ill
EPA-520/5-73-005
ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
RADIOACTIVITY IN THE VICINITY OF
SHIPPINGPORT ATOMIC POWER STATION
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Radiation Programs
m
-------
ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
RADIOACTIVITY IN THE VICINITY OF
SHIPPINGPORT ATOMIC POWER STATION
November 1973
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Radiation Programs
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
FOREWORD
The Office of Radiation Programs carries out a national program
designed to evaluate the exposure of man to ionizing and nonionizing
radiation, and to promote development of controls necessary to protect
the public health and safety and assure environmental quality.
Within the Office of Radiation Programs, the Field Operations
Division conducts programs relating to sources and levels of environ-
mental radioactivity and the resulting population radiation dose.
Reports of the findings are published in the monthly publication, Radi-
ation Data and Reports, appropriate scientific journals, and Division
technical reports.
The technical reports of the Field Operations Division allow
comprehensive and rapid publishing of the results of intramural and
contract projects. The reports are distributed to State and local
radiological health programs, Office of Radiation Programs technical
and advisory committees, universities, libraries and information serv-
ices, industry, hospitals, laboratories, schools, the press, and other
interested groups and individuals. These reports are also included in
the collections of the Library of Congress and the National Technical
Information Service.
Readers of these reports are encouraged to inform the Office of
Radiation Programs of any .omissions or errors. Comments or requests
for further information are also invited.
W. D. Rowe, Ph.D.
Deputy Assistant Administrator
for Radiation Programs
iii
-------
CONTENTS
Page
FOREWORD iii
INTRODUCTION 1
DESIGN OF STUDY 1
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION , 2
Iodine in Milk Data 2
Strontium-90 in Soil 5
Strontium-90 in Milk 6
Analysis of Duplicate Environmental Samples 6
Ambient Radiation Levels 7
In-Plant Data 8
CONCLUSIONS 9
RECOMMENDATIONS 10
REFERENCES 11
APPENDIX I - Special Milk Samples 17
APPENDIX II - Special Vegetation Samples 20
APPENDIX III - Special Soil Samples 21
APPENDIX IV - Analysis of Duplicate Samples 23
APPENDIX V - Ambient Radiation Levels 25
APPENDIX VI - Analysis of NUS TLD Data 26
APPENDIX VII - Radionuclides Analyzed at EERF 27
APPENDIX VIII- Analysis of 1971 Soil Samples 33
List of Figures
1. Milk and Soil Sampling Sites 13
2. EERF TLD Sites 14
3. Data from Analysis of Duplicate Milk Samples 15
4. Data from Analysis of Duplicate Soil Samples 16
-------
ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY
IN THE VICINITY OF
SHIPPINGPORT ATOMIC POWER STATION
INTRODUCTION
At the request of the Atomic Energy Commission (Division of
Operational Safety and the Division of Naval Reactors), the Environ-
mental Protection Agency (EPA), Eastern Environmental Radiation
Facility (EERF), has conducted a limited assessment of the environ-
mental radioactivity levels in the vicinity of the Shippingport Atomic
Power Station, Shippingport, Pa. The study was requested to help
clarify certain data which have been reported by the Nuclear Utilities
Services (NUS) Corporation, Rockville, Md., during the preoperational
monitoring program for Beaver Valley Units 1 and 2 (1) which are ad-
jacent to the Shippingport Atomic Power Station. NUS performs this
contract work for the Duquesne Light Company which also operates the
Shippingport Station for the Division of Naval Reactors.
The major points which were addressed are:
1. strontium-90 and iodine-131 levels in milk,
2. strontium-90 levels in soil, and
3. ambient radiation levels as determined using
thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD).
DESIGN OF STUDY
The data in question resulted from surveillance activities in the
vicinity of the Shippingport Plant in 1971 and 1972; therefore, it was
not possible in all cases to completely verify or explain these data.
Limited samples collected in 1971 by NUS were available for reanalysis.
It was possible to collect samples at the same locations as in 1971
and 1972, to place TLD's at the same locations, to study plant oper-
ating parameters, and to make inferences from these observations. This
was the approach taken in this study.
Milk samples had been collected by NUS at the six dairies located
within 10 miles of the plant. During our study milk was obtained from
the same dairies. In addition to the milk samples, the housing and
feeding practices, types of cows, and the size of herds were ascer-
tained. Samples of the cattle feed being used at the dairies were ob-
tained and the sources of the feed determined. Iodine and strontium
data from the 1971 and 1972 Pasteurized Milk Network (PMN) of the EPA
were studied to determine possible fallout contributions.
-------
Soil samples were collected at four of the approximate locations
used by NUS during the preoperational surveys. In addition, NUS
recently provided the EERF with aliquots of soil samples which they
reportedly had collected in 1971 for analysis.
Thermoluminescent dosimeters were placed at 14 of the monitoring
sites used by NUS during the preoperational program for Beaver Valley.
These 14 sites were selected in the predominant downwind directions
based on recent meteorological reports. The dosimeters were on lo-
cation for four monitoring periods of approximately 1 month each,
three periods while the plant was operating and once while the plant
was shut down. Measurements were also made with a pressurized ioni-
zation chamber at numerous locations in the vicinity of the plant to
determine uniformity of the ambient radiation levels.
To help characterize the sources and quantities of radioactive
effluents from the Shippingport Plant, specific in-plant liquids and
gaseous samples were collected and analyzed. All in-plant samples
requested were collected by Duquesne Light Company and the Division
of Naval Reactors personnel at the plant. The analyses of these
samples plus certain design and operating parameters for the plant
made it possible to estimate the radioactive discharges to the environ-
ment.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Iodine in Milk Data
One area of primary concern in the Shippingport Study was to
determine if reported iodine-131 levels in milk during the last quarter
of 1971 and the first quarter of 1972 (1) could be related to plant
releases.
For the purpose of this report,' data from three of the local
dairies have been analyzed, these being Sherman Dairy, Searight Dairy,
and Meyers Dairy (see figure 1).
The following assumptions were used in the analysis: Wind data
compiled for the winter months of 1970 (2) were used to estimate wind
conditions for 1971, since data were not available for the winter
months of 1971. However, analysis of windrose patterns for the two
years previous revealed similar distributions with the predominant wind
direction out of the northwest for the winter season. These available
data (2) indicated that 5 percent of the time the wind blew into the
north sector (Sherman Dairy) and 0.5 percent of the time the wind blew
into the southwest sector (Searight and Meyers Dairies). Estimates of
dispersion factors for ground level releases were used as presented by
Turner (3). Other assumptions used were:
-------
1. average wind speed—4 meters/second,
2. stability class—E type,
3. effective half-life for iodine-131 on pasture—5 days,
4. pasture-to-milk conversion—0.09 square meters of
pasture yields iodine-131 for 1 liter of milk,
5. radiological equilibrium exists in the pasture, and
6. velocity of deposition for iodine-131—10~2 meters/second.
Using the stated assumptions, the hypothetical iodine-131 release
rates which would produce the noted milk concentrations were calcu-
lated (4) with the following results as reported by NUS:
Hypothetical
iodine-131
Maximum iodine-131 release rate
concentration to produce milk
for quarter concentration
121 ± 29 pCi/liter 9.7 mCi/h
36 ± 13 pCi/liter 1.3 mCi/h
63 ± 33 pCi/liter 2.1 mCi/h
The total inventory of iodine-131 in the primary coolant may be
calculated using the concentration of 1.4 x 10"^ yCi/ml found in the
coolant samples analyzedw by the EERF (see appendix VII). This
iodine-131 concentration is three times the level reported in the Di-
vision of Naval Reactors Report NT-73-2; therefore, we feel it repre-
sents a conservative estimate of primary coolant iodine-131 concentra-
tion for the present core. With a primary coolant volume of 3,000
cubic feet, the iodine-131 inventory would be approximately 1.2 mCi.
Comparing this value with the hypothetical iodine-131 release for
Sherman Dairy (9.7 mCi/h), one sees that hourly plant releases would
have to be approximately eight times the primary coolant volume to
produce the reported milk concentration. Similarly improbable releases
of primary coolant would have to occur to reach the levels found at
Meyers and Searight Dairies. Furthermore, even if the assumed fraction*
of time the wind blew toward Sherman Dairy were increased from 5 per-
cent to 50 percent, the calculated hypothetical release rate would
still be approximately one primary volume per hour. Using the nominal
leakage rates of 80 gallons per day (proposed appendix I to 10 CFR 50),
this hypothetical leakage would be 50,000 times this nominal leakage
which is an obvious impossibility. It is evident that a nuclear plant
could not operate with losses of this magnitude.
Based on published meteorological data, if sizeable releases had
occurred, it would be predicted that iodine-131 concentrations would
-------
have exhibited a different distribution, i.e., Sherman, Searight, and
Meyers Dairies 'are located in the least prevalent wind directions, and
yet showed some of the highest iodine concentrations.
In addition to the calculations described above, predictions of
gaseous iodine-131 release rates were made for an operating pressurized
water reactor (PWR) using the physical parameters for the Shippingport
Plant and the observed primary coolant concentration found in this
study. The model used estimated release rates of iodine-131 to be in
the order of 10"7 mCi/h, which is several orders of magnitude below the
required hypothetical release to yield the reported milk concentrations.
For the milk samples collected during this study, the data are
presented in appendix I. All milk samples collected had iodine-131
concentrations below the minimum detectable activity of 10 pCi/liter.
A second possible source of the reported iodine-131 in milk might
have been radioactive fallout from nuclear testing. The nuclear deto-
nation which occurred in November 1971 could possibly be related to
the milk iodine-131 level of 29.5 pCi/liter reported in the NUS data
for December 1971 (_1). However, no nationwide Pasteurized Milk Net-
work (PMN) samples contained measurable iodine-131 for this month
(Radiation Data and Reports 13: 195 [April 1972]). The NUS reported
values for January 1972 (1) which range as high as 121 pCi/liter could
be related to the nuclear detonation of January 1972. These NUS
reported values exceed the highest values reported in the PMN milk
data (Radiation Data and Reports 13: 255 [May 1972]) for January 1972,
and no iodine-131 was reported in Pittsburgh milk (i.e., < 10 pCi/liter)
or in any other of the northeastern United States for this month. How-
ever, it should be noted that milk from an individual dairy may have
higher concentrations of certain radionuclides than a comparable PMN
sample which represents the dilution effect within a larger milkshed.
Another major point which indicates the improbability of iodine-131
in milk as a result of plant releases or fallout is evidenced in the
feeding and housing practices of the dairy cows. The Beaver County
agricultural agent and the operators of the six dairies provided thfi
following information.
1. All dairies except Meyers have the cows housed in barns
during the winter months. Meyers dairy cows are kept
in feed lots.
2. All cows are fed stored feed (hay, silage, etc.) from
approximately October through May.
Since this stored feed would have been cut and prepared during
late summer and early fall, the probability of it containing suffi-
cient iodine-131 to produce the iodine in milk levels reported in
-------
January by NUS is highly improbable. Analysis of feed samples,
although not from the January 1972 time period, revealed no measurable
iodine-131 (appendix II).
In light of these results, it was concluded that the reported
levels of iodine-131 in milk cannot be reasonably related to plant
releases; and based on feeding practices during the time of the year
in question, its relation to fallout from weapons testing is ques-
tionable.
Strontium-90 in Soil
Soil samples were collected by NUS throughout the preoperational
monitoring program for Beaver Valley. Eight locations were sampled in
the vicinity of the Shippingport site. Strontium-90 levels reported
in soil samples collected between January and June 1971 by NUS were
approximately 6 to 10 times those in soil samples collected by EERF
during February 1973 (see appendix III). Due to the half-life of
strontium-90 and the fact that no extensive worldwide fallout has
occurred, levels found in 1973 should have approximated the levels
which were present in 1971, all other factors being equal.
For the eight soil sampling locations used by NUS, the average
reported strontium-90 concentrations in soil are as follows:
Average
strontium-90
in soil Range
(pCi/g) (pCi/g)
4.2 2.3 - 6.8
3.1 1.9 - 5.6
1.6 .43 - 2.9
.75 .51 - .88
.16 .09 - .23
Changes of this magnitude would not be expected over this short
period of time unless sample collection or analytical techniques were
changed.
Portions of soil samples collected by NUS during April and
September 1971 were provided for analysis at the EERF. Following is a
summary of the results:
-------
NUS analysis EERF analysis
Number of strontium-90 (1) of strontium-90
Collection of (pCi/g) (pCi/g)
date samples Range Average Range Average
4/20/71 8 2.3 - 6.8 4.2 0.05 - 0.28 0.18
9/13/71 8 .4 - 2.9 1.6 .06 - .60 .27
Complete comparative data from the analyses of these samples are
in appendix VIII.
The elevated strontium-90 levels reported by NUS in these soil
samples were most likely the result of errors in the laboratory analy-
sis procedure in use by NUS at that time.
Strontium-9Q in Milk
Elevated strontium-90 levels were reported in milk samples
collected by NUS at the six dairies within a 10-mile radius of the
Beaver Valley site for the last two quarters of 1971 (I). These levels
averaged approximately 2 to 3 times the strontium-90 concentrations in
milk as reported by the PMN for either Pittsburgh or Philadelphia.
Beginning in January 1972, NUS reported the strontium-90 levels from
these six dairies approximately the same as or slightly below the
strontium-90 for Pittsburgh and Philadelphia (PMN data). These levels
of strontium-90 for 1972 are in the same range as the levels in milk
samples collected by the EERF in February 1973. A suitable explanation
cannot be made of the higher than average strontium-90 levels reported
in 1971. However, it is known that milk from an individual dairy may
have higher concentrations of certain radionuclides than reported by
the PMN due to an averaging effect of a large milkshed and the wide
variations in feeding practices.
Analysis of Duplicate Environmental Samples
In order to compare .and verify radioanalytical procedures,
duplicate sets of soil and milk samples were collected for analysis
during February 1973.
Duplicate milk samples were collected from the local dairies by
the EERF, by NUS, and by the Pennsylvania Department of Health. From
all the dairies except Nicols the samples were drawn from large storage
tanks at the dairy. At Nicols Dairy, the samples were already drawn
and in milk containers. Two of the samples collected by the EERF were
later split and portions sent to the AEC Health and Safety Laboratory
(HASL) in New York for analysis. Comparative data from the analyses
of these samples are presented in appendix IV and in figure 3. The
-------
strontium-90 concentrations reported by the Pennsylvania Department of
Health were generally below the mean concentration reported by the
other laboratories (figure 3). With the exception of one sample, the
strontium-90 concentrations reported by NUS, the AEG, and the EERF are
in acceptable agreement. Iodine-131 in these milk samples was below
the routinely reported minimum detectable level for both NUS and the
EERF.
In order to compare sampling and analytical techniques, duplicate
soil samples were collected by NUS and the EERF at six locations in the
vicinity of the Shippingport Plant. The samples collected by the EERF
were later split and portions sent to the AEC-HASL for analysis. Analy-
sis of the samples for strontium-90 produced results which are in very
good agreement as seen in appendix IV and figure 4.
With the exceptions noted above, the participants in this limited
cross-check study produced comparable data for the particular radio-
nuclides and media which were of concern in this study.
Ambient Radiation Levels
This portion of the study was designed to answer questions
concerning the high ambient radiation levels as reported by NUS for the
period 2/12/71 through 4/3/72. These ambient radiation levels were
determined using LiF TLD's. The NUS TLD monitoring program employs a
vendor in Santa Fe, N. Mex. The routine procedure is to ship annealed
TLD's from Santa Fe to Pittsburgh. From Pittsburgh, they are trans-
ported to the Beaver Valley area and placed on location for approxi-
mately 1 month before collection. After collection the dosimeters are
returned to Pittsburgh and shipped to Santa Fe for readout (1).
The accuracy of the ambient radiation levels reported using this
monitoring program is questionable due to the difficulty in determining
the dose received by the dosimeters during shipment and while being
held in either Pittsburgh or Santa Fe.
A TLD monitoring network using EERF dosimeters was established at
14 of the NUS TLD sites (figure 2). EERF dosimeters were the CaF2:Mn
glass encapsulated type. The dosimeters were annealed and read out on
location to avoid indeterminants involved in transportation of the
dosimeters. The dosimeters were read out at approximately 1-month
intervals.
Ambient radiation levels based on four 1-month periods are given
in appendix V. For the period 3/19/73 through 4/11/73, the Shipping-
port reactor was shut down for routine maintenance. These values are
all within the range of normal background for this area with no sta-
tistical difference between the "shutdown" period versus the operational
periods.
-------
The TLD data reported by NUS for the period of 2/12/71 through
4/3/72 contains questionable results. Values reported for the NUS
control dosimeter (a dosimeter annealed and read out concurrently with
the field dosimeters but held in a Pittsburgh office) showed readings
ranging from 12 to 40 yR/h for the periods in question. Our results
obtained by placing three dosimeters in the same location as the con-
trol dosimeter show an average reading of approximately 7 yR/h. The
difference between these values is most likely due to the exposure
received by the NUS dosimeters during transportation to and from
New Mexico.
An approximate exposure for the NUS control dosimeter can be
calculated based on our 7 yR/h observation and the length of the re-
ported exposure period. These values are shown in column 3 of appen-
dix VI. If these calculated values are subtracted from the reported
readings, the difference -would most likely be due to the exposure
received in transport. This transient exposure, shown in column 4,
appendix VI, would be approximately the same for all dosimeters in
that batch covering a given exposure period. If this transient expo-
sure is subtracted from the reported values for all field dosimeters
a better approximation of the actual field exposure can be obtained.
This calculation was performed for one NUS site, Shippingport Post
Office, and shown in columns 5, 6, and 7 (appendix VI). These cor-
rected values are in general agreement with the values observed on EERF
dosimeters at the same location. The only major exceptions would be
for the periods covering 4/1/71 through 5/11/71 and 5/11/71 through
6/3/71. These differences could be due to handling errors, such as
leaving the same dosimeter on location for two periods and returning
the new unexposed dosimeter for readout.
Although it is impossible to completely answer questions concerning
data 2 years old, several points are evident. The NUS TLD program, with
no means of correcting for transient exposures, is inadequate for accu-
rately determining low levels of radiation exposure. An effort to make
definite conclusions from the reported NUS data at this late date is
impossible, however, we feel the data, as it was reported by NUS, does
not represent the actual exposure for the periods in question. The
values reported for the control dosimeter alone would lead one to this
conclusion.
The exposure measured by the EERF using the TLD's is in good
agreement with measurements made at the same locations using a pressur-
ized ionization chamber and with the results obtained by EG&G, Inc.,
during their Aerial Radiological Measuring Surveys (ARMS) Program con-
ducted during February 1973 (5_) .
In-Plant Data
Although releases from the plant which occurred during 1971 and
1972 cannot be retrospectively measured, it is possible to make
-------
estimates of the releases based on physical operating parameters of the
plant. This has been done by the EERF, and the data are in general
agreement with release data -reported by Duquesne Light Company.
The primary purpose of reactor fuel cladding is to minimize the
release of fission products into the reactor primary coolant. The
fission product inventory of the primary coolant, therefore, provides
a simple and direct measure of "fuel performance."
Using the measured primary coolant concentration of 1.4 x 10~5
yCi/ml for iodine-131 (appendix VII) and the plant physical parameters,
the percent failed fuel for the Shippingport Plant was estimated to be
approximately 1 x 10"1* percent using a model developed by Binford (6) .
This estimated value may be compared with the value of 0.25 percent
assumed by the AEC in estimating routine releases during a projected
40-year lifetime of nuclear power plants (appendix I to 10 CFR 50).
The excellent fuel performance estimated appears to be consistent with.
the iodine-131 and iodine-133 levels in the primary coolant of 4.5 and
7.5 pCi/ml respectively reported for February 1973 by the Division of
Naval Reactors in Report NT-73-2, 1973. Using these values the percent
failed fuel was estimated to be 5 x 10~5 percent. These figures indi-
cate excellent fuel performance for the Shippingport Plant at the
present time; therefore, since the fuel in the reactor now is the same
as was in the reactor in 1971 and 1972, estimates of releases from the
plant at that time seem reasonable.
Data from in-plant samples collected by the EERF in March 1973 are
presented in appendix VII.
Conclusions
The following conclusions may be drawn from this study.
1. The iodine-131 levels found in the milk samples collected
during the last quarter of 1971 and the first quarter of
1972 by NUS cannot logically be attributed to plant re-
leases. Although analytical procedures are suspect,
iodine contributions from other sources and/or fallout
cannot be disproved. Present iodine-131 levels are below
the minimum detectable activity of 10 pCi/liter.
2. Strontium-90 levels in soil samples reported by NUS during
early 1971 are 6 to 10 times higher than those collected
by the EERF in 1973. The rapid decline in these levels
reported during the following year indicates a change
probably too great to be due entirely to the natural elimi-
nation of strontium-90 in the soil. Analysis by EER? of
soil samples collected by NUS in 1971 revealed that stron-
tium-90 concentrations reported by NUS for these samples
were incorrect.
-------
3. The strontium-90 levels reported by NUS in milk samples
analyzed the last half of 1971 are generally higher by
a factor of 2 to 3 than those reported by the PMN for
Pittsburgh and Philadelphia. No satisfactory expla-
nation of this can be given, however, samples collected
by EERF for this study show strontium-90 levels which
agree with current PMN data from Pittsburgh and
Philadelphia.
4. The TLD monitoring program employed by NUS between
February 1971 and April 1972 is inadequate for deter-
mining low levels of radiation exposure. Any attempt
to use this data to calculate the actual exposure for
the period in question would be inconclusive.
5. For the samples collected and analyzed during this
study, with the exceptions previously noted, present
laboratory analysis procedures used by the participants
for the analysis of duplicate samples appeared to have
adequate detection sensitivities and internal quality
assurance to accurately determine the concentrations of
specific isotopes in the environmental media of concern
in the Shippingport controversy.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the findings of this study the following recommendations
are offered. If implemented, we feel they will help prevent recur-
rences of similar problems in the future.
1. Data generated by environmental monitoring programs
should be critically analyzed and efforts made to ex-
plain obvious anomalies prior to its publication.
2. Thermoluminescent dosimeters or film badges used in
environmental monitoring programs should be processed
as near to the monitoring site as possible to avoid
lengthy shipment and exposures.
3. Organizations conducting environmental monitoring
programs should routinely participate in quality assur-
ance programs with a disassociated laboratory which
would provide an independent verification of analytical
results. If necessary, the AEC should require in its
licensing process that the utility or its contractor
participate in such a quality assurance program.
4. In order to assure validity of results, uniform methods
of sample collection should be employed. Representative
10
-------
samples should be chosen in the same manner for each
sampling period. Wide variations may be seen in data
depending on the method of sample collection.
REFERENCES
(1) COHEN, L. K. Pre-Operational Environmental Radioactivity Moni-
toring Program at the Beaver Valley Power Station. Quarterly
Report (January-March 1972), (October-December 1971). NUS Corp.
(1972).
(2) NUS CORPORATION. Meteorological Program at the Beaver Valley
Power Station. Second Annual Report (September 5, 1970-September 5,
1971). NUS Corp. (1972).
(3) TURNER, D. B. Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion Estimates, AP-26.
Environmental Protection Agency (1970).
(4) ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY. Guidelines for Review of Environ-
mental Impact Statements. Office of Radiation Programs, EPA (1972).
(5) EG&G, INCORPORATED. Radiological Survey of the Area Surrounding
the Shippingport Atomic Power Station - Shippingport, Pennsylvania -
Date of Survey: 24 February, Technical Report No. L-1087. EG&G,
Inc. (March 9, 1973).
(6) BINFORD, F. T., et al. Analysis of Power Reactor Gaseous Waste
Systems. 12th AEC Air Cleaning Conference (1972).
11
-------
FIGURE 1
MILK AND SOIL SAMPLING SITES
BEAVER COUNTY
PENNSYLVANIA
Route Designation
C j Soil Sampling Location
D
Milk Sampling Location
A. Sherman D. Brunton
B. Meyers E. Nicol's
C. Searight F. Hobbs
13
-------
FIGURE 2
EERF TLD SITES
BEAVER COUNTY
PENNSYLVANIA
Shippingport
Nuclear Power
Station
Route Designation
( ) TLD Sampling Location
-------
Figure 3
DATA FROM ANALYSIS OF DUPLICATE MILK SAMPLES
SHIPPINGPQRT, PENNSYLVANIA
SR-90 (pCi/l ± 2a)
12H
11 —
10 —
9 —
W
5 8 —
T
ca. /
a 6 —
oe 3
00
4 —
3 —
2 —
1 —
N
j
t
N
£
^
t
PH
NSNS
SPM
454
E,
i
t ^
k
-F
4
rH
t
SPM
455
r
E
4
k
1
N
P
i
H
NS
SPM
456
El
i
4
^
t
F
^
>
k
-H
NS
SPM
457
N
~r
E.
H
* E
i \
P P
ca ca
c>1 1^1 *"** LJ
v N v ri
NS NS
SPM SPM
458 464
SAMPLE
E=EERF N=NUS P =Pen nsyl vania Dept. of Health
NS = Sample Not Analyzed
H=HASL
-------
Figure 4
DATA FROM ANALYSIS OF DUPLICATE SOIL SAMPLES
SHIPPINGPORT, PENNSYLVANIA
SR-90 (pCi/g ± 2a)
0.8-^
0.7 —
OR
. o —
0.5 —
0.4 —
0.3 —
0.2 —
0.1 —
N
T1"
j k
SPS
448
T f f
^u T NH
"S - „ -n
-1- N
-1- -LjH c H
1=t f ^
I
__Jfi
SPS SPS SPS SPS SPS
449 450 451 452 453
E =EERF
SAMPLE
N =NUS
H=HASL
-------
Appendix I
Special milk samples, Shippingport, Pa.J
Identification
W~i r* c\ 1 *"* n i "i T"TT -!• -
Searignt Dairy
Brunton Dairy———
Hobbs Dairy — —
Sherman Dairy
•
Nicols Dairy — —
Sample code
and date —. — , . — r-
collected (8/Hter)
Q-r»M /i "^/i 1 /. n 4- 1O
opJM *O*t X . if U ± . XZ
2/27/73
Q-r»M /i R ^ 1/1^4- 19
DprT-*f 3 3 X . 4- j ± . XZ
2/27/73
C-rvTW /iRA 1994- 1O
"~ oprl"^ 3D X * ZZ ± . XZ
2/27/73
OT^M /. ^7 i c/, 4- TO
bprl 43/ X.D^-± .XZ
2/27/73
O r^Xf ARQ I/. 94- 19
— opJXl— H3O X.4J ± .XZ
2/27/73
Cr^M XiA/i 1 ^57 -1- 19
•'- bprl HDf X.J/ I .XZ
3/ 1/73
CT-.M— ft£9 1 7/i 4- 19
DpJXL"~ODZ X • j4 X • XZ
4/23/73
CT^M 7Qft 1 A7 4- 19
~ opn /"u i • 4 / x • _LZ
4/16/73
Radionuclide concentration
(pCi/liter)
89Sr 9°Sr 131I 137Cs
< 5 b6.4 ± 1.3 < 10 < 10
< 5 5.1 ± 1.4 < 10 < 10
< 5 4.9 ± 1.4 < 10 < 10
< 5 5.6 ± 1.5 < 10 b!2 ± 7
<5 6.211.7 <10 <10
< 5 3.7 ± 1.2 < 10 < 10
< 5 7.8 ± 1.6 < 10 < 10
< 5 5.4 ± 1.4 < 10 < 10
140^
Ba
< 10
< 10
< 10
< 10
< 10
< 10
< 10
< 10
See footnotes at end of table.
-------
Appendix I—Continued
Special milk samples, Shippingport, Pa,
Identification
Sample code
and date . -.
collected (g/lltei)
89Sr
Q-rtM 7QA 1974 19 «" ^
4/11/73
^nM 7Q7 1 A^ + 19
-------
Appendix I—Continued
o
Special milk samples, Shippingport, Pa.
Identification
Sample code
and date
collected
K
(g/liter)
Radionuclide concentration
(pCi/liter)
89Sr 9°Sr
131,
137^
Cs
l4°Ba
Brunton Dairy SpM-1021 bl,36 ± .12 < 5 b3.7 ± 1.0 < 10 < 10 < 10
5/14/73
Hobbs Dairy SpM-1018 1.36 ± .12 < 5 5.6 ± 1.3 < 10 < 10 < 10
5/14/73
Q
A spiked sample submitted by EEKF's Office of Quality Control was analyzed concurrently
with these samples and found to contain 13.7 pCi/liter. The known value was 12.7 pCi/liter.
Strontium-90 concentrations are an average of multiple determinations.
The error expressed is the relative 2 sigma counting error.
-------
Appendix II
Special vegetation samples, Shippingport, Pa.
Identification
SV-4, hay
SV-6, silage
Searight Dairy
SV-7, hay
Sherman Dairy ~
Sample code
and date
collected
SpV-461
2/27./7S
SpV-462
2/27/73
SpV-463
2/27/73
Percent
dry weight
30.8
24.4
87.0
Percent ash
dry weight
4.0
10.7
8.1
Strontium-90
activity
(pCi/g ash)
7.2 ± 9%
6.6 ± 9%
8.9 ± 8%
Gamma radioactivity
(pCi/kg dry weight)
Date counted-3/8/73
4°K: 9,885 ± 8%
4°K: 18,648 ± 6%
40
K: 18,999 ± 5%
-------
Appendix III
Special soil samples, Shippingport, Pa.
Sample code Strontium-90 Gamma radioactivity
Identification and date . FercfnJ; Percent ash activity (pCi/kg dry weight)
nT"V WP i <*n t" HTTJ rjf^~i on f"
collected y weiBnt ary wexgnt (pci/g ash) and date counted
SS - 13 SpS-448 65.6 90.5 0.25 ± 32% ^ft061
2/28/73 137Ru:
0-0Cs:
232Th:
K •
n — • rx. •
91 A
214Bi:
144
C— AAQ fil Q on n "\Q + ")/iV f o «
2/28/73 137Ru:
232Cs:
7nTh:
4°K •
214 "
/14B1:
SS - 9 SpS-450 66.7 92.8 .57 ± 22% ^"nfiCe:
2/28/73 137Ru:
~0oCs:
232Th-
/ ^V -Ll* •
4°K •
214 "
•"*Bi:
1,011 ±
280 ±
886 ±
1,007 ±
10,358 ±
755 ±
3/5/73
1,165 ±
417 ±
1,382 ±
882 ±
11,327 ±
806 ±
3/5/73
1,277 ±
575 ±
1,470 ±
, 779 ±
9,494 ±
562 ±
3/7/73
15%
49%
4%
6%
4%
11%
15%
37%
3%
7%
4%
12%
12%
24%
3%
7%
4%
14%
-------
K3
Appendix III—Continued
Special soil samples, Shippingport, Pa.
Sample code „ _ , Strontium-90 Gamma radioactivity
TJ 4-j.c- * j j ^ Percent Percent ash . . / 0. „ , . , ^
Identification and date .. . , . . . activity (pCi/kg dry weight)
n j dry weight dry weight , „. i ;\ j j 4. !! j
collected ^ 6 / & (pCi/g ash) and date counted
2/28/73 i^7Ru:
Cs*
OOO
Th-
/ ** -L 11 •
aO
V •
o i / ix •
9 I A
T> *
1 UU
cc 11 «_ — — Cr\Q/i(^7 f\^ ft Qnn ^9 + 9^t7 Prt •
2/28/73 T^7Ru:
r«3 •
r\ f\ rt uO •
2 T?
40Th:
if •
mix •
144
qc 17 cine /.ST S4 7 ft? 0 Sfi + 7S7 To-
2/28/73 137Ru:
o n f\ \sS *
2 i2
40Th:
Tf •
« i / rv •
214
1,230
416
227
738
10,783
495
3/7/73
1,215
479
1,093
1,118
13,862
1,080
3/7/73
1,092
479
1,093
1,118
13,862
680
3/7/73
± 10%
± 27%
± 11%
± 6%
± 3%
± 13%
± 13%
± 31%
+ 4%
± 5%
± 3%
± 13%
+ 15%
± 31%
± 4%
± 5%
± 3%
± 13%
-------
Appendix IV
Data from analysis of duplicate milk samples, Shippingport, Pa.'
strontium-90 (pCi/liter ± 2a)
Dairy
Sample code
and date
collected
EERF
NUS
Pennsylvania
Department
of Health
HASL
Sherman-
Nicols-
Meyers
Searight-
Brunton-
Hobbs-
2/27/73
SpM-^
2/27/73
4-456
2/27/73
SpM-^
2/27/73
SpM-458
2/27/73
SpM-464
3/ 1/73
6.4 ± 1.:
10.3 ± 1.1
4.9 ± 1.4
5.6 ± 1.5
7.7 ± 1.4
7.7 ± 1.2
3.7 ± 1.2
NS
2.5 ± 2
2.8 ±
2.0
NS
NS
NS
± .1
Spiked samples were reported by HASL and EERF. HASL standard—0.71 pCi/g reported as 0.74
pCi/g. EERF standard—12.7 pCi/liter reported as 13.7 pCi/liter.
NS, no sample.
Go
-------
Appendix IV—Continued
Data from analysis of duplicate soil samples, Shippingport, Pa.'
strontium-90 (pCi/g ± 2a)
Site
(near plant)
Near Nicols
(near plant)
(near plant)
aoutn
(near plant)
West of
Mechanicsburg —
Sample code
and date
collected
SpS-450
2/28/73
SpS-449
2/28/73
SpS-449
2/28/73
SpS-452
2/28/73
cnc AS3
2/28/73
SpS-448
2/28/73
Pennsylvania ,
EERF NUS Department RASL
of Health
0^7 + n i 9 n /. 9 + n n/, WQ n An 4- n m
SQ+ 1A SS+ OS Nfcj SI + 09
9S+ IT is+ m MQ IR + m
co + no or\ + nA MQ An 4- O9
c£ + 1A Sft 4- f\A MC RA 4- n/i
.25 ± .08 .36 ± .04 NS .32 ± .01
Spiked sample was reported by HASL. HASL standard—0.45 ± 0.03 pCi/g reported as 0.44 ± 0.02
PCi/g.
Soil samples analyzed by HASL were obtained by splitting the sample collected by EERF.
NS, no sample.
-------
Appendix V
Ambient radiation levels measured by TLD's, EERF
Site
i _ _ _ __ _
•!_
A .
5— — — —
(. _
7 _
_ _
i n~ — — — —
U_ _ _ _
i 7 _
_
bu
2/27/73-3/19/73
Average
(yR/h ± la)
7.36 ± 0.43
8.10 ± .49
8.31 + .61
8.29 ± .47
7.40 ± .33
8.05 ± .31
6.78 ± .47
7.22 ± .23
8.22 ± .50
7.16 ± .21
4.70 ± .29
7.60 ± .36
7. -78 ± .08
6.97 ± .16
3/19/73-4/ll/73a
Average
(yR/h ± la)
7.54 ± 0.25
7.86 ± .11
7.91 ± .48
8.49 ± .27
7.18 ± .35
7.79 ± .33
8.06 ± .12
7.07 ± .17
Lost
7.21 ± .09
5.55 ± .62
7.98 ± .14
6.57 ± .09
6.91 ± .17
4/11/73-5/10/73
Average
(yR/h ± la)
7.09 ±
8.35 ±
7.72 ±
8.78 ±
7.46 ±
8.02 ±
8.09 ±
7.08 ±
7.59 ±
5.40 ±
7.91 ±
6.72 ±
6.93 ±
0.69
.43
.74
.52
.44
.05
.49
.34
.31
.64
.17
.13
.16
5/10/73-6/6/73
Average
(yR/h ± la)
7.64 ±
8.29 ±
7.81 ±
8.65 ±
7.08 ±
8.02 ±
8.10 ±
6.95 ±
7.19 ±
5.68 ±
8.21 ±
7.89 ±
6.44 ±
0.17
.42
.91
.51
.24
.30
.29
.25
.19
.61
.30
.16
.15
Shippingport reactor shut down for maintenance.
3Same location as NUS control dosimeter.
NJ
Ol
-------
to
ON
Appendix VI
Analysis of NUS-reported TLD data
NUS control
Exposure
period
2/12- 3/19/71
3/19- q/01/71
4/01- 5/11/71
5/11- 6/03/71
6/03- 7/02/71
7/02- 7/30/71
7/30- 8/30/71
8/30- 9/30/71-*—
9/30-11/08/71
11/08-11/24/71
11/24-12/28/71
12/28- 1/31/72
1/31- 3/02/72
3/02- 4/03/72
Reported
exposure
(mR)
14.0 ±
12.6 ±
22.0 ±
11.6 ±
8.4 ±
18.0 ±
9.2 ±
11.6 ±
14.6 ±
11.8 ±
11.8 ±
8.8 ±
11.4 ±
12.4 ±
2.0
1.8
2.8
1.0
1.8
2.4
1.0
1.8
3.4
.8
.8
1.6
1.0
1.8
dosimeter
Calculated
exposure
(mR)
5.88
2.18
6.72
3.86
4.87
4.70
5.2
5.2
6.55
2.69
5.7
5.7
5.0
5.4
Transient
exposure
calculated
(mR)
8.12
10.42
15.28
7.74
3.53
13.. 3
4.0
6.4
8.05
9.11
6.1
3.1
6.4
7.0
± 2.0
± 1.8
± 2.8
± 1.0
± 1.8
± 2.4
± 1.0
± 1.8
± 3.4
± .8
± .8
± 1.6
± 1.0
± 1.8
NUS Shippingport site 10
Reported
exposure
(mR)
15.8
13.2
15.0
22.2
10.4
21.6
11.6
13.8
16.6
13.4
13.4
8.0
13.4
12.8
± 3.2
± .8
± 2.8
± 3.2
± 1.8
± 3.0
± 1.8
± 2.6
± 4.8
± 1.8
± 1.0
± 1.4
± 2.2
± 2.2
Corrected
exposure
(mR)
7.68
2.78
- .28
14.46
6.87
8.3
7.6
7.4
8.55
4.29
7.3
4.9
7.0
5.8
± 3.8
± 1.97
± 4.0
± 3.4
± 2.5
± 3.8
± 2.1
± 3.2
± 5.9
± 2.0
± 1.3
± 2.1
± 2.4
± 2.8
Corrected
exposure rate
(pR/h)
9.14
8.9
- .3
26.2
9.9
12.4
10.2
9.9
9.1
11.2
8.9
6.0
9.7
7.6
± 4.5
± 6.3
± 4.2
± 6.2
± 3.6
± 5.6
± 2.8
± 4.3
± 6.3
± 5.2
± 1.6
± 2.6
± 3.3
± 3.6
-------
Appendix VII
Radionuclides in primary coolant
Shippingport Atomic Power Station, 3/14/73, 0520
analyzed at EERF
Radio-
nuclide
3
24
wa
54
59
r e
58ro ---
Co
6°Pn----
Co
131T____
i
133.J.
134r*---
Cs
137- _..
Cs
133
-LJ-Jv^
Xe
89C
Nal gamma
analysis
40 ml sample
(yCi/ml)
-4
2Q «• 1 f\ «
.ox ID
1f\ tr i n~"
. U x ID
30 -.,- i n _
. y x iu
I/, -, i n"
. H X J.U
8r ,, i n~^
• OX 1U
-A
20 •«• i r> -
. / x 1U
Gamma analysis
of aliquot
over anion resin
(yCi/ml)
. /
. j
. 1
. _L
9n
.y
3C.
. O
91 _, i n"" + i"y
• JL X J.U i J./0
6/: „ 1 n~ -i- 1 7 — .
• OX 1U ± l/o
-_ ____ 10
__ J. . /
_ _ 10
JL . O
c; o
Specific
analysis
(yCi/ml)
-3
X J-U — \j • / /o
„ m~^ + iQ7
x iu ± iy/o
„ I A™" J. 1 V
x IU ± IX
-6
„ -i n"" 4- n ^a/
X IU ± U.J/o
_S
•«• i n 4. n 7^
X .LU X U. / A
•«• i n"~ 4- AV
X J.U I OA
•^ i r\~ 4- T*/
X -LU X Z/o
v in"' 4. 017
27
-------
Appendix VII—Continued
Radionuclides in secondary coolant
Shippingport Atomic Power Station, 3/14/73, 0715
analyzed at EERF
Radio-
nuclide
3H
51
54
n.n
59
58
L.O
60
uo
133
134C
137C
Nal gamma Gamma analysis
analysis of aliquot
40 ml sample over anion resin
(yCi/ml) (yCi/ml)
Q n -, n-6 _ _
o.O x 1U
i n -u- i n~ Q n -a- i n"~ + z.~\a/
J. . U X J-U O.U X J.U I jJ_A
o /. „ i n~" o n -u- i n~ -i- i Qa/
L.^ x J.U z.u x ±u i J.y^
Specific
analysis
(yCi/ml)
i f, „ in"" + /,"/
1 . D X J-U 2: 4/0
"NTH
-8
4A-u- in 4- oo'y
.U X J-U ± Z/A
Q
on-,, i n~ -i- TO"/
/.U x J-U ± JZ^
_Q
i n -<^ in -i- A £ "7
j.U x J-U ± ifD^
. z x 10 ± lU/o
2/. -^ in 4. o^
.4 X 10 ± j/o
ND, nondetectable. Other analyses with activity below detec-
tion limits include 65Zn, Sb.
28
-------
Appendix VII—Continued
Radionuclides in laundry waste tank
Shippingport Atomic Power Station, 3/14/73, 0748
analyzed at EERF
Radio-
nuclide
3H
ri
51fr
ur
54
ran
59
j
-------
Appendix VII—Continued
Radionuclides in blowdown water
Shippingport Atomic Power Station, 3/14/73, 0812
analyzed at EERF
Radio-
nuclide
3K
ii
24N*- -
wa
51rr
L.r
54
59
re
58
uo
60
LO
131T
i
133I
134
137
(jS
Nal gamma Gamma analysis
analysis of aliquot
40 ml sample over anion resin
(yd/ml) (yCi/ml)
8n -* i n"~
. U X 1U
In ,, i n~ Q r\ -,* ^ n~ -i- ci"/
.U X 1U o.U X ID ± _>/i
2/1 <«• i n o n -tr i A~ -i- i Q*y
.4 X ±U z.U x 1U ± IJA
Specific
analysis
(yCi/ml)
7 7 „ 1 r»~" j.
/ . / X XU ±
VVT\
NIJ
MT\
JNU
ND
INI)
ND
1/t __ i n "~ -i-
.4 x 1U ±
. U x 1(J ±
A"/
t/o
o c cy
JJ/i
1 f\o/
W/o
ND, nondetectable. Other analyses with activity below detec-
tion limits include 65Zn, Sb.
30
-------
54
59
Mn-
58
60
Fe-
Co-
Appendix VII—Continued
Radionuclides in test tank B
Shippingport Atomic Power Station, 3/14/73
analyzed at EERF
Radio-
nuclide
Nal gamma
analysis
40 ml sample
(yCi/ml)
Gamma analysis
of aliquot
over anion resin
(yCi/ml)
Specific
analysis
(yCi/ml)
Co -----
134
137
3.3 x 10
~7
ND
Cs-
x 10~5 ± 3%
ND
3.0 x 10~8 ± 10%
2.3 x 10~7 ± 6%
ND
ND
ND
ND
ND, nondetectable. Other analyses with activity below detec-
tion limits include 65Zn, Sb.
31
-------
Appendix VII—Continued
Radionuclides in gas samples
Shippingport Atomic Power Station, 3/14/73
analyzed at Radiochemistry and Nuclear
Engineering Research Laboratory—NERC-Cincinnati
Radio- Surge Air
nuclide3 tank ejector
3Hb 1.0 x 10~?
14Cb 9.8 x 10~5 2.2 x 10~7
133v -7 / in~5 i / in~6
Xe 7.4 x 10 1.4 x 10
133mv / -in-7
xe 4 x 10
135V , ..-7
Xe 6 x 10
'iTone of the listed radionuclides were detected in the gas
samples from the stack gas and the blowdown flash tank.
Tritium entirely as t^O; carbon-14 in surge tank two-thirds as
CC>2 and one-third in other form; carbon-14 in air ejector not as C02-
32
-------
Appendix VIII
Analysis of 1971 soil samples, Shippingport, Pa.
Identification
EERF
sample
1332
1333
1334
1335
1336
1337
1338
1339
1340
1341
1342
1343
1344
1345
1346
1347
NUS
sample
752
753
754
755
756
757
758
759
2021
2022
2023
2024
2025
2026
2027
2028
NUS
site
19
16
17
20
21
22
23
18
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
Date
collected
4/20/71
4/20/71
4/20/71
4/20/71
4/20/71
4/20/71
4/20/71
4/20/71
9/13/71
9/13/71
9/13/71
9/13/71
9/13/71
9/13/71
9/13/71
9/13/71
90
NUS-reported Sr
(pCi/g dry wt. ± 2a)
3.48 ± 0.
2.27 ± .
5.66 ± .
6.80 ± .
3.81 ± .
4.23 ± .
2.90 ± .
4.55 ± .
1.97 ± .
.43 ± .
1.74 ± .
2.85 ± .
.62 ± .
1.24 ± .
1.69 ± .
2.22 ± .
28
77
43
57
46
95
24
29
26
22
19
27
23
27
28
34
90
EERF-reported Sr
(pCi/g dry wt. ± 2cr)
0.23 ±
.08 ±
.08 ±
.26 ±
.22 ±
.24 ±
.05 ±
.28 ±
.12 ±
.06 ±
.34 ±
.32 ±
.34 ±
.60 ±
.22 ±
.16 ±
0.12
.06
.06
.09
.10
.10
.05
.11
.07
.06
.08
.07
.08
.08
.06
.05
Lo
-------
THE ABSTRACT CARDS accompanying this report
are designed to facilitate information retrieval.
They provide suggested key words, bibliographic
information, and an abstract. The key word con-
cept of reference material filing is readily
adaptable to a variety of filing systems ranging
from manual-visual to electronic data processing.
The cards are furnished in triplicate to allow
for flexibility in their use.
34 MJ.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1973 546-312/137 1-3
-------
ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY IN THE VICINITY
OF SHIPPINGPORT ATOMIC POWER STATION, EPA-520/5-73-005.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation
Programs (November 1973).
ABSTRACT: A study was conducted by the Eastern Environ-
mental Radiation Facility (EERF) to assess the environ-
mental radioactivity levels in the vicinity of the
Shippingport Atomic Power Station, Shippingport, Pa.
The results of this study were compared to an earlier
study done by NUS Corp. of Rockville, Md.
KEY WORDS: Environmental radiation; iodine-131; milk;
soil; Shippingport, Pa.; strontium-90; and surveil-
lance.
ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY IN THE VICINITY
OF SHIPPINGPORT ATOMIC POWER STATION, EPA-520/5-73-005.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation
Programs (November 1973).
ABSTRACT: A study was conducted by the Eastern Environ-
mental Radiation Facility (EERF) to assess the environ-
mental radioactivity levels in the vicinity of the
Shippingport Atomic Power Station, Shippingport, Pa.
The results of this study were compared to an earlier
study done by NUS Corp. of Rockville, Md.
KEY WORDS: Environmental radiation; iodine-131; milk;
soil; Shippingport, Pa.; strontium-90; and surveil-
lance.
ASSESSMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY IN THE VICINir
OF SHIPPINGPORT ATOMIC POWER STATION, EPA-520/5-73-005
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Radiation
Programs (November 1973).
ABSTRACT: A study was conducted by the Eastern Environ-
mental Radiation Facility (EERF) to assess the environ'
mental radioactivity levels in the vicinity of the
Shippingport Atomic Power Station, Shippingport, Pa.
The results of this study were compared to an earlier
study done by NUS Corp. of Rockville, Md.
KEY WORDS: Environmental radiation; iodine-131; milk;
soil; Shippingport, Pa.; strontium-90; and surveil-
lance.
------- |