ML24107A887
| ML24107A887 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Grand Gulf  |
| Issue date: | 04/16/2024 |
| From: | Hardy J Entergy Operations |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Document Control Desk |
| References | |
| GNRO2024-00009 | |
| Download: ML24107A887 (1) | |
Text
E) entergy GNRO2024-00009 April 16, 2024 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, 2023 through December 31, 2023.
There are no commitments contained in this submittal. If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at 802-380-5124.
Sin~
,J~
JH/ram
Attachment:
1, Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report
GNRO2024-00009 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 GNRO2024-00009 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report
- } entergy Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Page 1 of 59 YEAR: 2023 Document Number: GNRO 2024-00009 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I
Page 2 of 59 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
.......................... 21 ATTACHMENTS - Sample Deviations........................................................................................................ 28 - Monitoring Results Tables............................................................................................ 29 - lnterlaboratory Comparison Program Results...............................................................44
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I
Page 3 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 1.0 EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
1.1 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program 1.2 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, 2023. 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 2023, 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 2023 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. According to the 2022 Land Use Census, there are no milk producing animals.
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 2023, 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 2023 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: 2023 I
Page 4 of 59 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 NRC 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 2023, environmental sampling was performed for 5 media types addressed in the ODCM and for direct radiation. A total of 603 of the 604 scheduled samples 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.
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I
Page 5 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report
2.0 INTRODUCTION
2.1 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program 2.2 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 2023 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 I
Year: 2023 I Page 6 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating 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 l
Year: 2023 l
Page 7 of 59 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-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) - Sector 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: 2023 l
Page 8 of 59 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 mi.)
- Grand Gulf Road
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 9 of 59 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 Miles) - 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: 2023 I Page 10 of 59 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 such as population centers, nearby Lake Claiborne Entry Gate.
residences, schools, and in 1 or 2 areas to (Special) serve as control locations.
M-07 (Sector G, Radius 5.5 Miles) -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 Miles) - Grand Gulf Military Park.
(Special)
M-14 (Sector B, Radius 18.0 Miles) - 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 Miles) - St. Joseph, Louisiana, Auxiliary Water Tank. (Special)
Requirement SURFACE WATER 1 sample upstream and 1 sample downstream.
1 sample downstream during a Liquid Radwaste Discharge.
1 sample from Outfall 007 GROUNDWATER Samples from 2 sources Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 11 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental O~rating ~Report Table 3, Exposure Pathway - Waterborne Sample Point Description Distance and Direction MRUP (Sector R, Radius 1.8 Miles) - At least 4500 ft upstream of the GGNS discharge point into the Mississippi River to allow adequate mixing of the Mississippi and Big Black Rivers.
MRDOWN (Sector N, Radius 1.6 Miles) - At least 5000 ft downstream of the GGNS discharge point in the Mississippi River near Radial Well No. 1.
MRDOWN (Sector P, Radius 1.3 Miles) - Downstream of the GGNS discharge point in the Mississippi River near Radial Well No. 5.
OUTFALL 007 (Sector N, Radius 0.2 Miles) - Storm Drain System PGWELL (Sector G, Radius 5.0 Miles) - Port Gibson Wells -
Taken from distribution system or one of the five wells.
CONSTWELL (Sector Q, Radius 0.4 Miles) - GGNS Construction Water Well - Taken from distribution system or the well.
Sampling and Collection Frequency 92 days 366 days 31 days 366 days Type and Frequency Of Analyses Gamma isotopic and tritium analysis; 92 days Gamma isotopic and tritium analysis; 366 days Tritium; 31 days Gamma isotopic and tritium analysis; 366 days
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station J
Year: 2023 J Page 12 of 59 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 GGNS discharge point in the sample from upstream area 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: 2023 I Page 13 of 59 Annual Radiological Enyironmental Operating R~ort 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: 2023 I Page 14 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Figure 1, Exposure Pathway NUCLEAR POWER PLANT
~
LIQUID EFFLUENT
/.
0.rtct I ldi1tion
~EL TRANSPORT
-...:. j Cl,
~ --
-~
\\
~ -
Exposure pathways to man
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 15 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Figure 2, Sample Collection Sites -Near Field
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 16 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Figure 3, Sample Collection Sites - Far Field
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 17 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 4.0 INTERPRETATION AND TRENDS OF RESULTS 4.1 Air Particulate and Radioiodine Sample Results 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 2023 there were no samples above the LLD for 1-131. Indicator gross beta air particulate results for 2023 were comparable to results obtained from 2013-2022 of the operational REMP. Also, the 2023 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 2013 - 2022 (Minimum Value) 2023 Average Value 2013 - 2022 (Maximum Value)
Preoperational Result 0.008 0.024 0.040 0.032 In the absence of plant-related gamma radionuclides, gross beta activity is attributed to naturally occurring radionuclides. Table 7, 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.
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 18 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 4.2 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 10.0 millirem/quarter (mR/Qtr) shown in Table 7 for 2023 is within the historical bounds of 2013 -2022 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) 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 2023 10.0 10.1 11.2 4.3 Waterborne Sample Results Analytical results for 2023 surface water and drinking water samples were similar to those reported in previous years. Gamma radionuclides analytical results for 2023 surface water samples were similar to those reported in previous years. Tritium detected in Grand Gulf Nuclear Station surface water indicator samples is attributed to washout and entrainment of normal, previously monitored gaseous effluents.
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 entrainment of normal, previously monitored gaseous effluents. As a result, tritium is
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 19 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report occasionally observed. Tritium was measured during January (736 pCi/L) and December (9,620 pCi/L) at the Outfall 007 location. Tritium was not observed in the remaining Outfall 007 samples collected during 2023. Results are reported as annual average pCi/1.
Monitoring Period 2013-2022 (Minimum Value) 2023 Average Value 2013 - 2022 (Maximum Value)
Preoperational Result 347 5072 24600 2739 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 2023 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 2023 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 2023, 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 2023
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD 2013-2022
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD Preoperational
<LLD
< LLD
< LLD
<LLD 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 2023 and levels of radionuclides remain similar to those obtained in previous operational years.
Results from 2023 are summarized in Table 7.
4.3.3 Groundwater Groundwater monitoring data collected during administration of the Groundwater Protection Initiative (GPI) site program are included in the Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report.
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 20 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 4.4 Soil Sample Results Sediment samples were collected from two locations in 2023 and analyzed for gamma radionuclides. Listed below is a comparison of 2023 indicator results to the 2013 - 2022 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 2013 - 2022 (Minimum Value) 2023 Value 2012 - 2022 (Maximum Value)
Preoperational 4.5 Ingestion Sample Results 4.5.1 Milk Sample Results Result
<LLD
< LLD 39.9 295.0 Milk samples were not collected during 2023 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 2023, 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.
In 2023, food product samples were collected from two locations and analyzed for plant related lodine-131 and gamma radionuclides. The 2023 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 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.
4.7 Plant
Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 21 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report 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 8
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 a
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.
5.0 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM
SUMMARY
- 1.
Table 7, Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Summary, summarizes data for the 2023 REMP program.
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 22 of 59 Annual Radiologica! Envirqnmental 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 (Note2]
Mean (F)[Note 3]
Mean (F)(Note 3]
Non-Routine
[Note 1)
[Range]
Mean (F)[Note 3)
Results [Note SJ Location [Note 41
[Range]
[Range]
GB I 208 0.01 0.0241 (156/ 156)
AS-20 GR 0.0245 (52 I 52) 0.0250 (52 I 52) 0 Air
[0.0095 - 0.0505]
(Sector L, 0.9 mi)
[0.0108 - 0.0472]
[0.0109 - 0.0445]
Particulates GS/ 16 (pCi/m3)
Cs-134 0.05
<LLD NIA NIA
<LLD 0
CS-137 0.06
<LLD NIA NIA
<LLD 0
Airborne 1-131 / 208 0.07
< LLD 0
Iodine (pCi/ m3)
Inner Ring Gamma / 55
[Note6]
10.0 (55 / 55)
M-99 12.9 (4 / 4)
[6.7 -14.6]
(Sector K, 0.4 mi.)
[11.7 -14.6]
Outer Ring Gamma/ 28
[Note6]
10.1 (28 / 28)
M-57 12.2 (4 I 4)
NIA 0
TLDs (mR/Qtr)
[5.5 - 13.3]
(Sector F, 4.5 mi.)
[11.1-13.3]
Special Interest TLDs Gamma/ 28
[Note6]
10.4 (28 I 28)
M-01 11.7(4/4)
NIA 0
(mR/Qtr)
[8.1 -12.6]
(Sector E, 3.5 mi.)
[10.9 - 12.6]
Control TLD Gamma/ 4
[Note6]
NIA NIA NIA 11.2(4/4) 0 (mR/Qtr)
[10.3-12.7]
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station J
Year: 2023 J Page 23 of 59 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 (Note2]
Mean (F)[Note 3]
Mean (F)[Note 31 Non-Routine
[Note 1)
[Range]
Mean (F)INote 31 Results [Note SJ Location (Note 41
[Range]
[Range)
H-3 / 42 3000 5072 (4 / 42)
Outfall 007 5072 (4/ 24)
< LLD 0
[651 - 9620]
(Sector N, 0.2 mi.)
[651 - 9620]
GS I 18 Mn-54 15
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Fe-59 30
< LLD 0
Co-58 15
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Surface Water Co-60 15
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
(pCi/1)
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
1-131 15
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Cs-134 15
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Cs-137 18
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Ba-140 60
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
La-140 15
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 24 of 59 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 of Analyses LLD [Note2]
Mean (F)!Note 31 Non-Routine (Units)
[Note 1]
[Range]
Mean (F)[Note 3]
Mean (F)[Note 31 Results [Note SJ Location [Note 41
[Range]
[Range]
1-13114 1
< LLD 0
H-314 2000
< LLD 0
GS I 4 Mn-54 15
< LLD 0
Fe-59 30
< LLD 0
Drinking Water Co-58 15
< LLD 0
(pCi/1)
Co-60 15
< LLD 0
Zn-65 30
< LLD 0
Zr-95 30
< LLD 0
Nb-95 15
< LLD 0
Cs-134 15
< LLD 0
Cs-137 18
< LLD 0
Ba-140 60
< LLD 0
La-140 15
< LLD 0
Sediment GSl4 Cs-134 150
(pCi/kg)
Cs-137 180
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 25 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Table 7, Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Su'mmary Location with the Highest Annual Control Sample Type Type/ Number Indicator Locations Mean Locations Number of (Units) of Analyses LLD [Note2)
Mean (F)[Note 3)
Mean (F)INote 31 Non-Routine
[Note 1)
[Range]
Mean (f)[Note 3)
Results [Note SJ Location [Note 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 N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Cs-137 150
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
1-131 / 12 60
< LLD N/A N/A N/A 0
Food Products GS/ 12 (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: 2023 I Page 26 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Table 7, Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Summary Type/ Number Indicator Locations Location with the Highest Annual Control Sample Type Mean Number of of Analyses LLD [Note2]
Mean (F)[Note 3]
Locations (Units)
[Note 1]
Mean (F)[Note 3]
Non-Routine
[Range]
Mean (F)[Note 3]
Results [Note 51 Location [Note 41
[Range]
[Range)
GS/8 Mn-54 15
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Fe-59 30
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Co-58 15
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Co-60 15
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Surface Water Zn-65 30
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
(Special)
Zr-95 30
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
(pCi/1)
Nb-95 15
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
1-131 15
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Cs-134 15
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Cs-137 18
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Ba-140 60
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
La-140 15
< LLD N/A N/A
< LLD 0
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station l
Year:2023 I Page 27 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Table 7, Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Summary Location with the Highest Annual Sample Type Type/ Number Indicator Locations Mean of Analyses LLD [Note2]
Mean (F)(Note 3]
(Units)
[Note 1]
[Range]
Mean (F)INote 31 Location [Note 41
[Range]
GS/ 1 Mn-54 130
< LLD N/A N/A Meat Fe-59 260
< LLD N/A N/A (Special)
Co-58 130
Co-60 130
< LLD N/A N/A Zn-65 260
< LLD N/A N/A Cs-134 130
< 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)[Note 3]
[Range]
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD
< LLD Number of Non-Routine Results [Note 51 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 l
Year: 2023 I Page 28 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental O_eerating Report Page 1 of 1 Sample Deviations Table 8, Sample Deviations Table Comment Sample Sample Media Date Problem Evaluation I Actions No.
Affected Location During collection of 1st quarter 2023 TLDs, monitoring location M-96 1
TLD M-96 03/30/23 TLD Lost could not be located. Field observation indicated the TLD may have been lost when a fallen tree damaged the pole it was attached to.
CR-GGN-2023-01972 documents the condition.
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 29 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Page 1 of 15 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-1 AS-7 AS-20 AS-3 [Note 1)
(Indicator)
(Indicator)
(Indicator)
(Control)
REQUIRED LLD -+
0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 12/27/22 01 /03/23 0.0157 0.0166 0.0178 0.0184 01 /03/23 01 /10/23 0.0196 0.0184 0.0201 0.0195 01 /10/23 01 /17/23 0.0273 0.0280 0.0301 0.0283 01 /17/23 01 /24/23 0.0181 0.0157 0.0222 0.0191 01 /24/23 01 /31 /23 0.0146 0.0197 0.0128 0.0161 01 /31 /23 02/07/23 0.0201 0.0219 0.0203 0.0232 02/07/23 02/14/23 0.0203 0.0188 0.0163 0.0245 02/14/23 02/21 /23 0.0177 0.0141 0.0183 0.0172 02/21 /23 02/28/23 0.0198 0.0193 0.0206 0.0194 02/28/23 03/07/23 0.0212 0.0175 0.0194 0.0174 03/07/23 03/14/23 0.0239 0.0216 0.0209 0.0251 03/14/23 03/21 /23 0.0208 0.0241 0.0233 0.0200 03/21 /23 03/28/23 0.0223 0.0247 0.0225 0.0250 03/28/23 04/04/23 0.0240 0.0253 0.0239 0.0246 04/04/23 04/11/23 0.00952 0.00976 0.0108 0.0109 04/11 /23 04/18/23 0.0135 0.0141 0.0164 0.0174 04/18/23 04/25/23 0.0209 0.0194 0.0228 0.0214 04/25/23 05/02/23 0.0195 0.018 0.0178 0.0205 05/02/23 05/09/23 0.0222 0.0182 0.0174 0.0228 05/09/23 05/16/23 0.0226 0.0233 0.0190 0.0216 05/16/23 05/23/23 0.0208 0.0192 0.0229 0.0234 05/23/23 05/30/23 0.0249 0.0278 0.0267 0.0258 05/30/23 06/06/23 0.0216 0.0267 0.0236 0.0274 06/06/23 06/13/23 0.0242 0.0265 0.0270 0.0282 06/13/23 06/20/23 0.0152 0.0182 0.0172 0.0243 06/20/23 06/27/23 0.0206 0.0193 0.0211 0.0200 06/27/23 07/04/23 0.0212 0.0219 0.0229 0.0258
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 30 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Page 2 of 15 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-1 AS-7 AS-20 AS-3 (Note 1)
(Indicator)
(Indicator)
(Indicator)
(Control)
REQUIRED LLD ~
0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 07/04/23 07/11/23 0.0112 0.0145 0.0143 0.0152 07/11/23 07/18/23 0.0197 0.0211 0.0188 0.0218 07/18/23 07/25/23 0.0278 0.0285 0.0279 0.0293 07/25/23 08/01/23 0.0351 0.0339 0.0359 0.0298 08/01/23 08/08/23 0.0250 0.0230 0.0239 0.0317 08/08/23 08/15/23 0.0186 0.0175 0.0238 0.0216 08/15/23 08/22/23 0.0272 0.0305 0.0319 0.0268 08/22/23 08/29/23 0.0440 0.0377 0.0380 0.0429 08/29/23 09/05/23 0.0276 0.0274 0.0262 0.0296 09/05/23 09/12/23 0.0257 0.0243 0.0266 0.0276 09/12/23 09/19/23 0.0445 0.0440 0.0472 0.0417 09/19/23 09/26/23 0.0340 0.0330 0.0365 0.0329 09/26/23 10/03/23 0.0306 0.0330 0.0303 0.0362 10/03/23 10/10/23 0.0224 0.0232 0.0246 0.0253 10/10/23 10/17/23 0.0208 0.0168 0.0180 0.0183 10/17/23 10/24/23 0.0343 0.0307 0.0337 0.0308 10/24/23 10/31/23 0.0194 0.0197 0.0197 0.0232 10/31/23 11/07/23 0.0289 0.0309 0.0337 0.0261 11/07/23 11/14/23 0.0505 0.0238 0.0236 0.0259 11/14/23 11/21/23 0.0269 0.0272 0.0331 0.0282 11/21/23 11/28/23 0.0426 0.0374 0.0439 0.0445 11/28/23 12/05/23 0.0274 0.0257 0.0306 0.0274 12/05/23 12/12/23 0.0270 0.0243 0.0222 0.0245 12/12/23 12/19/23 0.0235 0.0276 0.0314 0.0249 12/19/23 12/26/23 0.0243 0.0217 0.0223 0.0268
[Note 1]- Station with highest annual mean.
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 31 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Page 3 of 15 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 12/27/22 01/03/23
<0.03215
<0.03159
<0.03274
<0.0323 01 /03/23 01 /10/23
<0.04344
<0.04178
<0.04339
<0.04328 01 /10/23 01 /17/23
<0.03374
<0.03166
<0.0339
<0.03371 01 /17/23 01/24/23
<0.02814
<0.02657
<0.02842
<0.02719 01 /24/23 01 /31 /23
<0.03414
<0.03334
<0.0344
<0.03396 01 /31 /23 02/07/23
<0.03247
<0.03242
<0.03355
<0.03288 02/07/23 02/14/23
<0.02569
<0.02486
<0.02576
<0.02535 02/14/23 02/21 /23
<0.02976
<0.02895
<0.03
<0.03017 02/21 /23 02/28/23
<0.0238
<0.03524
<0.03651
<0.03472 02/28/23 03/07/23
<0.03414
<0.03278
<0.03455
<0.03346 03/07/23 03/14/23
<0.04189
<0.04054
<0.04274
<0.04215 03/14/23 03/21 /23
<0.03362
<0.03244
<0.03338
<0.0322 03/21 /23 03/28/23
<0.02358
<0.02314
<0.02477
<0.02317 03/28/23 04/04/23
<0.02515
<0.02459
<0.02546
<0.02474 04/04/23 04/11/23
<0.02434
<0.02401
<0.02469
<0.02503 04/11 /23 04/18/23
<0.05558
<0.05702
<0.05809
<0.05543 04/18/23 04/25/23
<0.02761
<0.02763
<0.02804
<0.02776 04/25/23 05/02/23
<0.04729
<0.04596
<0.04681
<0.04645 05/02/23 05/09/23
<0.03181
<0.03101
<0.03164
<0.03202 05/09/23 05/16/23
<0.05846
<0.05732
<0.05907
<0.0572 05/16/23 05/23/23
<0.03556
<0.03464
<0.03566
<0.03492 05/23/23 05/30/23
<0.03366
<0.01487
<0.03352
<0.03299 05/30/23 06/06/23
<0.04779
<0.01961
<0.04794
<0.04789 06/06/23 06/13/23
<0.03231
<0.03169
<0.03233
<0.03154 06/13/23 06/20/23
<0.04906
<0.06347
<0.0649
<0.03955 06/20/23 06/27/23
<0.03838
<0.0383
<0.03759
<0.03703 06/27/23 07/04/23
<0.06008
<0.06056
<0.06121
<0.06099
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 32 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Page 4 of 15 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 07/04/23 07/11/23
<0.02545
<0.01223
<0.02588
<0.02683 07/11/23 07/18/23
<0.03018
<0.02882
<0.02932
<0.02765 07/18/23 07/25/23
<0.05296
<0.05472
<0.05537
<0.0549 07/25/23 08/01/23
<0.0214
<0.02146
<0.02165
<0.02154 08/01/23 08/08/23
<0.05162
<0.05189
<0.05244
<0.05153 08/08/23 08/15/23
<0.02691
<0.03546
<0.03594
<0.03597 08/15/23 08/22/23
<0.05442
<0.05504
<0.05561
<0.05531 08/22/23 08/29/23
<0.02569
<0.03864
<0.03914
<0.04248 08/29/23 09/05/23
<0.03504
<0.03526
<0.0357
<0.03766 09/05/23 09/12/23
<0.02102
<0.05104
<0.05144
<0.05554 09/12/23 09/19/23
<0.01644
<0.03456
<0.03482
<0.03615 09/19/23 09/26/23
<0.05401
<0.05303
<0.05336
<0.05315 09/26/23 10/03/23
<0.03908
<0.03819
<0.03855
<0.03847 10/03/23 10/10/23
<0.05006
<0.04958
<0.05028
<0.02053 10/10/23 10/17/23
<0.04485
<0.04393
<0.04485
<0.01838 10/17/23 10/24/23
<0.02147
<0.01602
<0.02136
<0.02172 10/24/23 10/31/23
<0.03187
<0.03117
<0.03159
<0.03059 10/31/23 11/07/23
<0.04107
<0.04026
<0.0173
<0.04162 11/07/23 11/14/23
<0.03493
<0.03407
<0.03483
<0.03507 11/14/23 11/21/23
<0.05101
<0.04968
<0.05102
<0.05162 11/21/23 11/28/23
<0.02991
<0.01493
<0.02979
<0.03039 11/28/23 12/05/23
<0.03262
<0.01541
<0.03251
<0.03294 12/05/23 12/12/23
<0.04434
<0.01817
<0.04417
<0.04567 12/12/23 12/19/23
<0.03549
<0.03426
<0.03522
<0.03539 12/19/23 12/26/23
<0.02066
<0.02006
<0.02057
<0.02102
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 33 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Page 5 of 15 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
<0.00157
<0.001454 AS-3
<0.001891
<0.001268 02/10/23 AS-7
<0.002328
<0.002329 AS-20
<0.001842
<0.001648 AS-1
<0.002751
<0.002093 AS-3
<0.002935
<0.002012 05/12/23 AS-7
<0.002445
<0.001362 AS-20
<0.001492
<0.001723 AS-1
<0.001863
<0.001446 AS-3 08/11/23
<0.002374
<0.001628 AS-7
<0.003083
<0.002801 AS-20
<0.002028
<0.001116 AS-1
<0.001938
<0.001825 AS-3
<0.001955
<0.001357 11/10/23 AS-7
<0.001921
<0.001352 AS-20
<0.002886
<0.002129
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 34 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Page 6 of 15 Monitoring Results Tables Table 12, Thermoluminescent Dosimeters - Inner Ring Analysis: Gamma Dose I
Units: mrem Station 1st Qtr 2023 2nd Qtr 2023 3rt1 Qtr 2023 4th Qtr 2023 Annual Mean 2023 M-16 10.3 10.0 12.1 11.7 11.0 M-19 8.7 9.0 10.4 10.1 9.5 M-21 12.0 11.3 12.4 12.2 12.0 M-22 8.3 7.7 9.0 9.2 8.5 M-23 8.0 8.6 8.8 9.7 8.8 M-25 7.5 6.7 9.4 9.3 8.2 M-28 10.4 10.6 11.9 12.0 11.3 M-94 9.8 9.3 11.6 11.0 10.4 M-95 6.8 10.1 7.9 7.7 8.1 M-96 Lost(Note 2) 6.8 10.8 10.4 9.3 M-97 7.1 9.6 8.0 8.2 8.2 M-98 11.1 7.1 12.3 12.4 10.8 M-99[Note 1) 12.0 11.7 13.6 14.6 12.9 M-100 9.4 11.8 11.0 12.2 11.1
[Note 1] - Station with highest annual mean.
[Note 2] - Reference Attachment 1, Sample Deviations, Table 8, Sample Deviations Table, Comment 1
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 35 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Page 7 of 15 Monitoring Results Tables Table 13, Thermoluminescent Dosimeters - Outer Ring Analysis: Gamma Dose I
Units: mrem Station 1st Qtr 2023 2nd Qtr 2023 3rd Qtr 2023 4th Qtr 2023 Annual Mean 2023 M-36 8.4 11.2 9.0 9.4 9.5 M-40 6.0 8.2 6.2 6.9 6.8 M-48 10.2 5.5 11.3 11.2 9.6 M-49 10.8 9.7 11.6 12.1 11.0 M-50 9.2 9.9 11.0 11.4 10.4 M-55 11.3 9.4 11.1 12.4 11.1 M-57[Nole 1]
11.1 11.1 13.1 13.3 12.2
[Note 1] - Station with highest annual mean.
Table 14, Thermoluminescent Dosimeters - Special Interest Areas Analysis: Gamma Dose I
Units: mrem Station 1st Qtr 2023 2nd Qtr 2023 3rd Qtr 2023 4th Qtr 2023 Annual Mean 2023 M-01 [Nole 1]
11.1 10.9 12.3 12.6 11.7 M-07 9.3 9.8 11.0 10.6 10.2 M-09 9.9 9.1 10.8 10.1 10.0 M-10 8.1 8.8 10.0 9.2 9.0 M-33 11.1 11.2 12.5 12.2 11.8 M-38 8.9 8.3 11.7 10.6 9.9 M-39 8.9 8.6 10.1 10.9 9.7
[Note 1] - Station with highest annual mean.
Table 15, Thermoluminescent Dosimeters - Control Analysis: Gamma Dose I
Units: mrem Station 1st Qtr 2023 2nd Qtr 2023 3rd Qtr 2023 4th Qtr 2023 Annual Mean 2023 M-14 10.3 10.3 12.7 11.7 11.2
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 Analysis: Gamma Isotopic Location Date Mn-54 REQUIRED LLD +
15 MRDOWN 02/06/23
<6.237 MRUP 02/06/23
<6.489 MRDOWNGG 02/06/23
<5.895 MRUP GG 02/06/23
<5.079 MRDOWN 05/02/23
<6.635 MRUP 05/02/23
<6.411 MRDOWNGG 05/02/23
<6.198 MRUP GG 05/02/23
<5.953 MRDOWN 08/02/23
<7.591 MRUP 08/02/23
<5.709 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Co-58 15
<6.853
<7.148
<6.898
<7.585
<6.903
<7.785
<5.782
<5.97
<6.36
<6.052 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
<18.67
<7.059
<10.84
<6.962
<13.25
<12.16
<11.84
<7.638
<14.13
<7.335
<12.07
<13.78
<14.34
<7.369
<18.63
<6.606
<11.93
<11.63
<16.66
<7.113
<15.79
<8.586
<11.05
<11.5
<13.29
<9.33
<12.69
<7.348
<10.77
<10.7
<8.004
<9.797
<13.08
<6.215
<9.494
<1 1.12
<7.65
<4.818
<15.49
<4.895
<12.76
<9.35
<11.71
<7.377
<10
<7.477
<9.058
<9.916
<14.5
<7.212
<12.22
<7.511
<12.92
<11.42
<8.042
<6.759
<10.9
<5.057
<10.65
<11.89 J
Page 36 of 59 Page 8 of 15 Cs-134 Cs-137 Ba-140 La-140 15 18 60 15
<7.684
<8.328
<31.55
<11.46
<6.878
<7.479
<35.54
<10.64
<6.013
<7.289
<33.9
<7.018
<6.462
<5.579
<31.32
<12.84
<7.399
<7.348
<39.78
<7.188
<8.557
<6.544
<35.13
<12.21
<6.508
<6.907
<29.49
<10.97
<5.927
<5.952
<24.56
<9.582
<6.885
<6.865
<30.78
<11.27
<6.487
<6.381
<27.68
<5.16
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 Analysis: Gamma Isotopic Location Date Mn-54 REQUIRED LLD +
15 MRDOWNGG 08/02/23
<7.627 MRUP GG 08/02/23
<6.459 MRDOWN 10/31 /23
<6.644 MRUP 10/31 /23
<7.684 MRDOWN GG 10/31/23
<5.578 MRUP GG 10/31/23
<7.145 MRDOWN*
10/18/23
<8.368 MRDOWNGG*
10/18/23
<6.374 GG - indicates duplicate sample Annual Radiological Environmental O~eratingfteport Co-58 15
<7.361
<5.859
<6.569
<8.615
<5.183
<7.666
<7.446
<7.844 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
<16.16
<6.237
<13.38
<6.712
<8.793
<13.12
<17.37
<6.713
<9.31
<5.679
<11.29
<10.95
<13.71
<7.609
<18.94
<7.626
<12.37
<10.62
<13.59
<5.587
<18.4
<9.854
<14.35
<13.4
<12.32
<7.711
<11.68
<6.295
<9.248
<11.1
<14.56
<6.425
<12.67
<7.217
<9.696
<9.546
<19.36
<8.876
<17.93
<6.939
<12.77
<10.15
<13.72
<8.087
<16.52
<9.24
<11.23
<11.7
- - indicates annual sample collected during liquid effluent discharge I Page 37 of 59 Page 9 of 15 Cs-134 Cs-137 Ba-140 La-140 15 18 60 15
<9.846
<8.248
<32.67
<13.91
<6.714
<7.492
<30.75
<11.32
<8.079
<7.864
<30.97
<7.131
<8.483
<6.744
<34.97
<9.44
<5.944
<5.758
<23.78
<9.49
<7.242
<6.891
<30.16
<10.5
<7.221
<7.786
<36.31
<11.31
<8.029
<7.094
<36.45
<10.7
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 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 /17/23 736 OUTFALL 007 GG 01 /17/23 651 MRDOWN 02/06/23
<539 MRUP 02/06/23
<539 MRDOWNGG 02/06/23
<532 MRUP GG 02/06/23
<571 OUTFALL 007 02/14/23
<501 OUTFALL 007 GG 02/14/23
<496 OUTFALL 007 03/15/23
<586 OUTFALL 007 GG 03/15/23
<597 OUTFALL 007 04/18/23
<525 OUTFALL 007 GG 04/18/23
<513 OUTFALL 007 05/16/23
<509 OUTFALL 007 GG 05/16/23
<508 MRDOWN 05/02/23
<466 MRUP 05/02/23
<475 MRDOWNGG 05/02/23
<479 MRUP GG 05/02/23
<479 OUTFALL 007 06/13/23
<599 OUTFALL 007 GG 06/13/23
<613 OUTFALL 007 07/18/23
<541 OUTFALL 007 GG 07/18/23
<540 MRDOWN 08/02/23
<573 MRUP 08/02/23
<551 MRDOWNGG 08/02/23
<572 I Page 38 of 59 Page 10 of 165
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Rev.2023 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Monitoring Results Tables Table 17, Surface Water-Tritium Analysis: H-3 Units: pCi/L Location Date _
<598 OUTFALL 007 08/16/23
<482 OUTFALL 007 GG 08/16/23
<487 OUTFALL 007 09/12/23
<548 OUTFALL 007 GG 09/12/23
<556 OUTFALL 007 10/17/23
<571 OUTFALL 007 GG 10/17/23
<567 MRDOWN*
10/18/23
<575 MRDOWN GG*
10/18/23
<570 MRDOWN 10/31/23
<554 MRUP 10/31/23
<569 MRDOWNGG 10/31/23
<560 MRUP GG 10/31/23
<562 OUTFALL 007 11/14/23
<586 OUTFALL 007 GG 11/14/23
<586 OUTFALL 007 12/12/23 9280 OUTFALL 007 GG 12/12/23 9620 GG - indicates duplicate sample
- - indicates Annual Sample collected during liquid discharge I Page 39 of 59 Page 11 of 15
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station l
Year: 2023
]
Page 40 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Page 12 of 15 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 CONSTWELL 11/08/23
<0.754
<6.757
<7.547
<11.83
<6.861
<12.93
<8.168
<10.02
<6.315
<5.861
<29.35
<9.228 CONSTWELL GG 11/08/23
<0.794
<7.784
<7.368
<15.33
<4.895
<1 4.9
<8.715
<11.25
<7.235
<8.581
<27.99
<12.94 PGWELL 11/08/23
<0.834
<6.979
<7.57
<13.07
<7.958
<18.72
<7.465
<11.49
<6.746
<7.1 41
<40.44
<8.571 PGWELLGG 11/08/23
<0.719
<5.708
<7.041
<13.79
<7.869
<14.3
<6.622
<11.02
<7.502
<7.69
<26.06
<7.117 GG - indicates duplicate sample
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 41 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Page 13 of 165 Monitoring Results Tables Table 19, Drinking Water-Tritium Analysis: H-3 Units: pCi/L Location Date H-3 REQUIRED LLD +
2000 CONSlWELL 11/08/23
<512 CONSlWELL GG 11/08/23
<521 PGWELL 11/08/23
<506 PGWELLGG 11/08/23
<517 GG - indicates duplicate sample Table 20, Sediment Analysis: Gamma Isotopic Units: pCi/kg Location Date Cs-134 Cs-137 REQUIRED LLD +
150 180 SEDHAM 09/06/23
<87.2
<84.37 SEDHAM GG 09/06/23
<81.08
<59.65 SEDCONT 09/06/23
<71.29
<50.13 SEDCONTGG 09/06/23
<85.66
<61.35 GG - indicates duplicate sample
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 42 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Page 14 of 165 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 Cs-137 Date REQUIRED LLD +
130 130 260 130 260 130 150 FISHDOWN 08/21/23
<33.31
<26.87
<50.69
<40.2
<61.96
<32.64
<26.61 FISHDOWNGG 08/21/23
<50.29
<37.72
<111.7
<64.72
<117.5
<57.63
<53.83 FISHUP 08/21/23
<52.18
<44.75
<107.3
<76.84
<151.8
<68.7
<49.66 FISHUP GG 08/21/23
<56.41
<56.32
<91.64
<64.01
<107.2
<70.3
<32.87 GG - indicates duplicate sample Table 22, Food Products Analysis: Gamma Isotopic, 1-131 Units: pCi/kg Location Collection Date 1-131 Cs-134 Cs-137 REQUIRED LLD +
60 60 80 VEG-CONT 02/13/23
<25.82
<26.73
<22.65 VEG-J 02/13/23
<28
<31.54
<21.95 VEG-CONTGG 02/13/23
<27.52
<27.05
<26.75 VEG-J GG 02/13/23
<28.07
<31.41
<26.22 VEG-CONT 05/15/23
<25.02
<23.44
<22.61 VEG-J 05/15/23
<28.49
<40.24
<29.82 VEG-CONTGG 05/15/23
<22.84
<20.52
<26.47 VEG-J GG 05/15/23
<40.4
<34.56
<37.66 VEG-CONT 08/14/23
<27.84
<25.87
<16.69 VEG-J 08/14/23
<21.61
<23.56
<18.43 VEG-CONT 11/06/23
<28.2
<29.23
<24.18 VEG-J 11/06/23
<34.54
<26.59
<29.19 GG - indicates duplicate sample
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 43 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmer1!al Opera!ing R~ort Page 155 of 165 Monitoring Results Tables Table 23, 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 03/20/23
<6.137
<5.242
<12.12
<5.97
<12.2
<6.706
<8.374
<8.272
<5.517
<5.613
<30.25
<14.39 OSN 007 GG 03/20/23
<6.171
<6.785
<12.51
<7.826
<13.62
<5.89
<11.1
<10.99
<7.178
<6.42
<29.85
<10.04 OSN 007 06/21/23
<7.895
<7.171
<16.34
<6.421
<9.47
<8.343
<12.5
<11.67
<6.711
<8.914
<34.39
<10.7 OSN 007 GG 06/21/23
<5.994
<4.226
<18.54
<11.35
<16.13
<4.457
<12.09
<11.69
<7.271
<5.844
<31.07
<10.92 OSN 007 09/25/23
<6.531
<6.914
<14.35
<7.505
<11.8
<5.269
<9.779
<7.377
<6.66
<5.931
<22.25
<8.534 OSN 007 GG 09/25/23
<4.618
<8.213
<12.35
<5.891
<16.94
<7.57
<11.48
<7.36
<6.381
<6.074
<18.28
<9.229 OSN 007 11/28/23
<6.007
<6.729
<12.29
<6.004
<14.74
<5.812
<8.033
<9.595
<7.366
<5.608
<27.11
<8.596 OSN 007GG 11/28/23
<6.046
<6.246
<11.37
<5.109
<8.588
<5.627
<9.345
<11.49
<8.001
<5.8
<26.02
<7.367 GG - indicates duplicate sample Table 24, Special Samples, Meat Analysis: Gamma Isotopic Units: pCi/kg Location I Date Mn-54 Co-58 Fe-59 Co-60 Zn-65 Cs-134 Cs-137 REQUIRED LLD +
130 130 260 130 260 130 150 DEER 1 10/22/23
<68.02
<75.15
<130.2
<78.96
<171.7
<73.05
<49.76
Plant: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station I
Year: 2023 I Page 44 of 59 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report ATTACHMENT 3 INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON RESULTS Quality control data from the following offsite environmental laboratories are summarized in the following pages.
Teledyne Brown Engineering Environmental Dosimetry Company/ 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 that represent test & matrix combinations available for REMP programs. 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 always resemble typical environmental samples obtained at commercial nuclear power facilities.
For the TBE laboratory, 124 out of 131 analyses performed met the specified acceptance criteria. Seven analyses did not meet the specified acceptance criteria and were addressed through the TBE Corrective Action Program. A summary is found below:
- 1.
The MAPEP February 2023 Soil Ni-63 result was evaluated as Not Acceptable. TBE's reported value was 294 Bq/kg and the known result was 1130 Bq/kg (range 791 - 1469).
The sample was reprepped by a different (senior) lab technician with results of 1120 &
1250 Bq. It was determined that there was a difference between the two techs during the sample prep (technique) and the procedure was revised to reflect these differences including using a specific aliquot amount. (NCR 23-08)
- 2.
The MAPEP February 2023 vegetation Sr-90 result was evaluated as Not Acceptable.
The reported value was 0.05 Bq (not detected) and the known result was a "false positive".
This was considered to be a statistical failure because TBE's reported result with 3 times the uncertainty resulted in a slightly positive net result (0.03194 Bq/kg). The reported result was significantly below TBE's average detection limit for vegetation samples.
(NCR 23-09)
- 3.
The ERA RAD April 2023 water Ba-133 result was evaluated as Not Acceptable. The reported value was 26.0 pCi/L and the known was 22.3 (acceptance range 17.1 - 25.8 pCi) or 117% of the known (acceptable for TBE QC). The sample was used as the workgroup duplicate with a result of 25.4 (114%). The sample had also been counted on a different detector with a result of 21.9 (98%). The was TBE's first failure for Ba-133.
(NCR 23-10)
- 4.
The MAPEP August 2023 soil Fe-55 result was evaluated as Not Acceptable. The reported value was 346 Bq/kg and the known result was 1280 (acceptance range of 896-1664 Bq/kg). This was TBE's initial evaluation for Fe-55 in soils. The result was received at the end of December and the root cause in under investigation. No client samples were associated with this cross-check. (CAR 23-31)
- 5.
The Analytics September 2023 milk Sr-90 result was evaluated as Not Acceptable. The reported result was 7.28 pCi/L and the known result was 12.8 (57% of known). This sample was used as the workgroup duplicate and the carrier yields for both samples were 107% and 75%. The LCS recovery for the workgroup was at 106%. The ERA drinking water Sr-90 cross check that was analyzed around the same time was acceptable at 108%. There was no explanation for the failure. This is the first low biased failure for Sr-90 milk. The last failure (high) was in 2016. (NCR 23-24)
- 6.
The ERA RAD October 2023 water Gross Alpha result was evaluated as Not Acceptable.
The reported result was 53.2 pCi/L and the known result was 70.6 (acceptable range of 54.0 - 87.2 pCi/L). The reported result was the workgroup duplicate and was within 75%
of the known value (within TBE QC range). The original result was 63.3 pCi/L (90% of the known). Because the LCS result was biased slightly high, the decision was made to report the lower value. (NCR 23-20)
- 7.
The ERA RAD October 2023 water 1-131 result was evaluated as Not Acceptable. The reported value was 23.5 pCi/L and the known result was 29.7 (acceptable range of 25.8 -
33.6) The reported result was 79% of the known, which is within the acceptable TBE QC range. The workgroup was reviewed with no anomalies found. The LCS/LCSD results were 109% and 86.1 %. The sample was not processed in a timely manner as per the ERA instructions which stated to analyze shortly after receipt due to the short half-life.
Going forward, the QA &/or Lab Mgr. will ensure that this analysis is started sooner.
(NCR 23-21)
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 2023 Date:
,?/('f/21,£--*
Date:
Environmental Dosimetry Company 10 Ashton Lane Sterling, MA 01564 3/;'(t1/2
TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES........................................................................................................................ ii EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
............................................................................................................ iii 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 Ill.
DATA
SUMMARY
FOR ISSUANCE PERIOD JANUARY-DECEMBER 2023................. 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 2023... 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 2023 Mean Dosimeter Analyses (n=6), January - December 2023 Summary of Independent QC Results for 2023
-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% 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 and one external audit were performed in 2023. There were no findings.
-iii-
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; =
the corresponding reported exposure for the ith dosimeter (i.e., the reported exposure)
H =
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)
H1 =
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 ith dosimeter is:
where:
H; = the reported exposure for the ith dosimeter (i.e., the reported exposure)
R
= the mean reported exposure; i.e., R
= IH:(~)
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.
- 2.
If the QA Officer determines that an investigation is required for a process, the results shall be issued as normal unless if the QC results prompting the investigation have a mean bias from the known of greater than +/-20%, then the results shall be issued with a note indicating that they may be updated in the future, pending resolution of a QA issue.
- 3.
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 +/-15%.
11 1.
DATA
SUMMARY
FOR ISSUANCE PERIOD JANUARY-DECEMBER 2023 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=6) of dosimeters evaluated against the internal tolerance criteria. Overall, 100% (12/12) of the dosimeter sets, evaluated against the internal tolerance petiormance 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 11, 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 2023. There were no findings identified.
- 2.
External DTE Energy Audit 23-001 was conducted on April 25-26, 2023. There were no findings identified.
VI.
PROCEDURES AND MANUALS REVISED DURING JANUARY - DECEMBER 2023 No procedures or manuals were revised in 2023.
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, 2023.
- 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 2023(11* (2l Dosimeter, Type 1 Numberr
% P-assed Bias erlteiia
% Passed IPreelslon iTested Panasonic Environmental 72
\\
100
<1lThis table summarizes results of tests conducted by EDC.
<2lEnvironmental dosimeter results are free in air.
TABLE 2 MEAN DOSIMETER ANALYSES lN=6)
JANUARY - DECEMBER 2023d), (2l Standard Process Date Exposure bevel Mean Bias%
1 JE>e'liatlon %
4/25/2023 107 0.8 1.1 5/2/2023 33 5.4 1.6 5/15/2023 56 5.1 1.3 7/23/2023 52 0.0 0.7 7/26/2023 33 2.8 2.6 8/14/2023 76
-3.0 1.5 11/4/2023 44 1.7 0.8 11/13/2023 64
-1.9 2.4 12/08/2023 83 2.7 1.0 01/30/2024 28
-0.7 1.6 02/04/2024 123
-2.7 1.6 02/8/2024 97
-1.1 1.2 0rlteliia 100 Tiolerance
~Limit at-/-15%
Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass
<1lThis table summarizes results of tests conducted by EDC for TLDs issued in 2023.
<2>Environmental dosimeter results are free in air.
TABLE 3
SUMMARY
OF INDEPENDENT DOSIMETER TESTING JANUARY - DECEMBER 2023(11* (2l lssuanee Peilod SIient 1st Qtr. 2023 Millstone 2na Qtr.2023 Seabrook 3ra Qtr. 2023 Millstone 3ra Qtr. 2023 SONGS 4tn Qtr.2023 Millstone 41n Qtr.2023 PSEG(PNNL) 48mR 4m Qtr.2023 PSEG(PNNL) 95mR 41n Qtr.2023 PSEG(PNNL) 143mR 4m Qtr.2023 PSEG(PNNL) 191 R 4
111 Qtr.2023 Seabrook
<1lperformance criteria are +/- 15%.
<2>sIind spike irradiations using Cs-137 5of 6 Mean Standard Blas%
Dev,latlon %
1.9 1.1 0.6 1.3
-3.8 1.4
-14.8 1.5 7.7 5.3 2.9 2.9 0.0 0.7 1.2 1.3 2.2 0.6 2.6 1.6 Pass 1 fall Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass Pass
APPENDIX A DOSIMETRY QUALITY CONTROL TRENDING GRAPHS ISSUE PERIOD JANAURY - DECEMBER 2023 6of 6
1fi 14 12 1D B
6 4
2 I
I INDMDUAL ACCURACY ENVIRONMENTAL FIGURE 1 I
I I
I D--l-J!!"""-'*:..,a,..__ _________
________________ ~
__........ ________ --J I
-2 I
-4
-8
-10
-12
-14 PROCESSING DATE
z 0
en c3 w
a:
a..
16 14 12 10 B
6 4
2 D
-2
-4
-<5
-l!
-10
-12
-14 LSL--12.&
INDMDUAI.. PRECISION ENVIRONMENTAL FIGURE2 PROCESSING DATE
16 14 12 6-4-
-2
-II-
- 10-.14_
LR. - -u MEAN ACCURACY ENVIRONMENTAL FIGURE3
-16~--....-----,------,--------.-------..-----,------,--------.-------..-----,-----,-----.---~
PROCESSING DATE
20 18 16 11 12 1D 8
6 1
2 D
~
-2 CD
-'4
-i5
-8
- 10
- 12
-11
-16
-18
- 20 SEABROOK CD-LOCATE ACCURACY FIGURE4
~-------------------------------------------------------
- a
-~--------------------------------------------------
EXPECTED FIELD EXPOSURE (mRISTD. QUARTER