2014 RETS-REMP & Groundwater Workshop, June 23-27, 2014, Westin Savannah, Savannah, GA
Sponsored by Nuclear Energy Institute


Jason Jang Award
Position Papers
Past Workshops
CHP Credit
Steering Committee
Contact Us
Workshop Links
Technical Links
Files and Software

Abstracts for the 2002 RETS-REMP Workshop

Gamma Analysis of Sewage Slduge for Unconditional Release Greg Barley
Effluent Release Performance Indicators - An Insurer's Perspective William G. Wendland, P. E.
Brief History of the REMP Dr. Jason C. Jang
Meteorological Instrument Error Determination Claude Flory
Control of Radiological Gaseous Effluents Claude Flory
Atmospheric Dispersion Factors:  What Are They and Why Do We Use Them? (Acrobat PDF) R. Brad Harvey
Ted A. Messier
Meteorological Data Processing for Commerical Nuclear Power Plants (Acrobat PDF) R. Brad Harvey
Ted A. Messier
The Past, present, and future of the NATC's public radiation research program J. T. Harris
Restructure of REMP Sampling at Callaway John Kerrigan
Pennsylvania's Environmental Monitoring Program Around Nuclear Power Facilities Tonda Lewis
EPRI Support of Utility Environmental Stewardship Through Optimized Liquid Radwaste Processing Programs Paul D. Saunders
Carbon-14 Monitoring Programs at Korean Nuclear Power Plants Hee Geun Kim
Wi Soo Kim
Duck Won Kang
Goung Jin Lee
Foundations of REMP Ken Sejkora
Greg Barley
Simple Digital Mapping of REMP Sampling Locations Ken Sejkora
Roger Tolbert
On-line Drying of Augmented Offgas Charcoal Ken Sejkora
Charlie Minott
Phil Harizi
Paul McNulty
Tritium in the Demin Water System - An IE Bulletin 80-10 Challenge Ken Sejkora
Meteorological Monitoring:  History, Requirements and Uses Robert F. Yewdall
ISFSI Dose Rate Calcuations and Measurements Andrew Hodgdon
Jo Ann Pelczar
Mel Gmyreck
DC Cook Plant Experience with PRC-001 Resin and the Impact on Radioactive Effluents  


Gamma Analysis of Sewage Sludge for Unconditional Release

Greg Barley, Progress Energy

Gamma isotopic analysis of sewage sludge samples is an important part of our processes for unconditional release of the material from the plant site. The USNRC has required that plants analyze samples to environmental Lower Limit of Detection (LLD's). However, to date there has not been any formal guidance issued by the USNRC to define the LLD's to be used for sewage sludge. The USNRC has suggested the use of the environmental LLD's from the table listed in the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) for environmental sampling (also listed in NUREG 1302).

Water best approximates the consistency of sewage sludge as it is removed from the site, hence the most appropriate LLD's may be those of water. While sewage sludge is a mixture of solid and liquid materials, it is typically greater than 95% water.

10 CFR Part 20 Appendix B, Table 3, lists the Monthly Average Concentration (µCi/ml) maximum values to be used for sewage releases to sewers. The values in Table 3 are a factor of 10 greater than the values listed in Table 2 (Effluent Concentrations). The factor of 10 is applied because there is no practical way for the licensee to determine the dose contribution because of the remoteness of the individual from the point of discharge.

Since the applicable limits set forth in 10 CFR Part 20 Appendix B, Table 3 apply a factor of 10 increase due to the remoteness of the individual from the point of discharge, it is a logical assumption to apply the same factor to the water environmental LLD's. A factor of 10 would yield no conservatism and would be inconsistent with other safety factors such as those used to demonstrate 10 CFR compliance in the ODCM. Typical ODCM setpoints have a factor of two for conservatism included to ensure compliance. A reasonable and acceptable approach for ensuring that an appropriate LLD is developed for sewage sludge would be to include a safety factor of two for the proposed environmental LLD's. This would mean that the environmental LLD's from the ODCM would be multiplied by 5 to establish an acceptably conservative LLD for sewage sludge. LLD's so derived would provide reasonable assurance that no radioactive material was being released into any municipal sanitary sewage system.

Back to Top


William G. Wendland, P.E.
American Nuclear Insurers
Town Center, Suite 300S
29 South Main Street
West Hartford, Connecticut, 06106-2430 USA

Telephone: 860-561-3433 Extension 302
FAX: 860-561-4655
E Mail: bwendland@amnucins.com

American Nuclear Insurers (ANI) provides nuclear liability insurance coverage to all US operating commercial nuclear power plants and other types of nuclear facilities as well. In the aggregate, ANI issues more than one thousand casualty and property policies every year at more than 400 locations. At power plants, ANI provides nuclear liability insurance of US $200 million in financial protection. Combined, these power plant facilities produce more than 300 gigawatts of electricity.

Beginning in 1981, ANI implemented a program to monitor and evaluate industry and individual nuclear plant performance based on select engineering plant performance indicators. The program is also used to redistribute a portion of total power reactor nuclear liability insurance premium based on the results of the select engineering performance indicators. The program is referred to as the ANI Engineering Rating Factor (ERF).

Currently ANI continuously evaluates fourteen areas of nuclear plant performance. Based on aggregate plant performance, a portion of nuclear plant liability premium is redistributed such that the best performers are eligible to receive a credit of up to 20 percent and the highest insurance risk performers can be assessed a surcharge of up to 30 percent. In addition, each of the performance areas is used to assist in development of An insurance risk profile that is used in the development of ANI liability engineering loss control inspection strategies.

This paper presents an overview of the ANI - ERF program including a detailed description of each performance indicator area and includes an evaluation of each indicator area with respect to industry performance, type of plant and class of plant. A primary focus will be related to airborne and gaseous effluent releases. Trends with respect to time are also presented.

Back to Top


13th Annual RETS-REMP Meeting

Dr. Jason C. Jang
US Nuclear Regulatory Commission
June 24-26, 2002

Atlantic City, New Jersey

1946-1962 The Formative Years of Nuclear Regulation

1946 The Atomic Energy Act. The 1946 law did not allow for private, commercial application of atomic energy. To manage the nation's atomic energy programs, the act established the five-member Atomic Energy Commission (AEC)

1954 The 1954 Atomic Energy Act redefined the atomic energy program (allowed private commercial nuclear industry)

Shippingport nuclear power, PA, Peach Bottom Unit 1

1960 Yankee Nuclear, Rowe, Initial Critical 485 Thermal MWt, (Westinghouse)

1961 Yankee Rowe, Commercial Operation

1963 Upgraded to 600 Thermal MWt

1992 Permanent Shutdown

1963-1975 The Nuclear Power Debate
1963: "Turnkey" by GE for Oyster Creek, 515 electric MegaWatt, $66 million

1969: Commercial Operation

Dec. 1969: Congress passed the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA).

Jan. 1970: President Nixon signed NEPA (now required federal agencies to consider the environmental impact of their activities)

July 1971: AEC decision for the Calvert Cliffs nuclear power plant was defeated by the NEPA.

1974 Established a New Agency, called Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)

Jan. 1975 NRC began its operations as a separation agency

1971-1980 REMP, The Best Era

Effect of Low-Level Radiation
Environmental Statement/Study for constructions
National Wildlife Magazine (Dead Birds at Beaver Valley Unit-1/2 Cooling Tower)
Tidal Wave Study (dispersion study)
Atmospheric Dispersion Study
Aerial Measurement (EG&G)
Non-Radiological Environmental Monitoring

    · Thermal Pollution (fish kill issues at Big Rock Point and Oyster Creek sites)

    · Chemical Pollution : Yellow Creek Decision, Non-radiological monitoring requirements were removed from the Technical Specification (NRC) and moved to the EPA (NPDES, Annual Non-Radiological Environmental Report).

    Radiological Environmental Monitoring (including benthos, pine needles, etc.)

    Analytical Measurements for REMP Samples

    · Gamma (NaI and GeLi)
    · Gross α/β
    · H-3 analysis in water and in fish flesh (water and organic bounding tritium analyses)
    · Sr-89/90
    · P-32
    · Fe-55
    · Ni-63
    · C-14
    · Ca-45
    · I-131 in charcoal cartridge (homogenous/face loaded geometry)
    · Ambient Radiation (Film, TLD, ion chamber)

March 28, 1979 TMI-2
Emerging Emergency Preparedness (EP)

1981-1990 RETS (NRC/Franklin Institute) & REMP

June 1990 BRC (Below Regulatory Concern) issued by NRC but rested.

April 26, 1986 Chenobyl

Best Opportunity to validate air sampling and analytical technique for the REMP since 1976

1991-2000 Reactor Oversight Process (ROP)

April 1991 Published NUREG -1301/1302, "ODCM Guidance: Standard Radiological Effluent Controls for PWR/BWR" GL 89-01, Supplement No. 1

1991 License Renewal Regulation Approved by the NRC (Environmental Impact Statement)

April 1998 BG&E, License Renewal for Calvert Cliffs,

July 1998 Duke Energy, License Renewal for Oconee,

Mar. 2000 ROP Complete the Pilot Program

April 2000 ROP-1 Implementation of the ROP-1

2001-? Biennial REMP Inspection

Back to Top

Meteorological Instrument Error Determination
Claude Flory

Regulatory Guide 1.23 has guidance on acceptable errors for wind speed and direction and temperature measurement instrumentation. These errors are applicable to the error of the whole instrument channel loop. During surveillances of meteorological instruments components of instrument channel loops are checked separately. This presentation will discuss how, at Millstone, the error for the whole meteorological channel loop is checked to verify conformance with the regulatory guidance.

Back to Top

Control of Radiological Gaseous Effluents
Claude Flory

Millstone is reassessing control of radioactivity in gaseous effluents from containment during outages and from other sources during non-routine maintenance activities. As part of this reassessment, a benchmarking survey was conducted. This presentation will discuss Millstone's present efforts and potential improvements in the area of controlling radiological gaseous effluents and will present results of the survey.

Back to Top

The Past, present, and future of the NATC's public radiation research program.

J. T. Harris and D. W. Miller
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign,
Department of Nuclear, Plasma, and Radiological Engineering,
103 S. Goodwin Avenue
Urbana, IL 61801

The North American Technical Center (NATC) has developed the official US effluent database for gaseous and liquid releases from U.S. nuclear power stations for the U.S. EPA and other governmental agencies as part of its Public Radiation Research Program. One of the goals of this program is to provide accurate effluent data for the UNSCEAR Reports issued by the United Nations every 4-5 years. U.S. effluent data is also being provided to the EDF, France's nuclear regulatory agency, for inclusion in their international PWR liquid and gaseous activity release report.

One important goal of the Public Radiation Research Program is to develop a web-based electronic database that the utilities can use to directly report their effluent releases to the U.S. NRC. However, several issues related to reporting and monitoring must be solved for this to become a reality. An expert group is being formed from industry leaders to tackle some of these issues. The Public Radiation Research Program is also interested in focusing on other important RETS-REMP issues.

This paper specifically addresses some of the results of past and ongoing projects within the NATC's Public Radiation Research Program. Results and trend analyses of the US effluent database from 1994-2000 will be presented. Sister plant, power output and operating lifetime comparisons will be made. Comparisons will also be made with European nuclear power plant releases. The formation of the expert group and the web-based electronic database will also be evaluated. Finally, future projects of the program, including collaborations with UNSCEAR and IAEA, will be discussed.

Back to Top


Callaway Plant was committed to having the preoperational radiological monitoring program effective for at least the first three years of operation. Following this period, program changes could be initiated based on operational experience.

Callaway plant began operation during 1986. It was decided in 1999 to evaluate the REMP sample and analysis schedule. In 2000 the following changes were implemented; 1) number of direct radiation stations and soil locations were reduced 2) analysis of Sr-89, Sr-90 & Ca in milk and Sr-89 & Sr-90 in airborne composites and fish was eliminated.

During this project the sector locations of the TLD and Air stations were verified.

This presentation will review the methodology used to eliminate these requirements and verification of locations.

John Kerrigan
Sr. Health Physicist
Callaway Plant

Back to Top

Pennsylvania's Environmental Monitoring Program Around Nuclear Power Facilities

Tonda Lewis
Environmental Surveillance Section/Bureau of Radiation Protection
PA Department of Environmental Protection


Among the provisions in Pennsylvania's Radiation Protection Act (1984-147) is: 'Maintain a comprehensive environmental radiation monitoring program around nuclear power plants and other locations throughout the Commonwealth' (Section 101 (3)). This is accomplished around Pennsylvania's five nuclear power facilities through cooperative routine environmental sampling programs between the state and each facility. Both independent and split or collocated sampling/monitoring is performed around each facility, and results are exchanged. This cooperation between the facility's and the state's environmental operations provides a greater reassurance of public safety from radiation exposure due to facility operations.

Back to Top

EPRI Support of Utility Environmental Stewardship Through Optimized Liquid Radwaste Processing Programs

Paul D. Saunders
V.P. of Development

EPRI has undertaken several important initiatives to support industry environmental stewardship goals related to minimizing generated liquid waste, the resultant solid radwaste, and discharges of processing effluent activity.

The first, "RadBench", is an interactive Web-based tool that was recently overhauled based on utility feedback and is up and running. It provides utilities with a platform to accurately capture and disseminate fundamental liquid radwaste processing benchmarking information. The program can be used for comparing both industry and individual facility trends and for assessing improvements or changes to a plant's liquid radwaste processing strategy. It also provides industry radwaste processing contact information for communicating ways to improve current processing techniques.

A second industry challenge is related to the release of liquid processing effluents. Goals for effluent activity, exposure, and liquid volume continue to be lowered. As a result, many stations are debating the cost-benefit of going to "zero release" based on liquid volume and/or MF & AP activity. There is no industry standard that defines "zero release" or that provides a solid evaluation methodology. Utilities have requested that EPRI facilitate an industry team-effort to develop an industry guideline document for use when assessing the most effective site-specific liquid processing strategy.

This presentation will describe the rationale, current status, and results to dates of these projects.

Back to Top

Carbon-14 Monitoring Programs in the Korean Nuclear Power Plants

Hee Geun Kim, Wi Soo Kim, Duck Won Kang and Goung Jin Lee+
Korea Electric Power Research Institute(KEPRI), 103-15, Munji-dong, Daejeon, 305-380, Korea
Chosun University, 375 Seosuck-dong, Gwangju, 501-759, Korea


Carbon-14 is one of the radionuclides released by nuclear power plants(NPPs). It is produced in nuclear reactors as an activation product due to a number of reactions in the fuel, cladding, coolant and moderator. It is almost always emitted and released as gas through the effluent stack.

From Korean pressurized heavy water reactors (PHWRs) about 95% of all Carbon-14 is released as Carbon dioxide(CO2). According to the revised Korean regulatory law, the radiocarbon should be monitored periodically at the effluent stream at Korean PHWR sites from 1999. At the Wolsong unit 1, it is PHWR type, the measured discharge rate was about 6.5 ~ 23.8 Ci/unit×yr from 1998 to 2001. The offsite dose from Carbon-14 exposures in the operation of the PHWRs can account for as much as 30% of the total offsite doses. So the management of doses arising from the Carbon-14 is a key program of the offsite dose management program at Wolsong NPPs. However, the measurement of the Carbon-14 at the Korean pressurized water reactors (PWRs) is not measured yet.

The existing regulations in the Korean PWRs do not require monitoring of Carbon-14 in liquid and gaseous effluents, nor the assessment of the dose impacts from such effluents. However the reactor site in Korea have more than 4 operating units, and the offsite dose at multi-unit reactors is increased due to carbon-14 releases to the environment. This paper has been focused on the carbon-14 monitoring program at the effluent stack at Korean PHWRs site and the pilot project at Korean PWRs to estimate and evaluate the carbon-14 release amount in the effluent stream.

Back to Top

Foundations of REMP

Ken Sejkora
Entergy Nuclear Northeast – Pilgrim Station
Greg Barley
Progress Energy


With the inception of nuclear power generation, the need was identified to monitor and assess the impact of radioactive effluent releases on the environment and members of the public. The requirement was put in place for power generation licensees to institute and perform radiological environmental monitoring programs (REMP) to monitor for such impacts. This presentation will discuss some of the historical perspectives and regulatory architecture behind REMP. The key elements of an effective REMP, as well as some of the recent extensions of REMP techniques into areas such as material free-release, will be discussed.

Back to Top

Simplified Digital Mapping of REMP Sampling Locations

Ken Sejkora
Entergy Nuclear Northeast – Pilgrim Station

Roger Tolbert
Entergy Nuclear South – Grand Gulf


One of the requirements of the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) is the inclusion of maps showing locations of radiological environmental monitoring program (REMP) sampling locations. Accurate determination of distance and direction from release points is an important element of an effective REMP, and can be especially useful for pinpointing nearest resident and garden locations for critical receptor dose assessments. Many licensees have generated ODCM maps from locally available maps which often lack the 'pedigree' of USGS topographical maps. In some cases, inaccuracies in local maps have resulted in sampling locations being in different compass sectors than originally intended. This presentation will discuss the use of low-cost, commercially available mapping software and global positioning system (GPS) receivers to easily and accurately map REMP sampling locations.

Back to Top

On-line Drying of Augmented Offgas Charcoal

Ken Sejkora, Brad Barrus, Charlie Minott, Phil Harizi, Paul McNulty
Entergy Nuclear Northeast – Pilgrim Station


At Pilgrim Station, we rely on the augmented offgas (AOG) treatment system to process radioactive gasses and to provide a substantial margin between what we discharge and allowable Federal limits. The AOG system had operated inconsistently for over twenty years, and had been yielding sub-standard performance with regard to noble gas retention times. Substantial resources were diverted to repeatedly troubleshoot and attempt to restore the system's full capabilities; moreover, continued system declining performance attracted increased regulator concern. An integrated team approach was used to assess the system design and performance to resolve the issue. A number of contributing factors were identified which led to carry-over of moisture into the charcoal, thereby reducing its efficiency to retain noble gases. A plan was put in place to resolve many of the outstanding issues, such as ineffective drain lines, poor cooler performance, high flow rates due to air inleakage, etc. A key element of the problem resolution involved a means to perform on-line drying of the charcoal. This presentation will discuss the success achieved through use of the integrated team approach, as well as the methods used to perform on-line drying, and assess system performance

Back to Top

Tritium in The Demin Water System – An IE Bulletin 80-10 Challenge

Ken Sejkora
Entergy Nuclear Northeast – Pilgrim Station


Routine sampling of the station heating system at Pilgrim Station during the fourth quarter of 2001 identified low levels of tritium. The source of this tritium was traced to makeup water provided by the demineralized water system. Extensive sampling of various legs of the demin water system was performed in an attempt to identify the source of tritium, but all results were inconclusive. Further review of system design identified a common vent line shared by the demin water tank and the condensate storage tanks. The demin water tank likely became contaminated as the tanks would 'breathe' tritiated water vapor through the shared vent line. When coupled with recent increases in boron and tritium concentrations in reactor coolant, the tritium levels in the demin system increased to levels sufficient to yield detectable concentrations in other systems. This presentation will discuss the steps taken to monitor this issue from the perspective of IE Bulletin 80-10, the dose impact resulting from tritium releases from this source, and steps being taken to resolve the issue.

Back to Top

Meteorological Monitoring

History, Requirements & Uses

Robert F. Yewdall
PSEG Nuclear LLC


Meteorological monitoring has and continues to be an important component of commercial nuclear power station design and operations. The use of meteorological information spans a number of functional uses. These uses involve site characterization and building design requirements (including structures and HVAC systems), development of normal and accident dispersion estimates for evaluation of radiological dose estimates, environmental impact analysis and emergency preparedness activities.

During the last 40 years the emphasis has shifted from primary data collection to display and realtime dispersion modeling. The early requirement focused on siting and data collection so utilities and the NRC (AEC) could evaluate the capability to meet 10CFR100, Reactor Siting Criteria and as low as reasonability achievable (ALARA) radiological effluent releases analysis (10CFR50, Appendix I). Following the TMI accident in 1978 the importance of site meteorological took on an expanded role. The NRC issued a number of NUREGs that basically became requirements. The NRC's treatment of meteorological monitoring and dispersion modeling has been a fairly prescriptive process. The most recent guidance covering meteorological monitoring is ANSI/ANS-3.11-2000, American National Standard for Determining Meteorological Information at Nuclear Facilities. This standard has yet to be recognized by the NRC.

Back to Top

ISFSI Dose Rate Calculations and Measurements

Andrew Hodgdon, Jo Ann Pelczar, and Mel Gmyreck

Radiological Engineering Group and Environmental Laboratory
400 Donald Lynch Blvd.
Marlborough, MA 01752
978 568 2750


We have performed calculations of photon and neutron dose rates for two ISFSIs and have compared to measurements at one. We are taking the measurements at the second and will present that data when it is ready. For the first ISFSI our calculations compared within a factor of two to measurements.

The purpose was to establish that the contact, fenceline, and site boundary dose rate criteria were met, a task that was especially difficult for the 25 mrem/year criterion in 10CFR72.104. This dose rate is too low to measure and too complicated to calculate. However, the job can be achieved when calculation and measurement are used together.

To perform the calculations we used the ORIGEN series codes to calculate source terms and used the MCNP codes to calculate dose rates. We will report briefly on the level of input detail required to achieve this accuracy and will report on our experience with codes that could not achieve this level of accuracy (Microshield, MicroSkyshine, ANISN, QAD, and DORT.)

Back to Top

DC Cook Plant Experience with PRC-001 Resin and the Impact on Radioactive Effluents

The use of PRC-001, sometimes referred to 'sticky resin' changed the chemical properties of the wastewater received by the Radioactive Wastewater Demineralization System. Due to this change the Radioactive Wastewater Demineralization System did not perform at its optimum capacity due to media loading based on previous outage experience. This resulted in an increased quantity of radionuclides being released to the environment.

Back to Top


North American Technical Center
Last Updated 02/22/2004

Contact Webmaster