NOC-AE-08002298, Transmittal of Annual Environmental and Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports for 2007

Transmittal of Annual Environmental and Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports for 2007

ML081280093
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	04/30/2008
From:	Bullard W South Texas
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
G25, NOC-AE-08002298, STI: 32306468
Download: ML081280093 (70)

Text

Nuclear Operating Company South Texas Pro/eel Electric Generating Station PO. Box 289 Wadsworth. Texas 77483 April 30, 2008 NOC-AE-08002298 File No.: G25 10 CFR 50.36b STI: 32306468 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 South Texas Project Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. STN 50-498, STN 50-499 2007 Annual Environmental and Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports Pursuant to South Texas Project Unit 1 Operating License NPF-76 and Unit 2 Operating License NPF-80 Appendix B, Environmental Protection Plan (Non-radiological), and Technical Specification 6.9.1.3, the STP Nuclear Operating Company provides the attached 2007 Annual Environmental and Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports.

There are no commitments included in this report.

If there are any questions, please contact either Marilyn Kistler at (361) 972-8385 or me at (361) 972-7130.

W. T. Bullard Manager, Health Physics MK

Attachment:

2007 Annual Environmental and Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports k_1~

NOC-AE-08002298 Page 2 of 2 cc:

(paper copy) (electronic copy)

Regional Administrator, Region IV A. H. Gutterman, Esquire U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400 Arlington, Texas 76011-8064 Mohan C. Thadani U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mohan C. Thadani Thad Hill Senior Project Manager Eddy Daniels U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Catherine Callaway One White Flint North (MS 7 D1) Brad Porlier 11555 Rockville Pike Steve Winn Rockville, MD 20852 Staney Rostad NRG South Texas LP Senior Resident Inspector Ed Alarcon U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission J. J. Nesrsta P. O. Box 289, Mail Code: MN116 R. K. Temple Wadsworth, TX 77483 Kevin Polio City Public Service U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Jon C. Wood Attention: Document Control Desk Cox Smith Matthews One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike C. Kirksey Rockville, MD 20852 City of Austin C. M. Canady City of Austin Electric Utility Department 721 Barton Springs Road Austin, TX 78704 Richard A. Ratliff Bureau of Radiation Control Texas Department of State Health Services 1100 West 49th Street Austin, TX 78756-3189

Attachment South Texas Project Units I and 2 2007 Annual Environmental and Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports

-I 7

I I

~'

• -1 A

x .-

\~ ~u\

&IFJAJ(oL (o)Tel mdmw Er~ro~mcmm:¶

The 2007 Annual Environmental Operating Report for the South Texas Project Electric Generating Station combines in one report the requirements for the Annual Environmental Operating Report (Non-radiological) found in Appendix B to Facility Operating License Nos. NPF-76 and NPF-80 and the requirements for the Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report found in Part A of the station's Offsite Dose Calculation Manual Graphic and artwork performed by Barbara Carnley Photography performed by Barbara Carnley, Ed Conaway, Rick Gangluff Gwen Finley, Gwenna Kelton, Russell Kiesling, Keith Owsley, Gary Parkey, Breck Sacra Cover photo by Gwenna Kelton

Completed in accordance with Technical Specifications for United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission License Nos.

NPF-76 & NPF-80 April 2008 Authored by:

(/J . Darrell Sherwood, Ph.D.

Supervisor Health Physics Division and Peggy LoftoeTavisJ.D.,CHMM Staff Consultant Environmental Division Technical Review:

Leonard M. Earls, Ph.D., CHP Health Physicist Health Physics Division Approved by:

Will iarn T ful lard, CH P Manager Health Physics Division Annual Environmental Oerating Report SOUTH TEXAS PROJECT ELECTRIC GENERATING STATION

Table of Contents Page Executive Summary.................................................................................... 1-1 Site and Area Description ............................................................................. 2-1 Non-Radiological Environmental Introduction and Summary ........................................ 3-1 Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report .................................................. 4-1 Environmental Conditions Aquatic and Ecological Monitoring.......................................................... 4-1 Water Quality Management ................................................................. 4-3 Air Quality Management..................................................................... 4-6 Non-Radioactive Waste Management....................................................... 4-8 Chemical Control and Management ....................................................... 4-10.

Environmental Protection Plan Status ........................................... ............... 4-10 Radiological Environmental Introduction and Summary .............................................. 5-1 Radiological Environmental Operating Report ........................................................ 6-1 Program Description.......................................................................... 6-1 Groundwater Protection Initiative....................................................  !........

6-1 Analysis of Results and Trends............................................................... 6-5 Land Use Census ........................................................................... 6-11 Quality Assurance........................................................................... 6-12 Program Deviation .......................................................................... 6-13 List of Tables Table 1: Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program................................. 6-14 Table 2: Sample Media and Location Descriptions ........................................ 6-16 Table 3: 2007 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Analysis Summary ..................................................... 6-21 STP Nuclear Operating Company

2007 Environmental Report List of Figures Page Figure 4-1: 2007 Nonradioactive Waste Management .................................................... 4-8 Figure 4-2: 2007 Nonradioactive Waste Generation ....................................................... 4-9 Figure 4-3: Hazardous Waste Generation H istorical Com parison ................................................................................. 4-9 Figure 6-1: Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Designated Sample Location Map .................................................. 6-2 Figure 6-2: Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Onsite Sampling Location Map ...................................................... 6-3 Figure 6-3: Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Zone Location M ap ....................................................................... 6-4 Figure 6-4: Historical Comparison ofAverage Q uarterly B eta Activity ................................................................................. 6-6 Figure 6-5: Environmental Dosimeter Comparisons ........................................................ 6-6 Figure 6-6: Historical Comparison of Cobalt-58 and Cobalt-60 in M ain Cooling Reservoir Sedim ent ............................................................. 6-7 Figure 6-7: Calculated Cumulative Curies of Cobalt-60 in the M ain C ooling R eservoir ...................................................................... 6-7 Figure 6-8: Historical Comparison of TritiumAdded to and Remaining in the Main Cooling Reservoir ............................................... 6-8 Figure 6-9: Historical Comparison of Tritium Activity in R eservoir R elief Wells ............................................................................ 6-9 Figure 6-10: Historical Comparison of Tritium Activity and Surface Water ....................................................................................... 6-9 Figure 6-11: Historical Comparison of Tritium Activity in Shallow A quifer Ground Water ............................................................... 6-10 Figure 6-12: 2007 Radiological Laboratory Quality Assurance Program Perform ance ............................................................... 6-12 STP Nuclear Operating Company ii

Photo By: Gary Parkey STP Nuclear Operating Company

Executive Summary Photo By: Gwenna Kelton Chapter 1

Executive Summary The South Texas Project continues to operate with no negative effect on the population or the environment. The exposure for people living in the area is maintained at less than one millirem per year. Environmental programs at the site monitor known and predictable relationships between the operation of the South Texas Project and the surrounding area. These monitoring programs verify that the operation of the South Texas Project has no impact offsite and is well within state and federal regulations and guidelines. These programs are verified by the state of Texas through collection and analysis of samples and placement of the state's thermoluminescent dosimeters and other onsite and offsite inspections.

This report describes the environmental monitoring programs, radiological and non-radiological, conducted at the South Texas Project during 2007. Included in this report are the Environmental Protection Plan Status, the results of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program and the Land Use Census.

Non-radiological environmental monitoring is performed each year as part of the station's overall Environmental Protection program which is intended to provide for protection of non-radiological environmental values during station operations. Non-radiological monitoring encompasses water quality, air quality, waste generation and minimization, local aquatic and terrestrial ecological condi-tions and more. In 2007, non-radiological monitoring by the station confirmed that the South Texas Project's efforts to honor and protect local environmental conditions were successful. The South Texas Project continued to be rated by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality as a high performer in the area of environmental compliance, continued to provide high-quality habitat areas for a variety of flora and fauna and continued to have no indications of negative non-radiological impacts to local environmental conditions.

Radiation and radioactivity in the environment are constantly monitored within a 15-mile radius of the South Texas Project. Sampling locations are selected using weather, land use and water use informa-tion. Two types of sampling locations are used. The first type, control stations, are located in areas that are beyond measurable influence of the South Texas Project or any other nuclear facility. The sample results from these stations are used to explain radiation from sources other than the South Texas Project. Indicator stations are the second type of stations. The samples from these stations measure any radiation contributed to the environment by the project. Indicator stations are located in areas close to the South Texas Project where any plant releases would be at the highest concentration.

Prior to initial operation of the South Texas Project, samples were collected and analyzed to determine the amount of radioactivity present in the area. These results are used as a "pre-operational baseline."

Results from the indicator stations are compared to both current control sample results and the pre-operational baseline values to determine if changes in radioactivity levels are attributable to station operations or other causes such as previous nuclear weapons testing programs and natural variations.

Radioactivity levels in the South Texas Project' s environment frequently fall below the minimum detection capabilities of the state-of-the-art scientific instruments. Samples with radiation levels that cannot be detected are below the Lower Limits of Detection. The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission requires that equipment used for radiological monitoring must be able to detect specified minimum limits for certain types of samples. This ensures that radiation measurements are suffi-ciently sensitive to detect small changes in the environment. The United States Nuclear Regulatory LIC ear peraL 11g ompany

2007 Environmental Report Commission also has a required "reporting level." Licensed nuclear facilities must prepare a special report and increase their sampling if any measured radiation level is equal to or greater than this reporting level. No sample from the South Texas Project has ever reached or exceeded a reporting level.

Measurements made are divided into four categories or pathways based upon how the results may affect the public. Airborne, waterbome, ingestion and direct radiation are the four pathways that are sampled. Each pathway is described below.

• The airborne pathway is sampled in areas around the South Texas Project by measuring radioactivity of iodine and particulate air filters. The 2007 airborne results were similar to pre-operational levels with only naturally occurring radioactive material unrelated to the operation of the South Texas Project detected.

• The waterborne pathway includes samples taken from surface water, ground water and drinking water. Also included in this path are sediment samples taken from the Main Cooling Reservoir and the Colorado River. Tritium was the only man-made isotope consistently detected in water samples and was measured in the shallow aquifer, the Main Cooling Reser-voir, ditches and sloughs onsite. The Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) developed a Groundwa-ter Protection Initiative to standardize the reporting protocols to the local, state, and federal officials. Those protocols have been followed at the South Texas Project. The levels of tritium found were near the concentration levels found in the Main Cooling Reservoir or lower. Additional onsite wells have been sampled to map tritium migration. The average tritium level in the Main Cooling Reservoir remained similar to past years and remained below United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission reporting limits and within United States Environmental Protection Agency drinking water standards. Plant-related isotopes (Co-60 and Co-58) were not detected in the reservoir sediment this year. One sample had detectable Cs-137 which is present in the environment and was detected in pre-operational concentrations. Offsite sediment samples continue to show no radioactivity from the South Texas Project. This indicates that the station produces no detectable effect offsite from this pathway

• The ingestion pathway includes broadleaf vegetation, agricultural products and food products.

Naturally occurring isotopes were detected at average environmental levels in the samples.

Man-made isotopes found in the samples were consistent with values found in pre-operational samples.

• The direct exposure pathway measures environmental radiation doses using thermolumines-cent dosimeters. These results are consistent with the readings from previous years and continue to show no effect from plant operations.

STP Nuclear Operating Company 1-2

Executive Summary The South Texas Project continues to operate with no negative effect on the population or the environ-ment. The exposure for people living in the area is maintained at less than one millirem per year -

considerably less than the average annual radiation exposure to people in the United States from natural and medical sources of 360 millirem. Environmental programs at the site monitor known and predictable relationships between the operation of the South Texas Project and the surrounding area.

These monitoring programs verify that the operation of the South Texas Project has had no impact offsite and is well within state and federal regulations and guidelines. These programs are verified by the state of Texas through collection and analysis of samples and placement of the state's thermolumi-nescent dosimeters and other onsite and offsite inspections.

Photo By: Gwenna Kelton 1-3 STP Nuclear Operating Company

Site amd1 Area Desciption

-7 Photo By.- Gary Parkey Chapter 9,

Site and Area Description The South Texas Project is located on 12,220 acres in Matagorda County, Texas, approximately 15 miles southwest of Bay City along the west bank of the Colorado River. The South Texas Project Electric Gener-ating Station is currently owned by NRG Energy, Inc., the City ofAustin and CPS Energy as tenants in common. The Houston Lighting & Power Company was the original project manager of the South Texas Project and was responsible for the engineering, design, licensing, construction, startup and initial operation of the South Texas Project. In 1997, the STP Nuclear Operating Company assumed operational control of the South Texas Project and responsibility for implementation ofassociated environmental programs.

The South Texas Project has two, 1,350-megawatt Westinghouse pressurized water reactors. Unit 1re-ceived a low-power testing license onAugust 21, 1987, obtained initial criticality on March 8, 1988, and was declared commercially operational onAugust 25, 1988. Unit 2 received a low-power testing license on December 16, 1988, obtained initial criticality on March 12, 1989, and was declared commercially opera-tional on June 19, 1989. Both units together produce enough electricity to serve approximately two million homes. STP is the largest employer and source ofrevenue for Matagorda County.

In September of 2007, NRG Energy, Inc., CPS Energy and STP Nuclear Operating Company filed a Combined Construction and Operating License Application (COLA) with the United States Nuclear Regula-tory Commission to build and operate two new additional units, Units 3 and 4, at the South Texas Project.

The proposed units will be built adjacent to the currently operating Units 1 and 2 on existing station property.

The station's 12,220-acre site and 7,000-acre cooling reservoir were originally designed for four units. The proposed new units will produce 2,700 megawatts and provide enough power to serve an additional two million homes.

Photo By: Gwenna Kelton 2-1 STP Nuclear Operating Company

2007 Environmental Report How the South Texas Project Works Fossil-fueled and nuclear-powered steam generating plants operate on the same principle. Fuel is used to produce heat to convert water into high-pressure steam. The steam is directed through a turbine to turn a generator. In a fossil fuel plant, burning coal, lignite, oil or natural gas in a boiler produces the heat. In a nuclear plant, the reactor replaces the boiler and the "fissioning" or splitting ofuranium atoms inside the reactor produces the heat.

The fuel for a nuclear reactor is uranium. It is formed into cylindrical ceramic pellets, each about the size of the end ofyour little finger. One pellet has the energy potential of about a ton of coal. Millions ofthese pellets are stacked in fuel rods that are arranged into assemblies that make up the core of the reactor. The use of uranium allows us to conserve natural gas, oil and coal and to avoid the associated production of greenhouse gases.

The fission process and generation of usable heat begins in a nuclear reactor when control rods in the core are withdrawn. In pressurized water reactors, like those at the South Texas Project, the fuel rods heat water circulating in sealed, stainless steel piping that passes through large heat exchangers called steam generators.

The water in the reactor is under pressure to prevent boiling. This is why the South Texas Project's Units 1 and 2 reactors are called "pressurized water reactors.

PRESSURIZER SECONDARY LOOP GENERATOR TURINEGENERA4TOR REACTOR CIRCULATING COOLING CONDENSATE PUMP PUMP I ~RESERVOIR MWo ACR~E LAKE)

CONTAINMENT PRIMARY LOOP WALL COOLING LOOP Figure 1-1 STP Nuclear Operating Company 2-2

Site and Area Description This hot, pressurized water heats a separate supply of water in the steam generators to produce steam that is directed through the blades of a turbine generator to produce electricity. The steam is then fed to a condenser where a separate supply of cooling water from the reservoir turns it back into water that is then pumped back to the steam generator for reuse. A diagram of the plant water systems is shown in Figure 1-1.

Inaddition to its safety systems, the South Texas Project has many built-in physical barriers that would prevent the release of radioactive materials in the unlikely event of an accident. The most visible ones are the 200-foot-tall, domed containment buildings with steel-reinforced concrete walls four feet thick. Inside each of these massive structures, two more concrete walls provide another 11 feet of shielding. The reactor vessel itself has steel walls six inches thick, and the fuel pellets inside it are sheathed in hardened metal tubes.

Nuclear energy has one of the lowest impacts on the environment. It's the most eco-efficient energy source because it produces the most electricity in relation to its minimal environmental impact. In 2006, the most recent year for which data is available, nuclear generation in the United States prevented 681.2 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, 3.12 million tons ofsulfur dioxide and 0.99 million tons ofnitrogen oxide from entering the earth's atmosphere. 1 Nuclear power plants generate approximately 73 percent of all carbon-free electric-ity in the United States and were responsible for 36 percent of the total voluntary greenhouse gas emissions reductions reported by United States companies in 2005 .2Addi-tional information on nuclear energy and the environment can be found on the website maintained by the Nuclear Energy Institute at http://www.nei.org.

The Site Sixty-five of the entire 12,220 acres at the South Texas Project are occupied by the two current power plants. Plant facilities include a 7,000-acre main cooling reservoir and a 47-acre essential cooling pond. Many smaller bodies of water onsite include wetlands, Kelly Lake, drainage ditches, sloughs and depressions. Much of the land east of the cooling reservoir is leased for cattle grazing. Approxi-mately 1,700 acres remain in a more natural state as a lowland habitat. A 110-acre wetland habitat area was established in 1996 on previously unused land located northeast of the power plants. The area surrounding the South Texas Project is characterized by coastal plain with farmland and pasture predominating. Local reliefofthe Photo By: Gary Parkey area is characterized by flat land, approximately 23 feet above sea level.

INuclear Energy Institute. EmissionsAvoided by the U.S. NuclearIndustry (1995 - 2006).

http://www.nei.org/filefolder/emissions avoided bythe u.s._nuclear industry_yearly.xls. April 2007.

2 Nuclear Energy Institute.

Nuclear Energy: A Key Tool in Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissionss.

http://www.nei.org/keyissues/protectingtheenvironment/ecology/. October 2007.

2-3 STP Nuclear Operating Company

2007 Environmental Report The Area The economic base for this area primarily is agricultural related. Most of the land near the site is used for the production of five major agricultural products: beef, rice, grain sorghum, soybeans and cotton. In addition to the agriculture industry, there is commercial fishing in the lower Colorado River, East and West Matagorda Bays, Intracoastal Waterway and the Gulf ofMexico. Currently shrimp, oysters, crab and fmr fish such as black drum are the predominant commercial fish in the county. Aquaculture farms continue to be developed in the area with the main crop being catfish.

Although the surrounding area is heavily cultivated, significant amounts ofwoodlands, thicket, brush, fields, marsh and open water exist to support wildlife. The area lies in the southern region of the central flyway and is host to an abundance of migratory birds. The local estuary environments provide the necessary habitat for a variety offish types to complete their life cycles. The area also affords opportunity for recreational hunting and fishing.

The South Texas Project is home to many species of animals. Inhabitants include American alligators, ospreys, and several hundred deer. In winter, literally hundreds of thousands of waterfowl, principally migratory geese as well as white pelicans and the common tern, have found that the plant's 7,000-acre cooling reservoir provides a good resting place during their migrations. Since 1997, a 15-mile diameter area that includes the South Texas Project has typically led or had one of the highest numbers ofbird species nationwide in the National Audubon Society'sAnnual Christmas Bird Count.

The climate of the region is subtropical maritime, with continental influence. It is characterized by short, mild winters and long, hot and humid summers. Rainfall is usually abundant throughout the year with an annual average ofapproximately forty-two inches. The prevailing wind direction is from the south-southeast, shifting to north-northeast for short intervals during the winter months.

Photo By: Gwenna Kelton STP Nuclear Operating Company 2-4

Site and Area Description Photo By: Gwenna Kelton STP Nuclear Operating Company

Non-Radiological Environmental Introduction and Summary Photo By: Gary Parkey Chapter 3

Non-Radiological Environmental Introduction and Summary Nonradiological environmental conditions and performance at the South Texas Project during 2007 remained satisfactory and demonstrated that the South Texas Project continued to operate in an environmentally responsible manner during the year. The South Texas Project achieved and maintained expected high standards of environmental performance and compliance throughout 2007.

The South Texas Project is committed to the production of electricity in a safe, reliable, and economical manner using nuclear energy. The station's programs, policies and business plan objectives also incorporate a commitment to environmental protection and sound environmental management. The dedication of station personnel who develop, implement, support and monitor site environmental protection programs and compliance exemplify this commitment.

The station's commitment to sound environmental management is illustrated by the following environmental successes in 2007 in addition to supporting development of the Combined Construction and Operating License Application for the proposed new units discussed in Chapter 2:

Continued classification as a high performer by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality based on the station's above-average environmental compliance record in all areas considered, including water quality, waste management and air quality compliance; Photo By: Gary Parkey 3-1 STP Nuclear Operating Company

2007 Environmental Report

" Station involvement in responsible management of regional and county water resources and community efforts to collect hazardous and non-hazardous waste for proper disposal; and,

• Completion of multiple environmental regulatory agency compliance inspections with no findings or violations.

Everyone has a responsibility to protect the environment. Commitment to environmental responsibility is an integral component of the South Texas Project operating policy. This responsibility reaches further than mere compliance with laws and regulations to encompass the integration of sound environmental practices into our daily operational and business decisions. The people at the South Texas Project understand the need to balance economic, operational and environmental issues for the benefit of the station and the public. We recognize our responsibility to hold ourselves to the highest principles of environmental stewardship for station activities.

Photo By: Gary Parkey STP Nuclear Operating Company 3-2

Non-Radiological Environmental Introduction and Summary Photo BY: Gwenna Ke/ton STP Nuclear Operating Company 3-3

Non=Ratdlleg'cam] Ei*i*vmentaRI Operafing Report

~.IE Photo by: Garv Parke)

Chapter 4

Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS This section of the report describes the South Texas Project's non-radiological environmental program performance and environmental conditions from January 1 through December 31, 2007. The STP Nuclear Operating Company environmental staff closely monitors environmental conditions and performance at the South Texas Project. NRG Energy, Inc. provides support and technical assistance to the South Texas Project. In 2007, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality conducted a compliance inspection for onsite beneficial land application with no findings or violations issued. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality also conducted an air quality compliance inspection and a potable water compliance inspection with no findings or violations issued for either.

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality classified the South Texas Project as a high performer in 2007 based on the station's above-average environmental compliance record. Facilities, such as the South Texas Project, are classified by the state as a high performer, average performer or poor performer based on that facility's compliance history. The state's classification of the South Texas Project as a high performer was based on the station's environmental performance over the last five year period. In addition, the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality approved STP Nuclear Operating Company as a bronze-level member of the CLEAN TEXAS program in December of 2007.

In 2007, the South Texas Project was a co-sponsor and participant in the Matagorda County Household Hazardous Waste Collection Day. The station also supported various bird counts and surveys sponsored by federal and state agencies and volunteer organizations such as the annual National Audubon Society Christmas Bird Count, the Great Texas Birding Classic and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Colonial Waterbird Survey.

AQUATIC AND ECOLOGICAL MONITORING The location of the South Texas Project falls within the Texas Land Resource Area designation as coastal prairie and can be divided into two broad ecological areas based on topography, soils and vegetation. The bottomland area is a swampy, marshy area that occupies approximately 1,700 acres of the site near the Colorado River. This area provides an important habitat for birds and other wildlife. A spoil impoundment constructed in 1972 by the United States Army Corps of Engineers is included in this area. In addition, an award-winning 110-acre wetland habitat area that attracts a variety of bird groups and other wildlife Photo by: Gary Parkey 4-1 STP Nuclear Operating Company

2007 Environmental Report was established in 1996 on previously unused land located northeast of the power plants. The remaining area of the site offers diverse habitats for mammals and several types of birds. The South S, *Texas Project environmental staffregularly monitor the site's A'" environs for changing conditions. Ecological conditions onsite in 2007 remained generally unchanged and satisfactory.

The South Texas Project is located on the state-sponsored Great Texas Coastal Birding Trail that spans the entire Texas Gulf Coast from Brownsville to the Louisiana border. Several bird species listed on the state and federal threatened or endangered species lists Photo by: Breck Sacra have been observed visiting the wetland habitat and elsewhere onsite. These include the bald eagle, peregrine falcon, wood stork, white-faced ibis, brown pelican and white-tailed hawk. Additional migratory and resident bird species such as a variety of ducks, geese, turkey and pelicans (both brown and white) have been observed during informal surveys of the site's diverse natural and man-made habitats.

The South Texas Project continues to provide vital habitat for more than 125 different species of wintering and resident birds, including the common tern and white pelicans. Matagorda County, which includes the South Texas Project, consistently ranks at or near the top of the National Audubon Society's annual Christmas Bird Count for the number of species identified. The summer of 2007 was the first year on record that brown pelicans were observed on site. The brown pelican population has made a significant comeback after bottoming out in the 1970's. Both the white and brown pelicans can be seen feeding on fish in the Main Cooling Reservoir.

Intensive bird nesting continues throughout the lowland habitat, particularly in a heron rookery around the perimeter of Kelly Lake. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service biologists estimate that approximately one-third of Texas' breeding adult Gull-billed Tern population, considered to be in decline, nest on the internal dikes of the Main Cooling Reservoir at the South Texas Project.

The South Texas Project continues to monitor important wildlife species to detect population changes. Informal observations by station and NRG Energy, Inc. personnel continue to indicate that the site provides high-quality habitat in which a wide range of animals live. The site continues to &4 attract extensive wildlife populations, offering a refuge for resident species as well as seasonal migrants. The lowland habitat located between the Colorado River and the east bank of the Main Cooling Reservoir offers a significant source of water year-Photo by: Breck Sacra STP Nuclear Operating Company 4-2

Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report round. These natural resource areas, in concert with numerous additional wetland and grassland areas, offer the key ingredients necessary to sustain the extensive wildlife population at the South Texas Project. Aquatic studies necessitated by the license application process associated with the proposed addition of Units 3 and 4 are discussed in the following section.

WATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT Water is an essential component in electricity production, and all electric utilities must comply with extensive federal, state and local water regulations. These regulations govern virtually every aspect of business operations at the South Texas Project. Water usage and wastewater treatment onsite are regulated under the Safe Drinking WaterAct, the Federal Clean WaterAct and the Texas Water Quality Act. Collectively, these acts provide for the safeguarding of public drinking water supplies and maintaining the integrity of state and federal waters.

The South Texas Project uses both surface water and groundwater for station purposes. Groundwater is pumped from deep aquifer wellsto provide onsite drinking water for station personnel, replenish the Essential Cooling Pond, and for other industrial purposes onsite. Consistent with the station's environmental principles encouraging efficient water usage and conservation, groundwater usage is carefully managed to conserve this important resource. Groundwater provided approximately two percent of the water utilized in 2007 by the South Texas Project. Water from the Main Cooling Reservoir and the Essential Cooling Pond is used as cooling water for plant activities. Water from the Colorado River replenishes the Main Cooling Reservoir via intermittent pumping periods. Surface water diverted to the Main Cooling Reservoir from the Colorado River accounted for approximately 98 percent of the water used at the South Texas Project in 2007. Information regarding water use in Texas can be found on the website maintained by the Texas Water Development Board at http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/.

Most of the water used by the South Texas Project is needed to condense steam and provide cooling for plant generating systems. The majority of this water is drawn from and returned to the station's Main Cooling Reservoir. The Main Cooling Reservoir is a 7,000-acre, above grade, off-channel reservoir capable of impounding 202,600 acre-feet of water at its maximum level. Reservoir makeup water is withdrawn intennittently from the adjacent Colorado River. In addition, the Essential Cooling Pond, a 47-acre, below grade, off-channel reservoir that supplies water to cool crucial plant components is capable of impounding 388 acre-feet of water. Various water rights permits, contractual agreements and compliance documents authorize the South Texas Project to maintain these reservoirs, impound water diverted from the Colorado River, and to circulate, Photo by: Givenna Kelton 4-3 STP Nuclear Operating Company

2007 Environmental Report divert and use water from the reservoirs for industrial purposes to operate the plant. These permits also limit the rate of diversion from the Colorado River. The South Texas Project diverted 58,740 acre-feet from the Colorado River in 2007 for the Main Cooling Reservoir fill operations while preserving adequate freshwater flow conditions for downstream bay and estuarine ecosystems.

The South Texas Project and the Lower Colorado RiverAuthority finalized an amended water rights contract for a secure water supply source to support reliable long-term operation of the station while providing flexibility to the Lower Colorado RiverAuthority for supplying the source water. The agree-ment also assists the Lower Colorado RiverAuthority to plan its future water supply strategies to help meet water demands identified in the Senate Bill 1regional water planning process discussed later in this report. Station operations were modified in 2006 to support the amended agreement and mutually-developed water delivery plan.

Existing federal and state water quality standards are implemented and enforced through the Texas Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (TPDES) permit program to restore and maintain the state's waters. Under this permit program, the South Texas Project monitors, records and reports the types and quantities of pollutants from wastewater discharges to ensure that we meet or exceed the stringent levels set in the permit. A monthly monitoring report is submitted to the Texas Commission on Environ-mental Quality for wastewater discharges. Reports identifying ground and surface water use are also submitted annually to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and Texas Water Development Board. An annual groundwater use report is also submitted to the Coastal Plains Groundwater Conser-vation District.

Wastewater generated at the South Texas Project is processed and discharged to the onsite Main Cooling Reservoir to be re-used by the station as cooling water for plant systems. No water was discharged from the reservoir in 2007. The station continued its outstanding wastewater discharge compliance performance record in 2007. Aquatic studies, including fish populations and habitat diver-sity in the Main Cooling Reservoir and the Colorado River as well as impingement and entrainment studies in the Main Cooling Water intake structure, were initiated in 2007 to support the license applica-tion process for Units 3 and 4. These studies are required by the National Environmental Policy Act to assess the potential environmental impact associated with the addition of the new units. These studies are anticipated to continue for approximately one year. No additional studies were required by the United States Environmental Protection Agency or the State of Texas either by way of station discharge permits or otherwise.

Wastewater discharges met state and federal water quality standards demonstrating a 100 percent compliance record for the year -*

while conserving and C' maximizing efficient 4 J ,

water usage at the .

station.

Photo By: Rick Ganglu/ff STP Nuclear Operating Company 4-4

Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report In addition to the wastewater discharge permit program, the Federal Clean Water Act, as amended, requires permits for storm water discharges associated with industrial activity. The South Texas Project Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan ensures that potential pollution sources at the site are evaluated, and that appropriate measures are selected and implemented to prevent or control the discharge of pollutants in storm water runoff. This plan is a working document that is revised whenever there is a change in design, construction, operation or maintenance that has a significant effect on the potential for the discharge of pollutants from the station. The station filed a Notice of Intent for coverage under the Multi-Sector General Permit and the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan was modified accordingly in 2006.

Following a severe drought in 1996, the Texas Legislature recognized the need to address a wide range of state water resource management issues. In 1997, the Texas Senate drafted legislation known as Senate Bill I to address these issues and to develop a comprehensive state water policy. Towards this end, this legislation required that the Texas Water Development Board create a statewide water plan that emphasizes regional planning. Sixteen planning regions were created, each tasked to prepare a regional plan for the orderly development, management and conservation of water resources. The South Texas Project was chosen to represent the electric generating utility interest for the water-planning region that encompasses the lower Colorado River Basin. Plans subsequently submitted by each planning region were incorporated into a State Water Plan in the year 2001 and again in 2006. How-ever, water resource planning is a continuous process and the Regional and State water plans must be updated every five years. The South Texas Project continues to actively participate in the Lower Colorado Regional Water Planning Group to identify strategies to meet future water supply demand projections for the region and update the existing plan accordingly. Additional information regarding Photo By: Gwenna Kelton 4-5 SI 1 INuclear Uperating Uompany

2007 Environmental Report regional water planning in Texas can be found on the website maintained by the Texas Water Develop-ment Board at http://www.twdb.state.tx.us/.

Senate Bill I also required groundwater conservation districts to develop groundwater management plans with estimates on the availability of groundwater in the district, details of how the district would manage groundwater and management goals for the district. The water planning and management provisions were further clarified in 2001 with the enactment of Senate Bill 2. Accordingly, the Coastal Plains Groundwater Conservation District encompassing Matagorda County was confirmed by local election in late 2001. The purpose of the District is to "...manage and protect the groundwater re-sources of the District." The South Texas Project was actively involved in providing review and com-ment on the Coastal Plains Groundwater Conservation district rules prior to their adoption. In 2005, the South Texas Project registered the station's onsite groundwater wells with the District and continues to monitor usage according to the requirements of the District's rules. Additional information regarding the Coastal Plains Groundwater Conservation District can be found on their website at http://www.coastalplainsgcd.com/.

The South Texas Project initially developed, submitted and implemented a station Water Conservation Plan in 1999 in accordance with state water use regulations. The purpose of the station's Water Con-servation Plan is to identify and establish principles, practices and standards to effectively conserve and efficiently use available water supplies and provide historical and projected average industrial water demand. This plan was revised, updated and re-submitted to the state in 2005.

The South Texas Project personnel understand that the water resources of the state are a critical natural resource requiring careful management and conservation to preserve water quality and availability.

Accordingly, the station continues to explore and support efforts focusing on the efficient use of water resources and reduction of water waste.

AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT Air emission sources at the South Texas Project fall under the scope of air pollution regulations pro-mulgated under the Texas Clean Air Act and the Federal Clean Air Act and the numerous associ-ated amendments. The purpose of these regula-tions is to protect air resources from pollution by controlling or abating air pollution and emissions.

Regulated emission sources at the South Texas Project include a fossil-fuel boiler, emergency die-sel generators, fire-fighting training and other mi-nor maintenance equipment and activities.

Unlike conventional electrical generating stations, nuclear power plants do not bum fossil fuel. There-fore, the South Texas Project produces virtually Photo By: Gwenna Kelton

..- 4-6 SIN FTuclear uperating Company

Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report no greenhouse gases or other air pollutants that are the typical by-products of industrial production pro-cesses. The use of emissions-free nuclear power is a significant contributor to the preservation of our community's clean air resources. The South Texas Project uses small amounts of fossil fuel for backup and emergency equipment. The major regulated air emission sources at the South Texas Project include one fossil-fuel boiler and various emergency diesel generators.

The South Texas Project has one oil-fired auxiliary steam boiler available to furnish steam for plant use when steam is not available from the nuclear steam supply system. In addition to the auxiliary steam boiler, a number of fossil-fueled diesel generators are located onsite. These diesels are designed to provide emergency power to various plant systems or buildings in the event of a loss of power. This equipment is not normally needed for daily operations and the station does not use it to produce elec-tricity for distribution. Routine maintenance runs are conducted to ensure availability if needed and for equipment maintenance.

No permit deviations from applicable station air quality permits occurred in 2007.

y.-*** ,

Photo By: Gary Parkey 4-7 STP Nuclear Operating Company

2007 Environmental Report NON-RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT Solid waste management procedures for hazardous and non-hazardous wastes generated at the South Texas Project ensure that wastes are properly dispositioned in accordance with applicable federal, state and local environmental and health regulations. By regulatory definition, solid waste includes solid, semi-solid, liquid and gaseous waste material. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, which administers the Texas Solid Waste Disposal Act and also the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act program, is the primary agency regulating non-radioactive wastes generated at the South Texas Project. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality regulates the collection, handling, storage and disposal of solid wastes, including hazardous wastes. The transportation of waste materials is regulated by the United States Department ofTransportation.

The South Texas Project is classified as a small quantity generator of industrial solid wastes. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality regulations require that industrial solid wastes generated at the South Texas Project be identified to the Commission and these are listed in the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Notice of Registration for the South Texas Project. The registration is revised whenever there is a change in waste management practices at the site. Waste handling and disposal activities are summarized and documented in a waste summary report for the South Texas Project that is submitted annually to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.

2007 Nonradioactive Waste Management South Texas Project Recycle 67%

Other Treatment 2%

Incineration &

Fuel Blending Landfill 5% 26%

Figure 4-1 STP Nuclear Operating Company 4-8

Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report Hazardous waste accumulation at the South Texas Project in 2007 was limited to a maximum holding period of 180 days. The Resource Conservation and RecoveryAct and Texas Solid Waste Disposal Act also requires the use of proper storage and shipping containers, labels, manifests, reports, personnel training, a spill control plan and an accident contingency plan. Plant personnel routinely inspect areas throughout the site to ensure wastes are not stored or accumulated inappropriately.

Station policies and regulations encourage the recycling, recovery or re-use of waste when possible to reduce the amount of waste generated or disposed of in landfills. Approximately 67 percent of the industrial non-radioactive waste generated in 2007 at the South Texas Project was recycled or processed for re-use.

(Reference Figure 4-1) The South Texas Project ships waste oil, grease, electrohydraulic fluid, adhesives, liquid 2007 Nonradioactive Waste Generation paint and solvent for fuel blending and Soutivexas Get thermal energy recovery. Used oil, diesel South Texas Project fuels and antifreeze solutions are sent to a Non-Hazardous recycling vendor for re-processing. Lead- Waste acid batteries are retumed, when possible, 971 to the original manufactrer for recycling or are shipped to a registered battery recycler, thereby reducing the volume of hazardous waste that might otherwise be Universal Waste generated. Asphalt, concrete and non- Hazardous Waste Ue 0.7ate hazardous blast grit were also shipped for 0.5% 1.7%

recycle in 2007. A site paper recycling program results in the collection of several Figure 4-2 tons of paper each year. In 2007, the station collected approximately pape reyclig.22 foverton tons of f pperHazardous Waste Generation Historical paper for recycling. Every ton ofpaper Comparison recycled saves approximately 17 trees, So mparon eliminates approximately three cubic yards South Texas Project oflandfill material and saves enough energy to power the average home for six months.

In addition, approximately 1,481 tons of scrap metal also were removed from the ' 1O station for recycle in 2007. Themajorityof

• s scrap metal was generated from 0 replacement of low-pressure turbines at the 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 station. The station continues to explore a new areas where recycling maybe Hazardous Waste expanded or initiated.

Vigure 4-.

Non-radioactive solid waste that cannot be shipped for recycling is shipped for disposal. Municipal-type trash is transported to an offsite landfill. Successful waste minimization and source reduction efforts by employees have allowed the South Texas Project to remain classified as a small-quantity generator since 2004. Hazardous waste accounts for only a small portion of the waste generated at the South Texas Project; however, minimization and reduction ofhazardous waste generation where feasible remains an important goal at the station. (Reference Figures 4-2 and 4-3) 4-9 STP Nuclear Operating Company

2007 Environmental Report CHEMICAL CONTROL AND MANAGEMENT The station's IntegratedSpill Contingency Planfor the South Texas ProjectElectric Generating Station,updated in 2006, consolidates multiple federal and state requirements into one plan. The plan is implemented through standard site operating procedures and guidelines. The South Texas Project uses standard operating procedures, policies and programs to minimize the generation of waste materials, control chemical usage and prevent spills. The South Texas Project also evaluates chemicals and products proposed for use, which could come in contact with plant components. Site procedures address the evaluation, storage, use, spill control, and disposal requirements of chemicals. These guidelines assist in reducing waste generation, ensure proper packaging for disposal and mitigate the consequences of inadvertent spillage.

The South Texas Project emphasizes awareness training for spill prevention and maintains station readiness to respond should a spill occur. Spill receive annual refresher training in hazardous material incident response.

No significant or conse-quential spills occurred in 2007.

Photo by: Barbara Carnley ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PLAN STATUS The South Texas Project's Environmental Protection Plan was issued in March of 1989 to provide for the protection of non-radiological environmental values during operation of the South Texas Project.

This report reviews Environmental Protection Plan non-compliances identified by the plant in 2007 and the associated corrective actions taken to prevent their recurrence. Potential nonconformities are promptly addressed, as identified, to maintain operations in an environmentally acceptable manner. The station uses its Corrective Action Program to document these conditions and track corrective actions to completion. Internal assessments, reviews and inspections also are used to document plant compliance.

This report also reviews non-routine reports submitted by plant personnel and any activities that involved a potentially significant unreviewed STP Nuclear Operating Company 4-10

Non-Radiological Environmental Operating Report environmental question. A proposed change, test or experiment is considered to present an unreviewed environmental questions if it concerns:

1) A matter that may result in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously evaluated in the Final Environmental Statement related to the Operation of South Texas Project, Units 1 and 2 (Docket Nos. 50-498 and 50-499), environmental impact appraisals, or in any decisions of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board; or,

2) A significant change in effluents orpower level; or,

3) A matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in the documents specified in (1) above, that may have a significant adverse environmental impact.

No unreviewed environmental questions were identified in 2007.

Events that require reports to federal, state or local agencies other than the Nuclear Regulatory Commission are reported in accordance with the applicable reporting requirements. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is provided with a copy of any such report at the time it is submitted to the cognizant agency. If a non-routine event occurs and a report is not required by another agency, then a 30-day report to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission is required by the Environmental Protection Plan.

No such 30-day or other non-routine report of this type was required in 2007.

Photo by: Russell Kiesling 4-11 STP Nuclear Operating Company

Radiological Environmental Introduction and Summary Photo by: Gwenna Kelton Chapter 5

Radiological Environmental Introduction and Summary The Radiological Environmental Moni-toring Program is designed to evaluate the radiological impact of the South Texas Project on the environment by collecting and analyzing samples for low levels of radioactivity. Measurements of samples from the different pathways indicate that there is no detectable effect offsite from the operation of the power plants.

Cobalt-60 was not detected in the Main Cooling Reservoir in 2007. Its concen-tration continues to decrease due to the improved processing of effluents. Only Photo by Barbara Carnley natural radioactive material has been identified in air samples in 2007. The measurements of direct radiation onsite and offsite indicate no effect from the power plants.

Samples of fish and meat collected and analyzed show no plant-related isotopes are present.

Water samples from the onsite drinking water supply from the deep aquifer and offsite sampling stations on the Colorado River show only natural background radioactivity.

Tritium is a radioactive isotope of hydrogen that is produced in the reactor and cannot be removed from effluents released to the Main Cooling Reservoir because it is a part of the water molecule.

During the design of the plant this was recognized and the presence of tritium in the Main Cooling Reservoir, various sloughs and ditches onsite, and the shallow aquifer were expected. Tritium has been identified and analyzed in these types of samples and the concentrations remain below the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) drinking water limits.

In 2005, several nuclear plants discovered tritium in groundwater on their sites at levels exceeding the EPA drinking water limits, mainly near underground process or effluent pipes. To determine if this were the case at the South Texas Project, test wells near underground process and effluent pipes were sampled and analyzed for tritium.

Although some results were posi-tive, all results were below the EPA drinking water limits. The current Photo by: Gwen Finley 5-1 STP Nuclear Operating Company

2007 Environmental Report sampling program samples two of these wells quarterly and three annually. The tritium concentration has decreased in the well that had the highest concentration during 2007, and the other wells have remained constant.

Additional onsite shallow aquifer wells have been added to the sampling schedule to monitor the rnigra-tion of tritium from the Main Cooling Reservoir. The additional wells are on all sides of the Main Cooling Reservoir. Two wells, near the site boundary and an adjoining county road on the west side of the Main Cooling Reservoir, were positive for tritium and those results were well below the EPA drinking water limit Analysis of the data collected from the implementation of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program indicates that the operation of the South Texas Project has no radiological impact.

Photo by: Ed Conawav STP Nuclear Operating Company 5-2

Radiological Environmental Introduction and Summary I

Photo by: GCuenna Kelton STP Nuclear Operating Company 5-3

Radiological Environmental Operating Report

,I .

ULa

'VIA y0 Chapter 6 Photo By: Gaty Parkey

Radiological Environmental Operating Report PROGRAM DESCRIPTION The South Texas Project initiated a comprehensive pre-operational Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program in July 1985. That program terminated on March 7, 1988, when the operational program was irnplemented. The pre-operational monitoring program data forms the baseline against which operational changes are measured.

Critical pathway analysis requires that samples be taken from water, air, and land environments. These samples are obtained to evaluate potential radiation exposure. Sample types are based on established path-ways and experience gained at other nuclear facilities. Sample locations were determined after considering site meteorology, Colorado River hydrology, local demography and land use. Sampling locations are further evaluated and modified according to field and analysis experience. Table 1 lists the minimum sampling locations and frequency of collection at the end of this section.

Sampling locations consist of indicator and control stations. Indicator stations are locations on or offthe site that may be influenced by plant discharges during plant operation. Control stations are located beyond the measurable influence of the South Texas Project or any other nuclear facility. Although most samples analyzed are accompanied by a control sample, it should be noted that this practice is not always possible or meaning-ful with all sample types. Fluctuations in the concentration ofradionuclides and direct radiation exposure at indicator stations are evaluated in relation to historical data and against the control stations. Indicator stations are compared with characteristics identified during the pre-operational program to monitor for radiological effects from plant operation.

Several sample identification methods are used to implement the program. Figures 6-1 and 6-2 are maps that identify permanent sample stations. Descriptions of sample stations shown on Figure 6-1 and 6-2 are found in Table 2. Table 2 also includes additional sampling locations and media types that may be used for additional information. Figure 6-3 illustrates the zones used when collection locations are not permanent sample stations.

NEI GROUNDWATER PROTECTION INITIATIVE During 2006, the Nuclear Energy Institute sponsored a task force to establish consistent methods and approaches to the monitoring and reporting of information about radioactive isotopes in groundwater. The resulting program is called the Groundwater Protection Initiative. In 2006 the South Texas Project partici-pated in the task force and is implementing its recommendations. In 2007, the Nuclear Energy Institue finalized the Groundwater Protection Initiative for the nuclear industry. In addition, the Electric Power Re-search Institute issued guidelines to provide technical guidance to utilities on the necessary elements ofa sound groundwater protection program. The South Texas Project is in the process of implementating these guide-lines with full implementation anticipated to be completed in 2008.

During 2005 several shallow aquifer wells were sampled within the Protected Area and had positive values that were below the EPA drinking water limit of 20,000 pCi/kg. The positive results were attributed to an underground pipe that leaked and was replaced several years ago. To monitor this tritium, several shallow aquifer test wells were added to the sampling schedule inside the ProtectedArea during 2007. Two of the wells, between the two units, were positive and have been sampled quarterly. The concentration of one well 6-1 STP Nuclear Operating Company

2007 Environmental Report Designated Sample Locations Figure 6-1 STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-2

Radiological Environmental Operating Report REMP ON SITE LOCATIONS 2X SCALE Figure 6-2 STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-3

2007 Environmental Report ZONE LOCATION MAP The zone station number is determined in the following manner:

• The first character ofthe station number "Z" to identify it as a zone station.

• The second character is the direction coordinate numbers 1-8.

• The third character is the distance from the site number 1-6.

Figure 6-3 STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-4

Radiological Environmental Operating Report has remained fairly constant at approximately 1,250 pCi/kg and the other has decreased from approximately 15,000 to 6,600 pCi/kg. Three wells that had no detectable tritium are sampled annually to determine ifthere is movement of the tritium in the ProtectedArea. The three wells continue to have no detectable tritium.

As discussed in previous reports, the presence of tritium has been monitored in the shallow aquifer for several years on the south side of the Main Cooling Reservoir. This was predicted by models used when licensing the site. The models predicted that the tritium would be at the highest concentration in the shallow aquifer on the southeast side ofthe Main Cooling Reservoir. This prediction has shown to be true with the positive results from station #251 and station #235 which have been sampled for several years and is discussed later in this report. To enhance the database, shallow aquifer wells onsite have been added to the environmental program. Station #259 and Station #258, on the west side of the Main Cooling Reservoir, are the only wells added that had detectable tritium and the concentrations were very low (200 to 600 pCi/kg). This data indicates that the model used during the licensing phase appears to predict the movement oftritium in the shallow aquifer correctly.

During 2007, there were two small discharges of water to the ground. One occurrence was from a leaking pipe joint containing water from the Main Cooling Reservoir. The second was rainwater out of a contaminated equipment storage box. These leaks were evaluated under site programs and proce-dures and recorded in the Corrective Action Program database. The evaluations revealed that there was no release to an unidentified pathway, no radioactive material was released offsite and the water did not reach a drinking water aquifer.

ANALYSIS OF RESULTS AND TRENDS Environmental samples from areas surrounding the South Texas Project continue to indicate no signifi-cant radiological effects from plant operation. Analytical values from offsite indicator sample stations continue to trend with the control stations. Onsite indicator samples continued to increase or decrease in measured values at their expected rates.

Average quarterly beta activity from three onsite indicator stations and a single control station for air particulate samples have been compared historically from 1988 through 2007 (see Figure 6-4). The average of the onsite indicators trends closely with the offsite control values. The comparison illustrates that plant operations are not having an impact on air particulate activity even at the Sensitive Indicator Stations (#1, #15, and #16). These stations are located near the plant and are located downwind from the plant based on the prevailing wind direction. The beta activity measured in the air particulate samples is from natural radioactive material. As a routine part of the program, we perform gamma analysis on quarterly composites of the air particulate samples to determine if any activity is from the South Texas Project. The gamma analysis revealed that it was all natural radioactivity.

Direct gamma radiation is monitored in the environment by thermoluminescent dosimeters located at 40 sites. The natural direct gamma radiation varies according to location because of differences in the natural radioactive materials in the soil, its moisture content and the vegetation cover. Figure 6-5 compares the amount ofdirect gamma radiation measured at the plant since the fourth quarter of 1985 for three different types of stations. The Control Stations are greater than 10 miles from the site and are 6-5 STP Nuclear Operating Company

2007 Environmental Report in the direction ofthe least prevailing winds (Stations #23 and #37). The Sensitive Indicator Stations are in the directions that the wind blows most often and are one mile from the power plants on Farm-to-Market Road 521 (Stations #1, #15 and #16). The Indicator Stations are the remainder of the stations excluding Stations #38,40, and 42. The values plotted are the averages for all of the stations according to type. Figure 6-5 indicates changing conditions in the area of the individual stations. The average of the Control Stations is higher than the other stations because station #23 is in an area that has a slightly higher natural background radiation, probably due to the soil composition. The trends shown in Figure 6-5 clearly show that the power plants are not adding to the direct radiation in the environment.

Historical Comparison of Average Quarterly Beta Activity from Indicator and Control Air Samples 1988 -2007 0.035

'P 0,020k 0.005 --

= Station #001, #015 & #016 Average of Onsite Indicators Station #037 Offsite Control Figure 6-4 Environmental Dosimeter Comparisons 22

l. Averaomof ndicatorStolmlno AverageofContt S9tatons 9Sn.ttive 20 18 4~16 12 _ _

10 5 1095 1996 1987 1939 19919990 1991 1992 M993 1994 199S 199 99971998 1999 2000 200912002 2003 2004 2009 2006 2007 Results by Quarter Figure 6-5 STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-6

Radiological Environmental Operating Report Bottom sediment samples are taken from the Main Cooling Reservoir each year. Figure 6-6 shows the positive results from two plant-produced radioactive materials, Cobalt-58 and Cobalt-60. The Cobalt-58 and Cobalt-60 inventory in the reservoir has decreased since 1992 because of equipment installed to reduce radioactive effluents. The amount of Cobalt-58 has decreased below levels that can be reliably detected. The concentration of Cobalt-60 in the reservoir bottom sediment samples varies and this year could not be detected. Figure 6-7 demonstrates the decline in the total amount of Cobalt-60 in the reservoir.

Historical Comparison of Cobalt-58 & Cobalt-60 in Main Cooling Reservoir Sediment 1986-2007 1800 oStatie #215: Cobalt-58 Plant Discharge 1600 EStatlion #215 : Cobalt-60 2 1400 Plant Discharge ISIStation #216: Cobalt-S8 1200 .. Blodown Structure V_ 1000 Stad on #216: Cobalt-60 Blowdown Structure S 800 C*-60 and Co-58 were not q.

600 t' ,2007. _detected in the sediment in Ho.e.r. there is an inventoty ofCo-60 still in the 400 -....-... reserwoir that has been calculated and shown in Figure

, - 6-200 0 , , ,I I 1986 1989 1992 1995 1998 2001 2004 2007 Figure 6-6 Calculated Cumulative Curies of Cobalt-60 in the Main Cooling Reservoir

~lt~60 0

'4'

'ýp ASSUMPTIONS:

1. Radioactive decay is the only mechanism for removal from the Main Cooling Reservoir.

2. The initial time for calculating the remaining radioactivity is July I of the year released.

Figure 6-7 STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-7

2007 Environmental Report Cesium-137 was measured in one ofthe Main Cooling Reservoir bottom sediment samples. However, Cesium- 137 was present in the environment before the operation of the South Texas Project and the sample concentrations were approximately equal to pre-operational values. The Cesium-137 measured in the Main Cooling Reservoir does not suggest an increase due to plant operation.

Tritium is a radioactive isotope of hydrogen and is produced during plant operation. Tritium produced in the reactors is a part of the water molecule. Wastewater is treated to remove impurities before release, but tritium cannot be removed, because it is chemically part of the water molecule. Some ofthe tritium is released into the atmosphere and the remainder is released into the Main Cooling Reservoir. The tritium escapes from the Main Cooling Reservoir by evaporation, movement into the shallow aquifer, Historical Comparison of Tritium Added to and Remaining in the Main Cooling Reservoir 1989-2007 4000 3500 .. . . . .. . .....

3000 2500 2000 T 1500 1000 500 0

1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

• Tritiun Released to theMain Cooling Resvoir ETritium Measured in the Main Cooling Reservoir Figure 6-8 and by percolation from the relief wells that are a part of the dike's stabilization system. Figure 6-8 shows the amount of tritium released to the Main Cooling Reservoir each year and the amount present during the last quarter of each year. This indicates that almost half ofthe tritium is removed from the reservoir annually. Tritium in the Main Cooling Reservoir is also diluted by river water diverted to the reservoir and by direct rainfall. Tritium concentrations also decrease due to radioactive decay and design leakage from relief wells and evaporation. Rainwater was collected during 2007 to determine if the tritium remained in the local area. Tritium was not found in any rain water samples.

The concentration of tritium in the Main Cooling Reservoir decreased in 2007. Tritium enters the sloughs and ditches of the site as runoff from the reliefwells that surround the reservoir. Examples of tritium in the relief wells are shown in Figure 6-9. Relief well #238 was sampled until a more dependable relief well #701 was identified. The tritium concentration in eight surface water sample points for 1988 through 2007 is shown in Figure 6-10. The specific sample point locations can be found in Table 2.

Tritium levels in the onsite sloughs and ditches vary due to the concentration in the reservoir and the amount ofrainfall received. The average tritium concentration in the sloughs and ditches should never STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-8

Radiological Environmental Operating Report Historical Comparison of Tritium Activity in Reservoir Relief Wells 1990 - 2007 30000-/

30,000 oCures prC Kdiogee - N.c1-t RegulatoryCommision RcpoinngLevel 25000-

• 20000- 20,000 picoCues per Kilogne,- En-virnmeal Pection Ag-ecy Reporing Level 15000-10000-5000- / id EMain Cooling Reservoir Relief Well (onsite) #238

• Main Cooling Reservoir Relief Well (onsite) #701 Figure 6-9 Historical Comparison of Tritium Activity in Surface Water 1988 - 2007 30,000 picoConesper Kileass -NycI=e Regrslety Cennseion Repocrfg Leve C

• River Sample Upstream of Plant (Offsite) #Q02 ERiver Sample Dowvnstream of Plant (Offsilte) #Q01 WeastBranch of River (Orsite) #213 U Little Robbins Slough (Onsite) #212 I East Branch of Little Robbins Slough (Onsite) #211 E Ditch NE of Main Cooling Reservoir (Onsite) #229 G Main Cooling Reservoir Blowdown (Onsite) #237 1 Main Cooling Reservoir (Onsite) #216 Figure 6-10 STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-9

2007 Environmental Report equal that of the reservoir, because it decays as it migrates through the dike relief system and is also diluted by rainwater.

Tritium was identified in the shallow (ten to thirty feet deep) aquifer test well #23 5, approximately seventy-five yards south of the reservoir dike base during 1999. In 2007, the concentration remained fairly constant. The concentration should rise and fall if it follows the trends observed in surface water samples onsite. In 2000, samples were collected from the shallow aquifer well #251, southeast of the Main Cooling Reservoir. Samples have been collected quarterly and the tritium levels have remained near that of the reliefwells. The results ofthe analysis from these two shallow aquifer wells are shown in Figure 6-11. One sample location, shallow aquifer well #258, had a positive tritium value slightly above the Lower Limit of Detection for the first time this year. It is near #259. which has been at that level, 250-300 pCi/kg, for over a year.

The drinking water onsite is pumped from deep aquifer wells and is tested quarterly to verify tritium is not present. The waters in the reservoir and other surface bodies of water onsite are not used as drinking water. The only way tritium could be introduced into humans is by eating fish from the reservoir, which is not permitted. If a person ate forty pounds of fish a year from water that contained the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission reporting level (30,000 picoCuries per kilogram),

that person would receive less than one millirem. This is insignificant compared to the almost twenty millirem a year everyone receives from naturally occurring radioactive potassium in the body. The current reservoir concentration is less than 1/2 the reporting level.

Some samples are collected and analyzed in addition to those required by our licensing documents or internal procedures. These samples are obtained to give additional assurance that the public and the environment are protected from any adverse effects from the plant. These samples include pasture grass, sediment samples, rain water, shallow aquifer well water, water from various ditches and sloughs onsite, and air samples near communities or other areas of interest. The results of these analyses indicate that there is no detectable radiological effect on the environment by plant operation.

Historical Comparison of Tritium Activity in Shallow Aquifer Ground Water 1997 - 2007 30000- 30,000picoCuriý WKilogr - Nucler RegalatoýCommisio Reporing Ule 25000-20000- 20,000picoCri*. pMr Le-1 Kilog.ra - Envinmser.l P.-t~ion Ag.cy Reporting 15000-10000-5000-0-

ETest Well B-3 directly south from MCR (onsite) #235 ETest Well B-4 Upper Aquifer (onsite) #251 Figure 6-11 STP Nuclear Operating Company 10

Radiological Environmental Operating Report LAND USE CENSUS The Annual Land Use Census is performed to determine if any changes have occurred in the location of residents and the use of the land within five miles of the South Texas Project generating units. The information is used to determine whether any changes are needed in the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program.

The census is performed by contacting area residents and local government agencies that provide the informa-tion. The results of the survey indicated that no changes were required.

In addition, a survey is performed to verify the nearest residents within five miles of the South Texas Project generating units in each of 16 sectors. The ten sectors that have residents within five miles and the distance to the nearest residence in each sector are listed below.

Sector Distance Location (approx. miles)

ENE 4.5 CR 232 (Ryman Road)

ESE 3.5 Selkirk Island SE 3.5 Selkirk Island SW 4.5 CR 386 (Corporon Road)

WSW 2.5 FM 521 W 4.5 FM 1095 WNW 4.5 CR 356 (Ashby-Buckeye Road)

NW 4.5 CR 354 (Mondrik Road)

NNW 3.5 Runnells Ranch (FM 1468)

N 3.5 Runnells Ranch (FM 1468)

The following items of interest were noted during the census:

Colorado River water from below the Bay City Dam has not been used to irrigate crops.

There were no identified commercial vegetable farms located within the five mile zone.

No commercial dairy operates within Matagorda County and there is no source ofmilk within the five mile zone.

STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-11

2007 Environmental Report Two commercial fish farms continue to operate. One is two miles west of the plant near FM 521 and the second is five miles southwest of the plant at the intersection ofRobbins Slough Road and South Citrus Road.

The water supply for the ponds is not affected by the operations of the STP power plants.

Broadleafvegetation sampling is performed at the site boundary in the three most leeward sectors and at a control location in lieu of a garden census. The broadleafvegetation samples taken also satisfy the collection requirement when milk samples are not available.

QUALITY ASSURANCE Quality assurance encompasses planned and systematic actions to ensure that an item or facility will perform satisfactorily. Reviews, surveillance and audits have determined that the programs, procedures and personnel are adequate and perform satisfactorily Quality audits and independent technical reviews help to determine areas that need attention and re-evalua-tion. Areas that need attention are addressed in accordance with the station's Corrective Action Program.

2007 Radiological Laboratory Quality Assurance Program Performance 0-5% Difference, 57 5-10% Difference, 15 10-15% Difference, 6 78 Total Analyses Figure 6-12 STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-12

Radiological Environmental Operating Report The measurement capabilities ofthe Radiological Laboratory are demonstrated by participating in inter-laboratory measurement assurance programs. These programs provide samples that are similar in matrix and size to those measured for the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program.

Figure 6-12 summarizes the results ofthese inter-comparison programs. In addition, approximately ten percent ofthe analyses made are quality control samples that consist of duplicate, split and blind samples.

Radiochemical measurements must meet sensitivity requirements at the lower level ofdetection for environ-mental samples and any deviation is discussed below.

PROGRAM DEVIATIONS Deviations from the sampling program must be acknowledged and explained in this report During 2007 the following samples were not collected or were unacceptable for analysis:

" One measurement of direct radiation out of one hundred and sixty required was missed due to the TLD station being run over by a tractor and the TLD then passing through a grass shredder.

" Three out of thirty-six required broadleaf vegetation samples were not collected due to seasonal unavailability in January.

Photo By: Gwenna Kelton STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-13

2007 Environmental Report

• Seven out of two hundred and sixty air samples were not continuously collected for the full time interval due to power failures. All but four of the samples met the required lower level of detection and are not listed in Table 3, the remaining three are included.

The minimum Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program is presented in Table 1. The table is organized by exposure pathway. Specific requirements like location, sampling method, collection frequency, and analyses are given for each pathway.

EXPOSURE: D)IRECT RADIATION 40 TOTAL SAMPLING STATIONS Sample Media, Number, Approximate Location and Distance of Routine Sampling Sampling and Analysis Minlilnuam Sample Stations rnom Containtment. Mode Collection Type Analysis Frequency Frequency Exposure Media: TLD 16- Located in all 16 meteorological sectors, 0 .2* to 4 miles. Continuously Quarterly Gaminta dose Quarterly 16- Located in all 16 meteeorological sectors, 2 to 7 miles.

6- Located in special interest areas (e.g. school, population centers), within 14 miles.

2- Control stations located in areas ofminitttal wind direction (WSW,EN F), 10- 16 miles.

• The inner ring o Istations in the southern sectors are located within I mile because oftthe main cooling reservoir EXPOSURE: AIRBORNE 5 TOTAL SAMPLING STATIONS Sample Media, Ntmber, Approximate Location, and Distance of Routine Sampling Nominal Analysis Miintium Sample Stations from Containnient. Mode Collection Type Analysis Frequency Frequency Charcoal and Particulate Filters 3- Located at the exclusion zone, N, NNW, NW Sectors, I mile. Continuous sampler Weekly or more Radioiodine Weekly operations frequently if Canister:

1- Located in Bay City, 14 miles, required by dust 1-131 loading 1- Control Station, located in a minimal wind direction (WSW), 10 Particulate miles. Sampler:

Gross Beta Following filter Activity change Gamma- Quarterly Isotopic of composite (by location)

EXPOSURE: WATERBORNE 13 TOTAL SAMPLING STATIONS Sanmple Media, Number And Approximate Location of Sample Routine Sampling Notminal Anlysis MiniFreenc Stations Mode Collection Type Analysis LFrequency Frequrency Surface I- Located in MCR at the MCR blowdown structure. Composite sample Monthly Gatmta- Monthly over a I month Isotopic I- Located above the site on the Colorado River not infltienced by period (grab if not plant discharge (control). available) Tritium Quarterly Composite 1- Located downstream frost blow down entrance into the Colorado River.

Ground 5- Located its wells used to monitor tritium migration in the shallow Grab Quarterly Gamma- Quarterly aquifer. Isotopic &

Tritium STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-14

Radiological Environmental Operating Report TABLE 1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM EXPOSURE: WATERBORNE (CONTINUED)

Sample Media, Number And Approximate Location of Sample Routine Sampling Nominal Analysis Minimum Stations Mode Collection Type Analysis Frequency Frequency Drinking Water I- Located on site. a Grab Monthly Gross Beta & Monthly Gamma-I- Located at a control station. Isotopic Triti nm Quarterly Composites Sediment Grab Semiannually Gamma- Semiannually Isotopic not influenced by I- Located above the site on the Colorado River, plant discharge.

I- Located downstream front blowdown entrance into the Colorado River.

1- Located in MCR.

No municipal water systems areaffected by STP. This sampletaken from deep aquifer supplying drinking water to employees while at work.

EXPOSURE: INGESTION 7TOTAL SAMPLING STATIONS Sample Media, Number And Approximate Location of Sample Routine Sampling Nominal Analysis Miniomum Statiotns Mode Collecti on Type Anal ysis Frequency Frequency Milk Grab Semi-monthly Gamma- Semi-monthly when animals are Isotopic when animnals are on pasture; And on pasture; monthly at other 1-131 monthly at other ttmes. ttne s.

Broadleaf Vegetation 2- Located at the exclusion zone, N, NW, or NNW sectors. Grab Monthly during As collected growing season Ganta-

/- Located in a minimal wind direction. (When available) Isotopic Limited source of sample in vicinity of the South Texas Project. (Attempts will be made to obtain samples when available.)

Three different kinds ofbroadleaf vegetation am to be collected over the growing season, not each collection period.

EXPOSURE: INGESTION (continued)

Sample Media, Numlbr And Approximate Location of Sample Stations Routine Sampling Mode Nominal Collection Frequency 1 Analysis Type Minimum Analysis Frequency Fish and Invertebrates (edible portions)

I- Representing commercially or recreational important species Grab Samplesemi- Gamma- As collected in vicinity ofSTP that maybe influenced by plant operation. annually Isotopic on edible portions I- Same or analogous species in area not influenced by STP.

_- Same or analogous species in the M CR.

Garoa-Agricultural Products Grab At time ofharvest Isotopic As collected Analysis in edible portion Domestic Meat Ga mma-1- Represents domestic stock fedon crops gown exclusively within Grab Annually Isotopic As collected I omiles of the plant.

No sample stations have been identified in the vicinity of the site. Presently no agricultural land is irrigated by water into which liquid plant wastes will be discharged. Agricultural products will be considered if these conditions change.

6-15 STP Nuclear Operating Company

2007 Environmental Report TABLE 2 SAMPLE MEDIAAND LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS Al AIRBORNE RADIOIODINE L6 COLLARD GREENS AP AIRBORNE PARTICULATE L7 MUSTARD GREENS BI RESIDENT DABBLER DUCK M1 BEEF MEAT B2 RESIDENT DIVER DUCK M2 POULTRY MEAT B3 MIGRATORY DABBLER DUCK M3 WILD SWINE B4 MIGRATORY DIVER DUCK M4. DOMESTIC SWINE B5 GOOSE M5 EGGS B6 DOVE M6 GAME DEER B7 QUAIL M7 ALLIGATOR B8 PIGEON M8 RABBIT CC CRUSTACEAN CRAB OY OYSTER CS CRUSTACEAN SHRIMP SO SOIL DR DIRECT RADIATION S1 SEDIMENT - SHORELINE Fl FISH - PISCIVOROUS S2 SEDIMENT - BOTT"OM F2 FISH - CRUSTACEAN & INSECT FEESVB3 ANY COMBINATION OF FEEDERS BROADLEAF SAMPLES (LI thru L7)

F3 FISH - PLANKTIVORES & DETRITUS VP PASTURE GRASS FEEDERS LI BANANA LEAVES WD DRINKING WATER L2 CANA LEAVES WG GROUND WATER L4 TURNIP GREENS WR RAIN WATER L5 CABBAGE WS SURFACE WATER WW RELIEF WELL WATER STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-16

Radiological Environmental Operating Report TABLE 2 SAMPLE MEDIAAND LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS MEDIA CODE STATION VECTOR LOCATION DESCRIPTION CODE (Approximate)

DRAI AP VB VP SO 001 1 mileN FM521 DR 002 1 mile NNE FM 521 DR 003 1 mile NE FM 521 DR 004 1 mile ENE FM 521 DR 005 1 mile E FM 521 DR AI AP SO 006 3.5 miles ESE Site near Reservoir Makeup Pumping Facility DR 007 3.5 miles SE MCR Dike DR 008 0.25 mile SSE MCR Dike DR 009 0.25 mile S MCR Dike DR 010 0.25 mile SSW MCR Dike DR Oil 0.5 mile SW MCR Dike DR 012 1.5 mile WSW MCR Dike DR 013 1.5 mile W FM 521 DR 014 1.5 mile WNW FM 521 DR AI AP VB SO VP 015 1 mile NW FM 521 DRAI AP VB SO VP 016 1 mile NNW FM521 DR 017 6.5 miles N Buckeye - FM 1468 DRA1 AP SO 018 5.5 miles NNE OXEA Corp. - FM 3057 DR 019 5.5 miles NE FM 2668 DR 020 5 miles ENE FM 2668 & FM 2078 DR 021 5 miles E FM 521 & FM 2668 DR 022 7 miles E Equistar Chemical Plant DR 023

• 16 miles ENE Intersection of FM 521 and FM 2540

• Control Stations Bold media codes are required.

STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-17

2007 Environmental Report TABLE 2 SAMPLE MEDIAAND LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS MEDIA CODE STATION VECTOR LOCATION DESCRIPTION CODE (Approximate)

DR 024 4 miles SSE MCR Dike DR 025 4 miles S MCR Dike DR 026 4 miles SSW MCR Dike DR 027 2.5 miles SW MCR Dike DR 028 5 miles WSW FM 1095 & Ellis Road DR SO 029 4.5 miles W FM 1095 DR 030 6 miles WNW Tres Palacios Oaks, FM 2853 DR 031 5.5 miles NW Wilson Creek Road DR 032 3.5 miles NNW FM 1468 DR A!AP SO 033 l4 miles NNE Microwave Tower at end of Kilowatt Road in Bay Ci City DR 034 7.5 miles ENE Wadsworth Water Supply Pump Station DR Al AP SO 035 8.5 miles SSE Matagorda DR 036 9 miles WSW College Port DR Al AP VB VP SO 037* 10 miles WSW Palacios AEP Substation DR 038 10.5 milesNW AEP Substation on TX 71 near Blessing TX 35 under High Voltage Power lines near DR Al AP 50 039 9 miles NW TieanHghSol Tidehaven High School DR 040 4.5 miles SW Citrus Grove DR 041 2.0 miles ESE MCR Dike DR 042 8.5 miles NW FM 459 at Tidehaven Intennediate School DR 043 4.5 miles SE Site boundary at blowdown outlet WG 205 4.0 miles SE Piezometer Well #446A, 40' deep WG 206 4.0 miles SE Piezometer Well #446, 78' deep WS 209 2 miles ESE Kelly Lake WD 210 On Site Approved drinking water supply from STP STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-18

Radiological Environmental Operating Report TABLE 2 SAMPLE MEDIAAND LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS MEDIA CODE STATION VECTOR LOCATION DESCRIPTION CODE (Approximate)

WS S1 211 3.5 miles S Site, E. Branch Little Robbins Slough WS S1 212 4 miles S Little Robbins Slough WS S1 213 4 miles SE West Branch Colorado River F (1,2, or 3) CC 214 2.5 miles SE MCR at Makeup Water Discharge S2 215 0.5 mile SW MCRat Circulating Water Discharge WS S2 216 3.5 miles SSE MCR at blowdown structure F (1, 2, or 3) CC CS OY 222 >10 miles West Matagorda Bay WS S(1 or 2) 227 5-6 miles SE West bank of Colorado River downstream of STP across from channel marker #22 WD 228* 14 miles NNE Le Tulle Park public water supply Drainage ditch north of the reservoir that empties WS S1 229 2.3 miles ESE into Colorado River upstream of the reservoir makeup pumping facility Colorado River at point where drainage ditch (#229)

S(l or 2) 230 3.5 miles ESE emtsinot empties into it S(l or 2) WS 233 4.5 miles SE Colorado River where MCR blowdown discharge channel empties into it.

WG 235 3.8 miles S Well B-3 directly south from MCR B8 236 N/A STP Protected Area WS 237 3.7 miles SSE Blowdown discharge channel from MCR S(! or 2) WS 242* >10 miles N Colorado River where it intersects Highway 35 Colorado River upstream of Bay City Dam at the Lower Colorado River Authority pumping station WO 245 4.5 miles SSE Water well approximately 60' deep located on private property about 0.5 miles south of MCR WS 247 <1 mile E Essential Cooling Pond F(1,2, or 3) 249* N/A Control sample purchased from a local retailer so 250 0.75 miles NW Sewage sludge land fanning area WG 251 4.0 miles SSE Test Well B-4, upper aquifer WG 255 4.2 miles SE Piezometer Well #415 110' deep STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-19

2007 Environmental Report TABLE 2 SAMPLE MEDIAAND LOCATION DESCRIPTIONS MEIACOESTATION VEUITOR MEDIA CODE CODE (Appro (Approximate) ) LOCATION DESCRIPTION WG 256 2.8 miles ESE Piezometer Well # 417 100 deep Piezometer Well # 421-02, 80' deep WG 257 3.9 miles SSW 1.1 miles down STP Road from Well # 258 approximately 20' inside east fence (site boundary)

Piezometer Well # 435-01, 1.5 miles down STP WG 258 2.9 miles SW Road from HWY 521 along east fence (site boundary)

Piezometer Well # 435-02, 1.5 miles down STP WG 259 2.9 miles SW Road from HWY 521 20' east of fence (site boundary)

WG 260 3.7 miles S Piezometer Well # 437, 74' deep WG 263 3.2 miles ESE Piezometer Well # 447, 104' deep WG 264 3.2 miles ESE Piezometer Well # 447A 46' deep WG 266 0.68 miles NW Piezometer Well # 602A, 40' deep WG 267 2.7 miles ESE Windmill north of Heavy Haul Road WG 268 3.0 miles SE Windmill west of MCR Windmill south of STP owner contolled area on WG 269- 4.2 miles SSE pvaeln private land F(1, 2, or 3) CC S2 300 S STP Main Cooling Reservoir WW 701 4 miles S MCR Relief Well # 440 WS Q01 N/A Quarterly composite of station #227 and/or alternate

1. 233 WS Q02 N/A Quarterly composite of station #243 and/or alternate

1. 242 STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-20

Radiological Environment Operating Report 2007 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Analysis Summary An analysis summary for all of the required samples is given in Table 3. The table has been formatted to resemble a United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission industry standard. Modifications have been made for the sole purpose of reading ease. Only positive values are given in this table.

Media type is printed at the top left of each table, and the units of measurement are printed at the top right.

The first column lists the type of radioactivity or specific radionuclide for which each sample was analyzed.

The second column gives the total number of analyses performed and the total number ofnon-routine analy-ses for each indicated nuclide. (A non-routine measurement is a sample whose measured activity is greater than the reporting levels for Radioactivity Concentrations in Environmental Samples.) The "LOWER LI MIT OF DETECTION" column lists the normal measurement sensitivities achieved which were more sensitive than specified by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

A set of statistical parameters is listed for each radionuclide in the remaining columns. The parameters contain information from the indicator locations, the location having the highest annual mean, and information from the control stations. Some sample types do not have control stations. When this is the case, "no samples" is listed in the control location column. For each of these groups ofdata, the following is calculated:

0 The mean value ofpositive real values.

• The number of positive real measurements/ the total number of analyses.

• The lowest and highest values for the analysis.

The data placed in the table are from the samples listed in Table 1.

Additional thennoluminescent dosimeters were utilized each quarter for quality purposes. The minimum samples required by Table 1 were supplemented in 2007 by six surface water samples, seven two shoreline sediment samples and four sediment samples from the Main Cooling Reservoir. Fish, deer, beef and vegetation samples vary in number according to availability but also exceeded the minimum number required by Table 1.

Photo By Gary Parkey 6-21 STP Nuclear Operating Company

2007 Environmental Report TABLE 3 2007 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Direct Radiation Units: MilliRoentgen/Standard Quarter ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHESTANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE /NONROUTINE LIMFITOF MEAN t LOCATION MEAN f MEAN t MEASUREMENTS IDETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGEL Gamma 175/0 1.4E+01 ( 167/ 167 ) 1 mile W 1.7E+01 (4/4) I.5E+0 ( 9 / 9)

(1.1 E+01 - 1.8E+01 ) (#013) (1.7E+01 - I.SE+01) (1.3E+0I -1.70+01 t Number of positive nicasurentcits/ total neasurements at specified locations.

TABLE 3 2007 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Airborne Particulate & Radioiodine Units: PicoCuries per Cubic Meter ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHESTANNUALMEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYP E2 /NONROUTINE LIMrITO MEAN . LOCATION MEAN 5 MEAN f MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANG Li Gross Beta 256/0 1.4E-03 2.3E-02 ( 204 / 204) 1 mile NNW 2.4E-02 ( 52 / 52) 2.2E-02 ( 52 / 52)

(7.9E 7.8 E-02) (#016) (7.9E 7.8E-02) (1.01-- 4.6E-02) lodine-131 256/0 1.9E-02 --- ( 0/204) ---...... ( 0/ 52)

Cesium-134 20/0 5.2E-04 --- ( 0/ 16) ---...... ( 0/ 4)

Cesium-137 20/0 5.2E-04 --- ( 0/ 16) ---...... ( 0/ 4)

Manganese-54 20/0 5.6E-04 --- ( 0/ 16) ---...... ( 0/ 4)

Iron-59 20/0 2.4E-03 --- ( 0/ 16) ---...... ( 0/ 4)

Cobalt-58 20/0 8.3E-04 --- ( 0/ 16) ........ ( 0/ 4)

Cobalt-60 20/0 5.7E-04 --- ( 0/ 16) ....... ( 0/ 4)

Zinc-65 20/0 1.4E-03 --- ( 0/ 16) ....... ( 0/ 4)

Zircontsiatt-95 20/0 1.6E-03 --- ( 0/ 16) ....... ( 0/ 4)

Niobium-95 20/0 9.0E-04 --- ( 0/ 16) ....... ( 0/ 4)

Lanthanunm- 140 20/0 9.3E-03 --- ( 0/ 16) ....... ( 0/ 4)

Barium- 140 SNtumber of positive measurements/ total mcamureitents at specified locations.

STP Nuldear Operating Company 6-22

Radiological Environment Operating Report TABLE 3 2007 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Surface Water Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHESTANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE /NONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN f LOCATION MEAN t MEAN t MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Hydrogen-3 12/0 2.7E+02 9.8E3+03 ( 4/ 8) 3 miles SSE 9.8E+03 ( 4 / 4 ) -- ( 0 / 4)

(8.2E+03 - 1.1 E+04) (#216) (8.2 E+03 - 1.1E +04)

Iodine-131 42/0 6.9E+00 --- ( 0/ 29) --. ( 0/ 13)

Cesium-134 42/0 1.8E+00 -- ( 0/ 29) --. ( 0/ 13)

Cesium -137 42/0 1.9E+00 ( 0/ 29 ) ---..... ( 0 / 13 )

Manganese-54 42/0 1.9E+00 --- ( 0/ 29) --- ( 0/ 13)

Iron-59 42/0 4.9E+00 ( 0/ 29) --. ( 0/ 13)

Cobalt-58 42/0 2.1EE+00 --- ( 0/ 29) ---..... ( 0 / 13)

C obalt-60 42/0 2.1E+00 ( 0 / 29 ) .....- ( 0 / 13 )

Zinc-65 42/0 4.5E+00 --- ( 0/ 29) ---....- ( 0/ 13)

Z irconium -9 5 42/0 3.6E+ 00 ( 0/ 29) .... ...- ( 0 / 13 )

N iobium-95 42/0 2.1 -E+00 ( 0/ 29) ...--. ( 0 / 13)

Lanthanum-140 42/0 5.8E+00 --- ( 0/ 29) ...--- ( 0/ 13)

Barium-140 t Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.

2007 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Ground Water (On site lest well) Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHESTANNUALMEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE /NONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN t LOCATION MEAN t MEAN t MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Hydrogen-3 27/0 2.7E+02 2.0E+03( 19 / 27) 4.0 miles SSE 5.3E+03 ( 6 / 6) no samnples (2.61E+02 - 5.6 E+03) (#251) (5.0E+03 - 5.6E+03 Iodine-131 27/0 5.3E+00 -- ( 0/ 27) --- no samples Cesium-134 27/0 2.11E+00 ( 0/ 27) --- no samples Cesium-137 27/0 2.2E+00 --- ( 0/ 27) --- no samples Manganese-54 27/0 2.1 E+00 ( 0/ 27) .

--- no samples Iron-59 27/0 5.0E+00 --- ( 0/ 27) --- - no samples Cobalt-58 27/0 2.3E+00 --- ( 0/ 27) ---.. no samples Cobalt-60 27/0 2.3E+00 --- ( 0/ 27) --- no samples Zinc-65 27/0 5.2E+00 --- ( 0/ 27) --- no samples Zirconium-95 27/0 3.9E+00 --- ( 0/ 27) --- no samples Niobium-95 27/0 2.3E+00 --- ( 0/ 27) .

--- no samples Lanthanum- 140 27/0 4.9E+00 --- ( 0/ 27) --- - no samples Barium- 140 t Number of positive measurements /total measurements at specified locations.

6-23 STP Nuclear Operating Company

2007 Environmental Report TABLE 3 2007 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Drinking Water Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHESTANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE /NONROUTINE LIMITOF MEAN t LOCATION MEAN t MEAN t MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Gross Beta 25/0 1.2E-01 2.OE+00( 13 / 13) 14 milesNNE 2.5E+00 ( 12 / 12) 2.5E+00 ( 12 / 12)

(1.3E+00 - 2.8 E+00) (#228) (1 .9E+00 -3.8E+00) ( 1.9E+00 - 3.8E+00)

Hydrogen-3 8/0 2.7E+02 -- ( 0/ 4) .... ( 0/ 4)

Iodine-131 25/0 4.4E+00 --- ( 0/ 13) ...... ( 0/ 12)

Cesium-134 25/0 2.2E+00 --- ( 0/ 13) ...... ( 0/ 12)

Cesium-137 25/0 2.2E+00 --- ( 0/ 13) ...... ( 0/ 12)

Manganese-54 25/0 2.IE+00 -- ( 0/ 13) .....-- ( 0/ 12)

Iron-59 25/0 5.OE+00 --- ( 0/ 13) ---.... ( 0/ 12)

Cobalt-58 25/0 2.2E+00 --- ( 0/ 13) ---.... ( 0/ 12)

Cobalt-60 25/0 2.3E+00 --- ( 0/ 13) ---..... ( 0/ 12)

Zinc-65 25/0 5.6E+00 --- ( 0/ 13) ---..... ( 0/ 12)

Zirconium-95 25/0 3.8E+00 --- ( 0/ 13) ...--. ( 0/ 12)

Niobium-95 25/0 2.4E+00 --- ( 0/ 13) ---.... ( 0/ 12)

Lanthanunm-140 25/0 4.4E+00 -- ( 0/ 13) ....... ( 0/ 12)

Barium- 140 t Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.

2007 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Rain Water Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHESTANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE /NONROUTINE LIMrr OF MEAN t LOCATION MEAN t MEAN t MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Hydrogen-3 4/0 2.7E+02 -- ( 0 / 4) .... no samples Iodine-131 4/0 5.9E+00 --- ( 0/ 4) - -- no samples Cesum-134 4/0 2.4E-00 - 0/ 4) -no samples Cesium-13 7 4/0 2.5E+00 -- ( 0 / 4) .... no samples Manganese-54 4/0 2.3E+00 --- ( 0 / 4) .

--- no samples Iron-59 4/0 5.5E+00 -- ( 0 / 4) .... no samples Cobalt-58 4/0 2.4E+00 --- ( 0 / 4) .

--- no samples Cobalt-60 4/0 2.5E+00 --- ( 0 / 4) ..

--- no samples Zinc-65 4/0 5.4E+00 --- ( 0 / 4) .

--- no samples Zirconium-95 4/0 4.4E+00 --- ( 0 / 4) .

--- no samples Niobium-95 4/0 2.4E+00 --- ( 0 / 4) .

--- no samples Lanthanum-140 4/0 4.8E+00 --- ( 0 / 4) ..... no samples Barium- 140 t Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.

STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-24

Radiological Environment Operating Report TABLE 3 2007 RADI OLOGI CAL ENVIRONMENrAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS SUMVIIARY Mediurn Sedirnent-Shoreline Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram dry weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH FIGHESTANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATI'ONS TYPE /NONROUTINE uIMfI'OF MEAN f LOCATION MEAN t MEAN I MEASUREMENIS DETECTION RANGE INORMATION RANGE RANCE Cesitun-134 6/0 3.6E+01 -- ( 0/ 4) -... ( 0/ 2)

Cesium-137 6/0 3.7E+0l -- ( 0/ 4) - -- ( 0/ 2)

Manganese-54 6/0 3.4E+0I -- ( 0/ 4) -... ( 0/ 2)

Iron-59 6/0 1.6E+02 -- ( 0/ 4) -... ( 0/ 2)

Cobalt-58 6/0 4.7E+01 -- ( 0/ 4) -... ( 0/ 2)

Cobalt-60 6/0 3.6E+01 -- ( 0/ 4) -... ( 0/ 2)

Zinc-65 6/0 1.3E+02 -- ( 0/ 4) -... ( 0/ 2)

Zirconium-95 6/0 9.8E+01 -- ( 0/ 4) -... ( 0/ 2)

Niobium-95 6/0 6.2E1+0 -- ( 0/ 4) -... ( 0/ 2)

Lanthanum-140 6/0 7.7E+02 -- ( 0/ 4) -- ( 0/

0- 2)

Baritsn- 140 t Number of positive measurements /total mcasureements at specified locations.

TABLE 3 2007 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Sediment-Bottom Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram dry weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHESTANNUALMEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMirOF MEAN t LOCATION MEAN t MEAN t MEASUREMENTS I)FrECTiON RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesium-134 6/0 3.8E+01 -- ( 0 / 6) -- o0-samples Cesium-137 6/0 3.OE+01 9.6E+01 ( 1 / 6) 3 miles SSE 9.6E+01 ( 1 / 3 ) no sanmples (9.6E+01 -9.6E+01) (#216) (9.6E+01 - 9.6E+01 )

Manganese-54 6/0 3.8E+01 --- ( 0 / 6) .... no samples Iron-59 6/0 1.5E+02 --- ( 0/ 6) .... no samnples Cobalt-58 6/0 5.OE+01 -- ( 0 / 6) .

--- no samples Cobalt-60 6/0 4.OE+01 --- 0 / 6) .

--- no samnples Zinc-65 6/0 1.3E+02 --- ( 0/ 6) .... no sanmples Zirconium-95 6/0 I.1E+02 --- ( 0/ 6) ..

--- o sanmples Niobium-95 6/0 6.1E+01 --- ( 0 / 6 ) .... no sanmples Lanthanum-140 6/0 6.5E+02 --- ( 0/ 6) ---.. no samples Barium- 140 I t- Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.

6-25 STP Nuclear Operating Company

2007 Environmental Report TABLE 3 2007 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Banana Leaves Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHESTANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE /NONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN f LOCATION MEAN t MEAN t MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Iodine-131 18/0 2.6E+01 ( 0/ 12) - -- - ( 0/ 6)

CCsiutm-134 18/0 2.8E+00 ( 0/ 12) ---. ( 0/ 6)

Ccsium-137 18/0 3.2E+00 ( 0/ 12) ...... ( 0/ 6)

Manginese-54 18/0 3.5E+00 ( 0/ 12) ...... ( 0/ 6)

Iron-59 18/0 1.5E+01 -- ( 0/ 12) -...... ( 0/ 6)

Cobalt-58 18/0 4.2E+00 -- ( 0/ 12) ..... ( 0/ 6)

Cobalt-60 18/0 4.6E+00 -- ( 0/ 12) ..... ( 0/ 6)

Zinc-65 18/0 1.2E+01 -- ( 0/ 12) .... ( 0/ 6)

ZirconiumL-95 18/0 7.1E+00 ( 0/ 12) .... ( 0/ 6)

Niobium-95 18/0 4.OE+00 -- ( 0/ 12) .... ( 0/ 6)

Lanthanumn- 140 18/0 1.2E+01 -- ( 0/ 12) ..... ( 0/ 6)

Bari uM- 140 t Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.

TABLE 3 2007 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Cana Leaves Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHESTANNUALMEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE /NONROUTINE LIMITOF MEAN T LOCATION MEAN t MEAN t MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Iodine-131 9/0 2.8E+01 --- ( 0/ 6) ---... ( 0/ 3)

Cesiuut-134 9/0 3.5E+00 ( 0/ 6) ---. ( 0/ 3)

Cesium-137 9/0 4.1E+00 --- ( 0/ 6) ---. ( 0/ 3)

Mangancsc-54 9/0 4.6E+00 ( 0/ 6) ---.... ( 0/ 3)

Iron-59 9/0 1.9E+01 --- ( 0/ 6) ..... ( 0/ 3)

Cobait-58 9/0 5.4E+00 ( 0/ 6) ---.... ( 0/ 3)

Cobalt-60 9/0 6.0E01+00- ( 0/ 6) ---. ( 0/ 3)

Zinc-65 9/0 1.6E+0 --- ( 0/ 6) ---.. ( (/3)

Zirconium-95 9/0 9.4E+00- ( 0/ 6) ...... ( 0/ 3)

Niobium-95 9/0 5.2E+00 --- ( 0/ 6) ---. ( 0/ 3 )

Lttthannutn-140 9/0 1.3E+01 --- ( 0/ 6) ---.... ( 0/ 3)

Barium- 140 t Number olfpositive measurements / total measurements at specified Iocations.

STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-26

Radiological Environment Operating Report TABLE 3 2007 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Mustard Greens Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHESTANNUALMEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE /NONROUTINE LIMITOF MEAN f LOCATION MEAN t MEAN t MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Iodine-131 6/0 I.0E+01 --- ( 0/ 4) ..... ( 0/ 2)

Cesium-134 6/0 2.0OE+00 --- ( 0/ 4) ...... ( 0/ 2)

Cesium-137 6/0 2.2E+00 ( 0/ 4) ---.. ( 0/ 2)

Manganese-54 6/0 2.4E+00 --- ( 0/ 4) ---.. ( 0/ 2)

Iron-59 6/0 8.4E+00 ( 0/ 4) ---.. ( 0/ 2)

Cobalt-58 6/0 2.6E+00 ( 0/ 4) ..... ( 0/ 2)

Cobalt-60 6/0 2.9E+00 ( 0/ 4) .... ( 0/ 2)

Zinc-65 6/0 7.7E+00 (0/ 4) .... ( 0/ 2)

Zirconium-95 6/0 4.6E+00 -- ( 0/ 4) .... ( 0/ 2)

Niobiumn-95 6/0 2.6E+00 ( 0/ 4) ...... ( 0/ 2)

Lanthanuln-140 6/0 4.5E+00 ( 0/ 4) .... ( 0/ 2)

Barium- 140 t Number of positive measurements /total measurements at specified locations.

TABLE 3 2007 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Fish - Piscivorous . Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE /NONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN t LOCATION MEAN T MEAN t MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesium-134 10/0 3.0E+0I --- ( 0/ 8) ....... ( 0/ 2)

Cesium-137 10/0 3.OE+01 --- ( 0/ 8) ...... ( 0/ 2)

Manganese-54 10/0 3.1E+01 --- ( 0/ 8) ...... ( 0/ 2 Iron-59 10/0 8.9E+01 --- ( 0/ 8) ....... ( 0/ 2)

Cobalt-58 10/0 3.4E+01 --- ( 0/8) ....... ( 0/ 2)

Cobalt-60 10/0 3.7E+01 --- 0/ 8) ...- (0/ 2)

Zinc-65 10/0 8.OE+01 --- ( 0/ 8) ........ ( 0/ 2)

Zirconium-95 10/0 6.E+1 01 --- ( 0/ 8) .......-. ( 0/ 2)

Niobium-95 10/0 3.4E+01 --- ( 0/ 8) ....... ( 0/ 2)

Lanthanum-140 10/0 1.3E+02 --- ( 0/ 8) ......- ( 0/ 2)

Barium- 140 t Number of positive measurements /total measurements at specified locations.

6-27 STP Nuclear Operating Company

2007 Environmental Report TABLE 3 2007 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium Fish - Crustacean & Insect Feeders Units: PicoCuries Der Kilogram wet wei t ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITHHIGHESTANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE /NONROUTINE LIMTFOF MEAN t LOCA TION MEAN t MEAN t MEASUREMENIS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesium-134 5/0 3.OE+01 -- ( 0/ 5) - -- no samples Cesiun-137 5/0 3.IE+01 -- ( 0/ 5) - -- no samples Manganese-54 5/0 3.IE+01 -- ( 0/ 5) - -- no samples lron-59 5/0 8.8E+01 -- ( 0/ 5) - -- no samples Cobalt-58 5/0 3.4E+01 ( 0/ 5) - -- no samples Cobalt-60 5/0 3.6E+01 -- ( 0/ 5) - -- no samples Zinc-65 5/0 7.8EE01 -- ( 0/ 5) - -- no samples Zirconium-95 5/0 5.8E+0I -- ( 0 / 5) - -- no samples Niobium-95 5/0 3.4E+01 -- ( 0 / 5) - -- no samples Lanthamum-140 5/0 1.2E+02 -- ( 0 / 5) - -- no samples Barium- 140 t Number of positive measurements /total measurements at specified locations.

TABLE 3 2007 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Crustacean Shrimp Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER NDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHESTANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE /NONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN t LOCATION MEAN f MEAN T MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesium-134 3/0 2.7E+01 -- (0/ 1) - -- -(0/ 2)

Cesium-137 3/0 2.7E+01 -- (0/I) .... (0/ 2)

Manganese-54 3/0 2.7E+01 -- ( 0/ 1) .... ( 0/ 2)

Iron-59 3/0 8.4E+01 -- ( 0/ 1) .... ( 0/ 2)

Cobalt-58 3/0 3.]E+01 -- ( 0/ 1) .... ( 0/ 2)

Cobalt-60 3/0 3.2E+01 -- ( 0/ 1) .... ( 0/ 2)

Zinc-65 3/0 7.1E+01 -- ( 0/ 1) .... ( 0/ 2)

Zirconium-95 3/0 5.6E+01 -- ( 0/ 1) .... ( 0/ 2)

Niobium-95 3/0 3.2E+01 -- ( 0/ 1) .... ( 0/ 2)

Lanthanum-140 3/0 1.7E+02 -- ( 0/ 1) .... ( 0/ 2)

Barium- 140 t Number of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.

STP Nuclear Operating Company 6-28

Radiological Environment Operating Report TABLE 3 2007 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Beef Meat Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITHI HIGHESTANNUAL MEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE /NONROUTINE LIMITOF MEAN t LOCATION MEAN t MEAN t MEASUREMENTS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesium-134 5/0 2.7E+01 -- ( 0 / 5) - -- no samples Cesium-137 5/0 2.8E+01 -- ( 0 / 5) - -- no samnples Manganese-54 5/0 2.93+01 -- ( 0 / 5) - -- no sanples lron-59 5/0 1.IE-+02 -- ( 0/ 5) .... no samples Cobalt-58 5/0 3.9E1+01 -- ( 0 / 5) .... no samples Cobalt-60 5/0 3.3E+01 - ( 0/ 5) - -- no samples Zinc-65 5/0 6.8E+01 -- ( 0/ 5) --- no samnples Zirconium-95 5/0 7.IE+01 --- ( 0/ 5) - -- no samples Niobium-95 5/0 4.E+01 --- ( 0 / 5) .... no sanples Lanthanum- 140 5/0 4.4E+02 --- ( 0 / 5) - -- no samples Barium- 140 t Numnber of positive measurements / total measurements at specified locations.

TABLE 3 2007 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANALYSIS

SUMMARY

Medium: Game Deer Units: PicoCuries per Kilogram wet weight ANALYSIS TOTAL ANALYSES LOWER INDICATOR LOCATIONS LOCATION WITH HIGHESTANNUALMEAN CONTROL LOCATIONS TYPE INONROUTINE LIMIT OF MEAN t. LOCATION MEAN t MEAN f MEASUREMENIS DETECTION RANGE INFORMATION RANGE RANGE Cesium-134 2/0 3.6E+01 --- ( 0 / 2) ---.. no samples Cesium-137 2/0 3.4E+0I --- ( 0 / 2) ---.. no sanples Manganese-54 2/0 3.4E+01 --- ( 0/ 2 ) .... no sanples Iron-59 2/0 8.9E+01 --- ( 0 / 2) .

--- no samples Cobalt-58 2/0 3.7E+01 -- ( 0 / 2) .... no samples Cobalt-60 2/0 3.61-+01 --- ( 0 / 2) .

--- no samnples Zinc-65 2/0 8.OE+01 --- ( 0 / 2) .

--- no samnples Zirconium-95 2/0 6.9E+01 --- ( 0 / 2 ) -- -- no samples Niobium-95 2/0 3.9E+01 --- ( 0 / 2) ..

--- o sanples Lanthanurn-140 2/0 1.3E+02 --- ( 0/ 2 ..

--- no samples Barium- 140 t Number of positive measurements / total rneastrenments at specified locations.

6-29 STP Nuclear Operating Company

www.stpegs.com