ML20211H971
| ML20211H971 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1985 |
| From: | GEORGIA POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8702260344 | |
| Download: ML20211H971 (35) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:6
- GEORGIA POWER COMPANY EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT
- ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT CALENDAR YEAR 1985
, I i
4
).
o e SD n i
\
l P 9 b l
@'4 g
i E lfk s ,I i t
e e t
. I e
RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE REPORT TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION
. TITLE PAGE 1.0 I N TR O D UC T I O N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.0 S UMMAR Y D ES CR I P T I O N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.0 RESULTS
SUMMARY
......................................... 7 4.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS................................... 13 4.1 Airborne Particulates................................... 13 4.2 Airborne Radioiodine.................................... 13 4.3 Direct Radiation........................................ 15 4.4 Mi1k.................................................... 15 4.5 Grass................................................... 17 4.6 River Water............................................. 17 4.7 F i s h / C l ams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18. . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.8 Sediment................................................ 18 , 5.0 i
~
CROSSCHECK PR0 GRAM...................................... 19
6.0 CONCLUSION
S............................................. 24 6 l I i
.i
9 e
.s LIST OF TABLES TABLE TITLE PAGE . 2-1
SUMMARY
DESCRIPTION OF RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM 2 2-2 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING LOCATIONS 5 3-1 ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM
SUMMARY
8 4-1 LOCATION OF THE NEAREST PERMANENT RESIDENCE IN EACH SECTOR 14 5-1 CROSSCHECK PROGRAM RESULTS FOR AIR FILTERS 20 5-2 CROSSCHECK PROGRAM RESULTS FOR MILK SAMPLES 21 5-3 CROSSCHECK PROGRAM RESULTS FOR WATER SAMPLES 22 O t 11 i
. t
-LIST OF FIGURES c FIGURE TITLE 6
2-1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING LOCATION MAP (SITE PERIPHERY) 2-2 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING LOCATION MAP (BEYOND SITE VICINITY)
- 4-1 Cs-137 IN GRASS SAMPLES 4-2 TRITIUM IN RIVERWATER
( . l . i P iii l
RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SdRVEILLANCE REPORT
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The objective of the Radiological Environmental Moni oring Program is to ascertain the levels of radiation and concentrations of radioactivity in the environment which are due to plant operations and to evaluate any impact to the environment from these radiological levels. Reported herein are the program's activities for calendar year 1985. The specifications for the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program were provideo by Section 3.2 of the Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS) during tne first two quarters of the year. At midyear, these were replaced by Section 3/4.16 of tne Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications (RETS) for Unit I and by Section 3/4.12 of the RETS for Unit 2. The Unit 2 RETS simply references the Unit 1 RETS. Henceforth, only the Unit 1 RETS will be referenced. A single program serves both units. A summary description of the program is provided in Section 2. Tnis includes maps showing all of the sampling locations; the mapi are keyed to a table indicating tne distance and direction of each sampling location as reckoned from the main stack. A summary of all of the laboratory analysis results obtained from the samples utilized for environmental monitoring is presenteo in Section 3. A discussion
'. of the results including assessments of any radiological impacts upon the environment are provided in Section 4 The results of the EPA Crosscheck Program are presented in Section 5. The chief conclusions are stateo in Section 6, 2.0
SUMMARY
DESCRIFTION A summary description of the Radiological Envirormental Monitoring Program is
- provided by Table 2-1. This taale is essentially a facsimile of Table l
- 3.16.1-1 of the RETS which delineates the program's recuirements for the last -
half of tne yea , with modifications added to accommodate the recuirements of l the first half cf the year which are spelled out in Ta:ie 3.2-1 of the ETS. Sampling it. cations required by Table 2-1 are described in Taale 2-2 and are shown on maos in Figures 2-1 and 2-2. The location numbering used to meet the requirement: of RETS and that usec to meet tne requirements of ETS are both delineatad in Table 2-2 while only the location numoering for RETS is indicatt:d on the maps ir, Tigures 2-1 and 2-2. I 1 1 1 i
,_. , _ _ , __m ------e-
.s TABLE 2-1 (Sheet 1 of 3)
StNMARY DESmilTION OF IW)IOIOGICAI, INVIIK)NMlWl'AT. Mf)NI_'lORING IPOGRA_M . Approximate Nimber Expnoire Pathway of Sanple Incations Sampling and
, airl/or Sanple RL'IU L'IS 0)llection Freo2ency Type of Analysis and Frennency
- 1. Airlorna
- a. Radioniclides 6 6 0)ntimous operation of Radioiodine canister. I-131
- 3. Partio11ates sanpler with sanple weekly.
collev: tion weekly. Partio11ete sampler. Analyra for gross beta radioactivity not less than 24 loirs following filter change and analyze for I-131 weekly. Perform gansna isotopic analysis on affected " sample when gross beta activity is 10 times the yearly mean of control sanples. Conposite (by location) for gansna isotopic analysis 02arterly.
- 2. Direct Radiation 36 9 (a) ,
Oiarterly Ganma dose ojarterly.
- 3. Ingestion
- a. Milk 2-5 (b) 2-5 (b) Biweekly Ganma isotopic and I-131 biweekly.
- b. Fish or 2 3 Semiantually Ganina isotopic analysis on Clams (c) edible portions semiantually.
- c. Grass or Trafy 3 3 Monthly chring growiry Ganm1 isotopic analysis monthly.
vnjetation <;eason. (d) O
- ; n TABLE 2-1 (Sheet of 3) .
RADIDIOGICN, IGNIROMWTAL MONT'lORING IWX71M4 Approximate Mimber Expomre Pathway of Sanple Incations and/or Sanple Sanpling and KFilS Firs Collection Freq2ency Type of Analysis and FreQJenCy
- 4. Waterborne
- a. Surface 2 2 Composite (e) sample Collected unnthly. Ganma isotopic analysis monthly.
Cbmposite (ty location) for b. tritium analysis giarterly. Sedinent 1 1 Yearly Ganwa isotopic analysis sanple yearly.
- c. Drinking One sanple of river water water (f)(g) River water collected I-131 analysis on each sanple near the intake and on4 near the intake will sanple of finished water when bi-weekly collections are tw a composite sample; req 2 ired. Gross beta and gamna from each of one to three the finishol water 4 of nearest water w pplies will be a grab sanple. isotopic analyses on each sample; which could le affected '1hese samples will composite (ty location) for ly llNP discharge. le collected monthly tritium 03arterly.
unless the caloilated dose die to conmnption of tie wat er is greater than 1 mrem / year; then the collection will be bi-weekly. 'the collections may revert to nnnthly sho 1d the caloilated doses in:<xne less than 1 mrem / year. d .
TABLE 2-1 (SHEET 3 of 3)
- a. At the beginning of 1980, to accommodate Revision 1 of the Technical Position of the Radiation Assessment Cranch of the NRC, twenty-five
, additional TLDs were set out to establish two TLD stations in each sector (one near the site boundary and the other at a distance of about four to five miles) except the East Sector which did not have suitable locations, and to provide stations of special interest. At the beginning cf 1984, two TLD stations were added for the East Sector although the locations are less than ideal.
- b. 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.
- c. Under RETS, clams are sampled if difficulties are encountered in obtaicing suitable samples of commercially or recreationally important species of fish. Under ETS it was just the opposite. Also under ETS, American Shad was sampled annually during the spring spawning season in the area of the discharge structure,
- d. If gamma isotopic analysis is not sensitive enough to meet the Lower Limit of Detaction, a separate analysis for I-131 may be performed,
~
- e. Composite samples shall be collected by collecting an aligmt at intervals not exceeding a few hours.
b f. If it is found that river water downstream of HNP is used for drinking, water samples will be collected and analyzed as specifiec herein.
- g. A survey shill be conducted annually at least 50 river miles downstream of HNP to identify those who use Altamaha River water for drinking.
4 1 w
Table 2-2 (Sheet 1of2)
.m RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING LOCATIONS Location Number Descriptive Direction (a) Distance (a) Sample . RETS ETS Location (miles) Type (b) 064 15(c)(d) Roadside Park WNW 0.8 D 101 19 Inner Ring N 1.9 0 102 26 Inner Ring NNE 2.5 D 103 9 (d) Inner Ring NE 1.8 AD 104 27 Inner Ring ENE 1.6 0 105 105 Inner Ring E 3.6 0 106 119 (d) Inner Ring ESE 1.1 DV 107 17 (d)(h) Inner Ring SE 1.2 AD 108 13 Inner Ring SSE 1.6 D 109 126 (d) Inner Ring S 0.9 D 110 14 Inner Ring SSW 1.1 0 111 16 Inner Ring SW 0.9 0 112 21 (d) Inner Ring WSW 1.0 ADV 113 133 (d) Inner Ring W l.1 D 114 2 Inner Ring WNW l.2 D 115 18 Inner Ring NW l.1 0 116 (e) Inner Ring NNW l.6 AD 152 (f) Williamson's NNE 3.2 M
{) 170 170 Upriver WNW (g) R 172 Downriver E (g) R 172 , 201 25 Outer Ring N 5.0 0 202 23 Outer Ring N f,E 4.9 D j . 5.0 0 203 29 Outer Ring NE 204 30 Outer Ring ENE 4.9 0
. 205 205 Outer Ring E 7.2 0 206 12 Outer Ring ESE 5.0 0 207 11 Outer Ring SE 4.3 D 208 10 Outer Ring SSE 4.7 0 l
209 8 Outer Ring S 4.4 0 l 4.3 21 0 7 Outer Ring SSW D 211 6 Outer Ring SW 4.5 0 i 212 4 Outer Ring WSW 4.4 D Pl3 3 Outer Ring W 4.3 D 214 23 Outer Ring WNW 5.4 D l ! 215 22 Outer Ring NW 4.5 0 216 24 Outer Ring NNW 4.8 0 301 31 Toombs Central. N 8.2 D f I 304 1 (d) State Prison ENE 11.3 AD 304 (f) State Prison ENE 10.8 M 309 5 Baxley Subst. S 10.0 ADV 311 Johnson Bros. SW 9.1 M
Table 2-2 (Sheet 2 of 2)
. '"i RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING LOCATIONS (a) Direction and distance are reckoned from the main stack (b) Sample Types for RETS:
A - Airborne Radioactivity D - Direct Radiation M - Milk R - River (fish or clams, shoreline sediment, and surface water) V - Vegetation (c) Airborne radioactivity was also sampled at this location under ETS (d) Only these nine TLD stations were specified by the ETS; see footnote (a) of Table 2-1 for an explanation of the additional 27 stations (e) Starting with the first quarter of 1984, airoorne radioactivity was sampled here since it was anticipated that this location would replace Air Station 15; it was then designated as Air Station 150. This location has also been designated as TLD Station 20 since the beginning of 1980. (f) Milk stations were not designated by number under ETS. (g) Station 170 is located at approximately 0.8 miles upstream of the' intake (")
-- structure for -iverwater, 1.1 miles for sediment and clams, and 0.9 miles for fish.
Station 172 is located at approximately 2.3 miles cownstream of the discharge structure for riverwater, 0.5 miles for sediment and clams, ! and-1.7 miles for fish. l . _The location from which riverwater and sometimes clams and sediment may j (.,, . , .be taken can be rather precisely define:. Often, however, the sampling EEff;j$.:. locations for clams have to be extended over a wide area to obtain a
' '~ sufficient quar tity; even then the quar.tity may not be sufficient. High .
-- - water adds to the difficulty in obtaining clam samples; high water might also make an otherwise suitable location for sadiment sampling
~ unavailable. A stretch of the river on the order of a mile or so is generally needed to obtain adeouate fish s amples. The mile locations given above represent approximations of the locations about which the catches were taken. Under ETS, American Shad was sampled in the area of the discharge structure.
(h) Grass was also sampled at this location under RETS. l l
4 Deviations are permitted from the required sampling schedule as delineated in Table 2-1 if samples are unobtainable due to hazardous conditions,
, e, 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.
The laboratory analyses of the samples are contracted to Teledyne Isotopes, Inc. of Westwood, New Jersey except for: the gross beta counting of the i airborne particulates which is performed by Georgia Power Company's Central Laboratory in Smyrna, Georgia; the reading of the TLDs which is done by Teledyne Isotopes Midwest Laboratory in Northbrook, Iliinois; and the gama scan of grass which is provided by the Center for Applied Isotope Studies at i the University of Georgia in Athens, Georgia. In previous years the plant did the gross beta counting of the airborne particulate samples. It is expected that in. time all of the laboratory analyses will be assumed by the Central Laboratory. 4 3.0 RES'JLTS
SUMMARY
. As required by Section 6.9.1.7 of RETS, summarized and tebulated results of all of the samples for the year are presented in Tasle 3-1 in the format of Table 6.9.1.7-1 of RETS. - Naturally occurring radionuclides are not required to be reported. Tne location numbering for RETS is used to identify the
( location with the nighest annual mean. 1 i . J i ( - I e
. . - . , _ . .- - -v- - , , , - _ . + , . - - _ - - . _ _ _ - , . - - . , , - - . - - - , - - - . . , - - - - - -- , - . , - _ , , - , _ _ - - . , - _ , , , . _ -
_ - . ~ . - - - - . , . , _ , ,
TABIE !'. , Sheet 1 of 5) .
. DNIROt4DTTAL RADIOIOGICM, MONI'IORING PROGRAM SLPNARY Name of Facility - H1 win I. llatch fliclear Plant Docket tb. 50-321, 50-366 Location of Facility - Appling County, Georgia Report Period 1985
- Incations of Ilichest Anrual Mean Mnditim or Type arrl Patte'ay Samples 'Ibtal Mimber Inwer Limit All Irvlicator Name (bntrol NJmber of (Unit of of Analysis of (a) Incations Distance Mean Incations RcFr1RTABLE Meant rement) Performl Detection Mean Range and Direction Range (b) Mean Range' OCCURI7KIS 0
Airborne Gross Beta 10 22 No. 064 23 21 0 , Partioilates 334 7 - 60 Roadside Park 15 - 46 6 - 55 (fCi/m I) 0.8 miles wtM (26/26) Ganm1 Isotopic 26 Cs-134 50 < LID < LID < LID 0 co Cs-137 60 0.733 No. 116 0.733 <IJD 0 0.733 - 0.733 Inner Ring 0.733 - 0.773 1.6 miles NNW (1/4) Airborne I-131 70 cr,in < LID <IJD 0 Radioiodine 334 (fCi/m3) Direct Read ' LID NA 14.7 No. 113 19.8 14.7 0 Radiation 142 5.5 - 28.2 Inner Ring 13.4 - 23 6.2 - 19.3 (mrom/91 days) 1.1 miles W (4/4) .
' TABIE 3 ,dheet 2 of 5) --
IWVIROtNINI'AT. RADIOTOGICAI, K)NI'IORING PROGW1 SLP9RRY Name of Facility - HMn I. llatch NJclear Plant Docket No. 50-321, 50-366 . Incation of Facility - Appling County, Georgia Report Period 1985 Incations of Hiqliont Anrual Mean Medium or Type and Pathway Samples 'Ibtal Rimbor Inwer Limit All Indicator Name Cbntrol M2mber of (Unit of of Analysis of (a) Incations Distance Mean Incations REIORTARTE Meaatrement) Performed Detection Mean Range and Direction Range (b) Mean Range OCORRENCES _= - Milk Ganna Isotopic ! (pCi/1) 78 i Cs-134 20 cum < UD < LID 0 Cs-137 20 9.14 No. 152 9.14 5.35 0 5.97 - 12.4 Williamson's 5.97 - 12.4 4.26 - 6.44 3.2 miles NNE (5/26) i l Ba-140 60 <UD < LID eMD 0 1 4 La-140 20 <UD < LID <uD 0 4 I-131 1 <UD < LID < LID 0 78 Grass Ganna Isotopic (pC1/kg wet) 37 I-131 60 < UD = UD < LID 0 , Cs-134 60 12.0 No. 106 12.0 < LID 0 12.0 - 12.0 Inner Ring 12.0 - 12.0 1.1 miles ESE (1/25) Cs-137 80 60.9 No. 309 113.3 113.3 0 9.0 - 133 Baxley 14 - 815 14 - 815 10 miles S (11/12)
- n. e-'% m
~~
TN11E h Jheet 3 of 5) 17NIRONME?7 PAL RADIOIDGICAL MONIERIrlG PROGRAM SLPNARY Name of Facility - 111 win I. Ilatch tuclear l'1 ant Ibcket No. 50-321, 50-366 Location of Facility - Appling Ocunty, Georgia Report Period 1985 Incations of Ilichest Anmal Mean tiedium or Type and Pattway Samples Total Nunber inm r Limit All Indicator Name Cbntrol N.imber of-(Unit of of Analysis of (a) Incations Distance Mean Incations REPORTABIE Meaalrement) Performed Detection Mean Range and Direction Range (b) Mean Range OOCURRENCES River Water Gansna Isotopics , (pCi/1) 8 ! Mn-54 20 <UD < LID < LID 0 Fe-59 30 < LID < LID = LID 0 (b-58 20 <UD < LID < LID 0 g C0-60 20 < LID -LID < LID 0 Zn-65 30 < LID = LID < LID 0 Zr-95 30 <UD < LID < LID 0 Nb-95 20 < LID < LID < LID 0 I-131 20 <UD < LLD <LLD 0 Cs-134 20 <UD - LID < LID 0 Cs-137 20
- LID < LID < LID 0 .
Ba-140 60 < LID < LID < LID 0 Ia-140 20 < LID < LLD < LID 0 i Tritium 3000 288 No. 172 288 220 0 8 120 - 600 Downriver 120 - 600 100 - 390 2.1 miles W (4/4)
- i. .
TABIE 3-1 (Sheet 4 of 5) . ENVIR0fNiWTAI, IMDI0 LOGICAL FNI'IORING PROGRNi SlMMRY Ibme of Facility - Illwin I. Ilatch N3 clear Plant Docket No. 50-321, 50-366 Incation of Facility - Appling County, Georgia Report Period 1985 I Tocations of Ilighent Anrual Mean Medium or Type and Pattway Samples 'Ibtal Nuober Iower Limit All Indicator Name (bntrol tbmber of (Unit ,E of Analysis of (a) Incations Dist.ance Mean Incations REPORTABIE Measu rnnent) Performed Detection Mean Itange and Direction Ranae (b) Mean Range OCORRINCES ______=- = _ _ _ _ _ _ - Fish Gunna Isotopic (pCi/kg wet) 7 Mn-54 100 < IJD < LID < LID 0 i j Fe-59 300 <IJD
- LID < LID 0 00-58 100 < LID < LID < LID 0
! Co-60 100 < Lin < LID < LID 0 Zn-65 300 <IJD < LID < LID 0 Cs-134 100 46.7 No. 172 4 6. ~1 21.1 0 19.8 - 97.1 Downriver 19.8 - 97.1 21.1 - 21.1
. 1.7 miles W (3/4)
Cs-137 200 117 No. 172 117 63.3 0 65.4 - 197 Downriver 65.4 - 197 41.5 - 85.3 1.7 miles W (3/4) o i
TABIE 3 ~7 sheet 5 cf 5) 17NIROtMWPAL RADIOIOGICAL f10NI'IORING PROGRAM SLMMRY - tiame of Facility - Rlwin I. Ilatch tuclear Plant Docket ib. 50-321, 50-366 Incation of Facilit.y - Appling Ocunty, Georgia Report Period 1985 Incations of Highest Anrual Mean Medium or Type and . Patlway Samples Total rumber Inwer Limit All Indicator Name Cbntrol Rimber of (Unit of of Analysis of (a) Incations Distance Mean Incations REPORTABIE Meomrement) Performed Detection liean Range and Direction Range (b) Mean Range OOCURRENCES l Sediment Gvma Isotopic (pCi/kg dry) 2 Cs-134 200 < LID < LID < LID 0 Cs-137 200 76.5 No. 170 269 269 0 76.5 - 76.5 Upriver 269 - 269 269 - 269 1.2 miles WNW (1/l)
- t' I
- a. Iower Limit of Detection is defined in table notation a. of Table 4.16.1-1, Specification 4.16.1 of Unit 1.
- b. rwan arvi ranqe based upon detectable measurements only. Fraction of detectable meamrements at specified locations is irrlicated in parenthe.ms.
. 1 l
4.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS An interpretation and evcs. tion, 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 of indicator and control l stations, Lt -Lc, and the calculated minimum detectable difference (MDD)
~
between these two groups at the 99% confidence level. Pertinent results are also compared with past results. Attempts are made to explain any Reporting Levels (RL) or other very high radiological levels found in the samples.
. Henceforth in this report, unless otherwise indicated, the station numbering will be that of RETS.
A land use survey to identify the locations of the nearest permanent residence in each sector within a distance of 5 miles was conducted on May 28, and 29; the results are tabulated in Table 4-1. The results of the annual milk animal survey are presented in Section 4.4. The results of the annual survey conducted downstream of the plant to determine if water from the Altamaha River is being used for drinking purposes are presented in Section 4.6. 4.1 Airborne Particulates At midyear, Air Station 15 under ETS was replaced by Air Station 116 under RETS which is at a new location; airborne sampling at the old location stopped. At the beginning of 1984, in anticipation of this cnange, airborne sampling commenced at the new location; it was desipated as Air Station 150 until midyear of 1985.
, The average gross beta activity for all stations during 1985 was 22 fCi/m3 L' The averages from 1982 through 1984 ranged from 27 to 33 fCi/m3 The Lj-Lc was 1 fCi/m3 which is well under the MDD of 3 fCi/m3, l
Due to mechanical failures, valid data was unavailable on two occasions at Station 116 and one occasion each at Stations 107 and 304. Three of the failures resulted from the rotary vanes breaking and seizing the pumps. The vendors for the vacuum , pumps were unable to explain these failures. Cor'sequently, the pumps are being changed every three months in an attempt to prt:1ude further failure. The fourth failure was due to a break in the pipe . between the pump and the filter holaer. The broken pipe was replaced. The only manmade radionuclide detected from the gamma isotopic analysis of the quarterly composites in tne fourth quarter.of the air particulate filters was Cs-137 at gtation 116 The activity was found to be 0.7 fCi/m which is very low compared to the allowed LLD and RL of 60 and 20,000 fCi/m3, respectively. 4.2 Airborne Radioiodine ( Tne charcoal cartridges used for adsorbing iodine from the atmosphere are l analyzed for I-131 by Ge(Li) spectroscopy. I-l? was not cetected in any of l tne samples during 1985. The maximum allowed LLD is 70 fCi/m3 the LLDs l achieved durir.g 1985 did not exceed 40 fCi/m3 The RL is 900 fCi/m3;. 13
^ TABLE 4-1 LOCATION OF THE NEAREST
.. PERMANENT RESIDENCE IN EACH SECTION DISTANCE SECTOR (miles)
N 2.1
. NNE 2.9 i NE 3.2 ENE 4.2 E
- ESE 3.7 SE 1.8 SSE 2.0 S 1.2 SSW l.3 SW l.1 WSW l.2 W l.1 WNW l.2 NW 3.6 NNW l.8
. '~- .
None within 5 miles 6 ,
. .?. . .i, . .
9 i 9 9 . % o 4 e 4-14
. . . . __ _. _ _ . _ - _ . _ _ _ _ . _ - . _ _ ~ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ . . .- - __ _ _ . _ . . _ _ . - - - _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ , _ , _ _ _ _ _
4.3 Dircet Radiation a Direct (extern:1) radiation is measured by thermoluminescent dosimeters I (TLDs). Two T:.0 badges are placed at each station; each badge contains five-LiF chips. Two TLD stations are established in each of the 16 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. The 16 stations forming the inner ring are designated as the indicator stations. The two control stations (Nos. 304 and 309) are at least 10 miles from the plant. Stations 064 and 301 accommodate special interest areas. Station 064 is located in an onsite roadside park while Station 301 is located adjacent to the Toombs Central School. Station 210 in the outer ring is located adjacent to the Altamaha School, the only other nearby school. As may be seen from Table 3-1, the average dose acquired at the indicator stations (inner ring) was the same as that acquired at the control stations. The difference between the average quarterly dose acquired at these two station groups has been within + 0.4 mrem since the inner ring was installed at the beginning of 1980. The average quarterly dose acquired at the inner ring stations was found to be one mrem greater than that acquired at the outer 1 ring stations. In past years the average quarterly dose for the inner ring stations has always been found to be greater than that for the outer ring stations by amounts ranging from 0.2 to 1.0 mrem. The doses acquired at the special interest stations g re within the range of tnose acquired at the other I stations. i
~
TLDs are frequently lost due to theft and are frequently damaged by vandalism. At monthly intervals the TLD stations are checked for missing or , damaged badges; replacements are provided as needed. When both badges are missing at the end of the quarter, there is no data to access the dose at that location for the quarter. Both badges were missing at Station 201 at the end of the first quarter and at Station 064 at the end of the second quarter. A l total of 17 badges from 10 different stations were found to be missing during the year. To diminish the frequency of missing or damaged badges, TLDs are placed in less conspicuous places wherever this is practical. 4.4 Milk l Milk was sampled from three locations. Station 152, Williamson's Farm, is the indicator station; since 1976, milk has not been available from any other location within 5 miles. Station 304, the State Prison Dairy, is the control station. Station 311, Jor.nson Brothers Dairy at 9.1 miles, is' a bit too far away to be considered as an indicatc* station; however, it is the closest location for milk sampling in the sector into which the wind blows most j frequently; it is not suitably located to be a control station. l I l 15 l 1
Milk samples were available and were collected biweekly at each of the three milk stations. Gamma isotopic and I-131 analyses were performed on each of
)
these samples. There was no positive indications of I '31 in any of the milk samples; there have been none for five years. The sample collected on January 28 was split with the State of Georgia. The State detected 2+1 pCi/l of I-131 while the contract laboratory's analysis
~
showed less than 0.3 pCi/1. An examination of the release data for the time periods prior to January 28 showed normal releases. The contract laboratory
. reviewed their radiochemical data to assure that the result reported was accurate. There was no indication of I-131 in the charcoal filter from a nearby air station.
As may be seen from Table 3-1, the only manmade radionuclide detected from the gamma isotopic analyses was Cs-137. The frequency of occurrence and the levels found were a little lower than those generally found in recent years. The RETS require that a survey be conducted annually to identify the location of the nearest milk animal in each of the 16 meteorological sectors within a distance of 5 milet and the location of all milk animals within a distance of 3 miles. A milk animal is a cow or goat which is producing milk for human consumption. The milk animal survey was conducted on May 28 and 29. The only milk animal found was the cow at Williamson's. During the milk animal survey, it was learned that a goat which pastures 1.2 miles from the plant in the WSW sector was being milked and that on rare occasions, the milk was consumed by humans. An investigation revealec that several months before the survey, about 2 gallons of the goat's milk had been
- provided to an adult over a 2 week period. This was the only occurrence of the goat's milk being consumed by humans. No samples of goat milk were obtained since the goat was going dry. Subsequent contacts witn the goat's owners at intervals of about three months confirmed that the goat was not being milked; on January 9,1986, the goat's owners reiterated they had no plans to milk the goat in the future.
The thyroid dose to an adult from drinki~ng' milk from a goat which castures 1.2 miles from the plant in the n'5W sector was calculated to be about 3.5 times the dose to a child from drinking milk from Williamson's cow which pastures 3.2 miles from the plant in the NNE sector. However, the actual consumpticn by the adult of the goat's milk during the year provided a dose of less than i . 9% of what conservatively might be expected for a child drinking the cow's milk from Williamson's. l l i 16
4.5 Grass
- Gamma isotopic -aalyses were performed on each of the grass samples collected monthly at the ' two indicator stations (Nos. 106 and 112) and the single control station (No. 309). As shown in Table 3-1, Cs-134 and Cs-137 were the only manmade radionuclides found.
In 1981 and again in 1983 like in 1985, Cs-134 appeared in one sample. The levels were 15 and 17 pCi/kg wet, respectively, in 1981 and 1983 or slightly higher than the 1985 level of 12 pCi/kg wet. The LLO and RL for Cs-134 are 60 and 1000 pCi/kg wet, respectively. Overall the levels- for Cs-137 were found to be about 60% lower than those found during 1984. A plot of the average Cs-137 level over past years is presented in Figure 4-1. It is seen that generally the levels at the control station overshadow those at the indicator stations. The LLD and RL for Cs-137 are 80 and 2000 pCi/kg wet, respectively. The ETS required a LLD not greater than 25 pCi/kg wet for I-131. This limit was exceeded on three occasions as follows: Station 17 21 February 27 March 29 May 35 The RETS require a LL: not greater than 60 pCi/kg wet. At midyear, Station 17 under ETS was replaced by Station 106 under RETS which is a new location; sampling at the old location stopped. In anticipation of the change, sampling commenced at the new location in January. The new location is less shady, has less sandy soil, and is c;oser to the plant. A total of 34 out of the specified 36 samples were collected in 1985. This is a substantial improvement over the 22 out of 36 samples collected during 1984. No sample was available at ETS Station 17 during January and February; however, samples were available in January, April and May at RETS Station 106 curing its phase in period. The ime-ovenent in sample availability may be attriouted to more favorable weatner, advice provided by the CcJnty Extension Agent, the eliminati~on of a less favorable station and a more conscientious effort in the maintenance of the plots. 4.6 River Wa.er Riv-e water is collected at an upstream location (No.170) and at a downstream location (No. 172) using automatic sampl'ing macnines. Small samples are collected at intervals not exceeding a few hours. Surfa.e water thus collected from the river is picked up monthly; quarterly composites are composed of tne month.y ccliections. 17
, . . . . _ - . . ._ _ _ m _ _ _ -
. s A gamma isotopic analysis is made of each monthly collection. As usual, no
~
o manmade radionuclides were detected. < I Tritium analyses are performed on the quarterly composites. As shown in Table 3-1, the tritium level at the indicator station (No. 172).is greater than that at the control station (No. 170) but the difference is not discernable. A comparison of the tritium levels at the two stations over previous years is ' l presented in Figure 4-2.
. A survey was conducted downstream of the plant for at least 50 miles 'on September 24 to identify any users of water from the Altamaha River for drinking purposes. As in all previous surveys, no intakes for drinking water were observed. If river wate? should become used for drinkirig, the RETS requirements for sampling and analyses will be implemented.
4.7 Fish / Clams j GqnvaaTspectral analyses are performed on the edible portion of fish or clam san'les p which are collected semiannually, as available, at the river stations. . Under the ETS, clams were the preferred species while fish is the preferred species under the RETS. Since sufficient cuantities of clams were not available on May 21, fishisamples consisting of largemouth bass and blue i gill were collected. On November 19, largemouth Dass were collected.
. N As shown in Table 3-1, Cs and Cs-137' were the only manmade radionuclides' 1
' detected. Wnile Cs-137 was found in eacn of ?.ne samp'es, Cs-134 was found inn,
= only four of the six samples. In each st::ple for each of; the radionuclides, the radiolocical lael was less than the requirfed LLD. There is no
~
discernable differerce between the avErige values for Cs-137 at the uostream and downstream stations since Lj-Lc is 53.7 pCi/kg and this , is less tnan
- the calculated MDD value of 194 pCi/kg. The levels in these samples are I
within the range of those found in previous years. ,
, 8 As required by the ETS, American Shadyas collected dwing the soring sparning As with all season (on March 5) .in the vicinity of tne discharge structure.
- samples in previous years, no manmade racionuclides wer'e detected. The s.imale 3 CcMections will not be continued under 9 j has been collected for eight years.
. RE TS. . - -
4.8 Sediment
~
1 z The annual collection of sediment twk place on May 21 at the river staticAs. The only manmade radionuclide detected was Cs-137. The radiological leve); we-e 269 and 76.5 pCi/kg dry at Stations 170 ,and 172, respectively. These values are lower than tnose generally found at Mese locations, especiallfat Station 172, the downstream location. ! 4t
't (x s g , Pe; m
~
j '\ p j i N
. 1 i !
C j I
' ,- 6 l8 ^ , ' ;. .
,~
i. j f
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ __.-_-m . _ _ . . - _ -
5.0 CROSSCHECK PROGRAM s Laboratories performing the analyses required by the radiological environmental monitoring program as delineated in Table 2-1 participate in EPA's Environmental Radioactivity Laboratory Intercomparison Studies (Crosscheck) 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 Crosscheck Program by these laboratories. Relevant participation is considered to consisk of those analyses for sample media covered by the EPA Crosscheck Program which are the same as those required by Table 2-1. At the beginning of 1985, the Central Laboratory replaced HNP in conducting the gross
, beta analysis of air filters; all other relevant media / analysis combinations
'were conducted by Teledyne. Because of the time lag involved in obtaining
' *results from the EPA and the subsequent reporting of these results by the
.. contract laboratories, not all of the 1985 results were available. The results reported herein also include the 1984 results which were not available last year.
Any results 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 I were investigated to cetermine 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 collection date given by the EPA. "Knowr.' refers to the EPA known value 1 one standard deviations, s. " Result" is the average value measured by tne laboratory 1 experimental s. " Resolution" is determined by dividing the known value by its s value. " Ratio" equals the " result" (value de ermined by the labo atory) divici: by the "known" (value determined by EPA). An explanation is p,rovided in the text for any of the comparisons showing " Disagreement". .It shotfd be noted that whenever the EPA known value is zero or the laboratory determined result is a "less than" value, or tne. calc.tlated resoluti.;n value
. is less'than 3, a comparison by tne NRC criteria cannot be made.
Tne results of the grcss beta and Cs-137 analyses of air filters are given in Table 5-1. Listed in Table 5-2 are the results of the I-131 and gamma analyses of milk samples. Table 5-3 presents the results of the gamma and
< tritium analyses of water. No comparisons show disacreement.
t e 4 19
a si . i ,
.-)
TABLE 5-1 CROSSCHECK PROGRAM RESULTS FOR AIR FILTERS , _, pCi/ filter Date Known Result Resolution 'Ratig Gross Beta 11/23/84 52 + 5 44.6 + 1.4 10.4 .86 3/29/85 3675 34 T 1 7.2 .94 8/30/85 4435 4910.6 8.8 1.11 Cs-137 ) i 11/23/84 10 + 5 9+2 2.0 .90 3/29/85 6T5 670 1.2 1.00 < 8/30/85 835 1011 1.6 1.25 e k } - . -j l l . 1 4 e ( l 20 i . -..
, TABLE 5-2 CROSSCHECK PROGRAM RESULTS FOR MILK SAMPLES pCi/l Date Known Result Resolution Ratio I-131 r
. 10/26/84 42 + 6 34 + 3 7.0 0.81 3/01/85 9 7 0.9 8T1 10 0.89 6/28/85 1116 911 1.8 0.82 Cs-137 10/26/84 32 + 5 32 + 4 6.4 1.00 6/28/84 11 T 5 11 7 2.6 2.2 1.00 l
e i i l 21
TABLE 5-3 i CROSSCHECK PROGRAM RESULTS FOR WATER SAMPLES pCi/l
, Late Known Result Resolution Ratio Cr-51 2/8/85 48 + 5 <57 9.6 6/7/85 44 T 5 <53.3 8.8 10/4/85 2115 <63 4.2 Co-60 2/8/85 20 + 5 19 + 2 4 0.95 6/7/85 1475 15.7 T 1.15 2.8 1.12 10/4/85 2015 17.733.21 4 0.89 Zn-65 2/8/85 55 + 5 57 + 2 11 1.04 6/7/85 47 I 5 48 T 2.51 9.4 1.02 10/4/85 1935 25.312.51 3.8 1.33 f Ru-106 2/8/85 25 + 5 <40 5 6/7/85 62 7 5 53.7 + 3.21 12.4 0.87 10/4/85 2015 <37 4 Cs-134 2/8/85 35 + 5 37 + 4 7 1.06 6/7/85 35 7 5 33 7 4.36 7 0.94 10/4/85 2015 1833.05 4 0.90 .
Cs-137 2/8/85 25 + 5 31 + 2 5 1.24 6/7/85 20 7 5 23.3 7 2.08 4 1.17 10/4/85 2015 22.311.15 4 1.17 H-3 10/12/84 2810 + 356 2750 + 177 7.9 0.98 12/14/84 3182 T 360 3523 7 289 8.8 1.11 2/02/85 3796 7 366 3933 7 58 10.4 1.04 4/12/85 35593364 33671321 9.8 0.95 6/14/85 2416 + 351 2367 + 115 6.9 0.98 8/16/85 4480 7 448 4433 T 152 10 0.99 ( 10/11/95 19741345 21331208 5.7 1.08 22
ATTACHMENT 1
, ) Criteria for Comparing Analytical Measurements This attachment provides criteria for comparing results of capability tests and verification measurements. The criteria are based on an empirical relationship which combines 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 aboratory'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 the Reference Laboratory, unless such rounding will result in a narrowed category of acceptance. The acceptance category 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" Agreement "B"
=: 3 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 5:3 and =:4. 0.4 - 2.5 0.3 - 3.0 No Comparison ,. 2:4 and <=8 0.5 - 2.0 0.4 - 2.5 0.3 - 3.0 2:8 and = 16 0.6 - 1.67 0.5 - 2.0 0.4 - 2.5 E:16 and <:51 0.75 - 1.33 0.6 - 1.67 0.5 - 2.0 2:51 and = 200 0.80 - 1.25 0.75 - 1.33 0.6 - 1.67 2:200 0.85 - 1.18 0.80 - 1.25 0.75 - 1.33 "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 nuclice. 23
6.0 CONCLUSION
S
' This report has shown the licensee's conformance 4ith Section 3.2 portions of the ETS during the first half of the year and to Section 3/4.16 of the RETS during the latter half of 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.
No measurable radiological impact upon the environment as a consequence of
, 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. we o= S e e e6 6G-
--e e
O we S * +0 4e *
~
i _ r l
- l l
t l 24 l l
./ * "*
\ l '
J ?$1 ' .:.
, y .
g ( t. ic:
} ".s; g(
'\ '
t$g[ 3' mw N?fs ', e s.
.,.E T= Q Q.c
.. s N k); .'-
.' ~
.\
1 )) , , ( . g 1n^ s ! n. s - gs a . [ ;!/ - - E- -\\, I({% . o . :. . / s
~
. .'.N
.p= hh ) '
k~ s
\
-'=-% .:--' n ~ TD t , -
f",P/ N eir ~li D~J. /-tr h.
) / t
'Nwr vtr 5
- t:- )9,,""
9. it it p.. Lj1 .
.e
..n. O '.5 3 s.
. u. ~2 'l -
1"'
, g:k . .'
P
'-= '
___. .~ Q . .? . * . .
. : . ~il. y . - .
l { t .g
- A,b:C op -- 7 _.
( L-I.$ 3 r. '
, ' 3, j 1 l
r;'.;;;'o , 'ss Nu ' : f '
.s n>
, *..g;..
.N, -
.thR
. C ,. .
'. s. ' , ! & *g. q' .:
- f. .
*a >IU.*/'-
t* Y '-;
\'
/
\
5 (. ., . . f [};; [
'.. _/ _ ,
-J. .
i - - l , y
.. >. , . .. .. /
' * , 4 , .
,\ ._. : /==,
+, .' i
'y . ' ... .
7 ,
/ j I .= " *,.* ':
\\ .
' ^ '
M w 'f,,
** 'u . , P* . %., y.~ '. -
l \' - p ;
.f w* ;,99=--
f \ Sl=,===2.; , , ,. (% lf'- ' "' j~-
. c. ,a f _.I_._ i u . . '. ,
,~W],",(
. .// %
j a,] l ,j
-{ l H ATCH ODCM. R EV 1 5/11:84
( Geo gia Power k M EDWIN 1. H ATCH NUCLEAR PLANT RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRO *."'- TAL SAMPLifiG LOCATI0t :- (SITE PERIPHE:.y) FIGURE 2-1 new l
. s e~ ~
, . ..J*.... . .. .,. s . ..
(* m ii ri. ..
' ~
f a;.
. e -;. ***'-*
\.
l'~
- ,. a
- y. .',, .:;. ~-
y . [. 8 , .- I
'%.,, ." ,,... . g. . . * .t
* *~
,.i
.e
.ps
? .g . .
g- *f
, . ~ *
. e , ,
es *., . .
, .s .. f ..s s .J,'."3*'"** *q ,. g.*.'. .ar
**;. g .* .; ,
.J* ., a ,
j.
., ,- . . ML ,
.,s- f,
':.[ '
si: e
* * . :. . , . . . .,? * '* s;
.: ~.,'.. *
. . ..= . ..
T*., * *. .
*c.!. .*," o , ...
**.s
. t% e. ..!
.-"- ~==-
,.. ;;i r -
. . ,,., g *)
.. r : . ..,
. .u-:-
. ~ .
a. i e.' , @ '_ , -C
; s 5
. , .P , .... -
**.:.,...,,e,, os < .
N.*'. .
'~ : .
e,;; g
. ,(
.. .. . , is n. .
. 5 , .. ,.
~,s..
(
- f. -s. .e , -- ".
.x.....
. .%I y' .: .o o
s .y, . '
,- m ,. s
- l ~
.. . .. t .l . .
- - ,io - h. . . .
~
(, , r.
. . , ' ' ...g.-. ..
.T 3 ,,
j, . "- . '
~
\ .-
~
n * '*. ***
. : . ~.
~
. ~
.."t.". .* '-. . ') '** 'y.
.!, 'N, ., ;
%.x.' .~.... % . . ....
c
.- a. -
., u.3.. .< w . m..c . c .;, ..
. . n .
.: . t 4 :1 i
.u- - . 43 .
I . - . .*. . . - - -
..e .r .. . .(.3 '1.. . .
; . .i) , * . ,. e
. .g .
I.
,V - -
. m. .. ; p .t
..t i ,f.?
. s! .*
.e .*L
. . ~ ,
.,**-/....,._,4..,.
s
. - t d'~/,.i= $ .
m.,..*
\.s
.* sg- 4. . - -
a- - - , s,
.A ;-;.-* t ~ + - q -.;
. . .w-. . .
,; .., y.y ., .,9
* "l '
p.5 %_. *4'~.=3% .=2 "Z .'MiieB <.%* 1L 2
. :. - w. 3x n
.i ,
s., - c :- m y u . e . w, >]-- -. Lo u
. y , s
. . : . ~2% -
. 0, .. _ .
..$r ...
m /
< ,.- Y.
%- a 9
.~ . . . .. , .
s.; - :. . * -
..- .1. , -
r'....
- h. . . .. . . . ~.,-
.-/.
i %.* . , m .L. W.. .
..c-
./
=
* . * ' . M
. ] ,
y -*
,p g*
. . [= v u
~
HATCH ODCM, REV 1 5/11/84 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMEr.TAL SAMPLING C g cowini.sArCs LOCATION W P (BEYOND Georgia Power h NUCLEAR PLANr SITE VIC!NITY) FIGURE 2-2 (SHEET T OF 3) um ..: . wu..
.... -~ . . w. .-.-
a.:. .; <, y,., . . ..;;:n .;. . . . . --. . . - - .
... . . . .._4.;.:;;...g..e ~2.vy. . . .. u . s p. . a.: .. . . .
( . . . . i t . -n- . 1. . I. ,. a. +_..- -
-: 7' %6- 5 ':.^ gY-43. '
3 . - . - -
,; % , y<ce k. 4."';:1-.3._u.y=2'?
, ( (,y. ,
m .A:; a g. - 5 a e,..
- a. .
... ~.... / . ,. .
. . ,..g .~A- ... ..
- - t. j - .
/
- q. . E.
te y
. n a .
.;3.-f :. -.s .s =--= .fr% - -. .3
.s
., a.7 8-
---t, x-S.g *I %.s., ...fe . * ,
s S .* 7' .
~
' r.
l ..
. . ~ ~ . ay ., . , .
o.. *
- t-- - -
0 ', ! .;,,.*, (, . f( ' '... , M r---i . '*i, ' * "
; s.
',*I
/ .,4
*" g.p_ g g***
;/' SJ.p.". s.:e. _^.
.,.c.
=.
a o N.N. L
'h...,,r--. I : , s.- g '. / ' W, Q ,4,j.oL 1
.., /\
*t -C
-z. * . t.,1,.a, .. . L. *
.,. esQ. s I. * ,
~9
.j .s . . . .
u.
*;,,-* , .I .
b *
.?y
- 4. 4.
y > . . . -, .,, ! p.
*I .
., , " ." e1 , .. . s. .
' . .. ~.
+ t' g........... .
,-: r- .
. i ,. ~ s,"-M.-oy< =- .
. e
- i. . ;. . ' e :- :. .---.:- , . f . .-.- . . .
W
- h. * * .
- c. . .
( . **.a l,". .
~~
- e. .
4 .yo;... se:
....l...,.
.,)K -i. .* , .~..t..... .-,. *
.e yf.*fs,,,,,,,,,
~
. :=3.
i
*s
---. 7 , 7 .
,,,,,,,.p,,,,, - -
s
+
. i. s -
., T.'"".
*3 .==* .
*3 .
a ..
"... .s, O.s-s ,,, p r -
( I. ;... . . 7..
- r. -. ... .
. f. .
. ..== . * , , , ,., . , , ,
,: n -- --4 . .. a. - -
-, . ..._, s ,h.
. /,: ,., .e . .
".c. , . .
- .X i ... , ,
--T -";?$y.
.,, . . _ l
,2 .}_-f, ,, - -
, ' ., ,e :,=# ./ .
.- ~ - =-~--- .=~ ' .*. . * " .c
w*
..t.. ..
t ll%g : . ' a ._
=:. 1, :.. . .. . ..,.
.s.:...
. L.p SW , s ..
. .r. 2. .
.r ...
- g. .
- .. w ..,..,r.
4,s .,,. .D.
.e
~ .
. . s . 22c- '. e* f -__ -* *. p..m - - -
. - .s... . .
s.. r .- gN.'cu, w,* .. 4.r..,.....
- r. . . . . g. . . .: c.. . .'N... ~ . . .
*8. >L .
.m
..,- . . /'_ w.
.. .. . .[. . .. = , - .. .. .
..*..A.,.. ,% .., ,,w - . .,. .
.;g.% s.x.i .-
. g. 4. ./ ,
.~ . ... o .
.....e. .
c
'~..3
- s. ,.a n'..
.. .- .. ..i e.
e,3M. .c y
- r
., a.w.s..
A. .
..N.,.. , .
8.*
.. . ...\ .. r.., . .........a
.p..,...
. . . .x. . , . .. ..
. . .. .. .s.. .
.n.. - . .
* ,r
.6.- .. *
. . ... /. ..., . . . . -.
. . . . . . o. ,....
.t. . ..
r..~ . . . .. :.
.2.. * .
- 3. ~.: ..
- 1
, ,..p*..e.;,
,n ;. ,
.... . . ; .. . . . SSW . *7 .
2.... t
. .s. ., e . :...
. . ., -t,.-. .
. .v . . ... .. -
. . ,-6,. '
. .i.
..s .. "*. .
- t. (f . . #.-
. s s- l: .e. .4. g r , . . ,
HATCH ODCM. REV 1 5/11/84 ( Georgia Powerkh EDWIN 1. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT RADIOLOG.: CAL ENVIR0iiMENTAL SAMPLING LOCAT.*0N MAP (BEYOND SITE VICINITY)
. FIGURE 2-2 (SHEET I 0F 3) un.o . . .... ;p.
.. n:. >.g.c w.- ,,. .. .;;c....ryjy.
n.
. n. .. 2... . .. . ..s .. . r: p ,~ .'s. .w.. ..a >e u .. . .y .
.w.-e s M,..i.. ,.i. ... . . . ;- .. . : n- - . - . . : . . . c., ::.. .-. .y .&.y.hw..'2.,-3?:a-.r.R.9. mAa.w. .;
34 --. ....:. .. .. .
o w ..
'~- -* . .
{,
~.* "i ' . . *
\
i 20, . ,. e. n . -. ;;;.y;;.' 6
.v ::: .-
1 . .; v. . 4 c-
....... .: '.\. <--'*-
.s;:. .
.. . . l p,.
, . . . ". , . , , . .s. ~- . .e
. .. ...e . p- * .
- ~
. s. ...-
,'g . .
, ,t s
, j . ' ' .,>Q
;g ene 'f.
* .. n. .
g..
,,,/,
A:'
.' m , . .. ,
. e ' *,
. -.s
. s
,p A%[
- ~i.i
,\
.- . . . 'Ay,, ::+(~
)'
g ,*h
'i% '. Q .; . 5-s
.t .< -
./ ,;%
e . g e *-
~-. ""- .s . p. ;
;: r ,.,., .
';..* }
* .s -
sY . f ' " . *?t ;. .- 3 .. 5
.1 L...'.
.-- s .. .....m*
'l:-
< N . -
- u. :.
. - 6.
y- ;
~
g ,..;;,
.. ,i ; . . + - g.. --i--
- s. .-i- @ 7.g^. \ y i.T'.: -
% eo-r .' y:,.
T- . ll .- L
.\
2 w ;,~ '" -
, /. -
- y
, *k,.
v s., i
% ., ,"%';.[~ ,[i imk ;,::-."6 I . , *;. --, ' . : .
. ~ %
.,. w.. \ 'g 8 '
i t - M .
, e
- l. .,_ . ...
wum
+.v.,
u s. .. :r.,4' .
/
;- . L.gg= - i
(
= .j .:3
. n W.-3 . .5: 4.
. 6 1 T ,.7.~i....-
u .> . .. ... t % R. M
,4.l e
. gn:s s
- 9. .-
.u
.q
- i. .;..--
q
, . , . . . . . . i..
o .
.( .
s/. . . . ,,c v.> .
=
u.
.--<, ~. w n.
/
, ; '~ay ! .
% 7. 7.j, j'i .-..c s W 'x%. .s. -f .
. .s. .
e . ,co..
..w,.*.v.
, s%. v. . . . .-
., t. , --:m. .. .
., 3- .a
)
.g
- y , . --;-
.J.a.~ - ::,, a . - - - . "
- g . '.
. s. ...
.. .a .
.. :g. y
> .t :en G .. ?? . '._ . .i._~--;.~ .-
% J '".a R. . ., ... -
e . l \ . .. n.5={ '..
- . i. g, ~.r-i-. ,--w. .-:;
1
?: -
r
- s. 7.:--
. . i .~ .
== ;. ' " .:.r
*, \ --- %l*- ..n.- ;y , . y'
. r '.....a
.* <- yS .
+.A, ~ a
- .....u. %. *...' ,
-4;> , 'T110t' .j.' : $ ):.
~ . .
, % ,r: 1. ,, A,,
.:. s x ...-
. s... ,. ?
', . . . . .. ,m. . * -
.,7..
s* -
~ ~:-
-+..
~~~ :~ .. eg :v. -.
uy_., . .
... ,:-:- n- =
. . .i-"
.s . ,_:., - .
.. .v..
i -
.- -.- .*f/J' .,
...'...Ai.-
2 o ... .:.. ,., .. :.n . - s.
.' .s . ..n .
L~...]=%
..' W .; q-j< .
0 L '.' . .' . , .: (;, ...: f,3.: .
,w g t ., . .
e
.. . + . ..,-. .
.~- c;.- . , -
...0 1
. ~ .
N -
< -. .:.... - .- ,p.
- I H ATCH ODCM. RrV 1 5/11/84
( Georgia Power s-s m ui. HATCH suctriartear RADIOLOGICAL ENVIR0t' MENTAL SAMPLING LOCATION MAP (BEYCND SIT: VICINITY) r FIGURE 2-2 (SHEET 3 0F 3) 3605-0
, ~. j'L,,, .
. "' E.* I' *
- . . ..:. .. w . ;.L.k. g. ..:s w-.-------~. . .....,..l., :.
m'-~._q - n. s.' ~ ' . . . .- .j'fa. v~ r: + . < . " '~.. ~ e- . . .~.----*a -.---
e i . . 1.1 - Cs-137 in Grass Samples t4 1 O.9 - , 0.8 -
\
0.7 - On .
.c%
$3D 0.6 -
i DR x3 - O 0.5 - N.-. c oo.s.v 4 0.4 - O.3 - \ N - 0.2 t -
/- \\
0.1 4
M l
a " j 0 - - 1 , i i i 78 79 80 81 ! 82 83 84 85
~
Year' O Control + Indicator , Figure 4-1 - 1 t
_s.N - - Tritium in River Water . 2 Comparison to Previous Years l 420 - , 400 - 380 - 360 - t 340 - E 320 - 3 , .-
'E ! 300 -
! A[ i i O 280 - ' _ 5 260 - U j o. 240 - 220 - , ) 200 -
- 180 -
s l l 160 + l 140 - 120 i , , l , , , , , , , , ! P-Op 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 82 i 81 83 84 85
. Year O Stat 170 '+ Stat ~ 172
. Figure 4-2'-
e s
m m mo e m sur >/2yg7
. = N.mo. o e- mem m.m.e,,
A0encF/96en : in,,,,,, w
- 1. b h( .
2.
- a. SU M /94T' 4.
b b A % L v49 k qu N F5e
%4 Note and Retum For CIserenee pqer Co mpersegen As W For Correcuen propero Reely Circulate For Your Infesrassen See tse Demment investisoto Signatuse e:: ^1 Justig MAGARMS
'?b-A&(e o c, bd d !
h- ' a T> o a .
%' y DO NOT use this form as a RECORD of approvels, concurrences, an=paanan steerences, and similar access FR0ti:(Name, org, symbol, fer 1/90st)
Room No.-88ds.
/ L Tyy f
.au i
. u se.po.: vene.4rt-529/412 [ OPTIONAL 708100 41 (Rev. 7-76)
M $ .gg m re i l l l l i 1 _ . _ _ _ _ - . . - _ - . . - . - - - . - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - ~ ~ ' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ^ ~ ~ ' ~ ~}}