1 From: Panel Registry From: Virtue,Robyn-Lynne [CEAA] On Behalf Of DGR Review / Examen DFGP [CEAA] Sent: June 26, :42 AM To: DGR Review / Examen DFGP [CEAA] Subject: Requested Reports To: 'Stella Swanson' ; 'Gunter Muecke'; James Archibald Cc: Subject: Great Lakes Radionuclide Level Reports Panel Members, As per your request to CNSC for updated information on radionuclide levels in Lake Huron during the public hearing in the Fall of 2013, enclosed are three reports - Bruce Power. Environmental Monitoring Program Report. April 2012; IJC Nuclear Task Force. Inventory of Radionuclides for the Great Lakes. December 1997; and Ahier, Brian A. and Bliss L. Tracy. Radionuclides in the Great Lakes Basin. Environmental Health Perspectives Volume 103, Supplement 9 (December 1995) - for your information. Thank you, Robyn Robyn-Lynne Virtue DGR Joint Review Panel Secretariat C/O Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency 160 Elgin Street, 22nd floor Ottawa, ON K1A 0H3 <contact information removed> file:///m /My%20Documents/Registry/DGR/Untitled.htm[04/07/2014 3:58:50 PM]
2 2012 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM REPORT B-REP R000 April 2013
3 B-REP Rev 000 April 2013 Page 2 of 176
5 B-REP Rev 000 April 2013 Page 4 of 176 ABSTRACT OF PRESENT REVISION: Executive Summary: The purpose of this report is to fulfill regulatory requirements under Licence Condition 1.7 of Bruce Power s Nuclear Power Reactor Operating Licence s (PROL) 15:00/2014 and PROL 16:00/2014. This licence condition requires Bruce Power to submit an annual environmental monitoring report by April 30 th of each year per Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) regulatory standard S-99 Section This report describes the effluent and environmental monitoring programs related to Bruce Power s operations. The monitoring programs include both radiological and hazardous substances and quantify the effect on human and non-human biota. The radiological emission from the Bruce Site is well within regulatory limits. Furthermore, for the 21 st consecutive year Bruce Power s calculated dose to a member of the public is less than the 10 μsv/year value that is regarded as the lower threshold for significance (the de minimus). Dose to potential critical groups are calculated using IMPACT The most recent site specific survey results (2011 Site Specific Survey), 2012 meteorological data, effluent and environmental monitoring data for Bruce site for year 2012 are all taken into account for the calculation. The highest dose estimated for year 2012 is 1.2 μsv, representing 0.1% of the regulatory dose limit of 1000 μsv/y. The critical group estimated for year 2012 is the one year old infant at the Bruce Mennonite Farmer 3 location Critical Group Dose Critical Group Committed Effective Dose Percentage of Legal Limit BMF3 Infant 1.17 μsv/y 0.12% Bruce Power compliance with relevant environmental legislation, regulations, and other requirements. Bruce Power adopts applicable best industry standards as a framework for achieving continual improvement and sustainable performance excellence, while minimizing our environmental impact and preventing pollution. Bruce Power will continue towards the implementation of CSA N , N and N Bruce Power complies with the Environmental Compliance Approvals and Permits issued by the Ontario Ministry of Environment. Bruce Power continues to monitor site/offsite groundwater. Bruce Power complies with the Federal Regulations and programs which protect human health and the environment under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act.
6 B-REP Rev 000 April 2013 Page 5 of 176 Table of Contents Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION Purpose Regulatory Requirements BACKGROUND Bruce Power Site Site Facilities MONITORING PROGRAM METHODOLOGIES Radiological Effluent Monitoring Program Methodologies Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Methodologies Conventional (Hazardous Substances) Monitoring Program Methodologies Impacts and Biodiversity Monitoring Program Methodologies RADIOLOGICAL EFFLUENT MONITORING PROGRAM - BRUCE A, BRUCE B, CMLF, OPG, AECL Radiological Effluent Results Historical Radiological Effluent Results Opportunities for Improvement RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM External Gamma in Air Tritium and Carbon-14 in Air Tritium and Gross Beta in Precipitation Water Samples Milk Samples Sediment Samples Fish Samples Agricultural Products Determination of Radiological Dose to Public Radiological Dose Modelling Radiological Quality Assurance Program CONVENTIONAL (HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES) MONITORING PROGRAM Hazardous Substances Effluent Monitoring Program Air Environmental Compliance Approval Water Groundwater Waste and Pollution Prevention...105
7 B-REP Rev 000 April 2013 Page 6 of IMPACTS AND BIODIVERSITY MONITORING PROGRAM Bass Nesting Bass Creel Whitefish Gillnetting Fish Impingement Temperature Monitoring Deer Interactions with Traffic CONCLUSION REFERENCES APPENDIX A: SAMPLING SITES APPENDIX B: SUMMARY OF BRUCE A AND BRUCE B MONITORING WELLS List of Figures Figure 1 Locations of Potential Critical Groups Considered in the 2011 Site Specific Survey (Source Base Map from Bruce County Map Factory)...18 Figure 2 Framework for Radioactive Effluent Controls and Limits...25 Figure 3 Historical Tritium Emissions in Air...29 Figure 4 Historical Tritium Emission in Water...30 Figure 5 Historical 14 C Emission in Air...31 Figure 6 Historical 14 C Emission in Water...32 Figure 7 Historical Iodine Emission in Air...33 Figure 8 Annual Average External Gamma Dose Rates at Bruce Power Indicator Sites and Provincial Background Sites Over Time...37 Figure 9 Tritium Concentrations (Bq/m 3 ) in Air from Active Samplers Near the Bruce Power Site As Compared to the Provincial Average on a Monthly Basis...39 Figure 10 Annual Average Tritium in Air Concentrations (Bq/m 3 ) from Active Samplers at Bruce Power and Provincial Locations Over Time...40 Figure C Concentrations in Air from Passive Samplers Sampled Quarterly Near the Bruce Power Site as Compared to the Provincial Average...42 Figure 12 Annual Average 14 C in Air Concentrations at Bruce Power and Provincial Locations Over Time...43 Figure 13 Annual Average Tritium and Gross Beta Concentrations in Precipitation at the Bruce Power Site Over Time...45 Figure 14 Historic Lake Huron Tritium Activity...50 Figure 15 Annual Average Tritium Concentrations (Bq/L) in Municipal Water Supply Plants Near the Bruce Power Site Over Time...51 Figure 16 Annual Average Tritium Concentrations (Bq/L) in Lake Huron and Off-Site Wells Near Bruce Power Site Over Time...52 Figure 17 Annual Average Tritium Concentrations (Bq/L) in Milk Samples Collected Near the Bruce Power Site and Provincial Locations Over Time...54 Figure 18 Annual Average 14 C Concentrations (Bq/L) in Milk Samples Collected Near the Bruce Power Site and Provincial Locations Over Time...55
8 B-REP Rev 000 April 2013 Page 7 of 176 Figure 19 Annual Average Concentration of 40 K (Bq/kg) in Sediment Samples (± Standard Error), Figure 20 Annual Average Concentration of 137 Cs (Bq/kg) in Sediment Samples (± Standard Error), Figure 21 Annual Average Concentration of 60 Co (Bq/kg) in Sediment Samples (± Standard Error), Figure 22 Gillnetting Locations...60 Figure 23 Annual Average Tritium Oxide (Bq/L) in Pelagic Fish Tissue by Year (± Standard Error)...65 Figure 24 Annual Average Tritium Oxide (Bq/L) in Benthic Fish Tissue by Year (± Standard Error)...66 Figure 25 Annual Average 14 C in Pelagic Fish Tissue (± Standard Error)...67 Figure 26 Annual Average 14 C in Benthic Fish Tissue (± Standard Error)...68 Figure 27 Annual Average 137 Cs in Pelagic Fish Tissue (± Standard Error)...69 Figure 28 Annual Average 137 Cs in Benthic Fish Tissue (± Standard Error)...70 Figure 29 Annual Average 40 K in Pelagic Fish Tissue (± Standard Error)...71 Figure 30 Annual Average 40 K in Benthic Fish Tissue (± Standard Error)...72 Figure 31 Annual Average Tritium in Vegetable Trend...77 Figure 32 Annual Average 14 C in Vegetation Trend...78 Figure 33 Percentage of Ionizing Radiation Exposure for the Population...81 Figure 34 Radiological Dose by Contaminant...84 Figure 35 Historical Dose to Public Trend...85 Figure 36 Historical Halocarbon Releases...96 Figure 37 Average Tritium Concentrations in Multi-level Wells Installed in the Bedrock Around the Bruce A Station, Figure 38 Average Tritium Concentrations in Multi-level Wells Installed in the Bedrock Around the Bruce B Station, Figure 39 Historical Groundwater Wells in the Vicinity of Bruce Power Figure 40 Smallmouth Bass Nest Locations in the Bruce A Discharge Channel Figure 41 Smallmouth Bass Nest Locations in the Bruce B Discharge Channel Figure 42 Smallmouth Bass Nest Locations in Baié du Doré Figure Number of Smallmouth Bass Nests (by Category) in Bruce A Discharge Channel Figure Number of Smallmouth Bass Nests (by Category) in Bruce B Discharge Channel Figure Number of Smallmouth Bass Nests (by category) in Baie du Dore Figure Gillnetting Locations in the Vicinity of the Bruce Power Site Figure 47 CUE Per Km Of Gillnet For Lake Whitefish And Round Whitefish By Lift Date And Area, Figure Catch per Unit Effort (CUE, Based on Kilometres of Gillnet) of Lake Whitefish and Round Whitefish by Area Figure 49 Spawning Condition Of Female And Male Round Whitefish (CUE/Km Gillnet) By Lift Date And Area, Figure Catch per Unit Effort (CUE, Based on Kilometers of Gillnet) of Lake Whitefish and Round Whitefish by Area Figure 51 Historical Catch-Per-Unit Effort of Whitefish From 2009 to Figure 52 Historic Gillnetting Results Figure 53 Stable Isotopes Values for Lake Whitefish Captured in the Bruce Power Area of Lake Huron During the 2010 Fall Breeding Season...136
9 B-REP Rev 000 April 2013 Page 8 of 176 Figure 54 Number of Fish Impinged (bars) and Number of Sampling Events (lines) by Year for Bruce A and Bruce B Figure 55 Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) Wildlife Management Unit 84 (WMU84) Figure 56 Total Harvest for All White-Tailed Deer (WMU-84) Figure 57 Number of Bruce Power White-tailed Deer Collisions and Collision Mortalities List of Tables Table 1 Previous Radiological Environmental Monitoring Reports...10 Table 2 Identification of Potential Critical Groups...17 Table 3 Percentage of Local Food Consumption for Each Potential Critical Group as Determined in the 2011 Site Specific Survey...19 Table 4 Percentage of Water Usage for Each Potential Critical Group as Determined in the 2011 Site Specific Survey...21 Table 5 Intakes of Fish and Venison for Each Potential Critical Group as Determined in the 2011 Site Specific Survey...22 Table 6 Radionuclide Exposure Pathways...22 Table 7 Annual Airborne (Gaseous) Radioactive Effluent Results for Table 8 Annual Waterborne (Aqueous) Radioactive Effluent Results for Table Bruce Power Outage Schedule...28 Table Annual External Gamma Dose Rate Measurements...35 Table Provincial Annual External Gamma Dose Rate Measurements...36 Table Annual Average Tritium in Air...38 Table Annual Average 14 C in Air from Passive Samplers at Bruce Power and Provincial Locations...41 Table Annual Average Precipitation Data...44 Table Bruce Power Annual Average Tritium and Gross Beta Concentrations...46 Table Tritium Concentrations (± 2 Standard Deviation) in Provincial Drinking Water Sampled Quarterly...48 Table Provincial Beta Concentrations (± 2 Standard Deviation) in Provincial Drinking Water Sampled Quarterly...49 Table Annual Average Concentration 3 H, 131 I, 14 C in Dairy Milk Samples...53 Table Bruce Power Sediment Data...56 Table 20 Fish Preparation and Methods...61 Table Annual Bruce Power Fish Data...62 Table Annual Provincial Fish Data...64 Table Annual Radionuclide Concentration in Animal & Agricultural Products Sampled Near the Bruce Power Site (± Standard Error)...73 Table Annual Grains Data...73 Table Corn Mash Data...74 Table Produce Data...74 Table Soil Data...79 Table Critical Group Dose...83 Table Radiological Dose by Containment for Critical Groups BMF3 Infant...84 Table 30 Characteristics of Adult Used in Dose Calculation for Year 2011 and Table 31 Summary of Missing Meteorological Records...87 Table Sample Availability Data...88 Table Laboratory Analysis Summary...89
10 B-REP Rev 000 April 2013 Page 9 of 176 Table 34 Summary of the QA/QC Program...90 Table Quality Control Data...91 Table Bruce Power Hazardous Substance Regulatory Reporting...94 Table Semi-annual Groundwater Data Table 38 Smallmouth Bass Nesting Survey Development Stage Codes Table 39 Number of Bass Nests by Location and Development Stage Over Time Table 40 Creel Sample Size by Strata Table 41 Interview Sample Size by Strata Table 42 Angler Effort Summaries by Year and Season (All Species Combined) Table 43 Smallmouth Bass Estimated Angler Effort, Harvest, Catch and CPUE by Year and Season Table 44 Chi-square Goodness of Fit Tests Among Strata for Smallmouth Bass Harvested Table 45 Fork Length of Smallmouth Bass by Year Table 46 Total Length of Smallmouth Bass by Year Table 47 Weight of Smallmouth Bass by Year Table Effort and Number of Whitefish Captured by Area Table 49 Number Of Individuals Of Lake Whitefish Assessed For Spawning Condition By Area, Table 50 Number Of Individuals Of Round Whitefish Assessed For Spawning Condition By Area, Table 51 Historical Gillnetting Results from 2007 to Table 52 Number Of Individuals Of Marked Lake Whitefish And Round Whitefish That Were Recaptured, By Year Table 53 Incidental Catches of Non-whitefish Species by Site During the 2011 Whitefish Gill Netting Assessment at Bruce Power Table Number of Individuals of Each Type of Fish Impinged, Including Species of Importance (Lake Whitefish, Round Whitefish, Gizzard Shad)...139
11 B-REP Rev 000 April 2013 Page 10 of INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose The purpose of this report is to fulfill regulatory requirements under Licence Condition 1.7 of Bruce Power s Nuclear Power Reactor Operating Licence s (PROL) 15:00/2014 and PROL 16:00/2014. This licence condition requires Bruce Power to submit an annual environmental monitoring report by April 30 th of each year per Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC) regulatory standard S-99 Section [R-2]. Canadian Standards Association (CSA) N , Environmental monitoring programs at Class 1 nuclear facilities and uranium mines and mills [R-1], was published in 2010 and supersedes the first edition published in 1990 titled Guidelines for Radiological Monitoring of the Environment. The first edition of this standard (N288.4-M90) discussed the monitoring of radioactive contaminants in the environment in pathways leading to human exposure. The recent edition of CSA N expands to protection of the environment in alignment with the Nuclear Safety and Control Act and includes radiological and conventional contaminants, physical stressors, potential biological effects, and pathways for human and non-human biota. While Bruce Power has implemented the first edition, work is underway to document, develop and implement the second edition. This report transforms its past appearance to and to meet the CNSC regulatory standard S-99 [R-2]. Beyond the current regulatory requirements, Bruce Power is adopting CSA N [R-1] as part of using applicable best industry standards as a framework for achieving continual improvement. Previous reports are listed in Table 1. Table 1 Previous Radiological Environmental Monitoring Reports B-REP B-REP B-REP B-REP B-REP Annual Summary and Assessment of Environmental Radiological Data for 2011 Annual Summary and Assessment of Environmental Radiological Data for 2010 Annual Summary and Assessment of Environmental Radiological Data for 2009 Annual Summary and Assessment of Environmental Radiological Data for 2008 Annual Summary and Assessment of Environmental Radiological Data for 2007
12 B-REP Rev 000 April 2013 Page 11 of Regulatory Requirements Licence Requirements To meet the CNSC Regulatory Standard, S-99, a licensee shall, by April 30 of each calendar, unless otherwise approved in writing by the Commission or a person authorized by the Commission, file with the designated CNSC contact, a report that contains information pertaining to environmental monitoring activities for the previous calendar year. The report shall include [R-2]: A summary of the results of the environmental monitoring program. An analysis of the significance, with respect to the health and safety of persons and the protection of the environment and the results of the environmental monitoring program. Calculations of the radiation doses to the critical group via environmental pathways associated with the operation of the nuclear power plant. A description of the domestic models used to calculate the radiation doses reported in the report. A description of the results of the quality assurance program that was implemented to assure the quality of the environmental monitoring. A description of any significant events or finding the respect of the conduct of, or results of the environmental monitoring program. The name and address of the sender of the report, the date of completion of the report and the signature of the designated representative of the licensee Regulatory Permits and Other Requirements Federal and provincial regulations require licencees to monitor and report on the characteristics of airborne and waterborne effluent. Licencees are required to comply with any statutes, regulations, licences, or permits that govern the operation of the nuclear facility or licenced activity. [R-4] The Bruce Power Environmental Safety Programs oversees the planning, implementation and operation of activities, in addition minimizing the potential adverse impact of Bruce Power operations on the natural environment. This includes ensuring the Bruce Power Environmental Safety Program conforms to International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standard for Environmental Management Systems, environmental legislation (acts and regulations), and other requirements applicable to the activities at Bruce Power; documented in BP-PROG-00.02, Environmental Safety Management. Other requirements comprise of commitments to regulators and contractual agreements with Ontario Power Generation (OPG). Currently, other requirements to which Bruce Power subscribe include: Commitment to the Ministry of Environment (MOE) and Ministry of Health (MOH) to maintain the average tritium level below ~ 100 Bq/L at treatment plants downstream of Bruce Power (i.e., the Southampton Water Treatment Plant). [R-10]
13 B-REP Rev 000 April 2013 Page 12 of 176 Communication between Bruce Power and the MOE, the MOH and the CNSC. Providing an annual report on environmental performance and OPG. Fulfilling Nuclear Emergency Preparedness Exercise and Drill Program, to meet the requirements of Bruce Power Nuclear Emergency Plan. 2.0 BACKGROUND 2.1 Bruce Power Site Bruce Power is located on the east shore of Lake Huron approximately 18 kilometres (km) north of Kincardine and 17 km southwest of Port Elgin. The site occupies an area of 932 hectares (2300 acres) within the Municipality of Kincardine, County of Bruce, Province of Ontario. Land use in the immediate vicinity is primarily agricultural, recreational and rural residential. Surrounding the Bruce Power site is a mixture of rural agricultural land, former gravel pits, fragmented woodlands, streams and wetlands. Recreational land use includes Inverhuron Park and cottages in the hamlet of Inverhuron (south of Bruce Power) and Baié du Doré/Scott Point area (north of Bruce Power) [R-3]. 2.2 Site Facilities Bruce Power utilizes a site specific survey to identify on-site facilities as well as neighbouring user groups within the area of concern. Bruce Power updates the facility s site specific survey every five years. The most recent survey took place in 2011 and the updated information is provided in the report entitled 2011 Site Specific Survey Report for the Bruce Power Site B-REP [R-3]. This updated information has been integrated into the relevant sections of this report. Multiple companies occupy and operate the lands at the Bruce Site. The on site facilities are summarized below [R-3] Bruce Power Bruce Power operates the Bruce Nuclear Generating Station A (BNGS A) and Bruce Nuclear Generating Station B (BNGS B), which each house four CANDU reactors. All eight of these units are currently operational with a production capacity of 6,300 megawatts of electricity for the Ontario grid. Two units at BNGS A restarted in late Several support facilities are located on the site such as the Bruce Steam Plant (BSP), a laundry facility, garages, warehouses, workshops, a sewage processing plant and various administrative buildings (collectively known as Centre of Site) [R-3] Ontario Power Generation The Western Waste Management Facility (WWMF) is owned and operated by Ontario Power Generation (OPG). It is located on-site, defined by the parcel of land designated for the management of OPG s radioactive waste and licenced for such use by the CNSC. This 19-hectare area currently contains the Low and Intermediate Level Waste (L&ILW) storage area and the used fuel dry storage area. This area is situated inside the Bruce Power Site (formally known as the Bruce Nuclear Power Development).
14 B-REP Rev 000 April 2013 Page 13 of 176 The objectives of the WWMF are to provide safe material handling (receipt, transfers and retrieval), treatment, and storage of radioactive materials produced at nuclear generating stations and other facilities currently or previously operated by Ontario Power Generation, or its predecessor Ontario Hydro. This facility also provides safe storage of Bruce Power s used fuel in Dry Storage Containers (DSC) until it can be transported to an alternative long term used fuel storage or disposal facility. The L&ILW storage area consists of various structures such as the Amenities Building, Waste Volume Reduction Building (WVRB), Transportation Package Maintenance Building (TPMB), above ground low-level and intermediate-level waste storage buildings, quadricells, in ground containers, trenches, and tile holes. These structures are primarily used for storage and processing of the L&ILW from OPG s Pickering and Darlington Nuclear Generating Stations as well as Bruce Power operations. The used fuel dry storage area is a security-protected area located northeast of the L&ILW storage area, and consists of DSC processing and storage buildings. [R-3] Atomic Energy of Canada Limited The Douglas Point Waste Management Facility (DPWMF) is owned by Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. (AECL) and is located on the Bruce Power Site. The facility consists of a permanently shutdown, partially decommissioned prototype 200-megawatt CANDU reactor and associated structures and ancillaries. This facility is presently in the long term Storage with Surveillance phase of a decommissioning program [R-3] Hydro One Hydro One owns and operates a number of assets within Bruce Power Site. These include, but are not limited to office and workshops for maintenance, switchyards at BNGS A/BNGS B, switching stations and transformer stations [R-3]. 3.0 MONITORING PROGRAM METHODOLOGIES 3.1 Radiological Effluent Monitoring Program Methodologies The radiological effluent monitoring program operated by Bruce Power is described in BP-PROC Bruce Power s effluent monitoring program demonstrates Compliance with authorized release limits Effectiveness of effluent control Provide data to assist in refining modeling Meet stakeholder commitment
15 B-REP Rev 000 April 2013 Page 14 of Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program Methodologies The monitoring program operated by Bruce Power is described in BP-PROC-00076, Management of the Off Site Radiological Environmental Monitoring program. The data gathered from the monitoring program is summarized in this report on a calendar year basis along with site emissions data. OPG operates a background radiological monitoring program [R-5] and provides this data to Bruce Power. Assessments are made for the public dose levels resulting from radiological emissions from Bruce Power site based on the identified potential critical group and data gathered from the Bruce Power s sampling sites. Section 5.9 provides specific details on the assessment. Background Tritium ( 3 H) and Carbon 14 ( 14 C) concentrations due to historical atmospheric weapons testing, natural occurrence, or other non Bruce Power site sources, have been subtracted, where appropriate, to determine the net environmental concentrations due to the emissions from the facilities on the Bruce Power site [R-5] [R-6]. The contribution of noble gases, radioiodine and radioactive particulate emissions to public dose cannot be reliably distinguished from natural background by the radiological environmental monitoring program at the typical low level emission rates measured at the Bruce Power site. Model estimates are therefore made of these contributors to dose based on site radiological emissions data. Environmental monitoring is carried out in order to use actual analyzed media values where available, in place of generated modeling values. The assessment of radiological dose to members of the public living near the Bruce Power site is based upon measured levels of radioactivity in the environment and calculated from reported emissions or containment transport modeling. Dose estimates are used because direct measurements of low radiation doses to a member of the public from all of Bruce Power s site operations are below detection limits. Doses are calculated for the thirteen potential critical groups from the Bruce Power site, and the Bruce Energy Centre Worker. A critical group, as defined by the CSA N288.1, Guidelines for Calculation Derived Release Limits for Radioactive material in Airborne and Liquid Effluents for Normal Operations of Nuclear Facilities [R-7], is a fairly homogeneous group of people whose location, habitat, diet, etc., cause them to receive doses higher than the average received by typical people in all other groups in the expose population. [R-1] [R-7] The radiological dose to a human for a radionuclide is determined by the degree of exposure to that radionuclide in the exposure medium and the radionuclide specific and pathway specific Dose Conversion Factor (DCF). The degree of exposure is dependent on the specific activity of the radionuclide in the exposure medium and the attributes that define the degree of contact with the medium. For example: The radiological dose received by a human due to the ingestion of Tritium (HTO) in drinking water over a calendar year is calculated via the following equation: E = A x Q Where:
16 B-REP Rev 000 April 2013 Page 15 of 176 E = Exposure, the amount of tritiated water ingested. A = the specific activity of HTO in the drinking water source (Bq/L). And: Q = the quantity of drinking water consumed in one calendar year (l/year). The radiological dose (D) is then equal to the exposure (E) multiplied by the dose conversion factor (DCF). D = E x DCF = A x Q x DCF This assumes the drinking water source containing HTO was the only source of drinking water for the entire year, which is highly conservative. The doses for the different nuclides and pathways are similarly calculated and summed to give total dose from all nuclides and pathways Critical Group Discussion The Potential Critical Groups (PCG) identified in the most recent site specific survey are listed in Table 2. The location of each PCG is illustrated in Figure 1. These groups are used as representatives of the general public for the purposes of dose assessment. For each group except Bruce Energy Centre (BEC) worker, three age classes are considered, that is, one year old infant, ten year old child and adult. The characteristics of each group, including the use of local water supplies and consumption of home grown produce, are based on the Bruce site specific survey [R-3]. Note that the absolute intake rates in different food categories are based on central dietary intake rates from CSA N [R-7] [R-18], except for fish and venison intakes which are based on site-specific survey [R-3]. For the dose assessment purpose, mean inhalation rates and water ingestion rates are used for each age class [R-19]. Since the 2007 Site Specific Survey, the significant changes identified in the survey are: Two distinct lifestyles in the farming community. Location of nearest dairy farmer. The results indicate that there are two distinct lifestyles in the farming community. The majority of the farming community purchase their food sources from the supermarket and only obtain a small portion (10% or less) of their food sources from their farms. The remainder of the farmers obtains all or most of their food sources from their farms. This latter group is a result of a new community that has recently been established between 5 km and 10 km south east of Bruce Power site.
17 B-REP Rev 000 April 2013 Page 16 of 176 Based on the lifestyle of this new community, this group of farmers was identified as a new PCG (known as Mennonite Farmer). Mennonite Farmer includes farms which produce raw cow's milk and milk products for their own consumption. This consumption is considered in the percentage local food consumption calculations. Farmer is defined as farms that are within 10 km of Bruce Power site and this farm group obtains the majority of their food sources from the supermarket. The 2007 survey identified a dairy farm located within 10 km of Bruce Power Site, and since the 2007 survey, this farm is no longer a dairy farm. The nearest commercial dairy farms are beyond 10 km from Bruce Power Site. One of these dairy farms is located at the intersection of Bruce Saugeen Townline and Highway 21 (BDF1), and the other (BDF9) at the intersection of Sideroad 15N and County Road 15 (See Figure 1). As a result of the information accumulation during the survey, the four types of potential critical groups are: 1. Non-farm residential 2. Dairy farm resident 3. Mennonite farmer 4. Farm resident Table 3 to Table 5 compare percentage of food intake obtained from local sources [R-3] [R-21]. Each critical group has dose calculations performed for an adult, 15 year old child, 10 year old child, 5 year old child, and one year old infant [R-7]. The group and age class which is assigned the highest calculated dose for the year is termed the critical group. Dose calculations are also performed for a worker employed at the Bruce Energy Centre. See Table A 2 to Table A 15 in Appendix A for dose calculations.
18 B-REP Rev 000 April 2013 Page 17 of 176 Table 2 Identification of Potential Critical Groups Group Name BR1 BR17 BR25 BR27 BR32 BR48 BF8 BF14 BF16 BMF2 BMF3 BDF9 Bruce Energy Centre (BEC) General Characteristics and Location of Potential Critical Groups Non-farm resident, Lakeshore Scott Point, Located north of the Bruce Power site Non-farm resident, Inland, Located to the east of the Bruce Power site Non-farm resident, Inland Located to the southeast of the Bruce Power site Non-farm resident, Inland, Trailer Park Located to the south of the Bruce Power site Non-farm resident, Lakeshore Located to the south of Bruce Power site in Inverhuron Non-farm resident, Inland Located to the east of the Bruce Power site near Baie du Doré Agricultural, farm resident Located to the southeast of the Bruce Power site Agricultural, farm resident Located to the southeast of the Bruce Power site Agricultural, farm resident Located to the east of the Bruce Power site Agricultural, farm resident Located to the southeast of the Bruce Power site Agricultural, farm resident Located to the southeast of the Bruce Power site Agricultural, Dairy farm resident Located to the southeast of the Bruce Power site Worker in BEC (now known as Bruce Eco-Industrial Park) Located to the east of the Bruce Power site
19 B-REP Rev 000 April 2013 Page 18 of 176 Figure 1 Locations of Potential Critical Groups Considered in the 2011 Site Specific Survey (Source Base Map from Bruce County Map Factory)
20 B-REP Rev 000 April 2013 Page 19 of 176 Table 3 Percentage of Local Food Consumption for Each Potential Critical Group as Determined in the 2011 Site Specific Survey Potential Critical Group Non-Farm Residents Dairy Farmer Food Infant (0-5 yr) Child (6-15 yr) Adult (17+ yr) Fruit Above ground Vegetables Grain Root Vegetables Beef Milk Venison Honey Pork Eggs Poultry Fish Fruit Above ground Vegetables Grain Root Vegetables Beef Milk Venison Honey Pork Eggs Poultry Fish
DGR EA Follow-up Monitoring Program March 2011 Prepared by: Nuclear Waste Management Organization NWMO DGR-TR-2011-10 DGR EA Follow-up Monitoring Program March 2011 Prepared by: Nuclear Waste Management
Technical Assessment of DOE Savannah River Site-Sponsored Radionuclide Monitoring Efforts in the Central Savannah River Area Prepared by the Savannah River Ecology Laboratory at the Request of The Department
February 2012 July 2012 GUIDANCE DOCUMENT FOR DEVELOPMENTS AND SUBDIVISIONS WHERE ONSITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS ARE PROPOSED i Table of Contents List of Tables...iii List of Figures...iii 1 Introduction...
Towards a Framework for the Manag gement of Conta aminated Land Position Paper October 2009 WSP Environment & Energy www.wspenvironmental.co.za Contents Page 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Background 1 1.2 Guiding
Sec. N.1 - N.3 SSRCR Volume I - April 2004 PART N REGULATION AND LICENSING OF TECHNOLOGICALLY ENHANCED NATURALLY OCCURRING RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL (TENORM) Sec. N.1 - Purpose. This Part establishes radiation
Minto Asset Management Plan 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 What the Municipality Provides The Town of Minto has a significant portfolio of community assets under its care and control. These assets form an integral
RADIOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT R E P O R T S S E R I E S Environmental Consequences of the Chernobyl Accident and their Remediation: Twenty Years of Experience Report of the Chernobyl Forum Expert Group Environment
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Department of Environmental Protection Guidelines for the Development and Implementation of Environmental Emergency Response Plans 400-2200-001 PA Department of Environmental
UNIFIED FACILITIES CRITERIA (UFC) LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE; DISTRIBUTION UNLIMITED UNIFIED FACILITIES CRITERIA (UFC) LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT Any copyrighted material included in
United States Office of Solid Waste EPA 550-B99-003 Environmental Protection and Emergency Response November 1999 Agency (5104) www.epa.gov/ceppo/ RMPs Are on the Way! How LEPCs and Other Local Agencies
IAEA-TECDOC-1240 Present and future environmental impact of the Chernobyl accident Study monitored by an International Advisory Committee under the project management of the Institut de protection et de
Title: PPC APPLICATION Generic information for UK EPR diesel generators UKEPR-0004-001 Issue 00 Total number of pages: 52 Page No.: I / II UKEPR Document Pilot: C. CAHUZAC Name/Initials Date 26/06/08 Approved
Directive 001 Directive 001: Requirements for Site-Specific Liability Assessments in Support of the ERCB s Liability Management Programs June 6, 2012 Effective June 17, 2013, the Energy Resources Conservation
La Salle River Integrated Watershed Management Plan October 2010 1 LA SALLE RIVER INTEGRATED WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN October 2010 Prepared and Published by: La Salle River Watershed Planning Authority
Indicator Protocols Set: EN Indicator Protocols Set Environment (EN) 2000-2011 GRI Version 3.1 Version 3.1 1 2000-2011 GRI Version 3.1 Indicator Protocols Set: EN Environment Performance Indicators Aspect:
AMERICAN NUCLEAR INSURERS ANI NUCLEAR LIABILITY INSURANCE GUIDELINE 07-01 Potential for Unmonitored and Unplanned Off-Site Releases of Radioactive Material March 2007 AMERICAN NUCLEAR INSURERS 95 GLASTONBURY
STATE OF MARYLAND DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT CLEANUP STANDARDS FOR SOIL AND GROUNDWATER JUNE 2008 INTERIM FINAL GUIDANCE (UPDATE No. 2.1) Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction 3 2.0 Purpose and Applicability
United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Environmental Information Washington, DC 20460 EPA/240/B-06/001 February 2006 Guidance on Systematic Planning Using the Data Quality Objectives Process
Rev 02, 3/12/2007 PHYSICAL SECURITY FOR THE GALENA 4S NUCLEAR POWER GENERATION FACILITY Prepared for the City of Galena, Alaska I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... 1 II BACKGROUND... 1 A. The City of Galena... 1 B.
BUILDING TOGETHER Guide for Municipal Asset Management Plans Ministry of Infrastructure Letter from the Minister of Infrastructure and Minister of Transportation Infrastructure investments are vital to
A SUBSTITUTE ORDINANCE BY CITY UTILITIES COMMITTEE 12-O-1761 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND VARIOUS SECTIONS OF CHAPTER 74, ARTICLE X OF THE CITY OF ATLANTA CODE OF ORDINANCES FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROMOTING GREEN
GUIDELINES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT USE OF RECLAIMED WATER GUIDELINES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT USE OF RECLAIMED WATER EPA Victoria 40 City Road, Southbank Victoria 3006 AUSTRALIA Publication 464.2
SECTOR DISCLOSURES ELECTRIC UTILITIES CONTENTS 1. HOW TO USE THE SECTOR DISCLOSURES 3 2. INTRODUCTORY SECTION FOR THE ELECTRIC UTILITY SECTOR 2.1 For whom are the Sector Disclosures Intended? 8 2.2 How