ML090540161

NRC Slides for Public Meeting, Assessment: Indian Point Contaminated Groundwater

ML090540161
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	05/31/2008
From:	NRC Region 1
To:
References
Download: ML090540161 (6)

Text

Agenda NRC ASSESSMENT: 6:30 Introductions

- Marc Dapas, Deputy Regional Adminmsrstor.

INDIAN POINT - Marsha Gamberonl, Director of Reactor Safely CONTAMINATED

• 6:40 Meeting Ground Rules

- Rich Barkley, Technical Communications GROUNDWATER

• 6:45 Entergy Presentation

- Don Mayer. Director of Special Projects

• 7:10 NRC Presentation

- John While, Branch Chief, Platt Support 2

• 7:50 Break

• 8:00 Questions and Answers c i... NRC Inspection and

.-. Coordinating Assessment Team Government Agencies Princinal Insoection Contributors:

Federal:

• NRC Region I

- James Noggle, Senior Health Physicist

• US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

- James Kottan, Senior Health Physicist

• US Geological Survey (USGS)

- John White, Chief, Plant Support Branch 2 o NRC Office of Research New York State:

- Thomas Nicholson, Senior Technical Advis6r-Radionuclide Transport

• Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC)

" US Geological Survey

• Department of Public Health (DPH)

John Williams, Senior Hydrologist Purpose . Purpose Evaluate Entergy's performance and provide

• Ensure Entergy's groundwater transport status of inspection findings associated with model is correct and tested the following:

- Cause of the groundwater contamination

• Research prior opportunities for leak

- Extent and migration of the groundwater releases discovery and evaluate Entergy's response

- Radiological significance of these releases

• Determine Entergy's conformance with Ensure that public health and safety and regulatory requirements protection of the environment were maintained 1

.Scope Scop e

" Assess Entergy's investigation of the Unit 2

• Independent Assessment Effort:

spent fuel pool leak since August 2005 - Collection and analysis of groundwater samples

- Verification of licensee's hydrological conclusions

• Examine Entergy's investigation of previous Unit 1 and Unit 2 spent fuel pool leaks - Verification of dose assessment to the public identified in 1992 - Verification of water inventory losses from Unit 1 and Unit 2 spent fuel pools

- Verification of no detectable environmental impact through the analysis of aquatic food samples from the Hudson River. E

" - Scope NRC Assessment

• Independent analysis confirms offsite migration.

• Comprehensive assessment of groundwater is limited to the Hudson River transport pathways and contaminant plume

• The groundwater transport model was based on behavior well-developed data, measurements, and field

• Historical conditions observations

,NRC Assessment . .. NRC Inspection Focus and Activities

• NRC Staff from Region I and Office of Nuclear Regulatory During site visits and teleconferences, questions Research provided technical oversight of IPEC ground-water posed: contamination studies

• U.S. Geological Survey scientist provided technical support to the

> to evaluate the Conceptual Site Model technical oversight assumptions, and Initial ground-water contamination identified in leak from Unit 2 Spenl uel Pool

> to pro-actively engage Licensee's contractor in Site visits focused on technical questions concerning the developing corroborating field data contaminant sources, pathways. potential receptors. and monitoring to detect future leaks

> to understand ground-water plume sources, Field data from rock cores, monitoring wells, geophysical surveys,

• extent, and behavior hydraulic tests and tracer tests independently reviewed 2

NRC Assessment NRC Assessment Questions Fundamental Understanding for the Conceptual Site Model What are the source(s) of the ground-water contamination?

• Nature of the leaks and initial pathways through backfills and fractured Where do they intersect the accessible environment?

rock at or above the local water table.

Are there fast and preferential pathways?

Do the contaminant plumes move under the Hudson River?

• Role of fractures and possibility of solutioning & connectivity Are local drinking water sources affected?

Are the plumes captured by the Discharge Canal?

• Interaction of ground-water flow with the Hudson River

• What are the hydraulic controls on theplume(s)' behavior as reflected in the Conceptual Site Model.

• Location and relationships to tocai drinking water sources -

• What remediation is appropriate?

• Ground-water flow gradients, vertical and horizontal flow directions

• How can future leaks be detected? related to the sources. Discharge Canal, and River

• What surveillance is needed to confirm dose assessments remain below regulatory limits?

• Movement of H-3, Sr-90. Cs-137 and Ni-63 to the River

• Benefits of a long-term ground-water monitoring program NRC Assessment NRC Assessment Conclusions Unit 1 and 2 are the source(s) of the ground-water contamination Entergy implemented timely actions to

'Plumes move west, intersect the Hudson River but not under to Rockland County investigate source, and determine dose impact

• Backfills and connected Iractures are the preferential pathways Entergy conformed to regulatory survey

• No local drinking water sources are affected requirements with 1 minor violation. of quality control of sample analyses

• Discharge Canal captures some but not all of the plume Groundwater contamination resulted only from

• Ground-water gradient and flow direction controlled by local hydrology leakage attributed to Unit 1 and Unit 2

• Monitored natural attenuation is the appropriate remediation approach Entergy's site characterization was based on

• Future leaks can be detected by monitoring wells near Units 1 and 2 state-of-the-practice monitoring wells, tests, L Lg-ter monitoring is needed to confirm dose assessments remain bel and analysis methods M regulatory limits during plant operations

- "NRC Assessment Radiation Dose Perspective

" Exposure pathway to man is aquatic food

• Background (est.) 360 mrem/year (NCRP 94) from Hudson River (fish, invertebrates)

• Public Dose Limits 100 mrem/year (1 CFR20.13011 25 mrem/year (40CFR190)

" Calculated exposure to maximum exposed individual is 0.002 mrem/yr total body and

• Liquid Effluent Limit 3 mrem/year, total body 10 mren/year, organ (10CFR50, App. I) 0.01 mrem/yr maximum organ

• Estimated Dose Rate 0.002 mrem/year, total body

" Calculated exposures are less than 0.1% 0.01 mrerm/year, bone of NRC regulatory limit EPA drinking water limits (40 CFR 141.16)

Tritium (H-3) 20,000 pCi/L Strontium (Sr- 90) 9 pCi/L (EPAmaximum contaminantlevel based on4 mrems per year) 3

Re.,u NRC Assessment- NRC Assessment Regulatory Requirements

• Entergy is monitoring and reporting the

• Removal of Unit 1 fuel and drainage of the pools groundwater effluent release condition in will eliminate the source of Sr-90, Ni-63, Cs-137 accordance with NRC regulations

• Entergy has initiated a long-term monitoring process to:

• Relative to Unit 1, there was no condition in which the licensee failed to meet a regulatory - Report groundwater liquid releases requirement or standard that was reasonably - Measure the effectiveness of remediation and natural attenuation within its ability to detect or correct

- Detect new or changing groundwater contamination conditions NRC Lessons-Learned -.- . Planned and Continuing NRC Inspection and Assessment NRC Lessons Learned Task Force Identified:

• Assessment of Long-Term Groundwater

- No regulatory guidance for detecting, evaluating, and Monitoring Plan

.monitoring releases via unmonitored pathways

• Inspection oversight of Unit I fuel removal and

- No regulatory requirement / guidance for remediation pool draining activities of groundwater conditions

- No requirement to assure leaks and spills will be

• Baseline inspection now includes aspects of detected before migration off-site groundwater protection and assessment Actions have been initiated to address these and . Inspection initiative to confirm~licensee implementation of Industry Groundwater other identified issues.

Protection Initiative Additional Information

• NRC Homepage

- www.nrc.gov Indian Point 2 Current Performance Summary

- www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESSIIP2/ip2_charn.html Indian Point 3 Current Performance Summary

- www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/IP2/ip3_chart.html Indian Point "Specific Plant of Interest" Page

- www.nrc.gov/reactors/plant-specfic-items/indian-point-issues~html Indian Point License Renewal Review Status

- www~nrc.gov/reactors/oDeratingllicensing/renewal/apnlicationsAn dian-Doint.html USGS Open-File Report on Flow-Log Analysis

- httD:/Hvubs.usps.qov/of/2008/1123/

4

Fig-I. Lctoo ~DPr oryCre oB~hp. e ok LONGTERMMONITORINGPLAN

.-A___

7T wuA*

• i*'$Z t*

1

7 N 10" Cross-se;tion of Tritium Plume sho.ing retafionship to Sourde. Discharge Ca,nal and River (GZA, 2008) 1 2