ORP/SID 72-2
ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY
SURVEILLANCE GUIDE
£ *m ro
iSB *
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Radiation Programs
-------
TECHNICAL REPORTS
Technical reports of the Surveillance and Inspection Division (formerly the Di-
vision of Environmental Radiation, Bureau of Radiological Health, Public Health
Service, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare) are available from the Na-
tional Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va. 22151. Price is $3 for paper copy
and $0.95 for microfiche. The PB number, if indicated, should be cited when ordering.
BRH/DER 69-1 .... Evaluation of Radon-222 Near Uranium Tailings Piles (PB 188-
691)
BRH/DER 70-1 _ Radiological Surveillance Studies at a Boiling Water Nuclear
Power Station (PB 191-091)
BRH/DER 70-2 Radioactive Waste Discharges to the Environment from Nuclear
Power Facilities (PB 190-717)
ORP/SID 71-1 Addendum-1 to BRH/DER 70-2, Radioactive Waste Discharges
to the Environment from Nuclear Power Facilities
ORP/SID 72-1 Natural Radiation Exposure in the United States
ORP/SID 72-2 Environmental Radioactivity Surveillance Guide
-------
ORP/SID 72-2
ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY SURVEILLANCE GUIDE
June 1972
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
OFFICE OF RADIATION PROGRAMS
SURVEILLANCE AND INSPECTION DIVISION
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 Surveillance and Inspection Divi-
sion conducts programs relating to sources and levels of environmental radioactivity
and the resulting population radiation dose. Reports of the findings are published in
the monthly publication, Radiation Data and Reports, appropriate scientific journals,
and Division technical reports.
The technical reports of the Surveillance and Inspection Division allow com-
prehensive 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 in-
formation services, 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.
I encourage readers of these reports to inform the Office of Radiation Programs
of any omissions or errors. Your additional comments or requests for further infor-
mation are also solicited.
W. D. Rows
Deputy Assistant Administrator
for Radiation Programs
-------
PREFACE
Discharges of radioactivity to the environment from nuclear power stations con-
tribute to the radiation dose received by the general population. The Surveillance and
Inspection Division developed this "Environmental Radioactivity Surveillance Guide"
as a part of its responsibility to provide guidance for surveillance of nuclear facilities.
The Guide recommends methods for conducting a minimum level of environmental
radiation surveillance outside the plant site boundary of light-water-cooled nuclear
power facilities but does not establish requirements for any particular organization
for conducting the surveillance program.
During the period that the Guide was being developed, the Division consulted
with the Atomic Industrial Forum, members of industry, the Atomic Energy Commis-
sion, and other colleagues in the Environmental Protection Agency on the technical
contents of the Guide. A substantial number of comments and recommendations from
these groups were included in the Guide. In addition, the contents of the Guide were
discussed in a presentation before the Conference of State Radiation Control Program
Directors in May 1972. Members of the Conference submitted their comments and
recommendations, and these were incorporated into the Guide. The Surveillance and
Inspection Division is grateful to the members of these organizations and agencies for
the time and effort they spent in reviewing and commenting on the content of the Guide.
CHARLES L. WEAVER
Acting Director
Surveillance and Inspection Division
-------
CONTENTS
' Page
Foreword in
Preface v
Chapter 1. Introduction _ 1
Chapter 2. Environmental Surveillance Protocol 3
Preoperational Environmental Surveillance 3
Operational Surveillance 4
Chapter 3. Sampling and Analysis - _ — 9
Air Particulate Sampling Equipment 9
Air Sampling Locations 9
Direct Radiation _ 13
Water Sampling 13
Sediment, Benthic Organisms and Aquatic Plants 16
Food Samples — 16
Analytical Quality Control Methods 17
Reporting Procedures 18
Chapter 4. Dose Estimations _— — 19
References —- 22
General Bibliography _ — 24
rii
-------
Tables: Page
1. Offsite surveillance of operating light-water-cooled nuclear power
facilities _ — - -— 6
2. Detection capabilities associated with analytical methods of environ-
mental radioactivity surveillance — _ 10
3. Analytical methods for routine environmental radioactivity surveillance 12
Figures:
1. Pathways between radioactive materials released to the atmosphere and
man - 5
2. Pathways between radioactive materials released to ground and surface
waters (including oceans) and man 5
3. Estimated distance of maximum ground level concentration as a func-
tion of Pasquill atmospheric stability conditions and stack height in
meters 12
4. Air particulate sample sites around a nuclear power facility based on
Pasquill atmospheric stability conditions 14
5. Air particulate sample sites around a nuclear power facility based on
annual average wind rose data 15
6. Suggested sediment sampling locations 17
viii
-------
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
This Environmental Radioactivity Surveil-
lance Guide recommends methods for conduct-
ing a minimum level of environmental radiation
surveillance outside the plant site boundary of
light-water-cooled nuclear power facilities. An
environmental surveillance program is pre-
sented to achieve uniformity so that the data
will be compatible and subject to singular
interpretation relative to the estimated popula-
tion radiation dose. The basic concepts pre-
sented may also apply to surveillance around
other nuclear facilities such as gas-cooled and
liquid-metal-cooled nuclear power facilities and
nuclear fuel reprocessing plants. However, as
additional nuclear facilities of these types are
licensed and operated, additional guides may
be needed. This Guide recommends procedures
but does not establish the requirements for any
particular organization for conducting environ-
mental surveillance.
Radionuclides released with the effluents
from nuclear power facilities become dispersed
in the environment and contribute some radi-
ation dose to the population. Environmental
radiation surveillance programs conducted
around nuclear power facilities should as a
minimum provide data which may be used
(1) for population dose calculations which can
be compared with Federal and State standards,
(2) for the evaluation of buildup of environ-
mental radioactivity, and (3) for public infor-
mation purposes.
Technical information for development of
this Guide was obtained from radiological
surveillance studies conducted by the Environ-
mental Protection Agency (EPA) at an operat-
ing boiling water reactor (1) and an operating
pressurized water reactor (2). These studies
provide information on quantities and char-
acteristics of radioactive material released to
the environment and on critical pathways by
.which the public may potentially be exposed
as a result of the releases.
-------
CHAPTER 2
Environmental Surveillance Protocol
The offsite environmental surveillance pro-
gram for a light-water-cooled nuclear power
station should be established on the basis of an
evaluation of radionuclide composition of the
liquid and gaseous waste discharges from the
facility and the environmental parameters that
could affect their dispersion and dilution in the
environment.
The recommended surveillance program con-
sists of two phases: the preoperational and the
operational. The preoperational phase provides
data which can be used as a basis for evaluat-
ing increases in radioactivity in the vicinity of
the plant after the plant becomes operational.
The evaluation must also include a determina-
tion as to whether an increase is attributable
to plant operations or to a general increase in
environmental radioactivity. Therefore, the
operational surveillance program must include
control data from sample sites considered to be
beyond the measurable influence of the nuclear
facility as well as data from the areas expected
to be most affected. The operational surveil-
lance program will provide the data required
for estimation of population dose. This dose
may be compared with that calculated using a
dose model and radionuclide discharge data for
the specific nuclear facility. In all cases, the
surveillance program must emphasize sampling
and measurement of the environmental media
which contribute most significantly to radi-
ation exposure of the public. Chapter 4 pro-
vides guidance on population dose estimation.
Preoperational Environmental Surveillance
Preoperational radiation surveillance of the
environment around nuclear power reactors
should be carried out for 1 year prior to facility
operations. This program consists of (1) iden-
tification of the probable critical exposure path-
ways, and (2) the critical population groups;
(3) selection of the sample media and sample
site locations; (4) the collection and analysis
of environmental samples, and (5) the inter-
pretation of the data.
The extent of preoperational surveillance de-
pends upon the particular environment in
which the reactor is located. If the effect of the
initial reactor in a reactor complex is to be
studied, the environmental surveillance and
training will be more extensive than that re-
quired for startup of other reactors in the same
reactor complex. A minimum preoperational
surveillance program to be undertaken 1 year
prior to facility operations is outlined as fol-
lows:
1. Make gamma radiation dose rate meas-
urements (i.e., TLD, film badge, or
pressurized ion chamber) at locations
identified for direct radiation meas-
urement in table 1. The locations may
be chosen on the basis of meteorologi-
cal data supplied with the Preliminary
Safety Analysis Report for the fa-
cility.
-------
2. Make in situ quantitative gamma spec-
trometric measurements at the sta-
tions in item 1. Analyze the spectra
to apportion the total gamma dose
rate among the various contributing
radionuclides. Beck et al. (3) provide
guidance and procedures for perform-
ing these measurements. Laboratory
analysis of soil and other terrestrial
materials contributing to ambient
gamma dose levels may be substituted
for the in situ measurements where
practical.
3. Collect low volume air samples at one
station for 6 months before startup
and determine the gross beta activity.
Perform gamma isotopic analyses1 of
a monthly composite of these samples.
4. Identify the critical population in the
plant environs. Collect relevant demo-
graphic data for the area within 50
miles of the facility.
5. Collect samples of water, food, and biota
along critical dose pathways. Perform
gamma isotopic analyses. These sam-
ples should be collected and analyzed
quarterly where appropriate to iden-
tify seasonal variations.
6. Long-lived alpha-emitting radionuclides
such as radium-226, thorium-232, and
plutonium-238/239, though not nor-
mally attributed to light-water-cooled
power reactor operations, have been
detected in environmental samples.
Additional gross or specific alpha
analyses during the preoperational
phase may be required to fully docu-
ment the population radiation expo-
sure situation in the vicinity of the
nuclear facility.
Gross alpha and/or gross beta screen-
ing of environmental samples may be
substituted for gamma spectroscopy
during the preoperational phase.
1 See footnote (a) to table 1 for definition.
Operational surveillance
The operational surveillance program should
begin at the time the plant becomes operational.
Specific media to be monitored during the
initial phase of the operational program should
have been identified during the preoperational
surveillance program. Atomic Energy Commis-
sion (AEC) regulations (4) require that each
nuclear power facility operator reports semi-
annually to the Commission the quantity of
each of the principal radionuclides released to
the environment in liquid and gaseous effluents.
This information and other data on distribu-
tion of radionuclides in environmental media
can be used to determine the population expo-
sure pathways that should be monitored and to
identify media in which there is potential for
long-term buildup of radioactivity. Figures 1
and 2 show the most important population
exposure pathways and these are listed below
in order of general significance.
For atmospheric discharges
(1) Atmospheric discharge-* whole body ex-
ternal exposure.
(2) Atmospheric discharge
posure.
(3) Atmospheric discharge
grass -» cattle -» milk ->• man.
(4) Atmospheric discharge
leafy vegetables -* man.
(5) Atmospheric discharge
grass -> cattle -* beef -» man.
(6) Atmospheric discharge
soil -» plants -» man.
inhalation ex-
deposition on
deposition on
deposition on
deposition on
For liquid discharges
(1) Aqueous discharge -> waterway
drinking water supply -» man.
(2) Aqueous discharge -» waterway
seafood/fish -> man.
(3) Aqueous discharge -» waterway
aquatic plants -> animals -> man.
(4) Aqueous discharge -» waterway
external exposure.
(5) Aqueous discharge -» waterway
sediments -» external exposure.
-------
- Direct Radiation
Figure 1. Pathways between radioactive materials released to the atmos-
phere and man (5)
RADIOACTIVE
MATERIAL
.>
SOIL
i '
SURFACE or
SROUND WATER
t
RADIOACTIVE
MATERIALS
*•
r
i — L
+ u
Sand and —
Sediment —
Irrigation
Water
1 „
Aquatic
Plants
-1 r
— i't
Aquatic
Animals
Fishing and L
Sports Gear |
'
Land »_
Plants
n
1
Land
Jm^
~~\S^
taimals k.. .-^
1 ' "(Meat)-*
— > INGESTION ••
Figure 2. Pathways between radioactive materials released to ground
and surface water (including oceans) and man (5)
-------
Table 1. Offsite surveillance of operating light-water-cooled nuclear power facilities
Operation or
sample type
Approximate number of samples
and their locations
Collection
frequency
Analysis type9
and frequency
Air participates
Air iodine
Direct radiation
Surface water'
Ground water
Drinking water
Sediment, benthic
organisms and
aquatic plants
Milk
Fish and
shellfish
Fruits and
vegetables
Meat and
poultry
Quality control
1 sample from the S locations of the highest offsite ground
level concentrations
1 sample from 1-3 communities within a 10-mile radius of
the facility
1 sample from a location greater than a 20-mile radius in
the least prevalent annual wind direction'
Same sites as for air particulatea
2 or more dosimeters placed at each of the locations of the
air particulate samples which are located at the 3 high-
est offsite ground level concentrations
1 or more dosimeters placed at each of 3 other locations
for which the highest annual offsite dose at ground level
is predicted*
2 or more dosimeters placed at each of 1-3 communities
within a 10-mile radius of the facility'
2 or more dosimeters placed at a location greater than a
20-mile radius in the least prevalent annual wind direc-
tion*
1 'upstream
1 downstream after dilution (e.g., 1 mile)
1 or 2 from sources most likely to be affected
Any supplies obtained within 10 miles of the facility
which could be affected by its discharges or the first
supply within 100 miles if none exists within 10 miles
1 directly dowstream of outfall'
1 upstream of outfall'
1 at dam site dowstream or in impoundments'
1 sample at nearest offsite dairy farm in the prevailing
downwind direction
1 sample of milk from local dairy representative of milk-
shed for the area
1 of each of principal edible types from vicinity of outfall
1 of each of the* sample types from area not influenced by
the discharges
1 each of principal food products grown near the point of
maximum predicted annual ground concentration from
stack releases and from any area which is irrigated by
water in which liquid plant wastes have been discharged
1 each of the same foods grown at greater than 20 miles
distance in the least prevalent wind direction
Meat, poultry, and eggs from animals fed on crops grown
within 10 miles of the facility at the prevailing down-
wind direction or where drinking water is supplied
from a downstream source
Samples as required for accurate sampling and analysis
Continuous collection—
filter change as required
Continuous collection—
canister changes as
required
Quarterly
Gross long-lived P at filter
change*
Composite for gamma iso-
topic analysis and radio-
strontium analysis* quar-
terly
Analyze weekly unless ab-
sence of radioiodine can be
demonstrated
Gamma dose quarterly
Monthly
(Record status of dis-
charge operations at
time of sampling)
Quarterly
Continuous proportional
samples'
Semiannually
Monthly
Semiannually
Annually
(At harvest)
Annually during or im-
mediately following
grazing season
Gross 6. gamma isotopic
analysis'1 monthly. Com-
posite for tritium and
radiostrontium analysis*
quarterly
Gross 8, gamma isotopic
analysis'1 and tritium quar-
terly
Gross 3, gamma isotopic
analysis11 monthly. Com-
posite for tritium and
radiostrontium analysis
quarterly"
Gamma Isotopic analysis
Semiannually
Gamma isotopic analysis and
radiostrontium analysis
monthly
Gamma isotopic analysis
Semiannually on edible
portions
Gamma isotopic analysis an-
nually on edible portions
Gamma isotopic analysis an-
nually on edible portions
Minimum
ally
frequency—annu-
• Gamma isotopic analysis means identification of gamma emitters
plus quantitative results for radionuclides that may be attributable to
the facility.
b Particulate sample filters should be analyzed for gross beta after
at least 24 hours to allow for radon and thoron daughter decay.
' Radiostrontium analysis is to be done only if gamma isotopic
analysis indicates presence of cesium-137 associated with nuclear
power facility discharges.
" The purpose of this sample is to obtain background information.
If it is not practical to locate a site in accordance with the cri-
terion, another site which provides valid background data should be
used.
• These sites based on estimated dose levels, as opposed to ground
level concentrations where the dose may be affected by sky shine,
high plumes, or direct radiation from the facility being monitored.
' These locations will normally coincide with the air particulate
samplers used in the monitored communities.
* For facilities not located on a stream, the upstream sample should
be a sample taken at a distance beyond significant influence of the
discharges. The downstream sample should be taken In an area be-
yond the outfall which would allow for mixing and dilution. Up-
stream samples taken in a tidal area must be taken far enough
upstream to be beyond the plant influence when the effluent is ac-
tually flowing upstream during incoming tides.
" If gross beta exceed 30 pCl/liter.
1 Drinking water samples should be taken continuously at the sur-
face water intake to municipal water supplies. Alternatively, if a
reservoir is used, drinking water samples should be taken from the
reservoir monthly. If the holding time for the reservoir is less than
1 month, then the sampling frequency should equal this holdup time.
Increases in concentration of activation and/or fission products at
these sources necessitate the analysis of tap water for the purpose
of dose calculations. Additional analyses of tap water may be nec-
essary to satisfy public demand.
1 See figure 6 for locations on a stream. For facilities located on
large bodies of water, sampling sites should be located at the dis-
charge point and in both directions along the shore line.
*Th« Analytical Quality Control Service of the Surveillance and
Inspection Division (SID) provides low-level radiochemical stand-
ards and interlaboratory services to State and local health depart-
ment*. Federal and international agencies, and nuclear power
facilities and their contractors. The Service operates several types
of cross-check programs for the analysis of radionuclide in envi-
ronmental media, such as milk, food, water, air. and soil. The sam-
ples are submitted on a routine schedule designed to fit the needs of
each laboratory. Technical experiments are undertaken to permit
detailed analyses of the accuracy and precision obtained by partici-
pating laboratories. In addition, low-level radioactivity standards are
provided to the agencies participating in the various programs. Pri-
mary and secondary standardization is also performed as needed on
those radionuelides not used on a routine basis.
-------
A recommended minimum level environ-
mental surveillance program is presented in
table 1. This table is a guide and should not be
followed literally as though it were a regulation.
There is no substitute for good professional
judgment in the development of a surveillance
program. The recommended program includes
monitoring of four basic exposure pathways
(air, water, food, and external radiation) and
certain indicators of environmental trends. It
is anticipated that only a portion of the listed
food pathways will be critical or predominant
pathways for population or individual radi-
ation exposure at specific sites. Therefore, it
will not be necessary to routinely monitor all
pathways listed. However, air particulates, di-
rect radiation, and surface water should be
monitored even though they may not be'critical
or predominant pathways of exposure.
Environmental conditions around nuclear
facilities will vary and it may be necessary to
modify portions of table 1 according to the in-
dividual site characteristics. Because of ethnic
or cultural differences, some individuals may
select diets which others would not. There may
also be economic or availability factors. For
example, fishermen might consume much more
fish or other seafoods than the normal popu-
lation.
The control sample sites should be located so
that they will be beyond measurable influence
by the plant in question or by other nuclear
facilities. State fallout networks are good
sources of control data for some sample media
if the sampling and analyses are done on the
same basis; that is, with the same type of
equipment, the same type of media and the
same delay time.
Quality control should be exercised and con-
firmed for all sample analyses. The EPA Office
of Radiation Programs' Analytical Quality
Control Service is described in footnote (k) of
table 1.
Periodically (e.g., biennially), in situ quan-
titative gamma spectrometric measurements
should be performed to characterize any in-
creases in environmental radiation levels. The
spectra should be analyzed to apportion the
total gamma dose rate among the various con-
tributing radionuelides. The routine surveil-
lance program' should be evaluated at this time
to determine if the program needs modification.
This evaluation should be made on the basis of:
(1) Changes in quantity or characteristics
of discharges as compared to pre-
dicted or actual circumstances on
which the previous program was
based,
(2) Analyses of samples of media that are
not routinely monitored but which,
on the basis of research or experi-
ence at other sites, have potential
for population exposure or long-
term buildup of radioactivity, and
(3) Experience with the existing program
which may indicate that deletion of
certain media or modification of the
frequency, type of analysis, or sam-
pling techniques would not compro-
mise the program.
-------
CHAPTER 3
Sampling and Analysis
The selection of sampling equipment and the
techniques used for collecting environmental
samples are important considerations in en-
vironmental radiation surveillance programs
around nuclear power facilities. The choice of
sampling equipment, method of sample prepa-
ration, and counting instruments are dependent
on the radionuclide composition and quantity
of radioactive material released to the environ-
ment. Because of low radionuclide concentra-
tions in environmental media, special methods
of analysis and sampling techniques have been
developed. Specialized techniques for measur-
ing environmental radioactivity resulting from
liquid and gaseous effluents from light-water-
cooled reactors have been reported (6-14).
Tables 2 and 3 provide references to analytical
techniques which are currently in use by moni-
toring organizations and which are suitable
for use with procedures discussed in this Guide.
If the sampling procedures or analytical tech-
niques contained in this Guide are not used,
the analytical laboratory should assure accu-
racy and precision equivalent to those included
in tables 2 and 3.
All samples should be accompanied by in-
formation which identifies the sample site, date
of collection, type of sample and the collector.
It may be desirable to assign a sample number
in order to follow the sample through a series
of analyses. Perishable samples which must be
saved for later analysis should be frozen or
chemically preserved. Scalable plastic bags
or polyethylene bottles are generally recom-
mended for collection and storage of samples.
Air Paniculate Sampling Equipment
Particulate samples are normally collected
on a filter medium with an air pump and a
flow-measuring device. Samples can be used
individually for beta radioactivity measure-
ments and composited for radionuclide analysis,
particle size studies, autoradiography, and the
like. Since gamma spectrometric analysis may
also be required in addition to gross beta de-
termination, a sample size of 300 m3 or more is
recommended. A continuous flow rate of 1 cubic
foot per minute for 1 week provides 285 m3
total volume.
The air sampling system should have a flow-
rate or flow integrating meter and should be
mounted in an all-weather shelter with the
sampler discharge located so as to prevent the
recirculation of air. A charcoal cartridge
should follow the particulate filter for collec-
tion of iodine. If flow-rate monitoring is used,
power outages or other factors which affect the
data should be automatically recorded.
Air Sampling Locations
Low volume samplers should be placed at
three sites of maximum predicted ground level
-------
Table 2. Detection capabilities associated with analytical methods of environmental radioactivity surveillance
Media Analytical c«.««ia
«nd method S»£?le
isotope from table 3 s"e
Air partieulates :
Gross beta
""Sr
*>Sr _ _.
>»Cs
1>TCs
«°Ba-La
Air gases :
mi
Short-lived gases ...
"Kr
»H (HTO)
Water:
«. «Co
"Co
"Co
>'°Ba-La_
"H
"C
»Sr
WSr
». i»Cs
131Cs
>"Cs
«Zn
"Mn ....
«Fe _
"Fe.
inj
«Zr-Nb. _..
"Zr . ._
"*Nb ..
Milk :
•Sr _
"Sr
«>I ... .
i»Cs
mCs _
...E
K
F
A
— A
A
A
...,B
c
D
..-A
B
B
B
H
I
_. J
K
L
_M
S
....N
O
P
B
N
O
P
_8
c
c
B
B
D
B
B
E
B
F
T
....B
._G
....G
_ B
C
D
-A
B
C
D
— .E
__E
E
300 m3
1 200 m>
1,200 ros
1 200 m3
1,200 m*
1 200 m3
300 m*
Not applicable—
1 m3
Minimum
detectable
levels9
... 3X10-» pCi/m' ... .
5X10-1 pCi/m3
...IXlO-apCi/m3
!X10-JpCi/m3
. . .. lXlO-apCi/m3
lX10-apCi/m3
-_4X10-spCi/m3
"20 mrem/yr
1 nCi/m>
10-15 in] of condensate.-.'S'xi'o-3 pCi/m3
100 mL 20 nCi /liter
3.5 liters
S 5 liters
3.5 liters
1 liter ..._
1 liter
4-5 ml
10-15 ml
10-50 ml__
200m]
500 ml
1 liter
1 liter
1 liter
1 liter
1 liter
1 liter
1 llter__ ....
1 liter
1 liter
3.5 liters
3.5 liters
3 5 liters
3.5 liters
400ml
100ml
3.5 liters
100ml
8.5 liters
100ml
10 liters
3.5 liters
200 ml
200ml
1 liter
1 liter
1 liter.
1 liter
1 liter
1 liter
1 liter
3.5 liters
3.5 liters
3.5 liters
10 pCi/liter
10 pCi/liter
. . 10 pCi/liter .
1.0 pCi/liter
_.. 1.0 pCi/liter. .
200 pHi/litpr
200 pCi/liter
400 pCi/liter
... 30pCi/liter
_. .6 pCi/liter _
5 pCi/liter
5 yd/liter
5 pCi/liter
6 pCi/liter
1.0 pCi/liter
1.0 pCi/liter _
. _ ._ l.OpCi/liter
. l.OpCi/liter
1.0 pCi/liter
10 pCi/liter
10 pCi/liter
20 pCi/liter
10 pCi/liter
40 pCi/liter
20 pCi/liter
20 pCi/liter
100 pCi/liter
10 pCi/liter
10 pCi/liter
.04 pCi/lite?
5 pCi/liter . ._
16 pCi/liter
25 pCi/liter
5 pCi/liter
1 pCi/liter
. 10 pCi/liter
10 pCi/liter
10 pCi/liter. _
Annual dose
associated
with MDL
(mrem/yr)*
0.025
... .05
... .006
.0025
.0038
1.0
...20
.002
000013
*S2
082
.. .16
. .41
_ .041
041
018
_ .018
_ .086
031
.. .0006
- 1.4
.- 1.4
- 1.4
- 1.4
- 2.7
- 2.7
- 2.7
-27
03
.. .80
14
054
... .082
82
02
... .27
1 4
27
27
... .1
.071
... .21
_ .21
1.2
... 2.3
50
25
... .11
Assumption for
dose model
Critical Annual
organ intake'
Bone
Bone
Bone _
Total body _
Total body
GI (LLJ)
Thyroid
Total body
Skin
Body Tissue'
Gl (LLI)
GI (LLI)
GI (LLI)
GI
Bone
Bone
Thyroid.
Totnl ho
-------
Table 2. Detection capabilities associated with analytical methods of environmental radioactivity surveillance
continued
Media
and
isotope
Analytical
method
from table 3
Sample
size
Minimum
detectable
levels0
Annual dose
associated
with MDL
Critical
organ
Assumption for
dose model
Annual
Shellfish (fish):
»Co..
°»Co
>*Cs
la*Cs.
<*Zn
"Mn
""Fe
«>Fe
a>Sr
«»Sr
A
A
A
- A
A
.... A
A
B<
C
D
_ C
D
E
200 grams
200 grams
200 grams
200 grams
200 grams
200 grams
200 grams
100 grams
200 grams
200 grams
200 grams
200 grams
200 grams
80 pCiAK
80 pCi/kg
SOpCiAg
80 pCi/kg
160 pCiAg
80 pCiAg
160 pCiAg
20 pCiAg
26 pCiAg
25 pCiAg
S.O pCiAg
5.0 pCiAK
.027
054
.1
046
018
027
.091
00028
.28
28
.55
.55
.55
GI (LLI)
GI (LLI)
Total body
Total body
Total body
GI (LLII
GI (LLI)
Spleen
Bone
Bone
.... 18.25 kg
18.25 kg
18.25 kg
18.25kg
18.25 kg
18.25kg
18.25kg
18.25kg
18.25kg
18.25 kg
"The minimum detectable levels (MDL) are practical detection
levels, rather than theoretical detection levels. These levels are
characteristic of the analytical procedure and the counting instru-
mentation in use. The MDL's listed assume the following instru-
mentation: (1) low background beta counter, (2) standard gamma
scan—100 to 612 multichannel analyzer—4-by 4-inch Nal(Tl)
detector, and (3) tritium—liquid scintillation counter. The detection
limit for a specific radionuclide by gamma spectrometry is de-
pendent upon the quantities of other radionuclides present in the
sample. The detection limits tested are those practically obtained
with the concentrations and mixtures of radionuclides normally
encountered with environmental samples. If only a single radio-
nuclide is present in a sample to be analyzed by gamma spectrom-
etry, then the detection limits listed could probably be reduced by
a factor of 2. The detection limits for specific nuclides would be
considerably greater than those listed when complicated mixtures
are encountered and in particular when certain constituents are
present in relatively high concentrations.
' These values were obtained by a simple ratio relating Radiation
Protection Guides of the Federal Radiation Council («> to the dose
associated with these Guides. Actual dose calculations resulting from
specific environmental levels should take into consideration addi-
tional factors relating to pathways, intake and other environmental
factors aa appropriate.
" Intake values assume standard man quantities or other refer-
enced values as follows:
1. 1 liter of miDc per day for a 1-year-old child (17).
2. 1.2 liters of water per day. adult (li}.
3. 20 cubic meters of air breathed per day for an adult (IS).
4. 4.7 cubic meters of air breathed per day for a 1-year-old
child (17).
6. 1.87 kilograms of food consumed per day for total diet of
a teenager (13}.
6. 50 grams per day of shellfish (SO).
d The annual intake of air is for a child (age I year). In the
case of ml, the child thyroid is the limiting factor.
e CaFi<:Mn dosimeter encapsulated in '"K-free glass or equivalent.
' Assuming temperature of 75* Farenheit and 90 percent relative
humidity.
' The critical organ for SH gas may be the skin, depending upon
the state of the JH (gaseous or oxide). The body tissue is used
as the most conservative case.
* Assumed worst case mixture of 100 percent of "Co.
* Procedure B under shellfish is for aqueous solutions so that
preliminary sample preparation is necessary prior to entering
this procedure.
concentration of stack releases, averaged over
a period of a year. Additionally, air sampling
stations should be located at one to three com-
munities within a 10-mile radius of the facility
and at a distant control site 20 or more miles
away in the prevailing upwind direction.
Considerable judgment must be exercised in
selection of air sampling sites. The follow-
ing is a technical approach to air sample site
selection based on average meteorological con-
ditions. These conditions are subject to vari-
ability, and site selections should be adjusted
as necessary, considering accessibility of the
sample site, availability of power to run the
equipment, equipment security, and environ-
mental conditions such as unusually dusty air.
The locations of the maximum ground level
concentrations may be identified by using the
graph in figure 3 in combination with prevail-
ing wind direction data. The distance of the
sampling site from the point of discharge will
be determined from figure 3 by using the
appropriate stack height and the predominant
stability conditions. The direction may be de-
termined from wind rose information using the
prevailing wind directions. Atmospheric sta-
bility data and wind rose data are generally
available in the Preliminary Safety Analysis
Report prepared by the facility operator in
application to the AEC for a permit or license
to construct or operate the facility. The wind
rose data may be plotted as a function of at-
ll
-------
Table 3. Analytical methods for routine environmental radioactivity surveillance
Media
Code
Analytical method
References
Air..
Water
Milk,.
Shellfish..
A Gamma Spectrometry for Iodine-131 of Air Filter* or Cartridge
Samples (6.2.2.) _ _ - - (*)
B Dosimeter-External Exposure _ _(JJ)
C Cryogenic Separation and Liquid Scintillation Counting — (tl)
D Determination of Tritium in Water _ _ _ (8.14)
E Gross Beta Counting of Air Filters (6.2.1) _. _ (S)
F Oxalate Precipitation (6.2.6) _ (*)
A Cobalt and Nickel - (10)
B Gamma Analysis in Water (6.2.6) («)
C Cesium—Phosphomolybdate—Chloroplatinate Method (10)
D Radioactive Manganese (ASTM D20S9-69) (JO)
E Radioactive Iron (ASTM D2461-69) (10)
F Radioactive Iodine Distillation (ASTM D2334-6S) (10)
G Zirconium-Niobium-96 (10)
H Basic Carbonate Method (B.2.3) (*)
I Radioactive Barium (ASTM D2038-68) _ (10)
3 Radioactive Tritium (ASTM D2476-59) _ (10)
K Determination of Tritium in Water _ <». U>
L Distillation Method—Tritium
-------
mogpheric stability condition; i.e., there would
be a wind rose for each condition. In this
instance, the sample sites would be located
along the radii of each prevailing wind direc-
tion at a distance from the stack as indicated
in figure 3, for the respective stability condi-
tion. However, wind rose data are usually pro-
vided on an annual average basis. These plots
may be used by selecting the three principal
average wind directions and locating the sam-
ple sites at a distance from the release point
based on the height of release and predominant
annual stability condition as indicated in figure
3. As an alternative, the prevailing average
wind direction could be determined and the
three sample sites would then be located along
that radius at distances based on the release
height and the three prevailing stability condi-
tions. This procedure or a combination with the
first alternative using annual average data
might be the best choice particularly in in-
stances where one of the prevailing wind direc-
tions is over water or other inaccessible area.
Figure 4 provides an example of sampling
sites located by using annual average wind rose
data which have been plotted as a function of
atmospheric stability conditions. (Remember
that the petals of a wind rose generally point in
the direction from which the wind blows and
therefore the sampling site would be in the
opposite direction.) In this example, it is as-
sumed that stability condition B exists 40 per-
cent of the time, condition C 30 percent, and
condition D 20 percent. It is further assumed
that the major portion of gaseous discharges
will be from a 100-meter stack.
Figure 5 shows two examples of sampling
site locations based on the annual average wind
rose for the same site and conditions as in
figure 4. Example 1 is based on the three pre-
vailing wind directions and the predominant
atmospheric stability condition, whereas exam-
ple 2 is based on the single prevailing wind
direction and the three predominant stability
conditions. Other similar procedures may be
used depending on types of meteorological data
available.
Direct Radiation
A network of integrating or continuously
recording dosimeters (TLD, film, or ion cham-
bers) should be placed at sites around the
nuclear facility as indicated in table 1. The rec-
ommended height for placement of the dosim-
eters is at 3 feet above the ground. If other
heights are used, the relationship to the 3 foot
dose should be established for the site.
Where integrating dosimeters are used, two
or more dosimeters should be located at each
site. Additionally, it is advisable to use a set
of dosimeters at each site for long-term ex-
posure (e.g., 6 months or 1 year) in addition
to the set changed quarterly. Integrating do-
simeters should be read as quickly as possible
following collection. For TLD, the date an-
nealed should be recorded and the time lapse
from date annealed to date read should be used
to compute the dose. Integrating dosimeters
should not be sent to a distant location for
processing unless evidence can be provided to
show that adequate precautions are taken to
avoid significant additional exposure. For ex-
ample, they may be exposed to other sources
of radiation such as shipments of radioactive
materials or high altitude cosmic radiation in
aircraft.
Water Sampling
The size of water samples will be determined
by the analytical procedure to be used and the
desired minimum detectable concentration of
the radionuclide of concern. A 3.5-liter (ap-
proximately 1 gallon) sample is usually re-
quired for gamma isotopic analysis. This
quantity should be doubled where split sam-
pling is planned. Ion exchange procedures using
resin columns are frequently used for larger
volume samples. These procedures may be ad-
vantageous for continuing sampling processes
except for those samples requiring tritium
analysis.
Surface water grab samples should be col-
lected from at least two sites. One site should
be located upstream from the facility discharge
outfall. This site will provide control data for
comparison with data from a second site down-
stream from the discharge. If the nuclear facil-
ity is located on a body of water other than a
stream, the control sample should be taken far
enough from the point of discharge so that the
facility effluent has little or no influence on the
sample content. When a reactor is located on
13
-------
Wind rose data plotted as a function of
Pasquill atmospheric stability conditions
Condition 'B'
Condition T1
Condition *D'
Annual average
wind rose
(f)
(e)
Figure 4. Air participate sample site around a nuclear power facility based on Pasquill atmospheric
stability conditions
(a) Facility site
(b) Community sample site
(c) Site at 0.7 km based on condition 'B'
(d) Site at 1.2 km based on condition 'C'
(e) Site at 3 km based on condition 'D'
(f) Control site at >20 km based on annual average wind rose
an estuary where the direction of flow is af-
fected by tidal action, the control sample should
be taken far enough upstream to avoid con-
tamination by the tidal action. The second
site should be located downstream from the
discharge outfall. The discharge-to-down-
stream-site distance should, as a rule of thumb,
be at least 10 times the river width to allow
for mixing. For those facilities located on a
lake or ocean, this site should be located near
the discharge outfall but beyond the turbulent
area caused by the discharge.
14
-------
Annual average
wind rase
Example 1
Example 2
Using 3 prevailing wind directions
and stability condition B* from
figure 3
Using the prevailing wind direction
and stability conditions B/C/S/D*
from figure 3
Figure 5. Air particulate, sample sites around a nuclear power facility based on annual average wind
rose data
(a) Nuclear power facility site
(b) Community sample site
(c) Sample site at 0.7 km north based on stability condition 'B'
(d) Sample site at 0.7 km southwest based on stability condition 'B'
(e) Sample site at 0.7 km northeast based on stability condition 'B'
(f) Control site at >20 miles
(R) Sample site at 0.7 km north based on stability condition 'B'
(h) Sample site at 1.2 km north based on stability condition 'C'
(i) Sample site at 3 km north based on stability condition 'D'
15
-------
The waste management procedures for liquid
wastes result in periodic discharges. Thus, grab
samples collected downstream from a nuclear
facility are of questionable value. Ideally, a
continuous proportional sampling device would
be used. However, in the absence of a direct
population exposure pathway from surface
water, continuous sampling is generally not
justifiable. As an alternative, one should collect
grab samples and include a record of the dis-
charge rate from the facility at the time the
sample was taken. If the sampling site is more
than a few minutes flow-time downstream, the
record should show the rate of discharge at the
time the water being sampled passed the point
of discharge. This record should accompany
the sample.
There is little possibility that ground water
will accumulate radioactivity from nuclear
power facility discharges. This is because these
facilities are located adjacent to major streams
or other large bodies of water and the natural
underground water flow is toward these bodies
of water. Further, the soil acts as a filter and
ion exchanger and thus removes minerals
present in underground seepage. Tritium is the
principal radionuclide with substantial poten-
tial for seeping through the soil into ground
water. Routine monitoring of offsite ground
water will be unnecessary in most instances;
however, in those instances where it is recom-
mended, tritium should be given particular at-
tention. However, there may be instances of
surface water carrying contamination directly
into ground water and additional radionuclides
should be analyzed as indicated in table 1.
Drinking water supplied from a source
which receives effluent from a nuclear power
facility should be sampled on a continuous
basis at the point of intake and/or at the tap
for all public supplies within 10 miles which
could be affected by facility discharges. In in-
stances where there are no drinking water
supplies within 10 miles, the first water supply
within 100 miles should be monitored.
Sediment, Benthic Organisms and Aquatic Plants
Sediment samples are taken to indicate the
buildup rate of radioactivity due to sedimenta-
tion. Figure 6 illustrates some suggested sam-
pling locations in a stream from which routine
sampling sites may be selected. Additional
locations should be sampled occasionally to
determine if routine sample sites should be
relocated. The downstream sample should be
taken in that part of the stream where the flow
rate is greatest. Samples may also be taken in
an area which favors sedimentation, such as
the inner bank of a bend. For reactors located
on a river a short distance upstream from the
fresh-salt water interface at the river mouth,
the downstream sediment sample should be
taken within the interface. Precipitation and
flocculation of the suspended silt occurs in this
area, thereby increasing the concentration of
radionuclide levels in the sediment. If the nu-
clear facility is located on a lake or ocean, a
sediment sample should be taken near the out-
fall but beyond the turbulent area created by
the outfall. The sediment sample should con-
tain at least 1 kilogram and should consist of
only the top layer or most recent sediment.
Aquatic 'plants and animals such as algae,
seaweed, and benthic organisms should be
sampled as part of the periodic surveillance
program evaluation. If buildup in excess of 10
times the levels in the water is found in any
of these media, that plant or animal should be
added to the routine program as indicated in
table 1. Sampling locations should be similar
to those described for sediment.
Food Samples
Milk should be collected from dairy cows fed
on fodder and pasturage grown within a 10-
mile radius of the plant. If possible, one sample
should be collected from cattle fed on vegeta-
tion grown in the downwind area of maximum
predicted concentration. An additional sample
should be collected from a local dairy represen-
tative of a milkshed for the area. Excessive
dilution of samples with milk from unaffected
areas should be avoided. At least a 1-gallon
sample should be collected in polyethylene bot-
tles and preserved with about 12 ml of 37 per-
cent formaldehyde solution for later analysis.
Alternatively, an ion exchange column may
be used to separate radionuclides from the
milk (9).
16
-------
Nuclear Power Facility
Relative Surface
Water Velocity Profiles
LEGEND
(a) Upstream site above plant influence
(b) Directly downstream of outfall
(c) Downstream site where flow is greatest
(d) Inner bank downstream
(e) Rivef widening
(f) At dam
(g) Fresh water-salt water interface
Figure 6. Suggested sediment sampling locations
Fish and shellfish samples should include
each of the principal edible types in the facility
environs. One sample should be taken from the
vicinity of the outfall with an additional sam-
ple from the same body of water at a site not
influenced by the discharge. The samples may
be purchased from fishermen if the origin can
be determined. Each sample should include 3.5
kilograms of edible flesh. (Care must be taken
to separate fish flesh from bone.) However, if
this quantity is not available, a 220-gram sam-
ple is recommended.
Fruit and vegetable samples should be col-
lected near the point of maximum predicted
annual ground concentration from stack re-
leases and from areas which may be contami-
nated by water into which liquid plant wastes
have been discharged. The primary sample
should consist of at least 3.5 kilograms of the
edible portion. Exposed surfaces of vegetation
or fruit samples can provide indications of
deposition and should not be washed.
Samples of meat, poultry, and eggs produced
in the area should be collected. Meat samples
may be collected at a slaughterhouse if the
origin of the animals can be documented. The
samples should represent animals fed on crops
grown within 10 miles of the plant in the pre-
vailing downwind direction. Samples from ani-
mals which drink from a source downstream
of the discharge should also be included where
available. To assure good geometry during
gamma isotopic analysis, the sample collection
should weigh at least 3.5 kilograms of the edible
portion.
Analytical Quality Control Methods
Environmental samples contain such small
quantities of radionuclides that highly refined
detection capabilities must be developed and
maintained. With samples being analyzed in
many different laboratories, it is necessary that
similar detection capabilities be available to
assure comparability. A laboratory should de-
velop and maintain uniform minimum detect-
able level capabilities and should routinely
participate in an interlaboratory quality control
program. A minimum quality control frequency
should be 10 percent of all nuclide analyses
including inhouse blanks, standards and splits.
17
-------
Analytical quality control methods generally
include cross checking or splitting samples with
a laboratory such as an Environmental Pro-
tection Agency laboratory. A cross check in-
volves the analyses of samples provided by a
control laboratory and comparison of results
with those of the control laboratory as well
as with other laboratories which received por-
tions of the same sample. Splitting a sample
involves obtaining two identical samples from
a single collected volume, with one sample
being analyzed by the monitoring laboratory
and the other by the control laboratory and
subsequent comparison of results. When split-
ting samples for interlaboratory comparison, it
is vital that both samples are representative
of the media in question. Splitting procedures
are listed below by media.
Air particulate filter paper should contain a
symmetric distribution of deposition and may
be cut exactly in half. Prior to cutting, the
filter should be sprayed lightly with a plastic
coating to prevent loss of the sample to the
container.
To obtain a split of a direct radiation meas-
urement, the sampling procedure must utilize
multiple dosimeters. The exposures should be
made side by side for exactly the same length
of time and the dosimeters must be treated as
similarly as possible, e.g., similar annealing or
charging of dosimeters and similar exposure
during storage or transit. Splitting the sample
with a control laboratory may be impractical
for short duration (1 quarter) exposures due
to variable exposure in transit.
When milk samples are being taken at local
farms, the collection should take place after
milk has mixed thoroughly in the bulk storage
tank or the individual samples should be mixed
in the laboratory and then split into two sepa-
rate containers.
Solid organic samples, such as fish, meat, and
vegetables should be collected in a quantity
equal to twice the normal sample. The sample
should then be mixed thoroughly (blended
where practical) and divided into separate
containers.
Radioactive material in water samples may
deposit on sample container walls and there-
fore it is desirable to obtain duplicate samples
simultaneously in similar containers rather
than split one large sample.
Sediment samples should be taken in dupli-
cate. The total sample should be thoroughly
mixed, halved, and bagged for shipment. The
samples should be as uniform as possible taking
care to avoid having larger particles concen-
trated in one sample.
Reporting Procedures
Reporting of data generated by the programs
suggested in this Guide should be done follow-
ing a clear and uniform format suitable for
automatic data processing.
The reported information should generally
include the following information:
1. Geographic location of sample site.
2. Sample type (media).
3. Sample number (optional).
4. Identification of organization or person
collecting the sample.
5. Identification of organization analyzing
the sample.
6. Time and date sample was taken (in-
clude duration of sample period for
integrated samples).
7. Sample preparation as appropriate
(e.g., concentration or wet vs. dry).
8. Type of analysis performed.
9. Value and units for each analysis and
associated 2-sigma error.
10. Parameters needed to calculate decay
of sample prior to analysis where
short-lived radionuclides are in-
volved.
11. Any known events that may have af-
fected the analytical results.
Much of the above information, such as sam-
ple site location and organization identification,
can be coded to reduce the record volume.
The reports should be distributed to State
and Federal agencies on a set frequency, e.g.,
semiannuaily. Specifically, the Environmental
Protection Agency's Office of Radiation Pro-
grams should receive the data periodically for
inclusion into the National Environmental
Radiation Monitoring Program. The Environ-
mental Protection Agency recommends a for-
mat in the "National Environmental Radiation
Data System" (16).
18
-------
CHAPTER 4
Dose Estimations
Estimations of population dose from envi-
ronmental radiation involves determination of
the concentration of each radionuclide in inges-
tion and inhalation pathways and the use of
mathematical models to convert these concen-
trations to whole body or organ dose. The
whole body dose from this calculation is then
added to the measured or calculated whole body
dose from external exposure. The direct meas-
urement of external dose or concentrations of
radionuclides in environmental media attrib-
utable to the discharges of radioactive material
from normal operations of nuclear power fa-
cilities will be difficult even with the most
sensitive systems of radiation detection. The
increment of dose to individuals at the facility
boundary in instances where the facility main-
tains discharges within the AEG Design Guides
(23) will be about one or two orders of magni-
tude less than the natural background dose.
Variations in natural background radiation
levels in many cases mask the increment of
dose attributable to discharges from the nuclear
facility. Therefore, it is generally more appro-
priate to estimate population dose based on
known quantities and types of radionuclides
discharged, considering the critical environ-
mental pathways and the associated reconcen-
tration factors. These estimates should be
compared wherever possible to dose calcula-
tions based on environmental measurements.
This comparison may not always be possible
because in some instances calculations based
on environmental measurements will determine
only that the population dose resulting from
nuclear facility discharges is below some level
representing the minimum sensitivity of analy-
sis. The data from exposure pathways, where
environmental levels attributable to nuclear
facility discharges are measurable, will pro-
vide a basis for the degree of confidence to be
placed on the calculated concentrations based
on discharges.
The models used to calculate concentrations
of radionuclides in the environment should be
tailored to represent the environmental and
demographic characteristics of the area sur-
rounding the site. The environmental char-
acteristics include those relating to the mete-
orology, hydrology, and population exposure
pathways. These pathways include external
radiation exposure as well as internal exposure
from inhalation and from ingestion of water
and food. The food pathways may be unique
to the environment in the area of the facility.
The collection of demographic characteristics
of the area should include population locations
and eating, recreational, and mobility habits.
Further, the hypothetical maximum exposed
individual should be identified. This would be
an individual with the greatest potential for
receiving a radiation dose from the facility
19
-------
discharges. For example, this might be & per-
son who lives at the location of the maximum
average ground level concentration of the gas-
eous plume; he would eat food from the area
having the greatest potential for radioactivity
from plant discharges; his drinking water
might be a cistern located at his residence or
some other source of water identified as a
critical pathway.
The demographic data should also identify
the critical population group which is the group
with the greatest potential for receiving radi-
ation dose resulting from the operation of the
facility. For example, the group may be fisher-
men who routinely utilize the marine life as
a source of food, or the residents of a town
whose drinking water would be influenced by
the facility discharges. Some of the food may
be grown locally, and the group may receive
some external exposure from gaseous emis-
sions. The demographic data should character-
ize the population density within a 50-mile
radius of the site and should summarize the
exposure pathways.
Mathematical models for calculation of con-
centrations in the environment based on dis-
charges and for calculation of population dose
based on environmental concentrations of ra-
dionuclides are available in various publica-
tions and no attempt is made to present them
in this Guide. Rather, a list of sources of the
information is provided with a brief discussion
of each source.
Slade (24), chapters 7 and 8, is an excellent
source of models and guidance for calculating
environmental concentrations based on atmos-
pheric discharges. He also provides models for
converting the concentrations to population
dose. These models may require modification to
suit local conditions. For example, some coastal
winds reverse direction twice per day, provid-
ing potential for buildup of concentrations.
General models for dispersion of liquid dis-
charges may not be as readily available as
those for gaseous discharges and selection of
the proper model may require more considera-
tion. Liquid discharges may be to a stream, an
impounded stream, a fresh or salt water lake,
an estuary, or to an ocean. Calculation of dose
from liquid effluents involves the use of models
that will provide concentrations as a function
of discharge rate. Concentration estimates for
streams can be made based on discharge rate,
radioactive half-life and dilution factors. Simi-
lar estimates can be made for impounded
streams and estuaries, with the addition of
concentration factors due to recirculation.
These factors are normally provided in the
Safety Analysis Report prepared for a nuclear
power facility. The use of these factors as the
basis for calculating environmental concentra-
tions resulting from liquid discharges generally
results in a conservative estimate due to radio-
nuclide depletion from precipitation, uptake by
biological media, and many other processes.
Okubo (25) provides a review of theoretical
models for calculating dilution due to turbulent
diffusion in the ocean. Baumgartner (26) pro-
vides a computer program for calculating
dilution of pipeline discharges into lakes, reser-
voirs, estuaries, or the ocean. Crim (27) re-
views the basic equations involved in modeling
hydraulic and water systems and presents a
general method of model construction. He also
provides numerous logic diagrams for model-
ing specific flow situations.
Calculated concentrations in air and water
provide a satisfactory base for calculating pop-
ulation dose from direct exposure, inhalation,
and drinking water. However, the calculation
of dose from ingestion of food requires the
application of reconcentration factors of radio-
nuclides by biological processes to determine
the concentration of specific radionuclides in
each food.
Models for calculating concentrations of ra-
dioiodine in milk resulting from reconcentra-
tion through the pasture-cow-milk pathway are
provided in Peterson (28) and Burnett (29).
Concentration factors in marine and fresh
water organisms are provided in references
(30-33). These references show a wide varia-
tion in the concentration factors for specific ra-
dionuclides in the same media. Environmental
circumstances can greatly influence these fac-
tors and it may be advisable to determine their
values prior to operation of the facility through
the use of stable element analysis or fallout
activity for the specific environment being
monitored.
The calculated or measured concentrations
20
-------
form the basis for dose calculations. Guidance
and models for internal radiation dose calcu-
lations based on concentrations in air, water,
and food are provided in ICRP-II (18).
The Federal Radiation Council (FRC) in
Report Nos. 2 and 5 (34, 35) provide specific
guidance for relating population dose to intake
of iodine-131, and strontium-89 and -90. Peter-
son and Smith (28) provide models for calcu-
lating thyroid dose from iodine-131 and -133
based on environmental measurements and on
guidance in FRC reports. A simple method for
estimating dose from radionuclides in air and
water is to compare the measured or calculated
concentration of individual radionuclides in air
or water to the respective maximum permissi-
ble concentrations (MFC) as provided in ICRP-
II. The ratio of the concentration to the MPS is
then multiplied by the dose represented by the
MPC to obtain the dose due to the concentra-
tion measured or calculated. For the nuclides
iodine-131, strontium-89, and strontium-90,
one should multiply the ratio of the intake rate
to the Radiation Protection Guide (RPG)
intake rate (34) times the dose represented by
the RPG intake rate. These methods may pro-
vide conservative estimates of dose because the
MPC's and RPG's are based on constant intake
rates until equilibrium is reached or for 50-
year continuous exposure.
However, the error introduced by the as-
sumption of long-term exposure is probably
very small compared to errors due to variable
intake and uptake factors among individuals
in the population and the inaccuracies in meas-
uring or calculating representative environ-
mental concentrations.
One potential exposure pathway is direct
radiation from gaseous plumes and, in par-
ticular, isotopes of the noble gases krypton and
xenon. Kahn et al. (1) and Russell (36) pro-
vide calculational techniques and models for
estimating dose from exposure to an infinite
cloud containing radionuclides of krypton and
xenon. Similar information for krypton-85 is
provided by Kirk (13).
Blanchard et al. (37) have demonstrated
several of the above techniques in calculating
population dose in the vicinity of Dresden Nu-
clear Power Station. These calculations were
based on radionuclide discharge data collected
by Kahn et al. (1) at the Dresden site.
Most of the published models are presented
as mathematical models as opposed to computer
models. However, some of the models have been
computerized by operators or suppliers of nu-
clear power facilities for application around
specific facilities.
Fletcher (38) describes the Hanford Engi-
neering Regional Model for Environmental
Studies (HERMES). This model is designed
to calculate radiation dose occurring within a
study area in a given year based on radio-
nuclide releases. In its present form the model
is large and complex. The major portions of
all modules of the HERMES model are written
in FORTRAN-V language and codes for the
various modules are included as appendices
to the report.
Soldat (39) describes a computer model
which calculates total annual radiation dose
and 50-year dose commitments to several cate-
gories of persons at population centers and
combines these calculated doses into integrated
(man-rem) annual and 50-year doses for large
populations. This model includes a subroutine
which calculates radionuclide concentrations in
a variety of foods at time of harvest from
concentrations in air, irrigation water, and soil.
Several government agencies have computer
models for calculation of environmental con-
centrations and dose either operational or
under development. These include EPA, AEC
and the Tennessee Valley Authority. Many
State agencies are developing computer capa-
bility to process, store, and report environ-
mental radiation data. These data will be used
in models for dose calculation.
21
-------
REFERENCES
(1) KAHN, B., R. L. BLANCHARD, ET AL. Radiological
surveillance studies at a boiling: water nuclear
power reactor, BRH/DER 70-1. PHS, Bureau
of Radiological Health, Rockville, Md. 20852
(March 1970).
(S) KAHN, B., R. L. BLANCHARD, ET AL. Radiological
surveillance studies at a pressurized water nu-
clear power reactor, RD 71-1. Environmental
Protection Agency, National Environmental Re-
search Center, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268 (August
1971).
(3) BECK, H. L., J. DECAMPO, and C. GOGOLAK. In situ
(Ge(Li) and Nal(Tl) gamma-ray spectroscppy
for the measurement of environmental radiation,
HASL-258. Health and Safety Laboratory, U.S.
Atomic Energy Commission, 376 Hudson Street,
New York, N.Y. 10014 (1972).
(4) U.S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION. Code of Federal
Regulations, Part 50, 10 CPR, Section 50.36(a),
Technical specifications on effluents from nuclear
power reactors. Superintendent of Documents,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington,
D.C. 20402.
(5) INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON RADIOLOGICAL PRO-
TECTION. Principles of environmental monitoring
related to the handling of radioactive materials,
ICRP Publication 7. Pergamon Press, New
York, N.Y. (1965).
(6) SETTER, L. R., R. ANDREW, R. GOLEM AN, A. FRIEND,
C. MARKARIAN, and A. STORY. Routine surveil-
lance of radioactivity around nuclear facilities,
Interlaboratory Technical Advisory Committee,
Report No. 1. Superintendent of Documents, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.
20402 (December 1966).
(7) PORTER, C. R., R. J. AUGUSTINE, J. M. MATUSEK,
and M. W. CARTER. Procedures for determi-
nation of stable elements and radionuclides in
environmental samples, PHS Publication No.
999-RH-10. Division of Radiological Health,
Rockville, Md. 20852 (January 1965).
(8) NATIONAL CENTER FOR RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH. Ra-
dioassay procedures for environmental samples,
PHS Publication No. 999-RH-27. Superintendent
of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C. 20402 (1967).
(9) JOHNS, F. B. Southwestern Radiological Health
Laboratory handbook of radiochemical analyti-
cal methods, PHS Publication No. SWRHL-11.
DREW, Southwestern Radiological Health La-
boratory, Las Vegas, Nev. 89114 (1970).
(10) KRIEGER, H. L. and S. GOLD. Radiochemical pro-
cedures for the analysis of nuclear reactor aque-
ous solutions. Environmental Protection Agency,
Radiochemistry and Nuclear Engineering
Branch, 5555 Ridge Avenue, Cincinnati, Ohio
45213 (August 1971).
(11) GEICER, E. L. Strontium-85 tracer method for
determination of strontium-90. Health Phys
13:607 (1967).
(12) HEALTH AND SAFETY LABORATORY. HASL proce-
dures manual, HASL-300. U.S. Atomic Energy
Commission, Health and Safety Laboratory, 376
Hudson Street, New York, N.Y. lOOfc (1972).
(IS) KIRK, W. P. Krypton 85, a review of the litera-
ture and an analysis of radiation hazards.
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Research and Monitoring, Washington, D.C.
20460 (January 1972).
(14) AMERICAN PUBLIC HEALTH ASSOCIATION. Stand-
ard methods for the examination of Tvater and
wastewater, 13th Edition. APHA, 1790 Broad-
way, New York, N.Y. 10019 (1971).
(15) TURNER, D. B. Workbook of atmospheric disper-
sion estimates, PHS Publication No. 999-AP-
26. National Center for Air Pollution Control,
Cincinnati, Ohio (1967).
(16) OFFICE OF RADIATION PROGRAMS. National en-
vironmental radiation data system, general
description and reporting instructions. Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency, Office of Radi-
ation Programs, Surveillance and Inspection
Division, Washington, D.C. 20460 (February
1972).
(17) BUREAU OF RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH. Radiological
health handbook. Superintendent of Documents,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington,
D.C. 20402 (January 1970).
(18) INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON RADIOLOGICAL
PROTECTION. Report of ICRP Committee II on
permissible dose for internal radiation, ICRP
Publication No. 2. Pergamon Press, New York,
N.Y. (1959).
(19) ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY. Radionu-
clides in institutional diet samples, January-
March 1971. Radiol Health Data Rep 12:469-
470 (September 1971).
(SO) WEAVER, C. L. A proposed radioactivity concen-
tration guide for shellfish. Radiol Health Data
Rep 8:491-494 (September 1967).
(21) CUMMINS, S. L., R. L. SHEARIN, and C. R. PORTER.
A rapid method for determining krypton 86 in
environmental air samples. EPA, Eastern En-
vironmental Radiation Laboratory, P.O. Box
61, Montgomery, Ala. 36101 (1972).
(22) RADIATION MANAGEMENT CORPORATION. Standard
procedure manual. Radiation Management
Corp., 3508 Market Street, Philadelphia, Pa.
19104.
(23) U.S.ATOMic ENERGY COMMISSION. Code of Fed-
eral Regulations, Part 50, 10 CFR, Proposed
Appendix I, Numerical guides for design ob-
jectives and limiting conditions for operation
to meet the criterion "as low as practicable"
for radioactive material in light-water-cooled
nuclear power reactor effluents. Superintendent
of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C. 20402.
SLADE, D. H., editor. Meteorology and atomic
energy, 1968, TID-24190. National Technical
22
-------
Information Service, U.S. Department of Com-
merce, Springfield, Va. 22151 (July 1968).
(25) OKUBO, A. Review of theoretical models for
turbulent diffusion in the sea. Contribution No.
61. Chesapeake Bay Institute, Johns Hopkins
University, Baltimore, Md. 21218 (1962).
(26) BAUMGARTNER, D. J., D. S. TRENT, and K. V.
BYRAM. User's guide and documentation for
outfall plume model, Working Paper No. 80.
Environmental Protection Agency, Pacific
Northwest Water Laboratory, 200 S.W. 35th
Street, Corvallis, Oreg. 97330 (May 1971).
(27) GRIM, R. L. A system of mathematical models for
water quality management, Technical Report
51. Environmental Protection Agency, Region
III, Annapolis Field Office, Annapolis, Md.
(January 1972).
(28) PETERSON, H. T. and J. M. SMITH. Guides for
predicting thyroid dose from environmental
measurements following radioiodine releases.
Environmental Surveillance in the Vicinity of
Nuclear Facilities, W. C. Reinig, editor. Charles
C Thomas, Publisher, Springfield, 111. (1970).
(29) BURNETT, T. J. A derivation of the "Factor of
700" for "il. Health Phys 18:73-75 (January
1970).
(90) CHAPMAN, W. H., H. L. FISHER, and M. W.
PRATT. Concentration factors of chemical ele-
ments in edible aquatic organisms, UCRL-
50564. Lawrence Radiation Laboratory, Uni-
versity of California, Livermore, Calif.
(December 1968).
(SI) PETERSON, H. T. Stable element and radionuclide
reconcentration in aquatic ecosystems. Pro-
ceedings of the Fifth Annual Midyear Topical
Symposium on Health Physics Aspects of Nu-
clear Facility Siting, Volume II. Idaho Falls,
Idaho (November 1970), pp. 289-328.
(32) NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. Radioactivity
in the marine environment. National Academy
of Sciences, Washington, D.C. 20418 (1971).
(S3) JINKS, S. M. and M. EISENBCD. Concentration
factors in the aquatic environment. Radiation
Data Rep 13:243-247 (May 1972).
(S4) FEDERAL RADIATION COUNCIL. Background ma-
terial for the development of radiation protec-
tion standards, Report No. 2. Superintendent of
Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C. 20402 (September 1961).
(35) FEDERAL RADIATION COUNCIL. Background ma-
terial for the development of radiation protect-
tion standards, Report No. 5. Superintendent of
Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C. 20402 (July 1964).
(36) RUSSELL, J. L. and F. L. GALPIN. Comparison of
techniques for calculating doses to the whole
body and to the lungs from radioactive noble
gases. Environmental Protection Agency, Tech-
nology Assessment Division, Rockville, Md.
20852 (October 1971).
(57) BLANCHARD, R. L., H. L. KRIEGER, H. E. KOLDE,
and B. KAHN. Dose rate derived from radio-
logical surveillance studies at a BWR nuclear
power station. PHS, Environmental Health
Service, Washington, D.C. 20460.
(38) FLETCHER, J. F. and W. L. DOTSON. Hermes—a
digital computer code for estimating regional
radiological effects from the nuclear power in-
dustry, HEDL-TME-71-168, UC-80. AEC, Han-
ford Engineering Development Laboratory,
Richland, Wash. (December 1971).
(59) SOLDAT, J. K. Modeling of environmental path-
ways and radiation doses from nuclear facili-
ties, BNWL-SA-3939. Battelle Pacific North-
west Laboratories, Richland, Wash. (October
1971).
23
-------
GENERAL BIBLIOGRAPHY
GIFFORD, F. A. Effect of meteorological variables on
the siting of large electric power plants. (Notes
prepared for the Committee on Power Plant Siting,
National Academy of Engineering.) National Oce-
anic and Atmospheric Administration, Air Resources
Atmospheric Turbulence and Diffusion Laboratory,
Oak Ridge, Tenn. (March 16, 1971).
COMMITTEE ON POWER PLANT SITING. Radiological en-
gineering aspects of power plants and their fuel
cycles. Engineering for Resolution of the Energy-
Environment Dilemma. National Academy of Engi-
neering, Washington, D.C. (1972), pp. 153-223.
STEVENSON, D. L. and F. B. JOHNS. A separation tech-
nique for the determination of krypton-85 in the
environment. Southwestern Radiological Health La-
boratory, Environmental Protection Agency, P.O.
Box 15027, Las Vegas, Nev. 89114.
EASTERLY, D. G., I. B. BROOKS, and J. H. HASUIKE.
Development of ion exchange processes for the re-
moval of radionuclides from milk, Report No.
RO/EERL 71-1. Eastern Environmental Radiation
Laboratory, EPA, Radiation Office, Rockville, Md.
20852 (1971).
LENTSCH, J. W., T. J. KNEIP, M. E. WRENN, G. P.
HOWELLS, and M. EISENBUD. Stable manganese and
Mn-54 distributions in the physical and biological
components of the Hudson River estuary. New York
University Medical Center, New York, N.Y. 10016
(1971).
LOGSDON, J. E. and R. I. CHISSLER. Radioactive waste
discharges to the environment from nuclear power
facilities, BRH/DER 70-2. DHEW, Bureau of Radio-
logical Health, Rockville, Md. 20852 (March 1970).
LOGSDON, J. E. Radioactive waste discharges to the
environment from nuclear power facilities. Radi-
ation Data Rep 13:117-129 (March 1972).
KAHN, B., B. SHLEIEN, and C. WEAVER. Environmental
experience with radioactive effluents from operating
nuclear power plants. Fourth International Confer-
ence on the Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy (in
publication).
FERRI, E., P. J. MAGNO, and L. R. SETTER. Radionuclide
analysis of large numbers of food and water sam-
ples, PHS Publication No. 999-RH-17. Superintend-
ent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, D.C. (1965).
TERBILL, J. G., JR., C. L, WEAVER, E. D. HARWARD, and
D. R. SMITH. Environmental surveillance of nuclear
facilities. Nucl Safety, 9:143-149 (February 1968).
WEAVER, C. L., E. D. HARWARD, and H. T. PETERSON.
Tritium in the environment from nuclear power
plants. Pub Health Rep 84:363-371 (April 1969).
WEAVER, C. L., B. KAHN, and G. E. STIGAUU A boiling
water reactor nuclear power plant as a source of
environmental radioactivity. Presented at Interna-
tional Radiation Protection Association Meeting in
Brighton, England, May 1970. Bureau of Radio-
logical Health, PHS, DHEW, Rockville, Md. 20852.
BISSELLE, C. A., S. N. GOLDSTEIN, R. S. GREELEY, A. C.
JOHNSON, R. C. NIGAM, R. P. PIKUL, W. D. ROWE,
and V. C. WENK. Monitoring the environment of the
nation, a system design concept. Sponsored by the
Council on Environmental Quality, Task No. 1350.
The Mitre Corp., Washington, D.C. (October 1970).
ABRAHAMS, J. H., JR. and R. H. JOHNSON, JR. Soil and
sediment analysis: preparation of samples for envi-
ronmental radiation surveillance, PHS Publication
No. 999-RH-19. Division of Radiological Health,
PHS, DHEW, Rockville, Md. 20852 (June 1966).
BLACK, S. C., R. E. ENGEL, V. W. RANDECKER, and
D. S. EARTH. Radioiodine studies in dairy cows
following Project Palanquin, Environmental Protec-
tion Agency and Atomic Energy Commission. Report
No. PNE-914F, USAEC. National Technical Infor-
mation Service, Springfield, Va. 22151 (May 1971).
GAMERTSFELDER, C. C. Regulatory experience and pro-
jections for future design criteria. Presented at St.
Petersburg, Florida, April 21-22, 1971. Atomic
Energy Commission, Division of Radiological and
Environmental Protection, Washington, D.C. 20545.
TRAINING BRANCH, DIVISION OF RADIOLOGICAL HEALTH.
Reactor safety and hazards evaluation. DHEW,
PHS, Radiological Health Laboratory, Rockville, Md.
20852 (1966).
SUBCOMMITTEE ON INTERGOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS.
Hearings on intergovernmental coordination of
power development and environmental protection act
of 1969 (S. 2752), Part 1. (February 3, 4,; March 3;
April 29, 1970). Superintendent of Documents, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402.
SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE.
Routine surveillance of radioactivity around nuclear
facilities, PHS Publication No. 999-RH-23. DHEW,
PHS, Division of Radiological Health, Rockville, Md.
20852 (December 1966).
PRINGLE, B. H., D. E. HISSONG, E. L. KATZ, and S. T.
MULAWKA. Trace metal accumulation by estuarine
mollusks. Proceedings of the American Society of
Civil Engineers, Vol. 94, No. SA3. (June 1968).
KAHN, B., G. K. MURTHY, C. PORTER, G. R. HAGEE,
G. J. KARCHES, and A. S. GOLDIN. Rapid methods for
estimating fission product concentrations in milk,
PHS Publication No. 999-R-2. Superintendent of Doc-
uments, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washing-
ton, D.C. (1963).
WEAVER, C. L. Environmental radiation surveillance
and monitoring. Division of Surveillance and In-
spection, Office of Radiation Programs, Environ-
mental Protection Agency, Rockville, Md. 20852
(July 1,1971).
BUTLER, G. C., I. L. KAROL, B. LINDELL, D. J. STEVENS,
and V. ZELENY. Assessment and control of environ-
mental contamination; experience with artificial
radioactivity. Basic paper prepared for the United
Nations Conference on the Human Environment on
behalf of the United Nations Scientific Committee
on the Effects of Atomic Radiation. (June 28, 1971)
TERRILL, J. G., JR., E. D. HARWARD, and I. P. LEGGETT,
24
-------
JR. Environmental aspects of nuclear and conven-
tional power plants. Indust Med Surg 36:412-419
(June 1967).
WEAVER, C. L. and G. E. STIGALL. Public health evalu-
ation of nuclear power plants. Health Phys 13:189-
196 (February 1967).
SHIMP, N. F., J. A. SCHLEICHER, R. R. RUCK, D. B.
HECK, and H. V. LELAND. Trace element and organic
carbon accumulation in the most recent sediments of
southern Lake Michigan, Environmental Geology
Notes, No. 41. Illinois State Geological Survey,
Urbana, 111. 61801 (January 1971).
MOGHISSI, A. A. Low-level liquid scintillation counting
of alpha and beta emitting nuelides. Chapter 7 of
The Current Status of Liquid Scintillation Count-
ing—E. D. Bransome, Jr., M.D., Editor. Grune &
Stratton, Inc., New York, N.Y. (1970).
MARTIN, J. E., E. D. HARWARD, D. T. OAKLEY, J. M.
SMITH, and P. H. BEDROSIAN. Radioactivity from
fossil-fuel and nuclear power plants, IAEA-SM-
146/19—Environmental Aspects of Nuclear Power
Stations. International Atomic Energy Agency,
Vienna (1971).
WEAVER, C. L. and E. D. HARWARD. Surveillance of
nuclear power reactors. Pub Health Rep 82:899-912
(October 1967).
LIEBERMAN, J., E. D. HARWARD, and C. L. WEAVER.
Environmental surveillance around nuclear power
reactors. Radiol Health Data Rep 11:325-332 (July
1970).
KARCHES, G. J., H. E. KOLDE, W. L. BRINCK, R. E.
SHEARIN, and C. E. PHILLIPS. Field determinations
of dose from 113Xe in the plume of a PWR. Pre-
sented at International Symposium on Rapid .Meth-
ods for Measuring Radioactivity in the Environment
(Sponsored by IAEA), July 5-9, 1971. National
Environmental Research Center, Environmental
Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268.
ILLINOIS STATE GEOLOGY SURVEY. Distribution of major,
minor and trace constituents in unconsolidated sedi-
ments from southern Lake Michigan, Environmental
Geology Notes, No. 32. Illinois State Geological Sur-
vey, Urbana, 111. 61801 (1970).
ILLINOIS STATE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY. Power and the en-
vironment—a potential crisis in energy supply, En-
vironmental Geology Notes, No. 40. Illinois State
Geological Survey, Urbana, 111. 61810 1970).
RICE, T. R. The role of plants and animals in the
cycling of radionuclides in the marine environment.
Health Phys 11:953-964 (1965).
KNEIP, T. J., G. P. HOWELLS, and M. E. WRENN. Trace
elements, radionuclides and pesticides residues in
the Hudson River. New York University Medical
Center, New York, N.Y. 10016 (December 1970).
BECK, H. L., W. M. LOWDER, B. G. BENNETT, and W. J.
CONDON. Further studies of environmental radiation,
HASL-170. Health and Safety Laboratory, U.S.
Atomic Energy Commission, 376 Hudson Street, New
York, N.Y. 10014 (1966).
HoUSER, B. L. Indexed bibliography on environmental
monitoring for radioactivity, ORNL-NSIC-101. Oak
Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tenn. 37830
(May 1972).
25
-------
THE ABSTRACT CARDS accompanying
this report are designed to facilitate infor-
mation retrieval. They provide space for an
accession number (to be filled in by the
user), suggested key words, bibliographic
information, and an abstract. The key word
concept 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.
26
6 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1972 O 469-334
------- |