ML20209H063

Annual Radiological Environ Surveillance Rept for CY86

ML20209H063
Person / Time
Site:	Hatch
Issue date:	12/31/1986
From:	Gucwa L GEORGIA POWER CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION & RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (ARM)
References
SL-2369, NUDOCS 8705010131
Download: ML20209H063 (45)

Text

__

ENCLOSURE

' GEORGIA POWER COMPANY PLANT HATCH - UNITS 1 AND 2 ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT CALENDAR YEAR 1986

\

8705010131 861231 PDR ADOCK 05000321 R PDR

( 0661H SL-2369

4 EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 Introduc tion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 -1 2.0 Summary Description ...................2-1 3.0 Results Summary .....................3-1

'4. 0 Discussion of Results ..................4-1 4.1 Airborne Particulates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-2 t

4.2 Ai rborne Radioi odi ne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-4 4.3 Di rect Radi ation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-5 4.4 Milk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-7 4.5 Grass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-9 4.6 River Water . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-11 4.7 F i s h . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 -12 4.8 Sedi me nt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-13 5.0 Interlaboratory Comparison Program . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-1 6.0 Conclusions .......................6-1 I

E i

i I

i APB 1987

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

LIST OF TABLES I

Table No.

2-1 Summary Description of Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program 2-2 Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations 3-1 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Annual Summary -

4-1 Location of the Nearest Permanent Residence in Each Sector 5-1 Crosscheck Program Results for Air Filters 5-2 Crosscheck Program Results for Milk Samples =

5-3 Crosscheck Program Results for Water Samples if AYn ,,g,

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

LIST OF FIGURES i

Figure No.

2-1 Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations on Site Periphery

2-2 Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations Beyond Site Periphery 2-3 Location of Additional Control Station for Milk l

I e

t l

i

! iii MP_B 19 8/

ACRONYMS EPA Environmental Protection Agency GPC Georgia Power Company HNP Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant LLD Lower Limit of Detection LT Less Than MDD Minimum Detectable Difference t n Number of Positive Results NA Not Applicable NDM No Detectable Measurement NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission ODCM Offsite Dose Calculational Manual REMP Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program RETS Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications RL Reporting Level s Standard Deviation TLD Thermoluminescent Dosimeter iv

'$EE J 1987

EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The objective of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) is to ascertain the levels of radiation and concentrations of radioactivity in the environment of the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant (HNP) and to evaluate any impact to the environment due to plant operations. Reported herein are the program's activities for calendar year 1986.

Events of special interest were:

The measurement of high radiological levels in a number of environmental samples following the Chernobyl incident; The taking over of the performance of the laboratory analyses on all of the radiological environmental monitoring samples except the thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) by Georgia Power Company's (GPC's)

Central Laboratory; The permanent unavailability of milk at 2 sampling locations with the subsequent deletion of these 2 stations from the REMP and the addition of a new milk sampling station; and The decision to replace the TLDs using lithium fluoride phosphors with those using calcium sulfate phosphors based upon an evaluation which included a comparison of side-by-side exposures of the 2 types of TLDs at each station for 3 quarters.

The specifications for the REMP are provided by Section 3/4.16 of the Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications (RETS) for Uni t 1 and by Section 3/4.12 of the RETS for Unit 2. The Unit 2 RETS simply reference the Unit 1 RETS. A single program serves both units.

A summary description of the program is provided in Section 2. This includes maps showing all of the sampling locations; the maps are keyed to a table indicating the distance and direction of each sampling location from the main stack.

A summary of all of the laboratory analysis results obtained from the samples utilized for environmental monitoring is presented in Section 3. A discussion of the results including assessments of any radiological impacts upon the environment is provided in Section 4.

The results of the Interlaboratory Comparison Program are presented in Section

• l S. The chief conclusions are stated in Section 6.

i i

I l -1

!AP.8 1m t

t 1 2.0 SUMARY DESCRIPTION

' A ' summary description of the REMP is provided in Table 2-1. This table is essentially a facsimile of Table 3.16.1-1 of the RETS which delineates the program's requirements. Sampling locations required by Table 2-1 are i described in Table 2-2 and are shown on maps in Figures 2-1 through 2-3. This

! description of the sample locations closely follows that found in the table i and figures of Section 3.0 of the Off-site Dose Calculational Manual (ODCM).

d Deviations are permitted from the required sampling schedule as delineated in j Table 2-1 if samples are unobtainable due to hazardous conditions, unavailability, inclement weather, malfunction of equipment, or other just reasons. Any deviations are stated in the discussions for each particular sample type in Section 4.

I For a number of years all of the laboratory analyses for the samples were performed by Teledyne Isotopes, Inc. of Westwood, New Jersey except for the gross beta counting of the airborne particulates, the reading of TLDs and the gamma isotopic analysis of grass. During 1986, all the laboratory analyses i

except the reading of the TLDs for the entire year and the analysis of the regularly collected milk samples for the first 9 months of the year were 1

performed by GPC's. Central Laboratory in Smyrna, Georgia. Before 1986, the Central Laboratory had conducted various analyses on numerous split samples

for training purposes to develop and test their proficiency and procedures;

, they also performed the gross beta counting of the airborne particulate 1

filters collected during 1985. The reading of the TLDs continues to be done l

by Teledyne Isotopes Midwest Laboratory in Northbrook, Illinois. The gamma l isotopic analysis of grass had in past years been provided by the Center for

! Applied Isotopic Studies at the University of Georgia in Athens, Georgia.

These contract laboratories shall continue to serve as backup laboratories to

! the Central Laboratory.

i i

I I

! 2-1

! %PA 1987

TABLE 2-1 (SHEET 1 of 3)

SUMMRY DESCRIPTION OF RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM i

Exposure Pathway Approximate Number Sampling and I and/or Sample of Sample Locations Collection Frequency Type of Analysis and Frequency

1. Airborne Radionuclides 6 Continuous operation of Radiofodine canister. I-1 31 and sampler with sample analysis weekly.

Particulates collection weekly.

Particulate sampler: analyze for gross beta radioactivity not less than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> following filter change weekly; perfom gamma isotopic analysis on affected sample when gross beta activity is 10 times the l yearly mean of control samples; and 1 composite (by location) for gamma j isotopic analysis quarterly.

! 2. Direct Radiation 36 Quarterly Gamma dose quarterly.

3. Ingestion Milk (a) 4 Biweekly Gamma isotopic and I-131 analyses biweekly.

Fish or 2 Semiannually Gamma isotopic analysis on edible Clams (b) portions semiannually.

i Grass or Leafy 3 Monthly during growing Gamma isotopic analysis monthly (c).

J Vegetation season.

hs EE 4

li

-u

TABLE 2-1 (SHEET 2 of 3)

SUP94ARY DESCRIPTION OF RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM Exposure Pathway Approximate Number Sampling and and/or Sample of Sample Locations Collection Frequency Type of Analysis and Frequency

4. Waterborne Surface 2 Composite sample Gamma isotopic analysis monthly.

collected monthly (d). Composite (by locations) for tritium analysis quarterly.

Sediment 2 Yearly Gamma isotopic analysis yearly.

Drinking One sample of river River water collected I-131 analysis on each sample when Water (e)(f) water near the near the intake will be biweekly collections are required intake and one a composite sample; the Gross beta and gamma isotopic sample of finished finished water will be analyses on each sample; composite water from each of a grab sample. These (by location) for tritium j one to three of the samples will be quarterly, i l nearest water collected monthly j supplies which unless the calculated I could be affected dose due to consumption l by HNP discharge, of the water is greater I than 1 mrem / year; then l the collection will be biweekly. The l

collections may revert to monthly should the l calculated doses become less than 1 mrem / year.

is R ,

Esf

TABLE 2-1 (SHEET 3 0F 3)

SU!HARY DESCRIPTION OF RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM NOTES

a. Up to three sampling locations within 5 miles and in different sectors will be used as available. In addition, one or more control locations beyond 10 miles will be used.

b. Commercially or recreationally important fish may be sampled. Clams may be sampled if difficulties are encountered in obtaining sufficient fish samples.

c. If gamma isotopic analysis is not sensitive enough to meet the Lower Limit of Detection (LLD), a separate analysis for I-131 may be performed.

d. Composite samples shall be collected by collecting an aliquot at intervals not exceeding a few hours.

e. If it is found that river water downstream of HNP is used for drinking, water samples will be collected and analyzed as specified herein.

f. A survey shall be conducted annually at least 50 river miles downstream of HNP to identify those who use Altamaha River water for drinking.

4 4

O 19 6/

SP.8

TABLE 2-2 (SHEET 1 of 2)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING LOCATIONS Location Descriptive Direction (a) Distance (a) Sample Number Location (miles) Type (b) 064 Roadside Park WNW 0.8 D 1 01 Inner Ring N 1.9 D 102 Inner Ring NNE 2.5 D 103 Inner Ring NE 1.8 AD 104 Inner Ring ENE 1.6 D 105 Inner Ring E 3.7 D 106 Inner Ring ESE 1.1 DV 107 Inner Ring SE 1.2 AD

[

108 Inner Ring SSE 1.6 D 109 Inner Ring S 0.9 0 110 Inner Ring SSW 1.0 0 111 Inner Ring SW 0.9 0 112 Inner Ring WSW 1.0 ADV 113 Inner Ring W 1.1 D 114 Inner Ring WNW 1.2 D 115 Inner Ring NW 1.1 D 116 Inner Ring NNW 1.6 AD 152 Williamson's NNE 3.2 M 170 Upriver WNW (c) R 172 Downriver E (c) R 201 Outer Ring N 5.0 D 202 Outer Ring NNE 4.9 0 203 Outer Ring NE 5.0 D 204 Outer Ring ENE 5.0 D 205 Outer Ring E 7.2 D 206 Outer Ring ESE 4.8 D 207 Outer Ring SE 4.3 D 208 Outer Ring SSE 4.8 0 209 Outer Ring S 4.4 0 21 0 Outer Ring SSW 4.3 D 211 Outer Ring SW 4.7 0 21 2 Outer Ring WSW 4.4 D 21 3 Outer Ring W 4.3 0 21 4 Outer Ring WNW 5.4 0 21 5 Outer Ring NW 4.4 D 21 6 Outer Ring HNW 4.8 D 301 Toombs Central N 8.0 0 304 State Prison ENE 11.2 AD 304 State Prison ENE 10.8 M .

309 Baxley Substation S 10.0 ADV 311 Johnson Brothers SW 9.1 M 31 6 Thompson's NNW 13.2 M APl 19 8 /

TABLE 2-2 (SHEET 2 0F 2)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING LOCATIONS NOTES

a. Direction and distance are reckoned from the main stack.

b. Sample types:

A - Airborne Radioactivity D - Direct Radiation M - Milk R - River (fish or clams, shoreline sediment, and surface water)

Y - Vegetation

c. Station 170 is located approximately 0.6 river miles upstream of the intake structure for river water,1.0 miles for sediment and clams, and 1.5 miles for fish.

Station 172 is located approximately 3.0 river miles downstream of the (

discharge structure (or about 2.4 miles by line of sight from the main L stack) for river water, sediment and clams, and 1.7 miles for fish. (

The location from which river water and sometimes clams and sediment may be taken can be rather precisely defined. Often the sampling locations for clams have to be extended over a wide area to obtain a sufficient quantity. High water adds to the difficulty in obtaining clam samples; high water might also make an otherwise suitable location for sediment sampling unavailable. A stretch of the river on the order of a mile or so is generally needed to obtain adequate fish samples. The mile locations given above represent approximations of the locations where the samples are collected.

SPJ j98i

3.0 RESULTS

SUMMARY

As required by Section 6.9.1.7 of RETS, sumarized and tabulated results for all of the ordinary samples collected for the year at the designated indicator and control stations are presented in Table 3-1 in the format of Table 6.9.1.7-1 of RETS. Naturally occurring radionuclides are not required to be reported. Results for other samples are included in Section 4, the discussion of results section, for the type sample.

l 9

3-1 MPJ. 1987

TABLE 3-1 (SHEET 10F 6)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL SIM4ARY Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Docket Nos. 50-321, 50-366 Appling County, Georgia, Report Period 1986 Location with Highest Control Locations Number cf Medium or Type and Lower Limit All Indicator Nonroutine of Locations Annual Mean Mean (b) i Pathway Sampled Total Number Range Reported i of Analyses Detection (a) Mean (b) Name Mean (b)

(Unit of Range Distance & Range Fraction Measurements Measurement) Performed (LLD)

Fraction Direction Fraction ,

i 36 No. 103 37 38 0 Airborne Gross Beta 10 10-256 Inner Ring 13-219 9-332 l Particylates 309 1.8 miles (50/50) (103/103)

(fCf/ma) (206/206)

NE Gamma Isotopic 24 0 1 (c) 5. 6 No. 103 9.1 4.5 Ru-103 4.3-4.7 4.2-9.1 Inner Ring 9.1 -9.1 (4/16) 1.8 miles (1/4) (2/8)

NE No. 103 5.4 4.7 0 Cs-134 50 4.5 3.8-5.4 Inner Ring 5.4-5.4 4.6-4.7 (4/16) 1.8 miles (1/4) (2/8)

NE No. 103 9.1 9.6 0 Cs-137 60 8.1 6.9-9.1 Inner Ring 9.1 -9.1 9.1-10.0 (4/16) 1.8 miles (1/4) (2/8)

NE No. 116 93 91 0 I-1 31 70 76 Airborne 26-148 Inner Ring 55-1 48 30-187 SE Radiciodine 311 1.6 miles (3/52) (7/103)

(14/208)

EE (fCi/m3) NNW l

~

0

TABLE 3-1 (SHEET 2 0F 6)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL SUMARY Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Docket Nos. 50-321, 50-366 Appling County, Georgia, Report Period 1986 Medium or Type and Lower Limit All Indicator Location with Highest Control Locations Number of Pathway Sampled Total Number of Locations Annual Mean Mean (b) Nonroutine (Unit of of Analyses Detection (a) Mean (b) Name Mean (b) Range Reported Me:suremert) Performed (LLD) Range Distance A Range Fraction Measurements Fraction Direction Fraction Gamma Dose NA 15.0 No. 105 17.1 14.0 0 Direct Radiation 72 12.3-18.2 Inner Ring 15.9-18.5 11.3-16.6 (tres/91 days) (64/64) 3.7 miles (4/4) (8/8)

E Milk Gamma Isotopic (pCf/1) 68 0

Cs-134 20 HDM (d) NDM NDM Cs-137 20 9.8 No.152 9.8 10.0 0 6.7-15.1 Williamson's 6.7-15.1 5.3-13.6 (9/18) 3.2 miles (9/18) (5/50)

NNE I Ba-140 60 NDM NDM NDM 0 La-140 20 NDM NDM NDM 0 I-1 31 1 8.9 No. 152 8.9 7.6 0 68 0.6-13.0 Williamson's 0.6-13.0 0.9-20.0 l

(3/18) 3.2 miles (3/18) (5/50)

NNE l

l gg.Grcss Gamma Isotopic

! ro (pCi/kg wet) 32 0

I-1 31 60 285 No. 112 41 0 170 160-410 Inner Ring 410-410 170-170 (2/20) 1.0 miles (1/11) (1/12) 06 WSW R

e r~'tc -s er

TABLE 3-1 (SHEET 3 0F 6)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL SUtttARY Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Docket Nos. 50-321, 50-366 Appling County, Georgia, Report Period 1986 Medium cr Type and Lower Limit All Indicator Location with Highest Control Locations Number of Pathway Sarpled Total Number of Locations Annual Mean Mean (b) Nonroutine (Unit of of Analyses Detection (a) Mean (b) Name Mean (b) Range Reported Measurement) Performed (LLD) Range Distance & Range Fraction Measurements Fraction Direction Fraction Cs-134 60 49 No. 106 49 NDM 0 49-49 Inner Ring 49-49 (1/20) 1.1 miles (1/9)  ;

ESE l Cs-137 80 80 No. 112 98 21 5 0 24-230 Inner Ring 24-230 14-1300 (11/20) 1.0 miles (3/11) (9/12)

WSW River Water Gamma Isotopics (pCi/1) 24 Mn-54 20 NDM NDM NDM 0 Fe-59 30 NDM NDM NDM 0 Co-58 20 NDM NDM NDM 0 Co-60 20 NDM NDM NDM 0 Zn-65 30 NDM NDM NDM 0 Zr-95 30 NDM NDM NDM 0 Nb-95 20 NDM NDM NDM 0 m

.~

e

~

smr - a

TABLE 3-1 (SHEET 4 0F 6)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL SU MARY Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Docket Nos. 50-321, 50-366 Appling County, Georgia, Report Period 1986 Medium or Type and Lower Limit All Indicator Location with Highest Control Locations Number of Pathway Sampled Total Number of Locations Annual Mean Mean (b) Nonroutine (Unit of of Analyses Detection (a) Mean (b) Name Mean (b) Range Reported Measurement) Performed (LLD) Range Distance & Range Fraction Measurements Fraction Direction Fraction i

1-1 31 20 (e) NDM NDM NDM 0 Cs-134 20 NDM NDM NDM 0 Cs-137 20 12 No. 126 12 NDM 0 12-12 Downriver 12-12 (1/12) 2.4 miles E (1/12)

Ba-140 60 NDM NDM NDM 0 La-140 20 NDM NDM 18 0 18-18 (1/12)

Tritium 3000 242 No. 172 242 206 0 8 242-242 Downriver 242-242 206-206 (1/4) 2.4 miles E (1/4) (1/4)

Fish Gamma Isotopic (pCi/kg wet) 9 Mn-54 1 00 NDt1 NDM NDM 0 Fe-59 300 NDM NDM NDM 0 Si NDM NDM 0 gg Co-58 100 NDM 100 NDM NDM 0 Co-60 NDM i C2 I k e

u ___o

TABLE 3-1 (SHEET 5 0F 6)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL SUPMARY Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Docket Nos. 50-321, 50-366 Appling County, Georgia, Report Period 1986 Medium or Type and Lower Limit All Indicator Location with Highest Control Locations Number of Pathway Sampled Total Number of Locations Annual Mean Mean (b) Nonroutine (Unit of of Analyses Detection (a) Mean (b) Name Mean (b) Range Reported

! Measurement) Performed (LLD) Range Distance & Range Fraction Measurements i Fraction Direction Fraction Zn-65 300 NDM NDM NDM 0 Cs-134 1 00 29 No. 172 29 NDM 0 27-31 Downriver 27-31 (2/4) 1.7 miles E (2/4) 3

~

Cs-137 200 79 No. 172 79 44 0 .

53-93 Downriver 53-93 23-63 (4/4) 1.7 miles E (4/4) (5/5)

S:diment Gamma Isotopic (pCi/kg dry) 2 Mn-54 50 (f) 28 No. 172 28 26 0 28-28 Downriver 28-28 26-26 (1/1) 2.4 miles E (1/1) (1/1)

Co-60 40 (f) 108 No. 172 108 33 0 108-108 Downriver 108-108 33-33 (1/1) 2.4 miles E (1/11) (1/1)

Zn-65 90 (f) 175 No. 172 175 NDM 0 175-175 Downriver 175-175 (1/1) 2.4 miles E (1/1) y, Cs-134 200 132 No. 172 132 NDM 0

,o 132-132 Downriver 132-132

! (1/1) 2.4 miles E (1/1)

I G5 EO I

TABLE 3-1 (SHEET 6 0F 6)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL SIM4ARY Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Docket Nos. 50-321, 50-366 Appling County, Georgia, Report Period 1986 Medium or Type and Lower Limit All Indicator Location with Highest Control Locations Number of Pathway Sampled Total Number of Locations Annual Mean Mean (b) Nonroutine of Analyses Detection (a) Mean (b) Name Mean (b) Range Reported (Unit of Distance & Range _ Fraction Measurements Measurement) Performed (LLD) Range Fraction Direction Fraction 200 238 No. 172 238 1 90 0 Cs-137 238-238 Downriver 238-238 190-190 (1/1) 2.4 miles E (1/1) (1/1)

__ ~

a. The LLD is defined in table notation a. of Table 4.16.1-1, of RETS. Except as noted otherwise, the values listed in this column are those found in that table.

Mean and range' are based upon detectable measurements only. Fraction of detectable measurements at b.

specified locations is ir.dicated in parenthesis,

c. This value is the LLD nominally attained by the Central Laboratory from the counting of blank filters. No j value was provided in Table 4.16.1-1 of RETS.

d. No Detectable Measurements.

e. Since no drinking water pathway exists, the LLD for gamma isotopic analysis may be used. In the latter part of the year, the value listed became the objective LLD and was nominally attained.

The Central Laboratory has determined that this value may be routinely attained. No value was provided in l

l g,,f.

l .u Table 4.16.1-1 of RETS.

3D C6 4

4.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS An interpretation and evaluation, as appropriate, of the laboratory results for each type sample are included in this section. Relevant comparisons are made between the difference in average values between indicator and control stations and the calculated Minimum Detectable Difference (MDD) between these two groups at the 99-percent confidence level. Pertinent results are also compared with past results including preoperations. Attempts are made to explain any Reporting Levels (RLs) or other high radiological levels found in the samples.

A land use survey to identify the locations of the nearest permanent residence in each of the 16 meteorological sectors within a distance of 5 miles was conducted on May 13; the results are tabulated in Table 4-1. The results of the annual milk animal survey are presented in Subsection 4.4. The results of the annual survey conducted downstream of the plant to determine whether water from the Altamaha River is being used for drinking purposes are presented in Subsection 4.6.

The Chernobyl incident began on April 26. The impact to the environs of HNP became evident during the second full week of May with step increases in the radiological levels of several samples and the appearance of Ru-103, I-131, and Cs-134 which are ordinarily absent. There was a return to normalcy within a month or two. Details regarding the results for the type samples listed in Table 2-1 follow in the subsequent subsections.

Rain water was also collected on May 19, June 2 and 16 at Station 309 and on June 9 and 16 at Station 112. Gamma isotopic and I-1 31 analyses were performed; no positive results were observed. Significant levels of I-131 in rain water were reported by others for collections on May 12 and 13 at locations about 90 miles NNE of HNP. The quantity of rain collected in the HNP area was scant until June 16 by which time the impact from the Chernobyl incident for rain water had passed.

4-1 APR wet

e s

4.1 Airborne Particulates As indicated by Table 2-2, airborne 'particulates and airborne radiof odine are collected at 4 indicator stations (Nos. 103, 107, 112, and 116) which encircle the site boundary and at 2 control stations (Nos. 304 and 309) which are at least 10 miles from the plant. At these locations air is continuously drawn through a dust filter and a charcoal canister in sequence to retain airborne particulates and airborne radiotodine, respectively. The filters and canisters are collected weekly.

As seen in Table 3-1 the annual average gross beta activity on the particulate filters which are counted weekly for the indicator stations is slightly less than that for the control stations; the absolute value of between these two values is less than the MDD of 16 fCi/m3.the difference The average activity for all stations during 1986 was 37 fCi/m3 Going back to 1976 and for several years afterwards, the average annual gross beta activity for all stations was generally several times higher than that found during 1986; for example: it was 242 and 195 fCi/m3 during 1977 and 1981, respectively. Those high values were shown to be the result of fallout from numerous nuclear weapons tests conducted on mainland China from 1976 to 1980. With the tennination of the weapons tests, the gross beta levels in recent years have been puch lower and diminishing. The annual average for alg stations was 33 fCi/m3 for 1982 and this steadily decreased to 22 fCi/m for 1985.

The increase in the gross beta activity for 1986 is attributed to fallout from the Chernobyl incident. Samples collected on May 12 showed average increases of an order of magnitude; samples collected four weeks later were two to three times normal levels; thereafter, the levels were normal. By excluding the results for the collections for tiay 12 through June 9, the annual average value drops to 24 fCi/m3; the indicator and control stations then had the same average value.

Valid data was unavailable on three occasions during the year. The data collected at Station 103 on June 16 and 30 was considered invalid due to torn filters. An air pump failure invalidated the data for the August 4 collection at Station 309. A different type filter holder has been installed at all of the air stations; this is expected to lessen the probability of tearing the filters in their placement or removal. Air pumps are being changed every four months; the number of yearly pump failures dropped from three in 1985 to one in 1986.

Only ,for the second quarter were manmade radionuclides detected by the gamma isotopic analysis of the quarterly composites of air particulate filters. At all stations Ru-103, Cs-134 and Cs-137 were detected. Their presence is attributed to the Chernobyl incident. From the mid 70s to the early 80s as a

• consequence of the Chinese weapons tests, Ru-103 and Cs-137 were frequently found with the higher readings being on the same order a those found for 1986. These radionuclides were also often detected during both preoperations and the early years of the plat.ts operations but at somewhat lower levels.

During the period of 1983 through 1985, Cs-137 was detected only twice, each time at a level of 0.7 fCi/m . 3On only one previous occasion had Cs-134 4-2 D mo,

been detected: a level of 2.9 fCi/m3 was measured during 1981. It should be realized that the levels being measured are a factor of 5 to 10 below their required LLDs and more than three orders of magnitude below their RLs as specified by RETS.

The RETS require a gamma isotopic analysis on affected air particulate filters when the gross beta activity is 10 times the yearly mean of control samples.

During 1985, the yearly meaq at control locations was 21 fCi/m3 The gross beta activity was 210 fCi/m3 or greater at 4 locations for the collections on May 12 and at all 6 locations for May 27. Gamma isotopic analyses were performed at all stations for the collections on May 12,19, and 27. The radionuclides identified, the number of positive results (n), and the values in units of fCi/mJ of the maximum, the minimum, the mean, and the standard deviation (s) were as follows:

Radionuclide n Max Min Mean s Ru-103 8 94 20 54 21 . 0 1-1 31 6 95 15 72 26.2 Cs-134 8 44 13 29 9.5 Cs-137 18 75 31 49 11.1 These extra results are not included in Table 3-1.

The levels obtained by the gamma isotopic analysis on these weekly airborne particulate filters are about an order of magnitude higher than those obtained on the quarterly composites. Positive results for I-131 were obtained only for the collections on May 12; the I-131 levels measured on the charcoal canisters for this week were nearly double the values measured on the particulate fil ters. Positive results for Cs-134 were obtained only at 4 stations for collections on May 12 and 27. Positive results for Ru-103 were obtained at 2 station on May 19 and all stations on May 27. Positive results for Cs-137 we, obtained from all samples and furthermore, results were more consistent as indicated by the low value for s relative to its mean value.

O 4-3 APR gggz

4.2 Airborne Radiofodine Significant levels of I-131 were detected in all of the charcoal canisters used to adsorb airborne radiofodine for the collections of May 12 through May 27 and in half of the canisters collected on June 2. These results are attributed to the Chernobyl incident. No other positive results were obtained for the year. Positive results for airborne radiofodine are not normally obtained. As mentioned in the previous section, an air pump failure invalidated the data for the August 4 collection at Station 309.

During 1976, 1977, and 1978 significant levels of I-131 were found for a period of a few weeks after the arrival of a cloud from each of the nuclear tests of that time. The levels for 1986 as delineated in Table 3-1 are on the order of those found daring the 70s and these are on the order of the required LLD. The highest level ever geasured was 217 fCi/m3 in 1977. The RL called for by the RETS is 900 fCi/m3 It might be noted that the average value for the control locations is 16 fCi/m{ greater rom Table than3-1 that for the indicator loca ions; this difference is far from being discernable since the MDD is 55 fCi/m .

! 4-4

{ APR gg

4.3 Direct Radiation Thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) with lithium fluoride phosphors have always been used in the REMP to measure the dose received from direct (external) radiation. Two TLD badges were placed at each station; each badge contained 5 lithium fluoride chips. This practice was continued in 1986, however, 2 TLD badges with calcium sulfate phosphors were also placed at each station, side-by-side with the lithium fluoride TLDs. Each of these new type badges contained 4 calcium sulfate cards.

Two TLD stations are established in each of the 16 meteorological sectors about the plant. The inner ring of stations (Nos.101 through 116) is located near the site boundary, while the outer ring (Nos. 201 through 216) is located at a distance of about 4 to 5 miles. However, each of the stations in the east sector is at a radius which is a few miles greater than the other stations in its ring; flood plains in this sector prevent easy access on a year-round basis to the site boundary and to the 4 to 5 mile annulus. The 16 stations forming the inner ring are designated as the indicator stations. The 2 control stations (Nos. 304 and 309) are at least 10 miles from the plant.

Stations 064 and 3 01 accommodate special interest areas. Station 064 is located in an onsite roadside park while Station 301 is located adjacent to Toombs Central School. Station 210 in the outer ring is located adjacent to the Altamaha School, the only other nearby school.

A comparison was made of the field performance for simultaneous exposures during the first 3 quarters of the year between the lithium fluoride and calcium sulfate TLDs placed in the inner and outer rings. The average reading for the calcium sulfate TLDs was 7.5% lower than that for the lithium fluoride TLDs; this is considered to be reasonably good agreement. The average percent standard deviation for the lithimn fluoride TLDs was 2.7 times that for the calcium sulfate TLDs - 6.1% vs. 2.3%. When the results of the 2 TLD badges of the same type at the same station were compared, the average percent difference was 17.7% for the lithium fluoride TLDs and 3.9% for the calcium sulfate TLDs. The better stability and precision of the calcium sulfate TLDs evidenced by the lower percent standard deviation and better agreement between the calcium sulfate badges at the same location have led to the decision to replace the lithium fluoride TLDs with calcium sulfate TLDs. The calcium sulfate TLDs also are reputed to be more sensitive and less susceptible to physical damage than the lithium fluoride TLDs. The direct radiation results for 1986 reported herein are those measured with the calcium sulfate TLDs.

As may be seen from Table 3-1, the average quarterly dose acquired at the indicator stations (inner ring) over the year was 1.0 mrem greater than that acquired at the control stations; this difference was not di scernabl e, however, since it was less than the MDD of 1.4 mrem. Previe niy, the difference between the average quarterly dose acquired at thera 2 station groups has been within + 0.4 mrem since the inner ring was installed at the beginning of 1980.

The quarterly doses acquired at outer ring stations ranged from 11.4 to 19.4 mrem with an average of 14.5 mrem for the year. There was no discernable difference between the averages of the inner and outer rings since this difference was less than the MDD of 0.8 mrem. In past l 4-5

(

gp

• l years, the average quarterly dose for the inner ring stations had always been found to be greater than that for the outer ring stations by amounts ranging from 0.2 to 1.0 mrem.

The quarterly doses in units of mrem acquired at the roadside park and at Toombs Central School were respectively:

n Average Minimum Maximum 4 14.6 13.4 15.9 4 15.1 13.5 16.4 The doses acquired at the special interest stations are seen to be within the range of those acquired at the other stations.

Frequently, TLDs are lost due to theft and damaged due to vandalism. At monthly intervals, the TLD stations are checked for missing or damaged badges; replacement badges are provided as needed. When both badges are missing at the end of the quarter, there are no means by which to assess the dose at that location for the quarter. Both badges were missing at Station 206 at the end of the first quarter and at Station 216 at the end of the second quarter. A total of 15 badges from 7 different stations was found to be missing during the year; this is a slight improvement from the previous year when a total of 17 badges was found to be missing.

The badges at Station 206 had been located on private property; they were missing at the end of the first quarter because they had been confiscated by the property owner. Consequently the badges for Station 206 and the badges at a number of the other stations were repositioned to locations where the property easements had been obtained. These relocations involved distances ranging from a score of yards to two tenths of a mile.

4.4 Milk In recent years, milk has been sampled from three locations: Station 152, Williamson's fann which has served as an indicator station; Station 304, the state prison dairy which has served as a control station; and Station 311, Johnson Br.others' Dairy which may also be considered as a control station.

During the latter half of the year milk became permanently unavailable at Johnson Brothers' Dairy and at Williamson's farm. These stations were deleted from the REMP. The cause of the unavailability in both cases was the removal of the milk animals. Thompson's Dairy was added to the REMP.

Since June of 1981, milk has been regularly collected at Johnson Brothers' Dairy which is about 9.1 miles from the plant. They went out of business and disbanded their dairy operations. The last sample was collected on August 11.

Milk samples have been collected, off and on, from Williamson's farm since November 1974. Since 1976, milk has not been available from any other location within 5 miles. However, last fall, the Williamson's sold their cows. The last sample was collected on October 6. Samples were also not available at Williamson's on March 10 and July 28 because they were away from home.

In an effort to find suitable replacement stations, contacts were made with the county extension agents in five nearby counties. The closest milk animals found were at Thompson's Dairy which is located in the NNW sector at approximately 13.2 miles. This location was added to the REMP as a control station. The first sample was collected on September 22.

During the first 9 months of the year, Teledyne Isotopes performed the laboratory analyses on all but two of the milk samples which nominally are collected biweekly. The Central Laboratory took over the analyses of milk samples beginning with the collection on October 6. To obtain supplementary data during the time of impact from the Chernobyl incident, a milk sample was also collected from the dairy at the state prison during the week it was not scheduled; extra samples were collected on May 12 and 27. The Central Laboratory performed the analyses on these two extra samples. The results are not included in Table 3-1 but are described below.

As seen in Table 3-1, positive results for the fission product Cs-137 were found in about a fifth of the samples. These result are typical of those found in recent years. No positive results for Cs-137 were found in the extra samples collected on May 12 and 27. The RL for Cs-137 is 70 pCi/1. The average value of Cs-137 at the indicator station is 0.2 pCi/l less than the average value for the control stations. This difference is not discernable since the MDD is 4.8 pCi/1.

This is the first year to have positive indications of I-131 in any of the

• milk samples since 1980. Positive results were also found in 1978 and in all years previous since operations began. Those results ranged from 0.095 to 88 pCi/1. All significant readings were generally attributed to the weapons test. During preoperations all readings were less than 2 pCi/l which was the allowed LLD at that time.

4-7 M 1987

i The positive levels of I -1 31 for 1986 are attributed to the Chernobyl l incident. Positive levels were found in each of the 8 samples collected from May 12 through June 2; this includes the 2 extra samples. Then positive levels were found in only one sample from each of the groups of 3 samples '

collected on June 16 and 30. As shown in Table 3-1, the levels for 1986 are modest compared to those reached in the latter part of the 70s; however, the readings for half of the samples were above the RL of 3 pCi/l and in only two of the 8 ordinary samples collected were the readings below the LLD of 1 pCi/1. The I-131 levels in the extra samples collected on May 12 and 27 were 2.21 and 3.49 pCi/1, respectively. Although the average I-131 level is 1.3 pCi/l greater at the indicator station than at the control stations, the difference is not discernable since the MDD is 21.9 pCi/1.

Two of the 6 samples collected on October 6 were not counted for sufficient time to reach the required LLD of 1 pCi/l for the I-131 analysis. The LLD achieved for the samples collected at Williamson's and the state prison were 1.16 and 1.26, respectively. The reason for this failure was a combination of: a malfunction of the beta-gamma coincidence counter, low chemical yields and too long a delay before counting (as a consequence of too many samples needing to be processed at the same time). The following corrective actions have been taken: 1) the detector problem has been isolated and corrected; 2) a table of counting time as a function of chemical yield and fraction decayed has been developed; and 3) the sampling schedule has been modified to reduce the number of samples needing I-131 analysis at the same time.

The annual land use survey to identify the location of the nearest milk animal in each of the 16 meteorological sectors within a distance of 5 miles and the location of all milk animals within a distance of 3 miles was conducted on May

13. A milk animal is a cow or goat which is producing milk for human consumption. The only milk animals found were at Williamson's farm.

4-8 IRR 1987

4.5 Grass j The RETS call for the gamma isotopic analysis of grass samples collected monthly at 3 locations. Two indicator stations (Nos. 106 and 112) and a single control station (No. 309) have been designated for these collections.

' Gamma isotopic analyses have been performed on grass samples since 1978. To obtain additional data during the aftennath of the Chernobyl incident, an extra sample was collected weekly at Station 309 between the ordinary May and June collections.

Due to the cold weather, adequate samples were not available in January at 1

Stations 106 and 112, and again in February at Station 106 only. Deer had eaten the grass to the ground at Station 106; a week after the aborted February collection, a fence was constructed at this remote plot in an attempt to preclude foraging. Samples were also not available in June at Station 106; dry weather hampered growth at this plot which had at that time been recently reseeded.

As shown in Table 3-1 for the ordinary collections, the manmade radionuclides

I-131, Cs-134, and Cs-137 were detected. Also, Cs-137 was detected in each of L the 4 extra collections, I-1 31 in all but one, and Ru-103 in one. The

! presence of I-131 and Ru-103 and the high levels of Cs-137 in a few of the '

samples are attributed to the Chernobyl incident.

Positive indications of I-131 were shown in all 3 samples collected on May 12; these results are indicated in Table 3-1. Positive levels of 220, 450, and 170 pCi/kg wet were then found in the extra sample for three consecutive weeks. Hence all samples with positive values exceeded the RL of 100 pCi/kg

! wet. Positive indications of I-131 have not been detected in grass samples since 1978, the year they replaced green leafy vegetation. The readings in the grass samples then were about the same as those found in the green leafy vegetation samples collected at that time. Those 1978 indications occurred a few weeks after a Chinese nuclear weapons test. Positive readings for I-131 in vegetatirn during 1976 and 1977 were also attributed to the weapons tests; the levels found during 1976 were about the same as those found in 1986.

Scant indications of I-131 in vegetation but at lower levels were also found

during the earlier years of operation.

A positive value of 49 pCi/kg wet for Cs-134 tus found in the sample collected at Station 106 in November. Single values ranging from 12 to 17 pCi/kg wet were found in samples collected in three out of the last five years. The LLD and RL for Cs-134 are 60 and 1000 pCi/kg wet, respectively.

l Twenty out of the 32 ordinary samples collected showed positive indications

!. for Cs-137. Fourteen had levels less than the LLD of 80 pCi/kg wet. Each of the four extra samples showed positive results with values ranging from 130 to 1900 pCi/kg wet. The RL is 2000 pCi/kg wet. The highest value occurring *

< outside of May and June was 230 pCi/kg wet. The frequency of occurrence and the range of levels attained including those for May and June are on the same order of those found in recent years.

Over the years, the Cs-137 level has been consistently higher at the control

}

station. As seen from Table 3-1, the average value for the control station is i

4-9 1

AP_8 1987

4 135 pCi/kg wet greater than the average value for the indicator stations.

This difference, however, is not discernable since the MDD is 457 pCi/kg wet.

The extra sample collected on June 9 showed a value of 57 pCi/kg wet for Ru-103. As discussed in Section 4.1, positive levels of Ru-103 were also found in airborne particulate samples collected at that time. As a consequence of the weapons tests, Ru-103 was found in grass samples daring 1978 with levels ranging from 79 to 116 pCi/kg wet and during 1981 with levels ranging from 19 to 84 pCi/kg wet. A value for the LLD of Ru-103 in grass is not provided in Table 4.16.1-1 of RETS, however, the Central Laboratory has determined that a value of 30 pCi/kg wet may be routinely attained.

The January sample from Station 309 was the only one for which there was a failure in attaining the required LLD for I-131. This failure was due to too long of a wait before counting. An administrative instruction was written to lessen the probability of this reoccurring.

4-10 19 8 /

!&P_R

4.6 River Water Surface water is collected continuously from the Altamaha River at an upstream location (No. 170) and at a downstream location (No. 172) using automatic sampling machines. Small quantities are collected at intervals not exceeding a few hours. River water collected by these machines is picked up monthly; quarterly composites are composed of the monthly collections.

A gamma ' isotopic analysis is made on each monthly collection. One manmade radionuclide was detected in each of 2 different samples. The only manmade radionuclide ever detected (by gamma isotopic analysis) previously occurred in the composite sample for the fourth quarter of 1975 at an indictor station where Ce-141 was found at a level of 78.2 pCi/1.

At Station 170, the sample collected on May 20 contained La-140 at a level of 18 pCi/1. At Station 172, the collection on June 23 contained Cs-137 at a level of 12 pCi/1. Each of these radionuclides has an LLD of 20 pCf /1. These collections could have been affected by the Chernobyl incident.

Because of too long a wait before counting, there were failures in attaining the required LLD for Ba-140 and La-140 for both samples collected on February 25 and for La-140 for the downriver sample collected on December 22. The LLD for Ba-140 is 60 pCi/1, values of 62 and 65 pCi/1 were attained. The LLD for La-140 is 20, the values attained ranged from 23 to 25 pCi/1. A table of the counting time needed as a function of elapsed time from sample collection has been developed; the proper use of this table will ensure that adequate

, counting times are used.

Tritium analyses are performed on the quarterly composites. Positive results were obtained only for the second quarter when levels of 206 and 242 pCi/1 were found at Stations 170 and 172, respectively. These levels are typical of those generally found. Positive results were obtained in only a quarter of i the samples this year; in the past few years, positive results had been i obtained in at least three quarters of the samples.

On October 14, the annual survey of the Altamaha River was conducted i downstream of the plant for at least 50 river miles to identify anyone who may I

use river water for drinking purposes. As in all previous surveys, no intakes i

for drinking water were observed. This was corroborated by information l obtained on September 25 from the State of Georgia that no surface water j permits on the Altamaha River downstream of HNP had been issued. If river water should become used for drinking, the RETS requirements for sampling and analysis will be implemented.

4-11

,APR 1987

4.7 Fish Gamma spectral analyses were performed on the edible portion of fish samples collected at the river stations on May 28 and November 18. Large mouth bass were collected at both stations each time. Channel catfish were collected at both stations in November but only at Station 170 in May. American eel were l

collected at both stations in May.

As shown in Table 3-1, Cs-134 and Cs-137 were the only manmade radionuclides detected. While Cs-137 was found in each sample, Cs-134 was found in only 2 of the 9 samples. These frequencies of occurrence are typical of those experienced during the past few years. Although the positive levels are all typical of those found during the past 3 years, they are generally lower. The average for Cs-137 was about 50% higher during this past 3-year period than during 1986 The average for Cs-134 during the past 3-year period was about twice that for 1986 but there have only been a few samples with positive values for Cs-134. The required LLDs are 100 and 200 pCi/kg wet for Cs-134 and Cs-137, respectively. The RL for each is 10 times its LLD. Each reading was well below its specified LLD.

Despite the generally lower readings for 1986 compared with those of the previous 3 years, the average value at the indicator station is higher than that at the control station as it has been for the 3 past years. The average value for Cs-137 at the downstream station was 35 pCi/kg wet, greater than that at the upstream station. However, this difference was not discernable since it is less than the MDD of 38.4 pCi/kg wet.

4-12 16P.R 1987

_ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .__ i

4.8 Sediment The annual collection of sediment took place on May 28 at the river stations.

As shown in Table 3-1, positive results were obtained for 5 radionuclides from the gamma isotopic analysis on the sample from each station.

It is noted that for each radionuclide the level is greater at the indicator station. It is also noted that each of these radionuclides are included in the plant's liquid releases. Of greater note, perhaps, is that the collections were made at the height of the impact of the Chernobyl incident.

In the latter 70s and early 80s, activation products and fission products attributable to the weapons' tests of those times suddenly appeared in sediment samples. The similarity between now and then is remarkable.

The activation products Co-60 and Zn-65 have not been found in sediment samples previously. In 1975, Mn-54 was detected at a level of 36.1 pCi/kg dry at Station 172.

The radionuclide Cs-134 had been previously detected in only four samples. At the control station during preoperations and in 1984, the levels were found to be 40 and 50 pCi/kg dry, respectively. At the indicator station in 1981 and 1984, the levels were found to be 280 and 220 pCi/kg dry, respectively. Its presence in 1981 was associated with the weapons tests at that time. As shown in Table 3-3, the LLD for Cs-134 is 200 pCi/kg dry.

The fission product Cs-137 has almost always been found in the sediment samples. The levels found this year are typical of those found in previous years but are somewhat below the average levels in recent years. The average level over the past 3 years was about 80% higher than that for 1986 and the average for the past 10 years was about 50% higher than that for 1986.

Previous positive results have ranged from 110 to 730 pCi/kg dry. During preoperations, values of 170 and 970 pCi/kg dry were found at Stations 170 and 172, respectively. The LLD for ' 137 is 200 pCi/kg dry.

A correlation is suggested between the trends of the level of Cs-137 in fish and in sediment with regard to the relative values at the indicator and the control stations and with regard to the changing values over the years.

i i

l 4-13 APR 1987 i

TAB;.E 4-1

~

LOCATION OF THE NEAREST PERMANENT RESIDENCE IN EACH SECTOR Distance Sector (miles)

N 2.1 NNE 2.9 NE 3.2 ENE 4.2 E

• ESE 3.8 SE 1.8 SSE 2.0 S 1.2 SSW 1.3 -

SW 1.1 WSW 1.2 W 1.1 WNW l.2 NW 3.6 NNW 1.8

• None within 5 miles.

e a

APR 1987

4 5.0 INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM Laboratories performing the analyses required by the REMP, as delineated in Table 2-1, participate in the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's)

Environmental Radioactivity Laboratory Intercomparison Studies (Crosscheck) i Program conducted by the Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory in Las Vegas, Nevada, or in an equivalent program. Not all of the sample media / analyses combinations listed in Table 2-1 are covered by the Crosscheck

Program. Reported herein are the results of relevant participation in the i

Crosscheck Program .by these laboratories. Relevant participation is considered to consist of those analyses for sample media covered by the EPA Crosscheck Program which are the same as those required by Table 2-1. All relevant media / analysis combinations were performed by the Central Laboratory except for the analyses of milk samples prior to October 1986 which were performed by Teledyne Isotopes, Inc. The results . reported herein also include the 1985 results which were not available last year due to the time lag involved in obtaining results from the EPA.

Any result of determinations in the Crosscheck Program for which disagreement can be established using the NRC's " Criteria for Comparing Analytical Measurements" as described in Attachment 1 to this section were investigated to determine the cause of the disagreement. Corrective actions were taken. as warranted. The results of any such investigations and corrective actions are

. reported in this section.

Since all of the results reported herein are presented in the same tabular format, an explanation of the column headings is provided. ""Date" means the i collection date given by the EPA. "Known" refers to the EPA known value + one standard deviation, s. "Re sul t" is the average value measured by the i laboratory + experimental s. " Resolution" is determined by dividing the known i

value by its s value. "Ratto" equals the " result" (value determined by the

, laboratory) divided by the "known" (value determined by EPA). An explanation

! is provided in the text for any of the comparisons showing " Disagreement." It i should be noted that whenever the EPA known value is zero or the i laboratory-determined result is a "less than" value, or the calculated resolution value is less than 3, a comparison by the NRC criteria _ cannot be

! made.

l

The results of the gross beta and Cs-137 analyses of air filters are given in l Table 5-1. Listed in Table 5-2 are the results of the I-1 31 and gamma

! analyses of milk samples. Table 5-3 presents the results of the gamma and tritium analyses of water. No comparisons show disagreement.

l

\

j l

1 4

} 5-1

APR 1987

( ..

l l

TABLE 5-1 e CROSSCHECK PROGRAM RESULTS FOR AIR FILTERS (pCi/ffiter)

Date Known Result Resolution -Ratio Gross Beta 4/25/86 47 + 5 54.3 + 1.2 9.4 1.16 9/12/86 6615 75.714.7 13.2 1.15 Cs-137 4/25/86 10 + 5 10. 3 + 0. 6 2.0 1.03 9/12/86 2215 20.312.5 4.4 0.92 APR 1987.

TABLE 5-2 CROSSCHECK PROGRAM RESULTS FOR MILK SAMPLES (pCi/1)

Date Known Result Resolution Ratio I-1 31 10/25/85 42.0 + 6.0 35.7 + 1. 5 7.0 0.85 2/28/86 9.0 T 6.0 9.0 T 0.0 1.5 1.00 6/27/86 41.0 T 6.0 41.0 T 1.0 6.8 1.00 10/31/86 49.0][6.0 56.7j[2.1 8.2 1.16 Cs-137 10/25/85 56.0 + 5.0 61. 3 + 4. 7 11.2 1.10 6/27/86 31.0 T 5.0 39.0 T 1.7 6.2 1.26 10/31/86 39.0][5.0 47.3 ][ 1.5 7.8 1 . 21 f

[

i

l t

4 5

t 6

.APR 1987

TABLE 5-3 CROSSCHECK PROGRAM RESULTS FOR WATER SAMPLES (pCi/1)

Date Known Result Resolution Ratio Cr-51 2/07/86 38 + 5 LT*46 7.6 6/06/86 075 LT 35 10/10/86 5915 77.0 + 32.0 11.8 1.31 Co-60 2/07/86 18 + 5 28.3 + 4.9 3.6 1.57 6/06/86 66 T 5 73.7 7 4.7 13.2 1.12 10/10/86 3115 39.312.5 6.2 1.27 4

Zn-65 2/07/86 40 + 5 45.0 + 5 8.0 1.13-6/06/86 86 T 5 114.0 T 20.2 17.2 1.33 10/10/86 8515 102.3 1 14.0 17.0 1.20 Ru-106 2/07/86 0+5 LT 31 6/06/86 50 T 5 83.3 + 34.4 10.0 1,67 10/10/86 7415 121.7 1 22.6 14.8 1.64 Cs-134 2/07/86 30 + 5 23.0 + 6.0 6.0 0.77 6/06/86 49 T 5 49.0 T 7.0 9.8 1.00 10/10/86 2815 29.013.0 5. 6 1.04 Cs-137 2/07/86 22 + 5 23.7 + 1.5 4.4 1.08 6/06/86 10T 5 13.0 T 1.7 2.0 1.30 10/10/86 4415 44.0110.4 8.8 1.00 H-3 2/14/86 5227 + 523 5243 + 101 10.0 1.00 6/13/86 3125 T 360 2653 7 327 8.7 .85 10/17/86 59731597 5107 1 174 10.0 .85

• LT means less than.

lAPR 1987

ATTACHMENT 1 Criteria for Comcaring Analytical Measurements This attachment provides criteria for comparing results of capability tests and verification measurements. The criteria are based on an empirical relationship which comaines prior experience and the accuracy needs of this program.

In these criteria, the judgment limits are variable in relation to the comparison of the Reference Lacoratory's value to its associated one sigma uncertainty. As this comparison referred to as " Resolution" increases, the acceptability of a licensee's measurement should be more selective.

Conversely, poorer agreement should be considered acceptable as the resolution decreases. The values in the ratio criteria may be rounded to fewer significant . figures to maintain statistical consistency with the number of significant figures reported by tne Reference Laboratory, unless sucn rounding The acceptance category will result in a narrowed category of acceptance.

reported will be the narrowest into which the ratio fits for the resolution being used.

RESOLUTION RATIO = LICENSEE VALUE/ REFERENCE VALUE Possible Possible Agreement Agreement "A" Aoreement "B" No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison c3 No Comparison r3 and c4 0.4 - 2.5 0.3 - 3.0 0.5 - 2.0 0.4 - 2.5 0.3 - 3.0 E 4 and c 8 - 2.5 E8 and cl6 0.6 - 1.67 0.5 - 2.0 0.4 0.75 - 1.33 0.6 - 1.67 0.5 - 2.0 E16 and c51 - 1.33 0.6 - 1.67 E51 and c200 0.80 - 1.25 0.75

- 1.33 2:200 0.85 - 1.18 0.80 - 1.25 0.75 "A" criteria are applied to the following analyses:

Gamma spectrometry where principal gamma energy used for identification is greater than 250 key.

Tritium analyses of liquid samples "B" criteria are applied to the following analyses:

Gamma spectrometry where principal gamma energy used for identification is less than 250 key.

Sr-89 and Sr-90 determination. .

Gross beta where samples are counted on the same date using the same reference nuclide.

I

6.0 CONCLUSION

S This report has shown the licensee's conformance with Section 3/4.16 of the RETS during the year. It has shown that all data were carefully examined. A summary and a discussion of the results of the laboratory analyses for each type sample collected have been presented.

The radiological impact of the Chernobyl incident upon the environment of HNP was shown to be significant, distinct, and transitory.

No measurable radiological impact upon the environment as a consequence of plant discharges to the atmosphere or to the river was established.

The relevant comparisons of the analytical measurements made by GPC and the contract laboratories with those made by EPA in the Crosscheck Program showed no disagreements.

6-1 LAPR 1987 t - - _ - - _ _ _ - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ . _

• ,e* ~.b.;. -

1 I.' ..

._ . IC x

.a \

N. N ENGLt$H EC07 s

g. *

.e .

?'s*

Q'

.,\,

A -

A

• [.

c:

- 'N x * - .' U.'s.g.?

. c t g

3 ,

"\\

.\ -

l'

% \ ..- C i i d

M N \

\

s, .D_ '

m /

k. -

( .

~

• . o 8

{ *

. s f ' S p -

.e

, m 11 5 e .

/ '. / ..

d

,5 '. , _ _ x. "

- m

'l 1

- D .~...

O  ::' I

, .  %.'N A

170 - .

I 8

'I / #

(** } q f i III

. vo.t

]?-w 'C'

$?d\~y-h

\^ 'N f

y. y,

, b* iN  %

g

= -

.s .

n. . G.'a'%. m.y.e. n ty - :.

. . \

1. .,--- 7 I n M. l i

/

06 b__ _ 3 111 ,

(::"

. ers 1 .! ,

g) -

si ..r. c y;;;"_. a ', ,

. s - -

. . < u lca..

,l .

• o Wp .. N ,

' [

s .j + *

r. .,

['

Tb*

>*- r,k, m

,, _ . _ . . _ . = _

q

'2

=/' *~

~

s l

,~ ..

= " Vl',

SP

'/

y,.1 "- -

-: .( '

d.. f

"~

% *I-h jR{

\g,jws T; b::::

• 1 /

e ^

.s - i c.

,, ,, . i

& / -

r

(

~4 z e. ,

, gi y s a g.. ., , ,y ,

t; 3

s.

r.-

s

. , $s

• ? -Q . y.

~d -

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING LOCATIONS ON SITE PERIPHERY EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT FIGURE 2-1 l&P_R 1987

- g;: .s ..

A

.6.

..p I .

~ - -

~

,b.. .

- . .. 1 -

~ f ,s .%f; 9-

,y .- .

. p-

.~y ,

.s .:x ., . . -

3 ,,s.-

a.

.r- <

s.

.s,.

o.

'... N,

.,....<,~o.

• * - (****- ,.

/

.c.~

3.-

.~ .<.

(

.\ . ~

. . . ,i

.1 7 5

.,i ... w .

'g, osee *' ,/ , .yp

., 7 , ., ,

$) . , ,.;.y , .

. *., .! ~ _ ,

['*%.) .',

s ' ... . ~* .

• s .- ,

. Y -- 4.:::

.,.-t .: . * ' *'

I n /- v.

-o

,..i

}. ,

e

,, , ,p.* * ^ _

'. .

• N ,,. . T. * ,\*. . . . .

., ~..? * .s .

~

' 1 . , , , . - ..

f .

my

. . y." '

e. re:> . oc ' ,

c. (-

>h..f, . W '-- J..q.

.- o, =s

...We ' --*- v,- ,s .'

.J..-!,['**t~

g:;{*; \:r ;- e. ,

,g.

3 '01 ) ' -

. ' ,3.cy

. . .\

,7 ,,

(.\,x.. .>.. . .=. . ...

-.,.c,,.

~ .

. . . ..-~: . . ^;

s n.c*.s, .

. k.

~.

.Oy 7.. ~,'N .

's , .

~

y i.* -

? - , ** i ... A

. 1 o*

_w

• .o

~-

/

s

(

'%g.-e ; q. w , , : . , +V. . " ' :-',p ' . , . >

, ~' u s

N; y, s~= . ..

g ' * * ~

'- / 6 f.

. _f-- \

i.

, .m .

\4 gL" .y..b.g' L .. J,, .. * *

..., : '. [

-@^Q LQ'3.%m' ~, , . . ..

~ #,

d. M .! - --

N' W-

[n y.1. _.f..

.. x. =.-

c E

q +\.y I i

...g

. e:

. ,~.

._.' .' x. l-

. .p. y f,. x.' q.f..:..

y .7 r'. h

< u, . _...,{

p @v,.. .

. s

. .(r ...

/. ... . ,

g .

. .$ p i

"' , . . 5 - .( .  : .- -. . '. . .

. . .yf .-

i

.n..y

- - y l- - ~ . .

M.

. .g y .s - s\ .,

l

.: . ~ . . . . .. ,.... m.c.

n-mi , . y~. 5..x .

. m .

1 . . . . .. .%

3 b Q,21 h . n i2M M :

E .=2i;f .$N #G. D -'4 %' 5

~~

$.. is., ' ' -

l .. . /

Ni \x A:eje.=M.1 "

,l!

• i t 'n .

)

e..., j q7 .. y -

n 1 c, y

\ r-

\! .. . . x. . . ....: , ,

.z , ,  :. . ,

. i .

.. / 7t .\ .x . _ _ .. ,

,....; ...... .. ~ . .

..,s -

c; . .

.. r.. w .

j :u . -

v .

..r- -z. -

s. j .

. _ -s

,c.

. . 'L y . .e m . 4/ -

7 . - , . - - ,,, e RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING l EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT LOCATIONS BEYOND SITE PERIPHERY i

l FIGURE 2-2 (SHEET 1 of 3)

APR 1987

o e. - .r c. -

.--- .. N.... w...s

.: s-.

,I.. e .

g

(.

e . . .....u.

,.f:a /. 9 .; ..

3, , ,.

m

.- s. ...

a.- r - s

. . . s , .

.-:-  : ;M.. 9 ,

7 t.

~7 H. ;,. . m.

.,Ig

. >.- ... s.

n.

,. 3<o 3 .,=

.s. .

m. x, :.

e.5 s . t

.- >.. .. :. -e e .. :

i N .

. s

. . . ,s. : , .

-- ) ., ), , ,'. e 'j r. f .om. 70'

'. ,. D;;,

f./y I,

,C...:

~: -

l ' j* j ~q, -

%~ - -

• M, ,

,e F 1

'

• 3 :. %S 's L . . g.:..^. .

,d* b . ,; ,, .s , I

'v '!/lw;?

. ., ,... s*

., ;i I% f- 6

• -, f 'S ./ % ; - sn-- .

.*-y ., i% / -

.\. m.

.J s ..~ . a.

.f,. .,

....:-.,. .% r ,

.g< .s. ,

,, . . , . w..:.. ,ane j f i

-9.,... . ..  ; ,, . \-  :

T,, .f ,

. . . ,.- - r. m.i . -

s . twsz , q~ , :- , w

7. :. c.;-

,. .,...:w ; .

. m. .~

......j., ,

d ,. . .

.=^',\, t ...,

. . v.. .;

g MEL& .,s g ,

' },,'

[.: i. \ ! >'. , s, v. .- - ..

\

p .

, ., z %N \ .

.s . . .

_ - - s s.

Jh5 3

)k ://$Y-?s.

0 T. '

5 ,.

N.Y.f.Nl.c$E

. ,6 i.. '. 3~.i ,:-.8 . .

• 9 k.10' i-e

-i . .

ni j . - g g-

,q

~

. \. . .

. .- f0

~ - -

~

l- .:

. l .. .

. 4 -! .. .

- : q-

p. ./ <

% su . .

a.

.i .

gf  ! . = - .  %

N_. , . -

- .h . u..*g~ z a

g

.n w w \, , - -

t,_,. .

i . . .

, 1 .  :: . . . .,

r , N.l."\, l' ' 's } ,-

g-@ %

(, . K}oy 8 , v. .

.. ' .* ,  :..g . -

.c . .

y%_m . . ,

.: ; ..I. ?( . .,'. .

f.-  !

. " y . :;-

. ' ; j o. -

. . ,' .. - - n ..f- -- - /

As * \ s:352 . n - ..

....-4*.-

,. . . , . . . 's - .

, ,,p 4

-u... . i.

g- 1

- - -~ =

I o s. j.

.; e s. m. m , /.o. :s. - .. / 'p& ).s.......,,3,-

. . .. - . . . . s. .. , , . . . . . . . ,

.. ts .

. s 3

~~- . -

.. .i **-*  % =:r  %. ( 0 l . - . -

9 '\,. '* . . . . J *

• e . . .. *

. )

n ,'-~

n - M .rn 'H O .'- .:'

'3.

i . , . im

+ .-s-- ,.

'As -r t.,! . .

', . . i **

/ [(- .

, -i. >

C* N. 'j ' ,

- ( . ,.:. ;, .. .- . . . . . %., \ '  :, .

u . [.~ g d_.......I\.

.x,- .) - l '. ;, .

. . , . .}. ,

m .

w.g - .' -

A. . ,;

.[,;- . . . .

-~~.- ,/~ n

. , ,. % q ,

L ...:... \., . . ~ .;; . ;

~ ,,: ' ~p .,

..'y L. ~

+ , . ~..

,-  ! .--~T' 'ooM'.',3 m s

.- ' ~ i _'. . ' - ~ . -

p,

.;.. ..,,N * ^

'-N. . x .- ,y:

c

> * ".x %,. , ' s ,' m.

~.%

~ ,".: ,

a.

s ,,

mg a

. : ,p- , .-

s'- i ,_

, , . _ ." . g

t

Q.s.w ..

m e

9 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT LOCATIONS BEYOND SITE PERIPHERY FIGURE 2-2 (SHEET 2 of 3)

APR 1987

. . ...- i t . -r i i s . 1: s m

'l,..a7 8.e6. . ml5 %G,.=--.36~ -- c

.-ff, ; :.h -M .a. .u

=. ~

'k*l \ g- hM '

. * ~' * '

,j -y l . ,

, q  ;,ir -- .. ' LPW '

y 1

' . .u,

. l

,M / t -,. '

p.;- c;; s ej

.. l  ? . - . x , .- ::s- , , . .<

m 4

f........., . , , , . , - -

)N.... . .. . . -

^ -

a

.,r ....,m. 7 j %. -cC' .e n."t.!x * .

-- /. (5  :* l' -

, y h'..s

.)

i

(

\

.- e~- ~. :u ! ..

[: y_'-

/,., %

• f) .e r

.s *

- ~+- ,J. 4- *

• ,. y . .

.o  %.':,i.;;;.- .l . s. d . ...s .. O g '=. 4

-^

s l l  ;

-~J - r.g 3 ( j

. - .g,*.-- l ab ~s.. -

p,2 : :.o

--h---- -

. . . .. j*. .t.'".. *'a,

.!.....j~./

~~

,_..,s N,f~.- .7

-~. ,/j.

,--~

, /

• f ,

. . h _h

,,,,,y. r. -.8,

~

a.n fr........

,f g . ......

A*'M"'-=

y

u. .~ .;.. .. .

1-s .

f. l .

.9 ---- , -

..., } '

g e

• g....... .... 7- .  :

3

.,, p . .

j, .j .<'..%..- -- -

-. .. . . rQ

' .- .C . ' . . ' o '*. ~ :,.

~~.~.~~ , _ . , - '

aL , - .

• /. - ^ ,y . ._ .

O ,' c / , .

g .. o .-

..:...,/

• s ., c.g l

.OL' ,.

Y Q 0 > '

A .

m. , - < 9.;-

. .,,,t .....1.... _ ,

.. ..y

4. . .. . )

i .

>),

o' .

~ ~. * &%. - f*%l, t-Q y' ' ~~~~. .~

f lTd i  :;_& .

~ c +. . a.. -

i .

• t e.,. . .

b. - - *

. .'. .. o g .*.. '

t.

• I # *

. j l s ':;"a ,

f3 . . ,3 b o,.~ W. N'.y. _. $ . .

,,j _w.

. / 3.. . .;g

..=

e

,a

.g. * *

.. , o.

..u.. .#'".

1 1 - --

s ", . .

a.-. . ..

. - - - - - - .:: a r *, - ...'~ go h:<. .:;

..., s

. . . .l3q. p. ; ; ,,5.

, . . . _ . . . . ,. . .=.- ,*'

4 _

.. ~.~ .

..s, -

s . .! . ,

- :f .

. . . ,1 .

/

. ~

.- c.

S W ; -.. _ . ms. .

M. .' . . . . .  :- .

2-' 220* *  ?*- *

, . 8 "r.". . . - - - -

_ ..r .

. c. , . ~

s E p: .- , . . t, .

', , c

~,

s..

- ~ . -

. o

.,,,,:.. - . .. e.

,. .s ,. , , ,. .

4

- . . . . .s .%.

. .... ..v..

. . . .. p .~ . . . .

' .s . . " . .

.-...-.,....* 5 0,

..'............., '.'.'.a. , g, ..

, , .\ . . .

m. . '.--

.3;  :

m .

. . , 2 .. .  ; u .. .r i 7,; u

. ~ .

e . -

-..~.

i

[. .

.,, . L . --

. , . c. -

.SSW .

'D . ma. .' ' w:. AJ __ y._ge .

i, ..

,. 3

. . ..s.. r : u. . . . .

. .. ~.~.s. ..

m. .

? .

a :;g.. ~z.. ,.

-e a

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT LOCATIONS BEYOND SITE PERIPHERY FIGURE 2-2 (SHEET 3 of 3)

.APR 1987

F-k ' h Y,h' Y '

f k?** &w '

?h W\

\1 4 '

~. %  % l U: n.'f U .x%. ~ f,.d*

.g / ',:r

.: a N'Vt ,

i .f /.,

\. ' k-s,. .4 '

q y y 3

~

5 ' p.

u. . . , .h%.c. 9

,W ff . ,. , ., . ,.. 'j;.,,

a 6

p  %,.!.

e fi.x y%,Q

• %.-4. C .g

,I:l' %a[ g.f'1 fi:.Qp ../ .@ Y .'ya #. *\p[ sT i... l *i

• A(. ,.. .g_ ( .K. :s ", ,i 5+.f&

Q.);f .; "'

s &rkuf[ ,  ;-Q .4Q ${=' _ e%. s V.

Nr

~'

s.

f f. l.t Q' , --';Q( Q, ,e'f' ; p[l n

. i. 5 l gr a

\

' b

\

v d

g- (",. X 4(. %, .J,L O

, n . .

r' 5< ( 'AL.(( .,r. '

1

~

k- ' ,

.gg.4

' I l .. f Nzd M " M. P,.>'

N.6 @ y'\. QMA 8 k . $

s. 4 1,. mas cown h ,< t % f~\ f

% s).) M- '- I.-

h I'Y "

4 .:--

(

. D.c'v- . uc? />

^

. .~. . . . . ~ o .n.. . . . ~,-. .:.,:::.;:: rp. i .,...+t

. ; . , ~..

,, L. -

..A,..

. j ,.,

Y *s *-kc;,..,;b 4: b

. %..c..

/

6 am". p".'w  ;, s.

h -, .w p -.v s  ;

mg\, .4,,f., .DiQ.b"l; tsep "' " ' 'i MY cow c a..r,.n. m. .

LGn. m'..%a.-%

s u :. .: .. ..

J < f;*. &

.  % .a A;fr' ,

s.@i -

v.,. m. . ..

hy 4 ,t ~_ g . .  ;- 3. g.. 9 g m\ As . .7r %;i, w.. ,. O. _:4. .: . ,  :. m*, .C % r ~. -

"~

/..- . g , t.

f *, Ip N.f Sy,;; ki ,  %. * .:',%,r. h ,, ArP ING cet::n 1, + ' es / j.

~- . 'S .: ( ,e . r.:: p,3 . . .

a

.. 4

. p. -. , -

W?D. .  :..M.,_.'++,.-W.;._9 4

t c * 'I ' . * .J* J. -*n'e'.'. ,

a

%p: . ...4.. . %' .e .,s". h. . . ,. ir4 , ..'a ,e. .

• ..s..,, ..

.~.,7 ~ ~..r.n t

• t.%* /,A * .,.J ,*M'-^ .u,f

~* % / :.::%~s .,

\ p ,. ,,.w (;:., r .,. :,+ ~

.n i:-~ .{ . , ~. . ,

• i-

• 1

{

v -n ..c. w. . n .-  : ..: ...t. ~~ rc,s., r.

(f. .

F 8 i x .

.,r 3* ~% .% .

• ~

. ". .f 8 d .

r. .r . s,. #.w l{ , e.n.;;s.

t-)&.,,[s .s - .r W-.$; 4 %, tA'V(.,%.

1

~.. ,'y3(~  %;.. ,2.W.ep,.m 7^. ' ,. .33ra., ?e '<,.-.

- '  ? . . .

y -t ,y,,! p; _2

/. ...r ,,,' 3

)J ,

m.y.:_.......:...,,_.

s . . .. . . , _.....y*'s

^* C

. ,4; q*, . ,a ,. .', ,:.Q.q%g ;. gl,q_.;f.. o ,*

n SCliEy IN MI,LES ,y ,, ,$

% *:rx d**9Y?.f:.:.l' W e a-w .,.f. Ac__ .h m s,

/ , ,

,~

~

hhi'h* ** , ], s/ ' .

• r.[,C [ (, U? ,,Nl%

• ,,, A ,,. w ..

. + . p .,.,..i(*;.[A['",;

" :;,.yg.;% , .(g9 a_.

'-- *g - *

~

x ,. . . :,

eg . ., .r ... r .,

e

...s ..

,7 s.

m ,.,.

s, *s

.....~.,r> ..

...s...

.\ ***g ' %.,+ . . ::*; . %.

. g r *'

• m . ., '. ,,7

>. , , .$7.p*iM. .' .-

, . (, ', , ;,, *.

• 7 y- .:. t r,s .

4 .. . g .*p*.g .  : ,s g,, e ,

3. . ,- ...

LOCATION OF ADDITIONAL CONTROL STATION FOR MILK EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT FIGURE 2-3 LAPR. 1987

Georgis Power Company 333 Piedmont Avenus Atlanta, Georgia 30308 Tebohone 404 5266526 Mailing Address:

Post Office Box 4545

- Atlanta. Georgia 30302 Georgia Power L T. Gucwa  !!e soutten rhttre sysk>m Manager Nuclear Safety and Licensing SL-2369 0661H X7GJ17-H520 April 21, 1987 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission ATTN: Document Control Desk Hashington, D.C. 20555 NRC DOCKETS 50-321, 50-366 OPERATING LICENSES DPR-57, NPF-5 PLANT HATCH UNITS 1, 2 ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT Gentlemen:

Pursuant to Section 6.9.1.6 of the Plant Hatch Technical Specifications, enclosed is the Annual Radiological Environmental Surveillance Report for the calendar year 1986.

If you have any questions regarding this report, please contact this office.

Sincerely,

& YG e =.

L. T. Gucwa

Enclosure:

.innual Radiological Environmental Surveillance Report MJB/lc c: Georaia Power Company U.S. Nuclear Reaulatory Commission Mr. J. P. O'Reilly Dr. J. N. Grace, Regional Mr. J. T. Beckham, Jr. Administrator GO-NORMS Mr. P. Holmes-Ray, Senior Resident Inspector-Hatch p

II

_ _