This is the first PNNL Site report to include LSLII and RTL facilities, as incorporated into the Radioactive Air Emissions License-05. This report documents radionuclide air emissions that result in the highest effective dose equivalent (EDE) to an offsite member of the public, referred to as the maximally exposed individual (MEI). The report has been prepared in compliance with the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Title 40, Protection of the Environment, Part 61, National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), Subpart H, "National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other than Radon from Department of Energy Facilities" and Washington Administrative Code (WAC) Chapter 246-247, "Radiation Protection-Air Emissions." Federal regulations in 40 CFR 61, Subpart H require the measurement and reporting of radionuclides emitted from DOE facilities and the resulting offsite dose from those emissions. Those regulations impose a standard of 10 mrem/yr EDE, which is not to be exceeded. Washington State adopted the 40 CFR 61 standard of 10 mrem/yr EDE into its regulations that require the calculation and reporting of the EDE to the MEI from both point source emissions and from any fugitive source emissions of radionuclides. WAC 246-247 further requires the reporting of radionuclide emissions, including radon, from all PNNL Site sources. The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1989 revised the NESHAP regulations (i.e., 40 CFR 61, Subpart H) to govern emissions of radionuclides from DOE facilities. Those regulations are intended for the measurement of point source emissions but are inclusive of fugitive emissions with regard to complying with the dose standard. The dose to the PNNL Site MEI due to routine major and minor point source emissions in 2012 from PNNL Site sources is 9E-06 mrem (9E-08 mSv) EDE. The dose from fugitive emissions (i.e., unmonitored sources) is 1E-7 mrem (1E-9 mSv) EDE. The dose from radon emissions is 2E-6 mrem (2E-08 mSv) EDE. No nonroutine emissions occurred in 2012. The total radiological dose for 2012 to the MEI from all PNNL Site radionuclide emissions, including fugitive emissions and radon, is 1E-5 mrem (1E-7 mSv) EDE, or 100,000 times smaller than the federal and state standard of 10 mrem/yr, to which the PNNL Site is in compliance.

No abstract

It is generally considered necessary to measure concentrations of contaminants-of-concern at a background location when conducting atmospheric environmental surveillance. This is because it is recognized that measurements of background concentrations can enhance interpretation of environmental monitoring data. Despite the recognized need for background measurements, there is little published guidance available that describes how to identify an appropriate atmospheric background monitoring location. This paper develops generic criteria that can guide the decision making process for identifying suitable locations for background atmospheric monitoring station. Detailed methods for evaluating some of these criteria are also provided and a case study for establishment of an atmospheric background surveillance station as part of an environmental surveillance program is described. While the case study focuses on monitoring for radionuclides, the approach is equally valid for any airborne constituent being monitored. The case study shows that implementation of the developed criteria can result in a good, defensible choice for a background atmospheric monitoring location.

Environmental surveillance data are used in assessing the impact of current and past site operations on human health and the environment, demonstrating compliance with applicable local, state, and federal environmental regulations, and verifying the adequacy of contaminant and effluent controls.SESP sampling schedules are reviewed, revised, and published each calendar year in the Hanford Site environmental surveillance master sampling schedule. Environmental samples are collected by SESP personnel in accordance with the approved sample collection procedures documented in this manual. Personnel training requirements are documented in SESP-TP-01 Surface Environmental Surveillance Project Training Program. MANUAL SCOPE/USEThis manual contains the procedures that are used for the collection of SESP environmental samples and field measurements on and around the Hanford Site. Specific responsibilities for personnel involved in SESP environmental surveillance activities are defined in Section 2.0 of this manual. Section 1.0Issued: 01-07 Supersedes: 12-01 PNL-MA-580 Page 2 ____________________________________________________________________________________________________This manual is intended for use by SESP personnel. Project specific training is required for all individuals collecting SESP samples or field measurements. The training will assure that the procedures in this manual are understood and properly applied. Training also assures that representative samples and measurements are collected in a safe and consistent manner and that analytical results are comparable between locations and over time. USE CATEGORYThe procedures in this manual fall under the Standards-Based Management System (SBMS) "Reference Use" category. Procedures will be available to the individuals performing the work but the procedures can be performed from memory. MANUAL REVISIONS AND UPDATESThe procedures described in this manual are reviewed annually by SESP personnel to assure that major revisions to existing procedures and new procedures are incorporated promptly. Small corrections or revisions that do not warrant complete manual updates may be issued to manual holders in the form of interim procedures. Interim procedures may be used for documenting changes to existing procedures. Interim procedures will be issued on a temporary basis (up to 1 year) and will be valid until the appropriate section is updated. After initial issuance and training, it is the responsibility of each manual holder to retain a copy of the interim procedure and be familiar with its contents.To assure that the procedures in this manual are accurate, complete, in the correct format, and usable, the following requirements must be met before a new, revised, or interim procedure is issued:• All new, interim, or revised procedures must be reviewed by the project manager, the project quality engineer, and a technical reviewer prior to issuance. Issuance approval by the author and the reviewers must be documented on the first page of the procedures with dated signatures.• ...