ML20148J522
| ML20148J522 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1996 |
| From: | Langenbach J GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| 6710-97-2173, NUDOCS 9706170171 | |
| Download: ML20148J522 (186) | |
Text
.l l
7 l
t l
GPU Nuclear,Inc.
(
Route 441 South NUCLEAR Post Office Box 480 Middletown, PA 17057 0480 Tel 717-944-7621 (717) 948-8832 April 25,1997 6710-97-2173 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555
SUBJECT:
Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Units 1 and 2 (TMI-l & TMI-2)
Operating License Nos. DPR-50 and DPR-73 Docket Nos. 50-289 and 50-320 1996 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report
Dear Sir:
In accordance with TMI-l Techn; cal Specification 6.9.3.1 and TMI-2 Technical Specification 6.8.1.1, enclosed is the 1996 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report for the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station.
Please contact J. Schork, TMI Regulatory Affairs at (717) 948-8832 if you have any questions regarding this submittal.
Sincerely, i
J. W. Langenbach I
Vice President and Director, TMI-l JSS Enclosure s
/
cc:USNRC TM1 Senior Resident Inspector
'b
. b/
USNRC Region 1 Regional Administrator USNRC TMI-2 Program Manager
/,
t
)
File 96011 u wn
.g 9706170171 961231 PDR ADOCK 03000289 R
PDR L-
'i[
- hy.
[
.,..e
?
fj*
- Il o,
'u_-.... '. :'
l l '
,1 l
k
... ){ " :.... f
- k. l,
^ ih l).\\
);..'
~. f.s}.. 5 ;; ) : W 11,
' E.
^
h,,,t ;.,):,?. '.... ' _, '..l L f n,'[ j 9;l, 1.
%*'[? '~ ;'.[ ; I'.," k l '.._
'vl as
".n-.<
' !. ' o ' ?. ?
- ~ _
. W;f.3';,
.., f ? l ' *.
}f
- M :- - '.;I ' : ? ?.;$. ',e. -
l'i d'll q;' : * ;..
- /. _,
- ** '*; _,.
- 5 L'..'
-' Q,$fP}lf'_ Q,;},}; y;
}
6';
' ll..
w.
- 1 L:
,.y [;[.p:.,};. 'R * '.;f,[. ;
_ f*
's,
- " ',.:.' { ' [.:[./ ;_. j. a
, j,.,
.0-G*
- A[N;;f-Q. _,
..:]::- 4 sf
}.
,,.,p....,..['>.:
'.,.4 hpf.f.:.! '..;)A:.' l..,- '. j.c J. '
f.* ;7
~. '.h.
'"*n
.'3.,%...h e
?.
.c....*
.. - o.v_,,
9 ;a
~,:
.9s : c-7,. _.
-.;. e
..... :'.;.". ;_,j.w
..; ;,,..._..ml.; u W,q y...'_;..
.,y_
g ce g
.-**g.
3'.:,&;,: ',:::;. _:..... i ',.
.'g"
-A L'. V :*. Y'* P., '.....,..
-; '... ;' !.. l '. ' I.
,. q..
T.'
4.'.
- M p.
,..~
. :... Y..
4.
.t f-.
-._.3.;$. '..f..
YY$
, i
- 4_,k
- $iW,,'.f. ;. 1 '.'
.?.
.f,.
., ',..'/
l '*.-.
Of ' *.
?. -
~
? :".
Fy.*l
'.)
i.
. y. '..
'. -. ;f,. 3.
- P i., -_.;.,
,l_;e,... '
},' '/s
- 4
...y 3,
- ;., ';Qr -
J.,#*'
g
,.g. - '
- {*.;;, ', y. L%,.'i$,g.;
g.g. fl;, [ ? '. :
g Nh.;,;h l,1 L
'N '
U'
(
.i I '. ' " <' ' 'Y '
.. l?.'.......I.
~
'7j.: :.
~. y '....
.. (,'
jf'
~
,.[..f he -,.
c-a
' E'.* h.i h_.
- .. l**
.:.i:
W':.
g,;. Y ' ' ' :.
- l ' 1 "..) : ',\\, : '_ -' l ( h '
5,%,
I..'
. 'I f.'
- , eh. ' ' -
),, f.f.3c'; ;- ' .._ ; ;. 49*,,'
- fef.i. (._ f.l;.
... 7 p.
J-
..'.:.,1 - j
' %, '*: f.*
- .(
%." A *,,,.,;..
'r
_ ;[:j.
't.
._ } ' -
'.'. := f_, v
_,. ' ' :/ Q - ' ' ~ w iY
. ' * ?T:
Q ::
fl., -
d'
- q.... '.9 s
.-'. ;. r.
5.':: l
..,,2'
. (.
l ',. _..
,. I. ' '.[.,' ",.y.
' h, s.
g,[.7 :..[.k '.,..,, ;.....,...,,. -.
% ' * ",' '.l., ".;.
^,,.#
'h *%
hI. 7
+.V 4,.. g. '.
M.
- 4f i,/., j, ( ?' t ',, ' '
f
.-;g. 4 j
W ;:. >,y). o :f,. :'; l. ; s....
..:.'r
_e.
.-,fM
.s p..- -,.
T.:..:
..,a
. ::,. : ' c:'.f.'.' .....:I.'.
%^j
(;..f "g'
~..
s,. '.,.. ~ -
2_
l ' f,.,
.z;.,y
-' ' Y.. ; 'e F., " ej,;,v,w..,;'
-'. ', ' ' ' ".2,2 ' ;
.i.... ;/ ;.,,-,:. : -).
o,-
" h,7f $f[lk;,,
l; M 1.[j.'g'.D..:{.lg.'[]p
- b. '.
5.k.f.
.$ k y.
g ' {,
..f.'.}...
.;.:4,'.. {.,
j ';,_;
k y.
- i
.i-
. ', i;.
n ' h **:. '.l-l.: Q.. '.l.
' '..' ; :l :
g * ' f. 's..,f.y<
_:. %. r 5 - *.
h.
E
,.1 ' ;l g:. ', [.,
1' E
, , '? j '_
L., ; - * ' ; Y
... ':.,';_.',..;...?-;'.."
i l' g \\...
.. _ ;,.,_ y
.,:.d.gW,' f '..~.f;,k' <$f','.;g.,%g' g 1 ; t. - *,'..
.. ; ; w,.,
o-
,.L.-
, ;g i.(
g f.'p. ?.- j ;'
Y M [ ' * ;j $ :. ' '.. z.. ' ' : h.. :._
, l Q.l ;m. '3
!-)'.
\\ " f l 2, ' '; ' : : ' " ';.. ".l,. 4 -
l..
...s.
q;..:) ',
y..
. h:.... f.;{..... q,;.,..j:
k, _ g. ;sy.- {f.f. - l. I.k f:j L l 1l' l.\\..f s... _.....
.,.l.
Y
- ?
,,..e..
rz g h.
l l
. ~.
o.
.l
'j..,
.{u k l. -
- k. - l... _ l,,.. ); ' I'Y :.
-. q :.,.
l;..
- ..., k
..:f
' "'.. ;.~ r.
. _.; ;.. :. j.g a. ' '., N;.: :;; '
..:....p:;, :.: ? x a.:.. ;.i: ' ?. '. ;., : :q,
, ';,. - y... T. ), e-Q ':a.
- i '.:, 5 ' ;.%.,.p - :&* " >,'.. % 'ci n
^%**k '. '...W' i ll '*.;;;" Y.;;Q j,.
5:'
J.
- '?.
).i.' ;. * ',. ll *..
\\,.* q[..
./
J :l-l '
.;_.L
,y'....:.
.* f..\\..
. en.1~:'... :..
a.r.;'.g :.:
'Y..p. $....'
.r*{ ?.
'.;--.' - g
-.9
.: s* ' '..:. :
...,g;.-
.x
's>
- '. ' t. 1
' * }l:.
- . ) 3 '
- _ ".. 1; :.'
,.. _. j..k.];;-
a.' f i;;-_.f';....
s
{.l;; ~. *,.ll( ' ' ~..
-[
G f.N f.
.l.Y.flf[.llj.lt['flf.u[,kh..cn" D};
..).
h k
n & nl.,_ fbf,hSOR.N { f f l~.
.,. v. a
{y n.. ~. n ~.... !.h k,
n g';h{
jfNhhIAffdk[
,hh< x. w.
~.
h.W
- khp N.
tM z.w,y<pupp.wga:
- c.l&n.v,3s...
hlQ-
..f r g
~.
gg v.y
. ir;A
- x;1 ~ ;cEm*..
44n p'.l)dtggj }f' ".,'.. ;.%:
Q: c
'.+...<; - :
.x
. ;L :
- s y I';.
4 3 3 ^ ; ?.y. f.R.i.y-
" 'of v
~
- M;;
V,;a 7
- * * ' ^
- 4,..., ';.-
N mg.mxmx xxy / wus_wg,.
Y Y
Y xxmm.c.vg m,p. :ngewn n
an.xg a x w
eg susy.
y.
m. _l._
?
h m.m
- h;hkO3$ b h Whih. [_2-. N^ b ' ".eJ h O
~N_k k neiwaonw A s,...b.
agem n.:..: w..M J![;[ h [ h- [ m e
$h[. -
'[ AN?tjaghttcdt Cchte'r'[ h $
}.N$
w:,. ** *w*. ' -'~ ; ' h'vm' wn..am. ' [e.,...[+., ' '
a.nl-.n w.n. w
~
j '
~:
. f,4 ?(.
.?
.h.
..'f';'
- . '. '...
- ..... ; '.,;n... : ".
j. '. ',; ;.
'.':.- ' ',. ?. "
3-
' ' _ [. O 'j:.. '.'
.}' *.f : * *e:
r: '-
L
-.l
, _ t.-8.-
,. =
_ f.,,
- b
. i ' :*
- h., n.
. &.. W.
- y. _
Q.. '.
- :. ~...... ; - -
- n
? : :<
. ;:i' : -.. ~ ~. :
.. c.7,.
F.
...:?+.
- i *... : ' L l-.
'., m
.a..
...- 4 p;. r
- ;;. a
....;....;~-.
.-: 4, ;............
1: -.. -
a...
q _..
t(([ *.j,,,.-
!.[.
~
.'[,,
,c.
- /
,..., p.
.,. =
c
- '. : o.'..
.._; ? :...' y '. m. ^.
g'
-,. 10 w -
G.:., < :.... _ ;..
- 3. ; g,:
.n...
_..s y.
. ~
-r.,
..c..
.' - h*.
.. '. : :~.: 'b, - _,
....w
"*'x..*
-. ~ '
t g,. -e +,_ - .\\'.. _.,.. *- " *.f. .l ' -. l
- w
s, Eb h{4kg' gqh[* % ,",x pg W" h
- .. ~ Q..
/...., q $ EQ (y .f., *,.. j ? >,,,,n '*.9
- Y., -
..y !. '.~' b Y ' i.ef; 1 f, a,,. ^ - , [4' ",, 'N O fj ; ]* /g. '.. '.,.,..p. .l., .O $,e - +
- R. ' 4
.. l }>* -'{ ^ fr-5
- f.
'). '. 7'p{".'; ~ A 4 l, f. Y.g5 f _ f; 5 's '^ h, pp y - 3 ;.;.g g. 3 p. Av.. q. 4 ..,4 +. . ggf~ .,,.e ~ 7 4" .~ 4 -. A 9 ,,g N 7, . y;q. y v y
- . J n
.a 2. 3. > 9 ,,l 1 QI f ' f, p%s.,.., ,[.. gg, ,(' j i J ~ 's .g.. f:s v y. b:h,. - .,iy's t -pl+ g'u f,v'j.',,,s *, " '; L q# ' MT - j
- i..,.
- i *
'1 d '- 4./., p 5 ],A 7+ *r 'e L. y 3 p.y g *g A, -.. s 'e,.. e- '-* - *^ N- '4 ~ .s x -_ Y ll l' 5 h, ; {
- W h
A i ; '~s..
- _ b a,
- g. -
? ~ $ ' N 'y
- ).. y
- g t.'
- 6. -. A7 Jc. g q
N_'. ^ ..,Y ,%p. t;, u ~ .;:n g. ~~ w c "s3 ,,y t 7' r* g '. ' eJ4 ' ..,.,,?, 'y...;g
- 'J J.V a
W'y g .\\ u, s gs,.;.j.p ^. j'.. s{.4 }gg ja fmnvl1 : m. rr 5 y%. e /-.N..- gh N.ATION Tl"w M'ilr Island .'M .. y EmimnmentaleAflhirs fj' - WB$,- GnvrIMign by:
- ed.
GPL' Senice 3 s..,, -. q..g .,. 7. p 9 Gmphit Resources ,c e.; . GnwrlMutingig: 4 y i.t., g.g.t . f, GPL' Eneme giF4 :..- Print Shop - e . re..- ['&.5..+ Ikpmgraj>hics in: N[h2 [.) f.[ 2I 'b ' f, '- ]. : : L M,.. . h Three Mile Island ' %.hf-Infinmation Resources i .A. 9 Management Center g.. g,.. T. '*C......t a..~, 7 .,..>2 .....g..
- g, m
,x. M- .[ ' -, . 9.,, ~' Ty4%. s. @y
1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT l TABLE OF CONTENTS l L Page Title i TABLE OF CONTENTS l iii LIST OF TABLES l iv LIST OF FIGURES l v LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS, SYMBOLS AND l ACRONYMS l 1
SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSIONS l 5 INTRODUCTION l 5 Characteristics of Radiation 6 Sources of Radiation 9 Nuclear Reactor Operations 10 Sources of Liquid and Airborne Emuents 13 DESCRIPTION OF THE TMINS SITE 13 GeneralInformation 14 Climatological Sununary 1996 16 EFFLUENTS 16 Historical Background 17 Emuent Release Limits IS Efiluent Control Program 18 Effluent Data 25 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 26 Environmental Exposure Pathways to Humans from Airborne and Liquid Effluents 26 Sampling 27 Analysis 28 Data Review 28 Quality Assurance Program 43 DIRECT RADIATION MONITORING 44 Sample Collection and Analysis 45 Results 49 ATMOSPHERIC MONITORING 50 Sample Collection and Analysis 50 Air Results i 58 AQUATIC MONITORING $9 Sample Collection and Analysis 60 Water Results 65 Fish Results j 65 Sediment Results t Page i l
19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MON 1110 RING REPORT Page Title 75 TERRESTRIAL MONITORING 76 Sample Collection and Analysis 77 Milk Results 78 Terrestrial Vegetation Results '/8 Rodent Results 81 GROUNDWATER MONITORING 82 Sample Collection and Analysis 83 Groundwater Results 85 Onsite Precipitation Results 86 RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT OF TMINS OPERATIONS 87 Dermination of Radiation Doses to the Public 88 Re.,e, of Dose Calculations 93 REFtkENCES APPENDIX A: 1996 REMP Sampling Locations and Descriptions, Synopsis of REMP, and Sampling and Analysis Exceptions APPENDIX B: 1996 Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) Exceptions APPENDIX C: 1996 REMP Changes APPENDIX D: 1996 Action Levels APPENDIX E: 1996 Quality Control Results APPENDIX F: 1996 Cross-Check Program Results APPENDIX G: 1996 Annual Land Use Census APPENDIX H: 1996 Data Reporting and Analysis APPENDIX I: 1996 Dose Calculation Methodology and Results APPENDIX J: 1996 Groundwater and Onsite Precipitation l Monitoring Results APPENDIX K: 1996 Meteorological Summary APPENDIX L: 1996 REMP Sample Collection and Analysis Methods APPENDIX M: 1996 TLD Quarterly Data i O Page ii
.. =. -- 1 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT LIST OF TABLES i l Page Title 7 Table 1 Sources and Doses of Radiation 22 Table 2 Radionuclide Composition ofTMINS Effluents for i 1996 33 Table 3 Summary of Radionuclide Concentrations in 1996 j Environmental Samples from Three Mile Island Nuclear Station 40 Table 4 1996 Monthly Average Exposure Rates for Offsite Real-Time Gamma Radiation Monitoring Stations 53 Table 5 1996 Average Gross Beta Concentrations in Air Particulates 53 Table 6 1996 Average Gross Alpha Concentrations in Air Particulates 68 Table 7 1996 Average Tritium Concentrations in Surface } and Drinking Water i 69 Table 8 1996 Average Gross Beta Concentrations in l Surface and Drmkmg Water l 90 Table 9 Calculated Maximum Hypothetical Doses to an ] Individual for Liquid and Airbome Releases from TMI-l and TMI-2 for 1996 i l 91 Table 10 Calculated Maximum Whole Body Doses to the i Population for Liquid and Airborne Releases from l TM1-1 and TM1-2 for 1996 i 4 4 l 1 O Pageiii .I 1 e
1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT LIST OF FIGURES Page Title 12 Figure 1 Three Mile Island Nuclear Station 23 Figure 2 Historical Releases of Radioiodines and Radioactive Particulates in TMI-l Liquid EfUuents 24 Figure 3 Historical Releases of Tritium in TMI-l Liquid Efiluents 30 Figure 4 Locations of REMP Stations Within 1 Mile of TMINS 31 Figure 5 Locations of REMP Stations 1 to 5 Miles from j TMINS j 32 Figure 6 Locations of REMP Stations Greater Than 5 Miles from TMINS 48 Figure 7 Historical Gamma Exposure Rates 54 Figure 8 1996 Gross Beta Concentrations in Air Particulates 55 Figure 9 Historical Gross Beta Concentrations in Air Particulates 56 Figure 10 1996 Gross Alpha Concentrations in Air Particulates 57 Figure 11 Historical Gross Alpha Concentrations in Air Particulates 70 Figure 12 1996 Tritium Concentrations in Surface Water 71 Figure 13 Historical Tritium Concentrations in Surface Water 72 Figure 14 1996 Tritium Concentrations in Drinkmg Water 73 Figure 15 1996 Gross Eeta Concentrations in Dnnkmg Water 74 Figure 16 Historical Cs-137 Concentrations in Aquatic Sediments 80 Figure 17 Historical Strontium-90 Concentrations in Cow Milk 92 Figure 18 Exposure Pathways for Radionuclides Routinely Released from TMINS O Page iv i l
d Q im naviatocicas suviaosusurat uosironiso asroar I LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS, l SYMBOLS AND ACRONYMS l ABBREVIATIONS south-southwest.. SSW cubic feet per second - .. cfs standard deviation.. ..std dev 4 j cubic meter (s)= . m' standard month... ...std month curie (s)........... .... Ci west.. ... W WNW curic(s) per year. ...Ci/yr west-northwest.. cast .E west-southwest.. ..WSW ] cast-northeast. ..ENE year (s).... ..yr cast-southeast.. ..ESE l gram (s).. .. g ELEMENT SYMBOLS j hour (s)...... .. h actinium.. .Ac j liter (s).. ..L antimony.. ..Sb meter (s)..... .. m argon... ... Ar i microroentgen(s) per hour... ..DR/h barium.. .Ba mile per hour.. .. mph beryllium.. .Be carbon. ... C i millirem (s)... .. mrem j millirem (s) per hour.. .. mrem /h cesium. ..Cs millirem (s) per standard chromium. ..Cr j ( month... . mrem /std month cobalt. .Co .Cm i millirem (s) per year.... . mrem /yr curium. ..H 3 ) milliroentgen (s).. .. mR hydrogen (tritium). I milliroentgen (s) per hour.. ... mR/h iodine. ...I I milliroentgen (s) per standard iron.. .. Fe i month.. ..mR/std month krypton.. ..Kr i north.. ..N lanthanum.. ..La j northeast.. .. NE manganese.. .Mn i northwest.. .. NW niobium.. ..Nb i north-northeast. .NNE nitrogen.. ..N j north-northwest. NNW oxygen.. .. O i percent.. plutonium.. ..Pu i picoeurie(s)..... .. pCi potassium. .. K l picoeurie(s) per cubic meter. ..pCi/m radium - .Ra 3 picoeurie(s) per gram.. ..pCi/g radon.. .. Rn .Ru picoeurie(s) per liter - ..pCi/L ruthenium. reference (s). .. Ref. (Refs.) silver. .. Ag rem (s) per year..... . rem /yr strontium. . Sr Roentgen (s).... .. R thoritun.. ./Ih Roentgen (s) equivalent man. .. rem tritiated water vapor.. ..HTO .S uranium. .. U south.... southeast.. .. SE xenon.. .Xe southwest.. ..SW zine.. ..Zn south-southeast.. ..SSE zirconium. Zr Page v
1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONIMRING REPORT ACRONYMS National Council on Radiation American National Standards Protection and Measurements........NCRP Institute............. .. ANSI NationalInstitute of Accident Generated Water... ..AGW Standards and Technology.......... .... NIST as low as reasonably National Voluntary Laboratory achievable........ ALARA Accreditation Program..... .NVLAP biological effects of atontic Offsite Dose Calculation Manual.....ODCM radiation..... . BEAR Operations Support Facility.... .. SF biological effects ofionizing .BEIR Pennsylvania State Bureau radiation... of Radiation Protection.. ..PaBRP borated water storage tank.. ...BWST Post Defueling Monitored Storage....PDMS Building 48.. .48s pressurized water reactor.. ..P W R Department of Energy.. .... DOE quality assurance.. ....Q A East Dike Catch Basin. .EDCB quality control.. ..QC l Federal Radiation Council.. .FRC radiological environmental Final Safety Analysis Report... ..FSAR monitoring program... .REMP ..SHD General Public Utilities Safe Harbor Dam. Nuclear Corporation.. ..GPU Nuclear simplified environmental Groundwater Monitoring Program.. .GMP effluent dosimetry system.. . SEEDS high efficiency particulate air. ..HEPA thermoluminescent dosimeter. .TLD International Committee on 'Ihree Mile Island. ..TMI Radiadon Protection. ..ICRP Three Mile Island lower limit of detection.. ..LLD Nuclear Station.. ...TMINS manmum permissible Three Mile Island - Unit 1. ..TMI-l concentration. ..MPC Three Mile Island - Unit 2. ,.TMI-2 mean sea level.. . msl Title 10 of the Code of National Academy of Sciences. ..NAS Federal Regulations, Part 20.. .10 CFR 20 Page vi
t 5 1 ] 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT y' i i ACRONYMS 4 i Title 10 of the Code of j Federal Regulations, Par;. 50, j Appendix I...... .10 CFR 50 App. I i 1 Title 40 of the Code of f Federal Regulations, Part 190........ .. 40 CFR 190 l United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation.. ..UNSCEAR I } United States Environmental l Protection Agency.... ..USEPA I United States Nuclear Regulatory l Commission... .....USNRC York Haven Dam..... ..YHD York Haven Pond... ..YHP I i 1 i } I i i t f, i f f l l 4 i t i i f f 1 i Page vii
19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONIMRING REPORT
SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSIONS i The radiological environmental monitoring performed in 1996 by GPU Nuclear for Three Mile Island Nuclear Station (TMINS) is discussed in this report. The environmental sample results and the doses calculated from measured effluents ) indicated that TMINS operations in 1996 had no ) adverse effect on the health of the public or the environment. The operation of a nuclear power station results in
- I i
the release of small amounts of radioactive materials to the environment. A radiological environmental monitoring program (REMP) has been established to monitor radiation and i radioactive materials in the environment around TMINS. The results of environmental j measurements are used to assess the impact of 1 j TMINS operations, to demonstrate compliance l with the TMI-l and TMI-2 Technical { Specifications (Refs. I and 2) and applicable i Federal and State regulations, and to verify the adequacy of containment and radioactive effluent l control systems. The program also evaluates the { relationship between amounts of radioactive material released in effluents to the environment and resultant radiation doses to individuals. 4
l 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONIMRING REPORT i Summaries and interpretations of the data are discussed in this report (Radiclogical Impact published annually in the Radiological of TMINS Operations anJ Appendix I). Environmental Monitoring Report. Previous reports in this series are referenced at the end The results provided in this report are of the report (Refs. 3 through 26). Additional summarized in the following highlights: information concerning releases of radioactive materials to the environment is contained in 5 More than 1700 samples were collected in the Radiological Efiluent Release Reports. 1996 from the aquatic, atmospheric and These reports are submitted annually to the terrestrial environments around TMINS. United States Nuclear Regulatory There were nearly 2700 analyses i Commission (USNRC). performed on these samples. Also, approximately 2100 radiation exposure Many of the radioactive materials discussed in measurements were taken using this report are normally present in the thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). environment, either from natural processes or Finally, more than 270 groundwater as a result of non-TMINS activities such as samples were collected and nearly 450 prior atmospheric nuclear weapon tests and analyses were performed on these samples. medicalindustry activities. To determine the The monitoring performed in 1996 met or impact of TMINS operations, if any, on the exceeded the sample collection and environment and the public, results froin analysis requirements of the TMI-l and samples collected close to TMINS (indicator TMI-2 Technical Specifications. stations) are compared to results from samples obtained at distant sites (control or u In addition to natural radioactivity, low background stations). Comparisons with concentrations of radionuclides such as historical data also are performed, as H-3, cobalt-60 (Co-60), Sr-90, appropriate. cesium-137 (Cs-137), cesium-134 (Cs-134) and I-131 were detected in During 1996, samples of air, surface, effluent various media and were attributed to either and drinking water, sediment, fruits, fallout from prior nuclear weapon tests, vegetables, fish, groundwater, milk and rodent the medicalindustry or TMINS carcasses were collected. Direct radiation operations. exposures also were measured in the vicinity ofTMINS. Samples were analyzed for gross a The raw surface water collected beta and gross alpha radioactivity, tritium downstream of the TMINS liquid j (H-3), strontium-89 (Sr-89) and strontium-90 discharge outfall typically had H-3 (Sr-90), iodine-131 (I-131) and/or gamma-concentrations greater than those detected emitting radionuclides. The results are in control samples as a result of routine discussed in the various sections of this TMINS operations. This was expected report. Additionally, radiological impacts in because the samples were collected from a terms of radiation dose as a result of TMINS site where mixing ofliquid effluents with radioactive releases were calculated and are Susquehanna River water was incomplete. Although raw water is not consumed by Paec2
p 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONhfENTAL Af0NITORING REPORT humans, all of the measured in USNRC 10 CFR 20 (Appendix B, concentrations were well below the United Table 2). State Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA) Primary Drinking Water u Strontium-90 was detected in one Standard of 20,000 picocuries per liter groundwater sample collected from an (pCi/L). onsite well. Its presence was attributed to past leaks from a TMI-2 tank which n As a result of routine TMINS operations, has since been drained. Water from the H-3 at low concentrations was detected in subject well is not used for drinking. indicator fish samples. Its presence was The measured concentration was well not unexpected because H-3 was released below the USNRC 10 CFR 20 effluent in liquid effluents and the indicator fish concentration limit for Sr-90. samples were collected in a zone where mixing of effluents and river water is a Tritium was detected in onsite incomplete. The H-3 concentrations in groundwater used for drinking. The the extracted water were a small fraction presence of H-3 in these samples was of the.USEPA Primary Drinking Water attributed to routine TMI-l operations j Standard. and possibly past TMI-2 operations. All of the H-3 concentrations measured in E Imw concentrations of TMINS-related onsite drinking water were well below the d Co-60, Cs-134 and Cs-137 were detected USEPA Primary Drinking Water in aquatic sediments collected proximal Standard. to or just downstream of the TMINS liquid discharge outfall. During 1996 as a Low concentrations of H-3 were detected well as in previous years, these materials in offsite groundwater. A portion of the were routinely released in TMINS liquid H-3 detected in these samples may be i effluents. Additionally, Co-60, Cs-134 related to atmospheric releases of H-3 and Cs-137 are readily adsorbed by from TMI-1. The concentratbns were a suspended particles in the water column small fiaction of the USEP.4 Primary and bottom sediments. A portion of the Drinking Water Standard. Cs-137 measured in the samples was attributed to fallout from prior nuclear E Gamma radiation exposure rates recorded weapon tests. at the offsite indicator TLD and real-time monitoring stations averaged 55 and 66 m Groundwater samples collected from the milliroentgens per year (mR/yr), onsite monitoring and supply wells respectively. The exposure rates were contained H-3 above ambient consistent with those presented by the concentrations as a result of routine National Council on Radiation Protection operations at TMI-l and past operations and Measurements (Ref. 27). No increase at TMI-2. All H-3 concentrations in ambient gamma radiation levels was detected in onsite groundwater were detected. Q below the effluent concentration specified V Paec 3
--- = 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MON 1110 RING REPORT E During 1996, small amounts of only a small fraction of the doses received radioactive materials were released in from natural background radiation. TMI-1 and TMI-2 effluents. The Additionally, the resultnadicated that there amount released from TMI-l was the was no permanent buildup of radioactive lowest in its operating history. This materials in the environment and no increase achievement was attributed to good fuel in background radiation levels. integrity, minimal leakage in the steam generators and improved efficiency of Therefore, based on the results of the the waste processing systems. radiological environmental monitoring program (REMP) and the doses calculated E The calculated doses to the public from from measured effluents, TMINS operations TMINS operations in 1996 were well in 1996 did not have any adverse effects on below all applicable regulatory limits and the health of the public or on the environment. significantly less than doses received from other common sources of radiation. The hypothetical maximum whole body dose potentially received by an individual from 1996 TMI-l and TMI-2 liquid and airborne effluents combined was 1 conservatively calculated to be 0.11 mrem. This dose is equivalent to 0.04% of the dose that an individual living in the TMI area receives each year from natural background radiation. m The hypothetical maximum whole body dose to the surrounding population from all 1996 liquid and airbome efiluents was calculated to be 1.06 person-rem. This dose is equivalent to 0.00016% of the dose that the total population in the TMI area receives each year from natural background radiation. In conclusion, radioactive materials related to TMINS operations were detected in environmental samples, but the measured concentrations were low and consistent with measured efIluents. The environmental sample results verified that the doses received by the public from TMINS effluents in 1996 were well below applicable dose limits and Pace 4
1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MON 110 RING REPORT INTRODUCTION Characteristics of Radiation Instability within the nucleus of radioactive atoms results in the release of energy in the form of radiation. Radiation is classified according to its nature -- particulate and electromagnetic. Particulate radiation consists of energetic subatomic particles such as electrons (beta l particles), protons, neutrons, and alpha particles. Because ofits limited ability to penetrate the human body, particulate radiation in the O environment contributes primarily to internal radiation exposure resulting from inhalation and i ingestion of radioactivity. Electromagnetic radiation in the form of x-rays and gamma rays has characteristics similar to visible light but is more energetic and, hence, more penetrating. Although x-rays and gamma rays are penetrating and can pass through varying thicknesses of materials, once they are absorbed they produce energetic electrons which release l their energy in a manner that is identical to beta l particles. The principal concern for gamma radiation from radionuclides in the environment l is their contribution to external radiation exposure. !O l Page 5 1
1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT The rate with which atoms undergo whether the rudiation source is external or disintegration (radioactive decay) varies internal to the body. The important factor is among radioactive elements, but is uniquely how much radiation energy or dose was constant for each specific radionuclide. The deposited The unit of radiation dose is the term " half-life" defines the time it takes for Roentgen equivalent man (rem), which also half of any amount of an element to decay incorporates the variable effectiveness of and can vary from a fraction of a second for different forms of radiation to produce some radionuclides to millions ofyears for biological change. For environmental others. In fact, the natural background radiation exposures, it is convenient to use radiation to which all mankind has been the smaller unit of millirem (mrem) to exposed is largely due to the radionuclides of express dose (1000 mrem equr.ls 1 rem). uranium (U), thorium (Th), and potassium When radiation exposure occurs over (K). These radioactive elements were periods of time, it is appropriate to refer to j formed with the creation of the universe and, the dose rate. Dose rates, therefore, define owing to their long half-lives, will continue the total dose for a fixed interval of time, and to be present for millions of years to come. for environmental exposures are usually For example, potassium-40 (K-40) has a expressed with 'eference to one year half-life of 1.3 billion years and exists (mrem /yr). j naturally within our bodies. As a result, approximately 4000 atoms of potassium emit Sources of Radiation radiation internally within each of us every second of our lives. Life on earth has evolved amid the constant exposure to natural radiation. In fact, the In assessing the impact of radioactivity on single major source of radiation to which the the environment, it is important to know the general population is exposed comes from quantity of radioactivity released and the natural sources. Although everyone on the resultant radiation doses. The common unit planet is exposed to natural radiation, some of radioactivity is the curie (Ci). It people receive more than others. Radiation represents the radioactivity in one gram (g) exposure from natural background has three of natural radium (Ra), which is also equal to components (i.e., cosmic, terrestrial, and a decay rate of 37 billion radiation emissions internal) and varies with altitude and every second. Because of the extremely geographic location, as well as with living small amounts of radioactive material in the habits. environment, it is more convenient to Use fractions of a curie. Subunits like picoeurie, For example, cosmic radiation originating pCi, (one trillionth of a curie) are frequently from deep interstellar space and the sun used to express the radioactivity present in increases with altitude, since there is less air environmental and biological samples. which acts as a shield. Similarly, terrestrial l radiation resulting from the presence of The biological effects of a whole body naturally-occurring radionuclides in the soil equivalent dose of radiation are the same and rocks varies and may be Page 6
I 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONRORING REPORT (j significantly higher in some areas of the, from natural background radiation sources country than in others. Even the use of (Ref 27). This estimate was revised from particular building materials for houses, about 100 to 300 mrem because of the cooking with natural gas, and home inclusion of radon gas which was always insulation affect exposure to natural present but was not previously included in radiation. the calculations. In some regions of the country, the amount of natural radiation is The presence of radioactivity in the human significantly higher. Residents of Colorado, body results from the inhalation and for example, receive an additional 60 ingestion of air, food, and water containing mrem /yr due to the increase in cosmic and naturally-occurnng radionuclides. For terrestrial radiation levels. In fact, for every l example, drinkmg water contains trace 100 feet above sea level, a person will amounts ofuraniam and radium and milk receive an additional 1 mrem /yr from cosmic contains radioactive potassium. Table 1 radiation. In several regions of the world, summarizes the common sources of radiation naturally high concentrations of uranium and and their average annual doses. radium deposits result in doses of several thousand mrem /yr to their residents (Ref. The average person in the United States 28). receives about 300 mrem /yr (0.3 rem /yr) l (dp) I l l TABLE 1 l ) Sources and Doses of Radiation
- l Natural (82%)
Manmade 08%) Radiation Dose Radiation Dose Source (mrem /vr) Source pgremivr) Radon 200 (55 %) Medical X-rays 39 (11 %) Cosmic rays 27 (8%) Nuclear Medicine 14 (4%) Terrestrial 28 (8%) Consumer products 10 (3%) Internal 40 (11 %) Other <1 (<1%) (Releases from nat gas, phosphate mining, burning of coal, weapons fallout, & nuclear fuel cycle) APPROXIMATE APPROXIMATE TOTAL 300 TOTAL 60
- Percentage contribution of the total dose is shown in parentheses.
1 Source: Ref. 27 b ( Page 7 V'- l
19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTA, MONiiORING REPORT i Recently, public attention has focused on Depending on their rate of radioactive decay radon (Rn), a naturally-occurring radioactive and biological elimination from the body, gas produced from uranium and radium some radionuclides stay in the body for very j decay. These elements are widely distributed short times while others remain for years. 1 in trace amounts in the earth's crust. Unusually high concentrations have been In addition to natural radiation, we are found in certain parts of eaetern Pennsylvania exposed to radiation from a number of and northern New Jersey. Radon levels in manmade sources. The single largest of these some homes in these areas are hundreds of sources comes from diagnostic medical times greater than levels found elsewhere in x-rays, and nuclear medicine procedures. the United States. However, additional Some 180 million Americans receive medical surveys are needed to determine the full x-rays each year. The annual dose to an extent of the problem nationwide. individual from such radiation averages about 53 mrem. Much smaller doses come from Radon is the largest component of natural nuclear weapon fallout and consumer background radiation and may be responsible products such as televisions, smoke for a substantial number oflung cancer deaths detectors, and fertilizers. Production of annually. The National Council on Radiation commercial nuclear power and its associated Protection and Measurements (NCRP) fuel cycle contributes less than 1 mrem to the estimates that the average individual in the annual dose of about 360 mrem for the United States receives an annual dose of average individual living in the United States. about 2,400 mrem to the lung from natural radon gas (Ref. 27). This lung dose is Fallout commonly refers to the radioactive i considered to be equivalent to a whole body debris that settles to the surface of the earth dose of 200 mrem. The NCRP has following the detonation of a nuclear recommended actions to controlindoor radon weapon. It is dispersed throughout the sources and reduce exposures. environment either by dry deposition or washed down to the earth's surface by When radioactive substances are inhaled or precipitation. There are approximately 200 swallowed, they are not uniformly distributed radionuclides produced in the nuclear weapon within the body. For example, radioactive detonation process; a number of these are iodine selectively concentrates in the thyroid detected in fallout. The radionuclides found gland, radioactive cesium is distributed in fallout which produce most of the fallout throughout the body water and muscles, and radiation exposures to humans are I-131, radioactive strontium concentrates in the Sr-89, Cs-137, and Sr-90. There has been no bones. The total dose to organs by a given atmospheric nuclear weapon testing since radionuclide also is influenced by the quantity 1980 and many of the cadionuclides, still and the duration of time that the radionuclide present in our environment, have decayed remains in the body, including its physical, significantly. Consequently, doses to the biological and chemical characteristics. public from fallout have been decreasing. Page 8
1 l l l CN 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT \\v) 1 As a result of the nuclear accident at are unstable atoms which emit radiation as Chernobyl, Ukraine, on April 26,1986, they decay to stable atoms. Neutrons which radioactive materials were dispersed are not absorbed by the uranium fuel may be throughout the environment and detected in absorbed by stable atoms in the materials various media such as air, milk, and soil. which make up the components and l Cesium-134, Cs-137, I-131 and other stmetures of the reactor. In such cases, radionuclides were detected in the weeks stable atoms often become radioactive. This following the Chernobyl accident. process is called activation and the radioactive atoms which result are called c l Nuclear Reactor Operations activation products. f Common to the commercial production of The TMINS reactors (TMI-I and TMI-2) are j l electricity is the consumption of fuel to pressurized water reactors (PWR). Only j p7 duce heat and steam. Trie steam turns the TMI-l is an operating reactor. At the end of l turbine which generates electricity. Unlike 1993, TMI-2 was placed in a condition called the burning of coal, oil, or gas in fossil fuel Post-Defueling Monitored Storage (PDMS). powered plants to generate heat, the fuel of As the name implies, TMI-2 will continue to most nuclear reactors is comprised of the be monitored until operations at TMI-l l A element uranium in the form of uranium cease. At that time, both TMI-l and TMI-2 l oxide. The fuel produces heat by the process will be decommissioned. called fission. The nuclear fuel used in an operating reactor In fission, the uranium atom absorbs a such as TMI-l is contained within sealed fuel neutron (an atomic particle found in nature rods arranged in arrays called bundles. The and also produced by the fissioning of bundles are located within a massive steel l uranium in the reactor) and splits to produce reactor vessel. Pressurized water reactors smaller atoms termed fission products, along utilize steam generators to transfer the heat of with heat, radiation and free neutrons. The the coolant water to the secondary steam l free neutrons travel through the reactor and loop; thus, the steam generators serve as a are similarly absorbed by the uranium, boundary between the radioactive primary permitting the fission process to continue. loop and the secondary steam loop. i As this process continues, more fission As depicted in Figure 1, heat is added to the products, radiation, heat and neutrons are water as it is pumped around and through the produced and a sustained reaction occurs. fuel bundles in the reactor vessel. The hot The heat produced is transferred - via primary coolant then passes inside thousands reactor coolant water -- from the fuel to of sealed tubes within the steam generator. produce steam which drives a turbine Heat is transferred through the tube walls generator to produce electricity. The fission into the secondary water which flows around products are mostly radioactive; that is, they the tubes, thereby creating steam for use in C tx Page 9 t
l 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT l 1 i the turbine. After the energy is extracted soluble and are retained in water in an toruc from the steam in the turbine, it is cooled and (electrically charged) form. These materials condensed back into water by a third loop can be removed in the primary coolant which circulates water between the condenser purification system. However, krypton (Kr) l and the cooling towers. and xenon (Xe) do not readily dissolve in the l coolant, particularly at high temperatures. l Several hundred radionuclides of some 40 Krypton and xenon collect as a gas above the I different elements are created during the coolant when the water is depressurized. process ofgeaerating electricity. And, because of mactor engineering designs, the The fourth barrier consists of the reactor short half-lives of many radionuclides, and pressure vessel and the steel piping of the their chemical and physical properties, nearly primary coolant system. The reactor pressure all radioactivity is contained. ve.ceelis a 36-foot high tank with steel walls a' ' 9 inches thick. It encases the reactor Pressurized water reactors have five com. The remainder of the primary coolant independent barriers that confine radioactive system includes the pressurizer, steam materials given off by the reactor fuel as it generators and associated piping. This heats the water. Under normal operating system provides containment for radioactivity conditions, essentially all radioactivity is in the primary coolant. contained within the first two barriers. 1 The reactor building (or containment The ceramic uranium fuel pellets provide the building) provides the fifth barrier. It has first barrier. Most of the fission products are steel-lined concrete walls about 4 feet thick either trapped or chemically bound in the fuel that enclose the reactor pressure vessel and where they remain. However, a few fission the primary coolant system. products which are volatile or gaseous at normal operating temperatures may not be Sources of Liauid and Airborne Efiluents contained in the fuel. Although the previously described barriers The second barrier consists of zirconium (Zr) contain radioactivity with high efficiency, alloy tubes (cladding) that resist corrosion small amounts of radioactive fission products and high temperatures. The fuel pellets are diffuse or migrate through minor flaws in the contained within these tubes. There is a small fuel cladding and into the primary coolant. gap between the fuel and the cladding, in Trace quantities of reactor system component which the noble gases and other volatile and structure surfaces which have been radionuclides collect and are contained. activated also get into the primary coolant water. Many of the soluble fission and The primary coolant water is the third barrier. activation products such as iodines, Many of the fission products, including strontiums, cobalts, and cesiums are removed radioactive iodine, strontium and cesium are by demineralizers in the purification system of 1 O l Page 10
l l p 1996 RA DIOLOGICAL ENVI2ONMENTAL MONIIDRING REPORT b I i l the primary coolant. The physical and (suction) with respect to the outside chemical properties of noble gas fission atmosphere. This pressure differential products in the primary coolant prevent their assures that all building air and air exhausted removal by the demineralizers. from potentially radioactive areas of the 1 buildings is filtered by HEPA and charcoal Because the reactor system has many valves filters prior to release to the environment. l and fittings, an absolute seal cannot be achieved. Small amounts of noble gases and Liquid wastes are generated from the primary trace quantities of residual fission and coolant purification system and from small activation products have the potential for amounts ofliquids which escape from valves, escape into the reactor building and piping, and equipment associated with the associated buildings. A portion of the primary coolant system during normal airborne effluents comes from the atmosphere operations. Liquids are treated using filters, around the primary coolant system, which demineralizers, and evaporators to remove receives steam and liquid leakage from valves radioactivity from the water prior to release. and pumps on systems carrying primary Purified water is reused or released to the coolant. Environmental release of airborne river and the processed wastes are radioactivity is reduced by simply holding the concentrated for offsite burial at approved, (, radioactivity inside the reactor building for a licensed facilities. Tritium, because ofits (' period of time which allows for the natural chemical behavior, is not removed from liquid radioactive decay of some radionuclides. wastes. l Radioactive gases from purification systems also contribute to airborne effluents and are As a result of minor leakage in the steam collected and stored in tanks for radioactive generators, small amounts of radioactive decay before being released. materials are present in the secondary (steam loop) water. Although not all of the water is Airborne effluents pass through a two-stage treated, all of the water is monitored and filtration system prior to environmental diluted with nonradioactive water prior to release. High efficiency particulate air being released. (HEPA) filters effectively remove radionuclides such as strontium and cesium GPU Nuclear conducts operations such that with a 99 percent (%) efEciency. Activated releases ofliquid and gaseous wastes are a small charcoal filters remove radioiodines with a 90 percentage of the Federal limits. Consequently, to 95 % efficiency. Noble gases and tritium, the doses associated with these releases are a however, cannot be removed by either of small fraction of the dose limits established by these filtration processes because of their the Federal Government. chemical and physical properties. Ventilation systems throughout the plant are designed to maintain a negative pressure /O i i V Page11
O O O P %u i Three Mile Island Nuclear Station NUCLEAR i t REACTOR CONTAINMENT BUILDING wa;.- - \\ Steam a 'p f [ Pressurizer Generator g. l . ff% l TURBINE GENERATOR BUILDIN^ [ ^ Control Rod ~, NI i Drives Y Generator 4 n \\ 1/g ~ = \\ / \\ /- F [ O_ _ .\\ / \\ / 1 1 t,# s-
- f
- .
s Condenser ?!F ~ l Feed \\ E Pump f f a Coolant Cooling Tower i Rea or Pump Condensate /Feedwate System f Condensate Pump System Figure 1 rage 12 l f
1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT DESCRIPTION 4 l OF THE TMINS SITE i General Information i l Three Mile Island (TMI) is located in Londonderry i Township of Dauphin County, Pennsylvania. It lies l approximately 2.5 miles north of the southern tip of j the county, where the county borders of Dauphin, Lancaster, and York converge. The Island is part of ) an 814 acre tract of Company-owned land which encompasses TMI and several adjacent islands in the i Susquehanna River (Refs. 29 and 30). Aligned north j to south, TMI is approximately 11,000 feet long and l 1700 feet wide. The eastern and western riverbanks i are 900 and 6500 feet, respectively, from TMI. l Covering about 200 acres ofland, Three Mile Island Nuclear Station (TMINS) is situated on the northem ) one-half of TMI. i The Island is relatively flat with elevations ranging from about 280 feet above mean sea level (msl) at the water's edge to slightly more than 300 feet above mst i in the north-central portion. The topography of the i area immediately surrounding TMI is characterized i by rolling terrain which slopes to the river valley j floor. The hills within a two mile radius have a j maximum relief of about 200 feet with the highest elevation seldom exceeding 500 feet above msl. The Susquehanna River at the site drains a watershed area of approximately 25,000 square miles. Pace 13
1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REl' ORT With the exception of the southern border of ten-mile radius of TMINS. The nearest TMI, the Island is bounded by the part of the population center is Goldsboro with a Susquehanna River known as York Haven population of 458 people. It lies Pond or Lake Frederick. The pond, which is approximately one mile to the west of the site. 1.5 miles wide at the site, is formed by the About 2.5 miles to the north,9,254 people York Haven and Red Hill Dams. Three Mile reside in the town of Middletown. I Island and Shelley Island divide the river into Harrisburg, situated 12 miles to the northwest, three main channels. Several lesser channels is the nearest major city with a population of also are formed by smaller islands. 52,376. Land within a 10 mile radius of the site is used primarily for farming. Farm The historical average annual flow of the products include poultry, meat, fmit, dairy Susquehanna River in the TMI region is products, vegetables, com, wheat, alfalfa, 34,000 cubic feet per second (cfs). During tobacco, and other crops oflesser importance. 1996, however, the annual average flow was higher than the historical average. The flow in Climatoloeical Summarv - 1996* 1996 averaged about 57,094 for the TMI region with monthly averages ranging from The Appalachian Mountains, located about 20 11,474 cfs in August to 125,974 cfs in miles to the north of TMI, protect the area January. The historical average annual somewhat from the cold winter outbreaks of maximum flow is about 300,000 cfs while the Arctic air that invade central and western minimum daily flow recorded for the region is Pennsylvania. However, the site is too far 1,700 cfs (Ref. 29). A flood protection dike inland to derive the full benefits of a coastal completely surrounds TMINS and was climate like that of the southeastern region of designed based upon a flow of 1,100,000 cfs. Pennsylvania. Summers tend to be warm and For comparison, the maximum flow / flood of humid and winters are cool, with frequent record occurred in June 1972 as a result of periods of precipitation. Summer rainfall tropical storm "Agnes" This event produced typically comes from thunderstorm activity, a flow of 1,020,000 cfs. while most of the precipitation in the winter is a result of coastal winter storms. Normal Present uses of the Susquehanna River include yearly rainfall for the TMI region is 40.5 public and industrial water supply, power inches. Winds primarily are from the generation, and recreation such as boating, northwesterly direction. The 1996 annual swimming and fhhing. While there are no average wind speed in the TMI region was commercial fisheries on the Susquehanna about 8.5 miles per hour (mph). Monthly River in the TMI region, recreational averages ranged from 4.8 mph in August to fisherman catch several different sporting 12.7 mph in April. (Ref. 32). species that inhabit the River. Three of the more prevalent sporting fishes in the vicinity of TMI include Smallmouth bass, Channel
- Sources:
catfish and Walleye.
- 1) Onsite Meteorological Data.
- 2) Local Climatological Data, Harrisburg, PA.
Based on 1990 census data (Ref. 31),
- 3) National Climatic Data Center, Asheville, approximately 175,000 people reside within a NC.
Page 14
l 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MON 11DRING REPORT l During 1996, the average monthly yields of hay in the region bect.use of high temperatures ranged from 26.2
- F in January moisture content. Corn yields, however, were to 74.1 'F in July. The maximum monthly considered good as they approached the deviation occurred in November when the record high which was set in 1994.
l temperatures averaged 4.8 ' F below the normal monthly average. The lowest A wind rose and joint frequency tables for the temperature of the year occurred on TMINS site, which tummarize wind and February 6 when it dropped to -1 'F. On dispersion information used for offsite dose August 23, the temperature rose to 92
- F, calculations, are provided in Appendix K.
marking the years highest temperature. The The data normally are generated from l overall annual average temperature was meteorological parameters recorded by onsite 52.4
- F which is within 1
- of the normal instrumentation. When real-time data are annual average for the area.
missing or invalid, default values are entered into the data base. The default values are A total of 55.9 (water equivalent) inches of consistent with actual meteorology for the precipitation was recorded during 1996. This TMINS vicinity. During 1996, a total of 65 amount was.about 15.4 inches above the hours of real-time data (0.7%) were missing normal annual average. Monthly precipitation or invalid. totals ranged from a low of 1.4 inches in O February to a high of 8.2 inches in July. The l b amount of precipitation which fell in July exceeded the normal total for the month by approximately 4.6 inches. The most significant rain events occurred on July 12 and 13 and again on October 18 and 19 when about 2.7 inches fell within 24-hour periods. The year's greatest snowfall recorded over a 24-hour period (21.7 inches) occurred on Januay 7 and 8. Januay's total snowfall was recorded at 38.9 inches wh:.ch was the greatest monthly total for the year. The year's greatest depth of snow measured on the ground was at 32 inches which occurred on January 12 and 13. 1 Compared to 1995 which was a more typical j year,1996 was highlighted by an early l blizzard which resulted in major flooding over numerous areas of the Susquehanna Valley. Most of the remainder of the year continued O with above normal precipitation which, economically speaking, caused much lower Page 15 l l
19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONIMRING REPORT EFFLUENTS Historical Background Almost from the outset of the discovery of x-rays l in 1895 by Wilhelm Roentgen, the potential a hazard ofionizing radiation was recognized and j efforts were made to establish radiation protection standards. The International Commission on i Radiological Protection (ICRP) and the NCRP were established in 1928 and 1929, respectively. These organizations have the longest continuous experience in the review of radiation health effects and with making recommendations on 0x guidelines for radiological protection and ] radiation exposure limits. ) In 1955, the United Nations created a Scientific l Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation l (UNSCEAR) to summarize reports received on i radiation levels and the effects on man and his i environment. The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) formed a committee in 1956 to review the i biological effects of atomic radiation (BEAR). A j series of reports have been issued by this and succeeding NAS committees on the biological j effects ofionizing radiation (BEIR), the most recent being 1990 (known as BEIR V). G Pace 16
i9% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT These committees and commissions of specified in the Technical Specifications for nationally and internationally recognized TMI-1 and TMI-2 and the Offsite Dose scientific expens have been dedicated to the Calculation Manual, ODCM, (Ref. 39). GPU understanding of the health effects of radiation Nuclear conducts operations such that by investigating all sources of relevant releases of radioactive efiluents are a small knowledge and scientific data and by percentage of the Federal limits. providing guidance for radiological protection. Their members are selected from A recommendation of the ICRP, NCRP, and universities, scientific research centers and FRC is that radiation exposures should be other national and international research maintained at levels which are "as low as organizr.tions. The committee reports contain reasonably achievable" (ALARA) and scientific data obtained from physical, commensurate with the societal benefit biological, and epidemiological studies on derived from the activities resulting in such radiation health effects and serve as scientific exposures. For this reason, dose limit references for information presented in this guidelines were established by the USNRC for report. releases of radioactive effluents from nuclear power plants. These guidelines are presented Since its inception, the USNRC has depended in Title 10 of the Code of Federal upon the recommendations of the ICRP, the Regulations, Pan 50, Appendix I (10 CFR 50, NCRP, and the Federal Radiation Council App. I). Maintaining doses within these (FRC), incorporated in the USEPA in 1970, operational guidelines demonstrates that for basic radiation protection standards and releases of radioactive effluents are being guidance in establishing regulations for the maintained "as low as reasonably achievable" nuclear industry (Refs. 33 through 36). These USNRC ALARA guidelines are a fraction of the dose limits established by the Emuent Release Limits USEPA. As part of routine operations at a nuclear The USNRC 10 CFR 50, App. I guidelines power station, limited quantities of radioactive are as follows: materials are released to the emironment in liquid and airborne effluents. At TAUNS, an a The dose to a member of the public from effluent control program is implemented by radioactive materials released in liquid GPU Nuclear to ensure that the amounts of effluents is limited to 5 3 mrem /yr to the radioactive materials released to the total body or 510 mrem /yr to any organ. environment are minimal and do not exceed release limits. s The air dose due to noble gases at a location which would be occupied by a The Federal government establishes limits on member of the public is limited to 510 radioactive materials released to the mrad /yr for gamma radiation or 5 20 environment. Regulated by the USNRC, mradlyr for beta radiation. these limits are set at levels to protect the health and safety of the public. They are Pace 17
) 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONA1 ENTAL MON 11DRING REPORT v u The dose to a member of the public from Emuent Instrumentation: Liquid and noble gases released in gaseous efiluents is airborne effluent measuring instrumentation is limited to 5 5 mrem /yr to the total body or designed to monitor the presence and the 515 mrem /yr to the skin. amount of radioactivity in effluents. The instruments provide continuous surveillance a The dose to a member of the public from of radioactivity releases. Calibrations of airborne iodines, tritium and particulates is effluent instruments are performed using limited to 515 mrenVyr to any organ. reference standards certified by the National l Institute of Standards and Technology The USEPA dose limits as defined in Title 40 (NIST). The instruments are calibrated to of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 190 respond to specific radionuclides and are (40 CFR 190), are as follows: sensitive enough to measure 100 to 1,000 l times below the applicable release limits. l E The dose to a member of the public shall l not exceed in a year 25 mrem /yr to the Each instrument is equipped with alarms l total body, 75 mrem /yr to the thyroid, and which are connected to the Control Room. 25 mrem /yr to any other organ as a result The alarm setpoints are set to ensure that ofuranium fuel cycle operations. effluent release limits will not be exceeded. If radiation monito alarm setpoints are reached, tfh Emuent Control Program liquid and airborne releases are automatically '\\ terminated. Efiluent coutrol includes plant components such as the ventilation system and filters, Emuent Sampling and Analysis: In waste gas holdup tanks, demineralizers and addition to continuous radiation monitoring evaporator systems. In addition to minimizing instruments, samples of effluents are taken l the release of radioactivity, the effluent and subjected to laboratory analysis to identify control program includes all aspects of the specific radionuclide quantities being l effluent monitoring. This includes the released. A sample must be representative of operation and data analysis associated with a the effluent from which it is taken. Sampling l complex radiation monitoring system, and analysis provide a sensitive and precise collection and analysis of effluent samples, method of determining efIluent composition. and a comprehensive quality assurance (QA) Samples are analyzed using state-of-the-art program. Over the years, the program has laboratory counting equipment. Radiation evolved in response to changing regulatory instrument readings and sample results are requirements and plant conditions. For compared to ensure correct correlation. example, additionalinstruments and samplers l have been installed to ensure that Emnent Data measurements of effluents remain onscale in the event of any accidental release of The amount of radioactivity released from radioactivity. TMINS varies and is dependent upon operating conditions, power levels, fuel l O conditions, efliciency ofliquid and gas O Pace 18 l
. -= 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONIMRING REPORT processing systems, and proper functioning of in the atmosphere when released and do not plant equipment. The largest variations occur react chemically or biologically with other in the airborne effluents of fission and materials. Typically, xenon and krypton are activation gases which are particularly the predominant radioactive materials sensitive to the holdup time capability in the released in TMI-l airborne effluents. This gas processing system and to the integrity of was not tme for 1996. The predominant the fuel cladding. radionuclide released in TMI-l airborne effluents was tritium. Lesser amounts of j During 1996, small amounts of radioactive xenon and krypton were released due to materials were released in TMI-l and TMI-2 good fuel integrity. liquid and airborne effluents. The total amount of radioactivity released from TMI-I Specifically,0.571 Ci of xenon (primarily in 1996 was the lowest in its operating Xe-133),0.847 Ci of krypton (primarily history. This notable achievement was due Kr-85) and 0.0909 Ci of Ar-41 were primarily to good fuel integrity, minimal released from TMl-1 to the atmosphere in leakage in the steam generators and 1996. For comparison, approximately 580 improved efficiency of the waste processing Ci of xenon and about 33 Ci of krypton were systems. As expected, the doses potentially released in 1995 TMI-l airborne effluents. received by individuals from 1996 TMI-l A very small amount of xenon (0.00000882 and TMI-2 liquid and airborne effluents Ci) also was released in TMI-l liquid were very low and a small fraction of the effluents. Noble gases were not detected in Federallimits. Doses to the public are 1996 TMI-2 liquid or airborne effluents. discussed in more detail in Radiological Impact of TMINS Operations and Iodines and Particulates: The discharge of Appendix I. radioiodines and radioactive particulates to the emironment is minimized by factors such The amounts of radioactive materials as their high chemical reactivity, solubility in released from TMINS as well as the water, and the high efficiency of removal in associated doses to the public are airborne and liquid processing systems. summarized and reported annually to the USNRC. The following sections discuss the During 1996, iodines were not detected in radioactive constituents of the 1996 TMI-l TMI-2 liquid or gaseous effluents. For and TMI-2 liquid and airborne effluents. TMI-1, I-131 and I-133 were the only They also are summarized in Table 2. All radioiodines released in liquid and gaseous amounts are reported in curies (Ci) to three efIluents. Iodine-131 was released in both significant figures. liquid and airborne effluents while I-133 was released only in airborne effluents. The Noble Gases: Noble gases such as argon, other isotopes ofiodine were not released at xenon and krypton are produced and detectable amounts either because of a very released from operating nuclear power short half-life or a low production rate. For stations. These gases are readily dispersed example, I-129 has a 17 million year half-life O Pace 19
O 4 \\ 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT x but its production in the nuclear fission in TMI-1 gaseous effluents and TMI-2 liquid process is so low that it cannot be detected and gaseous effluents, but at much lower routinely in effluents. amounts. Tritium is a radioactive isotope of hydrogen. It is produced in the reactor The principal radioactive particulates coolant as a result of neutron interaction with released as a result of 1996 TMI-1 the naturally-occurring deuterium (also a ) operations were the radiocesiums (Cs-134 hydrogen isotope) present in water and with and Cs-137), radiostrontiums (Sr-89 and the boron used for reactivity control of the Sr-90) and activation products Fe-55, Co-58, reactor. Co-60, Ag-110m and Sb-125. All of these radionuclides were released in TMI-1 liquid During 1996, the amounts of H-3 released in efflaents. Only Cs-137 was measured in TMI-l liquid and gaseous effluents were TMI-l airborne effluents. For TMI-2, small 167 Ci and 7.94 Ci, respectively. Figure 6 amounts of Sr-90, Cs-134 and Cs-137 were shows the amounts of H-3 released in TMI-l released in liquid effluents. Like TMI-1, liquid effluents for the period 1986-1996. For only Cs-137 was measured in TMI-2 TMI-2, H-3 releases were 0.00117 Ci and airborne effluents. 2.54 Ci for liquids and gases, respectively. To put these amounts ofH-3 into perspective,- The total amounts of radiciodines and O radioactive particulates released from TMI-1 the world inventory of natural cosmic ray U and TMI-2 in 1996 liquid effluents were Produced H-3 is 70 million Ci, which 0.00430 Ci and 0.0000657 Ci, respectively. corresponds, to a production rate of 4 million For airborne effluents, 0.00000725 Ci and Ci/yr (Ref. 37). Tritium contributions to the environment from nuclear power production 0.000000184 Ci of radioiodine and are too small to have any significant effect on radioactive particulates were released from the existing global environmental TMI-1 and TMI-2, respectively, concentrations. The combined amounts of radiciodines and Transuranics: Transuranics are produced by radioactive particulates released in liquid neutron capture m the fuel, and typically emit effluents from TMI-1 for the period of 1986 al ha and beta particles as they decay. P through 1996 are depicted in Figure 5. As ImPortant transuranic isotopes produced in shown in Figure 5, the amount released in rea tors are U-239, plutonium-238 (Pu-238), 1996 was much lower compared to previous Pu-239, Pu-240, Pu-241, americium-241 years. The reduction was due primarily to (Am-241), Pu-243, plus other isotopes of good fuel integrity, mtmmal component americium and curium (Cm). They have leakage and improved efficiency of the half-lives ranging from hundreds of days to hquid waste processing systems. millions of years. Transuranics are mostly retained within the nuclear fuel. Because they Tritium: Tritium was the predom.mant are so insoluble and non-volatile, they are not radionuclide released in 1996 TMI-l hqu.d readily transported from inplant pathways to i efIluents. This radionuclide also was released the environment. Gas and liquid processing pb Pace 20
1 i l 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT systems remove greater than 90% of any transuranics outside the reactor coolant. j Since greater than 99% of all transuranics are i retained within the fuel and transuranic j removal processes are extremely efficient, releases in airborne and liquid effluents are not 4 l routinely detected. 1 l During 1996, transuran;:s were not detected in TMI-1 or TMI-2 effluents. 4 i l 4 l l 9 I 1 i O Page 21
t I C Q 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT i TABLE 2 d I Radionuclide Composition of TMINS Effluents for 1996 ") Liquid Effluents (Cl) Airborne Effluents (Cl) O' G) Esdionuclide Half-Life TMI-I TMI-2 TMI-l TMI-2 H-3 1.23E+1 yr 1.67E+2 1.17E-3 7.94E+0 2.54E+0 Ar-41 1.83E+0 h 9.09E-2 Fe-55 2.70E+0 yr 8.50E-6 i Co-58 7.08E+1 day 2.04E-5 CW 5.27E+0 yr 8.44E-6 Kr-85 1.07E+13r 8.46E-1 Kr-88 2.84E+0 day 1.GtE-3 St-89 5.05E+1 day 2.75E-5 St-90 2.86E+1 r 6.16E-5 4.59E-6 3 Ag-110m 2.50E+2 day 5.55E-7 Sb-125 2.77E+0 3r 3.16E-4 I-131 8.04E+0 day 4.37E-7 2.85E-6 Xe-131m 1.18E+1 day 3.00E-3 1-133 2.08E+1 h 4.32E-6 Xe 133 5.25E+0 day 5.44E-1 Cs 134 2.06E+0 yr 6.74E-4 7.25E-8 Xe-135 9.llE+0 h 8 82E-6 1.63E-2 Xe-135m 1.54E+1 min 8.28E-3 Cs-137 3.02E+13r 3.18E-3 6.10E-5 8.16E-8 1.84E-7 U) The results are expressed in exponential form (i.e.,1.2E-2 = 0.012). O) Refer to List of Abbreviations, Symbols and Acronytns (p. v) for nomenclature of the radionuclides /clements. U) yr = year, h = hour, min = minute Page 22
4 O O O Historical Releases of Radioiodines and Radioactive Particulates in TMI-1 Liquid Effluents mci of Radioiodines and Radioactive Particulates by Year l E Radioiodines and Radioactive Particulates (mci) l 100 t NOll:.: Excludes H-3, noble gases and gross alpha activities 90 4 E i g 30 l {70 l 6 i e0 m l E 50 - = h G i f 40 -- - - - - - - l t ] 30 -- - - - - - - - ( i 5 10 --- 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 f Year Figure 2 eage 23 i
1 O O O Historical Releases of Tritium in TMI-1 Liquid Effluents Curies of Tritium by Year i BTritium (Ci) 800 i 7( f i 600 -- - - - 500 -- - - - - - - ----------------------- -------- 2 4 2 3 400 E b 300 ---- ---------- 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Year i Figure 3 ease a
1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT RADIOLOGICAL I ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING l GPU Nuclear conducts a comprehensive radiological environmental monitoring program j (REMP) at TMINS to measure levels of radiation and radioactive materials in the environment. I The information obtained from the REMP is then used to determine the effect of TMINS operations, l if any, on the environment and the public. .U The USNRC has established regulatory guides which contain acceptable monitoring practices. l The TMINS REMP was designed on the basis of I these regulatory guides along with the guidance provided by the USNRC Radiological Assessment i Branch Technical Position for an acceptable radiological environmental monitoring program (Ref. 38). The TMINS REMP meets or exceeds the monitoring requirements set forth by the USNRC. O Page 25
1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT The important objectives of the REMP are: cows may be transferred into milk, which is subsequently consumed by man. This route of m To assess dose impacts to the public exposure is referred to as the from TMINS operations. air-grass-cow-milk-human pathway. e To verify inplant controls for the Although radionuclides can reach humans by a containment of radioactive materials. number of pathways, some are more important than others. The critical pathway a To determine buildup oflong-lived for a given mdionuclide is the one that radionuclides in the environment and produces the greatest dose to a population, or changes in background radiation levels. to a specific segment of the population. This segment of the population is termed the M To provide reassurance to the public that critical group, and may be defined by age, the program is capable of adequately diet, or other cultural factors. The dose may assessing impacts and identifying be delivered to the whole body or confined to noteworthy changes in the radiological a specific organ; the organ receiving the status of the environment. greatest fraction of the dose is termed as the critical organ. This information was used to u To fulfill the requirements of the TMI-1 develop the THENS REhD). and TMI-2 Technical Specifications. Sampling Environmental Exposure Pathways to Humans from Airborne and Liauid The TMINS PEMP consists of two phases -- Emuents the preoperational and the operational. Data gathered in the preoperational phase is used as As previously discussed (Emuents), small a basis for evaluating radiation levels and amounts of radioactive materials are released radioactivity in the vicinity of the plant after to the enviromnent as a result of operating a the plant becomes operational. The commercial nuclear power station. Once operational phase began in 1974 at the time released, these materials move through the TMI-l became operational. environment in a variety of ways and may eventually reach humans via breathing, The program consists of taking radiation drinking, eating and direct exposure. These measurements and collecting samples from the routes of exposure are referred to as environment, analyzing them for radioactisity environmental exposure pathways. Figure 18 content, and then interpreting the results. illustrates the imponant exposure routes. With emphasis on the critical exposure pathways to humans, samples from the As can be seen from this figure, these aquatic, atmospheric, and terrestrial exposure pathways are both numerous and environments are collected. These samples varied. While some pathways are relatively include, but are not limited to, air, water, simple, such as inhalation of airborne sediment, finfish, milk, fmits, vegetables and radicactive materials, others may be complex. groundwater. Thermoluminescent dosimeters For example, radioactive airbome particulates (TLDs) are placed in the environment to may deposit onto forage which when eaten by measure gamma radiation levels. Page 26 u
(A) 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT v The Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, Analysis ODCM, (Ref. 39) implements the TMI-l and TMI-2 Technical Specifications and defines In addition to specifying the media to be the sample types to be collected and the collected and the number of sampling analyses to be performed. As appropriate, locations, the ODCM also specifies the changes to the REMP are initiated by the frequency of sample collection and the types recommendations from the scientific staff of and frequency of analyses to be performed. GPU Nuclear Environmental Affairs of Also specified are analytical sensitivities TMINS. However, the minimum sampling (detection limits) and reporting levels. Table and analysis requirements specified in the A-2 in Appendix A provides a synopsis of the ODCM are maintained. sample types, number of sampling locations, collection frequencies, number of samples Sampling Iccations were established by collected, types and frequencies of analyses, considering topography, meteorology, and number of samples analyzed. Table A-3 population distribution, hydrology, areas of in Appendix A lists samples which were not public interest and land use characteristics of collected or analyzed per the requirements of the local area. The sampling locations are the ODCM. Sample analyses which did not divided into two classes, indicator and meet the required analytical sensitivities are control. Indicator locations are those which presented in Appendix B. Changes in sample Q are expected to show effects from TMINS collection and analysis are described in V operations, if any exist. These locations were Appendix C. selected primarily on the basis of where the highest predicted environmental Mer.rement oflow radionuclide concentrations would occur. The indicator ccacentrations in environmental media locations are typically within a few miles of requires special analysis techniques. TMINS. Analytical laboratories use state-of-the-art laboratory equipment designed to detect all Control stations are located generally at three types of radiation emitted (alpha, beta, distances greater than 10 miles from TMINS. and gamma). This equipment must meet the The samples collected at these sites are analytical sensitivities required by the ODCM. expected to be unaffected by TMINS Examples of the specialized laboratory operations. Data from control locations equipment used are germanium detectors with provide a basis for evaluating indicator data multichannel analyzers for determining relative to natural background radioactivity specific gamma-emitting radionuclides, liquid and fallout from prior nuclear weapon tests. scintillation counters for detecting H-3 and Figures 2,3 and 4 show the current sampling low level proponional counters for detecting locations around TMI. Table A-1 in gross alpha and beta radioactivity. L Appendix A describes the sampling locations by distance and azimuth along with the type (s) Calibrations of the counting equipment are of samples collected at each sampling performed by using standards traceahle to the location. NationalInstitute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Computer hardware and Q software used in conjunction with the Page 27 4
^ 1996 RAD OLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT counting equipment perform calculations and aspects of the REMP including sample provide data management. Analysis methods collection, equipment calibration, laboratory are described in Appendix L. analysis and data review. Data Review The QA program is designed to identify possible deficiencies so that immediate The analytical results are routinely reviewed corrective action can be taken. It also by GPU Nuclear scientists to assure that provides a measure of confidence in the sensitivities have been achieved and that the results of the monitoring program in order to proper analyses have been performed. assure the regulatory agencies and the public Investigations are conducted when action that the results are valid. The QA program levds or USNRC reporting levels are reached for the measurement of rsdioactivity in or when anomalous values are discovered. environmental samples L implemented by: The action levels were established by GPU Nuclear and are typically 10 percent of the 5 Auditing all REMP-related activities USNRC reporting levels specified in the including analytical laboratories. ODCM. These levels are purposely set low so that corrective action can be initiated before a a Requiring analytical laboratories to reporting levelis reached. This review participate in a cross-check program (s). process is discussed in more detail in Appendix D. R Requiring analytical laboratories to split samples for separate analysis Pecounts Table 3 provides a summary of radionuclide are performed when samples cannot be concentrations detected in the primary split). environmental samples for 1996. Statistical methods used to derive this table along with a Splitting samples, having the samples other statistical conclusions are detailed in analyzed by independent laboratories, Appendix H. Quality :ontrol (QC) sample and then comparing the results for results were used mainly to verify the primary agreement. sample result or the first result in the case of a duplicate analysis. Therefore, the QC results a Reviewing QC results of the analytical were excluded from Table 3 and the main text laboratories including spike and blank of this report to avoid biasing the results. sample results and duplicate analysis results. Ouality Assurance Program The QA program and the results of the A quality assurance (QA) program is cross-check programs are outlined in conducted in accordance with guidelines Appendix E and F, respectively. provided in Regulatory Guide 4.15, " Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring The TLD readers are calibrated monthly j Prograins" (Ref. 40) and as required by the against standard TLDs to within five percent Technical Specifications. It is documented by of the standard TLD values. Also, each group GPU Nuclear written policies, procedures, of TLDs processed by a reader contains and records. These documents encompass all control TLDs that are used to correct for Page 28
1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT v minor variations in the reader. The accuracy In addition to the GPU Nuclear REMP, the and variability of the results for the control USNRC and the Pennsylvania State Bureau of TLDs are examined for each group of TLDs Radiation Protection (PaBRP) also maintain to assure the reader is functioning properly. surveillance programs in the TMI area. These In addition, each element (TLD) has an programs provide independent assessments of individual correction factor based on its radioactive releases and the radiolcgical i response to a known exposure. impact on the surrounding environment. The 1 results from these programs have compared i Other cross-checks, calibrations, and favorably with those from the GPU Nuclear 1 certifications are in-place to assure the program. accuracy of the TLD program: GPU Nuclear Three Mile Island a Semiannually, randomly selected TLDs Environmental Affairs Department collects are sent to an independent laboratory and analyzes samples of the TMINS liquid where they are irradiated to set doses not discharge as a QC check for the inplant known to GPU Nuclear. TLDs which effluent sampling program. Results from the meet the criteria specified by the National REMP samples were consistent with the Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation radioactivity measured inplant prior to release. Program (NVLAP) are used for this test. O The GPU Nuclear dosimetry laboratory h processes the TLDs and the results are comparea against established limits. 5 Every two years, each TLD is checked to ensure an appropriate correction factor is assigned to each element of the TLD. s Every two years, GPU Nuclear's dosimetry program is examined e.nd NVLAP recertified by the NIST. 5 Ten emironmental TLD stations have vendor-supplied quality control badges which are processed by the vendor. The results are compared against GPU Nuclear TLD results. The environmental dosimeters were tested and qualified to the American National Standard Institutes (ANSI) publication N545-1975 and the USNRC Regulatory Guide 4.13 (Refs. 41 and 42). The results for some of these tests v were published in the Health Physics Journal (Ref. 43). Page 29
.... - -. - - - - - - - -. - ~. -. _.. _.... -. - -... 1 ij l i Figure 4 i ( ) 4 i h. 1 r~~~g'" s.... / \\. 348 rs' ~ ~N AE } i \\ (k p N L i \\ E 33.75 N I 326 25-jj /x } ~ y A \\ i / k HILL - B '\\ d / .lSLAND /R \\' p ]t s ( y \\ N se2s \\ f s 7' N } ,/ i Y \\/ [ 7 '- { \\ o' f ~D in - I:3.. y \\w ur{ ist 78 75-P / c
- N,y \\j;THREE**Y
/ 28t25-f. 2 h,' t ISL D,! N
- lS
- sie,
,,, tT l t un d '
- 2" 0125-258 75*
u ase p .) 333 -M $i 1 MILE l \\ L) "j . / \\ ,\\ i \\ i \\ C; L \\j'\\v 2375' N si.. l 'N \\y[N. ./ g \\ \\K 'N ( / 1 i ( \\. \\o 5 h s 213 75- ) s\\,y x \\ s ea rs-j (s' 1212e-s' 4 g \\d (/ / 0 N s\\ 1 N w 9 / s [t( j x xx s / \\, 'y) g ( j i N xx 3 sd Locations of REMP Stations 1 Within 1 Mile of TMINS Page 30
-......_.~.... _ _. =.-. Figure 5 h 34875* t125' A l ,_-,_._-R'~~-'-~
- '8
~ 'G 'x 3375' 326 25' p gg ~ ~ N .a .N l rQ9R' N (a \\y 's i 303;p,.. ' s q,, s se as- /s't [.,' M1 l T WN '\\ k-A x x k,b\\[V \\ p 's. D ONDONDER \\ T / TW \\ s / - 's s ;w 7" 4 s t('2s '[' X a. O bOLDSB RO{ / .(.M / i \\ N*" E gu 7 h-(f I"l-2se z / 0125-MILES f\\ \\ s.,,V. b ) A ;'s u v x
- e.,
e s u, ~ ~ / e-N y.s ax / e. x n /12375-N NEWBERRY \\cs 'N 236 25' TWP 's L\\ ,\\ t'% n'N x 's. G \\d2s / N \\ s \\ KN e" H j ]s.~~'Q 'n \\ wS-s _.ng ~ - O Locations of REMP Stations 1 to 5 Miles from TMINS Page 31
O Figure 6 i O l \\ 34875* A n25' f ', B N 32625' 5 's. N \\ \\ 'N LEBANON i 30375' q A r / g@ f 5625' 4 s -f N e, HA ISbR e HERSHEY PALMYRA \\ s \\ s?"q 77~ RT.322 x M$ h[s /, l f lj - gp / HILL 7 h / MECHA CSBURG
\\
MDC.
- 0) = Indicator Station (C) = Control Station l
1 TABLE 6 l 1996 Average Gross Alpha Concentrations in Airborne Particulates (pCi/m') Station Description Averare +/- 2 std dev* 1 ) BI-4(I) TMINS North Gate 0.0012
- 0.0006 l
H310) Falmouth 0.0012
- 0.0007 M2-1(1)
Goldsboro 0.0013 0.0008 Q4-1(I) Hbg. International Airport 0.0014
- 0.0008 J15-1(C)
York 0.0013
- 0.0008 Q15-1(C)
West Fainiew 0.0014
- 0.0009
- Averages and standard deviations are based on concentrations > MDC.
Ig
- 0) = Indicator Station (C) = Control Station Pace 53 i
O O O 1996 Gross Beta Concentrations in Air Particulates Picocuries per Cubic Meter by Week --Indicator Control 0.050 NOTE: Results from one and two day samples were not included. 0.045 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0.040 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- 0.035 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - g 152 .o 0.030 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - S O Q 0.025 - t E 5 0.020 --- 8 1 2 0.015 -- - - - - - 0.010 -- - - - - - - 0.005 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------------------------------ --------------- 0.000
- :::.E.....:...E.....:...:..:.
5.......: S S 8 2 $ S S S a a a 8 $ @ $ S g 5 g g3 $y $ 2
- 8 a
a a s a Month / Day of 1996 Figure 8 eage s i r r3 1 ( V Historical Gross Beta Concentrations in Air Particulates Picoeuries per Cubic Meter by Quarter Indicator Samples -Control Samples 0.4 Sienificant Events Maior Atm.NuclearWeatxmTests TMI-I Critical June 1974 March 1972 June 1973 M-2 Nat Mmh IW8 Junei m SeptemM1m 0.35 -- - - - - - - - - TMI-2 Accident March 1979 September 1976 November 1976 TMI-2 RB Purge June 1980 September 1977 March 1978 Chemobyl April 1%6 December 1978 October 1%0 0.3 -- - - - - - - - - ----------------- -- ------------------------------------- B52 0.25 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---------- --------. .o_ O 5 0.2 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -------------------- ------------------ a. c)8 0.15 -t---- 2 T \\t l \\ l f l 0.1 - s 0.05 - O R R R R R R R R 8 5 2 2 3 2 8 E a 8 M 2 3 8 8 s .u u u u a ,u u u u a u u u u ,u u u u u u u u ,u u e e e e e e e Quarter & Year Figure 9 ease 35 O O O 1996 Gross Alpha Concentrations in Air Particulates Picocuries per Cubic Meter by Week Indicator Control 0.0060 NOTE: Actual sample concentrations (positive, negative, zero) were ] plotted. Results from one and two day samples stre not included. 0.0050 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0.0040 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5 a>2 0 j 0.0030 -- - - - ---------------- ------------------- - ----------------- ---- O B Q. ? $ 0.0020 - E Y n. 0.0010 -- - - - - -y-0.0000 -- - - - - --- -------------------- ------- - ------------------------- -0.0010 $hE kN $E $h!$5$bkEhE $E $$5E$k Month / Day of 1996 Figure 10 rage 56 (c pJ pv i i Historical Gross Alpha Concentrations in Air Particulates Picoeuries per Cubic Meter by Quarter Indicator Samples -Control Samples 0.01 NOTE-Prior to 1996. only sample concentrations Sienificant Events Maior Atm. Nuclear Weanon Tests > MDC were plotted. Beginning in 1996, actual sample 311-1 Critical June 1974 March 1972 June 1973 concentrations (positive, negative, zero) were plotted. 311-2 Critical March 1978 June 1974 September 1974 BII-2 Accident March 1979 September 1976 November 1976 Bil-2 RB Purge June 1980 %ptember 1977 March 1978 0.008 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Chernotvyt April 1986 December 1978 October 1980 m e2 .sa 0.006 - S O E ct b 5 0.004............... 8 US k 0.002 -- - - - f[ Missing Data 1974 - 1977 0 R R R R R R R R 8 5 0 8 3 8 5 3 8 8 E 9 8 8 8 8 u u u u u u u u a ,u ,u u u u u u a u u u u u u u u e e e e e e e Quarter & Year Figure 11 Page 37 e r---- -e,-- 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONIMRING REPORT AQUATIC MONITORING 1 Since radioactive materials are released to the Susquehanna River from routine operations at TMINS and this watershed is used as a source for l drinking water and recremional activities, the aquatic environment is monitored extensively for ~ radionuclides of potential TMINS origin. Recreational activities in the TMI reach of the j Susquehanna River include fishing, boating, 1 s'wimming and other water sports. O ueeiterie8 ertae eee tie e vireemeet ie tse vicinity of TMINS was accomplished by collecting and analyzing samples of surface water, drinking water, finfish and river sediments. The indicator (downstream) sampling sites were chosen based on studies of travel time and mixing characteristics for the Susquehanna River. Control samples were collected from locations which were not expected to be affected by I TMINS operations. The impact of TMINS operations was assessed by comparing control sample concentrations to those measured in indicator samples. As applicable, comparisons with results from previous years also were performed. Page 58 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT During 1996, samples from the aquatic A3-2 (Swatara Creek, Middletown, PA), environment were found to contain low Station F15-1 (Chickies Creek, Marietta, concentrations of radioactive materials PA) and Station PI-3 (TMI-l Pretreatment attributable to routine TMINS operations. Building). Control drinking water samples They included H-3 in fish, surface water and were obtained at two water treatment possibly drinking water and Co-60, Cs-134 facilities: Station J15-2 (York Water and Cs-137 in sediments. The Company, York, PA) and Station Q9-1 concentrations found in these samples, (Steelton Water Authority, Steelton, PA). however, were too low to adversely impact humans or the environment. Radionuclides Samples of the TMINS liquid discharge attributable to medical facilities and their (Station Kl-1) also were collected and patients, natural production in the analyzed. The liquid discharge samples atmosphere and fallout from prior nuclear were collected from a location where the weapon tests also were identified in various water was not yet mixed with the aquatic media. Susquehanna River. As appropriate, data from the liquid discharge samples were Samnie Collection and Analysis compared with data obtained from samples collected as part of the TMINS Effluent Surface (raw / unfinished) and drinking Monitoring Program. (finished) water samples were collected at nine stations (four indicators and five All water samples except those collected at controls) and analyzed during 1996. Station F15-1 (Chickies Creek), were Indicator samples were collected from normally obtained by an automatic water locations along the Susquehanna River which compositor. Samples from Chickies Creek were downstream of the TMINS liquid (Station F15-1) were collected as grabs twice discharge outfall. Indicator surface water per week. Grab samples also were collected samples were collected at one location, when the compositors were not operating Station J1-2 (west shore of TMI). Indicator (e.g. AC power loss or sampler drinking water samples were collected at malfunction). The water compositors three water treatment facilities: Station collected a measured volume of water at a G15-1 (Columbia Water Company, preset interval of time (30 or 60 minutes). Columbia, PA), Station G15-2 (Wrightsville These samplers were maintained and Water Supply, Wrightsville, PA) and Station calibrated by instrumentation technicians. G15-3 (Lancaster Water Authority, Columbia, PA). The composite samples normally were retrieved biweekly (every two weeks). To Control samples were collected from the verify that the samplers were operating Susquehanna River upstream of the TMINS properly, a surveillance was performed liquid discharge outfall or from its weekly. Occasionally, composite samples tributaries. Control surface water samples were retrieved weekly to close out a calendar j Ol v'ere collected from three locations: Station Page 59 l 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MON 1110 RING REPORT' i month or quarter. The grab samples Sr-90, H-3 and gamma-emitting l collected from Chickies Creek (Station radionuclides. l F15-1) were composited into weekly or biweekly samples. River sediments from four locations (three l indicators and one control) were collected in The weekly and biweekly composite samples the Spring (May) and Fall (November) of from indicator Stations G15-3 and G15-2 1996. All sedimem samples were collected along with those collected from control using a dredge designed for this purpose. Stations Q9-1, F15-1, A3-2 and PI-3 were Indicator sediment samples were collected at analyzed for low-level I-131 using a a site just downstream of the TMINS liquid chemical separation / concentration technique. discharge outfall (Station Kl-3), at the York Samples of the TMINS liquid discharge also Haven Dam, YHD, (Station J2-1) and at a were analyzed for low-level I-131 employing site on the west shore of TMI, between the the same technique. TMINS liquid outfall and the YHD (Station J1-2). The control samples were obtained All water samples retrieved weekly and from the Susquehanna Riverjust upstream of biweekly were combined by station into TMI(Station Al-3). All sediment samples monthly wmposites and analyzed for H-3 were dried and analyzed for gamma-emitting g and gamma-emitting radionuclides, including radionuclides. The samples collected in I I-131. Monthly gross beta analyses also November also were analyzed for Sr-89 and O were performed on all drinking water Sr-90. samples and the samples collected from Stations PI-3 and Kl-1. Semiannual Water Results composite samples were prepared for each station from the monthly samples and then Iodine-131 may be a constituent of TMI-l analyzed for Sr-89 and Sr-90. liquid effluents. This radionuclide also is discharged to the Susquehanna River and its In 1996, electroshocking equipment and tributaries by medical facilities and their hook and line were used to collect finfish patients via the municipal sewage system. samples in the Spring (May and June) and Institutions such as hospitals utilize this Fall (October). To monitor the progression material for diagnostic studies of the thyroid of radionuclides through the food chain, and thyroid therapy. Iodine-131 from bottom feeding finfish as well as predator medical facilities and their patients is species were collected. Indicator samples commonly detected in REMP samples were collected from zones or areas because the methods used to treat sewage do immediately downstream of the TMINS not remove this material. liquid discharge outfall, while control specimens were gathered from locations During 1996, I-131 above the mimimum l greater than ten miles upstream of TMI. detectable concentration (MDC) was l The edible portions were analyzed for Sr-89, detected in 14 control surface water samples. Iodine-131 above the MDC also was Page 60 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT identified in 5 samples collected from detected in the liquid discharge sample (1.7 Station K1-1, the TMINS liquid discharge. 0.3 pCi/L) and two control samples. The None of the indicator surface or drinking control samples collected at Stations P1-3 water samples collected in 1996 contained and A3-2 contained I-131 at a concentration I-131 above the MDC. of 2.010.3 pCi/L and 2.010.4 pCi/L, respectively. The similarity of the control The I-131 concentrations measured in and discharge results indicated that medical control surface water samples ranged from facilities and their patients, and not TMINS, 0.33 0.25 pCi/L to 2.0 i 0.4 pCi/L and was the source of the I-131 detected in these averaged 0.8 i 1.1 pCi/L. For samples. comparison, the average I-131 concentration for 1995 control surface water samples was Even though I-131 was detected in the liquid 0.64 i 0.91 pCi/L. The medical industry discharge samples, this material was not was responsible for the presence of I-131 in detected above the MDC in any of the all 1996 control surface water samples. indicator surface or drinking water sar. d t collected during 1996. This was expo A During 1996,5 of 29 TMINS liquid because indicator samples were obtained at discharge samples (weekly or biweekly locations where substantial mixing of liquid composites) contained I-131 above the effluents with river water has occurred. MDC. The I-131 concentrations ranged Additionally, I-131 is effectively removed from 0.53 i 0.27 pCi/L to 1.7 0.3 pCi/L when water is processed for drinking. and averaged 0.92 0.91 pCi/L. In 1996, H-3 above the MDC was measured The presence of I-131 in the liquid discharge in 50% of the monthly indicator surface samples, like control surface water samples, water samples. Tritium above the MDC was was attributed to medical facilities and their nct identified in any of the monthly control patients. When detected in a liquid surface water samples. Table 7 lists the discharge sample, I-131 at a similar annual average H-3 concentrations and for concentration also was detected in an the samples collected at each surface water upstream (control) sample (s) collected station. Also included in the table are the during the same or previous sampling annual average concentrations based on period. The data obtained from the samples actual sample concentrations, whether collected as part of the TMINS Effluent positive, negative or zero. Monitoring Program also supported this conclusion. As expected, H-3, a component of TMINS liquid effluents, was detected in 6 of 12 Only one batch release in 1996 contained monthly surface water samples collected at low level I-131 above the MDC. This indicator Station J1-2. This station is batch, like all others, was diluted prior to located just downstream of the TMINS J release. For the collection period which liquid discharge outfall where mixing of included the batch release, I-131 was liquid effluents with river water is Page 61 l O t 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT incomplete. More complete mixing is not A dose estimate was not performed for H-3 achieved until liquid effluents pass over the in surface water because this medium York Haven Dam. normally is not consumed by humans. All j of the H-3 concentrations measured in The annual average H-3 concentration for surface water during 1996 were, however, the samples collected at Station J1-2 was below the USEPA Primary Drinking Water 1200 t 3200 pCi/L. The results ranged Standard of 20,000 pCi/L. from 100 60 pCi/L to 4100 400 pCi/L. For comparison, H-3 was detected in all In 1996, H-3 above the MDC was measured monthly samples collected at Station J1-2 in in only one indicator and three control 1995. The concentrations ranged from 400 drinking water samples. Table 7 lists the i 80 pCi/L to 30000 300 pCi/L and annual average H-3 concentrations for the j averaged 5000 17000 pCi/L. The 1995 samples collected at each drinking water average and maximum concentrations were station. Also included are the annual biased high by a grab sample taken during a average concentrations based on actual release of high activity H-3. sample concentrations, whether positive, j negative or zero. Lower H-3 concentrations and fewer samples with concentrations greater than the MDC Tritium at concentrations greater than the t i were realized in 1996. This was a direct MDC was measured in three samples V result of releasing lower amounts of H-3 to collected from Control Station Q9-1 the Susquehanna River. Approximately 170 (Steelton Water Authority). The results Ci of H-3 were released in liquid effluents in ranged from 95 58 pCi/L to 140 60 1996, whereas, more than 500 Ci were pCi/L and averaged 120 50 pCUL. The released in 1995. concentrations measured in the 1996 control samples were consistent with those measured Figure 12 depicts the 1996 monthly trends of in previous years. The presence of H-3 in H-3 concentrations in surface water samples these samples was attributed to fallout from collected at Station J1-2. Actual prior weapon tests and natural production of concentrations (whether positive, negative or this material in the atmosphere. zero) were plotted. For comparison, the actual monthly H-3 concentrations measured Only one indicator drinking water sample in the TMINS liquid discharge samples also collected in 1996 contained H-3 above the are depicted in Figure 12. As shown by MDC. The indicator sample collected in Figure 12, the H-3 concentrations found in March from Station G15-3 (Lancaster Water the samples obtained from Station J1-2 were Authority) contained H-3 at a concentration directly related to those detected in the of110 70 pCi/L. For comparison, H-3 TMINS liquid discharge samples (Station above the MDC was measured in eight R1-1). Historical trends of H-3 indicator drinking water samples collected in cancentrations in surface water are shown in 1995. The 1995 concentrations ranged from n Figure 13. 110 70 pCi/L to 320 90 pCi/L and I \\ ( N) Page 62 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT averaged 200 i 160 pCi/L. The H-3 drinking water samples was most likely due concentrations measured in indicator to fallout or natural production. drinking water samples, like indicator surface water samples, weie lower in 1996 The average H-3 concentration for and fewer samples contained H-3 above the September indicator samples (68 pCi/L) was MDC. This primarily was due to releasing somewhat higher than the average lower amounts of H-3 in 1996. concentration for September controls (-9.5 pCi/L). Tritium was routinely released in Tritium was discharged in 1996 TMINS 1996 TMINS liquid effluents and it is liquid effluents and it is possible that a small possible that a portion of the H-3 detected in portion of the H-3 measured in the indicator the September indicator drinking water drinking water sample may be related to samples was due to TMINS operations. This TMINS operations. However, because 1) conclusion was supported by the liquid the indicator and control sample discharge sample data. As shown in Figure concentrations were similar and 2) very low 14 (lower), the highest H-3 concentration amounts of H-3 were released in March was measured in the September liquid liquid effluents, most, if not all, of the H-3 discharge sample. Additionally, the present in the indicator sample was due to September concentration was at least 5 times fallout from prior nuclear weapon tests and higher than the next highest result. natural production of this material in the atmosphere. To put this into perspective, the net average H-3 concentration (i.e. the difference Figure 14 (upper) displays the average between the September indicator average and monthly H-3 concentrations measured in the the September control average) of 1996 indicator and control drinking water approximately 78 pCi/L represented less samples. Instead of only using than 0.4% of the Primary Drinking Water concentrations above the MDC, actual Standard. Furthermore, if an individual concentrations (whether positive, negative or drank water at this concentration for an zero) were used for the graph. This method entire year, the whole body dose would be eliminated biases in the data and missing 0.0081 mrem. This calculated hypothetical data points. For comparison, the actual H-3 whole body dose is equivalent to 0.0027% concentrations obtained from samples of the whole body dose that an individual collected monthly at Station K1-1 also were living in the TMI area receives each year included in Figure 14 (lower), from natural background radiation (300 mrem). Except for September results, the average monthly H-3 concentrations calculated for The monthly composites of all drinking indicators were either consistent with or water, surface water from Station P1-3 lower than those calculated for controls (TMI-1 Pretreatment Building) and the (Figure 14, upper). This indicated that the TMINS liquid discharge samples from H-3 measured in both indicator and control Station K1-1 were analyzed for gross beta Page 63 1 l i (Jn) 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONAIENTAL MONITORING REPORT \\ l activity. Table 8 lists the annual average results indicated that gross beta radioactivity ) gross beta concentrations for drinking and detected in all drinking water samples was surface water stations. Actual attributed to naturally-occurring concentrations are included for comparison. radionuclides. The indicator drinking water samples The 1996 average gross beta concentration collected in 1996 had an annual average for samples collected from Station PI-3 gross beta concentration of 2.6 1.3 pCi/L (TMI-l Pretreatment Building) was similar while the average concentration for 1996 to the average concentration calculated for control drinking water samples was 2.7 samples collected from Station K1-1 1.5 pCi/L. The 1996 averages were (TMINS Liquid Discharge). The average consistent with the 1995 averages of 2.8 i gross beta concentrations were 2.9 i 1.8 1.6 pCi/L and 2.6 1.6 pCi/L for pCi/L and 4.5 i 2.8 pCi/L, respectively. indicators and controls, respectively. Similar average concentrations were calculated in 1995 for samples collected The monthly gross beta averages for from Station PI-3 (3.8 i 3.0 pCi/L) and indicator and control drinking water are Station Kl-1 (5.3 i 5.1 pCi/L). Like plotted in Figure 15. Actual concentrations drinking water, all samples collected from were used for this graph. Generally, Stations Pl-3 and K1-1 had gross beta indicator and control sample concentrations concentrations well below the Federal and v trended similarly throughout the year. State Primary Drinking Water Standard of Minor differences were evident, but 50 pCi/L. expected. Monthly composite samples of surface, The variability in the gross beta drinking and effluent water were analyzed concentrations was directly related to the for the presence of gamma-emitting type of treatment and the ovenll radionuclides. None of the samples contaminant removal efficiency of each collected in 1996 contained detectable levels water treatment facility. For example, of reactor-produced, gamma-emitting suspended solids with adsorbed man-made or radionuclides. Naturally-occurring K-40 naturally-occurring radioactive materials are was measured in one control drinking water removed from raw river water by common sample. treatment processes such as filtration and sedimentation. The amount removed by Semiannual composite samples were these processes will vary as a function of the prepared from monthly composites and then individual system design and operation. analyzed for the presence of Sr-89 and Sr-90. During 1996, none of the surface or All of the drinking water results for 1996 drinking water samples contained detectable were well below the Federal and State levels of Sr-89 or Sr-90. Additionally, Sr-89 Primary Drinking Water Standard of 50 and Sr-90 were not detected in semiannual pCi/L for gross beta radioactivity. The composite samples which were prepared Page 64 j l l 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT from the monthly TMINS liquid discharge Tritium was detected in all indicator fish samples. samples collected in the Spring and Fall. The H-3 concentrations ranged from 0.080 Esh Results 0.046 pCi/g (wet) to 0.22 0.05 pCi/g (wet) and averaged 0.14 i 0.12 pCi/g In the Spring (May and June) and Fall (wet). Tritium above the MDC was not (October) of 1996, fish samples were detected in the 1996 csontrol samples. collected at indicator and control locations. They included recreationally important Since H-3 was identified in indicator predators (Smallmouth bass and Largemouth samples and not in the controls, a portion of bass) and bottom feeders (Yellow bullhead, the H-3 measured in the indicator samples White catfish and Channel catfish). All was attributed to routine TMINS operations, samples were analyzed for gamma-emitting A portion of the H-3 detected in these radionuclides, Sr-89, Sr-90, and H-3. samples also was due to fallout and natural production in the atmosphere. As expected, naturally-occurring K-40 was detected in all fish samples. Cesium-137 was A conservative dose estimate was performed measured above the MDC in the Spring assuming that an individual consumed fish indicator predator sampe at a concentration flesh with the highest H-3 concentration for of 0.0069 i 0.0052 pCi/g (wet). The result one year. The maximum hypothetical whole was consistent with the Cs-137 concentration body dose was 0.00049 mrem. This dose is detected in the 1994 control predator sample equivalent to 0.00016% of the dose that an (0.0076 i 0.0039 pCi/g, wet). The individual living in the TMI area receives presence of Cs-137 in the 1996 indicator each year from natural background radiation. sample was most likely due to fallout from prior nuclear weapon tests. This conclusion Sediment Results was supported by two other facts. Very low amounts of Cs-137 were released in 1996 In May and November of 1996, aquatic liquid effluents. Additionally, other sediment samples were taken from the radioactive materials released in 1996 TMI Susquehanna River upstream and liquid effluents were not detected in the downstream of the TMINS liquid discharge indicator samples. outfall. All samples were analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. The samples Strontium-89 was not detected above the collected in November also were analyzed MDC in any of the 1996 fish samples, for Sr-89 and Sr-90. Strontium-90 was measured in one control sample at a concentration of 0.0039 Strontium-89 and Sr-90 were not detected 0.0024 pCi/g (wet). Its presence in the 1996 above the MDC in any of the 1996 sediment control sample was attributed to fallout from samples. The control sample was initially past nuclear weapon tests, reported by the laboratory to contain Sr-90 above the MDC. A reanalysis was O Page 65 O 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONhfENTAL MONITORING REPORT performed and yielded a result below the of the Cs-137 detected in the indicator MDC. The laboratory determined that the samples was due to TMINS operations. sample holder used in the original analysis was slightly contaminated. Figure 16 depicts Cs-137 concentrations m J river sediments from 1984 through 1996. Naturally-occurring Be-7, K-40, Ra-226, As shown in this figure, no discernible thorium-232 (Th-232) as well as fallout buildup of Cs-137 occurred at indicator j Cs-137 were identified in both indicator and locations prior to 1995. This was primarily control samples. Iodine-131 also was due to periodic scouring or removal of measured in the control sample collected in bottom sediments during high river flows the Spring. Its presence was attributed to (Ref. 44). High river flows typically are medical facilities and their patients. The caused by snow melts in the Spring and large samples collected from Indicator Station amounts of rainfall. Ki-3 also contained radionuclides associated with TMINS operations. They included Even though the amounts of Cs-137 and Co-60, Cs-134 and Cs-137. All of these Cs-134 released in TMINS liquid effluents radionuclides are readily adsorbed by were similar to or below those released in suspended and bottom sediments. 1993 and 1994, a buildup of Cs-137 and Cs-134 occurred in 1995 (Figure 16). q I Annual average Cs-137 concentrations for Temporary, the buildup was caused by lower indicator and control samples were 0.19 than normal river flows during the year and 0.13 pCi/g (dry) and 0.073 0.030 pCi/g especially in the spring months when most (dry), respectively. Indicator sample scouring occurs. concentrations ranged from 0.13 i 0.02 pCi/g (dry) to 0.29 0.03 pCi/g (dry). As shown in Figure 16, the average Cs-137 Control sample concentrations were concentrations in 1996 indicator samples somewhat lower, ranging from 0.063 i trended downward. The reduction was due 0.025 pCi/g (dry) to 0.084 0.024 pCi/g to relering lower amounts of Cs-137 and (dry). For comparison,1995 average having higher than average river flows Cs-137 concentrations were 0.67 i 0.83 which increase dilution ofliquid effluents. pCi/g (dry) and 0.12 i 0.10 pCi/g (dry), for indicators and controls, respectively. Additionally, a very high river flow occurred in January of 1996. This event Cesium-137 is a fallout product of weapons significantly scoured bottom sediments in the testing as well as a constituent of TMINS York Haven Pond (YHP) and significantly liquid effluents. Since the 1996 indicator reduced the amount of TMINS-related sample concentrations were higher than materials detected in indicator sediments. those measured in the control samples and Sediments which are scoured from the YHP other reactor-related materials (e.g. Co-60 and then transported downstream, will be and Cs-134) also were present, an increment diluted or mixed with sediments not impacted by TMINS operations. Page 66 19.96 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT Cesium-134 was detected above the MDC in mrem /yr was a small percentage (0.00023 %) both samples collected at Indicator Station of the dose received by an individual from K1-3 during 1996. This radionuclide was natural background radiation (300 mrem /yr). not measured above the MDC in the other indicator or control samples. The presence of Cs-134 in the samples collected from Station Ki-3 was attributed to TMINS operations. The Cs-134 concentrations averaged 0.019 i 0.004 pCi/g (dry) and ranged from 0.018 i 0.011 pCi/g (dry) to 0.021 i 0.010 pCi/g (dry). For comparison, the 1995 sample results averaged 0.14 0.18 pCi/g (dry) and ranged from 0.059 i 0.017 pCi/g (dry) to 0.33 0.03 pCi/g (dry). Iower concentrations of Cs-134 in 1996 sediments resulted from smaller release amounts, high river flows and significant scouring of the river bottom. The sample collected in May from Station Ki-3 also contained Co-60, a radionuclide released in 1996 TMI-l liquid effluents. The concentration measured in the 1996 sample (0.023 0.010 pCi/g, dry) was similar to those detected in previous years. Like C:;-134 and a portion of Cs-137, its presence was attributed to TMINS operations. Based on annual average concentrations of Co-60, Cs-134 and Cs-137 in samples collected from Station K1-3, an estimate of the shoreline total body dose to the maximally exposed individual was calculated. For this calculation, the annual average control concentration was subtracted from the annual average Station K1-3 J concentration to account for fallout Cs-137. The calculated whole body dose of 0.0069 Page 67 S d i 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE 7 1996 Average Tritium Concentrations in Surface and Drinking Water (pCi/L) Sample Concentrations > MDC") Actual Sample Concentrations '" Station Description Averane +/- 2 std dev . Range Averare +/- 2 std der Ranee Surface Water (" A3-2 (C) Swatara Creek (Middletown, PA) 171 69 (-43) - 61 (" (" PI-3 (C) TMI-l Pretreatment Building 37 SS (-8.7) - 87 "5 (" F15-1 (C) Chickies Creek (Marietta, PA) 31169 (-22) - 79 J1-2 (1) West shore ofTMI 1200
- 3200 100 - 4100 600i2400 39 -4100 Drinkine Water Q9-1 (C)
Steelton Water Authority (Steelton, PA) 120
- 50 95 - 140 69
- 82 14 - 140 J 15-2 (C)
York Water Company (York, PA) 2417I (-33) - 89 G15-1 (I) Columbia Water Company (Columbia, PA) 43
- 70 L3 - 110
(" G15-2 (I) Wrightsville Water Supply (Wrightsville, PA) 29
- 56
(-9.5) - 76 G15-3 (1) Lancaster Water Authority (Columbia, PA) I10 54169 (-0.77)- 110 Averages and ranges are based on sampic results above the minimum detectable concentration (MDC). Duplicate analysis results and quality control sample results are not included. Averages and ranges are based on actual sample concentrations (whether positive, negative or zero). Negatist sample concentrations are enclosed in parentheses. C' Using actual sample concentrations (sample count rate minus background or blank count rate) eliminates biases such as those caused by astraging only sample concentrations above the MDC. Negative sample concentrations are important to the overall avere,-c, but hwe no physical significance. Duplicate analysis results and quality control sample results are not included. (" All monthly sampie results were less than the MDC. (C) = Control (1) = Indicator Page 68 L 1996 RADICLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE 8 1996 Average Gross Beta Concentrations in Surface and Drinking Water I (pCi/L) Sc.mple Concen- + -3 > MDC
- Actual Sample Concentrations
- Station Description Averare +/- 2 std (
Range Ave rsze +/- 2 std dev Range i Surface Water PI-3 (C) TMI-I Pretreatment Building 2.9 1.8 1.5 - 4.3 2.5
- 2.2 0.66 -4.3 linnkine Water Q9-1 (C)
Steelten Water Authority (Steelton, PA) 3.1 t 2.1 2.0-45 2.0
- 2.6 0.51 -4.5 J15-2 (C)
York Water Company (York, PA) 2.4 i 0.6 2.0 - 2.9 2.2
- 1.2 1.0 - 2.9 G15-1 (I)
Columbia Water Company (Columbia, PA) 2.3
- 1.0 1.6 - 3.4 2.3
- 1.C 1.5 - 3.4 G15-2 (1)
Wrightsville Watcr Supply (Wrightsville, PA) 3.0 i 1.5 1.8 - 4.5 3.0
- 1.5 1.8 - 4.5 G15-3 (1)
Lancaster Water Authority (Columbia, PA) 2.5
- 1.2 1.7 - 3.3 2.1
- 1.5 1.0 - 3.3 (1)
Averages and ranges are based on sample results above the minimum detectable concentration (MDC). Duplicate analysis results and quality cont:ol sampic results are not induded. (2) Averages and ranges are based on actual sample concentrations (whether positive, negative or zero). Using actual sample concentrations (sample count rate minus background or blank count rate) to calculate annual averages eliminates bsses such as those caused averaging only sample concentrations abcvc the MDC. Negative sample concentrations are important to the overull average, but have no physical significance. Duplicate analysis results and quality control campie results are not included. i (C) = Control (1) = Indicator i Page 69 O O O CJ 3-1996 Tritium Concentrations in Surface Water Picoeuries per Liter by Month l i I NOVI: Actual sample ccacenut.: ions (positiw. W Station J1-2 (Downstream of Discharge) negative, zceo) wew plotted. scoo E 3 4099 3000 - e QQQQ.............. r a l 1QQQ............................................. s v 0; I - I Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jen Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec [ Mordr. of 1996 i i NOTE: Actual sample cancentradens (msitive-O Station Ki-1 (TMINS Liquid Discharge) r regative, zero) were plotted. ~ I'!!!!.!!i!!!!i'li!::?!?i:!!!*!!!!!:E!!!!!!!!5.Ei!!".i ?!!!!!!i!!ilil!!i:!! I 3 ==,-_.,_,--==,---- .. = ?P 2 10000 - -- !!!E:!!!! !!-!!!i!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.*!!: !!?!i!!!iliis a!!!!!!!:_------- _ _ 5!!:.! e c
- s
- .::::: W : ::::::: ::::::::::::::::::::::_ _ _
_ et;__ s q1 !!!:: 5 ^ -t ____ m 1000 i ;,,.; 5 3 ; o as a a;;;'i-==:___________________ !I__iss=.si:is si: sat: e ew3
- 3 :
=. =... = r i
- 55 fil : :lii:iiiii g;
- g 3,; g
, ; ; -- g ,3 g c ng ;- n - 4 7 .e. 100 -7 e a g g 333 A -o + ~- ya :::.s.:: 10
- pg.
- g
'+... v r m ~y.. m
- +. ;;;
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month of 1996 Figure 12 ease 70 o n a v V U Historical Tritium Concentrations in Surface Water Picocuries per Liter by Quarter Indicator Samples Control Samples i2000 Sienificant Events Major Atm. Nuclear Weanen Tena 11000 -. mI-i cneal Jaim Ju im vmwim TMI-2 Critical March 1973 September 1976 November 1976 TMI-2 Accident March 1979 September 1977 March 1978 10000 -- TM:-21G Purge June 1980 Ikcember 1978 October 1980 lChermbyl Apri:1936 9000 -- - - - -------- --- NOTE: Prior to 1996. only sample concentrations > MDC were plotted. Beginning 3000,- - - I* 1996. actual sample concentrations.(positive, negative, yero) were plotted. _ _ _ _ ____ ___,._ E l 7000 -- --- ---- --- c> ct y @QQ.,...................... c-a 8 g 9 Q. gg... 3000 y - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - k - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---f t gj........................................ 1000 --- - -- b- - n---- / - r - -- -\\ ~ 0 :; n:.:::! n::::Tn :..::.: r" :.. n.::::. n............. R R R R E R 8 E 2 2 3 9 3 3 8 5 a 8 a E 8 ,u ,u ,u u u u u u ,u ,u u 3 s u u u ,u .u .u u u ,u u Quarter & Year p i Figure 13 ease 71 C 0 , i 1996 Tritium Concentrations in Drinking Water Picoeuries per Liter by Month f NOTE: Acmal nmple concintrations (positive, negative, zero) lnd CatOr Samples Control Samples were planed. 200 3.5 150 NOW. MA NWng _VVa:e-Limit for Tritium: 20,000 pCi/L, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _,________ _ I g 100 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ---- ------ --- -------- ------------------ Og 5Q. w. ii' I _100 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec i Month of 1996 4 NODI: Actual sample concentrations (positive, negative, zero) D Station K1-1 (TMINS Liquid Discharge) i were plotted. I O
- 'i:!::!!!;:ie:! 5!: 11!:i: 5;!:!!5!:ii:!;i: 53!!!!!!!=::i!! =!i: 5!:li::!!_i m$
ug ~3 10000 =-....... =::: 5 52.I
- 5
- !:i:!I !;!!!!!!1?!!I!!!!!=!
E !-:-!!s!
- :?!: 5:
-g ? A.F 1000- =s _ _ ;_. M <n .s s: :-= = =>- _s, c ~- i5i 34 _s 7.... _e _.... =_.=..._.____ h-5I?I=i: :: -J - ::::i5 cp m g 3 m:_- $wf::,: 7 s': i,[:--:,,,g,:_:..~- _. y
- m.;[!
100 -,- in ass ,,1 mr 3x _g $p .o i g 555 $ -55 E II i:_ g
- i:
10 , _ -f4-,Ei j_
- : 5 [g Eli
.i 55 g-g.
- . L, _
m g Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month of 1996 i Figure 14 ease n t I O O O 1996 Gross Beta Concentrations in Drinking Water Picocuries per Liter by Month Windcator Samples sinControl Samples 10 NOTE: Actual sample concentrations (positive, negative, zero) 9-- - - - - - 8- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 7-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------------------------------------------------------ h 6- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E i i :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::::::::::::::::::::::~; if 3-1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month of 1996 Figure 15 eage u u Os J o s Historical Cesium-137 Concentrations in Aquatic Sediments Picocuries per Gram (dry) Indicator Samples Control Samples 1 Sienificant Event Chemobyl April 1986 0.9-- 0.8 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ------------- ---- --------- ----------- E 0.7 - P.L h0.6-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 Q 0.5 -- - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- ---------- l0 '-- 0.4 -- - - - - ------ y 8 y 0.3 - b 0.2 -- - - - 0.1 --- --- -- ----------- - [ o E 8 E 4 4 8 4 8 44 4 a$ 4a4a4a3a$ 44 4a44 4a4a 4a4a$ 4 4 4 5 8 a a a Month & Year i I Figure 16 eage 74 4 't O zm aanzotocicai suviaosueurat uouzivaisc asroar TERRESTIUAL MONITORING Radionuclides released to the atmos.phere may i deposit on soil and vegetation. They may eventually be incorporated into milk, meat, j fruits, vegetables, or other food products. To l assess the impact of TMINS operations to j humans from the ingestion pathway, primary food product samples such as green leafy vegetables, root vegetables, fruits, and milk were collected and analyzed during 1996. The ingestion pathway also is normally assessed by j collecting and analyzing indicator and control deer meat samples. No deer meat samples were analyzed in 1996 because indicator samples were l not available. l In addition to edible products, rodent carcasses were analyzed / frisked as part of the TMI-2 Post-l Defueling Monitored Storage (PDMS) Rodent i Collection and Analysis Program. The purpose [ of this program is to determine if radioactive materials have been transported by the movement of animals from radiologically-controlled areas to unrestricted areas. A s
- O Page 75
19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT The mdiological contribution of TMINS Tb purpose of the garden and residence operations was determined by comparing the ceuuses was to locate the nearest garden and results of samples collected in prevalent resideitee in each of the meteorological downwind locations, primarily to the south sectors, respectively. Only gardens of and east of the site, with control samples greater than 500 square feet producing broad collected from distant or generally upwind leaf vegetation were included in the garden directions. Comparipwi with results from census. The results of the residence and previous years also were performed, as garden censuses are listed in Tables G-2 and applicable. G-3 of Appendix G, respectively. The analytical results of samples collected The results of these censuses provide a basis during 1996 indicated that there was no for modifying the environmental monitormg discernible TMINS contribution to program and the models used for calculating radioactivity levels in locally-produced food offsite doses. Based on the 1996 land use products. As expected, Sr-90 was found in surveillance, changes to the REMP and the milk and broad leaf vegetable samples. The dose model were not required. concentrations observed in samples collected near TMINS (indicators) were similar to Sample Collection and Analysis levels observed in samples collected distant from the site (controls) and consistent with During 1996, samples of raw cow milk were data from prior years. The presence of collected biweekly from local farmers at one Sr-90 was attributable to fallout from prior control and six indicator locations. For most atmospheric nuclear weapon tests. of the year, five indicator samples were collected. The farmer at Station A4-1 As part of the REMP, a surveillance was ceased dairy operations in mid-March. performed to identify relevant changes in the Indicator samples were collected at locations use of land (unrestricted areas) around TMI. having a high dose potential. These This land use surveillance consisted of a locations generally were proximate to dairy census, a garden census and a TMINS and in dominant wind directions. residence census. Conversely, the control station was located greater than 10 miles from TMINS in a non-The dairy census was performed to prevalent wind direction. determine the locations of the nearest milk animals within five miles of TMINS in each A gamma isotopic analysis and a low-level of the sixteen meteorological sectors. Also, I-131 analysis were performed on each information on other livestock (beef cattle, biweekly milk sample. The biweekly milk chickens, etc.) within five miles of TMINS samples were then composited quarterly by was gathered. The results are listed in Table station and analyzed for Sr-89 and Sr-90. G-1 of Appendix G. Ripened fruits and vegetables were collected from h> cal farms and residences and from Page 76 1 O 1996 RAlilOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT gardens maintained by GPU Nuclear indicator samples (29%) and one of four Environmental Affairs. A total of seven controls (25 %) contained Sr-90 above the locations (six indicators and one control) MDC. Strontium-90 concentrations in were sampled in 1996. Like milk samples, indicator samples ranged from 0.65 0.37 indicator produce samples were collected at pCi/L to 1.9 0.6 pCi/L and averaged 1.2 locations having a high dose potential, while 0.9 pCi/L. The concentration measured in controls were obtained from distant sites. the control sample was 0.85 0.44 pCi/L. Tomatoes, green peppers, red beets, The Sr-90 concentrations measured in the potatoes, cabbages and sweet corn were 1996 milk samples were consistent with collected. All samples were analyzed for 1995 concentrations which ranged from 0.88 gamma-emitting radionuclides, including 0.17 pCi/L to 2.8 0.3 pCi/L and 0.82 i I-131. Cabbage samples also were analyzed 0.20 pCi/L to 1.7 0.3 pCi/L for indicators for Sr-89 and Sr-90. and controls, respectively. When available, GPU Nuclear analyzes a The station with the highest annual average limited number of rodent carcasses as part of Sr-90 concentration was the dairy farm the non-routine REMP. During 1996, two located 6.7 miles west-northwest of TMINS mice carcasses were frisked and/or analyzed (Indicator Station P7-1). Strontium-90 for gamma-emitting radionuclides. No other above the MDC was detected in only one of rodent carcasses were found in 1996, the four composite samples. The biwe:ldy a sample,s collected and composited during the Milk Results second quarter of 1996 at Station P7-1 were found to contain Sr-90 at a concentration of Iodine-131 was not detected above the 1.9 0.6 pCi/L. This concentration was minimum detectable concentration (MDC) in consistent with the average concentration any of the milk samples collected in 1996. calculated for Station P7-1 in 1995 (1.2 Gamma isotopic analyses yielded only 0.5 pCi/L). Samples collected in previous naturally-cccurring potassium-40 (K-40) and years from other dairy farms also had similar radium-226 (Ra-226). Potassium-40 was Sr-90 concentrations. detected in all 1996 biweekly milk samples. The concentrations measured in the indicator The presence of Sr-90 in milk primarily samples were similar to those measured in resulted from the transfer of this long-lived the controls. Radium-226, a radionuclide fallout product from soil to animal feed commonly measured in soil, was detected in (fresh or stored) to cow to milk. Figure 17 one sample. depicts the trends of Sr-90 concentrations in indicator and control cow milk samples since Strontium analyses were performed on 1979. The data plotted for 1996 was bcsed quarterly composite samples. None of the on actual sample concentrations because samples contained Sr-89 above the MDC. most of the results were below the MDC. As expected, Sr-90 was measured in a Using actual concentrations eliminates biases number of milk samples. Six of twenty-one G Page 77 i l l 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MON 1110 RING REPORT in the data and missing data points on ranged from 0.002810.0005 pCi/g (wet) to graphs. 0.013 1 0.001 pCi/g (wet). The 1995 l control sample contained Sr-90 at a l Generally, the Sr-90 concentrations have concentration of 0.029 0.002 pCi/g (wet). l trended downward. This decrease is related to the cessation of atmospheric nuclear As in previous years, the Sr-90 detecteti in l weapon testing and the radioactive decay and 1996 cabbage samples was attributed to depletion of both atmospheric and terrestrial fallout from prior nuclear weapon tests. The Sr-90 associated with prior weapon testing. detection of this long-lived fallout product was expected because measurable amounts of Terrestrial Vegetation Results Sr-90 are still present in the terrestrial environment. Additionally, cabbages have a Samples of broad leaf vegetables (cabbages), tendency to absorb Sr-90 residing in the soil, fruits (tomatoes, sweet corn and green peppers) and root vegetables (red beets and Rodent Results potatoes) were collected in 1996. Naturally-occurring K-40 was measured in all samples. During 1996, two rodent carcasses were One red beet s mple also contained frisked and then analyzed for gamma-naturally-occur. 3 Be-7. No gamma-emitting radionuclides. Both rodents were emitting radionudides (including I-131) mice and both were found in restricted, but attributable to TMINS operations were radiologically ' clean' areas. One carcass detected above the MDC. was found in the TMI-1 Machine Shop. The other was discovered near the condenser Strontium may become incorporated into vacuum pumps in the TMI-1 Turbine plants by either uptake from soil or direct Building. Gamrna-emitting reactor-related deposition on foliar surfaces. In 1996, none materials were not identified in either of the leafy vegetables (cabbages) contained carcass. Sr-89 above the MDC. Iow-level Sr-90 was detected in the control and three of five No defmitive conclusion can be made on indicator samples. The annual average Sr-90 whether radioactive materials are being concentration for indicator samples was transported by rodents. However, since the 0.006010.0030 pCi/g (wet). The rodent collection and analysis program concentrations ranged from 0.0043 0.0019 began, none of the carcasses collected from pCi/g (wet) to 0.0071 0.0025 pCi/g (wet). either restricted, radiologically ' clean' areas The control sample had a similar Sr-90 or unrestricted areas have contained concentration,0.0043 0.0021 pCi/g (wet). radioactive materials attributable to TMINS operations. The data suggest that rodents The 1996 Sr-90 concentrations were are not transporting radioactive materials to consistent with those reported in previous unrestricted areas. years. In 1995, for example, indicators averaged 0.0061 10.0095 pCi/g (wet) and Page 78 i I 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT n A pest control program is in place at ) TMINS. This program minimizes the potential for rodents to transport radioactive { materials to unrestricted areas. i i i i i 1 l 1 i l e Page 79 O u O, n Historica! Strontium-90 Concentrations in Cow Milk Picocuries per Liter by Quarter indcator Samples Control Samples 10 NO1I!: Prior to 1996, only sample concentrations > MDC Sienificant Events Maior Atm.NuclearWeatwTests - - - - - "* P tied-Pegi_nning in 19,96, actual _ sample _ _ _ TMI-2 Accident March 1979 December 1978 October 1980 1 9-concentrations (positive, negative, rero) were plotted. TMI-2 RB Purge June 1980 Chernobyl April 1986 8-- - - - - - - - - - - --- ---------- - -------------------------------- ------- 7-- - - - - - - - ------ -------------- u .n 6- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5 a. u) 5-- - - - e e-2 8 4 .s2 Q. 3--- 2 1-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - 0 R 8 E 2 9 E E E B E a 8 s R S 3 8 8 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 3 3 3 -5 Quarter & Year Figure 17 Page so l 1 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT l GROUNDWATER MONITORING Three Mile Island (TMI) is located in the Triassic lowland of Pennsylvania, a region often referred to as the Gettysburg Basin. The Island was formed as a result of fluvial deposition by the Susquehanna River. It is composed of sub-rounded to rounded sand and gravel, containing varying amounts of silt and clay. Soil depths on TMI vary from approximately six ikt at the south end to about 30 feet at the center. The site is underlain by Gettysburg shale which lies at i. elevation of approximately 277 feet (Refs. 29 and 30). The Island has two different water-bearing zones. One is composed of the soils overlying the Gettysburg shale (bedrock). The other is the bedrock. Relative to the natural soils, the movement of groundwater is much quicker in the bedrock. Groundwater from TMI migrates to the Susquehanna River, but does not impact onshore groundwater supplies. The migration of TMI groundwater to onshore supplies is prevented by the higher levels and the opposing flows of groundwater which exist beneath the surrounding terrain on the opposite sides of the Susquehanna River. The estimated travel time for groundwater to reach the river from the central portion of TMI is approximately 12 years (Ref. 45). i l Page 81 1 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT A groundwater monitoring program (GMP) attributed to routine TMI-l operations and was initiated around TMI-2 in 1980 to detect previous TMI-2 operations. leakage of water, if any, from the ThU-2 Reactor and Auxiliary Buildings and outside All H-3 concentrations measured in the storage tanks. Since 1980, the TMI GMP water collected from the onsite impoundment has been expanded and now monitors and the onsite monitoring and supply wells activities associated with both TMI-l and were below the USNRC 10 CFR 20 effluent TMI 2. concentration limit. For onsite and offsite groundwater used for drinking, all H-3 A surface water impoundment and 18 onsite concentrations were well below the USEPA monitoring wells, including 4 new wells, Primary Drinking Water Standard of 20,000 were sampled routinely in 1996. Three of pCi/L. the tew wells (MS-19, MS-20 and MS-21) were drilled in the latter part of 1995, but Strontium-90 (Sr-90) also was detected in were not sampled until 1996. The other new one onsite groundwater sample. The Sr-90 well (MS-22) was drilled in November of measured in the sample collected from an L996. The new wells were installed onsite well was attributed to past leaks from i primarily to monitor TMI-l activities and a TMI-2 tank which has since been mined. components. The water collected from the The water collected from the onsite well is onsite monitoring wells and the surface not used for drinking. The measured water impoundment was not used for concentration was well below the USNRC drinking. Two onsite and three offsite 10 CFR 20 effluent concentration limit of drinking water wells also were routinely 500 pCi/L for Sr-90. It also was below the sampled as part of the TMINS GMP. USEPA Primary Drinking Water Standard of 8 pCi/L. On a non-routine basis, groundwater samples were collected from four monitoring wells Based on the concentrations of H-3 and located around an onsite landfill (MW-1, Sr-90 detected in the 1996 groundwater MW-2, MW-3 and MW-4) and three new samples, no adverse impact to humans or the supply wells (NW-A, NW-B and NW-C). envireament resulted. Drilled in September of 1996, the supply i wells are expected to provide water to Sample Collection and Analysis various TMI-l systems in 1997. The water currently used in these systems is obtained All groundwater samples were collected from the Susquehanna River. using standard plumbing, a dedicated, in-well pumping system or a bailing device. During 1996, onsite surface water samples Surface water samples were collected as and onsite and offsite groundwater samples grabs Most groundwater stations were were found to contain H-3 above the sampled quarterly and analyzed for H-3 and minimum detectable concentration (MDC). gamma-emitting radionuclides. The The presence of H-3 in these samples was quarterly samples were then combined into Page 82 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MON 11DRING R;" PORT semiannual composites and analyzed for During 1996, H-3 was the only radionuclide Sr-90. consistently detected in samples collected from the onsite surface water impoundment The samples collected fmm the onsite and the onsite monitoring and supply wells. surface water impoundment (East Dike The presence of H-3 in the samples was Catch Basin, EDCB), the two onsite attributed to routine operations at TMI-1 and dnnking water wells (Operations Support past operations at TMI-2. Facility, OSF and Building 48,48s) and RW-1, a pumped well previously used to Generally, the H-3 concentrations measured recover oil, were collected monthly and in most samples collected from the onsite i analyzed for H-3. Except for those collected monitoring wells trended downward in 1996. from RW-1, the monthly samples were Additionally, the annual average l combined by station into quarterly concentrations generally were similar to or composites and analyzed for gamma-emitting below those calculated for the period just radionuclides. The quarterly composites prior to the operations of the TMI-2 were then combined into semiannual Evaporator (January 1991 through August composites and andyzed for Sr-90. Samples 1993). collected from RW-1 were analyzed only for H-3. The highest H-3 concentrations were p measured in the onsite groundwater samples Nonroutine samples were collected at collected from two recovery wells, RW-1 varying frequencies from several monitoring and RW-2. The wells were originally drilled wells (RW-1, RW-2, MS-19, MS-20, to recover oil from a past pipe leak, but only MS-21 and MS-22), the supply wells and the RW-1 was actually used for oil recovery. OSF well. These samples were analyzed for After the oil recovery process was H-3 only and the data were used to support completed, the wells were included in the specialinvestigations. Precipitation samples TMI GMP to provide additional monitoring also were collected on TMI to support the coverage for TMI-1 activities and systems investigations. (e.g. tanks, components and pipes). Groundwater Results The average H-3 concentrations for samples collected in 1996 from RW-1 and RW-2 locations of the onsite groundwater stations were 99,000 230,000 pCi/L and 5,700 i sampled in 1996 are shown in Figures J-1 21,000 pCi/L, respectively (Table J-1). and J-2 (Appendix J). Offsite groundwater Maximum concentrations for RW-1 stations are depicted in Figures 2 and 3 (450,000 50,000 pCi/L) and RW-2 (Radiological Environmental Monitoring). (58,000 6,000 pCi/L) were measured in The 1996 sample results are summarized in January. Generally, the H-3 concentrations Table J-1 of Appendix J. For comparison, in the water collected from both wells Table J-1 also includes 1995 station decreased over the last 11 months of 1996. p averages. U Pace 83 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT The groundwater collected from RW-1 and 1996 were consistent with 1995 results RW-2 was impacted from leakage of system (Table J-1). The 1995 average H-3 i components which then migrated to the concentration for samples collected from ground near these wells. Higher H-3 from the OSF and 48s were 1500 640 concentrations were expected in RW-1 pCi/L and 450 i 1000, respectively, samples because the well is equipped with a pump which draws the groundwater to the The H-3 detected in these samples primarily well. When pumped, the water from RW-1 was attributed to routine operations at TMI-1 is routed directly to the Turbine Building (e.g. routine airborne releases) and possibly Sump (TBS) and further diluted prior to past operations at TMI-2 (e.g. prior airborne release. The H-3 activity in the water is releases from the TMI-2 Evaporator). accounted for in TMINS liquid effluents. All of the H-3 concentrations detected in the Tritium above the minimum detectable onsite drinking water were a small fraction concentration (MDC) was measured in the of the USEPA Primary Drinking Water groundwater collected from the four new Standard of 20,000 pCi/L. monitoring wells (MS-19, MS-20, MS-21 and MS-22) and the three new supply wells Tritium above the minimum detectable (NW-A, NW-B and NW-C). The measured concentration (MDC) was detected in one of concentrations were within the expected the quarterly samples collected from Station j range based on their locations. The presence El-2 (TMI Visitors Center). The of H-3 in these samples was attributed to concentration was 180 i 90 pCi/L. All routine TMI-1 operations and previous quarterly samples collected from the well at TMI-2 operations. Station N2-1 (Goldsboro Marina) contained H-3 above the MDC. The concentrations All of the H-3 concentrations found in water averaged 140 60 pCi/L and ranged from collected from the onsite surface water 110 60 pCi/L to 170 90 pCi/L. impoundment and the onsite monitoring and supply wells were below the USNRC 10 The H-3 concentrations measured in the CFR 20 (Appendix B, Table 2) effluent samples collected from the offsite wells were concentration of 1,000,000 pCi/L. Iow an : vere consistent with historical resu$ portion of the H-3 detected in the Tritium also was measured in the water offsitt, d water was attributed to natural collected from the two onsite drinking water productiu in the atmosphere and fallout wells. The annual average H-3 concentration from prior nuclear weapon tests. It is for samples collected from the OSF well was possible that a portion of the H-3 found in 1500 580 pCi/L, with a maximum these samples also may be due to routine concentration of 2000 200 pCi/L. The airborne releases from TMI-1. 1996 average H-3 concentration for samples collected from 48s was lower (260 100 During 1996, reactor-produced, gamma-pCi/L). The concentrations measured in emitting radionuclides were not detected in Page 84 l 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONIMRING REPORT ,A any of the onsite or offsite groundwater Precinitation Results samples. To supplement special groundwater Strontirm-90 was detected in two monitoring projects, onsite precipitation groundwater samples in 1996. The sample samples were collected and analyzed in collected from onsite Station OS-16, which 1996. Samples of rain and/or snow were is proximal to the Borated Water Storage collected after each precipitation event and i Tank (EWST), contained Sr-90 at a analyzed for H-3. The results are listed in concentation of 1.3 0.4 pCi/L. Table J-2, Appendix J. The Sr-90 concentration measured in the All of the H-3 concentrations measured in OS-16 s.unple was consistent with those onsite precipitation were below the UShTC measure.1 in previous years. The 1996 result 10 CFR 20 effluent concentration limit and was well below the USNRC 10 CFR 20 were consistent with the trends observed in effluent concentration limit of 500 pCi/L for previous years. The presence of H-3 in Sr-90. And although the water collected these samples primarily was due to reutine from Sta; ion OS-16 is not used for drinking, TMI-1 airborne effluents. the meas tred concentration also was below the USEl'A Primary Drinking Water I Standard of 8 pCi/L. The presence of this radionuclide in the onsite grcundwater sample was attributed to previous spills / leaks from the TMI-2 BWST. To prepare TMI-2 for PDMS, the BWST was draim d in 1993 and the contents were processed through the TMI-2 Evaporator. Another Sr 90 concentration above the minimum detectable concentration (MDC) was reported by the laboratory for the sample collected from the offsite control well (Station R15-3). The reported Sr-90 activity was 1.1 0.6 pCi/L. A reanalysis was performed and the result (0.86 i 0.5 pCi/L) confirmed the original concentration. Because the sample was collected from a deep offsite control well, the sample result was suspect. The detection of Sr-90 in the sample was believed to be the result of a residual contamination on the sample holder. ) Page 85 im aniotocica envinosusura uosimassa asroar RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT OF TMINS OPERATIONS An assessment of potential radiological impact j indicated that radiation doses to the public from 1996 operations at TMINS were well below all applicable regulatory limits and were significantly less than doses received from natural sources of radiation. The 1996 whole body dose potentially received by an assumed maximum exposed individual from TMI-l and TMI-2 liquid and airborne effluents was conservatively calculated to be about 0.11 mrem. This dose is equivalent to 0.04% of the dose that an individual living in the TMI area receives each year from natural i background radiation. The 1996 whole body dose to the surrounding population from TMI-l and TMI-2 liquid and airborne effluents was calculated to be 1.06 person-rem. This is equivalent to 0'00016% of the dose that the total population living within 50 miles of TMI receives each year from natural background radiation. O Pace 86 19% ):ADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT Determination of Radiation Doses to the predicts doses which are higher than actual Public doses received by people. Dose assessmerts can be performed by using The type and amount of radioactivity released either effluent data and an environmental from TMINS is calculated using measurements transport model or environmental sample data. from eSuent radiation instruments and effluent To the extent possible, doses to the public are sample analyses. Once released, the dispersion based on the direct measurement of dose rates of radionuclides in the environment is readily from external sources and the measurement of determmed by computer modelling. Airborne radionuclide concentrations in environmental releases are diluted and carried away from the media which may contribute to an intemal dose site by atmospheric diffusion which continuously of radiation. Thermoluminescent dosimeters acts to disperse radioactivity. Varnbles which (TLDs) positioned in the environment around affect atmospheric dispersion include wind TMINS provide measurements to determine speed, temperature at different elevations, external radiation doses to humans. Samples of terrain, and shift in wind direction. A weather air, water and food products are used to station on the north end of TMI is linked to a determine internal doses. computer terminal which permanently records the meteorological data. Computer models also The quantity of radioactive materials released are used to predict the downstream dilution and during normal operations are typically too small travel times for liquid releases into the to be measured once distributed in the offsite Susquehanna River. environment. Therefore, the potential offsite doses are more effectively calculated for TMINS The pathways to human exposure also are operations using a computerized model that included in the model and are depicted in predicts concontrations of radioactive materials Figure 18. The exposure pathways considered in the envircnment and subsequent radiation for the discharge of TMINS liquid emuents are doses based on measured etIluents. Another consumption of drinking water and finfish, and reasoa for using eSuent data and a transport shoreline exposure. The exposure pathways model is that environmental sampling data considered for the discharge of TMINS airbome cannot provide enough information to calculate efEuents are plume exposure, inhalation, cow population doses. milk consumption, goat milk consumption, fmit and vegetable consumption, meat consumption GPU Nuclear calculates doses using an and land deposition. Numerous data files are advanced " class A" dispersion model. This used in the calculations which desente the area model incorporates the guidelines and around TMI in teims of population distribution methodology set forth by the USNRC in and foodstuffs production. Data files include Regulatory Guide 1.109. Due to the such information as the distance from the plant conservative assumptions that are used in the stack to the site boundary in each sector, the model, the calculated doses are generally higher population groupings, milk cows, milk goats, than the doses based on actual environmental gardens of more than 500 square feet, meat sample concentrations. Therefore, the model animals, downstream drinking water users, and crop yields. O Pace 87 O l 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT When determuung the dose to humans, it is 50 miles of TMI for airbome eEuents and the necessary to consider all applicable pathways entire population using Susquehanna River and all exposed tissues, summing the dose from water downstream of the plant also are each to provide the total dose for each organ as calculated. well as the whole body from a given radionuclide in the environment. Dose Results of Dose Calculations calculations involve detemumng the energy absorbed per unit mass in the various tissues. Doses from natural background radiation Thus, for radionuclides taken into the body, the provide a baseOn E. u.cssing the potential metabolism of the radionuclide in the body must public health significance of radioactive eEuents. be known along with the physical characteristics The average person in the United States receives of the nuclide such as energies, types of about 300 mrem /yr from natural background radiations emitted and half-life. The dose radiation sources. Natural background radiation assessment model also contains dose conversion from cosmic, terrestrial and natural radionuclides factors for the radionuclides for each of four age in the human body (not including radon), groups (adults, teenagers, children and infants) averages about 100 mrem /yr. The natural and eight organs (total body, thyroid, liver, skin, background radiation from cosmic and terrestrial kidney, lung, bone and GI tract). sources varies with geographical location, ranging from a low of about 65 mrem /yr on the (O Doses are calculated for what is termed the Atlantic and Gulf coastal plains to as much as / " maximum hypothetical individual" This 350 mrem /yr on the Colorado Plateau (Ref. 28). individual is assumed to be affected by the The NCRP now estimates that the average combined maximum environmental individual in the United States receives an annual concentrations wherever they occur. For liquid dose of about 2,400 mrem to the lung from releases, the maxunum hypothetical individual natural radon gas. This lung dose is considered would consume 193 gallons of water per year to be equivalent to a whole body dose of 200 from the Susquehanna River, eat 46 pounds of mrem (Ref 27). EEuent releases from TMINS fish each year that reside in the plant discharge and other nuclear power plants contribute but a area and stand on the shoreline (influenced by very small percentage to the natural radioactisity the plant discharge) 67 hours per year. For which has always been present in the air, water, airbome releases, the maximum hypothetical soil and even in our bodies. In general, the individual would live at the location of highest annual population doses from natural radionuclide concentration for inhalation and background radiation (excluding radon) are direct plume exposure. Additionally, this 1,000 to 1,000,000 times larger than the dases individual each year would consume 106 gallons to the same population resulting from nuclear of cow milk,141 pounds of leafy vegetables, power plant operations (Ref. 46). 1389 pounds of non-leafy vegetables and fruits and 243 pounds of meat produced at the Dose calculations based on airbome and liquid locations with the highest predicted radionuclide radioactive eBuents from normal operations for l concentrations. Consumption ofgoat milk is not 1996, showed that the maximum doses were included since this exposure pathway does not well below Federal regulatory dose limits and /] currently exist. Doses to the population within the guidelines of 10 CFR 50 App. I. This V i Pace 88 ~. 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT conclusion was supported by radionuclide concentrations detected in actual environmental samples. These low doses are the result of effons by GPU Nuclear to maintam releases "as low as reasonably achievable" (ALARA). Results of the dose calculations are summadzed in Tables 9 and 10. Table 9 compares the calculated maximum dose to an individual of the public to the 10 CFR 50, App. I dose guidelines. Table 10 presents the maxunum calculated total body radiation doses to the total population within 50 miles of the plant from airbome releases and the entire population using Susquehanna River water downstream of TMINS for liquid releases. These doses are compared to population doses from natural background radiation. As shown by the data, conservative calculations of the doses to members of the public from TMINS operations are less than the limits specified in 10 CFR 50, App. I,40 CFR 190 (25 mrem / site / year) and 10 CFR 20 (100 mrem /yr) and the dose from natural background radiation. Appendix I of this repon contains a more sletailed discussion of these dose calculations. O Page 89 i l I I 19% RADIOLOGICAL EN!'IRONMENTAL MONimRING REPORT ^ l l j TABLE 9 l Calculated Maximum Hypothetical Doses to an Individual for Liquid and Airborne Emuent Releases from TMI-1 and TMI-2 for 1996 l l Maximum Hypothetical Dose Tc An Individual l USNRC 10 CFR 50 APP. I Calculated Dose l Guidelines (mrem /yr) l (mrem /vr) TMI-1 TMI-2 l From Radionuclides 3 total body, or 1.07E-1 1.48E-3 In Liquid Releases 10 any organ 1.57E-1 2.29E-3 From Radionuclides in 5 total body, or 1.20E-4 0 Airborne Releases (Noble Gases) 15 skin 2.12E 4 0 From Radionuclides In Airborne 15 any organ 5.16E-4 7.14E-5 gj Releases (Iodines Tritium and Particulates) Calculated Dose 40 CFR 190 (mremlyr) Limits TMI 1 and TMI-2 (mrem /tr) Combined
- Total from Site 75 thyroid 3.26E-1 25 total body 4.82E-1 g
or other organs
- This sums together doses from TMI l and TMI 2 and includes the maximum regardless of age group for different pathways. It is further estimated that based on the maximum net fenceline dose rate of l
3.5 mrem /std month, a person residing at the fenceline for the duration specified in Regulatory Guide 1.109 for shoreline exposure, would receive no more than 0.32 mrem direct dose, for a maximum potential dose of 0.48 mrem (to any organ or the total body) for both TMI-l and TMI 2. l t d Page 90 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MON 11DRING REPORT TABLE 10 Calculated Maumum Whole Body Doses to the Population for Liquid and Airborne Effluent Releases from TMI-1 and TMI-2 for 1996 \\ j Calculated Population 1 Total Body Dose Person-rem /yr TMI-1 TMI-2 From Radionuclides In Liquid Releases 1.04E0 1.18E-3 (Downstream Susquehanna River Water Users) From Radionuclides In Airborne Releases 9.76E-3 4.3 IE-3 l (Within 50 Mile Radius ofTMINS) f Population Dose Due to Natural Backcround Radiation Approximately 660,000 person-rem />T 9 Pace 91 l i Figure 18 l t,3 IU Exposure Pathways For Radionuclides Routinely Released From TMINS I 3 gb. ( l PLU EXPOSil IE fEL ANIMALS A HALATI( (MILK, ME .p Ty ll Q vg7f hn$ h " * " " ~ " " " ~~ \\ C MED BY 1.E PEOPLE / i [h REL S[ E [f 1 RELEASES ED DILUTED BY J BY AN l!ALS jD )N@ ! J BY RIVER Y 9 -E N g# l .g ? CONS D KIN BY P. PLE j S 1"k! o / \\M rN / x PREDOMINANT RADIONUCLIDES NOBLE GASES (Xe,Kr) ACTIVATION PRODUCTS (Co-60, Mn-54) Plume exposure Shoreline exposure l RADIOIODINES (I-131, I-133) RADIOCESIUMS (Cs-134, Cs-137) Inhalation and consumption of milk, Shoreline exposure and consumption of milk, water, fruits, and vegetables meat, fish, water, fruits, and vegetables em ( -) RADIOSTRONTIUMS (Sr-89, Sr-90) TRITIUM (II-3) s_/ Consumption of milk, meat, Inhalation and consumption of water, fruits, and vegetables milk, fruits, and vegetables Page 92 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONIMRING REPORT REFERENCES (1) Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1, Technical l Specifications, DPR 50. l l (2) Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2, l PDMS Technical Specifications, DPR 73. (3) Radiation Management Corporation. "Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Preoperational Radiological l Environmental Monitoring Program, January 1,1974 - l June 5,1974." RMC-TR-75-17, January 1975. (4) Radiation Management Corporation. " Radiological l Environmental Monitoring Report for the Three Mile l Island Nuclear Station, First Operational Period, June 5 through December 31,1974." RMC-TR-75-02, February 1975. (5) Radiation Management Corporation. " Radiological l i Environmental Monitoring Report for the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station." RMC-TR-75-13, August 1975. l l (6) Radiation Management Corporation. " Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report for the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station,1975 Semi-annual Report II, July 1 through December 31." RMC-TR-76-01, February D76. (7) Radiation Management Corporation. " Radiological l Environmental Monitoring Report for the Three Mile l Island Nuclear Station,1976 Annual Report, January 1 through December 31." RMC-TR-77-01, March 1977. (8) Teledyne Isotopes. " Metropolitan Edison Company, Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report,1977 Annual Report, January 1 through December 31." IWL-5990-427, 1978. i l I i l Page 93 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT (9) Teledyne Isotopes. " Metropolitan Edison (20) GPU Nuclear Corporation. "1989 Annual Company, Radiological Environmental Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report Monitoring Report,1978 Annual Report." for the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station." IWL-5590-443,1979. May 1990. (10) Metropolitan Edison Company. "nree Mile (21) GPU Nuclear Corporation. "1990 Radiological Island Nuclear Station Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report, nree Mile Environmental Monitoring Program, Annual Island Nuclear Station." May 1991. Report for 1979.* April 1980. (22) GPU Nuclear Corporation. *1991 Radiological (11) Metropolitan Edison Company. *nree Mile Environmental Monitoring Report, nree Mile Island Nuclear Station Radiological Islend Nuclear Generating Station." May 1992. Environmental Monitoring Report,1980 Annual Report." March 1981. (23) GPU Nuclear Corporation. "1992 Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Radiological (12) GPU Nuclear Corporation. "1981 Radiological Environmental Morutoring Report." May Environmental Monitoring Report for Three 1993. Mile Island Nuclear Generating Station." May 1982. (24) GPU Nuclear Corporation. "1993 'Iluee Mile Island Nuclear Station, Radiological (13) GPU Nuclear Corporation. "1982 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report." May Environmental Monitoring Report for nree 1994. Mile Island Nuclear Generating Station." May 1983. (25) GPU Nuclear Corporation. "1994 Three Mile Island Nuclear Generating Station, Radiological (14) GPU Nuclear Corporation. "1983 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report." May Environmental Monitoring Report for Three 1995. Mile Island Nuclear Station.* May 1984. (26) GPU Nuclear Corporation. "1995 Three Mile (15) GPU Nuclear Corporation. "1984 Radiological Island Nuclear Generating Station, Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report for Three Environmental Monitoring Report." May Mile Island Nuclear Station." May 1985. 1995. (16) GPU Nuclear Corporation. "1985 Radiological (27) National Council on Radiation Protection and Environmental Monitoring Report for Three Measurements. Report No. 93. "lonizing Mile Island Nucla.r.r Station." May 1986. Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States." 1987. (17) GPU Nuclear Corporation. *1986 Radiological Eavironmental Monitoring Report for Three (28) CRC Handbook. *Radioecology: Nuclear Mile Island Nuclear Station." May 1987. Energy and the Environment." F. Ward Whicker and Vincent Schultz, Volume I,1982. (18) GPU Nuclear Corporation. "1987 Radiological Environmental Monitorir.g Report for Three (29) GPU Nuclear Corporation. " Final Safety Mile Island Nuclear Station." May 1988. Analysis Report, nree Mile Island Nuclear Station. Unit 1." 1994. (19) GPU Nuclear Corporation. "1988 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report, Three Mile Island Nuclear Station." May 1989. O Page 94 I i i 1 l l I I 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT (30) GPU Nuclear Corporation. " Post-Defueling (39) GPU Nuclear Corporation. "Three Mile Island Monitored Storage Safety Analysis Report. Nuclear Generating Station Offsite Dase i i Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2." Calculation Manual (ODCM)." 6610-PLN. 1993. 4200.01, Rev.11. (31) 1990 Census Information provided by The (40) United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Pennsylvania State Data Center. Regulatory Guide 4.15. " Quality Asurance for Radiological Monitoring Program. (Normal j (32) National Climatic Data Center. " Preliminary Operations) - Effluent Streams and the Local Climatological Data,1996, Middletown, Environment." Revision 1, February 1979. Pennsylvania". (41) American National Standards Institute, Inc. (33) National Council on Radiation Protection and " Performance, Testing ar.d Procedural ) Measureur.nts. Report No. 22. " Maximum Specifications for Thermolumines.:ence Permissible Body Burdens and Maximum Dosimetry." ANSI N545-1975. Permissible Concentrations of Radionuclides in Air and Water for Occuprtional Exposure." (42) United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. (Published as National Bureau of Standards Regulatory Guide 4.13. " Performance, Testing Handbook 69, Issued June 1959, superseding and Procedaral Specifications for ) Handbook 52). Dermoluminescence Dosimetry: Environmental Applications." Revision 1, July (34) International Commission on Radiological 1977. O Protection. Publication 2. " Report of Committee II on Permissible Dose for Internal (43) L. F. Toke, B. H. Carson, G. G. Baker, M. H. (b i Radiation (1959)," with 1962 Supplement McBride. " Performance Testing of the Issued in ICRP Publication 6; Publication 9, Environmental TLD System for the Three Mile ' Recommendations on Radiation Exposure," Island Nuclear Station." Health Physics Vol. (1965); ICRP Publication 7 (1965), amplifying 46, No. 5 (May), pp.1013 - 1020,1984. specific recommendations of Publication 9 concerning environmental monitoring; and (44) United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ICRP Publication 26 (1977). NUREG-0683. " Final Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement Related to (35) Federal Radiation Council. Report No.1. Decontamination and Disposal of Radioactive " Background Material for the Development of Wastes Resulting from March 28,1979 Radiation Protection Standards." May 13, Accident Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, 1960. Unit 2.* Docket No. 50-320, March 1981. (36) National Council on Radiation Protection and (45) Ground / Water Technology, Inc. Measurements. Report No.116. " Limitation of "Hydrogeological Investigation, Three Mile Exposure to Ionizing Radiation." March 1993. Island Nuclear Station, Londonderry Township, Pennsylvania." December 1981. (37) National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. Report No. 62. " Tritium in the (46) NUREG/CR-4068. " Summary of Historical Environment." March 1979. Experience with Releases of Radioactive Materials from Commercial Nuclear Power (38) United States Nuclear Regulatory Cormnission Plants in the United States.* 1985. Branch Technical Position. An Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring A Program." Revision 1, November 1979. I v Page 95 l c _.
- g
- tJ im a.unowaica enviaoxusura uostronina aeroar i
1 1 i i t i APPENDIX A i 5 i 996 RE;MP Sampling Locations and lO Descriptions, Synopsis of REMP, l and Sampling and Analysis Exceptions l i i i i Page Al i i 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE A-1 l TMINS Radiological Envicrnmental Monitoring Program Sample Locations - 1996 Sample Statiert hlap Bledismi f'ede Number Distance
- Wh Deectblon 7
l l AQS Al-3 16 0.5 mi 0* N cfsite of north tip ofThtl in Susque. anna River ID Al-4 113 0.3 5 N of Renaar Building en W rewe adjacern to North Weather Station. Tkt! AP,AI,lD Al-l 39 2.6 335 N of site at bliddletoun Substatices SW A3-2 40 2.5 335 N of site at Swatars Creek, Middletown hl A4-I I$2 33 to N of site at farm stong Rt. 230 ID A31 44 4.3 3 N Maite on Vine Street Exit off Route 283 ID A9-3 127 8.1 2 N of site at Duke Street Pumping Station,18ummelstosm ID DI 1 2 06 23 NNE r:fsite on light pole in middle of North Bridge, Thlt l ID Bi-2 114 0.4 26 NNE of Reactor thailding on top ofdike, Thil AP.Al Hl 4 148 0.5 28 NNE of tile at North Gate.Tht! ID B2-1 132 1.9 16 NNE et'sne on Sun et Dr. (cTIlithdale Rd } ID B$-1 45 4.8 18 NNE ofsite at intersection of School llouse and htiller Roads ID DIO-I 61 9.4 21 NNE of site at intersection of West Areba Avenue and Mill Street, lier %- FP B10-2 1 10.1 28 NE of fi'e at hiilton tierstiey School,liershey D Cl-1 17 0.7 35 NE nf aite al x g Reute 441 N .4 NE of Reactor Buitdir g on top of dike. Tkt! ID C12 II6 03 ID C2-1 43 1.6 45 NE orsite et h!iddletosm Junction ID C5-1 46 4.5 42 NE of site on Kennedy tane ID C8-i 62 7.2 48 NE of site at Schenn Church ort School llot:sc Road AQF Ccetrol Ali locations where finfish are collected upstream sf the ThfINS liquid discharge outfa!! (above Dock St. Sam, llarrisburg) are grouped together and referred to at "centror' OAD Control All tocations greater than 10 railes from Tk!!NS ID DI-l 3 0.2 74 ENE of Reactor Duilding an top ofdike, nil ID DI-2 I8 0.6 60 ENF. of site on taurel Road FP DI-3 III 0.5 65 ENE of site at residence ned to enminercial reenhouse on Route 44I N C hl D21 29 1.1 65 EFE ofsite at farm on Gingrich Road ID D2-2 133 1.7 73 ENE ci site alcos iiitisdaic Ri (S efZion Rd.) ID D61 47 5.2 65 ENE of site nff Beagle Road ID DI5-1 to 10.9 63 ENE of site along Reute 24I,lawit, PA AP,AI,lD,0W FP i'l-2 19 04 95 E ofsia at TkII Visitor's Center ID El-4 I!7 0.2 98 E of Reactor HuMing on tep of dike,TMI M E2-2 109 1.1 93 E ofsite at fann on Pecks Road ID E2-3 134 I.9 96 E ofsite along Iti!!sdale Rd. (N ofCt ek Rd) ID ES-1 48 46 81 E ofsita at intersection of Nceth Market Street (Route 230) and Zesger Road ID E7-1 64 6.8 86 E of site elong liummelstowe arect, Elizabetinown ID,FP F1-1 20 0.5 137 ESE of sita near entrance to 500 kV Substatien Page A2 O O O \\ p J ( Om 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MGNI?DRING ret
- ORT d
TABLE A-1 (Continued) TMINS Radiological Environmental Monitering Program Sample Locati: ns - 1996 d Sample Station klap Medium Code Number Distance
- gnetti Descriethm ID FI-2 118 CJi mi 199" ESE of Reactor Building on top of dike ramy wititin I<stdm Solid Wasu Stsging Facifity, TMI AP,Al FI-3 149 0.6 105 ESE of site m 500 kV Substation ID F1-4 154 0.3 115 ESE of Reactor Du:Idicg on t:m of dike,Thil ID F2-1 135 1.2 120 ESE of site along Ecgle Rosd hl F4-1 156 3.2 104 ESE cf site at farm on T*smpike Read ID F5-1 49 4.7 107 ESE of site along Amosite Resd ID F10-1 66 9.4 112 ESE of site along Donegal Sp:iags Road Donegal Sping i
SW Fl5-1 83 12.6 122 ESE cf site at Chidies Creek, Maietts ID F25-1 82 21.1 113 ESE ersite at intersection of Steel Way sad tenp Roads, lacaster ID GI-2 22 0.6 143 SE ofsite skm Route 44! S ID Gl-3 119 03 129 SE of Reactor Buildmg on top of dika, Thlt ID GI-5 139 0.3 I44 SE of Reactor Du::di,ig ca *.cp JJike, Tnt! ID GI-6 I40 0.3 14i SE of Reactor Duilding er top crdike. TMI [ Al,AP,hl G2-1 104 1.4 125 SE of site at f ami o:t 15e ier Road l l In G2-4 136 1.7 135 SE of =ne on ikker Road ID GS-1 50 4.8 I31 SE of:::e at intersectit.a of na,nbridge and kisser Rc, ads 3 AP.AI,ID G10-I 67 9.8 127 SE ofeine 71 farve along Engles To" gate Road. Mariet:s SW,lD 013 1 84 14.4 124 SR of site at Calreia W=ter Treat: terit Plant i SW G15-2 85 13.6 128 SE ofsite at WrightmT.e Weter T.estment Plant l SW GI 5-3 86 14.3 124 fcE of sae et Lancastar Water Treatment Plant ID 111 1 5 0.5 167 SSE of site, Thil FP 111-2 110 67 150 SSE ofute at produce stand off of R ute 441 S. AP.AI,ID 113 1 41 2.3 159 SSE ofsite in Fa!nmih-Collins Sulstation ID 11 5-1 52 4.1 157 SSE of site by Guard Shack at Drunner Island Steam Electric Station ID 118-l 68 7.4 163 SSE of site along Saginaw Road, Starview ID 1115-1 87 13.2 157 SSE of site at intersection ofOrchard and Stonewood Roads, Wilshire liills AQF Indicator All locations where fmfish are coIIceted danTatream of the ThflNS liquid discharge outfall are grouped together and referred to as'mdicatet'* GAD Indicator All locations within ten miles of Tk!!NS ID JI-l 6 0.8 184 Sofsite Thlt SW,AQS Ji-2 23 0.5 188 S of site dowrstream of the TMINS liquid discharge outfall in Susquehanna River ID J1-3 121 0.3 189 S of Reactor Duilding on wooden post of Duilding 221,just S of Unit 2 A$rni L Duilding TMI l AQS J2-1 31 1.5 182 S ofsite in Susquehanna Riverjust upstream of the York Haven Dam FP J2-2 144 1.5 178 S ofsite near York llaven Dam,TMI ID J3-1 241 2.7 178 5 ofsite at York Havently Page A3 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MON 11DRING REPORT TABLE A-1 (Continued) TMINS Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Sample Locations - 19% t Sample Station May Riediien Code Nuniber Distanced Arineuth Descristles AP,Al J3-2 150 2.9 mi ISI' S ofsite in Efet-Ed Cly Substation ID J5-1 53 4.9 182 S ofsite along Canal Road, Conewago lleights ID J7-I 69 6.5 177 S ofsite offof klaple Street, klanchester AP,AI,ID JIS-l 88 12.6 180 S ofsite in klet-Ed York lead Dispatch Station SW JI5-2 89 I4.7 178 S ofsite at York Water Company EW Kl-l 7 0.2 209 On site at Rkile7 klain Station Discharge Building AQS Ki-3 24 0.3 202 SSW ofsite in Susquehanna River ID KI-4 123 0.2 208 SSW of Reactor Duilding on top ofdike behind Warehouse 2. Tkfl ID K2-1 32 1.1 200 SSW ofsite on S Shelley Island ID K3-1 142 2.1 202 SSW of site along Rt. 262, N of Cly ID K5-1 54 5.0 200 SSW of site along Conewago Creek Road, Strinestown ID K8-1 70 7.4 196 SSW ofsite at intersection of Coppe4affer Road and Route 295, Zions View ID KIS-l 90 12.7 204 SSW ofsite on the Dird's Nest Chi!d Care Center Building, Weig!cstown kl K15-2 126 12.8 208 SSW of site at fann along Route 74 N r ID LI-l 9 0.1 235 SW of site on top of dike W of Mecit Draft Cooling Tower, TMI ID LI-2 26 0.5 221 SW ofsite on Beech Island ID 1.2-1 33 1.9 227 SW ofsite along Route 262 ID L5-1 55 4.1 228 SW efsite at intersection ofStevens aml Wilson Roads a ID L8-1 71 8.0 225 SW ofsite stong Rohlers Church Rd, Andenantown ID LIS-l 91 11.7 225 SW of site on W side of Route 74, rear of church, Mt. Royal f ID kil-1 129
- 0. I 249 WSW of Reactor Duilding on SE corner of U-2 Screenhouse fence, Tkli ID kil-2 I43 0.5 241 WSW ofsite on W sk'e of unnamed island between N tip of Deech Island and iiiielley island AP,AI,1D kl2-1 34 1.3 253 WSW ef site adjace::t to Fishing Creek, Goldsboro FP M2-2 146 1.3 252 WSW of site along Route 262, Goldsboro ID MS-1 56 4,3 249 WSW of site at intersection oflaw+. berry ard Roxberry 24 Newbe. pown T
ID M9-1 72 8.6 242 WSW ofsite along A! pine Road, klapc,wn ID NI-I 10 0.7 270 W ofsite on Shelley Island ID NI-3 124 0.1 270 W of Reactor Buil&ng on fence adjacent to Screenhaese entrance gate, Ill! ID.G W N2-1 35 1.2 262 W ofsite at Got& boro Marina FP N2-2 153 1.3 265 W ofsite at private residence la Goldsbero ID N5-1 57 4.9 268 W ofsite offof Old York Rcad along Robin Ilood Drive ID N8-1 73 7.8 260 W of site along Route 352, !!2 mile WI cf Lewisbeny ID NI 5-2 95 10.4 274 W ofsite at intersection of Lisk:rn Read and Main Street, Lisburn ID PI I 12 0.4 293 WNW of sne on Shelley island ID PI-2 38 0.2 2?0 WNW of Reacier liuMnc on fense N of Unit 1 1. .Ree, TMI SW PI-3 II 0.1 254 WNW of Reacier Duilding in the Pretreatment Buiding, influe a Water, TMI I i t hg A4 l G 9 9 m .m } Q w.Y w 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONEWRING REPORT TABLE A-1 (Continued) TMINS Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Sample Locations - 1996 Sample Station Map hfedium Code Number Distance
- Artmeth DeecdMien ID P2-1 36 I 9 mi 283*
WNW of site abg Route 2C ID PS-l 58 4.9 285 WNW ofsite at Mmection cf Valley Road (Route 262) and Deinhower Road hl P7-I 75 6.7 293 WNW ofsite at farm abg Old York Road. New Cumberia.ul ID P8-1 74 8.0 292 WNW of site abg Evereyeen Road, Reesers Summit ID Q1-1 13 0.5 317 NW ofsite on Shelley Island iD Q1-2 125 02 3I8 NW of Reactor Building on fen:e W of Warehouse 1. TElt ID Q2-1 37 I.8 310 NW of site along access road along river AP,Al Q4-1 151 3.7 325 NW ofsisc at airprt near control tower ID QS-1 59 5.0 318 NW cf site along Lumber Skeet, liighspire SW,lD Q9-1 76 8.5 308 NW ofsite at the Stee!!on Water Compani AP.Af !D Ql5-1 97 13.5 305 NW ofsite behind West Fainnw fire Dept. Social llatt ID Rl-1 14 0.2 335 NNW of Reacter Building abg W fence, Tall ID R l-2 27 0.7 332 NNW ofsite on llenry Island ID R3 ' 107 2.6 338 NNW of site at Crawford Station, kid.dletown ID R5-I 60 49 339 NNW of site at interstection of Spnng Ostden Drive and Route 441 ID R9-1 77
- 8. I 340 NNW of site at intmection of Deny and 66th Streets Ruthciford Ileights ID R15-I 99 11.2 330 NNW ofsite at intersection of Route 22 and Colonial Road, Colonial Puk IDENTIFICATION KEY i
ID = Immersion the (TLD) GW = Ground Water (ofi' site) AQF = Finfish SW = Surface Water AQS = AquaticSediment A1 = Airlodine hl - hiilk (Cow) EW = Effluent Water FP = Food Products (Green leafy Vegetation, Fruits, VegetaNes) AP = Air Particulate GAD = kleat (Game)
- All distanus ate measured from a point that is midway between the reactor luildings ofThli-l and Thil-2.
Page A5 4 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE A-2 Synopsis of the Operational Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program and Other Radiological Monitoring Programs Conducted by GPUN Environmental Affairs for Three Mile Island Nuclear Station 1996
- Nasaber of Neenber of Number of Senspic Sasapling Cearct6an Samspies Type of Analysis Seamples nur_
ItsatLont rre.ne.cv couected amatuit Freeuency Amatrzed
- a Airlodine 12 Woeuy 620 1-131 WeeJaly 620 Air Particulate 12 Wecuy 620 Gr-Beta WeeUy 616 "
Gr-Alpha Weekly 306* Garnraa Quarterly 48 Sr89 Semiarmually 24 Sr-90 Seiniannually 24 Finfish 2 Semsannually 8 Gamma W = "y 8 H-3 Semiannually 8 Sr-89 Serruannually 8 Sr 90 Seeruanrmally 8 Aquatic Sedunent 4 Senwannually 8 Gamrna Semiannually 8 Sr 89 Annually 4 Sr-90 Annually 4 Discharge Water 1 Weekly 4 1-131 Weekly 4 f Biweekly 25 1-131 Biweekly 25 Gamma Monthly 12 Gr-Beta Monthly 12 H3 Monthly 12 Sr 89 Semiannually 2 Sr-90 Semiannuany 2 Fruits 6 Annually 16 Gamma AnnuaUy 16 Broad Leaf 6 AnnuaHy 6 Gamma Annually 6 Vegetation Sr-89 AnnuaUy 6 Sr-90 Anrwauy 6 Vegetables 6 AnnuaUy 10 Gamma Anrmally 10 Groundwater 4 Monthly 48 H3 Mmthly 48 110 As Needed 135 H-3 As Needed 135 22 Quarterly 88 H3 Quarterly 88 Ganuna Quanerly 84 Gamma As Needed 43 Sr-90 SemiarmuaUy 42 Dusimeters 90 Quarterly 2115 Immersion Quarterly 2113 * (TLD)
- Dose NOTE: See Notes at end of table.
O Page A6 i 19% RADIO 1,0GICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT \\ TADLE A-2 Synopsis of the Operational Radiological Environmental Monitoring Programs and Other Radiological Monitoring Programs Conducted by GPUN Environmental Affairs for Three Mile Island Nuclear Station 19%
- Nurmhciof Number of Nassber of j
i Saunple Semptog CeBeetion Samples Type of Analysis Sam.ples j h IAcations Fres eency'" Collected Andvsis Freauency Anarned
- Milk 7
Biweekly 162 Gamma BiweeUy 162 1-131 BiweeUy 162 j Sr-89 Quarterly 2$ i &-90 Quarterly 2$ Surfacc/Dnnking 9 Weeuy 45 '" I 131 WeeUy 30 } Waur BiweeUy 216(* I-131 BiweeUy 144 Gamma Mordhly 108 Gr-Beta Monthly 72 { H-3 Mordhly 108 i Sr-89 Semiannually 18 Sr-90 Semiannually 18 i 1 Rodent 2 (TMI) When Available 2 Radiological When Available 2 l Frisk or Gamma i 1 1 g NOTES: 1 l (1) This table represents results from the prunary (base) progrant It does not include qualsty control (QC) resuhs. 1 (2) The total number of analyses does not include duplicate analyses, recounts, or reanalys.s. = l (3) For the purposes cf this table a dosi:nete; is considered to be a phcephor (element). l (4) The total number ofsamples or elements (TLDs) used for data analysis. f (5) Water frorn Stations J12, JIS-2, and 015-1 was not analyzed fer low level 1-131. (6) Biweekly means once every two weeks. (7) Nonroutine samples were collectM from RW-1, RW 2, OSF, OS-15, MS-19, MS-20, MS-21. MS-22 NW. A NW B, and NW4. k l i i j l 4 t 1 i l 1 i I 1 Page A7 i i 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONIMRING REPORT TABLE A-3 f Sampling and Analysis Exceptions 1996a Period of Deviation Description of Deviation and Corrective Action January 9,1996 to The supply line which provides the upstream control surface water (PI-3) January 22,1996 became blocked with sediment at the end of this period. The actual stop time was unknown. Maintenance personnel immediately were notified and the blockage was cleared on January 22,19%. During the same time period, the water compositor was removed from the near field indicator surface water station (J1-2) because of major flooding in the area creating a concern for electrical safety. In this case, a grab sample was collected and added to the available composited sample to account for the collection period. January 22,1996 to As stated above, a Bood caused the water compositor at indicator surface February 26,1996 water station J1-2 to be inoperable. Two grab samples were collected per week and composited for each sampling period. February 26,1996 to There was a power interruption at the closest downstream drinkmg water March 11,1996 station (G15-2) early in this sampling period. When power returned, the unit entered into the " PROGRAM HALTED" mode and compositing did not continue for the remainder of the first week of the period. The unit was reset after the first week and then proper colixtion was continued for the remainder of the collection period. During this same period, indicator surface water station J1-2 remained inoperable because of initial flood conditions as stated above. Again, two grab samples per week were composited in lieu of automatic compositing March 11,1996 to Raw river water grab samples were composited in lieu of automatic April 15,1996 compositing at indicator surface water station J1-2 as mentioned above. The delay in reinstallation of electric power was the cause of this deviation. The Electrical Maintenance Depanment again was notified to correct the problem. The main electrical line was cut during the flood and splicing of the line needed to be performed. O Page A8 O l 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONimRING REPORT TABLE A-3 (Continued) Sampling and Analysis Exceptions 1996* l l l Period of Deviation Description of Deviation and Corrective Action l l April 15,1996 to The electrical line problem mentioned above was repaired on April 19, 1 Apdl29,1996 1996 at indicator surface water station J1-2. Hence, four days of sampling were missed during this period. Also, control surface water station PI-3 lost supply line flow on or about April 22,19%. The blockage was cleared on April 23,1996 and about one day of sampling was lost. July 1,1996 to It was noticed during a mid-collection surveillance that indicator surface l August 12,1996 water station J1-2 compositor was malfunctioning. The collection tub was fdling because the unit continuously sampled. Technicians worked on the unit but could not immediately remedy the problem. The unit was O left off while new parts were acquired. Interruptions in sampling b/ occurred over two consecutive sampling pedods because of this problem. August 26,19% to During the mid-collection surveillance, the suction hose to the closest September 9,1996 downstream drinkmg water sampler (G15-2) was noted to be cracked. After the technicians replaced the hose, they inadvertently left the unit in the " STANDBY" mode resulting in one week loss of sampling. Instrument technicians and their supervisors particpated in a training session to reduce the likelihood of this happening again. At the end of the biweekly period, a grab sample was collected and added to the first week ofcomposited sample. September 23,1996 After running for over one week, the compositor at indicator surface September 30,1996 water station J1-2 exhibited a mechanical breakdown. The pump was replaced on September 30,1996. Based on the volume of composited water in the collection tub, it is estimated that about one day's loss of sampling occurred. l i Pace A9 t 1 m 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE A-3 (Continued) Sampling and Analysis Exceptions 1996* Period of Deviation Description of Deviation and Corrective Action September 30,19% to During the middle of this sampling period, the supply line for upstream October 14,1996 control surface water station PI-3 became blocked with sediment. The line was subsequently cleared and the unit was retumed to service. Hence, sampiing was intermpted for several days during the middle of this period. October 28,1996 to Over five consecutive sampling periods, the supply line for upstream December 30,19% control surface water station Pl-3 intermittently became blocked. The technicians determined that the inner surface of the piping contained corrosion deposits and blockage from sediment / corrosion readily occurred. Blowing pressurized gas into the line was repeated over the period in an attempt to reopen the blockage. During a one-week sampling period (11/25/96 - 12/02/96), no water was composited and a grab sample was coUected to account for that period. Du.ing the remainmg sampling periods, intermittent compositing occurred. The exceptions described in this table are those which are considered desiations from radiological environmental monitoring as required by the Technical Specifications and the ODCM. Other sampling and analysis deviations occurred during the year. They were not i included in this table because the nummum number of saraples were collected and analyzed. Reports describing all sampling and analysis excepGons are on Sie at Three Mile Island Environmental Affairs. O Page A10 L. i i i i 3 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MON 110 RING REPORT i i a i i i \\ 4 J l 1 ) i i APPENDIX B 1 i 1996 Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) Exceptions 1 4 b ( 1 1 i i 1 J p l 4 i 1 + l I l Page B1 I 4 f 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT l l TABLE B Analytical Results Which Failed to Meet the USNRC Required LLD During 1996 i No. of Samples Which Failed Samole Media Analysis Reauired LLD to Meet the LLD Comments Air Iodine (AI) 1-131 0.07 pCi/m' 1 The charcoal cartridge collected at Station J15-1 (York Substation) for the period 09/03/96 - 09/10/96 had a low sample volume due to an interruption in electrical power. The power interruption was caused by a blown fuse in the air sampler. Surface Water (SW) Ba-140 60 pCi/L 1 The quality control (QC) laboratory inadvertently La-140 15 pCi/L 1 failed to analyze the November drinking water sample from Station Q9-IF in a timely fashion. The primary sample was analyzed to the required LLDs. Air lodine (AI) I-131 0.07 pCi/m' 1 The charcoal cartridge collected at Station J15-1 (York Substation) for the period 12/03/96-12/10/96 had a low sample volume due to an interruption in electrical power. The power interruption was caused by a blown fuse in the air sampler. I Page B2 O O O i i i i t ) 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT i i, i \\ e i i i 1 i i i i 1 l i l i l APPENDIX C i i a 4 !t i 1996 REMP Changes i 1 i i t t l } } 4 t { Page Cl 5 i 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTA L MONITORING REPORT TABLE C 1996 REMP Changes January,1996 Several changes were made to the environmental TLD program. Twelve TLD stations (C20-1, D9-1, B1-3, El-1, Al-1, K1-5, J1-4, H1-9, G1-4, G1-7, M15-1 and P15-1) were deleted and eight stations (E5-1, F2-1, G1-2, Cl-1, J1-1, P5-1, Q2-1 and N2-1) were moved Y new locations within 90 meters of their previous locations. Additionally,4 Panasonic model 801 badges were replaced with 2 model 814 badges at each TLD station. Model 814 badges contain three calcium sulfate elements, whereas model 801 badges contain two calcium sulfate elements. Changes to the TLD program were made to 1) increase efficiencies in manpower, 2) decrease operating costs, 3) improve access to the sites and reduce security concerns. None of the changes significantly affected the quality of the program or the exposure rates. January,1996 Three new groundwater wells (MS-19, MS-20 and MS-21) were added to the monitoring program. The wells were constructed to incorporate a network of monitoring wells which would more completely encompass TMI-1. During the year, several wells were sampled at varying i frequencies (weekly to quarterly). The collection frequencies were ] dependent upon the criticality of their location; relative to areas of potential radiological concern. March,1996 Milk sampling station A4-1 was deleted from the monitoring program because the farmer retired from the dairy business. A replacement site was not added to the REMP because the number of milk samples collected for the remainder of the year was more than required by the ODCM. August,1996 Soil sampling was deleted from the REMP. This wasjustified because 1) the ODCM does not require soil sampling and 2) other environmental sampling media provide better data to assess impacts from TMINS. November,1996 Sampling of a new groundwater monitoring well (MS-22) was initiated. This well was installed to monitor the integrity of the TMI-1 Borated Water Storage Tank. Weekly monitoring of this well continued for the remainder of the year. O Page C2 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT APPENDIX D 1996 Action Levels l l l l l 1 i k P i i i t i Page D1 1 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT Analytical results of environmental samples were routinely reviewed and evaluated by the GPU Nuclear Three Mile Island Environmental Affairs staff. The results were checked for LLD violations, anomalous va!ues, USNRC reporting levels, main sample and quality control (QC) semple agreement (Appendix E), and action levels. Established by GPU Nuclear, the action level is defined as that level of reactor-related radioactivity which when detected in environmental samples initiates an investigation and subsequent actions, as necessary. An action level is reached if either of the following two criteria is met: a The radioactivity concentration at an indicator station reaches or exceeds those concentrations listed in Table D-1. (With the exception ofI-131 in food products f and water and Sr-90 in milk, water, fish, food products and airborne particulates, all concentrations listed correspond to 10% of the USNRC reporting levels.) m The radioactivity concentration at the indicator station reaches or exceeds 10 times the mean concentration for the control locations. (This criteria applies only to those media and analyses which are not listed in Table D-1.) Action levels for gamma exposure rates measured by TLDs have also been established. For TLDs, an action level is reached if any of the following three criteria is met: 5 The exposure rate at an indicator station not on the owner controlled area fence exceeds three times the mean of the control stations. m The exposure rate at an indicator station oa the owner controlled area fence exceeds 135 mR/std month (50% of the 40 CFR 190 limit of 25 mR/yr adjusted by a 67 hour recreational factor). 5 The exposure rate at an indicator station not on the owner controlled area fence exceeds either two times the previous quarterly result or two times the historical average for the station. If an action level is reached, an investigation is initiated which consists of some or all of the following actions: E Examine the collection sheets for an indicatica of any equipment malfunctions, collection or delivery errors. E Examine the running tables (prior data) for trends. m Review control station dea. m Review QC or duplicate sample data (if available). E Review TMI-l and TM1-2 effluent data. Pace D2 O 19% RADIOIDGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONil10 RING REPORT l M Recount and/or reanalyze the sample. u Collect and analyze an additional sample. The results of the investigation are then documented on the form provided in the TMI Environmental Affairs procedure 6510-SUR-4523.05. As appropriate, site personnel are apprised of plant-related radioactivity which exceeds the GPU Nuclear action level. Ifit is concluded that the detected activity is related to TMINS operations and also exceeds the USNRC reporting limits as defined in the ODCM, a detailed report will be issued to the USNRC. During 1996, only 1 indicator sample concentration equalled or exceeded an action level. The results of the investigation are summarized in Table D-2. The composite surface water sample collected in September at Station J1-2 contained H-3 at a concentration greater than 2000 pCi/L, the GPUN action level concentration for H-3 in surface water. The presence of H-3 in the sample was attributed to TMINS operations. Tritium at concentrations greater than background levels is j not unexpected in surface water collected at Station J1-2. The samples are collected just l downstream of the TMINS liquid discharge outfall where mixing ofliquid effluents and river water is incomplete. Complete mixing is not usually achieved until the water passes over the York Haven Dam which is downstream of the sampling site. A dose estimate for ingesting water was not performed because the sample was non-potable water. The action level concentration C was not reportable to the USNRC. l l l l l l l Page D3 l9% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT r TABLE D-1 TMINS REMP Action Levels for Positive Radioactivity Concentrations in Environmental Samples t Airborne Particulates Analysis Water *)(pCi/L) or Gases (pCi/m') Fish (pCile, wet) Milk (pCi/L) Food Products (pCi/r. wet) H-3 2000 Mn-54 100 3 Fe-59 40 1 Co-58 100 3 Co-60 33 1 Zn-65 30 2 Sr-90 4*) .05 .05 *) 4*' .05*) S' Zr-Nb-95 40 l.I31 1*> .09 .3 .0$*) i Cs-134 3 1 .I 6 .1 Cs-137 5 2 .2 7 .2 Ba-La-40 20 30 (a) Includes surface and drinking water. (b) 50% of USNRC reporting level. i Page D4 i 9 9 9 i I 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE D-2 Innstigations Conducted During 1996
- ofIndicator Samples Exceeding Collection Date Reason for Investigation the Action Level Conclusion of Int:stigation i
- 1. August 26,1996 The cornposite surface water sample collected i
The H-3 identified in the water sample resulted from to at indicator Station 11-2, located just the discharge of this material from TMINS into the September 30,1996 downstream of the TMINS liquid discharge Susquehanna River. Concentrations of H-3 above outfall, contained an H-3 concentration (4,100 background levels are expected in this sample
- 400 pCi/L) which equalled or exceeded the because the collection site is located proximate to the GPUN action Icvel of 2000 pCi/L.
TMINS liquid discharge outfall where mixing of effluents and river water is incomplete. Since the sample is raw (nonpotable) river water, a dose due to ingestion was not calculated. The result was not reportable to the USNRC. 7 ~ F t i t Page DS [ 1 l I i 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MON 1110 RING REPORT 1 t i I i i Y I APPENDIX E 4 I e i 1996 Quality Control Results l o l 1 i i l i 4 i 4 i j j Page El I 1 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT A quality assurance (QA) program is an essential part of any radiological environmental monitoring program (REMP). It provides reasonable assurance that the results of radiation measurements are valid. To be effective, elements of quality assurance must be evident in all phases of the monitonng program. These include, but are not limited to, tample collection, preservation and shipment, receipt of samples by the analysis laboratory, preparation and analysis of samples and data review and reporting. An effective QA program will allow for the identification of deficiencies in all monitoring processes so that appropriate investigative and corrective actions can be implemented. The USNRC published Regulatory Guide 4.15, " Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring Programs (Normal Operations)- EfIluent Streams and the Environment", which defines an acceptable QA program (Ref. 40). The guidance contained in Regulatory Guide 4.15 has been adopted by GPU Nuclear. To meet the objectives of this position document, procedures and plans have been written and implemented. In the laboratory, samples are typically analyzed one time. Therefore, laboratory personnel must be reasonably confident with the analytical results which are generated. One means of achieving confidence in the results is through the analysis of quality control (QC) samples. Three types of QC samples are routinely analyzed by the laboratories as part of the GPU Nuclear Three Mile Island Environmental Affairs REMP QA Program. They include intralaboratory split samples, cross-check program samples, and interlaboratory split samples. A discussion of each QC sample type is provided below. Intralaboratory Split Samples Each laboratory is required to split at a minimum every twentieth sample and perform an analysis (or analyses) on each portion. The samples which can not be split (e.g., air particulate filters) are counted twice. The results of the two analyses are then checked by staff scientists for agreement using the criteria defined in procedure 6510-SUR-4523.03. Agreement is considered acceptable if the coefficient of variation for the two values is eighty-five percent or less. Nonagreement of the sample concentrations may result in recounting or reanalyzing the sample (s) in question. During 1996, all of the paired intralaboratory split sample results were found to agree. Cross-check Program Samplu Each laboratory analyzing environmental samples for GPU Nuclear panicipates in two separate cross-check programs. Water samples are supplied by the USEPA; non-water samples (e.g., milk, filters and soil) are supplied by Analytics. All samples are sent to the laboratories as unknowns. Participation in these programs provides an independent check on the ability of each laboratory to Pace E2 i ( 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT L perform analyses on various kinds of samples containing detectable concentrations of radioactivity. The results submitted by the laboratories are compared to 1) limits established by the USEPA or 2) agreement criteria used by the NRC in their Configuratory Measurement Inspection. Program. If the results are outside the established limits or agreement criteria, the laboratories are requested to perform an investigation and take corrective action as necessary. The 1996 cross-check program results from each laboratory are listed in Appendix F. Explanations are provided for those results which were not submitted and/or which were not within the established limits. Interlaboratory Solit Samples The third type of QC sample is the interlaboratory split sample. These samples are the ones which are collected routinely for the REMP. After or during the collection process, the sample is thoroughly mixed (as necessary) to ensure that, as much as possible, the distribution of radioactivity in the sample is homogeneous. The sample is then split into two portions. One portion is sent to the primary (main) lab and the other portion is sent to the QC laboratory. 1 Since it is impractical to split airborne materials (filters, charcoal cartridges, etc.) separate samples l O from independent, but colocated, samplers are collected and then sent to the analysis laboratories. C/ Unfortunately, this practice of using distinctly different samples may result in higher than normal concentration differences for the two samples. Analysis results from the QC laboratory are then compared to those from the primary laboratory. The agreement criteria is the same as that used for the intralaboratory split samples. Corrective action for disagreements may include recounting or reanalyzing the sample (s). Table E-1 outlines the interlaboratory split sample program for 1996. There were two interlaboratory nonagreements during the entire year. An explanation is provided in Table E-2 for each nouagreement. i e i d i e Pace E3 i 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE E-1 1996 Interlaboratory Split Sample Program No. of Percentage of Primary Primary No. of QC Samples Submitted for i Sample Medium Stations Stations QC Analysis Air Particulate (AP) 12 1 8 percent j AirIodine (AI) 12 1 8 percent 4 Surface / Drinking Water (SW) 9 1 11 penent I Milk (M) 6 1 17 percent TLDs 90 10 11 percent (ID) ~ Groundwater (GW) 19(1) 1 5 percent ) Aquatic Sediment (AQS) 8(2) 1(2) 13 percent j Fish (AQF) 8(2) 1(2) 13 percent Food Products (FPV,FPF,FPL) 32(2) 3(2) 9 percent Meat (GAD) 0(3) 0(3) Not applicable Rodent (ROD) 2(2) O(2) O percent ) (1) Refers to the total number of stations routinely sampled and analyzed in 1996. (2) Refers to the total number of samples collected and analyzed in 1996. (3) Deer meat samples were not available in 1996. O Page E4 l ~. .~. O 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONhfENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE E-2 1 1996 Interlabcratory Split Sample Nonagreements Sample Collection j Medium Date Station Analysis Action and/or Resolution
- 1. AP 07/02/96 -
El-2 Gamma The primary and QC sample results were <0.03 pCi,'m' and 10/01/96 (K40) 0.00656
- 0.00300 pCi/m', respectively. The nonagreement was due to counting the QC sample five times longer than the primary sample. No funher action was taken because the QC sample concentration was below the dmated minimum l
detectable concentration (MDC) reported for the primary sample. Potassium 40 is a naturallyacurring radionuclide. Its presence in the QC r.:.mple was unrelated to TMINS operations.
- 2. G W 09/05/96 -
MS-2 Sr 90 The primary and QC sample results were 1.5
- 0.5 pCi/L and 12/05/96
<0.2 pCi/L, respectively. Since the primary sample result was inconsistent with historical concentrations, a reanalysis was requested and performed. The reanalysis yielded a concentration of <0.9 pCi/L. It did not confirm the original result. The laboratory reported that the sample holder used for i counting the original sample was slightly contaminated. n 1 1 4 4 4 i 4 k U I Page E5 ~ i 9 I IM RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTM MONilDRING REPORT i i t 4 ( i APPENDIX F l l 1996 Cross-Check Program i\\ Results l i l l i 1 } I Page F1 =_.
==
19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE F-1 1996 'USEPA Cross-Check Program Results Teledyne GPUN-ERL Brown Eng. Collection EPA Results Results Results Date Media Nuclide (A) (B) (B) 01/23/96 Water Sr-89 73.0
- 8.7 75.33
- 1.53 73.67
- 3.21 Sr-90 5.0 e7 8.33
- 0.58 5.00 0.00 01/26/96 Water Alpha 12.1
- 8.7 14.00
- 1 00 19.00 1.00 Beta 7.0 8.7 8.47
- 1.15 7.13 0.21 02/02/96 Water I-131 67.0 12.1 70.00
- 1.00 71.67
- 3.06 03/08/96 Water H-3 22002.0
- 3816.9 22000.00
- 0.00 22000.00
- 0.00 04/16/96 Water Alpha 74.8
- 32.4 69.33 i 2.52 63.67
- 2.89 Beta 166.9
- 43.4 156.67
- 5.77 160.00
- 0.00 Co-60 31.0
- 8.7 31.33
- 2.08 31.67
- 1.15 Sr-89 43.0
- 8.7 45.00
- 1.00 41.33
- 2.31 Sr-90 16.0
- 8.7 16.67
- 1.15 15.33
- 0.58 Cs-134 46.0
- 8.7 42.00
- 1.73 42.33
- 1.53 Cs-137 50.0
- 8.7 51.67
- 1.53 52.33
- 1.53 06/07/96 Water Co-60 99.0
- 8.7 98.67
- 1.53 99.00
- 1.73 Zn-65 300.0
- 52.0 326.67
- 5.77 309.33
- 2.08 Ba-133 745.0
- 130.1 770.00
- 0.00 711.00
- 71.42 Cs-134 79.0 8.7 75.33
- 0.58 69.67
- 1.53 (C)
) Cs-137 197.0
- 17.3 206.67
- 5.77 202.00 2.65 07,12/96 Water Sr-89 25.0
- 8.7 30.33
- 1.53 22.67 1.53 Sr-90 12.0
- 8.7 10.33 0.58 12.33
- 1.15 07/19/96 Water Alpha 24.4 10.6 23.67
- 0.58 22.67
- 0.58 Beta 44.8 8.7 48.00
- 3.00 45.33
- 2.08 08/09/96 Water H-3 10879.0
- 1887.6 11000.00
- 0.00 9800.00
- 346.41 10/04/96 Water
- -131 27.0
- 10.4 32.00
- 3.00 26.33
- 2.31
] 10/15/96 Wa.ter Alpha 59.1 25.7 59.33
- 4.16 55.67
- 5.03 l
Beta 111.8
- 29.I 106.67
- 5.77 110.00
- 0.00 Co-60 l'.0 8.7 15.33
- 0.58 14.67
- 1.53 Sr 89 10.0
- 8.7 18.00
- 3.61 9.00 0.00 Sr-90 25.0
- 87 16.00 1.00 26.00
- 1.00 (D)
Cs-134 20.0
- 8.7 19.33
- 0.58 19.67
- 1.15 Cs-137 30.0
- 8.7 31.33 i 0.58 29.33
- 1.15 Page F2
l ' ' ~ ' ' " ~ ' ~ 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE F-1 1996 USEPA Cross-Check Program Results 10/25/96 Water Alpha 10.3 8.7 8.43 2.23 9.03 0.72 Beta 34.6
- 8.7 35.33
- 1.53 39.6"1 0.58 l
11/8/96 Water Co-60 44.0
- 8.7 45.67
- 0.58
- 4. < 7 0.58 l
Zn-65 35.0
- 8.7 37.67
- 2.08 38.67
- 0.58 Ba 133 64.0
- 10.4 66.00
- 0.00 56.67
- 3.21 Cs-134 11.0 8.7 11.67
- 0.58 12.00
- 0.00 Cs-137 19.0 8.7 21.00
- 1.00 20.67
- 1.15 l
l l A. EPA Results - Expected Laboratory precision (control limit, 3 sigma, n = 3). Units are pCi/L. B. Results-Average one standard deviation. Units are pCi/L. C. The TBE Cs-134 result is below the c. ntrol limit. To verify the cause for the deviation, a Cs-134 standard l has been purchased. If the Cs-134 efficiency is lower than the efficiency at 604 Key and 795 Kev, then rather than change those ciliciencies (which may be needed for other isotopes of comparable energies), the Cs 134 branching intensity shall be adjusted. D. The ERL Sr-90 result is below the control limit. Upon investigation it was found that the background count rate was 2.47 cpm. This was outside of the instrument background control limit and should not l have been used. The sample holders are now being kept clean to prevent reoccurrence. I l I Criteria are listed in EPA 600/4-81-004 l l l I !t Page F3 l l l l
1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONI1DRING REPORT TABLE F-2 1996 ANALYTICS Cross-Check Program Results Collection ANALYTICS Uncertainty GPU Mm Max Date hiedia Nuclide Value (3 Sigma) (1 Sigms) Reschition Value Ratio Ratio Ratio Agreenwns (A) (B) 3/12/96 hber Alptwt 12 I 0.3 36.0 to 0.83 0.75 133 Yes Beta 85 4 13 63.8 74 0.87 0.8 1.25 Yes 3/12/96 blter Ce-143 194 10 3.3 58.2 210 1.08 0.8 1.25 Yes Cr-51 719 36 12.0 39.9 760 1.06 0.8 1.25 Yes Cs-134 128 6 20 64 0 120 0.94 0.8 1.25 Yes Cs-137 141 7 23 60 4 150 1.06 0.8 1.25 Yes Co-58 106 5 1.7 63.6 110 1.04 0.8 1.25 Yes Mn-54 70 3 1.0 70.0 75 1.07 0.8 1.25 Yes Fe-59 186 9 3.0 62.0 210 1.13 0.8 1.25 Yes Zn45 215 11 3.7 58.6 230 1.07 0.8 1.25 Yes Co60 169 8 2.7 63.4 180 1.07 08 I.25 Yes 3/12/96 Cartndge 1-131 92 5 1.7 55.2 91 0.99 0.8 1.25 Yes 3/12/96 Filter Sr-90 36 2 0.7 54 0 26 0.72 08 1.25 No Yes "B" Agreement (I result see Note D) 3/12/96 Milk Cc 141 234 12 4.0 58.5 170 0.73 08 1.25 No Out of Range Cc14l* 234 12 4.0 58.5 240 1.03 0.8 1.25 Yes
- Corrected Results (see Note C)
Cr 51 858 43 14 3 59.9 790 0.92 08 1.25 Yes Os-134 154 8 2.7 57.8 140 0.91 0.8 1.25 Yes Cs-137 170 9 3.0 56.7 170 1.00 0.8 1.25 Yes Co-58 128 6 2.0 64.0 130 1.02 0% I.25 Yes Mn-54 84 4 13 63.0 84 1.00 0.8 1.25 Yes Fe-59 223 11 3.7 60.8 240 1.08 0.8 1.25 Yes Zn45 260 13 43 60.0 290 1.12 0.8 1.25 Yes Co.60 204 10 33 61.2 200 0.98 0.8 1.25 Yes 3/12/96 Milk I-131 13 1 03 39.0 15 1.15 0.75 133 Yes (I result see Note D) 3/12/96 Milk Sr 89 31 2 07 46.5 20 0.65 0.75 133 No Yes "B" Agreement Sr-90 16 1 03 48.0 22 138 0.75 133 No Yes *B" Agreement 3/12/96 Soil Cc-141 0323 0.02 0.007 48.5 03 0 93 0.75 133 Yes Cr-51 1.182 0.06 0.020 59.1 1.175 0.99 0.8 1.25 Yes Os-134 0.212 0.91 0.003 63.6 0.175 0.83 0.8 1.25 Yes Cs-137 0332 0.02 0.007 49.8 0325 0.98 0.75 133 Yes Co-58 0.176 0 01 0.003 52.8 0.163 0.93 0.8 l.25 Yes Mn-54 0.116 0.01 0.003 34.8 0.119 1.03 0.75 1 33 Yes Fe-59, 0.107 0 02 0.007 46.1 0313 1.02 0.75 133 Yes Zn45 0 358 0.02 0.007 53.7 0363 1.01 0.8 1.25 Yes Co-60 0.281 0.01 '0.003 843 0.288 1.02 0.8 1.25 Yes Page F4 9 e e __ _J
19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIR AL MONI1DRING REPORT TABLE F-2 1996 Analytics Cross-Check Program Results Fas JL Units are pCit for Milk, pCi/g (dry) for Soil and total pCi Br Filter and Cartridge. B. GPU Value is an average of three or more detemsnatiora linits are pCi/L for Milk, gCi/g (dry) for Soil and total pCi for Filter and Cartridge. [ C. De val:se reported to Analytics was in etrar (Mean c,f 23 3.4+242.0+2Mmstead of 233.4+242.0* M5) D. Due to insufficient sample only I analysis was informed. l To determine mercement or possible anreement. t v
- 1. Divide each Analytics value by its associated one sigma uncettainty to obtais the resolution.
- 2. Divide each GPU value by the..
3, .i..g Analytics value to obtain the ratio.
- 3. The GPU measurement is in agreement if the value of the ratio falls within the limits shown in the folknving table for the corresponding resolution.
l l Asreement Asreement Resolution %reement "A* Criteria "13" Criteria <3 no comp no comp no comp 23-<4 0.4 - 2.5 0.3 - 3.0 nocamp 24-<8 0.5 - 2.0 0.4 - 2.5 03-3.0 2 8 < 16 0.6-1.67 0.5 - 2.0 0.4 - 2.5 216 <51 0.75-133 0.6-1.67 0.5 - 2.0 2 51 < 200 0.80 -1.25 0.75-I3 3 0.6 -1.67 1 2 200 0.85-1.18 0.80 -1.25 0.75 133 'A* criteria are applied to the following analyses: Gamne Spects metry where the principal gamma energy used for identification is greater than 250 key, Tritisan analyses ofliquid samples and ime-level I-t 31.
- B* criteria are applied to the following anal >ws:
i Gamma Spectrometry where the pnncipal gamma energy used for identification is less than 250 key, Sr-89 and Sr-90 determinations and Gross Alpha and Ikta. Criteria are sin'.ilar to those listed in USNRC Inspection Procedure 84750 with minor adjustments 10 account for ac*ivity concentrations with large uncettaintics. i l Page F5 i
19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONI1DRING REPORT. l TABLE F-3 1996 ANALYTICS Cross-Check Program Results Teledyne Brown Collection ANALYTICS Engineering Date Media Nuclide Value Value Ratio (A) (B) ( 3/12/96 Water 1-131 36
- 2 39
- 5 1.08 Cc-141 88
- 4 89
- 9 1.01 l
Cr 51 322
- 16 330 30 1.02 Cs-134 58
- 3 53i5 0.91 Cs 137 64
- 3 65
- 7 1.02 Co-58 48
- 2 49
- 5 1.02 Mn-54 31
- 2 37
- 4 1.19 Fe-59 83
- 4 93
- 9 1.12 Zn-65 97
- 5 100
- 10 1.03 Co-60 76
- 4 81
- 8 1.07 3/12/96 Milk 1-131 13
- 1 16
- 6 1.23 Cc-141 234 12 240
- 20 1.03 Cr-51 858
- 43 880
- 90 1.03 Cs-134 154
- 8 150
- 20 0.97 Cs-137 170 9 180
- 20 1.06 Co-58 128
- 6 140
- 10 1.09 Mn-54 84
- 4 93
- 9 1.11 Fe-59 223
- 11 250
- 30 1.12 Zn-65 260
- 13 260
- 30 1.00 Co-60 204
- 10 220*20 1.08 3/12/96 Water St-89 24
- 1 30
- 4 1.25 i
Sr-90 21 1 23
- 2 1.10 3/12/96 Milk Sr-89 31
- 2 30
- 4 0.97 St 90 16
- 1 17
- 1 1.06 3/12/96 Water H-3 2982
- 149 2800 200 0.94 6/19/96 Filter Alpha 35
- 2 37
- 3 1.06 Beta 144 7 150
- 10 1.04 6/19/96 Filter Ce-141 400
- 20 500
- 50 1.25 Cr-51 1048*52 1200
- 100 1.15 Cs 134 310
- 16 310 30 1.00 Cs-137 764
- 38 910
- 90 1.19 l
Co-58 173
- 9 210
- 20 1.21 Mn-5 4 559
- 28 690
- 70 1.23 Fe-59 144
- 7 190
- 20 1.32 Zn-65 108
- 5 140
- 10 1.30 Co-60 156
- 8 180 20 1.15 6/19/96 Filter Sr-90 74
- 4 71
- 3 0.96 6/19/96 Filter Sr-90 49 2 64 3 1.31 6/19/% Filter Si-90 63
- 3 66
- 4 1.05 O
Pace F6
l t 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MON 11DRING REPORT d TABLE F-3 l 1 1996 ANALYTICS Cross-Check Program Results ses A. Teledyne Results-Results are one determmation, courning error is two standard deviations. Units are pCMiter for water and udlk. For gamma results, if two standard deviations are less than 10%, than a 10% error is reported. Units are total pCi for air particulate filters. B. Ratio ofTeledyne Brown Engineenng to Analytics results. To determine aereement or possible arreement.
- 1. Divide each Analytics value by its associated one sigma uncertainty to obtain the resolution.
- 2. Divide each value by the corresponding Analytics value to obtain the ratio.
- 3. The measurement is in agreement if the value of the ratio falls within the limits shown in the following table for the corresponding resolution.
Agreement Agreement Eesolution Arreement " A" Criteria
- B" Cnteria
<3 no camp no comp no comp 23 <4 0.4 - 2.5 03 3.0 no comp 2 4-< 8 0.5 - 2.0 0.4 - 2.5 03 3.0 2 8 < 16 0.6-1.67 0.5 - 2.0 0.44.5 ) I 216 < 51 0.75 - 1.33 0.6 1.67 0.5 - 2.0 j 2 51 - < 200 0.80 1.25 0.75 1.33 0.6 1.67 i ) 2 200 0.85 -1.18 0.80 - 1.25 0.75-133 'A" criteria are applied to the following analyses: [p} Gamma Spectrometry where the principal ghmma energy used for identification is greater than 250 key, j Tritium analyses ofliquid samples and j (U 1 Low-level 1 131. "B" criteria are applied to the follsg analyscs: Gamma Smbstywhere the principal gamma energy used for identification is less than 250 key, Sr-89 and Sr-90 detenrdnations and Oross Algha and Beta. Criteria are similar to those listed in USNRC f aspection Procedure 84750 with minor adjustments to account for activity concentrations with large uncertamties. l N/ f Pace F7 l r
= _ _... I i ) 1 4 i 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONI1DRING REPORT 4 l i s i i } F i i i i 1 i APPENDIX G l l 1996 Land Use Census I 1 I ii f i i t i i i l i l i 1 e .i t 4 4j 1 4 Page G1..- 1
1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE G-1 1996 ANNUAL DAIRY AND LIVESTOCK CENSUS
- Azimuth
- *Name, Distance Address No.
No. Sector & Phone Cows Gosts Directien Code Number Dreed No. Cows Milked No. Goats Milked Uvestock Dairy Used Grazing Period 1.9km (1.2mi) 5* 2 Goats 0 All year but mainly N A store bought feed I l 3.3km (2.1mi) 3* Cows, goats, sheep and horses are penodically kept here for quarantine from a few days to a few weeks. Animals graze for short N A Animals are then shipped interstate or to foreign countries. If milked, milk is used as animal feed. periods prior to exportation. Occasionally they 2 receive feed 5.3km (3.3mi) 10* floistein 44 Cows 0 3 IIem Cows are confmed to N A 65 IIcifers 1 Rooster silage and grains which 3 Rabbits are partially grown on [3] farm. Calves on feed 8.5km (5.3mi) 3* IIolstein 135 Cows 135 Atlantic Dairy Co-Op & April 15 to October. N A 160 lleifers Own Use Silage & grains are 4 home grown 8.6km (3.3mi) 358* 32 Beef Cattle Sold at Lebanon Valley April to October. N A Auction Fced is home grown 5 5.4km (4.0mi) 24* 8 Chickens Eggs are for Own Use Store bought feed plus NNE B out all year 6 6.3km (3.9mi) 35* 70 Beef Some sold at Lebanon May to October. Feed is NE C Cattle Valley Auction & Own home grown (Simmentals & Use. Some Show Animals Angus) Sold at 4-11. Breeding stock sold in western PA, 7 VA, NY, etc.. i Page G2 O O O
O C O I996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONlwRING REPORT TABLE G-1 1996 ANNUAL DAIRY AND LIVESTOCK CENSUS
- l Arimuth "Name, Distance AJdress -
No. No. Sector & Phone Cows Goats Direction Code Number Breed No. Cows Milked No. Goats Milked Livestock Deiry Used Grazing Pe-led 6.6km (4.1mi) 35' floistein 120 Cows 120 75 Steers Atlantie Dairy Co-Op & Milk cows are on home NE C 100 lleifers Own Use grown feed.1Icifers 8 graze June to October 7.Okm (4 4mi) 48* Iloistein 140 Cows 125 Atlantic Dairy Co-Op & Confined to their own NE C 125 lleifers Own Use silage (IIcifers graze 9 May 15 - Oct.1) 1.7km (1.1mi) 65* lloistein 100 Cows 80-85 1 Steer Mt. Joy Cup & Own May I to November 1 ENE D 75 IIcifers 20 Sheep Use. Steeris forOwn plus hay & eorn [10] Use 4 Steers IIalf sold Privately & IlalfAll Summer /llay in 2.0km (l.3mi) 75* ENE D Sold for Own Use Winter 11 Ukm (2.8mi) 72* 1 0 8 Sheep Own Use Store bought feed & ENE D grazemostof rar 3 12 I 6.7km (4.2mi) 59-iloistein 58 Cows 52 Hamsburg Dairy & Own May I to November 1. ENE D 60 lleifers & Use Feed is home grown 13 Calves 7.2km (4.2mi) 57* Iloistein 82 Cows 72 Mt. Joy Co-Op & Own April to November ENE D 70 lleifers & Use 14 Calves 7.5km (4.7mi) 71* lloistein 75 Cows 65 Mt. Joy Co-op & Own May to October ENE D 50 lleifers Use 15 1.8km (1.1mi) 93* Iloistein 110 Cows 110 MtJoy Co-op Apnl to November plus E E R0 Heifers & home-grown feed {l6] Calves s Page G3
1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONhfENTAL hf0NITORING REPORT TABLE G-1 1996 ANNUAL DAIRY AND LIVESTOCK CENSUS
- Azimuth "Name, l
Distance Address No. No. Sector & Phone Cows Goats Direction Code Number Breed No. Cows Milked No. Goats Milked Uvestock Dairy Used Grarir.g Period 5.6km(3.5 ni) 96* lloistein 63 Cows 56 Mt. Joy Co-op & Own April to October / E E 23 I!cifers Use Winter on Silage & Hay 17 1.Okm (2.5sta) 112* 100 Pigs Pigs sre raised & then Store Bought feed ESE F transported to Hatfield or 18 Grcffs Meat Market 4.7km (2.9mi) 107* '2 0 10 Chickens Own Use + egg;to All year ESE F 16 Sheep neighbors & friends. Lambs will go to Lancaster Stock Yard, neighbors & friends. 5.heep meat sold to 19 neighbors 5.2km (3.2mii 104-Iloistein 75 Cows 64 70,000 Chickens Mt. Joy Co op & Chickens May to November / ESE F 50 licifers to Wengert Feeds Winter on stored silage [20] & hay 5.7km (3.6mi) 117' Holstein 32 Cows 30 Atlantic Dairy & Co Op. May to November ESE F 12 lleifers & & Neighbors 21 Calves 6.1km (3.Emi) I13* lloistein 102 Cows 95 1200llogs Atlantic Dairy CM)p. May to Octoben. Dairy ESE F 70 Ileifers 10 Steers BeerCows &ilogs Sold Cows are on silage at flatfield and at the 22 Stock Yards 6.6m (4. Imi) 1I3* 38 BeefCattle Lancaster Stock Yerds May to November ESE F 35 Sheep Winter on Silage & Hay 23 3 Pigs Page G4 O O O
(m ~ ) J %_./ 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONhfENTAL Af0NI1DRING REPORT TABLE G-1 1996 ANNUAL DAIRY AND LIVESTOCK CENSUS
- Azimuth "Name, j
Distance Address No. No. A Sector & Phone Cows Goats l Direction Code Number Breed No. Cows Milked No. Goats Milked Livestock Dairy Used Grazing Period 6.91an (4.3mi) 1I4* 45 Beef Cattle Sold Locally, Own Use All Year ESE F (Angus,IIereford & Steers Sold at Lanc. & Iloistein) Stock Yards, New IIolland Auction & 24 Minnich Sales 7.6km (4.7mi) 121' 12 Steers (Angus Steers sold at New Confined to home-ESE F & Iloistein) llolland Auction & grown hay & corn 36,000 Chickens Vintage Sales Stable. Chickens sold to Empire 25 in Mif11entown, PA 8.1km (5.0mi) I15' Iloistein 52 Cows 49 28,000 Chickens Atlantic Dairy Co-Op. April to Octotw/ ESE F 40 lleifers (Droilers) & Chickens sold Winter on silage 2 Steers commercially to Pennfield, Roherstown. 26 Steer Own Use 3.1km (5.0mi) I19' 35 Steers (Angus Sold Locally & at May to November. ESE F & Iloistein) Lancaster Stock Yard Winter on silage & hay 27 R.2km (5.lmi) 113' 85,000 Chickens Sold to Tyson ESE F (Broilers) 28 8.2km (3.1mi) 122' 30 Sheep Sold at Groffs & Sheepgraze Aprilto ESE F 1600 Hogs Lancaster Stock Yard. October / Store-bought 1 Steer feed & 4 acres of 29 pasture in winter 8.3km (5.1mi) 123' Iloistein 150 Cows 125 105,000 Atlantic Dairy Coop & Dairy Cows con-fined ESE F 90 Ileifers Chickens Chickens Sold to own feed /IIeifers 30 (Broilers) Commercially to Tyson graze May to October Page G5 . m. a m.
l 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE G-1 1996 ANNUAL DAIRY AND LIVESTOCK CENSUS
- l Azimuth "Name, Distance Address No.
No. Sector & Phone Cows Goats Direction Code Number Brmi No. Cows Milked No. Goats Milked Livestock Dairy Used Grazmg Period 8.5km (5.3mi) 103* Ayrshire & 137 Cows 115 164 Beef Cattle llamsburg Dairy & May to November ESE F IIolstein 95 IIcifers 1300llogs Livestock sold at local Winter on silage & hay 4 Bulls markets. Ilogs go to 31 Groffs Meat Market. l.8km (l.1mi) 124' 1 0 100 Beef Cattle Eggs sold to Quaker Cattle confmed to SE G (Iloistein) State. Beef sold at home-grown hay & 350,000 Moyers(Mo Pac). silage. Chickens on Chickens Sheep for Oun Use. store-bought feed 10 Sheep Also sold locally. 32 110,000 Pullets 2.3km (1.4mi) 130-Holstein 60 Cows 55 10 Steers National Farmers Apnl to SE G Ayrshire 20 lleifers Organization & Steers November / Winter on Sold at Lancaster Stock silage & hay (33] Yard 4.4km (2.8mi) 134' 43 Beef Cattle Lancaster Stock Yard All year. SE G (Angus,liereford 34 & Charlais) 6.0km (3.8mi) 14l' 50 BeefCattle Sold at New 11olland Cattle on pasture all SE G (Charlais & Vintage, Lancaster & year plus feed / Calves Limousine) pigs sold at various on feed (hay & silage) 250 Pigs markets including in winter Groirs Meat Market 35 6.5km (4.0mi) 141' I!olstein 60 Cows 65 3 0 3 Bulls (calves) MtJoy Coop & Own April to November SE G 50Ileifers & Use plus shared with plus silage allyear/ Calves friends Milking cows only on 36 silage & hay Page G6 9 9 9
p N O 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MON 11DRING REPORT TABLE G-1 1996 ANNUAL DAIRY AND LIVESTOCK CENSUS
- l Azimuth "Name, Distance Address No.
No. Sector & Phone Cows Goats Direction Code Number Br:cd No. Cows Milked No. Goats Milked Liveaock Dairy Used Grazing Period 6.6km (4.0mi) 129' Itolstein 160 Cows 150 i10 Stects . Mt. Jay Co-op & Steers April to October but SE G 150 lleifers ' sold at Auction (New mostlysilage. Milk IIolland & Vintage) Cows only on silage & 1 37 hay .j) Ixm (4.5mi) 137' 6 Steers y v.gus) Own Use All year SE G I Calf 38 7.4km (4.6 mi) 136* 25 Chickens Own Use Store bought feed & SE G scraps 39 7.9km (4.9mi) 131' 90,000 Chickens Eggs are Sold Silage all year SE G 60 Steers Commercially to Quaker State Farms & Own Use. Beef to Lancaster i Stock Yard or New 40 Ifolland 5.3km (3.3mi) 180* 70 Bcef Cattle Sold at Auction in May to December. S J (IIereford & Lancaster & Own Use Corn & silage rest of 41 Black Argus the year l 1.0km (2.5mi) 192* 1 Steer Own Use Graze year round plus SSW K store bought feed 42 7.8km (4.9 mi) 200* Iloistein 70 Cows 62 1 Sheep (Pet) Atlantic Dairy Co-Op April 15 to October 15 SSW K 50 lleifers 43 Page G7
I9% RAD:0 LOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE G-1 1996 ANNUAL DAIRY AND LIVESTOCK CENSUS
- Azimuth "Name, Distance Address No.
No. Sector & Phone Cows Goats Direction Code Number Breed No. Cows Milked No. Goats Milked Livestock Dairy Used Grazing Period 20.6km (12.8mi) 208* Jersey 188 Cows 155 13 IIens Atlantic Dairy Co-Op Cows on store bought SSW K Iloistein 70 lleifers 1 Rooster feed. Otheranimals Ayrshire & Calves 18 Turkeys graze Aprilto Brown Swiss 4 Rabbits November plus Guernsey haylage, silage a. ! m Milking grain year round. [44] Shorthorn 4.3km (2.8mi) 226' 12 Beef Cattle Lancaster Stock Yard Mr.y to November SW L (Angus, Hereford & 45 Charlais) 6 Okm (3.7mi) 233* 2 Nannies 0 2 Sheep Own Use Goats graze all year. SW L 4 Chickens Other animals use 46 1 Rabbit feed. 6.5km (4.0mi) 242* 300 Chickens Distributed Locally & Most confined to WSW M 30 Guineas Own Use chicken house for feeding. Some run ( 47 loose. 7.1km (4.4mi) 238' I Nanny 0 20 Chickens O.m Use. Eggs from Goat grazes May to WSW M 15 Geese Chickens & Ducks October 48 12 Ducks t I 5.0km (3.1mi) 286* 16 Cows (Black Own Use & April to December I WNW P Angus) Occasionally Distributed I Bull I m tly l i 49 R Calves (Bulls) r 5.8km (3.6mi) 284* 30 Beef Cattle Deef Own Use & Some Most of the year WNW P (Iloistein) to Auction. Eggs Osm S0 15 Chickens Use Page GR 9 O O
\\ D (" b ( 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONhfENTAL A10NilDRING REPORT TABI.E G-1 1996 ANNUAL DAIRY AND LIVESTOCK CENSUS
- Azimuth "Name, Distance Address No.
No. Sector & Phone Cons Goats Direction Code Number 13 reed No. Cows Milked No. Goats Milked Livestock Dairy Used Grazing Period 6.0km (3.7mi) 295* Iloistein 80 Cows 45 12 Nannies 0 20 Geese Atlantic Dairy Co-Op May to October WNW P Jersey 51 Brown Swiss 10.8km (6.7mi) 293* Iloistein 47 Cows 40 Rutters Dairy & Own May to October plus WNW P 52 Calves & Use stored feed [52] Ileifers 999 BeefCattle (Includes Steers, Cows & Calves) lloistein, 16 Bulls Atlantic Dairy Co-Op,
- Jersey, 2,152 Cows 4,453 Pigs &
MtJoy Coop,
- Apshire, 1,557 Ileifers &
I,870 24 0 flogs !Iarrisburt Dairy, TOTALS Brown Swiss, Calves 874,400 Rutters '> airy, Various
- Guernsey, Chickens Natbal Farmers Milking 35 Geese Organization Shorthorn 12 Ducks 8 Rabbits i
122 Sheep 30 Guineas 18 Tn: leys l Includes livestock which are used only for hinnan consumption and all dairy farms within approximately five miles of TMINS plus regularly sampled milk farms. l Names and addresses are on file at Three Mile Island Enviromnental Affairs. Indicates new farm / livestock owner this cenais.
- In lower right-hand coiner of the first column indicates running total of farms serveyed.
[#] Bracketed #'s indicate regularly sampled milk farms. Page G9
19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONI110 RING REPORT TABLE G-2 1996 Annual Residence Census
- Azimuth Azimuth Distance and Name, Address **
Distance and Name, Address ** and Sector and Sector Direction Code Telephone No. Direction Code Telephone No. 6,000 ft. 12,000 ft. (l;839 m) 5* (3,658 m) 186* N A S J 3,800 ft. 3,400 ft. (1,158 m) 28' (1,036 m) 213.7* NNE B SSW K 2,800 ft. 2,850 ft. (853 m) 48' (869 m) 226' NE -C SW L 2,450 ft. 2,500 ft. 047 m) 67.5* (777 m) 250' ENE D WSW M 2,300 ft. 1,850 ft 600 m) 80* (564 m) 272* ] E E W N 5,800 ft. 1,900 ft. (1,770 m) 123* (579 m) 293* ESE F WNW P 3,750 ft. 2,150 ft. (1,143 m) 145' (655 m) 306* SE G NW Q j 3,750 ft. 3,500 fL (1,143 m) 152' (1,067 m) 337.5* SSE H NNW R
- Census identifies nearest residence in each of the sixteen meteorological sectors.
- Names and addresses are on file at Three Mile Island Environmental AfTairs.
O Page GIO
I f\\ Q 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE G-3 Annual Garden Census 1996* Meteorologien! Dwaare "Name, Sector and Address 4 Q"-- Direction Ashauth & Phone Type of Vegetation llow Used and Distribution of Naumber Consumers A(1) 2.4km (1.5mi) 4* Pumpkins, Tomatoes, Squash, Lettuce, Own Use N Garlic, Zucchini, Corn, Potatoes 3 Aduhs 4 Also given away to other family members, friends & neighbors l B (2) l Akm (0.9mi) 24* Winter Turnips, Radishes, CauliGower, own Use ] NNE Corn, Peppers, Cabbage, Tonwoes, 3 Adults Asparagus, Horse Radish, Onions, Also given away to family, friends 1 Blueberries, Rhubarb Strawberries, & neighbors. Broccoli, Beans, Peas Potatoes C(3) I Akm (0.85mi) 34* Tomatoes. Peppers, Corn, Lettuce, Own Use NE Carrots, Radishes, Cucumbers 2 Adults 3 Children D(4) 2.3km (1.4mi) 73* Cabbage, Lettuce, Tomatoies, Peppers, One Use ENE Potatoes, Corn, Watermelon, Green 2 Adults Beans, Cantaloupes, Yellow Wax Beans Also given away to family k E(5) 0.mn (0.5mi) 94* Cabbage. Tomatoes, Peppers, Red Beets, Grown primarily for GPUN REMP. E Potatoes. Corn Excess consumed by GPUN personnel and their famities. F(6) 0.8km (0.5mi) 120* See 'E" See*E' ) ESE G(7) 1.0km (0.6mi) 135' Wide assortment of food products Own Use SE including broad-leaf vegetables (cabbage) 2 Adults. Also given away to relatives & sold along Rt. 441 at j the Red Hill Farm Produce Stand, j at the Farra Show Building Farmers Market and at the Hometown Market in Hazelton. Excess goes to Leola Produce Auction. H (8) 1.1km (0.7mi) 152' Green Beans, Tomatoes, Onions, Own Use SSE Peppers, Strawberries, Rhubarb, 3 Adults Asparagus, Radishes, Turnips Also given away to neighbors & friends J (9) 3.Nn (2.3mi) 186* Tomatoes. Corn, Melons Cabbage, Own Use S Cucumbers, Peppers, Strawberries, 2 Aduhs Watermelon, Pumpkins 1 Child 1 Teen Also given away to family & friends K(10) 3.5km (2.2mi) 197* lettuce, Carro,s, Tomatoes, Potatoes, Own Use SSW Cantaloupes, Peppers, String Beans. 2 Adults Watermelon, Parsley, Egg Plant, 3 Children Radishes, Red Beets, Zuchinni Also shared with family J Pace G11
1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE G-3 Annual Garden Census 1996a Meteorological Dbtance "Namie, Sector and Address Designation Direction Azimuth & Phone Type of Vegetation How Used and IXstribution of Nuniber Consassers L(11) 2.9km(1.8:ni) 225* Lettuce, Corn, Tomatoes, Peppers, Egg Own Use SW Plant, Watermelon, Cant.aloupes, Onions, 2 Adults Cucumbers 2 Children Also shared with neighbors M(12) 2.1Lrn (1.3mi) 253* Endive, Potatoes, Beana, Cabbage, Turnips, own Use WSW Peas, Zucchini, Onions, Lettuce, Tomatoes, 2 Adults Peppers, Egg Plant, Strawberries, Corn, Also infrequently sold locally and Neck Pumpkins some given away to friends & neighbors N (13) 2.1ksn (1.3mi) 265* Tomatoes, Potatoes, Red Beets, Peppers, Own Use W Onions, String Beans. Cabbage, 2 Adults Cucumbers, Rhubarb Also some given away to friends, neighbors & family P(14) 2.4km (1.5mi) 287* Brusul Sprouts, Blueberries, Peppers, Own Use WNW Zucchini, Tomatoes Lettuce. Potatoes, 2 Adults Watermelon, Cantaloupes, Raspberries, i Teen Pumpkins Cucumbers.
- stolli, Onions 2 Children Also given away to family Q(15) 2.4km (1.5mi) 310*
Peppers, Tomatoes, Rhubarb, Grapes, Own Use NW Strawberries (Identifiable vegetation only; 6 Adults there may be additional vegetation (Assuming 2 adults per each of 3 produced) plots identified during cenrus) R(16) 3.9km (2.4mi) 346' Tomatoes. Cucumbers, Peas, Beans, Own Use NNW Peppers. Cabbage, Carrots 2 Adults 1 Child Also shared with family & friendas__ 2 Census identifies nearest garden (greater than 500 ft and having a portion of broad-leaf vegetation) in each of the sixteen meteorological sectors. " Names and addresa are on file at Three Mile Istrnd Environmental Affairs. O Page G12 I l
t 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT i 1, i i i I i l APPENDIX H i l Data Reporting and Analysis i Page H1
1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT Environmental samples frequently contain very little, if any, radioactivity. Even when very sensitive, state-of-the-art counting equipment is used, many of the sample count rates can not be differentiated from the background count rate or the count rate of the blank sample. When this occurs, the sample is said to have a radioactivity level or concertration at or below the sensitivity of the analyses method. In this case, the analysis result is reported as less than a numerical value which corresponds to the sensitivity of the analysis method. Sensitivities are influenced by parameters such as sample volume, background or blank sample count rate and efficiency of the counting device. The terms used to describe the sensitivity are the lower limit of detection (LLD) and minimum detectable concentration (MDC). For this report, these two terms are considered to be synonymous. They are defined as: LLD (MDC) = 4.66 Sb E
- V
- 2.22
- Y
- exp (- A At) where:
the standard deviation of the background counting rate or the counting rate Sb = of a blank sample, as counts per minute, the counting efficiency of the equipment, as counts per disintegration, E = the volume or mass of the sample, such as L, g or m*, V = the number of disintegrations per minute per picocurie, 2.22 = the chemical yield, if applicable, Y = the radioactive decay constant for the particular radionuclide and A = the elapsed time between sample collection (or end of sample collection At = period) and counting. The applicable LLD or MDC for each radionuclide and analysis is listed in Table 3. A large percentage of the 1996 sample results were reported as less than the LLD or MDC. Results which were reported as less than the LLD or MDC were not included in the calculations of averages, standard deviations and ranges (by station or group) in the text and tables of this repon. The data from samples which contained concentrations above the LLD or MDC were used in the calculations (averages, standard deviations and ranges) contained in this report. The individual results were generally reponed to two significant figures. Each result also included a two-sigma counting uncenainty (95% confidence interval) to the same decimal place. At a minimum, a counting uncenainty equal to 10 percent of the measured concentratior. was reported. The counting uncertainties were not used in any statistical calculations in this report. O Page H2
l 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT ( i The data used in a few tables and all annual graphs were actual sample concentrations. For j historical graphs, actual sample concentrations were used for 1996 data points only. The actual concentration is calculated by subtracting the background count rate or the count rate of a blank sample from the count rate of the sample. The net count rate is the converted to a net sample concentration which is either positive, negative or zero. l There are several advantages of using actual sample concentrations. Biases in the data (averages, ranges, etc.), such as those caused by averaging only sample concentrations above the MDC, are eliminated. Missing data points on graphs also are eliminated. It should be noted that negative sample concentrations are important to the overall averages and trends in the data, but they have no physical significance. A negative sample concentration simply means that the background or j blank sample count rate is greater than the sample. All sample data were analyzed using S AS, a statistical analysis package developed by SAS Institute, Inc. The data were grouped by station, time period and by control and indicator status. Minimum, maximum and average values were calculated for each of these gro rps as well as standard deviations (2a,95% confidence interval). Quality control results (interlaboratory and intralaboratory) were not statistically analyzed with j O other data. Including quality control data would introduce a bias at selected stations while i V providing little additional interpretive information. i 4 4 ) i 1 4 i \\ U Pace H3 1
_________.___..._...._._.___.___.___.._..__.___......____....__.___.___._.___.m O 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONTIDRING REPORT l t APPENDIX I l l l 1996 o se caieoiation Methodoiogy O and Results I l l ilO PageIl i
19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT To the extent possible, radiological impacts were evaluated based on the measurement of exposure rates or radionuclide concentrations in environmental samples. However, the I radioactive materials released from TMINS during 1996 were often too small to be measured once dispersed in the offsite environment. As a result, the potential offsite doses were estimated by using computerized models that predict concentrations of radioactive materials in the environment and subsequent radiation doses on the basis of radionuclides released to the environment. GPU Nuclear calculates doses using an advanced class "A" dispersion model called SEEDS (simplified environmental effluent dosimetry system). This model incorporates the guidelines and methodology set forth in USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.109, and uses Lctual monthly Susquehanna River flow data and hourly meteorological information matched to the time of releases to assess the dispersion of effluents in the river and the atmosphere. Combining this assessment of dispersion and dilution with TMINS effluent data for each unit, postulated maximum hypothetical doses to the public are calculated. The maximum individual dose is calculated as well as the population dose to the total population within 50 miles of TMINS for gaseous effluents and the entire population using Susquehanna River water downstream of the station for liquid effluents. Values of environmental parameters and radionuclide concentration factors were chosen to provide conservative results. As a result, the doses calculated using this model are conservative estimates (i.e., overestimated). The dose summary tables, Table I-l and I-2, present the maximum hypothetical doses to an individual resulting from TMI-l and TMI-2 effluents, respectively, during the 1996 reponing period. Population doses for both units also are presented in Table I-l and Table I-2. Liquid Ondividual) The first two lines of Table I-l and Table I-2 present the maximum hypothetical dose to an individual from liquids. Presented are the total body and critical organ doses due to the radionuclides in the liquid efiluents. As recommended in USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.109, calculations are performed on the four age groups and eight organs. The pathways considered were water ingestion, shoreline exposure, and fresh water sportfish ingestion. The latter two i pathways are considered to be the primary recreational activities associated with the Susquehanna River in the vicinity of TMINS. The " receptor" would be that individual who drinks water from the Susquehanna River, eats fish that reside in the plant discharge, and stands on the shoreline influenced by the plant discharge. The tables present the maximum total body dose and critical organ dose for the age group most effected. For the 1996 reporting period, the calculated maximum hypothetical total body dose received by anyone from TMINS liquid effluents would have been 0.107 mrem (TMI-1) and 0.00148 mrem (TMI-2) to an adult. These represent 3.57 percent and 0.0493 percent, respectively, of the USNRC 10 CFR 50 App. I annual guidelines. The maximum hypothetical organ dose from TMI-and TMI-2 liquid effluents would have been 0.157 mrem to the liver of a teenager and Pace 12
O) 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT 0.00229 mrem, to the bone of a child, respectively. These represent 1.57 percent and 0.0229 percent, respectively of the USNRC 10 CFR 50 App. I armual guidelines. Gaseous (Individual) There were six major pathways considered in the dose calculation for gaseous effluents. These are: (1) plume exposure, (2) inhalation, consumption of(3) cow milk, (4) fruits and vegetables, (5) meat, and (6) standing on contaminated ground. Ingestion of goat milk was not considered because this pathway did not exist in 1996. Real-time meteorology (the actual conditions that existed at the time of releases) was used in dose calculations for gaseous efiluents. Default values were used if data were missing or invalid. 4 Lines 3 and 4 of Table I-1 and Table I-2 present the maximum plume exposures from noble gases at the site boundary. The notation of" air dose" is interpreted to mean that these doses are not to an individual but are considered to be the maximum dose at a location. The location is not necessarily a receptor. The tables present the distance in meters and the affected sector (compass i point). With respect to the noble gas releases for the 1996 reporting period, the maximum p%me exposure (air dose) would have been 0.000253 and 0.000210 millirads (mrad) for TMI-1, gamma and beta, respectively. The TMI-l exposures represent 0.00253 and 0.00105 percent of the O USNRC 10 CFR 50 App. I annual guidelines, respectively. Since TMI.2 released no noble gases, I V the gamma and beta air doses are zero. Lines 5 and 6 present the calculated dose from noble gases to the closest receptor (individual) in the maximally affected sector (s). The location of the receptor is described by both distance l (meters) and direction from the site. Plume doses to an individual, regardless of age, from gaseous effluents (noble gases only) during the 1996 reporting period were 0.000120 mrem and 0.000212 mrem for TMI-l total body and skin dose, respectively. These represent equal to or j less than 0.00240 percent of the USNRC 10 CFR 50 App. I annual guidelines. Since TMI-2 1 l released no n'oble gases, the total body and skin doses were zero. l Line 7 represents the dose to the maximally exposed organ due to airborne releases ofiodines, tritium and particulates. This does not include the whole body plume dose which was separated i out on line 5. The doses presented in this section again reflect the maximum exposed organ for the appropriate age group. During 1996, iodines, tritium and particulates released into the atmosphere from TMI-l would have resulted in a maximum dose of 0 000516 mrem to the thyroid of a child. The corresponding dose from TMI-2 was 0.0000714 mrem to the liver of a child. No other organ of any age group would have received a dose greater than this from either TMI-l or TMI-2. Both of these doses represent equal to or less than 0.00344 percent of the USNRC 10 CFR 50 App. I annual guidelines. %/ Page13
1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MON 11DRING REPORT Liauld and Gaseous (Population) Lines 8-11 of Tables I-l and Table I-2 present the person-rem dose resulting from the liquid and gaseous effluents. These doses are summed over ah pathways and the affected population. Liquid person-rem is based upon the population encompassed within the region from the TMINS outfall extending down to the Chesapeake Bay (approximately 5,000,000 people). The population dose due to gaseous effluents includes the population out to a distance of 50 miler around TMINS (approximately 2,200,000) as well as the much larger total population which can be fed by foodstuffs grewn in the 50 mile radius (up to approximately 13,000,000). Population doses are summed over all distances and sectors to give an aggregate dose. Based upon the calculations performed for the 1996 reporting period, total TMI-1 and TMI-2 liquid and gaseous effluents resulted in a population dose of 1.06 person-rem to the total body. This is more than 600,000 times lowcr than the dose that the population living within 50 miles of TMINS receives each year from natural background radiation. O l l [ O Pace 14 l
l l 3 \\ 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MON 11DRING REPORT TABLE I-1 i Summary of Maximum Individual and Population Doses from TMI-1 Emuents for 1996 l Individual Doses Estlanated Location Percent of 10 CFR 50 Dose / year Age Dat Dir 10 CFR 50 AppI E2Dueet Organ (mrem) Group (m) (Toward) App. I Ammaal Ananal Gaideline Guideline (airess/yr) 1 Uquid Total Body 1.07E-1 Adult Receptor 1 3.57E0 3 2 Uquid Uver 1.57E 1 Teenager Receptor 1 1.57E0 10 3 NobleOas Air Dose 2.53E 4 2000 NNW 2.53E 3 10 (Gurzna-mrad) l 4 Noble Oas Air Dose 2.10E-4 2000 NNW l.05E-3 20 (Beta-mrad) 5 Noble Oas Total Body 1.20E-4 All 2300 hWW 2.40 E-3 5 6 ?M>1e Gas Sida 2.12 E-4 All 2300 NNW l.41E 3 15 7 lodtnes. Thyroid 5.16E-4 Child 2000 N 3.44E 3 15 i Tritium & Particulates 1 l Population Doses l l Estletated Population Enluent Applicable Organ Dese (Person-rem) l 8 Uquid Total Body 1.04E+0 9 Uquid Uver 1.0$E+0 10 Gaseous Total Body 9.76 E-3 l 11 Gaseous Thyroid 1.08E 2 l i f Page15
1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MON 11DRING REPORT TABLE I-2 Summary of Maximum Individual and Population Doses from TMI-2 Efiluents for 1996 Individual Doses Estimated Location Percent of 30 CFR 50 Dese/ year Age Dbt IMr lo CFR 50 App. I Emuent Organ (mress) Croep (m) (Toward) App.I Ammuel Anmaal GuWellne Guideline (arem/yr) 1 Uquid Total Body 1.48L3 Adult Receptor 1 4.93L2 3 2 Uquid Bone 2.29L3 Child Receptor i 2.29E-2 10 = 3 Noble Gas Air Dose 0 0 10 t (Oanunaanrad) 4 Noble Gas Air Dose 0 0 20 1 (Beta 4 wad) j $ Noble Gas Total Body 0 0 5 0 15 6 Noble Oes Skin 0
- 71odines, Liver 7.14L3 Child 2000 SE 4.76E4 15 Tritium &
i Part mlates O Population Doses Estimated Populatbn Emment Applicable Organ Dose (Person-rem) 8 Uquid Total Body 1.1863 9 Uguid Bone 4.1963 10 Gaseous Total Body 4.3153 f 11 Gaseous Liver 4.42L3 O Page16
i a l0 im umotocicat suviaosusurat uosironino asroar i i i l i l, i-APPENDIX J 1996 Groundwater and Onsite j Precipitation Monitoring Results } l I i l-1 l 1 l i i i i i O PageIl 1 0 i
19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE J-1 TMI Groundwater Monitoring Tritium Concentrations j (PCi/L) 1995 Average
- 1996 Average
- Station
- 2 std dev
- 2 std dev 1996 Range OSF 1500* 610 1500
- 580 640 -2000 MS-1 380
- 310 250
- 140 170 -310 MS2 800
- 240 550
- 200' 440 -670 MS-3 1400*850 710
- 150 640 - 810 l
MS-4 1100* 930 760
- 580 490 - 1100 i
MS-5 370
- 190 230
- 20 220 -240 MS-7 230
- 83 330
- 220 190 -450 i
MS-8 660
- 370 440
- 410 160 - 650 OS-13B 340 42 4 to
- 230 280 - 510 OS-14 280 68 260
- 38 250 - 290 1
OS-15 NS ND { OS-16 2300
- 1700 1100
- 600 770 - 1500 OS-17 1900 930 2000
- 2700 990 -3900 El-2 ND 180 N2-1 ND 140
- 64 110 - 170 EDCB 260
- 150 200
- 250 100 - 480 48s 450
- 1000 260
- 100 170 -320 RW-1 390,000
- 380,000 99,000 230,000 590 - 450,000 RW-2 50,000
- 86,000 5700
- 21,000 820 - 58,000 MW-1 1400
- 1200 500 380 350 - 770 MW-2 250 ND MW-3 440
- 319 330
- 340 190 - 570 MW-4 210
- 140 160
- 92 120 - 210 MS-19 NS 1000 1600 170 - 2400 MS-20 NS 3500*2000 1900 - 4800 0
Page J2
g 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT 4 k i TABLE J-1 TMI Groundwater Monitoring Tritium Concentrations (PCi/L) 1995 Average
- 1996 Average
- Station
- 2 std dev
- 2 std dev 1996 Range 1
MS-21 NS 230
- 100 160 - 300 i
4 MS-22 NS 6500 t 12,000 2000 - 16,000 NW-A NS 4600
- 2500 3100 - 7100 NW-B NS 5900 2100 3800 8200
) l NW-C NS 7800 7900 3700 - 17,000 R15-3 NS 150 l Average of detectable results Only one positive result for this station i ND = No detectable actisity j [ NS = Not sampled, no data available j \\ (Refer to Figures J-1 and J 2 for locations of groundwater stations.) 4 i ) 3 I A k Page J3 )
1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE J-2 TMI Onsite I>recipitation Tritiuin Concentrations (PCi/L) Average
- Station
- 2 std dev Range MS-1 370
- 430 190 -720 MS2~
$50
- 870 160 - 1500 MS-4 360* 330 210 - 650 MS-8 540
- 800 150 - 1400 MS-20 650
- 1200 100 - 2800 MS-21 540
- 660 210 - 1100 OS-15 ND OSF 340
- 270 160 - 490 RW-2 550 970 180 - 1400 Substation 180*4.1 140 - 210 48S 230
- 320 150 - 620 Average of detectable results ND = No detectable actisity (Refer to Figures J-l and J-2 for locations of groundwater stations.)
O Page14
A Figure J-1 1996 TMINS REMP Groundwater and Precipitation Stations Inside the Protected Area "O ~ t?% /,. / ~ ~ } M %y t ________________________r==_________y.p________________________;r~l'____________.__ nw.1 $ a 1 e o.ad. c EPICOR e e i. sw.o. a. u. u. / l I F=. r.,* us.2 T,.n. r,.a. i N 8 l j 1 DW g u y,,,,
- )
, _ _} Unit 1 Turbine s r.. r,.n. Building j l/ ms 6 Bui ding o l f l l Former Sito l 8 of Unit 2 e E vaporator l-l l l l t 3 Unit 1 Unit 2 gus.s l {; l g 8 j j Reactor Reactor k t e l l O !bb I Unit 1 Auxiliary l l"8'2' Building h9 g l g \\ us-s& l l os-tse as rt l
== $ h \\ c.nd. 3------ j y,.,o ,_ m _..________________, i______,___________--_--------------"- ' -'.,.- ~ - ..._'"-"l ~ - - ~. _ ~ ~ " us. LEGEND $ Monitoring Well NO SCALE TMI-EA (2/97) ,( ") E t
Figure J-2 -A 1996 TMINS REMP Groundwater and Precipitation Stations Outside the Protected Area .,,,.,.y---.=-{....=-----==-'y~~~_____,- W 9 g;,..-.-- $e =^
- 6nuw-1
.i ..rll.- [-- ~ C3 l s 't I t l ?? ' ~ ' ' I...f j( ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ k""Q Y _m_., 4 1_^~ I -~ _d j l' l ..... --4 ~0..OQ'*+*daa g'us.4. f \\. l [ Ll... f- ~r_: m j o, V.. sthe 4es - L-00, R qh._.. g ' '. -- MA - -O 00 0l0 0 Y -2 l s. [ ~ ao -e s, x. s ...c s. . hle l blg {[] C,; E--- m%. Lt - -- 1 O g.... j Q pd.[.h' i J. s sj l[ g - SP. s..
- us.
Y C ok.- l !0] '!N
- r--
ho _ b;_U_ i L. ,,___. _ _ g. ys.i.::..;O.- _ ;...~ .-3 N:q ;... ^ . ~::...=: ll R... .l! ~~ 9 ' C2"--%. l-- O t, l l NQ - l r_. n [CU l.. + 3 Lootf -1i____ ~~'~~_____
- c...
r8 !.EGEND $ Monitoring Well Offsite Groundrater Wells: El-2 nt the TMI A Drinking Water Well y;,; ng.s Center and N2-1 at the Goldsboro Marina. Onsite Control Well: 05-15 at the south end O Surface Water Station of the island. h Precipitation Station O new Service water we!, Page 16 TMI-EA (2/97) O O
.__. ~... _ _ -i 1 i i i t i z ( 1 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MON 11DRING REPORT \\ ] s i 1 1 1 i i i APPENDIX K 3 4i 1 l 1 t 1996 Meteorological Summary i 6 i f i i i a 1 0 I 1 Page K1 i i l 4
1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE K-1 Meteorological Data l 1996 Joint Frequency Tables I Hours at Each Wind Speed and Direction Period ofRecord: 96010100 - 96123123 l StabilityClass: A SensorHeight: 100 fl. Wind Speed (mph) Winds From 1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TOTAL N 5 28 8 2 0 0 43 NNE 1 6 0 0 0 0 7 NE O 2 0 0 0 0 2 ENE O 3 0 0 0 0 3 E O 2 0 0 0 0 2 ESE O 4 4 2 0 0 10 SE 1 3 6 0 0 0 10 .SSE 1 6 3 0 0 0 10 S 1 4 2 0 0 0 7 SSVV 2 15 13 5 1 0 36 SW 8 30 19 0 0 0 57 WSW 12 14 3 0 0 0 29 W 11 14 11 1 1 0 38 WNW 16 29 19 7 0 1 72 NW 28 77 50 9 1 0 165 NNW 30 82 24 13 3 0 152 TOTAL 116 319 162 39 6 1 643 O Page K2
1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITOTING REPORT i TABLE K-1 (Continued) Meteorological Data 1996 Joint Frequency Tables j Hours at Each Wind Speed and Direction Period ofRecord: 96010100 - 96123123 Stability Class: B 4 i Sensor Height: 100 ft. i Wind Speed (mph) Winds From 1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TOTAL N 2 6 2 1 0 0 11 NNE 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 1 j NE 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ) j ENE 3 3 0 0 0 0 6 E 1 5 1 0 0 0 7 ESE 1 5 6 4 0 0 16 ) 4 SE 3 9 10 2 0 0 24 SSE 0 7 1 0 0 0 8 i S 1 6 4 0 0 0 11 3 SSW 3 14 19 4 6 0 46 SW 6 8 4 0 0 0 18 i j WSW 5 7 1 1 0 0 14 W 5 8 9 3 0 0 25 j WNW 5 14 14 15 '2 1 51 NW 10 11 17 15 3 0 56 NNW 10 9 13 10 3 1 46 TOTAL 55 114 101 55 14 2 341 x Page K3
imang 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE K-1 l' ~(Continued) Meteorological Data 1996 Joint Frequency Tables Hours at Each Wind Speed and Direction Pedod ofRecord: 96010100 - 96123123 Stability Class: C Sensor Height: 100 ft. Wind Speed (mph) Winds From 1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TOTAL N 0 2 1 1 0 0 4 NNE 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 NE 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 M 2 1 0 0 0 0 3 E O 3 0 0 0 0 3 ESE 0 2 6 3 0 0 11 SE 1 4 2 1 0 0 8 SSE 2 3 1 0 0 0 6 S 1 2 1 1 0 0 5 SSW 4 4 12 1 0 1 22 SW 6 6 1 0 0 0 13 WSW 2 6 3 0 0 0 11 W l 3 4 4 0 2 14 WNW 2 7 5 12 1 0 27 NW 5 8 19 14 6 1 53 NNW 5 4 5 8 2 0 24 TOTAL 33 57 60 45 9 4 208 Page K4
l 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE K-1 { (Continued) i Meteorological Data 1996 Joint Frequency Tables i j Hours at Each Wind Speed and Direction i 1 Period ofRecord: 96010100 - 96123123 Stability Class: D SensorHeight: 100 ft a ) J Wind Speed (mph) Winds From 1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TOTAL i N 31 48 24 9 0 0 112 i NNE 21 39 5 0 0 0 65 NE 30 59 6 0 0 0 95 { ( ENE 30 54 14 0 0 0 98 E 31 74 38 6 6 2 157 1 ESE 20 88 93 13 0 0 214 I SE 29 65 46 5 0 0 145 i j SSE 20 65 26 0 0 0 111 i S 17 45 42 14 0 0 118 l l SSW 19 56 73 30 7 2 187 l SW 25 51 24 3 0 0 103 4 ? WSW 26 60 9 1 0 0 96 VV 24 87 83 22 4 2 222 WNW 39 72 115 122 30 3 381 NW 45 72 134 138 52 4 445 NNW 42 79 82 59 10 1 273 TOTAL 449 1014 814 422 109 14 2822 O Pace K5
j i: l i 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONimRING REPORT TABLE K-1 (Continued) Meteorological Data j 1996 Joint Frequency Tables Hours at Each Wind Speed and Direction Period ofRecord: 96010100 - 96123123 1 Stability Class: E Sensor Height: 100 ft. h Wind Speed (mph) Winds { From 1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TOTAL 5 N 66 108 25 5 0 1 205 NNE 51 58 7 2 0 0 118 NE 62 65 9 3 0 0 139 ENE 58 74 6 0 0 0 138 E 71 105 30 2 1 3 212 ESE 66 101 50 8 0 0 225 ^ SE 59 42 23 5 2 0 131 SSE 37 60 23 3 1 0 124 S 25 74 44 17 3 0 163 SSW 23 102 56 22 10' 1 214 SW 67 103 30 7 1 0 208 WSW 72 91 16 1 0 0 180 VV 78 126 52 31 7 1 295 WNW 73 101 88 41 9 2 314 NW 70 78 101 49 7 2 307 NNW 65 79 23 17 7 1 192 TOTAL 943 1367 583 213 48 11 3165 Pace K6
l 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT' l TABLE K-1 (Continued) Meteorological Data 1996 Joint Frequency Tables Hours at Each Wind Speed and Direction Period ofRecord: % 010100 - 96123123 l Stability Class F Sensor Height: 100 ft. l Wind Speed (mph) l Wmas From 1-3 4-7 8-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TOTAL N 45 33 1 0 0 0 79 NNE 17 5 0 0 0 0 22 NE 23 6 0 0 0 0 29 ENE 25 13 0 0 0 0 38 E 58 27 1 0 0 0 86 ESE 50 17 0 1 0 0 68 SE 54 9 1 3 0 0 67 SSE 37 9 2 4 0 0 52 S 39 14 0 1 0 0 54 l SSW 41 38 2 1 0 0 82 SW 43 23 3 3 0 0 72 WSW 58 16 1 0 0 0 75 W 76 33 3 0 0 0 112 WNW 82 18 3 0 0 0 103 NW 75 21 7 2 2 0 107 i NNW 64 39 3 0 0 0 106 l TOTAL 787 321 27 15 2 0 1152 Page K7 l l
4 1996 RADIOLOGICM, ENVIRONMENTAL MON 11DRING REPORT TABLE K-1 (Continued) Meteorological Data i 1996 Joint Frequency Tables Hours at Each Wind Speed and Direction Period ofRecord: 96010100 - 96123123 Stability Class: G Sensor Height: 100 ft. l W'% ,..ed (mph) Winds From 1-3 4-7 8-12 13 18 19-24 >24 TOTAL N 14 8 0 0 0 0 22 NNE 6 5 0 0 0 0 11 NE 6 1 0 0 0 0 7 ENE 9 4 0 0 0 0 13 E 13 13 0 0 0 0 26 ESE 23 6 0 0 0 0 29 SE 21 2 0 0 0 0 23 SSE 18 0 0 0 0 0 18 S 18 2 0 0 0 0 20 SSW 14 14 0 0 0 0 28 SW 23 11 1 0 0 0 35 WSW 21 4 1 0 0 0 26 W 19 16 0 0 0 0 35 WNW 20 8 0 0 0 0 28 NW 19 11 2 0 0 0 32 NNW 26 9 0 0 0 0 35 TOTAL 270 114 4 0 0 0 388 i l Paee K8
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ 1996 RADIOIDGICAL ENVIRONMEN1AL MONIMRING REPORT TABLE K-1 (Continued) Meteorological Data 1996 Joint Frequency Tables Hours at Each Wind Speed and Direction Period ofRecord: 96010L - 96123123 Stability Class: ALL Sensor Height: 100 ft. Wind Speed (mphi Winds From 1-3 4-7 8.-12 13-18 19-24 >24 TOTAL N 163 233 61 18 0 1 476 NNE 97 116 12 2 0 0 227 NE 122 134 15 1 0 0 274 EFb 127 152 20 0 0 0 299 E 174 229 70 8 7 5 493 ESE 160 223 159 31 0 0 573 i SE 168 134 88 16 2 0 408 SSE 115 150 56 7 1 0 329 S 102 14) 93 33 3 0 378 4 SSVV 106 243 175 63 24 4 615 SW 178 232 82 13 1 0 506 WSW 196 198 34 3 0 0 431 VV 214 287 162 61 12 5 741 WNW 237 249 244 197 42 7 976 NW 252 278 330 227 71 7 1165 NNW 242 301 350 107 25 3 828 TOTAL 2653 3306 1751 789 188 32 8719 N HOURS OF MISSING / INVALID DATA : 65 i Pace Ko _
Three Mile Islcnd Figure K-1 N NNE 1996 Wind Rose Speed Sensor Height: 100 ft NNW Jan 1, 1996 to Dec 31,1996 I / - 12% x \\ \\ WNW y' ENE i (WINDS FROM) \\ \\/ \\ \\ 3% / ~ \\/ ~ W c //y: [Ng ,x n E /,f '\\ N. 1 \\ / / u WSW ESC N_ x SW SE o Wind Speed < 3.5 MPH y-
- Wind Speed <
7.5 MPH SSE + wind spt.ers < 12.5 MPH SSW g o Wind Speed > 12.5 MPH bge K10 9 9 e
i 1 i 19% RAD 10 LOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONHORING REPORT i } i i l ( i i i i i j APPENDIX L i l 1 1 l 1996 REMP Sample Collection and l Analysis Methods 1 1 i l i } t } 4 l l 1 1 3 i i 1 t i t 4 5 1 I 1 I 1 Page L1 u m -. - + - r,a VT g
19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONHORING REPORT TABLE L l t TMINS Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Summary of Sampic CoIIection and Analysis Methods 1996 Sample
- Appresimete Sample Size Analysis Analysis hfedium Sampiing Method Analyred Precedure Number Procedere Abstract Or-Alpha AP Continuous weekly air sampling through fiher ifiher Thil-EA Imr backpound gas flowmL : counting paper (570 Cubic hietm) 6510-IkiP4592.0?
If!her TBE-Westwood Same as above (570 Cubic hietm) PRO 432-10 Or-Beta AP Continuous weekly air sarrpling through filter I fiker Thil-EA low background gas flow propcetional counting paper (570 Cubic Efetm) 65Ic-IkiP-4592.05 1 fiher TBE-Westwood Same as above (570 Cubic hietm) PRO +32-10 SW, EW hionthly composee of grabs or biweekly or 500 mL Tht!-EA Sample evaporated on stainless stsel planchet for weekly samples which are automatically 6510-Ik1P-4592.01 low background gas flow proportional counting composited on a timed frequency i Iner TBE-Westwood Se.me as above PRO-032-1 Gamma AP Quarteily composite of fiher paper cc3ected 12 to 15 fihm (6,900 -9.300 Tht!-EA Sample placed in counting container for gamma S m;.% weekly Cubic kletm) 6510-IkiP-4592 05 isotopic analysis i 65104)PS-4591.04 l 12 to I 5 tihm (6.900 - 9,300 TBE-Westwood Same as abmv Cubic hieten) PRO-042-5 Al Continuous weekly air sampling through charcoal I cartridge Thtl-EA Sample counted for gamma isotopic analysis cartridges (370 Cubic hietm) 6510-OPS-4591.04 f 1 I cartridge TDE.Westwood Same as above l (570 Cubic hietm) PRO 042-5 [ Page L2 9 O O
1 O V ~ 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE L TMINS Radiological Environmental Monit9 ring Program Summary of Sample Collection and Analysis Methods 1996 Sample
- Apprestniste Sample Stre Analysis Analysis hfedlum Sampling hfethod Analyred Procelere Number Procedure At'atract Gamma El Diweekly grab sample of one or more milkings 3.5 htas TMI-EA Sample placed in courning container for gamma Spectrosctpy 6510-IMP-4592.06 isotopic analysis (Contd) 6510-OlG4591.04 i
i liter TBE-Westwood Same as abmv PRO 442-5 SW, EW Monthly composite of grabs or bineekly or 3.5 liters TMi-EA Sample placed in counting container for gamma weekly samples which are automatically 6510-IMP-4592.06 isotopic analysis composited on a timed frequency 65104PS-4591.04 i I hter TBE-Westwood Same as above PRO-042-5 t AQF Composite sample semiannually by feeding 13 pes Ikg TMl-EA Edible portion placed in cmmting container for (bottom f eder and predator) collected by either (ifpossible) 6510-IMP 4592.03 gamma isotopic analysis t electrofishing or hook and Ime 65104PS-4591.04 f Ikg TBE-Westws.od Same as above l (ifpossible) PRO-042-5 l i i i Page L3 i I
i 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT i TABLE L TMINS Radiolegical Environmental Monitoring Program Summary of Sample Collection and Analysis Methods 1995 Sample
- Approulmate Sample Size Analysis Analysis hiedlura Sampling hiethod Analyzed Precedure Number Prwedere Abstreet Gamma OW Quarterly grab sample or quarterly ccmposite of 3.5 liters Thil-EA Sample decarsed ad liquid portion placed in Sgmj monthly grab samples which are collected with a (ifpossible) 6510-IkiP-4592.06 counting container for gamma isotopic analysis.
(Conrd) hand bailer or frorn a faucet 6510-OPS-4591.04 Potable sarnples are mixed (not decanted) prior to analysis I liter TBE-Westwood Same as above (ifpossible) PRO-042-5 AQS Semiannual composite of thres or more grab lkg ' kil-EA Ikied and seived sample placed in courning i samples collected with a dredge sampler (ifpossible) s.510-IkiP-4592.04 corsairer for gamma isotopic analysis 65 to-OPS-4591.04 1kg TBE-Westwood Same as above (ifpossible) PRO-042-5 FP. GAD Orab sample annusHy or more frequently Ikg Thil-EA Edible portion placed in counting cordainer ibr (ifpossible) 6510-IkiP-4592.03 gamm. W analysis. Only root vegetables 6310-OPS-4591.04 and finits washed prior to anaNsis Ikg TBE-Westwood Same as above (ifpossible) PRO-042 5 Trniurn SW. EW hfonthly composite of grabs or biweekly or 7-10 mL Tkti-EA Sample filtered, mixed with scintillation fluid for weekly sampics which are automatically 6510-IkiP-4592.02 seireillatiericounting. Distillationmaybe composited on a timed frequency 6510-OPS-4591.05 performed ifimpurities are found to be present 65104)PS-4591.08 2mL TBE-Westwood Same as above PRO 452 35 PageIA G G G
AU 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT l TABLE L TMINS Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Summary of Sample Collection and Analysis Methods 1996 Sample
- Approximate Se:nple Size Analysis Analysis Medlam Samphng Method Analyred Precedure Number Precedure Abstreet i
Tri:iam AQF Composite sample semiannually by feeding types 7-10 mL Thil-EA Edible portion is freeze <ined in order to extract (Conrd) (bottom feeder and predator) collected by either 6510-Ih!P4592.02 I; quid for counting by lipid scintillation [ electronshing or hook and line 6510-IkiP4592.03 2 6510-OPS 4591.05 6510-OPS 4591.08 2mL TBE-Westwood Same as above l PRO 452-2 PRO-052-57 GW hienthly et quarterly grab or more frequent 7-10 mL Thit-EA Sample is Ghe ed, mixed with scintillation fluid sample according to samphng site using a hand 6510-lMP4592.02 for scintillstion counting, t haiter, a faucet or a dedicated bladder-type punp 6510-IkiP4591.05 6510-IkiP4591.08 2 mL cr 10 mL TBE-Westwood Same as above except distillation may be PRO 452 2 performed ifimpurities are found to be present PRO 452-35 h i [ i Page LS m
19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT i TABLE L h TMINS Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program l Summary of Sample Collection and Analysis Methods 1996 SampM Appresirnate Sample Size Analysis Analysis Medium Sampling Method Anolyzed Procesare Nuiber Procedure Abstract s-131 SW, EW Biweekly or weekly composite using an automatic 3.5 lite TMI-EA Sample is concentrated on anion exchange asin, l compositor set for sampling on a preset timed 6510-IkiP-4592.06 the resin is analyzed by gamma speamory [' frequency. One SW station is a biweekly or weekly composite of grab samples collected twice per week I liter TBE Westwood Anexchange, chemical reduction, CCh PRO 432-1i extraction, palladium precipitation, low-level beta counting FP Grab sample annually or more frequently Ikg TMI-EA Edible portion placed in counting container for (ifpossible) 6510-IkiP-4592.03 gamma isotopic analysis 6510-OPS-4591.04 1 kg TBE-Westwood Canier added, leached, evaporated and fused, (ifpossible) PR0432-12 residue dissolved, filtered and reduced with hydroxylami=e hylrechloride, precipitated as palladium iodide for counting on low-level beta counter M Biweekly grab sample ofone or more milkings 3.5 liters TMI-EA Same as I-13I in SW, EW 6510-lMP-4592.06 65104)PS-4591.04 I liter TBE-Westwood Same es I-131 in SW,EW PRO-032-1I t Page L6 am 9 O O
q w ) J O ~ 1996 RA DIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT TABLE L TMINS Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Summary of Samp!c CoIIcction and Analysis Methods 1996 Semple
- Approstmate Sample Size Analysis Analysis Medium Sampling Method Analped Proentare Namber Procedure Abstract
- Sr89, AP Semiannual remposite of fifter paper collected 26 weeks of filters per Thll-EA Sample is leached and stror.4ium in sample is Sr-90 weekly sangling site (I4.800 Cubic 6510-IMP-4592.12 separated tirough a series ofprecipitations and Meters) 6510-OPS-4591.01 then purified using an extraction material in a chromatographic column. The total strontium is dried on a planchet and counted ia a low background beta counter. After a period of time, the Yttrium-90, which has ingrown frorn the Sr-90, is separated from the samf e aM counted to l
determine the Sr-90 activity. The taal strontium minus the Sr-90 wi!! deteenine Sr-39 activity. 26 weeks of filters per TBE-Westwood Sample is leached and strentium in samp!c is sampling site (14.800 cubic PRO-032-24 separated 11 rough a series ofprecipitations, Sr. meters) 90 inferred Y-90 on yttrium exatate precipitate after 5 days or more ingrowth, low-level beta counting follows. After yttrium separation sample is precipitated widi SrCOsmounted on nylon planchet for counting on low background beta coumer for Sr-39 activity. AQI' Composite sample serniannually by feeding types 250 g TMI-EA Similar to THE Westwood Sr-89, Sr-90 in AP (bottam feeders and predators) col;ected by either 6510-lMP-4592.12 except sangle (edible portion)is dried and ashed electrofishing or hook and line 63100PS-4591.01 prior to separation. Ikg TBE Westwood Similar to TMI-EA Sr-89, Sr-90 in AP except (if.ossible) PRO 432-85 samrle (edible portion) is dried and ashed prior 3 to separation. AQS Composite of at least three grab samples collected 25kg TMI-EA SimilartoTMI-EASr-89,Sr-90in APexcept annually usmg a dredge sampler 6510-lMP-4592.12 sample is dried priorto separation 6510-OPS-4591.01 1Lg TBE-Westwood Sirrnlar to TBE Westwood Sr-89, Sr-90 in AP PRO 432-25 except sample is dried prior to scpr. ration Page L7
I996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MON!1DRING REPORT TABLE L TMINS Radiological Environmenta! Monitoring Program Summary of Sample Collection and Analysis Methods 1996 Sample
- Apyrerlmate Sample Size Analysis Anslysis bledlane Sampilng Method Analped Proc 4are Number Precedure Abstreet y
Sr-sa. 5W. EW Semiannual composite of grabs or biweekly or Iliter TKH-EA Similar to TM1-EA Sr-89,Sr-90 in AP. Sr.90 weekly semples which are automatically 6510-lMP-4592.12 (Conrd) corpposited on a timed frequency 6510-OPS 4591.01 I liter THE-Westwood similar to TBE-Westwood Sr-89, Sr-90 in AP. PRO 432-16 l FP(Droad nab sample annually or more frequently 250g TMI-EA Similar to TMI-EA Sr-89, St-90 in AP except
- LeafVeg, 6510-lMP-4592.12 sample (edible portion)is dried and ashed prior only) 6510-OPS 4591.01 to separatioet.
Ikg TBE-Westwood Similar to TBE-Westwood Sr-89, Sr-90 in AP (ifpossible) PRO 432-23 except sample (editte portion) is dried and ashed prior to separation. GW Semianrr.ial composite of monthly grab samples or I liter TMI-EA Similar to TMI-EA St-89, Sr-90 but sample quctterly grab samr es all of which are collected (ifpossible) 6510-lMP-4592.12 analyzed for St-90 culy. a wah a hand bailer, a submersible pump or by a 6510-OPS 4591.01 faucet. I liter TBE-Westwood Similar to TBE-Westwood Sr-89, Sr-90 but PRO-032-16 sample analyzed for Sr 90 only. M Qurterly compnaite ofbiweekly grab samples I liter TMI-EA Similar to Thn-EA Sr-89, Sr-90 in AP excegt 6510-lMP-4592.12 sample is dried and ashed prior to separation. 6510-OPS-4591.0I ~ l liter THE Westwood The method adds a stable strontiune carrier, PRO 432-105 ashes the sample in a muffle fumace and precipitates the phosphates. Strontium then is puriGed using an extraction material in a chromatographic column. Sample mounting and counting are similar te TBE-Westwood Sr-89, Sr-90 in AP. Page L3 9 9 9
I K + ) T r.N J . -.1996 RhDIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MON 11DRING REPORT n ^i TABLE L TMINS Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Summary of S,emple Co!Iection and Analysis Methods 1996 Samete* Approximate Sample Stre Aaafysts Anssysts Medhem samping Method Analyzed Procedure Number Procedure Abstract Oensas ID Ik, sin.ets exchanged quarterly 2 TLDs/* Elenwnts TMI-Ddunetry T5ermolummescent dosimetry using optical (Oirect 6610. OPS-4243.01 heating oferystats and PM tube for light treasteregnett. P.adiation) I TLDi4 Elements TBF Westwood Same as a!wve PRO.34217
- Identificaton Key Anomximate Sample Sire Caltected eer Station **
Ai - Airlodine --1 Cartridge (570 Cubic Mctm) per week AP = Air Particulate - 1 Titter (570 Cubic Metm)per wec+ AQF = Finfish I kg semiannually AQS = Aquatic Sediment ,1 kgsemiannually EW = Efhent Water 4 litm biweekly or weekly FP = Food Products (Fruits & Vegetables) _I kg annually or more frecuently I kg annually or more frequently (ifpossible) GAD = Osme(Dm) 4 liters (if available) morahty or quarterly. 250 mL as needed for tritium analysis ordy GW = Ground Water ID =ImmersionDose(TLD). 4 TLDi8 Elements quarterly M = Milk 4 lism Weekly SW = Surface / Drinking Watee 4 litm biwedly or weekly } Sample rire is for the r.ain laimratory se.yles. An adddional sample of the same sire (except la TLDs) is colle:ted at those stations which also are analyzed for quality corarol(QC) purposes. The OC TLD sestwo only have on. additicosal d':rinteier (4 eternesits) fo - Qi t-wposes. Page L9
.. - - - -. - -.-. - -. -.~..-. - -..- _ _. _ - 4 1 i 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONimRING REPORT i i i 4 i 4 1 i 4 I 4 APPENDIX M ii 5 i l 1996 TLD Quarterly ~ Data j i i i t i l 3 i a i 1 i: ] Page M1
1 19% RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT 4 TABLE M l 1996 TLD Quarterly Data ntR Per Std Month 2a Station HistoriceA ist Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter Al-4 4Ji03 3.7i03 3.510.2 3.410.2 3.810.4 A3-1 4Ji1.6 3.6103 3.510.2 3.410.4 3.6io.3 i AS-1 5.5 i0.9 4.610.4 4.6i0.2 4.5 t 0.5 4.810.6 A9-3 0.0i0.0 3.810.5 3.5i0.2 3.610.4 3.710.5 B1-1 4.411.4 3.fiO.2 3.5103 3.7t03 3.510.2 j B1-2 4J10.7 3.810.2 3.410.4 3.4103 3.610.2 l l B2-1 0.010.0 3.710.2 3.410.5 3.610.3 3.8 i0.4 B5-1 5.3 1.0 4.410.3 4310.5 4.4103 4.6 0.4 Blo-1 5.110.8 4.310.4 4310.4 4.1103 4.6 0.3 Cl 1 5.210.9 4.210.2 4.0io.4 4.0io.3 4.210.6 Cl 2 4 J i 0.9 3.710.4 3.4103 3.410.4 3.710.4 C2-1 0.0i0.0 4.210.3 4.01').4 3.910.5 4.110.3 C51 5.110.9 4.410.4 4 3 1 0.4 4.410.4 4.5103 C81 5.910.9 4.710.4 4.510.8 43103 4.710.7 DI-l 4.610.8 3.9i0.1 3.610.3 3.5 i0.5 3.7to.3 Dl-2 5.412.1 4.410.5 4.0to.6 4.l io.5 4.210.3 D2-2 0.0i0.0 5.210.4 4.80.7 4.9i0.4 5.410.8 D6-1 6.4 f l.3 5.0i03 4.7103 5.010.1 5.410.6 D15-1 5.7113 4.510.4 4.410.4 4.210.3 4.810.4 El 2 4.911.7 4.310.4 3.810.4 3.810.4 4.110.3 El-4 5.711.3 4.110.4 3.510.3 3.4i03 3.7103 E2-3 0.010.0 4.6 t 0.6 4.510.6 4.8 t03 5.0i0.3 E5-1 5.310.8 4310.4 4.2103 4.410.4 4.510.4 E7-1 5.211.0 4.410.6 4.5 t 0.4 4.410.3 4.310.4 Fl.1 5.011.1 4.410.4 3.810.2 4.110.3 4.210.3 F12 0.010.0 5.0103 4.410.2 4.110.4 4.310.4 F1-4 0.010.0 5.0i0.4 4.4 0.2 4.20.4 4.2103 F2-1 0.0i0.0 4.810.7 4.7 t0.6 4.910.5 5.110.5 F51 6.011.1 0.010.0 4.810.3 4.810.2 5.010.4 F10-1 6 3 t l.1 5.610.7 5.410.6 5.410.6 5.810.3 3 ~ F25-I 5.611.0 4.7 t 0.5 4.410.5 4.410.4 4.910.3 GI-2 4.911.0 4.210.4 4.110.3 4310.5 4.510.4 3 6.913.6 4 ] i o.4 3.8103 3.510.8 3.9103 01-5 0.0i0.0 4.410.3 3.910.4 3.810.7 4.2103 G2-4 0.010.0 5.00.7 5.110.4 5.210.3 5.410.5 G5-1 5.112.0 4.210.4 3.810.4 3.910.5 4.210.6 OIG.1 7.6i1.6 6.110.8 5.90.6 6.110.8 6.610.7 015-1 6.4123 4.610.6 4.4103 43103 4.910.2 H1-1 5312.0 4.210.5 4.1103 4.0f 0.4 4.210.5 H3-1 4.111.1 3.4103 3.0i03 3.110.6 3.410.4 H51 4.110.9 3.6103 3.2 to.4 3.310.6 3.510.3 H8-1 7.911.4 6.9 t 0.4 6.710.5 6.410.7 6.910.6 H151 5.8i1.I 5.110.5 4.710.3 4.910.9 5.410.8 J1-1 5311.4 3.9 0.4 3.510.4 3.510.4 3.810.4 Ji-3 3,7i0.4 33 0.5 3.0103 3.0103 3.110.3 J3-1 0.010.0 3.7103 3.810.4 3.910.2 4.110.. J5-1 5.7tlJ 4.810.7 4.810.5 4.5 0.7 5.110.2 J7-1 4.711.1 5.110.2 4.9 0.5 4.610.3 5.010.6 J15-f 6.111.7 5.210.5 4.910.5 4.810.4 5.310.4 i O Page M2
l l q 1996 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT l TABLE M 1996 TLD Quarterly Data i mR Per Std Month
- 2a Station thical 1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Qurter KI-4 4.7il.5 3.810.4 3.6i03 3.4103 3.5 i0.4 K21 5.8 1.2 0.010.0 4.710.4 0.0i0.0 4.9i0.7 K31 0.010.0 3.510.4 3.710.4 3.610.4 3.810.4 l
K5-1 6.911.2 4.710.5 4.810.5 4.710.7 5.110.6 K8-1 5.4 t l.3 4.910.2 4.610.5 4.4i0.5 4.810.6 K15-1 4.8i13 3.410.3 3.410.4 3.2103 3.410.4 L11 5.111.9 4.lio.4 3.810.4 3.710.4 4.0103 Lt 2 4311.1 0.010.0 3.810.4 3.6i0.4 3.910.2 L2-1 5.511.3 43i03 4.410.4 4.210.4 4.610.6 l LS-1 4.511.0 0.010.0 4.0103 3.710.3 4.I10.4 i L8-1 5.010.9 3.710.7 4.110.3 3.910.5 4.310.2 L151 5.211.4 4110.3 43i0.4 4.010.4 4.410.2 Mi1 0.010.0 3.610.4 3.310.2 3.410.5 3.60.3 M t.2 0.010.0 0.010.0 3.7103 3.7i0.6 3.810.4 M2-1 43 11.5 3.510.4 3.210.2 3.310.4 3.6 i0.4 MS-1 5.211.1 3.90.4 3.710.6 3.610.6 3.8103 M91 6.Sil.2 5.010.4 5.0i0.7 4.910.6 5.210.6 l N11 4.811.4 0.0i0.0 3.710.4 3.710.5 4.1103 N13 4.611.2 3.720.4 3.310.2 3.210.5 3.7to.2 N N21 5.3tl.0 3.610.4 3.610.6 3.310.4 3.710.4 ) N5-1 5.3tlJ 3.210.4 3.410.3 3.210.4 3.510.3 d N81 5.411.2 4.410.4 4.510.6 43i0.6 4.610.6 N15-2 5.910.9 5.110.3 4.810.4 4.810.4 5.110.8 i F1 1 4.711.3 0.0i0.0 3.910.5 3.810.5 4.I t 0.3 l PI-2 0.010.0 3.710.4 3.510.3 3.210.4 3.7i0.5 P21 5.4 f l.2 4.810.5 4.710.4 4.5 i0.6 4.910.4 PS 1 4.8 i 1.0 4.210.3 4.2103 3910.5 4.310.4 l P81 4.711.0 3.9i0.3 3.824 3.310.5 4.2io.6 0 Q11 4.611.0 0.0 t 0.0 3.710.5 3.7 t 0.5 4.010.5 I Ql.2 4.410.8 3.510.3 3.110.2 3.110.2 3310.1 Q2-1 5.411.1 3.910.4 3.8io.4 3.710.4 4.0t0.5 Q51 4.9i 1.2 4.310.6 3.910.3 '3.810.5 4310.4 Q91 5.311.2 4.210.6 4.010.4 4.010.5 4.410.2 Q15-1 5.911.1 4.5iOJ 4.510.6 4.510.5 4.910.5 Rl-1 4.811.2 4.010.5 3.510.3 3.510.6 3.710.4 l RI-2 4.211.2 0.0i0.0 3.4 03 3.410.4 3.610.4 R3-1 0.010.0 5.210.6 4.910.5 4.410.5 5.110.5 R51 5.li0.9 4.810.4 4.610.6 4.4 t 0.3 4.710.5 R91 5.210.9 4.610.6 4.6t 0.6 4310.4 4.610.4 R15. l 4.4 i l.0 3.610.3 3.410.3 3.50.4 0.0io.0 NOTES:
- 1) A Value of Zero Indicates NO Data
- 2) Some Newer Stations Have No Historical Data t
1 Page M3 e
,e 7 ] Figure M-1 Onsite TLD Station Locations at TMINS -A w' D E F C G \\ E1-4 " ci-2 ~~n -2 n-4 fo:.3 [~7.-=~ rG12;h. oi.,.-. & ~ ~ e--g 8 e - -------- H fi7 ~~~]IY _ 11 B s ' 5-e - \\ D ?-2g O,.-f
- \\
l i i v.,,g $ $ x :..;. { --- '-I---l - ' 0' l' l j'^ E: (,, ....'D rem. l k.i - 1 l. l j-gl! 1 e i j o s. v. j hl l ' T, fi s i Jl -l'b. l N ,i l w j i m i _ py, s' i ~7 ~'y I O.. j =oEE-E 2 =- J5li_.ci; c l' 1 o iO 0 N... - q_ 0l0 w ..H I (' ' E) r g: s 1
- .c
\\ ^ t 's ( Es ...;.3'.....' x. A ^'- ^% .,y l -( F p i ) i!,---- J ll l m ai i y e s [ 'M_NZ k ^* ... f ~ ~~ ~ kM L.. ' %;; ~ . L. _ r....---- ^~-~-.) ~~~ ~. D'% L R / K Q / L i i x P N M Stations 111 1 and Ji-1 arc located off the map to the south. NO SCA!.E E TMI-EA 0195) O O O
- }}