Topical Aspects on Monitoring

Airborne Radioactive Effluents

from NPPs
Wan-tae KIM

Contents
Concepts of Monitoring
Guidelines of Monitoring
Status of Monitoring

I. Concepts of Monitoring
WHAT
WHAT

WHY
WHY

HOW
HOW

MONITORING

WHEN
WHEN

WHERE
WHERE

Monitoring What
All radioactive effluents to the environment
Two broad source types at NPPs
Point source : stacks and ducts
Nonpoint source : all other sources

Focus on aerosol effluents from point source

Monitoring Why
For evaluation
the environmental impact
the potential annual radiation doses to the public
adequacy and performance of containment, waste
treatment methods, and effluent controls

To ascertain
regulatory requirements and LCO have been met
concentrations have been kept ALARA

Monitoring When
Continuously or periodically
At all conditions of reactor operation
Normal
Off-normal
Anticipated operational occurrences
Post-accident

Off-normal case should consider leakage of

particles through filter media, filter seals, and
cracks in filter frames

Monitoring Where (1)

All major and potentially significant paths
In 40 CFR Part 61.93 (4)(i) : continuous monitor at
release points that have the potential effective
dose equivalent (EDE) 0.1 mrem/yr
NUREG-0800, SRP 11.5, table 1 lists all paths

Monitoring Where (2)

NUREG-0800
11.5
Table 1

Monitoring How
Combination of direct measurement, sample
extraction, and analysis
Sample extraction is performed with sampling
system
Sampling system is very useful, but there are a lot
of complexities for getting representative samples

Sampling System
Generic Sampling System (from ANSI N13.1-1999)

Continuous Air Monitor

P&ID of a CAM Sampler

II. Guidelines of Monitoring

1977 CAAA : EPA limit emission to air
1983 EPA : propose NESHAP DOE &NRC
1987EPA:Case of VCD-reconsider NESHAP

ANSI N13.1-1969
1981 NRC : SRP 11.5 ver.3 - ANSI N13.1(1969)

1989 EPA:promulgate-40 CFR 61, Subpart I & H

Decision-making : VCD & benzene policy
No member of public exceeds 0.1 mSv/yr

1989 NRC : petition for regulation duplicate

1990 EPA: publish Rad NESHAP - 0.1 mSv/yr

EPA(1993a) : ANSI N13.1-1969
EPA(1993b) : 8-2 rule or duct diameter

1990 DOE : follow Rad NESHAP-ANSI N13.1(1969)

1993, propose
ANSI N13.1-199X
1996 NRC : announce new Constraint Rule transfer 0.1 mSv/yr to 10 CFR 20
1996 NRC : SRP11.5 Draft ver.4-ANSI N13.1(1993)

1997 EPA : rescind - 40 CFR 61, Subpart I

1997 KINS : SRP 11.5 ver.0 - ANSI N13.1(1969)

ANSI N13.1-1999

2002 EPA : update - Rad NESHAP

ANSI N13.1-1999 use for new & modified
Impose additional inspection on existing

2000 DOE : present DOE Position to EPA No supporting complete retrofitting &replacement
of all existing monitoring devices
2007 NRC : SRP 11.5 ver.4 - ANSI N13.1(1999)

Rad NESHAP (40 CFR 61, Subpart H)

Rad NESHAP standard for public dose limit
from 1 mSv/yr to 0.1 mSv /yr
from all pathway to just only air pathway

The technical requirements for determining dose to

the public became more rigidly defined
So, called out the ANSI N13.1-1969 as in
USEPA(1993a)
In addition, sampling sites are required to be selected
following procedures in USEPA(1993b)

Deficiency in USEPA(1993b)
USEPA(1993b) require that sampling should be done
at least 5 - 8 diameters downstream from a
disturbance and at least 2 diameters upstream flow
disturbances
Techniques is clear, but no criteria
Assumption : the degree of flow development and
mixing are directly related to the distance from
disturbance
This, unfortunately, is not necessarily true

Deficiency in USEPA(1993a) - 1
USEPA(1993a) assumes nothing about flow
development and mixing and calls out ANSI
recommendations for probe design
However, other characteristics of the bulk effluent (i.e.,
the degree of flow development and particulate
mixing) are also critical to determine the design
requirements of the probe
ANSI N13.1(1969) provides guidance for particulate
sampling probes that utilize a multinozzle array to
accomodate any deficiencies in the flow development
or mixing

Deficiency in USEPA(1993a) 2
This scheme has a
significant drawback
As additional nozzles are
added, the loss of
particles increase due to
impaction in the small
nozzle inlet and tube
bends
Depending upon the
density of the particulates
at a ratio 2.0, particulates
are underestimated by 10
to 50%

from ANSI N13.1-1969

ANSI N13.1-1999
ANSI N13.1-1999 compensate the deficiencies in
USEPA(1993a) and USEPA(1993b)
ANSI N13.1-1999 is a performance-based standard
rather than the prescriptive 1969 version
To assure a representative sample is collected, the
standard established required sampling system
performance criteria

Performance Criteria (1)

Total transport of 10 m AD particles and vaporous
contaminants shall be 50% from the free stream
to the collector/analyzer
Sampler nozzle inlet shall have a transmission ratio
between 80% and 130% for 10 m AD particles
Sampler nozzle shall have an aspiration ratio that
does not exceed 150% for 10 m AD particles

Performance Criteria (2)

Characteristics of a suitable sampling location are :
coefficients of variation over the central 2/3 area of
the cross section within 20% for 10 m AD
particles, gaseous tracer, and gas velocity
flow angle 20 relative to the long axis of the stack
and nozzle inlet
the tracer gas concentration shall not vary from the
mean 30% at any point on a 40 CFR 60, Appendix
A, Method 1 velocity mapping grid

Performance Criteria (3)

Effluent flowrate continuous measurement required
if flow variation is 20% in a year
Effluent and sample flow rate shall be measured
within 10%
Continuous sample flowrate measurement and
control required if flow varies 20% during a
sample interval
flow control shall be within 15%

III. Status of Monitoring

20 units under operation

6 units under construction
All NPPs under operation use stacks (and ducts) sampling
system with isokinetic multiple small-diameter nozzles
Besides, the APR-1000 and APR-1400 have much more
number of stacks and ducts

Design Differences
Status of sampling system at 4 units has been
surveyed during regular inspection in 2007
Considerable matters are listed :
the ratio of effluent/sample flow rate ranges from 10000
to 100000
unbalance seems to exist among the components
transport line seems too long, lots of bends
information related sampling location, nozzle, and
transport line for old system is absent
no total procedures to maintain sampling system
no method to inspect the inner sampling site

Data Comparability
Uniform method can provide a uniform basis for
data comparison from the different facilities
Uniform method can be maintained with
Periodic inspections of nozzle, transport lines, sample
and effluent flowmeters shall be conducted
Periodic calibrations of effluent and sample
flowmeters, CAMs, and sample analysis
instrumentation shall be conducted

Under Tasks
New plants under
construction in Korea are
planning to use ANSI
N13.1-1999
The performance criteria
of ANSI N13.1-1999 have
been studied to impose
on the existing facilities