ML072120268

Volume II, Mclaren/Hart, Inc. Preliminary Assessment/Site Investigation Report - Radiological, Gpu Nuclear, Inc. Oyster Creek Nuclear Generation Station, U.S. Route No. 9, Forked River, Nj, Site Remediation Program Case No E99575

ML072120268
Person / Time
Site:	Oyster Creek
Issue date:	02/28/2000
From:	McLaren Hart
To:	AmerGen Energy Co, GPU Nuclear, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Wrona D, NRR/DLR 415-2292
Shared Package
ML072280171	List: ML072120266 ML072120268
References
E99575
Download: ML072120268 (227)

Text

VOLUME 2 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT/

SITE INVESTIGATION REPORT-

ýADIOLOGICAL GPU NUCLEAR, INC.

OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR

.GENERATING STATION

%U.S.ROUTE NO. 9 iFORKED RIVER, NEW JERSEY Site Remediation Program Case No. E99575 5,Preparedfor:

GPU Nuclear, Inc.

U.S. Route No. 9 Forked River, New Jersey 08731 and AmerGen Energy Co, LLC 2301 Market Street S22-1 P.O. Box 8699 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania February 28, 2000 McLaren/Hart, Inc.

Blue Bell Executive Campus 470 Norristown Road, Suite 300 Blue Bell, Pennsylvania 19422 W-IfWf ? §TRATf@Y e.Tf PiNNY i ý%-WTIQN§

• VOLUME 2 P4 (fA V '- SMENT EA$

-SI* ..- .

ý..

NV

'.Li xi..-X*t7 ..

GPI~L1E,RITNC.

Oys..... C* R1*R NUCLEAR GENER ING$T-A-TION U N-.

.S.QTE.9 FORK DU VER, NEW JERSEY Site Rei"ediation Program CaSe.,No, E99575 P,:

Preparedfor.

GPU Nuclear, Inc.

-.U.S. Route No. 9 Forked River, New Jersey 08731 and AmerGen Energy Co, LLC 2301 Market Street S22-1

P.O. Box 8699" Philadelphia, Pennsylvania February 28, 2000

,*McLaren/Hart, Inc.

Blue. Bell Executive Campus 470 Noristown Road, Suite 300 Blue Bell, Pennsylvania 19422

APPENDIX N-SITE INVESTIGATION- RADIOLOGICAL REPORT..

11

APPENDIX N SITE INVESTIGATION - RADIOLOGICAL REPORT OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

................................................................................ 1-1 2.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION ................................................ .............. 2-1 2.1 SITE O PERA TIONS ................................................................................................. 2-1 2.1.1 Western Portion of the Property .............................................. 2-1 2.1.2 Eastern Portion of the Property ............................................... 2-2 2.2 S ITE H ISTO RY ....................................................................................................... 2-3 2.2.1 Western Portion of Property .................................................. 2-3 2.2.2 Eastern Portion of Property ................................................... 2-3 2.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ................................................................................... 2-4 2 .3 .1 C limate ............................................................................ 2-4 2 .3 .2 W ind ............................................................................... 2-4 2.3.3 T em perature ...................................................................... 2-4 2.3.4 Precipitation ...................................................................... 2-5 2.4 GEOLOGY/HYDROGEOLOGY ................................................................................. 2-5 2.4.1 Regional Geology ............................................................... 2-5 2.4.2 Regional Hydrogeology ........................................................ 2-6 2.4 .3 Site Geology ...................................................................... 2-6 2.4.4 Site Hydrogeology ............................................................. 2-10 3.0 RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING .......................................................... 3-1 3.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ................................. 3-1 3.2 ONSITE SAMPLING EVENTS ................................................................................... 3-4 3.2.1 March 1981 - New Radwaste Building - Tank Leak ..................... 3-4 3.2.2 October 1982 - Old Radwaste Building - Waste Surge Tank Release. 3-4 3.2.3 October 1982 - Old Radwaste Building - Truck Ramp Paving ......... 3-6 3.2.4 June 1985 - Proposed Emergency Safe Shutdown Facility (ESSF)

Location ........................................................................... 3-6 3.2.5 March 1991 - Condensate Storage Tank - Bottom Leakage ............. 3-7 3.2.6 April 1991 - CST Yard Spill .................................................. 3-7 3.2.7 August 1992 - Proposed ISFSI Concrete Pad Construction ............. 3-8 3.2.8 August 1997 -Upland Confined Disposal Facility Investigation ........ 3-8 3.2.9 September 1996 - Condensate Transfer Overboard Discharge Event.. 3-9 3.2.10 August 1999 - Old Radwaste Building Concrete Pad - Spill Event... 3-10 3.2.11 Non-Radiological ISRA Investigation ....................................... 3-10 3.2.12 Miscellaneous Sampling Events .............................................. 3-11 4.0 LIMITATION OF LIABILITY .............................................................. 4-1 G:ýS taf Sh ared\PEC O\roj ects~oy stercreeknuclearklNlR~ptF i McLaren/Hart, Inc.

APPENDIX N SITE INVESTIGATION - RADIOLOGICAL OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd.)

FIGURES 1.1 Site Location Map 1.2 Site Plan 2.4.3.1 Site Plan with Building Elevations 2.4.3.2 Cross Sections 2.4.4.1 Contour Map - Cape May/Cohansey Aquifer 3.1.1 Groundwater Sampling Location Map with Concentrations 3.2.1 March 1981 - New Radwaste Building - Tank Leak Sample Location 3.2.2 October 1982 - Old Radiological Waste Building - Waste Surge Tank Release Sample Location 3.2.3 October 1982 - Old Radiological Waste Building - Truck Ramp Paving Sample Location 3.2.4 June 1985 - Proposed ESSF Location Sample Location 3.2.5 March 1991 - Condensate Storage Tank - Bottom Leakage Sample Location 3.2.6 April 1991 - Condensate Yard Spill Sample Location 3.2.7 August 1992 - Proposed ISFI Concrete Pad Construction Sample Location 3.2.8 August 1997 - Upland Confined Disposal Facility Investigation Sample Location 3.2.9 September 1996 - Condensate Transfer Overboard Discharge Event Sample Location 3.2.10 August 1999 - Old Rad Waste Building Concrete Pad - Spill Event Sample Location 3.2.11 Non-Radiological ISRA Investigation Sample Locations 3.2.12 Miscellaneous Sampling Event Locations TABLES 3.1.1 1999 - Groundwater Sampling Results 3.2.1 March 1981 - New Radwaste Building - Tank Leak Sample Results 3.2.2 October 1982 - Old Radiological Waste Building - Waste Surge Tank Release Sample Results 3.2.3 October 1982 - Old Radiological Waste Building - Truck Ramp Paving Sample Results 3.2.4 June 1985 - Proposed ESSF Location Sample Results 3.2.5 March 1991 - Condensate Storage Tank - Bottom Leakage Sample Results 3.2.6 April 1991 - Condensate Yard Spill Sample Results 3.2.7 August 1992 - Proposed ISM Concrete Pad Construction Sample Results 3.2.8 August 1997 - Upland Confined Disposal Facility Investigation Sample Results 3.2.9 September 1996 - Condensate Transfer Overboard Discharge Event Sample Results 3.2.10 August 1999 - Old Rad Waste Building Concrete Pad - Spill Event Sample Results 3.2.11 Non-Radiological ISRA Investigation Sample Results 3.2.12 Miscellaneous Soil Sampling Results G:\Suf)\Shared\PECO\Projeczs\oys~ercr~knucIcar~RMI&Xj'p~F iiii McLarenll-Iart, Inc.

G:\Slaf*Sh.rcdkECO*Projects~oystercrecknuciearUkIRMRptF McLaren/Hart, Inc.

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station February 28, 2000

1.0 INTRODUCTION

McLaren/Hart, Inc. (McLaren/Hart) was retained by GPU Nuclear, Inc. ("GPU") and AmerGen to perform a Radiological Preliminary Assessment (PA) at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (OCNGS or Facility). The OCNGS is located in Forked River, New Jersey. A site location map and site plan map are provided as Figures 1.1 and 1.2, respectively. The Radiological PA was conducted in conjunction with a request by GPU to defer radiological remedial activites until the decommissioning of OCNGS.

OCNGS site personnel interviewed included James Vouglitois - Manager, Environmental Affairs; Michael Slobodien - Director of Radiological Health & Safety; William Cooper - Facility Manager Radiological Engineering; Robert Barbieri - Facility Engineer and David Moore - Environmental Scientist.

The documents, which have been reviewed extensively, include the following:

• Preliminary Assessment Report - Non-Radiological - URS Greiner Woodward Clyde (URSGWC), December 20, 1999;

• Site Investigation/RemedialInvestigation- Non-Radiological- URSGWC, January 2000;

• Theoretical Release Study - UJRSGWC, December, 1999; and

• 1998 RadiologicalEnvironmentalMonitoring Report - GPU - 1999.

This document is divided in to four sections. Section 2.0 provides a discussion of the property description, including site operations, site history and environmental settings. Section 3.0 provides a discussion of the two methods of radiological monitoring at the facility including sampling information and analytical results. Limitations of liability are provided in Section 4.0.

1-1 McLarenfHart, Inc.

G:\StamShared\PECOThjectsvytc~creeknucIcar\RMR\IptF G:\Staff\Shmed\PECO\Pmjom\oystercrecicnuciý\RMR\rptF 1-1 McLaren[Hart, Inc.

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station February28, 2000 2.0 PROPERTY DESCRIPTION The OCNGS is located in Lacey Township, Ocean County, New Jersey, about 35 miles north of Atlantic City. Access to the site is provided by U.S. Route 9, passing through the site and separating a 576-acre eastern portion from the balance of the property west of the highway. The OCNGS covers 720 acres extending approximately 2 1/4 miles inland from Barmegat Bay. The maximum width in the north-south direction is approximately 0.8 mile. The site location is part of the New Jersey coastal area with relatively flat topography and extensive freshwater and saltwater marshlands. The south branch of Forked River runs across the northern side of the site and Oyster Creek partly borders the southern side.

2.1 SITE OPERATIONS The property can be divided into the developed portion of the site west of Route 9 within the intake and discharge canals, and the area located east of Route 9 which is primarily heavily vegetated and undeveloped.

2.1.1 Western Portion of the Property The western portion of the property consists of a single boiling-water nuclear reactor and a turbine-generator to produce electrical power. This equipment and auxiliary support structures are located within the area bounded on the east by U.S. Route 9 and on the north, south and west by the Intake/Discharge Canal.

Three basics steps are involved in the process of producing electricity at the OCNGS. First, heat produced by fission in the nuclear reactor converts high-purity water to steam. Second, the steam is used to drive a turbine to produce mechanical energy. Third, the turbine is connected to a generator, which converts the mechanical energy of the rotating turbine into electrical energy.

G:\Staff\Shaed\PECO\Projects\oystrcretknuclcar\R M R\rptF 2-1 McLaren/Hart, lacl

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation February28, 2000 Saltwater from Barnegat Bay is used to cool the steam exhausted from the turbine and to condense the steam back into water. This condensed high-purity water is returned from the main station condensers to the heat source to be converted into steam again to continue to drive the turbine.

2.1.2 Eastern Portion of the Property The eastern portion of the property is heavily vegetated and largely undeveloped. JCP&L/GPUN have used the property in the following manner:

1) To deposit excavated/dredged soil and sediment during the construction and periodic maintenance dredging of the Intake and Discharge Canals for the OCNGS.

2) As a source of topsoil for re-vegetation projects on and around the OCNGS.

3) As an Environmental Laboratory (in buildings formerly located on the Property) from 1975-1988.

4) As a location for environmental monitoring activities including continuous air monitoring, groundwater monitoring and the planting of gardens to provide vegetables for radiological analyses.

The Barge Unloading Facility, located along the south shore of Oyster Creek adjacent to U.S.

Route 9, has been used to deliver large equipment components, such as the turbine rotor, to the OCNGS. This facility is currently used on an intermittent basis by the Ocean County Engineering Department to load reef construction materials (concrete and used tires) onto vessels for delivery to artificial reefs in the Atlantic Ocean.

2-2 McLaren/Hart, I~

G:\S~(f\Sh&ed\PECO\Projecs\oysw~creekn~cIear\RMR'rptF G:\kSta ftShaued\PECO\ProjczLs\oystercreek nuclýa\RM R*'pt F 2-2 McLaren/Hart, I1&2

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation February 28, 2000 2.2 SrrE HISTORY 2.2.1 Western Portion of Property The western portion of the property was purchased by Jersey Central Power and Light Company (JCP&L), a subsidiary of GPU, from Norman C. and Elsie H. Finninger (husband and wife) on January 28, 1961. This property is approximately 132-acres in size and is located in Lacey township as a portion of Block 1001, Lot 4. Approximately 12.01 acres of land located in Ocean Township, along the south bank of Oyster Creek (Block 41, Lot 43) was also purchased as part of that transaction. Prior to construction of the OCNGS, the site was vacant and undeveloped.

JCP&L initiated construction of OCNGS in December 1963. Commercial operations began on December 23, 1969. The OCNGS was operated by JCP&L until 1980 when GPU Nuclear, Inc.

(GPUN), another subsidiary of GPU, assumed responsibility for operations. GPUTN continues to operate the OCNGS for JCP&L, doing business as GPU Energy.

2.2.2 Eastern Portion of Property The eastern portion of the property was purchased by JCP&L from NOR-RU-EL, Inc. on June 28, 1996. The 548.07 property is located in Lacey Township as Block 100, Lots 1-20 & 20.01 and Ocean Township as Block 63, Lot 7. Prior to that purchase, the portion of the property located in Lacey Township (536.03 acres) was used for raising beef cattle while the 12.04 acre parcel located in Ocean Township was undeveloped.

JCP&L purchased an undeveloped 25.25-acre parcel (Lacey Township Block 101, Lot) located adjacent to the north side of the Finninger Farm Property, from Mayer Construction Company on March 8, 1971.

As part of the land acquisition for the construction of the intake canal for the OCNGS, JCP&L purchased a 2.01 acre undeveloped parcel (Lacey Township Block 138, Lot 2) from Charles R. Pearl MR\rptF 2-3 McLaren/Hart, I~i1 G:\Staff\Shared\PECO\Projeczs\oystrrcrecknocleax\R G:\Staff\Shwed\ PECO\Projmtskoysterc=k n=lý\R MR\rpt F 2-3 McLaren/Hart, IAa

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek NuclearGenerating Station February 28, 2000 and Marie D. Pearl on January 18, 1966, and an undeveloped lot comprising of 1.01 acres (Lacey Township Block 139, Lot 11) from Wilnor Realty Company on November 11, 1965.

2.3 ENVIRONMENTAL SETMING 2.3.1 Climate The climate in the coastal region is dominated by the Atlantic Ocean. In the autumn and early winter months, the coastal region will experience warmer temperatures than the interior regions of the state.

During the spring months, ocean breezes keep temperatures along the coast cooler. Coastal storms are most frequent between October and April. Tropical storms and hurricanes are also a special concern along the coast.

2.3.2 Wind During 1998, wind direction frequencies were normal. Winds were from the northwest, west-northwest, west and southwest. Seasonal winds, including the sea breeze circulation, exist during the late spring through early autumn season. Resulting winds during a sea breeze are from the south and southeast. The number of occurrences of this thermally induced wind was reduced due to the strong west-southwesterly flow during the summer months.

2.3.3 Temperature The annual average temperature for 1998 was 54.93 degrees Fahrenheit. The highest average temperature was recorded in July and the lowest average temperature was recorded in February. The historical average annual temperature is 53 degrees. Seven of the twelve months experienced below normal temperatures, although differences from the historical average were small.

G :\Staff\Shared\PECO\ProjecLu\oystercremknuclcw\RM R\rpIF 2-4 McLaren/Hart, l~r-

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek NuclearGenerating Station February28, 2000 2.3.4 Precipitation In 1998, Oyster Creek experienced above normal precipitation. The annual total precipitation amount was 54.24 inches. This amount is more than the average amount of 41.50 inches. The highest amount of precipitation was recorded in May while the lowest amount was recorded in September. During the first six months, precipitation was greater than the monthly historical value.

2.4 GEOLOGY/HYDROGEOLOGY 2.4.1 Regional Geology Site geology has been extensively investigated with a long history of core sampling, soil boring investigations and excavation work that began with a preliminary survey in 1960. Surface elevation in the vicinity of plant structures is 23 feet mean sea level. A stratigraphy typical of the Atlantic Coastal Plain physiographic province is found at OCNGS.

The Coastal Plain Physiographic Province is characterized by beds of sand, gravel, clay, and marl dipping gently to the southeast. In descending order, from ground surface are found the following:

The Cape May (Pleistocene age 2 million years before present), Cohansey Formation (Miocene age 25 million years before present) and the Kirkwood Formation (Miocene age) Formation.

The Cape May Formation has an average thickness of 40 feet and is comprised of a light gray to tan, medium to fine sand, with trace silt and coarse sand (Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 1982). It is poorly compacted and commonly contains a thin, shallow black clay bed in coastal areas (New Jersey Department of Conservation and Economic Development, 1969).

The Cohansey Formation lies beneath the Cape May Formation. Its average thickness is 60 feet and is primarily composed of a red-brown and tan, medium to fine sand, trace silt, coarse sand, and some coarse to fine gravel. Lenticular beds of clay are sometimes found and the lower portions are densely compacted (Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 1982).

G:\Staff\Shard\PECO\Projecis\oystercr

.. nucleaw\R MR\rt F 2-5 McLaren/lart, IiA&cf

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation February 28, 2000 The Cohansey is underlain by the Kirkwood Formation consisting of light gray to yellow-brown micaceous ilmenitic, lignitic, very fine to fine grained quartz sand and some coarse to fine gravel.

(New Jersey Department of Conservation and Economic Development, 1969). It is densely compacted and extends from a depth of about 100 feet to at least 250 feet below the surface (JCP&L).

2.4.2 Regional Hydrogeology Both the Cape May and Cohansey Formations contain unconfined aquifers. An artesian aquifer exists in the Kirkwood Formation. Occasional clay layers in the Cape May and the Cohansey cause slightly artesian conditions in localized areas, but these two formations communicate hydrogeologically. A clay layer separates the Kirkwood from the Cohansey. The clay layer acts as a confining layer and artesian heads as high as 22 feet above mean sea level have been found in the Kirkwood (JCP&L, 1972).

On a regional scale, groundwater flows generally to the southeast toward the coast, following the trend of the coastal basin sedimentary bedding. Water supplies in the area are derived from wells.

These wells are generally 60 to 70 or more feet in depth, penetrating at least one clay boundary to preclude contamination from salt-water intrusion or leachate from the many septic tanks in the area.

The deeper wells penetrate the Kirkwood aquifer and yield higher quality water. There are also many shallower wells that provide domestic water supplies, mainly for irrigation of lawns (Woodward-Clyde Consultants, 1984).

2.4.3 Site Geology There are five stratigraphic units found at the Site (exclusive of fill). These include (in descending order):

• Fill Material;

" The Cape May Formation;

• The Upper Clay; G::\Staff\Shard\PECO\ProjmEs\oystercreck nuclear\ RM R\rpt F 2-6 McLaren/Hart, I

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station February 28, 2000

" The Upper Cohansey Formation;

• The Lower Clay; and,

• The Kirkwood Formation Descriptions of these formations presented below are based on boring logs from this and previous investigations, and previous reports; principally the "Geotechnical Study, Proposed Radwaste and Off-Gas Building" (February 1975), the "Phase II Report, Ground Water Monitoring System" (March 1984), and additional boring log review.

FILL

==

Description:==

The fill is a tan, medium to fine grained sand with trace to some silt. No evidence of soft sediment structures such as lenses of silt or coarse sand. The density is typically less than the Cape May.

Thickness: The fill thickness from soil boring logs varies from 0 to 38 feet below ground surface (bgs) (el. 23 ft. to el. -15 ft). The maximum thickness of fill was in the borings closest to the Turbine Building. The maximum fill thickness must be 53 feet (el. -30 vs. surface elevation of +23 feet) in the vicinity of the Reactor Building. This is based on the depth of the excavation for these structures (no boring log was found indicating 53 feet of fill).

CAPE MAY FORMATION

==

Description:==

The Cape May Formation is the youngest formation encountered at OCNGS. It is described as a light gray to tan medium to fine grained sand with trace to some silt and occasional coarse sand. It is generally poorly compacted.

Thickness: The Cape May Formation in the study area varies from 0 feet to 21.5 feet thick. The variation is largely due to the amount of material excavated and replaced by fill as part of construction activities. The thickness of the Cape May Formation in undisturbed areas is generally in the range of 17 to 20 feet (presuming a ground surface elevation of 23 feet).

G: \StaffShared\ PECO\Projects\oystercreck nuclca\ RM R\rpt F2-Mc 2-7 McLaren/Hart, rn/aIi7 Qc7

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station February28, 2000 UPPER CLAY

Description:

The description is as follows: stiff to hard, gray, plastic organic clay containing inclusions (also described as lenses or partings) of dense fine sand with trace to some organic silt.

The deposits of fine sand within the Upper Clay layer have high relative densities and are believed to be in the form of lenses or inclusions. Some boring logs describe the "sand lenses" as the dominant feature over a 1 to 5 feet thickness. In the area southwest of the Turbine Building, approximately half of the total thickness of the Upper Clay, is silty sand (not clay).

Thickness: The Upper Clay is typically on the order of 15 to 18 feet thick (where not impacted by excavation). Early reports suggest a thinning trend from east to west. This trend is best observed by reviewing information from outside the study area, specifically boring logs from the western portion of the property and preliminary data from the Route 9 area (eastern portion of the property).

These data suggest the Upper Clay may be as thick as 25 feet east of Route 9 to 0 feet at the western portion of the property. The lack of a map identifying the locations of these borings makes correlation difficult and very speculative.

COHANSEY FORMATION

==

Description:==

Yellow-brown or tan, medium to fine sand with trace to some silt. Also contains pockets of coarse fine sand, and occasional gravel and pockets of sandy silt. The lower portion of the Cohansey Formation was deposited in a beach or barrier bar environment, while the upper portion is a fluvial deposit.

Thickness: The thickness of the Cohansey is estimated to be approximately 60-75 feet. There is insufficient data to identify a trending of the thickness of this formation beneath the Facility.

F 2-8 McLaren/Hart, I~t~

G:\S~fi\Shared\PECO\Proj~cxs\oyswrcreekn~ciear\RMR\rpi G:\Smaff\Shared\PECO\Projecut\oysiercreek nucleaA\R M R\rpi F 2-8 McLaren/Hart, IMc

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation February28, 2000 Lower Clay

Description:

The Lower Clay is a dense gray medium to fine sand containing a trace to some organic silt and layers or inclusions of very stiff to hard gray organic clay.

Thickness: The thickness of the Lower Clay is on the order of 10 to 20 feet. Again, there is limited thickness information on this formation. The majority of the borings reviewed for this study terminate above the Lower Clay.

KIRKWOOD FORMATION

==

Description:==

This is a medium to fine sand with trace silt. Casagrande and Casagrande (1968) reported two hard clay layers within the Kirkwood Formation at elevations less than -198 feet mean sea level.

Thickness: Unknown in the study area.

Construction activities have impacted stratigraphy at OCNGS. Construction activities of the major structures at the site (Reactor Building, Turbine Building, Old Radwaste building, New Radwaste Building, Intake/Discharge Structure and tunnel systems) included extensive soil removal for the construction of foundations and associated structures. Foundation depths are shown with respect to site buildings on Figure 2.4.3.1.

Based on Figure 2.4.3. 1, construction activities have caused the removal of the Cape May and the Upper Clay from various parts of OCNGS. The Cape May Formation and the Upper Clay Formation were removed during the excavation of 7 of the 8 major structures at OCNGS. In addition, the Cohansey Formation was partially removed during construction of the Reactor Building, the Intake Structure and the Discharge Tunnels. Cross sections depicting the current stratigraphy with respect to current OCNGS structures are provided in Figure 2.4.3.2.

G:\Stfafhaed\PECO\Projects\oystercrck nuclear\ RM R\rpt F 2-9 McLaren/Hart,1W

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station February28, 2000 2.4.4 Site Hydrogeology Extensive hydrogeologic investigations have been conducted at the site since 1983/1984 (Woodward Clyde Consultants, 1984). The results of the recent site investigations corroborate the earlier studies as summarized below.

Water level measurements from wells screened in the Cape May Formation (shallow wells) and wells screened in the Cohansey Formation (intermediate wells) indicate downward vertical gradient.

The general groundwater flow direction in both Formations is from areas of higher ground elevation towards the canal, which acts as a local groundwater discharge point. The influence of the canal on groundwater flow decreases with distance from the canal.

Ground Surface el. 23' Cape May and/or Fill Canal / _ el. 6 el. 0' .Water

. . Table el. -14' C -ohansey I.

NOT TO SCALE The site hydrogeology is dominated by the excavation of the Upper Clay. The construction of the Reactor Building, Turbine Building, Intake & Discharge Structures, etc. resulted in the excavation of the Upper Clay. The excavation of the Upper Clay has resulted in a hydraulic connection between the Cape May Formation and the Cohansey Formation. East of the Reactor Building the water table is several feet above the Upper Clay. West of the Turbine Building, the water table is several feet below the top of the Upper Clay (Figure 2.4.3.2).

G:\Staff\Shared\ PECO\Projects\oystercreeknuclear\R M R\rptF 2-10 McLaren/Hart, 1AnD

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station February28, 2000 The groundwater flow direction within Cape May Formation and, at a minimum the upper portion of the Cohansey Formation has been reversed. Groundwater in both the Cape May and the Cohansey formerly flowed east, towards Bamegat Bay. However, groundwater in the vicinity of the plant now flows west toward the Canal. A groundwater trough has been created in areas in which the Upper Clay has been excavated. The elevation of the water table is now less than average elevation of the Upper Clay in the area west of Route 9. A groundwater contour map is provided as Figure 2.4.4.1.

2-11 McLaren/Hart, mU G:\Staft\SharCd\PECO\ProjcC(s\oysWrCreCkfluCkaI~RMR\TpIF G:\Staff'Shared\ PECO\Projccts\oystercrecknucl1at\R MR\rpiF 2-11 McLaren/Hart, IlnUel

Site OysterInvestigation - Radiological Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation February28, 2000 3.0 RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING Based on document review and interviews with GPU personnel, OCGNS conducts radiological monitoring via two processes. The first process is a comprehensive radiological environmental monitoring program (REMP) to monitor radiation and radioactive materials around the Facility. The second method includes independent onsite soil, sediment and groundwater sampling events. This section of the report will detail information associated with each sampling event as reported in the most recent (1998) REMP Report and the other independent sampling events.

3.1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONIrORING PROGRAM GPUN conducts a REMP to monitor radiation and radioactive materials in the environment around the OCNGS. The REMP program evaluates the relationship between radioactive material released to the environment as gaseous and liquid effluents and resultant radiation doses to individuals. The monitoring program also serves as an effective method of monitoring the potential migration of any radiologically contaminated soil or groundwater from the OCNGS to the off-site environment. The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has established regulatory guidelines, which contain acceptable monitoring practices. The OCNGS REMP was designed on the basis of these regulatory guides along with the NRC Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position on Environmental Monitoring. The OCNGS REMP meets or exceeds all of these guidelines. The REMP was initiated in 1966, prior to the operation of the OCNGS, in order to obtain information on background levels of radiation and radioactive materials in the environment. Summaries and interpretations of the REMP have been published semiannually from 1969-1985 and annually since 1986. Additional information concerning releases of radioactive materials to the environment is contained in the Semi-Annual and Annual Effluent Release Reports submitted to the NRC.

Radioactive materials considered in the REMP are normally present in the environment, either naturally or as a result of non-OCNGS activities such as prior atmospheric nuclear weapons testing, medical industry activities, and the 1986 Chernobyl accident. Samples of air, surface water, groundwater, clams, sediment, fish, crabs and vegetables are collected and compared to background measurements to evaluate any impact of OCGNS operations. Samples are analyzed for radioactivity G \Staf\Shaied\PECO\ProjeCtSOySterCreeknucieuaA

.RMR~ptF 31M~rn~r, 3-1 McLaren/Hart, Inc.

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation February 28, 2000 including tritium, gross beta, and gamma-emitting radionuclides. In addition, external penetrating radiation dose measurements are also made using thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) in the vicinity of the OCNGS.

More than 40,000 environmental samples have been collected during the 33 years that the REMP has been implemented. The results of that effort have clearly demonstrated that any radionuclide contamination of the on-site soil or groundwater has not impacted the off-site environment. There are only barely detectable concentrations of radionuclides in the off-site environment that can be attributed to routine effluents from the OCNGS, and those concentrations are a small fraction of any existing or proposed, State or Federal, limits or cleanup standards. Independent monitoring programs conducted by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) and the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission have confirmed these results. The results of this offsite Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program satisfy any requirements for a Baseline Ecological Evaluation and Ecological Risk Assessment as specified by the Technical Requirements for Site Remediation (N.J.A.C. 7:26E).

The 1998 Radiological Environmental Report is provided in Appendix A of this report, however the results are summarized in the following:

• During 1998, 638 samples were taken from the aquatic, atmospheric and terrestrial environments around the OCNGS. A total of 893 analyses were performed on these samples. TLDs were also utilized to provide 170 direct radiation dose measurements. Forty groundwater samples, taken primarily from local municipal water supplies and on-site wells, were collected and eighty analyses were performed on those samples.

• OCNGS specific radionuclides were not detected in any samples of air, vegetables, fish, clams, crabs, or off-site groundwater.

SThe results of the analyses of 28 samples collected from the on-site groundwater monitoring well network showed that tritium was the only detectable plant specific radionuclide. The highest tritium concentration observed in these on-site wells (840 picoCuries per liter (pCifL)) was only G.\Staff\Shawed\PECO\Projectsoystercrcmkrnuclear\RAR\rptF 3-2 32M ~ rn~ rIc Inc.

McLaren[Hart,

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation February28, 2000 4.2 percent of the USEPA drinking water limit of 20,000 pCi/L. An increase in the frequency of occurrence of tritium in the on-site monitoring wells, when compared to prior years, can be attributed to an increase in the amount of tritium in airborne effluents from the OCNGS during 1997 and 1998, thought to be associated with control rod blade leakage. This source of tritium was significantly reduced during the 17R outage in the autumn of 1998.

" Off-site REMP groundwater monitoring during 1998 demonstrated that, as in previous years, the radioactive effluents associated with the OCNGS did not have any measurable effects on off-site drinking water.

• Minute levels of Cesium-137 (Cs-137) detected in aquatic sediment samples were attributable in part to past effluents from the OCNGS. This is the second consecutive annual reporting period during which Cobalt-60 (Co-60) was not detected in any environmental media.

• The amount of radioactivity released in effluents from the OCNGS during 1998 was the fifth smallest in the history of Facility operation. The predominant radionuclide in gaseous and liquid effluents was tritium. The maximum radiation dose to the public attributable to 1998 effluents was only 0.15 percent of applicable regulatory limit.

• During 1998, the maximum total body dose potentially received by an individual from liquid and airborne effluents was conservatively estimated to be 0.017 millirems. The total body dose to the surrounding population from liquid and airborne effluents was conservatively calculated to be 0.1 person-rem. This is approximately 12.3 million times lower than the population dose attributable to natural background sources.

Although the 1999 REMP has not been published, McLaren/Hart obtained groundwater monitoring data for 1999. In 1999, a total of 30 groundwater samples were collected from the onsite monitoring well network in 1999. Monitoring well locations are shown in Figure 3.1.1. Tritium was detected in 13 samples at concentrations ranging from 140 pCi/L to 580 pCi/L. All concentrations are below USEPA Drinking Water Standards. Groundwater analytical results are summarized in Table 3.1.1.

G.\StaflfSharcdP ECO\Projetsoystercrmknucli\RMR\rpptF 3-3 McLaren/Hart, Inc.

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station February 28, 2000 3.2 ONSITE SAMPLING EVENTS OCNGS has performed on-site soil, groundwater, sediment and surface water sampling to evaluate potential radiological impacts to the environment. These events are associated with various construction activities, miscellaneous releases from tanks or related appurtenances and investigations in conjunction with GPU's request to defer radiological remedial activites until decommissioning.

Based on document review and interviews with facility personnel, the following sampling events were conducted at OCNGS.

3.2.1 March 1981 - New Radwaste Building - Tank Leak In March 1981 a tank containing radiologically contaminated water located in the New Radwaste Building (NRW) overflowed to the floor. The water was contained in the isolated tank vault. After a period of time the water began to seep out of the building through the walls on the west and north side. In order to evaluate potential radiological impacts of the seepage, a total of 15 soil samples were collected north and west of the NRW in the area of the seepage from ground surface to approximately 17.5 feet below ground surface (bgs) and analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides.

Approximate sample locations are shown in Figure 3.2.1.

Concentrations of Co-60 ranged from below laboratory detection limits to 1.4 picoCuries per gram (pCi/g). Concentrations of Cs-137 ranged from below laboratory detection limits to 2.4 pCi/g.

Sample concentrations were below the NRC decommissioning guidelines of 3.8 pCi/g for Co-60 and 11.0 pCi/g for Cs-137. Table 3.2.1 summarizes all sampling information and results.

3.2.2 October 1982 - Old Radwaste Building - Waste Surge Tank Release In October 1982, a release of radiologically contaminated water was reported from the waste surge tank located on the northern side of the Old Radwaste (ORW) Building located on the central portion of OCNGS. In order to evaluate the radiological impact, soil samples were collected on four separate events. Approximate sample locations are located on Figure 3.2.2.

3-4 McLarenll-Iart, Inc.

Gs~Srif1\Shared\PECO\P~ojcystercreckrwck\RR\xptE G:\S ta \S har ed\ECO\Proj ectsýýystercr eeknuclear\RMR~rtFc 3-4 McLaren/Hart, Inc.

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station February28, 2000 October 7, 1982 On October 7, 1982, a total of 12 samples were collected from ground surface to 3.5 feet bgs south of the ORW waste surge tank to evaluate the radiological impacts from the release. Elevated concentrations of gamma emitting radionuclides were detected in all 12 samples. Concentrations of Co-60 ranged from 0.674 to 205.46 pCi/g. Concentrations of CS-137 ranged from 1.156 pCi/g to 337.87 pCi/g. A total of 8 samples exceeded the NRC decommissioning guidelines for Co-60 and 8 samples exceeded the NRC decommissioning guidelines for Cs-137. Table 3.2.2 summarizes all sampling information and results.

October 13, 1982 On October 13, 1982, a total of 12 samples were collected from approximately 0.5 feet to 5 feet bgs south of the ORW waste surge tank inside and outside the berm to further delineate radiological impacts from the waste surge tank release. In addition, one sample was collected from ground surface to 1.5 feet below the ORW surge tank pipe. Elevated concentrations of gamma emitting radionuclides were detected in all 13 samples. Concentrations of Co-60 ranged from 1.15 pCi/g to 163 pCi/g. Concentrations of Cs-137 ranged from 4.16 pCi/g to 192 pCi/g. A total of 9 samples exceeded the NRC decommissioning guidelines for Co-60 and 7 samples exceeded the NRC decommissioning guidelines for Cs-137. Table 3.2.2 summarizes all sampling information and results.

October 27, 1982 On October 27, 1982, a total of 13 samples were collected from ground surface to 7.5 feet bgs south of the ORW waste surge tank inside and outside the berm to further delineate radiological impacts from the waste surge tank release. In addition, one sample was collected from 8 feet bgs below the ORW surge tank pipe located outside the berm. Elevated concentrations of Cs-137 were detected in all samples and Co-60 was detected in 9 of 13 samples. Concentrations of Co-60 ranged from below laboratory detection limits to 47.387 pCi/g. Concentrations of Cs-137 ranged from 0.4814 pCi/g to 66.695 pCi/g. A total of 5 samples exceeded the NRC decommissioning guidelines for Co-G:\StafYShared\PECO\Pmjects\oystercreccknuclca\RMR\rptF 3-5 McLaren/Hiart, Inc.

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation February28, 2000 60 and 6 samples exceeded the NRC decommissioning guidelines for Cs-137. Table 3.2.2 summarizes all sampling information and results.

October 31, 1982 On October 31, 1982, a total of 42 samples were collected from ground surface to approximately 12 feet bgs east, west and south of the ORW waste surge tank to further delineate radiological impacts from the waste surge tank release. Elevated concentrations of gamma emitting radionuclides were detected in all samples. Concentrations of Co-60 ranged from 0.074 pCi/g to 79.807 pCi/g.

Concentrations of Cs-137 ranged from 0.094 pCi/g to 125.78 pCi/g. A total of 4 samples exceeded the NRC decommissioning guidelines for Co-60 and 4 samples exceeded the NRC decommissioning guidelines for Cs-137. Table 3.2.2 summarizes all sampling information and results.

3.2.3 October 1982 - Old Radwaste Building - Truck Ramp Paving During the period October 10-11, 1982 a truck ramp was under construction at the ORW. As part of construction activities, soil was removed. In order to evaluate potential radiological impacts of the excavated soil, a total of 55 surface soil samples (0-0.5 feet bgs) were collected from east, west and north of the ORW for gamma emitting radionuclides. Sample locations are shown in Figure 3.2.3.

Concentrations of Co-60 ranged from below laboratory detection limits to 40 pCi/g. Concentrations of Cs-137 ranged from below laboratory detection limits to 28.366 pCi/g. A total of 9 samples exceeded the NRC decommissioning guidelines for Co-60 and 3 samples exceeded the NRC decommissioning guidelines for Cs-137. Table 3.2.3 summarizes all sampling information and results.

3.2.4 June 1985 - Proposed Emergency Safe Shutdown Facility (ESSF) Location On June 1, 1985 and April 29, 1986 soil samples were collected to evaluate proposed locations for a new building to be constructed known as the ESSF (ultimately, the building was never built). As G \Staft\Sharcd\PECO\Projects~oystcrcrmeknuclear\RMRhrptF 3-6 McLaren/Hart, Inc.

Site Oyster Investigation Creek Nuclear - Radiological GeneratingStation February28, 2000 part of potential construction activities, soil would be removed for offsite disposal. In order to evaluate potential radiological impacts, a total of 84 soil samples were collected from the surface (0-6 inches) and analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides. Sample locations are shown in Figure 3.2.4.

Concentrations of Co-60 ranged from below laboratory detection limits to 5.29 pCi/g.

Concentrations of Cs-137 ranged from below laboratory detection limits to 4.6 pCi/g. One sample exceeded the NRC standard for Co-60 at a concentration of 5.29 pCi/g. All Cs-137 concentrations were below the NRC standard. Table 3.2.4 summarizes all sampling information and results.

3.2.5 March 1991 - Condensate Storage Tank - Bottom Leakage In March 1991, a leakage of radioactive contaminated water was reported from the bottom of the Condensate Storage Tank (CST) located on the western portion of the Facility. In order to evaluate the radiological impact, a total of 35 soil samples were collected from ground surface to 7 feet bgs from around and below the CST and analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides. In addition, one water sample was collected from the CST and analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides. Sample locations are shown in Figure 3.2.5.

Concentrations of Co-60 in soil ranged from below laboratory detection limits to 20 pCi/g. A total of two samples exceeded the NRC standard for Co-60 at a concentrations of 20 pCi/g and 6.81 pCi/g.

The concentration of Co-60 in the water sample was reported at 30.9 pCi/L. Table 3.2.5 summarizes all soil and CST water sampling information and results.

3.2.6 April 1991 - CST Yard Spill A spill from the CST discharge valve in the CST yard located on the western portion of OCNGS was reported in April 1991. In order to evaluate the radiological impact two surface (0-6 inches bgs) samples were collected from the CST Yard. One soil sample was collected in the collection pit G \Stafl\Shaied\PECO\Pojects\oystercknucIearRMR\rptF 3-7 McLaren/Hart, Inc.

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station February 28, 2000 under the transfer pipe and one sample was collected in the CST Yard at the tank discharge valve.

Samples were analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides. Sample locations are shown in Figure 3.2.6.

Elevated concentrations above NRC decommissioning guidelines were reported in both samples.

The soil sample collected at the discharge valve exhibited a Co-60 concentration of 157 pCi/g while the other sample exhibited a concentration of 22.2 pCi/g. Table 3.2.6 summarizes all soil sampling information and results.

3.2.7 August 1992 - Proposed Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) Concrete Pad Construction On August 6, 1992, soil samples were collected to evaluate the proposed location for the construction of a concrete pad at the ISFSI area. As part of potential construction activities, soil would be removed for offsite disposal. In order to evaluate potential radiological impacts for disposal purposes, a total of 28 soil samples were collected from the surface (0-6 inches) and analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides. Sample locations are shown in Figure 3.2.7.

Concentrations of Co-60 ranged from below laboratory detection limits to 0.0996 pCi/g.

Concentrations of Cs-137 ranged from below laboratory detection limits to 0.211 pCi/g. All concentrations were below the NRC decommissioning guidelines. Table 3.2.7 summarizes all sampling information and results.

3.2.8 August 1997 -Upland Confined Disposal Facility Investigation The Upland Confined Disposal Facility (CDF) is a portion of the site located east of U.S. Route 9, on the Finninger Farm Property, that has been used for the deposition of dredged material resulting from periodic maintenance dredging in the intake and discharge canals. Maintenance dredging was conducted in 1978, 1984 and 1997.

3-8 McLaren/Hart, Inc.

G:\Sr~fTShar.d\PECO'Projects\~ysiercre.kn.~cIc.r\RMR\rptF G :\SratiOS hared*PECO\P rojects\oyst ercree knucicar\VR-MRrptF 3-8 McLaren/tHart, Inc.

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation February28, 2000 Prior to the most recent dredging project (1997), an investigation of the soil at the CDF was conducted. All samples were collected in August of 1997, and represent sediment from previous dredging projects. Eighty-six samples were collected and analyzed for the gamma-emitting nuclides.

Only one of the 86 samples detected Co-60 at 0.075 pCi/g. Forty of the 86 samples detected Cs-137, with a maximum concentration of 0.20 pCi/g. All detections of both nuclides were well below the NRC decommissioning guidelines. Sample information and results are summarized in Table 3.2.8.

Additionally, prior to the 1997 dredging project, nine sediment cores were collected from the Forked River in areas that were to be dredged and deposited in the CDF. For both Co-60 and Cs-137, eight of nine samples exhibited detectable concentrations. All concentrations for both nuclides were well below the NRC decommissioning guidelines; the maximum concentrations for gamma emitting radionuclides were 0.088 pCi/g and 0.27 pCi/g, respectively.

3.2.9 September 1996 - Condensate Transfer Overboard Discharge Event On September 17, 1996, approximately 148,800 gallons of condensate water was discharged to the Circulating Water discharge tunnel via the Fire Protection System, and ultimately released to the Oyster Creek discharge canal.

Following the release, an investigation of potentially impacted surface water, sediments and biota (clams) was conducted. Sampling locations are provided in Figure 3.2.9. In surface water, tritium levels in the condenser intake were slightly elevated (330 pCi/L). The maximum tritium concentration observed in surface water samples (16,000 pCi/L) did not exceed the USEPA drinking water limit (20,000 pCi/L), and USNRC effluent limitations were not exceeded. Cobalt-60 was the only gamma emitting radionuclide to be detected in surface water, detected in only one of 23 samples, downstream of the 30" header (2.0 pCi/L). Concentration levels of Co-60 in all sediment samples from the Bamegat Bay and the intake canal were less than the limit of detection. In Oyster Creek sediment, Co-60 was detected in 4 of 16 samples. The maximum sediment concentration was 0.056 pCi/g, well below the NRC decommissioning guideline of 3.8 pCi/L. All Co-60 concentrations were less than or equal to those observed in REMP samples prior to the release.

Clams in Barnegat Bay were also sampled and determined to be non-detect for Co-60; this was Gi\SLaff\Shued\PECO\Projects\oystercrftknuclw\RMR\rptF 3-9 McLaren/Hart, Inc.

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation February28, 2000 consistent with previous REMP sampling results. Tritium was not found in clams collected near the mouth of Oyster Creek, however, low levels attributable to background were found in clams from Stouts Creek to the north and Manahawkin Bay to the south. Sample information and results are summarized in Table 3.2.9.

3.2.10 August 1999 - Old Radwaste Building Concrete Pad - Spill Event In August 1999, a release of radiologically contaminated water was reported from a container of mop water located at the ORW. In order to evaluate the radiological impact, three soil samples were collected and analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides. Soil sampling locations are shown in Figure 3.2.10.

Concentrations of Co-60 ranged from 1.28 pCi/g to 10.2 pCi/g. Concentrations of Cs-137 ranged from 0.64 pCi/g to 6.04 pCi/g. Two samples were above the NRC decommissioning guideline for Co-60. Concentrations of Cs-137 were below the NRC decommissioning guideline. Table 3.2.10 summarizes all sampling information and results.

3.2.11 Non-Radiological ISRA Investigation As part of the due diligence associated with the sale of OCNGS, as well as to anticipate the potential requirements of compliance with the Industrial Site Recovery Act (ISRA),URS Greiner Woodward Clyde (URSGWC) was retained to perform a Site Investigation (SI) and Remedial Investigation (RI) for non-radiological concerns conducted at OCNGS in August, September, November and December 1999, and January 2000. The scope of work for the SI/RI was based on information obtained from a Preliminary Assessment - Non-Radiological submitted to the NJDEP in December 1999. As part of the SI/RI, soil, sediment, groundwater and surface water samples were collected and submitted offsite for non-radiological laboratory analysis. In order to screen the samples prior to offsite analyses, they were analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides.

Approximately 231 soil samples were collected throughout OCNGS and analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides. A total of 5 sediment samples and 1 groundwater sample was collected and analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides. All sample locations are provided in Figure 3.2.11.

Gý\Staf\Shared\PECO\Projects\oysterreekrnuclearRMR\Rad S1Rev231QcaellrIc 3-10 McLaren/Hart, Inc.

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station February28, 2000 Concentrations of Co-60 ranged from below laboratory detection limits to 2.21 pCi/g.

Concentrations of Cs-137 ranged from below laboratory detection limits to 33 pCi/g. Of the 231 soil samples, only one sample exhibited concentrations above NRC decommissioning guidelines.

Sample information and results are summarized in Table 3.2.11.

Sediment samples exhibited concentrations below laboratory detection limits for Co-60.

Concentrations of Cs-137 ranged from below laboratory detection limits to 0.0775 pCi/g. All concentrations were below NRC decommissioning guidelines. Sample information and results are summarized in Table 3.2.11.

3.2.12 Miscellaneous Sampling Events Miscellaneous sampling events have occurred on six separate occasions. In order to evaluate the radiological impact, soil samples were collected. Each miscellaneous sampling event is provided below. Sample locations are provided on Figure 3.2.12. A summary of sampling information and analytical results is provided in Table 3.2.12.

March 21, 1986 On March 21, 1986 soil between the Main Fuel Oil Storage Tank (MFOST) and the railroad airlock was removed during construction activities. This area is located on the eastern portion of the OCNGS south of the ORW. In order to evaluate potential radiological impacts of the excavated soil, one soil sample was collected from the surface and analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides.

Analytical results indicate elevated concentrations of gamma emitting radionuclides. Co-60 was detected above NRC decommissioning guidelines at a concentration of 8.54 pCi/g. Cs-137 was detected at a concentration of 2.68 pCi/g below NRC decommissioning guidelines.

3-11 McLaren/Hart, Inc.

G:\SiamSha~ed\PECO\Projects\cystc~cretkn~cIw\RMR\rptF G:\Staff\Shar *d\PECO\Projcctsoystercrftknuclea\RRrptF 3-11 McLaren/Hart, Inc.

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station February28, 2000 June/July 1990 Soils from the OCNGS plant area were placed on the firing range parking lot, located on the adjacent Forked River Site (not a part of this transaction), during an excavation project in late June and early July of 1990. These soils contained low levels of Co-60 and Cs-137 at the time that they were placed on the parking area. Co-60 and Cs-137 concentrations in 14 soil samples, collected in October of 1990, ranged from less than the lower limit of detection to 0.200 pCi/g and 0.370 pCi/g, respectively. These concentrations are minute fractions of the NRC decommissioning guidelines. The soils were removed from the parking lot and returned to the OCNGS plant area in December of 1990. In order to verify that there was no residual plant specific radioactive material in this area, the firing range parking lot area was extensively surveyed in July of 1998 as a part of the Forked River property sale process. Fifty-two soil samples were collected from the parking lot and analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides. All soil samples were split with the NJ Department of Environmental Protection to allow for independent radiological analyses.

No Co-60 was detected in these soil samples. Cs-137 was detected in only one sample at a concentration (0.110 pCi/g) consistent with background levels. These results were verified by the independent analyses performed by the NJDEP. In addition to the soil sampling, a moving gamma spectroscopic scan of approximately 25 % of the potentially affected parking lot area was performed. Confirming the results of the soil analyses, no plant related nuclides could be detected with spectroscopic scanning.

March 2, 1992 On March 2, 1992 a leak was reported from the waste surge tank pipe at the ORW. In order to evaluate potential radiological impacts of the excavated soil, one surface soil sample was collected and analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides.

Analytical results indicated elevated concentrations of gamma emitting radionuclides.

Concentrations of CO-60 and Cs-137 were detected above NRC decommissioning guidelines at concentrations of 1100 pCi/g and 390 pCi/g, respectively.

G:\StafT\Shared\PECO\Projects\oystercreeknuclear\RMR\rptF 3-12 McLaren/Hart, Inc.

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation February28, 2000 April 3, 1992 Prior to installing an impermeable liner in the containment around the MFOST, four soil samples were collected to evaluate the extent of any radiological contamination.

Concentrations of CO-60 ranged from 0.247 pCi/g to 0.892 pCi/g. Concentrations of Cs-137 ranged from 0.395 pCi/g to 1.17 pCi/g. All sample concentrations were below NRC decommissioning guidelines.

September 3, 1997 On September 3, 1997, a 30 cubic yard dumpster containing approximately one ton of sand, that may have contained trace amounts of plant specific radionuclides, was inadvertently removed from the OCNGS and transferred to the Ocean County Landfill in Manchester Township, New Jersey.

The soil had been removed from an on-site excavation and was placed in the dumpster during the fall of 1996. Samples of the soil were collected at that time and analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides. The maximum observed Co-60 concentration was 0.028 pCi/g, a minute fraction of the NRC decommissioning guideline of 3.8 pCi/g. The maximum Cs-137 concentration was 0.031 pCi/g, consistent with background levels. The dumpster was moved to a storage area to allow evaluation of alternatives for ultimate disposition and to allow for decay. Approximately one year later it was inadvertently taken to the landfill. Since the removal was unintended, no recent sample results were available. Therefore, to be conservative, GPUN assumed that there was remaining activity in the soil. The owner of the landfill and the NJ Department of Environmental Protection were immediately notified of the event. Representatives of GPUN, the landfill owner, the NJDEP (Dr. Gerald Nicholls) and numerous other State and local officials met at the landfill on September 5, 1997 to discuss this event. It was agreed that although no occupational or public health concerns existed, GPUN would remove the soil that originated at the OCNGS from the landfill. On September 6, 1997, approximately 90 cubic yards of debris and sand was excavated from the area of the landfill where the soil from the OCNGS had been deposited, and delivered G.\Stafl\Shaied\PECO\Projects~oystercrceknuclear\RMR\rptF 3-13 McLaren/Hart, Inc.

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation February28, 2000 to the OCNGS. Subsequent sampling of the retrieved material showed that it was not contaminated with plant specific radionuclides. Independent radiological analyses of the material were also performed by the NJ Bureau of Nuclear Engineering and the NRC. The material was subsequently transferred to a licensed solid waste facility with the concurrence of the NJDEP Division of Solid and Hazardous Waste.

June 30, 1999 On June 30, 1999, OCNGS personnel conducted a search for a potential fuel oil pipeline leak under the floor of the maintenance shop (Building #4). One soil sample was collected and screened for radiological contamination prior to being sent offsite for non-radiological analysis.

Concentrations of Co-60 were not detected above laboratory detection limits and Cs-137 was detected at 0.0366 pCi/g, below the NRC guideline of 11 pCi/g.

July 16, 1999 On June 30, 1999 a diesel fuel spill was reported on the north side of the diesel generating building (DG). In order to screen diesel fuel contaminated soil for radiological impact prior to offsite disposal, one surface soil sample was collected and analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides on July 16, 1999.

Concentrations of Co-60 were not detected above laboratory detection limits and CS-137 was detected at 0.0936, below NRC decommissioning guidelines.

August27, 1999 A salt water system leak was identified under the chiller pad east of the Reactor Building. In order to gain access to the leak soil samples were collected to evaluate potential radiological impacts prior to accessing the leak under the concrete pad. Two soil samples were collected. One sample was 3-14 McLare~Illart, Inc.

G :\Sta ff\Sha redkPECO\Projects*,ystereek nucle~arUkRMRrptF 3-14 McLaren/Hart, Inc.

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station February28, 2000 collected along the eastern wall of the Reactor Building and one sample was collected along the west wall of the excavation. Both samples were analyzed for gamma emitting radionuclides.

Concentrations of Co-60 for the eastern and western excavation wall samples were detected at 0.75 pCi/g and 1.39 pCi/g, respectively. Concentrations of Cs-137 for the eastern and western excavation wall samples were detected at 1.68 pCi/g and 2.04 pCi/g, respectively. Both samples were below NRC decommissioning guidelines.

January 6, 2000 On January 6, 2000, three surface soil samples were collected from three separate soil berms located west of the dilution pump house, the main fuel oil storage tank and the south parking lot at the protected area fence line. As part of the effort to obtain additional site characterization data for the decommissioning planning effort, one surface soil sample was collected from each location and analyzed for Gamma emitting radionuclides.

Gamma emitting radionuclides were not detected above laboratory detection limits.

G.\StafT\ hat d\PECOgarjectoyst erafecknuciearLR.MRkrptF 3-15 McLaren/Hart, Inc.

Site Investigation - Radiological Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation February28, 2000 4.0 LIMITATION OF LIABILITY McLaren/Hart undertakes all assignments in its role as an environmental engineering consulting firm using our professional effort consistent with generally accepted environmental assessment practices.

McLaren/Hart has attempted to assess OCNGS, utilizing reasonably ascertainable information obtained during the site visits, reviews of available historical information; and interviews with employees and other parties believed to be reliable and knowledgeable of the Property.

McLaren/Hart has not conducted its own soil, groundwater, air or other environmental sampling and analysis. Findings presented herein are the are result of the review of documents presented by site personnel and interviews of site personnel.

This report was prepared solely for the use of AmerGen and their Assignees. The use of this report by these parties shall be consistent with the agreed Terms and Conditions of the engagement and no other parties shall rely on the contents of the report without written authorization from McLaren/Hart.

G:\Staff*Shared\PECO\Pw jcm3oystercr ¢knuciewaRMR\rptF 4-1 McLaren/Hart, Inc.

TABLES TPa.rb .1.1 1999 Groundwater Data Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station March 1999 September 1999 Tritium K-40* Ra-226* Th-232* Tritium K-40* Ra-226* Th-232*

Station (pCi/L) (pCi/L) (pCi/L) (pCi/L) (pCi/L) (pCi/L) (pCi/L) (pCi/L)

WW-1 < 130 < 30 < 40 < 7 < 130 < 40 < 60 < 13 WW-2 200 +-90 < 20 < 50 < 8 < 130 < 50 < 80 < 14 WW-3 < 130 < 40 < 60 < 12 160 +/-90 < 20 < 40 < 7 WW-4 140 +-80 < 50 < 80 < 14 < 130 < 20 < 50 < 7 WW-5 380. +/- 100 < 60 < 70 < 14 230 +/- 90 < 40 < 50 < 13 WW-6 < 130 < 40 < 60 < 11 < 130 < 50 < 70 < 13 WW-7 580 +/-100 < 50 < 70 < 13 190 +/-90 < 50 < 70 < 14 WW-9 340 +/- 90 < 40 < 70 < 10 140 +/- 90 < 110 < 120 < 20 WW-10 < 130 < 50 < 70 < 15 < 130 < 19 < 40 < 6 WW-12 280 +/-90 < 40 < 60 < 13 280 +/-90 < 50 < 70 < 14 WW-13 < 130 < 100 < 110 < 20 < 130 < 40 < 60 < 12 WW-14 < 130 < 20 < 40 < 6 < 130 < 40 < 60 <11 WW-15 320 +/-90 28 +/-17 < 40 < 6 < 130 < 50 < 70 < 13 WW-16 340 +/- 90 < 20 < 40 < 6 < 130 < 40 < 60 < 11 WW-17 < 130 < 40 < 50 < 11 < 130 < 19 < 30 < 4 Number of Wells Sampled 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 15 Maximum 580 28 N/A N/A 280 N/A N/A N/A Average 322.5 28 N/A N/A 200 N/A N/A N/A Minimum 140 28 N/A N/A 140 N/A N/A N/A Number of Positive Results 8 1 0 0 5 1 0 0

• Gamma isotopic nuclides.

T[ .-_ ý.L.l March 1981 - New Radwaste Building - Tank Leak 81-YAA-SB-OtXJ2 NKW1A 1/ 1InI-Yt" lehast ot NKW - JY soutt ot rollup door, 4' east ot tDutldng UJI.3 1.31) 81-YAA-SB-0004 NRWID 3/1/81 192-197.5" East of NRW - 35' south of rollup door, 4' east of building <MDA 0.100 81-YAA-SB-0001 NRWID2 3/1/81 197.5-210" East of NRW - 35' south of rollup door, 4' east of building <MDA <NDA 81-YAA-SB-0003 NRWIB 3/1/81 48-64" East of NRW - 35' south of rollup door, 4' east of building 0.18 0.250 81-YAA-SB-0015 NRW1C 3/1/81 96-114" East of NRW - 35' south of rollup door, 4' east of building <MDA <MDA 81-YAA-SB-0005 NRW2A 3/1/81 18-36" North of NRW - 4' East of NW Comer, 4' north of building 0.89 1.60 81-YAA-SB-0006 NRW2B 3/1/81 48-66" North of NRW - 4' East of NW Comer, 4' north of building 0.41 0.610 81-YAA-SB-0007 NRW2C 3/1/81 96-114" North of NRW - 4' East of NW Comer, 4' north of building <MDA <MDA West of NRW - 14.5' north of NW girder of stairwell, 6' West of 81-YAA-SB-0011 NRW4A 3/1/81 18-30" building 1.40 2.40 West of NRW - 6' north of NW girder of stairwell, 6' West of 81-YAA-SB-0012 NRW5A 3/1/81 18-36" building 1.20 2.40 West of NRW - 6' north of NW girder of stairwell, 6' West of 81-YAA-SB-0013 NRW5B 3/1/81 48-66" building 1.20 2.30 81-YAA-SB-0008 NRW3A 3/1/81 18-36" West of NRW - 9' South of NW comer, 6.5' west of building not listed not listed 81-YAA-SB-0014 NRW3B 3/1/81 48-66" West of NRW - 9' South of NW comer, 6.5' west of building 1.30 3.50 81-YAA-SB-0010 NRW3C 3/1/81 96-114" West of NRW - 9' South of NW comer, 6.5' west of building 0.24 0.490 81-YAA-SB-0009 NRW6A 3/1/81 18-30" West of NRW - 9' south of stairwell pad, 5.5' west of building 0.47 0.88 Notes."

Depth - inches below ground surface Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137

< MDA - Below Method Detection Limits

_ Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; 11 pCi/g - Cs-137)

N/A - Not Analyzed Page I of I 3.2.1

Tatne 3.2.2 October 1982 - Old Radwaste Building - Waste Surge Tank Release I I - 1.612 2.454 82-YAA-SB-0010 TSS4 10/7/82 0-33" S. of ORW Surge Tank 2.550 82-YAA-SB-0007 TSS2 10/7/82 0-40' S. of ORW Surge Tank 82-YAA-SB-0005 TSS3A 10/7/82 33-36" S. of ORW Surge Tank 0.674 1.156 82-YAA-SB-0004 TSS4A 10/7/82 33-36" S. of ORW Surge Tank I -Yf'7 7 C"7 82- YAA-SB-0006 TSS2A 10/7/82 40-42" S. of ORW Surge Tank 82-YAA-SB-0008 TSS I 10/7/82 0-33' SE of ORW Surge Tank 82-YAA-SB-001 1 TSSIA 10/7/82 33-36" SE of ORW Surge Tank 82-YAA-SB-0003 TSS5 10/7/82 0-33" SW of ORW Surge Tank 82-YAA-SB-0002 TSS5A 10/7/82 33-36" SW of ORW Surge Tank 82-YAA-SB-"0l TSS6 10/7/82 0-33" SW of ORW Surge Tank o/s berm 82-YAA-SB-"09 TSS6A 10/7/82 33-36" SW of ORW Surge Tank o/s of berm 82-YAA-SB-0075 TSS3-3 10/13/82 12-45" S. of ORW Surge Tank 82-YAA-SB-0076 TSS2-2 10/13/82 15-48" S. of ORW Surge Tank 82-YAA-SB-0072 TSS4-4A 10/13/82 40-43" S. of ORW Surge Tank 82-YAA-SB-0074 TSS3-3A 10/13/82 45-48" S. of ORW Surge Tank 82-YAA-SB-0079 TSS2-2A 10/13/82 48-51" S. of ORW Surge Tank 82-YAA-SB-0073 TSS4-4 10/13/82 7-40" S. of ORW Surge Tank 82-YAA-SB-0078 TSSI-I 10/13/82 24-57" SE of ORW Surge Tank 82-YAA-SB-0068 TSSI-IA 10/13/82 57-60" SE of ORW Surge Tank 1 1 r'% A W I 82-YAA-SB-0077 TSS5-5A 10/13/82 SW of ORW Surge Tank 41-44" 82-YAA-SB-0071 TSSS-5 10/13/82 8-41" SW of ORW Surge Tank 82-YAA-SB-0069 TSS7A 10/13/82 0-18" below pipe SW of ORW Surge Tank o/s berm 82-YAA-SB-0070 TSS6-6 10/13/82 19-52" SW of ORW Surge Tank o/s berm 82-YAA-SB-0080 TSS6-6A 10/13/82 52-55" SW of ORW Surge Tank o/s berm 3.200 5.350 82-YAA-SB-0085 TSS3-3-3 10/27/82 15-45" S. of ORW Surge Tank 0.3958 1.993 82-YAA-SB-0092 TSS4-4-4 10/27/82 22-48" S. of ORW Surge Tank 82-YAA-SB-0082 TSS3-3-3A 10/27/82 45-49" S. of ORW Surge Tank ND 0.4814 82-YAA-SB-009 1 TSS4-4-4A 10/27/82 48-52" S.=of ORW Surge Tank XMIMIMMM 82-YAA-SB-0084 TSS2-2-2 10/27/82 60-86" IS.of ORW Surge Tank I ND 1 1.723 Page 3 of 3 3.2.2

0 Tabw. -1.2.2 October 1982 - Old Radwaste Building - Waste Surge Tank Release rK7ýmýlr 1

82-YAA-SB-0081 TSS2-2-2A 10/27/82 86-90" S. of ORW Surge Tank 2.014 1.925 82-YAA-SB-0083 TSSI-l-I 10/27/82 20-50" SE of ORW Surge Tank 0.7899 2.578 82-YAA-SB-0093 TSSI-I-IA 10/27/82 50-55" SE of ORW Surge Tank 0.3958 1.993 82-YAA-SB-0090 TSS5-5-5 10/27/82 36-61" SW of ORW Surge Tank ND 82-YAA-SB-0089 TSS5-5-5A 10/27/82 61-65" SW of ORW Surge Tank 82-YAA-SB-0088 TSS6-6-6 10/27/82 0-30" SW of ORW Surge Tank o/s berm 82-YAA-SB-0087 TSS6-6-6A 10/27/82 30-33" SW of ORW Surge Tank o/s berm ND 2.646 82-YAA-SB-0086 TSS7A-7A 10/27/82 96". below pipe SW of ORW Surge Tank o/s berm 82-YAA-SB-0112 82-4A 10/31/82 0-30" East of ORW Surge Tank (10') 0.745 0.534 82-YAA-SB-0126 82-4E 10/31/82 103-120" East of ORW Surge Tank (10') 0.710 0.308 g2-YAA-SB-0127 82-4F 10/31/82 120-140" East of ORW Surge Tank (10') 0.137 0.197 82-YAA-SB-01 13 82-4B 10/31/82 30-60" East of ORW Surge Tank (10') 0.351 0.765 82-YAA-SB-0114 82-4C 10/31/82 60-80" East of ORW Surge Tank (10') 0.368 1.045 82-YAA-SB-0125 82-4D 10/31/82 80-103" East of ORW Surge Tank (10') 0.136 0.356 82-YAA-SB-0109 82-3A 10/31/82 0-30" East of ORW Surge Tank (5') 0.792 1.355 82-YAA-SB-0124 82-3B 10/31/82 30-60" East of ORW Surge Tank (5') 0.428 1.681 82-YAA-SB-01 10 82-3C 10/31/82 60-90" East of ORW Surge Tank (5') 0.131 1.083 82-YAA-SB-0111 82-3D 10/31/82 90-120" East of ORW Surge Tank (5') 1.699 1.944 82-YAA-SB-0103 82-9A 10/31/82 0-30" NE of ORW Surge Tank (10')

82-YAA-SB-0094 82-9E 10/31/82 120-150" NE of ORW Surge Tank (10')

82-YAA-SB-0104 82-9B 10/31/82 30-60" NE of ORW Surge Tank (10')

82-YAA-SB-0108 82-9C 10/31/82 60-90" NE of ORW Surge Tank (10') __2.121 6.301 82-YAA-SB-O106 82-9D 10/31/82 90-120" NE of ORW Surge Tank (10') 2.263 6.173 82-YAA-SB-0098 82-8A 10/31/82 0-22" NE of ORW Surge Tank (25')

82-YAA-SB-0102 82-8E 10/31/82 113-143" NE of ORW Surge Tank (25') NA 0.246 82-YAA-SB-0099 82-8B 10/31/82 22-53" NE of ORW Surge Tank (25') 0.258 1.600 82-YAA-SB-0100 82-8C 10/31/82 53-83" NE of ORW Surge Tank (25') 0.155 0.649 82-YAA-SB-O101 82-8D 10/31/82 83-113" NE of ORW Surge Tank (25') 0.629 1.542 82-YAA-SB-01 15 82-IA 10/31/82 0-28" ORW Surge Tank SW of tank (15') 0.500 0.370 82-YAA-SB-0116 82-lB 10/31/821 28-58" ORW Surge Tank SW of tank (15') 0.2766 0.281 Page 4 of 4 3.2.2

TVj.2.2 October 1982 - Old Radwaste Building - Waste Surge Tank Release 82-YAA-SB-01 17 82-IC 10/31/82 53-77" ORW Surge Tank SW of tank (15') 0.551 1.120 82-YAA-SB-0118 82-ID 10/31/82 77-101" ORW Surge Tank SW of tank (15') 0.440 0.660 82-YAA-SB-0119 82-2A 10/31/82 0-30" ORW Surge Tank SW of tank (20') 1.600 0.800 82-YAA-SB-0123 82-2E 10/31/82 120-145" ORW Surge Tank SW of tank (20') 0.200 0.650 82-YAA-SB-0120 82-2B 10/31/82 30-60" ORW Surge Tank SW of tank (20') NA 0.232 82-YAA-SB-0121 82-2C 10/31/82 60-90" ORW Surge Tank SW of tank (20') NA 0.420 82-YAA-SB-0135 82-2D 10/31/82 90-120" ORW Surge Tank SW of tank (20') NA 0.730 82-YAA-SB-0128 82-5A 10/31/82 0-30' ORW Surge Tank, South of tank (15') 0.223 0.893 82-YAA-SB-0132 82-5E 10/31/82 120-150' ORW Surge Tank, South of tank (15') 0.074 0.094 82-YAA-SB-0129 82-5B 10/31/82 30-60" ORW Surge Tank, South of tank (15') 0.343 0.517 82-YAA-SB-0130 82-5C 10/31/82 60-90" ORW Surge Tank, South of tank (15') 0.670 0.597 82-YAA-SB-0131 82-5D 10/31/82 90-120" ORW Surge Tank, South of tank (15') 0.438 0.639 82-YAA-SB-0133 82-6A 10/31/82 0-30" SW of ORW Surge Tank (25') 1.591 1.848 82-YAA-SB-0134 82-6B 10/31/82 30-60" SW of ORW Surge Tank (25') 0.823 1.333 82-YAA-SB-0107 82-6C 10/31/82 60-90" SW of ORW Surge Tank (25') 0.541 1.325 82-YAA-SB-0122 82-6D 10/31/82 90-120" SW of ORW Surge Tank (25') 0.280 0.430 82-YAA-SB-0105 82-7A 10/31/82 0-30" West of ORW Surge Tank (5') 1.606 7.225 82-YAA-SB-0095 82-7B 10/31/82 30-60" West of ORW Surge Tank (5') 1.054 9.514 82-YAA-SB-0096 82-7C 10/31/82 60-90" West of ORW Surge Tank (5') 2.631 2.668 82-YAA-SB-0097 82-7D 1/31 90-120' West of ORW Surge Tank (5') 0.945 5.624 Depth - inches below ground surface Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137

< MDA - Below Method Detection Limits N NGreater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; 11 pCi/g - Cs-137)

N/A - Not Analyzed Page 5 of 5 3.2.2

T Oad e B.2.3 October 1982 - Old Radiological Waste Building - Truck Ramp Paving 82-YAA-SS-0032 C13 10/10/82 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 0.605 0.553 82-YAA-SS-0031 C3 10/10/82 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 3.017 1.967 82-YAA-SS-0030 C4 10/10/82 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving _ __4.927 82-YAA-SS-0029 C5 10/10/82 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 1.567 1.348 82-YAA-SS-0028 C6 10/10/82 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 3.103 3.511 82-YAA-SS-0027 C7 10/10/82 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 3.651 3.585 82-YAA-SS-0026 C8 10/10/82 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 82-YAA-SS-0025 C9 10/10/82 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 1.19037 82-YAA-SS-0024 CIO 10/10/82 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 3.066 82-YAA-SS-0022 C 12 10/10/82 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 0.768 .

82-YAA-SS-0020 Cl 10/10/82 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 0.8264 0.6884 82-YAA-SS-0013 CI 10/10/82 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 1.787 1.6824 82-YAA-SS-0050 A9 10/10/82 0-6" South of ORW - Truck ramp areapaving_1.78 1.723 82-YAA-SS-0049 A10 10/10/82 0-6" South of ORW - Truck ramp area <MDA <MDA 82-YAA-SS-0048 All 10/10/82 0-6" South of ORW - Truck ramp area <MDA 0.0573 82-YAA-SS-0023 A8 10/10/82 0-6" South of ORW - Truck ramp area 0.7018 0.7458 82-YAA-SS-0021 A7 10/10/82 0-6" South of ORW - Truck ramp area <MDA <MDA 82-YAA-SS-0019 Al 10/10/82 0-6" South of ORW - Truck ramp area <MDA <MDA 82-YAA-SS-0018 A2 10/10/82 0-6" South of ORW - Truck ramp area <MDA 0.3067 82-YAA-SS-0017 A3 10/10/82 0-6" South of ORW - Truck ramp area 0.1264 0.0974 82-YAA-SS-0016 A4 10/10/82 0-6" South of ORW - Truck ramp area 1.594 1.814 82-YAA-SS-0015 A5 10/10/82 0-6" South of ORW - Truck ramp area <MDA 0.1094 82-YAA-SS-0014 A6 10/10/82 0-6" South of ORW - Truck ramp area 0.3449 0.4689 Page 6 of 6 3.2.3

Tabit J.2.3 October 1982 - Old Radiological Waste Building - Truck Ramp Paving

@5.714 82-YAA-SS-0047 BI 10/10/82 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 2.762 1 2.432 82-YAA-SS-0046 B2 10/10/82 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 0.184 0.2643 82-YAA-SS-0045 B3 10/10/82 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 2.135 2.435 82-YAA-SS-0044 B14 10/10/82 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 82-YAA-SS-0043 B4 10/10/82 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 8.002 82-YAA-SS-0042 B 12 10/10/82 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 1.479 1.514 82-YAA-SS-0041 BI5 10/10/82 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 1.966 4.299 82-YAA-SS-0039 BlO 10/10/82 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 1.690 1.663 82-YAA-SS-0038 B9 10/10/82 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 8.570 82-YAA-SS-0037 38 10/10/82 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 1.455 1.071 82-YAA-SS-0036 B7 10/10/82 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 2.484 2.296 82-YAA-SS-0035 B6 10/10/82 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 3.621 2.900 82-YAA-SS-0034 B5 10/10/82 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 82-YAA-SS-0033 B13 10/10/82 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 3.054 1.909 82-YAA-SS-0066 D2 10/11/82 0-6" North of ORW - Paving 2.014 1.594 82-YAA-SS-0065 D3 10/11/82 0-6" North of ORW - Paving 0.503 0.446 82-YAA-SS-0064 D4 10/11/82 0-6" North of ORW .- Paving 0.618 0.0624 82-YAA-SS-0063 D5 10/11/82 0-6" North of ORW - Paving 1.722 1.422 82-YAA-SS-0062 D6 10/11/82 0-6" North of ORW - Paving 0.863 0.625 82-YAA-SS-0061 D7 10/11/82 0-6" North of ORW - Paving 1.126 0.777 82-YAA-SS-0060 D9 10/11/82 0-6" North of ORW - Paving 1.575 1.677 82-YAA-SS-0056 DI 10/1/82 0-6" North of ORW - Paving not collected not collected Page 7 of 7 3.2.3

0 TIbe 3.2.3 October 1982 - Old Radiological Waste Building - Truck Ramp Paving 92-YAA-SS-0067 E7 10/11/82 0 INorth of ORW/South of NRW-Paving 1.004 0.784 82-YAA-SS-0059 E2 10/11/82 0-6" North of ORW/South of NRW-Paving 0.540 0.377 82-YAA-SS-0058 E3 10/11/82 0-6" North of ORW/South of NRW-Paving 0.913 0.844 82-YAA-SS-0057 E4 10/11/82 0-6" North of ORW/South of NRW-Paving 3.470 5.051 82-YAA-SS-0055 E6 10/11/82 0-6" North of ORW/South of NRW-Paving 1.292 0.615 82-YAA-SS-0053 E5 10/11/82 0-6" North of ORW/South of NRW-Paving 0.581 0.412 82-YAA-SS-0052 El 10/11/82 0-6" North of ORW/South of NRW-Paving 1.110 0.510 Notes:

Depth - inches below ground surface Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137

< MDA - Below Method Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; 11 pCi/g - Cs-137)

Page 8 of 8 3.2.3

Ta 3.2.4 June 1985 - Proposed ESSF Location 95-XWN-SS-0080 20 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0079 18 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location 1.89 1.90 95-XWN-SS-0078 17 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0077 B7 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0076 16 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND 0.501 85-XWN-SS-0075 15 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0074 14 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0073 13 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0072 33 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0071 12 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0070 10 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0069 9 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0068 8 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location 1.36 ND 85-XWN-SS-0067 7 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0066 6 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0065 5 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND 0.521 85-XWN-SS-0064 4 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0063 3 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0062 B12 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0061 B4 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0060 21 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND 0.954 85-XWN-SS-0059 2 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location 2.1 0.726 85-XWN-SS-0058 57 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND Page 9 of 9 3.2.4

Tabne 3.2.4 June 1985 - Proposed ESSF Location 85-XWN-SS-0057 49 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0056 65 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0055 64 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0054 63 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0053 61 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND 0.718 85-XWN-SS-0052 60 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0051 67 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0050 58 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0049 68 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0048 31 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0047 55 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0046 22 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0045 53 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0044 52 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0043 51 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0042 50 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0041 59 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0040 76 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0039 89 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0038 87 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0037 85 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0036 84 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0035 82 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0034 80 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND Page 10 of 10 3.2.4

Tab.l i.2.4 June 1985 - Proposed ESSF Location 85-XWN-SS-0033 66 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0032 78 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0031 54 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0030 75 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 185-XWN-SS-0029 74 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0028 73 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0027 72 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0026 71 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0025 70 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND 0.443 85-XWN-SS-0024 69 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0023 79 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0022 56 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0021 46 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0020 45 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0019 44 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0018 43 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0017 42 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0016 41 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0015 40 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0014 39 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0013 47 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0012 35 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0011 36 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0010 32 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND Page I1 of II 3.2.4

0 Tabit 3.2.4 June 1985 - Proposed ESSF Location 85-XWN-SS-O009 30 1 61/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND 4.60 85-XWN-SS-O008 29 6/1/85 0 Proposed ESSF Location ND 1.30 85-XWN-SS-O007 28 6/1/85 0 Proposed ESSF Location ND 0.968 85-XWN-SS-O006 25 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0005 25 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-O004 24 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0003 23 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0002 48 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 85-XWN-SS-0001 34 6/1/85 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 86-YAA-SS-0004 C- (2360-86) 4/29/8 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location Along RMA Fence 1.21 0.662 86-YAA-SS-0003 A-I (2358-86) 4/29/86 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location Along RMA Fence 2.81 86-YAA-SS- B-i (2359-86) 4/29/86 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location Along RMA Fence2.81 86-YAA-SS-O002 BI(2359-86) 4/29/86 0-"Proposed ESSF Location Along RMA Fence 2.35 1 1.48 Notese" Depth - inches below ground surface Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137

< MDA - Below Method Detection Limits eGreater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; 11 pCi/g - Cs-137)

N/A - Not Analyzed Page 12 of 12 3.2.4

TabIe 3.2.5 March 1991 - Condensate Storage Tank - Bottom Leakage 9 -XWW-SB-O010 B9-1 3/13/91 0-1' Circ Water Discharge Structure <0.020 91-XWW-SB-O011 B9-5 3/13/91 4-5' Circ Water Discharge Structure <0.011 91-XWW-SB-0012 B9-7 3/13/91 6-7' Circ Water Discharge Structure <0.013 91-XWW-SB-0006 B7-1 3/13/91 0-1' East of CST 91-XWW-SB-0007 B7-5 3/13/91 4-5' East of CST 0.062 91-XWW-SB-0015 B7-7 3/13/91 6-7' East of CST 0.180 91-XWW-SB-0008 B7-9 3/13/91 8-9' East of CST 0.420 91-CAA-SB-0001 B8-1 3/13/91 0-1' North of CST 0.045 91-CAA-SB-0009 B8-5 3/13/91 4-5' North of CST <0.020 91-CAA-SB-0029 B4-1 3/13/91 0-1' NW of CST 0.470 91-CAA-SB-0013 B5-1 3/13/91 0-1V NW of CST 0.480 91-CAA-SB-0031 B5-5 3/13/91 4-5' NW of CST <0.030 91-CAA-SB-0025 B4-5 3/13/91 4-5' NW of CST 0.079 91-CAA-SB-0017 B5-7 3/13/91 6-7' NW of CST <0.030 91-XWW-SB-0018 BI-1 3/13/91 0-iV SE of CST o/s fence 0.340 91-XWW-SB-0014 B6-1 3/13/91 0-i' SE of CST o/s fence 0.073 91-XWW-SB-0005 B6-11 3/13/91 10-11' SE of CST o/s fence <0.070 91-XWW-SB-0016 B1-5 3/13/91 4-5' SE of CST o/s fence 0.230 91-XWW-SB-0002 B6-5 3/13/91 4-5' SE of CST o/s fence <0.030 91-XWW-SB-0019 B1-7 3/13/91 6-7' SE of CST o/s fence 1.300 91-XWW-SB-0003 B6-7 3/13/91 6-7' SE of CST o/s fence <0.020 91-XWW-SB-0020 B1-9 3/13/91 8-9' SE of CST o/s fence 0.190 91-XWW-SB-0004 B6-9 3/13/91 8-9' SE of CST o/s fence <0.050 91-XWW-SB-0021 BI-10 3/13/91 9-10' SE of CST o/s fence 0.340 Page 13 of 13 3.2.5

0 Tat. J.2.5 March 1991 - Condensate Storage Tank - Bottom Leakage 91 -CAA-SB-0023 132-5 3/13/91 4-5' SW of CST in yard 0.035 9B2- 3/13/91 6-T SW of CST in yard 91-CAA-SB-O024 B2-7 3/13/91 6-7' SW of CST in yard 0.034 91-CAA-SFI-O030 B2-9 3/13/91 8-'SW of CST in yard <0.015 91-CAA-SB-0026 B3-1 3/13/91 0-l' West of CST 0.160 91-CAA-SB-0027 B3-5 3/13/91 4-5' West of CST < 0.020 91-CAA-SB-0028 B3-7 3/13/91 6-7' West of CST <0.014 91-CAA-SB-0034 BIO-I 4/17/91 0- Under tank 0.037 91-CAA-SB-0033 B 10-5 4/17/91 4-5' Under tank 0.170 91-CAA-SB-0035 BI0-7 4/17/91 6-7 Under tank 0.140 91 -CAA-SB-0032 B 10-9 4/17/91 9-10' Under tank (Unknown) --- 3/13/91 I-"-Water Sample Depth - feet below ground surface Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137

< MDA - Below Method Detection Limits Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60)

Page 14 of 14 3.2.5

Tamje 3.2.6 April 1991 - Condensate Yard Spill Spill in CST Yard - Collection pit 0-6" under transfer pipe.

Spill in CST Yard at tank discharge 0-6" valve.

Notesi Depth - inches below ground surface Co Cobalt 60

< MDA - Below Method Detection Limits MW * ]Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; 11 pCi/g - Cs-137)

N/A - Not Analyzed Page 15 of 15 3.2.6

0a-.7 August 1992 - Proposed ISFSI Concrete Pad Construction 92-XCD-SS-0033 10 8/6/92 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0233 1 0.0106 92-XCD-SS-0032 16 8/6/92 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction 0.0159 <0.0236 92-XCD-SS-0031 15 8/6/92 0-6' Proposed ISFSI Construction 0.0194 0.0111 92-XCD-SS-0030 14 8/6/92 0-6 Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0277 <0.0236 92-XCD-SS-0029 13 8/6/92 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0246 <0.0225 92-XCD-SS-0028 12 8/6/92 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction 0.0279 0.0319 92-XCD-SS-0027 11 8/6/92 0-6 Proposed 1SFSI Construction 0.0287 <0.0220 92-XCD-SS-0026 9 8/6/92 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction 0.0558 0.0973 92-XCD-SS-0019 17 8/6/92 0-6' Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0284 <0.0230 92-XCD-SS-0017 19 8/6/92 0-6' Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0299 <0.0207 92-XCD-SS-0016 20 8/6/92 0-6' Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0228 <0.0207 92-XCD-SS-0015 21 8/6/92 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction 0.0996 0.211 92-XCD-SS-0014 22 8/6/92 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0190 <0.0232 92-XCD-SS-0013 23 8/6/92 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0276 0.0211 92-XCD-SS-0012 24 8/6/92 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0177 <0.0176 92-XCD-SS-001 1 25 8/6/92 0-6' Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0223 <0.0218 92-XCD-SS-0010 26 8/6/92 0-6* Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0246 <0.0212 92-XCD-SS-0009 27 8/6/92 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0256 <0.0228 92-XCD-SS-0008 28 8/6/92 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0217 <0.0216 92-XCD-SS-0007 18 8/6/92 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction 0.0235 <0.0247 92-YFS-SS-0025 8 8/6/92 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Location 0.0215 0.0292 92-YFS-SS-0024 7 8/6/92 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Location 0.0474 0.0590 92-YFS-SS-0023 6 8/6/92 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Location <0.0214 <0.0225 92-YFS-SS-0022 1 8/6/92 0-6' Proposed ISFSI Location 0.068 0.0578 92-YFS-SS-0021 2 8/6/92 0-6' Proposed ISFSI Location 0.0392 0.0728 92-YFS-SS-0020 5 8/6/92 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Location 0.0382 0.130 92-YFS-SS-0018 4 8/6/92 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Location ND 0.0492 92-YFS-SS-0006 3 8/6/92 0-6 Proposed ISFSI Location 0.0271 0.0328 Depth - inches below ground surface Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137

< MDA - Below Method Detection Limits

ý q Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; 11pCi/g - Cs-137)

N/A - Not Analyzed Page 16 of 16 3.2.7

TI .2.8 August 1992 - Proposed ISFI Concrete Pad Construction 97-ZFS-SB-0001 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.080 0.190 97-ZFS-SB-0002 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 <0.040 97-ZFS-SB-0003 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 0.028 97-ZFS-SB-0004 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 0.059 97-ZFS-SB-0005 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.017 <0.030 97-ZFS-SB-0006 ZFS 8/12/97 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.040 <0.050 97-ZFS-SB-0007 ZFS 8/12/97 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 0.025 97-ZFS-SB-0008 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin < 0.050 0.110 97-ZFS-SB-0009 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.072 97-ZFS-SB-0010 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.090 <0.080 97-ZFS-SB-0011 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin 0.075 0.200 97-ZFS-SB-0012 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin < 0.020 0.042 97-ZFS-SB-0013 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 0.043 97-ZFS-SB-0014 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.060 < 0.070 97-ZFS-SB-0015 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin < 0.070 0.140 97-ZFS-SB-0016 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.060 0.077 97-ZFS-SB-0017 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 <0.020 97-ZFS-SB-0018 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.060 <0.040 97-ZFS-SB-0019 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.036 97-ZFS-SB-0020 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 <0.020 97-ZFS-SB-0021 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 0.035 97-ZFS-SB-0022 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 <0.030 97-ZFS-SB-0023 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.016 <0.030 97-ZFS-SB-0024 ZFS 8/12/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.060 <0.060 97-ZFS-SB-0025 ZFS 8/13/97 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.037 97-ZFS-SB-0026 ZFS 8/13/97 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.056 97-ZFS-SB-0027 ZFS 8/13/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 <0.020 97-ZFS-SB-0028 ZFS 8/13/97 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.019 0.040 97-ZFS-SB-0029 ZFS 8/13/97 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.018 <0.019 97-ZFS-SB-0030 ZFS 8/13/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.060 <0.060 97-ZFS-SB-0031 ZFS 8/13/97 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.080 < 0.070 97-ZFS-SB-0032 ZFS 8/13/97 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.060 <0.070 97-ZFS-SB-0033 ZFS 8/13/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin < 0.020 0.023 97-ZFS-SB-0034 ZFS 8/13/97 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.015 0..053 Page 17 of 17 3.2.8

TabV4.2.8 August 1992 - Proposed ISFI Concrete Pad Construction 7-ZFS-S 1-( e, < U.U2U 97-ZFS-SB-0036 ZFS 8/13/97 0-36" e*

Basin < 0.030 < 0.020 97-ZFS-SB-0037 ZFS 8/13/97 0-36" Basin <0.020 0.026 97-ZFS-SB-0038 ZFS 8/13/97 36-72" ureoge Basin <0.030 0.079 97-ZFS-SB-0039 ZFS 8/13/97 0-36" Dredge Basin <0.030 <0.030 97-ZFS-SB-0040 ZFS 8/13/97 36-72" L Dredge Basin <0.020 <0.030 97-ZFS-SB-0041 ZFS 8/13/97 72-108" Dredge S ntion Basin <0.040 <0.050

• 1* t 97-ZFS-SB-0042 ZFS 8/13/97 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin < 0.020 0.053 97-ZFS-SB-0043 ZFS 8/13/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.040 <0.050 97-ZFS-SB-0044 ZFS 8/13/97 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.018 <0.016 97-ZFS-SB-0045 ZFS 8/13/97 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin < 0.040 0. 190 97-ZFS-SB-0046 ZFS 8/13/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin < 0.020 <0.030 97-ZFS-SB-0047 ZFS 8/13/97 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 <0.040 97-ZFS-SB-0048 ZFS 8/13/97 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.043 97-ZFS-SB-0049 ZFS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 <0.030 97-ZFS-SB-0050 ZFS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.040 <0.040 97-ZFS-SB-0051 ZFS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 <0.030 97-ZFS-SB-0052 ZFS 8/14/97 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin < 0.060 <0.060 97-ZFS-SB-0053 ZFS 8/14/97 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.060 0.150 97-ZFS-SB-0054 ZFS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 0.038 97-ZFS-SB-0055 ZFS .8/14/97 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 0.035 97-ZFS-SB-0056 ZFS 8/14/97 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.050 <0.050 97-ZFS-SB-0057 ZFS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 <0.030 97-ZFS-SB-0058 ZFS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.070 0.077 97-ZFS-SB-0059 ZFS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.036 97-ZFS-SB-0060 ZFS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.037 97-ZFS-SB-0061 ZFS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 <0.020 97-ZFS-SB-0062 ZFS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.013 <0.020 97-ZFS-SB-0063 ZFS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 <0.040 97-ZFS-SB-0064 ZFS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.019 <0.020 97-ZFS-SB-0065 ZFS 8/14/97 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin < 0.020 0.027 97-ZFS-SB-0066 ZFS 8/14/97 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.018 < 0.030 97-ZFS-SB-0067 ZFS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 <0.020 97-ZFS-SB-0068 ZFS 8/14/97 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.015 <0.040 97-ZFS-SB-0069 ZFS 8/14/97 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.040 0.170 97-ZFS-SB-0070 ZFS 8/14/97 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.018 0.034 97-ZFS-SB-0071 ZFS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 <0.030 Page 18 of 18 3.2.8

TabO.2.8 August 1992 - Proposed ISF! Concrete Pad Construction 97-ZFS-SB-0076 ZS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 <0.040 97-ZFS-SB-0077 ZFS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.080 0.190 97-ZFS-SB-0078 ZFS 8/14/97 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.033 97-ZFS-SB-0079 ZFS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.050 0.150 97-ZFS-SB-0080 ZFS 8/14/97 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.040 0.120 97-ZFS-SB-0081 ZFS 8/14/97 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 0.059 97-ZFS-SB-0082 ZFS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 <0.030 97-ZFS-SB-0083 ZFS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.064 97-ZFS-SB-0084 ZFS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.060 0.091 97-ZFS-SB-0085 ZFS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 <0.030 97-ZFS-SB-0086 ZFS 8/14/97 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 <

Notesi' Table does not include the nine sediment cores collected prior to the 1997 dredging project.

Depth - inches below ground surface Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137

< MDA - Below Method Detection Limits Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; 11 pCi/g - Cs-137)

N/A - Not Analyzed Page 19 of 19 3.2.8

Tt .2.9 September 1996 - Condensate Transfer Overboard Discharge Event I 9/18/96 South branch of Forked River, west of Route 9 N/A 1,100 2 9/19/96 South branch of Forked River, west of Route 9 N/A 1660 3 10/3/96 South branch of Forked River, west of Route 9 N/A < 150 4 9/20/96 Near OCNGS intake tunnel N/A 1,700 5 10/3/96 Near OCNGS intake tunnel N/A 330 6 9/19/96 Near condenser discharge N/A 6,500 7 9/18/96 Near 30" header N/A 16,000 8 9/19/96 Near 30" header N/A 9,300 9 10/3/96 Near 30" header N/A < 150 10 9/18/96 OCNG discharge canal N/A 6,400 11 9/19/96 Midway between discharge Canal and Route 9 at Oyster Creek inlet N/A 970 12 10/3/96 Midway between discharge Canal and Route 9 at Oyster Creek inlet N/A < 150 13 9/18/96 Oyster Creek, east of Route 9 N/A 7,000 14 9/19/96 Oyster Creek, east of Route 9 N/A 1,700 15 10/3/96 North Shore of Oyster Creek midway between Route 9 and Barneget Bay N/A < 150 16 9/19/96 North Shore of Oyster Creek midway between Route 9 and Barneget Bay N/A 2,900 17 10/3/96 North Shore of Oyster Creek midway between Route 9 and Barneget Bay N/A < 150 18 9/19/96 Residential Lagoons (south) N/A 4,100 19 10/3/96 Residential Lagoons (south) N/A <1150 20 9/19/96 Residential Lagoons (south) N/A 1,300 21 10/3/96 Residential Lagoons (south) N/A < 150 22 9/19/96 Mouth of Oyster Creek into Barnegat Bay N/A 2,300 Page 20 of 20 3.2.9

Table 3.2.9 September 1996 - Condensate Transfer Overboard Discharge Event I I II II 1 10/3/96 I IN/A I 9/19/96 South branch of Forked River, west of Route 9 0.008 N/A 2 10/3/96 South branch of Forked River, west of Route 9 <0.008 N/A 3 9/19/96 Near 30" header 0.027 N/A 4 10/3/96 Near 30" header 0.046 N/A 5 9/19/96 Oyster Creek inlet, west of Route 9 0.047 N/A 6 10/1/96 Oyster Creek inlet, west of Route 9 <0.020 N/A 7 9/19/96 Oyster Creek, east of Route 9 <0.006 N/A 8 9/30/96 Oyster Creek, east of Route 9 <0.014 N/A 9 9/19/96 North Shore of Oyster Creek midway between Route 9 and Barneget Ba <0.015 N/A 10 10/3/96 North Shore of Oyster Creek midway between Route 9 and Barneget Bay 0.056 N/A 11 9/19/96 Residential Lagoons (south) <0.016 N/A 12 10/1/96 Residential Lagoons (south) <0.007 N/A 13 9/19/96 Residential Lagoons (south) <0.010 N/A 14 10/1/96 Residential Lagoons (south) <0.015 N/A 15 9/19/96 Mouth of Oyster Creek into Barnegat Bay <0.013 N/A 16 9/30/96 Mouth of Oyster Creek into Barnegat Bay <0.009 N/A 17 9/30/96 Barnegat Bay, out from mouth of Oyster Creek <0.012 N/A 18 9/30/96 Barnegat Bay, south of Oyster Creek Mouth <0.008 N/A 19 10/1/96 Manahawkin Bay <0.017 N/A 20 10/1/96 Great Bay <0.013 N/A 21 9/30/96 Stout's Creek < 0.03 _N/A Page 21 of 21 3.2.9

Tabi 3.2.9 September 1996 - Condensate Transfer Overboard Discharge Event I 9/30/96 Stout's Creek 0.017 0.118 2 9/30/96 Bamegat Bay, out from mouth of Oyster Creek <0.018 <0.090 3 9/30/96 Bamegat Bay, south of Oyster Creek Mouth <0.03 <0.09 4 10/1/96 Manahawkin Bay <0.040 0.110 5 10/1/96 Great Bay <0.012 <0.090 Notes: Not analyzed Depth - inches below ground surface Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137

< MDA - Below Method Detection Limits Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; 11 pCi/g - Cs-137)

N/A - Not Analyzed Page 22 of 22 3.2.9

0 Tabie 1.2.10 August 1999 - Old Rad Waste Building Concrete Pad - Spill Event North or ORW conc pad - adjacent to mop water spill Notes'.

Depth - inches below ground surface Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137

< MDA - Below Method Detection Limits IffGreater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; 11 pCi/g - Cs-137)

N/A - Not Analyzed Page 23 of 23 3.2.10

Ta.. .. 11 Non-Radiological ISRA Investigation 99-XWE-SS-0022 SS-1A-2A 9/1/99 0-12" IMFOST Collection Sump 0.086 0.210 99-XWE-SB-0019 SS-lA-2B 9/1/99 36-48" MFOST Collection Sump <0.030 0.074 99-XWE-SS-0014 SS-IA-3A 9/1/99 0-12" MFOST North of pad at RCA fence 0.480 2.400 99-XWE-SB-0023 SS-IA-3B 9/1/99 36-48" MFOST North of pad at RCA fence <0.015 0.040 99-XWE-SS-0018 SS-IA-5A 9/1/99 0-12" MFOST NW by RCA fence 0.950 3.200 99-XWE-SB-0017 SS-IA-5B 9/1/99 36-48" MFOST NW by RCA fence 0.052 0.260 99-XWE-SS-0016 SS-1A-6A 9/1/99 0-12" MFOST South of Pad ND 0.211 99-XWE-SB-0021 SS-IA-6B 9/1/99 36-48" MFOST South of Pad ND 0.105 99-XWW-SS-0012 SS-11-3A 9/1/99 0-12" South of TWST Yard (-3 feet) 0.025 0.087 99-XWW-SB-0011 SS-11-3B 9/1/99 36-48" South of TWST Yard (-3 feet) <0.010 <0.015 99-EAA-SS-0020 SS-11-2A 9/1/99 0-12" TWST Yard east of tank (by pump pad) 0.860 0.150 99-EAA-SB-0013 SS-11-2B 911/99 36-48" TWST Yard east of tank (by pump pad) <0.050 0.110 99-EAA-SS-0010 SS-11-IA 9/1/99 0-12" TWST Yard north of tank <0.019 0.054 99-EAA-SB-0015 SS-11-IB 9/1/99 36-48" TWST Yard north of tank <0.015 0.032 99-XWW-SS-0009 SS-11-4A 9/1/99 0-12" West of TWST Yard at well location <0.016 0.038 99-XWW-SB-"008 SS-11-4B 9/1/99 36-48" West of TWST Yard at well location <0.015 <0.018 99-XWE-SS-0048 SS-IA-IA 9/2/99 0-12" MFOST Moat North Plug <0.020 0.140 99-XWE-SB-0047 SS-IA-lB 9/2/99 36-48" MFOST Moat North Plug <0.014 0.016 99-XWE-SS-0033 SS-IA-4A 9/2/99 0-12" MFOST Moat South Plug ND 0.179 99-XWE-SB-0049 SS-IA-4B 9/2/99 36-48" MFOST Moat South Plug ND ND 99-XWN-SS-0037 SS-16E-IA 9/2/99 0-12" North of D/W Support Center <0.030 0.068 99-XWN-SB-0032 SS-16E-IA2 9/2/99 192.5-204.5" North of D[W Support Center ND ND 99-XWN-SB-0050 SS-16E-IAI 9/2/99 36-48" North of D/W Support Center <0.020 0.044 99-YAA-SS-0044 SS-16D-2A 9/2/99 0-12" North of NRW, North of sidewalk, U/S RCA fence 0.210 1.700 99-Y'AA-SB-0024 SS-16D-2A2 9/2/99 156.25-168.25" North of NRW, North of sidewalk, I/S RCA fence ND ND 99-YAA-SB-0043 SS-16D-2A1 9/2/99 36-48" North of NRW, North of sidewalk, I/S RCA fence 0.052 0.390 99-YAA-SS-0036 SS-16F-2A 9/2/99 0-12" North of ORW, NE Comer of filter pad 0.800 4.200 99-YAA-SB-0035 SS-16F-2A2 9/2/99 168-180 North of ORW, NE Comer of filter pad ND ND 99-YAA-SB-0030 SS-16F-2A1 9/2/99 36-48" North of ORW. NE Corner of filter pad 0.036 0.330 99-YAA-SS-0027 SS-16F-1A 9/2/99 0-12" North of ORW, NW Comer of filter pad 0.950 99-YAA-SB-0025 SS-16F-IA2 9/2/99 192-204" ,North of ORW, NW Comer of filter pad _ND 0.745__

Page I of I 3.2.11

T 9 ... 11.

Non-Radiological ISRA Investigation 99-YAA-SB-0028 SS-16F-IAI 9/2/99 36-48" North of ORW, NW Comer of filter pad 0.190 6.400 99-YAA-SS-0040 SS-16D-4A 9/2/99 0-12" South of NRW HX Building (-30 feet) 0.240 1.600 99-YAA-SB-0039 SS-16D-4AI 9/2/99 12-24" South of NRW HX Building (-30 feet) <0.020 0.250 99-YAA-SB-0031 SS-16D-4A2 9/2/99 48.5-60.5" South of NRW HX Building (-30 feet) ND 0.386 99-XWN-SS-0029 SS-16E-3A 9/2/99 0-12" SW comer of D/W Support Center <0.020 0.079 99-XWN-SB-0034 SS-16E-3A2 9/2/99 216-228" SW comer of D/W Support Center ND ND 99-XWN-SB-0026 SS-16E-3AI 9/2/99 36-48" SW comer of D/W Support Center <0.040 0.130 99-YAA-SS-0042 SS-16D-3A 9/2/99 0-12" West of NRW at macadam repair area <0.020 0.073 99-YAA-SB-0038 SS-16D-3A2 9/2/99 144-156" West of NRW at macadam repair area ND ND 99-YAA-SB-0041 SS-16D-3AI 9/2/99 36-48" West of NRW at macadam repair area <0.014 <0.012 99-XWN-SS-0046 SS-16D-IA 9/2/99 0-12" West of NRW O/S RCA fence 0.095 0.510 99-XWN-SB-0045 SS-16D-IAI 9/2/99 36-48" West of NRW O/S RCA fence <0.015 0.094 99-XWN-SS-0053 SS-16E-4A 9/3/99 0-12" North of RB, Near transformers west of D/W Process Facility ND 0.194 99-XWN-SB-0055 SS-16E-4A2 9/3/99 204.75-216.75" North of RB, Near transformers west of D/W Process Facility ND ND 99-XWN-SB-0054 SS-16E-4A1 9/3/99 36-48" North of RB, Near transformers west of D/W Process Facility <0.040 0.130 99-XWN-SS-0051 SS-16E-2A 9/3/99 0-12" NW comer of Outage Command Center 0.041 0.016 99-XWN-SB-0052 SS- 16E-2A2 9/3/99 180-192" NW comer of Outage Command Center ND ND 99-XWN-SB-0056 SS-16E-2AI 9/3/99 36-48" NW comer of Outage Command Center 0.027 0.120 99-XCD-SS-0062 SS-6A-2A 11/15/99 drum storage area SW level D ND ND 99-XCD-SS-0059 SS-6B-2A 11/15/99 0-24" Level D Storage Area, former drum collection area ND 0.111 99-XCD-SS-0058 SS-6B-IA 11/15/99 0-24" Level D Storage Area, former drum collection area ND 0.066 99-XCD-SS-0060 SS-6C-IA 11/15/99 0-24" Level D Storage Area, southwest drum storage area ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0071 SS:6C-2A 11/15/99 0-6" Level D Storage Area, southwest drum storage area ND ND 99-XCD-SS-0065 SS-6A-IA 11/15/99 0-24" North of Level D Storage Area at access road ND 0.072 99-XWS-SS-0068 SS-14C-2A 11/15/99 0-6" Seepage pit-pretreatment backwash ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0063 SS-14C-3A 11/15/99 0-6" Seepage pit-pretreatment backwash ND 0.058 99-XWS-SS-0057 SS-14C-4A 11/15/99 0-6" Seepage pit-pretreatment backwash ND 0.084 99-XWS-SB-0069 SS-14C-IB 11/15/99 9.5-10' Seepage pit-pretreatment backwash(deep) ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0070 SS-14C-IA 11/15/99 0-6" Seepage pit-pretreatment backwash(shallow) ND ND 99-XWS-SB-0067 SS-16C-4B 11/15/99 = = Southeast comer of Building 4 ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0061 SS-16C-4A 11/15/99 0-6" Southeast comer of Building 4 ND 0.100 Page 2 of 2 3.2.11

0 Tab.. -. 11 Non-Radiological ISRA Investigation 99-XWS-SB-0066 SS-16C-6B 11/15/99 Southwest of Building 4 ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0064 SS-16C-6A 11/15/99 Southwest of Building 4 ND 0.095 99-XWS-SB-0083 SS-16C-2B 11/16/99 East of Building 4 ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0080 SS-16C-2A 11/16/99 East of Building 4 ND ND 99-XWS-SB-0072 SS-16C-3B 11/16/99 East side South end of Building 4 ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0081 SS-16C-3A 11/16/99 East side South end of Building4 ND 0.065 99-XTL-SS-0089 SS-18B-IA 11/16/99 0-6" NE laydown and sandblast ND ND 99-XTL-SS-0087 SS-18B-2A 11/16/99 0-6" NE laydown and sandblast ND ND 99-XTL-SS-0082 SS-18B-4A 11/16/99 0-6" NE laydown and sandblast ND ND 99-XTL-SS-0075 SS-18B-3A 11/16/99 0-6" NE laydown and sandblast ND 0.037 99-XTL-SB-0088 SS-18B-2A 11/16/99 1-2' NE laydown and sandblast ND ND 99-XWN-SS-0074 SS-19A-IA 11/16/99 0-6" North of TB at Joy Compressor Building ND 0.039 99-XWN-SS-0076 SS-19B-IA 11/16/99 0-6" North of TB at old compressor area ND 0.101 99-XWS-SS-0094 SS-16C-IA 11/16/99 Northeast comer of Building 4 ND 0.080 99-XWS-SB-0091 SS-16C-IB 11/16/99 Northeast comer of Building 4 ND ND 99-XWN-SS-0090 SS-17H-1A 11/16/99 Northwest comer of TB at oil spill from 8/87 0.114 0.068 99-XWS-SB-0078 SS-16C-5B 11/16/99 South of Building 4 ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0077 SS-16C-5A 11/16/99 South of Building 4 ND 0.094 99-XCD-SS-0092 SS-15D-IA 11/16/99 0-6" Spare Main Transformer ND ND 99-XCD-SS-0086 SS-15D-3A 11/16/99 0-6" Spare Main Transformer ND ND 99-XCD-SB-0093 SS-15D-3B 11/16/99 12-24" Spare Main Transformer ND ND 99-XCD-SB-0084 SS-15D-1B 11/16/99 18-24" Spare Main Transformer ND ND 99-XWN-SS-0085 SS-1F-IA 11/16/99 0-6" Turbine Lube Oil Tank and Purification System ND 0.117 99-XWS-SS-0073 SS-16B-IA 11/16/99 0-24" West of Old Machine Ship ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0079 SS-16B-2A 11/16/99 0-24" West of Old Machine Shop ND 0.033 99- -SD-0117 SED-2 11/17/99 0-3" ND 0.0601 99- -SD-01 16 SED-4 11/17/99 0-3" ND ND 99- -SD-0115 SED-5 11/17/99 0-3" ND ND 99- -SD-0113 SED-6 11/17/99 0-3" ND 0.0775 99- -SD-0108 SED-7 11/17/99 0-3" ND 0.0621 99-XWS-SS-O101 SS-17C-2B 11/17/99 0-6" South of DG Building at oil spill area from 10/80 ND 0.0894 Page 3 of 3 3.2.11

Ta .11 Non-Radiological ISRA Investigation 99-XWS-SS-0100 SS-17C-IA 11/17/99 0-6" South of DG Building at oil spill area from 10/80 ND ND 99-XWN-SB-0109 SS-5C-lA 11/17/99 2.5-3' Torus piping to Rx Bldg ND 0.0615 99-XWN-SB-0105 SS-5C-6A 11/17/99 2.5-3' Torus piping to Rx Bldg ND ND 99-XWN-SB-0096 SS-5C-5A 11/17/99 2.5-3' Torus piping to Rx Bldg ND 0.0841 99-XWN-SB-0103 SS-5C-2A 11/17/99 4.5-5' Torus piping to Rx Bldg ND ND 99-XWW-SB-0099 SS-15K-3A 11/17/99 2-2.5' Transformer Area, East of northern transfromer ND ND 99-XWW-SB-01 12 SS-15K-2A 11/17/99 2-2.5' Transformer Area, North of all transformers ND 0.0359 99-XWW-SB-0110 SS-15K-2B 11/17/99 4-4.5' Transformer Area, North of all transformers ND ND 99-XWW-SB-0114 SS-15K-IA 11/17/99 2-2.5' Transformer Area, Northeast of all transformers ND 0.0675 99-XWW-SB-0095 SS-15K-1B 11/17/99 4-4.5' Transformer Area, Northeast of all transformers ND ND 99-XWW-SB-0107 SS-15K-5A 11/17/99 2-2.5' Transformer Area, Southeast of southern transformer ND ND 99-XWW-SB-0106 SS-15K-5B 11/17/99 4-4.5' Transformer Area, Southeast of southern transformer ND ND 99-XWW-SB-0097 SS-15K-6A 11/17/99 2-2.5' Transformer Area, Southwest of southern transformer ND ND 99-XWW-SB-0104 SS-15K-6B 11/17/99 4-4.5' Transformer Area, Southwest of southern transformer ND ND 99-XWW-SB-01 11 SS-15K-8A 11/17/99 2-2.5' Transformer Area, West of northern transformer ND ND 99-XWW-SB-0102 SS-15K-8B 11/17/99 4-4.5' Transformer Area, West of northern transformer ND ND 99-XWW-SB-0098 SS-15K-3B 11/17/99 4-4.5' Transfromer Area, East of northern transformer ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0138 SS-17G-IA 11/18/99 0-6" NE of DG Building, East of road ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0137 SS-17G-3A 11/18/99 0-6" North of Building 4 ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0144 SS-16A-IA 11/18/99 0-6" North of Hazardous Waste Collection Area ND 0.0258 99-XWS-SS-0126 SS-17G-2A 11/18/99 0-6" South of Blackout transformer, center of road. ND ND 99-XWW-SB-0125 SS-15K-4A 11/18/99 2-2.5' Transformer Area, Southeast of center transformer ND ND 99-XWW-SB-0119 SS-15K-4B 11/18/99 4-4.5' Transformer Area, Southeast of center transformer ND ND 99-XWW-SB-0142 SS-15K-7A 11/18/99 2-2.5' Transformer Area, Southwest of center transformer ND 0.0321 99-XWW-SB-0139 SS-15K-7B 11/18/99 4-4.5' Transformer Area, Southwest of center transformer ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0121 SS-17G-7A-1 11/18/99 0-6" West of Building 4 ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0 118 SS-17G-7A 11/18/99 0-6" West of Building 4 ND 0.165 99-XWS-SS-0140 SS-17G-8A 11/18/99 0-6" West of DG Building ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0141 SS-16A-6A 11/18/99 0-6" West of Hazardous Waste Collection Area ND 0.0628 99-XWW-SS-0122 SS-15L-1A 11/18/99 0-6" West of northern Start-Up Transformer ND ND 99-XWW-SB-0123 SS-15L-IB 11/18/99 1.5-2' West of northern Start-Up Transformer ND ND Page 4 of 4 3.2.11

TNal S g2.11 Non-Radiological ISRA Investigation 0

99-XWS-SS-0143 SS-17G-6A 11/18/99 0-6" West of RADIAC trailer ND ND 99-XWW-SS-0124 SS-15L-2A 11/18/99 0-6" West of southern Start-Up Transformer ND ND 99-XWW-SB-0120 SS-15L-2B 11/18/99 1.5-2' West of southern Start-Up Transformer ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0148 SS-16A-2A 11/19/99 0-6" East of Hazardous Waste Collection Area ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0147 SS-16A-3A 11/19/99 0-6" East of Hazardous Waste Collection Area ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0146 SS-16A-4A 11/19/99 0-6" South of Hazardous Waste Collection Area ND 0.0899 99-XWS-SS-0149 SS-16A-5A 11/19/99 0-6" West of Hazardous Waste Collection Area ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0145 SS-16A-7A 11/19/99 0-6" West of Hazardous Waste Collection Area ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0166 SS-5A-1OA 11/22/99 0-6" Oil Line east of Aux Office Building ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0163 SS-5A-12A 11/22/99 0-6" Oil Line east of Building 4 ND 0.0233 99-XCS-SS-0161 SS-5A-9A 11/22/99 0-6" Oil Line in OCAB Parking Lot near Site VP Space ND ND 99-XWE-SS-0157 SS-5A-3A 11/22/99 0-6" Oil Line near MFOST ND 0.332 99-XWE-SS-0155 SS-5A-5A 11/22/99 0-6" Oil Line near MFOST ND ND 99-XWE-SS-0151 SS-5A-2A 11/22/99 0-6" Oil Line near MFOST ND 0.672 99-XCS-SS-0156 SS-5A-7A 11/22/99 0-6" Oil Line near Protected Area fence by MFOST ND ND 99-XCS-SS-0154 SS-5A-6A 11/22/99 0-6" Oil Line near Security outer gate for Sally Port ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0164 SS-5A-19A 11/22/99 0-6" Oil Line north of DG Building ND 0.0316 99-XWS-SS-0162 SS-5A-16A 11/22/99 0-6" Oil Line north of DG Building ND 0.0296 99-XWS-SS-0165 SS-5A-I IA 11/22/99 0-6" Oil Line west of Aux Office Building ND ND 99-YFS-SS-0160 SS-1lA-IA 11/22/99 0-6" Runoff trench east of ISFSI area ND ND 99-YFS-SS-0158 SS-11A-2A 11/22/99 0-6" Runoff trench east of ISFSI area ND ND 99-XCD-SS-0153 SS-15D-2A 11/22/99 0-6" Spare Main Transformer ND ND 99-XCD-SS-0152 SS-15D-4B 11/22/99 0-6" Spare Main Transformer ND ND 99-XCD-SS-0150 SS-15D-4A 11/22/99 0-6" Spare Main Transformer ND 0.0521 99-XCD-SB-0159 SS-15D-2B 11/22/99 18-24" Spare Main Transformer ND ND 99-XWN-SB-0167 SS-5C-7A 11/22/99 4.5-5' Torus piping to Rx Bldg ND 0.117 99-XWS-SS-0194 SS-151-4A 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer area east of Aux Office Building ND 0.0777 99-XWS-SS-0193 SS-151-IA 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer area east of Aux Office Building ND 0.11 99-XWS-SS-0192 SS-151-2A 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer area east of Aux Office Building ND 0.0876 99-XWS-SS-0173 SS-151-3A 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer area east of Aux Office Building 0.091 0.154 99-XWN-SS-0195 SS-15E-IA 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer area east of Outage Command Center ND 0.327 Page 5 of 5 3.2.11

Ta ... 1..L1l Non-Radiological ISRA Investigation 99-XWN-SS-0181 SS-15E-2A 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer area east of Outage Command Center 2.21 0.866 99-XWN-SS-0176 SS-15E-3A 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer area east of Outage Command Center 0.352 0.307 99-XWN-SS-0179 SS-15P-2A 11/23/99 0'-0.5' Transformer area north of Maintenance Building ND 0.070 99-XWN-SS-0178 SS-15P-IA 11/23/99 0'-0.5' Transformer area north of Maintenance Building ND 0.050 99-XWN-SS-0177 SS-15P-4A 11/23/99 0'-0.5' Transformer area north of Maintenance Building ND 0.108 99-XWN-SS-0188 SS-15B-IA 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer area north of NRW building ND 0.0549 99-XWN-SS-0186 SS-15B-3A 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer area north of NRW building ND 0.0183 99-XWN-SS-0185 SS-15B-2A 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer area north of NRW building ND 0.117 99-XWN-SS-0182 SS-15B-4A 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer area north of NRW building ND 0.146 99-XWN-SS-0180 SS-15F-2A 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer area west of DW Process Center 0.156 0.296 99-XWN-SS-0175 SS-15F-IA 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer area west of DW Process Center 0.136 0.102 99-XWN-SS-0174 SS-15F-3A 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer area west of DW Process Center ND ND 99-XWN-SS-0172 SS-15F-5A 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer area west of DW Process Center 0.071 0.102 99-XWN-SS-0168 SS-15F-4A 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer area west of DW Process Center ND ND 99-XLA-SS-0187 SS-15N-4A 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer at Maintenance Fab Shop Area ND 0.035 99-XLA-SS-0171 SS-15N-2A 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer at Maintenance Fab Shop Area ND 0.0672 99-XLA-SS-0170 SS-15N-IA 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer at Maintenance Fab Shop Area ND 0.0986 99-XLA-SS-O169 SS-15N-3A 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer at Maintenance Fab Shop Area ND 0.0368 99-XWE-SS-0191 SS-15C-2A 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer at SW comer of warehouse ND 0.177 99-XWE-SS-0190 SS-15C-3A 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer at SW comer of warehouse ND 0.179 99-XWE-SS-0184 SS-15C-IA 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer at SW comer of warehouse ND 0.15 99-XWE-SS-0183 SS-15C-4A 11/23/99 0-6" Transformer at SW comer of warehouse ND 0.215 99-XWN-SS-0189 SS-15B-5A 11/23/99 0-6" Transfromer area north of NRW building 0.135 0.296 99-XWS-SS-0197 SS-15J-3A 11/24/99 0-6" Transformer area at Demin Trailer ND ND 99-XIA-SS-0199 SS-15M-3A 11/24/99 0-6" Transformer area east of intake structure ND ND 99-XIA-SS-0198 SS-!5M-1A 11/24/99 0-6" Transformer area east of intake structure ND ND 99-XIA-SS-0196 SS-15M-2A 11/24/99 0-6" Transformer area east of intake structure ND ND 99- -SB-0200 SS-MA-2A 11/29/99 15.5'-16' ND ND 99-XWS-SB-0203 SS-14A-1A 11/29/99 14.5'-15.5' Abandoned on-site waste water treatment facility ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0205 SS-15J-2A 11/29/99 0-6" Transformer area at Demin Trailer ND 0.088 99-XWS-SS-0204 SS-15J-1A 11/29/99 0-6" Transformer area at Demin Trailer ND ND Page 6 of 6 3.2.11

a bic i.2.11 Non-Radiological ISRA Investigation 99-WAA-SS-0209 SS-15A-3A 11/29/99 0'-0.5' Transformer area at LLRWSF ND ND 99-WAA-SS-0208 SS-15A-4A 11/29/99 0'-0.5' Transformer area at LLRWSF ND ND 99-WAA-SS-0206 SS-15A-IA 11/29/99 0'-0.5' Transformer area at LLRWSF ND ND 99-WAA-SS-0201 SS-15A-2A 11/29/99 0'-0.5' Transformer area at LLRWSF ND 0.017 99-XCS-SS-0213 SS-15G-2A 11/29/99 0'-0.5' Transformer area south of OCAB ND ND 99-XCS-SS-0212 SS-15G-4A 11/29/99 0'-0.5' Transformer area south of OCAB ND ND 99-XCS-SS-0211 SS-15G-5A 11/29/99 0'-0.5' Transformer area south of OCAB ND 0.030 99-XCS-SS-0210 SS-15G-3A 11/29/99 0'-0.5' Transformer area south of OCAB ND ND 99-XCS-SS-0207 SS-15G-6A 11/29/99 0'-0.5' Transformer area south of OCAB ND ND 99-XCS-SS-0202 SS-15G-7A 11/29/99 0'-0.5' Transformer area south of OCAB ND ND 99-XCS-SS-0214 SS-15G-IA 11/29/99 0'-0.5' Transfromer area south of OCAB ND ND 99-XWS-SB-0224 SS-14A-5A 11/30/99 16'-17' Abandoned on-site waste water treatment facility ND 0.036 99-YAA-SS-0220 SS-19D-IA 11/30/99 0-6" North of NRW Building at compressor 1.51 0.844 99-YAA-SS-0219 SS-19D-2A 11/30/99 0-6" North of NRW Building at compressor 1.44 0.956 99-YAA-SS-0223 SS-5G-IA 11/30/99 0-24" Northeast comer of Boiler House Fuel Oil pumping station 1.75 10.3 99-YAA-SS-0222 SS-5A-4A 11/30/99 0'-2' Oil Line near Boiler House ND 0.145 99-YAA-SB-0221 SS-5A-IA 11/30/99 3.5'-4' Oil Line near Boiler House ND ND 99-XCP-SS-0218 SS-150-IA 11/30/99 0'-0.5' Transformer south of Trailer 300 Complex ND ND 99-XCP-SS-0217 SS-150-2A 11/30/99 0'-0.5' Transformer south of Trailer 300 Complex ND ND 99-XCP-SS-0216 SS-150-3A 11/30/99 0'-0.5' Transformer south of Trailer 300 Complex ND 0.068 99-XCP-SS-0215 SS-150-4A 11/30/99 0'-0.5' Transformer south of Trailer 300 Complex ND 0.236 99-EAA-SB-0226 SS-MW-11-2A 12/2/99 10'-12' Monitoring Well installationSE of TWST ND ND 99-EAA-SB-0227 SS-MW-11-2A 12/2/99 12'-14' Monitoring Well installationSE of TWST ND ND 99-EAA-SB-0225 SS-MW-1I-2A 12/2/99 14'-18' Monitoring Well installationSE of TWST ND ND 99-'AA-SB-0235 SS-MW-IA-1A 12/3/99 16'-18' Monitoring well installation north of new Boiler House ND ND 99-EAA-SB-0236 SS-MW-I1-IA 12/3/99 13-17' Monitoring well installation NW of TWST ND ND 99-XIA-SS-0237 SS-8-lA 12/3/99 0'-i.5' North of road to switchyard south of intake structure ND 0.072 99-XIA-SS-0230 SS-8-2A 12/3/99 0'-2' North of road to switchyard south of intake structure ND 0.059 99-XWN-SS-0229 SS-lE-IA 12/3/99 0'-0.5' North of Turbine Dirty Oil Collection Tank ND ND 99-XWS-SS-0234 SS-ID-IA 12/3/99 0'-2' NW comer of DG Building at Oil Tank Moat ND ND 99-XCT-SS-0233 SS-15R-IA 12/3/99 01-0.5' Transformer area at North Trailer Park ND 0.07 Page 7 of 7 3.2.11

Tv'.9 .2.11 Non-Radiological ISRA Investigation 99-XCT-SS-0232 SS-15R-2A 12/3/99 0'-0.5' Transformer area at North Trailer Park ND 0.12 99-XCT-SS-0231 SS-15R-3A 12/3/99 0'-0.5' Transformer area at North Trailer Park ND ND 99-XCT-SS-0228 SS-15R-4A 1213/99 0'-0.5' Transformer area at North Trailer Park ND 0.07 99-XWS-SB-0240 SS-5A-IOA 12/8/99 1.5'-2.5' Oil Line east of Aux Office Building ND 0.050 99-XWW-SB-0242 SS-5B-2A 12/8/99 4'-4.5' Oil Line from Dirty Oil Tank to TB ND ND 99-XWW-SB-0241 SS-5B-IA 12/8/99 5' Oil Line from Dirty Oil Tank to TB ND ND 99-XWE-SB-0243 SS-2A-2A 12/8/99 7-7.5' South of warehouse, north of laundry trailer ND 0.125 99-XWE-SB-0239 SS-2A-IA 1218/99 7-7.5 South of warehouse, north of laundry trailer ND 0.10 99-XWE-SB-0238 SS-2A-3A 12/8/99 7-7.5' South of warehouse, north of laundry trailer ND ND 99-XWW-SB-0244 SS-MW-15K-IA 12/9/99 101-11 Monitoring well installation SW of Chlorination Building ND ND 99-XWE-SB-0245 SS-MW-IA-2A 12/9/99 15'-18' Monitoring well installation SW of MFOST ND ND 99-XWS-SB-0247 SS-14A-4A 12/13/99 13.5'-14' Abandoned on-site waste water treatment facility ND 0.110 99-XWS-SB-0248 SS-14A-3A 12/13/99 17.5'-18' Abandoned on-site waste water treatment facility ND ND 99-XWS-SB-0253 SS-15H-5A 12/13/99 2'-2.5' Transformer area south of Site Emergency Building ND ND 99-XWS-SB-0252 SS-15H-4A 12/13/99 2'-2.5' Transformer area south of Site Emergency Building ND ND 99-XWS-SB-0250 SS-15H-2A 12/13/99 2'-2.5' Transformer area south of Site Emergency Building ND 0.067 99-XWS-SB-0249 SS-15H-IA 12/13/99 2'-2.5' Transformer area south of Site Emergency Building ND ND 99-XWS-SB-0246 SS-15H-6A 12/13/99 2'-2.5' Transformer area south of Site Emergency Building ND ND 99-XWS-SB-0251 SS-15H-3A 12/13/99 3-3.5' Transformer area south of Site Emergency Building ND ND MW-IA-IA Groundwater 12/13/99 3-3.5' MW-1A-IA near MFOST ND ND Depth - inches below ground surface Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137

< MDA - Below Method Detection Limits N iGreater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; 11 pCi/g - Cs-137)

N/A - Not Analyzed Page 9 of 8 3.2.11

Miscellaneous Sampling Events 92-XWE-SS-0003 XWE-MFOST-03 413/92 0-6" IMFOST Valve Shed East 0.610 1.17 92-XWE-SS-0002 XWE-MFOST-01 4/3/92 0-6" MFOST Valve Shed North 0.247 0.395 92-XWE-SS-0005 XWE-MFOST-02 4/3/92 0-6" MFOST Valve Shed South 0.519 0.968 92-XWE-SS-0004 XWE-MFOST-04 4/3/92 0-6" MFOST Valve Shed West 0.892 1.07 99-X04-SS-0006 6/30/99 0-6" Fuel Oil Leak ND 0.0366 99-XDA-SS-0007 7/16/99 N/A Spill excavation on the north side of the DG Building <MDA 0.0936 99-YAA-SS-0005 8/27/99 Unknown East wall Rx Building by chiller pad (SW elbow) 0.75 1.68 99-YAA-SS-0004 8/27/99 Unknown West wall of excavation RB by chiller pad (SW Elbow) 1.39 2.04 00-XWW-SS-0002 1/6/00 0-6" Soil Berm West of Dilution Pump House ND ND 00-XWE-SS-0003 1/6/00 0-6" Soil from berm at Main Fuel Oil Storage Tank ND ND 00-XTS-SS-O001 1/6/00 0-6" Soil Mound West of South Parking Lot at PA Fence line ND ND Notes."

Data from June/July 1990 and September 1997 not included in table.

Depth - inches below ground surface Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137

< MDA - Below Method Detection Limits Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; 11 pCi/g - Cs-137)

N/A - Not Analyzed Page 32 of 32 3.2.12

I.

[ FIGURES

-. .7t....-'Y*, -

• _.*. .\.. *a:--$

-Basin k , . .

v4. is. " *. 'N. :-.

0 Al

.37

-I 20 -....

577

... , .. . .:* *.. 12..

• *~~~~ ..- ...

.*Z ... .... -

32 xx-- 17--

LL *A BM\ "° 9

--- . ,9

.m. -"

SCALE 1:24000 30 1MILE 1000 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 FEET 1 .5 0 1 KILOMETER SITE LOCATION MAP DRWN: TJG SCALE: AS NOTED WW1 NC. ~~RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING REPORT H':DT:0/5 0

__FORKED OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING RIVER, NEW JERSEY STATIONAPDFIUP':FG RE 1 1.

Figure 3.1.1 Site Investigation Report Included as Figure L-5 of Preliminary Assessment

0

,1 ii

-7

[]

SW1873 LEGEND SEXCEEDS SCREENING DCGL's

" J-DETECTABLE ACTIVITY LESS THAN SCREENING CDGL's SNO DETECTABLE ACTIVITY P0I - I-MVV rIIl.VVOrI. DUILI.JIIII - IIi1 SCALE: 1"=50'-O" AITE INVESTIGATION - RADIOLOGICAL DATE: 02/17/00 OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION FORKED RIVER, NEW JERSEY FIGURE 3.2.1

w Si)

IOA 3--72-2 I LEGEND EEXCEEDS SCREENING DCGL's S J-1DETECTABLE ACTIVITY LESS THAN SCREENING CDGL's SNO DETECTABLE ACTIVnry TANK RELEASE DRWN: TJG SCALE: 1"=50'-O" I AI - OLD RADWASTE BUILDING - WASTE SURGE OCTOBER 1982SITE INVESTIGATION - RADIOLOGICAL CHK'D: DATE: 02/17/00 I OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION FORKED RIVER, NEW JERSEY APP'D: -rFIlGURE 3.2.2

is ME in CAM m

3-2-3 02-17-W RME O

LEGEND SEXCEEDS SCREENING DCGL's S-:-J DETECTABLE ACTIVITY LESS THAN SCREENING CDGL's

Ž NO DETECTABLE ACTIVITY

/

-7 t.`--ý OCTOBER 1982 - OLD RADWASTE BUILDING - TRUCK RAMP PAVING IDRWN: TJG SCALE: 1"=70'-O" AMP SITE INVESTIGATION - RADIOLOGICAL II CHK'ft FIGURE 3.2.3 APP'D:

1CHK'D."

IDATE: 02/17/00O1 OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION FORKED RIVER, NEW JERSEY j [APP'D: rFIGURE 3.2.3J

p LEGEND C/= EXCEEDS SCREENING DCGL's E DETECTABLE ACTIVITY LESS THAN SCREENING CDGL's SNO DETECTABLE ACTIVI1Y JUNE 1985 - PROPOSED ESSF LOCATION DRWN: TJG SCALE: 1"=70'-0" I I

AffM SITE INVESTIGATION - RADIOLOGICAL CHK'D: DATE: 02/17/00 OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION FORKED RIVER. NEW JERSEY APP'D: FIGURE 3.2.4

0 0

1. 12 FiIl

1. 1 F-1 XFMR TURBINE BUILDING LEGEND SEXCEEDS SCREENING DCCL's S-- -DETECTABLE ACTIVITY LESS THAN SCREENING CDCL's E/7= NO DETECTABLE ACTIVITY I

I MARCH 1991 - CONDENSATE STORAGE TANK - BOTTOM LEAKAGE SCALE: 1"=50'-O" SITE INVESTIGATION - RADIOLOGICAL DATE: 02/17/00 OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION FORKED RIVER, NEW JERSEY FIGURE 3.2.5

p CAD Rw 02-17--00 FLEinDAM 91 H E43

__ #12 2 K

LEGEND SEXCEEDS SCREENING DCGL's 7)= S--' DETECTABLE ACTIVITY LESS THAN SCREENING CDGL's SNO DETECTABLE ACTIVITY TURBINE BUILDING CATE#4 APRIL 1991 - CONDENSATE YARD SPILL DRWN: TJG SCALE: 1"=50'-O" AIM RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING REPORT CHK'D: DATE: 02/17/00 OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION FORKED RIVER. NEW JERSEY APP'D: FIGURE 3.2.6

IDAml_-17-O p

I K

N 0 R T H G A T E HAZARDOUS AND NON-HAZARDOUS / *-L) -

WASTE STORAGE ,1 LEVEL D AREA S TOR AGE AREA SPARE MAIN XFMR Do LEGEND SEXCEEDS SCREENING DCGL's E ...... "1DETECTABLE ACTIVITY LESS THAN SCREENING CDGL's FP 7 NO DETECTABLE ACTIVITY FUEL STORA GE U/

AREA (ASPHALT PAVING)

F I

/

(

AUGUST 1992 - PROPOSED ISFSI CONSTRUCTION 1 DRWN:TJG SCALE: 1"=70' Affin SITE INVESTIGATION - RADIOLOGICAL OYSTER CREEK CHK'D: DATE: 02/17/00 I FORKEDNUCLEAR GENERATING JERSEY STATION RIVER. NEW FORKED RIVER. NEW JERSEY II APP'D:

Ii APPD:

AGURE 3.2.7 1 I FIGURE 3.2.7 1

LEMi LmZ Ai n ~ h~ 4

... "ol 2 ,.:: "* . ....ILI- . d' ..- "

-' / L~ gh IR h

~1 ~6'**.~ P 0 ec Dep~th 8~e ri q

-- e

• " :... .. .**. " 5 *;,

I ~,,~~~ , / *M. ...*.*:.. ' ... " g..".t .. ...*.:.t.

2' "\" '

29* ..../'.. .* "- .. .. " " .... ............ *22.. .

_ \1 (s)  :.- *18

~1.glfr~ 2 3(S) - oih

-' i- . ano

/14 _7' T.L ar SOURCE: UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY -FORKED RIVER, NEW JERSEY QUADRANGLE. PHOTO REVISED 1972

-ISEPTEMBER 1996 - CONDENSATE TRANSFER OVERBOARD DISCHARGE EVENT -SURFACE WATER SAMPLES' DRWN: TJG SCALE: AS NOTED A NCqm RDOOIAMOIOIGEETCK:

HA~t'i~cOYSTER DATE: 02-15-00 CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION FORKED RIVER, NEW JERSEY APP'D: FIGURE 3.2.9A 4.

a 1.¢.[

Stouts Creek

~2I 21 C.Lig~hl S 13M j~99 I.

I .,

11~...,... 12 C-ce

.. .Sands Point A,.

7.:. / 4 Harbor CC~,/ // ~ . y. iT

)AA

'1'

~ /

"'19 20

-~V 0,~ ~

SOURCE: UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY - FORKED RIVER, NEW JERSEY QUADRANGLE, PHOTO REVISED 1972 SEPTEMBER 1996 - CONDENSATERADIOLOGICAL TRANSFER OVERBOARD MONITORINGDISCHARGE EVENT EVENT - SEDIMENT SAMPLES I DRWN: TJG SCALE: AS NOTED CHK'D:, DATE: 02-15-00 OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION FORKED RIVER, NEW JERSEY APP'O: FIGURE 3.2.(

p.',"

Sft3-2-9C

= -. m 'Z:'

....... " '9 . . *) . . . "'., '" i

.. -* 4ilt  :: i ... .ii"'i 0

Light -Ligh t

• .: I * .:' ~ ~*" ":-- - "e..h .eet ' Stou.

Cree 1

. B . ,...:..

oi"

, *.. ,.,.j_*

,.*;*:*.* .... i:

.j,.-*.' . .S"n "P . Ts .:.. ...*...

i r-: *.. ... :* ..*:i... d.. ......

,..*,..j. ~

.....sPoi t

.... L=:,

• :*: C72i* "

• * "". . . . '. .. ....il*'....

~~-_7 Harb-or "X rr- ", .. =  :. . . . .. . ..;: . .... i:: :: ...

r . .* . 1"

, *:I! .:!!.i:.:i....i i. . .* . . . <.

SOURCE UNITED STATE GEOLOGICAL. SURVEY WFO D I NE. .JERSEY -I - ' .UADRANGLE.PHOTO.REV.SED.1972 ;i::.:.

EH TO R V SD 17

?,"4 R.E..SY Q U D A G

?

V YFR ...E.IE 0,

UU NIT E DSG E L G CL SR

,,'1...Y'*

ii~:: i::

R S C O E : ..... "....

3(

. , ' '""" '.'.-....n

.... ~~ ~

1-(3*.....

~

Greek

... ...~

.. .i

.:* -.- :::L:. t..

.. ~ ~":.-...~  :%%/;'

Mnnagh ah wki Ba 4, aw slot.*...

a ra at....

r......e Bay 4, 5

I SEPTEMBER 1996 - CONDENSATE TRANSFER OVERBOARD DISCHARGE EVENT - CLAM SAMPLES DRWN: TJG SCALE: AS NOTED RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING EVENT CHK'D: DATE: 02-15-00 OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION FORKED RIVER. NEW JERSEY APP'D: FIGURE 3.2.9C

LEGEND SEXCEEDS SCREENING DCGL's c-' - -- DETECTABLE ACTIVITY LESS THAN SCREENING CDGL's

& NO DETECTABLE ACTIVITY i

AUGUST 1999 - OLD RADWASTE BUILDING - CONCRETE PAD - SPILL EVENT I I DRWN: TJG II SCALE: 1"=50'-0" I

II SITE INVESTIGATION - RADIOLOGICAL II CHK'D: DATE: 02/17/do I OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION II II FORKED RIVER, NEW JERSEY I APP'D: IFIGURE 3.2.10J

I-EISTS LSLXGfE0 ii CATED 011E511 5MMU 514IE1 -Gý51 LEGEND EXCEEDS SCREENING DCGL's r ------ ,

L.--j DETECTABLE ACTIVITY LESS II E-THAN SCREENING CDGL's

- ~~ ---- - _-

0 NO DETECTABLE ACTIVITY Soil between FOST and RR airlock I I

£010114~-ul 4105JE,~tI5&S'tE IX LiT.M 0 ORW Surge Tank area - spill

)IE

______ a -Ecot ___.",_

LI0,,E GAM wcJ from tank

'3--24*555*05 ~) 1AcsD -

0 52.25.722355L~sO Bldg 4, Open trench inside building 0 Spill excavation on the north side of the DC Building

4. 1-11TI-I Ilii GATE1A111 S Sail Berm West of Dilution Pump House Soil from berm at Main Fuel Oil Storage Tank 0 Soil Mound West of South Parking Lot at PA Fence line 0 East wall Rx Building by chiller pod (SW elbow)

West wall of excavation RB by chiller pad (SW Elbow)

MISCELLANEOUS SAMPLING EVENTS SITE INVESTIGATION - RADIOLOGICAL OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION FORKED RIVER, NEW"SEY

'4--

1998 RADIoLOGIcAL ENvIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT PREPARED BY OYSTER CREEK ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS GPU NUCLEAR CORPORATION

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES iii LIST OF FIGURES v

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS 1 INTRODUCTION 3 Characteristics of Radiation 3 Sources of Radiation 4 Nuclear Reactor Operations 7 Sources of Liquid and Airborne Effluents 9 DESCRIPTION OF THE OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION SITE 11 General Information 11 Climatological Summary 11 EFFLUENTS 18 Historical Background 18 Effluent Release limits 18 Effluent Control Program 21 Effluent Data 22 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING 26 Environmental Exposure Pathways to Humans from Airborne and Liquid Effluents 26 Sampling 27 Analysis 28 Quality Assurance Program 31 DIRECT RADIATION MONITORING 33 Sample Collection and Analysis 33 Results 34 ATMOSPHERIC MONITORING 38 Sample Collection and Analysis 38 Results 38 AQUATIC MONITORING 43 Sample Collectio, and Analysis 43 Results 44

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

PAGE TERRESTRIAL MONITORING 52 Sample Collection and Analysis 52 Results 53 GROUNDWATER MONITORING 54 Sample Collection and Analysis 54 Results 55 RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT OF OCNGS OPERATIONS 57 Determination of Radiation Doses to the Public 57 Results of Dose Calculations 60 REFERENCES 64 APPENDIX A: 1998 REMP Sampling Locations and Descriptions, Synopsis of REMP, and Sampling and Analysis Exceptions 67 APPENDIX B: 1998 Lower Limits of Detection (LLD)

Exceptions 74 APPENDIX C: Changes to the 1998 REMP 76 APPENDIX D: Radionuclide Concentrations in 1998 Environmental Samples 78 APPENDIX E: 1998 Quality Assurance Results 105 APPENDIX F: 1998 Environmental Radioactivity Interlaboratory Comparison Results 111 APPENDIX G: 1998 Annual Dairy Census 122 APPENDIX R: Dose Calculation Methodology 124 APPENDIX I: 1998 Groundwater Monitoring Results 129 APPENDIX J: 1998 REMP Sample Collection and Analysis Methods 132 APPENDIX K 1998 TLD Quarterly Data 136

.1i

LIST OF TABLES TABLE TITLE PAGE I Sources and Doses of Radiation 2 Radionuclide Composition of OCNGS Effluents for 1998 23 3 TLD Exposure Periods During 1998 34 4 Cesium-137 Concentration in Aquatic Sediment, 1994 - 1998 (pCi/Kg-dry) 46 5 Cobalt-60 Concentration in Aquatic Sediment, 1994 - 1998 (pCi/Kg-dry) 50 6 Species of Fish Caught as Part of the OCNGS REMP in 1998 51 7 Tritium Results from Onsite Groundwater Monitoring Network (1989 through 1998) 56 8 Calculated Maximum Hypothetical Doses to an Individual from Liquid and Airborne Effluent Releases from OCNGS for 1998 62 9 Calculated Maximum Total Radiation Doses to the Population from Liquid and Airborne Effluent Releases from the OCNGS for 1998 63 A-I Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Sampling Locations 68 A-2 Synopsis of the Operational Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program - 1998 72 A-3 1998 Sampling and Analysis Exceptions 73 C-1 Changes to the REMP During 1998 77 D-1 Radionuclide Concentrations in 1998 Environmental Samples 78 E-I 1998 QA Sample Program - Number of Duplicate Analyses Performed 107 E-2 1998 QA Sample Program - Split Samples 108 E-3 Interlaboratory Comparison Results 109 F-I 1998 USEPA Cross Check Program Results 112 iii

LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

TABLE TITLE PAGE F-2 1998 DOE EML Cross Check Program Results 114 F-3 1998 ANALYTICS Environmental Cross Check Program Results 118 F-4 1998 ANALYTICS Cross Check Program Results 120 H-1 Summary of Maximum Hypothetical Individual and Population Doses From Liquid and Airborne Effluent Releases From the OCNGS for 1998 128 I-I Radionuclide Concentrations in Samples from the On-Site Groundwater Monitoring Network 130 J-1 Summary of Sample Collection and Analysis Methods - 1998 133 K-1 1998 T1D Quarterly Data - Panasonic TLD's 137 K-2 1998 TLD Quarterly Data - Teledyne Brown Engineering TL.J's 139 iv

LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE TITLE PAGE 1 Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Simplified Schematic 8 2 Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Wind Direction Frequency of Occurrence - 1998 Wind Direction "From" Each Compass Sector-Values in Percent of Houriy Occurrence 13 3 Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Monthly Mean Ambient Air Temperature - 1998 Compared with Historical (1946-1981) Atlantic City National Weather Service Average Temperature Data 15 4 Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Monthly Precipitation - 1998 Compared with H1istorical (1946-1981) Atlantic City National Weather Service Average Precipitation Data 16 5 Locations of Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) Stations Within Two Miles of the OCNGS 29 6 Locations of Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) Stations Greater than Two Miles From the OCNGS 30 7 Mean Panasonic TLD Gamma Dose-1989 through 1998 35 8 Mean Panasonic TLD Gamma Dose for 1998 Based on Distance from OCNGS 36 9 Air Particulate Gross Beta - 1998 Moving Range Quality Control Chart -Indicator Station Results Compared to Background Limits 39 10 Bi-Weekly Mean Air Particulate Gross Beta Concentrations - 1998 41 11 Monthly Mean Air Particulate Gross Beta Concentrations - 1984 through 1998 42 V

LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)

FIGURE TITLE PAGE 12 Mean Cesium-137 Concentration in Aquatic Sediment- 1984 through 1998 45 13 Mean Cobalt-60 Concentration in Aquatic Sediment- 1983 through 1998 48 14 Mean Cobalt-60 Concentration in Clams -

1983 through 1998 49 15 Exposure Pathways for Radionuclides Potentially Released from the OCNGS 59 I-1 Locations of On-Site Wells 131 vi

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS The radiological environmental monitoring performed during 1998 by the GPU Nuclear Environmental Affairs Department at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (OCNGS) is discussed in this report The operation of a nuclear power plant results in the release of small amounts of radioactive materials to the environment. A radiological environmental monitoring program (REMP) has been established to monitor radiation and radioactive materials in the environment around the OCNGS. The program evaluates the relationship between amounts of radioactive material released in effluents to the environment and resultant radiation doses to individuals. Summaries and interpretations of the data were published semiannually from 1969-1985 and annually since 1986 (Ref. 20 through 31). Additional information concerning releases of radioactive materials to the environment is contained in the Semi-Annual and Annual Effluent Release Reports submitted to the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC).

During 1998, as in previous years, the radioactive effluents associated with the OCNGS were a small firaction of the applicable federal regulatory limits and did not have significant effects on the quality of the environment The calculated maximum hypothetical radiation dose to the public attributable to 1998 operations at the OCNGS was only 0.15 percent of the applicable regulatory limit and significantly less than doses received from other man-made sources and natural background sources of radiation.

Radioactive materials considered in this report are normally present in the environment, either naturally or as a result of non-OCNGS activities such as prior atmospheric nuclear weapons testing, medical industry activities, and the 1986 Chernobyl accident. Consequently, measurements made in the vicinity of the site were compared to background measurements to determine any impact of OCNGS operations. Samples of air, well water, surface water, clams, sediment, fish, crabs, and vegetables were collected. Samples were analyzed for radioactivity including tritium (H-3), gross beta, and gamma-emitting radionuclides. External penetrating radiation dose measurements also were made using thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) in the vicinity of the OCNGS.

The results of these radiological measurements were used to assess the environmental impact of OCNGS operations, to demonstrate compliance with the Technical Specifications (Ref. 1), the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual Specifications (Ref. 2), applicable federal regulations, and to verify the adequacy of containment and radioactive effluent control systems. The data collected 1

by the REMP also provide a historical record of the levels of radionuclides and radiation attributable to natural causes, worldwide fallout from prior nuclear weapons tests and the Chemobyl accident, as well as OCNGS operations.

Radiological impacts in terms of radiation dose as a result of OCNGS operations were calculated and also are discussed. The results provided in this report are summarized in the following highlights:

During 1998, 638 samples were taken from the aquatic, atmospheric, and terrestrial environments around the OCNGS. A total of 893 analyses were performed on these samples.

TLDs were also utilized to provide 170 direct radiation dose measurements. Forty groundwater samples, taken primarily from local municipal water supplies and on-site wells, were collected and eighty analyses were performed on those samples.

Minute levels of cesium-137 (Cs-137) detected in aquatic sediment samples were attributable in part to past effluents from the OCNGS. This is the second consecutive annual reporting period during which cobalt-60 (Co-60) was not detected in any environmental media. This is a result of the minimization of liquid radioactive effluents and the natural radioactive decay process.

The amount of radioactivity released in effluents from the OCNGS during 1998 was the fifth smallest in the history of Station operation. The predominant radionuclide in gaseous and liquid effluents was tritium (-1-3). The maximum radiation dose to the public, attributable to 1998 effluents, was only 0.15 percent of applicable regulatory limit.

During 1998, the maximum total body dose potentially received by an individual from liquid and airborne effluents was conservatively estimated to be 0.017 millirems. The total body dose to the surrounding population from liquid and airborne effluents was conservatively calculated to be 0.1 person-rem. This is approximately 12.3 million times lower than the dose that the total population in the OCNGS area receives from natural background sources.

2

INTRODUCTION Characteristics of Radiation Instability within the nucleus of radioactive atoms results in the release of energy in the form of radiation.

Radiation is classified according to its nature - particulate and electromagnetic. Particulate radiation consists of energetic subatomic particles such as electrons (beta particles), protons, neutrons, and alpha particles. Because of its limited ability to penetrate the human body, particulate radiation in the environment contributes primarily to internal radiation exposure resulting from inhalation and ingestion of radioactivity.

Electromagnetic radiation in the form of x-rays and gamma rays has characteristics similar to visible light but is more energetic and, hence, more penetrating. Although x-rays and gamma rays are penetrating and can pass through varying thicknesses of materials, once they are absorbed, they produce energetic electrons which release their energy in a manner that is identical to beta particles. The principal concern for gamma radiation from radionuclides in the environment is their contribution to external radiation exposure.

The rate at which atoms undergo disintegration (radioactive decay) vanes among radioactive elements, but is uniquely constam for each specific radionuclide. The term "half-life" defines the time it takes for half of any amount of an element to decay and can vary from a fraction of a second for some radionuclides to millions of years for others. In fact, the natural background radiation to which all mankind has been exposed is largely due to the radionuclides of uranium (U), thorium (Th), and potassium (K). These radioactive elements were formed with the creation of the universe and, owing to their long half-lives, will continue to be present for millions of years to come. For example, potassium-40 (K-40) has a half-life of 1.3 billion years and exists naturally within our bodies. As a result, approximately 4000 atoms of potassium emit radiation internally within each of us every second of our life.

In assessing the impact of radioactivity on the environment, it is important to know the quantity of radioactivity released and the resultant radiation doses. The common unit of radioactivity is the curie (Ci). It represents the radioactivity in one gram (g) of natural radium (Ra) which is also equal to a decay rate of 37 billion radiation emissions every second. Because the level of radioactive material in the environment is extremely small, it is more convenient to work with portions or fractions of a curie.

3

Subunits such as picocurie (pCi), (one trillionth of a curie), are frequently used to express the radioactivity present in environmental and biological samples.

The biological effects of a specific dose of radiation are the same whether the radiation source is external or internal to the body. The important factor is how much radiation energy or dose was deposited. The unit of radiation dose is the Roentgen Equivalent Man (rem), which also incorporates the variable effectiveness of different forms of radiation to produce biological change. For environmental radiation exposures, it is convenient to use the smaller unit of millirem (nrem) to express dose (1000 mrem equals 1 rem). When radiation exposure occurs over periods of time, it is appropriate to refer to the dose rate.

Dose rates, therefore, define the total dose for a fixed interval of time, and for environmental exposures, are usually measured with reference to one year of time (mrem per year).

Sources of Radiation Life on earth has evolved amid the constant exposure to natural radiation. In fact, the single major source of radiation to which the general population is exposed comes from natural sources. Although everyone on the planet is exposed to natural radiation, some people receive more than others. Radiation exposure from natural background has three components (i.e., cosmic, terrestrial, and internal) and varies with altitude and geographic location, as well as with living habits.

For example, cosmic radiation originating from deep interstellar space and the sun increases with altitude, because there is less air to act as a shield. Similarly, terrestrial radiation resulting from the presence of naturally occurring radionuclides in the soil varies and may be significantly higher in some areas of the country than in others. Even the use of particular building materials for houses, cooking with gas, and home insulation affect exposure to natural radiation.

The presence of radioactivity in the human body results from the inhalation and ingestion of air, food, and water containing naturally occurring radionuclides. For example, drinking water contains trace amounts of uranium and radium, and milk contains radioactive potassium. Table 1 summarizes the common sources of radiation and their average annual dose.

4

TABLE 1 (Adapted from Ref. 4)

Sources and Doses of Radiation*

Natural (82%) Man-made (18%)

Radiation Dose Radiation Dose Source (mrem/year) Source (mrem/year)

Radon 200 (55%) Medical X-ray 39 (11%)

Cosmic rays 27 (8%) Nuclear Medicine 14 (4%)

Terrestrial 28 (8%) Consumer products 10 (3%)

Internal 40 (11%) Other <1 (<1%)

(Releases from nat. gas, phosphate mining, burning of coal, weapons fallout,

& nuclear fuel cycle)

Approximate Total 295 Approximate Total 64

• Percentage contribution of the total dose is shown in parentheses.

The average person in the United States receives about 300 mrem/yr (0.3 rem/yr) from natural background radiation sources. This estimate was recently revised from (approximately) 100 to 300 mrem because of the inclusion of radon gas which has always been present but has not been previously included in the calculations. In some regions of the country, the amount of natural radiation is significantly higher.

Residents of Colorado, for example, receive an additional 60 mrem/yr due to the increase in cosmic and terrestrial radiation levels. In fact, for every 100 feet above sea level, a person will receive an additional 1 mrem/yr from cosmic radiation. In several regions of the world, high concentrations of uranium and radium deposits result in doses of several thousand mrem/yr to their residents (Ref. 4).

Recently, public attention has fbcused on radon (Rn), a naturally occurring radioactive gas produced from uranium and radium decay. These elements are widely distributed in trace amounts in the earth's crust. Unusually high concentrations have been found in certain parts of eastern Pennsylvania and northern New Jersey. Radon levels in some homes in these areas are hundreds of times greater than levels found elsewhere in the United States. However, additional surveys are needed to determine the full extent of the problem nationwide. Radon is the largest component of natural background radiation and may be 5

responsible for a substantial number of lung cancer deaths annually. The National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) estimates that the average individual in the United States receives an annual dose of about 2,400 mrem to the lung from natural radon gas (Ref. 4). This lung dose is considered to be equivalent to a whole body dose of 200 millirems. The NCRP has recommended actions to control indoor radon sources and reduce exposures.

When radioactive substances are inhaled or swallowed, they are distributed within the body in a non-uniform fashion. For example, radioactive iodine selectively concentrates in the thyroid gland, radioactive cesium is distributed throughout the body water and muscles, and radioactive strontium concentrates in the bones. The total dose to organs by a given radionuclide also is influenced by the quantity and the duration of time that the radionuclide remains in the body, including its physical, biological, and chemical characteristics. Depending on their rate of radioactive decay and biological elimination from the body, some radionuclides stay in the body for very short times while others remain for years.

In addition to natural radiation, we are exposed to radiation from a number of man-made sources. The single largest of these sources comes from diagnostic medical x-rays and nuclear medical procedures.

Some 180 million Americans receive medical x-rays each year. The annual dose to an individual from such radiation averages about 53 millirems. Much smaller doses come from nuclear weapons fallout and consumer products such as televisions, smoke detectors, and fertilizers. Production of commercial nuclear power and its associated fuel cycle contributes less than 1 mrem to the annual dose of about 300 mrem for the average individual living in the United States.

Fallout commonly refers to the radioactive debris that settles to the surface of the earth following the detonation of nuclear weapons. It is dispersed throughout the environment either by dry deposition or washed down to the earth's surface by precipitation. There are approximately 200 radionuclides produced in the nuclear weapon detonation process; a number of these are detected in fallout. The radionuclides found in fallout which produce most of the fallout radiation exposures to humans are iodine-131 (1-131), sucoium-89 (Sr-89), strontium-90 (Sr-90), and cesium-137 (Cs-137). There has been no atmospheric nuclear weapon testing since 1980 and many of the radionuclides, still present in our environment, have decayed significantly. Consequently, doses to the public from fallout have been decreasing.

As a result of the nuclear accident at Chemobyl, USSR, on April 26, 1986, radioactive material was dispersed throughout the global environment and detected in various media such as air, milk, and soil.

6

Cesium-134, cesium-137, iodine-131, and other radionuclides released fiom Chernobyl were detected.at the OCNGS in significant amounts following the accident. These radionuclides continue to decay toward a stable state in the environment.

Nuclear Reactor Operations Common to the commercial production of electricity is the consumption of fuel which produces heat to make steam which turns the turbine-generator which generates electricity. Unlike the burning of coal, oil, or gas in fossil fuel powered plants to generate heat, the fuel of most nuclear reactors is comprised of the element uranium in the form of uranium oxide. The fuel produces power by the process called fission. In fission, the uranium atom absorbs a neutron (an atomic particle found in nature and also produced by the fissioning of uranium in the reactor) and splits to produce smaller atoms termed fission products, along with heat, radiation, and free neutrons. The free neutrons travel through the reactor and are similarly absorbed by the uranium, permitting the fission process to continue. As this process continues, more fission products, radiation, heat, and neutrons are produced and a sustained reaction occurs. The heat produced is transferred via reactor coolant (water) from the fuel to produce steam which drives a turbine-generator to produce electricity. The fission products are mostly radioactive; that is, they are unstable atoms which emit radiation as they decay to stable atoms. Neutrons which are not absorbed by the uranium fuel may be absorbed by stable atoms in the materials which make up the components and structures of the reactor. In such cases, stable atoms ofiten become radioactive. This process is called activation and the radioactive atoms which result are called activation products.

The OCNGS reactor is a Boiling Water Reactor (BWR). The nuclear fuel is designed to be contained within sealed fuel rods arranged in arrays called bundles which are located within a massive steel reactor vessel. As depicted in Figure 1, cooling water boils within the reactor vessel producing steam which drives the turbine. After the energy is extracted from the steam in the turbine, it is cooled and condensed back into water in the main condensers. This condensate is then pumped back into the reactor vessel and the cycle repeats.

Several hundred radionuclides of some 40 different elements are created in a nuclear reactor during the process of generating electricity. Because of reactor engineering designs, the short half-ives of many radionuclides, and their chemical and physical properties, nearly all radioactivity is contained.

7

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Simplified Schematic Reactor Water Feedwater/Conderwate sWten M Barnegat Bay Cooling Water

The OCNGS reactor has six independent barriers that confine radioactive materials produced in the reactor as it heats the water. Under normal operating conditions, essentially all radioactivity is contained within the first two barriers.

The ceramic uranium fuel pellets provide the first barrier. Most ofthe fission products are either trapped or chemically bound in the fuel where they remain. However, a few fission products which are volatile or gaseous at normal operating temperatures may not be contained in the fuel.

The second barrier consists of zirconium (Zr) alloy tubes (termed "fuel cladding') that resist corrosion and degradation due to high temperatures. The fuel pellets are contained within these tubes. There is a small gap between the fuel and the cladding, in which the noble gases and other volatile radionuclides collect and are contained.

The primary coolant water is the third barrier. Many of the fission products, including radioactive iodine, strontium, and cesium are soluble and are retained in water in an ionic (electrically charged) form. These materials can be removed in the reactor coolant purification system. However, krypton (Kr) and xenon (Xe) do not readily dissolve in the coolant, particularly at high temperatures. Krypton and.xenon collect as a gas above the condensate when the steam is condensed.

The fourth barrier consists of the reactor pressure vessel, turbine, condenser, and associated piping of the coolant system. The reactor pressure vessel is a 63-foot high tank with steel walls approximately eight inches thick. It encases the reactor core. The remainder of the coolant syst*r, including the turbine and condenser and associated piping, provides containment for radioactivity in the primary coolant.

The Drywell provides the fifth barrier. It is a steel-lined vessel, surrounded by concrete walls approximately 4 1/2 to 7 1/4 feet thick, that encloses the reactor pressure vessel and recirculating pumps and piping.

The Reactor Building provides the sixth barrier. It is a reinforced concrete and steel supaestucture with walls approximately 5 feet thick that enclose the drywell and other plant compots. The Reactor Budding is always maintained at a negative pressure to prevent out-leakage.

Sources of Liquid and Airborne Effluents Although the previously described barriers contain radioactivity with high efficiency, small amounts of radioactive fission products are nevertheless able to diffuse or migrate through minor flaws in the fuel 9

cladding and into the reactor coolant Trace quantities of reactor system component and structural surfaces which have been activated also get into the reactor coolant water. Many of the soluble fission and activation products such as iodines, strontiurns, cobalts, and cesiums are removed by demineralizers in the purification system of the reactor coolant The physical and chemical properties of noble gas fission products in the primary coolant prevent their removal by the demineralizers.

Because the reactor system has many valves and fittings, an absolute seal cannot be achieved. Minute drainage of radioactive liquids from valves, piping, and/or equipment associated with the coolant system may occur in the Reactor and/or Turbine Buildings. Noble gases, produced during the fission process, are collected as gaseous waste which is processed in the multistage systems in the OCNGS Augmented Off-Gas Building, while the remaining radioactive liquids are collected in floor and equipment drains and sumps and are pumped to and processed in the oCNGS Radwaste Facility.

Reactor off-gas, consisting primarily of hydrogen and radioactive nan-condenable gases, is withdrawn from the reactor primary system by steam jet air ejectors. These air ejectors drive the process stream through a 60 minute holdup pipe at approximately 110 cubic feet per minute and then into the Augmented Off-Gas (AOG)

System. The holdup pipe allows radionucides with short half-lives to decay. The Augmented Off-Gas System is a gaseous processing system which provides hydrogen conversion to water via a catalytic recombiner, removes the water (vapor) from the process stream, holds up the process stream to allow further decay of short-lived nuclides, and filters the off-gas using charcoal beds and High Efficiency Particulate (HEPA) filters prior to discharge to the base of the stack. Once the process stream enters the stack, it is diluted by building ventilation, which averages approximately 200,000 cubic feet per minute, is monitored and sampled, and then is discharged out the top of the 368-foot stack.

The liquid waste processing system receives water contaminated with radioactivity and processes it by filtration, demineralization, and distillation. Purified radwaste water is routinely recycled to the plant.

Occasionally, it may be necessary to discharge this purified water, under the guidelines of applicable permits, to the environment. Contaminants removed during the purification process are stored in the radwaste building and are eventually disposed of via the radioactive solids disposal systems. Before purified water is discharged to the environment, it is first sampled, analyzed, assigned a release rate, and then released to the discharge canal which has a flow rate of 460,000 to 980,000 gallons per minute.

10

DESCRIPTION OF THE OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION SITE General Information The Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station is located in Lacey Township of Ocean County, New Jersey, about 60 miles south of Newark, 9 miles south of Toms River, and 35 miles north of Atlantic City. It lies approximately 2 miles inland from Bamegat Bay. The site, covering 1416 acres, is situated partly in Lacey Township and, to a lesser extent, in Ocean Township. The Garden State Parkway bounds the site on the west. Access is provided by U. S. Route 9, passing through the site and separating a 661-acre eastern portion from the balance of the property west of the highway. The station is about 1/4 mile west of the highway and 1-1/4 miles east of the Parkway. The site property extends about 3-1/2 miles inland from the bay; the maximum width in the north-south direction is almost 1 mile. The site location is part of the New Jersey shore area with its relatively flat topography and extensive freshwater and saltwater marshlands. The South Branch of Forked River runs across the northern side of the site and Oyster Creek partly borders the southern side.

It is estimated that approximately 3.3 million people reside within a 50 mile radius of the OCNGS (Ref. 3). The nearest population center is Ocean Township which lies less than two miles south-southeast of the site. Based on 1994 population estimates, 5908 people reside in Ocean Township.

Two miles to the north of the OCNGS, 23,897 people reside in Lacey Township (estimated 1994 population). Dover Township, situated 9.5 miles to the north, is the nearest major population center with a population of 81,550 (estimated 1994 population). The region adjacent to Barnegat Bay is one of the State's most rapidly developing areas. In addition to the resident population, a sizable seasonal influx of people occurs during the summer. This influx occurs almost exclusively along the waterfiront.

Climatological Summ4 Meteorological data were obtained during 1998 from an on-site weather station. These data are subject to extensive quality assurance techniques and categorized for further analysis, including historical comparisons with both on-site and off-site sources as well as statistical processes to monitor instrument performance.

11

The climate of New Jersey and a great deal of the country was greatly influenced by the El Nino /

Southern Oscillation (ENSO), a major warming of the ocean waters across the eastern and central tropical Pacific Ocean. The effects of the ENSO were felt from January through June. They include abnormal patterns of rainfall and cloudiness, especially over the tropics. North America typically receives its strongest ENSO influence during winter and early spring. The persistence of abnormally warm waters off the west coast have increased the occurrence of extra-tropical storms that have buffeted the west coast with prolonged storms and increased mudslides. In addition, the persistence of the sub-tropical jet stream has brought milder temperatures across the entire continental United States during the winter, when the ENSO is strongest. "La Nina", described as a period of cold and dry conditions will sometimes follow its counterpart. It is not as common as the ENSO and did not appear in the latter half of 1998.

Climatological highlights during the year included a third consecutive above normal temperature and precipitation pattern during the fall and winter, along with a fourth consecutive cooler than normal summer. Tropical storm/hurricane activity in the Atlantic Ocean increased to 9 storms including Hurricane Bonnie, which struck the North Carolina coast in August. Most of the storm's effects passed south of the region.

During the summer months, winds were predominantly from the south and southwest directions. This ushers in warm and humid weather conditions. Precipitation resulting from these conditions is generally of short duration but high intensity (showers and/or thundershowers). During the autumn, winter and early spring, winds are generally from the west and northwest. Air masses during this time originate from the upper mid-west United States and Canada. They are typically characterized by generally cold and dry conditions.

Wind direction frequencies were normal during the year. The four highest frequency of occurrence sectors for the year, as measured at the 33-foot level, were winds from the northwest, west-northwest, west, and west-southwest (Fig. 2 ). Seasonal winds were evident as well, including the sea breeze circulation, (Ref. 3 ) during the late spring through early autumn season. Resulting winds during a sea breeze are from the south and southeast. The number of occurrences of this thermally-induced wind, created due to the differential heating between the land and the ocean, was reduced due to the strong west-southwesterly flow during the summer months.

12

p. IP OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION WIND DIRECTION FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE - 1998 WIND DIRECTION "FROM" EACH COMPASS SECTOR VALUES IN PERCENT OF HOURLY OCCURRENCE SSW qw 6%S 7% 6% W 6% SW 6% 7%

10%1 A..

ALI rW OT HERS 33%

W NW 11%

NNW 6%

N 33-FOOT "'IND DIRECTION NOTE: THE FOUR (4) HIGHEST FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE SECTORS ARE HIGHLIGHTED

The annual average temperature for the year was 54.93 degrees Fahrenheit, warmer than last year's average temperature of 52.56 degrees. The historical average annual temperature is 53 degrees. Seven of twelve months were characterized by below normal temperatures, although differences from the historical average were small. The largest differences occurred during the months of June and October (Fig. 3 ). The winter months of January, February and December experienced above normal temperatures for the third consecutive year. The lack of a sustained polar jet stream in the continental United States was the reason for the warmer temperatures. In addition, the ENSO and the sub-polar jet stream bringing warmer air masses originating over the Pacific Ocean were the dominating features, especially during the months of January and February. Normal continental polar air masses only penetrated as far south as Canada and retreated north. During the summer months, temperatures were below normal. A semi-permanent feature known as the sub-tropical high-pressure system usually settles over the southern half of the United States. This area produces southwest flow and ushers in warm, humid conditions. This feature was not strong during 1998 and although there were periods of high humidity over the region, temperatures remained near or slightly below normal with pronounced cloud cover.

For the third consecutive year, the area experienced above normal precipitation. The annual total precipitation amount was 54.24 inches, slightly higher than last years total of 50.93 inches. The 1998 total is over twelve inches more than the Atlantic City National Weather Service historical average (1946 -1981) of 41.50 inches. During the first six months, precipitation was greater than the monthly historical value. The greatest differences occurred in January, February, March, May and June (Fig 4).

A total of 9.95 inches fell in May, highlighted by a 5-day rainfall total of 6.70 inches from May 8 through May 12, the result of several slow moving low pressure systems over the northeast United States. The absence of the semi-permanent sub-tropical high pressure belt over the southeast allowed an influx of moisture from the southwest. This moisture was enhanced by the ENSO over the eastern Pacific. This moisture also caused enhanced development of extra-tropical storms during the first half of the year. Typically, the ENSO will produce enhanced rainfall over the southern tier of the United States and along the southeast coast. Summer precipitation was also a result of showers and thunderstorms that develop in warm, humid air. These events are generally of short duration but high intensity. As described earlier, there was an increase in tropical storm/hurricane activity due to the 14

OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION MONTHLY MEAN AMBIENT AIR TEMPERATURE - 1998 COMPARED WITH HISTORICAL (1946-1981)

ATLANTIC CITY NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE AVERAGE TEMPERATURE DATA 100 l i Oyster Creek

• -Atlantic City S09 20 . . . . . . . . . . . ... .

20 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION MONTHLY PRECIPITATION - 1998 COMPARED WITH HISTORICAL (1946-1981)

ATLANTIC CITY NATIONAL WEATHER SERVICE AVERAGE PRECIPITATION DATA 12.00 10.00 8.00

-Il o~ *~

6.00 4.00 2.00 0.00 z S cjn F-O

return of normal easterly flow in the tropics. Hurricane Bonnie passed east of the region on August 28, 1998 and produced high surf and gale force winds. Precipitation from Bonnie remained well off the coast. Typically, the main portion of winds and rain occur to the east and north of the hurricane's center. The moderate temperatures during the winter and late spring resulted in only a trace of snow for the months of January through April. A snowfall event of 5 inches occurred on December 23, 1998.

Generally the region will see approximately 10 inches of snow. In sunmmary, precipitation events in the region were a result of large extra-tropical storms, especially during the fall, winter and early spring along with warm frontal passages. A more frequent summer cloud cover reduced the frequency of violent weather associated with strong heating (thunderstorms, tornadoes, etc.) during 1998. The bulk of the year's precipitation occurred during the first half influenced by an active ENSO period.

For additional site-specific meteorological data, refer to the OCNGS Effluent and Off-Site Dose Report for 1998 (Ref. 32) 17

EFFLUENTS Historical Background Almost from the outset of the discovery of x-rays in 1895 by Wilhelm Roentgen, the potential hazard of ionizing radiation was recognized and efforts were made to establish radiation protection standards. The International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) and the National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) were established in 1928 and 1929, respectively. These organizations have the longest continuous experience in the review of radiation health effects and with making recommendations on guidelines for radiological protection and radiation exposure limits. In 1955, the United Nations created a Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) to summarize reports received on radiation levels and the effects on man and his environment. The National Academy of Sciences (NAS) formed a committee in 1956 to review the biological effects of atomic radiation (BEAR). A series of reports have been issued by this and succeeding NAS committees on the biological effects of ionizing radiation (BEIR), the most recent during 1990 (known as BEIR V).

These committees and commissions of nationally and internationally recognized scientific experts have been dedicated to the understanding of the. health effects of radiation by investigating all sources of relevant knowledge and scientific data and by providing guidance for radiological protection. Their members are selected from universities, scientific research centers, and other national and international research organizations. The committee reports contain scientific data obtained from physical, biological, and epidemiological studies on radiation health effects and serve as scientific references for information presented in this report.

Since its inception, the USNRC has depended upon the recommendations of the ICRP, the NCRP, and the Federal Radiation Council (FRC) (incorporated in the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) in 1970) for basic radiation protection standards and guidance in establishing regulations for the nuclear industry (Ref. 6 through 9).

Effluent Release Limits As part of routine plant operations, limited quantities of radioactivity are released to the environment in liquid and airborne effluents. An effluent control program is implemented by GPU Nuclear to ensure 18

radioactivity released to the environment is minimal and does not exceed release limits. The Federal government establishes limits on radioactive materials released to the environment. These limits are set at low levels to protect the health and safety of the public and are specified in the OCNGS Technical Specifications and Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) (Ref. 1 and 2). GPU Nuclear conducts operations in a manner that holds radioactive effluents to small percentages of the federal limits.

A recommendation of the ICRP, NCRP, and FRC is that radiation exposures should be maintained at levels which are "as low as reasonably achievable" (ALARA) and commensurate with the societal benefit derived from the activities resulting in such exposures. For this reason, dose limit guidelines were established by the USNRC for releases of radioactive effluents from nuclear power plants. These guidelines were then used as the basis for the development of the ODCM and Technical Specifications.

In keeping with the ALARA principle, the OCNGS operates in a manner that results in radioactive releases that are a small fraction of these limits.

Applicable OCNGS Offsite Dose Calculation Manual limits are as follows:

- ODCM Specification 4.6.1.1.3*A Radioactivity Concentration in Liquid Effluent The concentration of radioactive material, other than noble gases, in liquid effluent in the discharge canal at the U.S. Route 9 bridge shall not exceed 10 times the liquid effluent concentrations specified in 10CFR Part 20.1001-20.2401, Appendix B, Table II, Column 2.

- ODCM Specification 4.6.1.1.3.B Radioactivity Concentration in Liquid Effluent The concentration of noble gases dissolved or entrained in liquid effluent in the discharge canal at the U.S. Route 9 bridge shall not exceed 2.0 E-4 uCi/mi.

- ODCM Specification 4.6.1.1.4A Limit on Dose Due to Liczuid Effluent The dose to a MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC due to radioactive material in liquid effluent in the UNRESTRICTED AREA shall not exceed:

1.5 mrem to the Total Body during any calendar quarter 19

5.0 mrem to any body organ during any calendar quarter 3.0 mirem to the Total Body during any calendar year or 10.0 mrern to any body organ during any calendar year.

- ODCM Specification 4.6.1.1.5.A Dose Rate Due to Gaseous Effluent The dose equivalent rate in the UNRESTRICTED AREA due to radioactive noble gas in gaseous effluent shall not exceed 500 mrem/year to the total body or 3000 mremn/year to the skin.

- ODCM Specification 4.6.1.1.5.B Dose Rate Due to Gaseous Effluent The dose equivalent rate in the UNRESTRICTED AREA due to tritium (H--3), 1-131, 1-133, and to radioactive material in particulate form having half-lives of 8 days or more in gaseous effluents shall not exceed 1500 mrem/year to any body organ when the dose rate due to H-3, Sr-89, Sr-90, and alpha-emitting radionuclides is averaged over no more than 3 months and the dose rate due to other radionuclides is averaged over no more than 31 days.

ODCM Specification 4.6.1.1.6.A Air Dose Due to Noble Gas in Gaseous Effluent The air dose in the UNRESTRICTED AREA due to noble gas released in gaseous effluent shall not exceed:

5 mRad/calendar quarter due to gamma radiation 10 mRad/calendar quarter due to beta radiation 10 mRad/calendar year due to garmna radiation 20 mRad/calendar year due to beta radiation 20

- ODCM Specification 4.6.1.1.7A Dose Due to Radioiodine and Particulates in Gaseous Effluent The dose to a MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC from 1-131, 1-133, and from radiodines in particulate form having half-lives of 8 days or more in gaseous effluent in the UNRESTRICTED AREA shall not exceed 7.5 mnrem to any body organ per calendar quarter or 15 mrem to any body organ per calendar year.

- ODCM Specification 4.6.1.1.8.A Annual Total Dose Due to Radioactive Effluent The annual dose to a MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC due to radioactive material in effluent from the OCNGS in the UNRESTRICTED AREA shall not exceed 75 mrem to his/her thyroid or 25 mrem to his/her total body or to any other organ.

Effluent Control Program Effluent control includes plant components such as the ventilation system and filters, off-gas holdup components, demineralizers, and an evaporator system. In addition to minimizing the release of radioactivity, the effluent control program includes all aspects of effluent and environmental monitoring.

This includes the operation of a complex radiation monitoring system, collection and analysis of effluent samples, environmental sampling and monitoring, and a comprehensive quality assurance program. Over the years, the program has evolved in response to changing regulatory requirements, industry events and plant conditions. For example, additional instruments and samplers have been installed to ensure that measurements of effluents remain onscale in the event of any accidental release of radioactivity.

Effluent Instrumentation: Liquid and airborne effluent measuring instrumentation is designed to monitor the presence and the amount of radioactivity in effluents. Many of these instruments provide continuous surveillance of radioactivity releases. Calibrations of effluent instruments are performed using reference standards certified by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NiST). Instrument alarm setpoints are pre-set to ensure that effluent release limits will not be exceeded. If radiation monitor alarm setpoints are reached, releases are immediately terminated.

21

Where continuous surveillance is not practicable or possible, contingencies are specified in the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual and/or the Technical Specifications.

Effluent Sampling and Analysis: In addition to continuous radiation monitoring instruments, samples of effluents are taken and subjected to laboratory analysis to identify the specific radionuclide quantities being released. A sample must be representative of the effluent from which it is taken. Sampling and analysis provide a sensitive and precise method of determining effluent composition Samples are analyzed using state-of-the-art laboratory counting equipment. Radiation instrument readings and sample results are compared to ensure correct correlation.

Effluent Data As part of routine plant operations, limited quantities of radioactivity are released to the environment in effluents. The amounts of radioactivity released vary and are dependent upon operating conditions, power levels, fuel conditions, efficiency of liquid and gas processing systems, and proper functioning of plant equipment. The largest variations occur in the airborne effluents of fission and activation gases, which are proportional to the integrity of the fuel cladding and the operation of the OCNGS Augmented Off Gas system. In general, effluents have been decreasing with time due to improved fuel integrity and increased efficiency of processing systems.

The amount of radioactivity released in effluents from the OCNGS during 1998 was the fiLfth smallest in the history of Station operation. The predominant radionuclide in gaseous and liquid effluents was tritium (Table 2). Estimated doses to the public, attributable to these effluents, were a small fraction of the applicable regulatory limits (Tables 8 and 9). Summaries of OCNGS effluents can be found in Table 2 and in the Annual Effluent and Offsite Dose Report that is submitted to the USNRC (Ref 32).

Radioactive constituents of these effluents are discussed in the following sections:

Noble Gases: The predominant radioactive materials released in OCNGS airborne effluents are typically the noble gases krypton (Kr) and xenon (Xe). Small amounts of noble gases can also be released in liquid effluents. The total amounts of krypton and xenon released into the atmosphere in 1998 were 0.00323 curies and 8.29 curies, respectively, which is the lowest total in the history of the OCNGS. Noble gases are inert, which means they do not react chemically or biologically. Xenon-135 with a half-life of 9.1 hours1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> was the most abundant noble gas released. These noble gases were readily dispersed into the atmosphere when released and because of their short half-lives, quickly decayed into stable, nonradioactive forms. No noble gas 22

TABLE 2 RADIONUCLIDE COMPOSITION OF OCNGS EFFLUENTS FOR 1998 Radionuclide Half-Life Liquid Effluents (Ci) Airborne Effluents (Ci)

H-3 1.23E 1 Years 1.10E-2 3.07E2 Na-24 1.50E 1 Hours <LLD 1.69E-6 Cr-51 2.78E 1 Days <LLD 8.04E-5 Mn-54 3.12E 2 Days <LLD 9.3 1E-5 Co-58 7.13E 1 Days <LLD 3.38E-5 Co-60 5.26E 0 Years <LLD 3.82E-4 Kr-85m 4.50E 0 Hours <LLD 3.23E-3 Sr-89 5.05E 1 Days <LLD 5.02E-4 Sr-90 2.88E 1 Years <LLD 9.29E-6 Nb-95 3.50E 1 Days <LLD 2.11E-6 Tc-99m 6.00E 0 Hours <LLD 1.44E-6 1-131 8.05E 0 Days <LLD 1.56E-3 1-132 2.26E 0 Hours <LLD 1.50E-4 1-133 2.09E 1 Hours <LLD 7.55E-3 1-134 5.20E 0 Minutes <LLD 8.46E-7 1-135 6.68E 0 Hours <LLD 1.32E-6 Xe-135 9.10E 0 Hours <LLD 8.29E0 Cs-137 3.02E 1 Years <LLD 6.5 1E-6 Ba-140 1.28E 1 Days <LLD 1.21E-3 Gross Alpha 4.91E-6 NOTE: All effluents are expressed in scientific notation. No other nuclides were detected.

NOTE: < LLD = less than lower limit of detection.

23

activity was released in liquid effluents during 1998.

lodines and Particulates: The discharge of iodines and particulates to the environment is minimized by factors such as their high chemical reactivity, solubility in water, and the high removal efficiency of airborne and liquid processing systems.

Of the gaseous radioiodines, iodine-131 is of particular interest because of its relatively long half-life of 8.05 days. Particulates of relative concern are the radiocesiums (Cs-134 and Cs-137), radiostrontiurns (Sr-89 and Sr-90), and activation products, manganese-54 (Mn-54) and cobalt-60 (Co-60). The total amount of iodines and particulates released from the OCNGS in 1998 was 0.0116 curies in airborne effluents. No iodines or particulates were released in liquid effluents.

Tritium: Tritium (H-3) is typically the predominant radionuclide released in liquid effluents and is also released in airborne effluents. Tritium is a radioactive isotope of hydrogen. Itis produced in the reactor fuel and components and in reactor coolant as a result of neutron interaction with the naturally-occurring deuterium (also a hydrogen isotope) present in water. Liquid effluents from the OCNGS in 1998 resulted in 0.011 curies of tritium being released. Tritium released in airborne effluents accounted for 307 curies of radioactivity. As in 1997, the amount of gaseous tritium released during 1998 was higher than the annual amounts released prior to 1997, most likely as a result of control rod blade leakage. However, to put these amounts of H-3 into perspective, the world inventory of natural cosmic ray-produced tritium is approximately 70 million curies, which corresponds to a production rate of 4 million curies per year (Ref 10). Tritium contributions to the environment from OCNGS effluents are too small to have any measurable effect on the existing concentrations in the offsite environment.

Transuranics: Transuranics are produced by neutron capture in the fuel, and typically emit alpha and beta particles as they decay. Important transuranic isotopes produced in reactors are uranium-239 (U-239), plutonium-238 (Pu-238), plutonium-239 (Pu-239), plutonium-240 (Pu-240), plutonium-241 (Pu-241), americium-241 (Am-241), plutonium-243 (Pu-243), plus other isotopes of americium and curium. They have half-lives ranging from hundreds of days to millions of years. Greater than 99% of all transuranics are retained within the nuclear fuel.

These nuclides are insoluble and non-volatile and are not readily transported from in-plant pathways to the environment. Gaseous and liquid processing systems remove greater than 90% of transuranics that may be found in the reactor coolant. Because retention and removal efficiencies are so high, isotopic 24

analyses for transuranics are not routinely performed. However, most transuranics are alpha emitters and are monitored by performing routine gross alpha analyses.

Carbon-14: Production of carbon-14 (C-14) in reactors is small. It is produced in the reactor coolant as a result of neutron interactions with oxygen (0) and nitrogen (N). Estimates for all nuclear power production worldwide show that 235,000 curies were released from 1970 through 1990 (Ref. 11).

Carbon-14 also is produced naturally by the interactions of cosmic radiation with oxygen and nitrogen in the upper atmosphere. The worldwide inventory of natural C-14 is estimated at 241 million curies (Ref.

11). Since the inventory of naural carbon-14 is so large, releases from nuclear power plants do not result in a measurable change in the background concentration of carbon-14. Consequently, carbon-14 is not routinely monitored in plant effluents.

25

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING GPUN conducts a comprehensive radiological environmental monitoring program (REMP) to monitor radiation and radioactive materials in the environment around the OCNGS. The information obtained from the REMP is then used to determine the effect of OCNGS operations, if any, on the environment and the public.

The USNRC has established regulatory guides which contain acceptable monitoring practices (Ref. 12).

The OCNGS REMP was designed on the basis of these regulatory guides along with the USNRC Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position on Environmental Monitoring (Ref. 13). The OCNGS REMP meets or exceeds all of these guidelines.

The objectives ofthe REMP are:

0 to assess dose impacts to the public from OCNGS operations

• to verify in-plant controls for the containment of radioactive materials

• to monitor any buildup of long-lived radionuclides in the environment and changes in background radiation levels 0 to provide reassurance to the public that the program is capable of adequately assessing impacts and identifying noteworthy changes in the radiological status of the environment 0 to fulfill the requirements of the OCNGS Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) and Technical Specifications Environmental Exposure Pathways to Humans from Airborne and Liugid Effluents As previously discussed in the "Effluents" section, small amouns of radioactive materials are released to the environment as a result of operating a nuclear generating station. Once released, these materials move through the environment in a variety of ways and may eventually reach humans via breathing, drinking, eating, and direct exposure. These routes of exposure are referred to as environmental exposure pathways. Figure 15 illustrates the important exposure routes.

26

While some pathways are relatively simple, such as inhalation of airborne radioactive materials, others may be complex. For example, radioactive airborne particulates may deposit onto forage, which when eaten by cows, may be transferred into milk, which is subsequently consumed by man. This route of exposure is known as the air-grass-cow-milk-human pathway.

Although radionuclides can reach humans by a number of pathways, some are more important than others. The critical pathway for a given radionuclide is the one that produces the greatest dose to a population or to a specific segment of the population. This segment of the population is known as the critical group and may be defined by age, diet, or other cultural factors. The dose may be delivered to the whole body or confined to a specific organ; the organ receiving the greatest fraction of the dose is known as the critical organ. This information was used to develop the OCNGS REMP.

Sampling The OCNGS radiological environmental monitoring program consists of two phases - the preoperational and the operational. Data gathered in the preoperational phase were used as a basis for evaluating radiation levels and radioactivity in the vicinity of the plant after the plant became operational. The operational phase began in 1969 when the OCNGS attained initial criticality.

The program consists of taking radiation measurements and collecting samples from the environment, analyzing them for radioactive content, and interpreting the results. Emphasis is on the critical exposure pathways to humans with samples taken. from the aquatic, atmospheric, and terrestrial environments.

These samples include air, well water, surface water, clams, sediment, fish, crabs, and vegetables.

Thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) are placed in the environment to measure gamma radiation levels.

The ODCM Specifications, along with recommendations from GPUN scientists, specify the sample types to be collected and analyses to be performed.

Sampling locations were established by considering meteorology, population distribution, hydrology, and land use characteristics of the local area. The sampling locations are divided into two classes, indicator and background. Indicator locations are those which are expected to show effects from OCNGS operations, if any exist. These locations were primarily selected on the basis of where the highest predicted environmental concentrations would occur. While the indicator locations are typically within a few miles of the plant, the background stations are generally at distances greater than 10 miles from the OCNGS. Therefore, background samples are collected at locations which are expected to be unaffected 27

by station operations. They provide a basis for evaluating fluctuations at indicator locations relative to natural background radioactivity and fallout from prior nuclear weapon tests. Figures 5 and 6 show the current sampling locations around the OCNGS. Table A-i in Appendix A describes the sampling locations by distance and azimuth (compass direction) from the OCNGS, along with type(s) of samples collected at each sampling location.

In addition to specifying the minimum media to be collected and the minimum number of sampling locations, the ODCM Specifications stipulate the frequency of sample collection and the types and frequency of analyses to be performed. Also specified are analytical sensitivities (detection limits) and reporting levels. Table A-2 in Appendix A provides a synopsis of the sample types, number of sampling locations, collection frequencies, number of samples collected, types and frequencies of analyses, and number of samples analyzed. Table A-3 in Appendix A lists samples which were not collected or analyzed in accordance with the requirements of the ODCM Specifications. Sample analyses which did not meet the required analytical sensitivities are presented in Appendix B. Changes in sample collection and analysis are described in Appendix C.

The analytical results are routinely reviewed by GPUN scientists to assure that established sensitivities have been achieved and that the proper analyses have been performed. All analytical results are subjected to an automated review process which ensures that ODCM-required lower limits of detection are met and that reporting levels are not exceeded. Investigations are conducted when reporting levels are reached or when anomalous values are discovered.

Analytical REMN sample results are presented in Appendix D in this report. Table D-1 in Appendix D provides a tabular reporting of all analytical results for samples collected in 1998. Table D-I summarizes the data in a format that closely resembles the suggested format presented in the USNRC Branch Technical Position (Ref. 13). Quality Assurance (QA) sample results for split and/or duplicate samples were used to verify the primary sample results. The QA program is described below.

28

Figure 5 S

~~veazunsi

• v . .. -

Ga le ,tae. "- * * ,-." " '" -. " "

Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (OCNGS)

Locations of Radiological Envixonmental Monitoring Pmogrm (REMP)

Stations within two miles of the OCNGS 29

6 Figure Station (OCNGS)(REMP)

Generating Program Creek Nuclear Monitoring Oyster EnmbnmentalfrEom the OCNGS ofRadiological than 2 miles Locations Stationts greater 30

Measrement of low radionuclide concentrations in envirnmental media requires special analysis techniques. Analytical laboratoies use state-of-the-art laboratory equipment designed to detect beta and gamnm radiation. This equipment must meet the required analytical sensitivities. Examples of the specialized laboratory equipment used are germanium detectors with multichannel analyzers for identifying specific gamma emitting radionuclides, liquid scintillation detectors for detecting tritium, low level proportional counters for detecting gross beta radioactivity, and coincidence counters for low level 1-131 detection. Computer hardware and software used in conjunction with the counting equipment perform calculations and provide data management Analysis methods are described in Appendix J.

ua lity Assurance Program A Quality Assurance (QA) program is conducted in accordance with guidelines provided in Regulatory Guide 4.15, "Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring Programs" (Ref 16) and as required by the ODCM Specifications (Ref. 2) and Technical Specifications (Ref 1). The QA program is documented by GPUN written policies, procedures, and records. These documents encompass all aspects of the REMP including sample collection, equipment calibration, laboratory analysis, and data review.

The QA program is designed to identify possible deficiencies so that inmmediate corrective action can be taken if wanranted. It also provides a measure of confidence in the results of the monitoring program in order to assure the regulatory agencies and the public that the results are valid. The Quality Assurance program for the measurement of radioactivity in environmental samples is implemented by.

• auditing all REMP-related activities including analytical laboratories

• requiring analytical laboratories to participate in an NRC approved Environmental Radioactivity Intercomparison Program

• requiring analytical laboratories to split samples for separate analysis (recounts are performed when samples are not able to be split)

• splitting samples, having the samples analyzed by independent laboratories, and then comparing the results for agreement

• reviewing QA results of the analytical laboratories including spike and blank sample results and duplicate analysis results 31

The Quality Assurance program and the results of the Environmental Radioactivity Intercomparison Program are outlined in Appendices E and F, respectively.

The TLD readers are calibrated monthly against standard TLDs to within five percent of the standard TLD values. Also, each group of TLDs processed by a reader contains control TLDs that are used to correct for minor variations in the reader. The accuracy and variability of the results for the control TLDs are examined for each group of TLDs to assure the reader is functioning properly.

Other cross-checks, calibrations, and certifications are in place to assure the accuracy of the TLD program:

0 Semiannually, randomly selected TLDs are sent to an independent laboratory where they are irradiated to set doses not known to GPUN. The GPUN dosimetry laboratory processes the TLDs and the results are compared against established limits 0 Every two years, each TLD is checked for response within 10 percent of a known value a Every two years, the GPUN dosimetry program is examined and recertified by the NIST National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program (NVLAP)

• Four OCNGS REMP TLD stations have collocated quality assurance badges which are processed by an independent laboratory (Teledyne Brown Engineering). The results are compared against GPU Nuclear Panasonic TLD results The environmental dosimeters were tested and qualified to the specifications in the American National Standard Institute's (ANSI) Publication N545-1975 and USNRC Regulatory Guide 4.13 (Ref.14 and 15).

32

DIRECT RADIATION MONITORING Dose rates rm external radiation sources were measured at a number of locations in the vicinity of the OCNGS using thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs). Naturally occurring sources, including radiation of cosmic origin and natural radioactive materials in the air and ground, as well as fallout from prior nuclear weapon testing, resulted in a certain amount of penetatin radiation being recorded at all monitoring locations. Indicator TLDs were placed systematically, with at least one station in each of 16 meteorological compass sectors (in a ring), typically within 0.25 miles of the OCNGS, or as close as reasonable highway access would permit. TLDs were also placed in each of the 16 sectors within a five mile radius of the OCNGS, located in areas where the potential for deposition of radioactivity was determined to be high, in areas of public interest, and population centers. Background locations were located greater than twenty miles distant from the OCNGS and generally in an upwind direction.

Sample Collection and Analyis A state-of-the-art thermoluminescent dosimeter is used. Thermoluminescence is a process in which ionizing radiation, upon interacting with the sensitive material of the TLD (the phosphor or 'element) causes some of the energy deposited in the phosphor to be stored in stable 'taps' in the TLD material. These TLD traps are so stable that they do not decay appreciably over the course of years. This provides an excellent method of integrating the exposure received over a period of time. The energy stored in the TLDs as a result of interactions with radiation is removed and measured by a controlled heating process in a calibrated reading system. As the TLD is heated, the phosphor releases the stored nrgy as light The amount of light given off is directly proportional to the radiation dose the TLD received, The reading process 'zeros' the TLD and prepares it fbr reuse.

The TLDs in use for environmental monitoring at the OCNGS are capable of accurately measuring exposures between 1 murem (well below normal environmental levels for the quarterly monitoring periods) and 1000 rem.

TLDs were exposed quarterly at 44 monitoring locations ranging from less than 0.2 miles to 25 miles from the OCNGS. Two Panasonic Model 814 TLDs were exposed at each location. One of these locations was designated as a quality control station where two additional Model 814 badges were collocatedc Four Teledyne Brown Engineering TLDs were also exposed at designated quality control stations. Panasonic Model 814 TLDs provide 4 independent detectors per badge and 8 detectors per station.

33

The scheduled exposure periods for 1998 were:

Table 3 TLD EXPOSURE PERIODS DURING 1998 Start Date Collection Date 19 Jan 98 13 Apr 98 13 Apr 98 13 Jul 98 13 Jul 98 12 Oct 98 12 Oct 98 11 Jan 99 All TLD dose rate data presented in this report have been normalized to eliminate differences caused by slightly differing exposure periods. All results were normalized to a standard quarter (91.3 days). TLD dose rate data are presented in Tables K-I and K-2 in Appendix K.

Results The mean background dose exceeded the mean indicator dose during 1998 suggesting that the OCNGS had little if any affect on off-site exposure. The mean dose rate from indicator stations using Panasonic TLDs was 10.0 mrerm/standard quarter with a range from 6.9 to 17.5 mren/standard quarter (Table K-1). The mean background dose was 10.8 torerm/standard quarter with doses ranging from 9.2 to 12.4 torer/standard quarter. Mean doses at background stations have historically exceeded mean doses at indicator stations, most probably due to differences in local geology. These results are consistent with the results of measurements from previous years (Fig. 7).

Dose rates were slightly higher at some locations within 0.4 miles of the OCNGS when compared to background doses (Table K-I and Fig 8). However, these slightly higher doses were recorded at stations that were all located in the Owner Controlled Area where public access is restricted or completely denied. In contrast, doses recorded at stations located at approximately the same distance frEm the OCNGS where the public has unrestricted access (US Route 9) were less than those recorded at the background stations.

Specifically, the mean dose recorded at locations along US Route 9 (Stations 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, and 66) was 9.3 mrem/standard quarter compared to a mean dose of 10.0 mrem/standard quarter recorded at the background stations. In addition, the maximum dose recorded at these indicator stations was 11.0 mrem/standard quarter while the highest recorded background dose was 12.4 mrem/standard quarter. These results suggest that OCNGS operation contributed little if any to off-site exposure.

34

20.................................................................................

1 1

I INDICATOR MFAN BACKGROUND MEAN]

5-E L 5

0. .. T. I I I I 1 1" 1 1 1 1 1 I I I II T T I DATE

1 U MEAN PANASONIC TLD GAMMA DOSE FOR 1998 BASED ON DISTANCE FROM OCNGS 20--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

18 16--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

L. 14--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I- 1 12 ---------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------- -m2 80- . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . .. . .... ... ... ... .... . .. .. ..

. . . .. . .. . ..... .. . . 00 E

E 68 ............... -------

4 ...... -. .

2 - .... . ..

0 0 TO 2 MILS 2 TO 5 MILES OVER 5 MILES DISTANCE RING FROM PLANT U Apr-98 U Jul-98 U Oct-98 U Jan-99

Regarding Teledyne Brown Engineering TLD data, the dose rate measured at indicator stations averaged 9.2 morem/standard quarter and ranged from 7.9 to 10.0 mrem/standard quarter (Table K-2). The dose at background TLD stations averaged 10.3 mrem/standard quarter and ranged from 9.5 to 10.9 mrem/standard quarter. The mean dose rate from the background stations was higher than the mean dose rate from the indicator stations, again suggesting that OCNGS operation contributed little if any to off-site exposure.

37

ATMOSPHERIC MONITORING A potential exposure pathway to man is the inhalation and ingestion of airborne radioactive materials. Air was sampled by a network of seven continuously operating air samplers and then analyzed for radioactivity content.

Indicator air sampling stations are located in prevailing downwind directions, local population areas, and areas of public and special interest All indicator stations are located within 6.1 miles of the OCNGS. A background air sampling station is located 25 miles northwest of the OCNGS in Cookstown, NJ.

Sample Collection and Analysis Mechanical air samplers are used to continuously draw a recorded volume of air first through a glass fiber (particulate) filter and then through a charcoal cartridge. A dry gas meter, which is temperature compensated, is used in line with the filters to record the volume of air sampled. Internal vacuums are also measured in order to pressure correct the indicated volume. All air samplers are maintained and calibrated by the OCNGS Instrument and Control Department.

The particulate filters were collected every two weeks and analyzed for gross beta radioactivity. The filters were then combined quarterly by individual stations andaalyzed-for-gamma-emitting-radionuclides.-

Charcoal cartridges, used to collect gaseous radioiodines, contain activated charcoal. Charcoal cartridges were collected weekly and analyzed for iodine-131 (1-131) activity.

Results The results of the atmospheric monitoring during 1998 demonstrated that, as in previous years, the radioactive airborne effluents associated with the OCNGS did not have any measurable effects on the environment During 1998, 183 gross beta analyses were performed on air particulate filters (Table D-1). The background mean gross beta activity (0.0151 pCi/mn) was slightly higher than the indicator mean (0.0142 pCi/rn 3) and all gross beta analysis results were within two standard deviations of the historical mean. A quality control check of indicator station results shows that all but one of the 157 observations were within statistical control limits (Fig. 9).

38

AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA - 1998 MOVING RANGE QUALITY CONTROL CHART INDICATOR STATION RESULTS COMPARED TO BACKGROUND LIMITS 0

o Station3 X Station 20 Station 66 11Station 71 A Sta 72 X Sation731 0.02 7"

---

ICL =0.0238 X X 0.022 - 0 0.017 -

x X 1 0

0 N

X~K A

a X x CX a

0 K

0 m

0 X

A x

X= 0 .0 15 1 I

X 0 0 A A XA x K x 0.012 I 0 A x x W x

. W KCa U o0 A]

A A 0 0 0( 0 K 0 0.007 - a x

--- -- -- -- -- -- ------------- --------------- --------------- ------------- ------------- --------------------------------------- =0.0064 0.002 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 6 00 0 0 0 00 00000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00, 00 0,0 010 O* ON O ON ON ON ON Oa ON ON Oa ON\ aO O\ ON ON OaON ON O0 ON O ON ON ON ON cc 0 W I I I i

.1 -- ~.r4 tn f Nc 0\

-EM N- U th N eq 'C0 00 Cq NOTE: Upper (UCL) and lower (LCI) control limits (3-sigma theta) computed from lowest wind affected background station (Cookstown - NW of OCNGS)

Comparison of the 1998 bi-weekly mean air particulate gross beta concentrations from indicator and background stations shows that indicator and background concentrations were essentially identical (Fig. 10).

In all but three of the comparisons, the mean background concentration equaled or exceeded the mean indicator concentration. The results are consistent with the results of gross beta analyses of air samples from previous years (Fig. 11). The air particulate gross beta analysis results indicate that effluent containing gross beta radioactivity from OCNGS operation did not have any measurable impact on the local environment Gamma emitting radionuclides attributable to effluents from the OCNGS were not identified in any of the 28 air particulate filter composites subjected to gamma isotopic analysis (Table D-l). The only radionuclide identified was naturally occurring beryllium-7, which was seen in similar concentrations at both indicator and background stations.

Air charcoal cartridges (364) were analyzed for iodine-131 (1-131) and no radioiodine was detected in any of the samples (Table D-1). This is consistent with results from past years.

40

BI-WEEKLY MEAN AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA CONCENTRATIONS - 1998 0.05 -

0.04 -

E

0.03 -Ti

'2

_ 0.02 0 0.c 0.01 0

0000 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 at 00 00 ONý ONO NONO NO O NO O NO N ON, ON ON O aN, NO ON ON ON

-7 e-4 -, -7 -e. -7~ -

YEAR 1998

MONTHLY MEAN AIR PARTICULATE GROSS BETA CONCENTRATIONS 1984 THROUGH 1998 0.18 0.16 .--------------------- ...........................................................................................................

0!.14 ..................... .............................................................................................................

E CSTATION CLASSIFICATION

. 0.12 ................... .... .. ........................ ................

"4 INDICATOR C 9- BACKGROUND*

0 . 18-.. --- --- -- --- --.- -- -- --- --- -- ----.- --- -- --- -- .-.-- .-. -- . -- .-. -- . -...-.- . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

0..

0 .0 66 -. -. ----------------- .-.-------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------

0.08 . . .. . .

0.06 1.-t -rtnU tn 10 10 10 t- t- 00 00 a, c0l a, -T -r - In In W) tn '0 \0 '0 r. r- 00 o? I 00 00 00 00 0ý C" Cý Oý 0\

OT 0\ "I T T, Dt fr o.-, . - stat ti O N- .

at Dec b.r 19 'Co ,tDATE-SData from Cookstown station ONLY after December 1996 DATE

AQUATIC MONITORING Brackish water from Barnegat Bay is drawn in through the South Branch of Forked River, pumped into the OCNGS cooling systems, and then discharged to Bamegat Bay via Oyster Creek. Normally, no radioactive material is introduced to this non-contact cooling water. On occasion, radioactive liquids may be released to the discharge canal in accordance with the limits established in the OCNGS Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) Specifications, Technical Specifications, and IOCFR20. Highly purified water, containing traces of radioactivity, may be discharged into the OCNGS discharge canal, which routinely has a minimum flow rate of slightly under one-half million gallons per minute. Liquid effluents during 1998 resulted in the release of 0.011 curies of tritium.

Fish, clams, and crabs are harvested from the bay on a recreational and, to a limited extent, commercial basis.

The ingestion pathway is addressed because of fish, clam, and crab consumption by man. Samples of surface water, sediment, fish, blue crab, and hard clams were routinely collected from locations in the OCNGS discharge canal, Barnegat Bay, and Great Bay/Little Egg Harbor in order to monitor any environmental impact that may be associated with liquid effluents from the OCNGS.

Sample Collection and Analysis Surface water samples from two stations were collected monthly while an additional two stations were sampled on a semiannual basis. Sediment and clam samples were also collected semiannually. Grab samples of surface water and sediment were collected from three indicator stations and one background station. Grab samples of clams were collected from two indicator stations and one background station- An indicator station (Station 33) is located in the OCNGS discharge canal where surface water and sediment are collected, but no clams are available for collection. Two additional indicator stations for surface water, sediment, and clams are located in Bamegat Bay in close proximity to the mouth of Oyster Creek- One background station is located approximately 22 miles south of the OCNGS in Great Bay/Little Egg Harbor.

Fish samples were collected semiannually (when available) from two indicator stations and one background station. One crab sample was collected annually from an indicator station. Indicator stations for fish and crabs are located in the OCNGS discharge canal and the background station for fish is located in Great Bay/Little Egg Harbor. Crab pots were used to catch blue crab. Traps, as well as the hook and line technique, were used to catch fish.

43

Sediment, clam, fish, and crab samples were analyzed for gamma-eiing nuclides and surface water was analyzed for tritium as well as gamrma-emitting nuclides.

Results Operation of the OCNGS had no detectable effect upon the local surface water which was sampled 40 times at four different locations during 1998. One gamma-emitting nuclide, potassium-40 (K-40) was detected in 27 of 28 analysis performed (Table D-1). Tritium (H1-3) activity was also detected in one sample (Table D-1). Both of these nuclides are naturally occurring and commonly found in salt water at or above the observed concentrations. No other radionucides were detected in surface water samples.

Five gamma-emitting nuclides were detected in the 8 sediment samples collected during 1998 (Table D-1). Four of these radionuclides, beryllium-7 (Be-7), potassium-40, radium-226 (Ra-226), and thorium-232 (Th-232), are naturally occurring and not attributable to OCNGS effluents. Cesium-137 (Cs-137), which is a fission product, was also detected in both background and indicator samples.

Cesium-137 was widely distributed and detected in considerable abundance as a result of fallout following atmospheric weapons tests and the 1986 Chernobyl accident. Cesium-137 was also released in small quantities from the OCNGS in liquid effluents in past years. The results of the sediment sampling program indicate that the presence of cesium-137 in the sediments of the OCNGS discharge canal and nearby portions of Barnegat Bay may be attributable in part to past liquid discharges from the facility. A review of sediment sample analysis results for the 1994 - 1998 period shows cesium-137 was detected in 82 percent of background and only 60 percent of indicator samples (Table 4).

However, cesium-137 concentrations detected at the two indicator stations (Stations 33 and 93), which are closest to the OCNGS liquid discharge point, show concentrations consistently higher than those found at background stations (Fig. 12). During the previous five years, the mean concentration of cesium-137 at background stations was 32 pCi/kg-dry, while the average concentration at indicator Stations 33 and 93 was 93 pCi/kg-dry. In addition, during this five year period, the highest concentration of Cs-137 at an indicator station was 240 pCi/kg-dry, which was detected at Station 33 during March 1996. The highest concentration at a background station during the same five year period was 67 pCi/kg-dry.

It is important to note that even the highest concentration of Cs-137 observed in sediments (240 pCi/Kg-dry) was only slightly above the 180 pCi/kg-dry Lower Limit of Detection specified by the Nuclear Regulatory 44

MEAN CESIUM-137 CONCENTRATION IN AQUATIC SEDIMENT - 1984 THROUGH 1998 1000 8 0 00 - .-.- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- .-.- I STATION CLASSIFICATION

-- INDICATOR E I -u-BACKGROUND 60000-............................................................................................................................

• 600 0 0I"

-r -r -r tl) if) If n \f0 \O No rN t- 00 00 00 ON ON N0\ I= r'l n -r IT) \0 N1 00 00 00 w0 00  ? o? a? w0 00 w0 0 0 w00 w00 00 ON ON O\ m C\O ON ON ON

.6 ) .6 -6 6.~?

- ll--- rII - 4 e -l DATE

Table 4 Cesium-137 Concentration in Aquatic Sediment 1994-1998 (pCi/Kg-dry)

Station Station Station Station Station Station Station Station Date 23 24 25 31 32 33 93 _... 94 Jan 94 26 22 < LLD 40 54 140 110 67 Apr 94 < LLD 21 < LLD 49 45 150 67 48 Jul 94 < LLD < LLD < LLD 24 29 160 70 46 Nov 94 24 37 < LLD 22 44 140 95 61 Mar 95 < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD 72 46 94 < LLD May 95 56 < LLD < LLD < LLD < LUD 130 100 32 Aug 95 < LLD < LLD 9 13 32 60 91 15 Oct 95 47 31 < LLD < LLD < LLD 51 120 27 Mar 96 < LLD < LLD < LLD 37 20 240 110 26 Jun 96 32 21 11 23 < LLD 56 71 22 Aug 96 16 < LLD < LLD 17 < LLD < LLD 100 24 Sep 96 < LLD < LLD 15 39 23 33 100 17 May 97 45 < LLD 6 4.: ":-:64: 20

• -.:i*:. :!: :...:.*.* .:....!:,.

.........  : .*.-.i* '*:

Oct.97 <.LLD <.LLD .-........... 12 . 31 Junl98 < LLD < LU)*~**i"-...*<* 34 '.!:-.-*-.i.:*-i 45 Nov.98 <.LLD <.LLD .. .<L 58.......

Maximum 56 37 15 49 72 240 120 67 Average 35 26 12 29 40 92 94 34 Minimum 16 21 9 13 20 12 67 15

- Shaded areas indicate no data

- Stations 23, 24, 25, 32, 33, and 93 are indicator stations

- Stations 31 and 94 are background stations 46

Commission (Ref. 13) and only 12 percent of their Reporting Level for Cs-137 in fish and broad leaf vegetation (2,000 pCi/kg-wet).

Over the years, there has been a dramatic reduction in liquid discharges from the OCNGS and there have been no routine discharges of liquid radioactive wastes since 1989. As a result of this reduction in liquid effluents, as well as the ongoing natural radioactive decay process, the level of Cs-137 in sediments continues to decrease (Fig. 12).

Cobalt-60 was not detected in either indicator or background station sediment samples -during 1998 (Table D-1; Fig. 13). The presence of cobalt-60 in sediment samples in previous years has been attributed to past OCNGS liquid effluents (Ref 19). During the years 1994 through 1996, cobalt-60 was detected in 58 percent of sediment samples collected firom indicator stations 33 and 93, located in the OCNGS Discharge Canal (Table 5). During the same time period, no Co-60 was detected at either of the background stations, Stations 31 and 94, nor was it detected at any other indicator station. As documented in previous reports, OCNGS-related cobalt-60 activity had been found in sediment and clams from Barnegat Bay since the mid-1970's. The amount of radioactivity in liquid effluents has been significantly reduced since that time and this decrease in the rate of input of cobalt-60 to the environment, combined with radioactive decay of the existing inventory, has resulted in a gradual decline in the cobalt-60 concentration in sediment and clams (Figs. 13 and 14). The last detectable concentrations of this radionuclide in sediment were found during the third quarter of 1996 (Fig. 13), and in clams, during the third quarter of 1987 (Fig. 14).

No radionuclides attributable to effluents from the OCNGS were found in samples of clams, crabs and fish collected during 1998 (fable D-1).

Six clam samples were collected from three different locations during 1998. Gamma isotopic analyses indicated that the only gamma-emitting nuclide present was potassium-40, which is naturally occurring and commonly found in salt water (Table D-1).

One blue crab sample was collected from the OCNGS discharge canal during 1998. A gamma isotopic analysis was performed on this sample and naturally occurring potassiumn-40 and thorium-232 were the only radionuclides identified (Table D-1). The close association of this species with sediments could make it susceptible to cesium-137 and cobalt-60 uptake. However, no detectable Cs-137 or Co-60 activity has been observed in blue crab samples since routine collection began in 1985.

47

500 -.............................................................................................................................

N .C.LAA SSJF ICATI. N.

1.....

450 - .---. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .S-TAI$.TAT

,', *INDICATOR 400 - .---. . . . . . . . . . ..------------------------------------------------------------------------ N I

-u- BACKCROUNDI) 3 503 5 - ... .. .. . ... . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... .. .. ... .. .. .. .. ... . ... .. .. .. .. .. ... ... .. .. .. ... . .. ... .. .. .. . ... .. .. .. . ... .. .. .. .. . .. ..

00 .

L. 300 ---

• ~250-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

0.- -r" 0 5 . .... ...... ...... ........... ...........................................................................................

S200 -- -- --- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

. 10 0 -- - -. - -- --.- . . .......... .. .. . . ........................................................

15010 . . . . .... .. .... . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . ....

iln- tri S.

tl F.0 N 0 IC t- r- t- 00 00 00 aN ON O, 0= ;z ell i -r riF \0 NA 00 oo 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 oe 00 00 00 00 00) 00 00 00 00 O\ O O\ ON \ ON a\ Oa, Cl a I DAIT,

MEAN COBALT-60 CONCENTRATION IN CLAMS - 1983 THROUGH 1998 30 ATION CLASSIFICATION 25

• 4 ST*

INDICATOR E -a.- RA-KCRkIN "

24) 4_

00 . 15 .V-10 5

0 rn tri 00

ý.o Nl 0

N-00 N

0 00 0

00 0

oo0 CON 00 0%

m0 ON 00 ON 0

<=

ON O

ý N O N

e O

"l N

~

n O

nl N

-t O

-.r N

-r O

')

N t-O C- " ~ cr ' - z C")oC DATE

Table 5 Cobalt-60 Concentration in Aquatic Sediment 1994-1998 (pCi(Kg-dry)

Date 23 24 25 31 32 33 93 94 Station Station Station Station Station Station I Station I Station Jan 94 < LLD < LLD <LLD < LLD < LLD 26 37 < LU)

Apr 94 < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD 38 26 < LLD Jul 94 < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD 22 < LLD Nov 94 < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD 44 27 < LLD Mar 95 < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD 18 < LLD May 95 < LLD < LLD <LLD < LLD <LLD 41 < LLD < LLD Aug 95 < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD Oct 95 < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD 14 20 < LLD Mar 96 < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD 180 < LLD < LLD Jun 96 < LLD < LLD <LLD < LLD < LLD 15 < LLD < LLD Aug 96 <LLLD < LLD <LU) <LD <LU) <LLD 33 <LLD Sep 96 < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD May 97 < LLD < LLD  ::::::::::::::::::::?:::::< LU) < LLD Jun98 < LLD < LLD < LLD < LLD N~ov' 98 < .LLD < LLD) i:i:iiii:iiii!:'iiii:i: iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii* <LLD } l! i i < LU)

Maximum < LLD < LLD < LU) <LU) < LU) 180 37 < LLD Average < LLD < LLD < LLD <LU) <LU) 51 26 <LLD Minimum < LLD < LLD <<LLD <LU) <L) 14 18 < LLD

- Shaded areas indicate no data

- Stations 23, 24, 25, 32, 33, and 93 are indicator stations

- Stations 31 and 94 are background stations 50

Eighteen fish samples, yielding nine species, were collected from 3 sampling locations during 1998. The species and number of samples collected are listed in Table 6.

TABLE 6 SPECIES OF FISH CAUGHT AS PART OF THE OCNGS REMP IN 1998 Fish Number of Samples bluefish 3 striped bass 3 white perch 3 winter flounder 3 tautog 2 blowfish I sea bass 1 summer flounder 1 weakfish 1 Naturally, occurring potassium-40 was the only radionuclide detected in fish samples collected during 1998 (Table D-1).

51

TERRESTRIAL MONITORING Radionuclides released to the atmosphere may be deposited on soil and vegetation and may be incorporated into milk, vegetation, vegetables, and other food products. To assess the impact of dose to humans from this ingestion pathway, samples of green leafy vegetables were collected and analyzed during 1998.

The contribution of radionuclides from OCNGS effluents to this ingestion pathway was assessed by comparing the results of samples collected at indicator stations in prevalent downwind locations, primarily to the southeast of the site, with background samples collected from distant and generally upwind directions. Indicator samples are collected at the two locations with the highest D/Q (deposition factor). These locations were identified using site-specific meteorological data. This technique is utilized in lieu of performing any garden census, because it ensures that representative measurements of radioactivity in the highest potential exposure pathways are obtained as required by Technical Specification 6.8.4.b.

In addition, a dairy census was conducted to determine the locations of commercial dairy operations and milk producing animals in each of the 16 meteorological sectors out to a distance of five miles from the OCNGS. The census showed that there were no commercial dairy operations and no dairy animals producing milk for human consumption within a 5 mile radius of the plant (Appendix G).

Two gardens were maintained near the site boundary of the OCNGS in the two sectors with the highest potential for radioactive deposition in accordance with the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (Ref 2).

Both of these indicator gardens are greater than 50 square meters (500 square feet) in size and produced green leafy vegetables. A commercial farm located approximately 24 miles northwest of the site was used as a background station.

Sample Collection and Analysis Broadleaf vegetables, specifically cabbage and collards, were collected on a monthly basis beginning in August and ending in November 1998. A gamma isotopic analysis was performed on each sample.

52

Results The results of the terrestrial monitoring during 1998 demonstrated that the radioactive effluents associated with the OCNGS did not have any measurable effects on vegetation.

A gamma isotopic analysis was performed on twelve collard samples and six cabbage samples (Table D-1). Naturally occurring potassium-40 (K-40) was detected in all of the samples collected from both indicator and background stations. Beryllium-7 (Be-7), which is also naturally occurring, was identified in 3 of 8 collard samples and detected in 2 of 4 cabbage samples collected from the indicator garden.

No other radionuclides were detected in vegetable samples. Of the radionuclides detected, all are naturally occurring, and none are associated with OCNGS operation.

53

GROUNDWATER MONITORING The Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station is located on the Atlantic Coastal Plain Physiographic Province. This Province extends southeastward from the Fall Zone, a topographic break that marks the boundary between the Atlantic Coastal Plain and the more rugged topography of the Piedmont Province.

The Fall Zone is also where the crystalline and sedimentary rocks of the Piedmont and the unconsolidated Coastal Plain sediments meet.

At least five distinct bodies of fresh groundwater or aquifers exist in the vicinity of the OCNGS. From the surface downward, they are:

1. Recent and Upper Cape May Formation

2. Lower Cape May Formation

3. Cohansey Sand

4. Upper Zone in the Kirkwood Formation

5. Lower Zone in the Kirkwood Formation The Recent and Cape May Formations are replenished directly by local precipitation. The recharge to the underlying aquifers occurs primarily from direct rainfall penetration on the outcrop areas, which are generally to the west of the site at higher elevations.

Sample Collection and Analysis As part of the routine REMP, three groundwater wells were sampled on a quarterly basis. Grab samples were obtained from two local Municipal Utility Authority wells and an on-site drinking water well. The Lacey Municipal Utility Authority combines water from three wells which are drilled to depths of 239', 248', and 267'. This sampling location is 2.2 miles north-northeast of the OCNGS. A second sampling location is the Ocean Township Municipal Utility Authority well which is approximately 360' deep and located 1.6 miles from the OCNGS in a south-southwest direction. The third sampling location is the 400' deep on-site well that supplies drinking water to the OCNGS. Each sample was subjected to a tritium and gamma isotopic analysis.

54

In addition, a groundwater monitoring network installed around the OCNGS in 1983 to serve as an early detection and monitoring system for spills, was sampled in March and October 1998. This network is comprised of fifteen wells which are located in the Cape May, Cohansey, and Kirkwood Aquifers. Grab sample methodology was used and the samples. were also analyzed for tritium and gamma emitting nuclides.

Results The results of the REMP groundwater monitoring during 1998 demonstrated that, as in previous years, the radioactive effluents associated with the OCNGS did not have any measurable effects on offsite drinking water.

Twelve routine REMP well water samples were collected during 1998. No radioactivity was detected in any of these samples (Table D-1).

The results of the analyses of 28 samples collected from the onsite groundwater monitoring well network were similar to results seen in past years except for tritium concentrations (Table I-I).

Tritium, potassium-40, and thorium-232 were the only nuclides detected in these wells and each is naturally occurring. Tritium, however, is also produced as a byproduct in the OCNGS reactor and it was detected in these monitoring wells more frequently than in prior years (Table 7). Tritium was detected in 15 of the 28 samples collected in 1998. Tritium concentrations ranged from 150 to 840 pCi/liter with an average concentration of 299 pCi/liter. Prior to 1998, the highest frequency of occurrence was seven positive tritium results out of 25 samples in 1991. Only two positive tritium results, 170 pCilliter in each, were observed during 1997, and only one positive result (180 pCi/liter) was observed during 1996.

55

TABLE 7 FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF TRITIUM IN THE ONSITE GROUNDWATER MONITORING NETWORK (1989 through 1998)

Year Number of Samples Number of Tritium Collected Results That Were Above the Lower Limit of Detection 1998 28 15 1997 30 2 1996 15 1 1995 30 3 1994 29 1 1993 30 1 1992 25 2 1991 25 7 1990 30 5 1989 28 2 The increase in the frequency of occurrence and concentration of tritium in the onsite groundwater monitoring wells can be attributed to the increase in the amount of tritium in airborne effluents from the OCNGS during 1997 and 1998. Increases in reactor coolant tritium concentrations, thought to be related to control rod blade leakage, have resulted in an increase in the amount of tritium released in gaseous effluents. Remedial efforts during the 17R outage in the autumn of 1998, including the replacement and shuffling of control rods, were implemented in order to reduce or eliminate this source of tritium.

The highest tritium concentration detected in onsite monitoring wells during 1998 (840 pCi/liter) was only 42 percent of the analytical Lower Limit of Detection of 2,000 pCi/liter specified by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Ref. 13) and only 4.2 percent of the USEPA drinking water limit of 20,000 pCi/liter. In addition, as discussed above, no tritium was detected in samples collected from off-site drinking water wells.

56

RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT OF OCNGS OPERATIONS An assessment of potential radiological impact indicated that radiation doses to the public from 1998 operations at the OCNGS were well below all applicable regulatory limits and were significantly less than doses received from common sources of radiation. The 1998 total body dose, potentially received by a hypothetical maximum exposed individual, from OCNGS liquid and airborne effluents, was conservatively calculated to be 1.7E-2 millirem total or only 6.8E-2 percent of the regulatory limit. The 1998 total body dose to the surrounding population from OCNGS liquid and airborne effluents was calculated to be 1.OE-1 person-rem. This is approximately 12.3 million times lower than the doses to the total population within a 50-mile radius of the OCNGS resulting from natural background sources.

Determination of Radiation Doses to the Public To the extent possible, doses to the public are based on direct measurement of dose rates from external sources and measurements of radionuclide concentrations in the environment which may contribute to an internal dose of radiation. Thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) positioned in the environment around the OCNGS provide measurements to determine external radiation doses to humans. Samples of air, water, food products, etc. can be used to determine internal doses.

During normal plant operations the quantities of radionuclides released are typically too small to be measured once released to the offsite environment. As a result, the potential offsite doses are calculated using a computerized model that predicts concentrations of radioactive materials in the environment and subsequent radiation doses on the basis of radionuclides released to the environment. OCNGS doses were calculated using a computer program called SEEDS (Simplified Effluent Environmental Dosimetry System). This program is based upon the OCNGS Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) and incorporates the guidelines and methodologies set forth by the USNRC in Regulatory Guide 1.109 (Ref. 17). Due to the conservative assumptions that are used in SEEDS, the calculated doses are considerably higher than the actual doses to people.

The type and amount of radioactivity released from the OCNGS is calculated using measurements from effluent radiation monitoring instruments and effluent sample analysis.

Once released, the dispersion of radionuclides in the environment is readily estimated by 57

computer modeling. Airborne releases are diluted and carried away from the site by atmospheric diffusion which continuously acts to disperse radioactivity. Variables which affect atlnospheric dispersion include wind speed and direction, atmospheric stability, and terrain. A meteorological monitoring station northwest of the OCNGS permanently records and telemeters all necessary meteorological data. A computer program is also used to predict the downstream dilution and travel times for liquid releases into the Barnegat Bay estuary and Atlantic Ocean.

The pathways to human exposure are also included in the model. These pathways are depicted in Figure 15. The exposure pathways considered for the discharge of the station's liquid effluent are fish and shellfish consumption and shoreline exposure. The exposure pathways considered for airborne effluents include plume exposure, inhalation, vegetable consumption (during growing season), and land deposition.

SEEDS employs numerous data files which describe the area around the OCNGS in terms of demography and foodstuffs production. Data files include such information as the distance from the plant stack to the site boundary in each of the sixteen compass sectors, the population groupings, meat animals, and crop yields.

When determining the dose to humans, it is necessary to consider all pathways and all exposed tissues (summing the dose from each) to provide the total dose for each organ as well as the total body from a given radionuclide in the environment. Dose calculations involve determining the energy absorbed per unit mass in the various tissues. Thus, for radionuclides taken into the body, the metabolism of the radionuclide in the body must be known along with the physical characteristics of the nuclide such as energies, types of radiations emitted, and half-life. SEEDS also contains dose conversion factors for over 75 radionuclides for each of four age groups (adult, teen, child, and infant) and eight organs (total body, thyroid, liver, skin, kidney, lung, bone, and gastro-intestinal tract).

Doses are calculated for what is termed the "maximum hypothetical individual". This individual is assumed to be affected by the combined maximum environmental concentrations wherever they occur. For liquid releases at the OCNGS, the maximum hypothetical individual would be one who stands at the U.S. Route 9-discharge canal shoreline for 67 hours7.75463e-4 days <br />0.0186 hours <br />1.107804e-4 weeks <br />2.54935e-5 months <br /> per year while eating 58

FIGURE 15 EXPOSURE PATHWAYS FOR RADIONUCLIDES POTENTIALLY RELEASED FROM THE OCNGS I GseousEffluents ]'

PREDOMINANT RADIONUCLIDES 7=,7pjt.ý B'C S Zr 59

43 pounds of fish and shellfish. For airborne releases, the maximum hypothetical individual would live at the location of highest radionuclide concentration for inhalation and direct plume exposure while eating 1,389 pounds of vegetables per year. This location is 2,616 meters to the south-southwest based on meteorological air dispersion analysis. The usage factors and other assumptions used in the model result in a conservative overestimation of dose. Doses are calculated for the population within 50 miles of the OCNGS for airborne effluents and the entire population using the Barnegat Bay estuary and Atlantic Ocean for liquid effluents. Appendix H contains a more detailed discussion of the dose calculation methodology.

Results of Dose Calculations Doses from natural background radiation provide a baseline for assessing the potential public health significance of radioactive effluents. The average person in the United States receives about 300 millirem (rorem) per year from natural background radiation sources. Natural background radiation from cosmic, terrestrial, and natural radionuclides in the human body (not including radon), averages about 100 mrem/yr. The natural background radiation from cosmic and terrestrial sources varies with geographic location, ranging from a low of about 65 nrem/yr on the Atlantic and Gulf coastal plains to as much as 350 mrem/yr on the Colorado plateau (Ref.

5). The National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) now estimates that the average individual in the United States receives an annual dose of about 2,400,milhirems to the lung from natural radon gas. This lung dose is considered to be equivalent to a whole body dose of 200 millirems (Ref. 4). Effluent releases from the OCNGS and other nuclear power plants contribute a very small percentage to the natural radioactivity which has always been present in the air, water, soil, and even in our bodies.

In genera], the annual population doses from natural background radiation (excluding radon) are 1,000 to 1,000,000 times larger than the doses to the same population resulting from nuclear power plant operations (Rcf. 18).

Results of the dose calculations are summarized in Tables 8 and 9. Table 8 compares the calculated maximum dose to an individual of the public with the OCNGS ODCM Specifications, Technical Specifications, LOCFR20.1301, and 10CFRS0 Appendix I dose limits.

Table 9 presents the maximum total body radiation doses to the population within 50 miles of the 60

plant from airborne releases, and to the entire population using Barnegat Bay and the Atlantic Ocean, for liquid releases.

These conservative calculations of the doses to members of the public from the OCNGS resulted in a maximum dose of only 0.15 percent of the applicable regulatory limits. They are also considerably lower than the doses from natural background and fallout from prior nuclear weapon tests.

61

TABLE 8 CALCULATED MAXIMUM HYPOTHETICAL DOSES TO AN INDIVIDUAL FROM LIOUID AND AIRBORNE EFFLUENT RELEASES FROM THE OCNGS m

FOR 1998 EFFLUENT REGULATORY LIMITS PERCENT OF RELEASED CALCULATED DOSE REGULATORY trem/YEAR SOURCE mrem/YAR LIMIT LIQUID 3 - TOTAL BODY ODCM SPEC 4.6.1.1.4 8.6E-8 2.9E-6 LIQUID 10 - ANY ORGAN ODCM SPEC 4.6.1.1.4 8.6E-8 8.6E-7 AIRBORNE 100 - TOTAL BODY 10CFR20.1301 4.3E-5 4.3E-5 (NOBLE GAS)

AIRBORNE 3000 - SKIN ODCM SPEC 4.6.1.1.5 6.6E-5 2.2E-6 (NOBLE GAS)

AIRBORNE 15 - ANY ORGAN ODCM SPEC 4.6.1.1.7 2.2E-2 1.5E-1 (IODINE AND PARTICULATE)

TOTAL-LIQUID 25 - TOTAL BODY ODCM SPEC 4.6.1.1.8 1.7E-2 6.8E-2 AND AIRBORNE TOTAL - LIQUID 75- THYROID ODCM SPEC 4.6.1.1.8 2-2E-2 2.9E-2 AND AIRBORNE TOTAL - LIQUID 25 - ANY OTHER ODCM SPEC 4.6.1.1.8 6.6E-5 2.6E-4 AND AIRBORNE ORGAN 62

TABLE 9 CALCULATED MAXIMUM TOTAL RADIATION DOSES TO THE POPULATION' FROM LIQUID AND AIRBORNE EFFLUENT RELEASES FROM THE OCNGS FOR 1998 Calculatod Population Total Body Dose Person-rem/Year From Radionuclides in Liquid Releases 1.0E-3 (Barnegat Bay and Atlantic Ocean Users)

From Radionuclides in Airborne Releases 1.OE-1 (Within 50-Mile Radius of OCNGS)

DOSE DUE TO NATURAL BACKGROUND RADIATION Approximately 1,230,000 Person-rem Per Year Based upon 1990 Census Data 63

REFERENCES (1) Jersey Central Power and Light Company. Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Operating License and Technical Specifications, Appendix A, DPR-16, April 1969.

(2) GPU Nuclear, Inc. Oyster Creek Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, Procedure 2000-ADM-4532.04.

(3) GPU Nuclear, Inc. Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Updated Final Safety Analysis Report.

(4) National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Report No. 93, Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States, 1987.

(5) CRC Handbook, Radioecology: Nuclear Energy and the Environment, F. Ward Whicker and Vincent Schultz, Volume I, 1982.

(6) National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Report No. 22, Maximum Permissible Body Burdens and Maximum Permissible Concentrations of Radionuclides in Air and Water for Occupational Exposure, (Published as National Bureau of Standards Handbook 69, Issued June 1959, superseding Handbook 52).

(7) International Commission on Radiological Protection, Publication 2, Report of Committee II on Permissible Dose for Internal Radiation (1959), with 1962 Supplement Issued in ICRP Publication 6; Publication 9, Recommendations on Radiation Exposure, (1965); ICRP Publication 7 (1965), amplifying specific recommendations of Publication 9 concerning environmental monitoring; and ICRP Publication 26 (1977).

(8) Federal Radiation Council Report No. 1, Background Material for the Development of Radiation Protection Standards, May 13, 1960.

(9) National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Report No. 39, Basic Radiation Protection Criteria, January 197 1.

64

(10) National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Report No. 62, Tritium in the Environment, March 1979.

(11) National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, Report No. 81, Carbon-14 in the Environment, May 1985.

(12) United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Regulatory Guide 4.1, Programs for Monitoring Radioactivity in The Environs of Nuclear Power Plants, Revision 1, April 1975.

(13) United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Branch Technical Position, An Acceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program, Revision 1, November 1979.

(14) American National Standards Institute, Inc., Performance, Testing, and Procedural Specifications for Thermoluminescence Dosimetry, ANSI N545-1975.

(15) United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Regulatory Guide 4.13, Performance, Testing and Procedural Specifications for Thermoluminescence Dosimetry:

Environmental Applications, Revision 1, July 1977.

(16) United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Regulatory Guide 4.15, Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring Programs (Normal Operations) - Effluent Streams and the Enviroment, Revision 1, February 1979.

(17) United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Regulatory Guide 1.109, Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I, Revision 1, October 1977.

(18) NUREG/CR-4068, Summary of Historical Experience with Releases of Radioactive Materials from Commercial Nuclear Power Plants in the United States, 1985.

(19) Olsen, C.R, et. al, 1980. Reactor-released Radionuclides and Fine-grained Sediment Transport and Accumulation Patterns in Barnegat Bay, New Jersey and Adjacent Shelf Waters. Estuarine and Coastal Marine Science (1980) 10, 119-142.

65

(20) GPU Nuclear Corporation. 1986 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. May 1987.

(21) GPU Nuclear Corporation. 1987 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. May 1988.

(22) GPU Nuclear Corporation. 1988 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. May 1989.

(23) GPU Nuclear Corporation. 1989 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. May 1990.

(24) GPU Nuclear Corporation. 1990 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. May 1991.

(25) GPU Nuclear Corporation. 1991 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. May 1992.

(26) GPU Nuclear Corporation. 1992 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. May 1993.

(27) GPU Nuclear Corporation. 1993 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. May 1994.

(28) GPU Nuclear Corporation. 1994 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. May 1995.

(29) GPU Nuclear Corporation. 1995 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. May 1996.

(30) GPU Nuclear, Inc. 1996 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report for Oyster Creek Nuclea Generating Station. May 1997.

(31) GPU Nuclear, Inc. 1997 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. May 1998.

(32) GPU Nuclear, Inc. Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Effluent and Offsite Dose Report. January 1, 1998 through December 31, 1998. March 1999.

66

A APPENDIX Descriptions, Sampling Locations and 1998 REMP Sampling REMP, and Synopsis of Exceptions and Analysis 67

TABLE A-I RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM SAMPLING LOCATIONS Sample Station Distance Azimuth Medium Code (miles) (d~ Description TLD 0.3 227 SW of site, at OCNGS Fire Pond, Forked River, NJ WWA 0.1 208 On-site wells at OCNGS, Forked River, NJ 0.2 359 APT, AIO, TLD 6.1 94 E of site, near old Coast Guard Station, Island Beach State Park TLD 2.2 14 NNE of site, Lane Place, behind St. Pius Church, Forked River, NJ TLD 2.3 180 S of site, Route 9 at the Waretown Substation, Waretown, NJ TLD 2.0 230 SW of site, where Route 532 and the Garden State Parkway meet, Waretown, NJ C

APT, AMO, TLD 25 309 NW of site, GPU Energy office rear parking lot, Cookstown, NJ 11 ThD 8.3 156 SSE of site, 8 0t" and Anchor Streets at Water Tower, Harvey Cedars, NJ TLD 14 21.7 1 N of site, Larrabee Substation on Randolph Road, Lakewood, NJ APT, AIO 20 0.7 93 E of site, on Finninger Farm on south side of access road, Forked River, NJ TLD 22 1.6 146 SE of site, at 27 Long Silver Way, Skippers Cove, Waretown, NJ 23 SWA. CLAM, AQS 4.0 63 ENE of site, Barnegat Bay off Stouts Creek, 400 yards SE of Flashing Light "I" SWA, CLAM, AQS 24 2.0 104 ESE of site, Barnegat Bay, 250 yards SE of Flashing Light "3" SWA, AQS, FISHK 33 0.4 to 0.5 112 to 130 E to SE of site, east of Route 9 Bridge in OCNGS CRAB Discharge Canal VEG 35 0.4 110 ESE of site, east of Route 9 and north of the OCNGS Discharge Canal, Forked River, NJ 36 VEG 24 315 NW of site, at "U-Pick" Farm, New Egypt, NJ 68

TABLE A-l(Cont.)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM SAMPLING LOCATIONS Sample Station Distance Azimuth Medium Code (miles) (deg ) Description WWA 37 2.2 19 NNE of Site, off Boox Road at Lacey MUA Pumping Station, Forked River, NJ WWA 38 1.6 193 SSW of Site, on Route 532, at Ocean Township MUA Pumping Station, Waretown, NJ TLD 51 0.4 358 N of site, on the access road to Forked River site, Forked River, NJ TLD 52 0.4 340 NNW of site, on the access road to Forked River site, Forked River, NJ TLD 53 0.3 310 NW of site, at sewage lift station on the access road to the Forked River site, Forked River, NJ TLD 54 0.3 294 WNW of site, on the access road to Forked River site, Forked River, NJ TLD 55 0.3 265 W of site, on Southern Area Stores security fence, west of OCNGS Switchyard, Forked River, NJ TLD 56 0.3 250 WSW of site, on utility pole east of Southern Area Stores, west of the OCNGS Switchyard, Forked River, NJ TLD 57 0.2 203 SSW of site, on Southern Area Stores access road, Forked River, NJ TLD 58 0.4 180 S of site, on Southern Area Stores access road, Forked River, NJ TLD 59 0.3 163 SSE of site, on Southern Area Stores access road, Waretown, NJ TLD 61 0.3 116 ESE of site, on Route 9 south of OCNGS Main Entrance, Forked River, NJ TLD 62 0.2 99 E of site, on Route 9 at access road to OCNGS Main Gate, Forked River, NJ TLD 63 0.2 70 ENE of site, on Route 9 at access road to OCNGS North Gate, Forked River, NJ TLD 64 0.3 48 NE of site, on Route 9 north of OCNGS North Gate access road, Forked River, NJ TLD 65 0.4 22 NNE of site, on Route 9 at Intake Canal Bridge, Forked River, NJ 69

TABLE A-o(Cont.)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM SAMPLING LOCATIONS Sample Station Distance Azimuth Medium Code (miles) (de ) Description APT, AIO, TLD, 66 0.5 127 SE of size, east ofRoum 9 and south of the Discharge VEG Canal, Waretown, NJ TLD 68 1.2 271 W of site, on Garden State Parkway at mile marker 71.7 APT, AIO, TLD 71 1.7 165 SSE of site, on Route 532 at the Waretown Municipal Building, Waretown, NJ APT, AIO, TLD 72 1.9 26 NNE of site, on Lacey Road at Knights of Columbus Hall, Forked River, NJ APT, AIO, TLD 73 1.8 111 ESE of site, on Bay Parkway, Sands Point Harbor, Waretown, NJ TLD 74 2.0 90 E of site, Orlando Drive and Penguin Court, Forked River, NJ ENE of site, Beach Blvd. and Maui Drive, Forked TLD 75 2.0 69 River, NJ TLD 78 1.8 2 N of site, 1514 Arient Road, Forked River, NJ TLD 79 2.9 162 SSE of site, Hightie Drive and Bonita Drive, Waretown, NJ TLD 81 4.6 192 SSW of site, east of Route 9 at Brook and School Streets, Barnegat, NJ TLD 82 4.4 38 NE of site, Bay Way and Clairmore Avenue, Lanoka Harbor, NJ TLD 84 4.8 339 NNW of site, on Lacey Road, 1.3 miles west of the Garden State Parkway on siren pole, Forked River, NJ TLD 85 3.8 254 WSW of site, on Route 532, just east of Wells Mills Park, Waretown, NJ TiD 86 4.8 226 SW of site, on Route 554, 1 mile west of the Garden State Parkway, Barnegat, NJ TLD 88 6.6 127 SE of site, eastern end of 3Y Street, Barnegat Light, NJ TLD 89 6.2 110" ESE of site, Job Francis residence, Island Beach State Park TLD 90 6.6 74 ENE of site, parking lot A-5, Island Beach State Park 70

TABLE A-1(Cont.)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM SAMPLING LOCATIONS Sample Station Distance Azimuth Medium Code (miles) Description TLD 92 9.2 48 NE of site, at Guard Shack/Toll Booth, Island Beach State Park FISH 93 0.1 to 0.3 128 to 250 SE to WSW of site, OCNGS Discharge Canal between Pump Discharges and Route 9, Forked River, NJ SWA, AQS, CLAM, 94 21.8 201 SSW of site, in Great Bay/Little Egg Harbor FISH TLD 98 1.3 297 WNW of site, on Garden State Parkway at mile marker 72.3 318 NW of site, on Garden State Parkway at mile TLD 99 1.5 marker 72.8 TLD TI 0.3 227 SW of site, at OCNGS Fire Pond, Forked River, NJ SAMPLE MEDIUM IDENTIFICATION KEY APT = Air Particulate SWA = Surface Water TLD = Thermoluminescent Dosimeter AMO = Air Iodine AQS = Aquatic Sediment FISH = Fish WWA = Well Water CLAM = Clams CRAB= Crab VEG = Vegetables 71

TABLE A-2 SYNOPSIS OF THE OPERATIONAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM FOR TIM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION 1998 (1)

SAMPLE TYPE NUMBER OF COLLECTION NUMBER OF TYPE OF ANALYSIS NUMBER OF SAMPLING FREQUENCY SAMPLES ANALYSIS FREQUENCY SAMPLES LOCATIONS COLLECTED ANALY2ED (2)

Air Particulate 7 Bi-weekly 183 Gross Beta Bi-weekly 183(3)

Gamma Quarterly composite 28 Air Iodine 7 Weekly 364 1-131 Weekly 364 Well Water 3 Quarterly 12 Gamma Quarterly 12 H-3 Quarterly 12 Surface Water 4 2 locations-Monthly 28 Gamma Monthly 28 4 locations - Semi- H-3 (2 Stations) 28 Annually Semiannually (4 Stations)

Clam 3 Semiannually 6 Gamma Semiannually 6 w- Sediment 4 Semiannually 8 Gamma Semiannually 8 Vegetables 2 Monthly(4) 18 Gamma Monthly(4) 18 Fish 3 Semiannually 18 Gamma Semiannually 18 Crab I Annually I Gamma Annually I TLD-Teledyne 4 Quarterly 16 Immersion Dose Quarterly 16 Brown Engineering TLD-Panasonic 44 Quarterly 170 Immersion Dose Quarterly 170 (1) This table does not include Quality Assurance (QA) samples.

(2) The number of samples analyzed does not include duplicate analyses, recounts, or reanalyses.

(3) See Table A-3.

(4) Collected during harvest season only.

72

TABLE A-3 1998 SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS EXCEPTIONS During 1998, 638 samples were collected from aquatic, atmospheric, and terrestrial environments around the OCNGS. This is far more than the minimum number of samples required by the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) Specifications. There were sampling and analysis exceptions that occurred in 1998 that resulted in minor deviations from the requirements of the ODCM. These deviations did not compromise GPUN's ability to assess the impact of the OCNGS on public health or the environment because the scope of the monitoring program exceeds the ODCM requirements. The circumstances surrounding these events are described below.

On September 3, 1998, Instrument and Control Technicians were calibrating the air sampler at Station 66. Because there was a higher than usual loading on the particulate filter, the technicians replaced the particulate filter. Because of this, two filters were used to collect the sample during the two week collection period, as opposed to a single filter being used. Both filters were analyzed separately and the activity detected on each filter was within the normal range.

During the year, 170 out of a possible 176 Panasonic TLDs were collected and analyzed. Six TLD's, which were lost due to vandalism, are listed below:

STATION COLLECTION ODCM REQUIRED LOCATION DATE STATION 75 16 Apr 98 NO 6 22 Jul 98 YES 85 14 Oct 98 YES 6 14 Oct 98 YES 68 15 Oct 98 YES 51 13 Jan 99 YES 73

APPENDIX B 1998 Lower Limits of Detection (LLD) Exceptions 74

1998 LOWER LIMITS OF DETECTION (LLD) EXCEPTIONS During 1998, there were no Lower Limit of Detection (LLD) violations on any analyzed REMP sample.

75

APPENDIX C Changes to the REMP During 1998 76

Table C-I Changes to the REMP during 1998 January, 1998 The background TLD station at Allenhurst, NJ (Station A) was eliminated and reestablished in Lakewood, NJ (Station 14). Station 14 is located 21.7 miles from OCNGS at an azimuth of I degree. The Lakewood station is in a more practical location in regard to the TLD replacement tour.

May, 1998 A vegetable garden was reestablished at Station 66. The vegetable garden at this location had been eliminated in 1997 in lieu of collecting broadleaf vegetation from this location. This change allows for easier and quicker access to broadleaf vegetation.

77

APPENDIX D Radionuclide Concentrations in 1998 Environmental Samples 78

w U 0 TABLE D-I RADIOLODGICA L ENVIRONM ENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY 1998 THROUGHI DECEMBER 1998 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

2n  :;i11 THE FOLLOWING PAGES ARE A

SUMMARY

OF REMP DATA FOR THE SCHEDULED COLLECTION PERIOD JANUARY, 1998 THROUGH DECEMBER, 1998. DATA* ARE SUMMARIZED ON AN ANNUAL BASIS, WHERE:

SAMPLE TYPE: Media being analyzed ANALYSIS: Type of analysis being performed on the particular media N OF ANALYSES PERFORMED: The total number ofanalyses performed for a particular sample type LLD: The mean lower limit oftdetection. Note that this value Is based on samples whose resulta showed no detectable activity INDICATOR STATIONS: The mean, minimum, and maximum radioactive concentrations detected at all indicator stations HIGHEST ANNUAL MEAN: The mean, minimum, and maximum radioactive concentrations detected at the station with the hlghest annual mean concentration

-4 STATION: The station designation with the hlghest annual mean concentration BACKGROUND STATION: The mean, minimum, and maximum radioactive concentrations detected at all background stations (N/TOT): The fraction of detectable concentrations versus the total number ofanalyses performed An asterisk (1) Indicates no data BACKGROUND STATIONS AT OCNGS STATION(S):. C 94 37 36 SAMPLE TYPE(S): AIR PARTICULATE SURFACE WATER WELL WATER VEGETABLES AIR IODINE CLAMS SEDIMENT FISH

TABLE D-I (Cont)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1998 THROUGH DECEMBER, 1993

• ! .14".,:: s.,*: L';"

AIR PARTICULATE 1.42E-02 2.40E-02 (157/157)1 7.70E-03 1.52E-02 2.30E-02 (2/6 .60E-03 1.50E-02 2.30F-02 (26&26)

(pCIin3)

~LJaJRf. A PARTICULATE 28 I 5.75F-031I <LLD '<LLD <LLD (0124) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) 1 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4)

(pCvm3) q q N~ t~LD~

Z4; 14' eg~6k4 VA AIR oa PARTICULATE Gamma Scan Co-53 28 8.00E-04 [ <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/24) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) 1 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4)

(pCI/mI)

Cs-134 28 6.57E-041 < LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) 1 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4)

PARTICULATE <LLD (0/24) 1 <LLD (pC-n3)

Gamma Scan I r~4Lb.

-l-'Lt~- ~'

4 ii .

PARTICULATE Gamma Scan Fe-59 28 1.98F,04 I <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/24) 1 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4)

(pCI/m3) <LLD <LLD (0/4) 1 <LLD 1: 'I II4

• 1~r~t.~7 ~ I

~

r ~

AIR I i (0/24) 1 <LLD PARTICULATE Gamma Scan K-40 28 1.17E-02 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) 1 <LLD <LLD <LLD (014) inltn l I" I3

IAULL l-I tUont.)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1998 THROUGH DECEMBER, 1998

,RV KATL APAT3I I" ANAL MIN MEAN MAX (TO) MM' MEAN MA Y p~I~r~Y I AIR PARTICULATE Gammna Scan La-140 28 2.71E-03 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/24) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4)

(pCI/m3)

AllR Gamma ~CW Mii-54

-3 7.36E-04 ALLD <LLD <LLD ((60)2 - kLD 4LDýý Fit AIR PARTICULATE Gamma Scan Nb-95 28 I.IIE-03 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/24) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4)

(pCt'm3)

+ARiV~TICULATE. Garuams CaI Di-226 28 I .099-02 <LLD <LLD. c'LLD (0/24) ,<LLD  :.LLD ~LLD" ~

Os AIR PARTICULATE Gamma Scan Sb-125 28 2.16E-03 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/24) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4)

S (pCiIm3)

G3, kLb -' L Th-'232 28 1.73P,03 <LLD ~LLD 116D11et4)

PARTICULATE Gamma Scan U-235 28 2.66E-03 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/24) <LLD <LLD <LLD (014) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4)

~ plm3) 21;ýd 1.79k-63! -LLD icLLD ýcLLfl (0/4j) XL

'~LU -4 AIR PARTICULATE Gamma Scan Zr-95 28 1.38E-03 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/24) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4)

(pCVmJ) u' A**.!on

• IRi'

• LLD.:" '. LLD .. W, 3.

L,..!;(0,31)

KjODINE IoWln"313: J4131 8"". 1.76i-62 SURFACE WATER Tritium H-3 28 1.31E+02 1.60E+02 1.60E+02 1.60E+02 (1116) 1.60E1+02 1.60E+02 1.60E+02, (1/12) <LLD <LLD <LLD (pCL--l) StationN 33

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1998 TIHROUGII DECEMBER, 1998 INDICATOR STATIONS'- 1. ',' IGHzST A . .NALMEAN*irr TYPX I A A I MIN MEAN MAX .... 1o0.

Station-k il I

SURFACE WATER Gamma Scan Ag-II0m 28 2.29E+00 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0116) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LI (pCIL)

OMACE WATER 1.3019+01 k=~ <LLD~ <.LLD (0116)

<cLLD <LLD' <LLD (02 <LD 1 SURFACE WATER Gamma Scan Be-7 1.99E4-01 <LLD <LL D ** < a ."*: ."", .;.'. .

(pCtiL)

• 28 <LD LLD.: ',L 4 UAM WATER 2.45EO00 10P<LLD L1 <LLD (0116)

/SURFACE WATER Camma Scan Co-60 29 2.64E+00 <LLD <LLD 4LL. (.'..) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <1 0D <LLD 01 (pCIIL)

• <LLD <LLID <LLD (0/16)

Gahmma Scan 28 SURFACE WATER C9-137 2.43E+00 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <1 (PC/L) ýLLD (0416)

Gamma- Scan <LLD SURFACE WATER Gamma Scan 28

.2k + 00 <LLD SSURFACE WATER 1-131 <LLD <LLD (0116) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <

(pCitL) 29.

<LLD (0/16)

OUI&"AftWAT~R Gamma Scan Ook46ti 11.404-01

' .., :. .. 29 28 <LLD+0 SURFACE WATER Lea-Id 5.24E+00 <LLD <LLD (0116) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD JUL,"A (pCVL) 23 SSWU1C4WAtER <LLD <LL. 0116)

SURFACE WATER Gamma Scan Nb-95 29 2.79E+00 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/Ti <LD

_w_ :LLD <LLD (0/12)

(p1 IIL) 23 tO:, w9S+01 -<LWI <LD <.LL (Oil63 L) Iti ("..~.

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1998 TI[ROUGH DECEMBER, 1998 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

-LBAMPLE ANALYRS.. N.UCLJDhII#OF I LLDI t15.gI AsLppUALME.AI

_ ANALJ MIN MEAN MAX MN~OT)

, ,1. 1 . . . . .I i

I I WATER I Gamma Scan I

Sb-l25 I

28 7.79E+00 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/16) <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/

(PoL)

SURFACE WATER ,ammi.kin Th-132' 23 9.369+O00 <LLD <LLD <LLD.. (0/46) <LLD <LLD ',*LLD ,jc:

L, b <LLD <L"'LD SURFACE WATER Gamma Scan U-235 12 1.41F+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0116) <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/

(pMI-')

SUpRFlA WATER Gamma Scan <LLD. <LLD, kLL (i.16." <LLD. <LLI '40LLD; IL A 23 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/16) <LLD <LLD <LLD <LI SURFACE WATER Gamma Scan Zr-9S 4.32E+00 <LLD <LLD (pC/L) cIVWgLLUWATER, 12 1.33 E+02 <LLD. <LLD <LLD (0/8) <LLD <LLD ,LLD r i, ..

WELL WATER Gamma Scan 12 2.1 7E+00 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3) <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LILD 'y (pCIL) DA-140m 1.91 E+O1. <LLD <LLD <LLD. (0/)

WELL WATER Gamma Sctan De-7 12: 1.89E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/6)

(pCt/L) I

<LLD <LLD <LLD 12 2.20+000 t 1 <LLD ....-i*;.,., ~I

-<LLD <LD . . '. ,.. ",.LL

, ,.,R.*'

WELL WATER Sci~t

.am Co-60 12 2.44E+00 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/8) (w4) 1 <16LD "*Ltjup (pC/L) Gamma Scan

<LLD <LLD <LLD Gamma Scan 1.17E440

/* ./,i! l-.* £ ,,.

WELL WATER Gamma Scan: Cs-137 12 2.23E+00 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3) (0/4) 1 <LLD <LLD <L (u/4)

(pCIIL) 547 k400 <LLD :. LD <LLD (0/S)

I.A A J.'~4.

JA - .U I o n)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1993 TH]ROUCII DECEMBER, 1993 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

SAMviLZ u.p LI., MLAN MAX NToT)o ýmIN M~

ANAL

• L PERF. - ~~~statlon-#~'" LL

- I - * - * - *1 WELL WATER Gamma Scan 1-131 12 4.1 7E+00 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/8) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <L1LD <LLD i WELL WATER Gamma Scan 12 2.97E+01 <LLD <LLD

-LLD:.

<LLD (OMS (0/8)

<LLD ".C- LLD <..LL.D* (0/4) ' "LLD" '4 WELL WATER Gamma Scan La-I 40 12 4.50E+00 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/) cLLD

<LLD 4WL

<LLD -LLD

<LLD (0)

(0/4) <LLD <L (pCI/L)

':WELLWATER Gamma Scan 12 2.18E400 <cLLD <LLD <LLD .. (0/8) <LLD: <ýLLD <LLD (0/4) "LD " LD <LLD WELL WATER Gamma Scan Nb-9S 12 2.69E+00 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/8) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <L (pCl(L) 00  : .WELiLWAT*.ti Gamma Scan Rsa-226 &.08E+01 .<LLD <LLD <LLD (0/9) LD <LLD

...12.. <LLD <LLD (0/8) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <L WELL WATER4r Gamma Scan Sb-Il S 7.42E+00 <LLD 12

<CLLD.

t;L ,.(0/3):

Gamma Scan 3.679+00

'~~~~~!

... :, 0 1

<cLLD Craz~m <LLD <LLD <LLD (014) <LLD <L (pCI/L) Gamma Scan Scan U-235 12 1.34E+01 <cLLD <LLD (0/6) 4.IJM00 <~LLD

<LLD is,: I.:... oVa l;-. i.,,

WELL WATER <LLD (0/8)

Gamma Scan Zr-9S 12 3.92E+00 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <L (pCt/L)

.LLD, <LLD (0/U)

<LLD <LL:D <LLD (0/4) 1<LLD <1 Gamma Scan la01+ot <LL6 " 4,L ...

D . :: .! :*7 CABBAGE 6 Gamma Scan Da-140 6.67E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (014) D (0/2)

(pC*/kg(WET))

GammaSci 119&602 1 30]k+02 2.50+02  ;.70+) (2) ý86smlfOt' 1aOWN~i Xpa/kt(WT))'

I

. -UL,- k-,lLn RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1998 THROUGH DECEMBER, 1993 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

TYPE' miNl MEAN: MAX (1/TT M? MEAN4 M.AXlt 1 -77 ALZ I 4 -. p -. - p" CABBAGE Gamma Scan Co-58 6 1.57E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) 1 <LLD <LLD <LLD (pCI/kg(WET))

Gandna 84ft .6 i.53E+01 ,cLLD. 16D LD (PiM). "cLLD LLD

.' '4"L...-,". ,,," 0."

CABBAGE Gamma Scan Cs-134 6 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) (I

<LLD <LLD <LLD jj <LLD <LLD <LLD S(pCtMk(WET))

CABBAGE Gamma Scan Ca-137 6 4LD * :. LLD. (044Y

<LLD; S CABBAGE Gamma Scan Fe-59 6 3.67E+01 <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LLD

'.,;r ** , ;i tb::..@

U '(pCt&&(WET)) Gammag Scan 2.47 E+01 <LLD, <LLD <LLD (0) ..L .LD ,cLLD:-

. -D",.

6 S CABBAGE Gammi Scan K-40 No LLD 2.OOE+03 2.90E+03 3.30E+03 (414) 3.10E+03 3.20E+03 3.30E+03 (2/2) 2.20E+03 2.35E+03 2.50E+OW

• / CABBAGE " Reported Station-# 66 6

• A'BAEAGE Gamin. Scan 2.93E4-01 *..<LL LD <LLD (0/4) 6 CABBAGE Gamma Scan Mn-Sd <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LLD (pCwV(WET)) 1.62E+01 6 *cllj ,

Gamma Scan tRb-92

<LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD cLLD <LLD (0/i) <LLD <LLD cLLD Gamma sc 2.93E+02 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4)

Gamma Scan 6 4.50E+01 <LLD <LLD" (014) ,7 4,*

-m Sa

<LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LLD CABBAGE Th-232 6 5.50E+01 <LLD (pCi/kg(WET))

ý;.CABI.#..- 11. n .am

1 6.3E6 -"'

,!,.LLD <LLD L Od I

0 0 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1993 THROUGH DECEMBER, 1993 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

UAWlLX:. AMi Yl NIJCUXD # OF LID INDICATOR STATIONM *w I--- nzo Iaflf.aJ T"p ANAL PERIP, MW MIAN MAi (NJT AX NT)2

~

I~~~X I U. 1C CABBAGE Gamma Scan I Zn-65 I 0 J.OI7+UI I.

<LLD <LLD <LLD (014) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LLD (pCft*(WET))

" CABIlAGE Gamma Scan Zr-95 6 2.48E+01 <LLD <LLD .LD (0/4) "LD 4

<LLD LLID /I(/) a.<LLb,;

COLLARD Gamma Scan 12 1.1 IE+0I <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <LLD <LLD (pCkt*(WET))

COLLARD Da-.140 12 7.03K4IP.1<LLD.. <LLD. <LLD (O/t) *4*LD a.,<LLD' i.i~

C.:...LLD*(i~t-*.! t (pCI/g(WET)) Gamma Scani Be-7 12 I.11E402 1.80E+02 1.80E+02 1.80E+02 (3/8) 1.80E+02 1J.0E+02 i.ROE+02 (1/I) <LLD <LLD <LLD Oo ii:COLLbARD *. Station-0 35 Gamma Scan Co-48 12 1.~34#+01 *<LLD <LLD LLD (0/3) <LLD 4:LD *4D~(J) dLj$'

Gamma Scant COLLARD COLLAARD Co-60 12 1.41E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (018) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <LLD <LLD (pCI/kt(WET))

Ganuma Scaui Ca-134 1,12E4-01 .<LLD <LLD <LLD (0/8)

(pCM&(WVET))

Gamma Scan COLLARD 12 <LL <LL <LD (04 <L SKCOLLARD. Co-137 1.34E-f01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/8) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD -,ýLjlu

,Gamma scan 12 LL1.D~4 4LD'(/)

COLLARD Gamma Scan 1-131 12 3.69E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD

<LLD <LLD

<LLD <LLD

<LLD (0/4) <LLD (pCI/kg(WET)) <LLD.(0/8) (0/4) <LLD

) COLLARD Gamma Sant No LLW Repo,-ie COLLARD Gamma Scan La-140 12 2.43E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/8) .v <LI (JpCt/kg(WET))

C*!!O)LLA.R- Gamasca :Mn-U 12. 1.33E+01 'c~tb¶ .........

.j

<LLIJ -LLD LL /)

0 TABLE D-I (ConL)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 199811I"ROUGII DECEMBER, 1998 ANN"UAl. l0IM ARV 8AMPýZ: ANALYSIS lJ1run I or WIA I UK al A I IVl' xlli.u Z11uf1rlo 9 FUI Urot)I I

MEAN .MAX (N/TO!) MWN MirN I .

IEYA-I

~1-~~~~~ -. .

slation-#

. - II COLLARD Gamma Seen Nb-9S 12 1.51E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD I

(0/8) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0l4) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4)

(pCL/kq(WET))

COLLARlD

. (pct~kg( WT)) GammeaS&A lla-226 12 2.34E+02 -LLD <LLD .LLD (0/U)

<LLD <LLD CLLD ;04 COLLARD Gunn $cail Gamma Scan 12 3.933 +01 <LLD <LLD 4LDo

<LLD ... (0/.I)i:.

(0/9) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <LLD <LLD -1 (pCi/kg(WET))

.Th-232 .4.921+01 cLLD <LLD. 4L*' 40 *: < , -LD

)'.

12 COLLARD Gamma Scan U-235 6.O8E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/8) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <LLD <LLD .1 (pCVkg(WET)) 12

..<LLD <LLD <LLD. '(0/9):: *.<LLD")

• Lfr. .,*;LLD -J".:<tLL*"-./ifr "

s'.

Gamma Sca 3.25E+01 COLLARD <LLD <LLD (0/8)

Gamma Scan Zr-95 12 2.24E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <LLD <LLD (pCI/ki(WET))

.<.LLD!i <LLDc .:.c .LLD.. (.0/1)*

Gamu Scan Ag-ll0m J.00P.400 <.LLD <LLD <LLD (0/1).:

BLUE CRAB Gamma Scan 5.00E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/1)

(pCI/kg(WET)) I iBLUR CRAB  :-LLD.

• . ;..B:,,n*

e.:--

BLUE CRAB <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/1)

Gamma Scan A ,S 4.009+00 (pCl/Ic(WET)) I 4.0op0oo <L D" ("I".)

.. ,I...... . . **..t 14,.*

<LLD (0/I) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/1)

BLUE CRAB Gamma Scan Cs-134 4.001+00 <LLD <LLD (pCn/g( WET))

OammA 9"h* 4.O,+O00 -CLLD; 'LLD KLD 01 6dQWEl))

TABLE D-I (ConL)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1993 THROUGH DECEMBER, 1998 AIWJN1IAI C1,7? 4AMDV 8AMPLE UICATUM aTATIUNa ".".Ol'FHT ANNUAL MEAN A NIA LY SIS I NUCUD 9E NO MEAN MAX (141`1o') MIN- MEAN  ;.MAX.

,TYPE F LLD: I KIN I ". " Sttltoni.#

BLUE CRAB Gamma Scan Fe-59 I 1.1 OE+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/1) <LLD <LLD <LLD (011) a ('I')

(pC1/kg(WET))

Gamma Sean 1431 4.009+00 <LLD <LLD <1LLD (0/4). "cLLID' <LLD * <LLD ,;.0/6 .

' ' "' ' . i '.. * * ';'s I;. '.', .. I BLUE CRAB K-40 No LLD 2.OOE+03 2.00E+03 200E+03 (1/I) 2.00E+03 2.00E+03 2.OOE+03 (Il/)

(pCt/kZ(WET)) Reported Station-# 93 Gamma Scan  :.<LLD , <.:4LD .:4c (0/I) <LLD.:'... <LLD BLUE CRAB Gammia Scan. Mn-54 V1 4.OOE+OO <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/1) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/1)

(pCISg(WET))

Gamma Scan Nb-95 7.00E4-O0 -.LLD <LD <LLD (011) <LLID.'LLD " LD 'l BLUE CRAB Ganuna Scan Ra-22 6 8.00E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/1) <LLD <LLD <LLD (011)

I (pCV/k(WET))

IJMtJCRAD. Sb -1 19 1,20E+01 <LLD . 4LLD. <LLD -(0/1) 3 6.S0E+0I 6.50E+01 6.S0E+01 (1/1)

BLUE CRAB Gamma Scan Th-232 No LLD 6.50E+01 6.50E+01 6.50E+01 (/I1) 0 8tatlon-N 93 (pCl*z(WET)) Reporled

41,b :.LLD kLLD '(014)

BLUE CRAB Gamma Scan Zn-65 9.0 OE+00 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/I) <LLD <LLD <LLD (O/I)

(pCVkg(WET))

'.jiBLIA iel B!:i:. 9.OOE+O0 <LLD <LLD < LLD. (01) iBLUEFISH Gamma Scan As-11l0i 1.77 E+01

<LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3) RAW (pCIit(WET))

Gamini Scan 3 1.23E+02 <LLD..' <LU) <LLD' (0/3) I 4W 4LII '.~s ~LLtI Ah~~s I

• I ~

TABLE D-I (Cont.)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY. 1998 THROUGH DECEMBER, 1998 A.NJIA CVMAKAADV n

TYPE ALYSIS I NUCLZDK #OF ANAL

?ERF.

I LLD N

[DICATOR NTATIONS MEAN MAX (NfroT) MEAN MAX stalln.

N'T Mr4' a.~.

• JA JA*

BLUEFISH Gamma Scan Be-7 3 1.8OE+02 <LLD3 <LLD <LLD (013) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3) It 6 (,%/b)

(pC*/k(WET))

Gamma Seam Co-58 3 2.40E+01 <LLD <~LLD (0o3) <LLD <LLD <LLD. .(6/ ""

OLUEt1$H

. BLUEFISH Gamma Scan Co-60 3 2.43E+01O <LLD <LLD (0/3) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3)

• I1-1-1

<L D .L< L . ,. ,;-...:

(pCi/k"(WET)) <cLLD Gamma Sean Ca-t34 3 2.20E-1-6 4LD *.(01i)

<LLD <LLD BLUEFISH Gamma Scan Cs-137 3 2.43E+01 <LLD (013) <LLD

<LLD <LLD <LLD cL 6i (0/3)

• VI-)

(pC/kg(WET)) <LLD <LLD 3 5.33E+01 <LLD (0/3) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3). 1~%

00 , BLUEFISHI Gamma Scan Fe-59 *.

% (pCdk(WET)) <LLD I I B BLUEFISH Gamm Scan

,a U-131 3 5.OOE40I <LLD~ <LLD (013) <LLD <LLD <LLD.(0/3)

S(pCI/kg(WET)) *(o/3)

BLUEFISH Gamma Scan 3 No LLD 4LLD 3.27E403 3.40E+03 (3/3)

Riported Gamma Scan La-140 3 4.OOE+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3)

(pC/Ikg(WET)) (o3/3) 3 <LLD

<LLD Gammi Scan <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3) ...  ::

BLUEFISH Nb.95 3 3.23E+01 <LLD (0/3)

(pCt/kg(WET)) <LLD 6nC'tma Scan 3 5.00E4062 <LLD BLUEFISHt Gamma Scan Sb-I 25 3 7.67 E+401 <LLD <LLD (0/3) aOd (pCt/If(WET))

B~LUEFISH i1(p~i/icWET)) GSa ,en 3 7.33E+01 4LLD

• LLD"  :(0/3)"i  !<Ljp L 40~L fl' jI l-"'

Th-232 -

C IABLE V-I (UonL)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1998 THROUGH DECEMBER, 1998 LI L4M.;L? 0 I-ANAL PERF.

bm MEAN MAX (NfrOT) I) Mm MEAN MAX.

I*:..i; BLUEFISH Gamma Scan U-235 3 1,13E+02 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3) 6 (ft/')

(pCl/k&(WET))

BLUEPISH ." Gannm Scan 3 &67E4-01 <LD *<LLD . ,<LLD (t) <D<LL 4LD,  :<LLD-',0;;1*(*,)* t BLUEFISH Camm@ Scan Zr-95 3 3.67E401 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3) 6 (pCi/kIOET))

• . LA .'.. Ganuns Sem .6 1.259+01 -<LLD <LLD <LLD' (0)4) W. .. . D ... .......

. .. .L V S CLAMS Gamma Scan Be-140 6 1.00E+02 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LLD 111 (pCI*g(WET))

CLAMS Gaimui Scia Re-7 6 I .239+02 <LLD <LLD. <LLD W(04) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2)

Gamma Scan S CLAMS Gammina Scan Co-SI 6 1.55E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LELD S(11CI/g(WET))

(p lg(WT)): <LLD <LLD <LLD Gamma Scan 1.78E401 (0"4) "<LL .<LL Lb .. .do7)

C~LAMS,

'.i Ct,.

4Ms, *,,

CLAMS C9- 134

.6 1.25E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) -. lz.ld .JRLL -llulu (pCI/kg(WET)) Gammat Scan 6a-137 1.301+01 <LLD- '.<LLD. <LLD (0G4) 1.50E03LD .c0 10EL03 1.5LLb (2/)

S(pCt/ka(WET))

Gamma*Scan 6 <LLD <LED <LED (0/2)

CLAMS Gamma Scan Fe-59 3.93E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) ,LLU -L 6

Gammal LLD <LLD: (Ol).'

S CLAMS Gamma Scan Scin 1.009+01 <LLD I 1.50E+03 1.50E+03 1.50E+03 (2/2)

K-40 No LLD .40E+03 1.45E+03 1.SOE+03 (4/4) 1.00E+03 1.2 I., pz,)

Gamma Sculn Reporled Statlon-N 24 (pC/kg(WET))

6 3.671+01. <LLD <LED 4W (014) LLD >~LW ~s 'LED V

0 I MoLz U-I kton.L)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1998 THROUGH DECEMBER, 1998 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

Typs SANAL MII Muk MAX (/Tfol) mm. M MAX j I IP ERF.? I Statlon-#

I - U- I - U I CLAMS Gamma Scan Mn-54 6 1.35E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD (pCI/kg(WET))

7CLAMS- Gamma Scan 6 1.75E+01 KLLD .cLLb) -<LLD (0/4) <LLI 5LLD *<LLD ............

CLAMS Gamma Scun Ra-226 i.46 2.82E+02 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD (pCLkg(WET))

4.50"1O -kLD .cLLD) ..(0/4)

Gamma Scan <cLLD~/

CLAMS Gamma Scan Th-232 6 6.O0E+01 <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD (pClg((WETh) <LLD Gamma Scan U-235 6 6.679+01 <LLD <~LLD (014) .LLD :.* L: *.<.'. .. (0/2)4 IS.

<LLD ~1,f.',

CLAMS 66 'c*LLD. ,' <LLDI.",. ,L D ";i-zO ). *:~~ ~

(pC~kgVWET)) Gamma Scan iau-65 3.50E+01 <LLD <LLD (0/4) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) cLLD CLI

<~LLD

.6:

2.67E+01 <LLD <LLD: (0/4) ~LLI~~3Lt Gamma Scan <cLLD Ganmm Scan Ag-I l0i 3 1.70E+01 <LLD <LLD (013) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/1) - *-i-1 (pC/Vkg(WET))

<LLD.

'STRIPED BASS 3 . LLD 1.50E+02 <LLD. *1?,~

STRIPED BARS.

i-sTtmrPf BASS Gamma Scan BC-7 3 <LLD <LLD (0/3) <LLD <LLD <LLD (O/1)

(pC*OEg(WET))

STRIPED BASS Gamma ScMa 3 2.33 E401 ocLLD oCLLD .5LLD '(0b) - Fri (pCt/kg(WET))

Gamma Scan Co-60 3 2.33E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3) <CLLD <LLD <LLD 0) ca-p4 .3 . 4.oMil.  ;.17 (p:l/g(WB))

,.frlPED .

BA* .' GmaSn .. 1.57 E+d1 :...kLLD - ý <I'LD.. (013) V MOP

'w

iA,.tst* u-i tLofl.)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1998 THROUGH DECEMBER, 1998 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

. nair~o. ILt"d MUUIIZ4 A14INUAJUMLAJ TYin Pjftf*L a014 MELAN ANAL MWX (N"TI) ,MNMEAN MAX.

• I RY. q . .Station.4J STRIPED BASS Gamma Scan Cs-137 3 '2.1 3E+01 I

<LLD

~ <LLD <LLD f

(0/3) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/1) a

.ir a a (pCI/kg(VET))

STRIPýD MISS Gam mas en N459 5.33&4-01 <LLD <LLD <LLD '(0/3)

Lb, ;'k*L (pd&k(W9T))

Garmma Scan STRIPED BASS 1-131 3 5.20E+01 <LLD <cLLD <LLD (0/3) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/1) a (pCCV(WET))

STRIPED IIASS Gamma sBaf *K.40. 3 NoLLD 4.00E+03 4.07E+03 4I.209+03 (3/3) 00 K~1AAE40I+3 4 20E+0 O (/I Reported Btatioi~U g.

Gamma Scan Q STRIPED BASS La-140 3 5.53E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3) <LLD <LLD <LLD Oh/)

(pCt/kg(WET))

STRflP'ED BASS Gamma sAen NMn-54 1.97E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3) 4WLL <L Lb -41LD ~T. 4 STRIPED BASS Gamma Scan Nb-95 3 2.37E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/1) a a a (pCh/kg(WET))

• irTIUPgb BASS" Gantuna ~ckn. Ra-226 3 3.30E+02 <LLD- <LLD, ;cLLD. (0/3).ý ;4LD ~LLb ~LLbj~(9/i)~. I #~))~~ d 14 41

~. 'I..,

I ,. .~ f*~

STRIPED BASS Gamma Scan Sb-125 3 5.67E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (013) ~LLD cLLD cLLD (0)1) a a a (pCt/hcg(WET))

SIPWVIEASS Oxmtu, Scan W2432 3. 7.339+01 (cLLO .4Lb, '4LD STRIPED BASS Gamma Sc .an U-235 3 9.OOE+01 <LLD <LLD <L .LD (0/3) <L6D <LLD <.LLD kuril '=1")

(pCI/Ig(WET))

Gmaeu .3 &OOE+01 -<:LLR. )  ;*LLD (0W3) .: " , $'.

• .*: /,: , '. "" "*"', " 0I , ." "

STRIPED BASS Gamma Scan Zr-9S 3 3.33E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/1) a (pC*g(WET))

a,.

FLOUNDE,: G...n Beat, Ag tIlus -I I ~ (5/I',

O/kwE)n

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1998 TIROUGH DECEMBER, 1998 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

F

• .- . S.

MW4 M&AN MAX 0NTOn~ I ME-AN MAX PkF. Stafln.#'y

q. p p- p- y S SUMMER FLOUNDER Gamma Scan Bs-140 I~ 4.OOE+01 0 (./*) ('Io) <LLD <LLD <LLD (o/l)

(pCt 1 (WET))

O:iSMMER.

B~-7 6.00E+01 I U a (./.) 4

• SUMMER FLOUNDER Gamma Scan Co-58 I 7.OOE+00 (Oil) (0/4) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/1)

(p-Cgc(VET))

- SUMMER GammaW Seem Co-60 I 1.009+01 *0t * ('/') i ucLLI~

I'A FSUMMER t* FLOUNDER Gamma Scan Cs-134 I 7.00E+00 ('I.) al (0/0) <LLD <LLD (0/1)

(pCl/kz(WET)) <LLD fUMMER B". .I.

.4. ,.'..~

Giatmm Ream Cs-137 1.OOE+O0 I (h/h)

ý-:PLOUNDRR~ ,

I ***~' 4 ~ 44 SUMMER FLOUNDER (./.) A Gamma Scan Fe-59 I 2.OOE+01 0 (010) <LLD <LLD <LLD (011)

(pCl/kg(WET))

• ~(JMMER . . (h,.. ).

. I

~ FLOUNbIIR Omnia SciA 1-131 *.I 1.80a*0i

'(jid4cg(WET))

SUMMER FLOUNDER Gamma Scan I * ('1") * (1'") 4.40E+03 4.40E+03 4.40E+43 (1/1)

(pCVkg(WET)) Reported

• .~UMMER , .  :%.

~ FLOUNDER Oninina Beani ;LA-140. 13oi+OI

• f4j:

'I-(pCl/lg(WEI))

SUMMER FLOUNDER Gamma Scan Mn-54 I 7.00E+00 * * (.1.)

• 0 G S<(') LLD <LLD <LLD (011)

'nC-I/kI(WET*

TABLE D-I (Cont.)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1998 THROUGH DECEMBER, 1999 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

PL. ,°ANALYSIS.

NUCLJDZ #Or LLNDR ISGS A-NUALMEA, .' \ T. A TYRANALMN AN MX (IO) MN MA AK

~

GamIcnN-5 FLOUNDER ~ ~ I 9OE0 LUNDER S Gai.Sa b9 .O+O* ()*

l '. " '

.I('/I)- iD i ii it It I ()lit.5IE+0I"<LLD l22 <LLD <LLD (0/1) kiI00 t I pCoNi IM SUMMER FLOUNDER Gamma Scan Sb-125 I 2.OOE+01 " (<) <LLD -LLD <LLD

• (/1) (0/1)

(pCl/kg(WET))

i'iOtINVER GamnnU lkid Th-232 I 3.00E+01 '

O NI.E ani&n Zi6 2.OOE+0I Al

• Q

,,'3.

T.

~

U~~F~

ON r

SUMMER L(pCs(WET))

FLOUNDER Gamma Scan Zr-9S I 1.60E+01 6 (1) a (/'1) cLLD <LLD <LLD (0/1)

(PCi/g(WET))

AgIln O~0 ti; 40 LD 02 Lfl,4 T~i~

`,!At T-6ýK W. .. "f iW4w FAUTOG Gamma Scan Up-14O 2 9.OOE+01 <LLD <(LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2)

(pCkeVET)

Sc* i 05E b :e 4LD S. * .niA ".2 . ,.LD. .L., ... $'.*,.'

... T;i'AUTO " "Gnta Scant " o-i0 .2 "19.00E+ol <LLD " <LLb. <LLD "(0/2), <LLDt <4LLD <LD (r)

FLTAUTOG Gamma Scan Co-58 2 1.80E+01 <LLD <LD <LLD (0/2) LLD L K .. .. * ' ' " '" 'i '(01))

<LLD

{L() <LLD L

(/n(aET))

TABLE D-I (Cont.)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONTTORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1999 TItROUGI! DECEMBER, 1998

[MS #OP LLD INDICATOR STATIONS I HI.HEST ANNUALMEAN

-~~~F' V TAUTOG GaOumm Scan C9-134 ANAL PER?.F 2 1.75E+01 <LLD MEAN

<LLD MAX *IN

<LLD

.Fo (0/2) <LLD I

.-MtLU4

<LLD MAX

~~station-U~

<LLD (0/2) a a * (*1*)

(pCI~kg(WET))

Game,. Scan G,-.137' 1.80P+01 <LLD .<LLD -cLLD <LLD" <LD.LLD LD +':.1..)  ;' ..4;;

+*++-. ,*

(0/2) ... : ,

S TAUTOG Gamma Scan Fe-59 2 5.00 E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (2/2) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) (*/a)

(pCi/kg(WET))

2 3.40E4el <LLD 4LLD 40, c',LLD .- 'L."L " )

(0/2)

STAIJTOG (pC~tg(WET)) No LLD 4.70E+03 5.20E+03 5.70E+03 (2/2) 4.70E+03 5.20E+03 S.70E+03 (2/2) 4&

('1")

Gamma Scan K-40 Reported Station-0 93

' TAUTOG La-140 2 3.OOE-I01 .<LLD <LLD (0/2) <Lt;D <LLD,: 4L. k (pCI/lg(WET)) C,,,un, Scan <LLD 22 1.65E-l01 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2)

Gamma,seaz Mn-54 (0/0)

TAtTrOG <LLD (02);

(A (pClkg(WFT)) ",," a Scan 22 1.00E+o1 4LLD <LLD Gauzum Amm

<LLD

,(0/2)*

S TAUTOG Gamma sit Gamma Scan Ra-226 4.OOE+02 <LLD <LLD (0o2) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) a a a (~1')

(pCi/kg(WFT))

' LLD... 4" WLL <LWI) (o/2) 2

'V

' 4ft)) ..11Y .la.st..

i..<LI*I .- *':;'*LLD .Z ..:,L D

• O')

/ TAUTOG Gamma Scan Th-232 2 6.50E+'01 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2)

(0/2) a a a (i/I 2 9.00E+01 <LLD .<LLW (pCt/kg(WET))

Gamma Scan Zn-65 2 4.50E-'01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) . . "... j ,.

<LLD  ;.;, .-%

<LLD **,,**

" 4

<LLD ,. .. .

(0/2)

• U..

- r- UtTOG. Gamma scan 3.0oPg+01 <;LW '<LLD CLLD  :' (0/2)

TABLE D-I (Cont)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1998 THROUGOII DECEMBER, 1998 AWMJ AI ClMl .AADV SAMPLE- 1 NUC U JD K NO nNDICATORSTATIONS tU0 H. T"ANNUAL M9A TYPE. F. ANAL F L LD I MV] MEAN MAx O,)ro M. . ME". M.X.;

A ~4'L A

WEAK FIS H Gamma Scan Ag-110m I 1.40E+O0 <LLD <LLD (0/1)

(pCVlc 1(WE-T))

• A * (.I*)

• a..

i'ý -WEAKISH 1.00Z+02 A QkV~T)

-t WEAKFISH Be-1 I I .10F+02 <LLD ~LLU ~LLaU (pCVkg(WET))

r wi.~uu'isu Gamma Scan A'- 1.60E4-01 A 0 (ala) * .': ,.".

r WET))

• 4A WEAKFISH Gamina Scan Co-60 1.70E+01 a a \' , <LLD ,U <l (I"')

Gamma S- CO-1234 I 1l3OE+Ol A" * . .

a .4 WEAKFISH Gammi Scan Cs-137 I 1.60E+01 (.l.)

S(pCL/kg(WET))

.4.00&0O1 . * .,.1 ' Al e.t " .. :l **. *r " .

Ganima SeiK 10.9 .* .* *i: **** .,.,*

W EC AJv -. .A,

• 1 ., A .. . , , A'.. * ., . . * .

• A.

WEAKFJSH Gamma Scan 1-131 3.OOE+01 <1 .I, (pCV4k(WE-T))

Ganima. s.a .I No LLD A"'* ** , : .* .iA'* ' .: ", " .: ( A"/' a)" .

. .' : -. . . . . ( .A:/ 'A' ,.)

• I EA'kFISH Gamma Scan Lo-146 4.66E:+01 -<LL ID (o (pCI(ET)) * !:.:

J.;

Ga mma.Se.:

.. "A..  : ,* : ! l , - wt (AI'j I

WEA KFISH- Gamma Scan Nb-95 1.70E+01 A (AA) ~<LLD (pci/kg(WET))

R..* *.

~,'kI j~P2:0s~f E~O2  : K 1*46 .: ~ &. A/A

0 TABLE D-I (Cent)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1998 THROUGH DECEMBER, 1998 AM TTfAI lRIAtN.AAnV SAMPLE.

. . .. .I.

ANIALYSIS NUCLID1 I -a! g.

AI A I LWLD I VDICATOR MEAN.

IsATIO*4S *,0 -0.

MAX: (N... T Mm HIOIIKSTA

,~w WEAKFisII Gamma Scan Sb-125 I 4.OOE+01 a * * ('I') a * 'I*) <LLD .LaU (WI1)

(pCi/kg(WET))

.WEAXFIgH Gazwida giaA It 2.OOFAO2 a * ." . . " . -, , ' , ,

" . ,-. -:... .*,*...*:.¢,**,'

• *: *'*; * ,..- .::*, (.*1.w' WEAK FISH Gammai Scan Th-232 6.OOE+Ot (a,.) <1*LLu <]ULu <L (pCMZk(WET))

WFAJCFISH Gamma Scan 3U-235' 6.OOE~tl a * .. ... ( .):

't-,"

• I

• 5...

i. ALLD WEAKFISH Gamma Scan zai-65 4.OOE+01 (a/.)

• a a ('I,) ,u <Llju (p0t/kg(WET))

Gamma Scan Zwr-9 I 3.00E+61 (*1") -.. ~

• I.

• ~

.J(ptI/kg(WE1) *

'. ~,*

I~I[

fl.'7-'~p P,,.Pt WINTER FLOUNDER Gamma Scan Ag-I IOm 3 1.60E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3) ~LLD 'LLD <LLD (0/2) a * (1o/)

(pCI&g(WET))

tip.

MAO4 3 1.17E+02 :LW: c'LLI 'LLD (01/3) 4Lb~

Ga:"M'o. S'ca:n:

WINTER FLOUNDER Gammam Scan De-7 3 1.40E+021 <LLD -LLD <LLD (013) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) (1/4)

(pCIgk(WET))

A.-

Gamma A4~amI 1,900401 ".L,.. . . .. , ,.- . (

.11 WINTER FLOUNDER Gamma Scan Co-60 3 2.00E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3) -LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) a (a*t)

(pCI/lg(WET))

4W - i , 1! 1 SPLOT#NDgR - G 94 en. C-,q134 0 i.70E4Of b4 Y I,, , ,

TABLE D-1 (Con(.)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1998 TH[ROUGH DECEMBER, 1998 AI*JNrIA1. CIrMMAUV SAmrLg ,.

MIN MEllAN.

UflMN .1.LS b1 MA"I1UI (I.%1I 0 j -

MM.

-! M HA-3 MEAN AMY IMAX~N~1 Station. ~~'

p S - ~- p- q p WINTER 7

FLOUNDER Gamma Scan Cs-13 3 1.90E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) ('1")

(PCI/k(WET))

WINTER..

R F'LOUNDERi 0a" 3 &0ooE+01 -. LLD <LLD 1) I~3 *LD. - 4kLD 4L WINTER FLOUNDER Gamma Scan 1-131 3 4.67E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) 0 (,iI)

(pCt/k2(WET))

• WINTER A .j As FLUNDER. Gamma Sean K-40' 3 No LLD 3.8011+03 4.201103 4.80E+03 (3/3): 4.0E+03: 4.80+03 4.8o11+0.,* v1;)i Ix' Reported"

'WINTER

<LLD <LLD (0/2) I a cc FLOUNDER Gamma Scan La-140 3 4.00E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0o3) <LLD (1"I)

P 5pCM(WET))

WINTEr, tl.4KV ...

M~i ~n.54~ 1.90101 <LLD .<LLD ýCLLD. ,(0) 4W".1 4LLD

~1 ~

4LD ii 3

WINTER Gamma Scan Nb-95 3 2.33E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (013) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) a (0/h)

FLOUNDER (pCi/t(WET))

ot:".' - .' :

• Gamma.Stan' Re-226E 3.001Y+0 '<LLD -4LLD L (1) UD WINTER FLOUNDER Gamma Scan Sb-12S 3 5.33E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) * (Si')

(pCit/l(WET))

t'2i* WINTgR.

h 2 . S.i~~** L PLOUNDERil Th-232 3 7.671*4-011 <LLD LD LL (/)

• 5'.l5 WINTER FLOUNDER Gamma Scan U-235 3 7.67E+011 <LLD <LLD <LLD (03) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) (*/")

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1998 THROUGH DECEMBER, 1998

1. or LW INDICATOR STATIONS  : HIGHEST ANKUAL MEAN ý.

TYPýu5L.

ANALl N MEAN MAX" IOTI MIN MwA N 6Ml..* O 7"T I I Y - 1 WINTER FLOUNDER Gamma Scan Za-65

7. 3 4.67E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/3) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) *

• (*t*)

(pCtVk(WET))

I:,WINT, 1' 3 3.67&1-01 <LLh LLD.1 D. .(0/3) <LLD WHITE PERCH Gamma Scan Al- 10m 3 2.23E4-01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD ,U (C (pCtik 1 (WET))

2,WHITE

PERCH Gaiimi Scan Ba.140 3 9.67E+01 <LLD 4LLD <LLD . (0/2) <~LLD

.<LLD <LLD . (0/):

SW HITE PERCH Gamma Scan Be-7 3 1.73E+02 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LLD (PCI/Jcg(WET))

ý;tt P:IURItECH Gam., scan Co-5s 3 2.27P,+01 <~LLD <LLD .4LLI) (012)

, WHITE PERCH Gamma Scan Co-60 3 2.43E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (012) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD D <LLD (pCi/kg(WET))

C14 3*] 1.7R0  :-LLfl LD .LLb E1)

{

Gamma Scan Co-1 37 3 2.43E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <L (pC'*g(WET))

deitri &aii .009+01 *.cLLD....<LLD .. <LLD (04)

WHITE*PERCH Gamma Scan 1-131 3 2.93E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LLD' <LLD <LLD (pCI/kg(WET))

.,:.;wtlfrg PkktfIi.:..l Gimma Sera k-40 No4LLD 3.01"+03i M . ".01+"03 (0,)"

Repoi4~i WHITE PERCH Gamma Scan Le-140 3 3.53E+01 <LLD <LLD <ILLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <1LLD (0/2) <LLD I, .L~L~BJ (PCMI/k(WET))

c~ammaSc~u j Mn-Mi 1,.3

'~Is-I .%"LL C1ý;'jlL-i 2~7R+1j4Lfr ctD

RAOfOLOGfCAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1998 THROUGH DECEMBER, 1998 ANNUAL

SUMMARY

SAMPLE wul LI.WI ANAL. MIN MEAN MAX (MOT) .. MIN. MEAN I ANA -" -"* " I" PERP. Station-#, .

. " ... I , " ,

WHITE PERCH Gamma Scan Nb-95 3 2.77E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LI -1LmLU (p/C~g(WET)) Gammans Sc"a flA-226 3 4.67 K462C <LLD' <LLD <LLD * (0/2) <*LLD DLlb"LLDp'.-A'(o/2f 1ý ".lL J 14l1-

.. * .. ... .. - .'I ,...

• t; ,

.IIT,

• . . , C WHITE PERCHI Gammal 2scan 3 8.00E+01 <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <L!

(pCVklg(WET))

-'WITEPERCH Gtmma - Th-723.; 3 9.331.4-01' -<LU ..4LD <LLD (012).

WHITE PERCH Gamma Sci G,,mm. Scan U-235 3 1.20E+02 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <L1bD <LI (pCVIcg(WET)) (0/2)

"cLLD

< W <LLDqj*(02)" ,

• • 1iTrR PERCHI 3 6.33E.401 <LLD <LL0 <LLD 0 Ji "&E)) 6amma Scan A~

0 Gamma Scan Zr-95 3 3.03E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <L Lu WHITE PERCHl (pCtlij(WET))

at. 1.60114-01C <LLD cLLD

<LLD Gamma S&an I 1.20E+02 <LLD <LLD (Olt) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/1)

BLOWFISH Ba-140 (pC~ft(WFT)) <LLD

.<LLDI) LLD LLW D"r.,j..',.S

.(0/1)

B~LOWFISH (pd~g(WET)) < LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/1)

Gamma Scan Co-so 2.OOE+01 I.

i (Oil)

BLOWFISH C6-60. -4.LD.

(pCh~kg(WET)) 1.056E401 Gamma Scan Ca-134 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/I)

(p.1) Gn~~~

.p-137. 1.901.40I LD. UPt LD (1) 'i (c~D .~L;~~>;-(/)

Figure I-I Locations of On-Site Wells

. . un. L.ot.. -

Lip~~!.*

!iii. *"*J ii* .*~!*

131

TABLE D-I (Cont.)

RADIOL OGICAI ENVIRONM ENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1998 THROUGH DECEMBER, 1998 A. - F..1 r.. -A A DV "AMPLE ANALYSIS I NUCLJDýj #OF 1, LLD I HIGHEST ANNU kLMKN I

rDICATOR STATIONS ..

TYPE ANAL MEAN MAX (frroT) MIN . MEAN MAX * .(NrrOTl PER;. Stafloit': . 3 BLOWFISH Gamma Scan Fe-59 4.OOE+0I <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/1) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/I)

(pCt/k 1 (WET)) I

... BLOWFISH Gtra Scan 1-131 9.00 E4OI <CLLD <LLD <LLD i<LLb: <LLD. <LLD ,j' (Oil) -

• BLOWFISH Gamma Scan K-40 No LLD 3.60E+03 3.60E+03 3.60E+03 3.60E+03 3.60E1+03 3.60E+03 (/I!) 0 (pCt/Icg(WET)) Reporled Station-# 93 Gamma. g*n  ! 3.00E4-01 <CLLD . LLD <LLD cLLD4LD <LLD:;d~) U.*.*,  ;

(0/1) .. ' ,

BLOWFISH (pClg(WET)) Gamma Scan Mn-54 2.0OE+01 <CLLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/i)

I

.. LOWFISH (0/I) .<LLD cLL" Gamma Scan 2.00"+1 <~LLD <LLD <LLD * . .' *".I If (pC/kg(WET))

BLOWFISH Gamma Scan Ra-226 3.OOE+02 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/i) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/1) . ..a (pC"*OVET))

• ('I')

• PCt'kg(WET)) Gamma Sein sw-i2 .1 6..OOE+0I <LLD 4W. <LLD 0(/1) <.LLD <LD

~..ii.

<LLD (* 1.

(pCI/kR(WET)) <LLD *"<LLD : LLD, ' (0/1I);

BLOWFISH Gamma Scan Th-232 I 7.00E+01 <LLD <LLD (0/I) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/I) a

<LLD Gamma Scan

• LLD" beusScan I k.oik4o1 AILD 4.i].. ,!

<LLD BLOWFISH Gamma Scan Zn-65 I S.OOE+0I <LLD <LLD ,"i~~ ~~ ~~j

'":.;! *:*": ,.-;'tl;. W.O.,'

(pO/kg(WET)) V-I-)

//BLOWFISH - <LLD 3.OPOE+ ALD (o/I)

Gamma Scan I Arg-10 <LLD (0/1)

SEABASS 2-00E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/I) q 4i'A (pCtksV(WET))

-:i' iAMSS G.nunase*nj ~.-i4O t t.40E+02 <LLD 4LD) "<CLLD.(0/I)

TABLE D-I (Cont)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1993 THROUGH DECEMBER, 1998 ANAM IAW CIM..4.1AADV Noy71 rDICATOR STATIONS - HI' IHE3T ANNUAL MKAN I.k,.

IUI TYPE.

i ANALYSIS. I UC7 LIDEj[

ANAL I MlN MEAN MAX (Wrr0) MIt MEAN MAX

. . ," Statlon-*

(ftITOI.

,"' -f:

" 7 .. -.... . " *" MII4A.

9 A,

p - * - p-SEABASS Gamma Scan Be-7 2.00E40O2 <LLD <CLLD <LLD (0/I) <LLD <LLD <LLD (011) a a (*1*)

(pCI/kg(WET))

8EABASS Gamma Scan co-"8 3.00E4431 -cLLD <LLD <LLD 5LLD.. --LLP '<LLD. .j *

(Kno&wnT)) (0/1)

Co-60 .1 3.OOE+0Il <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/I) a 6 SEABASS Gamma Scan (pCit/kWET))

Gamma Scan Cv-1.34 2.OOE+O1 -cLLD. <LLD <LLD (O/l)

(0/1) <LLD. '41D'4t~oi (pC~ilg(W9T)) I

", ,, . "" i :. *-.

a SEABASS Gamma Scan Ce-I 37 3.OOE+0I <LLD <cLLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/1) (*/*)

(pCI/g(WET))

Gmnma Scan I &009E+01 -wLLD 4LD <LLD (0/I)

C, *(KV41c(WET)) <LLD <LLD 'LD~~l II a a (*/*)

SEABASS Gamma Scan 1-131 I 6.OOE+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD a (pClkg(WET)) '4 Gamma Scan )C-40. I No LLD .1.90E+63 <W) <LLD <LLD (0/1)

T a.

K'SEABASS Reporied

(,0111(WFT)) Gamma Scan La 140 6.OOE+0I <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/1) 1 ~~ .040~ ~ 140+3

.<LLD <LLD <LLD <cLLD (flit) ,'.771 SEABASS Gammna Bcan I 3.OOE+0i (0/1):!. .*')

• i'.*:,.

(pCI/1c(WET))

Gamma Scan Nb-95 4.OOE+01 <LLD <cLLD <LLD (0/I)

(pa~g~~

SEABASS Gannlma San I &00E402 ...,,LD' . LD ;c ,LLD .(OI) <LLD <LLD <LLD (Oi1)

(pCI/kg(WET)) a~ ~ v Gamma Scan Sb-I 25 1 8.00E+0I <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/1) -L

"`'-LLb0F~L

• ,~A ~

~ABAsB Gwnmma Seen Th-232 -cLD: 4LLD.b (Odl (ptl&C.VET))

TABLlD-I (ConL)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1998 THROUGH DECEMBER, 1999 ANNIIAI. qIfMM AD V

~AMYL~

~ n'i'k A14A,5 114t *LADX I ROY PERF. i ,

VD MLN MAX..(NIO I)1 MIN4 HIWIKSTu MA ANMA MEANmt q y - p- q. - i SEABASS Gamma Scan U-23S I 1.10E+02 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/I) <LLD <LLD <LLD a Cl')

(pC/kg(WET))

Gamma San 1 8.00E-1-0 <LLD. <LLD -ýLLD (0/1) 4;LLD --tLD ..ikLLD ..... *..i ) .

1&1WT))

I <LLD (o/i)

SEABASS Gamma Scan Zr-95 4.OOE+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/' ) (.P)

(pCt/Ig(WET))

i;:'AQUATIC. S<LLDI!;

SEDIMENT S Gamma Scan Al-I 10m I 1.73E+01 -kLLD <LLD <LLD, (0/6) - <LLD. .

4CQ/kg(DRY))

AQUATIC SEDIMENT Gamma Scan Do-140 8 I.53E+02 LLD <LLD <LLD (0/6) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2)

(pCIc(DRY))

. AQUATIC SEDIMENT Gomm  :", De-7 3 . 1.03H4+0211.709+02 2.70E+02 3.70E+02 (4/6) 3.20E+02 3.4SE+oi 3.70E0(22 6 E+ ý (2 w ~

CLLD Win AQUATIC SEDIMENT Gamma Scan Co-Se 8 2.OOE+0I <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/6) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2)

(pCikg(DRY))

.,*.* S.....

• 'IiAQ1ATIc*.i**

Gamma Scan CoO- 3" 2.1 0E+01 ~LLV . LL . (0/6 .. ~tLb'P~LL~ ,, .4L1 9 mP/2c(DRy) ~~..r: i~, ~

AQUATIC SEDIMENT Gamma Scan Co-134 8 I.59E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/6) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2)

(pCI/kg(DRY))

. AQUATIC Gamni SAI ca-t37.; '". l1s4E+-Oi 1.40E+01 4.40E'OI S.06FO I 2/6 3.~Qk4~

4 *; 51'41*4.

• AQUATIC SEDIMENT Gamma Scan Fe-59 8 S.25E+0I <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/6) <LLD <LLD <LLD (W) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION JANUARY, 1998 THiROUGH DECEMBER, 1998 ANALYI NCUDK #O.o LW INDICATOR STATIONS: IflHlEST ANNUALMZIý4Af ~I~

TY~'3 [ *:

• I!. - ANAL 1*ERPt[ MAN MAX rfoT MN MEAN MA 1Nr61I StM~A~

a- a

~ 1 F AQUATIC SEDIMENT Gamma Scan 1-131 8 7.SOE+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/6) <LLD <LLD <LLD (012) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2)

(pCt/kg(DRV))

,!!:.AQUATIt'*./

t.JEDIMMNT G"'" c* k~-40 8 No LLD &.20E+02 '4.67E4-03 941+/-3 (6/6) 2.0E+03. -. 60103 I.,

Siuo.I41 Reported AQUATIC SEDIMENT Gamma Scim La-140 8 5.50E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/6) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2)

(pCI&Z(DRY))

AQUATIC

SEDIMENT Gamma Scan M"-54 8 1.95E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/6). <LLD <iLL <LLD (0)

<LLDII.

AQUATIC SEDIMENT Gamma Scan Nb-95 8 2.75E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/6) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD (0/2)

(pCVkg(DRY))

• ":.iAQUATIC SEDIMENT i Gam. a Sim: .16-226 S. No LLD 5.90E+02 .9.521+02 1.20E+03. (6*6*) u.001+03 1.uog3 ý1.00140 Repouted AQUATIC SEDIMENT Gamma Scan Sb-125 9 6.00E+01I <LLD <LLD <LLD (016) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2)

(pC/ka(DRY))

., AQUATIC

,.. SEDIMENT !Th432;- :I. No LLD 1.909+02 3.63E+0~ .. 603,+02 (66 4j~k~j;J48"i 4,601,4

. m. ... ci Repolted ' ( B ii4o AQUATIC SEDIMENT Gamma Scan U-235 8 1.09E+021 <LLD <LLD <LLD (016) <LLD <LLD <LLD (On2) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2)

(,pCI/kg(DRY))

I. .,:

G~i Bean Zn-65 5.001+01 4W 4LD .-CLLD. .4 (.0/6)

~iJA~' lttlb

...AQuATIC.*

Gamma Scan Zr-95 8 4.00E+01 <LLD <LLD <LLD (016) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2) <LLD <LLD <LLD (0/2)

APPENDIX E 1998 Quality Assurance Results 105

The OCNGS REMP Quality Assurance (QA) Program is comprised of three phases. Phase I requires samples collected at designated stations be split and analyzed by separate (independent) laboratories. Analysis results from the quality assurance (QA) laboratory are compared to those from the primary laboratory as set forth in OC Environmental Affairs procedure 6530-ADM-4500.07. Agreement criteria are established in this procedure. If non-agreement of the data occurs, an investigation begins which may include recounting or reanalyzing the sample(s) in question. Table E-2 outlines the split sample portion (Phase I) of the QA program for the media collected during 1998. Of the 10 samples that were split, all resulted in an initial agreement (Table E-3) except for one case of possible initial agreement which was subsequently resolved by performing a recount.

Phase 11 requires laboratories analyzing REMP samples for the OCNGS to participate in a program involving analysis and reporting of single-blind radiological samples, such as the USEPA Cross-Check Program. This serves as independent verification of each laboratory's ability to correctly perform analyses on various kinds of samples containing unknown quantities of specific radionuclides. The Phase II program during 1998 included participation in cross-check programs with the USEPA, the Department of Energy Environmental Measurements Laboratory (DOE EML), and an independent contractor, Analytics, Inc. of Atlanta, Georgia.

The results of these interlaboratory comparison programs are presented i Appendix F.

Phase III requires that the REMP analytical laboratories perform duplicate analyses on every twentieth sample. The number of duplicate analyses performed during 1998 is outlined in Table E-1. Results of the duplicate analyses were reviewed in accordance with procedure 6530-ADM-4500.07. No non-agreements occurred during 1998 regarding duplicate analyses of OCNGS REMP samples.

106

TABLE E-1 1998 OA SAMPLE PROGRAM NUMBER OF DUPLICATE ANALYSES PERFORMED ANALYSES SAMPLE GROSS GAMMA MEDIUM BETA H-3 1-131 ISOTOPIC AIR PARTICULATE 7 2

. .'-:: :i.:i:ý:i::*?

WELL WATER .:.. ' '> -'. > : '" . "........... 00 SURFACE WATER 3*

• ~~ ..:. ~ . .................

AQUATIC SEDIMENT . 0............................

CLAMS1 FISH ..... 0 CRABS 0 VEGETABLES ' ': - -

*::-:  : === .:== .====

.== .== 2 2:::::::::~~i*i!i!i!!!

Notes: 1. Asterisks identify duplicate analyses performed on QC (split) samples.

2. Shaded areas identify analyses that are not performed.

107

TABLE E-2 1998 OA SAMPLE PROGRAM SPLIT SAMPLES WELL WATER 3 QUARTERLY 1 I QUARTERLY SURFACE 2 MONTHLY 0 MONTHLY WATER 2 SEMI-ANNUALLY I SEMI-ANNUALLY SEDIMENT 4 SEMI-ANNUALLY 1 ANNUALLY CLAMS 3 SEMI-ANNUALLY I ANNUALLY (WHEN AVAILABLE) (WHEN AVAILABLE)

VEGETABLES 3 MONTHLY 1 QUARTERLY (WHEN AVAILABLE) (WHEN AVAILABLE)

TLD 44 QUARTERLY 1 QUARTERLY 108

TABLE E-3 INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON RESULTS Two independent Laboratories (ERL and Teledyne Brown Engineering) analyzed selected split samples that were collected during 1998 by the OCNGS Environental Affairs deparanmit This practice gives further assurance that the n asuremaits reported by both labs are meaningful and valid.

A total of 10 gamma isotopic analyses on samples of six differet types of enviromnmental media were analyzed concurrently by both laboratories (ERL and Teledyne Brown Engineering) during the period of January 1998 through December 1998. The results reported by the ERL and the QC laboratory are listed in Table E-3.

Agreement between the ERL result and the QC laboratory result was achieved if it met the criteria similar to those listed in Gibson and Pagliaro, 1980 "Confirmatory Measurements of Radionuclide Concentrations in Power Reactor Effluents", ASTM STP 698.

During 1998, all of the paired results for nuclides reported by both laboratories to be present in detectable quantities were in agreement One pair of clam sample results, which were initially found to be in possible agreement for K-40, were found to be in agreement when a reanalysis was performed using a slightly larger aliquot of clams than originally counted.

109

0 TABLE E-3 (Cont.)

INTERLABORATORY COMPARISON RESULTS STATION ID SAMPLE ANALYSIS NUCLIDE ERL RESULT (I1 OC LAB RESULT (2) RATIO RESOLUTION AGREEKEN.

MEDIA UNITS OC04QC 19-98 SW GAMMA K-40 2.20e+02 +/- 2.OOE+01 1.84E+02 +/- 3.10E+01 pCi/I 11.00 0.84 YES OC05QC07-98 WW GAMMA ALL LLD LLD pCi/I YES OC05QC20-98 WW GAMMA ALL LLD LLD pCi/I YES OC06QC19-98 SE GAMMA K-40 1.10e+03 +1-2.OOE+02 1.66E+03 +/. 4.2013+02 pCi/kg(WET) 5.50 1.51 YES K-40 1.60e+03 +1- 4.OOE+02 6.96E+02 +/- pCi/kg(WET) 4.00 0.44 OC08QC 19-98 CL GAMMA 1.1313+02 (3)

+1- 3.OOE+0I +/-

OC04QC45-98 SW GAMMA K-40 3.00e+02 2.30E+02 2.9013+0 1 pCi/I 10.00 0.77 YES OC05QC33-98 WW GAMMA ALL LLD LLD pCi/I YES OC05QC46-98 WW GAMMA ALL LLD LLD pCi/I YES OC12QC33-98 CA GAMMA K-40 2.60e+03 +1- 3.00E+02 1.80E+03 +1- !.80E+02 pCi/kg(WET) 8.67 0.69 YES OC38QC33-98 CO GAMMA K-40 3.20e+03 +/- 3.OOE+02 3.30E+03 +/- 3.40E+02 pCi/kg(WET) 10.67 1.03 YES KEY TO SAMPLE MEDIA CA CABBAGE CL CLAMS CO COLLARDS SE AQUATIC SEDIMENT SW SURFACE WATER WW WELL WATER FOOTNOTES (1) The ERL result is 1 2 sigma.

(2) The Teledyne Brown Engineering (TBE) result is +/- 2 sigma.

(3) The initial result reported by TBE yielded an acceptance ratio of 0.44, which indicated possible agreement. A reanalysis performed by TBE on a slightly larger aliquot of clams yielded an acceptance ratio of 0.64,which is in agreement with the ERL result.

APPENDIX F 1998 Environmental Radioactivity Interlaboratory Comparison Results 111

TABLE F-I 1998 USEPA Cross Check Program Results EPA Control GPUN-ERL TBE Collection Limits Results Results Date Media Nuclide (A) (B) (B) 01/16/98 Water Sr-89 8.0

• 8.7 8.33 +/- 0.58 5.00 L 1.73 Sr-90 32.0 +/- 8.7 34.33  : 1.15 31.67 +/- 0.58 01/30/98 Water Alpha 30.5

• 13.2 21.00  : 2.65 33.00

• 2.65 Beta 3.9 +/- 8.7 7.23

• 0.32 5.60 +/- 0.90 02/06/98 Water 1-131 104.9 +/- 18.2 103.33

• 5.77 110.00

• 0.00 (C) 104.9 +/- 18.2 106.67 *- 5.77 (D) 03/13/98 Water H-3 2155.0

• 603.8 2166.67

• 57.74 1833.33

• 57.74 04/21/98 Water Alpha 54.4 +/- 23.6 46.67

• 2.08 50.00 +/- 1.73 Beta 94.7 - 17.3 87.33 +/- 11.02 102.00

• 6.56 Co-60 50.0

• 8.7 50.00

• 1.00 52.33

• 1.53 Sr-89 6.0

• 8.7 4.67 - 0.58 4.67

• 1.15 Sr-90 18.0 +/- 8.7 17.33 +/- 2.31 21.67

• 1.15 Cs-134 22.0 - 8.7 20.00

• 1.00 21.00

• 1.00 Cs-137 10.0 +/- 8.7 11.00

• 1.00 11.67 +/- 0.58 06/05/98 Water Co-60 12.0 +/- 8.7 13.00 +/- 0.00 13.00 +/- 1.00 Zn-65 104.0 - 17.3 105.67

• 7.51 111.67

• 2.52 Ba-133 40.0 + 8.7 40.00

• 2.00 35.00 +/- 2.65 Cs-134 31.0 +/- 8.7 29.00 +/- 1.73 32.33 +/- 0.58 Cs-137 35.0

• 8.7 34.33 +/- 1.15 37.67 +/- 2.08 07/17/98 Water Sr-89 21.0 +/- 8.7 21.67 +/- 2.31 21.00 +/- 1.00 Sr-90 7.0 +/- 8.7 6.67

• 0.58 6.33 +/- 0.58 07/24/98 Water Alpha 7.2 +/- 8.7 6.43 +/- 0.12 5.43

• 0.64 Beta 12.8 +/- 8.7 14.00 +/- 0.00 14.67 +/- 2.08 08/07/98 Water H-3 17996.0 +/- 3122.9 19000.00

• 0.00 16000.00

• 0.00 09/11/98 Water 1-131 6.1

• 3.5 7.00 Z. 0.53 5.93 +/- 0.55 (C) 6.1 3.5 6.60 k 0.26 (D) 10/20/98 Water Alpha 30.1

• 13.0 25.33  : 1.53 21.67 +/- 2.31 Beta 94.0

• 17.3 84.67

• 3.21 74.67 - 7.64 (E)

Co-60 21.0

• 8.7 22.67 - 2.52 22.33 E 1.15 Sr-89 19.0

• 8.7 19.00 - 1.00 18.33 +/- 1.53 Sr-90 8.0 +/- 8.7 5.00 - 0.00 8.33 k 1.15 Cs-134 6.0 +/- 8.7 6.67

• 0.58 6.67 +/- 0.58 Cs-137 50.0 +/- 8.7 53.67 - 2.52 56.33 +/- 3.79 112

TABLE F-I 1998 USEPA Cross Check Program Results EPA Conol GPUN-ERL TBE Collection Limits Results Results Date Media Nuclde (A) (B) (B) 11/13/98 Water Alpha 47.2

• 20.4 29.33

• 3.21 23.67 4.04 (E)

Beta 3.5

• 8.7 8.67

• 1.53 5.50 - 0.87 11/6/98 Water Co-60 38.0

• 8.7 38.00 + 1.00 39.67  : 2.52 Zn-65 131.0

• 22.6 146.67

• 5.77 140.67

• 10.97 Ba-133 56.0 L 10.4 59.67

• 1.53 46.33

• 2.52 Cs-134 105.0 L 8.7 103.00

• 6.08 103.00

• 2.00 Cs-137 111.0

• 10.4 116.67

• 5.77 115.33 +/- 1.53 A. The EPA Control Limit is the known concentration *3 sigma for three determinations. The units are pCi/L.

B. The GPUN-ERL and TBE results are the average of three determinations . one standard deviation. The units are pCi/L.

C. The analysis was performed by first concentrating 1-131 on a resin. The resin was then counted by gamma spectroscopy.

D. The analysis %as performed by gamma spectroscopy. The 1-131 in the sample was not concentrated prior to counting.

E. An investigation is underway. The results of the investigation will be available shortly.

Criteria are listed in EPA 600/4-81-004.

113

-'!I"6" - ' - -"

TABLE F-2 1998 DOE EM L Cross Check Program Results (I1'pl ID)E EMI. Mil. Max.

Collection VAIF' I UNCFRTI'AINTY VAI..IJ: IJNCERITAINTY RATIO RATIO RATIO AGUREEMENT Date Media Nuclidc (A & D) (13) (C&D) (E) 3/1/98 Air Filter Aln-241 0.076 0.008 0.069 0.003 1.106 0.71 2.12 YES

• ,. * . 0 ..: . 'F . . ,. . .. .... ........

• jYES Co-57 II I1.11 0.846 0.99 0.65 1.34 YES

,1....I.

.. 2.1. 1..

Cs- 134 18 2 19.74 1,38 0.912 0.74 1.23 YES I I F... II,"* : ,'ip

.~ ;F:.'  ! i;,!",  :.F.iF. FF '

1 F F F F , . . .. . .. ..

Alpha 1.3 0. I 1.4 0.1 0.929 0.49 1.56 YES

" 't";,:,j:t..F FIF0F..F71,

F:""

F jii!~i'".

. .. .F Fl

'",[,IF"B1l1,:;]..m'i,, lht,,'P,'.'r.i*.

.*,.FL,....

IIF:F: .,:Fl FF*i!;::',, Y, yl',FF I F

',!.:,FiF:..*i*ii!

1 1

'*FI2i  ::.H,,.i' * *F

l:iq:, 9 ':,," ,Pl,:llj:* .~ ..... . ..

.. . . .. 'I ' F , Mn-54F:.FF~FF:i h'*F.:h 5.3 F .. 0.6

... .. F.F

.. . .... . . F 5.44

. .I :F F 0.485 0F0F i  :: . .. 0.974 F 0.76 1 F "l': + " ':? ..

1.37 YES i.'i 000 F8 F' 007 0I.J03 F 0,863,; F ,72 FES L39 Pu-239 0.063 0.006 0,062 0.002 1.01 0.72 1.42 YES 1

F 1 1 F I FFFIFF~nFF.FF I F FF F F JA~FF F0.822 F; 16p~1 1.41 YEFF

...... .F.....

.... . 1F..

F':..... F'II ." .....

Sr-90........ IF'*: ... ...

2.2 F...... . F F... .... 00.3 0 4 . . . .. . 1.758 0 1 F F . .

0.042 ". .....

1.251 0.65 0.80 1.95 YES

. . .. ' " . . F...

F,:!P F+: . ,F. L; +++ FFFF, ,FFF*'+,,:: . F".. ' .. ..... :. .. .. .. . . .. F FF: I F ., F ...... 6 : +

IFFFF 0F FP F 0.03 0.003 109 U, 2.02 F E I-s U-238 0.033 0.004 0.03 0.001 1.083 0.8 2.55 YES F F'i F*

F F F.F. F F.F... F.. 1. F `F'IF . .. . . "FI .. .... . .. .. ... .

1.-A - . ..

FI*0F *6 F 4 3/1/98 Soil Arn-24 I 5 2.678 0.212 4.108 0.57 2.26 NO (G) ii F; -N ::-:i  :

• I i:}.-....hF:F"*t -20,,

. 5",..,,+.

Iii I'::"

• ' : , :, 0'8 K-40 380 40 313.5 10.15 1.212 0.76 1.54

"  : P O.1 ; '

7"' "

YES sr-90 17 7 13.091 0.279 1.299 0.56 2.87

. .0,.~O . . F

'. !.i; I: : i,;I*; 1,,* IF0.9311,1 F 'F

' 0.Q461.

F YES

... F..-F :i+  :  :

1.003 0.43 1.39 32 4 31.9 2.552 YES F:.*

F-.::

I ,Fi+

Fill[,.[ I F.j!*

F,Fr 1 Fi :FF: :; :.

""~F" ':" 1

• ..: 1* , : !F;: .,

"F"[: " y F'*"

1 *.* 'F3, Li I '. F tI F5

. r 9...

0,i* I 0:il29:;+*+*'""""+!!

. ;,.F- '.jI:F .

-,,;,i;;*, ,," ......... S . I..........................4 ~ I I 0.3 1.105 0.051 1.086 0.71 2.7 YES

. .. I ' I F1 I..1 : !

'+*,00

1 666 !,:,ý"+: i .~IFIiF.6 'F. .

1.04 0.65 1.46 YES 2 10.575 0.206

. F.

F,tFL;'Fi F.FF',IIFF.I'F:I:!*. , 1074 lfI N YES 80 707.5 24.987 0.76 1.31 F.-, }FF ,M:F F.F: F ' F~.+i::

+ F. 1 0, ..96:,,

. 6 9F:,,F 0.96

,! I '1 1.72 4.7 YES

• 'Fl. {i.. Y1.2S",8*+ ',!

0.3 1.77 0.154 0.59

," "'0) ".'." '6i+++i.i

ý.;~~;

,4'; 2 1ll::++Pt::++l+

I  :,..;,*... ................ .:.:

.s*.:,.:.L*

S. 1 .1 - - l-TABLE F-2(Cont.)

1998 DOE EML Cross Check Program Results GI)I DOIE EMI. Mil. Max.

Collectiol VALUE 1JNCEI'RTAINTY VALUE UNCERTAINTY RATIO RATIO RATIO AGREEMENT Date Media Nuclide (A & D) (13) (C&])) (E) 3/1/98 Water Am-241 1.4 0. I 1.226 0.05 1.142 0.72 1.52 YES Cs-137 53 5 46 1.7 1.152 0.8 1.25 YES S* [: .. . . .' .. ..  ; F... 30l 2028 F, F . . 2 . . F[ . ..  :[. 1.5NO(1) .. . . . .

."'. 10 F9 F ,, 2 F .92 1.529' 0.22'. .1 O[

Alpha 1500 100 1421 100 1.056 0.52 1.31 YES BeFFF2W, 'I I 11-3 240 30 218.3 6.505 1.099 0.69 1.8 YES F F l' , .1 i' " l' . 'F I F F'. F , .. .. . .. ... *....

Pu-238 2.5 0.3 2.526 0.06 0.99 0.76 1.25 YES Sr-90 5.3 0.9 4.357 0.192 1.216 0.75 1.56 YES

! F.~

! *:L  :. . .

iil;!*i! F'. .. ., , ,' .:' r' I:

U-238 : .i,ir[ *,:.!.i

] i 0.46 F F 0.06 0.396 0.037 , I" F 1.161 0.8 1.29 YES

• T',F 1

i-'

i-,l 9/I/98 Air Filter Ani-241 0.5 0.05 0.51 0008 0.9 073 2.58 YES

... . . . . 1.. ... F ~ 'r .. 1.6 91F6i F A~." E '

I III Cs-137 22 3 22.47 °'I 1.03 i i 0.979 0.737. 1.37 YES 2

2,a 0.2 2.16 0.07 0.926 0.72 1.67 YES

.. .. :1 1.  ;.~i '  : .

Pt'-238

.. *1....U...

0.18

. 10 :1 :]*" .:? ;. *!< op;l~

.ql.p,.. 0.05

' Ifi .[*

-',!. .. .  : !4l*!

0.'16 4 2 "'"1*: '.1; .... "0 0.005 1.043 00.74 7 '"I 1.4 , :*:,; YES ... .,: .

• ' .9.:..:

.F'. .. Sb'125 FI 13 .. . . 2 8.89 0.55 .. I.462 ...... .

0.61 ill P.,

1.43 NO (J)

"11-231 0.2 0.02 0.26 0.01 0.769 0.83. 1.92 NO (K)

• "  !................... ... a 1FF 0. 2 i'Fl'iiF l . I '"IlF' .5 30 F I . '1..........

2 .UN 1.7 9 F 8 .F5N O (K UNat 042 053 002 0792 0.8 335 NO (K)

I11 .. . . .... ,FF'I F1 I'F'IL::..... .

.F . .* I. . ~.... i I ,.. F....... .. . ,li; ... 4' .........

.. ............................ ............ F. F.............. ... ....

K-40 350 30 314 13 1.115 0.78 1.53 YES M. . .. [. [...6' ..'.0. .'

m --

O n - m - m -

TABM*,

-O--rol r-2(Cont.)

m - - -m -mo 1998 DOE EML Cross Check Program Results GPLJ DOE EMIL Mill. Max.

Collection VALUE UNCERTAINTY VALUE UNCERTIAINTY RATIO RATIO RATIO AGREIEMENT Date Media Nuclide (A & D) (13) (C&D) (E) 9/1/98 Vegetation Am-241 2.8 0.8 2.33 0.06 1.202 0.68 2.7 YES 1Fo-60 21 .1 2(1 I .05 0,09 1.,16 YlES K--0 520 50 460 20 1.13 0.79 1.42 YES

i

• *:Ii~" *:

Ii~ *"*

IIi ":

I *'....... ' '"ih Pi-239

.. ... ,I'Q 3.4 F F hI FF.... ' .....

0.6 3.726.....;;.i n:;FF 0.27 4 0.914 O0.68

• ~

1.59

. . . .*13.. .. YYESS 9/1/98 Water Am-241 1.4 0.3 1.25 0.08 1.12 0.75 1.49 YES F I::' ' I " F' FI F ""..F .'1F .*: :, . : . *:,b. ,'iF: . " '.,, , ". .4 94 F 1 03 2 !' F8 1 YE S Cs-137 " 52 5 . 50 1.7 1.04 0.8 1.26 YES 2 .. '9 1 3'"-  : .. 0 ;...4 .4"

... .,'5 3 Y ES..

Alpha 980 100 1080 60 0.907 0.61 1.32 YES F00io . t)ýF54F 1~ YES Mn-54 34 3 32.4 1.4 1.049 0.8 1.25 YES F 1F 0.01 YESF,.

1--j 1u-239 1.5 0.2 1.41 004 1.064 0.8 1.39 YES FA F' ~~ F , 'l75 FF ; '. N P (M )

Ch1 IJ-234 0.47 0.11 0.51 0,03 0.922 0.8 1.4 YES I I-Nat 0.97 I05 (0.(01 0.92-1 0().(7 I.12 Y15 A. The DOE EML value is the mean of replicate determinations for each 0clide.

B. The DOE EML uncertainty is the standard error of the mean.

C. The GPU Value is an average of I to 4 determinations.

D. The units are Bq/L for water, Bq/kg (dry) for soil, Bq/kg (wet) for vegetation and total Bq for air filters.

I.The (ilq I unlllatilly is file sqllure uotl i11tlhw1 Sum11 of" the squares 4f ti1e rellohled two siglm nuleillllyv of the individtinii ioelliitiilltuis for eUnuth nudclidte.

F. A reanalysis was requested. The reanulysis resuth Ugrees with the origirml analysis. The sumple must hiave been cotlttinailnted durilig digestiom. I eikeis used fIr high activity samples will be gamma scanned and discarded if contaminated.

(. TIhc Am-24 I result (reported on 8-Jon-1998) was too late to be submitted to tihe EMI.. (due date of' I-Jim--1998) for inclusion in the study. The reported value (I I +15 13l/kg) is not acceptable wilh the EML value (2.678 1:0.212 l1(1/kg). The ratio is 4.108. A reanalysis wais requested and the result (5.2 :1.1.6 13q/kg) is similar io the original resull tllid hits ii riatio wilh (lie FMI, of 1.9,12 aniid is icc.l)luhie wilh Wrmning. The EMI . sumiple consists olf tppfoxinitniely 2(00 gi('inls o('1111 ltir-dried. Illl'veizcd aiid blended soil. Soil samuples tested for homiogneieity ranged iin sample size front 2 ho600 grams. The sumple sizes used iwr Ain-2,11 anmlysis were 0.49 and 0.44 gin in.

Because both analysis resutlls agree wilh each other no further action is necessary.

II. The Co-60 result (17.00 I 2.(01(1/1l.) reported to Ihe EMI. is not wilhin icielutblte agirecennt wilh the "M!. vahiue ( 13.60 I 1.20 Ihl/I .). A rmetnlysis wats i'equiesletd.

'l'hi,i0tiimi lyssis iL slih( 1. "/7 I 1.282 Iltu/i.) hfils 1a1 gu il) t1,'I.08(t. w hichu is wiilhi it'l h~l htI utgiotllltuimt w illi iIh IM I vilhli . The -1il tiiiul 11 w (nl11n iuulitul.Il) im:.ullis %w ill:

I i I) 1 .)12 i1ntl1i( 1) I I 11.17 1114 .. II he ihlelait it' Iltese vahlics ( Io .F2li hl tlc l a1gllitio 11.1 IU i/I1.1 w as Ie ut'. 'h ill%l l tivebeen e w iljhi1 w linlilg. li h to l 'd'iti 'c hd-ciltb 111C1ii of 9t0 elUCln vihti.ci stis lic I.lMI. vahie was 1.092 for this miuclide, which idliciules a 9% hils.

TABLE F-2(Conft.)

1998 DOE EMNL Cross Clicck Program Results I. This sample has been analyzed five times.

The results arc:

8.6E-06 +/- 0.9E-06 uCi/mI 319 Bq/L 8.OE-06 +/--0.8E-06 uCi/mi 296 Bq/L 7.8E-06 +/- 0.9E-06 uCi/ml 289 Bq/L 8.OE-06 +/- 0.9E-06 uCi/mi 296 Bq/1, 9.8E-06 +/- 0. IE-05 uCi/mlI 363 Bq/L All of the results are similar.

The nuclides contained in this water matrix is unlike any samples analyzed in the EI.I. for Fc-55 . These nuclides may have cauised the high results.

18 laboratories reported Fc-55 results to tle EMI, in QAP 48. 7 werc Acceptable, 7 were Acceptable with Warning and 4 were Not Acceptable. Only 2 laboratories reported values below the EML value. Of tile 14 "A" and "W" reported values the Mean ratio was 1.194 (242 Bq/L). Tlhis indicates that the EML value (202.8 Bq/L) may be low. The ERL results for Fe-55 in tile previous QAP studies have been acceptable. Future Fc-55 in EMI. QAP studies will be ,sonitored to identify continuing trends.

J. Previously the ERL value was not in agreement with the EML and was lcss than the minimulm acceptable ratio. The library was analyzed and compared to the Kocher isotope table and the decay scheme. The decay scheme was incorrectly evaluated and a change was made to t(le library to reduce t(ie apparent abundance result was greater than the ,maximumn allowed ratio. This titlle the lihrary was cvaliated, and Gary Chevalier lit TMI was consulted. We camel to the agreement thit the Kocher listing could be confiusing und that tile abundance should be used as stated ii tile Kocher lisliug. Tlhe library "IEMli" was edited and the values ioiii Kocher were placed in the library for Sb-I 25. Rc-analyzing tile spectra resulted ill an Average result or 10.5 I This gives it ratio of I. 18 with the EFMI. known value.

T(i/nu.

Tlhe result is acceptable. All libraries will be checked to verify tile correct abundance for Sb-125.

K. 'The 'ML air lilter was processed fbr atclilide analyses. During tIhe prccipiilntion step for ilnunittin. titanin ill chloride (tiC.13) which is used to puity Itile prcci*itiunt appeared not to reacl as ill tile past. Notably tile dark color ol"l'iCI3 faded immediately alter being added to tIle Iaul soltilion. Allcr countitg tie iUirallulln source, a itmber of high-elnergy peaks inlterfered willt tile I-232 tnicer penk. These peuiks resulted in tilllimi imirlly high recove'ry ( 1,10%o) lit([ consequcutly yielded low results for the iadionuclhles (I J-23.1 aiid 11-238) ti Ibe repolted. A diitrieilt cross check slamle (IV'A tuilimimn ill wafer) resuilted in1file Same high CleCrgy freaks. Thi is sample was reprocessed using extra TiCI3 and the interfering peaks were eliminated. The reported result was within 0. 1 sigiia of the known value. Also, the other two media from the EML were processed with extra TiCI3 and yielded acceptable results. It appears that the TiCI3 lost its strength and more was needed to purify the final precipitant solution. A new reagent has since been purchased for future analysis.

L. Tile Sr-90 ill EML soil result (19 +/- 7 Bq/kg) is not acceptable with the EML value (39.63 +/- 0.003 13q/kg). The ratio is 0.479. A reanalysis was performed using a larger aliquot and this result (39+/- 5 Bq/kg) has a ratio with tile known value of 0.984 and is acceptable. For fiture processing of EML soils, a larger aliquot will be used in order to achieve the best result with the lowest error M. The EML water for strontium analysis failed to achieve acceptable results because the spiked value was at the lower end of the sensitivity for the analysis. Three aliquots, 2011l, 2511 and 30,i, were used for the analysis. The average result was 1.5 +/- 0.6 13q/1. The EMI. valute is 2.11 +/- 0.18 13q/i giving a ratio of 0.71 1. Due to the small volume ol water submitted by EMI., larger aliquliotS could not be taken for reprocessing. A reanalysis using a similar aliquot volunie (25n1l) was processed and yielded the same uracceptable result. To prevelt this non-agreceuncilt from reoccurring, only one aliquiot will be initially aualyzcd. The result will dictate what size aliquot should be used for additional analysis in order to achieve optilliu statistical results.

The cuntiol limit conlcept wits Ustilblishld fromi percunliles oif histinic ied1tui dishilmlitins (1W82 - 19')2). The evallati of this historic ilata nInd the devclollpncut of tile t 1,iitii,1 l i i lt ltiua1v ilull I H itF 'ill FM I 'utl.. l'. uuuitiol liiiui i NI t l t , )Ao .VII wu 'i, ,4 'l X V l v:i u t 11.s1 l l'i,1 lvti%-%tll

,,v'i uhit ,isl liuui l l,thll'Nuuus I'll' .l'*8I huii

-b w- m-f m w- N TABLE F-3 1998 ANALYTICS Cross Check Prograin Results

(;I,() ANAIYTIC'S Collection VALUIE VAIH UJNCERT'IAINTIY Mill. Max.

-)ale Media Nuclide (1)) (A(3 SIGMA) I (I SIGMA) RIESOILUTION RATIO IRAT1I10 RATIO AGREEMENT' 06/11/98 Air Filter Alpha 30 34 2 0.7 51.0 0.88 08 1.25 YES

........... '. .............. ......... ........ (.0........ .

(16/11/98 Air iiller Ce-141 120 118 6 2.0 59.0 1.02 0).8 1.25 YES Cs-134 110 113 6 2.0 56.5 0.97 0.8 1.25 YES Mn-54 140 126 6 2.0 63.0 1 II 0.8 1.25 Zn-65 170 145 7 2.3 62.1 1.17 0.8 1.25 YES 2.7 63.0 1.01 0.8 1.25 YES 06/11/98a6/uf Air fl~ Sr-89

~ Filter . .. ...... 170 168 ........ 8

.................. ~

06/11/98 Cartridge i-131 72 60) 3 I.0 60.0 I.20 0.8 1.25 YES 00

..... ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... ..... :ii~ii i! i !iiiiii !iii i ii * !!!** ***~ ii !!*!.*i !ii 0............... !ii* .... $*!i! ,:'i

.:i* ........ 2 ii,',i','ii*

!ii,!!:*

N l~(bi~iii~ii~

Ce-141 96 99 5 1.7 59.4 0.97 0.8 1.25 YES Cs-134 86 95 5 1.7 570{ 0)91 0)8 1.25 YES Mi-54 IiO 10}6 5 1.7 63.6 10{4 0.8 1.25YE Zn-65 130 122 6 2.1) 61. 1.07 0.8 1.25 YES 016/I11/98 Milk 1-131 75 67 3 1.0 67(0 1.12 OX. 1.25 Y___.___

,SI-910 51 60 3 1.0 60.0 0.85 (IX. 1.25 YES______

......... ... ...... 10.. .......... 0.

Cr-51 LIT. 0.188 0.009 0.003 62.7 0.8 1.25 Cs-137 0.11 0.1I 0(1)05 0.0(2 6(.0 1.01{ 0.8 1.25 YES I'e-59 ().(171 (0(165 (100 0001 (1(1 5(0 1.(19 0.8 1.25 YI. S

('o-6) ().21 ((.2(15 (11l (((11.1 61,9 1(1' (1.8 1.25 )]:

TABLE F-3 (cout.)

1998 ANALYTICS Cross Check Prograin Results Notes:

A. Units arc pCi/1, for Milk, pCi/g (dry) for Soil and total pCi for' Filler and Carlridge.

IB. G PI J Value is aln average of three or more determinatlions. IUJils ire pCi/I, fbr Milk, pC ilg (dry) tIo Soil and total pCi for Filler and Cartridge.

C. See Attached Laboratory Deviation Report D. See Attached Laboratory Deviation Report To dctcrnine arccnent or possible agreement:

1. D)ivide each Analytics value by iIs associated one sigma uncertainty to oblain I(he resolution.

2. Divide each GPIJ value by the corresponding Analytics value to obtain the ratio.

3. The GPt imeasurement is in agreemnent if the value of the ratio fhlls within the limits shownqm in (Ihe following table for thie corresponding resolution.

Agreement Agreement Resolution Aecrncnt "A" Criteria "I" Criteria

<4 0.4-2.5 no comparison no comparison

>=3 and <4 0.3-3.0 no comparison

>=4 and <8 0.5-2.0 0.4-2.5 0.3-3.0

k. >=8 and <16 0.6-1.66 0.5-2.0 0.4-2.5

>=16 and <51 0.75-1.33 0.6-1.67 0.5-2.0

>=51 and <200 0.80-1.25 0.75-1.33 0.6-1.67

>200 0.85-1.18 0.8-1.25 0.75-1.33 "A" criteria are applied to the following analyses:

( 1 l~uu Ir'lionclry wherui 11h0 Irinciltil 81111111111 c lett.y iI:icld fIr i'lcitli'calinoi i:l glcalt.-I 1h11 2 it kev, Trititun analyses ot liquid samnples and Low-level 1-131 "B"criteria are applied to the following analyses:

Gamma Spectrometry where the principal gumnnia energy used for identification is less than 250 key, Sr-89 and Sr-90 detenninations and Gross Alpha and Beta CIiifinill 111.tlihitt~rhfm~lihi,11tllw Ikld ill IlSNRCl~('imipicionm hotnrdmii. H17511 w~ithmir ittimmitIlimletttsI ititlfi c i~'il il-t-ill IIll ionm with Iirg lldivii t1oIllccilnl ics,

m mm"I mome -ivtm=mo- b=-

'rABIJI F-4 1998 Praau~im R~,uIfg TBlV. ANAIYTiCS Collection VALUE VALUE IUNCERTAINTY RATIO Min. Max.

Date Media Nuclide (A) (A) (3 SIGMA) (I SIGMA) RESOLUTION (B) RATIO RATIO AGREEMENT 031298 Milk 1-131 87 82 4 1.3 61.5 1.06 0.8 1 25 YES Cr-51 2201 201 10 3.3 60.3 I.(9 0.8 1.25 YIS

............... -Xi~.. ..

..... i~ i .:...********

~i~ii~

Cs-137 180 161 8 2.7 60.4 1.12 0.8 1.25 YES Fe-59 110 95 5 1.7 57.0 1.16 0.8 1.25 YES YES

____Co-60

. . 82...

............. ...... ..........85. . . . . . .....

..... 4

...... 1.3

.:*, ,,.,.,63.8

................ * ,,.,::. 0.96

• 'i!!i~0.8iglii:iii!,iiii,*1.25 *i~i.....

i**iiiiiiii* iii.. iiii !~iiiiiii Ce-141 94 99 5 1.7 59.4 .0.95 0.8 1.25 YES Cs-134 101 95 5 1.7 57.0 1.06 0.8 1.25 YES

,-.4 .......... , 1 i ........

0............. .. ...X.,*!, ............i i I3i

........ i, :~i : :: i1.06 63.6 i*....

• i[ *li.....

0.8.* ;'*i.....

.... :i!1.25:;~:'J. :::*!*i!!i!i~YESi~? :::

0 Zi,-65 143 122 6 2(1 61.0 1.17 0.8 1.25 YES 121198 Milk 1-131 65 71 4 1.3 53.3 1.92 0.8 1.25 YES

. . (1.8. ... . .. 1.25. .... .. '":" - "7 YES C.-5l ' " .. ..90(1

.. 979 9 16.6 59.9 92 Cs-137 177 183 9 3.0 61.1 (1.97 (1.8 1.25 YES Fe-59 156 148 7 253 63.4 1.105 1.8 1.25 YES Co-611 169 178 9 3.11 59.3 (1.95 (1.8 1.25 YES St-9(1 16 ,1 2 ().7 61. (1.39 108 1.25 NO (E'l'

- - -"" W" W - m '. W" M TABLE~ F-4 (cont.)

1998

'II.3I.'* ANALY'ICS t MollNction VAVI VNCERTAINTY I)11C Medill Nuclide (A) (A) I (3 8I(MA) I 0(I I(MA) IWI.S()I,11IO'(N 0(1) RA'I' lI() RATI)lOT AGRIEE:MI"NT RATI() Milt. j M x.

121498 Air Filler Ce-141 566 524 26 8.7 60.5 1.08 0.8 1.25 YE"S

.::.::.::.::.::..:..:.....:.-.... Cs-134 158 128 6 2.0 64.0

...,........................................ .. ................ .......... ...... 1.23 0.8 1.25 YES..

'Me-54 122 100 5  :. 1.77: 60.0  ::.1.22

... : 0.8 18 1.25 YES(P NO.

Zn-65 129 98 5 1.7 58.8 1.32 0.8 1.25 NO (F) 1248 Water H-3 5500 5980 299 99.7 60.0 0.92 0.8 1.25 YES Notes:

A The Analytics Value is the 'knownconcentration. Units are p(2i/L for Milk, polus (dsy) for Soil and total pCi for Filter and Cartridge.

B. Ratio of Teledyne Brown Engineering to Analyt~ics results.

I- C2.The C2r-5l result was slightly out ofrange. No follow up action was requested because other Cr-5I results were typically acceptable. Also, the result was acceptable if the resolution was based on the TBE result and its uncertainty.

D. The Fe-59 result was slightly out of range. No follow up action was requested because other Fe-59 results wverctypically acceptable. Also, the result was acceptable if the resolution was based on the TBE result and its uncertainty.

E. An investigation is being conducted. The results of the investigation will be available shortly.

F. The Zn-6S result was slightly out of range. No follow up action was requested because other Zn.65 results were typically acceptable. Also, the result was acccptable if the resolution was based on the TBE result and its uncertainty.

1. Divide each Analytics value by its associated one sigma uncertainty to obtain the resolution.

2. Divide each T"BE value by the corresponding Analytics value to obtain the ratio.

3. 'lth t,,esuCrXnt is in Ittieot irthie vlhl ,,'lhe ratio lhlls within the lin.its. ah..ii.the l,,wiit I.hle Ijir the. it: liidg ies,,hititt. ..

Agreement Agreement Agrcmcnl "A"Criteria WBCriteria 'A' criteria are applied to the following analyses:

0.4-2.5 no comparison no comparison Gamma Spectrometry where the principal gamma energy used for identification 0.5-2.0 0.4-2.5 0.3-3.0 is greater than 250 kev, Tritium analyses of liquid santples and Low-level 1-131.

0.6-1.66 0.5.2.0 0.4-2.5 0.75-1.33 0.6-1.67 0.5-2.0 W"criteria are applied to the rollowing analyses:

0.80.1.25 0.75.1.33 0.6-1.67 Gamma Spectrometry where the principal gamma energy used for identification 0.85-1.18 0.8-1.25 0.75-1.33 is less thian 250 kev, Sr-89 and Sr-90 dctcmtinations and (tross Alpha and Iteta.

0 i1cr ill illc siiIli IIli1.1lilt rm illI 1:;NU( 'Iimilcutillti I'll it rl Ill, 0 K-I/ill will I IIIrld IIIlilt Illlilt611illlit. itl- it II.VIIllIII.

illlitI-11 nill wit ItI'llgil illit rI I11111lic.i

I 3 APPENDIX G 1998 Annual Dairy Census I

I I

i.

I U

I I

I,

5. 122

Annual Dairy Census - 1998 An annual dairy census was conducted to determine the number of commercial dairy operations and/or lactating dairy animals providing milk for human consumption which were located within a five mile radius of the OCNGS. The results of the census demonstrated that no commercial dairy operations were located within 5 miles of the OCNGS.

/

Ocean County Agricultural Extension Service Agent, Ms. Debra Fiola, was contacted regarding the occurrence of dairy animals within a five mile radius of the OCNGS. Ms. Fiola indicated that no commercial dairy operations were active in the study area. The closest known dairy animals whose milk was being used for human consumption were goats owned by three families in Whiting, NJ, which is approximately 12 miles northwest of the OCNGS.

123

I I

I.

I I

I APPENDIX H Dose Calculation Methodology I

I I.

I I

I I

I I

I 3.

124

To the extent possible, radiological impacts were evaluated based on the direct measurement of dose rates or of radionuclide concentrations in the environment. However, the effluents associated with 1998 OCNGS routine operations were too small to be measured once dispersed in the offsite environment. As a result, the potential offsite doses could only be estimated using computerized models that predict concentrations of radioactive materials in the environment and subsequent radiation doses on the basis of radionuclides released to the environment. GPUN calculates doses using an advanced class "A" dispersion model called SEEDS (Simplified Effluent Environmental Dosimetry System). This model incorporates the guidelines and methodology set forth in USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.109 (Ref. 17). SEEDS uses real-time hourly meteorological information matched to the time of release to assess the dispersion of effluents in the discharge canal/estuary system and the atmosphere. Combining this assessment of dispersion and dilution with effluent data, postulated maximum hypothetical doses to the public from the OCNGS effluents are computed. The maximum individual dose is calculated as well as the dose to the total population within 50 miles of the OCNGS for gaseous effluents and the entire population downstream of the OCNGS around Barnegat Bay and the Atlantic Ocean for liquid effluents. Values of environmental parameters and radionuclide concentration factors have been chosen to provide conservative results. As a result, the doses calculated using this model are conservative estimates (i.e., overestimates) of the actual exposures.

The dose summary table, Table H-1, presents the maximum hypothetical doses to an individual, as well as the population dose, resulting from effluents from OCNGS during the 1998 reporting period.

Individual Doses From Liquid Effluents As recommended in USNRC Regulatory Guide 1.109 (Ref. 17), calculations of doses resulting from OCNGS liquid effluents are performed on four age groups and eight organs. The pathways considered are consumption of fish, consumption of shellfish, and shoreline exposure. All pathways are considered to be primary recreational activities associated with Bamegat Bay and the Atlantic Ocean in the vicinity of the OCNGS. The "receptor" would be that individual who eats fish and shellfish that reside in the OCNGS discharge canal, and stands on the shoreline influenced by the station discharge. Table H-1 presents the maximum total body dose and critical organ dose for the age group most affected.

125

For the 1998 reporting period, the calculated maximum hypothetical total body dose received from liquid effluents would have been 8.6E-8 mrem. This represents 2.9E-6 percent of the OCNGS Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) limit. Similarly, the maximum hypothetical organ dose from liquid effluents would have been 8.6E-8 mrem to the liver. This represents 8.6E-7 percent of the OCNGS ODCM annual dose limit.

Individual Doses From Gaseous Effluents There are seven major pathways considered in the dose calculation for gaseous effluents. These are: (1) plume exposure, (2) inhalation, (3) consumption of cow milk, (4) goat milk, (5) vegetables, (6) meat, and (7) standing on contaminated ground.

The maximum plume exposure reported in lines 3 and 4 of Table H-1 generally occurs at, or near, the site boundary. These "air doses" are not to an individual but are considered to be the maximum dose at a location. The location is not necessarily a receptor.

With respect to airborne noble gas releases for the 1998 reporting period, the maximum plume exposure (air dose) would have been 8.7E-5 and 4.0E-5 mRad for OCNGS gamma and beta radiation, respectively. These doses are equal to only 8.7E-4 percent and 2.OE-4 percent of the OCNGS ODCM annual dose limits, respectively.

The calculated airborne dose to the closest individual in the maximally affected sector (SSW) for total body dose and skin dose was at a distance of 2616 meters. These data are presented in lines 5 and 6 of Table H-I. Maximum calculated plume exposures to an individual from gaseous effluents during the 1998 reporting period were 4.3E-5 mrem to the total body and 6.6E-5 mrem to the skin. These doses are equivalent to only 4.3E-5 percent and 2.2E-6 percent of the applicable annual dose limits, respectively.

The dose to the maximum exposed organ due to radioactive airborne iodine and particulates is presented in line 7, Table H-1. This does not include the total body plume exposure, which was separated out on line 5. The dose presented in this section reflects the maximum exposure to an organ for the appropriate age group. During 1998, gaseous iodines and particulates from OCNGS would have resulted in a maximum dose of 2.2E-2 mrem to any organ, which during 126

1998 was the thyroid gland. This dose is only 1.5E-1 percent of the OCNGS ODCM specified annual dose limit.

Population Doses From Liquid and Gaseous Effluents The population doses resulting from liquid and gaseous effluents are summed over all pathways and the affected population (Table H-i, lines 8-11). Liquid population dose is based upon the population located within the region from the OCNGS outfall extending out to the .Atlantic Ocean. The population dose due to gaseous effluents is based upon the 1990 census data and considers the population out to a distance of 50 miles around the OCNGS as well as the much larger total population which can be fed by foodstuffs grown in the 50-mile radius. Population doses are summed over all distances and sectors to give an aggregate dose. OCNGS liquid and gaseous effluents resulted in a population dose of 1.OE-1 person-rem total body for the 1998 reporting period. This is approximately 12.3 million times lower than the doses to the same population resulting from natural background sources.

127

TABLE H-1

SUMMARY

OF MAXIMUM HYPOTHETICAL INDIVIDUAL AND POPULATION DOSES FROM LIQUID AND AIRBORNE EFFLUENT RELEASES FROM THE OCNGS FOR 1998 INDIVIDUAL DOSES Percent Effluent ODCM Specification Limit Calculated Dose Age Dist. Sector of Reg.

Released Group (in) Limit LIQUID 3 mrem-Total Body 8.6E-8 mrem Adult Receptor 1* 2.9E-6 %

LIQUID 10 mrem-Liver 8.6E-8 mrem Adult Receptor 1" 8.6E-7 %

AIRBORNE 10 mRad-Gamma 8.7E-5 mRad 530 SSW 8.7E-4 %

AIRBORNE 20 mRad-Beta 4.OE-5 mRad - 4000 SSW 2.OE-4 %

AIRBORNE 100 mrem-Total Body' 4.3E-5 mrem All 2616 SSW 4.3E-5 %

AIRBORNE 3000 mrem-Skin 6.6E-5 mrem All 2616 SSW 2.2E-6 %

AIRBORNE 15 mrem-Any Organ 2 2.2E-2 mrem All 966 SE 1.5E-1 %

POPULATION DOSES Calculated Effluent Dose Released (Person-rem)

LIQUID Total Body 1.0E-3 LIQUID All organs except bone which 1.01E-3 was 0 person-rem3 GASEOUS Total Body 1.OE-1 GASEOUS Thyroid I.3E-1

• Receptor 1 is the Discharge Canal at the U.S. Route 9 bridge.

'This limit is from 10CFR20.1301. The ODCM limit is 500 torem.

2 During 1998, this dose was to the thyroid gland.

3 The calculated dose for the liver, thyroid, kidney, lung, GI-Tract, and skin was 1.OE-3 person-rem.

The calculated dose for bone was 0 person-rem.

128

I" I APPENDIX I 1998 Groundwater Monitoring Results I

I I

I I.

I I

I" I .129

TABLE I-1 RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATIONS IN SAMPLES FROM THE ON-SITE GROUNDWATER MONITORING NETWORK ivlmrvn 11111A fte%11III WELL DEPTH TRITIUM GAMMVA 1~ISOTPIC (Ft.) (pCi/liter) K-40 j Th-232 invuIt.pri I I tnriI/u*,Pvr vw-_1 .0 < 40 WW-2 55.0 <100

< 1/2 <40 WW-3 24.0 No Sample No Sample No -ample

.WW-4. 52.0 No Sample No Sample WW-5 22.5 180 +/-70 < 30 <_I I

.WW-6 521.5 < 100 <80 WW-7 20.0 390 +/-70 < 30 <9 WW-9. . 20.01 240+/-70, < 30 WW-10 57.0 < 100 < 30 n*

WW-12 <100.

WW-13 50.0 < 100 <.3<

53.0-K <100. SIii~!i < 90 <...20..

ww-I1: 20.0 840+1-90 < 40 < 10 WW-16 20.0 240+1- 70, < 40 < 12 WW- 17' < 100 <30 <1 "

DEPIH (Ft.)

TRITIUM (pCi/liter) I K-40 tnrifliterl j Th-232 tnriIlit,*r' ww-1 WW-2, 550. 150+/-80, . <20 .. .<7 WW-3 24.0 220+/-80 < 30 <8 520, 'J80+1-'80 <20 <7 WW-4' flA 2S0+I-90<<40 +1l WW-7 20.0 " IU 1-i- iU I < 2U I I WW-9 20.0 ww-10 57.0 < 110 <40 < 12

.20.0 200 +1-90 <40......<.15.

WW-13 I 50.0 < 120 < 40 < 12 53.0, 200+/-.10 <40 < 11 ww-1t5 20.0 240 +/-80 < 50 < 14

.WW-16 20.0 280+/-90 <40 < 11 VVW-17 150.0 < 170 130

APPENDIX J 1998 REMP Sample Collection and

.f Analysis Methods I,

I I

I.

132

- - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - -.

TABLE J- I RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM

SUMMARY

OF SAMPLE COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS METHODS 1998 Collection Procedure Sample Size Analysis Procedure Analysis Sample Medium Sampling Method Number Number Procedure Abstract OCNGS Gross Beta Air Particulate Two week composite of continuous air sampling Environmental Affairs 1 filter TMI Environmental Low background gas flow through filter paper Department Procedure (approximately 1200 Affairs Department proportional counting DepartmeProcedur cubic meters bi- Procedure

_______________ _weekly) 6510-IMP-4592.05 Gamma Spectroscopy Air Quarterly composite of each station OCNGS 6 filters TMI Environmental Gamma Isotopic analysis Particulate Environmental Affairs (approximately 7200 Affairs Department Department Procedure cubic meters) Procedure 6530-IMP-4522.05 6510-IMP-4592.05 Gamma Spectroscopy Air Weekly composite of continuous air sampling OCNGS I cartridge TMI Environmental Gamma Isotopic analysis Iodine through charcoal filter Environmental Affairs (approximately 600 Affairs Department Department Procedure cubic meters weekly) Procedure 6530-IMP-4522.05 6510-OPS-4591.04 Gamma Spectroscopy Surface Monthly grab sample at two stations and semiannual OCNGS 3.78 liters TMI Environmental Gamma Isotopic analysis Water grab sample at an additional two stations Environmental Affairs Affairs Department Department Procedure Procedure 6530-IMP-4522.06 6510-IMP-4592.06 6510-OPS-4591.04 Teledyne Brown Gamma Isotopic analysis Engineering PRO-042-5 Gamma Spectroscopy Well Quarterly grab sample OCNGS 3.78 liters TMI Environmental Gamma Isotopic analysis Water Environmental Affairs Affairs Department Department Procedure Procedure 2870-IMP-4522.10 6510-IMP-4592.06 65 10-OPS-4591.04 Teledyne Brown Gamma Isotopic analysis Engineering PRO-042-5

TABLE J-I continued RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM

SUMMARY

OF SAMPLE COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS METHODS 1998 Collection Procedure Sample Size Analysis Procedure Analysis Sample Medium Sampling Method Number Number Procedure Abstract Gamma Spectroscopy Clams Semiannual grab sample OCNGS Approximately TMI Environmental Gamma Isotopic analysis Fish Semiannual grab sample Environmental Affairs Affairs Department 25 Crabs Annual grab sample Department Procedure 0gProcedure 6530-IMP-4522. 14 65Po-IMP-4592.03 6530-IMP-4522.16 6510-OPS-4591.04 Teledyne Brown Gamma Isotopic analysis Engineering PRO-042-5 Gamma Spectroscopy Sediment Semiannual grab sample OCNGS 3.78 liters TMI-EC Gamma Isotopic analysis Environmental Affairs 6510-IMP-4592.04 Department Procedure 6510-OPS-4591.04 6530-IMP-4522.03 Teledyne Brown Gamma Isotopic analysis Engineering PRO-042-5

-aApproximately Wl& Gamma Spectroscopy Vegetables Monthly grab sample during the harvest season OCNGS TMI-EC Gamma Isotopic analysis Environmental Affairs 1 kg 6510-IMP-4592.03 Department Procedure 651 0-OPS-4591.04 6530-IMP-4522.04 Teledyne Brown Gamma Isotopic analysis Engineering PRO-042.5 Tritium Well Water Quarterly grab sample OCNGS 3.78 liters TMI-EC Sample is filtered and Surface Water Monthly grab sample from two stations and Environmental Affairs 65 10-IMP-4592.02 mixed with scintillation semiannual grab sample from two additional stations Department Procedure 65 1 0-OPS-4591.05 fluid for scintillation 2870-IMP-4522.10 counting.

6530-IMP-4522.06 Teledyne Brown Sample is filtered and Engineering" mixed with scintillation PRO-052-2 fluid for scintillation PRO-052-35 counting.

- ~ - ~ m - W-0% -m I" -m TABLE J-I continued RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM

SUMMARY

OF SAMPLE COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS METHODS 1998 Collection Procedure Sample Size Analysis Procedure Analysis Sample Medium Sampling Method Number Number Procedure Abstract TLD (Panasonic) Immersion Dose Dosimeters exchanged quarterly OCNGS Two Badges TMI-Dosimetry Thermoluminescent Environmental Affairs 6610-OPS-4243.01 dosimetry Department Procedure 6530-IMP-4522.02 TLD (Teledyne Brown Immersion Dose Dosimeters exchanged quarterly OCNGS One Badge Teledyne Brown Thermoluminescent Engineering) Environmental Affairs Engineering dosimetry Department Procedure PRO-342-17 6530-IMP-4522.02 I-h In

APPENDIX K I 1998 TLD Quarterly Data I

I.

Le I,

U I

I' I0 1 136

Table K-1 1998 TLD Ouarterly Data - Panasonic TLD's

. U A Li Avut - J.7u I, Uti JUA LuU - A.ý7 Station First Period-1998 Second Period - 1998 C~A .,.4... ... .. 9 0.

14 10.4 4- 0.2 10.9 +1- 0.4 12.4 ./- 0.3 11.9 +1- 0.8

" :::. . -.  ;  ; "','r'". .. . * * ' .." ......." . ........ , " '" " "

3 7.4 +- 0.6 8.6 +1- 1.1 9.3 +1- 0.2 9.9 +1- 0.7 9.7 0.

OA- 8.9 4/- 0.8 8 . 8.0 .- 0.5 9.3 +/- 0.7 p 11 7.9 /- 1.1 92 +/- 0.8 9.7 +1- 0.3 10d,:ii3 8.6

+4-41-0.5 0.8 9 .. .. +.4 -. 0.4...-....

11.7 0..9 12.3 .1- 1.0 12.9 +/- 0.4 TLD Lost 12 .. ... .. 0.. . .. . ..... . 1.9.......0.4. 3,"

'. . .. . " 0.9 53 i!* 11.2 0*

.6 1.2 +1i!i1.0.5

÷- iiiiiii **.6.513.1÷- os  :!iii +- 11 I 55 ...... 14.7 1- 0.7 !ii 17.2 1- .1  :::i:!:

17.5 +1-0.7 16.8 +1- 1.0 I. 57 **: 11.0 +1- 1.1 12.8 +1- 0.7 12.1 +1 O.4A >*. 12.2 +1- O.4 I 59. iii; 9.9 +1-0.5

• .!* 1. 1 .

~ ~~~ ~~. . .. . ........ .. . .

2.0 +-

06 i!iiiii 1 .

/

p 62 iii 8.6 , 0.6 '* 9.7

• 0.9 iii! 9.8

• 0.5 iii 10.5 . 0.7 I .... ..... ........

I 6 i~

7.:.-:

/- 08 *::.:

8.9 +. 0.3 i*

z- .,,,,:,

9.8 +1- 0.6 iii*

10.4 +- 0.7 I 71 i*

• ~...

8.3 0.

• 9..

÷-o.6 10.1

- 0.3 ii:

9.8 0*.7 I

• i~i 7.7 0*.4

.i 8~.2 ,:::: 9-o6

........ .3 , 0.5

.......... 9.6 - 1.

, , .... ..-- i*X I *. .> .. ........ ..... -.-

I. 137

I1able K-i (cont.)

1998 TLD Ouarterly Data - Panasonic TLD's

-  :..:..:. mrem per ..Standard Quarter +/- 2 Sigma

.Station. . First.Period-

... 1998 Second.Penod 1998 ThirdPeriod-1998 Fourth Period-1998

""...... .... i; .

7$..7... .............

8 . 1 0......... ii~~iii~ 8  !~.:i~'

.-*.-i.*-i~i* '"......- . ."" ' "....... .... . .... .4 -. o6 8, 4 .o - o

........

• iii**iiii !i i~!*~ i :~ ~~~*!iio  : ii :**::* *.. . . . . .. . . .. .....

84  !~:i:*i

...... 9.6 +1- 0.3 10.1 +1- 0.6 iiiiii 10.6 +1- 0.8 i!* 1 . +- 09 589 *

........... - 7.1 7..--.. 1 .......... 48. 0.6 1 84 ' +1. . 05 0...... I

. -"... 1............. ... ... .............

98.5 +1- 0.6 0.6 7.1 -0.6

8. 1 0.4 07 9.0 +/- 0.5

...  :::::: 88- . .89079.

. . . ...... .. ... . .. . . . .. . . .,. . . 006

. . . ,. . . U10.0U

. . ,. +1,

' " :"' . ..' . " ' :*:ii:*:i:

!:!::*:*::' " " . .... . . ..  ;...............i!:!:

• ~"' ....... .'?."-':...'.

t TI  : 10.0:.1- 0  ::::*::::: t~:% .:p::K::  ::,::: lI +- 5x*: kt: .4 0.

99- 9.2iii~+f-ii!0. . .. 2 / 0.7 Wli +-

.9 1.0 138

I Table K-2 1998 TLD Ouarterly Data - Teledyne Browne Engineering TLD's

• I, ii:~~* iiJi:

i: mrem per Standard Quarter +/- 2 Sima Station,

.. iod- 1998 Second Period-1998 Third Period998 rounu renou - iy-t 10.0 +/- 0.7 iii~~* 89

+- 0.6 iiiii 9. +- 02 iiii 96 *1 0.

O A;;;-.. ...

... ........ ii~* 8 5 O A... U'..U / .

LL .. UL I

139