ML081280737: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Adams
#REDIRECT [[LR-N08-0097, Units 1 and 2, 2007 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report]]
| number = ML081280737
| issue date = 04/28/2008
| title = Hope Creek and Salem, Units 1 and 2, 2007 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report
| author name = Gellrich G H, Perry J F
| author affiliation = PSEG Nuclear, LLC
| addressee name =
| addressee affiliation = NRC/Document Control Desk, NRC/NRR
| docket = 05000272, 05000311, 05000354
| license number = DPR-070, DPR-075, NPF-057
| contact person =
| case reference number = FOIA/PA-2010-0209, LR-N08-0097
| document type = Environmental Monitoring Report, Letter
| page count = 140
}}
 
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:PSEG Nuclear LLC P.O. Box 236, Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038-0236 0 PSEG Nuclear LLC Technical Specification Section 6.9.1.7 (Salem)Technical Specification Section 6.9.1.6 (Hope Creek)APR 2 8 2008 LR-N08-0097 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001 Hope Creek Generating Station Facility Operating License No. NPF-57 NRC Docket No. 50-354 Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit Nos. land 2 Facility Operating License Nos. DPR-70 and DPR-75 NRC Docket Nos. 50-272 and 50-311
 
==Subject:==
2007 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report As required by Section 6.9.1.7 of Appendix A to Facility Operating Licenses DPR-70 and DPR-75 for Salem Generating Station Unit Nos. 1 and 2, and Section 6.9.1.6 of Appendix A to the Operating License NPF-57 for Hope Creek Generating Station, PSEG Nuclear hereby transmits one copy of the 2007 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report. This report summarizes the results of the radiological environmental surveillance program for 2007 in the vicinity of the Salem and Hope Creek Generating Stations.
The result of this program for 2007 was specifically compared to the result of the pre-operational program.95-2168 REV. 7/99 Document Control Desk LR-N08-0097 Page 2 If you have any questions or comments on this transmittal, please contact Richard Labott at (856) 339-1094.Sincerely, John F. Perry George H. Gellrich Plant Manager -Hope Creek Plant Manager -Salem Attachment
-2007 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Document Control Desk LR-N08-0097 Page 3 C Mr. S. Collins, Administrator-Region 1 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 Mr. R. Ennis, Project Manager Salem & Hope Creek U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North Mail Stop 08B3 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 Mr. Joseph T. Furia, NRC Inspector
-Region 1 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 USNRC Senior Resident Inspector
-Hope Creek (X24)USNRC Senior Resident Inspector
-Salem (X24)Mr. P. Mulligan, Manager IV Bureau of Nuclear Engineering PO Box 415 Trenton, New Jersey 08625 Ms. J. Chomiszak Delaware Emergency Management Agency 165 Brick Store Landing Road Smyrna, DE 19977 0PSEG RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM For Salem Generating Station, Unit 1: Docket No. 50-272 Salem Generating Station, Unit 2: Docket No. 50-311 Hope Creek Generating Station : Docket No. 50-354 2007 ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT JANUARY 1 TO DECEMBER 31,2007 Prepared by PSEG SERVICE CORPORATION MAPLEWOOD TESTING SERVICES APRIL 2008 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM.g'"" '7 SALEM & HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATIONS 2007 ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT JANUARY I TO DECEMBER 31, 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE SUM MARY ..............................................
...........................
1 THE RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ..............
3 O bje ctiv e s ......................................................................................
... ..5 D ata Inte rp retatio n ...................................................................................
7 Quality Assurance Program ....................................
8 Results and Discussion
................
......................
8 A tm o sp.h e ric ...... 7 ......................................................................
... .9 Direct Radiation..............
.........................
11 T e rre stria l ....................................................................................
1 2 A q u a tic .......................................................................................
2 0 P rog ram D eviations
............................................................................
26 C o n clusio n s .......................................................................................
.2 7 R E F E R E N C E S ...................
....................................................................
... .4 0 APPENDIX A -PROGRAM
 
==SUMMARY==
. ...............................
43 APPENDIX B -SAMPLE DESIGNATION AND LOCATIONS
...........................
49 A PPEND IX C -DATA TA BLES .....................................................................
57 APPENDIX D -
 
==SUMMARY==
OF RESULTS FROM ANALYTICS
&ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ASSOCIATES INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAMS....................................
87 APPENDIX E -SYNOPSIS OF LAND USE CENSUS ......................................
95 APPENDIX F -RADIOLOGICAL GROUNDWATER PROTECTION PROGRAM 99 LIST OF TABLES TABLE NUMBER TABLE DESCRIPTION PAGE 1. Salem and Hope Creek'Generatinfg Stations' Radiological Environmenial MonitoringP.roggrar:?
: -.... .... .........
28 LIS'TOF 'FIGURES FIGURE NUMBER FIGURE DESCRIPTION PAGE 1. Gross Bieta:Activ-ity`in AirParticulate
.-1987 through 2007 (Q uarterly)
....... 7... .........
................
............
33 2. Ambient Radiation
-Off-site vs Control Station 1987 through 2007 (Q uarterly)
......................................................
34 3..:, Iodine-131 Activity in Milk.1987 through 2007 (Quarterly).....................................
35 4. Gross Beta Activity in Surface Water 1987 through 2007 (Quarterly):.
...........................
... 36, 5. Tritium Activity in Surface Water 1987 through 2007 (Q uarterly)
......................................................
37 6. Cesium-137 and Cobalt-60 Activity in Aquatic Sediment 1987 through 2007 (Semi-Annual)..............................
38 7. Cesium -137 Activity in Soil 1974 through 2007 (Triennial)
..........................
...................
39
 
==SUMMARY==
: During normal operations of a nuclear power generating.
station there are releases of small amounts of radioactive material to the ahnvironment.TJo monitor and determine the effects of these releases a Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP)has been testablished for the environment around Artificial Island where the Salem Generating Stations (SGS) and Hope Creek Generating Station (HCGS) are located.The results of the REMP are published annuallynrovid!ng a summary and interpretation of the data collected.
PSEG's Maplewood Testing Services (MTS) has been responsible for the collection
, and analysis of environmental samples during the period of January.1,, 2007 t;hrough December 31, 2007, and the results are discussed in this" re'pioirt).-.
The REMP for SGS/HCGS was conducted in accordance with the SGS and HCGS'Tech,ýiical Specifications/Offsite Dose Calculation Manual. The Lower Limit of Detection (LLD)values required by the Technical Specifications/ODCM were achieved forthis.reporting period.. The objectives of the program were also met during this period. 'The data collected assists in demonstrating that SGS and HCGS were operated in compliance with Technical Specifications/ODCM.
Most of the radioactive materials noted in this* report are normally present 'n the environment, either naturally, such as potassium-40, or as a result of non-nuclear generating station activity, such as nuclear bomb testing. Measurements made in the vicinity Of SGS/HCGS were compared to background or control measurements and the preoperational REMP study performed before Salem Unit 1 became operational.
Samples of air particulates, air iodine, milk, surface, ground and drinking water, vegetables, game, fodder crops, fish, crabs, and sediment were collected and analyzed.External radiation dose measurements were also made in the vicinity of SGS/HCGS using thermoluminescent dosimeters.
1 From the results obtained, it can be concluded that the levels:and fluctuations of radioactivity in erivironmental sampeZs were as expected for an estuarihc environment.
No unusual radiological characteristics were observed in the environs of SGS/HCGS during this reporting period. Since these results were comparable to the results obtained during ;the preoperational "Paso,'6f the program, 'andwith historical results collected since commercial operation; ve canr. conclude.
ihat the operation.ofSGS and HCGS -had no'significant impact on- the radiological characteristics of the environs of.these stations.
., To demonstrate compliance ,with .Technical Specifications/ODCM (Sections 3/4.12.1 &6.8.4.h -1,2,3), ssamples Were analyzed for-one or more of the following:
gamma emitting iSotopes, tritium (H-3), iodine-131 (1-131), gross beta and gross alpha. -The results of these analyses were used to assess the environmental impact of SGS and HCGS Operations; thereby demonstrating compliance with Technical Specifications/ODCM (Section 3/4. 11) and, applicable Federal. and State regulations, and to verify thee adequacy of radioactive effluent control systems.The results provided in this report are summarized below:* There were a total of '1419 analyses on 1112 erivironmental samples during 2007, including direct radiation dose measurements made using 196'thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs)." In addition to the detection of naturally
-occurring isotopes (i.e. Be-7, K-40, Radium and Th-232) trace levels of H-3 and Cs-1 37 were also detected.
The concentrations of these nuclides were well below the Technical Specification reporting limit.* Dose measurements made with quarterly TLDs at 31 offsite locations around the SGS/HCGS site averaged 50 millirems for the year 2007.2 The average of the-dose measurements at the control locations (background) was 52 millirems for the year. This was comparable to the preoperational phase of the program which had an average of 55 mi~lirerms per year for 1973 to, 197.Appendix F contains the annual repqrt-on the status of the Radioogica!
Groundwater Protection Program' (RGPP) conducted at :Sale.m and, Hope.Creek Stations., The RGPP.was initiated by PSEG to'determine whether groundwater at and in the vicinity of Salem and Hope Creek Stations had been adversely impacted by any releases of radionuc!ides and not previously identified.
The RGPP is a voluntary program implemented by PSEG in conjunction with industry initiatives and guidance lt was concluded that the operation of Salem and Hope creek Stations-has had no adverse: radiclogical impact, on the environment from unmonitored or unplanned releases off radionuclides to gr oundwater.
During 2007, PSEG Nuclear continuedremedial actions for tritium identified in shallow, groundwater at Salem Station. These remedial actions have beencrinducted in,, accordance with a Remedial Action Work Plan that was approved by-the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
-Bureau of Nuclear Engineering (NJDEP-BNE) in November, 2004. The GRS is in operation, providing hydraulic control of the plume and effectively removing tritium contaminated groundwater, all monitoring wells are below 100,000 pCi/L at this time. The tritium contaminated groundwater is disposed of in accordance with Salem Station's liquid radioactive waste disposal program. There is no evidence or indication that tritium contaminated water above Ground Water Quality Criteria (GWQC) levels [GWQC is <20,000 pCi/L] has migrated to the station boundary or the Delaware River.3 THE RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM Lower Alloways Creek Township, Salem County, New Jersey is the site of Salem (SGS)and Hope Creek (HCGS) Generating Stations.
S'S consists of two operating pressurized water nuclear power reactors.
Salem Unit on' has a net raiting of 1 69megawatt electric(MWe) and Salem Unit Two has a net rating of 1155 MWe'. The licensed core power for both units is 3459 megawatt thermal (MWt). HCGS is a boiling water nuclear power reactor, which has a net rating of 1091 MWNe (3339 MVwt)'.SGS/HCGS are located on a man-made peninsula on the east bank of the Delaware River.It was created by the deposition of hydraulic fill from dredging operations.
The environment surrounding SGS/HCGS is characterized mainly by the Delaware River and Bay, extensive tidal marshlands, and low-lying meadowlands.
These land types make-up approximately 85% of the land area within five miles of the site. Most of the remaining land is used for agriculture
[1,2]. More specific information on the demography, hydrology, meteorology, and land use of the area may be found in the Environmental Reports [1,2], Environmental Statements
[3,4], and the Updated Final Safety Analysis Reports for SGS and HCGS [5,6].Since 1968, a radiological environmental monitoring program (REMP) has been conducted at the SGS/HCGS Site. Starting in December, 1972, more extensive radiological monitoring programs were initiated.
The operational REMP was initiated in December, 1976, when Salem Unit 1 achieved criticality.
'PSEG's Maplewood Testing Services (MTS).has been involved in the REMP since its inception.
MTS is responsible for the collection of all radiological environmental samples and, from 1973 through June, 1983, conducted a quality assurance program in which duplicates of a portion of those samples analyzed by the primary laboratory were also analyzed by MTS.From January, 1973, through June, .1983, Radiation Management Corporation (RMC) had primary responsibility for the analysis of all samples under the SGS/HCGS REMP and annual reporting of results.4 RMC reports for the preoperational and operational phase of the program are referenced in this report [7-9]. On July 1, 1983, MTS assumed primary responsibility for the analysis of all samples (except TLDs) and the reporting of results".
Teledyne'Brown lEngineering Environmental Services (TBE), assumed responsibility for third-party QA analyses and TLDs. An additional vendor, Controls for Environmental Pollution Inc. (CEP), was retained to provide third-party QA analyses.
and certain non-routine analyses from May, 1988, until June 1, 1992. Currently, AREVA NP, Inc. Environmental Laboratory (AREVA) is the third party QA vendor and the laboratory which performs.t.he TLD. analyses.
MTS reports for the operational phase from 1983 to 2006 are-referenced.in this report [10].An overview of the 2007 Program is provided in Table 1. Radioanalytical data from samplescollected under this program were compared with results from the preoperational phase. Differences between these periods were examined statistically to determine the effects of station operations.
This report presents the results from January 1 through December 31,.2007,'for the SGS/HCGS REMP.OBJECTIVES The objectives of the Operational REMP are: To fulfill the requirements of the Radiological Surveillance sections of the Technical-Specifications/ODCM for SGS/HCGS., To determine whether any significant increase occurred in the concentration of radionuclides in critical pathways.To determine if SGS or HCGS has caused an increase in the radioactive inventory of long-lived radionuclides.
To detect any change in ambient gamma radiation levels.5
* To verify that SGS and HCGS operations have no detrimental effects on the health and safety of-the pubiic.or on the.,-rivvironm.nt.
This report, as required by Sectionv5.9:1.7 6f;tie SalenvTechiical Specifications/ODCM and Section 6.9.1.6 of the Hope Creek TebrhnirkalSpecifications/ODCM, summarizes the findings of the 2007'REMP.
Results:)f the ,four.,-year preoperatiWnal program have baen-summadized for comparison with operational reports [8].In order to meet the objectives, arT cperationa[
REMP was developed.
Samples of various media were:selected for rno.iitoring due, tothe,'radiological dose impact to human and other organisms.
-4The selectiohncf Samples! was based on: (1), established critical pathways for.the trahsfe o'df radio'ULides throu'gh the environment to man, and, (2), experience gained during the preoperational -phase. Sampling locations were determined based on site meteorology,'DelaWa&#xfd;es'Stuarine hydrology, locaildemography, and land uses.Sampling locations were divided into two classes, indicator and control. Indicator stations are those, which are expected to manifest station effects. Control samples are collected at locations which are believed to be unaffected by station operations, usually at 15 to 30 kilometers distance.
Fluctuations in the levels of radionuclides and direct radiation at indicator stations are evaluated with respect to; analogous fluctuations at control stations.Indicator and control station data are also evaluated relative to preoperational data.Appendix A describes and summarizes, in accordance with Section 6.9.1.7 of the Salem TS and Section 6.9.1.6 of the Hope Creek TS, the operational program as performed in 2007.Appendix B describes the coding system which identifies sample type and location.
Table B-1 lists the sampling stations and the types of samples collected at each station. These sampling stations are indicated on Maps B-1 and B-2.6 DATA INTERPRETATION Results of analyses are grouped according to sample type and presente-d.
;n.Append4ix C.All results above the Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) are at a confidence level of 2 sigma.This represents the, range of values into whichi95%
of. -epeated .analyses of the same sample shoLid fall. As defined in; Re'gulatbr-,y.Guidea4.8;i LID is the smallest concentration of radioactive material in a sample-ithat will[yied-.:a net count (above system background)..
that will be detected with 95% probability,;.with only 5%0& probability of falsely concluding that a blank observation represents a "real signal".:
LLD is normally calculated as 4.66 times the standard deviaticn of the background counting'.ate,&#xfd;.Or of the blank, samplecount, as appropriate, divided by counting efficiency, sample 'size, 2.22 (dpm per picocurie), the radiochemical yield when appi,'cable, the radioactive decay.-constant an thee elapsed time between sample collection and: time of counting.
The Minimum Deftetable.,Concentration (MDC) is defined as the smallesti concentration-of radioactive material that can *be detected at a given confidence level. The MDC diffeis from the LLD in that the MDC takes into.consideration the interference caused by the'presence of other nuclides while the LLD does.not.The grouped data were averaged and standard deviations calculated in accordance with Appendix B of Reference
: 16. Thus, the 2 sigma deviations of the averaged data represent.
sample and not analytical variability.
For reporting and calculation of averages, any result occurring at or below the LLD is considered to be at that level. When a group of data was composed of 50% or more LLD values, averages were not calculated.
Grab sampling is a useful and acceptable procedure for taking environmental samples of a medium in whichthe concentration of radionuclides is expected to vary slowly with time or where intermittent sampling is deemed sufficient to establish the radiological characteristics of the medium. This method, however, is only representative of the sampled medium for that specific location and instant of time. As a result, variation in the radionuclide concentrations of the samples will normally occur.7 Since these variations will tend to counterbalance one another; aver.ages based upon .repetitive grab samples is considebred valid-..',QUA11Y ASE.URANCE PROGRAM: MTS has a ;quality assurance to .ensure-confidence in the analytical-program. Approximately-10
-1:5% ot-ie'tOtal analytical effort is spent on quality control.including process quality dontrol, instrjrfnnt&#xfd; quality contro',interlaboratory cross-check analyses, and data review., The quality of the results obtained by MTS is ensured by the implementation of the Quality Assurance Program as described in the Maplewood Testing Services Quality Assurance Plan [11] and the Environmental and Chemical Division Procedures Manual. The internal quality control activity Of MIS includes the quality control of instrumenta'tion,-
equipment and reagents; the use of reference standards in calibration, documentation of established procedures and computer programs, and analysis of duplicate samples. The external quality control activity is implemented through participation in both the Analytics and the Environmental Resource Associates Interdaboratory Comparison Programs. (The results of these Interlaboratory Comparison Programs are listed in Tables D-1 through D-4 in Appendix D). MTS's internal QC results are evaluated in accordance with the NRC Resolution Criteria [18]. This criteria is also used for the Analytics Crosscheck Program results. Since ERA has its own established performance criteria, MTS utilizes their comparison data with our results.RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The analytical results of the 2007 REMP samples are divided into categories based on exposure pathways:
atmospheric, direct, terrestrial, and aquatic. The analytical results for.the 2007 REMP are summarized in Appendix A.8 The data for individual, samples .are presented in Appendix C. The data collected demonstrates that the SGS and HCGS REMP was conducted.
in comp!iance with ;the Technical Specifications/ODCM.
The REMP for the, SGS/HCGS &#xfd;Site has his"rictl~
y i cludec samples and analyses not specifically required by these Stations' Technical Specifications/ODCM..
MTS continues to collect andanalyze some of-these samples, i',.:r ,o maintain personnel proficiency in performing these non-roietin~e analyses.
These analysr-s,-are referenced throughout the report as Management Audit samples. -The summary tablqs in this report include these additional samples and analyses.ATMOSPHERIC
, Air partic'_lates were collected on Schleicher-Schuell No. 25 glass fiber filters with low-volume air samplers.Iodine was collected from the air by adsorption on triethylene-diamine (TEDA) impregnated charcoal cartridges connected in series after the a*r particulate-filters.
Air sample volumes were measured with calibrated dry-gas meters and were corrected to standard temperature and pressure.Air Particulates (Tables C-1, C--2)Air particulate samples were collected weekly, at 6 locations.
Each of the 310 samples (see Program Deviations) collected for the year were analyzed for gross beta. Quarterly composites of the weekly samples from each station were analyzed for specific gamma emitters.
Total data recovery for the 6 sampling stations in 2007 was 99.2 percent.o Gross beta activity was detected in all of the indicator station samples collected at concentrations ranging from 9.7 x i03 to37 x 3 01 pCi/i 3 and in all of the control 9 station samples from 1 Ox! 0-3xW10-3. pCi/m 3.The av.erages forthe indicator and control station samples were 22 and 23.x 10-3-pCi/m 3 , respectively..
The maximum preoperational leveldetected was 92O0x 10-3 pCi/m3., with ap, average of 74 x 10-3 pCi/m 3.Results from 1987 to current year are plotted on Figure 1 as quarterly averages.
Included along with this plot, for purposes of comparison, is an inset depicting a continuation of this plot from the current year all the way back to 1973.Gamma spectroscopy,"perfofmed
,,i'orI each of the 24 quarterly composite samples analyzed, indicatedi'he presence~of~th,'
natura!ly-occiirring, radionuclides Be-7 and K-40. Ali other gamma emrtie,-s searched for were below, the LLD..
cosmicray activity in the atmosphere, was detected in all 20 indicator station composites that were analyzed, at concentrations ranging from 68 x 10-3 to 100 X 10-3 pCi/m 3 , with an average of 83 x 10.3 pCi/mi 3.It was detected in the 4 control station composites ranging from 76.x 10-3 to .95 x 10-3 pCi/m3, with an average of 85 x 10-3 pCi/m 3.The maximum preoperational level detected was 330 x 10-3 pCi/m 3 , with an average of 109 x 10-3 pCi/m 3.o Potassium-40 activity was detected in 18 of the indicator station samples, with concentrations ranging from 7.1 x 10-3 to 14 X 10-3 pCi/m 3 , with an average of 10 x 10-3 pCi/rnm. K-40 was also detected in 3 control station samples, at concentrations of 7.4X 10-3 to 16 x 10-3.No preoperational data is available for comparison.
Air Iodine (Table C-3)Iodine in filtered air samples was collected Weekly,,at 6 locations.
Each of the 310 samples collected (see Program Deviations) for the year was analyzed for 1-131.10 lodine-131 was not detected in any of the weekly samp~es-analyzed.
LLD's for all the stations, both indicator and,'control, ranged, fromm.< l.2 x107 3.to <9!8 x 10-3 pCi/m3 .The maximum preoperatibnal 1eve! detected was:42 x, .0-pCi/m 3.DIRECT RADIATION Ambient radiation levels in the. environs were measWpredWith energy-compensated CaSO 4 (TI) thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs),supplied and-,read by AREVA NP EL. Packets containing TLDs for quarterly exposure were placp.d. in the owner-rcontro!!ed area and around the Site at various distances and in each land based meteorological sector. Special emphasis was placed on special interest areas..such as popu!ation centers, nearby residences&
and schools.--
, Direct Radiation (Table C-4)A total of 49 locations were monitored for direct radiation during 2007, including 12 on-site locations, 31 off-site locations within the 10 mile zone, and 6 control locations beyond 10 miles. Effort was made to locate TLDs at~schools and population centers in the area.Five readings for each TLD (ie; 5 elements).at each location were taken in order to obtain a more statistically valid result: For these measurements, the rad is considered equivalent to the rem, in accordance with 10CFR20.1004.
The average dose rate for the 31 quarterly off-site indicator TLDs was 4.2 millirads per standard month, while the on-site average was 4.1 millirads per standard month. The average control rate was similar at 4.3 millirads per standard month. The preoperational average for the quarterly TLD readings was 4.4 millirads per standard month.11 In Figure 2,the quarterly average radiatian levels of the off-site ,indicator stationsversus the control stations, are plotted for the period 1..98.7,hrough 2007, with an inset graph depicting the current year back to 1973. .TERRESTRIAL
' --, Milk samples were taken semi-monthly when cows were on pasture and monthly when cows were not grazing on open pasture.'
Animals are considered on pasture from April to November of each yEar..:Samples werE:collected in polyethylene containers and transported in ice chests, With no preservatives added to the milk.A well water samplewas' collected monthly.-
Separate raw and treated potable water samples were compositeddaily at the City of Salem water treatment plant,. All samples were collected in new polyethylene containers.
Locally grown vegetable and fodder crops were collected at the time of harvest with the exception of ornamental cabbage. MTS personnel planted, maintained and harvested this broad leaf crop in the fall from three locations on site and one across the river. All samples were weighed and packed in plastic bags.Soil is sampled every three years at nine locations.
Ten core samples were collected at each location and then composited into one representative sample.Milk (Table C-5)Milk samples were collected at 4 local dairy farms (2 farms in NJ and 2 in Delaware).
Each sample was analyzed for 1-131 and gamma emitters..Iodine-131 was not detected in any of the 80 samples analyzed.12 LLD's for both the indicator and the control rsamples ranged from <0.1 to 0.8 pCi/L,.: .The maximum p-reoperationat Lv,, detectatd wa C5 p(/L.. which occur:red following a period of atmospheric nuclear weapons tests. Results,.from
.1987 -to 2007 are plotted on Figure 3, with an inset graph depicting the current year back to 1973.Gamma spectroscopy performed on each of the 80 samples indicated the presence of the naturally-occurring radionuclides K-40 and Radium. All other gamma emitters searched for were below the LLD.Potassiumn-40 was detected';n all 230-sampIe3- ,oncentratbi"s, for the 60 indicator station samples ranged from *1200 to 1510 pCi/L,,;with-an average of 1340 pCi/L. The 20 control station sample concentrations ranged from 1250 to 1410 pCi/L, with an average of 1i330 pCi/L. The maximum ='reoperational level detected'was 2000 pCi/L, with an average of 1437 pCi/L.,7:., o Radium was detected in 5 indicator station samples at concentrations ranging* "from 6 to 13 pCi/L, with anaverage of 10 pCi/L. The 1 positive control station sample had a concentration of 10 pCi/L. The preoperational had an averageof 3.8 pCi/L and a range of 1.5 to 11 pCi/L.Well Water (Ground water) (TablesC-6, C-7)Although wells in the vicinity of. SGS/HCGS are not directly affected by plant operations, water samples were collected monthly from one farm's well during January through December of the year. Each management audit.sample was analyzed for gross alpha, gross beta, tritium, and gamma emitters.-.Gross alpha activity was not detected in any of the well water samples. LLD's ranged from <0.5 to 2.0 pCi/L.13 The maximum preoperational level~dctected was 9.6-pCi/L.
There was, no preoperational average determinedfor this analysis.* Gross beta activity was detected in a1111'2 well'water samples'.
Concentrations for the samples ranged from 9.3 to 12 pCi/L, with an average of 10 pCi/L. The 2007 gross beta results are Comparablew;vithithe:..pr~operationalk.fesuIts which ranged from <2.1 to 38 pCi/L, with an average value. of:9pCiiL.
* Tritium activity Was'&#xf7;not detected*
in-any. of the well water samples. The LLD's ranged fror: < 147, to , p1:58 pO.-The'maXimum preoperational leve' detectd was 380.pCi/L. There was no preoperatibfnal average determined for this analysis.Gamma: spectroscopy performed on each of tie 12 well water :samples, indicated the presence of the naturally-occurring radionuclidesK-40 and Radium. Al other gamma emitters searched for were below the LLD.Radium was detected in all 12 of the well water samples at concentrations ranging from 86 to 173 pCi/L with an average of 122 pCi/L. The maximum preoperational level detected was 2.0 pCi/L. There was no preoperational average determined for this analysis.These values are similar to those found in the past 18 years. However, as with the 1989 through 2006 results, they are higher than those found in the preoperational program. These results are due to a procedural change for sample preparation.
The change results in less removal of radon (and its daughter products) from the sample. It is reasonable to conclude that values currently observed are typical for this region. [20,21,22]
Potassium-40 was detected in 6 of the samples at concentrations ranging from 53 to 74 pCi/L and an average of 39 pCi/L.14 The maximum preoperational level detected was 30 pCi/L..-.
There was no preoperational average determined fo,- this analysis.
..Potable Water (Drinking Water) (Tables C-8,, .C-9). .. .Both raw and treated potable water. sampleswee-,collected -and* composited by Salem water treatment plant personnel.
Each sample consisted of daily aliquots composited into a monthly sample. The raw water source for this plant is Laurel Lake and its adjacent wells.These are management audit samples as no liquid effluepts discharged from SGS/HCGS will directly affect this.pathway.
Each of the 24 individual samples was analyzed for gross alpha, gross beta, tritium, iodine-131 and gamma emitters....'
-.:-.Gross alpha activity was, detected in 4 raw and 2 treated water.samoles at ....concentrations of 0.5 to 1.7 pCi/L with an average of 07.-pCi/L..
LLD's for-the remaining 18 samples ranged from <0.22 to. <1.1 pCi/L.. The-maximum,..,.
preoperational level detected was 2.7 pCi/L. There was no preoperational average determined for this analysis.
.;* Gross beta activity was detected in all 24 of the raw and treated water samples. The raw samples were at concentrations ranging from 2.3 to 3.4 pCi/L. Concentrations for the treated water ranged from 2.5 to 3.7 pCi/L. The average concentration for both raw and treated was -30 pCi/L. The maximum preoperational level detected was9.0 pCi/L, with an average of 4.2 pCi/L.Tritium activity was not detected in any of the raw or treated potable water samples.LLD's for the raw and treated samples ranged from <137 to, <165 pCi/L. The maximum preoperational level detected was 350 pCi/L, with an average of 179 pCi/L.Iodine-131 measurements were performed to an LLD of 1.0 pCi/L, even though the drinking water supplies are not affected by discharges from the Site since the receiving water body (Delaware River) is brackish and therefore the water is not used 15 for human consumption.
Iodine3-13 measuremants for all 24,samples were below the LLD'&s These values ranged from, <0.1 to <0.3 pCi/L. There was no preoperational data available for comparison.
Gamma spectroscopy performed on each of the 24monthly water samples indicated the presence of the naturally-occurring.
radionuclides K-40 and Radium. All other gamma emitters searched for were below the LLD.* The radionuclide K-40 was detected in 6 of the treated potable waters at concentrations ranaing from 28 to 55 pCi/L. It was detected in 5 of the raw potable water samples at concentrations from 34 to 57 pCi/L. The average for both raw and treatedresults was 43 pCi/L. LLD's for the remaining 13 potable W samplets were <14 to <23,pCi!L.
There was no preoperational data available for comparison.
* Radium was detected in 4 of the treated potable waters at concentrations ranging from 3.2 to 38 pCi/L. It was detected in 1 of the raw potable water samples at a concentration of 8.1 pCi/L. The average for all the positive potable water samples was 14 pCi/L. LLD's for the remaining 19 samples were <1.5 to <5.8 pCi/L. The maximum preoperational level detected was 1.4 pCi/L. There was no preoperational average determined for this analysis.
The higher results in the three measurable samples are due to the procedural change for sample preparation, as discussed in the Well Water section.Vegetables (Table C-10)Although vegetables in the region are not irrigated with water into which liquid plant effluents have been discharged, a variety of food products grown in the area for human consumption were sampled at 5 indicator stations (16 samples) and 3 control stations (8 16 samples).
These'vegetables, collected vs managemnentaudit samples, were analyzed for.gamma emitters and included asparagus,.cabbage; sweet corn,, peppers, and tomatoes..Gamma spectroscopy performed on each of the 24 samples indicated the presence of the naturally-occurring radionuclide K-40 and in one sample radium'. All other gamma emitters.searched for were 6bel'ow the "LLD:* Potassium-40 was detected'in all 24 samples. Concentrations for the 16 indicator station samples ranged from 1330 to 2700 'pCi/Kg-wet and'aVeraged`2090 pCi/kg-wet. Concentrations for the 8 control station 'samples ranged from 1490 to 2670 pCi/kg-wet, and averaged 2060 pCi/kg-wet.
The avera'g'e concentration detected for all samples, both indicator and control, was 2080 p(i/kg-wet.
The maximum preoperational level detected was 4800 pCi/kg-wet, with an averageW' of2140 pCi/kg-wet.
Radium was detected in 1 of the indicator tomato samples at d concentration of 23 pCi/kg-wet.
LLD's for all the remaining vegetable samples,.both indicator and control, ranged from <2.2 to <10 pCi/L. There was no preoperational data available for comparison.
Fodder Crops (Table C-11)Although not required by the SGS or HCGS Technical Specifications/ODCM, 3 samples of crops normally used as cattle feed (silage and soybeans) were collected from three indicator stations (4 samples) and one control station (2 samples).
It was determined that these products may be a significant element in the food-chain pathway. These fodder crops are collected as management audit samples and analyzed for gamma emitters.
All four locations from which samples were collected this year are milk sampling stations.17 In addition to the silage and soybean, ornamental cabbage was planted and maintained by MTS personnel at. 3 locations on site and 41 in. Delaware, at 3.9 miles. These, samples were, harvested in: December.,These broad leaf.vegetation samples were, deemed necessary since thare are nio 10ngev"&ny milk Farmsi operating within the 5.km radius, of SGS/HCGS.The closest milk farm we have is located in Odessa, DE at 4.9.miles (7.88 kin).Gamma spectroscopy performed on each of the.10 samples indicated the -presence of the naturally-occurring radionuclides Be-7, K-40 plus Radium in one sample. All other gar. mi emitters searcheds forwere &#xfd;below the LLD..Beryllium-7,,attribUtOd to cosmic ra&#xfd;y activity in the atmosphere, was detected-in 3 of the indicator silage samples at concentrations from 170 to 506 pCi/kg-wet.
It was detected in the control station silage sample at 976 pCi/kg-wet.
The maximum p.redoperational 1evel detected for silage was 4700 pCi/kg-wet; with an average, of 2000 pCi/Kg-wet;.
Be-7 was not detected in either the indicator nor control station-soybean samples. 'The maximum preoperational level detected for soybean samples was 9300 pCi/kg-dry.
Be-7 was detected in all 4 of the ornamental cabbage samples at concentrations of 75 to 336 pCi/kg-wet with a combined average of 200 pCi/kg-wet.
There was no preoperational -data available for comparison with this-type of samples.* Potassium-40 was detected in all 10 of the vegetation station samples. The combined average for the indicator station samples was 5420 pCi/kg-wet.
The average for the 2 control station vegetation samples was 1.1350 pCi/kg-wet.
The average concentration detected for the.silage samples (both indicator and control)was 4890 pCi/kg-wet.
Preoperational results averaged .7000 pci/kg-wet.
Results for the soybean samples (indicator and control) was 15100 pCi/kg-wet.
Preoperational soybean results averaged 22000 pCi/kg-dry.
The average concentration of K-40 for the 4 ornamental cabbage samples was 4100 pCi/kg-wet.
There was no preoperational data available for comparison with these samples.18 b Radium was detected in 1 of the indicatorsoybean samples at a concentration of 15 pC/kg.W-wt.
LLD's-for ali the remaIinng;vrg.c,.'at'on samples, both-Jindicator.
and.c ntrol, ranged4rom'<7'2 to <14 pCi/LT:here was&#xfd;no preoperationaI average availabie for comparison..':
SOIL (Table'C-12)
Soil is sampled every three years at nine sta ons ..including two control ,.,and,analyzed for gamma emitters.
Samples are collected at each station, in areas that have been relatively undisturbed since the last collection, in order to determine any changp .n the.radionuclide inventory of the area.Gamma spectroscopy, performed on-each of the 9 samples, indica,+ed the preence of the naturally-occurring radionuclides K-40, Radium and Th-232, in additicn to lIw levels of the fission product Os-137. All other gamma emitters searched for-were below the LLD.-'Potassium-40 was detected in al 7 of the lindicator station samples. at concentrations ranging from 33000 to 13510 pCi/kg-dry with an average of 7700. pCi/kg-dry.
The 2 control.station samples had an average of 8150 pCi/kg-dry.
The maximum preoperational level detected:was 24000 pCi/kg-dry with an average of 10000 pCi/kg-dry.
Cesium-1 37 was detected in 5 of the indicator station samples ranging from 76 to 196 pCi/kg-dry, with an average of 150 pCi/kg-dry.
The control station samples had an average of 110 pCi/kg-dry.
The maximum preoperational level detected was 2800 pCi/kg-dry, with an average of.800 pCi/kg-dry.
Results from 1974.to the current year are plotted on Figure 7.19
* Radium was detected in all 7 indicator station samples in-concentrations of 259 to 1155 pCi/kg-dry, with an average of 600 pCi/kg-dry.
The control station samples showed an: average of0680 pC i/kg-dry.
The maximum preiperational level detected was 1500 pCi!kg-dr -th an .average cf 87C.pCillk,-dry.
* Thorium-232 Was detected:in aaWot tile ;indicator-station samples in ranges of 230 to 1176 pCiikg-dry, and had an average of 600 pCi!kg-dry.
The 2 control station samples were 739'and 790 pCi/kg.drywith an average of 765 pCi/kg-dry.
The maximum ileVel detebted was 1400 pCi/kg-dry with an average of.740 pCi/kg-dry...
AQUAT; .-.Environrnental'C6nsulting Services, Inc'(ECSI) collected-all aquatic samplus (with the exceptioIn of the 6S2 shoreline sediment and February's alternate surface water locations 7E1 and 11A1).Surface water samples were collected in new polyethylene containers that were rinsed twice with the sample medium prior to collection.
Edible fish and crabs are taken by net and ,then processed.
In processing, the fleshris separated from the bone and shell and the flesh placed in sealed 'containers and frozen before being transported in ice chests.Sediment samples collected by ECSI were taken with a bottom grab sampler and frozen in sealed polyethylene containers before being transported, in ice chests. MTS personnel Collect location 6S2 shoreline, sediment on the beach .behind the parking area for the Helicopter Pad.20 Surface Water (Tables C-1 3, C-14, C-15).Surface water sample! were collected monthly atA4 indicato_
statiorsand, one contrcl:, station in the Delaware estuary..
One, location is at the outfall area (-Nhichjis ,the area. where liquid radioactive effluents from the Salem Station are allowed to be discharged into the Delaware River), another is downstream fr~om the-ouatfll -araa, and another is directly west of the outfall area at the mouth of the AppoquiniminkRiv'er.
Two upstream locations are in the Delaware River and at the mouth of the Chesaopeake.
and Delaware Canal, the latter being sampled when the flow is.from the Canal &#xfd;;nto&#xfd;the-river.,Station-.12C1, at the mouth of the Appoquinimink River, serves as the operational control. [Location 12C1 was.chosen because the physical' characteristics of this station more closely resemble those of the outfall area than do those at the farther upstream location (1 F2). As discussed in the pre-operational summary report, due to the tidal nature of this Delaware-River-Bay estuary,.there are flow rate variations.
The further the distance from the boundary between the Delaware River and the Delaware Bay (Liston Point), the. lower the background.
leve!s, the lower the salinity, lower K-40(AA) and lower concentrations of soluble gross beta emitters.]
All surface water samples were analyzed monthly for gross beta, tritium and gamma.emitters.Gross beta activity was detected in 45 of the indicator station samples, ranging from 5.4 to 255 pCi/L, with an average of 82 pCi/L. Beta activity was detected in all 12 of the control station samples with concentrations ranging from 16 to 137 p.Ci/L, with, an average of 70 pCi/L. The maximum preoperational level detected wasil-.0 pCi/L, with an average of 32 pCi/L. Quarterly results for all Iccations are plotted on Figure 4, for the years 1987 to 2007, with an inset graph depicting the current year back to 1973.Tritium activity was not detected in any of the control station samples. It was detected in 8 of the indicator station samples at concentrations ranging from 170 to 460 pCi/L and an average of 82 pCi/L. LLD's for the remaining station samples, both indicator and control, ranged from <150 to <190 pCi/L. The maximum preoperational level detected was 600 pCi/L, with an average of 210 pCi/L.21 Positive results from 1987 to 2007-are., plotted.on Figu:e 5,-with an-inset graph depicting-the current year back to '1973.Gamma spectroscopy performed on each of the 47 indicator station and 12 control station surface water samples incdcated the: presence of the radionuclides K-40 and er ernmtterssearched for were below the LLD.Potassium-40 was Cetectbd -isamples from the indicator stations at concentrations ranging from 39 to 170 pCiIL and in all 12 of the control.station samples ranging from 44 to 155 pCi/L. The average for the indicator station locations was 85 pCi/L, while the average for the control station locations was 88 pCi/L. The maximum preoperational level detected was 200 pCi/L, with an average of 48 pCi/L.-Radium was detected in 2 of the indicator stations at concentrations of 6.4 and 7.3 pCi/L and an average of 6.9 pCi/L. It was detected in ,3 of the control location.samples from 7.4 to 8.4 pCiiL with an average of 7.9 pCi/L. LLD's for the remaining stationrsamples, both:indicator and control, ranged from <1.5 to <13 pCi/L. The maximum preoperationa!
levei detected was 4 pCiIL with no average determined.
Fish (Table C-15)Edible species of fish were collected semi-annually at 3 locations, 2 indicator and 1 control, and analyzed for gamma emitters in flesh. Samples included channel catfish, white catfish, bluefish, white perch, American shad, carp and striped bass. (See explanation of controls in the surface water section).22 Gamma spectroscopy.
performed on. each of t:7,e4'4 ihdicator station samples and: 2 control station samples indicated the presence of the naturally-occurring radionuclide K-40. All other gamma emitters searched for were below the LLD.Potassiurm-40 was :etected in :a!tL:4.,sa,,;3/4ipi:,::fr6&#xfd;i:ir thi&:.itndiuator stations at concentrations ranging fromr !,44C for an, average of 3618 pCi/kg-wet.
K-40 Was detected in both samples from, the control location at 3420 and 3700 pCi/kg-wet.
The average for the control samples was 3560 pCi/kg-wet.
The maximumrpreoperational level detacteod.,-
a 1300..0 ppi/kg-wet, with an average of 2900 pCi/kg-Wet.
... .. .4 ....[ ., Blue Crab .(Table C-16), 'Blue crab samples were collected twice during the season at 2 locations, 1 indicator and 1 control, and the edible portions, were analyzed for gamma. emitters. (See explanatic0i of controls in the surface water section).-
Gamma spectroscopy perfoimed on the flesh, of the indicatcr station, samples and the control station samples indicated the presence of the naturally-occurring radionuclide K-40. All other gamma emitters searched for were below the LLD.Potassium-40 was detected in both indicator station samples at concentrations of 2430 and 3170 pCi/kg-wet.
It was detected in both control station samples at 1390 and 3120 pCi/kg-wet.
The average for both the indicator and control station samples was 2530 pCi/kg-wet.
The maximum preoperational level detected was 12000 pCi/kg-wet, with an average of 2835 pCi/kg-wet.
23 Sediment (Table C-17)Sediment samples were collected, semi-annually from 7 locations, including 6 indicator stations and 1 cont&#xfd;-&#xfd;.)l station..(Lccctiin 6S2 is the orly shoreline sediment and it is directly affected by tidal fluctuat.ons)
Each of the .4,;samples wa;s analyzed for gamma emitters.Besides the naturally-occurring radionuclides K-40, Be-7,.Th.-232 and Radium, trace levels of the man-made nuclide, Cs-1 37, were detected in two sediment locations.
These levels were well within the acceptable levetsfspecified in section 3/4.12. 1,of the Technical Specifications/OODCM.
:(Se&#xfd;e' explanation o.ef controls in the surface water section)Gamma spectroscopy was- performed on each of the 12 indicator station samples and 2 control stationmsamplesc.
Except forthe radionuclides listed above, all other gamma, emitters searched for were belowthe LLD.o Cesium-i 37 was detected in 2 indicator station samples at concentrations of 32 and 53 pCi/kg-dry.
',It was not detected in any of the control station samples- The maximum preoperational level detected was 400 pCi/kg-dry with an average of 150 pCi/kg-dry.
Results from 1987 to 2007 are plotted on Figure 6, with an inset graph depicting the current year back to 1973.* Cobalt-60 was not detected in any of the sediment samples. LLD's for the 14 samples, indicator and control, ranged from <5.2 to <150 pCi/kg-dry.
Results of all the positive values from 1987 to 2007 are plotted on Figure 6, with an inset graph depicting the current year back to 1973. There was no preoperational data available for comparison.
* Beryllium-7 was only detected in one of the indicator station samples at a concentration of 1711 pCi/kg-dry.
It was not detected in either control location.
The maximum preoperational level detected was 2300 pCi/kg-dry.
There was no preoperational average determined for this nuclide.24 Potassium-40 was detected in al* 12 indicator station samples at concentrations ranging from 2250 to 20100 pCi/kg-dry, with an average of 8250 pCi/kg-dry.
Concentratiofis&#xfd; detected in both of the contro!, station: samples were at 14200 and 17100 pC,/kg-dry.
The average4for the conitol station. samples was 15650 pCi/kg-dry. The maximum preop'erationa'le d'etbet! d was-lCOO pCi/kg-dry,with an--average of 15000 pCi/kg ry Radium was detected in all 12 indicator sta'tion, ',samples-at concentrations ranging from 217 to 1050 pCi/kg-dry, wvith an average of 550'pCi/kg-dry.
Concentrations detected in both of the control station samples were at 604 and 614 pCi/kg-dry, with an average of 610 pCi/kg-dry.
The grand average' for both the. indicator and control station samples was 580 pCi/kg,-dry.
Tie maxinum p;e-ojerational ,level~detected was 1200 pCi/kg-dry, with an average of 760,pCi/kg-dry:..
* Thorium-232was detected irn all, 12 indicator station samples atconcentrations ranging from 240 to 995 pCi/kg-dry, with an average of 635 pCi/kq-dry.
Concentrations detected in both of :.he control station samples 'were at 920, and 1050 pCi/kg-dry, with an average of:985 pCi/kg-dry.
The grand average for both the indicator and control station samples was.690 pCi/kg-dry.
The maximum pre-operational level detected was 1300 pCi/kg-dry, with an average of 840 pCi/kg-dry.
25 PROGRAM: DEVIATIONS The foliowirig air samplers were *unavaiiLe due to p.ower Ioss:,,, STATION LOCATION, .&#xfd; -,HOURS, UNAVAILABLE, (1) 1F1i 5.8mi. N of vent -'. 145'-9&#xfd;(1.7%
for year)(2) 16E1 4.1 mi. NNWof vent.. 149.8 (1.8% foryear)(1) Both.,n air particulate andan air iodine. sample were considered invalid due to a power outage at location 1F1 durig the last week of February, 2007. This power outage was attributable toequipment malfunction.
It was determined that the pump vanes had broken into small pieces-causing the pump, to seize. Although this had not happened before, it was noted that the samplers/pumps had not been overhauled in over three* years..,MTS personnel decidedto overhaul all the air sampler pumps over the next several weeks. To avoid this happening in the future, all pumps will be placed on an 18-24 month maintenance schedule.
Overall availability for this air sampling location was 98.3% for the year 2007.(2) Both an air particulate and an air iodine sample were considered invalid due to a power outage at location 16E1 during the first week of October, 2007. MTS considered this power outage to be attributable to a blown fuse. It was decided to change the fuses in all the air samplers over the next several weeks. Overall availability for this air sampling location was 98.2% for the year 2007.During-the month of February, ice floes in the Delaware River prevented the aquatic.sampling vendor, ECSI, from launching a boat to collect the monthly surface water samples.Four alternate, land accessible sampling locations were used for this months collection instead. Since location 1 F2 is midpoint in the river, an alternate land was not established.
26 CONCLUSIONS" The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program for Salem and Hope Creek Generating Stations was-conducted during 2007. in&#xfd;cccord.nceG wifh the SGS and HCGS Technical:
Specifications/ODCM.
The LLD values required by the Technical Specifications/ODCM were achieved for t~i s teporting'-perod., The objectives of the program were also met during this period. The data collectedassists in demonstrating that SGS and HCGS were operated in compliance with Technical Specifications/ODCM.
From the results obtained, it can be concluded that the levels and fluctuations of radioactivity in environmental samples were as expected for an estuarin'e environment.
No unusual radiological characteristics were'observed in the environs of SGS/HCGS during this reporting period. Since these results were comparable to the- results obtained'during the preoperational phase of the program, which ran from 1973 to 1976, a'i-id'wvith
:historical-:
results collected'since commercial operation, we can conclude that the: operation offtht Salem and Hope Creek Stations had no significant impact-on the radiological characteristics of the environs of that area.27 TABLE 1 SALEM AND HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATIONS RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM:(Program .Overview)
EXPOSURE PATHWAY AND/OR SAMPLE 1. DIRECT RADIATION Thermoluminescent Dosimeters NUMBER OF REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLES AND SAMPLE LOCATIONS Forty-nine routine monitoring stations with two or more dosimeters placed as follows: An inner ring of stations, one in each land .based meteorological sector (not bounded by water) in the general area of the site boundary:
lSI, 2S2, 2S4, 3S1, 4S1, 5S1, 6S2, 7S1, 10SI, 11Si, 15S1, 16S1.An outer ring of stations, one in each land-based meteorological sector in the 5 -11 km range (3.12 -6.88 miles)., from the site (not bounded by or.over water) : 4D2, 5D1, OD, 1!4D1, 15D11 2E1, 3E1, lIE2, 12E1, 13E1, 16E1, IFi, 3F2, 4F2, 5F1, 6F1, 9F1, 10F2, 11Fi, 13F2, 14F2, 14F3, 15F3." The balance of the stations to be-placed in special interest areas such as population centers,-
nearby I residences, and schools: 2F2, 2F5, 2F6, 3F3, 7F2, 12F1, 13F3, 13F4, 14F4, 16F2, 1G3, 10G1, 16G1, 3H1. and in one or two areas to serve as control stations: 3G1, 14G1.&#xfd;-SAMPLING AND COLLECTION FREQUENCY.
Quarterly TYPE/FREQUENCY*
OF ANALYSIS Gamma dose/ quarterly TABLE 1 (cont'd)SALEM AND HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATIONS RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM EXPOSURE PATHWAY AND/OR NUMBER OF REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLES AND SAMPLING AND SAMPLE SAMP .LE LOCATIONS COLLECTION TYPE/FREQUENCY*
OF FREQUENCY ANALYSIS 2. ATMOSPHERIC Samples from 6 locations:.
: a. Air Particulate
: b. Air Iodine CD 3. TERRESTRIAL
: a. Milk 4 Samples -one sample from close to the Site Boundary : 5SI 3 Samples in different land based sectors: iFl, 2F6, 5D1..1 Sample from the vicinity of a community:
16E 1.1 Sample from a control location, as for example 15-30 km distant and in the least prevalent wind direction:
14GI.Samples from milking animals in 3 locations within 5 km distance.
I f there are none, then, .sample from milking animals in each of 3 areas between 5 -8 km (3.12 -5 miles) distant: 13E3, 14F4, 2G3. 1 Sample from milking animals at a control location 15 -30 km distant (9.38 -18.75 miles): 3G1.Samples from-one or two sources only..if likely to be affected. (Although wells in the vicinity of SGS/HCGS are not directly affected by plant operations, we sample 3E1 farm' s well, as management Zudit'Continuous sampler operation with sample collection weekly or more frequently if required by dust loading Gross Beta / weekly Gamma isotopic analysis/ quarterly composite*Iodine-131
/ weekly Semi-monthly (when animals are pasture)-Monthly (when animals are not on pasture)Gamma scan / semi-on monthly Iodine-131 semi-monthly Gamma scan / monthly Iodine-131
/ monthly Gamma Scan / monthly Gross alpha / monthly Gross beta / monthly Tritium / monthly b. Well Water-(Ground)Monthly TABLE 1 (cont'd)SALEM AND HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATIONS RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM EXPOSURE PATHWAY AND/OR SAMPLE NUMBER OF REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLES LOCATIONS AND SAMPLE AD ALSAMPLING AND COLLECTION FREQUENCY TYPE/FREQUENCY*
OF ANALYSIS 0 c. Potable Water (Drinking Water)d. Vegetables
: e. Fodder Crops One sample of the-nearept -water supply affected by its discharge (No groundwater samples are required as liquid effluents discharged from SGS/HCGS do not-directly affect'this pathway) However-for management audit, one raw and one treated sample from nearest unaffected water supply is 'required:
2F3 One sample of each principal class of food products from area. that is irrigated by water in which liquid plant wastes have been discharged (The Delaware River at the location of SGS/HCGS .is a brackish water source and is not used for irrigation of food products)
Management audit samples are collected from various locations during harvest: 2F4, 2F9, 3F7, 6F2, 14F3, 1G4, 2G2, 9G1, 3H5.Although not required by SGS/HCGS ODCa1, samples of crops normally used as cattle feed (silage-soybeans) were collected as management audit samples: 14F4, 3G1. Broad leaf vegetation (ornamental cabbage) was planted & collected in lieu of having a milk farm within 5 km of the Site (1)1ODI, lSl, 15S1, 16S1 Monthly (composited daily)Annually (at harvest)Annually (at harvest) -Gross alpha / monthly Gross beta / monthly Tritiu-n monthly, -..Gamma scan / monthly Iodine-131
/ monthly Gamma scan/on collection Gamma scan/on collection TABLE 1 (cont'd)SALEM AND HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATIONS RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM EXPOSURE PATHWAY AND/OR NUMBER OF REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLES AND SAMPLE AT ANDL LOCATIONS SAMPLE SAMPLING AND COLLECTION FREQUENCY Every 3 years (2007-2010-2013)
TYPE/FREQUENCY*
OF ANALYSIS Gamma scan/on collection
: f. Soil Although not required by SGS/HCGS ODCM, samples of soil were collected as management audit samples: 6S2, 2F9, 5F1, 1ODI, 16E1, 13E3, 14F4, 2G3, 3G1 One sample upstream:
1F2 One sample downstream:
7E1l.One sample outfali: llAl, One sample cross-stream (mouth .of Appoquinimink River): 12C1 (2)And an additional location in the Chesapeake
& Delaware Canal: 16F1 4. AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT Monthly Gross Beta/monthly Gamma scan/monthly Tritium/monthly**
: a. Surface Water b. Edible Fish One sample of each commercially and recreationally important'species-in' vicinity of plant discharge area: IAl.One sample of same speciesx in.area, not..influenced by plant discharge:
12C*1 (2 And an additional location downstream:
7E1 One sample of each commercially and recreationally important species. in vicinity of plant discharge area: lAl One sample of same species in area. rot influenced by plant discharge:
12CI (2..Semi-,,annually Gamma -scan (flesh)/ on collection
: c. Blue Crabs Semi-annually Gamma scan (flesh)/ on collection TABLE 1 (cont'd)SALEM AND HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATIONS RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM-SAMPLING AND.-NUMBER OF REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLES AND SAMPLE COLLECTION TYPE/FREQU ENCY*EXPOSURE PATHWAY LOCATIONS FREQUENCY OF ANALYSIS AND/OR SAMPLE d. Sediment One sample from downstream area: 7E1 One sample from cross-stream area: 12C1 One sample from outfall area: 11Al One sample from upstream area: 1F2 One sample from a control location:
12C1(2)One sample from shoreline area: 6S2.One sample from Cooling Tower Blowdown:..15AI And an additional location of south storm drain discharge line: 16A1 Semi-annually Gamma scan/on collection I CA,* Except for TLDs, the quarterly analysis is performed on a composite of individual samples-collected.
during the quarter.** Tech'Specs/ODCM require quarterly analysis but due to the tritium leak at Salem, it was decided to analyze surface waters on a monthly basis for tritium.(1) While these milk locations are not within the 5 km range, they are the closest farms in the Site vicinity.Since broad leaf vegetation is acceptable in lieu of milk collections, MTS personnel'planted and harvested ornamental cabbage (Brassica oleracea) at three locations on Site (lSl, 15S1, 16S1) and one across the river in Delaware (10D1).(2) Station 12C1 was made the operational control (1975) for aquatic samples since the physical characteristics of this station more closely resemble those of the outfall area than do those at the upstream location originally chosen. This is due to the distance from Liston Point, which is the boundary between the Delaware River and Delaware Bay. As discussed extensively in the SGS/HCGS Pre-operational-reports-, the sampling locations further upstream show significantly lower background levels, due to estuarine tidal flow-plus-lower&#xfd;.
K40 and Beta Activity.
FIGURE 1 GROSS BETA ACTIVITY IN AIR PARTICULATE 1987 THROUGH 2007 1000 100 GROSS BETA IN AIR PARTICULATE 1973 THROUGH 2007 1000 1976- 1 18 2 , ., ......................................... ...............................
CA) ~R 10 i-...........I ..................................I ...................1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 I QUARTERLY AVERAGEI FIGURE 2 AMBIENT RADIATION
-OFFSITE vs CONTROL STATION 1987 THROUGH 2007 10.0 8.0 6.0 4.0 2.0 0.0 AMBIENT RADIATION
-OFFSITE vs CONTROL STATION 1973 THROUGH 2007OFF-SITE STATIONS"- CONTROL STATIONS 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 IQUARTERLY AVERAGEI FIGURE 3 IODINE -131 ACTIVITY IN MILK 1987 THROUGH 2007 20 10 A IODINE-131 ACTIVITY IN MILK 1973 THROUGH 2007 30.00 20.00 10.00 0.00-10.00!A A-1976 1982 1988 1994 2000 2006 WA _j (Ji 0 I ---10 I I 1988 1990 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 2 0I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 I I I I I l I I 1992 1994 2006 I QUARTERLY AVERAGE I FIGURE 4 GROSS BETA ACTIVITY IN SURFACE WATER 1987 THROUGH 2007 1000 100 GROSS BETA ACTIVITY IN SURFACE WATER 1973 THROUGH 2007 C.) _.1 0) .'10 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 I QUARTERLY AVERAGE1 FIGURE 5 TRITIUM ACTIVITY IN SURFACE WATER 1987 THROUGH 2007 10,000 1,000 100 10 TRITIUM ACTIVITY IN SURFACE WATER 1973 Through 2007 10000 --- ---1000 100 1 1210 1976 1982 1988 1994 2000 2006 Effluent Discharge near time of sampling:
07-07-05.4....................................1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 I QUARTERLY AVERAGE FIGURE 6 CESIUM-137
& COBALT-60 ACTIVITY IN AQUATIC SEDIMENT 1987 THROUGH 2007 10000_CESIUM-137
& COBALT-60 ACTIVITY IN AQUATIC SEDIMENT 1973 THROUGH 2007-CS-137 10000-CO-60 1000 100A 10.1000 1978 1482 1988 1994 2000 2008 O..100 10 1990 1992 , 1 1 2 , , 2 6 , , , , , , 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 I SEMI-ANNUAL AVERAGE1 FIGURE 7 CESIUM -137 ACTIVITY IN SOIL 1974 THROUGH 2007 800.0 700.0 600.0 500.0 co B 400.0 L)CL Salem -2 Criticality 08-02-80~Hope Creek Criticality Salem 11-76 Chernobyl 04-26-86 300.0 200.0 100.0 0.0 1974 1977 1980 1983 1986 1989.- 199Z 1995 1998 2001.2004 2007 REFERENCES
[1] Public Service Enterprise Grou. r"Environmental Report, Operating License Stage -Salem Nuclear Generating Station Units 1 and 2". 1971.[2] Public Service Enterprise GrOup.. "E .viromental Repor, Operating License Stage -Hope Creek Generating Station", 1983.[3] United States Atomic Energy -Comrmission.
"'Final Environmental Statement-Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2". Docket No. 50-272 and 50-311. 1973, ...[4] United States Atomic Energy C6mnmission. "Final Environmental Statement
-Hope Creek Generating.
Station. Pocket No. 50-354. 1983.[5] Public Service Enterprise Group. "Updated Final Safety Analysis Report -Salem Nuclear, Generatilng Statio.n, Units-1 and 2". 1982.[6] Public Service Enterprise Group. "Updated Final Safety Analysis Report- Hope Creek Generating Station.[7] Radiation Management Corporation. "Artificial Island Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program -Annual Reports 1973 through 1982".[8] Radiation Management Corporation. "Artificial Island Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program -Preoperation Summary -1973 through 1976".RMC-TR-77-03, 1978.[9] Radiation Management Corporation. "Artificial Island Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program -December 11 to December 31, 1976". RMC-TR-77-02, 1977.[10] Maplewood Testing Services. "Salem and Hope Creek Generating Stations'Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program -Annual Reports 1983 through 2006".[11] Maplewood Testing Services. "Quality Assurance Plan." February, 2004[12] Public Service Enterprise Group. "Salem Nuclear Generating Station Technical Specifications", Appendix A to Operating License No. DPR-70, 1976, Sections 6.8.4.h -1,2,3 and 6.9.1.7.[13] Public Service Enterprise Group. "Hope Creek Generating Station Technical Specifications", Appendix A to Facility Operating License No. NPF-57, 1986, Sections 6.8.4.h -1,2,3 and 6.9.1.6.40 REFERENCES, (cont'd)[14] Public Service Enterprise Group. "Offsite Dose Calculation Manual"- Salem Generating Station.[15] Public Service Enterprise Group. "Offsite Dose Calculation Manual"- Hope Creek Generating Station.[16] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. "Prescribed Procedures for Measurement of Radioactivity in"Drinking Water." EPA-600/4-80=032, August, 1980.[17] U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "Environmental Technical Specifications For Nuclear Power Plants." Regulatory Guide4.8, December, 1975.[18] U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
: "NRC Inspection Mahual". Inspection Procedure 84750, Issue Date 3/15/94.[19] Maplewood Testing Services. "Procedures Manual." Mechanical Division /Environmental Section[20] NJDEP : "A South Jersey Homeowner's Guide to Radioactivity in Drinking Water: Radium" Revised April 2004.[21] U.S. Geological Survey :'Water Quality in the Delaware River Basin :1998-2001";
Circular 1227.[22] U.S. Geological Survey "Major Aquifers in New Jersey" 41 APPENDIX A PROGRAM
 
==SUMMARY==
43 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM SALEM GENERATING STATION " HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION DOCKET 50-272/-311 DOCKET NO. 50-354 SALEM COUNTY, NEW JERSEY JANUARY 1, 2007 to DECEMBER 31, 2007 MEDIUM OR PATHWAY Analysis And Lower All Indicator Locations Location with Highest Mean Control Location Number of SAMPLE Total Number Limit of Mean Name Mean Mean Nonroutine (UNIT OF MEASUREMENT:
of Analyses Detection (Range) Distance and Direction (Range) (Range) Reported Performed (LLD)* ** Measurements I. AIRBORNE Air Particulates (10-1 pCi/m3)Beta 310 6.0 22 (258/258)(10-37)Gamma Be7 14G1 11.8 miWNW 16E1 4.1 mi NNW 14G1 11.8 mi WNW 24 2.0 83 (20/20)(68-100)23 (52/52) 23 (52 152)(10-36) (10-36)88 (4/4) 85 (4/4)(72-100) (76-95)12 (3/4) 12.!(3/4)(7-16) (7716)0 0 0 0-01 K-40 24 11.0 1-131 310 10 (18/20)(7-14)Air Iodine (10-3 pCi/m3)<LLD<LLD'<LLD II DIRECT Direct Radiation (mrad/std.
month)III TERRESTRIAL Milk (pCi/L)Quarterly 196 Badges 4.2 (172/172)(2.8-6)IF1 5.8 mi N 5.6 (4/4) 4.3.(24/24 (5:176) (3.2-5.6)0 1-131 80 0.4<LLD<LLD Gamma K-40 80 32 1340 (60/60)(1200-1510) 80 8.5 10 (5/60)(6-13)RA-NAT 13E3 4.9 mi W 14F4 7.6 mi WNW 13E3 4.9 mi W 1390 (20/20 (1290-1460) 11 (1/20)(11-11)11 (1/20)(11-11)<LLD 1330 (20 /20)(1250-1410) 10 (1/20)(10-10)0 0 0 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM SALEM GENERATING STATION HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION DOCKET 50-272/-311 DOCKET NO. 50-354 SALEM COUNTY, NEW JERSEY JANUARY 1, 2007 tofDECEMBER 31, 2007 MEDIUM OR PATHWAY Analysis And Lower All Indicator Locations Location with Highest Mean Control Location Number of SAMPLE Total Number Limit of Mean. Name Mean Mean Nonroutine (UNIT OF MEASUREMENT:
of Analyses Detection (Range) Distance and Direction (Range) (Range) Reported Performed (LLD)- .....Measurements III TERRESTRIAL Well Water (pCi/L)Alpha 12 2.6<LLD 0)Beta 12 1.0- 10 (12/12)-(9.3-12)H-3 12 158 .<LLD Gamma K-40 12 31 60 (6/12)(53-74)RA-NAT 12 4.7 122 (12/12)(86-173)Alpha 24 1.5 0.8 (6/24)(0.5-1.7)Beta 24 1.0- 3 (24/24)(2.3-3.7)H-3 24 156 <LLD Potable Water (pCi/L)3E1 4.1 mi NE 3E1 4.1mi NE 3E1 4.1mi NE 2F3 8.0 mi NNE 2F3 8.0 mi NNE 2F3 8.0 mi NNE 2F3 8.0 mi NNE 15F4 7.0 mi NW 60 (6/12)(53-74)122 (1?/12)(86-173)
(0.5-1.7)3 (24 124)(2.3-3.7)<LLD No Control Location.No Control Location No Control Location No Control Location No Control Location<1LD No Control Location 10 (12/12) No*Control-(9.3-12);
Location'<.LD NouCoitrol'' : " LOCatibn';-
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0-0,:0 Gamma K-40 1-131 24 34 43 (11/24)(28-57)24 0.4 <LLD RA-NAT 24 4.7 14 (5/24)(3-38)-43 (11/24)..
No Control (28-57) Location<LLD No Control.-Location 14 (5/24) No Co'ntro'l 2(3-38) Location 2500 (2/2) 2060 (8/8)(2460-2530)
(1490-2670)
Fruit &Vegetables (pCi/Kg-wet)
Gamma K-40 24 55 2090 (16/16)(1330-2700) 0 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM SALEM GENERATING STATION HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION DOCKET 50-272/-311 DOCKET NO. 50-354 SALEM COUNTY, NEW JERSEY JANUARY 1, 2007 to DECEMBER 31, 2007 MEDIUM OR PATHWAY Analysis And Lower All Indicator Locations Locationwith Highest Mean Control Location Number of SAMPLE Total Number Limit of Mean Name
* Mean Mean Nonroutine (UNIT OF MEASUREMENT; of Analyses Detection (Range) Distance and Direction (Range) (Range) Reported Performed (LLD)' .. Measurements III TERRESTRIAL Fodder Crops (pCi/Kg-wet)-P, Soil (pCi/kg (dry)RA-NAT 24 17 23 (1/16)(23-23)Gamma Be-7 10 66 240 (7/8)(75-506)K-40 10 32 5420 (8/8)(2460-15800)
RA-NAT 10 17 .15 (1/8):, (15-15)Gamma K-40 9 70 7700 (7/7)(3300-13510)
Cs-137 9 33 150 (5/7)(76-196)RA-NAT 9 50 600 (7 /7)(259-1155)
Th-232 9 50 600 (7/7 )(230-1176)
Beta 59 ,11 82 (46/47)(5.4-255)H-3 59 170 239 -.(8/47)(170-460)Gamma K-40 59 31 85 (46/47)(39-170)RA-NAT 59 4.7 6.9 (2/47)(6.4-7.3)_
2F9 7.5 mi NNE 23 (1/4)(23-23)3G1 17 mi NE 3G1 17 mi NE 14F4 7.6 mi WNW 14F4 7.6 mi. WNW 1OD1 3.9 mi. SSW 14F4 7.6 mi. VWNW 14F4 7.6 mi. WNW 7E1 4.5 mi SE.7E1 4.5 mi SE-7E1 4.5 mi SE'1Co1 m2.5 i. 'WSW 976 (1 /2)(976)11350 (2/2)(8390-14300) 15 (1/2)(5-15)13510 (1/1)(13510-13510) 196 (10/1)(196-196), 1155 (1;/1)(1155_-1155) 1176(1 /1)(1176-1176) 976 (1 /2)(976-976)11350 (2/2)(8390-14300)
<LLD 8150 (2/2)(7790-b51 0)
)(97-123)'680:(2/2)
(671-694)765 (2/2)(739-790)70 (12/12)(16-:137)<LLD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 LLD 0 IV AQUATIC Surface Water (pCi/L)137 (12/12)(33-255).26& .(4/12)(180-460)102 (12/12)(46-170)* 7.9 (3/12)(7.4-8.4)88 (12/12) 0 (44-155)7.9 (3/12) 0 (7.4-8.4)
RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM SALEM GENERATING STATION HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION DOCKET 50-272/-311 DOCKET NO. 50-354 SALEM COUNTY, NEW JERSEY JANUARY 1, 2007 to DECEMBER 31, 2007 MEDIUM OR PATHWAY Analysis And Lower All Indicator Locations Location with Highest Mean .Control Location Number of SAMPLE Total Number Limit of Mean Name Mean Mean Nonroutine (UNIT OF MEASUREMENT:
of Analyses Detection (Range) Distance and Direction (Range) (Range) Reported Performed (LLD)* Measurements IV AQUATIC Blue Crabs (pCi/kg-wet)
Edible Fish (pCi/kg-wet)
Sediment (pCi/kg-dry)
Gamma K-40 Gamma K-40 Gamma 4 55 2800 (2/2)(2430-3170) 6 55 3620 (4/4)(3440-3740)
Be-7 14 301 1710 (1/12)(1710-1710)
K-40 14 55 8250 (12/12)(2250-20100)
Co-60 14 .25 <LLD Cs-137 14 54 43 (2/12)(32-53)RA-NAT 14 5.0 550 (12/12)(217-1050)
Th-232 14 8.1 635 (12/12)(240-995)11A1 0.2 mi. SW 7E1 4.5 mi. SE 16F1 6.9 mi. NNW 16F1 6.9 mi. NNW 16F1 6.9 mi. NNW 16F1 6.9 mi. NNW 12C1 2.5 mi. WSW 2800 (2/2) 2255 (2/2)(2430-3170)
(1350-3120) 36j5 (2/2) 35v0' (2/2)(3560-3730)
(34..0-3700) 1710 (1 /2 )(.1710-1710) 18050 (2/2)(16000-20100) 53 (1/2)(53-53)810 (2/2)(566-1050) 985 (21/2)(920-1050) 0<cLLD 15650 (2/2)(142(C0-17100)
<LLD ,<:LLD 610 (2/2)&#xfd;(604-614) 985 (2/2)(920-1050) 0 0~0, '0 LLD listed is the lower limit of detection which we endeavored to achieve during this reporting period. In some instances nuclides were detected at concentrations above/below the LLD values shown.** Mean calculated using values above LLD only. Fraction of measurements above LLD are in parentheses.
Typical LLD values.
APPENDIX B SAMPLE DESIGNATION AND LOCATIONS 49 APPENDIX B SAMPLE DESIGNATION The PSEG's Maplewood Testing Services identifies samples by a three part code. The first two letters are the program identification code. Because of the proximity of the Salem and Hope Creek Stations a common environmental surveillance program is being conducted.
The identification code, "SA", has been applied to Salem and Hope Creek stations.
The next three letters are for the media sampled.AIO =APT =ECH =ESF =ESS =FPL =FPV =GAM=Air Iodine Air Particulate Hard Shell Blue Crab Edible Fish Sediment Green Leafy Vegetables Vegetables (Various)Game (Muskrat)IDM =MLK =PWR=PVT =SOL =SWA=VGT =WWA Immersion Dose (TLD)Milk Potable Water (Raw)Potable Water (Treated)Soil Surface Water Fodder Crops (Various)= Well Water The last four symbols are a location code based on direction and distance from a standard reference point. Of these, the first two represent each of the sixteen angular sectors of 22.5 degrees centered about the reactor site. Sector one is divided evenly by the north axis and other sectors are numbered in a clockwise direction; e.g., 2=NNE, 3=NE, 4=ENE, etc. The next digit is a letter which represents the radial distance from the reference point: S A B C D= On-site location= 0-1 miles off-site= 1-2 miles off-site= 2-3 miles off-site= 3-4 miles off-site E.F G H 4-5 miles off-site 5-10 miles off-site 10-20 miles off-site>20 miles off-site The last number is the station numerical designation within each sector and zone; e.g., 1,2,3....
For example, the designation SA-WWA-3E1 would indicate a sample in the Salem and Hope Creek program (SA), consisting of well water (WWA), which had been collected in sector number 3, centered at 45 degrees (north east) with respect to the reactor site at a radial distance of 4 to 5 miles off-site, (therefore, radial distance E). The number 1 indicates that this is sampling station #1 in that particular sector.51 TABLE B-I SAMPLING LOCATIONS Specific information about the individual sampling locations are given in Table B-I. Maps B-I and B-2 show the locations of sampling stations with respect to the Site. A Portable Global Positioning System (GPS) was used to provide the coordinates of sampling locations.
The Datem used was WGS 84.STATION CODE IS1 2S2 2S4 3S1 4S1 5S1 6S2 7S1'is'iSSi 16S1 1lAl IIAIA 15Al 16Al 12C1 12CIA 4D2 5D1 1ODI 14D1 15Dl STATION LOCATION 0.55mi. N of vent 0.4 mi. NNE of vent; Lamp Pole 65 Near HC Switch Yard 0.59 mi. NNE of vent 0.58 mi. NE of vent 0.60 mi. ENE of vent 1.0 mi. E of vent; site access road 0.2 mi. ESE of vent; area around Helicopter Pad 0.12 mi. SE of vent; station personnel gate 0.14 mi. SSW of vent; inlet cooling water bldg.0.09 mi. SW of vent; service water inlet bldg.0.57 mi. NW of vent 0.54 mi. NNW of vent 0.2 mi. SW of vent; outfall area 0.17 mi. SW of vent; Located at the plant barge slip 0.3 mi. NW of vent; cooling tower blowdown discharge line outfall 0.7 mi. NNW of vent; south storm drain discharge line 2.5 mi. WSW of vent; west bank of Delaware River 3.7 mi. WSW of vent; Located at the tip of Augustine Beach Boat Ramp 3.7 mi. ENE of vent; Alloway Creek Neck Road 3.5 mi. E of vent; local farm 3.9 mi. SSW of vent; Taylor's Bridge Spur 3.4 mi. WNW of vent; Bay View, Delaware 3.8 mi. NW of vent; Rt. 9, Augustine Beach LATITUDINAL LONGITUDINAL DEG. MIN. SEC DEG. MIN. SEC 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39-28-28-28->28-28-27-27-27-27-27-28-28-27-27 16-07 18-08-02-38-43-" 44 41 43-10 13 59 41 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75-32 32 31 -31 --31(-32 -,- 32 --32 --32 --32 -32 -54 41 33 08 -55 03 10 12 32 26 25 02.SAMPLE TYPE IDM, VGT IDM IDM IDM IDM AIO,APT, IDM IDM, SOL, ESS IDM IDM IDM IDM, VGT IDM, VGT ECH,ESFESS,SWA Alternate SWA ESS ESS ECH,ESF,ESS,SWA Alternate SWA IDM AIO,APT, IDM IDM, SOL, VGT IDM IDM 39 67 39 24 75 19 75 58 75 08 75 48 39 39 39 39 39 39 39-27 -30 17-29-28-24-29-30 18 24 37 02 08 75 75 75 75 75-32-28-33-35-35 11 22 44 31 02 TABLE B-i (cont'd)STATION CODE STATION LOCATION, 2E1 3El 7E1 7EIA 11E2 12E1 13E1 13E3 16El IF1 1F2 2F2 2F3 oi 2F5 2F6 2F9 2F10 3F2 3F3 3F6 4.4 mi. NNE of vent; local farm 4.1 mi. NE of vent; local farm 4.5 mi.-SE of vent; 1 mi. W of Mad Horse Creek LATITUDINAL DEG. MIN. SEC 39 23 39 07 39 08 1 39 57 LONGITUDINAL DEG. MIN. SEC 8.87 mi.Bayside 5.0 mi.4.4 mi.4.2 mi.4.9 mi.4.1 mi.5.8 mi.7.1 mi.8.7 mi.Salem SE of vent; Located at the end of Road SW of vent; Rt. 9 WSW of vent; Thomas Landing W of vent; Diehl House Lab W of vent; Joseph Vari, Odessa, DE NNW of vent; Port Penn N of-vent; Fort Elfsborg N of vent; midpoint of Delaware River NNE of vent; Corner of 5 th & Howell, 39.-39 39 -39 39 39 39 24 26 27 27 30 32 33 34-20-52-59-17-47-43-08-38 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 ,75 75-30 28 28 24 35-36-.36-37 34-31-32-28-27-28-28-29-33-59-44-30-34 05 54-04-18 31-48-1-30 8.0 mi. NNE of vent; Salem Water Company 7.4 mi. NNE of vent; Salem High School 7.3 mi. NNE of vent; Southern Training Center 7.5 mi. NNE of vent; Tilbury Farms , 45 S.Tilbury Rd; Salem 9.2 mi. NNE of vent; Lewis Messer Farm, 1027 South Broadway (Rt. 49) Pennsville 5.1 mi. NE of vent;Hancocks Bridge Municipal Bld 8.6 mi. NE of vent; Quinton Township School 6.5 mi. NE of vent; #324 Salem/Hancocks Bridge Road 39 40 3.9 27 39 -.33 -.43*39 55 39 35 SAMPLE TYPE IDM GAM, IDM,VGT,WWA, FPV ESF, ESS, SWA Alternate SWA IDM IDM IDM MLK, FPV, VGT, SOL AIO,APT, IDM, SOL*AIO,APT, IDM SWA IDM PWR,PWT IDM AIO,APT,IDM.FPV, FPL, SOL FPV,FPL IDM IDM FPv, FPL FPV, FPL IDM IDM, SOL IDM IDM IDM IDM IDM IDM IDM 75 '-129 -35 3F7 4F2 5F1 6Fl 7F2 9F1 10F2 11F1 12F1 13F2 7.2 6.0 6.5 6.4 9.1 5.3 5.8 6.2 9.4 6.5 mi.mi.mi.mi.mi.mi.mi.mi.mi.mi.NE of vent; 55 Beasley Neck Road, RD#3 ENE of vent; Mays Lane, Harmersville E of vent; Canton.ESE of vent; Stow Neck Road SE of vent; Bayside, New Jersey S of vent; D.P.A.L. 48912-30217 SSW of vent; Rt. 9 SW of vent; Taylor's Bridge Delaware WSW of vent; Townsend Elementary School W of vent; Odessa, Delaware 39 -30 39 -32 39 -32"23'9 -32'3"9 29" 39 -28 39 -26 39 -22'3S9- u23 39' -:'23 i39- '24 39 -23 39 27-25-38-03-"07-58 22 24 56 03-01 34;4 47 18 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75, 75 75-27-24-28-25-i26-24-25-24-'32-34-. 37-41-39 36 45-00-46-03 59 09 17 32 09 37 18 21 TABLE B-i (cont'd)STATION CODE 13F3 13F4 14F2 14F3 14F4 15F3 15F4 16F1 16FlA 16F2 1G3 1G4 2G2 01 2G3 2G4 3G1 10G1 14G1 16G1 3H1 3H5 STATION LOCATION 9.3 mi. W of vent; Redding Middle School, Middletown, Delaware 9.8 mi. W of vent; Middletown, Delaware 6.6 mi. WNW of vent; Boyds Corner 5.4 mi. WNW of vent; local farm 7.6 mi. WNW of vent; local farm 5.4 mi. NW of vent 7.0 mi. NW of vent; local farm; 388 Port Penn Road;Delaware 6.9 mi. NNW of vent; C&D Canal.6.84 mi. NNW of vent; Located at the C&D Canal tip 8.1 mi. NNW of vent; Delaware City Public School 19 mi. N of Vent; N. Church St. Wilmington,tDel (Old Swedish Church Yard Park)10.8-mi. N of vent; (Dads Produce) Rte. 49, South Broadway, Pennsville
-13.5 mi. NNE of vent; Moore's Market; 324 Pointers Auburn Road (Rt. 540), Salem, NJ 08079 12 mi. NNE of vent; Asa Caldwalladeri Waldac Farms, Corner of Routes 540 & 45, Manning~tonjz.-NJ&#xfd; 11.3 mi. NNE of vent; large family garden; 498 Rt 45 & Welchville Rd,Mannington, NJ 17 mi. -NE of vent; Mr. Lee Williams Farm 12 mi. SSW of vent; Smyrna, Delaware 11.8 mi. WNW of vent; Rte. 286; Bethel Church Road;`Delaware 15 mi. NNW of vent; Across from Greater Wilmington Airport 32 mi. NE of vent; National Park., New Jersey 25 mi. NE of vent; Sorbello Farm Market, Rt 77-LATITUDINAL DEG>.-MIN.
SEC 39 14 LONGITUDINAL DEG. MIN. SEC 75 32 39 39 39 39 39 39, 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39&#xfd;39 39 39-26-30-29-30 S3,0.31-33--33..34-44 37--38-36-36-.35-1.8-31-40-51-41.51-f00-33-' 44-7 58-21-55 34 2- 18-16-54-19-21-02 56-13-18-38-36-02 75..75 75 75:75.75 ,75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75 75-43-38-37-40-36-38-34-33 35 32 7 .3.0 26-24-25 16 36 46 35-11-12 07 59 55 52 36 31 25 56 25 31 45t 10 53 21 47 05 30 35.06 23 SAMPLE TYPE IDM IDM IDM FPV, FPL MLK,VGT,SOL IDM FPV ESS,SWA Alternate SWA-&#xfd;IDM IDM FPV FPV MLK, FPV, VGT.FPV IDM,MLK,VGT,ZSOL IDM AIO,APT, IDM IDM IDM FPL,FPV NOTE: All station locations are referenced to the midpoint of the two Salem Units'location are: Latitude N 390 -27' -46.5" and Longitude W 750 -32' -10.6".Vents. The coordinates of this All Game (GAM), Vegetables(FPV
& FPL) and Vegetation (VGT), are management audit samples. They are not required by the Salem & Hope Creek Stations' Tech Specs nor listed in the Station's ODCM. Vegetable samples are not always collected in consecutive years from the same farmer since they rotate the type of crop they grow.
MAP B-1 ON-SITE SAMPLING LOCATIONS.i 1f 2S4,, 3 14 3s, HOPE CREEK GENERATING 5 STATION 13/ MET SALEM 5 G EN ERATING 12 8 9 55 56
'APPENU'X DATA TABLES 57' APPENDIX C DATA TABLES Appendix C presents the analytical results of the 2007 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program for the period of January 1 to December 31, 2007.TABLE NUMBER TABLE DESCRIPTION PAGE ATMOSPHERIC ENVIRONMENT AIR PARTICULATES C-1 2007 Concentrations of Gamma Emitters in Quarterly Composites o f A ir P a rtic u la te s ...................................................................................
..........
6 3 C-2 2007 Concentrations of Gross Beta Emitters in Air Particulates..........................
64 AIR IODINE C-3 2007 Concentrations of Iodine-131 in Filtered Air.............................................
66 DIRECT RADIATION THERMOLUMINESCENT DOSIMETERS C-4 2007 Direct Radiation Measurements
-Quarterly TLD Results ..............................
68 TERRESTRIAL ENVIRONMENT MILK C-5 2007 Concentrations of Iodine-131 and Gamma Emitters in Milk ..........................
69 WELL WATER C-6 2007 Concentrations of Gross Alpha and Gross Beta Emitters, a nd T ritium in W e ll W ate r ...................................................................................
7 1 C-7 2007 Concentrations of Gamma Emitters in Well Water ........................................
72 59 DATA TABLES (cont'd.)TABLE NUMBER -TABLE DESCRIPTION PAGE TERRESTRIAL ENVIRONMENT (cont'd)POTABLE WATER C-8 2007 Concentrations of Gross Alpha and Gross Beta Emitters, and Tritium in Raw and Treated Potable W aters ..................................................
73 C-9 2007 Concentrations of Iodine 131 and Gamma Emitters in Raw and T reated Potable W ater .......................................................................................
.74 FOOD PRODUCTS C-10 2007 Concentrations of Gamma Emitters in Vegetables
..... ..........
75 FODDER CROPS C-11 2007 Concentrations of Gamma Emitters in Fodder Crops...................................
76 C-12 2007 Concentrations of Gamma Emitters in Soil .....................
..........................
77 AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT SURFACE WATER C-13 2007 Concentrations of Gross Beta Emitters in Surface Water ..........................
78 C-14 2007 Concentrations of Gamma Emitters in Surface Water ...............................
79 C-1 5 2007 Concentrations of Tritium in Quarterly Composites of Surface W a te r ..............................................................................................................
8 1 J EDIBLE FISH C-16 2007 Concentrations of Gamma Emitters in Edible Fish .......................................
82 BLUE CRABS C-17 2007 Concentrations of Gamma Emitters in Crabs ...............................................
83 SEDIMENT C-1 8 2007 Concentrations of Gamma Emitters in Sediment .....................................
84 60 DATA TABLES (cont'd.)TABLE NUMBER TABLE DESCRIPTION PAGE SPECIAL TABLES.LLDs C-19 2007 PSEG Maplewood Testing Services' LLDs for Gamma Spectroscopy
...........................
...........
............
.. 85 61 Table C-1 2007 CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS*IN QUARTERLY COMPOSITES OF AIR PARTICULATES Results in Units of 10-3 pCi/m 3+/- 2 sigma STATION ID Sampling Period<- Gamma Emitters&->
Start Stop Be-7 K-40 SA-APT-5S1 SA-APT-1 F1 SA-APT-2 F6 SA-APT-5D1 SA-APT-16E1 SA-APT-1 4G1 (C)SA-APT-5S1 SA-APT-1 F1 SA-APT-2F6 SA-APT-5D1 SA-APT-16E1-SA-APT-14G1(C)
SA-APT-5S 1 SA-APT-1 F1 SA-APT-2F6 SA-APT-5D1 SA-APT-16E1 SA-APT-14G1(C)
SA-APT-5S 1 SA-APT-1 F1 SA-APT-2F6 SA-APT-5D1 SA-APT-16E1 SA-APT-14G1(C) 12/26/20061 12/26/2006 12/26/2006 12/26/2006 12/26/2006 12/26/2006 3/26/2007 3/26/2007 3/26/2007 3/26/2007 3/26/2007 3/26/2007 6/25/2007 6/25/2007 6/25/2007 6/25/2007 6/25/2007 6/25/2007 9/25/2007 9/24/2007 9/24/2007 9/25/2007 9/24/2007 9/24/2007 to4 .,to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to to 3/2.6!2007 3/26/2007 3/26/2007 3/26/2007 3/26/2007 3/26/2007 6/25/2007 6/25/2007 6/25/2007 6/25/2007 6/25/2007 6/25/2007 9/25/2007 9/24/2007 9/24/2007 9/25/2007 9/24/2007 9/24/2007 70+/-4 80+/-5 68+/-5 74+/-4 72+/-4 76+/-5 85+/-4 89+/-5 90+/-5 86+/-5 100+/-5 92+/-5 95+/-5 93+/-4 92+/-4 84+/-5 98+/-5 95+/-5 74+/-4 79+/-5 74+/-4 75+/-4 81+/-4 77+/-4 83+/-19 ,10+/-4 9+/-2 14+/-3 11+/-2.<4<7 8+/-2 11+/-3 10+/-2.11+/-3 11+/-2 11+/-3 9+/-3 10+/-2 8+/-2<4 12+/-3 16+/-4 12+/-3 12+/-4 7+/-2 9+/-3 7+/-3-7+/-3 10+/-6 12/26/2007 12/26/2007 12/26/2007 12/26/2007 12/26/2007 12/26/2007 AVERAGE* All other gamma emitters searched for were <LLD; typical LLDs are given in Table C-19.(C) Control Station 63 TABLE C-2 2007 CONCENTRATIONS OF GROSS BETA EMITTERSIN AIRPARTICULATES Results in Units of 103 pCi/mr 3+/- 2 sigma< ---------------------------------------
STATION ID-- >Control MONTH SA-APT-14G1 SA-APT-16E1 SA-APT -1F1 SA-APT-5DI SA-APT-5S1 AVERAGE January February March 0)4&#xfd;k 21+/-2 17+/-3 19+/-2 21+/-2 21+/-2 27+/-2 22+/-2 28+/-2 16+/-2 14+/-2 24+/-3 23+/-2 18+/-2 21+/-2 14+/-2 13+/-2 12+/-2 18+/-2 16+/-2 16+/-2 23+/-2 28+/-2 21+/-2 19+/-2 16+/-2 24+/-2 16+/-2 18+/-3 18+/-2 18+/-2 22+/-2 28+/-2 22+/-2 26+/-2 15+/-2 14+/-2 25+/-2 21+/-2 14+/-2 20+/-2 14+/-2 11+/-2 10+/-2 17+/-2 14+/-2 14+/-2 22+/-2 26+/-2 19+/-2 21+/-2 18+/-2 21+/-2 18+/-2 15+/-2 16+/-2 19+/-2.23+/-2 26+/-2 23+/-2 26+/-2 (1)13+/-2 26+/-2 22+/-2 18+/-2 20+/-2 15+/-2 11+/-2 10+/-2 16+/-2 16+/-2 16+/-2 29+/-2 27+/-2 20+/-2 19+/-2 20+/-2 23+/-2 18+/-2 15+/-2'16+/-2 17+/-2 23+/-2 26+/-2 24+/-3 25+/-2 14+/-2 16+/-2 21+/-2 22+/-2 19+/-2 20+/-2 15+/-2 12+/-2 11+/-2 17+/-2 17+/-2 15+/-2 28+/-2 30+/-2 22+/-2 19+/-2 19+/-2 22+/-2 1.7+/-2 16+/-3 18+/-?2 17+/-2 22+/-2 24+/--2 25+/-3 17+/-2 14+/-2 29+/-+3 20+/-2 15+/-2 17+/-2 12+/-2 12+/-2 10+/-2 16+/-2 15+/-2 13+/-2 19+/-2 24+/-2 16+/-2 17+/-2 18+/-2 20+/-2 1.6+/-2 16+/-3 17+/-2 18+/-2 22__.2 27+/-2 24+/-3 23+/-2 1812 10+/-&#xfd;2 23+/-_2 24+/-2 15+/-2 20+/-2 13+/-2 10+/-2 10+/-2 16+/-2 14+/-2 12+/-2 22+/-2 24+/-2-1 8+/-2 20+/-2 15+/-2 24+/-2 18+/-4 16+/-2 17+/-3 18+/-3 22+/-2 26+/-2 23+/-2 16+/-3 13+/-4 25+/-5 22+/-2 16+/-4 20+/-3 14-t3 12+/-2 110+/-1 17+/-2 15+/-3 14+/-3 24+/-8 26+/-4 19+/-4 19+/-3 17+/-4 22+/-3 April May June TABLE C-2 2007 CONCENTRATIONS OF GROSS BETA EMITTERS IN AIR PARTICULATES Results in Units of 10-3 pCi/m 3+/- 2 sigma< --STATION ID ---------------------------------------------
S O Control MONTH SA-APT-14G1 SA-APT-16E1 SA-APT-1F1 SA-APT-2F6 SA-APT-5D1 SA-APT-'5S1 AVERAGE July August September ,'1 26+/-2 21+/-2 36+/-3 28+/-2 21+/-2 32+/-3 34+/-3 32+/-3 10+/-2 36+/-2 34+/-3 21+/-2 27+/-2 35+/-3 16+/-2 23+/-2 34+/-3 23+/-2 28+/-2 24+/-2 24+/-2 25+/-2 29+/-2 19+/-2 21+/-2 31+/-2 23+/-13 25+/-2 22+/-2 30+/-2 26+/-2 19+/-2 34+/-3 34+/-3 28+/-2 12+/-2 31+/-2 33+/-3 23+/-2 24+/-2 32+/-3 (1).21+/-2 32+/-2 21+/-2 28+/-2 24+/-2 22+/-2 24+/-2 30+/-2 19+/-2.21+/-2 22+/-2 22+/-12 24+/-2 25+/-2 28+/-3 24+/-2 21+/-2 37+/-2 33+/-3 27+/-2 ,12+/-2 31+/-2.33+/-3 19+/-10 21+/-2 32+/-2 23+/-2 23+/-2 28+/-3 25i2 21+/-2 33+/-2 32+/-3 29+/-2 12+/-2 33+/-2 34+/-3 19+/-2 26+/-2 34+/-2 20+/-2 22+/-2 28+/-2 23+/-2 16+/-2 34+/-2 28+/-3 26+/-2 12+/-2 29+/-2 30+/-3 19+/-2 24+/-2 28+/-3 16+/- 2 19+/-2 27+/-2 20+/-2 26+/-2 25+/-.2 20+/-2 22+/-2 S 19+/-2 20+/-2.+/-2 ,, *21+/-11 24+/-2 25+/-2 30+/-3 28+/-2 16+/-2 34+/-3 35+/-3 28+/-2 11+/-2 28+/-2 30+/-3 20+/-2 26+/-2 3/1'63 24+/-4 23+/-a 30+/-6 26+/-4 19+/-5 34+/-4 33+/-5 28+/-4 11+/-1 31+/-6 32+/-4 20+/-4 24+/-4 October November December AVERAGE 16+/-2 19+/-2 33+/-2 22+/-2 27+/-2 26+/-2 26+/-2 24+/-2 20+/-2 20+/-2 29+/-2 22+/-12 16+/-2 20+/-2 29+/-2 21+/-2 28+/-2 22+/-2 21+/-2* 25+/-.2-24+/-2 18+/-2 22+/-2:;22+/-12.15+/-2161 i 52 2016 28+/-2 26+/-2 22+/-4 27+/-2 27+/-2 22+/-2 24i3 25+/-2 23+/-4 27+/-2 24+/-3 27+/-2 ..27+/-5 22+/-2 19+/-2 22+/-2 21+/-2 27+/-2 Q .27+/-6 21+/-13 27+/-6 22+/-12 GRAND AVERAGE (1) Power outage; results not included in averages.
See orogram deviations.
TABLE C-3 2007 CONCENTRATIONS OF IODINE-131*
IN FILTERED AIR Results in Units of 10.3 pCi/m 3------------------------------
STATION ID ------------
---------------------------------
>Control MONTH SA-AIO-14G1 SA-AIO-16E1 SA-AIO-1F1 SA-AIO-2F6 SA-AIO-5D1 SA-AIO-5S1 January February March 0)0)<5.1<4.4<2.9<2.8<2.2<3.5<2<3.7<4.5<5.1<4.5<5.6<5.7<3.5<3<2.7<9.6<3.5<4.9<1.4<7.1<2.6<9.5<2.4<8.1<4.9 April (2)May June<2.8<4.3<1.9<3.2<3.3<3.2<1.7<3.6<3<1.8<3.9<3.1.<2.2<4.9<5.4<8.7<9-.6"<2.2<1.6<3.3<4.5<1.7<4.5<3.5<2.5:<2.4<1.7<3.8.<3 6<3.5<1.8<3<3.3<3 (1)<2.5<5.8<3.5<3.3<2.6<2.3<8.3<8<4.4<2.3<6.4<3.1<2.9<2.8<3.8<3.9<4.6<4.3-<4.6<2.6<4.1I<4.2<2.6<6.9<1.6<6.2<3.9<4.2<2.5<2.41-<2.1<3.2<5.3<9.8<7.1<2.4<6.8<2.7<1.9<5<2<2<3.1<2.9<3'8<3.8<2.9<8.8<2.8<2.6<3.3<4.19<2.3<2.8<2.1<5.6<4.2<1.9<8.4<2<1.6<2.3<2.4<4.7<3.6<3.9<1.6<3.7<1.7<2.4<3.4<3.1<3.7<4.5<2.1<2<4,2<3.2<&#xfd;4.2<3.8<3.1<3."4<4.4<8.9<3.4<3.6<3.8.<3.9<3<3.2<2<4.3<7:7.
TABLE C-3 2007 CONCENTRATIONS OF IODINE-131*
IN FILTERED AIR Results in Units of 10.3 pCilm 3------------------------------------------------
STATION ID ----------------------------------------------
>Control MONTH SA-AIO-14G1
-SA-AIO-16E1 SA-AIO-1F1 SA-AIO-2F6 SA-AIO-5D1 SA-AIO-5S1 July August September 0)-'<3.3<3.1<4.2<2.7<2.4<3<1.5!7.9<2.4<3<4.7<2.5<1.8<3.5<3.3<2.2<4.8<1.4<7.7<8.2<5.1<1.6<3.3<1.5.<4.9<3.5,<1.8<3<3.4<3.6<3.3<2<4<2.8<3.5<2.4<1.5<2.3<4*8 (1)<2<1.6<2.5<6.1<6.9<6<2.3<3.3<2.6<3.7<2<3.9<4.4<4.5<3.6<3.1<2<2.9<2.3<4.1<4.<2.4<2<2.2<1.3<2.7<2.<3.7<7.9<6.2<9<1.7<2.4<3.8<6.1<1.4<7.4<2.3<4.2<3.2<2.7<3.8<3.9.<2.8<5.5<4.3<2.3<3.6<1.5<3.9<2.9<2.6<3.7<3.4<3.4<3.9<4.3<4.2<2.9<2.6<2.5<3.1<2.9<1.6<3.7<3.6<3.8<2.7<5.4<4.9.<2..<2<4.9<4<3<5.2<2.1<2.2<4.3<2.7:<3,!i<1.3.<3<6.9<3.9<5. 2<35<5.9<7.2<2.1<4<2:2<1.6<2<4.9 October November (2)(2)December<5.9<7.1<3-<2.5 1.-2<2.8`<6A<7.3<8.1<4.-2<1.7<4.1<1.9* 1-131 results are corrected for decay to sample stop date.(1) Power Outage: See program deviations.
(2) Samples analyzed by AREVA NP, Environmental Laiioratoiy
-"
TABLE C-4 2007 DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENTS
-QUARTERLY TLD RESULTS Results in mrad/standard month* +/- 2 sigma STATION ID;SA-IDM-2S2 SA-IDM-5S1 SA-IDM-6S2 SA-IDM-7S1 SA-IDM-10S1 SA-IDM-11Si SA-IDM-4D2 SA-IDM-5D1 SA-IDM-10DI SA-IDM-14D1 SA-IDM-15D1 SA-IDM-2E1 SA-IDM-3E1 SA-IDM-9F1 SA-IDM-1 1 E2 SA-IDM-12E1 SA-IDM-13EI1 SA-IDM-16E1 SA-IDM-1 F1 SA-IDM-2F2 SA-IDM-2F5 SA-IDM-2F6 SA-IDM-3F2 SA-IDM-3F3 SA-IDM-4F2 SA-IDM-5F1 SA-IDM-6F1 SA-IDM-7F2 SA-IDM-10F2 SA71DM-llF,1 SA-IDM-12F1 SA-IDM-13F2 SA-IDM-13F3 SA-IDM-13F4 SA-IDM-14F2 SA-IDM-15F3 SA-IDM-16F2 SA-IDM-1G3 (C)SA-IDM-3G1 (C)SA-IDM-10GI(C)
SA-IDM-16G1(C)
SA-IDM-3H1 (C)SA-IDM-1Sl SA-IDM-3S1 SA-IDM-2S4 SA-IDM-4S1 SA-IDM-15S1 SA-IDM-16S1 SA-IDM-14G1(C)
AVERAGE JAN; to'. / .MAR'-, 4.6+/-0..5 3.3+/-0.4 4.7+/-0.6 5.1+/-0.5 3.1+/-0.3 2.9+/-0.3.4.0+/-0.4 3.6i-0.4 4.2A0.4 -'.3/43.6+/-0.5 _...4.0+/-0.4 3.9+/-0.4 3.3+/-0.2:.4.4+/-0.64.2+/-0:4 3.3+/-04A 4.2+/-0.6 5.1+/-0.4 3.4+/-0.3 4.0+/-0.3 3.6+/-0.6'..
3.3+/-0.5 3.5+/-0.6 3.3+/-0.3 3.5+/-0.2 3.0+/-0.3 2.9+/-0.4 4.1+/-0.3 4.3+/-0.3 4,1+/-0.3 3.9+/-0.3 3.8+/-0.5 4.1+/-0.4 4.3+/-0.7 4.5+/-0.4 3.6+/-0.3 4.8+/-0.5 4.1+/-0.3 4.0+/-0.3 3.6+/-0.6 3.2+/-0.3 4,3+/-0.4 3.2+/-0.4 3.7+/-0.4 3.7+/-0.2 3.3+/-0.4 3.9+/-0.5 4.2+/-0.4 3.9+/-1.1 APF to'JUL I OCT JUN -.5.1+/-0.3 3.3+/-0.Y3 > 3 4.8+/-0.0 f;' 5, 5 3.7+/-0.5 :: 3 3.4+/-0:3' 3 4.4+/-0.4., 4 3.8+/-0:3
* 4 4.5+/-0:3 1 5 319+/-0.4- 3 4.4+/-0.4 4 4,0+/-0.4 4 3.4+/-0.2 3 4.7+/-0.3 4 4.5+/-0.3 4 4.4+/-0.3 4 13.5+/-0.4 3.4.3+/-0.5 4 5.6+/-0.5 5 3.5+/-0.4 3.4.3+/-0.3 4 ,4.0+/-0.4 4 3.7+/-0.3 3 3.6+/-0.3 3 3.6+/-0.5 3 3.8+/-0.3 3 ,3.2+/-0.4 3 2.9+/-0.2 2 4.4+/-0.7 4 4.5+/-0.4 4*'4.2+/-0.4 4'4.0+/-C.3 4 4.0+/-0.5 4 4.1+/-0.4 4 4.5+/-0.4 4 4.9+/-0.8 5 3.8+/-0.5 4:5.1+/-0.4 5 4.4+/-0.4 4 4.2+/-0.3 4 4.0+/-0.4 3 3.6+/-0.4 3 4.5+/-0.5 4 3.2+/-0.4 3 4.0+/-0.4 3 4.0+/-0.4 4'3.4+/-0.5 3 4.1+/-0.5 4 4.4+/-0.4 4 4.1+/-1.2 4 (.4.4.4.1 to to, SEP, DEC.3+/-6.5 5.0+/-0.7 5+/-0.4 3.86+/-.5 0+/-0.5, 5.3+/-0.5 3+/-0.5 5.6+/-0.7 3+/-0.4' 3.9+/-0.5 0+/-0.3- 3.4+/-0.5 5+/-0.5 4.7+/-0.5 1+0:3 4.2+/-0.4 0+/-0.4 5.3+/-0.6 9+/-0.3 4.2+/-0.4 6+/-0.4 4.9+/-0.5 3+/-0.4 4.5+/-0.4 5+/-0.4 3.9+/-0.3 8+/-0.7 5.2+/-0.5 7+/-0.4 5.1+/-0.5 7+/-0.4 .5.0+/-0.8 7+/-0.4 4.0+/-0.4 4+/-0.4 4.9+/-0.7 6:L0.5 6.0+/-0.7 4+/-0.3 3.8+/-0.4 4+/-0.5 4.7+/-0.6 0+/-0.5 4.3+/-0.4 7+/-0.3 3.9+/-0.5 7+/-0.3 4.2+/-0.7 6+/-0.4 4.1+/-0.4 8+/-0.4 4.2+/-0.5 2+/-0.3 3.7+/-0.5 9+/-0.3 3.3+/-0.4 6+/-0.4 4.7+/-0.5 9+/-0.5 5.0+/-0.8 3+/-0.5 4.8+/-0.4 3+/-0.5 4.6+/-0.5 5+/-0.5 4.7+/-0.6 4+/-0.4 4.7+/-0.5 7+/-0.5 5,1+/-0.4 1+/-0.7 5.1+/-0.5 1+/-0.4 4.6+/-0.5 1+/-0.4 5.6+/-0.5 5+/-0.8 5.0+/-0.6 3+/-0.3 4.7+/-0.6 9+/-0.3 4.4+/-0.4 5+/-0.4 3.9+/-0.4 5+/-0.5. 4.9+/-0.4 3+/-0.4 3.4+/-0.6 9+/-0.3 4.4+/-0.8 1+/-0.5 4.3+/-0.5 6+/-0.3 3.8+/-0.5 1+/-0.4 4.3+/-0.5 5+/-0.4 4.9+/-0.6 QTR ELEMENTS-AVG 5.0+/-0.5 ..3.4+/-0.5 5.0+/-0.6 5.4+/-0.6 3.5+/-0.7 3.2+/-0.5 4.4+/-0.6 3.9+/-0.6 4.7+/-1.0 3.9+/-0.5 4.5+/-0.8 4.2+/-0.6 3.5+/-0.5 4.8+/-0.6 4.6+/-0.7 4.6+/-0.7 3.6+/-0.5 4.4+/-0.6 5.6+/-0.7 3.5+/-0.4 4.3+/-0.6 4.0+/-0.5 3.7+/-0.5 3.7+/-0.6 3.6+/-0.7 3.8+/-0.6 3.3+/-0.5 3.0+/-0.4 4.5+/-0.6 4.7+/-0.6 4.3+/-0.6.4.2+/-0.7 4.3+/-0.8 4.3+/-0.6 4.6+/-0.7 4.9+/-0.6 4.0+/-0.9 5.2+/-0.7 4.5+/-0.8 4.3+/-0.6 4.0+/-0.6 3.5+/-0.6 4.5+/-0.5 3.3+/-0.3 4.0+/-0.6 4.0+/-0.5 3.5+/-0.5 4.1+/-0.3 4.5+/-0.6.2+/-1.3 4.5+/-1.2 GRAND AVG* The standard month = 30.4 days.** Quarterly Element TLD results by AREVA -NP Environmental Laboratory.(C) Control Station 4.2+/-1.3 68 TABLE C-5 2007 CONCENTRATIONS OF IODINE-131*
AND GAMMA EMITTERS**
IN MILK Resu!ts SAMPLING PERIOD-STATION ID SA-MLK-2G3 SA-MLK-13E3 SA-MLK-14F4 SA-MLK-3G1 (C)SA-MLK-2G3 SA-MLK-1 3E3 SA-MLK-14F4 SA-MLK-3G1 (C)SA-MLK-2G3 SA-MLK-13E3 SA-MLK-14F4 SA-MLK-3G1 (C)SA-MLK-2G3 SA-MLK-13E3 SA-MLK-14F4 SA-MLK-3G1 (C)SA-MLK-2G3 SA-MLK-13E3 SA-MLK-14F4 SA-MLK-3G1 (C)SA-MLK-2G3 SA-MLK-1 3E3 SA-MLK-14F4 SA-MLK-3G1 (C)SA-MLK-2G3 SA-MLK-13E3 SA-MLK-14F4 SA-MLK-3G1 (C)SA-MLK-2G3 SA-MLK-13E3 SA-MLK-14F4 SA-MLK-3Gi (C)SA-MLK-2G3 SA-MLK-1 3E3 SA-MLK-14F4 SA-MLK-3G1 (C)SA-MLK-2G3 SA-MLK-13E3 SA-MLK-14F4 SA-MLK-3G1 (C)SA-MLK-2G3 SA-MLK-1 3E3 SA-MLK-14F4 SA-MLK-3G1 (C)START&#xfd;1/2/2 007 1/1/2007 1/1/2007 1/2/2007 2/5/2007 2/4/2C07" 2/4/2007 2/5/2007 3/5/2007 3/4/2007 3/4/2007 3/5/2007 4/1/2007 4/1/2007 4/1/2007 4/1/2007 4/15/2007 4/15/2007 4/15/2007 4/15/2007 5/7/2007 5/6/2007 5/6/2007 5/7/2007 5/21/2007 5/20/2007 5/20/2007 5/21/2007 6/4/2007 6/3/2007 6/3/2007 6/3/2007 6/18/2007 6/17/2007 6/17/2007 6/18/2007 7/9/2007 7/8/2007 7/8/2007 7/9:2007 7/22/2007 7/22/2007 7/22/2007 7/23/2007 SAMPLING PERIOD" STOP.-1/3/20Q7 1/2/2007..:.
1/2/2007.-
1/3/200,7.." 2/6/2007'2/5/2007 2/5/2007 2/6/2007 3/6/2007 3/5/2007 3/5/2007 3/6/2007 4/2/2007 4/2/2007 4/2/2007 ".4/2/2007 4/16/2007 4/16/2007 4/16/2007 4/16/2007 5/8/2007 5/7/2007 5/7/2007 5/8/2007 5/22/2007 5/21/2007 5/21/2007 5/22/2007 6/4/2007 6/4/2007 6/4/2007-6/4/2007 6/19/2007 6/18/2007 6/18/2007 6/19/2007 7/10/2007 7/9/2007 7/9/2007 7/10/2007 7/23/2007 7/23/2007 7/23/2007 7/23/2007<0.2.:<0.2,,,<0 2<0.2<0.2.3<0.24 .<0.32<03.:<0.4<0.2<0.2<0.4<0.2<0.3<0.2.<0.2,<0.3<0.24<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.21<0.2<0.2<0.13<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.3<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2-<0.3<---- GAMMA EMITTERS .---->RA-NAT 1270 +/-72 <3.1 1410 +/-75 <3.1 1410 +/-73 <2.9 1310170 <3 1230:+/-72 <3 1400 +/-72 <3.4: 1270 +/-70 <3.3 1250 +/-'72 <2.8 1280 +/-71 <3.2 1330 +/-74 <2.4 1330'+/-70:
<3.3 1260:+/-70:3
<3.4 1340 +/-72. <3.8 1410.+/-69 <3.5 1330+/-7.4 <2.3 1400 +/-72 <33 1320 +/-74 <31 1410 +/-711 <3.1 ", 1270 +/ <2.9, 1280,+/-71 <2;9 , 1240 +/-70 <5.5 1370 +/-74 <2.4 1310 +/-74 <3 1380+/-73 <2.8 1230 +/-71 <5.2 1350 +/-68 <3.3 1300 +/-72 <2.9 1300 +/-74 <2.7 1270 +/-69 <3.3 1290 +/-74 <6.1 1380 +/-73 <3.1 1290 +/-71 <-3.1 1380 +/-70 <5.2 1350 +/-73 <3.2 1300 +/-70 <2.3 1310 +/-74 <3.1 1330 +/-70 <4.3 1420 +/-75 <2.3 1350 +/-71 <37 1260 +/-69 <2.9 .1510 +/-77 <4.8 1390 +/-72 <3 1290 +/-66 <3.5 1310 +/-68 <3.3 69 TABLE C-5 2007 CONCENTRATIONS OF IODINE-131*
AND GAMMA EMITTERS**
IN MILK Results, inUnits of pCi/L +/--2 sigma SAMPLING PERIOD <---- GAMMA EMITTERS ---->STATION ID START STOP.. ,.1-131 K-40 RA-NAT SA-MLK-2G3 SA-MLK-13E3 SA-MLK-14F4 SA-MLK-3G1&#xfd; C)SA-MLK-2G3 SA-MLK-13E3 SA-MLK-14F4 SA-MLK-3G1 (C)SA-MLK-2G3 SA-MLK-13E3 SA-MLK-14F4 SA-MLK-3G1 (C).8/6/2007 1... .-....8/ J0 o7_...8/5/2007 j:8/6/2007 8/5/2007 8/6/2007 8/6/2007 -WW-,7 8/20/2007 8/19/2007 8/19/2007 8/20/2007 9/3/2007 9/3/2007 9/3/2007 9/3/2007 SA-MLK-2G3 SA-MLK-13E3 SA-MLK-14F4 SA-MLK-3G1 (C)SA-MLK-2G3 SA-MLK-13E3 SA-MLK-14F4 SA-MLK-3G1 (C)SA-MLK-2G3 SA-MLK-13E3 SA-MLK-14F4 SA-MLK-3G1 (C)SA-MLK-2G3 (1)SA-MLK-13E3 (1)SA-MLK-14F4 (1)SAXMLK-3G1 (C)(SA-MLK-2G3 SA-MLK-13E3 SA-MLK-14F4 SA-MLK-3G1 (C)SA-MLK-2G3 SA-MLK-13E3 SA-MLK-14F4 SA-MLK-3G1 (C)9/17/2007 9/16/2007 9/16/2007 9/17/2007 9/30/2007 9/30/2007 9/30/2007 9/30/2007 10/14/2007 10/14/2007 10/14/2007 10/14/2007 11/4/2007 11/5/2007 11/4/2007 1) 11/4/2007 11/19/2007 11/19/2007 11/18/2007 11/18/2007 12/3/2007 12/2/2007 12/2/2007 12/3/2007 8/21/2007*8/20/2007 8/20/2007-8/21/2007 914/2007 9/4/2007 9/4/2007 9/4/2007 9/18/2007 9/17/2007 9/17/2007 9/18/2007 10/1/2007 1-0/1/2007 10/1/2007 10/1/2007 10/15/2007
.10/15/2007 10/15/2007 10/15/2007 11/5/2007 11/5/2007'11/5/2007 11/5/2007 11/20/2007 11/20/2007 11/19/2007 11/19/2007 12/4/2007 12/3/2007 12/3/2007 12/4/2007 1370 +/-70<0.2 .1380 +/-74<0.3 1270 +/-70
* <0.2 1360 +/-74<0.2 1390.+/-73<0.3 1360 +/-66<0.3. 1390 +/-72<0.2 1320 +/-72<0.2 1400 +/-59<0.3 1280 +/-70.<0.2 1340 +/-75<0.1<0.3<0.2<0.2<0.3<0.2<0.1<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.7<0.7<0.8<0.8<0.1<0.2<0.3<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.3<0.2 1340 +/-73 1310 +/-67 1270 +/-70 1300 +/-72 1410 +/-75 1410 +/-75 1340 +/-67 1300 +/-68 1330 +/-66 1400 +/-74 1420 +/-75 1410 +/-72 1300 +/-49 1420 +/-37 1200 +/-34 1340 +/-37 1260 +/-69 1460 +/-70 1440 +/-74 1400 +/-77 1240 +/-73 1450 +/-73 1230 +/-65 1350 +/-70 1340 +/-130<3.3<2.8,<3.2 S<3.6<3.6<3.2<3.3<3.3 13 +/-4<6.8<9.1<4.4, 6 +/-3 11 +/-3 11 +/-4 10 +/-3 7 +/-2<3.9<3.9<4.3<3.9<4<3.9<9.7<6.2<4.7<4.9<5.2<4.4<4.4<3.6<3.3<3.6<6<4.2<4.1 AVERAGE* lodine-131 results are corrected for decay to stop date of collection period & analyzed to an LLD of 1.0 pCi/L.** All other gamma emitters searched for were <LLD; typical LLDs are given in Table C-19 Monthly sample collected during Jan., Feb., March and Dec., when animals are not on pasture.(C) Control Station (1) Samples analyzed by AREVA NP Environmental Laboratory.
70 TABLE C-4 2007 CONCENTRATIONS OF GROSS ALPHA AND, GROSS BETA EMITTERS, AND TRITIUM IN WE'LL WATER (STATION ID SA-WWA-3E1 SA-WWA-3E 1 SA-WWA-3E 1 SA-WWA-3E1 SA-WWA-3E1 SA-WWA-3E1-SA-WWA-3E1 SA-WWA-3E1 SA-WWA-3E1 SA-WWA-3E1 SA-WWA-3E1 SA-WWA-3E1
... ..... :,-.Results SAMPLING DATE, 1/30i2007 2/26/2007 3/26/2007 4/30/2007 5/29/2007 6/25/2007 7/30/2007 8/27/2007 9/25/2007 10/29/2007 11/26/2007 12/26/2007 C A it~s of P(.i/r &#xf7; ; +bm : .... ..ROSS ' GROSS\LPHA 'BETA TRITIUM<0.7 -: .,"11+/-0.9 <155<5 10+/-0.9 .<151<0.7 2`2+/-+0.9 <151 :<0.7 9'6+/-0.9 <156<0.7 10+/-0. 9 <158<1.4 9.3+/-0.9 <151<1.5 10+/-0.9 <149<2 t11+/-1 <148<1.8 10+/-0.9 <147<0.5 11+/-0.9 <148<0.7 10+/-0.9 <149<0.7 10+/-0.9 <148 10+/-1 AVERAGE 71 TABLE C;.7 2007 CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS*
IN:WELL WATER Results in Units of pCi/L +/1 2 sigma STATI ON ID SA-WWA-3E1 SA-WWA-3E1 SA-WVA-3E1 SA-WWA-3E1 SA-WWA-3E1 SA-WWA-3E1 SA-WWA-3E1 SA-WWA-'3E1 SA-WWA-3E1 SA-WWA-3E1 SA-WWA-3E1 SA-WWA-3E1 SAMPLING-..DATE" J-1/30/2007 2/26/2007-3/26/2007' 4/30/2007 5/29/2007 6/25/2007 7/30/2007, 8/27/2007 9/25/2007 10/29/2007 11/26/2007 12/26/2007
<---.GAMMA EMITTERS 7:,---->..K ' .RA-NAT 74+/-22 '86+/-5 53+/-22 100+/-5<17 98+/-5, 53+/-21 173+/-6 57+/-20 164+/-6<1,3 96+/-4<19 .131+/-4<17 107+/-6<18 .111+/-4<19 124+/-4 67+/-20 146+/-6 56+/-17 123+/-4 AVERAGE 122+/-55 All other gamma emitters searched for were <LLD; typical LLDs are given in Table C-19.72 TABLE C-8 2007 CONCENTRATIONS OF GROSS ALPHA AND GROSS BETA EMITTERS AND TRITIUM IN RAW AND TREATED POTABLE WATER Results in Units of pCi/L +1- 2 sigma TYPE RAW&#xfd;TREATED RAW TREATED RAW TREATED RAW TREATED RAW TREATED RAW.TREATED RAW TREATED RAW TREATED RAW TREATED-RAW TREATED RAW TREATED RAW TREATED SAMPLING.PERIOD 1/1-31/2007 1/1-31/2007 2/1-28/2007 2/1-28/2007 3/1-31/2007 3/1-31/2007 4/1-30/2007 4/5 -30/2007 5/1-31/2007 5/1-31/2007 6/1-30/2007 6/1-30/2007 7/1-31/2007 7/1-31/2007 8/1-31/2007 8/1-31/2007 9/1-30/2007 9/1-30/2007 10/1-31/2007 10/1-31/2007 11/1-30/2007 11/1-30/2007 12/1-31/2007 12/1-31/20.07.GROSS .-GROSS A " BETA": 0.6+/-0 .3<0A,4<0.5<0.6-0.8+/-0.4 0.6+/-0.3<0.3 1.7+/-0.5, 0.6+/-0.3<0.3<0.7<0.8<0.8<0.9<0.9<1:,1<0.9<1<0.2<0.3<0.3<0.3 0.5+/-0.3<0.3 2.6+/-0.5 3.4+/-0.6 3.2+/-0.6 3.1+/-0.6, 3.3+/-0.6 2.8+/-0.6 3.4+/-0.6 2.9+/-0.6 2.7+/-0.6 2.9+/-0.6 2.5+/-0.6 2.5+/-0.6 3.14-0.7, 3.1+/-0.6 2.9+/-0.6 3.2+/-0.6 3+/-0.6 3.1+/-0.6 3.7+/-0.6 2.3+/-0.5 2.9+/-0.5 2.9+/-0.5 3+/-0.5 TRITIUM<150<151<145<149<150<147<153<162<165<165<149<151<147<148<146<141<147<148<137.<138<155<140<155<145 AVERAGE RAW TREATED GRAND AVERAGE 2.9+/-0.6 3+/-0.7 3+/-0.7 73 TABLE C-9 2007,CONCENTRATIONS OF IODINE-.131*
AND GAMMA. EMITTERS**
IN RAW-AND TREATED POTABLE WATER Resu-lts in Units of pCi/L +1- 2 sigma.SAMPLING :-"-,",---GAMMA EMITTERS--->
TYPE PERIOD :.131 K-40 RA-NAT RAW TREATED RAW TREATED RAW TREATED RAW TREATED RAW TREATED RAW TREATED RAW TREATED RAW TREATED RAW TREATED RAW TREATED RAW TREATED RAW TREATED AVERAGES RAW TREATED 1/1-31/2007 1/1-31/2007 2/1-28/2007 2/1-28/2007 3/1-31/2007 3/1-31/2007 4/1-30/2007 4/1-30/2007
':5/1-31/2007 5/1-31/2007 6/1-30/2007 6/1-30/2007 7/1-31/2007 7/1-31/2007 8/.1-31/2007 8/1-31/2007 9/1-301/2007 9/1-30/2007 10/1-31/2007 10/1-31/2007 11/1-30/2007 11/1-30/2007 12/1-31/2007 12/1-31/2007
<0.3<0.2-<0.3_<0.1<0.3<0.2<0.2 , <0.2'<0.1<0.2<0.3<0.2<0.3&#xfd;,<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.2<0.3<0.2<0.3<0.2 54+/-17 55+/-15<15-<23 ,<20<16 34+/-13 36+/-13<21<16<20 28+/-11 46+/-17 39+/-13<19&#xfd;<15 57+/-19 44+/-14<20<14<16<15<1.8<1.9<2.3<3.5<1.8<2.1<2.1<2.1<1.6 3+/-1<1.9 10+/-2<1.6<1.5<5.8 12+/-4 8+/-3 38+/-3<2.9<1.9<2<2.6<0.2<0.3 38+/-10 40+/-13<2.4<3.6 GRAND AVERAGE* Iodine-131 analyzed to an LLD of 1.0 pCi/L.** All other gamma emitters searched for were <LLD; typical LLDs are given in Table C-1 9.74 TABLE C-1 3 2007 CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS*
IN VEGETABLES Results in Units of pCi/kg (Wet) 47-, 2 sigma;SAMPLING-DATE-<--*GAMMA EMITTERS --->SAMPLETYPE K-40 RA-NAT STATION ID SA-FPV-2F9 SA-FPV-2G2 (C), AVERAGE'5/14/2007 5/21/2007.7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007.sparagus A sioaragus.
SA-FPL-2F10 SA-FPL-3F6 SA-FPL-3F7 SA-FPL-3H5 (C)Cabbage Cabbage ,Cabbage Cabbage AVERAGE SA-FPV-2F9 SA-FPV-2F10 SA-FPV-3F6 SA-FPV-2G4 (C)SA-FPV-3H5 (C)SA-FPV-15F4 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/30/2007 Corn Corn Corn Corn Corn Corn 1750+/-159'-1'860+/-173 1810+/-160.2700+/-110* 2350+/-172 1990+/-93 2230+/-760 2140+/-148 2370+/-151 2700+/-175.2320+/-146 2150+/-146.2530+/-163 2370+/-440 1820+/-159 1850+/-163 1330+/-148.1900+/-156 1490+/-164 1700+/-164-<6.8<10 , <3.5<3.2<8.2: "<3.9<6. 1<,'i ' 3<.5 , "<6.9.<6<7.6<7.3 AVERAGE SA-FPV-2F9 SA-FPV-2F10 SA-FPV-3F6 SA-FPV-3F7 SA-FPV-2G2 (C)SA-FPV-3H5
.(C)AVERAGE SA-FPV-2F10 SA-FPV-3F7 SA-FPV- 15F4 SA-FPV-2F9 SA-FPV-2G4 (C)SA-FPV-3H5 (C)AVERAGE GRAND AVERAGE 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 Peppers Peppers Peppers Peppers Peppers Peppers<9.3<2.2<9.5<10<9.5<19 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/30/2007 7/17/2007 7/17/2007 7/27/2007 Tomatoes Tomatoes Tomatoes Tomatoes Tomatoes Tomatoes 1680+/-450 1690+/-241 2070+/-147 2460+/-153 1920+/-139 2320+/-153 2670+/-165 2190+/-730 2080+/-760<7.5<7.2<9.8 23+/-8<5.7<8.5* All other gamma emitters searched for were <LLD; typical LLDs are given in Table C-i 9 (C) Control Station 75
_ i: ,TABLE C-ll 2007 CONCENTRATIONSOF GAMMA EMITTERS*IN FODDER CROPS Results in Units of pCi/kg (wet) +1- 2 sigma SAMPLING < ---------
GAMMA EMITTERS ---------
>STATION ID DATE SAMPLE TYPE Be-7 K-40 RA-NAT SA-VGT- 1 S 1 SA-VGT- 10D1 SA-VGT-15S1 SA-VGT-16S1 12/14/2007T 12/14/2007 12/14/2007 12/14/200,7r Ornamental Cabbage Ornamental Cabbage Ornamental Cabbage Ornamental Cabbage 75+/-34 37.10+/-190
<8.1 336+/-61 4060+/-235 <14 272+/-47 3890+/-182 <7.7 112+/-34 4740+/-194 <9.3 AVERAGE 200+/-250 4100+/-900 SA-VGT-2G3 SA-VGT-3G1 (C)SA-VGT-13E3 SA-VGT-14F4 AVERAGE;*SA-VGT-14F4 SA-VGT-3G1 (C)10/8/2007 10/8/2007:
10/8/2007 10/1/2007 Silage Silage Silage Silage 209+/-36 976+/-105 170+/-39 506+/-64 3860+/-163 8390+/-310 2460+/-132 4840+/-192<7.2<13<8.1<9.3.470+/-740 4890+/-5060 10/8/2007 12/4/2007 Soybeans Soybeans<26<25 15800+/-277 14300+/-276 15100+/-2120 15+/-5<8.2 AVERAGE* All other gamma emitters searched for were <LLD; typical LLDs are given in Table C-1 9.(C) Location 3G1 is the Control Station.76 TABLE C-12 2007 CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS*
IN SOIL Results* in Units of pCi/kg (dry) +/- 2,sigma SAMPLING'STATION ID DATE K-40 Cs-1 37 Ra-NAT Th-232 SA-SOL-6S2, (1)SA-SOL-2F9 (1)SA-SOL-5F1
)SA-SOL-10D1
)SA-SOL-16E1 (1)SA-SOL-13E3
()SA-SOL-14F4
()SA-SOL-2G3 (C) (1)SA-SOL-3G1 (C) (1)10/11/2007 10/11/2007 10/11/2007 10/11/2007 10/11/2007 10/11/2007 10/11/2007 10/11/2007 10/11/2007 3920+/-360 5510+/-470 3300+/-720 9100+/-1200 8630+/-710 9960+/-710 13510+/-770 8510+/-820 7-790+/-770 163+/-26 196+/-62,.49
: . 76+/-25 129+/-31 97+/-34 123+/-36 259+/-25 414+/-37 585+/-72 892+/-95 475+/-47 422+/-42 1155+/-60 671+/-59 694+/-59 230+/-44 423+/-56 400+/-110.880+/-160 566+/-81 536+/-73 1176+/-87, 739+/-97.790+/-89 GRAND AVERAGE 7800+/-6350 110+/-130 620+/-550 640+/-580.* All other gamma emitters searched for were <LLD; typical LLDs are given in Table C-20 (C) Control Station (1) All soil samples analyzed by AREVA, NP Environmental Laboratory 77 TABLE C-13 2007 CONCENTRATIONS OF GROSS BETA EMITTERS IN SURFACE WATER Results in Units of pCi/L +/- 2 sigma< -----------------------
7..------------------------.
STATION ID -------- -------------------...
>SAMPLING SA-SWA-11A1 SA-SWA-12C1 SA-SWA-16F1 SA-SWA-1F2
: SA-SWA-7E1 AVERAGE DATE (Control)January February (1)March April May June 00 July August September October November December AVERAGE 34+/-3 206+/-16 95+/-8 28+/-5 18+/-4 51+/-6 110+/-9 162+/-12 134+/-11 199+/-14 79+/-7 98+/-8 101+/-128 36+/-3 128+/-13 59+/-6 20+/-5 16+/-4 59+/-7 65+/-7 i09+/-9g-110+/-9 137+/-11 70+/-7 35+/-5 70+/-83 16+/-2 121+/-13 36+/-5_7+/-4 10+/-4 40+/-6 62+/-7'85+/-8 62+/-7 99+/-9 66+/-7 36+/-5 53+/-72 14+/-2 (1)19+/-4<5.9<5.4 13+/-4 38+/-6.84+/-8 51+/-7 90+/-8 49+/-6 15+/-4 30+/-60 69+/-5 218+/-17 115+/-9 54+/-6-33+/-5 95+/-9 152+/-13 192+/-15 218+/-15 255+/-18 187+/-13 52+/-6 34+/-44 168+/-101 65+/-80' 23+/-39 16+/-22 52+/-59 85+/-91 126+/-97 " 1 5+/-134-156+/-140, 91+/-111 47+/-62 137+/-153 GRAND AVERAGE 78+/-126 (1) Land accessible alternate surface water sampling locations were used for this month's collection.
See Program Deviations.
TABLE C-14 2007 CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS*
IN SURFACE WATER Results in Units of pCi/L +/- 2 sigma SAMPLING <- GAMMA EMITTERS ------ ->STATION ID DATE K-40 RA-NAT SA-SWA-1 F2 SA-SWA-7E1 SA-SWA-11A1 SA-SWA-12C1(C)
SA-SWA-16F1 SA-SWA-1 F2 (1)SA-SWA-7E1 (1)SA-SWA-I'IA1 (1)SA-SWA-12C1 (C)SA-SWA-16F1 (1)SA-SWA-1 F2 SA-SWA-7E1 SA-SWA-11A1 SA-SWA-12C1(C)
SA-SWA- 16F 1 SA-SWA-1 F2 sA-SWA-7E1 SA-SWA-11A1 SA-SWA-12C1(C)
SA-SWA-16F1 SA-SWA-1 F2 SA-SWA-7E 1 SA-SWA-1 1A1 SA-SWA-12C 1(C)SA-SWA-16F1 SA-SWA- 1F2 SA-SWA-7E1 SA-SWA-11A1 SA-SWA-I 2C 1(C)SA-SWA-16F 1 SA-SWA-1 F2 SA-SWA-7E1 SA-SWA-1 1A1 SA-SWA-12C1(C)
SA-SWA-16F1 1i3/2007 1/3/2007 1/3/2007 1/3/2007 1/3/2007 (1)2/26/2007 2/26/2007 (1) -. 2/26/2007 2/26/2007 3/7/2007 3/7/2007 3/7/2007 3/7/2007 3/7/2007 4/2/2007 1/2/1900 4/2/2007 4/2/2007 4/2/2007 5/9/2007 5/9/2007 5/9/2007 5/9/2007 5/9/2007 43+/-13*.- 77+/-14-.--- 64+/-17 57+/-16 55+/-15 (1) , 170+/-20.: 138+/-20 155+/-20 135+/-21 69+/-17 71+/-17 80+/-20 102+/-19 49+/-16 48+/-21 46+/-17 85+/-21 51+/-14 42+/-12 49+/-14 74+/-16 49+/-12'44+/-12 39+/-12 54+/-17 120+/-19 88+/-15 93+/-21 67+/-16 78+/-20 99+/-18 68+/-20--- .... 69+/-17 75+/-17-*<1.5*<2.7,.<2.1<1.7 1.9<1.7<1.8, 7.4+/-2.<2.1-<2'-<2.2<1.7,<2.3;<1.9,<1.9<1.6<1.9<1.6,.<1.6<1.7<2.2<2.1<1.9'<1.5<1.7<2.1<1.e<1.7/6/7/2007 6/7/2007 6/7/2007 6/7/2007 6/7/2007 7/6/2007 7/6/2007 7/6/2007 7/6/2007 7/6/2 00 7 ,<1.8<1.7<2<1.7<2 79 TABLE C-14 2007 CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS*
IN SURFACE WATER Results in Units of pCi/L +/- 2 sigma SAMPLING < ------ GAMMA EMITTERS --------STATION ID DATE -K-40 RA-NAT SA-SWA-1 F2 SA-SWA-7E1 SA-SWA-11A1 SA-SWA-12C1(C)
SA-SWA-16F 1 SA-SWA-iF2.
SA-SWA-7E1 SA-SWA-11A1 SA-SWA-12C1 (C)SA-SWA-16F1 SA-SWA-I F2'SA-SWA-7E1
-SA-SWA-1 1A1 SA-SWA-12C 1(C)SA-SWA-16F1 SA-SWA. 1 F2 -(2)SA-SWA,7E 1 (2)SA-SWA-11A1 (2)SA-SWA-12C1 (C)SA-SWA-16F1 (2)SA-;SWA-1 F2 SA-SWA-7E1 SA-SWA- 11 A1 SA-SWA-12C1(C)
SA-SWA-16F1 8/7/2007 8/7/2007 8/7/2007 8/7/2007 8/7/2007 9/4/,2007'
:..9/4/2007 9/4/2007 9/4/2007 9/4/2007 10/4/2007 10/4/2007 10/4/2007 10/4/2007 10/4/2007 11/5/2007)11/5/2007 11/5/2007 (2) 11/5/2007 1.1/5/2007 110+/-19 144+/-21 53+/-18 65+/-17 70+/-19<34 125+/-24 131+/-18 121+/-18 119+/-18 48+/-19 117+/-19 140+/-17 133+/-20 68+/-15 69+/-38 93+/-46 96+/-48 76+/-57 60+/-41<20 90+/-17 104+/-20 89+/-17 70+/-14<4.6<2.1<3<1.6<2.2<2.7<2.3 6.4+/-2 8+/-3<6.2<2.5<2 7.3+/-2<2.4<2.4<10<13<12<13<12 12/5/2007 12/5/2007 12/5/2007 12/5/2007 12/5/2007<2.8<2.4<2 8.4+/-3<2.6 AVERAGE 82+/-68* All other gamma emitters searched for were <LLD; typical LLDs are given in Table C-19 (C) Control Station (1) Alternate surface water locations, used for this month's collection.
See Program Deviations.
(2) Samples were analyzed by AREVA NP Environmental Laboratory.
80 TABLE C-15 2007 CONCENTRATIONS OF TRITIUM IN SURFACE WATER Results in Units of pCi/L +/- 2 sigma< SAM LI G.A..W-i A -------------------
A ------201 A- A---SAMPLING SA-SWA-11A1 SA-SWA-12C1 SA-SWA-1 PERIOD (Control)January <170 <170 <160 February (1) <150 _<140- <150 March <150 <150 <150 April 290+/-100 <150 <160 May 190+/-100 <150 <150 June <170 <160. <170 July <150 <i50 <150 August <150 <150 <150 September
<150 <150 <150 October 170+/-90 <140 <140 November <150 <150 <150 December 220+/-90 <170 <150 (1) Samples were collected at alternate land accessed sites.---STATION ID -----------------------
>6F1 SA-SWA-1F2 SA-SWA-7E1 AVERAGE*<160 (1)<150<150<150<170<150 .<150<140<140<150<196 See Progeamn Deviations.
<170<150<150 460+/-100 180+/-90<170<150 220+/-90<150 180+/-90<140'<163 -AK TABLE C-16 2007 CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS**
IN EDIBLE FISH Rasuits in Units, of pCi/kg (wet). +/-2 s -GAMMAEMITTERS SAMPLING STATIONID PERIOD"., K-40 SA-ESF-7E1 SA-ESF-11A1 SA-ESF-12C1 (0)-AVERAGE SA-ESF-7E1 SA-ESF-1 1AM SA-ESF-12C1 (C)AVERAGE GRAND AVERAGE.5/8-30/2007 5/8-30/2007 5/8-30/2007 9/19/2007 9/19/07-9/25/2007 9/18/2007 3560+/-200 3440+/-210 3420+/-190 3470+/-150 3730+/-200 3740+/-200 3700+/-190 3720+/-40 3600+/-290** All other gamma emitters searched for were .<LLD; typical LLDs are given inTable C-19 (C) Control Station 82 TABLE C.17 2007"CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS*
IN CRASS Rf sults ih Units of pCi/kg (wet) +/- 2 sigma GAMMA EMITTER-SAMPLING. (FI SH). .STATION ID:. PERIOD K-40 SA-ECH- 11A1 SA-ECH-12C1 (C)AVERAGE SA-ECH-11AI SA-ECH-12C1 (C)AVERAGE GRAND AVERAGE 7/23/2001",..
7/23/20b7 8/30/2007 8/30/2007 3170+/-190 3120:190 3150+/-70 2430+/-1 60 -1390+/-120 1910+/-1470 2530+/-1660* All other gamma emitters searched for were <LLD; Typical LLDs are given in Table C-19.(C) Control Station 83 TABLE C-18 2007 CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS*
IN SEDIMENT Results in Units of pCi/kg (dry) +/- 2 sigma SAMPLING STATION ID DATE Be-7 K-40 Co-60 Cs-i 37 RA-NAT Th-232 SA-ESS-6S2 SA-ESS-7E1 SA-ESS-11A1 SA-ESS-1 5A1 SA-ESS-16A1 SA-ESS-12C1 (C)SA-ESS-16F1 6/25/2007 6/27/2007 6/27/2007 6/27/2007 6/27/2007 6/27/2007' 6/271/2007
<72<88 -<66<116<i 09<74-17104+/-160 AVERAGE 2250+/-142-12900+/-371 "81401269 3820+/-201 6530+/-233 14200+/-389 16000+/-456 9100+/-10700 2560+/-660 8500+/-1230 4230+/-560 8060+/-820 5910+/-510 17100+/-1300 20100+/-2400
<5.4<5.9<6.8<7.3<11<11<11<5.19<28.1 32+/-8<9.08<5.,9<10.2 53+/-11 478+/-20.2 735+/-20.5 466+/-16.8 543+/-17.9 632+/-16.8 614+/-23.4 566+/-23.8&#xfd;641+/-32.7 995+/-66.2 664+/-50.4 691+/-39 936+/-62.8 1050+/-53 864+/-67.6-1 580+/-190 830+/-340, SA-ESS-6S2 (1)SA-ESS-7E1 (1)SA-ESS-1A1 (1)SA-ESS-15A1 (1)SA-ESS-16A1 (SA-ESS-12C1 (C)SA-ESS-16F1 (1)10/29/2007 10/17/2007 10/17/2007 10/17/2007 10/17/2007
: 1) 10/17/2007 10/17/2007
<360<691<302<360<300<470<1500<49<59<33<50<30<64<150<51<71<22<38<30<49<120 217+/-56 604+/-93 313+/-40 426+/-48 604+/-37 604+/-69 1050+/-160 240+/-140 560+/-160 342+/-70 648+/-88 521+/-72 920+/-39 521+/-72 (AVERAGE-: 9500+/-13200
-9300+/-11500 550+/-540 540+/-440 560+/-390 690+/-490 GRAND AVERAGE* All other gamma emitters searched for were <LLD; typical LLDs are given in Table C-19 (C) Control Station (1) Samples were analyzed by AREVA NP Environmental Laboratory.
84 TABLE C-1 9 2007 MAPLEWOOD TESTING SERVICES LLDs FOR GAMMA SPECTROSCOPY;..'
SAMPLE TYPE: < ........AIR-........->
:. <- .--'-WATER .---> <------MILK
-...---- >IOD!NE PARTICULATES
.:GAMMA SCAN IODINE GAMMA SCAN IODINE ACTIVITY:
10-3 pCi/m 3  10-3 pCi/m 3  pCi/L pCi/L :. pCi/L pCi/L GEOMETRY:
47 ML 13 FILTERS 3.5 L. ITER 100 ML 3.5 LITER 100 ML COUNT TIME: 120 MINS "500 MINS 1000 MIN, 1000MiNS .500 MINS 1000 MINS DELAY .TO COUNT: 2 DAYS 5 DAYS 7.DAYS 3. DAY- 2 DAYS -2 DAYS NUCLIDES BE-7 2.0 16 27 NA-22 -0.37 1.8 5 -5.2 K-40 -9 '34 CR-51 -1.7 15 -' 36 -MN-54 -0.31 1.6 -.. 3.2 CO-58 -0.40 1.8 -5.0 -FE-59 -0.61 4.3 10, .CO-60 .- 0.33 3.5 6.3 ZN-65 -0.70 5.2 11 ZRNB-95 -0.41 3.1 -10 " MO-99 -127 240 -8.3 -RU-103 .-0.32 1.6 RU-106 -1.9. 21 -9.0 -AG-1iM -0.43 2.7 SB-125 -0.64 3.5 -6.7 -TE-129M -13 59 -126 131 9.6 0.85 5.2 0.34 5:5 0.79 TE-132 -4.5 3.9 -3.9 -BA133 0.22 1.5 -3.5 -CS-134 0.20 1.5 -3.4 -CS-1 36 -0.48 3.0 -3.7 -CS-137 0.53 1.3 -2.7 -BALA-140 1.5 9.0 21 CE-141 0.19 .2.7 *4.3 CE-144 0.76 11.3 4.2 RA-NAT 1.2 6.2 9.7 TH-232 1.4 11.1 18 -85 TABLE C-19 (Cont'd)2007 MAPLEWOOD TESTING SERVICES LLD3 FOR FOOD SAMPLE TYPE: PRODUCTS VEGETATION SOIL FISH & SHELLFISH SEDIMENT ACTIVITY:
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ik p&#xfd;JgEETIDi"q!t2'.i
'':'"":'!ACTIVITY:
pCi/kgWET pCi/kg DR, ... pCi/Hg WET pCi/kg DRY GEOMETRY:
 
===3.5 LITER===
3.5 LITER 500 ml 500 ml 500 ml COUNT TIME: 500 MINS 5..,,,, 50,MIIS .... 33 MINS 500 MINS 500 MINS DELAY TO COUNT:" 3 DAXiS ' .7DAYS, " 30 DAYS&#xfd;(l) : 5 DAYS 30 DAYS NUCLIDES BE-7 NA-22 K-40 CR-51 MN-54 CO-58 FE-59 CO-60 ZN-65 ZRNB-95 MO-99 RU-103 RU-1 06 AG-110M SB-125 TE-129M 1-131 TE-132 BA-133 CS-134 CS-1 36 CS-1 37 BALA-140 CE-141 CE-144 RA-NAT TH-232 27 66 5 16 70 32 i 20 2.8 4.2 10 10 12 8.2 69 3.4 49 16 9.0 155 3.5 7.0 33 2.5 7.5 6.8 10 3.7 14 14 30 79 12 8.5 14 8 14 11 81 4.0 44 24 13 300 9.3 23 7.6 8.2 9.8 8.9 30 8.0 35 17, 40 390 57 70 1100 57 102.140 77 270 170 6600000 100 520 91 110 2000 560 160000 220 134 640 80 650 140 360 120 150 47 7.3 55 43 6.0 7.8 38 20 19 15 433 4.4 36 11 12 204 9.6 16 14 7.3 7.8 13 25 6.9 34 14 36 301 16 55 183 16 29 30 25 26 23 124000 11 106, 18 22 1160 93 3270 11 7.0 44 54 182 23 47 5.0 8.1 (1) All Soil samples were analyzed by Areva NP Environmental Laboratory.
86 APPFN DIXD
 
==SUMMARY==
OF RESULTS FROM ANALYTICS AND .,ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ASSOCIATES INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAMS 87 APPENDIX D
 
==SUMMARY==
OF RESULTS FOR ANALYTICS AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ASSOCIATES INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM Appendix D presents a summary of the analytical results for the 2007,-, Analytics and Environmental Resource Associates (ERA) Interlaboratory Comparison Program.TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE NO. TABLE DESCRIPTION PAGE D-1 Analytics Results: Gross Alpha/Beta in Water, Gross Beta 91 in Air Particulate filters, Iodine in Air Samples, and Tritium in Water Samples D-2 Analytics Results: Gamma Emitters in Water and Milk 92 Samples D-3 Analytics Results: Gamma Emitters in Air Particulate and 93 Soil Samples D-4 ERA Results: Gamma Emitters in Water, Gross Alpha/Beta 94 in Water, Tritium Analysis in Water, and Iodine Analysis in Water Samples 89 TABLE D-1 RESULTS FOR ANALYTICS ENVIRONMENTAL CROSS CHECK PROGRAM Gross Alpha and Gross Beta Emitters In Water (pCi/L), Iodine In Air Samples (pCi/m 3), Gross Beta In Air Particulate Filter (pCi/m 3), And Tritium Analysis In Water (pCi/L)MTS NITS Ratio Date Sample Sample Reported Known MTS/MM-YY Code Media Nuclide Value Value Resolution Anal.tics Evaluation 03-2007 B655 APT Beta 94.7 87.7 30 .,.:.1.08 Acceptable 03-2007 H657 WAT H-3 4997 5010 30 1.00 Acceptable 03-2007 1660 AIO 1-131 75.0-: 70.1 30 1.07 Acceptable 06-2007 B663 APT Beta 90.8 79.9 30 1.14 Acceptable 06-2007 AB664 WAT Alpha 209.6 164 30 1.28 Acceptable Beta 193.5 148 .30. 1.31 Acceptable 06-2007 1665 AIO 1-131 79.8 79 30 1.01 Acceptable 06-2007 H667 WAT H-3 9538 9040 30 1.06 Acceptable 09-2007 1670 A1O 1-131 68.7 69.7 60 0.99 Acceptable 09-2007 H672 WAT H-3 12285 12000 60 1.02 Acceptable 09-2007 AB673 WAT Alpha 92.0 109.0 60 0.84 Acceptable Beta 197.1 204.0 60 0.97 Acceptable 12-2007 AB676 WAT Alpha 141.1 158 60 0.89 Acceptable Beta 228.2 200 60 1.14 Acceptable 12-2007 1677 AIO 1-131 73.4 74.2 60 0.99 Acceptable 12-2007 H679 WAT H-3 8987 9020 60 1.00 Acceptable 12-2007 B680 APT Beta 87.2 77.5 60 1.12 Acceptable 91 TABLE: D-2 RESULTS" FOR ANALYTICS'ENNV'IROANENTALCROSS CHECK.PROGRAM.,Gamma, Emitters in Water And Milk, (pCi/L)MTS MTS Ratio Date Sample Samiple .Reported
.Known,-.-
MTS/MM-YY Code .Media Nuclide Value,. Value', Resolution Analytics Evaluation 03-2007 G658 WAT Cr-51 215.7 213.0 30 1.01 Acceptable Mn-54 16617 -158.0 30 1.05 Acceptable*
Co-58 86.9! 85.8 " 30 1.01 Acceptable Fe-59 991- 91.7 30 1.08 Acceptable C6-60 131'.0 132.0 .30 0.99 Acceptable YZn-65 912:7 -869.0 30 1.05 Acceptable 1-1131 101'.7 89.8 , 30 1.13 Acceptable Cs-134 94.3 97.1 30 0.97 Acceptable Cs-137 209.0 204.0 30 1.02 Acceptable Ce-141 265.3 258.0 30 1.03 Acceptable 03-2007. G656 MILK Cr-51 246.0 245.0 30 1.00 Acceptable Mn-54 192.7 182.0 30 1.06 Acceptable Co-58 101.7 98.8 30 1.03 Acceptable Fe-59 112.7 106.0 30 1.06 Acceptable Co-60 148.0 152.0 30 0.97 Acceptable Zn-65 1040.0 1000.0 30 1.04 Acceptable 1-131 95.7 85.2 30 1.13 Acceptable Cs-134 105.7' 112.0 30 0.94 Acceptable Cs-137 240.0 234.0 30 1.03 Acceptable Ce-141 305.3 297.0 30 1.03 Acceptable 12-2007 G678 WAT Cr-51 542.0 572 60 0.95 Acceptable Mn-54 221.7 212 60 1.05 Acceptable C6-58 196.0 194; 60 1.01 Acceptable Fe-59 168.0 166 60 1.01 Acceptable Co-60 229.3 236 60 0.97 Acceptable Zn-65 271.0 261 60 1.04 Acceptable 1-131 72.4 71.6 60 1.01 Acceptable Cs-134 143.0 153 60 0.93 Acceptable Cs-137 192.7 185 60 1.04 Acceptable Ce-141 152.0 157 60 0.97 Acceptable 92 TABLE D-3-, RESULTS FOR ANALYTICS ENVIRONMENTAL'CROSS.CHECK PROGRAM Gamma Emitters in Soil (pCiig/d-ry&#xfd; And Air. Particulate Samples (pCi/m 3)MTS MTS ."77 -Ratio Date Sample Sample Reported n... MTS/MM-YY Code Media Nuclide Value Value Resolution Analytics Evaluation 03-2007 G659 Soil Cr-51 0.268 0.241f: ..30 1.11 Acceptable Mn-54 0.203 0.130', 30 1.13 Acceptable Co-58 0.101 0.097,-
* 30 1.04 Acceptable Fe-59 0.124 .0..10.4 :-.30 1.20 Acceptable Co-&60 0.153&#xfd; 0.150 30 1.02 Acceptable Zn-65. ,991 0986: ".-30 -1.01 Acceptable Cs-134 0.102 0.110 30,:, 0.93' Acceptable Cs-137 0.371 0.329 30 1:13- Acceptable Ce-141 0.313 0.292 30 1.07 Acceptable 06-2007 G666 APT Cr-51 325:0 322.0. 30.,' 1.01 .Acceptable Mn-54 125.7 ' 105.0 30 1.20 Acceptable Co-58 136:0 125.0 30 1.09 Acceptable Fe-59 126.7 105.0 30 1.21 Acceptable Co-60 152.7 150.0 30 1.02 Acceptable.
Zn-65 250.7 21C.0 30 1.19 Acceptable Cs-134 132.3 152.0 30 0.87 Acceptable Cs-137 116.7 .106.0 30 1:10 Acceptable Ce-141 127.0 126.0 30 1.01 Acceptable 09-2007 G671 SOIL Cr-51 0.453 0.391 60 1.16 Acceptable MW-54. 0.259 0.227 60 1.14 -Acceptable Co-58 0.166 0.154 '60, 1.08 Acceptable Fe-59 0.178 0.149 60 1.19 Acceptable Co-60 0.211 0.200 60 1.06 Acceptable Zn-65 0.328 0.273 60 1.20 Acceptable Cs-134 0;206 0.199 60 1.04 Acceptable Cs-137 0.330 0.273 60 1.21 Acceptable Ce-141 0.313 .0.285 60 1.10 Acceptable 93 TABLE D-4 RESULTS FOR ENVIRONMENTAL RESOURCE ASSOCIATES (ERA) PROFICIENCY TESTING PROGRAM Gamma Emitters in Water (pCi/L), Gross Alpha and Beta in Water (pCi/L), Iodine-131 Analysis in Water and Tr[turum in Water (pCi/L), MTS MTS ERA Date Sample Sample Reported Assigned Acceptance MM-YY Code Media Nuclide Value Value Limits Evaluation 04-2007 H662 WT H -3 80.3 .. 8060. 6660 -9450 Acceptable 04-2007 1661 WAT 1-131 16.3 18.9 13.7- 24.1 Acceptable 07-2007 G669 WAT Ba-133 19.6 19.4 10.7-28.1 Acceptable Co-60 35.3 33.5 24.8 -42.2 Acceptable Cs-134 65.5 68.9 60.2-77.6 Acceptable Cs-137 61.0 61.3 52.6-70.0 Acceptable Zn-65 60.7 54.6 45.2 -64.0 Acceptable 07-2007 AB668 WAT Alpha 17.3 27.1 15.4-38.8 Acceptable Beta 14.1 11.5 2.8-20.2 Acceptable 10-2007 AB675 WAT Alpha 39.0 58.6 30.6-72.9 Acceptable Beta 17.8 9.73 4.3- 18.2 Acceptable 10-2007 1674 WAT 1-131, 31.3 28.9 24-33.8 Acceptable 10-2007 H681 WAT H-3 10037 9700 8430- 10700 Acceptable 94
] r E":&#xfd;SYNOPSIS OF LAND US-E CENSUS 95 APPENDIX E SYNOPSIS OF 2007 LAND USE CENSUS A land use census was conducted to identify, within a distance of 8 km (5 miles), the location of the nearest milk animal, the nearest residence, and the nearest garden of greater than 50m2 (500ft2) producing broad leaf vegetation, in each of the 16 meteorological sectors.Tabulated below are the results of these surveys: Milk Nearest Vegetable Animal Residence Garden Meteorological July, 2007 July, 2007 July, 2007 Sector Km (miles) Km (miles) Km (miles)N None None None NNE None None None NE None 6.4 (4.0) None ENE None 5.2 (3.2) None E None 8.7 (5.4) None ESE None None None SE None, None None, SSE None None None S None None None SSW None 5.5 (3.4) None SW None 6.9 (4.3) None WSW None 7.1 (4.4) None W 7.8 (4.9) 6.5 (4.0) None WNW None 5.5 (3.4) None NW None 5.9 (3.7) None NNW None 6.8 (4.2) None 97 APPENDIX F RADIOLOGICAL GROUNDWATER PROTECTION PROGRAM-(RGPP)99 Table of Contents I. Summary and Conclusions
.103 II. Introduction
...............................................
105 A. Objectives of the RGPP ................
......................
106 B. Implementation of the Objectives
.............................
107 C. Radionuclide Evaluation Strategies
..................
...........
.... ....... ... 115 D .C haracteristics of Tritium (H-3) .............................................................
11.7.Ill. P rog ram D escriptio n ..:..................................................................................
1 19 A. Sample Analysis .........................................
119 B .D ata Interpretation
........ ..... ..... .... ....... .... ...............................
120 C. Background Analysis ...............................
....122 IV .R esults and D iscussion
...............................................................................
125 A .G roundw ater R esults ..............................................................................
125 B. Leaks, Spills, and Releases ...........
......................
127 C .T re n d s ....................................................................................................
1 2 7 D .In ve stig a tio ns .........................................................................................
12 8 E. Projected RGPP Activities
..................................
128 Tables I Hope Creek Monitoring Well Construction Details .................................
130 2 Salem Monitoring Well Construction Details .....................
131 3 Relevant Groundwater Screening Criteria ..............................................
132 4A Groundwater Tritium Analytical Results Hope Creek Generating Station 133 4B Groundwater Tritium Analytical Results Salem Generating Station ..........
134 5 Groundwater Elevations
....................................
135 6 Hope C reek RG PP System s ...................................................................
136 7 Salem R G P P System s ...........................................................................
137 8 Salem and Hope Creek 10CFR50.75 (g) Data ........................................
139 Figures 1 Hope Creek Well Locations and Station Layout .........
..........
140 2 Salem Well Locations and Station Layout ...........................
141 3 Potentiometeric Surface Contour Map ..........................
142 4 S tratigraphy C olum n ...............................................................................
14 3 101 I. Summary and Conclusions This is the annual report on the status of the Radiological Groundwater Protection Program (RGPP) conducted at Salem and Hope Creek Stations.
This report contains significant background information and programmatic descriptions, reflects changes to this program; and provides the data and information representative Of the reporting year., The RGPP was initiated by PSEG Nuclear LLC (PSEG) to determine whether groundwater at and in the vicinity of Salem and Hope Creek Stations had been adversely impacted by any releases of radionuclides and not previously identified.
The RGPP is a voluntary program implemented by PSEG in conjunction with industry initiatives and guidance that is&#xfd; designed to complement the existing Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program and Radioactive Effluent Release Report programs.
This report covers the RGPP groundwater samples collected from the environment in 2007. All analytical results for 2007 monitoring are included in Tables 4A and 4B.Salem Generating Station identified a release from the Unit 1 Spent Fuel Pool in 2002, and has implemented the Remedial Action Work Plan (RAWP)reviewed by the USNRC and approved by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) Bureau of Nuclear Engineering (BNE). Only tritium activity was identified from this release; neither Strontium nor plant-related gamma emitters were identified in monitoring well water samples. In accordance with the RAWP, a Groundwater Recovery System (GRS) has been installed and is in operation to remove the tritiated water and maintain containment of the contaminated plume to prevent migration to the plant boundary.
The GRS is fully discussed in the quarterly Remedial Action Plan Reports (RAPR) provided to the regulatory agencies and the information is not included in the RGPP.103 Five specific monitoring wells are included in both the GRS monitoring and RGPP to ensure program comprehensiveness.
In assessing all the data gathered ifor.thls report; it, was concluded that the-operation.
of Salem and Hope&#xfd;Creek Stations has had&#xfd; no.adverse radjol!gical,, impact on the. environment from unmonitored or unplanned pf radionuclides togroundwater.
Historical unplanned and unmonitored; on site are maintained in accordance with federal regulation 10CFR50.75-(..)
and ,are shown in.-Table
: 8. There are no known active releases ,=&#xfd;o the groundwateriat Salemor Hope Creek Stations.Gamma-emitt-ing&#xfd;-radi~orwtuelides associated with licensed plant operations were not detected.at concen'trations greater than their respective Environmental Lower Limits,of Detection (LLDs);,as specified in the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODGM). in any of the groundwater samples. In the case of tritium, PSEG specified that its: laboratories achieve a lower limit of detection significantly lower than that required by federal regulation.
Strontium-89/90 was not detected at a, concentration greater than the LLD of 2.0 Pico Curies per liter (pCi/L) in any of the groundwater samples tested.Tritium was not detected in any of the groundwater or surface-water samples at concentrations greater than the.*United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) drinkingwater standard, of 20,000 pCi/L. Low levels of tritium were detected at corncentrationsgreater than.the LLD-of.200 pCi/L in 10 of the 26 groundwater monitoring locations.
The tritium cpncentrations were all below the Environmental LLD.,specified in the QDCM. Most of the tritium that was detected in groundwater:at Salem is believed to be. the result of isolated historical releases, and at Hope Creek the investigation does not indicate an increasing trend or an unmonitored release pathway to the groundwater.
To facilitate trending, additional samples are collected to ensure the trend analysis has a robust basis.104 II. " Introduction PSEG's Salam: ard Hope Creek generating stations' a;:e lo.-ated in a flat, largely undeveioped
'egiorno fsouthen NewJersey.The Stations!are bordered on -the west and.. s&uti tie Delaware.
River. Estuary and on the east and north by extensive m-arshlands.:
The Stations both obtain cooling-water from and water to the' Delaware River. The Stations are underlain by. over feet of interlayered sand, silt and clay. The uppermost55 feet ofhege geologic formations does not transmit appreciable quantities of groundwater.
The Stations draw potable water'from.
wells greater than 300 feet below. ground, There ar-no off-site wells within"at least oner'nieof the: site.The nearest po-.able supply well is lo~cated3.65 miles away in the'state of Delaware.Investigation into a release of tritiated water from' the ,spent fuel poolat Salem-was initiated in 2002. The mechanism for the. release and pathway taken by the-tritiated waier have been identified and controlled.
Groundwater rernediation began in 2004 with the Groundwater Recovery System (GRS) and is ongoing. Tritiurn has not migrated to the property* boundary no: to geologic formations deeper than the shallow water-bearing unit on site, and there is no complete exposure pathway to humans-or biota resulting from-this release. The GRS and related results are reported separately to the-regulatory agencies.
and are not included in this report.105 A. Objective of the RGPP The loh'g-termbbjectives of th.3 RGPP.are .s follow-:::,, 1. Identify suitable locations to monitor and evaluate potential impacts from station O6p'ratio,.
s before significant liadio;ogical impact to the"environment,64t-.ential drinking water sources can occur.2.
local hydrogeologic regime in the vicinity of the station;artd~nicintain up-to-date knowledge of flow patterns on the stiifabe; and Shallow ,jbsurfa.ze.
-3. "Perform routine water sampling and radiological analysis of water fromr, selected locations.
: 4. Report new leaks, spills, or other detections with potential radiological to stakeholders in a'timeiy.manrner.
: 5. Regularly assess analytical results to ideniify' adverse trends, 6.: Take necessary corrective actions to protect groundwater resources.
106 B. Implementation of the Objectives The objectives:ikentified hav.3 bee:n implanmnirted a' Salem and Hope Creek Generating Stations as discussed below: 1. PSEG personroe ,performcd a,s:yzsterinatis analysis of all structures, ,-systemsanid.
'ystem comporent',ithat handle plant-related-radionuclides to identify which of these posed a potential risk with respect to the release of rediolcgical.cosita.nhr,,tsto the environment.
:.Theprogram was zthat PSEG fully understands the safety: and reliability of, the equip..ent that stores, processes, and conveys radioactively contaminated water. It also serves 'to satisfy PSEG, its stakeholders;,and the-suf founding Community, that PSEG operates and maintains station equipment and systems with a high degree of integrity.
The systematic risk eval-uatioq was performedl to determine which-systems, structures and components at the stations have the most significant potential tc release, radi.onuclides to the environment.
Each of the 97 Salem and 137 Hope Creek facility systems was analyzed by the system engineers and system managers to identify and rate the potential risk of release of radionuclides.
Detailed evaluation criteria, including the potential exposure for all piping, tanks, valves, sumps, and water bodies, were used to evaluateeach system and system component.
The system components were rated based upon: 1) the degree of severity of a potential release, based upon concentration, flow rate or volume, if a release occurred from the specified component, 2) likelihood of the occurrence.
of such a failure, and 3) the ability to detect the release should such a failure occur.107
-q: Ai' systems and components that screened in weretargeted as potential sourp0. during development of the monitoring program.7hTere 5ere 16 Salem, &#xfd;ystems and 24 Hope Creek systems that screeredin These systems are identified in Tables 6 and 7.2.,r' PSEG Salem ond:HH-pe ,reek Generating Stations performed evaluationg and measurements to determine, the geological and'-hydrcw.&deg;lo I.:characteristics applicable to meeting the objective of theR.GP P. The. following ,ections provide information regarding the setting of the stations, including land environmental setting, precipitation and drainage, local geology and local hydrogeology.
a.&#xfd; Land Use, PSEG owns and/or controls an approximately.740-acre area of Artificial Island that includes'the stations., This area contains administrative ,and suppoil.facilities used by, both the Salemand.Hope Creek.Staticns, including the Salem and. Hope Creek Switch Yards, Administrative Support Buildings and 367 acres of uncommitted, undeveloped land. The zoning-classification for the stations is industrial.
The land adjacent is zoned for industrial and residential or agricultural use..b. Environmental Setting Beginning in the early twentieth century, The United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE) created the land upon which the stations are located.108 So-called Artificial Island was crezted by dspositing hydraulic dredge spoils from a shipping channel'in thej DrIawvare6 Riv'.rs Est.!ary into a!diked area established around"i.-
naural sard bal:4in the estuary. The stations are locatedon that pobtianhlio r1Artiticial
;lslar.. bordering the Delaware Estuary. The entire area of Artificial, ISlandis within the Delaware River's estuarine zone, as defined by the Delaware River Basin Commission (Zone; 5). In the vii'Jbity&#xfd; jf the stations, water in the estuary is tidal and bra',kish, with the Salinii`Lv.y;.
rying with both the tides and seasonally from almost fres:w'ate " -saltwater.
Prior to construction, the property known as Artikiial iiand; was undeveloped, low-lying land.c. Topography and Station Drainage The topography at the stations is essentially flat with limited local relief.The average elevation of the site is approximately 9 ft above mean sea level (msi). Storm water is managed'in accordance with th' New Jersey Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NJPDES) permits and Storm Water'Pollution, Prevention Plan.: Storm water is collected Jin; storm, drains and routed to the Delaware River for discharge.
Storm water from the major. petroleum storage handling areas isrouted to an oil/water separator prior to discharge.
: d. Climate and Precipitation Salem County is located in southwestern New Jersey. The county's climate is -considered to be humid and temperate, as the climate in this county is readily influenced by its proximity to the Delaware Bay.109 Coas'ta! storms are inot uncommon in this region.and can produce high: winds and heavy; rainfall, which can result in wind damage and flooding in low-lying&#xfd;arei-s.-
'Wind direction, in this region is .dependent upon the season; during the summer, winds are typically.from, the southwestwhile during the winter winds are commonly from the north-west.
Temperatures vary by season andthe maxirnum:expected high temperaturefor a given year is 100 degrees Fahrenheit,, while the minimum expected yearly low temperature-'s.
mirus 2 degrees Fahrenheit.
The average annual pre ;ip1iiatonjtotal is 39:9 inches..o, Geology, The stations are located in the Atlantic Coastal Plain Physiographic Province.
This area is characterized by relatively flat to gently undulating terrain, underlain by unconsolidated sediments that increase in thickness to the southeast.
These sediments range in age from Holocene to Cretaceous (0to 146 -million years old), areprimarily comprised of clay, silt, sand, and gravel, and are generally classified as continental, coastal, orrmarine in nature. Published geologic mapping indicates that the basement rock beneath these sediments
-(in the area of the stations)is metamorphic schist of the Wissahickon Formation, which is Pre-Cambrian in age (570 to, 900 million years old). The Atlantic Coastal Plain Physiographic Province, which is characterized by, a southeasterly dipping wedge of unconsolidated sediments consisting of clays, silts, sands, and gravels that:thicken in a seaward direction.
The Cretaceous and Tertiary age sediments that overlie the bedrock strike northeast-southwest and dip gently to the southeast between 10 and 60 feet per mile.110 The unconsolidated overburden; at the Salem and;,Hope Creek portions of Artificial Island consist of-approxirnately.25,feet oftdredge spoils, engineered fill material, tidal marsh deposits &id riv:-rbed deposits.
The'engineered fill, composed mainly of silt, silty clay, sand, and gravel, was used to replace the dredgespoilsduring the construction period of the stations.
Due to.ihe.composition aninature:of:the engineered fill, the hydraulic conductivity of this material isexpected to be very low, thus'iimiting the ability of the subsurface'rnaterials to,,Iransmit a&significant quantity of groundwate;.
Below 'he engineered fill there is an approximate five-foot iayer of tidal marsh-deposits-con5istirig of silty peat, and organic silt and meaduv mat,.which Beneath the tidal marsh deposits, there are approximately ten feet of discontinuous Quaternary Age riverbed deposits wi-ich consi'. t of sand and gravel. The engineered fill, the tidal marsh deposits, and the riverbed deposits &#xfd;combifne to forrrn the shallowV water-bearir:g zon,; .Beneath the shallow water-bearing zone, in orde : of incrcasing depth, are the following geologic formations (Figure 4):, IKirkwood Formation
-.The Kirkwood Formation'inthe vicinity of the site consists of dark,, gray to brown clay; vwith some sil. and layers of fine-grained micaceous quartz~sand.
Ithis opproximately 15 fed_.&#xfd;t thick and occurs from approximately 40.to 55 feet below ground surface (bgs).Vincentown Formation
-The Vincentown Formation occurs from a depth of approximately 55 feet bgs to a depth of 135 feet bgs and consists of a competent, greenish-gray, fine-to-medium sand with some silt, shell fragments, -feldspar and glauconite.
III Hornerstown Formation
-The Hornerstown Formation is; highly glauconitic, clayey, dark green sand that contains small percentages of quartz-grains and apatite pellets. The Hornerstolwn Formation unconformably overlies the Navesink Formation and is unconformably overlain by the Vincentown'F, rnmation.*
The Hornerstown Formation occurs from approximately 135 to 145; feet bgs. -Navesink Navesink Formation is characteristically glauconitic sandmwith varying amounts of si't and clay. It is brown or dark green to and. has a shellbed at its base. The upper part of the Iformatidnr is&#xfd; less glauconitic, more'clayey; more micaceous, and lighter in co)'btha r the'deeper.
strata. The Navesink Formation conformably overlies the- Mount Laurel' Sand (State of New Jersey Department of"'Conservation and Economic Development, 1969). The contact with the S;dverlying HornerstowrinFormation is gradational.
The Navesink Formation is encountered from approximately:
145 to 170 feet bgs.Mount Laurel-Wenonah Formation
-The Mount Laurel-Wenonah Forma'ion consists of clayey, medium-grained sand with some gravel, feldspar and glauconite.
In the vicinity of the stations, the Mount Laurel-Wenonah Formation is approximately 100 feet thick and occurs from .170 to 270,feetbgs.
Beneath the Mount Laurel-Wenonah Formation, more than .1,000 feet of Upper Cretaceous sediments overlie the crystalline bedrock. The Upper Cretaceous sediments include in descending order: the Marshalltown Formation (gray, fine sand); the Englishtown Formation (yellow-brown, fine' sand); the Woodbury Clay (dark gray; stiff, silty clay); the Merchantville Formation (dark green clay); the Magothy Formation (coarse to fine silt with little fine sand);112 and the Raritan and Potomac Formations (interbedded sand, gravelly sand and*clay).
f.; Hydrogeology~z-There are four primasry water-bQai:-1 zoncs underlying the stations, the shallow water-bearing zone and three aquifers;-1) the Vincentown Formation;
: 2) the Mount Laurel-Wenonah Formations; and, 3) the Potomac-Rarita,.-Magothy Cormationrs.
Thc 'shallow water-bearing zone, which the dredge-spoils,:engineeredfIfll, tidal marsh deposits and the discontinuous Quaternary riverbed deposits,, occurs between approximately 10 and 40 feet bgs. In general, the' dredge spoils, engineered fill and tidal: marsh deposits are:characterized by high porosity and low permeability.
Occasional lenses. of~sand within the dredge spoils may contain perched water within a few feet of the ground surface. The groundwater in theshallow water-bearing zone is generally .brackish, with flow generally to. the southwest under a gradient of approximately 0.007 feet/foot.
The Kirkwood Fcrmation is encountered at approximately,40 feet bgs., in the vicinity of the stations.
In this location, the Kirkwcod Formation consists of Miocene clays and acts as a confining layer, separating the shallow water-bearing zone from the underlying Vincentown Formation.
The Kirkwood Formation in this vicinity may be discontinuous due to excavation that was conducted to enable the construction.-The VWncentown Formation, whichtoccurs from approximately 55 to 135 feet bgs in this vicinity, is a semi-confined to confined aquifer.Groundwater in the Vincentown Formation generally flows, from north to south under a gradient of approximately 0.003 feet/foot.
113 The Vincentown Formation supplies potable water to domestic wells-located upgradient in eastern Salem County, where groundwater in the aquifer is moderately hard with:-high ion, content; Saltwater intrusion into the aqUifec4Occu.,s al'Ongthe Delaware Riverin western Salem County, however, rendering water quality brackish and nor-potable.
The Hornerstown and Navesink confining units separate the Vincentown Formation from the Mount, Laurel-Wenor.ah Formations.
The Mount Laure6-Wenonah aquuzr occurs from approximately 135 to 170 feet bgs.Both potable -anr6 fire-wE&#xfd;'-er supply wells at the stations are screened in this for mation.as well as the PRM aquifer.g. Groundwater Use As described above, severai geologic formations beneath.Artificial.Isand' Zonitain transmissive units andare capable of supplying a useable quantity of'water,..The shallow and manmade geologic units beneath the -Station are not transmissive and groundwater within the shallow zone is not used for potable or non-potable purposes.Moreover, in the general vicinity of the station there are no public water supply-wells or private wells completed in the Vincentown Formation...
The station derives its potable and sanitary water from the Mount Laurel-Wenonah and/or PRM formations, where supply wells for both Salem and Hope Creek are completed at depths of approximately 300 to 1, 100ft bgs. The nearest public water supply well is located approximately
 
===3.5 miles===
from the station in Delaware.3. PSEG has proceduralized the commitment to sample the RGPP monitoring wells twice per year for tritium and plant related gamma isotope concentrations and annually for strontium.
The results of analyses performed in 2007 are discussed in Section IV and included in Tables 4A and 4B.114 Samples of surface water from the Delaware River vwateyrare; collected monthly byPSEG as part. f.the existing site REMP program. Therefore, it, was not considered necessary to incorporate'Delaware Riyer sampling into the RGPP. .. .- , , -,4.- PSEG has implemented new precedures to identify and report new leaks, spills; or other detections with .poteltial radiological significance in a:timely i~nanner.
Nc or other detections with potential radiological significa.nce ,to:stakeholders were identified in 2007..4.5. PSEG regularly assesses analytical results to identify adverse trends. The investigation initiated atHope Creek-exemp',:fies&#xfd; this commitment, where .Hope Creek initiated the investigaticn-at.
tritium concentrations in groundwater,.significantly below the OQDCM Environmental LLD: with .limited data for trending to eansure timely and effective response to! unexplained results.:
Investigation results are discussed in Section IV., 6. PSEG will take all:necessary corrective actions to protect groundwater resources.-, C. Radionuclide Evaluation Strategies
: 1. Evaluation Strategy for Tritium The strategy approved in the Salem GRS RAWP is applied to the interpretation of tritium data generated during the RGPP: 115 If tritium is detected in groundwater samples from .Station monitoring wells at concentrations above 3,000 pCi/L (ODCM LLD), further evaluation of the source and extent of tritium, strontium and plant-related gamma emitters will be completed.
Additionally, PSEG has implemented procedures-defining escalating investigations at tritium concentrations,.between 200 pCi/L and.3,000 pCGilL.. These procedures define the investigativecriteria for each specific monitoring well based on the background tritium concentration to ensure the proper investigation is initiated to meet the objectives of the RGPP.2.. Evaluation.
Strategy for Strontium iPSEG made a decision to add total Strontium (Sr) as an analyte for'groundwater samples. Analyses were performed for total Sr, which.-includes both Strontium,89 and Strontium
: 90. The detection of Strontium above:2.0 pCi!L (the lower quantitation limit);was established by PSEG as a further investigation criterion; detections at or above this concentration would result in implementation of the investigative measures outlined above..3. .Evaluation Strategy for Plant-Related.
Gamma Emitters Plant related gamma emitters are analyzed by multi-channel gamma spectroscopy to the Environmental LLD~specified in the ODCM. The results of the analyses would also be used to assess any-plant-related radionuclides detected.-in groundwater.
If analytical results suggest specific sources are likely, these sources will be further investigated to enable. mitigation of releases to the environment.
The ODCM Environmental LLDs were applied and no detections above these concentrations have occurred.116 Any detection of a plant-related gamma emitter above the ODCM concentration would be-investigated:...
D. Characteristi'cs of Tritiunm (H13)Tritium (chemical symbol H-3) is:a .radlc.active isotope of hydrogen.
The most common form of tritium:is tritiudm oxidieWhich isalso called"tritiated water.":The chemicti properties iof t!itilm are essentially those of ordinary hydrogen.'
Tritiated water behaves the same as ordinary water in both the environment and the bcdy. Tritium can -be 6taken.Jinto the body by drinking water, breathing air, eating food, or absorption through skin.Once tritium enters the body, it disperses quickly and is uniformly distributed thr6ughout the body.- ,Tritium is excreted primarily through urine with a clearanie rate characte'rized'by aneffective biological half-life of about 14 days. Within one month or so after ingestion, essentially all tritium is cleawed.:Crganically bound tritium (tritium that-is incorporated in organic compounds) can remain in the body for a longer period.Tritium is produced -naturally in the upper atmosphere when cosmic rays strike air molecules.
Tritium is also produced during nuclear weapons explosions, as a by-product in reactors producing electricity, and in special production reactors, where the Isotopes lithium-7 and/or boron-10 are activated to produce tritium. Like normal water, tritiated water is colorless and odorless.
Tritiated water behaves chemically-and physically like nontritiated water'in the subsurface, and therefore tritiated water will travel at the same velocity as the average groundwater velocity.117 Tritium has a half-life of approximately 12.3 years: it decays spontaneously to helium-3 (He-3). This radioactive decay releases a beta particle (low-energy electron).
The radioactive decay of tritium is the source of the health risk from exposure to tritium. Tritium is one of the least dangerousV radionuclides because i4 emits very weak radiation and leaves the body relativoly quickly. Since tritium is almost always found as water, it g(6es'dir'ectly' into soft tissues-and organs. The associated dose to these tissues is generally uniform and is dependent on the water db0otnt'of the specific tissue.118 Ill. Program Description A.:, SL":Mple Analyss-This section describes the genei-a' aalytial.
methodologies used to.analyze thE r~nvironmental samples fo.&#xfd;radidactivity for the Salem and Hope Creek G:,nerating Stion RGRP in.2007.In order to achieve the stated objectives, the. cuqr.rent program includes the following analyses:* Concentrations of gamma emitters in groundwater." Concentrations of strontium in groundwater.
* Concentrations of tritium in groundwater.
As noted above, samples of surface water from the Delaware River water are collected monthly by PSEG as part of the existing site REMP program. Therefore, Delaware River samplingis not incorporated into the RGPP.I. Sampling Groundwater samples were collected from all monitoring wells. These samples were collected by PSEG Maplewood Testing Laboratory Technicians.
Consistent with USEPA and NJDEP guidance,, a modified low-flow sampling methodology was used. This methodology is consistent with protocols established for the Salem GRS investigation.
119 Groundwater samples were analyzed for plant-related gamma emitting radionuclides, and tritium, and annually for total strontium by a qualified.laoratory.
Samples were ,ollected in April and October 2007 for the same parameter-ofromr:all 26 RGPP wE!.ls. Wel/ldetaiIs are shown on Tables.1 and,:2.7, The 26 wells ,ri ,he RGPP are sampled ,at a minimum of twice per year. Samples of water .Are collected,.
managed, transported, and analyzed in accordance with approved procedures following EPA methods. Sample locations, sample collection frequencies and analytical frequencies are controlled in accordance with approved station "procedures.
Contractor andlor station personnel are trained in ,'%'the collection
.,preservation management, and shipment of samples, as well as in documentation of sampling events. Analytical laboratories are subject to internal quality assurance programs and industry cross-check programs.
Station personnel review and evaluate all analytical data deliverables as data are received,:
Analytical data results are reviewed-for adverse trends, or:anomalous data, field measurements are:reviewed to monitorfor changes toIhydrcgeologic conditions.
B. Data Interpretation The radiological data collected during the history of the stations in the groundwater were used as a baseline with which current operational data were compared: .Several factors are important in the interpretation of the data: 120
: 1. Lower Limit of Detection The. lower limit of detection (LLD) is specified ib,,, fedeT.a,'
rE.i",.jiation as a minimum sensitivity value-'hat must he achivr-routinel' by the analytical parameter.
The Environmental LLD specified, in the ODCM for tritium is 3,000 pCi/L (ODCM Table 14.12-1 for Salem and Table 14.12.1-1 for Hope Creek)'. For th.:RG-*PP, all tritium-analyses are performed with the LLD of 200 pCi/L-.2. " *LaboratorvMeasurements Unce,-taintb,,-"T
.." The estimated uncertainty ii measurement Of. tihtJLrn;,::
environmenItal samples is-frequently on the-orde of N5P%,ofthe measurement value. -Statistically,~the exact valuC of a! measu~em2nt, is expressed -as a range with b stated !evel of confidence; The convention is to report results with a 95% level tof confidence., The uincertainty comes from calibration standards, sample. ,olume or weight measurements, sampling uncertainty and other factors.Analytical uncertainties are reported at the 95% confidence level in this report for reporing consistency with the AREOR.3. Groundwater Quality Data, Analysis.Groundwater samples generally consisted of at least four aliquots, denoted as "A", "B", and "C" samples and the NJDEP-BNE split sample.These samples were either submitted to a -laboratory or held as back up samples as described in the following section.121 Groundwater "A" samples were submitted to the station's onsite chemistry laboratory for tritium and gamma scans. If these scans jndicatedlhat trItiurn concentrations wera below -10,,000.
pCi/L and no plant-related gamma emitters were present,'(all-RGPP samples met this criteria), thenmthe 'B" samples-were~.submitted to Teledyne Brown analytical laboratop/
for-, wlevel analysis. "C", samples were held as back up until the:apalytical results were received and determined to be accurate and valid.-jn ,the eyent, that the results were believed to be questionable,.(the S'C" samples were submitted for analysis., However, none were required in 2007. Sample aliquots were also periodically transmitted to the PSEG Maplewood Testing Services laboratory for comparison and quality verification.
Additionally a split sample from each well was submitted to the NJDEP-BNE designated laboratory, Eberline-. Services; for analysis regardless of the screening concentration,-according to the request of the BNE. Results for these samples will be.!provided by Eberline Service, to the NJDEP-BNE.
C. Background Analysis A pre-operational radiological environmental monitoring program;(pre-operational REMP) was conducted to establish background radioactivity levels prior~to operation of the Station. The pre-operational.REMP did not address the groundwater at the facility from a radionuclide standpoint.
Subsequent natural and anthropogenic events and activities, such as half-life, nuclear bomb testing, and Chernobyl, have altered the radiological environmental character.
Some of the. anthropogenic impacts were clearly identified during the Salem GRS investigation by age-dating characterization of low-level.
tritium concentrations.
Anthropogenic impacts have also been historically noted in Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Reports (AREORs).122 Background evaluation for eachl, moTnitoring well-vwas cornducted using adjacent well ccncentrat~ions, upgradient concentrations, areeal gradient impaicts fromionstruction, andr similarffaetorsiA factor to be considered in the RGPP is the ver.:ylow
!evel of tritiumn in the groundwater and the inability io reasonably perform reprodicible, analyses at a lower level than 200 pCi/L. Sin.`e plant-related':radiohuclides have not been detected in the groundwater, even in "ne knoWhyarea at the Salem GRS, the.:"historicalbackground value is 'notdetectsd" andthere is essentially no-comparative data. ..v'I1 Creation; of Trinium -Tritium is created in the environment from naturally occurii-..
processes-both cosmnic and subteirancoa n, as well as `,,roni anthropogenic (i.e., man-made) sources. In the upper atmosphere, 'Cosmogenic", tritium is produced from the bombardment of-stable nuclides and combines with oxygen to form tritiated water, whichwill then enter the hydrologic cycle.Below, ground, "lithogenic" tritium is produced by the bombardment of natural lithium present in Crystalline rocksby,.neutrons produced by the radioactive decay of naturally abundant-uranium and thorium. Lithogenic production of tritium is usually negligible compared:to other-sources due to the limited abundance'of lithium in rock. The lithogenict'itium is introduced directly to groundwater.
A major anthropogenic source of tritium and strontium-.90 comes from the former atmospheric.testing of thermonuclear weapons. Levels of tritium in precipitation increased significantly during the 1950s aiid early 1960s, and later with additional testing, resultirg in the release fsignificant amounts of tritium to the atmosphere.
123 The Canadian heavy water nuclear power reactors, other commercial power reactors, nuclear research and weapons production continue to-infljencc.
tritium concentrations in the environment.
: 2. Precipitation Data Precipitation samples are routinely collected at stations around the world for the analysis of tritium and other radionuclides.
Two publicly available databases th.at provide tritium concentrations int precipitation are Global"Network of 'ltopes in Precipitation (GNIP)and USEPA's RadNet database,.GNIP provides tritium-precipitation concentration data for samples collected world wide from 1960 to 2007. RadNet provides rtitium precipitation concentration data for samples collected at stations throuig. -out the;U.S.erom 1-9C0 .up to and including 2007. Tritium'coocentrations peaked around 1963. This peak,&#xfd; which approached
'--10,000 pCi/L for some stations, coincided with:the atmospheric testing* o thermonuclear weapons. Tritium;concentrations in surface water showed a sharp decline up until 1975 followed by a gradual decline since that time. Tritium concentrations in wells may still be above the 200, pCi/L detection limit from the external causes described above.Water from previous years and decades. is naturally captured in groundwater; so some well water, sources today are affected by the surface water from the 1960s that was elevated in tritium.124 IV. Results and Discussion The locations of the wells relative to major plant ccmpcnentz are shown in Figures 1 and 2. The analytical results are shown on Tables 4A and 4B.A. Groundwater Results -, Samples. were collectedfrom RGPP monit,-ring .wellsthroughout the year in.-accordance.With the :station'.
radiologii.l.9gro.undwat,3r protection program. Analytical results and anomalies discussed b3low.Tables 4A vand 4B pi"esent-the:ground water qualitNAna1aytipal results from the 26 RGPP wells. The groundwF.ter samrples were analyzed for tiitium, strontium and plant,.related gamma emitters by Teledyne-Brown.,The lower quaniitatior.i limits for-tritium and strontium were 200 pCi/L and 2.0 pCi/L, respectively.
Gamma emitting isotopes were analyzed to the LLD. shown, in. Table 3, plant-related gamima emitters were not detected during the investigation..
Tritium at Sblem Generatina Station-.The results of the laboratory analysis indicate that tritium was detected (i.e., reported at a concentration above the lower quantitation limit of 200 pCi/L) in groundwater within the shallow water-bearing zone (i.e., riverbed deposits) in three of the Salem monitoring wells sampled. The sampled wells included all of the "B Series" wells, and existing wells T, U, Y, Z and AL. Detection of tritium occurred in wells AL, and Z and BD, which is located just outside the cofferdam.
The tritium concentrations in these wells were above the quantitation limit, reported as 243 pCi/L, 264 pCi/L and. 217 pCi/L respectively.
125 The concentration of tritium detected in these wells is greater than an:o-def-f ma-gnitude below the ODCM LLD of 3,000 pCi/L. The tritium concentrations are being monitored'and trended in these wells through semi-annual sampling.
No adverse trend has been observed.Tritium at Hope Creek Generatinq Station Hope Creek Generating Station has observed low concentrations of tritium in, certain wells and anomalous tritium concentrations in other specific wells.Based on the 2006 tritium results, sample frequencies were increased on specific wells in accordance with the evaluation protocol discussed in Section II.C above and Station procedures.
Tritium was detected (concentration greater than 200 pC i/L) in wells BM, BN, and BQ at concentrations ranging from < 200 pCi/L to 326 pCi/L. Tritium was detected in the range of < 200 pCi/L to 481 pCi/I at Well BJ, located down gradient of the CST. These low concentrations of tritium were evaluated and determined not to be indicative of an adverse trend, these wells are being monitored semi-annually and the results will continue to be evaluated.
Wells BH, B1, and BK have presented anomalous tritium concentrations, ranging from < 200 pCi/L to 967 pCi/L during this reporting period.Confirmatory analyses were inconclusive and more recent analyses show a significant reduction in the reported tritium concentrations.
Laboratory quality assurance and quality control have been evaluated and determined not to be the source of the anomalous data. To ensure adequate trending and evaluations, sampling frequency for these wells was increased as shown in Table 4A. These analytical results showed no adverse trends.126 Strontium Total.strontium,., including Sr-89 and Sr-90, ..was. no.t detected,-above the LLD of 2 pCi/LinanyRGPP, weIl sample., Gamma Emitters.No plant-related gamma emitters were detected to above the ODCM Environmental LLDs in any RGPP 'weli sarfiplesi.
Naturally occurring Potassium-40 was detected in 7 of the welis-:6mrpled.
B. Leaks, Spills, and Releases No significant leaks, Spills or releases occurred orwere detected during this monitoring period.C. Trends There:have been no adversetrends identified through the RGPP during this reporting period.127 D. Investigations Salem Generating Station The tritium detections, at-S, aale m- Generating Station were evaluated and determined to be greater than an order of magnitude below the Further Investigatier Criteria.
The investigation included validation of the results through indepepdent analysis and is continuing through semi-annual monitoring of the wells for tritium concentration and evaluation of the results..Hope Creek Generating Station The tritium detections at Hope Creek Generating Station were evaluated and determined to be less than an order of magnitude below the Further Investigation Criteria.
Other than Well BJ all other wells included in this investigation showed significantly lower in tritium concentrations.
The investigation included validation of the results through independent analysis and is. continuing through semi-annual monitoring of the wells for tritium concentration and evaluation of the results.E. Projected RGPP Activities The RGPP will be continued in 2008, being modified as required to adaptively manage the program to meet the objectives.
Sampling will continue on the following schedule (in addition to the specific wells which exceed the LLD of 200 pCi/L being sampled quarterly for tritium concentration at Hope Creek): 128 Tritium will be analyzed at least twice each calendar year to an LLD of 200 pCi/L;* Plant-related gamma emitters will be analyzed semi-annually to the ODCM" Envi'ronmentaftLL..
and, Strontium will be analyzed an ualn as total strontium; if the total strontium is greater pGi/L a separate analysis will be performed speciially and strontium-90.
129 Table I Monitoring Well Construction Details, Hope Creek Generating Station Installation Construction Diameter Total Depth Monitoring MP MP Monitoring Well iD Date Details (inches) (feet bgs) Interval Elevation Elevation Purpose .. Source Targets.(feet bgs) (feet RPD) (feet msl)Well BH May-06 Sch-40 PVC 4 37.0 27 -37 97.92 8 Perimeter NA Well BI May-06 Sch-40 PVC 4 38.5 :28.5 -38.5 99.6 9.68 Source Facilities; Piping Well BJ May-06 Sch-40 PVC 4 38.0 28-38 100.23 10.31 Source Condensate Storage & Transfer; Facilities; Piping Well BK May-06 Sch-40 PVC 4 38.5 28.5-38.5 98.19 8.27 Perimeter NA Well BL May-06 Sch-40 PVC 4 35.0 25 -35 99.71 9.79 Perimeter NA Well BM May-06 Sch-40 PVC 4 38.0 28 -38 99.76 9.84 Source Facilities; Piping Well BN May-06 Sch-40 PVC 4 12.5 7.5- 12.5 102.64 12.72 Source Auxiliary Boiler Building; Piping Well BO May-06 Sch-40 PVC 4 36.0 26 -36 97.98 8.06 Perimeter/Source Building Sewage Well BP May-06 Sch-40 PVC 4 38.0 .28 -38 99.06 9.14 Perimeter/Source Building Sewage Well BQ May-06 Sch-40 PVC 4 42.0 32-42 102.16 12.24 Source Auxiliary Boiler Building; Dry Cask Storage Building; Piping Well BR May-06 Sch-40 PVC 4 -40.5 .30.5 -40.5 104.28 14.36 Perimeter/Source Piping; Dry Cask Storage Building Well BS May-06 Sch-40 PVC 4 35.0 25 -35 100.55 10.63 Upgradient NA Well BT May-06 Sch-40 PVC 4 38.5 -28.5 -38.5 99.60 9.68 Upgradient NA (0* Notes: MP Measuring Point bgs Below ground surface RPD .Relative to plant-datumr msl Relative to mean sea level (NAVD 1988)NA Not applicable NAD 83. North American Datum 1983 Table 2. Monitoring Well Construction Details, Salem Generating Station, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey Installation Construction Diameter Total Depth .Monitoring MP MP Monitoring Well ID Date Details (inches) (feet bgs) Interval Elevation Elevation Purpose Source Targets (feet bgs) (feet RPD) (feet msl)Well T Jun-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 31.2 21.2- 31.2 104.13 14.21 Source Facilities; House Heating BIr Well U May-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 32.2 27.2 -32.2 98.57 8.65 Source Facilities; House Heating BIr Well Y Sep-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 37.0 27.0-35.0 101.81 11.89 Perimeter NA Well Z Sep-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 37.5 27.5 -37.5 101.86 11.94 Perimeter NA Well AL Jan-04 Sch-40 PVC 2 25.3 15.3 -25.3 99.13 9.21 Perimeter NA Well BA May-06 Sch-40 PVC 4 39.5 29.5-39.5 101.07 11.15 Perimeter NA Well BB May-06 Sch-40 PVC 4 47.0 37 -47 99.38 9.46 Perimeter NA Well BC May-06 Sch-40 PVC 4 38.0 28 -38 98.78 8.86 Source I Perimeter Facilities; RAP Tanks; Piping Well BD May-06 Sch-40 PVC 4 40.5 30.5 -40.5 98.78 8.86 Source .Facilities; RAP Tanks; Piping Well BE May-06 Sch-40 PVC 4 37.0 27- 37 98.31 8.39 Perimeter NA Well BF May-06 ., Sch-40 PVC 4 42.5 32.5-42.5 99.11 9.19 Perimeter NA Well BG May-06 Sch-40 PVC 4 37.0 27 -37 100 10.08 Perimetei NA Well BU May-06 Sch-40.PVC 4 36.0 26-36 100.16 10.24 Upgradient NA C,, Notes: MP bgs RPD msL.NA NAD 83 Measuring Point Below ground surface Relative to plant datum Relative to mean sea level (NAVD 1988) ."Not applicable, North Americah Datum 1983 4 ,. .,.
Tabie 3.:Relev;ii t-Grouidicw,-ater Screening Criteria, Salem and Hope, Creek Generatinq Stations PSEG Reporting Level'. ~ isoto-pe ....... ... ... G PL D p i-, '...:" p iL Tritium Conc. (pCilL) .200 _ ____________....30.00_'.
_Total Strontfim (pCUL) 2.0 8 Mn-54 '... 15 1000__Fe-59________..___
-__. .. .30 400 Co-60 15 300.Zn-_65 30 300 15 400 Zr-95 15 200 Cs-134 15 30.....Cs-137.'_
18 50 Ba-140 60 200 La-140 15 200 in* nf6rnai Report, ODCM Report at 30,000 pCi/L I 132 Table 4A. Groundwater Tritium Analytical Results,.Hone Creek.Generating Statiiq , ...Tritium Conc. 1 T Tritium Conc.Well ID SampleDate
.(pCiIL) Well ID J Sample Date (pCilL)Jan-07 967 BH Feb-07 476 Mar-07 <200 Apr-07 301 BM Jan-07___..Feb-07T
., -.e200 J Mar-07 .<200'Apr-07" 226<200 Oct-07 250.- -Oct&#xfd;0.7-<200 Jan-07. 475 Feb-07. 284 BI Mar-07 <200 Apr-07 214 Oct-07 350.. ..Jan-07 .402 Feb-07 455 BJ Mar-07 481 Apr-07 269 Oct-07 <200 Jan-07 <200 Feb-07 <200 BK Mar-07 <200 Apr-07 <200 Oct-07 383 BL Apr-07 <200 Oct-07 <200 Jan-07 347 F.. <200 BN : Mar-07 : 264 K Apr-Q7 <200.. .... .... Oct-O *:i. .231.Apr-07 <200 Oct-07 <200 B P Apr-07 <200 Oct-07 <200 Jan-07 <200 Feb-07 326 BQ Mar-07 <200 Apr-07 <200 Oct-07 <200 BR Apr-07 <200 Oct-07 <200 1 Apr-07 1 <200 I Apr-07 1 <200 BS I Oct-07 1 <200 I Oct-07 1 <200 I-.'133 Table 4B. Groundwater Tritium Analytical Results;_Salem Generating Station _Tiitifirm
: c. .Tritium Well ID Sample Date " (pCiIL) j Well ID Sample Date Conc. (pCi/L)Jan-07<200 -, ::.-Jan-07 Apr-07.<200<200 Apr-07 243 " AL Jul-07 J 203 U Jul-07 <200 Oct-07<&#xfd;200 Oct-07<200 Apr-07 J <200 BA May-07. 200 Oct-07 <200 BB Apr-07 <200j <200 BC Apr-07 -<200 Oct-07 j <200 BD " Apr-07 256 Oct-07 264, BE- Apr-07 <200 BE_____ Oct-07 <200 BF Apr-07 !<200.-Oct-07 <200 BG Apr-07 <200 Nov-07 <200 BU Apr-07 <200 Oct-07 <200 Jan-07 .<200 Feb-07 <200 Mar-07 <200 Apr-07 <200'May-07 <200 Y Jun-07 <200 Jul-07 <200 Aug-07 <200 Sep-07 <200 Oct-07 <200 Nov-07 <200 Dec-07 <200 Jan-07<200 z Feb-07 <200 Mar-07 <200 Apr-07 217 May-07 <200 Jun-07 <200 Jul-07 <200 Aug-07 <200 Sep-07 <200 Oct-07 <200 Nov-07 <200 Jan-07 <200 Apr-07 J <200 Jul-07 I <2000 T Oct-07 <200 Dec-07<200 134 Table 5. Groundwater Elevations, Salem and Hope Creek Generating Stations Depth to Depth to Well Reference Point -Water Water-Level Water-Level Water Water-Level Water-Level Identification Location Elevation (ft btoc) Elevation (ft rpd) Elevation (ft msl) (ft btoc) Elevation (ft rpd) Elevation (ft msl)(NGVD.1988) 16-May-07 16-May-07 16-May-07 01-Aug-07 01-Aug-07 01-Aug-07 WeliT SGS :14.21 11.67 92.46 2.54 -13.59 90.54. 0.62 Well U SGS 8.65 18.27 _NA 0.38 6.24 92.33 2.41'WelIY SGS 11.89 .10.5 .91.31 ."39 10.62 91.4 --1.48 Well Z SGS ' 11.94 -10.52 91.34 1.42 10.44 91.42 1.5 Well AL SGS 9.21 -7.11 92.02 2.1 9.99 92.14 2.22 Well BA SGS 11.15 9,71 91.36 1.44 9.79 91.28 1&#xfd;.6 WellBB SGS 9.46 8.53 90.85 0.93 8.31 '91.07 -- 1.15 Well BC SGS 8.86 7.31 91.47 1.55 7.35 91.47 : 1.51_Well BD SGS 8.86 "7 91.78 1.86 7.21 91.57 1 1.65 Well BE SGS 8.39 6.6 91.71 1.79 6.73 91.58 --: 1.66 Well BF SGS 9.19 7.4 91.71 1.79 7.58 91.53 1.61 WelIBG SGS 10.08 7.73 92.27 2.35 8.03 91.97 2.:.5 Well BH HCGS 8 -6.33 91.59 1.67 6.49 91.43 -1.51 WelIBI HCGS 9.68 7.13 92.47 2.55 7.19 91.41 2.49 Well BJ HCGS 10.31 7.24 92.99 3.07 7.42 92.81 ; 2.89 Well BK HCGS 8.27 6.25, 9'.94 2.02 6.25 9,1.94 ....0 WelIBL HCGS , 9.79 8.29, 91.42A 1.5 -8.43 91.28 : 1.36 Well BM HCGS. 9.84- 'NA.' HNA; .NA 7.9 __7_6_1_ _j_-__1.__6 Well BN HCGS ;A1272. .6.48 j 96.-i6 ' 6.24 7;6 .: 95.t3 , 51" WelIBO HCGS 8.06 NA- WAV'. ..NA i' .NA' .NA -NA WelIBP HCGS 9.14 8.54 '90.52 -' :0.6 1. ' ,8.34 .90.72 _.._-0 WelIBQ HCGS 12.24 NA NA'- 'NA -.NA ' I NA % N, Well BR HOGS 14.36 1 12.44 91".64 ' 1.72 ; ...12,76 ' 2 91.S2 .1.6 Well BS HCGS 10.63 j 7.77 92.78 :2.86 .7.98 ' i92.57 -2,65 WellBT HCGS 9.68 6.59 f 93.01 ' ,3.09 ' 7 92.6 1 2.63 (31 Well BU SGS I 10.24-1 -:7.32 92.84 i 7.65 90.51 -, I 2"59-1S -::I 10.24--Notes ft bgs Feet belowv ground surfa6e. '-ft rpd -Elevation (in feet relative to plant datum.ft amsl Feet above mean sea level (NAVD 1988).Mean tide level at Artificial Island is 0.11 feet (NAVD 1988).NA Data not availab!e UTM Unable to monitor (No access)
Table 6. List of Systems of RGPP Interest and General Location and Description of System, Hope Creek Generating Station System Name ysteID .. stem Description/Location
.Core Spray System BE Provides sLipport to nuclear reaction process; housed within the Containment Dome.Reactor Core Isolation System BD .. Provides su pp.to nuclearreactioniprdcess; housed within th&#xfd; Containment Dome.Fuel Pool Cooling and Cleanup EC Provides support to nuclear reaction process; hbused within the Containment Dome.Filtration, Recirculation, and GU Provvides-support to nuclear reaction:
proces's;Tioused within the Containment Dome.Ventilation System (FRVS) ..Containment Atmosphere Control GS .-ro'videsisupportto nuclear reaction.
process;'housed within the ContainmentDome.
System ___Reactor Building HVAC System GR.,:.Si Provides support to nuclear reaction-process; housed within the Containment'Dome.
Lube Oil Storage and Transfer .C Located within the Outer Containment Building.System -7 eactor: Building Pressure Relief S Located within the Ouier Containment Building...
-..'-.L..' ....System Auxiliary Building HVAC. System GH, Loca-ted.at the boundary between the Outer Containmeni Building and the Hope (Radwaste Area). Creek Service/Radwaste Building.Licqud Radwaste System: HHB 7 Locate'd within theRadwasteBuifdihg.
..Radioactive Laundry; HI-I ,H,. Locatedfwifhin the6Radwasie Building.Auxiliary Building HVAC System GL .Located within the Radwaste Building.(Service Area) -...Building and Equipment Drains HG Located within the Turbine Building.Turbine Building HVAC System GE Located within the Turbine Building.
" Co0ndensate Storage and Transfer AP/BN ,Contains and transfers water used in cooling applications; located outside of the System ..... : sheetpiie adjacent to the Outer Containment Building.Residual Heat Removal System BC Contains and transfers water used in: cooling applications; located outside.of the........___ sheetpile adjacent to the Outer Containment Buildiniig.
Service Water System ..EA Provides raw water from the Delaware River; located within sheetpile trench.Storm Drainage System LB Collects precipitation runoff.Building Sewage System LA Processes waste water generated from sink drains and other comfort facilities at the Station.Auxiliary Boilers FA/FB Provide additional power to Station.Circulating Water System DA Supports cooling process; located within containment trenches and containment sleeves.Cooling Tower DB Supports cooling process for steam turbines.Low Volume Oily Waste LE Oily water from oil storage tank contaminant basins High Pressure Cooling Injection BJ Cooling support to nuclear reaction process System 136 Table 7. List of Systems of RGPP Interest and General Location and Description of System, Salem Generating Station ,: :j : ,: * * .'. [;; ,-.System Name System ID System Description/Location Auxiliary Feedwiter.
AF Provides feedwater to supplement steam generation process. Storage tanks located on the west side of the huxiliary BUilding, situated above the cofferdam.
Building and Yard BD Located within and around the TurbineBuilding and throughout the Station yard.Drains , .Feedwater and CN/FW Contains and transfers water transported to steam generator from turbines; located inside the Condensate, .... .........
Turbine Buildingand between the Containment Dome and the Turbine Building.Condensate Polishing CP Contains and transfers condensate from the Turbine Building to the proximally located....__ _ _Condensate Polishing Buildings.
Chemical'Volume CVC Provides support to the nuclear process watere management systems; housed within and Control .. adjacent to the Auxiliary Building an!d within' the Containment Domes.Circulating Water CW Non contact cooling water for the condensation process; runs from the'Delaware River to the_Turbine Building.Demineralized Water DM Provides support to Reactor Coolant System: located adjacent to the Auxiliary Building.Steam Generator Drains GBD Provides support to the steam generation process; located within the Containment Domes and and Blowdown runs to the Waste Basin to the south and to the Turbine Builiing.House Heating Boiler HHB Steam source for building heating; located to0the north of the Turbine Building Non-Radioactive Liquid LW Liquid Waste lines that~run from the Turbine Building south and east to Clarifiersi I and 2 and Waste .. the equalization basin.Main Steam MS ' Contains and transfers steam from the Generator to the Turbines; located w'ithin'the
________ Containment Domes and run to the Turbine Building.Spent Fuel Pool Cooling SF Supports storage and transfer of5p._nt:fuel, located within the Fuel Handling Buildings-`
Safety Injection Si Provides support to the riuclear reaction process; storage tanks located on theiwest side of the,;Auxiliary Building, situated above the cofferdam.
Service Water_.. SW Provides raw water from the Delaware River' located south and east of the Containment Domes., ': .-.Radioactive Liquid .WD Located-within the Auxiliary Building Drains .Waste Liquid WL ... Radioactive liqu-id waste sYstemlp.cated prir.arily in the Containment Dome and the Auxiliary Building.
'137 Table 8'. , Salem and Hope Creek 1052FR 50.75(g) Data Spill/Discharge Quantity(ies)
Spilled Location of Spill/Discharge Description
_____ ____ __ _ Discharged
-_.......__
_ _-__ _ _Apr-95 88 mCi Hope Creek and Salem Steam from the Decon Solution Evaporator released from Hope Creek's South Plant Vent.Jun-01 .5Ci Unit 1 RWST Salem Unit 1 RWST Nozzle Leak Sep-02 -5 Ci -Ground west of Unit 1 Spent Blockage of the Spent Fuel Pool Fuel Building liner's "tell-tales" caused backup of contaminated water through.___ building seams, Jan-05 No discharge to the Hope Creek rooms 3133, Water from inside the Waste environment 3135, 3129 and 5102 -Sludge Phase Separator Tank May-07 2.8 milli Curies ofCs 137 In front of Salem Unit 2 Burst site glass during operation.
condensate polisher Resin blown through wall into..switchyard C0 4, I -. -a-BLA m (waLAUoAEm Ii mti. 2m)WELL TO MIffIDRIMN WM SRIED 9 4 P TI %LLOW, WIT OUIIE W=E IWRS OF TE M"MF 35 FET TYIM PUMM~ -~ MMEW I -SBWE WASEER PPM o m CAOM PPM* MNW (SUM sE)RCP 0NORaEIE RPE MTL MM TIOE ILM-WunIore VAL'V I 4.I i I.L F, IM.L N WLL EU LOMIMO NOPE O ReHE EMUI SMFIRO WOPM 0 TASSOCAID IN SAMU I (o A-)-C---I----~ ---. ------. IA.-I.* ARCADIS ITmytli T$do135410 Fm300NU-1U1 PSEG NUCLEAR, L 1C HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATIO N-MWg NItX71 a Ob Ile, ZW STATION LAYOUT HANCOCKI BRIDE, NEWV RSEY Am0~T9 l BL~<LID MEMIRNG WM E 64 .2006)[]WELL RI MONITORING WELL SCREENED IN THE ENGINErOF
*ILL WITHN THE COFFERDAM, 20 FEET DEEP (WELLS M. N. 0. R)WE.LL S& 40khG WEL SCREENED IN THE SK4NLOW, %XTER TABLE 35 FEET DEEP..u. s S T. U. W)"IT. t, W N BCREENEb IN T14E 2'*CEp FOW RMATION, 80 FEET 0DEEP (WELL K, L. P. Q, V.)-J -NO f 1 1.ITE: WELL BF, WELL 9G AND WELL BU LOCATED' =O' HOPE CREEK44ENERATING STATION PROPERTY BUT ASSOCIED WITH SALEM UNIT II INVESTIGATION. i " .Ii]1/'A.1~~1-0: I I&deg;1~LAF-,.:1 lp r-r-&#xfd;---I/0 ML P BA'w 1e 0 300 SCALE. l'-300'ARCADIS pfi .' pllloo Nmmm, Pu 1U40 Trk373M= FmWNIMUll-PEW NUCLEAR LC SALE GENERATING STATION STATION LAYOUT HANCOCK BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY-I
-12 OPP[]0 CA1CNW&-m msm Sm%-A.D ~ , WELL R a MONITORING WELL SCREENED IN 1HE ENGINEERED FILL WITHIN THE COFFERDAM, 20 FEET DEEP (WELLS M, N. 0, R)WELL SO MONITORING WELL SCREENED IN THE SH.LOW, WATER TABLE AQUIFER OUTSIDE HiE COFFERDAM, 35 FEET DEEP (WELLS S. T. U, W)I WELL LO) MONITORING WELL SCREENED IN THE WINCENTN FORMATION.
8O FEET DEEP (WELLS'K, L, P. Q. V.)-2.00 ccum1 (0.IFT imij HED VM.REIE 1.Ki WAM 71E LMl OF THE KIANAK MIER AT*111K IUIADS 0.111FT (MfVDI" 2. VU BF. WMU. 8 MiD IMOL~U L==tE ON, HOI aWCOM7W1INt STAOO PROPM WT M SSOQ0ID Wo SALNi wff a Dhsmam*HIiwaDL mano w's"A=E ULMoNFE OWK WAN VA LIE.- NAAVO 1"0)Notnwn Pa18low T4*2UT5B111100 Fuz2U5TM9.101 PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC SALEM I HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE MAP SEPTEMBER 28, 2006 NfipOa1 00 18pUowtB7 MIFE HANCOCK'S BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY  31ftft--
'1/2',I 7.-I oL.-!o e*O a a f II~1I W WELL RU CM -M owin 0. v L- U 7' " L'/*1'I../MlNrIN WEU. SCREENED IN ThE D E mD FM,. vF lgL h120 PT orEE (WELLs M. N, 0. R)I~a p B d/' ' 'S\ \\U..b "D* or WELL L* MOUORIN0 WELL SCMIEnf IN WhE V*CB F0~T11N, 30 PUr oEEP ( S VK 4 P. Q. V.)WELL SO MOIITOR WELL "CR ImI IN hE SI.LOE, WATER TALE-UWER OTSIE 1HE COFF*N. 35 FEEr ODE (MELS So T. U. W)0~-2.00 1. DIE rEM I.EL m 1nE MOVE me UAT S JI MWOL WI.AS U 0.11 Fr (IA 0 5w0 7 2. M1L VF. W .LL so M .L ED ON WE am inuamn -m II MR wr imoamiw WmSIM aml w Imum LI* womm Ream o'w am -u SM MIL urIs i%, ARCADIS Nmmm Pu 16N60 Tgum s1MuD ft 8W5101 MKIULMh PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC SA.EM I HOPE CREEK GENERATING STATION POTENTIOMETRIC SURFACE MAP SEPTEMBER 28,2006 Numi Mfto HACO MDGE, NEW JRSEY DELTA _ I _S F V 1I ,I I JI I I I"mmu ma inrn.Is-50--100-m--~ ==~Smm-m--armi 4I -n U)I I-200--250.-300-400-450-500-600-700.-750.-900--1,o000.-1,050.-1.100--1.150,-1,200-i alllm wLqm-viumu M M MW 4--I m --a3 kummmosomr&#xfd;
&#xa3;.,, .::=;..---I*9-1j~Y~...........
...... ......m. m OWx-F --IF I..lan MME -aIx I I I UmME -M 6. ARCADIS ToU7NUMU, FuocX7l4I7!.1 PSE1 NUCLEAR, LLC STRATIGRAPHY COLUMN 142 DELTA SHm F F';11 eI I i 0.-50--100-IWOIM FIL m- am-1-- ==M F M --m ,r\mL.9 MM L UI 1~S U 0 z C, 0 t Itj-200--250--300.-350"-400"-450--500--550"-600-Im LA SWn LAM-VENMl AQIR 4 mm~ummimi UUWMW UN Du" omum MON QM ommcf3 m -UM iWNWmui 2 T I I!upWM am-650--700.-750.--800]M MAM I nM-85-9(-1,0G-1.0--1 ,2(50i 307)0-MULE -N aON 50'-50."a..mm 00" OM.E W M mif F AI " PSEG NUCLEARF LLC P. m SLE NPeOas71.o21 p.Mm.4m lokMAnzu0 d 6TE 1iy3 STRATiGRAPHY COLUMN ji a "=w 4-Fac2g7fMB-180t Qc.WE wowh.om h'IACOCICS BRIDGE, SALEM COUNTY, NEW JERSEY 142}}

Revision as of 12:41, 17 April 2019

Redirect to:

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML081280737&oldid=1475177"