ML19099A385
| ML19099A385 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/30/2019 |
| From: | Jennifer Davis, Garry S M, Matthew Smith Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Oak Ridge Associated Universities |
| To: | |
| Meyd, Donald | |
| References | |
| NUREG/CR-2907 V21 | |
| Download: ML19099A385 (101) | |
Text
NUREG/CR-2 907, V ol. 21 Annual Report 2015 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
NRC Reference Material As of November 1999, you may electronically access NUREG-series publications and other NRC records at the http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html. Publicly released records include, to name a few, NUREG-series publications; Federal Register notices; applicant, licensee, and vendor documents and correspondence; NRC correspondence and internal memoranda; bulletins and information notices; inspection and investigative reports; licensee event reports; and Commission papers and their attachments. NRC publications in the NUREG series, NRC regulations, and Title 10, Energy,Code of Federal Regulations may also be purchased from one of these two sources. 1. The Superintendent of Documents U.S. Government Publishing Office Washington, DC 20402-0001 Internet: http://bookstore.gpo.gov Telephone: 1-866-512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 2. The National Technical Information Service 5301 Shawnee Road Alexandria, VA 22161-0002 http://www.ntis.gov 1-800-553-6847 or, locally, (703) 605-6000 A single copy of each NRC draft report for comment is available free, to the extent of supply, upon written request as follows: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Administration Multimedia, Graphics and Storage & Distribution Branch Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: distribution.resource@nrc.gov Facsimile: (301) 415-2289 Some publications in the NUREG series that are posted at the http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs are updated periodically and may differ from the last printed version. Although references to material found on a Web site bear the date the material was accessed, the material available on the date cited may subsequently be removed from the site. Non-NRC Reference Material Documents available from public and special technical libraries include all open literature items, such as books, journal articles, transactions, Federal Register notices, Federal and State legislation, and congressional reports. Such documents as theses, dissertations, foreign reports and translations, and non-NRC conference proceedings may be purchased from their sponsoring organization. Copies of industry codes and standards used in a substantive manner in the NRC regulatory process are maintained at The NRC Technical Library Two White Flint North 11545 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 These standards are available in the library for reference use by the public. Codes and standards are usually copyrighted and may be purchased from the originating organization or, if they are American National Standards, from American National Standards Institute 11 West 42nd Street New York, NY 10036-8002 http://www.ansi.org (212) 642-4900 AVAILABILITY OF REFERENCE MATERIALS IN NRC PUBLICATIONS Legally binding regulatory requirements are stated only in laws; NRC regulations; licenses, including technical specifications; or orders, not in NUREG-series publications. The views expressed in contractor-prepared publications in this series are not necessarily those of the NRC. The NUREG series comprises (1) technical and administrative reports and books prepared by the staff (NUREG-XXXX) or agency contractors (NUREG/CR-XXXX), (2) proceedings of conferences (NUREG/CP-XXXX), (3) reports resulting from international agreements (NUREG/IA-XXXX), (4) brochures (NUREG/BR-XXXX), and (5) compilations of legal decisions and orders of the Commission and (NUREG-0750). DISCLAIMER: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the U.S. Government. Neither the U.S. Government nor any agency thereof, nor any employee, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed in this publication, or represents that its use by such third party would not infringe privately owned rights. SR-CR 10/2017 NUREG/CR-2 907, V ol. 21 Radioact i ve E ffluen ts from Nuclear P ower Plants Annual Report 2015 M anuscript C ompleted:September 2018 Date Published
Prepared by
- J.DavisOak Ridge Associat ed Universities 1299 Bethel Valley Road, S C-200, M S-21 Oak Ridge, T N 37830 Steven Garry, NRC Project Manager Micheal Smith, NRC Project Manager Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
ii i ABSTRACT In 2015, there were 99 commercial nuclear power plants (NPPs) licensed to operate on 61 sites in the United States (U.S.) regulated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). Each year, each power reactor sends a report to the NRC that identifies the radioactive liquid and gaseous effluents discharged from the facility. In 2015, these effluent reports comprised about 10,000 pages of information, which described the radioactive materials discharged, as well as the resulting radiation doses to the general public. This report summarizes that information and presents the information in a format intended for both nuclear professionals and the general public.
The reader can use this report to quickly characterize the radioactive discharges from any U.S. NPP in 2015. The radioactive effluents from one reactor can be compared with other reactors. The results can also be compared with typical (or median) effluents for the industry, including short
-term trends and long-term trends. Reference information is included so the reader can compare the doses from NPP effluents with the doses that the general public receives from other sources of radiation, such as medical procedures, industrial devices, and natural materials in the environment.
Although all operating NPPs released some radioactive materials in 2015, all effluents discharged were within the NRC's and the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) public dose limits, and NRC's "as low as is reasonably achievable" (ALARA) criteria. Additionally, the doses from radioactive effluents were much less than the doses from other sources of natural radiation that are commonly considered safe. This indicates radioactive effluents from NPPs in 2015 had no significant impact on the health and safety of the public or the environment.
v TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ...............................................................................................................................
...........
iii TABLE O F C ONTENTS........................................................................................................................
v LIST OF F IGURES ..............................................................................................................................
vii LIST O F TABLES...............................................................................................................................
.. ix ABBREVIATIO NS AND ACRONYMS
................................................................................................
xi 1INTRODUCTION
.............................................................................................................................
1-1 1.1 Purpose ...............................................................................................................................
.... 1-1 1.2 Scope ...............................................................................................................................
........ 1-1 1.3 Source of D ata .........................................................................................................................
1-5 1.4 Limitations of D ata ...................................................................................................................
1-5 2DESCRIPTION OF THE DATA ......................................................................................................
2-1 2.1 Introduction
..............................................................................................................................
2-1 2.2 Measuring R adioactivity i n Radioactiv e Effluents ...................................................................
2-1 2.3 Dose Un its a nd L imits.............................................................................................................
2-3 2.4 Radiation Dose to t he Public ..................................................................................................
2-4 2.5 Other S ources of R adiati on Dose to the U.S.
P opulation.......................................................
2-5 3EFFLUENT D ATA ..........................................................................................................................
3-1 3.1 Radioactiv e Materials i n Liqui d and Gaseous Effluents.........................................................
3-1 3.2 Short-Te rm Tr end in Gaseous E ffluents ...............................................................................
3-38 3.3 Long-Te rm T rend in Gaseous Effluents ................................................................................
3-42 3.4 Short-Te rm Trend in Liqui d Effluents ....................................................................................
3-43 3.5 Long-Te rm T rend in Liquid Effluents
.....................................................................................
3-47 3.6 Radiation Doses f rom Gaseous a nd Liquid Effluents ...........................................................
3-48 4
SUMMARY
...............................................................................................................................
...... 4-1 5REFERENCES
...............................................................................................................................
5-1 6GLOSSARY.......................................................................................................................
.............
6-1
vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1 Sources of Radiation Exposure to the U.S. Population
................................
........ 2-6 Figure 3.1 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Fission and Activation Gases
................................
3-19 Figure 3.2 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Iodine ................................
................................
.... 3-20 Figure 3.3 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Particulates
................................
...........................
3-21 Figure 3.4 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Tritium ................................
................................
... 3-22 Figure 3.5 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Carbon-14 ................................
.............................
3-23 Figure 3.6 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Fission and Activation Gases
................................
3-24 Figure 3.7 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Iodine ................................
................................
.... 3-26 Figure 3.8 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Particulates
................................
...........................
3-27 Figure 3.9 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Tritium ................................
................................
... 3-28 Figure 3.10 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Carbon-14 ................................
.............................
3-30 Figure 3.11 BWR Liquid Releases
- Fission and Activation Products
................................
. 3-32 Figure 3.12 BWR Liquid Releases
- Tritium ................................
................................
........ 3-33 Figure 3.13 PWR Liquid Releases
- Fission and Activation Products
................................
. 3-34 Figure 3.14 PWR Liquid Releases
- Tritium ................................
................................
........ 3-36 Figure 3.15 Long-Term Trend in Noble Gases in Gaseous Effluents
................................
.... 3-42 Figure 3.16 Long-Term Trend in MFAPs in Liquid Effluents
................................
..................
3-47 Figure 3.17 BWR Gaseous Effluents
- Maximum Annual Organ Dose
...............................
3-55 Figure 3.18 PWR Gaseous Effluents
- Maximum Annual Organ Dose
...............................
3-56 Figure 3.19 BWR Liquid Effluents
- Maximum Annual Total Body and Organ Dose
..........
3-58 Figure 3.20 PWR Liquid Effluents
- Maximum Annual Total Body and Organ Dose
..........
3-59 Figure 3.21 Median Maximum Annual Organ Dose, Gaseous Effluents 5
-Year Trend, 2011-2015 ................................
................................
................................
..........
3-61 Figure 3.22 Median Maximum Annual Dose, Liquid Effluents 5
-Year Trend, 2011
-2015...... 3-61
ix LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1 Nuclear Power Plants, 2015
.................................................................................
1-2 Table 1.2 Permanently Shut Down Nuclear Power Plants
...................................................
1-4 Table 1.3 Reactors for Which the NRC Has Normalized Data on a Unit
-Specific Basis
...... 1-6 Table 2.1 Radionuclides in Gaseous Effluents
.....................................................................
2-2 Table 2.2 Radionuclides in Liquid Effluents
..........................................................................
2-3 Table 3.1 BWR Gaseous Releases - Fission and Activation Gases, 2015
........................
3-2 Table 3.2 BWR Gaseous Releases - Iodine, 2015
............................................................
3-3 Table 3.3 BWR Gaseous Releases - Particulates, 2015
...................................................
3-4 Table 3.4 BWR Gaseous Releases - Tritium, 2015
...........................................................
3-5 Table 3.5 BWR Gaseous Releases - Carbon-14, 2015 .....................................................
3-6 Table 3.6 PWR Gaseous Releases - Fission and Activation Gases, 2015
........................
3-7 Table 3.7 PWR Gaseous Releases - Iodine, 2015
............................................................
3-9 Table 3.8 PWR Gaseous Releases - Particulates, 2015
.................................................
3-10 Table 3.9 PWR Gaseous Releases - Tritium, 2015
.........................................................
3-12 Table 3.10 PWR Gaseous Releases - Carbon-14, 2015 ...................................................
3-13 Table 3.11 BWR Liquid Releases - Fission and Activation Products, 2015
.......................
3-14 Table 3.12 BWR Liquid Releases - Tritium, 2015
..............................................................
3-15 Table 3.13 PWR Liquid Releases - Fission and Activation Products, 2015
.......................
3-16 Table 3.14 PWR Liquid Releases - Tritium, 2015
..............................................................
3-18 Table 3.15 Short-Term Trend in Noble Gases in Gaseous Effluents, BWRs, Curies (Ci)
.... 3-39 Table 3.16 Short-Term Trend in Noble Gases in Gaseous Effluents, PWRs, Curies (Ci)
.... 3-40 Table 3.17 Short-Term Trend in Mixed Fission and Activation Products in Liquid Effluents, BWRs, millicuries (mCi)
......................................................................
3-44 Table 3.18 Short-Term Trend in Mixed Fission and Activation Products in Liquid Effluents, PWRs, millicuries (mCi)
......................................................................
3-45 Table 3.19 BWR Gaseous Effluents - Maximum Annual Organ Dose, 2015
.....................
3-51 Table 3.20 PWR Gaseous Effluents - Maximum Annual Organ Dose, 2015
.....................
3-52 Table 3.21 BWR Liquid Effluents - Maximum Annual Total Body and Organ Dose, 2015
.........................................................................................................
3-53 Table 3.22 PWR Liquid Effluents - Maximum Annual Total Body and Organ Dose, 2015
.........................................................................................................
3-54
xi ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ALARA as low as is reasonably achievable ARERR Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report Bq becquerel BWR boiling-water reactor C-14 carbon-14 CFR Code of Federal Regulations Ci curie DOE Department of Energy EPA Environmental Protection Agency GBq gigabecquerels H-3 tritium mCi millicurie MFAP mixed fission and activation products MIMS Department of Energy
's Manifest Information Management System mrem millirem mSv millisievert NCRP National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements NPP nuclear power plant ODCM Offsite Dose Calculation Manual PW R pressurized
-water reactor RG Regulatory Guide SI International System of Units (abbreviation is from the French
- Le Systme International d'Unités) Sv sievert USGS United States Geological Survey U.S. NRC United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission
1-11 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose
This report describes radioactive effluents from operating commercial nuclear power plants (NPPs) in the U.S. during calendar year 2015. It is based on an extensive amount of information submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) by all U.S. NPP licensees. The original information was submitted by the NPPs in their Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports (ARERRs) and comprises several thousand pages of data. The ARERRs may be viewed in their entirety on the NRC Web site at
-experience/tritium/plant
-info.html. For the years between 1972 and 1993, this type of annual information was condensed in to a tabular format and published as a large volume of tabulated data (Refs. [1-22] ). An evaluation of the practice of generating tabular annual reports revealed the need for a more concise summary report that presented the information in a more intuitive, graphic format (Ref.
[23] ). As a result, this style of improved report was created. This report joins a series of previous reports on radioactive effluents presented in the revised graphic format (Refs.
[24-31] ). The purpose of this report is to condense an extremely large volume of technical information into a few tables and figures from which the reader can quickly, if broadly, characterize the effluents from any operating U.S. NPP. These tables and figures are designed to provide easily understandable information for the public at large, while also providing experienced professionals with enough information to evaluate trends in industry performance and to identify potential performance issues for individual power plants. Those users wanting more extensive and detailed information are encouraged to retrieve the original ARERRs from the NRC Web site.
1.2 Scope
The NRC uses the information on radioactive releases, along with other information collected during routine inspections of each facility, to ensure NPPs are operated within regulatory requirements. One of those requirements includes maintaining radiation doses from radioactive effluents "as low as is reasonably achievable" (ALARA). For this summary report, only information submitted with regard to NRC reporting requirements and guidance is included. Information not related to the NRC requirements for radioactive effluents or the NRC guidance on radioactive effluents is not included in this summary report. Additionally, information on solid radioactive waste is not included in this report. However, data on solid waste disposed in licensed waste disposal facilities is available from the Department of Energy
's Manifest Information Management System (MIMS) database at URL: http://mims.doe.gov/. This report summarizes data from all NPPs in commercial operation between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2015. The list of NPPs included in this report is provided in Table 1.1. During 2015, only two types of reactors were in commercial power operation in the US: 1) boiling
-water reactor (BWR) and 2) pressurized-water reactor (PWR). Nuclear reactors that are not used for commercial power production or are of an experimental design for research, are not included in this list and are not included in this report.
1-2 Table 1.1 Nuclear Power Plants, 2015 Plant Name Type Full Plant Name Location Arkansas 1, 2 PWR Arkansas Nuclear One (ANO), Units 1, 2 Russellville, AR Beaver Valley 1, 2 PWR Beaver Valley, Units 1, 2 Shippingport, PA Braidwood 1, 2 PWR Braidwood Generating Station, Units 1, 2 Braceville, IL Browns Ferry 1, 2, 3 BWR Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2, 3 Decatur, AL Brunswick 1, 2 BWR Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1, 2 Southport, NC Byron 1, 2 PWR Byron Generating Station, Units 1, 2 Byron, IL Callaway PWR Callaway Plant, Unit 1 Callaway, MO Calvert Cliffs 1, 2 PWR Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1, 2 Lusby, MD Catawba 1, 2 PWR Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2 York, SC Clinton BWR Clinton Power Station Clinton, IL Columbia BWR Columbia Station Richland, WA Comanche Peak 1, 2 PWR Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1, 2 Glen Rose, TX Cook 1, 2 PWR Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2 Bridgman, MI Cooper BWR Cooper Nuclear Station Brownville, NE Davis-Besse PWR Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 Oak Harbor, OH Diablo Canyon 1, 2 PWR Diablo Canyon, Units 1, 2 Avila Beach, CA Dresden 2, 3 BWR Dresden Generating Station, Units 2, 3 Morris, IL Duane Arnold BWR Duane Arnold Energy Center Palo, IA Farley 1, 2 PWR Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2 Ashford, AL Fermi 2 BWR Fermi 2 Nuclear Power Plant Newport, MI FitzPatrick BWR James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Lycoming, NY Ft. Calhoun PWR Ft. Calhoun Station, Unit 1 Ft. Calhoun, NE Ginna PWR R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1Ontario, NY Grand Gulf BWR Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Port Gibson, MS Harris PWR Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 New Hill, NC Hatch 1, 2 BWR Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2 Baxley, GA Hope Creek BWR Hope Creek Generating Station, Unit 1 Hancock's Bridge, NJ Indian Point 2, 3 PWR Indian Point Energy Center, Units 2, 3 Buchanan, NY LaSalle 1, 2 BWR LaSalle County Generating Station, Units 1, 2 Marseilles, IL Limerick 1, 2 BWR Limerick Generating Station, Units 1, 2 Saratoga, PA McGuire 1, 2 PWR McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2 Huntersville, NC Millstone 2, 3 PWR Millstone Power Station, Units 2, 3 Waterford, CT Monticello BWR Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Monticello, MN Nine Mile Point 1, 2 BWR Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2 Lycoming, NY
1-3 Table 1.1 Nuclear Power Plants, 2015 (continued)
Plant Name Type Full Plant Name Location North Anna 1, 2 PWR North Anna Power Station, Units 1, 2 Mineral, VA Oconee 1, 2, 3 PWR Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, 3 Seneca, SC Oyster Creek BWR Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Forked River, NJ Palisades PWR Palisades Nuclear Plant Covert, MI Palo Verde 1, 2, 3 PWR Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2, 3 Phoenix, AZ Peach Bottom 2, 3 BWR Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2, 3 Delta, PA Perry BWR Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 Perry, OH Pilgrim BWR Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 Plymouth, MA Point Beach 1, 2 PWR Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2 Two Rivers, WI Prairie Island 1, 2 PWR Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1, 2 Welch, MN Quad Cities 1, 2 BWR Quad Cities Generating Station, Units 1, 2 Cordova, IL River Bend BWR River Bend Station, Unit 1 St. Francisville, LA Robinson 2 PWR H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit 2Hartsville, SC Salem 1, 2 PWR Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2 Hancock's Bridge, NJ Seabrook PWR Seabrook Station, Unit 1 Seabrook, NH Sequoyah 1, 2 PWR Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2 Soddy-Daisy, TN South Texas 1, 2 PWR South Texas Project Electric Generating Station, Units 1, 2 Wadsworth, TX St. Lucie 1, 2 PWR St. Lucie Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2 Ft. Pierce, FL Summer PWR Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Jenkinsville, SC Surry 1, 2 PWR Surry Power Station, Units 1, 2 Surry, VA Susquehanna 1, 2 BWR Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1, 2 Berwick, PA Three Mile Island 1 PWR Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Harrisburg, PA Turkey Point 3, 4 PWR Turkey Point Nuclear Plant, Units 3, 4 Princeton, FL Vogtle 1, 2 PWR Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 1, 2 Waynesboro, GA Waterford 3 PWR Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 Killona, LA Watts Bar 1 PWR Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 Spring City, TN Wolf Creek PWR Wolf Creek Generating Station, Unit 1 Burlington, KS
1-4 As noted, only reactors in commercial power production during 2015 are included in this report. For clarity purposes, Table 1.
2 contains a list of commercial power plants (BWRs and PWRs) that have permanently shut down and are not included in this report. Vermont Yankee permanently shut down in December of 2014 and is not included in this analysis of radioactive effluents from operating reactors. These reactors are either in the process of decommissioning or have been decommissioned.
Table 1.2 Permanently Shut Down Nuclear Power Plants Plant Name Type Full Plant Name Location Big Rock Point BWR Big Rock Point Restoration Project Charlevoix, MI Crystal River 3 PWR Crystal River, Unit 3 Crystal River, FL Dresden 1* BWR Dresden Generating Station, Unit 1 Morris, IL Haddam Neck PWR Haddam Neck Nuclear Plant Site Haddam Neck, CT Humboldt Bay BWR Humboldt Bay Power Plant, Unit 3 Eureka, CA Indian Point 1
- PWR Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 1 Buchanan, NY Kewaunee PWR Kewaunee Power Station Kewaunee, WI La Crosse BWR La Crosse Boiling-Water Reactor Genoa, WI Maine Yankee PWR Maine Yankee Bath, ME Millstone 1 PWR Millstone Power Station, Unit 1 Waterford, CT Rancho Seco PWR Rancho Seco, Unit 1 Herald, CA San Onofre 1, 2, 3 PWR San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2, 3 San Clemente, CA Three Mile Island 2 PWR Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2 Middletown, PA Trojan PWR Trojan Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 Portland, OR Vermont Yankee BWR Vermont Yankee Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 Vernon, VT Yankee Rowe PWR Yankee Nuclear Power Station Franklin Co., MA Zion 1, 2 PWR Zion Generating Station, Units 1, 2 Warrenville, IL
- These reactor units have permanently shut down but are collocated on site beside operating reactor units. For these units, the licensee reported the sum of the effluents from operating and non
-operating units in one report. Therefore any potential effluents from the non
-operating units are included in the release amounts for the operating units in this report.
For a list of permanently shut down NRC
-licensed power reactors and their current license status, visit the NRC Web site at https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/u
-s-commercial
-nuclear-power-reactors-permanently
-shut-down-formerly-licensed-to-operate. A more comprehensive list of other nuclear facilities (i.e., Complex Materials Sites, Research and Test Reactors, Uranium Recovery Sites, and Fuel Cycle Facilities) that are in the process of decommissioning can be obtained from the NRC Web site at: https://www.nrc.gov/waste/decommissioning.html. Please note that Figures 3.15 and 3.16, which depict the long
-term trend of radioactive effluents, include effluent data from reactors that were in commercial power operation during the years shown.
1-5 1.3 Source of Data Each commercial nuclear power plant in the United States is authorized by the NRC to release small amounts of radioactive materials to the environment as specified in the licensing documents for the plant. NRC regulations require each NPP to establish and maintain a program for monitoring radioactive effluents (per Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations
[CFR] Part 50.36a and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I, Section IV.B) and to report these effluents in an Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report (ARERR) (per 10 CFR 50.36a)
(Ref. [32] ). In accordance with the regulatory framework, licensees submit their reports to the NRC in a format outlined by Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.21 (Ref. [33] ), or an equivalent format.
The information included in this document was obtained from the licensees' ARERRs. Individual licensee reports are available through the NRC Public Document Room, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852, phone 1
-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, and directly from the NRC's public Web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/ops
-experience/tritium/plant
-info.html. The data from these reports are also entered into a database that is maintained by the NRC. The public may access this database through an NRC Web site (https://www.reirs.com/effluent/). The data are entered into the database as reported by each site
. 1.4 Limitations of Data Some NPPs have more than one reactor unit located at a site. If the licensee reports data separately for each reactor unit, those data are included separately as reported by the licensee. Because some licensees operate multi
-unit sites with a common radioactive waste processing system, these licensees report total effluents from the site instead of reporting the totals from each reactor unit. This complicates the task of presenting the effluent information in a manner that allows both (1) a direct comparison of one reactor unit with another, and (2) a direct comparison of each reactor unit with NRC limits and regulations.
For purposes of this report, the data are reported on a per
-unit basis. For multi
-unit sites where the effluents are from a common radioactive waste system, the effluents are divided equally between the units. For example, Catawba has two units (1 and 2) with a common radioactive waste processing system. For this report, the total effluents for Catawba were split equally between Unit 1 and Unit 2. For other multi
-unit sites, the effluent activity is not divided equally between the units. For example, in the case of Beaver Valley, the licensee reports gaseous effluents from four sources: Unit 1, Unit 2, a common plant vent, and a common building vent. In this case, the releases from the common vents are split equally between Unit 1 and Unit 2, and the totals for each unit then are calculated. This method of splitting the data has been applied to radionuclide activity data and radiation dose data at some multi
-unit sites. The affected NPPs and the type of data affected are listed in Table 1.
- 3. Although there are other methods of reporting effluent data (e.g., on the basis of thermal or electrical power generation), the per reactor
-unit basis (1) is most intuitive, (2) is most directly comparable with the NRC required design objectives and limiting conditions for operation (i.e., referred to as ALARA criteria in this report), and (3) is easily derived from the effluent data supplied by the licensee. This approach satisfies a primary objective for this report which is to allow the reader to quickly formulate reasonable comparisons between reactors and the regulatory limits. It should be noted, however, that for some multi
-unit sites, the actual contributions from each unit might be different than the equal distributions calculated with this approach, such as when a plant is undergoing a major or extended outage.
1-6 The report may include licensees' corrections submitted to the NRC up to the time of publication. If a licensee submits amended data in accordance with NRC regulatory guidance, the NRC reserves the right to update the data in future reports. For the most current data, the reader should use the NPPs' ARERRs which are available on the NRC Web site. Table 1.3 Reactors for Which the NRC Has Normalized Data on a Unit
-Specific Basis Boiling-Water Reactors (BWRs) R D Pressurized
-Water Reactors (PWRs)
R D Browns Ferry 1, 2, 3 Beaver Valley 1, 2 Brunswick 1, 2 Calvert Cliffs 1, 2 LaSalle 1, 2 Catawba 1, 2 Limerick 1, 2 Comanche Peak 1, 2 Nine Mile Point 1, 2 Cook 1, 2 Peach Bottom 2, 3 Diablo Canyon 1, 2 Quad Cities 1, 2 McGuire 1, 2 Susquehanna 1, 2 North Anna 1, 2 Oconee 1, 2, 3 Point Beach 1, 2 Prairie Island 1, 2 Sequoyah 1, 2 Surry 1, 2 Notes: R = Radionuclide Data, D = Dose Data
2-1 2 DESCRIPTION OF THE DATA 2.1 Introduction Radioactive materials may be disposed of in one of three forms
- solid, liquid, or gas. This report summarizes the disposal of radioactive materials in liquid and gaseous effluents from commercial nuclear power plants. Note: Data on solid radioactive waste shipped from a nuclear power plant site is provided in each licensee's ARERR, and data on solid waste disposed in licensed waste disposal facilities is available from the MIMS database at URL
/. As described in Section 1.3, owners and operators of NPPs are required to report the radioactive effluents from their facilities to the NRC. The two basic characteristics most often used to describe radioactive effluents are the amount of radioactivity (curies or millicuries) and radiation dose (mrem). Radioactivity will be referred to as "activity" and radiation dose will simply be referred to in this document as "dose."
For this report, activity can be thought of as the amount of radioactive material present in radioactive effluents. The units for measuring activity are further described in Section 2.2.
The activities of various radionuclides in radioactive effluents from NPPs are presented in Sections 3.1 through 3.5.
Although the amount of activity is an important, inherent characteristic that helps to describe radioactive effluents, it is not
-by itself-a good indicator of the potential health effects from exposure to the radiation. Health effects are dependent on many factors, such as the radionuclide, the activity of the radionuclide, the type of radiation emitted by the radionuclide, the energy of the radiation, the uptake of the radionuclide into the human body, and the metabolism of the radionuclide by the human body. To properly describe the potential health effects from exposure to radioactive materials, a combined measure of risk (i.e., dose) that accounts for all of these differences is needed.
The units for measuring dose (mrem) are described in more detail in Section 2.3. The methods and models for calculating dose from radioactive effluents are discussed in Section 2.4. The actual dose values due to radioactive effluents from NPPs are presented in Section 3.6.
Radiation is around us all of the time. The human body
-each of us
-contains some natural radioactive materials such as radioactive carbon and radioactive potassium. Natural radioactive materials are also in rocks, in soil, in the air we breathe, and in the food we eat. As a result, humans have been exposed to radiation since the dawn of man. Over the last 100 years, man has developed new radioactive materials and new machines that create additional sources of radiation. These new sources include radioactive materials used in medicine, research, industry, and nuclear power plants. Section 2.5 contains basic information on the doses received by the average member of the U.S. population each year from all sources of radiation, including commercial NPPs.
2.2 Measuring
Radioactivity in Radioactive Effluents In order to present the liquid and airborne (gaseous) effluent data in a manner that is both useful and concise, only significant radionuclides are included in the tables and figures in this report.
Using the guidance in Revision 2 of RG 1.21 (Ref. [33] ), licensees evaluate radionuclides that have either a significant activity or a significant dose contribution in NPP effluents.
The radionuclides chosen for inclusion in this report are shown in Tables 2.1 and 2.2.
2-2 Activity is a measure of the number of atoms that transform (historically referred to as decay) in a given period of time and is reported in various units, normally either curies (Ci) or becquerels (Bq). In the United States, the traditional unit for reporting activity is the Ci. One Ci is equal to 37,000,000,000 (37 billion) radioactive atoms transforming in one second. In this document, activity will be reported as curies and millicuries (mCi). A curie is equal to one thousand millicuries. In countries that have adopted the International System of Units (or SI units), activity is reported in units of Bq. One Bq is one atomic disintegration (transformation) or decay per second. One curie equals 37,000,000,000 becquerels, which may be expressed in scientific notation as 3.7E+10 becquerels or 3.7 x 10 10 becquerels. One curie is sometimes expressed as 37 gigabecquerels or simply 37 GBq.
One curie of cobalt
-60 and one curie of hydrogen
-3 (tritium) have the same activity; however, when an atom of cobalt
-60 transforms, the atomic transformations typically produce one moderately energetic beta particle and two highly energetic gamma rays. By contrast, when an atom of hydrogen
-3 transforms, it emits a single, low
-energy beta particle. Sensitive instruments can detect and measure the transformation products that are unique to each radionuclide. Cobalt and hydrogen are just two examples of elements that can be radioactive. Other examples are shown in Tables 2.1 and 2.2.
The reporting of radionuclides in liquid and gaseous wastes is commonly grouped into categories (Ref. [33] ). These categories are described in Tables 2.1 and 2.2 as noble gases, iodines , particulates, tritium, carbon, and gross alpha activity. Each category contains one or more radionuclides. Beginning with the 2010 annual effluent summary report, a new radionuclide category has been added for carbon
-14 (C-14) in gaseous effluents.
Table 2.1 Radionuclides in Gaseous Effluents Gaseous Effluent Category Common Radionuclides Significant Radionuclides Fission and Activation Gases (sometimes referred to as Noble Gases)
Krypton (85, 85m, 87, 88)
Xenon (131, 131m, 133, 133m, 135, 135m)
Argon (41)
Kr-85 Xe-133 Xe-135 All (Sections 3.2, 3.3, and 3.6)
Iodines Iodine (131, 132, 133, 134, 135)
I-131 All (Section 3.6)
Particulates Cobalt (58, 60)
Cesium (134, 137)
Chromium (51)
Manganese (54)
Niobium (95)
Co-58 Co-60 Cs-134 Cs-137 All (Section 3.6)
C-14 Gross Alpha Total alpha activity Not Presented in this Report The radionuclides listed in this report are the most significant radionuclides discharged from a site. For example, although Table 2.1 lists 11 radionuclides in the category called "fission and activation gases," only the 3 most significant radionuclides (Kr-85, Xe-133, and Xe
-135) were selected for inclusion in Table 3.1 and Figure 3.1 for noble gas radionuclides. These three were chosen because these radionuclides are the most significant, are representative of the overall effluent releases, and because as their activities increase, the activities of other fission and activation gases typically increase as well. Conversely, if the activities of these three radionuclides 2-3 are very low, the activities of other fission and activation gases also tend to be low
. All noble gas radionuclides are included in Sections 3.2 Short
-Term Trend in Gaseous Effluents, 3.3 Long
-Term Trend in Gaseous Effluents, and 3.6 Radiation Doses from Gaseous and Liquid Effluents.
Table 2.2 Radionuclides in Liquid Effluents Liquid Effluent Category Common Radionuclides Significant Radionuclides Mixed Fission and Activation Products Iron (55) Cobalt (58, 60)
Cesium (134, 137)
Chromium (51)
Manganese (54)
Zirconium (95)
Niobium (95)
Iodine (131, 133, 135)
Fe-55 Co-58 Co-60 Cs-134 Cs-137 I-131 All (Sections 3.4, 3.5 and 3.6)
H-3 Dissolved and Entrained Noble Gases Krypton (85, 85m, 87, 88)
Xenon (131, 133, 133m, 135, 135m)
Not Presented in this Report Gross Alpha Total alpha activity Not Presented in this Report Much information about the operation of plant systems can be obtained from the radionuclides present in radioactive effluents. Additionally, the ratios of the activities of radionuclides can provide insights into fuel integrity, radioactive waste system operation, and general radioactive waste handling practices at a site. The reader who is interested in seeing the activities of all radionuclides released from any particular NPP is encouraged to review the detailed, site
-specific ARERRs provided on the NRC Web site.
Laboratory instruments can identify which radionuclides are present in radioactive effluents. The instruments can also measure the activities (curies or becquerels) of the radionuclides. As a result, many discussions about radioactive effluents focus on the curies (or becquerels) released. Although activity measures the rate of atomic transformations, it does not provide a direct measure of the potential health effects from exposure to radionuclides. When discussing potential health effects, the concept of dose is used. Radiation dose is discussed in more detail in the following paragraphs.
2.3 Dose Units and Limits The traditional unit for reporting radiation dose in the United States is the rem. Small exposures are often reported as millirem (mrem) or as fractions of a mrem. One thousand mrem equals one rem. Other countries report radiation dose in units of sieverts (Sv). One sievert equals 100 rem. One millirem equals 0.00001 sievert or 0.01 millisievert (mSv). The number 0.00001 can be represented in scientific notation as 1 x 10
-5 or 1E-05. Radioactive effluents discharged from NPPs are controlled by regulations. NRC regulations (10 CFR 20.1301) specify that the annual dose to individual members of the public does not exceed 100 mrem (1 millisievert) (Ref. [34] ). In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has established environmental radiation protection standards for nuclear power operations that the annual dose to any member of the public does not exceed 25 mrem to the whole body, 75 mrem to the thyroid, and 25 mrem to any other organ.
2-4 Typically, the median dose from radioactive effluents to members of the public is so low (usually less than 1 mrem in a year) that the radionuclides and the dose in the environment cannot be measured directly. As a result, hypothetical doses are typically calculated based on the measurements of radioactive effluents at the point of release from the plant.
2.4 Radiation
Dose to the Public Licensees are required by 10 CFR 50.36a to establish Technical Specifications which require that operating procedures for the control of effluents be established and followed, and that the radioactive waste system be maintained and used to keep average annual effluent releases at small percentages of the public dose limits (Ref. [32] ). The Technical Specifications establish the licensee's Radioactive Effluent Controls Program, which is used to ensure plant operations keep radioactive effluent releases ALARA and meet the ALARA criteria in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I (Ref. [32] ). The ALARA criteria are established as a small fraction (typically about 3 percent) of the NRC safety limits for dose to members of the public.
The licensee is required to keep levels of radioactive material in effluents ALARA, even under unusual operating conditions. The ALARA criteria are design objectives and limiting conditions for operation, not safety limits. If releases ever exceed design objectives, the licensee is required to take corrective actions to ensure the plant systems are functioning as designed and to report this information to the NRC.
The plant's license (i.e., Technical Specifications) requires licensees to establish a Radioactive Effluent Controls Program in the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) (or equivalent), and to control radioactive effluents in a manner such as to keep doses to members of the public from radioactive effluents ALARA. The methods of determining dose are described in the licensee's ODCM. The ODCMs are available through the NRC Public Document Room. Any changes to the ODCM are reported to the NRC and are provided in the licensee's ARERR. The licensee's Technical Specifications also require that an ARERR be submitted to the NRC on an annual basis. The ODCM contains both the offsite dose calculation methodologies and a radiological environmental monitoring program. Those dose calculations are based on:
actual measurements of the radioactive materials discharged to the unrestricted area; models of how radionuclides are dispersed and diluted in the environment; models of how radionuclides are incorporated into animals, plants, and soil; and biokinetic models of human uptake and metabolism of radioactive materials. The dose calculation models are designed to calculate the dose either to a real individual close to the NPP or conservatively to a hypothetical individual exposed to the highest concentrations of radioactive materials from radioactive effluents.
This person is often referred to as the maximum exposed individual (or maximum exposed hypothetical individual). The parameters and assumptions used in these dose calculations typically include conservative assumptions that tend to overestimate the dose. As a result, the actual doses received by real individuals are often much less than those calculated. Guidance for these calculations is provided in NRC RG 1.109 (Ref. [35] ).
2-5 The calculated annual organ doses and annual total body doses are included in Section 3.6. All the doses calculated by a licensee are reported in the NPPs' ARERRs. Summaries of the calculated doses are provided in Tables 3.19 through 3.22, and are shown graphically in Figures 3.17 through 3.22
. 2.5 Other Sources of Radiation Dose to the U.S. Population Doses from NPP radioactive effluents were discussed in the previous sections. This section discusses the doses that the average American typically receives each year from naturally occurring background radiation and all other sources of radiation. With the information presented in this section, the reader can compare the doses received from NPP effluents with the doses received from natural, medical, and other sources of radiation. This comparison provides some context to the concept of radiation dose effects.
In March 2009, the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) published Report No. 160 as an update to the 1987 NCRP Report No. 93, "Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States" (Refs.
[36] , [37] ). Report No. 160 describes the doses to the U.S. population from all sources of ionizing radiation for 2006, the most recent data available at the time the NCRP report was written. The NCRP report also includes information on the variability of those doses from one individual to another. The NCRP estimated that the average person in the United States receives about 620 mrem of radiation dose each year from all sources; i.e., both natural background radiation and man
-made radiation sources. NCRP Report No. 160 describes each of the sources of radiation that contribute to this dose, including:
naturally occurring sources (natural background) such as cosmic radiation from space, terrestrial radiation from radioactive materials in the earth, and naturally occurring radioactive materials in the food people eat and in the air people breathe; medical sources from diagnosis and treatment of health disorders using radioactive pharmaceuticals and radiation
-producing equipment; consumer products (such as household smoke detectors);
industrial processes, security devices, educational tools, and research activities; and exposure of workers that result from their occupations.
Figure 2.1 is a pie chart showing the relative contributions of these sources of radiation to the dose received by the average person. Larger contributors to dose are represented by proportionally larger slices of the pie. Doses to the public from NPPs are included in the industrial category; while doses to workers from nuclear power generation are included in the category of occupational dose.
Doses to the public due to effluents from NPPs are less than 0.1 percent (one-tenth of one percent) of what the average person receives each year from all sources of radiation. Doses to workers from occupational exposures, including those received from work at NPPs, also are less than 0.1 percent of the dose to member s of the public from all sources.
2-6 Figure 2.1 Sources of Radiation Exposure to the U.S. Population The chart above shows the contribution of various sources of exposure to the total collective dose and the total dose per individual in the U.S. population for 2006. Values have been rounded to the nearest 1%, except for those <1% [less than 1%]. Credit: Modification to image courtesy of National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements.
3-1 3 EFFLUENT DATA
3.1 Radioactive
Materials in Liquid and Gaseous Effluent s The activity of the most significant radionuclides discharged in liquid and gaseous effluents for 2015 are shown in Tables 3.1 through 3.14. The data from these tables are illustrated graphically in Figures 3.1 through 3.14. The tables and figures are organized by the two types of reactors used in the United States
- boiling-water reactors (BWRs) and pressurized-water reactors (PWRs). The tables and figures are further subdivided into liquid and gaseous effluents. Finally, the data are subdivided into the radionuclide categories (common radionuclides and significant radionuclides) as listed in Tables 2.1 and 2.2. These tables and figures allow a detailed comparison of each reactor's effluents with other reactors of the same type.
As described in Section 2.2, only the most significant radionuclides are included in the tables and graphs in Section 3.1. However, the total radiation dose from all radionuclides discharged from the reactors is included in Section 3.6, "Radiation Doses from Gaseous and Liquid Effluents.
" For comparison between plants, median values are included in some tables and figures. The median is the midpoint of the data such that half of the power plants will have greater activity and dose values than the median plant and half of the power plants will have values equal to or lower than the median plant. The median is a method of estimating a central or typical value while avoiding bias caused by extremely high or low values in the data set. All operating nuclear plant units are included when calculating the medians, even those sites for which no measurable release of a particular radionuclide is reported.
All licensees are required to have and use sensitive radioactive effluent measurement capabilities.
Many times, radioactive effluent releases are so low in concentration that a release cannot be detected. If no value is listed for a particular radionuclide in a table, it is because the licensee reported that the radionuclide was not detected at that NPP. Blanks in data fields are generally used instead of zeros in order to make it easier for the reader to quickly identify the positive values. On the following pages, the tables are presented first. In general, the information in each table is organized in descending order of activity. The facilities discharging the most activity are shown near the top of each table, while the facilities discharging the least activity are shown toward the bottom of each table. The median is shown in the middle of each data set. Tables with information on more than one radionuclide are listed by the total activity per plant, in descending order.
The figures are shown following the tables. In general, the information is organized in each figure in descending order of activity. The facilities discharging the most activity of the selected radionuclides are shown near the top of the figure, while the facilities discharging the least activity of the radionuclides are shown toward the bottom of each figure. The median is shown in the middle of each data set.
Figures with information on more than one radionuclide are listed by the total activity per plant, in descending order of activity. Figures with information on more than one radionuclide are shown in multi-colored graphs. For example, Figure 3.1 is a multi
-colored graph. In figures with multi
-colored graphs, the total activity of the selected radionuclides is shown on the right side of the graph, while the relative contribution of each radionuclide to the total activity is shown on the left side of the graph. The relative contributions of each nuclide are shown
-in multiple colors
-as a percent of the total activity. A multi-colored graph allows the reader to compare not only the activity but also the relative amounts of significant radionuclides released by the various facilities. Multi-colored graphs contain two separate scales of measurement. The total activity is show n on a logarithmic scale, while the radionuclide percentages of the total activity are shown on a linear scale.
3-2 Table 3.1 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Fission and Activation Gases, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Total Activity BWR Facility Kr-85 (Ci) Xe-133 (Ci) Xe-135 (Ci) Total (Ci) LaSalle 1 6.59E+02 6.25E+01 7.22E+02 LaSalle 2 6.59E+02 6.25E+01 7.22E+02 River Bend 3.48E+02 5.60E+01 4.04E+02 Grand Gulf 4.81E+01 1.64E+02 1.04E+02 3.16E+02 Monticello 1.75E+02 5.43E+01 2.29E+02 Dresden 3 6.32E+01 1.59E+01 7.91E+01 Brunswick 1 3.63E-01 6.26E+01 6.30E+01 Brunswick 2 3.63E-01 6.26E+01 6.30E+01 Perry 5.01E+01 1.43E+00 5.15E+01 Hope Creek 2.17E+01 1.48E+01 1.34E+00 3.78E+01 Oyster Creek 3.04E+00 3.28E+01 3.59E+01 Dresden 2 2.73E+01 6.56E+00 3.38E+01 Duane Arnold 5.89E+00 2.15E+01 2.74E+01 Limerick 1 9.19E-01 1.12E+01 9.15E+00 2.12E+01 Limerick 2 9.19E-01 1.12E+01 9.15E+00 2.12E+01 Peach Bottom 2 1.55E+01 4.88E+00 2.03E+01 Peach Bottom 3 1.55E+01 4.88E+00 2.03E+01 BWR Median Release 2.07E+00 1.48E+00 1.34E+01 Columbia 5.00E+00 1.41E+00 6.41E+00 FitzPatrick 5.73E+00 1.41E-01 5.88E+00 Quad Cities 1 1.10E+00 1.52E+00 2.62E+00 Quad Cities 2 1.10E+00 1.52E+00 2.62E+00 Nine Mile Point 2 7.33E-02 6.29E-01 7.02E-01 Clinton 5.06E-01 5.06E-01 Hatch 1 2.10E-01 2.18E-01 4.28E-01 Hatch 2 2.10E-01 2.18E-01 4.28E-01 Pilgrim 0.00E+00 2.36E-01 2.36E-01 Cooper 6.87E-03 2.26E-01 2.33E-01 Fermi 2 1.21E-01 1.21E-01 Browns Ferry 1 Browns Ferry 2 Browns Ferry 3 Nine Mile Point 1 Susquehanna 1 Susquehanna 2
3-3 Table 3.2 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Iodine, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Activity BWR Facility I-131 (Ci) BWR Facility I-131 (Ci) LaSalle 1 2.58E-02 BWR Median Release 6.00E-04 LaSalle 2 2.58E-02 Peach Bottom 2 5.68E-04 Monticello 8.22E-03 Peach Bottom 3 5.68E-04 River Bend 2.09E-03 FitzPatrick 4.22E-04 Dresden 3 1.75E-03 Pilgrim 2.47E-04 Dresden 2 1.50E-03 Nine Mile Point 1 2.35E-04 Fermi 2 1.48E-03 Columbia 2.02E-04 Brunswick 1 1.44E-03 Grand Gulf 1.87E-04 Brunswick 2 1.44E-03 Perry 1.27E-04 Hope Creek 1.41E-03 Hatch 1 1.11E-04 Oyster Creek 1.15E-03 Hatch 2 9.54E-05 Quad Cities 1 9.54E-04 Cooper 6.30E-05 Quad Cities 2 9.54E-04 Clinton 3.51E-05 Browns Ferry 1 7.24E-04 Duane Arnold 2.23E-05 Browns Ferry 2 7.24E-04 Limerick 1 7.05E-06 Browns Ferry 3 7.24E-04 Limerick 2 7.05E-06 Nine Mile Point 2 6.32E-04 Susquehanna 1 Susquehanna 2
3-4 Table 3.3 BWR Gaseous Releases - Particulates, 2015 Shown in Descending Order of Total Activity BWR Facility Co-58 (Ci) Co-60 (Ci) Cs-134 (Ci) Cs-137 (Ci) Total (Ci)
Oyster Creek 8.87E-03 9.37E-03 6.64E-04 1.89E-02 Dresden 3 7.96E-04 2.44E-03 3.24E-03 Dresden 2 7.21E-04 2.26E-03 2.98E-03 Browns Ferry 1 9.28E-04 1.10E-03 1.54E-05 2.04E-03 Browns Ferry 2 9.28E-04 1.10E-03 1.54E-05 2.04E-03 Browns Ferry 3 9.28E-04 1.10E-03 1.54E-05 2.04E-03 LaSalle 1 4.93E-04 1.42E-03 1.92E-03 LaSalle 2 4.93E-04 1.42E-03 1.92E-03 Peach Bottom 2 8.27E-05 1.07E-03 1.15E-03 Peach Bottom 3 8.27E-05 1.07E-03 1.15E-03 Nine Mile Point 1 9.24E-05 9.01E-04 2.03E-05 1.01E-03 Nine Mile Point 2 1.35E-05 9.04E-04 6.39E-05 9.81E-04 Brunswick 1 3.42E-05 4.35E-04 4.69E-04 Brunswick 2 3.42E-05 4.35E-04 4.69E-04 Hope Creek 2.61E-06 3.54E-04 3.57E-04 Quad Cities 1 3.20E-04 1.49E-05 3.35E-04 Quad Cities 2 3.20E-04 1.49E-05 3.35E-04 BWR Median Release 7.50E-06 3.08E-04 3.15E-04 Fermi 2 2.95E-04 2.95E-04 Monticello 1.30E-05 1.06E-04 1.52E-04 2.71E-04 Columbia 5.24E-06 1.25E-04 1.30E-04 Pilgrim 3.62E-06 8.22E-05 7.62E-06 9.34E-05 Cooper 7.28E-07 8.19E-05 2.29E-06 8.50E-05 River Bend 8.53E-06 6.49E-05 7.34E-05 Susquehanna 1 7.50E-06 4.68E-05 5.43E-05 Susquehanna 2 7.50E-06 4.68E-05 5.43E-05 Duane Arnold 3.24E-07 1.04E-05 1.07E-05 Limerick 1 8.35E-06 8.35E-06 Limerick 2 8.35E-06 8.35E-06 Clinton 8.23E-06 8.23E-06 Grand Gulf 5.73E-06 1.63E-06 7.36E-06 Hatch 1 7.21E-06 5.00E-08 7.26E-06 FitzPatrick 3.49E-06 3.49E-06 Hatch 2 1.19E-07 2.03E-08 1.39E-07 Perry 3-5 Table 3.4 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Tritium, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Activity BWR Facility H-3 (Ci) BWR Facility H-3 (Ci) Browns Ferry 1 3.68E+02 BWR Median Release 2.26E+01 Browns Ferry 2 3.68E+02 Duane Arnold 2.22E+01 Browns Ferry 3 3.68E+02 Limerick 1 2.10E+01 Brunswick 1 2.62E+02 Limerick 2 2.10E+01 Brunswick 2 2.62E+02 Columbia 1.86E+01 Hope Creek 2.01E+02 Monticello 1.83E+01 Fermi 2 1.69E+02 FitzPatrick 1.53E+01 Nine Mile Point 1 1.59E+02 LaSalle 1 1.18E+01 Pilgrim 7.18E+01 LaSalle 2 1.18E+01 Nine Mile Point 2 4.36E+01 River Bend 1.18E+01 Quad Cities 1 4.24E+01 Cooper 1.01E+01 Quad Cities 2 4.24E+01 Hatch 1 9.48E+00 Oyster Creek 3.08E+01 Hatch 2 9.39E+00 Grand Gulf 2.81E+01 Susquehanna 1 6.18E+00 Peach Bottom 2 2.54E+01 Susquehanna 2 6.18E+00 Peach Bottom 3 2.54E+01 Perry 3.80E+00 Clinton 2.30E+01 Dresden 3 3.33E+00 Dresden 2 3.12E+00 3-6 Table 3.5 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Carbon-14, 20 1 5 Shown in Descending Order of Activity BWR Facility C-14 (Ci) BWR Facility C-14 (Ci) Susquehanna 1 2.30E+01 BWR Median Release 1.42E+01 Susquehanna 2 2.30E+01 Hatch 1 1.42E+01 Nine Mile Point 2 1.98E+01 Hatch 2 1.42E+01 Peach Bottom 2 1.77E+01 Dresden 2 1.35E+01 Peach Bottom 3 1.77E+01 Fermi 2 1.32E+01 Grand Gulf 1.74E+01 Browns Ferry 1 1.22E+01 LaSalle 1 1.71E+01 Browns Ferry 2 1.22E+01 LaSalle 2 1.71E+01 Browns Ferry 3 1.22E+01 Limerick 1 1.70E+01 Cooper 1.19E+01 Limerick 2 1.70E+01 Brunswick 1 1.10E+01 Hope Creek 1.62E+01 Brunswick 2 1.10E+01 Perry 1.62E+01 River Bend 1.10E+01 Clinton 1.60E+01 FitzPatrick 1.07E+01 Columbia 1.48E+01 Duane Arnold 9.61E+00 Quad Cities 1 1.44E+01 Oyster Creek 9.32E+00 Quad Cities 2 1.44E+01 Nine Mile Point 1 8.44E+00 Dresden 3 1.43E+01 Pilgrim 7.18E+00 Monticello 6.64E+00 3-7 Table 3.6 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Fission and Activation Gases, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Total Activity PWR Facility Kr-85 (Ci) Xe-133 (Ci) Xe-135 (Ci) Total (Ci)
Sequoyah 1 4.11E+01 6.51E-03 4.11E+01 Sequoyah 2 4.11E+01 6.51E-03 4.11E+01 Catawba 1 2.69E-01 1.71E+01 4.02E-02 1.74E+01 Catawba 2 2.69E-01 1.71E+01 4.02E-02 1.74E+01 St. Lucie 2 7.07E-01 1.35E+01 6.34E-02 1.43E+01 Calvert Cliffs 1 1.66E+00 3.38E+00 8.94E-02 5.13E+00 Calvert Cliffs 2 1.66E+00 3.38E+00 8.94E-02 5.13E+00 Palisades 5.05E-04 1.92E+00 2.02E+00 3.94E+00 Ginna 3.54E-02 2.96E+00 8.30E-02 3.08E+00 Robinson 2 3.06E+00 9.39E-03 3.06E+00 South Texas 2 2.70E+00 2.70E+00 Millstone 2 1.82E+00 2.92E-01 1.00E-02 2.12E+00 Palo Verde 2 2.07E+00 9.12E-05 2.07E+00 Oconee 1 1.38E-03 1.78E+00 2.62E-02 1.81E+00 Oconee 2 1.38E-03 1.78E+00 2.62E-02 1.81E+00 Oconee 3 1.38E-03 1.78E+00 2.62E-02 1.81E+00 Millstone 3 8.65E-01 8.07E-03 2.23E-03 8.75E-01 Farley 1 8.25E-01 3.75E-02 8.62E-01 Byron 1 8.40E-01 1.81E-03 8.41E-01 Ft. Calhoun 7.63E-01 2.11E-02 7.84E-01 South Texas 1 7.51E-01 7.51E-01 Surry 1 6.06E-01 6.27E-02 6.69E-01 Surry 2 6.06E-01 6.27E-02 6.69E-01 Cook 1 4.35E-01 2.10E-01 6.61E-04 6.46E-01 Cook 2 4.35E-01 2.10E-01 6.61E-04 6.46E-01 Indian Point 3 5.06E-01 7.61E-02 5.83E-01 Three Mile Island 1 4.42E-01 2.68E-05 4.42E-01 St. Lucie 1 3.11E-03 4.01E-01 8.10E-03 4.12E-01 Harris 3.09E-03 3.85E-01 1.54E-02 4.04E-01 Byron 2 3.98E-01 1.41E-03 3.99E-01 North Anna 1 6.70E-02 2.60E-01 1.91E-03 3.29E-01 North Anna 2 6.70E-02 2.60E-01 1.91E-03 3.29E-01 3-8 Table 3.6 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Fission and Activation Gases, 201 5 (continued)
Shown in Descending Order of Total Activity PWR Facility Kr-85 (Ci) Xe-133 (Ci) Xe-135 (Ci) Total (Ci)
PWR Median Release 1.71E-01 3.14E-03 1.97E-01 Callaway 1.81E-01 7.91E-03 7.64E-03 1.97E-01 Salem 1 1.92E-01 5.07E-03 1.97E-01 Wolf Creek 1.50E-01 5.06E-04 1.51E-01 Beaver Valley 1 1.24E-01 2.62E-02 1.50E-01 Beaver Valley 2 1.24E-01 2.62E-02 1.50E-01 Point Beach 1 1.36E-01 1.33E-03 1.38E-01 Point Beach 2 1.36E-01 1.33E-03 1.38E-01 Prairie Island 1 4.95E-02 6.72E-02 2.83E-07 1.17E-01 Prairie Island 2 4.95E-02 6.72E-02 2.83E-07 1.17E-01 Vogtle 2 1.13E-01 1.57E-03 1.15E-01 Salem 2 8.98E-02 1.08E-02 1.01E-01 McGuire 1 1.98E-04 8.12E-02 5.85E-03 8.72E-02 McGuire 2 1.98E-04 8.12E-02 5.85E-03 8.72E-02 Comanche Peak 1 6.75E-02 1.29E-02 3.64E-03 8.41E-02 Comanche Peak 2 6.75E-02 1.29E-02 3.64E-03 8.41E-02 Watts Bar 1 3.77E-06 7.18E-02 6.39E-03 7.82E-02 Turkey Point 3 7.52E-02 2.76E-04 7.55E-02 Waterford 3 6.84E-02 6.84E-02 Turkey Point 4 6.67E-02 2.76E-04 6.70E-02 Braidwood 1 5.68E-02 5.68E-02 Braidwood 2 5.68E-02 5.68E-02 Indian Point 2 5.11E-02 4.75E-03 5.58E-02 Davis-Besse 4.03E-02 2.63E-03 4.29E-02 Arkansas 2 3.67E-02 3.67E-02 Palo Verde 3 3.25E-02 3.25E-02 Farley 2 1.61E-02 1.60E-03 1.77E-02 Diablo Canyon 1 1.26E-02 1.00E-04 1.27E-02 Diablo Canyon 2 1.26E-02 1.00E-04 1.27E-02 Vogtle 1 9.77E-03 9.77E-03 Arkansas 1 2.71E-03 1.07E-04 2.82E-03 Summer 2.00E-04 1.85E-03 1.32E-05 2.07E-03 Seabrook 2.60E-04 2.60E-04 Palo Verde 1 2.15E-04 2.15E-04 3-9 Table 3.7 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Iodine, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Activity PWR Facility I-131 (Ci) PWR Facility I-131 (Ci) Palisades 2.29E-04 PWR Median Release 0.00E+00 St. Lucie 2 1.04E-04 Arkansas 1 Braidwood 2 8.81E-05 Byron 1 Braidwood 1 6.00E-05 Callaway Palo Verde 3 4.88E-05 Comanche Peak 1 South Texas 1 3.53E-05 Comanche Peak 2 Millstone 2 3.25E-05 Davis-Besse Catawba 1 2.78E-05 Diablo Canyon 1 Catawba 2 2.78E-05 Diablo Canyon 2 Palo Verde 2 2.38E-05 Farley 2 Calvert Cliffs 1 1.98E-05 Indian Point 2 Calvert Cliffs 2 1.98E-05 Indian Point 3 Farley 1 1.90E-05 McGuire 1 Harris 1.35E-05 McGuire 2 St. Lucie 1 8.66E-06 Millstone 3 Vogtle 1 7.25E-06 North Anna 1 Byron 2 4.45E-06 North Anna 2 Ft. Calhoun 3.71E-06 Palo Verde 1 Arkansas 2 1.82E-06 Prairie Island 1 Beaver Valley 1 8.03E-07 Prairie Island 2 Beaver Valley 2 2.65E-07 Robinson 2 South Texas 2 2.36E-07 Salem 1 Cook 1 2.04E-07 Salem 2 Cook 2 2.04E-07 Seabrook Ginna 1.53E-07 Sequoyah 1 Watts Bar 1 6.65E-08 Sequoyah 2 Point Beach 1 2.61E-09 Summer Point Beach 2 2.61E-09 Surry 1 Oconee 1 3.80E-10 Surry 2 Oconee 2 3.80E-10 Three Mile Island 1 Oconee 3 3.80E-10 Turkey Point 3 Turkey Point 4 Vogtle 2 Waterford 3 Wolf Creek
3-10 Table 3.8 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Particulates, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Total Activity PWR Facility Co-58 (Ci) Co-60 (Ci) Cs-134 (Ci)
Cs-137 (Ci)
Total (Ci)
Palo Verde 3 1.30E-03 5.10E-04 1.81E-03 Beaver Valley 1 2.71E-04 2.73E-05 2.98E-04 South Texas 1 1.90E-04 7.45E-05 2.65E-04 Beaver Valley 2 1.81E-04 1.53E-05 1.97E-04 Millstone 2 1.10E-04 7.46E-06 3.95E-07 1.18E-04 Palisades 1.01E-05 5.36E-05 9.82E-08 6.38E-05 Palo Verde 2 3.34E-05 2.12E-05 5.46E-05 Surry 1 8.14E-06 2.52E-08 2.43E-05 3.25E-05 Surry 2 8.14E-06 2.52E-08 2.43E-05 3.25E-05 South Texas 2 2.17E-05 9.91E-06 3.16E-05 St. Lucie 1 1.73E-05 1.40E-06 4.36E-07 1.91E-05 St. Lucie 2 1.40E-05 1.58E-06 1.47E-06 1.71E-05 Watts Bar 1 6.00E-06 4.95E-06 1.10E-05 Wolf Creek 9.61E-06 9.61E-06 McGuire 1 4.80E-06 4.80E-06 McGuire 2 4.80E-06 4.80E-06 Diablo Canyon 1 4.35E-06 4.35E-06 Diablo Canyon 2 4.35E-06 4.35E-06 Robinson 2 4.13E-06 3.35E-08 4.25E-09 4.17E-06 Harris 2.72E-06 1.33E-06 5.68E-08 4.11E-06 North Anna 1 1.38E-06 1.24E-06 3.09E-07 2.93E-06 North Anna 2 1.38E-06 1.24E-06 3.09E-07 2.93E-06 Waterford 3 5.01E-07 1.36E-07 2.26E-06 2.90E-06 Seabrook 2.47E-06 2.47E-06 Point Beach 1 1.92E-06 5.15E-07 2.43E-06 Point Beach 2 1.92E-06 5.15E-07 2.43E-06 Turkey Point 3 2.20E-07 1.99E-06 2.21E-06 Palo Verde 1 7.35E-07 9.98E-07 1.73E-06 Sequoyah 1 1.28E-06 1.28E-06 Sequoyah 2 1.28E-06 1.28E-06 Prairie Island 1 9.90E-09 1.18E-06 1.19E-06 Prairie Island 2 9.90E-09 1.18E-06 1.19E-06 3-11 Table 3.8 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Particulates, 201 5 (continued)
Shown in Descending Order of Total Activity PWR Facility Co-58 (Ci) Co-60 (Ci) Cs-134 (Ci) Cs-137 (Ci) Total (Ci)
PWR Median Release 7.19E-07 Arkansas 2 7.19E-07 7.19E-07 Salem 2 3.77E-07 2.81E-07 6.58E-07 Farley 1 2.29E-07 3.90E-07 6.19E-07 Millstone 3 6.97E-08 6.97E-08 Cook 1 1.09E-09 1.09E-09 Cook 2 1.09E-09 1.09E-09 Arkansas 1 Braidwood 1 Braidwood 2 Byron 1 Byron 2 Callaway Calvert Cliffs 1 Calvert Cliffs 2 Catawba 1 Catawba 2 Comanche Peak 1 Comanche Peak 2 Davis-Besse Farley 2 Ft. Calhoun Ginna Indian Point 2 Indian Point 3 Oconee 1 Oconee 2 Oconee 3 Salem 1 Summer Three Mile Island 1 Turkey Point 4 Vogtle 1 Vogtle 2 3-12 Table 3.9 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Tritium, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Activity PWR Facility H-3 (Ci) PWR Facility H-3 (Ci) Palo Verde 2 9.19E+02 PWR Median Release 3.59E+01 Palo Verde 3 8.03E+02 Waterford 3 3.59E+01 Salem 1 4.27E+02 St. Lucie 1 3.16E+01 Palo Verde 1 3.31E+02 Vogtle 2 3.12E+01 Braidwood 2 1.62E+02 Wolf Creek 2.94E+01 Seabrook 1.41E+02 Byron 1 2.72E+01 Harris 1.39E+02 Vogtle 1 2.57E+01 Salem 2 1.22E+02 Farley 2 2.48E+01 Braidwood 1 1.12E+02 Summer 2.44E+01 Catawba 1 1.08E+02 Robinson 2 2.29E+01 Catawba 2 1.08E+02 South Texas 2 2.17E+01 Three Mile Island 1 1.07E+02 Comanche Peak 1 1.91E+01 Ginna 8.61E+01 Comanche Peak 2 1.91E+01 St. Lucie 2 7.32E+01 Arkansas 1 1.71E+01 Watts Bar 1 7.17E+01 Surry 1 1.58E+01 Oconee 1 6.00E+01 Surry 2 1.58E+01 Oconee 2 6.00E+01 Millstone 2 1.53E+01 Oconee 3 6.00E+01 Indian Point 3 1.30E+01 Davis-Besse 5.88E+01 Sequoyah 1 1.16E+01 Diablo Canyon 1 5.66E+01 Sequoyah 2 1.16E+01 Diablo Canyon 2 5.66E+01 Indian Point 2 1.09E+01 Byron 2 5.31E+01 Palisades 1.09E+01 Cook 1 5.16E+01 North Anna 1 8.97E+00 Cook 2 5.16E+01 North Anna 2 8.97E+00 Callaway 4.84E+01 Prairie Island 1 8.27E+00 Millstone 3 4.49E+01 Prairie Island 2 8.27E+00 South Texas 1 4.03E+01 Farley 1 8.26E+00 Point Beach 1 4.01E+01 Turkey Point 3 7.92E+00 Point Beach 2 4.01E+01 Turkey Point 4 5.83E+00 McGuire 1 3.94E+01 Calvert Cliffs 1 5.70E+00 McGuire 2 3.94E+01 Calvert Cliffs 2 5.70E+00 Arkansas 2 3.68E+01 Ft. Calhoun 2.88E+00 Beaver Valley 2 1.79E+00 Beaver Valley 1 1.15E+00 3-13 Table 3.10 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Carbon-14, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Activity PWR Facility C-14 (Ci) PWR Facility C-14 (Ci) North Anna 1 1.34E+01 PWR Median Release 9.24E+00 North Anna 2 1.34E+01 Indian Point 3 9.24E+00 Callaway 1.31E+01 Cook 1 9.16E+00 Waterford 3 1.31E+01 Cook 2 9.16E+00 Comanche Peak 1 1.27E+01 Millstone 2 9.02E+00 Comanche Peak 2 1.27E+01 Arkansas 1 8.76E+00 Millstone 3 1.25E+01 Turkey Point 4 8.64E+00 Seabrook 1.21E+01 Summer 8.42E+00 Vogtle 1 1.21E+01 Three Mile Island 1 8.30E+00 Vogtle 2 1.21E+01 Harris 7.88E+00 Diablo Canyon 2 1.19E+01 Oconee 1 7.85E+00 Diablo Canyon 1 1.14E+01 Oconee 2 7.85E+00 Salem 1 1.12E+01 Oconee 3 7.85E+00 St. Lucie 1 1.12E+01 Surry 1 7.78E+00 Indian Point 2 1.11E+01 Surry 2 7.78E+00 Arkansas 2 1.09E+01 Palisades 7.77E+00 Wolf Creek 1.07E+01 Robinson 2 7.70E+00 Davis-Besse 1.06E+01 Turkey Point 3 7.46E+00 Beaver Valley 1 1.05E+01 South Texas 1 7.30E+00 McGuire 1 1.05E+01 South Texas 2 7.29E+00 McGuire 2 1.05E+01 Ginna 6.80E+00 Salem 2 1.02E+01 Beaver Valley 2 6.02E+00 Calvert Cliffs 1 9.91E+00 Point Beach 1 5.88E+00 Calvert Cliffs 2 9.91E+00 Point Beach 2 5.84E+00 Catawba 1 9.88E+00 Byron 2 4.61E+00 Catawba 2 9.88E+00 Prairie Island 1 4.52E+00 St. Lucie 2 9.47E+00 Prairie Island 2 4.52E+00 Sequoyah 1 9.41E+00 Braidwood 1 4.28E+00 Sequoyah 2 9.41E+00 Byron 1 4.25E+00 Watts Bar 1 9.33E+00 Braidwood 2 4.19E+00 Farley 1 9.28E+00 Palo Verde 1 2.72E+00 Farley 2 9.28E+00 Palo Verde 2 2.72E+00 Palo Verde 3 2.72E+00 Ft. Calhoun 1.97E+00 3-14 Table 3.11 BWR Liquid Releases
- Fission and Activation Products, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Total Activity BWR Facility Co-58 (Ci) Co-60 (Ci) Cs-134 (C i) Cs-137 (Ci) Fe-55 (Ci) I-131 (Ci) Total (Ci) Browns Ferry 1 6.35E-03 8.29E-02 2.13E-04 1.20E-02 1.06E-03 1.03E-01 Browns Ferry 2 6.35E-03 8.29E-02 2.13E-04 1.20E-02 1.06E-03 1.03E-01 Browns Ferry 3 6.35E-03 8.29E-02 2.13E-04 1.20E-02 1.06E-03 1.03E-01 Hope Creek 2.76E-03 2.35E-02 3.62E-04 1.06E-03 3.12E-06 2.77E-02 Perry 7.36E-04 9.68E-03 8.96E-06 2.78E-05 1.05E-02 Susquehanna 1 2.00E-03 4.52E-03 1.03E-05 6.53E-03 Susquehanna 2 2.00E-03 4.52E-03 1.03E-05 6.53E-03 Peach Bottom 2 5.05E-06 5.28E-03 6.77E-05 5.36E-03 Peach Bottom 3 5.05E-06 5.28E-03 6.77E-05 5.36E-03 Grand Gulf 5.67E-05 2.01E-03 5.73E-06 1.68E-04 2.39E-03 4.62E-03 Hatch 1 2.33E-04 2.45E-03 7.54E-05 1.07E-03 2.60E-04 4.09E-03 River Bend 1.04E-05 2.51E-03 3.03E-06 2.75E-06 1.76E-06 2.52E-03 Dresden 3 1.82E-03 6.94E-04 2.51E-03 Limerick 1 1.66E-05 6.35E-05 2.26E-03 2.34E-03 Limerick 2 1.66E-05 6.35E-05 2.26E-03 2.34E-03 Quad Cities 1 1.37E-03 2.18E-05 4.40E-04 1.83E-03 Quad Cities 2 1.37E-03 2.18E-05 4.40E-04 1.83E-03 BWR Median Release 5.05E-06 1.16E-03 1.38E-06 1.66E-03 Hatch 2 1.55E-04 1.10E-03 1.39E-04 8.14E-05 4.46E-06 1.48E-03 Brunswick 1 7.75E-06 1.22E-03 3.58E-05 1.87E-04 1.45E-03 Brunswick 2 7.75E-06 1.22E-03 3.58E-05 1.87E-04 1.45E-03 Pilgrim 6.58E-06 1.56E-04 2.23E-05 1.85E-04 Clinton Columbia Cooper Dresden 2 Duane Arnold Fermi 2 FitzPatrick LaSalle 1 LaSalle 2 Monticello Nine Mile Point 1 Nine Mile Point 2 Oyster Creek
3-15 Table 3.12 BWR Liquid Releases
- Tritium, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Activity BWR Facility H-3 (Ci) BWR Facility H-3 (Ci) Brunswick 1 9.93E+01 BWR Median Release 3.15E+00 Brunswick 2 9.93E+01 Limerick 1 3.03E+00 Hope Creek 6.53E+01 Limerick 2 3.03E+00 River Bend 6.44E+01 Dresden 2 3.29E-01 Grand Gulf 4.49E+01 Quad Cities 1 2.62E-01 Browns Ferry 1 4.08E+01 Quad Cities 2 2.62E-01 Browns Ferry 2 4.08E+01 Oyster Creek 2.09E-01 Browns Ferry 3 4.08E+01 FitzPatrick 3.70E-02 Susquehanna 1 2.43E+01 Clinton Susquehanna 2 2.43E+01 Columbia Hatch 1 1.67E+01 Cooper Hatch 2 1.01E+01 Duane Arnold Peach Bottom 2 5.61E+00 Fermi 2 Peach Bottom 3 5.61E+00 LaSalle 1 Perry 5.46E+00 LaSalle 2 Pilgrim 3.56E+00 Monticello Dresden 3 3.28E+00 Nine Mile Point 1 Nine Mile Point 2
3-16 Table 3.13 PWR Liquid Releases
- Fission and Activation Products, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Total Activity PWR Facility Co-58 (Ci) Co-60 (Ci) Cs-134 (Ci) Cs-137 (Ci) Fe-55 (Ci) I-131 (Ci) Total (Ci) Calvert Cliffs 1 2.19E-02 3.22E-03 2.31E-02 2.63E-01 2.93E-03 3.14E-01 Calvert Cliffs 2 2.19E-02 3.22E-03 2.31E-02 2.63E-01 2.93E-03 3.14E-01 Arkansas 1 1.59E-02 2.13E-02 2.97E-03 6.54E-03 1.25E-03 7.98E-04 4.87E-02 Beaver Valley 1 1.58E-02 9.29E-03 4.11E-04 8.10E-03 3.36E-02 Beaver Valley 2 1.58E-02 9.29E-03 4.11E-04 8.10E-03 3.36E-02 Vogtle 1 2.20E-02 5.77E-03 1.10E-05 1.33E-03 4.26E-03 7.15E-08 3.34E-02 Waterford 3 9.69E-03 1.93E-03 1.71E-05 1.93E-02 3.09E-02 Indian Point 2 3.95E-04 6.98E-04 2.76E-02 5.47E-04 2.92E-02 Millstone 3 4.80E-03 4.10E-03 1.99E-03 9.17E-03 7.00E-03 2.71E-02 Farley 2 1.54E-02 9.38E-03 9.47E-04 2.11E-06 2.58E-02 McGuire 1 1.98E-03 1.53E-02 8.25E-07 5.40E-04 8.89E-04 1.87E-02 McGuire 2 1.98E-03 1.53E-02 8.25E-07 5.40E-04 8.89E-04 1.87E-02 Surry 1 2.15E-03 1.44E-02 6.60E-04 5.70E-06 1.72E-02 Surry 2 2.15E-03 1.44E-02 6.60E-04 5.70E-06 1.72E-02 Turkey Point 3 8.70E-03 2.66E-03 6.39E-06 1.56E-04 5.05E-03 1.66E-02 Turkey Point 4 8.70E-03 2.66E-03 6.39E-06 1.56E-04 5.05E-03 1.66E-02 Braidwood 1 5.66E-03 6.02E-03 4.55E-03 1.62E-02 Braidwood 2 5.66E-03 6.02E-03 4.55E-03 1.62E-02 Farley 1 1.01E-02 4.93E-03 2.16E-05 7.25E-04 1.58E-02 Watts Bar 1 8.81E-03 2.09E-03 5.63E-06 4.71E-03 1.56E-02 Sequoyah 1 1.17E-02 2.29E-03 5.93E-07 1.23E-03 1.52E-02 Sequoyah 2 1.17E-02 2.29E-03 5.93E-07 1.23E-03 1.52E-02 Robinson 2 6.65E-03 6.13E-03 1.32E-04 1.21E-03 1.41E-02 Harris 9.33E-03 3.68E-03 1.47E-05 1.53E-04 1.32E-02 Callaway 7.41E-06 2.41E-03 1.98E-04 9.62E-03 1.22E-02 Indian Point 3 4.57E-03 4.59E-03 6.83E-06 5.73E-04 1.69E-03 1.14E-02 Vogtle 2 7.04E-03 2.10E-03 3.35E-04 1.01E-03 1.05E-02 Catawba 1 4.25E-03 2.90E-03 1.63E-05 2.31E-03 1.37E-06 9.47E-03 Catawba 2 4.25E-03 2.90E-03 1.63E-05 2.31E-03 1.37E-06 9.47E-03 North Anna 1 6.93E-03 1.40E-03 7.65E-06 8.33E-03 North Anna 2 6.93E-03 1.40E-03 7.65E-06 8.33E-03 Ft. Calhoun 2.38E-03 6.23E-04 1.49E-05 3.21E-03 1.17E-03 4.52E-04 7.85E-03 3-17 Table 3.13 PWR Liquid Releases
- Fission and Activation Products, 201 5 (continued)
Shown in Descending Order of Total Activity PWR Facility Co-58 (Ci) Co-60 (Ci) Cs-134 (Ci) Cs-137 (Ci) Fe-55 (Ci) I-131 (Ci) Total (Ci) PWR Median Release 2.76E-03 2.03E-03 0.00E+00 4.43E-05 5.55E-04 0.00E+00 7.39E-03 Diablo Canyon 1 7.24E-04 3.12E-03 3.55E-03 7.39E-03 Diablo Canyon 2 7.24E-04 3.12E-03 3.55E-03 7.39E-03 Point Beach 1 4.53E-03 2.03E-03 4.43E-06 5.90E-05 6.63E-03 Point Beach 2 4.53E-03 2.03E-03 4.43E-06 5.90E-05 6.63E-03 Ginna 5.31E-03 1.18E-05 5.32E-03 Millstone 2 1.19E-03 7.14E-04 3.13E-08 1.75E-04 2.91E-03 2.22E-04 5.22E-03 Wolf Creek 3.71E-03 1.96E-04 8.24E-04 4.73E-03 Prairie Island 1 4.12E-03 3.25E-04 4.44E-03 Prairie Island 2 4.12E-03 3.25E-04 4.44E-03 Seabrook 3.44E-03 7.58E-04 7.60E-07 4.20E-03 Summer 4.24E-04 3.07E-03 1.59E-04 2.37E-04 3.89E-03 Salem 2 2.62E-03 1.18E-03 6.76E-05 3.87E-03 Byron 1 2.76E-03 1.09E-03 3.85E-03 Byron 2 2.76E-03 1.09E-03 3.85E-03 South Texas 1 2.34E-04 2.90E-03 4.43E-05 5.25E-04 3.70E-03 Salem 1 2.54E-03 8.98E-04 1.76E-05 2.41E-04 3.69E-03 Davis-Besse 7.21E-04 3.85E-04 9.28E-06 1.51E-04 1.73E-03 3.00E-03 Palisades 1.56E-03 3.60E-04 6.43E-05 1.98E-03 South Texas 2 5.21E-05 7.57E-04 6.26E-06 8.98E-04 1.71E-03 Arkansas 2 6.23E-04 1.89E-04 1.54E-05 3.48E-04 3.48E-04 2.67E-05 1.55E-03 Oconee 1 8.27E-04 3.55E-05 6.88E-05 2.85E-04 1.68E-06 1.22E-03 Oconee 2 8.27E-04 3.55E-05 6.88E-05 2.85E-04 1.68E-06 1.22E-03 Oconee 3 8.27E-04 3.55E-05 6.88E-05 2.85E-04 1.68E-06 1.22E-03 St. Lucie 1 3.56E-04 5.12E-04 2.02E-05 9.98E-06 8.98E-04 St. Lucie 2 3.56E-04 5.12E-04 2.02E-05 9.98E-06 8.98E-04 Comanche Peak 1 2.70E-04 4.36E-04 7.25E-05 7.78E-04 Comanche Peak 2 2.70E-04 4.36E-04 7.25E-05 7.78E-04 Cook 1 9.41E-05 9.43E-05 5.63E-06 1.22E-05 5.55E-04 7.61E-04 Cook 2 9.41E-05 9.43E-05 5.63E-06 1.22E-05 5.55E-04 7.61E-04 Three Mile Island 1 3.94E-06 1.57E-04 7.20E-05 2.33E-04 Palo Verde 1 Palo Verde 2 Palo Verde 3
3-18 Table 3.14 PWR Liquid Releases
- Tritium, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Activity PWR Facility H-3 (Ci) PWR Facility H-3 (Ci) Watts Bar 1 4.16E+03 PWR Median Release 5.91E+02 Byron 1 1.66E+03 Salem 2 5.91E+02 Byron 2 1.66E+03 Arkansas 2 5.82E+02 Braidwood 1 1.60E+03 Calvert Cliffs 1 5.64E+02 Braidwood 2 1.60E+03 Calvert Cliffs 2 5.64E+02 Seabrook 1.57E+03 Millstone 3 5.42E+02 South Texas 1 1.50E+03 Wolf Creek 5.39E+02 Sequoyah 1 1.24E+03 Millstone 2 5.31E+02 Sequoyah 2 1.24E+03 Palisades 5.30E+02 Waterford 3 1.20E+03 Farley 2 5.29E+02 Vogtle 1 1.06E+03 Robinson 2 5.11E+02 Three Mile Island 1 1.01E+03 Ginna 4.42E+02 Comanche Peak 1 9.75E+02 Point Beach 1 4.34E+02 Comanche Peak 2 9.75E+02 Point Beach 2 4.34E+02 Diablo Canyon 1 9.30E+02 Farley 1 4.28E+02 Diablo Canyon 2 9.30E+02 Salem 1 3.95E+02 Summer 8.61E+02 Oconee 1 3.46E+02 Callaway 8.56E+02 Oconee 2 3.46E+02 Davis-Besse 8.19E+02 Oconee 3 3.46E+02 Beaver Valley 1 7.56E+02 North Anna 1 3.38E+02 Beaver Valley 2 7.56E+02 North Anna 2 3.38E+02 South Texas 2 7.28E+02 Arkansas 1 3.32E+02 Cook 1 7.12E+02 Prairie Island 1 3.25E+02 Cook 2 7.12E+02 Prairie Island 2 3.25E+02 Harris 6.90E+02 Catawba 1 3.00E+02 McGuire 1 6.82E+02 Catawba 2 3.00E+02 McGuire 2 6.82E+02 St. Lucie 1 2.70E+02 Vogtle 2 6.65E+02 St. Lucie 2 2.70E+02 Turkey Point 3 6.49E+02 Ft. Calhoun 1.58E+02 Turkey Point 4 6.49E+02 Indian Point 2 4.48E-01 Surry 1 5.94E+02 Indian Point 3 1.09E-02 Surry 2 5.94E+02 Palo Verde 1 Palo Verde 2 Palo Verde 3
3-19
- BWR average radionuclide mix and median activity released.
Figure 3.1 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Fission and Activation Gases 0%25%50%75%100%Susquehanna 2Susquehanna 1Nine Mile Point 1Browns Ferry 3Browns Ferry 2Browns Ferry 1Fermi 2CooperPilgrimHatch 2Hatch 1ClintonNine Mile Point 2Quad Cities 2Quad Cities 1FitzPatrickColumbiaBWR *Peach Bottom 3Peach Bottom 2Limerick 2Limerick 1Duane ArnoldDresden 2Oyster CreekHope CreekPerryBrunswick 2Brunswick 1Dresden 3MonticelloGrand GulfRiver BendLaSalle 2LaSalle 1Radionuclide Distribution0.0100.100 1 101001,000Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
Kr-85 Xe-133 Xe-135Total Activity Released 3-20 Figure 3.2 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Iodine 1E-71E-61E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+0Susquehanna 2Susquehanna 1Limerick 2Limerick 1Duane ArnoldClintonCooperHatch 2Hatch 1PerryGrand GulfColumbiaNine Mile Point 1PilgrimFitzPatrickPeach Bottom 3Peach Bottom 2BWR Median ReleaseNine Mile Point 2Browns Ferry 3Browns Ferry 2Browns Ferry 1Quad Cities 2Quad Cities 1Oyster CreekHope CreekBrunswick 2Brunswick 1Fermi 2Dresden 2Dresden 3River BendMonticelloLaSalle 2LaSalle 1Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
I-131 3-21
- Particulates 0%25%50%75%100%PerryHatch 2FitzPatrickHatch 1Grand GulfClintonLimerick 2Limerick 1Duane ArnoldSusquehanna 2Susquehanna 1River BendCooperPilgrimColumbiaMonticelloFermi 2BWR *Quad Cities 2Quad Cities 1Hope CreekBrunswick 2Brunswick 1Nine Mile Point 2Nine Mile Point 1Peach Bottom 3Peach Bottom 2LaSalle 2LaSalle 1Browns Ferry 3Browns Ferry 2Browns Ferry 1Dresden 2Dresden 3Oyster CreekRadionuclide Distribution1E-111E-91E-71E-51E-31E-1Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
Co-60 Co-58 Cs-134 Cs-137Total Activity Released 3-22 Figure 3.4 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Tritium 0.0010.0100.100 1 101001,000Dresden 2Dresden 3PerrySusquehanna 2Susquehanna 1Hatch 2Hatch 1CooperRiver BendLaSalle 2LaSalle 1FitzPatrickMonticelloColumbiaLimerick 2Limerick 1Duane ArnoldBWR Median ReleaseClintonPeach Bottom 3Peach Bottom 2Grand GulfOyster CreekQuad Cities 2Quad Cities 1Nine Mile Point 2PilgrimNine Mile Point 1Fermi 2Hope CreekBrunswick 2Brunswick 1Browns Ferry 3Browns Ferry 2Browns Ferry 1Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
H-3 3-23 Figure 3.5 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Carbon-14 1 10100MonticelloPilgrimNine Mile Point 1Oyster CreekDuane ArnoldFitzPatrickRiver BendBrunswick 2Brunswick 1CooperBrowns Ferry 3Browns Ferry 2Browns Ferry 1Fermi 2Dresden 2Hatch 2Hatch 1BWR Median ReleaseDresden 3Quad Cities 2Quad Cities 1ColumbiaClintonPerryHope CreekLimerick 2Limerick 1LaSalle 2LaSalle 1Grand GulfPeach Bottom 3Peach Bottom 2Nine Mile Point 2Susquehanna 2Susquehanna 1Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
C-14 3-24
- PWR average radionuclide mix and median activity released.
Figure 3.6 PWR Gaseous Releases - Fission and Activation Gases 0%25%50%75%100%PWR *North Anna 2North Anna 1Byron 2HarrisSt. Lucie 1Three Mile Island 1Indian Point 3Cook 2Cook 1Surry 2Surry 1South Texas 1Ft. CalhounByron 1Farley 1Millstone 3Oconee 3Oconee 2Oconee 1Palo Verde 2Millstone 2South Texas 2Robinson 2GinnaPalisadesCalvert Cliffs 2Calvert Cliffs 1St. Lucie 2Catawba 2Catawba 1Sequoyah 2Sequoyah 1Radionuclide Distribution1E-71E-51E-31E-11E+11E+3Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
Kr-85 Xe-133 Xe-135Total Activity Released 3-25
- PWR average radionuclide mix and median activity released.
Figure 3.6 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Fission and Activation Gases (continued) 0%25%50%75%100%Palo Verde 1SeabrookSummerArkansas 1Vogtle 1Diablo Canyon 2Diablo Canyon 1Farley 2Palo Verde 3Arkansas 2Davis-BesseIndian Point 2Braidwood 2Braidwood 1Turkey Point 4Waterford 3Turkey Point 3Watts Bar 1Comanche Peak 2Comanche Peak 1McGuire 2McGuire 1Salem 2Vogtle 2Prairie Island 2Prairie Island 1Point Beach 2Point Beach 1Beaver Valley 2Beaver Valley 1Wolf CreekSalem 1CallawayPWR *Radionuclide Distribution1E-71E-51E-31E-11E+11E+3Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
Kr-85 Xe-133 Xe-135Total Activity Released 3-26 Note: See Table 3.7 for list of nuclear power plants with no releases of iodine reported.
Figure 3.7 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Iodine 1E-101E-81E-61E-41E-2PWR Median ReleaseOconee 3Oconee 2Oconee 1Point Beach 2Point Beach 1Watts Bar 1GinnaCook 2Cook 1South Texas 2Beaver Valley 2Beaver Valley 1Arkansas 2Ft. CalhounByron 2Vogtle 1St. Lucie 1HarrisFarley 1Calvert Cliffs 2Calvert Cliffs 1Palo Verde 2Catawba 2Catawba 1Millstone 2South Texas 1Palo Verde 3Braidwood 1Braidwood 2St. Lucie 2PalisadesActivity Released in 2015 (Ci)
I-131 3-27 Note: See Table 3.8 for list of nuclear power plants with no releases of selected particulates reported.
- PWR average radionuclide mix and median activity released.
Figure 3.8 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Particulates 0%25%50%75%100%Cook 2Cook 1Millstone 3Farley 1Salem 2Arkansas 2PWR *Prairie Island 2Prairie Island 1Sequoyah 2Sequoyah 1Palo Verde 1Turkey Point 3Point Beach 2Point Beach 1SeabrookWaterford 3North Anna 2North Anna 1HarrisRobinson 2Diablo Canyon 2Diablo Canyon 1McGuire 2McGuire 1Wolf CreekWatts Bar 1St. Lucie 2St. Lucie 1South Texas 2Surry 2Surry 1Palo Verde 2PalisadesMillstone 2Beaver Valley 2South Texas 1Beaver Valley 1Palo Verde 3Radionuclide Distribution1E-111E-101E-91E-81E-71E-61E-51E-41E-31E-2Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
Co-60 Co-58 Cs-134 Cs-137Total Activity Released 3-28 Figure 3.9 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Tritium 0.0010.0100.100 1 101001,00010,000PWR Median ReleaseArkansas 2McGuire 2McGuire 1Point Beach 2Point Beach 1South Texas 1Millstone 3CallawayCook 2Cook 1Byron 2Diablo Canyon 2Diablo Canyon 1Davis-BesseOconee 3Oconee 2Oconee 1Watts Bar 1St. Lucie 2GinnaThree Mile Island 1Catawba 2Catawba 1Braidwood 1Salem 2HarrisSeabrookBraidwood 2Palo Verde 1Salem 1Palo Verde 3Palo Verde 2Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
H-3 3-29 Figure 3.9 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Tritium (continued) 0.0010.0100.100 1 101001,00010,000Beaver Valley 1Beaver Valley 2Ft. CalhounCalvert Cliffs 2Calvert Cliffs 1Turkey Point 4Turkey Point 3Farley 1Prairie Island 2Prairie Island 1North Anna 2North Anna 1PalisadesIndian Point 2Sequoyah 2Sequoyah 1Indian Point 3Millstone 2Surry 2Surry 1Arkansas 1Comanche Peak 2Comanche Peak 1South Texas 2Robinson 2SummerFarley 2Vogtle 1Byron 1Wolf CreekVogtle 2St. Lucie 1Waterford 3PWR Median ReleaseActivity Released in 2015 (Ci)
H-3 3-30 Figure 3.10 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Carbon-14 0.00010.00100.01000.1000 1 10100PWR Median ReleaseFarley 2Farley 1Watts Bar 1Sequoyah 2Sequoyah 1St. Lucie 2Catawba 2Catawba 1Calvert Cliffs 2Calvert Cliffs 1Salem 2McGuire 2McGuire 1Beaver Valley 1Davis-BesseWolf CreekArkansas 2Indian Point 2St. Lucie 1Salem 1Diablo Canyon 1Diablo Canyon 2Vogtle 2Vogtle 1SeabrookMillstone 3Comanche Peak 2Comanche Peak 1Waterford 3CallawayNorth Anna 2North Anna 1Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
C-14 3-31 Figure 3.1 0 PWR G aseous R eleases - Carbon-1 4 (continued) 0.00010.00100.01000.1000 1 10100Ft. CalhounPalo Verde 3Palo Verde 2 Palo Verde 1Braidwood 2Byron 1Braidwood 1Prairie Island 2 Prairie Island 1Byron 2Point Beach 2 Point Beach 1Beaver Valley 2GinnaSouth Texas 2 South Texas 1Turkey Point 3Robinson 2PalisadesSurry 2 Surry 1Oconee 3 Oconee 2 Oconee 1HarrisThree Mile Island 1SummerTurkey Point 4Arkansas 1Millstone 2Cook 2 Cook 1Indian Point 3PWR Median ReleaseActivity Released in 2015 (Ci)C-14 3-32
- BWR average radionuclide mix and median activity released.
Figure 3.11 BWR Liquid Releases
- Fission and Activation Products 0%25%50%75%100%Oyster CreekNine Mile Point 2Nine Mile Point 1MonticelloLaSalle 2LaSalle 1FitzPatrickFermi 2Duane ArnoldDresden 2CooperColumbiaClintonPilgrimBrunswick 2Brunswick 1Hatch 2BWR *Quad Cities 2Quad Cities 1Limerick 2Limerick 1Dresden 3River BendHatch 1Grand GulfPeach Bottom 3Peach Bottom 2Susquehanna 2Susquehanna 1PerryHope CreekBrowns Ferry 3Browns Ferry 2Browns Ferry 1Radionuclide Distribution1E-61E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+0Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
Fe-55 Cs-137 Co-58 Co-60 Cs-134 I-131Total Activity Released 3-33 Figure 3.12 BWR Liquid Releases
- Tritium 1E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+01E+11E+21E+3Nine Mile Point 2Nine Mile Point 1MonticelloLaSalle 2LaSalle 1Fermi 2Duane ArnoldCooperColumbiaClintonFitzPatrickOyster CreekQuad Cities 2Quad Cities 1Dresden 2Limerick 2Limerick 1BWR Median ReleaseDresden 3PilgrimPerryPeach Bottom 3Peach Bottom 2Hatch 2Hatch 1Susquehanna 2Susquehanna 1Browns Ferry 3Browns Ferry 2Browns Ferry 1Grand GulfRiver BendHope CreekBrunswick 2Brunswick 1Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
H-3 3-34
- PWR average radionuclide mix and median activity released.
Figure 3.13 PWR Liquid Releases
- Fission and Activation Products 0%25%50%75%100%PWR *Ft. CalhounNorth Anna 2North Anna 1Catawba 2Catawba 1Vogtle 2Indian Point 3CallawayHarrisRobinson 2Sequoyah 2Sequoyah 1Watts Bar 1Farley 1Braidwood 2Braidwood 1Turkey Point 4Turkey Point 3Surry 2Surry 1McGuire 2McGuire 1Farley 2Millstone 3Indian Point 2Waterford 3Vogtle 1Beaver Valley 2Beaver Valley 1Arkansas 1Calvert Cliffs 2Calvert Cliffs 1Radionuclide Distribution1E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+0Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
Co-58 Co-60 Cs-134 Cs-137Fe-55 I-131Total Activity Released 3-35
- PWR average radionuclide mix and median activity released.
Figure 3.1 3 PWR Liquid Releases
- Fission and Activation Products (continued) 0%25%50%75%100%Palo Verde 3Palo Verde 2Palo Verde 1Three Mile Island 1Cook 2Cook 1Comanche Peak 2Comanche Peak 1St. Lucie 2St. Lucie 1Oconee 3Oconee 2Oconee 1Arkansas 2South Texas 2PalisadesDavis-BesseSalem 1South Texas 1Byron 2Byron 1Salem 2SummerSeabrookPrairie Island 2Prairie Island 1Wolf CreekMillstone 2GinnaPoint Beach 2Point Beach 1Diablo Canyon 2Diablo Canyon 1PWR *Radionuclide Distribution1E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+0Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
Co-58 Co-60 Cs-134 Cs-137Fe-55 I-131Total Activity Released 3-36 Figure 3.14 PWR Liquid Releases
- Tritium 0.0010.0100.100 1 101001,00010,000PWR Median ReleaseSurry 2Surry 1Turkey Point 4Turkey Point 3Vogtle 2McGuire 2McGuire 1HarrisCook 2Cook 1South Texas 2Beaver Valley 2Beaver Valley 1Davis-BesseCallawaySummerDiablo Canyon 2Diablo Canyon 1Comanche Peak 2Comanche Peak 1Three Mile Island 1Vogtle 1Waterford 3Sequoyah 2Sequoyah 1South Texas 1SeabrookBraidwood 2Braidwood 1Byron 2Byron 1Watts Bar 1Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
H-3 3-37 Figure 3.14 PWR Liquid Releases
- Tritium (continued) 0.0010.0100.100 1 101001,00010,000Palo Verde 3Palo Verde 2Palo Verde 1Indian Point 3 Indian Point 2Ft. CalhounSt. Lucie 2 St. Lucie 1Catawba 2 Catawba 1Prairie Island 2 Prairie Island 1Arkansas 1North Anna 2 North Anna 1Oconee 3 Oconee 2 Oconee 1Salem 1Farley 1Point Beach 2 Point Beach 1GinnaRobinson 2Farley 2PalisadesMillstone 2Wolf CreekMillstone 3Calvert Cliffs 2 Calvert Cliffs 1Arkansas 2Salem 2PWR Median ReleaseActivity Released in 2015 (Ci)H-3 3-38 3.2 Short-Term Trend in Gaseous Effluents In the previous section, only the significant radionuclides from each of the categories in Table 2.1 were shown in the tables and figures. Although particular focus on the significant radionuclides yields useful information , there are also less-significant radionuclides present in radioactive gaseous effluents. This section provides the reader with information to gain a better understanding of the total releases of gaseous effluents from a facility.
A long-standing, historical measure of the licensee's ability to control gaseous effluents is based on the activities of noble gases discharged in gaseous effluents. This category of radionuclides
-noble gases
-is described in Table 2.1. The noble gases category includes all radionuclides in gaseous effluents except iodines, particulates, carbon-14 (C-14), and tritium. Although the doses from noble gases are generally small, the activity and doses from other radionuclides (such as iodines and mixed fission and activation products) will generally only be elevated if the activity of noble gases is elevated. As a result, a plant's total noble gas release is sometimes used as a primary indicator of fuel integrity and the quality of a plant's gaseous radiological effluent control program. The amount of C
-14 released as a gaseous effluent is directly related to the amount of power produced rather than to the quality of a plant's effluent control program.
Tables 3.15 and 3.16 show the short
-term trend in the total activity of all noble gases in gaseous effluents for the last 5 years for BWRs and PWRs, respectively. The facilities are listed in alphabetical order for ease of reference when searching for a site.
Table 3.15 shows that the discharges of noble gases from all BWRs in 2015 ranged from a low of 0 curies to a maximum of 1,493.0 curies, wi th a median value of 41.8 curies. Table 3.16 shows that the discharge of noble gases from all PWRs in 2015 ranged from a low of 0 curies to a maximum of 87.5 curies, with a median value of 0.9 curies. Fluctuations in the short
-term data are within the range of expected values, based on power production and the increasing sensitivity of measurement techniques. For example, a plant that has an extremely sensitive measurement capability is capable of detecting extremely low concentrations of noble gas. Due to the amount of air discharged from the ventilation system, the plant is likely to report a certain amount of noble gas released. Meanwhile, a plant with a slightly less sensitive measurement capability may not be detecting the same extremely low concentration of noble gas and thus may report a low or zero amount of noble gas discharged. Overall, the nuclear power industry has steadily reduced the amount of radioactivity discharged into the environment (see Section 3.3 for the long
-term trend in gaseous effluents).
3-39 Table 3.15 Short-Term Trend in Noble Gases in Gaseous Effluents, BWRs, Curies (Ci)
Shown in Alphabetical Order Facility 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Browns Ferry 1 0.0 231.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Browns Ferry 2 0.0 231.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Browns Ferry 3 0.0 231.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Brunswick 1 139.7 88.3 55.6 70.1 94.4 Brunswick 2 139.7 88.3 55.6 70.1 94.4 Clinton 6.8 0.8 7.6 3.9 15.7 Columbia 75.2 67.3 43.9 65.3 36.9 Cooper 2.7 41.4 7.0 11.3 2.1 Dresden 2 15.9 34.5 27.5 19.7 48.1 Dresden 3 15.9 34.5 27.5 77.8 123.4 Duane Arnold 5.5 12.8 2.1 2.9 40.7 Fermi 2 3.2 4.8 12.3 25.4 4.4 FitzPatrick 43.1 61.2 61.1 164.2 48.4 Grand Gulf 446.4 452.5 1,920.2 438.7 479.9 Hatch 1 28.1 42.8 8.4 3.9 4.6 Hatch 2 23.4 42.9 15.7 6.0 4.6 Hope Creek 0.4 262.5 0.1 5.1 37.8 LaSalle 1 1,205.5 1,840.5 777.0 1,934.5 1,493.0 LaSalle 2 1,205.5 1,840.5 777.0 1,934.5 1,493.0 Limerick 1 93.3 35.8 56.5 54.4 42.3 Limerick 2 93.3 35.8 56.5 54.4 42.3 Monticello 958.0 797.0 504.0 666.0 558.6 Nine Mile Point 1 0.8 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 Nine Mile Point 2 339.2 104.2 50.2 9.4 1.6 Oyster Creek 226.3 209.1 49.7 62.5 41.3 Peach Bottom 2 288.0 259.5 233.3 309.7 305.5 Peach Bottom 3 288.0 259.5 233.3 309.7 305.5 Perry 0.2 103.0 76.1 66.9 55.8 Pilgrim 11.6 0.7 0.3 1.7 2.0 Quad Cities 1 139.9 61.5 36.4 54.3 62.6 Quad Cities 2 139.9 61.5 36.4 54.3 62.6 River Bend 83.4 34.4 17.8 9.8 840.0 Susquehanna 1 0.0 0.0 7.1 4.1 0.0 Susquehanna 2 0.0 0.0 7.1 4.1 0.0 MEDIAN 28.1 61.5 27.5 25.4 41.8 Note: Median data for the years 2011 to 2014 include effluent data for Vermont Yankee, which ceased operations on December 29, 2014.
3-40 Table 3.16 Short-Term Trend in Noble Gases in Gaseous Effluents, PWRs, Curies (Ci) Shown in Alphabetical Order Facility 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Arkansas 1 0.0 0.0 15.5 0.0 0.0 Arkansas 2 9.1 52.5 0.0 7.4 87.5 Beaver Valley 1 6.2 0.1 16.1 0.1 2.5 Beaver Valley 2 6.2 0.1 16.1 0.1 2.5 Braidwood 1 0.7 0.4 0.6 0.2 0.1 Braidwood 2 1.0 0.4 0.6 0.1 0.1 Byron 1 0.3 197.8 0.3 0.4 20.9 Byron 2 1.1 0.8 0.3 0.5 0.4 Callaway 19.6 4.5 2.6 0.8 0.4 Calvert Cliffs 1 47.3 53.3 40.0 11.5 5.2 Calvert Cliffs 2 47.3 53.3 40.0 11.5 5.2 Catawba 1 1.7 1.6 1.8 2.4 19.2 Catawba 2 1.7 1.6 1.8 2.4 19.2 Comanche Peak 1 18.7 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.3 Comanche Peak 2 18.7 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.3 Cook 1 1.3 1.6 1.7 1.6 1.0 Cook 2 1.3 1.6 1.7 1.6 1.0 Davis-Besse 1.4 0.8 0.4 0.8 0.3 Diablo Canyon 1 5.1 0.7 0.5 1.2 0.4 Diablo Canyon 2 5.1 0.7 0.5 1.2 0.4 Farley 1 3.4 5.1 5.1 3.0 3.6 Farley 2 3.1 1.2 1.8 2.2 6.6 Ft. Calhoun 0.8 0.0 0.0 1.5 1.3 Ginna 2.4 2.5 3.2 8.7 7.3 Harris 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.4 Indian Point 2 0.3 2.9 0.5 0.6 0.2 Indian Point 3 0.5 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.8 McGuire 1 1.4 1.1 1.0 1.1 0.9 McGuire 2 1.4 1.1 1.0 1.1 0.9 Millstone 2 9.2 1.3 0.4 0.6 2.3 Millstone 3 4.2 1.0 0.8 0.9 0.9 North Anna 1 2.6 0.3 11.6 3.4 0.4 North Anna 2 2.6 0.3 11.6 3.4 0.4 Note: Median data for the years 2011 to 2013 include effluent data for San Onofre Units 2 and 3, Crystal River Unit 3 and Kewa unee (no longer listed), all of which ceased operations in 2013.
3-41 Table 3.16 Short-Term Trend in Noble Gases in Gaseous Effluents, PWRs, Curies (Ci) (continued)
Shown in Alphabetical Order Facility 2011 201 2 201 3 201 4 201 5 Oconee 1 9.9 6.3 5.3 14.0 2.2 Oconee 2 9.9 6.3 5.3 14.0 2.2 Oconee 3 9.9 6.3 5.3 14.0 2.2 Palisades 10.4 13.8 3.0 9.8 10.8 Palo Verde 1 1.1 0.2 2.8 7.9 0.2 Palo Verde 2 3.8 4.8 9.9 6.5 9.9 Palo Verde 3 4.2 15.5 24.9 0.2 2.2 Point Beach 1 3.1 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.4 Point Beach 2 3.1 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.4 Prairie Island 1 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 Prairie Island 2 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 Robinson 2 0.3 0.8 2.9 0.2 6.3 Salem 1 0.2 49.2 14.0 0.2 0.3 Salem 2 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.2 Seabrook 0.9 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 Sequoyah 1 1.6 2.0 26.9 45.2 43.0 Sequoyah 2 1.6 2.0 26.9 45.2 43.0 South Texas 1 6.5 2.5 1.7 2.5 1.7 South Texas 2 7.1 2.0 5.4 2.3 5.1 St. Lucie 1 29.5 3.3 3.8 1.8 3.0 St. Lucie 2 18.5 4.7 3.4 21.5 18.2 Summer 0.3 0.7 0.9 0.3 0.1 Surry 1 0.4 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.7 Surry 2 0.4 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.7 Three Mile Island 1 115.7 0.7 0.4 0.6 1.7 Turkey Point 3 0.6 1.8 0.1 0.5 0.2 Turkey Point 4 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.1 Vogtle 1 2.8 0.7 11.6 6.4 2.0 Vogtle 2 56.5 22.8 6.6 0.8 0.2 Waterford 3 7.4 3.6 0.4 89.6 0.4 Watts Bar 1 5.6 50.6 3.8 0.4 10.0 Wolf Creek 0.7 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.4 MEDIAN 2.6 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.9 Note: Median data for the years 2011 to 2013 include effluent data for San Onofre Units 2 and 3, Crystal River Unit 3 and Kewa unee (no longer listed)
, all of which ceased operations in 2013.
3-42 3.3 Long-Term Trend in Gaseous Effluents NRC regulations require radioactive effluents to be ALARA. As a result of improved radioactive effluent control programs, the amount of activity of radioactive effluents has steadily decreased over time. The trend in the median noble gas activity of gaseous effluents since 1975 is shown in Figure 3.15. All power reactors that have operated in the United States are included, some of which are now shut down. Figure 3.15 Long-Term Trend in Noble Gases in Gaseous Effluents Figure 3.15 indicates a long
-term, downward trend in the amount of noble gases in gaseous effluents from both BWRs and PWRs. The magnitude of the reduction is significant. For example, in 1975, the median release for BWRs was greater than 40,000 curies; however, in 20 15, the median was 41.8 curies. That change corresponds to a 99.9 percent reduction in noble gas effluents over the last 40 years. One of the primary contributors to the reduction in noble gas effluents is improved fuel integrity in both BWRs and PWRs. The use of advanced off
-gas systems in BWRs is also responsible for reductions in the BWR industry averages. Lastly, contributions from the operations, maintenance, chemistry, and health physics departments at the various facilities have improved the handlin g and processing of gaseous waste to further improve and optimize effluent performance.
0.010.10 1 101001,00010,000100,000Noble Gases(Ci)IndustryMedian, per ReactorBWRsPWRs 3-43 3.4 Short-Term Trend in Liquid Effluents In Section 3.1, only the significant radionuclides discharged in liquid and gaseous effluents were shown in the tables and figures. Although particular focus on the significant radionuclides yields useful information, there are also less
-significant radionuclides present in radioactive liquid effluents. This section provides the reader with a tool to gain a better understanding of the total releases of liquid effluents from a facility.
An indicator of the licensee's ability to control liquid effluents is based on the activity of the mixed fission and activation products (MFAPs) discharged in liquid effluents. This category of radionuclides
-MFAPs-is described in Table 2.2. It includes all radionuclides in liquid effluents except tritium, C
-14, noble gases
, and gross alpha activity. MFAPs can be effectively reduced by liquid radioactive waste treatment systems installed in each NPP. As a result, MFAPs are sometimes used as a primary indicator of the overall control and handling of radioactive liquid effluents at a site.
Tables 3.17 and 3.18 show the short
-term trend in MFAPs in liquid effluents for BWRs and PWRs, respectively. In these tables, no MFAP radionuclides are left out. For each reactor unit, the activities of all MFAPs are added together. In this way, the yearly total of all MFAPs in liquid effluents from a reactor are represented by a single number.
The facilities are listed in alphabetical order for ease of reference when searching for a site. Fluctuations in these short
-term data are within the range of expected values, based on power production and the increasing sensitivity of measurement techniques. Overall, the nuclear power industry has steadily reduced the amount of radioactivity discharged into the environment (see Section 3.5 for the long
-term trend in liquid effluents).
3-44 Table 3.17 Short-Term Trend in Mixed Fission and Activation Products in Liquid Effluents, BWRs, millicuries (mCi)
Shown in Alphabetical Order Facility 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Browns Ferry 1 4.9 26.0 421.2 73.5 124.1 Browns Ferry 2 4.9 26.0 421.2 73.5 124.1 Browns Ferry 3 4.9 26.0 421.2 73.5 124.1 Brunswick 1 2.2 1.3 1.0 3.1 3.7 Brunswick 2 2.2 1.3 1.0 3.1 3.7 Clinton 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Columbia 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cooper 7.9 0.0 6.9 0.0 0.0 Dresden 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Dresden 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.2 Duane Arnold 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Fermi 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FitzPatrick 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Grand Gulf 26.6 83.8 51.4 65.5 12.7 Hatch 1 1.3 2.6 5.2 11.3 7.1 Hatch 2 1.3 0.4 14.1 7.3 3.8 Hope Creek 31.0 31.9 15.0 835.6 38.8 LaSalle 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 LaSalle 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Limerick 1 0.7 0.6 0.2 0.4 2.9 Limerick 2 0.7 0.6 0.2 0.4 2.9 Monticello 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Nine Mile Point 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Nine Mile Point 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 Oyster Creek 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Peach Bottom 2 0.1 2.8 0.1 7.9 6.3 Peach Bottom 3 0.1 2.8 0.1 7.9 6.3 Perry 37.4 32.9 95.3 3.3 14.9 Pilgrim 3.8 0.0 18.9 0.0 0.7 Quad Cities 1 4.3 3.6 6.1 0.0 1.9 Quad Cities 2 4.3 3.6 6.1 0.0 1.9 River Bend 0.5 0.1 0.9 3.8 3.0 Susquehanna 1 11.4 1.8 37.3 10.3 13.7 Susquehanna 2 11.4 1.8 37.3 10.3 13.7 MEDIAN 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.2 2.9 Note: Median data for the years 2011 to 2014 include effluent data for Vermont Yankee (no longer listed), which ceased operations on December 29, 2014.
3-45 Table 3.18 Short-Term Trend in Mixed Fission and Activation Products in Liquid Effluents, PWRs, millicuries (mCi)
Shown in Alphabetical Order Facility 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Arkansas 1 59.6 11.3 29.2 28.7 85.5 Arkansas 2 38.2 24.4 320.2 90.9 3.9 Beaver Valley 1 50.9 26.1 96.7 58.2 117.6 Beaver Valley 2 50.9 26.1 96.7 58.2 117.6 Braidwood 1 67.2 541.7 79.8 47.4 66.3 Braidwood 2 67.2 541.7 79.8 47.4 66.3 Byron 1 12.6 9.0 8.9 7.1 4.7 Byron 2 12.6 9.0 8.9 7.1 4.7 Callaway 138.0 90.2 103.7 10.2 39.5 Calvert Cliffs 1 5.9 1.7 7.4 14.9 327.1 Calvert Cliffs 2 5.9 1.7 7.4 14.9 327.1 Catawba 1 34.0 13.9 10.7 58.5 13.0 Catawba 2 34.0 13.9 10.7 58.5 13.0 Comanche Peak 1 3.3 6.9 1.7 0.4 0.9 Comanche Peak 2 3.3 6.9 1.7 0.4 0.9 Cook 1 0.3 0.7 0.8 0.4 1.5 Cook 2 0.3 0.7 0.8 0.4 1.5 Davis-Besse 11.4 15.4 7.2 12.0 5.8 Diablo Canyon 1 16.8 16.4 10.7 13.8 10.8 Diablo Canyon 2 16.8 16.4 10.7 13.8 10.8 Farley 1 54.3 87.9 77.2 60.0 54.3 Farley 2 126.8 76.1 112.5 163.7 72.0 Ft. Calhoun 2.0 1.1 1.2 2.2 12.1 Ginna 6.0 9.2 0.4 4.8 5.7 Harris 12.9 32.0 49.9 9.3 18.0 Indian Point 2 16.4 26.5 52.1 32.4 35.7 Indian Point 3 23.3 20.8 24.1 8.0 40.9 McGuire 1 45.0 11.0 13.3 19.9 34.7 McGuire 2 45.0 11.0 13.3 19.9 34.7 Millstone 2 130.2 112.1 11.3 9.5 15.6 Millstone 3 76.5 52.6 159.9 92.5 42.3 North Anna 1 5.7 8.0 10.4 32.0 8.5 North Anna 2 5.7 8.0 10.4 32.0 8.5 Note: Median data for the years 2011 to 2013 include effluent data for San Onofre Units 2 and 3, Crystal River Unit 3 and Kewa unee (no longer listed)
, all of which ceased operations in 2013.
3-46 Table 3.1 8 Short-Term Trend in Mixed Fission and Activation Products in Liquid Effluents, PWRs, millicuries (mCi) (continued)
Shown in Alphabetical Order Facility 201 1 2012 2013 2014 2015 Oconee 1 15.3 8.6 5.2 3.0 1.4 Oconee 2 15.3 8.6 5.2 3.0 1.4 Oconee 3 15.3 8.6 5.2 3.0 1.4 Palisades 20.7 11.3 6.3 20.9 3.1 Palo Verde 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Palo Verde 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Palo Verde 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Point Beach 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Point Beach 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prairie Island 1 31.8 17.0 8.5 1.7 6.7 Prairie Island 2 31.8 17.0 8.5 1.7 6.7 Robinson 2 2.9 4.6 8.9 30.5 37.7 Salem 1 21.7 9.9 11.3 7.6 7.7 Salem 2 13.9 13.5 6.4 9.8 6.9 Seabrook 16.5 7.3 2.6 6.5 6.9 Sequoyah 1 7.6 58.4 13.8 4.2 46.5 Sequoyah 2 7.6 58.4 13.8 4.2 46.5 South Texas 1 15.3 8.9 16.5 17.0 12.7 South Texas 2 16.0 2.8 12.8 4.8 4.5 St. Lucie 1 87.0 37.4 20.6 29.4 12.5 St. Lucie 2 87.0 37.4 20.6 29.4 12.5 Summer 11.7 14.6 5.0 15.5 10.1 Surry 1 9.8 2.9 3.1 8.9 24.8 Surry 2 9.8 2.9 3.1 8.9 24.8 Three Mile Island 1 0.6 0.4 1.6 0.0 0.2 Turkey Point 3 25.8 75.2 34.8 47.3 54.8 Turkey Point 4 25.8 75.2 34.8 47.3 54.9 Vogtle 1 101.3 106.6 133.4 102.0 53.8 Vogtle 2 6.6 29.9 24.9 102.1 19.1 Waterford 3 17.4 10.8 13.5 15.0 33.8 Watts Bar 1 267.5 38.6 23.1 26.4 16.8 Wolf Creek 4.5 9.0 17.4 8.6 11.8 MEDIAN 15.3 11.3 10.7 12.0 12.5 Note: Median data for the years 2011 to 2013 include effluent data for San Onofre Units 2 and 3, Crystal River Unit 3 and Kewa unee (no longer listed)
, all of which ceased operations in 2013.
3-47 3.5 Long-Term Trend in Liquid Effluents This section discusses the long
-term trend of MFAPs in liquid effluents from nuclear power plants in the United States. NRC regulations require radioactive effluents to be ALARA. As a result of improved radioactive effluent control programs, the amount of activity of radioactive effluents has steadily decreased over time. The trend in the median MFAP activity of liquid effluents since 1975 is shown in Figure 3.16. All power reactors that have operated in the United States are included, some of which are now shut down.
Figure 3.16 Long-Term Trend in MFAPs in Liquid Effluents Figure 3.16 indicates a long
-term, downward trend in the amounts of MFAPs in liquid effluents from both BWRs and PWRs. The magnitude of the reduction is significant. For example, in 197 5 , the median activity of liquid effluents from BWRs was greater than 1,100 millicuries; however, in 2015, the median was 2.9 millicuries. That corresponds to a 99.
7 percent reduction in MFAPs in liquid effluents over the last 40 years. One of the primary contributors to the reduction in liquid effluents is improved fuel integrity in both BWRs and PWRs. Additionally, many BWRs recycle (or re
-use) some or all of the reactor water. The recycling of reactor water at BWRs is one reason why effluents from BWRs are generally lower than from PWRs. The PWR design requires the use of boron in the reactor water, which makes water reuse impractical, whereas BWRs do not use boron in reactor water. The lack of boron in BWR reactor water allows the BWRs to recycle (or re
-use) reactor water which contributes to lower liquid releases in BWRs, particularly for tritium. The use of advanced liquid radioactive waste processing systems has also significantly lowered liquid effluents. Lastly, improvements in the handling and processing of liquid waste made by the operations, maintenance, chemistry, and health physics departments at the various facilities have further reduced the amount of effluent releases and public dose.
0.010.10 1 101001,00010,000BWRsPWRsMFAPs (mCi)Industry Median, per Reactor 3-48 Figure 3.16 shows that from 2013 to 2015, there was an increase in the median liquid effluents from BWRs.
An analysis of this increase in median MFAP activity in liquid effluents from BWRs indicates a small change occurred in th e waste processing of liquid effluents at some BWRs. For many decades, some BWRs have embraced a zero
-release strategy for radioactive liquid effluents, with a small increase in gaseous radioactive effluents including tritium. Such a strategy has cost advantages, because it is expensive to discharge very high
-quality water that could be reused in plant systems. Additionally, a zero
-release strategy for liquid effluents conserves the natural resources and virtually eliminates radioactive liquid effluents in those BWRs that adopt this strategy. A comparison between doses from gaseous effluents and liquid effluents can be made by examining Figures 3.21 and 3.22; and shows, in general, most of the dose from NPP effluents comes from the gaseous effluents. As a result, licensees wanting to lower doses may choose to focus additional efforts on reducing the radionuclides in gaseous effluents.
The zero-release strategy, combined with improved fuel performance, and advanced waste processing systems is responsible for the decreases in the median MFAP liquid activity releases during the 1980s, 1990s, and beyond 2000, which can be seen in Figure 3.16. However, at some sites using a zero
-release strategy, releasing tritium as a gaseous release (rather than as a liquid effluent release) has the potential to result in a small increase in dose to members of the public. This small increase in public dose, due to release of tritium as a gaseous release instead of as a liquid release, can be attributed to four factors: Waste water in some plants has been recycled (instead of discharged as a liquid effluent).As waste water is recycled, the tritium concentration in the water increases over time.When all radioactive liquid releases are eliminated, tritium is released through t he gaseous release points instead of as a liquid release
.The dose due to tritium discharged from a gaseous release point can, depending on plant design and site characteristics, be higher than the dose from the same amount of tritium discharged from a liquid release point.
However, a plant that allows some liquid effluent releases can shift the release of tritium from a gaseous release point to a liquid release point, thereby lowering public doses. This strategy can cause a slight increase in the amount of activity of MFAPs in liquid effluents and a small decrease
in total public dose.
3.6 Radiation
Doses from Gaseous and Liquid Effluents The maximum annual organ doses for 2015 from gaseous and liquid effluents are shown in Tables 3.19 through 3.22. The data from these tables are illustrated graphically in Figures 3.17 through 3.20. These tables and figures contain annual organ doses (for gaseous and liquid effluents) and annual total body doses (for liquid effluents). In accordance with regulatory requirements and the calculation methodologies of RG 1.109 (Ref. [35] ), the doses are calculated for either real or hypothetical individuals receiving the highest total body and organ doses. As a result, these doses are often referred to as the maximum total body and the maximum organ doses. Additionally, licensees are required to calculate the organ doses for six separate organs in the human body
- bone, liver, thyroid, kidney, lung, and intestines. Only the highest of the organ doses is shown in this report. Because these doses are 3-49 calculated for the individual receiving the highest dose from liquid and gaseous effluents, these individuals are typically located in close proximity to the facility. As a result, doses to other individuals, especially those located farther away from the facility, are expected to be significantly lower than those shown in this report.
The doses shown in the tables and graphs of this section include contributions from all radionuclides in the type of effluent shown (i.e., gaseous or liquid). For gaseous effluents, the majority of the dose is from C
-14. The NRC ALARA criteria, discussed in Section 2.4, are included in the tables and figures for purposes of comparison. Since many plants have more than one operating reactor, the ALARA criteria are shown on a per reactor basis.
If the licensee does not report a dose, a blank entry is used to indicate that either (1) no releases occurred (e.g., the NPP is a zero
-discharge plant) or (2) no exposure pathway exists. Also, blanks in data fields are generally used instead of zeros in order to make it easier for the reader to quickly identify the positive values.
Historically, C
-14 has not been considered a principal radionuclide, since the amount of activity in gaseous effluents was dominated by the xenon and krypton radionuclides.
As a result, C
-14 has not been reported as a radioactive effluent.
In addition, the release of C
-14 from NPPs has be en insignificant compared to the natural production and world inventory of C
-14 (Ref. [38] ). Although the amount of C
-14 released from NPPs has not increased, steady improvements in nuclear power plant effluent management practices have resulted in a 99.9 percent decrease in the amount of activity from noble gas effluents released to the environment (see Figure 3.15, "Long
-Term Trend in Noble Gases in Gaseous Effluents").
However, a recent NRC review of the significance of C
-14 releases on public dose has resulted in the NRC reclassifying C
-14 as a principal radionuclide. Releases of C
-14 have been included since th e 2010 report.
For comparison purposes, median dose values are included in the tables and figures. The median is the midpoint of the data. Approximately half of the power plants will report doses greater than the median and approximately half will report doses lower than the median. The median is a method of estimating a central or typical value while avoiding bias caused by extremely high or low values in the data set. All sites are included when calculating the medians, even those sites for which no dose is reported.
For example, in Table 3.20, the PWR median annual organ dose due to gaseous effluents is highlighted in bold at the top of the table. In this case, the median dose is 0.30 2 mrem. This represents the typical annual organ dose, due to all gaseous effluents, from all PWRs operating in the United States in 2015. Figures 3.21 and 3.22 show the 5
-year trend in the median maximum annual organ doses in gaseous and liquid effluents, respectively. The median organ doses for liquid effluents from BWRs and PWRs have remained consistently low between 2 0 1 1 and 2015 as seen in Figure 3.22.
The evaluation of effluent data can be a key factor in understanding radioactive effluents. By gaining a better understanding of radioactive effluents, it is possible to exercise more control in reducing doses from such effluents. This helps to ensure radioactive effluents are ALARA.
3-50 The tables in this section indicate that the highest total body dose from all of the facilities was 0.201 mrem (Table 3.2 2), and the highest organ dose from all of the facilities was 13.1 mrem (Table 3.19).
For purposes of comparison, 1 mrem is less than the radiation dose from any one of the following:
the dose received in 1 week from skiing in the Rocky Mountains;the dose received in 4 weeks from the natural potassium in each person's body; orthe dose received in 8 weeks by a homeowner with a brick or stone house.
The basis for each of these three natural background dose values is based on information from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (Ref. [39] ). Radiation exposure to cosmic rays at the high altitudes of Colorado would result in a dose of about 70 mrem per year. Additionally, the dose from rocks and soil in the mountains of Colorado would be about 40 mrem per year. The total of these two values is about 110 mrem per year for a person in the high elevations of Colorado. A person in Florida, who is typically at sea level and surrounded by the native Florida terrain, would receive about 40 mrem per year from rocks, soil, and cosmic radiation. As a result, people living at the high altitudes of Colorado receive about 70 mrem per year more radiation dose than a person living in Florida. People from Florida skiing in the Rocky Mountains for a week would be expected to receive an additional dose
-above what they might normally have received if they had stayed in Florida
-of about 1.3 mrem.
According to a DOE report prepared by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (Ref. [40] ), the average 150
-pound individual receives about 1.1 mrem per month or 14 mrem per year from the natural potassium
-40 that is incorporated into the human body.
NCRP Report No. 95 (Ref. [41] ) indicates that the radiation exposure from living in a brick, stone, adobe, or concrete home is about 7 mrem per year. At this annual dose rate, the exposure received in 8 weeks would be about 1.1 mrem. NPPs in the United States discharge small but measurable amounts of radioactive materials in radioactive effluents. All of these radioactive releases must comply with NRC requirements.
These requirements are in place to ensure (1) the radwaste processing systems at NPPs are operating properly, (2) the doses to members of the public are within the public dose limits, and (3) the doses to members of the public are ALARA.
3-51 Table 3.19 BWR Gaseous Effluents - Maximum Annual Organ Dose, 2015 Shown in Descending Order of Organ Dose BWR Facility Annual Organ Dose (mrem)
Grand Gulf 1.31E+01 River Bend 4.70E+00 Cooper 1.58E+00 Brunswick 1 1.01E+00 Brunswick 2 1.01E+00 Limerick 1 6.45E-01 Limerick 2 6.45E-01 Oyster Creek 5.53E-01 Fermi 2 4.98E-01 Susquehanna 1 3.63E-01 Susquehanna 2 3.26E-01 Peach Bottom 2 2.76E-01 Peach Bottom 3 2.76E-01 Perry 2.59E-01 Columbia 2.22E-01 Nine Mile Point 1 2.14E-01 Nine Mile Point 2 2.14E-01 BWR Median Dose 1.93E-01 Quad Cities 1 1.71E-01 Quad Cities 2 1.71E-01 Hope Creek 1.67E-01 Hatch 1 1.59E-01 Hatch 2 1.59E-01 LaSalle 1 1.27E-01 LaSalle 2 1.27E-01 Dresden 3 1.08E-01 FitzPatrick 1.03E-01 Dresden 2 9.26E-02 Duane Arnold 8.90E-02 Pilgrim 7.10E-02 Clinton 5.95E-02 Browns Ferry 1 4.03E-02 Browns Ferry 2 4.03E-02 Browns Ferry 3 4.03E-02 Monticello 3.74E-02 ALARA Criteria 15 3-52 Table 3.20 PWR Gaseous Effluents
- Maximum Annual Organ Dose, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Organ Dose PWR Facility Annual Organ Dose (mrem)
PWR Facility Annual Organ Dose (mrem)
Beaver Valley 1 1.00E+01 PWR Median Dose 3.02E-01 Beaver Valley 2 5.40E+00 Arkansas 2 3.02E-01 Waterford 3 3.91E+00 Seabrook 2.95E-01 Watts Bar 1 3.53E+00 Palo Verde 3 2.92E-01 Catawba 1 2.78E+00 Indian Point 3 2.83E-01 Catawba 2 2.78E+00 Millstone 2 2.62E-01 Sequoyah 1 1.83E+00 Arkansas 1 2.41E-01 Sequoyah 2 1.83E+00 Turkey Point 4 2.10E-01 McGuire 1 1.61E+00 Millstone 3 1.87E-01 McGuire 2 1.61E+00 Turkey Point 3 1.82E-01 Wolf Creek 1.30E+00 Point Beach 1 1.21E-01 Davis-Besse 1.27E+00 Point Beach 2 1.21E-01 Braidwood 1 1.15E+00 Comanche Peak 1 1.20E-01 Braidwood 2 1.12E+00 Comanche Peak 2 1.20E-01 Cook 1 8.80E-01 Palo Verde 1 1.19E-01 Cook 2 8.80E-01 Oconee 1 1.17E-01 North Anna 1 8.41E-01 Oconee 2 1.17E-01 North Anna 2 8.41E-01 Oconee 3 1.17E-01 Ft. Calhoun 7.68E-01 Salem 1 1.15E-01 Harris 7.08E-01 Salem 2 1.05E-01 Summer 6.87E-01 Vogtle 1 8.46E-02 Robinson 2 5.24E-01 Vogtle 2 8.46E-02 Farley 1 4.11E-01 South Texas 1 5.64E-02 Farley 2 4.11E-01 South Texas 2 5.57E-02 Three Mile Island 1 3.88E-01 Surry 1 4.60E-02 St. Lucie 2 3.66E-01 Surry 2 4.60E-02 St. Lucie 1 3.58E-01 Prairie Island 1 3.62E-02 Palisades 3.52E-01 Prairie Island 2 3.62E-02 Byron 1 3.48E-01 Ginna 1.94E-02 Byron 2 3.48E-01 Callaway 1.60E-02 Indian Point 2 3.42E-01 Calvert Cliffs 1 1.22E-02 Palo Verde 2 3.30E-01 Calvert Cliffs 2 1.22E-02 Diablo Canyon 1 4.89E-03 Diablo Canyon 2 4.89E-03 ALARA Criteria 15 3-53 Table 3.21 BWR Liquid Effluents
- Maximum Annual Total Body and Organ Dose, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Organ Dose BWR Facility Total Body Dose (mrem) Organ Dose (mrem) Grand Gulf 3.62E-02 5.74E-02 Browns Ferry 1 8.14E-03 1.02E-02 Browns Ferry 2 8.14E-03 1.02E-02 Browns Ferry 3 8.14E-03 1.02E-02 Hatch 1 4.22E-03 6.15E-03 Susquehanna 1 1.54E-03 2.32E-03 Susquehanna 2 1.54E-03 2.32E-03 Perry 1.02E-03 1.50E-03 Hatch 2 7.09E-04 1.09E-03 Brunswick 1 9.17E-04 9.43E-04 Brunswick 2 9.17E-04 9.43E-04 River Bend 5.75E-05 3.81E-04 Dresden 3 2.37E-04 3.69E-04 Hope Creek 1.13E-04 3.10E-04 Limerick 1 1.18E-04 3.10E-04 Limerick 2 1.18E-04 3.10E-04 BWR Median Dose 9.97E-05 2.85E-04 Peach Bottom 2 1.98E-04 2.85E-04 Peach Bottom 3 1.98E-04 2.85E-04 Pilgrim 8.61E-05 2.64E-04 FitzPatrick 3.23E-05 3.23E-05 Quad Cities 1 4.36E-06 6.50E-06 Quad Cities 2 4.36E-06 6.50E-06 Dresden 2 1.20E-06 1.20E-06 Oyster Creek 9.86E-07 9.86E-07 Clinton Columbia Cooper Duane Arnold Fermi 2 LaSalle 1 LaSalle 2 Monticello Nine Mile Point 1 Nine Mile Point 2 ALARA Criteria 3 10 3-54 Table 3.22 PWR Liquid Effluents
- Maximum Annual Total Body and Organ Dose, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Organ Dose PWR Facility Total Body Dose (mrem) Organ Dose (mrem) PWR Facility Total Body Dose (mrem)
Organ Dose (mrem) Catawba 1 3.24E-02 3.31E-01 PWR Median Dose 6.95E-03 8.23E-03 Catawba 2 3.24E-02 3.31E-01 Summer 7.21E-03 8.23E-03 Wolf Creek 2.01E-01 2.10E-01 Arkansas 1 5.93E-03 8.05E-03 North Anna 1 1.19E-01 1.20E-01 Callaway 2.25E-03 6.95E-03 North Anna 2 1.19E-01 1.20E-01 St. Lucie 1 2.13E-03 6.78E-03 Comanche Peak 1 9.46E-02 9.46E-02 St. Lucie 2 2.13E-03 6.78E-03 Comanche Peak 2 9.46E-02 9.46E-02 Davis-Besse 4.86E-03 5.41E-03 Byron 1 7.00E-02 7.90E-02 South Texas 2 4.19E-03 4.21E-03 Byron 2 7.00E-02 7.90E-02 Sequoyah 1 4.10E-03 4.10E-03 Oconee 1 5.23E-02 5.70E-02 Sequoyah 2 4.10E-03 4.10E-03 Oconee 2 5.23E-02 5.70E-02 Point Beach 1 3.42E-03 3.42E-03 Oconee 3 5.23E-02 5.70E-02 Point Beach 2 3.42E-03 3.42E-03 Farley 2 7.74E-03 5.39E-02 Millstone 2 2.51E-04 3.38E-03 Farley 1 6.95E-03 5.36E-02 Millstone 3 7.48E-04 1.53E-03 Beaver Valley 1 4.97E-02 5.28E-02 Prairie Island 1 1.33E-03 1.49E-03 Beaver Valley 2 4.79E-02 5.28E-02 Prairie Island 2 1.33E-03 1.49E-03 Braidwood 1 3.16E-02 5.03E-02 Indian Point 2 9.40E-04 1.48E-03 Braidwood 2 3.16E-02 5.03E-02 Waterford 3 1.07E-03 1.25E-03 Harris 3.26E-02 4.75E-02 Arkansas 2 9.93E-04 1.07E-03 Vogtle 1 4.17E-02 4.58E-02 Seabrook 5.27E-04 9.54E-04 Ft. Calhoun 3.22E-02 4.36E-02 Palisades 7.21E-04 9.47E-04 McGuire 1 9.01E-02 4.21E-02 Robinson 2 3.89E-04 7.16E-04 McGuire 2 9.01E-02 4.21E-02 Indian Point 3 3.07E-04 6.07E-04 Vogtle 2 2.63E-02 2.79E-02 Surry 1 1.72E-04 5.42E-04 Three Mile Island 1 2.52E-02 2.62E-02 Surry 2 1.72E-04 5.42E-04 Watts Bar 1 2.33E-02 2.32E-02 Diablo Canyon 1 1.19E-04 2.45E-04 Cook 1 2.14E-02 2.14E-02 Diablo Canyon 2 1.19E-04 2.45E-04 Cook 2 2.14E-02 2.14E-02 Turkey Point 3 1.70E-04 1.98E-04 Calvert Cliffs 1 1.06E-02 1.58E-02 Turkey Point 4 1.70E-04 1.98E-04 Calvert Cliffs 2 1.06E-02 1.58E-02 Salem 2 2.84E-05 7.11E-05 Ginna 8.63E-03 1.08E-02 Salem 1 2.78E-05 3.70E-05 South Texas 1 8.64E-03 8.70E-03 Palo Verde 1 Palo Verde 2 Palo Verde 3 ALARA Criteria 3 10 3-55 Figure 3.17 BWR Gaseous Effluents
- Maximum Annual Organ Dose 1E-61E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+01E+11E+2MonticelloBrowns Ferry 3Browns Ferry 2Browns Ferry 1ClintonPilgrimDuane ArnoldDresden 2FitzPatrickDresden 3LaSalle 2LaSalle 1Hatch 2Hatch 1Hope CreekQuad Cities 2Quad Cities 1BWR Median DoseNine Mile Point 2Nine Mile Point 1ColumbiaPerryPeach Bottom 3Peach Bottom 2Susquehanna 2Susquehanna 1Fermi 2Oyster CreekLimerick 2Limerick 1Brunswick 2Brunswick 1CooperRiver BendGrand GulfALARA Criteria2015 Annual Organ Dose (mrem) 3-56 Figure 3.18 PWR Gaseous Effluents
- Maximum Annual Organ Dose 1E-61E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+01E+11E+2PWR Median DosePalo Verde 2Indian Point 2Byron 2Byron 1PalisadesSt. Lucie 1St. Lucie 2Three Mile Island 1Farley 2Farley 1Robinson 2SummerHarrisFt. CalhounNorth Anna 2North Anna 1Cook 2Cook 1Braidwood 2Braidwood 1Davis-BesseWolf CreekMcGuire 2McGuire 1Sequoyah 2Sequoyah 1Catawba 2Catawba 1Watts Bar 1Waterford 3Beaver Valley 2Beaver Valley 1ALARA Criteria2015 Annual Organ Dose (mrem) 3-57 Figure 3.18 PWR Gaseous Effluents
- Maximum Annual Organ Dose (continued) 1E-61E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+01E+11E+2Diablo Canyon 2Diablo Canyon 1Calvert Cliffs 2Calvert Cliffs 1CallawayGinnaPrairie Island 2Prairie Island 1Surry 2Surry 1South Texas 2South Texas 1Vogtle 2Vogtle 1Salem 2Salem 1Oconee 3Oconee 2Oconee 1Palo Verde 1Comanche Peak 2Comanche Peak 1Point Beach 2Point Beach 1Turkey Point 3Millstone 3Turkey Point 4Arkansas 1Millstone 2Indian Point 3Palo Verde 3SeabrookArkansas 2PWR Median DoseALARA Criteria2015 Annual Organ Dose (mrem) 3-58 Figure 3.19 BWR Liquid Effluents
- Maximum Annual Total Body and Organ Dose 1E-91E-81E-71E-61E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+01E+11E+2Nine Mile Point 2Nine Mile Point 1MonticelloLaSalle 2LaSalle 1Fermi 2Duane ArnoldCooperColumbiaClintonOyster CreekDresden 2Quad Cities 2Quad Cities 1FitzPatrickPilgrimPeach Bottom 3Peach Bottom 2BWR Median DoseLimerick 2Limerick 1Hope CreekDresden 3River BendBrunswick 2Brunswick 1Hatch 2PerrySusquehanna 2Susquehanna 1Hatch 1Browns Ferry 3Browns Ferry 2Browns Ferry 1Grand GulfALARA Criteria2015 Annual Dose (mrem)OrganTotal Body 3-59 Figure 3.20 PWR Liquid Effluents
- Maximum Annual Total Body and Organ Dose 1E-61E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+01E+11E+2PWR Median DoseSouth Texas 1GinnaCalvert Cliffs 2Calvert Cliffs 1Cook 2Cook 1Watts Bar 1Three Mile Island 1Vogtle 2McGuire 2McGuire 1Ft. CalhounVogtle 1HarrisBraidwood 2Braidwood 1Beaver Valley 2Beaver Valley 1Farley 1Farley 2Oconee 3Oconee 2Oconee 1Byron 2Byron 1Comanche Peak 2Comanche Peak 1North Anna 2North Anna 1Wolf CreekCatawba 2Catawba 1ALARA Criteria2015 Annual Dose (mrem)OrganTotal Body 3-60 Figure 3.20 PWR Liquid Effluents
- Maximum Annual Total Body and Organ Dose (continued) 1E-61E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+01E+11E+2Palo Verde 3Palo Verde 2Palo Verde 1Salem 1Salem 2Turkey Point 4Turkey Point 3Diablo Canyon 2Diablo Canyon 1Surry 2Surry 1Indian Point 3Robinson 2PalisadesSeabrookArkansas 2Waterford 3Indian Point 2Prairie Island 2Prairie Island 1Millstone 3Millstone 2Point Beach 2Point Beach 1Sequoyah 2Sequoyah 1South Texas 2Davis-BesseSt. Lucie 2St. Lucie 1CallawayArkansas 1SummerPWR Median DoseALARA Criteria2015 Annual Dose (mrem)OrganTotal BodyOrganTotal Body 3-61 Figure 3.21 Median Maximum Annual Organ Dose, Gaseous Effluents 5-Year Trend, 20 1 1-201 5 Figure 3.22 Median Maximum Annual Dose, Liquid Effluents 5-Year Trend, 20 1 1-201 5 0.2030.2040.1840.2320.1930.2700.1940.1810.2600.3020.0000.0500.1000.1500.2000.2500.3000.35020112012201320142015BWRsPWRsDoses FromAll Gaseous Effluents (mrem)Noble gases, Iodines, Particulates, H
-3 and C-140.00010.00000.00010.00000.00030.00640.01140.00740.00620.00820.00010.00000.00010.00000.00010.00560.00630.00400.00340.00690.0000.0020.0040.0060.0080.0100.0120.01420112012201320142015BWRsPWRsDoses From All Liquid Effluents (mrem)OrganTotalBody NUREG/CR-2 907, V ol. 21 Annual Report 2015 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
NRC Reference Material As of November 1999, you may electronically access NUREG-series publications and other NRC records at the http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html. Publicly released records include, to name a few, NUREG-series publications; Federal Register notices; applicant, licensee, and vendor documents and correspondence; NRC correspondence and internal memoranda; bulletins and information notices; inspection and investigative reports; licensee event reports; and Commission papers and their attachments. NRC publications in the NUREG series, NRC regulations, and Title 10, Energy,Code of Federal Regulations may also be purchased from one of these two sources. 1. The Superintendent of Documents U.S. Government Publishing Office Washington, DC 20402-0001 Internet: http://bookstore.gpo.gov Telephone: 1-866-512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 2. The National Technical Information Service 5301 Shawnee Road Alexandria, VA 22161-0002 http://www.ntis.gov 1-800-553-6847 or, locally, (703) 605-6000 A single copy of each NRC draft report for comment is available free, to the extent of supply, upon written request as follows: U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Administration Multimedia, Graphics and Storage & Distribution Branch Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: distribution.resource@nrc.gov Facsimile: (301) 415-2289 Some publications in the NUREG series that are posted at the http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs are updated periodically and may differ from the last printed version. Although references to material found on a Web site bear the date the material was accessed, the material available on the date cited may subsequently be removed from the site. Non-NRC Reference Material Documents available from public and special technical libraries include all open literature items, such as books, journal articles, transactions, Federal Register notices, Federal and State legislation, and congressional reports. Such documents as theses, dissertations, foreign reports and translations, and non-NRC conference proceedings may be purchased from their sponsoring organization. Copies of industry codes and standards used in a substantive manner in the NRC regulatory process are maintained at The NRC Technical Library Two White Flint North 11545 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 These standards are available in the library for reference use by the public. Codes and standards are usually copyrighted and may be purchased from the originating organization or, if they are American National Standards, from American National Standards Institute 11 West 42nd Street New York, NY 10036-8002 http://www.ansi.org (212) 642-4900 AVAILABILITY OF REFERENCE MATERIALS IN NRC PUBLICATIONS Legally binding regulatory requirements are stated only in laws; NRC regulations; licenses, including technical specifications; or orders, not in NUREG-series publications. The views expressed in contractor-prepared publications in this series are not necessarily those of the NRC. The NUREG series comprises (1) technical and administrative reports and books prepared by the staff (NUREG-XXXX) or agency contractors (NUREG/CR-XXXX), (2) proceedings of conferences (NUREG/CP-XXXX), (3) reports resulting from international agreements (NUREG/IA-XXXX), (4) brochures (NUREG/BR-XXXX), and (5) compilations of legal decisions and orders of the Commission and (NUREG-0750). DISCLAIMER: This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the U.S. Government. Neither the U.S. Government nor any agency thereof, nor any employee, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed in this publication, or represents that its use by such third party would not infringe privately owned rights. SR-CR 10/2017 NUREG/CR-2 907, V ol. 21 Radioact i ve E ffluen ts from Nuclear P ower Plants Annual Report 2015 M anuscript C ompleted:September 2018 Date Published
Prepared by
- J.DavisOak Ridge Associat ed Universities 1299 Bethel Valley Road, S C-200, M S-21 Oak Ridge, T N 37830 Steven Garry, NRC Project Manager Micheal Smith, NRC Project Manager Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
ii i ABSTRACT In 2015, there were 99 commercial nuclear power plants (NPPs) licensed to operate on 61 sites in the United States (U.S.) regulated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). Each year, each power reactor sends a report to the NRC that identifies the radioactive liquid and gaseous effluents discharged from the facility. In 2015, these effluent reports comprised about 10,000 pages of information, which described the radioactive materials discharged, as well as the resulting radiation doses to the general public. This report summarizes that information and presents the information in a format intended for both nuclear professionals and the general public.
The reader can use this report to quickly characterize the radioactive discharges from any U.S. NPP in 2015. The radioactive effluents from one reactor can be compared with other reactors. The results can also be compared with typical (or median) effluents for the industry, including short
-term trends and long-term trends. Reference information is included so the reader can compare the doses from NPP effluents with the doses that the general public receives from other sources of radiation, such as medical procedures, industrial devices, and natural materials in the environment.
Although all operating NPPs released some radioactive materials in 2015, all effluents discharged were within the NRC's and the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) public dose limits, and NRC's "as low as is reasonably achievable" (ALARA) criteria. Additionally, the doses from radioactive effluents were much less than the doses from other sources of natural radiation that are commonly considered safe. This indicates radioactive effluents from NPPs in 2015 had no significant impact on the health and safety of the public or the environment.
v TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT ...............................................................................................................................
...........
iii TABLE O F C ONTENTS........................................................................................................................
v LIST OF F IGURES ..............................................................................................................................
vii LIST O F TABLES...............................................................................................................................
.. ix ABBREVIATIO NS AND ACRONYMS
................................................................................................
xi 1INTRODUCTION
.............................................................................................................................
1-1 1.1 Purpose ...............................................................................................................................
.... 1-1 1.2 Scope ...............................................................................................................................
........ 1-1 1.3 Source of D ata .........................................................................................................................
1-5 1.4 Limitations of D ata ...................................................................................................................
1-5 2DESCRIPTION OF THE DATA ......................................................................................................
2-1 2.1 Introduction
..............................................................................................................................
2-1 2.2 Measuring R adioactivity i n Radioactiv e Effluents ...................................................................
2-1 2.3 Dose Un its a nd L imits.............................................................................................................
2-3 2.4 Radiation Dose to t he Public ..................................................................................................
2-4 2.5 Other S ources of R adiati on Dose to the U.S.
P opulation.......................................................
2-5 3EFFLUENT D ATA ..........................................................................................................................
3-1 3.1 Radioactiv e Materials i n Liqui d and Gaseous Effluents.........................................................
3-1 3.2 Short-Te rm Tr end in Gaseous E ffluents ...............................................................................
3-38 3.3 Long-Te rm T rend in Gaseous Effluents ................................................................................
3-42 3.4 Short-Te rm Trend in Liqui d Effluents ....................................................................................
3-43 3.5 Long-Te rm T rend in Liquid Effluents
.....................................................................................
3-47 3.6 Radiation Doses f rom Gaseous a nd Liquid Effluents ...........................................................
3-48 4
SUMMARY
...............................................................................................................................
...... 4-1 5REFERENCES
...............................................................................................................................
5-1 6GLOSSARY.......................................................................................................................
.............
6-1
vii LIST OF FIGURES Figure 2.1 Sources of Radiation Exposure to the U.S. Population
................................
........ 2-6 Figure 3.1 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Fission and Activation Gases
................................
3-19 Figure 3.2 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Iodine ................................
................................
.... 3-20 Figure 3.3 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Particulates
................................
...........................
3-21 Figure 3.4 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Tritium ................................
................................
... 3-22 Figure 3.5 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Carbon-14 ................................
.............................
3-23 Figure 3.6 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Fission and Activation Gases
................................
3-24 Figure 3.7 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Iodine ................................
................................
.... 3-26 Figure 3.8 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Particulates
................................
...........................
3-27 Figure 3.9 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Tritium ................................
................................
... 3-28 Figure 3.10 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Carbon-14 ................................
.............................
3-30 Figure 3.11 BWR Liquid Releases
- Fission and Activation Products
................................
. 3-32 Figure 3.12 BWR Liquid Releases
- Tritium ................................
................................
........ 3-33 Figure 3.13 PWR Liquid Releases
- Fission and Activation Products
................................
. 3-34 Figure 3.14 PWR Liquid Releases
- Tritium ................................
................................
........ 3-36 Figure 3.15 Long-Term Trend in Noble Gases in Gaseous Effluents
................................
.... 3-42 Figure 3.16 Long-Term Trend in MFAPs in Liquid Effluents
................................
..................
3-47 Figure 3.17 BWR Gaseous Effluents
- Maximum Annual Organ Dose
...............................
3-55 Figure 3.18 PWR Gaseous Effluents
- Maximum Annual Organ Dose
...............................
3-56 Figure 3.19 BWR Liquid Effluents
- Maximum Annual Total Body and Organ Dose
..........
3-58 Figure 3.20 PWR Liquid Effluents
- Maximum Annual Total Body and Organ Dose
..........
3-59 Figure 3.21 Median Maximum Annual Organ Dose, Gaseous Effluents 5
-Year Trend, 2011-2015 ................................
................................
................................
..........
3-61 Figure 3.22 Median Maximum Annual Dose, Liquid Effluents 5
-Year Trend, 2011
-2015...... 3-61
ix LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1 Nuclear Power Plants, 2015
.................................................................................
1-2 Table 1.2 Permanently Shut Down Nuclear Power Plants
...................................................
1-4 Table 1.3 Reactors for Which the NRC Has Normalized Data on a Unit
-Specific Basis
...... 1-6 Table 2.1 Radionuclides in Gaseous Effluents
.....................................................................
2-2 Table 2.2 Radionuclides in Liquid Effluents
..........................................................................
2-3 Table 3.1 BWR Gaseous Releases - Fission and Activation Gases, 2015
........................
3-2 Table 3.2 BWR Gaseous Releases - Iodine, 2015
............................................................
3-3 Table 3.3 BWR Gaseous Releases - Particulates, 2015
...................................................
3-4 Table 3.4 BWR Gaseous Releases - Tritium, 2015
...........................................................
3-5 Table 3.5 BWR Gaseous Releases - Carbon-14, 2015 .....................................................
3-6 Table 3.6 PWR Gaseous Releases - Fission and Activation Gases, 2015
........................
3-7 Table 3.7 PWR Gaseous Releases - Iodine, 2015
............................................................
3-9 Table 3.8 PWR Gaseous Releases - Particulates, 2015
.................................................
3-10 Table 3.9 PWR Gaseous Releases - Tritium, 2015
.........................................................
3-12 Table 3.10 PWR Gaseous Releases - Carbon-14, 2015 ...................................................
3-13 Table 3.11 BWR Liquid Releases - Fission and Activation Products, 2015
.......................
3-14 Table 3.12 BWR Liquid Releases - Tritium, 2015
..............................................................
3-15 Table 3.13 PWR Liquid Releases - Fission and Activation Products, 2015
.......................
3-16 Table 3.14 PWR Liquid Releases - Tritium, 2015
..............................................................
3-18 Table 3.15 Short-Term Trend in Noble Gases in Gaseous Effluents, BWRs, Curies (Ci)
.... 3-39 Table 3.16 Short-Term Trend in Noble Gases in Gaseous Effluents, PWRs, Curies (Ci)
.... 3-40 Table 3.17 Short-Term Trend in Mixed Fission and Activation Products in Liquid Effluents, BWRs, millicuries (mCi)
......................................................................
3-44 Table 3.18 Short-Term Trend in Mixed Fission and Activation Products in Liquid Effluents, PWRs, millicuries (mCi)
......................................................................
3-45 Table 3.19 BWR Gaseous Effluents - Maximum Annual Organ Dose, 2015
.....................
3-51 Table 3.20 PWR Gaseous Effluents - Maximum Annual Organ Dose, 2015
.....................
3-52 Table 3.21 BWR Liquid Effluents - Maximum Annual Total Body and Organ Dose, 2015
.........................................................................................................
3-53 Table 3.22 PWR Liquid Effluents - Maximum Annual Total Body and Organ Dose, 2015
.........................................................................................................
3-54
xi ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ALARA as low as is reasonably achievable ARERR Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report Bq becquerel BWR boiling-water reactor C-14 carbon-14 CFR Code of Federal Regulations Ci curie DOE Department of Energy EPA Environmental Protection Agency GBq gigabecquerels H-3 tritium mCi millicurie MFAP mixed fission and activation products MIMS Department of Energy
's Manifest Information Management System mrem millirem mSv millisievert NCRP National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements NPP nuclear power plant ODCM Offsite Dose Calculation Manual PW R pressurized
-water reactor RG Regulatory Guide SI International System of Units (abbreviation is from the French
- Le Systme International d'Unités) Sv sievert USGS United States Geological Survey U.S. NRC United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission
1-11 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Purpose
This report describes radioactive effluents from operating commercial nuclear power plants (NPPs) in the U.S. during calendar year 2015. It is based on an extensive amount of information submitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) by all U.S. NPP licensees. The original information was submitted by the NPPs in their Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports (ARERRs) and comprises several thousand pages of data. The ARERRs may be viewed in their entirety on the NRC Web site at
-experience/tritium/plant
-info.html. For the years between 1972 and 1993, this type of annual information was condensed in to a tabular format and published as a large volume of tabulated data (Refs. [1-22] ). An evaluation of the practice of generating tabular annual reports revealed the need for a more concise summary report that presented the information in a more intuitive, graphic format (Ref.
[23] ). As a result, this style of improved report was created. This report joins a series of previous reports on radioactive effluents presented in the revised graphic format (Refs.
[24-31] ). The purpose of this report is to condense an extremely large volume of technical information into a few tables and figures from which the reader can quickly, if broadly, characterize the effluents from any operating U.S. NPP. These tables and figures are designed to provide easily understandable information for the public at large, while also providing experienced professionals with enough information to evaluate trends in industry performance and to identify potential performance issues for individual power plants. Those users wanting more extensive and detailed information are encouraged to retrieve the original ARERRs from the NRC Web site.
1.2 Scope
The NRC uses the information on radioactive releases, along with other information collected during routine inspections of each facility, to ensure NPPs are operated within regulatory requirements. One of those requirements includes maintaining radiation doses from radioactive effluents "as low as is reasonably achievable" (ALARA). For this summary report, only information submitted with regard to NRC reporting requirements and guidance is included. Information not related to the NRC requirements for radioactive effluents or the NRC guidance on radioactive effluents is not included in this summary report. Additionally, information on solid radioactive waste is not included in this report. However, data on solid waste disposed in licensed waste disposal facilities is available from the Department of Energy
's Manifest Information Management System (MIMS) database at URL: http://mims.doe.gov/. This report summarizes data from all NPPs in commercial operation between January 1, 2015 and December 31, 2015. The list of NPPs included in this report is provided in Table 1.1. During 2015, only two types of reactors were in commercial power operation in the US: 1) boiling
-water reactor (BWR) and 2) pressurized-water reactor (PWR). Nuclear reactors that are not used for commercial power production or are of an experimental design for research, are not included in this list and are not included in this report.
1-2 Table 1.1 Nuclear Power Plants, 2015 Plant Name Type Full Plant Name Location Arkansas 1, 2 PWR Arkansas Nuclear One (ANO), Units 1, 2 Russellville, AR Beaver Valley 1, 2 PWR Beaver Valley, Units 1, 2 Shippingport, PA Braidwood 1, 2 PWR Braidwood Generating Station, Units 1, 2 Braceville, IL Browns Ferry 1, 2, 3 BWR Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2, 3 Decatur, AL Brunswick 1, 2 BWR Brunswick Steam Electric Plant, Units 1, 2 Southport, NC Byron 1, 2 PWR Byron Generating Station, Units 1, 2 Byron, IL Callaway PWR Callaway Plant, Unit 1 Callaway, MO Calvert Cliffs 1, 2 PWR Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1, 2 Lusby, MD Catawba 1, 2 PWR Catawba Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2 York, SC Clinton BWR Clinton Power Station Clinton, IL Columbia BWR Columbia Station Richland, WA Comanche Peak 1, 2 PWR Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1, 2 Glen Rose, TX Cook 1, 2 PWR Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2 Bridgman, MI Cooper BWR Cooper Nuclear Station Brownville, NE Davis-Besse PWR Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 Oak Harbor, OH Diablo Canyon 1, 2 PWR Diablo Canyon, Units 1, 2 Avila Beach, CA Dresden 2, 3 BWR Dresden Generating Station, Units 2, 3 Morris, IL Duane Arnold BWR Duane Arnold Energy Center Palo, IA Farley 1, 2 PWR Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2 Ashford, AL Fermi 2 BWR Fermi 2 Nuclear Power Plant Newport, MI FitzPatrick BWR James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Lycoming, NY Ft. Calhoun PWR Ft. Calhoun Station, Unit 1 Ft. Calhoun, NE Ginna PWR R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1Ontario, NY Grand Gulf BWR Grand Gulf Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Port Gibson, MS Harris PWR Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 New Hill, NC Hatch 1, 2 BWR Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2 Baxley, GA Hope Creek BWR Hope Creek Generating Station, Unit 1 Hancock's Bridge, NJ Indian Point 2, 3 PWR Indian Point Energy Center, Units 2, 3 Buchanan, NY LaSalle 1, 2 BWR LaSalle County Generating Station, Units 1, 2 Marseilles, IL Limerick 1, 2 BWR Limerick Generating Station, Units 1, 2 Saratoga, PA McGuire 1, 2 PWR McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2 Huntersville, NC Millstone 2, 3 PWR Millstone Power Station, Units 2, 3 Waterford, CT Monticello BWR Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Monticello, MN Nine Mile Point 1, 2 BWR Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2 Lycoming, NY
1-3 Table 1.1 Nuclear Power Plants, 2015 (continued)
Plant Name Type Full Plant Name Location North Anna 1, 2 PWR North Anna Power Station, Units 1, 2 Mineral, VA Oconee 1, 2, 3 PWR Oconee Nuclear Station, Units 1, 2, 3 Seneca, SC Oyster Creek BWR Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Forked River, NJ Palisades PWR Palisades Nuclear Plant Covert, MI Palo Verde 1, 2, 3 PWR Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2, 3 Phoenix, AZ Peach Bottom 2, 3 BWR Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Units 2, 3 Delta, PA Perry BWR Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 Perry, OH Pilgrim BWR Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 Plymouth, MA Point Beach 1, 2 PWR Point Beach Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2 Two Rivers, WI Prairie Island 1, 2 PWR Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant, Units 1, 2 Welch, MN Quad Cities 1, 2 BWR Quad Cities Generating Station, Units 1, 2 Cordova, IL River Bend BWR River Bend Station, Unit 1 St. Francisville, LA Robinson 2 PWR H. B. Robinson Steam Electric Plant, Unit 2Hartsville, SC Salem 1, 2 PWR Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2 Hancock's Bridge, NJ Seabrook PWR Seabrook Station, Unit 1 Seabrook, NH Sequoyah 1, 2 PWR Sequoyah Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2 Soddy-Daisy, TN South Texas 1, 2 PWR South Texas Project Electric Generating Station, Units 1, 2 Wadsworth, TX St. Lucie 1, 2 PWR St. Lucie Nuclear Plant, Units 1, 2 Ft. Pierce, FL Summer PWR Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Jenkinsville, SC Surry 1, 2 PWR Surry Power Station, Units 1, 2 Surry, VA Susquehanna 1, 2 BWR Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1, 2 Berwick, PA Three Mile Island 1 PWR Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1 Harrisburg, PA Turkey Point 3, 4 PWR Turkey Point Nuclear Plant, Units 3, 4 Princeton, FL Vogtle 1, 2 PWR Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 1, 2 Waynesboro, GA Waterford 3 PWR Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 Killona, LA Watts Bar 1 PWR Watts Bar Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 Spring City, TN Wolf Creek PWR Wolf Creek Generating Station, Unit 1 Burlington, KS
1-4 As noted, only reactors in commercial power production during 2015 are included in this report. For clarity purposes, Table 1.
2 contains a list of commercial power plants (BWRs and PWRs) that have permanently shut down and are not included in this report. Vermont Yankee permanently shut down in December of 2014 and is not included in this analysis of radioactive effluents from operating reactors. These reactors are either in the process of decommissioning or have been decommissioned.
Table 1.2 Permanently Shut Down Nuclear Power Plants Plant Name Type Full Plant Name Location Big Rock Point BWR Big Rock Point Restoration Project Charlevoix, MI Crystal River 3 PWR Crystal River, Unit 3 Crystal River, FL Dresden 1* BWR Dresden Generating Station, Unit 1 Morris, IL Haddam Neck PWR Haddam Neck Nuclear Plant Site Haddam Neck, CT Humboldt Bay BWR Humboldt Bay Power Plant, Unit 3 Eureka, CA Indian Point 1
- PWR Indian Point Energy Center, Unit 1 Buchanan, NY Kewaunee PWR Kewaunee Power Station Kewaunee, WI La Crosse BWR La Crosse Boiling-Water Reactor Genoa, WI Maine Yankee PWR Maine Yankee Bath, ME Millstone 1 PWR Millstone Power Station, Unit 1 Waterford, CT Rancho Seco PWR Rancho Seco, Unit 1 Herald, CA San Onofre 1, 2, 3 PWR San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1, 2, 3 San Clemente, CA Three Mile Island 2 PWR Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2 Middletown, PA Trojan PWR Trojan Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 Portland, OR Vermont Yankee BWR Vermont Yankee Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 Vernon, VT Yankee Rowe PWR Yankee Nuclear Power Station Franklin Co., MA Zion 1, 2 PWR Zion Generating Station, Units 1, 2 Warrenville, IL
- These reactor units have permanently shut down but are collocated on site beside operating reactor units. For these units, the licensee reported the sum of the effluents from operating and non
-operating units in one report. Therefore any potential effluents from the non
-operating units are included in the release amounts for the operating units in this report.
For a list of permanently shut down NRC
-licensed power reactors and their current license status, visit the NRC Web site at https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/u
-s-commercial
-nuclear-power-reactors-permanently
-shut-down-formerly-licensed-to-operate. A more comprehensive list of other nuclear facilities (i.e., Complex Materials Sites, Research and Test Reactors, Uranium Recovery Sites, and Fuel Cycle Facilities) that are in the process of decommissioning can be obtained from the NRC Web site at: https://www.nrc.gov/waste/decommissioning.html. Please note that Figures 3.15 and 3.16, which depict the long
-term trend of radioactive effluents, include effluent data from reactors that were in commercial power operation during the years shown.
1-5 1.3 Source of Data Each commercial nuclear power plant in the United States is authorized by the NRC to release small amounts of radioactive materials to the environment as specified in the licensing documents for the plant. NRC regulations require each NPP to establish and maintain a program for monitoring radioactive effluents (per Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations
[CFR] Part 50.36a and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I, Section IV.B) and to report these effluents in an Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report (ARERR) (per 10 CFR 50.36a)
(Ref. [32] ). In accordance with the regulatory framework, licensees submit their reports to the NRC in a format outlined by Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.21 (Ref. [33] ), or an equivalent format.
The information included in this document was obtained from the licensees' ARERRs. Individual licensee reports are available through the NRC Public Document Room, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike (first floor), Rockville, Maryland 20852, phone 1
-800-397-4209 or 301-415-4737, and directly from the NRC's public Web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/ops
-experience/tritium/plant
-info.html. The data from these reports are also entered into a database that is maintained by the NRC. The public may access this database through an NRC Web site (https://www.reirs.com/effluent/). The data are entered into the database as reported by each site
. 1.4 Limitations of Data Some NPPs have more than one reactor unit located at a site. If the licensee reports data separately for each reactor unit, those data are included separately as reported by the licensee. Because some licensees operate multi
-unit sites with a common radioactive waste processing system, these licensees report total effluents from the site instead of reporting the totals from each reactor unit. This complicates the task of presenting the effluent information in a manner that allows both (1) a direct comparison of one reactor unit with another, and (2) a direct comparison of each reactor unit with NRC limits and regulations.
For purposes of this report, the data are reported on a per
-unit basis. For multi
-unit sites where the effluents are from a common radioactive waste system, the effluents are divided equally between the units. For example, Catawba has two units (1 and 2) with a common radioactive waste processing system. For this report, the total effluents for Catawba were split equally between Unit 1 and Unit 2. For other multi
-unit sites, the effluent activity is not divided equally between the units. For example, in the case of Beaver Valley, the licensee reports gaseous effluents from four sources: Unit 1, Unit 2, a common plant vent, and a common building vent. In this case, the releases from the common vents are split equally between Unit 1 and Unit 2, and the totals for each unit then are calculated. This method of splitting the data has been applied to radionuclide activity data and radiation dose data at some multi
-unit sites. The affected NPPs and the type of data affected are listed in Table 1.
- 3. Although there are other methods of reporting effluent data (e.g., on the basis of thermal or electrical power generation), the per reactor
-unit basis (1) is most intuitive, (2) is most directly comparable with the NRC required design objectives and limiting conditions for operation (i.e., referred to as ALARA criteria in this report), and (3) is easily derived from the effluent data supplied by the licensee. This approach satisfies a primary objective for this report which is to allow the reader to quickly formulate reasonable comparisons between reactors and the regulatory limits. It should be noted, however, that for some multi
-unit sites, the actual contributions from each unit might be different than the equal distributions calculated with this approach, such as when a plant is undergoing a major or extended outage.
1-6 The report may include licensees' corrections submitted to the NRC up to the time of publication. If a licensee submits amended data in accordance with NRC regulatory guidance, the NRC reserves the right to update the data in future reports. For the most current data, the reader should use the NPPs' ARERRs which are available on the NRC Web site. Table 1.3 Reactors for Which the NRC Has Normalized Data on a Unit
-Specific Basis Boiling-Water Reactors (BWRs) R D Pressurized
-Water Reactors (PWRs)
R D Browns Ferry 1, 2, 3 Beaver Valley 1, 2 Brunswick 1, 2 Calvert Cliffs 1, 2 LaSalle 1, 2 Catawba 1, 2 Limerick 1, 2 Comanche Peak 1, 2 Nine Mile Point 1, 2 Cook 1, 2 Peach Bottom 2, 3 Diablo Canyon 1, 2 Quad Cities 1, 2 McGuire 1, 2 Susquehanna 1, 2 North Anna 1, 2 Oconee 1, 2, 3 Point Beach 1, 2 Prairie Island 1, 2 Sequoyah 1, 2 Surry 1, 2 Notes: R = Radionuclide Data, D = Dose Data
2-1 2 DESCRIPTION OF THE DATA 2.1 Introduction Radioactive materials may be disposed of in one of three forms
- solid, liquid, or gas. This report summarizes the disposal of radioactive materials in liquid and gaseous effluents from commercial nuclear power plants. Note: Data on solid radioactive waste shipped from a nuclear power plant site is provided in each licensee's ARERR, and data on solid waste disposed in licensed waste disposal facilities is available from the MIMS database at URL
/. As described in Section 1.3, owners and operators of NPPs are required to report the radioactive effluents from their facilities to the NRC. The two basic characteristics most often used to describe radioactive effluents are the amount of radioactivity (curies or millicuries) and radiation dose (mrem). Radioactivity will be referred to as "activity" and radiation dose will simply be referred to in this document as "dose."
For this report, activity can be thought of as the amount of radioactive material present in radioactive effluents. The units for measuring activity are further described in Section 2.2.
The activities of various radionuclides in radioactive effluents from NPPs are presented in Sections 3.1 through 3.5.
Although the amount of activity is an important, inherent characteristic that helps to describe radioactive effluents, it is not
-by itself-a good indicator of the potential health effects from exposure to the radiation. Health effects are dependent on many factors, such as the radionuclide, the activity of the radionuclide, the type of radiation emitted by the radionuclide, the energy of the radiation, the uptake of the radionuclide into the human body, and the metabolism of the radionuclide by the human body. To properly describe the potential health effects from exposure to radioactive materials, a combined measure of risk (i.e., dose) that accounts for all of these differences is needed.
The units for measuring dose (mrem) are described in more detail in Section 2.3. The methods and models for calculating dose from radioactive effluents are discussed in Section 2.4. The actual dose values due to radioactive effluents from NPPs are presented in Section 3.6.
Radiation is around us all of the time. The human body
-each of us
-contains some natural radioactive materials such as radioactive carbon and radioactive potassium. Natural radioactive materials are also in rocks, in soil, in the air we breathe, and in the food we eat. As a result, humans have been exposed to radiation since the dawn of man. Over the last 100 years, man has developed new radioactive materials and new machines that create additional sources of radiation. These new sources include radioactive materials used in medicine, research, industry, and nuclear power plants. Section 2.5 contains basic information on the doses received by the average member of the U.S. population each year from all sources of radiation, including commercial NPPs.
2.2 Measuring
Radioactivity in Radioactive Effluents In order to present the liquid and airborne (gaseous) effluent data in a manner that is both useful and concise, only significant radionuclides are included in the tables and figures in this report.
Using the guidance in Revision 2 of RG 1.21 (Ref. [33] ), licensees evaluate radionuclides that have either a significant activity or a significant dose contribution in NPP effluents.
The radionuclides chosen for inclusion in this report are shown in Tables 2.1 and 2.2.
2-2 Activity is a measure of the number of atoms that transform (historically referred to as decay) in a given period of time and is reported in various units, normally either curies (Ci) or becquerels (Bq). In the United States, the traditional unit for reporting activity is the Ci. One Ci is equal to 37,000,000,000 (37 billion) radioactive atoms transforming in one second. In this document, activity will be reported as curies and millicuries (mCi). A curie is equal to one thousand millicuries. In countries that have adopted the International System of Units (or SI units), activity is reported in units of Bq. One Bq is one atomic disintegration (transformation) or decay per second. One curie equals 37,000,000,000 becquerels, which may be expressed in scientific notation as 3.7E+10 becquerels or 3.7 x 10 10 becquerels. One curie is sometimes expressed as 37 gigabecquerels or simply 37 GBq.
One curie of cobalt
-60 and one curie of hydrogen
-3 (tritium) have the same activity; however, when an atom of cobalt
-60 transforms, the atomic transformations typically produce one moderately energetic beta particle and two highly energetic gamma rays. By contrast, when an atom of hydrogen
-3 transforms, it emits a single, low
-energy beta particle. Sensitive instruments can detect and measure the transformation products that are unique to each radionuclide. Cobalt and hydrogen are just two examples of elements that can be radioactive. Other examples are shown in Tables 2.1 and 2.2.
The reporting of radionuclides in liquid and gaseous wastes is commonly grouped into categories (Ref. [33] ). These categories are described in Tables 2.1 and 2.2 as noble gases, iodines , particulates, tritium, carbon, and gross alpha activity. Each category contains one or more radionuclides. Beginning with the 2010 annual effluent summary report, a new radionuclide category has been added for carbon
-14 (C-14) in gaseous effluents.
Table 2.1 Radionuclides in Gaseous Effluents Gaseous Effluent Category Common Radionuclides Significant Radionuclides Fission and Activation Gases (sometimes referred to as Noble Gases)
Krypton (85, 85m, 87, 88)
Xenon (131, 131m, 133, 133m, 135, 135m)
Argon (41)
Kr-85 Xe-133 Xe-135 All (Sections 3.2, 3.3, and 3.6)
Iodines Iodine (131, 132, 133, 134, 135)
I-131 All (Section 3.6)
Particulates Cobalt (58, 60)
Cesium (134, 137)
Chromium (51)
Manganese (54)
Niobium (95)
Co-58 Co-60 Cs-134 Cs-137 All (Section 3.6)
C-14 Gross Alpha Total alpha activity Not Presented in this Report The radionuclides listed in this report are the most significant radionuclides discharged from a site. For example, although Table 2.1 lists 11 radionuclides in the category called "fission and activation gases," only the 3 most significant radionuclides (Kr-85, Xe-133, and Xe
-135) were selected for inclusion in Table 3.1 and Figure 3.1 for noble gas radionuclides. These three were chosen because these radionuclides are the most significant, are representative of the overall effluent releases, and because as their activities increase, the activities of other fission and activation gases typically increase as well. Conversely, if the activities of these three radionuclides 2-3 are very low, the activities of other fission and activation gases also tend to be low
. All noble gas radionuclides are included in Sections 3.2 Short
-Term Trend in Gaseous Effluents, 3.3 Long
-Term Trend in Gaseous Effluents, and 3.6 Radiation Doses from Gaseous and Liquid Effluents.
Table 2.2 Radionuclides in Liquid Effluents Liquid Effluent Category Common Radionuclides Significant Radionuclides Mixed Fission and Activation Products Iron (55) Cobalt (58, 60)
Cesium (134, 137)
Chromium (51)
Manganese (54)
Zirconium (95)
Niobium (95)
Iodine (131, 133, 135)
Fe-55 Co-58 Co-60 Cs-134 Cs-137 I-131 All (Sections 3.4, 3.5 and 3.6)
H-3 Dissolved and Entrained Noble Gases Krypton (85, 85m, 87, 88)
Xenon (131, 133, 133m, 135, 135m)
Not Presented in this Report Gross Alpha Total alpha activity Not Presented in this Report Much information about the operation of plant systems can be obtained from the radionuclides present in radioactive effluents. Additionally, the ratios of the activities of radionuclides can provide insights into fuel integrity, radioactive waste system operation, and general radioactive waste handling practices at a site. The reader who is interested in seeing the activities of all radionuclides released from any particular NPP is encouraged to review the detailed, site
-specific ARERRs provided on the NRC Web site.
Laboratory instruments can identify which radionuclides are present in radioactive effluents. The instruments can also measure the activities (curies or becquerels) of the radionuclides. As a result, many discussions about radioactive effluents focus on the curies (or becquerels) released. Although activity measures the rate of atomic transformations, it does not provide a direct measure of the potential health effects from exposure to radionuclides. When discussing potential health effects, the concept of dose is used. Radiation dose is discussed in more detail in the following paragraphs.
2.3 Dose Units and Limits The traditional unit for reporting radiation dose in the United States is the rem. Small exposures are often reported as millirem (mrem) or as fractions of a mrem. One thousand mrem equals one rem. Other countries report radiation dose in units of sieverts (Sv). One sievert equals 100 rem. One millirem equals 0.00001 sievert or 0.01 millisievert (mSv). The number 0.00001 can be represented in scientific notation as 1 x 10
-5 or 1E-05. Radioactive effluents discharged from NPPs are controlled by regulations. NRC regulations (10 CFR 20.1301) specify that the annual dose to individual members of the public does not exceed 100 mrem (1 millisievert) (Ref. [34] ). In addition, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has established environmental radiation protection standards for nuclear power operations that the annual dose to any member of the public does not exceed 25 mrem to the whole body, 75 mrem to the thyroid, and 25 mrem to any other organ.
2-4 Typically, the median dose from radioactive effluents to members of the public is so low (usually less than 1 mrem in a year) that the radionuclides and the dose in the environment cannot be measured directly. As a result, hypothetical doses are typically calculated based on the measurements of radioactive effluents at the point of release from the plant.
2.4 Radiation
Dose to the Public Licensees are required by 10 CFR 50.36a to establish Technical Specifications which require that operating procedures for the control of effluents be established and followed, and that the radioactive waste system be maintained and used to keep average annual effluent releases at small percentages of the public dose limits (Ref. [32] ). The Technical Specifications establish the licensee's Radioactive Effluent Controls Program, which is used to ensure plant operations keep radioactive effluent releases ALARA and meet the ALARA criteria in 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I (Ref. [32] ). The ALARA criteria are established as a small fraction (typically about 3 percent) of the NRC safety limits for dose to members of the public.
The licensee is required to keep levels of radioactive material in effluents ALARA, even under unusual operating conditions. The ALARA criteria are design objectives and limiting conditions for operation, not safety limits. If releases ever exceed design objectives, the licensee is required to take corrective actions to ensure the plant systems are functioning as designed and to report this information to the NRC.
The plant's license (i.e., Technical Specifications) requires licensees to establish a Radioactive Effluent Controls Program in the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) (or equivalent), and to control radioactive effluents in a manner such as to keep doses to members of the public from radioactive effluents ALARA. The methods of determining dose are described in the licensee's ODCM. The ODCMs are available through the NRC Public Document Room. Any changes to the ODCM are reported to the NRC and are provided in the licensee's ARERR. The licensee's Technical Specifications also require that an ARERR be submitted to the NRC on an annual basis. The ODCM contains both the offsite dose calculation methodologies and a radiological environmental monitoring program. Those dose calculations are based on:
actual measurements of the radioactive materials discharged to the unrestricted area; models of how radionuclides are dispersed and diluted in the environment; models of how radionuclides are incorporated into animals, plants, and soil; and biokinetic models of human uptake and metabolism of radioactive materials. The dose calculation models are designed to calculate the dose either to a real individual close to the NPP or conservatively to a hypothetical individual exposed to the highest concentrations of radioactive materials from radioactive effluents.
This person is often referred to as the maximum exposed individual (or maximum exposed hypothetical individual). The parameters and assumptions used in these dose calculations typically include conservative assumptions that tend to overestimate the dose. As a result, the actual doses received by real individuals are often much less than those calculated. Guidance for these calculations is provided in NRC RG 1.109 (Ref. [35] ).
2-5 The calculated annual organ doses and annual total body doses are included in Section 3.6. All the doses calculated by a licensee are reported in the NPPs' ARERRs. Summaries of the calculated doses are provided in Tables 3.19 through 3.22, and are shown graphically in Figures 3.17 through 3.22
. 2.5 Other Sources of Radiation Dose to the U.S. Population Doses from NPP radioactive effluents were discussed in the previous sections. This section discusses the doses that the average American typically receives each year from naturally occurring background radiation and all other sources of radiation. With the information presented in this section, the reader can compare the doses received from NPP effluents with the doses received from natural, medical, and other sources of radiation. This comparison provides some context to the concept of radiation dose effects.
In March 2009, the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) published Report No. 160 as an update to the 1987 NCRP Report No. 93, "Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States" (Refs.
[36] , [37] ). Report No. 160 describes the doses to the U.S. population from all sources of ionizing radiation for 2006, the most recent data available at the time the NCRP report was written. The NCRP report also includes information on the variability of those doses from one individual to another. The NCRP estimated that the average person in the United States receives about 620 mrem of radiation dose each year from all sources; i.e., both natural background radiation and man
-made radiation sources. NCRP Report No. 160 describes each of the sources of radiation that contribute to this dose, including:
naturally occurring sources (natural background) such as cosmic radiation from space, terrestrial radiation from radioactive materials in the earth, and naturally occurring radioactive materials in the food people eat and in the air people breathe; medical sources from diagnosis and treatment of health disorders using radioactive pharmaceuticals and radiation
-producing equipment; consumer products (such as household smoke detectors);
industrial processes, security devices, educational tools, and research activities; and exposure of workers that result from their occupations.
Figure 2.1 is a pie chart showing the relative contributions of these sources of radiation to the dose received by the average person. Larger contributors to dose are represented by proportionally larger slices of the pie. Doses to the public from NPPs are included in the industrial category; while doses to workers from nuclear power generation are included in the category of occupational dose.
Doses to the public due to effluents from NPPs are less than 0.1 percent (one-tenth of one percent) of what the average person receives each year from all sources of radiation. Doses to workers from occupational exposures, including those received from work at NPPs, also are less than 0.1 percent of the dose to member s of the public from all sources.
2-6 Figure 2.1 Sources of Radiation Exposure to the U.S. Population The chart above shows the contribution of various sources of exposure to the total collective dose and the total dose per individual in the U.S. population for 2006. Values have been rounded to the nearest 1%, except for those <1% [less than 1%]. Credit: Modification to image courtesy of National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements.
3-1 3 EFFLUENT DATA
3.1 Radioactive
Materials in Liquid and Gaseous Effluent s The activity of the most significant radionuclides discharged in liquid and gaseous effluents for 2015 are shown in Tables 3.1 through 3.14. The data from these tables are illustrated graphically in Figures 3.1 through 3.14. The tables and figures are organized by the two types of reactors used in the United States
- boiling-water reactors (BWRs) and pressurized-water reactors (PWRs). The tables and figures are further subdivided into liquid and gaseous effluents. Finally, the data are subdivided into the radionuclide categories (common radionuclides and significant radionuclides) as listed in Tables 2.1 and 2.2. These tables and figures allow a detailed comparison of each reactor's effluents with other reactors of the same type.
As described in Section 2.2, only the most significant radionuclides are included in the tables and graphs in Section 3.1. However, the total radiation dose from all radionuclides discharged from the reactors is included in Section 3.6, "Radiation Doses from Gaseous and Liquid Effluents.
" For comparison between plants, median values are included in some tables and figures. The median is the midpoint of the data such that half of the power plants will have greater activity and dose values than the median plant and half of the power plants will have values equal to or lower than the median plant. The median is a method of estimating a central or typical value while avoiding bias caused by extremely high or low values in the data set. All operating nuclear plant units are included when calculating the medians, even those sites for which no measurable release of a particular radionuclide is reported.
All licensees are required to have and use sensitive radioactive effluent measurement capabilities.
Many times, radioactive effluent releases are so low in concentration that a release cannot be detected. If no value is listed for a particular radionuclide in a table, it is because the licensee reported that the radionuclide was not detected at that NPP. Blanks in data fields are generally used instead of zeros in order to make it easier for the reader to quickly identify the positive values. On the following pages, the tables are presented first. In general, the information in each table is organized in descending order of activity. The facilities discharging the most activity are shown near the top of each table, while the facilities discharging the least activity are shown toward the bottom of each table. The median is shown in the middle of each data set. Tables with information on more than one radionuclide are listed by the total activity per plant, in descending order.
The figures are shown following the tables. In general, the information is organized in each figure in descending order of activity. The facilities discharging the most activity of the selected radionuclides are shown near the top of the figure, while the facilities discharging the least activity of the radionuclides are shown toward the bottom of each figure. The median is shown in the middle of each data set.
Figures with information on more than one radionuclide are listed by the total activity per plant, in descending order of activity. Figures with information on more than one radionuclide are shown in multi-colored graphs. For example, Figure 3.1 is a multi
-colored graph. In figures with multi
-colored graphs, the total activity of the selected radionuclides is shown on the right side of the graph, while the relative contribution of each radionuclide to the total activity is shown on the left side of the graph. The relative contributions of each nuclide are shown
-in multiple colors
-as a percent of the total activity. A multi-colored graph allows the reader to compare not only the activity but also the relative amounts of significant radionuclides released by the various facilities. Multi-colored graphs contain two separate scales of measurement. The total activity is show n on a logarithmic scale, while the radionuclide percentages of the total activity are shown on a linear scale.
3-2 Table 3.1 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Fission and Activation Gases, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Total Activity BWR Facility Kr-85 (Ci) Xe-133 (Ci) Xe-135 (Ci) Total (Ci) LaSalle 1 6.59E+02 6.25E+01 7.22E+02 LaSalle 2 6.59E+02 6.25E+01 7.22E+02 River Bend 3.48E+02 5.60E+01 4.04E+02 Grand Gulf 4.81E+01 1.64E+02 1.04E+02 3.16E+02 Monticello 1.75E+02 5.43E+01 2.29E+02 Dresden 3 6.32E+01 1.59E+01 7.91E+01 Brunswick 1 3.63E-01 6.26E+01 6.30E+01 Brunswick 2 3.63E-01 6.26E+01 6.30E+01 Perry 5.01E+01 1.43E+00 5.15E+01 Hope Creek 2.17E+01 1.48E+01 1.34E+00 3.78E+01 Oyster Creek 3.04E+00 3.28E+01 3.59E+01 Dresden 2 2.73E+01 6.56E+00 3.38E+01 Duane Arnold 5.89E+00 2.15E+01 2.74E+01 Limerick 1 9.19E-01 1.12E+01 9.15E+00 2.12E+01 Limerick 2 9.19E-01 1.12E+01 9.15E+00 2.12E+01 Peach Bottom 2 1.55E+01 4.88E+00 2.03E+01 Peach Bottom 3 1.55E+01 4.88E+00 2.03E+01 BWR Median Release 2.07E+00 1.48E+00 1.34E+01 Columbia 5.00E+00 1.41E+00 6.41E+00 FitzPatrick 5.73E+00 1.41E-01 5.88E+00 Quad Cities 1 1.10E+00 1.52E+00 2.62E+00 Quad Cities 2 1.10E+00 1.52E+00 2.62E+00 Nine Mile Point 2 7.33E-02 6.29E-01 7.02E-01 Clinton 5.06E-01 5.06E-01 Hatch 1 2.10E-01 2.18E-01 4.28E-01 Hatch 2 2.10E-01 2.18E-01 4.28E-01 Pilgrim 0.00E+00 2.36E-01 2.36E-01 Cooper 6.87E-03 2.26E-01 2.33E-01 Fermi 2 1.21E-01 1.21E-01 Browns Ferry 1 Browns Ferry 2 Browns Ferry 3 Nine Mile Point 1 Susquehanna 1 Susquehanna 2
3-3 Table 3.2 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Iodine, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Activity BWR Facility I-131 (Ci) BWR Facility I-131 (Ci) LaSalle 1 2.58E-02 BWR Median Release 6.00E-04 LaSalle 2 2.58E-02 Peach Bottom 2 5.68E-04 Monticello 8.22E-03 Peach Bottom 3 5.68E-04 River Bend 2.09E-03 FitzPatrick 4.22E-04 Dresden 3 1.75E-03 Pilgrim 2.47E-04 Dresden 2 1.50E-03 Nine Mile Point 1 2.35E-04 Fermi 2 1.48E-03 Columbia 2.02E-04 Brunswick 1 1.44E-03 Grand Gulf 1.87E-04 Brunswick 2 1.44E-03 Perry 1.27E-04 Hope Creek 1.41E-03 Hatch 1 1.11E-04 Oyster Creek 1.15E-03 Hatch 2 9.54E-05 Quad Cities 1 9.54E-04 Cooper 6.30E-05 Quad Cities 2 9.54E-04 Clinton 3.51E-05 Browns Ferry 1 7.24E-04 Duane Arnold 2.23E-05 Browns Ferry 2 7.24E-04 Limerick 1 7.05E-06 Browns Ferry 3 7.24E-04 Limerick 2 7.05E-06 Nine Mile Point 2 6.32E-04 Susquehanna 1 Susquehanna 2
3-4 Table 3.3 BWR Gaseous Releases - Particulates, 2015 Shown in Descending Order of Total Activity BWR Facility Co-58 (Ci) Co-60 (Ci) Cs-134 (Ci) Cs-137 (Ci) Total (Ci)
Oyster Creek 8.87E-03 9.37E-03 6.64E-04 1.89E-02 Dresden 3 7.96E-04 2.44E-03 3.24E-03 Dresden 2 7.21E-04 2.26E-03 2.98E-03 Browns Ferry 1 9.28E-04 1.10E-03 1.54E-05 2.04E-03 Browns Ferry 2 9.28E-04 1.10E-03 1.54E-05 2.04E-03 Browns Ferry 3 9.28E-04 1.10E-03 1.54E-05 2.04E-03 LaSalle 1 4.93E-04 1.42E-03 1.92E-03 LaSalle 2 4.93E-04 1.42E-03 1.92E-03 Peach Bottom 2 8.27E-05 1.07E-03 1.15E-03 Peach Bottom 3 8.27E-05 1.07E-03 1.15E-03 Nine Mile Point 1 9.24E-05 9.01E-04 2.03E-05 1.01E-03 Nine Mile Point 2 1.35E-05 9.04E-04 6.39E-05 9.81E-04 Brunswick 1 3.42E-05 4.35E-04 4.69E-04 Brunswick 2 3.42E-05 4.35E-04 4.69E-04 Hope Creek 2.61E-06 3.54E-04 3.57E-04 Quad Cities 1 3.20E-04 1.49E-05 3.35E-04 Quad Cities 2 3.20E-04 1.49E-05 3.35E-04 BWR Median Release 7.50E-06 3.08E-04 3.15E-04 Fermi 2 2.95E-04 2.95E-04 Monticello 1.30E-05 1.06E-04 1.52E-04 2.71E-04 Columbia 5.24E-06 1.25E-04 1.30E-04 Pilgrim 3.62E-06 8.22E-05 7.62E-06 9.34E-05 Cooper 7.28E-07 8.19E-05 2.29E-06 8.50E-05 River Bend 8.53E-06 6.49E-05 7.34E-05 Susquehanna 1 7.50E-06 4.68E-05 5.43E-05 Susquehanna 2 7.50E-06 4.68E-05 5.43E-05 Duane Arnold 3.24E-07 1.04E-05 1.07E-05 Limerick 1 8.35E-06 8.35E-06 Limerick 2 8.35E-06 8.35E-06 Clinton 8.23E-06 8.23E-06 Grand Gulf 5.73E-06 1.63E-06 7.36E-06 Hatch 1 7.21E-06 5.00E-08 7.26E-06 FitzPatrick 3.49E-06 3.49E-06 Hatch 2 1.19E-07 2.03E-08 1.39E-07 Perry 3-5 Table 3.4 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Tritium, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Activity BWR Facility H-3 (Ci) BWR Facility H-3 (Ci) Browns Ferry 1 3.68E+02 BWR Median Release 2.26E+01 Browns Ferry 2 3.68E+02 Duane Arnold 2.22E+01 Browns Ferry 3 3.68E+02 Limerick 1 2.10E+01 Brunswick 1 2.62E+02 Limerick 2 2.10E+01 Brunswick 2 2.62E+02 Columbia 1.86E+01 Hope Creek 2.01E+02 Monticello 1.83E+01 Fermi 2 1.69E+02 FitzPatrick 1.53E+01 Nine Mile Point 1 1.59E+02 LaSalle 1 1.18E+01 Pilgrim 7.18E+01 LaSalle 2 1.18E+01 Nine Mile Point 2 4.36E+01 River Bend 1.18E+01 Quad Cities 1 4.24E+01 Cooper 1.01E+01 Quad Cities 2 4.24E+01 Hatch 1 9.48E+00 Oyster Creek 3.08E+01 Hatch 2 9.39E+00 Grand Gulf 2.81E+01 Susquehanna 1 6.18E+00 Peach Bottom 2 2.54E+01 Susquehanna 2 6.18E+00 Peach Bottom 3 2.54E+01 Perry 3.80E+00 Clinton 2.30E+01 Dresden 3 3.33E+00 Dresden 2 3.12E+00 3-6 Table 3.5 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Carbon-14, 20 1 5 Shown in Descending Order of Activity BWR Facility C-14 (Ci) BWR Facility C-14 (Ci) Susquehanna 1 2.30E+01 BWR Median Release 1.42E+01 Susquehanna 2 2.30E+01 Hatch 1 1.42E+01 Nine Mile Point 2 1.98E+01 Hatch 2 1.42E+01 Peach Bottom 2 1.77E+01 Dresden 2 1.35E+01 Peach Bottom 3 1.77E+01 Fermi 2 1.32E+01 Grand Gulf 1.74E+01 Browns Ferry 1 1.22E+01 LaSalle 1 1.71E+01 Browns Ferry 2 1.22E+01 LaSalle 2 1.71E+01 Browns Ferry 3 1.22E+01 Limerick 1 1.70E+01 Cooper 1.19E+01 Limerick 2 1.70E+01 Brunswick 1 1.10E+01 Hope Creek 1.62E+01 Brunswick 2 1.10E+01 Perry 1.62E+01 River Bend 1.10E+01 Clinton 1.60E+01 FitzPatrick 1.07E+01 Columbia 1.48E+01 Duane Arnold 9.61E+00 Quad Cities 1 1.44E+01 Oyster Creek 9.32E+00 Quad Cities 2 1.44E+01 Nine Mile Point 1 8.44E+00 Dresden 3 1.43E+01 Pilgrim 7.18E+00 Monticello 6.64E+00 3-7 Table 3.6 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Fission and Activation Gases, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Total Activity PWR Facility Kr-85 (Ci) Xe-133 (Ci) Xe-135 (Ci) Total (Ci)
Sequoyah 1 4.11E+01 6.51E-03 4.11E+01 Sequoyah 2 4.11E+01 6.51E-03 4.11E+01 Catawba 1 2.69E-01 1.71E+01 4.02E-02 1.74E+01 Catawba 2 2.69E-01 1.71E+01 4.02E-02 1.74E+01 St. Lucie 2 7.07E-01 1.35E+01 6.34E-02 1.43E+01 Calvert Cliffs 1 1.66E+00 3.38E+00 8.94E-02 5.13E+00 Calvert Cliffs 2 1.66E+00 3.38E+00 8.94E-02 5.13E+00 Palisades 5.05E-04 1.92E+00 2.02E+00 3.94E+00 Ginna 3.54E-02 2.96E+00 8.30E-02 3.08E+00 Robinson 2 3.06E+00 9.39E-03 3.06E+00 South Texas 2 2.70E+00 2.70E+00 Millstone 2 1.82E+00 2.92E-01 1.00E-02 2.12E+00 Palo Verde 2 2.07E+00 9.12E-05 2.07E+00 Oconee 1 1.38E-03 1.78E+00 2.62E-02 1.81E+00 Oconee 2 1.38E-03 1.78E+00 2.62E-02 1.81E+00 Oconee 3 1.38E-03 1.78E+00 2.62E-02 1.81E+00 Millstone 3 8.65E-01 8.07E-03 2.23E-03 8.75E-01 Farley 1 8.25E-01 3.75E-02 8.62E-01 Byron 1 8.40E-01 1.81E-03 8.41E-01 Ft. Calhoun 7.63E-01 2.11E-02 7.84E-01 South Texas 1 7.51E-01 7.51E-01 Surry 1 6.06E-01 6.27E-02 6.69E-01 Surry 2 6.06E-01 6.27E-02 6.69E-01 Cook 1 4.35E-01 2.10E-01 6.61E-04 6.46E-01 Cook 2 4.35E-01 2.10E-01 6.61E-04 6.46E-01 Indian Point 3 5.06E-01 7.61E-02 5.83E-01 Three Mile Island 1 4.42E-01 2.68E-05 4.42E-01 St. Lucie 1 3.11E-03 4.01E-01 8.10E-03 4.12E-01 Harris 3.09E-03 3.85E-01 1.54E-02 4.04E-01 Byron 2 3.98E-01 1.41E-03 3.99E-01 North Anna 1 6.70E-02 2.60E-01 1.91E-03 3.29E-01 North Anna 2 6.70E-02 2.60E-01 1.91E-03 3.29E-01 3-8 Table 3.6 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Fission and Activation Gases, 201 5 (continued)
Shown in Descending Order of Total Activity PWR Facility Kr-85 (Ci) Xe-133 (Ci) Xe-135 (Ci) Total (Ci)
PWR Median Release 1.71E-01 3.14E-03 1.97E-01 Callaway 1.81E-01 7.91E-03 7.64E-03 1.97E-01 Salem 1 1.92E-01 5.07E-03 1.97E-01 Wolf Creek 1.50E-01 5.06E-04 1.51E-01 Beaver Valley 1 1.24E-01 2.62E-02 1.50E-01 Beaver Valley 2 1.24E-01 2.62E-02 1.50E-01 Point Beach 1 1.36E-01 1.33E-03 1.38E-01 Point Beach 2 1.36E-01 1.33E-03 1.38E-01 Prairie Island 1 4.95E-02 6.72E-02 2.83E-07 1.17E-01 Prairie Island 2 4.95E-02 6.72E-02 2.83E-07 1.17E-01 Vogtle 2 1.13E-01 1.57E-03 1.15E-01 Salem 2 8.98E-02 1.08E-02 1.01E-01 McGuire 1 1.98E-04 8.12E-02 5.85E-03 8.72E-02 McGuire 2 1.98E-04 8.12E-02 5.85E-03 8.72E-02 Comanche Peak 1 6.75E-02 1.29E-02 3.64E-03 8.41E-02 Comanche Peak 2 6.75E-02 1.29E-02 3.64E-03 8.41E-02 Watts Bar 1 3.77E-06 7.18E-02 6.39E-03 7.82E-02 Turkey Point 3 7.52E-02 2.76E-04 7.55E-02 Waterford 3 6.84E-02 6.84E-02 Turkey Point 4 6.67E-02 2.76E-04 6.70E-02 Braidwood 1 5.68E-02 5.68E-02 Braidwood 2 5.68E-02 5.68E-02 Indian Point 2 5.11E-02 4.75E-03 5.58E-02 Davis-Besse 4.03E-02 2.63E-03 4.29E-02 Arkansas 2 3.67E-02 3.67E-02 Palo Verde 3 3.25E-02 3.25E-02 Farley 2 1.61E-02 1.60E-03 1.77E-02 Diablo Canyon 1 1.26E-02 1.00E-04 1.27E-02 Diablo Canyon 2 1.26E-02 1.00E-04 1.27E-02 Vogtle 1 9.77E-03 9.77E-03 Arkansas 1 2.71E-03 1.07E-04 2.82E-03 Summer 2.00E-04 1.85E-03 1.32E-05 2.07E-03 Seabrook 2.60E-04 2.60E-04 Palo Verde 1 2.15E-04 2.15E-04 3-9 Table 3.7 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Iodine, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Activity PWR Facility I-131 (Ci) PWR Facility I-131 (Ci) Palisades 2.29E-04 PWR Median Release 0.00E+00 St. Lucie 2 1.04E-04 Arkansas 1 Braidwood 2 8.81E-05 Byron 1 Braidwood 1 6.00E-05 Callaway Palo Verde 3 4.88E-05 Comanche Peak 1 South Texas 1 3.53E-05 Comanche Peak 2 Millstone 2 3.25E-05 Davis-Besse Catawba 1 2.78E-05 Diablo Canyon 1 Catawba 2 2.78E-05 Diablo Canyon 2 Palo Verde 2 2.38E-05 Farley 2 Calvert Cliffs 1 1.98E-05 Indian Point 2 Calvert Cliffs 2 1.98E-05 Indian Point 3 Farley 1 1.90E-05 McGuire 1 Harris 1.35E-05 McGuire 2 St. Lucie 1 8.66E-06 Millstone 3 Vogtle 1 7.25E-06 North Anna 1 Byron 2 4.45E-06 North Anna 2 Ft. Calhoun 3.71E-06 Palo Verde 1 Arkansas 2 1.82E-06 Prairie Island 1 Beaver Valley 1 8.03E-07 Prairie Island 2 Beaver Valley 2 2.65E-07 Robinson 2 South Texas 2 2.36E-07 Salem 1 Cook 1 2.04E-07 Salem 2 Cook 2 2.04E-07 Seabrook Ginna 1.53E-07 Sequoyah 1 Watts Bar 1 6.65E-08 Sequoyah 2 Point Beach 1 2.61E-09 Summer Point Beach 2 2.61E-09 Surry 1 Oconee 1 3.80E-10 Surry 2 Oconee 2 3.80E-10 Three Mile Island 1 Oconee 3 3.80E-10 Turkey Point 3 Turkey Point 4 Vogtle 2 Waterford 3 Wolf Creek
3-10 Table 3.8 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Particulates, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Total Activity PWR Facility Co-58 (Ci) Co-60 (Ci) Cs-134 (Ci)
Cs-137 (Ci)
Total (Ci)
Palo Verde 3 1.30E-03 5.10E-04 1.81E-03 Beaver Valley 1 2.71E-04 2.73E-05 2.98E-04 South Texas 1 1.90E-04 7.45E-05 2.65E-04 Beaver Valley 2 1.81E-04 1.53E-05 1.97E-04 Millstone 2 1.10E-04 7.46E-06 3.95E-07 1.18E-04 Palisades 1.01E-05 5.36E-05 9.82E-08 6.38E-05 Palo Verde 2 3.34E-05 2.12E-05 5.46E-05 Surry 1 8.14E-06 2.52E-08 2.43E-05 3.25E-05 Surry 2 8.14E-06 2.52E-08 2.43E-05 3.25E-05 South Texas 2 2.17E-05 9.91E-06 3.16E-05 St. Lucie 1 1.73E-05 1.40E-06 4.36E-07 1.91E-05 St. Lucie 2 1.40E-05 1.58E-06 1.47E-06 1.71E-05 Watts Bar 1 6.00E-06 4.95E-06 1.10E-05 Wolf Creek 9.61E-06 9.61E-06 McGuire 1 4.80E-06 4.80E-06 McGuire 2 4.80E-06 4.80E-06 Diablo Canyon 1 4.35E-06 4.35E-06 Diablo Canyon 2 4.35E-06 4.35E-06 Robinson 2 4.13E-06 3.35E-08 4.25E-09 4.17E-06 Harris 2.72E-06 1.33E-06 5.68E-08 4.11E-06 North Anna 1 1.38E-06 1.24E-06 3.09E-07 2.93E-06 North Anna 2 1.38E-06 1.24E-06 3.09E-07 2.93E-06 Waterford 3 5.01E-07 1.36E-07 2.26E-06 2.90E-06 Seabrook 2.47E-06 2.47E-06 Point Beach 1 1.92E-06 5.15E-07 2.43E-06 Point Beach 2 1.92E-06 5.15E-07 2.43E-06 Turkey Point 3 2.20E-07 1.99E-06 2.21E-06 Palo Verde 1 7.35E-07 9.98E-07 1.73E-06 Sequoyah 1 1.28E-06 1.28E-06 Sequoyah 2 1.28E-06 1.28E-06 Prairie Island 1 9.90E-09 1.18E-06 1.19E-06 Prairie Island 2 9.90E-09 1.18E-06 1.19E-06 3-11 Table 3.8 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Particulates, 201 5 (continued)
Shown in Descending Order of Total Activity PWR Facility Co-58 (Ci) Co-60 (Ci) Cs-134 (Ci) Cs-137 (Ci) Total (Ci)
PWR Median Release 7.19E-07 Arkansas 2 7.19E-07 7.19E-07 Salem 2 3.77E-07 2.81E-07 6.58E-07 Farley 1 2.29E-07 3.90E-07 6.19E-07 Millstone 3 6.97E-08 6.97E-08 Cook 1 1.09E-09 1.09E-09 Cook 2 1.09E-09 1.09E-09 Arkansas 1 Braidwood 1 Braidwood 2 Byron 1 Byron 2 Callaway Calvert Cliffs 1 Calvert Cliffs 2 Catawba 1 Catawba 2 Comanche Peak 1 Comanche Peak 2 Davis-Besse Farley 2 Ft. Calhoun Ginna Indian Point 2 Indian Point 3 Oconee 1 Oconee 2 Oconee 3 Salem 1 Summer Three Mile Island 1 Turkey Point 4 Vogtle 1 Vogtle 2 3-12 Table 3.9 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Tritium, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Activity PWR Facility H-3 (Ci) PWR Facility H-3 (Ci) Palo Verde 2 9.19E+02 PWR Median Release 3.59E+01 Palo Verde 3 8.03E+02 Waterford 3 3.59E+01 Salem 1 4.27E+02 St. Lucie 1 3.16E+01 Palo Verde 1 3.31E+02 Vogtle 2 3.12E+01 Braidwood 2 1.62E+02 Wolf Creek 2.94E+01 Seabrook 1.41E+02 Byron 1 2.72E+01 Harris 1.39E+02 Vogtle 1 2.57E+01 Salem 2 1.22E+02 Farley 2 2.48E+01 Braidwood 1 1.12E+02 Summer 2.44E+01 Catawba 1 1.08E+02 Robinson 2 2.29E+01 Catawba 2 1.08E+02 South Texas 2 2.17E+01 Three Mile Island 1 1.07E+02 Comanche Peak 1 1.91E+01 Ginna 8.61E+01 Comanche Peak 2 1.91E+01 St. Lucie 2 7.32E+01 Arkansas 1 1.71E+01 Watts Bar 1 7.17E+01 Surry 1 1.58E+01 Oconee 1 6.00E+01 Surry 2 1.58E+01 Oconee 2 6.00E+01 Millstone 2 1.53E+01 Oconee 3 6.00E+01 Indian Point 3 1.30E+01 Davis-Besse 5.88E+01 Sequoyah 1 1.16E+01 Diablo Canyon 1 5.66E+01 Sequoyah 2 1.16E+01 Diablo Canyon 2 5.66E+01 Indian Point 2 1.09E+01 Byron 2 5.31E+01 Palisades 1.09E+01 Cook 1 5.16E+01 North Anna 1 8.97E+00 Cook 2 5.16E+01 North Anna 2 8.97E+00 Callaway 4.84E+01 Prairie Island 1 8.27E+00 Millstone 3 4.49E+01 Prairie Island 2 8.27E+00 South Texas 1 4.03E+01 Farley 1 8.26E+00 Point Beach 1 4.01E+01 Turkey Point 3 7.92E+00 Point Beach 2 4.01E+01 Turkey Point 4 5.83E+00 McGuire 1 3.94E+01 Calvert Cliffs 1 5.70E+00 McGuire 2 3.94E+01 Calvert Cliffs 2 5.70E+00 Arkansas 2 3.68E+01 Ft. Calhoun 2.88E+00 Beaver Valley 2 1.79E+00 Beaver Valley 1 1.15E+00 3-13 Table 3.10 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Carbon-14, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Activity PWR Facility C-14 (Ci) PWR Facility C-14 (Ci) North Anna 1 1.34E+01 PWR Median Release 9.24E+00 North Anna 2 1.34E+01 Indian Point 3 9.24E+00 Callaway 1.31E+01 Cook 1 9.16E+00 Waterford 3 1.31E+01 Cook 2 9.16E+00 Comanche Peak 1 1.27E+01 Millstone 2 9.02E+00 Comanche Peak 2 1.27E+01 Arkansas 1 8.76E+00 Millstone 3 1.25E+01 Turkey Point 4 8.64E+00 Seabrook 1.21E+01 Summer 8.42E+00 Vogtle 1 1.21E+01 Three Mile Island 1 8.30E+00 Vogtle 2 1.21E+01 Harris 7.88E+00 Diablo Canyon 2 1.19E+01 Oconee 1 7.85E+00 Diablo Canyon 1 1.14E+01 Oconee 2 7.85E+00 Salem 1 1.12E+01 Oconee 3 7.85E+00 St. Lucie 1 1.12E+01 Surry 1 7.78E+00 Indian Point 2 1.11E+01 Surry 2 7.78E+00 Arkansas 2 1.09E+01 Palisades 7.77E+00 Wolf Creek 1.07E+01 Robinson 2 7.70E+00 Davis-Besse 1.06E+01 Turkey Point 3 7.46E+00 Beaver Valley 1 1.05E+01 South Texas 1 7.30E+00 McGuire 1 1.05E+01 South Texas 2 7.29E+00 McGuire 2 1.05E+01 Ginna 6.80E+00 Salem 2 1.02E+01 Beaver Valley 2 6.02E+00 Calvert Cliffs 1 9.91E+00 Point Beach 1 5.88E+00 Calvert Cliffs 2 9.91E+00 Point Beach 2 5.84E+00 Catawba 1 9.88E+00 Byron 2 4.61E+00 Catawba 2 9.88E+00 Prairie Island 1 4.52E+00 St. Lucie 2 9.47E+00 Prairie Island 2 4.52E+00 Sequoyah 1 9.41E+00 Braidwood 1 4.28E+00 Sequoyah 2 9.41E+00 Byron 1 4.25E+00 Watts Bar 1 9.33E+00 Braidwood 2 4.19E+00 Farley 1 9.28E+00 Palo Verde 1 2.72E+00 Farley 2 9.28E+00 Palo Verde 2 2.72E+00 Palo Verde 3 2.72E+00 Ft. Calhoun 1.97E+00 3-14 Table 3.11 BWR Liquid Releases
- Fission and Activation Products, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Total Activity BWR Facility Co-58 (Ci) Co-60 (Ci) Cs-134 (C i) Cs-137 (Ci) Fe-55 (Ci) I-131 (Ci) Total (Ci) Browns Ferry 1 6.35E-03 8.29E-02 2.13E-04 1.20E-02 1.06E-03 1.03E-01 Browns Ferry 2 6.35E-03 8.29E-02 2.13E-04 1.20E-02 1.06E-03 1.03E-01 Browns Ferry 3 6.35E-03 8.29E-02 2.13E-04 1.20E-02 1.06E-03 1.03E-01 Hope Creek 2.76E-03 2.35E-02 3.62E-04 1.06E-03 3.12E-06 2.77E-02 Perry 7.36E-04 9.68E-03 8.96E-06 2.78E-05 1.05E-02 Susquehanna 1 2.00E-03 4.52E-03 1.03E-05 6.53E-03 Susquehanna 2 2.00E-03 4.52E-03 1.03E-05 6.53E-03 Peach Bottom 2 5.05E-06 5.28E-03 6.77E-05 5.36E-03 Peach Bottom 3 5.05E-06 5.28E-03 6.77E-05 5.36E-03 Grand Gulf 5.67E-05 2.01E-03 5.73E-06 1.68E-04 2.39E-03 4.62E-03 Hatch 1 2.33E-04 2.45E-03 7.54E-05 1.07E-03 2.60E-04 4.09E-03 River Bend 1.04E-05 2.51E-03 3.03E-06 2.75E-06 1.76E-06 2.52E-03 Dresden 3 1.82E-03 6.94E-04 2.51E-03 Limerick 1 1.66E-05 6.35E-05 2.26E-03 2.34E-03 Limerick 2 1.66E-05 6.35E-05 2.26E-03 2.34E-03 Quad Cities 1 1.37E-03 2.18E-05 4.40E-04 1.83E-03 Quad Cities 2 1.37E-03 2.18E-05 4.40E-04 1.83E-03 BWR Median Release 5.05E-06 1.16E-03 1.38E-06 1.66E-03 Hatch 2 1.55E-04 1.10E-03 1.39E-04 8.14E-05 4.46E-06 1.48E-03 Brunswick 1 7.75E-06 1.22E-03 3.58E-05 1.87E-04 1.45E-03 Brunswick 2 7.75E-06 1.22E-03 3.58E-05 1.87E-04 1.45E-03 Pilgrim 6.58E-06 1.56E-04 2.23E-05 1.85E-04 Clinton Columbia Cooper Dresden 2 Duane Arnold Fermi 2 FitzPatrick LaSalle 1 LaSalle 2 Monticello Nine Mile Point 1 Nine Mile Point 2 Oyster Creek
3-15 Table 3.12 BWR Liquid Releases
- Tritium, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Activity BWR Facility H-3 (Ci) BWR Facility H-3 (Ci) Brunswick 1 9.93E+01 BWR Median Release 3.15E+00 Brunswick 2 9.93E+01 Limerick 1 3.03E+00 Hope Creek 6.53E+01 Limerick 2 3.03E+00 River Bend 6.44E+01 Dresden 2 3.29E-01 Grand Gulf 4.49E+01 Quad Cities 1 2.62E-01 Browns Ferry 1 4.08E+01 Quad Cities 2 2.62E-01 Browns Ferry 2 4.08E+01 Oyster Creek 2.09E-01 Browns Ferry 3 4.08E+01 FitzPatrick 3.70E-02 Susquehanna 1 2.43E+01 Clinton Susquehanna 2 2.43E+01 Columbia Hatch 1 1.67E+01 Cooper Hatch 2 1.01E+01 Duane Arnold Peach Bottom 2 5.61E+00 Fermi 2 Peach Bottom 3 5.61E+00 LaSalle 1 Perry 5.46E+00 LaSalle 2 Pilgrim 3.56E+00 Monticello Dresden 3 3.28E+00 Nine Mile Point 1 Nine Mile Point 2
3-16 Table 3.13 PWR Liquid Releases
- Fission and Activation Products, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Total Activity PWR Facility Co-58 (Ci) Co-60 (Ci) Cs-134 (Ci) Cs-137 (Ci) Fe-55 (Ci) I-131 (Ci) Total (Ci) Calvert Cliffs 1 2.19E-02 3.22E-03 2.31E-02 2.63E-01 2.93E-03 3.14E-01 Calvert Cliffs 2 2.19E-02 3.22E-03 2.31E-02 2.63E-01 2.93E-03 3.14E-01 Arkansas 1 1.59E-02 2.13E-02 2.97E-03 6.54E-03 1.25E-03 7.98E-04 4.87E-02 Beaver Valley 1 1.58E-02 9.29E-03 4.11E-04 8.10E-03 3.36E-02 Beaver Valley 2 1.58E-02 9.29E-03 4.11E-04 8.10E-03 3.36E-02 Vogtle 1 2.20E-02 5.77E-03 1.10E-05 1.33E-03 4.26E-03 7.15E-08 3.34E-02 Waterford 3 9.69E-03 1.93E-03 1.71E-05 1.93E-02 3.09E-02 Indian Point 2 3.95E-04 6.98E-04 2.76E-02 5.47E-04 2.92E-02 Millstone 3 4.80E-03 4.10E-03 1.99E-03 9.17E-03 7.00E-03 2.71E-02 Farley 2 1.54E-02 9.38E-03 9.47E-04 2.11E-06 2.58E-02 McGuire 1 1.98E-03 1.53E-02 8.25E-07 5.40E-04 8.89E-04 1.87E-02 McGuire 2 1.98E-03 1.53E-02 8.25E-07 5.40E-04 8.89E-04 1.87E-02 Surry 1 2.15E-03 1.44E-02 6.60E-04 5.70E-06 1.72E-02 Surry 2 2.15E-03 1.44E-02 6.60E-04 5.70E-06 1.72E-02 Turkey Point 3 8.70E-03 2.66E-03 6.39E-06 1.56E-04 5.05E-03 1.66E-02 Turkey Point 4 8.70E-03 2.66E-03 6.39E-06 1.56E-04 5.05E-03 1.66E-02 Braidwood 1 5.66E-03 6.02E-03 4.55E-03 1.62E-02 Braidwood 2 5.66E-03 6.02E-03 4.55E-03 1.62E-02 Farley 1 1.01E-02 4.93E-03 2.16E-05 7.25E-04 1.58E-02 Watts Bar 1 8.81E-03 2.09E-03 5.63E-06 4.71E-03 1.56E-02 Sequoyah 1 1.17E-02 2.29E-03 5.93E-07 1.23E-03 1.52E-02 Sequoyah 2 1.17E-02 2.29E-03 5.93E-07 1.23E-03 1.52E-02 Robinson 2 6.65E-03 6.13E-03 1.32E-04 1.21E-03 1.41E-02 Harris 9.33E-03 3.68E-03 1.47E-05 1.53E-04 1.32E-02 Callaway 7.41E-06 2.41E-03 1.98E-04 9.62E-03 1.22E-02 Indian Point 3 4.57E-03 4.59E-03 6.83E-06 5.73E-04 1.69E-03 1.14E-02 Vogtle 2 7.04E-03 2.10E-03 3.35E-04 1.01E-03 1.05E-02 Catawba 1 4.25E-03 2.90E-03 1.63E-05 2.31E-03 1.37E-06 9.47E-03 Catawba 2 4.25E-03 2.90E-03 1.63E-05 2.31E-03 1.37E-06 9.47E-03 North Anna 1 6.93E-03 1.40E-03 7.65E-06 8.33E-03 North Anna 2 6.93E-03 1.40E-03 7.65E-06 8.33E-03 Ft. Calhoun 2.38E-03 6.23E-04 1.49E-05 3.21E-03 1.17E-03 4.52E-04 7.85E-03 3-17 Table 3.13 PWR Liquid Releases
- Fission and Activation Products, 201 5 (continued)
Shown in Descending Order of Total Activity PWR Facility Co-58 (Ci) Co-60 (Ci) Cs-134 (Ci) Cs-137 (Ci) Fe-55 (Ci) I-131 (Ci) Total (Ci) PWR Median Release 2.76E-03 2.03E-03 0.00E+00 4.43E-05 5.55E-04 0.00E+00 7.39E-03 Diablo Canyon 1 7.24E-04 3.12E-03 3.55E-03 7.39E-03 Diablo Canyon 2 7.24E-04 3.12E-03 3.55E-03 7.39E-03 Point Beach 1 4.53E-03 2.03E-03 4.43E-06 5.90E-05 6.63E-03 Point Beach 2 4.53E-03 2.03E-03 4.43E-06 5.90E-05 6.63E-03 Ginna 5.31E-03 1.18E-05 5.32E-03 Millstone 2 1.19E-03 7.14E-04 3.13E-08 1.75E-04 2.91E-03 2.22E-04 5.22E-03 Wolf Creek 3.71E-03 1.96E-04 8.24E-04 4.73E-03 Prairie Island 1 4.12E-03 3.25E-04 4.44E-03 Prairie Island 2 4.12E-03 3.25E-04 4.44E-03 Seabrook 3.44E-03 7.58E-04 7.60E-07 4.20E-03 Summer 4.24E-04 3.07E-03 1.59E-04 2.37E-04 3.89E-03 Salem 2 2.62E-03 1.18E-03 6.76E-05 3.87E-03 Byron 1 2.76E-03 1.09E-03 3.85E-03 Byron 2 2.76E-03 1.09E-03 3.85E-03 South Texas 1 2.34E-04 2.90E-03 4.43E-05 5.25E-04 3.70E-03 Salem 1 2.54E-03 8.98E-04 1.76E-05 2.41E-04 3.69E-03 Davis-Besse 7.21E-04 3.85E-04 9.28E-06 1.51E-04 1.73E-03 3.00E-03 Palisades 1.56E-03 3.60E-04 6.43E-05 1.98E-03 South Texas 2 5.21E-05 7.57E-04 6.26E-06 8.98E-04 1.71E-03 Arkansas 2 6.23E-04 1.89E-04 1.54E-05 3.48E-04 3.48E-04 2.67E-05 1.55E-03 Oconee 1 8.27E-04 3.55E-05 6.88E-05 2.85E-04 1.68E-06 1.22E-03 Oconee 2 8.27E-04 3.55E-05 6.88E-05 2.85E-04 1.68E-06 1.22E-03 Oconee 3 8.27E-04 3.55E-05 6.88E-05 2.85E-04 1.68E-06 1.22E-03 St. Lucie 1 3.56E-04 5.12E-04 2.02E-05 9.98E-06 8.98E-04 St. Lucie 2 3.56E-04 5.12E-04 2.02E-05 9.98E-06 8.98E-04 Comanche Peak 1 2.70E-04 4.36E-04 7.25E-05 7.78E-04 Comanche Peak 2 2.70E-04 4.36E-04 7.25E-05 7.78E-04 Cook 1 9.41E-05 9.43E-05 5.63E-06 1.22E-05 5.55E-04 7.61E-04 Cook 2 9.41E-05 9.43E-05 5.63E-06 1.22E-05 5.55E-04 7.61E-04 Three Mile Island 1 3.94E-06 1.57E-04 7.20E-05 2.33E-04 Palo Verde 1 Palo Verde 2 Palo Verde 3
3-18 Table 3.14 PWR Liquid Releases
- Tritium, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Activity PWR Facility H-3 (Ci) PWR Facility H-3 (Ci) Watts Bar 1 4.16E+03 PWR Median Release 5.91E+02 Byron 1 1.66E+03 Salem 2 5.91E+02 Byron 2 1.66E+03 Arkansas 2 5.82E+02 Braidwood 1 1.60E+03 Calvert Cliffs 1 5.64E+02 Braidwood 2 1.60E+03 Calvert Cliffs 2 5.64E+02 Seabrook 1.57E+03 Millstone 3 5.42E+02 South Texas 1 1.50E+03 Wolf Creek 5.39E+02 Sequoyah 1 1.24E+03 Millstone 2 5.31E+02 Sequoyah 2 1.24E+03 Palisades 5.30E+02 Waterford 3 1.20E+03 Farley 2 5.29E+02 Vogtle 1 1.06E+03 Robinson 2 5.11E+02 Three Mile Island 1 1.01E+03 Ginna 4.42E+02 Comanche Peak 1 9.75E+02 Point Beach 1 4.34E+02 Comanche Peak 2 9.75E+02 Point Beach 2 4.34E+02 Diablo Canyon 1 9.30E+02 Farley 1 4.28E+02 Diablo Canyon 2 9.30E+02 Salem 1 3.95E+02 Summer 8.61E+02 Oconee 1 3.46E+02 Callaway 8.56E+02 Oconee 2 3.46E+02 Davis-Besse 8.19E+02 Oconee 3 3.46E+02 Beaver Valley 1 7.56E+02 North Anna 1 3.38E+02 Beaver Valley 2 7.56E+02 North Anna 2 3.38E+02 South Texas 2 7.28E+02 Arkansas 1 3.32E+02 Cook 1 7.12E+02 Prairie Island 1 3.25E+02 Cook 2 7.12E+02 Prairie Island 2 3.25E+02 Harris 6.90E+02 Catawba 1 3.00E+02 McGuire 1 6.82E+02 Catawba 2 3.00E+02 McGuire 2 6.82E+02 St. Lucie 1 2.70E+02 Vogtle 2 6.65E+02 St. Lucie 2 2.70E+02 Turkey Point 3 6.49E+02 Ft. Calhoun 1.58E+02 Turkey Point 4 6.49E+02 Indian Point 2 4.48E-01 Surry 1 5.94E+02 Indian Point 3 1.09E-02 Surry 2 5.94E+02 Palo Verde 1 Palo Verde 2 Palo Verde 3
3-19
- BWR average radionuclide mix and median activity released.
Figure 3.1 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Fission and Activation Gases 0%25%50%75%100%Susquehanna 2Susquehanna 1Nine Mile Point 1Browns Ferry 3Browns Ferry 2Browns Ferry 1Fermi 2CooperPilgrimHatch 2Hatch 1ClintonNine Mile Point 2Quad Cities 2Quad Cities 1FitzPatrickColumbiaBWR *Peach Bottom 3Peach Bottom 2Limerick 2Limerick 1Duane ArnoldDresden 2Oyster CreekHope CreekPerryBrunswick 2Brunswick 1Dresden 3MonticelloGrand GulfRiver BendLaSalle 2LaSalle 1Radionuclide Distribution0.0100.100 1 101001,000Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
Kr-85 Xe-133 Xe-135Total Activity Released 3-20 Figure 3.2 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Iodine 1E-71E-61E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+0Susquehanna 2Susquehanna 1Limerick 2Limerick 1Duane ArnoldClintonCooperHatch 2Hatch 1PerryGrand GulfColumbiaNine Mile Point 1PilgrimFitzPatrickPeach Bottom 3Peach Bottom 2BWR Median ReleaseNine Mile Point 2Browns Ferry 3Browns Ferry 2Browns Ferry 1Quad Cities 2Quad Cities 1Oyster CreekHope CreekBrunswick 2Brunswick 1Fermi 2Dresden 2Dresden 3River BendMonticelloLaSalle 2LaSalle 1Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
I-131 3-21
- Particulates 0%25%50%75%100%PerryHatch 2FitzPatrickHatch 1Grand GulfClintonLimerick 2Limerick 1Duane ArnoldSusquehanna 2Susquehanna 1River BendCooperPilgrimColumbiaMonticelloFermi 2BWR *Quad Cities 2Quad Cities 1Hope CreekBrunswick 2Brunswick 1Nine Mile Point 2Nine Mile Point 1Peach Bottom 3Peach Bottom 2LaSalle 2LaSalle 1Browns Ferry 3Browns Ferry 2Browns Ferry 1Dresden 2Dresden 3Oyster CreekRadionuclide Distribution1E-111E-91E-71E-51E-31E-1Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
Co-60 Co-58 Cs-134 Cs-137Total Activity Released 3-22 Figure 3.4 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Tritium 0.0010.0100.100 1 101001,000Dresden 2Dresden 3PerrySusquehanna 2Susquehanna 1Hatch 2Hatch 1CooperRiver BendLaSalle 2LaSalle 1FitzPatrickMonticelloColumbiaLimerick 2Limerick 1Duane ArnoldBWR Median ReleaseClintonPeach Bottom 3Peach Bottom 2Grand GulfOyster CreekQuad Cities 2Quad Cities 1Nine Mile Point 2PilgrimNine Mile Point 1Fermi 2Hope CreekBrunswick 2Brunswick 1Browns Ferry 3Browns Ferry 2Browns Ferry 1Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
H-3 3-23 Figure 3.5 BWR Gaseous Releases
- Carbon-14 1 10100MonticelloPilgrimNine Mile Point 1Oyster CreekDuane ArnoldFitzPatrickRiver BendBrunswick 2Brunswick 1CooperBrowns Ferry 3Browns Ferry 2Browns Ferry 1Fermi 2Dresden 2Hatch 2Hatch 1BWR Median ReleaseDresden 3Quad Cities 2Quad Cities 1ColumbiaClintonPerryHope CreekLimerick 2Limerick 1LaSalle 2LaSalle 1Grand GulfPeach Bottom 3Peach Bottom 2Nine Mile Point 2Susquehanna 2Susquehanna 1Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
C-14 3-24
- PWR average radionuclide mix and median activity released.
Figure 3.6 PWR Gaseous Releases - Fission and Activation Gases 0%25%50%75%100%PWR *North Anna 2North Anna 1Byron 2HarrisSt. Lucie 1Three Mile Island 1Indian Point 3Cook 2Cook 1Surry 2Surry 1South Texas 1Ft. CalhounByron 1Farley 1Millstone 3Oconee 3Oconee 2Oconee 1Palo Verde 2Millstone 2South Texas 2Robinson 2GinnaPalisadesCalvert Cliffs 2Calvert Cliffs 1St. Lucie 2Catawba 2Catawba 1Sequoyah 2Sequoyah 1Radionuclide Distribution1E-71E-51E-31E-11E+11E+3Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
Kr-85 Xe-133 Xe-135Total Activity Released 3-25
- PWR average radionuclide mix and median activity released.
Figure 3.6 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Fission and Activation Gases (continued) 0%25%50%75%100%Palo Verde 1SeabrookSummerArkansas 1Vogtle 1Diablo Canyon 2Diablo Canyon 1Farley 2Palo Verde 3Arkansas 2Davis-BesseIndian Point 2Braidwood 2Braidwood 1Turkey Point 4Waterford 3Turkey Point 3Watts Bar 1Comanche Peak 2Comanche Peak 1McGuire 2McGuire 1Salem 2Vogtle 2Prairie Island 2Prairie Island 1Point Beach 2Point Beach 1Beaver Valley 2Beaver Valley 1Wolf CreekSalem 1CallawayPWR *Radionuclide Distribution1E-71E-51E-31E-11E+11E+3Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
Kr-85 Xe-133 Xe-135Total Activity Released 3-26 Note: See Table 3.7 for list of nuclear power plants with no releases of iodine reported.
Figure 3.7 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Iodine 1E-101E-81E-61E-41E-2PWR Median ReleaseOconee 3Oconee 2Oconee 1Point Beach 2Point Beach 1Watts Bar 1GinnaCook 2Cook 1South Texas 2Beaver Valley 2Beaver Valley 1Arkansas 2Ft. CalhounByron 2Vogtle 1St. Lucie 1HarrisFarley 1Calvert Cliffs 2Calvert Cliffs 1Palo Verde 2Catawba 2Catawba 1Millstone 2South Texas 1Palo Verde 3Braidwood 1Braidwood 2St. Lucie 2PalisadesActivity Released in 2015 (Ci)
I-131 3-27 Note: See Table 3.8 for list of nuclear power plants with no releases of selected particulates reported.
- PWR average radionuclide mix and median activity released.
Figure 3.8 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Particulates 0%25%50%75%100%Cook 2Cook 1Millstone 3Farley 1Salem 2Arkansas 2PWR *Prairie Island 2Prairie Island 1Sequoyah 2Sequoyah 1Palo Verde 1Turkey Point 3Point Beach 2Point Beach 1SeabrookWaterford 3North Anna 2North Anna 1HarrisRobinson 2Diablo Canyon 2Diablo Canyon 1McGuire 2McGuire 1Wolf CreekWatts Bar 1St. Lucie 2St. Lucie 1South Texas 2Surry 2Surry 1Palo Verde 2PalisadesMillstone 2Beaver Valley 2South Texas 1Beaver Valley 1Palo Verde 3Radionuclide Distribution1E-111E-101E-91E-81E-71E-61E-51E-41E-31E-2Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
Co-60 Co-58 Cs-134 Cs-137Total Activity Released 3-28 Figure 3.9 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Tritium 0.0010.0100.100 1 101001,00010,000PWR Median ReleaseArkansas 2McGuire 2McGuire 1Point Beach 2Point Beach 1South Texas 1Millstone 3CallawayCook 2Cook 1Byron 2Diablo Canyon 2Diablo Canyon 1Davis-BesseOconee 3Oconee 2Oconee 1Watts Bar 1St. Lucie 2GinnaThree Mile Island 1Catawba 2Catawba 1Braidwood 1Salem 2HarrisSeabrookBraidwood 2Palo Verde 1Salem 1Palo Verde 3Palo Verde 2Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
H-3 3-29 Figure 3.9 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Tritium (continued) 0.0010.0100.100 1 101001,00010,000Beaver Valley 1Beaver Valley 2Ft. CalhounCalvert Cliffs 2Calvert Cliffs 1Turkey Point 4Turkey Point 3Farley 1Prairie Island 2Prairie Island 1North Anna 2North Anna 1PalisadesIndian Point 2Sequoyah 2Sequoyah 1Indian Point 3Millstone 2Surry 2Surry 1Arkansas 1Comanche Peak 2Comanche Peak 1South Texas 2Robinson 2SummerFarley 2Vogtle 1Byron 1Wolf CreekVogtle 2St. Lucie 1Waterford 3PWR Median ReleaseActivity Released in 2015 (Ci)
H-3 3-30 Figure 3.10 PWR Gaseous Releases
- Carbon-14 0.00010.00100.01000.1000 1 10100PWR Median ReleaseFarley 2Farley 1Watts Bar 1Sequoyah 2Sequoyah 1St. Lucie 2Catawba 2Catawba 1Calvert Cliffs 2Calvert Cliffs 1Salem 2McGuire 2McGuire 1Beaver Valley 1Davis-BesseWolf CreekArkansas 2Indian Point 2St. Lucie 1Salem 1Diablo Canyon 1Diablo Canyon 2Vogtle 2Vogtle 1SeabrookMillstone 3Comanche Peak 2Comanche Peak 1Waterford 3CallawayNorth Anna 2North Anna 1Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
C-14 3-31 Figure 3.1 0 PWR G aseous R eleases - Carbon-1 4 (continued) 0.00010.00100.01000.1000 1 10100Ft. CalhounPalo Verde 3Palo Verde 2 Palo Verde 1Braidwood 2Byron 1Braidwood 1Prairie Island 2 Prairie Island 1Byron 2Point Beach 2 Point Beach 1Beaver Valley 2GinnaSouth Texas 2 South Texas 1Turkey Point 3Robinson 2PalisadesSurry 2 Surry 1Oconee 3 Oconee 2 Oconee 1HarrisThree Mile Island 1SummerTurkey Point 4Arkansas 1Millstone 2Cook 2 Cook 1Indian Point 3PWR Median ReleaseActivity Released in 2015 (Ci)C-14 3-32
- BWR average radionuclide mix and median activity released.
Figure 3.11 BWR Liquid Releases
- Fission and Activation Products 0%25%50%75%100%Oyster CreekNine Mile Point 2Nine Mile Point 1MonticelloLaSalle 2LaSalle 1FitzPatrickFermi 2Duane ArnoldDresden 2CooperColumbiaClintonPilgrimBrunswick 2Brunswick 1Hatch 2BWR *Quad Cities 2Quad Cities 1Limerick 2Limerick 1Dresden 3River BendHatch 1Grand GulfPeach Bottom 3Peach Bottom 2Susquehanna 2Susquehanna 1PerryHope CreekBrowns Ferry 3Browns Ferry 2Browns Ferry 1Radionuclide Distribution1E-61E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+0Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
Fe-55 Cs-137 Co-58 Co-60 Cs-134 I-131Total Activity Released 3-33 Figure 3.12 BWR Liquid Releases
- Tritium 1E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+01E+11E+21E+3Nine Mile Point 2Nine Mile Point 1MonticelloLaSalle 2LaSalle 1Fermi 2Duane ArnoldCooperColumbiaClintonFitzPatrickOyster CreekQuad Cities 2Quad Cities 1Dresden 2Limerick 2Limerick 1BWR Median ReleaseDresden 3PilgrimPerryPeach Bottom 3Peach Bottom 2Hatch 2Hatch 1Susquehanna 2Susquehanna 1Browns Ferry 3Browns Ferry 2Browns Ferry 1Grand GulfRiver BendHope CreekBrunswick 2Brunswick 1Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
H-3 3-34
- PWR average radionuclide mix and median activity released.
Figure 3.13 PWR Liquid Releases
- Fission and Activation Products 0%25%50%75%100%PWR *Ft. CalhounNorth Anna 2North Anna 1Catawba 2Catawba 1Vogtle 2Indian Point 3CallawayHarrisRobinson 2Sequoyah 2Sequoyah 1Watts Bar 1Farley 1Braidwood 2Braidwood 1Turkey Point 4Turkey Point 3Surry 2Surry 1McGuire 2McGuire 1Farley 2Millstone 3Indian Point 2Waterford 3Vogtle 1Beaver Valley 2Beaver Valley 1Arkansas 1Calvert Cliffs 2Calvert Cliffs 1Radionuclide Distribution1E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+0Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
Co-58 Co-60 Cs-134 Cs-137Fe-55 I-131Total Activity Released 3-35
- PWR average radionuclide mix and median activity released.
Figure 3.1 3 PWR Liquid Releases
- Fission and Activation Products (continued) 0%25%50%75%100%Palo Verde 3Palo Verde 2Palo Verde 1Three Mile Island 1Cook 2Cook 1Comanche Peak 2Comanche Peak 1St. Lucie 2St. Lucie 1Oconee 3Oconee 2Oconee 1Arkansas 2South Texas 2PalisadesDavis-BesseSalem 1South Texas 1Byron 2Byron 1Salem 2SummerSeabrookPrairie Island 2Prairie Island 1Wolf CreekMillstone 2GinnaPoint Beach 2Point Beach 1Diablo Canyon 2Diablo Canyon 1PWR *Radionuclide Distribution1E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+0Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
Co-58 Co-60 Cs-134 Cs-137Fe-55 I-131Total Activity Released 3-36 Figure 3.14 PWR Liquid Releases
- Tritium 0.0010.0100.100 1 101001,00010,000PWR Median ReleaseSurry 2Surry 1Turkey Point 4Turkey Point 3Vogtle 2McGuire 2McGuire 1HarrisCook 2Cook 1South Texas 2Beaver Valley 2Beaver Valley 1Davis-BesseCallawaySummerDiablo Canyon 2Diablo Canyon 1Comanche Peak 2Comanche Peak 1Three Mile Island 1Vogtle 1Waterford 3Sequoyah 2Sequoyah 1South Texas 1SeabrookBraidwood 2Braidwood 1Byron 2Byron 1Watts Bar 1Activity Released in 2015 (Ci)
H-3 3-37 Figure 3.14 PWR Liquid Releases
- Tritium (continued) 0.0010.0100.100 1 101001,00010,000Palo Verde 3Palo Verde 2Palo Verde 1Indian Point 3 Indian Point 2Ft. CalhounSt. Lucie 2 St. Lucie 1Catawba 2 Catawba 1Prairie Island 2 Prairie Island 1Arkansas 1North Anna 2 North Anna 1Oconee 3 Oconee 2 Oconee 1Salem 1Farley 1Point Beach 2 Point Beach 1GinnaRobinson 2Farley 2PalisadesMillstone 2Wolf CreekMillstone 3Calvert Cliffs 2 Calvert Cliffs 1Arkansas 2Salem 2PWR Median ReleaseActivity Released in 2015 (Ci)H-3 3-38 3.2 Short-Term Trend in Gaseous Effluents In the previous section, only the significant radionuclides from each of the categories in Table 2.1 were shown in the tables and figures. Although particular focus on the significant radionuclides yields useful information , there are also less-significant radionuclides present in radioactive gaseous effluents. This section provides the reader with information to gain a better understanding of the total releases of gaseous effluents from a facility.
A long-standing, historical measure of the licensee's ability to control gaseous effluents is based on the activities of noble gases discharged in gaseous effluents. This category of radionuclides
-noble gases
-is described in Table 2.1. The noble gases category includes all radionuclides in gaseous effluents except iodines, particulates, carbon-14 (C-14), and tritium. Although the doses from noble gases are generally small, the activity and doses from other radionuclides (such as iodines and mixed fission and activation products) will generally only be elevated if the activity of noble gases is elevated. As a result, a plant's total noble gas release is sometimes used as a primary indicator of fuel integrity and the quality of a plant's gaseous radiological effluent control program. The amount of C
-14 released as a gaseous effluent is directly related to the amount of power produced rather than to the quality of a plant's effluent control program.
Tables 3.15 and 3.16 show the short
-term trend in the total activity of all noble gases in gaseous effluents for the last 5 years for BWRs and PWRs, respectively. The facilities are listed in alphabetical order for ease of reference when searching for a site.
Table 3.15 shows that the discharges of noble gases from all BWRs in 2015 ranged from a low of 0 curies to a maximum of 1,493.0 curies, wi th a median value of 41.8 curies. Table 3.16 shows that the discharge of noble gases from all PWRs in 2015 ranged from a low of 0 curies to a maximum of 87.5 curies, with a median value of 0.9 curies. Fluctuations in the short
-term data are within the range of expected values, based on power production and the increasing sensitivity of measurement techniques. For example, a plant that has an extremely sensitive measurement capability is capable of detecting extremely low concentrations of noble gas. Due to the amount of air discharged from the ventilation system, the plant is likely to report a certain amount of noble gas released. Meanwhile, a plant with a slightly less sensitive measurement capability may not be detecting the same extremely low concentration of noble gas and thus may report a low or zero amount of noble gas discharged. Overall, the nuclear power industry has steadily reduced the amount of radioactivity discharged into the environment (see Section 3.3 for the long
-term trend in gaseous effluents).
3-39 Table 3.15 Short-Term Trend in Noble Gases in Gaseous Effluents, BWRs, Curies (Ci)
Shown in Alphabetical Order Facility 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Browns Ferry 1 0.0 231.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Browns Ferry 2 0.0 231.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Browns Ferry 3 0.0 231.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Brunswick 1 139.7 88.3 55.6 70.1 94.4 Brunswick 2 139.7 88.3 55.6 70.1 94.4 Clinton 6.8 0.8 7.6 3.9 15.7 Columbia 75.2 67.3 43.9 65.3 36.9 Cooper 2.7 41.4 7.0 11.3 2.1 Dresden 2 15.9 34.5 27.5 19.7 48.1 Dresden 3 15.9 34.5 27.5 77.8 123.4 Duane Arnold 5.5 12.8 2.1 2.9 40.7 Fermi 2 3.2 4.8 12.3 25.4 4.4 FitzPatrick 43.1 61.2 61.1 164.2 48.4 Grand Gulf 446.4 452.5 1,920.2 438.7 479.9 Hatch 1 28.1 42.8 8.4 3.9 4.6 Hatch 2 23.4 42.9 15.7 6.0 4.6 Hope Creek 0.4 262.5 0.1 5.1 37.8 LaSalle 1 1,205.5 1,840.5 777.0 1,934.5 1,493.0 LaSalle 2 1,205.5 1,840.5 777.0 1,934.5 1,493.0 Limerick 1 93.3 35.8 56.5 54.4 42.3 Limerick 2 93.3 35.8 56.5 54.4 42.3 Monticello 958.0 797.0 504.0 666.0 558.6 Nine Mile Point 1 0.8 2.7 0.0 0.0 0.0 Nine Mile Point 2 339.2 104.2 50.2 9.4 1.6 Oyster Creek 226.3 209.1 49.7 62.5 41.3 Peach Bottom 2 288.0 259.5 233.3 309.7 305.5 Peach Bottom 3 288.0 259.5 233.3 309.7 305.5 Perry 0.2 103.0 76.1 66.9 55.8 Pilgrim 11.6 0.7 0.3 1.7 2.0 Quad Cities 1 139.9 61.5 36.4 54.3 62.6 Quad Cities 2 139.9 61.5 36.4 54.3 62.6 River Bend 83.4 34.4 17.8 9.8 840.0 Susquehanna 1 0.0 0.0 7.1 4.1 0.0 Susquehanna 2 0.0 0.0 7.1 4.1 0.0 MEDIAN 28.1 61.5 27.5 25.4 41.8 Note: Median data for the years 2011 to 2014 include effluent data for Vermont Yankee, which ceased operations on December 29, 2014.
3-40 Table 3.16 Short-Term Trend in Noble Gases in Gaseous Effluents, PWRs, Curies (Ci) Shown in Alphabetical Order Facility 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Arkansas 1 0.0 0.0 15.5 0.0 0.0 Arkansas 2 9.1 52.5 0.0 7.4 87.5 Beaver Valley 1 6.2 0.1 16.1 0.1 2.5 Beaver Valley 2 6.2 0.1 16.1 0.1 2.5 Braidwood 1 0.7 0.4 0.6 0.2 0.1 Braidwood 2 1.0 0.4 0.6 0.1 0.1 Byron 1 0.3 197.8 0.3 0.4 20.9 Byron 2 1.1 0.8 0.3 0.5 0.4 Callaway 19.6 4.5 2.6 0.8 0.4 Calvert Cliffs 1 47.3 53.3 40.0 11.5 5.2 Calvert Cliffs 2 47.3 53.3 40.0 11.5 5.2 Catawba 1 1.7 1.6 1.8 2.4 19.2 Catawba 2 1.7 1.6 1.8 2.4 19.2 Comanche Peak 1 18.7 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.3 Comanche Peak 2 18.7 0.7 0.5 0.3 0.3 Cook 1 1.3 1.6 1.7 1.6 1.0 Cook 2 1.3 1.6 1.7 1.6 1.0 Davis-Besse 1.4 0.8 0.4 0.8 0.3 Diablo Canyon 1 5.1 0.7 0.5 1.2 0.4 Diablo Canyon 2 5.1 0.7 0.5 1.2 0.4 Farley 1 3.4 5.1 5.1 3.0 3.6 Farley 2 3.1 1.2 1.8 2.2 6.6 Ft. Calhoun 0.8 0.0 0.0 1.5 1.3 Ginna 2.4 2.5 3.2 8.7 7.3 Harris 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.4 Indian Point 2 0.3 2.9 0.5 0.6 0.2 Indian Point 3 0.5 0.1 0.4 0.1 0.8 McGuire 1 1.4 1.1 1.0 1.1 0.9 McGuire 2 1.4 1.1 1.0 1.1 0.9 Millstone 2 9.2 1.3 0.4 0.6 2.3 Millstone 3 4.2 1.0 0.8 0.9 0.9 North Anna 1 2.6 0.3 11.6 3.4 0.4 North Anna 2 2.6 0.3 11.6 3.4 0.4 Note: Median data for the years 2011 to 2013 include effluent data for San Onofre Units 2 and 3, Crystal River Unit 3 and Kewa unee (no longer listed), all of which ceased operations in 2013.
3-41 Table 3.16 Short-Term Trend in Noble Gases in Gaseous Effluents, PWRs, Curies (Ci) (continued)
Shown in Alphabetical Order Facility 2011 201 2 201 3 201 4 201 5 Oconee 1 9.9 6.3 5.3 14.0 2.2 Oconee 2 9.9 6.3 5.3 14.0 2.2 Oconee 3 9.9 6.3 5.3 14.0 2.2 Palisades 10.4 13.8 3.0 9.8 10.8 Palo Verde 1 1.1 0.2 2.8 7.9 0.2 Palo Verde 2 3.8 4.8 9.9 6.5 9.9 Palo Verde 3 4.2 15.5 24.9 0.2 2.2 Point Beach 1 3.1 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.4 Point Beach 2 3.1 0.5 0.5 0.7 0.4 Prairie Island 1 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 Prairie Island 2 0.4 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 Robinson 2 0.3 0.8 2.9 0.2 6.3 Salem 1 0.2 49.2 14.0 0.2 0.3 Salem 2 0.5 0.5 0.2 0.3 0.2 Seabrook 0.9 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 Sequoyah 1 1.6 2.0 26.9 45.2 43.0 Sequoyah 2 1.6 2.0 26.9 45.2 43.0 South Texas 1 6.5 2.5 1.7 2.5 1.7 South Texas 2 7.1 2.0 5.4 2.3 5.1 St. Lucie 1 29.5 3.3 3.8 1.8 3.0 St. Lucie 2 18.5 4.7 3.4 21.5 18.2 Summer 0.3 0.7 0.9 0.3 0.1 Surry 1 0.4 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.7 Surry 2 0.4 0.8 0.3 0.1 0.7 Three Mile Island 1 115.7 0.7 0.4 0.6 1.7 Turkey Point 3 0.6 1.8 0.1 0.5 0.2 Turkey Point 4 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.1 Vogtle 1 2.8 0.7 11.6 6.4 2.0 Vogtle 2 56.5 22.8 6.6 0.8 0.2 Waterford 3 7.4 3.6 0.4 89.6 0.4 Watts Bar 1 5.6 50.6 3.8 0.4 10.0 Wolf Creek 0.7 0.4 0.5 0.2 0.4 MEDIAN 2.6 1.1 1.0 0.8 0.9 Note: Median data for the years 2011 to 2013 include effluent data for San Onofre Units 2 and 3, Crystal River Unit 3 and Kewa unee (no longer listed)
, all of which ceased operations in 2013.
3-42 3.3 Long-Term Trend in Gaseous Effluents NRC regulations require radioactive effluents to be ALARA. As a result of improved radioactive effluent control programs, the amount of activity of radioactive effluents has steadily decreased over time. The trend in the median noble gas activity of gaseous effluents since 1975 is shown in Figure 3.15. All power reactors that have operated in the United States are included, some of which are now shut down. Figure 3.15 Long-Term Trend in Noble Gases in Gaseous Effluents Figure 3.15 indicates a long
-term, downward trend in the amount of noble gases in gaseous effluents from both BWRs and PWRs. The magnitude of the reduction is significant. For example, in 1975, the median release for BWRs was greater than 40,000 curies; however, in 20 15, the median was 41.8 curies. That change corresponds to a 99.9 percent reduction in noble gas effluents over the last 40 years. One of the primary contributors to the reduction in noble gas effluents is improved fuel integrity in both BWRs and PWRs. The use of advanced off
-gas systems in BWRs is also responsible for reductions in the BWR industry averages. Lastly, contributions from the operations, maintenance, chemistry, and health physics departments at the various facilities have improved the handlin g and processing of gaseous waste to further improve and optimize effluent performance.
0.010.10 1 101001,00010,000100,000Noble Gases(Ci)IndustryMedian, per ReactorBWRsPWRs 3-43 3.4 Short-Term Trend in Liquid Effluents In Section 3.1, only the significant radionuclides discharged in liquid and gaseous effluents were shown in the tables and figures. Although particular focus on the significant radionuclides yields useful information, there are also less
-significant radionuclides present in radioactive liquid effluents. This section provides the reader with a tool to gain a better understanding of the total releases of liquid effluents from a facility.
An indicator of the licensee's ability to control liquid effluents is based on the activity of the mixed fission and activation products (MFAPs) discharged in liquid effluents. This category of radionuclides
-MFAPs-is described in Table 2.2. It includes all radionuclides in liquid effluents except tritium, C
-14, noble gases
, and gross alpha activity. MFAPs can be effectively reduced by liquid radioactive waste treatment systems installed in each NPP. As a result, MFAPs are sometimes used as a primary indicator of the overall control and handling of radioactive liquid effluents at a site.
Tables 3.17 and 3.18 show the short
-term trend in MFAPs in liquid effluents for BWRs and PWRs, respectively. In these tables, no MFAP radionuclides are left out. For each reactor unit, the activities of all MFAPs are added together. In this way, the yearly total of all MFAPs in liquid effluents from a reactor are represented by a single number.
The facilities are listed in alphabetical order for ease of reference when searching for a site. Fluctuations in these short
-term data are within the range of expected values, based on power production and the increasing sensitivity of measurement techniques. Overall, the nuclear power industry has steadily reduced the amount of radioactivity discharged into the environment (see Section 3.5 for the long
-term trend in liquid effluents).
3-44 Table 3.17 Short-Term Trend in Mixed Fission and Activation Products in Liquid Effluents, BWRs, millicuries (mCi)
Shown in Alphabetical Order Facility 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Browns Ferry 1 4.9 26.0 421.2 73.5 124.1 Browns Ferry 2 4.9 26.0 421.2 73.5 124.1 Browns Ferry 3 4.9 26.0 421.2 73.5 124.1 Brunswick 1 2.2 1.3 1.0 3.1 3.7 Brunswick 2 2.2 1.3 1.0 3.1 3.7 Clinton 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Columbia 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cooper 7.9 0.0 6.9 0.0 0.0 Dresden 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Dresden 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.2 Duane Arnold 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Fermi 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 FitzPatrick 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Grand Gulf 26.6 83.8 51.4 65.5 12.7 Hatch 1 1.3 2.6 5.2 11.3 7.1 Hatch 2 1.3 0.4 14.1 7.3 3.8 Hope Creek 31.0 31.9 15.0 835.6 38.8 LaSalle 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 LaSalle 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Limerick 1 0.7 0.6 0.2 0.4 2.9 Limerick 2 0.7 0.6 0.2 0.4 2.9 Monticello 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Nine Mile Point 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Nine Mile Point 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.2 0.0 Oyster Creek 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Peach Bottom 2 0.1 2.8 0.1 7.9 6.3 Peach Bottom 3 0.1 2.8 0.1 7.9 6.3 Perry 37.4 32.9 95.3 3.3 14.9 Pilgrim 3.8 0.0 18.9 0.0 0.7 Quad Cities 1 4.3 3.6 6.1 0.0 1.9 Quad Cities 2 4.3 3.6 6.1 0.0 1.9 River Bend 0.5 0.1 0.9 3.8 3.0 Susquehanna 1 11.4 1.8 37.3 10.3 13.7 Susquehanna 2 11.4 1.8 37.3 10.3 13.7 MEDIAN 0.7 0.4 0.2 0.2 2.9 Note: Median data for the years 2011 to 2014 include effluent data for Vermont Yankee (no longer listed), which ceased operations on December 29, 2014.
3-45 Table 3.18 Short-Term Trend in Mixed Fission and Activation Products in Liquid Effluents, PWRs, millicuries (mCi)
Shown in Alphabetical Order Facility 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Arkansas 1 59.6 11.3 29.2 28.7 85.5 Arkansas 2 38.2 24.4 320.2 90.9 3.9 Beaver Valley 1 50.9 26.1 96.7 58.2 117.6 Beaver Valley 2 50.9 26.1 96.7 58.2 117.6 Braidwood 1 67.2 541.7 79.8 47.4 66.3 Braidwood 2 67.2 541.7 79.8 47.4 66.3 Byron 1 12.6 9.0 8.9 7.1 4.7 Byron 2 12.6 9.0 8.9 7.1 4.7 Callaway 138.0 90.2 103.7 10.2 39.5 Calvert Cliffs 1 5.9 1.7 7.4 14.9 327.1 Calvert Cliffs 2 5.9 1.7 7.4 14.9 327.1 Catawba 1 34.0 13.9 10.7 58.5 13.0 Catawba 2 34.0 13.9 10.7 58.5 13.0 Comanche Peak 1 3.3 6.9 1.7 0.4 0.9 Comanche Peak 2 3.3 6.9 1.7 0.4 0.9 Cook 1 0.3 0.7 0.8 0.4 1.5 Cook 2 0.3 0.7 0.8 0.4 1.5 Davis-Besse 11.4 15.4 7.2 12.0 5.8 Diablo Canyon 1 16.8 16.4 10.7 13.8 10.8 Diablo Canyon 2 16.8 16.4 10.7 13.8 10.8 Farley 1 54.3 87.9 77.2 60.0 54.3 Farley 2 126.8 76.1 112.5 163.7 72.0 Ft. Calhoun 2.0 1.1 1.2 2.2 12.1 Ginna 6.0 9.2 0.4 4.8 5.7 Harris 12.9 32.0 49.9 9.3 18.0 Indian Point 2 16.4 26.5 52.1 32.4 35.7 Indian Point 3 23.3 20.8 24.1 8.0 40.9 McGuire 1 45.0 11.0 13.3 19.9 34.7 McGuire 2 45.0 11.0 13.3 19.9 34.7 Millstone 2 130.2 112.1 11.3 9.5 15.6 Millstone 3 76.5 52.6 159.9 92.5 42.3 North Anna 1 5.7 8.0 10.4 32.0 8.5 North Anna 2 5.7 8.0 10.4 32.0 8.5 Note: Median data for the years 2011 to 2013 include effluent data for San Onofre Units 2 and 3, Crystal River Unit 3 and Kewa unee (no longer listed)
, all of which ceased operations in 2013.
3-46 Table 3.1 8 Short-Term Trend in Mixed Fission and Activation Products in Liquid Effluents, PWRs, millicuries (mCi) (continued)
Shown in Alphabetical Order Facility 201 1 2012 2013 2014 2015 Oconee 1 15.3 8.6 5.2 3.0 1.4 Oconee 2 15.3 8.6 5.2 3.0 1.4 Oconee 3 15.3 8.6 5.2 3.0 1.4 Palisades 20.7 11.3 6.3 20.9 3.1 Palo Verde 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Palo Verde 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Palo Verde 3 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Point Beach 1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Point Beach 2 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Prairie Island 1 31.8 17.0 8.5 1.7 6.7 Prairie Island 2 31.8 17.0 8.5 1.7 6.7 Robinson 2 2.9 4.6 8.9 30.5 37.7 Salem 1 21.7 9.9 11.3 7.6 7.7 Salem 2 13.9 13.5 6.4 9.8 6.9 Seabrook 16.5 7.3 2.6 6.5 6.9 Sequoyah 1 7.6 58.4 13.8 4.2 46.5 Sequoyah 2 7.6 58.4 13.8 4.2 46.5 South Texas 1 15.3 8.9 16.5 17.0 12.7 South Texas 2 16.0 2.8 12.8 4.8 4.5 St. Lucie 1 87.0 37.4 20.6 29.4 12.5 St. Lucie 2 87.0 37.4 20.6 29.4 12.5 Summer 11.7 14.6 5.0 15.5 10.1 Surry 1 9.8 2.9 3.1 8.9 24.8 Surry 2 9.8 2.9 3.1 8.9 24.8 Three Mile Island 1 0.6 0.4 1.6 0.0 0.2 Turkey Point 3 25.8 75.2 34.8 47.3 54.8 Turkey Point 4 25.8 75.2 34.8 47.3 54.9 Vogtle 1 101.3 106.6 133.4 102.0 53.8 Vogtle 2 6.6 29.9 24.9 102.1 19.1 Waterford 3 17.4 10.8 13.5 15.0 33.8 Watts Bar 1 267.5 38.6 23.1 26.4 16.8 Wolf Creek 4.5 9.0 17.4 8.6 11.8 MEDIAN 15.3 11.3 10.7 12.0 12.5 Note: Median data for the years 2011 to 2013 include effluent data for San Onofre Units 2 and 3, Crystal River Unit 3 and Kewa unee (no longer listed)
, all of which ceased operations in 2013.
3-47 3.5 Long-Term Trend in Liquid Effluents This section discusses the long
-term trend of MFAPs in liquid effluents from nuclear power plants in the United States. NRC regulations require radioactive effluents to be ALARA. As a result of improved radioactive effluent control programs, the amount of activity of radioactive effluents has steadily decreased over time. The trend in the median MFAP activity of liquid effluents since 1975 is shown in Figure 3.16. All power reactors that have operated in the United States are included, some of which are now shut down.
Figure 3.16 Long-Term Trend in MFAPs in Liquid Effluents Figure 3.16 indicates a long
-term, downward trend in the amounts of MFAPs in liquid effluents from both BWRs and PWRs. The magnitude of the reduction is significant. For example, in 197 5 , the median activity of liquid effluents from BWRs was greater than 1,100 millicuries; however, in 2015, the median was 2.9 millicuries. That corresponds to a 99.
7 percent reduction in MFAPs in liquid effluents over the last 40 years. One of the primary contributors to the reduction in liquid effluents is improved fuel integrity in both BWRs and PWRs. Additionally, many BWRs recycle (or re
-use) some or all of the reactor water. The recycling of reactor water at BWRs is one reason why effluents from BWRs are generally lower than from PWRs. The PWR design requires the use of boron in the reactor water, which makes water reuse impractical, whereas BWRs do not use boron in reactor water. The lack of boron in BWR reactor water allows the BWRs to recycle (or re
-use) reactor water which contributes to lower liquid releases in BWRs, particularly for tritium. The use of advanced liquid radioactive waste processing systems has also significantly lowered liquid effluents. Lastly, improvements in the handling and processing of liquid waste made by the operations, maintenance, chemistry, and health physics departments at the various facilities have further reduced the amount of effluent releases and public dose.
0.010.10 1 101001,00010,000BWRsPWRsMFAPs (mCi)Industry Median, per Reactor 3-48 Figure 3.16 shows that from 2013 to 2015, there was an increase in the median liquid effluents from BWRs.
An analysis of this increase in median MFAP activity in liquid effluents from BWRs indicates a small change occurred in th e waste processing of liquid effluents at some BWRs. For many decades, some BWRs have embraced a zero
-release strategy for radioactive liquid effluents, with a small increase in gaseous radioactive effluents including tritium. Such a strategy has cost advantages, because it is expensive to discharge very high
-quality water that could be reused in plant systems. Additionally, a zero
-release strategy for liquid effluents conserves the natural resources and virtually eliminates radioactive liquid effluents in those BWRs that adopt this strategy. A comparison between doses from gaseous effluents and liquid effluents can be made by examining Figures 3.21 and 3.22; and shows, in general, most of the dose from NPP effluents comes from the gaseous effluents. As a result, licensees wanting to lower doses may choose to focus additional efforts on reducing the radionuclides in gaseous effluents.
The zero-release strategy, combined with improved fuel performance, and advanced waste processing systems is responsible for the decreases in the median MFAP liquid activity releases during the 1980s, 1990s, and beyond 2000, which can be seen in Figure 3.16. However, at some sites using a zero
-release strategy, releasing tritium as a gaseous release (rather than as a liquid effluent release) has the potential to result in a small increase in dose to members of the public. This small increase in public dose, due to release of tritium as a gaseous release instead of as a liquid release, can be attributed to four factors: Waste water in some plants has been recycled (instead of discharged as a liquid effluent).As waste water is recycled, the tritium concentration in the water increases over time.When all radioactive liquid releases are eliminated, tritium is released through t he gaseous release points instead of as a liquid release
.The dose due to tritium discharged from a gaseous release point can, depending on plant design and site characteristics, be higher than the dose from the same amount of tritium discharged from a liquid release point.
However, a plant that allows some liquid effluent releases can shift the release of tritium from a gaseous release point to a liquid release point, thereby lowering public doses. This strategy can cause a slight increase in the amount of activity of MFAPs in liquid effluents and a small decrease
in total public dose.
3.6 Radiation
Doses from Gaseous and Liquid Effluents The maximum annual organ doses for 2015 from gaseous and liquid effluents are shown in Tables 3.19 through 3.22. The data from these tables are illustrated graphically in Figures 3.17 through 3.20. These tables and figures contain annual organ doses (for gaseous and liquid effluents) and annual total body doses (for liquid effluents). In accordance with regulatory requirements and the calculation methodologies of RG 1.109 (Ref. [35] ), the doses are calculated for either real or hypothetical individuals receiving the highest total body and organ doses. As a result, these doses are often referred to as the maximum total body and the maximum organ doses. Additionally, licensees are required to calculate the organ doses for six separate organs in the human body
- bone, liver, thyroid, kidney, lung, and intestines. Only the highest of the organ doses is shown in this report. Because these doses are 3-49 calculated for the individual receiving the highest dose from liquid and gaseous effluents, these individuals are typically located in close proximity to the facility. As a result, doses to other individuals, especially those located farther away from the facility, are expected to be significantly lower than those shown in this report.
The doses shown in the tables and graphs of this section include contributions from all radionuclides in the type of effluent shown (i.e., gaseous or liquid). For gaseous effluents, the majority of the dose is from C
-14. The NRC ALARA criteria, discussed in Section 2.4, are included in the tables and figures for purposes of comparison. Since many plants have more than one operating reactor, the ALARA criteria are shown on a per reactor basis.
If the licensee does not report a dose, a blank entry is used to indicate that either (1) no releases occurred (e.g., the NPP is a zero
-discharge plant) or (2) no exposure pathway exists. Also, blanks in data fields are generally used instead of zeros in order to make it easier for the reader to quickly identify the positive values.
Historically, C
-14 has not been considered a principal radionuclide, since the amount of activity in gaseous effluents was dominated by the xenon and krypton radionuclides.
As a result, C
-14 has not been reported as a radioactive effluent.
In addition, the release of C
-14 from NPPs has be en insignificant compared to the natural production and world inventory of C
-14 (Ref. [38] ). Although the amount of C
-14 released from NPPs has not increased, steady improvements in nuclear power plant effluent management practices have resulted in a 99.9 percent decrease in the amount of activity from noble gas effluents released to the environment (see Figure 3.15, "Long
-Term Trend in Noble Gases in Gaseous Effluents").
However, a recent NRC review of the significance of C
-14 releases on public dose has resulted in the NRC reclassifying C
-14 as a principal radionuclide. Releases of C
-14 have been included since th e 2010 report.
For comparison purposes, median dose values are included in the tables and figures. The median is the midpoint of the data. Approximately half of the power plants will report doses greater than the median and approximately half will report doses lower than the median. The median is a method of estimating a central or typical value while avoiding bias caused by extremely high or low values in the data set. All sites are included when calculating the medians, even those sites for which no dose is reported.
For example, in Table 3.20, the PWR median annual organ dose due to gaseous effluents is highlighted in bold at the top of the table. In this case, the median dose is 0.30 2 mrem. This represents the typical annual organ dose, due to all gaseous effluents, from all PWRs operating in the United States in 2015. Figures 3.21 and 3.22 show the 5
-year trend in the median maximum annual organ doses in gaseous and liquid effluents, respectively. The median organ doses for liquid effluents from BWRs and PWRs have remained consistently low between 2 0 1 1 and 2015 as seen in Figure 3.22.
The evaluation of effluent data can be a key factor in understanding radioactive effluents. By gaining a better understanding of radioactive effluents, it is possible to exercise more control in reducing doses from such effluents. This helps to ensure radioactive effluents are ALARA.
3-50 The tables in this section indicate that the highest total body dose from all of the facilities was 0.201 mrem (Table 3.2 2), and the highest organ dose from all of the facilities was 13.1 mrem (Table 3.19).
For purposes of comparison, 1 mrem is less than the radiation dose from any one of the following:
the dose received in 1 week from skiing in the Rocky Mountains;the dose received in 4 weeks from the natural potassium in each person's body; orthe dose received in 8 weeks by a homeowner with a brick or stone house.
The basis for each of these three natural background dose values is based on information from the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) (Ref. [39] ). Radiation exposure to cosmic rays at the high altitudes of Colorado would result in a dose of about 70 mrem per year. Additionally, the dose from rocks and soil in the mountains of Colorado would be about 40 mrem per year. The total of these two values is about 110 mrem per year for a person in the high elevations of Colorado. A person in Florida, who is typically at sea level and surrounded by the native Florida terrain, would receive about 40 mrem per year from rocks, soil, and cosmic radiation. As a result, people living at the high altitudes of Colorado receive about 70 mrem per year more radiation dose than a person living in Florida. People from Florida skiing in the Rocky Mountains for a week would be expected to receive an additional dose
-above what they might normally have received if they had stayed in Florida
-of about 1.3 mrem.
According to a DOE report prepared by the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (Ref. [40] ), the average 150
-pound individual receives about 1.1 mrem per month or 14 mrem per year from the natural potassium
-40 that is incorporated into the human body.
NCRP Report No. 95 (Ref. [41] ) indicates that the radiation exposure from living in a brick, stone, adobe, or concrete home is about 7 mrem per year. At this annual dose rate, the exposure received in 8 weeks would be about 1.1 mrem. NPPs in the United States discharge small but measurable amounts of radioactive materials in radioactive effluents. All of these radioactive releases must comply with NRC requirements.
These requirements are in place to ensure (1) the radwaste processing systems at NPPs are operating properly, (2) the doses to members of the public are within the public dose limits, and (3) the doses to members of the public are ALARA.
3-51 Table 3.19 BWR Gaseous Effluents - Maximum Annual Organ Dose, 2015 Shown in Descending Order of Organ Dose BWR Facility Annual Organ Dose (mrem)
Grand Gulf 1.31E+01 River Bend 4.70E+00 Cooper 1.58E+00 Brunswick 1 1.01E+00 Brunswick 2 1.01E+00 Limerick 1 6.45E-01 Limerick 2 6.45E-01 Oyster Creek 5.53E-01 Fermi 2 4.98E-01 Susquehanna 1 3.63E-01 Susquehanna 2 3.26E-01 Peach Bottom 2 2.76E-01 Peach Bottom 3 2.76E-01 Perry 2.59E-01 Columbia 2.22E-01 Nine Mile Point 1 2.14E-01 Nine Mile Point 2 2.14E-01 BWR Median Dose 1.93E-01 Quad Cities 1 1.71E-01 Quad Cities 2 1.71E-01 Hope Creek 1.67E-01 Hatch 1 1.59E-01 Hatch 2 1.59E-01 LaSalle 1 1.27E-01 LaSalle 2 1.27E-01 Dresden 3 1.08E-01 FitzPatrick 1.03E-01 Dresden 2 9.26E-02 Duane Arnold 8.90E-02 Pilgrim 7.10E-02 Clinton 5.95E-02 Browns Ferry 1 4.03E-02 Browns Ferry 2 4.03E-02 Browns Ferry 3 4.03E-02 Monticello 3.74E-02 ALARA Criteria 15 3-52 Table 3.20 PWR Gaseous Effluents
- Maximum Annual Organ Dose, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Organ Dose PWR Facility Annual Organ Dose (mrem)
PWR Facility Annual Organ Dose (mrem)
Beaver Valley 1 1.00E+01 PWR Median Dose 3.02E-01 Beaver Valley 2 5.40E+00 Arkansas 2 3.02E-01 Waterford 3 3.91E+00 Seabrook 2.95E-01 Watts Bar 1 3.53E+00 Palo Verde 3 2.92E-01 Catawba 1 2.78E+00 Indian Point 3 2.83E-01 Catawba 2 2.78E+00 Millstone 2 2.62E-01 Sequoyah 1 1.83E+00 Arkansas 1 2.41E-01 Sequoyah 2 1.83E+00 Turkey Point 4 2.10E-01 McGuire 1 1.61E+00 Millstone 3 1.87E-01 McGuire 2 1.61E+00 Turkey Point 3 1.82E-01 Wolf Creek 1.30E+00 Point Beach 1 1.21E-01 Davis-Besse 1.27E+00 Point Beach 2 1.21E-01 Braidwood 1 1.15E+00 Comanche Peak 1 1.20E-01 Braidwood 2 1.12E+00 Comanche Peak 2 1.20E-01 Cook 1 8.80E-01 Palo Verde 1 1.19E-01 Cook 2 8.80E-01 Oconee 1 1.17E-01 North Anna 1 8.41E-01 Oconee 2 1.17E-01 North Anna 2 8.41E-01 Oconee 3 1.17E-01 Ft. Calhoun 7.68E-01 Salem 1 1.15E-01 Harris 7.08E-01 Salem 2 1.05E-01 Summer 6.87E-01 Vogtle 1 8.46E-02 Robinson 2 5.24E-01 Vogtle 2 8.46E-02 Farley 1 4.11E-01 South Texas 1 5.64E-02 Farley 2 4.11E-01 South Texas 2 5.57E-02 Three Mile Island 1 3.88E-01 Surry 1 4.60E-02 St. Lucie 2 3.66E-01 Surry 2 4.60E-02 St. Lucie 1 3.58E-01 Prairie Island 1 3.62E-02 Palisades 3.52E-01 Prairie Island 2 3.62E-02 Byron 1 3.48E-01 Ginna 1.94E-02 Byron 2 3.48E-01 Callaway 1.60E-02 Indian Point 2 3.42E-01 Calvert Cliffs 1 1.22E-02 Palo Verde 2 3.30E-01 Calvert Cliffs 2 1.22E-02 Diablo Canyon 1 4.89E-03 Diablo Canyon 2 4.89E-03 ALARA Criteria 15 3-53 Table 3.21 BWR Liquid Effluents
- Maximum Annual Total Body and Organ Dose, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Organ Dose BWR Facility Total Body Dose (mrem) Organ Dose (mrem) Grand Gulf 3.62E-02 5.74E-02 Browns Ferry 1 8.14E-03 1.02E-02 Browns Ferry 2 8.14E-03 1.02E-02 Browns Ferry 3 8.14E-03 1.02E-02 Hatch 1 4.22E-03 6.15E-03 Susquehanna 1 1.54E-03 2.32E-03 Susquehanna 2 1.54E-03 2.32E-03 Perry 1.02E-03 1.50E-03 Hatch 2 7.09E-04 1.09E-03 Brunswick 1 9.17E-04 9.43E-04 Brunswick 2 9.17E-04 9.43E-04 River Bend 5.75E-05 3.81E-04 Dresden 3 2.37E-04 3.69E-04 Hope Creek 1.13E-04 3.10E-04 Limerick 1 1.18E-04 3.10E-04 Limerick 2 1.18E-04 3.10E-04 BWR Median Dose 9.97E-05 2.85E-04 Peach Bottom 2 1.98E-04 2.85E-04 Peach Bottom 3 1.98E-04 2.85E-04 Pilgrim 8.61E-05 2.64E-04 FitzPatrick 3.23E-05 3.23E-05 Quad Cities 1 4.36E-06 6.50E-06 Quad Cities 2 4.36E-06 6.50E-06 Dresden 2 1.20E-06 1.20E-06 Oyster Creek 9.86E-07 9.86E-07 Clinton Columbia Cooper Duane Arnold Fermi 2 LaSalle 1 LaSalle 2 Monticello Nine Mile Point 1 Nine Mile Point 2 ALARA Criteria 3 10 3-54 Table 3.22 PWR Liquid Effluents
- Maximum Annual Total Body and Organ Dose, 201 5 Shown in Descending Order of Organ Dose PWR Facility Total Body Dose (mrem) Organ Dose (mrem) PWR Facility Total Body Dose (mrem)
Organ Dose (mrem) Catawba 1 3.24E-02 3.31E-01 PWR Median Dose 6.95E-03 8.23E-03 Catawba 2 3.24E-02 3.31E-01 Summer 7.21E-03 8.23E-03 Wolf Creek 2.01E-01 2.10E-01 Arkansas 1 5.93E-03 8.05E-03 North Anna 1 1.19E-01 1.20E-01 Callaway 2.25E-03 6.95E-03 North Anna 2 1.19E-01 1.20E-01 St. Lucie 1 2.13E-03 6.78E-03 Comanche Peak 1 9.46E-02 9.46E-02 St. Lucie 2 2.13E-03 6.78E-03 Comanche Peak 2 9.46E-02 9.46E-02 Davis-Besse 4.86E-03 5.41E-03 Byron 1 7.00E-02 7.90E-02 South Texas 2 4.19E-03 4.21E-03 Byron 2 7.00E-02 7.90E-02 Sequoyah 1 4.10E-03 4.10E-03 Oconee 1 5.23E-02 5.70E-02 Sequoyah 2 4.10E-03 4.10E-03 Oconee 2 5.23E-02 5.70E-02 Point Beach 1 3.42E-03 3.42E-03 Oconee 3 5.23E-02 5.70E-02 Point Beach 2 3.42E-03 3.42E-03 Farley 2 7.74E-03 5.39E-02 Millstone 2 2.51E-04 3.38E-03 Farley 1 6.95E-03 5.36E-02 Millstone 3 7.48E-04 1.53E-03 Beaver Valley 1 4.97E-02 5.28E-02 Prairie Island 1 1.33E-03 1.49E-03 Beaver Valley 2 4.79E-02 5.28E-02 Prairie Island 2 1.33E-03 1.49E-03 Braidwood 1 3.16E-02 5.03E-02 Indian Point 2 9.40E-04 1.48E-03 Braidwood 2 3.16E-02 5.03E-02 Waterford 3 1.07E-03 1.25E-03 Harris 3.26E-02 4.75E-02 Arkansas 2 9.93E-04 1.07E-03 Vogtle 1 4.17E-02 4.58E-02 Seabrook 5.27E-04 9.54E-04 Ft. Calhoun 3.22E-02 4.36E-02 Palisades 7.21E-04 9.47E-04 McGuire 1 9.01E-02 4.21E-02 Robinson 2 3.89E-04 7.16E-04 McGuire 2 9.01E-02 4.21E-02 Indian Point 3 3.07E-04 6.07E-04 Vogtle 2 2.63E-02 2.79E-02 Surry 1 1.72E-04 5.42E-04 Three Mile Island 1 2.52E-02 2.62E-02 Surry 2 1.72E-04 5.42E-04 Watts Bar 1 2.33E-02 2.32E-02 Diablo Canyon 1 1.19E-04 2.45E-04 Cook 1 2.14E-02 2.14E-02 Diablo Canyon 2 1.19E-04 2.45E-04 Cook 2 2.14E-02 2.14E-02 Turkey Point 3 1.70E-04 1.98E-04 Calvert Cliffs 1 1.06E-02 1.58E-02 Turkey Point 4 1.70E-04 1.98E-04 Calvert Cliffs 2 1.06E-02 1.58E-02 Salem 2 2.84E-05 7.11E-05 Ginna 8.63E-03 1.08E-02 Salem 1 2.78E-05 3.70E-05 South Texas 1 8.64E-03 8.70E-03 Palo Verde 1 Palo Verde 2 Palo Verde 3 ALARA Criteria 3 10 3-55 Figure 3.17 BWR Gaseous Effluents
- Maximum Annual Organ Dose 1E-61E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+01E+11E+2MonticelloBrowns Ferry 3Browns Ferry 2Browns Ferry 1ClintonPilgrimDuane ArnoldDresden 2FitzPatrickDresden 3LaSalle 2LaSalle 1Hatch 2Hatch 1Hope CreekQuad Cities 2Quad Cities 1BWR Median DoseNine Mile Point 2Nine Mile Point 1ColumbiaPerryPeach Bottom 3Peach Bottom 2Susquehanna 2Susquehanna 1Fermi 2Oyster CreekLimerick 2Limerick 1Brunswick 2Brunswick 1CooperRiver BendGrand GulfALARA Criteria2015 Annual Organ Dose (mrem) 3-56 Figure 3.18 PWR Gaseous Effluents
- Maximum Annual Organ Dose 1E-61E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+01E+11E+2PWR Median DosePalo Verde 2Indian Point 2Byron 2Byron 1PalisadesSt. Lucie 1St. Lucie 2Three Mile Island 1Farley 2Farley 1Robinson 2SummerHarrisFt. CalhounNorth Anna 2North Anna 1Cook 2Cook 1Braidwood 2Braidwood 1Davis-BesseWolf CreekMcGuire 2McGuire 1Sequoyah 2Sequoyah 1Catawba 2Catawba 1Watts Bar 1Waterford 3Beaver Valley 2Beaver Valley 1ALARA Criteria2015 Annual Organ Dose (mrem) 3-57 Figure 3.18 PWR Gaseous Effluents
- Maximum Annual Organ Dose (continued) 1E-61E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+01E+11E+2Diablo Canyon 2Diablo Canyon 1Calvert Cliffs 2Calvert Cliffs 1CallawayGinnaPrairie Island 2Prairie Island 1Surry 2Surry 1South Texas 2South Texas 1Vogtle 2Vogtle 1Salem 2Salem 1Oconee 3Oconee 2Oconee 1Palo Verde 1Comanche Peak 2Comanche Peak 1Point Beach 2Point Beach 1Turkey Point 3Millstone 3Turkey Point 4Arkansas 1Millstone 2Indian Point 3Palo Verde 3SeabrookArkansas 2PWR Median DoseALARA Criteria2015 Annual Organ Dose (mrem) 3-58 Figure 3.19 BWR Liquid Effluents
- Maximum Annual Total Body and Organ Dose 1E-91E-81E-71E-61E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+01E+11E+2Nine Mile Point 2Nine Mile Point 1MonticelloLaSalle 2LaSalle 1Fermi 2Duane ArnoldCooperColumbiaClintonOyster CreekDresden 2Quad Cities 2Quad Cities 1FitzPatrickPilgrimPeach Bottom 3Peach Bottom 2BWR Median DoseLimerick 2Limerick 1Hope CreekDresden 3River BendBrunswick 2Brunswick 1Hatch 2PerrySusquehanna 2Susquehanna 1Hatch 1Browns Ferry 3Browns Ferry 2Browns Ferry 1Grand GulfALARA Criteria2015 Annual Dose (mrem)OrganTotal Body 3-59 Figure 3.20 PWR Liquid Effluents
- Maximum Annual Total Body and Organ Dose 1E-61E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+01E+11E+2PWR Median DoseSouth Texas 1GinnaCalvert Cliffs 2Calvert Cliffs 1Cook 2Cook 1Watts Bar 1Three Mile Island 1Vogtle 2McGuire 2McGuire 1Ft. CalhounVogtle 1HarrisBraidwood 2Braidwood 1Beaver Valley 2Beaver Valley 1Farley 1Farley 2Oconee 3Oconee 2Oconee 1Byron 2Byron 1Comanche Peak 2Comanche Peak 1North Anna 2North Anna 1Wolf CreekCatawba 2Catawba 1ALARA Criteria2015 Annual Dose (mrem)OrganTotal Body 3-60 Figure 3.20 PWR Liquid Effluents
- Maximum Annual Total Body and Organ Dose (continued) 1E-61E-51E-41E-31E-21E-11E+01E+11E+2Palo Verde 3Palo Verde 2Palo Verde 1Salem 1Salem 2Turkey Point 4Turkey Point 3Diablo Canyon 2Diablo Canyon 1Surry 2Surry 1Indian Point 3Robinson 2PalisadesSeabrookArkansas 2Waterford 3Indian Point 2Prairie Island 2Prairie Island 1Millstone 3Millstone 2Point Beach 2Point Beach 1Sequoyah 2Sequoyah 1South Texas 2Davis-BesseSt. Lucie 2St. Lucie 1CallawayArkansas 1SummerPWR Median DoseALARA Criteria2015 Annual Dose (mrem)OrganTotal BodyOrganTotal Body 3-61 Figure 3.21 Median Maximum Annual Organ Dose, Gaseous Effluents 5-Year Trend, 20 1 1-201 5 Figure 3.22 Median Maximum Annual Dose, Liquid Effluents 5-Year Trend, 20 1 1-201 5 0.2030.2040.1840.2320.1930.2700.1940.1810.2600.3020.0000.0500.1000.1500.2000.2500.3000.35020112012201320142015BWRsPWRsDoses FromAll Gaseous Effluents (mrem)Noble gases, Iodines, Particulates, H
-3 and C-140.00010.00000.00010.00000.00030.00640.01140.00740.00620.00820.00010.00000.00010.00000.00010.00560.00630.00400.00340.00690.0000.0020.0040.0060.0080.0100.0120.01420112012201320142015BWRsPWRsDoses From All Liquid Effluents (mrem)OrganTotalBody