EPA-520/5-76-003
RADIOLOGICAL SURVEILLANCE
STUDIES AT THE OYSTER CREEK
BWR NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION
OFFICE OF RADIATION PROGRAMS
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
CINCINNATI, OHIO 45268
-------
EPA-520/5-76-003
RADIOLOGICAL SURVEILLANCE STUDIES
AT
THE OYSTER CREEK
BWR NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION
Richard L. Blanchard
William L. Brinck
Harry E. Kolde
Herman L. Krieger
Daniel M. Montgomery
Seymour Gold
Alex Martin
Bernd Kahn
June 1976
U. S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
Office of Radiation Programs
Eastern Environmental Radiation Facility
Radiochemistry and Nuclear Engineering Branch
Cincinnati, Ohio 45268
-------
This report has been reviewed by the Office of Radiation Programs, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, and approved for publication. Mention of
trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or
recommendation for use.
11
-------
FOREWORD
The Office of Radiation Programs of the Environmental Protection Agency carries out a national
program designed to evaluate population exposure to ionizing and non-ionizing radiation and to promote
development of controls necessary to protect public health and safety. In order to carry out these
responsibilities relative to the nuclear power industry, the Environmental Protection Agency has
performed field studies at nuclear power stations and related facilities. These field studies have required
the development of means for identifying and quantifying radionuclides as well as the methodology for
evaluating reactor plant discharge pathways and environmental transport.
Electrical generation utilizing light-water-cooled nuclear power reactors has experienced rapid
growth in the United States. The growth of nuclear energy has been managed so that environmental
contamination is minimal at the present time. The Environmental Protection Agency has engaged in
studies at routinely operating nuclear power stations to provide an understanding of the radionuclides in
reactor effluents, their subsequent fate in the environment, and the real or potential population
exposures.
A previous study at the Dresden 1 reactor (210 MWe) provided an initial base for evaluating the
environmental effects of operating boiling water reactors. This particular field study was performed at
the Oyster Creek nuclear power station, a 640 MWe boiling water reactor. Results from this study have
allowed the evaluation of the operational and environmental effects of larger boiling water reactors, and
will provide a better basis on which to evaluate larger reactors not yet operating. This is the last in a series
of four studies which also included the Yankee Rowe (185 MWe) and Haddam Neck (573 MWe)
pressurized water reactors. The Oyster Creek study was the only one in the series directed at
environmental impacts in a salt water coast environment.
Comments on this report would be appreciated. These should be sent to the Director, Technology
Assessment Division of the Office of Radiation Programs, Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M
Street, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460.
W. D. Rowe, Ph.D.
Deputy Assistant Administrator
for Radiation Programs
111
-------
Contents
1. INTRODUCTION Pag(j
1.1 Need for Study '.'.'.'.'.'. 1
1.2 The Station '.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'. 1
1.3 The Study '.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'. 2
1.4 References 2
2. RADIONUCLIDES IN WATER ON SITE '.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.['.'.'.'.' 5
2.1 Water Systems and Samples 5
2. .1 General *
2. .2 Reactor coolant system 5
2. .3 Reactor cleanup and demineralizer system 7
2. .4 Circulating water system 7
2. .5 Paths of radionuclides from the reactor coolant system 7
2. .6 Other liquids on site g
2. .7 Samples o
2.2 Analysis o
2.2.1 General g
2.2.2 Gamma-ray spectrometry IQ
2.2.3 Radiochemistry 10
2.3 Results and Discussion ! ' ' ' ' 10
2.3.1 Radioactivity in reactor water 10
2.3.2 Tritium in reactor water 16
2.4 References 17
3. AIRBORNE RADIOACTIVE DISCHARGES . . . . . ......... '. '. ' '.'.'.'.'. '. '. '. '. '. '. '. [ 19
3.1 Gaseous Waste System and Samples ^19
3.1.1 Gaseous waste system 19
3.1.2 Radionuclide release 20
3.1.3 Sample collection 21
3.2 Analysis 21
3.2.1 Gamma-ray spectrometry 21
3.2.2 Radiochemical analysis 21
3.3 Results and Discussion 22
3.3.1 Gaseous radionuclides discharged from reactor coolant at main
condenser steam jet air ejectors 22
3.3.2 Radionuclides discharged from air ejector at turbine
gland seal condenser 24
3.3.3 Radionuclides in building ventilation air.exhaust 25
3.3.4 Radionuclides in reactor drywell air . . . 27
3.3.5 Radionuclides in effluent from startup vacuum pumps 27
3.3.6 Radioactive gases discharged through the stack 27
3.3.7 Radioactive particles discharged through the stack 29
3.3.8 Radioiodines discharged through the stack 30
3.3.9 Estimated annual radionuclide discharges 31
-------
Page
3.3.10 Estimated maximum radiation dose to individuals 32
3.4 References , 33
4. RADIONUCLIDES IN LIQUID WASTES 35
4.1 Liquid Waste Systems 35
4.1.1 Waste processing 35
4.1.2 Radionuclide release 36
4.2 Samples and Analyses 37
4.2.1 Samples 37
4.2.2 Analysis of waste solutions 37
4.3 Results and Discussion 37
4.3.1 Radionuclides in waste sample tank 37
4.3.2 Radionuclides in laundry drain tank 39
4.4 Radionuclides in Coolant Canal Water 40
4.4.1 Estimated radionuclide concentrations in coolant canal water 40
4.4.2 Sampling and analysis of coolant canal water 40
4.4.3 Field testing of concentration techniques 44
4.4.4 Coolant canal sampling and results 45
4.4.5 Summary of coolant canal measurements 50
4.5 References 51
5. RADIONUCLIDES IN THE AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT 53
5.1 Introduction 53
5.1.1 Oyster Creek and Barnegat Bay hydrology 53
5.1.2 Studies near Oyster Creek 54
5.1.3 Aquatic surveillance studies by station operator 54
5.1.4 Aquatic surveillance studies by the State 54
5.1.5 Other aquatic studies 55
5.2 Surface Water Concentration of Radionuclides and Stable Elements 55
5.2.1 Sampling and analysis 55
5.2.2 Stable elements in surface water 57
5.2.3 Radionuclides in surface water 58
5.2.4 Hypothetical radionuclide concentrations in the discharge canal
(Oyster Creek) 61
5.3 Radionuclides in Algae and Grass 61
5.3.1 Sampling and analysis 61
5.3.2 Results and discussion of stable element concentrations 64
5.3.3 Results and discussion of radionuclide concentrations 67
5.3.4 Significance of radionuclides in marine algae and grasses 74
5.4 Radionuclides in Fish 75
5.4.1 Introduction 75
5.4.2 Collection and analysis 75
5.4.3 Results and discussion of stable element concentrations 77
5.4.4 Results and discussion of radionuclide concentrations 79
5.4.5 Hypothetical radionuclide concentrations in fish 84
5.5 Radionuclides in Shellfish 86
5.5.1 Introduction 86
5.5.2 Collection and analysis 87
5.5.3 Results and discussion 87
5.5.4 Hypothetical radionuclide concentration in shellfish 92
5.6 Radionuclides in Crustacea 95
5.6.1 Introduction 95
5.6.2 Collection and analysis 95
5.6.3 Results and discussion 95
vi
-------
Page
5.7 Radionuclides in Sediment %
5.7.1 Sample collection and preparation 96
5.7.2 Description of sediment samples 98
5.7.3 Radioactivity measurements
5.7.4 Results and discussion of analyses
5.8 References ._,
6. ENVIRONMENTAL AIRBORNE ACTIVITY '.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'.'. 109
6.1 Introduction ' .„„
6.1.1 Purpose '.'.'.'.'. 109
6.1.2 Environment of Oyster Creek 109
6.1.3 Meteorology ]10
6.1.4 Off-site surface air surveillance by the State _HQ
6.2 Short-Term Ground-level Radiation Exposure Rates and Radionuclide Concentrations . . . . 'llO
6.2.1 Exposure measurements 1 IQ
6.2.2 Concentration measurements 111
6.2.3 Description of tests 112
6.2.4 Estimated atmospheric dispersion 115
6.2.5 Air sampling results 115
6.2.6 Exposure rate results U7
6.3 Helicopter-Borne Measurement of Radiation Exposure . . A24
6.3.1 General ,24
6.3.2 Procedure 125
6.3.3 Description of plume 12g
6.3.4 Comparison of airborne and ground-level measurements 126
6.3.5 Conclusions 12g
6.4 Direct Gamma-ray Radiation from the Station 128
6.5 Long-term Radiation Exposure Measurements 130
6.5.1 Measurements 130
6.5.2 Results 132
6.6 References ,37
1. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . '. .'.'.'. ........................... '.'. '.' 139
7.1 Radionuclides in Effluents from the .Oyster Creek Station 139
7.2 Radionuclides in the Aquatic Environment at the Oyster Creek Station 140
7.3 Radionuclides in the Terrestrial Environment at the Oyster Creek Station 142
7.4 Monitoring Procedures 143
7.5 Recommendations for Environmental Surveillance 143
7.6 Suggested Future Studies 145
APPENDICES
A Acknowledgments 147
B.I Oyster Creek Average Monthly Power and Reactor Coolant Chemistry Statistics
from Semiannual Operating Reports 149
B.2 Oyster Creek Radioactive Waste Discharges from Semiannual Operating Reports 150
B.3 Oyster Creek Noble Gas Discharges from Semiannual Operating Reports 151
B.4a Radionuclides Discharged in Liquid Wastes by the Oyster Creek Nuclear
Generating Station, 1971 152
B.4b Radionuclides Discharged in Liquid Wastes by the Oyster Creek Nuclear
Generating Station, Jan.-June 1972 153
B.4c Radionuclides Discharged in Liquid Wastes by the Oyster Creek Nuclear
Generating Station, July-Dec. 1972 154
B.4d Radionuclides Discharged in Liquid Wastes by the Oyster Creek Nuclear
Generating Station, Jan.-June 1973 155
vu
-------
Page
B.4e Radionuclides Discharged in Liquid Wastes by the Oyster Creek Nuclear
Generating Station, July-Dec. 1973 156
C.I Calculated Generation Rate of Fission Products in Fuel at 1930 MWt Power 157
D.I Concentrations of Radioactive Gas Effluents from Main Condenser Steam Jet Air
Ejectors after Passage Through 75-minute Delay Line 158
D.2 Release Rates and Estimated Annual Discharges of Radioactive Gases from
Main Condenser Air Ejector Delay Line 159
D.3 Release Rates and Estimated Annual Discharges of Noble Gases in Turbine
Gland Seal Condenser Off-Gas, February 29, 1972 160
D.4 Release Rates of Gaseous Radionuclides from End of Steam Condenser Air
Ejector Delay Line and in Stack, uCi/s 161
E.I Radionuclide Concentrations Measured in Aquatic Samples by the Station
Operator 162
E.2 The Average Radionuclide Concentrations in Aquatic Samples Reported by the
State of New Jersey (BRP) 163
E.3 Estimation of Airborne Radioactivity in the Environment 164
E.4 Atmospheric Dispersion and Plume Rise Estimates for Short-term Air Sampling 166
F.I Relation of Airborne Radionuclide Concentration to Dose Rate 167
F.2 Relation of Daily Radionuclide Intake in Water to Dose Rate 168
vin
-------
Figures
Page
2.1 Coolant Flow Schematic 5
2.2 Oyster Creek Electrical Production 6
2.3 Gamma-ray Spectrum of Radionuclides from Reactor Water Retained on
Cation Exchange Paper 11
2.4 Gamma-ray Spectrum of Radionuclides from Reactor Water Retained on
Anion Exchange Paper 12
2.5 Gamma-ray Spectrum of Radionuclides from Reactor Water Not Retained
on Cation or Anion Papers 13
3.1 Gaseous Waste Disposal System 19
4.1 Liquid Radioactive Waste System 35
4.2 Radionuclide Concentration System 44
4.3 Ion Exchange Column for Concentration of Co, Cs, and Mn from Seawater 44
5.1 Aquatic Sampling Sites Near the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 56
5.2 Aquatic Sampling Sites in the Area of the Oyster Creek Nuclear
Generating Station 58
5.3 Sediment Sampling Sites Near the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 97
5.4 Distant Sediment Sampling Sites at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 98
6.1 Sampling Locations for Environmental Radiation .Measurements 114
6.2 Net Exposure Rate in Test la, January 18, 1972 117
6.3 Net Exposure Rate in Test Ib, January 18, 1972 118
6.4 Net Exposure Rate in Test Ic, January 19, 1972 118
6.5 Net Exposure Rate in Test 2a, April 11, 1972 119
6.6 Net Exposure Rate in Test 2b, April 11, 1972 120
6.7 Gross Exposure Rate Profile East of Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station
During Stable Plume Conditions 120
6.8 Gross Exposure Rate Measurements in Plume During Change from Stable to
Unstable Meteorological Conditions, Test 3c, August 23, 1972 121
6.9 Net Exposure Rate in Test 4c, December 13, 1972 122
6.10 Net Exposure Rate in Test 4d, December 14, 1972 122
6.11 Locations of Ground and Aerial Plume Measurements, April 3 and 4, 1973 123
6.12 Radiation Exposure Rates 1.5 km East of Stack (1-min Averages) 124
6.13 Radiation Exposure Rates Measured in Helicopter, April 4, 1973 127
6.14 Gross Exposure Rate Profile East of Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station,
December 12, 1972 13°
6.15 Gamma-ray Spectrum of "N Direct Radiation from Turbine Building, Measured
0.2 km West of Building 131
6.16 Locations of TLD Measurements, September 29, 1971 to June 15, 1972 133
6.17 Comparison of Measured and Estimated Exposure Rates, March 14 to
April 20, 1972 135
6.18 Locations of TLD Measurements, April 17 to July 2, 1973 136
6.19 Comparison of Measured and Estimated Exposure Rates, April 17 to July 2, 1973 137
IX
-------
Tables
Page
1.1 Operating Data on Selected BWR Nuclear Power Stations, 1973 2
2.1 Radionuclide Concentration in Reactor Water, uCi/ml 14
2.2 Comparison of Radionuclide Concentrations Measured and Calculated
in Reactor Water, uCi/ml 15
3.1 Concentrations of Longer-Lived Radioactive Gases Released from
Main Condenser Steam Jet Air Ejectors 23
3.2 Release Rates and Estimated Annual Discharges of Longer-Lived Radioactive
Gases from Main Condenser Air Ejector Delay Line 24
3.3 Long-Lived Radioactive Gases from the Turbine Gland Seal Condenser
Air Ejector, February 29, 1972 25
3.4 Long-Lived Radioactive Gases in Building Ventilation Air, March 28, 1973 26
3.5 Long-Lived Radioactive Gases in the Reactor Drywell Atmosphere, April 11, 1972 27
3.6 Concentrations of Long-Lived Radioactive Gases in Stack Effluent 28
3.7 Release Rates and Estimated Annual Discharge of Long-Lived
Radioactive Gases in Stack Effluent 29
3.8 Concentrations of Longer-Lived Paniculate Radionuclides in Stack Effluent 29
3.9 Average Concentration and Release Rate and Estimated Annual Discharge
of Longer-Lived Paniculate Radionuclides from Stack 30
3.10 Gaseous Iodine-131 Concentrations and Release Rates in Stack Effluents 31
4.1 Radionuclides Discharged in Liquid Waste, Ci/yr 36
4.2 Radionuclide Concentrations in Liquid Waste Sample Tank, pCi/ml 38
4.3 Chemical States of Radionuclides in Liquid Waste Sample Tank, Sept. 25, 1972 40
4.4 Radionuclide Concentrations in Laundry Drain Tank, pCi/ml 41
4.5 Radionuclides Discharged from the Laundry Drain Tank 42
4.6 Estimated Radionuclide Concentrations in Oyster Creek Based on
Measured Effluent Concentrations 43
4.7 Recovery of Radionuclides on Concentration System, September 1972 45
4.8 Recovery of Radionuclides on Concentration System, July 1973 46
4.9 Radionuclides in Coolant Canal Water on January 18, 1972 47
4.10 Radionuclides in Coolant Canal Water on April 12, 1972 47
4.11 Radionuclides in Coolant Canal Water on May 16, 1972 48
4.12 Radionuclides in Coolant Canal Water on September 25-26, 1972 48
4.13 Radionuclides in Coolant Canal Water on July 17-18, 1973 49
4.14 Radionuclides in Background Seawater (Great Bay), pCi/liter 50
4.15 Paniculate Radionuclides in Coolant Canal 51
5.1 Concentration of Stable Elements in Surface Water 57
5.2 Average Measured and Estimated Stable Elements in Water, mg/1 59
5.3 Concentration of MSr and '"Cs in Barnegat and Great Bay Water Samples 60
5.4 Radionuclide Concentrations in Water Samples Collected May 15-16, 1972 61
5.5 Paniculate Radionuclides in Water Samples Collected September 28, 1972 62
5.6 Average Radionuclide Concentration in the Discharge Canal, pCi/liter 63
5.7 Stable Ion Concentrations in Algae and Marine Plants, mg/g Ash 65
xi
-------
Page
5.8 Average Stable Element Concentration in Algae and Marine Plants, mg/g Ash 67
5.9 Radionuclide Concentrations in Algae and Marine Plants, pCi/g Ash 68
5.10 Average Concentration of Radionuclides in Species of Algae and Spartina
Collected from the Three Principal Sampling Sites in Barnegat Bay,
pCi/kg Fresh Weight 72
5.11 Radionuclide Concentrations in Algae and Spartina Samples from Great Bay
(Background Area), pCi/kg Fresh Weight 73
5.12 Fish Collected in Barnegat and Great Bays 76
5.13 Concentration of Stable Elements in Fish, g/kg Fresh Weight 78
5.14 Radionuclide Concentrations in Fish Muscle or Whole Fish and
Bone, pCi/kg Fresh Weight 80
5.15 Radionuclide Concentration in Fish Gut, pCi/kg Fresh Weight 82
5.16 Concentration of 1MCs in Fish Samples 83
5.17 Average '"Cs Concentration in Uncontaminated Fish 83
5.18 Hypothetical Radionuclide Concentrations in Fish from Oyster Creek 85
5.19 Radiation Dose from Eating Fish 86
5.20 Radionuclide Concentrations in Shellfish, pCi/kg Fresh Weight 88
5.21 The Concentration of 210Pb and "°Po in Shellfish Samples 90
5.22 Radionuclide Concentration in Barnacles and Annelid Tubes, pCi/kg Fresh Weight 92
5.23 Hypothetical Radionuclide Concentrations in Shellfish Muscle 93
5.24 Radiation Dose from Eating Clam Meat 94
5.25 Radionuclide and Stable Element Concentrations in Crab Exoskeletons 96
5.26 Mineralogical Analysis of Sediment Samples 99
5.27 Clay Mineralogy of Sample 305 from Oyster Creek 100
5.28 Effects of Sample Preparation and Dispersion Technique on Particle Size Analysis 100
5.29 Radionuclide Analyses of Oyster Creek Sediment Samples, pCi/g Dry Weight 102
5,30 Average Background Concentrations of Radionuclides in Great Bay Sediment Samples 104
5.31 Radionuclide Concentrations in Composite Core Samples, pCi/g Air-dried 104
5.32 Net Count Rate of '"Co with Underwater Probe and Measured
60Co Concentrations in Related Sediment Samples 105
6.1 Conditions for Radiation Dose Measurements of Stack Effluent in the Environment 113
6.2 Xenon-133 in Environmental Air Samples 116
6.3 Radiation Exposure Rates from Plume at Ground-Level on April 3, 1973, uR/hr 123
6.4 Aerial Measurement Locations 125
6.5 Radiation Exposure Rates at Centerline of Plume West of Plant 126
6.6 Radiation Exposure Rates at Centerline of Plume East of Plant 128
6.7 External Radiation Exposure Rates on-Site 129
6.8 Comparison Between lonization Chamber Measurements, uR/hr 130
6.9 Long-Term Exposure Rate Measurements, uR/hr (September 29, 1971 to June 15, 1972) . . . .134
6.10 Comparison of Operating vs. Shutdown Period Exposure Rates, pR/hr
(September 29, 1971 to June 15, 1972) 135
6.11 Long-Term Exposure Rate Measurements, uR/hr (April 17 to July 2, 1973) 137
xn
-------
1. INTRODUCTION
/./ Need for Study
Radiological monitoring is an integral part of
routine operation at a nuclear power station.
Radionuclides in discharges and direct radiation at the
station are measured to demonstrate compliance with
operating regulations and to compute the population
exposure with radiation exposure models.
Measurements of radionuclides and radiation in the
environment can check the models, yield the
radionuclide transfer or dispersion factors most
appropriate to the site, and assure that population
exposures are within established limits.
Unless the environmental surveillance program is
carefully planned in terms of the models with regard to
critical radionuclides, pathways, and exposed
populations, much of it will be uninformative and
result in a large number of inappropriate "less-than"
values. An effective program uses the results of on-site
measurements to select sample types, locations,
collection times, and amounts, as well as procedures
and instruments for the analyses. To provide guidance
for applying these on-site and environmental
measurements to evaluate population radiation
exposures, the Office of Radiation Programs (ORP) of
the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
undertook a program of studies at commercially
operated nuclear power stations. The Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC), the Energy Research
and Development Administration (ERDA), state
health or environmental protection agencies, and
station operators have participated in these studies.
This report describes the fourth and final project in this
series of studies — two at pressurized water reactors
(PWR's) and two at boiling water reactors (BWR's).
Results of the first three projects, at the Dresden I
BWR, the Yankee-Rowe PWR and the Haddam Neck
PWR, have been published//-.?;
Guidance for evaluating population radiation
exposures by emphasizing the observation of critical
radionuclides, pathways, and exposed populations in
the environment has been available for some time. (4)
This approach concentrates efforts on the few most
important ("critical") causes of exposure in the
presence of many potential ones. Models for computing
radionuclide transfers — for example, from water to
fish, stack to vegetation, stack to cows' milk for "'I, and
stack direct to man — have been utilized in the earlier
reports, (1-3) and are described fully in the AEC, NRC
and EPA models. (5-7) During the last few years,
considerable information has been published
concerning the movement and transfer of radionuclides
in the environment at nuclear facilities, (8-16) as well as
additional guides for environmental monitoring.
(17-18) There are also at least two additional reports
available describing environmental studies at
commercial nuclear power stations in the U. S. (19,20)
The four stations were selected for study so as to
provide generally applicable information. Because the
program was begun during the initial expansion in
nuclear power production, the first two stations studied
at Dresden and Yankee-Rowe were relatively small
while the third and fourth were at the larger Haddam
Neck and Oyster Creek stations. Hence, care must be
taken in applying observations at these stations to
larger or newer stations that are different in design and
operation. Oyster Creek was selected for study in part
because it included a marine environment, whereas, the
three previous stations studied were sited on bodies of
fresh water. The study was planned to contribute
information specific to large BWR stations on the
radionuclide content of effluents, their sources and
pathways, evaluation of population radiation
exposures, techniques of measuring radionuclides and
radiations at the station and in its environment, and
provide additional guidance on environmental
monitoring.
1.2 The Station
The study was undertaken at the Oyster Creek
Nuclear Generating Station, a direct cycle BWR
manufactured by the General Electric Company for the
Jersey Central Power and Light Company. The station
began operating in 1969 and reached its present
maximum power level of 1930 megawatts thermal
(MWt)in 1971; the corresponding gross electrical
output is approximately 640 MWe. The station had
produced more than 16 million megawatt hours (1.84
-------
GW-yr) of electricity at the end of 1973. Operation of
the station is described in several publications.(2/-24)
During the study, the reactor was partially refueled
twice — in September 1971 and May 1972. The fuel
elements consist of uranium dioxide (UO2) pellets
enriched to 2.42% in 2"U, enclosed in annealed
Zircaloy-2 tubes. f2/,22J Water serves as both
moderator and coolant.
The station is located in a relatively flat marshland
area of Ocean County, New Jersey, about 3.2 km inland
from the shore of Barnegat Bay. The site is situated
14.5 km south of Toms River, New Jersey and 56 km
north of Atlantic City, New Jersey. It is bounded on the
east by the Central Railroad of New Jersey and U.S.
Route 9; on the west by the Garden State Parkway; on
the north by the South Branch of Forked River and on
the south by Oyster Creek. (22)
The study was undertaken at Oyster Creek because
it was one of only two large BWR stations — the other
was Nine Mile Point — in the U. S. that had been
operating for more than a year in 1971. For
comparison, the commercial BWR stations that had
been operated for a full year in 1973 are listed in Table
1.1 with their radioactive discharges in curies (Ci)
during that year. (24) All of the stations listed in Table
1.1 contain reactors manufactured by the General
Electric Company. The gross radioactivity at Oyster
Creek in both liquid and airborne waste is shown by
Table 1.1 to have been similar to values at other
stations. The relatively high amounts of 131I released at
Oyster Creek reflected in the last column is attributed
to fission produced I3'I leaking through the fuel
cladding. The very low radioactivity in liquid waste
released at Monticello is due to their recycle of
processed wastes and the shipment of laundry off-site,
resulting in a near-zero release to the environment.
1.3 The Study
Field trips to the station and its environs were
conducted between October 1971 and November 1973,
scheduled to observe radionuclide concentrations
throughout the station operating cycle and in the
environment at various seasons. Because liquid
effluents were discharged into a marine environment
abundant with aquatic life, often utilized as food, the
aquatic portion of this study was greatly expanded
relative to the previous three studies. Measurements
were considered to approximate average or total
radionuclide values for sources and pathways sufficient
for the generic purpose of the study. The computed
averages or totals from this study are compared, when
possible, with values obtained on a more frequent basis
by the station operator to evaluate the applicability of
the measurements during the field trips. The field trips
were not intended to be inspections of operating
practices at the station.
Table 1.1 Operating Data on Selected BWR Nuclear Power Stations, 1973
Station
Dresden I
Millstone I
Vermont Yankee
Monticello
Nine Mile Point
Oyster Creek
Pilgrim I
Dresden 2, 3
Quad Cities 1, 2
Year of
initial
operation
1959
1970
1972
1970
1969
1969
1972
1970/71
1971/72
Rated
power,
MWe
200
652
514
545
625
640
664
809 ea.
800 ea.
1973 power
generation,
106 MWt-hr
2.4
6.0
6.1
9.9
11
11
13
27
31
Liquid waste, Ci
MFP* §
activation
products
9.2
33.4
2 x 10"5
Ot
40.8
2.4
0.9
25.9
21.4
3H
19
4
0.1
Ot
47
36
0.4
26
25
Airborne
Gases
8.4 x 10S
0.8 x 105
1.8 x 105
8.7 x 105
8.7 x 105
8.1 x 105
2.3 x 105
8.8 x 10S
9.0 x 105
waste, Ci
Particulates
6 Halogens**
0.3
0.2
0.1
6.5
5.9
30.7
8.2
27.0
12.5
* MFP - Mixed fission products.
**A11 halogens are included.
t No liquid release.
-------
The Radiochemistry and Nuclear Engineering
Facility at the EPA National Environmental Research
Center, Cincinnati, performed the study with the
support of the Technology Assessment Division, ORP-
EPA, and other EPA laboratories. Cooperating in
these studies were the persons listed in Appendix A
from the New Jersey Department of Environmental
Protection, the Health and Safety Laboratory, ERDA,
the Health Services Laboratory, ERDA, the U.S. Coast
Guard Station at Floyd Bennett Field, New York, the
Jersey Central Power and Light Co., the ERDA and
theNRC.
The study was planned on the basis of results
obtained at the similar but smaller BWR station at
Dresden-I.^) In addition, the following information
provided guidance: publications describing the Oyster
Creek station and environment, (22,22,25-2$ semi-
annual station operating reports, and the state's
environmental surveillance reports. (25>, 30)
This information suggested that:
(1) several sources at the station emit gaseous and
liquid effluents of possible dosimetric import;
however, the off-gas from the steam condenser
air ejectors and the liquid from the test tanks
would probably be the major sources;
(2) critical radiation exposure pathways probably
include fish and clams caught in Oyster Creek
and in Barnegat Bay near the mouth of Oyster
Creek, external radiation from effluent gases,
and direct radiation from the plant;
(3) bottom sediments in Oyster Creek and aquatic
vegetation and macro-algae in Oyster Creek
and Barnegat Bay would contain readily
detectable radionuclides from the station;
(4) radioiqdine might be at detectable levels in the
thyroid of cattle, if any grazed near the station;
(5) dilution factors for radionuclides in Barnegat
Bay would be difficult to calculate due to the
complex hydrology of the Bay.
The measurement program accordingly emphasized
these aspects of the station and its environment. It
differed from previous station studies with respect to
(1) terrestrial sampling was minimal because of the
state's thorough environmental sampling program and
sparse sampling media, and (2) most in-plant sampling
was conducted by the AEC.(J1)
1.4 References
1. Kahn, B., R. L. Blanchard, H. L. Krieger, H. E.
Kolde, D. B. Smith, A. Martin, S. Gold, W. J. Averett,
W. L. Brinck, and G. J. Karches, "Radiological
Surveillance Studies at a Boiling Water Nuclear Power
Reactor," U.S. Public Health Service Rept.
BRH/DER 70-1 (1970).
2. Kahn, B., R. L. Blanchard, H. E. Kolde, H. L.
Krieger, S. Gold, W. L. Brinck, W. J. Averett, D. B.
Smith, and A. Martin, "Radiological Surveillance
Studies at a Pressurized Water Nuclear Power
Reactor," EPA Rept. 71-1 (1971).
3. Kahn, B., R. L. Blanchard, W. L. Brinck, H. L.
Krieger, H. E. Kolde, W. J. Averett, S. Gold, A.
Martin, and G. Gels, "Radiological Surveillance Study
at the Haddam Neck PWR Nuclear Power Station,"
EPA Rept. EPA-520/3-74-007 (1974).
4. Committee 4, International Commission on
Radiation Protection, "Principles of Environmental
Monitoring Related to the Handling of Radioactive
Materials," ICRP Publication no. 7, Pergamon Press,
Oxford (1965).
5. Directorate of Regulatory Standards, U.S.
Atomic Energy Commission, "Final Environmental
Statement Concerning Proposed Rule Making Action:
Numerical Guides for Design Objectives and Limiting
Conditions for Operation to Meet the Criterion 'As
Low As Practicable' for Radioactive Material in Light-
Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor Effluents,"
AEC Rept. WASH-1258 (1973).
6. Office of Radiation Programs, "Environmental
Analysis of the Uranium Fuel Cycle, Part II - Nuclear
Power Reactors," EPA Rept. EPA-520/9-73-003-C
(1973).
7. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Effluent
Treatment Systems Branch, "Calculation of Releases
of Radioactive Materials in Liquid and Gaseous
Effluents from Boiling Water Reactors (BWR's) —
Principal Parameters Used in BWR Source Term
Calculations and Their Bases," Regulatory Guide
l.CC, Appendix B, Draft (1975).
8. Peaceful Uses of Atomic Energy, Proceedings of
the Fourth International Conference, Vol. 2 and 11,
United Nations, New York (1972).
9. Radioecology Applied to Man and His
Environment, International Atomic Energy Agency,
Vienna (1972).
10. Thompson, S. E., etal., "Concentration Factors
of Chemical Elements in Edible Aquatic Organisms,"
AEC Rept. UCRL-50564 Rev. 1 (1972).
11. Jinks, S. M. and M. Eisenbud, "Concentration
Factors in the Aquatic Environment," Rad. Health
Data Rept. 13,243 (1972).
12. Radioactive Contamination of the Marine
Environment, International Atomic Energy Agency,
Vienna (1973).
13. Environmental Behavior of Radionuclides
Released in the Nuclear Industry, International
-------
Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna (1973).
14. Environmental Surveillance Around Nuclear
Installations, International Atomic Energy Agency,
Vienna (1974).
15. Physical Behavior of Radioactive
Contaminants in the Atmosphere, International
Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna (1974).
16. Radiological Impacts of Releases from Nuclear
Facilities into Aquatic Environments, International
Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, to be published.
17. "Environmental Radioactivity Surveillance
Guide," EPA Rept. ORP/SID 72-2 (1972).
18. Directorate of Regulatory Standards, U.S.
Atomic Energy Commission, "Regulatory Guide 4.1.
Measuring and Reporting Radioactivity in the
Environs of Nuclear Power Plants," USAEC,
Washington, B.C. (1973).
19. Lentsch, J. W., etal., "Manmade Radionuclides
in the Hudson River Estuary," in Health Physics
Aspects of Nuclear Facility Siting, P. J. Voilleque and
B. R. Baldwin, eds., B. R. Baldwin, Idaho Falls, Idaho
499(1971).
20. Lowder, W. M. and C. V. Gogolak,
Experimental and Analytical Radiation Dosimetry
Near a Large BWR, IEEE Trans. NS-21,423 (1974).
21. Jersey Central Power and Light Company,
"Facility Description and Safety Analysis Report,
Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant," Vol. 1 and 2,
AEC Docket No. 50-219-1 and 50-219-2,
Morristown, N. J. (1967).
22. Jersey Central Power and Light Company,
"Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station -
Environmental Report," Amend, no. 2, Morristown,
N.J.(1972).
23. Directorate of Licensing, U.S. Atomic Energy
Commission, "Final Environmental Statement Related
to Operation of Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating
Station," AEC Docket No. 50-219 (1974).
24. Office of Operations Evaluation, U.S. Atomic
Energy Commission, "Summary of Radioactivity
Released in Effluents from Nuclear Power Plants
During 1973," U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Rept. NUREG-75/001 (January 1975).
25. Loveland, R. E., et a/., "The Qualitative and
Quantitative Analysis of the Benthic Flora and Fauna
of Barnegat Bay Before and After the On-set of
Thermal Addition," Rutgers State University, Progress
Repts. 1-7(1966-1970).
26. Wurtz, C. B., "Barnegat Bay Fish," Dept. of
Environmental Sciences, Rutgers State University,
Rept. to the Jersey Central Power and Light Company,
Morristown, N. J. (1969).
27. Westman, J. R., "Barnegat Reactor Finfish
Studies," Department of Environmental Sciences,
Rutgers State University, Rept. to the Jersey Central
Power and Light Company, Morristown, N. J. (1967).
28. Carpenter, J. H., "Concentration Distribution
for Material Discharged Into Barnegat Bay," John
Hopkins University, Rept. to the Jersey Central Power
and Light Company, Morristown, N. J. (1965).
29. McCurdy, D. E., "1971 Environmental
Radiation Levels in the State of New Jersey," New
Jersey State Department of Environmental Protection
Report (1971).
30. McCurdy, D. E. and J. J. Russo,
"Environmental Radiation Surveillance of the Oyster
Creek Nuclear Generating Station," New Jersey
Department of Environmental Protection Repts. (1972
and 1973).
31. Pelletier, C. A., "Results of Independent
Measurements of Radioactivity in Process Systems and
Effluents at Boiling Water Reactors," USAEC Rept.,
unpublished (May 1973).
-------
2. RADIONUCLIDES IN WATER ON SITE
2.1 Water Systems and Samples
2.1.1 General. The power-producing systems at
Oyster Creek are, in general, typical of BWR's. Water
flow pathways in the reactor coolant systems are shown
in Figure 2.1.(1) Other water systems on site include
reactor cleanup and demineralizer, circulating water,
standby core cooling, primary containment spray
cooling, standby liquid control, fire protection, makeup
water, service water, reactor building closed cooling
water, turbine building closed cooling water, fuel
storage pool filtering, demineralizing and cooling, and
sewage treatment. Plant electrical production and
periods of operation are indicated on Figure 2.2.(2)
2.1.2 Reactor coolant system.(3) The reactor at
Oyster Creek is a direct-cycle BWR. During routine
operation, feed water at 150° C and 1000 psig enters the
reactor vessel through the feedwater nozzle and is
9xl02 Kg/sec
mixed with recirculating water. A mixture of steam and
water is generated as the reactor coolant passes upward
through the reactor core and is heated by fissioning in
the nuclear fuel. At this stage the water-steam mixture
is considered "low-quality" steam. The excess
entrained water is removed by steam separators located
in the reactor vessel directly above the core and the
steam is then dried in a steam dryer assembly above the
steam separators. The dry steam at 285° C and 950 psi
flows to the turbines at a rate of 900 kg/s (7 x 10*
Ib/hr). Approximately 2.0 x 10' kg of water plus 6 x 101
kg of steam are in the reactor coolant system.^
Water removed in the steam separators is returned
to the main recirculation flow within the vessel and is
pumped through the five recirculation loops. Flow rate
through the recirculation loops is varied to control
reactor power. When the reactor is operating at rated
power, rapid power maneuvers can be accomplished by
Rtaetor
950ptig, 285° C
Circulating Water
(from Canal)
Rtcirculatlon
Loops (5)
9x103 kg/stc
Powtr- 1930 MWt
Rioctor Coolant Wattr
Mats- 2xlOs kg
Figure 2.1 Coolant flow schematic.
-------
600-
| 500-
£
g 400-
5
35 300-
s
i 200-
o
I 100^
-------
changing the coolant recirculation pump speed which
alters the reactor recirculation flow.
Electrical power is produced by a 640,000-KW,
1800-rpm, tandem-compound six-flow 2-stage reheat
steam turbine-generator. The turbine has one double-
flow, high pressure and three double-flow, low pressure
elements. Exhaust steam from the high pressure
turbine passes through moisture separators and
reheaters before entering the three low pressure units.
The separators reduce the moisture content of the
steam to less than 1 percent by weight.
Steam passes from the low pressure units to three
horizontal, single pass, divided-water box, deaerating-
type condensers. These are designed to produce a back
pressure of 2.5 cm Hg absolute at rated load with 9° C
cooling water. Deaeration by a steam jet air ejector is
provided in each condenser to remove air from normal
inleakage, hydrogen and oxygen gases due to
dissociation of water in the reactor, and gaseous
radionuclides.
Condensate is pumped from the condenser hotwells
through the condensate demineralizers by the three
condensate pumps. The full-flow condensate
demineralizer system (Figure 2.1) ensures the supply of
water of the required purity to the reactor. This
demineralizer system removes corrosion products from
the turbine, condenser, and shell side of the feedwater
heaters, protects the reactor against condenser tube
leaks, and removes condensate impurities which might
enter the system in the makeup water.
The condensate demineralizer consists of seven
mixed-bed units (including one spare) sized for rated
load condensate flow. Demineralizer resins are
normally regenerated and reused. Any radioactive
material removed from exhausted resins by rinse
solutions is transferred to the radioactive waste system
(see Section 4.1).
From the condensate demineralizer, water is
pumped by the feedwater pumps through feedwater
heaters and back to the reactor vessel.
2.1.3 Reactor cleanup and demineralizer system. (3)
The primary purposes of the reactor cleanup
demineralizer system are to reduce concentrations of:
1. corrosion products;
2. radioactive materials (primarily radioiodine)
produced in the core;
3. transient bursts of Cl" ions to maintain
acceptable levels of Cl" in the primary water
system;
4. coolant radioactivity during refueling.
The cleanup system provides continuous
purification of a portion of the recirculation flow with a
minimum of heat loss from the cycle. It can be operated
during startup, shutdown, and refueling operations, as
well as during normal operations.
Water is normally removed at reactor pressure and
cooled in a regenerative and a nonregenerative heat
exchanger, reduced in pressure, filtered, demineralized,
and pumped through the shell side of the regenerative
heat exchanger to the reactor.
The cleanup filters are pressure precoat type, using
a nonsilicious filter aid. Two full-size filters are
provided for continuous operation, with one filter being
on standby. The flow rate through the mixed-bed
cleanup demineralizer was 25 kg/s (2.0 x 10' Ib/hr) at
the time of the study. (4) Spent cleanup resins are not
normally regenerated because of the radioactivity of
the impurities removed from the reactor coolant, but
are sluiced from the demineralizer vessels directly to
the radwaste system for disposal.
2.1.4 Circulating water system. Circulating cooling
water is transferred from Forked River through the
main condenser by 4 pumps at the rate of 1.7 x 10*
kg/min (450,000 gpm). It is returned to Oyster Creek
carrying with it the heat extracted from the steajn,/Th6.
maximum temperature increase in the circulating
cooling water is 12.8* C (23° F).
To limit temperature increase in the Oyster Creek,
three 1.0 x 10* kg/min (260,000 gpm) dilution pumps
are available to take water from the intake and by-pass
the condenser, discharging directly to Oyster Creek.
The dilution flow is adjusted as required to meet
temperature limits in Barnegat Bay.
2.1.5 Paths of radionuclides from the reactor
coolant system.(2-4) The radionuclides in the reactor
coolant water are fission products and activation
products. The fission products in the water are formed
within the uranium oxide fuel and enter the water
through imperfections in the Zircaloy cladding of the
fuel elements. Other possible sources of fission
products — apparently minor — are fuel that
contaminates the surface of new fuel elements ("tramp
uranium") and fuel that passes into reactor coolant
water from failed fuel elements. The activation
products in reactor coolant water are formed by
neutron irradiation of the water and its contents
(including gases and dissolved or suspended solids) and
of materials in contact with the coolant (container and
structural surfaces, fuel and control rod cladding) that
subsequently corrode or erode.
The radionuclides in the reactor coolant water
circulate and decay within the system and may deposit
as "crud" (which may later recirculate). They are
retained by the cleanup demineralizer or condensate
demineralizer or leave the system with gases and
liquids. The cleanup demineralizer resin is periodically
-------
replaced and processed for shipment off-site as solid
waste. The condensate demineralizer is periodically
regenerated, and the regenerant solution is processed in
the liquid waste system.
During routine operation, water and associated
gases leave the reactor coolant system through leaks
and by intentional discharge for volume control. At the
time of the study, losses of 6.5 x 104 liters/day (17,200
gpd) from the reactor coolant system included 5.7 x 104
liters/day (15,000 gpd) water leakage to equipment
drains and 8.3 x 103 liters/day (2,200 gpd) of water as
steam leakage to turbine building, reactor building and
radwaste building air. (4) Another estimate of reactor
coolant water loss was based on the AEC 1200-MWe
model BWR. (5) Adjusted to Oyster Creek plant size,
this estimate is 1.9 x 10' liters/day (5,000 gpd) loss to
equipment drains and 4.5 x 103 liters/day (1,200 gpd)
loss to building air for a total loss of 2.34 x 104
liters/day (6,200 gpd).
Radionuclides in the leaking water are expected to
be equal to or less than the concentrations observed in
samples of reactor coolant water. Those leaks which
release steam or condensate would be expected to have
higher concentrations of volatile radionuclides and
lower concentrations of nonvolatile radionuclides.
Volatile radionuclides are vented continuously from
the reactor, turbine and radwaste buildings, but
accumulate in the drywell until it is vented.
2.1.6 Other liquids on site.(3) Several ancillary
water systems exist at the station, but only the first
three of the following are believed to result in
radioactive discharge:
1. Radioactive waste treatment system. The
system for gases is described in Section 3.1.1,
and for liquids, in Section 4.1.1.
2. Fuel storage pool filtering, demineralizing and
cooling. This system is designed to filter and
demineralize the pool water and remove decay
heat from spent fuel which is stored in the fuel
pool. The fuel pool filter and demineralizer,
which may become radioactive, are located in
the radwaste building. Cooling water for the
heat exchangers is supplied by the reactor
building closed cooling water system.
3. Refueling water. The cavity above the reactor
vessel is flooded during refueling. Purity of the
water during refueling is maintained by the
reactor cleanup demineralizer. Fuel removed
from the reactor is transferred underwater to
the fuel storage pool. Excess primary system
water after the completion of refueling is
discharged through the pool filter and
demineralizer and reactor cleanup system to
the condenser hotwell. It is returned to
condensate storage through the condensate
pump and demineralizers.
4. Fire protection system. The fire protection
system furnishes water to all points
throughout the plant area and to buildings
where water for fire-fighting may be required.
The fire protection water is fresh water stored
on site in the 3.8 x 107 liter (10,000,000 gal.)
storage pond.
5. Makeup water system. Makeup water
requirements for the plant are provided by
processing well water, or water from Oyster
Creek, or a mixture of the two. The system
utilizes a coagulator followed by charcoal
filters, carbon filters, 2 cation-anion primary
demineralizers, and a final mixed-bed
polishing unit. A 1.1 x lO'-liter (30,000 gal.)
makeup demineralizer water storage tank is
provided to store water for normal
requirements. The required quality of water
used as makeup is—
PH
Conductivity
Silica
Chloride
7.0
<1.0 micromho at 25° C
<0.01 ppm as SiO2
<0.01 ppm as Cl"
6. Cooling water systems. A closed loop, forced
circulation, cooling system (reactor building
closed cooling water system) is employed for
cooling the reactor plant equipment. Seawater
from the service water system cools this
system through heat exchangers. The turbine
oil coolers, hydrogen coolers, stator coolers,
and similar associated equipment are cooled
by another closed loop system located in the
turbine building (turbine building closed
cooling water system). Seawater from either
the service water or circulating water systems
cools this system through heat exchangers.
The service water system provides 4.5 x
104 liters/min (12,000 gpm) of water for
cooling plant components. Service water is
taken from the Forked River intake and is
discharged into the Oyster Creek discharge
canal.
7. Emergency systems. Three systems are
provided for emergency shutdown and cooling
of the reactor:
a. Standby liquid control system. The liquid
poison backup systems can shut down the
reactor should the control rods fail to
8
-------
function. This system consists of devices
which can inject a sodium pentaborate
solution from a 15,000-liter storage tank
into the reactor vessel.
b. Standby core cooling system. The
standby core cooling system is designed
to remove the decay heat from the core
following a postulated loss-of-coolant
accident. Duplicate independent systems
are available to take water from the 2.4 x
lO'-liter absorption pool and spray it over
the core.
c. Primary containment spray cooling
system. A containment system is installed
within the primary containment structure
which would take water from the
absorption pool and from service water to
remove decay heat from the primary
containment system in the event of an
accident.
8. Sewage treatment system. Water for domestic
and sanitary purposes is taken from a deep
well on the site. Domestic and sanitary wastes
from the unrestricted, nonradioactive areas of
the plant are treated in a packaged sewage
treatment facility. The aerobic system utilizes
the activated sludge process, and treats about
4000 liters/day of raw wastewater. Effluent
from this system is chlorinated and released to
the discharge canal.
2.1.7 Samples. To identify potential radioactive
effluents at the Oyster Creek nuclear power station,
samples of reactor water where radionuclides occur at
much higher concentrations and are therefore more
easily detected than at the point of release were
obtained from the recirculation loops (see Figure 2.1).
The following reactor water samples were provided in
plastic bottles by station personnel:
1. 1 liter, acidified, collected Aug. 31, 1971 at
1522;
2. 500 ml, collected Aug. 31,1971 at 1522;
3. 100 ml, acidified, collected Nov. 30, 1971 at
1100;
4. 20 ml, collected Nov. 30,1971 at 1100;
5. 1 liter, acidified, collected Mar. 14, 1972 at
1000;
6. 500 ml, collected Mar. 14,1972 at 1000;
7. 150 ml, collected Dec. 13,1972 at 0825.
The unacidified samples were analyzed for 3H, "C,
3!S, and radioiodine; the acidified samples, which
contained 10% by volume of cone, nitric acid to reduce
deposition of radionuclides on the walls of the bottle,
and sample no. 7 were analyzed for other
radionuclides.
2.2Analysis
2.2.1 General. Aliquots of all samples were counted
for gross alpha and beta radioactivity, examined with
gamma-ray spectrometers and analyzed
radiochemically. Analyses were performed for high-
yield fission products and common activation
products. Because radioactive decay between sampling
and analysis was usually more than 24 hours,
radionuclides with half-lives less than 6 hours could not
be measured. Aliquot volumes for individual analyses
ranged from 1 to 200 ml.
A special effort was made to measure radionuclides
that emit only weak beta particles, such as 12.3-yr JH
(maximum beta particle energy, 18 keV), 5,730-yr 14C
(158 keV), 88-d 3!S (167 keV), and 92-yr "Ni (67 keV).
Radionuclide concentrations were computed from
count rates obtained with detectors calibrated with
radioactivity standards as functions of gamma-ray or
average beta-particle energies. All values were
corrected for radioactive decay or ingrowth, and are
given as concentrations at sampling time. Half-lives
and branching ratios are from recent publications.(6-9)
The difficulty of retaining radionuclides in solution
was reported in earlier publications, (10-12) and was
also observed during this study by measuring
radionuclides that remained on the empty plastic
sample containers when the liquid samples were poured
out after contact periods of days to weeks. Even with
acidification, losses of 10-50% were observed for
radionuclides such as "Cr, MMn, "Co, *°Co, and "Fe.
The following techniques were applied to prevent
underestimating the radionuclide content of liquid
samples:
1. Cutting the empty sample bottles into small
pieces and measuring gamma-ray emitters by
counting them in a container for which the
counting efficiency had been determined.
2. Collecting the liquid sample on a dried sponge
in a container to saturate the sponge with the
liquid at a volume calibrated for the counting
efficiency of gamma-ray emitters.
3. Passing solutions of low ionic content
immediately through cation- and anion-
exchange membrane filters* to collect
*Acropor SA-6404 and Acropor SB-6407, distributed by the Gelman Instrument Co., were found to be
satisfactory for this ionic separation.
-------
participate and ionic radionuclides on the
filters for analysis by a gamma-ray
spectrometer. The filtrate was also analyzed.
2.2.2 Gamma-ray spectrometry. Radionuclides
emitting gamma rays were identified by their
characteristic gamma-ray energies in aliquots of
reactor coolant water by multichannel spectrometry
with a Ge(Li) detector. Spectral analyses were obtained
at appropriate intervals to eliminate interference by
shorter-lived radionuclides, to measure half-lives and
confirm the identity of the radionuclides.
The large number of nuclides and the large
differences in concentration in the reactor water
samples made identification after collection on ion-
exchange papers convenient. This technique also
differentiated between particulate, ionic and neutral
species of the radionuclides. Sample no. 7 (Section
2.1.7) was analyzed by filtering a 35-ml aliquot of the
reactor water through a suction apparatus which
consisted of 3 cation- and 2 anion-exchange papers in
series. The papers were separated and transferred
individually to containers for spectral analysis. The 35-
ml filtrate was collected and also analyzed. Figures 2.3,
2.4, and 2.5 show the Ge(Li) spectra of each fraction 5
days after collection.
The radionuclides "Co, MCo, 134Cs, 1MCs, I37Cs, and
M'Np were predominant on the cation papers and "Cr,
"Mo, '"I, I531,115I, I13Xe and 140La on the anion paper.
The '"Xe was produced by beta decay of the 1HI. Only
about 1 percent or less of the radionuclides passed
through both filters and were in the filtrate.
Sample (6) and another aliquot of sample (7)
(Section 2.1.7) were analyzed by adding 20-ml to a dry
sponge in a falcon container. This volume just
saturated the sponge and expanded it to the 35 ml
geometry selected for calibration. This technique
enabled the liquid to be transported without losses from
spillage or from deposition on container walls.
Calculation of individual radionuclide concentrations
from Ge(Li) spectra of these samples agreed with
results obtained utilizing the ion-exchange technique
above.
Reactor water samples were analyzed by obtaining
repeated spectra over a period of several weeks after
collection. Initially, gamma rays of energies below 160
keV from relatively short-lived radionuclides were
obscured by the high '"Xe content, which also
produced an excessive counter dead time. This
interference was totally eliminated by boiling and
stirring a 35-ml aliquot with 5 ml cone. HC1. Replicate
tests indicated that less than 1 % of the "'I volatilized in
this process.
Samples were analyzed by either an 11.4- or 54-cm3
Ge(Li) detector or a 10-cm x 10-cm NaI(Tl) detector
with multichannel spectrometers. For those samples
containing fewer radionuclides at lower levels of
radioactivity, the higher energy resolution of the
Ge(Li) detector was generally unnecessary, and the
higher counting efficiency of NaI(Tl) detectors was
advantageous.
2.2.3 Radiochemistry. Radiochemical separations
were performed to confirm spectral identification by
gamma-ray energy and half-life, measure radionuclides
more precisely and at lower concentrations than by
instrumental analysis of a mixture, and detect
radionuclides that emit only obscure gamma rays or
none at z\\.(13) After chemical separation, the
following detectors were used: NaI(Tl) crystal plus
multichannel analyzer for photon-emitting
radionuclides; low-background end-window Geiger-
Mueller (GM) counter for "C, 32P, "S, "Sr, MSr, and
"*W; liquid scintillation spectrometer for 3H, "C and
*3Ni; and xenon-filled proportional counter plus
spectrometer for "Fe. Measurements with the GM
detector included observation of the effect of aluminum
absorbers on count rates to determine maximum beta-
particle energies and thus confirm radionuclide
identification.
2.3 Results and Discussion
2.3.1 Radioactivity in reactor water. Iodine-133,
IMI, "To, and "*Np were the most abundant of the
measured radionuclides listed in Table 2.1. The sum of
all measured radionuclides, except 3H and the noble
gases, for each sampling period ranged between 0.07
and 0.16 uCi/ml. In comparison, the sum of all
measured radionuclides reported by Pelletier except 3H
and the noble gases was 0.29 nCi/ml.(4) However,
radionuclides with half-lives less than 6 hours
contributed 0.22 uCi/ml to the latter value. Major
short-lived contributors were 2.71-hr MSr, 2.28-hr I31I,
52.3-min I34I, 32.2-min 13iCs, 83.2-min "'Ba and 18.3-
min 14lBa.
Several high-yield fission products could not be
detected at the limiting sensitivity of approximately 1 x
10"* uCi/ml (see footnote 3 to Table 2.1). Most of the
other radionuclides are neutron activation products
that have been reported earlier. (10-12) They are
formed in water, steel, boron (in the boron control
curtains), antimony (in the Sb-Be neutron sources), and
zirconium (in the Zircaloy-2 cladding). The activation
products "C and IJ4Sb were found at relatively low
concentration, as in previous studies///, 12) The gross
alpha radioactivity was low in all samples, 5 x 10~'
10
-------
10
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
Figure 2.3 Gamma-ray spectrum of radionuclides from reactor water retained on cation exchange paper, 0-2000 keV.
Detector: Ge(Li). 11.4 cm3.
Sample: Cation exchange paper containing activities from 20 ml, collected Dec. 13. 1972 at 0825
Count: Dec. 15. 1972, 97.6 minutes.
-------
100
200
3OO
4OO
500
600
700
800
900
1000
Figure 2.4 Gamma-ray spectrum of radionuclides from reactor water retained on anion exchange paper, 0-2000 keV.
Detector: Ge(Li). 11.4 cm3.
Sample: Anion exchange paper containing activities from 20 ml, collected Dec. 13, 1972 at 0825.
Count: Dec. 16, 1972, 19.8 minutes.
-------
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
Figure 2.5 Gamma-ray spectrum of radionuclides from reactor water not retained on cation or anion papers, 0-2000 keV.
Detector: Ge(Li). 11.4cm3.
Sample: Effluent from cation-anion exchange paper containing activities from 20 ml, collected Dec. 13, 1972
at 0825.
Count: Dec. 19, 1972, 99.8 minutes.
-------
Table 2.1 Radionuclide Concentration in Reactor Water, uCi/ml
1971
Radionuclide August 31
November 30
March 14
1972
December 13
Fission Products
BQ _C
50.5 -d Sr 1.5 x 10
28.5 -yr 90Sr 7 x 10"6
9.7 -hr 91Sr -5.8 x 10"3
QC _c
65 -d Zr** 4.1 x 10
35.1 -d 95Nb** <3 x 10"6
QQ -^
66.2 -hr MMo** 1.4 x 10
6.0 -hr 99mTc 2.1 x lo"2
39.6 -d 103Ru 8 x 10"6
36 -hr 105Rh NA
8.06-d 131I 6.9 x 10"3
20.9 -hr 133I 2.2 x 10"2
6.7 -hr 135I -2.5 x lo"2
5.29-d 133Xe 8.6 x 10"4
9.1 -hr 13SXe 1.3 x 10"2
2.07-yr 134Cs*** 2.6 x 10"5
13 -d 136Cs*«* 3.2 x 10"5
30 -yr 137Cs 6.0 x Ifl'5
12.8 -d 140Ba 6.7 x 10"4
32.4 -d 141Ce 4.4 x 10"5
33 -hr 143Ce NA
284 -d 144Ce -3 x 10'6
2.34-d 239Np*** 1.4 x 10"2
gross alpha -S x 10
from activation of water,
12.3 -yr 3H" 1.8 x 10"3
5730 -yr 14C <1 x 10"6
15.0 -hr 24Na 1.4 x 10"3
14.3 -d 32P 3.8 x 1C"5
27.7 -d 51Cr 7.1 x 10"3
313 -d 54Mn 1.1 x 10"4
2.7 -yr 55Fe 1.6 x 10"5
44.6 -d 59Fe 1.0 x 10
270 -d 57Co -1 x 10"6
71.3 -d 58Co 5.3 x 10~4
5.26-yr 60Co 3.9 x 10"A
12.8 -hr 64Cu NA
244 -d 65Zn NA
26 -hr 76As NA
2.7 -d 122Sb NA
60.2 -d 124Sb*** 1.7 x lo"5
5.1 -d l83Ta NA
24 -hr 187W NA
Concentration at time of sampling;
3.5 x 10"5
3.8 x 10"6
-7.3 x 10"3
8.2 x 10"5
1.1 x 10"4
8.4 x 10"4
1.8 x 10"2
7.8 x 10"5
-4.0 X 10"4
1.1 x 10"3
1.5 x 10"2
-2.7 x 10"2
6.4 x 10"4
1.8 x 10"2
1.7 x 10"5
<1 xlO-5
3.0 x 10"5
4.7 x 10"4
9.8 x 10"5
-2.0 x 10~4
-1.1 x 10"4
1.5 x 10"2
-2 X 10'7
7.0 x 10"5
3.0 x lo"6
4.8 x 10~3
2.4 x 10'6
1.3 x 10'6
9.2 X 10~4
3.8 x 10"2
1.2 x 10~6
2.7 X 10"4
7.6 x 10"3
2.6 x 10~2
2.3 x 10"2
NA
NA
4.1 X 10"5
3.0 x 10"5
7.1 X 10"5
6.1 x 10"4
1.7 x 10"5
NA
<3 x 10'6
3.6 x 10~3
<2 x 10"7
4.1 x 10"4
3.5 x 10"5
8.3 x 10"3
1.1 x 10"5
2.1 x 10"5
2.5 x lo"3
ND
-------
Table 2.2 Comparison of Radionuclide Concentrations Measured
and Calculated in Reactor Water, uCi/ml
Radionuclide
Average of measured
concentrations*
Reported concentrations
by AEC**(4)
Calculated from
NRC Reg. Guide l.CC+
Fission Products
89Sr
9°Sr
91Sr
9SNb
9SZr
97Zr
99Mo
99V
103Ru
106Ru
131I
133,
ISSj
132Te
134Cs
136Cs
137CS
140Ba
141Ce
144Ce
147Nd
3H
14
C
24Na
32P
SICr
54Mn
S5Fe
59Fe
58Co
60Co
63N1
65Zn
187W
239Np
gross alpha
1.3 x 10~4
1.2 x 10"5
6.5 x 10"3
3.3 x 10"5
3.4 x 10"5
<1 x 10'6
1.4 x 10"3
2.6 x 10"2
2.2 x 10'S
<1 x 10'6
4.8 x 10"3
2.1 x 10"2
2.S x 10~2
<1 x 10'6
4.5 x 10'5
2.8 x 10"S
7.0 x 10"5
7.1 x 10"4
4.9 x 10*5
3.0 x 10"5
<1 x 10'6
Corrosion
2.9 x 10~3
-6++
-4 X 10~
1.5 x 10"3
4.9 x 10"5
3.8 x 10"3
9.9 x 10"4
3.8 x 10"3
6.0 x 10"4
5.5 x 10~4
1.8 x 10"3
<1 x 10"6
<1.3xlO-5
4.0 x 10~3
1.8 x 10~2
•2 x 10~7
1.4 x 10"4
5.6 x 10"6
3.5 x 10"3
NR
<2 x 10'6
NR
2.1 x 10"3
2.0 x 10"2
NR
NR
3.9 x 10"3
1.7 x 10"2
2.3 x 10*2
<1.1 x 10'5
3.3 x 10"5
<1 xlO-5
5.7 X 10"5
5.9 x 10"4
6.0 x 10~5
NR
NR
and Activation Products
2.5 x 10"3
-fi
<1 x 10 6
1.4 x 10"3
2.9 x 10"4
1.9 X 10'3
4.3 x 10"5
2.2 x 10"3
2.4 x 10"S
3.3 x 10~5
7.8 x 10~5
<5 x 10~7
< 1 x 10~5
NR
1.8 x 10~3
<1 xlO-7
4 x 10"S
3 x 10'6
2 x 10"3
3 x 10~6
3 x 10'6
2 x 10'6
8 x 10"4
9 x 10"3
8 x 10'6
1 x 10'6
4 x 10"3
2 x 10"2
2 x 10"2
3 x 10'6
2 x 10"5
8 x 10-6
3 x 10"5
2 x 10"4
2 x 10"5
2 x 10'6
1 x 10'6
3 x 10"3
NR
3 x 10"3
8 x 10"5
2 x 10"3
3 x 10"5
4 x 10"4
2 x 10"5
8 x 10"5
2 x 10~*
4 x 10~7
8 x 10~5
-4
2 x 10 *
3 x 10"3
MR
*
Average of concentrations given In Table 2.1;< values were averaged as 1/2
Concentrations given In Table C-2 of Appendix B. NRC
to the parameters of the Oyster Creek reactor.'14'
tt_ . . . .
Regulatory Guide l.CC, adjusted
Based on only one analysis.
Note:
1. NR - not reported.
15
-------
uCi/ml or less. The beta-decay and absorption studies
performed on chemically purified phosphorus fractions
of each reactor water sample indicated that more than
90 percent of the beta radioactivity was due to "P. This
observation shows that "P, if present, can be no more
than 10 percent of the "P concentration.
The concentrations of radionuclides measured in
reactor water and presented in Table 2.1 were averaged
and are compared in Table 2.2 with measurements
made by the AEC during a 7-day period in January
1912,(4) and with concentrations based on the NRC
model for a 3400-MWt boiling water reactor.(14) In
order for the latter to be applicable to Oyster Creek, the
concentrations given by the model were adjusted as
described in the NRC Regulatory Guide l.CC with
respect to the Oyster Creek reactor parameters: (14)
1930 MWt power, 1.9 x 10' kg (4.2 x 10! Ibs) of water in
the reactor vessel, a cleanup demineralizer flow rate of
9.0 x 104 kg/hr (2.0 x 10' Ibs/hr), a steam flow rate of
3.2 x 10' kg/hr (7.1 x 10" Ibs/hr) and a ratio of
condensate demineralizer flow rate to steam flow rate
of unity (see Section 2.1). The adjustment factors,
which are multiplied by the NRC reference reactor
concentrations to approximate the Oyster Creek
reactor water concentrations, were about 0.67 for the
radioiodines and 0.39 for all other radionuclides. The
adjustment of the NRC reference reactor water 5H
concentration is based on an appearance rate in the
water of 120 Ci/yr and the weight of reactor vessel
water in the Oyster Creek reactor, 1.9 x 10! kg, with a
leakage rate of 6.5 x 10' kg/d.
For many of the radionuclides the three sets of
values are in agreement. The concentration predicted
by the NRC model agree with those measured within a
factor of 5 for more than 70 percent of the
radionuclides. Of the fission products, the measured
concentrations of "Nb, "Zr and 144Ce are significantly
higher than the predicted values — in general, most
measured concentrations are high compared to the
predicted concentrations. This is particularly true of
the corrosion and activation products, which can be
partially explained by the high concentrations
measured in the November 30, 1971, sample (see Table
2.1). This sample was collected shortly after startup, a
period during which high levels of corrosion products
might be expected in the reactor water. See, for
example, the high concentrations of MMn, "Fe, "Fe,
"Co, "Co, etc. for this period. Omission of the
November 30 data produces much better agreement
with most of the predicted activation product
concentrations.
Variations between measurements at different
times may be expected, as these nuclides are associated
mainly with "crud" and are either in or out of solution
depending on their chemical behavior in reactor water.
They may be deposited in the system resulting in low
measured concentrations at one time or be resuspended
or redissolved at another time. Pelletier has reported
that concentrations of radionuclides in the Oyster
Creek reactor water not only vary with time, but also
differ by factors of 5 to 7, depending upon the location
in the system at which the sample is collected.^
Fission and activation product concentrations in
reactor water are also affected by other variables,
including the quality of the fuel elements, the
occurrence of shutdowns, the length of operation, and
the rate of reactor water purification and turnover.
The activity ratios of '*Co/*°Co and MMn/°Co
measured in the reactor water by this laboratory are
0.31 and 0.55, respectively. These ratios are similar to
those reported by the AEC, (4) and are consistent with
measurements of the liquid radwaste (see Table 4.1,
and Appendix B.2). The NRC model correctly predicts
the s'Co/*°Co activity ratio but not the "Mn/*°Co ratio.
2.3.2 Tritium in reactor water. The average
measured 3H concentration shown in Table 2.2 is in
close agreement with the concentration reported by
Pelletier/49 and with that predicted by the NRC
model. (14) During this period, the station operator did
not report 3H concentrations in reactor water at the
Oyster Creek station.
The probable major sources of tritium in the
reactor water are: (1) ternary fission in the fuel, (2)
activation of deuterium in the water, and (3) neutron-
boron reactions in the boron control curtain. It is
difficult to ascertain which of these sources is the most
important. Even though the production of JH is 2000
times greater by fission and 700 times greater from
boron relative to that from deuterium, the diffusion
rate through the Zircaloy-2 cladding and from the
boron is unknown. (15) Experience has indicated,
however, that the latter is quite small. Estimated
formation rates of tritium from the three sources for a
1930-MWt GE-BWR with a 0.8 capacity factor follow:
Source
deuterium
fission
boron
Location
reactor water
in fuel
in control
elements
Formation
n\e,(!4)
uCi/s
0.20
380
155
Appearance
rate in
reactor
water, uCi/s
0.20
0.46*
0.16"
Annual
production ,
Ci
6.4
14.5
5.0
25.9
* based on an appearance rate of 3 x 10" pCi/s-MWt.<75,)
**Assumes a transfer to reactor water equal to that from
the fuel cladding, 0.10 percent.
16
-------
Approximate appearance rates in the reactor water are
listed in the fourth column. The appearance rate from
the deuterium in the water is equal to the formation
rate. The appearance rate from fission is taken from the
literature, (15) while the transfer to the water from the
boron curtains is assumed to be of the order of that
through fuel cladding, 0.1 percent. The estimated
annual production of tritium from each source
appearing in reactor water is given in the last column
with their sum, about 26 Ci. This estimated annual
production of 3H is low, considering that the annual
discharge was about 40 Ci in liquids (see Appendix B.3)
and 27 Ci in gas, mostly as water vapor (see Section
3.3.6). A better estimate of the tritium production can
be made using the NRC Regulatory Guide l.CC which
predicts a steady-state condition to exist relative to 3H
in the reactor water and a release of 0.025 Ci/yr-MWt
through liquid and vapor pathways. Adjusted to the
Oyster Creek BWR, a 3H production of approximately
50 Ci/yr is predicted, a value more closely
approximating the measurements. As the boron control
curtains were removed in October 1971 with no
apparent decrease in the quantity of 3H discharged, the
appearance rate of 3H in reactor water from the boron
curtains may be overestimated in the above tabulation;
that due to fission may be underestimated by a factor of
about 4. Because the production of JH from fission is
very large compared to that by activation of deuterium,
any significant transfer through the cladding should be
readily detectable in the reactor water.
The 3H concentrations measured in Oyster Creek
reactor coolant during this study compare as follows to
those reported from other BWR power stations: (15)
Station
Period
Reactor water,
nCi/ml
Oyster Creek
Nine Mile Point
Dresden- 1
Dresden-2
Millstone Point
Monticello
1971-1972
1970
1968
1970
1971
1971
0.9-4.5
0.9
1.3-1.7
0.2-1.0
0.6-0.9
0.6-1.1
The 3H concentrations at other BWR stations are
similar to those measured at Oyster Creek, and are
about three orders of magnitude lower than were
observed at the pressurized water reactors utilizing
stainless-steel-clad fuel. (11,12)
2.4 References
1. Lish, K. C, Nuclear Power Plant Systems and
Equipment, Industrial Press, New York, N. Y. (1972).
2. Jersey Central Power and Light Co., "Oyster
Creek Nuclear Generating Station Semi-Annual
Repts.," Nos. 1-9, Morristown, N. J., May 3, 1969
through December 31,1973.
3. Jersey Central Power and Light Co., "Facility
Description and Safety Analysis Report, Oyster Creek
Nuclear Power Plant," Vol. 1 and 2, AEC Docket No.
50-219-1 and 50-219-2, Morristown, N. J. (1967).
4. Pelletier, C. A., "Results of Independent
Measurements of Radioactivity in Process Systems and
Effluents at Boiling Water Reactors," USAEC Rept,
unpublished (May 1973).
5. Directorate of Regulatory Standards, U.S.
Atomic Energy Commission, "Numerical Guides for
Design Objectives and Limiting Conditions for
Operation to Meet the Criterion 'As Low As
Practicable* for Radioactive Material in Light-Water-
Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor Effluents," AEC Rept.
WASH-1258, Vol. 1(1973).
6. Lederer, C. M., J. M. Hollander, and I. Perlman,
Table of Isotopes, John Wiley, New York (1967).
7. McKinney, F. E., S. A. Reynolds, and P. S.
Baker, "Isotope Users Guide," AEC Rept. ORNL-
IIC-19(1969).
8. Martin, M. J. and P. H. Blichert-Toft,
"Radioactive Atoms," Nuclear Data Tables A8, 1
(1970).
9. Bowman, W. W. and K. W. McMurdo,
"Radioactive-decay Gammas," Nuclear Data and
Nuclear Data Tables 13,89 (1974).
10. Kahn, B,, et al., "Radiological Surveillance
Studies at a Boiling Water Nuclear Power Reactor,
Public Health Service Rept. BRH/DER 70-1 (1970).
11. Kahn, B., et al., "Radiological Surveillance
Studies at a Pressurized Water Nuclear Power
Reactor," EPA Rept. RD 71-1 (1971).
12. Kahn, B., et al., "Radiological Surveillance
Study at the Haddam Neck PWR Nuclear Power
Station," EPA Rept. EPA-520/3-74-007 (1974).
13. Krieger, H. L. and S. Gold, "Procedures for
Radiochemical Analyses of Nuclear Reactor Aqueous
Solutions," EPA Rept. EPA-R4-70-014 (1973).
14. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Effluent
Treatment Systems Branch, "Calculation of Releases
of Radioactive Materials in Liquid and Gaseous
Effluents from Boiling Water Reactors (BWR's) —
Principal Parameters Used in BWR Source Term
Calculations and Their Bases," Regulatory Guide
l.CC, Appendix B, Draft (1975).
15. Smith, J. M. and R. S. Gilbert, "Tritium
Experience in Boiling Water Reactors," in Tritium, A.
A. Moghissi and M. W. Carter, eds., Messenger
Graphics, Phoenix, 57-68 (1973).
17
-------
3. AIRBORNE RADIOACTIVE DISCHARGES
3.1 Gaseous Waste System and Samples
3.1.1 Gaseous waste system. The gaseous waste
treatment system at Oyster Creek during this study was
typical of then current techniques at boiling light-water
reactors. Non-condensable gases are removed
continuously from the reactor steam system, diluted
with large volumes of air after a short delay, and
discharged through a tall stack. The effluent airborne
radionuclides are either gases — fission-produced
tritium, krypton, xenon and iodine and activation-
produced tritium, carbon, oxygen and nitrogen — or
particles. The movement of airborne radioactivity from
the reactor to discharge is depicted in Figure 3.\.(l-8)
A program to improve the waste system to reduce the
amounts of effluent radioactivity is being considered by
the station operator. #)
Most radioactivity discharged to the stack is gas
separated directly from steam in the three main
condensers. This gas contains hydrogen and oxygen
from radiolytic decomposition of reactor coolant
water, air that has leaked into the system, water vapor
and trace quantities of fission and activation products.
After passing through the turbines, the gas is separated
from condensed steam by steam jet air ejectors (SJAE)
on the condensers and passed to a 193-m3 pipe. The
approximately one-hour passage through the delay
pipe permits removal of most radionuclides by physical
decay, especially the abundant activation products of
air — 10-min 13N, 7.1-s "N and 29-s "O. Other
radionuclides with half-lives of 10 min or less are
reduced to at least one percent of their initial activity.
The discharged radioactivity consists mostly of §3"Kr,
M-Kr, "Kr, "Kr, IMXe, '"'Xe, '"Xe, and "'Xe.
Gas passing through the delay line is held up,
according to station staff, 50 to 70 minutes, depending
on the flow rate. #) Delay times measured in early 1972
were found to be 72 and 75 min when the estimated
flow rate was 44.6 cc/s (94.4 cfm) (some discrepancy
exists since the station reported a 25 percent higher
flow rate at the time(7J). At the end of the delay line,
the gas passes through two high-efficiency paniculate
air (HEPA) filters (nominal particle removal efficiency
of 99.95 percent for 0.3-um size)to remove
accompanying aerosols, particularly the radioactive
progeny of decayed gases.
Stack height -112m
Air
Ejector
72 minuti
Delay Lin*
Seal*
Gland Stal
Condenser
Air Ejector
l7m'/» from Turbine Building roof exhauster*
to atmoiphere during warm weather (at 33m)
.
(31
.Turbine Bldo. Vent*
(39 m3/*)
(Rodwo»te Bldg. Vent
(7.3 m3/*)
Figure 3.1 Gaseous Waste Disposal System.
19
-------
Air inleakage to the turbine is prevented by passing
0.1 percent of the steam through the shaft gland seal
annulus. The steam is then condensed and returned to
the reactor coolant system. Noncondensable gases are
removed by a SJAE at the condenser and vented to the
stack through a 1.75-min holdup pipe at a release rate
of 0.28 mVs (600 ctm).(7)
Gaseous wastes are diluted at the stack by
ventilation air exhausted from site structures. The air
flows at 31 mVs (65,000 cfm) from the reactor building,
7.3 mVs (15,000 cfm) from the radwaste building, and
39 mVs (82,400 cfm) from the turbine building. (3>
During warm weather, air in the upper level of the
turbine building is discharged directly to the
atmosphere at 17 mVs (36,000 cfm) through roof
exhausters at an elevation of 33 m (108 feet).
Building ventilation air becomes contaminated
from many small sources of steam leaks and from
liquid leakage through valve stems, pump seals or
flanged connections. Airborne radioactivity is released
as it separates from steam or as a portion of the liquid
evaporates before drainage. The Oyster Creek staff has
indicated that small amounts of noble gases originate in
the fuel pools and cleanup demineralizer area in the
reactor building and in the steam leaks in the heater bay
and condensate area of the turbine building. (3) The
Environmental Statement assumed steam leakage rates
during reactor operation to be 230 kg/hr in the reactor
building, 770 kg/hr in the turbine building, and
negligible in the radwaste building.(i9 These are also
the rates estimated for a model BWR plant by the
AEC(9>nd the EPA. (70;
Minor sources of airborne radioactivity released to
the stack without treatment include:
1. Air in the normally-isolated drywell (the reactor
primary containment) and the suppression chamber
may become radioactive from inleakage of radioactive
gases or by activation with neutrons. The drywell and
chamber are purged directly to the stack without
treatment before they are opened for refueling or
maintenance. The free air volume has been specified to
be 8.64 x 103 m3 (305,000 ft3)^ or 5.10 x 103 m3
(180,000 ft3); (7,) the former value may include the
volume of the suppression chamber located adjacent to
the drywell.
2. Mechanical vacuum pumps remove
noncondensable gases from the main condensers
during reactor startup when steam to operate the SJAE
is unavailable. The off-gases are vented to the holdup
pipe used for turbine gland seal leakage. The pumps are
nominally operated for 4 hrs during startup.^
The stack stands 112 m (368 ft) above ground level
and 119m above mean sea level. Its diameter at the top
is 2.5 m (8.25 ft) and, for an effluent linear velocity of
15.9 m/s, the discharge rate is 77.9 m3/s. A probe
located at 81 m (265 ft) is used to withdraw samples of
stack effluent continuously at a nominal rate of 1 liter/s
(2 cfm). The air sample is piped to the base of the stack
and passed sequentially through a 5-cm-dia. glass fiber
filter for retention of particles, a 27-g bed of activated
charcoal (Cesco type B cartridge) for sampling
radioiodines, and a radiation detector for monitoring
radioactive noble gas effluent. At the time of the study,
the filter and cartridge were normally changed every
three days and analyzed for radionuclide contents.
At the time of the study, off-gas from the SJAE was
sampled daily. A gross radioactivity analysis was
performed with a NaI(Tl) detector after a 2-hour
waiting period. Samples taken on Wednesdays were
analyzed for specific radionuclides with a NaI(Tl)
detector and gamma-ray spectrometer at intervals of 1,
2 and 5 hours after sampling.^
3.1.2 Radionuclide release. The permissible limits
for Oyster Creek stack effluents have been established
as follows by the AEC to assure conformance to Title
10 Code of Federal Regulations Part 20:
1. The maximum release rate of gross activity,
except iodines and particulates with half-lives
longer than eight days, shall be limited in
accordance with the following equation:
Q = 0.21/E Ci/s
where Q is the stack release rate (Ci/s) of gross
activity and E is the average gamma energy
per disintegration (MeV/dis). (The nominal
limit observed by the station is 0.26 Ci/s.(3J)
2. The maximum release rate of iodines and
particulates with half-lives longer than eight
days shall not exceed 4 uCi/s.
3. Radiogases released from the stack shall be
continuously monitored except for the short
time during monitor filter changes. If this
specification cannot be met, the reactor shall
be placed in the isolated condition/.?)
Gaseous waste discharges of radioactive noble
gases, halogens, particles and tritium reported
periodically by the station operator (11) are tabulated in
Appendices B.2 and B.3. The station has reported the
following annual discharges since reactor operation
began:
20
-------
Year
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
Noble gases
7.0
1
5
8
8
.1
.2
.7
.1
x
X
X
X
X
IO3
10s
Iff
Iff
10'
Halogens
3 x 1Q-3*
3.1 x 10-'*
2.0
6.3
6.7
Particles
8 x IO-1
1
1
2
.0 x
.7 x
.3 x
4.2 x
io-2
lo-'f
lo-'f
io-1
3H
**
**
**
7.5 x
3.2 x
io-1
io-1
* Includes only halogens with half-lives greater
than 8 d.
** Included with noble gas total.
f No alpha-emitting radionuclides detected.
3.1.3 Sample collection. Samples of off-gas from the
main condenser SJAE were obtained at a point 4
minutes into the delay line on August 31, 1971, January
18, 1972, April 10 and 12, 1972, August 24, 1972,
December 13, 1972 and March 28, 1973. All samples
were obtained in duplicate. Samples were supplied by
station personnel in 15-cc glass serum bottles (in 4-cc
bottles for August 1971 samples) stoppled with rubber
inserts and covered with sealing wax.
Stack effluent samples were collected in evacuated
metal bottles from a port following the filter and
cartridge in the stack air monitoring line. Samples
collected were:
Date
Volume,
liters
Date
Volume,
liters
January 20, 1972 1.8
February 29, 1972 34.
April 10, 1972 1.8
May 17, 1972 (during
refueling) 34.
August 23, 1972 1.8
December 13, 1972 8.2
March 28, 1973 34.
Paniculate air filters exposed in the stack monitor
during 16 sampling periods ranging from July 1971 to
December 1972 were obtained. Also provided were 17
charcoal cartridges representing essentially the same
periods. These samples were provided by the station
staff after they had completed their analyses that
required several weeks, which precluded measurement
of short-lived emissions. The sample of December
1972, however, was provided 6 days after removal.
Other samples included 34 liters of off-gas from the
turbine gland seal condenser SJAE (February 29,
1972), 1.8 liters of air from the reactor drywell (April
11, 1972) and 34 liters of air exhausted through the
ventilation ducts from each of the turbine, reactor and
radwaste buildings (March 28,1973).
As part of the joint study, the AEC Health and
Safety Laboratory (HASL) obtained off-gas samples
from the SJAE on August 31, 1971, February 29, 1972,
April 10 and 12, 1972, and March 28, 1973. (7, # To
study variation of individual radionuclide
concentrations, HASL obtained off-gas samples on the
morning and afternoon of January 18 to 20 and
morning of January 21, 1972. Their onsite
measurements with a Ge(Li) detector and
multichannel analyzer provided data on many short-
lived gases. HASL has also reported results of gas
samples obtained from the stack and the turbine gland
seal condenser on February 19, 1972. HASL
measurements are tabulated in Appendices D.I to D.4.
3.2Analysis
3.2.1 Gamma-ray spectrometry. Radionuclides
that emit gamma-rays were routinely analyzed with a
10- x 10-cm NaI(Tl) detector coupled with a 400-
channel pulse-height analyzer. Samples containing
many radionuclides were analyzed with 11.3-cc or 55-
cc Ge(Li) detectors and a 4096-channel pulse-height
analyzer. Iron-55 was measured with a xenon-filled x-
ray proportional counter and a 200-channel pulse-
height analyzer.
Sample analyses were begun normally two to five
days after collection, hence only radionuclides with
relatively long half-lives were usually detectable. Off-
gas from the steam condenser air ejectors was counted
in the collection bottles. Aliquots of 1.8-, 8.2-, or 34-
liter bottles were transferred to 209-cc glass flasks,
sealed with rubber stoppers, aluminum bands and
sealing compound. Particulate air filters and charcoal
cartridges were placed directly on the detectors.
Detection efficiencies for the radionuclides,
containers, sample volumes and media of interest were
determined with standardized radioactive solutions
and gases provided by the National Bureau of
Standards. Because glass contains MK, and charcoal,
K and J"Ra, distinct background measurements were
made for these materials.
Counting intervals and techniques were selected to
provide, when possible, analytical precision of ^10
percent or better at the 95-percent confidence level.
The usual counting duration for low-level radioactivity
was 1000 min. Samples were re-analyzed periodically
to confirm container sealing integrity and radionuclide
quantification and to look for longer-lived
radionuclides.
Radionuclide decay scheme data were obtained
from compilations provided by the Nuclear Data
Project. (12,13)
3.2.2 Radiochemical analysis. Krypton-85 was
separated from other gases by a cryogenic technique
21
-------
(14) and transferred to 25-cc bottles containing 15 cc of
1-mm-dia. plastic scintillator spheres for analysis by a
liquid scintillation counter. Approximately one half of
the sample volume was used.
The other half of the gas sample was used for
duplicate measurements of tritium as HTO vapor and
HT or other gaseous forms and 14C as CO2 and other
gaseous forms (CO, CH4, etc.). Aliquots were mixed
with radioactively pure H2) CH4, and CO2 carrier gases
and if necessary, water vapor. The mixture was passed
through a separation train consisting sequentially of a -
76" C freeze trap for removal of tritiated moisture, a
bubbler containing Ba(OH)2 to collect 14CO2, an
alumina-platinum (0.5 percent) catalyst heated to 750°
C for oxidation of hydrogen (collected in a second
freeze trap) or other 14C gases (removed in a second
bubbler with Ba(OH)2). Tritium was measured by
liquid scintillation counting for at least 300 min.
Carbon-14 was determined by low background GM
beta particle detectors and, for samples obtained after
July 1972, by liquid scintillation counting.
Strontium was chemically separated from the
paniculate filters and measured with low background
GM beta particle detectors for 100-min periods.
Strontium-90 was distinguished from "Sr by separating
and counting the 90Y daughter.
3.3ResultsandDiscussion
3.3.1 Gaseous radionuclides discharged from
reactor coolant at main condenser steam jet air ejectors.
Radionuclides found in off-gas from the SJAE include,
as given in Table 3.1, long-lived noble gases, gaseous
3H, and 14C, both as CO2 and other gaseous carbon.
Measurements by HASL of long-lived as well as many
short-lived noble gases, I3'I and, on one occasion, "N
are presented in Appendix D.I.(7,8) Included in the
tables are the gross release rates of radioactive stack
effluents at the time of sampling, as reported by the
station operator or measured by HASL.
Average discharge rates and estimates of annual
releases of radionuclides from the SJAE delay line are
given in Table 3.2 (EPA measurements) and Appendix
D.2 (HASL measurements). Average release rates
during sampling were calculated by multiplying mean
concentrations (last columns, Table 3.1 and Appendix
D.I) by the delay line flow rate. To obtain
representative annual discharges, the individual
radionuclide release rates (Table 3.2, column 1) were
normalized by the ratio of the gross radioactivity
release rates during sampling (Table 3.1, last line) to
3.90 x 104 uCi/s, the average release rate during reactor
operation from July 1,1971 to June 30,1973. Estimates
of annual radionuclide discharges were based on 80
percent plant availability.
The SJAE off-gas delay line discharges to the stack
about 1 x 10' Ci/yr, consisting almost entirely of noble
gas radionuclides. Tritium and 14C releases are on the
order of 1 and 3 Ci/yr, respectively. Release of "N
based on a single observation is estimated to be 500
Ci/yr.
Annual releases estimated frorh measurements
compare as follows with values calculated from the
source term for the AEC model BWR plant (9) and
values presented in the station Environmental
Report:^
Annual
discharge,
Ci
Model
Radionuclide
1.86-hr
4.48-hr
10.7 -yr
76.3-min
2.80-hr
3.16-min
11.9 -d
2.25-d
5.29-d
15.65-min
9.15-hr
3.83-min
14.17-min
8.06-d
20.9 -hr
Total
"•Kr
"•Kr
"Kr
"Kr
"Kr
"Kr
"'-Xe
"'•Xe
"5Xe
""Xe
'"Xe
"7Xe
1MXe
1J1I
'"I
Measured BWR/-0/
6.9
1.1
1.3
1.4
5.1
1.6
8.8
3.0
6.0
1.7
9.5
x
x
X
X
—
—
X
X
X
X
—
X
—
X
104
10't
10'
10'
io't
10't
104
10't
104
10'
3.1
6.9
4.2
1.3
2.0
0
3.7
5.0
1.4
1.6
3.8
2.2
4.5
8.3
4.5
1.0
x
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
x
104
10*
10J
10s
10s
10'
101
10'
104
10'
104
10'
10*
Station
" report^/*
8
2
3
.8
.2
.0
2.0
3
7
1
.3
.6
.2
—
x
—
X
X
—
—
—
X
—
X
...
x
—
—
X
104
10'
10s
10'
10'
104
10*
* Based on source term for a 3500 MWt
reactor with 30 min SJAE off-gas delay normalized
to 1930 MWt and 75 min delay.
**Applies for 32 days of steady operation at 1850 MWt,
60 min delay and a delay line flow rate of
5.3 x 104 cc/s.
t Average of values from Table 3.2 and
Appendix D.2.
Annual discharges based on measurements agree
very well with values computed from the AEC model,
excepting "Kr, "'"Xe and I31I. Results from the station
Environmental Report are consistently higher, which
probably results from the choice of different operating
parameters.
Estimated SJAE discharges provided in the AEC
Environmental Statement^ for Oyster Creek
approximate those of the AEC Model BWR, except
that IM"Xe and '"Xe releases are computed to be 500
and 29 Ci/yr. Estimates given by the EPA model(lO)
are very similar to the AEC model, although the "Kr
discharge is calculated to be 240 Ci/yr.
22
-------
Table 3.1 Concentrations of Longer-Lived Radioactive Gases Released from
Radionuclide
3H (gas)
3
H (HO)
14
C (non-CO )
14
C (CO )
85., 2
Kr
133m
Xe
133
Xe
135,,
Xe
Gross radio-
activity
release rate,
yCi/s
•— — . Concentration,* pCi/cc
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
1.0+O.lxlO"2
_ i
2.7^0.1x10
_ i
5.6^0.1x10
3.6xl04
2 ±1
<1
7.2+0
S.5+_0
xlO"6
XIO'6
.8xlO'6
.8xlO-6
NA
4.4+0
1.0+0
2.6+0
1x10
1x10
4.7X104
2 +1 xio"7
<2 xlO"7
3.5+0.8X10"7
4.2+0.3X10'6
9.9+^O.lxlO-5
5.9iO-3xlO"3
1.4+^O.lxlO-1
NA
7.8xl04
3.9+0.7xlo'7
2.
2.
2.
7
1.
3.
<9 xlo'8
5+O.Sxlo"7
3+0.2X10'6
7+O.lxlO'4
+1 XIO'3
3+O.lxlO"1
9+O.lxlO"1
7.8xl04
nug. it, iy/^
<3 Xl0'7
<3 Xl0~7
1.8+0.8xlO'7
2.8+O.lxlO'6
2.2+0.1xlO"S
9.2+0.4xlO~4
2.3+O.lxlo"2
NA
1.4xl04
Dec. 13, 1972
4 +1 xlO'7
<1 xlO-7
1.5+0.9X10"7
1.5+0.4X10"6
3.0+0.2X10"5
4.4+0.4xlO"4
6.7+O.lxlo"2
NA
4.0xl04
Mar. 28
6 +2
< 5
1.0+0.5
1.2+0.1
NA
1.3+0.1
3.1+0.1
7.1+0.1
1.2
, 1973
xlO'8
xio"7
xlO"2
x 10"1
x 10"1
x 105
Average**
7 x 10"7
< 3 x 10"7
1.4 x 10"6
2.7 x 10"6
7.9 x 10"5
5.7 x 10"3
1.5 x 10"1
4 4 x lo"
**Average concentration computed for 7S-min delay. Results of Apr. 10 and 12, 1972, were averaged as single sample.
Notes:
1. + values indicate analytical error expressed at 2o; < values are minimum detectable concentration levels at the 3o counting error.
2. NA - not analyzed.
-------
Table 3.2 Release Rates and Estimated Annual Discharges of Longer-Lived Radioactive
Gases from Main Condenser Air Ejector Delay Line
Radionuclide
Average release
rate during
<7* «-»Tr»v\ l-iYirf 'ft llL 1 /
Normalized avg.
release rate,**
yCi/s
Estimated annual
release,t
Ci
3H (gas)
3H (HO)
id
*C (non-C02)
14C (CO )
85Kr
133mXe
133Xe
135Xe
*
Based on a delay
**
*
3
< 1
6
1
3
2
6
2
.2
.2
.2
.5
.6
.7
.0
line
" •*
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
1C'2
io-2
io-2
io-1
2
io3
io4
off-gas
2
<8
4
8
3
1
4
1
flow rate
.1
.0
.0
.1
.8
.7
.1
of
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
4.
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
5
-2
-3
-2
-2
2
3
4
x IO4 cc/s.
.
5
<2
1
2
7
4
1
2
.0 x 10'1
x 10
.0
.0
.9 x IO1
.6 x IO3
.2 x IO5
8 y in5
. o X 1U
,
Average of gross radioactivity stack release rates during sampling
normalized to annual average stack release rate of 3.90 x IO4 yCi/s
reported by station during operation in period of July 1, 1971 to
June 30, 1973.
t Based on 292 d (2.52 x IO7 s) of reactor operation per year (80 percent
availability).
Because of the good agreement between measured
values and the AEC model, the latter may be useful for
inferring discharges of those radionuclides not
measured because they possess either weak energy
emissions, low abundance or rapid decay rates. Of the
four noble gases, ""Kr is the most abundant, being
discharged at about 3 x IO4 Ci/yr.
3.3.2 Radionuclides discharged from air ejector at
turbine gland seal condenser. Gaseous radionuclides
with half-lives longer than 14 min were measurable in
the single sample of gas from the condenser SJAE for
gland seal steam. Concentrations of long-lived
radionuclides are given in Table 3.3. Noble gas
measurements by HASL are presented in Appendix
D.3.
All radionuclides measured in off-gas from the
main condensers were found in gland seal condenser
off-gas. The latter, however, contained a higher
percentage of short-lived radionuclides at the point of
discharge to the stack due to a shorter holdup period.
Gaseous tritium was not detectable in gland seal
exhaust (the presence of tritiated water vapor is
uncertain). Carbon-14 was measurable only as CO2.
Radionuclide release rates to the stack and
estimated annual discharge from this pathway are also
given in Table 3.3 and Appendix D.3.
Annual releases calculated for Oyster Creek from
the AEC model are as follows: <
•)•
»5»
Kr 4.8 x 10' Ci/yr
Kr 8.0 x 10'
"Kr < 1
"Kr 2.4 x IO2
2.6 x IO2
6.2 x IO2
2.3 x IO-2
1.3 x 10"'
"Kr
"Kr
uij
'"I
13"Xe
'"•Xe
'"Xe
'"•Xe
13!Xe
'"Xe
1MXe
6 x 10-'
5
1.4 x 10'
3.8 x IO1
4.1 x IO2
1.1 x IO5
1.2 x 10J
Ci/yr
Calculated releases agree within a factor of two
with measured values, except for 135"Xe. The agreement
indicates that the computed values may be used to infer
releases of short-lived noble gases. Annual noble gas
discharge from this pathway is of the order of 4.5 x IO3
Ci/yr, much less than one percent of that from the
main condenser SJAE. Radioiodine releases from the
gland seal system are indicated to be about 0.2 Ci/yr.
Gland seal steam flows nominally at 0.1 percent of
the total steam flow (3.3 x 10s kg/hr). Comparison of
the release rate of relatively long-lived 1MXe from the
gland seal condenser to the rate computed from its
measured concentration in main condenser SJAE off-
gas for February 29, 1972 (see Appendix D.I) yields a
result close to the nominal exhaust rate of 0.1 percent.
24
-------
Table 3.3 Long-Lived Radioactive Gases from the Turbine Gland Seal Condenser
Air Ejector, February 29, 1972
Radionuclide
Concentration,
yCi/cc
Release rate,*
uCi/s
Estimated annual
release,**Ci
3H (gas)
3H (H20)
14C (non-C02)
14C (CO )
85Kr
133Xe
< 3
<4
6 +2
2.4 + 0.
2 +_ 1
x IO-10
NA
x IO-10
x ID'10
1 x 10~8
x 10"5
< 8 x 10~
v _ _
<1 x 10~4
2 x 10"4
6.7 x 10~
6
<2
< 3
5
1
2
x
x
X
.9 x
X
1Q-3
io"3
io"3
io-1
io2
* Based on an off-gas flow rate of 2.8 x 10 cc/s (600 cfm).
**Calculated from the release rate by normalizing to the annual average stack
release rate of 3.9 x IO4 yCi/s and multiplying by 292 d (2.52 x 10' s) of
operation. Stack release rate at sampling time was 3.5 x IO4 uCi/s.
Notes:
1. ^values indicate analytical error expressed at 2o; < values are
minimum detectable concentration levels at 3o counting error.
2. NA - not analyzed.
Annual release of I3N from gland seal leakage is
calculated to be 5 x IO2 Ci. This estimate is based on the
single HASL measurement of "N in main condenser
SJAE off-gas (see Appendix D.I) corrected for decay to
the beginning of the delay line, 0.1 percent steam flow,
1.75 min of delay, and a turbine gland seal SJAE flow
rate of 2.8x10'cc/s.
3.3.3 Radionuclides in building ventilation air
exhaust. Xenon-135 was the most abundant long-lived
radioactive gas measured in the single samples of air
exhausted from the reactor, turbine and radwaste
buildings, as shown in Table 3.4. Tritiated water vapor
and 14C as CO2 were found in all samples. Turbine and
radwaste building exhaust contained long-lived noble
gases; only "Kr was detectable in reactor building
exhaust. No radioiodines were detected in any sample.
The minimum detectable concentration of I3T, for
example, in this case was <4 x 10"* uCi/cc at the 3 a
level.
Turbine building air bore the highest gaseous
radioactivity, due presumably to more leakage of steam
to air. Its annual discharge of long-lived gases is
estimated to be 3 x IO3 Ci/yr, while the reactor and
radwaste buildings contribute about 3 Ci/yr and 2 x IO3
Ci/yr, respectively.
Annual release values at the reactor building
computed in the Oyster Creek Environmental
Statement were 1 Ci/yr for individual noble gas
radionuclides and 1.5 x 10"1 and 6.2 x 10J Ci/yr for 13II
and 133I, respectively.^ Turbine building discharge
computed from the model contains all the noble gas
radionuclides found in off-gas from the condenser
SJAE (see Section 3.3.1). All nuclides, except "Kr and
IJI"Xe, are exhausted at more than 1 Ci/yr, and the
total is estimated to be 1.2 x IO3 Ci/yr. (6) Calculated
emissions of I33Xe and 135Xe, however, are both 25 times
lower than annual discharge estimated from measured
concentrations (Table 3.4), indicating a higher steam
leakage rate than the 770 kg/hr value assumed for the
model. Iodine-131 and IMI releases given by the model
are 0.53 and 3.0 Ci/yr, respectively.
Radwaste building annual discharges are not
estimated in the Environmental Statement. Values
reported elsewhere by the station operator indicate that
1.9 x IO3 Ci/yr are released when the gross
radioactivity release rate is 3.9 x IO4 uC\/s.(3)
Annual releases of 3H based on measurements by
HASL in 1972 are 2.0, 8.3 and 0.8 Ci/yr for reactor,
turbine and radwaste building exhaust air,
respecti\e\y.(15) The two sets of results agree within a
factor of 3.
Additional sampling is recommended to obtain
discharge rates representative of operating cycle
variations, to obtain measurements of short-lived noble
25
-------
Table 3.4 Long-Lived Radioactive Gases in Building Ventilation Air, March 28, 1973
Concentration,
uCi/cc
Release rate,*
uCi/s
Estimated
annual release,**
Ci
3H (gas)
3H (H_0)
fc
14C (non-COj
»CO,
2
85Kr
133m
AC
133Xe
135Xe
3H (gas)
3H (H20)
14C (non-C02)
14c (co )
85Kr
133mv
Xe
133Xe
135Xe
3H (gas)
3H (HO)
1/1 2
14C (non-C02)
14C (CO )
85Kr
133xee
135Xe
<6
2.1 +_ 0.
<6
3.8 ^ 0.
7.9 +_ 0.
<8
<8
<4
<6
2.4 +. 0.
<5
8.7 + 0.
1.4 +_ 0.
<3
7.9 +_ 0.
2.4 +_ 0.
<5
7.8 +_ 0.
<5
1.4 +. 0.
2
5
5
1
3
1
6
2
5
4
x
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Reactor
io-11
io"9
io"n
io-10
io-10
io-7
io-8
io"7
Turbine
io-11
!o-n
io-10
io-9
io"7
io"7
io-6
Radwaste
io-11
io-9
io-11
io-10
Building
<2
6
<2
1
2
<2
<3
<1
.4
.2
.4
x
x
X
X
X
X
X
io"3
io"2
io-3
io-2
io-2
io1
io1
<5
1
<5
3
6
<7
< 7
<3
x
.6
x
.1 X
.1 X
X
X
X
io-2
1C'2
lo"1
io-1
io2
io1
io2
Building
<2
9
<2
3
5
<1
3
9
.4
.4
.5
.1
.4
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
io"3
io-1
io-3
io-2
io-2
io1
io1
io1
<6
2
<6
8
1
<3
7
2
X
.4 x
X
.5 x
.4
x
.8 x
.4 x
1
io1
io-2
ID'1
io2
io2
io3
Building
<4
5
<4
1
.7
.0
X
X
X
X
io"4
io"2
io"4
1Q-3
< 1
1
< 1
3
x
.8
x
.2 x
NA
<4
9.8 +_ 0.
7.1 + 0.
4
3
X
X
X
io-6
io-7
io-6
<3
7
5
.2
.2
X
X
io1
io1
<9
2
1
x
.3 x
.6 x
io-2
f\
ID'2
-
io2
io2
io3
* Based on ventilation —
turbine building -39 m^/o
radwaste building- 7.3 m^/s
**Computed for 292 d/yr (2.52 x 10? s) of reactor operation for the reactor and
turbine buildings and 365 d (3.15 x 10? s) of radwaste operations.
Notes"
1.' ± values are analytical error expressed at 2a;
-------
gases and to measure discharges during operation of
the turbine building roof exhausters.
3.3.4 Radionuclides in reactor drywell air. The
single sample of drywell atmosphere contained 3H as
gas and water vapor, "C as CO2, and noble gases with
half-lives longer than two days, as shown in Table 3.5.
Short-lived radionuclides could not be analyzed since
three days elapsed between sampling and
measurement. As indicated in Figure 2.2, the
containment had not been purged for at least three
months before the date of sampling.
Table 3.5 Long-Lived Radioactive Gases
in the Reactor Drywell Atmosphere, April 11, 1972
Radionuclide
3H
3H
14C
14C
8SK
133
133
(gas)
CH20)
(non-C02)
(C02)
r
Xe
Concentration
uCi/cc
1.
4
5.
1.
7
1.
0
5
6
3
+
+
<
+
+
+
+
0.2
1
6
0.5
0. 1
2
0.1
x
X
X
x
x
x
x
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
, Estimated
-8
-8
-9
-8
-6
-6
-4
1
6
<5
9.
2.
1
2.
annual discharge,*
Ci
.7 x
x
X
.6 x
.8 x
x
.2
ID'4
1C'4
io-5
io-4
IO-2
lO'1
Based on a drywell free air volume of 8.64 x IO9 cc
(305,000 ft3) and two drywell purges per year.
Note:
1. ^values indicate analytical error expressed
at 2o;
-------
Table 3.6 Concentrations of Long-Lived Radioactive Gases in Stack Effluent
3H (gas)
3H (H20)
14C (non C(
14c ceo.)
133mXe
133Xe
135Xe
le Jan. 20. 1972
< 1 x 10'8
1.0 + 0.6 x 10"8
32) <2 x 10"8
< 1 x 10"8
NA
6^2 x 10"6
8.9 + 0.2 x 10"5
NA
Feb. 29, 1972
<2 x 10"
NA
<2 x ID' 10
1.3 + 0.5 X 10"9
8.0 + 0.1 x 10"8
NA
1.1 + 0.1 x 10"4
NA
< 3 x 10~9
1.9 + 0.3 x 10"8
< 9 x 10
< 1 x 10*
1.2 + 0.1 x 10"7
7 *_ 2 x 10"6
8.7 + 0.1 x 10"5
NA
Concentration, uCi/cc
3.7 + 0.5
(total
2.5 + 1.0
(total
2.5 + 0.1
<4
x !0-10
SH)
1410"10
x ID'9
NA
xlO-7
NA
< 8 x
3.7 + 0.6 x
< 3 x
1.4 + 0.2 x
5.2 +_ 0.1 x
NA
3.2 +_ 0.3 x
NA
io-y
_Q
10 8
Q
10 9
io-8
10 °
io-5
Dec, 1
<5
1.0 +_ 0.
2.0 + 0
3.7 ^0
7.6 *_ 0
<2
4.4 +_ 0
3, 1972
X ID'10
-8
2 X 10
.0
4 x 10
5 x 10'9
4 x 10 8
x 10 6
3 x 10"5
NA
1.4
2.0
1.0
2.9
3.2
1.0
1.8
5.4
^0.2
+_ 0.1
+ 0.6
± o-1
+ 0.2
^ 0.2
i o-i
+ 0.2
x
x
X
X
X
x
X
X
io-y
-8
10
-10
10
io-9
-7
10
c:
10 b
ID'4
-4
10 ^
Gross radio-
activity release 4
rate, pCi/s 4.7 x 10
3.5 x 104
7.8 x 104
0
1.4 x
!04
4
.0 x IO4
1.2
X
iob
Obtained during reactor refueling.
Notes:
1. + values indicate analytical error expressed at 2o;
-------
Table 3.7 Release Rates and Estimated Annual Discharge of Long-Lived Radioactive Gases in Stack Effluent
Average release rate,* uCi/s
Radionuclide
3H (gas)
T
H (H20)
14C (non-CO )
1 L
14c (co.)
85Kr
133mXe
133Xe
135Xe
reactor
operation**
3.
9.
4.
3.
6.
3
4.
1.
5
8
0
2
9
9
4
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
io-2'
10 1
ID'2
10"1
io2
io3
io4
refueling
2.9 x IO"2
(total 3H)
1.9 x 10~~2
(total 14Q
2.0 x IO"1
< 3 x IO1
Estimated annual release, t Ci
reactor
operation
8
2
1
8
1
7
1
3
.9 x
.5 x
.0
.1
.7 x
x
.2 x
.5 x
io-1
io1
io2
io3
io5
IO5
refueling
1.2 x IO"1 8'
2.
8.4 x 10"2 1-
8.
8.4 x 10"1 1.
7
< 1 x IO2 1.
3.
total
.9 x
5 x
0
1
7 x
x
2 x
5 x
lO'1
io1
io2
io3
io5
io5
* Based on a stack flow rate of 77.9 m3/sec (165,000 cfm)and average measured concentrations in Table 3.6.
**Average of gross radioactivity release rates during sampling normalized to annual average release rate of
3.90 x IO4 yCi/s reported by plant for period of July 1, 1971 to June 30, 1973.
t Estimates based on 292 days (2.52 x IO7 s) of reactor operation and 50 days (4.32 x IO6 s) for refueling.
proper test of agreement requires that all pathways be
sampled at the same time.
3.3.7 Radioactive particles discharged through the
stack. Particulate radionuclides in stack effluents,
given in Table 3.8, consisted of those found in reactor
coolant (see Table 2.1). Most were long-lived fission
and activation products; on occasion radionuclides
with half-lives of a day to several days were measured
when the interval between sampling and analysis was
relatively short. The principal source of particulate
radioactivity at Oyster Creek is reported to be
unfiltered air exhausted from the reactor, turbine and
radwaste buildings/75^
Table 3.9 provides average concentrations and
release rates of the sampled radionuclides and
estimated annual discharge. Particle collection was
assumed to proceed at a constant rate during the
approximately 3-day exposure of each sample. Halves
of the 10 samples collected in January 1972 were
composited for analyses since several bore no
identification. The principal radionuclides released as
particles are u°Ba, 21'Np and the radioiodines, 131I and
U3I (radioiodines are discussed in Section 3.3.8).
Annual releases of the longer-lived radionuclides were
computed for 365 days of discharge per year, since
release of particulate radionuclides in ventilation air
Table 3.8 Concentrations of Longer-Lived Particulate Radionuclides in Stack Effluent
Radionucl:
27.7 -d
313 -d
2.7 -yr
44.6 -d
71.3 -d
5.26-yr
50.5 -d
28.5 -yr
66.2 -hr
8.06-d
2.07-yr
30.0 -yr
12.8 -d
32.8 -d
J
Lde
51Cr<
54Mn
55Fe
59Fe<
58Co
6°Co
89Sr
90Sr
"MO
131,
134Cs
137Cs
140Ba
141Ce
Concentration, iiCi/m^
luly 12-15,
1971
5
1.
1.
1
1.
4.
9.
1.
6.
7.
4.
1.
4.
x 10"7
8 x 10'7
3 x 10"6
x 10"7
4 x 10"7
6 x 10"?
8 x 10"6
0 x 10"7
NA
3 x lO'6
1 x 10'8
2 x 10"7
1 x 10"S
3 x 10'7
July 24-27,
1971
<5 x 10"7
5.0 x IO*8
2.9 x 10"7
<1 x 10"7
3 x 10'8
1.3 x 10"7
2.4 x 10"6
4.1 x 10"8
NA
2.5 x 10"6
l.S x 10"7
3.6 x IO*7
3.1 x 10"6
1.5 x 10"7
July 27-30,
1971
5.0 x 10"6
1.2 x 10'7
1.7 x 10'6
<1 x 10"7
1.3 x 10"7
5.0 x 10"7
1.3 x 10'5
8.0 x 10"8
NA
6.8 x 10"6
7.0 x 10"8
2.4 x 10'7
1.2 x 10"5
5.9 x 10"7
Jan. 1-Feb. 1,
1972*
1.6 x 10'7
6.4 x 10"7
NA
2.7 x 10"7
1.9 x 10"7
1.7 x 10"6
NA
NA
NA
2.9 X 10"5
5.8 x 10"8
2.2 x 10"7
5.0 x 10"6
1.7 x 10"7
Aug. 15-18,
1972
2.2
1.9
1.9
1.5
3.3
3.3
1.5
8.4
2.8
9.4
5.8
9.5
9.0
<4.0
x 10
x 10
x 10
x 10
xlO-6
x 10"
x 10"5
x 10
x 10
x 10"
xlO-7
x IO-7
x 10
x 10"8
Aug. 18-21,
•1972
3.8 x 10"6
7.0 x 10"7
5.4 x 10"6
2.5 x 10*7
7.0 x 10"?
1.4 x 10'6
2.1 x 10"5
6.6 x 10"8
3.9 x 10*6
1.8 x 10"5
4.4 x 10"7
9.9 x 10"7
1.3 x 10"S
<3.0 X 10"8
Dec. 12-15,
1972**
4.0 x
8.9 x
4.8 x
<9.5 x
5.1 x
3.5 x
NA
NA
5.2 x
1.6 x
1.9 x
3.7 X
2.3 x
5.6 x
10'4
io-5
ID'4
ID'6
io"5
io-4
ID'4
io-2
io-4
io-4
!o-s
Measurement of composite set of 10 filters.
"Also measured, in vd/m3: 244-d 65Zn - 2.4 x 10~5, 20.9-hr 133I - 1.6 x 10"2, 13-d 136Cs - 2 3 x lo"5
and 2.34-d * yNo - 3.5 x 10--5 ' '
and 2.34-d "aNp - 3.5 x 10
Note: NA - not analyzed.
29
-------
Table 3.9 Average Concentration and Release Rates and Estimated Annual Discharge
of Longer-Lived Participate Radionuclides from Stack
Radionuclide
Average
concentration,*
iiCi/m3
Average
release rate**
Estimated annual
discharge,"'"
Ci
51Cr
54Mn
55Fe
59Fe
58Co
6°Co
65Zn
89Sr
9°Sr
99u
Mo
131I
133
134Cs
136Cs
137Cs
14°Ba
141r
Ce
239M
Np
1.
2.
1.
3.
1.
8.
2.
1.
7.
2.
3.
1.
4.
2.
9.
5.
1.
3.
0 x
3 x
7 x
3 x
3 x
7 x
4 x
3 x
4 x
7 x
9 x
6 x
9 x
3 x
5 x
8 x
9 x
5 x
1C'4
io-5
io-4
io-6
io-5
io-5
io-5tt
io-5
io"8
io-4
io-3
io-2tt
io-5
io-5tt
io-5
io-4
io-5
io-3tt
8.
1.
1.
2.
1.
6.
1.
1.
5.
2.
3.
1.
3.
1.
7.
4.
1.
2.
0 x
8 x
3 x
6 x
0 x
8 x
9 x
0 x
8 x
1 x
0 x
2
8 x
8 x
4 x
5 x
5 x
7 x
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
10
1
1
-2
-4
-3
-3
-3
-3
-6
-2
-1
-3
-3
-3
-2
-3
-1
2.
5.
4.
8.
3.
2.
6.
3.
1.
5.
9.
3.
1.
5.
2.
1.
4.
6.
5
7
1
2
2
1
0
2
8
3
5
0
2
7
3
4
7
8
x
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
io-1
io-2
10"1
io-3
io-2
io-1
io-2
io-2
io-4
io-1
io1
io-1
io-2
io-1
io-2
Mean of the average concentrations for the July 1971, Jan. 1972, Aug. 1972
and Dec. 1972 sampling periods, given in Table 3.8, except as noted.
** i
Computed for a stack flow rate of 77.9 m-Vs.
t
tt
Estimate based on 365 days (3.15 x IO7 s) of stack discharge for longer-lived
radionuclides and 292 days for short-lived 99Mo, 133I and 23yNp.
'From single sample of Dec. 12-15, 1972.
was found to continue during purging and refueling
operations//^ Approximately 50 Ci of paniculate
radionuclides with half-lives longer than
approximately one day were estimated to be discharged
annually.
3.3.8 Radioiodines discharged through the stack.
Concentrations and release rates of I3II measured on 17
occasions with the charcoal stack sampler are given in
Table 3.10. Release rates varied from 0.12 to 0.49 uCi/s
during the observations. The mean release rate
obtained from the averages for the five individual
sampling periods is 0.30 uCi/s.
The annual "'I discharge from charcoal
measurement is estimated to be 7.6 Ci for 292 d of
reactor operation. As indicated in Section 3.3.7,
however, slightly more than this annual amount of "'I
was found on the particle sampler preceding the
charcoal — presumably gaseous radioiodine entrained
with particles. Summing these, the overall "'I discharge
is 17 Ci/yr. Since the SJAE is the expected major
source of "'I to the stack, it is difficult to explain the
low amount measured (1.7 Ci/yr) relative to that in the
stack. Although the AEC model BWR predicts five
times more I31I by the SJAE pathway (see Section
30
-------
Table 3.10 Gaseous Iodine-131
Concentrations and Release Rates in Stack Effluents
Concentration, Release rate,**
Period uCi7m3* yCi/s
July 12-15, 1971 2.0 x 10~3 1.5 x lo"1
24-27 1.7 x 10~3 1.4 x ID"1
27-30 1.6 x Iff3 1.2 x 10"1
Jan. 1- 4, 1972 3.1 x 10"3 2.4 x ID"1
4-7 2.7 x 10~3 2.1 x 10"1
7-10 3.2 x 10~3 2.5 x ID"1
10-13 2.8 x 10~3 2.2 x lO""1
13-16 3.3 x 10 2.6 x 10
16-19 3.1 x 10~3 2.4 x 10"1
19-22 2.7 x 10~3 2.1 x lO"1
22-25 2.7 x 10~3 2.1 x lO"1
25-29 3.0 x 10~3 2.3 x 10~l
Jan. 29-Feb. 1 4.4 x 10~3 3.5 x lO"1
Apr. 7-11 3.3 x 10"3 2.5 x 10"1
Aug. 15-18 6.3 x 10"3 4.9 x lO'1
18-21 6.1 x 10~3 4.7 x 10"1
Dec. 12-15 5.0 x 10~3 3.9 x lO"1
* Analytical precision of all samples is 0.1
percent or less at the 2o confidence level.
Retention efficiency of cartridge assumed
to be 90 percent.
**Computed for a stack flow rate of
77.9 m3/sfl6S,000 cfm).
3.3. \),(9) this will not account for all of the difference
since the other pathways will contribute only small
additional amounts (see Sections 3.3.2 and 3.3.3).
The AEC has reported that, based on a single set of
measurements at Oyster Creek, most radioiodines were
found to be discharged to the stack from the SJAE
pathway, with lesser amounts from building ventilation
exhaust/7, /# The AEC indicated further that nearly
all of the iodine was of an organic species. The
remainder consisted of hypoiodous acid and a small
fraction of elemental iodine. The ratios of other iodine
radionuclide activities to '"I in the stack were
measured to be:
2.3-hr "'I - 0.24
20.9-hr 1JJI - 0.73
52.0-min 1J4I - 0.29
6.7-hr "'I - 0.38
Additional sampling at Oyster Creek is necessary
to determine the pathways of all iodine radionuclides to
the stack and their chemical composition.
3.3.9 Estimated annual radionuclide discharges.
The effluent values discussed in the preceding parts of
Section 3.3 provide the radioactivity source terms for
planning environmental measurements. The total
discharged radioactivity and the associated radiation
doses (discussed in Section 3.3.10) based on estimates
from measured values are as follows:
Estimated annual
Estimated dose at location
annual of highest annual
release , * concentration , * *
Radionuclide Ci mretn
Gases
12.3 -yr 3H (as HT) 8.9 x 10"' 4.2 x 1(T7
(as HTO) 2.7 x 10' 3.9 x 10°
5730. -yr I4C (total) 9.1 8.7 x 10"
10. -min "N 1. x 10J 7. x 10°
1.86-hr "-Kr 3.1 x 10't 1.2 x 10''
4.48-hr ""Kr 6.9 x 104 6.6 x 10 '
10.7 -yr "Kr 1.7 x 10' 5.4 x 1CT5
76.3 -min "Kr 1.3 x 10s 6.2 x 1Q-'
2.80-hr "Kr 1.4 x 10s 4.5 x 10'1
3.16-min "Kr 8.3 x 10't 3.2 x IQr3
11.9 -d "'"Xe 3.7 x 10't 8.8 x \V*
2.25-d ""Xe 5.1 x 103 1.6 x 10"1
5.29-d '"Xe 1.6 x 10s 5.1 x 10''
15.65-min 1M"Xe 8.9 x 10' 3.4 x 10''
9.15-hr 135Xe 3.0 x 10* 2.9 x 10T1
3.83-min '"Xe 1.5 x 10't 5.7 x 1Q-3
14.17-min 1MXe 6.2 x 104 2.4 x 10'1
Panicles and UII
27.7 -d "Cr 2.5 x 10"' 9.0 x 10''
313. -d MMn 5.7 x Iflr1 1.6 x 10"
2.7 -yr "Fe 4.1 x 1Q-' 3.9 x ID-*
44.6 -d "Fe 8.2 x 10* 1.2 x 10"
71.3 -d "Co 3.2 x KT1 4.7 x 10"
5.26-yr "Co 2.1 x KT1 2.0 x Iff4
244. -d "Zn 6.0 x 10r2 6.8 x 10"
50.5 -d "Sr 3.2 x NT1 1.9 x 10"
28.5 -yr "Sr 1.8 x 10" 1.0 x 10"
2.76-d "Mo 6.6 x 10'' 2.7 x 10-*
8.06-d "'I 1.7 x 10' 3.2 x 10'2
2.07-yr 1J4Cs 1.2 x 10'1 8.5 x 10"
13. -d 114Cs 5.7 x 10T1 2.7 x 10"
30.0 -yr mCs 2.3 x KT1 1.3 x 10"
12.8 -d '"Ba 1.4 4.0 x 10"
32.8 -d 141Ce 4.7 x 10'1 2.7 x 10"
2.34-d "*Np 8.5 1.2 x 10"
* Except for 3H (as HT), 14C (as COj) and "Kr,
the annual release represents the sum of the pathways;
annual release of the former radionuclides are based on
stack measurements. Values apply for an average stack
release rate of 3.9 x 104 uCi/s of gross radioactivity.
••Dose to critical organ specified in Appendix F.I.
t Calculated release, not directly measured.
31
-------
Because these release values are based on
occasional — sometimes single — measurements, they
can only approximate the total discharges. Whether
they are representative was checked by comparing: (1)
measurement of the same pathway at several points, as
in Section 3.3.6; (2) discharge data reported by the
station for the semi-annual periods from July 1971 to
June 1973 (see Appendices B.2 and B.3); and (3)
discharge estimates in the Final Environmental
Statement. (6)The latter two are as follows:
Annual discharge, Ci
Radio-
nuclide
3H
"-Kr
8!"Kr
8!Kr
"Kr
"Kr
"Kr
m-Xe
I3J'Xe
'"Xe
"'"Xe
1J!Xe
'"Xe
1MXe
"'I
"'I
Oyster Creek
reports
5.1 x
—
7.4 x
—
1.4 x
2.1 x
...
—
—
1.1 x
...
2.6 x
—
6.9 x
6.2
7.3
10-'
104
10s
10'
10'
10!
104
Environmental
Statement
estimate
3.4 x
6.9 x
4.2 x
1.4 x
2.0 x
8.3 x
3.6 x
5.0 x
1.4 x
3.0 x
3.8 x
1.5 x
1.1 x
1.2 x
6.6 x
104
104
10J
10'
10s
102
10'
102
10s
104
10s
103
10'
10'
10'
Annual noble gas discharges estimated from
measurements agree with station reports. The values in
the Environmental Statement are similar except that
these predicted quantities are two-fold higher for "Kr
and l35l"Xe than measured values, and 10-fold lower for
'""Xe. The Environmental Statement estimates for
133"Xe and U5"Xe, however, differ considerably with
AEC model BWR(9) values from which they are
derived. Radioiodine releases reported by the station
operator are lower than the estimates based on
measurements in this study or given in the
Environmental Statement. Estimated 3H discharge
from measurements is much higher than the reported
station release; it is not certain whether the station
measures 3H discharge as HT, HTO or both.
The measurements show the predominant source of
gaseous radionuclides found in the stack to be off-gas
from the main condenser SJAE. Most tritiated water
vapor, however, comes from steam leaks in the turbine
building. Based on AEC model BWR values, (9)
practically all short-lived "Kr and 117Xe results from
turbine gland seal exhaust.
3.3.10 Estimated maximum radiation dose to
individuals. The annual total-body dose to an adult
residing where the highest annual average
concentration occurs (2.4 km north of the stack)^ is
estimated to be 2.3 millirems (mrem) from airborne
effluents according to the values listed in Section 3.3.9.
Practically all of the dose resulted from radioactive
noble gases. Only about 0.1 percent of this dose was to
specific organs from inhaling 131I and airborne
radioactive particles, and nearly all of this results from
I3II. The annual thyroid dose from inhaling I3II at the
maximum ratio of dose to intake — for a 4-year-old —
would be four times the listed value, i.e., 0.13
mre.m,(10) Additional dose increments would be
expected from exposure to participate progeny of noble
gases ("Kb, 13'Cs) and other iodine radionuclides. On
the other hand, actual dose to persons would be lower
since no adjustment was made for residential shielding
and occupancy factors.
The annual dose for each listed radionuclide was
obtained by computing the annual average
concentration in ground-level air at the point of interest
and then converting from concentration in air to tissue
dose. To determine the average concentration at
ground level, the estimated annual discharge was
divided by 3.15 x 107 s/yr to obtain the average
discharge rate. This rate was multiplied by the annual
average X/Q (see Appendix E.3). The X/Q values for
various locations and distances were calculated by the
station operator, using meteorological data compiled
during a 12-month period.^ The conversion factors
from annual average radionuclide concentrations in
ground-level air to the annual dose to specific critical
organs are given in Appendix F. 1.
The radiation dose at the nearest residence and
other significant locations listed in Appendix E.3
relative to the maximum average ground-level
concentration are:
Location
nearest residence
nearby population group
nearby population group
fishing in canal
Ratio of
annual dose
Distance to dose
and at maximum
direction location
1.1 km N 0.17
2.4 km ESE 0.91
2.4 km NNE 0.64
0.8 km ESE 0.05
The relative dose to persons fishing in the coolant water
discharge canal is based on 700 hrs of fishing per year.
32
-------
3.4 References
1. Jersey Central Power and Light Co., "Facility
Description and Safety Analysis Report, Oyster Creek
Nuclear Power Plant," Vol. 1 and 2, USAEC Docket
No. 50-219-1 and 50-219-2, Morristown, N. J. (1967).
2. Jersey Central Power and Light Co., "Oyster
Creek Nuclear Generating Station - Environmental
Report," Amend. No. 2, Morristown, N. J. (1972).
3. Jersey Central Power and Light Co., "Proposed
Modification to the Gaseous Radioactive Waste
System for Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station,"
Morristown, N.J.( 1973).
4. Ross, D. A., Jersey Central Power and Light Co.,
personal communications, 1972 and 1973.
5. Sullivan, J. L,, Jersey Central Power and Light
Co., personal communications, 1972 and 1973.
6. U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, "Final
Environmental Statement Related to Operation of
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station," AEC
Docket No. 50-219 (1974).
7. Beck, H., et al., U.S. Atomic Energy
Commission, personal communication, July 1972.
8. Beck, H., U.S. Atomic Energy Commission,
personal communication, April 16,1973.
9. Directorate of Regulatory Standards, U.S.
Atomic Energy Commission, "Final Environmental
Statement Concerning Proposed Rule Making Action:
Numerical Guides for Design Objectives and Limiting
Conditions for Operation to Meet the Criterion 'As
Low As Practicable' for Radioactive Material in Light-
Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor Effluents,"
AEC Rept. WASH-1258, Volumes 1 and 2 (July 1973).
10. Office of Radiation Programs, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, "Environmental
Analysis of the Uranium Fuel Cycle. Part II-Nuclear
Power Reactors," EPA Rept. EPA-520/9-73-003C
(1973).
11. Jersey Central Power and Light Co., "Oyster
Creek Nuclear Generating Station Semi-Annual
Reports," Nos. 1 to 11, Morristown, N. J. (1969 to
1974).
12. Martin, M. J. and P. H. Blichert-Toft,
"Radioactive Atoms," Nuclear Data Tables AS, Nos.
1-2 (1970).
13. Martin, M. J., "Radioactive Atoms-
Supplement I," AEC Rept. ORNL-4923 (1973).
14. Stevenson, D. L. and F. B. Johns, "Separation
Techniques for the Determination of "Kr in the
Environment," in Rapid Methods for Measuring
Radioactivity in the Environment, IAEA, Vienna,
157-162(1971).
15. Pelletier, C. A., "Results of Independent
Measurements of Radioactivity in Process Systems and
Effluents at Boiling Water Reactors," USAEC Rept.
(1973).
33
-------
4. RADIONUCLIDES IN LIQUID WASTES
4.1 Liquid Waste Systems
4.1.1 Waste processing. (1) At the Oyster Creek
station, four categories of radioactive liquid waste are
segregated and processed according to source: low
conductivity wastes, high conductivity wastes,
chemical wastes, and laundry wastes (sometimes called
detergent wastes). The source of liquid waste and the
liquid waste processing systems, at the time of the
study, are shown in Figure 4.1.
Low conductivity wastes are high purity liquids,
primarily from piping and equipment drains. Other
sources include liquid waste from the fuel pool, reactor
cleanup system, adsorption chambers, spent resin and
filter sludge dewatering, low conductivity condensate
demineralizer backwash, and the chemical waste
control subsystem. The liquid is transferred from the
initial collection points to the 114,000-liter waste
collector tank. Liquid from the waste collector tank is
processed through a precoat-type waste collector filter
and a mixed-bed waste demineralizer. Spent filter
media and demineralizer resins are backwashed to the
solid waste disposal system for solidification and
shipment off-site for disposal. The processed liquid is
collected in one of two 114,000-liter waste sample
tanks. The liquid is sampled and analyzed for
radioactivity before either (1) return for further
processing, (2) transfer to the condensate storage tank,
or (3) discharge to the circulating water discharge
canal. The system is designed to process about 190,000
liters/day, providing approximately one day of decay
time for liquids passing through at that rate.
High conductivity wastes are low purity liquids,
primarily from floor drains. The liquid is transferred
HIGH CONDUCTIVITY WASTE
Rgdwoit* Floor Drain Sump«.(2L_
Rtoetor Bldn. Floor Orpin Sumet (2)
Turbine Bldfl. Floor Droln Sumps (31
rvvw*ll Floor Drain Sump
CHEMICAL WASTE
Onmlcolt
Loborotorv Drolns
Sootpl* Tank Drains
Condtnsatt Dtmintrollitr Rogantratlon
Shoo Decontamination Proln«
LOW CONDUCTIVITY WASTE
Rodirast* Eauipmtnt Drain Sump
Floor
Drain
Fllttr
(1100 l./min)
Wotli
N«u»roll»r
Tank.C)
(45,400 l.*aj
Evaporator Cendtniatt
Fuel Pool Wo»tt«
Turbint Bldo. Eoulomtnt Drain Took
Rtactor Blda. Eoulonmit Drcln Tank
Drywsll Equipment Drain Tank
Stock Eaulomtnt Droln Sump
DtmlntroHztrBackWQih
Floor Drain
Sgmplt
Tanks
(37,900 I.
To Solid Wostt
Disposal Systtm
To Condtnsat*
Storagt Tonk
Wait!
Samplt
TankslZ)
(114,000 I. taj
LAUNDRY WASTE
Laundry
Cask Dtcontamination
.Laundry
Drain
Tonk.C)
, (7600 l.«aj I
To condtnwr Cooling
Watsr and Olscharat
Canal
Figure 4.1 Liquid radioactive waste system.
35
-------
from collection sumps to the 37,900-liter floor drain
collector tank in the radwaste building. From the tank
the liquid is processed through a precoat-type floor
drain filter and collected in one of two 37,900-liter floor
drain sample tanks. The liquid is transferred from the
floor drain sample tanks to a waste neutralizer tank for
processing with chemical wastes. At a processing rate
of 30,000 liters/day, approximately 3,5 days of decay
time are provided for the high conductivity liquid
waste.
Chemical wastes consist of laboratory drainage and
condensate demineralizer regeneration solutions which
have high conductivities and variable concentrations of
radioactive material. The wastes are collected in one of
two 45,400-liter waste neutralizer tanks along with the
waste transferred from the floor drain sample tanks.
The liquid collected in the waste neutralizer tanks is
sampled for analysis, then neutralized and processed
through the evaporator at a rate of 57 liters/min. The
condensate from the waste concentrator is routed to the
radwaste equipment drain sump for processing as low
conductivity waste. A flow rate of 7,000 liters/day
through the system would provide a decay time of 3.5
days for the chemical waste.
Laundry waste from the laundry operation and
waste from the shipping cask decontamination station
are collected in one of two 7,600-liter laundry drain
tanks. These wastes are discharged to the circulating
water discharge canal without treatment. Flow
through this system is assumed by the AEC to be 3,000
liters/day//;
4.1.2 Radionuclide release. Radionuclide liquid
release limits for the Oyster Creek station are based on
the following:^
1. The release of radioactive liquid effluents shall
be limited such that the concentration of
radionuclides in the discharge canal at the site
boundary shall not at any time exceed the
concentrations given in Appendix B, Table II,
Column 2, of 10 CFR 20 and notes 1 through 5
thereto.
2. Radioactive liquid effluent being released into
the discharge canal shall be continuously
monitored, or, if the monitor is inoperative,
two independent samples of any tank to be
discharged shall be taken, one prior to
discharge and one near the completion of
discharge, and two station personnel shall
independently check valving prior to
discharge of radioactive liquid effluents.
The radionuclides discharged in liquid waste from
the Oyster Creek station between 1971 and 1973 are
tabulated in Appendix B.4 and summarized in Table
4.1. The average concentration of radionuclides in the
discharge canal due to station releases can be calculated
from dilution volumes (see Table 4.1) as follows:
1971: uCi/ml = amount released (Ci/yr) x 9.5 x 10""
1972: uCi/ml = amount released (Ci/yr) x 8.6 x 10'10
1973: uCi/ml = amount released (Ci/yr) x 8.4 x 10""
The limits in the discharge canal for an annual flow
of 1.1 x 10" ml and based on the limits listed in
Appendix B, Table II, column 2 of 10 CFR 20 are
tabulated in Table 4.1 with the radionuclide discharges.
Table 4.1 Radionuclides Discharged in Liquid Waste, Ci/yr
Radionuclide 1971 1972 1973
3H 21.45 61.62 36.60
51Cr 0.164 0.118 0.489
54Mn 0.431 0.630 0.172
58Co 0.108 0.153 0.043
60Co 0.823 1.676 0.272
59Fe 0.045 0.020 0.001
65Zn NR
89Sr
90Sr 0.3
NR 0.001
0.182
*3 °'228 0.028
91Sr 0.050 0.065 0.002
99
Mo 0.129 0.215 0.243
99mTc 0.101 0.199 0.242
124Sb 0.003 0.003 NR
131I 0.382 0.452 0.082
133I 0.291 0.414 0.078
133Xe NR
135Xe NR
0.784 0.754
2.487 2.221
154
Cs 0.101 2.062 0.083
137Cs 0.242 3.047 0.082
140
Ba-La 0.160 0.067 0.147
14 ^6 NR
144Ce NR
NR 0 . 005
NR 0.020
7^Q
"3Np 0.656 0.683 0.233
Limit,*
Ci/yr
3 x 106
2 x 106
1 x 105
1 x 10S
5 x 104
7 x 104
1 x 104
1 x 104
1 x 102
8 x 104
4 x 104
3 x 106
2 x 104
2 x 103
8 x 103
_ --
...
1 x 104
2 x 104
2 x 104
1 x 105
1 x 104
1 x 105
Waste volume,
107 liters 2.40 1.58 1.24
Dilution volume,
1012 liters 1.05
1.16 1,19
Discharge into circulating cooling water flowing
at the rate of 1.1 x 10 ml/yr and permissible
concentrations from Table II, Column 2, 10 CFR 20.
Note: NR - not reported.
36
-------
The individual radionuclides were discharged at
concentrations at or below 0.1 percent of these limits.
4.2 Samples and Analyses
4.2.1 Samples. The following samples of liquid
waste were provided by the station staff:
1) waste sample tank "A", 1 liter, acidified,
collected Aug. 30, 1971 at 0830;
2) waste sample tank "A", 1 liter, acidified,
collected Jan. 18, 1972 at 0840;
3) waste sample tank "A", 500 ml, collected Jan.
18,1972 at 0840;
4) waste sample tank "A", 1 liter, acidified,
collected Mar. 2, 1972;
5) waste sample tank "A", 500 ml, acidified,
collected April 12, 1972;
6) waste sample tank "A", 500 ml, collected
April 12, 1972;
7) waste sample tank "A", 1 liter, collected Sept.
25, 1972;
8) waste sample tank "B", 1 liter, collected Sept.
25, 1972;
9) waste sample tank (unspecified), 3 liters,
collected Aug. 23,1972 at 1100;
10) waste sample tank "A", 1 liter, acidified,
collected July 16, 1973 at 0945;
11) waste sample tank "A", 1 liter, acidified,
collected Nov. 29,1973 at 1500;
12) laundry drain tank, 3 liters, collected Jan. 22,
1972;
13) laundry drain tank, 1 liter, collected Mar. 2,
1972;
14) laundry drain tank, 1 liter, acidified, collected
May 16,1972 at 1305; and
15) laundry drain tank, 1 liter, collected May 16,
1972 at 1305.
Liquid wastes were sampled from only two points
in the liquid waste system: 1) the waste sample tanks
(the treated effluent from the low and high
conductivity waste and chemical waste), and 2) the
laundry waste tanks (liquids from the laundry and cask
decontamination). These samples are pertinent to the
environmental study because radionuclides in these
liquid effluents are discharged directly to the coolant-
water canal which empties into Barnegat Bay.* The
measurement of radionuclides in the wastes, therefore,
provides guidance for analyzing samples from the
aquatic environment, in which radionuclides are in
many cases near or below minimum detectable levels.
The samples obtained on Jan. 18, 1972, April 12,
1972, May 16, 1972, Sept. 15, 1972 and July 16, 1973,
were collected while the liquids in the waste sample
tank or laundry drain tank were being discharged to
Oyster Creek. During these discharges, large water
samples were also collected from Oyster Creek. The
radionuclide concentrations measured in the latter
samples are compared in Section 4.4.4 with
concentrations computed from waste sample tank
liquid analyses, using the appropriate dilution factors.
4.2.2 Analysis of waste solutions. The liquid waste
samples were analyzed in a similar manner as the
reactor water (Section 2.2.1), except that aliquot
volumes were 100 ml or larger since radioactivity levels
were much lower. The samples were analyzed
spectrometrically with a Ge(Li) gamma-ray detector.
The samples were first counted within a day to a week
after collection and again several weeks later to identify
radionuclides by combining observations of gamma-ray
energies and decay rates. The identified radionuclides
were quantified by computing disintegration rates from
count rates under characteristic photon peaks on the
basis of prior counting efficiency calibrations of these
detectors. In general, the minimum detectable levels
were 1 x 10"' uCi/ml, and only radionuclides with half-
lives of 12 hours or more could be detected. The
unacidified samples were analyzed radiochemically for
JH, 14C and U1I, and the acidified samples, for "P, !!Fe,
"Ni,"SrandMSr.£r;
4.3 Results and Discussion
4.3.1 Radionuclides in waste sample tank. The
radionuclide concentrations measured in liquids from
the waste sample tank are listed in Table 4.2. In
general, concentrations were low in August 1971 and
relatively high in August and September 1972.
Although the 3H concentration remained relatively
constant during the period of sampling, the
concentrations of MMn, MFe, !§Co, "Co, "Sr, "°Sr, 131I,
114Cs and '"Cs were at least 100-fold greater in the later
samples, particularly on August 23, 1972. As shown in
Figure 2.2, the reactor had been down and started up
on August 14, nine days before the sample was
collected from the waste sample tank. The higher
concentrations measured in this sample, therefore, may
be the result of expansion water from the reactor
•Recent operational changes include processing of laundry and cask decontamination waste through the
radwaste system. (%>
37
-------
Table 4.2 Radionuclide Concentrations in Liquid Waste Sample Tank, pCi/ml
Radionuclide
3H
14c
32p
51Cr
54Mn
5SFe
59Fe
58Co
60Co
64Cu
65Zn
76AS
89Sr
9°Sr
95Zr
95Nb
99Mo
103Ru
105Rh
U%
124Sb
134
ISSj
133Xe
135Xe
134Cs
137Cs
14°Ba
141Ce
144Ce
239Np
Aug. 30,
1971
1500
< 0.1
1.1
10
0.1
0.2
0.1
0.1
0.5
ND*
ND
ND
< 0.1
< 0.01
< 0.1
< 0.1
12
<0.1
<0.1
ND
<0.1
1.8
5.3
130
100
1.0
0.9
<0.1
0.5
<0.5
<0.4
Jan. 18,
1972
1900
0.1
5.0
13
3.7
7.5
0.6
1.0
9.4
ND
ND
18
0.5
< 0.01
< 0.1
0.3
8.5
0.2
11
ND
0.2
2.0
2.2
17
46
0.2
0.4
1.3
0.5
<0.5
<0.4
Mar. 2,
1972
3800
<0.1
1.2
23
6.1
21
1.0
1.5
18
ND
ND
1.0
<0.1
<0.01
<0.1
0.2
6.7
<0.1
<0.1
ND
0.6
4.2
1.7
NA
56
0.1
0.2
0.4
2.6
<0.3
<0.4
April 12,
1972
4000
1.9
3.6
46
0.3
0.9
0.2
0.2
0.8
5.0
ND
1.5
0.2
<0.05
<0.1
<0.1
20
<0.1
8.6
ND
< 0.1
4.2
1.6
1.5
30
0.1
0.3
1.1
0.9
0.1
< 0.4
Aug. 23,
1972
1500
<0.1
-------
A quantitative analysis of the efficiencies for
removal of radionuclides by the separate components
of the radwaste treatment system was undertaken by
AEC participants in the study. (6) Consequently, such
measurements were not repeated here. Radionuclide
concentrations in reactor water (Table 2.1), however,
compare with those measured in the waste sample tank
as follows:
1) The average tritium concentration in reactor
water and in water from the waste sample tank
are nearly equal, suggesting that waste water
from the various sources (see Figure 4.1) is not
significantly diluted by uncontaminated
water.
2) The average radionuclide concentrations in
liquids from the waste sample tank are lower
than those in the reactor water by 1 to 3 orders
of magnitude. The ratios of the average
radionuclide concentrations measured in
reactor water to that measured in liquid from
the waste sample tank (CR/CW) are:
Radio-
nuclide
3H
"P
"Cr
"Mn
"Fe
"Co
"Co
"Sr
"Sr
"Mo
uij
'"Cs,
'"Cs
'"Ba
141Ce
Q/Cw*
1.0
20
150
40
590
300
60
480
400
130
820
100
100
770
20
d.f. from
ref. #6**
NRf
NR
> 4.6
>55
NR
>17
43
1000
>55
NR
>73
>78
>190
>110
23
* Samples collected in August and September, 1972,
were omitted from the calculation since the radwaste
treatment system was not operating properly.
**d.f. - decontamination factors measured across the
waste collector filter and waste demineralizer
combined.
fNR- not reported.
The study of the waste treatment systems at the Oyster
Creek station, performed by the AEC in January 1972,
yielded the combined decontamination factors in the
third column of the above tabulation for the waste
collector filter and waste demineralizer. (6) Most of
these factors are "greater than" because the
concentrations measured in the output liquid from the
components were below detectable limits. The ratios
given in the second column are not actually
decontamination factors comparable to values in the
third column because all sources of radioactivity to the
waste system were not considered and the
concentrations in the reactor water do not relate in time
to that in the waste sample tank. However, since
reactor water leakage is low conductivity waste, the
decontamination through the waste collector filter and
waste demineralizer will influence the activity ratios
given in the second column (see Figure 4.1). In
comparison, the ratios are of the same order of
magnitude as the decontamination factors given by the
AEC study in the third column. This indicates that,
except for 3H, considerable decontamination of
radioactivity in liquid effluent wastes is achieved when
the waste treatment system is operating properly.
To identify the physical or chemical states of
radionuclides discharged from the radwaste system,
50-ml aliquots of the sample of September 25 were
filtered and then either passed successively through
cation- and anion-exchange resins, or equilibrated with
carbon tetrachloride and subjected to a silver iodide
precipitation. As indicated in Table 4.3, more than one-
half of the "Mn and "Co and small fractions of the "'I,
IJ4Cs and '"Cs were retained by the filter. Manganese-
54 and "Co are corrosion products and would be
associated to a large degree with paniculate matter.
The soluble "Mn, **Co, l"Cs and n'Cs were cationic.
The solvent extraction and precipitation of I5II suggest
that approximately one-fourth was elemental, one-half
was I" and a few percent were in the form of IO3". In
the ion-exchange test, some of the I2 undoubtedly was
adsorbed on both resins, I" was retained by the anion-
exchange resin, and IO3~ to some extent passed
through both resin columns. However, the observed
species distribution may not be representative because
the radwaste system was not operating properly during
sampling.
4.3.2 Radionuclides in laundry drain tank. Liquids
from the laundry drain tank were sampled three times
during the study (see Section 4.2.1). The sources of
these liquids are laundry operation and the shipping
cask decontamination station. As shown in Figure 4.1,
these wastes are discharged directly to the circulating-
water coolant canal without any treatment.
The results of the analyses are given in Table 4.4.
The major radionuclides present were "Mn, S5Fe, "Co,
*°Co and u'Cs. Relatively large amounts of 3H and IJII
were also in the sample collected on May 16,1972. The
total concentration in the laundry drain tank liquid was
about 0.20 uCi/liter. Since the tank volume is 7600
39
-------
Table 4.3 Chemical States of Radionuclides in Liquid Waste Sample Tank, Sept. 25, 1972
Percent retained in each separation
Membrane filter,
Cation-exchange
resin, Dowex-50
Anion-exchange
resin, Dowex-1
Residue
54Mn
6°CO
131I
134Cs
157Cs
74
52
9
3
3
26
48
8
97
97
0
0
75
0
0
0
0
8
0
0
12
Solvent extraction, Precipitation,
CC14 Agl
23
59
Notes
1.
2.
Solution was neutral.
Order of treatment is from left to right.
3. 50 ml solution passed through resins in columns each 8-cm long, 1.2-cm diameter,
at 1 ml/min flow rate.
4. 50 ml solution equilibrated with 50 ml CC14, then mixed with 24 mg Nal and excess
volume discharged for the three-year (1971-1973)
study period, 1.74 x 107 liters, (3) Because the liquid
waste system was not operating properly prior and
during the sampling on August 23, 1972, results from
this sample were not averaged into these calculations.
The average quantity of radionuclides discharged
annually from the laundry drain tank was taken from
Table 4.5. The estimated average radionuclide
concentrations in Oyster Creek, shown in the last
column of Table 4.6, were obtained by dividing the
summation of the annual average contributions from
the waste sample tanks and the laundry drain tanks by
the average annual dilution volume for the three-year
period, 1.13 x 10" liters.^ No adjustment in these
concentrations was made for recirculation. The total
radioactivity discharged annually by the station was
calculated to be 54 Ci, which is in agreement with the
1971-1973 annual average liquid discharges reported
by the station, 52 ± 18 Ci (see Appendix B.2). These
estimated concentrations will be utilized in later
sections of this report.
4.4.2 Sampling and analysis of coolant canal water.
Radionuclide concentrations in the coolant canal
during the discharge of liquid wastes were measured to
develop and test methods for determining
radionuclides at very low concentrations (on the order
liters, the total quantity of radioactivity that might be
discharged at any one time is about 1500 uCi.
The average radionuclide concentrations in the
liquid from the laundry drain tank are given in Table
4.5. The average annual quantities discharged, based on
an annual volume of 9.08 x 10s liters (240,000 gal),(3>
are given in the third column. In the last column are
given the percent contribution of radionuclides
discharged from the laundry drain tank to that in the
total from the laundry drain tank plus the waste sample
tank (see Table 4.6). In general, the contribution of
radionuclides from the laundry drain tank is minor.
Approximately 0.19 Ci of radioactivity is discharged
annually from the laundry drain tanks, of which about
50 percent is 3H.
4.4Radionuclides in Coolant Canal
Water
4.4.1 Estimated radionuclide concentrations in
coolant canal water. The average quantities of specific
radionuclides discharged annually to Oyster Creek are
listed in Table 4.6. The concentration of radionuclides
in the liquids discharged from the waste sample tank is
based on the average measured concentrations before
discharge (see Table 4.2) and the average annual
40
-------
Table 4.4 Radionuclide Concentrations in Laundry Drain Tank, pCi/ml
Radionuclide
3H
14c
32p
51
Cr
54
Mn
55
C
59
5 Fe
58
5 Co
60
bUCo
*9Sr
90
Sr
95Zr
95Nb
103Ru
124 sb
131j
134Cs
137
Cs
140D
Ba
141
4 Ce
144Ce
Jan
< 1.
0.
0.
1.
41
5.
6.
9.
110
0.
0.
0.
1.
0.
1.
2.
5.
0.
1.
. 22, 1972
5
2
3
6
8
8
9
20
020
6
6
20
8
ND
7
8
ND
2
5
+ 0.
+ 0.
+ 0.
± 2
+ 0 .
+ 0.
+ 0,
+_ 5
+ 0.
+ 0,
+ 0,
+ 0,
+ 0,
+ 0,
+ 0,
+ 0,
+ 0
+ 0,
,1
,1
.1
,1
.1
.1
.05
.002
.1
.1
.05
.1
.1
.1
.1
.1
March 2,
< 1.
0.
2.
3.
0.
0.
7.
<0.
< 0.
<0.
0.
<0.
0.
<0.
0.
1.
0.
0.
5
1
NA
9 +_
0 +
2 +_
5 +
6 +
9 +_
1
01
1
1 +_
1
1 +_
1
6 +
6 +_
ND
1 +_
2 +_
1972
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
1
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
May 16, 1972
320
0
0
6
11
4
4
3
32
0
0
2
4
0
0
1
3
4
1
1
1
.2
.1
.6
.9
.1
.4
.6
.080
.6
.5
.3
.5
.1
.3
.3
.0
.0
.2
± 20
+_ 0.1
+ 0.1
+ 0.1
+ 2
+ 0.1
+ 0.1
^~
+ 0.1
^~
± 5
+ 0.1
"™"
+_ 0.002
+_ 0.1
+_ 0.1
+ 0.1
""""
+_ 0.1
+_ 0.1
+ 0.1
+_ 0.1
+ 0.1
+_ 0.1
+_ 0.1
Notes:
1. +_ values are 2a and < values are 3a of the counting error.
2. NA - not analyzed; ND - not detected.
41
-------
Nuclide
3H
14c
32p
51Cr
54Mn
55Fe
59Fe
57Co
58Co
6°CO
89Sr
90Sr
95Zr
95Nb
103Ru
124Sb
131I
134Cs
137Cs
140Ba
141Ce
144Ce
Table 4.5 Radionuclides
Average concentration
pCi/1
107,000
150
200
3,000
18,000
4,600
3,800
100
4,600
50,000
280
35
1,100
2,100
180
800
5,600
2,200
3,900
1,000
430
970
Discharged from the Laundry Drain
Annual average
, (a) discharge, 00
yCi
97,200
140
180
2,700
16,000
4,200
3,500
90
4,200
45,000
250
30
1,000
1,900
160
730
5,100
2,000
3,500
910
390
880
Tank
Percent of total
waste discharged^0)
0.23
1.6
0.29
0.51
3.8
0.75
4.8
7.9
4.9
1.8
2.5
5.8
7.2
1.3
7.7
3.6
0.08
0.09
2.9
1.0
3.1
a Average of concentrations given in Table 4.4;
-------
Table 4.6 Estimated Radionuclide Concentrations in Oyster Creek Based on Measured Effluent Concentrations
Radionuclide
Avg. concentration
in waste sample
tank,(a) pCi/ml
Avg. annual discharge
from waste sample
uCi
Avg. annual discharge
from laundry drain
Total annual Avg. concentration
discharge,Cd) in Oyster Creek,Ce)
3H
14C
32p
51Cr
54Mn
55Fe
59Fe
58Co
60Co
64Cu
6SZn
76As
89Sr
90Sr
95Zr
95Nb
99MO
103
Ru
105
Rh
H%g
1 ">A
1Z4Sb
151
I
133
I
1 \T>
l"*e
i T<;
libXe
134Cs
137Cs
1 4fl
140Ba
141
Ce
144Ce
23V
Detected in
2450
0.48
3.6
31
24
32
3.9
2.8
50
0.7*
0.3
2.9
0.8
0.07
0.9
1.4
9.3
0.7
2.8
0.1
0.5
7.7
2.7
50
58
140
230
1.7
2.2
1.6
1.7*
only one sample;
42.7 x IO6
8.4 x IO3
6.3 X IO4
5.4 x IO5
4.2 x IO5
5.6 x IO5
6.8 x IO4
4.9 x IO4
8.7 x IO5
1.2 x IO4
5.2 x IO3
5.1 x IO4
1.4 x IO4
1.2 x IO3
1.6 x IO4
2.4 x IO4
1.6 x IO5
A
1.2 x 10
4
4.9 x 10
1.7 x IO3
7
8.7 x 10
c
1.3 x 10
4
4.7 X 10
C
8.7 x 103
£
1.0 x 10°
2.4 x IO6
4.0 x IO6
A
3.0 x 10*
4
3.8 X 10
2.7 x IO4
3.0 x IO4
9.7 x IO4
1.4 x IO2
1.8 x IO2
2.7 x IO3
1.6 x IO4
4.2 x IO3
3.5 x IO3
4.2 x IO3
4.5 x IO4
ND**
ND
ND
2.5 x IO2
30
1.0 x 10
1.9 x IO3
ND
n
1.6 x 10
ND
ND
7.3 x 10
5.1 x 10
ND
ND
ND
2 x IO3
3.5 X IO3
9.1 x 10
^
3.9 x 10*
8.8 x IO2
ND
42.8
0.0085
0.063
0.54
0.44
0.56
0.072
O.OS3
0.92
0.012
0.0052
0.051
0.014
0.0012
0.017
0.026
0.16
0.012
0.049
0.0017
0.0094
0.14
0.047
0.87
1.0
2.4
4.0
0.031
0.038
0.028
0.030
pi i/i
37.7
0.007S
0.056
0.48
0.39
0.49
0.063
0.047
0.81
0.011
0.0046
0.045
0.012
0.0011
0.015
0.023
0.14
0.011
0.043
0.0015
0.0083
0.12
0.041
0.77
0.88
2.1
3.5
0.027
0.034
0.025
0.026
Cu (4/12/72) and 239Np (7/16/73).
ND - Not Detected.
Notes:
a . Average
system
b. Average
of concentrations
was not functioning
(1971-1973) annual
given in Table 4.2, omitting the Aug. 23, 1972
• All < values were averaged as 1/2 < value.
volume of waste discharged:
Average
Average annual discharge - average concentration
1971 - 2.41 x 10
1972 - 1.58 x IO7
1973 - 1.24 x IO7
1.74 x IO7
sample since the
liters
liters
liters
liters
in waste sample tank (pCi/1) x 1.74
waste treatment
x IO7 liters
c. See Table 4.S.
d. The sum
e. Average
of columns 3 and 4
(1971-1973) annual
.
dilution volume: 1971 - 1.
1972 - 1.
1973 - 1.
05 x 10!2 liters
16 x IO12 liters
19 x in^2 liters
Average
Average concentration in the discharge canal
1.13 x lf)lZ liters
total annual discharge (Ci)/1.13 x IO12 liters
43
-------
of 0.1 pCi/liter) in brackish or saline water, and to
verify the predicted concentrations in the coolant
canal. The high salinity of the coolant canal water
precluded the use of the ion-exchange surveillance
column used in earlier studies at nuclear power
stations, where essentially all cationic and anionic
species were concentrated from large volumes of fresh
water .(7,8)
Methods were developed for the determination of
54Mn, '"Co, "Sr, "Sr, 1311,1MCs, and '"Cs in the coolant
canal, where these radionuclides were expected to be in
the highest concentrations. Previous studies at another
BWR showed that these radionuclides, plus MOBa, were
in coolant canal water. (7)
The techniques for concentrating radionuclides
from sample volumes of 16 to 400 liters have been
reported.^ This description includes the details
regarding radionuclide analysis, collection efficiency,
and testing of methods.
The concentration system used (see Figure 4.2)
collects particulate and certain ionic species.
Paniculate radionuclides are collected by filtering up
to 400 liters of water through a prefilter followed by a
0.45-u membrane filter. The cationic fractions of Mn,
Co and Cs are concentrated from the filtrate on the
column shown in Figure 4.3. The column consists of a
300-cc section of a chelating ion-exchange resin
(Chelex-100) for Mn and Co, followed by a 200-cc
section of an inorganic ion exchanger (ammonium
hexacyanocobalt ferrate coated on silica gel) for Cs.
Early measurements included a 450-cc section of anion
resin (Dowex 1 x 8) for concentrating 1J1I, but the
collection efficiency was only 20-60 percent. After
concentration of the radionuclides by filtration and ion-
exchange, the filters and ion-exchange sections were
analyzed with a Ge(Li) detector and multichannel
analyzer for gamma-ray-emitting radionuclides.
Strontium-90 and '"I were collected by
precipitating SrCOj and Agl from a 16-liter sample of
column effluent. Radiostrontium and radioiodine were
FROM
TUBING PUMP •
30 cm.
CHELEX -100
!200f cm(3
NCFC>
•GLASS WOOL
•GLASS WOOL
Figure 4.3 Ion exchange column for concentration of
Co, Cs, and Mn from seawater.
determined by reprecipitation as SrCO3 and PdI2 for
determining the gravimetric yield and for beta-particle
counting.
4.4.3 Field testing of concentration techniques.
Since few data were available regarding the physico-
chemical species of the radionuclides in liquid wastes
discharged by the station, the concentration techniques
were tested in the field to verify collection efficiencies
for radionuclides in the same physical and chemical
forms present in the coolant canal. Two field tracer
experiments were conducted by adding 400 and 1000
ml of liquid waste from the station to approximately
200 liters of coolant canal water in a plastic-lined drum.
TO
SAMPLING
POINT
CENTRIFUGAL
PUMP
VALVE
WATER
METER
c;
BRIDGE RESERV°IR t
FILTER (200-400 liters)
TUBING
PUMP
ION
EXCHANGE
COLUMN
COLUMN
EFFLUENT
15 liters/min.
12 liters/hr.
Figure 4.2 Radionuclide concentration system.
44
-------
The water was circulated for one hour to simulate
conditions in the canal and then passed through the
concentration system (filters and ion exchange
column). Aliquots of the waste solutions were retained
to determine the identity and activity of the
radionuclides added to the water.
The results of the field tracer experiments are given
in Tables 4.7 and 4.8. Recoveries of "Mn, "Co, MCo,
1MCs, and '"Cs were > 95 percent. After correction for
chemical yield, the recoveries of "Sr and 13II by
coprecipitation were 120 ± 30 and 96 -j- 7 percent,
respectively (Table 4.8). The first tracer experiment
(Table 4.7) afforded a better test of the ion-exchange
column since more !4Mn and MCo remained in the
filtrate. The second tracer experiment (Table 4.8)
contained a more complex mixture of radionuclides,
mostly particles, as indicated by the high recovery on
the filter. The tracer experiments demonstrated the
validity of these techniques for monitoring the above-
cited radionuclides in liquid waste discharged to the
seawater environment near the station.
4.4.4 Coolant canal sampling and results. On four
occasions the radionuclide concentrations in the
coolant canal were measured during discharge from the
waste sample tank and on one occasion, May 16, 1972,
during discharge from the laundry drain tank. Samples
of the undiluted wastes were obtained from either the
waste sample tank or the laundry drain tank to
determine the identity and quantity of discharged
radionuclides (see Sections 4.3.1 and 4.3.2). Samples of
coolant water from the intake or discharge canals were
also collected before or after tank discharge to correct
for recirculation of wastes discharged to Barnegat Bay.
Intake and discharge coolant water could not be
sampled simultaneously because the additional
equipment was not available. Water samples from a
background location in Great Bay were analyzed to
determine the contribution of radionuclides deposited
in atmospheric fallout.
The discharge canal sampling location was at the
railroad bridge adjacent to the Route 9 bridge, and was
approximately 0.8 km downstream from the point of
waste discharge. The intake sampling location was at
the railroad bridge adjacent to the Route 9 bridge
approximately 1.3 km upstream of the waste discharge.
Water samples were collected by pumping water from
the canal through the filters and collecting the filtrate.
Radionuclides in the filtrate were concentrated by
passing the filtrate through the ion-exchange system
described in Section 4.4.2. The pump intake was
located in the center of the canal approximately 2
meters below the surface.
The results of measurements in the coolant canal
and Great Bay are given in Tables 4.9 to 4.14. These
results showed that the following radionuclides
discharged by the station were at concentrations
greater than 1 pCi/liter in the coolant canal: "Cr, 54Mn,
MCo, "Mo, '"I, IMCs, and 137Cs. The maximum
individual radionuclide concentration in the coolant
canal was 6.3 pCi/liter of 137Cs. In addition, "Co, "Fe,
MZr, "Mb, M1Ce, and 144Ce were detected at
concentrations between 0.1 and 1.0 pCi/liter. The
unusually high concentration of IMRu (about 3 pCi/1)
on January 25, 1972 was attributed to fresh fallout
from the Chinese atmospheric nuclear detonation in
January 1972, since 10*Ru was not detected in the
undiluted waste. Great Bay samples (Table 4.14)
showed the presence of several radionuclides
attributable to atmospheric fallout at concentrations
between 0.1 and 1 pCi/1 in the particles collected by
filtration on April 12, 1972 and May 16, 1972. These
radionuclides were also detected in coolant canal
Table 4.7 Recovery of Radionuclides on Concentration System, September 1972
Percent recovery
Radioactivity Cartridge Membrane
Radionuclide added, pCi/liter filter filter discs Chelex-mn
51Cr
S4Mn
60Co
131j
134Cs
137Cs
Notes:
1.
2.
3.
4.
129 ^6 102 +_ 5 1.8
61 1 3 69 +_ 3 0.10
330 _+ 15 55 +_ 3 0.7
400 j+ 18 1.8 + 0.1
-------
Table 4.8 Recovery of Radionuclides on Concentration System, July 1973
s—s: — c^^s^^^c»=!es»s
Radionuclide
51Cr
54Mn
58Co
59Fe
60,,
Co
65Zn
89Sr
9°Sr
95Nb
95Zr
99Mo
103Ru
l10mAg
124Sb
131j
134Cs
137Cs
14°Ba
141Ce
144Ce
239NP
Radioactivity
added>
pCi/liter
303
166
11
26
193
3.2
13
0.5
18
5.3
61
3.7
0.6
3.7
28
2.8
7.4
11.1
10.1
22
58
1 1S
1 9
± °-
+_ 1
± 9
1 °-
+ 1
+ 0.
± °'
1 °-
± 4
+ 0.
1 o.
+ 0.
+ . 3
± °'
± °-
± !•
+ 0.
+ 3
+ 8
5
5
xs=
111 ' "
Filter
99
96
91
95
95
116
+
+
+
+
+
+
5
5
4
4
5
16
NA
1
5
5
5
3
5
2
5
6
5
NA
56
121
84
93
0
100
57
25
26
22
82
57
35
+
+
+
+
.1
+
+
+
+
+
1
+
±
3
11
6
13
14
6
12
6
3
4
8
5
Percent
recovered
Ion exchange*
1.2
0.50
6.5
0.4
2.2
7
100
120
<1
< 1
< 1
<1
67
< 1
39
91
73
< 1
4
< 1
59
+_ 0.2
+_ 0.04
+_ 0.5
+_ 0.2
^ 0.1
+ 2
+_ 10**
+ 30**
1 I6
+ 4**
± 9
± 5
^ 1
± 10
Total
100
96
98
95
97
120
100
120
56
121
84
93
70
100
96
116
99
22
86
57
94
±
+
•f
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
1
+
+
+
—
±
+
+
1
+
5
5
4
4
5
16
10
30
3
11
6
13
20
14
7
15
8
3
4
8
11
* 134Cs and 137Cs were concentrated on the NCFC section; all other
cations were retained on the Chelex-100 section.
**89Sr, 90Sr, 131I determined by precipitation from a 16-liter sample.
Notes:
1. 1000 ml of waste sample tank on July 17, 1973, were added to
208 liters of coolant canal water.
2. Coolant canal water: pH 7.2, salinity 16.4°/oo.
3. Total volume of solution passed through collection system was
190 liters.
4. + values are based on a 20 counting error or a minimum of 5%;
"values are 3c counting errors.
5. NA - Not analyzed
46
-------
Table 4.9 Radionuclides in Coolant Canal Water on January 18, 1972
Radionuclide
51Cr
54Mn
60Co
99Mo
106Ru
during
Predicted*
.0
0
0
0
<0
.79
.22
.55
.50
.02
+_ 0.06
+_ 0.02
+_ 0.04
+_ 0.01
Discharge canal
discharge, pCi/liter
Filters
0.9 + 0
0.15 + 0
0.4 + 0
0.40 + 0
2.6 +_ 0
.2
.04 <0
.1 0
.04
.4
Filtrate
NA
.1
.2 + 0.1
NA
NA
Discharge canal
before discharge,
pCi/liter
< O.S
< 0.5
< 0.5
NA
3.7 + 0.6
Measured
Pr
1.
0.
1.
0.
eaic
1 +
7 +
1 +
8 +
:ted
n ?
n T
o ?
0 1
Calculated from waste analysis and dilution factor of 17,000.
Notes:
1. Sample volumes: during discharge - 380 liters filtered and 38 liters of filtrate through
concentration column; before discharge - 76 liters filtered.
2. Filters: 8-u and 0.45-u membrane filter discs in series.
3. NA - not analyzed.
Table 4.10 Radionuclides in Coolant Canal Water on April 12, 1972
Radionuclidi
51Cr
Qf\
90Sr
95Zr
SNb
"MO
131j
137CS
1/!0Ba
141Ce
144Ce
147Nd
Calculated
Notes:
1. Samp]
Discharge canal
during discharge, t»Ci/liter
e Predicted *
2.7 +_0.1
< 0.003
< 0.006
< 0.006
1.2 +_ 0.1
0.25 + 0.02
< 0.02 <
< 0.06
< 0.05
< 0.01
< 0.02
from waste analysis
le volumes: during c
Filters
1.8 +_ 0.2
NA
0.36 +_ 0.07
0.22 +_ 0.05
1.06 +_ 0.08
0.17 + 0.04
0.02
0.18 + 0.06
0.30 +_ 0.06
0.3 +_ 0.1
0.3 + 0.1
and dilution
lischarge - 31
Filtrate
NA <
0.26 +_ 0.02
NA
NA
NA <
0.12 +_ 0.03 <
0.26 +_ 0.05 <
NA <
NA
NA
NA
factor of 17,000.
50 liters filtered
Discharge canal
before discharge,
pCi/ liter
Filters
0.2
NA
0.06 +_ 0.04
0.05 +_ 0.03
0.02
0.02
0.01
0.06
0.07 *_ 0.03
0.06 +_ 0.03
0.15 * 0.08
and Itt) 1 4 + A
Filtrate
NA
0.17 +_ 0.02
NA
NA
NA
< 0.6
0.34 + O.OS
NA
NA
NA
NA
v*c nf +N 1 +•••»« 4- A nr
Measured
Predicted
0.7 + 0.1
...
...
...
0.9 +_ 0.1
1.2 +_ 0.2
concentration column.' *" " """ "lp"" «""ea and 290 liters passed through
2. Filters: 8-u and 0.45-u filter discs in series.
3. Water analyses: Oyster Creek PH 7.3; salinity 20.6°/oo; suspended solids 2 mg/liter.
4. NA - not analyzed.
47
-------
Table 4.11 Radionuclides in Coolant Canal Water on May 16, 1972
Discharge canal
Hurine discharge, pCi/liter _
Radionuclide
51Cr
54Mn
59Fe
58Co
60Co
90Sr
95Zr
95Nb
131t
134Cs
137Cs
141Ce
144Ce
Calculated
**
Determined
Notes:
1. Sample
Predic
0.7 +_
1.14 +_
0.41 +_
0.34 +_
3.2 +.
0.010 +_
0.26 +_
0.45 +_
1.11 +_
0.33 +_
0.43 +_
0.10 +_
0.12 +
from waste
:ted*
0.1
0.05
0.02
0.02
0.1
0.002
0.03
0.02
0.06
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.02
Filters
0.6 +_ 0.
0.99 +_ 0.
0.4 +_ 0.
0.22 +_ 0.
2.1 +_ 0.
NA
<0.05
0.19 +_ 0.
0.33 +_ 0.
0.24 +_ 0.
0.42 +_ 0.
0.19 +_ 0.
0.4 + 0.
2
09
1
Filtrate
NA
0.23 +_ 0
0.11 +_ 0
.04
.05
04 <0.03
1
05
08
03
02
05
1
analysis and dilution
by analysis of a
volumes:
during
16-liter sample
discharge
2. Filters: 8-u and 0.45-v membrane
3. Water
analyses:
during
i /•
discharge
- 200
0.34 i 0
0.23 +_ 0
NA
NA
0.47 + 0
0.11 +_ 0
0.50 + 0
NA
NA
factor of
of column
liters;
.04
.04**
.09
.02
.03
<0
<0
<0
<0
0
0
0
<0
<0
0
0
0
Discharge canal
before discharge,
pCi/liter
Filters Filtrate
.2
.02
.07
.02
.07 ^ 0
NA
.05 1 0
.13 + 0
.05
.02
.02 +_ 0
.06 +_ 0
.11 i 0
<0
<0
< 0
.03 <0
0
.03
.03
0
< 0
.01 0
.02
.03
NA
.07
.1
.1
.1
.23 +_ 0.04**
NA
NA
.02 +_ 0.01
.02
.40 + 0.04
NA
NA
Measured
Prsdicted
0.9 +_ 0.4
1.1 +_ 0.1
1.2 +_ 0.2
0.6 ^ 0.2
0.7 + 0.1
—
---
...
0.7 ^ 0.2
1.1 ^ 0.1
1.2 *_ 0.1
...
10,000.
effluent.
before
discharge
- 330 liters.
filter discs in series.
- PH
_ nU
7.3; salinity 17.1
7 1- cnlinif v 17.1
°/oo;
°/oo;
suspended solids 32
suspended solids 26
mg/ liter.
mg/liter.
NA - not analyzed.
Table 4.12 Radionuclides in Coolant Canal Water on September 25-26, 1972
Discharge canal during
discharge on September 25,
Intake canal during
discharge on
September 26,
pCi/liter
Radionuclide
60Co
90Sr
131j
134Cs
137Cs
Free
0
0
<0
1
S
9
.17
.92
.01
.12
.6
.4
lir.te
+ 0.
+ 0.
+ 0.
+ 0.
+ 0.
d*
01
02
02
1
1
Filters
0.29 +
1.1 •*•
NA
0.07 +
0.07 +
0.08 +
0.05
0.1
0.01
0.05
0.05
Fill
0.04
0.21
0.25
0.37
3.3
6.3
;rate Filters
+ 0
+ 0
± °
+ 0
± °
± °
.02 0.3 +_ 0.1
.02 0.7 +_ 0.2
.02 NA
.04** <0.05
.2 <0.05
.6 <0.1
Filtrate
< 0.05
0.24
0.24
<0.05
2.2
4.5
+_ 0.05
+_ 0.02**
+. 0.2
+_ 0.3
Calculated from waste analysis and dilution factor of 170,000.
**Determined by analysis of a 16-liter sample of column effluent.
Notes:
1. Sample volumes: discharge canal - 190 liters; intake canal - 150 liters.
2 Filter- 0.45-u membrane cartridges with prefilter at all locations.
' anises:
3. NA - not analyzed.
48
-------
Table 4.13 Radionuclides in Coolant Canal Water on July 17-18, 1973
Radionuclide
51Cr
54Mn
59Fe
58Co
60Co
89Sr
90Sr
95Nb
95Zr
103Ru
131,
134Cs
137Cs
141Ce
Discharge canal
during discharge on
July 17, pCi/liter
: Predicted*
0.9 +_ 0. 1
2.4 +_ 0.1
0.42 +_ 0.03
0,14 ^0.01
2.9 +_0.1
0.015 _+ 0.001
0.003 + 0.001
0.17 +_ 0.01
0.10 +_ 0.01
0.04 +0.02
0.16 _+ 0.01
0.016 + 0.005
0.02 +_ 0.01
0.06 +_ 0.01
Filters
1.1 +_ 0.3
1.9 +_ 0.1
0.3 _+ 0.1
0. 12 + 0.03
2.0 +_ 0.1
NA
NA
0. 18 + 0.03
0.12 _+ 0.04
ND
< 0.15
< 0.01
<0.01
ND
Filtrate
NA
0.02 _+ 0.01
ND
ND
0.06 +_ 0.01
<0.04t
0.91 +_ 0.04
NA
NA
NA
<0.1t
0.08 +_ 0.01
0.46 +_ 0.01
0.06 + 0.02
Intake canal
after discharge
on July 18,
pCi/liter
Filters
ND
0.04 ;* 0.01
ND
ND
0.10 + 0.02
NA
NA
ND
ND
0.06 *_ 0.03
ND
ND
0.02 + 0.01
< 0.015
Filtrate**
NA
<0.1
NA
<0.1
<0.1
<0.03
0 . 34 +_ 0 . 04
NA
NA
NA
NA
<0.1
0.31 +_ 0.06
NA
Measured
Predicted
1.2 +_ 0.3
0.8 +_ 0.1
0.7 +_ 0.3
0.9 +^ 0.2
0.7 + 0.1
1.1 +_ 0.2
1.2 + 0.4
...
Calculated from waste analysis and dilution factor of 38,000.
**
16 liters were analyzed by sequential analysis.
Determined by analysis of a 16-liter sample of column effluent or filtrate.
Notes:
1. Sample volumes:
2. Water analyses:
discharge canal water - 209 liters; intake water - 152 liters.
discharge canal: PH 7.2; salinity 16.4 °/oo; solids 33 mg/liter.
intake canal: pH 7.2; salinity 18.1 °/oo; solids 46 rag/liter.
3. NA - not analyzed; ND - not detected, generally<0.01 pCi/liter.
concentrations were comparable to those measured in
the discharge canal during this waste discharge.
samples on the same dates. This illustrates the necessity
of background measurements to differentiate between
effluent releases and background contributions.
Radiochemical analyses of Great Bay water samples
(filtrate only) showed maximum concentrations of 0.2
pCi/liter for MSr and 0.5 pCi/liter for '"Cs.
The predicted radionuclide concentrations in the
coolant canal, given in Tables 4.9 to 4.13, were
calculated from the concentration of radionuclides
discharged and the dilution factor in the canal. The
dilution factor was assumed to be the ratio of the canal
flow rate to waste tank release rate. The waste tank
release rates and canal flow rates were obtained from
plant personnel. For radionuclides measured with
sufficient precision, the ratio of measured to predicted
concentrations was calculated after correcting for any
contribution from recirculation or fallout. These ratios
were not tabulated for the discharge on September 25,
1972 (see Table 4.12), because of atypical station
Measurements in the discharge canal, corrected for
recirculation, were approximately 4 to 5 times lower
than expected for this sample. Factors that could
explain lower than predicted concentrations include:
1. the waste tank sample was not representative
of the waste being discharge during sampling;
wastes were not discharged during the entire
sampling period;
the canal flow rate was higher than the station
value;
sedimentation or settling of suspended
material.
With the exception of the discharge on September 25,
1972, the measured to predicted values ranged from 0.6
to 1.2 for the radionuclides shown to be quantitatively
retained on the filters and ion-exchange column. The
measured to predicted ratio was also near unity for "Cr
2.
3.
4.
is i— \-— —/' — — -Jt,.w... »i.i*v
-------
Table 4.1* Radionuclides in Background Seawatcr (Great Bay), pCi/liter
April 12, 1972
n ^r,-,-n,,r-iiHf> Filters Filtrate
poH-i nmir 1 1 ne riiuci^
51Cr <0.2 NA
54Mn
59Fe
58Co
60,,
May 16, 1972
Filters
< 0.06
< 0.05
< 0.02
< 0.01
< 0.05
September
Filters
<0.03 <(
<0.03
-------
Table 4.15 Particulate Radionuclides in Coolant Canal
Percent of measured concentration retained
Radionuclide
51Cr*
54Mn
60Co
134
Cs
137
Cs
Jan. 18, 1972 May 16,
86 +_
>60 81 +
70 ^20 88 +
41 +_
46 +_
1972
30
8
5
4
5
Sept. 25, 1972
88 +_ 20
84 +_ 12
4 1 2
3 +_ 1
on filters
July 17,
100 +
99 +
97 +
< 15
< 5
1973
20
5
5
Filtrate was not analyzed for Cr; the predicted concentration was used instead
of the total measured concentration.
radionuclides between particulate and dissolved species
that monitoring techniques in the aqueous environment
of nuclear power stations should be tested under actual
conditions to ensure that all physico-chemical species
are collected. The concentrations of major
radionuclides in the coolant canal were between 0.1 and
10 pCi/1 during waste discharge and generally
consistent with predicted values. The coolant canal
studies showed that monitoring waste discharges after
dilution was difficult because of low concentrations and
recirculation effects. The advantages and validity of
predicting radionuclide concentrations discharged to
Barnegat Bay by analysis of the liquid waste before
dilution and application of the calculated dilution
factor were shown.
The observation that several radionuclides in the
coolant canal were mostly particulate suggests that
realistic predictions of radionuclide levels in aquatic
organisms based on effluent concentrations would
require additional information regarding the physico-
chemical species of these radionuclides in seawater.
4.5 References
1. Directorate of Licensing, U.S. Atomic Energy
Commission, "Final Environmental Statement Related
to Operation of Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating
Station," AEC Docket No. 50-219 (1974).
2. Jersey Central Power and Light Company,
"Technical Specifications and Bases for Oyster Creek
Nuclear Power Plant, Change No. 7," Morristown, N.
3. Jersey Central Power and Light Company,
"Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Semi-
Annual Repts.," Nos. 4 through 9, Morristown, N. J.,
January 1, 1971 through December 31, 1973.
4. Carroll, J. T., Oyster Creek Nuclear
Generating Station, personal communication (1976).
5. Krieger, H. L. and S. Gold, "Procedures for
Radiochemical Analysis of Nuclear Reactor Aqueous
Solutions," EPA Rept. EPA-R4-73-014 (1973).
6. Pelletier, C. A., "Results of Independent
Measurements of Radioactivity in Process Systems and
Effluents at Boiling Water Reactors," USAEC Rept.,
unpublished (May 1973).
7. Kahn, B., et al., "Radiological Surveillance
Studies at a Boiling Water Nuclear Power Reactor,"
Public Health Service Rept. BRH/DER 70-1 (1970).
8. Kahn, B., et al., "Radiological Surveillance
Studies at a Pressurized Water Nuclear Power
Reactor," EPA Rept. RD 71-1 (1971).
9. Montgomery, D. M., Krieger, H. L. and
Kahn, B., "Monitoring Low-Level Radioactive
Aqueous Discharges from a Nuclear Power Station in a
Sea Water Environment," in Environmental
Surveillance Around Nuclear Installations, IAEA,
Vienna, 243 (1974).
51
-------
5. RADIONUCLIDES IN THE AQUATIC ENVIRONMENT
5.1 Introduction
5.1.1 Oyster Creek and Barnegat Bay
hydrology. (1-4) Condenser cooling water is taken from
Barnegat Bay through a canal extending from the south
branch of Forked River and discharged through
another canal to Oyster Creek which empties into the
bay about 1.8 .km south of Forked River (see Figure
5.1). Both Forked River and Oyster Creek are small
streams. The average natural discharge of the south
branch of Forked River was estimated to be less than
0.14 mVs, while for Oyster Creek the mean daily flow
during 1966-1969 was 0.71 mVs with a maximum of
3.5 mVs and a minimum of 0.34 m Vs. (3,) The station
utilizes about 1.2 x 10" liters/month which creates a
flow in Oyster Creek during operation of about 45
mYs.0) As the volume of Barnegat Bay is
approximately 2.4 x 10" liters/.?) one-half bay volume
of water is used by the station each month. Hence, the
fresh water flow in these streams is insignificant
relative to this large demand which has resulted in a
reversal of the flow in Forked River producing a
brackish water environment up Forked River from the
bay through the south branch and in Oyster Creek.
Also, when conditions in the bay are such that the
discharge from Oyster Creek is forced northward along
the west shore, recirculation of station effluents occurs.
Barnegat Bay (see Figure 5.2) is about 50 km long
with a maximum width of 6.4 km. The bay is shallow,
having an average depth of 1.5 m and a maximum
depth of 6 m. It is isolated from the ocean on the east by
two narrow barrier beaches, Island Beach and Long
Beach, separated by Barnegat Inlet which lies
approximately midway on the bay and 7 km SE from
Oyster Creek. Barnegat Inlet provides the main access
to the ocean, as the bay is essentially closed to the north
and contains only a small channel into Beach Haven
Inlet at the southern end. The maximum tidal range of
the bay is 1 m, while at the mouth of Oyster Creek it is
only about 0.15m.
The mixing of radionuclides discharged from
Oyster Creek to the bay is complicated and difficult to
predict. The movement of water in the bay and through
Barnegat Inlet to the ocean is under the influences of
tidal forces, local wind stresses, the hydraulic head
produced by runoff of rainfall, and density differences
due to salinity and temperature gradients. Due to the
shallowness of the bay, wind can be predominant in
mixing and moving water in the bay. The circulation of
water through Forked River and Oyster Creek will also
affect the movement of bay water in the vicinity of
Oyster Creek, since this amounts to an approximately
one-half bay volume per month (see above).
A month-long study of bay water mixing and its
transfer to the ocean was performed by Carpenter
during August 1963. (I) Rhodamine B dye was
continuously introduced into the water in the mouth of
Oyster Creek during a period when water-borne
materials discharged to the bay would be transferred to
the ocean at a minimum rate. Runoff into the bay was
minimal and the winds were low to moderate. Hence,
concentrations near the mouth of Oyster Creek were
expected to be near maximum during the study month.
The observations can be summarized as follows:
(1) The average (minimum) exchange rate of
Barnegat Bay with the ocean is about 14
percent a day and the half-life for the exchange
process is about 5 days.
(2) All fresh water is introduced to the bay along
the west shore, which produces a density
gradient across the bay from west to east. The
resulting pressure gradient in combination
with the Coriolis force produces a current to
the south. This movement is in addition to the
movement produced by the hydraulic head
associated with run-off accumulation in the
enclosed basin to the north of the inlet.
(3) The predominant wind from the south
produced a flow to the north during the study.
This caused a pressure gradient due to
accumulation of water in the enclosed
northern portion of the bay, as the expected
circulation to the south below the surface is
prevented by the shallowness of the bay. The
result is a reduced displacement of the water.
It is expected, however, that some circulation
to the south occurs near the shore where the
wind speed is less. A wind from the north
53
-------
would force a flow to the south, but a smaller
pressure gradient would develop as flow from
the bay would occur through Beach Haven
Inlet at the southern end of Barnegat Bay. The
data show that winds can have a greater
influence than tidal action on the movement of
water in the bay.
(4) The bay end of the channel to Barnegat Inlet
lies only 1.6 km to the south of the mouth of
Oyster Creek. Materials discharged from
Oyster Creek that drift south are rapidly
flushed along the channel into the ocean
during ebb tide. Hence, material that is in this
area at the beginning of ebb tide is discharged
directly into the ocean. Relatively constant
vertical salinity profiles in the central portion
of the bay indicate the strong influence of tidal
action in this region.
(5) Concentration profiles for a constant
discharge derived from the data are not
particularly applicable to actual station
discharges. That is, after termination of a
periodic batch discharge, the concentration at
some point in the bay, depending on the
conditions discussed above, will exceed that in
Oyster Creek.
This complex hydrology of the bay and the batch-
wise discharge of wastes by the station make it
extremely difficult to predict quantitatively the
concentration of radionuclides relative to time of
discharge by the station and location in the bay.
5.1.2 Studies near Oyster Creek. The measurements
described in Section 4.4 showed that radionuclides
from the Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Station were in
the circulating coolant water discharge canal (Oyster
Creek) and possibly were in measureable
concentrations in Barnegat Bay. Sampling was mostly
confined to Oyster Creek and Barnegat Bay between
Cedar Creek and Waretown. Some samples were
collected from other areas of the bay to determine
overall radionuclide distribution. Samples of water,
macro-algae, aquatic plants, fish, clams, crabs and
sediment were collected. These studies are described in
detail in Sections 5.2 to 5.7.
5.1.3 Aquatic surveillance studies by station
operator. Radioactivity in the aquatic environment is
monitored by the station operator and reported
quarterly. ^Samples of surface water, silt and clams
are collected routinely and analyzed for gamma-ray
emitters, '°Sr and gross alpha and beta radioactivity.
Surface water is sampled at five sites: one in Forked
River, one in Oyster Creek, and three in the bay (near
the mouth of Oyster Creek, 3.2 km NE of Forked River
and about 3 km east of Waretown). Silt samples are
collected from the same five sites as surface water,
while clams are collected from the three bay sites.
Average concentrations in samples are reported each
quarter for the combined sites. The station operator's
aquatic analyses summarized semi-annually for
January 1970 to November 1973 are given in Appendix
E.I. The results of the four-year surveillance program
show no increase of radioactivity in these samples with
time. Except in the few cases of "Zn in clam meat, the
results are similar to preoperational data. The *'Zn
concentrations were slightly above the minimum
detectable level of 0.09 pCi/gm.
5.1.4 Aquatic surveillance studies by the State. The
New Jersey State Department of Environmental
Protection, Bureau of Radiation Protection (BRP), has
conducted a thorough radiological surveillance
program of the aquatic environment in the vicinity of
the nuclear power station since 1970.(6,7)This study
included a greater variety of aquatic samples than that
of the operator's program discussed above. Samples
analyzed were surface water, silt, benthic macro-algae,
aquatic plants, fish, clams and crabs. The principal
station-produced radionuclides observed in these
samples were !4Mn and '"Co. The results of the state's
1971 and 1972 surveillance program are discussed
below. (6,7)
Grab samples of surface water were obtained
during 1971 and 1972 from Oyster Creek, Forked
River, Barnegat Bay and Great Bay. Station-produced
radionuclides were detected in concentrations above
the minimum detectable level only in Oyster Creek and
Forked River. However, results based on grab samples
are not particularly informative because they are
dependent upon sampling time relative to the time of
station discharge as well as conditions in the bay
(discussed in Section 5.1.1). The BRP sampled water
continuously in Oyster Creek at Sands Point Marina
from April through December 1972 and in the South
Branch of Forked River at the station condenser inlet
from January to April 1973//9 The average
concentrations are given in Appendix E.2. Although all
concentrations are low, they reflect higher levels of
reactor-produced radionuclides in Oyster Creek than in
Forked River.
Average annual radionuclide concentrations for
sediment samples collected in 1971 and 1972 from
Oyster Creek, Forked River and Barnegat Bay are also
given in Appendix E.2. The 1972 concentrations of
MMn and '"Co in sediments were significantly less than
in 1971. Zinc-65 was not detected (<0.2 pCi/g) and
only possible traces of "Co (<0.15 pCi/g) and I34Cs
(< 0.15 pCi/g) were present. These results indicate that
54
-------
effluents from the station are deposited in Oyster
Creek, Forked River and along the west shore of
Barnegat Bay, possibly as far north as Cedar Creek.
Radionuclide concentrations were measured in
benthic macro-algae and marine grasses collected from
Barnegat Bay and several other sites in the vicinity. The
most commonly sampled species were C. fragile, U.
lactuca, G. verrucosa and the grass, Z. marina. The
average radionuclide concentrations are listed in
Appendix E.2 for samples collected in 1971 and 1972
from sites in the bay near the mouth of Oyster Creek,
near the mouth of Cedar Creek and east of Waretown.
Radionuclides were concentrated from the water in all
species. The greatest concentrations were measured in
G. verrucosa and the least in C fragile. The average
concentrations in all species were significantly higher
in 1971. The fallout radionuclide, mRu, was observed
only in 1972. The two standard deviation uncertainties
for the "Co values in 1971 are included to indicate the
small differences, in some cases, between the average
concentration and the minimum detectable level. Stems
and roots of four samples of Z. marina were analyzed
separately and the roots were found to contain more
than twice the "Mn and '°Co (root/stem = 2.1 -j- 0.3).
Radionuclide concentrations were measured in
whole fish collected from Barnegat Bay during 1971
and 1972. Concentrations were generally below
minimum detectable levels. Of 13 samples collected in
1972, trace amounts of'°Co were observed in 5 samples,
'"Cs in 6 samples, '"Cs in one sample and ""Sr in 8
samples. Since the whole fish was analyzed, it is not
known with which tissues these radionuclides were
associated.
The average radionuclide concentrations and the
concentration range observed in shellfish (Mercenaria
mercenaria) meat collected from Barnegat Bay near
Waretown and near the mouths of Oyster and Cedar
Creeks are listed in Appendix E.2. The principal
radionuclides discharged by the station and detected in
the clam meat are MMn, "Co and '"Co. As observed in
the sediment and algae samples, concentrations in
clams collected during 1972 were less than in 1971.
No significant radionuclide concentrations were
observed in crab meat collected in 1972. Two samples
collected from Oyster Creek in 1971 contained small
quantities of "Co, "Co and "Zn.
The results described briefly above, abstracted from
BRP reports, (6,7) will be utilized in later discussions.
5.1.5 Other aquatic studies. A number of non-
radiological environmental studies have been
conducted in Barnegat Bay near Oyster Creek. Benthic
flora and fauna of Barnegat Bay have been studied
since 1965 by Rutgers University to assess the species
population before and after the onset of warm water
discharges by the station/,?; A finfish study of
Barnegat Bay was also performed by the Department of
Environmental Sciences at Rutgers University/P, 10) \
census consisting of more than 60 species of fish was
obtained. The results of these studies will be utilized in
the discussions appearing later in this report.
Some studies are in progress from which data are
not yet available. These include the continuation of the
studies by Rutgers, and a benthic survey of the New
Jersey coastal waters by the Sandy Hook Laboratory,
U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, which also
considers the effects of thermal addition on benthic
algae and organisms. New Jersey's Department of
Environmental Protection, Bureau of Fisheries, has
recently completed a study of bay finfish and related
physical and chemical parameters, but the report has
not been published.
5.2Surface Water Concentration of
Radionuclides and Stable Elements
5.2.1 Sampling and analysis. Eight-liter water
samples were collected from Oyster Creek, Forked
River, Barnegat Bay and Great Bay during each field
trip at the sites from which flora and fauna were
obtained. Sampling was repeated four times during a
12-month period at three sites in Barnegat Bay, near
Waretown and near the mouths of Oyster and Cedar
Creeks, and from Great Bay, the control sampling site
indicated by an X in Figure 5.2. The dates on which the
samples were collected and the site locations are listed
in Table 5.1 and shown in Figures 5.1 and 5.2. The
water temperatures and salinities were measured at the
time of sampling.* The unacidified water samples were
returned to the laboratory in polyethylene bottles for
analysis.
Two-liter aliquots of the water samples were
analyzed for MSr and "7Cs by the sequential procedure
described in Section 4.4.2. Samples collected during
October 18-21, 1971, were also analyzed for "Mn and
Co using the same procedure. The stable elements,
except potassium, were determined by atomic
* Water temperature determinations were made using a Model 43-TD Telethermometer of the Yellow Springs
Instrument Company. Salinities were determined with a Model 10423 Goldberg Refractometer specifically
designed by American Optical Instrument Company for direct reading measurements.
55
-------
Figure 5.1 Aquatic sampling sites near
the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station.
56
-------
Table 5.1 Concentration of Stable Elements in Surface Water
Date Water Salinity
Collected Location* temperature, °C (ppt)
Oct. 18, 1971
Oct. 19, 1971
Oct. 21, 1971
Oct. 21, 1971
Oct. 21, 1971
Oct. 21, 1971
April 17, 1972
April 18, 1972
April 18, 1972
April 19, 1972
July 10, 1972
July 11, 1972
July 12, 1972
July 12, 1972
Oct. 31, 1972
Oct. 31, 1972
Nov. 1, 1972
Nov. 1, 1972
Nov. 1, 1972
Nov. 2, 1972
Nov. 2, 1972
D
F
E
I
C
G
GB-X
H
B
G
GB-X
H
B
G
GB-X
L
H
B
G
N
M
NM**
NM
NM
NM
16
17
13
11
15
13
24
NM
33
24
11
10
11
13
11
10
11
16
22
22
24
20
21
29
25
24
22
28
28
23
24
23
28
22
22
22
16
17
Ca
(mg/1)
190
290
NM
281
248
257
333
281
NM
219
29S
262
219
286
NM
NM
276
267
276
228
276
Sr
(nig/1)
4.2
5.4
NM
5.7
4.9
5.3
6.7
5.4
NM
5.1
5.6
5.2
4.6
5.3
NM
NM
5.4
5.1
4.9
4.5
5.2
K
(mg/1)
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
206
205
210
190
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
NM
See Figures 5.1 and 5.2 for sampling locations; GB-X indicates
Bay.
**
NM - not measured.
Note: Stable elements below the minimum detectable level were'
Mn (<0.1 mg/1) and Co (<0.2 mg/1).
site X in Great
Fe (<0.07 mg/1),
absorption spectrophotometry. Potassium concen-
trations were based on 4°K radioactivity, assuming 848
pCi'-K/gK.
In addition to the 8-liter water samples described
above, larger volumes of water were collected on May
15-16, 1972, and September 28, 1972. In the earlier
case, 105- to 210-liter samples from 5 sites in Barnegat
Bay and one site in Great Bay were filtered through 8-
and 0.45-micron membrane filters in series, and 20
liters of the filtrate were retained for sequential analysis
of MMn, "Co, *°Sr and '"Cs. On the second occasion,
150- to 380-liter samples from 5 sites in Barnegat Bay
were passed through 0.45-micron cartridge filters (see
Section 4.4.3) and the filtrate was discarded. The
membrane and cartridge filters were analyzed by
gamma-ray spectrometry with a 54-cmJ Ge(Li)
detector. Since the filtrates were not analyzed in the
latter sampling, only the insoluble or paniculate
radionuclides were measured.
5.2.2 Stable elements in surface water. The
concentration of stable strontium, calcium and
potassium measured in water samples from Oyster
57
-------
Figure 5.2 Aquatic sampling sites in the area of the
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station.
Creek, Forked River, Barnegat Bay and Great Bay are
listed in Table 5.1. Concentrations of iron, manganese
and cobalt were below minimum detectable levels in all
samples. Also included in the table are the water
temperatures and salinities* at the time of collection.
Being an estuarine environment, the salinities and
stable element concentrations vary somewhat, but not
greatly within Barnegat Bay. The lowest salinities were
measured in Oyster Creek (D) and at the northern end
of Barnegat Bay (N), where the influence of fresh water
is greatest (see Section 5.1.1). Salinities were relatively
high in Great Bay, which is more open to the ocean
than Barnegat Bay. The average salinity of all water
samples is 23 ± 4 °%. Since the mean salinity of
Atlantic Ocean water is 34.90 M/0,(4) the water in the
vicinity of Oyster Creek consists of about 66 ± 10
percent ocean water and 34 ± 6 percent fresh water.
In the first line of Table 5.2 are presented the mean
concentrations in mg/liter of stable calcium, strontium
and potassium, with the standard deviations of the
individual measurements. The Sr/Ca ratios of the
water samples from the bay varied between 17.8 and
23.3 mg Sr/g Ca, with a mean and standard deviation
of 19.9 ± 1.3 mg Sr/g Ca. Concentrations of iron,
manganese and cobalt were below the minimum
detectable levels indicated and could not be measured.
Since salinity is a measure of dissolved salts, principally
Na, Mg, Ca and K, it indicates the relative amounts of
fresh water and sea water. In principle, it is possible to
estimate the concentration of stable elements in the bay
water from salinity measurements and concentrations
normally observed in fresh and pelagic ocean water.
Given in Table 5.2 are the concentrations reported to
be in fresh and pelagic Atlantic Ocean water. An
approximate concentration is obtained by summing the
products of the fresh and ocean water concentrations
multiplied by the measured mean salinity fractions
given above, 0.34 + 0.06 and 0.66 ± 0.10,
respectively.t The estimated concentrations are given
in the last line of Table 5.2. The calculated
concentrations for calcium, strontium and potassium
agree with the measured mean concentrations. This
might be expected since the concentration of these
elements are relatively uniform in pelagic ocean waters
and relatively small in fresh water. The concentrations
calculated for iron, manganese and cobalt, however,
depend on their normally greater concentrations in
fresh water, which vary greatly between geographical
locations. For these elements a concentration range has
been calculated which spans one or more magnitudes.
These values indicate that measurement of Mn, Fe
and Co requires an increase in analytical sensitivity of
at least two orders of magnitude. This can be done by
altering the analytical technique or incorporating a
concentration process into the procedure. Knowledge
of these concentrations is useful, as their radioactive
isotopes are discharged by the station and their
presence influences the uptake of the radioactive
isotope by marine organisms.
5.2.3 Radionuclides in surface water. The results of
the radiochemical analyses of the 8-liter grab samples
collected during October 1971 and three times during
1972 are listed in Table 5.3. Since the volumes available
for each analysis were only 2 to 4 liters and the
radionuclide concentrations were quite low, the results
•Salinities are given in units of parts per thousand (ppt).
t An example of this calculation for Ca is 15 mg/1 xO.34 + 400 mg/1 x 0.66 = 269 mg/liter.
58
-------
Table 5.2 Average Measured and Estimated Stable Elements in Water, mg/1
Source
This study
Ref. 11
Ref. 12
Ref. 13
Ref. 14
Ref. 15
Est. cone.*
Source
This study
Ref. 11
Ref. 12
Ref. 13
Ref. 14
Ref. 15
Est. cone.*
Ca
Fresh Sea
269 + 35
15 400
400
11-79 400
15 410
400
270 + 40
Fe
Fresh Sea
< 0.07
0.1 0.01
--
0.03-0.2 0.01
0.03
0.002-0.02
0.012-0.088
Sr
Fresh Sea
5.3 + O.S
0.1 8
7.7
0.02-0.18 8.0
0.07 8
81
5.3 + 0.8
Mn
Fresh Sea
< 0.1
0-01 o.OOl
0.0001
0.005-0.03 0.002
0.007 0.002
0.002-0.004
0.0018-0.013
V
Fresh Seq
205 + 10
3 380
..
..
2.3 390
340
245 + 40
Co
Fresh Sei
< 0.2
0.005 0.001
0.00013
0.004-0.007 0.0005
0.001 0.0004
0.0005
0.0004-0.0027
Computed estimated concentrations = 0.34 x cone, in fresh water + 0.66 x cone, in sea water.
reflect considerable uncertainty in the measurements.
The '"Cs concentration in Barnegat Bay ranged from
0.2 to 1.3 pCi/liter. The '"Cs concentrations in
background samples from Great Bay were 0.4 -j- 0.1
and 0.3 ±_ 0.1 pCi/liter, similar to that observed in
Chesapeake Bay water (about 0.3 pCi/liter).(7<9Only
three samples from Barnegat Bay had '"Cs
concentrations at or in excess of 1 pCi/liter. After
correcting the measured concentrations for the
background '"Cs from fallout, the 137Cs concentrations
of all Barnegat Bay samples were less than 1 pCi/liter,
and the average concentration in the bay resulting from
station discharges was about 0.3 pCi/liter.
The MSr concentrations in the Barnegat Bay water
samples varied from <0.1 to 2.6 pCi/liter. The "Sr
concentrations of two background samples from Great
Bay were 0.50 ± 0.06 and 0.36 ± 0.04 pCi/liter, with
an average specific activity of 0.070 -j- 0.008 pCi
"Sr/mg Sr. The only samples having MSr
concentrations significantly greater than that of the
background samples were those collected during the
period of October 18-21, 1971. The average specific
activity of these samples was 0.37 ± 0.08 pCi MSr/mg
Sr, while in samples collected during 1972 the average
specific activity was 0.07 ± 0.04, similar to that in
samples from Great Bay. After correcting the
measured values for the background contribution from
fallout, the *°Sr concentrations in the October 1971
samples varied from 1.3 to 2.2 pCi/liter. These samples
were collected during the month when the station
reported discharging the highest MSr levels during 1971
and 1972. The average MSr concentration in Oyster
Creek was 1.57 pCi/liter during October 1971
compared to annual averages of 0.34 and 0.21 pCi/liter
of "Sr + "Sr in 1971 and 1972, respectively (see
Appendix B.4). In view of the relatively high level of
Sr discharged in October 1971, the MSr concentrations
observed in Barnegat Bay water samples during this
period are reasonable and attributable to station
discharges.
Manganese-54 concentrations in the Barnegat Bay
water samples collected during October 18-21, 1971
were less than 3 pCi/liter, and, with the exception of
two locations.J'Co concentrations were less than 2
pCi/liter. The "Co concentrations of samples collected
near the mouth of Cedar Creek (G) and off Island
59
-------
Table 5.3 Concentration of '"Sr and '"Cs in
Barnegat and Great Bay Water Samples
Date
Collected Location**
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
April
April
April
April
July
July
July
July
Oct.
Oct.
Nov .
Nov.
Nov .
Nov.
Nov.
18,
19,
21,
21,
21,
21,
17
18
18
19
10,
11,
12,
12,
31,
31,
1,
1,
1,
2,
2,
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
1971
, 1972
, 1972
, 1972
, 1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
D
F
E
I
C
G
GB-X
H
B
G
GB-X
H
B
G
GB-X
L
H
B
G
N
M
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
0
137Cs,
pCi/1
.8 +_
.0 +_
.9 +_
.7 +
.5 +_
.5 +_
.3 ±
.4 +_
.3 ^
.2 *_
.4 +_
.4 *_
.8 +_
.0 ^
NA
NA
.8 ^
.8 +_
.6 +_
.4 +_
.6 +_
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
3
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
< 0
0
pCi/l'
.7 +_
.9 +_
.5 +_
.5 +_
.8 +_
.6 +_
.50 +_
NA1"
.58 +_
.25 +
.36 +_
.24 +_
.19 +_
.^6 +.
NA
NA
•9 ±
•3 ±
.4 *_
.1
_ 2 +
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
4
4
3
3
3
4
06
05
05
04
05
04
04
1
1
1
1
In all samples the 54Mn and 60co
concentrations were <3 pCi/1 and< 2 pCi/1,
respectively, except for those collected
Oct. 21, 1971, at locations C and G in which
the kOc0 concentrations were 3^2 and
7+^2 pCi/1, respectively.
**Locations refer to Figure 5.1; GB-X indicates
site X in Great Bay.
^ NA - not analyzed; +_ values are 2o and
< values are 3o of the count rate.
Beach (C) were 7 ± 2 and 3 ± 2 pCi/liter, respectively.
These concentrations appear high compared to the
average calculated 60Co concentration of 1.05 pCi/liter
in Oyster Creek during October 1971 (see Appendix
B.4). It is possible that these samples were collected
after discharge of wastes in Oyster Creek that produced
"Co concentrations substantially greater than the
monthly average. Samples collected during 1972 were
not analyzed radiochemically for 54Mn or Co.
The large volume water samples collected during
the period May 15-16,1972, show no !4Mn, "Co, "Sr or
'"Cs attributable to station operation (see Table 5.4).
During this period, only laundry wastes were being
discharged. Manganese-54 and '°Co concentrations
were less than 0.05 and 0.6 pCi/liter for the suspended
and dissolved (filtrate) fractions, respectively. Cesium-
137 concentrations in the filtrates ranged from 0.40 to
0.57 pCi/liter, while the average 90Sr concentration was
about 0.3 pCi/liter, near the levels that would be
expected as a result of fallout.
The results for the water samples collected
September 28, 1972, from Barnegat Bay, Oyster Creek
and the south fork of Forked River are given in Table
5.5. Since only the filters were analyzed, the reported
concentrations refer to suspended radionuclides. The
only detectable gamma-ray-emitting radionuclides
were !4Mn and MCo. Manganese-54 and '"Co were
found in every sample except that no 54Mn was detected
in the sample collected from Barnegat Inlet (P). The
station was discharging wastes on September 28, 1972,
as indicated by the relatively high 54Mn and '"Co
concentrations measured in Oyster Creek and Forked
River. The radionuclide concentrations in Barnegat
Bay samples were all lower than concentrations in
Oyster Creek, and the only bay sample with
concentrations higher than in Forked River was taken
just north of the river (A). The concentrations in
Forked River can be higher than those in Barnegat Bay
because wastes discharged into the bay from Oyster
Creek can recirculate through Forked River. The bay
measurements, however, cannot be related to effluent
values from the station because the effects of wind and
tide on the dilution of wastes from Oyster Creek into
the bay cannot be predicted (see Section 5.1.1). These
samples were collected during a period when the
station was discharging wastes almost daily, so that
radionuclide concentrations in the bay reflect multiple
discharges.
The !4Mn and '"Co measurements were not
quantitative since only the suspended radionuclides
were measured and no data regarding the distribution
of radionuclides between suspended and dissolved
species in Barnegat Bay are available. Measurements in
the discharge canal showed that 66 percent to 96
percent of S4Mn and '"Co discharged to Oyster Creek
were associated with suspended material (see Section
4.4.4). These measurements, however, reflect the
fraction of MMn and MCo in paniculate form in sea
water after only a short residence time, and it is possible
that the distribution between suspended and dissolved
species may change after longer residence times in
Barnegat Bay. The measurements do show that
insoluble radionuclides can be detected at distances of
3.1 km north and 8.5 km south of Oyster Creek, as well
60
-------
Table 5.4 Radionuclide Concentrations in Water Samples Collected May 15-16, 1972
Location
Sample Suspended
Salinity
Concentrations,
pCi/1
vol., 1 solids, mg/1 pH g/1
90
Sr
137
Cs
in Forked River (E)
in Bay near Waretown (H)
in Bay near Gulf Point (L)
in Bay near Toms River (M)
in Oyster Creek Channel (N)
in Great Bay
105
105
107
105
210
210
18
17
17
18
17
28
7.4
7.5
7.3
7.3
7.4
7.1
18.4
20.2
23.5
16.4
22.6
28.4
0.32
0.32
0.25
NA
NA
NA
0.57
0.40
0.44
NA
NA
NA
Notes:
1. Letters refer to locations in Figure 5.1.
2. Concentrations of Mn and 60Co in filtered solids were <0.05 pCi/liter, and
in filtrates <0.6 pCi/liter, in all samples.
3. Concentrations of 90Sr and 137Cs measured in 20-liter volumes of the
filtrates.
as in the channel leading into the Atlantic Ocean.
The sampling on September 28, 1972 occurred
when levels of radionuclides discharged by the station
were unusually high because of problems associated
with the waste treatment system. £5> During 1972 the
station reported discharging 1.8 Ci of 60Co, of which 1.2
Ci (67 percent) was released during August and
September of that year.(3) Likewise, a total of 0.63 Ci
of MMn was discharged during 1972, while 0.45 Ci (71
percent) of this total was released during the same two
months of 1972/5;
5.2.4 Hypothetical radionuclide concentrations in
the discharge canal (Oyster Creek). Because
concentrations of radionuclides discharged by the
station were in most cases near or below minimum
detectable levels in the discharge canal and Barnegat
Bay water, average water concentrations in Oyster
Creek were calculated from data reported by the
station. (3) The average radionuclide concentrations
calculated to be present in Oyster Creek during the
period of study are shown in Table 5.6. The average
annual concentrations in Oyster Creek in the first three
data columns are based on quantities discharged
monthly and the total available dilution reported by the
station (see Appendix B.4). The station reported the
total combined activities of "Sr and MSr for 1971 and
1972. The average concentrations listed in the fourth
data column were taken from Table 4.6. These values
were calculated from measured concentrations of
liquids in the waste sampling tank and the laundry
drain tank and the average annual liquid waste volume
and the average annual total dilution volume (see
Section 4.4.1). No adjustment was made for
recirculation.
For the 17 radionuclides for which a comparison of
concentrations obtained by the two procedures is
possible, 12 agreed within a factor of three. The values
of "Sr, 1MI, 1MCs, '"Cs, "'Ba and "'Np differed by a
much larger factor. Because concentrations based on
monitoring all discharges as reported by the station
should be superior to those based on the occasional
periodic samples from the waste sample tank, the
average concentrations based on the 1971-1973 values
reported by the station will be utilized later in this
report to indicate the concentration of radionuclides in
the aquatic pathways. For those radionuclides not
measured by the station, the values obtained from the
analysis of liquid wastes prior to discharge and
appearing in the last column of Table 5.6 will be used.
However, concentrations in Oyster Creek at any time
could differ considerably from these averages because
reactor wastes are discharged periodically, and the
radionuclide composition of these wastes changes with
time.
5.3 Radionuclides in Algae and Grass
5.3.1 Sampling and analysis. Three species ojf
macro-algae (Gracilaria verrucosa, Codium fragile,
Ulva lactuca), two aquatic grasses (Zostera marina,
Spartina altemiflora) and a sponge (Porifera) were
collected. Ten locations were initially sampled during
61
-------
Table 5.5 Particulate Radionuclides
Sample
Location-Collection Time Vol., 1
in Bay near Sunrise Beach,
0920 (0) 151
in Bay north of Forked
River 1630 (A) 151
in Bay near Waretown,
1000 (H) 151
in Bay near Waretown,
1530 (H) 189
in Bay near Gulf Point,
1440 (R) 114
in Bay near Barnegat
Inlet, 1400 (P) 378
in Oyster Creek, 1030 (D) 91
South Branch Forked
River, 1115 (E) 76
Notes:
1. Letters refer to locations
col lection.
2. Concentrations are based on
in Water Samples
Suspended
solids, g/1
NA
80
NA
49
51
9
15
30
in Figure 5.1
analysis of
Collected September 28, 1972
Salinity,
PH ppt
NA NA
7.6 25.2
NA NA
7.4 25.6
7.4 26.6
7.6 31.5 <
7.5 24.8
1'. 3 24.1
; times refer to
cartridge filter
3. No other photon-emitting radionuclides were detected on
Concentrations ,
pCi/1
5 4
Mn
0.09
0.99
0.31
0.55
0.26
0.01
2.19
0.67
beginning
.
•
filter
Co
0.38
2.23
0.66
1.08
0.64
0.07
3.98
1.72
of
5.
6.
(< 0.05 pCi/1).
Tide: low-tide CO.03 m) at approx. 0810 and high tide (1.65 m) at
approx. 1430.
Wind: from NE at 10-15 mph.
NA - not analyzed.
September and October 1971. Of these, three were
selected as sites of sufficient productivity and
importance to be resampled three additional times over
a 12-month period (April, July and October, 1972): in
the bay near the mouth of Oyster Creek (B), at the
mouth of Cedar Creek (G) and near Waretown (H) (see
Figure 5.1). It was initially planned to use the site in
Barnegat Bay at Surf City (I) to obtain background
samples, but '"Co and "Mn were found in samples from
there. Background samples, instead, were obtained
from Great Bay, 36 km south of Oyster Creek (site X).
To determine the extent of the distribution of
radionuclides from the station in Barnegat Bay,
samples were also collected on October 31, 1972 to
November 2, 1972 at the northern extremity of the bay
at Sloop Point (N), near the mouth of Toms River (M),
and at the southern extremity of the bay in Little Egg
Harbor (L).
The samples were dried at 96° C, ashed at 450* C,
and analyzed directly by gamma-ray spectrometry with
10- x 10-cm Nal(Tl) detectors, a Nal(Tl) gamma-ray
coincidence-anticoincidence spectrometer system, and
with 54-cm3 or 85-cm3 Ge(Li) detectors. Iron was
chemically separated, and analyzed for "Fe with an x-
ray proportional detector. The stable elements, Sr, Ca
and Fe, were determined with an atomic absorption
spectrophotometer. To analyze for volatile
radionuclides, particularly JH, I4C and UII, aliquots of
the fresh sample were analyzed prior to drying and
ashing. The analyses for 3H and 14C were made by
62
-------
Table 5.6 Average Radionuclide Concentration in the Discharge Canal, pCi/1
Radionuclide
12.3 -yr
5730 -yr
14.3 -d
27.7 -d
313 -d
2.7 -yr
44.6 -d
71.3 -d
5.26-yr
12.8 -hr
244 -d
26 -hr
50.5 -d
28.5 -yr
9.7 -hr
65 -d
35.1 -d
66.2 -hr
6.0 -hr
39.6 -d
36 -hr
253 -d
60.2 -d
8.06-d
20.9 -hr
2.07-yr
30 -yr
12.8 -d
32.4 -d
284 -d
235 -d
3H
14c
32p
51Cr
54Mn
55Fe
59Fe
58Co
6°Co
64Cu
65Zn
76As
89Sr
9°Sr
91Sr
95Zr
95Nb
99
Mo
99mTc
i n-i
•*• *-'*-' l-v
Ru
i nc
1UbRh
110mA
124
1-i4Sb
131j
133j
134Cs
137Cs
140
Ba
141
14 Ce
144Ce
239
m.1
Calculated from values
reported by station* Calculated from measured
1971 1972 1973 effluent samples,**
21.1
NRf
NR
0.15
0.42
NR
0.05
0.10
0.79
NR
<0.011
NR
JO. 34
0.05
JNR
0.11
0.10
NR
NR
NR
0.003
0.'38
0.28
0.10
0.25
0.16
NR
NR
0.63
50.8
NR
NR
0.10
0.48
NR
0.02
0.12
1.26
NR
< 0.036
NR
JO. 21
0.05
j< 0.002
0.17
0.16
NR
NR
NR
0.003
0.35
0.31
1.45
2.14
0.054
NR
NR
0.48
31.9
NR
NR
0.40
0.15
NR
0.008
0.036
0.24
NR
<0.011
NR
0.18
0.024
0.002
>NR
0.21
0.21
NR
NR
NR
ND
0.077
0.063
0.074
0.073
0.12
0.005
0.018
0.22
37.7
0.0075
0.056
0.48
0.39
0.49
0.063
0.047
0.81
0.011
0.0046
0.045
0.012
0.0011
NDf
0.015
0.023
0.14
ND
0.011
0.043
0.0015
0.0083
0.12
0.041
2.1
3.5
0.027
0.034
0.025
0.026
See Appendix B.4
Concentrations from Table 4.6
NR - not reported; ND - not detected
Note: Approximately 0.6 Ci of 133Xe, 1.8 Ci of 135Xe and small quantities of
85mKr and 88]Cr (<0.03 Ci) were discharged annually in the water, but
aeration would be expected to expel these nuclides.
63
-------
treating 5-g aliquots of fresh sample in a combustion
train, collecting water and CO2, and measuring the
radioactivity with a liquid scintillation counter. The
minimum detectable concentrations at the 95 percent
confidence level were 250 pCi 3H/kg fresh weight and
an excess of 6.3 dpm 14C/g C above the normal
background concentration.
Because of the various drying periods in transit to
the laboratory, it was difficult to ascertain appropriate
ash weight/wet weight ratios for the algae samples. The
state's Bureau of Radiation Protection (BRP) has
reported ash weight/fresh weight ratios for four of
these species, and the average ratios are significantly
lower since its laboratory is so near the collection sites
that drying in transit is minimal.^ The following
values and standard deviations for this ratio were
found:
this
laboratory
Codium fragile
Gracilaria
(17)
verrucosa (14)
Ulva lactuca (14)
Zostera marina
Spartina
altemiflora
Porifera (2)
(5)
(10)
0.029
0.085
0.055
0.02*
0.032
0.136
±
±
±
±
±
±
0.014
0.045
0.025
0.009
0.007
0.050
New Jersey, BRP
0.014
0.036
0.027
0.022
±
±
±
±
no value
no value
0.005
0.008
0.012
0.003
given
given
Notes:
1. The number of samples analyzed is given
in parentheses.
2. ^ values are the standard deviation of
individual measurements.
The agreement for Z. marina is to be expected because
this grass does not dehydrate as rapidly as the algae.
The same is probably true of Spartina. To convert the
ash weight values given in the following Tables to fresh
weight values, it is recommended that the BRP ratios
be applied to the three species of algae, that this
laboratory's ratios be applied to the two species of
grass, and one-half the value (0.07) be applied to the
Porifera samples.
5.3.2 Results and discussion of stable element
concentrations. The concentrations of stable elements
measured in the algae and marine plant samples are
listed in Table 5.7 according to collection date and site.
No significant difference in stable element
concentrations was observed in samples collected from
*OR (Observed Ratio) = (Sr/Ca)slm|>ie -=- (Sr/Ca)w,,er
64
the various sites in either Barnegat Bay or Great Bay.
These data indicate, as did the water analyses (see
Section 5.2.2), that strontium, calcium and potassium
are uniformly distributed throughout the bay. The
same is true of iron. There does appear to be a decrease
in the concentration of strontium, calcium and iron in
algae samples collected during the fall of the year.
Concentrations averaged 70 percent higher in samples
collected during the summer relative to those collected
in the fall. This is probably due to a reduced level of or
lack of cell division in algae in the colder (11" C) waters
of November relative to average summer temperatures
(27° C).(7^The algae collected in the fall, particularly
C. fragile and U. lactuca, were less abundant and in a
poorer condition than in the summer, apparently being
in the early stages of cellular degeneration or dead.
The annual average concentrations of stable
elements and the Sr/Ca weight ratio measured in each
species of algae and grass from all sites are listed in
Table 5.8. There are no significant differences in the
concentrations of iron, strontium or calcium in the
various species of algae and grasses, only in potassium.
The Sr/Ca weight ratio in the marine plants is the
same as that measured in the water (see Section 5.2.2),
i.e., OR* = 1. Except possibly for C. fragile, the Sr/Ca
ratios in the algae are less than that observed in the
water. The average OR in these species of algae is about
0.6, indicating either an affinity for calcium or
discrimination against strontium. This observation is
consistent with the mean concentration factors (CF)
tabulated below which, at equilibrium, is defined as
(mg/kg fresh weight)Mmple -^ (mg/liter)w,ter:
Concentration factors
Species
Fet
Sr
Ca
K
C. fragile 3,200 0.8 ± 0.3 0.9 ± 0.3 1.6 ± 0.5
G. verrucosa 6,300 1.0 ± 0.3 1.6 ± 0.8 34 ± 8
U. lactuca 5,400 0.9 ± 0.4 1.7 ± 0.9 7 ±2
Spartina 4,000 1.4 ± 0.2 1.8 ± 0.9 13 ± 4
Z marina 8,400 1.9 ± 0.4 1.9 ±0.4 6 ±2
fAn estimate assuming a water concentration of
0.04 mg Fe/liter (see Section 5.2.2).
Notes:
1. Concentrations in mg/g ash were converted to
mg/kg fresh weight by using the ratios in
Section 5.3.1.
Concentrations in water were taken from
Table 5.1.
2. i values are standard deviations of
individual observations.
-------
Table 5.7 Stable Ion Concentrations in Algae and Marine Plants, mg/g Ash
Sample
No.
4
5
6
9
30
45
44
46
43
58
60
59
61
26
25
32
31
50
49
48
63
65
64
28
29
42
40
39
55
57
56
Collection Date
Sept. 23, 1971
Sept. 23, 1971
Sept. 23, 1971
Oct. 18, 1971
April 12, 1972
July 12, 1972
July 12, 1972
July 12, 1972
July 12, 1972
Nov. 1, 1972
Nov. 1, 1972
Nov. 1, 1972
Nov. 1, 1972
Oct. 21, 1971
Oct. 21, 1971
April 19, 1972
April 19, 1972
July 12, 1972
July 12, 1972
July 12, 1972
Nov. 1, 1972
Nov. 1, 1972
Nov. 1, 1972
April 18, 1972
April 18, 1972
July 11, 1972
July 11, 1972
July 11, 1972
Nov. 1, 1972
Nov. 1, 1972
Nov. 1, 1972
Sample*
Bay at mouth of
C
G
Z
S
u
C
G
U
S
C
G
U
S
Bay near mouth
C
G
C
U
C
G
U
C
G
U
Bay at
C
U
C
G
U
C
G
U
Ca
Sr
Fe
K++
Oyster Creek (B)**
9.5
4.0
8.4
11.0
11.0
19.0
22.2
22.3
27.1
16.8
9.3
5.6
15.9
of Cedar Creek
23.8
40.2
19.9
25.2
15.7
14.1
30.9
NA +
8.0
9.8
Waretown (H)
24.2
20.4
13.3
11.8
11.7
11.3
13.1
NA
0.37
0.09
0.20
0.37
0.19
0.22
0.23
0.25
0.22
0.23
0.12
0.08
0.25
(G)
0.42
0.41
0.30
0.21
0.20
0.13
0.31
NA
0.10
0.14
0.38
0.23
0.21
0.15
0.15
0.17
0.14
0.12
2.2
4.2
8.9
2.3
10.0
15.6
12.7
13.2
6.8
7.1
5.6
7.3
1.9
4.9
8.9
12.1
10.8
10.9
10.0
17.9
15.4
2.2
10.5
6.4
6.3
16.3
13.5
4.5
5.9
3.1
NA
35
212
46
63
84
27
271
52
87
20
256
40
104
25
123
25
60
19
170
45
26
212
55
22
70
31
224
52
17
142
28
Bay off Island Beach (C)
7
8
22
23
Sept. 23, 1971
Sept. 23, 1971
Oct. 21, 1971
Oct. 21, 1971
C
Z
C
Z
12.0
19.1
6.9
12.0
0.37
0.30
0.11
0.41
3.4
12.6
7.0
12.0
21
61
15
31
65
-------
Table 5.7 Stable Ion Concentrations in Algae and Marine Plants, mg/g Ash (Cont'd)
Sample
No.
Collection Date
Sample* Ca
Sr
Bay between Oyster Creek and Forked
12
13
14
2
10
11
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
. Sept .
Oct.
Oct.
19,
19,
19,
23
21,
21,
1971
1971
1971
, 1971
1971
1971
C
G
P
Bay at
C
South
G
S
4.0
7.5
2.0
0.14
0.14
0.07
Fe K++
River (F)
8.1
4.0
8.8
25
145
15
mouth of Forked River (A)
4.3
Branch of Forked
35.8
7.4
Bay at Sloop Point
67
66
Nov.
Nov.
2,
2,
1972
1972
G
U
9.7
12.0
0.06
River
0.37
0.20
(N)
0.11
0.13
10.6
(E)
10.0
3.6
4.3
7.7
40
153
45
153
71
Bay near Toms River (M)
68
Nov.
2,
1972
C
NA
NA
8.2
31
In Cedar Creek (K)
24
47
16
18
15
53
22
33
35
36
38
51
54
Oct.
July
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
April
July
July
July
July
Oct.
Oct.
*
Samples: C
C
21,
12,
20,
20,
20,
31,
19
10,
10,
10,
10,
31,
31,
1971
1972
1971
1971
1971
1972
, 1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
1972
S
S
C
z
P
U
U
U
G
F
S
U
S
;-Codium fragile;
i-Spartina
10.5
6.4
Bay off Surf City
4.5
21.5
23.8
Little Egg Harbor
10.5
Great Bay (X)
11.9
9.4
5.0
18.8
"9.3
6.6
15.9
0.29
0.22
(!)
0.07
0.32
0.53
(L)
0.14
0.15
0.14
0.12
0.13
0.19
0.07
0.23
G-Gracilaria verrucosa;
alterniflora; Z-Zostera
marina
3
1
4
15
1
3
3
9
8
10
11
2
2
U-Ulva
.4
.2
.4
.0
.5
.7
.7
.5
.1
.1
.2
.7
.8
70
94
11
20
18
57
47
65
188
162
104
43
60
lactuca;
; P-Porifera
; F-Fuca.
Locations: See Figures 5.1 and 5.2.
NA - not analyzed
''"''Based on 848 pCi 4°K/gK
Note: The standard deviation for the K, Ca, Sr and Fe values is approximately
5%.
66
-------
Table 5.8 Average Stable Element Concentration in Algae and Marine Plants, mg/g Ash
Species
C. fragile (16)
G. verrucosa (12)
U. lactuca (14)
Spartina (8)
Z. marina (4)
K
24 +
187 +
55 +
78 +
40 +
7
47
14
22
17
9
7
8
5
12
Fe
+ 4
+ 3
+ 4
+ 3
+ 2
Sr
0.23
0.18
0.17
0.24
0.31
+ 0.11
+ 0.10
+ 0.07
+ 0.06
+ 0.08
Ca
14
15
14
13
15
+ 7
+ 11
+ 7
+ 6
+ 6
0.
0.
0.
0.
0.
Sr/Ca
018 +_
014 +
013 +_
022 *_
022 +_
0.009
0.005
0.003
0.009
0.009
Notes:
1. Number of samples are given in parentheses.
2. + values are standard deviations of individual measurements.
The concentrations of strontium and calcium in water
were taken from Table 5.1 for the date and site which
corresponded to the algae or grass sample. As the
concentration of iron in the water samples was below
the minimum detectable level, a value of 0.04 mg
Fe/liter that was computed in Section 5.2.2 was used in
these calculations. The average potassium
concentration measured in the four July water samples,
200 ±15 mg/liter, was assumed uniform with respect
to time and used to calculate CF's for potassium (see
Section 5.2.2).
Concentration factors for algae determined in this
study compare as follows with those previously
published for marine algae:
the summer when the growth rate was greatest and the
concentrations highest.
These factors indicate that algae and plants are
generally good indicators of iron in the marine
environment. Their usefulness for indicating potassium
levels depends upon the species, while for strontium
and calcium, the concentration factors are not
significant for the species studied.
5.3.3 Results and discussion of radionuclide
concentrations. The concentrations of relatively long-
lived radionuclides measured in samples of marine
flora are listed in Table 5.9 according to collection date
and sampling site. The two predominant radionuclides
attributable to the station are "Mn (above
Concentration factors
Source
Sr
Ca
Fe
Reference 11
Reference 18
Reference 19, 20
Reference 15
Reference 12
0.9
0.2
0.1
1
2
- 20
- 82
- 90
- 3
5
1.8 - 31
2
—
4
50,000
300 - 6,000
1,000 - 5,000
730
...
26
4-31
...
50
4
Since CF's in the literature are frequently reported for
algae without indicating species, only a gross
comparison can be made. Values reported by Bryan et
aJ. and Polikarpov refer to Ulva lactuca and Ulva
rigida, respectively. (12,15)
The CF's determined in this study are similar to, or
fall within the range, of those previously established.
Because the factors in this study are based on annual
average concentrations, they may tend to be low
relative to CF's based solely on data collected during
concentrations of 0.2-0.3 pCi/g) and ""Co. Cobalt-58
and 1MCs were detected in samples collected in July and
November 1972 at all three principal sampling sites (B,
G and H). In addition, "Cr was detected in two
Spartina samples collected from the discharge canal in
July and November 1972 at 5 ± 1 pCi/g and 3 ± 1
pCi/g, respectively. No tritium was detected in algae.
The minimum detectable level (3
-------
Table 5.9 Radionuclide Concentrations in Algae and Marine Plants, pCi/g Ash
Collection Date
Sept. 23, 1971
Sept, 23, 1971
Sept. 23, 1971
Oct. 18, 1971
April 18, 1972
July 12, 1972
July 12, 1972
July 12, 1972
July 12, 1972
Nov. 1, 197-2
Nov. 1, 1972
Nov. 1, 1972
Nov. 1, 1972
Oct. 21, 1971
Oct. 21, 1971
April 19, 1972
April 19, 1972
July 12, 1972
July 12, 1972
July 12, 1972
Nov. 1, 1972
Nov. 1, 1972
Nov. 1, 1972
Oct. 20, 1971
Oct. 20, 1971
April 18, 1972
Sample*
C
G
Z
S
u
C
G
U
S
C
G
U
S
C
G
C
U
• C
G
U
C
G
U
C
G
C
54Mn
5.6
8
9
5
1.9
4.3
4.2
2.3
4.8
2.4
3.8
4.4
3.6
7.2
14
2.7
2.6
1.6
3.6
2.8
5.3
4.4
5.2
8
11
1.1
5*Co
< 0.5**
< 1.1
<2.6
2.6
<0.6
<0.6
0.6
0.3
1.1
0.3
0.5
0.5
0.4
<0.7
<2.0
<0.5
<0.6
0.2
0.3
<0.5
0.5
0.4
0.4
<1.0
<1.3
<0.3
60-
Co
Bay,
7.7
18
13
11
2.5
12
11
5.2
8.7
9.6
14.7
17.9
10.9
Bay,
9
16
3.1
4.0
3.4
7.0
7.3
18
13
16
16
25
4.0
90Sr
95Zr
95Nb
106Ru
134Cs
137Cs
141Ce
144Ce
at mouth of Oyster Creek (B)
0.40
0.80
1.2
0.05
<0.05
0.05
0.11
0.10
0.21
0.34
0.10
0.06
0.27
near mouth
0.11
0.28
0.06
<0.05
0.06
0.53
0.13
0.10
0.17
0.06
Bay, at
0.12
NA
<0.05
1.8
NA
NA
<0.5
<1.2
1.6
.2.6
1.5
2.9
<1.0
<0.8
<1.0
0.5
of Cedar
NA
<2.0
<0.9
2.6
1.0
2.3
1.1
<0.5
<0.4
<0.4
Waretown
<1.8
<1.0
1.9
3.6
NA
NA
1.0
3.5
2.4
2.1
1.2
4.2
<0.6
<0.6
<0.8
0.8
Creek (G)
NA
4.0
1.2
1.0
1.0
0.9
1.6
0.7
0.5
0.3
(H)
2.1
1.4
0.9
4.7
5.9
NA
5.4
3.9
3.2
4.9
3.2
3.5
NA
NA
NA
NA
3.1
7.6
2.9
5.0
2.7
3.1
3.1
NA
NA
NA
6.5
7.0
3.5
<0.4
<0.9
<2.0
<0._8
<0.5
<0.5
<0.2
0.15
0.52
<0.4
0.55
<0.3
1.2
<0.9
<2.0
<0.5
<0.6
<0.2
<0.2
<0.3
<0.2
0.43
0.17
<1.1
<1.0
<0.2
< 0.4
<1.0
<2.0
<0.8
1.5
<0.6
0.7
0.5
1.0
<0.5
1.4
<0.4
2.5
<0.8
<2.0
1.0
0.6
0.2
0.3
0.5
0.6
1.0
0.5
<1.0
1.5
0.5
NA+t
NA
NA
NA
1.7
1.3
1.0
0.6
1.0
<0.3
<0.2
<0.3
<0.2
NA
NA
0.8
1.1
0.4
0.8
0.7
<0.2
<0.3
<0.2
NA
NA
0.9
NA
NA
NA
NA
4.0
2.9
2.4
1.7
1.9
1.0
<0.6
1.0
1.2
NA
NA
3.4
4.2
1.3
2.9
2.0
1.2
0.7
0.8
NA
NA
3.3
-------
Table 5.9 Radionuclide Concentrations in Algae and Marine Plants, pCi/g Ash (Cont'd)
Collection Date
April
July
July
July
Nov.
Nov.
Nov.
Sept.
Sept.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Oct.
Sept.
Sept.
18, 1972
11, 1972
11, 1972
11, 1972
1, 1972
1, 1972
1, 1972
23, 1971
23, 1971
21, 1971
21, 1971
19, 1971
19, 1971
19, 1971
23, 1971
23, 1971
Sample*
U
C
G
U
C
G
U
C
Z
C
Z
C
G
P
C
G
54Mn
0.9
2.0
3.7
l.S
1.3
6.3
1.7
5.6
26
2.9
20
7.2
11
1.3
23
22
58Co
-------
Table 5.9 Radionuclide Concentrations in Algae and Marine Plants, pCi/g Ash (Cont'd)
Collection Date
Sample*
54Mn
58rv.
CD
60Co
90Sr
95Zr 95Nb
106_
Ru
134Cs 137Cs 141Ce
144C.e
In Cedar Creek (K)
Oct. 21,
July 12,
Nov. 1,
Oct. 20,
Oct. 20,
Oct. 20,
1971
1972
1972
1971
1971
1971
S
S
S
C
Z
P
<0.4
0.2
<0.4
1.0
8.3
<1.0
<0.8
<0.1
<0.4
<0.4
<2.0
<1.0
<0.3
0.2
<0.6
0.4
5.0
0.5
0.11
0.12
0.19
Bay, off
0.11
0.37
0.12
<2.0
5.0
<0.6
Surf City (I)
<0.5
NA
<1.8
1.9
6.4
1.1
0.6
NA
2.1
1.5
1.6
NA
2.5
6.0
4.9
< 1 . 1 < 1 . 1 NA
<0.1 0.5 1.9
<0.3 0.9 <0.3
<0.5 <0.4 NA
<1.0 <1.0 NA
<1.0 <1.0 NA
NA
3.4
2.2
NA
NA
NA
Little Egg Harbor (L)
Oct. 31, 1972 U 0.2 <0.2 0.2 0.09 <0.2 0.10 NA <0.1 0.1 <0.2 0.4
Great Bay (X)
April 19, 1972
July 10, 1972
Oct. 31, 1972
July 10, 1972
July 10, 1972
Oct. 31, 1972
July 10, 1972
U
U
U
G
S
'S
F
* Samples: C-Codium fragile;
**« values are 3o
20% for 54Mn,
<0.3
<0.3
<0.2
<0.5
0.2
<0.4
0.3
<0.3
<0.5
<0.2
<0.5
<0.3
<0.5
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.2
<0.5
0.2
0.08
0.12
0.06
0.12
0.25
0.10
0.14
1.8
1.1
<0.2
<1.4
1.7
<0.7
3.1
1.0
0.7
0.2
1.9
2.2
<0.5
3.5
1.3 <0.2
1.4 <0.2
NA <0.1
1.6 <0.1
1.7 <0.1
NA <0.1
2.6 <0.1
G-Gracilaria verrucosa; U-Ulva lactuca; S-Spartina alterniflora; Z-Zostera
of the counting error
106Ru and 141Ce;.and
t Locations: see Figures 5
.1 and 5.2.
; the 1
10% for
2o counting
60Co.
errors
are 30%
for 58co,
90Sr, 95Zr, 95Nb, *•
0.3
0.2
<0.2
0.2
0.3
0.3
0.4
marina;
"Cs, 13"
1.2
0.4
<0.2
0.4
0.3
<0.4
0.3
P-Porifera;
'Cs and 144Ce
1.9
0.9
<0.4
1.5
1.4
<1.0
1.0
F-Fuca.
,
ttNot Analyzed.
Notes:
1. Minimum detectable levels (3o) for those nuclides not (rarely) detected, pCi/gm ash weight except H, pCi/kg fresh weight:
3» 51Cr 55Fe 59Fe 65Zn 103Ru
250 2.3 3 2 0.8 0.3
2. Mean 14C concentration - 17.5 _+ 1.3 dpm/gC.
-------
inability to detect 3H in these samples is expected since
the concentration factor for tritium is near 1 and the
water concentration is probably less than 100 pCi/1
(about 5 pCi/1 in sea water, 150 pCi/1 in fresh water
and the 40 pCi/1 contributed by the station, see Table
4.6. (15) The "C concentrations in algae and grass
collected near the mouth of the discharge canal did not
significantly exceed the concentrations in comparable
samples from Great Bay. The mean "C concentration
was 17.5 ±_ 1.3 dpm/g C. This value is within the range
of the normal specific activity of I4C that has resulted
from cosmic ray bombardment of nitrogen in the upper
atmosphere and fallout from thermonuclear
detonations, 17 ± 2 dpm/g C.(22) Additional natural
and fallout radionuclides observed in some samples
were 7Be, MK, "Sr, "Zr, "Nb, "*Ru, '"Cs, M1Ce and
144Ce.
No significantly consistent difference in MMn or
MCo concentrations in algae was observed among the
three principal sampling locations. This indicates
considerable movement of radionuclides north along
the coast from Oyster Creek, even though the channel
across the bay to Barnegat Inlet extends eastward from
about Waretown, south of Oyster Creek (see Section
5.1.1). Samples collected at 11 different sites indicated
contamination of algae throughout Barnegat Bay.
Above-ambient concentrations of MMn and "Co were
measured in samples collected from the south end of
Little Egg Harbor (L), the southern extremity of
Barnegat Bay, from the east side of the bay at Island
Beach (C) and Surf City (I), and from Toms River (M)
and Sloop Point (N), in the northern part of the bay
(see Figure 5.2). Cesium-134 and "Co were also
detected in a sample of G. verrucosa from the latter
site. Relatively high levels of "Co, "Mn, 1MCs, "Co, and
"Cr were observed in Spartina that had grown in the
mouth of the discharge canal. However, only
background concentrations of fallout radionuclides
were detected in Spartina collected from the mouths of
Cedar Creek (K) and Toms River (J). Hence, although
radioactivity from the station is dispersed throughout
the bay, it apparently does not enter the creeks and
rivers emptying into the bay in detectable amounts. An
exception to this is Forked River, 1.6 km north of the
discharge canal, which is used by the station as the
coolant water intake. Algae and Spartina samples from
the south branch of Forked River (E) contained both
MMn and "Co. This confirms earlier reports that
radionuclides recirculate in coolant water (see Section
5.1.4).
No contamination was detected in samples from
Great Bay, immediately south of Barnegat Bay, which
was used as the background site for this study. Fuca, an
algae not observed growing in Barnegat Bay,
contained, in addition to relatively higher
concentrations of the normally observed fallout
radionuclides, small amounts of MMn and "Co that
may be due to fallout.
Because the radionuclide concentrations were not
significantly different in samples from the three
principal sites, the concentrations there were averaged
for each species based on fresh weight, using the
appropriate ash weight/fresh weight ratios given in
Section 5.3.1. The average concentrations are listed in
Table 5.10. Although species cannot be consistently
ranked by radionuclide concentration, the highest
concentrations were usually observed in G. verrucosa,
followed by U. lactuca containing about one-half as
much activity, and then C. fragile. A similar ranking
was indicated by McCurdy.^
Except for MMn and "Co, concentrations in
Spartina approach those observed in G. verrucosa.
Because of dilution in the bay, the Spartina that grew in
the discharge canal was exposed to higher
concentrations of radionuclides from the station than
the algae in the bay, which would indicate a relatively
lower uptake by the Spartina. Zostera manna, another
rooted plant that grows submerged in the bay, reflected
a high affinity for both "Mn and "Co. Samples
collected at Island Beach (C) and Surf City (I), 10 km
and 17 km, respectively, from Oyster Creek, contained
easily detectable quantities of MMn, 650 pCi/kg, and
"Co, 190 pCi/kg. These concentrations are 10 times
those measured in C. fragile collected concurrently
from the same sites. High absorption through the root
system might account for the observed uptake, as the
concentrations of "Mn and MCo in the root system of Z.
marina has been found to be twice that in the stem. (6)
The "K concentrations in algae were strongly
species dependent and constant throughout the
growing season. G. verrucosa contained 4-6 times the
4CK content as U. lactuca, which normally contained
about 4 times the amount in C. fragile. These large
differences were not observed of l3TCs, but the species
rank was the same.
The large standard deviations assigned to some of
the average concentrations tabulated in Table 5.10 are
due in part to observed seasonal variations. A trend of
increasing concentration from a low in spring samples
to the highest levels in fall was observed for 'Be, MMn,
"Co, "Co, IMCs and, in some species, "'Cs. In fact, 'Be,
"Co and I34Cs were not detected in any spring samples,
and the latter two were detected only at site B in the
summer samples. They were observed, however, at all
three sites in samples collected in the fall, including G.
verrucosa at site N. Radionuclides found to be in
71
-------
Table 5.10 Average Concentration of Radionuclides in Species of Algae and Spartina Collected
from the Three Principal Sampling Sites in Barnegat Bay, pCi/kg Fresh Weight
Nuclide
7Be
14C**
40
K
54Mn
60Co
90Sr
95Zr
95Nb
103 t
°Ru
106
Ru
137,,
'Cs
14L, tt
Ce
144
*Ce
C. fragile
40 +_ 20
18 +_ 1
320 +_ 80
50 +_ 30
120 +_ 50
1.1 +_ 0.4
14 +_ 8
20 +_ 14
10 +_ 3
50 +_ 17
7 ± 4
11 _+ 4
30 +_ 14
G. Verrucosa
180 +_ 80
17 +_ 2
6300 +_ 1400
240 +_ 120
540 +_ 210
5.4 +_ 2.5
50 +. 30
40 + 20
30+7
200 + 60
30 + 20
™ ~
30 + 7
60 +_ 40
U. lactuca
70 +_ 20
18 + 2
1200 +_ 300
70 + 30
120 + 50
2.4 +_ 1.0
30 +. 20
30 + 20
20 + 5
100 + 30
20 + 10
«_
30 + 20
60 +_ 40
Spartina*
420 +_ 320
16 + 2
2300 +_ 500
140 +_ 30
320 +_ 40
6.1 +_ 2.9
40 +_ 30
60 + 60
20 + 15
140 + 40
40 + 30
20 + 10
—
50 +_ 15
tt
Sites B, G and H; average for Spartina from Site B only.
Concentrations given as dpm C/gC.
Detected only in samples collected July 1972; for other periods, <7 pCi/kg.
Not detected in samples collected Nov. 1972; <7 pCi/kg.
Notes:
1.
-------
Table 5.11 Radionuclide
Concentrations in Algae and Spartina Samples
from Great Bay (Background Area), pCi/kg Fresh Weight
Nuclide U.
7Be
14
C*
54Mn
58Co
60Co
90Sr
95
y:>Zr
95Nb
103Ru
106RU
134Cs
137Cs
141Ce
144Ce
Note: No C
lactuca
60
18
<8
<9
<10
2
27
17
15
36
<5
6
16
30
. fragile
G. verrucosa
126
18
< 18
< 18
< 7
4
50
68
27
58
<4
7
14
54
was observed
Spartina
67
17
< 12
<12
<11
5
32
43
42
54
<4
10
11
38
growing
in Great Bay.
Concentrations given as dpm 14C/gC.
in the Spartina. The concentration of those
radionuclides contributed by the station are as follows:
Concentration, pCi/kg
Species
U. lactuca
G. verrucosa
C. fragilf*
Spartina
"7Cs
14
23
5
30
±
±
±
±
11
18
4
30
""Ru
60
140
30
90
±
±
±
±
'Be
30
60
17
40 350
± 320
* Background activity assumed to be in same
ratio to other algae samples as observed
in Barnegat Bay samples.
Strontium-90 was measured in excess of the
background concentration only in the following
samples:
Collection date Site
Sept. 23, 1971 B
Sept. 23, 1971 C
Oct. 21, 1971 G
July 12, 1972 G
Excess **Sr,
G. verrucosa
20 ± 10
6 ± 4
15- ± 6
pCiAg
Z. marina
24 ± 10
20 ± 6
Uptake of "Mn and "Co by algae can be compared
by observing the 60Co/MMn activity ratios. This ratio
did not vary significantly between samples from sites
near the discharge canal (B, G, H, F, A, E) for any one
sampling period. Differences in the activity ratio were
observed in samples collected at different times, as
shown in the second column of the following
tabulation. The "Co/MMn activity ratio was similar in
samples collected during the first three sampling
periods; however, the ratio was significantly higher in
those collected during the fall of 1972. The activity
ratio in the Spartina samples from Oyster Creek were
similar to those listed for algae.
"Co/*Mn Activity Ratio
Date
Oct.-Nov. 1971
April 1972
July 1972
Nov. 1972
algae
1.9 ± 0.4**
2.1 ± 0.8
2.5 ± 0.5
3.8 ± 0.6
effluent*
1.7
2.4
2.0
3.7
* Average of month sampled and previous
month.
**± values are standard deviations of
individual ratios.
The last column above lists the average "Co/MMn
activity ratio in station effluents during the month
sampled and the previous month (see Appendix B.4).
The similarity between the "Co/^Mn ratio in algae and
in the station effluent is obvious, and the much larger
activities discharged by the station during August,
September and October 1972 are also reflected in the
algae measurements. These close correlations, if real,
suggest that MMn and "Co act similarly in the aqueous
environment of the discharge canal and bay, and are
adsorbed similarly by algae. These data also suggest
that algae adsorb "Co and MMn from the water as the
station discharges these nuclides, and not from
dissolved MMn and MCo that had been deposited earler
in the sediment. The "Co/'Mn activity ratio measured
in sediment near the mouth of Oyster Creek during this
study was about 6 (see Section 5.7.4), similar to the
ratio'reported by McCurdy and much higher than that
observed in the algae or grasses. (6)
At all sampling points along the west coast of
Barnegat Bay, at Sloop Point (N) and in Little Egg
Harbor (L), "Co activity exceeded that of MMn in
samples of algae, grasses (except in one sample of
Spartina from Forked River, E), sediment and water.
However, along the east side of the bay, the MMn
concentrations exceeded those of "Co in every case. At
Island Beach State Park (C), the average "Co/"Mn
73
-------
ratio in two samples of C. fragile and Z. marina was
0.32 ± 0.02, and at Surf City (I), the ratio in one
sample of each was 0.50 ± 0.14. Samples from Island
Beach State Park were reported by McCurdy to contain
similar activity ratios of 0.13 to 0.42 for the same two
species .(6) The reason for these high MMn
concentrations relative to '"Co along the east shore of
the bay is not known, but may be the result of an
earlier, higher level discharge of 54Mn.
No differences were observed in the "Co/°Co ratio
in algae collected during the same period at sites B, G
and H. However, the average ratio in algae collected in
July 1972, 0.054 ± 0.010, was twice that observed in
the November 1972 samples, 0.029 ± 0.003. The
activity ratio in station effluent during 1972 was about
twice that measured in algae, which suggests that most
of the cobalt had been in the environment for an
average time of about 70 days.
In samples containing IMCs, the I34Cs/"Cs activity
ratio did not appear to vary significantly with species,
location or season. Subtracting a background 137Cs
concentration of 0.2 pCi/g ash, the average '"Cs/'^Cs
activity ratio was 0.53 ± 0.05, similar to the ratio of 0.6
in effluent (see Table 5.6). In April of 1972, the
114Cs/'"Cs ratio in sediment near the mouth of the
discharge canal was reported to be 0.25 ^ 0.08/7?
Earlier discharges may account for the low IMCs/'"Cs
ratio of 0.22, measured in the algae sample from Sloop
Point, about 29 km north of Oyster Creek.
Concentration factors (CF) for all radionuclides
measured in algae and water-grass samples cannot be
determined because most were not measurable in
water. Also, it was not possible to estimate the
concentrations in the bay water from the radioactivities
discharged by the station because the amount of
dilution in the bay is not known (see Section 5.1.1).
Concentration factors are thus given for only the two
radionuclides measured in water, MSr and "7Cs (see
Table 5.3).
The range and average CF's calculated for each
species of algae and Spartina over a one-year period are:
Concentration factors
MSr
"Cs
Species range
average
3± 3
range
average
C. fragile 0.4-16 3 ± 3 1.5 - 11 5 ± 4
G. verrucosa 2 - 73 20 ± 18 6 - 36 20 ± 13
U. lactuca 1 - 13 5 ± 4 7 - 32 14 ± 8
Spartina 1 - 35 15 ± 13 12 - 40 23 ± 12
Note: ± values are standard deviations of the
individual factors.
These factors were calculated by dividing the
concentration measured in the algae sample (pCi/kg
fresh weight) by that measured in a water sample
(pCi/liter) collected at the same site and time.
These CF's vary considerably as indicated by the
range and large standard deviations. This is largely due
to the two or three measured water concentrations at
each location not being representative of the
concentration associated with the algae during most of
its growing period and variations in uptake with
seasonal growth characteristics of the algae (see Section
5.3.3). The factors calculated for radiostrontium are
generally higher than those calculated for stable
strontium (see Section 5.3.2). The factors for stable
strontium reflect equilibrium conditions while those for
"Sr may be in response to higher MSr concentrations.
The average CF's for MSr and '"Cs, including all
samples of algae and Spartina, are of the same order of
magnitude as the previously published values listed
below:
Published CF's
Reference
11
18
19
20
This study
"Sr
12.5
0.2 - 82
0.1 - 90
96
11 ±8
'"Cs
20
17 - 240
16 - 20
—
16 ± 8
5.3.4 Significance of radionuclides in marine algae
and grasses. Although these algae and grasses are not
consumed by man, they are an important type of
sample for surveillance of aquatic environments
because:
1) They provide a source of radionuclides to the
aquatic environment. Upon death and decay,
radionuclides are released to the water or
become available to invertebrates in the
sediment that are fed upon by fish and other
large aquatic organisms.
2) Many species of algae are consumed by
organisms in the food chain effecting an
increase in the uptake of radionuclides by
man.
3) They concentrate biologically significant
radionuclides and can act as indicators
allowing the detection and monitoring of
radionuclides in an aqueous environment
when radionuclide concentrations are
otherwise undetectable. Large samples can be
easily collected and ashed to small volumes,
enabling very sensitive analyses.
74
-------
5.4 Radionuclides in Fish
5.4.1 Introduction. Barnegat Bay is a popular sport
and commercial fishing area. Fish caught from the bay
are commonly sold to local fish markets and
restaurants, while sport fishermen frequent the bay
throughout the year/J^ Over fifty species of fish have
been identified in the bay, although many are not eaten
by man.^During the period 1960-1969, seven species
offish were taken commercially .(3) These species with
the estimated total ten-year catch in kgs are given
below:
Winter flounder - 95,300
White perch - 14,800
Alewives - 14,800
Eels - 136,000
Mullet -34,100
Shad - 400
Black fish - 200
In 1969, however, only the first four species were taken
commercially, totaling 34,700 kg valued at $215,000.
The quantity of fish taken by sportsmen, including
many more species than taken commercially, is not
known but is undoubtedly quite large.
The life histories and distribution of most of the
estuarine fish of Barnegat Bay are not well known.
Their presence in the bay depends upon a number of
factors, including spawning season, feeding habits and
conditions existing in the estuary. (23) In this report,
the fish have been classified according to feeding habits
and human consumption, both being important in
consideration of the food chain.
Estuarine fish are abundant in both the intake and
discharge canals because of the circulation of bay water
and the higher temperature of the discharge canal in
winter. Fishermen are active along the banks of these
canals throughout most ,of the year. The high water
temperatures of the discharge canal result in some fish
remaining long after they would normally have
departed for warmer southern waters. Fish then
become thermally trapped and cannot escape to the
south through the cold water of Barnegat Bay. This
perpetuates fishing in the discharge canal during the
colder months of the year. (24)
5.4.2 Collection and analysis. On the initial field
trips in September and October 1971, fish were
collected from five sites in Barnegat Bay and from both
canals. On trips in April, July and November of 1972,
fish were collected from only three sites in Barnegat
Bay and one in Great Bay.* These sites corresponded
to those selected for sampling benthic algae, discussed
in Section 5.3.1. Fish from Great Bay were considered
control samples. All fish were collected by trawling.
Sampling for fish in the discharge and intake canals
was eliminated in 1972, due to the debris which fouled
the trawl. A sample of menhaden (Brevoortia
tyrannus) killed by thermal shock in the discharge
canal was obtained in January 1972.
The 18 species of collected fish are listed in Table
5.12 with the number collected, feeding habits, habitat
(environment - behavior), and edibility. Although
menhaden are not generally eaten, they are processed
into a protein concentrate which may be used to
alleviate protein deficiency in some populations and
into a meal for poultry and cattle. (25} Silversides are
eaten only by some ethnic groups. The relative number
of each fish species collected is similar to that found in a
fish survey conducted during 1966-1968, except for the
relatively large number of menhaden present in the
discharge canal during winter.^ Their presence in
large numbers was undoubtedly due to the heated
discharge, as menhaden were not captured in the bay
during any of the field trips.
Samples were frozen immediately after collection
and returned to the laboratory on dry ice. For analysis,
the fish were thawed and weighed, and those of
sufficient size were dissected into muscle, bone, gut,
and kidney plus liver. Separation of muscle from the
skeleton was facilitated by cooking in a microwave
oven; however, some small bones, particularly in small
fish, may have been retained in the musc\e.(26) Small
fish were analyzed whole. When sample size was
sufficient, samples were combined for analysis by
species offish for each sampling site.
To measure volatile radionuclides, all soft tissues
were analyzed in fresh form directly by gamma-ray
spectrometry with a 10- x 10-cm NaI(Tl) detector and
54-cm3 or 85-cm3 Ge(Li) detectors. For higher "Co and
"'I sensitivities, samples of liver-kidney were also
analyzed with a NaI(Tl) gamma-ray coincidence/anti-
coincidence system. The iron fraction was separated
and analyzed for 55Fe with an x-ray proportional
detector.
Bone was ashed at 600° C, and strontium was
separated chemically. Radiostrontium was measured
by counting total strontium and *\.(27) Stable
•We thank E. G. Karvelis, USEPA, for his assistance in collecting and identifying these samples and the
Edison Water Quality Laboratory and the National Field Investigations Center-Cincinnati, USEPA, for
making available boats and sample collecting apparatus.
75
-------
Oi
Table 5.12 Fish Collected in Barnegat and Great Bays
Fish Name
No.
Collected
Food
Habitat*
Human
Consumption
Atlantic Menhaden (Brevoortia tyrannus) 100's
Atlantic Silversides (Menidia menidia) 1000's
Blackfish or Tautog (Tautoga onitis) 20
Bluefish (Potnatomus saltatrix) 3
Fourspine Stickleback (Apeltes quadracus) 1000's
Jack (Caranx sp.) 9
Northern Kingfish (Menticirrhus saxatilis) 2
Northern Puffer (Sphaeroides maculatus) 11
Northern Searobin (Prionotus carolinus) 2
Oyster Toadfish (Opsanus tau) 40
Shorthorn Sculpin (Myoxocephalus scorpius) 6
Silver Perch (Bairdiella chrysura) 225
Striped Killifish (Fundulus majalis) 100's
Summer Flounder (Paralichthys dentatus) 3
Weakfish (Cynoscion regalis) 1
White Perch (Roccus americanus) 68
Windowpane (Scophthalmus aquosus) 2
Winter Flounder (Pseudopleuronectes americanus) 322
Plankton
Plankton
Shellfish, crustacean
Fish
Plankton
Fish
Invertebrates*
Invertebrates
Opportunist**
Opportunist
Opportunist
Fish, invertebrates
Plankton
Fish, invertebrates
Fish, invertebrates
Fish, invertebrates
Invertebrates
Invertebrates
Migrant No
Resident Yes
Migrant Yes
Migrant Yes
Resident No
Migrant Yes
Migrant Yes
Migrant Yes
Local marine No
Resident Rarely
Resident No
Migrant Yes
Resident No
Small - resident Yes
Large - migrant
Migrant Yes
Resident Yes
Local marine Yes
Small - resident Yes
Large - migrant
* Bottom feeder
**Consumes any food available to him, including crustacean and shellfish.
+ Migrant - fish that enter the bay during certain seasons of the year either for spawning or for feeding in nursery
grounds.
Resident - fish continuously present in the bay and which carry out their complete life cycle in the bay.
Local marine - indigenous fish that have their greatest abundance in shoreline waters, but are also common in
estuarine waters.
-------
strontium and calcium were determined by atomic
absorption spectroscopy.
Muscle and gut were dried at 100° C, ashed at 400°
C, and then analyzed by gamma-ray spectrometry. The
potassium content of the muscle was calculated from
the 40K measurement (848 pCi 40K/gm K), and stable
calcium, strontium and iron concentrations were
determined by an atomic absorption spectrometer.
Radiochemical analyses were performed to measure
MSr. Analyses for 3H and UC were made by treating 4-g
aliquots of fresh sample in a combustion train,
collecting water and CO2, and measuring the
radioactivity with a liquid scintillation counter. The
minimum detectable concentrations at the 95 percent
confidence level were 250 pCi 3H/kg fresh weight and
an excess of 6 dpm I4C/g C above the normal
background concentration.
5.4.3 Results and discussion of stable element
concentrations. The concentrations of calcium,
strontium, potassium and iron in whole fish or muscle
and of calcium and strontium in bone are given in terms
of fresh weight in Table 5.13. The ash weight/fresh
weight ratios were measured and found to be constant
between tissues of the same type. The mean weight
ratios with standard deviations for individual samples
were:
Fish muscle = 0.016 ± 0.003 g ash/g fresh weight
Whole fish = 0.036 ± 0.008 g ash/g fresh weight
Bone =0.17 ± 0.03 g ash/g fresh weight.
These ratios may be applied to the data in Table 5.13 to
convert concentrations to an ash weight basis. The
collection site, date and the number of fish comprising
each sample are also given.
Concentrations of strontium and calcium in fish
bone were reasonably constant. The mean
concentrations were 0.24 ± 0.03 g Sr/kg fresh weight
and 49 +_ 7 g CaAg fresh weight. The calcium
concentration is similar to that observed previously in
fresh water fish, but the strontium concentration is
significantly higher. (26,28,29) The average ratio of
Sr/Ca in bone is 4.9 ± 0.6 mg Sr/g Ca, very similar to
that observed in muscle, 4.5 ± 0.6 mg Sr/g Ca. The
high and variable concentrations of calcium and
strontium in muscle reflects to a great degree
contamination of muscle by bone, which yields a low
bone/muscle concentration ratio. The highest
bone/muscle ratio observed is about 90 (sample #10),
which approaches the previously reported ratio of
100(2$ and is similar to that found by Templeton and
Brown.(30) Assuming a concentration ratio of 100 for
strontium and calcium in bone to bone-free muscle is
probably reasonable. Dividing the average Sr/Ca ratio
measured in the fish by the average Sr/Ca ratio
measured in water, 19.9 mg Sr/g Ca (see Section 5.2.2),
yields an O.R.* of 0.25. This value agrees with those
previously reported and reflects a strong discrimination
against strontium relative to calcium in fish
bone. (26,29-31)
The mean concentrations of potassium and iron in
fish muscle were 3.0 ± 0.5 and 0.027 ±0.015 g/kg,
respectively. These concentrations are in agreement
with published concentrations for marine fish. (11)
Concentration factors (CF) for these elements in
fish were calculated using the fish muscle
concentrations listed in Table 5.13 and the
corresponding water concentrations given in Table 5.1.
As the concentration of iron in the water samples was
below the minimum detectable level, the computed
value of 0.04 mg Fe/liter (see Section 5.2.2) was used in
these calculations. The average potassium
concentration measured in the four July 1972 water
samples, 200+15 mg/liter, was assumed to be
uniform with respect to time and was used to calculate
the CF for potassium (see Section 5.2.2). Also, because
of the contamination of muscle by bone, the
concentration of strontium and calcium in the muscle
(bone-free) is assumed to be 1 percent of that measured
in bone, as discussed above. Concentration factors
calculated for fish muscle from these data and those
reported in the literature are:
Source
This study
Ref.* 12
Ref. 11
Ref. 18
Ref. 20
Sr
0.45
0.3-0.6
0.5
0.43
0.1
Ca
1.8
1.4-2.3
0.5
1.9
1.5
K
15
...
11
16
13
Fe
700
...
3000
1800
1600
*Reference
Concentratioh factors calculated from data of this
study compare well with the referenced values, except
for iron which is about 1/4 to 1/2 that usually cited.
This low iron CF is probably due to an overestimated
iron concentration in water. The CF listed for calcium
in reference 11 appears low.
Normally the CFs for whole fish are unimportant
because only the muscle is consumed by man.
•O.R. (Observed Ratio) = (mg Sr/g Ca)^, H- (mgSr/gCa).
77
-------
ex
Table 5.13 Concentration of Stable Elements in Fish, g/kg Fresh Weight
Sample
No.
1A
21
28
39
40
16
22
29
30
38
20
31
11
12
17 (W)1"
23 (W)t
1
2
15
6
10
18
19
24
35
36
Date
Fish type collected
toad fish
flounder
mixture
jack, bluefish
blackfish, toadfish
flounder
flounder
flounder
toadfish
flounder
flounder
flounder
flounder
white perch
menhaden
silversides
blackfish
flounder
flounder
blackfish
toadfish
flounder
sculpin
flounder
white perch
flounder, windowpane
*
Letters refer to Figures 5.1
fWhole fish.
9/23/71
4/18/72
7/12/72
11/1/72
11/1/72
10/19/71
4/19/72
7/12/72
7/12/72
11/1/72
4/18/72
7/11/72
10/18/71
10/18/71
1/30/72
4/19/72
10/21/71
10/21/71
10/19/71
10/20/71
10/20/71
4/17/72
4/17/72
7/10/72
10/31/72
10/31/72
and 5.2.
Collection
site*
B
B
B
B
B
G
G
G
G
G
H
H
D
D
D
D
E
E
F
I
I
GB-X
GB-X
GB-X
GB-X
GB-X
No. of
fish
4
25
27
11
4
18
26
28
4
6
15
39
26
14
many
many
1
43
28
8
9
24
6
2
8
5
Muscle
Ca
1.71
0.81
3.03
1.35
1.10
1.24
1.00
2.02
1.68
1.08
0.67
1.75
1.60
1.21
5.1
4.8
0.82
0.93
1.00
1.12
0.57
0.68
0.95
1.58
1.12
1.00
Sr
0.0081
0.0038
0.010
0.0053
0.0044
0.0053
0.0047
0.0084
0.0055
0.0052
0.0030
0.0067
0.0089
0.0054
0.020
0.023
0.0035
0.0045
0.0049
0.0042
0.0031
0.0032
0.0056
0.0073
0.0060
0.0045
K
2.4
2.5
3.6
2.6
3.4
2.7
3.1
2.6
3.4
3.8
3.3
3.4
2.9
3.2
2.1
2.3
2.8
2.1
2.9
2.4
2.4
3.5
2.9
3.0
3.5
3.1
Fe
0.015
0.034
0.022
0.010
0.011
0.012
0.050
0.035
0.010
0.012
0.030
0.050
0.044
0.027
0.084
0.064
0.064
0.012
0.010
0.016
0.015
0.034
0.034
0.062
0.012
0.014
Bone
Ca
40
36
45
60
66
46
55
52
49
54
36
44
46
52
46
38
54
52
49
44
54
58
59
48
Sr
0.24
0 . 19
0.21
0.24
0.31
0.23
0.26
0.24
0.23
0.24
0.21
0.22
0.21
0.30
0.28
0.19
0.23
0.25
0.27
0.19
0.29
0.23
0.26
0.23
-------
However, menhaden and silversides are sometimes
eaten whole (see Section 5.4.2). The CFs for these
whole fish are:
CFCa = 19 CFK = 11
CFSr = 4 CFFe = 1850
The CF for potassium is the same as that in muscle, and
the factors for calcium, strontium and iron are
considerably higher in the case of whole fish.
5.4.4 Results and discussion of radionuclide
concentrations. The results of the radionuclide analyses
of whole fish and muscle, bone and gut are given in
Tables 5.14 and 5.15. The concentrations are listed
relative to fresh weight, but if desired, the ash
weight/fresh weight ratios given in Section 5.4.3 may
be applied to these data to convert concentrations to an
ash weight basis. Gut was analyzed only in the fresh
state.
The concentrations reported in fish generally agree
with results from comparable samples analyzed by
McCurdy.(6,7) The two predominant radioisotopes in
these samples attributable to the station are 54Mn and
MCo. In addition to the radionuclides listed in Tables
5.14 and 5.15,134Cs was measured in 5 samples of whole
fish or muscle and 2 samples of gut collected in the fall
of 1972. These concentrations are listed in Table 5.16.
All other samples of whole fish or muscle contained
less than 20 pCi "4CsAg. One fish muscle sample
(No.28) contained an excess of 14C, 69 ± 5 dpm/g C,
which was equivalent to 1670 -j- 120 pCi/kg fresh
weight. The.mean 14C concentration of all other fish
muscle samples was 17.0 ± 2.5 dpm/g C (670 ± 100
pCi/kg fresh weight), the same as that recently
reported for the normal specific activity of "C, 17^2
dpm/g C.(22) No other radionuclides, including "Co,
were detected in either muscle or gut. Also, no
significant concentration of radionuclides was detected
in any samples of kidney and liver, probably because of
the small sample sizes.
The concentrations of l37Cs in whole fish or muscle
samples from Barnegat Bay, the discharge canal and
the intake canal are similar to that in the Great Bay
samples, except for five samples collected in November
1972 and one in October 1971. Omitting these six
samples, the average '"Cs concentrations and 137Cs/K
ratios were calculated for the four fish types, and the
values are given in Table 5.17. The 1J7Cs concentrations
in fish from different sites were combined, as no
significant difference between sites was observed.
Except the predator, of which one sample from Great
Bay was collected, the average values for fish from the
environment of Oyster Creek are the same as those
from Great Bay. The average '"Cs concentration in all
fish was 28 ± 10 pCiAg fresh weight. This is much less
than that reported for fresh water fish, but similar to
that measured in shad collected in the Connecticut
River estuary.(26,2S,29)Tto& is expected since CF's for
fresh water fish are 10 to 100 times those for marine
species. (11,12) Dividing the '"Cs concentrations
measured in whole fish or muscle by those measured in
the water collected at the same time and site (see Table
5.3), results in an average CF for '"Cs in fish of 50 ±_
30. The values varied from 10 to 150, but the variation
did not appear to correlate with feeding habits.
Reported CF's are generally somewhat lower,
15-4Q,(11,15-20) but have been reported as high as
244 .(12)
The excess amounts of 137Cs (concentration in fish
less the concentration in that fish type from Great Bay)
in the six fish samples which had concentrations
significantly exceeding background levels were:
Excess
Sample
No.
1A
39
40
41
37
38
*ND -
Fish
type
Toadfish
Jackfish,
Bluefish
Blackfish,
Toadfish
Flounder
Silver
Perch
Flounder
not detected
'"Cs.
pCiAi
From
37
120
96
31
From
43
44
'"Cs,
g pCi/kg
Site B
ND»
79
55
20
Site G
30
28
1J4Cs/'"Cs
0.66
0.57
0.65
0.70
0.64
The excess I37Cs levels result from plant discharges. All
fish were collected near the mouth of the discharge
canal and, except for sample 1A, during a period
(November 1972) of unusually high 1MCs-'37Cs
discharges (see Appendix B.4).
The 134Cs/IJ7Cs ratios given in the above tabulation
(background I37Cs concentrations subtracted)
approximate the 134Cs/I37Cs ratio of 0.70 ± 0.05 in
station effluents from July through October 1972 (see
Appendix B.4). This confirms that recent station
discharges are the major source of excess 137Cs and 1MCs
rather than dissolution or uptake from sediment, which
would reflect a lower 1MCs/IJ7Cs ratio.
The MSr concentrations measured in fish bone are
listed in Table 5.14. Except for sample 1A, MSr
concentrations in fish bone samples from Barnegat Bay
were not significantly different than those in fish from
79
-------
00
o
Table 5.14 Radionuclide Concentrations in Fish Muscle or Whole Fish and
Bone, pCi/kg Fresh Weight
Sample
No. Fish type
1A
21
28
39
40
41
Toadfish
Flounder
Silver perch
Puffer
Flounder
Toadfish
Jackfish
Bluefish
Blackfish
Toadfish
Flounder (Whole)
Date
No. of
fish
Barnegat
9/23/71
4/18/72
7/12/72
11/1/72
11/1/72
11/1/72
4
25
10
<5
6
6
Whole fish or muscle
54Mn
60Co
90Sr
106Ru
137Cs
Bone
9°Sr
Bay near mouth of Oyster Creek (B)
34 +. 5
6 +_ 2
5
9 <16
2
3
1
4
Barnegat
16
22
29
30
37
38
Flounder
Flounder
Flounder
Toadfish
Silver perch (Whole)
Flounder
10/19/71
4/19/72
7/12/72
7/12/72
11/1/72
il/1/72
18
26
28
4
50
6
<7
15
54 +_ 7
<5
IS +_ 3
30 +_ 15
26 *_ 8
53 +_ 8
1.5 *_ 0.5
1.3 +_ 0.6
NA
1.2 +_ 0.5
1.1 +_ 0.4
2.1 +_ 0.8
<30
<8
22 +_ 12
<27
NA
NA
75
26
54
170
134
60
+_ 5
± 3
± 4
± 20
± 9
± 12
200 *_
33 +
46 +
50 +_
76 +_
50
8
13
IS
15
Bay near mouth of Cedar Creek (G)
5 ± 2
<4
<8
<7
7 1 2
<6
Barnegat Bay
20
31
32
33
34
Flounder
Flounder
Toadfish (Whole)
Silver perch (Whole)
Blackfish (Whole)
Puffer (Whole)
4/18/72
7/11/72
7/11/72
7/11/72
7/11/72
15
39
6
4
3
3
10 ^ 3
<6
8 ± 2
<5
<15
-------
Table 5.14 Radionuclide Concentrations in Fish Muscle or Whole Fish and
Bone, pCi/kg Fresh Weight (Cont'd)
Sample
No. Fish type
4
5
14
IS
Silver perch (Whole)
White perch (Whole)
Silver perch (Whole)
Flounder
No. oi
Date fish
10/21/71
10/21/71
Barnegat
10/19/71
10/19/71
75
6
Bay
35
28
P
Whole fish or muscle
54Mn 60Co
<4
<6
between
IS +_ 3
<4
Bamegat
6
7
8
9
10
Blackfish
Flounder (Whole)
Puffer (Whole)
Silver perch (Whole)
Toadfish
10/20/71
10/20/71
10/20/71
10/20/71
10/20/71
8
21
3
19
9
<7
16 1 5
20 + 6
<6
<5
7 ± 3
<6
Oyster Creek and
<6
<6
90Sr
7 '" ± l
12 +_ 2
Forked River
10 +_ 2
0.6 +_ 0.3
106D
Ru
23 +_ 10
26 + 13
(F)
20 +_ 12
<20
137Cs
24 +_ 4
8 +_ 4
34 +_ 3
24 +_ 4
Bone
90Sr
_._
—
...
65 +_ 15
Bay near Surf City (I)
<5
<8
< 10
<8
<6
1.0 +_ 0.6
2.3 +_ 1.0
12 +_ 3
7 +_ 1
1.0 + 0.4
<20
40 +_ 20
<40
40 +_ 20
<20
31 +_ 6
43 +_ 6
20 ±6
15 + 3
27 +_ 3
44 *_ 16
_„
_._
...
105 +_ 30
Bamegat Bay near Island Beach (C)
2A
Toadfish (Whole)
9/23/71
4
21 *_ 7
<9
5 +_ 2
<50
24 +_ 8
—
Great Bay (Control)
18
19
24
25
26
27
35
36
Flounder
Sculpin
Flounder
Toadfish (Whole)
Blackfish (Whole)
Searobin
Silversides
Stickelback (Whole)
Killifish
White perch
Flounder
Windowpane
4/17/72
4/17/72
7/10/72
7/10/72
7/10/72
7/10/72
10/31/72
10/31/72
24
6
2
2
3
2
Many
8
3
< 4
< 6
<7
<5
<5
< 3
<6
<6
<3
< 5
<8
<5
<5
<3
-------
Table 5.15 Radionuclide Concentration in Fish Gut, pCi/kg Fresh Weight
Sample
No.
1A
1
2
6
10
11
12
15
16
18
19
20
21
22
28
29
30
31
35
36
38
39
40
Notes:
1.
Fish type
Toadfish
Blackfish
Flounder
Blackfish
Toadfish
Flounder
White Perch
Flounder
Flounder
Flounder
Sculpin
Flounder
Flounder
Flounder
Mixed
Flounder
Toadfish
Flounder
White Perch
Flounder
Windowpane
Flounder
Jackfish
Bluefish
Blackfish
Toadfish
< values are 3a and +_
54..
Mn
56 +_ 12
100 +_ 34
61 +_ 25
<30
58 1 21
184 +_ 32
81 1 27
<23
39 +_ 11
<25
<10
50 ^ 7
70 +_ 30
38 +_ 6
<20
<35
<35
<20
<40
< 35
<100
<70
90 + 40
values are
£(
60r«
Co
81 1 19
54 +_ 27
92 +_ 10
<25
<13
510 +_ 35
280 + 40
80 +_ 20
40 +_ 20
<25
<10
35 1 16
100 +_ 25
40 +_ 7
70 +_ 20
<30
60 + 25
64 +_ 22
<40
<30
130 +_ 40
100 + 40
500 +_ 60
2a counting
106_
Ru
90 +_ 50
< 140
180 +_ 30
<110
43 +_ 30
500 +_ 120
185 + 100
<180
<150
<160
-------
Table 5.16 Concentration of '"Cs in Fish Samples
Sample
No. Fish type Site**
37
38
39
40
41
Silver Perch*
Flounder
Jackfish, Bluefish
Blackfish, Toadfish
Flounder*
G
G
B
B
B
Muscle
_ pCi/kgt
30
28
79
55
20
+ 3
+ 6
+ 12
+ 7
+_ 7
Gut
pCi/kj>t
„,
<60
110 +
65 +
—
40
25
Whole fish
Letters refer to Figure 5.1.
f Concentrations based on fresh weight.
Table 5.17 Average 137Cs Concentration in
Uncontaminated Fish
Station Environment
Fish Type
Planktonic
Bottom Feeders
Opportunists
Predator
pCi/kg* pCi/gK
22 +.
27 +_
33 _+
26 i
4t
8
7
13
9
9
13
8
+_ 1
+_ 3
+_ 3
+_ 3
Great Bay
pCi/k«*
24**
29+5
38 + 6
50**
pCi/i
9
8
12
13
?K
+ 1
+ 2
**0nly one sample collected.
t Uncertainties are the standard deviations
of the individual measurements.
Great Bay. The bones of sample 1A, 4 toadfish
collected in September 1971, contained about 4 times
the ""Sr as the bones of fish from Great Bay. The
average 90Sr concentration of all other fish bone
samples was 57 ± 20 pCi/kg fresh weight, 0.23 ± 0.05
pCi/mg Sr and 1.1 ± 0.3 pCi/g Ca. Similar to the
stable strontium results discussed above, the
concentrations are much less than those usually
observed in fresh water fish. (26,28,29) Taking the
water concentrations of calcium and '°Sr from Tables
5.1 and 5.3, respectively, the average OR is 0.7 -j- 0.4.
This OR is much higher than that calculated forstable
strontium (see Section 5.4.3) and that normally
observed for '"Sr, Q.\-Q.T.(30,31) Because of the high
OR variability between samples, as reflected in the
large standard deviation and the large uncertainty
associated with MSr measurements in water (see Table
5.3), it is recommended that the OR calculated for
stable strontium in Section 5.4.3 be applied to MSr. No
"Sr was detected in any fish bone samples at the
minimum detectable concentration of 60 pCi/kg fresh
weight (3 a counting error).
Both '"Co and 54Mn were in fish gut at higher
concentrations than in muscle. In the 8 samples of
whole fish or muscle which contained measurable
amounts of both MMn and "Co, the average activity
ratio of 60Co/MMn is 2.1 ± 1.3. This is very similar to
the ratio in fish gut and in the effluent discharged
during this period, 2.4 ± 0.6 (see Appendix B.4). These
ratios, however, appear inconsistent with published
CF's for these two nuclides; 600 for "Mn and 100 for
wCo.(ll)Based on the MCo/MMn activity ratio of 2.4 in
station effluent, the activity ratio in fish muscle
according to these CF's should be about 0.4, if both
radionuclides are in a chemical form equally available
for uptake. Since the fractions of "Co and 54Mn in
soluble form in canal water were found to be similar
(see Section 4.4.4), it is assumed that differences in
chemical availability would not account for this large
difference. Hence, either the CF's for these two
radionuclides are about the same for these fish, or ""Co
from another source is available. Since much of the
food for most of these fish is obtained either directly or
indirectly from the bottom, such a source may be the
benthos which is associated with sediments containing
about 6 times more "Co that 54Mn (see Section 5.7.4). If
the latter is true, estimated concentrations in fish based
on water to fish CF's will be in error.
The "Co concentration in fish collected at the
mouth of the discharge canal (Site B) during the four
field trips increased with the total "Co discharged
during a 2-month period immediately proceeding
collection. The increase in fish muscle concentration,
however, was not proportional to the amounts
discharged. Variable and unknown factors contributing
to this are:
1) The existence of varying fractions of soluble
and insoluble (paniculate) radionuclides in the
waste solution discharged by the station. The
'"Co and MMn in soluble form ranged from
about 1 to 50 percent (see Section 4.4.4).
Hence, the total amount discharged is not a
measure of the quantity of radionuclides
available to fish if only the soluble fraction is
available for uptake. (32)
2) The time fish remain in contaminated water as
well as the time during which the discharge
occurs and the interval between discharges.
3) The uptake of radionuclides by fish from
sources other than the water/.?.?; For predator
fish and those that eat shellfish and benthic
organisms, the major source is probably their
food. For example, the muscle of the toadfish
(sample 1A) which contained a large number
of gastropods in its gut had high
concentrations of both "Co and "Mn even
though the plant had discharged less than 0.07
Ci of either for 9 months before sample
collection. Rice has shown that fish obtain
83
-------
more than twice as much "Zn from food than
from water when both contain the same
concentration/JJ,) and the uptake of "Mn and
MCo may be of a similar nature.
4) Due to the complex hydrology, it is not
possible to ascertain dilution factors for
various sites in the bay.
The effects of these factors, and possibly others, are
reflected in the results of the menhaden samples
collected on January 30, 1972. Movement of these fish
probably had been restricted to the discharge canal for
3 months because of the low water temperature of the
bay. Based on station effluent data and the available
dilution in Oyster Creek, the average water
concentrations of "Mn and <0Co for the 3-month
period, November 1971 through January 1972, were
1.32 and 2.55 pCi/liter, respectively (see Appendix
B.4). Dividing these concentrations into those
measured in the fish yield CF's for 54Mn and 60Co of
only 22 and 18, respectively. The principal reasons for
these very low estimated CF's are probably items 1 and
2 above.
5.4.5 Hypothetical radionuclide concentrations in
fish. Radionuclide concentrations in fish exposed to
radioactive effluents in the discharge canal from the
station are computed in Table 5.18 to indicate possible
critical radionuclides.
These calculated hypothetical concentrations are
based on CF's for edible portions of marine
fish//1,15,34-36) the estimated annual average
1971-1973 concentrations of radionuclides in the
discharge canal water (see Section 5.2.4) and the
assumption that radionuclides in the edible portions of
all consumed fish had reached equilibrium with
concentrations in canal water. Of these factors and
assumptions, the calculated water concentrations and
many of the CF's are quite approximate, and it is highly
improbable that radioactive equilibrium in fish is
attained. Also, the first three factors discussed in
Section 5.4.4 will apply to these calculations, increasing
the uncertainty of these estimated concentrations. £?.?J
The hypothetical l34Cs and '"Cs concentrations in
fish agree with average measured concentrations of
'34Cs and excess (above background) '"Cs in fish at sites
B and D. This would indicate that a CF of 30 for
cesium is reasonable. The calculated values for "Mn
and "Co are much higher than any measured
concentrations in fish from these two sites. The
hypothetical concentrations for "Fe, "Fe and "Zn are
significantly higher than the minimum detectable levels
determined for fish muscle, and would have been
detected if present at these concentration levels. The
absence of equilibrium conditions and dilution of the
canal water as it enters the bay at Site B contribute
significantly to these differences. Also, these
radionuclides are activation products released to the
coolant by corrosion. Therefore, all might be associated
with paniculate matter and unavailable for uptake by
fish.
The values in the last column of Table 5.18 are
based on an assumed average daily consumption of 50 g
of fish.(37) The calculations assume the maximum
permissible daily occupational drinking-water intake
listed by the International Commission on Radiation
Protection (ICRP) to correspond to 5 rem/yr to the
total body, 15 rem/yr to the GI tract, and 30 rem/yr to
bone. (38,39) These values, listed in Appendix F.2 for
each radionuclide, assume the daily intake persists for
either 50 years or until equilibrium is reached in the
body. The limits given for the radioiodines are based on
a child's thyroid.
Phosphorus-32 appears to be the critical
radionuclide discharged by the station. The annual
dose rates from the listed radionuclides would be 5.7
mrem/yr to bone (mostly from 32P), 1.1 mrem/yr to a
child's thyroid (mostly from I3II), 0.9 mrem/yr to the
GI tract (mostly from MP), and 0.3 mrem/yr internal
whole body (mostly from 32P). Except to the thyroid,
32P contributes the major dose to the other organs of the
body, and for this reason, the doses calculated here
exceed those estimated by the U.S. Atomic Energy
Commission (USAEC) whose calculations did not
include "P. (3) Fish collected on October 31, 1973, were
analyzed for "P but it was not measurable above the
minimum detectable concentration of 200 pCiAg,
equivalent to a dose to the bone of <0.7 mrem/yr.
However, this result is not certain because the amount
of "P last discharged is not known. Sensitive
measurement of both "P and 131I in fish is
recommended for future studies.
Radiation doses based on measured radionuclide
concentrations in muscle are much lower than those
estimated from hypothetical concentrations. The
average measured muscle concentrations for fish
collected from Oyster Creek (D) and near its mouth (B)
and of'°Sr inferred from fish bone analyses are listed in
the second column of Table 5.19 relative to a 50 g
sample. This average includes 111 fish combined into 7
samples collected during four periods of the year.
Subtracting the concentrations in muscle of fish
collected from Great Bay gives the amount in the canal
fish due to the station. These values are listed in the
third column. Listed in the next column are the annual
radiation exposures due to station operation based on a
daily fish intake of 50 g and the dose rate-daily intake
relationships given in Appendix F.2. According to
84
-------
Table 5.18 Hypothetical Radionuclide Concentrations in Fish from Oyster Creek
Radionuclide
3H
14c
32p
S1Cr
54Mn
55Fe
59Fe
58CO
60-
Co
64-
Cu
65
Zn
76As
89Sr
90Sr
91Sr
95Zr
95Nb
99Mo
99mTc
103Ru
10SRh
110m
1U Ag
124Sb
131j
133j
134Cs
137Cs
140Ba
14]
Ce
144Ce
239Np
Annual average Hypothetical
concentration concentration
in canal water, Concentration in canal fish,t
1971-1973,* pCi/1 factor** pCi/kg
34.6
0.0073
0.056
0.22
0.35
0.49
0.026
0/085
0.76
0.077
0.015
0.11
0.22
0.030
0.034
0.013
0.021
0.16
0.16
0.0078
0.11
0.0064
0.002
0.27
0.22
0.54
0.82
0.11
0.032
0.020
0.44
0.93
1800
30000
100
600
1600
1600
100
100
670
2000
330
0.5
0.5
0.5
30
100
10
10
3
10
1000
40
10
10
30
30
10
25
25
10
(11)
(11)
(11,20)
[34)
(11)
(20)
(20)
(ID
(11)
(11)
(11)
(11)
(11)
(ID
(11)
(34)
(20)
(11,20)
(11)
(34)
(11)
(34)
(11)
(11)
(11)
(11)
(11)
fill
(ID
CH)
(ID
32
13
16SO
22
210
780
42
8.5
76
52
30
36
0.11
0.015
0.017
0.39
2.1
1.6
1.6
0.023
1.1
6.4
0.080
2.7
2.2
16
25
1.1
0.80
0.50
4.4
Percent of
limit1"1"
< 0.001 TB
< 0.001 TB
1.1 B
0.12 TB
0.37 GI
< 0.001 GI
0.04 GI
0.02 S
0.01 GI
0.002 GI
0.03 GI
0.003 GI
0.002 TB
0.04 GI
< 0.001 B
< 0.001 B
<0.001 GI
<0.001 GI
< 0.001 GI
< 0.001 GI
<0.001 GI
<0.001 GI
< 0.001 GI
0.004 GI
< 0.001 GI
0.17 T
0.04 T
0.01 TB
0.008 TB
0.001 GI
< 0.001 GI
0.001 GI
0.001 GI
* From Section 5.2.4; for 1971 and 1972, 89Sr and 90Sr assumed to be in same ratio
as in 1973.
**
References given in parentheses.
The product of the values in columns 2 and 3.
tfThe limit is based on an intake of 50 g fish per day that will result in an
exposure equal to the Radiation Protection Guides recommended by the FRC(4°):
the RPG are 500 mrem/yr for thyroid [T) and bone (B), and 170 mrera/yr for all
other critical organs; total body (TB), gastrointestinal tract (GI), and
spleen (S).
85
-------
Table 5.19 Radiation Dose from Eating Fish
Radio-
nuclide
14C
54Mn
60Co
90C
Sr
106Ru
134Cs
137Cs
Average concentration
measured in fish,
pCi/50 g*
total from station
40 6
0.50 0.50
' 1.04 1.04
0.042f 0.014
1.17 0.06
1.2 1.2**
3.61 1.80
*
Average concentration measured in fish
Creek (D)
and at its mouth (B) ;
-------
trace metals concentrated in algae, plankton or other
food material. (43,44) The complicated nature of this
process is demonstrated by "filter-feeding" animals of
different species living in the same environment and
having the capacity to concentrate different
radionuclides/JJJ Because of their feeding habits and
metabolic requirements, clams tend to concentrate a
number of trace elements that are major radioactive
corrosion products (Co, Mn, Cr, Zn, etc.) discharged in
liquid effluents from nuclear power stations. (33,43—45)
Because of this as well as the immobility of clams
within beds located near the mouth of the discharge
canal and the large quantities of clam meat from
Barnegat Bay that are consumed by man, one might
expect clams to concentrate certain radionuclides to
higher levels than the mobile finfish, constitute a
significant radiation exposure pathway to man, and be
a good biological indicator of radionuclides in the
aquatic environment.
5.5.2 Collection and analysis. Samples of M.
mercenaria were collected from sites B, G and H in
Barnegat Bay (see Figure 5.1). Samples were collected
5 times during the period of October 1971 to October
1973, although all sites were not sampled on each
occasion. Background samples were also taken from
Great Bay each time. The clams were collected in 1 to 3
meters of water by a clam rake operated from a boat. In
addition to M. mercenaria, the large clam-eating
whelk, Busycon canaliculatum, was obtained from Site
H in April 1972 and from Site G in November 1972,
Although this species is not normally eaten by man, it
sometimes feeds on the M. mercenaria and, therefore,
may contain higher levels of radioactivity. f42) One
sample of the common mud snail, Nassarius absoletus,
was taken from the gut of a large toadfish collected in
September 1971 near the mouth of the discharge canal.
Rock barnacles (arthropods) and polychaeta tubes
were collected on two occasions. The former was
obtained once beneath the route U.S. 9 bridge in the
intake canal and twice beneath the railroad bridge in
the discharge canl, while the latter was obtained twice
at the intake canal sampling point. A large sample of
annelid tubes from a live colony (species unknown)
were obtained in the trawl at Site H near Waretown in
April 1972.
Except for the last two samples, numbers 17 and
18, the shellfish were frozen in their shells and returned
to the laboratory on dry ice. In the case of the last two
samples, the clams were shucked in the boat as they
were collected, and the meat and fluid were placed in
separate containers and returned to the laboratory on
ice.
The clam meat was thawed, removed from the
shell, and analyzed for gamma-ray emitters and for 3H,
"C and radiostrontium as described in Section 5.4.2.
The fluid of the M. mercenaria was analyzed
separately. The shells were analyzed after removing all
organic material. The snails, N. absoletus, were
analyzed whole, as were the barnacles and the worm
tubes after cleaning all foreign material from their
exterior.
Samples of clam meat and fluid were analyzed for
"•pb-'"Po by digesting the sample in HNO3 and 72
percent HC1O4 at 85° C. The 21"Pb concentrations were
calculated from the JI°Po ingrowth which was
measured by repeating the 210Po deposition on another
silver disc 3 to 4 months after the initial deposition. The
activity of the deposited "°Po was measured in a low-
background ZnS(Ag) scintillation counter. The
measured 2l°Po concentrations were corrected for
ingrowth and decay to the time of collection.
5.5.3 Results and discussion. The shellfish
collection data and analytical results are shown in
Tables 5.20 and 5.21. The samples are listed in Table
5.20 according to the collection site. Sample sizes of M.
mercenaria varied from 34 to 55 clams each, which
were combined and homogenized prior to analysis.
Only one B. canaliculatum consisting of about 130 g of
meat was collected on each occasion.
Except in one case, the only radionuclides
attributable to the station in the shellfish samples were
**Co in the meat and fluid, which was detected in all
samples except the controls from Great Bay and one of
the large whelks, and **Sr in the shells. The one
exception was N. absoletus obtained from the gut of a
toadfish. These small gastropods contained relatively
high levels of both "Co and "Mn. The consequence of
this diet was reflected in an unusually high "Co and
"Mn content in fish muscle (see Section 5.4.4, sample
1A in Table 5.14). This was the only shellfish sample in
which MMn was detected. The concentration of '"Co in
the clam meat did not vary significantly with time or
location, and the mean concentration of all samples of
clam meat from Barnegat Bay was 190 ±_ 40 pCi/kg
fresh weight. This concentration is similar to that
reported by McCurdy, who also did not detect "Mn in
clams collected in 1972. Detectable amounts of "Mn,
however, were reported in clams during 1971 (see
Section 5.1.4)Y$This may indicate that higher levels
of "Mn were discharged by the station in 1971 or
earlier. Carbon-14 was detected in all samples near the
normal level of 17 ± 2 dpm/g C.(22) The mean 14C
concentration measured was 18^3 dpm/g C, which
was equivalent to 270 ± 50 pCiAg fresh weight.
87
-------
00
ex
Table 5.20 Radionuclide Concentrations in Shellfish, pCi/kg Fresh Weight
Sample
No.
2
1A
5
11
1 "*
18
1
7
10
Number
Species Date in Sample Sample
Bay, at mouth of Oyster Creek
M. mercenaria 10/22/71 38 meat
fluid
shell
H. absoletus1" 9/23/71 8 whole
M. mercenaria 4/18/72 34 meat
fluid
shell
M. mercenaria 7/12/72 37 meat
fluid
shell
M mercenaria 11/2/72 37 meat
fluid
shell
M. mercenaria 10/31/73 50 meat
fluid
shell
Bay, off Waretown (H)
M. mercenaria 10/22/71 41 meat
fluid
shell
B. canaliculatum 4/18/72 1 meat
shell
M. mercenaria 7/11/72 55 meat
fluid
shell
60r~
Co
nr
200 + 30
180 + 20
20 +_ 10
1300 + 180
170 + 20
170 +_ 25
17 +_ 11
230 + 20
230 + 30
40 +_ 20
180 + 20
160 + 20
26 + 11
150 + 10
170 + 15
33 +_ 9
260 + 50
230 + 30
15 + 9
<25
NA
150 + 20
120 +_ 20
35 +_ 20
90Sr
< 15
NA
180 +_ 50
NA
<12
NA
160 +_ 50
<20
NA
400 +_ 40
NA
NA
120 +_ 40
NA
NA
NA
<20
NA
95 *_ 30
NA
190 +_ 50
<15
NA
210 +_ 40
K**
0.43 +_ 0.05
0.36 +_ 0.08
0.20 4_ 0.10
4 +_2
1.20 +_ 0.10
0.80 +_ 0.20
0.40 ± 0.10
0.88 +_ 0.09
1.20 +_ 0.20
0.40 +_ 0.10
0.70 + 0.20
0.90 +_ 0.20
0.20 +_ 0.10
1.7 +_ 0.2
0.47 1 0.09
0.25 +_ 0.07
1.50 +_ 0.20
0.46 +_ 0.05
0.30 +_ 0.10
1.50 +^ 0.20
NA
1.04 +_ 0.10
1.10 +. 0.10
0.26 +_ 0.07
-------
Table 5.20 Radionuclide Concentrations in Shellfish, pCiAg Fresh Weight (Cont'd)
Sample
No. Species Date
14 M. mercenaria 11/2/72
15 M. mercenaria 11/2/72
16 B. canaliculatum 11/2/72
4 M. mercenariat 4/17/72
9 M. mercenaria 7/10/72
12 M. mercenaria 10/31/72
17 M. raercenaria 10/30/73
Number
in Sample Sample
45 meat
fluid
shell
Bay, near mouth of Cedar Creek
45 meat
fluid
shell
1 meat
shell
Great Bay CX)
36 meat
fluid
shell
55 meat
fluid
shell
37 meat
fluid
shell
40 meat
fluid
shell
60Co
170 + 20
150 +_ 30
30 +_ 10
JG)
200 + 30
190 +_ 40
22 + 9
160 + 20
NA
<12
<15
NA
<20
< 20
< 17
<17
<17
NA
<10
<10
< 11
90Sr
NA
NA
100 +_ 50
<20
NA
220 + 50
<20
260 + SO
<15
NA
90 + 40
NA
NA
120 + 40
<18
NA
110 + 40
NA
NA
NA
K**
1.10 -i- 0.20
1.40 + 0.50
0.14 +• 0.07
1.16 + 0.09
1.60 + 0.50
0.30 + 0.10
1.70 + 0.20
NA
1.40 + 0.10
1.10 + 0.10
NA
1.30 * 0,10
1.10 + 0.20
0.20 + 0.10
1.50 + 0.30
1.10 + 0.20
NA
1.30 + 0.20
0.80 + 0,10
0.20 +_ 0.10
oo
CD
Locations: See Figures 5.1 and 5.2.
** An
Potassium given in units of g/kg, and based on there being 848 pCi K/gK.
Additional radionuclides were 3100 +_ 200 pCi 54Mn/kg in sample 1A, 40 +_ 10 pCi 137Cs/kg in sample 4,
and a mean concentration of 18 +_ 3 dpro l4C/gC for all samples.
NA - Not analyzed.
Radionuclides below detectable quantities were 3H (<250), 32P (<400), 5*Cr (<25Q) S4Mn f<20)
"Fe (<100), 58Co (<30), 65zn (<60), 95Zr-95Nb (<80), 13ll (<15), 134Cs f<301 ^Cs r<201 • all va],iP "v wy t \ *"jj y *-*3 v.^*juj, ^& \<-£.\j) f an values
in pCi/kg fresh weight.
-------
Table 5.21 The Concentration of
"°Pb and "°Po in Shellfish Samples
Sample
No.
12
13
14
15
16
Collection Sample
site* type
GB-X
B
H
G
G
Meat
Meat
Fluid
Meat
Fluid
Meat
Fluid
Meat
210p0>
PCi/kg
350
390
80
500
130
390
100
230
+_ 5
± 10
+_ 3
± 10
± 8
+_ 5
+_ 2
+ 10
210Pb,
pCi/kg
70
70
15
30
10
70
15
20
^ 2
+ 5
1 2
± 3
+ 3
+_ 2
+_ 2
+_ 2
Letters refer to map in Figure 5.2.
Notes:
1. All samples M. mercenaria, except
No. 16 which is £. canaliculatum,
and were collected between
10/31-11/2/72.
2. Errors are 2o of the count rate.
The concentration of 60Co was reported earlier to be
higher in clam fluid than in meat. (6) The results in
Table 5.20, however, show no significant difference in
'"Co concentration between the two media. The mean
concentration of all samples of the clam fluid is 180 +
30 pCi/kg. This level in clam fluid, similar to that in
meat, is unexpected since a large portion of the fluid
consists of sea water. It has been suggested that the 60Co
is associated with coarse particles that were rejected by
the clam and became suspended in the fluid. (6)
Another explanation may be that while the animals
remain alive between collection and analysis, an
equilibrium between meat and fluid is established. To
test these hypotheses, the shellfish that were obtained
in Barnegat Bay at the mouth of the discharge canal on
October 31, 1973, were shucked in the boat
immediately after collection and the meat and fluid
were placed in separate containers, cooled on ice and
returned to the laboratory for analysis. The results of
the sample (No. 18, Table 5.20) again reflect similar
concentrations of '"Co in meat and fluid. After the
initial fluid analysis, 400 cc were centrifuged at 2800
rpm for 30 minutes to remove paniculate matter. The
residue obtained contained less than 2 percent of the
total "Co activity in the 400 cc sample. The protein
fraction of the fluid was then separated by
ultracentrifugation at 178,000 G's for 1 hour.* The
protein recovered weighed 15 g wet and 2.75 g dry. The
MCo activity associated with the protein fraction based
on 400 cc was equivalent to 200 + 12 pCi/1, while the
concentration of the supernatant liquor was < 7 pCi/1.
The "Co concentration based on that measured in the
protein is in reasonable agreement with the original
clam fluid measurement, 170 ± 15 pCi/1. These
results indicate that MCo in clam fluid is associated
closely with the protein and has been metabolized by
the clam. This is important since clam fluid is often
consumed with the meat.
The protein associated radioactivity may also
explain the higher fluid concentrations relative to that
of the meat reported earlier by McCurdy,(6) who
recently observed that fluid samples separate into two
phases upon prolonged standing/^ The denser
protein fraction, containing most of the radioactivity,
settles nearer the container bottom (nearer the
detector) leading to a better counting geometry than
that when the radioactivity is uniformly distributed
throughout the total sample volume. Because of this,
fluid samples should be analyzed immediately after
sample preparation to assure homogeneity.
The ""Co concentrations in the two large whelk
samples were considerably less than that measured in
the M. mercenaria. This may be due to the filter feeding
characteristics of the latter and the presence of 68Co in
the plankton and algae they consume. No '"Co was
detected in the sample collected in Barnegat Bay near
Waretown (<25 pCiAg) and only 60 pCi/kg was
measured in the sample from the site near Cedar Creek.
This is only 30 percent of that in the M. mercenaria
collected at the same site and time. Either this large
whelk, which sometimes feed on M. mercenaria, as well
as other invertebrates in the bottom sediments, had not
done so recently or absorbed very little cobalt through
the gut. Large differences in the ability of different
species of mollusks to concentrate trace metals have
been demonstrated. (33)
In most cases, the MSr concentration in mollusk
shells collected from the three Barnegat Bay sites were
significantly higher than that in the controls from
Great Bay. There were considerable variations in
concentration between samples, and the concentrations
in shells from the sites near Oyster Creek and Cedar
Creek appeared higher than in those near Waretown.
Concentrations of "Sr in the shells of M. mercenaria
•We thank Dr. G. Murthy, USFDA, Cincinnati, Ohio, for assisting with the protein separation.
90
-------
and B. canaJiculatum were similar. The mean
concentration of 90Sr in all M. mercenaria shells from
Barnegat Bay was 190 +_ 100 pCi/kg, compared to 105
+_ 15 pCi/kg in the shells from Great Bay. Subtracting
the concentration of '°Sr in the control shells of Great
Bay from the concentration in the Barnegat Bay shells
gives an average *°Sr excess of 85 j- 100 pCiAg. The
ratio of strontium in shell to that in muscle is reported
to vary from about 10 to I6.(12,15,45,47) Applying
these ratios, the '"Sr concentration in clam meat taken
from these areas of Barnegat Bay would vary from
about 10 to 25 pCi/kg, near or below the minimum
detectable level of 20 pCi/kg.
The average potassium concentration in muscle of
M. mercenaria is 1.3 + 0.4 g/kg, somewhat higher
than that in the fluid, 1.0 ± 0.3 g/kg. Dividing the
concentration in muscle by a CF of 6.6/71) indicates a
water concentration of 200 +_ 60 mg/1, which agrees
with the potassium concentration in water collected
from Barnegat Bay (see Section 5.2.2).
No 3H, "P, MCo or "Zn was detected in any
shellfish. Manganese-54 was not detected in any
samples of M. mercenaria or B. canaliculatum, and the
l31Cs concentration was below the minimum detectable
level in all samples except #4 from Great Bay which
contained 40+10 pCi/kg. Radionuclides detected in
the control samples from Great Bay were 40K in meat,
MSr in shell, and !"Cs in one meat sample. Failure to
detect '"Cs in meat samples results from the small
amounts discharged, low sea water concentration, and
the relatively low CF for l"Cs in clam meat. Failure to
detect MMn when it was easily detectable in fish muscle,
however, is surprising in view of the very large CF
quoted for manganese in clam meat (10* to 5 x
\tf).(n, 15,20,34)
Because 2l°Po, an alpha-emitting naturally-
occurring radionuclide, has been reported in shellfish
muscle, (48,49) 5 shellfish samples were analyzed for
"°Pb and ll*Po, with the results given in Table 5.21. The
lloPo is in higher concentration in shellfish muscle than
any radionuclide from plant effluents. The "°Po in meat
ranged from 230 to 500 pCi/kg fresh weight, and was
concentrated in muscle relative to fluid by a factor of
about 4. The concentration of 2l<1Pb in clam muscle
varied from 20 to 70 pCiAg fresh weight, and it was
similarly concentrated in the muscle.
Average concentrations were 370 j- 90 pCi
"°Po/kg and 50 ± 20 pCi 21°Pb/kg in the muscle, and
100 ± 20 pCi J10Po/kg and 13 ± 3 pCi J10Pb/kg in
fluid. Hence, the J"Po is unsupported in shellfish
muscle and fluid. The JI*Po/JIOPb activity ratios varied
from 5 to 17, with an average ratio of 9. This indicates
that the 2iaPo is accumulated by shellfish from food
rather than water, as concentrations of 2i°Pb and 2l°Po
in coastal sea water indicate a 2l°Po/2l°Pb activity ratio
below unity.(49) Phytoplankton and zooplankton,
which are consumed by filter-feeding clams, contain
relatively high levels of 210Po and a 21°Po/2'0Pb activity
ratio ranging from 4 to 13, similar to that observed in
clams.(49,50) High "°Po levels may thus also be
expected in finfish that consume mostly plankton.
The distribution of ""Po in clam fluid was
examined to determine if 2l°Po was associated mainly
with protein, as has been reported. (SI) The 2l°Po
concentration of sample No. 18 was measured in fluid
and in the liquid phase of the fluid after the protein had
been removed by ultracentrifugation (see above). The
Po could not be measured directly in the protein
fraction as it had previously been ashed at 450" C. The
results of these analyses were:
2"Po, !"Pb,
pCiAg pCiAg
Whole fluid 91 ± 3 14 ± I
Supernatant liquid 17 ^ 1 3 ± 1
The protein fraction, which consisted of only about 4
percent of the fluid mass (15 g protein/400 g fluid), is
determined by difference to contain 80 percent of the
310Po and 2"Pb, as was the case of "Co.
The concentration of radionuclides measured in
whole barnacles (arthropoda) and annelid tubes from
the coolant water and intake canals, and in the cluster
of annelid tubes collected from Barnegat Bay near
Watetown, are given in Table 5.22. These results
indicate that these organisms concentrate MMn, "Co,
"Co and "Sr discharged from the station. The higher
levels in the earlier samples reflect higher station
discharges in the latter part of 1971.
Barnacles (Pollicipes polymerus) collected in the
eastern Pacific Ocean have been reported to contain
about 5 pCi/kg each of HMn and "Co. (52) These levels
reflect large concentration factors, 103-10', as the
concentration of "Mn and "Co in sea water from
fallout is very low. CF's based on concentrations
measured in whole barnacles collected in January 1972
from the discharge canal and the average October-
December 1971 hypothetical water concentrations in
Oyster Creek* (see Appendix B.4), are:
•A three-month discharge period was selected because mollusk excretion data indicate that the bulk of the
radionuclides measured in these samples would be predominantly the result of station discharges during the
previous 100 days. (45,33)
91
-------
Table 5.22 Radionuclide Concentration in Barnacles and Annelid Tubes, pCiAg Fresh Weight
Date
collected
Location
54Mn
58Co
6(
}Co
90Sr
137Cs
Arthropoda
1/18/72
1/18/72
4/11/72
1/18/72
4/11/72
4/18/72
discharge canal
intake canal
discharge canal
intake canal
intake canal
Site H
1200
200
300
300
300
320
+_ 50
1 20
± 20
Annelid
± 20
+ 20
+ 20
600 +_ 30
< 50
< 40
Tubes
< 50
< 70
< 40
2700
300
1000
400
300
200
*_ 90
+_ 30
+ 100
+_ 30
+ 25
± 20
2100 +_
680 +_
380 +_
800 +.
300 +_
NA
200
200
40
200
40
100
< 50
< 100
< 50
<100
130
*_ 20
+_ 20
Notes
OQ
I. Sr< 200 pCi/kg
2. and
3) the average concentrations of '"Co and 54Mn in
clam muscle are 180 pCiAg and < 20 pCiAg,
respectively,
92
-------
Table 5.23 Hypothetical Radionuclide Concentrations in Shellfish Muscle
Radio-
nuclide
3H
14c
32p
51Cr
54Mn
55Fe
59Fe
58Co
60
Co
64
Cu
65
Zn
76
As
CO
89Sr
90Sr
91Sr
Zr
95Nb
99^
103
Ru
105
Rh
110m
" Ag
124,,,
Sb
131,
I
133
134
Cs
137_
Cs
140
Ba
141
Ce
144
Ce
239M
Annual average
concentration
in water,*
pCi/1
34.6
0.0073
0.056
0.22
0.35
0.49
0.026
0.085
0.76
0.077
0.015
0.11
0.22
0.030
0.034
0.013
0.021
0.16
0.16
0.0078
0.11
0.0064
0.002
0.27
0.22
0.54
0.82
0.11
0.032
0.020
0.44
Concentration
factor**
1
4,700
6,000
440
12,000
9,600
9,600
600
600
5,000
11,000
650
1
1
1
2
7
60
100
3
100
7,100
1,000
50
SO
8
8
3
360
360
10
Hypothetical
concentration
in shellfish, +
PCi/kK
35
34
340
97
4,200
4,700
250
51
460
380
160
72
0.22
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.15
10
16
0.023
11
45
2
14
11
4.3
6.6
0.3
12
7
4.4
Percent of
limittt
< 0.001 TB
< 0.001 TB
0.23 B
< 0.001 GI
0.84 GI
0.12 S
0.08 GI
0.01 GI
0.18 GI
0.03 GI
0.01 TB
0.07 GI
< 0.001 B
0.001 B
< 0.001 GI
< 0.001 GI
< 0.001 GI
0.001 GI
< 0.001 GI
< 0.001 GI
0.002 GI
0.03 GI
0.002 GI
0.93 T
0.22 T
0.003 TB
0.002 TB
< 0.001 GI
0.003 GI
0.01 GI
0.001 GI
* 89 Qfl
From Section 5.2.4; Sr and Sr assumed to be the same ratio in 1971 and 1972
cLS in 1973.
**CF based on reference 20, except 3H, 99raTC, 105Rh and 239Np are based on
reference 34.
The product of the values in columns 2 and 3.
The limit is based on an intake of 50 g fish per day that will result in an
exposure equal to the Radiation Protection Guides recommended by the FRC(40)-
the RPG are 500 mrem/yr for thyroid (T) and bone (B), and 170 mrem/yr for all
other critical organs; total body (TB), gastrointestinal tract (GI), and
spleen (S).
93
-------
the CF of "Mn at best can be no greater than 1.7 times
that of'"Co, or about 1000, assuming a '"Co CF of 600.
The average radionuclide concentrations measured
in clam meat are listed in the second column of Table
5.24 relative to a 50 g sample, the assumed average
daily intake by persons eating shellfish. f5# The
average 90Sr concentration listed for the meat is based
on the average clam shell concentration of 190 pCi/kg
and a shell/meat ratio of 16 (see Section 5.5.3).
Subtracting the concentrations in the background
clams from Great Bay, 105 pCi '°Sr/kg shell -f- 16, 270
pCi 14C/kg and 21 pCi 210Po/kg, gives the amount in
meat of Barnegat Bay clams due to effluents from the
station. These values are listed in the third column. The
fourth column lists the hypothetical concentrations
from Table 5.23. The next three columns list the
estimated radiation dose rates: the total, that resulting
from station effluents, and that based on the
hypothetical concentrations. These dose rates were
calculated using the daily intake-dose rate relationships
given in Appendix F.2.
Except for *°Sr, the hypothetical dose rates exceed
those based on measured concentrations and would
indicate that radioiodines, "P, MMn and MSr are the
critical radionuclides. The dose rate from MMn has
been shown to be greatly overestimated; large
minimum detectable levels prevent comparisons for the
radioiodines and 32P values. Also, it is not possible to
confirm the "Sr dose to the bone as it could not be
measured in the meat at the level inferred from the shell
measurements. An effort should be made in future
studies to measure these radionuclides. The largest
dose rates are delivered by 2l°Po, a naturally-occurring
radionuclide. The dose rates from radionuclides in
station discharges are relatively small compared to
those resulting from 2l°Po.
A summation of the annual doses from station
discharges, given in Table 5.24 for each critical organ,
compare with those calculated by the USAEC as
follows:
Critical
organ
Total Body
Thyroid
GI tract
Bone
Annual dose
based on
measured
cone. , mrem
<0.1
<5
0.1
1.0
Hypothetical
annual dose,
mrem
<0.1
5.1
1.8
1.1
Annual dose
calculated
by USAEC.fj;
mrem*
0.03
0.5
0.3
0.03
*Based on a daily intake of 25 g of clam meat.
Table 5.24 Radiation Dose from Eating Clam Meat
Radio-
nuclide
14c
32P
54Mn
55Fa
59Fe
60Co
90Sr
131,
133j
210n
Po
Average concentration, pCi/50 g
total
14
< 20
< 1
< 5
< 2
10
0.6**
< 0.8
NDft
21
from station
< 5
< 20
< 1
< 5
< 2
10
0.3**
< 0.8
ND"
0
hypothetical*
1.7
17
210
235
13
23
<0.1
0.7
0.6
0
Radiation dose rate, mrem/yr
total
<0.1
< 1.3
<0.1
<0.1
<0.1
0.1
2.0
<5t
21
18
5
3
0.7
0.5
from station
< 0.1
< 1.3
< 0.1
< 0.1
< 0.1
0.1
1.0
<5t
0
0
0
0
0
0
hypothetical*
<0.1
1.1
1.4
0.2
0.1
0.3
<0.3
4t
1.1 +
0
0
0
0
0
0
Critical
organ
Total Body
Bone
GI(LLI)
Spleen
GI(LLI)
GI(LLI)
Bone
Thyroid
Thyroid
Spleen
Kidney
Liver
Bone
Total Body
GI(LLI)
* Based on the hypothetical concentrations given in Table 5.23; only those radionuclides that
deliver 0.1 mrem/yr or more are included.
**Based on the average 90Sr concentration in the shells and a shell/muscle ratio of 16.
f Dose is based on a child's thyroid (see Appendix F.2).
ftND - not detected.
94
-------
The dose rates show reasonable agreement, considering occurring 40K and small concentrations of '"Cs from
that the AEC calculations were based on a daily intake fallout were observed in crab meat at an average
of 25 g clam meat. Phosphorus-32, which the AEC did concentration of 2.8 ± 0 4 g K*Ag and 30+12 oCi
not consider, is responsible for the larger hypothetical "7Cs/kg fresh weight. The average 14C concentration
bone dose, and failure to detect Mn in any samples was 17 ± 2 dpm/g C (470 + 100 pCiAg fresh weight)
established the hypothetical GI dose to be and is totally attributed to cosmic ray production and
overestimated. These dose rates are all less than 2 fallout.^; The minimum detectable levels of
percent of the Radiation Protection Guides radionuclides in crab meat at the 3-standard deviation
recommended by the FRC: 500 mrem/yr to the bone confidence level were: "Co <60 pCiAg MMn <50
and thyroid and 170 mrem/yr to all of the other critical pCiAg, and 6!Zn < 80 pCiAg. Because of the absence
organs. (40) As discussed above, for all critical organs of measurable quantities and the difficulty in separating
except the thyroid, these dose rates are small compared meat from exoskeleton, crabs were not collected after
to that due to Po. For this reason, it is recommended the July 1972 field trip
that, in addition to »P and "'I, future surveillance Some exoskeletons contained measurable
studies include measurements of Po in shellfish meat quantities of MMn and "Sr exceeding those measured in
to determine the relative significance of the exposures control samples from Great Bay, as shown in Table
resulting from radionuclides discharged by the station. 5.25. Manganese-54 was observed in the skeleton of
f < Z7ox/,V>n,.x./.w^^ • /^L. * crabs collected from the discharge canal, the south
5.6 RadlOnUChdeS in Crustacea branch of Forked River (intake canal) and from Sites B,
,<-,,,. H and G in Barnegat Bay. Concentrations ranged from
56.1_ Introduction. The blue crab, Collinectes 80 pCi/kg to 440 pCiAg fresh weight, and were
sapides, is taken from Barnegat Bay and the intake and somewhat higher in the fall of 1971 than in the summer
discharge canals by both commercial and sport of 1972. High "Mn levels in the crab exoskeleton
fishermen. The total harvest of blue crabs from the area relative to interior body parts have previously been
was estimated to be 29,600 kg in 1969 and 32,700 kg in observed and attributed to both surface adsorption of
1970.a^> Crabs are taken in large numbers by MnO2 from surrounding water and the possible
individuals fishing from the Highway 9 bridge over the substitution of Mn for Ca in the lattice of the chitin
discharge canal and along its banks. skeleton. (56)
Crab samples are not included in the station's Crabs were very scarce during April 1972, having
aquatic environmental monitoring program.^ not recovered from hibernation. The only sample in
McCurdy analyzed a few crab samples and detected Barnegat Bay collected during this period were 5 crabs
veryl,ttlerad,oactiv,tyintheediblePortionS.^7;Even from near Cedar Creek, Site G, which contained no
though little evidence of radionuclide uptake exists, (55) measurable quantities of MMn, as might be expected.
blue crabs were studied because of their abundance in The average concentration of "Sr measured in the
Barnegat Bay and the discharge canal and the exoskeleton of control crabs from Great Bay was 110
significant amounts eaten by the local population. ± 30 pCi/kg or 19 ± 5 pCi "Sr/mg Sr. The levels of
5.6.2 Collection and analysis. Blue crabs were "Sr in the samples obtained from Barnegat Bay in the
collected by trawl in the fall of 1971 and again in April vicinity of the mouth of Oyster Creek (Sites D, B, E, F,
and July of 1972. A total of 13 samples, consisting of 5 G, H) range from 35-95 pCi "Sr/mg Sr, and exceeds
to 35 specimens each, were obtained from the discharge the background concentration in some cases by more
and intake canals, Barnegat Bay and Great Bay. than 5 times
Samples from the latter were considered controls. A The average stable strontium and calcium skeletal
description of the crab samples is given in Table 5.25. concentrations were 5.4 + 0.4 ing/kg and 0 42 + 0 03
The crabs were frozen, returned to the laboratory, g/kg, respectively, with an average Sr/Ca ratio of 12.8
thawed and dissected mto meat, gut and stomach, gills ± 0.7 mg Sr/g Ca. Assuming an average Sr/Ca ratio in
and skeleton. Radiochemical and stable chemical the bay water of 20 ± 1 mg Sr/g Ca (see Section 5.2.2),
analyses were performed as descnbed previously. results in an observed ratio for the exoskeleton of 0.64
JL » H r!? *"dtd™USS!on- No radionuclides ± 0.05. Concentration factors for strontium and
attributable to the Oyster Creek station were detected calcium were calculated to be 1.0 and 1.6, respectively
in the muscle, gills, gut and stomach. Naturally, using the average concentrations of strontium and
•Calculated by measuring the "K concentration and assuming 848 pCi "K/g K.
95
-------
Table 5.25 Radionuclide and Subl* Element Cooceat rations in Cr»b
Samp 1 e
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Col lection
date
9/23/71
9/23/71
10/18/71
10/21/71
10/19/71
10/20/71
10/21/71
4/17/72
4/19/72
7/11/72
7/11/72
7/12/72
7/12/72
Location*
B
C
D
E
F
I
G
GB-X
G
GB-X
H
B
G
No. of Sr,
specimens g/kg g
13
5
16
->2
6
35
13
10
5
12
6
S
16
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
.0050
.0049
.0060
.0054
.0045
NA
.0058
.0059
.0058
.0058
.0056
.0052
.0052
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Ca,
.45
.40
.48
.42
.34
NA
.43
.44
.45
.46
.42
.40
.42
S4Mn,
PCi/kg
290 +_ 30
< 60
440 _* 50
320 ^ 30
<60
< 40
240 j* 40
< 20
< 60
< 30
110 ^ 20
150 +_ 50
SO * 30
90Sr,
pCi/kg
170 *_
240 +_
570 *_
320 +_
180 *_
NA
470 *_
90 +_
240 *_
130 *_
200 *_
250 *_
200 *_
20
50
60
30
50
50
10
30
20
20
30
20
•Locations are shown on map in Figures 5.1 and 5.2.
Notes:
1. Concentrations based on fresh weight.
2. *_ values are 2o of count rate; values are 3o of count rate.
3. Error of Ca and Sr values are 2\ and 3**. respectively.
calcium in bay water given in Section 5.2.2 with those
above for the exoskclclon. Crab skeletons would thus
not be useful indicators of strontium or calcium in the
environment. Relating the concentration of nuclides in
crab cuokkeleton lo station discharges over any period
of time may be difficult because, in addition to the
normal turnover of radionuclides in the calcareous
material of the crab, periodic molting will result in a
tudden loss of all accumulated nuclides.
At the present operating level and conditions at
Oyster Creek, the consumption of crab meat by man
does not constitute a measurable pathway.
5.7 Radionuclides in Sediment
5 7.1 Sample collection and preparation. On five
field trip* from October 1971 to October 1973, a total
•We flunk Mr S*m Windhwn. Eastern Environmenul
uutrument «nd paflict|MUW| •» «»e weMurtmenu
of 59 sediment samples were collected from the
discharge canal, intake canal, throughout Barnegat
Bay and in Great Bay at locations shown in Figures 5.3
and 5.4. They were obtained with Petersen or Eckman
dredges at depths of 2-10 cm. During the first trip
(October 1971) the largest number of samples (31) was
obtained throughout Barnegat Bay to survey the range
of accumulated reactor-produced radionuclides in
sediment. A submersible 10- x 10-cm NalfTl) probe
and associated portable multichannel pulse-height
analyzer were used to locate areas where build-up of
-Co was detectable. • (26)
On April 18, 1972. several 2.5-cm-diameter core
samples were taken at Site 4 in the discharge canal (see
Figure 5.3). In the laboratory, they were separated into
3 clearly visible zones (0-* cm, 6-12 cm, and 12-30
cm) and each zone was combined to yield samples
sufficiently large for gamma-ray analysts.
Ftctiuy. USEPA. for pcowdm* the
-------
5.3 S*dimant sampling sites near lh« Oyster Cr»«k Nucl«ar GarMratin^ Station.
-------
Figure 5.4 Distant sediment sampling sites at the
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station.
Sediment samples were air-dried in the laboratory
at room temperature (20° C) by spreading thinly on
plastic sheets for 5-10 days. Air drying was preferred to
oven drying to minimize cementation (aggregation)
effects on subsequent determination of particle size
distribution. The dried samples were screened through
a number 10 mesh sieve (2.0 mm) and further
homogenized by shaking.
5.7.2 Description of sediment samples. To define
the sediment samples geochemically, aliquots collected
in the discharge canal, intake canal, Barnegat Bay and
Great Bay during the October-November 1972 field
trip (OC B-300 series) were analyzed for pH, cation
exchange capacity, particle size distribution and
organic content.* In addition, samples 305 and 310
were analyzed in both the original wet and laboratory
dried states. Analytical methods used for these analyses
were standard techniques recommended jointly by the
American Society of Agronomy and the American
Society for Testing and Materials^//,) and have been
described in a previous report.(26)
The results of the mineralogical analyses of these 11
samples are given in Table 5.26. Sediments collected
from the wide area of the discharge canal (locations 4,
5, 6), intake canal (location 39), Cedar Creek (location
44), Little Egg Harbor (location 41) and Great Bay
(location 40) were relatively rich in organic matter and
had a high cation-exchange capacity (CEC). Sandy
material was also present in some of these areas as
shown by a comparison of samples 300 and 301
collected from one location in Great Bay (location 40).
It was not possible to separate physically the fine
organic and mineral components of these samples.
Multiple regression analysis of the CEC as functions of
organic carbon and total clay content indicated that the
organic carbon and clay fractions contributed nearly
equally to the total CEC, about 54 and 46 percent,
respectively.
Sample 310 was collected at Site 43 in the fresh
water area of Oyster Creek above its confluence with
the discharge canal (see Figure 5.3). The creek passes
through a cedar swamp in this area, and the water was
brown in color and acidic (pH = 4.1), presumably due
to tannic acid leached from decaying cedar logs in the
stream. This is reflected in the pH 4.2 of the sediment.
The effects of this acidic water of the sorption of
radionuclides on sediment downstream in the
discharge canal portion of Oyster Creek are probably
minimal, as the contribution of fresh water from Oyster
Creek to that in the discharge canal is small (see
Section 5.1.1).
The clay mineral composition of sample 305 was
determined by x-ray crystallography of preferred-
oriented aggregate clay fractions on ceramic plants.
This sample was from the wide segment of Oyster
Creek, location 6, and considered typical of sediments
from this area of the creek. The results are given in
Table 5.27. The failure to detect any chlorite mineral in
this sediment sample suggests that these sediments
were of terrestrial rather than marine origin. This is
expected in an estuarine environment where much of
the material in the sediments has originated from
runoff through adjacent fresh water tributaries, and in
this case from circulating bay water containing
suspended terrestrial material that had deposited in the
bay at some earlier time.
*We thank Professor L. Wilding, Department of Agronomy, Ohio State University, for performing these
analyses.
-------
Table 5.26 Mineralogical Analysis of Sediment Samples
Sample
No. Location pH
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
Notes :
1.
2.
3.
4.
40
40
41
4
5
6
39
44
22
42
43
Textural
% organic
% organic
For parti
7.0
7.9
7.2
6.6
6.5
6.8
6.4
6.0
7.0
6.1
4.2
Cation exchange % %
Textural capacity Carbonates Organic
class meq/100 g (as CaCOO carbon
loam
coarse sand
v. fine silt
fine silt
loam
loam
silt
silt
loam
silt
fine sand
classification is empirical
carbon
matter
cle size
18.6
0.4
10.2
16.9
21.6
29.1
34.0
43.2
15.1
14.6
23.2
, based
is corrected for inorganic
is % organic carbon
distribution, air
times
dried p
0.6
0.4
1.1
1.1
1.0
1.4
1.6
0.9
3.1
1.1
<0.1
1.15
0.10
2.24
3.04
3.52
4.71
4.69
6.84
2.63
2.41
6.88
on observation by qualified
carbonates
1.72.
ortions of s<
% Particle size distribution
Organic
matter
1.98
0.17
3.85
5.23
6.05
8.10
8.07
11.76
4.52
4.14
11.83
Clay
<2 p
21.6
0.7
9.3
11.6
17.1
24.3
25.6
27 A
14.4
10.6
1.7
Silt
2-50 u
47
0
17
21
33
48
69
68
42
54
8
.5
.6
.4
.0
.3
.8
.8
.4
.9
.3
.7
Sand
50-2000 u
30.9
98.7
73.3
67.4
49.6
26.9
4.6
4.5
42.7
35.1
89.6
soil scientist.
(calcite and dolomite).
ample were electi
•olyte-dispersed in water b
y sodium
hexametaphosphate (calgon).
-------
Table 5.27 Clay Mineralogy of Sample 305 from Oyster Creek
Clay Percentages
Basis of
calculation
Expandables
(montmorillonite)
+ other species
Mica Kaolinite Quartz Amorphous"
(Illite)
X-ray crystal-
line clay
fraction
Total clay
fraction
31
24
45
36
16
13
21
Sample from Location 6.
**Weight loss on treatment with boiling 0.5 N NaOH. Clay percentages are
estimated to be within +_ 5%.
To determine the effects of sample preparation on
particle size distribution, aliquots of samples 305 and
310 were analyzed in the original wet state and in the
laboratory dried form. The wet and dried samples were
dispersed with both water and sodium
hexametaphosphate (calgon), an electrolyte, prior to
the particle size determination. The results, listed in
Table 5.28, do reflect some differences due to sample
preparation, but the differences are not large. The wet
form water-dispersed samples probably better
represent natural conditions than dry or electrolyte-
dispersed forms.
5.7.3 Radioactivity measurements. Radionuclides
that emit gamma-rays were analyzed with 54-cc or 85-
cc Ge(Li) detectors and a 4096-channel spectrometer.
Generally, 400 ml aliquots of dried sediment were
analyzed 1000 min. The Ge(Li) detectors were
calibrated with aqueous solutions, as previous
evaluation had indicated that self-absorption (density)
errors were 10 percent or less for these types of
Table 5.28 Effects of Sample Preparation and Dispersion Technique on Particle Size Analysis
Particle size distribution
Sample No.
305
310
Preparation
form
Dry
Dry
Wet
Wet
Dry
Dry
Wet
Wet
Dispersant
Electrolyte
Water
Electrolyte
Water
Electrolyte
Water
Electrolyte
Water
Clay
«2 u)
24.3
21.0
24.9
16.2
1.7
0.6
1.9
2.6
Silt
(2-50 y)
48.8
49.9
43.4
50.7
8.7
16.0
13.2
12.6
Sand
(50-2000 y)
26.9
29.1
31.7
33.1
89.6
83.4
84.9
84.8
Notes
1. Electrolyte dispersant is sodium hexametaphosphate (calgon).
2. Dry-electrolyte combination is the standard ASTM procedure.
3. Sample no. 305 is from brackish water; 310 was collected upstream
* __ M * j . .
on Oyster Creek in a fresh water area.
100
-------
samples. (26) Since denser, sandier samples (density
> ~ 1.5 g/cc) invariably contained little radioactivity,
statistical counting errors tend to obscure any self-
absorption error. Therefore, corrections for self-
absorption were not included in the calculations.
Naturally-occurring ""K, 2MRa, and 232Th are
reported for all sediment samples. Potassium-40 and
"'Ra were measured directly by their 1462 keV and 186
keV gamma-ray peaks, respectively. However, 2UTh
was measured indirectly using the 909 keV gamma-ray
peak of its "8Ac daughter and assuming that secular
equilibrium existed. Because thorium isotopes are
insoluble in a sea water environment, which is not the
case for radium isotopes, this assumption is probably
not valid and more M2Th was present in the sediment
samples than indicated by the results. (58)
Strontium-90, measured only in 5 samples from the
first field trip because concentrations were so low, was
determined by acid leaching 5-g aliquots, precipitating
SrCOj, and beta counting the measured MSr plus **Y
daughter activities. (2 7) Fine, calcareous shell
fragments in all sediment samples were too small and
numerous to remove.
5.7.4 Results and discussion of analyses.
Radionuclide concentrations measured in the 59
sediment samples collected during the two-year study
from the discharge canal, intake canal, Barnegat Bay
and Great Bay are given in Table 5.29. Cobalt-60 was
the most widely distributed radionuclide attributable to
the station. Concentrations ranged from 0.26 to 18.6
pCi/g in the discharge canal and decreased in the bay
with distance to a concentration less than detectable at
the southern (Little Egg Harbor) and northern (Sloop
Point) extremities. In addition, MMn, IMCs and 1JTCs in
excess of background were observed in many of the
samples from the discharge canal, intake canal, and
near the west shore of Barnegat Bay between
Waretown and Cedar Creek (see Figure 5.3). No "Co
was observed in any samples (<0.1 pCi/g), and the
'"Sb observed in a few samples is attributable to fallout.
The presence of "Co and MMn in the intake canal
sediments is evidence of recirculation of effluent
discharged by the station, as observed in algae and fish
samples (see Sections 5.3.3 and 5.4.4). In general, the
concentrations of MMn, "Co and IMCs agree with those
reported by McCurdy (see Section 5.1.4), and confirm
his observation of station effluent recirculation. (^
Concentrations of *°Sr in five sediment samples
obtained during the October 1971 field trip were only
0.1 to 0.2 pCi/g. Since levels did not appear elevated in
the discharge canal sediment and because samples
contained calcareous shell fragments which tend to
elevate the strontium levels, "Sr measurements were
discontinued.
The average concentration of radionuclides
measured in 4 background samples from Great Bay
(location 40) are given in Table 5.30. Sample no. 301
was not included in the background averages because it
consisted entirely of coarse sand, atypical of sediments
collected from the Oyster Creek sites (see Table 5.26).
A very small quantity of "Co, 0.02 ± 0.01 pCi/g, was
observed in one background sample (No. 300), which is
also attributed to atmospheric fallout from nuclear
weapons tests. The relatively large standard deviations
reflect considerable variability of concentrations
between samples. This is not unexpected and has been
discussed in an earlier report. (26)
The highest concentrations of radionuclides
attributable to station operation were found at
locations 4 to 10 in the wide area of the discharge canal
and at locations 11 to 13 progressing downstream from
the wide area to the mouth of the canal (see Figure 5.3).
Little radioactivity was detected in the discharge canal
above the wide area in the narrow channel where high
stream velocity had washed out the finer particles,
leaving only coarse sand. Sands are characterized by
high density (> 1.5 g/cc) and the absence of fine
particles, consisting of clay minerals and organic
matter which account for most of the ion-exchange
properties of soils (see Section 5.7.2). For example, the
sediment was sandy (density 1.7 g/cc) 100 m above the
wide area in the discharge canal and contained only
0.26 pCi MCo/g. Samples 3 and 4, however, collected a
short distance downstream in the wide area, were less
sandy (densities 1.4 and 1.2 g/cc, respectively) and
contained 0.8 and 4.2 pCi MCo/g, respectively.
Whether sorption occurred on suspended fine particles
during transport down the canal to the wider area
where they settle due to slower stream velocity or
adsorption occured from the slower moving water
along the silty bottom of the wide area cannot be
ascertained from these data. Results reported in
Section 4.4.4 would indicate the former most likely, as
radionuclides discharged by the station were observed
either to be highly associated with particulate matter at
discharge or to become so soon after discharge.
Concentrations of 134Cs and M7Cs were significantly
higher in the sediment collected in the vicinity of the
station during October-November 1972. Based on the
October 1973 samples, these concentrations remained
relatively high throughout the following year. This was
a consequence of the relatively large quantities
discharged by the station between July and September
1972 when the liquid radwaste system was not
operating properly (see Section 4.3.1 and Appendix
101
-------
Table 5.29 Radionuclide Analyses of Oyster Creek Sediment Samples, pCi/g Dry Weight
Sample
No.
1
2
3
4
5
6
10
11
12
13
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
100
101
104
Site
1
2
3
4
5
6
10
11
12
13
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
40
4
5
Density
0.91
1.71
1.35
1.15
1.20
0.97
0.88
1.01
1.00
1.39
1.24
1.16
1.71
1.54
1.36
1.24
1.39
1.59
1.12
1.49
0.99
1.30
1.22
1.17
1.38
1.19
1.58
1.01
0.97
1.22
1.15
1.04
0.88
40K
7.1 +. 0.3
0.8 +. 0.1
1.9 +_ 0.2
8.4 +. 0.4
9.7 +. 0.4
13.7 +_ 0.5
16.0 +_ 1.1
16.1 +. O.S
14.6 +. 0.5
5.0 +. 0.3
12.6 +_ 0.4
13.1 ^0.4
2.1 +. 0.2
1.0 *. 0.3
5.7 +_ 0.3
5.9 +_ 0.3
5.2 +_ 0.3
0.6 +_ 0.1
14.5 +. 0.5
7.3 +. 0.3
14.8 +. O.S
4.1 +. 0.2
14.0 +. 0.4
13.7 +. 0.4
12.0 f 0.4
14.0 +. 0.4
3.2 +. 0.2
14.4 +. 0.4
8.5 +. 0.4
1.9 +_0.1
17.2 +. 0.6
13.6 +. 0.6
9.5 +_ 0.5
S4Mn
0.75 +_ 0.14
<0.09
<0.17
0.38 1 0.1S
1.7 +.0.2
0.68 +. 0.19
3.6 +. 0.3
<0.26
0.95 +. 0.19
<0.18
<0.11
<0.21
<0.12
0.05 +_ 0.02
<0.11
<0.09
<0.03
<0.04
<0.12
<0.09
0.34 +_ 0.13
<0.08
<0.12
<0.16
<0.10
<0.10
<0.08
<0.18
<0.18
<0.06
<0.04
0.15 +. 0.03
0.91 +_ °-°6
60Co
October
4.9 ^0.1
0.26 +_ 0.02
0.82 +_ 0.04
4.2 +_0.1
9.0 +_0.1
5.0 +0.1
18.6 + 0.4
1.2 +_0.1
5.0 +_0.1
5.3 +_0.1
0.10 +_0.03
0.19 +. 0.03
<0.04
0.23 +_ 0.03
0.61 +. 0.03
0.10 +. 0.02
0.13 +.0.02
0.04 +_ 0.01
0.37 +_ 0.04
0.09 +. 0.02
1.6 +.0.1
0.09 +. 0.02
0.54 +_ 0.04
0.04 + 0.02
0.23 +_0.3
0.14 +. 0.03
0.23 +_ 0.02
1.00 +_ 0.05
1.7 +.0.1
0.03 +_ 0.01
April
<0.04
0.85 +_ 0.06
7.6 ^0.1
125Sb
18-21, 1971
0.24 +_ 0.07
<0.05
<0.07
<0.12
0.22 +_ 0.08
<0.14
<0.26
<0.12
<0.18
<0.08
<0.06
0.13 +_ 0.04
<0.04
<0.06
<0.04
<0.07
<0.05
<0.03
<0.09
<0.07
<0.11
<0.06
<0.09
0.12 +_ 0.05
<0.07
<0.09
<0.05
0.14 +_ 0.04
<0.10
<0.06
17-18, 1972
0.14 +_ 0.04
0.09 +_ 0.05
0.17 +^ 0.07
134Cs
<0.05
<0.02
<0.03
<0.05
<0.06
<0.06
<0.14
<0.05
<0.06
<0.05
<0.03
<0.03
<0.03
<0.02
<0.04
<0.03
<0.02
<0.01
<0.12
<0.04
<0.04
<0.04
<0.03
<0.03
<0.03
<0.03
<0.02
<0.04
<0.04
<0.02
<0.02
<0.03
<0.04
137Cs
0.87 +_ 0.03
0.02 +_ 0.01
0.05 +_0.01
0.28 +. 0.02
0.53 *_ 0.03
0.61 +_ 0.03
1.3 +_0.1
0.15 +. 0.02
0.36 *_ 0.03
0.10 +_0.01
0.14 +_ 0.02
0.46 +_ 0.02
<0.01
0.05 +. 0.01
0.11 +_ 0.02
0.16 +_ 0.02
0.13 +_ 0.02
<0.01
0.33 +_ 0.02
0.03 +^ 0.01
0.34 +_ 0.03
0.10 +_ 0.01
0.21 +_ 0.02
0.33 + 0.02
0.07 +_0.02
0.22 +^0.02
0.05 *_ 0.01
0.31 +_ 0.03
0.30 1 0.03
0.13 +_ 0.02
0.45 +_ 0.03
0.32 +_ 0.03
0.53 +. 0.04
22
2.4
0.8
1.2
1.6
1.6
2.1
1.9
2.3
1.8
1.4
1.0
1.7
0.6
0.5
1.4
1.3
0.3
0.3
1.7
1.4
1.9
1.3
1.6
1.8
1.7
2.1
0.9
2.0
2.4
1.2
1.2
0.8
1.0
6Ra
*_ 0.3
+. 0.2
+_0.2
+_0.3
+_ 0.3
+_ 0.3
+_ 0.6
+_ 0.3
+_ 0.3
+_ 0.2
i 0.3
+^ 0.3
+_ 0.2
+_ 0.1
+_ 0.3
*_ 0.3
*_ 0.1
+_ 0.2
+_ 0.3
+_ 0.3
+_ 0.4
+_ 0.3
+_ 0.3
*_ 0.2
*_ 0.3
+_ 0.4
+_ 0.2
+_ 0.4
+ 0.4
+_ 0.3
+_ 0.1
+_ 0.1
+_ 0.2
232Th
0.42 +. 0.08
0.21 +_ 0.04
0.34 +_ 0.04
0.55 +_0.10
0.60 +. 0.10
0.70 +_ 0.10
0.90 +_ 0.40
0.70 +. 0.10
0.70 +_ 0.10
0,43 +_ 0.06
0.46 + 0.05
0.53 +_ 0.06
0.09 +. 0.01
0.22 +_ 0.05
0.46 +_ 0.06
0.37 +_ 0.05
0.41 *_ 0.05
0.10 *_ 0.03
0.62 +_ 0.07
0.62 *_ 0.06
0.68 *_ 0.09
0.28 +. 0.05
0.63 +^ 0.07
0.61 +. 0.07
0.76 +_ 0.07
0.77 +_ 0.07
0.24 +^ 0.03
0.62 +_ 0.07
0.68 *_ 0.06
0.24 '*. 0.03
0.72 +_ 0.08
0.70 +_ 0.10
0.50 +. 0.10
-------
Table 5.29 Radionuclide Analyses of Oyster Creek Sediment Samples, pCi/g Dry Weight (Cont'd)
Sample
No. Site
105
106
27
24
Dry
Density
1.00
1.09
40K 54Mn
15.9 +. 0.8 0.51 +_ 0.06
15.9 +_ 0.5 <0.13
60Co
2.1 ^0.1
0.54 +_ 0.04
125Sb
0.17 +_ 0.07
0.16 +. 0.04
July 10-11,
200
201*
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
300
301
302
303
304
305
30%
307
308
309
310
400
404
405
Notes:
1.
2.
3.
40
5
12
21
24
27
45
46
47
48
40
40
41
4
5
6
34
44
22
42
43
40
5
6
+ values
9°Sr was
Site 40
1.15
0.83
1.29
1.50
1.23
0.87
1.69
1.54
1.68
1.74
1.27
1.79
1.25
1.13
1.00
0.82
1.01
0.90
1.15
1.13
1.18
1.11
1.11
1.15
13.6 +_ O.S <0.03
9.1 +_ 1.7 1.8 +_ 0.3
3.7 +. 0.3 0.21 ^0.03
1.0 .+ 0.1 <0.05
1.6 +_ 0.1 0.02 +. 0.01
13.2 +. O.S 0.24 +. 0.06
0.6+^0.1 <0.04
1.4 +. 0.2 <0.03
1.2 +_ 0.1 <0.04
0.3 + 0.1 <0.08
16.8 +. 0.3 <0.01
0.9 +.0.1 <0.01
13.9 +. O.S <0.02
5.4 +. 0.3 1.8 +. 0.1
9.8 +. 0.4 1.7 +. 0.1
11.5 +. 0.6 2.0 +. 0.1
IS. 9 +.0.5 <0.09
15.2 +. 0.6 0.19 +. 0.02
10.5 +. 0.4 <0.06
13.4^0.5 <0.02
1.6 +.0.1 <0.01
14.0 +. 0.05 <0.02
9.9+^0.4 1.4 i 0.1
10.5 +.0.4 1.5 +. 0.1
<0.02
13.8 +. 0.5
0.88 +_ 0.04
1.3 +_0.1
O.OS +_ 0.01
1.7 ^0.2
0.04 +. 0.01
<0.03
<0.01
1972
<0.07
<0.4
<0.05
<0.05
<0.02
0.15 +_ 0.05
<0.
< o.
< 0,
03
03
03
<0.04 <0.02
October 31-November 2, 1972
0.02 + 0.01
<0.01
<0.03
7.8 +.0.1
9.8 +. 0.1
10.9 +. 0.2
0.17 +. 0.03
0.81 +. 0.05
0.16 +, 0.02
<0.03
<0.01
October
<0.02
7.4 +.0.1
6.8 +. 0.1
0.
<0.
0.
< o.
<0.
< o.
<0.
< 0.
0.
<0.
<0.
30-31
0.
0.
0.
14 +_ 0.02
02
09 *_ 0.04
10
13
21
06
09
14 *_ 0.04
05
02
, 1973
04 1 0.02
13 i 0.05
09 +_ 0.05
134Cs
<0.05
<0.04
<0.04
<0.18
<0.02
<0.02
<0.01
<0.05
<0.01
<0.01
<0.02
<0.02
<0.01
<0.01
<0.02
0.62 +. 0.04
0.62 +_ 0.04
0.89 +_ 0.07
0.04 + 0.02
0.15 1 0.03
<0.03
<0.02
<0.01
<0.03
0.34 +^0.03
0.23 +. 0.02
137Cs
0.47 *_ 0.05
0.32 +_ 0.03
0.34 +_ 0.02
0.50 +. 0.10
0.15 *_ 0.02
<0.02
<0.01
0.33 +.0.03
0.02 *_ 0.01
<0.01
<0.01
<0.02
0.34 +_ 0.01
<0.01
0.08 *_ 0.01
1.3 +_0.1
1.6 +. 0.1
2.0 +.0.1
0.41 +.0.02
0.51 +.0.03
0.44 +_ 0.02
0.22 +. 0,02
0.04 +_ 0.01
0.26 +_ 0.02
1.1 +.0.1
0.93 +.0.04
226Ra
0.6
1.8
1.2
2.2
0.7
1.0
0.3
1.9
0.5
0.6
0.4
2.9
0.5
0.2
1.6
1.5
2.4
2.8
2.1
2.3
1.7
2.0
1.3
1.4
1.7
1.4
+. 0.2
+. 0.3
+_ 0.2
+ 1.1
+. 0.2
+^0.2
+. O.I
+. 0.3
+_ 0.2
+. 0.1
+ 0.1
+ 0.2
+. o.i
+^ 0.1
+. 0.2
1 0.4
+ 0.4
+ 0.5
+. 0.3
+. 0.4
+, 0.3
+. 0.3
+_ 0.1
+. 0.3
1 0.3
+. 0.3
indicate analytical error expressed at 2o and < values are Minima detectable concentrations at 3a counting error.
determined in sanples 1, 2, 3, 19 and 30 to be 0.16 +, 0.08, 0.12 +. 0.09, 0.16 + 0.06, 0.11 +_ 0.06, and <0.12 pCi/g,
is in Great
Bay (Background).
232Th
0.60 +_ 0.10
0.67 +. 0.06
0.60 +_ 0.05
0.90 +_ 0.50
0.26 ± 0.05
0.31 +^ 0.04
0.13 +_ 0.02
0.60:+_0.10
0.08 +_ 0.02
0.10 +_ 0.03
0.06 +_ 0.02
1.1 + 0.1
0.70 +. 0.04
0.04 +_ 0.02
0.68 +_ 0.07
O.SO +^ 0.10
0.60 +_ 0.20
0.50 +_ 0.20
0.80 +. 0.10
0.60 +.0.10
0.60 +_ 0.06
0.55 +_ 0.07
0.34 +. 0.02
0.51 +_ 0.05
0.60 1 0.10
0.60 +_ 0.10
respectively.
-------
Table 5.30 Average Background Concentrations of
Radionuclides in Great Bay Sediment Samples
Concentration, Concentration,
Radionuclide pCi/g Radionuclide pCi/g
4°K
S4Mn
60Co
125Sb
15 +2
<0.02
<0.02
0.09 i 0.06
134Cs
137Cs
226Ra
232Th
<0.02
0.35 + 0.08
1.1 + 0.4
0.6 ^0.1
Note: +_ values are the standard deviation of
individual observations;
-------
Table 5.32 Net Count Rate of "Co with Underwater Probe and Measured
"Co Concentrations in Related Sediment Samples
Sample
No.
5
6
10
11
12
13
17
18
21
22
23
25
27
31
32
34
35
19
20
24
26
33
36
Probe,
net count/min
500 +_
1100 +_
2100 +_
200 +_
2500 +_
800 _+
<50
<50
100 +_
<50
<50
100 ^
400 +_
<50
<50
200 +_
300 +_
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
<50
Silty
100
200
200
50
200
200
30
30
50
50
50
Sandy
Sediment Samples
Pd/g
Samples
9.0
5.0
18.6
1.2
5.0
5.3
0.1
0.2
0.6
0.1
0.1
0.4
1.6
0.2
0.1
1.0
1.7
Samples
<0.1
0.2
<0.1
0.1
0.2
<0.1
C/min
per
Pd/g
60
220
110
170
500
150
170
250
250
200
180
Notes:
1. Samples collected October 18-22, 1972.
2. Net count rate of probe for gamma rays with energies between
1.0 - 1.4 Mev; counting times were 10 min.
3. +_ values are 2-sigma counting error; < values are 3-sigma
counting error.
4. Concentration of Co in dried sediment samples from
Table 5.29.
105
-------
210 i 100 cpm per pCi/g. This is a lower efficiency
than measured previously at other nuclear power
stations,(26,29) Hence, the probe is not an appropriate
tool for making quantitative analyses of sediments in
situ, although it is useful as a surveillance technique for
locating areas of radioactive buildup with a limiting
sensitivity of about 0.5 pCi "Co/g.
Cobalt-60 was the principal radionuclide in
sediments that indicated contamination from the
station. It was detected in the bay as far north as Toms
River, as far south as the Manahawkin Bridge, and in
nearly all samples collected between these locations.
Similar to the algae results, radioactivity in sediment
samples collected near the west shore of the bay was
generally higher than in samples from near the east
shore. Cobalt-60 was also detected in a sample
collected from Forked River above the South Branch,
presumably deposited during high tides. No
radioactivity attributable to the station was detected in
sediment samples collected from the northern (near
Point Pleasant) or southern (Little Egg Harbor)
extremities of Barnegat Bay.
5.8 References
1. Carpenter, J. H., "Concentration Distribution
for Material Discharged Into Barnegat Bay," John
Hopkins University, Report to the Jersey Central
Power and Light Company, Morristown, N. J. (1965).
2. Jersey Central Power and Light Company,
"Facility Description and Safety Analysis Report,
Oyster Creek Nuclear Power Plant," Vol. 1 and 2,
AEC Docket No. 50-219-1 and 50-219-2,
Morristown, N. J. (1967).
3. Directorate of Licensing, U.S. Atomic Energy
Commission, "Final Environmental Statement Related
to the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station,"
Docket No. 50-219 (December 1974).
4. Pritchard, D. W., R. O. Reid, A. Okubo and
H. H. Carter, "Physical Processes of Water Movement
and Mixing," in Radioactivity in the Marine
Environment, NRC-NAS Publication, 90 (1971).
5. Jersey Central Power and Light Company,
"Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Semi-
Annual Repts.," 1-9 (1970-1973).
6. McCurdy, D. E., "1971 Environmental
Radiation Levels in the State of New Jersey," New
Jersey State Department of Environmental Protection
Rept. (1972).
7. McCurdy, D. E. and J. J. Russo,
"Environmental Radiation Surveillance of the Oyster
Creek Nuclear Generating Station," New Jersey State
Department of Environmental Protection Rept. (1973).
8. Loveland, R. E., et al., "The Qualitative and
Quantitative Analysis of the Benthic Flora and Fauna
of Barnegat Bay Before and After the Onset of Thermal
Addition," Rutgers State University, Progress Repts.
1-7(1966-1970).
9. Wurtz, C. B., "Barnegat Bay Fish,"
Department of Environmental Sciences, Rutgers State
University, Report to the Jersey Central Power and
Light Company, Morristown, N. J. (1969).
10. Westman, J. R., "Barnegat Reactor Finfish
Studies," Department of Environmental Sciences,
Rutgers State University, Report to the Jersey Central
Power and Light Company, Morristown, N. J. (1967).
11. Thompson. S. E., C. A. Burton, D. J. Quinn
and Y. C. Ng, "Concentration Factors of Chemical
Elements in Edible Aquatic Organisms," USAEC
Rept., UCRL-50564 Rev. 1 (1972).
12. Bryan, G. W., A. Preston and W. L.
Templeton, "Accumulation of Radionuclides by
Aquatic Organisms of Economic Importance in the
United Kingdom," in Disposal of Radioactive Wastes
into Seas, Oceans and Surface Waters, IAEA, Vienna,
623 (1966).
13. Lowman, F. G., D. K. Phelps, R. McClin, V.
R. De Vega, I. O. De Padovani and R. J. Garcia,
"Interactions of the Environmental and Biological
Factors on the Distribution of Trace Elements in the
Marine Environment," ibid. 249.
14. Goldberg, E. D., W. S. Broecker, M. G. Gross
and K. K. Turekian, "Marine Chemistry," in
Radioactivity w the Marine Environment, NRC-NAS
Publication, 137(1971).
15. Polikarpov, G. G., Radioecology of Aquatic
Organisms, North-Holland Publishing Co., Reinhold
Book Division, N. Y. (1966).
16. Rid, G. K., "Radioactive Cesium in
Estuaries," Radiol. Health Data Rept. //, 659 (1970).
17. Rice, T. R., "The Accumulation and
Exchange of Strontium by Marine Planktonic Algae,"
Lim. Ocean. 7,123(1956).
18. Jinks, S. M. and M. Eisenbud, "Concentration
Factors in the Aquatic Environment," Rad. Health
Data Rept. 13,243 (1972).
19. Bowen, V. T., J. S. Olsen, C. L. Osterberg and
J. Ravera, "Ecological Interactions of Marine
Radioactivity," in Radioactivity in the Marine
Environment, NRC-NAS Publication, 200 (1971).
20. Lowman, F. G., T. R. Rice and F. A.
Richards, "Accumulation and Redistribution of
Radionuclides by Marine Organisms," ibid. 161.
21. Kolthoff, I. M. and E. B. Sandell, Textbook of
Quantitative Inorganic Analysis, Macmillan Co., N.
Y., 395 (1946).
106
-------
22. Office of Radiation Programs, U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency, "Carbon-14 in
Total Diet and Milk, 1972-1973," Rad. Health Data
Rept. 14,679 (1973).
23. Percy, W. G. and S. W. Richards,
"Distribution and Ecology of Fishes of the Mystic
River Estuary, Connecticut," Ecology 43, 248 (1962).
24. McCurdy, D. and J. Ross, "Temporal
Variations of the Oyster Creek Water Temperature
Downstream From the Oyster Creek Nuclear
Generating Station During 1973 and 1974," New
Jersey State Department of Environmental Protection
Rept. (1975).
25. Beasley, T. M., T. A. Jokela and R. J. Eagle,
"Radionuclides and Selected Trace Elements in Marine
Protein Concentrates," Health Phys. 21,815 (1971).
26. Kahn, B., et al., "Radiological Surveillance
Studies at the Haddam Neck PWR Nuclear Power
Station," EPA Rept. EPA-520/3-74-007 (1974).
27. Porter, C. R., B. Kahn, M. W. Carter, G. L.
Rehnberg and F. W. Pepper, "Determination of
Radiostrontium in Food and Other Environmental
Samples," Environ. Sci. Technol. /, 745 (1967).
28. Kahn, B., et al., "Radiological Surveillance
Studies at a Boiling Water Nuclear Power Reactor,"
U.S. Public Health Service Rept. BRH/DER 70-1
(1970).
29. Kahn, B., et al., "Radiological Surveillance
Studies at a Pressurized Water Nuclear Power
Reactor," EPA Rept. RD 71-1 (1971).
30. Templeton, W. L. and V. M. Brown,
"Accumulation of Calcium and Strontium by Brown
Trout from Waters in the United Kingdom," Nature
198,198(1963).
31. Ophel, I. L. and J. M. Judd, "Skeletal
Distribution of Strontium and Calcium and
Strontium/Calcium Ratios in Several Species of Fish,"
in Strontium Metabolism, J. Lenihan, J. Loutit and J.
Martin, eds., Academic Press, New York 103 (1967).
32. Hoss, D. E. and J. P. Baptist, "Accumulation
of Soluble and Paniculate Radionuclides by Estuarine
Fish," in Proc. 3rd Natl. Symp. on Radioecology, ed.,
D. J. Nelson, Oak Ridge, Vol. 2,776 (1971).
33. Rice, T. R., "The Role of Plants and Animals
in the Cycling of Radionuclides in the Marine
Environment," Health Phys. //, 953 (1965).
34. Directorate of Regulatory Standards, "Final
Environmental Statement Concerning Proposed Rule
Making Action - Analytical Models and
Calculations," Vol. 2, AEC Rept. WASH-1258 F50
(1973).
35. Freke, A. M., "A Model for the Approximate
Calculation of Safe Rates of Discharge of Radioactive
Wastes into Marine Environments," Health Phys. 13,
743 (1967).
36. Harrison, F. L., "Biological Implications of
Nuclear Debris in Aquatic Ecosystems," Nucl. Tech
//, 444 (1971).
37. Cowser, K. E. and W. S. Snyder, "Safety
Analysis of Radionuclide Release to the Clinch River,"
AEC Rept. ORNL-3721, Supp. 3 (1966).
38. International Commission on Radiological
Protection, "Report of Committee II on Permissible
Dose for Internal Radiation," Health Phys. 3, (1960).
39. International Commission on Radiological
Protection, Recommendations of the ICRP (As
Amended 1959 and Revised 1962), Publication 6,
Pergamon Press, Oxford (1964).
40. "Background Material for the Development of
Radiation Protection Standards," Fed. Rad. Council
Rept. #2, U.S. Government Printing Office,
Washington, D. C. 20402 (1961).
41. Ketchum, B. H., Global Effects of
Environmental Pollution, ed., S. F. Singer, New York,
190(1970).
42. Karvelis, E., U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, Cincinnati, personal communication (1972).
43. Kopfler, F. C. and J. Mayer, "Concentrations
of Five Trace Metals in the Waters and Oysters
(Crassostrea virginica) of Mobile Bay, Alabama,"
Proc. Natl. Shellfisheries Assoc. 63,27 (1972).
44. Schelske, C. L., D. A. Wolfe and D. E. Hoss,
"Ecological Implications of Fallout Radioactivity
Accumulated by Estuarine Fishes and Mollusks," in
Proc. 3rd Natl. Symp. Radioecology, ed., D. J. Nelson,
Oak Ridge, 791 (1971).
45. Harvey, R. S., "Uptake and Loss of
Radionuclides by the Fresh Water Clam Lampsilis
Radiata(Gmel.)," Health Phys. 17,149(1969).
46. McCurdy, D. E., New Jersey State
Department of Environmental Protection, personal
communication (1976).
47. Templeton, W. L. and A. Preston, "Transport
and Distribution of Radioactive Effluents in Coastal
and Estuarine Waters of the United Kingdom," in
Disposal of Radioactive Wastes into Seas, Oceans and
Surface Waters, IAEA, Vienna, 267 (1969).
48. Beasley, T. M., C. L. Osterberg and Y. M.
Jones, "Natural and Artificial Radionuclides in
Seafoods and Marine Protein Concentrates," Nature
227,1207(1969).
49. Beasley, T. M., R. J. Eagle and T. A. Jokela,
"llfPo, "'Pb and Stable Lead in Marine Organisms,"
Fallout Program Quarterly Report, USAEC, HASL-
273,1-2(1973).
107
-------
50. Shannon, L. V. and R. D. Cherry, HlliPo in
Marine Plankton," Nature 216, 352 (1967).
51. Hill, C. R., "Polonium-210 in Man," Nature
^0^,423(1965).
52. Young, D. R. and T. R. Folsom, "Mussels and
Barnacles as Indicators of the Variation of MMn, "Co
and "Zn in the Marine Environment," in Radioactive
Contamination of the Marine Environment, IAEA,
Vienna, 633 (1973).
53. Cranmore, G. and Harrison, F. L., "Loss of
'"Cs and "Co from the Oyster Crassostrea Gigas,"
Health Phys. 28, 319 (1975).
54. Weaver, C. L., "A Proposed Radioactivity
Concentration Guide for Shellfish," Radiol. Health
Data Rep. 8,491 (1967).
55. Chipman, W. A., "Accumulation of
Radioactive Materials by Fishery Organisms," llth
Annual Meeting of the Gulf and Caribbean Fisheries
Institute, Miami Beach, Florida, Nov. 17-21,1958.
56. Tennant, D. A. and W. O. Forster, "Seasonal
Variation and Distribution of "Zn, MMn and "Cr in
Tissues of the Crab Cancer Magister Dana," Health
Phys. 7£ 649 (1970).
57. Black, C. A., et al., "Methods of Soil
Analysis," Amer. Soc. of Agronomy, Monograph No.
9, Vol. 1 and 2, Madison, Wisconsin (1965).
58. Blanchard, R. L., M. H. Cheng and H. A.
Potratz, "Uranium and Thorium Series Disequilibria
in Recent and Fossil Marine Molluscan Shells," J.
Geophys. Res. 72,4745 (1967).
108
-------
6. ENVIRONMENTAL AIRBORNE ACTIVITY
6.1 Introduction
6.1.1 Purpose. Radiation exposures and
radionuclide concentrations were measured in or
beneath the plume from the stack to confirm the annual
population radiation doses calculated by the station
operator from radionuclide release data,
meteorological dispersion models, and photon dose
equations. Gaseous effluent from nuclear power
stations with boiling-water reactors is the main source
of radiation dose to the population.
Concentration measurements in the environment
were compared with release rates determined at the
same time in the stack or the main condenser steam jet
air ejectors to obtain dispersion values under the
atmospheric conditions prevailing during the brief
measurement periods. Radiation exposure results were
related to these release rates, and are intended for
computing annual radiation doses by adjusting for
annual average conditions of atmospheric stability,
wind speed, and wind direction. To obtain net values,
the radiation background was determined by repeating
the measurement at each location after the wind
direction had changed so that the plume was no longer
near the location.
Brief (1/4 to 2 hours) ground level measurements
were conducted at various locations beyond the station
perimeter during different atmospheric conditions (see
Section 6.2). Plume radiation was determined directly
with sensitive ionization chambers. Radioactive gases
were collected in tanks by pumps, particles by high-
volume air samplers and filters, and radioiodines by air
samplers and various types of filters and charcoal. An
ionization chamber mounted aboard a helicopter
provided measurements of the radiation fields and
extent of the plume (Section 6.3). Measurements were
also performed near the station to determine radiation
being emitted directly from various on-site structures
(Section 6.4). For longer periods (up to six weeks)
sensitive thermoluminescent dosimeters were placed at
many locations to measure long-term exposure (Section
6.5).
6.1.2 Environment of Oyster Creek. The station is
located on a 573-hectare (1,416 acres) site in the eastern
portion of the Pine Barrens of New Jersey. The site lies
in Lacey and Ocean Townships in Ocean County. The
plant is located 430 m west of U.S. Highway 9, which
intersects the site. The Garden State Parkway bounds
the site on the west. Undeveloped land lies beyond the
north and south boundaries, consisting of the south
branch of the Forked River and Oyster Creek,
respectively. Residential developments surround the
eastern portion of the site. The 1140-MWe Forked
River pressurized-water reactor is being constructed on
a site west of the plant. The local area, particularly to
the west, is densely wooded with mostly pitch pines and
some mixed hardwoods. The ground is sandy and
relatively flat, sloping gradually from 3 m above mean
sea level near the eastern shoreline to about 18 m at 3
km to the west. The north and east quadrants contain
many waterways, lakes, and fresh and salt water
marshes. Barnegat Bay lies about 3 km to the east and
the Atlantic Ocean, 10 km. (1)
Land within 10 km of the station is poor for
agriculture. Cranberries are cultivated in bogs about 10
km to the north. Virtually no milk is produced in the
vicinity. Some milk-producing cattle were recently
reported to be located 9 km south and a herd of four
cows, 10.6 km northnorthwest. Goats are milked 14 km
to the southwest.^ Because of the poor crop and
pasture conditions around the station, vegetables and
milk were not collected.
Deer were present around the station. Since no
radioactivity due to station effluents had been detected
in specimens collected near other power
teactors,(3,4,5) deer near Oyster Creek were not
considered an important pathway to man and no
samples were collected.
Based on the 1970 census, the station is located in a
region of relatively low but increasing population
density. The nearest communities are Forked River,
about 2.5 km northeast, and Waretown, 2.5 km
southeast. The largest nearby population (23,554)
resides in Toms River and adjacent communities about
15 km north. The number of residents, particularly in
regions adjacent to Barnegat Bay and water
recreational areas, is expected to grow at a rate of 4
percent annually/^ In addition to the permanent
109
-------
population, a sizeable influx of part-time residents
occurs in the waterfront areas during summer months.
The 1970 resident population was:(7,)
Distance from Accumulated Distance from Accumulated
site, km population site, km population
1.6
3.2
4.8
8.0
226
2,514
5,433
9,835
16
32
48
80
45,586
229,243
513,510
3,483,895
The resident and estimated seasonal population in
various directions within 3.2 km of the site was:
Population
within
1.6 km
Direction
N ,
NNE
NE
ENE
E
ESE
SE
SSE
S
ssw
sw
wsw
w
WNW
NW
NNW
Total
Resident
0
75
79
0
0
42
28
2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
226
Seasonal
0
153
154
0
0
151
101
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
559
Population
1.6 and
Resident
198
333
257
441
75
158
305
225
224
31
41
0
0
0
0
0
2288
between
3.2 km
Seasonal
381
644
499
852
145
571
1105
815
128
17
23
0
0
0
0
0
5180
6.1.3 Meteorology. The local climate is of a
continental type modified by maritime effects/A)
Westerly winds prevail, blowing usually from SSW to
NW. Northeasterly winds, however, occur frequently
during precipitation. The proximity of large bodies of
water induce onshore winds during warm, sunny
periods. Annual rainfall averages 107 cm, with 8 to 13
cm occurring each month.
A 122-m-tall meteorological tower stands 360 m
west of the effluent stack. Wind speed and direction are
measured at 10, 23 and 122 m elevations and recorded
continuously. Thermometers are located at 3.7, 23, 61
and 122 m and read every 15 min. The station operator
determines atmospheric stability from the difference in
temperature between 3.7 and 122 m. The
meteorological data are summarized quarterly and
annually by a contractor. The AEC has indicated,
however, that the data collected at the tower up to 1974
are of doubtful accuracy and that an improved
program is being implemented/2^ During this study,
incorrect temperature and wind data were detected and
corrected by results of balloon releases, compass
sightings and other observations.
6.1.4 Off-site surface air surveillance by the
State.(6)Ai the time of this study, the New Jersey State
Department of Environmental Protection, Bureau of
Radiation Protection (BRP), maintained a network of
sampling stations for monitoring concentrations of
radioactive particles and iodine in air in the vicinity of
the Oyster Creek station. The network consisted of 5
stations within 12 km of the site and a background
station 24 km west of the site. Each sampler, operated
at a flow rate of 0.7 m'/min, contained a particulate
filter (Mine Safety Appliances Co. type BM-2133) and
a charcoal canister (MSA part No. 46727, similar to
type 2306). Samples were changed every 7 days, and
analyzed by a Geiger-Muller beta-particle detector and
a gamma-ray spectrometer with a Ge(Li) detector.
Radioiodine on charcoal was analyzed with a Ge(Li) or
NaI(Tl) detector coupled to a gamma-ray
spectrometer. Radiostrontium was chemically
separated from composited particulate filters and
analyzed with a proportional counter.
Although most radioactivity on the air filters was
attributed to fallout from nuclear weapons testing,
quantities of MMn, MCo and 131I were definitely
traceable to Oyster Creek. Cobalt-60 was the most
frequently detected radionuclide. Measured "Sr and
"Sr probably originated from fallout. BRP reported
that most radioactive particles in air near Oyster Creek
were 10"* to 10~T of the maximum permissible
concentration values (10CFR20, Table 2, Column 1)
for the various radionuclides.
Iodine-131 was frequently measured in the week-
long samples, particularly those obtained 2 to 4 km
from the Oyster Creek station. Up to the end of 1973,
the highest measured concentration was 1.3 x 10"1"
uCi/m3, which occurred during the period after reactor
startup on January 10, 1973. Elevated ml airborne
concentrations on the order of 1 x 10"" to 6 x 10""
uCi/m3 were measured during the two-month period
before shutdown for refueling in April 1973. BRP
indicated that most "'I measured in air was in the form
of methyl iodide.
6.2 Short'Term Ground~level
Radiation Exposure Rates and
Radionuclide Concentrations.
6.2.1 Exposure measurements. Radiation exposure
was measured during the first two field trips with a
sensitive muscle-equivalent ionization chamber and
110
-------
Shonka electrometer, from which exposure data are
obtained by measuring the time required to null a one-
volt charge placed on the chamber.(7,8) The
measurement is made by observing the movement of a
fiber in the electrometer through a microscope. After
the second field trip, the system was modified with a
Keithley electrometer and a strip-chart recorder to
record either continuous or integral exposure readings.
The system was calibrated with a radium standard to
convert readings to microroentgens per hour (uR/hr).
Also utilized were cylindrical NaI(Tl) gamma-ray
detectors (5- x 5-cm) connected to portable count-rate
meters. The instruments had been calibrated by
comparing their count rates for gamma rays in the
natural radiation background at Cincinnati with
measurements by the muscle-equivalent ionization
chamber. Radiation levels during calibration ranged
from 5 uR/hr over water in a lake to 19 uR/hr over
granite. The count rate (C, counts/min) of the survey
instruments varied linearly with the radiation exposure
rate (R, uR/hr) of the ionization chamber; a typical
calibration curve had the equation R = 7.0 x 10"*C 4-
3.3. Radiation exposure rates at measurement locations
near Oyster Creek not affected by the plume were
computed by applying these calibration curves to the
observed count rates.
Despite the dependence of the counting efficiency
of NaI(Tl) detectors on the energy distribution of the
gamma-ray flux, the calibration curves have been
found applicable in a variety of natural radiation
backgrounds. In numerous measurements, the
standard error of the survey meters was ± 0.35 uR/hr,
and the exposure values computed from the readings
were within 4 percent of the values measured with the
ionization chamber in 95 percent of the
measurements.^
For measurements under the plume, where the
gamma-ray energy distribution differed greatly from
natural background, the portable instruments were
calibrated by comparing their count rates with
measurements by the muscle-equivalent ionization
chamber. Again, the count rate was found to vary
linearly with radiation exposure rate, although the
relationship was different than for natural background.
During the fifth field trip, a pressurized ionization
chamber (PIC)(W) was tested in comparison with the
muscle-equivalent ionization chamber. The PIC
consists of a high-pressure, argon-filled steel chamber,
an electrometer, a recorder and a power supply. The
instrument was calibrated with a radium standard to
convert readings to uR/hr.
6.2.2 Concentration measurements. Gaseous
samples were obtained with an air compressor (27-V
DC Cornelius model 32-R-300) connected to a 34-liter
low-pressure gas bottle rated to contain 0.9 m1 at
maximum pressure. Each cylinder was filled with
about 0.4 mj air. The pump was powered by an 115-V
AC motor generator with output converted to 27 V DC
by a full-wave rectifier.
For 1MXe analysis, sampled air was released at the
laboratory from the tank at a rate of 6 liters/min for
16.7 min. It was passed through beds of Linde 13X
molecular sieve and Ascarite for removal of water
vapor and CO2, then through a 1-cm-dia x 80-cm
copper cooling coil, and finally through a 3.2-cm-dia x
66-cm copper U-tube containing 180 g of Columbia
6GC (10-20 mesh) charcoal. Both tubes were
immersed in a -76" C dry-ice-acetone refrigerant bath.
The charcoal under these conditions collected all '"Xe
from one m3 or less of air.
After passage of 100 liters, the U-tube was opened
and the charcoal transferred to 10-cm-dia, 450-cc
plastic containers. The charcoal was allowed to warm
up for one hour to room temperature to eliminate
pressure build-up. The container was then sealed with a
rubber gasket and a bolted lid. Thirty-five percent of
the UJXe on the charcoal is lost due to warming. The
charcoal was analyzed for 1000 min with a 10- x 10-cm
NaI(Tl) gamma-ray detector connected to a 200-
channel spectrometer. The analyzer was calibrated
with a U3Xe radioactivity standard from the National
Bureau of Standards.
The remainder of the air sample was analyzed for
"Kr, adding 1.86-hr ""Kr to determine the krypton
yield. Krypton was separated and purified by cryogenic
fractionation.(7/>The fraction was transferred to 25-cc
bottles containing 15 cc of 1-mm-dia plastic scintillator
spheres for analysis by a liquid scintillation counter.
Radioactive particles were sampled by pumping air
at the rate of 1,5 mVmin through a glass fiber filter
(Mine Safety Appliances type 1106, 20 x 26 cm) with
conventional high-volume air samplers. The filters
were counted within approximately 30 min with
Nalfjl) gamma-ray spectrometers* to detect short-
lived "Rb and IMCs, the progeny of the short-lived
radioactive noble gas fission products, "Kr and 1MCs,
respectively.
Gaseous radioiodines were sampled by pumping air
through a 96-g bed of activated charcoal (MSA
•We thank Messrs. David McCurdy, N.J. Department of Environmental Protection, and Harold Beck,
HASL.AEC, for counting these samples.
Ill
-------
cartridge type 2306) mounted with holding rings and a
gasket on a high-volume air sampler. Also, to sample
gaseous radioiodine, glass fiber filters impregnated
with sodium thiosulfate were placed behind the filter
for particle sampling. Organic species of iodine were
sampled with 96-g cartridges of Kl-impregnated
charcoal (MSA charcoal type 85851). The media were
analyzed with Nal(Tl) or Ge(Li) detectors and gamma-
ray spectrometers for periods of 100 or 1000 min.
6.2.3 Description of tests. Five sets of tests were
conducted in the environs of Oyster Creek from
January 1972 to April 1973. Most measurements were
made at ground level within 5 km of the stack.
Radiation exposure and airborne concentrations were
frequently determined simultaneously. For air
sampling, slightly unstable to neutral atmospheric
conditions were selected since the plume was likely to
be at ground level at relatively short distances.
Test locations, atmospheric conditions and types of
measurements and samples obtained are summarized
in Table 6.1. Sampling locations of tests 1 through 4 are
indicated on Figure 6.1 and, of the fifth test, on Figure
6.11. Wind directions and speeds at the top of the stack
are from the station meteorological tower. Independent
observations of wind direction were also made by a
meteorologist by releasing balloons. Atmospheric
stability conditions frequently had to be determined by
the meteorologist on the basis of professional judgment,
because some meteorological tower data —
particularly temperature differences as a function of
elevation—were found to be in error. *
After 0900 hrs on January 18, 1972, the
atmosphere was initially slightly unstable, changing to
neutral, marked by a decrease in wind speed and a shift
in wind direction. The intent of the test Ib during the
evening of that day .was to measure the plume under
very stable (inversion) conditions with the plume aloft.
This condition had not been reached, however, at the
time of measurement. Test Ic was undertaken in the
morning of January 19 under cloud cover with
somewhat changeable winds and occasional light rain.
The stack radioactivity release rate was 3.6x10* uCi/s
on both days.
The weather during test 2a on April 11, 1972, was
overcast with low, thick clouds. The wind speed
decreased gradually during sampling and heavy rain
began at 0935 hrs. During test 2b, the sky was partly
cloudy with fluctuating wind direction. The stack
radioactivity release rate at this time was 7.8 x 104
uCi/s.
On August 22 and 23, 1972, the plume was
measured on several occasions to test the muscle-
equivalent ionization chamber and Keithley
electrometer and to determine exposure levels on the
highway in front of the station when the plume was
moving both overhead and away. During this time the
surface wind due to the pressure gradient was generally
from the south, but the presence of the ocean nearby
produced east winds from the ocean during the day,
and west winds toward the ocean at night. The days
were sunny and hot. In the morning of August 23, the
direction trace at 122 m was steady until 0810 and
shifted from then on, indicating less stable air. The
early morning was foggy. The release rate of noble gas
fission products was reported by the station to be 1.4 x
104uCi/s.
During the December 1972 trip, gas and participate
samples were collected in the plume; radiation was
measured on and off the reactor site with a NaI(Tl)
detector and a spectrometer, NaI(Tl) survey meters,
and a muscle-equivalent ionization chamber. The on-
site measurements provided data on radiation being
emitted from station buildings. The Ludlum survey
meters with NaI(Tl) detectors were a new type, tested
in the field for the first time. The stack radioactivity
release rate during the period was 4.0 x 10* uCi/s. The
skies were cloudy on December 12 with the
temperature rising slowly throughout the day.
December 13 was cloudy and windy. The temperature
continued to rise until noon, then began falling after the
winds shifted due to a passing cold front. Skies were
mostly cloudy with weak sunshine during midday of
December 14. The winds were regularly shifting
between NNE and ENE. After 1240 hrs, the general
wind direction was northerly with continuous shifting.
The purposes of the April 1973 trip were 1) to
compare response from a high-pressure ionization
chamber with a muscle-equivalent ionization chamber
while in the plume at ground level, and 2) to attempt to
measure the radiation field of the plume by mounting a
muscle-equivalent ionization chamber in a helicopter
and making traverses at various distances from the
stack. The latter was conducted on the afternoon of
April 3 (test 5c) and the morning of April 4 (test 5d).
The stack radioactivity release rate during the period
was 1.39 x 10' uCi/s. The morning of April 3 was sunny
* We thank Messrs. P. Humphrey, O. DeMarrais, and R. Fankhauser, Division of Meteorology, EPA,
NERC-RTP. for participating in the field trips and undertaking the meteorological analyses.
112
-------
Table 6.1 Conditions for Radiation Dose Measurements of Stack Effluent in the Environment
Test
No.
la
Ib
1C
2a
2b
3a
3b
3c
4a
4b
4c
4d
5a
5b
5c
5d
Date
Jan.
Jan.
Jan.
Apr.
Apr.
Aug.
Aug.
Aug.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Dec.
Apr.
Apr.
Apr.
Apr.
18, 1972
18, 1972
19, 1972
11, 1972
11, 1972
22, 1972
23, 1972
23, 1972
12, 1972
13, 1972
13, 1972
14, 1972
3, 1973
3, 1973
3, 1973
4, 1973
Sampling point
azimuth,
Period, hrs deg.
0930-1030
2000-2100
0845-1015
0900-0930ff
1500-1615
1730-1900
0700-0800
0820-0910
1400-1630
0950-1215
1540-1735
1130-1340
0930-1000
1000-1200
1515-1545
0815-1030
72
35
60
0
135
22-127
22-127
85
22-127
270
127
239
100
100
100
285
Distance
from
stack, km
2.4
2.1
1.7
2.4
1.6
0.4-0.8
0.4-0.8
0.35
0.4-0.8
0.2-0.4
0.6
3.9
1.5
1.5
1.5,10
0.8-34
Atmospheric
stability
class*
D
E
D
D
D
D
E-F
D-E
D-E
D
D
D
C
D
D,D-C
D
Mean wind
direction,** Mean speed,**
deg. m/s
255
235
260
180
180
180
260
260
80
250
300
50
280
275
210-290
85-105
5.6
10.6
8.8
6.0
8.4
5.0
5.2
2.4
4.6
10.0
11.0
5.3
7.4
7.3
6.2
4.5-9.8
Types of
measurement"1"
R,P
R,P
R.G.P
R,P,I
R.G.I
R
R
R
R
R,S
R.S
R,G,P,I
R,G,I
R.I
R
R
tt.
Pasquill-Gifford atmospheric stability classification: A - extremely unstable D - neutral
B - moderately unstable E - slightly stable
C - slightly unstable F - moderately stable
*
Measured at the 122-m elevation on the meteorological tower.
Code: G - gas sampling; I - radioiodine sampling; P - particle sampling; R - radiation exposure; S - gamma-ray spectrometry.
No meteorological observations after 0930.
-------
Ft 0
m 0
1000 2000 30OO
500 1000
Figure 6.1 Sampling locations for environmental radiation measurements.
114
-------
with westerly winds. Clouds began developing after
0930 hours. An hour later, the sky was overcast, with
intermittent breaks. Light rain occurred after 1130.
Cloudiness slowly diminished during the afternoon so
that by 1530 hours cloud coverage was less than SO
percent. On the morning of April 4, a storm system
approaching from the southwest caused
eastsoutheasterly winds that changed slowly to
easterly. The sky remained overcast after 0800 hours
and neutral conditions persisted. Light rain started at
1030 hours.
6.2.4 Estimated atmospheric dispersion.
Atmospheric dispersion along the plume centerline at
ground-level downwind sampling locations was
estimated by the Pasquill-Gifford model. (12) The
dispersion equation and coefficient values for the
various sampling tests are given in Appendix E.4. The
vertical and horizontal plume dispersion values apply
to the atmospheric stability class judged to be
prevailing. The model was derived for open and level
terrain and for 10-min sampling intervals.
Measurements were adjusted to account for plume
meander when sampling periods exceeded 10 mm. (12)
Plume rise estimates based on the techniques of
Briggsf/J) were computed by the USEPA Meteorology
Laboratory for various ambient air temperatures,
stability classes and wind speeds. (14) Xenon-133 test
data, dispersion values indicated by measured "3Xe
concentrations or predicted by the model, and exposure
rates from plume radioactivity are given in Table 6.2.
Exposure rates, discussed in Section 6.2.6, represent
the mean of 10-min measurements with the muscle-
equivalent ionization chamber during the 1MXe
sampling periods.
6.2.5 Air sampling results. Xenon-133 was
observed in most samples of air analyzed for
radioactive gases as shown in Table 6.2. No other
gaseous radionuclides with half-lives of less than 5 days
were measured because either the interval between
sampling and laboratory analysis was too long or stack
emission rates lead to unmeasurable ambient
concentrations. Krypton-85 was detected only in one
sample (test 2b); it could not be measured at other
times because of relatively low emission rates or
insufficient sample quantities for analysis.
Atmospheric dispersion (X/Q) values were
obtained by dividing measured 1MXe concentrations in
ground-level air by the IMXe stack release rate (see
Section 3.3.6). The values agreed within a factor of two
with values for the plume centerline calculated by the
Pasquill-Gifford technique only in test 5a. Although
this sampling interval was the shortest, it occurred
when the release rate was relatively high, which may
have aided in defining the optimum sampling location.
Other measured X/Q values exceeded predicted levels
based on neutral (category D) atmospheric stability by
factors ranging from 3 to 32. Using an alternative
atmospheric condition (slightly unstable, category C),
predicted X/Q values become 8.1 x 10"' s/m1 for tests
Ic and 9.6 x 10'7 s/m3 for test 2b. Measured values then
agree closely for test Ic and within a factor of 3 for test
2b.
No l33Xe was detected in test 4d although the
predicted X/Q value exceeds by a factor of 4 that given
by the minimum detectable concentration level. The
relatively low average radiation exposure rate of 2.8
uR/hr indicates that the air sampler may have been
located frequently on the fringe of the plume, where the
l33Xe concentration is lowest.
The measured ground-level "Kr concentration
during test 2b was 2.8 ± 0.1 x 10"* uCi/m3 when the
stack release rate was 9.4 iiCi/s, as measured the
previous day. The resulting measured X/Q value is 340
and 30 times greater than levels predicted for category
D and C stabilities, respectively. A possible explanation
for these large discrepancies may be a significant
increase in the stack release rate during sampling.
The progeny of "Kr and IMXe plume constituents,
17.8-min MRb and 32.2-min IJICs, respectively, were
observed on a glass fiber particulate filter exposed
during all of test Ic. On this occasion, the New Jersey
State mobile laboratory with a NaI(Tl) gamma-ray
spectrometry system provided analysis immediately
after sampling. A sample volume of 133 m3 of air was
obtained from 0857 to 1014 hrs and the filter was
analyzed for 30 min. Krypton-88 and "*Xe were being
discharged at 4630 and 1840 uCi/s, respectively,
according to measurements by the AEC Health and
Safety Laboratory. f/5> Estimated ambient levels of the
progeny were based on ingrowth beginning after
passage through the off-gas holdup line filters and a 3-
min interval to reach the sampling location ("Kb and
1MCs levels were corrected for decay that occurred
during samling and analysis). The effective release rates
(Q) were computed to be 510 uCi/s of "Rb and 115
uCi/s of IMCs. Measured ambient concentrations were
2,000 ± 400 pCi/m1 of "Rb and 150 ± 20 pCi/m* of
lliCs. Using the predicted dispersion value of 1.1 x KT7
s/m3 (see Table 6.2), ambient concentrations were
expected to be 57 pCi/m1 of "Rb and 13 pCi/m1 of
I3*Cs, which are 35 and 12 times less than the measured
values. As with IMXe, use of the alternative dispersion
value of 8.1 x WT s/m' for slightly unstable conditions
leads to predicted concentrations that are factors of 5
and 2 less than measured levels. In addition, as shown
by the radiation exposure rates in Figure 6.4, the plume
115
-------
Table 6.2 Xenon-133 in Environmental Air Samples
Sampling period, hrs
Sample volume, m
Stack release rate, vCi/s
Measured concentration,*
uCi/m3
Atmospheric dispersion
(X/Q), s/ra3
Measured
Predicted
Radiation exposure rate,
wR/hr
led)
0850-0926
0.33
7,900
2.8 +_ 0.2 x 10"3
3.5 x 10"7
1.1 x 10"7
14 +_ 4
Test No.
Icf2)
0929-1014
0.36
7,900
8.7 +_ 0.1 x 10"3
1.1 x 10"6
1.1 x 10"7
24 i 4
2b
1512-1610
0.40
11,200
3.1 +_ 0.1 x 10"2
2.8 x 10"6
8.8 x 10"8
11 ^ 8
4dm
1153-1230
0.22
3,400
<4 x 10~4
<1.2 x 10"7
4.5 x 10"7
3.4 +_ 0,8
4df21
1231-1317
0.40
3,400
<4 x 10"4
< 1.2 x 10"7
4.5 x 10"7
2.3 +_ 1.1
5a
0945-1000
0.084
22,240
2.1 +_ 0.2 x 10"2
9.3 x 10"7
9.3 x 10"7
31 + 20
Normalized to 10-min sampling intervals
Notes:
1. ^values for concentration data indicate analytical error expressed at 2-sigma and for exposure rates represent standard
deviation of 10-min average results.
2.
-------
occurred more frequently near the sampling location
during the latter part of the test. In this event,
measured concentration values would be lower and
approximate the alternative predicted levels. Sampling
for shorter intervals would be necessary for
confirmation.
Particulate or gaseous iodine radionuclides were
never observed in the atmosphere during brief sampling
periods, primarily because the stack release rates lead
to ambient concentrations below analytical sensitivity
levels. For "'I, the minimum detection levels for
various sampling devices and expected concentrations
during each optimum test of a sampling device were as
follows:
Sampling
device
Glass fiber filter
Activated charcoal
Na2S2O3-coated
filter
Kl-impregnated
charcoal
Sample
Test volume
no. m3
Ic
5b
5b
2b
133
119
210
38
MDC,*
uCi/m3
<3.8 x 10""
<2.4 x ID'7
<2.6 x IO-8
<2.4 x ID'7
Expected
cone.,**
uCi/m3
2.4 x
2.0 x
2.0 x
2.2 x
io-8
io-8
10"'
io-8
* Minimum detectable concentration at the 3<7
confidence level.
**Assumes all effluent '"I existed as the species
being sampled.
6.2.6 Exposure rate results. Short-term exposure
rate measurements were used to (1) determine the
location of the plume for more detailed radionuclide
concentration measurements, (2) confirm annual
population dose estimates from calculation models
using radionuclide release rates, meteorological
dispersion models and photon dose equations, (3)
calibrate portable survey meters for use in monitoring
plume exposure rates and (4) to test new exposure rate
measurement equipment.
On January 18 and 19, 1972, the plume from the
stack was measured at the locations described in Table
6.1 and shown on Figure 6.1. The measured radiation
exposure at location la at a total noble gas release rate
of 3.6 x IO4 uCi/s is shown in Figure 6.2. Radiation
exposures during test Ib are shown in Figure 6.3. Test
Ic was undertaken in the morning under cloud cover
with somewhat changeable winds and occasional light
rain. The radiation exposures during the period, shown
in Figure 6.4, show a gradual increase from 9 to 25
uR/hr, with frequent fluctuations due to variations in
wind direction. The bars on Figures 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4
indicate muscle equivalent ionization chamber
measurement periods.
20 _
10 _
Background- 5.0uR/hr
/\
9:40
9-50
IOHO
10 20
lO'OO
Time, hrs
Figure 6.2 Net exposure rate in test 1a, January 18. 1972.
The plume was measured at two locations on April
11, 1972. The net radiation exposure for test 2a was
approximately 9 uR/hr between 0908 and 0936 hours,
and then dropped almost to zero when rain began (see
Figure 6.5). For test 2b, periodic fluctuations in wind
direction are indicated by the variations in radiation
exposure shown in Figure 6.6, in the range 1 to 38
uR/hr.
The plume was measured on August 22 and 23,
1972, under the conditions shown for tests 3a and 3b in
Table 6.1. The measured radiation exposure profiles,
shown in Figure 6.7, are not instantaneous, because of
the time required to traverse the distance of 0.8 km on
the road, but no significant wind shift occurred during
the measurements. On August 22 during test 3a, the
plume was approximately parallel to the road; the
higher value 0.35 km north of the stack is believed to be
due to the spreading of the plume. Note that these are
gross values. Net radiation exposure rates from the
plume would be 4 to 6 uR/hr lower — the typical
natural background rate in this area, which may also
include some direct radiation from the station.
The constancy of the radiation exposure rate under
the stable condition that prevailed in test 3b is
suggested by the values shown in Figure 6.8 for the
period immediately afterward (0820 to 0850), when the
measurement for test 3c was made just east of the stack
on Route 9. During test 3c, the plume crossed the road
at right angles, resulting in a maximum radiation
exposure rate of 10.5 uR/hr at the centerline under
stable conditions, 12.5 uR/hr as the inversion
gradually broke up, and peaking to 24 uR/hr as shown
in Figure 6.8 during the transitory neutral condition.
Results of exposure rate measurements during test
4c with the muscle-equivalent chamber are shown in
Figure 6.9. Measurements made over the same period
117
-------
20 _
Background - 5.3 uR/hr
19-50 20=00 20=10 20=20 2030 20=40
Time, hrs
Figure 6.3 Net exposure rate in test 1b, January 18, 1972.
20=50
2t=00
with the NaI(Tl) survey meters indicate that the survey
meter calibration curve due to exposure to
radionuclides in the plume can be represented by R =
2.8 x 10~* C, where R is the exposure rate above natural
background in uR/hr and C is the survey meter count
rate in counts/min.
Measurements in test 4d were made at distances of
3.9 and 9,0 km from the stack. Exposure rates
measured at the 3.9 km location with the muscle-
equivalent ionization chamber (see Figure 6.10)
indicate that the exposure rate measured by the survey
meter due to radionuclides in the plume can be
represented by R = 3.5 x 1CT* C. This relationship was
found to hold above the natural background exposure
rate of 4.1 uR/hr at that location. The average
exposure rate above background during the sampling
period was found to be 2.5 ± 1.7 uR/hr. The
measurements made at a location 9 km from the stack,
approximately 30 min later, yielded a net exposure rate
of 2.3 ± 0.8 uR/hr.
During test 5b, plume radiation measurements
were made simultaneously at distances of 1.5 and 10
km east of the stack, at the locations shown in Figure
6.11 (see Section 6.3.2). At the 1.5-km distance,
continuous readings were obtained with the muscle-
equivalent ionization chamber, and the values were
.20 _
a:
a
3 10
o
a
x
UJ
Background - 5.1 uR/hr
* I
\ I
\ I
\ I
\l
8=50
9:20
9'00 9= 10
Time, hrs
Figure 6.4 Net exposure rate in test 1c, January 19, 1972.
9=30
9:40
118
-------
12 _
10 _
8 _
6_
£
I
2_
Background-4.9 pR/hr
9=00
9--IO
9-30
9-20
Time, hrs
Figure 6.5 Net exposure rate in test 2a, April 11, 1972.
9'40
119
-------
4O_
i
§20
10 .
Background - 5.1 yR/hr
I5-OO
I5'2O
16 00
16-20
Time, hrs
Figure 6.6 Net exposure rate in test 2b, April 11, 1972.
confirmed with a pressurized ionization chamber. Two
survey meters with 5- x 5-cm Nal(Tl) detectors were
calibrated for plume measurements relative to the
muscle-equivalent chamber during part of this time.
The exposure rate measurements at 10 km were
conducted for 11 min in the Island Beach State Park
east of Barnegat Bay with the same meters.
Ground-level measurements during test 5b, and
during the airborne measurements of tests 5c and 5d
(see Section 6.3), were compared to exposure rates
computed by Gamertsfelder's treatment of a finite
cloud, using his Eq. 7.43. (16) Standard deviation values
were selected for either C or D stability conditions. The
plume standard deviations in Figures 3.10 and 3.12 of
Reference 16 were considered to be for approximately
10-min periods. The computed exposure was divided
by the factor 1.4 for the longer period of measurement
on the ground. (12) The plume rise was computed to be
28 m during test 5b. (14) _
The average energy, E, of gamma rays from the gas
was computed to be 0.73 ± 0.03 MeV at 0,4, 10 and 60
min after discharge. The composition of these
radioactive gases at discharge, measured March 28,
1973, was: (17)
9_
8-
I
6_
•S 5_|
o
4_
Plume 3D, August 23, 1972
Plume 3o, August 22, 1972
km 0
0.1
II
'I
c
Location on Route 9
Figure 6.7 Gross exposure rate profile east of Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station during stable
plume conditions.
120
-------
25 _
20..
15 _
1
10 _
5_
820
8-30
840 8*50
Time, hrs
900
9-10
Figure 6.8 Gross exposure rate measurements in plume during change from stable to unstable meteorological
conditions, test 3c, August 23, 1972.
Radionuclide
Stack
effluent
composition
0.071
0.129
0.185
0.161
0.040
0.348
0.060
In addition to gamma rays from these radionuclides,
those from 17.8-min "Rb and 32.2-min 138Cs, formed by
the decay of their radioactive precursors, were included
in computing E. The composition of this mixture
approximated the average observed mixture (see
4.48-hr
76.3 -min
2.8 -hr
5.29-d
15.6 -min
9.15-hr
14.2 -min
""Kr
"Kr
"Kr
113Xe
'""Kr
l"Xe
'"Xe
Section 3.3.1) except that the "Kr value above is 25
percent higher and 13'°Xe is lower by a factor of two.
The average radiation exposure rate above the natural
radiation background was 32 uR/hr during a 144-min
period 1.5 km east of the stack, and 2 uR/hr during an
11-min period 10 km east of the stack (see Table 6.3).
The extensive fluctuation of the exposure rate is
indicated by the 1-min averages at the 1.5-km location
shown in Figure 6.12. Instantaneous values, those
recorded at the instrument response time of 10 s,
ranged from 2 to 162 uR/hr, and 10-min averages from
7 to 63 uR/hr. No difference is apparent in Figure 6.12
between the values before 1000 hours, when the sky
was becoming cloudy (unstable, class C) and after 1000
hours, when the sky was overcast (neutral, class D).
121
-------
QC
16.
14.
12-
10.
£ 8-
I
M
o
6.
4.
2_
15=40
16=00
16=20
16=40
I7=OO
17=20
Time, hrs
Figure 6.9 Net exposure rate in test 4c, December 13, 1972.
1=20
Background-4.1 pR/hr
11=40
12^40
(2=00 I2=2O
Time, hrs
Figure 6.10 Net exposure rate in test 4d, December 14. 1972.
I3<00
13=20
122
-------
Oyster Creek
Nuclear generating
Station
Atlantic
Ocean
Figure 6.11 Locations of ground and aerial plume measurements, April 3 and 4, 1973.
Table 6.3 Radiation Exposure Rates from Plume at Ground-Level on April 3, 1973, uR/hr
Measured value
Location
1.5 km E
10 km E
Time
0945-1000
1000-1152
1157-1208
Average
31
32
2
Maximum
162
160
6
Computed
94
72
20
value*
(C)
(D)
(D)
Pasquill-Gifford stability class in parentheses; computed value at 1.5 km E
for 1000-1152 hours has been divided by 1.4 to correct for long (2-hr)
measurement period.
123
-------
130-r
120
MO
100--
90--
80--
f. 70-j-
x
(T
T 60-
-------
6.2.1). The test was intended (a) to observe the
fluctuations of exposure rates on the ground, (b) to
compare measurements in the air and on the ground,
and (c) to obtain exposure-rate gradients of the plume
at several elevations and distances.
6.3.2 Procedure. Radiation exposure rates were
measured at the eight locations listed in Table 6.4 and
shown in the area and detailed maps of Figure 6.11.
The muscle-equivalent chamber was placed in a
Sikorsky HH3F helicopter almost directly beneath the
rotor and engine. One staff member operated the
instrument and recorded the time and all information
relayed from the cockpit concerning location and
altitude. Another staff member, in the cockpit, directed
the flight pattern according to the study plan and
radiation readings observed with a survey meter. The
helicopter flew at an average speed of 33 m/s (65
knots). It approached within 0.8-km of the stack at an
elevation of 270 m, circled to locate the plume, then
traversed the plume at successively lower elevations at
30-m intervals. The helicopter then flew away from the
stack, within the plume, to the next selected traverse
distance. These distances, and angles at which exposure
rates were at maximum, were established from a
computer in the helicopter, supplemented with visual
location of landmarks. When, after passing through the
plume, the exposure readings had returned to
background values, the helicopter turned and flew 30-
m higher to make the next traverse in the opposite
direction. In a few instances, a traverse was repeated.
The muscle-equivalent chamber readings were
corrected for the 10-s response time of the system. Most
of the delay was due to the ion collection time in the
chamber. Numerical integration with experimentally
observed rise-time curves of the system showed, for
example, that a radiation exposure rate profile in the
shape of a normal distribution curve with a standard
deviation of 3 s would result in an observed profile with
the same area, but lagging by 2 s. The observed peak
value would be 0.82 of the actual, and the observed
standard deviation would be 3.6 s. This example was
typical of profiles found 0.8-1.9 km from the stack. At
greater distances, the time in the plume was longer, and
the correction was correspondingly less.
The indicated direction of the maximum reading
during each traverse was corrected for the above-
mentioned time lag in instrument response. Reversed
flight directions on alternate traverses minimized any
consistent directional error. These corrected values
showed plume directions consistently at 100° and 285*.
Meteorological data for computing the diffusion of
radionuclides from the stack, and the resulting
radiation exposure rates, were obtained from the
station's meteorological tower at several elevations to
122 m and from the observations of a participating
meteorologist. The meteorological data are
summarized in Table 6.1 and discussed in Section 6.2.3.
Radiation exposure rates from the plume were
computed by Gamertsfelder's treatment of a finite
cloud(7#(see Section 6.2.6). For the very brief periods
of measurement by helicopter, standard deviations for
puffs computed according to Table 4.23 in Reference
16 were also used. The wind speeds applied in the
calculations were from meteorological-tower data for
Table 6.4 Aerial Measurement Locations
Date and time
Direction
from stack
Distance
from stack, km
Altitude above
sea level, m
April 3, 1973:
1526-1532
1543-1547
April 4, 1973:
0813-0831
0836-0854
0858-0916
0933-0948
0957-1017
1023-1031
East (100°)
West (285°)
1.5
10
0.8
1.9
3.2
8
20
34
120-210
120-210
120-300
120-270
120-270
120-270
120-270
210-360
125
-------
the measurement periods, as given in Table 6.1. The
vertical distance from the plume centerline to the
measurement location was taken to be zero at the
highest radiation-exposure rates in the helicopter, and
140 m from plume to ground. The plume rise was
computed to be 28 m above the 112-m stack.
6.3.3 Description of plume. Profiles in the vertical
plane of the radiation exposure rates measured on April
4 at distances between 0.8 and 34 km from the stack are
shown in Figure 6.13 and summarized in Table 6.5 for
peak value and standard deviation at the elevation of
maximum exposure. Many of the plumes near the
stack, for which traverses required less than 10 s,
resemble normal distribution curves; others show
irregularities indicating that the plume moved. Plume
motion is also seen in the irregularities of maximum
values during traverses at successive elevations. The
altitudes of maximum exposures at 1.9-20 km
distances are consistent with the combined stack height
plus plume rise of 140 m, but at 0.8 km the plume
centerline appeared to be approximately at the 112-m
stack height. The maximum exposure rates and plume
dimensions were the same at distances of 0.8 km and
1.9 km, then decreased with distance by approximately
log uR/hr = 2.3 - log km
to 34 km.
The measured maximum exposure rates were
considerably lower at all distances than the values
computed for a finite cloud (see Table 6.5) with
standard deviation values for either plume or puff at
the appropriate class D stability. The two sets of
computed values and the measured values appear to
converge at a distance greater than 34 km, presumably
because the plume becomes large and the transit times
long. The standard deviations of the computed
radiation exposure — inferred in Figure 7.12 of
Reference 16 to be somewhat larger than the standard
deviations of the concentration at the four nearby
locations and equal at the two distant ones — are
approximately the same as the value for the measured
profiles (see Table 6.5 and Figure 6.13) between 1.9 and
20 km. The computed value is less at 0.8 km and more
at 34 km.
6.3.4 Comparison of airborne and ground-level
measurements Radiation exposure rates measured
from the helicopter in the plume at the two locations to
the east of the stack (see Table 6.6) and those on the
ground (see Table 6.3) are not directly comparable
because the helicopter was available in the afternoon
but not during the morning. However, conditions were
similar for wind direction, wind speed and atmospheric
stability during the two measurement periods.
The indicated maximum exposure rate was
observed near an altitude of 150 m; centerline values at
altitudes of 120, 270, and 300 m were approximately
half as great. Qualitatively, the maximum exposure
rates measured from the helicopter were expected to be
higher than the ground-level maxima, but this was not
the case. The values measured in air may have been
lower due to:
(a) a larger plume in the afternoon, under the
somewhat unstable atmospheric conditions;
(b) radiation shielding by the helicopter,
particularly by the engine and fuel tanks;
(c) maximum in the vertical plume profile located
between successive traverses; and
(d) disturbance of plume by the helicopter rotor.
The computed values in Table 6.6 show the
considerable influence of the assumed stability
condition: the plume values for class C are
approximately 1.5 times the measured values, while
those for D are three to eight times as high. Calculation
of exposure rates for "puff" dimensions (Reference 15,
p. 175, Table 4.23) is believed to be more applicable
than "plume" exposures because the passage of the
Table 6.5 Radiation Exposure Rates at Centerline of Plume West of Plant
Distance
from
stack, km
0.8
1.9
3.2
8
20
34
Computed
exposure (
rate, pR/hr
Plume
650 (D)
270 (D)
140(D)
39 (D)
13(D)
5(D)
Puff
1500 (D)
590 (D)
300 (D)
100 (D)
35 (D)
11(D)
4ax. exposure
rate, uR/hr
110
110
47
25
9.5
4.5
Measured values
Height above ground
at max. exposure, m
-------
Distance from Stack 0.8 Km
Ground Elevation 6-9m
Distance from Stock 1.9km
Ground Elevation 6-9m
Altitude (m)
Distance from Stock 3.2 km
Ground Elevation 9-12m
Altitude (m)
5OO 0 50O
Distance from Maximum (m.)
5OO 0
Distance from Maximum
500
(m.)
500 O
Distance from Maximum (mj
Distance from Stack 6km
Ground Elevation 3O-35m
270 —
22.5 —
18.0 —
Distance from Stack 20km
Ground Elevation 49-90m
13.5 — K - I3.S
9.0— g — 90
4.5— — 4.S
O — —0
500
Distance from Maximum (m.)
Altitude
-------
Table 6.6 Radiation Exposure Rates at Centerline of Plume East of Plant
Distance Compi
from expo;
stack, km rate,
1.5
10
Plume
180(C)
430 (D)
10 (C)
50(D)
uted Measured values
sure Max. exposure Height above ground
uR/hr rate, yR/hr at max. exposure, m
Puff
210(B) 130 150
880 (D)
12 (B) 6 120-180
120(D)
Horizontal standard
dev. of profile, m
180
280
helicopter through the cloud took seconds rather than
the 10- to 15-min period for which the plume
dimensions are usually computed (Reference 11, p. 6)
but the puff values differed even more from the
measured ones.
6.3.5 Conclusions. This initial test indicates some of
the advantages in using a helicopter to measure
radiation exposure rates due to BWR stack release:
(a) Capability of flying as low as 100 m above
ground over unpopulated areas yields plume
rise, indicated by a maximum in radiation
exposure as a function of height.
(b) Maneuverability for obtaining many
measurements in a brief period can define the
plume in terms of exposure rate gradients. In
140 minutes, the described plume was
traversed at six altitudes at each of the six
locations between 0.8 and 34 km distant from
the stack.
(c) Measurements of radiation exposure gradients
— plume profiles — in all three dimensions
could provide a more detailed description of
atmospheric stability than the factors now
used for this purpose. Applied to research,
these measurements can provide fundamental
definitions of stability conditions; applied to
evaluating radiological models, such
measurements can better define conditions if
the topography is complex and can yield more
precise calculations if it is simple.
(d) The helicopter shares with the airplane the
capability of following the radioactive plume
to relatively great distances, where the plume
could not be so definitely measured, or even
identified, from the ground.
In future tests, measurements at ground level and
from the helicopter should be performed
simultaneously to permit direct comparisons.
Measurements obtained at twice the vertical centerline,
i.e., the reflections in air of ground-based values, should
be of particular interest for comparing airborne and
ground-based exposure rates.
Artifacts that may affect the airborne
measurements should be identified. It will be desirable
to shorten the ionization chamber response time by
increasing the applied voltage, and to calculate and
measure the radiation attenuation at the detector due to
the helicopter.
The observations indicate that the radioactive
plume could be detected beyond 34 km at the indicated
release rate and meteorological conditions. With more
numerous measurements, the rise of the plume and its
vertical and horizontal spreading should be readily
definable as a function of local topography and
atmospheric stability. Availability of a more
appropriate model for computing exposure rates would
be desirable. To match the measurements, the model
should be revised to define the plume for periods of 0.2
to 2 min in terms of radiation exposure rate.
6.4 Direct Gamma-ray Radiation from
the Station.
Gamma-ray radiation being emitted directly from
buildings at the Oyster Creek station was measured
during several field trips. Measurements were made
with NaI(Tl) portable survey instruments, described in
6.2.1, supplemented by measurements with the muscle-
equivalent ionization chamber with a Keithley
electrometer. During one trip, measurements were
made to compare results of the muscle-equivalent
chamber with Shonka electrometer and a pressurized
ionization chamber operated by staff of the ABC
Health and Safety Laboratory (HASL).
Gamma exposure rate measurements were made
with the survey meter on October 6,1971, along a line
beginning outside the northeast corner of the plant
security fence and progressing northeasterly toward the
Route 9 highway bridge over the intake canal.
Exposure rates shown in Table 6.7 were found to
128
-------
Table 6.7 External Radiation Exposure Rates On-Site
Distance,*
km
0.18 NNE
0.23 NNE
0.29 NNE
0.35 NNE
0.43 NNE
0.70 NNE
0.45 E
Total exposure rate
on October 6, 1971, uR/hr**
18.4
10.0
7.7
7.6
7.5
6.0
6. It
Distance from center of radwaste building.
Natural background exposure rate in this area is
approximately 4.3 yR/hr.
Measured on December 12, 1972.
decrease with distance from the radwaste building. An
attempt was made to evaluate exposure rates off-site by
extrapolating from the higher values measured on-site.
The distance of each measurement location from the
center of the radwaste building appeared to be the
critical parameter in correlating the exposure and
distance measurements. It is possible that direct
radiation from the stack may also contribute to the
measured exposure. However, due to the close
proximity of the stack to the radwaste building the
relationship between distance and exposure rate would
not change. The values of exposure rate, above the
natural background radioactivity of 4.3 iiR/hr,
measured on-site were found to fit the equation:
R = 0.9D'Jexp(-4D)
where R is the net radiation exposure rate (background
subtracted) in uR/hr and D is the distance in
kilometers from the center of the radwaste building.
The constant of 0.9 was obtained from the net exposure
rates found on-site by a least squares evaluation of the
data. The exponential constant of 4 accounts for the
attenuation of the gamma-ray radiation in air. From
this relationship the exposure rate at the nearest
residence, 1.1 km north of the plant, is estimated to be
0.08 mR/yr. A similar relationship between exposure
rate from direct gamma-ray radiation and distance
from the waste storage tanks was found at the Haddam
Neck station.^ In that study the constant was found
to be 1.4 instead of 0.9. This difference is probably due
to different gamma-ray energies in the wastes and
different shielding at the two stations. The contribution
of "N to the exposure rates is not considered to be
significant at the Oyster Creek measurement locations.
Measurements by HASL indicate that elevated
exposure rates due to "N are to be found west of the
turbine centerline;^; "N gamma-rays were shielded
by the reactor building at the locations studied in the
preceding measurements.
On October 6 and October 19, 1971, exposure rate
measurements were made along the west and north
boundaries of the site, using the NaI(Tl) survey meter.
Exposure rates were found to range from 4.4 to 6.0
uR/hr at the time of the survey. Variations appear to be
due to natural variability in soil radioactivity — the
rates measured beside the Garden State Parkway,
which forms the west site boundary, were highest —
and are not attributed to station operations.
Several comparisons between the muscle-
equivalent ionization chamber and the HASL
pressurized ionization chamber were made on January
18, 1972, as shown in Table 6.8. The third and fourth
measurements show good agreement for natural
radiation backgrounds at slightly different levels. The
first two are on-site measurements that, according to
HASL staff, (22) include direct radiation with a
relatively low-energy component from stored waste in
the first case, and the very strong gamma rays (6.1 and
7.1 MeV) of 7.1-s "N in the turbines in the second case.
The greatest difference is 15 percent.
Exposure rates were measured with the muscle-
equivalent ionization chamber along the east plant site
boundary on Route 9 when the plume was blowing to
the west on December 12, 1972. The results of these
measurements are shown on Figure 6.14, where it can
be seen that exposure rates above the natural
background level of 4.3 uR/hr were measured opposite
the plant. The highest net exposure rate (about 1.8
uR/hr above background) was found at the location
nearest the stack and the radwaste building. Estimation
of the dose due to sources in or near the radwaste
building at the nearest location on Route 9 given by the
equation above leads to an estimated dose of 1.7 uR/hr
above background, comparable to the net measured
exposure rate of about 1.8 uR/hr. The average net
exposure rate above background attributable to direct
radiation from the plant along Route 9 is estimated
from this survey to be 0.8 yR/hr between the bridges
over the intake and discharge canals. An individual
driving at 64 km/hr (40 mph) over this distance would
be exposed to 0.012 uR per passage. Assuming 5000
cars per day with an average 1.5 persons per car leads
to an annual population dose of 0.034 man-rem.
Measurements were made on-site to the west of the
plant, in areas expected to be primarily exposed to
high-energy gamma rays from "N in the turbine, on
December 13, 1972. The total exposure rate at a
location near the meteorological tower, about 340 m
129
-------
Table 6.8 Comparison Between lonization Chamber Measurements, uR/hr
1.
2.
3.
4.
Location
N.E. corner of security area, on-site
S.W. of plant, on site (HASL-B)
2.7 km SSE of plant
7.1 km N of plant
MEIC*
81.1
21. S
5.3
6.1
PIC**
87.2
25.0
5.5
6.2
Muscle-equivalent ionization chamber.
k
Pressurized ionization chamber; measurements performed by HASL.
6.
w 5.
•C
V
= 4.
«T
o '-I
I
I
(£
S
•S
I
a:
A.
Location on Route 9
Figure 6.14 Gross exposure rate profile east of Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, December 12, 1972.
west of the turbine building, was measured to be 8.7
uR/hr. The total exposure rate 180 m from the turbine
building, near the switchyard, was found to be 21.1
uR/hr. These values agree well with those determined
by HASL staff between August 1971 and January 1972
using pressurized ionization chambers and a NaI(Tl)
gamma-ray spectrometer system/.?/,) A gamma-ray
spectrum obtained with a NaI(Tl) detector during this
measurement is shown in Figure 6.15.
6.5Long-term Radiation Exposure
Measurements
6.5.1 Measurements. Long-term exposure
measurements were obtained in the vicinity of the
station with thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD).
Measurements were made during the periods of
September 29 to November 30, 1971, March 14 to June
15, 1972, and April 17 to July 2, 1973. Two to six
dosimeters were placed at each of the locations shown
on Figures 6.16 and 6.18. Monitoring sites were
selected to surround the station as much as possible.
Some of these sites (101, 108 and 109) coincided with
TLD stations established by HASL. Background
values at each site were obtained when the station was
not operating and operational values while the station
was operating.
The TLD system, manufactured by EG&G, utilizes
the model TL-3B reader'and model TL-15 bulb-type
dosimeters. The dosimeter is a hot-pressed CaF2:Mn
cylinder bonded to a heater element contained in an
evacuated glass tube. The bulb is enclosed in an
aluminum-lead-tin shield to eliminate detector over-
response to gamma rays below approximately 100 keV.
It detects gamma rays with energies above 60 keV.
Calibration factors and internal background for each
dosimeter were determined in the laboratory. (23)
The dosimeters used during the first two sets of
measurements had not been fully evaluated in the
laboratory. As discussed later, these measurements
indicated that more laboratory testing of the
dosimeters was necessary before environmental
130
-------
10
10
3
o
o
.o
10s
10
20 40 60 60 100
Channel (~4O kev /channel)
120
140
teo
180
Figure 6.15 Gamma-ray spectrum of 16N direct radiation from turbine building, measured
0.2 km west of building.
Detector: 10-xlO-cm Nal(TI)
Count: Dec. 13, 1972, 40 min (background not subtracted).
measurements could be performed with confidence and
that dosimeters with lower internal self-dosing
characteristics were desired. Improvements in
dosimeter design led to the use of the dosimeters
discussed below for the third measurement period.
Calibration factors for converting arbitrary
dosimeter units to exposure in mR were determined by
exposing each dosimeter eight times to 5 mR to 10 mR
gamma-ray radiation from a 2 mCi radium-226
standard and reading the dosimeters 24 hours later.
The mean calibration factors of the 94 dosimeters
varied from 0.20 to 0.27 mR/reader unit. The average
standard deviation (1 o-) was 1.8 percent. This
represents the reproducibility of reading these
dosimeters at typical environmental radiation levels
under laboratory conditions.
131
-------
Studies of dosimeter fading indicated that most
occurs within 5 hours of exposure. Between 5 hours
and 24 hours the fade is about one percent with no
measurable fade after 24 hours. Therefore, no fading
correction is necessary for environmental monitoring
where the dose is accumulated over 2 to 4 weeks.
The internal background (self-dosing) of the
dosimeters, from radioactivity in their component
materials, was determined by placing annealed
dosimeters for 160 hours in a shield with 15-cm-thick
steel walls. The natural background exposure rate in
the shield was measured with a muscle-equivalent
ionization chamber to be 2.0 uR/hr. The internal
background of each dosimeter was determined in 5 to
10 measurements by subtracting the natural
background from the dosimeter reading. The average
internal background for the 94 dosimeters of the type
used in the last set of measurements was 1.98 ± 0.09
uR/hr (average of the standard deviations of the
individual dosimeters).
A minimum detectable level can be defined as three
times the standard deviation associated with the
background measurement. As an example, assume that
the dosimeter was placed in the field for a 1-month
monitoring period. At the end of the 720 hours, the
dosimeter would have accumulated 1.43 ± 0.06 mR
from internal background alone. Therefore, the
minimum detectable exposure for a 1-month
monitoring period is calculated to be three times 0.06
mR or 0.18 mR for a single dosimeter. For multiple
dosimeters, the minimum detectable exposure would be
less. Thus, a typical natural background radiation
exposure level of 6 mR/month can be readily measured
with TLD's. However, there is greater uncertainty in
determining an increase above the natural background
because the latter fluctuates by several uR/hr. The
minimum detectable increase above natural
background radiation exposure contributed by a
nuclear power station which can be measured by TLD
is typically 1 uR/hr if some of these fluctuations can be
quantified. (24)
For field measurements, the TLD reader was
located in an EPA laboratory at Edison, N. J., during
the first two periods and in Forked River, N. J., during
the third period, so that the dosimeters could be read
within 6 hours after collection and returned
immediately to their monitoring locations. This
procedure minimized any unknown exposures
occurring during transportation over long distances to
and from the laboratory. The maximum error in the
results due to the dosimeters not being on location
during transportation and readout is estimated to be
equivalent to 0.1 uR/hr. Values obtained from the two
to six dosimeters at a given location were averaged. In
five instances results were lost because dosimeters were
missing from the measurement location.
During dosimeter placement and retrieval, the
external radiation exposure rate at the location was
measured with the 5- x 5-cm NaI(Tl) survey meters.
The mean la values for these measurements was ±0.3
uR/hr. In a previous study, (3) readings with
adequately calibrated survey meters corresponded
closely to the TLD results except for time-dependent
differences, since the survey meter gives an
instantaneous value whereas the TLD integrates the
exposure over several weeks.
To facilitate analysis, TLD measurements have
been divided into two groups — eight periods during
September 29, 1971 to June 15, 1972 and two periods
during April 17 to July 2, 1973. For the first group of
measurements, the plant was operating during a part of
the third period and during the fourth and fifth periods.
The TLD reader and dosimeters were provided by the
EPA Eastern Environmental Radiation Facility.
Dosimeters were placed in 20-cm x 45-cm clear plastic
bags and attached 2 m above ground to trees or poles at
the selected sites. After three measurement periods, the
dosimeters were returned to the laboratory for testing,
and later replaced at the measurement locations for an
additional five periods. On November 18 and 19, 1971,
measurements were made simultaneously with the
muscle-equivalent ionization chamber at four of the
TLD locations.
A new batch of dosimeters that had relatively low
self-dosing characteristics was placed around the
station from April 17 to June 4, 1973, while the plant
was not operating and from June 4 to July 2, 1973,
while the plant was operating in a normal manner.
These dosimeters were placed in 7.5-cm x 10-cm clear
plastic bags which made them less conspicuous and
reduced theft.
6.5.2 Results. Measurements during the first group
of eight periods were made at the locations shown on
Figure 6.16. Measurements at location 102 were
discontinued due to frequent theft. Measurements at
location 112 were discontinued when residential
development began.
Results of the first group of measurements are
shown in Table 6.9. The environmental exposure rate
was found to vary between 5.0 and 9.6 jiR/hr.'The
natural background is relatively low in the area,
undoubtedly because of the sandy soil, and increases
gradually with increasing distance from the seashore.
The TLD values appear to be reasonably consistent
with the survey meter readings and the few ionization
chamber readings.
132
-------
IOOO
Figure 6.16 Locations of TLD measurements. Sept. 29. 1971 to June 15, 1972.
133
-------
Table 6.9 Long-Term Exposure Rate Measurements, uR/hr (September 29, 1971 to June 15, 1972)
9/29-10/18/711
Location
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
TLD
5.6 +_ 0.1
7.1 i 0.1
5.1 +_ 0.2
6.5 +_ 1.1
6.7 +_ 0.2
5.2 i 0.4
5.6 +_ 0.4
5.3 +_ 0.8
6.3
6.5 +_ 0.2
5.1 +. 0.5
Survey
meter
5.0
7.1
5.5
5.2
6.6
5.7
5.9
5.8
6.0
5.8
5.4
10/18.19-11/11/711
TLD
5.
7.
6.
3
1
1
6.1
7.
5.
5.
6.
7.
7.
7.
5.
3
3
4
0
2
5
4
9
4/5-20/723
101
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
113
114
115
TLD
6.5 +_ 0.0
6.2 +_ 0.2
6.2 +_ 0.0
9.6 +_ 0.1
6.8 +_ 0.3
5.7 +_ 0.1
6.3 +_ 0.0
6.9 +. 0.2
6.5 *_ 0.2
7.0 *_ 0.1
6.0 +_ 0.0
7.6 +_ 0.1
8.6 + 0.3
Survey
meter
6.0
6.0
5.0
10.8
8.1*
5.6
5.7
6.7
6.3
5.9
5.9
7.3
21.9*
+_ 0.2
+_ 0.2
+. 0.1
+_ 0.3
+_ 0.5
*_ 0.3
*_ 0.1
+_ 0.3
i 0.1
+_ 0.4
+_ 0.0
Survey
meter
5.0
7.1
5.4
4.9
6.6
5.5
5.3
5.5
6,9
5.7
5.8
5.2
4/21-5/8/721
TLD
6.
6.
6.
7
3
2
+_ 0.3
+_ 0.1
*_ 0.2
lost
5.
5.
5.
6.
6.
6.
5.
7.
7.
7
0
9
6
8
4
6
3
9
*_ 0.1
+_ 0.1
+_ 0.0
+_ 0.1
*_ 0.2
*. 0.1
+. 0.3
*_ 0.5
+ 0.5
Survey
meter
5.0
5.1
4.6
6.8
5.5
5.0
5.7
7.4
5.7
5.7
5.3
5.9
7.0
11/12-30/712
TLD
5.5 _* 0.3
lost
6.1 *_ 0.5
5.8 +_ 0.2
7.7 *_ 0.2
6.5 *. 0.2
6.3 *_ 0.1
6.7 *_ 0.0
7.8 +_ 0.2
6.8 _+ 0.1
7.0 ^0.1
6.4 +. 0.0
Survey
meter
5.1
7.0
6.2*
5.2
7.0
5.6
5.7
5.8
7.1
5.9
6.0
5.3
11/18, 19/712
Shonka
6
5
5
7.5 9
5.3 7
5
5.3 6
6.1 6
6
6
5
6
8
S/9-31/721
TLD
5.8 +_ 0.2
5.4 +_ 0.2
5.7 i 0.2
6.3 +_ 0.2
5.2 +_ 0.3
5.1 +_ 0.0
5.9 +. 0.1
6.6 +_ 0.5
6.3 +. 0.1
6.0 +_ 0.1
lost
5.7 +_ 0.4
6.2 +_ 0.4
Survey
meter
5.3
5.6
4.6
7.0
5.6
5.2
5.7
6.6
5.8
5.9
5.4
6.4
7.2
5
5
5
5
5
6
5
5
6
3/14-4/4/723
TLD
.6
.4 +_ 0.2
.4 +_ 0.1
.6 +_ 0.2
.4 +_ 0.3
.9 +_ 0.0
.1 +_ 0.0
.4 +_ 0.1
.1 +_ 0.0
.3 *_ 0.1
.4 +_ 0.2
.2 +_ 0.6
.0 i 0.4
Survey
meter
5.1
5.3
4.9
8.6
8.1*
6.8*
5.5
6.7
5.8
5.8
5.3
6.5
9.0
6/1-15/721
TLD
.0 +_ 0.1
,4 +_ 0.1
.8 +_ 0.1
.1 1 0.0
.1 +_ 0.2
.3 +. 0.5
lost
lost
.6 1 0.4
.6 +_ 0.5
.2 +_ 0.7
Survey
meter
4.6
4.8
6.9
5.7
5.0
5.7
7.1
5.8
5.9
5.5
6.4
6.8
In plume at time of measurement.
1 Plant not operating.
Plant operation variable.
3 Plant operating .
Note: + values are la.
Exposure rates measured while the station was
operating and when it was not operating were averaged.
The difference between the two averages represents
exposure due to station operation in the absence of
significant changes in the natural radiation
background.
Radiation exposure rates during station operation
were estimated (Table 6.10) using the method of
Burke. (25) This assumes that the exposure rate due to
the plume of radioactive gases from the stack varies
inversely with distance from the stack, weighted by the
wind direction frequency from data reported by the
station operator for the period most nearly coinciding
with the period of interest (in this case, March and
April 1972).(2<9The values obtained from the model
were then normalized to correspond to the measured
values. Although the measured net values are not
statistically significant at the Iff level, except for two
134
-------
Table 6.10 Comparison of Operating vs. Shutdown Period Exposure Rates, uR/hr
(September 29, 1971 to June 15, 1972)
Distance from
Location Stack (km) Plant Operating
101
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
113
114
115
2.5 NNE
1.7 ENE
3.8 ENE
0.6 S
1.2 ESE
2.4 ESE
2.7 SSE
7.1 N
2.6 WSW
2.0 WNW
7.9 NE
1.0 NNE
0.5 E
6.1 +_
5.8 *_
5.8 +_
9.5 +_
7.1 +_
5.8 +_
6.2 +_
6.6 +_
6.3 +_
6.6 +_
5.7 +_
6.9 +_
8.3 +_
0.1
0.6
O.S
0.3
0.5
0.1
0.1
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.7
0.6
Plant Not
Operating^
5.5 +_
5.8 +_
5.8 +
6.6 +_
5.3 +_
5.2 +_
5.8 +_
6.8 +_
6.8 +
6.6 +_
5.6 +_
6.1 +_
6.8 +_
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.7
0.6
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.6
0.4
1.0
1.1
Net
Plant
+0.
0.
0.
+2.
+1.
+ 0.
+0.
-0.
-0.
+0.
+0.
+ 0.
+1.
Due To
Operation
6 +_ 0
0^0
0 +_ 0
9 +_ 0
8 +_ 0
6 +_ 0
4 + 0
2 + 0
5 + 0
.6
.7
.6
.&
.1
.4
.5
.7
.6
0 +_ 0.7
1 +_ 0
8 +_ 1
5 +_ 1
.6
.2
.3
Estimated
Exposure Rate
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
2
.5
.6
.4
.9
.7
.4
.0
.1
.4
.6
.2
.2
.0
Note: + values are la.
1
2
Measurements
obtained during March
14 to April 20,
1972.
^ «v« 11 i m i
: i ->i ~«^
1 T..«A
71 i mo
locations, the set of all measured and estimated values
are highly correlated, as shown in Figure 6.17. The line
of best fit drawn for the 13 points has a correlation
coefficient of 0.94.
3.0_
-1.0
Estimated Exposure Rate, pR/hr
Figure 6.17 Comparison of measured and estimated
exposure rates. March 14 to April 20, 1972.
Locations for the second group of measurements
are shown on Figure 6.18. Most of these locations are
the same as, or very near, the locations used earlier.
Results of these measurements are shown in Table 6.11.
The environmental exposure rates ranged from 4.3 to
6.5 uR/hr. The TLD values were again relatively
consistent with the survey meter readings at the time of
collection. Net exposure rates attributed to plant
operation were found to be positive in 15 of 16 cases
and in 8 cases were found to be statistically significant
at the 2
-------
Figure 6.18 Locations of TLD measurements. April 17 to July 2. 1973.
136
-------
Table 6.11 Long-Term Exposure Rate Measurements, pR/hr (April 17 to July 2, 1973)
Location
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
Distance
from
stack, km
7.9
2.5
2.2
1.0
1.7
3.8
1.5
0.5
0.6
1.2
2.4
2.7
2.6
2.0
7.1
3.8
NE
NNE
N
NNE
ENE
ENE
E
E
S
ESE
ESE
SSE
wsw
WNW
N
NNW
4/17-6/4/73
Plant not operating
Survey
meter
4.6
5.0
4.2
5.7
4.7
4.1
4.6
8.6
7.5
5.0
4.5
4.9
4.9
4.6
6.1
7.9
TLD
4.S i 0.3
4.S +_ 0.2
4.3 +. 0.1
4.8 *_ 0.5
4.5 *_ 0.0
4.4 i 0.2
4.3 +_ 0.2
4.5 +_ 0.4
5.4 +_ 0.2
4.6 +_ 0.0
4.4 +_ 0.2
4.6 +_ 0.3
4.9 +_ 0.1
4.5 +_ 0.4
5.0 +_ 0.4
6.4 ^ 0.1
Survey
meter
4.9
4.9
4.6
5.9
5.0
4.5
5.1
6.8
6.6
4.7
4.6
5.1
5.1
5.0
6.6
8.0
4.
4.
4.
5.
4.
4.
4.
6.
5.
4.
4.
4.
5.
4.
5.
6.
6/4-7/2/73
Plant operating
TLD
6 +_ 0.5
9 +_ 0.4
8 ^ 0.1
5 +_ 0.2
9 +_ 0.3
6 +_ 0.4
6 +_ 0.3
5 ^ 0.2
2 ^ 0.3
S *_ 0.1
S +_ 0.2
8 +_ 0.4
7 + 0.4
9 +_ 0.4
7 + 0.5
7 + 0.0
Survey
meter
5.0
5.1
6.1
5.2
5.5
5.2
7.1
8.4*
5.9
6.9
5.1
5.9
5.3
7.4
8.4
Net due to
plant
operation
0.1
0.4
0.5
0.7
0.4
0.2
0.3
2.0
-0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
0.8
0.4
0.7
0.3
+ 0.6
+_ 0.4
1 O-1
+_ 0.5
*_ 0.3
+_ 0.4
+_ 0.4
+_ 0.4
+_ 0.4
1 0.1
^ 0.3
*_ 0.5
+_ 0.4
+_ 0.6
+_ 0.6
+_ 0.1
Estimated
exposure
rate
0.1
0.3
0.2
0.7
0.5
0.2
0.6
1.7
0.6
0.8
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.1
0.2
In plume at time of measurement.
Note: + values are 2o.
3.0_,
1
3
i
Q 0_
-1.0.
Flags indicate 2CT
Note- X's indicate outlying points
neglected in determining
solid line.
I I
1.0 2.0
Estimated Exposure Rate,
I
3.0
Figure 6.19 Comparison of measured and estimated
exposure rates, April 17 to July 2, 1973.
6.6 References
\. Jersey Central Power and Light Co., "Oyster
Creek Nuclear Generating Station - Environmental
Report," Amend. No. 2, Morristown, N. J. (1972).
2. Directorate of Licensing, U.S. Atomic Energy
Commission, "Final Environmental Statement Related
to Operation of Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating
Station," AEC Docket No. 50-219 (1974).
3. Kahn, B., et al., "Radiological Surveillance
Studies at a Boiling Water Nuclear Power Reactor,"
U.S. Public Health Service Rept. BRH/DER 70-1
(1970).
4. Kahn, B., et al, "Radiological Surveillance
Studies at a Pressurized Water Nuclear Power
Reactor," EPA Rept. RD 71-1 (1971).
5. Kahn, B., et al., "Radiological Surveillance
Study at the Haddam Neck PWR Nuclear Power
Station," EPA Rept. EPA-520/3-74-007 (1974).
6. McCurdy, D. E. and J. J. Russo,
"Environmental Radiation Surveillance of the Oyster
Creek Nuclear Generating Station," New Jersey State
Department of Environmental Protection Rept. (1973).
7. Kastner, J., J. Rose and F. Shonka, "Muscle-
Equivalent Environmental Radiation Meter of
Extreme Sensitivity," Science 140, 1100(1963).
137
-------
8. Gustafson, P. F., J. Kastner and J.
Luetzelschwab, "Environmental Measurements of
Dose Rates," Science 145,951-954 (1964).
9. Levin, S. G., R. K. Stems, E. Kuerze and W.
Huskisson, "Summary of National Environmental
Gamma Radiation Using a Calibrated Portable
Scintillation Counter," Radiol. Health Data Rept. 9,
679(1968).
10. DeCampo, J. A., H. L. Beck and P. D. Raft,
"High Pressure Argon lonization Chamber Systems
for the Measurement of Environmental Exposure
Rates," AEC Rept. HASL-260 (1972).
11. Stevenson, D. L. and F. B. Johns, "Separation
Techniques for the Determination of "Kr in the
Environment," in Rapid Methods for Measuring
Radioactivity in the Environment, IAEA, Vienna,
157-162(1971).
12. Turner, D. B., "Workbook of Atmospheric
Dispersion Estimates," USEPA Rept. AP-26 (1970).
13. Briggs, G. A., Plume Rise, U.S. Atomic
Energy Commission Critical Review Series (1969).
14. Fankhauser, R., U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, personal communication, April
1973.
15. Beck, H., et al., U.S. Atomic Energy
Commission, personal communication, July 1972.
16. Slade, D. H., ed., "Meteorology and Atomic
Energy 1968," USAEC Rept. TID-24190 (1968).
17. Beck, H., U.S. Atomic Energy Commission,
personal communication, April 16,1973.
18. Andrews, V. E. and T. R. Horton, "Humboldt
Bay Nuclear Power Plant Survey, March through May,
1971," USEPA Rept. WERLV-1 (1972).
19. EG&G, Inc., "Dresden Nuclear Power
Station, July 1970," EGG-1183-1545 (1972).
20. Golden, J. C. and R. A. Pavlick,
"Measurements of Radioactivity in Process Systems of
Dresden Station Units 1 and 2 and in the Environment,
January-February, 1971," abstract, Health Physics 25,
308 (1972); Commonwealth Edison Co., Rept. 21
(1973).
21. Lowder, W. M., "Environmental Gamma
Radiation from Nitrogen-16 Decay in the Turbines of a
Large Boiling Water Reactor," USAEC Rept. HASL-
271 (1973).
22. Beck, H., U.S. Atomic Energy Commission,
personal communication, Feb. 15,1972.
23. Partridge, J. E., et al., "Suitability of Glass-
Encapsulated CaF2:Mn Thermoluminescent Dosime-
ters for Environmental Radiation Surveillance," U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Rept. ORP/EEF
73-1 (June 1973).
24. Gross, K. C., E. J. McNamara and W. L.
Brinck, "Factors Affecting the Use of CaF2:Mn
Thermoluminescent Dosimeters for Low-Level
Environmental Radiation Monitoring," to be
published.
25. Burke, G. deP., "Thermoluminescent Dosim-
eter Measurements of Perturbations of the Natural
Radiation Environment," in The Natural Radiation
Environment II, ERDA Rept. CONF-720805-P1
(1972).
26. Jersey Central Power & Light Co., "Oyster
Creek Nuclear Generating Station Semi-Annual
Report," No. 6, January 1,1972 to June 30,1972.
27. Jersey Central Power & Light Co., "Oyster
Creek Nuclear Generating Station Semi-Annual
Report," No. 8, January 1,1973 to June 30,1973.
28. Burke, G. deP., "Variations in Natural
Environmental Gamma Radiation and its Effect on the
Interpretability of TLD Measurements Made Near
Nuclear Facilities," USERDA Rept. HASL-289
(1975).
138
-------
7. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
7.1 Radionuclides in Effluents from the
Oyster Creek Station
Radionuclides were discharged by numerous
pathways in small amounts relative to effluent limits.
The most abundant constituents among radioactive
effluents were 3H, 61 percent in liquid waste, and the
radioactive noble gases, mostly in airborne wastes. Also
in the liquid wastes, the activation products "Cr, "Mn,
"Fe, MCo and 1MCs and fission-produced "'I, 1MXe,
'"Xe and U7Cs were discharged in relatively large
quantities. These observations appear to be generally
applicable to large BWR nuclear power stations.
Results of effluent measurements in this study are
summarized below, based on the information in
Sections 3 and 4. For simplicity, they are given as
annual releases. Because these values were obtained by
occasional sampling, they should be considered only
indications of the magnitude of radionuclide
discharges. Exact values must be derived from frequent
or continuous measurements at each discharge
location.
The estimated amounts of radionuclides in airborne
effluents during the second half of 1971 through the
first half of 1973 are as follows:
Radionuclides in airborne effluents, Ci/yr
Radionuclide
5H
"N
"C
§J-Kr
""Kr
"Kr
"Kr
"Kr
"Kr
"'I
""Xe
IU-Xe
"3Xe
"""Xe
"'Xe
'"Xe
mXe
Long-lived
particulate**
(1)
Main
condenser
steam jet
air ejector
5.0 x Iff'
5.0 x 10-'
3.0
3.1 x 104*
6.9 x 104
1.1 x 101
1.3 x 10s
1.4 x 10s
0*
1.7
3.7 x 10'*
5.1 x 103
1.6 x 10s
8.8 x 104
3.0 x 10s
2.2
6.0 x 104
NA
(2)
Turbine
gland seal
condenser
<2 x 10J
5 x 10'
5 x 10-3
NA
8.2 x 10'
1.9 x 10-'
2.9 x 10*
1.4 x 101
6.2 x 10'
NA
NA
NA
2.1 x 102
1.2 x 103
4.7 x 10'
1.1 x 10J*
2.0 x 10'
NA
(3)
Building
ventilation
air
2.7 x 10'
NAf
1.2
NA
NA
2.0
NA
NA
2.1 x 101*
5 x Kr1*
NA
NA
1.0 x 103
NA
4.0 x 103
3.6 x 102*
NA
NA
(4)
Reactor
drywell
8 x 10-
NA
9.6 x Iff4
NA
NA
2.8 x lOr1
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
i x icr'
2.2
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
(5)
Stack
2.6 x 10'
NA
9.1
NA
NA
1.7 x Itf
NA
NA
NA
1.7 x 10'
NA
7 x 103
1.2 x 10*
NA
3.5 x 10*
NA '
NA
5.0 x 10'
Calculated value, radionuclide not measured.
"Excluding particulate I3'I.
t NA - not. analyzed.
139
-------
The values for stack discharge in data column 5
reflect radioactivity from individual waste pathways,
columns 1 through 4. Effluent radioactivity from
reactor startup, not included since it was not measured,
is expected to be a minor contributor. The 3H and 14C
values are for all forms of the radionuclides;
distinctions between Initiated water and gases and
between UC in CO2 and other gases are made in Section
3 for most pathways. The amounts of radionuclides in
some waste streams were inferred when their
contributions were expected to be significant. Short-
lived progeny of noble gases, such as "Rb and IMCs, and
relatively short-lived iodine isotopes, such as '"I, '"!,
I14I and USI, were also expected to be present.
Most stack radioactivity resulted from the air
ejectors on the main condensers. Ventilation air
contributed most of the 3H effluent. Much of the I3N
and short-lived noble gases in stack discharge came
from the turbine gland seal condenser.
Airborne effluents are expected to yield a total-
body dose of 2.3 mrem/year to an adult residing where
the highest annual average concentration occurs (see
Section 3.3.10). The closest resident is estimated to
receive 0.39 mrem/year, and a member of the closest
population group, 2.1 mrem/year. (Actual dose would
be lower since residential shielding and occupancy
factors were not considered.) Dose to persons fishing in
the discharge canal 700 hrs per year is expected to be
about 0.1 mrem/year.
The estimated amounts of radionuclides in liquid
effluents during the period from August 1971 to
November 1973 are as follows:
Radionuclides in liquid effluents, Ci/yr
Radionuclide
3H
14C
"P
"Cr
!4Mn
"Fe
"Fe
"Co
"Co
"Cu
"Zn
"As
"Sr
"Sr
"Zr
"Nb
"Mo
1MRu
Waste sample
tank
4 x 10'
8 x 10°
6 x 10J
5 x 10-'
4 x 10''
6 x ID'1
7 x 10J
5 x ID'2
9 x 10-'
1 x 10-'
5 x 10J
5 x lO'2
1 x 10J
1 x 10J
2 x 10J
2 x 10-'
2 x 10-'
1 x 10-'
Laundry drain
tank
1 x 10-'
1 x 10"
2 x 10"
3 x 10J
2 x 10''
4 x 10J
4 x 10J
4 x 1Q-1
5 x ID'2
ND
ND
ND
3 x 10"
3 x 10'5
1 x 10J
2 x 10-'
ND
2 x 10"
""Rh
no. •
Ag
124Sb
131I
'"I
133Xe
15SXe
1J4Cs
137Cs
u'Ba
H1Ce
144Ce
"'Np
5 x 10°
2 x 10'J
9 x 10J
1 x 10-'
5 x 10'1
9 x 10-'
1
2
4
3 x ID'2
4 x ID'2
3 x 10-'
3 x 10-'
ND
ND
7 x lor1
5 x 10'1
ND
ND
ND
2 x 10J
4 x 10-J
9 x 10"
4 x 10"
9 x 10"
ND
Note: ND - not detected
The bulk of the liquid effluent radioactivity was
discharged from the waste sample tanks after treatment
and storage. Only a small quantity, generally less than
5 percent, was discharged directly from the laundry
drain tanks to the discharge canal. For the 17
radionuclides which could be compared with annual
discharges reported by the station operator, agreement
was reasonable except for the relatively low measured
quantities of "'Np, "Sr and '°Sr. Further evidence of
agreement was derived from the ability to predict
radionuclide concentrations in the circulating coolant
canal during discharge from pre-discharge
measurements of the sample test tank contents and
appropriate dilution factors (see Section 4.4).
The results obtained in this study reflect the
operations and conditions at the station during the
study period, October 1971 to November 1973.
According to the station operator, the replacement of
original fuel and improved fuel cladding periormance
since the study period has significantly reduced off-gas
release rates. Further reduction of radioactivity in the
off-gas from the steam condenser air ejectors will be
realized when the plant is fitted with an extended
radwaste treatment system. Radioactivity in liquid
effluents have also been reported by the station
operator to have decreased due to improvements in the
radwaste treatment system.
7.2 Radionuclides in the Aquatic
Environment at the Oyster
Creek Station
Radionuclides from the station were found at low
concentrations in various media sampled in the aquatic
environment:
(1) The following radionuclides discharged by the
station were at concentrations greater than 1
140
-------
pCi/liter in the coolant canal: "Cr, MMn, "Co,
"Mo, '"I, IMCs and U7Cs. In addition, "Co,
"Fe, "Zr, "Nb, I4ICe and 144Ce were detected at
concentrations between 0.1 and 1.0 pCi/liter.
Concentrations of'"Sr in water from Barnegat
Bay and the intake and discharge canals were
generally near background levels. Manganese-
54 and "Co were measured at levels up to 2.2
and 4.0 pCiAHer, respectively, in large water
samples (76-380 liters) collected from the
canals and bay. They were associated mostly
with suspended material. Predicted
radionuclide concentrations in the coolant
canal during discharge agreed usually with
measurements (see Section 5.2).
(2) Radionuclides found in station effluents were
observed in macro-algae and aquatic grasses
collected from all sites in the bay and canals.
The predominant radionuclides were "Mn
(0.2-26 pCiAg) and "Co (0.2-45 pCiAg).
Some samples contained "Cr, "Co, IMRu, I54Cs
and U7Cs in quantities slightly exceeding
background concentrations. Highest
concentrations were observed usually in G.
verrucosa, followed by U. lactuca and C.
fragile. Radionuclide concentrations varied
significantly with season of the year,
presumably resulting from variations in
atmospheric fallout, plant growing periods,
and time of sample collection relative to
discharge. The concentrations of "Mn and
"Co in algae reflected relative amounts
discharged and indicated little uptake from
sediment. Algae proved to be sensitive
indicators for monitoring radionuclides when
water concentrations were below detectable
levels (see Section 5.3).
(3) Manganese-54 (to 34 pCiAg) and "Co (to 54
pCi/kg) were predominant in fish muscle.
Their concentrations generally increased with
greater station discharges and decreased with
distance from the mouth of Oyster Creek.
Small quantities of IS4Cs were detected in fish
that also contained '"Cs above background
levels (see Section 5.4).
(4) Similar concentrations of "Co were detected in
shellfish muscle and fluid, ranging from
120-260 pCi/kg. Almost all "Co in fluid was
associated with protein. Although not
detected in clam muscle, the shells of clams
from Barnegat Bay contained twice as much
"Sr as those from the background area, 190 vs.
105 pCiAg. Barnacles collected from both
canals contained MMn, 5iCo, "Co, "Sr and
U7Cs from the station, and, being fixed in
position, they provide good indicators of
station discharges. Differences in
concentration in barnacles from the discharge
and intake canals indicated that 10 to 15
percent of the station effluent is recirculated.
The radionuclide of highest concentration in
clams was naturally-occurring "*Po, 230 to
500 pCVkg muscle, which is not attributed to
reactor operations. An average 2"Po/2l*Pb
activity ratio of 9 indicated clam food (algae
and plankton) was the probable source of the
2tfPo (see Section 5.5)..
(5) No effluent radionuclides were detected in
crab muscle, gills, gut or stomach, although
the exoskeletons of some from Barnegat Bay
contained more MMn and **Sr than
background samples. Because the exoskeleton
is not eaten and is periodically molted, little
useful information can be obtained from these
analyses (see Section 5.6).
(6) In sediment, "Co was the most widely
distributed radionuclide, ranging from 0.26 to
18.6 pCi/g in the discharge canal to less than
detectable quantities at the extremities of
Barnegat Bay. Some sediment contained "Mn,
114Cs and IS7Cs in excess of background. The
highest "Co concentrations occurred in
sediment from the wide area of the discharge
canal that consisted of clay minerals and
organic matter of low density. Core samples
indicated that MMn and "Co were deposited to
at least 6 cm, and possibly to 12 cm below the
surface. The underwater probe proved to be
useful for locating areas of radioactive buildup
above 0.5 pCi "Co/g (see Section 5.7).
Except for a few elements, the ability to determine
concentration factors (CF) was not possible at Oyster
Creek. Water concentrations were generally
undetectable and, except for barnacles, effluent
concentrations were unuseable due to uncertainty in
the amount of dilution occurring in Barnegat Bay with
its complicated hydrology (see Section 5.1.1). In a few
cases, however, it was possible to estimate CFs for this
site when the concentrations were constant and
measurable. In other cases, the magnitude of published
CPs could be evaluated from measured sample
concentrations and knowledge of station discharges.
CFs derived from this study are:
141
-------
Element or
Fish
Whole
radionuclide Algact Grasses muscle whole Clams barnacles
Fe
Sr
Ca
K
'"Cs
MMn
"Co
5000
0.9
1.4
14
13
ND
ND
6200
1.7
1.9
10
23
ND
ND
700
0.5
1.8
15
30
ND
ND
1850
4
19
11
23
ND
ND
ND*
ND
ND
7
ND
<1000
600
ND
1600**
ND
ND
100
800
1000
* ND - not determined.
••Based on "Sr.
t The average CFs for the three species of algae are given,
but significant species differences were noted for K and
'"Cs.
Published CFs of 100 and 600 for **Co and MMn,
respectively, in fish do not satisfy the observed data.
The CF for MMn is probably too high and may be
nearer the value for "Co. Also, the CF for "Mn in clam
meat was shown to be < 1000 rather than the
published value of 12,000. The difficulties associated
with the utilization of concentration factors are
discussed in detail in Sections 5.4.4, 5.4.5, 5.5.3 and
5.5.4.
The highest population radiation doses from liquid
discharges were computed from the annual average
coolant canal concentrations to be from consuming fish
caught in and near the coolant-water discharge canal.
Fish consumption may result in 6 mrem/yr to bone, 0.9
mrem/yr to the GI tract, 1 mrem/yr to thyroid and 0.3
mrem/yr to the total body. These doses, although
much greater than those based on measured
radionuclide concentrations, are less than 5 percent of
the limit recommended by the Federal Radiation
Council and are almost entirely due to "P, "'I and IUI.
These radionuclides were generally not determined
with sufficient sensitivity or in sufficient samples offish
or clams to confirm the calculations and should,
therefore, be measured (see Section 5.4.5). Naturally-
occurring "*Po is a major contributor to the total clam-
ingestion dose, and, although its content in fish was not
measured, a similar situation may apply to fish. It
would be desirable to determine this radiation
background dose from consuming seafood whenever
the dose due to nuclear operations is evaluated.
7.3 Radionuclides in the Terrestrial
Environment at the Oyster
Creek Station
Gaseous radioactive effluents and direct radiation
from the station were detected in the terrestrial
environment. No samples of milk or food were
obtained since they are not produced near the station in
significant quantities due to poor soil conditions. The
following measurements of radionuclides or radiation
from the station in the environment were made:
(1) By collecting large volumes of air during
routine stack discharge, luXe was measured in
ground-level air at concentrations ranging
from 3 x NT1 to 3 x Ifr* uCi/m1, and "Kr at 3
x \G* uCi/mJ (see Section 6.2.5). Other short-
lived gases would have been detected if
analysis was initiated promptly. The short-
lived progeny of "Kr and l3*Xe were measured
by drawing 133 mj of air through paniculate
filters and immediately analyzing them.
Paniculate or gaseous "'I could not be
detected during brief sampling periods
although large volumes of air were sampled.
(2) Measurements of radioactive gases from the
stack were made near the station with a
muscle-equivalent ionization chamber, a
pressurized ionization chamber and portable
NaI(Tl) survey meters. The plume was readily
detectable above the background radiation
level. Computed radiation exposure rates at a
location 1.5 km from the stack were two to
three times higher than the measured rates
(sec Section 6.2.6).
(3) A muscle-equivalent ionization chamber
mounted in a helicopter was used to measure
radiation exposure rates in the plume of
radioactive gases from the stack. This
technique was shown to be useful in measuring
the rise of the plume and its vertical and
horizontal spreading. Exposure rates
computed with models generally exceeded
measured values (see Section 6.3).
142
-------
(4) Direct radiation from station buildings
measured with survey meters and a muscle-
equivalent ionization chamber along the
station boundary ranged up to 1.8 uR/hr (16
mR/yr) above the background radiation
exposure of approximately 4.3 uR/hr (38
mR/yr). Extrapolation of elevated radiation
exposure rates within the boundary to distant
sites gives a result comparing well with
measurements. The exposure rate at the
nearest residence is estimated to be 0.08
mR/yr. The annual population dose to
persons driving along Rt. 9, the eastern site
boundary, is estimated to be 0.034 man-rem
(see Section 6.4).
(5) Long-term radiation exposures in the station's
environment were measured with
thermoluminescent dosimeters. Measured
levels above the natural radiation background
were correlated with estimated exposures
computed from a model (see Section 6.5).
7.4 Monitoring Procedures
The following procedures were demonstrated in
this study for monitoring effluents and environments of
BWR stations:
(1) analysis by gamma-ray spectrometry with
Ge(Li) detectors of multiple radionuclides in
samples of primary coolant and effluent water
before discharge and dilution, and in off-gas
from reactor coolant and in various airborne
waste pathways;
(2) measurement of effluent radionuclides other
than the long-lived ones readily detected by
gamma-ray spectrometry; of particular
interest, in addition to usually measured 'H
"Sr and "Sr, are I4C, "P and "Fe;
(3) collection of ionic and insoluble radionuclides
in fresh and sea water by concentration from
400-liter volumes for measurements at
concentrations as low as 10~" uCi/ml;
(4) collection and analysis of food samples,
including fish, clams and crabs;
(5) collection and analysis of environmental
media that serve as indicators, including
aquatic grasses, algae, barnacles and sediment;
(6) surveillance of sediment with submersible
gamma-ray detectors to indicate "hot spots"
for detailed sampling and analysis, and the
superiority of sediment sampling by hand
(diver) rather than by dredge;
(7) measurement of JH and MC in several gaseous
species;
(8) use of portable 5- x 5-cm NalfTl) survey
meters as sensitive detectors of the plume from
the stack;
(9) use of muscle-equivalent ionization chamber
and pressurized ionization chamber for
quantifying the radiation exposure rate during
brief periods within or beneath the plume;
(10) use of thermoluminescent dosimeters to
quantify the average long-term radiation
exposure rate from the plume;
(11) use of pressurized ionization chamber, large
15- x 23-cm NaI(Tl) detector and
spectrometer, muscle-equivalent ionization
chamber with Shonka electrometer, and a
portable 5- x 5-cm NaI(Tl) survey meter to
measure direct radiation from the station;
(12) use of helicopter to characterize plume shape
and dispersion;
(13) collection of large volumes of environmental
air and applying separation techniques for
measurement of "*Xe and "Kr at very low
concentrations, (applicable also to short-lived
noble gases);
(14) collection of *Rb and ""Cs in environmental
air on filters with high-volume samplers, and
analysis by gamma-ray spectrometry; and
(15) use of measured release rates at the station,
meteorological data and transfer coefficients
to estimate radionuclide concentrations in
samples for comparison with measured or
minimum detectable values.
In addition, the following procedures were
demonstrated in a previous study for monitoring
environments of BWR stations:
(1) collection and analysis of drinking water and
food samples, including vegetables, milk,
rabbits and deer;
(2) collection of radkriodine from 22.5-liter
volumes of milk on anion-exchange resin, and
analysis by gamma-ray spectrometry; and
(3) use of bovine thyroids to detect UII at very low
concentrations (equivalent to 0.02 pG/liter
milk) in the terrestrial environment
7.5Recommendationsfor
Environmental Surveillance
The fundamental objective of an environmental
surveillance program is to measure radiation dose rates
143
-------
and radionuclide concentrations in the critical
exposure pathways in order to determine radiation
doses to individuals and selected population groups
from operation of a nuclear facility and to determine or
confirm compliance with applicable standards. Other
objectives are to confirm estimated environmental
concentrations based on effluent data, determine any
accumulation of long-lived radionuclides in the plant
environs, and respond to public concerns and inquiries.
The recommendation for radiological surveillance
programs conducted by nuclear generating stations to
meet the above objectives, based on observations in this
study and those at Dresden I BWR, and the Yankee
and Haddam Neck PWR's, is that all radioactive
effluents be analyzed to obtain in detail their
radionuclide content. Environmental radionuclides
and radiation levels attributable to station operation
are generally too variable, obscured by the radiation
background, or near instrumental detection limits to be
measured with sufficient accuracy for evaluating
exposure. The measurements at the source must
include all significant pathways and radionuclides
during the entire period of operation; critical
radionuclides can be missed by monitoring only the
obvious effluents and, as in the case of "P, the easily
measured radionuclides, or by ignoring the effects of
changes in the operating cycle. After all radionuclides
in the effluent have been quantified and all critical
pathways identified, analyses can be limited to the
radionuclides at highest abundance and of greatest
health significance in environmental samples from the
critical pathways. Additional samples for analysis
should include only media that are known or observed
to concentrate radionuclides discharged by the station.
As knowledge of the environment increases and the
pattern of radionuclide discharges is established, fewer
measurements will be needed. However, significant
changes in station operation or radionuclide content of
effluents will require at least a brief return to more
detailed analysis.
The environmental program must be evaluated
periodically to consider modification in response to
changes in effluent radioactivity, new patterns of
population distribution and environmental use, and
increased knowledge of the behavior of radionuclides in
the environment.
Adhering to these recommendations will insure a
radiological surveillance program that will provide the
necessary information to satisfy the above objectives at
a lower cost than many current programs that include
non-pathway type samples or samples that continually
contain either less than measurable quantities or
concentrations indiscernible from the natural radiation
background. Also, the recommended program will
generate on-site transfer coefficients and concentration
factors providing a better and more pertinent basis for
calculating exposures at the site from station effluent
data than most published values.
Environmental measurements at the Oyster Creek
Station were found to be useful in developing the
environmental surveillance recommendations
described above, for supporting and confirming the
population radiation exposures computed from on-site
monitoring, and for providing these computations with
numerical factors applicable to the site. Such
measurements, if performed reliably, can also be
reassuring in demonstrating that no unexpected
radioactivity is in the environment. For a station and
site such as Oyster Creek, the following measurements
provide useful information:
(1) confirmation of critical pathways
a) measure inhalation and external radiation
exposure rates from the plume at off-site
locations,
b) measure direct radiation exposure rates
on site and the decrease of the exposure
rate with distance to off-site locations,
c) measure critical radionuclides in fish,
clams and crabs caught in the intake and
discharge canals and in Barnegat Bay;
(2) determination of numerical factors for
computing radiation doses
a) determine the soluble and insoluble
radionuclide fractions in liquid effluents
and in the discharge canal,
b) confirm or ascertain applicability of
aquatic concentration factors,
c) compute X/Q values by measuring 1MXe
or other radionuclide concentrations in
ground-level air relative to the release
rate at the station;
(3) utilization of environmental concentration loci
a) measure critical radionuclides in marine
grasses, algae and barnacles to determine
the extent of contamination in the aquatic
environment;
(4) assurance that no significant exposure exists
from unforeseen sources or occasional
operational occurrences
a) measure radiation exposure at nearby
habitations, canal banks utilized by
fishermen and beaches in the immediate
area,
b) measure radionuclides in seafood and
water collected from the immediate
vicinity of the station,
144
-------
c) if agricultural practices change in the
vicinity of the station, measure
radionuclides in milk and food products.
7.6 Suggested Future Studies
The following studies at nuclear facilities are
suggested on the basis of the previous four field studies:
1) develop more sensitive technqiues for
measuring radioiodines in various chemical
forms in airborne waste pathways through the
station and in environmental air;
2) develop techniques to measure gaseous
radionuclides, such as M"Kr and 1JI"Xe that
emit only low-energy photons, while being
part of a noble gas mixture;
3) examine the effect of radioactive waste
treatment on discharge practices in order to
evaluate the cost of reducing the radionuclide
content of effluents;
4) characterize the physical-chemical states of
radionuclides in liquid wastes discharged to
the environment and determine changes
occurring after mixing with environmental
waters;
5) measure critical radionuclides in
environmental samples that are difficult to
analyze, such as JIP in Oyster Creek fish, to
confirm hypothetical concentrations based on
station effluent analysis;
6) perform a radiological surveillance study at a
high temperature gas-cooled reactor (HTGR)
similar to previous studies except focus effort
on the gaseous effluents and their impact on
the environment;
7) perform a surveillance study at a multiple
reactor site to determine modeling parameters
for dual stack releases and the existence of a
scaling factor — quantities discharged vs.
power generation; and
8) perform studies to validate atmospheric
dispersion models used in dose assessment at
sites with different meteorological and
topographical characteristics.
These studies will further determine the
environmental impact of nuclear facilities and develop
better environmental surveillance techniques.
145
-------
Appendix A
Acknowledgments
This report presents the work of the staff of the Radiochcmistry and Nuclear Engineering Facility, USEPA,
consisting of the following:
William J. Averett Betty J. Jacobs* Alex Martin
Richard L. Blanchard Bernd Kahn Eleanor R. Martin*
William L. Brinck Jasper W. Kearney Daniel M. Montgomery*
Teresa B. Firestone Harry E. Kolde James B. Moore
George W. Frishkorn* Herman L. Krieger* Richard Sporrer
Gerald L. Gels B. Helen Logan Ethel M. Tivis
Seymour Gold*
•Field and analytical support provided by staff of the Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory,
ORD.
Participation of the following is gratefully acknowledged:
David McCurdy, New Jersey State Department of Environmental Protection, Trenton, NJ
John Feeney, New Jersey State Department of Environmental Protection, Trenton, NJ
Charles Amato, New Jersey State Department of Environmental Protection, Trenton, NJ
Floyd Galpin, Office of Radiation Programs, USEPA, Washington, D.C '
William Lahs, Office of Radiation Programs, USEPA, Washington, D.C
W. Neill Thomasson, Office of Radiation Programs, USEPA, Washington. D.C
Lois Fischler, Office of Radiation Programs, USEPA, Washington, D.C
Chris Nelson, Office of Radiation Programs, USEPA, Washington, D.C
Raymond Johnson, Office of Radiation Programs, USEPA, Washington, D. C
Michael Terpilak, Region II Office, USEPA, New York, NY
Bruce Jorgensen, Region II Office, USEPA, New York, NY
Joseph Cochran, Northeastern Radiological Health Laboratory, USEPA, Winchester, MA
James Hardin, Northeastern Radiological Health Laboratory, USEPA, Winchester, MA
George C. Nicholson, Northeastern Radiological Health Laboratory, USEPA, Winchester, MA
Samuel Windham, Eastern Environmental Radiation Facility, USEPA, Montgomery AL
J. Partridge, Eastern Environmental Radiation Facility, USEPA, Montgomery, AL
Richard Douglas, Western Environmental Radiation Laboratory, USEPA, Las Vegas, NV
Fred Johns, Western Environmental Radiation Laboratory, USEPA, Las Vegas, NV
Harold Beck, Health and Safety Laboratory, AEC, New York, NY
Carl Gogolak, Health and Safety Laboratory, AEC, New York, NY
Peter Raft, Health and Safety Laboratory, AEC, New York, NY
Ernest Karvelis, National Field Investigation Center, USEPA, Cmcinnati, OH
Richard Dewling, Edison Laboratory, USEPA, Edison, NJ
Robert Davis, Edison Laboratory, NJ
Charles Pelletier, AEC, Washington, D.C
Jacob Kastner, AEC, Washington, D.C.
John Sullivan, Jersey Central Power and Light Co., Morristown, NJ
147
-------
Donald Ross, Jersey Central Power and Light Co., Morristown, NJ
Allen Dhams, Cmdr., U.S. Coast Guard, Floyd Bennett Field, Long Island, NY
F. M. Blackburn, Lt. Cmdr., U.S. Coast Guard, Floyd Bennett Field, Long Island, NY
Paul Humphrey, Meteorological Laboratory, USEPA, Research Triangle Park, NC
Gerard DeMarrais, Meteorological Laboratory, USEPA, Research Triangle Park, NC
Robert Fankhauser, Meteorological Laboratory, USEPA, Research Triangle Park, NC
Howard Moneypenny, Meteorological Laboratory, USEPA, Research Triangle Park, NC
We thank David E. McCurdy, State of New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection; Stephen V.
Kaye, Oak Ridge National Laboratory; John T. Collins and Bernard Weiss, Nuclear Regulatory Commission;
Wayne M. Lowder, Health and Safety Laboratory, ERDA; Messrs. E. J. Growney, R. L. Stoudnour and J. T.
Carroll, Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station; and Messrs. Sam T. Windham, Charles R. Porter, Floyd L.
Galpin, Charles Robbins, Paul L. Giardina, James M. Gruhlke, J. W. Phillips, J. Broadway and E. G. Karvelis,
USEPA, for reviewing the report.
148
-------
Appendix B.I
Oyster Creek Average Monthly Power and Reactor Coolant Chenustry Statistics from Semiannual Operating Reports
Period
Jan. 1970
Feb.
March
April
May
June
Jan . -June ' 70 Avg .
July 1970
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
July-Dec. '70 Avg.
Jan. 1971
Feb.
March
April
May
June
Jan. -June '71 Avg.
July 1971
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
July-Dec. '71 Avg.
Period
July 1973
Aug.
Sept.
Oct.
Nov.
Dec.
July-Dec. '73 Avg.
fll
-------
Appendix B.2
Oyster Creek Radioactfre Waste Discharges from Semiannual Operating Reports
Liouid
Volume of
liquid wastes
Period (liters)
May-Dec '69
Jan- June ' 70
July-Dec '70
Jan- June '71
July-Dec '71
Jan- June "72
July-Dec '72
Jan- June "73
July-Dec '73
July '71
Aug. '71
Sept. '71
Oct. '71
Nov. '71
Dec. '71
Jan. '72
Feb. '72
March '72
April '72
May '72
June ' 72
July '72
Aug. '72
Sept. '72
Oct. '72
Nov. '72
Dec. '72
Jan. '73
Feb. '73
March '73
April '73
May '73
June ' 73
July '73
Aug. '73
Sept. '73
Oct. '73
Nov. '73
Dec. '73
3.27 x 10
2.55 x 107
2.67 x 10?
1.46 x 10?
0.94 x 107
0.74 x 107
0.85 x 107
0.58 x 107
0.65 x 107
0.79 x 106
0.85 x 106
0.85 x 106
3.08 X 106
2.74 x 10°
1.14 x 106
1.17 x 106
1.27 x 106
0.98 x 106
0.38 x 106
1.S5 x 106
2.02 x 10°
2.08 x 106
2.55 x 106
1.67 X 106
1.05 X 106
0.44 x 106
0.69 x 106
0.81 X 106
0.77 x 106
.14 x 106
.05 x 106
.79 x 106
.27 x 106
.49 x 106
.38 x 106
.72 x 10*
.26 x 106
0.29 x 106
0.41 x 106
Gross
B.Y
(Ci)
0.48
7.2
11.2
8.81
3.31
0.87
9.16
1.07
3.08
0.12
0.11
0.05
0.41
0.72
1.90
0.08
0.08
0.17
0.03
0.24
0.27
1.23
5.05
2.09
0.63
0.05
0.11
0.19
0.20
0.18
0.23
0.18
0.09
0.99
0.84
0.56
0.36
0.12
0.23
Dissolved
noble gases
{Ci}
1.25
1.21
2.08
1.26
1.71
0.22
0.25
0.20
<0.01
0.31
0.28
0.27
0.35
0.33
0.11
<0.01
0.15
0.52
0.66
0.40
0.25
0.08
0.18
0.07
0.28
0.48
0.37
<0.01
0.05
0.55
0.48
0.28
0.20
0.08
0.13
Tritium
CCi)
5.07
10.35
11.51
9.87
11.59
22.82
38.79
16.99
19.63
0.78
1.02
0.98
3.60
3.55
1.65
1.73
3.11
3.06
0.84
5.06
9.02
10.52
12.33
8.36
5.19
<0.01
2.39
2.38
2.37
3.46
3.06
4.98
0.72
4.68
4.31
5.13
3.86
0.67
0.97
Noble gases
(Ci)
0.70 x 104
4.35 x 104
6.83 x 10*
17.49 x 104
34.15 x 104
60.62 x 104
26.01 x 104
63.16 x 104
18.08 x 104
6.22 x 104
10.66 x 104
6.75 x 104
0
0.86 x 104
9.66 x 104
11.5 x 104
12.78 x 104
16.73 x 10J
18.09 x 104
0.82 x 104
0.70 x 104
2.13 x 104
2.41 x 104
3.34 x 104
4.30 X 104
4.91 x 104
8.41 x 104
5.00 x 104
15.07 x 104
29.02 x 104
12.18 x 104
0
1.89 x 104
3.30 x 10*
5.03 X 104
0.70 x 104
1.66 x 10*
3.12 x 104
4.08 x 104
KflCAAItC
Halogens* Participate*
CCi) CCi)
<0.01
0.13
0.18
0.70
1.33
2.76
3.50
4.90
1.83
0.30
0.28
0.10
0
0.16
0.49
0.42
0.51
0.54
0.71
0.39
0.18
0.30
0.49
0.53
0.77
0.64
0.78
0.93
0.82
1.11
1.44
0.06
0.54
0.49
0.65
0.15
0.21
0.20
0.13
0.08 x 10"2
0.32 x 10-2
0.67 x ID'2
2.11 x 10-2
8.90 x ID'2
8.40 x 10'2
14.60 x 10-2
24.20 x ID"2
18.08 x ID"2
0.7 x 10-2
1.9 x ID'2
1.3 x 10*2
<0.1 x 10-2
1.4 x 10-2
3.5 x 10"2
1.3 x ID"2
1.1 X 10-2
1.9 x 10-2
1.6 x 10"Z
1.4 x ID'2
1.1 x ID'2
1.3 x ID'2
1.2 x 10-2
1.1 x lO'2
1.2 x ID'2
6.4 x 10,
3.4 x 10'2
1.4 x 10-2
12.0 x 10~2
5.0 x ID'2
2.8 X ID"2
0.3 x 10-2
2.7 x ID"2
1.8 x 10"2
3.8 x ID'2
3.6 x ID"2
2.1 x 10-2
4.1 x ID'2
2.7 x ID"2
Tritium
CCi)
0.11
0.24
0.52
0.15
0.17
0.03
0.03
0.02
0
0.01
0.03
0.03
0.06
0.05
0.05
0.00
0.04
0.11
0.12
0.06
0.08
0.06
0.08
0.03
0.03
0.04
0.02
o
0.03
0.07
0.02
0.01
0.02
0.02
0.03
half life >8 days
150
-------
July-Dec. 1971
Jan.-June 1972
July-Dec. 1972
Jan.-June 1973
July-Dec. 1973
1.97 x 10*
4.79 x 104
4
4.42 x 10
9.88 x 10*
6.01 x 10
1.55 x 105
7.17 x 10
4.58 x 104 1.05 x 105 1.40 x 105 1.12 x 10*
3.84 x
9.50 x
1.11 x 102
1.59 x 105
7.20 x 10*
1.86 x 10S
1.16 x 1Q4 3.46 x 104 3.99 x 104 3,11 x 104 3.47 x 104
2.04 x 10H
4.40 x 10
2.57 x 10
4
4.88 x 10
2.89 x 10H
151
-------
Appendix B.4a
Radionuclides Discharged in Liquid Wastes by the
w •» — — —j ••««. ***J »•.%,• ^*»v^.n i-*M^mc;At *JKAm«uug outuUUf 17 fj
Discharged
Nucllde 1/1-6/30.**:!*1
3H
32
P
«A
54Mn
58
Co
60
Co
59
65
3Zn
69
Sr
90
Sr
Ql
91Sr
99
124°
Sb
1
134
137C.
140B«
*3*Np
Vol.
Totll
9.87
NR*
0.080
0.029
0.0070
0.057
0.045
<0.005
0.104
NR
0.026
0.026
NR
0.115
0.0044
0.072
0.116
/La 0.054
NR
of viite* (liter*)
dilution (Uteri)
Cone . in
Oyster Cree
. 1/1-6/30,
> oCi/1
21.0
NR
0.17
0.062
0.015
0.12
0.096
<0.011
0.22
NR
0.055
0.055
NR
0.25
0.010
0.15
0.25
0.12
NR
I,46xl07
4.70X1011
k
July
0.78
NR
0.017
0.001
<0.001
0.003
NR
NR
NR
0.002
ND+
0.038
0.010
ND
0.007
0.005
ND
ND
0.024
0.014
7.91xl05
1.19xlOU
Discharged. Ci<2)
AUK.
1.02
NR
0.040
0.001
<0.001
0.003
NR
NR
NR
0.001
ND
0.018
0.007
ND
0.009
0.010
ND
ND
0.007
0.011
8.52xl05
1.14xlOU
Sept.
0.98
NR
ND
0.002
0.001
0.005
NR
NR
NR
0.007
ND
0.001
0.002
ND
0.026
0.004
ND
ND
ND
0.002
8.44xlOS
8.63xl010
Oct.
3.60
NR
ND
0.054
0.014
0.090
NR
NR
NR
0.135
ND
<0.001
0.002
ND
0.063
<0.001
0.008
0.034
0.005
0.002
3.08xl06
8.59X1010
Nov.
3.55
NR
0.026
0.152
0.038
0.256
NR
NR
NR
0.022
ND
0.003
0.005
0.001
0.018
0.086
0.017
0.041
0.013
0.035
2.74xl06
9.05X1010
Dec.
1.65
NR
0.001
0.192
0.048
0.409
NR
NR
NR
0.072
0.050
0.043
0.049
0.002
0.144
0.182
0.004
0.051
0.057
0.592
Concentrations in Oyster Creek. oCi/liter** C!
July Au». Sent. Oct. N™ n«.
6.55
NR
0.14
0.0084
<0.0084
0.025
NR
NR
NR
0.017
ND
0.32
0.084
ND
0.059
0.042
ND
ND
0.20
0.12
8.95 11.36
NR NR
0.35 ND
0.0088 0.023
<0.0088 0.012
0.026 0.058
NR NR
NR NR
NR NR
0.0088 0.081
ND ND
0.16 0.012
0.061 0.023
ND ND
0.079 0.30
0.088 0.046
ND ND
ND ND
0.061 ND
0.096 0.023
41.91
NR
ND
0.63
0.16
1.05
NR
NR
NR
1.57
ND
<0.012
0.023
ND
0.73
<0.012
0.093
0.40
0.058
0.023
39.23
NR
0.29
1.68
0.42
2.83
NR
NR
NR
0.24
ND
0.033
0.055
0.011
0.20
0.95
0.19
0.45
0.14
0.39
19.30
NR
0.012
2.25
0.56
4.78
NR
NR
NR
0.84
0.58
0.50
0.57
0.023
1.68
2.13
0.047
0.60
0.66
6.92
Average
jncentration
'/1-12/31,
21.22
NR
0.13
0.77
0.19
1.46
NR
NR
NR
0.46
0.10
0.17
0.14
0.006
0.51
0.54
0.055
0.24
0.19
1.26
1.14xl06
8.55xl010
Reported semiannual total*
**No correction for reclrculatlon has betn Included.
+ NR - not reported; ND - not detected.
Note*:
1) Jersey Central Power & Light Company, "Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Report of Operations - January 1, 1971 to June 30, 1971" Semi-Annual
Rept. #4.
2) Jersey Central Fover & Light Company, "Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Report of Operations - July 1, 1971 to December 31, 1971," Semi-Annual
Rept. *5.
-------
Appendix B.4b
Radionuclides Discharged in Liquid Wastes by the Oyster Creek Nuclear
Generating Station, Jan.-June 1972
Discharged. Cl^1'
Nucllde
3H
32P
51Cr
54Mn
58Co
60Co
59F.
65zn
89
90sr
91Sr
99Mo
99-Tc
I248b
131X
133j
l3*Ct
137c.
l*°B«/te
239Np
95Zr-95Nb
Vol. of wactea
(Uteri)
Total dilution
(11 ten)
Jan.
1.73
NR+
ND*
0.017
0.004
0.041
ND
<0.003
0.002
ND
0.006
0.006
ND
0.005
0.003
<0.001
<0.001
ND
ND
ND
1.17x10°
7.46xl010
Feb.
3.11
NR
ND
0.004
0.001
0.012
ND
<0.003
0.002
ND
0.012
0.012
ND
0.021
0.011
0.001
<0.001
ND
ND
ND
1.26xl06
8.86xl010
March
3.06
NR
0.008
0.005
0.001
0.009
ND
<0.002
0.027
ND
0.006
0.006
ND
0.035
0.018
0.020
0.034
ND
ND
ND
9.80xl05
9. 73xl010
Aoril
0.84
NR
0.006
<0.001
<0.001
0.003
ND
<0.001
0.013
ND
0.002
0.002
ND
0.001
<0.001
<0.001
ND
ND
ND
ND
3.82xl05
9.46X1010
May
5.06
NR
0.038
0.028
0.008
0.050
0.020
<0.004
0.052
ND
0.002
0.002
0.002
0.016
ND
0.003
0.003
0.016
ND
<0.001
1.55x10*
8.02xl010
June
9.02
NR
0.001
0.030
0.007
0.053
ND
<0.005
0.066
ND
0.011
0.011
<0.001
0.023
0.037
0.012
0.013
0.002
ND
MD
2.02x10°
8.14xlOl°
Concentration in Oyster Creek, pd/liter*
Jan.
23.19
NR
ND
0.23
0.054
0.55
ND
<0.04
0.027
ND
0.080
0.080
ND
0.067
0.040
<0.013
<0.013
ND
ND
ND
Feb.
35.10
NR
ND
0.045
0.011
0.14
ND
<0.034
0.023
ND
0.14
0.14
ND
0.24
0.12
0.011
<0.011
ND
ND
ND
March
31.45
NR
0.082
0.051
0.010
0.092
ND
<0.021
0.28
ND
0.062
0.062
ND
0.36
0.18
0.21
0.35
ND
ND
ND
April
8.88
NR
0.063
<0.011
<0.011
0.032
ND
<0.011
0.14
ND
0.021
0.021
ND
0.011
<0.011
<0.011
ND
ND
ND
ND
May
63.09
NR
0.47
0.35
0.100
0.62
0.25
<0.050
0.62
ND
0.025
0.025
0.025
0.20
ND
0.037
0.037
0.20
ND
<0.012
June
110.81
NR
0.012
0.37
0.086
0.65
ND
<0.061
0.81
ND
0.14
0.14
0.012
0.28
0.45
0.15
0.16
0.025
ND
ND
Average
Concentration,
pCi/1
45.42
NR
0.10
0.18
0.045
0.35
0.042
<0.036
0.32
ND
0.078
0.078
0.0062
0.19
0.13
0.070
0.093
0.038
ND
<0.002
* No correction for recirculatlon hat been included.
+ NR - not reported; ND - not detected
Note:
1) Jer»ey Central Power & Light Company, "Oyiter Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Report of Operationa - January 1, 1972-June 30, 1972," Semi-Annual
Rept. *6.
-------
Appendix B.4c
Generating Station, July-Dec. 1972
Nucllde
5lCr
5*Mn
58Co
60Co
59F.
"in
JJj
91Sr
"Mo
99"Tc
l24Sb
•131X
13>x
134C.
137C.
l40B«-La
*39Np
Vol. of vaite*
(Uteri)
Total dilution
(Uteri)
July
10.5
0.036
0.041
0.010
0.094
NR+
NR
0.058
ND
0.037
0.037
ND
0.042
0.103
0.292
0.440
0.008
0.031
2.08x10*
1.20xlOn
12.3
0.022
0.193
0.046
0.369
NR
NR
0.002
0.006
0.055
0.039
ND
0.161
0.096
1.376
2.058
0.037
0.589
2.54xl06
1.20xl011
DlacharKed.
Sept.
8.4
ND+
0.252
0.059
0.853
NR
NR
0.002
0.014
0.035
0.035
ND
0.085
0.064
0.285
0.402
ND
0.005
1.67xl06
1.16xlOU
Ci^ ' Concentration In Oyster Creek. pCi/1*
Oct.
5.2
ND
0.046
0.012
0.161
NR
NR
0.001
0.045
0.029
0.029
ND
0.053
0.072
0.059
0.077
<0.001
0.046
l.OSxlO6
l.lfcclO11
Nov.
0.001
MD
0.002
<0.001
0.008
NR
NR
<0.001
ND
0.006
0.006
ND
0.005
0.003
0.004
0.008
<0.001
0.005
4.35xl05
8.80xl010
Dec.
2.4
0.007
0.011
0.003
0.023
NR
NR
0.002
ND
0.014
0.014
ND
0.005
0.006
0.008
0.010
0.002
0.007
6.93xlOS
7.67xl010
July
87.5
0.30
0.34
0.083
0.783
NR
NR
0.483
ND
0.308
0.308
ND
0.350
0.858
2.433
3.67
0.067
0.258
Au«.
102.5
0.18
1.61
0.383
3.075
NR
NR
0.017
0.050
0.458
0.325
ND
1.342
0.800
11.467
17.15
0.308
4.908
Sept.
72.4
ND
2.17
0.509
7.353
NR
NR
0.017
0.121
0.302
0.302
ND
0.733
0.552
2.457
3.47
ND
0.043
Oct.
43.7
ND
0.39
0.101
1.353
NR
NR
0.008
0.378
0.244
0.244
ND
0.445
0.605
0.496
0.65
<0.008
0.387
Nov.
0.011
ND
0.023
<0.011
0.091
NR
NR
<0.011
ND
0.068
0.068
ND
0.057
0.034
0.045
0.091
<0.011
0.057
Dec.
31.3
0.09
0.14
0.039
0.300
NR
NR
0.026
ND
0.182
0.182
ND
0.065
0.078
0.104
0.130
0.026
0.091
Average
Concentration,
oCi/1
56.23
0.10
0.78
0.19
2.16
NR
NR
0.093
0.092
0.26
0.2ft
ND
0.50
0.49
2.83
4.19
0.069
0.96
+HR - not reported; ND - not detected
Note:
1. Jeney Central Power & Light Conpany, "Oyster
Report #7.
Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Report of Operation - July 1, 1972 to December 31, 1972," Semi-Annual
-------
Appendix B.4d
luuuunucuoes uucfurgea in uquia irasies oy me uysier ureen nuciew
Generating Station, Jan.-Jane 1973
Discharged, Cl(1)
Nucllde
3H
51Cr
^Mn
59F.
58CO
6°Co
65Zn
89Sr
90Sr
91Sr
91y
99MO
99-Tc
12*Sb
Ulj
i33x
l«Xe
135X.
134C,
137C,
140Ba-Li
141c.
144Ce
239»p
Vol. of wastes
(liters)
Total dilution
(liters)
Jan.
2.385
ND+
0.028
ND
0.006
0.026
ND
0.002
<0.001
ND
ND
0.010
0.010
ND
0.016
0.006
0.019
0.050
0.020
0.029
0.006
ND
ND
0.033
8.06xl05
7.77xl010
Feb.
2.371
0.003
0.020
ND
0.005
0.041
ND
0.014
0.002
ND
ND
0.015
0.015
ND
0.001
0.002
0.071
0.214
0.005
0.004
0.012
ND
ND
0.060
7.65xl05
7.30xlOl°
March
3.461
0.039
0.001
ND
<0.001
0.004
ND
0.025
0.004
ND
ND
0.034
0.034
ND
0.004
0.004
0.075
0.402
0.004
0.002
0.010
ND
ND
0.014
11.43xl05
7.77X1010
April
3.064
0.054
0.003
<0.001
0.001
0.008
0.001
0.023
0.004
0.001
ND
0.026
0.026
ND
0.032
0.008
0.181
0.193
0.005
0.002
0.024
ND
ND
0.015
10.52xl05
9.08xlOl°
May
4.980
0.026
0.016
ND
0.003
0.024
ND
0.044
0.008
<0.001
ND
0.003
0.002
ND
0.012
<0.001
0.005
ND
0.006
0.006
0.005
0.003
0.015
0.001
17.94xl05
8.77xl010
June
0.724
0.022
0.012
ND
0.002
0.013
ND
0.006
0.001
ND
0.002
0.006
0.006
ND
<0.001
0.001
0.010
0.039
0.001
0.001
0.002
0.001
0.002
0.007
2.69xl05
11.19xlOl°
Jan.
30.70
ND
0.36
ND
0.077
0.34
ND
0.026
0.013
ND
ND
0.13
0.13
ND
0.21
0.077
0.25
0.64
0.26
0.37
0.077
ND
ND
0.43
Concentration In Oyster Creek, pCi/1*
Feb.
32.48
0.041
0.27
ND
0.069
0.56
ND
0.19
0.027
ND
ND
0.21
0.21
ND
0.014
0.027
0.97
2.93
0.069
0.055
0.16
ND
ND
0.82
March
44.54
0.50
0.013
ND
<0.013
0.052
ND
0.32
0.052
ND
ND
0.44
0.44
ND
0.052
0.052
0.97
5.17
0.052
0.026
0.13
ND
ND
0.18
April
33.74
0.60
0.033
<0.011
0.011
0.088
0.011
0.25
0.044
0.011
ND
0.29
0.29
ND
0.35
0.088
1.99
2.13
0.055
0.022
0.26
ND
ND
0.17
May
56.78
0.30
0.18
ND
0.034
0.27
ND
0.50
0.091
<0.011
ND
0.034
0.023
ND
0.14
<0.011
0.057
ND
0.068
0.068
0.057
0.034
0.17
0.011
June
6.47
0.20
0.11
ND
0.018
0.12
ND
0.054
0.009
ND
0.018
0.054
0.054
ND
<0.009
0.009
0.089
0.35
0.009
0.009
0.018
0.009
0.018
0.063
Average
Concentration ,
PCI/1
34.12
0.27
0.16
<0.011
0.036
0.24
<0.011
0.22
0.039
0.003
0.003
0.19
0.19
ND
0.13
0.043
0.72
1.87
0.086
0.092
0.12
0.007
0.031
0.28
*No correction for reclrculatlon hat been included.
+ND - not detected
Note:
1. Jersey Central Power & Light Company, "Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Report of Operations - January 1, 1973 to June 30. 1973," Semi-Annual
Rept. 48.
-------
Appendix B.4e
Radionudides Discharged in Liquid Wastes by the Oyster Creek Nuclear
Generating Station, July-Dec. 1973
Nucllde
3H
51Cr
^Mn
59Fe
58Co
60Co
65Zn
89Sr
9°Sr
91Sr
91y
99Mo
«"TC
124Sb
131t
133I
133X.
I3sx.
134C.
137C.
UOB.-L.
l*lc«
"*c.
239Np
Vol. of wastes
(liters)
Total dilution
(liters)
July
4.676
0.106
0.042
<0.001
0.011
0.045
ND
0.046
0.001
ND
0.008
0.048
0.048
ND
<0.001
0.002
0.141
0.413
0.003
0.002
0.034
ND
ND
0.037
6
1.490x10
11.977xl010
Aug.
4.310
0.079
0.013
0.005
0.004
0.037
ND
0.015
0.003
ND
0.002
0.046
0.046
ND
0.002
0.005
0.116
0.369
0.022
0.031
0.022
ND
ND
0.019
1.379xl06
12.141xl010
Discharged
Sept.
5.130
0.087
0.027
ND+
0.006
0.057
ND
0.004
<0.001
ND
ND
0.020
0.020
ND
0.011
0.010
0.073
0.202
0.011
0.001
0.010
0.001
0.003
0.014
1.720xl06
9.320xl010
. Ci Concentration in Oyster Creek, pCi/1*
Oct.
3.860
0.049
0.008
0.004
0.002
0.011
ND
<0.001
<0.001
ND
0.008
0.018
0.018
ND
0.001
0.005
0.031
0.166
0.003
0.004
0.012
ND
ND
0.015
1.265x10*
11.235xl010
Nov.
0.668
0.012
<0.001
<0.001
<0.001
0.003
ND
<0.001
<0.001
ND
ND
0.007
0.007
ND
ND
ND
0.009
0.067
<0.001
<0.001
0.004
ND
ND
ND
0.288xl06
10.659xl010
Dec.
0.974
0.012
0.001
ND
<0.001
0.003
ND
<0.001
<0.001
ND
ND
0.010
0.010
ND
0.001
0.034
0.023
0.106
0.002
<0.001
0.006
ND
ND
0.018
0.406xl06
11.860xl010
July
39.04
0.89
0.35
<0.008
0.092
0.38
ND
0.38
0.0084
ND
0.067
0.40
0.40
ND
<0.008
0.017
1.18
3.45
0.025
0.017
0.28
ND
ND
0.31
Aug.
35.50
0.65
0.11
0.041
0.033
0.31
ND
0.12
0.025
ND
0.016
0.38
0.38
ND
0.017
0.041
0.96
3.04
0.181
0.255
0.18
ND
ND
0.16
Sept.
55.04
0.93
0.29
ND
0.064
0.61
ND
0.043
<0.011
ND
ND
0.22
0.22
ND
0.118
0.107
0.78
2.17
0.118
0.011
0.11
0.011
0.032
0.15
Oct.
34.35
0.44
0.071
0.036
0.018
0.098
ND
<0.009
<0.009
ND
0.071
0.16
0.16
ND
0.009
0.045
0.28
1.48
0.027
0.035
0.11
ND
ND
0.13
Nov.
6.27
0.11
<0.009
<0.009
<0.009
0.028
ND
<0.009
<0.009
ND
ND
0.07
0.07
ND
ND
ND
0.08
0.63
<0.009
<0.009
0.04
ND
ND
ND
Dec.
8.21
0.10
0.008
ND
<0.008
0.025
ND
<0.008
<0.008
ND
ND
0.08
0.08
ND
0.008
0.287
0.19
0.89
0.017
<0.008
0.05
ND
ND
0.15
Average
Concentration,
oCi/1
29.74
0.52
0.14
0.014
0.036
0.24
ND
0.09
0.009
ND
0.026
0.22
0.22
ND
0.026
0.083
0.58
1.94
0.062
0.055
0.13
0.002
0.005
0.15
*No correction for recirculatlon has been included.
+ ND - not detected
Note:
1. Jersey Central Power & Light Company, "Oyster
Report #9.
Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Report of Operations - July 1, 1973 to December 31, 1973," Semi-Annual
-------
Appendix C.1
Calculated Generation Rate of Fission Products in Fuel at 1930 MWt Power
Fission
Product
3H
83mKr
85m|(r
85]
-------
Appendix D.I
Radionuclide t
13
10.0 -min N
4.4 -hr 85mKr
10.76-yr 85Kr
76.4 -min 87Kr
2.8 -hr 88Kr
8.05-d 131I
2.26-d 133mXe
5.27-d 133Xe
15.6 -min 135mXe
9.16-hr 135Xe**
14.2 -min 138Xe
Gross radioactivity
release rate,
WCi/s
Plant report
HASL measurement
^oncenn
•aaons 01 tcarnoacnre i
Ejectors after Pa
j*s enioenn rrom main uonoenser steam jei AIT
ssage Through 75-minute Delay Line
Concentration, uCi/cc
lug. 31, 1971
NM
9.1 x 10"2
NM
2.0 x 10"1
1.5 x 10"1
NM
1.1 x 10"2
3.0 x 10"1
1.1 x 10"1
3.8 x 10"1
7.0 x 10"2
3.6 x 104
6.1 x 104
Jan. 18-20, 1972
-A
4 x 10
5.6 x 10"2
9 x 10"5
1.2 x 10"1
1.1 x 10"1
2.5 x 10"6
2.9 x 10"3
1.8 x 1Q"1
3.1 x 10"2
2.7 x 10"1
4.0 x 10"2
4.7 x 104
3.6 x 104
Feb. 29, 1972
NM
5.8 x 10"2
1 x 10"4
1.0 x 10"1
1.0 x 10"1
4.0 x 10"6
2.5 x 10"3
1.8 x 10"1
2.7 x 10"2
2.6 x 10"1
4.7 x 10"2
No data
3.5 x 104
Apr. 10-12, 1972
NM
7.6 x 10"2
4 X 10"5
1.4 x 10"1
1.3 x 10"1
4.0 x 10"6
4.5 x 10"3
2.5 x 10"1
3.5 x 10"1
NM
NM
7.8 x 104
-4.5 x 104
Mar. 28, 1973
NM
1.9 x 10"1
5.1 x 10"4
3.6 x 10"1
5.2 x 10~l
7.6 x 10"8
1.8 x 10"2
4.5 x 10"1
1.1 x 10"1
9.7 x 10"1
1.7 x 10"1
1.2 x 105
1.2 x 105
Average
concentration,
yCi/cc
-4
4 x 10
9.4 x 10"2
1.9 x 10"4
1.8 x 10"1
2.0 x 10"1
2.6 x 10"6
7.8 x 10"3
2.7 x 10"1
1.3 x 10"1
4.7 x 10"1
8.2 x 10"2
Beck, H. et al., U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, personal communications, July 1972 and H. Beck, April 16, 1973.
**Includes decay of 135mXe.
NM - not measured.
-------
Appendix D.2
Release Rates and Estimated Annual Discharges of Radioactire Gases from
Main Condenser Air Ejector Delay Line
Radionuclide
N
85mKr
85Kr
87
Kr
88
Kr
131
I
133mv
Xe
133Xe
135mXe
135Xe
138Xe
Average release
rate during
sampling, **uCi/s
2
4
8
8
9
1
3
1
5
2
3
.2
.6
.4
.1
.2
.5
.2
.6
.0
.6
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
io1
io3
3
10
3
10
-1
10
io2
io4
io3
io4
io3
Normalized avg.
release rate,'"'
pCi/s
2
2.
5.
5.
5.
6.
2.
7.
3.
1.
2.
7
6
2
7
6
2
6
5
3
4
x
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
io1
IO3
7
10
•I
10
~
10
io2
io3
IO3
IO4
IO3
Estimated annual
release,'*"''
Ci
5
6.
1.
1.
1.
1.
5.
1.
8.
3.
6.
x
9 x
4 x
3 x
4 x
7
5 x
9 x
8 x
3 x
0 x
IO2
io4
io2
c
io5
c
:o5
io3
ro5
io4
!0S
io4
* Computed from data given in Appendix D.I.
**
Based on delay line off-gas flow rates of 4.5 x IO4 cc/s (95 cfm).
Average of gross radioactivity stack release rates during sampling normalized
to annual average stack release rate of 3.90 x IO4 yCi/s reported by plant
for period of July 1, 1971 to June 30, 1973.
Based on 292 days (2.52 x IO7 s) of reactor operation per year.
159
-------
Appendix D.3
Release Rates and Estimated Annual Discharges of Noble Gases in Turbine
Gland Seal Condenser Off-Gas, February 29, 1972
Radionuclide
85m.,
Kr
87Kr
88,.
Kr
133V
Xe
135mv
Xe
135Xe
138Xe
Release rate,**
uCi/s
2.9
1.03 x 101
S.I
7.5
4.2 x 101
1.65 x 101
7.15 x 101
Estimated annual
release, t Ci
i
8.2 x 10
2.9 x 102
?
1.4 x 1(T
2
2.1 x 10
1.2 x 103
4.7 x 102
2.0 x 103
Beck, H. et_al_., U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, personal communication,
July 1972.
**
Based on off-gas release rate of 2.8 x 105 cc/s (600 cfm). Gross radio-
activity release rate was 3.47 x 104 uCi/s on February 29, 1972.
Calculated for an annual average stack release rate of gross radioactivity
of 3.90 x 10* uCi/s during reactor operation and 292 days (2.52 x 107 s).
160
-------
Appendix D.4
Release Rates of Gaseous Radionuclides from End of Steam Condenser Air
Ejector Delay Line and in Stack, uCVs
Radionuclide
85mKr
85
sKr
87Kr
88Kr
89Kr
mXe
133Xe
135m
Xe
135Xe
Xe
138Xe
Total activity
Jan. 1972**
Delay Line
2
6
4
4
8
1
1
1
3
.6 x
.4 x
.4 x
.0 x
.3 x
.15 x
.4 x
.36 x
io3
io3
io3
io3
3
10
io4
IO3
io4
2
6
4
4
7
2
1
7
3
Stack
.0 x
.9 x
.9 x
.9 x
.5 x
.13 x
x
.42 x
io3
io3
io3
io3
3
10-*
io4
io2
io4
Mar. 28,
Delay Line
8
2
1
2
0
8
-2
4
4
0
7
1
.8 x
.7 x
.60 x
.3 x
x
.0 x
.9 x
.31 x
.4 x
.24 x
io3
i
IO1
io4
io4
IO2
io4
1.
io5
io4
io3
io5
1973f
Stack
8.9 x
NM
1.59 x
2.0 x
0
9 x
2.02 x
1.15 x
4.07 x
0
NM
1.26 x
io3
io4
io4
2
IO4
4
10*
io4
tt
io5
**
Beck, H. et^ajU, U. S. Atomic Energy Commission, personal communication,
July 1972 and H. Beck, April 16, 1973.
Based on delay line time of 72 min and release rate of 4.46 x IO'* cc/s and
stack flow rate of 7.79 x IO1 m3/s.
* Based on delay line time of 75 min and release rate of 5.33 x IO4 cc/s and
stack flow rate of 7.79 x IO1 m^/s.
^Assumed to be 7.4 x IO3 yCi/s for total radioactivity calculation.
Note: NM - not measured.
161
-------
OJ
to
Appendix E.1
Radioaudlde Concentrations Memsnred in Aqnatic Samples by die Station Operator
Jan. -June July-Dec. Jan. -May June-Nov.
Analyses 1970 1970 1971 1971
No. samples
Gross o (S)*
Gross a (D)*
Gross B (S)
Gross 0 (D)
40K
90Sr
U
228Ra
Dec . -May
1971-2
June-Nov.
1972
Dec. -May June-Nov.
1972-3 1973
Surface Water, pCi/1
NR**
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
Nuclides not detected were 3H
226Ra (<0.2).
No. of samples
Gross a
Gross 6
No. of samples
Gross a
Gross 6
40K
90g"
137Cs
NR
NR
NR
NR 24
<0.1-1.2 0.
<0.1-1.7 0.
2.3-3.2 1.
<0.12 <0.
0.006 <0.
< 0.009 <0.
Nuclides not detected were 5S
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
NR
£ 1000) , 58co (<
NR
NR
NR
1-0.27
4-2.3
7-4.5
1-0.25
001-0.011
07-0.15
>Co (<0.07)
NR
NR
NR
21
<0.1
1.3
3.5
0.15
31
<0.3
<0.3
1.9
3.8
320
0.58
0.039
1.6
7.0), 60Co (<7
Silt, pCi/g
6
1.5
10
Clams, pCi/g
6
0.12
0.9
2.9
0.09
0.008 0.005
0.10
. 60Co
0.12
(<0.07), 131I
30
<0.3
0.53
1.7
3.7
296
0.63
0.040
1.1
.0), 65zn (<
10
3.1
31
6
<0.1
1.1
3.4
0.11
0.021
<0.07
£0.06).
35
<0.3
<0.3
0.51
2.0
270
0.36
0.023
1.1
9.0), 131I (•
15
1.1
11
9
<0.1
1.1
3.6
<0.09
0.021
0.09
30
<0.3
0.27
0.66
1.6
257
0.46
0.025
0.97
c6.0), 137Cs
15
1.3
8.7
6
< 0.1
1.2
3.0
<0.09
0.021
0.10
35
<0.3
<0.3
< 1.4
< 2.1
191
0.70
<0.02
0.93
£7.0),
13
<2.0
21
9
<0.1
1.2
< 1.2
<0.09
< 0.003
0.08
* S - suspended solids; D - dissolved
**NR - not reported
Notes: 1. Data reported by station operator from June-Nov. and Dec.-May due to one month delay for
sample analysis and reporting.C5)
2. Data for clams during 1970 were reported as a range rather than an average.
-------
Appendix E.2
The Average Radionuclide Concentrations in Aquatic Simples Reported by the
State of New Jersey (BRP)
Radionuclide
3H
54Mn
58Co
60Co
59Fe
90
Sr
134_
Cs
137,,
Cs
Surface Water
Samples, pCi/1*
Forked River
<1100
<0
<0
0
<0
0
<0
0
.14 (trace)
.13
.09
.2
.3
.2
.4
Oyster Creek
<1100
0.9
0.3
2.6
<0.34
0.3
4.0
6.3
(trace)
_. ------._•_..„ wv »y *ftmmnjr * w 4. 4. VflU r\L*& X J. i.U
from January to April, 1973 in Forked River.
Location
Oyster Creek
Forked River
Barnegat Bay*
•Near nouth of
S4Mn
2.0
0.9
0.13
Cedar
1971
58_ 60-
Co Co
0.6
0.2
<0.1
Creek .
9.
3.
0.
5
0
3
6SZn
0.4
<0.2
* 0. 1
137Cs
0
0
0
.5
.4
.1
1972
54Mn 60Co 137Cs
0.8 4
0.3 2
<0.1 <0
.8
.1
.1
0
0
0
.4
.4
.07
1971
G.
C.
U.
2.
Species
verrucosa
fragile
lactuca
marina
•Radionuclides
(
«130), "Fe i
54Mn
1400
130
1420
820
58Co
190
31
250
180
+
+
+
_
not detected and
(<75), 65j
to (<6
5),
160
23
110
95
their
60Co
1260
150
. 830
630
minima
i (<260)
54Mn
264
70
180
ISO
detectable
.
1972
S8Co
-------
Appendix E.3
Estimation of Airborne Radioactivity in the Environment
Oyster Creek uses the following diffusion equation for estimating annual
average relative concentrations at distances downwind of its stack [see Oyster
Creek Nuclear Generating Station - Environmental Report, Amend. No. 2 (1972)] :
I If..
zi;j ij J i]
where :
X/Q. . = average relative concentration for the ith stability condition and the
. 3
jth wind speed class, s/m (x represents the radionuclide concentration,
in yCi/m ; Q, the stack emission rate, uCi/s)
f=.j = fraction of time the wind direction occurs in the i, j condition
0 = sector angle in radians (22.5 degrees)
x = receptor distance downwind, m
a = vertical plume standard deviation for the i, j condition, m
ij
u. . = average wind speed at stack height, m/s
H. = effective stack height (112 m plus plume rise) for j wind speed, m
The station Environmental Report provides annual average relative concen-
trations calculated for 16 22.5-degree sectors at 10 incremental distances to
80 km. Values of a^ were obtained from Watson and Gamertsf elder. Stack plume
rise was calculated by the Holland-Moses method. The meteorological data were
collected from February 1966 to February 1967, after a 122-m instrumented tower
was erected 390 m west of the stack in February 1966. (The AEC Final Environ-
mental Statement indicates that much of the meteorological data collected up to
1974 are of doubtful accuracy and notes that an improved program is being
implemented. During the EPA study, misadjustments of some wind sensors,
temperature indicators and chart recorders were detected by weather balloon and
other observations.)
Average annual relative concentration values for various sector midpoint
distances calculated by Oyster Creek staff are as follows:
164
-------
. Annual average x/Q»
Characteristic Location s/m3
Highest concentration 2.4 km N (of stack) 6.02 x 10~9
Approximate fenceline 0.8 km N 4.24 x 10"9
Nearby population 2.4 km ESE 5.45 x 10"9
Nearby population 2.4 km NNE 3.86 x 10"9
Waretown, NJ 2.4 km SSE 3.43 x 10"9
Fishing in discharge canal 0.8 km ESE 4.04 x 10"9
The annual average stack release rate (Q) used for the station calculations
was 25,000 yCi/s for a 365-d year. The station operator indicates that the
highest average concentration occurs in the city of Forked River. Dose at the
north exclusion fence is lower than in Forked River due to release from a tall
stack. Annual dose to the closest resident (1.3 km NNE of the stack) is
computed by the station operator to be 4.6 mrem after applying shielding and
occupancy factors.
The AEG Final Environmental Statement indicates that the nearest residence
is located about 1.1 km N of the stack, where X/Q is 1.6 x 10"9 s/m3. The
total body dose due to air submersion at that location is 0.31 mrem/yr.
Fishermen spending 700 hrs/yr at the highway bridge over the discharge canal
receive an estimated total body dose of 0.20 mrem.
165
-------
Appendix £.4
Atmospheric Dispersion and Plume Rise Estimates for Short-term Air Sampling
Concentrations of stack effluents at ground level on the plume centerline
rious doi
estimated bv:
at various downwind distances during the test described in Section 6, were
v = 2 exp {_ % (Ji) }
X i"y °z u P V
where:
X = ground-level centerline concentration, yCi/m
Q = source release rate, uCi/s
o = crosswind plume standard deviation, m
y
az = vertical plume standard deviation, m
u = average wind speed, m/s
H = effective stack height (112 + Ah), m
Plume rise (Ah), the height of the plume centerline above the stack height,
was calculated by the methods of Briggs. Stack parameters for the computations
were effluent temperature of 305°K, velocity of 16 m/s, exit diameter of 2.5 m
and volume flow of 78 m/s. The Meteorology Laboratory, EPA, provided calcula-
tions for various ambient air temperatures, wind speeds and atmospheric
stabilities.
Parameters used to estimate dispersion for air concentration measurements
(see Table 6.2):
Test
no.
Ic
2b
4d
5a
5b
u,
m/s
8.8
8.7
5.4
7.6
7.3
°y,
m
122
108
240
145
97
°*.
m
48
43
75
85
41
A,
m
24
17
41
15
26
166
-------
Appendix F.I
Relation of Airborne Radionuclide Concentration to Dose Rate
Air concentration-
dose rate f actors. m
Radionuclide Critical organ
Gases
3H (HTO) Total body (In) (2)
(HT) Skin (Sub) (3)
UC (C02) Fat (In)
Total body (In)
13N Total body (Sub)
8S*Kr Total body (Sub)
8SKr Total body (Sub)
Kr Total body (Sub)
Kr Total body (Sub)
™Xe Total body (Sub)
i 33m
Xe Total body (Sub)
Xe Total body (Sub)
Xe Total body (Sub)
other fission gases
with half- lives <2
hrs Total body (Sub)
rCi/cc * r<
2/S
400/30
1/S
2/5
1/5
3/5
0.2/5 -
0.28/5M) -
4/5
2.8/5(*> -
3/5
1/5
0.27/sW) -
tm/yr
0.4
13
0.2
0.4
0.09
0.2
0.6
0.04
0.06
0.8
0.6
0.6
0.2
0.05
Airborne particles and iodine by inhalation
51Cr Lung (I)(S)
4Mn Lung (I)
Fe Spleen (S), Lung (I)
S9Fe Lung (I)
S8Co Lung (I)
6°Co Lung (I)
65-
Zn Lung (I)
89Sr Bone (S)
Lung (I)
90
Sr Bone (S)
Total body (S)
99
Mo Lung (I)
I Thyroid (S)
133I Thyroid (S)
135I Thyroid (S)
l34Cs Lung (I)
Cs Lung (I)
l37Cs Lung (I)
UOBa Lung (I)
14ICe Lung (I)
239Np GI(LLI) (I)
1. ICRP, Report of Comittee 2 on Permissible
ICRP Publication 2, Pergaaon Press, Oxford
on 168-hour Halts.
2. (In) - Inhalation
3. (Sub) - Subversion
0.8/15
0.01/15
0.3/15
0. 02/15
0.02/15
0.003/15 -
0.02/15 •
0.01/30 •
0.01/15
0.0001/30 -
0.0003/5 •
0.07/15
0.003/30 •
0.01/30 -
0.04/30
0.004/15 «
0.06/15
0.005/15 «
0.01/15
0.05/15 -
0.2/15
Dose for Internal
0.053
0.00067
0.020
0.0013
0.0013
0.00020
0.0013
0.00033
0.00067
0.0000033
0.000060
0.0047
0.0001
0.00033
0.0013
0.00027
0.004
0.00033
0.00067
0.0033
0.013
Radiation.
(1959). Concentrations based
4. Based on ICRP Publication 2. equation 21. divided by 4 for a
(MPC). • |4, x 1/4 « pCi/cc.
168-hour week:
where l(E). the total effective energy per disintegration (v.B.B*. e". x-rays).
has the values:
13N
88.
1.51 HeV
"Hi • 2.33 MeV
133"Xe • 0.234 MeV
89.
S.
6.
Short-lived nuclides
(T,/2 < 2 hrs) . 2.42 HeV (based on "fir. the radionuclide
of the highest disintegration energy with a half-life less than 2 hours)
(I) - Insoluble
(S) - Soluble
167
-------
Appendix F.2
Relation of Daily Radionuclide Intake in Water to Dose Rate
Radionuclide
3H
I4c
fA
24Na
32P
51Cr
54
54Mn
55Fe
S9Fe
57Co
S8Co
fin
60Co
64
MCu
65
76As
89Sr
90Sr
91Sr
95Zr
95Nb
"MO
1) ICRP Report
Critical organ
Total body
Total body
GI(LLI)
Bone
Total body
GI(LLI)
GI(LLI)
GI(LLI)
Spleen
GI(LLI)
Spleen
GI(LLI)
GI(LLI)
GI(LLI)
GI(LLI)
Total body
GI(LLI)
Bone
Bone
GI(LLI)
GI(LLI)
GI(LLI)
GI(LLI)
of Committee 2 on
Daily intake-dose
rate factors, (D
pCi/day t mrem/yr
22,000
4,400
290
15
400
130
2,900
150
1,170
90
150
730
150
70
440
440
30
7.3
0.30(2)
100
90
150
290
Permissible Dose for
Daily intake-dose
Radionuclide
99"Vc
103Ru
Iflfi
106Ru
105Rh
11 ^Ag
124Sb
131j
m
1.S3,
135,
134Cs
136Cs
137Cs
Ba
i AI
141Ce
1 A A
144Ce
210
239NP
Critical organ
GI(LLI)
GI(LLI)
GI(LLI)
GI(LLI)
GI(LLI)
GI(LLI)
Thyroid
Thyroid
Thyroid
Total body
Total body
Total body
GI(LLI)
GI(LLI)
GI(LLI)
Spleen
Kidney
Liver
Bone
Total body
GI(LLI)
GI(LLI)
rate factors,
(1)
pCi/day 4 mrem/yr
8,800
120
15
150
40
30
l.S(3)
( ^^
5.1
15W
40
400
90
40
130
15
1.0
1.2
4.4
7.3
30
40
150
Internal Radiation, ICRP Publication 2, Pergamon
Press, Oxford (1959); Intake, based on 168 hour concentration Units, assumed to persist for 50 years
or until equilibrium is reached in the body.
2) Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection (As Amended 1959 and
Revised 1962), ICRP Publication 6. Pergamon Press, Oxford (1964).
3) To calculate a child's thyroid dose, divide this factor by 10.
168
-------
Abstract
RADIOLOGICAL SURVEILLANCE STUDIES AT THE OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION. R. L. BUnchard.
( EPA-520/5-76.003.
A radiological surveillance study, the fourth of a series at commercially operated nuclear power sutions. was undertaken at the
Oyster Creek BWR plant. Radionuclide concentrations and external radiation were measured in the immediate vicinity of the 640-MWe
statton. The radionuclide contents of gases and liquid, were also me.*™* at the point, of di^lurge to estunate racSonucBde levels in the
environment
The predominant radionuclide. in airborne effluents were the noble gases having half-live, exceeding 3 minutes; >H «N »C and'»!
were also significant Most suck effluent radioactivity cam, from the steam jet air ejectors on the main coolant condensers. Radioactive
uquid effluent. mea,ured included those discharged to the coolant discharge canal from the waste sample tanks and laundry drain tanks.
Tritium was the major constituent. «muj u«.ui lansa.
Environment^ radic«tivity aitribuUble to the sution. mainly -Mn and -Co, wa, found re*Sry in the aquatic ecoaysttm: in rhh.
cUms, algae and sediment Concentration, in water were generally too low to meuure except immediately following wute cSscnarge, Suck
effluent could be detected by a muscle-equivalent tarnation chamber at disunce, up to 4 km at ground levtl and «p^ 34 IcmtoabeLpte,
Duect radiation from the nation could be measured only to the rite boundary. On the bawof effluent and «vut,ra»enlal measurements!
population radiation doses of leu than 3 mrem / yr were estimated to occur by (1) consuming Oyster Cree*fi»h«iKlcJ«iB, (2) direct radiation
(at newest residence) and (3) external radiation from gueou, effluent. 2.4 km north of the suck (location of highe* ««,«.!.»«„,« ground-
level concentration). —»~— wvu»-
KEY WORDS:
Nuclear
Power
Radiological
Surveillance
Radionuclide
Analysis
Radiation
Exposure
Reactor
Effluents
Abstract
RADIOLOGICAL SURVEILLANCE STUDIES AT THE OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION. R. L. Blaneluu*
' **« "
A radiological surveillance study, the fourth of a series it commercially operated nuclear power stations, was undertaken at the
Oyster Creek BWR plant Radionuclide concentration, and external rtdialion were measured in the immediate vicinity of the MO-MWe
station. The rxiionuclide content, of gase, and liquids were also measured ti the points of discharge to estimate radioniKlide levels in the
environment
The predominant radionuclide, in lirborne effluents were the noble gase, having half-lives exceeding 3 minutes; >H, "N, "C and '"1
were also significant Most stack effluent .radioactivity came from the steam jet air ejectors on the main coolant condensers. Radioactive
liquid effluents meaiured included those discharged to the coolant discharge canal from the waste sample tanks and laundry drain tanks.
Tritium wa, the major constituent.
Environmental radioactivity attributable to the station, mainly «Mn and "Co, was found readily in the aquatic ecosystem: in fish.
clams, algae and sediment. Concentration, in water were generally too tow to measure except immediately following waste discharge. Stack
effluent could be detected by a muscle-equivalent ionization chamber at distances up to 4 km at ground level and up to 34 km in a helicopter
Direct radiation from the station could be measured only to the lite boundary. On the basis of effluent and environmental measurements!
population radiation doses of less than 3 mrem/ yr were estimated to occur by ( 1 ) consuming Oyster Creek fish and clams. O) direct radiation
(at nearest residence) and (3) external radiation from gaseous effluents 2.4 km north of the stack (location of highest annual averate Bound-
level concentration).
KEY WORDS:
Nuclear
Power
Radiological
Surveillance
Radionuclide
Analysis
Radiation
Exposure
Reactor
Effluents
Abstract
RADIOLOGICAL SURVEILLANCE STUDIES ATTHE OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION. R. L Blanchard.
W. L. Brinck. H. E. Kolde. H. L. Krieger. D. M. Montgomery, S. Gold, A. Martin and B. Kahn: June 1976; KI'A-r.iSI/S.TB.Ottl
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY.
A radiologies! surveillance study, the fourth of a series at commercially operated nuclear power stations, was undertaken at the
Oyster Creek BWR plant. Radionuclide concentrations and external radiation were measured in the immediate vicinity of the 64O-MWe
waiion. The radionuclide contents of gase, and liquid, were also measured al the points of discharge to estimate radionuclide levels in the
environment
The predominant radionuclide, in airborne effluents were the noble gases having half-live, exceeding 3 minutes: >H. »N. "C and '"I
were also significant Most stack effluent radioactivity came from the steam jet air ejectors on the main coc4.nl condensers. Radioactive
Uquid effluents measured included those discharged to the coolant discharge canal from the waste sample tanks and laundry drain tanks.
Tritium was the major constituent
Environmental radioactivity attributable to the station, mainly *Mn and "Co. was found readily in the aquatic ecosystem in fish.
clams, algae and sediment. Concentration, in water were generally too low to measure except immediately following waste discharge Suck
effluent could be detected by a muscle-equivalent ionizstion chamber at distances up to 4 km at (round level and up to 34 km in a helicopter
Direct radiation from the sution could be measured only to the site boundary. On the basis of effluent and environmental measureai«U.
population radianon doses of les. than 3 mrem/yr were estimated tooccur by (1) comuming Oyster Creek fish and clams. (2) direct radiation
Ut nearest residence) and (3) external radiation from gaseous effluents 2.4 km north of the suck (location of highest annual average ground.
KEY WORDS:
Nuclear
Power
Radiological
Surveillance
Radionuclide
Analysis
Radiation
Exposure
Reactor
Effluents
*USGPO: 1976 — 657-695/5436 Region 5-11
------- |