Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Independent environmental monitoring and public dose assessment around the Canadian Nuclear Power Plants

  • Published:
Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Radiological impact to members of the public living around the Canadian Nuclear Power Plants (NPPs) was assessed using environmental monitoring data for tritium, gross alpha, 137Cs and 131I and dose calculations. The monitoring data exhibited concentrations much lower than guidelines and are comparable to other results in Canada. Tritium is the most significant radionuclide and major contributor to the very low dose (µSv y−1), to members of the public. The tritium dose was a fraction of the regulatory dose limit and background radiation dose. The public living around Canadian NPPs is not exposed to radiation that would result in a radiological impact.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) (1982) United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation report to the General Assembly New York (United Nations)

  2. New Brunswick Power (NBP) (2014) Environmental radiation monitoring program, annual report ACR-07000-2014. New Brunswick, Canada

  3. Ontario Power Generation (OPG) (2014) Results of environmental monitoring programs report, NREP-03443-10014 Toronto, Canada

  4. Hydro-Québec (HQ) (2014) Résultats du programme de surveillance de l’environnement de la centrale de Gentilly-2. Rapport technique G2-RT-2014-00518-003 Québec, Canada

  5. Bruce Power (BP) (2013) Environmental monitoring program report, B-REP-07000-00006, Revision 1. Kincardine Canada

  6. International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) (2014) Basic safety standards radiation protection and safety of radiation sources: international basic safety standards. General Safety Requirements Part 3 Vienna, Austria

  7. Intenational Committee on Radiation Protection (ICRP) (1996) Compilation of ingestion and inhalation dose coefficients in age dependent doses to members of the public from intake of radionuclides: part 5, Publication 72. Ann ICRP 26(1):1–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Canadian Standard Association (CSA) (2014). Guidelines for calculating derived release limits for radioactive material in airborne and liquid effluents for normal operation of nuclear facilities. Ontario, Canada

  9. International Committee on Radiation Protection (ICRP) (1995) Age-dependent doses to members of the public from intake of radionuclides: part 4 inhalation dose coefficients. Publication 71. Annals of the ICRP 25 (3/4). Pergamon Press, Oxford, UK

  10. Laurence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) (2002) Environmental report, appendix C. Methods of dose calculations. UCRL-50027-02. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. California, United States

  11. Health Canada (HC) (2009) Health Canada guidelines for canadian drinking water quality screening level: guideline technical document—radiological parameters. Ottawa, Canada

  12. Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (2001) Tritium in the Canadian environment: levels and health effects. Report RSP-0153-1. Prepared for the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission under CNSC contract no. 87055-01-0184 by Ranasara Consultants and Richard Osborne

  13. Ontario Ministry of Labour (OML) (2014) Nuclear reactor surveillance programs report to the radiation monitoring working group. Ontario, Canada

  14. Mihok S et al (2016) Tritium dynamics in soils and plants grown under three irrigation regimes at a tritium processing facilities in Canada. J Environ Radioact 153:176–187

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Thompson P et al (2015) Levels of tritium in soils and vegetation near Canadian nuclear facilities releasing tritium to the atmosphere: implications for environmental models. J Environ Radioact 140:105–113

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Osborne RV (2002) Tritium in the Canadian environment: levels and health effects. Report RSP-0153-1. Prepared for the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission

  17. United Nations Food and Agriculture and World Health Organization (CodexAlimentarius) Standards for radioactivity in foods (http://www.codexalimentarius.net/)

  18. Currie LA (1968) Limits for qualitative detection and quantitative determination. Anal Chem 40(3):586–593

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Marsh R, Croudace IW, Warwick PE, St-Amant N, Cooper N (2017) A new bomb-combustion system for tritium extraction. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 314(2):651–658

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Kim SB, Baglan NJO, St-Amant N, Carter B, Clark I, Bucur C (2015) Canadian Inter-laboratory organically bound tritium (OBT) analysis exercise. J Environ Radioact 150:236–241

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Connan O, Hebert M, Solier L, Caldeira Ideas P, Laguionie P, St-Amant N (2015) In situ measurements of tritium evapotranspiration (3H-ET) flux over grass and soil using the gradient and eddy covariance experimental methods and the FAO-56 model. J Environ Radioact 148:1–9

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Ciallella HE et al (2004) Environmental radiological surveillance around nuclear power plants in Argentina. In: Proceedings of 11th International Congress on the International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA), Madrid, Spain, 23–28 May, pp 35–40

  23. Trivedi A et al (1997) Daily tritium intakes by people living near a heavy-water research reactor facility: dosimetric significance AECL report, AECL-11648, COG-96-333-1, Chalk River Laboratories, Chalk River, Ontario, Canada

  24. Lane R et al (2013) Radiation exposure and cancer incidence (1990 to 2008) around Nuclear Power Plants in Ontario. J Environ Prot 4:888–913

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Ravi PM et al (2008) Environmental radiation measurements and comprehensive impact assessment around a nuclear power plant site in Kaiga, India. J Nucl Sci Technol Suppl 5:635–638

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (1999). Environmental report, appendix A. Methods of dose calculations. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, California, United States

  27. Diabate S, Strack S (1993) Organically bound tritium. Health Phys 65(6):698–712

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Nuclear Safety and Control Act (NSCA) (2015) Radiation protection regulations (SOR/2000-203). Government of Canada

  29. Grasty RL, LaMarre JR (2004) The annual effective dose from natural sources of ionizing radiation in Canada. Radiat Prot Dosim 108(3):215–226

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation (UNSCEAR) (2004) United Nations Scientific Committee on the Effects of Atomic Radiation Report to the General Assembly New York (United Nations)

  31. Advisory Committee on Radiological Protection (ACRP) (1990) Advisory Committee on Radiological Protection and Advisory Committee on Nuclear Safety. Recommended de Minimis Radiation Dose Rates for Canada

  32. Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (2014) Regulatory oversight report for Canadian nuclear power plants: 2014 (September, 2015). Ottawa, Canada

  33. International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) (2007). Recommendations of the ICRP, Publication 103, Annals (2–4). Elsevier Ltd

  34. Leggett RW et al (1998) Reliability of ICRP’s systemic biokinetic models. Radiat Prot Dosim 79(1–4):335–342

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Hart D (2010) Uncertainty in dose estimates based on environmental monitoring results. Candu Owners Group-07-3043I. Canada

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank site Inspectors and staff (Environmental Compliance Group and Laboratory Services Division) for their collaboration in providing logistical support, and contribution to the design of the sampling plans, and collecting samples during 2013 and 2015 sampling campaigns.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission (CNSC), 280 Slater Street, Station B, PO Box 1046, Ottawa, ON, K1P 5S9, Canada

    S. Hamlat, P. Thompson, M. Rinker, N. St-Amant, P. Pan, K. Peters, E. Dagher, S. Jovanovic & K. Sauvé

Authors
  1. S. Hamlat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. P. Thompson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. M. Rinker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. N. St-Amant
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. P. Pan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. K. Peters
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. E. Dagher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. S. Jovanovic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. K. Sauvé
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Hamlat.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hamlat, S., Thompson, P., Rinker, M. et al. Independent environmental monitoring and public dose assessment around the Canadian Nuclear Power Plants. J Radioanal Nucl Chem 317, 325–335 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-018-5903-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10967-018-5903-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation