ML18150A454

Radiological Environ Monitoring Program,920101-1231. W/930427 Ltr

ML18150A454
Person / Time
Site:	Surry
Issue date:	12/31/1992
From:	Stewart W VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.)
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
93-255, NUDOCS 9305060166
Download: ML18150A454 (124)

Text

e e

.. VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY RICHMOND, VIRGINIA 23261 April 27 , 1993 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Serial No.93-255 Attention: Document Control Desk NURPC Washington, D. C. 20555 Docket Nos. 50-280 50-281 License Nos. DPR-32 DPR-37 Gentlemen:

VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY SURRY POWER STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL OPERATING REPORT Attached is the 1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report for Surry Power Station which fulfills the reporting requirements of Surry Technical Specification 6.6.B.2.

Very truly yours, Q~P~

fcV W. L. Stewart Senior Vice President - Nuclear Attachment cc: U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II 101 Marietta Street, N. W.

Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30323 Mr. M. W. Branch NRC Senior Resident Inspector Surry Power Station Commissioner Department of Health Room 400 109 Governor Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 050P98

( 9305060166 921231 .*

• . PDR . ADOCK 05000280

• I' R* . J>DR

\lirgi,nifl Electric and Power Company Surry Power Station Radiological, Environmental Monitoring Program January 1, 1992 to December 31, 1992 Prepared by VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY and TELEDYNE ISOTOPES 1

Annutd Radwlogical, Environmental Operati,ng Report

) Surry Power Station January 1, 1992 to December 31, 1992 Prepared by:

Reviewed by:

Supervisor Radiological Analysis Reviewed by:

Barry A. Garber Supervisor Technical Services, Health Physics Approved by:

Dean L. Erickson Superintendent Radiological Protection 2

Table of Contents Section Title Page Preface .................................................................................................. 7 Executive Summary .................................................................................... 8 I. Introduction .................................................................................. 10 II. Nuclear Power and The Environment: In Perspective .................................. 12 III. Sampling and Analysis Program ..................... ~ .................................... 25 IV. Program Exceptions ......................................................................... 38 V. Summary and Discussion Of 1992 Analytical Results .................................. 39 A. Airborne Exposure Pathway ........................................................ 40

1. Air Iodine/Air Particulates .................................................... 40 B. Waterborne Exposure Pathway .................................................... .41

1. River Water ...................................................................... 41

2. Well Water ...................................................................... 42 C. Aquatic Exposure Pathway .......................................................... 44

1. Silt ................................................................................. 44

2. Shoreline Sediment ............................................................ 44 D. Ingestion Exposure Pathway ........................................................ 48

1. Milk ............................................................................... 48

2. Fish ................................................................................ 49

3. Food Products ..................................................................... 49 E. Direct Radiation Exposure Pathway ................................................ 51

1. TLD Dosimeters ................................................................. 51 VI. Conclusion ................................................................................... 53 3

Table of Contents (Cont)

Section Title Page VII. References .................................................................................... 56 VIII. Appendices ........ ; .......................................................................... 57 Appendix A - Radiological Environmental Monitoring ................................. 57 Program Annual Summary Tables - 1992 Appendix B - Data Tables .................................................................. 60 Appendix C - Land Use Census - 1992 ..................................................78 Appendix D - Synopsis of Analytical Procedures ......................*................79 Appendix E - EPA Interlaboratory Comparison Program ..............................92 List of Trending Graphs

1. Gross Beta in Air Particulates ............................................................. .43

2. Tritium in River Water ...................................................................... 43

3. Tritium in Well Water ....................................................................... 45

4. Cobalt-58 in Silt ............................................................................. 45

5. Cobalt-60 in Silt ............................................................................. 46

6. Cesium-134 in Silt ........................................................................... 46

7. Cesium-137 in Silt ............................................................................ 47

8. Cobalt-58 1n Clams .......................................................................... 47

9. Co balt-60 in Clams .......................................................................... 50

10. Cesium-137 in Clams ........................................................................ 50

11. Direct Radiation Measurements-TLD Results ............................................ 52

- 4

Table of Contents (Cont)

List of Figures Figure Title Page

1. Atomic Structure ............................................................................. 12

2. Alpha Particle ................................................................................ 14

3. Beta Particle ................................................................................... 14

4. Gamma Ray ........................................................................ ~ ......... 14

5. The Penetrating Ability of Various Types ofRadiation ................................. 15

6. Unit Comparison ............................................................................ 15

7. The Curie, a Measurement of Activity .................................................... 16

8. Average Annual Dose Equivalent to Persons in the U.S.

From Various Radiation Sources .......................................................... 17

9. Estimated Average Days of Life Expectancy Lost Due to Various Health Risks ....................................................................... 19

10. Reactor Vessel with Fuel Assemblies, Rods, and Fuel Pellets ........................ 20

11. Fission: A Chain Reaction ................................................................. 21

12. PWR System Diagram ................................. *...................................... 22

13. Containment Schematic ..................................................................... 23

14. Surry Radiologicru. Monitoring Locations ................................................ 30 5

List of Tables e Table Page

1. Uranium Isotopes ........................................................................... 13

2. Radiological Sampling Station Distance and Direction from Unit 1 ................................................................................... 26

3. Surry Power Station Sample Analysis Program ........................................ .35

4. Gross Beta Analysis Summary ............................................................ 40 Appendix B Tables B-1 Iodine-131 Concentration in Filtered Air ..........................................*......60 B-2 Gross Beta Concentration in Air Particulates ............................................ 62 B-3 Gamma Emitters Concentration in Quarterly Air Particulates ............................................................................... 64 B-4 Gamma Emitter and Tritium Concentration in River Water ............................ 66 B-5 Gamma Emitter and Tritium Concentration in River Water - State Split Samples ......................................................... 68 B-6 Gamma Emitter and Tritium Concentration in Well Water ................................................................................... 69 B-7 Gamma Emitter Concentrations in Silt. ................................................... 70 B-8 Gamma Emitter Concentrations in Shoreline Sediment ..........................................................................70 B-9 Gamma Emitter, Strontium-89, and Strontium-90 Concentration in Milk .......................................................................71 B-10 Gamma Emitter Concentration in Clams .................................................. 73 B-11 Gamma Emitter Concentration in Oysters ................................................7 4 B-12 Gamma Emitter Concentration in Crabs ..................................................7 5 B-13 Gamma Emitter Concentration in Fish ....................................................75 B-14 Gamma Emitter Concentration in Vegetation ............................................. 75 B-15 Direct Radiation Measurements - Quarterly TLD Results Set 1 ........................76 B-16 Direct Radiation Measurements - Quarterly Tf__,D Results Set 2 ........................77 6

Preface

• 1his report is submitted as required by Technical Specification 6.6.B.2, Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report for Surry, Units 1 and 2, Virginia Electric and Power Company Docket Nos. 50-280 and 50-281.

• 7

Executive Summary Tilis document is a detailed report of the 1992 Surry Nuclear Power Station Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP). Radioactivity levels from January 1 through December 31, 1992 in air, water, silt, shoreline sediment, milk, aquatic biota, food products, vegetation, and direct exposure pathways have been analyzed, evaluated, and summarized. The REMP is designed to ensure that radiological effluent releases are As Low As is Reasonably Achievable (AIARA), no undue environmental effects occur, and the health and safety of the public is protected. The program also detects any unexpected environmental processes which could allow radioactive accumulations in the environment or food pathway chains.

Radiation and radioactivity in the environment is con-stantly monitored within a 25 mile radius of the station.

Virginia Power also collects samples within this area. A number of sampling locations for each medium were selected using available meteorological, land use, and water use data.

Two types of samples are taken. The first type, control samples, are collected from areas that are beyond measurable influence of Surry Nuclear Power Station or any other nuclear facility. These samples are used as reference data. Normal background radiation levels, or radiation present due to causes other than Surry Power Station, can thus be compared to the environment surrounding the nuclear power station. Indicator samples are the second sample type obtained. These samples show how much radiation is contributed to the environment by the plant. Indicator samples are taken from areas close to the station where any plant contribution will be at the highest concentration.

Prior to station operation, samples were collected and analysed to determine the amount of radioactivity present in the area. The resulting values are used as a "pre-operational baseline."

Analysis results from the indicator samples are compared to both current control sample values and the pre-operational baseline to determine if changes in radioactivity levels are attributable to station operations, other causes such as the Chernobyl accident, or natural variation.

Teledyne Isotopes provides sample analyses for various radioisotopes as appropriate for each sample media. Participation in the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Interlaboratory Comparison Program provides an independent check of sample measurement precision and accuracy. Typically, radioactivity levels in the environment are so low that analysis values frequently fall below the minimum detection limits of state-of-the-art measurement methods.

Because of this, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) requires that equipment used for radiological environmental monitoring must be able to detect specified minimum Lower Limits of Detection (LLD). Tilis ensures that analyses are as accurate as possible. Samples with extremely low levels of radiation which cannot be detected are therefore reported as being below the LLD.

The NRC also mandates a "reporting level." Licensed nuclear facilities must report any releases equal to or greater than this reporting level. Environmental radiation levels are sometimes referred to as a percent of the reporting level.

8

Analytical results are divided into five categories based on exposure pathways: Airborne, waterborne, aquatic, ingestion, and direct radiation. Each of these pathways is describe below:

• The airborne exposure pathway includes airborne iodine and airborne particulates. The 1992 airborne results were very similar to previous years and to preoperational levels. No increase was noted and there were no detections of fission products or other man-made isotopes in the airborne particulate media during 1992.

• The waterborne exposure pathway includes well water and river water. No river water samples indicated the presence radioisotopes except tritium and naturally occurring potassium. The average tritium activity in 1992 was less than 2.00/o of the NRC reporting level. No man-made isotopes were detected in well water. This trend is consistent throughout the operational monitoring program.

• The aquatic exposure pathway includes silt and shoreline sediment samples. Silt contained some cesium-137, cesium-134, cobalt-58, and cobalt-60. During the preoperational period, there were no man-made isotopes detected for this pathway. Man-made isotopes have accumulated. Gamma-emitting isotope concentrations in 1992, however, indicate a decreasing trend compared to the previous five year period. Shoreline sediment, which may provide a direct exposure pathway, contained no man-made isotopes. Naturally occurring isotopes detected in 1992 sediment samples revealed a steady trend over the recent past.

• The ingestion exposure pathway includes milk, aquatic biota, and food product samples.

Iodine-131 was not detected in any 1992 milk samples and has not been detected in milk prior to or since the 1986 Chernobyl accident. Strontium-90, attributable to past atmospheric nuclear weapons testing, was detected at levels somewhat higher than the previous years. Cesium-137 was detected in one sample at a concentration that equals the previous five year average concentration. Naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected at average environmental levels.

The aquatic biota exposure pathway includes samples taken from localized populations of crabs, fish, clams, and oysters. Naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in each of the aquatic biota samples at average environmental levels. Vegetation samples revealed naturally occurring potassium-40 and beryllium-7 at levels which are lower than the previous years samples. Cesium-137 was detected in two samples at levels comparable to past years. These samples, however, are calculated to be less than one percent of the reporting level concentration. -

• The direct exposure pathway measures environmental radiation doses by use of thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). TLD results have indicated a continual decrease over the past six years.

During 1992, as in previous years, operation of the Surry Nuclear Power Station created no adverse environmental affects or health hazards. The maximum dose calculated for the hypothetical individual at the Surry Power Station site boundary due to liquid and gaseous effluents released from the site during 1992 was 0.006 millirem. For reference this dose may be compared to the 360 millirem average annual exposure to every person in the United States from natural and man-made sources. Natural sources in the environment provide approximately 82% of radiation exposure to man while Nuclear Power contributes less than 0.1%. These results demonstrate not only compliance with federal and state regulations, but also the adequacy of radioactive effluent control at the Surry Nuclear Power Station.

9

I. Introduction The operational Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) conducted for the year 1991 for Suny Power Station is provided in this report. The results of measurements and analyses of data obtained from samples collected from January 1, 1992 through December 31 , 1992 are summarized.

A. The Suny Power Station of Virginia Electric and Power Company is located on the Gravel Neck peninsula adjacent to the James River, approximately 25 miles upstream of the Chesapeake Bay. The site consists of two units, each with pressurized water reactor (PWR) nuclear steam supply system and turbine generator furnished by Westinghouse Electric Corporation. Each unit is designed with a gross electrical output of 822.6 megawatts electric (MWe). Unit 1 achieved commercial operation on December 22, 1972, and Unit 2 on May 1, 1973.

B. The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) regulations (10 CFR 50.34a) require that nuclear power plants be designed, constructed, and operated to keep levels of radioactive material in effluents to unrestricted areas As Low As is Reasonably Achievable (ALARA). To ensure these criteria are met, the operating license for Suny Power Station includes Technical Specifications which address the release of radioactive effluents. Inplant monitoring is used to ensure that these release limits are not exceeded. As a precaution against unexpected or undefined environmental processes which might allow undue accumulation of radioactivity in the environment, a program for monitoring the plant environs is also included in Virginia Power's Station Administrative Procedure VPAP-2103, Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM).

?fi!?=*

.-:\ -.~...:~s-10

C. Virginia Electric and Power Company is responsible for collecting the various indicator and control environmental samples. Teledyne Isotopes is responsible for sample analysis and submitting reports of radioanalyses. The results are used to determine if changes in radioactivity levels could be attributable to station operations. Measured values are compared to control levels, which vary with time due to such external events as cosmic ray bombardment, weapons test fallout, and seasonal variations of naturally occurring isotopes. Data collected prior to the plant operation is used to indicate the degree of natural variation to be expected. This pre-operational data is compared to data collected during the operational phase to assist in evaluating any radiological impact of plant operations.

D. Occasional samples of environmental media show the presence of man-made isotopes. As a method of referencing the measured radionuclide concentrations in the sample media to a dose consequence to man, the data is compared to the reporting level concentrations listed in the USNRC Regulatory Guide 4.8 and Surry Power Station's ODCM. These concentrations are based upon the annual dose commitment recommended by 10 CFR 50, Appendix I, to meet the criterion of "As Low As Is Reasonably Achievable."

E. This report documents the results of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program for 1992 and satisfies the following objectives of the program:

1. Provides measurements of radiation and of radioactive materials in those exposure pathways and for those radionuclides that lead to the highest potential radiation exposure of the maximum exposed members of the public resulting from the station operation.

2. To supplement the radiological effluent monitoring program by verifying that radioactive effluents are within allowable limits.

3. To identify changes of radioactivity in the environment.

4. To verify that the plant operations have no detrimental effect on the health and safety of the public.

• 11

• IL Nuclear Power And The Environment.e In Perspective Coal, oil, natural gas, nuclear power, and hydropower have all been used to run the nation's electric generating stations. Each method, however, has its drawbacks. Coal-fired power can damage the envirorunent during the mining process, or by airborne discharges such as fly-ashand chemicals which contribute to acid rain.. Oil and natural gas are costly because of their limited supply. Few suitable sites for hydropower exist, and building the large dams necessary to produce Hydropower has a significant impact on the environment.

Nuclear energy provides an alternate source of energy which is readily available. The operation of nuclear power stations has a very small impact on the environment. In fact, hundreds of acres adjoining Surry Power Station are a state waterfowl refuge, and Lake Anna, next to North Anna Power Station, is a well-known fishing site with a state park on its shore.

In order to more fully understand this unique energy source, background infonnation about basic radiation characteristics, risk assessment, reactor operation, effluent control, envirorunental monitoring, and radioactive waste is provided in this section.

Fundamentals

• The Atom Everything we encounter is made of atoms. Atoms are the smallest parts of an element that still have all the chemical properties of that element. At the center of an atom is a nucleus. The nucleus consists of neutrons and protons. Electrons move in an orbit around the nucleus and are negatively charged. Protons and neutrons are nearly identical in size and weight, and each is about 2000 times heavier than an electron. The proton, however, has a positive charge, while the neutron

--- Protons Positive Charge

~

Nucleus e Neutrons Neutral Charge

• KC565 has no charge, it is electrically neutral. Figure 1 presents a simple diagram of an atom.

Isotopes The number of protons in the atom of any specific element is always the same. For example, all hydrogen atoms have one proton whereas all oxygen atoms have eight protons. Unlike protons, 12

the number of neutrons in the nucleus of an element may vary. Atoms with the same number of

• protons, b ut a different number of ne utrons, are called isotopes. Table 1 lists the isotopes of uranium .

Isotopes Symbols Number of Protons Number of Neutrons Uranium-235 23su 92 143 Uranium-236 236u 92 144 Uranium-237 237U 92 145 Uranium-238 233u 92 146 Uranium-239 239U 92 147 Uranium-240 240u 92 148 Table 1 . Uran

• urn Isotopes Radiation and Radioactivity Radwnuclides

• Normally, the parts of an atom are in a balanced or stable state . A small percentage of atoms naturally contain excess energy and therefore are not stable atoms. If the nucleus of an atom contains excess energy, it may be called a radioactive atom , a radio isotope, or rad ionuclide . The excess energy is usually due to an im balance in the n umber of electrons, protons, and/ or neutrons which make up the ato m .

Radionuclides can be naturally occurring, such as uranium-238, thorium-232 and p otassium-40, or m an-made, such as iodine-131, cesium-137, and cobalt-60.

Radioactive Decay Radioactive atoms attempt to reach a stable (no n-radioactive) state through a p rocess known as radioactive decay. Radioactive decay is the release of energy from the atom through the emission of particulate and/or electromagnetic radiation. Particulate radiation may be in the form of electrically charged particles such as alpha (2 protons plus 2 neutrons) or beta particles (1 electron) ,

or may be electrically ne utral, such as neutrons. Part of the electromagnetic spectrum consists of gamma rays and X-rays w hich are similar to light and microwaves, but have a much higher energy.

Half-Life

• A radioactive half-life is the amount of time required for a radioactive substance to lo se half of its activity through the process of radioactive decay. Co balt-60 has a half-life of about 5 years.

13

After 5 years, 50% of its radioactivity is gon , and after 10 years, 75% has decayed away. Radioactive

• half-lives vary from millionths of a second to millions of years .

Radioactive atoms may decay directly to a stable state or may undergo a series of decay stages.

During the decay process, several daughter products may be formed which eventually transform into stable atoms. Naturally occurring radium-226, for example , has 10 successive daughter products (including radon) resulting finally with lead-206 as a stable form.

Types Of Radiation Two types of radiation are considered in the nuclear industry, particulate and -*------***--*---*-- 1 electromagnetic. Particulate radiation may come from the nucleus of an atom in the form of an ejected alpha particle.

Alpha particles consists of two protons I!

together with two neutrons. I Alpha particles have a very limited I

ability to penetrate matter. A piece of KC56 I!

paper will stop all alpha radiation. For this reason, alpha radiation from sources out-

• side the body are not considered to be a radiation hazard.

A beta particle is like an electron that has been ejected from the nucleus of an atom. Skin or a thin piece of aluminum will stop beta radiation. Exposure to beta radiation can be a hazard to the skin or lens of the eye. Because of their limited ability to penetrate the body, beta and KC567 alpha radiation are a health concern p arily if alpha or beta emitters are swallowed or inhaled where they might cause internal radiation exposure. Gamma rays are like X-rays, except that they come from the nucleus of an atom while X-rays come from the electron rings.

• ... *.. }  !

• *.* *.* Electromagnetic l Ganuna rays can penetrate deep into *. *-:::- radiation indistinguishable j from X-rays II the body and thus give a "whole-body" radiation dose. Several inches of concrete KC568 or lead will stop both ganuna and X-rays .

Figure 5 shows the approximate penetrat-ing ability of various types of radiation.

14

• Cl= Alpha

~= Beta y= Gamma Radioactive Material Paper Aluminum Concrete As radiation travels, it collides with other atoms and loses energy. Alpha particles can be stopped by a sheet of paper, beta particles by a thin sheet of aluminum, and gamma radiation by several inches of concrete or lead.

KC564 Quantities And Units Of Radioactive Measurement Several quantities and units are used to describe radioactivity and its effects. In the following sections two terms, rem and activity, will be used to describe amounts of radiation .

Rem measures the potential effect of radiation exposure on human cells. Small doses are cou nted in millirem. Each millirem is equal to one thousandth of a rem. Federal standards limit exposure for an individual member of the public to 500 millirem annually. This annual limit does not include the average 300 millirem received from natural sources and approximately 60 millirem from medical applications.

n 1 inch 1 millirem Just as Twelve inches ---------------------*

equals one foot 1000 millirem equals 1 rem KC561 15

• Activity is the number of nuclei in a sample that disintegrate (decay) every second. Each time a nucleus disinte-grates, radiation is emitted. The unit of activity is the curie. A Curie (Ci) is the

~ ;

v

~ _.~ ~

amount of radioactive material which v ..- ....

v ,,_._.~

decays at a rate of 37 billion atoms per r-t' I, ....-' .,.

second. Smaller units of the Curie are v  ; .,.

..... Curie often used. Two common units are the ,, . . - "" ,,_.

v ,,_.

microCurie (uCi), one millionth of a

"~"

., Lil Curie, and the picoCurie (pCi), one 10 Tons of Thorium-232 1 Gram of Radium-226 trillionth of a Curie. A Curie is a mea- (radiation source) (radiation sou rce) surement of radioactivity, not a quan- One gram of radium-226 and 10 tons of thorium-232 tity of material. The amount of material are both approximately 1 Curie. KC569 necessary to make one Curie varies. For example, one gram of radium-226 is one Curie of radioactivity, but it would take 9,170,000 grams (about 10 tons) of thorium-232 to obtain one Curie.

Sources Of Radiation

• Background Radiation Radiation is not a new creation of the nudear power industry; it is a natural occurrence on the earth. Mankind has always lived with radiation and always will. Every second of our lives, over 7,000 atoms undergo radioactive decay in the body of the average adult. Radioactivity exists naturally in the soil, water, air and space. All of these common sources of radiation contribute to the natural background radiation that we are exposed to each day.

The earth is constantly showered by a steady stream of high energy gamma rays. These rays come from space and are known as cosmic radiation. Our atmosphere shields out most of this radiation, but everyone still receives about 20 to 50 millirem each year from this source. At high altitudes, the air is thinner and provides less protection from cosmic radiation. Because of this, people living at higher altitudes or even flying in an airplane are exposed to more radiation.

Radioactive atoms commonly found in the atmosphere as a result of cosmic ray interactions include beryllium-7, carbon-14, tritium, and sodium-22.

Other natural sources of radiation include radionuclides naturally found in soil, water, food, building materials and even people. People have always been radioactive, in part because the carbon found in our bodies is a mixture of all carbon isotopes, both non-radioactive and radioactive. Approximately two-thirds of the whole body dose from natural sources is contributed

• by Radon gas. About one-third of the naturally occuring external terrestrial and internal whole body radiation dose is attributable to a naturally radioactive isotope of potassium, potassium-40.

16

Man-Made

• In addition to naturally occurring radiation, people are also exposed to man-made radiation.

The largest sources of these exposures are from medical X-rays, fluoroscopic examinations, radioactive drugs, and tobacco. Small doses are received from consumer products such as television, smoke alarms, and fertilizers. Very small doses result from the production of nuclear power. Fallout from nuclear weapons tests is another source of man-made exposure . Fallout radionuclides include strontium-90, cesium-137, carbon-14, and tritium.

Man-Made Sources Nuclear Power (0.1%)

Miscellaneous (0.1%)

~ - - Occupational (1 .4%)

er Goods (15.6%)

Man-Made Medical Natural And Man~Made Sources Diagnostic X-Rays 39.00 Other Medical 14.00

• Consumer Products Occupational Miscellaneous Environmental Nuclear Power 5.00 to 13.00 0.90 0.06 0.05 Natural Background Radon (55.6%)

Radon and Radon Daughters 200.00 Cosmic Rays 27.00 Cosmo~enic Radiation 1.00 Terrestrial Radiation 28.00 Internal Radiation 40.00 Total 360.00 MREM Per Year NCRP Report No. 93, "Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States,' 30 Dec 1987, Bethesda, MD 20814 KC563 17

Effects Of Radiation

• Studies The effects of ionizing radiation on human health have been under study for more than eighty years. Scientists have obtained valuable knowledge through the study of laboratory animals that were exposed to radiation under controlled conditions. It has proven difficult, however, to relate the biological effects of irradiated laboratory animals to the potential health effects on humans.

Because of this, human populations irradiated under various circumstances have been studied in great depth. These groups include:

• Survivors of the atomic bomb.

• Persons undergoing medical radiation treatment .

• Radium dial painters during World War I who ingested large amounts of radioactivity by "tipping" the paint bmshes w ith their lips.

• Uranium miners, who inhaled large amounts of radioactive dust while mining pitchblende (uranium ore).

s Early radiologists, who accumulated large doses of radiation from early X-ray

• equipment while being unaware of the potential hazards .

Analysis of these groups has increased our knowledge of health effects resulting from large radiation doses. Less is known about the effects oflow doses of radiation . To be on the conservative side, we assume that health effects occur proportionally to those observed following a large dose of radiation. That is, if one dose of radiation causes an effect, then half the dose will cause half the effect. Radiation scientists agree that this assumption overestimates the risks associated w ith low level radiation exposure. The effects predicted in this manner have not been actually observed in individuals exposed to low level radiation .

Health Risks Since the actual effects of exposure to low level radiation are difficult to measure, scientists often refer to the possible risk involved. The problem is one of evaluating alternatives, of comparing risks and weighing them against benefits. People make decisions involving risks every day, such as deciding whether to wear seat belts or smoke cigarettes. Risks are a part of everyday life . The question is to determine how great the risks are.

We accept the inevitability of automobile accidents. Building safer cars or wearing seat belts will reduce the risk of injury. You could choose to not drive to be even safer, but pedestrians and bicyclists are also injured by cars. Reducing the risk of injury from automobiles to zero requires moving to a place where there are no automobiles .

18

While accepting the many daily risks of living, some people feel that their demands for energy

• should be met on an essentially risk-free basis. Attention is focused on safeguarding the public, developing a realistic assessment of the risks, and placing them in perspective.

Because you cannot see, feel, taste, hear, or smell radiation, it is often a source of concern. We have the same lack of sensory perception for things such as radio waves, carbon monoxide , and small concentrations of numerous cancer causing substances. Although these risks are just as real as the risks associated with radiation, they have not generated the same degree of concern as radiation.

Most risks are with us throughout our lives, and their effects can be added up over a lifetime to obtain a total effect on our life span. The typical life span for an American woman is now 76 years, whereas men average 71 years of age. Figure 9 shows a number of different factors that decreased our average life expectancy.

I' Days Activity I 2500 1 . Smoking 1 Pack of Cigarettes a Day Ij 2000 2.

3.

Being 20% Overweight Construction j

! 4. Agriculture 1500 5. Auto Accidents ll 6. Avg Alcohol Consumption per Person j 1000 7. Home Accidents i 8. All Industry Hazards

!I 500

9. Radiation Dose of 6.5 Millirem per Year for 30 Years NCRP Report No. 95, "Radiation Exposure of the U.S.

Population from Consumer Products and Miscellaneous 0

I Sources,' National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, 30 Dec 1987, Bethesda, MD 20814 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 KC562 The American Cancer Society estimates that about 30 percent of all Americans will develop cancer at some time in their lives from all possible causes. So, in a group of 10,000 people it is expected that 3,000 of them will develop cancer. If each person were to receive a radiation exposure of one rem in addition to natural background radiation, then it is expected that three more may develop cancer during their lifetime . This increases the risk from 30 percent to 30.03 percent.

Hence, the risks of radiation exposure are small when compared to the risks of everyday life.

These comparisons should give you some idea of the risk involved in activities that you are familiar with. They give a basis for judging what smoking, eating, or driving a car could mean to your health and safety. Everyone knows that life is full of risks. If you have the basis for judgment, you can decide what to do or what not to do.

19

Nuclear Reactor Operation

• Electricity in the United States is being produced using fossil fuel, uranium, or falling water.

A fossil-fueled power station bums coal, oil or natural gas in a boiler to produce energy. Nuclear power stations use uranium fuel and the heat produced from the fission process to make energy.

In both cases, they heat and boil water to produce steam. The steam is used to drive a turbine which turns a generator and produces electricity.

Nuclear Fuel Uranium (U) is the basic ingredient in nuclear fuel, consisting of U-235 and U-238 atoms.

Natural uranium contains less than one percent U-235 when it is mined. Commercial nuclear power plants use fuel with a U-235 content of approximately three percent The process used to increase the U-235 concentration is known as enrichment.

Reactor Operation After enrichment, the uranium fuel is chemically changed to uranium dioxide, a dry black powder. This powder is compressed into small ceramic pellets. Each fuel pellet is about 3/ 4 inches long and 3/8 inches in diameter. The pellets are placed into 12 foot long metal tubes made of zirconium alloy to make a fuel rod. About five pounds of pellets are used to fill each rod. A total of 204 fuel rods make a single fuel assembly, Virginia Power nuclear reactors contains 157 fuel

• assemblies (Figure 10) .

Reactor Vessel Fuel Rod Control Rods Coolant Outlet Nozzle Coolant Inlet Nozzle Fuel Rod Assembly Fuel Pellet Fuel Rod Assemblies Thermal Shield Core Support

• 20

Fission

• Nuclear energy is produced by a process called fission. Fission occurs in a reactor when uranium is split into fragments producing heat and releas-ing neutrons. These neutrons strike other uranium atoms, causing them to split (fission) and release more heat and neutrons. This is called a chain

• reaction (Figure 11) and is controlled by the use of reactor control rods.

8 Heavy Atom o Free Neutron Fission Fragment ~ Heat Control rods are an essential part of the nuclear reactor. Control rods con-tain cadmium, indium, and silver metals which absorb and control the amount of neutrons produced in the reactor. The control rods act to slow down or stop the chain reaction. A chain reaction cannot occur when the control rods are inserted completely into the core. When the control rods are withdrawn, the chain reaction begins and heat is generated.

Design & Operation Surry Power Station and North Anna Power Station use a Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR)

• system to generate electricity. There are two complete and independent PWR systems on-site at both Surry and North A.nna Power Stations. These are referred to as Unit-1 and Unit-2.

The reactor ore is inside a large steel container called the Reactor Pressure Vessel. The reactor core is always surrounded by water. The fissioning of the uranium fuel makes the fuel rods get hot. The hot fuel rods heat the water, which serves as a coolant that carries away heat.

In a pressurized water reactor, heat is moved from place to place by moving water, the reactor's coolant. The water flows in closed loops. As (primary) water moves through the core it gets very hot (605°F), but because it is under such high pressure , 2235 pounds per square inch (psi), it doesn't boil. The hot water then flows to the steam generator. The steam generator is a heat exchanger. Reactor coolant passes through it but doesn't mix with the steam generator (secondary) water. Instead, heat from the primary water is transferred through thousands of tubes to the cooler secondary water. The water in the steam generator is under much less pressure, and the heat boils the secondary water to steam. At Virginia Electric and Power stations, each unit has 3 steam generators.

The steam is piped to a steam turbine that turns an electric generator. The exhausted steam from the turbine is cooled and converted back to water in a condenser. The condenser is also a heat exchanger; in it heat passes from the steam to a third loop of water. In Surry's case the James River provides the third loop water. At North Anna Power Station third loop water is from Lake Anna. The steam turns back to liquid and is pumped back to the steam generator. Figure 12 is a diagram of typical nuclear reactor systems.

21

""'"***.,*.wm High Pressure Safety Injection System

,.... w,. .w..... (Emergency Core Cooling)

- Low Pressure Safety Injection System (Emergency Core Cooling)

Containment Spray System

, _ Main Steam System Reactor Containment Building - Reactor Cooling System (Primary Cooling System)

Condenser Cooling System

- Main Feedwater System

- Auxiliary Feed Water System Ventilation Turbine Building Release Stack Electrical Power Auxiliary Building To Transmission System Charcoal Filter Containment Spray Pump Containment Sump KC56C*

Containment Nuclear power plants are designed to prevent the escape of large quantities of radiation and radioactive substances. Two principles are used. First, thick, heavy walls are used as shielding to absorb radiation and prevent its escape. Second, strong, airtight walls called containment, are used to prevent the escape of radioactive materials.

The reactor pressure vessel and the containment building that houses it are enormously strong (Figure 13). Strong enough, in fact, to withstand a direct hit from a 707 jetliner. The reactor core lies within a sealed pressure vessel. Like all boilers its walls must be very strong because the water inside must be kept under high pressure. The reactor pressure vessel in a nuclear power plant is even heavier than an ordinary steam boiler because of the need to minimize the chance of rupture and release of any radioactive materials. The reactor pressure vessel is made from a stainless steel alloy 6 to 8 inches thick.

Around the reactor pressure vessel is a thick concrete wall. This wall acts as shielding, protecting workers by absorbing radiation resulting from the nuclear chain reaction. Next an airtight 1/2 inch steel liner surrounds the entire interior of the containment. If the reactor pressure vessel or any of the primary piping should break, the escaping steam would be trapped inside the liner.

22

- - 1/2 inch Steel Liner

- - 3/8 Inch Steel Liner 4 1/2 Feet Thick Concrete 185 Feet 122 Feet

• ~ - - - - - - - 126 Feet -

Finally, the building's reinforced oncrete outer wall is 4 1/ 2 feet thick tapering to 2 1/ 2 feet at the top of the dome. It is designed to act as shielding and is also intended to withstand natural and man-made events like earthquakes and even the direct impact from a large commercial jet aircraft.

Operating the Reactor Safely Accidents The most serious accident that could happen in a nuclear power plant involves overheating in the nuclear reactor core. Such an accident would result from a loss-of-coolant accident or LOCA.

• During a LOCA, primary coolant would no longer circulate through the reactor core to remove heat .

Circulation could be lost if a combination of pipes burst, for example. Conceivably, a dry, overheated reactor core could melt through the pressure vessel.

23

The reactor itself is designed to respond automatically to such an emergency. Operators are

• also trained to make corrections for any system failure. The automatic and operator responses have two goals: to prevent damage to the reactor, and prevent the release of radiation. Shutting the reactor down is relatively easy. Control rods drop in and chemical to stop the nuclear reaction are injected into the coolant. Losing the coolant itself tends to stop the chain reaction because the coolant is needed to keep the nuclear chain reaction going. Within 10 seconds of shutdown, the amount of heat is less than 5 percent of the amount produced at full power and within 15 minutes, less than 1 percent.

To carry heat away during an accident, all reactors have Emergency Core Cooling Systems (ECCS). The ECCS consists of primary and back-up pumps and reservoirs of coolant that operate separately from those that normally circulate through the system. A nuclear reactor has many different back-up safety systems designed so that if one fails another is always available.

Workers There are many different jobs at a nuclear power plant and they are filled by people with diverse backgrounds. All employees are initially trained and then retrained annually by the company.

Virginia Power's Training centers are fully accredited by the National Academy for Nuclear Training and the Institute for Nuclear Power Operations. The operators are tested and certified by the United

• States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC}

Safety Statistics Job safety is another measure of assurar1ce that the station is being properly operated. Surry Power Station attained 2,700,000 man hours without a lost time accident and is continuing that record into 1993. North Anna reached 6,000,000 man hours without a lost time accident, prior to 1992. In 1992, however, two accidents occurred which resulted in broken legs. Since those accidents, North Anna has appro:xJmately 800,000 man-hours without a lost time accident.

Sunzmary

• Nuclear energy provides an alternate source of energy which is readily available. The operation of a nuclear power station has a very small impact on the environment.

e Radiation is not a new creation of the nuclear power industry; it is a natural occurrence on the earth. Mankind has always lived with radiation and always will. Radioactivity exists naturally in the soil, water, air and space. All these common sources of radiation contribute to the natural background radiation to which we are exposed.

In addition to naturally occurring radiation and radioactivity, people are also exposed to man-made radiation. Very small doses result from the production of nuclear power.

~ Nuclear power plants are designed to prevent the escape of radiation and radioactive

• ~

substances.

A nuclear reactor has many different back-up safety systems designed so that if one fails another is available.

24

ill. SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PROGRAM A. Sampline Pro~am

1. Table 1 summarizes the sampling program for Surry Power Station during 1992.

The symbols on this table refer to the sample locations shown on Figures 1 through

3. Figure 1 indicates the locations of the land based samples while Figure 2 shows the locations of the river based samples. The small triangles in Figure 3 designate the position of environmental thermoluminescent dosimeters (1LDs) at the site boundary.

2. For routine 1LD measurements, two dosimeters made of CaS04:Dy in a teflon card are deployed at each sampling location. Several TLDs are co-located with NRC and Commonwealth of Virginia direct radiation recording devices. Th~ are indicted as "co-location"' samples.

3. In addition.to the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program required by Surry Technical Specifications, Virginia Electric and Power Company splits samples with the Commonwealth of Virginia. All samples listed in Table I are collected by Vepco personnel except for those labeled state split. All samples are

-shipped to Teledyne botopes in Westwood, New Jersey.

4. All samples listed in Table I are taken at indicator locations except those labeled "control".

B. Analysis Proeram

1. Table 2 summarizes the analysis program conducted by Teledyne Isotopes for Surry Power Station during 1992.

25

e TABLE 2 (Page 1 of 4)

SURRY-1992 RADIOLOOICAL SAMPLING STATION DISTANCE AND DIRECTION FROM UNIT NO. 1 Distance Collection Sample Media Location Station MIies Direction Degrees Frequency Remarks Environmental Control (00) Quarterly Onsite*

(TLD's) West North West (02) 0.17 WNW mo Quarterly Site Boundary Suny Station Discharge (03) 0.6 NW ?IU Quarterly Site Boundary I::,. North North West (04) 0.4 NNW 330° Quarterly Site Boundary North (05) 0.33 N 357° Quarterly Site Boundary North North East (06) 0.28 NNE Z1!' Quarterly Site Boundary North East (07) 0.31 NE 45° Quarterly Site Boundary East North East (08) 0.43 ENE ~ Quarterly Site Boundary East (Exclusion) (09) 0.31 E W' Quarterly Onsite West (10) 0.40 w voo Quarterly . Site Boundary West South West (11) 0.45 WSW 2500 Quarterly Site Boundary South West (12) 0.30 SW 2250 Quarterly Site Boundary South South West (13) 0.43 SSW 2030 Quarterly Site Boundary South (14) 0.48 s 1800 Quarterly Site Boundary South South East (15) 0.74 SSE 157° Quarterly Site Boundary South East (16) 1.00 SE 135° Quarterly Site Boundary East (17) 0.57 E W' Quarterly Site Boundary Station Intake (18) 1.23 ESE 113° Quarterly Site Boundary Hog Island Reserve (19) 1.94 NNE '16° Quarterly Near Resident. co-location N

Bacons Castle (20) 4.45 SSW 202" Quarterly Apx.5mile co-location O' Route633 (21) 3.5 SW 2240 Quarterly Apx. Smile Alliance (22) 5.1 WSW 2480 Quarterly Apx. Smile co-location Suny (23) 8.0 WSW 2500 Quarterly Population Center Route 636 and 637 (24) 4.0 w Z'/00 Quarterly Apx. Smile Scotland Wharf (25) 5.0 WNW 2850 Quarterly Apx. Smile co-location Jamestown (26) 6.3 NW 3100 Quarterly Apx. Smile co-location Colonial Parkway (27) 3.7 NNW 330° Quarterly Apx. Smile Route 617 and 618 (28) 5.2 NNW 3400 Quarterly Apx. 5 mile Kingsmill (29) 4.8 N 'I' Quarterly Apx. Smile Williamsburg (30) 7.8 N (J' Quarterly Population Center co-location Kingsmill North (31) 5.6 NNE 14° Quarterly Apx.5 mile Budweiser (32) S.7 NNE zr Quarterly Population Center

• TLD stored in a lead shield in environmental building

e e TABLE 2 e

(Page 2 of 4)

SURRY-1992 RADIOLOGICAL SAMPLING STATION DISTANCE AND DIRECTION FROM UNIT NO. 1 Distance Collection Miles Direction Degrees Frequency Remarks Sample Media Location Station (33) 4.8 NB 41° Quarterly Apx.. 5milc Environmental Water Plant TLD's(Cont.) Dow i (34) 5.1 ENE ENE 7fJ' 730 Quarterly Quarterly Apx.. Smile Population Center co-location Lee Hall (35) 7.1 5.0 B ggo Quarterly Apx.. 5 mile

b. Goose Island (36) co-locatim (37) 4.8 ESB 107° Quarterly Apx.5mile Fort Eustis 102° Quarterly Population Center Newport News (38) 16.5 ESB 14.8 SSE 147° Quarterly Control Location James River Bridge (39) Control Location Benn'* Church (40) 14.5 s 175° Quarterly Population Center Smithfield (41) 11.5 s 176° Quarterly Apx. 5 mile (42) 5.2 SSE 156° Quarterly Rushmerc co-location Rt 628 (43) 5.0 s 177° Quarterly Apx.Smile (SS) .37 NNE 150 Weekly Site boundary location with Air Charcoal Suny Station HighcltD/Q and Particulate 260 Weekly Co-location Hog Island Reserve (HIR) 2.0 NNB 4.5 SSW 'lJJlO Weekly D Bacons Castle (BC)

(ALL) 5.1 WSW 2480 Weekly Co-location Alliance 330° Weekly N Colonial Parkway (CP) 3.7 NNW

...._J (DOW) 5.1 ENE 7CJ' Weekly Dow Chemical 107° Weekly Fort Eustis (FE) 4.8 ESE 16.5 ESE 122° Weekly Control Location Newport News (NN)

River Water Suny Discharge 0.17 NW 3250 285° Monthly Monthly Con t!flitLocation/State Split State Scotland Wharf 5.0 WNW 1.9 ESE 77° Bi-monthly w Suny Station Intake 2.4 NE 52° Bi-monthly Hog Island Point 140° Bi-monthly Newport News 12.0 SE 11.2 WNW 300" Bi-monthly Control Location Cbickahominy River 3250 Monthly Suny Station Discharge 0.17 NW Scotland Wharf s.o WNW 285° Monthly

e TABLE 2 (Page 3 of 4)

SURRY-1992 RADIOLOGICAL SAMPLING STATION DISTANCE AND DIRECTION FROM UNIT NO. 1 Distance Collection Sample Media Location MIies Direction Degrees Frequency Remarks Well Water Suny Station Quarterly Onsite*

Hog Island Reserve 2.0 NNE 'II° Quarterly w Bacon, Castle 4.5 SSW 203° Quarterly Jamestown 6.3 NW 309° Quarterly Shoreline Hog Island Reserve 0.8 N ~ Semi-Annually Sediment Burwell'* Bay 7.76 SSE 167° Semi-Annually SD Slit Chickahominy River 11.2 WNW 300" Semi-Annually Control Location Suny Station Intake 1.9 ESE 710 Semi-Annually s Hog Island Point 2.4 NE 52° Semi-Annually Point of Shoals 6.4 SSE 157° Semi-Annually Newport News 12.0 SE 140" Semi-Annually Suny Station Discharge 0.5 NNW 341° Semi-Annually N

CX>

MIik Lee Hall(a) 7.1 ENE c,io Monthly State Split Epps 4.8 SSW 201° Monthly State Split A Colonial Parkway 3.7 NNW 337° Monthly J,dkins 6.2 SSW 211° Monthly Williams 22.5 s 182° Monthly Control Location Oysters Deep Watc:r Shoals 3.9 ESE 105° Bi-Monthly Point of Shoals 6.4 SSE 157° Bi-Monthly 0 Rock Landing Shoals 7.8 SE 140" Bi-Monthly State Split Newport News 12.0 SE 140" Bi-Monthly Clams Chickabominy River 11.2 WNW 300" Bi-Monthly Control Location Suny Station Discharge 1.3 NNW 341° Bi-Monthly State Split C Hog Island Point 2.4 NE 52° Bi-Monthly Jamestown 5.1 WNW 300" Bi-Monthly Lawncs Creek 2.4 SE 131° Bi-Monthly

• Well water sample taken onsite at Suny Environmental Building (a) Lee Hall dairy station became unavailable 09/92. Replacement sample is not required.

• e TABLE 2 (Page4of 4)

SURRY-1992 e

RADIOLOGICAL SAMPLING STATION DISTANCE AND DIREC110N FROM UNIT NO. 1 Distance Collection Sample Media Location MIies Direction Degrees Frequency Remarks Crabs Suny Station Discharge 0.6 NW 312" Annually CR Fish Suny Station Discharge 0.6 NW 312" Semi-Annually F

Crops Brock'* Farm 3.8 s 188° Annually State Split (Com,Peanutl) Slade's Farm 2.4 s 177° Annually State Split Soybeans) Spratley'* Garden 3.2 s 18s0 Annually State Split (Cabbage,K.ale) . Pool's Garden 2.3 s 182" Annually State Split Carter'* Grove Garden 4.8 NE 560 Annually State Split Stone'* Garden - - Annually State Split Luca'* Garden - Annually State Split/Control Loe.

(Chester, Va.)

Spratley's Garden (a) 3.2 s 185° Annually State Split N

\.t)

(a) Spratley's Garden replaced Poole's Garden on 6{23/92.

ESE SW Legend Air San1)1ing Stations TLD San1)1ing State Environmental Monitoring Sites

• State n.o Sites

- - - -

• Site Boundary Figure 14. Surry Radiological Monitoring Locations

Surry Emergency Plan Map e Air Sampling Stations Nearest Residents e TLD Sampling e Nearest Farm Animals e Nearest Garden Aquatic Samples Original 4' 1991 by ADC of Alexandria, Inc., 6440 General Green Wa y, Alexandria, VA 22312 . USED WITH PERMISSION . No other reproduction mav be made without the writlen permission of ADC.

w CB3308

/

SSE

,~:~.*-~

=

.*:_., _______________:_:"_::_:_i::_;_:_:_:_l:_:_~:_a_ls__,

Original 4' 1991 by ADC of Alexandria, Inc., 6440 General Green Way, Alexandria , VA22312 . USED WITH PERMISSION . No other reproduction may be made w~hout the written perm ission of ADC.

CB3309

w

~~

- ,\

CB331 0

Surry Emergency Plan Map e Air Sampling Stations Nearest Residents e TLD Sampling e Nearest Farm Animals e Nearest Garden Aquatic Samples Original () 1991 by ADC of Alexandria, Inc., 6440 General Green Way, Alexandria, VA22312. USED WITH PERMISSION . No other reproduction may be made without the written permission of ADC.

/i . WNWQ~

./

~*.*.*:**

CB3307

TABLE 3 SURRY POWER STATION SAMPLE ANALYSIS PROGRAM SAMPLE MEDIA FREQUENCY ANALYSIS LLD~t} REPORT UNITS Thermoluminescent Quarterly GammaDose 1.5 mR/month Dosimetry (TLD)

Air Iodine Weekly 1-131 0.07 pCi/m3 Air Particulate Weekly Gross Beta 0.01 pCi/m3 Quarterly (2) Gamma Isotopic pCifm3 Cs-134 0.05 Cs-137 0.06 River Water Quarterly Tritium 2000 pCi/1 composite of monthly sample Monthly and 1-131 10 pCi/1 Bi-monthly Gamma Isotopic Mn-54 15 Fe-59 30 Co-58, 60 15 Zn-65 30 Zr-95 30 Nb-95 15 Cs-134 15 Cs-137 18 Ba-140 60 La-140 15 Well Water Quarterly Tritium 2000 pCi/1 1-131 1 Gamma Isotopic Mn-54 15 Fe-59 30 Co-58, 60 15 Zn-65 30 Zr-95 30 Nb-95 15 Cs-134 15 Cs-137 18 Ba-140 60 La-140 15 Footnotes located at end of table.

35

TABLE 3 (ConL)

SURRY POWER STATION SAMPLE ANALYSIS PROGRAM SAMPLE MEDIA FREQUENCY ANALYSIS LLD(l) REPORT UNITS Shoreline Sediment Semi-Annual Gamma Isotopic pCi/kg-dry Cs-134 150 Cs-137 180 Silt Semi-Annual Gamma Isotopic pCi/kg-dry Cs-134 150 Cs-137 180 Milk Monthly 1-131 1 pCi/1 Gamma Isotopic Cs-134 15 Cs-137 18 Ba-140 60 La-140 15 Oyster Bi-Monthly . Gamma Isotopic pCi/kg-wet Mn-54 130 Fe-59 260 Co-58,60 130 Zn-65 260 Cs-134 130 Cs-137 150 Clams Bi-Monthly Gamma Isotopic pCi/kg-wet Mn-54 130 Fe-59 260 Co-58, 60 130 Zn-65 260 Cs-134 130 Cs-137 150 Crabs Annually Gamma Isotopic pCi/kg-wet Mn-54 130 Fe-59 260 Co-58, 60 130

-"260- -- .

Zn-65 Cs-134 130 Cs-137 150 Footnotes located at end of table.

36

- TABLE 3 (Cont.)

SURRY POWER STATION SAMPLE ANALYSIS PROORAM SAMPLE MEDIA FREQUENCY ANALYSIS LLD(l) REPORT UNITS Fish Semi-Annual Gamma Isotopic pCi/kg-wet Mn-54 130 Fe-59 260 Co-58, 60 130 Zn-65 260 Cs-134 130 Cs-137 150 Crops Annually Gamma Isotopic pCi/kg-wet 1-131 60 Cs-134 60 Cs-137 80 Footnotes:

This table is not a complete listing of nuclides which can be detected and reported. Other peaks that are measurable and identifiable, together with the above nuclides, shall also be identified and reported.

(1) LLDs indicate those levels that the environmental samples should be analyred to, in accordance with the Surry Radiological Environmental Program. Actual analysis of the samples by Teledyne Isotopes may be lower than those listed.

(2) Quarterly composites of each location's weekly air particulate samples are analyred for gamma emitters.

37

III. PROGRAM EXCEPTIONS The REMP program exceptions for 1992 are presented in L'tls section. All samples were obtained as required by the REMP.

The Lee Hall Dairy (milk sample location) went out of business, a.'lld no replacement was available.

Each monitoring location has two thennolumL'lescent dosimeters (TLDs). Several of these locations had one TLD missing. The second TLD *at each location was available for accountability, thus satisfying all monitoring requirements. Based on 1992 occurrences, no further action is necessary.

V. Summary and Discussion - 1992 Analytical Results Definitions Below are listed definitions of words and phrases for some of the common terms used in the following sections.

Average Activity: The arithmetic mean of detected radioactivity for all samples within a sampled parameter.

Impact: Defines the influence on people.

Isotope: The radioactive element identified in a sampled pathway.

Lower Limit of Detection (LLD): The smallest amount of radioactivity that can be detected by analysis instrumentation and is statistically significant above background level The NRC provides Surry Power Station with LLD's that we must achieve using our analysis equipment. Many times the results of an analysis is reported as below LLD and this may sound like a contradiction. However, the LLD being referred to is the Technical Specification (NRC required) LLD and not the actual instrument LLD. The technology in the analytical field is advancing rapidly and the LLD's achieved by current state-of-the-art equipment is in many cases lower values than those required by the NRC.

Pathway: Routes by which people may become exposed to man made and naturally occurring radioactivity. In this report, VEPCO and the State of Virginia sample and analyze components of many pathways; for example: air samples are obtained to analyze the exposure through the inhalation pathway and fish and other marine species are analyzed for exposure through the ingestion pathway.

Reporting Level Concentration: A method of referencing the measured radionuclide concentrations in sample media to a dose consequence. Reporting level concentrations are listed in the NRC Regulatory Guide 4.8. These concentrations are based upon 25% of the annual dose commitment required by 10CFR50, Appendix I, to meet the criterion "As Low As Reasonably Achievable".

Trend: Steady, rising or falling based on the same sampled parameter from preoperational data and previous years.

39

Analytical Results 1992 Analytical Results are discussed by pathway below.

Airborne Exposure Pathway Airborne Radioiodine Charcoal cartridges are used to collect airborne raclioiodine. Once a week. the samples are collected and analyzed. The results are presented in Table B-1. All results are below the lower limit of detection with no positive activity detected. These results are similar to preoperational data and the results of samples taken prior to and after the 1986 accident in the Soviet Union at Chernobyl.

Airborne Gross Beta Results of the weekly gross beta analysis are presented in Table B-2. A review of Table B-2 indicates that results from the station indicator compare favorably to the control location in Newport News; briefly summarized in Table 5.

Table 4 Gross Beta Analysis Summary Quarterly Average Quarterly Average Calendar Quarter All Locations Control Station 1st 16pCi/m3 14 pCi/m3 2nd 15 pCifm3 13 pCifm3 3rd 15 pCi/m3 14 pCiJm3 4th 16pCiJm3 16 pCiJm3 Quarterly averages are consistent with background radioactivity levels. The gross beta concentrations observed indicate a steady trend compared to levels found during the previous 7 years. Gross beta activity found during the preoperational---and early operating period of Surry were higher because of nuclear weapons testing. During the past two decades nearly 740 nuclear 40

weapons have been tested worldwide. In 1985 weapons testing ceased, and with the exception of the Chernobyl accident, airborne gross beta results have trended at stable levels.

Airborne Gamma Isotopic Air particulate filters are analyzed for isotopes that are gamma emitters. The results of the composite analysis are listed in Table B-3. No gamma emitting radioactivity attributable to the power station was detected. However, natural background radioactivity was detected in many of the samples. The two isotopes that were identified are beryllium-7 and potassium-40. Beryllium-7 is continuously produced in the upper atmosphere by cosmic radiation. Potassium-40 is naturally present in foods, building materials and soil.

WATERBORNE EXPOSURE PATHWAY River Water

- The analysis results for the James River water sampling program are presented in Table B-

4. Samples of James River water are collected as monthly grab samples at both Surry Discharge and Scotland Wharf and Bi-monthly grab samples at Hog Island Point, Newport News, Chickahominy River and Surry In.take. All samples are analyzed by gamma spectroscopy and for iodine-131 by a radiochemical procedure. These samples are also composited and analyzed for tritium on a quarterly basis.

Naturally occurring potassium-40 was measured in 18 samples with an average concentration of 91.4 pCi/liter.

All samples were analyzed for gamma emitting radioisotopes. With the exception of naturally occurring potassium-40 no other gamma emitters were detected. In particular, no iodine-131 was detected. This trend is consistent with previous years.

Tritium was measured in 11 of 24 quarterly composite samples. The average tritium concentration was 295 pCi/liter. Preoperational data for tritium indicated levels of activity considerably higher than current levels due in part to atmospheric weapons testing. This years level is less than the average for the past 7 years. The State of Virginia samples water from the e station discharge and a control site located up stream of the station Scotland Wharf. These samples are taken as part of the State Split Sample Program and analyzed independently. The results are-41

presented in Table B-5. River water from the station discharge and control location identified

-tritium concentration of 403 pCi/liter and 150 pCi/liter respectively. Scotland Wharf is taken as a weekly grab sample. Station discharge is sampled by a composite sampler and collected weekly.

Monthly composite samples are prepared for gamma and iodine-131 analysis and quarterly composites are prepared for tritium analysis.

In addition to the VEPCO monthly grab sample and the State Split composite sample, a VEPCO station discharge composite sampler was placed in service in May of 1989. A tritium composite from this sampler was analywd monthly and then composited for quarterly analysis.

The average tritium concentration for 1992 was 552 pCi/liter.

The trend graphs provide a comparison of tritium concentration measured in the downstream sample (Surry Station Discharge) and in the upstream control location (Scotland Wharf). As expected, the Surry discharge samples indicated higher levels of tritium than the control location. The water in the discharge canal is further diluted by the river water beyond the discharge structure. The average tritium concentration in grab samples taken downstream of the station indicate good comparison to the State Split control concentration.

Well Water Well water is not considered to be affected by station operations because there are no discharges made to this pathway. However, Surry does monitor well water and analyi.es water samples from four indicator locations. The results of these sample analysis are presented in Table B-6.

These samples were analyzed by gamma spectroscopy and indicated that there were no man made radioisotopes present Naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in two samples with an average concentration of 63.8 pCi/liter. Preoperational samples were only analyzed for gross alpha and gross beta. Gamma emitting isotopes have no\ been detected within the recent past and this trend is consistent throughout the operational monitoring program.

All well water samples were analyzed for tritium. No tritium was detected in any of the control or indicator samples. Preoperational samples were not analywd for tritium however, this years results indicate a decrease from previous operating data.

42

TRENDING GRAPH-1: GROSS BETA IN AIR PARTICULATES 1.0E+O-,---------------------------------,

(a) 1.0E-1 1.0E-2 1.0E-3-+------.----...---........----.----.....------.-----.------,----"T" 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 (a) Chernobyl

- Indicator __._ Control -A Avg-Pre Op - ~ Average LLD TRENDING GRAPH- 2: TRITIUM IN RIVER WATER 100000-,------------------------------~

10000

....Q) <) - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- - - -------- ~

=

""" 1000 0

a.

100 -+--.....-........---.---,-...----.---r---.---r---.-..--...--,----,---,----,.-,---,--.--.........--.----,-.---,---1 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92

- Surry Discharge ---- Scotland Whart - <) Average LLD 43

AQUATIC EXPOSURE PATHWAY Silt Silt samples were taken to evaluate any buildup of radionuclides in the environment due to the operation of the power station. The radioactivity in silt is a result of precipitation of radionuclides in the waste discharges and the subsequent dispersion of the material by the river current Sampling this pathway provides a good indication of the dispersion effects of effluents to the river. Buildup of radionuclides in silt could indirectly lead to increasing radioactivity levels in clams, oysters and fish.

Silt samples are collected from six locations both up stream and down stream of the power station. These samples are analyzed for gamma emitting radioisotopes. The results of these analyses are presented in Table B-7.

The NRC does not assign reporting levels to radioisotopes measured in this pathway.

However, Surry's operating license requires that we track and trend the concentrations of man made and naturally occurring gamma emitters. Preoperational analyses indicates that there were no man made radioisotopes present in this pathway.

Cobalt-58, cobalt-60, cesium-134 and cesiurn-137 average levels indicate a decrease in concentration when compared to last year and the previous 6 year trend The concentration of manmade radioisotopes in silt is projected to decrease. Surry Power Station currently has in service a Radioactive Waste Treatment Facility which employs state of the art technologies to reduce the volume and activity of liquid effiuents and reduce the impact on the environment. This facility went into operation in September of 1991.

Shoreline Sediment Unlike river bottom silt, shoreline sediment may provide a direct dose to humans. Buildup of radioisotopes along the shoreline may provide a source of direct exposure for those using the area for commercial and recreational uses. Samples were taken in February and August at Hog Island Point and at Burwell's Bay. The samples were analyzed by gamma spectroscopy and the results are presented in Table B-8.

This exposure pathway was not selected for analysis during the preoperational years.

Nevertheless, samples analyzed over the past 7 years from this pathway indicate a steady trend in 44

TRENDING GRAPH - 3: TRITIUM IN WELL WATER 10000~-----------------------------------.

• ----------------------------------+

1000

....~

en 100 0

8.

~

....Q)

I

=

--=: 10 (5

Q.

1_._---.----~----.----------.----~---------------

1/86 7/86 1/87 7/87 1/88 7/88 1/89 7/89 1/90 7/90 1/91 7/91 1/92 7/92

- Station-BC _._ Station-HIR """"*" Station.JMTN ---4'- Station-SS - +- Average LLD e

TRENDING GRAPH - 4: COBALT-58 IN SEDIMENT SILT ffi 100 0

~

8.

~

---

~

1 1-+----.---------.--~--------------.-----------.-----!

72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 During the preoperational period cobalt-58 was not measured.

---

Hog Island _... Station Intake

• Station Discharge -+- Average LLD 45

TRENDING GRAPH - 5: COBALT-60 IN SILT 10000~-----------------------------------,

e

J 1000 Cl) 0 8.

~

100 10

, -+--...----,.---,--...----,---,--...----,---,--...----,.--.--...----,.--.--...----,--.---...----,--1 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 During the preoperational period cobalt-60 was not measured.

- Hog Island _._ Station Intake Station Discharge -~ Average LLD TRENDING GRAPH-6: CESIUM-134 IN SILT

J Cl) 0 8.

~

1-+----.--.--...----,.--.--~~---~~-~---.--...----,.--.--...----,.--.--~-

72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 During the preoperational period cesium- 134 was not measured.

- Hog Island ~ Station Intake _... Station Discharge -+ Average LLD 46

TRENDING GRAPH-7: CESIUM-137 IN SILT 10000~-----------------------------------,

Cl) 0 8.

~

. 1000

~

~

1 0Q.

100-+--..--.---.--.----.---.--.--,-.-..--,.--.--.----.---,---.....---.---.--r--.--..---1 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 During the preoperational period cesium-137 was not measured.

_._ Hog Island _._ Station Intake ---.- Station Discharge - + Average LLD TRENDING GRAPH - 8: COBALT-58 IN CLAMS 1000-.------------------------------------,

~

Cl) 100 10 1-+---.--.---.----.---.--..----,,---.---.--..----,,---.---.--...---.....--.---.---.----1 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 During the preoperational period cobalt-58 was not measured.

- Chickahominy _._ Surry Discharge ___..._ Hog Island - + Average LLD 47

the detection of gamma radioisotopes. This years analysis along with last years results indicates that no radioisotopes attributable to the operation of the power station have been detected.

Naturally occurring radioisotopes were measured in several of the samples. Potassium-40, thorium-228 and radium-226 show a steady trend over the recent past INGESTION EXPOSURE PATHWAY Milk Mille samples are an important indicator for measuring the affect of radioactive iodine, and other radioisotopes in airborne releases. The dose consequence to man is from both a direct and indirect exposure pathway. The direct exposure pathway is from the inhalation of radioactive material. The indirect exposure pathway is from the grass-cow-milk pathway. In this pathway radioactive material is deposited on the plants consumed by the dairy animals. The radioactive material is in turn passed on to man via the milk. The results of iodine-131 and other ga.!'llma analysis of milk are presented in Table B-9.

Iodine-131 has not been detected in milk prior to and since the 1986 accident at Chernobyl in the Soviet Union.

Preoperational data shows that cesium-137 was detected in this pathway. The average activity over the past six years is consistent with the preoperational data. Cesium-137 was detected in one sample at a concentration equal to the previous five year average concentration.

Naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in all samples analyzed. The preoperational monitoring program did not analyze for this radioisotope.

Strontium-90 was detected in 11 of the 12 samples collected in participation with the State Split Program. Preoperational data shows levels 5 times higher than present values. This years analysis shows an increase when compared to the previous three years. Strontium-90 is not a part of station effluents but rather a product of weapons fallout Aquatic Biota All plants and animals have the ability to concentrate certain chemicals. Radioisotopes display the same chemical properties as their non-radioactive counter part. VEPCO samples 48

various aquatic biota to detennine the accumulation of radioisotopes in the environment. The results of the sampling program for this pathway are detailed below.

Clams were analyred from 5 different locations. The results of the analyses are presented in Table B-10. As expected, naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in 21 of 30 samples.

Potassium-40 is a naturally occurring radioisotope and is not a component of station effiuent Thorium-228 was detected in one sample from the Jamestown station with a concentration of 57.7 pCi/kg. No other gamma emitting radioisotopes were detected. The trend of gamma emitting radioisotopes in clams over the recent past continues to decrease and is well below the lower limits of detection. This marked decrease coincides with the extensive steam generator replacement project completed in 1982.

Oysters were analyzed from 3 different locations. The results of the analyses are presented in Table B-11. As expected, naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in 20 of 24 samples.

The current average level of potassium-40 is comparable to the preoperational average. No other gamma emitting radioisotopes were detected in any samples. This is consistent with preoperational data and data collected since the 1986 accident at Chernobyl in the Soviet Union.

Crab samples were collected in June from the discharge canal of the station and analyzed by gamma spectroscopy. The results of the analyses are presented in Table B-12. As expected naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected. Potassium-40 is a naturally occurring radioisotope and is not a component of station effluent. No other gamma emitting radioisotopes were detected in this sample. This is consistent with preoperational data and data collected during the past seven years.

Four fish samples were collected in April and October from the station discharge canal and analyzed by gamma spectroscopy. The results of the analyses are presented in Table B-13. As expected naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in all samples. Cesium-137 was not observed in any of the fish samples. The trend in cesium-137 in fish shows a decrease when compared to the previous seven years as none was de~ted in any sample.

Food Products and Vegetation Food products and vegetation samples were collected from five different locations and analyzed by gamma spectroscopy. The results of the analyses are presented in Table B-14. As expected naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in all samples. The average concentration 49

TRENDING GRAPH - 9: COBALT-60 IN CLAMS

~

V en5I 100 8

i"

> I 10 1-+---.---.....----..---,.--.----...----......---,.--.----...----..---,.--.----~---

74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92

- Chickahominy __._ Surry Discharge -r Hog Island - + Average LLD During the preoperational period cobalt-60 was not measured.

TRENDING GRAPH-10: CESIUM-137 IN CLAMS 1000-,---------------------------------~

~

, 100 enI Cl

~

0

c. 10 1-+---.---.-----..---.---.-----......----.--.....--...---,.--.---.---.----..---.---.---.----,.-~

74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92

- Chickahominy __._ Surry Discharge -;- Hog Island - + Average LLD 50

was lower than the average in 1991. Potassium-40 is a naturally occurring radioisotope and is not a component of station effluent. Naturally occurring beryllium-? was detected in one of the nine samples. Cesium-137 was measured in two samples of cabbage and soybeans with an average concentration of 18.5 pCi/kg. The concentration of radioactivity found in the samples this year is comparable to last year and may be attributable to world wide fallout. This sample is less than the lower limits of detection (80 pCi/kg) and is 0.9% of the required reporting limits.

DIRECT RADIATION EXPOSURE PATHWAY A thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) is an inorganic crystal used to detect ambient radiation. TLDs are placed in two concentric rings around the station; one at the site boundary and the other at approximately 5 miles from the station. TLDs are also placed in special interest areas such as population areas and nearby residences. Several additional TLDs serve as controls and these TLDs measure ambient radiation. Ambient radiation comes from naturally occurring radioisotopes in the air and soil, radiation from cosmic origin, fallout from nuclear weapons testing, station effluents and direct radiation from the station.

The results of the analyses are presented in Table B-15 and B-16. Control and indicator averages indicate a continuing decreasing trend in ambient radiation levels.

51

TRENDING GRAPH -11: DIRECT RADIATION MEASREMENTS TLD RESULTS t:

(JJ I

0 0

c..

Cl)

> I

,5 6 10

J:

'E cu

't1 fii

{ii a:

E

_.. Site Boundary - 5 Mile Boundary

~-----.\

52 I

VI. CONCLUSIONS The results of the 1992 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program for Surry Nuclear Power Station have been presented. The following sections present conclusions for each pathway individually followed by a program summary.

Airborne Exposure Pathway Air particulate gross beta concentrations of all the indicator locations for 1992 trend well with the control location. The gross beta concentrations indicate a steady trend when compared to the levels found during the previous 6 years. Gamma isotopic analysis of the particulate samples identified natural background radioactivity. No radioactivity attributable to the operation of the power station were identified.

Waterborne Exposure Pathway All river water samples were analyzed for gamma emitting radioisotopes. With the exception of naturally occurring potassium-40 no other gamma emitters were detected. In particular, no iodine-131 was detected.

Tritium activity was measured in several samples with an average concentration of 295 pCi/liter. This value is less than the average for the past five years. This concentration is less than 1.0% of the Reporting Level Concentration of 30,000 pCi/liter. Because there is no supply of drinking water or water used for crop irrigation, there is an insignificant dose consequence to the public from this pathway. Research of the preoperational data for tritium indicates levels of activity considerably higher than current levels due to atmospheric weapons testing.

Well Water Well water samples were analyzed and indicated that there were no man made or naturally occurring radioisotopes present.

53

Silt The NRC does not assign reporting levels to radioisotopes measured in this pathway. The average levels of man made radioisotopes in silt indicate a decrease in concentration when compared to the previous 6 year trend. In September 1991 Surry Power Station put into service a Radioactive Waste Treatment facility which reduces the activity of liquid effluents released to the environmenL Shoreline Sediment Only naturally occurring radioisotopes were detected at concentrations equivalent to normal background activities. There were no radioisotopes attributable to the operation of the power station found in any sample.

Milk Mille samples are an important indicator for measuring the affect of radioactive iodine and radioisotopes in airborne releases.

lodine-131 was not measured in any of the 57 milk samples. Naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected at a slight increase in average concentration when compared to the average of the previous five years.

Cesium-137 was detected in one sample at a concentration equal to the previous five year's average concentration. The concentration of strontium-90 in this years analysis indicate a slight increase when compared to the previous two years. However, strontium-90 is not a part of station effluent, but rather a product of weapons fallouL Aquatic Biota Clams, Oysters and Crabs As expected, naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in all samples. A review of the pervious 6 years indicates the potassium in clams and oysters is at average environmental levels. Other than one measurement of thorium-228, no other gamma emitting radioisotopes were detected in any of the samples. This trend is consistent with preoperational data.

54

Fish As expected, naturally occurring potassium-40 was detected in all samples. Based on the previous 6 years, the trend of potassium-40 in fish is decreasing.

Cesium-137 was not observed in any fish samples during 1992, nor were any other gamma emitting radioisotopes detected in any of the samples.

Food Products and Vegetation As expected, naturally occurring potassium-40 and beryllium-? (one sample) was detected in samples collected and analyzed.

Cesium-137 was observed in two samples of cabbage and soybeans. The concentration of radioactivity found in samples this year is comparable to last year and may be attributable to world wide fallout. The percent Technical Specification Reporting Level for this sample is calculated to be less than 1% and indicates an insignificant ingestion dose consequence.

Direct Radiation Exposure Pathway Control and indicator averages indicate a decreasing trend in ambient radiation levels. This years levels are slightly less than the previous five years.

The direct radiation exposure that may be attributed to the station operation is 0. 73 mR/standard month (0.023 mR/day). This exposure is not significant when compared to the United States average background radiation levels of 360 mRem/year (0.98 mRem/day).

55

VI I. REFERENCES

1. DOE/NE-0072, "Nuclear Energy and Electricity, The Harnessed Atom," US Dept. of Energy, 1986.

2. Eichholz, G., "Environmental Aspects of Nuclear Power," Lewis Publishers, Inc., 1985.

3. Eisenbud, M., "Environmental Radioactivity," Academy Press, Inc., Orlando, Fl, 1987.

4. Fitzgibbon, W., "Energy Skill Builders, Nuclear Reactor," Enterprise for Education, Inc.,

1987.

5. Glasstone, S., and Jordan, W., "Nuclear Power and its Environmental Effects," American Nuclear Society, 1982.

6. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Report No. 39, "Basic Radiation Protection Criteria," Washington, D.C., January 1971.

7. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Report No. 45, "Natural Background Radiation in the United States," Washington, D.C., November 1975.

8. National Council ori Radiation Protection and Measurements, Report No. 95, "Radiation Exposure of the U.S. Population from Consumer Products and Miscellaneous Sources,"

Washington, D.C., December 1987.

9. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Report No. 93, "Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States," Washington, D.C., December 1987.

10. NUREG 0472, "Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications for PWRs", Rev. 3, March 1982.

11. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.109, Rev. 1, "Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance with 10CFR50, Appendix I", October, 1977.

12. United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Regulatory Guide 4.8 "Environmental Technical Specifications for Nuclear Power Plants", December, 1975.

13. USNRC Branch Technical Position, "Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program", Rev. 1, November 1979.

14. VEPCO, Station Administrative Procedure, VPAP-2103, Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, Rev 0, May 31, 1990.

15. Virginia Electric and Power Company, Surry Power Station Technical Specifications, Units 1 and 2.

56

e APPENDIX A RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL

SUMMARY

TABLES

• 1992

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONrrORING PROGRAM

SUMMARY

Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1992 Docket No. 5-280-281 January 1 to December 31, 1992 Page 1 of 3 All Indicator Control tbl-Medium or Analysts Locations Location with Hlahest Mean Location rtdne Pathway Total LLD1

~

Sampled (Unit)

Air Iodine Type No.

1-131 Mean Ranae Name

- ~

Mean Ranae Mean Ranae mens 416 0.07 - -(0/364) NIA NIA NIA -(0/52) 0 (pCi/m3) - '

Airborne Gross 416 10 15.5(364/364) FE 4.8mi 17.7(52/52) 14.3(52/52) 0 Particulate Beta (7.0-30) ESE (9.5-28) (7.9-25)

(1e-03 Gamma 32 0 pCi/m3) Be-7 32 - 115(28/28) FE 4.8mi 136(4/4) 107(4/4) 0 (82.7-154) ESE {122-147) {93.9-134)

K-40 32 130 6.37(9/28) NN 12.0mi 11.1(1/4) 11.1 (1/4) 0 (2.9-11.0) SE - -

River Gamma 48 0 Water2 K-40 48 - 94_7(16/42) NN 12.0mi 130(6/6) 64.9(2/6) 0 (pCVliter) (49.2-205) SE (66.6-205) (55.0-74.8)

Tritium 24 2000 311(10/20) SD 0.17mi 620(3/4) 140(1/4) 0 (Qtrly) (120-1400) NW (230-1400) -

River Gamma 24 0 Water3 K-40 24 0 n.3(6/12) SD 0.17mi n.3(6/12) 69.7(1/12) 0 (pCVliter- (44.3-127) NW (44.3-127) -

State Split) Tritium 8 2000 403(4/4) SD 0.17mi 403(3/4) 150(1/4) 0 (Otrly) (24Q-680) NW (24Q-680) -

Well Water Gamma 16 0 (pCVliter) K-40 16 . 63.8(2/16) HIR 2.0mi 71.5(1/4) NONE 0 (56.0-71.5) NNE -

Tritium 16 2000 -(0/16) NIA NIA NIA NONE 0 (Otrly) -

Silt Gamma 12 0 pCi/kg (dry) Be-7 12 1250(4/10) POS 6.4mi 1335(2/2) -(0/2) 0 (1130-1510) SSE (1160-1510) -

K-40 12 14191(10/10) CHIC 11.2 mi 17200(2/2) 17200(2/2) 0 (8710-17000) WNW (16200-18200) (16200-18200)

Co-60 12 211(9/10) SI 1.9mi 358(1/2) 117(2/2) 0 (57.0-369 ESE . (112-121)

Cs-134 12 150 123(1/10) SD 0.5mi 123(1/2) -(0/2) 0

- NNW . -

Cs-137 12 180 434(10/10) POS 6.4mi 561 (2/2) 489(2/2) 0 (192-765) SSE (533-588) (433-545) 1 LLD is the Lower Limit of Detection as defined and required in USNRC Branch Technical Position on an Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program, Revision 1, November 1979.

2 Analyses for monthly and bi-monthly samples are listed in Table 8-4.

3 Monthly State Split analyses presented in Table 8-5.

57

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM

SUMMARY

Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1992 Docket No. 5-280-281 January 1 to December 31, 1992 Page 2 of 3 All Indicator Control Ne>>

Medium or Analvsls Locations Location with Hiahest Mean Location rouine Pathway ReJDEd Sampled Total LLD Mean Name llslance Mean Mean Maaslre-(Unit) Type No. 1 Range llreclion Range Range mem Silt --

cont'd Ra-226 12 1895(10/10) CHIC 11.2mi 2310(2/2) 2310(2/2) 0 pCi/kg (dry) (823-2700) WNW (2300-2320) (2300-2320)

Th-228 12 1068(10/10) CHIC 11.2mi 1350(2/2) 1350(2/2) 0 (558-1410) WNW {1220-1480) (1220-1480)

Shoreline Gamma 4 0 Sediment Spec (pCi/kg dry) K-40 4 4528(4/4) HIR 0.8miN 6745(2/2) NONE 0 (1680-6760) (6730-6760) -

Ra-226 4 560(2/4) BB 7.76mi 560(2/2) NONE 0 (474-646) SSE (474-646)

Th-228 4 140(2/4) BB 7.76mi 140(2/2)

• NONE 0

{121-158) SSE (121-158)

Milk Gamma 57 0 e (pCVliter) K-40 1-131 57 57 1

1366(45/45)

(1060-1580)

-(0/45)

CP NIA 3.7mi NNW NIA 1377(12/12) 1363(12/12)

(1210-1520) (1220-1440)

NIA -(0/12) 0 0

Cs-137 57 7.46(1/45) JDKS 6.2mi 7.46(1/12) -(0/12) 0 10 - SSW - -

Sr-89 12 - -(0/12) NIA NIA NIA -(0/0) 0 Sr-90 12 - 2.19(11/12) CP 3.7mi 3.75(4/4) -(0/0) 0 (0.25-5.7) NNW (1.6-5.7) -

Clams Gamma 30 0 (pCi/kg wet) Spec K-40 . - - 437(19/24) HIP 2.4mi 540(5/6) 375(2/6) 0 (220-763) NE (303-763) (365-384)

Th-228 30 - 57.7(1/24) JMTN 5.1 mi -(0/6) - 0

- WNW -

- 1 2

3 LLD is the Lower Limit of Detection as defined and required in USNRC Branch Technical Position on an Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program, Revision 1, November 1979.

Analyses for monthly and bi-monthly samples are listed in Table 8-4.

Monthly State Split analyses presented in Table B-5.

58

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM

SUMMARY

Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1992 Docket No. 5-280-281 January 1 to December 31, 1992 Page3of 3 All Indicator Control l'bl-Medium or Analysis Locations Location with Hlahest Mean Location rcuine

~~

Pathway LL01 Sampled Total Mean Name UISlal"- Mean Mean (Unit} Type No. Ranqe Ranae Ranae mer1s Oysters Gamma 24 0 (pCi.lkg wet) Spec K-40 24 - 661(20/24) RLS 7.8mi 783(5/6) NONE 0 (225-1280) SE (418-1280)

Crabs Gamma 1 0 (pCi.lkg wet) Spec K-40 - - 1430(1/1) SD 0.6mi 1430(1/1) NONE 0

- NW -

Fish Gamma 4 0 (pCi.lkg wet) Spec K-40 - - 1280(4/4) SD 0.6mi 1280(4/4) NONE 0 (898-1650) NW (898-1650)

Direct Gamma 328 2 5.85(312/312} 38 16.Smi 7.68(8/8) 5.12(16/16) 0 Radiation (4.1-9.6) ESE (6.9-8.3) (4.o-6.7)

TLDs (mR/

std. month) e Vegetation (pCi.lkg wet)

Gamma K-40 9

9 6085(8/8) Brock 8327(3/3) 5000(1/1) 0 0

(1470-14900) Garden (4010-14900) -

Be-7 9 64.4(1/8) Carter 64.4(1/3) -(0/1) 0

- Garden - -

Cs-137 9 18.5(2/8) Carter 21.7(1/1) -(0/1) 0 (15.2-21.7) Garden - -

1 LLD is the Lower Limit of Detection as defined and required in USN RC Branch Technical Position on an Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program, Revision 1, November 1979.

2 Analyses for monthly and bi-monthly samples are listed in Table B-4.

3 Monthly State Split analyses presented in Table B-5.

59

e APPENDIX B DATA TABLES

- TABLE B-1: IODINE-131 CONCENTRATION IN FILTERED AIR COLLECTION Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1992 pCVm3 +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1992 STATIONS Page 1 of 2 DATE ss HIR BC ALL CP DOW FE NN JANUARY 12/30/91-01/07/92 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 01/07/92-01/14/92 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 01 /14/92-01 /21 /92 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 01/21/92-01/28/92 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 01/28/92-02/04/92 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.03 <.02 <.03 <.03 FEBRUARY 02/04/92-02/11/92 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 02/11/92-02/18/92 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 02/18/92-02/25/92 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.01 < .01 < .01 < .01 <.02 02/25/92-03/03/92 <.009 < .01 <.01 < .01 <.01 <.01 < .01 <.01 MARCH e 03/03/92-03/10/92 03/10/92-03/17/92 03/17/92-03/24/92

<.01

<.008

<.01

<.02

<.008

< .01

<.02

<.009

<.01

<.02

<.009

< .01

<.02

<.02

< .01

<.02

<.02

<.01

<.02

<.02

< .01

<.02

<.02

<.01 03/24/92-03/30/92 < .01 < .01 <.02 < .01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 AeBlL 03/30/92-04/07/92 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.01 <.01 < .01 <.01 04/07/92-04/14/92 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.01 < .01 < .01 < .01 <.01 04/14/92-04/21/92 < .01 <.02 <.02 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 04/21/92-04/28/92 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.01 <.01 < .01 <.009 MAY 04/28/92-05/05/92 < .01 <.01 < .01 < .01 < .01 < .01 < .01 <.01 05/05/92-05/12/92 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 < .01 <.01 < .01 <.01 05/12/92-05/19/92 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 05/19/92-05/27/92 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.01 < .01 < .01 <.02

.JUNE 05/27/92-06/03/92 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.01 06/03/92-06/09/92 < .01 <.01 <.01 < .01 <.02 < .01 < .01 <.01 06/09/92-06/16/92 < .01 <.01 <.01 < .01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 06/16/92-06/23/92 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.01 < .01 <.01 06/23/92-06/30/92 < .01 <.03 <.01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 < .02*

e 60

e TABLE B-1: IODINE.. 131 CONCENTRATION IN RLTERED AIR Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1992 pCi/m3 +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1992 Page 2 of 2 COLLECTION STATIONS DATE ss HIR BC ALL CP DOW--* FE NN

.JULY 06/30/92-07/07/92 <.009 < .01 <.008 <.009 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 07/07/92-07/14/92 <.01 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.03 <.03 <.03 <.03 07/14/92-07/21/92 < .01 <.02 <.02 <.01 <.05 <.02 <.02 <.02 07/21/92-07/28/92 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.01 < .01 < .01 <.01 AUGUST 07/28/92-08/04/92 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.04 <.02 <.02 <.02 08/04/92-08/11/92 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 08/11/92-08/18/92 <.01 <.02 <.01 <.02 <.01 <.008 <.008 <.008 08/18/92-08/25/92 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.02 <.03 <.03 <.03 08/25/92-09/01 /92 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 SEPTEMBER 09/01/92-09/08/92 <.01 < .01 <.01 < .01 . <.01 <.009 <.009 <.01 e 09/08/92-09/15/92 09/15/92-09/22/92 09/22/92-09/29/92

< .01

< .01

<.02

< .01

<.02

<.02

<.01

<.02

<.02

<.01

<.02

<.02

<.009

<.01

<.01

<.009

< .01

< .01

<.009

< .01

<.01

<.01

<.01

<.01 OCTOBER 09/29/92-10/06/92 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 10/06/92-10/13/92 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.01 < .01 <.01 <.01 10/13/92-10/20/92 <.01 <.02 <.01 <.01 <.01 < .01 < .01 <.01 10/20/92-10/27/92 < .01 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.01 < .01 < .01 <.01 NOVEMBER 10/27/92-11/03/92 <.01 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 11/03/92-11/10/92 < .01 <.01 <.01 <.01 <.01 < .01 < .01 < .01 11/10/92-11/17/92 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.01 <.01 < .01 <.01 11/17/92-11/24/92 < .01 <.01 <.01 < .01 <.01 < .01 <.01 <.01 11/24/92-12/01/92 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.03 <.03 <.03 <.03 DECEMBER 12/01 /92-12/08/92 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.01 < .01 < .01 <.01 12/08/92-12/15/92 < .01 < .01. < .01 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 12/15/92-12/22/92 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 12/22/92-12/29/92 <.01 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 <.02 61

TABLE 8-2: GROSS BETA CONCENTRATION IN AIR PARTICULAT~S Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1992 1.0 e-03 pCifm3 +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to Decermer 31, 1992 Page 1 of 2 STATIONS COLLECTION .ss HIR BC ALL CP DOW NN Average DATE +/-2 Slama JAHl.!ABI * :1992 12/30-01/07 13+/- 2 11 +/- 1 11 +/- 1 10+/- 1 11 +/- 1 12+/- 2 14+/- 2 11 +/- 1 12+/- 3 01/07-01/14 21 +/- 2 20+/- 2 20+/- 2 17+/- 2 18+/- 2 20+/- 2 25+/- 2 17+/- 2 20+/-5 01/14-01/21 18+/- 2 16+/- 2 18+/- 2 17+/- 2 15+/- 2 17+/- 2 22+/- 2 17+/- 2 18+/- 4 01/21-01/28 20+/- 2 21 +/- 2 21 +/- 2 18+/- 2 17+/-2 16+/- 2 20+/- 2 18+/- 2 19+/- 4 01/28-02/04 20+/- 2 17+/- 2 20+/- 2 19+/- 2 17+/- 2 14+/- 2 24+/- 2 17+/- 2 19+/- 6 FEBBUABI 02/04-02/11 13+/- 2 15+/- 2 19+/- 2 15+/- 2 13+/- 2 13+/- 2 19+/- 2 13+/- 2 15+/- 5 02/11-02/18 13+/- 2 16+/- 2 20+/- 2 17+/- 2 12+/- 2 16+/- 2 20+/- 2 13+/- 2 16+/- 6 02/18-02/25 15+/- 2 11 +/- 2 16+/- 2 15+/- 2 13+/- 2 14+/- 2 18+/- 2 12+/- 2 14+/- 5 02/25-03/03 12+/- 1 12+/- 2 19+/- 2 13+/- 2 13+/- 2 12+/- 2 18+/- 2 11 +/- 2 14+/- 6 MARCH 03/03-03/10 15+/- 2 14+/- 2 18+/- 2 14+/- 2 11 +/- 2 12+/- 2 17+/- 2 11 +/- 2 14+/- 5 03/10-03/17 2J +/- 2 17+/- 2 20+/- 2 16+/- 2 14+/- 2 16+/- 2 24+/- 2 16+/- 2 18+/- 7 03/17-03/24 13+/- 2 17+/- 2 19+/- 2 13+/- 2 12+/- 2 15+/- 2 21 +/- 2 15+/- 2 16+/- 6 03/24-03/30 12+/- 2 15+/- 2 16+/- 2 15+/- 2 12+/- 2 15+/- 2 18+/- 2 11 +/- 2 14+/- 5 atr. Avg. 16+/- 7 16+/- 6 18+/- 5 15+/- 5 14+/- 5 15+/- 5 20+/- 6 14+/- 6 16+/- 7

+/-2 s.d.

AeBlL 03/30-04/07 15+/- 2 12+/- 1 19+/- 2 14+/- 2 13+/- 1 14+/- 2 19+/- 2 14+/- 2 15+/- 5 04/07-04/14 25+/- 2 20+/- 2 24+/- 2 22+/- 2 16+/- 2 19+/- 2 23+/- 2 18+/- 2 21 +/- 6 04/14-04/21 22+/- 2 16+/- 2 21 +/- 2 18+/- 2 13+/- 2 17+/- 2 21 +/- 2 16+/- 2 18+/- 6 04/21-04/28 15+/- 2 12+/- 2 16+/- 2 14+/- 2 11 +/- 2 12+/- 2 15+/- 2 13+/- 2 14+/- 4

.MAI 04/28-05/05 21 +/- 2 16+/- 2 19+/- 2 16+/- 2 13+/- 2 17+/- 2 22+/- 2 16+/- 2 18+/- 6 05/05-05/12 12+/- 2 7.0+/- 1.3 13+/- 2 7.9 +/- 1.4 7.4+/- 1.3 8.5 +/- 1.4 11 +/- 2 7.9 +/- 1.4 9+/- 5 05/12-05/19 16+/- 2 12+/- 2 15+/- 2 10+/- 2 9.1 +/- 1.4 13+/- 2 14+/- 2 9.8 +/- 1.5 12+/- 5 05/19-05/27 17+/- 2 14+/- 2 17+/- 2 12+/- 2 10+/- 1 15+/- 2 18+/- 2 14+/- 2 15+/- 5 JUNE 05/27-06/03 15+/- 2 11 +/- 2 13+/- 2 11 +/- 1 8.4+/- 1.4 10+/- 1 12+/- 2 8.0+/- 1.3 11 +/- 5 06/03-06/09 14+/- 2 11 +/- 2 14+/- 2 10+/- 2 17+/- 3 12+/- 2 15+/- 2 12+/- 2 13+/- 5 06/09-06/16 15+/- 2 12+/- 2 12+/- 2 14+/- 2 12+/- 2 12+/- 2 13+/- 2 13+/- 2 13+/- 2 06/16-06/23 11 +/- 1 13+/- 2 14+/- 2 11 +/- 1 21 +/- 3 14+/- 2 14+/- 2 11 +/- 1 14+/- 7 06/23-06/30 18+/- 2 20+/- 3 22+/-*2 20+/- 2 20+/- 2 19+/- 2 21 +/- 2 20+/- 2 20+/- 2 atr. Avg. 16+/- 7 16+/- 6 17+/- 8 14+/- 8 13+/- 9 14+/- 7 17+/- 8 13+/- 7 15+/- 8

+/-2 s.d.

~

06/30-07/07 16+/- 2 17+/- 2 15+/- 2 18+/- 2 14+/- 2 15+/- 2 18+/- 2 14+/- 2 16+/- 3 07/07-07/14 24+/- 2 20+/- 2 29+/- 2 24+/- 2 19+/- 2 25+/- 2 28+/- 2 25+/- 2 24+/- 7 07/14-07/21 15+/- 2 15+/- 2 17+/- 2 14+/- 2 30+/- 4 14+/- 2 16+/- 2 14+/- 2 17+/-11 07/21-07/28 14+/- 2 13+/- 2 13+/- 2 12+/- 2 11 +/- 2 13+/- 2 13+/- 2 12+/- 2 13+/- 2 62

TABLE B-2: GROSS BETA .CONCENTRATION IN AIR PARTICULATES Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1992 1.0 e-03 pCVm3 +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1992 Page2 of 2 STATIONS COLLECTION ss HIR BC ALL CP DOW FE NN Average DATE +2Slgma AUGUST 07/28-08/04 18+/- 2 17+/- 2 17+/- 2 17+/- 2 21 +/- 3 17+/- 2 18+/- 2 16+/- 2 18+/- 3 08/04-08/11 17+/- 2 15+/- 2 14+/- 2 15+/- 2 14+/- 2 14+/- 2 16+/- 2 15+/- 2 15+/- 2 08/11-08/18 7.9 +/- 1.4 11 +/- 2 10+/- 2 11 +/- 2 14+/- 2 10+/- 2 11 +/- 2 11 +/- 2 11 +/- 3 08/18-08/25 16+/- 2 18+/- 2 16+/- 2 17+/- 2 11 +/- 1 16+/- 2 17+/- 2 16+/- 2 16+/- 4 08/25-09/01 16+/- 2 17+/- 2 19+/- 2 17+/- 2 13+/- 2 15+/- 2 20+/- 2 9.4+/- 1.4 16+/- 7 SEPTEMBEB 09/01-09/08 12+/- 2 15+/- 2 18+/- 2 17+/- 2 19+/- 2 18+/- 2 18+/- 2 18+/- 2 17+/- 5 09/08-09/15 12+/- 2 14+/- 2 15+/- 2 13+/- 2 11 +/- 2 13+/- 2 14+/- 2 13+/- 2 13+/- 3 09/15-09/22 12+/- 2 12+/- 2 13+/- 2 10+/- 1 13+/- 2 12+/- 2 12+/- 2 12+/- 2 12+/- 2 09/22-09/29 7.1 +/- 1.2 8.6 +/- 1.4 9.0 +/- 1.4 7.7 +/- 1.3 8.2+/- 1.3 8.1 +/- 1.3 9.5+/- 1.4 9.4 +/- 1.4 8.5*+/- 1.7 Qtr. Avg. 14+/- 9 15+/- 6 16+/- 10 15+/- 8 15+/- 12 15+/- 8 16+/- 9 14+/- 8 15+/- 9

+/-2 s.d.

QCTQBEB 09/29* 10/06 10+/- 1 13+/- 2 16+/- 2 15+/- 2 14+/- 2 13+/- 2 16+/- 2 14+/- 2 14+/- 4 10/06-10/13 14+/- 2 14+/- 2 16+/- 2 17+/- 2 14+/- 2 15+/- 2 17+/- 2 15+/- 2 15+/- 3 10/13-10/20 18+/- 2 22+/- 2 26+/- 2 22+/- 2 21 +/- 2 20+/- 2 28+/- 2 21 +/- 2 22+/- 7 10/20-10/27 16+/- 2 18+/- 2 19+/- 2 20+/- 2 16+/- 2 19+/- 2 21 +/- 2 18+/- 2 18+/- 4 NQ~EMElEB 10/27-11/03 16+/- 2 16+/- 2 19+/- 2 19 +/- 2 18+/- 2 16+/- 2 17+/- 2 19+/- 2 18+/- 3 11/03-11/10 8.7+/- 1.4 8.5+/- 3 10 +/- 1 8.9 +/- 1.4 9.7 +/- 1.4 10+/- 1 13+/- 2 11 +/- 1 10+/- 3 11/10-11/17 14+/- 2 16+/- 2 16+/- 2 16+/- 2 15+/- 2 18+/- 2 18+/- 2 16+/- 2 16+/- 3 11/17-11/24 15+/- 2 16+/- 2 18+/- 2 21 +/- 2 17+/- 2 18+/- 2 19+/- 2 17+/- 2 18+/- 4 11/24-12/01 10+/- 2 13+/- 2 11 +/- 2 13+/- 2 13+/- 2 11 +/- 2 12+/- 2 14+/- 2 12+/- 3 12E~EM6EB 12/01-12/08 14+/- 2 19+/- 2 16+/- 2 17+/- 2 15+/- 2 15+/- 2 19+/- 2 16+/- 2 16+/- 4 12/08-12/15 10+/- 1 12+/- 2 12+/- 2 12+/- 2 10+/- 1 11 +/- 2 13+/- 2 9.9 +/- 1.5 11 +/- 2 12/15-12/22 13+/- 2 15+/- 2 13+/- 2 17+/- 2 13+/- 2 15+/- 2 18+/- 2 15+/- 2 15+/- 4 12/22-12/29 16+/- 2 18+/- 2 18+/- 2 18+/- 2 18+/- 2 16+/- 2 21 +/- 2 17+/- 2 18+/- 3 Quarter Avg. 13+/- 6 15+/- 7 16+/- 8 17+/- 7 15+/- 6 15+/- 6 18+/- 4 16+/- 6 16+/- 4

+/-2 8.d.

Annual Avg. 15+/-.B 15+/- 7 17+/- 8 15+/- 7 14+/- 8 15+/- 6 18+/- 8 14+/- 7 15+/- 4

+/-2 s.d.

63

TABLE 8-3: GAMMA EMIITER1 CONCENTRATION IN QUARTERLY AIR PARTICULATES Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1992 1.0 e-03 pCVm3 +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1992 Page 1 of 2 First Second Third Fourth Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter Average Station Nuclide 01/02-()4/02 03/30-06/30 06/30-09/29 09/29-12/29 +/-2 s.d.

STA-SS Be-7 109 +/- 11 140+/- 14 86.2+/- 8.6 82.7+/- 8.3 104+/-53 K-40 3.18 +/- 1.80 <5 5.12 +/- 2.11 <4 4.15+/- 2.7 Co-60 < 0.3 < 0.3 <0.3 <0.2 Cs-134 < 0.2 < 0.3 <0.3 <0.2 Cs-137 < 0.2 < 0.3 <0.3 <0.2 Th-228 < 0.4 < 0.5 <0.4 <0.3 STA-HIR Be-7 94.1 +/- 9.4 113+/- 11 113+/- 11 86.2+/- 8.6 102+/- 27 K-40 <6 6.04+/- 2.36 6.16+/-2.87 <4 6.10 +/- 0.17 Co-60 <0.2 <0.3 <0.3 <0.2 Cs-134 < 0.3 < 0.3 <0.3 <0.2 Cs-137 <0.2 < 0.3 <0.3 <0.2 Th-228 < 0.3 < 0.4 <0.5 <0.3 STA-BC Be-7 150+/- 15 142 +/- 14 127+/- 13 94.2+/- 9.4 128+/- 49 K-40 <4 11.0+/- 3.3 3.67+/- 1.74 <9 7.34+/- 10.4 Co-60 < 0.2 < 0.3 < 0.3 <0.3 Cs-134 < 0.2 < 0.4 <0.2 <0.3 Cs-137 <0.2 < 0.3 <0.2 <0.3 Th-228 <0.5 < 0.5 <0.4 <0.4 STA-ALL Be-7 108+/- 11 128+/- 13 102+/- 10 104 +/- 10 111 +/- 24 I K-40 2.90+/- 1.65 <3 9.91 +/-2.98 <5 6.41 +/- 9.9 Co-60 <0.3 < 0.2 <0.3 <0.3 Cs-134 < 0.3 < 0.2 <0.3 < 0.4 Cs-137 <0.2 < 0.2 < 0.3 <0.3 Th-228 <0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 <0.6 STA-CP Be-7 102 +/- 10 111+/- 11 122 +/- 12 88.2+/- 8.8 106 +/- 29 K-40 <3 9.38+/- 4.87 <7 <8 9.38+/-4.87 Co-60 <0.2 < 0.5 < 0.4 < 0.3 Cs-134 < 0.2 <0.5 <0.4 <0.3 Cs-137 <0.2 < 0.5 <0.3 <0.3 Th-228 < 0.3 < 0.7 <0.6 <0.3 1 All gamma emitters other th.an those listed were <LLD.

64

TABLE B-3: GAMMA EMITTER1 CONCENTRATION IN QUARTERLY AIR PARTICULATES Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1992 1.0 e-03 pCVm3 +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1992 Page 2 of 2 First Second Third Fourth Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter Average Station Nuclide 01/02-()4/02 03/30-06/30 06/30-09/29 09/29-12/29 +/-2s.d.

STA-DOW Be-7 102 +/- 10 154+/- 15 122+/- 12 94.7+/- 9.5 118+/-53 K-40 <4 <5 <5 <10 Co-60 < 0.2 < 0.3 <0.3 < 0.4 Cs-134 < 0.2 < 0.3 <0.2 < 0.3 Cs-137 < 0.2 < 0.3 <0.2 < 0.3 Th-228 < 0.3 < 0.5 <0.4 < 0.4 STA-FE Be-7 126 +/- 13 147 +/- 15 147 +/- 15 122 +/- 12 136+/- 27 K-40 <8 <4 <6 <5 Co-60 < 0.3 < 0.2 <0.3 < 0.2 Cs-134 < 0.3 < 0.2 <0.3 < 0.2 Cs-137 < 0.3 < 0.2 <0.3 <0.2 Th-228 < 0.4 < 0.4 <0.7 < 0.5 STA-NN Be-7 99.5+/- 9.9 134 +/- 13 99.7+/- 10.0 93.9+/- 9.4 107+/-37 K-40 <5 <7 <9 11.1 +/- 2.7 11.1 +/- 2.7 Co-60 < 0.3 < 0.3 <0.4 < 0.3 Cs-134 < 0.3 < 0.3 <0.3 < 0.3 Cs-137 < 0.4 < 0.3 <0.3 < 0.3 Th-228 < 0.5 < 0.7 <0.4 < 0.4 1 All gamma emitters other than those listed were <LLD.

65

TABLE 8-4: GAMMA EMITTER1 AND TRmUM CONCENTRATIONS IN RIVER e WATER Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1992 pCi/1 +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1992 Page 1 of 2 Collection Station Date Be-7 K-40 1-131 Cs-137 Ba-140 La-140 Th-228 H-3 JANUARY - 1992 CHIC 01/10 <40 < 100 < 0.2 <4 <20 <8 <7 < 100 HIP 01/09 <30 <50 < 0.2 <4 <20 <8 <6 240+/- 90 NN 01/09 <30 110+/- 42 < 0.5 <4 <20 <8 <6 220+/- 100 SD 01/09 <40 < 90 < 0.2 <4 <20 <7 <6 230+/- 80 SI 01/09 <30 <90 < 0.3 <4 <20 <8 <6 130+/- 80 SW 01/10 <40 < 100 < 0.2 <5 <20 <7 <7 120+/- 70 SD 02/25 <30 63.7+/- 37.4 < 0.2 <4 <9 <4 <7 SW 02/25 <30 <60 < 0.2 <4 <9 <5 <7 CHIC 03/18 <30 <60 < 0.1 <5 <10 <6 <6 HIP 03/18 <30 <60 < 0.1 <4 <10 <6 <6 e NN SD SI 03/18 03/18 03/18

<40

<30

<30 163 +/- 39

<60

< 100

< 0.2

< 0.1

< 0.1

<5

<4

<4

<20

<10

<20

<8

<6

<6

<8

<7

<6 SW 03/18 <40 <70 < 0.1 <4 <10 <6 <9 SD 04/21 <30 < 90 < 0.2 <4 < 10 <6 <6 SW 04/21 <40 <60 < 0.2 <4 <10 <6 <7 CHIC 05/12 <30 <50 < 0.2 <4 <10 <6 <5 <200 HIP 05/11 <30 <50 < 0.2 <4 <10 <6 <5 160 +/- 100 NN 05/11 <30 78.6+/- 24.9 < 0.3 <3 <20 <6 <6 < 100 SD 05/11 <30 <50 < 0.2 <3 <10 <6 <6 230 +/- 110 SI 05/11 <30 <80 < 0.2 <3 <20 <7 <5 <200 SW 05/12 <30 <60 < 0.1 <3 <10 <6 <7 <200 SD 06/16 <30 <60 < 0.2 <4 <10 <6 <8 SW 06/16 <40 <70 < 0.1 <5 <20 <7 <8 66

TABLE B-4: GAMMA EMfITER1 AND TRmUM CONCENTRATIONS IN RIVER e WATER Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1992 pCi/1 +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1992 Page 2 of 2 Collection Station Date , Be-7 K-40 1-131 Cs-137 Ba-140 La-140 Th-228 H-3 CHIC 07/20 <30 <50 < 0.3 <4 <10 <5 <6 140+/-70 HIP 07/20 <30 <90 < 0.2 <4 <10 <6 <6 200+/-110 NN 07/20 <40 157+/- 39 < 0.3 <4 <10 <6 <7 <200 SD 07/20 <30 <60 < 0.2 <4 <10 <6 <6 <200 SI 07/20 <40 61.4+/- 30.2 < 0.3 <5 <20 <7 <7 <200 SW 07/20 <30 49.2+/- 26.2 < 0.2 <4 <10 <5 <6 180+/-80 SD 08/18 <30 61.2+/- 22.9 < 0.3 <5 <10 <6 <7 SW 08/18 <30 <60 <0.2 <4 <10 <7 <6 CHIC 09/22 <30 55.0+/- 23.9 <0.2 <3 <10 <6 <5 HIP 09/21 <40 <70 <0.2 <4 <20 <7 <7 NN 09/21 <40 205+/- 42 < 0.2 <4 <20 <9 <9 SD e SI SW 09/22 09/21 09/22

<30

<30

<30 51.0 +/- 24.1 70.5+/- 30.9

<90

<0.2

< 0.3

< 0.3

<5

<4

<3

<20

<20

<10

<8

<7

<6

<6

<7

<6 SD 10/20 <30 142 +/- 28 < 0.1 <4 <10 <5 <7 SW 10/20 <30 <80 < 0.1 <4 <20 <5 <7 CHIC 11/24 <30 74.8+/- 23.7 <0.2 <4 <10 <6. <6 <200 HIP 11/24 <30 <80 < 0.2 <3 <10 <4 <5 <200 NN 11/24 <30 66.6+/- 29.5 <0.2 <4 <10 <7 <6 * < 100 SD 11/24 <30 93.2 +/- 28.1 < 0.2 <4 <10 <7 <6 1400+/-200 SI 11/24 <30 61.9 +/- 23.5 < 0.2 <3 <10 <5 <5 <200 SW 11/24 <30 <50 < 0.2 <3 <10 <5 <6 <200 SD 12/15 <30 81.3 +/- 23.1 < 0.2 <3 <10 <5 <6 SW 12/15 <30 <60 < 0.1 <3 <10 <5 <7

- 1 All gamma emitters other than those listed were< LLD.

67

TABLE B-5 GAMMA EMITTER1 AND TRmUM CONCENTRATIONS IN RIVER WATER e State-Split Samples Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1992 pCi/1 +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1992 Page 1 of 2 Collection Station Date Be-7 K-40 1-131 Cs-137 Ba-140 La-140 Th-228 H-3 SCOT1.AND WH, (SW)

Jan. 01/31 <30 <80 < 0.5 <4 <20 <8 <6 < 100 Feb. 02/29 <30 <50 < 0.4 <3 <10 <7 <6 Mar. 03/31 <30 <50 . <0.6 <3 <30 <9 <6 Apr. 04/30 <30 <50 < 0.4 <3 .<20 <8 <5 <200 May 05/31 <40 <40 < 0.6 <3 <40 < 15 <6 Jun. 06/30 <30 <90 < 0.7 <3 <30 < 10 <5 Jul. 07/31 <30 <50 < 0.3 <2 <30 <10 <5 150+/- 80 Aug. 08/30 <30 <50 < 0.6 <3 <20 < 10 <6 Sep. 10/14 <30 < 100 < 0.1 <4 <10 <5 <7 Oct. 10/30 <40 <90 <4 <3 <30 < 10 <6 <200 Nov. 11/30 <40 < 100 < 0.9 <4 <20 <6 <6 Dec. 12/31 <50 69.7+/-35.5 <1 <5 <30 < 10 <7 e Average+/- 2 s.d. 69.7+/-35.5 150+/- 80 SURRY PIS, (SD)

Jan. 01/31 <40 127 +/- 30 < 0.5 <5 <30 <9 <9 680+/- 120

. Feb. 02/29 < 30 91.5 +/- 31.0 < 0.3 <4 <20 <7 <6 Mar. 03/31 <40 <50 < 0.7 <4 <30 <10 <6 Apr. 04/30 <30 <50 < 0.3 <3 <30 <10 <6 290+/- 90 May 05/31 <30 <40 < 0.6 <3 <30 < 10 <5 Jun. 06/30 <40 <90 < 0.9 <4 <30 <9 <6 Jul. 07/31 <20 <40 < 0.3 <2 <30 < 10 <4 400+/- 90 Aug. 08/30 <40 65.2+/- 32.8 < 0.8 <4 <30 < 10 <7 Sep. 10/14 <30 <60 < 0.2 <3 <10 <6 <7 Oct. 10/30 <30 85.5 +/- 21.4 <4 <3 <20 <B <5 240+/- 110 Nov. 11/30 <30 50.5 +/- 20.1 <1 <3 <10 <5 <5 Dec. 12/31 <40 44.3 +/- 22.1 <1 <4 <20 <9 <6 Average+/- 2 s.d. 77.3+/- 61.3 403+/- 393

- 1 All gamma emitters other than those listed were <LLD.

68

TABLE 8-6: GAMMA EMIITER1 AND TRmUM CONCENTRATIONS IN WELL WATER Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1992 pCi/1 +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1992 Page 1 of 1 Collection Date Station Be-7 K-40 1-131 Cs-137 Ba-140 La-140 Th-228 H-3 FIRST QUARTER 03/17 BC <30 <90 < 0.1 <4 <10 <5 <6 <200 03/17 HIR <30 <50 < 0.1 <4 <10 <6 <7 <200 03/17 JMTN <40 56.0+/-28.4 < 0.1 <4 <10 <6 <7 <200 03/17 ss <40 < 100 < 0.1 <5 <20 <7 <7 <200 SECOND QUARTER 06/23 BC <30 <90 < 0.2 <4 <10 <7 <6 <-200 06/23 HIR <30 71.5 +/- 25.3 < 0.2 <4 <10 <6 <8 < 100 06/23 JMTN <30 <50 < 0.1 <5 <10 <6 <6 < 100 06/23 ss <30 <50 < 0.2 <3 <10 <6 <7 < 100 THIRD QUARTER 09/22 BC <40 < 100 < 0.2 <4 <20 <8 <6 < 100 09/22 HIR <40 <70 < 0.2 <4 <20 <7 <9 < 100 09/22 JMTN <30 <60 < 0.2 <5 <20 <7 <7 < 100 09/22 ss <30 <50 < 0.2 <4 <20 <8 <7 < 100 FOURTH QUARTER 12/22 BC <30 < 90 < 0.1 <4 <10 <6 <6 <200 12/22 HIR <30 <50 < 0.1 <3 <10 <5 <6 <200 12/22 JMTN <30 <80 < 0.1 <3 <10 <4 <5 <200 12/22 ss <20 <40 < 0.1 <2 <9 <4 <5 <200 Average 63.8+/- 22

+/- 2 s.d.

1 All gamma emitters other than those listed were < LLD.

69

TABLE B-7: GAMMA EMITTER1 CONCENTRATIONS IN SILT Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1992 pCVkg (dry)+/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1992 Page 1 of 1 Station CHIC HIP NN POS SD SI Coll. Date 03/18 03/18 03/18 03/18 03/18 03/18 Be-7 <400 <600 <400 1160+/-350 <300 1200+/-350 K-40 16200+/- 1600 14000 +/- 1400 15500 +/- 1500 16400 +/- 1600_ 12900+/- 1300 17000+/- 1700 Mn-54 <40 <50 <40 <40 <40 <50 Co-58 <40 <60 <40 <50 <30 <40 Co-60 112+/-36 355+/-63 57.0+/-32.0 263+/-43 128+/- 29 358+/-51 Cs-134 <50 <70 <50 <50 <40 <60 Cs-137 433+/- 51 617 +/- 70 225 +/- 42 588+/-59 216 +/- 40 765+/-76 Ra-226 2300+/- 720 2350+/- 1060 1470+/- 580 2100+/- 540 1870 +/- 490 2210+/-670 Th-228 1220+/- 120 1180+/- 120 847+/- 85 1410+/- 140 1160 +/- 120 1190+/- 120 Icon. Date 09/22 09/21 09/21 09/21 09/22 09/21 Avs+2s. d.1 Be-7 < 700 <400 < 500 1510+/-460 1130 +/- 450 <400 1250+/- 351 K-40 18200 +/- 1800 12200 +/- 1200 15000 +/- 1500 14400 +/- 1400 15800 +/- 1600 8710+/- 870 14693+/-5066 Mn-54 < 60 <30 <40 <50 <50 <30 Co-58 <60 <40 <50 <50 <60 <30 Co-60 121 +/- 51 139+/-29 65.4+/-31.2 165 +/- 52 369+/-58 < 50 194+/-240 Cs-134 < 70 <40 <40 <60 123+/- 41 < 40 123+/-41 Cs-137 545+/- 64 307+/-36 229 +/- 41 533+/-63 663+/- 66 192 +/- 32 443+/- 404 Ra-226 2320+/- 740 2200+/- 560 1600 +/- 540 1630 +/- 620 2700+/- 780 823+/- 459 1964+/- 1020 Th-228 1480 +/- 150 1260 +/- 130 792+/- 79 1060 +/- 110 1220 +/- 120 558 +/- 56 1115 +/- 527 TABLE B-8: GAMMA EMIITER1 CONCENTRATIONS IN SHORELINE SEDIMENT Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1992 pCVkg (dry) +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1992 Page 1 of 1 Station HIR Burwell's HIR Burwell's Average Collection Date 02/25 02/25 08/25 08/25 +2 s.d.

Be-7 <200 <200 <200 <200 K-40 6760+/-680 1680 +/- 240 6730+/-670 2940+/-300 4528+/-5223 Co-60 < 20 < 20 <20 <20 Cs-134 <20 < 20 <20 <20 Cs-137 < 20 <20 < 20 <30 < 20 Ra-226 <400 474+/-263 <300 646+/-309 560+/- 243 Th-228 <40 121 +/- 15 <40 158 +/- 22 140 +/- 52 1 All gamma emitters other than those listed were< LLD.

70

TABLE 8-9: GAMMA EMIITER1, STRONTIUM-89, AND STRONTIUM-90 CONCENTRATIONS IN MILK Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1992 pCi/kg (wet) +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1992 Page 1 of 2 I NUCLIDE LEE HALL EPPS CP WMS JDKS I

JANUARY Sr-89 <2 <3 <4 Sr-90 1.6 +/- 0.2 1.9+/-0.3 3.1 +/-0.3 K-40 1320 +/- 130 1200+/- 120 1210+/- 120 1360+/- 140 1390 +/- 140 Cs-137 <5 <5 <4 <4 <4 1-131 < 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 FEBRUARY K-40 1330 +/- 130 1220+/- 120 1280+/- 130 1320 +/- 130 1200 +/- 120 Cs-137 <4 <4 <4 <4 <4 1-131 < 0.1 < 0.2 < 0.1 < 0.2 < 0.1 MARCH K-40 1410 +/- 140 1320+/- 130 1220+/- 120 1310 +/- 130 1290 +/- 130 e Cs-137 1-131

<4

< 0.2

<4

< 0.1

<4

< 0.2

<4

< 0.2

<5

< 0.1 Af.BlL Sr-89 < 5 (a) < 5 (a) < 5 (a)

Sr-90 0.25 +/- 0.14 1.9 +/- 0.5 4.6+/- 0.5 K-40 1210 +/- 120 1310 +/- 130 1520+/- 150 1220+/- 120 1580 +/- 160 Cs-137 <3 <4 <4 <5 <4 1-131 < 0.3 < 0.3 <0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 MAY K-40 1320+/- 130 1320 +/- 130 1380+/- 140 1390+/- 140 1410 +/- 140 Cs-137 <5 <4 <4 <4 <4 1-131 < 0.1 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.1 <0.2 JUNE K-40 1530 +/- 150 1400 +/- 140 1370+/- 140 1410 +/- 140 1420+/- 140 Cs-137 <5 <4 <4 <5 <4 1-131 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 1 All gamma emitters other than those listed were< LLD.

(a) June samples were depleted due to 1-131 reanalysis prior to preparation of these composites.

71

TABLE B-9: GAMMA EMITTER1, STRONTIUM-SB, AND STRONTIUM-BO CONCENTRATIONS IN MILK Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1992 pCi/kg (wet) +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1992 Page 2 of 2 I NUCLIDE LEE HALL EPPS CP WMS JDKS I

JY.LI Sr-89 <2 <1 <2 Sr-90 0.59+/- 0.16 1.3+/- 0.2 5.7+/-0.3 K-40 1450+/- 140 1410+/- 140 1430 +/- 140 1420+/- 140 1410+/- 140 Cs-137 <4 <5 <4 <5 <5 1-131 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.4 < 0.1 AUGUST K-40 1410 +/- 140 1410+/- 140 1390+/- 140 1400+/- 140 1550 +/- 150 Cs-137 <5 <4 <4 <4 <4 1-131 < 0.1 <0.2 < 0.1 < 0.2 < 0.2 SEPTEMBER K-40 1320 +/- 130 1450+/- 150 1400+/- 140 1320+/- 130 1060+/-110 Cs-137 <5 <5 <4 <4 <4 1-131 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 Q~IQBEB Sr-89 (a) <2 <2 Sr-90 1.5 +/- 0.2 1.6 +/- 0.2 K-40 1350 +/- 130 1480+/- 150 1430+/- 140 1460+/- 150 Cs-137 <3 <5 <5 <4 1-131 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.3 < 0.2 NQVEMBEB K-40 1400 +/- 140 1460+/- 150 1440+/- 140 1340 +/- 130 Cs-137 <3 <4 <4 7.46 +/- 327 (b) 1-131 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.5 < 0.2 DECEMBER K-40 1330+/- 130 1380 +/- 140 1340+/- 130 1410+/- 140 Cs-137 <4 <4 <4 <4 1-131 < 0.1 <1 < 0.3 < 0.2 1 All gamma emitters other than those listed were < LLD.

(a) Lee Hall dairy station became unavailable 09/92. Replacement sample not required.

(b) Confirmed by analysis of a second aliquot.

72

TABLE B-10: GAMMA EMIITER1 CONCENTRATION IN CLAMS e Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1992 pCi/kg {wet) +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1992 Page 1 of 1 Station Date Type Be-7 K-40 Co-58 c~ Cs-137 Ra.:2~6 Th-228

~

01/10/92 Clams <300 <500 <30 <20 <20 <400 <40 03/18/92 Clams < 100 <200 <10 <10 <10 <300 <20 05/12/92 Clams <300 <300 <30 <20 <20 <300 <30 07/20/92 Clams <200 384+/- 106 <20 <20 <20 <400 <40 09/22/92 Clams < 100 <300 <10 < 10 <10 <200 <20 11/24/92 Clams <200 365+/- 114 < 10 < 10 <10 <300 <30 JMTN 01/10/92 Clams <300 <400 <30 <20 <20 <500 <50 03/18/92 Clams < 100 223+/- 102 <10 <20 <20 <300 57.7+/- 14.7 05/12/92 Clams <300 285 +/- 162 <20 <20 <20 <400 <40 07/20/92 Clams < 100 269+/-90 <20 <10 <20 <200 <20 09/22/92 Clams <200 285+/-95 <20 <10 <20 <300 <30 11/24/92 Clams < 100 27~+/-86 <10 < 10 < 10 <200 <20 e S.12 01/09/92 Clams <300 <700 <30 <30 <30 <400 <40 03/02/92 Clams < 100 220+/- 99 <10 <10 < 10 <300 <30 05/04/92 Clams <400 512 +/- 208 <40 <20 <30 <500 <50 06/25/92 Clams < 200 226+/- 103 <20 < 10 < 10 <300 <30 09/03/92 Clams < 100 628 +/- 107 <10 <10 <10 <200 <20 10/29/92 Clams <200 707 +/- 112 < 20 < 10 <10 <200 <20 H!f 01/09/92 Clams <300 <500 <30 <30 <30 <500 <50 03/18/92 Clams < 100 429 +/- 137 <10 <20 <20 <300 <30 05/12/92 Clams <400 666+/-222 <30 <20 <20 <500 <50 07/20/92 Clams <200 540+/- 114 <10 <20 <20 <300 <20 09/21/92 Clams < 100 303+/- BB <10 < 10 * < 10 <200 <20 11/24/92 Clams < 100 763 +/- 120 <10 < 10 <10 <200 <20 J.C.

01/09/92 Clams <300 <500 <40 <30 <20 <600 <50 03/18/92 Clams < 100 <300 <10 <10 <10 <200 <20 05/11/92 Clams <400 451 +/- 251 <30 <30 <30 <500 <50 07/20/92 Clams <200 450+/- 116 <20 < 10 <20 <200 <20 09/21/92 Clams < 100 606+/- 96 <10 <10 <10 <200 <20 11/24/92 Clams <200 456 +/- 111 <20 < 10 <10 <300 <30 e Average+/- 2 s.d. 431 +/- 340 57.7 +/- 14.7 1 All gamma emitters other than those listed were <LLD.

73

TABLE B-11: GAMMA EMIITER1 CONCENTRATION IN OYSTERS Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1992 pCVkg (wet) +/- 2 Sigma January 1 to December 31, 1992 Page 1 of 1 IStation DATE TYPE Be-7 K-40 Co-58 ~ Cs-137 Ra-226 Th-228 I

BlJi 01/09/92 Oysters <300 1010+/- 290 <20 <20 <20 <500 <40 03/18/92 Oysters < 100 418+/- 124 <10 <10 <20 <300 <30 05/11/92 Oysters <400 <500 <40 <20 <30 <500 <50 07/20/9.2 Oysters <200 666+/- 108 <20 <10 <10 <200 <20 09/21/92 Oysters < 100 540+/-93 <10 <10 < 10 <200 <20 11/24/92 Oysters <200 1280+/- 130 <20 <10 <10 <200 <20 DWS 01/09/92 Oysters <300 <500 <30 <23 <23 <500 <50 03/18/92 Oysters <200 724 +/- 144 <20 <20 <20 <300 <20 05/11/92 Oysters <300 543 +/- 199 <30 <20 <20 <400 <30 07/20/92 Oysters <200 592 +/- 136 <10 <10 <10 <300 <20 09/21/92 Oysters < 100 <400 <10 <10 <10 <200 <20 11/24/92 Oysters < 100 679 +/-99 <10 <10 <10 <200 <20 POS 01/09/92 Oysters <300 412 +/- 195 <30 <20 <30 <400 <40 01/09/92 2 Oysters <400 <500 <30 <20 <30 <700 <60 03/06/92 2 Oysters < 100 304 +/- 113 <10 <10 <20 <300 <20 03/18/92 Oysters < 100 225 +/- 97 <10 <10 <10 <200 <20 05/11/92 Oysters <400 1030+/- 230 <40 <20 <20 <400 <40 05/15/92 2 Oysters <300 389 +/- 219 <30 <20 <20 <500 <50 06/26/92 2 Oysters <200 973+/- 116 <20 < 10 <10 <200 <20 07/20/92 Oysters <200 876 +/- 150 <20 <20 <20 <300 <20 08/31/92 2 Oysters <200 772 +/- 128 <20 <10 < 10 <300 <30 09/21/92 Oysters < 100 585 +/- 115 <20 < 10 <20 <200 <20 11/02/92 2 Oysters <200 763+/- 123 <20 <10 <20 <200 <20 11/24/92 Oysters <200 439 +/- 123 <20 <10 <10 <300 <30 Average+/- 2 s.d. 661 +/- 545 1 All gamma emitters othern than those listed were <LLD.

2 State split samples.

74

TABLE B-15: DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENTS - QUARTERLY TLD RESULTS Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1992 mR/month +/- 2 Sigma - Set 1 - 098 January 1 to December 31, 1992 Page 1 of 1 Station First Second Third Fourth Average Number Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter +/-2 s.d.

02 6.2+/-0.4 6.4+/-0.6 7.1 +/-0.2 7.0+/- 1.8 6.7+/- 0.9 03 6.7+/-0.2 7.4+/- 0.4 7.5+/-0.4 8.3+/-0.4 7.5+/- 1.3 04 5.6+/- 0.3 5.8+/-0.4 6.0+/-0.3 5.8+/-2.0 5.8+/- 0.3 05 5.5+/-0.5 7.2+/- 0.3 5.9+/-0.3 6.2+/-0.4 6.2+/- 1.5 06 5.7+/-0.3 5.0+/-0.3 6.7+/-0.3 6.1 +/- 1.2 5.9+/- 1.4 07 5.2+/- 0.3 6.3+/-0.7 5.9+/-0.2 6.9+/-0.8 6.1 +/- 1.4 08 5.5+/-0.5 5.9+/- 0.3 6.1 +/- 0.1 6.2+/-0.7 5.9+/- 0.6 09 5.7+/-0.8 6.3+/-0.3 6.2+/-0.3 7.0+/-0.4 6.3+/- 1.1 10 5.2+/- 0.2 5.7+/- 0.6 5.9 +/- 0.1 6.4+/-0.6 5.8+/- 1.0 11 5.4+/-0.3 6.0+/- 0.6 6.0+/-0.4 6.7+/-0.2 6.0+/- 1.1 12 5.5+/- 0.2 6.4+/- 0.7 6.2+/-0.3 6.8+/-0.6 6.2+/- 1.1 13 5.7+/- 0.3 6.1 +/- 0.8 6.2+/-0.5 (a) 6.0+/- 0.5 14 6.0+/- 0.5 6.4+/-0.7 6.8+/-0.6 7.1 +/-0.6 6.6+/- 1.0 15 5.1 +/- 0.2 5.7+/-0.2 5.7+/-0.2 6.2+/-0.4 5.7+/-0.9 16 5.5+/- 0.4 6.5+/- 0.8 5.8 +/- 0.1 5.9+/-0.7 5.9+/- 0.8 17 5.1 +/- 0.5 6.0+/- 0.7 5.5+/-0.2 5.9+/-0.2 5.6+/-0.8 18 4.1 +/- 0.2 5.5 +/-0.5 4.7+/-0.2 5.1 +/- 0.4 4.9+/- 1.2 19 4.6+/- 0.2 6.0+/- 0.9 4.9+/-0.2 5.9 +/-0.3 5.4+/- 1.4 20 4.7+/- 0.6 6.4+/-0.6 4.6+/-0.2 5.9+/-0.6 5.4+/- 1.8 21 4.5+/- 0.2 5.3+/-0.6 5.1 +/- 0.3 5.9+/-0.8 5.2+/- 1.2 22 4.3+/-0.5 5.4 +/- 0.3 4.8+/-0.2 5.5 +/-0.7 5.0+/- 1.1 23 (a) 6.7+/-0.3 5.9+/-0.4 6.6+/-0.5 6.4+/- 0.9 24 4.8+/- 0.2 5.6+/-0.5 5.3+/-0.3 6.1 +/- 0.2 5.5+/- 1.1 25 4.7+/- 0.2 6.3+/- 0.2 6.1 +/- 0.9 6.5+/-0.3 5.9 +/- 1.6 26 4.8+/- 0.2 5.8+/- 0.3 5.0+/-0.2 6.1 +/- 0.3 5.4+/- 1.2 27 4.6+/- 0.3 4.9 +/- 0.5 4.7+/-0.2 4.5+/-0.3 4.7+/-0.3 28 (a) 5.4 +/- 0.7 5.3+/- 0.3 6.5+/- 0.4 5.7 +/- 1.3 29 4.2+/- 0.3 5.2+/- 0.4 4.6+/- 0.2 5.4 +/- 0.1 4.9 +/- 1.1 30 4.7+/- 0.2 5.3+/- 0.6 (a) 5.8+/- 0.8 5.3+/- 1.1 31 4.3+/- 0.4 5.0+/- 0.5 4.6 +/- 0.1 5.4 +/- 0.4 4.8+/- 1.0 32 (a) 5.9 +/- 0.3 5.0+/-0.2 5.7+/- 0.4 5.5+/- 0.9 33 (a) 6.3+/- 0.3 5.6+/-0.2 5.6+/- 1.0 5.8+/- 0.8 34 5.3+/- 0.2 6.3+/- 0.6 5.6+/- 0.2 6.8+/- 0.7 6.0+/- 1.4 35 5.7+/- 0.6 7.1 +/- 0.7 6.3+/- 0.2 7.0+/- 0.2 6.5 +/- 1.3 36 (a) 6.8 +/- 0.5 6.4+/- 0.2 9.6 +/- 0.4 (b) 7.6+/- 3.5 37 5.1 +/- 0.2 5.8+/- 0.2 5.5+/- 0.3 5.7 +/- 1.0 5.5+/- 0.6 38 6.9+/- 0.5 8.0+/- 0.9 7.4 +/- 0.3 8.3 +/- 0.4 7.7+/-1.2 39 5.0+/- 0.4 5.8+/- 0.5 5.2+/- 0.2 5.9+/- 0.7 5.5+/- 0.9 40 4.0+/- 0.1 4.8+/- 0.3 4.3 +/- 0.1 6.7+/-0.3 5.0+/- 2.4 41 (a) 6.4 +/- 0.6 6.4 +/- 0.2 6.4 +/- 0.8 6.4+/-0.0 42 4.9 +/- 0.4 5.4 +/- 0.4 5.4+/- 0.2 6.1 +/- 1.4 5.5 +/- 1.0 43 4.7+/- 0.3 5.2 +/- 0.6 5.2+/-0.2 6.3+/- 1.2 5.4 +/- 1.4 Average 5.2 +/- 1.4 6.0 +/- 1.4 5.7 +/- 1.6 6.3 +/- 1.8 5.8 +/- 1.5

+/-2 s.d.

(a) TLD missing.

(b) TLD noticed missing. Replacement exposed from 12/15/92 to 01/12/93.

76

TABLE B-16: DIRECT RADIATION MEASUREMENTS-QUARTERLY TLD RESULTS Surry Nuclear Power Station, Surry County, Virginia - 1992 mR/month +/- 2 Sigma - Set 2 - 099 January 1 to December 31, 1992 Page 1 of 1 Station First Second Third Fourth Average Number Quarter Quarter Quarter Quarter +/-2s.d.

02 6.5+/- 0.7 6.8+/-0.5 7.5+/-0.3 8.0+/-0.6 7.2+/- 1.4 03 7.0+/-0.5

• 5.8+/-0.4 7.9+/-0.5 7.8+/-0.7 7.1 +/- 1.9 04 5.6+/- 0.2 4.7+/-0.3 6.5 +/- 0.1 6.8+/-0.3 5.9 +/- 1.9 05 5.4+/-0.2 5.7+/-0.2 6.2+/-0.2 6.8+/-0.7 6.0+/- 1.2 06 6.1 +/-0.4 6.3+/-0.4 6.9+/-0.3 7.2+/-0.4 6.6+/- 1.0 07 5.4+/-0.3 5.6+/-0.2 6.2+/-0.3 5.4+/- 1.1 5.7+/-0.8 08 5.5+/-0.3 5.9+/-0.6 6.3+/-0.4 6.5+/-0.4 6.1 +/-0.9 09 5.6+/-0.4 6.1 +/-0.6 6.4+/-0.4 6.5+/-0.5 6.2+/-0.8 10 5.2+/- 0.2 5.5+/-0.3 5.9+/-0.2 6.4+/- 1.0 5.8+/- 1.0 11 5.4+/- 0.3 5.8+/-0.1 6.3+/-0.2 6.4+/-0.6 6.0+/-0.9 12 5.7+/-0.2 6.1 +/-0.8 6.5+/-0.3 5.5+/-0.3 6.0+/- 0.9 13 5.8+/- 0.3 6.1 +/-0.7 6.5+/-0.5 5.8+/-0.2 6.1 +/- 0.7 14 6.2+/-0.2 6.7+/- 0.7 6.7+/-0.4 7.3+/-0.4 6.7+/-0.9 15 5.3+/- 0.2 5.5+/-0.5 6.0+/-0.2 6.6+/-0.3 5.9 +/- 1.2 16 5.3+/- 0.3 6.7+/- 1.4 6.0+/-0.3 8.0+/- 1.4 6.5+/- 2.3 17 4.9+/-0.1 5.5+/-0.5 5.7+/-0.2 6.0+/- 0.8 5.5+/- 0.9 18 4.3+/- 0.2 4.4+/-0.2 4.9+/-0.3 5.3+/-0.6 4.7+/- 0.9 19 4.5+/- 0.2 5.3+/- 0.8 5.3+/-0.2 6.1 +/- 0.2 5.3+/- 1.3 20 4.3+/- 0.4 4.9+/-0.2 5.1 +/- 0.4 4.4+/-0.9 4.7+/- 0.8 21 4.8+/- 0.2 4.9+/-0.5 6.0+/-0.2 6.1 +/- 0.2 5.5+/- 1.4 22 4.3+/- 0.3 4.8+/- 0.7 5.1 +/- 0.2 5.6+/-0.2 5.0+/- 1.1 23 5.4+/- 0.4 6.0+/-0.3 6.1 +/- 0.3 6.8+/-0.5 6.1 +/- 1.1 24 4.9+/- 0.3 5.8+/- 0.9 5.5+/- 0.2 6.2 +/- 0.1 5.6+/- 1.1 25 4.9+/- 0.2 6.0+/-0.4 5.4+/-0.2 6.4+/-0.4 5.7+/-1.3 26 4.6+/- 0.3 5.3+/-0.4 5.2+/- 0.1 6.0+/-0.2 5.3+/- 1.1 27 4.3+/- 0.2 4.9 +/- 0.3 5.0+/-0.3 4.5 +/- 0.1 4.7+/-0.7 28 5.1 +/- 0.2 5.7+/- 0.4 5.5 +/- 0.1 5.2+/-0.2 5.4+/- 0.6 29 4.4+/- 0.2 4.7+/-0.4 4.9+/-0.2 5.5+/-0.3 4.9+/- 0.9 30 5.0+/- 0.5 5.0+/- 0.3 5.2+/- 0.2 6.2+/- 0.9 5.4+/- 1.1 31 4.1 +/- 0.3 5.0+/-0.5 4.8+/- 0.1 5.6+/- 0.5 4.9+/- 1.2 32 5.1 +/- 0.3 5.2 +/- 1.0 5.0+/-0.3 6.4+/- 0.5 5.4+/- 1.3 33 5.5+/- 0.2 6.1 +/-0.4 5.9+/-0.2 7.3+/-0.5 6.2+/- 1.5 34 5.1 +/- 0.2 5.8+/- 0.4 5.8+/-0.4 7.1 +/-0.5 6.0+/- 1.7 35 5.5+/- 0.2 6.3+/-0.4 6.2 +/- 0.1 7.2+/- 0.7 6.4 +/- 1.1 36 6.1 +/- 0.3 7.3+/- 0.9 6.6+/-0.2 7.3+/-0.6 6.8+/- 1.2 37 5.4+/- 0.2 5.9+/-0.3 5.6+/-0.2 6.0+/- 0.4 5.7+/- 0.6 38 7.0+/- 0.4 8.0+/- 1.0 7.5+/-0.3 8.3+/-0.4 7.7 +/- 1.1 39 5.0+/- 0.3 5.4+/- 0.3 5.4+/-0.2 5.9+/- 1.5 5.4+/- 0.7 40 4.0+/- 0.1 5.0+/- 0.6 4.3+/-0.1 5.2+/-0.3 4.6+/- 1.1 41 5.6+/-0.3 6.5+/- 0.3 6.3+/-0.3 6.6+/- 0.2 6.3+/- 0.9 42 5.0+/- 0.3 5.5+/-0.4 5.4 +/- 0.1 5.0+/- 0.0 5.2+/- 0.5 43 4.9+/-0.1 4.1 +/- 0.1 5.3+/-0.3 5.9+/- 0.5 5.1 +/- 1.5 Average 5.2 +/- 1.4 5.7 +/- 1.5 5.9 +/- 1.6 6.3 +/- 1.8 5.8+/- 1.6

+/-2s.d.

77

I -

APPENDIX C LAND USE CENSUS - 1992

LAND USE CENSUS1 Surry Nuclear Power Station. Surry County, Virginia January 1 to December 31, 1992 Page 1 of 1 Nearest Nearest Nearest Nearest Sector Direction Resident Garcten2 Cow Goat A N 4.12@ 8° * *

• B NNE 1.90@ 34° 1.90@ 34° *

• C NE 4.80@ 35° 4.91@ 56° *

• D ENE 4.73@ 63° 4.91@ 56° *

• E E * * *

• F ESE * * *

• G SE * * *

• H SSE 4.75@ 152° 5.0@ 160° *

• J s 1.69@ 182° 1.90@ 189° *

• K SSW 1.87@ 193° 1.87@ 193° 4.84@ 201°

• L SW 2.28@ 222° 3.65@ 2.24° *

• M WSW 2.82@ 243° 3.57@ 2.46° *

• N w 3.15@ 260° 4.14@ 2.69° *

• p WNW 4.79@ 281° * *

• Q NW 4.84@ 319° * *

• R NNW 3.73@ 339° 4.89@ 340° 3.65@ 337°

• e

• None 1 Locations shown by statute miles and degree heading relative to true north from radius center.

2 Area greater than 50 m2, containing broad leaf vegetation.

78

APPENDIX D SYNOPSIS OF ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES e

ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES SYNOPSIS Appendix D is a synopsis of the analytical procedures performed on samples collected for the Surry Power Station's Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program. All analyses have been mutually agreed upon by VEPCO and Teledyne Isotopes and include those-recommended by the USNRC Branch Technical Position, Rev. 1, November 1979.

ANALYSIS TITLE PAGE Gross Beta Analysis of Samples * * * * . * * . . * * * . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * .

• 80 Air Particulate.s * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 80 Analysis of Samples for Tritium (Gas) ************************************* 81 Water ****************************.* ************************* 81 Analysis of Samples for Tritium (Liquid Scintillation) ****************.********** 82 Analysis of Samples for Strontium-89 and -90 ******************************** 83 Total Water * * * * * * * * * * * * * . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 83 Milk ************.*******.*.******************************* 83 Soil arid Sediment ********************************************** 83 Organic Solids * * * * * * * * * * * . . * * * * * * . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * . * * * * * * *

• 84 Air Particulates * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

• 84 Analysis of Samples for Iodine-131 .....*...*.*.*.*****.*.****....*.****** 87 Milk or Water . * * . * * . . . . . . . . * . . . * * . * * * . * * . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * . * * *

• 87 Garrum S~metiy of Sainp~ . * . * * . * * . . . * * * . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * . * * * * * * *

• 88 Milk and Water * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * . * . * * . * * * * * * * * * * * * * . * * * * * * * * * * *

• 89 Dried Solids other than Soils and Sediment .**************************** 88 Fish ****.**.***.****..*..**.***.*******.*.******..*****.** 88 Soils and Sediments *..*.**.*.*.......******.**.**....*..*..*.** 88 Charcoal Cartridges (Air Iodine) ....**...********.**.**...**.....*.. 88 Air Particulate.s *****..*********.** ** **************************** 89 Environmental Dosimetry *....*.*..*.*...*.*..*****.*.**.***********.** 91 79

GROSS BETA ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES Airborne Particulates After a delay of five or more days. allowing for the radon-222 and radon-220 (thoron) daughter products to decay. the filters are counted in a gas-flow proportional counter. An unused air particulate filter. supplied by the customer. is counted as the blank.

Calculations of the results. the two sigma error and the lower limit of detection (LLD):

RESULT (pCi/m3) = ((S/T) - (B/t))/(2.22 V E) 1WO SIGMA ERROR (pCi/m3) = 2((S/T2) + (B/t2))1/2/(2.22 VE)

LLD (pCi/m3) = 4.66 (B/t/T) 1/2 /(2.22 V E) where:

s = Gross counts of sample including blank B = Counts of blank E = Counting efficiency T = Number of minutes sample was counted t = Number of minutes blank was counted V = Sample aliquot size (cubic meters) 80

ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES FOR TRITIUM (Gas Counting)

Water Approximately 2 ml of water are converted to hydrogen by passing the water, heated to its vapor state, over a granular zinc conversion column heated to 400* C. The hydrogen is loaded into a one liter proportional detector and the volume is determined by recording the pressure.

The proportional detector is passively shielded by lead and steel and an electronic, anticoincidence system provides additional shielding from cosmic rays.

Calculation of the results, the two sigma error and the lower limit detection (LLD) in pCi/1:

RESULT = 2(3.234) TN VN(CG - B)/(CN Vs) 1WO SIGMA ERROR = 2(3.234) TN VN(E) 1 /2 /(CN Vs)

UD = 3.3 (3.234)TN VN(E) 1 /2 /(CN Vs) where: TN = tritium units of the standard 3.234 = conversion factor changing tritium units to pCi/1 VN = volume of the standard used to calibrate the efficiency of the detector in psia Vs = volume of the sample loaded into the detector in psia CN = the net cpm of the standard of volume VN ex; = the gross cpm of the sample of volume Vs B = the background of the detector in cpm

~t = counting time for the sample E = S/1'2 + B/t2 81

ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES FOR TRITIUM (Liquid Scintillation)

Water

• Ten milliliters of water are mixed with 10 ml of a _!iquid scintillation "cocktail" and then the mixture is counted in an automatic liquid scintillator.

Calculation of the results, the two sigma error and the lower limit detection (LLD) in pCi/1:

RESULT = (N-B)/(2.22 V E) 1WO SIGMA ERROR = 2((N + B)/~t)l/2/ (2.22 VE)

UD = 4.66 (B/~t)l/2/(2.22 VE) where: N = the gross cpm of the sample B = the background of the detector in cpm e 2.22 V

=

=

conversion factor changing dpm to pCi volume of the sample in ml E = efficiency of the detector

~t = counting time for the sample e

82

ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES FOR STRONTIUM-89 AND -90 Water Stable strontium carrier is added to 1 liter of sample and the volume is reduced by evaporation. Strontium is precipitated as Sr(N03)2 using nitric acid. A barium scavenge and an iron (ferric hydroxide) scavenge are performed followed by addition of stable yttrium carrier and a minimum of 5 day period for yttrium ingrowth. Yttrium is then precipitated as hydroxide, dissolved and re-precipitated as oxalate. The yttrium oxalate is mounted on a nylon planchet and is counted in a low level beta counter to infer Sr-90 activity. Strontium-89 activity is determined by precipitating SrC03 from the sample after yttrium separation. This precipitate is mounted on a nylon planchet and is covered with an 80 mg/cm2 aluminum absorber for low level beta counting.

Stable strontium carrier is added to 1 liter of sample and the sample e is first evaporated, then ashed in a muffle furnace. Toe ash is dissolved and strontium is precipitated as phosphate. then is dissolved in 3M HN03. This solution is passed through a crown ether extraction column to isolate elemental strontium. Stable yttrium carrier is added and the sample is allowed to stand for a minimum of 5 days for yttrium ingrowth. Yttrium is then precipitated as hydroxide. dissolved and re-precipitated as oxalate.

The yttrium oxalate is mounted on a nylon planchet and is counted in a low level beta counter to infer Sr-90 activity. Strontium-89 is determined by precipitating SrC0 3 from the sample after yttrium separation. This precipitate is mounted on a nylon planchet and is covered with an 80 mg/cm2 aluminum absorber for low level beta counting.

Soil and Sediment The sample is first dried under heat lamps and an aliquot is taken.

Stable strontium carrier is added and the sample is leached in hydrochloric acid. The mixture is filtered and strontium is precipitated from the liquid 83

portion as phosphate. Strontium is precipitated as Sr(N03)2 using fuming (90%) nitric acid. A barium chromate scavenge and an iron (ferric hydroxide) scavenge are then performed. Stable yttrium carrier is added and the sample is allowed to stand for a minimum of 5 days for yttrium ingrowth. Yttrium is then precipitated as hydroxide, dissolved and re-precipitated as oxalate. The yttrium oxalate is mounted on a nylon planchet and is counted in a low level beta counter to infer Sr-90 activity. Strontium-89 activity is determined by precipitating SrC03 from the sample after yttrium separation. This precipitate is mounted on a nylon planchet and is covered with an 80 mg/ cm2 aluminum absorber for low level beta counting.

br~anic Solids A wet portion of the sample is dried and then ashed in a muffle furnace. Stable strontium carrier is added and the ash is leached in hydrochloric acid. The sample is filtered and strontium is precipitated from the liquid portio~ as phosphate. Strontium is precipitated as Sr(N03) using fuming (90%) nitric acid. An iron (ferric hydroxide) scavenge is performed, followed by addition of stable yttrium carrier and a minimum of 5 days period for yttrium ingrowth. Yttrium is then precipitated as hydroxide, dissolved and re-precipitated as oxalate. The yttrium oxalate is mounted on a nylon planchet and is counted in a low level beta counter to infer strontium-90 activity. Strontium-89 activity is determined by precipitating SrC03 from the sample after yttrium separation. This precipitate is mounted on a nylon planchet and is covered with an 80 mg/ cm2 aluminum absorber for low level beta counting.

Air Particulates Stable strontium carrier is added to the sample and it is leached in nitric acid to bring deposits into solution. The mixture is then filtered and the filtrate is reduced in volume by evaporation. Strontium is precipitated as Sr(N03) 2 using fuming (90%) nitric acid. A barium scavenge is used to remove some interfering species. An iron (ferric hydroxide) scavenge is performed, followed addition of stable yttrium carrier and a 7 to 10 day period for yttrium ingrowth. Yttrium is then precipitated as hydroxide, 84

dissolved and re-precipitated as oxalate. The yttrium oxalate is mounted on a nylon planchet and is counted in a low level beta counter to infer stron-tium-90 activity. Strontium-89 activity is determined by precipitating SrC03 from the sample after yttrium separation. This precipitate is mounted on a nylon planchet and is covered with 80 mg/cm2 aluminum absorber for level beta counting.

Calculations of the results, two sigma errors and lower limits of detection

• (LLD) are expressed in activity of pCi/volume or pCi/mass:

RESULT Sr-89 = (N/ At-Bc-BA)/(2.22 V Ys DFsR-89 EsR-89) 1WO SIGMA ERROR Sr-89 = 2((N/At+Bc+BA)/At) 1 f2/(2.22 V Ys DFsR-89 EsR-89 LLD Sr-89 = 4.66((Bc+BA)/At)l/2/(2.22 V Ys DFsR-89 EsR-891 RESULT Sr-90 = (N/At - B)/(2.22 V Y1 Y2 DF IF E) 1WO SIGMA ERROR Sr-90 = 2((N/At+B)/At)l/2/(2.22 V Y1 Y2 DF E IF))

LLD Sr-90 = 4.66(B/At)l/2/(2.22 VY1 Y2 IF DF E) 85

where: N = total counts from sample (counts)

At = counting time for sample (min)

Be = background rate of counter (cpm) using absorber configurati 2.22 = dpm/pCi V = volume or weight of sample analyzed BA background addition from Sr-90 and ingrowth of Y-90 BA = 0.016 CK) + (K) (Ey/absl (IGy_go)

Ys = chemical yield of strontium DF SR-89 = decay factor from the mid collection date to the counting date for SR-89 EsR-89 = efficiency of the counter for SR-89 with the 80 mg/cm.sq.

aluminum absorber K = (N/ At - Bc)v-90/(Ey_go IFY-90 DFy_goY1)

DFY-90 = the decay factor for Y-90 from the "milk" time to the mid count time Ey_go = efficiency of the counter for Y-90 IFy_go = ingrowth factor for Y-90 from scavenge time to milking timt IGy_go = the ingrowth factor for Y-90 into the strontium mount from "milk" time to the mid count time

= the efficiency of measuring SR-90 through a No. 6 absorber

= the efficiency of counting Y-90 through a No. 6 absorber

= background rate of counter (cpm)

= chemical yield of yttrium

= chemical yield of strontium

= decay factor of yttrium from the radiochemical milking time to the mid count time E = efficiency of the counter for Y-90 IF = ingrowth factor for Y-90 from scavenge time to the radio-chemical milking time e

86

ANALYSIS OF SAMPLES FOR IODINE-131 Milk or Water Two liters of sample are first equilibrated with stable iodide carrier. A batch treatment with anion exchange resin is used to remove iodine from the sample. The iodine is then stripped from the resin with sodium hypochlorite solution, reduced with hydroxylamine hydrochloride and extracted into toluene as free iodine. It is then back-extracted as iodide into sodium bisulfite solution and is precipitated as palladium iodide. The precipitate is weighed for chemical yield and is mounted on a nylon planchet for low level beta counting. The chemical yield is corrected by measuring the stable iodide content of the milk or the water with a specific ion electrode.

Calculations of results, two sigma error and the lower limit of detection (LLD) in pCi/1:

RESULT = (N/At-B)/(2.22 EVY DF) 1WO SIGMA ERROR = 2((N/At+B)/At)l/2(2.22 EVY DF)

LLD = = 4.66(B/At)l/2/(2.22 EVY DF) where: N = total counts from sample (counts)

At = countin-g time for sample (min)

B = background rate of counter (cpm) 2.22 = dpm/pCi V = volume or weight of sample analyzed y = chemical yield of the mount or sample counted DF = decay factor from the collection to the counting date E = efficiency of the counter for 1-131, corrected for self absorption effects by the formula E = Es(exp-0.0085M)/(exp-0.0085M 8 )

Es = efficiency of the counter determined from an 1-131 standard mount Ms = mass of Pd l 2 on the standard mount, mg M = mass of PdI2 on The sample mount, mg 87

GAMMA SPECTROMETRY OF SAMPLES Mille and Water A 1.0 liter Marinelli beaker is filled with a representative aliquot of the sample. The sample is then counted for approximately 1000 minutes with a shielded Ge(Li) detector coupled to a mini-computer-based data acquisition system which performs pulse height analysis.

Dried Solids Other Than Soils and Sediments A large quantity of the sample is dried at a low temperature, less than 100°C. As much as possible (up to the total sample) is loaded into a tared 1-liter Marinelli and weighed. The sample is then counted for approximately 1000 minutes with a shielded Ge(Li) detector coupled to a mini-computer-based data acquisition system which performs pulse height analysis.

As much as possible (up to the total sample) of the edible portion of the sample is loaded into a tared Marinelli and weighed. The sample is then counted for approximately 1000 minutes with a shielded Ge(Li) detector coupled to a mini-computer-based data acquisitiQn system which performs pulse height analysis.

Soils and Sediments Soils and sediments are dried at a low temperature, less than 100°C.

The soil or sediment is loaded fully into a tared. standard 300 cc container and weighed. The sample is then counted for approximately six hours with a shielded Ge(Li) detector coupled to a mini-computer-based data acquisition system which performs pulse height and analysis.

Charcoal Cartrid~es {Air Iodine)

Charcoal cartridges are counted up _to five at a time, with one positioned on the face of a Ge(Li) detector and up to four on the side of the Ge(Li) detector. Each Ge(Li) detector is calibrated for both positions. The detection limit for 1-131 of each charcoal cartridge can be determined 88

(assuming no positive 1-131) uniquely from the volume of air which passed through it. In the event 1-131 is observed in the initial counting of a set, each charcoal cartridge is then counted separately, positioned on the face of the detector Airborne Particulates The thirteen airborne particulate filters for__JL_quarterly composite for each field station are aligned one in front of another and then counted for at least six hours with a shielded Ge(Li) detector coupled to a mini-computer-based data acquisition system which performs pulse height analysis.

A mini-computer software program defines peaks by certain changes in the slope of the spectrum. The program also compares the energy of each peak with a library of peaks for isotope identification and then performs the radioactivity calculation using the appropriate fractional gamma ray abundance, half life, detector efficiency, and net counts in the peak region. The calculation of results, two sigma error and the lower limit of detection (LLD) in pCi/volume of pCi/mass:

89

RESULT = (S-B)/2.22 t EV F DF)

'IWO SIGMA ERROR = 2(S+B)ll2/(2.22 t EV F DF)

UD = 4.66(B) 1/2 /(2.22 t EV F OF) where: s = Area, in counts, of sample peak and background (region of spectrum of interest)

B = Background area, in counts, under sample peak, determined by a linear interpolation of the representative backgrounds on either side of the peak t = length of time in minutes the sample was counted 2.22 = dpm/pCi E = detector efficiency for energy of interest and geometry of sample V = sample aliquot size (liters, cubic meters, kilograms, or grams)

F = fractional gamma abundance (specific for each emitted gamma)

OF = decay factor from the mid-collection date to the counting date 90

ENVIRONMENTAL DOSIMETRY Teledyne Isotopes uses a CaS04:Dy therm.oluminescent dosimeter (TLD) which the company manufactures. This material has a high light output, negligible thermally induced signal loss (fading)~ and negligible self dosing. The energy response curve (as well as all other features) satisfies NRC Reg. Guide 4.13. Transit doses are accounted for by use of separate TIDs.

Following the field exposure period the TLDs are placed in a Teledyne Isotopes Model 8300. One fourth of the rectangular TLD is heated at a time and the measured light emission (luminescence) is recorded. The TLD is then annealed and exposed to a known Cs-137 dose: each area is then read again. This provides a calibration of each area of each TLD after every field use. The transit controls are read in the same manner.

Calculations of results and the two sigma error in net milliRoentgen (mR):

RESULT D = (D 1+D 2+D 3 +D4 )/4 1WO SIGMA ERROR = 2((D 1-D)2+(D 2-D)2+(D 3 -D)2+(D 4 -D)2)/3)l/2 WHERE: = the net mR of area 1 of the TLD, and similarly for D2, D3. and D4 Dl = 11 K/R1 -A 11 = the instrument reading of the field dose in* area 1 K = the known exposure by the Cs-137 source R1 = the instrument reading due to the Cs-137 dose on area 1 A = average dose in mR, calculated in similar manner as above, of the transit control TLDs D = the average net mR of all 4 areas of the TLD.

91

APPENDIX E EPA INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM

EPA Interlaboratory Comparison Program Teledyne Isotopes participates in the US EPA Interlaboratory Comparison Program to the fullest extent possible. That is, we participate in the program for all radioactive isotopes prepared and at the maximum frequency of availability. In this section trending graphs (since 1981) and the 1992 data summary tables are presented for isotopes in the various sample media applicable to the Surry Power Station's Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program. The footnotes of the table discuss investigations of problems encountered in a few cases and the steps taken to prevent reccurrence.

92

e VEPCO - SURRY US EPA INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM 1992 (Page 1 of 3)

EPA Date Tl Malled Date EPA EPA Tl Norm Dev. **warning Preparation Results Issued Results Media Nuclide Results(a) Results(b) (Known) ***Action 01/17/92 03/24/92 06/25/92 Water Sr-89 51.0 +/- 5.0 45.67 +/- 1.53 -1.85 Sr-90 20.0 +/- 5.0 18.67 +/- 1.53 -0.46 01/31/92 02/25/92 03/24/92 Water Gr-Alpha 30.0 +/- 8.0 25.00 +/- 4.00 -1.08 Gr-Beta 30.0 +/- 5.0 31.67 +/- 0.58 0.58 02/07/92 02/26/92 04/22/92 Water 1-131 59.0 +/- 6.0 61.00 +/- 1.73 0.58 02/14/92 03/24/92 06/25/92 Water Co-60 40.0+/- 5.0 38.00 +/- 2.65 -0.69 Zn-65 148.0 +/- 15.0 145.00 +/- 1.73 -0.35 Ru-106 203.0 +/- 20.0 191.00 +/- 21.66 -1.04 Cs-134 31.0 +/- 5.0 29.00 +/- 2.00 -0.69 Cs-137 49.0+/- 5.0 53.67 +/- 2.52 1.62 Ba-133 76.0 +/- 8.0 75.67 +/- 7.51 -0.07 02/21/92 03/18/92 04/22/92 Water Tritium 7904.0 +/- 790.0 7800.00 +/- 100.00 -0.23 03/27/92 05/13/92 06/29/92 Air Filter Gr-Alpha 7.0 +/- 5.0 11.33 +/- 0.58 1.50 Gr-Beta 41.0 +/- 5.0 43.00 +/- 1.00 0.69

\.0 Sr-90 15.0+/- 5.0 12.67 +/- 0.58 -0.81

\Al Cs-137 10.0 +/- 5.0 11.00 +/- 1.73 0.35 04/14/92 05/25/92 08/18/92 Water Gr-Beta 140.0 +/- 21.0 98.00 +/- 2.00 -3.46 (c)

Sr-89 15.0 +/- 5.0 16.00 +/- 1.00 0.35 Sr-90 17.0 +/- 5.0 14.33 +/- 1.15 -0.92 Co-60 56.0 +/- 5.0 55.00 +/- 1.73 -0.35 Cs-134 24.0+/- 5.0 22.67 +/- 1.53 -0.46 Cs-137 22.0 +/- 5.0 24.67 +/- 3.06 0.92 Gr-Alpha 40.0+/- 10.0 34.33 +/- 2.08 -0.98 Ra-226 14.9+/- 2.2 13.33 +/- 2.08 -1.23 Ra-228 14.0 +/- 3.5 15.33 +/- 0.58 0.66 04/24/92 06/25/92 08/18/92 Milk Sr-89 38.0 +/- 5.0 36.00 +/- 4.58 -0.69 Sr-90 29.0 +/- 5.0 26.00 +/- 0.00 -1.04 1-131 78.0 +/- 8.0 71.67 +/- 4.04 -1.37 Cs-137 39.0+/- 5.0 46.67 +/- 2.31 2.66 (d)

K 1710.0 +/- 86.0 1680.00 +/- 72.11 -0.60 Footnotes located at end of table.

e VEPCO - SURRY US EPA INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM 1992 (Page 2 of 3)

EPA Date Tl Malled Date EPA EPA Tl Norm Dev. **Warning Preparation Results Issued Results Media Nuclide Results(a) Results(b) (Known) ***Action 05/08/92 07/07/92 08/19/92 Water Sr-89 29.0+/- 5.0 24.00 +/- 1.73 -1.73 Sr-90 8.0+/- 5.0 6.33+/- 0.58 -0.58 05/15/92 06/12/92 07/06/92 Water Gr-Alpha 15.0+/- 5.0 10.00 +/- 1.00 -1.73 Gr-Beta 44.0+/- 5.0 44.67 +/- 1.15 0.23 06/05/92 07/09/92 09/11/92 Water Co-60 20.0+/- 5.0 21.33 +/- 0.58 0.46 Zn-65 99.0+/- 10.0 107.00 +/- 3.61 1.39 Ru-106 141.0 +/- 14.0 127.00 +/- 11.53 -1.73 Cs-134 15.0 +/- 5.0 15.00 +/- 1.00 0.00 Cs-137 15.0 +/- 5.0 16.00 +/- 1.00 0.35 Ba-133 98.0+/- 10.0 93.33 +/- 6.03 -0.81 06/19/92 07113/92 08/18/92 Water H-3 2125.0 +/- 347.0 2100.00 +/- 0.00 -0.12 08/07/92 09/18/92 11/02/92 Water 1-131 45.0 +/- 6.0 43.33 +/- 6.03 -0.48 08/28/92 10/06/92 12/238/92 Air Filter Gr-Alpha 30.0 +/- 8.0 27.33 +/- 0.58 -0.58 U> Gr-Beta 69.0+/- 10.0 69.00 +/- 1.00 0.00

.i:- Sr-90 25.0+/- 5.0 22.67 +/- 1.15 -0.81 Cs-137 18.0 +/- 5.0 16.67 +/- 2.31 -0.46 08/28/92 10/21/92 11/24/92 Water Gr-Alpha 45.0+/- 11.0 45.00 +/- 2.00 0.00 Gr-Beta 50.0 +/- 5.0 45.00 +/- 1.73 -1.73 09/11/92 11/04/92 12/22/92 Water Sr-89 20.0+/- 5.0 126.00 +/- 1.00 -1.39 Sr-90 15.0 +/- 5.0 13.00 +/- 1.0 -0.69 10/09/92 11/16/92 12/28/92 Water Co-60 10.0+/- 5.0 11.00 +/- 1.00 0.35 Zn-65 148.0 +/- 15.0 156.67 +/- 0.58 1.00 Ru-106 175.0 +/- 18.0 164.33 +/- 7.51 -1.03 Cs-134 8.0+/- 5.0 8.67 +/- 0.58 0.23 Cs-137 8.0 +/- 5.0 8.67+/- 0.58 0.23 Ba-133 74.0+/- 7.0 75.67 +/- 9.29 0.41

e. e VEPCO

• SURRY US EPA INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON PROGRAM 1992 (Page 3 of 3)

EPA Data Tl Malled Date EPA EPA Tl Norm Dav. **warning Preparation Results Issued Results Media Nucllde Results(a) Results(b) (Known) ***Action 10/23192 11/22/92 10/23192 Water H-3 5962.0 +/- 596.0 5666.67 +/- 57.74 -0.86 09/25/92 11/18/92 01/04/93 Milk Sr-89 15.0 +/- 5.0 16.00 +/- 2.00 0.35 Sr-90 15.00 +/- 5.0 12.67 +/- 1.15 -0.81 1-131 100.0 +/- 10.0 99.00 +/- 7.21 -0.17 Cs-137 15.0 +/- 5.0 15.67 +/- 1.15 0.23 K 1750.0 +/- 88.0 1660.00 +/- 85.44 -1.77 10/20/92 12/02/92 02/01/93 Water Gr-Beta 53.0 +/- 10.00 49.00 +/- 2.65 -0.69 Sr-89 8.0 +/- 5.0 8.67+/- 0.58 0.23 Sr-90 10.0 +/- 5.0 8.00 +/- 1.00 -0.69 Co-60 15.0 +/- 5.0 15.00 +/- 12.00 0.00 Cs-134 5.0 +/- 5.0 5.00+/- 0.00 0.00 Cs-137 8.0 +/- 5.0 8.67 +/- 0.58 0.23 Gr-Alpha 29.0+/- 7.0 27.33 +/- 4.16 -0.41

\..0 V,

(a) Average+/- experimental sigma.

(b) Expected laboratory precision (1 sigma, l determination)

(c) There was large fraction oflow energy beta emitters (Co-(i() and Cs-134) in the sample. Detector efficiency decreases with decreasing energy. We arc required to calibrate with the high energy beta emitters (Cs-137 and Sr.-90). No corrective action is necessary. *

(d) There is no apparent reason for the high Cs-137 results. The sample geometry and detector efficiencies were verified to be corrccl The Total Kand 1-131 by gamma spectroscopy were in good agreement with EPA values. There is no trend and results were within+/- sigma so no action taken.

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM GROSS ALPHA IN AIR PARTICULATES 60 0

C. 40 as 0

t-

\.D 20 O'

0

-20 1--......---.----...--......----.---,.---.----,----r---,.....--r----.---r-r--....---T"""---T-,---,---T"""---'T-r-i 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 c Tl +/- 3 Sigma o EPA+/-3Sigma j

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM GROSS BETA IN AIR PARTICULATES 160 . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,

140 120 0 100 D C.

cu 0

I- 80 60 40 20 H i HI i t a 0 l---r--Y----r-r------r---......-..---r---r--.~...---,,---r---,~-r---..----r-r---r--.--T-r----1 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 test l

• 08/25/89 EPA invalid.

I a Tl +/- 3 Sigma o EPA +/- 3 Sigma

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM STRONTIUM-90 IN AIR PARTICULATES 60 0

C.

40 0

cu t-20 0

-20 .___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___,,--....---r-~-r---.----.-----T---.-----.-"T""--r--"'T'---,r--r---t 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 c Tl+/- 3sigma o EPA+/- 3 sigma j

e EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM CESIUM-137 IN AIR PARTICULATES 60 CJ

c. 40 0

ca I-20 0

H 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 j c Tl +/- 3 sigma o ~PA +/- 3 sigma I

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM STRONTIUM-89 IN MILK 100 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

BO 60 i

Cl) 0

~

a. 40 D D

~

20 0 0

-20 t--~------.-..--..,.......---,----,,--..--..,.......---,----,,--.,......--,-~---.---,--......,............-,........~---.........- r - - - 1 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 D Tl+/- 3 sigma o EPA +/-3 sigma I

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM STRONTIUM-90 IN MILK 60 GI 40

--0 D.

i  ! Cl I Ii Ii 20 iij ~

I IJ 0

i

-201---.........-------~-------------.,---...---......------.,-.-...---.----..---,,---.....---...-.......~.---...............-.........--...........t 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 c Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA +/-3 sigma I

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM POTASSIUM-40 IN MILK 2400 2200 2000 Q) 1800 0

a. 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 1--------~..---...----.~..--------.~......--T---..~..--------~......-------~---------......--...--------.~

1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 a Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA +/-3 sigma j

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM IODINE-131 IN MILK 160 140 120

.. 100 Cl)

BO

( .)

D.

60 40 20 u,{ I j 0

Cl 0

1983 a

1984 1985 1986 I I

-201--....-........--,-.--.-........------r----....---r--r--....---r---,,-.--.-.....,...--,--,---,---,l""--,---.--t 1981 1982 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 , 1993 I c Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA +/-3 sigma I

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM CESIUM-137 IN MILK 100 . . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

80 a,

0 60 l

D.

40 20 0 1,-.....---------------------------------------------11 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 I c Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA +/-3 ~igma I

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM GROSS ALPHA IN WATER 160-----------------

140 120

...c>> 100

- 80 0 Cl C.

60 20 0

f-.___.,,-..-.-_--,--_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.___,.._._--t 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 I c Tl +/- 3 Sigma o -EPA+/- 3 S1igma I

e e EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM GROSS BETA IN WATER (pg. 2 of 2) 200 180 160

. 140 CD 120 Cl 0

D. 100 BO 60 40

-20 i------...-~-.--------.~-----~-----------~--...--~..-------~-..--~--------.-~...-------t 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993

! c Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA +/- 3 sigma !

e EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM GROSS BETA IN WATER (pg. 1 of 2) 220 200 180 160

.. 140 Cl>

- 0 C.

120 100 80

-20 J . - - - - - - - - - - - - r - - - . , . - - , - - - - - - - , , - - - - , r - - - - - - , r - - - 1 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 I D Tl+/-3sigma o EPA+/-3sigma I

e EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM TRITIUM IN WATER (pg. 2 of 2) 18000 16000 14000

. 12000 Q)

--- 10000 0

a.

8000 6000

~

4000 f f f 1le ~

2000 !i j 01-------------------------------,,----...--f 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 D Tl +/- 3 s O EPA :\: 3 s I

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM TRITIUM IN WATER (pg. 1 of 2) 4000 Q) 3000 2000 r

0 a.

1000 0

-1000 1-----------....--------,----------r---------1 1984 1985 1981 1982 1983 I D Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA +/-3 sigma

e EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM COBALT-60 IN WATER (pg. 2 of 2) 100 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .

BO

. 60 Cl)

--u a.

40 20 C

1 I I 0

-20 1-------...-------.---------------r-------1 1992 1993 1988 1989 1990 1991 I D Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA +/-3 sigma

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM COBAL T-60 IN WATER (pg 1 of 2) 100 ,......_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

80 60 G>

-- 0 C.

40 20 0

CJ 0 0 CJ 0

lH i f

-20 t------""T""""'----""T""------,---~.,.-----~-----r------t 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 I CJ Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA +/-3 sigma I

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM CESIUM-134 IN WATER (pg. 2 of 2) 100 , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .

BO 60 c>>

--0 a.

40 20

~

I C

~

0

-20 t---....--------..----..-----.---------------..-----t 1990 1988 1989 1991 1992 1993 I D Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA +/-3 sigma

e*

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM CESIUM-134 IN WATER (pg. 1 of 2) 100 .--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~----------------------------------.

80

. 60 CD

- 0 40 D.

I 20 a

0 f I

-20 ._--------------------....---------.-----------....---------.--------------....------------1 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 I a Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA +/-3 sigma

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM IODINE-131 IN WATER 160 . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - . .

140 120 e..

100 Cl CD 0

BO I D.

60 40 if ,1 20 0

~ 12 , ISi as i a

-20 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 D Ti +/- 3 sigma 0 EPA +/-3 sigma I

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM CESIUM-137 IN WATER (pg. 2 of 2) 120 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

100 80 I a,

60 (J

ca. 40 20 I I hI 0

Cl

' ~ Cl

-20 ..._-----..--------r-------r------~--------1 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 I D Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA +/-3 sigma j

EPA CROSS CH.ECK PROGRAM CESIUM-137 IN WATER (pg. 1 of 2) 60 a, 40 0

a.

20 0 l

-201-----------------------.-------....----~

1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 I a Tl +/- 3 sigma

• o EPA +/-3 sigma

e EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM STRONTIUM-89 IN WATER (pg. 2 of 2) 100 , - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ,

80

.... 60 II Cl)

I

( .)

g, 40 2

20

~ I t

'ii

~*

0 i 2 2 a I 2

-20 1-------------------------..---------...---------1 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 I a Tl +/- 3 Sigma ** o EPA +/- 3 Sigma j

e EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM STRONTIUM-89 IN WATER (pg. 1 of 2) 100 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ,

80 60 G)

II i 40 u

a. g .

i 20 0

-20 1------------------------------------i 1983 1984 1985 1981 1982 I D Tl +/- 3 sigma o EPA +/-3 sigma I

EPA CROSS CHECK PROGRAM STRONTIUM-90 IN WATER 60 CD 40 u

D.

20 0

-20 ..._~-yo----T""""-T"---,P--.....--Y-----T""-r---,,---.--...--Y-----T""_ ____,,---...-...---1 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 I a Tl +/- 3 sigma O EPA d:3 sigma I