ML14245A196

Pilgrim - Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report for January 1 Through December 31, 2013

ML14245A196
Person / Time
Site:	Pilgrim
Issue date:	05/15/2014
From:	Lynch J R Entergy Nuclear Operations
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
2.14.038
Download: ML14245A196 (180)

Text

Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc..i _ ., I , 0 0 R o c k y H ill R o a d Plymouth, MA 02360 Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station May 15, 2014 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn: Document C(ntrol:-Desk Washington, D1.C.' 20555

SUBJECT:

Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Docket No.: 50-293 License No0.: DPR-35 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report for J-anuaryJ 1through December..31,-2

.3" -LETTER NUMBER: 214.038

Dear Sir or. Madam:

in accordance with Pilgrim Technical Specification:

5.6.2, Entergy Nucle&r Operations, Inc submits the attaiched Annual Radi.ological Environrrental.

Operating Report for6January1, 2013 throughDecember31, 20"13..This letter contains no. cormmitments.

Should yOu have questions-or require additional information, I can .be contacted at (508) 830-8403.Sincerely, Joseph.R.

Lynch Manager, Regulatory Assurance

Attachment:

-

Pilgrim Anual Radiological Envir'onmentalOperatig Report for.Januaiy1,013 throughecembeir j1 20i3 ' " ...: .-cc: U.S. N6er.. Regulatory., Commission M: Nadiyah-MOrgan, Project. Manager-kRegion DiV sion of Operating-ReactorLicensing

.2100 Repaissance BIvd,'Suite 100: .OfficeQfNuclearR.eactor.

Regulatio.n-King-of-:Prussia, PA 19406-271"3 .US Nuilea. Regulatoiy Comrnissii'.

USN-RC Senior Residet ' MaihSt6pi:O-8-F2.

."

nspettor'

.11555Rockvki lie, Pike.. .PilgrimNuc ear P6owerStation Attachment 1 Letter Number 2.14.038 Pilgrim Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report for January 1, 2013 through December 31, 2013 PI.LORIMN NUCLEAR.POWER STATION Facility Operating License DPR-35 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report January 1 through December 31, 2013 PEntergye1 Page I

• En'tergy PILGRIM NUCLEAR POWER STATION Facility Operating License DPR-35 ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL.

OPERATING REPORT JANUARY 01 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2013 A 161 ý-Prepared by: Reviewed by: Reviewed by: 0'r-PAL*, -471-11 K. J. -a7 Senior HPZ7hemistry Specialist/ia nke-nbiller

" Chemistr Superintendent

.57 Brewer Radiation Protection Manager Page 2 Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report January-December 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3.1.4 1.5 2.0 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.9 2.10 2.11 2.12 2.13 2.14 2.15 2.16 2.17 3.0 4.0 APPENDIX A APPENDIX B APPENDIX C APPENDIX D APPENDIX E APPENDIX F APPENDIX G SECTION TITLE EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION Radiation and Radioactivity Sources of Radiation Nuclear Reactor Operations Radioactive Effluent Control Radiological Impact on Humans RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM Pre-Operational Monitoring Results Environmental Monitoring Locations Interpretation of Radioactivity Analyses Results Ambient Radiation Measurements Air Particulate Filter Radioactivity Analyses Charcoal Cartridge Radioactivity Analyses Milk Radioactivity Analyses Forage Radioactivity Analyses Vegetable/Vegetation Radioactivity Analyses Cranberry Radioactivity Analyses Soil Radioactivity Analyses Surface Water Radioactivity Analyses Sediment Radioactivity Analyses Irish Moss Radioactivity Analyses Shellfish Radioactivity Analyses Lobster. Radioactivity Analyses Fish Radioactivity Analyses

SUMMARY

OF RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT ON HUMANS REFERENCES Special Studies Effluent Release Information Land Use Census Environmental Monitoring Program Discrepancies Environmental Dosimetry Company Annual Quality Assurance Status Report J.A. Fitzpatrick Interlaboratory Comparison Program GEL Laboratories LLC 2013 Annual Quality Assurance Report PAGE 6 8 8 9 10 16 18 23 23 24 27 28 29 30 30 31 31 32 32 32 33 33 33 34 34 68 70 71 72 82 83 Page 3 Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report January-December 2013 LIST OF TABLES TABLE TABLE TITLE PAGE 1.2-1 Radiation Sources and Corresponding Doses 9 1.3-1 PNPS Operating Capacity Factor During 2013 10 2.2-1 'Routine Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations 35 2.4-1 Offsite Environmental TLD Results 37 2.4-2 Onsite Environmental TLD Results 39 2.4-3 Average TLD Exposures By Distance Zone During 2013 40 2.5-1 Air Particulate Filter Radioactivity Analyses 41 2.6-1 Charcoal Cartridge Radioactivity Analyses 42 2.7-1 Milk Radioactivity Analyses 43 2.8-1 Forage Radioactivity Analyses 44 2.9-1 VegetableNegetation Radioactivity Analyses 45 2.10-1 Cranberry Radioactivity Analyses 46 2.12-1 Surface Water Radioactivity Analyses 47 2.13-1 Sediment Radioactivity Analyses 48 2.14-1 Irish Moss Radioactivity Analyses 49 2.15-1 Shellfish Radioactivity Analyses 50 2.16-1 Lobster Radioactivity Analyses 51 2.17-1 Fish Radioactivity Analyses 52 3.0-1 Radiation Doses From 2013 Pilgrim Station Operations 69 B.1 Supplemental Information 73 B.2-A Gaseous Effluents Summation of All Releases 74 B.2-B Gaseous Effluents

-Elevated Releases 75 B.2-C Gaseous Effluents

-Ground Level Releases 77 B.3-A Liquid Effluents Summation of All Releases 79 B.3-B Liquid Effluents:

January-December 2013 80 Page 4 Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report January-December 2013 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE FIGURE TITLE PAGE 1.3-1 Radioactive Fission Product Formation 12 1.3-2 Radioactive Activation Product Formation 13 1.3-3 Barriers to Confine Radioactive Materials 14 1.5-1 Radiation Exposure Pathways 20 2.2-1 Environmental TLD Locations Within the PNPS Protected Area 53 2.2-2 TLD and Air Sampling Locations:

Within 1 Kilometer 55 2.2-3 TLD and Air Sampling Locations:

1 to 5 Kilometers 57 2.2-4 TLD and Air Sampling Locations:

5 to 25 Kilometers 59 2.2-5 Terrestrial and Aquatic Sampling Locations 61 2.2-6 Environmental Sampling and Measurement Control Locations 63 2.5-1 Airborne Gross Beta Radioactivity Levels: Near Station Monitors 65 2.5-2 Airborne Gross Beta Radioactivity Levels: Property Line Monitors 66 2.5-3 Airborne Gross Beta Radioactivity Levels: Offsite Monitors 67 Page 5 EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

ENTERGY NUCLEAR PILGRIM NUCLEAR POWER STATION ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT JANUARY 01 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2013 INTRODUCTION This report summarizes the results of the Entergy Nuclear Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) conducted in the vicinity of Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station (PNPS) during the period from January 1 to December 31, 2013. This document has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of PNPS Technical Specifications section 5.6.2.The REMP has been established to monitor the radiation and radioactivity released to the environment as a result of Pilgrim Station's operation.

This program, initiated in August 1968, includes the collection, analysis, and evaluation of. radiological data in order to assess the impact of Pilgrim Station on the environment and on the general public.SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS The environmental sampling media collected in the vicinity of PNPS and at distant locations include air particulate filters, charcoal cartridges, animal forage, vegetation, cranberries, seawater, sediment, Irish moss, shellfish, American lobster, and fishes.During 2013, there were 1,230 samples collected from the atmospheric, aquatic, and terrestrial environments.

In addition, 431 exposure measurements were obtained using environmental thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs).A small number of inadvertent issues were encountered during 2013 in the collection of environmental samples in accordance with the PNPS Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM).Nine out of 440 TLDs were unaccounted for during the quarterly retrieval process. However, the 431 TLDs that were collected provided the information necessary to assess ambient radiation levels in the vicinity of Pilgrim Station. Equipment failures and power outages resulted in a small number of instances in which lower than normal volumes were collected at the airborne sampling stations.

In some cases, outages were of sufficient duration to yield no sample, and 563 of 572 air particulate and charcoal cartridges were collected and analyzed as required.

A full description of any discrepancies encountered with the environmental monitoring program is presented in Appendix D of this report.There were 1,286 analyses performed on the environmental media samples. Analyses were performed by the J.A. Fitzpatrick Environmental Laboratory in Fulton, New York. Samples were analyzed as required by the PNPS ODCM.LAND USE CENSUS The annual land use census in the vicinity of Pilgrim Station was conducted as required by the PNPS ODCM between September 09 and September 20, 2013. A total of 30 vegetable gardens having an area of more than 500 square feet were identified within five kilometers (three miles) of PNPS. No new milk or meat animals were located during the census. Of the 30 garden locations identified, samples were collected at or near three of the gardens as part of the environmental Page 6 monitoring program. Other samples of natural vegetation were also collected in predicted high-deposition areas.RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT TO THE ENVIRONMENT During 2013, samples (except charcoal cartridges) collected as part of the REMP at Pilgrim Station continued to contain detectable amounts of naturally-occurring and man-made radioactive materials.

No samples indicated any detectable radioactivity attributable to Pilgrim Station operations.

Offsite ambient radiation measurements using environmental TLDs beyond the site boundary ranged between 40 and 76 milliRoentgens per year. The range of ambient radiation levels observed with the TLDs is consistent with natural background radiation levels for Massachusetts.

RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC During 2013, radiation doses to the general public as a result of Pilgrim Station's operation continued to be well below the federal limits and much less than the collective dose due to other sources of man-made (e.g., X-rays, medical, fallout) and naturally-occurring (e.g., cosmic, radon)radiation.

The calculated total body dose. to the maximally exposed member of the general public from radioactive effluents and ambient radiation resulting from PNPS operations for 2013 was about 0.9 mrem for the year. This conservative estimate is well. below the EPA's annual dose limit to any member of the general public and is a fraction of a percent of the typical dose received from natural and man-made radiation.

CONCLUSIONS The 2013 Radiological Environmental Monitoring P'rogram for Pilgrim -Station resulted in the collection and analysis of hundreds of environmental samples and measurements.

The data obtained -were used to determine the impact of Pilgrim Station's operation on the environment and on the general public.An evaluation of direct radiation measurements, environmental sample analyses, and dose calculations showed that all applicable federal criteria were met. Furthermore, radiation levels and resulting doses were a small fraction of those that are normally present due to natural and man-made background radiation.

Based on this information, there is no significant radiological impact on the environment or on the general public due to Pilgrim Station's operation.

Page 7

1.0 INTRODUCTION

The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program for 2013 performed by Entergy Nuclear Company for Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station (PNPS) is discussed in this report. Since the operation of a nuclear power plant results in the .release of small amounts of radioactivity and low levels of radiation, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) requires a program to be established to monitor radiation and radioactivity in the environment (Reference 1). This report, which is required to be published annually by Pilgrim Station's Technical Specifications section 5-.6.2, summarizes .the results of measurements of radiation and radioactivity in the environment in the vicinity of the Pilgrim Station and at distant locations during the period January 1 to December 31, 2013.The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program consists of taking radiation measurements and collecting samples from the environment, analyzing them for radioactivity content, and interpreting the results. With emphasis on the critical radiation exposure pathways to humans, samples from. the aquatic, atmospheric, and terrestrial environments are collected.

These samples include, but are not limited to: air, animal forage, vegetation, cranberries, seawater, sediment, Irish moss, shellfish, American lobster, and fish. Thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) are placed in the environment to measure gamma radiation levels. The TLDs are processed and the environmental samples are analyzed to measure the very low levels of radiation and radioactivity present in the environment as a result of PNPS operation and other natural and man-made sources. These results are reviewed by PNPS's Chemistry staff and have been reported semiannually or annually to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and others since 1972.In order to more fully understand how a nuclear power plant impacts humans and the environment, background information on radiation and radioactivity, natural, and man-made sources of radiation, reactor operations, radioactive effluent controls, and radiological impact on humans is provided.

It is believed that this information will assist the reader in understanding the radiological impact on the environment and humans from the operation of Pilgrim Station.1.1 .Radiation and Radioactivity All matter is made of atoms. An atom is the smallest part into which matter can be broken down and still maintain all its chemical properties.

Nuclear radiation is energy, in the form of waves or particles that is given off by unstable, radioactive atoms.Radioactive material exists naturally and has always been a part of our environment.

The earth's crust, for example, contains radioactive uranium, radium, thorium, and potassium.

Some radioactivity is a result of nuclear weapons testing. Examples of radioactive fallout that is normally present in environmental samples are cesium-137 and strontium-90.

Some examples of radioactive materials released from a nuclear power plant are cesium-1 37, iodine-1 31, strontium-90, and cobalt-60.Radiation is measured in units of millirem, much like temperature is measured in degrees. A millirem is a measure of the biological effect of the energy deposited in tissue. The natural and man-made radiation dose received in one year by the average American is about 620 mrem (References 2, 3, 4).Radioactivity is measured in curies. A curie is that amount of radioactive material needed to produce 37,000,000,000 nuclear disintegrations per second. This is an extremely large amount of radioactivity in comparison to environmental radioactivity.

That is why radioactivity in the environment is measured in picocuries.

One picocurie is equal to one trillionth of a curie.Page 8 1.2 Sources of Radiation As mentioned previously, naturally occurring radioactivity has always been a part of our environment.

Table 1.2-1 shows the sources and doses of radiation from natural and man-made sources.Table 1.2-1 Radiation Sources and Corresponding Doses (1)NATURAL MAN-MADE Radiation Dose Radiation Dose Source (millirem/year)

Source (millirem/year)

Internal, inhalation(2) 230 MedicaI(3) 300 External, space 30 Consumerý4) 12 Internal, ingestion 30 Industrial(s) 0.6 External, terrestrial 20 Occupational 0.6 Weapons Fallout < 1 Nuclear Power Plants < 1 Approximate Total 310 Approximate Total 315 Combined Annual Average Dose: Approximately 620 to 625 millirem/year (1) Information from NCRP Reports 160 and 94 (2) Primarily from airborne radon and its radioactive progeny (3) Includes CT (150 millirem), nuclear medicine (74 mrem), interventional fluoroscopy (43 mrem) and conventional radiography and fluoroscopy (30 mrem)(4) Primarily from cigarette smoking (4.6 mrem), commercial air travel (3.4 mrem), building materials (3.5 mrem), and mining and agriculture (0.8 mrem)(5) Industrial, security, medical, educational, and research Cosmic radiation from the sun and outer space penetrates the earth's atmosphere and continuously bombards us with rays and charged particles.

Some of this cosmic radiation interacts with gases and particles in the atmosphere, making them radioactive in turn. These radioactive byproducts from cosmic ray bombardment are referred to as cosmogenic radionuclides.

Isotopes such as beryllium-7 and carbon-14 are formed in this way. Exposure to cosmic and cosmogenic sources of radioactivity results in about 30 mrem of radiation dose per year.Additionally, natural radioactivity is in our body and in the food we eat (about 30 millirem/yr), the ground we walk on (about 20 millirem/yr) and the air we breathe (about 230 millirem/yr).

The majority of a person's annual dose results from exposure to radon and thoron in the air we breathe. These gases and their radioactive decay products arise from the decay of naturally occurring uranium, thorium and radium in the soil and building products such as brick, stone, and concrete.

Radon and thoron levels vary greatly with location, primarily due to changes in the concentration of uranium and thorium in the soil. Residents at some locations in Colorado, -New York, Pennsylvania, and New Jersey have a higher annual dose as a result of higher levels of radon/thoron gases in these areas.Page 9 In total, these various sources of naturally-occurring radiation and radioactivity contribute to a total dose of about 310 mrem per year.In addition to natural radiation, we are normally exposed to radiation from a number of man-made sources. The single largest doses from man-made sources result from therapeutic and diagnostic applications of x-rays and radiopharmaceuticals.

The annual dose to an individual, in the U.S. from medical and dental exposure is about 300 mrem. Consumer activities, such as smoking, commercial air travel, and building materials contribute about 13 mrem/yr. Much smaller doses result from weapons fallout (less than 1 mremlyr) and nuclear power plants. Typically, the average person in the United States receives about 314 mrem per year from man-made sources. The collective dose from naturally-occurring and man-made sources results in a total dose of approximately 620 mrem/yr to the average American.1.3 Nuclear Reactor Operations Pilgrim Station generates about 700 megawatts of electricity at full power, which is enough electricity to supply the entire city of Boston, Massachusetts.

Pilgrim Station is a boiling water reactor whose.nuclear steam supply system was provided by General Electric Co. The nuclear station is located on a 1600-acre site about eight kilometers (five miles) east-southeast of the downtown area of Plymouth, Massachusetts.

Commercial'operation began in December 1972.Pilgrim Station was operational during most of 2013, with the exception of the refueling outage that occurred between mid-April through May. The resulting monthly capacity factors are presented in Table 1.3-1.TABLE 1.3-1 PNPS OPERATING CAPACITY FACTOR DURING 2013 (Based on rated reactor thermal power of 2028 Megawatts-Thermal)

Month Percent Capacity January 69.3%February 68.8%March 92.8%April 38.9%May 1.8%June 97.0%July 99.6%August .76.8%September 67.7%October 76.7%November 99.0%December 86.8%Annual Average 72.9%Page 10 Nuclear-generated electricity is produced at Pilgrim Station by many of the same techniques used for conventional oil and coal-generated electricity.

Both systems use heat to boil water to produce steam. The steam turns a turbine, which turns a generator, producing electricity.

In both cases, the steam passes through a condenser where it changes back into water and recirculates back through the system. The cooling water source for Pilgrim Station is the Cape Cod Bay.The key difference between Pilgrim's nuclear power and conventional power is the source of heat used to boil the water. Conventional plants bum fossil fuels in a boiler, while nuclear plants make use of uranium in a nuclear reactor.Inside the reactor, a nuclear reaction called fission takes place. Particles, called neutrons, strike the nucleus of a uranium-235 atom, causing it to split into fragments called radioactive fission products.The splitting of the atoms releases both heat and more neutrons.

The newly-released neutrons then collide with and split other uranium atoms, thus making more heat and releasing even more neutrons, and on and on until the uranium fuel is depleted or spent. This process is called a chain reaction.The operation of a nuclear reactor results in the release of small amounts of radioactivity and low levels of radiation.

The radioactivity originates from two major sources, radioactive fission products and radioactive activation products.Radioactive fission products, as illustrated in Figure 1.3-1 (Reference 5), originate from the fissioning of the nuclear fuel. These fission products get into the reactor coolant from their release by minute amounts of uranium on the outside surfaces of the fuel cladding, by diffusion through the fuel pellets and cladding and, on occasion, through defects or failures in the fuel cladding.

These fission products circulate along with the reactor coolant water and will deposit on the internal surfaces of pipes and equipment.

The radioactive fission products on the pipes and equipment emit radiation.

Examples of some fission products are krypton-85 (Kr-85), strontium-90 (Sr-90), iodine-131 (1-131), xenon-1 33 (Xe-1 33), and cesium-1 37 (Cs-1 37).Page 11 Nuclear Fission Fission is the splitting of the uranium-235 atom by a neutron to release heat and more neutrons, cr-eating a chain reaction.Radiation and fission products are by-products of the process.L-,Radiation Neutron Uranium Uranium Fission Products Figure 1.3-1 Radioactive Fission Product Formation Page 12 Radioactive activation products (see Figure. 1.3-2), on the other hand, originate from two sources.The first is by neutron bombardment of the hydrogen, oxygen and other gas (helium, argon, nitrogen) molecules in the reactor cooling water. The second is a result of the fact that the internals of any piping system or component are subject to minute yet constant corrosion from the reactor cooling water. These minute metallic particles (for example: nickel, iron, cobalt, or magnesium) are transported through the reactor core into the fuel region, where neutrons may react with the nuclei of these particles, producing radioactive products.

So, activation products are nothing more than ordinary naturally-occurring atoms that are made unstable or radioactive by neutron bombardment.

These activation products circulate along with the reactor coolant water and will deposit on the internal surfaces of pipes and equipment.

The radioactive activation products on the pipes and equipment emit radiation.

Examples of some activation products are manganese-54 (Mn-54), iron-59 (Fe-59), cobalt-60 (Co-60), and zinc-65 (Zn-65).-[N-In,=m==Co-59 Neutron Stable Cobalt Nucleus Radioactive Cobalt Nucleus.Figure 1.3-2 Radioactive Activation Product Formation At Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station there are five independent protective barriers that confine these radioactive materials.

These five barriers, which are shown in Figure 1.3-3 (Reference 5), are:* .fuel pellets;* fuel cladding;* reactor vessel and piping;* primary containment (drywell and torus); and,* secondary containment (reactor building).

Page 13 SIMPLIFIED DIAGRAM OF A BOILING WATER REACTOR 3. REACTOR VESSEL 1. FUEL PELLETS 2. FU REACTOR BUILDING 4. PRIMARY CONTAINMENT

5. SEC 1A ONDARY CONTAINMENT DRVINELL Figure 1.3-3 Barriers To Confine Radioactive Materials Page 14 The ceramic uranium fuel pellets provide the first barrier. Most of the radioactive fission products are either physically trapped or chemically bound between the uranium atoms, where they will remain.However, a few fission products that are volatile or gaseous may diffuse through the fuel pellets into small gaps between the pellets and the fuel cladding.The second barrier, the fuel cladding, consists of zirconium alloy tubes that confine the fuel pellets.The small gaps between the fuel and the cladding contain the noble gases and volatile iodines that are types of radioactive fission products.

This radioactivity can diffuse to a small extent through the fuel cladding into the reactor coolant water.The third barrier consists of the reactor pressure vessel, steel piping and equipment that confine the reactor cooling water. The reactor pressure vessel, which holds the reactor fuel, is a 65-foot high by 19-foot diameter tank with steel walls about nine inches thick. This provides containment for radioactivity in the primary coolant and the reactor core. However, during the course of operations and maintenance, small amounts of radioactive fission and activation products can escape through valve leaks or upon breaching of the primary coolant system for maintenance.

The fourth barrier is the primary containment.

This consists of the drywell and the torus. The drywell is a steel lined enclosure that is shaped like an inverted light bulb. An approximately five foot thick concrete wall encloses the drywell's steel pressure vessel. The torus is a donut-shaped pressure suppression chamber. The steel walls of the torus are nine feet in diameter with the donut itself having an outside diameter of about 130 feet. Small amounts of radioactivity may be released from primary containment during maintenance.

The fifth barrier is the secondary containment or reactor building.

The reactor building is the concrete building that surrounds the primary containment.

This barrier is an additional safety feature to contain radioactivity that may escape from thie primary containment.

This reactor building is equipped with a filtered ventilation system that is used when needed to reduce the radioactivity that escapes from the primary containment.

The five barriers confine most of the radioactive fission and activation products.

However, small amounts of radioactivity do escape via mechanical failures and maintenance on valves, piping, and equipment associated with the reactor cooling water system. The small amounts of radioactive liquids and gases that do escape the various containment systems are further controlled by the liquid purification and ventilation filtration systems. Also, prior to a release to the environment, control systems exist to collect and purify the radioactive effluents in order to reduce releases to the environment to as low as is reasonably achievable.

The control of radioactive effluents at Pilgrim Station will bediscussed in more detail in the next section.Page 15 1.4 Radioactive Effluent Control The small amounts of radioactive liquids and gases that might escape the five barriers are purified in the liquid and gaseous waste treatment systems, then monitored for radioactivity, and released only if the radioactivity levels are below the federal release limits.Radioactivity released from the liquid effluent system to the environment is limited, controlled, and monitored by a variety of systems and procedures which include:* reactor water cleanup system;* liquid radwaste treatment system;* sampling and analysis of the liquid radwaste tanks; and,* liquid waste effluent discharge header radioactivity monitor.The purpose of the reactor water cleanup system is to continuously purify the reactor cooling water by removing radioactive atoms and non-radioactive impurities that may become activated by neutron bombardment.

A portion of the reactor coolant water is diverted from the primary coolant system and is directed through ion exchange resins where radioactive elements, dissolved and suspended in the water, are removed through chemical processes.

The net effect is a substantial reduction of the radioactive material that is present in the primary coolant water and consequently the amount of radioactive material that might escape from the system.Reactor cooling water that might escape the primary cooling system and other radioactive water sources are collected in floor and equipment drains. These drains direct' this radioactive liquid waste to large holdup tanks. The liquid waste collected in the tanks is purified again using the liquid radwaste treatment system, which consists of a filter and ion exchange resins.Processing of liquid radioactive waste results in large reductions of radioactive liquids discharged into Cape Cod Bay. Of all wastes processed through liquid radwaste treatment, 90 to 95 percent of all wastes are purified and the processed liquid is re-used in plant systems.Prior to release, the radioactivity in the liquid radwaste tank is sampled and analyzed to determine if the level of radioactivity is below the release limits and to quantify the total amount of radioactive liquid effluent that would be released.

If the levels are below the federal release limits, the tank is drained to the liquid effluent discharge header.This liquid waste effluent discharge header is provided with a shielded radioactivity monitor. This detector is connected to a radiation level meter and a strip chart recorder in the Control Room. The radiation alarm is set so that the detector will alarm before radioactivity levels exceed the release limits. The liquid effluent discharge header has an isolation valve. If an alarm is received, the liquid effluent discharge valve will automatically close, thereby terminating the release to the Cape Cod Bay and preventing any liquid radioactivity from being released that may exceed the release limits.An audible alarm notifies the Control Room operator that this has occurred.Some liquid waste sources which have a low potential for containing radioactivity, and/or may contain very low levels of contamination, may be discharged directly to the discharge canal without passing through the liquid radwaste discharge header. One such source ofliquids is the neutralizing.

sump. However, prior to discharging such liquid wastes, the tank is thoroughly mixed and a representative sample iscollected for analysis of radioactivity content prior to being discharged.

Page 16 Another means for adjusting liquid effluent concentrations to below federal limits is by mixing plant cooling water from the condenser with the liquid effluents in the discharge canal. This larger volume of cooling water further dilutes the radioactivity levels far below the release limits.The preceding discussion illustrates that many controls exist to reduce the radioactive liquid effluents released to the Cape Cod Bay to as far below the release limits as is reasonably achievable.

Radioactive releases from the radioactive gaseous effluent system to the environment are limited, controlled, and monitored by a variety of systems and procedures which include:* reactor building ventilation system;* reactor building vent effluent radioactivity monitor;* sampling and analysis of reactor building vent effluents;

• standby gas treatment system;* main stack effluent radioactivity monitor and sampling;* sampling and analysis of main stack effluents;

• augmented off-gas system;* steam jet air ejector (SJAE) monitor; and,* off-gas radiation monitor.The purpose of the reactor building ventilation system is to collect and exhaust reactor building air.Air collected from cont aminated areas is filtered prior to combining it with air collected from other parts of the building.

This combined airflow is then directed to the reactor building ventilation plenum that is located on the side of the reactor building.

This plenum; which vents to the atmosphere, is equipped with a radiation detector.

The radiation level meter and strip chart recorder for the reactor building vent effluent radioactivity monitor is located in the Control Room. To supplement the information continuously provided by the detector, air samples are taken periodically from the reactor building vent and are analyzed to quantify the total amount of tritium and radioactive gaseous and particulate effluents released.If air containing elevated amounts of noble gases is routed past the reactor building vent's effluent radioactivity monitor, an alarm will alert the Control Room operators that release limits are being approached.

The Control Room operators, according to procedure, will isolate the reactor building Ventilation system and initiate the standby gas treatment system to remove airborne particulates and gaseous halogen radioactivity from the reactor building exhaust. This filtration assembly consists-of high-efficiency particulate air filters and charcoal adsorber beds. The purified air is then directed to the main stack. The main stack has dilution flow that further reduces concentration levels of gaseous releases to the environment to as far below the release limits as is reasonably achievable.

The approximately 335 foot tall main stack has a special probe inside it that withdraws a portion of the air and passes it through a radioactivity monitoring system. This main stack effluent radioactivity monitoring system continuously samples radioactive particulates, iodines, and noble gases. Grab samples for a tritium analysis are also collected at this location.

The system also contains radioactivity detectors that monitor the levels of radioactive noble gases in the stack flow and display the result on radiation level meters and strip chart recorders located in the Control Room. To supplement the information continuously provided by the detectors, the particulate, iodine, tritium, and gas samples are analyzed periodically to quantify, the total amount of radioactive gaseous effluent being released.The purpose of the augmented off-gas .system is to reduce the radioactivity from the gases that are removed from the condenser, This purification system consists of two 30-minute holdup lines to Page 17 reduce the radioactive gases with short half-lives, several charcoal adsorbers to remove radioactive iodines and further retard the short half-life gases, and offgas filters to remove radioactive particulates.

The recombiner collects free hydrogen and oxygen gas and recombines them into water. This helps reduce the gaseous releases of short-lived isotopes of oxygen that have been made radioactive by neutron activation.

The radioactive off-gas from the condenser is then directed into a ventilation pipe to which the off-gas radiation monitors are attached.

The radiation level meters and strip chart recorders for this detector are also located in the Control Room. If a radiation alarm setpoint is exceeded, an audible alarm will sound to alert the Control Room operators.

In addition, the off-gas bypass and charcoal adsorber inlet valve will automatically re-direct the off-gas into the charcoal adsorbers if they are temporarily being bypassed.

If the radioactivity levels are not returned to below the alarm setpoint within 13 minutes, the off-gas releases will be automatically isolated, thereby preventing any gaseous radioactivity from being released that may exceed the release limits.Therefore, for both liquid and gaseous releases, radioactive effluent control systems exist to collect and purify the radioactive effluents in order to reduce releases to the environment to as low as is reasonably achievable.

The effluents are always monitored, sampled and analyzed prior to release to make sure that radioactivity levels are below the release limits. If the release limits are being approached, isolation valves in some of the waste effluent lines will automatically shut to stop the release, or Control Room operators will implement procedures to ensure that federal regulatory limits are always met.1.5 Radiological Impact on Humans The final step in the effluent control process is the determination.of the radiological dose impact to humans and comparison with the federal dose limits to the public. As mentioned previously, the purpose of continuous radiation monitoring and periodic sampling and analysis is to measure the quantities of radioactivity being released to determine compliance with the radioactivity release limits.This is the first stage for assessing releases to the environment.

Next, calculations of the dose impact to the general public from Pilgrim Station's radioactive effluents are performed.

The purpose of these calculations is to periodically assess the doses to the general public resulting from radioactive effluents to ensure that these doses are being maintained as far below the federal dose limits as is reasonably achievable.

This is the second stage for assessing releases to the environment.

The types and quantities of radioactive liquid and gaseous effluents released from Pilgrim Station during each given year are reported to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission annually.

The 2013 Radioactive Effluents are provided in Appendix B and will be discussed in more detail in Section 3 of this report. These liquid and gaseous effluents were well below the federal release limits and were a small percentage of the PNPS ODCM effluent control limits.These measurements of the physical and chemical nature of the effluents are used to determine how the radionuclides will interact with the environment and how they can result in radiation exposure to humans. The environmental interaction mechanisms depend upon factors such as the hydrological (water) and meteorological (atmospheric) characteristics in the area. Information on the water flow, wind speed, wind direction, and atmospheric mixing characteristics are used to estimate how radioactivity will distribute and disperse in the ocean and the atmosphere..Page 18 The most important type of information that is used to evaluate the radiological impact on humans is data on the .use of the environment.

Information on fish and shellfish consumption, boating usage, beach usage, locations of cows and goats, locations of residences, locations of gardens, drinking water supplies, and other usage information are utilized to estimate the amount of radiation and radioactivity received by the general public.The radiation exposure pathway to humans is the path radioactivity takes from its release point at Pilgrim Station to its effect on man. The movement of radioactivity through the environment and its transport to humans is portrayed in Figure 1.5-1.Page 19 EXAMPLES OF PILGRIM STATION'S RADIATION.

EXPOSURE.

PATHWAYS) GASEOUS ( EFFLUENTS:

LIQUID EFFLUENTS 4. DIRECT RADIATION-(SOIL DEPOSITION)(AIR SUBMERSION)

1. SHORELINE DIRECT RADIATION (FISHING, PICNICJNG)

_2. DIRECT RADIATION (IMMERSION IN OCEAN;BOATING, SWIMMIG 6. CONSUMPTION (MILK AND MEAT INGESTION 1COSMTN 3.ISCONSUMPTFION)

Figure 1.5-1 Radiation-Exposure Pathways Page 20 There are three major ways in which liquid effluents affect humans:* external radiation from liquid effluents that deposit and accumulate on the shoreline;

• external radiation from immersion in ocean water containing radioactive liquids; and,* internal radiation from consumption of fish and shellfish containing radioactivity absorbed from the liquid effluents.

There are six major ways in which gaseous effluents affect humans: " external radiation from an airborne plume of radioactivity;

• internal radiation from inhalation of airborne radioactivity;

• external radiation from deposition of radioactive effluents on soil;* ambient (direct) radiation from contained sources at the power plant;* internal radiation from consumption of vegetation containing radioactivity deposited on vegetation or absorbed from the soil due to ground deposition of radioactive effluents; and," internal radiation from consumption of milk and meat containing radioactivity deposited on forage that is eaten by.cattle and other livestock.

In addition, ambient (direct) radiation emitted from contained sources of radioactivity at PNPS contributes to radiation exposure in the vicinity of the plant. Radioactive nitrogen-16 contained in the steam flowing through the turbine accounts for the majority of this "sky shine" radiation exposure immediately adjacent to the plant. Smaller amounts of ambient radiation result from low-level radioactive waste stored at the site prior to shipping and disposal.To the extent possible, the radiological dose impact on humans is based on direct measurements of radiation/and'radioactivity in the environment.,.

When PNPS-related activity is detected in samples that represent a plausible exposure pathway, the resulting dose from such exposure is assessed (see Appendix.A).

However, the operation of Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station results in releases of only small amounts of radioactivity, and, as a result of dilution in the atmosphere and ocean, even the most sensitive radioactivity measurement and analysis techniques cannot usually detect these tiny amounts of radioactivity above that which is naturally present in the environment.

Therefore, radiation doses are calculated using radioactive effluent release data and computerized dose calculations that are based on very conservative NRC-recommended models that tend to result in over-estimates of resulting dose. These computerized dose calculations are performed by or for Entergy Nuclear, personnel.

These computer codes use the guidelines and methodology set forth by the NRC in Regulatory Guide 1.109 (Reference 6). The dose calculations are documented and described in detail in the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station's Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (Reference 7), which has been reviewed by the NRC.Monthly dose calculations are performed by PNPS personnel..

It should be emphasized that because of the very conservative assumptions made in the computer code calculations, the maximum hypothetical dose to an individual is considerably higher than the dose that would actually be received by a real individual.

After dose calculations are performed, the results are compared to the federal dose limits for the public. The two federal agencies that are charged with the responsibility of protecting the public from radiation and radioactivity are. the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).Page 21 The NRC, in 10CFR 20.1301 (Reference

8) limits the levels of radiation to unrestricted areas resulting from the possession or use of radioactive materials such that they limit any individual to a dose of:* less than or equal to 100 mrem per year to the total body..In addition to this dose limit, the NRC has established design objectives for nuclear plant licensees.

Conformance to these guidelines ensures that nuclear power reactor effluents are maintained as far below the legal limits as is reasonably achievable.

The NRC, in 10CFR 50 Appendix I (Reference

9) establishes design objectives for the dose to a member of the general public from radioactive material in liquid effluents released to unrestricted areas to be limited to: " less than or equal to 3 mrem per year to the total body; and," less than or equal to 10 mrem per year to any organ.The air dose due to release of noble gases in gaseous effluents is restricted to:* less than or equal to 10 mrad per year for gamma radiation; and,* less than or equal to 20 mrad per year for beta radiation.

The dose to a member of the general public from iodine-1 31, tritium, and all particulate radionuclides with half-lives greater than 8 days in gaseous effluents is limited to:* less than or equal to 15 mrem per year to any organ., The EPA, in 40CFR1 90.10 Subpart B (Reference 10), sets forth the environmental standards for the uranium fuel cycle. During normal operation, the annual dose to any member of the public from the entire uranium fuel cycle shall be limited to:* less than or equal to 25 mrem per year to the total body;* less than or equal to 75 mrem per year to the thyroid; and," less than or equal to 25 mrem per year to any other organ.The summary of the 2013 radiological impact for Pilgrim Station and comparison with the EPA dose limits and guidelines, as well as a comparison with natural/man-made radiation levels, is presented in Section 3 of this report.The third stage of assessing releases to the environment is the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP). The description and results of the REMP at Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station during 2013 is discussed in Section 2 of this report.Page 22 2.0 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM 2.1 Pre-Operational Monitoring Results The Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) at Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station was first initiated in August 1968, in the form of a pre-operational monitoring program prior to bringing the station on-line. The NRC's intent (Reference

11) with performing a pre-operational environmental monitoring program is to:.measure background levels and their variations in the environment in the area surrounding the licensee's station; and,* evaluate procedures, equipment, and techniques for monitoring radiation and radioactivity in.the environment.

The pre-operational program (Reference

12) continued for approximately three and a half years, from August 1968 to June 1972. Examples of background radiation and radioactivity, levels measured during this time period are as follows:* Airborne Radioactivity Particulate Concentration (gross beta): 0.02 -1.11 pCi/m 3:* Ambient Radiation (TLDs): 4.2 -22 micro-R/hr (37 -190 mRPyr);* Seawater Radioactivity.Concentrations (gross beta): 12 -31 pCi/liter;

• Fish Radioactivity Concentrations(gross beta): 2,200 -11,300 pCi/kg;* Milk Radioactive Cesium-1 37 Concentrations:

9.3 -32 pCi/liter;

• Milk Radioactive Strontium-90 Concentrations:

4.7 -17.6 pCi/liter;

• Cranberries Radioactive Cesium-137 Concentrations:

140 -450 pCi/kg;* Forage Radioactive Cesium-1 37 Concentrations:

150 -290 pCi/kg.This information from the pre-operational phase is used as a basis for evaluating changes in radiation and radioactivity levels in the vicinity of the plant following plant operation.

In April 1972, just prior to initial reactor startup (June 12, 1972), Boston Edison Company implemented a comprehensive operational environmental monitoring program at Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station.This program (Reference

13) provides information on radioactivity and radiation levels in the environment for the purpose of:.demonstrating that doses to the general public and levels of radioactivity in the environment are within established limits and legal requirements; monitoring the transfer and long-term buildup of specific radionuclides in the environment to revise the monitoring program and environmental models in response to changing conditions; checking the condition of the station's operation, the adequacy of operation in relation to the.adequacy of containment, and the effectiveness of effluent treatment so as to provide a mechanism of determining unusual or unforeseen conditions and, where appropriate, to trigger special environmental monitoring studies;assessing the dose equivalent to the general public and the behavior of radioactivity released during the unlikely event of an accidental release; and, Page 23

• . determining whether or not the radiological impact on the environment and humans is significant.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission requires that Pilgrim Station provide monitoring of the plant environs for radioactivity that will be released as a result of normal operations, including anticipated operational occurrences, and from postulated accidents.

The NRC. has established guidelines (Reference

14) that specify an acceptable monitoring program. The PNPS Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program was designed to meet andexceed these guidelines.

Guidance contained in the NRC's Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position on Environmental Monitoring (Reference

15) has been used to improve the program. In addition, the program has incorporated the provisions of an agreement made with the Massachusetts Wildlife Federation (Reference 16). The program was supplemented by including improved analysis of shellfish and sediment at substantially higher sensitivity levels to verify the adequacy of effluent controls at Pilgrim Station.2.2 Environmental Monitoring Locations Sampling locations have been established by considering meteorology, population distribution,.

hydrology, and land use .characteristics of the Plymouth area. The sampling locations are divided into two classes, indicator and control. Indicator locations are those that are expected to show effects from PNPS operations, if any exist. These locations were primarily selected on the basis of where the highest predicted environmental concentrations would occur. While the indicator locations are typically within a few kilometers of the plant, the control stations are generally located so as to be outside the influence of Pilgrim Station. They -provide a basis on which to. evaluate fluctuations at indicator locations relative to natural background radiation and natural radioactivity and fallout from prior nuclear weapons tests.The environmental sampling media collected in the.vicinity of Pilgrim Station during 2013 included air particulate filters, charcoal cartridges, animal forage, vegetation, cranberries, seawater, sediment, Irish moss, shellfish, American lobster, and fishes. The sampling mediumn, station description, station number, distance, and direction for indicator and control samples are listed in Table 2.2-1.These sampling locations are also displayed on the maps shown in Figures 2.2-1 through;2.2-6.

The radiation monitoring locations for the environmental TLDs are shown in Figures 2.2-1 through 2.2-4. The frequency of. collection and types of radioactivity analysis are described in Pilgrim Station's ODCM, Sections 3/4.5.The land-based (terrestrial) samples and monitoring devices are collected by Entergy personnel.

The aquatic samples are collected by Marine Research, Inc. The radioactivity analysis of samples and the processing of the environmental TLDs are performed by Entergy's J.A. Fitzpatrick Environmental Laboratory..

The frequency, types, minimum number of samples, and maximum lower limits of detection (LLD) for the analytical measurements, are specified in the PNPS ODCM. During 2003, a revision was made to the PNPS ODCM to standardize it to the model program described in NUREG-1302 (Reference

.14) and the Branch Technical Position of' 1979 (Reference 15). In accordance with this standardization, a number of changes occurred regarding the types and frequencies, of sample collections.

In regard to terrestrial REMP sampling, routine collection and analysis of soil samples was discontinued in lieu of the extensive network of environmental TLDs around PNPS, and the weekly collection of air samples at 11 locations.

Such TLD monitoring and air sampling would provide an early indication of any potential deposition of radioactivity, and follow-up soil sampling could be performed on an as-needed basis. Also, with the loss of the indicator milk. sample at the Plymouth Page 24 County Farm and the lack of a sufficient substitute location that could provide suitable volumes for analysis, it was deemed unnecessary to continue to collect and analyze control samples of milk.Consequently, routine milk sampling was also dropped from the terrestrial sampling program. NRC guidance (Reference

14) contains provisions for collection of.vegetation and forage samples in lieu of milk sampling.

Such samples have historically been collected near Pilgrim Station as part of the routine REMP program.In the area of marine sampling, a number of the specialized sampling and analysis requirements implemented as part of the Agreement with the Massachusetts Wildlife Federation (Reference 16)for licensing of a second reactor at PNPS were dropped. This agreement, made in 1977, was predicated on the construction of a second nuclear unit, and was set to expire in 1987. However, since the specialized requirements were incorporated into the PNPS Te~hnical Specifications at the.time, the requirements were continued.

When the ODCM was revised in 1999 in accordance with NRC Generic Letter 89-01, the sampling program description was relocated to the ODCM. When steps were taken in 2003 to standardize the PNPS ODCM to the NUREG-1302 model, the specialized marine sampling requirements were changed to those of the model program. These changes include the following:

• A sample of the surface layer of sediment is collected, as opposed to specialized depth-incremental sampling to 30 cm and subdividing cores into 2 cm increments." Standard LLD levels of about 150 to 180 pCi/kg were established for sediment, as opposed to the specialized LLDs of 50 pCi/kg.* Specialized analysis of sediment for plutonium isotopes was removed..Sampling of Irish moss, shellfish, and fish was rescheduled to a semiannual period, as opposed to a specialized quarterly sampling interval.* Analysis of only the edible portions of shellfish (mussels and clams), as opposed to specialized additional analysis of the shell portions.* Standard LLD levels of 130 to 260 pCi/kg were established.

for edible portions of shellfish, as opposed to specialized LLDs of 5 pCi/kg.The PNPS ODCM was revised in 2009. In conjunction with this revision, two changes were made to the environmental sampling program. Due to damage from past storms to the rocky .areas at Manomet Point, there is no longer a harvestable population of blue mussels at this site. Several attempts have been made over the past years to collect samples from this location, but all efforts were unsuccessful.

Because of unavailability of mussels at this location as a viable human foodchain exposure pathway, this location was dropped from the sampling program. The other change involved the twice per year sampling of Group II fishes in the vicinity of the PNPS discharge outfall, represented by species such as cunner and tautog. Because these fish tend to move away from the discharge jetty during colder months, they are not available for sampling at a six-month semi-annual sampling period. The sampling program was modified to reduce the sampling for Group II fishes to once per year, when they are available during warmer summer months.Upon receipt of the analysis results from the analytical laboratories, the PNPS staff reviews the results. If the radioactivity concentrations are above the reporting levels, the NRC must be notified within 30 days. For radioactivity that is detected that is attributable to Pilgrim Station's operation, calculations are performed to determine the cumulative dose contribution for the current year.Depending upon the circumstances, a special study may also be completed (see Appendix A for 201.3 special studies).

Most importantly, if radioactivity levels in the environment become elevated as a result of the station's operation, an investigation is performed and corrective actions are recommended to reduce the amountof radioactivity to as far below the legal limits as is reasonably achievable.

The radiological environmental sampling locations are reviewed annually, and modified if necessary.

A garden and milk animal census is performed every year to identify changes in the use of the environment in the vicinity of the station to permit modification of the monitoring and sampling locations.

The results of the 2013 Garden and Milk Animal Census are reported in Appendix C.Page 25 The accuracy of the data obtained through Pilgrim Station's Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program is ensured through a comprehensive Quality Assurance (QA) programs.

PNPS's QA program has been established to ensure confidence in the measurements and results of the radiological monitoring program through: 4 Regular surveillances of the sampling and monitoring program;* An annual audit of the analytical laboratory by the sponsor companies;

• Participation in cross-check programs;* Use of blind duplicates for comparing separate analyses of the same sample; and,* Spiked sample analyses by the analytical laboratory.

QA audits and inspections of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program are performed by the NRC, American Nuclear Insurers, and by the PNPS Quality Assurance Department.

The J.A. Fitzpatrick Environmental Laboratory conducts extensive quality assurance and quality control programs.

The 2013 results of these programs are summarized in Appendix E. These results indicate that the analyses and measurements performed during 2013 exhibited acceptable precision and accuracy.Page 26 2.3 lnterpretation of Radioactivity Analyses Results The following pages summarize the analytical results of the environmental samples collected during 2013. Data for each environmental medium are included in a separate section. A table that summarizes the year's data for.,each type of medium follows a discussion of the sampling program and results. The unit of measurement for each medium is listed at the top of each table. The left hand column contains the radionuclides being reported, total number of analyses of that radionuclide, and the number of measurements that exceed ten times the yearly average for the control station(s).

The latter are classified as "non-routine" measurements.

The next column lists the Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) for those radionuclides that have detection capability requirements specified in the PNPS ODCM.Those sampling stations within the range of influence of Pilgrim Station and which could conceivably be affected by its operation are called "indicator" stations.

Distant stations, which are beyond plant* influence, are' called "control" stations.

Ambient radiation monitoring stations are broken down into four separate zones to aid indata'analysis.

For each sampling medium, each radionuclide is presented with a set of statistical parameters.

This set of statistical parameters includes separate analyses for (1) the indicator stations, (2) the station having the highest annual mean concentration, and (3) the control stations.

For each of these three groups of data, the following values are calculated:

S. *The mean value of detectable concentrations, including only those values above.LLD;

• The standard deviation of the detectable measurements; The lowest and highest concentrations; and,* The number of positive measurements (activity which is three times greater than the standard deviation), out of the total number of measurements.

Each single radioactivity measurement datum is based on a single measurement and is reported as a concentration plus or minus one standard deviation.

The quoted uncertainty represents only the random uncertainty associated with the measurement of the radioactive decay process (counting statistics), and not the propagation of all possible uncertainties in the sampling and analysis process.A sample or measurement is considered to contain detectable radioactivity if the measured value (e.g., concentration) exceeds three times its associated standard deviation.

For example, a vegetation sample with a cesium-137 concentration of 85 +/- 21 pCi/kilogram would be considered"positive" (detectable Cs-137), whereas another sample with a concentration of 60 +/- 32 pCi/kilogram would be considered "negative", indicating no detectable cesium-137.

The latter.sample may actually contain cesiurn-1 37, but the levels counted during its analysis were not significantly different.

than the background levels.As an 'example of how to interpret data presented in the results tables, refer to the first entry on the table for air particulate filters (page 41). Gross beta (GR-B) analyses were performed on 563 routine samples. None of the samples exceeded.

ten times the average concentration at the control location.

The lower limit of detection (LLD) required by the ODCM is 0.01 pCi/m 3.For samples collected from the-ten indicator stations, 511 out of 511 samples indicated detectable activity at the three-sigma (standard deviation) level. The mean concentration of gross beta activity in these 511 indicator station samples was 0.014 +/- 0.0049 (1.4E-2 +/- 4.9E-3) pCi/mi. Individual values ranged'from 0.00047 to 0.035 (4.7E-4 -ý 3.5E-2) pCi/mi.The monitoring station which yielded the highest mean concentration was the Control location EW (East Weymouth), which. yielded a mean concentration of 0.014' +/- 0.0053 pCi/m 3 , based' on 52 Page 27 observations.

Individual values ranged from 0.0044 to 0.030 pCi/m 3.Fifty-two of the fifty-two samples showed detectable activity at the three-sigma level.At the control location, 52 out of 52 samples yielded detectable gross beta activity, for an average concentration of 0.014 +/- 0.0043 pCi/m 3.Individual samples at the control location ranged from 0.0044 to 0.030 pCi/m 3.Referring to the next-to-last entry row in the table, analyses for cesium-1 37 (Cs-1 37) were performed 43 times (quarterly composites for 11 stations

• 4 quarters, minus one quarterly sample). No samples exceeded ten times the mean control station concentration.

The required LLD value Cs-137 in the PNPS ODCM is 0.06 pCi/m 3.At the indicator stations, all 40 of the Cs-137 measurements were below the detection level. The same was true for the four measurements made on samples collected from the control location.2.4 Ambient Radiation Measurements The primary technique for measuring ambient radiation exposure in the vicinity of Pilgrim Station involves posting environmental thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) at given monitoring locations and retrieving the TLDs after a specified time period. The TLDs are then taken to a laboratory and processed to determine the total amount of radiation exposure received over the period. Although TLDs can be used to monitor radiation exposure for short time periods, environmental TLDs are typically posted for periods of one to three months. Such TLD monitoring yields average exposure rate measurements over a relatively long time period. The PNPS environmental TLD monitoring program is based on a quarterly (three month) posting period, and a total of 110 locations are monitored using this technique.

In addition, 27 of the 110 TLDs are located onsite, within the PNPS protected/restricted area, where the general public does not have access.Out of the 440 TLDs (110 locations

• 4 quarters) posted during 2013, 431 were retrieved and processed.

Those TLDs missing from their monitoring locations were lost to storm damage, and/or building renovation, and their absence is discussed in Appendix D. The results for environmental

• TLDs located offsite, beyond the PNPS protected/restricted area fence, are presented in Table 2.4-1. Results from onsite TLDs posted within the restricted area are presented in Table 2.4-2. In addition to TLD results for individual locations, results from offsite TLDs were grouped according to geographic zone to determine average exposure rates as a function of distance.

These results are summarized in Table 2.4-3. All of the listed exposure values represent continuous occupancy (2190 hr/qtr or 8760 hr/yr).Annual exposure rates measured at locations beyond the PNPS protected area boundary ranged from 40 to 154 mR/yr. The average exposure rate at control locations greater than 15 km from Pilgrim Station (i.e., Zone 4) was 60.2 +/- 10.9 mR/yr. When the 3-sigma confidence interval is calculated based on these control measurements, 99% of all measurements of background ambient exposure would be expected to be between 27 and 93 mR/yr. The results for all TLDs within 15 km (excluding those Zone 1 TLDs posted within the site boundary) ranged from 40 to 81 mR/yr, which compares favorably with the preoperational results of 37 -190 mR/yr.Inspection of onsite TLD results listed in Table 2.4-2 indicates that all of those TLDs located within the PNPS protected/restricted area yield exposure measurements higher than the average natural background.

Such results are expected due to the close proximity of these locations to radiation sources onsite. The radionuclide nitrogen-16 (N-16) contained in steam flowing through the turbine accounts for most of the exposure onsite. Although this radioactivity is contained within the turbine and is not released to the atmosphere, the "sky shine" which occurs from the turbine increases the ambient radiation levels in areas near the turbine building.Page 28 A small number of offsite TLD locations in close proximity to the protected/restricted area indicated ambient radiation exposure above expected background levels. All of these locations are on Pilgrim Station controlled property, and experience exposure increases due to turbine sky shine (e.g., locations OA, TC, PB, and P01) and/or transit and storage of radwaste onsite (e.g., locations BLE and BLW). Due to heightened security measures following September 11 2001, members for the general public do not have access to such locations within the owner-controlled area.One TLD, located in the basement of the Plymouth Memorial Hall, indicated an annual exposure of 76 mR in 2013. The higher exposure within the building at this location is due to the close proximity of stone building material, which contains higher levels of naturally-occurring radioactivity, as well as from the buildup of radon in this area of the building.It should be noted that several of the TLDs used to calculate the Zone 1 averages presented in Table 2.4-3 are located on Pilgrim Station property.

If the Zone 1 value is corrected for the near-site TLDs (those less than 0.6 km from the Reactor Building), the Zone 1 mean falls from a value of 71.6+/- 21.3 mR/yr to 62.2 +/- 8.9 mR/yr. Additionally, exposure rates measured at areas beyond Entergy's control did not indicate any increase in ambient exposure from Pilgrim Station operation..

For example, the annual exposure rate calculated from the two TLDs adjacent to the nearest offsite residence 0.80 kilometers (0.5 miles) southeast of the PNPS Reactor Building was 62.1 +/- 7.7TmR/yr, which compares quite well with the average control location exposure of 62.2 +/- 8.9 mR/yr.In conclusion, measurements of ambient radiation exposure around Pilgrim Station do not indicate any significant increase in exposure levels. Although some increases in ambient radiation exposure level were apparent on Entergy property very close to Pilgrim Station, there were no measurable, increases at areas beyond Entergy's control.2.5 Air Particulate Filter Radioactivity Analyses Airborne particulate radioactivity is sampled by drawing a stream of air through a glass fiber filter that has a very high efficiency for collecting airborne particulates.

These samplers are operated continuously, and the resulting filters are collected weekly for analysis.

Weekly filter samples are analyzed for gross beta radioactivity, and the filters are then composited on a quarterly basis for each location for gamma spectroscopy analysis.

PNPS uses this technique to monitor 10 locations in the Plymouth area, along with the control location in East Weymouth.Out of 572 filters (11 locations

• 52 weeks), 563 samples were collected and analyzed during 2013.Several air sampling stations lost power during winter storm Nemo during the week of 05-Feb through 12-Feb 2014. Another problem occurred at location WR when tree trimming activities on 14-Aug-2012 resulted in damage to the electrical service and sampling station. The sampler was not repaired until 28-Feb-2013, resulting in the loss of sampling capabilities at this location for the last 21 weeks of 2012, and the first eight weeks of 2013. This event is described'in Condition Report CR-PNP-2012-3545.

There were also a few instances where power was lost or pumps failed during the course of the sampling period at some of the air sampling stations, resulting in lower than normal sample volumes. All of these discrepancies are noted in Appendix D.The results of the analyses performed on these 563 filter samples are summarized in Table 2.5-1.Trend plots for the gross beta radioactivity levels at the near station, property line, and offsite airborne monitoring locations are shown in Figures 2.5-1, 2.5-2 and 2.5-3, respectively.

Gross beta radioactivity was detected in 563 of the filter samples collected, including 52 of the 52 control location samples. This gross beta activity arises from naturally-occurring radionuclides such as radon decay daughter products.

Naturally-occurring beryllium-7 was detected in 44 out of 44 of the quarterly composites analyzed with gamma spectroscopy.

Naturally-occurring potassium-40 (K-40)was detected in 1 of 4 control samples: No airborne radioactivity attributable to Pilgrim Station was Page 29 detected in any of the samples collected

'during 201.3, and results of any detectable naturally-occurring radioactivity were similar to those observed in the preoperational monitoring program.2.6 Charcoal Cartridge Radioactivity Analyses Airborne radioactive iodine is sampled by drawing a stream of air through a charcoal cartridge after it has passed through the high efficiency glass fiber filter. As is the case with the air particulate filters, these samplers are operated continuously, and the resulting cartridges are collected weekly for analysis.

Weekly cartridge samples are analyzed for radioactive iodine. The same eleven locations monitored for airborne particulate radioactivity are. also sampled for airborne radioiodine.

Out of 572 cartridges (11 locations

• "52 weeks), 563 samples were collected.

and analyzed during 2013. Several air sampling stations'lost power during winter storm Nemo during the week of 05-Feb through 12rFeb 2014. Another problem occurred atlocation WR when tree trimming activities on 14-Aug-2012 resulted in damage to the electrical service and sampling station. The sampler was not repaired until 28-Feb-2013, resulting in the loss of sampling capabilities at this location for the last 21 weeks of 2012, and the first eight weeks of 2013. This event is described in Condition Report CR-PNP-2012-3545.

There were also a few instances where power was lost or pumps failed during the course of the sampling period at some of the air sampling stations, resulting in lower than normal sample volumes. All of these discrepancies are noted in Appendix D. Despite such events during 2013, required LLDs were met on 563 of the 563 cartridges collected during 2013.The results of the analyses performed on these charcoal cartridges are summarized in Table 2.6-1.No airborne radioactive iodine attributable.

to Pilgrim Station was detected in any of the charcoal cartridges collected.

2.7 Milk Radioactivity Analyses In July 2002, the Plymouth County Farm ceased operation of its dairy facility.

This was historically the only dairy facility near Pilgrim Station, and had been sampled continuously since Pilgrim Station began operation .in 1972. Although attempts were made to obtain samples from an alternate indicator-location within 5 miles as specified in NRC guidance (Reference 14), a suitable substitute location could not be found. Thus, milk collection at an indicator location was discontinued in July 2002, but control samples of milk continued to be collected and analyzed in the event an indicator location could. be secured. In conjunction with the standardization of the ODCM during 2003, the decision was made to remove milk sampling from the PNPS Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program since no suitable milk sampling location existed in the vicinity of Pilgrim Station.The nearest milk animals to Pilgrim Station are located at the Plimoth Plantation, approximately 2.5 miles west of PNPS, in a .relatively upwind direction.

Due to the limited number of milk animals available, this location is not able to provide the necessary volume of 4 gallons of milk every two weeks to facilitate the milk sampling program and meet the required detection sensitivities.

Although milk sampling is not performed at Plimoth Plantation, effluent dose calculations are performed for this location assuming the presence of a milk ingestion pathway, as part of the annual Effluent'and Waste Disposal Report (Reference 17).As included in a provision in standard ODCM guidance in NUREG-1302 (Reference 13), sampling and analysis of vegetation from the offsite"locations calculated to have the highest D/Q deposition factor can be performed in lieu of milk sampling.

Such vegetation sampling has been routinely performed at Pilgrim Station as part of the radiological environmental monitoring program, and the results of this sampling are presented in Section 219.Page 30 2.8 Forage Radioactivity Analyses Samples of animal forage (hay) had been collected in the past from the Plymouth County Farm, and from control locations in Bridgewater.

However, due to the absence of any grazing animals within a five-mile radius of Pilgrim Station that are used for generation of food products (milk or meat), no samples of forage were collected during 2013. A number of wild vegetation samples were collected within a five mile radius of Pilgrim Station as part of the vegetable/vegetation sampling effort, and the results of this sampling would provide an indication of any radioactivity potentially entering the forage-milk or forage-meat pathways.

Results of the vegetable/vegetation sampling effort are discussed in the following section.2.9 VecietableNeqetation Radioactivity Analyses Samples of vegetables and naturally-growing vegetation have .historically been collected from the Plymouth County Farm and from the control locations in Bridgewater, Sandwich, and Norton. In addition, samples of vegetables or leafy vegetation were collected at or near a number of gardens identified during the Annual Land Use Census. Results of this census are discussed in Appendix C.In addition to these garden samples, naturally-growing vegetation is collected from locations yielding the highest D/Q deposition factors. All of the various samples of vegetables/vegetation are collected annually and analyzed by gamma spectroscopy.

Twenty-three samples of vegetables/vegetation were collected and analyzed as required during 2013. Results of the gamma analyses of these samples are summarized in.Table 2.9-1. Naturally-occurring beryllium-7, potassium-40, radium-226, and actinium/thorium-228 were identified in several of the samples collected.

Cesium-137 was also detected in four out of 15 samples of vegetation collected from indicator locations, and one of eight control samples collected, with concentrations ranging from non-detectable

(<12 pCi/kg) up to 61 pCi/kg. The highest concentration of 61 pCi/kg was detected in a sample of natural vegetation collected from the Pine Hills area of the Pine Hills south of PNPS. This Cs-137 result is within of the normal range of average values expected for weapons-testing fallout (75 to 145 pCVkg as projected from the pre-operational sampling program).It should be noted that natural vegetation samples collected in the 1990s often showed detectable Cs-137 from nuclear weapons tests up into the range of 300 to 400 pCi/kg, whereas soil samples often indicated concentrations in excess of 2000 pCi/kg. Cs-137 has a 30-year half-life, and measureable concentrations still remain in soil and vegetation as a result of atmospheric nuclear weapons testing performed during the 1950s through 1970s. Weekly particulate air filters collected from the Cleft Rock sampling station within 400 meters of where the vegetation was -sampled indicated no detectable Cs-137. A review of effluent data presented in Appendix B indicates that there were no measurable airborne releases of Cs-137 from Pilgrim Station during 2013 that could have attributed to this level. The sample with the highest level of Cs-137 also contained high levels of Ra-226 and AcTh-228, indicating appreciable soil content on the vegetation.

This sample of natural vegetation was analyzed "as is" without any measure to clean the, samples as normally would be performed prior to consuming vegetables, and would have detected any Cs-137 in soil adhering to those leaves collected.

Certain species of plants such as sassafras are also known to concentrate chemical elements like cesium, and this higher-than-expected level is likely due to a combination of external soil contamination and bioconcentration in the leaves of the plants sampled. These levels are not believed to be indicative of any releases associated with Pilgrim Station. No radioactivity attributable to Pilgrim Station was detected in any of the vegetable/vegetation samples collected during 2013, and results of any detectable naturally-occurring radioactivity were similar to those observed in the preoperational monitoring program.Page 31 2.10 Cranberry Radioactivity Analyses Samples of cranberries are normally collected from two bogs in the Plymouth area and from the control location in Kingston.

Samples of cranberries are collected annually and analyzed by gamma spectroscopy.

In 2012, the bog on Bartlett Road ceased harvesting operations, and a sample was collected from an alternate location along Beaver Dam Road. Samples were also not available from the historical control location in Halifax, and a substitute control sample was collected-from a bog in Kingston.

These discrepancies are noted in Appendix D.Two samples of cranberries were collected and analyzed during 2013. One of the bogs normally sampled along Bartlett Road is no longer in production.

Results of the gamma analyses of cranberry samples are summarized in Table 2.10-1. Cranberry samples collected during 2013 yielded detectable levels of naturally-occurring beryllium-7, potassium-40, and radium-226.

No radioactivity attributable to Pilgrim Station was detected in any of the samples collected during 2013, and results of any detectable naturally-occurring radioactivity were similar to those observed in the preoperational monitoring program.2.11 Soil Radioactivity Analyses In the past, a survey of radioactivity in soil had been conducted once every three years at the 10 air sampling stations in the Plymouth area and the control location in East Weymouth.

However, in conjunction with standardization of the ODCM during 2003, the soil survey effort was abandoned in favor of the extensive TLD monitoring effort at Pilgrim Station. Prior to ending the soil survey effort, there had been no apparent trends in radioactivity measurements at these locations.

2.12 Surface Water RadioactiVity Analyses Samples of surface water are routinely collected from the discharge canal, Bartlett Pond in Manomet and from the control location at Powder Point Bridge in Duxbury. Grab samples are collected weekly from the Bartlett Pond and Powder Point Bridge locations.

Samples of surface water are composited every four weeks and analyzed by gamma spectroscopy and low-level iodine analysis.

These monthly composites are further composited on a quarterly basis and tritium analysis is performed on these quarterly samples.A total of 36 samples (3 locations

• 12 sampling periods) of surface water were collected and analyzed as required during 2013. Results of the analyses of water samples are summarized in Table 2.12-1. Naturally-occurring potassium-40, radium-226, and actinium/thorium-228 were detected in several of the samples, especially those composed primarily of seawater.

No radioactivity attributable to Pilgrim Station was detected in any of the surface water samples collected during 2013.In response to the Nuclear Energy Institute Groundwater Protection Initiative, Pilgrim Station installed a number of groundwater monitoring wells within the protected area in late 2007. Because all of these wells are onsite, they are not included in the offsite radiological monitoring program, and are not presented in this report. Details regarding Pilgrim Station's groundwater monitoring effort can be found in the Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report.Page 32 2.13 Sediment Radioactivity Analyses Samples of sediment are routinely collected from the outfall area of the discharge canal and from three other locations in the Plymouth area (Manomet Point, Plymouth Harbor and Plymouth Beach), and from control locations in Duxbury and Marshfield.

Samples are collected twice per year and are analyzed by gamma spectroscopy.

Twelve of twelve required samples of sediment were collected during 2013. Gamma analyses were performed on these samples. Results of the gamma analyses of sediment samples are summarized in Table 2.13-1. Naturally-occurring beryllium-7, potassium-40, radium-226, and actinium/thorium-228 were detected in a number of the samples. No radioactivity attributable to Pilgrim Station was detected in any of the samples collected during 2013, and results of any detectable naturally-occurring radioactivity were similar to those observed in the preoperational monitoring program.2.14 Irish Moss Radioactivity Analyses Samples of Irish moss are collected from the discharge canal outfall and two other locations in the Plymouth area (Manomet Point, Ellisville), and from a control location in Marshfield (Brant Rock). All samples are collected on a semiannual basis, and processed in the laboratory for gamma spectroscopy analysis.Eight samples of Irish moss scheduled for collection during 2013 were obtained and analyzed.Results of the gamma analyses of these samples are summarized in Table 2.14-1. Naturally-occurring potassium-40 and radium-226 were detected in a number of the samples. No radioactivity attributable to Pilgrim Station was detected in any of the samples collected during 2013, and results of any detectable naturally-occurring radioactivity were similar to those observed in the preoperational monitoring program.2.15 Shellfish Radioactivity Analyses Samples of blue mussels, soft-shell clams and quahogs are collected from the discharge canal outfall and one other location in the Plymouth area (Plymouth Harbor), and from control locations in Duxbury and Marshfield.

All samples are collected on a semiannual basis, and edible portions processed in the laboratory for gamma spectroscopy analysis.Ten of the 10 required samples of shellfish meat scheduled for collection during 2013 were obtained and analyzed.

Results of the gamma analyses of these samples are summarized in Table 2.15-1.Naturally-occurring potassium-40 and radium-226 were detected in a number of the samples. No radioactivity attributable to Pilgrim Station was detected in any of the samples collected during 2013, and results of any detectable naturally-occurring radioactivity were similar to those observed in the preoperational monitoring program.Page 33 2.16 Lobster Radioactivity Analyses Samples of lobsters are routinely collected from the outfall area of the discharge canal and from control locations in Cape Cod Bay and Vineyard Sound. Samples are collected monthly from the discharge canal outfall from June through September and once annually from the control locations.

All lobster samples are normally analyzed by gamma spectroscopy.

Five samples of lobsters were collected as required during 2013. Results of the gamma analyses of these samples are summarized in Table 2.16-1. Naturally-occurring potassium-40 and radium-226 were detected in a number of the samples. No radioactivity attributable to Pilgrim Station was detected in any of the samples collected during 2013, and results of any detectable naturally-occurring radioactivity were similar to those observed in the preoperational monitoring program.2.17 Fish Radioactivity Analyses Samples of fish are routinely collected from the area at the outfall of the discharge canal and from the control locations in Cape Cod Bay and Buzzard's Bay. Fish species are grouped into four major categories according to their biological requirements and mode of life. These major categories and the representative species are as follows:* Group I -Bottom-Oriented:

Winter Flounder, Yellowtail Flounder* Group II -Near-Bottom Distribution:

Tautog, Cunner, Pollock, Atlantic Cod, Hake* Group III -Anadromous:

Alewife, Smelt, Striped Bass* Group IV -Coastal Migratory:

Bluefish, Herring, Menhaden, Mackerel.Group I fishes are sampled on a semiannual basis from the outfall area of the discharge canal, and on an annual basis from a control location.

• Group II, Ill, and IV fishes are sampled annually from the discharge canal outfall and control location.

All samples of fish are analyzed by gamma spectroscopy.

Eight samples of fish were collected during 2013. The autumn sample of Group I Fish (flounder) was not available during the October sampling period due to seasonal unavailability as the fish moved away from the Discharge Outfall to deeper water. Results of the gamma analyses of fish samples collected are summarized in Table 2.17-1. The only radionuclides detected in any of the samples were naturally-occurring potassium-40 and radium-226.

No radioactivity attributable to Pilgrim Station was detected in any of the samples collected during 2013, and results of any detectable naturally-occurring radioactivity were similar to those observed in the preoperational monitoring program.Page 34 Table 2.2-1 Routine Radioloqical Environmental Sampling.

Locations Pil.rim Nuclear Power Station, Plymouth, MA Code Distance Description Direction Air Particulate Filters. Charcoal Cartridges Medical Building WS East Rocky Hill Road ER West Rocky Hill Road WR Property Line PL Pedestrian Bridge PB Overlook Area OA East Breakwater EB Cleft Rock CR Plymouth Center PC Manomet Substation MS East Weymouth Control EW Foraae Plymouth County Farm CF Hansen Farm Control HN Vegetation Plymouth County Farm CF Hansen Farm Control HN Cranberries Bartlett Road Bog BT Beaverdam Road Bog MR Hollow Farm Bog Control .HF 0.2 km 0.9 km 0.8 km 0.5 km 0.2 km 0.1 km 0.5 km 1.3 km 6.7 km 3.6 km 40 km 5.6 km 35 km 5.6 km 35 km 4.3 km 3.4 km 16 km.SSE SE WNW NNW N W ESE SSW W SSE NW W W W* SSE S WNW-1 Page 35 Table 2.2-1 (continued)

Routine Radiological Environmental Sampling Locations Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Plymouth, MA Description Code Distance Direction Surface Water Discharge Canal Bartlett Pond Powder Point Control Sediment Discharge Canal Outfall Plymouth Harbor Duxbury Bay Control Plymouth Beach Manomet Point Green Harbor Control Irish Moss Discharge Canal Outfall Manomet Point Ellisville Brant Rock Control Shellfish Discharge Canal Outfall Plymouth Harbor Duxbury Bay Control Manomet Point Green Harbor Control Lobster Discharge Canal Outfall Plymouth.

Harbor Duxbury Bay Control Fishes Discharge Canal Outfall Priest Cove Control Jones River Control Vineyard Sound Control Buzzard's Bay Control Cape Cod Bay Control DIS BP PP DIS Ply-H Dux-Bay PLB MP GH DIS MP EL BR 0.2 km 2.7 km 13 km 0.8 km 4.1 km 14 km 4.0 km 3.3 km 16 km 0.7 km 4.0 km 12 km 18 km.0.7 km 4.1 km 13 km 4.0 km 16 km 0.5 km 6.4 km 11 km N SE NNW NE W NNW WNW ESE NNW NNE ESE SSE NNW NNE W NNW ESE NNW N WNW NNW N SW WNW SSW SSW.ESE DIS Ply-H Dux-Bay MP GH DIS Ply-H Dux-Bay DIS PC JR MV BB CC-Bay 0.5 48 13 64 40 24 km km km km km km Page 36 Table 2.4-1 Offsite Environmental TLD Results TLD Station TILD Location*

Quarterly Exposure -mPR/uarter (Value +/- Std.Dev.)_I 2013 Annual-ID Descrption Distance/Dire~tion Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Exposure._mR/year Zone I TLDs: 0-3km .0-3km 17.1:+/-15.1 16.5+/-4.8 18.4+/-5.8 19.6+/-5.2 71.6+/-21.3 BLW BOAT LAUNCH WEST 0.11 km E 32.6 +/- 1.6 33.1 +/- 1.0 35.5 +/- 2.1 34.4 +/- 2.9 135.6 6.7 OA OVERLOOK AREA 0.15 km W 37.9 +/- 2.0 30.3 11.4- 42.9 +/- 2.5 43.2 +/- 1.7 154.3 +/- 24.3 TC HEALTH CLUB 0.15rkmWSW 18.4 t 0.8 16.5+/-0.6 20.5+/-0.8 20.6+/-0.9 76.0+/-7.9 BLE BOAT LAUNCH EAST 0.16 km ESE 27.0 +/- 1.9 31.7 +/- 2.4 31.8 +/- 1.2 29.1 +/- 1.8 119.5+/- 9.9 PB PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE 0.21 km N 26.2 +/- 1.4 24.4+/-0.8 26.9+/-.1.1 27.4+/- 1.5 104.9+/-5.9 P01 SHOREFRONT SECURITY 0.22 km NNW 15.9 +/- 0.8 16.5 +/- 0.7 18.1 +/- 1.2 .18.6 +/- 1.0 69.1 :15.5 WS MEDICAL BUILDING 0.23 km SSE 18.6+/- 1.2 18.2+/-t 0.8 20.0+/- 1.0 21.0+/- 1.0 77.8+/-5.5 CT PARKING LOT 0.31 km SE 19.2 +/- 1.3 18.2 +/- 0.6 20.9 +/- 0.8 19.0 +/- 0.7 77.3 +/- 4.9 PA SHOREFRONT PARKING 0.35 km NNW 16.3 +/- 0.9 17.8 +/- 0.7 19.7 +/- 1.0 18.7 +/- 0.9 72.5 +/- 6.0 A STATION A 0.37 km WSW 14,6+/- 1.5 14.4+/-0.8 16.5+/-0.8 18.9+/-0.9 64.4+/- 8.6 F STATION F 0.43 km NW 15.0 +/- 0.7 14.0 +/- 0.8 16.4 +/- 0.7 18.8 +/- 1.0 64.2 +/- 8.4 EB EAST BREAKWATER 0.44 km ESE 16.0+/-0.9 17.5+/-1.0 18.6+/-0.7 19.0 +/- 0.9 71.1+/-5.7 B STATION B. 0.44 kmS 22.7 +/- 0.9 18.6+/-0.7 21.5+/-1.2 23.4+/-1.2 86.2+/-8.7 PMT PNPS MET TOWER ..0.44 km WNW 17.3 +/- 0.9 15.7 +/- 1.0 17.7 +/- 0.7 20.8 +/- 1.1 71.5 +/- 8.7 H STATION H 0.47 km SW 17.7+/- 1.4 16.6+/-0.6 19.6+/- 1.0 21.9+/- 1.1 75.8+/- 9.5 I STATION I 0.48 km WNW 15.9+/- 1.0 13.9+/-0.7 16.9+/-0.8 19.5+/-0.9 66.2+/-9.5 L STATION L .. 0.50 km ESE 15.4 +/- 0.7 18.6 +/- 0.7 19.2 +/- 0.8 18.5 +/- 1.0 71.7 +/- 7.0 G STATION G 0.53km W 15.3+/-0.9 14.1+/-0.8 16.1+/-0.7 16.2+/-0.8 61.8+/-4.2 D STATION D 0.54 km NNW 18.5+/-0.9 15.5.+/-0.6 17.3+/- 1.0 20.2+/-1.0 71.5+/-8.1 PL PROPERTY LINE 0.54 km NW 15.4:+/- 0.8 15.9 +/- 0.8 16.6 +/- 1.1 16.8 +/- 0.9 64.7 +/- 3.2 C STATION C 0.57 km ESE .16.0 +/- 0.8 14.7 +/- 0.6 18.4 +/- 1.2 17.8 +/- 0.9 66.8 +/- 6.9 HB HALL'S BOG 0.63 km SE 14,6 +/- 0,8 17.3 +/-0.6 19.1 +/- 1.0 Missinq 67.9 L 9.2 GH GREENWOOD HOUSE 0.65 km ESE 16.4 +/- 0.9 17.0 +/- 0,7 Missing 17.7 +/- 0.8 68.1 +/- 3.4 WR W ROCKY HILL ROAD 0.83 km WNW 19.6 +/- 0.8 19.2 +/- 0.9 20.9 +/- 0.9 20.8 +/- 1.0 80.5 +/- 3.8 ER E ROCKY HILL ROAD 0.89 km SE 14.0 +/- 0.9 14.2 +/- 0.7 14.4 +/- 0.8 15.2 +/- 0.8 57.8 +/- 2.6 MT MICROWAVE.TOWER 1.03 km SSW 14.4 +/- 0.6 18.0 +/- 0,7 16.0 +/- 0.8 16.9 +/- 0.9 65.2 +/- 6.4 CR CLEFT ROCK 1.27 km SSW .18.3 +/- 0.8 17.5 i 0.9 .15.9 +/- 1.1 17.3 +/- 1.2 68.9.+/- 4.4 BD BAYSHORE/GATE RD 1.34kmWNW 14.9+/-0.7 14:8+/-0.6 16.7 +/- 0.8 17.8+/-0.9 64.2+/-6.0 MR MANOMET ROAD 1.38 km S 16.0+/- 0.7 .15.2 +/- 0.6 17.4+/- 0.7 20.3+/- 1.0 68.9 +/- 9.2 DR DIRT ROAD 1.48 km SW 12.9+/-0.6 11.7+/-0.5 13.4+/-0.6 16.8+/- 1.2 54.8+/-8.9 EM EMERSON ROAD 1.53 km SSE 15.9+/- 0,8 14.2 0.6 16.1+/- 0.7 169 +/- 1.0 63.1+/- 4.8 EP EMERSON/PRISCILLA 1.55 km SE Missing 14.5 +/- 0.8 16.4 +/- 0.9 17.4+/- 0.9 64.5 +/- 6.2 AR EDISON ACCESS ROAD 1.59 km SSE 13.1+/-0.7 12.8+/-0.6 14.3+/-0.7 17.2+/-0.8 57.5+/-8.2 BS BAYSHORE 1.76 km W 16.1+/- 0.8 15.4 +/- 0.8 .17.3+/- 0.7 20.3 +/-1.0 69.1 +/- 8.9 E STATION E 1.86km S .15.1 +/- 0.7 13.7 +/- 0.5 15.6 +/- 0.6 17.9 +/- 1.0 62.3 +/- 7.2 JG JOHN GAULEY 1.99 kmW 15.4 +/- 0.7 14.6 +/- 0.6 16.4 +/- 0.8 18.1 +/- 1.2 64.5 +/- 6.2 J STATION J 2.04 km SSE 13.5+/- 0.7 13.1+/- 0.5 15.1+/- 1.2 17.4 +/- 0.8 59.2 +/- 8.0 WH WHITEHORSE ROAD 2.09 km SSE 15.6 +/- 0.6 14.5 +/- 0.5 16.2 +/- 0.8 17.1 +/- 0.8 63.4 +/- 4.7 RC PLYMOUTH YMCA 2.09kmWSW 14.0++/-t0.6 14.0 +/- 0.6 15.3+/- 0.7 18.8+/- 1.0 62.1+/-9.2 K STATION K 2.17 kmS S 13.5+/- 0.6 13.1 +/- 0.8 14.2 t 0.8 17.0+/- 0.8 57.9+/- 7.1 TT TAYLOR/THOMAS 2.26 km SE 15.2 +/- 0.8 12.8+/- 0.7 -15.0 +/- 0.7 16.0 +/-11.0 59.0 +/- 5.6 YV YANKEE VILLAGE 2.28 km WSW 14.7 +/- 0.6. 14.4 +/- 0.6 15.2 +/-1.3 18.6 0.9 62.9 +/- 8.0 GN GOODWIN PROPERTY 2.38 kmSW 11.2+/-0.8 10.1+/-0.6 11.5+/-0.5 14.9+/-1.0 47.8+/-8.4 RW RIGHT OF WAY 2.83 kmS 12.7+/-0.8 11.4+/-0.9 12.9+/-0.6 13.0+/-0.7 50.0+/-3.4 TP TAYLOR/PEARL 2.98 km SE 15.0 +/- 0.7 12.6 +/- 0.6 15.0 +/-1.4 15.3 +/-10.9 57.8 +/- 5.4* Distance and direction are measured from centedine of Reactor Building to the monitoring location.Annual value is based on arithmetic mean of the observed quarterly values multiplied by four quarters/year.

Page 37 Table 2.4-1 (continued)

Offsite Environmental TLD Results TLD Station TLD Location*

Quarterl Exposure-mRq uarter(Value+/-

Std.Dev.)I J2013 Annual**ID Description Distance/Direction Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Exposure_ mR/year Zone 2 TLDs: 3-8 kn 3-8 km 14.2 +/- 2.3 13.0 +/- 1.9 14.8 +/- 2.0 15.9 +/- 2.0 57.8 +/- 9.0 VR VALLEY ROAD 3.26 km SSW 14.2 +/- 0.8 11.7 +/- 0.6 14.3 +/- 0.9 Missing 53.6 +/- 6.2 ME MANOMET ELEM 3.29 kmSE 14.8-+/-0.7 13.1 +/-0.8 15.4+/-0.7 Missing 57.8+/-5.0 WC WARREN/CLIFFORD 3.31 km W 12.7 +/- 0.6 12.3 +/- 0.7 Missing 16.9 +/- 0.9 55.9 +/- 10.5 BB RT.3A/BARTLETT RD 3.33 km SSE 14.9+/-0.8 13.5 +/-0.5 14.9 +/- 0.6 18.1 +/- 1.1 61.4 7.9 MP MANOMET POINT 3.57 km SE 15.0 +/- 0.7 13.0 +/- 1.0 15.1 +/- 0.7 14.9 +/- 0.8 57.9 +/-4.3 MS MANOMET SUBSTATION 3.60 km SSE 16.9+/-0.6 17.1 +/-0.9 17.5+/-0.8 17.8+/-0.9 69.2+/-2.3 BW BEACHWOOD ROAD 3.93 km SE 15.6+/-0.7 12.6+/-0.7 15.6+/-0.8 16.4+/-1.1 60.3+/-6.9 PT PINES ESTATE 4.44 km SSW 13.2 +/- 0.7 11.6 +/- 0.6 14.1 +/- 0.7 14.2 +/- 0.8 53.2 4.9 EA EARL ROAD 4.60 km SSE 11.9+/-0.6 12.1 +/-0.6 12.8+/-1.0 16.4+/-1.1 53.2+/-8.7 SP S PLYMOUTH SUBST 4.62 kmW 15.8+/-1.1 13.4+/-0.5 15.8+/-1.2 15.6+/-0.8 60.6+/-5.1 RP ROUTE 3 OVERPASS 4.81 kmSW 15.8+/- 1.2 13.6+/- 0.6 16;0+/-0.7 15.8+/- 0.7 61.2+/- 5.0 RM RUSSELL MILLS RD 4.85 km WSW 14.3 +/- 1.2 12.4 +/- 0.6 14.9 +/- 0.7 15.1 +/- 0.8 56.7 + 5.3 HD HILLDALE ROAD 5.18 kmW 13.8+/- 1.0 13.6+/-0.9 15.2+/-0.9 17.7+/-0.9 60.2 +/- 7.7 MB MANOMET BEACH 5.43 km SSE 15.7+/-0.8 13.4+/- 0.6 15.7+/- 1.0 16.3+/-0.9 61.2+/- 5.4 BR BEAVERDAM ROAD 5.52 km S 15.0 +/- 1.3 13.4 +/- 0.6 15.7 +/- 1.5 16.0 +/- 0.8 60.1 +/- 5.0 PC PLYMOUTH CENTER 6.69 kmW 9.7+/-0.7 9.9+/-0.6 9.9+/-0.8 11.0+/-0.6 40.5+/- 2.7 LD LONG POND/DREW RD 6.97 km WSW 10.9 +/-0.5 14.0 0.6 13.7 0.6 16.5 +/- 0.9 55.2 +/- 9.2 HR HYANNIS ROAD 7.33 km SSE Missing Missing. 14.0 +/- 0.7 15.0 +/- 0.7 57.9 +/- 3.4 SN SAQUISH NECK 7.58 km NNW 10.6+/-1.1 9.2+/-0.4 11.8+/-0.9 12.8+/-0.9 44.6+/-6.5 MH MEMORIAL HALL 7.58 km WNW 19.1+/-0.7 17.6+/-0.7 19.4 +/- 0.8 19.9+/-0.9 76.0+/-4.2 CP COLLEGE POND 7.59 km SW 13.3 +/- 0.7 13.3 +/-0.6 14.3 +/- 0.8 Missing 54.4+/- 3.0 Zone 3 TLDs: 8-15 km 8-15 km 13.8 +/- 1.1 13.0 +/- 1.7 14.1 +/- 1.7 15.9+/- 1.9 56.7+/- 7.6 DW DEEP WATER POND 8.59 km W 15.3 +/- 0.9 14.4 +/- 0.5 16.9 +/- 1.1 18.8 +/- 1.4 65.3 +/- 8.0 LP LONG POND ROAD 8.88 km SSW 13.2 +/- 0.7 12.2 +/- 0.6 13.1+/-0.6 14.8 +/- 0.7 53.3+/- 4.5 NP NORTH PLYMOUTH 9.38 km WNW 15.3 t 0.7 17.4 +/-1.0 17.3 +/- 1.0 19:5 t 1.5 .69.4 +/- 7.3 SS STANDISH SHORES 10.39 km NW 13.3+/-0.6 11.9+/- 0.6 13.5+/-0.7 15.1 +/- 1.0 53.9+/-5.4 EL ELUSVILLE ROAD 11.52 km SSE 14.6 +/- 0.9 12.7 +/- 0.6 14.0 +/- 0.9 15.3 +/- 0.8 56.7 +/- 4.6 UC UP COLLEGE POND RD 11.78km SW 11.7+/-1.5 11!6+/-0.4 12.2+/-0.8 13.7+/-0.8 49.2+/-4.3 SH SACRED HEART 12.92 km W 14.3+/-0.8 12.6+/-0.8 13.8+/-0.6 15.7+/-0.8 56.5+/- 5.4 KC KING CAESAR ROAD 13.11 kmNNW 13.6+/-0.8 12.1 +/-0.5 13.4+/- 0.6 15.8+/-0.8 54.8+/-6.3 BE BOURNE ROAD 13.37 km S 13.4+/-0.7 12.1 +/-0.5 12.9+/-0.5 14.4+/-1.1 52.8+/-4.0 SA SHERMAN AIRPORT 13.43 km WSW 13.1 +/- 0.6 12.5 +/- 0.7 13.5 +/- 0.7 15.8+/-1.0 54.9 +/- 5.9 Zone4TLDs:

>15km >15kin 14.7+/-2.9 13.9+/-3.0 15.2+/-2.6 16.4+/-2.5 60.2+/- 10.9 CS CEDARVILLE SUBST 15.93 km S 15.8+/-0,7 13.9+/-0.6 16.3+/-0.8 17.3+/-1.4 63.3+/-6.1 KS KINGSTON SUBST 16.15 km WNW 15.3+/-0.8 14.3+/-0.5 15.2+/-0.7 16.6+/-0.9 61.4+/-4.1 LR LANDING ROAD 16.46 km NNW 13.4+/- 0.9 12.8 +/- 0.5 14.6 +/- 0.7 15.2 +/- 0.9 56.0 +/-4.6 CW CHURCHIWEST 16.56 km NW 9.1 +/-0.5 8.5+/-0.5 10.4 +/- 0.9 11.7+/-0.7 39.7+/-5.9 MM MAIN/MEADOW 17.02 km WSW 14.4+/-0.7 13.4 +/-0.8 14.5 +/- 1.0 16.7 +/-1.3 59.0 5.8 DMF DIV MARINE FISH 20.97 km SSE 17.5 +/- 0.9 17.8 +/-1.3 17.6 +/- 0.7 19.4+/- 0.9 72.4 +/-4.0 EWE WEYMOUTH SUBST 39.69 km NW 17.6 +/- 1.0 16.4 +/- 0.9 17.9 +/- 0.7 18.0 +/- 1.2 69.9 +/- 3.5 Distance and direction are. measured from centerline of Reactor Building to the monitoring location.Annual value is based on arithmetic mean of the observed quarterly values multiplied by four quarters/year.

Page 38 Table 2.4-2 Onsite Environmental TLD Results TLD Station TLD Location*

Quarterly Exposure -mRl/uarter (Value +/- Std.Dev.)2013 Annual-ID Description Distance/Direction Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Exposure___________________

-_________-

________ I mRlyear Onsite TLDs_P21 O&M/RXB. BREEZEWAY 50 m SE 28.2 +/- 1.2 29.0 +/- 1.2 26.5 +/- 1.2 24.5 +/- 1.1 108.2 + 8.4 P24 EXEC.BUILDING 57mW 42.7 +/- 1.5 41.1 +/- 1.5 47.7 +/- 2.4 50.8 +/- 2.8 182.4 18.5 P04 FENCE-R SCREENHOUSE 66 m N 36.5 +/- 1.3 41.2 +/- 2.0 43.4 +/- 1.8 44.0 +/- 1.8 165.2 +/- 14.1 P20 O&M -2ND W WALL 67 r SE 27.3 t 1.7 24.1 +/- 0.8 280 +/- 2.2 28.3 +/- 1.9 107.7.+/- 8.4 P25 EXEC.BUILDING LAWN 76 m WNW 33.9 +/- 1.7 43.0+/-2.1 43.1 +/-2.5 47.4+/- 3.2 167.4+/-23.2 P05 FENCE-WATER TANK 81 m NNE 21.1 +/- 0.9 21.7 +/- 1.0. 22.5 +/- 0.9 24.2 +/- 0.9 89.4 +/-5.6 P06 FENCE-OIL STORAGE 85 m NE 29.4 +/- 1.2 29.4 +/- 1.4 30.3 +/- 1.8 31.5 1 2.4 120.6 +/- 5.4 P19 O&M -2ND SW CORNER 86mS 20.2 +/- 1.0 19.8 +/-:0.8 20.8+/- 1.2 22.4 +/- 1.1 83.2 4.9.P18O&M- 1ST SW CORNER 90m S 24.3 +/- 1.4 23.5++/- 0.8 29.8+/- 1.1 31.3+/- 2.0 108.9+/- 15.8 P08 COMPRESSED GAS STOR 92mE 31.9+/- 2.4 31.5+/- 2.5 32.4+/- 1.3 34.2+/- 1.6 130.0+/-6.2 P03 FENCE-L SCREENHOUSE 100 m NW 33.7 +/- 1.2 29.0 +/- 0.9 32.8 +/- 1.2 35.0 t 2.4 130.5 +/- 10,7 P17 FENCE-EXEC.BUILDING 107mrW 51.0+/- 2.9 42.9+/- 3.3 52.5+/-2.1 52.9+/- 1.9 199.3 19.4 P07 FENCE-INTAKE BAY 121 m ENE 25.4 +/- 1.3 25.5 +/- 1.3 28.7 +/- 1.2 28.2 +/- 1.1 .107.8 7.5 P23 O&M -2ND S WALL 121 m SSE 26.0 +/- 1.3 23.4+/- 0.9 27.1 +/- 1.4 29.2 +/- 1.4 105.8+/- 10.0 P26 FENCE-WAREHOUSE 134 m ESE 28.3+/- 1.2 31.1 +/- 1.2 29.6+/- 1.7 30.4+/- 1.7 119.4+/- 5.7 P02 FENCE-SHOREFRONT 135 m NW 25.4 +/- 1.2 23.5 +/- 0.8 28.7 +/- 1.7 29.7 +/- 1.2 107.4 +/- 11.8 P09 FENCE-W BOAT RAMP 136 mE 26.1 +/- 1.2 25.9 +/- 1.5 27.5 +/- 1.6 26:5 +/- 1.5 106.0 t 4.1 P22 O&M -2ND N WALL 137 m SE 20.6 +/- 1.1 20.7 +/-0.8 21.8 +/- 0.9 22.2 +/- 1.2 85.3 +/- 3.7 P16 FENCE-W SWITCHYARD 172 m SW 69.1 +/- 2.7 56.4 +/- 3.3 76.1 +/- 4.0 75.4 +/- 5.0 276.9 +/- 37.3 P11 FENCE-TCF GATE 183 m ESE 40.1 +/- 1.7 53.0i +/-1.6 51.5 +/- 3.0 38.4 +/- 1.8 183.0 +/- 30.5 P27 FENCE7TCF/BOAT RAMP 185 m ESE 21.8 +/- 1.0 23.6 +/- 1.1 25.0 +/- 1.9 23.5 +/- 1.3 93.9 +/- 5.8 P12 FENCE-ACCESS GATE 202 m SE 23.9 +/- 1.0 21.8 +/- 0.7 23.5 +/- 1.3 25.3 +/- 1.3 94.6 +/- 6.2 P15 FENCE-E SWITCHYARD 220 m S 22.0 +/- 1.1 21.7 +/- 1.0 24.5 +/- 0.9 25.1 +/- 1.7 .93.2+/-7.4 P1O FENCE-TCF/INTAKE BAY 223 m E 24.9 +/- 1.7 28.6 +/- 1.2 29.6 +/- 1.6 24.8 +/- 1.1 107.9 +/- 10.2 P13 FENCE-MEDICAL BLDG. 224 m SSE 21.5 +/- 1.2 20.3 +/- 1.5 22.9 +/- 1.4 24.7 +/- 1.4 89.4 +/- 8.1 P14 FENCE-BUTLER BLDG 228 m S 20.8 +/- 0.9 18.9 +/- 1.1 21.1 +/- 0.9 22.9 +/- 1.3 83.7 +/- 6.7 P28 FENCE-TCF/PRKNG LOT 1259 m ESE 68.2 +/- 2.3 53.1 +/- 2.8 80.0 +/- 4.7 55.7 +/- 2.1 257.1 +/- 50.0 Distance and direction are measured from centerline of Reactor Building to the monitoring location.Annual value is based on arithmetic mean of the observed quarterly values multiplied by four quarters/year.

Page 39 Table 2.4-3 Average TLD Exposures By Distance Zone During 2013 Average Exposure +/- Standard Deviation:

mR/period Exposure Zone 1* I Zone 2 Zone 3 Zone.4 Period 0-3 km ..3-8 km F 8-15 km >15 km Jan-Mar 17.1 +/-:5.1 14.2 +/- 2.3 13.8 +/- 1.1 14.7 +/- 2.9 Apr-Jun 16.5 +/- 4.8 13.0 +/- 1.9 13.0 +/- 1.7 13.9 +/- 3.0 Jul-Sep 18.4 +/- 5.8 14.8 +/- 2.0 14.1 +/- 1.7 15.2 +/- 2.6 Oct-Dec 19.6 +/- 5.2 15.9 +/- 2.0 15.9 +/- 1.9 16.4 +/- 2.5 Jan-Dec 71.6 +/- 21.3** 57.8 +/- 9.0 56.7 +/- 7.6 60.2 +/- 10.9* Zone 1 extends from the PNPS restricted/protected area boundary outward to 3 kilometers (2 miles), and includes several TLDs located within the site boundary.When corrected for TLDs located within the site boundary, the Zone 1 annual average is calculated to be 62.2 +/- 8.9 mR/yr.Page 40 Table 2.5-1 Air Particulate Filter Radioactivity Analyses Radiological Environmental Program Summary Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Plymouth, MA (January -December 2013)MEDIUM: AirParticulates (AP) UNITS: oCi/cubic meter Indicator Stations Station with Highest Mean Control Stations Mean t Std.Dev. Station: Mean +/- Std.Dev. Mean +/- Std.Dev.Range -Range Range Fraction>LLD Fraction>LLD Fraction>LLD 1.3E-2 +/- 4.9E-3 EW: 1.4E-2 +/- 5.3E-3 1.4E-2 +/- 5.3E-3 4.7E-4 -3.5E-2 4.4E-3 -3.0E-2 4.4E-3 -3.0E-2 511/511 1 52/52 52152 Be-7 43 1.0E-1 +/- 1.9E-2 EW: 1.2E-1 +/- 1.9E-2 1.2E-1 +/- 1.9E-2 0 6.3E 1.4E-1 1.OE-1 -1.4E-1 1.0E-1 -1.4E-1 1 40/40 .4/4 4/4 K-40 43 <LLD 5.9E-2 +/- 1.32-2 5.9E-2 +/- 1.3E-2 0 <LLD <LLD -5.9E-2 <LLD -5.9E-2 0/40 114 1/4 Cs-134 43 0.05 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/40 0/40 0/4 Cs-137 43 0.06 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/40 0/40 0/4 Ra-226 43 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD* 0/40 0/40 0/4 Non-Routine refers to those radionuclides that exceeded the Reporting Levels in ODCM Table 3.5-4.Page 41 Table 2.6-1 Charcoal Cartridge Radioactivity Analyses Radiological Environmental Program Summary Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Plymouth, MA (January -December 2013)MEDIUM: Charcoal Cartridge (CF) UNITS: pCilcubic meter Indicator Stations Station with Highest Mean Control Stations Mean +/- Std.Dev. Station: Mean +/- Std.Dev. Mean +/- Std.Dev.No. An~alyses Required Range Range Range Radionuclide Non-routine LLD Fraction>LLD Fraction>LLD Fraction>LLD 1-131 563 0.07 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0I <LLD <LLD <LLD I I I 1- 0/511 0/52 0/52* Non-Routine refers to those radionuclides that exceeded the Reporting Levels in ODCM Table 3.5-4.Page 42 Table 2.7-1 Milk Radioactivity Analyses Radiological Environmental Program Summary Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Plymouth, MA (January -December 2013)No milk sampling was performed during 2013, as no suitable indicator locations for milk production were available for sampling within 5 miles of Pilgrim Station.Page 43 Table 2.8-1 Forage Radioactivity Analyses Radiological Environmental Program Summary Pilgrim Nuclear PowerStation, Plymouth, MA (January -December 2013)No forage sampling was performed during 2013, as no grazing animals used for food products were available at any indicator locations within 5 miles of Pilgrim Station..Page 44 Table 2.9-1 Vegetable/Vegetation Radioactivity Analyses Radiological Environmental Program Summary Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Plymouth, MA (January -December 2013)hjr-"KA %I-ef I M IIlT12. HFIIntaa s WA hdi " L&31 hn-1 U Indicator Stations Station with Highest Mean Control Stations Mean +/- Std.Dev. Station: Mean +/- Std.Dev. Mean +/- Std.Dev.No. Analyses Required Range Range Range Radionuclide Non-routine*

LLD Fraction>LLD Fraction>LLD Fraction>LLD Be-7 23 1.5E+3 t 8.9E+2 DMF: 3.5E+3 t 1.3E+2 2.OE+3 +/- 1.5E+3 0 <LLD -2.8E+3 3.5E+3 -3.5E+3 <LLD -3.5E+3 10/15 1/1 3/8 K-40 23 3.2E+3 +/- 8.7E+2 Norton: 7.7E+3 +/- 2.5E+2 3.7E+3 +/- 2.2E+3 0 2.1 E+3 -5.3E+3 7.7E+3 -7.7E+3 1.0E+3 -7.7E+3 15/15 1/1 8/8 1-131 23 60 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0115 0)15 0/8 Cs-134 23 60 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/15 0/15 0/8 Cs-137 23 80 3.7E+1 +/- 1.9E+1 PineHills:

6.1E+1 +/- 7.1E+0 9.2E+0+/- 4.1E+0 0 <LLD -6.1E+1 6.1E+1 -6.1E+1 <LLD -9.2E+0 4/15 1/1 1/8 Ra-226 23 4,8E+2 +/- 3.6E+2 Ply Cnty. 7.4E+2 +/- 1.3E+2 4.OE+2 +/- 2.0E+2 0 <LID -7.4E+2 <LLD -7.4E+2 <LLID -5.7E+2 2/15 1/4 .4/8 AcTh-228 23 2.5E+2 +/- 2.6E+2 Greenwood:

6.4E-2 +/- 3.OE+1 1.1E+2 + 6.4E+ 1 0 <LLD -6.4E+2 6.4E+2 -6.4E+2 <LLD -1.7E+2 4/15 1i1 3/8 Non-Rouline refers to those radionuclides that exceeded the Reporting Levels in ODCM Table 3.5-4.Page 45 Table 2.10-1 Cranberry Radioactivity Analyses Radiological Environmental Program Summary Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Plymouth, MA (January -December 2013)KAl~rll rA -0 Q k ;TO b ., On;US/II E.LOI If;l,. Ild I U EL~ I gz LJ ai.l~% wei t Indicator Stations Station with Highest Mean Contrcd Stations Mean +/- Std.Dev. Station: Mean -Std.Dev. Mean t Std.Dev.No. Analyses -Required Range Range Range Radionuclide Non-routine LLD FracUon> LLD Fraction>

LLD Fraction>

LLD Be-7 2 2.7E+2 +/- 4.8E+1 BvdamRd: 2.7E+2 +/- 4.8E+ 1 <LLD 0 2.7E+2 -2.7E+2 2.7E+2 -2.7E+2 <LLD 1/1 1/1 0/1 K-40 2 8.4E+2 +/- 9.2E+1 HollowBog:

9.7E+2 +/- 8.5E+1 9.7E+2 +/- 8.5E+1 0 8.4E+2 -8.4E+2 9.7E+2 -9.7E+2 9.7E+2 -9.7E+2 1/1 11/ 1)1 1-131 2 60 <LLD <LLD <LLID 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0O1 0/1 011 Cs-134 2 60 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLID <LLD Oil O/i 0/1 Cs-137 2 80 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/1 0/1 0/1 Ra-226 2 2.3E+2 t 1.OE+2 HollowBog:

3.5E+2+/- 1.2E+2 3.5E+2 +/- 1.2E+2 a 2.3E+2 -2.3E+2 3.5E+2 -3.5E+2 3.5E+2 -3.5E+2 111 1/1 1/1 AcTh-228 2 <LLD <LLD <LID 0 <LLD <LLID <LLD 0/1 0/1 0/1* Non-Routine refers to those radionuclides that exceeded the Reporting Levels in ODCM Table 3.5-4.Page 46 Table 2.12-1 Surface Water Radioactivity, Analyses Radiological Environmental Program Summary Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Plymouth, MA (January -December 2013)M Ule 0 ýt 1.w~r-~u l .,..uL==,., v er Lv I U131I : D, Iu.l/, Radionuclide No. Analyses Required Indicator Stations Station with Highest Mean Control Stations H-3 12 3000 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0' <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/24 #N/A 0/4 Be-7 36 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/24 0/12 0/12 K-40 36 2.8E+2 +/- 1.5E+2 PP: 3.9E+2 +/- 8.3E+1 3.9E+2 +/- 8.3E+1 0 <LLD -5.8E+2 3.OE+2 -5.2E+2 3.OE+2 -5.2E+2 20124 12/12 12/12 Mn-54 36 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD S0/24 0/12 0/12 Fe-59 36 30 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LID <LLD <LLD 0/24 0/12 0/12 Co-58 36 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/24 0/12 0/12 Co-60 36 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD-' 0/24 0112 0/12 Zn-65 36 30 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/24 0/12 0/12 Zr-95 36 30 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LID <LLD 0/24 0/12 0/12 Nb-95 36 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/24 0/12 0/12 1-131 36 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/24 0/12 0/12 Cs-134 36 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/24 0/12 0/12 Cs-137 36 18 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/24 0/12 0/12 Ba-140 36 60 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0124 0112 0/12 La-140 36 15 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 1 0/24 0/12 0/12 Ra-226 36 9.2E+1 +/- 2.7E+1 PP: 9.8E+1 +/- 2.9E+1 9.8E+1 + 2.9E+1 0 <LLD- 1.5E+2 <LLD- 1.5E+2 <LLD- 1.5E+2..18/24 9112 9/12 AcTh-228 36 8.2E+0 +/- 2.2E+0 DIS: 8.7E+0 +/- 2.6E+0 8.4E+0 : 3.1E+0 0 <LLD-1.2E+1

<LLD- 1.2E+1 <LLD- 1.4E+1 8/24 5/12 9112 Non-Routine refers to those radionuclides that exceeded the Reporting Levels in ODCM Table 3.5-4.Page 47 Table 2.13-1 Sediment Radioactivity Analyses Radiological Environmental Program Summary Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Plymouth, MA (January -December 2013).A "ll -" 0A. l;C. .. tOrI M6llmen, ism 0 I 'J~l ,8 INlQu l Indicator.Stations Station with Highest Mean Control Stations Mean +/- Std.Dev. Station: Mean i Std.Dev..

Mean +/- Std.Dev.No. Analyses Required Range Range Range Radionuclide Non-routine*

LLD. Fractlon>LLD Fraction>LLD Fraction>LLD Be-7 12 4.4E+2 +/- 1.1E+2 Manmt Pt: 4.4E+2 +/- i.- IE+2 <LLD 0 <LLD -4.4E+2 <LLD -4.4E+2 <LLD 1/8 1/2 0/4 K-40 12 9.4E+3 +/- 1.5E+3 Gm Hrbr: 1.1E+4 +/- 5.OE+3 1.'1E+4 +/- 3.OE+3 0 6.8E+3 -1.2E+4 7.5E+3 -1.5E+4 7.5E+3 -1.5E+4*8/8 2/2 4/4 Cs-134 12 150 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/6 0/2 0/2 Cs-137 12 180 <LLD <LLD <LLD* 0 <LD <LLD <LLD 0/6 0/2 0/2 Ra-226 .12 5.5E+2 +/- 3.6E+2 Manmt Pt: 8.7E+2 + 2.6E+2 5.1E+2 +/- 4.IE+2 0 <LLD -9.8E+2. <LLD -8.7E+2 <LLD -9.6E+2 6/8 .1/2 .3/4.AcTh-228 12 4.1E+2:+/- 1.2E+2 Ply Hbr: 5.2E+2 +/- 1.1E+2 3.9E+2+/- 1.3E+2 0 <LLD -5.9E+2 4.5E+2 -5,9E+2 2.5E+2 .- 5.4E+2 5/8 .2/2 4/4 Non-Routine refers to those radionuclides that exceeded the Reporting Levels in ODCM Table 3.5-4.Page 48 Table 2.14-1 Irish Moss Radioactivity Analyses Radiological Environmental Program Summary Pilgrm Nuclear Power Station, Plymouth, MA (January -December 2013)RAMIHI"II 1A. Ilh Il e I I SU UOSS LL36J MUEUý2QS:dLMQ VM Indicator Stations Station with Highest Mean Control Stations Mean +/- Std.Dev. Station: Mean +/- Std.Dev. Mean +/- Std.Dev.No. Analyses Required Range Range Range Radionuclide Non-rouline" LLD Fraction>LLD Fraction>LLD Fraction>LLD Be-7 8 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 016 0/2 0/2 K-40 8 6.OE+3+/- 1.5E+3 Ellisville:

7.4E+3 +/- 1.8E+3 5.4E+3 +/- 1.9E+3 0 4.2E+3 -8.7E+3 6.2E+3 -8.7E+3 4.1E+3 -6.8E+3 6/6 2/2 2/2 Mn-54 8 130 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/6 012 0/2 Fe-59 8 260 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/6 0/2 0/2 Co-58 8 130. <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/6 0/2 0/'2 CO-60 8 130 <LLD <LLD <LLD.0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/6 0/2 0/2 Zn-65 8 260 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/6 0/2 0/2 1-131 8 !LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/6 0/2 0/2 Cs-134 8 130 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/6 0/2 .0/2 Cs-137 8 150 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/6 0/2 0/2 Ra-226 8 4.2E+2 +/-- 1.4E+2 Ellisville:

4.5E+2 +/- 1.6E+2 3.3E+2 +/- 1.4E+2 0 <LLD -4.5E+2 <LLD -4.5E+2 <LLD -3.3E+2 1 216 1/2 .1/2 AcTh-228 8 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD I I 1 0/6 0/2 0/2* Non-Routine refers to those radionuclides that exceeded the Reporting Levels in ODCM Table 3.5-4.Page 49 Table 2.15-1 Shellfish Radioactivity Analyses Radiological Environmenlal Program Summary Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Plymouth, MA (January -December 2013)MFrllIIM. Indicator Stations Station with Highest Mean Control Stations Mean +/- Std.Dev. Station: Mean +/- Std.Dev. Mean +/- Std.Dev.No. Analyses Required Range Range Range Radionuclide Non-routine*

LLD Fraction>LLD Fraction>LLD Fraction>LLD 3e-7 10 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD*0/6 0/4 0/4 K-40 10 2.3E+3 +/- 9.gE+2 Ply Hrbr: 2.5E+3 +/- 1.1E+3 1.6E+3 +/- 1.7E+3 0 1.2E+3 -3.8E+3 1.5E+3 -3.8E+3- 1.3E+2 -3.2E+3 6/6 4/4 4/4 Mn-54 10 130 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/6 0/4 0/4 Fe-59 10 260 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD: ,0/6 0/4 0/4 Co-58 10 130 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/6 014 0/4 Co-60 10 130 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/6 0/4 0/4" Zn-65 10 260 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD .<LLD <LLD 0/6 0/4 0/4 Cs-134 10 130 <!LID <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/6 0/4 0/4 Cs-137 10 150 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/6 0/4 0/4 Ra-226 10 5.9E+2 +/- 2.8E+2 Gm Hrbr. 7.3E+2 +/- 3.OE+2 7.3E+2 +/- 3.OE+2 0 <LLD -5.9E+2 <LLD -7.3E+2 <LLD -7,3E+2 1/6 '112. 1/4.AcTh-228 10 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD I 1 0/6 .0/4 0/4 Non-Routine refers to those radionuclides that exceeded the Reporting Levels in ODCM Table 3.5-4.Page 50 Table 2.16-1 Lobster Radioactivity Analyses Radiological Environmental Program Summary Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Plymouth, MA (January -December 2013)MEDIUM: American Lobster (HA) UNITS: oCi/kgwet Indicator Stations Station with Highest Mean Control Stations Mean +/- Std.Dev. Station: Mean +/- Std.Dev. Mean +/- Std.Dev.No. Analyses Required Range Range Range Radionuclide Non-routine*

LLD Fraction>LLD Fraction>LLD Fraction>LLD Be-7 5 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/4 0/4 0/1 K-40 5 2.8E+3 +/- 5.4E+2 DIS: 2.8E+3 +/- 5.4E+2 1.7E+3 +/- 2.4E+2 0 2. 1E+3 -3.4E+3 2.1E+3 -3.4E+3 1.7E+3 -1.7E+3 4/4 4/4 1/1 Mn-54 5 .130 <LLD .<LLD <LLD 0 <LLD .<LLD <LLD 0/4 0/4 0/1 Fe-59 5 260 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/4 0/4 0/1 Co-58 5 130 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/4 0/4 0/1 Co-60 5 130 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/4 0/4 0/1 Zn-65 5 260 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD<0/4 0/4 0/1 Cs-134 5 130 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/4 0/4 0/1 Cs-137 5 150 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/4 014 0/1 Ra-226 5 6.7E+2 +/- 2.3E+2 DIS: 6.7E+2 +/- 2.3E+2 5.4E+2 +/- 3.OE+2 0 <LLD -7.OE+2 <LLD -7.0E+2 5.4E+2 -5.4E+2 2/4 2/4 1/1 AcTh-228 5 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 014 0/4 0/1"Non-Routine refers to those radionuclides that exceeded the Reporting Levels in ODCM Table 3.5-4.Page 51 Table 2.17-1 Fish Radioactivity Analyses Radiological Environmental Program Summary Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Plymouth, MA (January -December 2013)MFI'IIM Fim .' r iIh H)INITR" nflknwpt Indicator Stations Station with Highest Mean Control Stations Mean +/- Std.Dev. Station: Mean +/- Std.Dev. Mean +/- Std.Dev.No. Analyses Required Range Range Range Radionuclide Non-routine*

LLD Fraction>LLD Fracton>LLD Fraction>LLD Be-7 8 <LLD <LLD cLLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LID 0/5 0/5 0/4 K-40 8 4.8E+3 +/- 8.1E+2 DIS: 4.8E+3+/- 8.1E+2 4.5E+3 +/- 5.2E+2 0 3.9E+3 -5.7E+3 3.9E+3 -5.7E+3 3.9E+3 -4.9E+3 4/4 4/4 4/4 Mn-54 8 130 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/5 0/5 0/4 Fe-59 8 260 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD_ _0/5 0/5 0/4 Co-58 8 130 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/5 0/5 0/4 Co-60 8 130 <LLD <LLt) <LID 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/5 0/5 0/4 Zn-65 8 260 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD. <LLD 0/5 0/5 0/4 Cs-134 8 130 <LLD <LILD <LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/5 0/5 0/4 Cs-137 8 150 <LLD <LLD <LID 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD 0/5 0/5 0/4 Ra-226 \ 8 1.3E+3 +/- 5.7E+2 DIS: 1.3E+3 +/- 5.7E+2 8.1E+2 +/- 1.8E+2 0 <LLD -1.7E+3 <LLD -1.7E+3 <LLD -8.8E+2 2/4 2/4 3/4 AcTh-228 8 <LLD <LID .<LLD 0 <LLD <LLD <LLD.015 015. 0/4 Non-Routine refers to those radionuclides that exceeded the Reporting Levels in ODCM Table 3.5-4.Page 52 Figure 2.2-1 Environmental TLD Locations Within the PNPS Protected Area TLD Station L Location*Description

[Code Distance/Direction TLDs Within Protected Area O&M/RXB. BREEZEWAY P21 50 m SE EXEC.BUILDING P24' 57 m W FENCE-R SCREENHOUSE P04 66'm N O&M-2NDW WALL P20 67 m SE EXEC.BUILDING LAWN P25 76 m WNW FENCE-WATER TANK P05 81 m NNE FENCE-OIL STORAGE*.

P06 85 m NE O&M -2ND SW CORNER. Pig 86'm S" O&M-1STSW CORNER P18 90 m S COMPRESSED GAS STOR P08 92 m E FENCE-L SCREENHOUSE P03 100 m NW FENCE-EXEC.BUILDING P17 107 m W O&M -2ND S WALL P23 121 m ENE FENCE-INTAKE BAY P07 121 m SSE FENCE-WAREHOUSE P26 134 m ESE FENCE-SHOREFRONT P02 135 m NW FENCE-W BOAT RAMP P09 136 m E O&M-2NDNWALL P22 137 m SE FENCE-W SWITCHYARD P16 172 m SW FENCE-TCF GATE P1l 183 m ESE FENCE-TCF/BOAT RAMP P27 185 m ESE FENCE-ACCESSGATE P12 202 m SE FENCE-E SWITCHYARD P15 220'm S FENCE-TCF/INTAKE BAY P1o 223 m E FENCE-MEDICAL BLDG. P13 224 m SSE FENCE-BUTLER BLDG P14 228 m S FENCE-TCFIPRKNG LOT P28 259 m ESE Distance and direction are measured from centerline of Reactor Building to the monitoring location.Page 53 Figure 2.2-1 (continued)

Environmental TLD Locations Within the PNPS Protected Area H-1 6 0K Met Tower Protected Area Fence Page 54 Figure 2.2-2 TLD and Air Sampling Locations:

Within 1 Kilometer TLD Station Location*

Air Samplina Station Location*Description.

Code Distance/Direclion Description Code Distance/Direction Zone I TLDsi 0-3 km BOAT LAUNCH WEST BLW 0.11 km .E OVERLOOK AREA OA 0.15 km W OVERLOOK AREA OA 0.15 km W PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE PB 0.21 km N HEALTH CLUB TC 0.15 km WSW MEDICAL BUILDING WS 0.23 km SSE BOAT LAUNCH EAST BLE 0.16 km ESE EAST BREAKWATER EB 0.44 km* ESE PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE PB 0.21 km N PROPERTY LINE PL 0.54 km NNW SHOREFRONT SECURITY P01 0.22 km NNW W ROCKY HILL ROAD WR 0.83 km WNW MEDICAL BUILDING WS 0,23 km SSE E ROCKY.HILL ROAD ER 0.89 km SE PARKING LOT CT. 0,31 km SE SHOREFRONT PARKING PA 0.35 km NNW STATION A A 0,37 km WSW STATION F F 0.43 km NW STATION B B 0.44 km. S EAST BREAKWATER EB 0.44 km ESE PNPS MET TOWER PMT 0.44 km WNW STATION H H 0.47 km SW STATION I I 0.48 km WNW STATION L L 0.50 km ESE STATION G G 0.53 km W STATION D 0 0.54 km NW PROPERTY LINE PL 0.54 km NNW STATION C C ' 0.57 km ESE HALL'S BOG HB 0.63 kon SE GREENWOOD HOUSE GH 0.65 km ESE W ROCKY HILL ROAD WR 0.83 km WNW E ROCKY HILL ROAD ER 0.89 km SE Page 55 Figure 2.2-2 (continued)

TLD and Air Sampling Locations:

Within 1 Kilometer Page 56 Figure 2.2-3 TLD and Air Sampling Locations:

1 to 5 Kilometers TLD Station Location*

Air Samplin: Station Location*Description Code Distance/Direction Description Code Distance/Direction Zone 1 TLDs: 0-3 km MICROWAVE TOWER MT 1.03 km 'SSW CLEFT ROCK CR 1.27 km SSW CLEFT ROCK CR 1.27 km SSW MANOMET SUBSTATION MS 3.60 km SSE BAYSHORE/GATE RD BD 1.34 km WNW MANOMET ROAD MR 1.38 km S DIRT ROAD DR 1.48 km SW EMERSON ROAD EM 1.53 km SSE EMERSON/PRISCILLA EP 1.55 km SE EDISON ACCESS ROAD AR 1.59 km SSE BAYSHORE BS 1.76 km W STATION E E 1.86 km S JOHN GAULEY JG 1.99 km W STATION J J 2.04 km SSE WHITEHORSE ROAD WH 2.09 km SSE PLYMOUTH YMCA RC 2.09 km WSW STATION K K 2.17 km S TAYLOR/THOMAS TT 2.26 km SE YANKEE VILLAGE YV 2.28 km WSW GOODWIN PROPERTY GN 2.38 km SW RIGHT OF WAY RW 2.83 km S TAYLOR/PEARL TP 2.98 km SE Zone 2 TLDs7.3-8 km VALLEY ROAD VR 3.26 km SSW MANOMET ELEM ME 3.29 km SE WARREN/CLIFFORD WC 3.31 km W RT.3A/BARTLETT RD BB 3.33 krn SSE MANOMET POINT MP 3.57 km SE MANOMET SUBSTATION MS 3.60 km SSE BEACHWOOD ROAD BW 3.93 km SE PINES ESTATE PT 4.44 km SSW EARL ROAD EA 4.60 km SSE S PLYMOUTH SUBST SP 4.62 kmn W ROUTE 3 OVERPASS RP 4.81 k1 SW RUSSELL MILLS RD RM 4.85 km WSW __Distance and direction are measured from centerline of Reactor Building to the monitoring location.Page 57 I Figure 2.2-3 (continued)

TLD and Air Sampling Locations:

1 to 5 Kilometers Page 58 Figure 2.2-4 TLD and Air Sampling Locations:

5 to 25 Kilometers T'D Station Location*

Air Sampling Station Location*, Description Code Distance/Direction Description Code Distance/Direction Zone 2 TLDs: 3-8 km HILLDALE ROAD HD 5.18 km W PLYMOUTH CENTER PC 6.69 km W MANOMET BEACH MB 5.43 km SSE BEAVER DAM ROAD BR 5.52 km S PLYMOUTH CENTER PC 6.69 km W LONG POND/DREW RD LD 6.97 km WSW HYANNIS ROAD HR 7.33 km SSE MEMORIAL HALL MH 7.58 km WNW SAQUISH NECK SN 7.58 km NNW COLLEGE POND CP 7.59 km SW Zone 3 TLDs: 8-15 km DEEP WATER POND DW 8.59 km W LONG POND ROAD LP 8.88 km SSW NORTH PLYMOUTH NP 9.38 km WNW STANDISH SHORES SS 10.39 km NW ELLISVILLE ROAD EL 11.52 km SSE UP.COLLEGE POND RD UC 11.78 km SW SACRED HEART SH 12.92 km W KING CAESAR ROAD KC 13.11 km NNW BOURNE ROAD BE 13.37 km S SHERMAN AIRPORT SA 13.43 km WSW Zone4TLDs:

>15km CEDARVILLE SUBST CS 15.93 km S KINGSTON SUBST KS 16.15 km WNW.LANDING ROAD LR 16"46 km NNW-CHURCH/WEST CW 16.56 km NW MAIN/MEADOW MM 17.02 km WSW DIV MARINE FISH DMF 20.97 km SSE Distance and.direction are measured from centerline of Reactor Building to the monitoring location.Page 59 Figure 2.2-4 (continued)/

TLD and Air Sampling Locations:

5 to 25 Kilometers Page 60 Figure 2.2-5 Terrestrial and Aquatic Sampling Locations Description Code ' Distance/Direction I Description Code Distance/Direction*

FORAG Plymouth County Farm Bridgewater Control Hanson Farm Control SEi TABLESNEGETATyION Site Boundary C Site Boundary B Rocky Hill Road Site Boundary D Site Boundary A Clay Hill Road Brook Road Beaver Dam Road Plymouth County Farm Hanson Farm Control Norton Control CRANBERRIES Bartlett Road Bog Beaverdam Road Bog Hollow Farm Bog Control CF BF HN BC BB RH Bd BA CH BK BD CF HN NC BT MR HF 5.6 krn W 311 k W 34 km W 0.5 0.5 0.9 1.1 1.5 1.6 2.9 3.4 5.6 34 5b 4.3 3.4 16 km km km km km km km km km km km SW ESE SE S SSW W SSE S W W W SURFACE WATER Discharge Canal Bartlett Pond Powder Point Control SEDIMENT Discharge Canal Outfall Plymouth Beach Manomet Point Plymouth Harbor Duxbury Bay Control Green Harbor Control IRISH MOSS Discharge Canal Outfall Manomet Point Ellisville Brant Rock Control SHELLFISH Discharge Canal Outfall Plymouth Harbor Manomet Point Duxbury Bay Control Powder Point Control Green Harbor Control Discharge Canal Outfall Plymouth Beach Plymouth Harbor Duxbury Bay Control FISHES Discharge Canal Outfall Plymouth Beach Jones River Control Cape Cod Bay Control N River-Hanover Control Cataumet Control Provincetown Control Buzzards Bay Control Priest Cove Control Nantucket Sound Control'Atlantic Ocean Control Vineyard Sound Control km SSE km S km WNW DIS BP PP DIS PLB MP PLY-H DUX-BAY GH DIS MP EL BK DIS PLY-H MP DUX-BAY PP GH DIS PLB PLY-H DUX-BAY DIS PLB JR CC'BAY NR CA PT BB PC NS AO MV 0.8 km 4.0 km 3.3 km 4.1 km 14 km 16 km 0.7 Ikm 4.0 km 12 km 18 kn 0.7 km 4.1 km 4.0 km 13 km 13 km 16 km 0.5 km 4.0 km 6.4 km 11 km 0.5 km 4.0 km 13 km 24 km 24 km 32 km 32 km 40 km 48 km 48 km 48 km 64 km NE W ESE W NNW NNW NNE ESE SSE NNW NNE W ESE NNW NNW NNW N W WNW NNW N W WNW ESE NNW SSW NE SSW SW SSE E SSW 0.2 km N 2.7 km SE 13 km NNW-I* Distance and direction are measured from the centerline of the reactor to the sampling/monitoring location.Page 61 Figure 2.2-5 (continued)

Terrestrial and Locations:SYMBO KEY--SHELLFISH.(MIrBLUEMVII$SEL)(S sFT S HELp)*(.H 'HAR-SHEL;L)

• IRISH MOSS LOBSTER c-~ FISHES".U SORFACE WATER U SEDIMENT ()CRANBERRY I VEGETATIONj 0 MILES: 2 SCALEi.?2 KILOMETERS NorakiAsTr

.4E~METSRS

'EAST (fý3:43'KWMETERS' low- .ý6UTHWEiT 42 KILOMETERS

§Uf'SbUTH.SOST WS 64IiESLOMETERS

..SOUT.H.SOUTI4WEST 32 KILOmerTFs SOUITH-SOUJTHWEST SUHSUHAST Page 62 Figure 2.2-6 Environmental Sampling And Measurement Control Locations Description Code Distance/Direction*

Description Code Distance/Directiont TL2 SURFACE WATER Cedarville Substation CS 16 km S. Powder Point Control PP 13 km NNW Kingston Substation KS 16 km WNW Landing Road *LR 16 km NNW SEDIMENT Church & West Street CW 17 km NW Dubury Bay Control DUX-BAY 14 km NNW Main & Meadow Street MM 17 km WSW Green Harbor Control GH 16 km NNW Div. Marine Fisheries DMF 21 km SSE East Weymouth Substation EW 40 km NW IRISH MOSS Brant Rock Control BK 18 km NNW AIR AMPLER East Weymouth Substation EW 40 km NWV SHELLFISH Duxbury Bay Control OUX-BAY 13 km NNW FORGE Powder Point Control PP 13 km NNW Bridgewater Control BF 31 km W Green Harbor Control GH 16 km NNW Hanson Farm Control HN 34 km W LOBSTER VEGETABLESNEGETATION .Duxbury Bay Control DUX-BAY 11 km NNW Hanson. Farm Control HN 34 km W Norton Control NC 50 km W FISHES Jones River Control JR 13 km WNW Cape Cod Bay Control CC-BAY 24 km ESE C E N River-Hanover Control NR 24 km NNW Hollow Farm Bog Control HF 16 km WNW Cataumet Control CA 32 km SSW.Provincetown Control PT 32 km NE Buzzards Bay Control BB 40 km SSW Priest Cove Control PC 48 km SW Nantucket Sound Control NS 48 km SSE Atlantic Ocean Control AID 48 km E Vineyard Sound Control MV 64 km SSW Distance and direction are measured from the centerline of the reactor to the sampling/monitoring location.Page 63 Figure 2.2-6 (continued)

Environmental Sampling And Measurement Control Locations SYMBOL-KEY" IHUFISEWT ER AIR SO V-SHLL LAX~ TIDHOS-,,il .E* OBTE 0 MIES1 SCALE CxmPo BAY<gahy Page 64 Airborne Gross-Beta Radioactivity Levels Near-Station Monitors 5.OE-02 4.OE-02 Z 3.OE-02 E V 0 .OE0 0 1 .0E-02 O.OE+O0 1 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month -2013 AP-00 Warehouse

--AP-07 Pedestrian Bridge AP-08 Overlook Area U AP-09 East Breakwater-w- AP-21 East Weymouth Control Figure 2.5-1 Airborne Gross-Beta Radioactivity Levels: Near Station Monitors Page 65 Airborne Gross-Beta Radioactivity Levels PropertyLine Monitors Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Month -2013--- AP-01 E. Rocky Hill Road -AP-03 W. Rocky Hill Road AP-06 Property Line --- AP-21 East Weymouth Control Figure 2.5-2 Airborne Gross-Beta Radioactivity Levels: Property Line Monitors Page 66 Airborne Gross-Beta Radioactivity Levels Offsite Monitors 5.0E-02 4.OE-02 a 3.OE-02 E.0 U 1 .OE-02 o.oE+ao .Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct. Nov Dec Month -2013---AP-10 Cleft Rock*,AP-17 Manomet Substation AP-1 5 Plymouth Center--- AP-21 East Weymouth Control Figure 2.5-3 Airborne Gross-Beta Radioactivity Levels: Offsite Monitors Page 67 3.0

SUMMARY

OF RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT ON HUMANS The radiological impact to humans from the Pilgrim Station's radioactive liquid and gaseous releases has been estimated using two methods: " calculations based on measurements of plant effluents;.and

". calculations based on measurements of environmental samples.The first method utilizes data from the radioactive effluents (measured at the point of release)together with. conservative models that calculate the dispersion and transport of radioactivity through the environment to humans (Reference 7). The second method is based on actual measurements of radioactivity in the environmental samples and on dose conversion factors recommended by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

The measured types and quantities of radioactive liquid and gaseous effluents..

released from Pilgrim Station during 2013 were reported to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; copies of which are provided'in Appendix B. The- measured levels of radioactivity in the .environmental samples that required dose calculations are listed in Appendix A.The maximum individual dose from liquid effluents was calculated Using the following radiation exposure pathways: " shoreline external radiation during fishing and recreation at the Pilgrim Station Shorefront;" external radiation from the ocean during boating and swimming; and* ingestion of fish and shellfish.

For gaseous effluents, the maximum individual dose was calculated.

using the following radiation exposure pathways: " external radiation from cloud shine and submersion in gaseous effluents;" inhalation of airborne radioactivity;

• external radiation from soil deposition;" consumption of vegetables; and* consumption of milk and meat.The results from the dose calculations based on PNPS operations are presented in Table 3.0-1.The dose assessment data presented were taken from the "Radioactive Effluent Release Report" for the period of January 1 through December 31, 2013 (Reference 17).Page 68 Table 3.0-1 Radiation Doses from 2013 Pilgrim Station Operations J Maximum Individual Dose From Exposure Pathway -mrem/yr Gaseous Liquid Ambient Receptor Effluents*

Effluents Radiation**

Total Total Body 0.032 0.0027 0.43 0.47 Thyroid 0.037 0.00027 0.43 0.47 Max. Organ 0.066 0.0021 0.43 0.50* Gaseous effluent exposure pathway includes combined dose from particulates, iodines and tritium in addition to noble gases, calculated at the nearest residence.

• • Ambient radiation dose for the hypothetical maximum-exposed individual at a location on PNPS property yielding highest ambient radiation exposure value as measured with TLDs.Two federal agencies establish dose limits to protect the public from radiation and radioactivity.

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) specifies a whole body dose limit of 100 mrem/yr to be received by the maximum exposed member of the general public. This limit is set forth in Section 1301, Part 20, Title 10, of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (IOCFR20)..

By-comparison, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) limits the annual whole body dose to 25 mrem/yr, which is specified in Section 10, Part 190, Title 40, of the Code of Federal Regulations (40CFR1 90).Another useful "gauge" of radiation exposure is provided by the amount of dose a typical individual receives each year from natural and man-made sources of radiation.

Such radiation doses are summarized in Table 1.2-1. The typical American receives about 620 mrem/yr from such sources.As can be seen from the doses resulting from Pilgrim Station Operations during 2013, all values are well within the federal limits specified bythe NRC and EPA. In addition, the calculated doses from PNPS operation represent only a fraction of a percent of doses from natural and man-made radiation.

In conclusion, the radiological impact of Pilgrim Station -operations, whether based on actual environmental measurements or calculations made from effluent releases, would yield doses well within. any federal dose limits set by the NRC or EPA. Such doses represent only a small percentage of the typical annual dose received.

from natural and man-made sources of radiation.

Page 69

4.0 REFERENCES

1) United States of America, Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 50, Appendix A Criteria 64.2) Donald T. Oakley, "Natural Radiation Exposure' in the United States." U. S. -Environmental Protection Agency, ORP/SID 72-1, June 1972.3) National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Report No. 93, "Ionizing Radiation Exposures of the Population of the United States," September 1987. ....4) United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Guide 8.29, "Instructions Concerning Risks from Occupational Radiation Exposure," Revision 0, July 1981.5) Boston: Edison Company, "Pilgrim Station" Public Information Brochure 100M, WNTHP, September 1989.6) United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Guide 1.1i 09, "Calculation.

of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I," Revision 1, October 1977.7) Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, Revision 9, June 2003.-8) United States of America, Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 20.1.301.9) United States of America, Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 50, Appendix I.10) United States of America, Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 190.1.1) United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Guide 4.1, "Program forMonitoring Radioactivity in the Environs of Nuclear Power Plants," Revision 1, April 1975.12) ICN/Tracerlab, "Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Pre-operational Environmental Radiaition Survey Program, Quarterly Reports," August 1968 to June 1972.13) International Commission of Radiological Protection, Publication No. 43,. "Principles of Monitoring for the Radiation Protection of the Population," May 1984.14) United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, .NUREG-1 302, "Offsite Dose Calculation Manrual Guidance:

Standard Radiological Effluent Controls for Boiling Water Reactors," April.1991..

15) United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Branch Technical Position, "An Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program," Revision 1., November 1979..16) Settlement.

Agreement Between Massachusetts Wildlife Federation and Boston Edison Company Relating to Offsite Radiological Monitoring

-June 9, 1977..17). Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, "Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report", May 20.13.Page 70 APPENDIX A SPECIAL STUDIES There were no environmental samples collected during 2013 that contained plant-related radioactivity.

Therefore, no special studies were required to estimate dose from plant-related activity.Page 71 APPENDIX B'Effluent Release Information TABLE TITLE PAGE B.1 Supplemental Information 73 B.2-A Gaseous Effluents Summation of All Releases 74 B.2-B Gaseous Effluents

-Elevated Releases 75 B.2-C Gaseous Effluents

-Ground Level Releases 77.B.3-A Liquid Effluents Summation of All Releases 79 B.3-B Liquid Effluents 80 Page 72 Table B.1 Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report Supplemental Information January-December 2013 FACILITY:

PILGRIM NUCLEAR POWER STATION LICENSE: DPR-35 1. REGULATORY LIMITS a. Fission and activation gases: 500 mrem/yr total body and 3000 mrem/yr for skin at site boundary b,c. lodines, particulates with half-life:

1500 mrem/yr to any organ at site boundary>8 days, tritium d. Liquid effluents:

0.06 mrem/month for whole body and 0.2 mrem/month for any organ (without radwaste treatment)

2. EFFLUENT CONCENTRATION LIMITS a. Fission and activation gases: 10CFR20 Appendix B Table II b. lodines: 10CFR20 Appendix B Table II c. Particulates with half-life

> 8 days: 10CFR20 Appendix B Table II d. Liquid effluents:

2E-04 I.tCi/mL for entrained noble gases;IOCFR20 Appendix B Table I1 values for all other radionuclides

3. AVERAGE ENERGY Not Applicable

4. MEASUREMENTS AND APPROXIMATIONS OF TOTAL RADIOACTIVITY

a. Fission and activation gases: High purity germanium gamma spectroscopy for all b. lodines: gamma emitters; radiochemistry analysis for H-3, c. Particulates:

Fe-55 (liquid effluents), Sr-89, and Sr-90 d. Liquid effluents:

5. BATCH RELEASES Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Dec 2013 2013 2013 2013 2013 a. Liquid Effluents 1. Total number of releases:

5.OOE+00 1.20E+01 N/A 4.O0E+00 2.10E+01 2. Total time pedod (minutes):.

6.29E+02 1.18E+03 N/A 2.36E+03 4.16E+03 3. Maximum time period 1.70E+02 1.22E+02 N/A 6.35E+02 6.35E+02 (minutes):

4. Average time period (minutes):

1.26E+02 9.81 E+01 N/A 5;89E+02 2.71 E+02 5. Minimum time period (minutes):

9.90E+01 7.50E+01 N/A 5.20E+02 7.50E+01 6. Average stream flow during periods of release of efflueint peintos a lowingest1.20E+06 9.39E+05 N/A 1.17E+06 1.11E+06 effluents into a flowing stream (Liters/min):

b. Gaseous Effluents None None None None None 6. ABNORMAL RELEASES a. Liquid Effluents None None None None None b. Gaseous Effluents None None None None None Page 73 Table B.2-A Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report Gaseous Effluents

-Summation of All Releases January-December 2013 Est.RELEASE PERIOD Jan-Mar Apr-Jun .Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Dec Total 2013 2013 2013 2013 1 2013 Error A. FISSION AND ACTIVATION GASES Total Release: Ci 0.OOE+00 0.00E+00 2.91E-01 00.oE+00 I 2.91E-01 Average Release Rate: ,tCi/sec 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 3.69E-02 0O.E+00 9.23E-03 _-+/-22%Percent of Effluent Control Limit *...E B, IODINE-131 T6tal Iodine-131 Release: Ci 1.84E-04 9.29E-05 5.91E-05 1.71E-04 5.08E-04 Average Release Rate: jCi/sec 2.34E-05 1.18E-05 7.50E-06 2.17E-05 1.61 E-05 +/-20%Percent of Effluent Control Limit*....

C. PARTICULATES WITH HALF-LIVES

> 8 DAYS Total Release: Ci 2.78E-04 1.72E-04 5.50E-05 1.62E-04 6.67E-04 Average Release Rate: ý.Ci/sec 3.53E-05 2.18E-05 6.97E-06 2.05E-05 212E-05 Percent of Effluent Control Limit* +/-21%Gross Alpha Radioactivity:

Ci NDA NDA NDA NDA NDA D. TRITIUM Total Release: Ci 6.24E+00 6.44E+00 2.34E+01 2.79E+01 6.40E+01 Average Release Rate: p.Ci/sec 7.91E-01 8.17E-01 2.97E+00 3.53E+00 2.03E+00 _+/-20%Percent of Effluent Control Limit* .....E. CARBON-14 Total Release: Ci 1.51 E+00 9.73E-01 1.90E+00 1.87E+00 6.26E+00 Average Release Rate: i+/-Ci/sec 1.91E-01 1.23E-01 2.41 E-01 2.38E-01 1.98E-01 N/A Percent of Effluent Control Limit* .....Notes for Table B.2-A:* Percent of Effluent Control Limit values based on dose assessments are provided in Section 6 of this report.1.2.3.NDA stands for No Detectable Activity.LLD for airborne gross alpha activity listed as NDA is 1 E-1 1 itCi/cc.N/A stands for not applicable.

Page 74 Table B.2-B Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report Gaseous Effluents

-Elevated Release January-December 2013 CONTINUOUS MODE RELEASES FROM ELEVATED RELEASE POINT Nuclide Released I Jan-Mar 2013 Apr-Jun 2013 Jul-Se 2013 Oct-Dec 2013 Jan-Dec 2013 1. FISSION AND ACTIVATION GASES: CI Ar-41 0.00E+00 O.OOE+00 0.00E+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Kr-85 O.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.0OE+00 Kr-85m 0.OOE+00 O.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 O.O0E+00 Kr-87 0.OOE+00 0.001E00 O.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Kr-88 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 O.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Xe-131m 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Xe-133 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.aaE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Xe-133m 0.00E+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Xe-135 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 2.91 E-01 0.OOE+00 2.91E-01 Xe-135m 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.00E+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Xe-137 0.00E+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 O.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Xe-1 38 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 O.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Total for Period 0.00E+00 0.OOE+00 2.91E-01 0.OOE+00 2.91E-01 2. IODINES: CI 1-131 1.24E-05 1.52E-06 4.34E-06 3.90E-06 2.21 E-05 1-133 1.14E-05 0.00E+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 1.14E-05 Total for Period 2.38E-05 1.52E-06 4.34E-06 3.90E-06 3.35E-05 3. PARTICULATES WITH HALF-LIVES

> 8 DAYS: Ci Cr-51 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.00E+00 Mn-54 0.OOE+00 O.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Fe-59 0.OOE+00 O.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Co-58 0.00E+00 O.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.00E+00 Co-60 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 O.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Zn-65 0.00E+00 0.0011+00 .OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Sr-89 O.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Sr-90 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 O.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 O.OOE+00 Ru-103 0.OOE+00 0.00E+00 O.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Cs-134 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Cs-137 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 BaILa-140 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.00E+00 0.OOE+00 O.OOE+00 Total for Period 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.OOE+0O 4. TRITIUM: Ci H-3 1.53E-02 2.97E-02 5.30E-02 3.77E-02 1.36E-01 5. CARBON-14:

Ci C-14 1.46E+00 9.43E-01 1.85E+00 1.82E+00 6.07E+00 Notes for Table B.2-B: 1. N/A stands for not applicable.

2. NDA stands for No Detectable Activity.3. LLDs for airborne radionuclides listed as NDA are as follows: Fission Gases:, 1E-04 g.Ci/cc lodines: 1E-12 i.Ci/cc Particulates:

1E-11 g+/-Ci/cc.)Page 75 Table B.2-B (continued).

Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Annual Radioactive*

Effluent Release Report Gaseous Effluents

-Elevated Release January-December 2013 BATCH MODE RELEASES FROM ELEVATED RELEASE POINT Nuclide Released .Jan-Mar 2013 Apr-Jun 2013' Jul-Sep 2013 Oct-Dec 2013 Jan-Dec 2013 1. FISSION AND ACTIVATION GASES: Ci Ar-41 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Kr-85 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Kr-85m N/A N/A, N/A N/A N/A Kr-87 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Kr-88 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Xe-131m N/A N/A N/A N/A NIA Xe-133 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Xe- 133m N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Xe-135 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Xe-135m N/A *N/A N/A N/A N/A Xe-137 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Xe-138 .N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total for period N/A N/A.. N/A N/A N/A 2. IODINES: Ci 1-131 N/A N/A' N/A N/A N/A..1-133 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total for period N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 3. PARTICULATES WITH HALF-LIVES

> 8 DAYS: Ci Cr-51 N/A N/A _N/A N/A N/A Mn-54 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Fe-59 N/A NIA N/A N/A N/A Co-58 .N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Co-60 .N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A' Zn-65 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Sr-89 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Sr-90 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A.Ru-103 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Cs-134 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Cs-137 " N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Ba/La-140

.N/A N/A. N/A ._N/A N/A Total for period N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 4. TRITIUM: Ci H-3 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 5. CARBON-14:

Ci C-14 N/A N /A N/A N/A N/A Notes for Table B.2-B: 1. N/A stands for not applicable.

2. NDA stands for No Detectable Activity.3. LLDs for airborne radionudides listed as NDA are as follows: Fission Gases: 1E-04 iCi/cc.lodines:

1E-12 gCi/cc Particulates:

1E-11 pCi/cc Page 76 Table B.2-C Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report Gaseous Effluents

-Ground-Level Release January-December 2013 CONTINUOUS MODE RELEASES FROM GROUND-LEVEL RELEASE POINT Nuclide Released Jan-Mar 2013 Apr-Jun2013 2 Ju-Se 2013 _ Oct-Dec 2013 Jan-Dec 2013 1. FISSION AND ACTIVATION GASES: Ci Ar-41 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.00E+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Kr-85 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Kr-85m 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Kr-87 0.00E+00 0.OOE+00 O.OOE+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 Kr-88 0.OOE+00 0.O0E+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 O.OOE+00 Xe-131m 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+-00 0.OOE+00 Xe-133 O.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Xe-133m 0.OOE+00 0-OOE+00 0.OOE+00 o.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Xe-135 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0:00E+00 0.00E+00 0.OOE+00 Xe-135m 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 O.OOE+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 Xe-137 0.00E+00 0.OOE+00 0.00E+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Xe-138 O.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.00E+00 0.OOE+00 0.00E+00 Total for period. 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 2. IODINES: Ci 1-131 1.72E-04 9.14E-05 5.48E-05 1.68E-04 4.85E-04 1-133 6.23E-04 1.39E-04 1.80E-04 5.21 E04 1.46E-03 Total for period 7.94E-04 2.30E-04 2.35E-04 6.89E-04 1.95E-03 3. PARTICULATES WITH HALF-LIVES

> 8 DAYS: Ci Cr-51 0.OOE+00 2.10E-05 O.00E+00 0.00E+00 2.1OE-05 Mn-54 2.84E-06 1.56E-05 5.08E-06 1.42E-05 3.77E-05 Fe-59 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Co-58 O.OOE+00 O.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Co-60 0.OOE+00 6.34E-05 1.63E-05 2.74E-05 1.07E-04 Zn-65 0.00E+00 1.73E-05 0.00E+00 6.14E-06 2.34E-05 Sr-89 0.00E+00 0.OOE+00 1.02E-05 1.96E-05 2.98E-05 Sr-90 O.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 O.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Ru-103 .0.00E+00 0OOE+00 O.0OE+00 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Cs-134 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 .0.00E+00.

0.00E+00 0.OOE+00 Cs-137 0.00E+00 0.OOE+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 Ba/La-140 2.75E-04 .5.47E-05 2.34E-05 9.45E-05 4.48E-04 Total for period 2.78E-04 1.72E-04 5.50E-05 1.62E-04 6.67E-04 4. TRITIUM: Ci H-3 6.22E+00 6.41 E+00 2.34E+01 2.78E+01 6.38E+01 5. CARBON-14:

Ci C-14 4.53E-02 2.92E-02 5.71E-02 5.62E-02 1.88E-01 Notesfor Table B.2-C: 1. N/A stands for not applicable.

2. NDA stands for No Detectable Activity.3. LLDs for airborne radionuclides listed as NDA are as follows: Fission Gases: 1E-04 gCi/cc lodines: 1E-12 IiCi/cc Particulates:

1 E-1 1 gCi/cc Page 77 Table B.2-C (continued)

Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station". Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report Gaseous. Effluents

-Ground-Level Release January-December 2013 BATCH MODE RELEASES FROM GROUND-LEVEL RELEASE POINT Nuclide Released Jan-Mar 2013 Apr-Jun 2013 Jul-Sep 2013 Oct-Dec 2013. Jan-Dec 2013 1. FISSION AND ACTIVATION GASES: Ci Ar-41 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Kr-85 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Kr-85m N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Kr-87 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Kr-88 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Xe-1 31m .N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Xe-133 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A.Xe-133m N/A. N/A N/A N/A N/A Xe-1 35 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Xe-135m N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Xe-137 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Xe-138 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total for period N/A .N/A N/A N/A N/A 2, IODINES: Ci 1-131 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1-133 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total for perod N/A. N/A N/A N/A N/A 3. PARTICULATES WITH HALF-LIVES

> 8 DAYS: Ci Cr-51 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Mn-54 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Fe-59 N/A N/A.. N/A N/A N/A Co-58 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A'Co-60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Zn-65 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Sr-89 ' N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Sr-90 ,. N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Ru-103 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Cs- 134 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Cs-1 37 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Ba/La-140 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total ,for period N/A .N/A _N/A N/A I N/A 4. TRITIUM: Ci H-3 I -N/A -I N/A- N/A N/A N/A.5. CARBON-14:

Ci..C-14 N/A I..N/A N/A N/A N/A Notes for Table B.2-C: 1. N/A stands for not applicable.

2. NDA stands for No Detectable Activity.3. LLDs for airbbrne radionuclides listed as NDA are as follows: Fission Gases: 1 E-04 jiCi/cc lodines: 1E-12 iCi/cc Particulates:

.1E-11 pCi/cc Page 78 Table B.3-A Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report Liquid Effluents

-Summation of All Releases January-December 2013-,C 1 Est.RELEASE PERIOD Jan-Mar Apr-Jun Jul-Sep Oct-Dec Jan-Dec Total 2013 2013 2013 2013 .2013 Error A. FISSION AND ACTIVATION PRODUCTS Total Release (not including 3.98E=06 1.89E-02 N/A 2.93E-05 1.89E-02 tritium, gases, alpha): Ci 3.98E-06 190 N 23 5 .E2 Average Diluted Concentration" AverageDilute Conce o 2.73E-14 1.74E-10 N/A 1.89E71.3 3.36E-1.1

-.+12%During i.Ci/mL. _____._______________

____Percent of Effluent 9.11E-08%

.2.47E-03%

'N/A 1.32E-05%

4.81 E-04%Concentration Limit*B. TRITIUM Total Release: Ci 8.10E-01 5.25E+00 N/A 1.57E-01 6.21E+00 Average Diluted Concentration 5.57E-09 4.81E-08 N/A 1.01E-09 1'..10E-08 During Period: ltCi/mL _9_46/_Percent of Effluent Concentraton fLient 5.57E-04%

4.81'E-03%

N/A 1.01E-04%

1.1OE703%Concentration Limit*C. DISSOLVED AND ENTRAINED GASES Total Release: Ci NDA NDA N/A NDA NDA;Average Diluted Concentration NDA NDA N/A NDA NDA During Period: 4.Ci/mL +/-D D ./;,NA D 16%Percent of Effluent N _ O.00E+00%

0_00E+00%Concentration Limit* O.OOE+OO%

O.OOE+00%

N/A O.a1E+00%

OOOE+00%D. GROSS ALPHA RADIOACTIVITY Total Release: Ci NDA N/A .N/A N/A NDA +/-34%E. VOLUME OF WASTE RELEASED PRIOR TO DILUTION Waste Volume: Liters 2.11EE+05 8.30E+05 N/A 1.37E+05 1,18E+06 +/- 5.7%F. VOLUME OF DILUTION WATER USED DURING PERIOD Dilution Volume: Liters 1.46E+11 1.09E+11 1.55E+11 1.55E+!1'

.5.65E+11 i +/-10%Notes for Table B.3-A:* Additional percent of Effluent Control Limit values based on dose assessments are provided in Section 6 of this report.1. N/A stands for not applicable..

2. NDA stands for No Detectable Activity.3. LLD for dissolved.

and entrained gases listed as NDA is 1 E-05 ý.Ci/mL_.4. LLD for liquid gross alpha activity listed as NDA is 1E-07 pCi/mL.Page 79 Table B.3-B Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report Liquid Effluents January-December 2013 CONTINUOUS MODE RELEASES Nuclide Released Jan-Mar 2013 Apr-Jun 2013 Jul-Sep 2013 Oct-Dec 2013 Jan-Dec 2013 1. FISSION AND ACTIVATION PRODUCTS:

Ci Cr-51 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Mn-54 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Fe-55 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Fe-59 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Co-58 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Co-60 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Zn-65 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Zn-69m N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Sr-89 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Sr-90 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Zr/Nb-95 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Mo-rc-99 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Ag-110m N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Sb-124 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1-131 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 1-133 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Cs-134 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Cs-137 .N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Ba/La-140 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Ce-141 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total for period N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A 2. DISSOLVED AND ENTRAINED GASES: Ci Xe-133. N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Xe-135 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Total for period N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Notes for Table 8.3-B: 1. N/A stands for not applicable.

2. NDA stands for No Detectable Activity.3. LLDs for. liquid radionuclides listed as NDA are as follows: Strontium:

5E-08 l.Ci/mL lodines: 1E-06 l.Ci/m L Noble Gases: 1 E-05 ýtCi/mL All Others: 5E-07 pCi/mL Page 80 Table B.3-B (continued)

Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report Liquid Effluents January-December 2013 BATCH MODE RELEASES Nuclide Released Jan-Mar 2013 Apr-Jun 2013 Jul-Sep 2013 Oct-Dec 2013 Jan-Dec 2013 1. FISSION AND ACTIVATION PRODUCTS:

Ci Na-24 0.00E+00 O.O0E+00 N/A 0.00E+00 0.00E+00 Cr-51 0.00E+00 4.50E-03 N/A O.OOE+00 4.50E-03 Mn-54 3.98E-06 3.73E-03 N/A 3.02E-06 3.74E-03 Fe-55 0.OOE+00 5.72E-04 N/A 0.OOE+00 5;72E-04 Fe-59 0.00E+00 1.11E-03 N/A 0.OOE+00 1.11E-03 Co-58 0.OOE+00 4.89E-04 N/A 0.00E+00 4.89E-04 Co-60 0.OOE+00 5.73E-03 N/A 8.86E-06 5.74E-03 Zn-65 0.00E+00 1.57E-03 N/A 0.00E+00 1.57E-03 Zn-69m 0.OOE+00 0.00E+00 N/A O.00E+00 0.OOE+00 Sr-89 0.OOE+00 0.00E+00 N/A 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Sr-90 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 N/A O.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Zr/Nb-95 0.OOE+00 4.69E-05 N/A 0.OOE+00 4.69E-05 Mo/Tc-99 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 N/A 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Ag-110m 0.OOE+00 1.08E-03 N/A 0.OOE+00 1.08E-03 Sb-124 0.OOE+00 9.60E-05 NIA 0.OOE+00 9.60E-05 1-131 0.00E+00 0.OOE+00 N/A 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 1-133 0.OOE+00 0.00E+00 N/A 0.00E+00 0.OOE+00 Cs-134 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 N/A 0.OOE+00 O.OOE+00 Cs-137 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 N/A 1.74E-05 1.74E-05 Ba/La-1 40 O.00E+00 0.OOE+00 N/A O.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Ce-141 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 N/A O.OOE+00 0.00E+00 Ce-144 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 N/A 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 Total for period 3.98E-06 1.89E-02 N/A 2.93E-05 1.89E-02 2. DISSOLVED AND ENTRAINED GASES: Ci Xe-133 NDA NDA N/A NDA NDA Xe-1 35 NDA NDA N/A NDA NDA Total for period NDA NDA N/A NDA NDA Notes for Table B.3-B: 1. N/A stands for not applicable.

2. NDA stands for No Detectable Activity.3. LLDs for liquid radionuclides listed as NDA are as follows: Strontium:

5E-08 g.Ci/m.L lodines: 1E-06 [tCi/mL Noble Gases: 1 E-05 .Ci/mL All Others: 5E-07 g.Ci/mL Page 81 APPENDIX C LAND USE CENSUS RESULTS The annual land use census for gardens and milk and -meat animals in the. vicinity of Pilgrim Station was performed between September 09 and September 20, 2013. The census was conducted by driving along each improved road/street in the Plymouth area within 5 kilometers (3 miles) of Pilgrim Station to stirvey for visible gardens with.an area of greater than 500 square feet. In compass sectors where no gardens were identified within 5 km (SSW, WNW, NW, and NNW sectors), the survey was extended to 8 km (5 mi). A total of 30 gardens Were identified in the vicinity of Pilgrim Station. In addition, the Town of Plymouth Animal Inspector was contacted for information regarding milk and meat animals.Atmospheric deposition (DIQ) values at the locations of the identified gardens were compared to those for the existing sampling program locations.

These Comparisons enabled PNPS personnel to ascertain the best locations for monitoringfor releases of airborne radionuclides.

Gardens yielding higher DIQ values than those currently in the sampling program were also sampled as part.of the'radiological environmental monitoring program.Based on assessment of the garden's identified during the 2013 land use census, samples of garden-grown vegetables or naturally-growing vegetation (e.g. grass, leaves from bushes or trees, etc.) were collected at or near the closest gardens in each of the following landward compass sectors..

These locations, and their distance and direction relative to the PNPS Reactor Building; are as follows: Rocky Hill Road 0.9 km SE Rocky Hill Road 1.8 km SSE Clay Hill Road 1.6 km W Additional samples of naturally-growing vegetation were collected at the site boundary in the ESE.*and SE sectors to monitor for atmospheric deposition in the vicinity of the nearest resident in the SE sector.In addition to these special sampling locations identified and sampled, in conjunction with the 2013 land use census, samples were also collected at or near the Plymouth County Farm 1(5.6 km W), and from control locations in Bridgewater (31 km W), Sandwich (21 km SSE), and Norton (49 km W).Samples of na.turally-growing vegetation were also collected in the. vicinity of the site boundary locations.yielding the highest deposition (D/Q) factors for each of the two release points. These locations, and their distance and direction relative to the PNPS Reactor Building, are as follows: Highest Main Stack D/Q: 1.5 km SSW Highest Reactor Building Vent D/Q: 0.5 km ESE 2 nhighest D/Q, both release points: 1.1 km S No new milk or meat animals were identified during the land use census. In addition, the Town of Plymouth Animal Inspector stated that their office is not of any animals at locations other than the Plimoth Plantation.

Although milk sampling is not performed at Plimoth Plantation, effluent dose calculations are performed for this location assuming the presence.

of a milk ingestion pathway, as part of the Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report (Reference 17).Page 82 APPENDIX D ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM DISCREPANCIES There were a number of instances during 2013 in which inadvertent issues were encountered in the collection of environmental samples. All of these issues were minor in nature and did not have an adverse effect on the results or integrity of the monitoring program. Details of these various problems are given below.During 2013, :nine offsite thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD) were not recovered from their assigned locations during the quarterly retrieval process. Degradation of the plastic cages housing the TLDs resulted in the loss of the following TLDs: Emerson & Priscilla

-EP (Qtr 1); Greenwood House -GH (Qtr 3); Warren & Clifford -WC (Qtr 3); Hall's Bog -HB (Qtr 4); Manomet Elementary

-ME (Qtr 4); and College Pond -CP (Qtr 4). In each of these cases, the plastic cage holding the TLD were replaced and a new TLD posted. The TLD at Hyannis Road -HR was vandalized during both the 1 st and 2 nd quarters of 2013. The TLD at this location was relocated a short distance to be less conspicuous.

Turing the 4 1h Quarter exchange of TLDs in early January- 2014, the TLD at Valley.Road -VR could not be retrieved due to snow-covered roads leading to this remote location.

The TLD was recovered during the retrieval of 1 st Quarter 2014 TLDs in April 2014, and will be analyzed to determine the average dose at that location during the two periods represented by that TLD.Despite these losses, the 431 TLDs that were collected (98.0%) allowed for adequate assessment of the ambient radiation levels in the vicinity of Pilgrim Station.Within the air sampling program, there were a few instances in which continuous sampling was interrupted at the eleven airborne sampling locations during 2013. Most of these interruptions were due to short-term power losses and were sporadic and of limited duration (less than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> out of the weekly sampling period). Such events did not have any significant impact on the scope and purpose of the sampling program, and lower limits of detection (LLDs) were met for both airborne particulates and iodine-131 on 563 of the 563.filters/cartridges collected.

Out of 572 filters (11 locations

• 52 weeks), 563 samples were collected and analyzed during 2013.A problem occurred at location WR when tree trimming activities on 14-Aug-2012 resulted in damage to the electrical service and sampling station. The sampler was not repaired until 28-Feb-2013, resulting in the loss of sampling capabilities at this location for the last 21 weeks of 2012, and the first eight weeks of 2013. This event is described in Condition Report CR-PNP-2012-3545.

There were also a few instances where power was lost or pumps failed during the course of the sampling period at some of the air sampling stations, resulting in lower than normal sample volumes.All required LLDs were achieved on these samples. Winter Storm Nemo resulted in wide-scale loss of power during the week of 05-Feb through 12-Feb-2103.

Power interruptions of greater than 24-hours occurred from this storm at Property Line, Pedestrian Bridge, Cleft Rock, Manomet Substation, East Rocky Hill Road, East Breakwater; and Medical Building.The configuration of air samplers that had been in use at Pilgrim Station since the early 1980s, was replaced between June and August of 2012. Both the pumps and dry gas meters were replaced, and operating experience since changing over to the new configuration has been favorable.

Although the occurrence of pump failures and gas meter problems have been largely eliminated, the new configuration is still subject to trips of the ground fault interrupt circuit (GFCI). Such problems can be encountered at air samplers located at the East Breakwater and Pedestrian Bridge. Both of these locations are immediately adjacent to the shoreline and are subject to significant wind-blown salt water, and are prone to tripping of the GFCI. The following table contains a listing of larger problems encountered with air sampling stations during 2013, many of which resulted in loss of more than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> in a sampling period.Page 83 Location Sampling Period Sampling Problem Description Hours Lost WR 01/02 to 02/28 1375 of 1375 Sampling station damaged during tree trimming activities in Aug-2012; condition report CR-PNP-2012-3545; repaired 02/28/2013 PL 02/05 to 02/12 36.1 of 174.9 Power loss from Winter Storm Nemo PB 02/05 to 02/12 57.4 of 170.3 Power loss from Winter Storm Nemo CR 02/05 to 02/12 33.3 of 170.5 Power loss from Winter Storm Nemo MS 02/05 to 02/12 30.7 of 170.3 Power loss from Winter Storm Nemo ER 02/05 to 02/12 90.8 of 173.9 Power loss from Winter Storm Nemo EB 02/05 to 02/12 36.1 of 170.5 Power loss from Winter Storm Nemo WS 02105 to 02112 36.1, of 168.8 Power loss from Winter Storm Nemo OA 04122 to 05/01 72.1 of 220 Load shed activity of power feed from Main Stack during-refueling outage.WS 06/11 to 06/17 139 of 139 Faulty circuit breaker feeding power to sampling station.WR 6/25 to 07/09 None Filter left on for 2-week period due to inaccessibility at* 0.0 of 336.5 location of sampler PB 10/14 to 10/21 39.3 of 156.3 Loss of offsite power caused GFCI outlet to trip PB 10/21 to 10/29 23.1 of 191.2 Trip of GFCI outlet PB 12/10 to 12/17 60.5 of 168.0 Trip of GFCI outlet CR 12/10 to 12/23 None Filter left on for 2-week period due to inaccessibility at 0.0 of 311.3 location of sampler PB 12/17 to 12/23 134.5 of 143.3 Pump experienced mechanical failure Despite the lower-than-normal sampling volumes in the various instances involving power interruptions and equipment failures, required LLDs were met on 563 of the 563 particulate filters, and 563 of the 563 of the iodine cartridges collected during 2013. When viewed collectively during the entire year of 2013, the following sampling recoveries were achieved in the airborne sampling program: Location Recovery I Location Recovery I Location Recovery Recver WS ER WR PL 98.7%98.9%84.2%99.5%PB OA EB CR 96.1%98.0%99.6%99.5%PC MS EW 99.9%99.6%99.9%An alternate location had to be found for sampling control vegetable samples in the Bridgewater area. In past years, samples had been collected at the Bridgewater County Farm, associated with the Bridgewater Correctional Facility.

Due to loss of state funding for garden projects during 2006, no garden was grown. An alternate location was found at the Hanson Farm in Bridgewater, located in the same compass sector, and at approximately the same distance as the Bridgewater County Farm. Additional samples of naturally-occurring vegetation were collected from distant control locations in Sandwich and Norton. As expected for control samples, vegetables and vegetation collected at these locations only contained naturally-occurring radioactivity (Be-7, K-40, and Ac/Th-228).Some problems were encountered in collection of crop samples during 2013. Crops which had normally been sampled in the past (lettuce, tomatoes, potatoes, and onions) were not grown at the Plymouth County Farm (CF) during 2013. Leafy material from pumpkin plants and corn plants were substituted for the lettuce to. analyze for surface deposition of radioactivity on edible plants.Samples of squash, tomatoes, cucumbers, zucchini, and grape leaves were also collected from two other locations in the immediate vicinity of Pilgrim Station. No radionuclides attributed to PNPS operations were detected in any of the samples.Page84 Naturally-growing leafy vegetation (grass, leaves from trees and bushes, etc.) was collected near some gardens identified during the annual land use census. Due to the unavailability of crops grown in several of these gardens, these substitute samples were collected as near as practicable to the gardens of interest.

No radionuclides attributed to PNPS operations were detected in any of the samples. Additional details regarding the land use census can be found in Appendix C of this report.As presented in Table 2.9-1, several samples of naturally-occurring vegetation (leaves from trees, bushes, and herbaceous plants) were collected at a number of locations where the highest atmospheric deposition would be predicted to occur. Some of these samples indicated Cs-137 at concentrations ranging from non-detectable up to 61 pCi/kg. The highest concentration of 61 pCi/kg was detected in a sample of natural vegetation collected from the Pine Hills area of the Pine Hills south of PNPS. This Cs-137 result is within of the normal range of average values expected for weapons-testing fallout (75 to 145 pCi/kg as projected from the pre-operational sampling program).It should be noted that natural vegetation samples collected in the 1990s often showed detectable Cs-1 37 from nuclear weapons tests up into the range of 300 to 400 pCi/kg, whereas soil samples often indicated concentrations in excess, of 2000 pCi/kg. Cs-137 has a 30-year half-life, and measureable concentrations still remain in soil and vegetation as a result of atmospheric nuclear weapons testing performed during the 1950s through 1970s. A review of effluent data presented in Appendix B indicates that there were no measurable airborne releases of Cs-137 from Pilgrim Station during 2013 that could have attributed to these detectable levels. The sample with the highest level of Cs-137 also contained high levels of Ra-226 and AcTh-228, indicating appreciable soil content on the vegetation.

This sample of natural vegetation was analyzed "as'is" without any measure to clean the samples as normally would be performed prior to consuming vegetables, and would have detected any Cs-1 37 in soil adhering to those leaves collected.

Certain species of plants such as sassafras are also known to concentrate chemical elements like cesium, and this higher-than-expected level is likely due to a combination of external soil contamination and bioconcentration in the leaves of the plants sampled. These levels are not believed to be indicative of any releases associated with Pilgrim Station. No radioactivity attributable to Pilgrim Station was detected in any of the vegetable samples collected during 2013, and results of any detectable naturally-occurring radioactivity were similar to those observed in the preoperational monitoring program.The cranberry bog at Pine Street Bog in Halifax was not in production during 2013, so a sample could not be obtained from this location.

A substitute sample was collected from a bog (Hollow Bog)in Kingston, beyond the influence of Pilgrim Station. In addition, the cranberry bog along Bartlett Road suspended operation during 2013, and was not producing cranberries.

Samples were collected from a single indicator location located along Beaverdam Road.During the week of 05-Feb through 12-Feb-2013, water samples could not be collected from the sampling locations at the Pedestrian Bridge and Bartlett Pond. Both areas were inaccessible due to damage from Winter Storm Nemo.Additional problems were encountered with composite water samples collected from the Discharge Canal during the weeks of 12-Feb to 19-Feb-2013, and 16-Apr to 22-Apr-2013 when the lift pump suspended in the Discharge Canal failed and water was not provided to the composite sampler.Grab samples were obtained at the time of filter collection to substitute for the'normal composite samples that would have been collected during the week. No radioactive liquid, discharges were occurring during either of these two periods.Failure of the peristaltic tubing in the composite sampler also occurred during the weeks of 18-Mar to 25-Mar, and 01-May to 07-May-2013, and grab samples were also substituted for the composite samples. One radioactive liquid discharge of. 9686 gallons containing 0.086 Curies of tritium occurred during the week of 18-Mar to 25-Mar, but the dilution in the discharge canal would have resulted in a tritium concentration of about 7.3 pCi/L, which is well below the detection sensitivity for tritium in REMP samples. No tritium was detected in the quarterly composite for the second quarter of 2013. No radioactive liquid discharges occurred during the period covered by the composite sample for the week of 01-Mat to 07-May.Page 85 Group I fishes, consisting of winter flounder or yellow-tail flounder are normally collected twice each year in the spring and in the autumn from the vicinity of the Discharge Canal Outfall. When fish sampling occurred in the September to November collection period, no samples of Group I fish could be collected, as the species had already moved to deeper water for the upcoming winter. Repeated and concerted efforts were made to collect these species, but failed to produce any samples.In summary, the various problems encountered in collecting and analyzing environmental samples during 2013 were relatively minor when viewed in the context of the entire monitoring program.These discrepancies were promptly corrected when issue was identified.

None of the discrepancies resulted in an adverse impact on the overall monitoring program.Page 86 APPENDIX E ENVIRONMENTAL DOSIMETRY COMPANY Annual Quality Assurrance Status Report January -December 2013 ENVIRONMENTAL DOSIMETRY-COMPANY

'A4NNUALAQUALITY SSU1RANCE STATUS REPORT 2J..January -December, 2013 Pre pa red By : QA' 1- m. "m-"Dad-ýioved By: Date: 1 4 L1 4 APO.. EnvironmentalDosimetrty.Company" 'Sterling, A 01:564..~,... ...., .-.. ...? , ..I! ..Y: ,

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page L IST O F TA B L E S. ............................................................................................................

EXECUTIVEN S UM A ....................................................

S..................................................I.

v A. INTRO DU CTIO N ..................................................................................................

1 A. .QC Program.............................................................................

1 B .Q A P rogram ...................................................................................................

1 II. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA ..............................................................

1 A. Acceptance Criteria for Internal Evaluations

.............................

........1 B. QC Investigation Criteria and Result Reporting

.......................

3 C. Reporting of Environmental Dosimetry Results to EDC Customers

...............

3 Ill. DATA

SUMMARY

FOR ISSUANCE PERIOD JANUARY-DECEMBER 2013 .............

3 A .G eneral D iscussion

.........................................................................................

3 B .R esult T rending ...............................................................................................

4 IV. STATUS OF EDC CONDITION REPORTS (CR) ...........................

4 V. STATUS OF AUDITS/ASSESSMENTS

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

..............................

4 A .Internal .................................................................................

......................

4 B .External ......................................................................................................

4 V

I. PROCEDURE

S AND MANUALS REVISED DURING JANUARY -DECEMBER 2013... 4 VII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

...............

....................................

4 V III. R E F E R EN C E S ......................................................................

.........................................

4 APPENDIX A DOSIMETRY QUALITY CONTROL TRENDING GRAPHS-ii-LIST OF TABLES Page 1. Percentage of Individual Analyses Which Passed EDC Internal Criteria, January -December 2013 5 2. Mean Dosimeter Analyses (n=6), January -December 2013 5 3. Summary of Independent QC Results for 2013 5-iii-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% (72172) 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 2013. There were no findings.-Iv-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-housetesting program coordinated by the EDC QA Officer and (2) independent test perform by EDC clients. In-house test are performed using six pairs of 814 dosimeters, a pair is reported as an individual result and six pairs are reported as the mean result.Results of these tests are described in this report.Excluded from this report are instrumentation checks. Although instrumentation checks represent an important aspect of the quality assurance program, they are not included as process checks in this report. Instrumentation checks represent between 5-10% of the TLDs processed.

B. QA Program An interral assessment of dosimetry activities is conducted annually by the Quality Assurance Officer (Reference 1). The purpose of the assessment is to review procedures, results, materials or components to identify opportunities to improve or enhance processes and/or services.PERFORMANCE EVALUATION CRITERIA A. Acceptance Criteria for Internal Evaluations

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

The percent deviation relative to the delivered exposure is calculated as follows: H,'- Hi 100 Hi where: Hi' = the corresponding reported exposure for the ith dosimeter (i.e., the reported exposure)Hi = the exposure delivered to the ith irradiated dosimeter (i.e., the delivered exposure)1 of 6

2. Mean Bias For each group of test dosimeters, the mean bias is the average percent deviation of the reported result relative to the delivered exposure.

The mean percent deviation relativeto the delivered exposure is calculated as follows: H>-7H, Jo100 H I *,.where: H'= 'the corresponding reported exposure for the ith dosimeter (i.e., the reported exposure)H, = the exposure delivered.to the it" 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 ith dosimeter is: where: H,= the reported exposure for the ith dosimeter (i.e., the reported exposure)J H the mean reported exposure; i.e., H= FHi1)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.

2 of 6 B. QC Investigation Criteria and Result Reporting EDC Quality System Manual (Reference

2) specifies When an investigation is required due to a QC analysis that has failed the EDC bias criteria.

The criteria are as follows: 1. No investigation is necessary when an individual .QC result falls outside the QC performance criteria for accuracy.2. Investigations are.initiated when the mean of a QC processing batch is outside the performance criterion for bias.C. Reporting of Environmental Dosimetry Results to EDObCustomers

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 than +/-20%, the results shall be issued with a note indicating that they may be updated in the future, pending resolution of a QA.issue.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 2013 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 forhigh-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 evaluatedagainst 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.3 'of 6 B. Result Trending One of the main benefits of performing quality control tests on a routine. basis is to identify trends or performance changes. The results of the Panasonic environmental dosimeter performance tests are presented in Appendix A. The results are evaluated against each of the performance criteria listed in Section II, namely: individual dosimeter accuracy, individual dosimeter precision, and mean bias.All of the results presented in Appendix A are plotted sequentially by processing date.IV. STATUS OF EDC CONDITION REPORTS (CR)No condition reports were issued during this.annual period.V. STATUS OF AUDITS/ASSESSMENTS A. Internal EDC Internal Quality Assurance Assessment was conducted during the fourth quarter 2013. There were not any findings as a result of this assessment.

B. External.No external assessments were conducted in 2013.V

I. PROCEDURE

S AND MANUALS REVISED DURING JANUARY -DECEMBER 2013 No procedures or manuals were revised in 2013.VII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The quality control evaluations continue to indicate the dosimetry processing programs at the EDC satisfy the criteria specified in the Quality System Manual. The EDC demonstrated the ability to meet all applicable acceptance criteria.VIII. REFERENCES

1. EDC Quality Control and Audit Assessment Schedule, 2013.2. EDC Manual 1, Quality System Manual, Rev. 3, August 1, 2012.4 of 6 TABLE 1 PERCENTAGE OF INDIVIDUAL DOSIMETERS THAT PASSED EDC INTERNAL CRITERIA JANUARY -DECEMBER 2013(0)' (2)I I f I I I I (h'This table summarizes results of tests conducted by EDC..(2)Environmental dosimeter results are free in air.TABLE 2 MEAN DOSIMETER ANALYSES (N=6)JANUARY- DECEMBER 2013(1' (2)1 1 1 1-1 ,I I?" -+. I *-IZ r,-,0 -13 4.5 1_2 Pass 13 -1.1 1.9, Pass 13 0.8 1.0 Pass 3 -1.1 1.6 Pass 3 0.1 2.3 Pass 113 1.5 1.2 Pass 713 0.1 1.7 Pass F113 -1.8 1.0 Pass 14 3.7 2.3 Pass 14 -2.6 0.9 Pass 4 0.7 0.6 Pass'I#(1 hThis table summarizes results of tests conducted by EDC for TLDs issued in 2013.(2)Environmental dosimeter results are free in air.TABLE 3

SUMMARY

OF INDEPENDENT DOSIMETER TESTING JANUARY -DECEMBER 2013(1)' (2)(')Performance criteria are +/- 30%.(2>Blind spike irradiations using Cs-137 5 of 6 APPENDIX A*DOSIMETRY QUALITY CONTROL TRENDING GRAPHS ISSUE PERIOD JANAURY -DECEMBER 2013 6 of 6 IYJDC.; AGIRACY ENVIRONMENTAL_, FIGURE 1*1:40 ., , 0 T 0: 0 ., *. ..0- 0 ,Tiar~e.-

0, Nii I1J* * " -. .. ....,;- o o e , o-o =* ' "" ,oe~0...... ..; .. ....... ... ... .... ....- ...0.0, ,... ... .. o,0. .... .... ... ,. .. " _ .. ... .o" '" ',-: , " -~. ~ ..%\~~ ~ k & 45_____ 'Mtd

.V e l>2 0 e *v 0.V 12 N 14" PR)Q,5,jG*

A .JF I

.-p' O'S , ---,~I-I NEW Iff-a-m-m-m-W-m-laft-ow-W WIN- ý-1II~1 -~j. ..4 .~17111 5 0 i 1311;M713KII-1, ýTM.~-~"' *~S-~w ~'IC~5; "4." ff... 5'"wlm.I I II~S\T.4k.IS

PRO ý'Oý ','10.j 612 I a-:1 0 Ji .i3 ;- -& I -- v -- ;7.7 -w--T R4qýX APPENDIX F J.A. Fitzpatrick Interlaboratory Comparison Program January -December 2013 8.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE

/ QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM 8.1 PROGRAM DESCRIPTION The Offsite Dose Calculation Manual .(ODCM), Part 1, Section 5.3 requires that the licensee participate in an Interlaboratory Compafison Program. The Interlaboratory Comparison Program shall include sample media for which samples are routinely collected and for which comparison samples are commercially available.

Participation in an InterlaboratoryComparison Program ensures that independent checks on the precision and accuracy of the measurement of radioactive material in the environmental samples are performed as part of the Quality Assurance Program for environmental

• monitoring.

To fulfill the requirement for an Interlaboratory Comparison Program, the James A.FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant (JAF) Environmental Laboratory has engaged the services of Eckert& Ziegler Analytics, Incorporated in Atlanta, Georgia.Eckert & Ziegler Analytics supplies sample media as blind sample spikes, which contain certified levels, of radioactivity unknown to the analysis laboratory.

These samples are. prepared and analyzed by the JAF Environmental Laboratory using standard laboratory procedures.

Eckert &Ziegler Analytics issues a statistical summary report of the results. The JAF Environmental Laboratory uses -predetermined acceptance.

criteria methodology for evaluating the laboratory's performance.

The JAF Environmental Laboratory also analyzes'laboratory blanks. The analysis -of laboratory blanks provides a means to detect and measure radioactive contamination of analytical samples..The analysis of analytical blanks also provides information on the adequacy of background subtraction.

Laboratory blank results are analyzed using control charts.8-1 8.2 PROGRAM SCHEDULE Table 8-1 SAMPLE PROVIDER SAMPLE LABORATORY ECKERT & ZIEGLER MEDIA. ANALYSIS ANALYTICS Water Gross Beta 3 Water Tritium 3 Water 1-131 2 Water Mixed Gamma 2 Air Gross Beta 2 Air 1431 2 Air Mixed Gamma 2 Milk 1-131 2 Milk Mixed Gamma 2 Soil Mixed Gamma I Vegetation Mixed Gamma I TOTAL SAMPLE INVENTORY 22 8.3 ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA Each sample result is evaluated, to determine the accuracy and precision of the laboratory's analysis result. The sample evaluation method is discussed below.8.3.1 SAMPLE RESULTS EVALUATION Samples provided by Eckert & Ziegler Analytics are evaluated using what is specified as the NRC method. This method is based on the calculation of the ratio of results reported by the participating laboratory (QC result) to the Vendor Laboratory Known value (reference result).8-2 An Environmental Laboratory analytical result is evaluated using the following calculation:

The value for the error resolution is calculated.

The error resolution

=Reference Result Reference Results Error (I sigma)Using the appropriate row under the Error Resolution column in Table 8.3.1 below, a corresponding Ratio of Agreement interval is given.The value for the ratio is then calculated.

Ratio of Agreement= OC Result Reference Result If the value falls within the agreement interval, the result is acceptable.

TABLE 8-2 ERROR RESOLUTION RATIO OF AGREEMENT< 4 No Comparison 4 to 7 0.5 to 2.0 8 to 15 0.6 to 1.66 16 to 50 0.75 to 1.33 51 to 200 0.8 to 1.25>200 0.85 to 1.18 This acceptance test is generally referred to as the "NRC" method. The acceptance criteria are contained in Procedure EN-CY-102, Laboratory Analytical Quality Control. The NRC method generally results in an acceptance range of approximately

+/- 25% of the Known value when applied to sample results from the Eckert & Ziegler Analytics Interlaboratory Comparison Program. This method is used as the procedurally required assessment method and requires the generation of a deviation from QA/QC program report when results are unacceptable.

8-3 8.4 PROGRAM RESULTS

SUMMARY

The Interlaboratory Comparison Program numerical results are provided on Table 8-3.8.4.1 ECKERT & ZIEGLER ANALYTICS QA SAMPLES RESULTS Twenty two QA blind spike samples were analyzed as part of Eckert & Ziegler Analytics 2013 Interlaboratory Comparison Program. The following sample media were evaluated as part of the comparison program.* Air Charcoal Cartridge:

1-131 e Air Particulate Filter: Mixed Gamma Emitters, Gross Beta* Water: 1-131, Mixed Gamma Emitters, Tritium, Gross Beta* Soil: Mixed Gamma Emitters* Milk: 1-131, Mixed Gamma Emitters* Vegetation:

Mixed Gamma Emitters The JAF Environmental Laboratory performed 86 individual analyses on the 22 QA samples. Of the 86 analyses performed, 86 were in agreement using the NRC acceptance criteria for a 100 % agreement ratio.8-4 TABLE 8-3 INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gross Beta Analysis of Air Particulate Filter REFERENCE SAMPLE JAF ELAB RESULTS LAB* RATIO DATE ID NO. MEDIUM ANALYSIS pCi +/-1 sigma pCi sigma (1)06/13/2013 E10568 Filter 98.9 +/- 1.0 GROSS 101.3 + 1.0 94,6 1.58 1.0 A BETA 98.5 + 1.0 Mean= 99.6. 0.6 12/05/2013 E10751A Filter 102.5 + 1.0 GROSS 102.2 +/- 1.0 GRSS12. 10 96 1 1.6 1.06 A BETA 100.7 + 1.0 Mean= 101.8 __0.6 (1) Ratio = Reported/Analytics.

• Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.A=Acceptable U=Unacceptable TABLE 8-3 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Tritium Analysis of Water REFERENCE DATE SAMPLE MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF ELAB RESULTS LAB*RATIO ID NO.. pCi/liter-+1 sigma pCi/liter

+1 sigma (1).3/14/2013 E10490 Water H-3 4305 +/- 158 4490 +/- 156 4920 +/- 82.2 0.92 A 4781 +/- 161 Mean= 4525 + 91 6/13/2013 E10567 Water H-3 1106 : 124 919 +/- 122 948 + 15.8 1.05 A 965 +/- 123 Mean= 997 +/- 71 9/12/2013 E10614 Water H-3 830 +/- 122 765 +/- 122 700 -120 828 -118 871 +/- 119 870 119 965 -16.1 0.88 A 800 -+/- 118 1024 +/- 122 908 +/- 120 889 +/- 120 Mean= 846 +/- 40 (1) Ratio = Reported/Analytics.

• Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.A=Acceptable U=Unacceptable 8-5 TABLE 8-3 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gross Beta Analysis of Water SAMPLE MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF ELAB RESULTS REFERENCE LAB* RATIO(1)DATE ID NO. pCi/liter 41 sigma pCi/liter

+/-41 sigma 03/14/2013 E10493 Water 276.5 +/- 2.6 GROSS 279.2 +/- 2.6 300.0 4. 5.0 0.92 A BETA 276.4 1- 2.6 Mean= 277.4 -1 1.5 06/13/2013 E10573 Water 264.6 +/-r 2.6 GROSS 265.3 +/- 2.6 294.0 +/-r 4.9 0.90 A BETA 266.0 +/-r 2.6 Mean= 265.3 4- 1.5 09/12/2013 E 10619 Water 244.4 +/-r 2.3 GROSS 244.4 +/-r 2.3* EA 4.3A 23 267.0 Ar 4.5 0.91 A BETA 241.3 +/-- 2.3 Mean= 243.4 :k 1.3 (1) Ratio= Reported/Analytics.

• Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.A=Acceptable U=Unacceptable INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM 1-131 Gamma Analysis of Air Charcoal SAMPLE MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF ELAB RESULTS REFERENCE LAB*DATE ID NO. pCi +/-1 sigma pCi +/-1 sigma RATIO (1)6/13/2013 E10571 Air 92.8 +/-r 2.57 1-131 96.8 +/-- 3.1 89.5 4- 1.49 1.04 A 89.5 +/-r 3.02 Mean= 93.0 +/-- 1.68 9/12/2013 E10618 Air 81.9 Ar 3.21 1-131 778.1 -2.99 79.8 Ar 1.33 0.99 A 77.8 Ar 3.03 Mean= 79.3 Ar 1.78 (1) Ratio = Reported/Analytics.

• Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.A=Acceptable U=Unacceptable 8-6 TABLE 8-3 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Water DATE SAMPLE M A JAF ELAB RESULTS REFERENCE LAB* ..ID NO. MEDIUM *ANALYSIS pCi/liter+1 sigma pCilliter

+/-1, sigma RATIO (1)3/14/2013 E10491 Water Ce-141 95 i 5.94 102 + 7.24 100 + 5.57 Mean = 99 +-. 3.63 97 + 1.62 1.02 A 260 +/- 26.30 C-i245 4. 32.10 .Cr-51 +/- 2.0 244.+ 4.07 1.04 A 254 +/- 25.50 Mean= 253 + 16.24'.107 *+/- 7.58 95 + 10.80 Cs-134 1100 + 1.84 0.94 A 107 +/- 8.34 Mean= 103 +/- 5.20 '137 +/- 4.53 Cs-137 129 +/- 5.88 137 +/- .2.29 0.97. A 134 +/- 4.73 Mean.= 133 +/- 2.93.105 +/- 4.12 C-8113 :E 5.74 Co-58 113 L 4.46 107.0

• 1.79 1.03 A'_Mean 110.3 +/- 2.79 116. +/- 4.27 Mn-54 105 +/- 5:76 107 -1.79 1.03 A 110 +/- 4.56 Mean= 110.3 +/- 2.83 138 +/- 5.51 Fe-59 141 +/- 7.36 130.0. 2.17 1.09 A 146 +/- 5.89 Mean= 141.7 :E 3.64 162 +/- 7.98-Zn-65. i65. +/- 10.60 155 +/- 2.59 1.08 A" 175 +/- 8.86 Mean= 167.3 +/- 5.32 207 +/- 4.12 Co-60 196 5.44 206 + 3.44 1.00 A 212 q 4.47 Mean= 205.0 : 2.72 t 1-131**60.3 +/-58.2 +/-61 +/-Mean = 59.8 1 1..02 1.10*1.02 0.60 50.0 A+/- 0.83.5 1.20* (1) Ratio = Reported/Analytics.

(1) Ratio = Re ported/Analytics.

• Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.** Result determinedby Resin Extraction/Gamma Spectral Analysis.A=Acceptable U=Unacceptable 8-7 TABLE 8-3 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Water SAMPLE JAF ELAB RESULTS REFERENCE LAB* RATIO (1)DATE I ID .MEDIUM ANALYSIS pCi/liter

-1 sigma pCi/liter

+/- 1 sigma ____ (1 9/12/2013 E10615 Water Cr-51 244 +/-233 +/-267 +/-206+/-Mean= 237.5 h 224 23.6 22.2 26.1 11.8 2.51E+02 +/-4.18E+00 0.95 A 133 +/- 7.2 147 +/- 6.8 1 Cs-i34 145 +/- .7.3 1.56E+02 +/- 2.60E+00 0.92 A 151 +/- 5.7*Mean.= 144.0 +/- 3.4 117 3.5 123 +/- 3.6 Cs-137 .11 3-6 1.18E+02 +/- 1.97E+00 0.97 A 109 +/- 4.5 Mean= ..115.0 +/-. 1.9 98 +/- 3.5 98 +/- 3.2 Co-58 102. +/- 3.6 9.73E+01 +/- 1.62E+00 1.01 A 96 +/- 4.3.Mean= 98.7

• 1.8 141 +/- 3.8 142 + 3.9 Mn-54 131 +/- 3.9 1.25E+02 +/- 2.09E+00 1.08 A 126 +/- 4.9 Mean= 135.0 +/- 2.1 135 +/- 4.4 130 +/- 4.4 Fe-ý9 127 +/- 4.7 1.18E+02.

+/- 1.97E+00 1..11 A 131 +/- 5.9 Mean= 130.8 +/- 2.4 246+/- 7.8 263 +/- 7A Zn-65 269 +/- 8.2 2.41E+02 +/- 4.02E+00 1.07 A 257 +/- 10.6 Mean= 258.8 +/- 4.3 186 ÷ 3.2 180 +/- 3.2 Co-60 188 +/- 3.4 1.77E+02 +/- 2.96E+00 1.04 A 179 +/- 4.3 Mean= 183.3 +/- '1.8. _.100 +/- 4.8 109 +/- 4.7 1-131 100 +/- 4.3 9.79E+01 +/- 1.63E+00 1.05 A 101 +/- 6.1.Mean= 102.4 +/- 2.5 1-131**III 109 111 Mean= 110.3 1.4 1.6 1.7 0.9 9.79E+01 +/- 1.63E+00 1.13 A (1) Ratio = Reported/Analytics.

• Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.** Result determined by Resin Extraction/Gamma Spectral Analysis.8-8 A=Acceptable U=Unacceptable

.TABLE 8-3 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Milk DATE SAMPLE JMEDIUM ANALYSIS AF ELAB RESULTS REFERENCE LAB* TIO (1)ID NO. MEDIUM A Y pCi/liter

+/--1 sigma pCi/literA:1 sigma RAIO(1 6/13/2013 1 E10569 MILK Cel141 88 95 89 74 93 Mean = 87.6 5.4 6.1 6.0 7.4 5.8 2.8 90 +/-- 1.51 0.97 A 265 +/-- 26.3 260 +/-- 27.4 Cr-51 261 +/- 28.4 250 -4.18 1.05 A 267 +/-- 34.0 265 +/-- 28.6 Mean= 263.6 +/- 13.0 121 +/- 8.7 119 +/- 8.1 Cs-134 123 +/- 8.4 125 A- 2.09 0.97 A 118 +/-- 11.1 127 +/-- 8.4 Mean= 121.6 +/- 4.0 139 +/- 4.8 147 +/-- 4.7 Cs-137 157 +/- 4.8 151 A- 2.52 0.95 A 137 +/-- 6.0 140 +/-: 5.0 Mean= 144.0 :L 2.3 95 +/- 4.3 100 +/- 4.2 101 A- 4.1 Co-58 94 A- 1.57 1.02 A 88 A- 5.5 94 4.4.Mean= 95.7 -2.0 , 175 5.4-184 A- 5.2 Mn-54 177 + 5.2 172 A- 2.87 1.03 A 175 + 6.8 171 A- 5.4 Mean= 176.4 + 2.5 Fe-59 126 139 122 121 129 Mean= 127.4 A: A: A: A:+/-A:.5.8 5.5 5.3 7.5 5.9 2.7 120 +/- 2 1.06 1 A I I (Continued) 8-9 TABLE .8-3 (Continued)

IINTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Milk SAMPLE JAF ELAB RESULTS REFERENCE LAB*DATELE MEDIUM ANALYSIS .iitr im ~ /ie isga. RATIO (1)ID NO. Ci/liter +/- I sigma' pCi/liter

+I sigma 6/13/2013 E10569 MILK 244 4-9.4 (Continued) 228 +/- 9.4 ZN-65 187" + 12.2 217 +/- 3.63 1.02 A 218 +/- 10.3 Mean= 221.8 +/- 4.6.182 +/- 4.2 182 +/- 3.9..Co-60 .175 + i75 + 2.93 1.02 A.168 +/- 5.2 187 + 4.3 Mean= 178.8 -1.9 91 + 5.1 102 +/-:'5.3 s.90 +/- 5.0 1-131, 91 +/- 6. .96 + 1.59 0.98 A 91 +/-4 '6.3 96 d- 5.3 Mean= .94.0 -. 2.4A 99 .E 1.2 I ~ 3 1 *10 1 -+/- 1 .3 131" +/- 1. 96 +/- 1.59 1.06 A 104 1.4 Mean= 101 = 0.8 (1) Ratio Reported/Analytics.

• Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.** Result determined by Resin Extraction/Gamma Spectral Analysis.A=Acceptable U=Unacceptable 8-10 TABLE 8-3 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Milk SAMPLE JAF ELAB RESULTS REFERENCE LAB*ID NO. M A pCi/liter.+/-l sigma pCi/liter

+1 sigma RATI_(1 9/12/2013 E10617 MILK Cr-51 253 222 313 Mean = 262.7 36.60 34.90 31.50 19.86 277 +/- 4.63 0.95'A 173 +/- 12.30 Cs-134 171 : 12.20 172 4 2.88 0.98 A 164 +/- 9.30 Mean = 169.3 +/- 6.55 131 J- 5.97 Cs-137 125 +/- 131 +/- 2.19 0.99 A 135 +/- 4.70 Mean = 130.3 +/- 3.23 101 +/- 5.59 Co-58 113 +/- 6.11 108 +/- 1.8 1.00 A 110 +/- 4.22 Mean= 108.0 -3.10 147 +/- 6.50 Mn-54 164 +/- 6.59 139 = 2.32 1.08 A 138 L 4.82 Mean = 149.7 -3.48 135 -7.78 Fe-59 152 + 7.96 130 -2.18. 1.11 A 147 -5.97 Mean = 144.7 +/- 4.21 274 +/- 13.50 Zn-65 244 +/- 13.60 266 +/- 4.45 1.04 A 314 +/- 10.50 Mean = 277.3 +/- 7.28 200 +/- 5.64 Co-60 199 +/- 5.68 196 +/- 3.27 1.03 A 204 +/- 4.15 Mean= 201.0 +/- 3.01 99 +/- 7.19 94 +/- 7.49 1-131103 +/- 6.29 98.3 -1.64 1.00 A Mean= 98.7 +/- 4.05 1-131**102 103 106 Mean= 103.7 1.38 1.79 1.86 0.98 98.3 +/- 1.64 1.05 A (1) Ratio = Reported/Analytics.

(1) Ratio = Re ported/Analytics.

• Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.** Result determined by Resin Extraction/Gamma Spectral Analysis.A=Acceptable U=Unacceptable 8-11 TABLE 8-3 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Air Particulate Filter DATE ~SAMPLE MEDIUM JANALYSIS AF ELAB RESULTS REFERENCE LAB* JRATIO (1)I ID NO. MEDI UM YI pCi +/-1 sigma pCi +/-1 sigma I 3/14/2013 1 E10492A FILTER Ce-141 118 +/-113 +/-115 +/-Mean = 115.3 +3.62 3.49 3.41 2.03 105 +/- 1.76 1.10 A 296 +/- 20.00 284 +/- 19.00 Cr-51 265 + 4.43 1.13 A 319 +/- 21.00 Mean= 299.7 +/- 11.56 115 +/- 8.27 Cs-134 105 +/- 8.12 120 +/- 2.01 0.93 A 113 +/- 9.24 Mean= 111.0 + 4.94 155 +/- 4.36 Cs-137 154 +/- 4.40 149 +/- 2.49 1.04 A 155 +/- 4.84 Mean = 154.7 =L 2.62 123 +/- 4.34 Co-58 121 4.27 117 +/- 1.95 1.07 A 132 + 4.99 Mean = 125.3 +/- 2.62 142 +/- 4.50 Mn-54 135 + 4.40 117 + 1.95 1.19 A 139 +/- 4.98 Mean = 138.7 +/- 2.68 178 +/- 5.90 170 +/- 5.85 Fe-59 169 : 6.89 142 +/- 2.37 1.21 A 169 +/-6.89 Mean-= 172.3 -3.60 193 +/- 8.30 Zn-65 194 8.78 169 +/- 2.82 1.17 A 206 +/- 10.10 Mean 197.7 -5.25 Co-60 237 232 240 236.3 4.39 4.4"3 5.09 2.68 225.0 +/- 3.75 1.05 A Mean =(1) Ratio = Reported/Analytics.

• Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.A=Acceptable U=Unacceptable 8-12 TABLE 8-3 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Air Particulate Filter DATE SAMPLE [MEDIUM JANALYSIS

[AF ELAB RESULTS REFERENCE LAB* RTIO(1)I ID NO. I I pCi +/-1 sigma pCi +/-1 sigma RATI_(1 9/12/2013 E10616 FILTER Cr-51 274 +/-284 +/-252 *280 +/-Mean = 272.5 +/-18.00 19.00 18.90 21.10 9.64 254 +/- 4.25 1.07 A 147 +/- 8.41 135 +/- 8.48 Cs-134 141 +/- 9.24 158 + 2.64 0.89 A 142 +/- 8.78 Mean= 141.3 +/- 4.37 122 +/- 4.00 131 +/- 4.07 Cs-137 129 +/- 4.21 120 +/- 2 1.06 A 125 +/- 3.95 Mean= 126.8 .2.03 109 +/- 3.87 103 +/- 3.82 Co-58 109 +/- 4.22 99 +/- 1.65 1.07 A 102 +/- 3.86 Mean= 105.8

• 1.97 140 +/- 4.44 137 +/- 4.48 Mn-54 146 +/- 4.85 127 +/- 2.13 1.11 A 143. +/- 4.50 Mean= 141.5 L 2.29 .153 +/- 5.73 142 +/- 5.54 Fe-59 148 + 6.28 120 +/- 2 1.23 A 147 +/- 5:66 Mean= 147.5 +/- 2.90-292 +/- 10.10 291 +/- 10.20 Zn-65 299 +/- 10.90 244 +/- 4.08 1.20 A 294 L 10.10 Mean= 294.0 .5.17 Co-60 187 +/- 4.06 192 +/- 4.09 200 +/- 4.49 194 +/- 4.02 Mean = 193.3 1 2.08 180 +/- 3 1.07 A (1) Ratio = Reported/Analytics.

(1) Ratio = Reported/Analytics.

• Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.A=Acceptable U=Unacceptable 8-13 TABLE 8-3 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Soil SAMPLE MEDIUM ANALYSIS JAF ELAB RESULTS REFERENCE LAB* RATIO 6)DAE_ ID NO. ..pCi/gAI sigma pCi/g +/-1 sigma 6/13/2013 E10570 SOIL Ce-141 0.081 0.121 0.097 0.092 0.082 Mean = 0.098+/--+/--+/--4-+0.018 0.020 0.020 0.021 0.025 0'009 0.098 +/- 0.002 1.00 A 0.215 +/- 0.082 0.283 +/- 0.083 Cr-51 0.297 .+/- 0.011 0.271 +/- 0.005 0.92 A 0;166 +/- 0.099 Mean= 0.249 +/- 0.032 0.132 4- 0.029 0.155 +/- 0.013 Cs-134 0.142 -0.015 0.136 0.002 1.11 A 0.135 -0.024 0.171 + 0.027 Mean= 0.151 +/- 0.010 0.218 +/- 0.017 0.242 -0.016 0.193 +/-- 0.016 Cs-137 0.243 0.016 0.248 +/- 0.005 0.92 -A 0.242 +/- 0.016 0.232 4-0.016 Mean= 0.227 +/- 0.007.0.095 -0.013 0.063 -0.012 Co-58 0.074 -0.012 0.102 -0.002 0.77 A 0.098 +/- 0.013 0.079 -0.013 Mean= 0.078 .0.006 0.019 -0.016 0.207 -0.015 0.178 +- 0.015 Mn-54 0.178 0.015 0.186 -0.003 1.08 A 0.214 4-0.016 Q.2,04 +/-0.015 IMean= 0.201 0.0071 Fe-59 0.135 0.131 0.11O, 0.146 0.141 Mean = 0.133+/--+-0.018 0.018 0.017 0.018 0,020 0.008 1.03 0.130 +/- 0.002 A U A. I_________0

.1008 (Continued) 8-14 TABLE 8-3 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Soil (Continued)

SAMPLE ANALYSIS JAF ELAB RESULTS REFERENCE LAB* RATIO (I)DATE ID NO. MEDIUM pCi/g+/-1 sigma pCi/g 1 sigma 6/13/2013 E10570 SOIL 0.221 +/- 0:029 (Continued) 0.230 +/- 0.024 0.284 +/-. '0.026 Zn-65 0.24 +/- 0.026 0.236 .0.004 1.06 A.0.240 + 0.024'0.243 +/- 0.026.Mean= 0.249 +/- 0.012-0.172 +/- 0.013 0:175 +/- 0.011 Co-600.181

+/- 0.011 0.190 0.003 0.93 A C0.163 +/- 0.010 0.190 +/- 0.011 Mean= 0.177 +/- 0.005 1 1 (1) Ratio Reported/Analytics.

• Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.A=Acceptable U=Unacceptable 15 TABLE 8-3 (Continued)

INTERLABORATORY INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM Gamma Analysis of Vegetation DATE SAMPLE J MEDIUM ANALYSIS J AF ELAB RESULTS REFERENCE LAB* TIO (1)I ID NO. MEIIUM ANALY pCi/g:-I sigma pCi/g'+l sigma RIO (1)6/13/2013 E10572 VEG Ce- 141 0.190 0.186 0.197 0.177 Mean = 0.188 0.013 0.015 0.011 0.013 0.007 0.215 A+/- 0.004 0.87 A 0.583 +/- 0.074 0.569 +/- 0.081 Cr-51 0.443 +/- 0.062 0.596 -4 0.010 0.87 A 0.482 +/- 0.071 Mean= 0.519 +/-z 0.036 0.256 +/- 0.029 0.259 +/- 0.025 Cs-134 0.260 +/- 0.023 0.298 +/- 0.005 0.87 A 0.262 +/- 0.028 Mean= 0.259 +/-z 0.013 0.337 +/- 0.015 0.311 +/- 0.014 Cs-137 0.318 +/-z 0.012 0.259 A 0.006 1.21 A 0.287 +/- 0.014 Mean 0.313 +/- 0.007 0.216 +/-z 0.014 0.216 +/-z 0.012 Co-58 0.199 + 0.011 0.224 + 0.004 0.94 A 0.212 +/- 0.014 Mean= 0.211 +/- 0.006 0.429 AL 0.017 0.374 A 0.015 Mn-54 0.369 A 0.014 0.409 A 0.007 0.95 A 0.387 A .0.017 Mean= 0.390 A 0.008 0.295 +/- 0.019 0.285 A 0.018 Fe-59 0.297 +/- 0.015 0.285 + 0.005 1.01 A 0.273 +/- 0.018 Mean= 0.288 +/- 0.009 0.494 +/- 0.032 0.495 1z 0.028 Zn-65 0.510 +/- 0.027 0.518 + 0.009 0.97 A 0.509 +/- 0.031 Mean= 0.502 +/- 0.015 Co-60 0.373 0.402 0.398 0.361 Mean = 0.384 0.013 0.012 0.011 0.013 0.006 0.417 Az 0.007 0.92 A (1) Ratio = Reported/Analytics.

• Sample provided by Analytics, Inc.A=Acceptable U=Unacceptable 8-16

8.5 REFERENCES

8.5.1 Radioactivity and Radiochemistry, The Counting Room: Special Edition. 1994 Caretaker Publications, Atlanta, Georgia.8.5.2 Data Reduction and Error Analysis for the Physical Sciences, Bevigton P.R.,'McGraw Hill, New York (1969).8-17 APPENDIX G GEL Laboratories LLC 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT FOR THE RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM (REMP)

Ii Laboratorles LLC 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT FOR THE RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM (REMP)GEL LABORATORIES, LLC P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 843.556.8171 P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT.Page 2of 58 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT FOR THE RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM -(REMP)Anoroved Bv: Robert L. Pullano Director, Quality Systems Angroved Bv: February 11. 2013 Date P.O. Box 3.0712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 3 of 58.TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. IN TR O D U C TIO N ................................................................................................

.........

.5 2. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAMS FOR INTER-LABORATORY, INTRA-LABORATORY AND THIRD PARTY CROSS-CHECK

..............................................................................

6 3. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM FOR INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL AUDITS ...........

7 4. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SAM PLE ANALYSIS .....................................................................................................

8 5. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION SAMPLES .................................

8 6. QUALITY CONTROL PROGRAM FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SAMPLE ANALYSIS ............

8 7. SUM M ARY O F DATA RESULTS ................................................

..........................................

9 8.

SUMMARY

OF PARTICIPATION IN THE ECKERT & ZIEGLER ANALYTICS ENVIRONMENTAL CROSS-CHECK PROGRAM: ...........................................................

10 9.

SUMMARY

OF PARTICIPATION IN THE MAPEP MONITORING PROGRAM ...............

10 10.

SUMMARY

OF PARTICIPATION IN THE ERA MRAD PT PROGRAM: ..................

........ 10 11.

SUMMARY

OF PARTICIPATION IN THE ERA PT PROGRAM .......................

10 12. CORRECTIVE ACTION REQUEST AND REPORT (CARR) ....................

10 13. R E F E R E N C E S ...................................................................................................................

12 P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT .Page 4 of 58 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)

TABLES Table 1 2012 Radiological Proficiency Testing Results and Acceptance Criteria .....................

13 Table 2 2012 Eckert & Ziegler Analytics Performance Evaluation Results ........................

23 Table 3 2012 Department of. Energy Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP)Results ........................................................................

26 Table 4 2012 ERA Program Performance Evaluation Results ..............

.............................

30 Table 5 2012 ERA Program (MRAD) Performance Evaluation Results ...................................

32 Table 6 REMP Intra-Laboratory'Data Summary: Bias and Precision By Matrix.: ...............

46 Table 7 All Radiological Intra-Laboratory Data Summary: Bias and Precision By Matrix ....... ......................................................

48 Table 8 2012 Corrective Action Report Summary .....................................................

54 FIGURES Figure 1 Cobalt-60 Performance Evaluation Results and % Bias .......................................

36 Figure 2 Cesium-137 Performance Evaluation Results and % Bias ...................................

37 Figure 3 Tritium Performance Evaluation Results and % Bias ...........

...........

38 Figure 4 Strontium-90 Performance Evaluation Results and % Bias ...... ,, ....................

39.Figure 5 Gross Alpha Performance Evaluation Results and % Bias ....................................

40 Figure 6 Gross Beta Perfoirmance Evaluation Results and % Bias .........................

41 Figure.7 oddine-131 Performance Evaluation Results and % Bias .........................................

42 Figure 8 Americium-241 Performance Evaluation Results and % Bias ................

43 Figure 9 Plutonium-238 Performance Evaluation Results and % Bias .................................

4..... 4 La b ...at ..rs 01 P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 5 of 58 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT FOR THE RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM .(REMP)1. Introduction GEL Laboratories, LLC (GEL) is a privately owned environmental laboratory

• dedicated to providing personalized client services of the highest quality. GEL was established as an analytical testing laboratory in 1981. Now a full service lab, our analytical divisions use state of the art equipment and methods to provide a comprehensive array of organic, inorganic, and radiochemical analyses to meet the needs of our clients.At GEL, quality is emphasized at every level of personnel throughout the company.Management's ongoing commitment to good professional practice and to the quality of our testing services to our customers is demonstrated by their dedication of personnel and resources, to develop, implement, assess, and improve. our technical and management operations.

The purpose of GEL's quality assurance program is to establish policies, procedures, and processes to meet or exceed the expectations of our clients. To achieve this, all personnel that support these services to our clients are introduced to the program and policies during their initial orientation, and annually thereafter during company-wide training sessions.GEL's primary goals are to ensure that all measurement data generated are scientifically and legally defensible, of known and acceptable quality per the data quality objectives (DQOs), and thoroughly documented to provide sound support-for environmental decisions.

In addition, GEL continues to ensure compliance with all contractual requirements, environmental standards, and regulations established by local, state and federal authorities.

GEL administers the QA program in accordance with the Quality Assurance Plan, GL-QS-B-001.

Our Quality Systems include all quality assurance (QA) policies and quality control (QC)procedures necessary to plan, implement, and assess the work we perform. GEL's QA Program establishes a quality management system (QMS) that governs all of the activities of our organization.

This report entails the quality assurance program for the proficiency testing and environmental monitoring aspects of GEL for 2013. GEL's QA Program is designed to monitor the quality of analytical processing associated with environmental, radiobioassay, effluent (10 CFR Part 50), and waste (10 CFR Part 61) sample analysis.

/This report covers the category of Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) and includes: " Intra-laboratory QC results analyzed during 20.13.* Inter-laboratory QC results analyzed during 2013 where known values were available.

,:Labor., L....P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 6 of 58 2. Quality Assurance Programs for Inter-laboratory, Intra-laboratory and Third Party Cross-Check In addition to internal and client audits, our laboratory participates in annual performance evaluation studies conducted by independent providers.

We routinely participate in the following types of performance audits:* Proficiency testing and other inter-laboratory comparisons

• Performance requirements necessary to retain Certifications

• Evaluation of recoveries of certified reference and in-house secondary reference materials using statistical process control data.* Evaluation of relative percent difference between measurements through SPC data.We also participate in a number of proficiency testing programs for federal and state agencies and as required by contracts.

It is our policy that no proficiency evaluation samples be analyzed in any special manner. Our annual performance evaluation participation generally includes a combination of studies that support the following:

• US Environmental Protection Agency Discharge Monitoring Report, Quality Assurance Program (DMR-QA).

Annual national program sponsored by EPA for laboratories engaged in the analysis of samples associated with the NPDES monitoring program.Participation is mandatory for all holders of NPDES permits. The permit.holder must analyze for all of the parameters listed on the discharge permit. Parameters include general chemistry, metals, BOD/COD, oil and grease, ammonia, nitrates, etc.0 Department of Energy Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP). A semiannual program, developed by DOE in support of DOE contractors performing waste analyses.

Participation is required for all laboratories that perform environmental analytical measurements in support of environmental management activities.

This program includes radioactive isotopes in water, soil, vegetation and air filters.* ERA's MRAD-Multimedia Radiochemistry Proficiency test program. This program is for labs seeking certification for radionuclides in wastewater and solid Waste. The program is conducted in strict compliance with USEPA National Standards for Water Proficiency study.4 ERA's InterLaB RadCheM Proficiency Testing Program for radiological analyses.

This program completes the process of replacing the USEPA EMSL-LV Nuclear Radiation Assessment Division program discontinued in 1998. Laboratories seeking certification for radionuclide analysis in drinking water also use the study. This program is conducted in strict compliance with the USEPA National Standards for Water Proficiency Testing Studies. This program encompasses Uranium by EPA method 200.8 (for drinking water certification in Utah/Primary NELAP), gamma emitters, Gross Alpha/Beta, lodine-131, naturally occurring radioactive isotopes, Strontium-89/90, and Tritium.

P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 7 of 58* ERA's Water Pollution (WP) biannual program for waste methodologies includes parameters for both organic and inorganic analytes.* ERA's Water Supply (WS) biannual program for drinking water methodologies includes parameters for organic and inorganic analytes.* Environmental Cross-Check Program administered by Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc.This program encompasses radionuclides in water, soil, milk, naturally occurring radioactive isotopes in soil and air filters.GEL procures single-blind performance evaluation samples from Eckert & Ziegler Analytics to verify the analysis of sample matrices processed at GEL. Samples are received on a quarterly basis. GEL's Third-Party Cross-Check Program provides environmental matrices encountered in a typical nuclear utility REMP. The Third-Party Cross-Check Program is intended to meet or exceed the inter-laboratory comparison program requirements discussed in NRC Regulatory Guide 4.15. Once performance evaluation samples have been prepared in accordance with the instructions provided by the PT provider, samples are managed and analyzed in the same manner as environmental samples from GEL's clients;3. Quality Assurance Program for Internal and External Audits During each annual reporting period, at least one internal assessment of each area of the laboratory is conducted in accordance with the pre-established schedule from Standard Operating Procedure for the Conduct of Quality Audits, GL-QS-E-001.

The annual internal audit plan is. reviewed for adequacy and includes the scheduled frequency and scope of quality control actions necessary to GEL's QA program. Internal audits are conducted at least annually in accordance with a schedule approved by the Quality Systems Director.

Supplier audits are contingent upon the categorization of the supplier, and may or may not be conducted prior to the use of a supplier or subcontractor.

Type I suppliers and subcontractors, regardless of how they were initially qualified, are re-evaluated at least once every three years.In addition, prospective customers audit GEL during pre-contract audits. GEL hosts several external audits each year for both our clients and other programs.

These programs include environmental monitoring, waste characterization, and radiobioassay.

The following list of programs may audit GEL at least annually or up to every three years depending on the program.* NELAC, National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program 0 DOECAP, U.S. Department of Energy Consolidated Audit Program* DOELAP, U.S. Department of Energy Laboratory Accreditation Program* DOE QSAS, U.S. Department of Energy, Quality Systems for Analytical Services* ISO/IEC 17025:2005

• A2LA, American Association for Laboratory Accreditation

• DOD ELAP, US Department of Defense Environmental Accreditation Program* NUPIC, Nuclear Procurement Issues Committee* South Carolina Department of Heath and Environmental Control (SC DHEC)The annual radiochemistry laboratory internal audit (13-RAD-001) was conducted in August 2013. Three (3) findings, two (2) observations, and one (1) recommendations resulted from this P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 8 of 58 assessment.

'By October, .2013, each finding was closed and appropriate laboratory staff addressed each observation and recommendation'.

4. Performance Evaluation Acceptance Criteria for Environmental Sample Analysis GEL utilized an acceptance protocol based upon two performance models. For those inter-laboratory programs that already have established performance criteria for bias (i.e., MAPEP, and ERA/ELAP), GEL will utilize the criteria for the specific program. For intra-laboratory or third party quality control programs that do not have a specific acceptance criteria (i.e. the Eckert-Ziegler Analytics Environmental Cross-check Program), results will be evaluated in accordance with GEL's internal acceptance criteria.5. Performance Evaluation Samples Performance Evaluation (PE) results and internal quality control sample results are evaluated in accordance with GEL acceptance criteria.

The first criterion concerns bias, which is defined as the deviation of any one result from the known value. The second criterion concerns precision, which deals with the ability of the measurement to be replicated by comparison of an indiVidual result with the mean of all results for a given sample set.At GEL, we also evaluate our analytical performance on a regular basis through statistical process control (SPC) acceptance criteria.

Where feasible, this criterion is. applied to both measures of precision and accuracy and is specific to sample matrix. We establish environmental process control limits at least annually.For Radiochemistry analysis, quality control evaluation is based on static limits rather than those that are statistically derived. Our current process contrOl limits are maintained in GEL's AlphaLIMS.

We also measure precision with matrix duplicates and/or-matrix spike duplicates..The upper and lower control limits (UCL and LCL respectively) for precision are plus or minus three times the standard deviation from the mean of a series of relative percent differences.

The static precision criteria for radiochemical analyses are 0 -20%, for activity levels exceeding the contract required detection limit (CRDL).6. Quality Control Program for Environmental Sample Analysis GEL's internal QA Program is.. designed.

to include QC functions such as instrumentation calibration checks (to insure proper instrument response), blank samples, instrumentation backgrounds, duplicates, as well as overall staff qualification analyses and statistical process controls.

Both quality control and qualification analyses samples, are used to be as similar as the matrix type of'those samples submitted for analysis by the various laboratory clients. These performance test samples (or performance evaluation samples) are either actual sample submitted in duplicate in order.to evaluate .the precision of laboratory measuremehts, or fortified blank samples, which have been given a known quantity of a radioisotope that is in.the interest to GEL's clients.Accuracy (or Bias) is measured through laboratory control samples and/or matrix'spikes, as well as surrogates and internal standards.

The UCLs and LCLs for accuracy are plus or minus three" times the standard deviation from the mean of a series of recoveries.

The static limit for taborato-ri' L P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 9 of 58 radiochemical analyses is. 75 -125%. Specific instructions for out-of-control situations are provided in the applicable analytical SOP.GEL's Laboratory Control Standard (LCS) is an aliquot of reagent water or other blank matrix to which known quantities of the method analytes are added in the laboratory.

The LCS is analyzed exactly like a sample, and its purpose is to determine whether the methodology is in control, and whether the laboratory is capable of making accurate and precise measurements.

Some methods may refer to these samples as Laboratory Fortified Blanks (LFB). The requirement for recovery is between 75 and 125% for radiological analyses excluding drinking water matrix.Bias (%) = (observed concentration)

• 100 %(known concentration)

Precision is a data quality indicator of the agreement between measurements of the same property, obtained under similar conditions, and how well they conform to themselves.

Precision is usually expressed as standard deviation, variance or range in either absolute or relative (percentage) terms.GEL's laboratory duplicate (DUP or LCSD) isan aliquot .of a sample taken from the same container and processed in the same manner under identical laboratory conditions.

The aliquot is analyzed independently from the parent sample and the results are compared to measure precision and accuracy.If a sample duplicate is analyzed, it will be reported as Relative Percent Difference (RPD). The RPD must be 20 percent or less, if both samples are greater than 5 times the MDC. If both results are less than 5 times MDC, then the RPD must be equal to or less than 100%. If one result is above the MDC and the other is below the MDC, then the RPD can be calculated using the MDC for the result of the one below the MDC. The RPD must be 100% or less. In the situation where both results are above the MDC but one result is greater than 5 times the MDC I and the other is less than 5 times the MDC, the RPD must be less than or equal to 20%. If both results are below MDC, then the limits on % RPD are not applicable.

Difference

(%) = (high duplicate result -low duplicate result)

• 100 %(average of results)7. Summary of Data Results During 2013, forty-four (44) radioisotopes associated with seven (7) matrix types were analyzed under GEL's Performance Evaluation program in participation with ERA, MAPEP, and Eckert &.Ziegler Analytics.

Matrix types were representative of client analyses performed during 2012. Of the four hundred twenty-three (423) total results reported, 97% (410 of .423) were found to be acceptable.

The list below contains the type of matrix evaluated by GEL." Air Filter* Cartridge* Water* Milk* Soil e. Liquid

,L.bOt LLC P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 10 of 58 Vegetation Graphs are provided in Figures 1-9 of this report to allow for the evaluation of trends or biases.These graphs include radioisotopes Cobalt-60, Cesium-137, Tritium, Strontium-90, Gross Alpha, Gross Beta, Iodine-131, Americium-241, and Plutonium-238.

8. Summary of Participation in the Eckert & Ziegler Analytics Environmental Cross-Check Program Eckert & Ziegler Analytics provided samples for eighty-nine (89) individual environmental analyses.

The accuracy of each result reported to Eckert & Ziegler Analytics, Inc. is measured by the ratio of GEL's result to the known value. All results fell within GEL's acceptance criteria (100%).9. Summary of Participation in the MAPEP Monitoring Program MAPEP Series 27, 28 and 29 were analyzed by the laboratory.

Of the one hundred thirty-eight (138) analyses, 96% (133 out of 138) of all results fell within the PT provider's acceptance criteria.

Five analytical failures occurred:

Uranium-238/235 and Total Uranium in vegetation by ICP/MS, and Uranium-234/233, and Urabuyn-238 by Alpha Spectroscopy.

For the corrective actions associated with MAPEP Series 28, refer to CARR130513-789 which is detailed in Table 8.10. Summary of Participation in the ERA MRaD PT Program The ERA MRad program provided samples (MRAD-18 and MRAD-19) for one hundred fifty (150)individual environmental analyses.

One hundred forty-five (145)'of the 150 analyses fell within the PT provider's acceptance criteria (97%). Five analytical failures occurred:

Cesium-134, Cesium-137 and Zinc-65 in soil, and Uranium-234 and Total Uranium in vegetation.

For the corrective actions associated with MRAD-18 and MRAD-19, refer to CARR130522-791 and CARR131205-845 which are detailed in Table 8.11. Summary of Participation in the ERA PT Program The ERA program provided samples (RAD-92 and RAD-94) for forty-six (46) individual environmental analyses.

Of the 44 analyses, 93% (43 out of 44) of all results, fell within the PT provider's acceptance criteria.

Two analytical failures qccurred:

Gross Alpha and Strontium-89 in water.For the corrective actions associated with RAD-92 refer to corrective actions CARR1 30826-810 (Table 8).12. Corrective Action Request and Report (CARR)There are two categories of corrective action at GEL. One is corrective action implemented at the analytical and data review level in accordance with the analytical SOP. The other is formal corrective action documented by the Quality Systems Team in accordance with GL-QS-E-002.

A P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 11 of 58 formal corrective action is initiated when a nonconformance reoccurs or is so significant that permanent elimination or prevention of the problem is required.

Formal corrective action investigations include root cause analysis.GEL includes quality requirements in most analytical standard operating procedures to ensure that data are reported only if the quality control criteria are met or the quality control measures that did not meet the acceptance criteria are documented.

A formal corrective action is implemented according to GL-QS-E-002 for Conducting Corrective/Preventive Action and Identifying Opportunities for Improvement.

Recording and documentation is performed following guidelines stated in GL-QS-E-012 for Client NCR Database Operation.

Any employee at GEL can identify and report a nonconformance and request that corrective action be taken. Any GEL employee can participate on a corrective action team as requested by the QS team or Group Leaders. The steps for conducting corrective action are detailed in GL-QS-E-002. In the event that correctness or validity of the laboratory's test results in doubt, the laboratory will take corrective action. If investigations show that the results have been impacted, affected clients will be informed of the issue in writing within five (5) calendar days of the discovery.

Table 8 provides the status of CARRs for radiological performance testing during 2013. It has been determined that causes of the failures did not impact any data reported to our clients.

SL.,.abor atorIe-s P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 12 of 58 13. References

1. GEL Quality Assurance Plan, GL-QS-B-001

2. GEL Standard Operating Procedure for the Conduct of Quality Audits, GL-QS-E-001

3. GEL Standard Operating Procedure for Conducting Corrective/Preventive Action and Identifying Opportunities for Improvement, GL-QS-E-002

4. GEL Standard Operating Procedure for AlphaLIMS Documentation of Nonconformance Reporting and Dispositioning and Control of Nonconforming Items, GL-QS-E-004

5. GEL Standard Operating Procedure for Handling Proficiency Evaluation Samples, GL-QS-E-013 6. GEL Standard Operating Procedure for Quality Assurance Measurement Calculations and Processes, GL-QS-E-014

7. 40 CFR Part 136 Guidelines Establishing Test Procedures for the Analysis of Pollutants

8. ISO/IEC 17025-2005, General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories

9. ANSI/ASQC E4-1994, Specifications and Guidelines for Quality Systems.for Environmental Data Collection and Environmental Technology Programs, American National Standard 10. 2003 NELAC Standard, National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Program 11. 2009 TNI Standard, The NELAC Institute, National Environmental Accreditation Program 12. MARLAP, Multi-Agency Radiological Laboratory Analytical Protocols 131 10 CFR Part 21, Reporting of Defects and Noncompliance

14. 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix B, Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants and Fuel Reprocessing Plants 15. 10 CFR Part 61, Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal and Radioactive Waste 16. NRC REG Guide 4.15 and NRC REG Guide 4.8 La Woratoes LLC P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 13 of 58 TABLE 1 2013 RADIOLOGICAL PROFICIENCY TESTING RESULTS AND ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA PT Quarter I Analytical Sample GEL Known Acceptance Provider Year Date Sample Number Media Unit Analyte I Nuclide Value value Range/Ratio Evaluation GENE01 MAPEP ls/ 2013 02/27/13 RdFR1 Filter Bq/sample Uranium-234/233 0.0143 0.0155 0.0109-0.0202 Acceptable GENE01 MAPEP 1st/ 2013 02t27113 RdFR1 Filter Bq/sample Uranium-238 0.0999 0.098 0.069-0.127 Acceptable EZA 4th/2012 02/01/13 E10323 Cartridge pD Iodine-131 7.31E+01 7.29E+01 1.00 Acceptable EZA 4th/2012 02/01/13 E10324 Milk pCilL Strontium-89 9.89E+00 1.38E+01 0.72 Acceptable EZA 4th/2012 02/01113 E10324 Milk pCi/L -Strontium-90 9.83E+00 1.48E+01 1.02 Acceptable EZA 4th/2012 02/01113 E10325 Milk pCi/L Iodine-131 9.57E+01 9.00E+01 1.06 Acceptable EZA. 4th/2012 02/01/13 E10325 Milk pCi/L Chromium-51 3.67E+02 3.48E+02 1.06 Acceptable EZA 4th/2012 02/01/13 E10325 Milk pCilL. Cesium-134 1.54E+02 1.65E+02 0.93 Acceptable EZA 4thJ2012 02/01/13 E10325 Milk pCilL Cesium-137 1.18E+02 1.17E+02 1.01 Acceptable EZA 4th/2012 02/01/13 E10325 Milk pCi/L Cobalt-58 9.85E+01 9.85E+01 1 Acceptable EZA 4th/2012 02/01/13 E10325 Milk pCi/L Manganese-54 1.16E+02 1.16E+02 1 Acceptable EZA 4th2012 02/01/13 E10325 Milk pCi/L lron759 1.33E+02 1.16E+02 1.15 Acceptable EZA 4th/2012 02/01/13 E10325 Milk pCil/L Zinc-65 3.19E+02 2.91E+02 1.09 Acceptable EZA 4thJ2012 02/01/13 E10325 Milk pCi/L Cobalt-60 1.73E+02 1.70E+02 1.02 Acceptable EZA 4th/2012 02/01/13 E10325 Milk pCi/L Cesium-141 5.38E+01 5.10E+01 1.05 Acceptable EZA 4th/2012.

02/01/13 E10380 Water pCi/L Iodine-131 7.47E+01 7.25E+01 1.03 Acceptable EZA 4th/2012 02/01/13 E10380 Water pCi/L Chromium-51 3.81E+02 3.62E+02 1.05 Acceptable EZA 4th/2012 02/01/13 E10380 .Water pCi/L Cesium-134 1.57E+02 1.73E+02 0.91 Acceptable EZA 4th/2012 02/01/13 E10380 Water pCi/L Cesium-137 1.25E+02 1.22E+02 1.03 Acceptable EZA 4th/2012 02/01/13 E10380 Water pCi/L Cobalt-58 1.02E+02 1.03E+02 0.99 Acceptable EZA 4th12012 02/01/13 E10380 Water. pCi/L Manganese-54 1.28E+02 '1.21E+02 1.06 Acceptable EZA 4th/2012 02/01113 E10380 Water pCi/L Iron-59 1.38E+02 1.21E+02 1.14 Acceptable EZA 4th/2012 02/01/13 E10380 Water pCi/L Zinc-65 2.13E+02 1.94E+02 1.1 Acceptable EZA 4th/2012 02/01/13 E10380 Water pCi/L Cobalt-60 1.80E+02 1.77E+02 1.01 Acceptable ERA 1st/ 2013 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Barum-133 55.4 54.4 44.9-60.2 Acceptable ERA 1st/ 2013 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Cesium-134 27.2 29.9 23.4-32.9 Acceptable ERA 1st/ 2013 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Cesium-137 74.3 '75.3 67.8-85.5 Acceptable ERA 1st/ 2013 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Cobalt-60 89.0 97.7 87.9-110 Acceptable ERA Ist/ 2013 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Zinc-65 126 114 103-136 Acceptable ERA 1st/ 2013 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Gross Alpha 26.0 24.8 12.5-33.0 Acceptable ERA 1st/ 2013 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L. Gross Beta 19.4 19.3 11.3-27.5 Acceptable ERA IsV 2013 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water .pCi/L Gross Alpha .31.4 24.8 12.5-33.0 Acceptable ERA st/ 2013 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Radium-226 10.4 9.91 7.42-11.6 Acceptable ERA lst/ 2013 02/28/13 RAD- 92 Water pCi/L .Radium-228 4.84 5.22 3.14-6.96 Acceptable ERA 1st/ 2013 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Uranium (Nat) 6.43 5.96 4.47-7.13 Acceptable Uranium (Nat)ERA lst/ 2013 02128/13 RAD -92 Water ug/L mass 9.59 8.69 6.50-10.4 Acceptable I

P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 14 of 58 l~ti 9fl1~~QA A9P~RJ1 ~R~0- 9 WAkJt~r nr~i/I IIAA F 004 7 A').11 ERA 1st/ 2013 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Radium-228 5.13 5.22 3.14-6.96 Acceptable ERA 1st/ 2013 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Uranium (Nat) 5.95 5.96 4.47-7.13 Acceptable Uranium (Nat)ERA lst/ 2013 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water ug/L mass 9.95 8.69 6.50-10.4 ,Acceptable ERA Ist/ 2013 02/28/13 RAD- 92 Water pCi/L Tritium 1430 1320 .1040-1480 Acceptable ERA 1st/ 2013 02/28/13 RAD- 92. Water pCi/L Strontium-89 47.5 48. 37.6-55.3 Acceptable ERA lst/ 2013 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Strontium-90 35.9 39.8 29.2-45.8 Acceptable ERA lst/ 2013 02/28/13 RAD -92. Water pCi/L Strontium-89 42.9 48 37.6-55.3 Acceptable ERA 1st/ 2013 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Strontium-90 34.6 39.8 29.2-45.8 Acceptable ERA. lst/ 2013 02128/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L lodine-131 23.6 22.7. 18.8-27.0 Acceptable

'ERA 1st/ 2013 02/28/13 RAO -92 Water pCi/L Iodine-131 27 22.7 18.8-27.0 Acceptable EZA 1st/2013 04/25/13 E10469 Cartridge lCi lodine-131

.9.38E+01 9.27E+01 1.01 ,Acceptable EZA 1st/2013 04/25/13 E10470 Milk pCi/L Strontium-89 1.07E+02 9.97E+01 1.07 Acceptable EZA 1st/ 2013 04/25/13 E10470 Milk pCi/L Strontium-90 1.18E+01 1.10E+01 1.07 Acceptable

• EZA Ist/ 2013 04/25/13 E10471 Milk pCi/L Iodine-131 3.54E+00 1.67E-v00 1.12 Acceptable EZA 1st/2013 04/25/13 E10471 Milk pCi/L Cerium-141 2.00E+01 1.87E+01 1.07 Acceptable EZA 1st/ 2013 04/25/13 E10471. Milk pCi/l Chromium-51 5.09E+01 4.72E+01 1.08 Acceptable EZA .lst/2013 04/25/13 E10471. Milk pCi/L Cesium-134 2.06E+02 2.14E+02 0.96 Acceptable EZA lst2013 04125113 E10471 Milk pCi/L Cesium-137 2.83E+02 2.66E+02 1;07. Acceptable' EZA 1stJ 2013 04/25/13 E10471 Milk pCi/L Cobalt-58 2.19E+02 2.08E+02 1.05 Acceptable EZA. lst/ 2013 04/25/13.

E10471 Milk pCi/L Mn-54 2.21E+02 2,08E+02 1.06 Acceptable EZA lst/ 2013 04/25/13 E10471 Milk , pCi/L Iron-59 2.78E+02 2,52E+02 1.1 Acceptable EZA lst/ 2013 04/25/13 E10471 Milk pCi/L Zinc-65 3.39E+02 3,01E+02 1.13 Acceptable EZA lst/ 2013 04/25/13 E10471 Milk pCi/L Cobalt-60 4.02E+02 4.OOE+02 1..01 .Acceptable EZA 1st/ 2013 04/25/13 E10472 Water pCi/L Iodine-131 1.12E+02 9.28E+01 1.21 Acceptable EZA lst/ 2013 04/25113 E10472' Water pCi/L Cerium-141 1.88E+02 1.79E+02 1.05 .. Acceptable.

EZA lst/ 2013 04/25/13 E10472 Water pCi/L Chromium-51 4.84E+02 4.52E+02 1.07 Acceptable EZA 1stl 2013 04/25/13.

E10472 Water pCV/L Cesium-134 1.96E+02 2.05E+02 0.96 .Acceptable EZA 1st/ 2013 04/25113 E10472 Water pCi/L Cesium-137 2.71E+02 2.54E+02 1.07 Acceptable EZA lst/ 2013 04/25/13 E10472 Water pCi/L Cobalt-58 2.03E+02 1.99E+02 1.02 .Acceptable EZA 1st/ 2013 04/25/13 E10472 Water pCi/L Mn-54 2.15E+02 1.99E+02 1:08 Acceptable EZA lst/ 2013 04/25/13-E10472 Water pCi/L Iron-59 2.67E+02 2.4.1E+02 1.11 Acceptable EZA lst1 2013 04/25/13 E10472 Water. pCi/L Zinc-65 3.14E+02 2.88E+02 1.09 Acceptable EZA lst) 2013 04/25/13 .E10472 Water pCi/L Cobalt-60 3.92E+02 3.83E+02 1:02 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05113/13 MAPEP-27-GrF28 Filter Bq/sample Gross Alpha 0.656. 1.20 0.36-2.04 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-27-GrF29 Filter Bq/sample Gross Beta 0.954 0.85 0.43-1.28 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kg Americium-241 118 .113 .79-147 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kq Cesium-134 829 887 621-1153 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kg Cesium-137 623 587 411:763 Acceptable:.

MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kg Cobalt-57 1.04 0 False Pos Test Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 -05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kg Cobalt-60 737 691 484-898. Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mq/kgq Iron-55 -0.380 0 False Pos Test Acceptable" MAPEP 2nd/2013 '05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kg Manganese-54 0.760 0 .False Pos Test Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05113/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kg Nickel-63 719 670 469-871 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 .05/13/13 MAPEP-.3-.aS28

• Soil mq/kg Plutonium-238 0.571 0.52 Sens. Eval. Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kg Plutonium-77.70 79.5 .55.7-103.4 7Acceptable

L4oaoifes LL P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 15 of 58 239/240 MAPEP 22nd/2013 05/113/13 MMAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kg Potassium-40 713 625 438-813 Acceptable MAPER 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mq/kg Strontium-90 693.0 628 440-816 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MAS28 Soil mg/kg Technetium-99 419.0 444 311-577 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kg Uranium-234/233 60.0 62.5 43.8-81.3 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kg Uranium-238 274 281 197-365 Acceptable MAPEP 2n, d/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kg Zinc-.65 1130 995 697-1294 Acceptable.

MAPEP 2nd/20113 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water " Bq/L Americium-241 0.690 0.689 0.428-0.896 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/113 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water Bq/L Cesium-134 21.1 24.4 17.1-31.7 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water* Bq/L Cesium-137 0.10 0.0 False Pos Test Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water Bq/L Cobalt-57 31.0 30.9 21.6-40.2 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water Bq/L Cobalt-60 19.4 19.6 13.7-25.4 Acceptable MAPEP 2nrd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water Bq/L Hydrogen-3 517 507 355-659 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water .-. Bq/L Iron-55 39.7 44.0 30.8-57.2 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13113 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water Bq/L Manganese-54 28.0 27.4 19.2-35.6 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28

• Water BqlL Nickel-63 32.9 33.4 23.4-43.4 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPFP-13-.MaW26 Water Bq/L Plutonium-238 0.825 0.884 0.619-1.149 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPSP-13-MaW28 Water Bq/L Pu-239/240 0.0162 0.0096 Sens. Eval. Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13113 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water Bq/L Potassium-40

-0.471 0 False Pos Test Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water BqlL Strontium-90 12.5 10.5 7.4-13.7 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water Bg/L Technetium-99 12.9 13.1 9.2-17.0 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water Bq/L Uranium-234/233 0.289 0.315 0.221-0.410 Acceptable*

MAPEP 2nd/2013 05113/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water Bq/L Uranium-238 1.81 1.95 1.37-2.54 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water Bq/L Zinc-65 32.8 30.4 21.3-39.5 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-GW28 Water Bq/L Gross Alpha 2.60 2.31 0.69-3.93 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-GrW28 Water Bq/L Gross Beta 14.2 13.0 6.5-19.5 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-XaW28 Water Bq/L Iodine-129 5.94 6.06 4.24-7.88 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter ug/sample Uranium-235 0.036 0.036 0.025-0.047 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter ug/sample Uranium-238 18.0 18.6 13.0-24.2 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter ug/sample Uranium-Total 17.7 18.6 13.0-24.2 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13113 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter ug/sample Americium-241 0.106 0.104

• 0.073-0.135 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Bq/sample Cesium-1 34 1.75 1.78 1.25-2.31 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 APEP-13-RdF28 Filter Bq/sample Cesium-137 2.71 2.60 1.82-3.38 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Bq/sample Cobalt-57 2.51 2.36 .1.65-3.07 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Bg/sample Cobalt-60 0.005 0.00 False Pos Test Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Bg/sample Manganese-54 4.43 4.26 2.98-5.54 Acceptable*

MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Bq/sample Plutonium-238 0.124 0.127 0.089-0.165 Acceptable MAPEP. 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Bq/sample Pu-239/240 0.118 0.1210 0.085-0.157 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Bo/sample Stronlium-90 1.54 1.49 1.04-1.94 Acceptable MAPEP 2hd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Bq/sample Uranium-234/233 0.0342 0.0318 0.0223-0.0413 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Bq/sample Uranium-238 0.230 0.231 0.162-0.300 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Bg/sample Zinc-65 3.38 3.13 2.19-4.07 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-GrF2S Filter Bq/sample Gross Al pha 0.656 1.20 0.36-2.04 Acceptable MAPEP 2rid/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-GrF28 Filter Bq/sample Gross Beta 0.95 0.85 0.43-1.28 Acceptable MAPEP 2rid/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Bq/sample Americium-241 0.106 0.104 0.073-0.135 Acceptable MAPEP 2rnd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation ug/sample Uranium-235 0.0029 0.001 0.0009-0.0017 Not Accept.MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation ug/sample Uranium-238 0.419 0.180 0.13-0.23 Not Accept.MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation ug/sample Uranium-Total 0.4219 0.180 0.13-0.23 Not Accept.MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAP'EP-13-RdV28 Vegetation ua/sample Americium-241 0.1350 0.140 -0.098-0.182 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation BQ/sample Cesium-134 0.0525 0.00 False Pos Test Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation Ba/sample Cesium-137 7,13 6.87 .4.81-8.93 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation Bq/sample Cobalt-57 8.86 8.68 6.08-11.28 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13113 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation Bq/sample' Cobalt-60 6.07 5.85 4.10-7.61 Acceptable LabL b ..ri P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 16 of 58 MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation Bg/sample Manganese-54

-0.002 0.00 False Pos Test Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation Bq/sample Plutonium-238 0.110 0.110 0.077-0.143 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation Bqsample Pu-239/240 0,113 0.123 0.086-0.160 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation Bosample Strontium-90 1.358 1.64 1.15-2.13 Acceptable MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation BW/sample Uranium-234/233 0.0081 0.0038 Sens. Eval. Not Accept.MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV2M Vegetation Bq/sample Uranium-238 0.00489 0.002 Sens. Eval. Not Accept.MAPEP 2nd/2013 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation Bq/sample Zinc-65 6.59 6.25 4.38-8.13 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kq Actinium-228 1500 1240 795-1720 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Americium-241

.225 229 134-297 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD'-18 Soil pCi/kg Bismuth-212 1250 1240 330-1820 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22M13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Bismuth-214 4410 3660 2200-5270 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Cesium-134 7850 6370 4160-7650 Not Accept.ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Cesium-137 8070 6120 4690-7870 Not Accept.ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Cobalt-60 10300 7920 5360-10900 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Lead-212 1290 1240 812-1730 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Lead-214 4690 3660 2140-5460 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Manganese-54

<63.4 <1000 0-1000 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Plutonium-238 651 788.00 474-1090 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22113 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Plutonium-239 320 366.00 239-506 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Potassium-40 10300 10300 7520-13800 Acceptable ERA 2ndl2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Strontium-90 6730 8530 3250-13500 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Thorium-234 3290 1900 601-3570 Acceptable ERA 2ndl2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Zinc-65 1910 1400 1110-1860 Not Accept.ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Strontium-90 6730 8530 3250-13500 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCI/kg Uranium-234 1210 1920 1170-2460 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Uranium-238 1630 1900 1180-2410 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Uranium-Total 2840 3920 2130-5170 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05122/13 MRAD-18 Soil ug/kg Uranium-Total(mass) 4150 5710 3150-7180 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Ve etation pCi/kg Americium-241 629 553 338&735 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kq Cesium-134 1400 1240 797-1610 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kg Cesium-137 687 544 394-757 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kg Cobalt-60 2410 1920 1320-2680 Acceptable ERA "2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kg Curum-244 1420 1340 657-2090.

Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kg Manganese-54

<47.4 <300 0.00-300 , Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kg Plutonium-238 2060 1980 1180-2710 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kg Plutonium-239 2230 2260 1390-3110 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kg Potassium-40 35600 31900 23000-44800 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kg Strontium-90 3720 3840 2190-5090 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kg Uranium-234 2650 2460 1620-3160 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kg Uranium-238 2580. 2440 1630-3100 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kq Uranium-Total 5361 5010 3390-6230 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation ug/kg Uranium-Totalfmass) 7740 7310 4900-9280 Acceptable.

ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kq Zinc-65 1150 878 633-1230 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter Americium-241 62.9 66.8 41.2-90.4 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18. Filter pCi/Filter Cesium-134 1080 1110 706-1380 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter Cesium-137 971 940 706-1230 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter Cobalt-60 217 214 166-267 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05122/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter Iron-55 224 225 69.8-440 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter Manganese-54

<5.27 <50.0 0-50.0 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter Plutonium-238 48.0 50.1 34.3-65.9 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filler Plutonium-239 62.7 65.2 47.2-85.2 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filler Strontium-90 139 138 67.4-207 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filler Uranium-234 54.5 59.4 36.8-89.6 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter Uranium-238 58.5 58.9 38.1-81.4 Acceptable

-'.. ,. .. .P.O. Box 30712, Charleston,.

SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT ,Page 17 of 58 ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCVFilter Uranium-Total 117 121 67.0-184 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter uq/Filter Uranium-total(mass) 176 176 113-248 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter Zinc-65 .222 199 142-275 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter Gross Alpha 55.5 42.3 14.2-65.7 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter

.Gross Beta 31 25.1 15.9-36.6 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Americium-241 118 118 79.5-158 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Cesium-134 1320 .1400 1030-1610

.Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water .pCi/L Cesium-137 1900 1880 1600-2250 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water .pCi/L Cobalt-60 2370 .2270 1970-2660 Acceptable.

ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Iron-55 812 712 424-966 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Manganese-54

<7:6 <100 0.00-100 Acceptable ERA .2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Plutonium-238 91 99 73.1-123 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22013 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Plutonium-239..

161 185 .Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 .05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Strontium-90 144 .137 89.2-181 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05122/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Uranium-234 47.3 48.8 36.7ý62.9 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Uranium-238 50.8 48.4 36.9-59.4 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Uranium-Total 98.1 .99.5 73.1-129 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 .MRAD-18 Water uglL Uranium-Tolallmass) 152. 145 i .116-175 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18. Water pCi/L Zinc-65 428 384 320-484 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Gross Alpha 138.0 130 46.2-201 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Gross Beta 87 78.9 45.2-117 Acceptable ERA 2nd/2013 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Tritium 13100 12300 8240-17500 Acceptable EZA 2nd/2013 08/02113 E10577' Cartridge PC! Iodine-131 9.16E+01 9.55E+01 1.02 Acceptable EZA 2nd/2013 .08/02/13 E10578 Milk pCr/L Strontium-89 9.272+01 9.04E+01 0.98 Acceptable EZA 2nd/2013 08/02/13 E10578 Milk pCi/L Strontium-9O 1.20E+01 1.70E+01 0.7 Acceptable EZA 2nd/2013 08102/13 E10579 Milk pCi/L Iodine-131 9.86E+01 9.55E+01 .1.03 Acceptable EZA 2nd/2013 08/02/13 E10579 .Milk pCi/L. Cerium-141 9.44E+01 9.04E-01 1.04 Acceptable EZA 2nd/2013 08/02/13 E10579 Milk pCi/L Chromium-51 2.58E+02 2.50E-i-02 1.03 Acceptable EZA 2nd/2013 08/02/13 E10579 Milk pCi/L Cesium-134 1.21E-02 1.25E+02 0.97 Acceptable EZA 2nd/2013 08/02/13 E10579 Milk pCi/L Cesium-137 1.49E+02 1.51E402 0.99 Acceptable.EZA 2nd/2013 08/02/13 E10579 Milk pCi/L Cobalt-58 9.44E-01 9.40E+01 1.00 Acceptable EZA 2nd/2013 08/02/13 E10579 Milk pCi/L Manganese-54 1.80E+02 1.72E+02 1.05 .Acceptable EZA 2nd/2013 08/02/13 E10579 Milk pCi/L Iron-59 1.36E+02 1.20E+02 .1.14 Acceptable.

EZA 2nd/2013 08/02/13 .E10579 Milk pCi/L Zinc-65 2.39E+02 2.17E+02 1.10 Acceptable EZA 2nd/2013 08/02/13 E10579 ... Milk pCi/L Cobalt-60 1.77E+02 1.75E+02 1.01 Acceptable EZA .2nd/2013 08/02/13 E10178 .Water pCi/L .lodine-131' 9.33E+01 9.54E+01 0.98 Acceptable EZA 2nd/2013 08/02/13 E10178 Water pCi/L *Cerium-141 1.15E+02 1.10E+02 1.04. Acceptable EZA 2nd/2013 08/02/13 E10178 Water pCi/L Chromium-51 3.40E+02 3.06E+02 .1.11 Acceptable EZA 2nd/2013 08/02/13 E10178 Water pCi/L Cesium-134 1.48E202 1.53E+02 0.97 Acceptable EZA 2nd/2013 08/02/13 E10178 Water ' pCiL Cesium-137 1.83E+02 1.84E+02 0.99 Aceptable EZA 2nd/2013 08/02/13 E10178 Water pCi/L Cobalt-58 1:132&02 1.15E+02 0.99 Acceptable EZA 2nd/2013 08/02/13 E10178 Water pCi/L Manganese-54 2.09E+02 2.10E+02 1.00 Acceptable.

EZA 2nd/2013 08/02/13 E10178 Water pCi/L Iron-59 1.51E+02 1.46E+02 1.03 Acceptable EZA 2nd/2013 08/02/13 E10178 Water pCi/L Zinc-65 .2.86E+02 2:65E+02 1.08 Acceptable EZA 2nd/2013 08/02/13 E10178 Water pCi/L. .Cobalt-60

.2.25E-i.02 2.14E+02 1.05 Acceptable 3rd ERA 2013 .08122/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Barium-133

'76.4 740.5 62.4-82.0 Acceptable 3rd ERA 2013 08/22/13 RAD- 94 Water pCi/L Cesium-134

.68.7, 72.4

• 59.1-79.6 Acceptable 3rd /ERA 2013 08/22/13 RAD- 94 Water pCi/L. Cesium-137

.-154. 155 140-172 .Acceptable 3rd /ERA 2013 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water .pCi/L. Cobalt-60 85.3 82.3 74.1-92.9 Acceptable 3rd/ERA 2013 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water .pCi/L Zinc-65 297 260 234-304 Acceptable ERA 3rd 08/22/13 RAD_- 94, Water, pCi/L Gross Alpha 74.3. 57.1 29.8-71.2 Not Of..... -.. ...L_-*La-b~ortor1'ts.VSL P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 18 of 58 I2013 Acceptable 3rd /ERA 2013 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Gross Beta 34.3 41.8 27.9-49.2

• Acceptable 3rd /ERA 2013 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Gross Alpha 67.7 57.1 29.8-71.2 Acceptable 3rd /ERA 2013 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Radium-226 16.9 17.2 12.8-19.7 Acceptable 3rd /ERA 2013 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Radium-226 17 17.2 12.8-19.7 Acceptable 3rd /ERA 2013 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Radium-228 3.53 3.86 2.18-5.4 Acceptable 3rd /ERA 2013 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Uranium (Nat) 20.4 21.4 17.1-24.1 Acceptable 3rd / Uranium (Nat)ERA 2013 08122113 RAD -94 Water. -ug/L mass 30.4 31.2 25.0-35.2 Acceptable 3rd /ERA 2013 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L. Radium-226 14.6 17.2 12.8-19.7 Acceptable 3rd /ERA 2013 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Uranium (Nat) 21.6 21.4 17.1-24.1 Acceptable 3rd / Uranium (Nat)ERA 2013 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water ug/L mass 33.7 31.2 25-35.2 Acceptable 3rd /ERA 2013. 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Tritium 12500 13300 11600-14600 Acceptable 3rd / Not ERA 2013 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Strontium-89 48.9 .36.5 27.4-43.4 Acceptable 3rd /ERA 2013 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Strontium-90 14.3 19.8 14.1-23.4 Acceptable 3rd / *Not ERA 2013 08/22113 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Strontium-89 44.3 36.5 27.4-43.4 Acceptable 3rd /ERA 2013 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Strontium-90 17.3 19.8 14.1-23.4 Acceptable 3rd /ERA 2013 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Iodine-131 26.1 24.3 20.2-28.8 Acceptable ERA 3rd/2013 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L lodine-131 23.3 24.3 20.2-28.8 Acceptable EZA 3rd/2013 10/25/13 E10625 Cartridge pCi Iodine-131 8.57E+01 7.96E+01 1.08 Acceptable EZA 3rd/2013 10/25/13 E10626 Milk pCi/L Strontium-89 9.33E+01 9.60E+01 0.97 Acceptable EZA 3rd/2013 10/25/13 E10626 Milk pCi/L Strontium-90 1.09E+01 1.32E+01 0.83 Acceptable EZA 3rd/2013 10/25/13 E10627 Milk pCi/L Iodine-131 1.OOE+02 9.83E+01 1.02 Acceptable EZA 3rd/2013 10/25/13 E10627 Milk pCi/L Chromium-51 3.09E+02 2.77E+02 1.11 Acceptable EZA 3rd/2013 10/25/13 E10627 Milk .pCi/L Cesium-134 1.46E+02 1.72E+02 .0.85 Acceptable.

EZA 3rd/2013 10/25113 E10627 Milk pCi/L Cesium-137 1.33E+02 1.31E+02 1.02 Acceptable EZA 3rd/2013 10/25/13 E10627 Milk pCi/L Cobalt-58 1.04E+02 1.08E+02 0.97 Acceptable EZA 3rd/2013 10125/13 E10627 Milk pCi/L Manclanese-54 1.44E+02 1.39E+02 1.04 Acceptable EZA 3rd/2013 10/25113 El 0627 Milk pCilL 'Iron-59 1.43E+02 1.30E+02 1.1 Acceptable EZA 3rd/2013 10/25/13 E10627 Milk pCi/L Zinc-65 2.86E+02 2.66E+02 1.07 Acceptable EZA 3rd/2013 10/25/13 El 0627 Milk pCi/L Cobalt-60 2.01E+02 1.96E+02 1.03 Acceptable EZA 3rd/2013 10/25/13 E10628 Water pCi/L Iodine-131 1.01E+02 9.79E+01 1.03 Acceptable EZA .3rd/2013 10/25/13 E10628 Water pCi/L Chromium-51 2.80E+02 2.51E+02 1.12 Acceptable EZA 3rd/2013 10/25/13 E10628 Water pCi/L Cesium-134 1.42E+02 1.56E+D2 0.91 Acceptable EZA 3rd/2013 10/25/13 E10628 Water pCi/L Cesium-137 1.19E+02 1.18E+02 1.01 Acceptable EZA 3rd/2013 10/25/13.

E10628 Water pCi/L Cobalt-58 9.80E+01 9.73E+01 1.01 Acceptable EZA 3rd/2013 10/25113 E10628 Water pCiL Manganese-54 1.29E+02 1.25E+02 1.05 Acceptable EZA 3rd/2013 10/25/13 E10628 Water pCi/L Iron-59 1.23E+02 1.18E+02 .1.04 Acceptable EZA 3rd/2013 10/25/13 E10628 Water pCi/L Zinc-65 2.62E+02 2.41E+02 1.09 Acceptable EZA 3rd/2013 10/25/13 E10628 Water pCi/L Cobalt-60 1.87E+02 1.77E+02 1.06 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12113 GrF29 Filter Ba/sample

• GrossAlpha 1.090 0.900 0.3-1.5 Acceptable MAPEP-1i3-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 GrF29 Filter Bq/sample Gross Beta 1.730 1.630 0.82-2.45 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 MaS29 Soil mg/kg -Americium-241 0.00 n0 False Pos Test Acceptable

.La'bo ROrs LLC P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 19 of 58 MAPEP-13-MaS29 MAPEP I 4tti/2013 11/12/13 Soil malka Cesium-134 820-1524 Acceotable 1090 1172 MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/1213 MaS29 Soil mg./k. Cesium-137 1010 977 684-1270 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 MaS29 Soil m1/kg Cobalt-57 0.0 0 False Pos Test Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 MaS29 Soil mg/kg Cobalt-60 462.00 451.00 316-586 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 MaS29 Soil mg/kg Iron-55 887 820 574-1066 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12113 MaS29 Soil mq/kg Manganese-54 692 674 472-876 Acceptable MAPEP- 13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 MaS29 Soil mg/kq Nickel-63 525.0 571 400-742 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11112113 MaS29 Soil mg/kg Plutonium-238 60.8 62 43.1-80.0 Acceptable MAPEP Plutonium-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 MaS29 Soil mg/kq. 239/240 1.33 0.4 Sens. Eval. Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12113 MaS29 Soil mglkg Potassium-40 638 633 443-823 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 MaS29 Soil mg/kg Strontium-90 458.0 460 322-598 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12113 MaS29 Soil mg/kq Technetium-99 0.0 0 False Pos Test Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 MaS29 Soil mg/kg Uranium-234/233 26.1 30 21.0-39.0 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11112/13 MaS29 Soil mg/kg Uranium-238 30.0 34 23.8-44.2 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 41h/2013 11/12/13 MaS29 -Soil mg/kg Zlnc-65 0.0 0 False Pos Test Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12113 MaW29 Water Bq/L Americium-241 0.0001 0.000 False Pos Test Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 MaW29 Water Bq/L Cesium-134 27.20 30.0 21.0-39.0 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11112/13 MaW29 Water Bq/L Cesium-137 31.8 31.6 22.1-41.1 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 MaW29 Water Bq/L Cobalt-57 0 0.0 False Pos Test Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 MaW29 Water Bq/L Cobalt-60 23.60 23.6 16.51-30.65 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 MaW29 Water Bq/L .Hydrogen-3

-3.5 0 False Pos Test Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 .11/12/13 MaW29 Water Bq/L Iron-55 53.00 53.3 37.3-69.3 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 MaW29 Water Bq/L Manganese-54.

-0.009 0.0 False.Pos Test Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 MaW29 Water Bq/L Nickel-63 27.7 26.4. 18.5-34.3 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 MaW29 Water Bq/L Plutonium-238 1.070 1.216 0.851-1.581 Acceptable MAPEP Plutonium-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 MaW29 Water Bg/L 239/240 0.907 0.996 0:697-1.295 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/113 MaW29 Water Bq/L Potassium-40 0.339 0 False Pos Test Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 MaW29 Water Bq/L Strontium-90.

6.65 7.22 5.05-9.39 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 MaW29 Water Bq/L "Technetium-99 15.4 16.20 11.3-21.1 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 MaW29 Water Ba/L Uranium-234/233 0.065 0.07 Sens. Eval. Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 MaW29 Water Bq/L Uranium-238 0.031 ..0.034 Sens. Eval. Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 MaW29 Water Bq/L Zinc-65 36.500 34.60 24.2-45.0 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12113 MaW29 Water Bq/L GrossAlpha 0.793 0.701 .0.201-1.192 Acceptable L aboratorio's.

L L0 P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 20 of 58 MAPEP-13-MaW29 Ba/L MAPEP 4t1,/2013 11/12/13 Water Gross Beta 6.220 5.94 2.97-8.91 Accentable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 RdF29 Filter ug/sample Uranium-235 0.034 0.032 0.0227-0.0421 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 41112013 11/12113 RdF29 Filter uci/sample Uranium-238

.15.8 16.5 11.6-21.5 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 RdF29. Filter uq/sample Uranium-Total 15.80 16.5 11.6-21.5 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 RdF29 Filter uq/sample Americium-241 0.0002 0.000 False Pos Test Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 RdF29 Filter Bg/sample Cesium-134

-0.0016 0.00 False Pos Test Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 RdF29 Filter Bq/sample Cesium-137 3.010 2.70 1.9-3.5 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4(h/2013 11/12/13 RdF29 Filter Bq/sample Cobalt-57 3.530 3.40 .2.4-4.4 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 41h/2013 11/12/13 RdF29 Filter Ba/sample Cobalt-60 2.440 2.30 1.6-3.0 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 RdF29 Filter Bq/sample Manganese-54 3.720 3.50 2.5-4.6 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 RdF29 Filter Bq/sample Plutonium-238 0.128 0.124 0.087-0.161 Acceptable MAPEP

.Plutonium-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 RdF29 Filter Bq/sample 239/240 0.092 0.0920 0.064-0.12 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11112/13 RdF29 Filter Bq/sample Strontium-90 1.690 1.81 1.27-2.35 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 RdF29 Filter Ba/sample Uranium-234/233 0.027 0.0292 0.0204-0.038 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11112/13 RdF29 Filter Bq/sample Uranium-238 0.020 0.021 0.144-0.267 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 RdF29 Filter Bq/sample Zinc-65 3.050 2.70 1.9-3.5 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 RdV29 Vegetation Ba/sample Americium-241 0.226 0.19 0.135-0.251 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 RdV29 Vegetation Bq/sample Cesium-134 4.750 5.20 3.64-6.67 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 RdV29 Vegetation Ba/sample Cesium-137 6.910 6.60 4.62-8.58 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th!2013 11/12/13 RdV29 Vegetation Bq/sample Cobalt-57

-0.002 0.00 FlsePos Test Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 RdV29 Vegetation Ba/sample Cobalt-60 0.008 0.00 False .Pos Test .Acceptable

• MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013' 11/12/13 RdV29 Vegetation Bq/sample Manqanese-54 7.980 7.88 5.52-10.24 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th!2013 11/12/13 RdV29 Vegetation Ba/sample Plutonium-238 0.001 0,001 Sens. Eval. Acceptable MAPEP Plutonium-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 RdV29 .Vegetation Bq/sample 239/240 0.1510 0.171 .0.120-0.222 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 RdV29 Vegetation Ba/sample Strontium-90 2.330 2.32 1.62-3.02 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 RdV29 Vegetation Bq/sample Uranium-234/233 0.046 0.047 0.0326-0.0606 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 RdV29 Vegetation Ba/sample Uranium-238 0.332 0.324 0.227-0.421 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 RdV29 Vegetation Ba/sample Zinc-65 2.850 2.63 1.84-3.42 Acceptable MAPEP-13-MAPEP 4th/2013 11/12/13 XaW29 Water Bq/L Iodine-129 3.62 3.79 2.65-4.93 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kq Actinium-228 1200 1240 795-1720 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Americium-241 186 164 95.9-213 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Bismuth-212 1760 1220 325-1790 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Bismuth-214 4350 3740 2250-5380 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kq Cesium-134 2690 2820 1840-3390 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Cesium-137 3960 4130 3160-5310 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Cobalt-60 5490 5680 3840-7820 Acceptable

.aboratories P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 21 of 58 ERA 4th/2013 11126/13 MRAD-19 Soil oCikg Lead-212 1260 1220 799-1700 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11126/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Lead-214 4700 3740 2180-5580 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Manganese-54

<55.2 <1000 0-1000 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26113 MRAD-19 Soil pCI/kg Plutonium-238 576 658 396-908 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Plutonium-239 400 397 260-548 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26M13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Potassium-40 111200 12400 9080-16700 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Strontium-90 8220 6860 2620-10800 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Thorium-234 2870 3080 974-5790 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg .Zinc-65 3400 3160 2520-4200 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Uranium-234 2870 3080 974-5790 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Uranium-238 2979 3080 1910-3910 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Uranium-Total 6870 6320 3430-8340 Acceptable Uranium-ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil ug/kg Total(mass) 8460 9220 5080-11600 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD Vegetation pCi/kg Americium-241 3800 3630 2220-4830 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Cesium-134 907 859 552-1120 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Cesium-137 1220 1030 747-1430 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCI/kg Cobalt-60 2100 1880 1300-2630 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Curium-244 1230 1250 612-1950 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Manuanese-54

<53.3 <300 0-300 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11126/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Plutonium-238 1280 1290 769-1770 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Plutonium-239 2580 2770 1700-3810 Acceptable ERA 4th12013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Potassium-40 33600 33900 24500-47600 Acceptable ERA 4th12013 11126/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Strontium-90 5870 6360 3630-8430 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11126/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Uranium-234 674 654 430-840 Acceptable Not ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Uranium-234 1050 654 430-840 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Uranium-238 655 648 432-823 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kQ Uranium-Total 1364 1330 901-1660 Acceptable Not ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation I pCi/kg Uranium-Total 1773 1330 901-1660 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation ug/kg Uranium-Total(mass) 1960 1940 1300-2460 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Zinc-65 1990 1540 1110-2160 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Americium-241 75.2 66.4 40.9-89.9 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Cesium-134 845 868.0 552-1080 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Cesium-137 641 602 452-791 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 .MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Cobalt-60 534 .494 382-617 Acceptable ERA. 4th/2013 11/26/13' MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filler Iron-55 466 389.0 121-760 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filler Manlanese-54

<3.9 <50 0.00-50.0 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter ug/Filter Plutonium-238 72.8 68.5 46.9-90.1 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Plutonium-239 56.5 53.4 42.4-93.1 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Strontium-90 130 125 61.1-187 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Uranium-234 56 87 35.6-86.6 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 .11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Uranium-238 58 56.90 36.8-78.7 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Uranium-Total 116 117 64.8-178 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter ug/Filter Uranium-Totallmass) 172 171 109-241 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Zlnc-65' 514 419 300-578 Acceptable Uranium-ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter ug/Filter Total(mass)

.169 171 109-241 Acceptable Uranium-ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter ug/Filter Total(mass) 150 171 109-241 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Gross Alpha 100 83 27.8-129 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Gross Beta 65.7 56.3 35.6-82.2 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Americium-241 126 126 84.9-169 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11126/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Cesium-134 2060.0 2180 1600-2510 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Cesium-137 2730 2760 2340-3310 Acceptable Urn- Labtol L .6 P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417.2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 22 of 58 E RA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Cobalt-60 1960 1890 1640-2210 Acceptable ERA *4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Iron-55 721 689 411-935 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Manganese-54

<7.24 <100 0.00-100 Acceptable.

ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Plutonium-238 133 138 102-172 Acceptable' ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Plutonium-239 98.7 109 84.6-137 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Strontium-90 726 788. 513-1040 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Uranium-234 93 99 74.3-128 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Uranium-238 93 98.00 74.7-120 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Uranium-Total 186 201 .148-260 "Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26i13 MRAD-19 Water uIg/L Uranium-Total(mass) 278 294 234-355 .Acceptable ERA .4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Zinc-65 1560 , 1370 1140-1730 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Gross Alpha .105.0 97 34.3-150 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11126113 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L

• Gross Beta .78.8 84.5

• 48.41125 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26113 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Tritium 8740 9150 6130-13000. " Acceptable, ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Uranium-234 92.4 98.9, 74.3-128 Acceptable ERA. 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Uranium-238 96.1 .98.0 74.7-120 Acceptable" ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Uranium-Total

.193 201 148-260 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water ug/L Uranium-Totalfmass)'

288 294 234-355. Acceptable ERA 4th/2013' 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Uranium-234 " '95.2

• 98.9 74.3-128 Acceptable ERA 41h/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Uranium-238 115 98.00 74.7-120 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Uranium-Total 215 , 201. .148-260 Acceptable ERA 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water ucq/L Uranium-Total(mass) 344 294 234-355 Acceptable ERA. 4th/2013 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water .ug/L Urarnum-Total(mass).

258 294 234-355 Acceptable

..... L Qbo rtores L P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 23 of 58 TABLE 2 2013 ECKERT & ZIEGLER ANALYTICS PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RESULTS Acceptance Report Sample Sample Analyte I GEL Known Range/Date Number Media Unit Nuclide Value value Ratio Evaluation 02/01/13 E10323 Cartridge 10Ci Iodine-131 7.31 E+01 7.29E+01 1.00 Acceptable

.02/01/13 E10324 Milk pCi/L Strontium-89 9.89E+00 1.38E+01 0.72 Acceptable 02/01/13 E10324 Milk pCi/L Strontium-90 9.83E+00 1.48E+01 1.02 Acceptable 02/01113 E10325 Milk pCi/L Iodine-131 9.57E+01 9.00E+01 1.06 Acceptable Chromium-02/01/13 E10325 Milk pCi/L 51 3.67E+02 3.48E+02 1.08 Acceptable 02/01/13 E10325 Milk pCi/L Cesium-134 1.54E+02 1.65E+02 0.93 Acceptable 02/01/13 E10325 Milk pCi/L Cesium-137 1.18E+02 1.17E+02 1.01 Acceptable 02/01/13 E10325 Milk pCi/L Cobalt-58 9.85E+01 9.85E+01 1 Acceptable Manganese-02/01/13 E10325 Milk pCi/L 54 1.16E+02 1.16E+02 1 Acceptable 02/01/13 E10325 Milk pCi/L Iron-59 1.33E+02 1.16E+02 1.15 Acceptable 02/01/13 E10325 Milk loCiL Zinc-65 .3.19E+02 2.91E+02 1.09 Acceptable 02/01/13 E10325 Milk pCi/L Cobalt-60 1.73E+02 1.70E+02 1.02 Acceptable 02/01/13 E10325 Milk pCi/L Cesium-141 5.38E+01 5.10E+01 1.05 Acceptable 02101113 E10380 Water D~i/L Iodine-131 7.47E+01 7.25E+01 1.03 Acceptable Chromium-02/01/13 E10380 Water pCi/L 51 3.81E+02 3.62E+02 1.05 Acceptable 02/01/13 E10380 Water pCi/L Cesium-134

.1.57E+02 1.73E+02 0.91 Acceptable 02/01/13 E10380 Water pCi/L Cesium-137 1.25E+02 1.22E+02 1.03 Acceptable 02/01/13 E10380 Water pCi/L Cobalt-58 1.02E+02 1.03E+02 0.99 Acceptable Manganese-02/01/13 E10380 Water pCi/L 54 1.28E+02 1.21E+02 1.06 Acceptable 02/01/13 E10380 Water pCi/L Iron-59 1.38E+02 1.21E+02 1.14 Acceptable 02/01/13 E10380 Water pCi/L Zinc-65 2.13E+02 1.94E+02 1.1 Acceptable 02/01/13 E10380 Water pCi/L Cobalt-60 1.80E+02 1.77E+02 1.01 Acceptable 04/25/13 E10469 Cartridge I pCi Iodine-131 9.38E+01 9.27E+01 1.01 Acceptable 04/25113 E10470 Milk pCi/L Strontium-89 1.07E+02 9.97E÷01 1.07 Acceptable 04/25/13 E10470 Milk pCi/L Strontium-90 1.18E+01 1.10E+01 1.07 Acceptable 04/25/13 E10471 Milk pCi/L Iodine-131 1.12E+02 1OOE+02 1.12 Acceptable 04/25/13 E10471 Milk PCi/L Cerium-141 2.00E+01 1.87E+01 1.07 Acceptable 04/25/13 E10471 Milk pCi/L Cr-51 5.09E+01 4.72E+01 1.08 Acceptable 04/25/13 E10471 Milk pCi/L Cesium-134 2.06E+02 2.14E+02 0.96 Acceptable 04/25/13 E10471 Milk pCi/L Cesium-137 2.83E+02 2.66E+02 1.07 Acceptable 04/25/13 E10471 Milk pCi/L Cobalt-58 2.19E+02 2.08E+02 1.05 Acceptable 04/25/13 E10471 Milk pCi/L Mn-54 2.21E+02 2.08E+02 1.06 Acceptable 04/25/13 E10471 Milk vCi/L Iron-59 2.78E+02 2.52E+02 1.1 Acceptable 04/25/13 E10471 Milk pCi/UL Zinc-65 3.39E+02 3.01E+02 1.13 Accepotable 04/25/13 E10471 Milk pCi/L Cobalt-60 4.02E+02 .4.OOE+02 1.01 Acceptable 04/25/13 E10472 Water pCi/L. Iodine-131 1.12E+02 9.28E+01 1.21 Acceptable 04/25113 E10472 Water pCi/L Cernum-141 1.88E+02 1.79E+02 1.05 Acceptable 04/25/13 E10472 Water oCi/L Cr-51 4.84E+02 4.52E+02 1.07 Acceptable P:O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 24 of 58 04/25/13 E10472 Water oCi/L Cesium-134 1.96E-02 2.05E+02 0.96 Acceptable 04/25/13 E10472 Water pCi/L Cesium-137 2.71E+02 2.54E+02 .1.07 Acceptable 04/25/13 E10472 Water pCi/L Cobalt-58 2.03E+02 1.99E+02 1.02 Acceptable 04/25/13 E10472 Water pCi/L Mni-54 2.15E+02 1.99E+02 1.08 Acceptable 04/25/13 E10472 Water pCi/L Iron-59 2.67E+02 2.41E+02 1.11 Acceptable 04/25/13 E10472 Water pCi/L Zinc-65 3.14E+02 2.88E+02 1.09 Acceotable 04/25/13 E10472 Water pCi/ Cobalt-60 3.92E+02 3.83E+02 1.02 Acceptable 08/02/13 E10577 Cartridge pCi Iodine-131 9.16E+01 9.55E+01 1.02 Acceptable 08/02/13 E10578 Milk pCi/L Strontium-89 9.27E+01 9.04E+01 0.98 Acceptable 08/02/13 E10578 Milk pCi/L Strontium-90 1.20E+01 1.70E+01 0.7 Acceptable 08/02/13 E10579 Milk pCi/L Iodine-131 9.86E+01 9.55E+01 1.03 Acceptable 08/02/13 E10579 Milk pCi/L Cerum-141.'

9.44E+01 9.04E+01 1.04 Acceptable Chromium-08/02/13 E10579 Milk pCi/L 51 2.58E+02 2.50E+02 1.03 Acceptable 08/02113.

E10579 Milk pCi/L Cesium-134 1.21E+02 1.25E+02 0.97 Acceptable 08/02/13 E10579 Milk pCi/l Cesium-1,37 1.49E+02 1.51E+02 0.99 Acceptable 08/02/13 E10579 Milk pCi/L Cobalt-58 9.44E+01 9.40E+01 1:00 Acceptable S /, Manganese-08/02113 E10579 Milk pCi/L 54 1.80E+02 1.72E+02 1.05 Acceptable 08/02/13 E10579 Milk pCi/L Iron-59 1.36E+02 1.20E+02 1.14 Acceptable 08/02/13 E10579 Milk pCi/L Zinc-65 2.39E+02 2.17E+02' 1:10 Acceptable 08/02/13 E10579 Milk pCi/L Cobalt-60 1.77E+01 1.75E+02 1.01 Acceptable 08/02/13 E10178 Water pCi/L Iodine-1 31 " 9.33E+01 9.54E+01.

0.98 Acceptable 08/02/13 E10178 Water pCi/L Cerium-141 1.15E+02 1.10E+02 1.04 Acceptable Chromium-08/02113 E10178 Water pCI/L 51 3.40E+02 3.06E+02 1.11 Acceptable 08/02/13 E10178 Water pCi/L Cesium-134 1.48E+02 1.53E+02 0.97 Acceptable 08/02/13 E10178 Water pCi/L Cesium-137 1.83E+02 1.84E+02 0.99 Acceptable 08/02113 E10178 Water pCi/L Cobalt-58 1.13E+02 1.15E+02 0.99 Acce table Manganese-08102113 E10178 Water pCi/L 54 2.O9E+02 2.10E+02 1.00. Acceptable 08/02/13 E10178 Water pCi/L Iron-59 1.51E+02 1.46E+02 1.03 Acceptable..

08/02/13 E10178 ' Water. pCi/I Zinc-65 2.86E+02 2.65E+02 1.08 Acceptable 08/02/13 E10178 Water pCi/L Cobalt-60 2.25E+02 2.14E+02 1.05 Acceptable 10/25/13 E10625 Cartridge*

pCi lodine-131 8.57E+011 7.96E+01 1.08 Acceptable 10/25/13 E10626 Milk pCi/L Strontium-89 9.33E+01 9.60E+01 0.97 Acceptable 10/25/13 E10626 Milk pCi/L Strontium-90 1.09E+01 1.32E+01 0.83 Acceptable 10/25/13 E10627 Milk pCi/L Iodine-1.31 1.OOE+02 9.83E+01 1.02 Acceptable Chromium-10/25/13.

E10627 Milk pCi/L 51 3.09E+02 2.77E+02 1.11 Acceptable 10/25/13 E10627 Milk pCi/L Cesium-134 1.46E+02 1.72E+02 0.85 Acceptable 10/25/13 E10627 Milk pCi/L Cesium-137 1.33E+02 1.31E+02 1.02 Acceptable 10/25/13 E10627 Milk pCi/L Cobalt-58 1.04E+02 1.08E+02 0.97, Acceptable S ..; Manganese-10/25113 E10627 Milk pCi/I 54 1.44E+02 1.39E+02 1.04 Acceptable 10/25/13 E10627 Milk pCI Iron-59 1.43E+02 1.30E+02 11 Acceptable 10/25/13 E10627 .Milk pCi/L Zinc-65 .2.86E+02 2.66E+02 1.07 Acceptable 10/25/13 E10627 Milk pCi/L Cobalt-60 2.01E+02 1.98E+02 1.03 Acceptable 10/25/13 E10628 Water p~lL Iodine-131 11,"E+02 9.79E+01 1.03 Acceptable Chromium-10/25/13.

E10628 Water " pCi/I 51 2.80E+02 2.51E+02 1.12 ' Acceptable L-b Lab " taori,'s LL P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 25 of 58 10/25113 E10628 Water pCi/L Cesium-134 1.42E+02 1.56E+02 0.91 Acceptable 10125/13 E10628 Water pCi/L Cesium-137 1.19E+02 1.18E+02 1.01 Acceptable 10/25/13 E10628 Water pCi/L Cobalt-58 9.80E+01 9.73E+01 1.01 Acceptable Manganese-10/25/13 E10628 Water pCi/L 54 1.29E+02 1.25E+02 1.05 .Acceptable 10/25/13 E10628 Water pCi/L Iron-59 1.23E+02 .1.18E+02 1.04 Acceptable 10/25/13 E10528 Water pCi/L Zinc-65 2.62E+02 2.41E+02 1.09 Acceptable 10/25/13.

E10628 .Water pCi/L Cobalt-60 1.87E+02 1.77E+02 .1.06 Acceptable Lboatori os* LLC P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417-2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 26 of 58 TABLE 3 2013 DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY MIXED ANALYTE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PROGRAM_ _ _P )RESULTS Acceptance Report Sample Analyte I GEL Known Range/Date Sample Number Media Unit Nuclide Value value Ratio Evaluation 0.0109-02127/13 GENE01-27-RdFR1 Filter Bq/sample U-234/233 0.0143 0.0155 0.0202 Acceptable 02/27/13 GENE01-27-RdFR1 Filter Bq/sample Uranium-238 0.0999- 0.098 0.069-0.127 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-GrF28 Filter Bq/sample Gross Alpha 0.656 1.20 0.36-2.04 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-GrF28 Filter Bq/sample Gross Beta 0.954 0.85 0.43-1.28 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kq Americium-241 118 113 79-147 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kg Cesium-134 829 887 621-1153 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kg Cesium-137 623 587 411-763 Acceptable False Pos 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kg Cobalt-57 1.04 0 Test Acceptable 05M13113 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kg Cobalt-60 737 691 484-898 Acceptable False Pos 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mq/kg Iron-55 -0.380 0 Test I Acceptable False Pos 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kg Manganese-54 0.760 0 Test Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kg Nickel-63 719 670 469-871 Acceptable 05/13113 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil .mo, Plutonium-238 0.571 0.52 Sens. Eval. Acceptable Plutonium-05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kg 239/240 77.70 79.5 55.7-103.4 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-1 3-MaS28 Soil mg/kg Potassium-40 713 625 438-813 .Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kg Strontium-90 693.0 628 440-816 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil m n/kg Technetium-99 419.0 444 311-577 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kq U-234/233 60.0 62.5 43.8-81.3 Acceptable 05113/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kg Uranium-238 274 281 197-365 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaS28 Soil mg/kg Zinc-65 1130 995 697-1294 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-1 3-MaW28 Water Bq/L Am-241 0.690 0.689 0.428&0.896 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water Bq/L Cesium-134 21.1 24.4 17.1-31.7 Acceptable False Pos 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water Bq/L Cesium-137 0.10 0.0 Test .Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water Bq/L Cobalt-57 31.0 30.9 21.6-40.2 Acceptable 05113/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water B3/L Cobalt-60 19.4 19.6 13.7-25.4 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water Bq/L Hydrogen-3 517 507 355-659 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water Bq/L Iron-55 39.7 44.0 30.8-57.2 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water Bq/L Manganese-54 28.0 27.4 19.2-35.6.

Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water BoqL Nickel-63 32.9 33.4 23.4-43.4 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water Bq/L Plutonium-238 0.825 0.884 0.619-1.149 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water Bq/L Pu-239/240 0.0162 0.0096 Sens. Eval. Acceptable False Pos 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water Bq/L Potassium-40

-0.471 0 Test Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water Bq/L Strontium-90 12.5 10.5 7.4-13.7 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water Bq/L Technetium-99 12.9 .13:1 9.2-17.0 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water BqlL U-234/233 0.289 0.315 0.221-0.410 Acceptable 05/13113 MAPEP-13-MaW2B Water Bq/L Uranium-238 1.81 1:95 1.37-2.54 Acce table 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-MaW28 Water B/l Zinc-65 32.8 30.4 21.3-39.5 Acceptable Labot~o'ii.

LWC P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 27 of 58 05113113 MAPEP-13-GrW28 Water BOIL Gross Alpha 2.60 2.31 0.69-3.93 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-GrW28 Water Bq/L Gross Beta 14.2 13.0 6.5-19.5 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-XaW28 Water Bg/L Iodine-129 5.94 6.06 4.24-7.88 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter ug/sample Uranium-235 0.036 0.036 0.025-0.047 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter un/sample Uranium-238 18.0 18.6 13.0-24:2 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter ug/sample Uranium-Total 17.7. 18.6 13.0-24.2 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter ug/sample Americium-241 0.106 0.104 0.073-0.135 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Bq/sample Cesium-134 1.75 1.78 1;25-2.31 Acceptable 05113/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Bq/sample Cesium-137 2.71 2.60 1.82-3.38 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filler Bo/sample Cobalt-57 2.51 2.36 1.65-3.07 Acceptable False Pos 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Bq/sample

'Cobalt-60 0.005 0.00 Test Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Bq/sample Manganese-54 4.43 4.26 2.98-5.54 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Bg/sample Plutonium-238 0.124 0.127 0.089-0.165 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Bq/sample Pu-239/240 0.118 0.1210 0.085-0.157 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Ba/sample Strontium-90 1.54 1.49 .1.04-1.94 Acceptable 0.0223-.05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Bg/sample U-234/233 0.0342 0.0318 0.0413 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Bq/sample Uranium-238 0.230 0.231 0.162-0.300 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Bq/sample Zinc-65 3.38 3.13 2.19-4.07 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-GrF28 Filter Bq/sample Gross Alpha 0.656 1.20 0.36-2.04 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-GrF28 Filter Bq/sample Gross Beta 0.95 0.85 0.43-1.28 Acceptable 05/13113 MAPEP-13-RdF28 Filter Be/sample Americium-241 0.106 0.104 0.073-0.135 Acceptable

'0.0009-05/113/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation ug/sample Uranium-235 0.0029 0.001 0.0017 Not Accept.05/13/13.

MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation ug/sample Uranium-238 0.419 0.180 0.13-0.23 NotAccept.

05/13113 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation uq/sample Uranium-Total 0.4219 0.180 0.13-0.23 Not Accept.05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation uqlsample Americium-241 0.1350 0.140 0.098-0.182 Acceptable False Pos 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation Bq/sample Cesium-134 0.0525 0.00 Test Acceptable 05113/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation SBq/sample Cesium-137 7.13 6.87 4.8118.93 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation Be/sample Cobalt-57 8.86 8:68 6.08-11.28 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation Bq/sample Cobalt-60 6.07 5.85 4.10-7.61 Acceptable False Pos 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation Be/sample Manganese-54

-0.002 0.00 Test Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation Be/sample Plutonium-238 0.110 0.110 0.077-0.143 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation Bq/sample Pu-239/240 0.113 0.123 0.086-0.160 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation Bq/sample Strontium-90 1.358 1.64 1.15-2.13 Acceptable 05/13/13 MAPEP-1 3-RdV28 Vegetation Bq/sample U-234/233 0.0081 0.0038 Sens. Eval. Not Accept.05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation Be/sample Uranium-238 0.00489 0.002 Sens. Eval. Not Accept.05/13/13 MAPEP-13-RdV28 Vegetation Bq/sample Zinc-65 6.59 6.25 4.38-8.13 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-GrF29 Filter Bq/sample Gross Alpha 1.090 0.900 0.3-1.5 Acce table 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-GrF29 Filter Bq/sample Gross Beta 1.730 1.630 0.82-2.45 Acceptable False Pos 11112/13 MAPEP-13-MaS29 Soil mg/kg iAmericium-241 0.00 0 Test Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-1,3-MaS29 Soil mg/kg Cesium-134 1090 1172 820-1524 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaS29 Soil mglkg- Cesium-137 1010 977 684-1270 Acceptable False. Pos 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaS29 Soil mg/kg Cobalt-57 0.0 0 Test Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaS29 Soil Im/k I Cobalt-60 462,00 451.00 316-586 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MAS29 Soil mg/kg lron-55 887 820 574-1066 Acceptable P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT." Page 28 of 58 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 28 of 58 I 1414 '~I12 I l~AADcD.A~..IIA,,~fl I ~niI I U ~ I~7A 1 101 l S -1.1/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaS29 Soil mg/kq Nickel-63 525.0 571 400-742 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaS29 Soil mg/kq Plutonium-238

.60.8 62 43.1-80.0.

Acceptable Plutonium-11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaS29 Soil mg/kq 239/240 1.33 0.4 Sens. Eval. Acceptable 11112/13 MAPEP-13-MaS29 Soil mg/kg Potassium-40 638 633 443-823 , Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaS29 Soil mg/kg Strontium-90 458.0 460 322-598 Acceptable False Pos 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaS29 Soil mg/kg Technetium-99 0.0 0 Test Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaS29 Soil mg/kg U-234/233 26.1 30. 21.0-39.0 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaS29 Soil mg/kg Uranium-238 30.0 .34 23.8-4'4.2 Acceptable False Pos.11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaS29 Soil mq/kq Zinc-65 0.0 0 Test Acceptable False Pos 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaW29 Water Bq/L Americium-241 0.0001 0.000 Test Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaW29 Water Bq/L Cesium-134 27.20 30.0 21.0-39.0 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaW29 Water Bq/L Cesium-137 31.8 31.6 22.1-41.1 Acceptable False Pos 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaW29 Water BO/L Cobalt-57 0 .0.0. Test Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaW29 Water Bq/L Cobalt-60 23.60 23.6 16.51-30.65 Acceptable False Pos 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaW29 Water Bq/L Hydrogen-3

-3.5 0 Test Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaW29 Water Bq/L Iron-55 53.00 53.3 .37.3-69.3 Acceptable False Pos 11/12/13 MAPEPL13-MaW29 Water Bq/L Manganese-54

-0.009 0.0 Test Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaW29 Water Bq/L Nickel-63 27.7 26.4 18.5-34.3 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaW29 Water Bq/L Plutonium-238 1.070 1.216 0.851-1.581 Acceptable Plutonium-11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaW29 Water Bq/L 239/240 0.907 0.996 0.697-1.295 Acceptable False Pos 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaW29 Water Ba/L Potassium-40 0.339 0 Test Acceptable.

11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaW29.

Water Bq/L Strontium-90 6.65 7.22 .5.05-9.39 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaW29 Water Bq/l Technetium-99 15.4 16.20 11.3-21.1

.Acceptable Uranium-11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaW29 Water Bq/L 234/233 0.065 0.07 Sens. Eval. Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaW29.

Water Ba/L Uranium-238 0.031 0.034 Sens. Eval. Acceptable 11112/13 MAPEP-13-MaW29 Water Bq/L Zinc-65 .36.500 34.60 24.2-45.0 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaW29 Water Bq/L Gross Alpha 0.793 0.701 0.201-1.192 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-MaW29 Water B,/L Gross Beta 6.220 5.94 2.97-8.91

.Acceptable 0.0227-11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdF29 Filter ug/sample Uranium-235 0.034 0.032 0.0421 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdF29 Filter ug/sample Uranium-238 15.8 16.5. 11.6-21.5 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdF29 Filter ug/sample Uranium-Total 15.80 16.5 11.6-21.5 Acceptable False Pos 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdF29 Filter ucq/sample Americium-241 0.0002 0.000 Test Acceptable False Pos 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdF29 Filter Ba/sample Cesium-134

-0.0016 0.00' Test Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdF29 Filter Bq/sample Cesium-137 3.010 2.70 1.9-3.5 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdF29 Filter B/sample Cobalt-57

.3.530 3.40. 2.4-4.4 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdF29 Filter Bq/sample Cobalt-60 2.440 2.30 1.6-3.0 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdF29 Filter Ba/sample Mangaanese-54 3.720 3.50 2.5-4.6 Acceptable.

11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdF29 Filter Ba/sample Plutonium-238 0.128 0.124

• 0.087-0.161 Acceptable:

Plutonium-11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdF29 Filter Bq/sample

• 239/240 0.092 0.0920 0.064-0.12 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdF29 Filter Bo/sample Strontium-90 1.690 1.81 1.27-2.35 Acceptable.

LLC P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417'2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 29 of 58 Uranium-2341233 0.0204-A0.03 111/tIMAPFP-13-RdtF2g Filter I n am l 0 027 00,Q9 Arr.ent~ahIn 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdF29 Filter Bq/sample Uranium-238 0.020 0.021 0.144-0.267 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdF29 Filter Bq/sample Zinc-65 3.050 2.70 1.9-3.5 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdV29 Vegetation Bq/sample Americium-241 0.226 0.19 0.135-0.251 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdV29 Vegetation Bo/sample Cesium-134 4.750 5.20 3.64-6.67 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdV29 Vegetation Bq/sample Cesium-137 6.910 6.60 4.62-8.58 Acceptable False Pos 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdV29 Vegetation Bc/sample Cobalt-57

-0.002 0.00 Test Acceptable False Pos 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdV29 Vegetation Bq/sample Cobaltm60 0.008 0.00 Test Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdV29 Vegetation Bg/sample Manganese-54 7.980 7.88- 5.52-10.24 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdV29 Vegetation Bg/sample Plutonium-238 0.001 0.001 Sens. Evat. Acceptable Plutonium-11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdV29 Vegetation BP/sample 239/240 0.1510 0.17i 0.120-0.222 Acceptable 11112/13 MAPEP-13-RdV29 Vegetation Bq/sample Strontium-90 2.330 2.32 1.62-3.02 Acceptable Uranium- 0.0326-11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdV29 Vegetation Bq/sample 234/233 0.046 0.047 0.0606 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdV29 Vegetation Bq/sample Uranium-238 0.332 0.324 0.227-0.421 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-RdV29 Vegetation Bq/sample Zinc-65 2.850 2.63 1.84-3.42 Acceptable 11/12/13 MAPEP-13-XaW29 Water Bq/L. Iodine-129 3.62 3.79 2.65-4.93 Acceptable 4 + 4 4 1 4 4 -4 7ab0tO8 LLC.P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 30 of 58 TABLE 4 2013 ERA PROGRAM PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RESULTS Acceptance Report Sample Sample GEL Known Range/Date Number Media Unit Analyte I Nuclide Value value Ratio Evaluation 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Barium-1 33 55.4 54.4 44.9-60.2 Acceptable 02/28/13 RAD- 92 Water pCi/L Cesium-134 27.2 29.9 23.4-32.9 Acceptable 02/28/13 RAD- 92 Water pCi/L Cesium-137 74.3 75.3 67.8-85.5 Acceptable 02128/13 RAD -92 Water PCi/L Cobalt-60 89.0 97.7 87.9-110 Acceptable 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Zinc-65 126 114 103-136 Acceptable 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water PCi Gross Alpha 26.0 24.8 12.5-33.0 Acceptable 02/28113 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Gross Beta 19.4 19.3 11.3-27.5 Acceptable 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Gross Alpha 31.4 24.8 12.5-33.0 Acceptable 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Radium-226 10.4 9.91 7.42-11.6 Acceptable 02/28/13 RAD- 92 Water pCi/L Radium-228 4.84 5.22 3.14-6.96 Acceptable 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Uranium (Nat) 6.43 5.96 4.47-7.13 Acceptable 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water uq/L Uranium (Nat) mass 9.59 8.69 6.50-10.4 Acceptable 02128113 RAD -92 Water pCilL Radium-226 11.60 9.91 7.42-11.6 Acceptable 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Radium-228 5.13 5.22 3.14-6.96 Acceptable 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Uranium (Nat) 5.95 5.96 4.47-7.13 Acceptable 02128/13 RAD -92 Water ug/L Uranium (Nat) mass 9.95 8.69 6.50-10.4 Acceptable 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Tritium 1430 1320 1040-1480 Acceptable 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Strontium-89 47.5 48 37.6-55.3 Acceptable 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Strontium-90 35.9 39.8 29.2-45.8 Acceptable 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Strontium-89 42.9 48 37.6-55.3 Acceptable 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L Strontium-90 34.6 39.8 29.2-45.8 Acceptable 02/28/13 RAD- 92 Water pCi/L Iodine-131 23.6 22.7 18.8-27.0 Acceptable 02/28/13 RAD -92 Water pCi/L. Iodine-131 27 22.7 18.8-27.0 Acceptable 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Barium-133 76.4 740.5 62.4-82.0 Acceptable 08/22/13 RAD- 94 Water pCi/L Cesium-134 68.7 72.4 59.1-79.6 Acceptable 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Cesium-137 154 155 140-172 Acceptable 08/22/13 RAD- 94 Water pCi/L Cobalt-60 85.3 82.3 74.1-92.9 Acceptable 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water

• pCi/L Zinc-65 297 260 234-304 Acceptable Not 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Gross Alpha 74.3 57.1 29.8-71.2 Acceptable 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Gross Beta 34.3 41.8 27.9-49.2 Acceptable 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Gross Alpha 67.7 57.1 29.8-71;2 Acceptable 08/22/13 RAD- 94 Water pCi/L Radium-226 16.9 17.2 12.8-19.7 Acceptable 08122/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Radium-226 17 17 2 12.8-197 Acceptable 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Radium-228 3.53 3.86 2.18-5.4 Acceptable 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Uranium (Nat) 20.4 21.4 17.1-24.1 Acceptable Uranium (Nat)08122/13 RAD -94 Water uo,/L mass 30.4 31.2 25.0-35.2 Acceptable 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Radium-226 14.6 17.2 12.8-19.7 Acceptable 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Uranium (Nat) 21.6 21.4 .t7.1-24.1 Acceptable Uranium (Nat)08122/13 RAD -94 Water ug/L mass 337 31.2 25-35.2 Acceptable 08/22/13 RAD '94 Water pCi/L Tritium 12500 13300 11600-14600 Acceptable

,o s:a. L-L P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 31 of 58 Not 08/22113 RAD -94 Water. pCi/L Strontium-89 48.9 36.5 27.4-4,3.4 Acceptable 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Strontium-90 14.3 19.8 14.1-23.4

.Acceptable Not.08/22J13 RAD.- 94 Water pCi/L Strontium-89 44.3 36.5 .27.4-43.4 Acceptable 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Strontium-90 17.3 19.8 14.1-23.4

.Acceptable 08/22113 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Iodine-1 31. 26.1 24.3 20.2-28.8 Acceptable 08/22/13 RAD -94 Water pCi/L Iodine-131 23.3 24.3 20.2-28.8 Acceptable

~I 'LaboatorieS, LL P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page32 of 58 TABLE 5 2013 ERA PROGRAM (MRAD) PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RESULTS Acceptance Report Sample Sample GEL Known Range[Date Number Media Unit Analyte Nuclide Value value Ratio Evaluation 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Actinium-228 1500 1240 795-1720 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Americium-241 225 229 134-297 Acceptable 05122113 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Bismuth-212 1250 1240 330-1820 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Bismuth-214 4410 3660 2200-5270 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Cesium-134 7850 6370 4160-7650 Not Accept.05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Cesium-137 8070 6120 4690-7870 Not Accept.05/22/13:

MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Cobalt-60 10300 7920 5360-10900 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Lead-212 1290 1240 812-1730 Acceptable 05/22113 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Lead-214 4690 3660 2140-5460 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Manganese-54

<63.4 <1000 0-1000 Acceptable 505/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Plulonium-238 651 788.00 474-1090 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Plutonium-239 320 366.00 239-506 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kq Potassium-40 10300 10300 7520-13800 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Strontium-90 6730 8530 3250-13500 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Thorium-234 3290 1900 601-3570 Acceptable 05/22113 MRAD-18 Soil Ci/ka Zinc-65 1910 1400 1110-1860 Not Accept.05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Strontium-90 6730 8530 3250-13500 Acceptable 05/22113 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Uranium-234.

1210 1920 1170-2460 Acceptable 05/22/13 .MRAD-18 Soil pCi/k Uranium-238 1630 1900 1180-2410-Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Soil pCi/kg Uranium-Total 2840 3920 2130-5170 Acceptable 05/22113 MRAD-18 Soil ug/kg Uranium-Total(mass) 4150 5710 3150-7180 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/ka Am-241 629 553 338-735. Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kq Cesium-134 1400 1240 797-1610 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kg Cesium-1 37 687 544 394-757' Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kg Cobalt-60 2410 1920 1320-2680 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kg Curium-244 1420 1340 657-2090 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kg Manganese-54

<47.4 <300 0.00-300 Acceptable 05/22013 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kfq Plutonium-238 2060 1980 1180-2710 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kg Plutonium-239 2230 2260 1390-3110 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kq Potassium-40 35600 31900 23000-44800 Acceptable 05/22113 MRAD-18 Vegetation PCi/kg Strontium-90.

3720 3840 2190-5090 Acceptable 05/22113 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kg Uranium-234 2650 2460 1620-3160 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/ko Uranium-238 2580 2440 1630-3100 Acceptable 05/22113 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kg Uranium-Total.

5361 5010 3390-6230 Acceptable 05/22113 MRAD-18 Vegetation ug/kg Uranium-Totaltmass) 7740 7310 4900-9280 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Vegetation pCi/kg Zinc-65 1150 878 633-1230 Acceptable 05/22113 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter Amedcium-241 62.9 66.8 41.2-90.4.

Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter Cesium-134 1080 1110 706-1380 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter Cesium-137 971 940 706-1230.

Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter Cobalt-60 217 214 166-267 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter Iron-55 224 225 69.8-440 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Fiiter pCi/Filter Manganese-54

<5.27 <50.0 0-50.0 Acceptable La baratd., LLC P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 33 of 58 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCiFilter Plutonium-238 48.0 50.1 34.3-65.9 Acceptable 05122/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter Plutonium-239 62.7 65.2 47.2-85.2 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter Strontium-g0 139 138 67.4-207 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter Uranium-234 54.5 59.4 36.8-89.6 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter Uranium-238 58.5 58.9 38.1-81.4 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter Uranium-Total 117 121 67.0-184 Acceptable 05122/13 MRAD-18 Filter ug/Filter ,Uranium-Total?(ass) 176 176 113-248 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter Zinc-65 222 199 142-275 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter GrossAlpha 55.5 42.3 14.2-65.7 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Filter pCi/Filter Gross Beta 31 25.1 15.9-36.6 Acceptable 05/22113 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Americium-241 118 118 79.5-158 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Cesium-134 1320 1400 1030-1610 Acceptable 05122/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Cesium-137 1900 1880 1600-2250 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Cotialt-60 2370 2270 1970-2660 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Iron-55 812 712 424-966. Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Manganese-54

<7.6 <100 0.00-100 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Plutonium-238 91 99 73.1-123 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Plutonium-239 161 185 144-233 Acceptable 05/22113 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Strontium-90 144 137 .89.2-181 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Uranium-234 47.3 48.8 36.7-62.9 Acceptable 05/22113 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Uranium-238 50.8 48.4 36.9-59.4.

Acceptable 05/22113 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Uranium-Total 98.1 99.5 73.1r129 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water u1/L Uranium-TotaIfmassl 152 145 116-175 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Zinc-65 428 384 320-464 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Gross Alpha 138.0 130 46.2-201 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L Gross Beta 87 78.9 45.2-117 Acceptable 05/22/13 MRAD-18 Water pCi/L. Tntium 13100 12300 8240-17500 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kq Actinium-228 1200 1240 795-1720 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kq Americium-241 186 164 95.'9-213 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Bismuth-212 1760 1220 325-1790 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Bismuth-214 4350 3740 2250-5380 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Cesium-134 2690 2820 1840-3390 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Cesium-137 3960 .4130 3160-5310 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Cobalt-60 5490 5680 3840-7820 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kgq Lead-212 1260 1220 799-1700 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Lead-214 4700 3740 2180-5580 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Manganese-54

<55.2 <1000 0-1000 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Plutonium-238 576 658 396-908 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Plutonium-239 400 397 260-548 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Potassium-40 11200 12400 9080-16700 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Strontium-90 8220 6860 2620-10800 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kq Thorium-234 2870 3080 974-5790 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kq Zinc-65 3400 3160 2520-4200 Acceptable 11/26M13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kq Uranium-234 2870 3080 974-5790 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Uranium-238 2979 3080 1910-3910 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil pCi/kg Uranium-Total 6870 6320 3430-8340 Acceptable Uranium-11/26/13 MRAD-19 Soil ug/ik Total(mass) 8460 9220 5080-11600 Acceptable Lab~t ori' L' Cs -L t 08 P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 34 of 58 I 119A1i1 I ftA~AflAO I \f~notnt~nn I lanA I lW~fl Am,./Al'VV)AA~lA 11/26113 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Cesium-134 907 859 552-1120 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Cesium-137 1220 1030 747-1430 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/ki Cobalt-60 2100 1880 1300-2630 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation

-pCi/kg Curium-244 1230 1250 612-1950 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Manganese-54

<53.3 <300 0-300 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Plutonium-238 1280 1290 769-1770 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Plutonium-239 2580 2770 1700-3810 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Potassium-40 33600 33900 24500-47600 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Strontium-90 5870 6360 3630-8430 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Uranium-234 674 654 430-840 Acceptable Not 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Uranium-234 1050 654 430-840 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Uranium-238 655 648 432-823 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Uranium-Total 1364 1330 901-1660 Acceptable Not 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kq Uranium-Total 1773 1330 901-1660 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation ug/kg Uranium-Total(mass) 1960 1940 1300-2460 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Vegetation pCi/kg Zinc-65 1990 1540 1110-2160 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Americium-241 75.2 66.4 40.9-89.9 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Cesium-134 845 868.0 552-1080 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Cesium-137 641 602 452-791 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Cobalt-60 534 494 382-617 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter lron-55 466 389.0 121-760 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Manganese-54

<3.9 <50 0.00-50.0 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter uglFilter Plutonium-238 72.8 68.5 46.9-90.1 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Plutonium-239 56.5 53.4 42.4-93.1 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter oCt/Filter Strontium-90 130 125 61.1-187 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Uranium-234 56 87 35.6-86.6 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Uranium-238 58 56.90 36.8-78.7 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Uranium-Total 116 117 64.8-178 Acceptable 11126/13 MRAD-19 Filter ug/Filler Uranium-Totalfmass) 172 171 109-241 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Zinc-65 514 419 300-578 Acceptable Uranium-11126/13 MRAD-19 Filter ug/Filter Total~mass) 169 171 109-241 Acceptable Uranium-11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter ug/Filter Total(mass) 150 171 109-241 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Gross Alpha 100 83 27.8-129 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Filter pCi/Filter Gross Beta 65.7 56.3 35.6-82.2 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Americium-241 126 126 84.9-169 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Cesium-134 2060 2180 1600-2510 Acceptable 111/26/13 MRAO-19 Water pCi/L Cesium-137 2730 2760 2340-3310 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Cobalt-60 1960 1890 1640-2210 ,Acceptable 11126/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Iron-55 721 689 411-935 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCiL .Manganese-54

<7.24 <100 0.00-100 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Plutonium-238 133 138 102-172 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Plutonium-239 98.7 109 84.6-137 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/_ Strontium-90 726 788 513-1040 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water PiL Uranium-234 93 99 74.3-128 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD:19 Water pCi/L Uranium-238 93 98.00 74.7-120 Acceptable

-6 b o' rg ..t. k- ýý÷P.0. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT'Page 35 of 58 H i T I Ion 4 4110/4 " I RADI 1 lqf Pill" 4AQorn 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water ug/L Uranium-Total(mass) 278 294 234-355 Acceptable 11126/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Zinc-65 1560 .1370 1140-1730 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 .Water pCi/L Gross Alpha 105.0 97 34.3-150 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Gross Beta 7.8.8 84.5 48&4-125 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Tritium 8740 9150 6130-13000.

Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/0 Uranium-234 92.4 98.9. 74.3-128 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water .pCi/L ..Uranium-238 96.1 98.0 74.7-120 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Uranium-Total

.193 201 148-260 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water u./-L Uranium-Total(mass) 288 294 234-355 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Uranium-234 95.2 98.9 74.3-128 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Uranium-238 115 .98.00 .74.7-120 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water pCi/L Uranium-Total 215 201 148-260 Acceptable 11/26/13 MRAD-19. Water uC/ Uranium-Tolal(mass)

.344 294 234-355 Acceptable.

11/26/13 MRAD-19 Water /L Uraniurvi-Total(mass" 258 294 234-355 Acceptable P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUAuTY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 36 of 58 FIGURE 1 COBALT-60 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RESULTS AND % BIAS 2013 Cobalt-60 Performance Evaluation Results and % Bias 100.0 7&0 50.0*25.0,-25.0 --50.0-75.0-1000 Lower Control Limit UpperContro Limit January 2013 -December 2013 P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 37 of 58 FIGURE 2 CESIUM-137 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RESULTS AND % BIAS 2013 Cesium-137 Performance Evaluation Results and % Bias 100-0 750 50.0 -C-3ý4- Cs -13 7 25.0.--. -Lower Control Limit----Upper Control-25A L ,Limit-50.0-75.0 January 2013 -December 2013 j ýaborls LL0 P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013-ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 38 of 58 FIGURE 3 TRITIUM PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RESULTS AND % BIAS 2013 Tritium Performance Evaluation Results and % Bias0<100,0 75.0 50.0 25.0 0.0-25.0-50.0-75.0-100.0 H-3--.- Lower Control Limit---- Upper Control Limit January 2013 -December 2013

.'Labotatorios-LLC P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 39 of 58 FIGURE 4 STRONTIUM-90 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RESULTS AND % BIAS I!abch rtors LLW P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 40 of 58 FIGURE 5 GROSS ALPHA PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RESULTS AND % BIAS 2013 Gross Alpha Performance Evaluation Results and % Bias 100.0 50.0 cD 0:0-50.0-100.0 Gross Alpha-- --Lower Control Lim it S- --- Uplper Control Limit January 2013. December 2013 oL.bi iat-or os LLC P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 41 of 58 FIGURE 6 GROSS BETA PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RESULTS AND % BIAS 2013 Gross Beta Performance Evaluation Results and % Bias 100.0 50,0 50 r. C, Gross Beta----Lower Control 0.0 Limit-.-- Upper Control Limit-50.0-100.0 January 2013 -December 2013 N abo'rtoribs.

LL P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 42 of 58 FIGURE 7 IODINE-131 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RESULTS AND % BIAS 2013 Iodine-131 Performance Evaluation Results and % Bias 100.0 j -75.0 50.0 25,0 2500 Lim.0 Iodine-131

---

Lower Control Limit -'.Upper Control Limit-25.0-50.0I-75.0-100.10.Lý January 2013 -December 2013

Laboatmories--

LLC P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 43 of 58 FIGURE 8 AMERICIUM-241 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RESULTS AND % BIAS Labor to0?iers LLC P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 44 of 58 FIGURE 9 PLUTONIUM-238 PERFORMANCE EVALUATION RESULTS AND % BIAS 2013 Plutonium-238 Performance Evaluation Results and %Bias 100.0 75.0 50.0 25.0 0,0-25.0-50.0-75.0-100.0------ -----------f -r --------Plutonium-238

---

Lower Control Limit---- Upper Control Limit January 2013. December 2013

..ab.... r.. ,,.L P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 45 of 58 TABLE 6 REMP INTRA-LABORATORY DATA

SUMMARY

BIAS AND PRECISION BY MATRIX Bias Criteria Precision Criteria REMP 2013 (+/- 250/o) (Note 1){~~ ~ WTI UTDE WiTIN, OUJTSIDE CRTE1AL'.RXTERTA, RIý RI~ CRITERIA Gamma Iodine-131 41 0 131 0 Gas Flow Sr 2nd count 46 0 49 0 Gas Flow Total Strontium 35 0 35 0 Gamma Spec Liquid RAD A-013 with Ba, La 1 61 0 120 0 LSCIron-55 5 0 5 0 Gamma Spec Solid RAD A-013 28 0 31 0 LSC Nickel 63 5 0 5 0 Gas Flow Sr 2nd count 4 0 4 0 Gas Flow Total Strontium 8 0 8 0 Gamma Spec Solid RAD A-013 with Ba, La 7 0 10 0 Gamma Spec Solid RAD A-013 with Iodine 6 0 7 0 FILTER .'.. .,_.._"__ " ,_ "_'_._ "_"_: Gamma Spec Filter RAD A-013 4 0 4 0 Gas Flow Sr 2nd Count 5 0 5 0 Alpha Spec Am241Curium 3 0 3 0 Gas Flow Total Strontium 3 0 3 0 Gross A & B 526 0 527 0 Gamma Spec Filter 45 0 51 0 LIQUID ::__:___ _:_____. .Alpha Spec Uranium 8 0 9 0 Tritium 336 0 337 0 Plutonium 1 0 1 0 LSC Iron-55 40 0 42 0 LSC Nickel 63 41 0 43 0 Gamma Spec Liquid RAD A-013 7 0 7 0 Gamma Iodine-131 33 0 33, 0 Alpha Spec Plutonium 10 0 10 0 Gas Flow Sr 2nd count 20 0 20 0 Alpha Spec Am241 Curium 17 0 17 0 Gas Flow Total Strontium 161 0 163 0 Gross Alpha Non Vol Beta 102 0 104 0 Gamma Spec Liquid RAD A-013 with Ba, La -.129 0 209 0 Gamma Spec Liquid RAD A-013 with Iodine 1 56 0 85 0:T U E : ....': i:° " .. ...... ..,,... ... ....... ......: .

~! LaboratoriS LLC.P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 46 of 58 Gamma Spec Solid RAD A-013 45 0 48 0 LSC Nickel 63 2 0 2 0 Gas Flow Sr 2nd count 10 0 10 0 Gas Flow Total Strontium 17 0 17 0 Gamma Spec Solid RAD A-013 with Ba, La 6 0 5 0 Gamma Spec Solid PAD A-013 with Iodine 17 0 17 0 SEA WATER.....-....

LSC Iron-55 2 0 2 0 LSC Nickel 63 2 0 2 0 Gas Flow Total Strontium 1 0 1 0 Gross Alpha Non Vol Beta 1 0 1 0 Gamma Spec Liquid RAD A-013 with Iodine 1 0 1 0 VEGETATI'ZON.I..

............

_ * .___,-Gas Flow Sr 2nd count 9 0_9 0 Gamma Spec Solid PAD A-013 with Iodine 91 0 93 ._0 AIR CHA RCO A L ..... "_.... ........... " Gamma Iodine 131 RAD A-013 623 0 645 0 0 Carbon-14 (Ascarite/Soda Lime Filter per Liter) 46 0 47 0 DRINKING WATER Tritium 51 0 52 0 LSC Iron-55 24 0 22 0 LSC Nickel 63 23 0 21 0 Gamma Iodine-131 38 0 38 0 Gas Flow Sr 2nd count 16 0 16 .0 Gas Flow Total Strontium 31 0 31 -0 Gross Alpha Non Vol Beta 103 0 103 0 Gamma Spec Liquid RAD A-013 with 0 Ba, La 44 0 98 ..Total 2996 3359 Note 1: The RPD must be 20 percent or less, if both samples are greater than 5 times the MDC. If both results are less than 5 times MDC, then the RPD must be equal to or less than 100%. If one result is above the MDC and the other is below the MDC, then the RPD can be calculated using the MDC for the result of the one below the MDC. The RPD must be 100% or less. In the situation where both results are above the MDC but one result is greater than 5 times the MDC and the other is less than 5 times the MDC, the RPD must be less than or equal to 20%. If both results are below MDC, then the limits on % RPD are not applicable.

Lbo'tatori:0s8 L-Lc.P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 47 of 58 TABLE 7 ALL RADIOLOGICAL INTRA-LABORATORY DATA

SUMMARY

BIAS AND PRECISION BY MATRIX ,. Bias Criteria ,,.

• PrecisionaC-itferia K,+. +-Note..WITHIN OUTSIDE WITHIN f OUTSIDE ENVIRONMENTAL 2013 CRITERIA CRITERIA CRITERIA CRITERIA MILK .....Gamma Spec Liquid RAD A-013 8 0 8 0 Gamma Iodine-129 1 0 1 0 Gamma Iodine-131 41 0 131 0 Gas Flow Sr 2nd count 50 0 51 0 Gas Flow Strontium 90 10 0 10 0 Gas Flow Total Strontium 35 0 35 0 Gamma Spec Liquid RAD A-013 with Ba, La 61 0 120 0 Gamma Spec Liquid RAD A-013 with Iodine 5 0 3 0 SO LID.__...

....... ..._. _ _ _Gas Flow Radium 228 29 0 29 0 Tritium 266 0 312 0 Carbon-14 136 0 227 .'0 LSC Iron-55 146 0 165 0 Alpha Spec Polonium Solid 19 0 22 0 Gamma Nickel 59 RAD A-022 138 0 157 0 LSC Chlorine-36 in Solids 8 0 13 0 Gamma Spec Ra226 RAD A-013 35 0 42 0 Gamma Spec Solid'RAD A-013 701 0 893 0 LSC Nickel 63 176 0 201 0.LSC Plutonium 223 0 245 0 Technetium-99 309 0 339 0 Gamma Spec Uquid PAD A-013 4 0 4 0 1CP-MS Technetium-99 in Soil 75 0 74 0 LSC Selenium 79 5 0 5 0 Total Activity.

2 0 3 0 Tritium 5 0 5 0 Alpha Spec Am243 33 0 42 .0 Gamma Iodine-129 172 0 199 0 Gas Flow Lead 210 18 0 19 0 Total Uranium KPA 10 0 18 0 Alpha Spec Uranium 278 0 380 0.LSC Promethium 147 4 0 4 0 LSC, Rapid Strontium 89 and 90 106 0 120 0 Alpha Spec Thorium 207 0 288 0 Gas Flow Radium 228 2 0 2 0 ICP-MS Uranium-233, 234 in Solid 6 0 .5 0 SLabo atories: L..W P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 48 of 58 Aloha Spec Plutonium 242 0 263 0 ICP-MS Technetium-99 Prep in Soil 78 0 74 0 LSC Calcium 45 2 0 2 0 Alpha Spec Neptunium 234 0 256 0 Alpha Spec Plutonium 157 0 195 0 Alpha Spec Radium 226 7 0 8 0 Gamma Spec Solid with Ra226, Ra228 5 0 6 0 Gas Flow Sr 2nd count 15 0 18 0 Gas Flow Strontium 90 .187 0 207 0 Gas Flow Total Radium 1 0 1 0 Lucas Cell Radium 226 71 0 93 0 Total Activity Screen 10 0 13 0 Alpha Spec Am241 Curiurn 292 0 336 0 Alpha Spec Total Uranium 5 0 6 0 Gas Flow Total Strontium 40 0 44 0 Gross Alpha Non Vol Beta 3 0 3 0 ICP-MS UraniUm-233, 234 Prep in Solid 5 0 5 0 ICP-MS Uranium-235, 236, 238 in Solid 7 .0 8 0 Alpha Spec Polonium Solid 6 0 4 0 Gamma Spec Solid RAD A-013 with Ba, La 7 0 10 0 Gamma Spec Solid RAD A-013 with" Iodine 6 0 7" 0 Gamma Spec Solid RAD A-013 (pCi/Sample) 0 0 2 0 Tritium 3 0 3 0 ICP-MS Uranium-234, 235, 236, 238 in Solid 245 0 234 0 ICP-MS Uranium-235, 236, 238 Prep in'Solid 5 0, 5 0 Gross Alpha/Beta 297 0 405 0 Gross Alpha/Beta (Americium Calibration)

Solid '.0 0 1 0 ICP-MS Uranium-234, 235, 236, 238 Prep in Solid 122 0 115 0 Lucas Cell Radium 226 by DOE HASL 300 Ra-04 Solid 2 0 2 0 FILTER Alpha Spec Uranium 18 0 24 0 Alpha Spec Polonium 0 0 54 0 Gamma 1-131, filter 4 0 4 0 LSC Plutonium Filter 143 0 169 3 Tritium 134 0 201 ,0 Carbon-14 82 0 140 0 Nickel-63 0 0 4 0 LSC Iron-55 147 0 161 0 Gamma Nickel 59 RAD A-022 140 0 159 0 Gamma Iodine 131 RAD A-013 2 0 2 0 P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 49 of 58 I SC Nickel 63 138 p 162 A Technetium-99 103 0 137 0 Gamma Spec Filter RAD A-013 195 0 245 0 Alphaspec Np Filter per Uter 30 0 42 0 Alphaspec Pu Filter per Uter 14 0. 29 0 Gamma Iodine-125 13 0 0 0 Gamma Iodine-129 114 0. 127 0 Gross Alpha/Beta

.. 0 .0 1 0 Alpha Spec Am243 13 0 42 0 Gas Flow Lead 210 0 0 4 0 LSC Plutonium Filter per Liter 36 0 43 0 Total Uranium KPA 11 0 18 0 Alpha Spec Uranium 83 0 114 0 LSC. Rapid Strontium 89 and 90 144. 0 168 0 Alpha Spec Thorium 45 0 57 0 Gas Flow Radium 228 0 0 2 0 Alpha Spec Plutonium 107 0 123 0 Alpha Spec Neptunium 112 0 129 0 Alpha Spec Plutonium 142 0 183 0 Alpha Spec Polonium.,(Filter/Liter) 0 0 10 0 Alpha Spec Radium 226 0 0 1 0 Gas Flow Sr 2nd Count 93 0 101 0 Gas Flow Strontium 90 59 0 78 0 Gas Flow Total Radium 0 0 4 0 Lucas Cell Radium-226 0 0 2 0 Alpha Spec Am241Curium 157 0 198 0 Gas Flow Total Strontium 5 0 .5 0 Total Activity in Filter, 0 0 7 0 Alphaspec Am241 Curium Filter per Liter 33 0 42 0 Tritium 106 0 108 0 Gamma Spec Filter RAD A-013 Direct Count 7 0 8 0 Carbon-14 44 0 44 0 Direct Count-Gross Alpha/Beta 72 0 0 0 Gross Alpha/Beta 74 0 81 0 ICP-MS Uranium-234, 235, 236, 238 in Filter 8 0' 4 0 Alpha Spec U 31 0 60 0 Gross A& B 639 0. 584 0 LSC Iron-55 39 0 51 0 Technetium-99 37 0 55 0 Gas Flow Sr-90 29 0 35 0 LSC Nickel 63 " 37 0 44 0 Carbon-14 (Ascarite/Soda Lime Filter per Uter) 2 0 2 0 Gas Flow Pb-210 25 0 46 0 Gas Flow Ra-228 24 0 .35 0 Labotatofiso LL P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 50 of 58 Gamma Iodine 129 47 0 47 0 ICP-MS Uranium-234, 235, 236, 238 Prep in Filter .6 0 3 0 Gamma Spec Filter .142 0 163 0 Lucas Cell Ra-226 32 0 47 0 Alpha Spec Thorium 27 0 46 0 LIQUID........

Alpha Spec Uranium 418 0 607 0 Alpha Spec Polonium 2 0 3 0 Electrolytic Tritium 19 0 29 0 Tritium 1415 0 1503 0 Tritium by Combustion 1 0 1 0 Carbon-14 181 0 204 0 Plutonium 81 0 89 0 Chlorine-36 in Liquids 2 0 3 0 Iodine-131 6 0 3 0 LSC Iron-55 290 0 '347 0 Gamma Nickel 59 RAD A-022 29 0 33 0 Gamma Iodine 131 RAD A-013 3 0 3 0 Gamma Radium 228 PAD A-013 1 0 1 0 LSC Nickel 63 328 0 370 0 LSC Radon 222 5 0 12 0 Technetium-99 303 0 365 0 Gamma Spec Uquid RAD A-013 874 0 875 0 Alpha Spec Total U RAD A-011 0 0 2 0 LSC Selenium 79 1 0 1 0 Total Activity, 6 0 6 0 Alpha Spec Am243 12 0 20 0 Gamma Iodine-129 84 0 117 0 Gamma Iodine-131 33 0 33 0 ICP-MS Technetium-99 in Water 5 0 28 0 Gas Flow Lead 210 83 0 94 0 Total Uranium KPA 96 0 226 2 LSC Promethium 147 3 0 3 0 LSC, Rapid Strontium 89 and 90 15 0 15 0 Alpha Spec Thorium 205 0 278 0 Gas Flow Radium 228 244 0 318 0 Gas Flow Radium 228 36 0 35 0.Gas Flow Radium 228 1 0 1 0 Alpha Spec Plutonium 317 0 436 0 Alpha Spec Neptunium 110 0' 127 0 Alpha Spec Plutonium 61 0- 86 0 Alpha Spec Radium 226. 0 0 1 0 Gas Flow Sr 2nd count 283 0 316 0 Gas Flow Strontium 90 499 0 568 0.Gas Flow Strontium 90 2 0 2 0 Gas Flow Total Radium 92 0 129 0 ICP-MS Technetium-99 Prep in Water 5 0 28 0

-abmatr 'LLC P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 51 of 58 ICP-MS Uranium-233, 234 in Liquid 1 0 1 0.Lucas Cell Radium 226 372 0 487 0 Lucas Cell Radium-226 17 0 21 0 Total Activity Screen 3 0 3 0 Chlorine-36 in Liquids 4 0 10 0 Alpha Spec Am241 Curium 307 0 405 0 Gas Flow Total Strontium 231 0 241 0 Gross Aloha Non Vol Beta 1313 0 1554 0 LSC Phosphorus-32 2 0 2 0 Lucas Cell Radium 226 by Method Ra-04 3 0 3 0 ICP-MS Uranium-233, 234 Prep in Liquid 1 0 1 0 Tritium in Drinking Water by EPA 906.0 11 0 14 0 Gamma Spec Liquid RAD A-013 with Ba, La 131 0 211 0 Gamma Spec Liquid RAD A-013 with Iodine 159 0 205 0 Gas Flow Strontium 89 & 90 6 0 0 0 ICP-MS Uranium-235, 236, 238 in Liquid 2 0 2 0 Gas Flow Total Alpha Radium 13 0 11 0 Gross Alpha Co-precipitation 7 0 9 0 ICP-MS Uranium-235, 236, 238 Prep in Liquid 1 0 1 0 ICP-MS Uranium-234, 235, 236, 238 in Liquid ..22 0 98 0 Gross Alpha Beta (Americium Calibration)

Liquid 16 0 21 0 ICP-MS Uranium-234, 235, 236, 238 Prep in Liquid .14 0 51 0 Alpha/Beta (Americium Calibration)

Drinking Water 5. 5 0 4 0 Carbon-14 2 0 2 0 LSC Iron-55 3 0 3 *0 Gamma Nickel 59 RAD A-022 2 0 2 0 Gamma Spec Solid RAD A-013 71 0 79 0 LSC Nickel 63 4 0 4 0 LSC Plutonium 1 0 1 0 Technetium-99 2 0 2 0 Tritium 1 0 1 0 Gamma Iodine-129 2 0 2 0 Gas Flow Lead 210 2 0 2 0 Alpha Spec- Uranium 5 0 5 0 Alpha Spec Thorium 2 0 2 0 Alpha Spec Plutonium 10 0 10 0 Alpha Spec Neptunium 4 0 4 0 Alpha Spec Plutonium 2 0 2 0 Gas Flow Sr 2nd count 10 0 10 0 I labortori'8s LL P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 52 of 58 Gas Flow Strontium 90 20 0 23 0 Alpha Spec Am241 Curium 9 0 9 0 Gas Flow Total Strontium 19 0 19 0 Gamma Spec Solid RAD A-013 with Ba, La 6 0 5 0 Gamma Spec Solid RAD A-013 with Iodine 17 0 17 0 Gross Alpha/Beta 2 0 2 0 SEA WATER LSC Iron-55 2 0 2 0 LSC Nickel 63 2 0 2 0 Gas Flow Total Strontium 1 0 1 0 Gross Alpha Non Vol Beta 1 0 1 0 Gamma Spec Liquid RAD A-013 with Iodine 1 0 1 0 VEGETATION Gamma Nickel 59 RAD A-022 3 0 3 0 Gamma Spec Solid RAD A-013 31 0 31 0 LSC Nickel 63 3 0 3 0 LSC Plutonium 1 0 1 0 Technetium-99 6 0 6 0 Tritium 9 0 9. 0 Gamma Iodine-129 1 0 1' 0 Gas Flow Lead 210 8 0 7 0 Total Uranium KPA 4 0 4 .0 Alpha Spec Uranium 23 0 21 0 Alpha Spec Thorium 7 0 7 0 Alpha Spec Plutonium 15 0 .12 .0 Alpha Spec Neptunium 1 0 1 0 Alpha Spec Plutonium 1 0 1 0 Gas Flow Sr 2nd count 9 0 9 0 Gas Flow Strontium 90 19 0 18 0 Gas Flow Total Radium 2 0 3 0 Alpha Spec Am241 Curium 11 0 8 .0 Gamma Spec Solid RAD A-013 with Iodine 91 0 93 0 Gamma Spec Solid RAD A-013 (pCi/Sample) 5 0 3 0 Alpha Spec.Am241 (pCi/Sample) 3 0 2 0 ICP-MS Uranium-234, 235, 236, 238 in Solid .9 0 7 0 Alpha Spec Uranium 1 0 17 0 Gross Alpha/Beta 4 0 4. 0 Alpha Spec Plutonium 2 0 2 0 Gas Flow Strontium 90 4 0 2 0 ICP-MS Uranium-234, 235, 236, 238 Prep in Solid 7 0 5 0 AIR CHARCOAL Gamma Iodine 131 RAD A-013 623 0 645 0 P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 53 of 58 Gamma Iodine-129

' 0

• 1- 0 Carbon-14 (Ascarite/Soda Lime Filter. I per Liter) ,89 0 88 , 0 Alpha Spec Uranium 7 0 8 0 Tritium 51 0 52 0 Iodine-131 1 0 2 0 LSC Iron-55 24 0 22 0 LSC Nickel 63 23 .0 21 0 LSC Radon 222 96 0 96 0 Gamma Spec Uquid RAD A-013 24 0. 24. 0 Total Activity,.

2 0 2 0.Gamma Iodine-129

.. 2 0 2 0 Gamma Iodine-131 38 .0 38 " 0 Total Uranium KPA 15 0 28 0 Gas Flow Radium 228 42 0 42 0 Alpha Spec Plutonium 6 0 6 0 Gas Flow Sr 2nd count 16 0 16 0 Gas Flow Strontium 90 25 0 24 0 Lucas Cell Radium-226 58 6 .78. ._0 Alpha Spec Am241 Curium 6 0 6 ,. 0 Gas Flow Total Strontium 31 0 31 0 Gross Alpha Non Vol Beta .. 343 0 287 .0 Tritium in Drinking Water by EPA 906,0. 37. 0 34 "0 Gamma Spec Liquid RAD A-013 with Ba, La 44 0. 98 0 Gas Flow Strontium 89 & 90 20 ,.0 1.3. ., _ 0 Gas Flow Total Alpha Radium 1 0 .1 0.Gross Alpha Co-precipitation 105 0 .87. 0 Alpha/Beta (Americium Calibration)

Drinkingi Water 13 1 0 13 0 ECLS-R-GA NJ 48 Hr Rapid Gross Alpha 8 0 -0.... 1 8 1 ..- 0 Total 20148 23892 Note 1: The RPD must-be 20 percent or less, if both samples are greater than 5 times the MDC: If both results are less than 5 times MDC, then the RPD must be equal to or less than1 00%. If one result is above the MDC and the other is below the MDC, then the RPD can be calculated, using the MDC for the result, of the one below the MDC. The RPD must be 100% or less. In the situation where both results are abovethe MDC but one result is greater than 5 times the MDC and the other is less than 5 times the MDC. the RPD must be less than or equal to 20%. If both results are below MDC, then the limits on % RPD arenot applicable.

c~i Lab~or atorie~s.

L P.O: Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 54 of 58 TABLE 8.2013 CORRECTIVE ACTION REPORT

SUMMARY

CORRECTIVE ACTION ID#& DISPOSITION PE FAILURE CARR130513-789 ISO Documentation of PT Failures in MAPEP-13-RdV28 for Uranium in Vegetation by ICP/MS and Alpha Spec Root Cause Analysis of MAPEP-13-RdV28 Uranium-234/233, Uranium-235, Uranium-238 and Total Uranium Following reviews of our process and data and conversations with personnel from the affected laboratories, it was determined that all failures were due to an analyst error during sample preparation.

Glass instead of Teflon beakers were used during the sample digestion which contained Hydrofluoric (HF) acid. Per Standard Operating Procedure SOP) GL-RAD-A-015 section 11.2.4, the sample should have been transferred to a Teflon beaker. In this instance, this step was omitted. The digestion was performed in glass beakers so trace amounts of Uranium were leached from the glass into the sample, resulting in high bias in the results. Normal procedure dictates that glass is not used when using HF in the digestion process due to the presence of natural Uranium in the glassware.

In order to prove that this was an isolated incident and that our overall process is in control a series of digestions were performed in the glass beakers to confirm our conclusion.

• HCL /HN0 3 only digestion

-Uranium was not.detected.HCL, HNO 3 , and HF digestion

-Enough Uranium activity was detected to account for the high bias (as many as 70 counts in a 16 hour1.851852e-4 days <br />0.00444 hours <br />2.645503e-5 weeks <br />6.088e-6 months <br /> and 40 minute count).* HF only digestion

-Results similar to HCL, HNO 3 , and HF were observed A second PT was successfully analyzed for this matrix.CARR130522-791 Following a review of our processes, the data and conversations with personnel from the affected laboratories, it ISO Documentation of PT Failures in was determined that our normal procedure for preparing soil-MRAD-18 for Cesium-134, Cesium- samples is not sufficient for this soil matrix. Per the Standard 137 and Zinc-65 in Soil Operating Procedure (SOP) GL-RAD-A-021, the sample was

• LabL L. 0,.L P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 55 of 58 dried, homogenized, and passed through a 28 mesh sieve.However, approximately 20-30% of the sample consists of particles greater than the 28 mesh sieve size. These larger particles were not affected by our normal homogenization process. In accordance with the SOP, the larger particles were removed prior to preparing the container for gamma counting.Upon receipt of the graded report, the following steps were taken to prove that this was an isolated incident and that our overall process is in control.1. A recount of the initially prepared sample performed and confirmed the originally reported results.2. A new container was then prepared from the original sample but omitting the preparation step and counted.This produced acceptable results.3. A second sample was prepared per the SOP;however, only a portion of the sample was removed during the sieving steps. This sample produced similar high biased results.An aliquot of the sample was then pulverized prior to gamma counting.

This approach also produced acceptable results.Permanent Corrective/Preventive Actions or Improvements:

In the future, these samples will be pulverized to ensure that all the material passes through the 28 mesh sieve; thus, eliminating the need to remove any of the original sample. A comment has been added to the set-up for the solid matrix.A second PT was- successfully analyzed for this matrix.

Labotato, ,'s. LL*P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 56 of 58 CARR130826-810 For Failures of RAD-94 for Gross Alpha/Bea and Strontium 89/90 in Water Root Cause Analysis of Gross Alpha After a review of the data, an apparent reason for this discrepancy could not be determined.

The following steps were taken to prove that this high bias was an isolated occurrence and that our overall process is within control.1. The batch quality control samples were reviewed and found to be compliant.

The LCS recovered at 110%. While the recovery is slightly elevated, it is well within the 80%-120% acceptance range.2. Laboratory control data were also reviewed for trends. None were noted.3. The instrument calibrations were reviewed for positive biases that could have attributed to this failure. None were noted.4. Two sample duplicates were also prepared and counted along with the reported result. Both results fell within the method's acceptance range for duplicate.

One of the results also fell within the.acceptance range of the study.5. The original sample was also recounted and the results fell within the acceptance range.Root Cause Analysis of Strontiurn-89 (Sr-89)LAB PBMS A-004 After a review of the data, an apparent reason for this discrepancy could not be determined.

The following steps were taken to prove that this high bias was an isolated occurrence and that our overall process is within control.1. The batch quality control samples were reviewed and found to be compliant.

The LCS recovered at 98.1%.2. Laboratory control data were also reviewed for trends. None were noted.3. The instrument calibrations were reviewed for positive biases that could have attributed to this failure. None were noted.4. Sample duplicates were also prepared and counted along with the reported result. Duplicate results fell within the acceptance range of the study.Root Cause Analysis of Strontium-89 (Sr-89)EPA 905.0 After a review of the data, an apparent reason for this discrepancy could not be determined.

The following steps were taken to orove that this hiah bias was an isolated lab 'P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 57 of 58 occurrence and that our overall process is within control.1. The batch quality control samples were reviewed and found to be compliant.

The LCS recovered at 102%.2. Laboratory control data were also reviewed for trends. None was noted.3. The instrument calibrations were reviewed for positive biases that could have attributed to this failure. None were noted.4. Sample duplicates were also prepared and counted along with the reported result. All results fell within the method's acceptance range for duplicates.

Permanent CorrectlvelPreventive Actions or Improvements:

Gross Alpha The laboratory must assume an unidentified random error caused the high bias because all quality control criteria were met for the batch. The lab will continue to monitor the recoveries of this radionuclide to ensure that there are no issues.Strontium-89 (Sr-89)LAB PBMS A-004 and EPA 905.0 To summarize our efforts (including the initial result), the laboratory had 3 analysts, two different methods, processed with 2 calibrations and two separate Y carriers used in the analysis of this sample and only one acceptable result for Sr-89. All LCS results have met acceptance criteria.

This leads the laboratory to conclude that there is possibly an error in the original make-up of the PT sample. The instructions list stable Sr and Y as being included but they are not at levels greater than are normally listed so we suspect that the make up of the sample was the cause. The laboratory will continue to monitor the recoveries from these two methods to ensure that there are no issues.

' :'"oi 'ib; 'e P.O. Box 30712, Charleston, SC 29417 2013 ANNUAL QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT Page 58 of 58 Root Cause Analysis CARR131205-845 These elevated results were obtained following our routine For failures of MRAD-19 for Uranium- procedure.

The reported result for U-234 was less than the 234 and Total Uranium in Vegetation MDA and had a elevated uncertainty.

This high U-234 result also attributed to the high-Total-U result.Upon receipt of the graded report,. the following steps were taken to prove that this was an isolated incident and that our overall process is in control.* A recount of the initially prepared sample performed and confirmed the originally reported resul ts.0 The sample was- reanalyzed using a larger aliquot and results that fell within the acceptance range were achieved.Permanent Corrective/Preventive Actions or Improvements In the future when the result is below, the MDA and are not *compatible with other analytical technologies, the laboratory will attempt to use a -larger sample aliquot with hopes of achieve a result above the MDA or with a lower uncertainty.

If the matrix and larger sample size do not provide useable data, the results may not be report.