ML16138A566

2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station; Docket No. 50-271; License No. DPR-28

ML16138A566
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png
Issue date:	05/12/2016
From:	Chappell C Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
BVY-16-019
Download: ML16138A566 (109)

Text

~ Entergy Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC Vermont Yankee 320 Governor Hunt Rd .

Vernon, VT 05354 (802) 257-7711 Coley C. Chappell Manager, Design and Programs BVY 16-019 May 12, 2016 ATTN: Document Control Desk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 *

Subject:

2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Docket No. 50-271 License No. DPR-28

Dear Sir or Madam ,

In accordance with Vermont Yankee Technical Specification 6.6.E, enclosed is a copy of the 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report. This report contains a summary and analysis of the radiological environmental data collected for the calendar year 2015.

There are no new regulatory commitments being made in this submittal.

Should you have any questions or require additional information concerning this submittal, please contact me at (802) 451-3374.

Sincerely,

~B~rr~

Enclosure:

Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report - Year 2015 cc listing (next page)

BVY 16-019 I Page 2 of 2 cc: Mr. Daniel Dorman, Region 1 Administrator U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 2100 Renaissance Blvd ., Suite 100 King of Prussia, PA 19406-2713 Mr. Jack D. Parrott, Senior Project Manager U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop T-8F5 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2378 Mr. Christopher Recchia, Commissioner VT Department of Public Service 112 State Street - Drawer 20 Montpelier, VT 05620 Vermont Department of Health Division of Radiological Health Attn : Bill Irwin P.O. Box 70 Burlington , VT 05402-0070 Massachusetts Department of Public Health Jack Priest, Director Radiation Control Program 529 Main Street, Suite 1M2A Charlestown , MA 02129 Augustinus Ong, Administrator Department of Health and Human Services Radiolog ical Health Section 29 Hazen Drive Concord , NH 03301-6504 John Giarrusso Nuclear Preparedness and Planning Manager 400 Worcester Road Framingham , MA 01702 Tony Honnellio Radiation Program Manager, Health and Safety Coordinator EPA, New England , Region 1 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100 (OSRR02-2).

Boston , Massachusetts 02109

ENTERGY-VERMONTYANKEE Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT Year 2015 Reviewed by:

• -=----'-----~R-~-~--------~

I ~'DAfe jt//;t;:;

Approved for Distribution:

-~~~~-.11=.~t-;:/C~h~e-m-:-is-:-try--;M--;-a=-:n-ag-=--:e

=- :-::-r--

I £/r;! <o Date

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 1

2. BACKGROUND RADIOACTIVITY ......................................................................................... 2

'

2.1 Naturally Occurring Background Radioactivity ................................................................. 2 2.2 Man-Made Background Radioactivity ................................................................................ .3

3. GENERAL PLANT AND SITE INFORMATION .................................................................... .4

4. PROGRAM DESIGN ................................................................................................................... 5 4.1 Monitoring Zones ................................................................................................................ 6 4.2 Pathways Monitored ............................................................................................................ 6 4.3 Descriptions of Monitoring Programs ................................................................................. 7 5 RADIOLOGICAL DATA

SUMMARY

TABLES ................................................................... 24

6. ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS ................................................................... 43 6.1 Sampling Program Deviations ......................................................................................... 43 6.2 Comparison of Achieved LLDs with Requirements ........................................................ 44 6.3 Comparison of Results with Reporting Levels ................................................................ 45 6.4 Changes in Sampling Locations ....................................................................................... 45 6.5 Data Analysis by Media Type .......................................................................................... 46

7. . QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM .................................................................................... 83 7 .1 Environmental Dosimetry Company Laboratory ................................................ '." .......... 83 7.2 Teledyne Brown Engineering-Environmental Services (TBE-ES) Laboratory ............... 97

8. LAND USE CENSUS ............................................................................................................... 100

9.

SUMMARY

.............................................................................................................................. 102 10.. REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 103

LIST OF TABLES 4.1 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program .................................. 10 4.2 Radiologkal Environmental Monitoring Locations (Non-TLD) ............................................................................. 12 4.3 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Locations (TLD) ..................................................................................... 14 4.4 Environmental Lower Limit of Detection (LLD)

Sensitivity Requirements ........................................................................ 16 4.5 Reporting Levels for Radioactivity Concentrations in Environmental Samples ...................................................................... 17 5.1 Radiological Environmental Program Summary .................................... 26 5.2 Environmental TLD Data Summary ....................................................... 40, 5.3 Environmental TLD Measurements ........................................................ 41 6.1 Summary of Storm Drain System Sediment Sample Analyses ............... 50 '

6.2 Summary of Storm Drain System Water Sample Analyses ................... 51 6.3 Summary of Air Compressor Condensate and Manhole Water Tritium Concentrations ................................................. 52 8.1 Land Use Census Locations ................................................... 101 11

LIST OF FIGURES 4.1 Environmental Sampling Locations in Close Proximity to the Plant ................................................................... 18 4.2 Environmental Sampling Locations Within 5 Kilometers of Plant ...................................................................... 19 4.3 Environmental Sampling Locations.

Greater than 5 Kilometers from Plant ......................................................... 20 4.4 TLD Locations in Close Proximity to the Plant .................................................................................................. 21 4.5 TLD Locations Within 5 Kilometers of Plant .............................................................. ,......................................... 22 4.6 TLD Locations Greater than 5 Kilometers from Plant. ................................................................................................... 23 6.1- 6.27 Environmental Program Trend Graphs ....................................................... 56 iii

1. INTRODUCTION This report summarizes the findings of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) conducted by Entergy-Vermont Yankee in the vicinity of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VYNPS) in Vernon, Vermont during the calendar year 2015. The analyses of samples collected indicated that no plant-generated radioactive material was found in any location off site. In all cases, the possible radiological impact was negligible with respect to exposure from natural background radiation. In no case did the detected levels exceed the most restrictive federal regulatory or plant license limits for radionuclides in the environment. Measured values were several orders of magnitude below reportable levels listed in Table 4.5 of this report. Except for sample deviations listed in Section 6.1, all other samples were collec~ed and analyzed as required by the program.

This report is submitted annually in compliance with plant Technical Specification 6.6.E. The remainder of this report is organized as follows:

Section 2: Provides an introductory explanation of background radioactivity and radiation detected in the plant environs.

Section 3: Provides a brief description of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station site and its environs.

Section 4: Provides a description of the overall REMP program design. Included is a summary of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VYNPS) Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) requirements for REMP sampling, tables listing all locations sampled or monitored in 2015 with compass sectors and distances from the plant, and maps showing each REMP location. Tables listing Lower Limit of Detection requirements and Reporting Levels are also included.

Section 5: Consists of the summarized data as required by the VYNPS ODCM. The tables are in a format similar to that specified by the NRC Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position on Environmental Monitoring (Reference 1). Also included is a summary of the 2015 environmental TLD measurements.

Section 6: Provides the results of the 2015 monitoring program. The performance of the program in meeting regulatory requirements as given in the OD.CM is discussed, and the data acquired during the year are analyzed.

Section 7: Provides an overview of the Quality Assurance programs used at AREVA Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory and Teledyne Brown Engineering.

Section 8: Summarizes the requirements and the results of the 2015 Land Use Census.

Section 9: Gives a summary of the 2015 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program.

1

2. BACKGROUND RADIOACTIVITY Radiation or radioactivity potentially detected in the Vermont Yankee environment can be grouped into three categories. The first is "naturally-occurring" radiation and radioactivity. The second is "man-made" radioactivity from sources other than the Vermont Yankee plant. The third potential source of radioactivity is due to, emissions from the Vermont Yankee plant. For the purposes of the Vermont Yankee REMP, the first two categories are classified as "background" radiation, and are the subject of discussion in this section of the report. The third category is the one that the REMP is designed to detect and evaluate.

2.1 Naturally Occurring Background Radioactivity Natural radiation and radioactivity in the environment, which provide the major source of human radiation exposure, may be subdivided into three separate categories: "primordial radioactivity,"

"cosmogenic radioactivity" and "cosmic radiation." "Primordial radioactivity" is made up of those radionuclides that were created with the universe and that have a sufficiently long half-life to be still present on the earth. Included in this category are the newly-formed "daughter" radionuclides descending from these original elements. A few of the more important radionuclides in this category are Uranium-238 (U-238), Thorium-232 (Th-232), Rubidium-87 (Rb-87), Potassium-40 (K-40), Radium-226 (Ra-226), and Radon-222 (Rn-222). Uranium-238 and Thorium-232 are readily detected in soil and rock, whether through direct field measurements or through laboratory analysis of samples. Radium-226 in the earth can find its way from the soil into ground water, and is often detectable there. Radon-:222 is one of the components of natural background in air, and its daughter products are detectable on air sampling filters.

Potassium-40 comprises about 0.01 percent of all natural potassium in the earth, and is consequently detectable in most biological substances, including the human body. There are many more primordial radionuclides found in the environment in addition to the major ones discussed above (Reference 2).

The second sub-category of naturally-occurring radiation and radioactivity is "cosmogenic radioactivity."

This is produced through the nuclear interaction of high energy cosmic radiation with elements in the earth's atmosphere, and to a much lesser degree, in the earth's crust. These radioactive elements are then incorporated into the entire geosphere and atmosphere, including the earth's soil, surface rock, biosphere, sediments, ocean floors, polar ice and atmosphere. The major radionuclides in this category are Carbon-14 (C-14), Hydrogen-3 (H-3 or Tritium), Sodium-22 (Na-22), and Beryllium-7 (Be-7). Beryllium-7 is the one most readily detected, and is found on air sampling filters and occasionally in biological media (Reference 2).

2

The third sub-category of naturally-occurring radiation and radioactivity is "cosmic radiation." This consists of high energy atomic and sub-atomic particles of extra-terrestrial origin and the secondary particles and radiation that are produced through their interaction in the earth's atmosphere. The majority of this radiation comes from outside of our solar system, and to a lesser degree from the sun. We are protected from most of this radiation by the earth's atmosphere, which absorbs the radiation.

Consequently, one. can see that with increasing elevation one would be exposed to more cosmic radiation as a direct result of a thinner layer of air for protection. This "direct radiation" is detected in the field with gamma spectroscopy equipment, high pressure ion chambers and thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs).

2.2 Man-Made Background Radioactivity The second source of "background" radioactivity in the Vermont Yankee environment is from "man-madh" sources not related to the power plant. The most recent contributor (prior to year 2011) to this category was the fallout from the Chernobyl accident in April of 1986, which was detected in the Vermont Yankee environment and other parts of the world. Some smaller amounts of radioactivity were detected in the environment following the Fukushima Daiichi plants accidents in March 2011. A much greater contributor to'this category, however; has been fallout from atmospheric nuclear weapons tests.

Tests were conducted from 1945 through 1980 by the United States, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, China and France, with the large majority of testing occurring during the periods 1954-1958 and 1961-1962. (A test ban treaty was signed in 1963 by the United States, Soviet Union and United Kingdom, but not by France and China.) Atmospheric testing was conducted by the People's Republic of China as recently as October 1980. Much of the fallout detected today is due to this explosion and the last large scale test performed in November of 1976 (Reference 3).

The radioactivity produced by these detonations was deposited worldwide. The. amount of fallout deposited in any given area is dependent on many factors, such as the explosive yield of the device, the latitude and altitude of the detonation, the season in which it occurred, and the timing of subsequent rainfall which washes fallout from the troposphere (Reference 4). Most of this fallout has decayed into stable elements, but the residual radioactivity is still readily detectable in environmental samples worldwide. The two predominant radionuclides are Cesium-137 (Cs-137) and Strontium-90 (Sr-90). They are found in soil and in vegetation, and since cows and goats graze large areas of vegetation, these radionuclides are also often detected in milk.

• Other potential "man-made" sources of environmental "background" radioactivity include other nuclear power plants, coal-fired power plants, national defense installations, hospitals, research laboratories and 3

industry. These, collectively, are insignificant on a global scale when compared to the sources discussed above (natural and fallout).

3. GENERAL PLANT AND SITE INFORMATION The Vermont Yankee Nuclear Po~er Station is located in the town of Vernon, Vermont in Windham County. The 130-acre site is on the west shore of the Connecticut River, immediately upstream of the Vernon Hydroelectric Station. The plant site is bounded on the north, south and west by privately-owned land and on the east by the Connecticut River. The surrounding area is generally rural and lightly populated, and the topography is flat or gently rolling on the valley floor.

Construction of the single unit 540 megawatt BWR (Boiling Water Reactor) plant began in 1967. The pre-operational Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program, designed to measure environmental radiation and radioactivity levels in the area prior to station operation, began in 1970. Commercial operation began on November 30, 1972. An Extended Power Uprate, conducted in 2006, resulted in the present generation capacity of 650 megawatts electric.

A decision was made in 2013 to permanently shut down and decommission Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station at the end of2014. The last day of power operation occurred on December 29, 2014.

4

4. PROGRAM DESIGN The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) for the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VYNPS) was designed with specific objectives in mind. These are:

• To provide an early indication of the appearance or accumulation of any radioactive material in the environment caused by the operation of the station.

• To provide assurance to regulatory agencies and the public that the station's environmental impact is known and within anticipated limits.

• To verify the adequacy and proper functioning of station effluent controls and monitoring systems.

• To provide standby monitoring capability for rapid assessment of risk to the general public in the event of unanticipated or accidental releases of radioactive material.

The program was initiated in 1970, approximately two years before the plant began commercial operation. It has been in operation continuously since that time, with improvements made periodically over those years.

The current program is designed to meet the intent of NRC Regulatory Guide 4.1, Programs for Monitoring Radioactivity in the Environs of Nuclear Power Plants; NRC Regulatory Guide 4.8, Environmental Technical Specifications for Nuclear Power Plants; the NRC Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position of November 1979, An Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program; and NRC NUREG-0473, Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications for BWRs. The environmental TLD program has been designed and tested around NRC Regulatory Guide 4.13, Performance, Testing and Procedural Specifications for Thermoluminescence Dosimetry: Environmental Applications. The quality assurance program is designed around the guidance given in NRC Regulatory Guide 4.15, Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring' Programs (Normal Operations) - Effluent Streams and the Environment.

The sampling requirements of the REMP are given in the Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual Table 3.5.1 and are summarized in Table 4.1 of this report. The identification of the required sampling locations is given in the Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM), Chapter 7. These sampling and monitoring locations are shown graphically on the maps in Figures 4.1 through 4.6 of this report.

5

The Vermont Yankee Chemistry Department conducts the radiological environmental monitoring program and collects all airborne, terrestrial and ground water samples. VYNPS maintains a contract with Normandeau Associates to collect all fish, river water and river sediment samples. In 2015, analytical measurements of environmental samples were performed at Teledyne Brown Engineering Laboratory irt Knoxville, Tennessee. TLD badges are posted and retrieved by the Vermont Yankee Chemistry Department, and were analyzed by Environmental Dosimetry Company in Sterling, Massachusetts.

4.1 Monitoring Zones The REMP is designed to allow comparison of levels of radioactivity in samples from the area possibly influenced by the plant to levels found in areas not influenced by the plant. Monitoring locations within the first zone are called "indicators." Those within the second zone are called "controls." The distinction between the two zones, depending on the type of sample or sample pathway, is based on one or more of several factors, such as site meteorological history, meteorological dispersion calculations, relative direction from the plant, river flow, and distance. Analysis of survey data from the two zones aids in determining if there is a significant difference between the two areas. It can also help in differentiating between radioactivity and radiation due to plant releases and that due to other fluctuations in the environment, such as atmospheric nuclear weapons test fallout or seasonal variations in the natural background.

4.2 Pathways Monitored Four pathway categories are monitored by the REMP. They are the airborne, waterborne, ingestion artd direct radiation pathways. Each of these four categories is monitored by the collection of one or more sample media, which are listed below, and are described in more detail in this section:

Airborne Pathway Air Particulate Sampling Charcoal Cartridge (Radioiodine) Sampling Waterborne Pathways River Water Sampling Qround Water Sampling Sediment Sampling Ingestion Pathways Milk Sampling Silage Sampling Mixed Grass Sampling Fish Sampling Direct Radiation Pathway TLD Monitoring 6

4.3 Descriptions of Monitoring Programs 4.3.1 Air Sampling Continuous air samplers are installed at seven locations until 8/4/2015 when sample collection was discontinued at one station not required by the VY ODCM. (Five are required by the VYNPS ODCM.)

The sampling pumps at these locations operate continuously at a flow rate of approximately one cubic foot per minute. Airborne particulates are collected by passing air through a 50 mm glass-fiber filter. A dry gas meter is incorporated into the sampling stream to measure the total volume of air sampled in a given interval. The entire system is housed in a weatherproof structure. The filters are collected on a weekly frequency and, to allow for the decay of radon daughter products, the analysis for gross beta radioactivity is delayed for more than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />. The weekly filters are composited by location at the environmental laboratory for a quarterly gamma spectroscopy analysis.

If the gross-beta activity on an air particulate sample is greater than ten times the yearly mean of the control samples, ODCM Table 3.5.1, Note c, requires a gamma isotopic analysis on the sample.

Whenever the main plant stack effluent release rate of I-131 is equal to or greater than 0.1 µCi/sec, weekly air particulate collection from the plant stack is required by ODCM Table 3.5.1, Note h.

4.3.2 Charcoal Cartridge (Radioiodine) Sampling Continuous air samplers are installed at seven locations until 8/4/2015 when sample collection was discontinued at one station not required by the VY ODCM. (Five are required by the ODCM Table 3.5.1.)

The sampling pumps at these locations operate continuously at a flow rate of approximately one cubic foot per minute. A 60 cc TEDA-impregnated charcoal cartridge is located downstream of the air particulate filter described in Section 4.3.l above. A dry gas meter is incorporated into the sampling stream to measure the total volume of air sampled in a given interval. The entire system is housed in a weatherproof structure. These cartridges are collected and analyzed weekly for I-131.

Whenever the main plant stack effluent release rate of I-131 is equal to or greater than 0.1 µCi/sec, weekly charcoal _cartridge collection from the plant stack is required, pursuant to ODCM Table 3.5.1, Note h.

4.3.3 River Water Sampling An automatic compositing sampler is maintained at the downstream sampling location by the Vermont Yankee Chemistry Department staff. Normandeau Associates personnel maintain the pump that delivers river water to the sampler. The sampler is controlled by a timer that collects a frequent aliquot of river water. An additional grab sample is collected monthly at the upstream control location. Each sample is analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. Although not required by the VYNPS ODCM, a gross-beta 7

analysis is also performed on each sample. The monthly composite and grab samples are composited by location by the contracted environmental laboratory for a quarterly tritium (H-3) analysis.

4.3.4 Ground Water (Deep Well Potable Water) Sampling Grab samples are collected quarterly from up to four indicator locations and one control location. Only one indicator and one control are required by the VYNPS ODCM. Each sample is analyzed for gamma,.

emitting radionuclides and H-3. Although not required by the VYNPS ODCM, a gross-beta analysis is also performed on each sample.

4.3.5 Sediment Sampling River sediment grab samples are collected semiannually from the downriver location and at the North Storm Drain Outfall by Normandeau Associates. Each sample is analyzed at an offsite environmental laboratory for gamma-emitting radionuclides.

4.3.6 Milk Sampling When milk animals are identified as being on pasture feed (May through October), milk samples are collected twice per month from that location. Throughout the rest of the year, and for the full year where animals are not on pasture, milk samples are collected on a monthly schedule. Two locations are chosen as a result of the annual Land Use Census, based on meteorological dispersion calculations and proximity to the plant. The third location is a control, which is located sufficiently far away from the plant to be outside any potential plant influence. Other samples may be collected from locations of interest.

Immediately after collection, each milk sample is refrigerated and then shipped to the contracted environmental laboratory. Each sample is analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. A separate low-level I-131 analysis is performed to meet the Lower Limit of Detection requirements in the ODCM.

Although not required by the ODCM, Sr-89 and Sr-90 analyses are also performed on quarterly composited samples.

4.3.7 Silage (Chopped Corn or Grass) Sampling Silage samples are collected at the milk sampling location at the time of harvest, if available. The silage from each location is shipped to the contracted environmental laboratory where it is analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. Although not required by the ODCM, the silage samples are analyzed for low-level I-131.

8

4.3.8 Mixed Grass Sampling At each air sampling station, a mixed grass sample is collected quarterly, when available. Enough grass is clipped to provide the minimal sample weight needed to achieve the required Lower Limit of Detection (LLD). The mixed grass samples are analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. Although not required by the ODCM, the grass samples are analyzed for low-level 1-131.

4.3.9 Fish Sampling Fish samples are collected semiannually at two Connecticut River locations (upstream of the plant and in the Vernon Pond) by Normandeau Associates. The samples are frozen and delivered to the environmental laboratory where the edible and inedible portions are separately analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides.

4.3.10 TLD Monitoring Direct gamma radiation exposure is continuously monitored with the use of thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). Specifically, Panasonic UD-801AS1 and UD-814AS1 calcium sulfate dosimeters are used, with a total of five elements in place at each monitoring location. Each pair of dosimeters is sealed in a plastic bag, which is in turn housed in a plastic screen cylinder. This cylinder is attached to an object such as a fence or utility pole.

A total of 40 stations are required by the ODCM. Of these, 24 must be read out quarterly, while those from the remaining 16 incident response (outer ring) stations need only be de-dosed (annealed) quarterly; unless an ODCM gaseous release limit was exceeded during the period. Although not required by the ODCM, the TLDs from the 16 outer ring stations are read out quarterly along with the other stations' TLDs. In addition to the TLDs required by the ODCM, more than thirteen are typically posted at or near the site boundary. The plant staff posts and retrieves all TLDs, while the contracted environmental laboratory (Environmental Dosimetry Company) provides processing.

9

TABLE4.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM (as required by ODCM Table 3.5.1)*

Collection Anal' sis Exposure Pathway and/or Number of Routine Analysis Collection Sample Media , Sample Sampling Analysis Frequency )

Frequency Locations Mode Type

1. Direct Radiation (TLDs) 40 Continuous Quarterly Gamma dose; Outer Each TLD Ring - de-dose only, unless gaseous release Control was exceeded

2. Airborne (Particulates 5 Continuous Weekly Particulate Sample:

and Radioiodine) Gross Beta Each Sample Gamma Isotopic Quarterly Composite (by location)

Radioiodine Canister: Each Sample 1-131

3. Waterborne

a. Surface water 2 Downstream. Monthly Gamma Isotopic Each Sample Automatic Tritium (H-3) Quarterly Composite composite Upstream: grab

b. Ground water 3 Grab Quarterly Gamma Isotopic Each Sample Tritium (H-3) Each Sample

c. Shoreline Sediment 2 Downstream: grab Semiannually Gamma Isotopic Each Sample N. Storm Drain Outfall: grab

• See ODCM Table 3.5.l for complete footnotes.

10

TABLE 4.1, cont.

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM (as required by ~DCM Table 3.5.1)*

Exposure Pathway Collection Analysis and/or Nominal Sample Media Nominal Number of Routine Sampling Analysis Analysis Collection Sample Mode Type Frequency Frequency Locations

4. Ingestion

a. Milk 3 Grab Monthly Gamma Isotopic Each sample (Semimonthly 1-131 Each sample

,

when on pasture) 2 Grab Semiannually Gamma Isotopic on Each sample

b. Fish edible portions

c. Vegetation Grass sample 1 at each air Grab Quarterly when Gamma Isotopic Each sample sampling available station Silage sample 1 at each milk Grab At harvest Gamma Isotopic Each sample sampling station

• See ODCM Table 3.5.1 for complete footnotes.

11

TABLE4.2 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING LOCATIONS (NON-TLD) IN 2015 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION Distance Direction Exposure Station From Plant From Pathway Code Station Description Zone(a) Stack (km) Plant I. Airborne AP/CF-11 River Sta. No. 3.3 I 1.9 SSE AP/CF-12 N. Hinsdale, NH I 3.6 NNW AP/CF-13 Hinsdale Substation I 3.1 E AP/CF-14 Northfield, MA I 11.6 SSE AP/CF-15 Tyler Hill Road I 3.1 WNW AP/CF-21 Spofford Lake c 16.4 NNE

2. Waterborne

a. Surface WR-11 River Sta. No. 3.3 I 1.9 SSE WR-21 Rt.9 Bridge c 11.8 NNW

b. Ground WG-11 Main Plant Well I 0.2 On-site WG-12 Vernon Green Well I 2.1 SSE WG-14 Plant Support Bldg (PSB) Well I 0.3 On-site WG-15 Southwest Well I 0.3 On-site WT-14 Test Well 201 I On-site WT-16 Test Well 202 I On-site WT-17 Test Well 203 I On-site WT-18 Test Well 204 I On-site WG-22 Copeland Well c 13.7 N

c. Sediment SE-11 Shoreline Downriver I 0.6 SSE SE-12 North Storm Drain Outfall I 0.1 E 12

TABLE 4.2, cont.

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING LOCATIONS (NON-TLD) IN 2015 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION Distance Direction Exposure Station From Plant From Pathway Code Station Descrintion Zone(a) Stack(km) Plant Stack

3. Ingestion

a. Milk TM-11 Miller Farm I 0.8 w TM-18 Blodgett Farm I 3.6 SE TM-20 Dunklee Farm (Vern-Mont)ie) c 5.5 s TM-22 Franklin Farm c 9.7 WSW

b. Fish FH-11 Vernon Pond I 0.6(b) SSE FH-21 Rt.9 Bridge c 11.8 NNW

c. Mixed Grass TG-11 River Sta. No. 3.3 I 1.9 SSE TG-12 N. Hinsdale, NH I 3.6 NNW TG-13 Hinsdale Substation I 3.1 E TG-14 ) Northfield, MA I 11.6 SSE TG-15 Tyler Hill Rd. I 3.1 WNW TG-21 Spofford Lake c 16.4 NNE TG-40 Gov. Hunt House I On-site

d. Silage TC-11 Miller Farm I 0.8 w TC-18 Blodgett Farm I 3.6 SE TC-20 Dunklee Farm (Vern-Montie) c 5.2 s TC-22 Franklin Farm c 9.7 WSW (a) I= Indicator Stations; C = Control Stations (b) Fish samples are collected anywhere in Vernon Pond, which is adjacent to the plant (see Figure 4.1).

(c) deleted (d) deleted (e) Dunklee Farm (Vern-Mont) is outside of the 3-mile ODCM Zone and not required by the ODCM.

Sample collection ceased effective 8/17/2015 due to cessation of plant operation.

13

TABLE4.3 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING LOCATIONS (TLD) IN 2015 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION Distance Direction Station From Plant From Code Station Descrintion Zone(a) (km) (d) Plant(d)

DR-1 River Sta. No. 3.3 I 1.6 SSE DR-2 N. Hinsdale, NH I 3.9 NNW DR-3 Hinsdale Substation I 3.0 E DR-4 Northfield, MA c 11.3 SSE DR-5 Spofford Lake c 16.5 NNE DR-6 Vernon School I 0.52 WSW DR-7 Site Boundary(c) SB 0.28 w DR-8 Site Boundary SB 0.25 SSW DR-9 Inner Ring I 1.7 N DR-10 Outer Ring 0 4.5 N DR-11 Inner Ring I 1.6 NNE DR-12 Outer Ring 0 3.6 NNE DR-13 InnerRing I 1.2 NE DR-14 Outer Ring 0 3.9 NE DR-15 Inner Ring I 1.5 ENE DR-16 Outer Ring 0 2.8 ENE DR-17 Inner Ring I 1.2 E DR-18 Outer Ring 0 3.0 E DR-19 InnerRing I 3.7 ESE DR-20 Outer Ring 0 5.3 ESE DR-21 Inner Ring I 1.8 SE DR-22 Outer Ring 0 3.3 SE DR-23 InnerRing I 2.0 SSE DR-24 Outer Ring 0 3.9 SSE DR-25 Inner Ring I 1.9 s DR-26 Outer Ring 0 3.8 s DR-27 InnerRing I 1.1 SSW DR-28 Outer Ring 0 2.2 SSW DR-29 Inner Ring I 0.9 SW DR-30 Outer ;Ring 0 2.4 SW 14

TABLE 4.3, cont.

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING LOCATIONS (TLD) IN 2015 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION Distance Direction Station From Plant From Code Station Descri12tion Zone(a) (km)<d) Plant(d)

DR-31 Inner Ring I 0.71 WSW DR-32 Outer Ring 0 5.1 WSW DR-33 Inner Ring I "0.66 WNW DR-34 Outer Ring 0 4.6 w DR-35 Inner Ring I 1.3 WNW DR-36 Outer Ring 0 4.4 WNW DR-37 Inner Ring I 2.8 NW DR-38 Outer Ring 0 7.3 NW DR-39 Inner Ring I 3.1 NNW DR-40 Outer Ring 0 5.0 NNW DR-41(b) Site Boundary SB 0.38 SSW DR-42 (b) Site Boundary SB 0.59 s DR-43 (b) Site Boundary SB 0.44 SSE DR-44Cb) Site Boundary SB 0.19 SE DR-45Cbl Site Boundary SB 0.12 NE DR-46Cb) Site Boundary SB 0.28 NNW DR-47(b) Site Boundary SB 0.50 NNW DR-48Cbl Site Boundary SB 0.82 NW DR-49Cbl Site Boundary SB 0.55 WNW DR-50(bl Gov. Hunt House I 0.35 SSW DR-51 (b) Site Boundary SB 0.26 w DR-52(bl Site Boundary SB 0.24 SW DR-53 (bl Site Boundary SB 0.21 WSW (a) I= Inner Ring TLD; 0 =Outer Ring Incident Response TLD; C =Control TLD; SB =Site Boundary TLD.

(b) This location is not considered a requirement of ODCM Table 3.5.1.

(c) DR-7 satisfies ODCM Table 3.5.l for an inner ring direct radiation monitoring location. However, it is averaged as a Site Boundary TLD due to its close proximity to the plant.

(d) Distance and direction is relative to the center of the Turbine Building for direct radiation monitors.

15

TABLE4.4 ENVIRONMENTAL LOWER LIMIT OF DETECTION (LLD) SENSITIVITY REQUIREMENTS Airborne Particulates Sediment Water or Gases Fish Milk Vegetation (pCi/Kg-Analysis (pCi/l) (pCi/m3) (pCi/Kg) (pCi/l) (pCi/Kg) dry)

Gross-Beta 4 0.01 H-3 2000(a)

Mn-54 15 130 Fe-59 30 260 Co-58,60 15 130 Zn-65 30 260 Zr-Nb-95 15 I-131 1(b) 0.07 1 60 Cs-134 15 0.05 130 15 60 150 Cs-137 18 0.06 150 18 80 180 Ba-La-140 15 15 (a) If no drinking water pathway exists, a value of 3000 picocuries/liter may be used.

(b) If no drinking water pathway exists, a value of 15 picocuries/liter may be used.

See ODCM Table 4.5.1 for additional explanatory footnotes.

16

TABLE4.5 REPORTING LEVELS FOR RADIOACTIVITY CONCENTRATIONS IN ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLES Airborne Particulates or Gases Fish Milk Food Product Sediment Analysis Water (pCi/m3) (pCi/Kg) (pCi/l) (pCi/Kg) - (pCi/Kg-dry)

(pCi/l)

H-3 20 ooo<a)

'

Mn-54 1000 30,000 Fe-59 400 10,000 Co-58 1000 30,000

,'

3000(b)

Co-60 300 10,000 Zn-65' 300 20,000 Zr-Nb-95 400 1-131 2Cc) 0.9 3 100 Cs-134 30 10 1000 60 1000 Cs-137 50 20 2000 70 2000 Ba-La-140 200 300 (a) Reporting Level for drinking water pathways. For non-drinking water, a value of30,000 pCi/liter may be used.

(b) Reporting Level for grab samples taken at the North Storm Drain Outfall only.

(c) lfno drinking water pathway exists, a value of20 picocuries/liter may be used.

See ODCM Table 3.5.2 for additional explanatory footnotes.

17

W SW SW Miles 0 _]

Figure 4.1 Environmental Sampling Locations In Close Proximity to Plant 18

,

.I

/

N

.*

i

/

I

/

-'

' '[

I

• ,*w I

• - ~.

I

__,. _....

... -***-----

-* . -~~*-

~

.-*

>

,.,*. .,.

/

_. '

_,

. /

'* I I

' /

,. ' ,I

....

' "" *.

/

I

.......

,

/

,;

.

I

./

/

---

Miles -..._........-...___ "+\---------~~~b\_~_j 0 .2' .4 .6 .8 \ \

Figure 4.2 Environmental Sampling Locations Within 5 Km of Plant 19

N l

,/ *.

'

NW :

t - * ...

J

• w

.

VT \ ...

T -22/

.

I NH !ESE

\

' M.¥

'/

\

f

'.(

~* I

./

J S'N .... /

SE

,.

I

.

\ -

0 2 3 4

• Figure 4.3 Environmental Sampling Locations Greater than 5 Km from Plant 20

Fenceline /

~R-48

\

\.

)

w Miles 0 .1 .2 Figure 4.4 Thermoluminescent Dosimeter Locations In Close Proximity to Plant 21

" E

,,.'

_- - ..

. . ... -~

.... - _.......- ,,,_

---

0 .2 .4 .6 .8 I

= - ,. Cbm

t:rr * =:tq haCS Figure 4.5 Thermoluminescent Dosimeter Locations Within 5 Km of Plant 22

' .

- \\". 1(1 *

- - - ~ - --

.

.. - - -i .. ......

I -~

--.

- 'f' I

E

_,., .. . _.-

\([

MA

\

'

.

8\\' / /

I / SE

'*- --

."'

~

Miles 0 2 3 4 Figure 4.6 Thermoluminescent Dosimeter Locations Greater than 5 Km from Plant 23

5. RADIOLOGICAL DATA

SUMMARY

TABLES This section summarizes the analytical results of the environmental samples that were collected during 2015. These results, shown in Table 5.1, are presented in a format similar to that prescribed in the NRC's Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position on Environmental Monitoring (Reference 1). The results are ordered by sample media type and then by radionuclide. The units for each media type are also given.

In 2015, Vermont Yankee contracted with one laboratory for primary analyses of the environmental samples. A second laboratory was used to cross-check the first laboratory for selected samples and to analyze other samples for hard-to-detect radionuclides (such as Strontium-89 and 90).

The left-most column of Table 5.1 contains the radionuclide of interest, the total number of analyses for that radionuclide in 2015 and the number of measurements which exceeded the Reporting Levels found in Table 3.5.2 of the VYNPS Off-site Dose Calculation Manual. The latter are classified as "Non-routine" measurements. The second column lists the required Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) for those radionuclides that have detection capability requirements as specified in the ODCM Table 4.5.l. The absence of a value in this column indicates that no LLD is specified in the ODCM for that radionuclide in that media. The target LLD for any analysis is typically 50 percent of the most restrictive required LLD.

Occasionally the required LLD may not be met. This may be due to malfunctions in sampling equipment or lack of sufficient sample quantity which would then result in low sample volume. Delays in analysis at the laboratory could also be a factor. Such cases, if and when they should occur, would be addressed in Section 6.2.

For each radionuclide and media type, the remaining three columns summarize the data for the following categories of monitoring locations: (1) the Indicator stations, which are within the range of influence of the plant and which could be affected by its operation; (2) the Control stations, which are beyond the influence of the plant; and (3) the station which had the highest mean concentration during 2015 for that

\

radionuclide. Direct radiation monitoring stations (using TLDs) are grouped into Inner Ring, Outer ring, Site Boundary and Control.

In each of these columns, for each radionuclide, the following statistical values are given:

• The mean value of all concentrations, including those results that are less than the a posteriori LLD for that analysis.

• The minimum and maximum concentration, including those results that are less than the a posteriori LLD. In previous years, data less than the a posteriori LLD were converted to zero for purposes of 24

reporting the means and ranges.

• The "Number Detected" is the number of positive measurements. A measurement is considered positive when the concentration is greater than three times the standard deviation in the concentration and greater than or equal to the a posteriori LLD (Minimum Detectable Concentration or MDC).

• The "Total Analyzed" for each column is also given.

Each single radioactivity measurement datum in this report is based on a single measurement of a sample.

Any concentration below the a posteriori LLD for its analysis is averaged with those values above the a posteriori LLD to determine the average of the results. Likewise, the values are reported in ranges even though they are below the a posteriori LLD. To be consistent with normal data review practices used by Vermont Yankee, a "positive measurement" is considered to be one whose concentration is greater than three times its associated standard deviation, is greater than or equal to the a posteriori LLD and satisfies the analytical laboratory's criteria for identification.

The radionuclides reported in this section represent those that: 1) had an LLD requirement in Table 4.5.l of the ODCM, or a Reporting Level listed in Table 3.5.2 of the ODCM, or 2) had a positive measurement of radioactivity, whether it was naturally-occurring or man-made; or 3) were of special interest for any other reason. The radionuclides routinely analyzed and reported by the environmental laboratory (in a gamma spectroscopy analysis) were: Th-232, Ba/La-140, Be-7, Co-58, Co-60, Cs-134, Cs-137, Fe-59, K-40, Mn-54, Zn-65 and Zr-95.

Data from direct radiation measurements made by TLDs are provided in Table 5.2. The complete listing of quarterly TLD data is provided in Table 5.3.

25

Radiological Environmental Program Summary 2015 Radiological Environmental Operating Report Vermont Yankee Table 5.1:

Sample Medium: Air Particulate (AP)

Sample Medium: Charcoal Cartridge (CF)

Sample Medium: River Water (WR)

Sample Medium: Ground Water (WG)

Sample Medium: Sediment (SE)

Sample Medium: Test Well (WT)

Sample Medium: Milk (TM)

Sample Medium: Silage (TC)

Sample Medium: Mixed Grass (TG)

Sample Medium: Fish (FH) 26

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVffiONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER Pl.ANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS AIR PARTICULATES GR-B 343 0.01 0.0153 0.0278 0.0278 21CONTROL 0 (PCVTOTAL) (2901291) (52152) (52152) SPOFFORD LAKE

( 0.004510.0296) ( 0.003710.5840) ( 0.003710.5840) 16.4 KM NNE OF SITE GAMMA 27 BE-7 NIA 0.1138 0.1097 0.1356 40 INDICATOR 0 (22123) (414) (313)

(< 0. 05231 0.1669) ( 0.082410.1226) ( 0.118510.1669)

K-40 NIA 0.0426 0.0363 0.0614 40 INDICATOR 0 (1/23) (014) (013)

( Q.02471< 0.0897) (< 0.02841< 0.0451) (< 0.03591< 0.0897)

CS-134 0.05 0.0026 0.003 0.0035 40 INDICATOR 0 (0123) (014) (013)

(< 0.00171< 0.0053) (< 0.00171< 0.0060) (< 0.00261< 0.0053)

CS-137 0.06 0.0024 0.0027 0.003 40 INDICATOR 0 (0123) (014) (013)

(< 0.00161< 0.0047) (< 0.00151< 0.0056) (< 0.00161< 0.0047)

RA-226 NIA 0.0417 0.0401 0.0555 40 INDICATOR 0 (0123) (014) (013)

'-.._

(< 0.02771< 0.0899) (< 0.02821< 0.0648) (< 0.03731< 0.0899)

AC-228 NIA 0.0091 0.0122 0.0122 21CONTROL 0 (0123) (014) (014) SPOFFORD LAKE

(< 0.0061/< 0.0167) (< 0.00651< 0.0246) (< 0.00651< 0.0246) 16.4 KM NNE OF SITE TH-228 NIA 0.0036 0.0038 0.0051 40 INDICATOR 0 (0123) (014) (013)

(< 0.00251< 0.0080) (< 0.00231< 0.0073) (< 0.00331< 0.0080)

FRACTION OF DETECTABLE l)i'IEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 27

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS AIR IODINE GAMMA 343 (PCiffOTAL) I-131 O.D7 0.026 0.0408 0.0408 21CONTROL 0 (0/291) (0/52) (0/52) SPOFFORD LAKE

(< 0.0046/< 0.0398) (< 0.0070/< 0.4722) (< 0.0070/< 0.4722) 16.4 KMNNE OF SITE RIVER WATER GR-B 24 4 1.829 1.753 1.829 11 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/LITER) (1112) (2112) (1/12) RIVER STA. NO 3.3

(< 1.630/ 2.490) (< 1.510/ 2.560) (< 1.630/ 2.490) 1.9 KM SSE OF SITE H-3 24 3000 613 613 613 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9BRIDGE

(<358/<741) (<353/<739) (<353/<739) 11.8 KM NNW OF SITE GAMMA 24 MN-54 15 1.079 1.169 1.169 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9BRIDGE

(< 0.570/< 2.097) (< 0.697/< 2.468) (< 0.697/< 2.468) 11.8 KM NNW OF SITE C0-58 7.5 1.332 1.393 1.393 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT.9BRIDGE

(< 0.713/< 2.479) (< 0.795/< 2.595) (< 0.795/< 2.595) 11.8 KM NNW OF SITE FE-59 30 3.114 3.158' 3.158 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE

(< 1.851/< 5.626) (< 1.780/< 5.583) (< 1.780/< 5.583) 11.8 KM NNW OF SITE C0-60 15 1.073 1.189 1.189 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9BRIDGE

(< 0.434/< 2.108) (< 0.546/< 2.450) (< 0.546/< 2.450) 11.8 KM NNW OF SITE ZN-65 30 2.249 2.409 2.409 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9BRIDGE

(< 1.264/< 4. 646) (< 1.143/< 5.019) (< 1.143/< 5.019) 11.8 KM NNW OF SITE FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 28

'

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS

• RIVER WATER (cont'd) ZR-95 15 2.405 2.587 2.587 21CONTROL 0 (PCI/LITER) (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT.9BRIDGE

(< 1.293/< 4.087) (< 1.453/< 4.664) (< 1.453/< 4.664) 11.8 KM NNW OF SITE I-131 15 22.645 22.813 22.813 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/11) (0/11) RT.9BRIDGE

(< 4.784/<183.3) (<4.470/<175.6) (< 4.470/<l 75.6) 11.8 KM NNW OF SITE CS-134 15 1.036 1.152 1.152 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT.9BRIDGE

(< 0.512/< 2.137) (< 0.678/< 2.606) (< 0.678/< 2.606) 11.8 KM NNW OF SITE CS-137 18 1.144 1.265 1.265 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT.9BRIDGE

(< 0.589/< 2.269) (< 0.743/< 2.568) (< 0. 743/< 2.568) 11.8 KM NNW OF SITE BA/LA-140 15 6.868 6.205 6.868 II INDICATOR 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RIVER STA. NO 3.3

(< 2.586/<28.52) (< 2.047/<30.23) (< 2.586/<28.52) 1.9 KM SSE OF SITE RA-226 NIA 29.303 29.848 29.848 21CONTROL 0 (0112) (0/13) (0113) RT. 9BRIDGE

(<12.22/<55.56) (< 4.410/<82.4 I) (< 4.410/<82.41) 11.8 KMNNW OF SITE GROUND WATER GR-B 20 4 4.64 2.74 5.76 15 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/LITER) (15/16) (4/4) (4/4) SOUTHWEST WELL

(<1.49/8.34) (2.03/4.63) (3. 83/8. 34) 0.3 KM ON-SITE H-3 20 2000 596 586 599 14 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4) PLANT SUPPORT BLDG

(<579/<610) (<574/<603) (<590/<602) WELL 0.3 KM ON-SITE FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 29

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE

.(UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS GROUND WATER (cont'd) I-131 20 4 4.714 2.398 4.9I8 15 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/LITER) (16/16) (3/4) (4/4) SOUTHWEST WELL

( 3.470/ 6.770) (< 1.320/ 3.340) ( 3.540/ 6.270) 0.3 KM ON-SITE GAMMA 20 MN-54 15 1.359 1.313 1.499 15 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4) SOUTHWEST WELL

(< 0.567/< 2.129)- (< 0.749/< 1.694) (< 0. 761/< 2.129) 0.3 KM ON-SITE C0-58 15 1.431 1.445 1.594 15 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4) SOUTHWEST WELL

(< 0.577/< 2.230) (< 0.730/< 1.892) (< 0.902/< 2.230) 0.3 KM ON-SITE FE-59 30 3.087 3.107 3.42 15 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4) SOUTHWEST WELL

(< 1.508/< 5.126) (< 1.728/< 4.029) (< 1.740/< 5.126) 0.3 KM ON-SITE C0-60 15 1.374 1.486 1.526 12 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4)

(< 0.475/< 2.428) (< 0.718/< 1.995) (< 0. 784/< 2.428)

ZN-65 30 2.692 2.723 3.032 15 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4) SOUTHWEST WELL

(< 0.923/< 4.471) (< 1.553/< 3.519) (< 1.671/< 4.471) 0.3 KM ON-SITE ZR-95 15 2.546 2.675 2.787 15 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/4) (014) SOUTHWEST WELL

(< 1.122/< 3.990) (< 1.285/< 3.714) (< 1.577/< 3.990) 0.3 KM ON-SITE CS-134 15 1.261 1.239 1.37 15 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4) SOUTHWEST WELL

(< 0.545/< 2.029) (< 0.641/< 1.617) (< 0.665/< 2.029) 0.3 KM ON-SITE FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 30

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS GROUND WATER (cont'd) CS-137 18 1.41 1.463 1.571 15 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/LITER) (0116) (014) (014) SOUTHWEST WELL

(< 0.6201< 2.326) (< 0. 7261< 1.956) (< 0.8001< 2.326) 0.3 KM ON-SITE BA/LA-140 7.5 3.317 3.596 3.63 12 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (014) (014)

(< 1.6171<4.780) (<2.171/<4.940) (< 2.9001< 4.653)

RA-226 2 37.088 32.025 44.145 15 INDICATOR 0 (1/16) (014) (114) SOUTHWEST WELL

(<17.22/71.1) (<15.741<46.49) (<18.54/71.1) 0.3 KM ON-SITE

(< 0.6201< 2.326) (< 0.7261< 1.956) (< 0.8001< 2.326)

SEDIMENT GAMMA 36 (PCI/KG DRY) BE-7 NIA 2941.25 3245.68 4229.5 18 INDICATOR 0 (1/30) (016) (012)

(<673.51<7349) (<513.61<7297) (<11101<7349)

K-40 NIA 21078.33 19655 26410 29 INDICATOR 0 (30130) (616) (212) N. STORM DRAIN OUTFALL (10990128640) (12010127690) (24180128640) 0.1 KMEOF SITE MN-54 NIA 72 71.49 95.02 19 INDICATOR 0 (0130) (016) (012) N STORM DRAIN OUTFALL

(<27.291<105.4) (<37.111<107.5) (<88.131<101.9) 0.1 KM E OF SITE C0-60 55.3 56.5 74.24 19 INDICATOR 0 (0130) (016) (012) N STORM DRAIN OUTFALL

(<17.921<86.76) (<38.011<68.87) (<73.191<75.29) 0.1 KMEOF SITE ZN-65 NIA 160.47 168.18 204.2 12 INDICATOR 0 (0130) (016) (012)

(<65.981<248.9) (<71.581<247.1) (<159.51<248.9)

FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 31

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS SEDIMENT (cont'd) NB-95 NIA 271.32 287.61 368.3 18 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/KG DRY) (0130) (016) (012)

(<70.091<61 l) (<53.921<634.9) (<125.61<611)

CS-134 150 55.36 56.29 73.l 19 INDICATOR 0 (0130) (016) (012) N STORM DRAIN OUTFALL

(<17.691<74.58) (<28.81/<74.17) (<72.841<73.35) 0.1 KMEOF SITE CS-137 180 106.09 89.5 181 19 INDICATOR 0 (23130) (216) (212) N STORM DRAIN OUTFALL

(<21.651253.3) (<64.21/133.7) (108.71253.3) 0.1 KM E OF SITE BA/LA-140 NIA 1288468.9 1531509.35 2257652.8 35 INDICATOR 0 (0130) (016) (012)

(<305.61<4515000) (<522.31<3529000) (<305.61<4515000)

RA-226 NIA 2861.19 2565.83 4204.5 13 INDICATOR 0 (27130) (416) (212) N STORM DRAIN OUTFALL

(<802.815295) (<127613481) (311415295) 0.1 KMEOF SITE AC-228 NIA 2343.21 2217.92 4382.5 19 INDICATOR 0 (28130) (516) (212) N STORM DRAIN OUTFALL

(<160.515575) (<229.513171) (319015575) 0.1 KME OF SITE TH-228 NIA 1849.64 1733.33 2902 35 INDICATOR 0 (30130) (616) (212)

(723.113863) (85212390) (1941/3863)

TH-232 NIA 1415.67 1425.38 1836 29 INDICATOR 0 (30130) (616) *(212) N. STORM DRAIN OUTFALL (653.612104) (636.311997) (156812104) 0.1 KMEOF SITE FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 32

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVffiONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS TEST WELLS U-238 NIA 6137.5 6253 7793 18 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/LITER) (0130) (016) (012)

(Nuclear Energy Institute (<234 l/<9359) (<3 7031<79 80) (<69971<8589)

Groundwater Protection Initiative Samples) GR-B 16 4 8.5 NIA 10.9 14 INDICATOR 0 (16116) (414) TEST WELL 201

( 4.3114.9) ( 8.2112.7) ON-SITE H-3 16 3000 593 NIA 596 17 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (014) TEST WELL 203

(<351/<697) (<3521<697) ON-SITE GAMMA 16 K-40 NIA 15.2 NIA 25.8 14 INDICATOR 0 (1/16) (114) TEST WELL 201

(< 4.1155.3) (<11.2155.3) ON-SITE MN-54 15 0.7 NIA 0.7 16 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (014) TEST WELL 202

(< 0.41< 1.1) (< 0.61< 0.9) ON-SITE C0-58 15 0.9 NIA 0.9 14 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (014) TEST WELL 201

(< 0.51< 1.3) (< 0.51< 1.3) ON-SITE FE-59 30 2.1 NIA 2.2 18 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (014) TEST WELL 204

(< 1.21< 3.8) (< 1.31< 3.1) ON-SITE C0-60 15 0.7 NIA 0.7 16 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (014) TEST WELL 202

(< 0.41< 1.0) (< 0.51< 0.9) ON-SITE FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 33

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVffiONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS TEST WELLS (cont'd) NB-95 15 1 NIA 1 18 INDICATOR (PCI/LITER) (0116) (014) TEST WELL 204 (Nuclear Energy Institute (< 0.61< 1.3) (< 0.71< 1.3) ON-SITE Groundwater Protection Initiative Samples)

I-131 15 41.9 NIA 48.4 18 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (0/4) TEST WELL 204

(< 5.81<139.4) (< 7.21<139.4) ON-SITE CS-134 15 0.6 NIA 0.6 14 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (014) TEST WELL 201

(< 0.41< 0.9) (< 0.41< 0.9) ON-SITE CS-137 18 0.7 NIA 0.7 16 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (014) TEST WELL 202

(< 0.51< 1.0) (< 0.51< 1.0) ON-SITE BA/LA-140 15 8.1 NIA 8.9 18 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (014) TEST WELL 204

(< 2.51<19.8) (< 2.51<18.8) ON-SITE MILK I-131 65 0.339 0.367 0.372 20CONTROL 0 (PCI/LITER) (0136) (0129) (0111) DUNKLEE FARM

(<0.171/<0.454) (< 0.1691< 0.497) (< 0.1691< 0.463) 5.5 KM S OF SITE SR-89 15 10 7.18 7.81 8.08 20CONTROL 0 (0/8) (017) (0/3) DUNKLEE FARM

(< 5.421< 8.35) (< 5.691< 9.96) (<.6.07/< 9.96) 5.5 KM S OF SITE SR-90 15 2 1.05 1.6 1.9 22CONTROL 0 (0/8) (3/7) (3/4) FRANKLIN FARM

(< 0.75/< 1.53) (< 0.7913.63) ( I. 13/ 3.63) 9.7 KM WSW OF SITE FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 34

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREME}'ff) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS MILK (cont'd) GAMMA 65 (PCI/LITER) BE-7 NIA 42.21 43.13 44.32 18 INDICATOR 0 (0136) (0129) (0118) BLODGETT FARM

(<24.121<59.78) (<23.81/<75.01) (<33.681<59.78) 3.6 KM SE OF SITE -

K-40 NIA 1369.58 1329.69 1394.67 18 INDICATOR 0 (36136) (29129) (18118) BLODGETT FARM

( 1172/1607) (106611481) (123911607) 3.6 KM SE OF SITE CS-134 15 4.59 4.56 4.73 18 INDICATOR 0 (0136) (0129) (0118) BLODGETT FARM

(< 2.891< 6.80) (< 2.791< 7.03) (< 3.481< 6.80) 3.6 KM SE OF SITE CS-137 18 5.24 5.77 6.04 22CONTROL 0 (0136) (0129) (0118) FRANKLIN FARM

(< 3.531< 7.98) (< 4.001< 8.62) (< 4.291< 8.62) 9.7KMWSWOF SITE BA/LA-140 15 6.5 6.15 6.59 18 INDICATOR 0 (0136) (0129) (0118) BLODGETT FARM

(< 4.661< 7.47) (< 4.021< 7.47) (< 4.771< 7.43) 3.6 KM SE OF SITE RA-226 NIA 128.97 124.08 134.14 18 INDICATOR 0 (1136) (0129) (0118) BLODGETT FARM

(<76.61/<196. l) (<82.181<188.9) (<95.91<179.1) 3.6 KM SE OF SITE SILAGE I-131 16 30 23.04 25.93 28.6 40 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/KG WET) (0112) (014) (011)

(<18.61<29.6) (<23.41<26.9) (<28.6)

GAMMA 16 BE-7 NIA 716.41 1956.48 2527.3 21CONTROL 0 (6112) (214) (213)

(<17012998) (<24415829) (<262.915829)

FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 35

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL '

LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATIIWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS SILAGE (cont'd) K-40 NIA 4678.17 5860.75 10650 22CONTROL 0 (PCl/KG WET) (12/12) (414) (1/1) FRANKLIN FARM (289616420) (2810110650) (10650) 9.7 KM WSW OF SITE CS-134 60 22.8 26.15 28.5 22 CONTROL 0 (0112) (014) (Oil) FRANKLIN FARM

(<11.821<29.25) (<23.791<28.5) (<28.5) 9.7 KM WSW OF SITE CS-137 80 26.08 28.21 33.64 22CONTROL 0 (0112) (014) (Oil) FRANKLIN FARM

(<13.031<34.95) (<24.731<33.64) (<33.64) 9.7 KM WSW OF SITE AC-228 NIA 108.92 111.95 138.2 22 CONTROL 0 (1/12) (014) (Oil) FRANKLIN FARM

(<61. 961179 .I) (<91.21<138.2) (<138.2) 9.7 KM WSW OF SITE TH-228 NIA 41.51 50.64 52.74 22CONTROL 0 (0112) (014) (Oil) FRANKLIN FARM

(<25.761<51.36) (<47.691<52.74) (<52.74) 9.7 KM WSW OF SITE MIXED GRASS GAMMA 19 (PCl/KG WET) BE-7 NIA 1056.15 2527.3 2527.3 21CONTROL 0 (9116) (213) (213) SPOFFORD LAKE

(<215.513919.L (<262.915829) (<262.915829) 16.4 KM NNE OF SITE

\ K-40 NIA 5033.25 4264.33 6218.67 13 INDICATOR 0 (16116) (313) (313)

(2520/7331) (281016578) (541616833)

I-131 60 91.94 106.66 152.6 40 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (013) (Oil) GOV. HURT HOUSE

(<40.721<184.9) (<43.371<154.4) (<152.6) ON-SITE FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 36

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVffiONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS MIXED GRASS (cont'd) CS-134 60 22.4 25.37 25.37 21CONTROL 0 (PCI/KG WET) (0/16) (0/3) (0/3) SPOFFORD LAKE

(<11.291<29.25) (<23.79/<27.71) (<23.791<27.71) 16.4 KM NNE OF SITE CS-137 80 25.89 26.4 31.03 15 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (013) (013) TYLER HILL ROAD

(<12.961<34.95) (<24.73/<29.28) (<25.0l/<34.95) 3.1 KM WNW OF SITE RA-226 NIA 533.55 659.77 659.77 21CONTROL 0 (0/16) (0/3) (0/3) SPOFFORD LAKE

(<289.2/<703) (<540.4/<867) (<540.4/<867) 16.4 KM NNE OF SITE AC-228 NIA 109.95 103.2 126.23 15 INDICATOR 0 (1116) (013) (1/3) TYLER HILL ROAD

(<59.071179.1) (<91.2/<110.3) (<971179.1) 3.1 KM WNW OF SITE TH-228 NIA 41.53 49.94 50.93 40 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/3) (011) GOV. HURT HOUSE

(<25.76/<53.31) (<47.691<52.71) (<50.93) ON-SITE FISH GAMMA 8 (PCI/KG WET) K-40 NIA 3958 3407.75 3958 11 INDICATOR 0 (4/4) (414) (414) MILLER FARM (336214516) (2782/4194) (3362/4516) 0.8 KM W OF SITE MN-54 130 16.43 17.343 17.343 II INDICATOR 0 (0/4) (0/4) (0/4) MILLER FARM

(<10.341<21.16) (<13.24/<20.71) (<13.241<20.71) 0.8 KM W OF SITE C0-58 130 31.843 30.673 31.843 11 INDICATOR 0 (0/4) (0/4) (0/4) MILLERFARM

(<22.31<36.69) (<22.621<38.12) (<22.31<36.69) 0.8 KM W OF SITE FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 37

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS FISH (cont'd) FE-59 260 113.185 105.13 113.185 11 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/KG WET) (014) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(<86.441<125) (<74.791<125.I) (<86.441<125) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE I

C0-60 130 14.213 15.95 15.95 II INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(<11.581<17.18) (<13.681<19.36) (<13.681<19.36) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE ZN-65 260 35.268 40.768 40.768 11 INDICATOR 0 (014) (0/4) (014) VERMONPOND

(<23.151<44.17) (<30.151<46.48) (<30.151<46.48) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE CS-134 130 13.715 15.133 15.133 II INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(< 8.6201<17.25) (<11.281<17.49) (<11.281<17.49) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE CS-137 150 15.568 16.968 16.968 11 INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(<11.741<19.06) (<13.181<19.53) (<13.181<19.53) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE H-3 4 NIA 377 588 588 11 INDICATOR 0 (012) (012) (012) VERMONPOND

(<1961<558) (<5371<639) (<5371<639) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE AM-241 8 NIA 3.219 5.618 5.618 11 INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(< 2.4761< 3.737) (< 2.4711<1 l.86) (< 2.4711<1 l.86) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE CM-242 8 NIA 1.34 2.538 2.538 11 INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(< 0.841/< 1.853) (< 0.8761< 6.005) (< 0.8761< 6.005) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 38

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVffiONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS FISH (cont'd) CM-2431244 8 NIA 3.713 8.023 8.023 11 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/KG WET) (014) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(< 1.8791< 6.920) (< 1.7511<19.29) (< 1.7511<19.29) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE FE-55 8 NIA 1534 1672.25 1672.25 II INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (0/4) VERMONPOND

(<12371<1830) (<12651<1880) (<12651<1880) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE PU-238 8 NIA 1.012 2.686 2.686 II INDICATOR 0 (0/4) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(< 0.0041< 2.280) (< 1.1421< 5.612) (< 1.1421< 5.612) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE PU-2391240 8 NIA 2.348 3.939 3.939 11 INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(< 0.0081< 5.386) (< 2.0691< 5.953) (< 2.0691< 5.953) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE PU-241 8 NIA 364 374.75 374.75 II INDICATOR 0 (0/4) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(<2661<484) (<2881<468) (<2881<468) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE PU-242 8 NIA 1.71 2.89 2.89 11 INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(< 0.0061< 3.341) (< 0.8081< 4.465) (< 0.8081< 4.465) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE SR-89 8 NIA 292 251 291.75 II INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(<2291<395) (<231/<271) (<2291<395) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE SR-90 8 NIA 28.4 37.35 37.35 11 INDICATOR 0 (1/4) (214) (214) VERMONPOND

(<16.1148.6) (<18.7169.4) (<18.7169.4) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE DIRECT RADIATION TLD-QUARTERL Y 212 NIA 6 4.0 9.7 DR43 INDICATOR 0 (MILLI-ROENTGENIQTR.: (2041204) (818) (414)

(O'.J*2) (0/7) ( 4.5111.6)

FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 39

TABLE 5.2:

ENVIRONMENTAL TLD DATA

SUMMARY

VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, VERNON, VT (JANUARY - DECEMBER 2015)

OFFSITE STATION INNER RING TLD OUTER RING TLD WITH HIGHEST MEAN CONTROL TLDs MEAN* MEAN* STA.NO./ MEAN* MEAN*

RANGE* RANGE* RANGE* RANGE*

(NO. MEASUREMENTS)** (NO. MEASUREMENTS)** (NO. MEASUREMENTS)** (NO. MEASUREMENTS)**

6.37 +/- 0.28 6.37 +/- 0.30 DR19 6.46 +/- 0.31 6.12 +/- 0.19 4.52 to 7.68 0.00 to 7.95 o.oo to 7.95 4.91 to 7.19 76 68 4 8 SITE BOUNDARY TLD WITH HIGHEST MEAN SITE BOUNDARY TLD STA.NO./ MEAN* MEAN*

RANGE* RANGE*

(NO. MEASUREMENTS)** (NO. MEASUREMENTS)**

DR45 8.62 +/- 1.92 6.70 +/- 0.32 7.81 to 11.50 4.28 to 11.64 4 60 Units are in micro-R per hour.

Each "measurement" is typically based on quarterly readings from five TLD elements.

40

TABLE 5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL TLD MEASUREMENTS 2015 (Micro-R per Hour)

ANNUAL Sta. 1STQUARTER 2ND QUARTER 3RD QUARTER 4TH QUARTER AVE.

No. Description EXP.

DR-01 River Sta. No. 3.3 4.78 +/- 0.22 5.51 +/- 0.23 6.36 +/- 0.00 6.04 +/- 0.26 5.7 DR-02 N Hinsdale, NH 5.20 +/- 0.25 6.66 +/- 0.39 7.32 +/- 0.00 7.03 +/- 0.22 6.6 DR-03 Hinsdale Substation 5.58 +/- 0.26 7.10 +/- 0.31 7.50 +/- 0.00 7.35 +/- 0.26 6.9 DR-04 Northfield, MA 4.91 +/- 0.22 5.87 +/- 0.25 6.43 +/- 0.00 6.11 +/- 0.30 5.8 DR-05 Spofford Lake, NH 5:--i5 +/- 0.29 6.48 +/- 0.25 7.19 +/- 0.00 6.83 +/- 0.25 6.4 DR-06 Vernon School 5.00 +/- 0.19 6.83 +/- 0.27 6.89 +/- 0.00 6.68 +/- 0.28 6.4 DR-07 Site Boundary 4.73 +/- 0.24 6.94 +/- 0.38 7.09 +/- 0.29 6.87 +/- 0.23 6.4 DR-08 Site Boundary 5.28 +/- 0.18 5.81 +/- 0.43 5.95 +/- 0.34 5.66 +/- 0.27 5.7 DR-09 Inner Ring 5.06 +/- 0.34 6.40 +/- 0.29 6.41 +/- 0.21 6.18 +/- 0.25 6.0 DR-10 Outer Ring 4.24 +/- 0.16 6.09 +/- 0.32 6.23 +/- 0.31 5.61 +/- 0.31 5.5 DR-11 Inner Ring 4.62 +/- 0.21 6.82 +/- 0.42 7.07 +/- 0.21 6.66 +/- 0.31 6.3 DR-12 Outer Ring 4.40 +/- 0.24 7.76 +/- 0.45 7.95 +/- 0.34 7.71 +/- 0.34 7.0 DR-13 Inner Ring 5.28 +/- 0.25 6.90 +/- 0.33 7.07 +/- 0.29 6.84 +/- 0.23 6.5 DR-14 Outer Ring 5.34 +/- 0.22 7.45 +/- 0.33 7.43 +/- 0.25 7.30 +/-_ 0.23 6.9 DR-15 Inner Ring 5.66 +/- 0.29 6.63 +/- 0.27 7.15 +/- 0.50 6.42 +/- 0.20 6.5 DR-16 Outer Ring +/- 6.73 +/- 0.35 7.09 +/- 0.25 6.74 +/- 0.26 6.9 DR-17 Inner Ring 4.73 +/- 0.26 7.53 +/- 0.37 7.68 +/- 0.33 7.40 +/- 0.39 6.8 DR-18 Outer Ring 5.08 +/- 0.22 7.15 +/- 0.27 7.53 +/- 0.31 7.14 +/- 0.27 6.7 DR-19 Inner Ring 5.34 +/- 0.21 6.88 +/- 0.39 6.82 +/- 0.38 6.79 +/- 0.24 6.5 DR-20 Outer Ring 4.93 +/- 0.18 7.05 +/- 0.39 7.05 +/- 0.31 6.97 +/- 0.26 6.5 DR-21 Inner Ring 4.75 +/- 0.26 6.33 +/- 0.25 5.96 +/- 0.38 5.94 +/- 0.36 5.8 DR-22 Outer Ring 5.05 +/- 0.21 6.00 +/- 0.26 6.10 +/- 0.21 5.91 +/- 0.38 5.8 DR-23 Inner Ring 4.75 +/- 0.23 6.54 +/- 0.38 6.31 +/- 0.34 6.47 +/- 0.36 6.0 DR-24 Outer Ring 4.34 +/- 0.19 7.12 +/- 0.36 7.42 +/- 0.66 7.00 +/- 0.38 6.5 DR-25 Inner Ring 4.99 +/- 0.19 6.66 +/- 0.37 6.59 +/- 0.22 6.49 +/- 0.27 6.2 DR-26 Outer Ring 4.81 +/- 0.38 6.77 +/- 0.44 6.89 +/- 0.29 6.71 +/- 0.28 6.3 DR-27 Inner Ring 4.52 +/- 0.18 6.86 +/- 0.39 6.86 +/- 0.33 6.60 +/- 0.27 6.2 DR-28 Outer Ring 5.07 +/- 0.29 6.67 +/- 0.30 6.63 +/- 0.29 6.50 +/- 0.22 6.2 DR-29 Inner Ring 4.96 +/- 0.26 6.95 +/- 0.27 6.79 +/- 0.39 6.67 +/- 0.32 6.3 DR-30 Outer Ring 4.59 +/- 0.20 6.66 +/- 0.33 6.59 +/- 0.29 6.42 +/- 0.22 6.1 DR-31 Inner Ring 4.81 +/- 0.27 7.23 +/- 0.42 6.82 +/- 0.23 6.82 +/- 0.26 6.4 DR-32 Outer Ring 4.83 +/- 0.25 6.84 +/- 0.45 7.20 +/- 0.26 6.91 +/- 0.37 6.5 DR-33 Inner Ring 5.19 +/- 0.33 6.74 +/- 0.31 6.62 +/- 0.25 6.52 +/- 0.32 6.3 DR-34 Outer Ring 4.88 +/- 0.27 7.78 +/- 0.34 7.93 +/- 0.30 7.66 +/- 0.39 7.1 DR-35 Inner Ring 4.64 +/- 0.22 7.00 +/- 0.32 6.90 +/- 0.26 6.77 +/- 0.32 6.3 DR-36 Outer Ring 5.88 +/- 0.35 7.13 +/- 0.31 6.85 +/- 0.22 7.16 +/- 0.35 6.8 DR-37 Inner Ring 4.84 +/- 0.22 6.98 +/- 0.35 7.02 +/- 0.33 6.98 +/- 0.40 6.5 DR-38 Outer Ring 4.93 +/- 0.33 6.76 +/- 0.28 7.02 +/- 0.27 6.73 +/- 0.32 6.4 DR-39 Inner Ring 5.25 +/- 0.21 7.14 +/- 0.29 6.88 +/- 0.35 6.70 +/- 0.28 6.5 DR-40 Outer Ring 5.34 +/- 0.28 7.00 +/- 0.39 7.08 +/- 0.35 6.96 +/- 0.37 6.6 Note: Blank spaces indicate missing TLDs 41

TABLE 5.3 (cont.)

ENVIRONMENTAL TLD MEASUREMENTS 2015 (Micro-R per Hour)

ANNUAL Sta. 1STQUARTER 2ND QUARTER 3RD QUARTER 4TH QUARTER AVE.

No. Description EXP.

DR-07 Site Boundary 4.73 +/- 0.24 6.94 +/- 0.38 7.09 +/- 0.29 6.87 +/- 0.23 6.4 DR-08 Site Boundary 5.28 +/- 0.18 5.81 +/- 0.43 5.95 +/- 0.34 5.66 +/- 0.27 5.7 DR-41 Site Boundary 5.10 +/- 0.27 6.82 +/- 0.27 7.10 +/- 0.31 6.80 +/- 0.28 6.5 DR-42 Site Boundary 4.75 +/- 0.31 6.13 +/- 0.30 5.92 +/- 0.33 5.98 +/- 0.32 5.7 DR-43 Site Boundary 9.91 +/- 0.24 11.64 +/- 0.80 11.34 +/- 0.49 11.30 +/- 0.36 11.1 DR-44 Site Boundary 5.60 +/- 0.40 7.01 +/- 0.31 6.88 +/- 0.30 6.83 +/- 0.27 6.6 DR-45 Site Boundary 11.50 +/- 0.68 7.67 +/- 0.30 7.81 +/- 0.28 7.50 +/- 0.43 8.6 DR-46 Site Boundary 5.45 +/- 0.22 6.33 +/- 0.39 6.50 +/- 0.22 6.33 +/- 0.29 6.2 DR-47 Site Boundary 5.53 +/- 0.31 6.28 +/- 0.33 6.68 +/- 0.25 6.30 +/- 0.21 6.2 DR-48 Site Boundary 4.28 +/- 0.29 6.64 +/- 0.25 6.83 +/- 0.37 6.76 +/- 0.26 6.1 DR-49 Site Boundary 4.57 +/- 0.30 7.13 +/- 0.26 7.31 +/- 0.43 7.09 +/- 0.23 6.5

,I DR-50 Governor Hunt House 4.91 +/- 0.29 7.03 +/- 0.27 7.14 +/- 0.26 6.76 +/- 0.34 6.5 DR-51 Site Boundary 4.37 +/- 0.19 7.35 +/- 0.28 7.40 +/- 0.32 7.47 +/- 0.36 6.7 DR-52 Site Boundary 5.03 +/- 0.20 6.89 +/- 0.44 7.39 +/- 0.21 6.71 +/- 0.31 6.5 DR-53 Site Boundary 5.45 +/- 0.32 6.97 +/- 0.40 7.24 +/- 0.28 7.09 +/- 0.25 6.7 42

6. ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS 6.1 Sampling Program Deviations Off-site Dose Calculation Manual Control 3 .5 .1 allows for deviations "if specimens are unobtainable due to hazardous conditions, seasonal unavailability, malfunction of automatic sampling equipment and other legitimate reasons." In 2015, 11 deviations were noted in the REMP. Six of the noted deviations are to track sampling delays caused by weather or samples discontinued due to the permanent cessation of operations at Vermont Yankee. These deviations did not compromise the program's effectiveness and are considered typical with respect to what is normally anticipated for any radiological environmental program. The specific deviations for 2015 were:

a) The Spofford environmental air sample station (APCF-21) air pump was found to be out of service on January 6, 2015. Continuous collection of air samples at this Station is required by the Vermont Yankee Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, Section 3/4, Table 3.5.I Section 1 (Airborne) and table note a. A new sample pump was installed immediately and normal collection of environmental air sample at this location was resumed.

b) One thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) was found missing (DR-16) during the quarterly exchange of TLDs performed April 7, 2015. This dosimetry is required by Table 3.5.l, Section 2 of the Vermont Yankee - Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (VY ODCM). The TLD was found at it designated location in the three remaining calendar quarters for2015 allowing an average annual dose rate to be calculated from the data collected.

c) A sample from sentinel well GZ-22D was not able to be collected within the scheduled sample collection interval due to complications from winter weather. The monthly sample was collected February 10, 2015 but was outsi,de of the frequency designated by procedure. No sample was missed.

d) A watt:Jr and sediment sample from the north outfall was not able to be collected due to unsafe conditions caused by winter weather.

e) A sample from perimeter wells GZ-4, GZ-14 and GZ-14D were not able to be collected within the scheduled sample collection interval due to complications from winter weather. The quarterly samples were collected March 2, 2015 and March 4, 2015 but were outside of the frequency designated by procedure. No sample was missed.

f) The monthly measurement of direct gamma exposure from the station was lower than the background reading for the month of March 2015. The rate of snow cover melting and ground thawing between the point of interest and the control location resulted in more shielding from the ground at the point of interest than at the control location. The net measurement of direct gamma exposure was reported at 0.0 milliRoentgen r~ther than reporting a negative exposure value.

g) One thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) was found missing (C0-15) during the quarterly exchange of TLDs performed July 6, 2015. This dosimetry is not required by Table 3.5.1, Section 2 of the Vermont Yankee Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (VY ODCM), but was part of a cooperative effort with the State of Vermont to validate TLD data. The TLD was found at it designated location in the 43

two remaining calendar quarters for 2015 allowing an average annual dose rate to be calculated from the data collected. This TLD was dropped from the monitoring program after the third quarter of 2015.

h) Milk and Silage sample collection was discontinued at Dunklee Farm (TM-22, TC-22) effective August 17, 2015. This farm was not a required station in the Vermont Yankee Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (VY ODCM) and sampling was discontinued due to the cessation of operations of Vermont Yankee.

i) Environmental Air/Particulate and mixed grass sample collection was discontinued at Governor Hunt House station (APCF-40, TG-40) effective August 17, 2015. This station was not a required station in the Vermont Yankee Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (VY ODCM) and sampling was discontinued due to the cessation of operations of Vermont Yankee.

j) The River station environmental air sample station (APCF-11) air pump was found to be out of service on August 18, 2015. Continuous collection of air samples at this station is required by the Vermo_nt Yankee Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, Section 3/4, Table 3.5.1 Section 1 (Airborne) and table note a. A new sample pump was installed immediately and normal collection of environmental air sample at this location was resumed.

k) The Northfield environmental air sample station (APCF-14) air pump was found to be out of service on August 18, 2015. Continuous collection of air samples at this station is required by the Vermont Yankee Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, Section 3/4, Table 3.5.l Section 1 (Airborne) and table note a. A new sample pump was installed immediately and normal collection of environmental air sample at this location was resumed.

1) Air sample station outages during 2015 are reflected in the air sample collection time percentages listed below. Air sample collection from station 40 was ceased in the third quarter of 2015 due to cessation of plant operation. The time in service was calculated for the weeks in the third quarter the station was in service.

AP/CF# 1st Quarter 2"d Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter 11 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0 12 99.9 99.9 100.0 100.1 13 99.9 100.0 100.0 100.l 14 95.2 100.1 99.9 100.l 15 99.9 100.0 99.8 99.8 21 92.3 100.0 100.1 100.1 40 100.0 99.9 100.1 NIA 6.2 Comparison of Achieved LLDs with Requirements Table 4.5.1 of the VYNPS ODCM (also shown in Table 4.4 of this report) gives the required Lower Limits of Detection (LLDs) for environmental sample analyses. On occasion, an LLD is not achievable due to a situation such as a low sample volume caused by sampling equipment malfunction or limited sample availability. In such a case, ODCM 10.2 requires a discussion of the situation. At the contracted environmental laboratory, the target LLD for the majority of analyses is 50 percent of the most restrictive 44

required LLD. Expressed differently, the typical sensitivities achieved for each analysis are at least 2 times greater than that required by the VYNPS ODCM.

For each analysis having an LLD requirement in ODCM Table 4.5.1, the a posteriori (after the fact) LLD calculated for that analysis was compared with the reqqired LLD. During 2015, all sample analyses performed for the REMP program achieved an aposteriori LLD less than the corresponding LLD

• requirement.

6.3 Comparison of Results with Reporting Levels ODCM Section 10.3:4 requires written notification to the NRC within 30 days of receipt of an analysis result whenever a Reporting Level in ODCM Table 3.5.2 is exceeded. Reporting Levels are the environmental concentrations that relate to the ALARA design dose objectives of 10 CFR 50, Appendix I.

Environmental concentrations are averaged over the calendar quarters for the purposes of this comparison. The Reporting Levels are intended to apply only to meas'!lred levels of radioactivity due to plant effluents. During 2015; no analytical result exceeded a corresponding reporting level requirement in Table 3.5.2 of the ODCM.

6.4 .Changes in Sampling Locations The Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual Section 10.2 states that if "new environmental sampling locations are identified in accordance with Control 3.5.2, the new locations shall be identified in the next Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report." There were no required sampling location changes due to the Land Use Census conducted in 2015.

Milk collection from Dunklee farm (Vern-Mont Farm in Vernon) commenced in April, 2010 at the request of the farm owner. As of August 17, 2015 (Section 6.1.h) this farm was discontinued as a VY REMP sample location due to the decrease in risk from the plant being in permanent shutdown. At this time, all dairy farms in Vernon that are required for the ODCM are supplying milk for analysis.

This year Vermont Yankee is continuing to add data from the on-site air sampling station, AP/CF 40, at the Governor Hunt House up to August 17, 2015 (Section 6.1.i). This location has been used continuously as a demonstration since early in the program, but the data had not previously been included in this report. This station was not required for the ODCM and sample collection was halted due to plant shutdown.

45

6.5 Data Analysis by Media Type The 2015 REMP data for each media type is discussed below. Whenever a specific measurement result is presented, it is given as the concentration in the units of the sample (volume or weight). An analysis is considered to yield a "detectable measurement' when the concentration exceeds three times the standard deviation for that analysis and is greater than or equal to the Minimum Detectable Concentration (MDC) for the analysis. With respect to data plots, all net concentrations are plotted as reported, without regard

'

to whether the value is "detectable" or "non-detectable." In previous years, values that were less than the MDC were converted to zero.

6.5.1 Airborne Pathways 6.5.1.1 Air Particulates (AP)

The periodic air particulate filters from each of the seven sampling sites were analyzed for gross-beta radioactivity. At the end of each quarter, the filters from each sampling site were composited for a gamma analysis. The results of the air particulate sampling program are shown in Table 5.1 and Figures 6.1 through 6.7.

Gross beta activity was detected in all but one of the air particulate filters that were analyzed. As shown in Figure 6.1, there is no significant difference between the quarterly average concentrations at the indicator (near-plant) stations and the control (distant from plant) stations. Notable in Figure 6.1 is a distinct annual cycle, with the minimum concentration in the fourth quarter, and the maximum concentration in the third quarter.

Figures 6.2 through 6.7 show the weekly gross beta concentration at each air particulate sampling location compared to the control air particulate sampling location at AP-21 (Spofford Lake, NH). Small differences are evident and expected between individual sampling locations. Figure 6.2 clearly demonstrates the distinct annual cycle, with the minimum concentration in the second quarter, and the maximum concentration in the first quarter. It can be seen that the gross-beta measurements on air particulate filters fluctuate significantly over the course of a year. The measurements from control station AP-21 vary similarly, indicating that these fluctuations are due to regional changes in naturally-occurring airborne radioactive materials, and not due to Vermont Yankee operations.

There was one naturally-occurring gamma-emitting radionuclides detected on the air particulate filters 46

during this reporting period. Be-7, a naturally-occurring cosmogenic radionuclide, was detected on 22 of 27 filter sets analyzed.

6.5.1.2 Charcoal Cartridges (CF)

Charcoal cartridges from each of the seven air sampling sites were analyzed for I-131 each time they were collected. The results of these analyses are summarized in Table 5.1. As in previous years, no I-131 attributable to the operation of Entergy Vermont Yankee was detected in any charcoal cartridge.

6.5.2 Waterborne Pathways 6.5.2.1 River Water (WR) .

Aliquots of river water were automatically collected periodically from the Connecticut River downstream from the plant discharge area and hydro station, location WR-11. Monthly grab samples were also collected at the upstream control location, also on the Connecticut River, location WR-21. The composited samples at WR-11 were collected monthly and sent along with the WR-21 grab samples to the contracted environmental laboratory for analysis. Table 5.1 shows that gross-beta measurements were positive in 1 out of 12 indicator samples as would be expected due to naturally-occurring radionuclides in the water. Gross-beta was detected in two of the 12 control samples. As seen in Figure 6.8, the mean concentration of the indicator locations was similar to the mean concentration at the control location in 2015.

For each sampling site, the monthly samples were composited into quarterly.samples for H-3 (Tritium) analyses. None of the samples contained detectable quantities ofH-3.

No gamma-emitting radionuclides were detected in any of the samples.

6.5.2.2 Ground Water - Potable Drinking Water (WG)

Quarterly ground water (deep wells supplying drinking water to the plant and selected offsite locations) samples were collected from four indicator locations (only one is requir~d by VYNPS ODCM) and one control location during 2015. In 1999, WG-14 (PSB Well) another on-site well location was added to the program. In July 2012, WG-15 (Southwest Well) was added to the ODCM as a quarterly sample location. Tab!~ 5.1 and Figure 6.9 show that gross-beta measurements were positive in 15 out of 16 indicator samples and in 4 out of 4 control samples. The beta activity is due to naturally-occurring radionuclides in the water. The levels at all sampling locations, including the higher levels at station 47

WG-13, were consistent with those detected in previous years. No gamma-emitting radionuclides or tritium were detected in any of the samples.

6.5.2.3 Sediment (SE)

Semi-annual river sediment grab samples were collected from two indicator locations during 2015. The North Storm Drain Outfall location (SE-12) is an area where up to 40 different locations can be sampled within a 20 ft by 140 ft area. In 2015, 18 locations were sampled at SE-12 during each of the semi-annual collections. Two samples were collected at SE-11 during the year. Be-7 was not detected in any of the 36 samples analyzed. As would be expected, naturally-occurring Potassium-40 (K-40) was detected in all of the samples. Cobalt-60 was not detected in any of the samples. Radium-226 (Ra-226) was detected in 31 of 36 samples. Actinium-228 (Ac-228) was detected in 33of36 samples. Thorium-228 (Th-228) was detected in all of the samples analyzed. Thorium-232 (Th-232) was detected in all 36 samples analyzed.

Uranium-238 (U-238) was not detected in any of the 36 samples. Cesium-137 (Cs-137) was detected in 23 out of 30 of the indicator samples and one of the two control samples. The levels of Cs-137 measured were consistent with what has been measured in the previous several years and with those detected at other New England locations. Also see section 6.5.2.6 for more information.

48

6.5.2.4 Test Wells (WT)

During 1996, sampling was initiated at test wells around the outer edges of an area in the south portion of the VYNPS site where septic sludge is spread. This sampling continued through 2015. The test well locations are shown on Figure 4.1 and the results are summarized in Table 5.1 under the media category, Test Well (WT). In 2015, four samples were taken at each of the four locations and all were analyzed for gamma isotopic, gross beta and H-3 activity.

Prior to the gross beta analysis, each sample was filtered through a 0.45 micron Gelman Tuffryn membrane filter. Gross beta activity was detected in all 16 samples collected with levels ranging from 4.3 to 14.9 pCi/kg. No other radionuclides were detected.

6.5.2.5 Storm Drain System The presence of plant-generated radionuclides in the onsite storm drain system has been identified in previous y~ars at Vermont Yankee (VY). As a consequence, a 50.59 evaluation of radioactive materials discharged via the storm drain system was perform~d in 1998. This assessment was in response to Information and Enforcement Bulletin No. 80-10 and NRC Information Notice No. 91-40. The evaluation demonstrated that the total curies released via the VYNPS storm drain system are not sufficient to result in a significant dose (i.e. dose does not exceed 10% of the technical specification objective of 0.3 millirem per year to the total body, and 1.0 millirem per year to the target organ for the maximally exposed receptor). Water and sediment in the onsite storm drain system was routinely sampled throughout 2015 at various points. The results of this sampling are summarized below.

Sediment samples were taken from the storm drain system at onsite manhole locations in 2015 for a total of 2 samples. All samples were analyzed for gamma emitting isotopes. Table 6-1 summarizes the analytical results of the sediment samples. The naturally-occurring isotope K-40 was found in both of the samples as expected.

No other gamma emitters were detected in the storm drain system sediment samples in 2015.

49

Table 6.1 Summary of Storm Drain System Sediment Sample Analyses*

Isotope No. Detected** Mean Range Station With Highest (pCi/kg) (pCi/kg) Detected Concentration Ra-226 0/2 NA NA -

Cs-137 0/2 NA NA -

Mn-54 0/2. NA NA -

Co-60 0/2 NA NA -

Zn-65 0/2 NA NA -

• Radionuclides that were not detected in any sample are not listed

• • The fraetion of sample analyses yielding detectable measurements (i.e. >3 standard deviations).

Water samples were taken from the storm drain system at various access points in 2015 including Manholes MH-12A and MH-14. Table 6-2 summarizes the analytical results of water samples from the storm drain system (MH-12A and MH-14) in 2015. Low levels of gross beta activity were detected in 7 of the 9 samples analyzed, at concentrations that are typical of any environmental water sample. Tritium (H-3) was not detected in any of the 9 samples analyzed.

In 1998, an additional dose assessment was performed that incorporated all of the 1998 storm drain system analytical results (including both sediment and water). The dose assessment was performed using the maximum measured concentration of radionuclides in 1998, and a conservative estimate of the volume of sediment and water discharged via the storni drain system. The results of this dose assessment are estimates of the total body and maximum organ dose equaling 3.2% and 1.6% of the corresponding Technical Specification dose limits respectively. Therefore, there was no significant dose impact from plant-related radionuclides in the storm drain system in *1998. The sampling conducted in 2015 indicates that the presence of radionuclides in the storm drain system has not changed significantly. Therefore, the storm drain system remains an insignificant impact to dose. The VYNPS staff will continue to monitor the presence of plant related radionuclides in the storm drain system.

50

Table 6.2 Summary of Storm Drain System Water Sample Analyses*

Isotope No. Detected ** Mean Range Station With Highest (pCi/L) (pCi/L) Detected Concentration Gross Beta 7/9 4.8 E 0 (1.6 - 10.3) E 0 MH-12A (WW-12)

H-3 019 NA NA -

Ra-226 019 NA NA -

1-131 019 NA NA -

Cs-134 019 NA NA -

Cs-137 019 NA NA -

ZrNb-95 019 NA NA -

Co-58 019 NA NA -

Mn-54 019 NA NA -

Zn-65 019 NA NA -

Fe-59 019 NA NA -

Co-60 019 NA NA -

Ba/La-140 019 NA NA -

• Radionuclides that were not detected in any sample are not listed

• • The fraction of sample analyses yielding detectable measurements (i.e. >3 standard deviations).

6.5.2.6 Air Compressor Condensate and Manhole Sampling Results The presence of tritium in station air compressor condensate and manholes (Storm Drain System) has been identified since 1995 (ER_95-0704). An evaluation has been performed (S.R.1592) which states

" ... leakage of tritium found in the storm drains (manholes) to ground water beneath the site will be transported by natural ground water gradient to the Connecticut River. However, at the current measured concentrations and postulated leak rate from the storm drains, the offsite dose impact is not significant

(<2.4E-5 mrem/year)." Data provided in Table 6.3 will be filed under the requirements of 1OCFR50.75(g) and is presented here in response to ER_95-0704_04 commitments. Because of revisions in the security arrangements at the plant site, there was no water available for collection in Manholes 11 H, 13 and 8 during 2015. Due to the cessation of plant operation, production of tritium has stopped at VY and tritium measurements of the air compressor condensate did not detect any tritium in 2015.

51

Table 6.3 Summary of Air Compressor Condensate and Manhole Water Tritium Concentrations*

Sample No. Mean Range Location Detected** ( microcuries/ml ) (microcuries/ml)

Air Compressor 0/7 NA NA Condensate Manhole llH 0/0 No Sample Available No Sample Available Manhole 13 0/0 No Sample Available No Sample Available Manhole 8 0/0 No Sample Available No Sample Available

• Reported per ER_950704_04.

• • The fraction of sample analyses yielding detectable measurements 6.5.2.7 Groundwater Monitoring Wells Samples Results (WS)

Leakage from primary system piping between the Augmented Off Gas (AOG) Building and the Turbine Building was identified early in 2010. A large pool of subsurface water became contaminated with Tritium as a result of this leak. A large number of new groundwater sample wells were installed and a significant effort was mounted to find the leak and fix it. Presently, mitigation efforts have resulted in the extraction of more than 300000 gallons of trititated water from this subsurface pool. Dose calculations have been performed assuming that this underground plume of contaminated water is moving towards and into the Connecticut River. The dose impacts and other details of this event are provided in the year 2015 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report.

6.5.3 Ingestion Pathways 6.5.3.1 Milk (TM)

Milk samples from cows at several local farms were collected monthly during 2015. Twice-per-month collections were made during the "pasture season" since the milking cows or goats were identified as being fed pasture grass during that time. Each sample was analyzed for I-131 and other gamma-emitting radionuclides. Quarterly composites (by location) were analyzed for Sr-89 and Sr-90.

As expected, naturally-occurring K-40 was detected in all samples. Also expected was Sr-90. Sr-90 was not detected in the 8 indicator samples but was detected in three of the seven control samples. Although Sr-90 is a by-product of nuclear power plant operations, the levels detected in milk are consistent with that expected from worldwide fallout from nuclear weapons tests, and to a much lesser degree from fallout from the Chernobyl incident. The Sr-90 levels shown in Table 5.1 and Figure 6.11 are consistent 52

with those detected at other New England farms participating in other plant environmental monitoring programs. This radionuclide and Cs-137 are present throughout the natural environment as a result of atmospheric nuclear weapons testing that started primarily in the late 1950's and continued through 1980.

They are found in soil and vegetation, as well as anything that feeds upon vegetation, directly or indirectly. The detection of Cs-137 in environmental milk samples is expected and has been detected in previous years. Cs-137 was not detected in any of the 65 samples in 2015. See Figure 6.10. It should be noted here that most of the Cs-137 concentrations and many of the Sr-90 concentrations shown on Figures 6.10 and 6.11, respectively, are considered "not detectable." All values have been plotted, regardless of whether they were considered statistically significant or not. As shown in these figures, the levels are also consistent with those detected in previous years near the VYNPS plant. There is also little actual difference in concentrations between farms. As in previous years, no I-131 attributable to the operation of Entergy Vermont Yankee was detected in any milk sample. Naturally occurring Ra-226 was not detected in any of the 65 samples analyzed.

6.5.3.2 Silage (TC)

A silage sample was collected from each of the required milk sampling stations during October. Each of these was analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides and I-131. As expected with all biological media, naturally-occurring Be-7 was detected in 8 of 16 samples and K-40 was detected in all samples. No Cs-13 7 or I-131 was detected in any sample.

6.5.3.3 Mixed Grass (TG)

Mixed grass samples were collected at each of the air sampling stations during three of the four quarters of 2015. As expected with all biological media, naturally-occurring Be-7 was detected in 11 of the 19 samples. Naturally-occurring K-40 was detected in all samples. Cesium-137 was not detected in any of the samples.

6.5.3.4 Fish (FH)

Semiannual samples of fish were collected from two locations in both spring and fall of 2015 for the VY REMP. Several species may be collected such as Walleye, Small Mouth Bass, Large Mouth Bass, Yellow Perch, White Perch, and Rock Bass. The edible portions of each of these were analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. As expected in biological matter, naturally-occurring K-40 was detected in all eight samples. In addition to the analysis of edible portions, the inedible portions were also analyzed.

These fish were also analyzed for Gross Beta, H-3, Am-241, Cm-242, Cm-243/244, Fe-55, Ni-63, Pu-2328, Pu-239/240, Pu-241, Pu-242, Sr-89 and Sr-90.

53

Strontium 90 was detected in some of the inedible portions (bones, guts and skin are included in the

'inedible' portion). This is the fifth year in the VY REMP program that fish has been analyzed for Hard-to-Detects such as Strontium-90. The results were compared to studies done in the Hudson River by New York State officials and it was concluded that the Strontium-90 detected is a result of weapons-testing era fallout to the environment and not from nuclear power plant releases.

As shown in Table 5.1, Cs-137 was not detected in this year's samples. It should be noted that the majority of the Cs-137 concentrations plotted in Figure 6.12 are considered "not detectable." All values were plotted regardless of whether they were considered statistically significant or not. The Cs-13 7 levels plotted for 2014 and previous years are typical of concentrations attributable to global nuclear weapons testing fallout.

6.5.4 Direct Radiation Pathway Direct radiation was continuously measured at 53 locations surrounding the Vermont Yankee plant with the use ofthermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs).

In 1999, DR-53 was added on the site boundary. The TLDs are collected every calendar quarter for readout at the environmental laboratory. The complete summary of data may be found in Table 5.3.

From Tables 5.2 and 5.3 and Figure 6.13, it can be seen that the Inner and Outer Ring TLD mean exposure rates were not significantly different in 2015. This indicates no significant overall increase in direct radiation exposure rates in the plant vicinity. It can also be seen from these tables that the Control TLD mean exposure rate was not significantly different than that at ~he Inner and Outer Rings .. Figure 6.13 also shows an annual cycle at both indicator and control locations. The lowest point of the cycle occurs usually during the winter months. This is due primarily to the attenuating effect of the snow cover on radon emissions and on direct irradiation by naturally-occurring radionuclides in the soil. Differing amounts of these naturally-occurring radionuclides in the underlying soil, rock or nearby building materials result in different radiation levels between one field site and another Upon examining Figure 6.17, as well as Table 5.2, it is evident that in recent years, station DR-45 had a higher average exposure rate than any other station. This location is on-site, and the higher exposure rates are due to plant operations and activities in the immediate vicinity of this TLD. There is no significant dose potential to the surrounding population or any real individual from these sources since they are located on the back side of the plant site, between the facility and the river. The same can be said for station DR-46, which has shown higher exposure rates in previous years.

54

Environmental Program Trend Graphs 2015 Radiological Environmental Operating Report Vermont Yankee Graphs:

6.1 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (Average Concentrations) 6.2 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (11) 6.3 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (12) 6.4- Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (13) 6.5 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (14) 6.6 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (15)

6. 7 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (40) 6.8 - Gross Beta Measurement on River Water (Average Concentrations) 6.9-Gross Beta Measurement on Ground Water (Average Concentrations) 6.10- Cesium-137 in Milk (Annual Average Concentrations) 6.11 - Strontium 90 in Milk (Annual Average Concentrations) 6.12- Cesium-137 in Fish (Annual Average Concentrations) 6.13 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring, Outer Ring, and Control TLDS 6.14 - Exposure Rate at Indicator TLDS, DRO 1-03 6.15 - Exposure Rate at Indicator TLDS?, DR 06,50 6.16- Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLDS, DR 07 - 08, 41 - 42 6.17 - Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLDS, DR 43-46 6.18 - Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLDS, DR 4 7-49, 51-53 6.19-Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDS, DR 09-15(odd) 6.20-Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDS, DR-17-23 (odd) 6.21 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDS,DR 25-31 (odd) 6.22-Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDS, DR 33-39 (odd) 6.23 -Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDS, DR 10 - 16 (even) 6.24-Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDS, DR 18-24 (even) 6.25 -Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDS, DR 26-32 (even) 6.26-Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDS, DR 34-40 (even) 6.27 - Exposure Rate at Control TLDS, DR 04-05 55

Figure 6.1 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters - Quarterly Average Concentrations 0.08

0.05

-

+-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-----l+---

a>

E 0.01 0 -r-~.----r~-.,..-~--r-~.-~.--------,,------.~-.,..-~---.--~.---~..-----,~-,-~-,--~-.--~.---~.,-----,.~-,-~--r-~.---~,.---

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 201120122013 2014 2015 Year

- Indicator Stations - - - Control Station 56

53 52

{,

r--

LI) 51 50 49 I 48 47 H

• • 46 I 45 4

• 44 43

....IA I

• 42 41 I 40

.....

C1' u..

• 39

~ 38 J:

.....

C1' C'tS I 37 z Qj t 36 .:.::

J 0 ~ 35 "'

....J "E

t II 34

~a.

C'tS I 33 c..

• C/)

32 .....

....

t 31

...

Qi N

0:.

~ <I:

1* 30 'E c:

0

.....

IA II I

29 z:J 28 ~

t c:

C1' I 27 ~

E ~ 26 ~

....C1' ~ 25 ~

J ~ 24 ~ c 0

IA *~

C'tS 0 23 U'5 C1' 11 22 Qi

E It 21 >

~

s 20 .....

C1' co ~I

• 19 ~

18 IA IA 0

.... **

'

17 16 t

(!) I ~ 15 N ~ 14

<D

~ I

• 1213

J 1* 11

~

C'I 10 u.. ~ 9 I 8

~ I

• 7 6

IJ 5 I 4 3

-- ~ 2

-

-

• • 1 0

~ cq ~ '<t: ~ "! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 Jataw :>1qn:>f!:)d

Figure 6.3 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters 0 .7 0 .6

.

0 .5

...

-(1)

(1)

E 0.4 0

.0

-u::I 0

a.

0 .3 0 .2 I

0.1 0

.... ... - - -.... - - - - --- - ... - ...

- ~

.....

- - __... - . . .._.

- -- - - ... - - -- -... ... -- - - - -- - - - -.... ..._

- -....

o~Nw~~m~~w~~~~~~~~~~NNNNNNNNNNWWWWWWWWWW~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

o~Nw~~m~~wo~Nw~~m~~wo~Nw~~m~~wo~Nw~~m~~wo~Nw 2015 Week Number

~ AP- 12 North Hinsdale - - - AP-21 Spofford Lake NH 58

53 52

~

l 51 50 en l/)

11 49 I 48 It 47 ll 46 I 45 I ** 44 43 I 42 I 41

~ 40

~

C1' I

• 39 u.. 38

-

I C1'

('\S t

• 37 36 J:

z Q)

s I 35

.><

u '°

-'

t: u 34 'E

('\S I 33 ~0.

Q..

~

<t I

• I 32 31 .....

30 .c Q)

(/)

N 0..

c: <(

0 I t 29 E

.....fl) 1 28 z:::l T c: H 27 ..:.::

C1' 26 ~

E C1'

~

~*

0 25 ~

s ~ 24 ~ c:

.n 23 ~

fl)

('\S

.2 c;;

C1' 22 u;

.c

- 21 I c75

('\S 4 20 S1 C1'

~

'° co I 19 c:

fl) 18 :I:

fl) 0 17 ...

("')

0..

~ ~ 16 <(

C>

....,. I I 15 14 t

<D 13 C1'

~

12

s I 11 O> 10 u.. t 9 I 8 I ~ 7 41 6 II 5 H 4 3

-- ~ 2

- ~ 1 0

"-: <!:! ~ '<t: ~ "! ..- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Jataw :>!qn:>J!::>d

53 52 I

i 51 50 0

<..O H 49 I 48 II 47 I 46 I

• 45 I 44

• • I 43 42 41

-...

I/) 1* 40 Cl) I 39 u.

~ I 38

- I 37 J:

Cl) z

~

t 36 ~

.,Cl>

J It 35 _J 0 H 34 "E

e

~

I 33 ~

8.

1* 32

...

0... (/)

......

I 31 ... N cl.

<2: I t 30 ~ <(

c: I 29 E f

-0 I/)

c:

Cl)

E I

I

• II 25 28 27 26

~

.::t:.

3:

~

...

Cl)

J i 24 ~ <(

E I/) It 23 ~ "O iii

~ I

• 22 Cl) "".c

!: ** 21 "S

-

m

~

Cl) 0 20

~ 19 18

.,,.......z cl.

<(

I/)

I/)

...0

(!)

• I 15 17 16 t I 14 I()

• I 13

<D I 12

...

Cl)

J 1* 11 Cl i 10

u. 9

~ 8 I~ 7 I 6 II 5 I 4 3

-- *~ 2

- .,....

0 1

0 I": ~ ~ <:t: ~ C"!

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ja1aw ::>!qn::>f!:::>d

53 52 .-i l=

I .... 50 51 l.D u . . 49 I ~ 48

, ~ .... 47 It ~ 46 41 ~

45

. . . 44 I ~

43 1 ~ 42 I .... 41 f!! U >- 40

~ I .... 39 u.. I ~

38 I

.....cu II ~ 37 z

CD

~ I .... 36 ....:

Ill

s _J u 1 * .... 35

'E u ~ 34 t: ~

~ I ~ 33 8.

a. CJ)

• • ~

.... 32 ......

N I .... 31

~

.. . . 30

... a.

c: ~ <(

0 I * .... 29 E

.....

Ill II .... 28 i T c: I .... 27 ~

cu l ~ 26 E Q) cu

.... I ~ 25 ~ i0

s t .... 24 ~ a::

Ill I .... 23 ~

~

cu I .... 22 ~.._

!! ~ I ~ 21 CD "5-

~ I-

.....

cu o ~ 20 in

......

al I .... 19 a.

Ill 18 <(

Ill 0

....

(!)

I 17 16 t ti 15

.*,.

<D 14

<D 13

....cu 12

s C'l I

, 11 10 u.. I 9 I

• 8 0

• 7 6

It 5 I 4 3

-- -

-

~

0 2

1 0

I'-: <q ~ "<f: ~ "! ..-- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 JaJaw :>!qn:>f!:)d

53 52

.

N l.D 51 50 I 49 11 48 I 47 ti 46 II 45 I 44

• 43 42 41

...

In C1' I 40

!:::::

u.

1* 39 I 38

~ I 37 C'O I 36 J:

s II 35 z u Q,l EC'O a..

.. I 34 33

""'"'

....J

'E

... I 32

~

-

<(

0

...

In c:

C1' 0

I I

I 31 ....

30 I 29 E

~

28 z::l 27 ~

(/)

c:::i a:.

<

T E I

• 26 ~

...

C1'

s

• I 25 t 24

~

~

In C'O *I 23 ~ ~

C1'  ::::J u 22 0

E J:

...

C'O C1'

~

• • 21 20 E

J J:

co I 19 0 c:

In I 18 Q; In ~

...0

(.!)

~

I 17 16

(.!)

0

"'i Cl.

I 15

,.._

<D

~

~

u 13 u 12 14 t

s I

• 11 Cl I 10 u.

~ 9 I ~ 8 I ~ 7 iI 6 I 5 II 4 ti 3 2

I'-: c.q

- ~ -.:: ~ "! ..-

~ 1 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Jataw :>1 q n:>f!~d

Figure 6.8 - Gross Beta Measurements on River Water Semi-Annual Average Concentration

....Q)

~ 2.00 -t--~~~+-~t--~~~-------+~-H--+--t---t-t-t-t---tt---...-----~t-----,pt--t---,t---t---1H---t~~~~~--1>--+--tt--~--t 0--

a.

0.00 +-~..----.~-...~-.-~-r-~-r-~~~-.--~..-----,.----...~-.-~-r-~-r-~.....-~-.-~..----.~--..~-.-~--.-~.....-~-.----1 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 200 1 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Year

-+- 'NR-11 River Station (3-3) - l/l/R-21Rt9 Bndge (3-8) 63

Figure 6.9 - Gross Beta Measurements on Ground Water Semi-Annual Average Concentrations 0.0 -+-~..-----,.---.,.~-...~-.-~-..--~-.-~~--.,.-~--.-~-..--~-.-~-,--~..,...-~..--~.---.,.~--.,.-~--.-~-.--~-.-~~~..--~

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year

- wG-11 Plant Well - - - WG-12 Vernon Nursing Well WG-22 Copeland Well

- WG-13 COB Well -+-- WG-14 Engineering Building WG-15 Southwest Well 64

Figure 6.10 - Cesium 137 in Milk - Annual Average Concentration 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0

...a.>

-

J

--c.

u 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 4-~~.........::~;....L~~...L::::..-.......1===-:::~......~..L...~~~--,-~~~~-.-~.-----.-~-.---,.~-..-~..---.-~-.---,.~~

19901991199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015 Note: In 2005 , switched to reporting < MDA when no activity was detected . Year Using MDA values result in a larger number.

- TM-11 Miller (cow) - TM- 14 Brown (cow) TM-16 Meadow Crest Farm (cow) - - TM-18 Blodgett Farm (cow)

-lK- TM-24 County Farm (control) --+- TM-22 Franklin (cow) -+- TM-25 Downey-Spencer (goat) - - TM-26 Cheney Hill

- - TM-99 Special Farm TM-20 Dunklee (cow) 65

Figure 6.11 - Strontium 90 in Milk - Annual Averge Concentrations 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5

....

-u 4>

.._

.J 2.0 a.

1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 1990 199 11 992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 200 120022003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20112012 2013 2014 2015 Note: In 2005, switched to reporting< MDA when no activity was detected. Averages Year include the MDAs and positive values. Using MDA values result in a larger number.

- TM-11 Miller (cow} -tt- TM-14 Brown (cow) TM-18 Blodgett Farm (cow ) - - TM-24 County Farm (control)

- TM-22 Franklin Farm (cow) - . - TM-25 Downey- Spencer (goat) -+- TM-26 Cheney Hill TM-20 Dunklee Farm (cow}

'~

66

Figure 6.12 - Cesium 137 in Fish - Annual Average Concentrations Cl

~ 40.0 +-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-t--t-~~~~~~~~~~~~~___.,,._~~~~~~_.

(.)

c.

0.0 ~.....-~-r-~-.--~-.-~-.-~--.,.~---.~~..--~.,--~.....-~-.-~-.-~-.-~-.-~-.-~---.~---.~~..--~.,--~-..-~.....-~-.-----i 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 201 1 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year Note: In 2005 switched to reporting < MDA when no actMty was detected . Using MDA values result in a larger number.

- FH -11 Vernon Pond - FH -21 Rt 9 Bridge (Control) 67

Figure 6.1 3 -Average Exposure Rate at Inner Ring , Outer Ring and Control TLDs 9.0 8.5 8.0 7.5 5 7.0 . ~

0

.s:::.

...

Q)

a. 6.5 et:I

...0

~ 6.0

-ft-~~~-A-~~~--"* -1~-t. -,__~-=----~~~~~~~~-M I

i 5.5 >--~~~~~~--~.*ic---~~l~~~~~-~

5.0

• 4.0 -!-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Ret rieval Dat e

- control _._ Inner Ring Outer Ring 68

Figure 6.14 - Exposure Rate at Indicator TLDs, DR01-03 10.0 9.5 9.0 8.5 8.0 - --

...

J 0 7.5 J:

...

(I)

a. 7.0 0:::I

...u 0

6.5

~

6.0 4.0 -+-~-.-~~-.--~-.-~~....---~---.-~~....---~-.-~~....---~-.-~~....---~---.-~~-.--~---.-~~....---~-.-~~-.--~~~---1 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

-+- DR-01 River Station No. 3.3 -If- DR-02 North Hinsdale, NH DR-03 Hinsdale Substation 69

Figure 6.15 - Exposure Rate at Indicator TLDs, DROG & DR-50 10.0 9.5 9.0 8.5 8.0

...:J 0 7.5

.r:.

...

~

a. 7.0 0:::

I

...CJ 0

6.5

~

6.0 5.5 5.0 4.5 4.0 -+-~--r-~~.---~-r-~---,.~~.----~-r~~..--~-,-~--,~~-.-~-,-~~...,.--~--r-~~.---~-.-~-,-~~..--~-l 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

-+- DR-06 Vernon School - - - DR-50 Gov. Hunt House 70

Figure 6.16 - Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TL Os DR07, 08, 41 & 42 11 9

...::J 0

c 8

...

Q) a.

0::

I

...u 0

~

6 4 +-~----..~~--.-~~..--~-.-~~--r--~~,--'--~-.-~~--.--~--.~~-r-~~-,..-~----..~~--.-~~..--~-.-~~--.--~----..~~

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

- DR-07 Srte Boundary - i i - DR-08 Site Boundary DR-41 Site Boundary DR-42 Site Boundary 71

Figu re 6.17 - Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLDs - DR43 thru 46 19 18 17 16 15 14

!5 13 ----

0

..c.

~ 12 - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - -

c.

~ 11

...0

• !::? 10

~

9 8

7 6

5 4 -----,.---..------r-- - . - - - - . - - - - - , - - - r - - - , . - - - , - - - - , - - - - , - - - , - - - . . - - - - - - r - - - - - i r - - --r-- - r - - - - - I 1997 1998 1999 2000 200 1 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

~ DR-4 3 Site Boundary -II-- DR-44 Site Boundary DR-45 Site Boundary DR-46 Site Boundary 72

Figure 6.18 - Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLDs DR47-49 & 51-53 12 -.-~~-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.

...:::I 9 0

...

.I:

G)

c. 8 0::

I

...u0

~ 7 II 4 +-----..----~----..----~~~~~~--~-.-~~...-~--..~~-...-~~..--~-....~~~~~.--~-.-~~~~-....~---;

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

~ DR-47 Site Boundary - - - DR-48 Site Boundary DR-49 Site Boundary

- - DR-51 Site Boundary --ilE-- DR-52 Site Boundary -+- DR-53 Site Boundary 73

Figure 6.19 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDs DR09, 11 , 13 & 15 S7 +-~+-f--.!l~+--++-,._~~+-~~~.,...-~~~~-=-~fr~-t--'c--f-i.---t--r--~~-t--t-~+-r~--.. 11~~~~~*-----i 0

~

...

Cl) a.

0:::I

...

0

• !::? 6 +----+......._._ .......+

~

4 +-~-.-~~..--~-,-~~.--~-r-~~.--~-.-~--,~~-.-~--.~~-.-~-,.~~~~---r~~,--~-,-~~.--~~

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

-+- DR-09 Inner Ring - oR-11 Inner Ring DR-13 Inner Ring -~ DR-15 Inner Ring 74

Figu re 6.20 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDs DR1T, 19, 21 & 23 9

...::::J 0 8

.r:.

...G>

c..

0::

...u 0

7

~

6 4 -t-~---.-~~-.-~---.-~~...,.-~--r~~..........~---,r-~--r-~~r-~--r-~~,--~....,-~~-.--~-r~~-.--~-r~~-.--~---1 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retriev al Date

-+- DR-17 Inner Ring - DR-19 Inner Ring DR-21 Inner Ring - - DR-23 Inner Ring 75

Figure 6.21 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDs DR25, 27, 29 & 31 9

8.5 8

7.5

...:J 7 0

.r:.

...

Q)

c. 6.5 et:I

...0CJ 6

~

5.5 5

4 -!-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

-+- DR-25 Inner Ring - DR-27 Inner Ring DR-29 Inner Ring DR-31 Inner Ring 76

Figu re 6.22 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDs DR33, 35, 37 & 39 8

...

~

0

.I:.

...

Q)

c. 7 0:::

I

...CJ 0

~

6 l'l 5

4 +-~-.-~~...--~-.-~~.---~-,.....-~---.~~......--~-...~~-.--~---.-~~..--~-.-~~...--~-,.....-~---.~~...,....-~--.,...~--l 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

--+- DR-33 Inner Ring _._ DR-35 Inner Ring DR-37 Inner Ring - DR-39 Inner Ring 77

Figure 6.23 - Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDs DR10, 12, 14 & 16 8

...::::l 0

.!:.

...

Q)

a. 7 0::I

...00

~

6 4 +-~-.-~~...-~-.-~~,.--~--r-~--,~~-.-~-,-~~-.--~---.-~~...--~-.-~~.--~--r-~---.~~-.-~--.-~--'-l 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

-+- DR-10 Outer Ring _._ DR-12 Outer Ring DR-14 Outer Ring DR-16 Outer Ring 78

Figure 6.24 - Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDs DR18, 20, 22 & 24 9.5 9

8 .5 I..

J 0 8

c I..

QI Q. 7.5 0::

I 0

I.. 7 u

~

6.5 6

5.5 5

4.5 4 -~-.,.-~~,.--~--,-~---.~~-r-~----.-~~-r-~--r-~----,~~-r-~---.-~~-r-~-r-~----,.--~-r-~---.-~~-r-~~

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

~ DR-18 Outer Ring - - DR-20 Outer Ring DR-22 Outer Ring - DR-24 Outer Ring 79

Figu re 6.25 - Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDs DR26, 28, 30 & 32 8

7.5

...::I 7 0

c

...

~ 6.5 IXI

...

0

(..)

6

~

5.5 5

4.5 4 -!-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1997 1998 1999 2000 200 1 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 201 4 2015 Retrieval Date

-+- DR-26 Outer Ring - DR-28 Outer Ring DR-30 Outer Ring - DR-32 Outer Ring 80

Figure 6.26 - Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDs DR 34, 36, 38 & 40

....

~ 7.5

....

8. 7 -

0:::I 0

ti 6 .5 <p.;.;-..;<,--____,,_ _ -11 .. ,._____,,.,.___-ttl--itt---r---..~-1 --11 .........o--+ -.---r-r--+-i~---< +----+ tt+-- - ---+--#-T+---i 1---'W'-~--I H+*lf--Hi

~

4 +---r---.----.-----r----r------r---.-----.---.----.-----r----r----r---.---,------,----r-----t 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 201 1 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

-+- DR-34 Outer Ring - - DR-36 Outer Ring DR-38 Outer Ring - - DR-40 Outer Ring 81

Figure 6.27 - Exposure Rate at Control TLDs DR04 & 05 9

8.5 8

7.5

...::s 7 0

I

...

~ 6.5 0:::

I

...u 0

6

~

5.5 5

4 +-~~~~~~~~~~~....-~--..-~~..,....-~~~~~~~~~~~....-~--..-~~..,....-~~~~~~....-~-!

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 201 1 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

- DR-04 Northfield, MA ---- DR-05 Spofford Lake, NH 82

7.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAMS 7.1 ENVIRONMENTAL DOSIMETRY COMPANY ENVIRONMENTAL DOSIMETRY COMPANY ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE STATUS REPORT January - December 2015 Prepared By: Date:

L/J.-2//b

• Approved By: Date: c9 [~il ((5 Environmental Dosimetry Company 10 Ashton Lane Sterling, MA 01564 83

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................................... 85 EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

.......................................................................................................... 86 I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 87 A. QC Program ...................................................................................................... 87 B. QA Program ....................................................................................................... 87 II. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA ................................................................. 87 A. Acceptance Criteria for Internal Evaluations ...................................................... 87 B. QC Investigation Criteria and Result Reporting .................................................. 89 C. Reporting of Environmental Dosimetry Results to EDC Customers ................... 89 Ill. DATA

SUMMARY

FOR ISSUANCE PERIOD JANUARY-DECEMBER 2015 ................ 89 A. General Discussion ............................................................................................ 89 B. Result Trending ................................................................................................. 90 IV. STATUS OF EDC CONDITION REPORTS (CR) .......................................................... 90 V. STATUS OF AUDITS/ASSESSMENTS ........................................................................ 90 A. Internal .............................................................................................................. 90 B. External ........................................................ :.................................................... 90 VI. PROCEDURES AND MANUALS REVISED DURING JANUARY - DECEMBER 2015 .. 90 VII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................ 90 VIII. REFERENCES ............................................................................................................,. ..90 APPENDIX A DOSIMETRY QUALITY CONTROL TRENDING GRAPHS

LIST OF TABLES

1. Percentage of Individual Analyses Which Passed EDC Internal Criteria, January - December 2015 88

2. Mean Dosimeter Analyses (n=6), January - December 2015 88

3. Summary of Independent QC Results for 2015 88 85

EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

Routine quality control (QC) testing was performed for dosimeters issued by the Environmental Dosimetry Company (EDC) .

During this annual period, 100% (72/72) of the individual dosimeters, evaluated against the EDC internal performance acceptance criteria (high-energy photons only), met the criterion for accuracy and 100% (72/72) met the criterion for precision (Table 1). In addition, 100% ( 12/12) of the dosimeter sets evaluated against the internal tolerance limits met EDC acceptance criteria (Table 2) and 100% (6/6) of independent testing passed the performance criteria (Table 3). Trending graphs, which evaluate performance statistic for high-energy photon irradiations and co-located stations are given in Appendix A.

One internal assessment was performed in 2Q15. There were no findings.

86

I. INTRODUCTION The TLD systems at the Environmental Dosimetry Company (EDC) are calibrated and operated to ensure consistent and accurate evaluation of TLDs. The quality of the dosimetric results reported to EDC clients is ensured by in-house performance testing and independent performance testing by EDC clients, and both internal and client directed program assessments.

The purpose of the dosimetry quality assurance program is to provide performance.

documentation of the routine processing of EDC dosimeters. Performance testing provides a statistical measure of the bias and precision of dosimetry processing against a reliable standard, which in turn points out any trends or performance changes. Two programs are used:

A. QC Program Dosimetry quality control tests are performed on EDC Panasonic 814 Environmental dosimeters. These tests include: (1) the in-house testing program coordinated by the EDC QA Officer and (2) independent test perform by EDC clients. In-house test are performed using six pairs of 814 dosimeters, a pair is reported as an individual result and six pai~s are reported as the mean result.

Results of these tests are described in this report.

Excluded from this r~port are instrumentation checks. Although instrumentation checks represent an important aspect of the quality assurance program, they are not included as process checks in this report. Instrumentation checks represent between 5-10% of the TLDs processed.

• B. QA Program An internal assessment of dosimetry activities is conducted annually by the Quality Assurance Officer (Reference 1). The purpose of the ass~ssment is to review procedures, results, materials or components to identify opportunities to improve or enhance. processes and/or services.

II. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA A. Accept~mce Criteria for Internal Evaluations

1. Bias For each dosimeter tested, the measure of bias is the percent deviation of the reported result relative to the delivered exposure. The percent deviation relative to the delivered exposure is calculated as follows:

where:

H~ = the corresponding reported exposure for the i1h dosimeter (i.e., the reported exposure)

Hi = the exposure delivered to the i1h irradiated dosimeter (i.e., the delivered exposure) 87

2. Mean Bias For each group of test dosimeters, the mean bias is the average percent /

deviation of the reported result relative to the delivered exposure. The mean percent deviation relative to the delivered exposure is calculated as follows:

where:

H; = the corresponding reported exposure for the i1h dosimeter (i.e., the reported exposure)

H; = the exposure delivered to the i1h irradiated test dosimeter (i.e., the delivered exposure) n = the number of dosimeters in the test group

3. Precision For a group of test dosimeters irradiated to a given exposure, the measure of precision is the percent deviation of individual results relative to the mean reported exposure. At least two values are required for the determination of precision. The measure of precision for the i1h dosimeter is:

where:

H; = the reported exposure for the i1h dosimeter (i.e., the reported exposure)

H= the mean reported exposure; i.e., R IH;(~) =

n = the number of dosimeters in the test group

4. EDC Internal Tolerance Limits All evaluation criteria are taken from the "EDC Quality System Manual,"

(Reference 2). These criteria are only applied to individual test dosimeters irradiated with high-energy photons (Cs-137) and are as follows for Panasonic Environmental dosimeters: +/- 15% for bias and +/-

12.8% for precision.

88

B. QC Investigation Criteria and Result Reporting EDC Quality System Manual (Reference 2) specifies when an investigation is required due to a QC analysis that has failed the EDC bias criteria. The criteria are as follows:

1. No investigation is necessary when an individual QC result falls outside the QC performance criteria for accuracy.

2. Investigations are initiated when the mean of a QC processing batch is outside the performance criterion for bias.

C. Reporting of Environmental Dosimetry Results to EDC Customers

1. All results are to be reported in a timely fashion.

2. If the QA Officer determines that an investigation is required for a process, the results shall be issued as normal. If the QC results, prompting the investigation, have a mean bias from the known of greater ttian +/-20%, the results shall be issued with a note indicating that they may be updated in the future, pending resolution of a QA issue.

3. Environmental dosimetry results do not require updating if the ----.

investigation has shown that the mean bias between the original results and. the corrected results, based on applicable correction factors from the investigation, does not exceed +/-20%.

Ill. DATA

SUMMARY

FOR ISSUANCE PERIOD JANUARY-DECEMBER 2015 A. General Discussion Results of performance tests conducted are summarized and discussed in the following sections. Summaries of the performance tests for the reporting period are given in Tables 1 through 3 and Figures 1 through 4.

Table 1 provides a summary of individual dosimeter results evaluated against the EDC internal acceptance criteria for high-energy photons only. During this period, 100% (72/72) of the individual dosimeters, evaluated against these criteria met the tolerance limits for accuracy and 100% (72/72) met the criterion for precision.

A graphical interpretation is provided in Figures 1 and 2.

Table 2 provides the Bias + Standard deviation results for each group (N=6) of dosimeters evaluated against the internal tolerance criteria. Overall, 100%

( 12/12) of the dosimeter sets evaluated against the internal tolerance performance criteria met these criteria. A graphical interpretation is provided in Figures 3 Table 3 presents the independent blind spike results for dosimeters processed during this annual period. All results passed the performance acceptance criterion. Figure 4 is a graphical interpretation of Seabrook Station blind co-located station results.

89

B. Result Trending One of the main benefits of performing quality control tests on a routine basis is to identify trends or performance changes. The results of the Panasonic environmental dosimeter performance tests are presented in Appendix A. The results are evaluated against each of the performance criteria listed in Section II, namely: individual dosimeter accuracy, individual dosimeter precision, and mean bias.

All of the results presented in Appendix A are plotted sequentially by processing date.

IV. STATUS OF EDC CONDITION REPORTS (CR)

No condition reports were issued during this annual period.

V. STATUS OF AUDITS/ASSESSMENTS A. Internal EDC Internal Quality Assurance Assessment was conducted during the fourth quarter 2015. There were no findings identified.

B. External None.

VI. PROCEDURES AND MANUALS REVISED DURING JANUARY - DECEMBER 2015 Procedure 1052 was revised on December 23, 2015. Several procedures were reissued with no changes as part of the 5 year review cycle.

VII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The quality control evaluations continue to indicate the dosimetry processing programs at the EDC satisfy the criteria specified in the Quality System Manual. The EDC demonstrated the ability to meet all applicable acceptance criteria.

VIII. REFERENCES

1. EDC Qual[ty Control and Audit Assessment Schedule, 2015.

2. EDC Manual 1, Quality System Manual, Rev. 3, August 1, 2012.

90

TABLE 1 PERCENTAGE OF INDIVIDUAL DOSIMETERS THAT PASSED EDC INTERNAL CRITERIA JANUARY - DECEMBER 2015( 1), (2 )

Number  % Passed Precision Dosimeter Type  % Passed Bias Criteria Tested Criteria Panasonic Environmental 72 100 100 1

< lThis table summarizes results of tests conducted by EDC .

2

< lEnvironmental dosimeter results are free in air.

TABLE 2 MEAN DOSIMETER ANALYSES CN=6)

JANUARY - DECEMBER 2015( 1), (2l Standard Tolerance Process Date Exposure Level Mean Bias% Deviation Limit+/.

% 15%

4/16/2015 55 4.5 1.1 Pass 4/28/2015 91 2.7 1.6 Pass 05/07/2015 48 0.3 1.3 Pass 7/22/2015 28 1.5 1.4 Pass 7/24/2015 106 2.9 1.8 Pass 8/06/2015 77 -3 .3 1.3 Pass 10/30/2015 28 3.7 2.2 Pass 11/04/2015 63 2.5 1.0 Pass 11 /22/2015 85 -2 .9 1.7 Pass 1/27/2016 61 3.1 0.9 Pass 1/31/2016 112 2.2 1.3 Pass 2/05/2016 36 3.2 1.4 Pass 1

< lThis table summarizes results of tests conducted by EDC for TLDs issued in 2015.

2

< lEnvironmental dosimeter results are free in air.

TABLE 3

SUMMARY

OF INDEPENDENT DOSIMETER TESTING JANUARY - DECEMBER 2015(1), (2 )

Standard Pass I Fail Issuance Period Client Mean Bias%

Deviation%

1st Qtr. 2015 Millstone -6 .5 2.9 Pass 2nd Qtr.2015 Millstone -2 .2 3.7 Pass 2nd Qtr.2015 Seabrook 1.4 0.9 Pass 3rd Qtr. 2015 Millstone -3.4 1.1 Pass 4th Qtr.2015 Millstone -1.5 2.3 Pass 4th Qtr.2015 Seabrook 0.8 1.8 Pass 1

< >Performance criteria are +/- 30% .

2

< lBlind spike irradiations using Cs-137 91

APPENDIX A DOSIMETRY QUALITY CONTROL TRENDING GRAPHS ISSUE PERIOD JANAURY - DECEMBER 2015 92

INDIVIDUAL ACCURACY ENVIRONMENTAL FIGURE 1 16

.-r.;.000- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

14 12 10 8

6 *

• * * * *

• 4 * * * ** ** * * *

• • * *

• *

• 2 * *** * ** ** * * ** * * * * * *

• en 0 Target = 0

• • • .. *

• *

• *

<(

al -2 * * * * *

• **

';ft

-4 * * **

-6 * *

-8

-10

-12

-14

~ --1s.~-----------------------------------

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~

~

$!

~

~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~

~ ~

rv [')

~ [')

.....

~

~

~ ~ .....~

Q:j

..... .....

PROCESSING DATE 93

INDIVIDUAL PRECISION ENVIRONMENTAL FIGURE 2 16 14 12 -~mr---------------- -------------------------

10 8

6 4

2

• * * *

• z 0 * * ** * ** *** * * * * * * * * ** * * * * *

• Cl)

• *

• * * ** * * * * * * * ** * * *

(.)

w a:::

-2 ** * * * * * *

• a..

0~

-4 *

-6

-8

-10

[*~*-------------------------------------------]

I I I I I I I I I I I i I

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~

$'

~

~

~

~

~

~

~ ~ ~

'd Clj

'd Clj ~

~"" ~ f\j

....

~

.s ~

(')

.... ~

"' ~

PROCESSING DATE

~

94

MEAN ACCURACY ENVIRONMENTAL FIGURE 3 16

-n.uuu- -----------~

14 12 10 8

6 4 * *

• * *

• 2 *

• Ta =O

• 0 Cl) c(

m -2

'#.

• *

-4

-6

-8

-10

-12

-14

~ --1s.~------------------------------------------

95

SEABROOK CO-LOCATE ACCURACY FIGURE4 22 ~----

20 * '20 . ~ - - ---- - -- - ------------------------------- ------

18 16 14 12 10 8

• 6 *

• 4

• *

• 2

• * *

• 0 Ta =O

• *

• en

-2 * * * * * * *

< -4 *

• co -6 * * *

~

-8 *

-10

• *

-12

-14 *

-16

-18

-20 L0. *-20.000_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ ___ _

-22 ~-.--....--""T""---r---.--r--..,---.----...---.--r--..,---.----...--.----r---.----r---r-'

,,,.

.......

l)o.

EXPECTED FIELD EXPOSURE (mR/STD. QUARTER) 96

7.2 Teledyne Brown Engineering Laboratory- Environmental Services (TBE-ES)

• 7.2.1 Operational Quality Control Scope 7.2.1.1 Inter-laboratory The TBE-ES Laboratory QC Program is designed to monitor the quality of analytical processing associated with environmental, effluent (lOCFR P~rt 50), and waste characterization (lOCFR Part

61) samples.

Quality Control of environmental radioanalyses involves the internal process control program and independent third party programs administered by Analytics, Inc and Environmental Resource Associates (ERA).

TBE..ES participates in the Quality Assessment Program (QAP) administered by the Department of Energy (DOE) Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP). The MAPEP is a set of performance evaluation samples (e.g. water, soil, air filters, etc.) designed to evaluate the ability and quality of analytical facilities performing sample measurements which contain hazardous and radioactive (mixed) analytes.

Quality Control for radioanalyses during this reporting period was divided among internal process check samples, third party process checks prepared by Analytics, Inc. (which was submitted by users or secured directly by TBE-ES for QC purposes), ERA, and DOE's MAPEP.

7.2.1.2 Intra-laboratory The internal Quality Control program is designed to include QC functions _:;;uch as instrumentation checks (to ensure proper instrument response), blank sam.ples (to which no analyte radioactivity has been added), instrumentation backgrounds, duplicates, as well as overall staff qualification analyses and process controls. Both process control and qualification analyses samples seek to mimic the media type of those samples submitted for analyses by the various laboratory clients. These process controls (or process checks) are either actual samples submitted in duplicate in order to evaluate the accuracy of labora,tory measurements, or blank samples which have been "spiked" with a known quantity of a radioisotope that is of interest to laboratory clients. These QC samples, which represent either "single" or "double-blind" unknowns, are intended to evaluate the entire radiochemical and radiometric process.

To provide direction and consistency in administering the quality assurance program, TBE-ES has developed and follows an annual quality control and audit assessment schedule. The plan describes the scheduled frequency and scope of Quality Assurance and Control considered necessary for an adequate QA/QC program conducted throughout the year. The magnitude of the process control program combines both internal and external sources targeted at 5% of the routine sample analysis load.

7.2.1.3 QA Program (Internal and External Audits)

During each reporting period at least one internal assessment is conducted in accordance with the pre-established TBE-ES Quality Control and Audit Assessment Schedule. In addition, the laboratory may be audited by prospective customers during a pre-contract audit, and/or by existing clients who wish to conduct periodic audits in accordance with their contractual 97

arrangements. The Nuclear Utilities Procurement Issues Committee (NUPIC) conducts audits of TBE-ES as a function of a Utilities Radiological Environment Measurement Program (REMP).

TBE-ES Laboratory-Knoxville has successfully completed the Energy Solutions (NIAC audit),

State of Tennessee, Nuclear Utility Procurement Issues Committee (NUPIC), New York State and Department of Health's Environmental Laboratory Approval ~rogram (NELAP) audits.

These audits were each a comprehensive review ofTBE-ES's Quality and Technical programs used to assess the laboratory's ability to produce accurate and defensible data. No significant deficiencies, which would adversely impact data quality, were identified during any of these audits. Administrative findings identified during these inspections are usually addressed promptly, according to client specifications.

7.2.2 Analytical Services Quality Control Synopsis 7.2.2.1 Results Summary 7.2.2.1.1 Environmental Services Quality Control During this annual reporting period, twenty-three nuclides associated with six media types were analyzed by means of the laboratory's internal process control, Analytics, ERA and DOE quality control programs. Media types representative of client company analyses performed during this reporting period were selected. The results for these programs are presented in Tables 7 .2.

Below is a synopsis of the media types evaluated:

• Air Filter

• Charcoal (Air Iodine)

• Milk

• Soil

• Vegetation

• Water 7.2.2.1.2 Analytics Environmental Cross-Check Program Twelve nuclides were evaluated during this reporting period. Iron-55 in water was added to the Analytics program and removed from the DOE MAPEP program in 2010 due to the low level ofFe-55 activity in the MAPEP samples. All but one of the environmental analyses performed were within the acceptable criteria.

7.2.2.1.3 Summary of Participation in the Department of Energy (DOE) Monitoring Program TBE-ES participated in the semi annual Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP) for liquid, air particulate, soil, and vegetation analyses (MAPEP-Series 30 and 31). During this reporting period, 16 nuclides were evaluated. All but five of the environmental analyses performed were within the acceptable criteria.

The Teledyne Brown Engineering's MAPEP March 2015 Sr-90 in soil and AP results were evaluated as failing on the low side. The soil was incompletely digested and this resulted in low results. The U-234-233 low result was difficult to quantify. The Gr-A filter has the activity embedded in the filter. To correct the low bias, TBE will create an 98

attenuated efficiency for MAPEP samples. No Vermont Yankee samples were affected by these failures.

The Teledyne Brown Engineering's MAPEP 2015 September water sample for NI-63 had extremely low activity and was difficult to quantify. The Sr-90 for AP and vegetation was lost during separation, possibly from substance added by MAPEP. No Vermont Yankee samples were affected by these failures.

7.2 ..2.1.5 Summary of participation in the ERA Program During this reporting period, 12 nuclides were analyzed under ERA criteria. Gross alpha in an air particulate by digestion method was added to the ERA program in May 2010.

All except three of the environmental analytica~ results were acceptable.

Teledyne Brown Engineering's ERA 2015 Sr-89 and Sr-90 in water had a yield on the high side of our acceptance range which indicates the possibility of calcium interference.

No Vermont Yankee samples were affected by this failure.

Teledyne Brown Engineering's ERA 2015 U-Nat in water was not diluted by the technician. If diluted, the result would have been 57.1, which fell within the acceptance limits. No Vermont Yankee samples were affected by this failure.

7.2.2.2 Intra-Laboratory Process Control Program The TBE-ES Laboratory's internal process control program evaluated 5433 individual samples.

7.2.2.2.1 Spikes/Matrix Spikes All of the 1548 environmental spikes were analyzed with statistically appropriate activity reported for each spike.

7.2.2.2.2 Analytical Blanks During this reporting period, all of the 1491 environmental analytical blanks analyzed reported less than MDC.

7.2.2.2.3 Duplicates Total All of the 2900 duplicate sets analyzed were within acceptable limits.

7.2.2.2.4 Non-Conformance Reports There were 9 non-conformance reports issued for this reporting period. No ENNVY data was impacted by the non-conformance in each of these cases.

99

8. Land Use Census The Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Off-site Dose Calculation Manual 3/4.5.2 requires that a Land Use Census be conducted annually between the dates of June 1 and October 1. The census identifies the locations of the nearest milk animal and the nearest residence in each of the 16 meteorological sectors within a distance of five miles of the plant. The census also identifies the nearest milk animal (within three miles of the _plant) to the point of predicted highest annual average D/Q (deposition factor for dry deposition of elemental radionuclides and other particulates) value due to elevated releases from the plant stack in each of the three major meteorological sectors. The 2015 Land Use Census was conducted in the summer of2015 in accordance with the ODCM.

Following the collection of field data and in compliance with Off-site Dose Calcul~tion Manual (ODCM)

Section 10 .1, a dosimetric analysis would be performed to compare the census locations to the "critical receptor" identified in the ODCM. This critical receptor is the location that is used in the Method 1 screening dose calculations found in the ODCM (i.e. the dose calculations done in compliance with ODCM Surveillance 4.3.3). If a census location has a 20% greater potential dose than that of the critical receptor, this fact must be announced in the annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report for that period. A re-evaluation of the critical receptor would also be done at that time. No changes in the census data from year 2008 occurred in the 2015 census; therefore no revisions of the 2008 calculations were required.

Pursuant to ODCM 3.5.2.a, a dosimetric analysis would be performed, using site specific meteorological data, to determine which milk animal locations would provide the optimal sampling locations. If any location had experienced a 20% greater potential dose commitment than at a currently sampled location, the new location would be added to the routine environmental sampling program in replacement of the location with the lowest calculated dose (which is eliminated from the program). The 2015 Land Use Census did not identify any locations, meeting the criteria of ODCM Table 3.5.1, with a greater potential dose commitment than at currently sampled locations. No changes to the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) were required based on the Land Use Census.

The results of the 2015 Land Use Census are included in this report in compliance with ODCM 4.5.2 and ODCM 10.2. The locations identified during the census may be found in Table 8.1.

100

TABLE 8.1 2015 LAND USE CENSUS LOCATIONS*

SECTOR NEAREST RESIDENCE NEAREST MILK ANIMAL Km(Mi) Km (Mi)

N 1.4 (0.9) ----

NNE 1.4 (0.9) 5.5 (3.4) Cows NE 1.3 (0.8) ----

~

ENE 1.0 (0.6) ----

E 0.9 (0.6) ----

ESE 1.9 (1.2) ----

SE 2.0 (1.2) 7.i (4.4) Cows SSE 2.1 (1.3) ----

s 0.6 (0.4) 3.6 (2.2) Cows**

SSW 0.8 (0.5) ----

SW 0.4 (0.3) ----

WSW 0.5 (0.3) 9.7 (6.0) Cows w 0.6 (0.4) 0.8 (0.5) Cows WNW 1.1 (0.7) ----

NW 2.3 (1.4) ----

NNW 1.7 (1.1) ----

• Sectors and distances are relative to the plant stack as determined by a Global Positioning System survey conducted in 1997.

• • Location of nearest milk animal within 3 miles of the plant to the point of predicted highest annual average D/Q value in each of the three major meteorological sectors.

101

9.

SUMMARY

During 2015 as in previous years during plant operation, a program was conducted to assess the levels of radiation or radioactivity in the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station environment. Over 900 samples were collected (including TLDs) over the course of the year, with a total of over 2700 radionuclide or exposure rate analyses performed. The samples included groundwater, river water, sediment, fish, milk, silage, mixed grass, storm drain sediment, and storm drain water. In addition to these samples, the air surrounding the plant was sampled continuously and the radiation levels were measured continuously with environmental TLDs.

Three of the objectives of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) are:

• To provide an early indication of the appearance or accumulation of any radioactive material in the environment caused by the operation of the station.

• To provide assurance to regulatory agencies and the public that the station's environmental impact is known and within anticipated limits.

• To verify the adequacy and proper functioning of station effluent controls and monitoring systems ..

Low levels ofradioactivity from three sources (discussed below) were detected in samples collected off-site as a part of the radiological environmental monitoring program. Most samples had measurable levels of naturally-occurring K-40, Be-7, Th-232 or radon daughter products. These are the most common of the naturally-occurring radionuclides.

Samples of sediment contained fallout radioactivity such as Cs-137 froi;n atmospheric nuclear weapons tests conducted primarily from the late 1950s through 1980.

Tritium, at concentrations significantly higher than background levels, was detected in on-site groundwater monitoring wells installed in 2007 and in 2010 in response to industry events and the discovery of primary system leakage from underground Augmented Off Gas (AOG) System condensate return piping into the subsurface groundwater pool under the plant site. The leakage from this piping was terminated in early February, 2010. Extensive sampling and analysis was performed on groundwater samples and other media throughout all of year 2015. Steps to remediate the contamination of the subsurface groundwater layer under the plant site were terminated in December 2014. Additional 102

assessme~t of the dose contribution of radioactive waterborne releases from this event is provided in the 2015 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report.

10. REFERENCES

1. USNRC Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position, "An Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program," Revision 1, November 1979.

2. NCRP Report No. 94, Exposure of the Population in the United States and Canada from Natural Background Radiation, National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, 1987.

3. Ionizing Radiation: Sources and Biological Effects, United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR), 1982 Report to the General Assembly.

4. Kathren, Ronald L., Radioactivity and the Environment - Sources, Distribution, and Surveillance, Harwood Academic Publishers, New York, 1984.

5. Till, John E. and Robert H. Meyer, ed., Radiological Assessment - A Textbook on Environmental Dose Analysis, NUREG/CR-3332, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.,

1983.

6. NUREG/CR-3130, Influence of Leach Rate and Other Parameters on Groundwater Migration, February 1983.

7. Vermont Yankee Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM), Revision 35, October 9, 2014.

103

~ Entergy Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC Vermont Yankee 320 Governor Hunt Rd .

Vernon, VT 05354 (802) 257-7711 Coley C. Chappell Manager, Design and Programs BVY 16-019 May 12, 2016 ATTN: Document Control Desk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 *

Subject:

2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Docket No. 50-271 License No. DPR-28

Dear Sir or Madam ,

In accordance with Vermont Yankee Technical Specification 6.6.E, enclosed is a copy of the 2015 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report. This report contains a summary and analysis of the radiological environmental data collected for the calendar year 2015.

There are no new regulatory commitments being made in this submittal.

Should you have any questions or require additional information concerning this submittal, please contact me at (802) 451-3374.

Sincerely,

~B~rr~

Enclosure:

Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report - Year 2015 cc listing (next page)

BVY 16-019 I Page 2 of 2 cc: Mr. Daniel Dorman, Region 1 Administrator U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 2100 Renaissance Blvd ., Suite 100 King of Prussia, PA 19406-2713 Mr. Jack D. Parrott, Senior Project Manager U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop T-8F5 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2378 Mr. Christopher Recchia, Commissioner VT Department of Public Service 112 State Street - Drawer 20 Montpelier, VT 05620 Vermont Department of Health Division of Radiological Health Attn : Bill Irwin P.O. Box 70 Burlington , VT 05402-0070 Massachusetts Department of Public Health Jack Priest, Director Radiation Control Program 529 Main Street, Suite 1M2A Charlestown , MA 02129 Augustinus Ong, Administrator Department of Health and Human Services Radiolog ical Health Section 29 Hazen Drive Concord , NH 03301-6504 John Giarrusso Nuclear Preparedness and Planning Manager 400 Worcester Road Framingham , MA 01702 Tony Honnellio Radiation Program Manager, Health and Safety Coordinator EPA, New England , Region 1 5 Post Office Square, Suite 100 (OSRR02-2).

Boston , Massachusetts 02109

ENTERGY-VERMONTYANKEE Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT Year 2015 Reviewed by:

• -=----'-----~R-~-~--------~

I ~'DAfe jt//;t;:;

Approved for Distribution:

-~~~~-.11=.~t-;:/C~h~e-m-:-is-:-try--;M--;-a=-:n-ag-=--:e

=- :-::-r--

I £/r;! <o Date

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................................................... 1

2. BACKGROUND RADIOACTIVITY ......................................................................................... 2

'

2.1 Naturally Occurring Background Radioactivity ................................................................. 2 2.2 Man-Made Background Radioactivity ................................................................................ .3

3. GENERAL PLANT AND SITE INFORMATION .................................................................... .4

4. PROGRAM DESIGN ................................................................................................................... 5 4.1 Monitoring Zones ................................................................................................................ 6 4.2 Pathways Monitored ............................................................................................................ 6 4.3 Descriptions of Monitoring Programs ................................................................................. 7 5 RADIOLOGICAL DATA

SUMMARY

TABLES ................................................................... 24

6. ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS ................................................................... 43 6.1 Sampling Program Deviations ......................................................................................... 43 6.2 Comparison of Achieved LLDs with Requirements ........................................................ 44 6.3 Comparison of Results with Reporting Levels ................................................................ 45 6.4 Changes in Sampling Locations ....................................................................................... 45 6.5 Data Analysis by Media Type .......................................................................................... 46

7. . QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM .................................................................................... 83 7 .1 Environmental Dosimetry Company Laboratory ................................................ '." .......... 83 7.2 Teledyne Brown Engineering-Environmental Services (TBE-ES) Laboratory ............... 97

8. LAND USE CENSUS ............................................................................................................... 100

9.

SUMMARY

.............................................................................................................................. 102 10.. REFERENCES .......................................................................................................................... 103

LIST OF TABLES 4.1 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program .................................. 10 4.2 Radiologkal Environmental Monitoring Locations (Non-TLD) ............................................................................. 12 4.3 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Locations (TLD) ..................................................................................... 14 4.4 Environmental Lower Limit of Detection (LLD)

Sensitivity Requirements ........................................................................ 16 4.5 Reporting Levels for Radioactivity Concentrations in Environmental Samples ...................................................................... 17 5.1 Radiological Environmental Program Summary .................................... 26 5.2 Environmental TLD Data Summary ....................................................... 40, 5.3 Environmental TLD Measurements ........................................................ 41 6.1 Summary of Storm Drain System Sediment Sample Analyses ............... 50 '

6.2 Summary of Storm Drain System Water Sample Analyses ................... 51 6.3 Summary of Air Compressor Condensate and Manhole Water Tritium Concentrations ................................................. 52 8.1 Land Use Census Locations ................................................... 101 11

LIST OF FIGURES 4.1 Environmental Sampling Locations in Close Proximity to the Plant ................................................................... 18 4.2 Environmental Sampling Locations Within 5 Kilometers of Plant ...................................................................... 19 4.3 Environmental Sampling Locations.

Greater than 5 Kilometers from Plant ......................................................... 20 4.4 TLD Locations in Close Proximity to the Plant .................................................................................................. 21 4.5 TLD Locations Within 5 Kilometers of Plant .............................................................. ,......................................... 22 4.6 TLD Locations Greater than 5 Kilometers from Plant. ................................................................................................... 23 6.1- 6.27 Environmental Program Trend Graphs ....................................................... 56 iii

1. INTRODUCTION This report summarizes the findings of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) conducted by Entergy-Vermont Yankee in the vicinity of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VYNPS) in Vernon, Vermont during the calendar year 2015. The analyses of samples collected indicated that no plant-generated radioactive material was found in any location off site. In all cases, the possible radiological impact was negligible with respect to exposure from natural background radiation. In no case did the detected levels exceed the most restrictive federal regulatory or plant license limits for radionuclides in the environment. Measured values were several orders of magnitude below reportable levels listed in Table 4.5 of this report. Except for sample deviations listed in Section 6.1, all other samples were collec~ed and analyzed as required by the program.

This report is submitted annually in compliance with plant Technical Specification 6.6.E. The remainder of this report is organized as follows:

Section 2: Provides an introductory explanation of background radioactivity and radiation detected in the plant environs.

Section 3: Provides a brief description of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station site and its environs.

Section 4: Provides a description of the overall REMP program design. Included is a summary of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VYNPS) Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) requirements for REMP sampling, tables listing all locations sampled or monitored in 2015 with compass sectors and distances from the plant, and maps showing each REMP location. Tables listing Lower Limit of Detection requirements and Reporting Levels are also included.

Section 5: Consists of the summarized data as required by the VYNPS ODCM. The tables are in a format similar to that specified by the NRC Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position on Environmental Monitoring (Reference 1). Also included is a summary of the 2015 environmental TLD measurements.

Section 6: Provides the results of the 2015 monitoring program. The performance of the program in meeting regulatory requirements as given in the OD.CM is discussed, and the data acquired during the year are analyzed.

Section 7: Provides an overview of the Quality Assurance programs used at AREVA Framatome ANP Environmental Laboratory and Teledyne Brown Engineering.

Section 8: Summarizes the requirements and the results of the 2015 Land Use Census.

Section 9: Gives a summary of the 2015 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program.

1

2. BACKGROUND RADIOACTIVITY Radiation or radioactivity potentially detected in the Vermont Yankee environment can be grouped into three categories. The first is "naturally-occurring" radiation and radioactivity. The second is "man-made" radioactivity from sources other than the Vermont Yankee plant. The third potential source of radioactivity is due to, emissions from the Vermont Yankee plant. For the purposes of the Vermont Yankee REMP, the first two categories are classified as "background" radiation, and are the subject of discussion in this section of the report. The third category is the one that the REMP is designed to detect and evaluate.

2.1 Naturally Occurring Background Radioactivity Natural radiation and radioactivity in the environment, which provide the major source of human radiation exposure, may be subdivided into three separate categories: "primordial radioactivity,"

"cosmogenic radioactivity" and "cosmic radiation." "Primordial radioactivity" is made up of those radionuclides that were created with the universe and that have a sufficiently long half-life to be still present on the earth. Included in this category are the newly-formed "daughter" radionuclides descending from these original elements. A few of the more important radionuclides in this category are Uranium-238 (U-238), Thorium-232 (Th-232), Rubidium-87 (Rb-87), Potassium-40 (K-40), Radium-226 (Ra-226), and Radon-222 (Rn-222). Uranium-238 and Thorium-232 are readily detected in soil and rock, whether through direct field measurements or through laboratory analysis of samples. Radium-226 in the earth can find its way from the soil into ground water, and is often detectable there. Radon-:222 is one of the components of natural background in air, and its daughter products are detectable on air sampling filters.

Potassium-40 comprises about 0.01 percent of all natural potassium in the earth, and is consequently detectable in most biological substances, including the human body. There are many more primordial radionuclides found in the environment in addition to the major ones discussed above (Reference 2).

The second sub-category of naturally-occurring radiation and radioactivity is "cosmogenic radioactivity."

This is produced through the nuclear interaction of high energy cosmic radiation with elements in the earth's atmosphere, and to a much lesser degree, in the earth's crust. These radioactive elements are then incorporated into the entire geosphere and atmosphere, including the earth's soil, surface rock, biosphere, sediments, ocean floors, polar ice and atmosphere. The major radionuclides in this category are Carbon-14 (C-14), Hydrogen-3 (H-3 or Tritium), Sodium-22 (Na-22), and Beryllium-7 (Be-7). Beryllium-7 is the one most readily detected, and is found on air sampling filters and occasionally in biological media (Reference 2).

2

The third sub-category of naturally-occurring radiation and radioactivity is "cosmic radiation." This consists of high energy atomic and sub-atomic particles of extra-terrestrial origin and the secondary particles and radiation that are produced through their interaction in the earth's atmosphere. The majority of this radiation comes from outside of our solar system, and to a lesser degree from the sun. We are protected from most of this radiation by the earth's atmosphere, which absorbs the radiation.

Consequently, one. can see that with increasing elevation one would be exposed to more cosmic radiation as a direct result of a thinner layer of air for protection. This "direct radiation" is detected in the field with gamma spectroscopy equipment, high pressure ion chambers and thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs).

2.2 Man-Made Background Radioactivity The second source of "background" radioactivity in the Vermont Yankee environment is from "man-madh" sources not related to the power plant. The most recent contributor (prior to year 2011) to this category was the fallout from the Chernobyl accident in April of 1986, which was detected in the Vermont Yankee environment and other parts of the world. Some smaller amounts of radioactivity were detected in the environment following the Fukushima Daiichi plants accidents in March 2011. A much greater contributor to'this category, however; has been fallout from atmospheric nuclear weapons tests.

Tests were conducted from 1945 through 1980 by the United States, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, China and France, with the large majority of testing occurring during the periods 1954-1958 and 1961-1962. (A test ban treaty was signed in 1963 by the United States, Soviet Union and United Kingdom, but not by France and China.) Atmospheric testing was conducted by the People's Republic of China as recently as October 1980. Much of the fallout detected today is due to this explosion and the last large scale test performed in November of 1976 (Reference 3).

The radioactivity produced by these detonations was deposited worldwide. The. amount of fallout deposited in any given area is dependent on many factors, such as the explosive yield of the device, the latitude and altitude of the detonation, the season in which it occurred, and the timing of subsequent rainfall which washes fallout from the troposphere (Reference 4). Most of this fallout has decayed into stable elements, but the residual radioactivity is still readily detectable in environmental samples worldwide. The two predominant radionuclides are Cesium-137 (Cs-137) and Strontium-90 (Sr-90). They are found in soil and in vegetation, and since cows and goats graze large areas of vegetation, these radionuclides are also often detected in milk.

• Other potential "man-made" sources of environmental "background" radioactivity include other nuclear power plants, coal-fired power plants, national defense installations, hospitals, research laboratories and 3

industry. These, collectively, are insignificant on a global scale when compared to the sources discussed above (natural and fallout).

3. GENERAL PLANT AND SITE INFORMATION The Vermont Yankee Nuclear Po~er Station is located in the town of Vernon, Vermont in Windham County. The 130-acre site is on the west shore of the Connecticut River, immediately upstream of the Vernon Hydroelectric Station. The plant site is bounded on the north, south and west by privately-owned land and on the east by the Connecticut River. The surrounding area is generally rural and lightly populated, and the topography is flat or gently rolling on the valley floor.

Construction of the single unit 540 megawatt BWR (Boiling Water Reactor) plant began in 1967. The pre-operational Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program, designed to measure environmental radiation and radioactivity levels in the area prior to station operation, began in 1970. Commercial operation began on November 30, 1972. An Extended Power Uprate, conducted in 2006, resulted in the present generation capacity of 650 megawatts electric.

A decision was made in 2013 to permanently shut down and decommission Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station at the end of2014. The last day of power operation occurred on December 29, 2014.

4

4. PROGRAM DESIGN The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) for the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (VYNPS) was designed with specific objectives in mind. These are:

• To provide an early indication of the appearance or accumulation of any radioactive material in the environment caused by the operation of the station.

• To provide assurance to regulatory agencies and the public that the station's environmental impact is known and within anticipated limits.

• To verify the adequacy and proper functioning of station effluent controls and monitoring systems.

• To provide standby monitoring capability for rapid assessment of risk to the general public in the event of unanticipated or accidental releases of radioactive material.

The program was initiated in 1970, approximately two years before the plant began commercial operation. It has been in operation continuously since that time, with improvements made periodically over those years.

The current program is designed to meet the intent of NRC Regulatory Guide 4.1, Programs for Monitoring Radioactivity in the Environs of Nuclear Power Plants; NRC Regulatory Guide 4.8, Environmental Technical Specifications for Nuclear Power Plants; the NRC Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position of November 1979, An Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program; and NRC NUREG-0473, Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications for BWRs. The environmental TLD program has been designed and tested around NRC Regulatory Guide 4.13, Performance, Testing and Procedural Specifications for Thermoluminescence Dosimetry: Environmental Applications. The quality assurance program is designed around the guidance given in NRC Regulatory Guide 4.15, Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring' Programs (Normal Operations) - Effluent Streams and the Environment.

The sampling requirements of the REMP are given in the Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual Table 3.5.1 and are summarized in Table 4.1 of this report. The identification of the required sampling locations is given in the Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM), Chapter 7. These sampling and monitoring locations are shown graphically on the maps in Figures 4.1 through 4.6 of this report.

5

The Vermont Yankee Chemistry Department conducts the radiological environmental monitoring program and collects all airborne, terrestrial and ground water samples. VYNPS maintains a contract with Normandeau Associates to collect all fish, river water and river sediment samples. In 2015, analytical measurements of environmental samples were performed at Teledyne Brown Engineering Laboratory irt Knoxville, Tennessee. TLD badges are posted and retrieved by the Vermont Yankee Chemistry Department, and were analyzed by Environmental Dosimetry Company in Sterling, Massachusetts.

4.1 Monitoring Zones The REMP is designed to allow comparison of levels of radioactivity in samples from the area possibly influenced by the plant to levels found in areas not influenced by the plant. Monitoring locations within the first zone are called "indicators." Those within the second zone are called "controls." The distinction between the two zones, depending on the type of sample or sample pathway, is based on one or more of several factors, such as site meteorological history, meteorological dispersion calculations, relative direction from the plant, river flow, and distance. Analysis of survey data from the two zones aids in determining if there is a significant difference between the two areas. It can also help in differentiating between radioactivity and radiation due to plant releases and that due to other fluctuations in the environment, such as atmospheric nuclear weapons test fallout or seasonal variations in the natural background.

4.2 Pathways Monitored Four pathway categories are monitored by the REMP. They are the airborne, waterborne, ingestion artd direct radiation pathways. Each of these four categories is monitored by the collection of one or more sample media, which are listed below, and are described in more detail in this section:

Airborne Pathway Air Particulate Sampling Charcoal Cartridge (Radioiodine) Sampling Waterborne Pathways River Water Sampling Qround Water Sampling Sediment Sampling Ingestion Pathways Milk Sampling Silage Sampling Mixed Grass Sampling Fish Sampling Direct Radiation Pathway TLD Monitoring 6

4.3 Descriptions of Monitoring Programs 4.3.1 Air Sampling Continuous air samplers are installed at seven locations until 8/4/2015 when sample collection was discontinued at one station not required by the VY ODCM. (Five are required by the VYNPS ODCM.)

The sampling pumps at these locations operate continuously at a flow rate of approximately one cubic foot per minute. Airborne particulates are collected by passing air through a 50 mm glass-fiber filter. A dry gas meter is incorporated into the sampling stream to measure the total volume of air sampled in a given interval. The entire system is housed in a weatherproof structure. The filters are collected on a weekly frequency and, to allow for the decay of radon daughter products, the analysis for gross beta radioactivity is delayed for more than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />. The weekly filters are composited by location at the environmental laboratory for a quarterly gamma spectroscopy analysis.

If the gross-beta activity on an air particulate sample is greater than ten times the yearly mean of the control samples, ODCM Table 3.5.1, Note c, requires a gamma isotopic analysis on the sample.

Whenever the main plant stack effluent release rate of I-131 is equal to or greater than 0.1 µCi/sec, weekly air particulate collection from the plant stack is required by ODCM Table 3.5.1, Note h.

4.3.2 Charcoal Cartridge (Radioiodine) Sampling Continuous air samplers are installed at seven locations until 8/4/2015 when sample collection was discontinued at one station not required by the VY ODCM. (Five are required by the ODCM Table 3.5.1.)

The sampling pumps at these locations operate continuously at a flow rate of approximately one cubic foot per minute. A 60 cc TEDA-impregnated charcoal cartridge is located downstream of the air particulate filter described in Section 4.3.l above. A dry gas meter is incorporated into the sampling stream to measure the total volume of air sampled in a given interval. The entire system is housed in a weatherproof structure. These cartridges are collected and analyzed weekly for I-131.

Whenever the main plant stack effluent release rate of I-131 is equal to or greater than 0.1 µCi/sec, weekly charcoal _cartridge collection from the plant stack is required, pursuant to ODCM Table 3.5.1, Note h.

4.3.3 River Water Sampling An automatic compositing sampler is maintained at the downstream sampling location by the Vermont Yankee Chemistry Department staff. Normandeau Associates personnel maintain the pump that delivers river water to the sampler. The sampler is controlled by a timer that collects a frequent aliquot of river water. An additional grab sample is collected monthly at the upstream control location. Each sample is analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. Although not required by the VYNPS ODCM, a gross-beta 7

analysis is also performed on each sample. The monthly composite and grab samples are composited by location by the contracted environmental laboratory for a quarterly tritium (H-3) analysis.

4.3.4 Ground Water (Deep Well Potable Water) Sampling Grab samples are collected quarterly from up to four indicator locations and one control location. Only one indicator and one control are required by the VYNPS ODCM. Each sample is analyzed for gamma,.

emitting radionuclides and H-3. Although not required by the VYNPS ODCM, a gross-beta analysis is also performed on each sample.

4.3.5 Sediment Sampling River sediment grab samples are collected semiannually from the downriver location and at the North Storm Drain Outfall by Normandeau Associates. Each sample is analyzed at an offsite environmental laboratory for gamma-emitting radionuclides.

4.3.6 Milk Sampling When milk animals are identified as being on pasture feed (May through October), milk samples are collected twice per month from that location. Throughout the rest of the year, and for the full year where animals are not on pasture, milk samples are collected on a monthly schedule. Two locations are chosen as a result of the annual Land Use Census, based on meteorological dispersion calculations and proximity to the plant. The third location is a control, which is located sufficiently far away from the plant to be outside any potential plant influence. Other samples may be collected from locations of interest.

Immediately after collection, each milk sample is refrigerated and then shipped to the contracted environmental laboratory. Each sample is analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. A separate low-level I-131 analysis is performed to meet the Lower Limit of Detection requirements in the ODCM.

Although not required by the ODCM, Sr-89 and Sr-90 analyses are also performed on quarterly composited samples.

4.3.7 Silage (Chopped Corn or Grass) Sampling Silage samples are collected at the milk sampling location at the time of harvest, if available. The silage from each location is shipped to the contracted environmental laboratory where it is analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. Although not required by the ODCM, the silage samples are analyzed for low-level I-131.

8

4.3.8 Mixed Grass Sampling At each air sampling station, a mixed grass sample is collected quarterly, when available. Enough grass is clipped to provide the minimal sample weight needed to achieve the required Lower Limit of Detection (LLD). The mixed grass samples are analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. Although not required by the ODCM, the grass samples are analyzed for low-level 1-131.

4.3.9 Fish Sampling Fish samples are collected semiannually at two Connecticut River locations (upstream of the plant and in the Vernon Pond) by Normandeau Associates. The samples are frozen and delivered to the environmental laboratory where the edible and inedible portions are separately analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides.

4.3.10 TLD Monitoring Direct gamma radiation exposure is continuously monitored with the use of thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). Specifically, Panasonic UD-801AS1 and UD-814AS1 calcium sulfate dosimeters are used, with a total of five elements in place at each monitoring location. Each pair of dosimeters is sealed in a plastic bag, which is in turn housed in a plastic screen cylinder. This cylinder is attached to an object such as a fence or utility pole.

A total of 40 stations are required by the ODCM. Of these, 24 must be read out quarterly, while those from the remaining 16 incident response (outer ring) stations need only be de-dosed (annealed) quarterly; unless an ODCM gaseous release limit was exceeded during the period. Although not required by the ODCM, the TLDs from the 16 outer ring stations are read out quarterly along with the other stations' TLDs. In addition to the TLDs required by the ODCM, more than thirteen are typically posted at or near the site boundary. The plant staff posts and retrieves all TLDs, while the contracted environmental laboratory (Environmental Dosimetry Company) provides processing.

9

TABLE4.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM (as required by ODCM Table 3.5.1)*

Collection Anal' sis Exposure Pathway and/or Number of Routine Analysis Collection Sample Media , Sample Sampling Analysis Frequency )

Frequency Locations Mode Type

1. Direct Radiation (TLDs) 40 Continuous Quarterly Gamma dose; Outer Each TLD Ring - de-dose only, unless gaseous release Control was exceeded

2. Airborne (Particulates 5 Continuous Weekly Particulate Sample:

and Radioiodine) Gross Beta Each Sample Gamma Isotopic Quarterly Composite (by location)

Radioiodine Canister: Each Sample 1-131

3. Waterborne

a. Surface water 2 Downstream. Monthly Gamma Isotopic Each Sample Automatic Tritium (H-3) Quarterly Composite composite Upstream: grab

b. Ground water 3 Grab Quarterly Gamma Isotopic Each Sample Tritium (H-3) Each Sample

c. Shoreline Sediment 2 Downstream: grab Semiannually Gamma Isotopic Each Sample N. Storm Drain Outfall: grab

• See ODCM Table 3.5.l for complete footnotes.

10

TABLE 4.1, cont.

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM (as required by ~DCM Table 3.5.1)*

Exposure Pathway Collection Analysis and/or Nominal Sample Media Nominal Number of Routine Sampling Analysis Analysis Collection Sample Mode Type Frequency Frequency Locations

4. Ingestion

a. Milk 3 Grab Monthly Gamma Isotopic Each sample (Semimonthly 1-131 Each sample

,

when on pasture) 2 Grab Semiannually Gamma Isotopic on Each sample

b. Fish edible portions

c. Vegetation Grass sample 1 at each air Grab Quarterly when Gamma Isotopic Each sample sampling available station Silage sample 1 at each milk Grab At harvest Gamma Isotopic Each sample sampling station

• See ODCM Table 3.5.1 for complete footnotes.

11

TABLE4.2 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING LOCATIONS (NON-TLD) IN 2015 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION Distance Direction Exposure Station From Plant From Pathway Code Station Description Zone(a) Stack (km) Plant I. Airborne AP/CF-11 River Sta. No. 3.3 I 1.9 SSE AP/CF-12 N. Hinsdale, NH I 3.6 NNW AP/CF-13 Hinsdale Substation I 3.1 E AP/CF-14 Northfield, MA I 11.6 SSE AP/CF-15 Tyler Hill Road I 3.1 WNW AP/CF-21 Spofford Lake c 16.4 NNE

2. Waterborne

a. Surface WR-11 River Sta. No. 3.3 I 1.9 SSE WR-21 Rt.9 Bridge c 11.8 NNW

b. Ground WG-11 Main Plant Well I 0.2 On-site WG-12 Vernon Green Well I 2.1 SSE WG-14 Plant Support Bldg (PSB) Well I 0.3 On-site WG-15 Southwest Well I 0.3 On-site WT-14 Test Well 201 I On-site WT-16 Test Well 202 I On-site WT-17 Test Well 203 I On-site WT-18 Test Well 204 I On-site WG-22 Copeland Well c 13.7 N

c. Sediment SE-11 Shoreline Downriver I 0.6 SSE SE-12 North Storm Drain Outfall I 0.1 E 12

TABLE 4.2, cont.

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING LOCATIONS (NON-TLD) IN 2015 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION Distance Direction Exposure Station From Plant From Pathway Code Station Descrintion Zone(a) Stack(km) Plant Stack

3. Ingestion

a. Milk TM-11 Miller Farm I 0.8 w TM-18 Blodgett Farm I 3.6 SE TM-20 Dunklee Farm (Vern-Mont)ie) c 5.5 s TM-22 Franklin Farm c 9.7 WSW

b. Fish FH-11 Vernon Pond I 0.6(b) SSE FH-21 Rt.9 Bridge c 11.8 NNW

c. Mixed Grass TG-11 River Sta. No. 3.3 I 1.9 SSE TG-12 N. Hinsdale, NH I 3.6 NNW TG-13 Hinsdale Substation I 3.1 E TG-14 ) Northfield, MA I 11.6 SSE TG-15 Tyler Hill Rd. I 3.1 WNW TG-21 Spofford Lake c 16.4 NNE TG-40 Gov. Hunt House I On-site

d. Silage TC-11 Miller Farm I 0.8 w TC-18 Blodgett Farm I 3.6 SE TC-20 Dunklee Farm (Vern-Montie) c 5.2 s TC-22 Franklin Farm c 9.7 WSW (a) I= Indicator Stations; C = Control Stations (b) Fish samples are collected anywhere in Vernon Pond, which is adjacent to the plant (see Figure 4.1).

(c) deleted (d) deleted (e) Dunklee Farm (Vern-Mont) is outside of the 3-mile ODCM Zone and not required by the ODCM.

Sample collection ceased effective 8/17/2015 due to cessation of plant operation.

13

TABLE4.3 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING LOCATIONS (TLD) IN 2015 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION Distance Direction Station From Plant From Code Station Descrintion Zone(a) (km) (d) Plant(d)

DR-1 River Sta. No. 3.3 I 1.6 SSE DR-2 N. Hinsdale, NH I 3.9 NNW DR-3 Hinsdale Substation I 3.0 E DR-4 Northfield, MA c 11.3 SSE DR-5 Spofford Lake c 16.5 NNE DR-6 Vernon School I 0.52 WSW DR-7 Site Boundary(c) SB 0.28 w DR-8 Site Boundary SB 0.25 SSW DR-9 Inner Ring I 1.7 N DR-10 Outer Ring 0 4.5 N DR-11 Inner Ring I 1.6 NNE DR-12 Outer Ring 0 3.6 NNE DR-13 InnerRing I 1.2 NE DR-14 Outer Ring 0 3.9 NE DR-15 Inner Ring I 1.5 ENE DR-16 Outer Ring 0 2.8 ENE DR-17 Inner Ring I 1.2 E DR-18 Outer Ring 0 3.0 E DR-19 InnerRing I 3.7 ESE DR-20 Outer Ring 0 5.3 ESE DR-21 Inner Ring I 1.8 SE DR-22 Outer Ring 0 3.3 SE DR-23 InnerRing I 2.0 SSE DR-24 Outer Ring 0 3.9 SSE DR-25 Inner Ring I 1.9 s DR-26 Outer Ring 0 3.8 s DR-27 InnerRing I 1.1 SSW DR-28 Outer Ring 0 2.2 SSW DR-29 Inner Ring I 0.9 SW DR-30 Outer ;Ring 0 2.4 SW 14

TABLE 4.3, cont.

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING LOCATIONS (TLD) IN 2015 VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION Distance Direction Station From Plant From Code Station Descri12tion Zone(a) (km)<d) Plant(d)

DR-31 Inner Ring I 0.71 WSW DR-32 Outer Ring 0 5.1 WSW DR-33 Inner Ring I "0.66 WNW DR-34 Outer Ring 0 4.6 w DR-35 Inner Ring I 1.3 WNW DR-36 Outer Ring 0 4.4 WNW DR-37 Inner Ring I 2.8 NW DR-38 Outer Ring 0 7.3 NW DR-39 Inner Ring I 3.1 NNW DR-40 Outer Ring 0 5.0 NNW DR-41(b) Site Boundary SB 0.38 SSW DR-42 (b) Site Boundary SB 0.59 s DR-43 (b) Site Boundary SB 0.44 SSE DR-44Cb) Site Boundary SB 0.19 SE DR-45Cbl Site Boundary SB 0.12 NE DR-46Cb) Site Boundary SB 0.28 NNW DR-47(b) Site Boundary SB 0.50 NNW DR-48Cbl Site Boundary SB 0.82 NW DR-49Cbl Site Boundary SB 0.55 WNW DR-50(bl Gov. Hunt House I 0.35 SSW DR-51 (b) Site Boundary SB 0.26 w DR-52(bl Site Boundary SB 0.24 SW DR-53 (bl Site Boundary SB 0.21 WSW (a) I= Inner Ring TLD; 0 =Outer Ring Incident Response TLD; C =Control TLD; SB =Site Boundary TLD.

(b) This location is not considered a requirement of ODCM Table 3.5.1.

(c) DR-7 satisfies ODCM Table 3.5.l for an inner ring direct radiation monitoring location. However, it is averaged as a Site Boundary TLD due to its close proximity to the plant.

(d) Distance and direction is relative to the center of the Turbine Building for direct radiation monitors.

15

TABLE4.4 ENVIRONMENTAL LOWER LIMIT OF DETECTION (LLD) SENSITIVITY REQUIREMENTS Airborne Particulates Sediment Water or Gases Fish Milk Vegetation (pCi/Kg-Analysis (pCi/l) (pCi/m3) (pCi/Kg) (pCi/l) (pCi/Kg) dry)

Gross-Beta 4 0.01 H-3 2000(a)

Mn-54 15 130 Fe-59 30 260 Co-58,60 15 130 Zn-65 30 260 Zr-Nb-95 15 I-131 1(b) 0.07 1 60 Cs-134 15 0.05 130 15 60 150 Cs-137 18 0.06 150 18 80 180 Ba-La-140 15 15 (a) If no drinking water pathway exists, a value of 3000 picocuries/liter may be used.

(b) If no drinking water pathway exists, a value of 15 picocuries/liter may be used.

See ODCM Table 4.5.1 for additional explanatory footnotes.

16

TABLE4.5 REPORTING LEVELS FOR RADIOACTIVITY CONCENTRATIONS IN ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLES Airborne Particulates or Gases Fish Milk Food Product Sediment Analysis Water (pCi/m3) (pCi/Kg) (pCi/l) (pCi/Kg) - (pCi/Kg-dry)

(pCi/l)

H-3 20 ooo<a)

'

Mn-54 1000 30,000 Fe-59 400 10,000 Co-58 1000 30,000

,'

3000(b)

Co-60 300 10,000 Zn-65' 300 20,000 Zr-Nb-95 400 1-131 2Cc) 0.9 3 100 Cs-134 30 10 1000 60 1000 Cs-137 50 20 2000 70 2000 Ba-La-140 200 300 (a) Reporting Level for drinking water pathways. For non-drinking water, a value of30,000 pCi/liter may be used.

(b) Reporting Level for grab samples taken at the North Storm Drain Outfall only.

(c) lfno drinking water pathway exists, a value of20 picocuries/liter may be used.

See ODCM Table 3.5.2 for additional explanatory footnotes.

17

W SW SW Miles 0 _]

Figure 4.1 Environmental Sampling Locations In Close Proximity to Plant 18

,

.I

/

N

.*

i

/

I

/

-'

' '[

I

• ,*w I

• - ~.

I

__,. _....

... -***-----

-* . -~~*-

~

.-*

>

,.,*. .,.

/

_. '

_,

. /

'* I I

' /

,. ' ,I

....

' "" *.

/

I

.......

,

/

,;

.

I

./

/

---

Miles -..._........-...___ "+\---------~~~b\_~_j 0 .2' .4 .6 .8 \ \

Figure 4.2 Environmental Sampling Locations Within 5 Km of Plant 19

N l

,/ *.

'

NW :

t - * ...

J

• w

.

VT \ ...

T -22/

.

I NH !ESE

\

' M.¥

'/

\

f

'.(

~* I

./

J S'N .... /

SE

,.

I

.

\ -

0 2 3 4

• Figure 4.3 Environmental Sampling Locations Greater than 5 Km from Plant 20

Fenceline /

~R-48

\

\.

)

w Miles 0 .1 .2 Figure 4.4 Thermoluminescent Dosimeter Locations In Close Proximity to Plant 21

" E

,,.'

_- - ..

. . ... -~

.... - _.......- ,,,_

---

0 .2 .4 .6 .8 I

= - ,. Cbm

t:rr * =:tq haCS Figure 4.5 Thermoluminescent Dosimeter Locations Within 5 Km of Plant 22

' .

- \\". 1(1 *

- - - ~ - --

.

.. - - -i .. ......

I -~

--.

- 'f' I

E

_,., .. . _.-

\([

MA

\

'

.

8\\' / /

I / SE

'*- --

."'

~

Miles 0 2 3 4 Figure 4.6 Thermoluminescent Dosimeter Locations Greater than 5 Km from Plant 23

5. RADIOLOGICAL DATA

SUMMARY

TABLES This section summarizes the analytical results of the environmental samples that were collected during 2015. These results, shown in Table 5.1, are presented in a format similar to that prescribed in the NRC's Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position on Environmental Monitoring (Reference 1). The results are ordered by sample media type and then by radionuclide. The units for each media type are also given.

In 2015, Vermont Yankee contracted with one laboratory for primary analyses of the environmental samples. A second laboratory was used to cross-check the first laboratory for selected samples and to analyze other samples for hard-to-detect radionuclides (such as Strontium-89 and 90).

The left-most column of Table 5.1 contains the radionuclide of interest, the total number of analyses for that radionuclide in 2015 and the number of measurements which exceeded the Reporting Levels found in Table 3.5.2 of the VYNPS Off-site Dose Calculation Manual. The latter are classified as "Non-routine" measurements. The second column lists the required Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) for those radionuclides that have detection capability requirements as specified in the ODCM Table 4.5.l. The absence of a value in this column indicates that no LLD is specified in the ODCM for that radionuclide in that media. The target LLD for any analysis is typically 50 percent of the most restrictive required LLD.

Occasionally the required LLD may not be met. This may be due to malfunctions in sampling equipment or lack of sufficient sample quantity which would then result in low sample volume. Delays in analysis at the laboratory could also be a factor. Such cases, if and when they should occur, would be addressed in Section 6.2.

For each radionuclide and media type, the remaining three columns summarize the data for the following categories of monitoring locations: (1) the Indicator stations, which are within the range of influence of the plant and which could be affected by its operation; (2) the Control stations, which are beyond the influence of the plant; and (3) the station which had the highest mean concentration during 2015 for that

\

radionuclide. Direct radiation monitoring stations (using TLDs) are grouped into Inner Ring, Outer ring, Site Boundary and Control.

In each of these columns, for each radionuclide, the following statistical values are given:

• The mean value of all concentrations, including those results that are less than the a posteriori LLD for that analysis.

• The minimum and maximum concentration, including those results that are less than the a posteriori LLD. In previous years, data less than the a posteriori LLD were converted to zero for purposes of 24

reporting the means and ranges.

• The "Number Detected" is the number of positive measurements. A measurement is considered positive when the concentration is greater than three times the standard deviation in the concentration and greater than or equal to the a posteriori LLD (Minimum Detectable Concentration or MDC).

• The "Total Analyzed" for each column is also given.

Each single radioactivity measurement datum in this report is based on a single measurement of a sample.

Any concentration below the a posteriori LLD for its analysis is averaged with those values above the a posteriori LLD to determine the average of the results. Likewise, the values are reported in ranges even though they are below the a posteriori LLD. To be consistent with normal data review practices used by Vermont Yankee, a "positive measurement" is considered to be one whose concentration is greater than three times its associated standard deviation, is greater than or equal to the a posteriori LLD and satisfies the analytical laboratory's criteria for identification.

The radionuclides reported in this section represent those that: 1) had an LLD requirement in Table 4.5.l of the ODCM, or a Reporting Level listed in Table 3.5.2 of the ODCM, or 2) had a positive measurement of radioactivity, whether it was naturally-occurring or man-made; or 3) were of special interest for any other reason. The radionuclides routinely analyzed and reported by the environmental laboratory (in a gamma spectroscopy analysis) were: Th-232, Ba/La-140, Be-7, Co-58, Co-60, Cs-134, Cs-137, Fe-59, K-40, Mn-54, Zn-65 and Zr-95.

Data from direct radiation measurements made by TLDs are provided in Table 5.2. The complete listing of quarterly TLD data is provided in Table 5.3.

25

Radiological Environmental Program Summary 2015 Radiological Environmental Operating Report Vermont Yankee Table 5.1:

Sample Medium: Air Particulate (AP)

Sample Medium: Charcoal Cartridge (CF)

Sample Medium: River Water (WR)

Sample Medium: Ground Water (WG)

Sample Medium: Sediment (SE)

Sample Medium: Test Well (WT)

Sample Medium: Milk (TM)

Sample Medium: Silage (TC)

Sample Medium: Mixed Grass (TG)

Sample Medium: Fish (FH) 26

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVffiONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER Pl.ANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS AIR PARTICULATES GR-B 343 0.01 0.0153 0.0278 0.0278 21CONTROL 0 (PCVTOTAL) (2901291) (52152) (52152) SPOFFORD LAKE

( 0.004510.0296) ( 0.003710.5840) ( 0.003710.5840) 16.4 KM NNE OF SITE GAMMA 27 BE-7 NIA 0.1138 0.1097 0.1356 40 INDICATOR 0 (22123) (414) (313)

(< 0. 05231 0.1669) ( 0.082410.1226) ( 0.118510.1669)

K-40 NIA 0.0426 0.0363 0.0614 40 INDICATOR 0 (1/23) (014) (013)

( Q.02471< 0.0897) (< 0.02841< 0.0451) (< 0.03591< 0.0897)

CS-134 0.05 0.0026 0.003 0.0035 40 INDICATOR 0 (0123) (014) (013)

(< 0.00171< 0.0053) (< 0.00171< 0.0060) (< 0.00261< 0.0053)

CS-137 0.06 0.0024 0.0027 0.003 40 INDICATOR 0 (0123) (014) (013)

(< 0.00161< 0.0047) (< 0.00151< 0.0056) (< 0.00161< 0.0047)

RA-226 NIA 0.0417 0.0401 0.0555 40 INDICATOR 0 (0123) (014) (013)

'-.._

(< 0.02771< 0.0899) (< 0.02821< 0.0648) (< 0.03731< 0.0899)

AC-228 NIA 0.0091 0.0122 0.0122 21CONTROL 0 (0123) (014) (014) SPOFFORD LAKE

(< 0.0061/< 0.0167) (< 0.00651< 0.0246) (< 0.00651< 0.0246) 16.4 KM NNE OF SITE TH-228 NIA 0.0036 0.0038 0.0051 40 INDICATOR 0 (0123) (014) (013)

(< 0.00251< 0.0080) (< 0.00231< 0.0073) (< 0.00331< 0.0080)

FRACTION OF DETECTABLE l)i'IEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 27

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS AIR IODINE GAMMA 343 (PCiffOTAL) I-131 O.D7 0.026 0.0408 0.0408 21CONTROL 0 (0/291) (0/52) (0/52) SPOFFORD LAKE

(< 0.0046/< 0.0398) (< 0.0070/< 0.4722) (< 0.0070/< 0.4722) 16.4 KMNNE OF SITE RIVER WATER GR-B 24 4 1.829 1.753 1.829 11 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/LITER) (1112) (2112) (1/12) RIVER STA. NO 3.3

(< 1.630/ 2.490) (< 1.510/ 2.560) (< 1.630/ 2.490) 1.9 KM SSE OF SITE H-3 24 3000 613 613 613 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9BRIDGE

(<358/<741) (<353/<739) (<353/<739) 11.8 KM NNW OF SITE GAMMA 24 MN-54 15 1.079 1.169 1.169 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9BRIDGE

(< 0.570/< 2.097) (< 0.697/< 2.468) (< 0.697/< 2.468) 11.8 KM NNW OF SITE C0-58 7.5 1.332 1.393 1.393 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT.9BRIDGE

(< 0.713/< 2.479) (< 0.795/< 2.595) (< 0.795/< 2.595) 11.8 KM NNW OF SITE FE-59 30 3.114 3.158' 3.158 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9 BRIDGE

(< 1.851/< 5.626) (< 1.780/< 5.583) (< 1.780/< 5.583) 11.8 KM NNW OF SITE C0-60 15 1.073 1.189 1.189 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9BRIDGE

(< 0.434/< 2.108) (< 0.546/< 2.450) (< 0.546/< 2.450) 11.8 KM NNW OF SITE ZN-65 30 2.249 2.409 2.409 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT. 9BRIDGE

(< 1.264/< 4. 646) (< 1.143/< 5.019) (< 1.143/< 5.019) 11.8 KM NNW OF SITE FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 28

'

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS

• RIVER WATER (cont'd) ZR-95 15 2.405 2.587 2.587 21CONTROL 0 (PCI/LITER) (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT.9BRIDGE

(< 1.293/< 4.087) (< 1.453/< 4.664) (< 1.453/< 4.664) 11.8 KM NNW OF SITE I-131 15 22.645 22.813 22.813 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/11) (0/11) RT.9BRIDGE

(< 4.784/<183.3) (<4.470/<175.6) (< 4.470/<l 75.6) 11.8 KM NNW OF SITE CS-134 15 1.036 1.152 1.152 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT.9BRIDGE

(< 0.512/< 2.137) (< 0.678/< 2.606) (< 0.678/< 2.606) 11.8 KM NNW OF SITE CS-137 18 1.144 1.265 1.265 21CONTROL 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RT.9BRIDGE

(< 0.589/< 2.269) (< 0.743/< 2.568) (< 0. 743/< 2.568) 11.8 KM NNW OF SITE BA/LA-140 15 6.868 6.205 6.868 II INDICATOR 0 (0/12) (0/12) (0/12) RIVER STA. NO 3.3

(< 2.586/<28.52) (< 2.047/<30.23) (< 2.586/<28.52) 1.9 KM SSE OF SITE RA-226 NIA 29.303 29.848 29.848 21CONTROL 0 (0112) (0/13) (0113) RT. 9BRIDGE

(<12.22/<55.56) (< 4.410/<82.4 I) (< 4.410/<82.41) 11.8 KMNNW OF SITE GROUND WATER GR-B 20 4 4.64 2.74 5.76 15 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/LITER) (15/16) (4/4) (4/4) SOUTHWEST WELL

(<1.49/8.34) (2.03/4.63) (3. 83/8. 34) 0.3 KM ON-SITE H-3 20 2000 596 586 599 14 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4) PLANT SUPPORT BLDG

(<579/<610) (<574/<603) (<590/<602) WELL 0.3 KM ON-SITE FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 29

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE

.(UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS GROUND WATER (cont'd) I-131 20 4 4.714 2.398 4.9I8 15 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/LITER) (16/16) (3/4) (4/4) SOUTHWEST WELL

( 3.470/ 6.770) (< 1.320/ 3.340) ( 3.540/ 6.270) 0.3 KM ON-SITE GAMMA 20 MN-54 15 1.359 1.313 1.499 15 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4) SOUTHWEST WELL

(< 0.567/< 2.129)- (< 0.749/< 1.694) (< 0. 761/< 2.129) 0.3 KM ON-SITE C0-58 15 1.431 1.445 1.594 15 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4) SOUTHWEST WELL

(< 0.577/< 2.230) (< 0.730/< 1.892) (< 0.902/< 2.230) 0.3 KM ON-SITE FE-59 30 3.087 3.107 3.42 15 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4) SOUTHWEST WELL

(< 1.508/< 5.126) (< 1.728/< 4.029) (< 1.740/< 5.126) 0.3 KM ON-SITE C0-60 15 1.374 1.486 1.526 12 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4)

(< 0.475/< 2.428) (< 0.718/< 1.995) (< 0. 784/< 2.428)

ZN-65 30 2.692 2.723 3.032 15 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4) SOUTHWEST WELL

(< 0.923/< 4.471) (< 1.553/< 3.519) (< 1.671/< 4.471) 0.3 KM ON-SITE ZR-95 15 2.546 2.675 2.787 15 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/4) (014) SOUTHWEST WELL

(< 1.122/< 3.990) (< 1.285/< 3.714) (< 1.577/< 3.990) 0.3 KM ON-SITE CS-134 15 1.261 1.239 1.37 15 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/4) (0/4) SOUTHWEST WELL

(< 0.545/< 2.029) (< 0.641/< 1.617) (< 0.665/< 2.029) 0.3 KM ON-SITE FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 30

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS GROUND WATER (cont'd) CS-137 18 1.41 1.463 1.571 15 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/LITER) (0116) (014) (014) SOUTHWEST WELL

(< 0.6201< 2.326) (< 0. 7261< 1.956) (< 0.8001< 2.326) 0.3 KM ON-SITE BA/LA-140 7.5 3.317 3.596 3.63 12 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (014) (014)

(< 1.6171<4.780) (<2.171/<4.940) (< 2.9001< 4.653)

RA-226 2 37.088 32.025 44.145 15 INDICATOR 0 (1/16) (014) (114) SOUTHWEST WELL

(<17.22/71.1) (<15.741<46.49) (<18.54/71.1) 0.3 KM ON-SITE

(< 0.6201< 2.326) (< 0.7261< 1.956) (< 0.8001< 2.326)

SEDIMENT GAMMA 36 (PCI/KG DRY) BE-7 NIA 2941.25 3245.68 4229.5 18 INDICATOR 0 (1/30) (016) (012)

(<673.51<7349) (<513.61<7297) (<11101<7349)

K-40 NIA 21078.33 19655 26410 29 INDICATOR 0 (30130) (616) (212) N. STORM DRAIN OUTFALL (10990128640) (12010127690) (24180128640) 0.1 KMEOF SITE MN-54 NIA 72 71.49 95.02 19 INDICATOR 0 (0130) (016) (012) N STORM DRAIN OUTFALL

(<27.291<105.4) (<37.111<107.5) (<88.131<101.9) 0.1 KM E OF SITE C0-60 55.3 56.5 74.24 19 INDICATOR 0 (0130) (016) (012) N STORM DRAIN OUTFALL

(<17.921<86.76) (<38.011<68.87) (<73.191<75.29) 0.1 KMEOF SITE ZN-65 NIA 160.47 168.18 204.2 12 INDICATOR 0 (0130) (016) (012)

(<65.981<248.9) (<71.581<247.1) (<159.51<248.9)

FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 31

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS SEDIMENT (cont'd) NB-95 NIA 271.32 287.61 368.3 18 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/KG DRY) (0130) (016) (012)

(<70.091<61 l) (<53.921<634.9) (<125.61<611)

CS-134 150 55.36 56.29 73.l 19 INDICATOR 0 (0130) (016) (012) N STORM DRAIN OUTFALL

(<17.691<74.58) (<28.81/<74.17) (<72.841<73.35) 0.1 KMEOF SITE CS-137 180 106.09 89.5 181 19 INDICATOR 0 (23130) (216) (212) N STORM DRAIN OUTFALL

(<21.651253.3) (<64.21/133.7) (108.71253.3) 0.1 KM E OF SITE BA/LA-140 NIA 1288468.9 1531509.35 2257652.8 35 INDICATOR 0 (0130) (016) (012)

(<305.61<4515000) (<522.31<3529000) (<305.61<4515000)

RA-226 NIA 2861.19 2565.83 4204.5 13 INDICATOR 0 (27130) (416) (212) N STORM DRAIN OUTFALL

(<802.815295) (<127613481) (311415295) 0.1 KMEOF SITE AC-228 NIA 2343.21 2217.92 4382.5 19 INDICATOR 0 (28130) (516) (212) N STORM DRAIN OUTFALL

(<160.515575) (<229.513171) (319015575) 0.1 KME OF SITE TH-228 NIA 1849.64 1733.33 2902 35 INDICATOR 0 (30130) (616) (212)

(723.113863) (85212390) (1941/3863)

TH-232 NIA 1415.67 1425.38 1836 29 INDICATOR 0 (30130) (616) *(212) N. STORM DRAIN OUTFALL (653.612104) (636.311997) (156812104) 0.1 KMEOF SITE FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 32

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVffiONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS TEST WELLS U-238 NIA 6137.5 6253 7793 18 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/LITER) (0130) (016) (012)

(Nuclear Energy Institute (<234 l/<9359) (<3 7031<79 80) (<69971<8589)

Groundwater Protection Initiative Samples) GR-B 16 4 8.5 NIA 10.9 14 INDICATOR 0 (16116) (414) TEST WELL 201

( 4.3114.9) ( 8.2112.7) ON-SITE H-3 16 3000 593 NIA 596 17 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (014) TEST WELL 203

(<351/<697) (<3521<697) ON-SITE GAMMA 16 K-40 NIA 15.2 NIA 25.8 14 INDICATOR 0 (1/16) (114) TEST WELL 201

(< 4.1155.3) (<11.2155.3) ON-SITE MN-54 15 0.7 NIA 0.7 16 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (014) TEST WELL 202

(< 0.41< 1.1) (< 0.61< 0.9) ON-SITE C0-58 15 0.9 NIA 0.9 14 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (014) TEST WELL 201

(< 0.51< 1.3) (< 0.51< 1.3) ON-SITE FE-59 30 2.1 NIA 2.2 18 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (014) TEST WELL 204

(< 1.21< 3.8) (< 1.31< 3.1) ON-SITE C0-60 15 0.7 NIA 0.7 16 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (014) TEST WELL 202

(< 0.41< 1.0) (< 0.51< 0.9) ON-SITE FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 33

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVffiONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS TEST WELLS (cont'd) NB-95 15 1 NIA 1 18 INDICATOR (PCI/LITER) (0116) (014) TEST WELL 204 (Nuclear Energy Institute (< 0.61< 1.3) (< 0.71< 1.3) ON-SITE Groundwater Protection Initiative Samples)

I-131 15 41.9 NIA 48.4 18 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (0/4) TEST WELL 204

(< 5.81<139.4) (< 7.21<139.4) ON-SITE CS-134 15 0.6 NIA 0.6 14 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (014) TEST WELL 201

(< 0.41< 0.9) (< 0.41< 0.9) ON-SITE CS-137 18 0.7 NIA 0.7 16 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (014) TEST WELL 202

(< 0.51< 1.0) (< 0.51< 1.0) ON-SITE BA/LA-140 15 8.1 NIA 8.9 18 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (014) TEST WELL 204

(< 2.51<19.8) (< 2.51<18.8) ON-SITE MILK I-131 65 0.339 0.367 0.372 20CONTROL 0 (PCI/LITER) (0136) (0129) (0111) DUNKLEE FARM

(<0.171/<0.454) (< 0.1691< 0.497) (< 0.1691< 0.463) 5.5 KM S OF SITE SR-89 15 10 7.18 7.81 8.08 20CONTROL 0 (0/8) (017) (0/3) DUNKLEE FARM

(< 5.421< 8.35) (< 5.691< 9.96) (<.6.07/< 9.96) 5.5 KM S OF SITE SR-90 15 2 1.05 1.6 1.9 22CONTROL 0 (0/8) (3/7) (3/4) FRANKLIN FARM

(< 0.75/< 1.53) (< 0.7913.63) ( I. 13/ 3.63) 9.7 KM WSW OF SITE FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 34

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREME}'ff) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS MILK (cont'd) GAMMA 65 (PCI/LITER) BE-7 NIA 42.21 43.13 44.32 18 INDICATOR 0 (0136) (0129) (0118) BLODGETT FARM

(<24.121<59.78) (<23.81/<75.01) (<33.681<59.78) 3.6 KM SE OF SITE -

K-40 NIA 1369.58 1329.69 1394.67 18 INDICATOR 0 (36136) (29129) (18118) BLODGETT FARM

( 1172/1607) (106611481) (123911607) 3.6 KM SE OF SITE CS-134 15 4.59 4.56 4.73 18 INDICATOR 0 (0136) (0129) (0118) BLODGETT FARM

(< 2.891< 6.80) (< 2.791< 7.03) (< 3.481< 6.80) 3.6 KM SE OF SITE CS-137 18 5.24 5.77 6.04 22CONTROL 0 (0136) (0129) (0118) FRANKLIN FARM

(< 3.531< 7.98) (< 4.001< 8.62) (< 4.291< 8.62) 9.7KMWSWOF SITE BA/LA-140 15 6.5 6.15 6.59 18 INDICATOR 0 (0136) (0129) (0118) BLODGETT FARM

(< 4.661< 7.47) (< 4.021< 7.47) (< 4.771< 7.43) 3.6 KM SE OF SITE RA-226 NIA 128.97 124.08 134.14 18 INDICATOR 0 (1136) (0129) (0118) BLODGETT FARM

(<76.61/<196. l) (<82.181<188.9) (<95.91<179.1) 3.6 KM SE OF SITE SILAGE I-131 16 30 23.04 25.93 28.6 40 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/KG WET) (0112) (014) (011)

(<18.61<29.6) (<23.41<26.9) (<28.6)

GAMMA 16 BE-7 NIA 716.41 1956.48 2527.3 21CONTROL 0 (6112) (214) (213)

(<17012998) (<24415829) (<262.915829)

FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 35

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL '

LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATIIWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS SILAGE (cont'd) K-40 NIA 4678.17 5860.75 10650 22CONTROL 0 (PCl/KG WET) (12/12) (414) (1/1) FRANKLIN FARM (289616420) (2810110650) (10650) 9.7 KM WSW OF SITE CS-134 60 22.8 26.15 28.5 22 CONTROL 0 (0112) (014) (Oil) FRANKLIN FARM

(<11.821<29.25) (<23.791<28.5) (<28.5) 9.7 KM WSW OF SITE CS-137 80 26.08 28.21 33.64 22CONTROL 0 (0112) (014) (Oil) FRANKLIN FARM

(<13.031<34.95) (<24.731<33.64) (<33.64) 9.7 KM WSW OF SITE AC-228 NIA 108.92 111.95 138.2 22 CONTROL 0 (1/12) (014) (Oil) FRANKLIN FARM

(<61. 961179 .I) (<91.21<138.2) (<138.2) 9.7 KM WSW OF SITE TH-228 NIA 41.51 50.64 52.74 22CONTROL 0 (0112) (014) (Oil) FRANKLIN FARM

(<25.761<51.36) (<47.691<52.74) (<52.74) 9.7 KM WSW OF SITE MIXED GRASS GAMMA 19 (PCl/KG WET) BE-7 NIA 1056.15 2527.3 2527.3 21CONTROL 0 (9116) (213) (213) SPOFFORD LAKE

(<215.513919.L (<262.915829) (<262.915829) 16.4 KM NNE OF SITE

\ K-40 NIA 5033.25 4264.33 6218.67 13 INDICATOR 0 (16116) (313) (313)

(2520/7331) (281016578) (541616833)

I-131 60 91.94 106.66 152.6 40 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (013) (Oil) GOV. HURT HOUSE

(<40.721<184.9) (<43.371<154.4) (<152.6) ON-SITE FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 36

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVffiONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNIT OF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS MIXED GRASS (cont'd) CS-134 60 22.4 25.37 25.37 21CONTROL 0 (PCI/KG WET) (0/16) (0/3) (0/3) SPOFFORD LAKE

(<11.291<29.25) (<23.79/<27.71) (<23.791<27.71) 16.4 KM NNE OF SITE CS-137 80 25.89 26.4 31.03 15 INDICATOR 0 (0116) (013) (013) TYLER HILL ROAD

(<12.961<34.95) (<24.73/<29.28) (<25.0l/<34.95) 3.1 KM WNW OF SITE RA-226 NIA 533.55 659.77 659.77 21CONTROL 0 (0/16) (0/3) (0/3) SPOFFORD LAKE

(<289.2/<703) (<540.4/<867) (<540.4/<867) 16.4 KM NNE OF SITE AC-228 NIA 109.95 103.2 126.23 15 INDICATOR 0 (1116) (013) (1/3) TYLER HILL ROAD

(<59.071179.1) (<91.2/<110.3) (<971179.1) 3.1 KM WNW OF SITE TH-228 NIA 41.53 49.94 50.93 40 INDICATOR 0 (0/16) (0/3) (011) GOV. HURT HOUSE

(<25.76/<53.31) (<47.691<52.71) (<50.93) ON-SITE FISH GAMMA 8 (PCI/KG WET) K-40 NIA 3958 3407.75 3958 11 INDICATOR 0 (4/4) (414) (414) MILLER FARM (336214516) (2782/4194) (3362/4516) 0.8 KM W OF SITE MN-54 130 16.43 17.343 17.343 II INDICATOR 0 (0/4) (0/4) (0/4) MILLER FARM

(<10.341<21.16) (<13.24/<20.71) (<13.241<20.71) 0.8 KM W OF SITE C0-58 130 31.843 30.673 31.843 11 INDICATOR 0 (0/4) (0/4) (0/4) MILLERFARM

(<22.31<36.69) (<22.621<38.12) (<22.31<36.69) 0.8 KM W OF SITE FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 37

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS FISH (cont'd) FE-59 260 113.185 105.13 113.185 11 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/KG WET) (014) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(<86.441<125) (<74.791<125.I) (<86.441<125) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE I

C0-60 130 14.213 15.95 15.95 II INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(<11.581<17.18) (<13.681<19.36) (<13.681<19.36) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE ZN-65 260 35.268 40.768 40.768 11 INDICATOR 0 (014) (0/4) (014) VERMONPOND

(<23.151<44.17) (<30.151<46.48) (<30.151<46.48) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE CS-134 130 13.715 15.133 15.133 II INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(< 8.6201<17.25) (<11.281<17.49) (<11.281<17.49) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE CS-137 150 15.568 16.968 16.968 11 INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(<11.741<19.06) (<13.181<19.53) (<13.181<19.53) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE H-3 4 NIA 377 588 588 11 INDICATOR 0 (012) (012) (012) VERMONPOND

(<1961<558) (<5371<639) (<5371<639) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE AM-241 8 NIA 3.219 5.618 5.618 11 INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(< 2.4761< 3.737) (< 2.4711<1 l.86) (< 2.4711<1 l.86) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE CM-242 8 NIA 1.34 2.538 2.538 11 INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(< 0.841/< 1.853) (< 0.8761< 6.005) (< 0.8761< 6.005) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 38

TABLE 5.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVffiONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

FOR THE VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, 2015 Name of Facility: VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NUMBER: 50-271 Location of Facility: VERNON, VT REPORTING PERIOD: 2015 INDICATOR CONTROL LOCATION WITH HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN LOCATIONS LOCATION MEDIUM OR TYPES OF NUMBER OF REQUIRED MEAN MEAN MEAN STATION# NUMBER OF PATHWAY SAMPLED ANALYSES ANALYSES LOWER LIMIT (F) (F) (F) NAME NONROUTINE (UNITOF PERFORMED PERFORMED OF DETECTION RANGE RANGE RANGE DISTANCE AND REPORTED MEASUREMENT) (LLD) DIRECTION MEASUREMENTS FISH (cont'd) CM-2431244 8 NIA 3.713 8.023 8.023 11 INDICATOR 0 (PCI/KG WET) (014) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(< 1.8791< 6.920) (< 1.7511<19.29) (< 1.7511<19.29) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE FE-55 8 NIA 1534 1672.25 1672.25 II INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (0/4) VERMONPOND

(<12371<1830) (<12651<1880) (<12651<1880) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE PU-238 8 NIA 1.012 2.686 2.686 II INDICATOR 0 (0/4) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(< 0.0041< 2.280) (< 1.1421< 5.612) (< 1.1421< 5.612) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE PU-2391240 8 NIA 2.348 3.939 3.939 11 INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(< 0.0081< 5.386) (< 2.0691< 5.953) (< 2.0691< 5.953) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE PU-241 8 NIA 364 374.75 374.75 II INDICATOR 0 (0/4) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(<2661<484) (<2881<468) (<2881<468) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE PU-242 8 NIA 1.71 2.89 2.89 11 INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(< 0.0061< 3.341) (< 0.8081< 4.465) (< 0.8081< 4.465) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE SR-89 8 NIA 292 251 291.75 II INDICATOR 0 (014) (014) (014) VERMONPOND

(<2291<395) (<231/<271) (<2291<395) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE SR-90 8 NIA 28.4 37.35 37.35 11 INDICATOR 0 (1/4) (214) (214) VERMONPOND

(<16.1148.6) (<18.7169.4) (<18.7169.4) 0.6 KM SSE OF SITE DIRECT RADIATION TLD-QUARTERL Y 212 NIA 6 4.0 9.7 DR43 INDICATOR 0 (MILLI-ROENTGENIQTR.: (2041204) (818) (414)

(O'.J*2) (0/7) ( 4.5111.6)

FRACTION OF DETECTABLE MEASUREMENTS AT SPECIFIED LOCATIONS IS INDICATED IN PARENTHESES (F) 39

TABLE 5.2:

ENVIRONMENTAL TLD DATA

SUMMARY

VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, VERNON, VT (JANUARY - DECEMBER 2015)

OFFSITE STATION INNER RING TLD OUTER RING TLD WITH HIGHEST MEAN CONTROL TLDs MEAN* MEAN* STA.NO./ MEAN* MEAN*

RANGE* RANGE* RANGE* RANGE*

(NO. MEASUREMENTS)** (NO. MEASUREMENTS)** (NO. MEASUREMENTS)** (NO. MEASUREMENTS)**

6.37 +/- 0.28 6.37 +/- 0.30 DR19 6.46 +/- 0.31 6.12 +/- 0.19 4.52 to 7.68 0.00 to 7.95 o.oo to 7.95 4.91 to 7.19 76 68 4 8 SITE BOUNDARY TLD WITH HIGHEST MEAN SITE BOUNDARY TLD STA.NO./ MEAN* MEAN*

RANGE* RANGE*

(NO. MEASUREMENTS)** (NO. MEASUREMENTS)**

DR45 8.62 +/- 1.92 6.70 +/- 0.32 7.81 to 11.50 4.28 to 11.64 4 60 Units are in micro-R per hour.

Each "measurement" is typically based on quarterly readings from five TLD elements.

40

TABLE 5.3 ENVIRONMENTAL TLD MEASUREMENTS 2015 (Micro-R per Hour)

ANNUAL Sta. 1STQUARTER 2ND QUARTER 3RD QUARTER 4TH QUARTER AVE.

No. Description EXP.

DR-01 River Sta. No. 3.3 4.78 +/- 0.22 5.51 +/- 0.23 6.36 +/- 0.00 6.04 +/- 0.26 5.7 DR-02 N Hinsdale, NH 5.20 +/- 0.25 6.66 +/- 0.39 7.32 +/- 0.00 7.03 +/- 0.22 6.6 DR-03 Hinsdale Substation 5.58 +/- 0.26 7.10 +/- 0.31 7.50 +/- 0.00 7.35 +/- 0.26 6.9 DR-04 Northfield, MA 4.91 +/- 0.22 5.87 +/- 0.25 6.43 +/- 0.00 6.11 +/- 0.30 5.8 DR-05 Spofford Lake, NH 5:--i5 +/- 0.29 6.48 +/- 0.25 7.19 +/- 0.00 6.83 +/- 0.25 6.4 DR-06 Vernon School 5.00 +/- 0.19 6.83 +/- 0.27 6.89 +/- 0.00 6.68 +/- 0.28 6.4 DR-07 Site Boundary 4.73 +/- 0.24 6.94 +/- 0.38 7.09 +/- 0.29 6.87 +/- 0.23 6.4 DR-08 Site Boundary 5.28 +/- 0.18 5.81 +/- 0.43 5.95 +/- 0.34 5.66 +/- 0.27 5.7 DR-09 Inner Ring 5.06 +/- 0.34 6.40 +/- 0.29 6.41 +/- 0.21 6.18 +/- 0.25 6.0 DR-10 Outer Ring 4.24 +/- 0.16 6.09 +/- 0.32 6.23 +/- 0.31 5.61 +/- 0.31 5.5 DR-11 Inner Ring 4.62 +/- 0.21 6.82 +/- 0.42 7.07 +/- 0.21 6.66 +/- 0.31 6.3 DR-12 Outer Ring 4.40 +/- 0.24 7.76 +/- 0.45 7.95 +/- 0.34 7.71 +/- 0.34 7.0 DR-13 Inner Ring 5.28 +/- 0.25 6.90 +/- 0.33 7.07 +/- 0.29 6.84 +/- 0.23 6.5 DR-14 Outer Ring 5.34 +/- 0.22 7.45 +/- 0.33 7.43 +/- 0.25 7.30 +/-_ 0.23 6.9 DR-15 Inner Ring 5.66 +/- 0.29 6.63 +/- 0.27 7.15 +/- 0.50 6.42 +/- 0.20 6.5 DR-16 Outer Ring +/- 6.73 +/- 0.35 7.09 +/- 0.25 6.74 +/- 0.26 6.9 DR-17 Inner Ring 4.73 +/- 0.26 7.53 +/- 0.37 7.68 +/- 0.33 7.40 +/- 0.39 6.8 DR-18 Outer Ring 5.08 +/- 0.22 7.15 +/- 0.27 7.53 +/- 0.31 7.14 +/- 0.27 6.7 DR-19 Inner Ring 5.34 +/- 0.21 6.88 +/- 0.39 6.82 +/- 0.38 6.79 +/- 0.24 6.5 DR-20 Outer Ring 4.93 +/- 0.18 7.05 +/- 0.39 7.05 +/- 0.31 6.97 +/- 0.26 6.5 DR-21 Inner Ring 4.75 +/- 0.26 6.33 +/- 0.25 5.96 +/- 0.38 5.94 +/- 0.36 5.8 DR-22 Outer Ring 5.05 +/- 0.21 6.00 +/- 0.26 6.10 +/- 0.21 5.91 +/- 0.38 5.8 DR-23 Inner Ring 4.75 +/- 0.23 6.54 +/- 0.38 6.31 +/- 0.34 6.47 +/- 0.36 6.0 DR-24 Outer Ring 4.34 +/- 0.19 7.12 +/- 0.36 7.42 +/- 0.66 7.00 +/- 0.38 6.5 DR-25 Inner Ring 4.99 +/- 0.19 6.66 +/- 0.37 6.59 +/- 0.22 6.49 +/- 0.27 6.2 DR-26 Outer Ring 4.81 +/- 0.38 6.77 +/- 0.44 6.89 +/- 0.29 6.71 +/- 0.28 6.3 DR-27 Inner Ring 4.52 +/- 0.18 6.86 +/- 0.39 6.86 +/- 0.33 6.60 +/- 0.27 6.2 DR-28 Outer Ring 5.07 +/- 0.29 6.67 +/- 0.30 6.63 +/- 0.29 6.50 +/- 0.22 6.2 DR-29 Inner Ring 4.96 +/- 0.26 6.95 +/- 0.27 6.79 +/- 0.39 6.67 +/- 0.32 6.3 DR-30 Outer Ring 4.59 +/- 0.20 6.66 +/- 0.33 6.59 +/- 0.29 6.42 +/- 0.22 6.1 DR-31 Inner Ring 4.81 +/- 0.27 7.23 +/- 0.42 6.82 +/- 0.23 6.82 +/- 0.26 6.4 DR-32 Outer Ring 4.83 +/- 0.25 6.84 +/- 0.45 7.20 +/- 0.26 6.91 +/- 0.37 6.5 DR-33 Inner Ring 5.19 +/- 0.33 6.74 +/- 0.31 6.62 +/- 0.25 6.52 +/- 0.32 6.3 DR-34 Outer Ring 4.88 +/- 0.27 7.78 +/- 0.34 7.93 +/- 0.30 7.66 +/- 0.39 7.1 DR-35 Inner Ring 4.64 +/- 0.22 7.00 +/- 0.32 6.90 +/- 0.26 6.77 +/- 0.32 6.3 DR-36 Outer Ring 5.88 +/- 0.35 7.13 +/- 0.31 6.85 +/- 0.22 7.16 +/- 0.35 6.8 DR-37 Inner Ring 4.84 +/- 0.22 6.98 +/- 0.35 7.02 +/- 0.33 6.98 +/- 0.40 6.5 DR-38 Outer Ring 4.93 +/- 0.33 6.76 +/- 0.28 7.02 +/- 0.27 6.73 +/- 0.32 6.4 DR-39 Inner Ring 5.25 +/- 0.21 7.14 +/- 0.29 6.88 +/- 0.35 6.70 +/- 0.28 6.5 DR-40 Outer Ring 5.34 +/- 0.28 7.00 +/- 0.39 7.08 +/- 0.35 6.96 +/- 0.37 6.6 Note: Blank spaces indicate missing TLDs 41

TABLE 5.3 (cont.)

ENVIRONMENTAL TLD MEASUREMENTS 2015 (Micro-R per Hour)

ANNUAL Sta. 1STQUARTER 2ND QUARTER 3RD QUARTER 4TH QUARTER AVE.

No. Description EXP.

DR-07 Site Boundary 4.73 +/- 0.24 6.94 +/- 0.38 7.09 +/- 0.29 6.87 +/- 0.23 6.4 DR-08 Site Boundary 5.28 +/- 0.18 5.81 +/- 0.43 5.95 +/- 0.34 5.66 +/- 0.27 5.7 DR-41 Site Boundary 5.10 +/- 0.27 6.82 +/- 0.27 7.10 +/- 0.31 6.80 +/- 0.28 6.5 DR-42 Site Boundary 4.75 +/- 0.31 6.13 +/- 0.30 5.92 +/- 0.33 5.98 +/- 0.32 5.7 DR-43 Site Boundary 9.91 +/- 0.24 11.64 +/- 0.80 11.34 +/- 0.49 11.30 +/- 0.36 11.1 DR-44 Site Boundary 5.60 +/- 0.40 7.01 +/- 0.31 6.88 +/- 0.30 6.83 +/- 0.27 6.6 DR-45 Site Boundary 11.50 +/- 0.68 7.67 +/- 0.30 7.81 +/- 0.28 7.50 +/- 0.43 8.6 DR-46 Site Boundary 5.45 +/- 0.22 6.33 +/- 0.39 6.50 +/- 0.22 6.33 +/- 0.29 6.2 DR-47 Site Boundary 5.53 +/- 0.31 6.28 +/- 0.33 6.68 +/- 0.25 6.30 +/- 0.21 6.2 DR-48 Site Boundary 4.28 +/- 0.29 6.64 +/- 0.25 6.83 +/- 0.37 6.76 +/- 0.26 6.1 DR-49 Site Boundary 4.57 +/- 0.30 7.13 +/- 0.26 7.31 +/- 0.43 7.09 +/- 0.23 6.5

,I DR-50 Governor Hunt House 4.91 +/- 0.29 7.03 +/- 0.27 7.14 +/- 0.26 6.76 +/- 0.34 6.5 DR-51 Site Boundary 4.37 +/- 0.19 7.35 +/- 0.28 7.40 +/- 0.32 7.47 +/- 0.36 6.7 DR-52 Site Boundary 5.03 +/- 0.20 6.89 +/- 0.44 7.39 +/- 0.21 6.71 +/- 0.31 6.5 DR-53 Site Boundary 5.45 +/- 0.32 6.97 +/- 0.40 7.24 +/- 0.28 7.09 +/- 0.25 6.7 42

6. ANALYSIS OF ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS 6.1 Sampling Program Deviations Off-site Dose Calculation Manual Control 3 .5 .1 allows for deviations "if specimens are unobtainable due to hazardous conditions, seasonal unavailability, malfunction of automatic sampling equipment and other legitimate reasons." In 2015, 11 deviations were noted in the REMP. Six of the noted deviations are to track sampling delays caused by weather or samples discontinued due to the permanent cessation of operations at Vermont Yankee. These deviations did not compromise the program's effectiveness and are considered typical with respect to what is normally anticipated for any radiological environmental program. The specific deviations for 2015 were:

a) The Spofford environmental air sample station (APCF-21) air pump was found to be out of service on January 6, 2015. Continuous collection of air samples at this Station is required by the Vermont Yankee Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, Section 3/4, Table 3.5.I Section 1 (Airborne) and table note a. A new sample pump was installed immediately and normal collection of environmental air sample at this location was resumed.

b) One thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) was found missing (DR-16) during the quarterly exchange of TLDs performed April 7, 2015. This dosimetry is required by Table 3.5.l, Section 2 of the Vermont Yankee - Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (VY ODCM). The TLD was found at it designated location in the three remaining calendar quarters for2015 allowing an average annual dose rate to be calculated from the data collected.

c) A sample from sentinel well GZ-22D was not able to be collected within the scheduled sample collection interval due to complications from winter weather. The monthly sample was collected February 10, 2015 but was outsi,de of the frequency designated by procedure. No sample was missed.

d) A watt:Jr and sediment sample from the north outfall was not able to be collected due to unsafe conditions caused by winter weather.

e) A sample from perimeter wells GZ-4, GZ-14 and GZ-14D were not able to be collected within the scheduled sample collection interval due to complications from winter weather. The quarterly samples were collected March 2, 2015 and March 4, 2015 but were outside of the frequency designated by procedure. No sample was missed.

f) The monthly measurement of direct gamma exposure from the station was lower than the background reading for the month of March 2015. The rate of snow cover melting and ground thawing between the point of interest and the control location resulted in more shielding from the ground at the point of interest than at the control location. The net measurement of direct gamma exposure was reported at 0.0 milliRoentgen r~ther than reporting a negative exposure value.

g) One thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) was found missing (C0-15) during the quarterly exchange of TLDs performed July 6, 2015. This dosimetry is not required by Table 3.5.1, Section 2 of the Vermont Yankee Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (VY ODCM), but was part of a cooperative effort with the State of Vermont to validate TLD data. The TLD was found at it designated location in the 43

two remaining calendar quarters for 2015 allowing an average annual dose rate to be calculated from the data collected. This TLD was dropped from the monitoring program after the third quarter of 2015.

h) Milk and Silage sample collection was discontinued at Dunklee Farm (TM-22, TC-22) effective August 17, 2015. This farm was not a required station in the Vermont Yankee Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (VY ODCM) and sampling was discontinued due to the cessation of operations of Vermont Yankee.

i) Environmental Air/Particulate and mixed grass sample collection was discontinued at Governor Hunt House station (APCF-40, TG-40) effective August 17, 2015. This station was not a required station in the Vermont Yankee Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (VY ODCM) and sampling was discontinued due to the cessation of operations of Vermont Yankee.

j) The River station environmental air sample station (APCF-11) air pump was found to be out of service on August 18, 2015. Continuous collection of air samples at this station is required by the Vermo_nt Yankee Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, Section 3/4, Table 3.5.1 Section 1 (Airborne) and table note a. A new sample pump was installed immediately and normal collection of environmental air sample at this location was resumed.

k) The Northfield environmental air sample station (APCF-14) air pump was found to be out of service on August 18, 2015. Continuous collection of air samples at this station is required by the Vermont Yankee Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, Section 3/4, Table 3.5.l Section 1 (Airborne) and table note a. A new sample pump was installed immediately and normal collection of environmental air sample at this location was resumed.

1) Air sample station outages during 2015 are reflected in the air sample collection time percentages listed below. Air sample collection from station 40 was ceased in the third quarter of 2015 due to cessation of plant operation. The time in service was calculated for the weeks in the third quarter the station was in service.

AP/CF# 1st Quarter 2"d Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter 11 100.0 99.9 100.0 100.0 12 99.9 99.9 100.0 100.1 13 99.9 100.0 100.0 100.l 14 95.2 100.1 99.9 100.l 15 99.9 100.0 99.8 99.8 21 92.3 100.0 100.1 100.1 40 100.0 99.9 100.1 NIA 6.2 Comparison of Achieved LLDs with Requirements Table 4.5.1 of the VYNPS ODCM (also shown in Table 4.4 of this report) gives the required Lower Limits of Detection (LLDs) for environmental sample analyses. On occasion, an LLD is not achievable due to a situation such as a low sample volume caused by sampling equipment malfunction or limited sample availability. In such a case, ODCM 10.2 requires a discussion of the situation. At the contracted environmental laboratory, the target LLD for the majority of analyses is 50 percent of the most restrictive 44

required LLD. Expressed differently, the typical sensitivities achieved for each analysis are at least 2 times greater than that required by the VYNPS ODCM.

For each analysis having an LLD requirement in ODCM Table 4.5.1, the a posteriori (after the fact) LLD calculated for that analysis was compared with the reqqired LLD. During 2015, all sample analyses performed for the REMP program achieved an aposteriori LLD less than the corresponding LLD

• requirement.

6.3 Comparison of Results with Reporting Levels ODCM Section 10.3:4 requires written notification to the NRC within 30 days of receipt of an analysis result whenever a Reporting Level in ODCM Table 3.5.2 is exceeded. Reporting Levels are the environmental concentrations that relate to the ALARA design dose objectives of 10 CFR 50, Appendix I.

Environmental concentrations are averaged over the calendar quarters for the purposes of this comparison. The Reporting Levels are intended to apply only to meas'!lred levels of radioactivity due to plant effluents. During 2015; no analytical result exceeded a corresponding reporting level requirement in Table 3.5.2 of the ODCM.

6.4 .Changes in Sampling Locations The Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual Section 10.2 states that if "new environmental sampling locations are identified in accordance with Control 3.5.2, the new locations shall be identified in the next Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report." There were no required sampling location changes due to the Land Use Census conducted in 2015.

Milk collection from Dunklee farm (Vern-Mont Farm in Vernon) commenced in April, 2010 at the request of the farm owner. As of August 17, 2015 (Section 6.1.h) this farm was discontinued as a VY REMP sample location due to the decrease in risk from the plant being in permanent shutdown. At this time, all dairy farms in Vernon that are required for the ODCM are supplying milk for analysis.

This year Vermont Yankee is continuing to add data from the on-site air sampling station, AP/CF 40, at the Governor Hunt House up to August 17, 2015 (Section 6.1.i). This location has been used continuously as a demonstration since early in the program, but the data had not previously been included in this report. This station was not required for the ODCM and sample collection was halted due to plant shutdown.

45

6.5 Data Analysis by Media Type The 2015 REMP data for each media type is discussed below. Whenever a specific measurement result is presented, it is given as the concentration in the units of the sample (volume or weight). An analysis is considered to yield a "detectable measurement' when the concentration exceeds three times the standard deviation for that analysis and is greater than or equal to the Minimum Detectable Concentration (MDC) for the analysis. With respect to data plots, all net concentrations are plotted as reported, without regard

'

to whether the value is "detectable" or "non-detectable." In previous years, values that were less than the MDC were converted to zero.

6.5.1 Airborne Pathways 6.5.1.1 Air Particulates (AP)

The periodic air particulate filters from each of the seven sampling sites were analyzed for gross-beta radioactivity. At the end of each quarter, the filters from each sampling site were composited for a gamma analysis. The results of the air particulate sampling program are shown in Table 5.1 and Figures 6.1 through 6.7.

Gross beta activity was detected in all but one of the air particulate filters that were analyzed. As shown in Figure 6.1, there is no significant difference between the quarterly average concentrations at the indicator (near-plant) stations and the control (distant from plant) stations. Notable in Figure 6.1 is a distinct annual cycle, with the minimum concentration in the fourth quarter, and the maximum concentration in the third quarter.

Figures 6.2 through 6.7 show the weekly gross beta concentration at each air particulate sampling location compared to the control air particulate sampling location at AP-21 (Spofford Lake, NH). Small differences are evident and expected between individual sampling locations. Figure 6.2 clearly demonstrates the distinct annual cycle, with the minimum concentration in the second quarter, and the maximum concentration in the first quarter. It can be seen that the gross-beta measurements on air particulate filters fluctuate significantly over the course of a year. The measurements from control station AP-21 vary similarly, indicating that these fluctuations are due to regional changes in naturally-occurring airborne radioactive materials, and not due to Vermont Yankee operations.

There was one naturally-occurring gamma-emitting radionuclides detected on the air particulate filters 46

during this reporting period. Be-7, a naturally-occurring cosmogenic radionuclide, was detected on 22 of 27 filter sets analyzed.

6.5.1.2 Charcoal Cartridges (CF)

Charcoal cartridges from each of the seven air sampling sites were analyzed for I-131 each time they were collected. The results of these analyses are summarized in Table 5.1. As in previous years, no I-131 attributable to the operation of Entergy Vermont Yankee was detected in any charcoal cartridge.

6.5.2 Waterborne Pathways 6.5.2.1 River Water (WR) .

Aliquots of river water were automatically collected periodically from the Connecticut River downstream from the plant discharge area and hydro station, location WR-11. Monthly grab samples were also collected at the upstream control location, also on the Connecticut River, location WR-21. The composited samples at WR-11 were collected monthly and sent along with the WR-21 grab samples to the contracted environmental laboratory for analysis. Table 5.1 shows that gross-beta measurements were positive in 1 out of 12 indicator samples as would be expected due to naturally-occurring radionuclides in the water. Gross-beta was detected in two of the 12 control samples. As seen in Figure 6.8, the mean concentration of the indicator locations was similar to the mean concentration at the control location in 2015.

For each sampling site, the monthly samples were composited into quarterly.samples for H-3 (Tritium) analyses. None of the samples contained detectable quantities ofH-3.

No gamma-emitting radionuclides were detected in any of the samples.

6.5.2.2 Ground Water - Potable Drinking Water (WG)

Quarterly ground water (deep wells supplying drinking water to the plant and selected offsite locations) samples were collected from four indicator locations (only one is requir~d by VYNPS ODCM) and one control location during 2015. In 1999, WG-14 (PSB Well) another on-site well location was added to the program. In July 2012, WG-15 (Southwest Well) was added to the ODCM as a quarterly sample location. Tab!~ 5.1 and Figure 6.9 show that gross-beta measurements were positive in 15 out of 16 indicator samples and in 4 out of 4 control samples. The beta activity is due to naturally-occurring radionuclides in the water. The levels at all sampling locations, including the higher levels at station 47

WG-13, were consistent with those detected in previous years. No gamma-emitting radionuclides or tritium were detected in any of the samples.

6.5.2.3 Sediment (SE)

Semi-annual river sediment grab samples were collected from two indicator locations during 2015. The North Storm Drain Outfall location (SE-12) is an area where up to 40 different locations can be sampled within a 20 ft by 140 ft area. In 2015, 18 locations were sampled at SE-12 during each of the semi-annual collections. Two samples were collected at SE-11 during the year. Be-7 was not detected in any of the 36 samples analyzed. As would be expected, naturally-occurring Potassium-40 (K-40) was detected in all of the samples. Cobalt-60 was not detected in any of the samples. Radium-226 (Ra-226) was detected in 31 of 36 samples. Actinium-228 (Ac-228) was detected in 33of36 samples. Thorium-228 (Th-228) was detected in all of the samples analyzed. Thorium-232 (Th-232) was detected in all 36 samples analyzed.

Uranium-238 (U-238) was not detected in any of the 36 samples. Cesium-137 (Cs-137) was detected in 23 out of 30 of the indicator samples and one of the two control samples. The levels of Cs-137 measured were consistent with what has been measured in the previous several years and with those detected at other New England locations. Also see section 6.5.2.6 for more information.

48

6.5.2.4 Test Wells (WT)

During 1996, sampling was initiated at test wells around the outer edges of an area in the south portion of the VYNPS site where septic sludge is spread. This sampling continued through 2015. The test well locations are shown on Figure 4.1 and the results are summarized in Table 5.1 under the media category, Test Well (WT). In 2015, four samples were taken at each of the four locations and all were analyzed for gamma isotopic, gross beta and H-3 activity.

Prior to the gross beta analysis, each sample was filtered through a 0.45 micron Gelman Tuffryn membrane filter. Gross beta activity was detected in all 16 samples collected with levels ranging from 4.3 to 14.9 pCi/kg. No other radionuclides were detected.

6.5.2.5 Storm Drain System The presence of plant-generated radionuclides in the onsite storm drain system has been identified in previous y~ars at Vermont Yankee (VY). As a consequence, a 50.59 evaluation of radioactive materials discharged via the storm drain system was perform~d in 1998. This assessment was in response to Information and Enforcement Bulletin No. 80-10 and NRC Information Notice No. 91-40. The evaluation demonstrated that the total curies released via the VYNPS storm drain system are not sufficient to result in a significant dose (i.e. dose does not exceed 10% of the technical specification objective of 0.3 millirem per year to the total body, and 1.0 millirem per year to the target organ for the maximally exposed receptor). Water and sediment in the onsite storm drain system was routinely sampled throughout 2015 at various points. The results of this sampling are summarized below.

Sediment samples were taken from the storm drain system at onsite manhole locations in 2015 for a total of 2 samples. All samples were analyzed for gamma emitting isotopes. Table 6-1 summarizes the analytical results of the sediment samples. The naturally-occurring isotope K-40 was found in both of the samples as expected.

No other gamma emitters were detected in the storm drain system sediment samples in 2015.

49

Table 6.1 Summary of Storm Drain System Sediment Sample Analyses*

Isotope No. Detected** Mean Range Station With Highest (pCi/kg) (pCi/kg) Detected Concentration Ra-226 0/2 NA NA -

Cs-137 0/2 NA NA -

Mn-54 0/2. NA NA -

Co-60 0/2 NA NA -

Zn-65 0/2 NA NA -

• Radionuclides that were not detected in any sample are not listed

• • The fraetion of sample analyses yielding detectable measurements (i.e. >3 standard deviations).

Water samples were taken from the storm drain system at various access points in 2015 including Manholes MH-12A and MH-14. Table 6-2 summarizes the analytical results of water samples from the storm drain system (MH-12A and MH-14) in 2015. Low levels of gross beta activity were detected in 7 of the 9 samples analyzed, at concentrations that are typical of any environmental water sample. Tritium (H-3) was not detected in any of the 9 samples analyzed.

In 1998, an additional dose assessment was performed that incorporated all of the 1998 storm drain system analytical results (including both sediment and water). The dose assessment was performed using the maximum measured concentration of radionuclides in 1998, and a conservative estimate of the volume of sediment and water discharged via the storni drain system. The results of this dose assessment are estimates of the total body and maximum organ dose equaling 3.2% and 1.6% of the corresponding Technical Specification dose limits respectively. Therefore, there was no significant dose impact from plant-related radionuclides in the storm drain system in *1998. The sampling conducted in 2015 indicates that the presence of radionuclides in the storm drain system has not changed significantly. Therefore, the storm drain system remains an insignificant impact to dose. The VYNPS staff will continue to monitor the presence of plant related radionuclides in the storm drain system.

50

Table 6.2 Summary of Storm Drain System Water Sample Analyses*

Isotope No. Detected ** Mean Range Station With Highest (pCi/L) (pCi/L) Detected Concentration Gross Beta 7/9 4.8 E 0 (1.6 - 10.3) E 0 MH-12A (WW-12)

H-3 019 NA NA -

Ra-226 019 NA NA -

1-131 019 NA NA -

Cs-134 019 NA NA -

Cs-137 019 NA NA -

ZrNb-95 019 NA NA -

Co-58 019 NA NA -

Mn-54 019 NA NA -

Zn-65 019 NA NA -

Fe-59 019 NA NA -

Co-60 019 NA NA -

Ba/La-140 019 NA NA -

• Radionuclides that were not detected in any sample are not listed

• • The fraction of sample analyses yielding detectable measurements (i.e. >3 standard deviations).

6.5.2.6 Air Compressor Condensate and Manhole Sampling Results The presence of tritium in station air compressor condensate and manholes (Storm Drain System) has been identified since 1995 (ER_95-0704). An evaluation has been performed (S.R.1592) which states

" ... leakage of tritium found in the storm drains (manholes) to ground water beneath the site will be transported by natural ground water gradient to the Connecticut River. However, at the current measured concentrations and postulated leak rate from the storm drains, the offsite dose impact is not significant

(<2.4E-5 mrem/year)." Data provided in Table 6.3 will be filed under the requirements of 1OCFR50.75(g) and is presented here in response to ER_95-0704_04 commitments. Because of revisions in the security arrangements at the plant site, there was no water available for collection in Manholes 11 H, 13 and 8 during 2015. Due to the cessation of plant operation, production of tritium has stopped at VY and tritium measurements of the air compressor condensate did not detect any tritium in 2015.

51

Table 6.3 Summary of Air Compressor Condensate and Manhole Water Tritium Concentrations*

Sample No. Mean Range Location Detected** ( microcuries/ml ) (microcuries/ml)

Air Compressor 0/7 NA NA Condensate Manhole llH 0/0 No Sample Available No Sample Available Manhole 13 0/0 No Sample Available No Sample Available Manhole 8 0/0 No Sample Available No Sample Available

• Reported per ER_950704_04.

• • The fraction of sample analyses yielding detectable measurements 6.5.2.7 Groundwater Monitoring Wells Samples Results (WS)

Leakage from primary system piping between the Augmented Off Gas (AOG) Building and the Turbine Building was identified early in 2010. A large pool of subsurface water became contaminated with Tritium as a result of this leak. A large number of new groundwater sample wells were installed and a significant effort was mounted to find the leak and fix it. Presently, mitigation efforts have resulted in the extraction of more than 300000 gallons of trititated water from this subsurface pool. Dose calculations have been performed assuming that this underground plume of contaminated water is moving towards and into the Connecticut River. The dose impacts and other details of this event are provided in the year 2015 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report.

6.5.3 Ingestion Pathways 6.5.3.1 Milk (TM)

Milk samples from cows at several local farms were collected monthly during 2015. Twice-per-month collections were made during the "pasture season" since the milking cows or goats were identified as being fed pasture grass during that time. Each sample was analyzed for I-131 and other gamma-emitting radionuclides. Quarterly composites (by location) were analyzed for Sr-89 and Sr-90.

As expected, naturally-occurring K-40 was detected in all samples. Also expected was Sr-90. Sr-90 was not detected in the 8 indicator samples but was detected in three of the seven control samples. Although Sr-90 is a by-product of nuclear power plant operations, the levels detected in milk are consistent with that expected from worldwide fallout from nuclear weapons tests, and to a much lesser degree from fallout from the Chernobyl incident. The Sr-90 levels shown in Table 5.1 and Figure 6.11 are consistent 52

with those detected at other New England farms participating in other plant environmental monitoring programs. This radionuclide and Cs-137 are present throughout the natural environment as a result of atmospheric nuclear weapons testing that started primarily in the late 1950's and continued through 1980.

They are found in soil and vegetation, as well as anything that feeds upon vegetation, directly or indirectly. The detection of Cs-137 in environmental milk samples is expected and has been detected in previous years. Cs-137 was not detected in any of the 65 samples in 2015. See Figure 6.10. It should be noted here that most of the Cs-137 concentrations and many of the Sr-90 concentrations shown on Figures 6.10 and 6.11, respectively, are considered "not detectable." All values have been plotted, regardless of whether they were considered statistically significant or not. As shown in these figures, the levels are also consistent with those detected in previous years near the VYNPS plant. There is also little actual difference in concentrations between farms. As in previous years, no I-131 attributable to the operation of Entergy Vermont Yankee was detected in any milk sample. Naturally occurring Ra-226 was not detected in any of the 65 samples analyzed.

6.5.3.2 Silage (TC)

A silage sample was collected from each of the required milk sampling stations during October. Each of these was analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides and I-131. As expected with all biological media, naturally-occurring Be-7 was detected in 8 of 16 samples and K-40 was detected in all samples. No Cs-13 7 or I-131 was detected in any sample.

6.5.3.3 Mixed Grass (TG)

Mixed grass samples were collected at each of the air sampling stations during three of the four quarters of 2015. As expected with all biological media, naturally-occurring Be-7 was detected in 11 of the 19 samples. Naturally-occurring K-40 was detected in all samples. Cesium-137 was not detected in any of the samples.

6.5.3.4 Fish (FH)

Semiannual samples of fish were collected from two locations in both spring and fall of 2015 for the VY REMP. Several species may be collected such as Walleye, Small Mouth Bass, Large Mouth Bass, Yellow Perch, White Perch, and Rock Bass. The edible portions of each of these were analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. As expected in biological matter, naturally-occurring K-40 was detected in all eight samples. In addition to the analysis of edible portions, the inedible portions were also analyzed.

These fish were also analyzed for Gross Beta, H-3, Am-241, Cm-242, Cm-243/244, Fe-55, Ni-63, Pu-2328, Pu-239/240, Pu-241, Pu-242, Sr-89 and Sr-90.

53

Strontium 90 was detected in some of the inedible portions (bones, guts and skin are included in the

'inedible' portion). This is the fifth year in the VY REMP program that fish has been analyzed for Hard-to-Detects such as Strontium-90. The results were compared to studies done in the Hudson River by New York State officials and it was concluded that the Strontium-90 detected is a result of weapons-testing era fallout to the environment and not from nuclear power plant releases.

As shown in Table 5.1, Cs-137 was not detected in this year's samples. It should be noted that the majority of the Cs-137 concentrations plotted in Figure 6.12 are considered "not detectable." All values were plotted regardless of whether they were considered statistically significant or not. The Cs-13 7 levels plotted for 2014 and previous years are typical of concentrations attributable to global nuclear weapons testing fallout.

6.5.4 Direct Radiation Pathway Direct radiation was continuously measured at 53 locations surrounding the Vermont Yankee plant with the use ofthermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs).

In 1999, DR-53 was added on the site boundary. The TLDs are collected every calendar quarter for readout at the environmental laboratory. The complete summary of data may be found in Table 5.3.

From Tables 5.2 and 5.3 and Figure 6.13, it can be seen that the Inner and Outer Ring TLD mean exposure rates were not significantly different in 2015. This indicates no significant overall increase in direct radiation exposure rates in the plant vicinity. It can also be seen from these tables that the Control TLD mean exposure rate was not significantly different than that at ~he Inner and Outer Rings .. Figure 6.13 also shows an annual cycle at both indicator and control locations. The lowest point of the cycle occurs usually during the winter months. This is due primarily to the attenuating effect of the snow cover on radon emissions and on direct irradiation by naturally-occurring radionuclides in the soil. Differing amounts of these naturally-occurring radionuclides in the underlying soil, rock or nearby building materials result in different radiation levels between one field site and another Upon examining Figure 6.17, as well as Table 5.2, it is evident that in recent years, station DR-45 had a higher average exposure rate than any other station. This location is on-site, and the higher exposure rates are due to plant operations and activities in the immediate vicinity of this TLD. There is no significant dose potential to the surrounding population or any real individual from these sources since they are located on the back side of the plant site, between the facility and the river. The same can be said for station DR-46, which has shown higher exposure rates in previous years.

54

Environmental Program Trend Graphs 2015 Radiological Environmental Operating Report Vermont Yankee Graphs:

6.1 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (Average Concentrations) 6.2 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (11) 6.3 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (12) 6.4- Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (13) 6.5 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (14) 6.6 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (15)

6. 7 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters (40) 6.8 - Gross Beta Measurement on River Water (Average Concentrations) 6.9-Gross Beta Measurement on Ground Water (Average Concentrations) 6.10- Cesium-137 in Milk (Annual Average Concentrations) 6.11 - Strontium 90 in Milk (Annual Average Concentrations) 6.12- Cesium-137 in Fish (Annual Average Concentrations) 6.13 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring, Outer Ring, and Control TLDS 6.14 - Exposure Rate at Indicator TLDS, DRO 1-03 6.15 - Exposure Rate at Indicator TLDS?, DR 06,50 6.16- Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLDS, DR 07 - 08, 41 - 42 6.17 - Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLDS, DR 43-46 6.18 - Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLDS, DR 4 7-49, 51-53 6.19-Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDS, DR 09-15(odd) 6.20-Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDS, DR-17-23 (odd) 6.21 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDS,DR 25-31 (odd) 6.22-Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDS, DR 33-39 (odd) 6.23 -Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDS, DR 10 - 16 (even) 6.24-Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDS, DR 18-24 (even) 6.25 -Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDS, DR 26-32 (even) 6.26-Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDS, DR 34-40 (even) 6.27 - Exposure Rate at Control TLDS, DR 04-05 55

Figure 6.1 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters - Quarterly Average Concentrations 0.08

0.05

-

+-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-----l+---

a>

E 0.01 0 -r-~.----r~-.,..-~--r-~.-~.--------,,------.~-.,..-~---.--~.---~..-----,~-,-~-,--~-.--~.---~.,-----,.~-,-~--r-~.---~,.---

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 201120122013 2014 2015 Year

- Indicator Stations - - - Control Station 56

53 52

{,

r--

LI) 51 50 49 I 48 47 H

• • 46 I 45 4

• 44 43

....IA I

• 42 41 I 40

.....

C1' u..

• 39

~ 38 J:

.....

C1' C'tS I 37 z Qj t 36 .:.::

J 0 ~ 35 "'

....J "E

t II 34

~a.

C'tS I 33 c..

• C/)

32 .....

....

t 31

...

Qi N

0:.

~ <I:

1* 30 'E c:

0

.....

IA II I

29 z:J 28 ~

t c:

C1' I 27 ~

E ~ 26 ~

....C1' ~ 25 ~

J ~ 24 ~ c 0

IA *~

C'tS 0 23 U'5 C1' 11 22 Qi

E It 21 >

~

s 20 .....

C1' co ~I

• 19 ~

18 IA IA 0

.... **

'

17 16 t

(!) I ~ 15 N ~ 14

<D

~ I

• 1213

J 1* 11

~

C'I 10 u.. ~ 9 I 8

~ I

• 7 6

IJ 5 I 4 3

-- ~ 2

-

-

• • 1 0

~ cq ~ '<t: ~ "! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 Jataw :>1qn:>f!:)d

Figure 6.3 - Gross Beta Measurements on Air Particulate Filters 0 .7 0 .6

.

0 .5

...

-(1)

(1)

E 0.4 0

.0

-u::I 0

a.

0 .3 0 .2 I

0.1 0

.... ... - - -.... - - - - --- - ... - ...

- ~

.....

- - __... - . . .._.

- -- - - ... - - -- -... ... -- - - - -- - - - -.... ..._

- -....

o~Nw~~m~~w~~~~~~~~~~NNNNNNNNNNWWWWWWWWWW~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

o~Nw~~m~~wo~Nw~~m~~wo~Nw~~m~~wo~Nw~~m~~wo~Nw 2015 Week Number

~ AP- 12 North Hinsdale - - - AP-21 Spofford Lake NH 58

53 52

~

l 51 50 en l/)

11 49 I 48 It 47 ll 46 I 45 I ** 44 43 I 42 I 41

~ 40

~

C1' I

• 39 u.. 38

-

I C1'

('\S t

• 37 36 J:

z Q)

s I 35

.><

u '°

-'

t: u 34 'E

('\S I 33 ~0.

Q..

~

<t I

• I 32 31 .....

30 .c Q)

(/)

N 0..

c: <(

0 I t 29 E

.....fl) 1 28 z:::l T c: H 27 ..:.::

C1' 26 ~

E C1'

~

~*

0 25 ~

s ~ 24 ~ c:

.n 23 ~

fl)

('\S

.2 c;;

C1' 22 u;

.c

- 21 I c75

('\S 4 20 S1 C1'

~

'° co I 19 c:

fl) 18 :I:

fl) 0 17 ...

("')

0..

~ ~ 16 <(

C>

....,. I I 15 14 t

<D 13 C1'

~

12

s I 11 O> 10 u.. t 9 I 8 I ~ 7 41 6 II 5 H 4 3

-- ~ 2

- ~ 1 0

"-: <!:! ~ '<t: ~ "! ..- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Jataw :>!qn:>J!::>d

53 52 I

i 51 50 0

<..O H 49 I 48 II 47 I 46 I

• 45 I 44

• • I 43 42 41

-...

I/) 1* 40 Cl) I 39 u.

~ I 38

- I 37 J:

Cl) z

~

t 36 ~

.,Cl>

J It 35 _J 0 H 34 "E

e

~

I 33 ~

8.

1* 32

...

0... (/)

......

I 31 ... N cl.

<2: I t 30 ~ <(

c: I 29 E f

-0 I/)

c:

Cl)

E I

I

• II 25 28 27 26

~

.::t:.

3:

~

...

Cl)

J i 24 ~ <(

E I/) It 23 ~ "O iii

~ I

• 22 Cl) "".c

!: ** 21 "S

-

m

~

Cl) 0 20

~ 19 18

.,,.......z cl.

<(

I/)

I/)

...0

(!)

• I 15 17 16 t I 14 I()

• I 13

<D I 12

...

Cl)

J 1* 11 Cl i 10

u. 9

~ 8 I~ 7 I 6 II 5 I 4 3

-- *~ 2

- .,....

0 1

0 I": ~ ~ <:t: ~ C"!

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Ja1aw ::>!qn::>f!:::>d

53 52 .-i l=

I .... 50 51 l.D u . . 49 I ~ 48

, ~ .... 47 It ~ 46 41 ~

45

. . . 44 I ~

43 1 ~ 42 I .... 41 f!! U >- 40

~ I .... 39 u.. I ~

38 I

.....cu II ~ 37 z

CD

~ I .... 36 ....:

Ill

s _J u 1 * .... 35

'E u ~ 34 t: ~

~ I ~ 33 8.

a. CJ)

• • ~

.... 32 ......

N I .... 31

~

.. . . 30

... a.

c: ~ <(

0 I * .... 29 E

.....

Ill II .... 28 i T c: I .... 27 ~

cu l ~ 26 E Q) cu

.... I ~ 25 ~ i0

s t .... 24 ~ a::

Ill I .... 23 ~

~

cu I .... 22 ~.._

!! ~ I ~ 21 CD "5-

~ I-

.....

cu o ~ 20 in

......

al I .... 19 a.

Ill 18 <(

Ill 0

....

(!)

I 17 16 t ti 15

.*,.

<D 14

<D 13

....cu 12

s C'l I

, 11 10 u.. I 9 I

• 8 0

• 7 6

It 5 I 4 3

-- -

-

~

0 2

1 0

I'-: <q ~ "<f: ~ "! ..-- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 JaJaw :>!qn:>f!:)d

53 52

.

N l.D 51 50 I 49 11 48 I 47 ti 46 II 45 I 44

• 43 42 41

...

In C1' I 40

!:::::

u.

1* 39 I 38

~ I 37 C'O I 36 J:

s II 35 z u Q,l EC'O a..

.. I 34 33

""'"'

....J

'E

... I 32

~

-

<(

0

...

In c:

C1' 0

I I

I 31 ....

30 I 29 E

~

28 z::l 27 ~

(/)

c:::i a:.

<

T E I

• 26 ~

...

C1'

s

• I 25 t 24

~

~

In C'O *I 23 ~ ~

C1'  ::::J u 22 0

E J:

...

C'O C1'

~

• • 21 20 E

J J:

co I 19 0 c:

In I 18 Q; In ~

...0

(.!)

~

I 17 16

(.!)

0

"'i Cl.

I 15

,.._

<D

~

~

u 13 u 12 14 t

s I

• 11 Cl I 10 u.

~ 9 I ~ 8 I ~ 7 iI 6 I 5 II 4 ti 3 2

I'-: c.q

- ~ -.:: ~ "! ..-

~ 1 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Jataw :>1 q n:>f!~d

Figure 6.8 - Gross Beta Measurements on River Water Semi-Annual Average Concentration

....Q)

~ 2.00 -t--~~~+-~t--~~~-------+~-H--+--t---t-t-t-t---tt---...-----~t-----,pt--t---,t---t---1H---t~~~~~--1>--+--tt--~--t 0--

a.

0.00 +-~..----.~-...~-.-~-r-~-r-~~~-.--~..-----,.----...~-.-~-r-~-r-~.....-~-.-~..----.~--..~-.-~--.-~.....-~-.----1 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 200 1 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Year

-+- 'NR-11 River Station (3-3) - l/l/R-21Rt9 Bndge (3-8) 63

Figure 6.9 - Gross Beta Measurements on Ground Water Semi-Annual Average Concentrations 0.0 -+-~..-----,.---.,.~-...~-.-~-..--~-.-~~--.,.-~--.-~-..--~-.-~-,--~..,...-~..--~.---.,.~--.,.-~--.-~-.--~-.-~~~..--~

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year

- wG-11 Plant Well - - - WG-12 Vernon Nursing Well WG-22 Copeland Well

- WG-13 COB Well -+-- WG-14 Engineering Building WG-15 Southwest Well 64

Figure 6.10 - Cesium 137 in Milk - Annual Average Concentration 10.0 9.0 8.0 7.0 6.0

...a.>

-

J

--c.

u 5.0 4.0 3.0 2.0 1.0 0.0 4-~~.........::~;....L~~...L::::..-.......1===-:::~......~..L...~~~--,-~~~~-.-~.-----.-~-.---,.~-..-~..---.-~-.---,.~~

19901991199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015 Note: In 2005 , switched to reporting < MDA when no activity was detected . Year Using MDA values result in a larger number.

- TM-11 Miller (cow) - TM- 14 Brown (cow) TM-16 Meadow Crest Farm (cow) - - TM-18 Blodgett Farm (cow)

-lK- TM-24 County Farm (control) --+- TM-22 Franklin (cow) -+- TM-25 Downey-Spencer (goat) - - TM-26 Cheney Hill

- - TM-99 Special Farm TM-20 Dunklee (cow) 65

Figure 6.11 - Strontium 90 in Milk - Annual Averge Concentrations 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5

....

-u 4>

.._

.J 2.0 a.

1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 1990 199 11 992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 200 120022003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20112012 2013 2014 2015 Note: In 2005, switched to reporting< MDA when no activity was detected. Averages Year include the MDAs and positive values. Using MDA values result in a larger number.

- TM-11 Miller (cow} -tt- TM-14 Brown (cow) TM-18 Blodgett Farm (cow ) - - TM-24 County Farm (control)

- TM-22 Franklin Farm (cow) - . - TM-25 Downey- Spencer (goat) -+- TM-26 Cheney Hill TM-20 Dunklee Farm (cow}

'~

66

Figure 6.12 - Cesium 137 in Fish - Annual Average Concentrations Cl

~ 40.0 +-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-t--t-~~~~~~~~~~~~~___.,,._~~~~~~_.

(.)

c.

0.0 ~.....-~-r-~-.--~-.-~-.-~--.,.~---.~~..--~.,--~.....-~-.-~-.-~-.-~-.-~-.-~---.~---.~~..--~.,--~-..-~.....-~-.-----i 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 201 1 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year Note: In 2005 switched to reporting < MDA when no actMty was detected . Using MDA values result in a larger number.

- FH -11 Vernon Pond - FH -21 Rt 9 Bridge (Control) 67

Figure 6.1 3 -Average Exposure Rate at Inner Ring , Outer Ring and Control TLDs 9.0 8.5 8.0 7.5 5 7.0 . ~

0

.s:::.

...

Q)

a. 6.5 et:I

...0

~ 6.0

-ft-~~~-A-~~~--"* -1~-t. -,__~-=----~~~~~~~~-M I

i 5.5 >--~~~~~~--~.*ic---~~l~~~~~-~

5.0

• 4.0 -!-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Ret rieval Dat e

- control _._ Inner Ring Outer Ring 68

Figure 6.14 - Exposure Rate at Indicator TLDs, DR01-03 10.0 9.5 9.0 8.5 8.0 - --

...

J 0 7.5 J:

...

(I)

a. 7.0 0:::I

...u 0

6.5

~

6.0 4.0 -+-~-.-~~-.--~-.-~~....---~---.-~~....---~-.-~~....---~-.-~~....---~---.-~~-.--~---.-~~....---~-.-~~-.--~~~---1 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

-+- DR-01 River Station No. 3.3 -If- DR-02 North Hinsdale, NH DR-03 Hinsdale Substation 69

Figure 6.15 - Exposure Rate at Indicator TLDs, DROG & DR-50 10.0 9.5 9.0 8.5 8.0

...:J 0 7.5

.r:.

...

~

a. 7.0 0:::

I

...CJ 0

6.5

~

6.0 5.5 5.0 4.5 4.0 -+-~--r-~~.---~-r-~---,.~~.----~-r~~..--~-,-~--,~~-.-~-,-~~...,.--~--r-~~.---~-.-~-,-~~..--~-l 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

-+- DR-06 Vernon School - - - DR-50 Gov. Hunt House 70

Figure 6.16 - Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TL Os DR07, 08, 41 & 42 11 9

...::J 0

c 8

...

Q) a.

0::

I

...u 0

~

6 4 +-~----..~~--.-~~..--~-.-~~--r--~~,--'--~-.-~~--.--~--.~~-r-~~-,..-~----..~~--.-~~..--~-.-~~--.--~----..~~

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

- DR-07 Srte Boundary - i i - DR-08 Site Boundary DR-41 Site Boundary DR-42 Site Boundary 71

Figu re 6.17 - Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLDs - DR43 thru 46 19 18 17 16 15 14

!5 13 ----

0

..c.

~ 12 - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - - -

c.

~ 11

...0

• !::? 10

~

9 8

7 6

5 4 -----,.---..------r-- - . - - - - . - - - - - , - - - r - - - , . - - - , - - - - , - - - - , - - - , - - - . . - - - - - - r - - - - - i r - - --r-- - r - - - - - I 1997 1998 1999 2000 200 1 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

~ DR-4 3 Site Boundary -II-- DR-44 Site Boundary DR-45 Site Boundary DR-46 Site Boundary 72

Figure 6.18 - Exposure Rate at Site Boundary TLDs DR47-49 & 51-53 12 -.-~~-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.

...:::I 9 0

...

.I:

G)

c. 8 0::

I

...u0

~ 7 II 4 +-----..----~----..----~~~~~~--~-.-~~...-~--..~~-...-~~..--~-....~~~~~.--~-.-~~~~-....~---;

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

~ DR-47 Site Boundary - - - DR-48 Site Boundary DR-49 Site Boundary

- - DR-51 Site Boundary --ilE-- DR-52 Site Boundary -+- DR-53 Site Boundary 73

Figure 6.19 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDs DR09, 11 , 13 & 15 S7 +-~+-f--.!l~+--++-,._~~+-~~~.,...-~~~~-=-~fr~-t--'c--f-i.---t--r--~~-t--t-~+-r~--.. 11~~~~~*-----i 0

~

...

Cl) a.

0:::I

...

0

• !::? 6 +----+......._._ .......+

~

4 +-~-.-~~..--~-,-~~.--~-r-~~.--~-.-~--,~~-.-~--.~~-.-~-,.~~~~---r~~,--~-,-~~.--~~

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

-+- DR-09 Inner Ring - oR-11 Inner Ring DR-13 Inner Ring -~ DR-15 Inner Ring 74

Figu re 6.20 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDs DR1T, 19, 21 & 23 9

...::::J 0 8

.r:.

...G>

c..

0::

...u 0

7

~

6 4 -t-~---.-~~-.-~---.-~~...,.-~--r~~..........~---,r-~--r-~~r-~--r-~~,--~....,-~~-.--~-r~~-.--~-r~~-.--~---1 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retriev al Date

-+- DR-17 Inner Ring - DR-19 Inner Ring DR-21 Inner Ring - - DR-23 Inner Ring 75

Figure 6.21 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDs DR25, 27, 29 & 31 9

8.5 8

7.5

...:J 7 0

.r:.

...

Q)

c. 6.5 et:I

...0CJ 6

~

5.5 5

4 -!-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

-+- DR-25 Inner Ring - DR-27 Inner Ring DR-29 Inner Ring DR-31 Inner Ring 76

Figu re 6.22 - Exposure Rate at Inner Ring TLDs DR33, 35, 37 & 39 8

...

~

0

.I:.

...

Q)

c. 7 0:::

I

...CJ 0

~

6 l'l 5

4 +-~-.-~~...--~-.-~~.---~-,.....-~---.~~......--~-...~~-.--~---.-~~..--~-.-~~...--~-,.....-~---.~~...,....-~--.,...~--l 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

--+- DR-33 Inner Ring _._ DR-35 Inner Ring DR-37 Inner Ring - DR-39 Inner Ring 77

Figure 6.23 - Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDs DR10, 12, 14 & 16 8

...::::l 0

.!:.

...

Q)

a. 7 0::I

...00

~

6 4 +-~-.-~~...-~-.-~~,.--~--r-~--,~~-.-~-,-~~-.--~---.-~~...--~-.-~~.--~--r-~---.~~-.-~--.-~--'-l 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

-+- DR-10 Outer Ring _._ DR-12 Outer Ring DR-14 Outer Ring DR-16 Outer Ring 78

Figure 6.24 - Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDs DR18, 20, 22 & 24 9.5 9

8 .5 I..

J 0 8

c I..

QI Q. 7.5 0::

I 0

I.. 7 u

~

6.5 6

5.5 5

4.5 4 -~-.,.-~~,.--~--,-~---.~~-r-~----.-~~-r-~--r-~----,~~-r-~---.-~~-r-~-r-~----,.--~-r-~---.-~~-r-~~

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

~ DR-18 Outer Ring - - DR-20 Outer Ring DR-22 Outer Ring - DR-24 Outer Ring 79

Figu re 6.25 - Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDs DR26, 28, 30 & 32 8

7.5

...::I 7 0

c

...

~ 6.5 IXI

...

0

(..)

6

~

5.5 5

4.5 4 -!-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

1997 1998 1999 2000 200 1 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 201 4 2015 Retrieval Date

-+- DR-26 Outer Ring - DR-28 Outer Ring DR-30 Outer Ring - DR-32 Outer Ring 80

Figure 6.26 - Exposure Rate at Outer Ring TLDs DR 34, 36, 38 & 40

....

~ 7.5

....

8. 7 -

0:::I 0

ti 6 .5 <p.;.;-..;<,--____,,_ _ -11 .. ,._____,,.,.___-ttl--itt---r---..~-1 --11 .........o--+ -.---r-r--+-i~---< +----+ tt+-- - ---+--#-T+---i 1---'W'-~--I H+*lf--Hi

~

4 +---r---.----.-----r----r------r---.-----.---.----.-----r----r----r---.---,------,----r-----t 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 201 1 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

-+- DR-34 Outer Ring - - DR-36 Outer Ring DR-38 Outer Ring - - DR-40 Outer Ring 81

Figure 6.27 - Exposure Rate at Control TLDs DR04 & 05 9

8.5 8

7.5

...::s 7 0

I

...

~ 6.5 0:::

I

...u 0

6

~

5.5 5

4 +-~~~~~~~~~~~....-~--..-~~..,....-~~~~~~~~~~~....-~--..-~~..,....-~~~~~~....-~-!

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 201 1 2012 2013 2014 2015 Retrieval Date

- DR-04 Northfield, MA ---- DR-05 Spofford Lake, NH 82

7.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAMS 7.1 ENVIRONMENTAL DOSIMETRY COMPANY ENVIRONMENTAL DOSIMETRY COMPANY ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE STATUS REPORT January - December 2015 Prepared By: Date:

L/J.-2//b

• Approved By: Date: c9 [~il ((5 Environmental Dosimetry Company 10 Ashton Lane Sterling, MA 01564 83

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF TABLES ...................................................................................................................... 85 EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

.......................................................................................................... 86 I. INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................... 87 A. QC Program ...................................................................................................... 87 B. QA Program ....................................................................................................... 87 II. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA ................................................................. 87 A. Acceptance Criteria for Internal Evaluations ...................................................... 87 B. QC Investigation Criteria and Result Reporting .................................................. 89 C. Reporting of Environmental Dosimetry Results to EDC Customers ................... 89 Ill. DATA

SUMMARY

FOR ISSUANCE PERIOD JANUARY-DECEMBER 2015 ................ 89 A. General Discussion ............................................................................................ 89 B. Result Trending ................................................................................................. 90 IV. STATUS OF EDC CONDITION REPORTS (CR) .......................................................... 90 V. STATUS OF AUDITS/ASSESSMENTS ........................................................................ 90 A. Internal .............................................................................................................. 90 B. External ........................................................ :.................................................... 90 VI. PROCEDURES AND MANUALS REVISED DURING JANUARY - DECEMBER 2015 .. 90 VII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................................................................ 90 VIII. REFERENCES ............................................................................................................,. ..90 APPENDIX A DOSIMETRY QUALITY CONTROL TRENDING GRAPHS

LIST OF TABLES

1. Percentage of Individual Analyses Which Passed EDC Internal Criteria, January - December 2015 88

2. Mean Dosimeter Analyses (n=6), January - December 2015 88

3. Summary of Independent QC Results for 2015 88 85

EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

Routine quality control (QC) testing was performed for dosimeters issued by the Environmental Dosimetry Company (EDC) .

During this annual period, 100% (72/72) of the individual dosimeters, evaluated against the EDC internal performance acceptance criteria (high-energy photons only), met the criterion for accuracy and 100% (72/72) met the criterion for precision (Table 1). In addition, 100% ( 12/12) of the dosimeter sets evaluated against the internal tolerance limits met EDC acceptance criteria (Table 2) and 100% (6/6) of independent testing passed the performance criteria (Table 3). Trending graphs, which evaluate performance statistic for high-energy photon irradiations and co-located stations are given in Appendix A.

One internal assessment was performed in 2Q15. There were no findings.

86

I. INTRODUCTION The TLD systems at the Environmental Dosimetry Company (EDC) are calibrated and operated to ensure consistent and accurate evaluation of TLDs. The quality of the dosimetric results reported to EDC clients is ensured by in-house performance testing and independent performance testing by EDC clients, and both internal and client directed program assessments.

The purpose of the dosimetry quality assurance program is to provide performance.

documentation of the routine processing of EDC dosimeters. Performance testing provides a statistical measure of the bias and precision of dosimetry processing against a reliable standard, which in turn points out any trends or performance changes. Two programs are used:

A. QC Program Dosimetry quality control tests are performed on EDC Panasonic 814 Environmental dosimeters. These tests include: (1) the in-house testing program coordinated by the EDC QA Officer and (2) independent test perform by EDC clients. In-house test are performed using six pairs of 814 dosimeters, a pair is reported as an individual result and six pai~s are reported as the mean result.

Results of these tests are described in this report.

Excluded from this r~port are instrumentation checks. Although instrumentation checks represent an important aspect of the quality assurance program, they are not included as process checks in this report. Instrumentation checks represent between 5-10% of the TLDs processed.

• B. QA Program An internal assessment of dosimetry activities is conducted annually by the Quality Assurance Officer (Reference 1). The purpose of the ass~ssment is to review procedures, results, materials or components to identify opportunities to improve or enhance. processes and/or services.

II. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA A. Accept~mce Criteria for Internal Evaluations

1. Bias For each dosimeter tested, the measure of bias is the percent deviation of the reported result relative to the delivered exposure. The percent deviation relative to the delivered exposure is calculated as follows:

where:

H~ = the corresponding reported exposure for the i1h dosimeter (i.e., the reported exposure)

Hi = the exposure delivered to the i1h irradiated dosimeter (i.e., the delivered exposure) 87

2. Mean Bias For each group of test dosimeters, the mean bias is the average percent /

deviation of the reported result relative to the delivered exposure. The mean percent deviation relative to the delivered exposure is calculated as follows:

where:

H; = the corresponding reported exposure for the i1h dosimeter (i.e., the reported exposure)

H; = the exposure delivered to the i1h irradiated test dosimeter (i.e., the delivered exposure) n = the number of dosimeters in the test group

3. Precision For a group of test dosimeters irradiated to a given exposure, the measure of precision is the percent deviation of individual results relative to the mean reported exposure. At least two values are required for the determination of precision. The measure of precision for the i1h dosimeter is:

where:

H; = the reported exposure for the i1h dosimeter (i.e., the reported exposure)

H= the mean reported exposure; i.e., R IH;(~) =

n = the number of dosimeters in the test group

4. EDC Internal Tolerance Limits All evaluation criteria are taken from the "EDC Quality System Manual,"

(Reference 2). These criteria are only applied to individual test dosimeters irradiated with high-energy photons (Cs-137) and are as follows for Panasonic Environmental dosimeters: +/- 15% for bias and +/-

12.8% for precision.

88

B. QC Investigation Criteria and Result Reporting EDC Quality System Manual (Reference 2) specifies when an investigation is required due to a QC analysis that has failed the EDC bias criteria. The criteria are as follows:

1. No investigation is necessary when an individual QC result falls outside the QC performance criteria for accuracy.

2. Investigations are initiated when the mean of a QC processing batch is outside the performance criterion for bias.

C. Reporting of Environmental Dosimetry Results to EDC Customers

1. All results are to be reported in a timely fashion.

2. If the QA Officer determines that an investigation is required for a process, the results shall be issued as normal. If the QC results, prompting the investigation, have a mean bias from the known of greater ttian +/-20%, the results shall be issued with a note indicating that they may be updated in the future, pending resolution of a QA issue.

3. Environmental dosimetry results do not require updating if the ----.

investigation has shown that the mean bias between the original results and. the corrected results, based on applicable correction factors from the investigation, does not exceed +/-20%.

Ill. DATA

SUMMARY

FOR ISSUANCE PERIOD JANUARY-DECEMBER 2015 A. General Discussion Results of performance tests conducted are summarized and discussed in the following sections. Summaries of the performance tests for the reporting period are given in Tables 1 through 3 and Figures 1 through 4.

Table 1 provides a summary of individual dosimeter results evaluated against the EDC internal acceptance criteria for high-energy photons only. During this period, 100% (72/72) of the individual dosimeters, evaluated against these criteria met the tolerance limits for accuracy and 100% (72/72) met the criterion for precision.

A graphical interpretation is provided in Figures 1 and 2.

Table 2 provides the Bias + Standard deviation results for each group (N=6) of dosimeters evaluated against the internal tolerance criteria. Overall, 100%

( 12/12) of the dosimeter sets evaluated against the internal tolerance performance criteria met these criteria. A graphical interpretation is provided in Figures 3 Table 3 presents the independent blind spike results for dosimeters processed during this annual period. All results passed the performance acceptance criterion. Figure 4 is a graphical interpretation of Seabrook Station blind co-located station results.

89

B. Result Trending One of the main benefits of performing quality control tests on a routine basis is to identify trends or performance changes. The results of the Panasonic environmental dosimeter performance tests are presented in Appendix A. The results are evaluated against each of the performance criteria listed in Section II, namely: individual dosimeter accuracy, individual dosimeter precision, and mean bias.

All of the results presented in Appendix A are plotted sequentially by processing date.

IV. STATUS OF EDC CONDITION REPORTS (CR)

No condition reports were issued during this annual period.

V. STATUS OF AUDITS/ASSESSMENTS A. Internal EDC Internal Quality Assurance Assessment was conducted during the fourth quarter 2015. There were no findings identified.

B. External None.

VI. PROCEDURES AND MANUALS REVISED DURING JANUARY - DECEMBER 2015 Procedure 1052 was revised on December 23, 2015. Several procedures were reissued with no changes as part of the 5 year review cycle.

VII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The quality control evaluations continue to indicate the dosimetry processing programs at the EDC satisfy the criteria specified in the Quality System Manual. The EDC demonstrated the ability to meet all applicable acceptance criteria.

VIII. REFERENCES

1. EDC Qual[ty Control and Audit Assessment Schedule, 2015.

2. EDC Manual 1, Quality System Manual, Rev. 3, August 1, 2012.

90

TABLE 1 PERCENTAGE OF INDIVIDUAL DOSIMETERS THAT PASSED EDC INTERNAL CRITERIA JANUARY - DECEMBER 2015( 1), (2 )

Number  % Passed Precision Dosimeter Type  % Passed Bias Criteria Tested Criteria Panasonic Environmental 72 100 100 1

< lThis table summarizes results of tests conducted by EDC .

2

< lEnvironmental dosimeter results are free in air.

TABLE 2 MEAN DOSIMETER ANALYSES CN=6)

JANUARY - DECEMBER 2015( 1), (2l Standard Tolerance Process Date Exposure Level Mean Bias% Deviation Limit+/.

% 15%

4/16/2015 55 4.5 1.1 Pass 4/28/2015 91 2.7 1.6 Pass 05/07/2015 48 0.3 1.3 Pass 7/22/2015 28 1.5 1.4 Pass 7/24/2015 106 2.9 1.8 Pass 8/06/2015 77 -3 .3 1.3 Pass 10/30/2015 28 3.7 2.2 Pass 11/04/2015 63 2.5 1.0 Pass 11 /22/2015 85 -2 .9 1.7 Pass 1/27/2016 61 3.1 0.9 Pass 1/31/2016 112 2.2 1.3 Pass 2/05/2016 36 3.2 1.4 Pass 1

< lThis table summarizes results of tests conducted by EDC for TLDs issued in 2015.

2

< lEnvironmental dosimeter results are free in air.

TABLE 3

SUMMARY

OF INDEPENDENT DOSIMETER TESTING JANUARY - DECEMBER 2015(1), (2 )

Standard Pass I Fail Issuance Period Client Mean Bias%

Deviation%

1st Qtr. 2015 Millstone -6 .5 2.9 Pass 2nd Qtr.2015 Millstone -2 .2 3.7 Pass 2nd Qtr.2015 Seabrook 1.4 0.9 Pass 3rd Qtr. 2015 Millstone -3.4 1.1 Pass 4th Qtr.2015 Millstone -1.5 2.3 Pass 4th Qtr.2015 Seabrook 0.8 1.8 Pass 1

< >Performance criteria are +/- 30% .

2

< lBlind spike irradiations using Cs-137 91

APPENDIX A DOSIMETRY QUALITY CONTROL TRENDING GRAPHS ISSUE PERIOD JANAURY - DECEMBER 2015 92

INDIVIDUAL ACCURACY ENVIRONMENTAL FIGURE 1 16

.-r.;.000- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

14 12 10 8

6 *

• * * * *

• 4 * * * ** ** * * *

• • * *

• *

• 2 * *** * ** ** * * ** * * * * * *

• en 0 Target = 0

• • • .. *

• *

• *

<(

al -2 * * * * *

• **

';ft

-4 * * **

-6 * *

-8

-10

-12

-14

~ --1s.~-----------------------------------

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~

~

$!

~

~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~

~ ~

rv [')

~ [')

.....

~

~

~ ~ .....~

Q:j

..... .....

PROCESSING DATE 93

INDIVIDUAL PRECISION ENVIRONMENTAL FIGURE 2 16 14 12 -~mr---------------- -------------------------

10 8

6 4

2

• * * *

• z 0 * * ** * ** *** * * * * * * * * ** * * * * *

• Cl)

• *

• * * ** * * * * * * * ** * * *

(.)

w a:::

-2 ** * * * * * *

• a..

0~

-4 *

-6

-8

-10

[*~*-------------------------------------------]

I I I I I I I I I I I i I

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

~

$'

~

~

~

~

~

~

~ ~ ~

'd Clj

'd Clj ~

~"" ~ f\j

....

~

.s ~

(')

.... ~

"' ~

PROCESSING DATE

~

94

MEAN ACCURACY ENVIRONMENTAL FIGURE 3 16

-n.uuu- -----------~

14 12 10 8

6 4 * *

• * *

• 2 *

• Ta =O

• 0 Cl) c(

m -2

'#.

• *

-4

-6

-8

-10

-12

-14

~ --1s.~------------------------------------------

95

SEABROOK CO-LOCATE ACCURACY FIGURE4 22 ~----

20 * '20 . ~ - - ---- - -- - ------------------------------- ------

18 16 14 12 10 8

• 6 *

• 4

• *

• 2

• * *

• 0 Ta =O

• *

• en

-2 * * * * * * *

< -4 *

• co -6 * * *

~

-8 *

-10

• *

-12

-14 *

-16

-18

-20 L0. *-20.000_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ ___ _

-22 ~-.--....--""T""---r---.--r--..,---.----...---.--r--..,---.----...--.----r---.----r---r-'

,,,.

.......

l)o.

EXPECTED FIELD EXPOSURE (mR/STD. QUARTER) 96

7.2 Teledyne Brown Engineering Laboratory- Environmental Services (TBE-ES)

• 7.2.1 Operational Quality Control Scope 7.2.1.1 Inter-laboratory The TBE-ES Laboratory QC Program is designed to monitor the quality of analytical processing associated with environmental, effluent (lOCFR P~rt 50), and waste characterization (lOCFR Part

61) samples.

Quality Control of environmental radioanalyses involves the internal process control program and independent third party programs administered by Analytics, Inc and Environmental Resource Associates (ERA).

TBE..ES participates in the Quality Assessment Program (QAP) administered by the Department of Energy (DOE) Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP). The MAPEP is a set of performance evaluation samples (e.g. water, soil, air filters, etc.) designed to evaluate the ability and quality of analytical facilities performing sample measurements which contain hazardous and radioactive (mixed) analytes.

Quality Control for radioanalyses during this reporting period was divided among internal process check samples, third party process checks prepared by Analytics, Inc. (which was submitted by users or secured directly by TBE-ES for QC purposes), ERA, and DOE's MAPEP.

7.2.1.2 Intra-laboratory The internal Quality Control program is designed to include QC functions _:;;uch as instrumentation checks (to ensure proper instrument response), blank sam.ples (to which no analyte radioactivity has been added), instrumentation backgrounds, duplicates, as well as overall staff qualification analyses and process controls. Both process control and qualification analyses samples seek to mimic the media type of those samples submitted for analyses by the various laboratory clients. These process controls (or process checks) are either actual samples submitted in duplicate in order to evaluate the accuracy of labora,tory measurements, or blank samples which have been "spiked" with a known quantity of a radioisotope that is of interest to laboratory clients. These QC samples, which represent either "single" or "double-blind" unknowns, are intended to evaluate the entire radiochemical and radiometric process.

To provide direction and consistency in administering the quality assurance program, TBE-ES has developed and follows an annual quality control and audit assessment schedule. The plan describes the scheduled frequency and scope of Quality Assurance and Control considered necessary for an adequate QA/QC program conducted throughout the year. The magnitude of the process control program combines both internal and external sources targeted at 5% of the routine sample analysis load.

7.2.1.3 QA Program (Internal and External Audits)

During each reporting period at least one internal assessment is conducted in accordance with the pre-established TBE-ES Quality Control and Audit Assessment Schedule. In addition, the laboratory may be audited by prospective customers during a pre-contract audit, and/or by existing clients who wish to conduct periodic audits in accordance with their contractual 97

arrangements. The Nuclear Utilities Procurement Issues Committee (NUPIC) conducts audits of TBE-ES as a function of a Utilities Radiological Environment Measurement Program (REMP).

TBE-ES Laboratory-Knoxville has successfully completed the Energy Solutions (NIAC audit),

State of Tennessee, Nuclear Utility Procurement Issues Committee (NUPIC), New York State and Department of Health's Environmental Laboratory Approval ~rogram (NELAP) audits.

These audits were each a comprehensive review ofTBE-ES's Quality and Technical programs used to assess the laboratory's ability to produce accurate and defensible data. No significant deficiencies, which would adversely impact data quality, were identified during any of these audits. Administrative findings identified during these inspections are usually addressed promptly, according to client specifications.

7.2.2 Analytical Services Quality Control Synopsis 7.2.2.1 Results Summary 7.2.2.1.1 Environmental Services Quality Control During this annual reporting period, twenty-three nuclides associated with six media types were analyzed by means of the laboratory's internal process control, Analytics, ERA and DOE quality control programs. Media types representative of client company analyses performed during this reporting period were selected. The results for these programs are presented in Tables 7 .2.

Below is a synopsis of the media types evaluated:

• Air Filter

• Charcoal (Air Iodine)

• Milk

• Soil

• Vegetation

• Water 7.2.2.1.2 Analytics Environmental Cross-Check Program Twelve nuclides were evaluated during this reporting period. Iron-55 in water was added to the Analytics program and removed from the DOE MAPEP program in 2010 due to the low level ofFe-55 activity in the MAPEP samples. All but one of the environmental analyses performed were within the acceptable criteria.

7.2.2.1.3 Summary of Participation in the Department of Energy (DOE) Monitoring Program TBE-ES participated in the semi annual Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP) for liquid, air particulate, soil, and vegetation analyses (MAPEP-Series 30 and 31). During this reporting period, 16 nuclides were evaluated. All but five of the environmental analyses performed were within the acceptable criteria.

The Teledyne Brown Engineering's MAPEP March 2015 Sr-90 in soil and AP results were evaluated as failing on the low side. The soil was incompletely digested and this resulted in low results. The U-234-233 low result was difficult to quantify. The Gr-A filter has the activity embedded in the filter. To correct the low bias, TBE will create an 98

attenuated efficiency for MAPEP samples. No Vermont Yankee samples were affected by these failures.

The Teledyne Brown Engineering's MAPEP 2015 September water sample for NI-63 had extremely low activity and was difficult to quantify. The Sr-90 for AP and vegetation was lost during separation, possibly from substance added by MAPEP. No Vermont Yankee samples were affected by these failures.

7.2 ..2.1.5 Summary of participation in the ERA Program During this reporting period, 12 nuclides were analyzed under ERA criteria. Gross alpha in an air particulate by digestion method was added to the ERA program in May 2010.

All except three of the environmental analytica~ results were acceptable.

Teledyne Brown Engineering's ERA 2015 Sr-89 and Sr-90 in water had a yield on the high side of our acceptance range which indicates the possibility of calcium interference.

No Vermont Yankee samples were affected by this failure.

Teledyne Brown Engineering's ERA 2015 U-Nat in water was not diluted by the technician. If diluted, the result would have been 57.1, which fell within the acceptance limits. No Vermont Yankee samples were affected by this failure.

7.2.2.2 Intra-Laboratory Process Control Program The TBE-ES Laboratory's internal process control program evaluated 5433 individual samples.

7.2.2.2.1 Spikes/Matrix Spikes All of the 1548 environmental spikes were analyzed with statistically appropriate activity reported for each spike.

7.2.2.2.2 Analytical Blanks During this reporting period, all of the 1491 environmental analytical blanks analyzed reported less than MDC.

7.2.2.2.3 Duplicates Total All of the 2900 duplicate sets analyzed were within acceptable limits.

7.2.2.2.4 Non-Conformance Reports There were 9 non-conformance reports issued for this reporting period. No ENNVY data was impacted by the non-conformance in each of these cases.

99

8. Land Use Census The Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Off-site Dose Calculation Manual 3/4.5.2 requires that a Land Use Census be conducted annually between the dates of June 1 and October 1. The census identifies the locations of the nearest milk animal and the nearest residence in each of the 16 meteorological sectors within a distance of five miles of the plant. The census also identifies the nearest milk animal (within three miles of the _plant) to the point of predicted highest annual average D/Q (deposition factor for dry deposition of elemental radionuclides and other particulates) value due to elevated releases from the plant stack in each of the three major meteorological sectors. The 2015 Land Use Census was conducted in the summer of2015 in accordance with the ODCM.

Following the collection of field data and in compliance with Off-site Dose Calcul~tion Manual (ODCM)

Section 10 .1, a dosimetric analysis would be performed to compare the census locations to the "critical receptor" identified in the ODCM. This critical receptor is the location that is used in the Method 1 screening dose calculations found in the ODCM (i.e. the dose calculations done in compliance with ODCM Surveillance 4.3.3). If a census location has a 20% greater potential dose than that of the critical receptor, this fact must be announced in the annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report for that period. A re-evaluation of the critical receptor would also be done at that time. No changes in the census data from year 2008 occurred in the 2015 census; therefore no revisions of the 2008 calculations were required.

Pursuant to ODCM 3.5.2.a, a dosimetric analysis would be performed, using site specific meteorological data, to determine which milk animal locations would provide the optimal sampling locations. If any location had experienced a 20% greater potential dose commitment than at a currently sampled location, the new location would be added to the routine environmental sampling program in replacement of the location with the lowest calculated dose (which is eliminated from the program). The 2015 Land Use Census did not identify any locations, meeting the criteria of ODCM Table 3.5.1, with a greater potential dose commitment than at currently sampled locations. No changes to the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) were required based on the Land Use Census.

The results of the 2015 Land Use Census are included in this report in compliance with ODCM 4.5.2 and ODCM 10.2. The locations identified during the census may be found in Table 8.1.

100

TABLE 8.1 2015 LAND USE CENSUS LOCATIONS*

SECTOR NEAREST RESIDENCE NEAREST MILK ANIMAL Km(Mi) Km (Mi)

N 1.4 (0.9) ----

NNE 1.4 (0.9) 5.5 (3.4) Cows NE 1.3 (0.8) ----

~

ENE 1.0 (0.6) ----

E 0.9 (0.6) ----

ESE 1.9 (1.2) ----

SE 2.0 (1.2) 7.i (4.4) Cows SSE 2.1 (1.3) ----

s 0.6 (0.4) 3.6 (2.2) Cows**

SSW 0.8 (0.5) ----

SW 0.4 (0.3) ----

WSW 0.5 (0.3) 9.7 (6.0) Cows w 0.6 (0.4) 0.8 (0.5) Cows WNW 1.1 (0.7) ----

NW 2.3 (1.4) ----

NNW 1.7 (1.1) ----

• Sectors and distances are relative to the plant stack as determined by a Global Positioning System survey conducted in 1997.

• • Location of nearest milk animal within 3 miles of the plant to the point of predicted highest annual average D/Q value in each of the three major meteorological sectors.

101

9.

SUMMARY

During 2015 as in previous years during plant operation, a program was conducted to assess the levels of radiation or radioactivity in the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station environment. Over 900 samples were collected (including TLDs) over the course of the year, with a total of over 2700 radionuclide or exposure rate analyses performed. The samples included groundwater, river water, sediment, fish, milk, silage, mixed grass, storm drain sediment, and storm drain water. In addition to these samples, the air surrounding the plant was sampled continuously and the radiation levels were measured continuously with environmental TLDs.

Three of the objectives of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) are:

• To provide an early indication of the appearance or accumulation of any radioactive material in the environment caused by the operation of the station.

• To provide assurance to regulatory agencies and the public that the station's environmental impact is known and within anticipated limits.

• To verify the adequacy and proper functioning of station effluent controls and monitoring systems ..

Low levels ofradioactivity from three sources (discussed below) were detected in samples collected off-site as a part of the radiological environmental monitoring program. Most samples had measurable levels of naturally-occurring K-40, Be-7, Th-232 or radon daughter products. These are the most common of the naturally-occurring radionuclides.

Samples of sediment contained fallout radioactivity such as Cs-137 froi;n atmospheric nuclear weapons tests conducted primarily from the late 1950s through 1980.

Tritium, at concentrations significantly higher than background levels, was detected in on-site groundwater monitoring wells installed in 2007 and in 2010 in response to industry events and the discovery of primary system leakage from underground Augmented Off Gas (AOG) System condensate return piping into the subsurface groundwater pool under the plant site. The leakage from this piping was terminated in early February, 2010. Extensive sampling and analysis was performed on groundwater samples and other media throughout all of year 2015. Steps to remediate the contamination of the subsurface groundwater layer under the plant site were terminated in December 2014. Additional 102

assessme~t of the dose contribution of radioactive waterborne releases from this event is provided in the 2015 Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report.

10. REFERENCES

1. USNRC Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position, "An Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program," Revision 1, November 1979.

2. NCRP Report No. 94, Exposure of the Population in the United States and Canada from Natural Background Radiation, National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, 1987.

3. Ionizing Radiation: Sources and Biological Effects, United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR), 1982 Report to the General Assembly.

4. Kathren, Ronald L., Radioactivity and the Environment - Sources, Distribution, and Surveillance, Harwood Academic Publishers, New York, 1984.

5. Till, John E. and Robert H. Meyer, ed., Radiological Assessment - A Textbook on Environmental Dose Analysis, NUREG/CR-3332, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C.,

1983.

6. NUREG/CR-3130, Influence of Leach Rate and Other Parameters on Groundwater Migration, February 1983.

7. Vermont Yankee Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM), Revision 35, October 9, 2014.

103