Text

Aerial Radiological Survey of Area Surrounding E Hatch Nuclear Plant, Date of Survey Mar 1977
	ML20236N834
Person / Time
Site:	Hatch
Issue date:	11/30/1978
From:	Stobie G, Stuart T; EG&G, INC.
To:	; NRC
Shared Package
ML20236N805	List: IA-98-219, Final Response to FOIA Request for Documents.App a Records Encl & Being Made Available in PDR; ML20236N802; ML20236N834; ML20236N838;
References
	FOIA-98-219 EGG-1183-1726, NUDOCS 9807150276
	Download: ML20236N834 (16)
	v • d • e

-

EGG-1183-1726 v

hEGaG Energy Measurements Group

\

I Orr O D. y 7. . . 1 .

m.. ..

. gn ,. ..W, M <.y.9.

92. p.w%. F#,. .es ,2m u 3 -

di- ru su L@ .. e Eqe . ~ e %a e s w;u :w n%p w&:nyy -

qh Airial REsasu

[gg weg;g'riniSystems' b.

~ '^p*khi!y iM dig.0i

p. .

1, w: y; m g}hi.(',$y4??,., e sN g av ne ww>.wa 4

. m; ..

_ -- # cg %...e;w..sg t9a fIS h ' '

.?-s :

%,. a!a}d}E X.,,. R I A1 -. ,

'O .

.c a. .

a HE ib EA S .

ett[g[phh5k{ ig .. , I. ._CA.,..leS. w e t.gey s M W

ER .,

T,~C. , H.wnW E J W M./.MWlg

c. e M pP

h-

^

.r> .A,,,.

dn %n h ws p fMy cq

-:;n;p.n. m.u

hyl)A. ..; . I"y w'%

PL:AN.. G1

g;q, .sTF,Ww 9

&. ~e maa.g q.qjem.

iT,

-. 2 n..

$hE?$ f ,

v. .? g4 pk n,, ..

~ e sk,f s j .

fgMW ;,.m .. wen ., .M V . .g4 . . . . ' 3;i. $ ^/ q.

MR

,' d"" %- T T O F ; SDxRVE , ^ MARC l

.i $Pg

0. ~

F^

19773:#n%

ffi . p ,

[k y414 e

, )

' g

i. }

y

.sen

3. ,

n ..- .

y'A ,% .t 4 mi_ T$

[947,4I I M

h. i_$.m. - m .. -

. . _ . _ %.k}5s 3'. sp 9807150276 980706 - ' f M,.-

PDR FOIA # g 4 %' 44y %.E4j_g.;g d 3 Q;

'~' -

,Y 9 8,- 2 1 9 PDR

' - ' ^ - '

s . -- BLOn C K E. g /7

soa-1183-172s 4

$$ES Energy Measurements Group

&r & & 't w w f

,T-a&vn "t ft wce ,r ga

V M"' %wA m '"i* A m.

ww:. ,>.a,;,e m,,;s._ .

RW c:W: p . - m Nan .mN a . wd$h h L ~9. Shih2 mem*pey +s w =. :

S, N[W'ITNdNh Jwan hy[ "

M >*lhhhh!b 2 7 5!H W W h@$n4958E'6AN*AERl*N,. Di~

1 A.~MlSU,s.V.EY:O.F(TH.

R

.ns y 4 n aa 4 .:..

Whp REA!n.. SU. .. .. DNDINGhTHEC&22,i/TM6. rg h$hk sw E

" $ N $ hhf h jk T c H g(e n u g Q

m ynyy Qjy -

yQ"

- Q'yyy#qlfffQ}Q y9 Wrge ';gg q

e. g % g-gyd%.

.b.-<. .:n p r

Gk;pp- 7y V "

E G1 * %,.g. eg,g . g.c..a@g.

9# 4 w ~t.N,..@q.

.47 i:Q

& %p,<

q

% n, ra vn rp;.

l

@h&, yp3 u t ;~K Q>. m.s g y mW th y

b fhfh knv , e>W t% . . . 4

?lE i

e' b @%diMjD_ATESOFJ .RVE ,:

g, ARC. 6#

pNy:']g.gg ;W i ,

1,9,77.g&@, .

gy t?. d

Y

%N p? <

y

{Db P y

$ '~p jh? ' . :

r ER $976 4 0; '

3.* #

-W 9.h.iY y;r e.y h$f~%% . '- ~

,c mg% .s .;g_ wk

. - _ ._ :y -

n -

h.p3.

m aa . ,a 'f, I i <g k,., y,,>,,.G.w

. k[^ . . : .3+ ,f 9807150276 980706 0~

4 L

< PDR FOIA $ - e;, - t yg h i'L M.,f,%'

1 f l ' ?a,.

9 '

's- , BLOCKE,Y98,-219

_ __ g __ PDR - ~ - - '

/7

.l 9

i NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government. Neither the United States, nor the United States Department of Energy, nor any of their employees, nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights.

e

yhgggg EGG-1183-1726 November 1978 AN AERIAL RADIOLOGICAL SURVEY OF THE AREA SURROUNDING THE EDWIN I. HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT BAXLEY, GEORGIA l

DATE OF SURVEY: MARCH 1977 l

L. K. Hilton Project Scientist APPROVED FOR PUBLICATION t Y LD

' T. P. Stuart, Manager Remote Sensing Sciences Department >

This Document is UNCLASSIFIED

/, . i*8 s G. P. Stobie Classification Officer l

This work was performed by EG&G for the United States Department of Energy, Division of Operational and Environmental Safety, and the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, under Contract No. EY-76-C48-il83.

ABSTRACT An airborne radiological survey of a 2146 km2 area surrounding the Edwin 1. liatch Nuclear Plant was made 28-31 March 1977. Detected radioisotopes, and their associated gamma ray exposure rates, were consistent with that expected from the normal background emitters.

Count rates observed at 152 m altitude are converted to equivalent exposure rates at 1 m above the ground, and are presented in the form of an isopleth map.

Exposure rates measured with small portable instruments and soil sample analysis showed agreement with the l

i airborne data.

iii

e ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Special appreciation is given to L. J. Deal, assistant Director for Field Operations, Division of Operational and Environmental Safety, United States Department of Energy, and B. H. Weiss, Office ofInspection and Enforcement, United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, for their support and encouragement in this program.

iv

b TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE ABSTRACT...................................................... ........ iii A C K NO W L E DG M E N TS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ...... ........... iv TABLE OF CONTENTS . ... . . . .. ..... ... . ...... . .. .. .. ... . v LIST O F I L L U ST R ATI O N S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . V L I ST O F TA B L ES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ... . . .............. v 1.0 I NTRO D U CTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... ................ ......... .... I 2.0 SITELOCATION.......................................................... I 3.0 A E R I A L M E A S U R E M E NTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I 4.0 GROUND BASED MEASUREMENTS. .... ....................................... 1 5.0 DISCUSSION................................................................... I A PPE N DIX A - SITE G EO LOG Y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 REFERENCES.................................................................. I1 D I ST R I B U TI O N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ..... 13 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS FIGURE PAGE I Photograph of the Ed win 1. Hatch Nuclear Plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2 Flight pattern and soil sample locations superimposed on a USGS topographic map of the area surrounding the Edwin 1. Hatch Nuclear Plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......... 3 3 Beechcraft King Air A-100 aircraft containing REDA R system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4 NOVA 840 computer which is heart of R EDAC system . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5 Exposure rate isopleth (from gross count data) superimposed on a USGS topographic map of the arca surrounding the Edwin 1. Hatch Nuclear Plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6 A gamma pulse-height spectrum typical of the natural terrestrial background of the Ed win 1. H atch N uclea r Pla nt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 A-1 Geological isopleth of the area surrounding the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE I Edwin 1. Hatch Soil Sample Data . . . . . . . . ................................. ........ 7 2 Compa rison of Ground Based and Aerial M measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 V

i

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The United States Department of Energy (DOE) maintains an aerial surveillance operatiorr called the Aerial Measuring Systems (AMS),* which is operated for the DOE by EG&G.This continuing nationwide program. started in 1958, involves surveys to monitor radiation levels in and around facilities producing, utilizing. or storing radioactive materials. At the request of the DOE, or other federal and/or state agencies (such as the United States Nuclear Regulatory Con, mission), the AMS is deployed for various aerial survey operations.

The AMS was utilized during the period 28-31 March 1977 to radiometrically survey a 2146 km2 area centered on the Edwin 1. Hatch Nuclear Plant located near Baxley, Georgia.

2.0 SITE LOCATION (cps) per u R/ h. An average cosmic ray contribution of The Edwin 1. Hatch Nuclear Plant, operated by the 3.7 pR/h was then added to produce the total Georgia Power Company, is located in Appling CXPosure ratt County, Georgia, near the south bank of the Altamaha Spectral data were accumulated in a 300 channel River, approximately 113 km inland from the Georgia analyzer aboard the aircraft. A gamma pulse-height coastline. Nearby population centers include Baxley, spectrum typical of the natural terrestrial background 18 km to the south, Hazelhurst, 24 km to the near the Hatch Plant is shown in Fig. 6.

southwest, and Reidsville, 28 km to the northeast.

Other towns within a 40 km radius are Glennville, Lyons, Vidalia, and Lumber City. The site lies approximately 18 km east of the confluence of the 4.0 GROUND BASED Ocmulgee and Oconee Rivers whichjom to form the MEASUREMENTS l

)

Altamaha. Figure I is a photograph of the Plant. Soil samples were collected along selected flight lines, and exposure rate values were measured with an ion {

chamber located I m above the ground at each sampling position. Sampling was done at the same 3.0 AERIAL MEAS'UREMENTS time the aerial survey was conducted. The soil samples were radiometrically analyzed and tabulated for this The aerial data were accumulated at an altitude of 152 report by a team of scientists at EG&G's Santa m above the terrain along lines 46 km long and spaced Barbara Laboratory. Systems and procedures for soil approximately 0.93 km apart (Fig. 2). Fifty such lines sample data are outlined in a separate publication.*

were flown using the AMS Beechcraft King Air A-100 aircraft equipped with 28 Nal(TI) scintillation The ground sampling sites for this survey are shown in detectors and associated instrumentation (Figs. 3 4). Fig. 2. Ten soil samples were taken from each of 2 sites Spectral and gross count data were collected (numbers 1 and 6). The results of the soil sample data simultaneously along these lines. Complete systems analysis are presented in Table 1. lon chamber and procedures are described elsewhere.m readings were taken at all 14 sites.

The gross count data were combined with position Table 2 compares the results of the exposure rates btained from soil analysis, son chamber informa; ion from a microwave ranging system to produce an exposure rate isopleth map of a 2146 km2 measurements 1 m above the sampling area,and AMS a data.

area (Fig. 5). The gross count rate was adjusted for

! altitude variations, non-terrestrial background I (radon, aircraft, and cosmic), and system dead time.

Flights along the Altamaha River were used to 5.0 DISCUSSION determine the non-terrestrial contributions to the observed count rates. Analysis of the radiological data taken over the area surrounding the Edwin 1. Hatch Nuclear Plant ,

The net count rate of terrestrial origin was converted indicated ihat the terrestrial radioisotopes, and to exposure rate (also of terrestrial origin) at I m by associated gamma ray exposure rates, were consistent '

applying a conversion factor of 683 counts per second with natural background emitters.

'Formerly the Aenal Radiological Measunng System (ARMS).

I

i n

e a

s-

'Y?Y$$ _

it g __m

,%w,Wis e-, ._ es,'.:1

%"**4gy w.-= v verw.3p*%;z o s

M'%:y' 9%<f4]*.*j& u w & .-sE - - ~ ~ ^^-'^^ n - - - -

. .._p u. .s[.. _A s .2 <

'6 '

A,,.4 . %,,

t r*'

'v

.~.e,9 #3 p.ti.i .ly*%,gto L,,,,6 w, I; p, .

m , 41 '

~

-- , ~ 9 kh. a$- h_ N=

+ *

. -(

+ . _ . - - - - -

"~~~~ I .~T~ ~ p. , ,

C 1

t c ,.,= % y i

,, ! , . [ :, .

T v-BA 'W. ,

d-==,

W.,

i.

5.. ~ .4 J*M7 ..%

.uwE% , -r 1 h:u_ _ , , - - { !

s t-

-w' 4:

g

a. -

O

. ..n

g_y-3.c. T~Msh g, ,. __ f-

%.' .- - _ jam. ..S W EEP M M } l .

@ UA8'

' l

~~

'a i l 7 l } Tim ~p 5 4 { - O -_j A. ~

Q.

khDh

=_= # 5 m '- -

o#

M )

~ .

- Y LQ VD'[x a % g$ (r.

N . _%al$deem.3 - _ ,.

a,. *

~ ~ .

a;-

' 5'Wi:N& t.o.4 .:-

m s .

. .. .bWiww 7 m.,2*~L .~$ ..

W sy,;a,M .

t + r+ 73,,-J,,5 45% -Q.- -

+-> ,s. =+:.wwx

^

g w- ;'

f~Y&:

1.

s .' * ^2.: 2;- ~

fy <.-?i$' .y ~ ;Jg. ,

.; q;,g G-iy$ p@'- ,- ..

y diRh b- 7, g.t. . : 81

',4( .,.)r,,.d.g:h -

_. + re. ..

' ~ M:.J3

%ii%,, "*W%N.e*. a V,* * '

g.w. ' :i;J

" ' b -' te e" 9;--Ly?!$!W.ii t .

2WG

^

kw j y % % %@

~

p Q

i a

. ..i*1M- . u mah ' '

...=..,y

~

Figure 1. Photograph of the Edwin 1. Hatch Nuclear Plant.

2

k

-. - y 44 . -) %, 's

,' ,' 1 s

]

I, , \

,i / '- . / fa :

s t. 3 s ., ,e-

..-./' !, , .* , , ' , , . .v . 'j .. ' . .\ 2' w =h---'*- '

- -, , p s , ,i- a ,

N K:

, l . / i -

/ ' p p

., r /..

a s

N s / .-

I

-f4 'l

/

i

.s

! P

. y '

'N, / .,,,,s., l s

g ' '

- / <

i

,9 f, \ , * -

e s

. .. N 4

/ s h '

t i

.'I 'h' 1

/ g y 9 -

3 l ,

i.' ..

d -

%... I

,,' ; n

'\

, ~~, '; ,,. /

, . 1 y -

m l

- .* ~

.p

_ ,/ \

-1 e 'F .'

. 1 c.f, ;

.hN

.\ s. n' j .

y _* .., ,,

s t

j. .'!

s

, .q w3si l /

c - -

/ f< ...

t,

, r, j

% /

,/ _ (,

S' ' a

~

j y9[ A V ' -

o -1 .

', )

l O O

\ / a -

\\t[;

(

- -) N,-

n .' ..

\ ; ?

"~ f

&';1 ,. - 2 , ;

.s.: ',

.%, +

p . . wj 4 .-.

- . i

%li \ < .,,o

' I.

., / .x s m.._y s ,,,, .

-y ,

g g .-. - -

\.

/ -

f -

l3,, '

L' Q ,.]

l y~u .. - - . ;- '

s l qQ ., .x ,. 4

, .. .-I \

q ,; i -

/

k q

- - ~ ~ ' 9*s g ; _ _ . _ .

, f

,s

.. f %- m - j ..

t ,

g- %

M4]

2 , ,

JA i

D ; .

ii .. 4

-l

\ \ \ ]%>9

',in.

i l '

[

L.- ., .

\

S,'j

.\

s i %,

I \

g,,'

i

,s . w ude s

..?'- Q w'

, s n '" ^

_17C m ,

g ,', '

' \

\

I 2.5 D n amoamms p' s . -.

's \ V+

g

, i: \ . . *.g. *.

s- ' 4 ', ; ,

,, h , m. ~

, , ' s '

s s

( p.

s Figure 2. Flight pattern and soil sample locations superimposed on a USGS topographic map of the area surrounding the Edwin 1. Hatch Nuclear Plant.

3

l m.

a .

eseee .

b h*z

, 4. ;*

,5~2 _

Figure 3. The Beechcraft King Air A-100 aircraft is operated by a, pilot and navigator. The latter also operate,s the REDAR (Radiation and Environmental Data Acquisition and Recorder) system which is acquiring gamma data from 2810.1 x 10.1 cm Nal(Tl) detectors.

m '

m

,a -

.__?

o s

. q m.

hfti ii khhi Figure 4. The heart of the REDAC (Radiation and Environmental Data Analyzer and Computer) system is a NOVA 840 computer. Sophisticated software routines allow preliminaryisopleths to be prepared in the field. Gamma spectra may be obtained immediately after the aircraft returns from a mission.

1 4

e 1

e

,,,/, , -, ,,,/ , . --S .L

d' *~

h u- \

~ ~ j. ,

, y. s xr

I

,, j

\ 'g .

f 5, ,/ '. *\

f s

t

/ s\

,. , i. i g' . ,

,/ 's W

[ .*. ., .

i. T g& -

/

p' t.. n \

* *M

\ ', i 8 l 7 6.

..?/ % **

,C, ,

'- o

, A

\ .

(

- s,% -

i

/ -

,'i ,. .

/ \

b ID g @ ,

y Jg

l e

e@

\

/- w. , , , .

/

D

, . i h -

c3 g bL ,y-W *g, j h e, ,_

, W

~

c o ,

@ n. c3

' h' , ' ~ -

'p _

~ -

,,, '^ ,C. / # ,G\\N ".

K Y

- r* . -

j

~g - 't -

g .,

._ ,

z _. ,

, 0- . < . . - .. .

.. C, x,1,

C t T

g. ,

Y:, ,.

.' .r. -

, /' ,

u- -V- A .g ,. _ _ . .

,c_/, g. _. *i;< g

. . ,

er.v ., / --

@ 't.~. ^

m

' , 'u

, f.' .. . ... ]. f - -

3 . . ,

s / --

'% ., . As .

/ '*'

@ =\g -

', ' %g-T. ,,.,-

7 9 I c vL d , s

[.{

t;

'\

L.

S Cy?

E ,.h ' '

, r N- g s

,/

\

ce=, =m x.-

.'\

s u !w N , ,e * *e mius a's"ygs*'

,c, p-- g i i i i i i \

2 c" k%

I I I I ,

~.h i n .I E

.euo m. \ ;

',. u

( ,/)'

\ \ ' '

_ 's h.s 4... 'O=W'""

+. -

g

(.s..

~

.( '

I Figure 5. Exposure rate isopleth (from gross count data) superimposed on a USGS topographic map of the area surrounding the Edwin 1. Hatch Nuclear Plant.

5

g,y - - -

AIRCRAFT ALTITUDE .

500 FEET y+.8- $r "

JJC l NE J

Wv Zm wy "

Z. 8 x 3 +.6 -

IJ V --) ., ..

1 E$N W (/) +.9- '

L &

E r Z '

N

Q . l .

H O ~

1 m Z m m cu

e

-) y+.2- A ,

a y m -

O m- I m - J Ve~ .

i m i

j I '-

+.0

+.0 +.5 1.9 1.5 2.0 2.5 9.0 ENERGY CMEV)

Figure 6. A gamma pulse-height spectrum typical of the natural terrestrial background of the Edwin 1. Hatch Nuclear Plant.

6

e Table 1. Edwin I. Hatch Soil Sample Data Net ppm Net ppm l 23s U 228 U Sample % (Calculated (Calculated Net ppm Net pCi/g Net pCi/g No, Moisture from 2HBI) from 2""'Pa) 232Th H'Cs #K l- l 2.2 2.110.2 <5 7.010.5 0.1920.01 0.1920.08 1 2'" 3.9 1.820.2 <5 6.021.0 0.1920.01 0.2 10.1 l- 3'" 4.5 1.720.2 <5 5.521.0 0.1710.01 0 l

I- 4'" 4.6 2.220.2 <5 7.00.5 0.2020.01 0.3720.09 l 5'" 4.7 1.310.2 <5 4.520.5 0.1410.02 0 1- 6'" 5.0 1.710.3 <5 6.021.0 0.1920.01 0 l- 7 2.5 2.00.2 <5 6.320.4 0.1820.01 0.6 20.1 l- 8 4.0 1.510.5 <5 5.020.5 0.1720.01 0 l9 3.7 1.020.1 <5 2.510.3 0.20 0.01 0 1-10 2.5 2.210.2 <5 9.021.0 0.3110.01 0.4420.08 6- I 7.4 1.710.9 <5 6.022.0 1.5 10.5 0 l 6- 2'" 6.7 1.520.2 <5 5.0t 1.0 0.3520.02 1.4 20.2 6- 3' " 6.9 1.910.2 0 7.021.0 0.1320.01 1.9 20.2 ,

6- 4'" 6.8 1.710.2 3.021 6.620.5 0.1510.01 2.1 10.2 1 6- 5'" 5.8 1.310.2 <5 5.021.0 0.0810.01 1.2 20.2 6- 6'" 5.5 1.7t0.2 2.521 6.0t0.5 0 1.9 20.2 I 6- 7 25.0 2.320.4 6.012 8.021.0 0.6 10.2 3.0 t1.0 6- 8 3.7 1.820.2 2.522 7.60.4 0.0320.01 1.2 20.2 l

6- 9 7.1 2.110.1 <5 {

l 7.020.5 0.9410.04 2.3 10.2 6-10 7.1 2.30.2 <$ 6.220.4 0.8420.03 2.6 20.2 NOTE:

uh Subsurface profiir sample.

Table 2. Comparison of Ground Based and Aerial Measurements Ground Survey Gamma Exposure Rate A'fI*I (uR/h) S"" 'I Gamma Soil Soil Exposure Site Moisture Ion Analysis Mates Number % Chamber'" Estimate'$ (uR/hy

1 3.0 8.4 6.7 6- 8 2 'S 8.4 0' 6- 8 3 (* 9.3 'S 6- 8 4

11.1

8-10 5

7.5 '"

6- 8 6 10.1 8.9 7.6 6- 8 7

9.3

6- 8 8 o' 8.4 o' 6- 8 9

7.5

6- 8 i

l 10 <* 8.9

6- 8 11

8.9

6- 8 12 G' o' 7.1 4- 6 13

8.9

6- 8 14 o' 14.2 o' 8-10 l

NOTES:

y n' Reuter Stokes Afodel RSS-ill. Serial No. RSH.

o includes cosmic raw conersbunon of 3.1 pRlh.

& No sod samples taken at thu sur.

7

APPENDIX A SITE GEOLOGY The Georgia coastal terraces in the reactor site region The Edwin 1. Hatch Nuclear Plant site is situated in the coastal terrace province of the Georgia coastal plain? are composed of Quaternary and Tertiary sands and This plain is the local expression of a much larger gravels? These marine deposits were derived from the coastal plain encompassing most of the eastern Georgia uplands during higher stands of sea level in seaboard states. The plain was formed on the sea floor the Pleistocene, and deposited on the sea floor. The during higher stands of the sea in the Pleistocene. As lithology of these sands reflects a parentage traceable such, it is a gently seaward sloping, almost featureless, to the crystalline rocks underlying the Piedmont plain. This plain has undergone dissection by streams province of Georgia and neighboring states.

since it was laid bare after the Pleistocene seas The coastal deposits of Georgia represent retreated to their present level. Erosion has only mildly accumulations of land derived sediment formed altered the anpearance of the land surface due to the during interglacial stages of the Pleistocene. These shortness of time this area has been exposed. Several deposits may be correlated with specific shoreline levels of marine terraces are present. These correspond stand which decrease in elevation with decreasing age.

to the individual interglacial periods during which Thus, the Brandywine Formation, oldest of the terrace each one was formed. in most places, rivers and deposits, accumulated during a time when the sea streams have not yet messed enough to remove the last stood 270 fe'et above its present level. Accordingly it remnants of the uppermost terraces from drainage outcrops further west. Successively younger terrace divides and ridges. Hence, the tops of ridges and deposits outcrop further and further east and at disides are flat or gently undulating, representing the progressively lower elevations. These younger as yet unaltered sea floors as they were laid down. deposits have, therefore, been derived from older, Drainage is fairly well integrated over the entire previously existing marine terraces, and are composed region, though 25% of the land surface is swamp. of material reworked during later interglacial stages.

These swamps generally occur in small shallow upland Due to continued reworking,'errace deposits younger depressions and on river floodplains. Many of the than the Sunderland Formation resemble each other Altamaha tributaries discharge into floodplain closely in lithology.

swamps, never reaching the Altamaha channel proper. g g, g ,g g ,

Indications are that the water table remains fairly close .

broad synclinal depression which is centered off the to the surface except in regions of high ground s uthern coast of Georgia. Regional dip is coastward immediately adjacent to major drainage, and is less than 1. Smce the beds are close to The average elevation of the region is 250 feet above horizontal, the outcrop pattern is closely related to the mean sea level. Maximum elevation is slightly above drainage pattern which generally trends northwest-300 feet, and occurs south of Vidalia.in the northern southeast.

section of the survey region. .

A geologicalisopleth of the area is shown in Fig. A-1.

l 8

.6

~

x ; c, . . '. . . * !*

G:Qa$ ALLUVIUM & TERRACE DEPOSITS ~: . . - f:l '. n%. eQ h /, , -

a m, 1 m + Op + PENHOLLOWAY Fm.

4 g

.... .flf. f /~

z . . .**.. ..

, i E ,,'Oh

WICOMICO Fm.

i ,' /

4 *- ~ - * ,

. *[. *

I : ** '

E

~ 's ~ t, . .*,. /. . *. * .* :

'fii'. t 3 ...'. b s. ..; .SUNDERLAND Fm. :**.. ..* .

O ' /o/,f,4 o'

.. ,. ~...* * .'..

s .

/ ,1,,,

;.p.a.

10c: . .}'l. COHARI Fm. g

- ,!.,,s

.... .: g *.,;:<; *

, . . \

r ,1 .i,o *

~ E 4 r 'e,ir.oQb'!,s o BRANDYWINE Fm. **L **.e" .. ~

N N

M n- ..*.*.*.:.

6.:'

Mh HAWTHORN Fm. *[.,, Sf f g

s.

v

.. ... \ . ..

u.

s, .....

+.*, .l .q Q ., .

m . . ... ..f.u*. .:.*.

...:.p<

, , , , , 1 x-no y. . .. . ., , . . . .,f, . ..... :

~ ,

.n. . . .

u N ~ K ~' -

.". :. -lg . . ::. .*. ::. . *::' . : . .; :: . 4

?'W ~

y

. !sm ~ ' v . .NS:h_ : y ce; u :., y.g.. -, .. . ,

[ +

,s

-} , ~ .

e.

4 1

09 ,4 ';

n +.

r" + * ,

Y t I ,1

' ! t. pt ; #

l' I ,1 I I ,1 , l 'pil,1,*r

I $

I J S

'I t

/

~

s '"

r l'l'

,1,,o,l' li p l ,1 i

1 1 leI'p oIl ,g1 g oD, * !

,eot,,1, I g; , . . -:.Y.*.. 4. . . ; R.y. . -. .. . . . , , - - -

\

t ,1 g

.. e * * ;. ;;l.Q.; :;. .. ;p;* / *

'o ,,s,'o,r,'s,I r. ' .'f!b

:i*.,'?tlg:: :-.".SU'.. .$'*l: ' *; * *E * **

I * '

I oo o'a ',t',* -: '- ** -a

! ,s' ol,e o t e'. : :'. . ~ . - ; ; :W.* ' . .= . . '..L*

n;::y.'.::i.,'.f.: v?. . . :.f::?.(.,'^.t

'. 'g ,,o o

. Y.i. T. : ' ... ; * '.* . .:. .

.: '!. -} * -* , *

. . .

e :r.l:

y G..e .. . . . .. ;.?.%.*f: '.

s ', r , . ;.

.:4. *. ,'Q' ' '.::'s;t :t: . *:v':: -

?. L e

.'? ". -. ~.K.:.* : * . t . ', . . ":

" . . ::;}:. :'::: ..... .: ":::: C:l yi:.it::l b.'.'.W o

t/s ...*E.. ,

,s!

.y-. ~

.~

'* n tp..T..: ;y... <4.

. ; :n . . . ,

d. :t.'.

,,..':-l:i lii.. ' :':.Q,':j.'N:.5.

, . . h:, * :. l.y .%;.4::lll. . . . . . :r.: ;;W::*. *. :::?.'. %..:::i.'

t- . , . .. ' t.st:::: . -

l;:

. . :. ::. ;ty:.. .. .

.:.~;-

..;. ..?;. :.*:.. m..sA:... . . .: . ..?::

. : .ll. ;;: ::.:.

e~ . . .\ .s

~ M h '. ^ '

c

. 3,

'Oc:'.v:.s: A -~%w:. :;,. ... ;

M:9.w%p.;.t:w<'. . :. #::,.. .. . :? *

..g......:.:,.r.. >.: . .

s

.:. . : .. .:n.:..:m. :~

.m.:

s .. .. .c.. 4..y .. .

s :.. ..

. .:.....,.:...... . ... .. . .....u.....

. . . . :. . . .c c . .._...

,t .

r *

: ;;e::

,.v -

3 ..:,p:: .: ,. . ...s. .. .:. . .,._ e* . . g .

T ;

w . ,- --

W.~:::v...:os.. :.

' * .a :. : .

. . .. . , c.

1::f.

, 4.c.$ ..

. W;?. .f.:l::*;

.. : ,. x:. ::... :::,

s. . ~

mf ....:: . . .:.: 2.,.. .* * * * .

. .?;.

. v.: ;. . . Q s. ,. .:-.

. .. - l .. . .:p.. .

Figure A 1. Geologicalisopleth of the area surrounding the Edwin 1. Hatch Nuclear Plant.

9

t 1

1 b

REFERENCES

1. Boyns, P. K. "The Aerial Radiological Measuring System ( ARMS) Systems, Procedures and Sensitivity (1976),"

Report No. EGG-il83-1691, EG&G, Las Vegas, NV, July 1976.

2. Mohr, R., Fritzsche, A., and Franks, L.," Ground Survey Procedures," Report No. EGG-il83-2339, EG&G, Goleta, CA, January 1976. l

3. Cooke, C. W., " Physical Geography of Georgia; the Coastal Plain," Georgia Geological Survey Bulletin 42, pp.19-54,1925.

4. Cooke, C. W., " Geology of the Coastal Plain of Georgia," U. S. Geological Survey Bulletin 941,1943.

)

/

i i

l1

k DISTRIBUTION NRC LBL B. H. Weiss (15) H. A. Wollenberg (1)

DOE /DOES REECo L J. Deal (5) H. E. LaPlant (1)

DOE /DMA EG&G R. E. Lounsbury (1) R. H. Beers, WAMD (2)

H. M. Borella, SBO (2) l J. F. Doyle, LVO (1) i DOE /NV W. A. Frankhauser, WAMD (1)

L. A. Franks, SBO (1)

H. F. Hahn, EMO (1)

L. K. Hilton, LVO (1)

D. G. Jackson (3) H. A. Lamonds, SBO (1)

J. A. Koch (1) R. L. Lynn, SBO (1)

R. R. Loux (1) R. A. Mohr, SBO (1)

J. K. Magruder (1)

L. G. Sasso, LVO (1)

R. B Purcell(2) G. R. Shipman, WAMD (1)

G. P. Stobie, LVO (1)

E. J. Story, LVO (1)

DOE / TIC T. P. Stuart, LVO (1)

T. B. Abernathy (2) W. J. Tipton, LVO (1)

H&N LIBRARIES W. E. Anderson (1) AMO(50) l Las Vegas (1) l Santa Barbara (2) l I

i 13 l

t

ML20236N834

Text

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Navigation menu

Search