0.42 SSE DR-44** Site Boundary SB 0.21 SE DR 45** Lite Boundary SB 0.12 NE DR-46** Site Boundary SB 0 . 2 '. NtN DR-47** Site Boundary SB 0.51 N!N DR-48** Site Boundary SB 0.82 tN DR-49** Site Boundary SB 0.27 WNW DR-50** Gov. Hunt House I 0,34 SSW DR-51** -Site Boundary SB 0.27 W
- I_ - Inner Ring TLD; O - Outer Ring Incident Response TLD; 2 - C 'ntrol TLD; SB - Site Boundary TLD.
00 This location is not considered a requirement of Technical Specification Table-3.9.3.
TABLE'4.4 Environmental Lower Limit of Detection (LLD). Sensitivity Requirements Airborne Particulates Vegetati Water or Games . Fish Milk on Sediment Analysis (pci/1) (pci/m3) (pci/kg) (pci/1) (pC1/kg) (pci/kg
-dry)
Gross-Beta 4 0.01 H-3 3000 Mn-54 15 130 Fe-59 .30 260 co-58,60- 15 130 Zn-65 30 260' Zr-Nb-95 15 I-131 0.07 1 60' Cs-1.14 15 0.05 130 15 60 150 Ca-137 18 0.06 150 18 80 180 Ba-La-140 15 15 (Several explanatory footnotes ven in Tech. Spec. Table 4.12-1.
t a . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ - _
m _ .
TABLE 4.5 Reporting Levels for Radioactivity Concentrations In Environmental Samples Airborne Sediment
, .Particulaten Food (pC1/kg-Water or Cases Fish Milk . Product dry)
(PCi/1) -(pC1/m3) (pci/kg) (pci/1) (pci/kg)
Analysis H-3 20,000*
Mn-54 1000 -30,000 Fe-59 400 10,000 co-58 1000 30,000 co-60 300 10,000 3000**-
.! 1- O f 300 20,000 Zr- e ' 400 .
I .31 0.9 3 100 Cs-134 30 10 1000 60 1000 Cs-137 50 20 2000 70 2000 Ba-La-140 200 300 Reportir:q Level for drinking water pathways. For non-drinking water, a value of 30,000 may be used.
- Reporting. Level for grab samples taken at the North Storm Drain outfall only.
I
-'_____-_E-. . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ - ._m.a._.._.
(2 0 500
)
MLT(R$
N .
Oc 0p, 0,s 4
i.
,/%, Yp
\ ,# s, i
FINCELINE 7 ' ,
N '
t
' /
TC 11 s ,
IM 11 A . '
l 's i
Of RNC5/ NW
$\ \
's SIACK I ' s ggg
's 's g 's % INTMC s C4 '
b, t
( s WG 11 %,
i A in-11 e, \ p ' l 0 's k - cts HAR;I
\ I YERNON [LEMENTARY $<*'90L x 'g ',
7
/
) ,/ g g,gg 1 MIN 50 ALE. N,H. '
s ,-
\
', e' s ~.,'
YERn0N. V.T.
5 p
- l 4 '
CCN\ECTTC::T Ytt sN 0"/ RtVEt
\
Figure 4.1 Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations Within Close Proximity to Plant 22-
1 l
N s
Tu 19 A TG 12 -
lav A'/CF 12 A
8"e HINSDAl.E, N.H. -
I TC 15 A TM-15 te 16 TM 16 Oc
- q. \
Q> \
~~
i c#
apt5 10 13 l' , 1G 13 A AP/CFall I
- d AP/CF 13 l i i
, i i t
3 PLANT E i M l l l sit t:::Anwir: n T:Lu ' 1 l vtRNON CAM j e i
I TC 14 g Apfe,.gj VERNON, V.T. '" O
[3, '8 11 w.11 TC 13
'"3 0 1 2 3 L1LYPCW E!LOMETERS Figure 4.2 Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations Within 5 Kilometers of Plant 7
I N -{
TC 20
)' in ro A A fa 24 TC.24 l SP0FFORD LAKE 44 10 21 A W 22 4 AP/CF-21 b
4, g
~
A ru.21 .
1 E 3Act ut, Vit 21 l CHt3TERFl[LD A W 21 4
- MAR.LBORO : n BRATTLEBORO 9 0 trr ut.uccvtxr a nxtr '4 2 I 1 1". I I 1
% 8 -\
1
- i g TC 12 g HIN$Mll I IlI #0 *
- 4 TM 12 ;
i i WINCHESTER l lYERNON e l PLANT l t '
i '
8 VE#140NT NEW %4P$H!RE MAssACxtsgTT3
- - - TM 17 A+ 1 t'A51ACHUSETTS ,
e NORTHFliLD A AP/CF'1' TG 14 h
I GR([NFIELD # +
- 0. $- '10 R I KI.0 MITERS-Figure 4,3 Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations -
Creater than Five Miles from Plant >
, .. . - - , - - . - . a --- ,_ ; 2 - _ _ ~ a - . ;. . . .. _. . _ _ . _ _ _. ......a._...._.._._._____-__- ~.2
0 503 N
--e_.-,
l
.. I 4,c> 1
% l
^
- 18
,# g
- N
,' A Ca 4s ',
i FENCILINE ] ' '
's s i t4 47 A i
\ '\, '
i (4Ca.49, 's, PEtw'4 P0W I \
6 C4 33 \ STAOK [,ca-46
's ',
q
\ $
INTi k[
k) CR 5't ,A h g CR 31 A \ *.
4 A CR 44 on s'A % ;scHAntit D CR 6 A . k
' S VERNON ELEMENTARY $CH00L i CR 29 A g4 D<l 4 i CR-50 A 'Y l '
I H!NSDAL(, N.H. +
1 s" Ca*42 ,A,r' VERN0't. V.T. M i // /
CONNECTICLT YEPJtCN C AM gypgg Ca.27 A
.. I Figure 4,4 TLD Monitoring Locations in Close Proximity to Flant
{ .. ...
II t
""" :!::E N-Y
!!'d A ca 40 A et to III
\ g@s
/
/
g ,4 A ca 12 s HINSDRE / N.H. g y
\ 4 08 2a ca.3i L'
N s
A DR 36
- 37 A \_i '
/ /
/
- <*c ca 9 A A en.it[ /
\ / ca.,/ z:::
N Q b***"
'" O t j/ ca A 15 PLANT ! A ca.it A ca.ts
= z y/,/l\
- i sit vsw:c<t.n :] r:xrt 4-e N7 ' '
nms a 's a 21 ,
A ca.19 A ca.32 g ca.30 A ca 23 ca 25 A VSW VERfl0N, V.T. A A ca 1 ESE
,1 ca 28 g g,,3 N
N SV 0
O D '
1 2 3 uty me
\ SE K!LONETERS SSW S' SCE Figure 4.5 TLD Monitoring Locations Within 5 Kilometers from Plant 26-
.. y
+., - . - ,
, N f I
\
l p\83 9 I y
1NTFJ@ LAKE Act $
/
- /
NNSACC MF.
S*
kh k CHISTERF!!(D A MRt BORO
/$ /
BR.ATTLEBO N - njecture; a 3
\ t 38 4 :
t A
%' [i /
/
WikCNESTER W . E
- /j/ ,N, ! ]
440420 p
\
YERMO*4T -p
/ / \ '\
~~ s NEW HAMPSH!R, M[5EACHUSEiTS ~k~~ / \ tussAD<uSET'S ,,
e NORTHFI A ct 6 g,.
44 h
/ \
GREENFl[LD #
0 5 10 1
KILOMETERS Figure 4.6 TLD Monitoring Locations Greater than 5 Kilometers from Plant 27-
- 5. BApioLooIcAL._ DATA BUMMAEX_IAD1EH This section summarizes the analytical results of the environmental samples which were collected during 1991. These results, shown in Table 5.1, are presented in a format similar to that prescribed in the NRC's Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position on Environmental Monitoring (Reference !
1). The results aro ordered by sample media type and then by radionuclido. I The units for each nedia type are also given.
The left most column contains the radionuclide of interest, the total number of analyses fcr that radionuclide in 1991, and the number of measurements which exceeded the Reporting Levels fcund in Table 3.9.4 of the VYNPS Technical Specifications. The latter are classified as *Non-routine" measurements. The second column lists the required Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) for t. hose radionuclides which have detection espability reqairements as specified in the plant's Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications (Table 4.9.3). The absence of a value in this column indicates that no LLD is specified in the Technical Specifications for that radionuclide in that media. The target LLD for any analysis is typically 30 40 percent of the most restrictive required LLD. On rare occasions the required LLD is not met. This is usually due to malfunctions in sampling equipment, which results in low sample volume. Such cases are addressed in Section 6.2.
For each radionuclido and media type, the remaining three columns summarize the data for the following categories of monitoring locations: (1) the Indicator or Zone i stations, which are within the range of influence of the plant and thich could conceivably be affected by its operation; (2) the station which had the highest mean concentration during 1991 for that radionuclide; and (3) the Control or Zone 2 stations, which are beyond the influence of the plant. Direct radiation monitoring stations (using TLDs) are grouped into Inner Ring, Outer ring, Site Boundary and Control stations.
In each of these columns, for each radionuclide, the following statistical values are given:
- The mean value of all concentrations. f o
- The standard error of the mean.
4
- The lowest and highest concentration. [
- The number of positive measurements (a concentration which is greater than the a costeriori LLD for that analysis) divided by the total number of measurements, l
Each single radioactivity measurement datum in this report is based on a l sinc ~i measurement and is reported as a concentration plus or minus a one l standard deviation uncertainty. The standard deviation on each measurement represents only the random uncertainty associttef with the radioactive ;
decay process (counting statistics), and not the propagation of all possible uncertainties in the analytical procedure.
Pursuant to VYN?S Technical Specification Table 4.9.3 (footnote f), any concentration below the LLD for its analysis is reported as "not detected."
These values are set to zero for averaging purposes. Where a range of values is reported in the tables of this section, values less than the a coster!2Il LLD for the analysis are reported as zero.
The radionuclides teported in this section represent those that: 1) had an ,
LLD requirement in Table 4.9.3 of the Technical Specifications, or a Reporting Level listed in Table 3.9.4, or 2) had a positive measurement of
-radioactivity, whether it was naturally occurring or man made; or 3) were ,
of specific interest for any other reason. The radionuclides that were routinely analyzed and reported by the Laboratory (in a gamma spectroscopy analysis) were: AcTh 228, Ag 110m, Ba 140, Be-7, Cc 141, Co-144, Co 57, Co 58, Co 60, Cr-51, Cs 134, Cs 137, Fe 59, 1-131, I-133, K 40, Mn 54, Mo-99, Np 239 Ru 103, Ru 106, Sb-124 Se-75, Tel 132, 2n 65 and Zr-95. In no case did a radionuclide not shown in Table 5.1 of this report appear as a
" detectable measurement" during 1991,
-29
r TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL EWylRCuMENTAL PROCAAM SLMMARY VERMoni TAMKIE MuttIAR fur R $1 AllCW, VEkWON, VI (JAAAlARY . DE(IMlllR 1971)
INDICATOR $1A110h5 $1Afl0N V11N PlGNE$f MEAN CM TROL STA110NS eeeeeeeeeeeeeesees eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee...... ................
ILADIDWUCL!DE t* HEAN MEAW MEAW !
(k0. AEALYSES) REQUIRED ILAtGE 51A. RANGE RAKE (NON RCUTlWE)" LLO NO. DE TECTED*" h0. NO. DETECTED *" h0. Ct f E CTED"'
EDILM AIR PARil(11LATES (AP) Lklist pCl/ctble meter CR B (155) .01 ( 2.1 s 0.0)E 2 12 ( 2.2 s 0.1)E .2 ( i9s 0.1)E 2
( 0) ( 1.1
- 3.4)E 2 ( i.2 - 3.1)E -2 ( 1.0 - 2.8)E 2 (129/129) ( 26/ 26) ( 26/ 26)
LE.P ( 24) ( 7.4 s 0.5)E 2 12 ( 8.5 a 1.5)E 2 ( 6.7 1.1)E 2
( 0) ( 3.9 - 12.0)E 2 ( 4.6 12.0)E 2 ( 3.8 - 9,0)E 2
( 20/ 20) ( 4/ 4) ( 4/ 4)
Co 60 ( 24) ( 0.0 : C.0)E 0 11 ( 0.0 a 0.0)E O ( 0.0 s 0.0)E o
( 0)
( C/ 20) ( 0/ 4) ( 0/ 4)
C5 134 24) .05 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E 0 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E o ( 0.0 s 0.0:t 0
. 0)
( 0/ 20) ( 0/ 4) ( 0/ 4)
C5 137 ( 24) .06 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E D 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O ( 0.0 a 0.0)E O
( 0)
( 0/ 40) ( 0/ 4) ( 0/ 4)
MEDllm s CKARCDAL FILTERS (CF) UNITS: Ff/ctbic meter 1 131 (155) .07 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 A 0.0)E D ( 0.0 s 0.0)E 0
( 0)
( 0/120) ( 0/ 25) ( 0/ 26)
MGILM: river WATER (WR) UNITS: pCl/kg CR B ( 24) 4 ( 2.0 s 0.2)E 0 11 ( 2.0 s 0.2)E O ( 1.9 s 0.1)E D
( 0) ( 0.0 - 3.5)E D ( 0.0 - 3.5)E O ( 1.3 - 3.2)E O
( '*' 12) ( 11/ 12) ( 12/ 12)
MW 54 ( 24) 15. ( 0.0 s 0.0)E D 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O ( 0.0 s 0.0)E D
( 0)
( 0/ 12) { C/ 12) ( 0/ 12) kOTE: footnotes rey te fourd at the erd of Table 5.1.
30
TABLE 5.1 MDlutoGICAL ENVltaestWTAL HKKANI RDMAtt utmai 1ANrtE NUCLEAR Puuta s1Alltm, VERNcw, vi (JAsp.at . Dttssta 1W1)
IkDICATOR stall 0h3 stall 0N WifN HICHEST MEAN Cohlt0L $1AllDhl
..... ............ ......................... ......... eeeeee RAD 10erJCLIDE $* MEAN MEAN MEAN (NO. AkALT$($) REQUIRED RANGE $1A. RANCE rah 6E (NON dauflWE)** LLO NO. Di1ECTED*" NO. ho. DCIECTEb*" No. LETE CTED
KDitM: RIVER WATER (WR), contlawd UNii!! ICl/kg Co 56 ( 24) 15. ( 0.0 a 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O -.
( 0/ 12) ( C/ 12) ( 0/ 12) i FE.59 ( 24) 30. ( 0.0 t 0.Dit 0 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E D ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O
( 0)
( 0/ 12) ( 0/ 12) ( 0/ 12)
Co.60 ( 24) 15. ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E 0 ( 0.0 a 0.0)E O
( 0)
( 0/ 12) ( 0/ 12) ( 0/ 12) 20-65 ( 24) 30. ( 0.0 a 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E D ( 0.0 a 0.0)E O l 0)
( 0/ 12) ( 0/ 12) ( S/ 12)
ZR 95 ( 24) 15. ( 0.0 a 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E D ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O N w ( 0)
( C/ 12) ( 0/ 12) ( 0/ 12)
Cs.134 ( 24) 15. ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 a 0.0)E D ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O
( 0)
( C/ 12) ( 0/ 123 ( 0/ 12)
CS 137 ( 24) 18. ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O ( 0.0 a 0.0)E O
( 0)
( 0/ 12) ( 0/ 12) ( 0/ 12 BA-140 ( 24) 15. ( 0.u a 0.0)E 0 1; ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O ( 0.0 s 0.0)E D
( 0) t 0/ 11) ( 0/ 12) ( 0/ 12)
H3 ( 8) 3000. ( 0.0 a 0.01t 0 11 ( 0.1 0.0)E O ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O
( 0)
< 0/ 4) ( 0/ 4) ( 0/ 4)
NOTE: Footretes soy te f ound at the evd of inble 5.1.
-31
)
l 1
1ABLE 5.1 LAD 10 LOGICAL INVIROMsE NI AL PROGRAM RDDERT VtRMtui TAKIt itEttAR PuhER $1A110N, Vir:KM, V1 (JAWuARY - DECL etR 1991)
INDICATOR $1AllOh5 $1AllON W11N HlCHEL1 MEAN CONTROL $1AllOh5 eeeeeeeeeee......e eseeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee seeeeeeeeeeeeese RADIONUCLIDE$* hl AW MEAW MtAN (No. AkALT$ts) tt0UltID RANCE $1A. RANGt RAhCE (DON. kUUllht )" LLD W3. DtitCitD'" Wo. ko. DtitCitD* No. Dt1LCi[D*"
FEDILM: CRCLtd3 WAlta (WG) (2115: ICl/kg 03 5 ( 16) 4. ( 5.2 s 1.2)E O 11 ( 7.5 1.8)E O ( 2.0 s 0.1)t 0
( 0) ( 0.0 - 1.4)E 1 ( 2.9 - 13.5)E O ( 1.6 2.4)E O
( 9/ 10) ( $/ 5) ( 6/ 6)
CN-54 ( 14) 15. ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O ( 0.0 s 0.0)t 0
( 0)
( 0/ 10) ( 0/ 5) ( 0/ 4)
C048 ( 14) 15. ( 0.0 s 0.0)E y 11 ( 0.0 a 0.0)E D ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O
( 0)
( 0/ 10) ( 0/ 5) ( 0/ 4)
Ft.59 ( 14) 30. ( 0.0 s 0.0)E D 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)t 0 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O
( 0)
( 0/ 10) ( 0/ 5) ( 0/ 4)
Co 60 ( 14) 15. ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E 0 ( 0.0 s 0.0)! 0
( 0)
( 0/ 10) ( C/ 5) ( 0/ 4)
Zu-65 ( 14) 30. ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O ( 0.0 3 0.0)[ 0
( U)
( 0/ 10) ( 0/ 5) ( 0/ t. )
zu.95 ( 14) 15. ( 0.0 s 0.0)[ 0 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O ( 0.0 s 0.0)E D
( 0)
( 0/ 10) ( 0/ 5) ( 0/ 4)
Ct.134 : 14) 15. ( 0.0 s 0.0)k 0 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O ( 0.0 a 0.0)1 0
( 0)
( 0/ 10) ( 0/ 5) ( 0/ 4)
C$.137 ( 14) 18. ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O ( 0.0 a 0.0)E O
( 0)
( 0/ 10) ( 0/ 5) ( 0/ 4)
WOft: Footnotes may te icmd at the erd of Table 5.1.
32
TAlti 5.1 RADICLOGICAL ENVIRoutNIA1 PR(ERM stM4 ART WRMONI TANGE suCLEAR MMR $f ATION, WRNON, VI (JAsuART . DE Ellet 8 1991) thDICATOR $1Aflohl $f ATION Wif M HlCHl.51 ME AN CONTROL STATIONS RADICWUCLIDE S* MEAN MEAN MEAN (No. AAALYSES) REQUIRED RAbOE $1A. RAWCE RAhCE (WOW Rut /fibE)** LLD WO. OffECTED*** ko. WO. DETECTED *** Wo. DETECTED ***
wr!LM CRCUND WATER (WG), cmtirtaxf UNIlst gCl/kg SA 160 ( 14) 15. ( 0.0 a 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O ( 0.0 a 0.0)E O
( 0)
( 0/ 10) ( 0/ 5) ( 0/ 4) 03 ( 16) 3300. ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O ( 0.0 s 0.0)E D j
( 0) l
( 0/ 10) ( 0/ 5) ( 0/ 6)
MDitma $EDIENT ($t) UNii$3 (Cl/kg (dry)
BE T ( 82) ( 5.2 a 2.8)E 1 12 ( 5.4 s 2.8)E 1 ho DATA
( 0) ( 0.0 - 1.6)E 3 ( 0.0 - 1.6)t 3
( 4/ 82) ( 4/ 80)
E 60 ( 82) ( 1.3 a 0.0)E 4 12 ( 1.3 s 0.0)E 4 ho E.'fA
( 0) ( 1.0 1.7)E 4 ( 1.0 1.7)E 4
( 82/ 82) ( 80/ 80)
Co 58 ( 82) ( 0.0 a 0.0)L 0 11 ( 0.0 a 0.0$t 0 k0 DATA
( 0)
( 0/ ?2) ( 0/ 2)
Co 60 ( 82) ( 1.7 0.5)t i 12 ( 1.7 s 0.5)E 1 ho DATA
( 0) ( 0.0 - 1.8)E 2 ( 0.0 - 1.8)E 2
( 13/ 82) ( 13/ 80)
Cs 134 ( 82) 150. ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 a 0.0)E O ho DATA
( 0)
( 0/ 82) ( 0/ 2) l C$ 137 ( 82) 180. ( 2.1 s 0.1)E 2 12 ( 2.1 a 0.1)E 2 h3 OATA
( 0) ( 1.2 - 3.8)F 2 ( 1.2 - 3.8)E 2
( 82/ B2) ( 80/ 80)
Acih228 ( B2) ( 9.3 a 0.1)E 2 11 ( 9.4 s 0.7)E 2 No DAT.
[
( 0) ( 6.7 - 11.8)E 2 ( 9.2 - 9.6)E 2
( 82/ B2) ( 2/ 2)
NOTE: Footnotes rey be f ard at the eed of Table 5.1.
33 l
l 1ARLE 5.1 l I
RADi(10GICAL ENVIRGestNTAL f*0 GAM EDOUutT VERf0Ni TANKEE WUCLEAR KMR STATI(at, yttmas, VI (JANUARY . DECEMRER 1W1)
IWDICAlpR $1Afl0h5 STATION WifM MIGNEli MEAN C0hiROL $1ATIDN5 eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeese... ...............e ,
RADIDWUCLIDES* MEAN MEAN MEAW (NO. AAALYEES) RE QUIRED RAhGE sfA. kANCE RANCE (NON'ROUllWE)** LLD WO. DETECTED *** No. b0. DETECTED *** ho. DETECTED ***
............. ..... .. ..............e...... .......................... .....................
MEDIUMt MILK (TM) UhlT$s [Cl/kg SR 89 ( 26) ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E 0 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O
( 0) l, .'
( 0/ 22) ( 0/ 4) ( 0/ 4)
SR 90 ( 26) ( 2.0 s 0.4)E 0 12 ( 3.6 s 0.6)E O ( 6.5 : 6.5)E .i
( 0) ( 0.0 4.9)E D ( 2.3 - 4.9)E O ( 0.0 - 2.6)E O
( 14/ 22) ( 4/ 4) ( 1/ 4)
K.60 (109) ( 1.5 0.0)E 3 12 ( 1.9 s 0.0)E 3 ( 1.3 s 0.0)E 3
( 0) ( 9.9 - 22.7)E 2 ( 1.2 - 2.3)E 3 ( 1.1 - 1.4)E 3
( 90/ 90) ( 20/ E0) ( 19/ 19) l*131 (109) 1. ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 a 0.0)E O ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O
( 0)
( 0/ 90) ( 0/ I?) ( 0/ 19)
CS 134 (109) 15. ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O ( 0.0 s 0.C)E O
( 0)
( 0/ 90) ( 0/ 13) ( 0/ 19)
CS.137 (109) 18. ( 3.3 s 0.8)E O 12 ( 1.3 0.3)E 1 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O
( 0) ( 0.0 - 3.9)E 1 ( 0.0 3.9)E 1
( 23/ 90) ( 17/ 20) ( 0/ 19) nA 160 (109) 15. ( 0.0 s 0.0;E O 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O ( 0.0 s 0.0)E D
( 0)
( 0/ 90) ( 0/ 13) ( 0/ 19)
KDitM: $1LA E (TC) ikliS pCl/kg BE 7 ( 6) ( 2.2 s 1.0)E 2 14 ( 5.2 s 0.8)E 2 ( 4.3 : 1.0)E 2
( 0) ( 0.0 - 5.2)I 2
( 3/ 5. ( 1/ 1) ( 1/ 1)
K 60 ( 6) ( 4.1 e 1.9)E 3 12 ( 1.2 s 0.1)E 4 ( 5.3 0.3)E 3
( 0) ( 1.1 11.6)E 3
( 5/ 5) ( 1/ 1) ( 1/ 1)
NOTE: Footnotes eey be foo d at the end of fable 5.1.
-34
TABLE 5.1 1AD10 LOG 1 CAL ENVIRowWTAL FWOGRAM SL9 MARY P RENT TAWLIE NUCLEAR KnAR $1A130W, YttuuN, V1 (JAMUARY . DECEMBit 1991)
INDICATOR STAi!Oh$ $1A110W WITH Nicht$1 MEAW COW 1ROL $1A110hs eeee..........<e ....e.................... e ee......e eeee RAD 10WUCLIDE$* MEAN kE AN MIAN (WO. AWALYtE$) REQUltED RAhGE $1A. RAWGE RANGE (WOW.tajil WE )** LLP Wo. OETECTED*" h0. h0. DETELTED*** h0. DETECTED *"
MU)llM 51 LACE (TC), contitux! LWITS: pCl/kg 1 131 ( 6) 60. ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 4.2)E O ( 0.0 a 4.1)E O
( 0)
( 0/ 5) ( 0/ 1) ( C/ 1)
CS 134 ( 6) d4. ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 a 7.8)E O ( 0.0 a 7.1)E O
( 0)
( 0/ 5) ( 0/ 1) ( 0/ 1)
C$ 137 ( 6) 60. ( 1.2 : 1.2)E 1 12 ( 6.2 1.6)E i ( 0.0 6.9)E O
( 0) ( 0.0 - 6.2)E 1
( 1/ 5) ( 1/ 1) ( 0/ 1)
EA 140 ( 6) ( 0.0 t 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 t 1.9)E 1 ( 0.0 s 1.5)E 1
( 0)
( 0/ 5) ( 0/ 1) ( 0/ 1)
EDitM MIKED CAA55 (TG) L2118: $Cl/kg EE-7 ( 18) ( 3.7 t 1.1)E 2 12 ( 5.9 e 2.9)E 2 ( 3.2 s 0.7)E 2
( 0) ( 0.0 - 1.2)E 3 ( 2.8 - 11.8)E 2 ( 1.9 - 4.5)E 2
( 9/ 15) ( 3/ 3) ( 3/ 3)
K 40 ( 18) ( 5.9 : 0.4)E 3 11 ( 7.3 : J.3)E 3 ( 6.4 t 1.6)E 3
( 0) ( 3.8 8.2)E 3 ( 6.9 - 8.0)E 3 ( 4.1 - 9.6)E 3
( 15/ 15) ( 3/ 3) ( 3/ 3) 1 131 ( 18) 60. ( 0.0 a 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 t 0.0)F. 0 ( 0.0 a 0,0)E O
( 0)
( 0/ 15) ( 0/ 3) ( 0/ 3)
C$ 134 ( 18) 60. ( 0.0 a 0.0)E 0 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O ( 0.0 0.0)E O
( 0)
( 0/ 15) ( 0/ 3) ( 0/ 3)
C$.137 ( 18) 80. ( 7.8 a 5.9)E O 15 ( 2.8 s 2.8)E 1 ( 0.0 a 0.0)E O
( 0) ( 0.0 8.5)E 1 ( 0.0 - 8.5)E 1
( 2/ 15) ( 1/ 3) ( 0/ 3)
WOTE: Footnotes may be found at the end of Table 5.1.
35
TAALE 5.1 l
RADIOLOGICAL EWIRCs8EfNTAL PROGRAM E8mAFT VERMONT TANGE ItJCLEAR PMR $1All(Ef, VERWON, VI (JAKlARY - DlGJett 1991)
INDICATOR $?Afl0NS $1All0N W11N NIGHE$1 MEAN Coh1ROL $1Aftons ItAD10NUCLIDE$* MtAN MtAk MEAN (WQ. AhALY5ts) REQUIRED RANGE $1A. RA%GE RANGE (WON RaulthE)** LLD WO. DETECitD*** ko. WD. DIftCTED*** h0. DEftCff0***
EDitM FISM (FW) tulist rCI/kg K 60 ( 4) ( 2.2 s 0.2)( 3 21 ( 3.2 0.7)E 3 ( 3.2 s 0.7)B 3
( 0) ( 1.9 - 2.4)E 3 ( 2.6 - 3.9)E 3 ( 2.6 - 3.9)E 3
( 2/ 2) ( 2/ 2) ( 2/ 2)
MN 54 ( 4) 130. ( 0.0 t 0.0)E o 11 ( 0.0 a 0.0)E O ( 0.0 3 0.0)E D
( 0)
( 0/ 2) ( 0/ 2) ( 0/ 2)
Co 58 ( 4) 130. ( 0.0 s 0.0)E J 11 ( 0.0 a 0.0)E O ( 0.0 a 0.0)E D
( 0)
( 0/ 2) ( 0/ 2) ( 0/ 2)
FE 59 ( 4) 260. ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)t 0 ( 0.0 a 0.0)E O
( 0)
( 0/ 2) ( 0/ 2) ( 0/ 2)
Co 60 ( 4) 130. ( 0.0 a 0.0)E 0 11 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E 0 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O .
( 0)
( 0/ 2) ( 0/ 2) ( 0/ 2)
- W 65 ( 41 260. ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O 11 ( 0.0 a 0.0)E 0 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E 0
(
( 0/ 2) ( 0/ 2) ( 0/ 2)
C$.134 ( 4) 130. ( 0.0 s 0.0)! 0 11 ( 0.0 a 0.0)F 0 ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O
( 0)
( 0/ 2) ( 0/ 2) < 0/ 2)
C$ 137 ( 4) 150. ( 0.0 s 0.0)E O 21 ( 1.9 e 1.971 1 ( 1.9 1.9)E 1
( 0) ( 0.0 - 3.8)E 1 ( 0.0 - 3.8)E 1
( 0/ 2) ( 1/ 2) ( 1/ 2)
NOTE: Footnotes auy be fourd at the ord of Table 5.1.
36
footnotes to Table $.1:
- The only radionuclides reported in this table are those with LLD requirerants, those for which positive radioactivity was detected, and those that were of some other speclat interest. See section 5 of this report for a discussion of other radionuclides that were analyzed.
- Non-Routine refers to those radior ..' ides that exceeded the Reporting Levels in Technical Specification Table 3.9.4.
- The fraction of sanple analyses yielding detectable sessurements (i.e. the concentration is greater than the 3 j oosterf orf LLD) is sho.n in parentheses.
I 37-
...__ . . . _ .._m ... _ . . . - - . .
_m. _ _ - - . . _ - _ _ ._ _ __. _ ___ - _ _ _ . _ .
TAalt 5.2 ENVIROWENTAL TLD DATA SLaetART l' wnmMT YANKEE NUCLEAR Mata s1Atlte Wahou, vi (JANUARY DEMieEt 1991) .
1 l
l l
l OFF$1TE $1Atl0W INutt RING TLDs DUTER tlNG TLDs WifM NIGNEST MEAN C0 hit 0L TLDs
............ ....... .................... .................... eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee.
MEAN MEAN MEAN MEAN RANGE RANGE - RANGE RANGE (No. MEASUREMENT $)* (NO. MEASUREMENi$)* (NO. MEASUR[NEgi$)* (hQ, M[ASUR[M(Ni$)* ,
l 6.6 s 0.4 6.8
- 0.7 DR 20 7.T 0.3 6.4 a 0.4 i 5.7 7.9-- 5.1 8.2 7.4 8.2' 5.8 6.7 (83) (63) (4) (8) t SITE 80UNDART TLD WITN NIGHf81 MEAN $1TE BOUNDARY TLDs eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee .eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee M(AN' MEAN- _
-RANGE RANGE (No. MEASUREMENTS)* (ND, MEASUREMEhi$)*
t 04-45 16.3 a 1.8 9.1 t 4.3 14.7 + 18.6 6.2 32.0 (4) (46)
- Esch w asurement" is based typically on quarterly readings from five TLD elements. i
!=
i i
a f
38 vvsa , ., ,_.-. . . ' , , , . ,, .,.m
-. - _-_ - .- ~.- , - ~ . _ _ ~ - ~ - - . _ - - . - - - . . . _ . _ _ . . . . ~ _
TABLE 5.3 StageART OF 1991 (WVih01BIIk1AL TLD IEASURIMNil (Micro R per Ikar)
AhWUAL
$te. 18f GUARTit- ?WD QUAtitt 3RD 00Atitt 4tu QUAttle A vt .
No. Description- EEP. 5.0. EXP. S.D. (KP. 8.D. EXP. S.D. (KP.
DR 01 River ste. No. 3.3 6.1 : 0.3 6.1 a 0.3 5.8 s 0.3 6.2 a 0.2 6.1 Da 02 N. Ninadele, n 5.9 a 0.3 6.4 s 0.4 6.4 a 0.3 6.3 0.3 6.3 De 03 Ninedele $4stetton 7.0 a 0.4 7.7 s 0.4 7.9 s 0.2 7.3 s 0.3 7.5 DR 04 porthfield, MA 5.9 0.3 6.2 s 0.3 5.8 s 0.4 6.3 a 0.2 6.1 0R 05 Spofford Lake, H 6.6 s 0.6 6.7 s 0.4 6.7 t 0.3 6.7 s 0.3 6.7 De 06 Vernon $choot 6.5 s 0.3 7.1 s 0.4 6.7 a 0.3 6.8 s 0.2 6.8 DR 07 Site soundary 8.2 s 0.4 8.6 s 0.5 8.4 s 0.3
- 8.4 08 08 lite Domdery 8.1 s 0.4~ 8.8 s 0.4 8.8 s 0.2 8.8 s 0.3 8.6 ,
DR 09 Inner sing - 6.3 s 0.3 6.7 0.4 6.4 s 0.4 6.4 a 0.2 6.5 '
De 10 Outer ning 5.1 a 0.3 5.4 s 0.3 5.3 a 0.2 5.4 s 0.2 5.3 5.7 : 0.4 6.0 s 0.3 6.0 s 0.3 DR 11 Inner ting 6.2 s 0.3 60. ;
Da*12 Outer king 5.8 : U.3
- 5.8 s 0.3 %.9 s 0.2 5.8 !
D4 13 Inner Ring - 6.2 a 0.4 6.4 s 0.4 6.4 s 0.3 6.5 s 0.3 6.4 Da*14 Outer Ring 7.1 s 0.3 7.8 0.4 7.6 s 0.3 7.5 s 0.3 7.5 Da*15 Imer Ring . 6.3 s 0.3 *
- f. 6 s 0.3 6.7 s 0.2 6.5 DR 16 Nter Ring 6.9 s 0.3 7.2 s 0.4 7.0 : 0.4 7.0 s 0.2 7.0 DR 17 inner Ring 5.7 s 0.3 6.6 s 0.4 6.5 s 0.3 6.2 s 0.3 6.3 DR 18 ' outer ting 6.6 s 0.3 7.2 s 0.4 7.0 s 0.3 6.8 s 0.2 6.9 DR 19 inner Ring 6.2 s 0.4 - 7.1 : 0.4 6.9 s 0.2 6.9 s 0.2 6.8 Da 20 Outer tire 7.4 s 0.5 8.7 0.6 7.7 0.3 7.6 s 0.3 7.7 De 21 Inner ting = 6.2 a 0.4 7.1 a 0.4 6.8 s 0.3 6.8 s 0.3 6.7 02 22 ChJter ting 6.3 s 0.3 6.9 0.3 6.9 s 0.3 6,6 0.3 6.7 Da 23 Imer Ring - 6.3 s 0,3 6.9 s 0.4 ' 6.6 s 0.2 6.6 s 0.3 6.6 DR 24 Outer Ring 5.6 s 0.3 6.0 s 0.4 5.7 s 0.2 5.8 s 0.2 5.8 DR 25 inner ting 6.2 s 0.4 6.7 s 0.4 6.9 s 0.2 6.6 0.3 6.6 08 26 Outer Ring ~ 6.5 s 0.5. 7.1 0.3 7.C s 0.2 6.7 s 0.3 6.8 De 27 inner Ring 6.4 s 0.3 7.3 a 0.4 6.8 0.2 6.9 s 0.4 6.8 DR 28 Outer Ring 6.3 s 0.3 7.2 s 0.6 1.1 s 0.3 6.9 s 0.3 6.9 Dt+29 inner ting 6.1 a 0.4 6.9 s 0.3 6.9 s 0.2 6.7 s 0.2 6.7 Da*30 Outer Ring 5.9 s 0.3 6.9 s 0.4 6.6 s 0.3 6.6 s 0.2 4.5 08 31 Inner Ring 6.4 s 0.4 7.2 s 0.4 6.9 s 0.2 6.9 0.3 6.0 Da.32 Outer ting 6.2 a 0.3 6.7 s 0.4 6.9 s 0.2 6.6 s 0.3 6.5
- Da 33 Imer Ring - 6.6
- 0.3 7.1 s 0.3 6.9 0.2 6.9 s 0.2 6.9 DR 34 ' Outer Ring 6.7 s 0.4 7.4 s 0.4 7.3 s 0.2 7.0 s 0.2 7.1
.DR 35 Inner Ring 6.4 s 0.4 7.0 s 0.4 6.9 0.4 6.6 s 0.3 6.7 Da 36 - outer ting 7.3 a 0.5 8.0 s 0.4 8.0 s 0.3 7.5 s 0.3 7.7 DA 37 Imer ting 6.4 s 0.3 7.2 s 0.4 7.1 s 0.2 7.0 s 0.2 6.9 DR 38 Outer Ring 6.5 s 0.4 7.4 s 0.5 7.2 s 0.2 6.9 0.3 7.0 DR 39 Ireer Ring. 6.2 s 0.3 6.9 s 0.3 6.9 0.3 6.4 s 0.2 6.6 DF40 - outer eine 6.4 s 0.3 6.7 s 0.3 6.7 0.3 6.4 s 0.3 6.5
+
t 39 .
. _ . _ . . _ - _ . - _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _,2.____._..,.___,___ _ . _ _ , , . _
I ABLE 5.3, cmtituod Raewtf of 1991 ENVit0NmMTAL TLD MASLRimmis (Nitro a per Maur)
AkWUAL Ste, i$f QUARTER ZWD QUAtitt 3RD QUAtift 41N QUAtilt Avt .
No. Description (AP. S.D. [KP. S.D. [AP. $.D. EkP. $.D. [KP.
DR 41 tite a d ry 7.2 a 0.4 7.8 : 0.4 8.0 a 0.2 7.6 : 0.3 7.7 08 42 $lte Bourcary 6.2 : b.1 7.3 a 0.4 7.2 s 0.2 6.8 0.3 6.9 D8 43 tite somdery 6.8 : 0.3 7.6 s 0.4 7.7 0.2 7.2 s 0.3 7.3 Dt.44 site Bomdury 8.1 s 0.5 7.6 s 0.5 8.2 t 0.3 8.3 s 0.3 8.0 Dk.45 site soundary 18.6 a 1.2 16.8 : 0.9 15.2 s 0.4 14.7 0.4 16.3 DR 46 Site Soundary 32.0 1.7 11.1 s 0.6 9.1 : 0.3 8.6 0.4 15.3 DR 47 tite Bourdery 8.1 0.5 8.2 a 0.4 8.2 s 0.3 7.9 s 0.3 8.1 Dt 48 site somdery 6.5 0.5 7.3 t 0.5 7.3 s 0.3 7.1 : 0.3 7.1 Dt 49 site Bo m dsry 6.4 a 0.4 7.1 s 0.4 6.9 s 0.3
- 6.8 bt 50 covernor Hunt House 6.6 0.5 7.5 0.4 7.4 a 0.3 7.2 s 0.3 7.2 DR 51 $lte 1.ourdery 8.0 s 0.7 8.4 s 0.5 8.5 0.3 8.5 0.3 8.4
\
- Data ret a-allable due to missing TLDs.
h 40-
6, ANALt919 OF ENyIRQJIMXNTAL RESULTG 6.1 Lauline Program DeYtatians in 1991, sweral desiations were noted in the RDiP. These deviations did not comprcmise the progratn's effectiveness and in f act are considered tyoicc1 with respect to what is nortaally anticipated for any radiological environmental monitoring prograte. Radiological Effluent Technical Specification 3.9.C allows for deviations "if specimens are unobtainable
^
due to onzardous conditions, seasonal unavailability, malfunction of automatic paapling equipment and vther legitimate reasons." The specific deviations for 1991 were:
- a. For une:plained ressons, the power to air sampiing station /.P/CF-14 had beec interrupted approximately hal' way thrvtgh the samp1hg period of April 2 to April 16, 1991. Or'eration of the sampler was reOumed on April 16, 1992. (See Potential Reportable Occurrence No. 92 28.)
- b. On August 20, 1991, during the routine sample collection at air aamplia.g station AP/CF-11, it was discovered that an incomplete sample was collected due to the failure of the sample pump during the collectinn period. The sample peried encompassed August 6 to August 20, 1991. The sample pump was replaced. (See Potential Reportabic Occurrence No. 91-61.)
- c. On January 11, 1991, at power outage at river water sampling station w'R 11 cauced the sampling line to freeze. The period of January 11 to Sant.ary 18, 1991 was therefore not sampled. The ,
condition was corrected on January 18, 1991. (See Potential Reportable Occurrence No. 91-03.)
- d. On h rch 20, 1991, during the routine sample collection at river water sampling station WR-11, it was discovered that the water supply to the automatic compositin$ sampler was out of service, for re.asons unexplained. The sampling period encompassed by this sample was March 13 to april 17, 1991. The sampling pump was put back into service on April 22, 1991. (See Potential Reportable Occurrence No. 91-20.)
- e. The automatic river water sampler at station VR-11 was interrupted on two occasions during the monthly period of Jum 13 to July 15, 1991 On the ev9ning of June 15, a sevet e lightning 41-
storm caused a power outage that was discovered on June 17. The sampler was put back in service on June 18. (See Potential Repertable Occurrence No. 91-47.) On July 3,1991, the water supply to the automatic sampler was found to be interrupted for unknown reasons. The water supply was put back in service on July 4, 1991. (See Potential Repc: table Occurrence No. 91-50.)
- f. Samples vero not available at TM 19 (an optional milk sampling location) on all monthly collection dates except January 3 and February 6, 1991.
- g. The following TLDs were found to be missing in the field during 1991: DR 12, 2nd Quarter; DR 15, 2nd Quarter; DR-7, 4th Quarter; and DR-49, 4th Quarter.
- h. Due to the' lack of growing vegetation during the winter season, mixed grass samples were not collected durin6 the first and fourth quarters of 1991.
6,2 Comparison of Achieved LLDs with Recuirements Table 4.9.3 of the VYNPS Technical Specifications (also shown in Table 4.4 of this report) gives the required Lower Limits of Detection (LLDs) for environmental sample analyses. On occasion, an LLD is not achievable due -
to a situation such as.a low sample volume caused by sampling equipment malfunction. In such a case, Technical Specification 6.7.C.3 requires a discussion of the situation. At the Yankee Atomic Environmental
- Laboratory, the target LLD for any analysis is typically 20 40 percent of the most restrictive required LLD. Expressed differently, the typical sensitivities achieved for each analysis are at least 2.5 to 3 times greater than that required by VYNPS Technical Specifications.
For each analysis having an LLD requirement in Technical Specification Table 4.9.3, the a postertgIl (after the fact) LLD calculated for that analysis was compared with the required LLD. -Of the over 7400 analyses performed during 1991, of which approximately 1300 had an IJE requirement in Technical Specification Table 4.9.3, all but two met the requirement.
The two sample analyses in question were for the paired air particulate and charcoal samples for the air sampling period August 6 to August 20, 1991.
A failed pump and the consequent low sample volume resultad in an LLS that was unachievable.
- -- . - - . - - . - - - - - ~ . - . - - . _ . - . _ . - - - - . - - . . - - - . .
6,3 1991 Results Compared Acainst Redortinc Levels l
Technical Specification Table 3.9.4 requires the written notification of the NRC (within 30 days) whenever a Reporting Level in that table is exceeded. Reporting Levels are the environmental concentrations that relate to the ALARA design dose objectives of 10 CFR 50, Appendix 1. It should be noted that environmental concentrations are averaged cver calendar quarters for the purposes of this comparison, and that Reporting levels apply only to measured levels of radioactivity due to plant j effluents. During 1991, no Reporcing Levels were exceeded.
6.4 Chances in Samnline Locations V1NPS Technical Specification 6.7.C.3 states that if "new environmental sampling locations are identified in accordance with Specification 3.9 D.
the new locations shall be identified in the next annual Radiological Environmental Surveillanco Report." Several changes were made in sampling locations during 1991, as described below:
- a. In March of 1991, the Ranney Farm (TM 20. TC 20) went out of business. This control milk and silage sampling location was replaced with the County Farm (TH 24. TC 24) in April of 1991.
, (See Potential Reportable Occurrence No. 91-17.)
- b. In July of 1991, the Tall Oaks Farm (TM 16, TC 16) went out of business. This allk ar.d silage sampling locatit.. was replaced with the Cayland Farm, which is adjacent to the Tall Oaks Farm.
The Cayluud Farm is essentially the same fsra as the previous Coomos Farm, but under different ovnership. The Cayland Farm was given the-same designation as the previous Coombs Farm,-TM 15 and TC 15. (See Potential Reportable Occurrence No. 91 054.)
- c. '
When the routino sample collection was attempted at the control location WG-21 on February 12, 1991, the water source was inaccessible. (An alternate sample was then collected on February 12 at the Southern Vermont Engineering Co.) It was decided to change the sampling location to a permanent new location that "ould prove to be nore consistently available. The Skibniowsky well was cho.cn, and a test sample was collected on March 14, 1991 The well became the permanent sampling location on May 8, 1991. It was. designated UG 22.
r
. _ . . , . - . - , - _ . , . -- . - - _ _ . _ - - _ _ - - _ . . , . ~ . , . , . _ . . _.._-m__ . . . . . - . - - . - _ - - __
6.4 Data Analysis by Media Tvoc The 1991 REMP data for each media type is discussed below. Whenever a specific measurement result is presented, it is given as the concentration plus or minus one standard deviation. This standard deviation represents only the random uncertainty associated with the radioactive decay process (counting statistics), and not the propagation of all possible uncertainties in the analytical procedure. An analysis is considered to yield a " detectable measurement" when the concentration exceeds the a costeriori LLD for that analysis. With respect to data plots, all net concentrations are plotted as reported, without regard to whether the value is " detectable" or "non detectable."
6.4.1 Airborne Pathvavs 6.4.1.1 Air Particulate.s.
The bi weekly air particulate filters from each of the six sampling sites were analyzed for gross-beta radioactivity. At the end of each quarter, the thirteen weekly filters from each sampling site were composited for a gamma analysis. The results of the weekly air particulate sampling program are shown in Table 5.1 and Figures 6.1 and 6.2.
As shown in Figures 6.1 and 6.2, gross-beta measurements on air particulate filters fluctuated significantly over the course of a year. The measurements from control station AP 21 varied similarly, indicating that these fluctuations were due to regional changes in naturally-occurring airborne radioactive materials, and not to VYNPS operations. Table 5.1 shows that the near concentrations from indicator stations were not significantly different than those from the control location, further supporting this conclusion. The only other radionuclide detected on air particulcte filters was Be 7, a naturally occurring cosmogenic nuclide.
It should be noted that the gross beta measurement reported to VYNPS by the Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratory for the period August 6 to August 20, 1991 at station AP 11 was not included in the Tabic 5.1 summary or in Figure 6.1. Since the sample volume for the period was extremely low and not specifically known, a gross beta concentration could therefore not be reliably determined. The Laboratory's reported concentration was based on an arbitrary volume of one cubic meter for the sample period.
g 6.4.1.2 Charcoal Cartridges The bi weekly charcoal cartridges from each of the six air sampling sites were analyzed for I-131. The results of these analyses are summarized in Table 5.1. As in previous years, no 1 131 was detected in any charcoal cartridge during 1991.
It should be noted that the I 131 measurement reported to VYNPS by the Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratory for the period August 6 to August ]
20, 1991 at station CF-11 was not included in the Table 5.1 summary. Since j tho sample volume for the period was extremely low and not specifically j known, an 1 131 concentration could therefore not be reliably determined. l The Laboratory's reported concentration was based on an arbitrary volume of one cubic meter for-the sauple period.
l 6.4.2 Vaterborne Pathways 6.4.2.1 Elver Vater l l
Aliquots of river water were automatically collected every two hours from ,
the Connecticut River downstream from the plant discharge area. Monthly '
grab samples were also collected at the upstream control location, also on l the Connecticut River. The composited sacples at VR 11 were collected monthly and sent to the Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratory, along with the WR-21 grab samples, for analysis. Table 5.1 shows that 6ross beta measurements were positive in most samples, as would be er.pected, due to l naturally occurring radionuclides in the water. The mean concentrations at the indicator and control locations were not significantly diffcrent in .
1991. Both mean concentrations were consistent with those detected in previous years, as shown in Figure 6.3. No gamma-emitting radionuclides attributable to VYNPS operations were detected in any of the samples.
'Fr>r each sampling site, the monthly samples were composited into quarterly samples for Tritium (H-3) analyses. None of the samples contained detectable quantities of H-3.
'6.4.2.2 Ground Vater Quarterly ground water samples were collected froin two indicator locations (only one is required by VYNPS Technical Specifications) and one control 45
.- ~ ~ , . . _ _ _ - . - - _
location during 1991. Table 5,1 and Figure 6.4 show that gross beta measurements were positive in nost samples. This is due to naturally-occurring radionuclides in the water. The levels at all sampling locations, including the higher levels at station WG 11, were consistent with that detected in previous years. No gamma emitting radionuclides or Tritium (H 3) were detected in any of the samples.
6.4.2.4 Sedinent Semiannual sediment grab samples were collected from two locations during 1991. A single sample was collected from SE 11 on May 16 and again on October 24, 1991. Forty (40) grab _ samples were collected from a gridded area at the North Storm Drain Outfall (SE 12) on May 15 and again on l October 24, 1991. As would be expected, naturally occurring K 40 and Ac-Th 228 were detected in all samples. Naturally occurring Be-7 was detected in several samples.
In addition to the above radionuclides, Cs 137 was detected in all samples, '
as'was expected. The levels measured at both locations were consistent with what has been measured in the previous several years and with that detected at other New England locations that are monitored as part of other Yankee affiliated environmental monitoring programs. This Ca-137 is attributed to nuclear weapons testing fallout that has persisted in the environment. This is further substantic ced by the fact that there were no liquid releases from Vermont Yankee during the period 1982 through 1991.
Co-60 was also detected in many samples from station SE 12. This radioactivity is due to plant operations and is localized within a small area near the west shore of Vernon Pond. Its presence has been monitored for several years. The Co 60 levels, as shown in Table 5.1, have decreased significantly since 1990. It should be noted that the mean values in Table 5.1 are weighted heavily toward station SE 12, since 80 of the 82 samples collected in 1991 were from that location. No Co-60 has been detected at station SE-11, which is downstream of the North Storm Drain Outfall (SE-12).
6.4.3 Incestion Pathways 6.4.3~.1 Hilk Milk samples from cows or goats at several local faras were collected
-46 l
monthly during 1991. Semimonthly collections were made at four of these locations during the " pasture season" since the milking cows or goats were identified as being fed pasture grass during that time. Each sample was analyrad fot 1-131 and other gamma emitting radionuclides. Quarterly composites (by location) were analyzed for Sr 89 and Sr 00.
i As was expected, n?'" rally occurring K 40 wat detected in all samples.
Also expected were Cs .37 and Sr 90. Cs 137 was detected in 23 out of 80 indicator samples. Sr 90 was detected in 14 out of 22 indicator samples, and 1 out of 4 control samples. Although both Cs 137 and Sr-90 are a by-product of plant operations, the levels detected in milk are due to worldwide fallout from nuclear weapons tests, and to a much lesser degree from fallout from the Chernobyl incident. Those two radionuclides are _
present throughout the natural environment as a result of atmospheric nucicar veapons testing that started primarily in the late 1950's and continued through 1980. They may be found in soil and vegetation, as well as anything that feeds upon vegetation, directly or indirectly. The Cs-137 and Sr 90 levels shown in Table S.1 and Figures 6.5 through 6.8 are consistent with those detected at other New England farms that are monitored as part of other Yankee affiliated environmental monitoring program.
As shown in these figures, the levels are also consistent with those detected in previous year near the VYNPS plant, with one exception. The farm at IH-12 has elevated levels of Cs 137 and to a lesser degree, Sr-90.
It has been shown in the past that Cs 137 and Sr 90 levels in cow or goat milk can vary substantially from one farm to the next, due primarily to the differences in feeding habits of the animals. It is also known that goats have a much higher transfer coefficient from vegetation to milk for -
strontium and cesium. This means that for a given amount of Cs 137 in the vegetation, the concentration in the milk vill typically be higher for a goat than for a cow.
6.4.3.2 Ellagg A silage sample was collected from the required milk sampling stations on October 2 and 3, 1991. Each of these va. analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. As expected with all biological media, naturally occurring K 40 was detected in all samples. Naturally-occurring Be 7 was also detected in most samples. Cs-137 was detected in a single sample from station TC-12, with a concentration of 62 1 16 pCi/kg. Since TM 12 is a private residence with several goats, as opposed to a dairy farm, silage
was not available and a hay sample was collected instead. The above level of Cs-137 is consistent with other hay and mixed grass samples 'ollected in the northeastern 'J.S. and, as discussed above for the allk samples, is attributed to fallout from nuclear weapons tests. Had the Cs 137 levels been due to emissions from Vermont Yankee, it would most likely have been detected at the air sampling station situated direct 1, between the farm at TM 12 ($ 2 km in the East sector) and the plant. None has been detected there. (The air sampling station at AP 13 is located at 3.1 km from the plant in the East sector.)
6.4.3.3 Mixed Crars Mixed grass samples were collected at each of the air sampling stations on three occasions during 1991, Samples were not available during the first and fourth quarters in 1991. As expected with all biological media, naturally-occurring K 40 was detected in all samples. Naturally-occurring Be 7 was also detected in most aamples. Cs 137 was detected in two indicator samples: 32110 pCi/kg at station TG 12 on July 10, 1991, and 85 1 13 pCi/k5 at station TG 15 on September 10, 1991. Although Cs 137 is a by product of plant operations, the levels detected in grass are due to worldwide fallout from nu. lear weapons tests, and to a much lesser degree from fallout from the Chernobyl incident. These two radionuclides are present throughout the natural environment as a result of atmospheric nuclear weapons testing that started primarily in the late 1950's and continued through 1980. They may be found in soil and vegetation, as well as anything that feeds upon vegetation, directly or indirectly. The Cs 137 levels in grass shown in Table 5.1 and Figures 6.9 and 6.10 are consistent with those detected at other New England locations that are monitored as part of other Yankee affiliated environmental mcnitoring program.
6.4.3.2 Elah Semiannual samples of fish were collected from two locations during 1991.
The edible portions of each of these were analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. As expected in biological matter, naturally occurring K-40 was detected in all samples. As shown in Table 5.1 and Figure 6.11, Cs-137 was detected in one of the two control samples, but not in the two indicator samples. This radioactivity is attributed to global nuclear weapons testing faliout. No other radionuclides were detected.
i
_ . __ m . - - _ ____ _ _ - _ _ _ --._. .~_m .. _ . . _ _ . _ _ .-_ __..m . _ _ . _ . _ _
6.4.4 Direct Radiation Pathway l
Direct radiation was continuously measured at 51 locations surrounding the i Vermont Yankee plant with the use of thermo1 mine ent dosimeters (TLDs).
These are collected every calendar quarter for 1,-sout at the Yankee Atomic Envirotusental 1.aboratory. The comp.'ete summary o' data may be found in Tcble 5.3.
As can be seen in Figures 6.12 to 6.25. there is - distinct aanual cycle at both indicator and control locations. Toe lowest point of the cycle occurs during the winter months. This is due primarily to the attenuating effect of the snow cover on radon emissions and on direct irradiation by naturally occurring radionuclides in the soil. biffering amounts of these na:urally occurring radionuclides in the underlying soil, rock or nearby building materials result in different radiation levels between one field site and another.
From Table 5.2, it can be seen that the mean exposure rates for the Inner r Ring, Outer Ring and Control categories were not statistically different in 1991. This indicates no significant overall increase in direct rediation exposure rates in the plant vicinity. As shown in Figures 6.12 to 6.25, the levels in 19>h re consistent with those in previous years.
Upon examining 1.gure 6.15 and Tabic 5.2, it is evident that statEons DR-45 and DR-46 had higher average exposure rates than any other station. Both locations are on sito, and the higher exposure rates are due to plant operations in the immediate vicinity of the TLDs. There is no significent dose potential to the surrounding population or any real individual froin these sources.
49 L
y-- y=-r-, . e u y e. w---yv.w-..-r,we- , -.e-.. .ww,-m . ,m r-,.. os.,, ~ -v-,-e. -,ic,
~ ...
,& . _ _ _ _ _ u . _ _ . . . .. . . . , ,. ..
MNNd e e e N-1 i1I
&aa&
.4 4 4.4 R:
N k~f ! ' -~ ! ! ! !
4 l h we
.o -
- .g (f) . -
-L. g W' '
,;e ~' "O
.H.
_t -
' -m H-l LL
.Z.
WO . %~w,
.H H . -,
4F Y-J4 aF - -7 0 U)
H -
HT EW s 43- -
1O 1- _
\ -g i .et [-
- HE - "A
- (O q q W I-W-2-J EOU-
_ (NW
- __m a.-a -o 0 (D Z -
A )
LL Z W ' .
-z WW ~
E1 V ,
\
y7 - -O E< % I
- D >- . 1 -p h._
. . N -<.
IO.
4 k _-
g' -
-7 HW' W> -
. -7 O
- g ..
l~ ~
OK - r-O - -<
..g ,.s O . -z s.
" la i 1 i n 7 i t i l t h 1
g 4 g -g .I g I g I g I g_ I m CD b c O V M N " O O R R R R R R R R O O O 0 0 0 0 0 0 8313H DI9nD / S3IHnDODId
Y,,,,J 4 se tn m
.a >. wmN <
- p. - l- I 1-Q. a O ~ 4 444 ,
.l-l ,
, c i .- , , ,
i- .i - i .
i i, .i > i i. . ._g
- i. i i S(
g t
- a. -a ,
g
-z -
E- "
1
- (1) -
-O g
. .J - . _, ,
H i (L. 2 -- .
B WO +
HH . .,
4H~ >
_J <
.-a r - -,
UO w H ^
g e -1 EW
.<x- - -
- 0. O 1 -
-r gg HE m <t < -
Fu w z'W; l ,,
EOO 3 D- as
-Hor- u) z - -
-a 4 Z w: _
2 w w-yy .
Wz- "
N "O
C<-
- D >- - . -,
=
u)
=3 4g- ~
wz
. z - o .. E.
-v 4g - -,
F-w
.w>- - -,
'I m
- 2 g;
o - s' -<
T. ,, @
0 -
g 1
, , , . Je g-d% .
y,8
, - , , , i , ,
o.
i A- i 6 .i _;_ >
g i g i
- i ai gg m n .e <> , n n. . o
- . R. R R R R R R R
.O- O -O O 'O O O O O
- HalaH DIano / saIenoooId
'.,w...
- , - .m w < - , - .y. . , , , . - - .r --- .,M,. - - , - ..y..y.
, i. .
d
' FIGURE 6.3 GROSS-BETA MEASUREMENTS ON RIVER-WATER-i
- VEPMONT. YANKEE. NUCLEAR POWER STATION
,o ' * ' '
l l .l j.
e-- --
- lE g __
l i o.
m _J w ! H 6--
' x --
N __ D- WR-ii:
in --O-- WR w y4 --
a 0 .
O. --
9 --
f JQ )g t . -
,a. .
,2. -
1 .
.a. .
4 FIGURE 6.4 GROSS-BETA MEASUREMENTS.ON GROUND WATER
- VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION -
20 l l l l y 33__ __
E __ __
i O g o __ __
i s __ __
Y- D- WG-11 N ---C WG-12'
,g__ __
m -A- WG-21 g __ __
s -V- WG-22 o
__[ __
\
o __ sg .
N __
s 3__ __
O o i l i l . l . ! ,
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992
FIGURE 6.5-CEEIUM-137 IN MILK
- VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAP POWER STATION -
so l { L i '
F so-- --
x --
N 25 2
, o ao-- ~
~-
E id --D-- T M- i l M
(Cows)
N Z 3g :- --O-- T M- 12 to --
o (Goats) y
~
~
-h- TM-13 U O (Cows) 2o-- ) --
O -_
O __
U --
g -
~
{ __
10-- o a-
_.. )
o 1987 ba 1989 i% ___ bg 1989 Ew Q 1990 R AbM1991 k
1992
FIGURE 6.6 CESIUM-137 IN MILK
- VERMONT; YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION -
4o l,
l l
l 4 __ __
3 ao-- - -
j __ __
r 3, o __ __ h TM-14 T d __ __ (Cows)
Y __
--C TM __
N gg__ __
'(Cows) m ~~ ~~
-A- TM-19 d ~~
- (Go a ts)'
$ ~[ -V-- TM-20 g __ __
(Cows)
S i o__ __
1987 if . m 1988 dMgt 1989 h 1990 1991
$ W~
1992
~
~ ,..p.,
M "3e to e 2 I O I O 1 O IOIOIU W~H"W~
l -l l l l l l l l 8
~
/
i x -
l 1
g g /p -8 i H /
r O
.J W H2 IO ..
/ __8 6Z M l Ha ,/ <
@ 4 OW ID 01. J . _
E I U DID OD2 HH c -
me
- _ /
,p m 2
O I
E ID
> .. . 8
.g 4
o l l e
l !
e 5
l l l m
l om 8 HyuOO7IN / SBIBn30DId
)
) ) s )
4 s6s9t0 s 1 w1 w1 a2w
- o- o- o- o MCMCMGMC T( T( T( T(
D
)
C A V 2
_ 1 _
g -
9 9 .
1 _
- \ \ 1 l 9 9
N O
I g 1 T
A T '
S KR \
LE IW 0 MO l .
9 9
P 1 8N -
.IR 6 A ; _
0E E9L '
R - C UMU GUN II FTE 9 NE l 8 9
OK 1 RN TA SY g T '
N O
M R
E 0 V l , 8 9
1 c 7
- - _ _ _ ~ - - _ 8
- - _ _ _ - - _ 9 o e s # 2 1 s
E god x N md @0o if
FIGURE 6.9 CESIUM-137 IN MIXED GRASSES
- VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION -
soo F-- l l !
250-- --
I T
, a 200--
tn cre t s,j y 3-- T G- 1 1 iso --
--O--- T G- 12
-a- TG-13 E
D U ico-- --
O U
H Q
SC-- --
s, N / A n ,_
.A._qc, l___. '=y&_wf&
w k, ,
1987 19k 1739 1990 2991 1992
a .
l l
FIGURE 6.10 l i
CESIUM-137 IN MIXED GRASSES
- VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION -
+ i ' '
, , , i 300 250--
I E +
L9 -
, o 200-w _J e s 8 y D- TG-14 s --
-O-- TG- 15 sso--
-A- TG-21 H
i E
1 3 -*-
O 100--
O l 0 H
I O 50--
- b. .
4
~_ -
/ , , .
e -
1931 1992 1998 1S 39 1990 1987 l . _ _ _
l l
FIGURE 6.11 CESIUM-137 IN FISH ]
- VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION -
l
! l too l BO--
- E T __
o O
m _1 --
o H 60--
t y D-- FH--11 N __
--O-- FH-21 m
tu '
g a
40--
\N O N __
o __
a u u 9 \
s
- n. % --
20--
y- C l l . ! ,
o , ! ,
1990 1991 1992 1997 1988 1999 n
i23 _
D00 _
RRR DDD UOA
_ _ _ _ - - ~ _ - - - _ _ - - 1 ._ .
2
' e 9 9
1 3
0 -
M4 1 N 0O RT OA I
t Y3 9 9
1 1
T $
.S S .
OR L A
M0 LE TV O
2RP 1 O 9
- N w9 1
RDC UNU %
GIN I
FTE M .
AE
~sw K - 9 EN l - i8 i
9 TA 1 AY R m
- E T e EN nt RO UM SR 1 os iy tS a
tD M -
8
{ l e E - pN 9
1 m
If o
7
- $ .e u 8
- - - _ - - - - - - - - _ - - - $ - 9 0 0 e 0 1 4 3 e 1 13OX b-IQ a 0EoY imT
4 97 (D O I O O 10 I I I i CCC OOO l
4 l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l 1 i N
-- d --g-j O
D
~
. I \
(D OZ O
.H -
Yb *
- O4 h,l -
I-- IU CW $
O /If.ij C 1
.W -
O 'E OO J CL p bb / ./ o
" C ...
m S
- C <T
- DOW !!
Ha LLI 4 O IOD DH Z -
1 OO i H ZW l LL H W $
b ll m y2 4 + c --g
> l W
HH e 4Z c3 h 1 3E -
WC %"
aW a> E.- S >p .
O I --
,e , --h~
n W
a:c v/, e A'e N
x ./ -
,z i i , i i , , , i,iiiiii E g, , , ,
g, ,,,g, , , ,
,g
, n m -
HnOH B3d 6-OBOIH FIGURE 6.14 EXPOSURE RATE AT SITE 8OUNDARY TLDS. DR 07-08,41-42
- VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION -
ao i t i i ' !
__ Implementation .__
of New TLD System so-- 1_
g __
i @ __
I h --
a __
--G-- D R- 0 7
$ po__ __
+ DR-08 g __
-b- DR-41 o
8
-V- DR-42 f __ E __
s =
umasus
_mED
FIGURE 6.15 EXPOSURE RATE AT SITE BOUNDARY TLDS. DR 43-46
- VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION -
l
' j- l 100 l
-r 90-- _-
p m n ation __
0 0 --- of New TLD Systec __
mus E 70-- --
e
~) '-
e O --
' A 8
I 60-- --O--- O R- 4 3 E _
---O-- DR-44 g --
O. 50--
-A- DR-45 g __
-V- DR-46 f ,,__
E _
o --
\' H l I 30--
__ \[ __
1 ":: WQ% ::
%w.=.m _ _ % 1989 1990 1991 h
1992 1987 1988 l
l l
FIGURE 6.10 EXPOSURE RATE AT SITE BOUNDARY TLDS, DR 47-49.51
- VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION -
' 2 '
do 1 l l l l
Implementation __
of New TLD Systerp 30-- --
x _-
i @ __
$, I __
c g --
E}-- DR-47
- n. 20-- --
---Cr-- D R - 4 8 g __
-h- DR-49 i
o --
-V- DR-51 E
U -- N
[d --
Q -- /
10-- --
A- %6
-AV-2 M __
o , ! , l , ! , l . I 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992
FIGURE 6.17 EXPOSURE RATE AT INNER RING TLDS. DR 09-15 (Odd)
- VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION -
4o l l + l l Implementation __
of New TLD System 30-- --
g __
s ~)
e o -- ~~
- 1 __
c __
D--- DR-0 9
$ go _ __
- O- DR-11 a __
-A- DR-13 i -V- DR-15 o --
E o __
} __
y __
10-- ..
M.. -- $f gg ,Q g enme o-- i l . l , ! , ! , i 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992
FIGURE 6.18 EXPOSURE RATE AT INNER RING TLDS. DR 17-23 (Odd)
- VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION -
do l l ! l 4
_;_ Implementation __
of New TLD System 30~- -"
a- -- --
3 --
0 --
y X __ __
1 __ __
- --D- DR- 17
$ 20-- --
0 UR-19 1 __ __
-h- DR-21 o
1
-V- DR-23 o -- --
~
y_ __
l/ /
g io ,- \ \V j --
Y5 0~& ^g-ir-6 _
1 o , ! , l , ! , ! , i 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 I
I
l l
FIGUPE 6.19 EXPOSURE RATE AT INNER RING TLDS. DR 25-31 (Odd) 1 - VERMONT YANKEE fJUCLEAR POWER STATION -
' J ' '
l ! l do l Implementation __
of New TLD System ~~
30--
a __
i 3 --
o O --
m I __
i __
D- DR-25 m
--O-- DR-27 1
$ 20
-A- DR-29 )
g __
-V- DR-31 o' --
s s
E u --
\, _-
y __ p 4d V --
so- -
\
g E %
1 __
_pe
! ! . ! c o , 1- 1 ! , ,
1991 1992 1987 1988 1999 1990 ,
~
1
'4 .A
, . , 3 .- . . ,
..;. - e,
FIGURE 6.20 EXPOSURE RATE AT INNER RING TLDS. DR 33-39 (Odd)
- VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION -
40 t l ; i l ;
Implementation ~~
of New TLD System
~~
30 l- __
1 -- _
& a -- _..
y X _.. __
E --
O-- DR-33 w
c_ go__ __
O-- DR-35 a __ _
-A- DR-37
-V- DR-39 O -- __
H
~~ ~~
1
\ .
10-- --
y ' ~
~~
_ m y ~ & =_- __
_lu.
O i ! , ! , { , , l 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992
1 FIGURE 6.21 EXPOSURE RATE AT OUTER RING TLDS. DR 10-16 (Even)
- VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION -
, , . . i 40
! I ' '
Implementation of New TLD System ,,
30-- y 1 --
~~
e ] __
Td I DR-iO e
~~
--C '
i x " --O-- DR- 12 i w -. \
1 20-- ~~
-A- DR- 14 c -- __ _ y _ ,- D R - 1 6 ;
i __
o --
E __
o --
s .
3 %. Q \; ..
10-- \
Ch; h
^-
e- w h y h h s-a ;;
t
_1 . .
i , ,
1989 1990 1991 1992 1987 iggs 1
1 1
e FIGURE 6.22 EXPOSURE RATE AT OUTER RING TLDS. OR 18-24 (Even)
- VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION -
Ao- l l l l ;
I
_. Implementation of New TLO System 30-- --
g --
D L o --
y I --
c --O-- DR- 18 w
- c. go__ __
O-- DR-20 g __
-A- DR-22 1
o --
-V- DR-24 E
o --
H y -- .
10-- -
-u6 o
, l . ! , ! , l , l 1987 1989 1989 1990 1991 1992
FIGURE 6.23 EXFOSURE RATE AT OUTER RING TLDS. OR 26-32 (Even)
- VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION -
40 l l l l l
__ Irnplementetion __
of New TLD System 30-- --
g __
d' I __
a _
--G-- D R-2 6 I go _l __
+ DR-28 C __
-A- DR-30 o
1
-V- DR-32 C
U --
/ --
y __ d __
1 o -+-
V --
- 'O~
(( %? -; ; ((
l o , ! , l . i . l i :
1987 1999 1989 1990 1991 1992
4680 3334 RRRR ODDC DOAV
_ _ ' _ _ _ I1 _ _ _ _ - _ _ _
2
- 991
)
n n e
v E
(
1 ,.
0N 4O I 1
- n 9 4T ;9 3A 1 T -
RS D
R ' ,
.E SW OO 4LP _
2T N, 0 R l
FTE y UE OK 9 N ;
- 9 8 TA 1 AY .
iy RM tS e
R tD v
EE nL eT RV m . \
ew U
S - l l e pN K ;8 9
9 O m 1 P If o
X E /
/n ,
g-Qr 7
- - _ - - - - - - - ~ _
o 0
1 - - . _ - ~ _
o o l- - ,8 o1 9
d 3 a s aaO @0 a,o- UHX
I FIGURE 6.25 EXPOSURE RATE AT CONTROL:TLD DR-05 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION -
do l l !. !
__ Implementation .
of New TLD-System-30-- --
g --
D 4 g __
a, I __
C __
tu __
1 mo-- --
D- DR-05 x .-
1 o --
E g __
H 3 ..
to--
V --
am '
em eme o '. l . ! . l .. ! . l 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992
_-.. __=
- 7. QUMdTY ASSURANCE PROGRAM The quality assurance program at the Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratory is designed to serve two overall purposes: 1) Establish a measure of confidence in the measurement process to assure the licensen, regulatory agencies and the public that the analytical results are accurate and precise; and 2) Identify deficiencies in the sampling and/or measurement process to those responsible for these operations so that corrective action can be taken. Quality assurance is applied to all steps of the measurement process, including the collection, reduction, evaluation and reporting of data, as well as the record keeping of the final results. Quality control is a part of the quality assurance program. It provides a means to control and measure the characteristics of measurement equipment and processes, _
relative to established requirements.
The Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratory employs a thorough quality assurance program to ensure reliable environmental monitoring data. The program includes the use of written, approved and controlled procedures for all work activities, a nonconformance and corrective action tracking system, systematic internal audits, audits from external groups, a laboratory quality control program, and a complete training and retraining system. The Intralaboratory Quality Control program at the laboratory and the EPA third party inter *aboratory program are discussed in more detail below. Also discussed is the environmental TLD quality assurance program and the blind duplicate quality assurance program conducted by the Laboratory Quality Control Audit Committee.
7.1 Intralaboratory Ouality Control Program -
The Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratory conducts an extensive intralaboratory quality control program to assur' the validity and reliability of non-TLD analytical data. Includte are the interr.21 process control program and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) Measurement Assurance Program. These together comprise ,
approximately ten to fifteen percent of the laboratory sample throughput.
The records of the quality control program are reviewed by the responsible cognizant individual, and corrective measures are taken whenever applicable.
For the internal process control program and the NIST Measurement Assurance Program, there were 602 analyses for accuracy and 640 for precisior. in 1991. Of the 602 analyses for accuracy reviewed during this period, 99.0%
met-the Laboratory acceptance criteria for accuracy, while 1.0% (6 out of 602 analyses) were identified as outside the Labo atory acceptance criteria. Of the 640 analyses for precision during 1991, 99,5% met the Laboratory acceptance _ criteria for precision, while 0.5% (3 out of 640 analyses) were. identified as outside the Laboratory acceptance criteria.
Table 7.1 shows a summary of the results of this program.
7.2 EPA Intercomparison Prontag To further verify the accuracy and precision of the Laboratory analyses via an independent outside third party, the Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratory partici oates in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Environmental Radis activity laboratory Intercomparison Studies Program for those'available species and matrices routinely analyzed by the Laboratory.
Participation in this program is required by VYNPS Technical Specification
! 3.9.E. Each sample supplied by the EPA is analyzed in triplicate, and the results are returned to the EPA within a specified time frame. When the known values are retarned to the Laboratory, the Laboratory and EPA results are then evaluated against-specific Laboratory and EPA acceptance criteria.
When the_results of the cross-check analysis fa?1 outside of the control
(- limit, an investigation is made_to determins the cause of the problem and corrective measures are taken, as appropriate. Results of this program are provided in this report in compliance with Technical Specification 4.9.E.
For the EPA Intercomparison Program, there were 177 analyses for accuracy on 93 samples. The samples consisted of water, milk and air particulate filters. -The analyses were for gamma-t 'tting radionuclides, gross-beta, strontium, iodine, plutonium and tritius. Table 7.2 shows a summary of the results for 1991. Of the 177 analyses for accuracy, only one mean value did not meet'the-EPA Control Limits. This was for a set of Strontium analyses on three water samples (Laboratory Sample Nos. S97981, S97982 and S97983). .The-mean value was 38.6 pCi/l and the EPA Control Limits were from 40.3 - 57.7.pCi/1. The Labe ratory is currently invcatigating this set of results under Yankee Laboratory _ Corrective Action Request YLCAR ASG 92. The results of this investigation will be discussed with the next report on the EPA.Intercomparison Program in the VYNPS Radiological Environmental Surveillance Report for 1992, 7.3: Environmental TLD Ouality Assurance Procram The Panasonic environmental TLD (thermoluminescent dosimeter) program at l i
l 1
l the ' Yankee Atomic Environmental . Lab >ra e' as its own quality assurance program. In addition to instrumentation checks performed by the Dosimetry Services Group 1(DSG), which represent approximately 10% of the TLDs processed, two independent test programs'are performed for accuracy and precision. The' first of these progr.ms is performed by the in-house Dosimetry QA Officer. and the second involves the University of Michigan third-party testing program. Under these programs, dosimeters are irradiated to known doses (unknown to the DSG) and given to the DSG for read-out.
-In 1991, out of 1428 TLDs processed at the Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratory, 6.7% (96 TLDs) were processed as part of the performance testing program. Of these 96 TLDs, 72 were from the in-house Dosimetry QA Officer .and 24 were from the University of Michigan testing pragram. All of these (100%) met the acceptance criteria for accuracy and precision.
7,4 Blind Duolicate Ouality Assurance Program The Laboratory Quality Control Audit Committee (LQCAC) is comprised of one member from each of the five power plants tl at are serviced by the Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratory. Two of the primary functions of the LQCAC
.are to conduct an annual audit of Laboratory operations and to coordinate the Blind Duplicate Quality Assurance Program. Under the Blind Duplicate Quality Assurance Program, paired samples are submitted from the five l
plants, including the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station. They are prepared from homogeneous environmental media at each respective plant, and are sent to the Laboratory for analysis. They are " blind" in that the identification of the matching sample is not identified to the Laboratory.
The LQCAC analyzes the results of the paired analyses to evaluate precision in Laboratory measurements, A total of 58 paired samples were submitted under this program by the five partic6pating plants-duringl1991. Faired measurements were evaluated for 26 gamma emitting radionuclides, H-3, Sr-89, Sr 90, I-131 and gross-beta.
'All measurements were evaluated, whether the results were considered statistically positive or not, and whether the net concentration was positive or negative. The 1470 paired duplicate measurements evaluated in 1991, 1466 (99.7%) fell within the established acceptance criteria. With the four paired measurements that did not meet the acceptance criteria, none had radioactivity that was considered statiatically positive. The results of this program are summarized in Table 7.3 and 7.4.
1 l i.
TABLE 7.1
SUMMARY
OF FROCESS CONTROL ANALYSIS RESULTS January - December 1991 ACCURACY PRECISION SAMPLE MEDIA NUMBER NUMBER ANALYSES ANALYSES NUMBER OF OUTSIDE NUMBER OF OUTSIDE ANALYSES ACCEPTANCE ANALYSES ACCEPTANCE r;'
CRITERIA _
CRITERIA 70 AIR CliARCOAL Garmna 167 0 162 0 AIR FILTER Beta 234 1 221 0 caman 19 0 15 0 Strontiwn 12 1 1? O M11X Gastma 50 2 69 0 Iodine 41 1 40 0 .
S t rontiwn 12 1 18 1 WATER Cross-Beta 3 0 3 9 Gamma 36 0 36 0 lodine 6 0 6 0 l Radiwa 9 0 9 0 Tritiwn 7 0 3 0 SOIL / SEDIMENT Gamma 0 0 46 2 TOT /tL 602 6 640 3
-78
TABLE 7.2
SUMMARY
OF EPA INTERCOMFARISON ANALYSIS RESULTS January Decem:>er 1991
.._ ~ , _ _ _ _
h0. OF NO. OUTSIDE SAMPLE MEDIA SAvl'lIS NO. OF EPA CONTROL ANALYZED
- ANALYSES LlHITS" AIR FILTER c
Beta 2 6 0 -
Gamma 2 6 0 Strontium 2 6 ')
M11X =
Camma 2 15 0 Iodine 2 6 0 Strontium 2 12 0 VATER Cross-Beta 2 6 0 Camma 5 69 0 Iodine 2 6 0 m Plutonium 2 6 0 l Strontium 5 30 1 l
Tritium 3 9 0 ,
The number of EPA samples that were analyzed for the specified radionuclide. Each of these ramples was analyzed in triplicate.
The number of mean values (from triplicate samples) outsidc ':PA Control Limits.
- .y
TABLE 7.3 SUMMAkY OF BLIND DUPLICATE SAMPLES SUDMITTED Janvary - December 1991 TYPE OF SAMPLE hTMBER OF PAIRED SAlf"LES SUBMITTED Cow Milk 20 Cround Water 8 River Vater 4 Estuary Water 10 Sea Vater 8 Irish Moss 2 ;
Mussels 4 Food Product Corn 1 Food Product - Cranberries 1 TOTAL $8 80-
TABLE 7.4
SUMMARY
OF BLIND DUPLICATE RESULTS January - December 1991 TOTAL ANALYSES
- ANALYSIS TYPg FO'JD MARINE MllX UATER PRODUCT A14AE MUSSEL TOTAL Gamma 485 (?) 728 (1) 49 (0) 48 (0) 96 (0) 1406 (4)
_]- 49,'9 0
. 7 (0) - - - ..
7 (0)
H.3 -
13 (0) - - -
13 (0)
Cross Beta --
12 (0) -- - --
12 (0) 1-131 20 (0) 4 (0) - - --
24 (0)
Ra-226/228 -
1 (0) -- -- --
1 (0)
- The nurnber of patted measureteents that d'.d not meet the acceptance '
criteria are given in parentheses. See text for details.
1 J
- 8. LAND USE CENSUE VYNPS Technical Specification 3/4.9.0 requires that a land Use Cenrus be i
conducted annually between ths dates o f June 1 and October 1. The Census identifies the locations of the nearest milk animal and the nearest residence in each of the 16 meteorological sectors within a distance of five miles of the plant. It also identifies the nearest milk animal (within three miles of the plant) to the point of predicted highest annual avera6e D/Q value in each of the three major meteorological sectors due to elevated releases from the plant stack. The 1991 Land Use Cer. sus was conducted between the dates specified above.
Immediately following the collection of field data, in compliance with Technical Specification 6.7.C.1.b, a dosimetric analysis is performed to compare the census locations to the " Critical Receptor" identified in the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM). This Critical Receptor is the location that is used in the conservative Method 1 dose calculations found in the ODCM (i.e. the dose calculations done in compliance with Technical Specification 4.8.C.1). If a census location has e 20t greater potential dose than that of the Critical Receptor, this for,t must be announced in the Semiannual Ef fluer.e Release Report for thac petiod. A re-evaluation of which location to use as a Critical Receptor would also be done at that time. For the 1971 Census, no such locations were identified.
Pursuant to Technical Specification 3.9 D.2, a dosimetric analysis in then performed, using site specific meteorological data, to determine which milk animal location, would provide the optimal sampling locations. If any location has a 20% greater potential dose conaitment than at a currently-sampled location, the new location is added to the routine environmental sampling program in replacement of the location with the lowest calculated dose (which is eliminated from the program). For the 1991 Census, two such milk animal locations were identified. These were the Mitchell and Dominick locations. Due to the small number of milk animals (goats) owned at each location, the owners would not be able to provide samples of sufficient size on a regular basis. Consequently, no changes were made in the Technical Specification-required milk sampling program as defined in Table 4.1 of the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual. The two locations identified above, however, were sampled as available.
The results of the 1991 Land Uae Census are included in this report in compliance with Technical Specifications 4.9.D.1 and 6.7.C.3. The locations identified during the Census may be found in Tabic 8.1.
l TAB 12 8.1 1991 1AND USE CENSUS 14 CAT 10NS*
f SECTOR NEAREST F.ESIDENCE NEAREST M11X ANI.d.AL Y.In (M1) Ya (M1)
N 1.6 (1.0) --
NNE 1.6 (1.0) 4.0 (2.5) Goats NE 1.3 (0.7) ----
ENE 0.97 (0.6) ----
E 0.97 (0.6) 5.2 (3.2) Goats ESE 2.8 (1.75) ---
SE 1.8 (1,1) 3.4 (2.1) Cows SSE 2.0 (1.3) 5.1 (3.2) Cows S 0.5 (0.3) -
SSV 0.5 (0.3) 2.1 (1.3) Cows SV 0.5 (0.3) 7.2 (4.5) Cows VSW 0.5 (0.3) -
V 0.5 (0.3) --
VNV 0.6 (0.4) -
0.8 (0.5) Cows IN 1.2 (0.8) 4.7 (2.9) Cows **
NIN 2.1 (1.3) -- -
- Sector and distance relative to plant stack.
- This location overlaps the NW and WNW sectors.
- 9. 30000tRY i
i During 1991, as in all previvus years of plant operation, a program was conducted to assess the 16vals of radiation or radioactivity in the Vermont Yankew Nuclear power Station environment. Over 750 samples were collected (including TLDs) tver the course of the year, with a total oi over 7500 radionuclide or exposure rate analyses being performed on them. The samples included ground water, river weter, sediment, fish, milk, silage and mixed grass. In eddition to these samples, the air surrounding the plant wa6 sampled continuously and the radiation levels were measured continuously with environmental TLDs.
Low lovels of radioactivity from three sources were detected. Most samples had measurable levels of K-40, Be-7, AcTh 228 or radon daughter products.
These are the most common of the naturally-occurring radionuclides. Many samples (milk and sediment in particular) had fallout rcdioactivity frorn atmospheric nuclear weapons tests conducted primarily from the late 1950's through 1980. Several samples of cediment had low 1cvels of radioactivity resulting from emissions from the Vermont Yankee plant. These were all collected at the North Storm Drain Outfall. In all cases, the possible radiological impact was negligibic with respect to exposure from natural background radiation. In no caso did the detected icvels approach or exceed the most restrictive federal regulatory or plant license limits for radionuclides in the environment.
10 EEPEREtM;3E
- 1. USNRC Radiological Asssssment Branch Technical Position, "An Acceptable Radiological Environmental Honitoring Program,"
Revision 1, November 1979.
- 2. NCRP Report No. 94, Eyposure of the Population in the United States and Cangli a f rom Natural Backcround Aadiation, National Council on Radiation Protection and Heasurements, 1987.
- 3. Ionizint Radiation: Sources and Biolocical Effects, United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR), 1982 Report to the Ceneral Assembly.
- 4. Rathren, Ronald L., Ead12 Activity and the Environment Sources.
Distribution. . and Surveillance , liarwood Academic Publishers, New York, 1984