Text

Response to Request Regarding the Document Titled, Field Sampling and Dose Assessment Plan for the Western New York Nuclear Service Center in Follow-Up to Aerial Gamma Radiation Survey Conducted in 2014.
	ML15281A416
Person / Time
Site:	West Valley Demonstration Project
Issue date:	10/13/2015
From:	Norato M; NRC/NMSS/DDUWP/MDB
To:	Bembia P; State of NY, Energy Research & Development Authority
	Amy Snyder
References
	Download: ML15281A416 (7)
	v • d • e

October 13, 2015 Paul J. Bembia, Director West Valley Site Management Program New York State Energy Research and Development Authority 9030-B Route 219 West Valley, NY 14171-9500

SUBJECT:

RESPONSE TO REQUEST REGARDING THE DOCUMENT TITLED, FIELD SAMPLING AND DOSE ASSESSMENT PLAN FOR THE WESTERN NEW YORK NUCLEAR SERVICE CENTER IN FOLLOW UP TO AERIAL GAMMA RADIATION SURVEY CONDUCTED IN 2014

Dear Mr. Bembia:

On October 1, 2015, in an email (ML15279A465), the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA), provided an electronic copy of the subject Plan (ML15279A498), dated October 1, 2015, to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).

NYSERDA asked that the NRC, along with other regulatory agencies, provide any remaining input on NYSERDAs revised Plan. At the same time, NYSERDA also provided a comment matrix (ML15279A504) identifying how NYSERDA addressed the comments it received on its draft Plan.

Because the NRC is the regulator in the matter of potential offsite areas of elevated radioactivity, the NRC cannot provide input as a co-author or in consultation with NYSERDA.

The objective of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissions (NRCs) review of NYSERDAs Plan is to provide comments regarding whether the NRC believes that NYSERDAs proposed strategy appears to be reasonable for 1) the characterization of the off-site areas of potential concern for use in its public dose compliance demonstration and 2) the associated public dose compliance demonstration to verify that there is not a public health and safety concern.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRCs Agency Rules of Practice and Procedure, a copy of this letter will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records component of NRCs Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html.

P. Bembia If you have any questions, please contact Ms. Amy Snyder, NRC Project Manager for West Valley. She can be reached at (301) 415-6822 or Amy.Snyder@nrc.gov.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Michael A. Norato, Ph.D., Chief Materials Decommissioning Branch Division of Decommissioning, Uranium Recovery, and Waste Programs Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards Docket Number: 050-00201 License Number: CSF-1

Enclosure:

Comments on Plan cc w/

Enclosure:

B. Bower, DOE-WV P. Giardina, EPA T. Rice, NYSDEC D. Samson, NYSDOH

ML15281A416 OFFICE DUWP DUWP DUWP DUWP NAME A. Snyder C. Holston C. McKenney M. Norato A.Schwartzman for DATE 10/08/15 10/ 09 /15 10/09/15 10/13/15 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIONS COMMENTS ON THE REPORT TITLED, FIELD SAMPLING AND DOSE ASSESSMENT PLAN FOR THE WESTERN NEW YORK NUCLEAR SERVICE CENTER IN FOLLOW UP TO AERIAL GAMMA RADIATION SURVEY CONDUCTED IN 2014, DATED OCTOBER 1, 2015 Comments:

1. The NRC staff notes that the revised Plan is substantially revised and addresses most of the NRC staff comments made on the draft Plan with exception of the new comments noted below.

2. The NRC staff notes that the Plan no longer references the EPA uranium fuel cycle standard. The Plan indicates that the 10 CFR 20.1402, Radiological Criteria for Unrestricted Use Dose Limits, will be used as a basis for comparison. This approach appears to be a reasonable first step. Based on the NRCs evaluation of NYSERDAs submittal (land use survey results, sampling results, and dose assessment), any NYSERDA proposed follow-on actions, and any other pertinent information, the NRC will then determine if more information is needed or if any further regulatory actions under NRC License CSF-1 regarding this matter will be required.

3. The NRC staff notes that the Plan indicates that the surface soil Derived Concentration Guideline Levels (DCGLs) derived in the Phase 1 West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) Decommissioning Plan (DP) will be used to evaluate dose to the resident farmer for Areas 3, 4, and 5. This approach appears to be a reasonable first step.

However, the NRC staff anticipates that NYSERDA will provide an explanation whether, based on land use surveys and other information, that the exposure pathways used to derive the DCGLs in the Phase 1 WVDP DP are applicable to the areas under investigation. Based on the NRCs evaluation of NYSERDAs submittal (land use survey results, sampling results, and dose assessment), any NYSERDA proposed follow-on actions, and any other pertinent information, the NRC will then determine if more information is needed or if any further regulatory actions under NRC License CSF-1 regarding this matter will be required.

4. As indicated on page 6 of the Plan, NYSERDA has now defined the areas targeted for walk-down surveys are confined to areas that were determined to be statistically above background (i) 1000 cps in the anthropogenic extraction and (ii) 30 cps in the Cs-137extraction based on the results of the aerial survey. NYSERDA explains that areas above background were delineated based on spatial averaging on a scale of 300 to 3000 feet because point-by-point comparisons were assumed to be inconsistent with the averaging effects of the aerial survey data. However, the NRC staff believes that the delineated areas above background based on the aerial survey results should not be treated as clear lines of demarcation for further investigation given the resolution and ENCLOSURE

uncertainty in the aerial survey data that is being confirmed in the field. Rather, the aerial survey data should be used as an indicator of potentially problematic areas for follow-up investigation. Further because many of the delineated areas are co-located, it would be prudent to expand the areas to cover larger areas between the delineated areas. While NYSERDA explains in its response to Comment No. 65 in the comment response matrix (ML15279A504) that an area of about 10 percent greater than the delineated areas may be targeted for the survey, if the survey results indicate that the delineated areas are in fact, statistically above background, then the survey areas should be expanded to delineate the lateral extent above background even if the overall areas extend beyond 10 percent of the delineated areas. Furthermore, NYSERDA should consider treating co-located sub-areas as one larger area for the purpose of walkover surveys (e.g., subareas in Areas 1, 4 and 5 that are co-located).

5. It is not clear when expanded analyses will be conducted and if the number of expanded analyses is sufficient to perform dose modeling. NYSERDAs response to Comment No.

74 in the comment response matrix (ML15279A504) states the following: All samples will be analyzed for gross alpha, gross beta and gamma spectroscopy. Based on these results, additional expanded analyses detailed in Table 5 may be completed, and at a minimum, each sub-area will have a minimum of two samples sent for expanded analyses. If expanded analyses are not completed and the gross alpha values are greater than background plus two standard deviations, the most limiting alpha-emitting radionuclide (either Am-241 or Pu-239) will be assumed. If gross beta values are greater than background plus two standard deviations, Sr-90 will be assumed as the beta-emitting radionuclide. However, it is not clear from the revised Plan that the approach outlined in the comment response is being followed. For example, Section 10(e)(I) of the Plan indicates that All of the 0-15 cm interval samples will be analyzed for gross alpha, gross beta and gamma spectroscopy. Based on these results, additional expanded analysis (detailed in Table 5) may be warranted (page 18). Table 4 Expanded Analysis column for Subareas in Areas 1-5 refers back to Section 10.

Section 10(e)(III) indicates If the gross alpha or beta results are greater than background plus 2 standard deviations, then radiation doses will be calculated assuming that the gross beta background exceedance is attributed to Sr-90, and the gross alpha exceedance is attributed to the most limiting (i.e., most conservative) alpha-emitting radionuclide (Am-241 or Pu-239 ). Therefore, it is not clear that expanded analyses will in fact, be conducted. Although a statement is made in Section 10 that At a minimum, two quality control samples from each sub-area will be sent for expanded analysis, this statement is made in the sub-surface soil sample section so it is not clear that surface soil samples will be submitted for expanded analysis. Please clarify if expanded analyses in Subareas within Areas 1-5 are planned for surface soils and what the decision criteria are to perform these analyses.

6. Section 10(e)(III) of the revised Plan indicates If the gross alpha or beta results are greater than background plus 2 standard deviations, then radiation doses will be calculated assuming that the gross beta background exceedance is attributed to Sr-90, and the gross alpha exceedance is attributed to the most limiting (i.e., most conservative) alpha-emitting radionuclide (Am-241 or Pu-239 ). It is not clear why Am-241 and Pu-239 were selected as the most limiting alpha-emitting radionuclides, and Sr-90 was selected as the most limiting beta emitting radionuclide. The most limiting radionuclides with respect to the dose assessment could be based on the most-restrictive DCGL, which is a function of the exposure scenario being evaluated (i.e.,

hiker or resident). For example, it does not appear that the most restrictive radionuclides, with respect to the Phase 1 WVDP DP DCGLs, were selected for estimating the potential dose. Please clarify the basis for the selection of the most limiting radionuclides.

7. Section 9 of the revised Plan provides information on background locations. Ten potential background locations are identified in the Cattaraugus Territory of the Seneca Nation of Indians. Five of these locations are located within the Cattaraugus Creek valley, and five background locations are outside of the stream valley. NYSERDA should consider whether two sets of background locations may be needed for the Cattaraugus Territory of the Seneca Nation of Indians (i.e., Area 4 is in the flood plain while Area 5 is not in the flood plain) if the background concentrations are significantly different in these areas. This may also be true of other Areas near the site.

8. In NYSERDAs response in the comment response matrix (ML15279A504) to NRC Comment No. 26, NYSERDA states that A specific number of samples will be sent for full analysis as specified in the QAPP. Additional samples may also be sent for expanded analysis, based on professional judgement, or if needed to refine the dose assessment. Also, in NYSERDAs response in the comment response matrix (ML1529A504) to NRC Comment Nos. 29 and 31, NYSERDA states that each subarea will have a minimum of two samples sent for expanded analysis. Although certain information about the expanded analysis is provided, it is not clear what the basis is for full analysis. Please define what these types of analysis are. Also, what will be the criteria used for professional judgement and who will be responsible for making decisions based on professional judgment?

9. What will be the accuracy of the tissue equivalent microrem measurements in the likely ranges measured with the Bicron MicroRem Meter?

10. In response to NRC Comment No. 21, NYSERDA states that the surveys will be completed during dry weather conditions to the degree possible. Scanning may not be effective if there is standing water. In this situation, what will be the basis for identifying elevated sediment locations and the basis for determining the number of sediment samples to be collected?