ML23110A055
| ML23110A055 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Grand Gulf  |
| Issue date: | 04/20/2023 |
| From: | Hardy J Entergy Operations |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Document Control Desk |
| References | |
| GNRO2023-00008 | |
| Download: ML23110A055 (1) | |
Text
- ) entergy GNRO2023-00008 April 20, 2023 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Entergy Operations, Inc.
P.O. Box 756 Port Gibson, Mississippi 39150 Jeffery Hardy Manager Regulatory Assurance Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Tel: 802-380-5124 GGNS TS 5.6.2
SUBJECT:
Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report (AREOR)
Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Docket No. 50-416 License No. NPF-29 In accordance with Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Unit 1 Technical Specification 5.6.2, attached is the Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report (AREOR) for the time-period of January 1, 2022 through December 31, 2022.
There are no commitments contained in this submittal. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at 802-380-5124.
SiO\\~\\~
JH/ram
Attachment:
1, Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report
GNRO2023-00008 Page 2 of 2 cc:
NRC Senior Resident Inspector Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Port Gibson, MS 39150 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001 GNRO2023-00008 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report
S, entergy Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Page 1 of 62 YEAR: 2022 Document Number: GNRO 2023-00008 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 2 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
............................................................................................................. 3
2.0 INTRODUCTION
......................................................................................................................... 5 3.0 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS...................... 6 4.0 INTERPRETATION AND TRENDS OF RESULTS.................................................................... 17 5.0 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM
SUMMARY
.......................... 22 ATTACHMENTS - Sample Deviations........................................................................................................ 28 - Monitoring Results Tables............................................................................................ 29 - lnterlaboratory Comparison Program Results...............................................................47
1.0 1.1
1.2 Plant
Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I
Page 3 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program The Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report presents data obtained through analyses of environmental samples collected for Grand Gulf Nuclear Station (GGNS) Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) for the period January 1 through December 31, 2022. This report fulfills the requirements of Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Technical Specification 5.6.2.
All required lower limit of detection (LLD) capabilities were achieved in all sample analyses during 2022, as required by the GGNS Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) Specifications Table 6.12.1-3. No measurable levels of radiation above reporting levels for radioactivity as outlined in ODCM Specifications Table 6.12.1-2 were detected in the vicinity of GGNS. The 2022 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program thus substantiated the adequacy of source control and effluent monitoring at GGNS, with impacts of plant operations to the environment within regulatory limits.
GGNS established the REMP in 1978 prior to the station's becoming operational (1985) to provide data on background radiation and radioactivity normally present in the area. GGNS has continued to monitor the environment by sampling air, water, sediment, fish and food products, as well as measuring direct radiation. GGNS also samples milk if milk-producing animals used for human consumption are present within five miles (8 km) of the plant.
The REMP includes sampling indicator and control locations within an approximate 20-mile radius of the plant. The REMP utilizes indicator locations near the site to show any increases or buildup of radioactivity that might occur due to station operation and control locations farther away from the site to indicate the presence of only naturally occurring radioactivity. GGNS personnel compare indicator results with control and preoperational results to assess any impact GGNS operation might have had on the surrounding environment.
In 2022, environmental samples were collected for radiological analysis. The results of indicator locations were compared with control locations and previous studies. It was concluded that no significant relationship exists between GGNS operation and effect on the area around the plant. The review of 2022 data showed radioactivity levels in the environment were undetectable in many locations and near background levels in significant pathways.
Reporting Levels When averaged over any calendar quarter, no environmental samples equaled or exceeded reporting levels for radioactivity as outlined in ODCM Specifications Table 6.12.1-2; the analytical results did not trigger any Radiological Monitoring Program Special Reports.
1.3 Plant
Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I
Page 4 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Comparison to State and/or Federal Program GGNS personnel compared REMP data to state monitoring programs as results became available. Historically, the programs used for comparison have included the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Thermoluminescent Dosimeter (TLD)
Direct Radiation Monitoring Network and the Mississippi State Department of Health (MSDH), Division of Radiological Health monitoring program.
The NRG TLD Network Program was discontinued in 1998. Historically these results have compared to those from the GGNS REMP. GGNS TLD results continue to remain similar to the historical average and continue to verify that plant operation is not affecting the ambient radiation levels in the environment.
The MSDH and the GGNS REMP entail similar radiological environmental monitoring program requirements. These programs include collecting air samples and splitting or sharing sample media such as water, sediment, and fish. Both programs have obtained similar results over previous years.
1.4 Sample Deviations 1.5 During 2022, environmental sampling was performed for 5 media types addressed in the ODCM and for direct radiation. A total of 358 samples of the 359 scheduled were obtained. Of the scheduled samples, 99 percent were collected and analyzed in accordance with the requirements specified in the ODCM. Attachment 1 contains the listing of sample deviations and actions taken.
Program Modifications There were no program modifications during the reporting period.
2.0 2.1
2.2 Plant
Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I
Page 5 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operatina Report INTRODUCTION Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program GGNS established the REMP to ensure that plant operating controls properly function to minimize any associated radiation endangerment to human health or the environment. The REMP is designed for:
Analyzing applicable pathways for anticipated types and quantities of radionuclides released into the environment.
Considering the possibility of a buildup of long-lived radionuclides in the environment and identifying physical and biological accumulations that may contribute to human exposures.
Considering the potential radiation exposure to plant and animal life in the environment surrounding GGNS.
Correlating levels of radiation and radioactivity in the environment with radioactive releases from station operation.
Pathways Monitored The airborne, direct radiation, waterborne and ingestion pathways are monitored as required by GGNS ODCM Table 6.12.1-1. A description of the REMP utilized to monitor the exposure pathways is described in the attached Tables and Figures.
Section 4.0 of this report provides a discussion of 2022 sampling results with Section 5.0 providing a summary of results for the monitored exposure pathways.
2.3 Land Use Census GGNS conducts a land use census biennially, as required by Section 6.12.2 of the ODCM. The purpose of this census is to identify changes in uses of land within five miles of GGNS that would require modifications to the REMP and the ODCM. The most important criteria during this census are to determine the location in each sector of the nearest occupied residence, unoccupied residence, garden, and milking animal.
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station l
Year: 2022 J Page 6 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental O__p_erating Report 3.0 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLING PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS Table 1, Exposure Pathway - Airborne Requirement Sample Point Description Sampling and Collection Type and Frequency Of Analyses Distance and Direction Frequency RADIOIODINE AND PARTICULATES AS-7 (Sector H, 0.5 miles) -
1 sample close to the SITE BOUNDARY South-southeast of GGNS at the IBEW Union Hall having the highest calculated annual average ground level D/Q.
RADIOIODINE AND PARTICULATES AS-1 (Sector G, 5.5 miles) -
Radioiodine Canisters 131 analysis every 7 days 1 sample from the vicinity of a community Southeast of GGNS at the Air Particulate - Gross beta radioactivity analysis Port Gibson City Barn having the highest calculated annual average 7 days, or more frequently if following filter change ground level D/Q.
required by dust loading.
Air Particulate - Gamma Isotopic composite (by RADIOIODINE AND PARTICULATES AS-20 (Sector L, 0.9 miles) -
location) every 92 days 1 sample from the vicinity of a community South-southeast of GGNS at the former Glodjo residence having the highest calculated annual average ground level D/Q.
RADIOIODINE AND PARTICULATES AS-3 (Sector B, 18 miles)-
1 sample from a control location 15 - 30 km North of the Vicksburg Airport distance.
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 7 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Re~ort Table 2, Exposure Pathway - Direct Radiation Requirement Sample Point Description Sampling and Collection Type and Frequency Of Analyses Distance and Direction Frequency TLDS M-16 (Sector A, Radius 0.9 An inner ring of stations in the general areas Miles) - Meteorological Tower.
92 days Gamma dose; 92 days of the SITE BOUNDARY.
M-19 (Sector E, Radius 0.5 Miles) - Eastern SITE BOUNDARY Property line, North-northeast of HWSA M-21 (Sector J, Radius 0.4 Miles) - Near Former Training Center Building on Bald Hill Road.
M-22 (Sector G, Radius 0.5 Miles) - Former RR Entrance Crossing On Bald Hill Road.
M-23 (Sector Q, Radius 0.5 Miles) - Gin Lake Road 50 Yards North of Heavy Haul Road on Power Pole.
M-25 (Sector N, Radius 1.6 Miles)- Radial Well Number 1.
M-28 (Sector L, Radius 0.9 Miles) - Bald Hill Road.
M-94 (Sector R, Radius 0.8 Miles) - Sedor R Near Meteorological Tower.
M-95 (Sector F, Radius 0.5 mi) -
Spoils Area, fence of old storage area, near entrance gate
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 8 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Table 2, Exposure Pathway - Direct Radiation Requirement Sample Point Description Sampling and Collection Type and Frequency Of Analyses Distance and Direction Frequency TLDS M-96 (Sector B, Radius 0.7 mi.)-
An inner ring of stations in the general areas North Gate Fence 92 days Gamma dose; 92 days of the SITE BOUNDARY.
M-97 (Sector D, Radius 0.8 mi.) -
Grand Gulf Road entrance gate to spoils area M-98 (Sector H, Radius 0.5 mi.) -
Bald Hill Road, across from Union Hall, in curve M-99 (Sector K, Radius 0.4 mi.) -
North Fence of old Ball Field near utility pole M-100 (Sector C, Radius 0.6 ml.)
- Grand Gulf Road
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station j
Year: 2022 I Page 9 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Table 2, Exposure Pathway - Direct Radiation Requirement Sample Point Description Sampling and Collection Type and Frequency Of Analyses Distance and Direction Frequency TLDS M-36 (Sector P, Radius 5.0 An outer ring of stations approximately 3 to 5 MIies) - Curve on HW 608, Point 92 days Gamma dose; 92 days miles from the site.
Nearest GGNS at Power Pole.
M-40 (Sector M, Radius 2.3 Miles) - Headly Drive, Near River Port Entrance.
M-48 (Sector K, Radius 4.8 Miles) - 0.4 Miles South on Mont Gomer Road on West Side.
M-49 (Sector H, Radius 4.5 Miles) - Fork in Bessie Weathers Road/Shaifer Road.
M-50 (Sector B, Radius 5.3 Miles) - Panola Hunting Club Entrance.
M-55 (Sector D, Radius 5.0 Miles) - Near lngelside Karnac Ferry Road/Ashland Road Intersection.
M-57 (Sector F, Radius 4.5 Miles)- Hwy 61, Behind the Welcome to Port Gibson Sign at Glensdale Subdivision.
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 10 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Table 2, Exposure Pathway - Direct Radiation Requirement Sample Point Description Sampling and Collection Type and Frequency Of Analyses Distance and Direction Frequency TLDS M-01 (Sector E, Radius 3.5 Additional stations in special interest areas Miles) -Across the road from 92 days Gamma dose; 92 days Lake Claiborne Entry Gate.
such as population centers, nearby (Special) residences, schools, and in 1 or 2 areas to serve as control locations.
M-07 (Sector G, Radius 5.5 Mlles)-AS-1 PG, Port Gibson City Barn. (Special)
M-09 (Sector D, Radius 3.5 Miles) -Warner Tully Y-Camp.
(Special)
M-10 (Sector A, Radius 1.5 MIies) - Grand Gulf Military Park.
(Special)
M-14 (Sector B, Radius 18.0 Mlles)-AS-3-61VA, Hwy 61,
North of Vicksburg Airport.
(Control)
M-33 (Sector P, Radius 12.5 Miles) - Newellton, Louisiana Water Tower. (Control)
M-38 (Sector M, Radius 9.5 Miles) - Lake Bruin State Park, Entrance Road. (Special)
M-39 (Sector M, Radius 13.0 MIies) - St. Joseph, Louisiana, Auxiliary Water Tank. (Special)
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 J Page 11 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Table 3, Exposure Pathway - Waterborne Requirement Sample Point Description Sampling and Collection Type and Frequency Of Analyses Distance and Direction Frequency MRUP (Sector R, Radius 1.8 Miles)
- At least 4500 ft upstream 92 days Gamma isotopic and tritium analysis; 92 days of the GGNS discharge point into SURFACE WATER the Mississippi River to allow adequate mixing of the Mississippi 1 sample upstream and 1 sample and Big Black Rivers.
downstream.
MRDOWN (Sector N, Radius 1.6 Miles) - A! least 5000 ft downstream of the GGNS discharge point in the Mississippi River near Radial Well No. 1.
MRDOWN (Sector P, Radius 1.3 1 sample downstream during a Liquid Miles) - Downstream of the 366 days Gamma isotopic and tritium analysis; 366 days GGNS discharge point in the Radwaste Discharge.
Mississippi River near Radial Well No. 5.
1 sample from Outfall 007 OUTFALL 007 (Sector N, Radius 31 days Tritium; 31 days 0.2 MIies) - Storm Drain System PGWELL (Sector G, Radius 5.0 Miles) - Port Gibson Wells -
366 days Gamma isotopic and tritium analysis; 366 days Taken from distribution system or GROUNDWATER one of the five wells.
Samples from 2 sources CONSTWELL (Sector Q, Radius 0.4 Miles) - GGNS Construction Water Well - Taken from distribution system or the well.
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 12 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Table 3, Exposure Pathway - Waterborne Requirement Sample Point Description Sampling and Collection Type and Frequency Of Analyses Distance and Direction Frequency SEDIMENT FROM SHORELINE SEDHAM (Sector N, Radius 1.6 1 sample from downstream area and 1 Miles) - Downstream of the 366 days Gamma isotopic; 366 days sample from upstream area GGNS discharge point in the Mississippi River near Hamilton Lake outlet.
SEDCONT (Minimum of 100 yds)
- Upstream of the GGNS discharge point in the Mississippi River.
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 13 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Table 4, Exposure Pathway - Ingestion Requirement Sample Point Description Distance Sampling and Collection Type and Frequency Of Analyses and Direction Frequency MILK If commercially available, 1 sample from Currently, no available milking animals 92 days when required Gamma isotopic and 1-131; 92 days milking animals within 8 km distant within 8 km of GGNS.
1 sample from milking animals at a ALCONT (Sector K, Radius 10.5 control location >8 km distant when an Miles) - Located South-southwest of indicator location exists.
GGNS at Alcorn State University.
(Control)
FISH AND INVERTEBRATES FISHDOWN - Downstream of the 1 sample in vicinity of GGNS discharge GGNS discharge point into the 366 days Gamma isotopic on edible portions; 366 days point.
Mississippi River FISHUP - Upstream of the GGNS 1 sample uninfluenced by GGNS discharge point into the Mississippi discharge.
River uninfluenced by plant operations.
FOOD PRODUCTS VEG-J (Sector J, Radius 0.4 Miles) -
1 sample of broadleaf vegetation grown in South of GGNS near former Training 92 days when available Gamma isotopic and 1-131; 92 days one of two different offsite locations with Center on Bald Hill Road.
highest anticipated annual average VEG-CONT (Sector K, Radius 10.5 ground level D/Q if milk sampling is not Miles) -Alcorn State University south-performed.
southwest of GGNS when available, 1 sample of similar vegetation grown 15-otherwise a location 15-30 km distant.
(Control) 30 km distant if milk sampling is not performed.
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 14 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Figure 1, Exposure Pathway NUCLEAR POWER PLANT LIQUID EFFLUENT
/.......
/........... R
~L TRANSPORT Exposure pathways to man
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 15 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Figure 2, Sample Collection Sites -Near Field Ii:
~ 11 i 'r ul 1
,,, I CJ,i 11 t
A i iii i i!nu~,,
i~f ~
~..
~
'- 0<] 80 0-lE-$
I i
I
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 16 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Figure 3, Sample Collection Sites - Far Field I
fl.
§ R
aJ laJ' I 11 ei I Ii u
- lj~
I! I I
w e LLI
(!) Ill I
4.0
4.1 Plant
Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report INTERPRETATION AND TRENDS OF RESULTS Air Particulate and Radioiodine Sample Results I Page 17 of 62 GGNS did not detect any plant related gamma emitting radionuclides in the quarterly air particulate composites. The REMP had previously detected airborne radioactivity attributable to other sources in this pathway. These sources include the Chinese nuclear test in 1980 and the accident at the Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in 1986.
The GGNS REMP detected radioactivity released from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Nuclear Power Plant following the March 11, 2011, Tohoku earthquake.
In 2022 there were no samples above the LLD for 1-131. Indicator gross beta air particulate results for 2022 were comparable to results obtained from 2012-2021 of the operational REMP. Also, the 2022 gross beta annual average was less than the average for preoperational levels. Results are reported as annual average picocuries per cubic meter (pCi/m 3).
Monitoring Period 2012 - 2021 (Minimum Value) 2022 Average Value 2012-2021 (Maximum Value)
Preoperational Result 0.008 0.022 0.041 0.032 In the absence of plant-related gamma radionuclides, gross beta activity is attributed to naturally occurring radionuclides. Table 3.1, which include gross beta concentrations and provide a comparison of the indicator and control means and ranges emphasizes the consistent trends seen in this pathway to support the presence of naturally occurring activity. Therefore, it can be concluded that the airborne pathway continues to be unaffected by Grand Gulf Nuclear Station operations.
4.2 Plant
Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 18 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Thermoluminescent Dosimetry {TLD} Sample Results Grand Gulf Nuclear Station reports measured dose as net exposure (field reading less transit reading) normalized to 92 days and relies on comparison of the indicator locations to the control as a measure of plant impact. Grand Gulf Nuclear Station's comparison of the inner ring and special interest area TLD results to the control, as seen in Table 7, identified no noticeable trend that would indicate that the ambient radiation levels are being affected by plant operations. In addition, the inner ring value of 9.6 millirem/quarter (mR/Qtr) shown in Table 7 for 2022 is within the historical bounds of 2012 -2021 annual average results, which have ranged from 9.3 to 10.0 mrem. Overall, Grand Gulf Nuclear Station concluded that the ambient radiation levels are not being affected by plant operations.
Table 5, Direct Radiation Annual Summary Year Inner Ring (mR/Qtr)
Outer Ring (mR/Qtr)
Control Location (mR/Qtr) 2012 9.5 9.7 11.0 2013 9.8 9.7 10.8 2014 10.0 9.9 11.0 2015 9.6 9.5 10.8 2016 9.3 9.3 10.7 2017 9.9 9.9 11.3 2018 9.7 9.8 10.6 2019 10.0 9.7 10.7 2020 9.6 9.4 10.7 2021 9.9 10.2 11.7 2022 9.6 9.7 10.8 4.3 Waterborne Sample Results Analytical results for 2022 surface water and drinking water samples were similar to those reported in previous years. Gamma radionuclides analytical results for 2022 surface water samples were similar to those reported in previous years. Tritium in Grand Gulf Nuclear Station surface water indicator samples continues to be detected, but is attributed to washout and entrainment of normal, previously monitored gaseous effluents. These results are further explained below.
4.3.1 Surface Water Samples were collected from two indicator locations (Outfall 007, MRDOWN) and one control location (MRUP) and analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides and tritium. Plant related gamma emitting radionuclides and tritium remained undetectable in the upstream and downstream Mississippi River locations, which is consistent with previous operational years.
Storm waters contribute to Outfall 007 and can include tritium as a result of washout and
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 19 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report entrainment of normal, previously monitored gaseous effluents. Results are reported as annual average pCi/1.
Monitoring Period 2012 - 2021 (Minimum Value) 2022 Average Value 2012 - 2021 (Maximum Value)
Preoperational Result 449 5087 6530 2739 In addition to the tritium samples required by the REMP, 50 special surface water samples for tritium and nine special surface water samples for gamma emitting radionuclides were collected at the Outfall 007 location. During the first quarter of 2022, the stormwater system was impacted when condensation from a steam leak migrated out of the Turbine Building to a storm drain. Elevated tritium concentrations were observed in Outfall 007 samples during the first quarter of 2022. The average tritium concentration in Outfall 007 for all samples collected during the first quarter of 2022 was 29,796 pCi/I, which is less than the reportable level specified in the GGNS ODCM Table 6.12.1-2. The steam leak was repaired in February 2022, and tritium concentrations have remained near baseline levels since March 2022. Plant related gamma emitting radionuclides remained undetectable in surface water samples during 2022. Special sample results are summarized in Table 23 and Table 24.
Grand Gulf Nuclear Station personnel have noted no definable increasing trends associated with the tritium levels at the discharge location (Outfall 007). Levels detected during 2022 and previous operational years have remained below regulatory limits. Therefore, the operation of Grand Gulf Nuclear Station had no definable impact on this waterborne pathway during 2022 and levels of radionuclides remain similar to those obtained in previous operational years.
4.3.2 Drinking Water Drinking water samples were collected from two locations, CONSTWELL (indicator) and PGWELL (control). Drinking water samples were analyzed for 1-131, gamma radionuclides and tritium. During 2022, gamma radionuclides, 1-131, and tritium concentrations were below the LLD limits at the indicator and control locations, which is consistent with previous operational years. Results are reported as annual average pCi/L.
Radionuclide Gross Beta lodine-131 Gamma Tritium 2022
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD 2012-2021
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD Preoperational
<LLD
< LLD
< LLD
<LLD
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 20 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Grand Gulf Nuclear Station personnel have noted no definable trends associated with drinking water results at the indicator location. Therefore, the operation of Grand Gulf Nuclear Station had no definable impact on this waterborne pathway during 2022 and levels of radionuclides remain similar to those obtained in previous operational years.
Results from 2022 are summarized in Table 7.
4.3.3 Groundwater 4.4 Groundwater monitoring data collected during administration of the Groundwater Protection Initiative (GPI) site program are included in the Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report.
Soil Sample Results Sediment samples were collected from two locations in 2022 and analyzed for gamma radionuclides. Listed below is a comparison of 2022 indicator results to the 2012-2021 operational years. Grand Gulf Nuclear Station operations had no significant impact on the environment or public by this waterborne pathway. Results are reported as pCi/kg.
Monitoring Period 2012 - 2021 (Minimum Value) 2022 Value 2012-2021 (Maximum Value)
Preoperational Result
<LLD
< LLD 40.1 295.0 4.5 Ingestion Sample Results 4.5.1 Milk Sample Results Milk samples were not collected during 2022 due to the unavailability of indicator locations within five miles of Grand Gulf Nuclear Station.
4.5.2 Fish Sample Results Fish samples were collected from two locations and analyzed for gamma radionuclides. In 2022, gamma radionuclides were below detectable limits which are consistent with preoperational and operational years. Therefore, based on these measurements, Grand Gulf Nuclear Station operations had no significant radiological impact upon the environment or public by this ingestion pathway.
4.5.3 Food Product Sample Results The REMP has detected radionuclides prior to 1990 that are attributable to other sources. These include the radioactive plume release due to reactor core degradation at Chernobyl Nuclear Power Plant in 1986 and atmospheric weapons testing.
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 21 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report In 2022, food product samples were collected from two locations and analyzed for plant related lodine-131 and gamma radionuclides. The 2022 levels remained undetectable, as has been the case in previous years. Therefore, based on these measurements, Grand Gulf Nuclear Station operations had no significant radiological impact upon the environment or public by this ingestion pathway.
4.6 Land Use Census Results 4.7 The latest land use census, performed in 2022, did not identify any new locations that yielded a calculated dose or dose commitment greater than those currently calculated.
The land use census identified no milk-producing animals within a five-mile radius of the plant site. In accordance with ODCM Section 6.12.1, Grand Gulf Nuclear Station personnel sampled broadleaf vegetation.
Table 6, Land Use Census - 2022 Nearest Residence Within Five Miles Sector Direction Nearest Residence (miles)
Nearest Garden (miles)
A N
1.02 none within 5 miles B
NNE 1.51 1.52 C
NE 0.70 none within 5 miles D
ENE 2.60 4.50 E
E 0.83 0.91 F
ESE 2.25 none within 5 miles G
SE 3.72 4.20 H
SSE 1.10 4.31 J
s 3.14 none within 5 miles K
SSW 2.20 2.18 L
SW 0.89 0.89 M
WSW none within 5 miles none within 5 miles N
w none within 5 miles none within 5 miles p
WNW none within 5 miles none within 5 miles Q
NW none within 5 miles none within 5 miles R
NNW 1.44 none within 5 miles The next land use census is scheduled to be conducted in 2024.
lnterlaboratory Comparison Results Teledyne Brown Engineering and Stanford Dosimetry analyzed interlaboratory comparison samples to fulfill the requirements of ODCM Specification 6.12.1. The results are shown in Attachment 3.
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 22 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 5.0 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM
SUMMARY
- 1.
Table 7, Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Summary, summarizes data for the 2022 REMP program.
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022
[
Page 23 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Table 7, Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Summary Location with the Highest Annual Control Sample Type Type/ Number Indicator Locations Mean Locations Number of (Units) of Analyses LLD [Nota2J Mean (F)[Note 31 Mean (f)lNota 31 Non-Routine
[Note 1)
[Range]
Mean (F)[Note 31 Results [Note &J Location [Nota 41
[Range]
[Range]
GB/ 208 0.01 0.0218 (156 / 156)
AS-1 PG 0.0220 (52 I 52) 0.0228 (52 I 52) 0
[0.0075 -
Air
[0.0074 - 0.0384)
(Sector G, 5.5 mi)
[0.0074 - 0.0384) 0.0356)
Particulates GS/ 16 (pCi/m3)
Cs-134 0.05
<LLD NIA N/A 0
CS-137 0.06
<LLD N/A N/A
<LLD 0
<LLD Airborne 1-131 / 208 0.07
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Iodine (pCi/ m3)
Inner Ring Gamma/ 56
[Note6]
9.6 (56 / 56)
M-99 12.1 (4 / 4)
N/A 0
TLDs (mR/Qtr)
[5.3 -13.5)
(Sector J, 0.4 mi.)
[11.1-13.5)
Outer Ring Gamma/28
[Note6]
9.7 (28 / 28)
M-57 11.4 (4 / 4)
N/A 0
TLDs (mR/Qtr)
[5.0 -12.4)
(Sector F, 4.5 mi.)
[10.3 - 12.4)
Special Interest TLDs Gamma/27
[Note6]
10.3 (27 / 27)
M-01 12.0 (4 / 4)
N/A 0
(mR/Qtr)
[7.7 -13.0)
(Sector E, 3.5 mi.)
[11.5 - 13.0)
Control TLD Gamma/4
[Note6]
N/A N/A N/A 10.8 (4 / 4) 0 (mR/Qtr)
[9.7 - 12.2)
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station l
Year: 2022 J Page 24 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Table 7, Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Summary Location with the Highest Annual Control Sample Type Type I Number Indicator Locations Mean Locations Number of (Units) of Analyses LLD [NotezJ Mean (F)(Note 31 Mean (f)INote 31 Non-Routine
[Nota 1)
[Range]
Mean (F)[Nota 31 Results [Note 51 Location [Note 41
[Range]
[Range]
H-3135 3000 5087 (7127)
Outfall 007 5087 (7 117)
< LLD 0
[34 7 - 24600]
(Sector N, 0.2 mi.)
[34 7 - 24600]
GS 118 Mn-54 15
< LLD 0
Fe-59 30
< LLD 0
Co-58 15
<LLD 0
Surface Water Co-60 15
< LLD 0
(pCi/1)
Zn-65 30
< LLD 0
Zr-95 30
< LLD a
Nb-95 15
< LLD 0
1-131 15
< LLD 0
Cs-134 15
< LLD 0
Cs-137 18
< LLD 0
Ba-140 60
< LLD 0
La-140 15
< LLD 0
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station l
Year: 2022
[
Page 25 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Table 7, Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Summary Location with the Highest Annual Control Sample Type Type/ Number Indicator Locations Mean Locations Number of (Units) of Analyses LLD (Note 2]
Mean (F)[Note 3J Mean (F)lNote 31 Non-Routine
[Note 1]
[Range]
Mean (F)[Note 31 Results [Note 61 Location [Note 41
[Range]
[Range]
1-131 / 4 1
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
H-3 / 4 2000
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
GS/ 4 Mn-54 15
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Fe-59 30
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Drinking Water Co-58 15
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
(pCi/1)
Co-60 15
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Zn-65 30
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Zr-95 30
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Nb-95 15
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Cs-134 15
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Cs-137 18
< LLD 0
Ba-140 60
< LLD 0
La-140 15
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Sediment GS/4 150
< LLD N/A N/A N/A Cs-134 0
(pCi/kg)
Cs-137 180
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 26 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Op_~l'_a_!ing Report Table 7, Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Summary Location with the Highest Annual Control Sample Type Type/ Number Indicator Locations Mean Locations Number of (Units) of Analyses LLD [Note2)
Mean (F)INotB 31 Mean (F)INote 31 Non-Routine
[Note 1)
[Range]
Mean (F)[Note 31 Results [Note &J Location INota 41
[Range]
[Range]
GS/4 Mn-54 130
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Fe-59 260
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Fish (pCi/kg)
Co-58 130
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Co-60 130
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Zn-65 260
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Cs-134 130
< LLD 0
Cs-137 150
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
1-131 / 10 60
Food Products GS/ 10 (pCi/kg)
Cs-134 60
< LLD N/A N/A N/A 0
Cs-137 80
< LLD N/A N/A N/A 0
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 l Page 27 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental O_p_erating Report Table 7, Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Summary Location with the Highest Annual Sample Type Type/ Number Indicator Locations Mean of Analyses LLD [Nota2]
Mean (F)INota 31 (Units)
[Note 1)
[Range]
Mean (F)[Note 31 Location !Note 41
[Range]
H-3 / 50 3000 44,498 (19 / 50)
Outfall 007 44498 (19 / 50)
[1230-261000]
(Sector N, 0.2 mi.)
[1230 - 261000]
GS/9 Mn-54 15
< LLD N/A N/A Fe-59 30
< LLD N/A N/A Co-58 15
< LLD N/A N/A Surface Water Co-60 15
< LLD N/A N/A (Special)
Zn-65 30
< LLD N/A N/A (pCi/1)
Zr-95 30
< LLD N/A N/A Nb-95 15
< LLD N/A N/A 1-131 15
< LLD N/A N/A Cs-134 15
< LLD N/A N/A Ba-140 60
< LLD N/A N/A La-140 15
< LLD N/A N/A LEGEND:
[Note 1] - GB= Gross beta; 1-131 = lodine-131; H-3 = Tritium; GS= Gamma scan.
[Note 2]- LLD= Required lower limit of detection based on ODCM Table 6.12.1-3.
Control Locations Mean (F)INota 31
[Range]
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD Number of Non-Routine Results [Nota 61 5
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
[Note 3]- Mean and range based upon detectable measurements only. Fraction of detectable measurements at specified locations is indicated in parenthesis (F).
[Note 4] -Where applicable, locations are specified (1) by name, (2) distance from reactor site, and (3) meteorological sector.
[Note 5] - Non-routine results are those which exceed ten times the control station value. If no control station value is available, the result is considered non-routine if it exceeds ten times the preoperational value for the location.
[Note 6] - LLD is not defined in ODCM Table 6.12.1-3.
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 28 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental O~erating Report Page 1 of 1 Sample Deviations Table 8, Sample Deviations Table Comment Sample Sample Media Date Problem Evaluation / Actions No.
Affected Location During collection of 1st quarter 2022 TLDs, monitoring location M-39 was 1
TLD M-39 03/29/22 TLD Lost could not be located. Field observation indicated the TLD was may have been inadvertently removed during landscaping activities. CR-GGN-2022-03623 documents the condition.
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 29 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Page 1 of 18 Monitoring Results Tables Table 9, Air Particulate Data Summary Table Analysis: Gross Beta I
Units: pCi/m3 Station Station Station Station Start Date End Date AS-7 AS-20 AS-3 [Note 1]
AS-1 (Indicator)
(Indicator)
(Indicator)
(Control)
REQUIRED LLD ~
0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 12/28/21 01/04/22 0.01780 0.0206 0.01940 0.0242 01/04/22 01/11/22 0.03090 0.0239 0.02580 0.0287 01/11/22 01/18/22 0.02570 0.0257 0.02430 0.0231 01/18/22 01/25/22 0.02280 0.0240 0.02600 0.0290 01/25/22 02/01/22 0.02340 0.0244 0.02250 0.0260 02/01/22 02/08/22 0.01700 0.0188 0.01870 0.0191 02/08/22 02/15/22 0.02890 0.0317 0.02580 0.0288 02/15/22 02/22/22 0.02190 0.0275 0.01730 0.0211 02/22/22 03/01/22 0.01800 0.0187 0.01800 0.0178 03/01/22 03/08/22 0.02600 0.0249 0.02410 0.0261 03/08/22 03/15/22 0.01520 0.0160 0.01800 0.0196 03/15/22 03/22/22 0.01330 0.0146 0.01520 0.0197 03/22/22 03/29/22 0.01690 0.0181 0.01680 0.0192 03/29/22 04/05/22 0.02430 0.0204 0.02010 0.0217 04/05/22 04/12/22 0.01780 0.0162 0.01760 0.0223 04/12/22 04/19/22 0.01700 0.0145 0.01460 0.0161 04/19/22 04/26/22 0.02080 0.0237 0.02340 0.0268 04/26/22 05/03/22 0.02520 0.0193 0.02290 0.0297 05/03/22 05/10/22 0.01870 0.0179 0.02290 0.0205 05/10/22 05/17/22 0.02140 0.0255 0.02640 0.0202 05/17/22 05/24/22 0.02490 0.0220 0.02340 0.0247 05/24/22 05/31/22 0.02200 0.0197 0.01850 0.0244 05/31/22 06/07/22 0.01420 0.0163 0.01830 0.0199 06/07/22 06/14/22 0.02040 0.0194 0.01740 0.0188 06/14/22 06/21/22 0.02360 0.0197 0.01940 0.0245 06/21/22 06/28/22 0.03840 0.0329 0.03310 0.0303 06/28/22 07/05/22 0.0157 0.0156 0.0130 0.0163
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 30 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Page 2 of 18 Monitoring Results Tables Table 9, Air Particulate Data Summary Table Analysis: Gross Beta I
Units: pCi/m 3 Station Station Station Station Start Date End Date AS-7 AS-20 AS-3 (Note 1]
AS-1 (Indicator)
(Indicator)
(Indicator)
(Control)
REQUIRED LLD +
0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 07/05/22 07/12/22 0.0121 0.0090 0.0075 0.0129 07/12/22 07/19/22 0.0162 0.0163 0.0189 0.0213 07/19/22 07/26/22 0.0176 0.0155 0.0160 0.0194 07/26/22 08/02/22 0.0113 0.0136 0.0141 0.0135 08/02/22 08/09/22 0.0074 0.0090 0.0081 0.0094 08/09/22 08/16/22 0.0111 0.0202 0.0123 0.0125 08/16/22 08/23/22 0.0144 0.0128 0.0132 0.0155 08/23/22 08/30/22 0.0076 0.0085 0.0076 0.0075 08/30/22 09/06/22 0.0207 0.0196 0.0169 0.0237 09/06/22 09/13/22 0.0197 0.0199 0.0191 0.0245 09/13/22 09/20/22 0.0348 0.0337 0.0298 0.0317 09/20/22 09/27/22 0.0355 0.0361 0.0346 0.0343 09/27/22 10/04/22 0.0247 0.0250 0.0244 0.0231 10/04/22 10/11/22 0.0383 0.0380 0.0377 0.0356 10/11/22 10/18/22 0.0327 0.0323 0.0380 0.0340 10/18/22 10/25/22 0.0269 0.0310 0.0254 0.0300 10/25/22 11/01/22 0.0273 0.0290 0.0261 0.0226 11/01/22 11/08/22 0.0323 0.0264 0.0288 0.0289 11/08/22 11/15/22 0.0235 0.0257 0.0231 0.0229 11/15/22 11/22/22 0.0348 0.0317 0.0337 0.0307 11/22/22 11/29/22 0.0254 0.0300 0.0348 0.0250 11/29/22 12/06/22 0.0312 0.0285 0.0338 0.0299 12/06/22 12/13/22 0.0160 0.0132 0.0140 0.0161 12/13/22 12/20/22 0.0185 0.0222 0.0216 0.0204 12/20/22 12/27/22 0.0206 0.0189 0.0198 0.0192
[Note 1]- Station with highest annual mean.
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 31 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Page 3 of 18 Monitoring Results Tables Table 10, Radioiodine Cartridge Data Table Summary Analysis: 1-131 I
Units: pCi/m 3 Start Date End Date AS-1 AS-7 AS-20 AS-3 (Indicator)
(Indicator)
(Indicator)
(Control)
REQUIRED LLD +
0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 12/28/21 01/04/22
<0.03591
<0.03624
<0.03733
<0.0369 01/04/22 01/11/22
<0.05535
<0.05558
<0.05798
<0.05714 01/11/22 01/18/22
<0.01733
<0.01768
<0.01816
<0.01815 01/18/22 01/25/22
<0.04629
<0.04588
<0.04612
<0.0463 01/25/22 02/01/22
<0.02798
<0.02771
<0.02802
<0.02841 02/01/22 02/08/22
<0.02668
<0,02646
<0.02686
<0.02663 02/08/22 02/15/22
<0.02614
<0,02576
<0.02621
<0.02622 02/15/22 02/22/22
<0.02721
<0.02676
<0.02746
<0.02737 02/22/22 03/01/22
<0.02767
<0.0123
<0.02776
<0.02762 03/01/22 03/08/22
<0.02413
<0.02349
<0.02421
<0.02438 03/08/22 03/15/22
<0.04405
<0.04433
<0.04481
<0.04562 03/15/22 03/22/22
<0.03072
<0.03143
<0.03172
<0.03097 03/22/22 03/29/22
<0.02765
<0.0284
<0.02866
<0.0284 03/29/22 04/05/22
<0.0264
<0.02656
<0.02692
<0.02688 04/05/22 04/12/22
<0.04303
<0.04365
<0.04506
<0.04475 04/12/22 04/19/22
<0.03226
<0.03764
<0.03861
<0.03344 04/19/22 04/26/22
<0.02818
<0.02936
<0.02955
<0.02927 04/26/22 05/03/22
<0.04161
<0,0429
<0.0432
<0.04297 05/03/22 05/10/22
<0.04167
<0.04296
<0.04417
<0.04314 05/10/22 05/17/22
<0.02511
<0.02906
<0.02893
<0.026 05/17/22 05/24/22
<0.02878
<0.0302
<0.0296
<0.0295 05/24/22 05/31/22
<0.01828
<0.01898
<0.01576
<0.01903 05/31/22 06/07/22
<0.03293
<0.03413
<0.03388
<0.03402 06/07/22 06/14/22
<0.04944
<0.05139
<0.05105
<0.05221 06/14/22 06/21/22
<0.02763
<0.02815
<0.02819
<0.0281 06/21/22 06/28/22
<0.05033
<0.05671
<0.05675
<0.05057 06/28/22 07/05/22
<0.02863
<0.03054
<0.03028
<0.02857
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 32 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Page 4 of 18 Monitoring Results Tables Table 10, Radioiodine Cartridge Data Table Summary Analysis: 1-131 I
Units: pCi/m 3 Start Date End Date AS-1 AS-7 AS-20 AS-3 (Indicator)
(Indicator)
(Indicator)
(Control)
REQUIRED LLD +
0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 07/05/22 07/12/22
<0.03869
<0.04414
<0.04414
<0.03922 07/12/22 07/19/22
<0.05641
<0.05985
<0.05947
<0.05933 07/19/22 07/26/22
<0.02416
<0.02447
<0.02488
<0.02424 07/26/22 08/02/22
<0.02023
<0.02029
<0.02043
<0.02022 08/02/22 08/09/22
<0.04947
<0.04986
<0.04957
<0.04929 08/09/22 08/16/22
<0.03983
<0.0429
<0.04262
<0.03939 08/16/22 08/23/22
<0.04175
<0.04212
<0.04197
<0.04211 08/23/22 08/30/22
<0.03602
<0.0358
<0.03577
<0.03565 08/30/22 09/06/22
<0.03585
<0.03674
<0.03644
<0.037 09/06/22 09/13/22
<0.03609
<0.03762
<0.03735
<0.03691 09/13/22 09/20/22
<0.03666
<0.03636
<0.03643
<0.03774 09/20/22 09/27/22
<0.03166
<0.03111
<0.03107
<0.03075 09/27/22 10/04/22
<0.05452
<0.05467
<0.05388
<0.02219 10/04/22 10/11/22
<0.03767
<0.03722
<0.03739
<0.03675 10/11/22 10/18/22
<0.01537
<0.02974
<0.02978
<0.02961 10/18/22 10/25/22
<0.0311
<0.03069
<0.03093
<0.03055 10/25/22 11/01/22
<0.04005
<0.0397
<0.03988
<0.03936 11/01/22 11/08/22
<0.06095
<0.05771
<0.05835
<0.05744 11/08/22 11/15/22
<0.04347
<0.04302
<0.04329
<0.01805 11/15/22 11/22/22
<0.03142
<0.03067
<0.03175
<0.03142 11/22/22 11/29/22
<0.0338
<0.03308
<0.03369
<0.03305 11/29/22 12/06/22
<0.01672
<0.01644
<0.01677
<0.01646 12/06/22 12/13/22
<0.04078
<0.01702
<0.04147
<0.04092 12/13/22 12/20/22
<0.02758
<0.01488
<0.03033
<0.02719 12/20/22 12/27/22
<0.0406
<0.04002
<0.04088
<0.04096
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 33 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Page 5 of 18 Monitoring Results Tables Table 11, Air Gamma Quarterly Composite Analysis: Gamma Isotopic Units: pCi/cu.m Location Date CS-134 CS-137 REQUIRED LLD +
0.05 0.06 AS-1
<0.002752
<0.00279 AS-3
<0.002212
<0.002072 02/11/22 AS-7
<0.002178
<0.001906 AS-20
<0.002401
<0.002448 AS-1
<0.001759
<0.001954 AS-3
<0.001943
<0.001571 05/13/22 AS-7
<0.002711
<0.001868 AS-20
<0.002039
<0.001773 AS-1
<0.001812
<0.001646 AS-3 08/12/22
<0.002504
<0.002322 AS-7
<0.002485
<0.00212 AS-20
<0.001761
<0.003233 AS-1
<0.002674
<0.002242 AS-3
<0.001478
<0.00157 11/11/22 AS-7
<0.001673
<0.001348 AS-20
<0.001916
<0.001768
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 34 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Page 6 of 18 Monitoring Results Tables Table 12, Thermoluminescent Dosimeters - Inner Ring Analysis: Gamma Dose I
Units: mrem Station 1st Qtr 2022 2nd Qtr 2022 3rd Qtr 2022 4th Qtr 2022 Annual Mean 2022 M-16 10.1 10.4 10.8 12.0 10.8 M-19 8.8 9.2 8.9 10.4 9.3 M-21 11.1 11.9 11.8 12.8 11.9 M-22 8.2 8.4 7.6 9.1 8.3 M-23 8.2 8.1 9.2 10.1 8.9 M-25 6.1 5.3 8.6 9.9 7.5 M-28 10.3 10.2 10.4 12.0 10.7 M-94 10.1 9.5 10.5 11.2 10.3 M-95 6.7 10.3 6.6 8.3 8.0 M-96 7.8 6.6 7.9 9.3 7.9 M-97 6.8 8.0 7.3 9.6 7.9 M-98 10.5 7.3 11.2 12.5 10.4 M-99[Note 1) 11.1 11.7 12.3 13.5 12.1 M-100 8.6 11.8 9.1 10.6 10.0
[Note 1] - Station with highest annual mean.
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 35 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Page 7 of 18 Monitoring Results Tables Table 13, Thermoluminescent Dosimeters -Outer Ring Analysis: Gamma Dose I
Units: mrem Station 1st Qtr 2022 2nd Qtr 2022 3rd Qtr 2022 4th Qtr 2022 Annual Mean 2022 M-36 8.0 12.3 8.8 9.5 9.7 M-40 5.2 8.8 5.7 6.6 6.6 M-48 9.5 5.0 9.5 10.1 8.5 M-49 10.0 9.5 9.9 11.6 10.3 M-50 9.3 10.7 10.1 10.7 10.2 M-55 10.4 10.6 10.9 12.2 11.0 M-57[Nole 1]
10.9 10.3 11.8 12.4 11.4
[Note 1] - Station with highest annual mean.
Table 14, Thermoluminescent Dosimeters - Special Interest Areas Analysis: Gamma Dose I
Units: mrem Station 1st Qtr 2022 2nd Qtr 2022 3rd Qtr 2022 4th Qtr 2022 Annual Mean 2022 M-01[Nole1]
11.5 11. 7 11.6 13.0 12.0 M-07 10.1 10.1 10.0 11.5 10.4 M-09 9.5 9.4 9.3 10.3 9.6 M-10 8.6 8.3 8.5 9.9 8.8 M-33 10.9 12.3 11.4 12.6 11.8 M-38 9.4 7.7 9.6 10.4 9.3 M-39 Lost[Nole 2) 9.0 9.4 11.3 9.9
[Note 1] - Station with highest annual mean.
[Note 2] - Reference Attachment 1, Sample Deviations, Table 8, Sample Deviations Table, Comment 1 Table 15, Thermoluminescent Dosimeters - Control Analysis: Gamma Dose I
Units: mrem Station 1st Qtr 2022 2nd Qtr 2022 3rd Qtr 2022 4th Qtr 2022 Annual Mean 2022 M-14 9.7 10.8 10.5 12.2 10.8
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 Analysis: Gamma Isotopic Location Date Mn-54 REQUIRED LLD +
15 MRDOWN 02/01/22
<5.234 MRUP 02/01/22
<5.347 MRDOWNGG 02/01/22
<7.221 MRUP GG 02/01/22
<6.404 MRDOWN 05/04/22
<6.419 MRUP 05/04/22
<4.748 MRDOWNGG 05/04/22
<5.285 MRUPGG 05/04/22
<4.752 MRDOWN 08/03/22
<6.638 MRUP 08/03/22
<6.204 Annual Radiological ~nviroml!ental Operating Report Co-58 15
<5.393
<5.953
<5.526
<5.449
<5.795
<6.355
<7.139
<4.538
<4.422
<7.292 Monitoring Results Tables Table 16, Surface Water - Gamma Units: pCi/L Fe-59 Co-60 Zn-65 Nb-95 Zr-95 1-131 30 15 30 15 30 15
<11.04
<6.052
<9.451
<7.526
<9.599
<9.13
<13.17
<7.846
<12.45
<7.198
<12.34
<10.88
<10.15
<5.731
<12.3
<5.987
<10.59
<9.306
<12.19
<4.664
<7.033
<8.262
<12.34
<8.128
<14.51
<7.294
<12.33
<7.171
<10.68
<9.161
<11.03
<5.315
<10.79
<6.133
<8.762
<9.756
<13.81
<7.307
<11.89
<6.413
<10.63
<10.54
<11.84
<5.856
<12.86
<5.687
<9.369
<8.838
<14.89
<6.23
<15.12
<6.288
<11.42
<10.83
<13.83
<6.148
<10.92
<6.973
<11.06
<10.65 I Page 36 of 62 Page 8 of 18 Cs-134 Cs-137 Ba-140 La-140 15 18 60 15
<6.47
<6.558
<24.13
<8.869
<6.129
<6.176
<29.49
<8.495
<6.959
<5.808
<28.53
<8.475
<4.374
<6.366
<31.32
<11.6
<6.702
<6.363
<28.08
<8.269
<6.042
<4.68
<29.12
<7.096
<6.059
<5.891
<29.36
<11.31
<6.022
<4.932
<28.03
<7.225
<6.452
<8.024
<27.58
<10.54
<6.759
<6.68
<23.03
<10.4
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station l
Year: 2022 Analysis: Gamma Isotopic Location Date Mn-54 REQUIRED LLD +
15 MRDOWNGG 08/03/22
<4.858 MRUP GG 08/03/22
<6.12 MRDOWN 11/02/22
<7.033 MRUP 11/02/22
<5.398 MRDOWNGG 11/02/22
<5.927 MRUPGG 11/02/22
<4.635 MRDOWN*
11/14/22
<7.101 MRDOWNGG*
11/14/22
<6.787 GG - indicates duplicate sample Annual Radiological Environmental Operating_Report Co-58 15
<6.006
<5.06
<5.3
<6.805
<5.305
<5.468
<4.784
<6.761 Monitoring Results Tables Table 16, Surface Water - Gamma Units: pCi/L Fe-59 Co-60 Zn-65 Nb-95 Zr-95 1-131 30 15 30 15 30 15
<11.9
<5.483
<13.75
<5.878
<9.26
<10.49
<10.14
<6.841
<11.7
<6.37
<10.15
<11.55
<17.76
<6.674
<11.91
<6.1
<13.19
<11.29
<12.47
<6.449
<10.31
<6.638
<11.24
<11.7
<15.18
<5.741
<11.31
<6.175
<9.763
<12.57
<12.51
<4.915
<14.89
<6.716
<10.76
<9.9
<12.87
<5.13
<11.66
<8.049
<9.602
<10.96
<12.72
<5.337
<12.16
<7.022
<8.678
<10.64
- - indicates annual sample collected during liquid effluent discharge I Page 37 of 62 Page 9 of 18 Cs-134 Cs-137 Ba-140 La-140 15 18 60 15
<6.678
<5.115
<24.37
<8.85
<5.879
<6.718
<27.91
<5.081
<6.964
<5.202
<29.6
<6.743
<7.171
<6.057
<29.77
<9.026
<7.498
<5.77
<27.46
<10.68
<4.79
<4.478
<24.71
<11.12
<7.288
<5.847
<29.11
<13.8
<7.727
<6.275
<26.63
<11.16
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Monitoring Results Tables Table 17, Surface Water-Tritium Analysis: H-3 Units: pCi/L Location I
3000 OUTFALL 007 01/18/22 24600 MRDOWN 02/01/22
<563 MRUP 02/01/22
<554 MRDOWNGG 02/01/22
<557 MRUP GG 02/01/22
<596 OUTFALL 007 02/14/22 1140 OUTFALL 007 03/16/22 6500 OUTFALL 007 04/20/22
<477 OUTFALL 007 GG 04/20/22
<480 MRDOWN 05/04/22
<546 MRUP 05/04/22
<533 MRDOWNGG 05/04/22
<522 MRUP GG 05/04/22
<522 OUTFALL 007 06/15/22
<437 OUTFALL 007 GG 06/15/22
<573 OUTFALL 007 07/20/22
<555 MRDOWN 08/03/22
<587 MRUP 08/03/22
<590 MRDOWNGG 08/03/22
<583 MRUP GG 08/03/22
<567 OUTFALL 007 08/16/22
<510 OUTFALL 007 GG 08/16/22
<525 OUTFALL 007 09/12/22
<616 OUTFALL 007 10/18/22
<595 OUTFALL 007 GG 10/18/22
<606 I Page 38 of 62 Page 10 of 18
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Rev.2022 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Monitoring Results Tables Table 17, Surface Water-Tritium Analysis: H-3 Units: pCi/L Location Date H-3 MRDOWN 11/02/22
<530 MRUP 11/02/22
<566 MRDOWNGG 11/02/22
<533 MRUP GG 11/02/22
<587 MRDOWN*
11/14/22
<587 MRDOWN GG*
11 /14/22
<570 OUTFALL 007 11/15/22 1370 OUTFALL 007 GG 11/15/22 1270 OUTFALL 007 12/12/22 347 OUTFALL 007 GG 12/12/22 382 GG - indicates duplicate sample
- - indicates Annual Sample collected during liquid discharge I Page 39 of 62 Page 11 of 18
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 40 of 62 Annual Radiolo_gical Environmental Operating Report Page 12 of 18 Monitoring Results Tables Table 18, Drinking Water-Gamma, 1-131 Analysis: Gamma Isotopic, 1-131 Units: pCi/L Location Date 1-131 Mn-54 Co-58 Fe-59 Co-60 Zn-65 Nb-95 Zr-95 Cs-134 Cs-137 Ba-140 La-140 REQUIRED LLD +
1 15 15 30 15 30 15 30 15 18 60 15 CONSlWELL3 11/08/22
<0.65
<5.574
<5.797
<11.43
<6.485
<14.03
<7.632
<10.04
<6.275
<6.349
<25.94
<8.62 CONSlWELL 3 GG 11/08/22
<0.844
<4.539
<6.138
<13.04
<6.913
<11.49
<5.479
<10.76
<5.852
<5.5
<23.1
<9.971 PGWELL 11/08/22
<0.571
<7.388
<7.581
<13.49
<7.492
<17.24
<9.179
<10.99
<8.575
<8.488
<23.16
<8.519 PGWELLGG 11/08/22
<0.62
<7.872
<6.292
<8.48
<6.543
<19.8
<7.429
<10.45
<6.514
<8.044
<25.31
<6.392 GG - indicates duplicate sample
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 41 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Monitoring Results Tables Table 19, Drinking Water - Tritium Analysis: H-3 Location Date REQUIRED LLD +
CONSTWELL 3 11/08/22 CONSTWELL 3 GG 11/08/22 PGWELL 11/08/22 PGWELL GG 11/08/22 GG - indicates duplicate sample Table 20, Sediment Units: pCi/L H-3 2000
<575
<560
<589
<564 Analysis: Gamma Isotopic Units: pCi/kg Location Date Cs-134 Cs-137 REQUIRED LLD +
150 180 SEDHAM 09/08/22
<97.68
<81.36 SEDHAM GG 09/08/22
<53.55
<51.94 SEDCONT 09/08/22
<73.9
<61.6 SEDCONTGG 09/08/22
<59.78
<52.04 GG - indicates duplicate sample Page 13 of 18
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 42 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Page 14 of 18 Monitoring Results Tables Table 21, Fish Analysis: Gamma Isotopic Units: pCi/kg Location Collection Mn-54 Co-58 Fe-59 Co-60 Zn-65 Cs-134 Date REQUIRED LLD +
130 130 260 130 260 130 FISHDOWN 08/31/22
<43.71
<36.58
<96.53
<55.01
<106.6
<47.48 FISHDOWNGG 08/31/22
<55.76
<61.6
<146.5
<59.52
<136.1
<53.41 FISHUP 08/31/22
<59.34
<63.87
<145.3
<73.23
<123.3
<66.11 FISHUP GG 08/31/22
<44.04
<46.68
<90.07
<50.18
<79.22
<43.97 GG - indicates duplicate sample Table 22, Food Products Analysis: Gamma Isotopic, 1-131 Units: pCUkg Location Collection Date 1-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 REQUIRED LLD +
60 60 80 VEG-CONT 02/14/22
<22.06
<27.17
<22.47 VEG-J 02/14/22
<25.18
<23.98
<18.49 VEG-CONT 05/19/22
<42.13
<27.22
<22.39 VEG-J 05/19/22
<26.82
<27.59
<24.19 VEG-CONTGG 05/19/22
<29.79
<24.54
<23.38 Cs-137 150
<47.95
<49.66
<49.63
<36.47
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station l
Year: 2022 I Page 43 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental ()perating R_eport Monitoring Results Tables Table 22, Food Products Analysis: Gamma Isotopic, 1-131 Location Collection Date 1-131 VEG-J GG 05/19/22
<35.42 VEG-CONT 08/22/22
<47.52 VEG-J 08/24/22
<45.19 VEG-CONT 11/14/22
<31.28 VEG-J 11/14/22
<31.85 GG - indicates duplicate sample Page 15 of 18 Units: pCi/kg Cs-134 Cs-137
<23.26
<26.23
<22.34
<23.57
<24.7
<34.99
<29.57
<28.48
<34.84
<22.02
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 44 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Page 16 of 18 Monitoring Results Tables Table 23, Special Samples, Surface Water - Tritium Analysis: H-3 Units: pCi/L Location Date H-3 REQUIRED LLD +
3000 OUTFALL 007 01/06/22 9320 OUTFALL 007 GG 01/06/22 10100 OUTFALL 007 01/17/22 137000 OUTFALL 007 01/19/22 73800 OUTFALL 007 01/24/22 14120 OUTFALL 007 01/27/22 193000 OUTFALL 007 01/31/22 52100 OUTFALL 007 02/04/22 261000 OUTFALL 007 02/08/22 1836 OUTFALL 007 02/11/22 26600 OUTFALL 007 02/17/22 1480 OUTFALL 007 02/21/22 18800 OUTFALL 007 02/22/22 7550 OUTFALL 007 02/24/22 7800 OUTFALL 007 02/28/22
<424 OUTFALL 007 03/03/22
<550 OUTFALL 007 03/04/22
<535 OUTFALL 007 03/07/22
<531 OUTFALL 007 03/09/22
<562 OUTFALL 007 03/10/22 5240 OUTFALL 007 03/14/22
<613 OUTFALL 007 03/17/22 8290 OUTFALL 007 GG 03/17/22 10500 OUTFALL 007 03/21/22
<593 OUTFALL 007 GG 03/21/22
<614
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 l Page 45 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Qperatina Report Page 17 of 18 Monitoring Results Tables Table 23, Special Samples, Surface Water - Tritium Analysis: H-3 Units: pCi/L Location Date H-3 OUTFALL 007 03/23/22 5700 OUTFALL 007 03/24/22
<459 OUTFALL 007 03/28/22
<477 OUTFALL 007 03/31/22
<449 OUTFALL 007 04/05/22
<522 OUTFALL 007 04/08/22
<513 OUTFALL 007 04/14/22
<570 OUTFALL 007 04/11/22 857 OUTFALL 007 04/12/22
<558 OUTFALL 007 04/18/22
<515 OUTFALL 007 04/21/22
<518 OUTFALL 007 04/25/22 1230 OUTFALL 007 04/29/22
<543 OUTFALL 007 05/02/22
<544 OUTFALL 007 05/05/22
<556 OUTFALL 007 05/09/22
<509 OUTFALL 007 05/12/22
<558 OUTFALL 007 05/16/22
<528 OUTFALL 007 05/17/22
<521 OUTFALL 007 GG 05/17/22
<541 OUTFALL 007 05/19/22
<492 OUTFALL 007 05/23/22
<507 OUTFALL 007 05/26/22
<503 OUTFALL 007 05/30/22
<518 OUTFALL 007 06/02/22
<518 GG - indicates duplicate sample
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 46 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Page 18 of 17 Monitoring Results Tables Table 24, Special Samples, Surface Water - Gamma Isotopic Analysis: Gamma Isotopic Units: pCi/L Location Date Mn-54 Co-58 Fe-59 Co-60 Zn-65 Nb-95 Zr-95 1-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 Ba-140 La-140 REQUIRED LLD +
15 15 30 15 30 15 30 15 15 18 60 15 OSN 007 02/11/22
<4.552
<6.263
<10.11
<5.986
<10.99
<4.633
<8.475
<13.99
<5.848
<4.113
<25.61
<10.13 OSN 007 03/17/22
<5.844
<6.213
<11.59
<5.918
<6.439
<5.645
<11
<8.234
<7.645
<6.172
<24.69
<10.61 OSN 007GG 03/17/22
<6.229
<7.172
<16.88
<6.8
<15.97
<7.18
<12.68
<12.05
<7.703
<8.072
<32.96
<10.01 OSN 007 06/20/22
<5.383
<5.138
<9.173
<3.855
<11.6
<4.793
<9.427
<7.5
<5.696
<5.539
<25.59
<6.168 OSN 007GG 06/20/22
<6.119
<5.939
<14.05
<6.86
<11.55
<6.149
<12.22
<9.716
<7.496
<5.952
<33.25
<7.034 OSN 007 09/19/22
<6.309
<6.27
<11.79
<5.725
<12.07
<6.854
<11.86
<8.78
<8.678
<5.505
<29.14
<9.649 OSN 007GG 09/19/22
<5.311
<6.513
<16.47
<7.565
<9.234
<4.209
<9.79
<9.306
<7.151
<6.418
<28.21
<8.582 OSN 007 12/05/22
<7.285
<7.672
<16.07
<7.978
<18.85
<6.705
<14.95
<9.038
<9.676
<5.483
<33.81
<8.889 OSN 007GG 12/05/22
<6.002
<6.496
<12
<4.803
<10.98
<6.206
<11.56
<9.693
<7.715
<6.826
<25.79
<10.33 GG - indicates duplicate sample
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2022 I Page 47 of 62 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report ATTACHMENT 3 INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON RES UL TS Quality control data from the following offsite environmental laboratories are summarized in the following pages.
Teledyne Brown Engineering Environmental Dosimetry Company I Stanford Dosimetry.
TELEDYNE BROWN ENGINEERING The TBE Laboratory analyzed Performance Evaluation (PE) samples of air particulate (AP), air iodine, milk, soil, vegetation, and water matrices for various analytes. The PE samples supplied by Analytics Inc., Environmental Resource Associates (ERA) and Department of Energy (DOE)
Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP), were evaluated against the following pre-set acceptance criteria:
A.
Analytics Evaluation Criteria Analytics' evaluation report provides a ratio of TBE's result and Analytics' known value. Since flag values are not assigned by Analytics, TBE evaluates the reported ratios based on internal QC requirements based on the DOE MAPEP criteria.
B.
ERA Evaluation Criteria ERA's evaluation report provides an acceptance range for control and warning limits with associated flag values. ERA's acceptance limits are established per the US EPA, National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Conference (NELAC), state-specific Performance Testing (PT) program requirements or ERA's SOP for the Generation of Performance Acceptance Limits, as applicable. The acceptance limits are either determined by a regression equation specific to each analyte or a fixed percentage limit promulgated under the appropriate regulatory document.
C.
DOE Evaluation Criteria MAPEP's evaluation report provides an acceptance range with associated flag values. MAPEP defines three levels of performance:
Acceptable (flag = "A") - result within +/- 20% of the reference value Acceptable with Warning (flag = "W') - result falls in the +/- 20% to +/- 30% of the reference value Not Acceptable (flag = "N") - bias is greater than 30% of the reference value Note: The Department of Energy (DOE) Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP) samples are created to mimic conditions found at DOE sites which do not resemble typical environmental samples obtained at commercial nuclear power facilities.
For the TBE laboratory, 142 out of 150 analyses performed met the specified acceptance criteria. Eight analyses did not meet the specified acceptance criteria and were addressed through the TBE Corrective Action Program. NOTE: Two analyses (soil for Tc-99 and U-238) that did not meet acceptance criteria was performed for TBE information and is not on the list of required ICP analyses. A summary is found below:
- 1.
The Analytics March 2022 AP Ce-141 result was evaluated as Not Acceptable. The reported value for Ce-141 was 60.9 pCi and the known result was 42.0 pCi/L (1.45 ratio of reported result vs. known; TBE's internal acceptance range is 0. 70 - 1.30). This sample was used as the workgroup duplicate with a result of 45.7 (109% of known) and was also counted on a different detector with a result of 50.9 (121 % of known). This was TB E's first
failure for AP Ce-141. (NCR 22-04)
- 2.
The MAPEP February 2022 Urine U-234 & U-238 results were evaluated as Not Acceptable. TBE's reported values of 0.142 and 0.0254 were above the known upper ranges of 0.0096 and 0.0134 respectively for U-234 and U-238. These spiked values were below TBE's typical MDC for urine client samples. The samples were re-prepped using a larger sample aliquot and counted for 60 hours6.944444e-4 days <br />0.0167 hours <br />9.920635e-5 weeks <br />2.283e-5 months <br /> as opposed to 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br />. The recount results were 0.00732 for U-234 and 0.0119 for U-238 (both within acceptable range). MAPEP urine samples will be flagged to use a larger sample aliquot and counting time than typical client samples. MAPEP did not include any urine cross-check samples in August. (NCR 22-05)
- 3.
The ERA MRAD September 2022 AP Pu-238 was evaluated as Not Acceptable. The reported value was 38.8 pCi and the known result was 29.9 (acceptance range 22.6 -
36.7). The AP filter was cut in half prior to digestion (shared with Fe-55) but should have been complete digested together and aliquoted afterwards like typical client samples. This is the first failure for AP Pu-238. (NCR 22-19)
- 4.
The ERA October 2022 water Uranium result was evaluated as Not Acceptable. The reported value was 10.54 pCi/L and the known was 8.53 (acceptance range 6.60- 9.88) or 124% of the known (acceptable for TBE QC). The 2-sigma error was 3.2, placing the reported result well within the acceptable range. This sample was used as the workgroup duplicate with a result of 8.2 +/- 2.9 pCi/L (also within the acceptable range). All other QA was reviewed with no anomalies. (NCR 22-20)
- 5.
The Analytics AP Co-60 result was evaluated as Not Acceptable. The reported value was 207 pCi and the known was 147 (141% of the known). TBE's internal QC acceptance is 70 -130%. All QA was reviewed with no anomalies. This sample was used as the workgroup duplicate and counted on a different detector with a result of 167 pCi (114% of the known). This is the first failure for AP Co average result ratio compared to the known is 109%. (NCR 22-21)
- 6.
The MAPEP August 2022 water Tc-99 result was evaluated as Not Acceptable. The reported value was 1.86 +/- 0.414 Bq/L for this "false positive" test. The evaluation of the submitted result to the 3 times the uncertainty indicated a slight positive. This sample was used as the workgroup duplicate with a result of 0.88 +/- 0.374 Bq/L. All QC was reviewed, and no anomalies found. This is the first unacceptable since the resumption of reporting water Tc-99 for the 3rd quarter of 2020. TBE to known ratios have ranged from 94-109% during this time. (NCR 22-22)
The Inter-Laboratory Comparison Program provides evidence of "in control" counting systems and methods, and that the laboratories are producing accurate and reliable data.
Prepared By:
Approved By:
ENVIRONMENTAL DOSIMETRY COMPANY ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE STATUS REPORT January - December 2022 J-4=-* d,d!-od Date:
J/J_ i /._.2--?
i-\\edJGhJL Date:
3/tJitf/8~
Environmental Dosimetry Company 1 O Ashton Lane Sterling, MA 01564
TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES....................................................................................................................... iii EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
............................................................................................................ iv I.
INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................ 1 A.
QC Program........................................................................................................ 1 B.
QA Program........................................................................................................ 1 II.
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA................................................................... 1 A.
Acceptance Criteria for Internal Evaluations........................................................ 1 B.
QC Investigation Criteria and Result Reporting................................................... 3 C.
Reporting of Environmental Dosimetry Results to EDC Customers..................... 3 111.
DATA
SUMMARY
FOR ISSUANCE PERIOD JANUARY-DECEMBER 2022................. 3 A.
General Discussion............................................................................................. 3 B.
Result Trending.................................................................................................. 4 IV.
STATUS OF EDC CONDITION REPORTS (CR)........................................................... 4 V.
STATUS OF AUDITS/ASSESSMENTS.......................................................................... 4 A.
Internal................................................................................................................ 4 B.
External.............................................................................................................. 4 VI.
PROCEDURES AND MANUALS REVISED DURING JANUARY - DECEMBER 2022... 4 VII.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS................................................................. 4 VIII.
REFERENCES............................................................................................................... 4 APPENDIX A DOSIMETRY QUALITY CONTROL TRENDING GRAPHS LIST OF TABLES
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
Percentage of Individual Analyses Which Passed EDC Internal Criteria, January - December 2022 Mean Dosimeter Analyses (n=6), January - December 2022 Summary of Independent QC Results for 2022
-ii-5 5
5
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
Routine quality control (QC) testing was performed for dosimeters issued by the Environmental Dosimetry Company (EDC).
During this annual period100% (72/72) of the individual dosimeters, evaluated against the EDC internal performance acceptance criteria (high-energy photons only), met the criterion for accuracy and 100% (72/72) met the criterion for precision (Table 1). In addition, 100% (12/12) of the dosimeter sets evaluated against the internal tolerance limits met EDC acceptance criteria (Table 2) and 100% (6/6) of independent testing passed the performance criteria (Table 3). Trending graphs, which evaluate performance statistic for high-energy photon irradiations and co-located stations are given in Appendix A.
One internal assessment was performed in 2022.There were no findings.
I.
INTRODUCTION The TLD systems at the Environmental Dosimetry Company (EDC) are calibrated and operated to ensure consistent and accurate evaluation of TLDs. The quality of the dosimetric results reported to EDC clients is ensured by in-house performance testing and independent performance testing by EDC clients, and both internal and client directed program assessments.
The purpose of the dosimetry quality assurance program is to provide performance documentation of the routine processing of EDC dosimeters. Performance testing provides a statistical measure of the bias and precision of dosimetry processing against a reliable standard, which in turn points out any trends or performance changes. Two programs are used:
A.
QC Program Dosimetry quality control tests are performed on EDC Panasonic 814 Environmental dosimeters. These tests include: (1) the in-house testing program coordinated by the EDC QA Officer and (2) independent test perform by EDC clients. In-house test are performed using six pairs of 814 dosimeters, a pair is reported as an individual result and six pairs are reported as the mean result.
Results of these tests are described in this report.
Excluded from this report are instrumentation checks. Although instrumentation checks represent an important aspect of the quality assurance program, they are not included as process checks in this report. Instrumentation checks represent between 5-10% of the TLDs processed.
B.
QA Program An internal assessment of dosimetry activities is conducted annually by the Quality Assurance Officer (Reference 1). The purpose of the assessment is to review procedures, results, materials or components to identify opportunities to improve or enhance processes and/or services.
- 11.
PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA A.
Acceptance Criteria for Internal Evaluations
- 1.
Bias For each dosimeter tested, the measure of bias is the percent deviation of the reported result relative to the delivered exposure. The percent deviation relative to the delivered exposure is calculated as follows:
where:
(H-H)
I I 100 H;
H; =
the corresponding reported exposure for the ith dosimeter (i.e., the reported exposure)
Hi = the exposure delivered to the ith irradiated dosimeter (i.e., the delivered exposure) 1of 6
- 2.
Mean Bias For each group of test dosimeters, the mean bias is the average percent deviation of the reported result relative to the delivered exposure. The mean percent deviation relative to the delivered exposure is calculated as follows:
where:
Precision H; =
the corresponding reported exposure for the ith dosimeter (i.e., the reported exposure)
H, =
the exposure delivered to the ith irradiated test dosimeter (i.e., the delivered exposure) n =
the number of dosimeters in the test group For a group of test dosimeters irradiated to a given exposure, the measure of precision is the percent deviation of individual results relative to the mean reported exposure. At least two values are required for the determination of precision. The measure of precision for the i th dosimeter is:
where:
H; = the reported exposure for the ith dosimeter (i.e., the reported exposure)
R = the mean reported exposure; i.e., R = ~H:(~)
n = the number of dosimeters in the test group
- 3.
EDC Internal Tolerance Limits All evaluation criteria are taken from the "EDC Quality System Manual,"
(Reference 2). These criteria are only applied to individual test dosimeters irradiated with high-energy photons (Cs-137) and are as follows for Panasonic Environmental dosimeters: +/- 15% for bias and +/-
12.8% for precision.
2of 6
B.
QC Investigation Criteria and Result Reporting EDC Quality System Manual (Reference 2) specifies when an investigation is required due to a QC analysis that has failed the EDC bias criteria. The criteria are as follows:
- 1.
No investigation is necessary when an individual QC result falls outside the QC performance criteria for accuracy.
- 2.
Investigations are initiated when the mean of a QC processing batch is outside the performance criterion for bias.
C.
Reporting of Environmental Dosimetry Results to EDC Customers
- 1.
All results are to be reported in a timely fashion.
- 4.
If the QA Officer determines that an investigation is required for a process, the results shall be issued as normal. If the QC results prompting the investigation have a mean bias from the known of greater than +/-20%, the results shall be issued with a note indicating that they may be updated in the future, pending resolution of a QA issue.
- 5.
Environmental dosimetry results do not require updating if the investigation has shown that the mean bias between the original results and the corrected results, based on applicable correction factors from the investigation, does not exceed +/-20%.
Ill.
DATA
SUMMARY
FOR ISSUANCE PERIOD JANUARY-DECEMBER 2022 A.
General Discussion Results of performance tests conducted are summarized and discussed in the following sections. Summaries of the performance tests for the reporting period are given in Tables 1 through 3 and Figures 1 through 4.
Table 1 provides a summary of individual dosimeter results evaluated against the EDC internal acceptance criteria for high-energy photons only. During this period100% (72/72) of the individual dosimeters, evaluated against these criteria, met the tolerance limits for accuracy and 100% (72/72) met the criterion for precision. A graphical interpretation is provided in Figures 1 and 2.
Table 2 provides the bias and standard deviation results for each group (N=S) of dosimeters evaluated against the internal tolerance criteria. Overall,100% (12/12) of the dosimeter sets, evaluated against the internal tolerance performance criteria, met these criteria. A graphical interpretation is provided in Figure 3.
Table 3 presents the independent blind spike results for dosimeters processed during this annual period. All results passed the performance acceptance criterion. Figure 4 is a graphical interpretation of Seabrook Station blind co-located station results.
3of 6
B.
Result Trending One of the main benefits of performing quality control tests on a routine basis is to identify trends or performance changes. The results of the Panasonic environmental dosimeter performance tests are presented in Appendix A. The results are evaluated against each of the performance criteria listed in Section II, namely: individual dosimeter accuracy, individual dosimeter precision, and mean bias.
All of the results presented in Appendix A are plotted sequentially by processing date.
IV.
STATUS OF EDC CONDITION REPORTS (CR)
No condition reports were issued during this annual period.
V.
STATUS OF AUDITS/ASSESSMENTS
- 1.
Internal EDC Internal Quality Assurance Assessment was conducted during the fourth quarter 2022. There were no findings identified.
- 2.
External None.
VI.
PROCEDURES AND MANUALS REVISED DURING JANUARY - DECEMBER 2022 Two procedures were reissued with no changes as part of the 5 year review cycle.
VII.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The quality control evaluations continue to indicate the dosimetry processing programs at the EDC satisfy the criteria specified in the Quality System Manual. The EDC demonstrated the ability to meet all applicable acceptance criteria.
VIII.
REFERENCES
- 1.
EDC Quality Control and Audit Assessment Schedule, 2022.
- 2.
EDC Manual 1, Quality System Manual, Rev. 4, September 28, 2020.
4of 6
TABLE 1 PERCENTAGE OF INDIVIDUAL DOSIMETERS THAT PASSED EDC INTERNAL CRITERIA JANUARY - DECEMBER 2022111* 121 Dosimeter. Type Number % Passed Blas Criteria
% Passed Precision Tested Criteria Panasonic Environmental 72 100 100 (1>This table summarizes results of tests conducted by EDC.
(
2>Environmental dosimeter results are free in air.
TABLE 2 MEAN DOSIMETER ANALYSES ~N=6)
JANUARY - DECEMBER 20221 I, 121 Process Date Exposure Level Mean Blas%
Standard Deviation%
4/25/2022 43 1.2 1.8 4/27/2022 62 6.2 1.0 5/05/2022 99 2.3 0.7 7/26/2022 34
-2.6 1.2 7/27/2022 81 0.6 1.7 8/07/2022 107
-3.5 0.7 10/27/2022 52 1.8 0.9 11/02/2022 76 2.0 0.9 11/07/2022 27 7.0 0.7 01/24/2023 38 1.5 1.7 01/26/2023 115
-0.3 2.0 02/14/2023 49 2.3 4.0 Tolerance Limit +/-15%
Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass (1>This table summarizes results of tests conducted by EDC for TLDs issued in 2022.
<2>Environmental dosimeter results are free in air.
TABLE 3
SUMMARY
OF INDEPENDENT DOSIMETER TESTING JANUARY - DECEMBER 2022111, 121 Issuance Period Client 1st Qtr. 2022 Millstone 2na Qtr.2022 Millstone 3
rd Qtr. 2022 Millstone 4m Qtr.2022 Millstone 4m Qtr.2022 PSEG(PNNL) 48mR 4m Qtr.2022 PSEG(PNNL) 95mR 4m Qtr.2022 PSEG(PNNL) 143mR 4m Qtr.2022 PSEG(PNNL) 190mR 4m Qtr.2022 SONGS (1>performance criteria are +/- 15%.
(2>sIind spike irradiations using Cs-137 5of 6 Mean Standard Blas%
Deviation%
-0.6 0.6
-3.9 1.0 0.1 0.5
-2.6 1.2 1.1 1.5 0.7 0.3 2.3 0.8 1.4 0.8
-5.6 1.1 Pass/ Fall Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass
APPENDIX A DOSIMETRY QUALITY CONTROL TRENDING GRAPHS ISSUE PERIOD JANAURY - DECEMBER 2022 6of 6
16 14 12 10 8 ~
6 4 j 0
- 2 --
-8
- 1D J J J
-12,_
---II
-14
- I l1n * * ~
5_
I I
I I
I INDMDUAL ACCURACY ENVIRONMENTAL FIGURE 1
~- ---
I I
PROCESSING DATE
~
~
I
z 0
en u w
er:
a..
-.F-INDMDUAL PRECISION ENVIRONMENTAL FIGURE2 16..,.._ ________________________
12-6 2-0 l....,._
- D
- lit:I a.n, a
-14
//// ///////////// /
PROCESSING DATE
MEAN ACCURACY ENVIRONMENTAL FIGURE3 16 J
14j 12 j.l
~
~
co
~
1
-6~
-ai
- 1Di
.uJ
- H
/
,$.0;
<}, ~/
~~;
,i.'/J'
~/J'
/
/
~/
PROCESSING DATE
~
- 2 CD
~
~J
. :~
- 12-j
- 14-j
-11;J
- 181
-:m v v :;,,'
.:,~<;,
{><:,
¢'..
SEABROOK CO-LOCATE ACCURACY FIGURE4
~q
~
~
,f>
,o'!I
~
~'?
EXPECTED AELD EXPOSURE (nfl/STD. QUARTER
~
~
~-:,
,r..
+.,.. ~