HBL-12-008, Annual Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report for 2011

Annual Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report for 2011

ML12125A206
Person / Time
Site:	Humboldt Bay
Issue date:	04/19/2012
From:	Sharp L Pacific Gas & Electric Co
To:	Document Control Desk, NRC/FSME
References
HBL-12-008
Download: ML12125A206 (39)

Text

Pacific Gas and Electric Company 1000 King Salmon Avenue Humboldt Bay Power Plant Eureka, CA 95503 Loren D. Sharp 707-444-0819 Director andPlantManagerHumboldt Bay Nuclear April 19, 2012 PG&E Letter HBL-12-008 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001 Docket No. 50-133 License No. DPR-7 Humboldt Bay Power Plant Unit 3 Annual Radiological Environmental Monitorinq Report for 2011

Dear Commissioners and Staff:

Enclosed is the Humboldt Bay Power Plant Unit 3, "Annual Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report" for 2011. This report provides the information required by Section 4.1 of the SAFSTOR/Decommissioning Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM).

The report has three sections. Section A provides a summary description of the SAFSTOR Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP), including maps of sampling locations. Section A also provides the results of licensee laboratory participation in the Interlaboratory Comparison Program.

Section B provides summaries, interpretations, and analyses of trends of the results of the REMP for the reporting period. The material provided is consistent with the objectives outlined in the ODCM, and in 10 CFR 50, Appendix I, Sections IV.B.2, IV.B.3, and IV.C.

Section B also includes a comparison with the baseline environmental conditions at the beginning of SAFSTOR.

Section C provides monitoring results for the reporting period, with summaries and tabulations. Radiological environmental samples and environmental radiation measurements were taken at the locations identified in ODCM Table 2-7 as quality-related locations. The summarized results are formatted for applicable reporting requirements of the NRC Radiological Assessment Branch's Branch Technical Position.

There are no regulatory commitments made in this letter.

Document Control Desk PG&E Letter HBL-12-008 April 19, 2012 Page 2 If you wish to discuss the information in the enclosed report, please contact Karl Johnson at (707) 444-0842, or David Sokolsky at (415) 973-5024.

Sincerely, Loren D. Sharp .

Directorand Plant ManagerHumboldt Bay Nuclear cc/enc: Elmo E. Collins, Jr., NRC Region IV John B. Hickman, NRC Project Manager HBPP Humboldt Distribution Enclosure

Enclosure PG&E Letter HBL-12-008 HUMBOLDT BAY POWER PLANT UNIT 3 ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT JANUARY 1 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2011

TABLE OF CONTENTS A. RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ............................ 1

1. P ro g ra m D e scriptio n ............................................. .............................................. 1

2. Monitoring Requirements ...................................... 2

a. Offsite Environmental Monitoring- Direct Radiation,................................. 2

b. Onsite Environmental Monitoring .............................. .......................... 2

c. O the r Mo nitoring ..................................................................................... .. 3

3. Interlaboratory Comparison Program ............................................................. 3

4. NEI Groundwater Protection Initiative .................................................... 4 B. TRENDS, BASELINE COMPARISONS AND INTERPRETATIONS .................... 4

1. General Comments ........................................................................................ 4

2. Direct Radiation Pathway ..................................................................................... 5

3. Airborne Pathway .......................................................................................... 6

4. Waterborne Pathway ..................................................................................... 6 a . S urface W ate r ......................................................................................... .. 6

b. G roundw ate r ........................................................................................... . . 6

5. Ingestion Pathway ......................................................................................... 7

6. Terrestrial Pathway .......................................................................................... 7 C. MONITORING RESULTS ..................................................................................... 7

1. Annual Summary ............................................................................................ 7

2. Direct Radiation Pathway ...................................... 8

3. Airborne Pathway ........................................................................................... 8

4. W aterborne Pathway ..................................................................................... 8

a. Surface W ater ........................................................................................... 8

-i-

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

b. rond ate .........

b. Groundwater ..........................

.,.................................... ........ :..............-.:...... . ....... ......... ....... 9

5. Ingestion Pathway ........................................... 10 6 . T e rrestrial P athw ay .............................................. ...................... .................. 10

7. NEI Groundwater Protection, Initiative Voluntary ReportingResults ............... 10

8. Errata For Previous Report............................................. 11 St

-ii -

"LIST.OF TABLES Table Pane A-i HBPP Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program................................. 12 A-2 Distances And Directions to HBPP Offsite TLD Locations ................ 13 A-3 GEL Participation - Interlaboratory Cross-Check Program Data ...................... 14 C-1 Radiological: Environmental Monitoring Program Annual Report Summary ......... 17 C-2 Onsite,Environmental TLD Stations ................... " .. .. ." ." ..... 19 C-3 Offsite Environmental TLD Stations ............................... 20 C-4 Discharge Canal Sample Results ................................. 21 C-5 Groundwater Monitoring'W ell Results ......................................................... 23 C-6 Caisson Sump Monitoring Results ................................ 25 C-7 French Drain Monitoring Results ........................... ................ .... .. :.......... 26 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page A-I HBPP Onsite TLD Locations ................................. ....27 A-2 HBPP Onsite Monitoring W ell Locations ............... ............................ 28 A-3 HBPP Offsite TLD Locations....................................... 29 B-1 Offsite Environmental Radiation Level Trends .................. .. .... 32 B-2, Onsite Environmental RadiationvLevel Trends'....... ........ .................................... 33

- iii -

PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY ANNUAL RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING REPORT FOR HUMBOLDT BAY POWER PLANT UNIT 3, COVERING THE PERIOD JANUARY 1 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2011 This annual report is required by Section 4.1 of the SAFSTOR Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM). This report provides information about the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) for the period of January 1 through December 31, 2011, in a manner consistent with the objectives outlined in the ODCM, and in 10CFR 50, Appendix I, Sections IV.B.2, !V.B.3, and IV.C.

The report has.three sections. Section A provides.a summary description of the REMP, -including maps of sampling locations. Section A also provides the results of licensee laboratory participation in the Interlaboratory Comparison Program.

Section B provides summaries, interpretations, and analyses of trends of the results of the REMP for the reporting period. The material provided is consistent with the objectives outlined in the ODCM, and in 10CFR 50, Appendix I, Sections IV.B.2, IV.B.3, and IV.C. Section B also includes a comparison with the baseline environmental conditions at the beginning of SAFSTOR.,

Section C provides the results of analyses of radiological environmental samples and of environmental radiation measurements taken during the period pursuant to the quality related locations specified in the table, and figures in the ODCMK, presented as both summarized and tabulated results of these analyses and measurements. The summarized results are formatted for applicable reporting requirements of the NRC Radiological Assessment Branch's Branch Technical Position.

A. RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM

1. Program Description The NRC Radiological Assessment Branch issued a Branch Technical Position (BTP) on environmental monitoring in March 1978. Revision 1 of the BTP was issued as Generic Letter 79-65, "Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Requirements - Enclosing Branch Technical Position," .Revision 1, dated November 27, 1979, and -sets forth an example of an acceptable minimum radiological monitoring program. The specified-environmental monitoring program provides measurements of radiation and of radioactive materials in those exposure pathways andfor those radionuclides that lead-to the highest potential radiation exposures of individuals resulting from plant effluents.

As discussed below, many of the exposure pathway sample requirements specified in the BTP are not required for the HBPP REMP because of the baseline conditions established in the SAFSTOR Decommissioning Plan (now identified as the Post Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report (PSDAR) and Defueled Safety Analysis Report (DSAR)) and the Environmental Report.

-1 -

In addition, the nuclides specified for analysis by the BTP have been revised to reflect the available source term at a nuclear power plant that has been shut down since July 2, 1976.

The REMP consists of the collection 'and analysis of both onsite and offsite environmental samples. HBPP personnel perform sample collection and General Engineering Laboratories (GEL) personnel perform sample analysis.

The Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP) dosimetry group performs analysis of thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) used for monitoring direct radiation. A summary of the REMP is provided as Table A-I,'"HBPP Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program."

Sample collection for the REMP is performed at the sampling stations defined by Table A-2, "Distances and Directions to HBPP Offsite TLD Locations;"

Figure A-i, "HBPP Onsite TLD Locations;" Figure A-2, "HBPP Onsite Monitoring Well Locations;" and the discharge canal shown in Figure A-2.

2. Monitoring Requirements.-

a. Offsite EnvironmentalMonitoring - Direct Radiation, The SAFSTOR ODCM ,requires four (4) offsite environmental monitoring stations equipped with TLDs to monitor gamma exposure. The TLDs are required to be exchanged quarterly. The stations selected to satisfy this requirement are Stations 1, 2,14, 25, and T17 as described in Table A-2.

These stations are considered to be the five control locations for the direct radiation dose pathway.

b. Onsite Environmental Monitoring (1) Direct Radiation The SAFSTOR ODCM requires 16 onsite environmental monitoring stations, equipped with TLDs to monitor gammaexposure. The TLDs are required to be exchanged quarterly. The -stations.selected to satisfy this'requirement are Stations T1 through T16, shown on Figure A-I. ýFour (4) additional TLDs were added around the ISFSI in 2010. These are Stations T18 through T21.

• Each quarter the exposures from 20: stations are determined, which results in the 80 analyses for a full year. Each TLD station has three

,TLDs, eachcontaining a numberof phosphors (normally three).

,,The phosphor exposures for each TLD, are averaged and then the three TLDs per station are averaged.to provide the quarterly exposure for the station.

'(2)': Surface Water The SAFSTOR ODCM requires that the discharge canal effluent be monitored by gamma -isotopic analysis and by tritium analysis.,

Composite samplesare normally collected weekly from a continuous sampler, with dip (grab) samples collected if the sampler is, inoperable.

(3) Groundwater The SAFSTOR ODCM requires that twelve groundwater wells be monitored by gamma isotopic analysis-and by tritium analysis...

Samples are to be collected quarterly. The monitoring wells selected to satisfy, this requirement are identified as: MW-1, MW-2, MW-4, MW-6, MW-11, RCW-SFP-1,, RCW-SFP-2, RCW-CS-1, RCW-CS-2, RCW-CS-3, RCW-CS-4, and RCW-CS shown on Figure A-2.

.c. Other Monitoring Airborne, ingestion and terrestrial pathway monitoring. is not required by the ODCM. The Environmental Report, submitted to the NRC as Attachment 6 to SAFSTOR License Amendment Request 84-01, dated July 31, 1984, established baseline conditions for these pathways. In accordance with the NRC-approved SAFSTOR Decommissioning Plan, (now identified as the PSDAR and DSAR), these baseline conditions willonly, need to be reestablished prior to final decommissioning if a significant release occurs during SAFSTOR. The Environmental Report also contains a description of the .demography and human activities within the environs surrounding the site.

As a matter of plant policy, groundwater leakage into the-reactor caisson is routinely sampled, approximately monthly, and analyzed for tritium and gamma emitters, in order to develop a historical record of these parameters. The results are included in this report, but are not considered part of the SAFSTOR REMP.

3. Interlaboratory Comparison Program PG&E's contract laboratory, GEL, has analyzed evaluation samples provided by a commercial supplier to satisfy the, requirement to. participate in an Interlaboratory Cross-Check Program.. This participation includes sufficient determinations (sample medium and radionuclide. combination) to ensure independent checks on the precision and accuracy of.the measurements of radioactive materials in the REMP samples. Table A-3 presents the participation in this Interlaboratory Cross-Check Program for.samples analyzed in the report. period that represent analyses'performed for HBPP. The agreement criteria are consistent with the guidance ýfor,' Confirmatory Measurements" in, NRC Inspection ,Procedure 83502.3,-, Radiological Environment Monitoring.Program and Radioactive Material Conrtrol Program."

GEL analyzed four (4) Eckert & Ziegler Analytics samples for 37 parameters that are representative of analyses performed for HBPP during 2011. All results met the acceptance criteria with the exception of the second Eckert &

Ziegler Analytics sample for Cr-51. GEL believes that the half-life and resulting elevated uncertainty were the major contributing factors in the failure. The following steps were taken by. GEL to prove that the failure was an isolated event:

1) The batch controls samples were reviewed and found to be compliant.

2) A duplicate of the sample-was also prepared and counted along side the original; its result also fell outside the acceptable range.

3) The instrument calibrations were reviewed for any anomalies that'could have been attributed to this failure and none were noted.

GEL also participated in various proficiency testing programs for federal and state agencies, including the DOE Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP). Included in Table A-3 are the results of three (3) Gross Alpha. and three (3) Gross Beta~analyses. All results were acceptable.

No adverse trends in quality were noted in the crosscheck program results.

4. NEI Groundwater Protection Initiative.

Groundwater monitoring data is collected in accordance-with the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) Groundwater Protection Initiative. The results show that there are detectable concentrations of radionuclides inthe groundwater within the HBPP restricted area. These are believed to be the results of historical spills at the site.,

The impact of these detectable concentrations is negligible, because the groundwater is saline'and'isýnot used now nor likely to be used in the future for either direct consumption or for agricultural purposes.

B. TRENDS, BASELINE COMPARISONS AND INTERPRETATIONS Section B provides interpretations of results, and analyses of trends of the results. The material provided is consistent with the objectives outlined in the ODCM, :and in 10CFR50, Appendix lI, Sections IV.B.2, IV.B.3, and IV.C.

Section B also includes a comparison with the baseline environmental conditions-at the beginning of -SAFSTOR.

1. General Comments The Environmental Report, submitted to the NRC as Attachment 6 to

'SAFSTOR License'Amendment Request,84-01, establishled baseline conditions for soil, biota and sediments:The results-to date :indicate no significant change from the baseline environmental conditions established

'in the En*vironmental-Report.

The' results, .interptetations; and analysis !of trends of the results, indicate

-that SAFSTOR activities have had no measurable radiological effect on the environment. Facility surveys for radiation and radioactive surface contamination are performed on both a scheduled basis and on an as-required basis. These surveys indicate that the radioactivity control barriers established for SAFSTOR and decommissioning continue to be effective.

As discussed below, the ODCM calculation model conservatively assumes that exposure pathways begin at the unrestricted area, boundary, also known as the owner controlled area (OCA) boundary. Since there have not been any changes i n the location of the boundary, no survey for changes to the use of unrestricted areas was necessary.

2. Direct Radiation Pathway A plot.of the radiation: level trends.for the five control (offsite) locations is

.shown in-Figure B-i, "Offsite Environmental Radiation Level Trends." A plot of the radiation level trends for onsite stations is shown in Figure B-2,

,"Onsite Environmental Radiation Level Trends." Theplots show that the offsite annual doses continue to be within the ranges that have been observed over the last ten years.

Figure B-2 includes. the average dose for two-groups of onsite stations,

.. selected by their potential to be affected by radioactive waste handling activities. Figure B-2 also shows that dose measurement, variations can be attributed to in-plant sources and low-level waste packaging and shipping activities. However, allowing for the background change in the general environs, all measurements were comparable to the ranges observed at these locations since entering SAFSTOR,.,with the onsite station dose levels approximately within the range of dose levels .shown by the offsite stations.

The ODCM calculation model for the, direct radiation exposure pathway assumes an occupancy factor for the portion of the unrestricted area

,-boundary that-is closest to the radioactive waste handling area of the plant,

.(TLDs T5-T8), which is the location of the highest potential exposure. The occupancy factor is 67 hours7.75463e-4 days <br />0.0186 hours <br />1.107804e-4 weeks <br />2.54935e-5 months <br /> per year, based.on regulatory guidance for shoreline recreation, even though the-actual shoreline is farther from the boundary. Since there have been no significant changes of the locations of the radioactive waste handling activities, boundary, or shoreline, no further survey for changes to the use of unrestricted areas is necessary. Using the maximum yearly dose, as seen on TLDs T5-T8 and corrected to the 67 hour7.75463e-4 days <br />0.0186 hours <br />1.107804e-4 weeks <br />2.54935e-5 months <br /> occupancy, and subtracting the average of the.five: (5) offsite control TLDs, the dose to the maximum exposed individual from this source was indistinguishable from background.

The Independent Spent Fuel Storage. Installation ý(!SFSI) was constructed in 2008, and spent fuel transfer from the spent fuel pool (SFP) was completed in December, 2008.: As a result of this,: the dose rates at the OCA fence line increasedslightly. The:.ISFSI. Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) assumes an occupancy~factor of 2,080 hours9.259259e-4 days <br />0.0222 hours <br />1.322751e-4 weeks <br />3.044e-5 months <br /> per year at the OCA fence line., Using the maximum, yearly dose,- as seen on TLDs T1 8-T21 and corrected to the 2080 hour0.0241 days <br />0.578 hours <br />0.00344 weeks <br />7.9144e-4 months <br /> occupancy, and, subtracting the average of the five (5) offsite control TLDs, the dose to the maximum exposed individual from this source would be 2.2 mrem per year.

3. Airborne Pathway Airborne pathway monitoring is not required by the ODCM. The Environmental Report, submitted to the NRC as Attachment 6 to SAFSTOR License Amendment Request 84-01, established baseline conditions for the airborne pathway. In accordance with the NRC-approved SAFSTOR Decommissioning Plan, (now identified as the PSDAR'and DSAR), these baseline, conditions will only need to be reestablished prior to final decommissioning if a significant release occurs during SAFSTOR. The ODCM calculation model for the airborne pathway assumes that the airborne exposure pathway (inhalation exposure) is at the unrestricted area boundary, which is the location of the highest potential exposure.

4. Waterborne Pathway

a. Surface Water None of the. REMP samples indicated detectable levels of tritium or gamma radioactivity. These sample results were typical of those observed-since entering SAFSTOR.

The ODCM calculation model for the surface water waterborne pathway assumes that the waterborne exposure pathway (vertebrate and invertebrate food consumption) beginsat the unrestricted area boundary, which is the location of the highest potential exposure.

The ODCM calculation model is based on the average concentration of the radioactivity released and diluted by the tidal flow of water in the discharge canal. For the purposes of comparing the sampling results with effluents, consider a conservatively estimated liquid waste batch of 7,000 gallons containing tritium at 30,000 pico-Curies/liter, Cs-137 at 1,000 pico-Curies/liter,* and Co-60 at 100 pico-Curies/liter. For a single batch release during a week-long canal composite sample, the tidal

-flow volume is approximately 7E6 gallons, so the diluted activity for

-tritium, Cs-137 and Co-60 would be 30, 1.0, and 0.1 pico-Curies/liter,

• respectively. These concentrations are unlikely to be detected.

b. Groundwater None of the samples of the twelve (12) SAFSTOR REMP required monitoring wells indicated detectable levels of;tritium. For gamma radioactivity, these sample results were typical of those observed since

'entering, SAFSTOR. Results for other parameters and samples were comparable to the ranges observed since entering SAFSTOR.

This report alsocontains information on gamma emitting radionuclides and tritium concentrations in the caisson sump and gamma emitting radionuclide concentrations for the SFP french drain. There is detectable radioactivity, due to plant operations, at these sample points. Both of these locations are believed to be contaminated as a result of groundwater intrusion into historically contaminated areas of concrete and fill material.

The ODCM does not provide a model for the groundwater waterborne pathway, because the groundwater is saline and is not used now nor likely to be used: in the future for either direct consumption or for agricultural purposes.

5. .Ingestion Pathway:

Ingestion, pathway monitoring is not required by the ODCM. The Environmental Report, submitted .to the NRC as Attachment 6 to SAFSTOR License Amendment Request 84-01, established baseline conditions for the ingestion pathway. In accordance with the NRC-approved SAFSTOR Decommissioning Plan, (now identified as the PSDAR and DSAR), these baseline conditions will only need to be reestablished priorto final decommissioning if a significant release occurs during SAFSTOR.

The ODCM calculation model for the airborne.pathway assumes that the ingestion pathways (milk, -meat and vegetable* consumption) begin at the unrestricted area boundary, which is the location of the highest potential exposure, whether any dairy, farm,,etc. is actually present.

6. Terrestrial Pathway Terrestrial pathway monitoring is not required by the ODCM. The Environmental Report, submitted to the NRC as Attachment 6 to SAFSTOR

..License Amendment Request 84-01, established baseline conditions for

.,the terrestrial pathway. In accordance with the NRC-approved SAFSTOR Decommissioning Plan, (now identified as the PSDAR and DSAR), these

.-baseline conditions will only need to-be reestablished prior to final decommissioning if a significant release occurs during SAFSTOR.

The ODCM calculation model for the terrestrial pathway conservatively assumes that the terrestrial exposure (direct radiation from airborne radioactivity deposition) is at the unrestricted area. boundary, which is the location of the.highest potential exposure.

C. MONITORING RESULTS

1. Annual Summary Results of the. REMP: sampling andanalysis are. summarized in Table C-I in the format of the BTP Table:3.',. None of the REMP samples results exceeded the reporting levels for radioactivity concentration in environmental samples ;specified in-HBPP ODCM Table 2-8.

-'7-

All of the minimum detectable activities (MDAs) for analyses required by the SAFSTOR REMP were less than or equal to the lower limit of detection (LLD) criteria for radioactivity in environmental samples specified in Table C-1 of this report. Because alpha and beta radioactivity analyses of the saline ground water are less effective than tritium: and gamma radioactivity analyses for monitoring potential SFP leakage, the ODCM does not currently require alpha and beta radioactivity analyses to be part of the SAFSTOR REMP.

2. Direct'Radiation Pathway Monitoring of the direct radiation pathway is performed at 20 onsite locations near the OCA fence line, and at 5 offsite (control) locations in the vicinity of the facility. Monitoring is performed with TLDs with multiple crystal elements. Three TLDs are installed at each station, and the set is exchanged quarterly. The reported result and its standard error are calculated from the measurements of multiple elements in the TLD triplet.

Results of the onsite and offsite monitoring are provided in Tables C-2 and C-3, respectively.

3. Airborne Pathway Airborne pathWay monitbring is not required by the ODCM.

4. Waterborne Pathway

a. Surface Water

• Surface water sampling of the waterborne pathway is performed by sampling the discharge canal effluent. Sampling is normally performed by collecting a weekly sample from a discharge canal continuous composite sampler. If the composite sampler is found to be

• inoperable, dip, samples from the discharge canal are taken. All samples during the reporting period were obtained from. the continuous compositesampler%.

Detailed results of the discharge canal monitoring are provided in Table C-4. None of the REMP samples indicated detectable levels of tritium or gamma radioactivity at or above the MDA with the exception of wsamples taken on:6/1/11 and 11/23/11. These samples showed Cs-137 concentrations of 4.58 and 8.95 'pCi/L, respectively. The MDA for these -analyses Was at or below the LLD stated in Table C-1 of this report. These sample resuilts were'typical of those observed since entering SAFSTOR and decommissioning. PG&E has determined that the positive Cs-1 37 results are most likely attributed to the batch releases done during the collection period.

- 8.-ý.

b. Groundwater Groundwater sampling of the waterborne pathway is performed by sampling twelve (12) monitoring wells located to monitor for leakage from the SFP. Sampling of these monitoring wells is performed quarterly. Detailed results of groundwater monitoring are provided in Table C-5..

The tritium concentration for all of the wells listed in Table C-5 during 2011 was less than the MDA of approximately 300 pCi/liter. The addition of the several more groundwater monitoring wells, in the last couple of years will help to further characterize groundwater issues. All of the monitoring wells are inside the OCA boundary, and the groundwater is saline and is not used now nor likely to be used in the future for either direct consumption or for agricultural purposes.

Therefore, there is no groundwater waterborne pathway for a member of the public. None of the other ODCM required REMP samples indicated detectable levels of tritium or gamma radioactivity.,

Because alpha and beta radioactivity analyses, of the saline groundwater are less effective than tritium and gamma radioactivity analyses for monitoring potential SFP leakage, -the ODCM does not currently require alpha and beta radioactivity analyses to be part of the SAFSTOR REMP. Nevertheless, alpha and ,beta radioactivity analyses are performed as a matter of plant policy, in order to maintain a historical record of this parameter for the remainder of .SAFSTOR.

These results are included in Table C-5, but are not considered part of the SAFSTOR REMP.

All required sampling and analysis for the twelve (12) monitoring wells of the waterborne pathway required- during this reporting period were performed successfully.

Groundwater leakage into the reactor caisson- is also routinely sampled, approximately monthly, and analyzed for gamma.emitters and tritium as a matter of plant policy, in order to develop a historical record of these parameters for SAFSTOR and decommissioning. These results are included in Table C-6, but are not considered part of the SAFSTOR REMP..

The french drain beneath the SFP is'also routinely sampled,

• approximately monthly, and analyzed for gamma emitters as a matter of plant policy; inorder todevelop a his~torical ,record ofjthis parameter for SAFSTOR and decommissioning. These results areincluded in Table C-77, but are not considered part'of the :SAFSTOR REMP.

5. Ingestion Pathway

-.Ingestion pathway monitoring is not required by the ODCM.

6. Terrestrial Pathway Terrestrial pathway monitoring is not required by the ODCM.

7. NEI Groundwater Protection Initiative Voluntary Reporting Results The NEI Groundwater Protection Initiative contains the following requirements:

OBJECTIVE 2.2 VOLUNTARY COMMUNICATION Make informal notification as soon as practicableto appropriate State/Local officials, with follow up notification to the NRC, as appropriate, regardingsignificant onsite leaks/spills into groundwaterand onsite or offsite water sample results exceeding the criteriain the REMP as describedin the ODCM/ODAM.

HBPP Response to 2.2:

There were no reports or notifications required to be generated in 2011 for groundwater results exceeding reporting/notification levels or significant onsite leaks/spills.

OBJECTIVE 2.3 THIRTY-DAY REPORTS Submit a 30-day report to the NRC for any watersample result for onsite groundwaterthat is or may be used as a source of drinking water that exceeds the criteriain the licensee's existing REMP for 30-day reporting of offsite water sample results. Copies of 30-day reports for both onsite and offsite water samples will also be provided to the appropriateState agency, and:

HBPP Response to 2.3:

There were no reports or notifications required to be generated in 2011 for groundwater results exceeding reporting/notification levels or significant onsite leaks/spills.

OBJECTIVE 2.4 ANNUAL REPORTING Document all on-site ground water sample results and a description of any significant on-site leaks/spills into groundwaterfor each calendaryear in the AREOR for REMP or the ARERR for the RETS as containedin the appropriatereportingprocedure, beginning with Calendaryear 2006.

HBPP Response to 2.4:

Onsite groundwater monitoring points are described and reported in this report as follows: MW-1, MW-2, MW-4, MW-6, MW-11, RCW-SFP-1, RCW-SFP-2, RCW-CS-1, RCW-CS-2, RCW-CS-3, RCW-CS-4, and RCW-CS-5, the caisson sump and the french drain. A summary of the sample results are provided in Section C.

There were no significant onsite leaks/spills into groundwater in 2011.

Note: the term "significant" is defined by the NEI Initiative as greater than 100 gallons.

8. Errata for Previous Report There.are, no errata for previous reports.

-.11.-

TABLE A-1 HBPP RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM Exposure Pathway Number of Samples Sampling and Collection Type of Analysis And/Or Sample And Locations Frequency DIRECT RADIATION 20 onsite stations with TLDs TLDs exchanged quarterly Gamma exposure 5 offsite stations with TLDs TLDs exchanged quarterly Gamma exposure WATERBORNE Surface Water Discharge canal'effluent Continuous sample"r operation Gamma isotopic a) and with sample collection weekly. tritium analysis of Dip samples ifsampler weekly sample inoperable Groundwater 5 groundwater monitoring Quarterly Tritium and gamma wells . isotopic(a) analysis Gamma isotopic analysis means the identification and quantificationhof gamma emitting radionuclides that may be attributable to the effluents from the facility.

TABLE A-2 DISTANCES AND DIRECTIONS TO HBPP OFFSITE TLD LOCATIONS Radial Radial Direction Distance Station By From Plant Number Station Name Sector Degrees (Miles) 1 King Salmon Picnic Area W 270 0.3 2 City of Fortuna Water Pollution SSE 158 9.4

'Control Plant, 180 Dinsmore Drive, Fortuna 14 South Bay School Parking Lot S. 180 0.4 25 Irving Drive, Humboldt Hill SSE 175 1.3 T17 .Mitchell Heights Drive NNE 45. 6

-.13 -

TABLE A-3 GEL PARTICIPATION - INTERLABORATORY CROSS-CHECK PROGRAM DATA Table Notation: (a) All of the values shown are relative. Therefore, the units for total activity or concentration levels are not shown.

Sample/Analysis Radionuclide Sample Number Quarter 2011 GEL Ref Value Evaluation Water/Gamma 1-131 E7-468-278 1st 9.73E+01 9.40E+01 Acceptable Cr-51. E7-468-278 1st 2.16E+02 1.96E+02 Acceptable Cs-1 34 . E7-468-278 1st 8.52E+01 8.56E+01 Acceptable Cs-137 E7-468-278 1st 1.47E+02 1.35E+02 Acceptable C0-58 - E7-468-278' 1st 7.71E+01 7.44E+01 Acceptable M.n-54 E7-468-278 1st 1.88E+02 1.75E+02 Acceptable Fe-59 E7-468-278 1st. 1.26E+02 1.15E+02 Acceptable Zn-65 'E7-468-278 1st 1".90E+Q2:, 1.72E+02 Acceptable Co-60 I E7-468-278 1st 1.1,4E+02 1.13E+02 Acceptable Samp!elAna!ysis Radionuclide Sample Number Quarter 2011 GEL Ref Value Evaluation

.Water/Gamma 1-131 E7-862-278 .. 2nd 1.20E+02 1.01E+02 Acceptable Cr-51 E7-862-278 2nd 3.36E+02 2.41 E+02 Not Acceptable Cs-134 E7-862-278 .. 2nd 2.02E+02 2.22E+02 Acceptable Cs-137 E7-862-278 2nd 1.73E+(02 1.61E+02 Acceptable Ce-141 E7-862-278 2nd 9.30E+014 9.35E+01 Acceptable Mn-54 E7-862-278 .2nd 1.66E+02 . 1.61E+02, 'Acceptable Fe-59 E7-862-278 2nd 1.57E+02 1.44E+02 Acceptable zn-65 E7-862-278 2nd 3.47E+02 3.05E+02 Acceptable Co-60 E7-862-278 2nd 2.38E+02. 2.28E+02 Acceptable TABLE A-3 (Continued)

GEL PARTICIPATION - INTERLABORATORY CROSS-CHECK PROGRAM DATA Sample/Analysis Radionuclide Sample Number Quarter 2011 GEL Ref Value Evaluation Water/Gamma 1-131 E8098-278 3rd 7.23E+01 8.01E+01 Acceptable Cr-51 E8098-278 3rd 3.19E+02 3.1OE+02 Acceptable Cs-134 E8098-278 .3rd 1.57E+02 1.76E+02 Acceptable Cs-137 E8098-278 3rd 1.60E+02, 1.56E+02 Acceptable Ce-141 E8098-278 3rd 9.06E+01 9.15E+01 Acceptable Mn-54 E8098-278 3rd 2.19E+02 2.075+02 Acceptable Fe-59 E8098-278 3rd 9.04E+01 7.52E+01 +Acceptable Zn-65 E8098-278 3rd .2.74E+02 2.47E+02 Acceptable Co-58 E8098-278 3rd 1.34E+02 1,34E+02 Acceptable Co-60 E8098-278 3rd 2.25E+02 2.15E+02 Acceptable SamplelAnalysis Radionuclide Sample Number Quarter 2011 GEL Ref Value Evaluation Water/Gamma 1-131 E820027 4th 8.44E+01 8.87E+01 Acceptable

---

Cr-51 _E8200-278 4th . 5.32E+02_ 5.66E+02 Acceptable Cs-134 E8200-278 4th 1.56E+O2 _1.71E+02 Acceptable Cs-137 .E8200-278 4th 2.06E+02 2.1OE+02 Acceptable Co-58. E8200-278- -4th. 2.02E+02. 2.21E+02 Acceptable Mn-54 E8200-278 4th 2.50E+02 2.41E+02 Accepta~b!e Fe59- E8200-278 th -1.81.E+02 1.83E+02 Acceptable Zn-65. E8200-278 4th 2.95E+02 2.91 E+02 Acceptable Co-60 E8200-278 4th . 2.58E+02 2.70E+02 Acceptable TABLE A-3 (Continued)

GEL PARTICIPATION - INTERLABORATORY CROSS-CHECK PROGRAM DATA Sample/Analysis Radionuclide Sample Number Quarter 2011 GEL Ref Value Evaluation Gross Alpha INA. MAPEP-1 O-GrW23 1st. 1.67 -1.92 Acceptable Gross Beta NA MAPEP-1O-GrW23 1st 4.407 4.39 Acceptable Gross Alpha NA MAPEP-11-GrW24 3rd 1.019 1.136 Acceptable Gross Beta NA MAPEP-11-GrW24 3rd 3.14 2.96 Acceptable Gross Alpha NA . MAPEP-11-GrW25 4th 0.876 0.866 Acceptable Gross Beta NA. MAPEP-11-GrW25 4th 5:003 4.81 Acceptable TABLE C-1 RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL REPORT

SUMMARY

Name of Facility Humboldt Bay Power Plant Unit 3 Docket No. 50-133: License No. DPR-7 Location of Facility Humboldt County, California Reporting Period January 1 - December 31, 2011 (County, State)

Type and All Indicator Location with Highest Annual Mean Control Total - Lower Locations _ Locations Number of Medium or Number of Limit of Mean, Name, Mean, Mean, Nonroutine Pathway Sampled Analyses Detectiona (Fraction) Distance and (Fraction) (Fraction) Reported

[Unit of Measurement] Performed (LLD) & [Range, b Direction & [Ran&ge] b Measurements AIRBORNE Radioiodine and Not N/A N/A N/A N/A NotRequired N/A Particulates Required DIRECT RADIATION

[mR/quarter] Direct 3 13.3 +/- 0.1 Station T1 14.7 +/-'0.9 12.7 +/- 0.2 0 radiation (80/80) Figure B-1 (4/4) (20/20) -

(80) [11.2- 15.9]. [13.6-15.8] [11.5-15.6]

WATERBORNE Surface Water Gamma Co-60: 15 Co-60 <MDA N/A N/A Not Required 0 (Discharge canal isotopic, Cs-137:18 [NA]

effluent) (52) (0/52)

[pCi/I] Cs-137 6.87 +/- 5.2.2

[4.58--8.95]

(2/52)

Tritium (52) _ODCM:3000. <MDA N/A, N/A -Not Required 0 Plant Policy: (0/52) 400 [N/A]

.;=, , '} :;-

t: : i:* . F "  :. . ..

TABLE C-1 (Continued)

RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM ANNUAL RE=PORT

SUMMARY

Type All Indicator Location with Highest Annual Control Medium or and Total Lower Locations Mean Locations Number of Pathway Sampled Number of Limit of Mean, Name, Mean, Mean, Nonroutine

[Unit of Analyses Detectiona (Fraction) Distance and (Fraction) (Fraction) Reported Measurement] Performed (LLD) & [Range] b Direction & [Range]b & [Range] b Measurements WATERBORNE Co-60 Cs-137 Co-60 Cs-137 Co-60 Cs-137 Co-60 Cs-137 .

(continued)

Groundwater Gamma Co-60: 15 <MDA <MDA N/A N/A <MDA <MDA N/A N/A 0 (Monitoring wells) isotopic Cs-137: 18 (0/48) (0/48) (0/4) (0/4)

[pCi/I] (48). [N/A] [N/A] [N/A] [N/A]

Tritium ODCM:2000 <MDA N/A <MDA N/A 0 (48) Plant Policy: (0/48) (0/4),

-400 [N/A] [N/A]

Drinking Water Not Required N/A N/A N/A N/A Not Required N/A Sediment Not Required N/A N/A N/A N/A Not Required N/A Algae Not Required N/A N/A -. N/A N/A Not Required N/A INGESTION Milk Not Required N/A N/A N/A N/A Not Required N/A Fish and Not Required N/A N/A -- N/A N/A Not Required N/A invertebrates TERRESTRIAL Soil Not Required N/A N/A N/A N/A Not Required N/A a The LLD is defined as the smallest concentration .of radioactive material in a sample that will.yield a net count, above system. background, that will be detected with 95 percent probability with only 5 percent probability of falsely concluding that a blank observation represents a "real" signal.

LLD is defined as the a priori (before the fact) lower limit of detection (as pCi per unit mass or volume) representing the capability of a measurement system and not as the a posteriori (after the fact)*limit for a particular measurement. (Current literature defines the LLD as the detection capability for the instrumentation only, and the MDA, minimum detectable concentration, as the detection capability for a given instrument, procedure'and type of sample.) The-actual MDA for these analyses Was at or below the LLD.

b The mean and the range are based on detectable measurements only. The fraction of detectable measurements at specified locations is indicated in parentheses; e.g., (10/12) means that 10 out of 12 samples contained detectable activity. The range of detected results is indicated in brackets; e.g., [23-34].

Not Required: Not required by the HBPP Unit 3 Technical Specifications or the SAFSTOR Offsite Dose Calculation Manual. Baseline environmental conditions for this parameter were established in the Environmental Report as referenced by the SAFSTOR Decommissioning Plan (now identified as the Post Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report and Defueled Safety Analysis Report).

N/A - Not applicable TABLE C-2 ONSITE ENVIRONMENTAL TLD STATIONS Station TLD Exposure Measurements (mR)

Number First Quarter Second Quarter Third Quarter Fourth Quarter TTI 15.8 +/- 0.5 13.6+/-0.5 14.9+/-0.9 14.3 +/- 0.7 T2 14.0 +/- 0.6 12.3 +/- 0.8 13.4 +/- 0.7 12.9 +/- 0.7 T3 13.3 +/- 0.7 13.0 +/- 0.7 12.3 +/- 0.7 13.9 +/- 0.6 T4 15.0 0.6 13.5 +/- 0.6 13.1 +/- 1.0 14.2 +/- 0.5 T5& 12.5 +/-0.4 12.6 +/- 0.5 12.1 +/- 0.6 12.9 +/- 0.7 T6-- 12.2+/-0.7 11.7 +/-0.8 11.6+/-0.7 11.8+/-0.7 T7 13.3 +/- 0.8 12.0 +/- 0.4 12.1 +/- 0.8 13.0 +/- 0.4 T8 12.4+/-0.9 11.2+/-0.8 11.2+/-0.5 11.7 +/- 0.4 T9 13.4 +/- 1.1 12.3 +/- 0.7 13.1 +/- 0.7 13.1 +/-,0.6 Ti 0, 13.1 +/-0.6 11.8+/-0.4 12.0+/-1.9 12.1 +/-0.5 T11 .13.5 0.8 12.1 +/- 0.7 13.1 +/- 0.7 13.4 +/- 0.8 T12 13.9 +/- 0.6 13.0 +/- 0.5 13.7 +/- 0,6 .13.8 +/- 0.9 T13 14.4 +/- 0.9 12.9 +/- 0.5 12.9 +/- 0.6 13.7 +/- 0.6 T14 14.6+/-0.8 13.4+/-0.5 13.3+/-0.7 14.4+/-0.5 T15 13.5 +/- 0.8 13.1 +/- 0.4 12.8 +/- 0.8 14.2 +/-'0.4 T16 , 13.8 0.7ý 12.6 +/- 0.6 12.7 +/- 0.7 13.4 +/- 0.7 T18 15.5+/-0.9 13.7+/-0.2 13.4+/-1.0 13r9+/-0.9 T19 14.8 +/- 0.7 14.4 +/- 0.7- -14.5 +/- 0.2 14.9 +/- 0.2 T20, 15.9 0.5 13.3 +/- 0.6 14.2 +/- 0.8 14.1 +/-0.5 T21 14.9 +/-0.5 13.2 +/- 0.1 13.1 +/- 0.9 13.4 +/-0.5

- Calculated Parameters (mR)

Parameter First Quarter Second Quarter Third Quarter Fourth Quarter Average 14.0 +/- 0.1 12.8 +/- 0.1 .13.0 +/- 0.1 13.5 +/-0.1 Maximum 15.9 +/- 0.5 14.4 +/- 0.7 14.9 +/- 0:9 14.9 +/- 0.2 Notes:

1. These exposures are'-reported for a standardized period of 90 days.

TABLE C-3 OFFSITE (Control) ENVIRONMENTAL TLD STATIONS Station TLD Exposure Measurements (mR)

Number First Quarter Second Quarter Third Quarter Fourth Quarter 1 12.7 +/- 0.8 12.6 +/- 1.4 12.0 +/- 0.8, 12.9 +/- 0.6 2 15.0 +/- 0.6 13.6 +/- 0.9 13.7 +/- 0.9 15.6 +/- 0.9 14 11.9+/- 0.6 11.5+/-0.5 1.1.6 +/- 0.7 12.1 +/-0.5 25 12.6+/-0.6 11.6+/-0.6 12.3+/- 0.5 12.4+/-0.6 T17 13.5+/-0.9 11.7+/-0.5 12.0+/-0.7 ,12.2_+/-0.6 Average 13.1 +/- 0.5 12.2 +/- 0.4 12.3 +/-.0.4 12.7 +/- 0.7 Maximum 15.0 +/- 0.6 13.6 +/- 0.9 13.7 +/- 0.9 15.6 +/- 0.9 Note:

1. These exposures are reported for a standardized period of 90 days.

ss' TABLE C-4 DISCHARGE CANAL SAMPLE RESULTS Gamma Activity (pCi/I) Tritium Activity Sample Date Cs-1 37 Co-60 (pCi/I) 1/05/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA:

1/12/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 1/19/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 112612011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 2/02/2011, <MDA <MDA <MDA 2/09/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 2/16/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 2/23/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 3/0212011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 3/09/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 3/16/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 312312011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 3130/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 4106/2011 <MDA .<MDA <MDA 4/13/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 4/20/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 4127/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 5/0412011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 5/11/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 5/1812011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 5/25/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 6/01/2011 4.58 +/- 3.56 <MDA <MDA 6108/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 6/15/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 6/22/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 612912011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 7106/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 7/13/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 712012011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 7/27/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 8/03/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 8/10/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 8117/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 8124/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 8131/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 9/07/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 9114/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 9/21/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 9/28/201-1 <MDA <MDA <MDA TABLE C-4 (Continued)

DISCHARGE CANAL SAMPLE RESULTS Gamma Activity (pCill) Tritium Activity Sample Date Cs-1 37 Co-60; (pCi/I) 1,0/0512011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 10/12/2011 <MDA <MDA. <MDA 10/19/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 10/2612011 <MDA <MDA. <MDA 11/02/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA 11/09/2011 * <MDA <MDA <MDA 11/16/2011 <MDA <MDA <MDA.

1112312011; 8.95 +/- 6.87 <MDA <MDA 11/30/2011 <MDA <MDA. <MDA 1210712011 <MDA <MDA .<MDA 12114/2011 <MDA <MDA:- <MDA 1212412011 <MDA <MDA. <MDA 1212812011 <MDA <MDA <MDA Calculated' Gamma Activity (pCi/i) Tritium Activity Parameters CSI-137 Co-60 (pCi/!)

Average 6:87ý+/- 5.22 Note4 Note 4 Maximum_ 8.95,+ 6.87 Note 4 Note 4 Notes:

1. Gamma measurements are performed on the original sample, with results corrected to the time of

• sampling. Naturally occurring isotopes are not reported. The maximum lower limits of detection (LLDs) for Cor-60 and Cs-137 are 15 and 18 pCi/I, respectively. The MDA for these analyses was at or below the LLD and are reported a's-"<MDA.

2. For purposes of this report, LLD is defined as the a priori (before the fact) lower limit of detection, which represents, the capability of the measurement system. MDA is defined as the a posteriori (after the fact) limit of detection capability considering a given instrument, procedure and type of sample.

3. Tritium analysis is performed on a measured aliquot of distilled sample. The reported values are net measurements above instrument background. The normal MDAfor the:analyses for tritium was less than 400 pCi/I. Results.that are at or below the normal MDA are reported as "<,MDA".

4. Results identified as "<MDA' are not included in the calculation of average and maximum values.

1 TABLE C-5 GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL RESULTS Monitor Alpha Beta . Gamma Tritium Well Sample Activity Activity Activity Activity Number Date (pCi/I) (pCi/I) (pCi/I). (pCi/I)

.... .. ___ __ .... _ _ _ ,0Cs'-137 Co-60 MW-1 2/21/11 <6.67,(MDA) <9:87 (MDA) <4.77 (MDA) '<3.72 (MDA) .<312(MDA)

MW-2 2/21/11 <2.44. (MDA) <2.54 (MDA) <5.02 (MDA) <4.02, (MDA) <310 (MDA)

MW-4 2/21/11. <2.12(MDA) 6.15 +/- 2.77 <5.35 (MDA) <6.85 (MDA) <314 (MDA)

MW-6 . 2/21/11 <0.87 (MDA) 2.24 +/- 1.35 <5.16'(MDA) <4.04 (MDA) <312 (MDA)

MW-1 1 2/21/11 <5.71 (MDA) <11.7 (MDA) <4.54 (MDA) <4;71.(MDA) , <314 (MDA)

RCW-SFP-I 2/21/11 <1^40 (MDA) 2.44 +/- 1.29 <3.46 (MDA) <4.00 (MDA) <311 (MDA)

RCW-SFP-2 2/21/11 <7.22 (MDA) 7.89 +/- 4.37 <4.18 (MDA) <3.22 (MDA) <308 (MDA)

RCW-CS-,l 2/21/11 -,;36.0.(MDA) .<83.9 (MDA) <7.95 (MDA). <5.51 (MDA) <306 (MDA)

RCW-CS-2 2/21/11 <29.1-(MDA) <32.1 (MDA) <3.90 (MDA) <4.13 (MDA) ,<310 (MDA)

RCW-CS-3 2/21/11 1.07 +/-.638 <2.18 (MDA) " <5.32 (MDA) <5.53.(MDA) <310 (MDA)

RCW-CS-4 2/21/11 <2.64 (MDA)' <5.45 (MDA) <4.96 (MDA) <313 (MDA)

RCW-CS-5 2/21/11 <1. 04 (MDA) 3.16 +/- 1.62 <5.47 (MDA) <6.45 (MDA) <311 (MDA)

MW-1 5/13/11 <6.31 (MDA) <7 50 (MDA). <6.11 (MDA) <4.85 (MDA) <303 (MDA)

MW-2 5/13/11 <2.66 (MDA) - <2.75 (MDA) <4.28 (MDA) <4.68 (MDA) . <301 (MDA),

MW-4 5/13/11 <3.06 (MDA) 9.42 +/- 2.70 <4.02 (MDA) <4.16 (MDA) <307 (MDA)

MW-ý6 5/13/11 <3.42 (MDA) <2:67 (MDA) <3.18 (MDA) <3.11 (MDA) . <304 (MDA)

MW-11 5/13/11 <4.94,(MDA) 9.85 +/- 3.63 <4.65 (MDA) <5.10 (MDA) <303 (MDA)

RCW-SFP-1 5/13/11 <2.87 (MDA) 4.21 +/- 2.33 <3.41 ,(MDA) <4.45 (MDA) <303 (MDA)

RCW-SFP-2 5/13/11 <4.11 (MDA) 4.71 +/- 2.69  ;<3.94 (MDA) <4.24 (MDA)* <301 (MDA)

RCW-CS-1 5/13/11 <20.7,(MDA) <37.9 (MDA) . <4.64 (MDA) <4.81 (MDA), .<300 (MDA)

RCW-CS-2 5/13/11 <12.9 (MDA) <20.0 (MDA) :t4.48'(MDA) <4.06 (MDA). <304 (MDA)

RCW-CS-3 5/13/11 <2.5 (MDA) <3.29 (MDA) <7.81 (MDA) . <4.31 (MDA) <307 (MDA)

RCW-CS-4 5/13/11 <3.68 (MDA) 10.5 +/- 3.95 <6.95 (MDA) <6.23 (MDA) <303 (MDA)

RCW-CS-5 5/13/11 <2.6ý3 MDA) <3.08(MDA) <5.18 (MDA) <4.43 (MDA) <306 (MDA)

MW-1 8/17/11 <1 1.4 (MDA) <11.3 (MDA) <4.69 (MDA) <6.16 (MDA) <288 (MDA)

MW-2 8/17/11 <2.88 (MDA) <3.19 (MDA) *<4.87 (MDA) <5.39 (MDA) <284 (MDA)

MW-4 8/17/11 <3.17 (MDA) 6.23 +/-2.53; <4.00 (MDA) <3.04 (MDA) <282, (MDA)

MW-6 8/17/1-1 <2.71 (MDA) 3.08 +/-2.07 <5.95 (MDA). <5.81 (MDA) <286 (MDA)

MW-11i 8/17/11 <11.2 (MDA) <10.9 (MDA) <4.84 (MDA) <4.34 .(MDA) ,<287 (MDA)

RCW-SFP-1 8/17/11 <2.76 (MDA) <3.03 (MDA) <5.44 (MDA) <5.40 (MDA) <284 (MDA)

RCW-SFP-2 8/17/11 <5.49 (MDA) .8.91 +/- 4.34 <5.13 (MDA) <5.42 (MDA) <286 (MDA)

RCW-CS-1 8/17/11 <42.8 (MDA) <529 (MDA) <4.04 (MDA) <4.85 (MDA) <286 (MDA)

RCW-CS-2, .8/17/11 <32.1. (MDA) <40.0 (MDA) <3.64 (MDA) . <3.79 (MDA) <286 (MDA)

RCW-CS-3 8/17/11 <3.23 (MDA) <2.85 (MDA) <4.51 (MDA) .:<4.38 (MDA) <287 (MDA)

RCW-CS-4 8/17/11 <2.68 (MDA) 5.47 +/- 2.06 <5.52 (MDA) <4.40 (MDA) <285 (MDA)

RCW-CS-5 8/17/1l1 <2.95 (MDA) <3.00(MDA) 4.97 +/- 4.21, <5.68 (MDA) <284/MDA)

MW-1 11/15/11 <8.82 (MDA) 7.25+/- 3.59 <2.79 (MDA) <3.04 (MDA) <283 (MDA)

MW-2 - 11/15/111 <1.07'(MDA) 1.63 +/--1.02 <2.48 (MDA) <2.57;(MDA) <280 (MDA)

MW-4 11/15/11 <2.41 (MDA) <3.61 (MDA)  !<2.07 (MDA) <1.93 (MDA)- <279 (MDA)

MW-6, 11/15/11 <1.52 (MDA) <1.30 (MDA) <223 (MDA)- <2.15 (MDA) <279 (MDA)

MW-1I1 11/15/11 <11.1 (MDA) <8.00 (MDA) '<4.14 (MDA) <274 (MDA) <286(MDA)

RCW-SFP-1 11/15/11 <1.29 (MDA) <1.50 (MDA) <4.58 (MDA) <5.12 (MDA)., <282 (MDA).

RCW-SFP-2 11/15/11 <4.65 (MDA) 8.39 +/- 4.00 <5.54 (MDA) <5.92 (MDA) <283 (MDA)

RCW-CS-1 11/15/11 <51.6 (MDA), <43.3 (MDA) <3.45 (MDA) <4.55 (MDA) <286 (MDA)

RCW-CS-2 11/15/11 <23.0 (MDA) <17.1 (MDA) <6.30 (MDA) <6.79 (MDA) <280 (MDA)

RCW-CS-3 11/15/11 <0.828 (MDA) 3.62 +/- 1.21 <6.63 (MDA) <6.00 (MDA) <278 (MDA)

RCW-CS-4 111/15/11 <3.67 (MDA) 7.85 +/- 3.42 <5.61 (MDA) <6.78 (MDA) <281 (MDA)

RCW-CS-5 - 11/15/11 <1.47/MDA) 3.97 +/- 1.11 <4.07/MDA) <3.54/MDA) <279/MDA)

TABLE C-5 (CONTINUED)

GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL RESULTS Calculated Alpha Beta Gamma Tritium Parameters Activity Activity Activity Activity (By Monitor Well (pCi/l) (pCi/I) (pCi/I) (pCi/I)

Number) _ _ __ Cs-1 37 Co-60 Average: MW-1 Note 4 7.25 +/- 3.59 Note 4. Note 4 Note 4 Average: MW-2 Note 4 1.63 +/- 1.02 Note 4,. Note 4 Note 4 Average: MW-4 Note 4 7.39 +/- 2.67 *Note 4 Note 4 Note 4 Average: MW-6 Note 4 2.66 +/- 1.71 Note 4 ' Note 4 Note 4 Average: MW-1i Note 4 9.85 +/- 3.63 Note 4 .Note 4 Note 4 Average: RCW-SFP-1 Note 4 3.33 +/- 1.81 Note 4 Note 4 Note 4 Average: RCW-SFP-2' Note 4 7.48 +/- 3.85 Note 4 Note 4 Note 4 Average: RCW-CS-1 Note 4 Note 4 Note 4 Note 4 Note 4 Average: RCW-CS-2 Note 4 Note 4 . Note 4 Note 4 Note 4 Average: RCW-CS-3 1.07 +/- .638. 3.62 +/-1.21 Note 4 Note 4 Note 4 Average: RCW-CS-4' Note 4 7.94 +/- 3.14 Note 4 Note 4 Note 4 Average: RCW-CS-5 Note 4. 3.57 +/- 1.37 Note 4., *Note 4 Note 4 Maximum: MW-1. Note 4, .7.25 +/- 3.59 Note 4 . Note 4 Note 4 Maximum: MW-2 Note 4 1.63 +/- 1.02 , Note4- Note 4 Note 4 Maximum: MW-4 -Note 4 9.42 +/- 2170 Note 4 Note 4 Note 4 Maximum: MW-6 Note 4 3.08 +/- 2.07 Note 4 Note 4 Note 4 Maximum: MW-11 Note 4 *9.85 +/- 3.63 Note 4 Note 4 Note 4

• Maximum: RCW-SFP-1 Note 4 .4.21 +/- 2.33 Note 4 Note 4 Note 4 Maximum: RCW-SFP-2 Note 4 . 8.91 +/- 4.34 Note 4 Note 4 Note 4 Maximum: RCW-CS-1 Note 4 Note 4 Note 4 Note 4 Note 4 Maximum: RCW-CS-2 ... Note 4 Note 4 Note 4 Note 4 Note 4 Maximum:. RCW-CS-3 ' 1.07 +/- ,638 3.62 +/- 1.21 Note 4 Note 4 Note 4 Maximum: RCW-CS-4 Note 4 10.5 +/- 3.95 -. Note 4 Note 4 Note 4 Maximum: RCW-CS-5 Note 4 3.97 +/- 1.11 Note4 Note 4 Note 4 Notes:

1. Reported values are net measurements (above instrument background). The normal minimum detectable activities (MDAs) for the analyses for gross alpha, gross*beta and tritium are approximately 4, 4 and 400 pCi/I, respectively. Results that are at or. below the normal MDA are reported as "<MDA".

2. Gamma activity measurements are performed on the original sample, with results corrected to the time of

'sampling. Naturally occurring isotopes are not reported. The maximum lower limits of detection (LLDs) for Co-60 and Cs-1 37 are 15 and 18 pCi/I, respectively. The actual MDAs for these analyses were at or below the LLD.

3. For purposes of this report, LLD is defined as the a priori (before the fact) lower limit of detection, which represents the capability of the measurement system. MDA is defined as the a posteriori (after the fact) limit of detectioncapability considering a given' instrument, procedure and type of sample.

4. Results identified as "<" are not included in the calculation of average and maximum values.

- 24 -

TABLE C-6 CAISSON SUMP MONITORING RESULTS Cs-1 37 Activity Co-60 Activity Tritium Sample (pCi/L) (pCilL) Activity Date (pCi/I) 1113/2011 <MDA <MDA 779 + 214

• 2/10/2011 14.3 <MDA 1250 214 3/10/2011 -17.7 <MDA 929 324 4A12/2011 17.5 <MDA 1040+/- 287 5/10/2011 11.2 <MDA 746 231 6/0712011 .<MDA <MDA 734 210 7/12/2011 <MDA .<MDA 599 +/- 220 8/08/2011 <MDA <MDA 749 - 221 9106/2011 -<MDA <MDA,-... 634 +/-t198 10/06/2011 14.1 <MDA 859.+/- 299 11/08/2011 <MDA <MDA 839 +/- 359 112/06/20111,ý <MDA <MDA 646 +/- 265 Notes:

1. Gamma measurements are performed on the original sample, with results corrected to the time of sampling. Naturally occurring isotopes are not reported.- The maximum lower limits of detection (LLDs) for Co-60 and Cs-1 37 are 15 and 18 pCi/l,,respectively. The MDA for these analyses was at or below the LLD and are reported as "<MDA".

2. For purposes of this report, LLD is defined as the a priori (before the fact) lower limit of detection, which represents the capability of the measurement system.. MDA is defined as the a posteriori (after the fact) limit of detection capability considering'a given instrument, procedure and type of sample.

3. Tritium analysis is performed on a measured aliquot of distilled sample. The reported values are net measurements above instrument background. The normal MDA for the analyses for tritium was less than 400 pCi/l. Results that are at or below the normal MDA are reported as "<MDA".

TABLE C-7 FRENCH DRAIN MONITORING RESULTS Cs-137 Activity Co-60 Activity Sample (pCi/L) (pCi/L)

Date 1/1312011 227 15.3 2/10/2011 238 13.0 3/1012011 2,13 14.7 4/12/2011 244 9.8 5/1012011 229 10.0 6/07/2011 255 6.0 7/12/2011 294 7.2 8/08/2011 298 11.8 910612011- 266 8.8 10/0612011 258 10.6 11/08/2011 268 9.8 12106/2011 228 14.9 Notes:

1. Gamma measurements are performed on the original sample, with results corrected to the time of sampling. Naturally occurring isotopes are not reported. The maximum lower limits of detection (LLDs) for Co-60 and Cs-137 are 15 and 18 pCi/I, respectively. The MDA for these analyses was at or below the LLD and reported as "<MDA".

2. For purposes of this report, LLD is defined as the a priori (before the fact) lower limit of detection, which represents the capability of the measurement system. MDA is defined as the a posteriori (after the fact) limit of detection capability considering a given instrument, procedure and type of sample.

FIGURE A-1 HBPP ONSITE TLD LOCATIONS Location (3PS toordinate's tNAD'83,tJAVD-88 'CA.lone'i 1 kBPP (-case-d n-oftfI Ir~umbw Eastln-a Nualwno Al. Fast Ti 50;4911.06 2160822.11 10,78 4873,87 9169.63 504804.52 582 2160710.72 11.56 4513.84 920.18 T3 5048609,45 2161061.84 41,77 4540.12 9608.91 T4 5948778,72 216120.0.1 43.66 47W5.13 9752,07 75 6049002.39 2161368.44 38.19 503M.50 9713.72 T6 5"94150.22 21101437.55 36.30 5205177 98*0.W T7 5W4280.02 21161494.61 32.04 5338.22 9869.38 T8 5049511.99 2181000.38 12.9 5504.82 96.39.33 T9 5049851.46 2181968.47 11.79 5701.27 9547.04 TIO 594012.89 2161633.96 11.17 5945.65 9443.64 TII1 5050011t.77 2181207,56 14.18 5844.48 9107.3 T 12 5050019.25 2180158.44 11,25 5614,86 8734.19 T13 5949841.53 2180718.00 9.79 5389.40 8712A.

__T1_4- 5049583.98 21600,4.24 10.40 5154.03 8823.00 TIs 54044.8 2)60000.95 10.34 4W90.6 882.81 T1"6 5949352.82 2160667.18 10.00 4961.19 8934-52 T18 5948867.24 2161238,38 43.47 4852.98 9878.44

. T1 5048796,71 2161242,74 42.84 4795,52 9719.50 "20 5948747.14 2161191.68 44.14 4726.20 9703.44 121 5948934.62 2161182.89 45.71 4799.39 9644.52

- 27 -

FIGURE A-2 HBPP ONSITE MONITORING WELL LOCATIONS I ,AcW4PF4 L2~4~II

-t l4IM~

I"_1 MkW-11 m4I -I HBPP (Plant Noih)

Mloncuing GP$ Coordinales (NAD$3HNAVD8 CA, Zone I)

We"l Emoting Northin ~ ell East ot MW-1 5949428.45 2161020.10 MI.3S 5205.88 919017 5!2 5949393.32 216119,01 37,36 5257.03 0334.29 W_4 6949470.A 2181159.02 1M.41 5318.85 923.81 MW-6 5949423.12 2161223.94 10.90 5311.84 9364.38 MW-1l 5I49588.32 2181053.64 12.04 5358,42 9131-73 RCW-CS-1 5949309.92 2161136.20 10.82 5169.16 9351.96 RCW-CS-2 5949448,86 211612"52 10.87 5323,44 9338 56 RCW-C$-3 594960415 21161 W2250 11.22 5324,99 923521 RCW.CS-4 5949448A7 2160980.19 11.17 5201.08 9145.77 RCW-CS-5 549645.79 21600"9. 31 i1.19 5276.99 9063.90 RCW-SFP-i 594939597 2161258.83 26At 5313,34 9416 78 RCW-SPF-2 5949204A8 2161235.37 3263 5134.27 9492,39 FIGURE A-3 HBPP OFFSITE TLD LOCATIONS Stations 1,14, & 25 GP$- C wlrdines (NADU3N AVM8 CA, Zone I) D~gewe Denim Nodhirva I el. Latkude Lon9gucit I 5H4ON-62 21011a3,79 11.38 40-7405 -124.21903 S14 5O4G76-03 215888439 18.65 40.73533 (-124,20$02 25 5950247-30 2154214.18 2n-22 , 40.r2260 -124,20626

- 29 -

FIGURE A-3 HBPP OFFSITE TLD LOCATIONS (Continued)

Station 2 Fortuna TLD Location 0

Eastin NAD3~NVDS C ~~Oi~j G~ Cor~ats NothigIne Degmee.VDoi met Latitu~de Longkuda I

59625886--1I 2105797.82 I35.5 I II 40.59057 m

_124i.15746 I

- 30 -

FIGURE A-3 HBPP CONTROL TLD LOCATION (Continued)

Station T17 Eureka TLD Location 21.

jf 0PS C odinates (NA b3M~AVD84 CA Zon Dogie.Doc imal 0 Eas~n~

$~~~~496 ou~tnv ,, utude Ln*d tA24,1 4~~?4O9 Figure B-1 Offsite Environmental Radiation Level Trends 70 60 50 40 E

0 30 0

a, 20 10 0

Year The baseline values for each location were obtained by averaging the readings at each location from 1977 through 1983. These values, however, were obtained using ion chambers instead of TLDs. The average annual values from 1977 through 1983 were Station 1 - 83.0 mrem, Station 2 - 79.8 mrem, Station 14 - 80.2 mrem, and Station 25 - 73.7 mrem

- 32 -

Figure B-2 Onsite Environmental Radiation Level Trends 70 60-50 -

E 40 E

• 30-0 20-

- - - - Stations Near Radwaste Activities (T5 through TB) 10 -

-Other Onsite Stations

-Stations Surrounding ISFSI (T18 through 121) 0 4 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year The baseline values for the two areas were obtained by averaging the readings for each area from 1977 through 1983. These values, however, were obtained using ion chambers instead of TLDs. The average annual value from 1977 through 1983 for the stations near the radwaste activities was 78.6 mrem and the average annual value for other onsite stations was 79.4 mrem.

-33 -