ML20140F268
| ML20140F268 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Yankee Rowe |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1996 |
| From: | Kay J YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| BYR-97-023, BYR-97-23, NUDOCS 9705020203 | |
| Download: ML20140F268 (100) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:YA EE ATOMICELECTRIC COMPANY "C"*,G.,"jo','*;*g'"
& 580 Main Street, Bolton, Massachusetts 01740-1398 . v.
YANKEE / April 30,1997 BYR 97-023 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555
Reference:
(a) License No. DPR-3 (Docket No. 50-29)
Subject:
ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT
Dear Sir / Madam:
Enclosed please find the 1996 Yankee Atomic Annual Radiological Environmental OpereJng Report. Th's report summarizes the findings of the Radiological Environmental Monitonng Program coaducted by Yankee Atomic Electric company in the vicinity of the Yankee Nuclear Power Station in Rowe, Massachusetts. This information is submitted in accordance with Technical Specification 6.8.2.a. We tmst that this information is satisfactory; however, should you have any questions, please contact us. Sincerely, YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY
,w.
b J. A. Kay Oh Principal Licensing Engineer 020073 I j 9705020203 961231 Il,.,, DR ADOCK 050000 9 ,
YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT January - December 1996 I April 1997 I I I I I I I Prepared by: Yankee Atomic Electric Company Environmental Engineering Department 580 Main Street Bolton, Massachusetts 01740 1 I W u -
TABLE OF CONTENTS
- 1. INTRODUCTION . . . I
- 2. NATURALLY OCCURRING AND MAN-MADE EACKGROUND RADIOACTIVITY . . . . 2 2.1 Naturally Occurring Background Radioactivity . .2 2.2 Man-Made Background Radioactivity . . .3
- 3. GENERAL PLANT AND SITE INFORMATION . 5
- 4. PROGRAM DESIGN .. 6 4.1 Monitoring Zones . 7 4.2 Pathways Monitored . . . ... 7 4.3 Descriptions of Monitoring Programs . 8
- 5. RADIOLOGICAL DATA
SUMMARY
TABLES 28
- 6. ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS 44 6.1 Sampling Program Deviations . 44 6.2 Comparison of Achieved LLDs with Requirements 44 6.3 1996 Results Compared Against Reporting Levels 45 I 6.4 Data Analysis by Media Type . . 46
- 7. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM 79 7.1 Intralaboratory Quality Control Program 79 I 7.2 7.3 Third Party Intercomparison Program . .
Environmental TLD Quality Assurance Program . 80 81 7.4 Blind Duplicate Quality Assurance Program . . . 82
- 8. LAND USE CENSUS . . 91 I 9.
SUMMARY
. . . 93
- 10. REFERENCES . . . 94 b ii w
LIST OF TABLES Table Iltle East 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 I 4.5 Reporting Levels for Radioactivity Concentrations in Environmental Samples . .20 5.1 Environmental Radiological Program Summary . . 30 5.2 Environmental TLD Data Summary . .42 1 5.3 Environmental TLD Measurements . .43 1 7.1 Environmental Process Control Analysis Results . . 83 7.2 EPA Intercomparison Program . . . 84 7.3 Analytics, Inc. Cross-Check Program Results . .86 7.4 Summary of Blind Duplicate Samples Submitted . . 90 8.1 Land Use Census Locations . . . .92 1 1 l ... 111 I W
LIST OF FIGURES Figure Iltle Eage 4.1 Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations Within 1 Mile of YNPS . . . .21 4.2 Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations Within 12 Miles of YNPS . . . . . .22 1 4.3 Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations Outside 12 Miles of YNPS . . . . 23 l 4.4 Environmental TLD Monitoring Locations at the YNPS Industrial Area Fence . . . . .24 4.5 Environmental TLD Monitoring Locations Within i Mile of YNPS . .25 4.6 Environmental TLD Monitoring Locations Within 12 Miles of YNPS . .26 I 4.7 Environmental TLD Monitoring Locations Outside 12 Miles of YNPS . .27 6.1 Gross-Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters . .53 (Quarterly Averages) 6.2 Gross-Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters . . . 54 (AP-11 vs. AP-21 Control) 6.3 Gross-Beta Measurements on Air Paniculate Filters . .55 (AP-12 vs. AP-21 Control) 6.4 Gross-Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters . .56 (AP-13 vs. AP-21 Control) iv I
[ LIST OF FIGURES (continued) { Laurn Iille Eass 6.5 Gross-Beta Measurements on Air Paniculate Filters . . . ...............57 (AP-14 vs. AP-21 Control) [ 6.6 Gross-Beta hieasurements on Air Particulate Filters . .. . . . . . . . .58 (AP-31 vs. AP-21 Control) f 6.7 Gross Beta hieasurements of Ground Water . . . . . . . .59 ( 6.8 H-3 in Ground Water at Station WG-12. . . .. .60 [ 6.9 Gross Beta hieasurements of River Water . . . . . . 61 6.10 Cesium-137 in Shoreline Sediment at Station SE-11 . .. ... 62 6.11 Cesium-137 in Shoreline Sediment at Station SE-21. .. . . . . 63 6.12 Cesium-137 in Bottom Sediment at Station SE-91. . . . . . . . . . .. 64 ( 6.13 Cesium-137 in hiilk .... . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . 65 6.14 Strontium-90 in Milk . . .. . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . .. 66 ( 6.15 Cesium-137 in Fish .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 67 6.16 Exposure Rate at Indicator, Outer Ring and Control TLDs . . . . .68 6.17 Exposure Rate at Indicator TLDs, Ghi 01-04 ... . . . .69 6.18 Exposure Rate at Indicator TLDs, Ghi 05-08 . . . . . . . .. 70 f { v e M
I f LIST OF FIGURES (continued) (- Eigne Iille Eage 6.19 Exposure Rate at Indicator TLDs, GM 09-12,40. .... .. . . . . ... 71 6.20 Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDs, GM 24-27.. .. . . . . . . .. .72 6.21 Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDs, GM 28 31. .. . , . . . . . . .. . 73 f 6.22 Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDs, GM 32-35.... .. . .. .. . 74 6.23 Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDs, GM 36-39.. .. . . . 75 -[ 6.24 Exposure Rate at Fenceline TLDs, GM 13-16. . .. .. . . . 76 6.25 Exposure Rate at Fenceline TLDs, GM 17-21 .. . . . . . . .... 77 6.26 Exposure Rate at Control TLDs, GM 22-23 . .. .. . . 78 { [ [ { ( l-vi f
- 1. INTRODUCTION This report summarizes the findings of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) conducted by Yankee Atomic Electric Company in the vicinity of the Yankee Nuclear Power Station (YNPS) in Rowe, Massachusetts during the calendar year 1996. It is submitted annually in compliance with plant Technical Specification 6.8.2.a.
l The remainder of this report is organized as follows: l Section 2: Provides an introductory explanation to the background radioactivity and radiation that is detected in the YNPS environs. f Section 3: Provides a brief description of the YNPS site and its environs. f Section 4: Provides a description of the overall REMP program design. Included is a summary of the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) Requirements for REMP sampling, tables listing all locations sampled or monitored in 1996, with compass sectors and distances from the plant, and maps showing each REMP location. Tables listing Lower Limit of Detection requirements and Reporting Levels are also included. Section 5: Consists of the summarized data as required by the ODCM. The tables are in the format specified by the NRC Branch Technical Position on Environmental Monitoring (Reference 1). Also included is a summary of environmental TLD measurements for 1996. Section 6: Provides the results of the 1996 monitoring program. The performance of the l program in meeting regulatory requirements as given in the Technical Specifications and ODCM is discussed, and the data acquired during the year are analyzed. Section 7: Provides an oversiew of the Quality Assurance programs used at the Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratoiy (YAEL). As required by the ODCM, the results of the l EPA and Analytic's, Inc. Intercomparison Programs are given. j Section 8: Summarizes the requirements and the results of the 1996 Land Use Census. Section 9: Gives an overall summary of the results of the 1996 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program. I r
l
- 2. NATURALLY OCCURRING AND MAN-MADE BACKGROUND RADIOACTIVITY I
Radiation or radioactivity potentially detected in the YNPS environment can be grouped into three categories. The first is " naturally-occurring" radiation and radioactivity. The second I is " man-made" radioactivity from sources other than YNPS. The third potential source of radioactivity is due to emissions from YNPS. For the purposes of the YNPS REMP, the first l two categories are classified as " background" radiation, and are the subject of discussion in this section of the report. The third category, radioactivity from plant emissions, is the one that the REMP is primarily designed to detect and evaluate. 2.1 Naturally Occurring Background Radioactivity Natural radiation and radioactivity in the environment, which provide the major source of human radiation exposure, may be subdivided into three separate su.b-categories: " primordial radioactivity," "cosmogenic radioactivity," and " cosmic radiation." " Primordial radioactivity" is made up of those radionuclides that were created with the universe and that have a I sufficiently long half-life to be still present on the eanh. Included in this category are the radionuclides that these elements have decayed into. A few of the more imponant l radionuclides in this category are Uranium-238 (U-238), Thorium-232 (Th-232), Potassium-40 (K-40), Radium-226 (Ra-226), and Radon-222 (Rn-222). Uranium-238 and Thorium-232 are readily detected in soil and rock, whether through direct field measurements or through laboratory analysis of samples. Radium-226 in the earth can fmd its way from the soil into ground water, and is oflen detectable there. Radon-222 is one of the components of natural I 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 l many more primordial radionuclides found in the environment in addition to the major ones discussed above (Reference 2). The second sub-category of naturally-occurring radiation and radioactivity is "cosmocenic l radioactivity." This is produced through the nuclear interaction of high energy cosmic radiation with elements in the earth's atmosphere, and to a much lesser degree in the canh'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 category are Carbon-14 (C-14), [ 2 ~ Y
,___a
Hydrogen-3 (H-3 or Tritium), Sodium-22 (Na-22), and Beryllium-7 (Be-7). Begilium-7 is the one most readily detected, and is found on air sampling filters and occasionally in biological media (Reference 2). The third sub-category of naturally-occurring radiation and radioactivity is " cosmic radiation." This consists of high energy atomic and sub-atomic particles of extra-terrestrial I 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 ab'sorbs the radiation. Consequently, one can see that with I increasing elevation one would be exposed to more cosmic radiation as a direct result of a thinner layer of air for protection. This " direct radiation" is best detected in the field with high pressure ion chambers. 2.2 Man-Made Background Radicactivity The second source of" background" radioactivity in the YNPS environment is from " man-made" sources not related to the power plant. The most recent contributor to this category was the fallout from the Chernobyl accident in April of 1986, which was detected in the YNPS environment and other parts of the world. A much greater contributor to this category, ho vever, 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 I 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. Atmospheric testing, was conducted by the People's Republic of China last in October 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 I fallout deposited in any given area is dependent on many factors, such as the explosive yield of the device, the latitude and altitude of the detonation, the season in which it occurred, and the l timing of subsequent rainfall which washes fallout from the troposphere (Reference 4). Most of this fallout has decayed into stable elements, but the residual radioactivity is still readily detectable in environmental 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 l since cows and goats graze large areas of vegetation, these radionuclides are also readily 3 ]
F i detected in milk. l 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 I compared to the sources discussed above (natural and fallout). I I I I I I I I I I [ 4 W
- 3. GENERAL PLANT AND SITE INFORMATION The Yankee Nuclear Power Station (YNPS) is located on a 2200 acre site in a I predominantly mral area of northwestern Massachusetts, three-quarters of a mile south of the Vermont border. The plant resides in the town of Rowe, Massachusetts, approximately 9 miles east-northeast of North Adams, Massachusetts. The surrounding area is heavily forested and lightly populated. Hills bounding the river valley rise 500 to 1000 feet above the site, reaching elevations of 2100 feet.
l The Deerfield River is used extensively for hydroelectric power generation both upstream I and downstream of YNPS. Sherman Dam, immediately adjacent to YNPS, operates as a hydroelectric generating station. Sherman Pond, the impoundment behind this dam, has been used as a source of cooling water for YNPS. YNPS was voluntarily shut down on October 1,1991 and ceased power operation on February 26,1992 after 32 years of reliable operation. The plant has begun the process of decommissioning which will eventually entail the disassembly and removal of the plant I components and structures. This process will take place in strict conformance with USNRC regulations. Oversight will also continue from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the Massachusetts Depanment of Environmental Protection, Massachusetts Department of Public Health, and Massachusetts Emergency Management Administration. The radiological environmental monitoring program for YNPS continued to operate through 1996, and will continue throughout the decommissioning period. I I I I I ]
{ i
- 4. PROGRAM DESIGN '
The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program for the YNPS was designed with specific objectives in mind. These were: To provide an early indication of the appearance or accumulation of any radioactive materialin the environment caused by YNPS activities. To provide assurance to regulatory agencies and the public that the environmental ( impact from YNPS is known and within anticipated limits. To verify the adequacy and proper functioning of station efiluent controls and monitoring systems. f 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. These objectives will continue to be in force, to varying degrees, throughout I decommissioning activities at the YNPS site. Due to the shutdown status of the plant, and due to the relatively low quantities of radioactive material now on the site, some of the objectives ( have a different degree ofimportance than in the past. The radiological environmental monitoring program was initiated in 1958, approximately two years before the plant began commercial operation in 1960. It has been in operation continuously since that time, with improvements made periodically over those years. The current program was designed to meet the intent of NRC Regulatory Guide 4.1, Programsfor Monitoring Radioactivity in the Environs ofNuclear Power Plants; NRC Regulatory Guide 4.8, Environmental TechnicalSpecificationsfor Nuclear Power Plants; the NRC Branch Technical Position of November 1979 entitled, An Acceptable Radiological { EnvironmentalMonitoring Program; and NRC NUREG-0472, Radiological Effluent TechnicalSpecifcationsfor PWR's. The environmental TLD program was designed and ( tested around NRC Regulatory Guide 4.13, Performance, Testing andProcedural Specipcationsfor Thermoluminescence Dosimetry: Environmental Applications. The quality assurance program was designed around the guidance given in NRC Regulatory Guide 4.15, Quality Assurancefor RadiologicalMonitoring Programs (Normal Operations) - Effluent 6
i Streams amithe Environment. j Prior to August 1992, the requirements for the Radiological Environmental Monitoring
- Program (REMP) were given in the YNPS Technical Specifications. In August 1992, the 3
REMP requirements were removed from the Technical Specifications and placed in the Offsite j Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) (Reference 5) pursuant to NRC Generic Letter 89-01 i (Reference 6). ODCM controls are cited in this report when specific REMP requirements are I discussed. F The minimal sampling requirements of the REMP are given in Table 4.1 of the ODCM, which is summarized in Table 4.1 of this report. The identification of the required sampling i locations is given in Table 4.4 of the ODCM, as well as in Tables 4.2 and 4.3 of this report. j The sampling and monitoring locations are shown graphically on the maps in Figures 4.1
- through 4.7.
- 4.1 Monitoring Zones 5
) The REMP is designed to allow comparison oflevels of radioactivity in samples from the j area possibly influenced by the plant to levels found in areas not influenced by the plant. The I first area is called Zone 1, and its monitoring locations are called " indicators." The second area i is called Zone 2, and its monitoring locations are called " controls." The distinction between i 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, ] i relative direction from the plant, river flow, and distance. Analysis of survey data from the two l zones aids in determining if there is a significant difference between the two areas. It can also j help in differentiating between radioactivity or radiation due to plant activities and that due to
; other fluctuations in the environment, such as atmospheric nuclear weapons test fallout or j seasonal variations in the natural background.
.8 i
; 4.2 Pathways Monitored 1
i 4 Four pathway categories are monitored by the REMP. They are the direct radiation,
- airborne, waterborne, and ingestion pathways. Each of these four categories is monitored by
! the collection of one or more sample media, which are listed below, and are described in more detailin this section: 5 l 7 i i
-._-y-. - . . , - - _,.
l Airborne Pathway Air Paniculate Sampling Charcoal Cartridge (Radiciodine) Sampling Waterborne Pathways River Water Sampling Ground Water Sampling Storm Drain Water Sampling Sediment Sampling Ingestion Pathways Milk Sampling Fish Sampling f Food Product and Broad Leaf Vegetation Sampling Direct Radiation Pathway TLD Monitoring 4.3 Descriptions of Monitoring Programs { 4.3.1 Air Sampling Continuous air samplers are installed at seven locations, five of which are required by the YNPS ODCM. 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 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. The filters are collected weekly, and to allow for the decay of radon daughter products, they are held for at least 100 hours at the YAEL before being analyzed for gross-beta radioactivity (indicated as GR-B in the data tables). The weekly filters are composited (by location) at the YAEL for a quarterly gamma spectroscopy analysis. 4.3.2 Charcoal Cartridge (Radiciodine) Sampling Continuous air samplers are installed at seven locations, five of which are required by the YNPS ODCM. The sampling pumps at these locations operate continuously at a flow rate of i 8
approximately one cubic foot per minute. A 60cc charcos 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 weekly for I-131. 4.3.3 River Water Sampling Automatic compositing samplers are located at one upstream and one downstream sampling location. The samplers are controlled by timers that collect an aliquot of river water at least every two hours. An additional grab sample is collected monthly at Sherman Pond. All river water samples are preserved with hcl and NaHSO 3, or HNO 3, to prevent the plate out of potentially-present radionuclides on the container walls. Each sample is analyzed for gross-beta and gamma-emitting radionuclides. These monthly composites or grabs are composited quarterly, by location, at the YAEL for a H-3 analysis. 4.3.4 Ground Water Sampling i Grab samples are collected monthly from two on-site locations. The ODCM requires a minimum of a quarterly collection. All ground water samples are preserved with hcl and NaHSO3to prevent the plate out of potentially-present radionuclides on the container walls. l Each sample is required by the ODCM to be analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides and H-3. Samples are also analyzed for gross beta activity which is not an ODCM requirement. 4.3.5 Storm Drain Water Sampling Grab samples are collected monthly from the West Storm Drain. This is not an ODCM required sampling location. This water is comprised of non-radioactive secondary side plant effluents, as well as groundwater and precipitation (including snow melt) draining from the west side of the plant facility. All storm drain water samples are preserved with hcl and NaHSO3, or HNO ,3 to prevent the plate out of potentially-present radionuclides on the container walls. Each sample is analyzed for gross-beta and gamma-emitting radionuclides, as well as H-3. 1 9
4.3.6 Sediment Sampling Shoreline sediment cores are collected semiannually from two locations, one upstream and one downstream of the plant. At each location, six two-inch inner diameter plastic coring tubes are driven into the sediment at least six inches deep. The cores are carefully extracted and kept in an upright position and frozen prior to delivery to the YAEL. At the Laboratory, the frozen cores are cut into 5 cm (two-inch) segments. For each location. the 0-5 cm segments are blended into a single sample, as are the 5-10 cm and 10-15 cm segments. These composite samples are then analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. An additional bottom sediment core is collected semiannually in Sherman Pond near the plant discharge. A Wildco K. B. Core Sampler, fitted with a plastic coring tube, is dropped from a boat. Six cores are collected here, and are processed and analyzed as described above. 4.3.7 Milk Sampling From January I through June 1, and again from November 1 through December 31, milk samples are collected monthly. During the " grazing season", which mns from June I to November 1, samples are collected once per two weeks. Immediately after collection, each milk sample is preserved with an appropriate amount of formaldehyde. hiethimazole is also added to prevent protein binding of any radiciodine. 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 ODChi. Although not l required by the ODChi, Sr-89 and Sr-90 analyses are also performed on quarterly composited samples. Beginning in mid August of 1995, only one indicator location was available within five miles as a result of the farm at location Thi-14 no longer having a cow. Although not required, mixed grass samples have been collected at location Thi-14 since August 1995 and into 1996, in lieu of milk. One controllocation is also included which is located sufliciently far away from the plant to be outside any potential influence from it. 10 1
4.3.8 Fish Sampling Fish samples are collected semiannually at two locations (upstream of the plant and in Sherman Pond). A gill net is set overnight from a boat, and mixed species of fish are removed the following day. The species typically collected are yellow perch, smelt, pickerel, trout, bullheads or suckers. The fish samples are frozen and delivered to the YAEL where the edible portions are analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. 4.3.9 Food Products and Broadleaf Vegetation Sampling Food Products are collected annually (at harvest) at three locations. The samples are either g tuberous vegetables, above-ground vegetables, or fmit. Two indicator locations are chosen as I a result of the annual Land Use Census, based on meteorological dispersion calculations. The third location is a control, which is located sufficiently far away from the plant to be outside l any potential influence from it. Immediately after collection, each unwashed food product sample is preserved with an appropriate amount of NaOH. The edible portions of the samples are then analyzed at the YAEL for gamma-emitting radionuclides. An additional sample of edible broadleaf vegetation is collected at a single location (as determined from the Land Use Census) and is preserved as above. A separate low-level I-131 analysis is performed on this sample to meet the Lower Limit of Detection requirements in the ODCM. l In addition to the above food products, optional maple syrup samples are collected I annually, as described below. f 4.3.10 Maple Syrup Sampling Maple syrup is an important commercial product in northern New England, including the YNPS plant environs. Because of this, samples are collected annually from two or three locations. (There is no ODCM requirement.) These samples are collected from the syrup manufacturer as a finished product, that is, following the boiling down of the maple sap. Since the samples have already been boiled down as part of the symp production process, no preservatives are needed in the samples. Following collection, the samples are analyzed at the YAEL for gamma-emitting radionuclides. It should be noted that because of the boiling down and filtering of the sap, the resulting radionuclide measurements do not represent actual 11
environmental concentrations. It is estimated that the resulting syrup has been concentrated by a factor of from 15 to 120 times the original sap, depending mostly on the time of the season that the sap was collected. 4.3.11 TLD Monitoring Direct gamma radiation exposure was continuously monitored with the use of thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). Specifically, Panasonic UD-801 ASI and UD-814ASI 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-I screened container. This container is attached to an object such as a tree, fence or utility pole. TLDs are posted at 40 locations, with 38 of these stations required by the ODCM. Of the 38, 22 must be read out quarterly, while those from the remaining 16 incident response (outer ring) stations need only be de-dosed (annealed) quarterly, unless a gaseous release Control was exceeded during the period. Although not required by the ODCM, the TLDs from the 16 I outer ring stations are read out quarterly along with the other stations's TLDs. The plant staff posts and retrieves all TLDs, while the YAEL processes them. I I I l 1 1 I I 12 1 ]
1 I w i u unum m m m w-TAIILE 4.1 Radiological Emironmental hionitoring Program (as required by ODChi Table 4.1) Collection Analysis Exposure Pathway Numberof Routine Analysis Analysis Sample Media Sample Locations Sampling Collection Type Frequency ; Mode Frequency j
- 1. Direct Radiation (TLDs) 38 Continuous Quarterly Gamma Dose; Outer Ring -
1 Each TLD Includes 16 Outer l de-dose only, unless gaseous i Ring Incident release Control was exceeded I Response TLDs
- 2. Airborne (Particulates and 5 Continuous Weekly Particulate Sample:
Radiciodine) Gross Beta Each Sample Gamma Isotopic Quarterly Commisite(by location) Radioiodine Canister I-I31 Each Sample
- 3. Waterborne
- a. Surface Water 2 Composite Monthly Gross Beta Each Sample (aliquot every Gamma Isotopic Each Sample 2 hours) Tritium (11-3) Quarterly Compsite
- b. Ground Water 2 Grab Quarterly Gamma Isotopic Each Sample Tritium (11-3) Each Sample
- c. Shoreline Sediment I Grab Semiannually Gamma Isotopic Each Sample 13
j' jl1
)lI ll s y c iye s n a u lnq e e e e e e ArF lpp l lp lp lp mm a a m
a m a m a s s s s s hh h h h c c c c c aa a a a s EE E E E is ly a n A le le b i b i s d d e e is e lyp n n ay o o c c c nT ip ip ip A t o t o o t o s o s o s I I I a a s n a n m mo mo m3 1 1 mir t mi t 3 GI a1
- Gp ao Gp a or 1 I
m a r g 2 % o r r e p P) nv g1 laoc e n f n4 nin c o n lyi irle t ce e Oe n l l ) t ob a iml ol a u (h a a e unt a t s t s int o Noe CF r lyw) e ht s r n oi n a ps r e vr v r e 1 ) f l nk us ia se ro a a d Aa o eet m r p h h 4 e l C Mwp S (o a e p t t E un taD a A A Li t nO e 4 B n y 1 Ao mb n T (c od e r i r miu n e gn E q o ilnie d b b b b r e i t t u po r a a r a r a r l c a om cs ig (a
!c o ram S G G G G l
o C i o d a R
- f os re o n
y bi ma u oc t NL 3 2 3 1 laic inp m m a NoS m m y d n a u w."' o r n h g o P'M
- t i ta ei t a
_ vur t e#* s b of e c r " u IP t a ro e s '
- c r v o
- tu o s, f p b x sl e a e
x n n ub l E m P oa r t d t k h l x e e a s l s x b g e i ue m g M F i i Tv D n F. b. I a c _- 4.
.m r
1
i TABLE 1.2 l Radiological Environmental Monitoring lecations (non-TLD) in 1996 I Yankee Nuclear Power Station Distance Direction l From Plant From l EmosurePathwny Station Code Station Descrintion Zonq* (km) Plant [
- 1. Airborne l AP/CF-11 Observation Stand 1 0.5 NW AP/CF 12 Monroe Bridge 1 1.1 SW AP/CF-13 Rowe School 1 4.2 SE I AP/CF-14 11arriman Station 1 3.2 N AP/CF-21 Williamstown, MA 2 22.2 W AP/CF-31 YAEC Visitor's Center 1 0.8 SW AP/CF-32 lleartwellville, VT 2 12.6 NNW
- 2. Waterborne
- a. Surface WR-11 Bear Swamp Lower Reservoir 1 6.3 Down-river WR-21 11animan Resenoir 2 10.1 Up-river WR-31 Sherman Pond 1 0.1 N
- b. Ground WG-11 Plant Potable 1 On-site --
WG-12 Sherman Spring 1 0.2 NW
- c. Storm Drain WW-52 West Storm Drain 1 On-site --
l d. Sediment SE 11 No. 4 Station 1 36.2 Down-river 3 SE-21 IIaniman Reservoir 2 10.1 Up-river SE-91 Shennan Pond 1 0.1 N
- 3. Ingestion
- a. Milk TM-13 Whitingham, VT 1 8.4 ENE TM 14 *
- Rowe, MA 1 3.2 SE TM-2I Williamstown, MA 2 21 WSW
- b. Fish Fil 11 Sherman Pond 1 1.5 Near Dischg.
FIl-21 11arriman Reservoir 2 10.1 Up-river [ [ 15
TABLE 4.2 (continued) Radiological Environmental Monitoring locations (non-TLD) in 1996 Yankee Nuclear Power Station f Distance Direction From Plant From
&nosurePathway Station Code Station Descrintion Zgng' h h j 3. Ingestion,(continued) l c. Food Products TF/TV 11 Monroe Bridge, MA 1 1.3 SW TF-13 Monroe, MA i 1.9 WNW TF-21 Williamstown, MA 2 21.0 WSW
( L MS-33 Rowe, MA i 1.0 S (Maple synip) MS-45 Florida, MA 2 10.5 WSW ( (Maple syrup) p
- 1 = Indicator Stations; 2 = Control Stations
** Grass samples designated as TC 14 have been collected since milk became unavailabic in August 1995.
( ( [ ; i b I
)
[ 16 I u 1
I TABLE 4.3 Radiological Environmental Monitoring locations (TLD) in 1996 Yankee Nuclear Power Station Distance From Plant Direction l Station Code Station Descrintion Long* (km) From Plant GM-1 YAEC Visitors' Center 1 0.8 SW GM-2 Observation Stand 1 0.5 NW I GM-3 Rowe School 1 4.2 SE GM-4 Harriman Station 1 3.2 N GM-5 Monroe Bridge 1 1.1 SW I GM-6 Readsboro Road Barrier 1 1.3 N GM-7 Whitingham Line 1 3.5 NE GM-8 Monroe Ilill Barrier 1 1.8 S I GM-9 Dunbar Brook 1 3.2 SW GM 10 Cross Road 1 3.5 E GM-11 AdamsIligh Line 1 2.1 WNW GM-12 Readsboro, VT 1 5.5 NNW GM-13 Restricted Area Fence F 0.08 WSW GM-14 Restricted Area Fence F 0.11 WNW GM-15 Restricted Area Fence F 0.08 NNW GM-16 Restricted Area Fence F 0.13 NNE I GM-17 Restricted Area Fence F 0.14 ENE GM-18 Restricted Area Fence F 0.14 ESE GM-19 Restricted Area Fence F 0.16 SE I GM-20 Restricted AreaFence F 0.16 SSE GM-21 Restricted Area Fence F 0.11 SSW GM-22 11eartwellville, VT l 2 12.6 NNW B GM-23 Williamstown Substation 2 22.2 W GM-24 1larriman Dam O 7.3 N GM-25 Whitingham, VT O 7.7 NNE GM-26 Sadoga Road O 7.6 NE GM-27 Number 9 Road O 7.6 ENT GM-28 Number 9 Road O 6.0 E GM-29 Route 8A O 8.2 ESE GM-30 Route 8A O 9.4 SE 17
[ TABLE 4.3 { (continued) Radiological Environmental Monitoring Locations (TLD) in 1996 ( Yankee Nuclear Power Station ( Distance From Plant Direction Station Code Stauon Desenphon Zooc* (km) From Plant GM-31 legate HillRoad O 7.6 SSE GM-32 Rowe Road O 7.9 S
' GM-33 Zoar Road O 6.9 SSW
( GM-34 Fife Brook Road O 6.4 SW.
' GM-35 Whitcomb Summit O 8.6 WSW GM-36 Tilda Road O 6.6 W
{ GM-37 Turner HillRoad O 6.7 WNW GM-38 West Hill Road O 6.6 NW GM-39 ( GM-40 Route 100 0 6.8 NNW Readsboro Road 1 0.5 W 1 = Indicator TLD; 2 = Control TLD; O = Outer Ring Incident Response TLD; F = Fenceline TLD. [ [ [ [ [ [ l8 I L r
1 1 - - - - - -. TABLE 4.4 Environmental bmer Limit of Detection (LLD) Sensitivity Requirements Airborne Food Sedunent Particulates Fish Milk Product (pCi!kg - Analysis Water (pCill) or Gases (pCihn3) (pCi/kg) (pCi/l) (pCilkg) dry) Gross-Beta 4 0 01 11-3 2000 Mn-54 15 130 Fe-59 30 260 Co-58,60 15 130 Zn-65 30 260 Zr-Nb-95 15 I-131 1* 0.07 1 60 " Cs-134 15 0.05 130 15 60 150 Cs.I37 18 0.06 150 18 80 180 Ba-La-140 15 15 LLD for drii&ing water.
** LLD fbr leafy vegetation.
Additional explanatory fbotnotes are given in ODCM Table 4.3. I9
1 1 -T r, r- usamm - - --w i TABLE 4.5 Reporting levels for Radioactivity Concentrations in Envirimmental Samples Aidxane Particulates Fish Milk Food Product Analysis Water (pCill) or Gases (pCi/m3) (pCiikg) (pCi/l) (pCi/kg) Il-3 30000
- Mn-54 1000 30000 Fe-59 400 10000 Co-58 1000 30000 Co-60 300 10000 Zn-65 300 20000 Zr-Nb-95 400 1-131 2 0.9 3 100 Cs-134 30 10 1000 60 1000 Cs-137 50 20 2000 70 2000 Ba-La-140 200 3(X)
Reporting Lewl fbr non-drinking water pathways. l 20
[
/
( Vennant
-1 (jAFH11 ~
Massachusetts -
-l --
/
N " p;_l 0 500 i , , , , , . METERS { ShTR4AN POND ] ( )V
/ fi
( ( I
/r(.
AP/CF11A[_~ASE-915 ( = N A WG-12 V 5 [
/ ~-W PLANT e, -
+
A WG 11 S.
/
'o "
=
'AP/CF-31 Monroe Bridge A AP/CF-12
#
- Higg 4ar *d NEF24 Figure 4,1 Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations 111 thin 1 Mile of YNPS 21
N Y
~=.
=
=
=
HEARTWELLV!LLE ^ _C A AP/CF-32 q
/s__
ilSE21
~ A FH 21
~
~ ~ ' _ -* WHITINGHAM
.~
READSBORO e WR 21 A TM 13 A AP/CF-14 SheAn1n Pond l VERMONT
~~~~ [1 s l
. ~
TF-13 A j -= 1 MASSACHUSETTS
~
HONROE BRIDGE ' SEE ENIAMDENT IN TICuRE 4.1 g c--- 1 PLANT I
- t. _ _ _ _ i A MS-33 A TC 14 Sm hp loset Ruervoir A AP/CF-13 A WR-11
- HEATH A MS-45 Cf 44 4Et CHARLEMONT
{
- t I t t i t t i _
KILOMETERS SE-11 A f SHELBURNE FALLS , [ Figure 4.2 Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations Within 12 Miles of YNPS 22
-l I
I I N
)
I BENNINGTON e f __ e ( l l l Hattiman Re,6eAvoir r HEARTWELLVILLE ( /
/ \ e WH1 TINGHAM t
READSBORO *
\ vT.
{ xi . MONROE BRIDGE e FN
- e8r WILLIAMSTOWN
# e NORTH ADAMS R0WE A AP/CF-21 , ,
, A TM-21 HEATH TF-21 e
'et4 CHARLEMONT l % -
SHELBURNE FALLS [ [ ( 0 5 to 15 20 I i f 1 l [ ( FITTSFIELD KILOhETERS e , Figure 4.3 Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations s outside 12 Miles of YNPS
l i 4
)
i i'. % 0 50 100 ;; .
+ -
[ ' ' i i I e e , ,i ..
,, .- v g g.
-/j.
METERS .. i,,li 8.,,5 -
.. o., ,.
.,.. /
g '. -
,o :.
. g
, , ,(,.
n \ -
. ll ,
SHEh W1 PC.VO cace CH-14"dD::: a-~--------.
-. f f!u-./.. GM$15 '.
House , I ( . s, l Suicch- 8 oggge,, ., l yard)l* CH-16 A' Turbine l l l. , Inforaation ^"* Bay l Aren GM-13. -l Center 1 ," ,
, - g() wse. *
-{-
, s .
l e t V3 Pot n ~
- ,1 s Coutniaege ana. 11 ..
_.1_
,s --
c, 8 I l PAB 3 y .
'
- J
- V l'.
!. ', 'Mov TT A'cM-21 ,'
s w O . g' 8 j l : O i l
/b GM-17 l .'
i j , s I l .
* - . e s
----------..........:, ,e i
i ,
- a. .
u I
. t s * .
s e s , s . J R '
', cx-18 A i
\ .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . ' ~ " '
CM-20 A -- 4 CH 19 A . - , s j .
--- s' Figure 4.4 Environmental TLD Monitoring Locations at the YNPS Industrial Area Fence 24
. _ . ~ ~ -. . - _ . _ . . . - -. .. . - - - - . _ . .
J 1 i
/ l N*
Vennong / l 1 l __ ~~ n- __ -- CM-6 A ' "
~~ l Massachusett _ ,
I O 500 j ) I , ' ' ' I l ' METERS { SHERMAN POND l 4 (l l ( t l N Y f [ CM-2 A y x / l Sp* A CM 40 Yz/ I
+
l, \
/ -
xN ; l Y ' f.o f , 'o,# l
~
l l Honroe grigge i
' CH-5 Ai J
Mo 11 g
^
g {AcM-8 i Odng Locations , jJ 25 l
= _ _ _ _ . _ .. , _ _ ....- ~ ... _ _ _ _. ....__ . . . _ ~ _.=.. _ __. _ _ . . _ _ ... _ __.
d i I N 2 i ~ l ~. _ ! f _._~'~ HEARTWELLy! LE '-_, HMAimen RueAvoir I
\*, A GM 22 _
l .. . = 4 4 2 A GM-25 GM 24 A _ _ , g. ggg3 GM-39 GM- 2 A REA BOR0
'0A 'cg 4 A GM-26
*f 1
1 htAma Pond /
/ A GM 27 4
j O GM.jj A g ---5 rJ , / 4 GM-7 VERMONT
~~
MONRO R,IDGE k, 8 rrr rutAncturg n f'] ggr k MASSACHUSETTS 4 GM-36 L. _ _ _ g j { 3 A GM-9 j Sat P lotuer Eu { GM-3 A A GM.29 l A GM 7 ROWE
\ GM-34 i HEATH A GM-33 A GM-30 A CM-31 A GM-32 e, ,
'4 4
Et CHARLEMONT
# f f t , I f ,
KILOMETERS SHELBURNE FALLS , Figure 4.6 Environmental TLD Monitoring Locations t
'Within 12 Miles of YNPS 26
I l I N I N I I I ENQ!NGTON l 1 HEARTWELLV LLE f #
,~
\
/
, i e W ITINGHAM
\
t BORO
- i
\ ,
VT. I A Pass. x./ . MONR0- e N t WILLIAMSTOWN
\R0WE i
=/ '[ #
A GM-23 N w
#'eI . CHARLEMOMT 4"%. -
\
BURNE FALLS l l 1 i 1 I O 5 10 15 20 t t t I ! KILOMETERS i PITTSFIELD l Figure 4.7 Environmental TLD Monitoring Locations Outside of 12 Miles from YNPS 27
d . 5. RADIOLOGICAL DATA
SUMMARY
TABLES
\
This section summarizes the analytical results of the environmental samples that were collected during 1996. 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 l Environmental Monitoring (Reference 1). The results are ordered by sample media type and l then by radionuclide for the pathways described in Section 4.2 and 4.3. The units for each l media type are also given. Table 5.2 provides the same information for TLD direct rdiation I measurements. The left-most column contains the radionuclide ofinterest, the total number of analyses for ! that radionuclide in 1996, and the number of measurements which exceeded the Reporting Levels found in Table 4.2 of the YNPS ODCM. The latter are classified as "Non-routine" j measurements. The second column lists the required Lower Limit ofDetection (LLD) for those radionuclides which have detection capability requirements as specified in the ODCM Table 4.3. The absence of a value in this column indicates that no LLD is specified in the ODCM for that radionuclide in that media. The target LLD for any analysis is typically 30-40 ; percent of the most restrictive required LLD. Occasionally the required LLD is not met. This ; is usually due to malfunctions in sampling equipment, which result in low sample volume. ! Such cases are addressed in Section 6.2. i For each radionuclide and media type, the remaining three columns summarize the data for the following categories of monitoring locations: (1) the Indicator or Zone 1 stations, which i are within the range ofinfluence of the plant and which could conceivably be affected by plant activities; (2) the station which had the highest mean concentration during 1996 for that , radionuclide; and (3) the Control or Zone 2 stations, which are beyond the influence of the i plant. Direct radiation monitoring stations (using TLDs) are grouped into Indicator, Outer Ring, Fenceline and Control stations. In each of these columns, for each radionuclide, the following are given: The mean value of all concentrations including negative values and values that are not considered " detectable" The lowest and highest concentration. 28 i
r The number of detectable measurements divided by the total number of measurements. ! i A sample is considered to yield a " detectable measurement" when the concentration i exceeds three times its associated standard deviation. The standard deviation on each measurement represents only the random uncenainty associated with the radioactive decay I proces.s (counting statistics), and not the propagation of all possible uncenainties in the analytical procedure. ! The radionuclides reported in this section represent those that: 1) had a Reporting Level i listed in Table 4.2 of the ODCM or, a LLD requirement in Table 4.3 of the ODCM 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 are routinely analyzed and reported by the YAEL in a gamma spectroscopy analysis were: Th-232, Ag-110m, !
Ba-140, Be-7, Ce-141, Ce-144, Co-57, Co-58, Co-60, Cr-51, Cs-134, Cs-137, Fe-59, I-131, f I-133, K-40, Mn-54, Mo-99, Np-239, Ru-103, Ru-106, Sb-124, Se-75, Tel-132, Zn-65 and Zr-95. In no case did a radionuclide not shown in Table 5.1 appear as a " detectable ; measurement" during 1996. j i Data from direct radiation measurements made by TLDs are provided in Table 5.2 in a ! format essentially the same as above. The complete listing of quarterly TLD data is provided j in Table 5.3. { 1 I l l I 29
Taine 8.1 Radiological Environmental Program Summary Yankee Nuclear Power Stadon, Rowe.MA ] (January . December ites) i ! MEDIUM. Air Particulates (AP) UNIT 8: ocucubic meter i j
.IWar
. . S.t.a.t.io.n.e....
. . . .S.t.a.t. ion..W..it.h..H..igh.e.s.t
. .. . .M..e.a..n.. .C.o..n.t.r.o.l.S..ta.tio.n..e.....
Radionuclides
- Mean Sta. Mean Mean
] (No. Analysee) Required Ran0e Range Range Non-Routine" LLD No. Detecter" No. Detected *** No. Detecter ** 4 GR.B (371) 0.01 1.9E -2 12 2.1E -2 1.7E -2 (c) ( 7.2 - 42.e)E ~3 ( 7.2 - 4 2. 8)E -3 ( 3.6 - 33.5)E -3 (265/ 265) (53/ 53) (106/ 106) i 1 Be-7 (28) 9.eE -2 11 1.oE -1 s.4E -2 (0) -( 6.0 - 14. 9) E -2 ( 7.8 - 12.2)E -2 ( 6.4 - 12.3)E -2
- (20/ 20) (4/ 4) (8/ e) i Co-48 (28) -2.e5 -5 31 2.2E -4 -9.oE -5 (0) ( -7.1 - 10.4) E -4 ( -2. 5 - 10. 4) E -4 ( -7.0 - 3.7) E -4 )
(0/ 20) (0/ 4) (o/ e) Co40 (28) 4.0E -5 32 3.9E -4 2.6E -4 (0) ( -9.2 - 8.3)E -4 ( -1. 6 - 6. 7) E -4 ( -1. 6 - 6. 7) E -4 (0/ 20) (0/ 4) (0/ e) Co.134 (28) 0.05 -1,3E -4 32 3.75 -5 2.2E -5
- (0) ( -5.9 - 3.0)E -4 ( -1. 4 - 10.7) E -5 ( -2.4 - 1.5)E -4 J i (0/ 20) (0/ 4) (0/ e) j Co.137 (28) 0.06 -6.oz -5 11 7.2E -5 3.eE -5 (0) ( -6.1 - 3. 7) E -4 ( -3.5 - 3. 7) E -4 ( -e.2 - 17.3) E -5 l (o/ 20) (0/ 4) (0/ e) 4 4
4 i l
. 30 t
i
Table 5.1 P "" ;*:d Environmental Program Sumnary Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Rowe,MA (January . December 1998) MEDIUM. CharcoalCartrklee (CF) . UNIT 8: oCi/ cubic mater
.in..d.ic.a.t.o.r
. S.t.a.t.i.o.n.s.. .S.t.a.t.io..n..W.R.h..H..' ... .M..e.an .C.o..n.t.r.o.l.S.
.. .ta.tio.n..s.....
Radionuclidee* Mean Sta. Mean Mean (No. Analyses) Required Range Range Range Non-Routine" LLD No. Detected"* No. Detected *" No. Detected *" l-131 (371) 0.07 -2.SE -4 12 2.35 -3 1.65 -4 2 (0) ( -3.1 - 2. 6) E -2 ( -2. 9 - 2. 6) E -2 ( -2. 3 - 1. 9) E -2 (0/ 265) (0/ 53) (0/ 106) 31
_.__ ._ _. _ _ ~ _ .-.._. _ _ . _ __ . . _ . _ . _ . . _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ . . . _ l r a Table 6.1 Radiological Environmental Program Summary l Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Rowe,MA (January. December 1996) MEDIUM: Ground Water (WG1 UNITS: oC1/ka I 1 S
!a9c..ar. St='.1.a'... ..'..' a M.h Hghys},Mean
. , ,, g,ontg,Sjag,s,,,,,
Radionuclides
- Mean Sta. Mean Mean I l
(No. Analyses) Required Range Range Range i Non-Routine" LLD No. Detected *" No. Detected *" No. Detected"* , I GR (26) 4 4.5E O 12 4.9E O NO DATA ! (0) ( 3. 4 - 9.4) E O ( 3.4 - 9.4)E O (26/ 26) (13/ 13) H4 (26) 20n0 1.6E 2 12 2.7E 2 No DATA (0) ( -1. 6 - 4. 9) E 2 ( 1.3 - 4. 9) E 2 (3/ 26) (3/ 13) Mn44 (26) 15 -6.4E -2 12 3.2E -2 No DATA 1 (0) ( -1. 4 - 2. 6) E D ( -1. 4 - 1.7) E O I (0/ 26) (0/ 13) Co46 (26) 15 -6.3E -1 12 -2.9E -1 NO DATA (0) ( -3.2 - 1. 6) E O ( -1. 6 - 1. 6) E O (0/ 26) (0/ 13) Fe49 (26) 30 2.9E -1 11 1.3E O NO DATA (0) ( -5. 9 - 5. 9) E O ( -1. 9 - 5. 9) 5 1 (0/ 26) (O ' 1 ^ ) Co40 (26) 15 3,6E -2 12 1.0E -1 NO DATA (0) ( -2.1 - 1. 7) E O ( -1.1 - 1.7) E O (0/ 26) (0/ 13) Zn46 (26) 30 1.5E o 11 3.5E O NO DATA (0) ( -4.6 - 12.3)E O ( -3.3 - 12.3)E O (0/ 26) (0/ 13) Z. 96 (26) 15 -2.7E -1 12 -2.7E -1 NO DATA (0) ( -2.7 - 3.5)E o ( -2.7 - 3.5)E O (0/ 26) (0/ 13) 1131 (26) 1 1.5E -1 11 7.eE -1 NO DATA (0) ( -5.2 - 9.7) E O ( -4.1 - 9. 7) E o (0/ 26) (0/ 13) Cs-134 (26) 15 -e.2E -1 12 -4.9E -1 NO DATA (0) ( -e.3 - 2.3)E O ( -5.2 - 2.3)E O (0/ 26) (0/ 13) Cs.137 (26) is -2.5E ~2 12 4.6E -2 NO DATA (0) ( -2.3 - 2.e)E O ( -2. 2 - 1. 6) E O (0/ 26) (0/ 13) Ba.140 (26) 15 -3,0E -1 11 5.7E -1 NO DATA (0) ( -3.3 - 4.1)E O ( -3.3 - 4.1) E O (0/ 26) (0/ 13) i 32 l I
k Table 5.1 Radiological Environrnental Program Summary Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Rowe,MA 1 (January December 1996) i MEDIUM: RiverWater (WRn UNITS! DCl/ka 4 1 Stat a.?.?..Hjghes},y,gan
!ad?.a.'. ' Stat.' a.!... ,,, gg,ntrol, Stags,,,,,
Radionuclides
- Mean Sta. Mean Mean (NO. Analyses) Required Range Range Range Non. Routine" LLD No. Detecter" No. Detecter" No. Detected *"
1 C R.8 (37) 4 1.3E O 21 1.4E O 1.4E O (0) ( 6.7 '- 19.2)E -1 ( 4. 6 - 26.8) E -1 ( 4. 6 - 26.8) E -1 l (17/ 25) (9/ 12) (9/ 12) H3 (16) 2000 -6.2E o 31 3.1E 1 -4.4E 1 (0) ( -5.4 - 2.9) E 2 ( -3. 3 - 2.9) E 2 ( -1. 5 - 1.7) E 2 (0/ 12) (0/ 4) (0/ 4) Mn44 (41) 15 -3.01 -3 91 8.3E -1 -3,0E -1 (0) ( -2.1 - 1.7)E o ( 2.7 - 15.2)E -1 ( -2.7 - 1.5)E O (0/ 29) (0/ 4) (0/ 12) Co48 (41) 15 -1.4E -1 11 7.0E -2 -2.3E -1 (0) ( -2.2 - 2.e)E O ( -1. e - 2. 8) E O ( -2.6 - 2.3)E O (0/ 29) (0/ 12) (0/ 12) Fe49 (41) 30 6.0E -1 31 1.3E O 7.2E -1 (0) ( -7.5 - 8.2)E O ( -3.8 - 8.2) E O ( -3.3 - 3.9)E O (0/ 29) (0/ 13) (0/ 12) Co40 (41) 15 3.3E -1 91 1.6E O -3.7E -1 (0) ( -2.3 - 2. 7) E O ( 4.2 - 23.5)E -1 ( -2.9 - 0. 9) E O (0/ 29) (0/ 4) (0/ 12) l Zn45 (41) 30 -1,$E -1 91 7.0E -1 -3.6E -1 i (0) ( -5.4 - e.0)E D ( -7. 8 - 227. 3) E -2 ( -5. 4 - 14. 4) E O I (0/ 29) (0/ 4) (0/ 12) Zr46 (41) 15 1.7E -1 21 7.9E -1 7.9E -1 (0) ( -3. 9 - 4. 6) E O ( -3.1 - 2. 7) E D ( -3.1 - 2. 7) E O (0/ 29) (0/ 12) (0/ 12) 1131 (41) -4.sE -1 91 1.5E -1 1.OE -1 (0) ( -0. 2 - 2. 6) E O ( -3. 6 - 2.2) E O ( -2.0 - 3. 6) E O (0/ 29) (0/ 4) (0/ 12) Cs.134 (41) 15 -3.4E -1 31 -9.0E -2 -1.3E O (9) ( -4.6 - 3.4)E O ( -4.6 - 3.4)E O ( -7.1 - 0.3) E O (0/ 29) (0/ 13) (0/ 12) Cs.137 (41) 18 -4.2E -2 31 1.sE -1 1.5E -1 (0) ( -2. 6 - 1. 9) E o ( -1. 4 - 1. e) E O ( -1. 3 - 2. 9) E O (0/ 29) (0/ 13) (0/ 12) Ba.140 (41) 15 -9.BE -1 21 -5.5E -2 -5.5E -2 (0) ( -5.2 - 2.7)E D ( -2.7 - 2.3)E O ( -2.7 - 2.3) E O (0/ 29) (0/ 12) (0/ 12) 33
. _ . . - . . - . . . . . - _ ~ .. - . . ~ _ - . ~ . ~ , - - . . . . _ _ _ _ ~ . . . -
1 i I l Table 6.1 ! Radiological Environtnental Program Summary Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Rowe,MA { (January . December 1996) 4 MEDIUM: Storm Drain Water fWW) UNITS: DCilka I 1 Indicator Stations Station With Highest Mean Control Stations j 1 I Radionuclides
- Mean Sta. Mean Mean d
(No. Analyses) Required Range Range Range Hon-Routine" LLD No. Detected"* No. Detected *" No. Detected *" ] $- O'44 1.7E o 62 1.7E O NO DATA (13) (0) ( 1.1 - 2.5)E O ( 1.1 - 2.5) E O (13/ 13) (13/ 13) j H4 (13) 2.0E 2 62 2.0E 2 NO DATA (0) ( -2.1 - 71.0) E 1 ( -2.1 - 71.0) E 1 j (0/ 13) (0/ 13) .i . Mn44 (13) 4.4E -1 62 4.4E -1 No DATA j (0) ( -4. 4 - 20. 6) E -1 ( -4.4 - 20. 6) E -1 { (0/ 13) (0/ 13) Co-68 (13) -2.4E -1 62 -2.4E -1 NO DATA l (0) ( -1.s - 2.1)E O ( -1.8 - 2.1)E O (0/ 13) (0/ 13) FG-69 (13) 1.2E -1 62 1.2E -1 NO DATA (0) ( -3.1 - 4. 9) E O ( -3.1 - 4. 9) E D (0/ 13) (0/ 13) Co40 (13) 7.2E -1 62 7.2E -1 NO DATA (0) ( -1. 4 - 4. 3) E O ( -1.4 - 4.3)E O (0/ 13) (0/ 13) Zn46 (13) -7.PE -1 62 -7.9E ~1 NO DATA (0) ( -4.2 - 5.8)E o ( -4.2 - 5.0)E o l (0/ 13) (0/ 13) I Zr46 (13) 2.3E -1 62 2.3E -1 No DATA (0) ( -2.2 - 3.2)E o ( -2.2 - 3.2)E o (0/ 13) (0/ 13) ; l-131 (13) -e.12 -1 62 -e.it -1 No DATA ) (0) ( -5. 7 - 5. 7) E O ( -5. 7 - 5. 7) E O (0/ 13) (0/ 13) Cs 134 (13) -3.7E -2 62 -3.7E -2 NO DATA (0) ( -2.7 - 2. 9) E O ( -2.7 - 2.9)E D (0/ 13) (0/ 13) Cs.137 (13) 1.2E -1 62 1.2E -1 No DATA (0) ( -1.2 - 2.5)E O ( -1.2 - 2.5) E O (0/ 13) (0/ 13) Ba-140 (13) -7.4E -1 62 -7.4E ~1 NO DATA (0) ( -5.0 - 2.5)E O ( -5.0 - 2.5)E O (0/ 13) (0/ 13) 34
. . . - . . _ ~ . - . . . _. - .
G Table 5.1 Radiological Environmental Program Summary Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Rowe,MA (January . December ites) 1 MEDIUM: Sediment (SE) UMTS: oCl&n dry
.In..d.ic..a.t.o.r..S.t.a.t.i.o.n.s.... .S.t.a.t.io..n..W...t.h..H..igh.e.s..t .M. .e.an.. I
.. .C.o..n.t.r.o.l.S..ta.t.io.n..s.....
1 i Radionuclides
- Mean Sta. Mean Mean (No. Analyses) Required Range Range Range l Non-Routine" LLD No. Detector" No. Detecter" No. Detected *" i l
ge-7 (13) -1.e5 1 91 3.3E 0 -3.1E 1 l
- (0) ( -3.8 - 4.8) E 2 ( -3.7 - 4.s) E 2 ( -5.0 - 2.0)E 2 4
(0/ 12) (0/ 6) (0/ 6) K40 (18) 1.e5 4 31 2.1E 4 1.3E 4 (0) ( 1.3 - 2.4)E 4 ( 1.9 - 2.4)E 4 ( 1.0 - 1.s)E 4 (12/ 12) (6/ 6) (6/ 6) l Co45 (18) -1.1E 1 11 2.4E o -9.5E o l 2 (0) ( -4.8 - 4.2)E 1 ( -1. 9 - 4. 2) E 1 ( -1. 9 - 0.0) E 1 1 i' (0/ 12) (0/ 6) (0/ 6) < I Co40 (18) 2.1* 1 91 3.6E 1 -6.0E -1 l (0) ( -6.6 - 62.2)E o ( 1.0 - 6.2)E 1 ( -1.0 - 1.3)E 1 (1/ 12) (1/ 6) (0/ 6) ) Cs-134 (18) 150 -1.08 1 11 3.2E O ~2.5E 1 I (0) ( -7.5 - 1.5)E 1 ( -4.7 - 15. 5) E O ( -9.6 - 0. 6) E 1 , (0/ 12) (0/ 6) (0/ 6) ( l
- Cs.137 (18) iso e.0E 2 31 1.3E 3 1.7E 1 (0) ( 2.1 - 25.1)E 2 ( 6. 4 - 25.1) E 2 ( -1.0 - 3.e)E 1 (12/ 12) (6/ 6) (0/ 6) 1 Th-232 (18) 1.2E 3 31 1.5E 3 3.e5 2
- (0) ( 6. 7 - 18. 9) E 2 ( 1.1 - 1. 9) E 3 ( 2.4 - 5.3)E 2 i (12/ 12) (6/ 6) (5/ 6)
I I I 35 i
1 l l 1 Table 5.1 Radiological Environmental Program Summary Yankee Nuclear Power Station. Rowe.MA l (January . December 1996) l l MEDIUM: Milk (TM) UNITS: ocilka l . .In..d.ic.a.t.o.r..S.t.a.t.i.o.n.s....
. .S.t.a.t.io.n..W...it.h..H..igh.e.s.t.M..a.an..
. .. . .C.o..n.t.r.o.l.S..te.lio.n..s Radionuclides
- Mean Sta. Mean Mean j (No. Analysee) Required Range Range Range Non-Routine" LLD No. Detected"* No. Detected *" No. Detected *"
K 40 (40) 1.45 3 13 1.4E 3 1.4E 3 (0) ( 1.3 - 1.5)E 3 ( 1. 3 - 1. 5) E 3 ( 1.2 - 1.5)E 3 (20/ 20) (20/ 20) (20/ 20) Sr.se (s) -7.3E -1 21 -1.3E -1 -1.3E -1 (0) ( -3.2 - 1. 6) E o ( -2. 6 - 2. 6) E O ( -2.6 - 2.6)E O (0/ 4) (0/ 4) (0/ 4) , 1 Sr.00 (s) 9.3E -1 13 9.3E -1 6.5E ~1 (0) ( 0.0 - 1.e)E o ( 0.0 - i.e)E o ( 0.0 - 1.4)E o (2/ 4) (2/ 4) (1/ 4) ) l l-131 (40) 1 1.3E -1 13 1.3E -1 -e.4E -2 j (0) ( -5.7 - 224.5)E -2 ( -5.7 - 224.5)E -2 ( -2.5 - 0.2)E O l (0/ 20) (0/ 20) (0/ 20) l Cs-134 (40) 15 -6.0E -3 13 -6.0E -3 -1.6E -1 (0) ( -2.2 - 1.9)E O ( -2.2 - 1. 9) E O ( -2.6 - 2.3)E O (0/ 20) (0/ 20) (0/ 20) l Cs-137 (40) to 7.5E -1 13 7.5E -1 3.75 -1 (0) ( -2.9 - 3.4)E O ( -2.9 - 3.4)E o ( -2. 0 - 4.7) E D (0/ 20) (0/ 20) (0/ 20) Ba-140 (40) 15 2.1E -1 13 2.1E -1 -5.0E -1 (0) ( -3. 6 - 2.8)E o ( -3.6 - 2.8) E o ( -6.7 - 3.3)E o (0/ 20) (0/ 20) (0/ 20) l l 36 . l
Table 5.1 Radiological Environmental Program Summary Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Rowe.MA (January. December 1994) MEDIUM: Mixed V:::'_=:-,in lieu of TM-14 milk sample (TC) UMTS: oCi/ka Wh
.In..d.ic.a.t.o.r..S.t.a.t.i.o.n.s....
. .S.t.a.t.io.n..W...it.h
. H.1.e.s..t.M..e.an.. .C.o..n.t.r.o.l.S..ta..t.io.n..s.....
Radionuchdes* Mean Sta. Mean Mean (No. Analyses) Required Range Range Range NoMioutine" LLD No. Detected *" No. Detected *" No. Detected *" Be.7 (3) 2.0E 3 14 2.OR 3 NO DATA (0) ( 1.1 - 3.2) E 3 ( 1.1 - 3.2)E 3 l (3/ 3) (3/ 3) K.40 (3) 3.5E 3 14 3.5E 3 NO DATA (0) ( 3.2 - 4.1)E 3 ( 3.2 - 4.1)E 3 l (3/ 3) (3/ 3) Co48 (3) -9.4E O 14 -9.45 0 No DATA (0) ( -2.4 - 0.3) E 1 ( -2.4 - 0.3)E 1 (0/ 3) (0/ 3) Co-40 (3) 2.e5 -1 14 2.sE -1 No DATA (0) ( -6.6 - 7.5)E O ( -6.6 - 7.5)E O (0/ 3) (0/ 3) 1131 (3) 3.8E 1 14 3.8E 1 NO DATA (0) ( -4.1 - 15. 6) E 1 ( -4.1 - 15. 6) E 1 (0/ 3) (0/ 3) Cs.134 (3) -2.2E O 14 -2.2E O NO DATA (0) ( -1.1 - 0. 8 ) E 1 ( -1.1 - 0.8)E 1 (0/ 3) (0/ 3) Cs.137 (3) 2.6E 1 14 2.6E 1 NO DATA (0) ( 1. 9 - 3. 6) E 1 ( 1.9 - 3.6)E 1 (0/ 3) (0/ 3) Ba.140 (3) 2.4E 1 14 2.4E 1 No DATA (0) ( 1.s - 553.2)E -1 ( 1. 8 - 553.2) E -1 (0/ 3) (0/ 3) Th 232 (3) 1.78 1 14 1.75 1 NO DATA (0) ( -5.3 - 12.1)E 1 , ( -5.3 - 12.1)E 1 (0/ 3) (0/ 3) i l 1 i 4 i ) 37 l l
Table 5.1 ) i Radiological Environmental Program Summary l Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Rowe,MA ) (January - December 1996) l MEDIUM: Fish (FH) UNITS: oCl&c 1
.In..d.ic.a.t.o.r
. S.t.a.t.x.m..s. . .S.t.a.t.io.n..
Wit.h..H..igh.e.s.t.M..e.an
.. . .C.o..n.t.r.o.l.S..ta.tio.n..s.
.. .. )
j Radionuclides' Mean Sta. Mean Mean I (No. Analyses) Required Range Range Range
]
No. Detecter" Non-Routine ** LLD No. Detecter ** No. Detector" K.40 (4) 2.0E 3 21 2.6E 3 2.6E 3 (0) ( 1.7 - 2.2)E 3 ( 2.2 - 3.0) E 3 ( 2.2 - 3.0)E 3 (2/ 2) (2/ 2) (2/ 2) Mn44 (4) 130 4.5E -1 11 4.5E -1 -6.2E O (0) ( -6.7 - 7.6)E O ( -6.7 - 7.6)E O ( -1.2 - 0.0) E 1 (0/ 2) (0/ 2) (0/ 2) Co48 (4) 130 7.6E 0 11 7.6E O -e.2E O (0) ( -9.3 - 161.3) E -1 ( -9. 3 - 161.3) E -1 ( -1.1 - -0.5)E 1 (0/ 2) (0/ 2) (0/ 2) Fe49 (4) 260 -2.4E 1 21 5.9E O 5.9E O (0) ( -4.4 - -0.5)E 1 ( 3.3 - 0.4)E 0 ( 3.3 - 8.4)E O (0/ 2) (0/ 2) (0/ 2) Co40 (4) 130 6.2E o 21 1.3E 1 1.35 1 (0) ( -3.5 - 128.2)E -1 ( 2.9 - 23.7)E O ( 2.9 - 23.7)E O (0/ 2) (0/ 2) (0/ 2) Zn46 (4) 260 7.0E O 21 3.6E 1 3.6E 1 (0) ( -1.2 - 2. 6) E 1 ( 2.8 - 4.3) E 1 ( 2.8 - 4.3)E 1 (0/ 2) (0/ 2) (0/ 2) Cs.134 (4) 130 1.1E 1 21 1.2E 1 1.2E 1 (0) ( 9.5 - 13.3)E o ( 2.4 - 21.7)E O ( 2.4 - 21. 7) E 0 (0/ 2) (0/ 2) (0/ 2) Cs.137 (4) 150 1.9E O 21 3.32 1 3.3E 1 (0) ( -1.5 - 1.s)E 1 ( 2.6 - 4.0)E 1 ( 2.6 - 4.0) E 1 (0/ 2) (0/ 2) (0/ 2) 38
Table 8.1
- Radiological Environmental Program Surumary Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Rowe,MA (January Decemberiets)
MEDIUM: Food Croe (TF) UNfTS: oCIAm
.In.d.ic.a.t.o.r
.. S.t.a.t.i.o.n.s .. .S.t.a.t.io.n..W...it.h..High.e.s.t.M..e.a..n..
. .. . C.o..n.t.r.o.l.S..ta..t.io.n..s.....
Radionuclides
- Mean Sta. Mean Mean (No. Analyses) Required Range Renge Range Non-Routine" LLD No Detected"* No. Detected"* No. Detected *" 1 1
K 40 (3) 2.ss 3 11 4.2s 3 7.es 2 (0) ( 1.1 - 4.2): 3 (2/ 2) (1/ 1) (0/ 1) Co48 (3) 1.1s 1 13 2.4s 1 1.os 1 (0) ( -1.3 - 23.e)s o , (o/ 2) (o/ 1) (o/ 1) l Co40 (3) -4.es o 21 5.ss o 5.ss o (0) ( -1.2 - 0.2)E 1 (0/ 2) (c/ 1) (o/ 1) 1-131 (4) 5.1s o 21 1.2s 1 1.2s 1 (0) ( -e.2 - 13.6) o (0/ 3) (0/ 1) (0/ 1) Cs-134 (3) so -6.3s o 21 5.7s o 5.7s o (0) ( -1.3 - 0.o): 1 (o/ 2) (0/ 1) (o/ 1) Cs-137 (3) so 1.4E 1 13 2.es 1 1.es 1
]
(0) ( -9.6 - 284.2): -1 (0/ 2) (o/ 1) (o/ 1) l l l i a 39 l
_ __ __ _ ._ __ .m . - Tame 6.1 Radiological Environmental Program Summary Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Rowe,MA 1 (January - December 1996) MEDIUM. Maole Syrup (MS) UNITS: oCilka
!$.e.S!"Bl* Std.T.E.?..Hg,,gp,, gg,ol,S,tygs,,,,,
Radionuclides
- Mean Sta. Mean Mean (No. Analyses) Required Range Range Range Non-Routine" LLD No. Detected *** No. Detected *** No. Detected *"
K.40 (2) 2.75 3 33 2.7E 3 1.5E 3 (o) (1/ 1) (1/ 1) (1/ 1) Co48 (2) -1.5E o 46 -7.9E -1 -7.9E -1 (0) (0/ 1) (0/ 1) (0/ 1) Co40 (2) 9.15 -1 46 1.9E 0 1.9E O (c) (0/ 1) (0/ 1) (0/ 1) 1-131 (2) 1.1E 1 46 2.5E 1 2.5E 1 (c) (0/ 1) (0/ 1) (0/ 1) Cs-134 (2) 1.6E 0 33 1.6E O 1.3E O (0) (0/ 1) (0/ 1) (0/ 1) Cs.137 (2) 2.0E 1 33 2.0E 1 1.5E 1 (c) (1/ 1) (1/ 1) (1/ 1) 40
i Footnotes to Table 5.1: The only radionuclides reported in this table are those with LLD requirements, those for which positive radioactivity was detected, and those which may be of interest for some other specific reason. See section 5 of this report for a discussion of other radionuclides that were analyzed.
** Non-Routine refers to those radionuclides that exceeded the Reporting Levels in 00CM Table 4.2. ' " The fraction of sample analyses yielding detectable measurements (i.e. > 3 standard deviations) is shown in parentheses.
l 1 l 1 l l l l 41 1
~ . . , . - _ . . -.___.-...-- - .. .... -- . . - .
. - - . . . . - - . ~ . _ - . - - . . - - ~ - .
j' a
)
! l
- 1 TABLE S.2 1
+ i ENVIRONMENTALTLD DATA
SUMMARY
YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, ROWE, MA (,IANUARY . DECEMBER 1996) INDICATOR TLDs OUTER RING TLDs l'ENCELINE TLDs CONTROL TLDs MEAN MEAN MEAN MEAN RANGE RANGE RANGE RANGE (NO. kEASUREhENTSf (NO. KEASURELENT:;f NO. LEASURELENT37 (NO. KEASUREhEt(TSf 6.6
- 0.8 6.7
- 1.1 8.9
- I .4 7.2
- 0.8 4.58.4 4.6 - 8.8 7.3 13.7 5.4 - 8.1 (52) (63) (36) (8)
OITSITE STATION WITII filGilEST MEAN MEAN STA. RANGE NO. (NO. MEASUliEMENTS)* l GM-34 8.6
- 0.4 7.9 - 8.9 (4) l I
l
- Each " measurement" is based typically on quarterly readings from five TLD etcments. l I
i 42
. . _ . -_ _. , m. . s._ _ . . _ - _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . -
I i TABLE 53 l i ENVIRONMENTALTLD MEASUREMENTS { 1996 ! (Micro-R per flour) - ANNUAL
.Sta. IST QUARTER 2ND QUARTER 3RD QUARTER 4Til QUARTER AVE.
No. Description EXP. S.D. EXP. S.D. EXP. S.D. EXP. S.D. EXP. I GM-01 YNPS Visitor's Center - 5.5*03 6.9*03 6.4*03 6.9* 03 6.4 GM 02 Observation Stand 5.8*03 6.2
- 0.4 6.6*03 6.9
- 0.4 6.4 i GM4B Rowe School
~
4.5
- 0.2 5.5*03 5.5*03 5.6*03 53 l GM 04 Harriman Station 5.4
- 0.2 5.8*03 5.6*03 60*03 5.7 i GM 05 Monroc Bridge 6.7
- 0.2 73 *03 7.240.4 7.6
- 0.4 7.2 GM 06 Readsboro Rd. Barrier 5.5*03 6.9*03 7.1* 03 7.1
- 0.4 6.7 GM-07 Whitingham Line 6.1
- 0.2 73 *03 7.5*03 7.4* 03 7.1 GM-08 Monroe Hill Barrier 5.5
- 0.2 6.1*03 6.4*03 63 *0.3 6.1 .j GM-09 DunbarBrook 6.1*03 73 *03 7.2*03 7.2* 03 7.0 GM-10 Cross Rd. 5.7* 03 6.6*03 6.7*03 6.840.6 6.5 GM-11 Adams liigh Line 6.2
- 0.4 7.6
- 0.4 6.4*03 6.2* 03 6.6 GM-12 Readsboro, VT 7.8
- 0.4 8.4
- 0.4 7.8*03 8.0* 03 8.0 GM-13 Restr. Area Fence 8.9
- 0.4 9.6
- 0.5 9.1
- 0.4 9.1
- 0.4 9.2 GM 14 Restr. Area Fence 7.7
- 0.4 8.9*03 8.2* 03 7.9*03 8.2 GM-15 Restr. Area Fence 7.5
- 0.4 7.9
- 0.4 8.0
- 0.4 7.7* 03 7.8 GM-16 Restr. Area Fence 73 *0.4 7.6*03 7,4*03 7.6* 03 75 GM-17 Restr. Area Fence 7.7
- 0.4 7.9*03 7.7* 03 7.5
- 0.4 7.7 GM 18 Restr. Area fence 11.0
- 0.4 10.0
- 0.4 9.8
- 0.4 9.1
- 0.4 10.0 GM-19 Restr. Area Fence 13.7
- 0.5 10.8
- 0.5 9.8
- 0.3 8.8*03 10.8 GM-20 Restr. Area Fence 9.9
- 0.4 9.6
- 0.4 9.0*03 8.4
- 0.4 9.2 GM-2i Restr. Area Fence 12.2
- 0.5 10.0
- 0.5 9.5
- 0.4 8.5
- O 4 10.1 '
GM-22 Ileartwellville, VT 5.4*03 7.2*03 7.0*03 7.2203 6.7 GM-23 .Williamstown Subst. 7.0*03 8.1*03 7.8*03 7.5* 03 7.6 GM-24 1!arriman Dam 6.2* 03 7.9
- 0.4 8.2
- 0.4 8.4*03 7.7 GM-25 Whitingham,VT 5.8*03 63 *03 6.2*03 6.5
- 0 ) 6.2 GM 26 Sadoga Rd. 5.1
- 0.2 7.1
- 0.4 7.1*03
- 6.4 GM 27 Number 9 Rd. 4.9
- 0.2 63 *03 6.2*03 6.4 *.03 6.0 GM-28 Number 9 Rd. 6.2*03 7.1*03 7.0*03 7.0* 03 6.8 GM-29 Route BA -4.6*03 4.9
- 0.2 5.0
- 0.2 4.8
- 0.2 4.8 GM 30 Route BA 5.1*03 5.9*03 5.9*03 5.7* 03 5.7 ,
GM-31 Legate liill Rd. 5.5
- 0.2 6.5
- 0.4 63
- 03 6.4*03 6.2 GM 32 Rowe Rd. 5.4*03 6.4
- 0.4 6.4
- 0.2 63 *0.4 6.1 GM-33 Zoar Rd. 63 *0.4 6.8
- 0.4 7.0
- 0.4 7.0*03 6.8 GM 34 Fife Drook Rd. 7.9*03 8.7* 03 8.7
- 0.4 8.9
- 0.4 8.6 GM-35 WhitcombSummit 5.4
- 0.2 7.3
- 0.4 7.5*03 7.2* 03 6.9 GM-36 Tilda Rd. 5.6
- 0.2 7.0
- 0.4 7.4
- 0.4 7.1* 03 6.8 GM-37 Turnerliill Rd. 6.0
- 0.5 7.2*03 7.4*03 7.2*03 7.0 GM 38 WestIlillRd. 6.0*03 8.1
- 0.4 8.2* 03 8.2*03 7.6 GM-39 Route 100 73 *0.4 8.8
- 0.6 8.6* 03 8.6
- 0.4 83 GM-40 Readsboro Rd. 5.7
- 0.2 7.1* 03 7.0*03 6.9
- 0.4 6.7
- TLD not returned.
t i 43 l
- 6. ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS 6.1 Sampling Program Deviations ODCM Control 4.1 allows for deviations "if specimens are unobtainable due to hazardous conditions, seasonal unavailability or to malfunction of automatic sampling equipment."
Several minor deviations were noted in the REMP during 1996. These deviations did not compromise the program's effectiveness and in fact are considered insignificant with respect to what is normally anticipated for any radiological environmental monitoring program. These specific deviations were:
- 1. The pump at air sampling station AP/CF-12 seized up during the week of October 15 to October 22, resulting in a low sample volume. The pump was replaced on October 22.
1
- 2. The pump at air sampling station AP-12 was found to be pulling a low sample volume on October 29 (for the week October 22 to October 29). The pump was replaced.
- 3. The circuit breaker tripped at air sampling station AP-32 during the week of October 29 to November 5, resulting in a low sample volume. The breaker was reset.
- 4. The milk sample station TM-14, in Rowe, continued to be unavailable during 1996.
(It initially became unavailable on approximately August 1,1995 when there was no longer a ecw at this farm.) No other milk sampling location was available within 5 miles of the plant t o serve o replacement during 1996. In lieu of the milk samples, mixed grass samples were collected at this location on Auguet 29, September 10 and October 1. (These are not required by the ODCM.) On October 31,1996, Revision i 11 to the ODCM was issued, requiring milk samples at only two locations (currently I TM-13, Whitingham, VT and TM 21, Williamstown, MA). ( 5. TLDs were lost, apparently due to vandalism, during the fourth quaner at station l GM-26. [ 6.2 Comparison of Achieved LLDs with Requirements [ Table 4.3 of the ODCM (reproduced as Table 4.4 in this repon) gives the required Lower , Limits of Detection (LLDs) for environmental sample analyses. On occasion, an LLD is not l 44 r u /
I achieved due to situations such as a low sample volume caused by sampling equipment malfunction. In such a case, Control 7.1 of the ODCM requires a discussion of the situation in the Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report. At the YAEL, the target LLD for ; any analysis is typically 30-40 percent of the most restrictive required LLD. Expressed differently, the typical sensitivities achieved for each analysis are at least 2.5 to 3 times better I than that required by the YNPS ODCM. 1 For each analysis having an LLD requirement in ODCM Table 4.3, the aposteriori or after the fact LLD calculated for that analysis was compared with the required LLD. Of the , l 1800 analyses performed with a specified LLD requirement, all met the requirement in 1996 i with the exception discussed below. l Table 4.3 of the ODCM, assigns an LLD of 1.0 pCi/ liter for I-131 in drinking water. This drinking water LLD was required from the time ofimplementation of the ODCM in 1983 through the issuance of Revision 11 on October 31,1996. Given the short half-life of this nuclide, Revision 11 removed the I-131 LLD requirement due to the absence of this radionuclide at the site following the reactor's shutdown in 1992. An internal audit conducted in 1996 identified that the 1 pCi/ liter LLD requirement had not been met between 1983 and l 1996 for samples from the on-site well at WG-11. Ahhough this well had not been viewed as I the primary source of drinking water since bottled water had been available on-site up to 1993, the potential existed for water from this well to have been ingested through the use of on-site sinks. The average LLD achieved during this period has been 9.5pCi/ liter. The presence of I-131 should not have been expected at WG-11 given the following considerations. t
- Sherman Spring, which is 600 feet down-graiient of the Vapor Container area, is used as a ground water REMP sampling location. It has had no I-131 detected in samples, although it has historically contained detectable levels of H-3. I-131 LLD for these samples has been 4-24 pCi/ liter. This site would be the best indicator for I-131 in the ground water if that nuclide had been present.
- The well at WG-11 is 525 feet up-gradient of the Vapor Container area. No H-3 has not been detected in any of the samples from this location during the period in question.
The presence of H-3 in this case is a very reliable indicator of migration of radioactivity from plant sources to these ground water sampling locations. 45
l Given the distance of WG-11 from the plant and the ground water velocity of approximately 500-1000R/ year in the down-gradient direction it is unlikely that I-131 would have traveled up-gradient to this well before decaying away or that any levels ofI-131 could l have exceeded the reporting level of 2 pCi/ liter since the sampling requirement went into effect in 1983. 1 6.3 1996 Results Compared Against Reporting Levels ODCM Control 4.1.a. requires the written notification to the NRC within 30 days whenever a Reporting Levelin ODCM Table 4.2 is exceeded. Reporting Levels are the environmental concentrations that relate to the ALARA design dose objectives of 10 CFR 50,
]
Appendix I. It should be noted that environmental concentrations are averaged over calendar quarters for the purposes of this comparison, and that Reporting Levels apply only to measured levels of radioactivity due to plant efiluents. During 1996, no Reporting Levels were exceeded. 6.4 Data Analysis by Media Type The 1996 REMP data for each media type are discussed below. These are arranged in the same order as in Table 5.1, and are further categorized by pathway. Graphical plots of I monitoring data are shown at the end of this section in Figures 6.1 to 6.26. With respect to data plots, all values are plotted, whether they are " detectable" or "non-detectable." 6.4.1 Airborne Pathways 6.4.1.1 Air Particulates The weekly air particulate filters from each of the seven operating sampling sites were analyzed for gross-beta radioactivity. At the end of each quarter, the thineen 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 through 6.6. As shown in Figure 6.1, there has been no significant difference between the quarterly average concentration at the indicator (near-plant) stations and the control (distant from plant) stations. Also notable is a distinct annual cycle, with the minimum concentration in the second quaner, and the maximum concentration in the first quarter. 46
.__ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~_ ..___ _ _.._-_-_
i Figures 6.2 through 6.6 show the weekly gross beta concentration at each air paniculate i sampling location required by the ODChi along with the control air particulate sampling j l location at AP-21 (Williamstown, hiA). It can be readily seen that the gross-beta j measurements on air particulate filters fluctuate significantly over the course of a year. The measurements from control station AP-21 vary similarly, indicating that these fluctuations are due to regional changes in naturally-occurring airborne radioactive materials, and not due to j YNPS operations. Table 5.1 shows that the mean concentration fiom indicator stations, on the l average, are similar to those from controllocations, further supporting this conclusion. All of the annual concentrations were consistent with gross beta measurements of air
- particulate filters performed in 1996 throughout New England as part of other Yankee I
affiliated environmental monitoring programs, and ranged from 1.6E 2.lE-2 pCi/ meter'. ] Gamma isotopic analyses performed on the air paniculate filters from weeks 43,44, and 45 did i not detect any radionuclides that could be attributed to plant effluents. l' { The only radionuclide detected on the quarterly gamma isotopic analysis of the composited air j particulate filters was Be-7, a naturally-occurring cosmogenic radionuclide. l 6.4.1.2 Charcoal Cartridges i The weekly charcoal cartridges from each of the seven operating air sampling sites were l analyzed for I-131. The results of these analyses are summarized in Table 5.1. As in previous l years, no I-131 was detected in any charcoal cartridge. l -6.4.2 Waterborne Pathways l 6.4.2.1 Ground Water I l hionthly ground wat. r samples were collected from two on-site locations during 1996. l (Only quarterly samples are required by ODChi Table 4.1.) Table 5.1 shows that gross-beta ] measurements were positive in all samples. This is due to naturally-occurring radionuclides in the water. The December sample contained a confirmed gross beta concentration of 9.5
- 0.9
- pCi/kg. An aliquot of this sample was filtered through a 0.45 micron tuffryn filter and the
! resulting gross beta concentration of the filtered water was 5.1
- 0.7 pei/kg. The solids were analyzed for gamma emitting nuclides, to a Cs-137 and Co-60 LLD of approximately 2
] pCi/kg, and resulted in no gamma emitting radionuclides being detected. j l The elevated first half semiannual average gross-beta concentration in 1992 at WG-ll, as i i 47 I k i 1
k seen in Figure 6.7, was due to naturally occurring radionuclides in water which was trucked in from an inf-site source. A detailed discussion can be found in the Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports for 1992 and 1993. H-3 was detected in three out of thirteen WG-12 (Sherman Spring) samples, as shown in Table 5.1 and Figure 6.8. The water from Sherman Spring leaves the ground on YNPS property and flows into the Deerfield River. Neither the Deerfield River nor Sherman Spring are used for drinking water. The maximum monthly concentration at WG-12 in 1996 was 493 (
- 114 pCi/kg, and the mean value was 270 pCi/kg. These H-3 levels are due to early plant operations and have been detected in previous samples from this location. The concentration of H-3 at this location has decreased steadily for many years. The maximum concentration of 493 pCi/kg is approximately two percent of the NRC Reporting Level of 30,000 pCi/kg for the non-drinking water pathway.
No gamma-emitting radionuclides were detected in any of the ground water samples. 6.4.2.2 River Water Aliquots ofriver water were automatically collected every two hours from the Deerfield River downstream from the plant, as well as at the Harriman Reservoir control location. These [ composited samples were collected monthly and sent to the YAEL for analysis. Monthly grab samples were also collected at Sherman Pond near the discharge area. [ Table 5.1 shows that gross-beta measurements were positive in most samples, as would be expected, due to naturally-occurring radionuclides in the water. The historical concentrations at the indicator and control locations have not been significantly different, as shown in Figure 6.9 except during the last half of 1992 when the levels at WR-11 were slightly elevated relative to the control. This was attributed to naturally occurring radioactivity and is discussed in the 1992 and 1993 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports. No gamma-emitting radionuclides attributable to activities at YNPS were detected in any of the samples. For each sampling site, the monthly samples were composited into quarterly ( samples for H-3 analyses. No H-3 was detected in river water samples during 1996. Beginning in July 1994, a split sampling program was undertaken in cooperation with the { Massachusetts Department ofPublic Health (MDPH). Water samples were collected at the discharge point and then split with the MDPH, at their discretion. During 1996, four samples - 48 w
were split and analyzed by the YAEL and the MDPH laboratory. A gamma spectroscopy and H-3 analyses were performed on each sample. No radioactivity was detected in any of the 1996 samples, as analyzed at the YAEL. In Figure 4.1 and Table 4.2, this sample location is identical to WR-31. In the data of Table 5.1, this location is labeled as WR-91 to distinguish it from routine REMP samples collected from WR-31. 6.4.2.3 Storm Drain Water Monthly grab samples were collected from the West Storm Drain (WW-52) during 1996. Each sample was analyzed for gross-beta and gamma-emitting radionuclides and H-3. Gross-beta measurements were positive in all of the samples, as would be expected. The levels are consistent with those from previous years. No gamma-emitting radionuclides or H-3 were detected in any of the samples. f 6.4.2.4 Sediment Semiannual sediment core samples were collected from three locations during 1996. Each set of samples was segmented by depth (0-5, 5-10,10-15 cm) and analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. As would be expected, naturally-occurring K-40 and Th-232 were detected in most of the samples. In addition to the naturally-occurring radionuclides, Cs-137 was detected in most segments. The results from the 0-5 cm depth segment from downstream location SE-Il was consistent with what has been measured in the previous several years (see Figure 6.10) and is attributed to nuclear weapons testing fallout. The Cs-137 in the 5-10 cm and 10-15 cm depth segments at SE-11 are bounded by levels previously reported at the control location (SE-21). The levels and the distribution of the Cs-137 in the core segments indicate nuclear weapons testing fallout as the origin. At both the indicator and the control location, the character of the sediment is highly dependent on the specific location sampled, which in turn is dependent on the water level in Harriman Reservoir or on the Deerfield River shoreline at the time of sampling. The diverse character of the sediment at either location and the fact that Cs-137 tends to bind more to sediment containing organic matter than to sandy and rocky sediment leads to a wide range of Cs-137 concentrations, as shown in Figure 6.10 and 6.11. Table 5.1 and Figure 6.12 show the levels of Cs-137 at station SE-91. These samples were collected from a deep water location near the plant discharge in Sherman Pond. Although much of the Cs-137 in this sediment is due to global nuclear weapons testing fallout, f 49 L /
some of the Cs-137 in these samples is likely due to emuents released from monitored plant discharges. It is believed that the higher Cs-137 levels at SE-91, whether due to fallout or plant emuents, are related to the physical make-up of the sediment (rich organic " mud") at the bottom of Sherman Pond. Co-60 has been detected in the past in the deep water sediment at SE-91. With respect to 1996 samples, the 0-5 cm segment from the core taken in May 1996 at SE-91 showed a Co-60 concentration of 62 12 pCi/kg-dry. The 5-10 cm and 10-15 cm segments and the sample collected in October contained no detectable Co-60. This sample, as all others at SE-91, were collected in deep water, well away from the shoreline and is attributed to licensed plant discharges in past years. None of this radioactivity is involved in any significant pathway of exposure to man. 6.4.3 Ingestion Pathways 6.4.3.1 Milk Milk samples from cows at two local farms were collected twice-per-month during the 1996 pasture season, and monthly during the remainder of the year. Each sample was analyzed for 1-131 and other gamma-emitting radionuclides. Quarterly composites, by location, were analyzed for Sr-89 and Sr-90. As expected, naturally-occurring K-40 was detected in all samples. Also expected was Cs-137 and Sr-90. No Cs-137 was detected in either the indicator or control samples in 1996 although it has been detected in previous years as shown in Figure 6.13. It should be noted that the annual average Cs-137 concentration in Figure 6.13 was calculated using all the measured concentrations regardless of whether they were considered " detectable" or not or whether they were positive or negative. Sr-90 was detected in two out of four indicator samples, and one out of four control samples. This data is shown in Figure 6.14. Figures 6.13 and 6.14 also include data from TM-12, which was part of the sampling program until February 1993, when it went out ofbusiness. 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 Chernobylincident. 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 50 , l
I anything that feeds upon vegetation, directly or indirectly. The Cs-137 and Sr-90 levels shown in Table 5.1 and Figures 6.13 and 6.14 are consistent with those detected at other New England farms that are monitored as part of other Yankee-affiliated environmental monitoring programs. As shown in these figures, the levels are also consistent with those detected in previous years near YNPS. Milk became unavailable at station TM-14 in mid-August 1995 and because no replacement sampling locations were available within five miles of the plant, mixed " roadside" grass was collected in lieu of a milk sample at that location. In 1996 three samples were collected and are categorized as TC-14. The data are shown in Table 5.1 under the category Mixed Vegetation (TC). The naturally occurring radionuclides, Be-7 and K-40 were detected in all of the samples. No other gamma emitting radionuclides were detected. 6.4.3.2 Fish Semiannual samples of fish were collected from two locations during 1996. 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. No other gamma emitting radionuclides were detected in 1996 fish sample ^ - in many of the previous years, the 1996 average Cs-137 concentrations shown on Fir .15 are not considered detectable or
" positive" measurements. The radioactivity detected in previous years at both indicator and
{ control locations shown on Figure 6.15 is attributed to global nuclear weapons testing fallout. 6.4.3.3 Food Products / Broad Leaf Vegetation The food crops collected in 1996 consisted of samples of blackberries, cucumbers and kale. Each was analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. K-40 was detected in two out of three samples. No other radionuclides were detected. A sample of kale was collected in 1996 at Station TV-11 to satisfy the broad leaf vegetation sampling requirement. This sample was analyzed for low-level I-131 to meet the broad leaf
, vegetation LLD specified in ODCM Table 4.3. The results are included in Table 5.1 under " Food Crop (TF). No 1-131 was detected in the sample.
6.4.3.4 Maple Syrup Processed maple syrup samples were collected from an indicator and control location in April 1996. These samples had been concentrated, relative to the original tree sap, by boiling (see 51 5
, Section 4.3.10). Naturally occurring K-40 was detected in both samples, as was Cs-137. The concentrations of Cs-137 in 1996 samples are consistent with that detected in both indicator and control samples in previous years, and is attributed to global nuclear weapons testing fallout. This radioactivity has been detected in most samples since collection was started in 1972.
6.4.4 Direct Radiation Pathway Direct radiation is continuously measured at 40 locations surrounding YNPS with the use of thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). These are collected every calendar quarter for readout at the YAEL. As can be seen in Figures 6.16 to 6.26, there is a distinct annual cycle at both indicator and controllocations. The 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. Differing amounts of these radionuclides in the underlying soil, rock or nearby building materials result in different radiation levels between one field site and another. This explains why the control TLD station at the Fife Brook Road station (GM-34,6.4 km from the plant) had the highest mean exposure for 1996 and previous years, as can be seen in Tables 5.2 and 5.3, as well as in Figure 6.22. From Table 5.2 and 5.3, it can be seen that the mean exposure rates for the Indicator, Outer { Ring and Control categories were not significantly different in 1996. This indicates that there was no significant overallincrease in direct radiation exposure rates in the plant vicinity. As shown in Figures 6.16 to 6.26, the levels in 1996 are consistent with those of previous years. It should be noted that the "Fenceline" TLDs shown in Figures 6.24 and 6.25 and I summarized in Tables 5.2 and 5.3 are located on the fence surrounding the Radiation Control Area on the YNPS site, and are influenced by licensed plant activities. The fenceline is well within the YNPS property bounds. )
l 4 FIGURE 6.1 GROSS-BETA MEASUREMENTS ON AIR PARTICULATE FILTERS QUARTERLYAVERAGES 0.05 0.05 0.04 -0.04 g . . j g 0.03- -0.03
.x X M 0.025 ,
> i , -0.02
@ x '
X, 5 0.01- - 0.01 [ 0 . i . i . 0 1987 1989 1991 1993 1995 1997
+ IndicatorStations
-x- Control Stations
{ 53 I
I { FIGURE 6.2 GROSS-BETA MEASUREMENTS ON AIR PARTICULATE FILTERS 0.06 0.06 0.05- -0.05 lii 0.04 -- -0.04 lii [ E - o - .
- x. .
T) 0.03- , rp b -0.03 r { ko - g
.,< x 0.02i ., ,
, x. '
-0.02
~, ; ,
X . g'* R - 0.01 i -0.01 [ O' . . i , . i
. O Dec Mar Jun Sep Dec 1996
[ G AP-11 Observation Stand
-x- AP-21 Williamstown, MA (control)
( 54 F
i [ [ FIGURE 6.3 GROSS-BETA MEASUREMENTS ON AIR PARTICULATE FILh u3 0.06 _ 0.06 0.05i -0.05 is 0.04- -0.04 o x. , 25 0.03 -- x -
-0.03 3
( k o - x l ' x l, x M
<x x :;
~
,x l '. , '
-0.02
" 0.02 i x -
D x F 'R x "x x
^'
[ . g.l ,, A /'x. /' , O.01 i x -0.01 [ 0 . i . . i . . i
. . , . O Dec Mar Jun Sep Dec 1996
[
-e- AP-12 Monroe Bridge
-x- AP-21 Williamstown, MA (control) 55 e
l l l l FIGURE 6.4 GROSS-BETA MEASUREMENTS ON AIR PARTICULATE FILTERS 0.06 _ 0.06 0.05 -- -0.05 5 0.04 ' 0.04 m : E { -
$ 0.03i ,
-0.03 R -
x x o x . o
,x -0.02 0.02_~ ,
. x
." x
- 0.01 --[ ' 0.01 O' . .
i . . i . . i . O Dec Mar Jun Sep Dec 1996 f
--e- AP-13 Rowe School
-x- AP-21 Williamstown, MA (control) 56
/
FGURE 6.5 GROSS-BETA MEASUREMENTS ON AIR PARTICULATE FILTERS 0.06 0.06 0.05 -0.05 iii 0.04- -0.04 lis : E - o -
- x. -
25 0.03- .
-0.03 M -
x W q
- x '
O.02 . ,,
'. x ,, -0.02 x
l' y; O.01 - * ' E - 0.01
~
O' . . , , .
, . . , . 0 Dec Mar Jun Sep Dec 1996 G AP-14 Harrirnan Station
-x- AP-21 Williamstown, MA (control) 57
?
4 FIGURE 6.6 4
- GROSS-BETA MEASUREMENTS ON AIR PARTICULATE FILTERS i
0.06 , 0.06 4 0.05i -0.05
)@
0.04i
-0.04 E .
x - ' U -
- 5 s 0.03- -0.03 M -
X k,' O
)R .
i 0.022 l '-
,x ,
,x x'
..x 'f -
- 0.02 x . g
* - 0.01 0.01 -
. . \ 0 . . i . . , . . , .
. O Dec Mar Jun Sep Dec !
1996
- x - AP-21 Williamstown, MA (control) l l
0 AP-31 YAEC Visitors Center i e 58
]
I FIGURE 6.7 GROSS-BETA MEASUREMENTS OF GROUND WATER SEMI-ANNUALAVERAGES 16, 16 142 ##"M"M ' 14
- vderinxked in from off-site. :
12 -12 10-~ -10 hc. Bi.
-8 Si -6
~
4 u u u o -4 2- '2 0 i . , . i 0 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996
-t3- WG-11 Plant Potable A WG-12 Sherman Spring 59 e
[ l FIGURE 6.8 { H-3 IN GROUNDWATER STATIONWG-12, SHERMAN SPRING 2000 2000 1600 -1600 [ [1200- -1200 R : . 800- -
-800 400 -
-400 f
0 . . , . . , . . . , . . . , . . . 0 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 { 60 L
I 1 FIGURE 6.9 { GROSS-BETA MEASUREMENTS OF RIVER WATER SEMI-ANNUALAVERAGES ( : 5 -5
~
4f -4 { o h Si ct
-3 2 X-- '
, X.
.x. -2
'X x.
- 'X- X..
X 1 -~ -1
~
0 , . , . , . i 0 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 c WR-11 Bear Swamp Lower Reservoir {
-x- WR-21 Harriman Reservoir
( l 61
w T e- , , w - - - w w .. . ' pCilkg (dry) l
- n w r u, a ~ m :
O 8 8
....l..
8 8 8 8 8 8
.t....t....l.. .!. .i1i.. I....
5/87 N i
)
10/87 h 5/88 i 11/88 % 5/89 i o m 10/89 U' @ C 5/90 N , NE
-4 '
10/90 , o - D Z N
. R 5/91 CD 2 3 w e Q m o m m u)
O. a ei e 10/91 i A I C ao m f 3 3 5/92 m 10/92 h z $ CD m 5/93 $Co
-4 m 10/33 5 52 5/94 @
10/94 M i 5/95 U 10/95 i 5/96 . 10/96 i 8 O 8 O 8 O 8 O 8 O 8 O a8 O O
i I FIGURE 6.11 l CESIUM - 137 IN SHORELINE SEDIMENT STATION SE-21, HARRIMAN RESERVOIR l 2500 , 2500 2000 -
-2000 1500 -1500 13g 1000-5
-1000 l R :
~
500f -500 g l 0
- ' #- J -
i ii - i i ri - - - i ii i ii iiicii _0
-500 -500 I
ssssssassssssssea ssss e - - e n - ---- I Core Segment E 0-5 cm E 5-10 cm '_ O 10-15 cm [ 63 s - . . , - - . . -
FIGURE 6.12 CESIUM-137 IN BOTTOM SEDIMENT STATION SE -91, SHERMAN POND l 6000_ 6000 5000 -5000 l 4000 -4000 h l 5 3000i -3000 en o o ',' .- m m m e e e in ua e e sssssssssssssss Core Segment E 0-5 cm E 5-10 cm l O 10-15 cm I { 64
FIGURE 6.13 CESIUM-137 IN MILK ANNUALAVERAGES 15 15 10- -10 cn { s ~ [ x 5- l ', . -5
- x. / '.
'X
} -
1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 TM-12 Roadsboro, VT f -n- TM-13 Whitingham, VT c TM-14 Rowe, MA
-x- TM 21 Williamstown, MA (control)
[ [ { 65
FIGURE 6.14 STRONTIUM -90 IN MILK ANNUALAVERAGES 15 15 l 10- -10 l R - X 5- -5 j *i mm., x .x. 0 . , . ,.,,i. . .
.i.i 0 1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1
-o- TM 12 Readsboro, VT A TM-13 Whitingham, VT o TM-14 Rowe, MA x- TM-21 Williamstown, MA (control)
I I 66 w
l FIGURE 6.15 CESIUM - 137 IN FISH I ANNUAL AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS l 140 140 120 -120 100f -100 80 -80 l R - 60- -60 1 - 40- -40 l _ 20 -
-20 0 -
0 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 Year I E FH-11 Sherman Pond O FH-21 Harriman Reservoir (control) ( 67 4 w
l [ [ [ FIGURE 6.16 EXPOSURE RATE AT INDICATOR, OUTER RING AND CONTROL TLD'S 15 15 j _ 5 10- _10 ( _
,x .
,X '
,x,
' x x
'x, ,.-****x 3 5- -5 0 , , ,
, o 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
-e- Indicators
( 4 Outer Ring (- -x Control { 68 I w
FIGURE 6.17 EXPOSURE RATE AT INDICATORTLDS, GM 01 -04 15 15 g 10- -10
~
8. W - o - E 5- -5 0 . . . i . . . i . . , . . . i . . . i 0 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 Retrieval Date
-e- GM-01 YAEC Visitors Center A GM-02 Observation Stand
+ GM-03 Rowe School e GM-04 Harriman Station 69 I
FIGURE 6.18 l EXPOSURE RATE AT INDICATOR TLDS, GM 05 - 08 15 15 3 10- -10
$u '
8,
~
CC _ o - E 5- -5 0 . . . , . . . i . . . i i 0 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 Retrieval Date G GM-05 Monroe Bridge o GM-06 Readsboro Road Barrier x GM-07 Whitingham Line o GM-08 Monroe Hill Barrier 70
FIGURE 6.19 EXPOSURE RATE AT INDICATOR TLDS, GM 09 - 12,40 15 15 3 10- -10 1 -
~
5-y -5 0 . .
.i... ... ... ...,0 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 Retrieval Date a GM-09 Dunbar Brook A GM-10 Cross Road x GM-11 Adams High Lane e GM-12 Readsboro, VT
-v- GM-40 Readsboro Road 71
FIGURE 6.20 EXPOSURE RATE AT INDICATORTLDS, GM 24-27 15 15 10- -10 3 1 i 4 -
._.g -
2 5- -5 0 , . . , . . . , . . . , . . . , . . . , 0 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 Retrieval Date f + GM-24 Harriman Dam e GM-25 Whitingham, VT x GM-26 Sadoga Road
--o- GM-27 Number 9 Road 72
]
FIGURE 621 EXPOSURE RATE AT INDICATORTLDS, GM 28 - 31 15 15 g 10- -10 $ ~ i . T . 2 5- .
-5 0 . . .
i . . . i . . . i i - - . i 0 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 Retrieval Date
--t3- GM-28 Number 9 Road e GM-29 Route 8A x GM-30 Route 8A c, GM-31 Legate Hill Road 73
s FIGURE 6.22
! EXPOSURE RATE ATINDICATORTLDS, GM 32-35 !
l 15 15
- 10- -10
! o - 1 - I {
- E -
i 6 4 3 . .
- E 5-d -5 1
1 5 . i 1 0 . . . , . . . i i 0 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1 1 RetrievalDate GM-32 Rowe Road . e GM-33 Zoar Road
-x- GM-34 Fife Brook Road
-o- GM-35 Whitcomb Summit 1
l l 74
7 I s 3 FIGURE 6.23 ; EXPOSURE RATE AT OUTER RING TLDS, GM 36-39 15 15 r g 10- -10 o x ' { W - E 5- -5
~
l l
~
0 . . , i . . . i i . . . i 0 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 ! Retrieval Date i l l C GM 36 Tilda Road x GM-37 Tumer Hill Road l I e GM-38 West Hill Road
+ GM-39 Route 100 l
1 l 75
l l i i FIGURE 6.24 EXPOSURE RATE ATINDICATORTLDS, GM 13-16 50 50 1 1
-40 l 40f Ei -
y 30- -30 u -
- 8. -
x - o 20- -20 5 - N
-4 -10 10f
~
v y l 0 . . . a 0 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997
]
RetrievalDate 1
--c- GM-13 Restricted Area Fence e GM-14 Restricted Area Fence x GM-15 Restricted Area Fence l
- o-- GM-16 Restricted Area Fence l !
t 'I 76 , 1
FIGURE 6.25 EXPOSURE RATE ATINDICATORTLDS, GM 17-21 50 50 40 -40 , Es -
-E 30- .
-30 E. :
cc
- .h 202 -20 2 -
,/
__ g g_ 0 . . . i . . . i i i 0 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 l l Retrieval Date l --t3- GM-17 Restricted Area Fence l A GM-18 Restricted Area Fence
--x- GM-19 Restricted Area Fence e GM-20 Restricted Area Fence
--o- GM-21 Restricted Area Fence 4
4 77 i
t t i FIGURE 6.26 - EXPOSURE RATE AT CONTROL TLDS, GM 22-23 l ! 15 15 i I m
- s 10- -10 i O -
I . m ? R g - -a : fr . 6 m [ l
.2 -5 5-l 0 . . . , , ,
i i 0
)
1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 l 4 Retrieval Date
--c- GM-22 HeartweHville, VT l 1
6 GM-23 Williamstown Substation i I l i I l l l j .i l i
)
78 I l J
I i l 7.- QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM l The quality assurance program at the YAEL is designed to serve two overall purposes: 1) I Establish a measure of confidence in the measurement process to assure the licensee, regulatory agencies and the public that 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 I keeping of the final results. Quality control, as part of the quality assurance program, provides a means to control and measure the characteristics of measurement equipment and processes, relative to established requirements. The YAEL employs a comprehensive quality assurance program designed to monitor the quality of analytical processing to ensure reliable environmental monitoring data. The program includes the use of approved and controlled procedures for all work activities, a nonconformance and corrective action tracking system, systematic internal audits, audits by external groups, a laboratory quality control program, and a staff training and retraining system. Monitoring programs include the Intralaboratory Quality Control Program administered by the Laboratory QA Officer (used in conjunction with the National Institute of Standards and Technology's Measurement Assurance Program, NIST MAP) and third pany interlaboratory programs administered by the EPA and Analytics, Inc. Together these programs are targeted to supply QC/QA sources at 5% of the routine sample analysis load. In addition the Laboratory Quality , Control Audit Committee conducts a blind duplicate quality assurance program. l 7.1 Intralaboratory Quality Control Program The YAEL conducts an extensive intralaboratory quality control program to assure the validity and reliability of environmental analytical data. Process check samples are either samples submitted in duplicate to evaluate the precision of the measurements or are " spiked" with a known quantity of radioactive material to assess the bias in the measurement. The program is administered by the Laboratory QA Officer. A summary of the program process check results may be found in Table 7.1. For each of the three results falling in category 4 of the Bias Criteria, the mean bias for the set was within the *15% and no funher action was required. 79
i J 1 j 7.2 Third Party Intercomparison Program l To funher verify the accuracy and precision of the Laboratory analyses the YAEL j participates in two independent third parties intercomparison programs. At the end of 1995 the j U.S. Environmental Protection Agency stopped its Environmental Intercomparison Studies ]' Program. To replace the mix of radionuclides and matrices which comprised this one program the Laboratory now participates in two third party programs, the U.S. EPA Perfonnance Evaluation Study for radionuclides in water and the Analytics Inc. Environmental Cross Check Program for j radionuclides in milk, water and on air filters. Participation in such programs and the reporting of i 1 j results in this report is pursuant to ODCM Part B, Section 4.0 and Technical Specification I 1 6.8.1.3. l- Each sample supplied by the EPA or Analytics is analyzed in triplicate and the results are { returned to the EPA cr Analytics within a specified time frame. When the known values are j returned to the Laboratory, the results are evaluated against specific Laboratory acceptance j criteria and the EPA results are also evaluated against the EPA control limits. When the results of
- the cross-check analysis fall outside of the acceptance criteria or control limit, an investigation is I j initiated to determine the cause of the problem and if appropriate, corrective measures are taken.
l For the EPA Intercomparison Program,26 sample sets in a water matrix were analyzed. ) l The analyses included gamma-emitting radionuclides, gross alpha, gross-beta, Sr-89, Sr-90, low j l level I-131, tritium (H-3), Ra-226, Ra-228 and Natural Uranium. Table 7.2 provides a summary I l of the results for 1996. i e i One result did not fall within the EPA control limits and is described below: a , ! The mean value for Gross Alpha in water (Reference date 7/19/96) of 10.82 pCi/L failed i i to fall within the EPA control limits of 13.8 - 35 pCi/L. An investigation was conducted j (YLCAR IG-02-96) which indicated that the deposition of solids during processing was j the likely root of the problem (EL 608/96). Subsequent processing of and EPA gross j alpha set ( Reference date 10/25/96) and a process check set (Reference date 01/22/97)
)
j yielded a mean bias of +1.6% and -2.9%, respectively. The Laboratory is continuing to investigate the development of a mass correction curve. l I i l i 80 1 1
f 1 For the Analytics Inc. Cross Check Program,18 sample sets in water, milk and air filter matrices were analysed. The analyses included gamma-emitting radionuclides, gross alpha, gross-beta, Sr-89, Sr-90, low level I-131, tritium (H-3), Ra-226, Ra-228 and Natural Uranium. Table 7,32 provides a summary of the results for 1996. The Analytics results which failed to meet the criteria for acceptance are discussed below. YAEL Inquiry 3-96 was issued in response to the failure of the results for Mn-54 and Fe-59 in sample set E0717-162 (Reference date 2nd quarter,1996) to meet the j acceptance criteria of 15%. The investigation determined that the root cause was differences in the filter spiking techniques used at the Laboratory and Analytics (EL 522/96 and EL 614/96). A mixed gamma filter calibration source was purchased and used to set up a calibration curve for the Analytics filter geometry. The mean bias was re-evaluated for all nuclides and was found to be +2.9%. No further action is considered necessary. The reported mean bias for the gross beta on air filter set E0902-162 failed to meet the criteria for agreement of 15%. A corrective action request was issued on 3/18/97, YLCAR IG06-97. 7.3 Environmental TLD Quality Assurance Program Performance documentation of the routine processing of the Panasonic environmental TLDs (thermoluminescent dosimeter) program at the YAEL is provided by the dosimetry quality assurance testing program.. This program includes the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program, independent third party performance testing by Battelle Pacific Northwest Labs and internal performance testing conducted by the Laboratory Quality Assurance Officer. Under these programs, dosimeters are irradiated to ANSI specified testing criteria and submitted for processing to the Dosimetry Services Group as " unknowns". The bias and precision of TLD processing is measured against this standard and is used to indicate trends and changes in performance. Instrumentation checks, although routinely performed by the Dosimetry Services Group and representing between 5-10% of the TLDs processed, are not presented in this report because they do not represent a true process check sample since the doses are known to the processor. j i 81 I I
~ ..- - _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . . _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ _ 4 ; 4 The YAEL processed 3232 environmental TLDs during 1996. Ninety-six independent performance tests were conducted. Of these 96 TLDs,72 were submitted by the Dosimetry QA , Officer and 24 were submitted as part of Battelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories testing program.
- All of these, or 100% met the acceptance criteria for accuracy and precision with an average bias
{ during the first half of 1996 of 0.7*2.6 and -3.8 5.0 during the second half of 1996. i 7.4 Blind Duplicate Quality Assurance Program
- The Laboratory Quality Control Audit Committee (LQCAC) is comprised of one member j from each of the five sponsor power plants that are serviced by the YAEL. Two of the primary I functions of the LQCAC are to conduct an annual audit ofLaboratory operations and to i coordinate the Blind Duplicate Quality Assurance Program. Under the Blind Duplicate Quality l Assurance Program, paired samples are submitted from the five plants, including the Yankee j 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 i 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.
+
J
- Forty-nine paired samples were submitted under this program by the five participating plants l during 1996. Paired measurements were evaluated for 26 gamma emitting radionuclides, H-3, Sr- ;
l 89, Sr-90, I-131 and gross-beta. All measurements are evaluated, whether the results are > { statistically positive or not, and whether the net concentration is positive or negative. Of the 1283 2 paired measurements evaluated in 1996,1273 (99.2%) fell within the established acceptance criteria. Only one of the ten measurements falling outside the acceptance is considered to have ! l statistically positive gross beta activity and is being addressed by the Laboratory as corrective j action YLCAR IG07-97. j The samples submitted through this program are listed in Table 7.4. I i p . i i i i i ! J 82 a t t
r j i ' E ' iI ' ll &l ;
], {' -
< 1f[ ii i,!! f I!; ?
1 i l 1 1 I _ 4 3 I . 6 0 1 i 1 1 y51
%01 5'a r
?
i _ r = 3 o= = < ir g _
)
e<d<d a n n nC aete 2 t d ( a Ca d i r e n%%0 o a%is t i051 r I 1 i C t r 4 5 2 4 5 1 7 1 7 8 i>c s e
> > O m _
r n P1 234 i o 2 y= = = = _ s b yvvy i c _ e r a roo ir g g g g r r r oo S P t i t e e e e e t t t _ E l l l r a a a a _ CCCCC I 9 2 6 Y R 2 1 I 4 1 6 0 7 nnn nn _ B O ooooo iiii S G i s s s s s T E 1 ie c iiiic c c c LY T r re rer er e UR A PPPPP SO E TC 2
)
RA T l lh l l l ( SR N I E ll S O Y BM LAE 6 #N li[I l l Al R9 NL SU9 I 1 1
]3 _
]1 1 _
AA A LT R NlE E 4 _ 1 O R EhB 7 TMDM _ E NN NE C _ L O O A,E 3 CR AD i 4 3 2 l 2 6 A I SVI DL 1 T S E CEN ER 3 OC MA ,U RI AN I ) PNI A 1 ( LOR J s l ATE T ir 5 4 8 4 2 3 1
@i _
T AI t e 1 _ NER i r 2_ 2 EEC C _ MKE s 2 _ _ N NC i a _ OAN B R YAI' I l - V l' 2 7 3 0 4 6 2 li _ N E 4 9 2 1 7 8 _ E C 1 _ C A I 5 _ y 'i ? g _ r5 o 0 1= 1 a r i n lI I l l l I lI l ll l I g= = < te i d e < < dir n tad d aC n u . Cn o r _ s n e _ o l
) a l iB'aa. ia%d
? 0 s i
t e a h a i o O t u o c r L L p t e m S
/ b y>$ >1 >O u d m itu m r a a ( lA B a 0 n a t : .
a e e 0 _ h m l t m e n r s s m en u n iu e m g a 1 m i F a m i e s o s o m di i o t m m n ir1 e 234 l C_r a r e t k a d t a r r a o da tr ir i_ d a a t
= = - - a u
G In l ir G B i G G G I R S T e G R_ Cvyyy q iA M W S n : : s r r r r s ooo e e iA_ i r f d e e s ia ge ge ge ce t o o s n t e s ly Bt a a a a t t t _
- f 1 1 II V. V. b e e a y _
~~ I I m gco n t
nCCCC e s s s s a n h u t a r n P_ fJo c a a aii rii a l i a PeBBliH . l e l t a c a o t u r t m ) T e o u _ l}lIi! i ll l lik i !I{ TIIP [I'1[ Sit 1 (
- i
. . . . . . . . . - - . . - _ _ . _ . . . .. _~.--- --,.- . - - - . - _ . . . . -..
- i 1 i l
Table 7.2
- I Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratory d
1996 EPA Intercomparison Program f I LOWER -UPPER ! ! REFERENCE E-LAB CONTROL CONTROL i j NUCLIDE MEDIA DATE MEAN* LIMIT
- LIMIT
- i l Co-60 Water 10/17/95 47.36 40.3 57.7 d
Cs-134 Water 10/17/95 36.96 31.3 48.7 - ! Cs-137 Water 10/17/95 29.86 21.3 38.7
- Nat. U Water 10/17/95 26.5 f
21.8 32.2 Ra-226 Water 10/17/95 26 18.4 31.2 l s Ra-228 Water 10/17/95 21.1 11.7 29.7 l Sr-89 Water 10/17/95 22.53 11.3 28.7 Sr-90 Water 10/17/95 9.74 1.3 18.7 Ba-133 Water 11/03/95 94.1 81.7 116.3 Co-60 Water i1/03/95 58.77 { 3 51.3 68.7 - ! Cs-134 Water i1/03/95 36.55 31.3 48.7 ) Cs-137 Water 11/03/95 50.77 40.3 57.7 , Sr-89 Water 01/23/96 79.2 64.3 81.7 j Sr-90 Water 01/23/96 4.65 0 13.7 i Zn-65 Water 11/03/95 126.6 102.4 147.6 j H3 Water 03/08/96 23429.8 18185.1 25818.9 j Co-60 Water 04/16/96 31.4 22.3 39.7 l
! Cs-134 Water 04/16/96 43.03 37.3 54.7 l ! Cs-137 Water 04/16/96 49.02 41.3 58.7 }
l Nat. U Water 04/16/96 55.47 48.3 68.5 j i Ra-226 Water 04/16/96 3.6 2.1 3.9
- Ra-228 Water 04/16/96 5.14 2.7 7.3 i
LSr-89 Water 04/16/96 46.07 34.3 51.7 i Sr-90 Water 04/16/96 14.73 7.3 24.7 Ba-133 Water 06/07/96 734.63 614.9 875.1 Co-60 Water 06/07/96 95.99 90.3 107.7 Cs-134 Water 06/07/96 76.35 70.3 87.7 Cs-137 Water 06/07/96 198.1 179.7 214.3 Zn-65 Water 06/07/96 303.43 248 352 Nat. U Water 06/21/96 19.02 15 25.4 Ra-226 W ater 06/21/96 5.39 3.7 6.1 Ra-228 Water 06/21/96 8.07 5 13
- Units in pCi/ Liter i l
l 1 i ' 84
Table 7.2, continued Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratory 1996 EPA Intermmparison Program T LOWER UPPER REFERENCE E LAB CONTROL CONTROL NUCLIDE MEDIA DATE MEAN* LIMIT * 'iMIT* Sr-89 Water 07/12/96 24.37 16.3 33.7 Sr-90 Water 07/12/96 11.92 3.3 20.7 l Alpha Water 07/19/96 10.82 13.8 35 ! Beta Water 07/19/96 40.53 36.1 53.5 H-3 Water 08/09/96 10227.8 8991.4 12766.6 Nat. U Water 09/27/96 9.68 4.9 15.3 Ra-226 Water 09/27/96 13.22 10.4 17.6 l Ra-228 Water 09/27/96 6.24 2.6 6.8 l-131LL Water l 10/04/96 28.24 16.6 37.4 j Co-60 Water 10/15/96 13.71 6.3 23.7 ' Cs-134 Water 10/15/96 18.99 11.3 28.7 Cs-137 Water 10/15/96 30.02 21.3 38.7 ] Nat. U Water 10/15/96 38.74 33.8 48 i Ra-226 Water 10/15/96 9.07 7.3 12.5 i Ra-228 Water 10/15/96 6.67 2.8 7.4 Sr-89 Water 10/15/96 11.8 1.3 18.7 Sr-90 Water 10/15/96 22.93 16.3 33.7 Alpha Water 10/25/96 10.47 1.6 19 Beta Water 10/25/96 34.6 28.2 47.2 Ba-133 Water 11/08/96 60.94 53.6 74.4 Co-60 Water 11/08/96 43.68 35.3 52.7 Cs 134 Water 11/08/96 10 65 2.3 19.7 Cs-137 Water 11/08/96 19.74 10.3 27.7 7_.n-65 Water i1/08/96 34.46 26.3 43.7 Nat U Water 12/06/96 4.71 0 10.2 Ra-226 Water 12/06/96 18.62 14.9 25.3 Ra-228 Water 12/06/96 10.5 5.7 14.7
- Units in pCi/ Liter 1
l l 85 l I
, Table 7.3 YAEL 1996 ANALYTICS CROSS-CHECK RESULTS ! Sample: E0642-162 Quarter: 1st,1996 E0645-162 Sr89/90 *
, Media: Milk Units: pCi/L
- l Ratio Nuclide Reported Known YAEU Evaluation 4
Value Value Analytics i Cr-51 875 858 1.02 Agreement i Mn-54 88 84 1.05 Agreement Co-58 132 128 1.03 Agreement Fe-59 235 223 1.05 Agreement Co-60 207 234 1.01 Agreement Zn-65 267 260 1.03 Agreement Sr-89 35 31 1.13 Agreement Sr-90 17 16 1.06 Agreement
- I-131 11 13 0.85 Agreement I-131LL i 1.8 13 0.91 Agreement Cs-134 155 154 1.01 Agreement
~ Cs-137 170 170 1 Agreement Ce-141 237 234 1.01 Agreement t, 3 Sample: E0643-162 Quarar: 1st,1996 1 E0641-162 Alpha / Beta ; E0644-162 Ra/U Media: Water Units: pCi/L l 4 Ratio i Nuclide Reported Known YAEll Evaluation Value Value Analytics Alpha 12 10 1.2 Agreement Beta 118 107 1.03 Apeement l Cr-51 328 322 1.02 Agreement Mn-54 30 31 0.97 Agreement Co-58 48 48 1 Agreement Fe-59 85 83 1.02 Agreement Co-60 73 76 0.96 Agreement Zn-65 90 97 0.93 Agreement 1-131 34 36 0.94 Agreement Cs-134 55 58 0.95 Agreement Cs-137 63 64 0.98 Agreement Cc-141 88 88 1 Agreement l Ra-226 68 70 0.97 Agreement ; j Ra-228 49 49 I Agreement !
; U-234 40 40 1 Agreement
! U-23S 42 41 1.02 Agreement
. ._ .. . _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _.-......_.__--._.--.__..__.-.__.._-____j l 86 .
l l
. .. . __- . . - ~ .
Table 7.3 continued YAEL 1996 ANALYTICS CROSS-CHECK RESULTS Sample: E0717-162 Quarter: 2nd,1996 E0716-162 Alpha / Beta E0719-162 Sr89/90 Media: Air Filter Units: pCi/ Filter Ratio Nuclide Reported Known YAEU Evaluation Value Value Analytics Alpha 41 40 1.03 Agreement Beta 185 179 1.03 Agreement Cr>51 1071 953 1.12 Agreement Mn-54 597 508 1.18 Non-Agreement Co-58 176 157 1.12 Agreement Fe-59 151 131 1.15 Non-Agreement Co-60 153 142 1.08 Agreement Zn-65 110 98 1.12 Agreement Sr-89 <MDC 44 pCi/ Filter Sr-90 57 64 0.89 Agreement Cs-134 281 282 1 Agreement l Cs-137 797 694 1.15 Agreement I Ce-141 380 363 1.05 Agreement l 1 l Sample: E0718-162 Quarter: 2nd,1996 E0720-162 Media: Milk Units: pCi/L Water H-3 i Ratio Nuclide Reported Known YAEU Evaluation Value Value Analytics H3 4580 4915 0.93 Agreement K-40 1350 1269 1.06 Agreement Cr-51 581 563 1.03 Agreement Mn-54 311 300 1.04 Agreement Co-58 93 93 i Agreement Fe-59 82 77 1.06 Agreement i Co-60 84 84 1 Agreement 2n-65 53 58 0.91 Agreement 1-131 16 15 1.07 Agreement l Cs-134 167 166 1.01 Agreement ! Cs-137 409 410 1 Agreement l Ce-141 219 215 1.02 Agreemen't i _t ._ _ j j 87
. .-. - . ~_- . .. .
Table 7.3 continued YAEL 1996 ANALYTICS CROSS-CHECK RESULTS Sample: E0818-162 Quaner: 3rd,1996 4 E0820-162 Sr89/90 Media: Milk Units: pCi/L Ratio Nuclide Repoded Known YAEU Evaluation Value Value Analytics Cr-51 514 486 1.06 Agreement Mn-54 189 180 1.05 Agreement Co-58 132 131 1.01 Agreement Fe-59 40.8 37 1.1 Agreement Co-60 118 114 1.04 Agreement , Zn-65 73 70 1.04 Agreement Sr-89 54 50 1.08 Agreement St-90 22 22 1 Agrectnent i I-131 24.5 24 1.02 Agreement Cs-134 226 222 1.02 Agreement Cs-137 176 169 1.04 Agreement Ce-141 325 318 1.02 Agreement
\
Sample: E0819-162 Quaner: 3rd,1996 EOS17-162 Alpha / Beta E0821-162 Sr89/90 Media: Water Units: pCi/L 4 Ratio Nuclide Reported Known YAEU Evaluation Value Value Analvties Alpha 77 74 1.04 Agreement Beta 77 70 1.1 Agreement Cr-51 650 646 1.01 Agreement Mn-54 248 239 1.04 Agreement Co-58 172 174 0.99 Agreement Fe-59 51 50 1.02 Agreement Co-60 155 151 1.03 Agreement Zn-65 98 93 1.05 Agreement Sr-89 47 40 1.18 Agreement Sr-90 36 35 1.03 Agreement j I-131 49 50 0.98 Agreement Cs-134 299 295 1.01 Agreement Cs-137 226 225 1 Agreement Cc-141 420 423 0.99 Agreement 88
Table 7.3 continued YAEL 1996 ANALYTICS CROSS-CHECK RESULTS 7 Sample:/ Media E0901-162 Milk Quarter: 4th,1996 E0902-162 Filter Sr-89,90 E0903-162 Water H-3 Units: pCi/L pCi/ Filter Ratio Nuclide Reported Known YAEU Evaluation Value Value Anahties Alpha 75 80 0.94 Agreement Beta 199 170 1.17 Non-Agreement H-3 2440 2686 0.91 Agreement - Cr-51 202 214 0.94 l Agreement Mn-54 217 206 1.05 Agreement Co-58 120 121 0.99 Agreement Fe-59 52 49 1.06 Agreement Co-60 113 110 1.03 Agreement Zn-65 94 93 1.01 Agreement Sr-89 102 96 1.06 Agreement Sr-90 72 77 0.94 Agreement I-131 65 59 1.10 Agreement I-131LL 56 59 0.95 Agreement Cs-134 168 175 0.96 Agreement , Cs-137 194 195 0.99 Agreement ' Ce-141 278 277 1.00 Agreement l l l I l 89 1
TABLE 7.4
SUMMARY
OF BLIND DUPLICATE SAMPLES SUBMITTED January - December 1996 TYPE OF SAMPLE NUMBER OF PAIRED SAMPLES SUBMITTED Cow Milk 21 Ground Water 6 Surface Water 15 Irish Moss 2 Mussels 4 Food Product - Cranberries 1 TOTAL 49 90
l
- 8. LAND USE CENSUS !
I A Land Use Census is conducted annually between the dates of June 1 and October 1 to identify the locations of the nearest milk animal, the nearest residence and the nearest garden of i greater than 500 square feet producing fresh leafy vegetables in each of the 16 meteorological sectors within a distance of five miles of the plant. Immediately following the collection of field data, in compliance with ODCM Control 4.2, a dosimetric analysis is performed to compare the census locations to the " Critical Receptor" identified in the ODCM. This Critical Receptor is the location that is used in the conservative Method I dose calculations found in the ODCM (i.e. the dose calculations done in compliance with ODCM Surveillance Requirement 3.4). If a Census location has a 20% greater potential dose than that of the Critical Receptor, this fact must be announced in the Semiannual Efiluent Re! ease Report for that period. A re-evaluation of which location to use as a Critical Receptor would also be done at that time. For the 1996 Census, no such locations were identified. l Pursuant to ODCM Control 4.2, a dosimetric analysis is then performed, using site specific meteorological data, to determine which milk and food product census locations would provide the optimal sampling locations. If any location has a 20% greater potential dose commitment 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 later eliminated from the program). For the 1996 Census, no such garden or milk animallocations were identified, and consequently no changes were mandated for the food product, broadleaf vegetation or milk sampling programs. The Land Use Census was carried out and completed between the dates of June 1 and October 1, as required. The results of the 1996 Land Use Census are included in this report in compliance with ODCM Surveillance Requirement 4.2. The locations identified during the Census may be found in Table 8.1. 91
l l TABLE 8.1 1996 LAND USE CENSUS LOCATIONS i SECTOR NEAREST NEAREST NEAREST hfILK l RESIDENCE GARDEN ANIMAL I Km (Mi) Km (Mi) Km (Mi) i l N 4.8 (3.0) 6.1 (3.8) 6.1 (3.8) (Cow) l NNE 4.4 (2.75)
- 4.7 (2.9)
NE 3.1 (1.9)
- 3.7 (2.3)
ENE 3.9 (2.4) 5.8 (3.6) 8.4 (5.2) (Cow) E 3.0 (1.9)
- 3.4 (2.1)
ESE 3.2 (2.0) 3.7 (2.3) 3.5 (2.2) (Goat) SE 2.3 (1.4) 3.5 (2.2) 3.2 (2.0) (Cow) SSE 2.1 (1.3) 3.6 (2.3)
- S 2.3 (l.4) 2.9 (l .8)
SSW * *
- SW
- l .3 (0.8) 7.9 (4.9)
WSW l.3 (0.8) 1.3 (0.8)
- W 1.9 (1.2) 2.7 (1.7) 6.9 (4.3) (Goat)
WNW l.9 (l.2) 1.9 (1.2)
- NW
- 2.4 (1.5) 4.6 (2.8)
NNW
- 2.9 (1.8) 3.9 (2.4)
- No location was identified within 5 miles of the plant.
92
- 9.
SUMMARY
During 1996, as in all previous years since 1958, an environmenal monitoring program was I conducted to assess the levels of radiation or radioactivity in the Yankee Nuclear Power Station environment. Over 1,000 samples were collected (including TLDs) over the course of the year, l with a total of over 3,000 radionuclide or exposure rate analyses being performed on them. The samples included ground water, river water, storm drain water, sediment, fish, locally grown food products, mixed vegetation, maple symp and milk. In addition to these samples, the air I surrounding the plant was sampled continuously and the radiation levels were measured continuously with environmental TLDs. Low levels of radioactivity from three sources were detected. Most samples had measurable levels of naturally-occurring K-40, Be-7, Th-232 or radon daughter products. Many samples (milk, sediment and maple syrup) had fallout radioactivity from atmospheric nuclear weapons tests conducted primarily from the late 1950's through 1980. Several samples had low levels of I radioactivity resulting from emissions from YNPS. These were all collected in the immediate vicinity of the plant or from on-site locations. In all cases, the possible radiological impact was negligible with respect to exposure from natural background radiation. In no case did the detected levels approach cr exceed the most restrictive federal regulatory or plant license limits for radionuclides in the environment. I l l l I
)
r 93
- 10. REFERENCES
- 1. USNRC Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position, "An Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program," Revision 1, November 1979.
- 2. NCRP Report No. 94, Exoosure of the Population in the United States and Canada from Natural Background Radiation. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, 1987.
- 3. Ionizine Radiation: Sources and Biological Effects. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR),1982 Report to the General Assembly.
- 4. Kathren, Ronald L., Radioactivity and the Environment - Sources Distribution. and Surveillance. Harwood Academic Publishers, New York,1984.
- 5. Letter, " Issuance of Amendment No.146 to Facility Possession Only License No. DPR Yankee Nuclear Power Station," M. Fairtile, NRC to J. Grant, Yankee Atomic Electric Company, dated November 5,1992.
- 6. NRC Generic Letter 89-01,
Subject:
Implementation of Programmatic Controls for Radiological Efiluent Technical Specifications in the Administrative Controls Section of the Technical Specifications and the Relocation of Procedural Details of RETS to the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual or to the Process Control Program. Dated January 31,1989. o r 94
. _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _}}