ML16293A139
Text
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 8.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM PURPOSE OF THIS SECTION The purpose of this section is to describe the Quality Assurance Program for Phase 1 of the WVDP decommissioning , focusing on characterization , eng ineering data, calculations, dose modeling , and the final status surveys. The information in this section shows how the Quality Assurance Program will be managed and implemented .
It is also intended to show NRC staff how accurate, high-quality information will be provided to support Phase 1 of the decommissioning .
INFORMATION IN THIS SECTION The focus of this section is appropriate because the decommissioning is being conducted under the WVDP Act as explained in Section 1. The information provided is necessarily generic in nature because contractual arrangements for the decommissioning have not yet been made.
This section begins with a description of the quality assurance organization and the duties and responsibilities of the quality assurance and decommissioning organizations that are associated with the Quality Assurance Program . It continues with a description of the Quality Assurance Program , control of documents, measuring and test equipment, purchased materials, and subcontractor services. The section concludes with descriptions of corrective action , audits and surveillances , and management of quality assurance records .
Because some preliminary engineering work such as dose modeling and the engineered barrier design will be completed before decommissioning activities commence under this plan, this section refers to existing quality control assurance programs for those activities and briefly describes these programs.
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLAN SECTIONS To understand the scope of the Quality Assurance Program , one must consider the information in Section 1. Section 1 discusses the project background , the decommissioning activities , and project management and organization.
This section provides the quality assurance requirements for the programs and activities identified in Sections 5, which addresses dose modeling, and Section 9, which deals with radiation surveys. It also applies to engineering data and calculations related to designs described in Section 7 for the Canister Interim Storage Facility for the vitrified HLW canisters and the hydraulic barrier walls that will remain in place after Phase 1 is completed .
Revision 2 8-1
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSION ING PLAN 8.1 Quality Assurance Organization The Quality Assurance (QA) Organization is shown in Figure 8-1 . The QA Manager, who reports directly to the Decommiss ioning Contractor Seni or Executive , mana ges the organ ization. The QA Manager provides centra l leadersh ip, di rection , and management to the decom missioning project.
NOTES: This simplified chart is intended to DOE- W V DP show an organization suitable for managing the decommissioning. Some variations would be acceptable. For example, the Decommissioning Contractor may elect to establish a position of Environmental, Safety, and Health (E, S, & H)
Manager, but this position is not mandatory. The Decommissioning reporting relationship of the Quality Assurance Contractor Manager is mandatory as shown to maintain suitable independence. Some subordinate Senior Executive positions, such as those for field supervisors
.* .* under the Operations manager, were omttted for E, S, & H simplicity, as were relationships involving
- ... ............................. oversight, advice, and technical direction, except Manager t
. in the case of the Quality Assurance Manager.
Decommissioning Project Manager Radiological Health and Quality Control Safety Assurance Manager Officer Manager
T------ -,----------r----1 I I
_ _ _.........;T--. ..-T_ _.__ __
Operations Engineering Specialty Manager Manager Subcontractors Rad Con Supervisor(s)
Decommissioning Engineering Workers Staff Rad Techs Final Status Survey Project Manager Radiological Instrumentation Laboratory Eng ineering Support Support Support Survey Legend: - Supervision and support
- - + Oversight, advice and technical direction Technicians regarding quality.
Figure 8-1. Decommissioning Organization Quality Assurance Relationships Revi sion 2 8-2
WVOP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Quality must be built into the decommissioning project by project personnel. Each person in the decommissioning organization is responsible for QA related to the tasks he or she performs. To help ensure that quality is built in , QA procedures implementing the QA Program will be developed by the decommissioning organization . QA will be provided through implementation of the QA Program and project implementing procedures as it relates to QNquality control (QC) issues .
The QA duties and responsibil ities of the QA organization and the decommissioning organization are listed below.
8.1.1 Quality Assurance Organization Duties and Responsibilities The QA Manager is responsible to:
- Develop the project QA Program manual or plan as a formal document implementing the requirements of this section and maintain this document current;
- Provide central leadership, direction , and management of the decommissioning QA Program ;
- Ensure that preparation and maintenance of the QA Program are responsive to DOE and NRC QA requirements and act as the primary QA interface with DOE and NRC;
- Implement DOE and WVDP quality policies and define the direction of the QA Program with respect to these policies ;
- Perform as the certifying agency for the QA Program ;
- Make final interpretations of established QA requirements;
- Determine when conditions during decommissioning are not in compliance with the QA Program;
- Provide input and direction for QA training ;
- Provide oversight of subcontractor and vendor activities;
- Provide receipt inspection services for purchased materials;
- Evaluate the adequacy and effectiveness of the QA Program ;
- Review and approve procedures implementing the requirements of the WVDP QA Program ;
- Review and approve procurement documents as required ;
- Perform and document independent audits, surveillances, inspections and tests as required ;
- Stop unsatisfactory work and control processing and delivery of unsatisfactory materials; and
- Maintain required QA records .
Revision 2 8-3
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 8.1.2 Decommissioning Project Quality Assurance Duties and Responsibilities Project personnel are responsible to :
- Provide the requisite level of quality in work performed;
- Develop organizational procedures implementing the requirements of the WVDP QA Program ;
- Implement the policies and procedures established to support the QA Program ;
- Ensure that activities affecting quality are prescribed by documented instructions, procedures, and drawings and that such activities are accomplished through implementation of these documents;
- Prepare QA Project Plans in support of characterization and the final status survey;
- Perform work safely and correctly the first time , and assure that reliability, performance, and customer satisfaction are maximized ;
- Meet established requirements and recommend improvements in material and work process quality;
- Inform management of suspected unsafe or unacceptable quality conditions ; and
- Stop work when it is known or suspected that work being performed could potentially result in an unsafe or unacceptable quality condition.
8.2 Assuring Quality in Preliminary Engineering Work Some engineering work in support of the decommissioning has already been performed by DOE contractors and more will be performed before this plan is approved and placed into effect. Two especially important examples of this work are dose modeling and preliminary conceptual design of engineered barriers to be installed during Phase 1 of the WVDP
. decommissioning .
DOE ensures that QA programs used for such work meet applicable requirements, such as DOE Order 414.1 C and the quality assurance requirements of Code of Federal Regulations 10 CFR 830 .120. How this was accomplished for the two examples cited is as follows.
8.2.1 Dose Modeling The dose modeling was performed by Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) under contract to DOE .
SAIC Quality Assurance Plan and Supporting Procedures SAIC prepared and followed a QA Project Plan that applied to the modeling work (SAIC 2009a), along with four supporting QA procedures (SAIC 2008a, 2008b, 2009b , and 2009c) that relate to the dose modeling . This plan was based on the SAIC Business Unit QA Program that was developed to meet customer requirements including those in DOE Order Revision 2 8-4
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 414.1C, 10 CFR 830.120, and ASME NQA-1(ASME2000). Elements of the QA Project Plan and the supporting procedures included :
- Project organization and responsibilities,
- Personnel qualification and certification ,
- Document preparation ,
- Preparation of code development and verification packages,
- Performing calculations and analyses ,
- Independent technical reviews by a qualified person(s),
- Documented comment resolution with formal revisions for significant changes ,
- Management and independent assessment, and
- Project records .
Oversight and Review In addition to the oversight and review provided by SAIC, DOE provided QA oversight and review of this effort, including peer review of the modeling process .
8.2.2 Engineered Barrier Design Conceptual engineering work related to engineered barriers was performed by Washington Safety Management Solutions (WSMS) under the requirements of the WSMS QA Plan (WSMS 2009a)1 .
WSMS Quality Assurance Program The WSMS QA program embodies the QA criteria of 10 CFR 830.122 and DOE Order 414.1 A (the earlier version of DOE Order 414.1 C) and applicable DOE technical standards.
The programs also use ASME NQA-1 (ASME 2000) as a basis with program enhancements from other consensus standards to ensure that the requisite level of quality for all key activities is maintained . Elements of the programs Include:
- Line management responsibility for quality;
- Individual responsibility for quality at all levels;
- QA management providing planning , direction, control, and support to achieve quality objectives;
- Formal personnel training and qualification;
- A formal quality improvement process;
- Design controls, with formal design and verification processes; 1
WSMS is now part of the Washington Division of URS Corporation .
Revision 2 8-5
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
- Work process controls ;
- Procurement controls ;
- Inspection and acceptance testing;
- Management assessment; and
- Independent assessment.
Contractual arrangements between WSMS and SAIC required WSMS to comply with applicable requirements of:
- The WSMS procedure for preparing technical documents and performing engineering calculations for the EIS and this plan (W.SMS 2009b).
Oversight and Review WSMS review of subcontracted work related to this plan is carried out in accordance with the WSMS QA Plan (WSMS 2009a) and the related procedure (WSMS 2009b). In addition, DOE provides independent oversight of the work performed by site contractors .
8.2.3 Other Engineering Work DOE will ensure that other engineering data and engineering work, calculations , and modeling provided by DOE contractors in support of Phase 1 of the decommissioning conforms to applicable QA requirements . For example, if another contractor(s) were to complete engineered barrier designs begun by URS and WSMS, then DOE will ensure that the QA program of the new contractor(s) is equivalent to applicable requirements in the WSMS QA Plan and the WVDP supporting procedure (WSMS 2009b).
8.3 Decommissioning Quality Assurance Program The Decommissioning QA Program identifies and describes the integral elements of the QA activities that apply to a broad spectrum of decommissioning work performed at the WVDP. The QA Program provides the framework and criteria for implementing a QA program to control activities that affect the quality of the WVDP Phase 1 decommissioning .
Specifically, the QA Program will be used to plan , perform , and assess the effectiveness of project activities such as data acquisition and evaluation . It also provides the framework for the development of new or revised engineering data, calculations , and modeling associated with engineered barrier design and any revisions to the dose modeling . Activities affecting quality of the WVDP decommissioning will be subject to the applicable controls of the QA Program and activities covered by the QA Program will be identified in program-defining documents .
The Decommissioning QA Program will meet the intent of 10 CFR 830 .120, Subpart A, QA Requirements and the requirements of DOE Order 414.1C.
Revision 2 8-6
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 8.3.1 General Description of the Program The WVDP Phase 1 Decommissioning QA Program will include the following elements:
- It will be established by the WVDP to govern those activities that may affect quality of the project, including the health and safety of the general public as well as project personnel.
- It will be described in a formal document that incorporates the requirements of this section .
- It shall be implemented by written procedures and carried out throughout Phase 1 of the WVDP decommissioning in accordance with those procedures. The QA procedures will be consistent with regulatory and QA Program requirements .
- Activities affecting quality shall be accomplished under suitable controlled conditions .
Controlled conditions include the use of appropriate equipment; suitable environmental conditions for accomplishing the activity , such as adequate cleanliness ; and assurance that all prerequisites for the given activity have been satisfied .
- The program shall take into account the need for special controls , processes, test equipment, tools , and skills to attain the required quality, and the need for verification of satisfactory implementation .
- Management of organizations participating in the program shall regularly review and assess the status, adequacy, and compliance of the parts of the program that they will be implementing .
- It shall utilize this plan and appropriate implementing QA procedures to meet its objectives.
- It will require training and qualification of workers and quality verification personnel in accordance with DOE Order 414.1C, with instruction on implementing quality assurance in decommissioning activities and documentation of the objectives and content of the training or qualification, attendees, and dates of attendance .
- NRC will be notified when there are changes to the QA Program or organizational elements as approved in this plan before the revised QA Program is implemented .
8-.3.2 Characterization and Final Status Survey Data The portion of the QA Program that sets the requirements for characterization and survey data will ensure that the data sets are of the type and quality needed to demonstrate with sufficient confidence that decommissioning activities can be carried out in accordance with applicable requirements . The objective will be met through the use of the data quality control processes for data collection design , analysis, and evaluation .
The data quality control processes will ensure that: (1) the elements of the facility characterization and Phase 1 final status survey plans will be implemented in accordance with the approved procedures; (2) surveys will be conducted by trained personnel using Revision 2 8-7
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN calibrated instrumentation; (3) the quality of the data collected will be adequate; (4) all phases of facility characterization and final survey data acquisition and evaluation will be properly reviewed , and oversight provided ; and (5) corrective actions, when identified , will be implemented in a timely manner and determined to be effective. This portion of the QA Program will be applied to all aspects of final facility characterization and Phase 1 final status survey activities. Basic elements of the QA Program as they will be applied to characterization and survey data are discussed below.
As explained in Section 4, the underground waste tanks have previously been characterized for residual radioactivity and bounding source term estimates have been developed for other areas considered in dose modeling evaluations. Reports identified in Section 4 describe QA associated with obtaining characterization data for making source term estimates in these areas; the QA processes used were similar to those summarized below.
Training and Qualification Personnel performing facil ity characterization and Phase 1 final status survey measurements will be trained and qualified in accordance with DOE Order 414.1C. Training will include procedures governing the performance of measurements, operation of field and laboratory instrumentation, and control of measurements and samples.
The extent of training and qualification will be commensurate with the education, experience and proficiency of the individual and the scope , complexity and nature of the activity. Records of training will be maintained in accordance with the approved course description for initial and continuing training for decommissioning .
Measurement Documentation Control Date, instrument, location, type of measurement, and mode of operation will identify each measurement. Generation , handling , and storage of the original Phase 1 final status survey and facility characterization plans and data packages will be controlled . Records will be designated as quality documents and they will be maintained as such in accordance with WVDP procedures.
Survey and Sampling Methods Areas or facilities to be characterized or surveyed will be designated as separate characterization or survey areas. Depending on its size, each area may be divided into smaller areas. The methods for determining the type and number of measurements required for each area are discussed in Section 9.
Written Procedures Sampling and measurement tasks must be performed properly and consistently in order to assure the quality of the final results . The measurements will be performed in accordance with approved , written procedures that describe the methods and techniques used for the facility characterization or Phase 1 final status survey measurements and acceptance criteria to ensure that sampling and measurements are performed satisfactorily.
Revision 2 8-8
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Control of Samples Responsibility for the control of samples from the point of collection through the determination of the final results will be established by procedure. When control is to be transferred , chain of custody forms will accompany the sample for tracking purposes. Secure storage will be provided for archived samples.
Quality Assurance Project Plans Quality assurance for each major task associated with characterization and the Phase 1 final status survey will be described in a QA Project Plan that provides a blueprint for how the quality system of this section will be applied to the particular task. Such plans will be consistent with guidance contained in the Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM) (NRC 2000). The applicable guidance in the Uniform Federal Policy for Implementing Environmental Quality Systems: Evaluating, Assessing, and Documenting Environmental Data Collection/Use and Technology Programs (DOE 2005) will also be considered .
Quality Control Procedures will establish built-in QC verification in the processes for both field and laboratory measurements. The QC verifications will duplicate the original measurements where possible. Acceptance criteria will be established to ensure data are within appropriate bounding oondit,ions . Laboratory analysis verification testing will make use of blank, spiked duplicate and replicate samples and measurements in addition to duplicates. If the acceptance criteria are not met, an investigation will be conducted to determine the cause and corrective action .
Selection, Calibration and Operation of Instrumentation Proper selection and use of instrumentation will ensure that sensitivities are sufficient to detect radionuclides at the minimum detection capabilities as well as assure the validity of the data. Instrument calibration will be performed with traceable sources using approved procedures. Issuance , control and operation of instruments will be conducted in accordance with WVDP procedures. Instrument operability will be verified using background and check sources as specified in Section 9.
Control of Tools and Sample Containers New sample containers will be used for each individual sample taken. This practice will ensure the data obtained from each sample will meet QA requirements . Tools will be decontaminated after each sample and surveyed for contamination prior to taking new or additional samples .
Control of Vendor-Supplied Services Vendor-supplied services, such as instrument calibration and laboratory sample analysis, will be procured from appropriate vendors in accordance with approved quality and procurement procedures .
Revision 2 8-9
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 8.3.3 Engineering Design and Data, Calculations, and Modeling Engineering designs and data , calculations , and modeling of engineered barrier modifications will be developed within the framework of applicable engineering requirements .
The adequacy of these engineering products will be verified or validated by individuals or groups other than those who performed the work. Verification and validation work will be completed before approval and implementation .
A control process that meets the intent of the appropriate requirements of ASME NQA-1 (ASME 2000) will be implemented . Controls will be determined through a controlled process that considers environmental and quality impact.
Basic elements of the QA Program as they will be applied to engineering design modifications, engineering data , calculations , and system , structure, and component modeling are discussed below.
Design Control The formal design process defines the control of design inputs, processes, outputs, changes , lines of communication, interfaces, and records . This process provides for timely and correct translation of design inputs into design outputs, effective coordination and interfacing of organizations participating in the design process, and acceptable and verified design outputs. Design and design modifications shall provide for the intended end use, including (but not limited to) inspection, acceptance criteria , and hazard mitigation.
Design inputs (such as engineering data) will be correctly translated into design outputs (such as specifications, drawings, procedures, and instructions). Calculations and associated design decisions will be checked for correctness during the design process. Design outputs will be verified to confirm that they will be suitable for their intended use.
Changes to final designs (including field changes and modifications and nonconform ing items that will be dispositioned "use as is" or "repair") will be subjected to design control measures commensurate with those applied to the original design . These design control measures may include review of the relevant design analyses to verify their continued validity.
The acceptability of design activities and documents - including design inputs, processes, outputs, and changes - will be verified as appropriate. Computer programs will be proven through previous use , or verified through testing or simulation prior to use.
Control of Models and Calculations Revisions to analytical and computer models that support decommissioning activities will be verified to ensure they satisfy design requirements and solve the right problem (e.g.,
correctly model physical laws and implements system , structure , or component design rules) .
Calculations that support decommissioning activities will be completed , checked ,
reviewed , and approved prior to using their results . The process for developing calculations that support decommissioning activities will require that calculations define the input data ,
Revision 2 8-10
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN assumptions, analytical methods, results , and conclusions . An independent reviewer will perform the verification of the correctness of the calculations including the validity of the input data and assumptions . The reviewer also will verify that any modeling of engineering barriers correctly models the design as described in the design documents. As stated above, computer programs will be proven through previous use, or verified through testing or simulation prior to use.
Written Procedures The collection of engineering data and design , calculations, and modeling tasks must be performed properly and consistently in order to assure the quality of the final results . These tasks shall be performed in accordance with approved , written procedures . Such procedures will describe acceptable methods used for engineering tasks associated with decommissioning and contain acceptance criteria to ensure that these tasks will be performed satisfactorily.
8.4 Document Control Documents that come under the oversight of the QA Program include, but are not limited to , the QA Manual or Plan , technical and QA procedures , engineering data documents, engineering drawings , calculations , instrument calibration records , survey and characterization documents, contractor and subcontractor quality control records , and personnel training and qualification records.
Measures shall be established to control the issuance of documents that prescribe activities affecting quality, such as procedures and drawings and changes thereto . These measures shall address development of the documents by the responsible party. This will assure that documents, including changes , will be reviewed for adequacy and approved for release by authorized personnel , and will be distributed to and used at the location where the prescribed activity is to be performed. Changes to documents shall be reviewed and approved by the same organization that performed the original review and approval or by another designated responsible organization .
All QA documents will be developed, issued , revised , and retired according to the QA procedures developed for handling these documents. These QA procedures shall be controlled to assure that current copies will be made available to personnel performing the prescribed activities. Required procedures shall be reviewed by a technically competent person other than the author, and shall be approved by a management member of the organization responsible for the prescribed activity. Significant changes to required procedures shall be reviewed and approved in the same manner as the original.
Documents affecting quality will be formally retired after their use has ended or after they are superceded by another project document. The QA Program w ill specify details of how this will be done.
Revision 2 8-11
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 8.5 Control of Measuring and Test Equipment Measures shall be established to assure that tools, gauges, instruments, and other measuring and testing devices used in decommissioning activities important to health and safety will be properly controlled , calibrated , and adjusted at specified periods to maintain accuracy within necessary limits. See Section 9 for a description of survey test and measuring equipment, maintenance and calibration requirements , calibration documentation ,
and daily check source measurements. Only properly calibrated and maintained equ ipment will be used for decommissioning surveys and measurements. Documentation will be maintained to demonstrate that only properly calibrated and maintained equipment will be used ; details of how this will be accomplished will appear in the QA Program .
- 8.6 Control of Purchased Material and Subcontractor Services Measures shall be established to assure that purchased material , equipment, and services conform to the procu rement documents. These measures shall include provisions, as appropriate, for vendor evaluation and selection , objective evidence of quality furnished by the vendor, inspection at the vendor source and inspection of products upon delivery.
The effectiveness of the control of contractor services shall be assessed at intervals consistent with the importance of the service. The adequacy of a vendor's QA program specified in procurement documentation shall be verified prior to use when appropriate.
Vendors' adherence to their QA program shall also be verified as appropriate.
Commensurate with potential adverse impacts on quality or health and safety, material and equipment shall be inspected upon receipt at the WVDP site prior to use or storage to determine that the procurement requirements will be satisfied .
Materials, parts , or components that will be utilized for shipment of radioactive material shall be inspected upon receipt to assure that associated procurement document provisions have been satisfied. Measures shall be establ ished for identifying nonconforming material ,
partsandcomponen~ .
8.7 Corrective Action Measures shall be established to assure that conditions adverse to quality such as failures , malfunctions, discrepancies, deviations, defective material and equipment, and non-conformances will be promptly identified and corrected . The identification of the condition adverse to quality, the cause of the condition and the corrective action taken shall be documented and reported to appropriate levels of management. All corrective actions shall be reviewed and approved by the decommissioning organization line management and concurred with by the QA Manager.
8.8 Audits and Surveillances The WVDP will perform assessments of decommissioning work processes and operations through the WVDP decommissioning project organization self-assessments, audits, and surveillances. These may include, but will not be limited to ,
inspections/surveillances, tests , and QA audits.
Revision 2 8-12
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN The assessments will be provided by designated decommissioning project or qualified QA personnel who have sufficient authority and organizational independence to perform these assessments. These personnel will not have direct responsibilities in the areas they will be assessing. The assessments will provide (but not be limited to) the following :
- Methods to identify quality issues and problems;
- Recommendations for resolving quality issues and problems;
- Independent confirmation of resolutions and implementation of audit and surveillance findings by designated project or QA personnel ;
- Tracking information on audit and surveillance findings and resolutions to trend quality issues and problems;
- Identification of improvements to decommissioning project work processes ,
operations, procedures, and the QA Program from trending information ;
- Audit and surveillance reports which document the items identified above, that will be managed and controlled by decommissioning project procedures and designated project personnel ;
- Information to line management and the QA Manager to ensure that further collection , analysis, or use of data will be controlled until the issue or problem is suitably resolved ; and
- Information to line management and the QA Manager to ensure that further design ,
fabrication , construction , or operation of engineered features will be controlled until nonconforming , deficient, or unsatisfactory conditions have been suitably resolved . ,
8.9 Quality Assurance Records Quality assurance records shall conform to the following requirements :
- Sufficient records shall be maintained to furnish evidence of activities affecting quality.
- Records shall be identifiable and retrievable .
- Measures shall be established which assure that qualification records of personnel performing special process activities, such as welding , nondestructive evaluation ,
inspection , etc., will be retained .
- Measures shall be established which assure that quality-related procurement documents will be retained.
- Measures shall be established which assure that appropriate records pertaining to audits will be retained .
- Measures shall be established which assure that records associated with rad ioactive material and personnel exposure controls will be retained .
Revision 2 8-13
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
- Requirements shall be established concerning record retention , such as duration ,
location, and assigned responsibility. Such requirements shall be consistent with the potential impact on quality, health and safety of the public, safety of project personnel , and applicable regulations .
- The QA Program will specify in particular where QA records will be stored during the decommissioning and after the decommissioning for the required retention period .
- QA records shall be periodically audited by the Decommissioning QA organization and stored in a designated QA records facility to be identified prior to implementation of this plan.
8.10 References Code of Federal Regulations and Federal Register Notices 10 CFR 830 .120, Quality Assurance Requirements .
DOE Orders, Policies, Manuals, and Standards DOE Order414.1C Quality Assurance. DOE , Washington , D. C., June 17, 2005.
Other References ASME 2000, Quality Assurance Program Requirements for Nuclear Facility Applications, ASME NQA-1-2000. American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, 2000 .
DOE 2005, Uniform Federal Policy for Implementing Environmental Quality Systems:
Evaluating, Assessing, and Documenting Environmental Data Collection/Use and Technology Programs , DOE/EH-0667, Final Version 2. Intergovernmental Data Quality Task Force, Washington, D.C. March 2005.
NRC 2000 , Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM) ,
NUREG-1575, Rev 1. NRC, Washington D.C., August 2000.
SAIC 2008a, Technical Procedure No. 1, Internal Code Development, Verification and Maintenance for (1) Decommissioning and/or Long-term Stewardship EIS for the WVDP and the Western New York Nuclear Services Center, (2) WVDP Decommissioning Plan Project, WV EIS/DP TP1 , Revision 1. SAIC, Germantown, Maryland, January 30, 2008 .
SAIC 2008b, Technical Procedure No. 3, Code Modification, Verification, and Maintenance for Externally Acquired Software for (1) Decommissioning and/or Long-term Stewardship EIS for the WVDP and the Western New York Nuclear Services Center, (2) WVDP Decommissioning Plan Project, WV EIS/DP TP3, Revision 1. SAIC, Germantown , Maryland , January 30, 2008 .
SAIC 2009a , Quality Assurance Project Plan for Preparation of (1) Decommissioning and/or Long-term Stewardship EIS for the WVDP and the Western New York Nuclear Services Center, (2) WVDP Decommissioning Plan Project, WV EIS/DP QAPP, Revision 2. SAIC, Germantown, Maryland , June 29, 2009 .
Revision 2 8-14
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN SAIC 2009b , Technical Procedure No. 2, Calculations and Analyses for (1) Decommissioning and/or Long-term Stewardship EIS for the WVOP and the Western New York Nuclear Services Center, (2) WVOP Decommissioning Plan Project, WV EIS/DP TP2, Revision
SAIC 2009c, Technical Procedure No. 4, Software Configuration Management for (1)
Decommissioning and/or Long-term Stewardship EIS for the WVOP and the Western New York Nuclear Services Center, (2) WVOP Decommissioning Plan Project, WV EIS/OP TP4 , Revision 2. SAIC, Germantown , Maryland, June 29, 2009 .
WSMS 2009a , Washington Safety Management Solutions LLC Quality Assurance Plan ,
WSMS QA 100, Revision 1. Washington Safety Management Solutions, Aiken , South Carolina , August 10, 2009 .
WSMS 2009b , Preparation of WSMS Technical Documents for the West Valley Integrated Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship EIS and WVOP Decommissioning Plan Project, WSMS-OPS-05-0004, Revision 2. Washington Safety Management Solutions, West Valley, New York, September 29, 2009 .
Revision 2 8-15
WVDP PHAS E 1 D ECOMMISSIONING PLAN 9.0 FACILITY RADIATION SURVEYS PURPOSE OF THIS SECTION The purpose of this section is to describe radiation surveys to be performed in connection with Phase 1 of the WVDP decommissioning .
INFORMATION IN THIS SECTION This section first refers to the cleanup criteria for surface soil. subsurface soil, and streambed sediment that will be used to ensure that the level of remediation achieved during Phase 1 will not limit options for Phase 2 of the decommissioning . It then identifies the types of radiological surveys to be performed and the purpose of each survey. Requirements for background surveys, characterization surveys, in-process surveys, and the Phase 1 final status surveys are described .
This section outlines the survey process for each waste management area and then for environmental media . It concludes with a summary of requirements for the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Report.
While this section addresses all applicable requirements for facility radiation surveys, it does so in general terms because two supplemental documents will provide additional details: a Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan and a Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan.
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLAN SECTIONS To put into perspective the information in this section, one must consider:
- The information in Section 1 on the project background and those facilities and areas within the scope of the DP;
- The information in Section 2 on facilities to be removed before the Phase 1 decommissioning activities begin;
- The facility descriptio_ns in Section 3;
- The information on the results of scoping and characterization surveys contained in Section 4 and Appendix B;
- The information in Section 5 on dose modeling and cleanup criteria ; and
- The decommissioning activities and related characterization activities described in Section 7.
The characterization survey process described in this section applies to characterization surveys performed in connection with decommissioning activities described in Section 7.
Rev 2 9-1
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN The survey methodology specified in this section is consistent with the provisions of NUREG-1757, Volume 2 (NRC 2006) and with the guidance found in NUREG-1575, Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM) (NRC 2000). It is also consistent with DOE requirements of DOE Order 5400.5, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment.
As used in this section. the term surveys includes both systematic scanning and static measurements performed with an appropriately-sensitive instrument calibrated to the radiation of interest, as well as the laboratory analysis of physical samples of potentially contaminated media .
9.1 Release Criteria Release criteria are based on the dose modeling described in Section 5 and the planned end-states for facilities and areas within the scope of the plan as discussed in Sections 1 and
- 7. The appearance of the Phase 1 end-state for the project premises will be similar to that shown in Figure 1-5. As explained in Section 5, derived concentration guideline levels (DCGLs) were developed for surface soil, subsurface soil and streambed sediment.
Note that DCGLs for the WVDP Phase 1 decommissioning end state are expressed on the basis of 25 mrem total effective dose equivalent annually to the average member of the critical group. This annual dose is used as the basis for the cleanup criteria because the resulting DCGLs provide a conservative end state that ensures that all decommissioning options for the remainder of the project premises and the Center remain available in Phase 2.
DCGLs and Cleanup Goals Because of the complexity of the site and the necessity to ensure that the Phase 1 cleanup activities will support a range of approaches that might be used for Phase 2 of the decommissioning, cleanup goals lower than the DCGLs will be used as indicated in Section 7. These goals are identified in Table 5-14 of Section 5. The cleanup goals are referred to in this section simply as the DCGLs for consistency in terminology.
The DCGL w is the release criterion based on average concentration of radioactivity distributed over a large area . Area factors are used to adjust the DCGLw values to estimate the DCGLEMC* the criterion for small areas of contamination elevated above the release criterion and to estimate the minimum detectable concentration for scanning surveys .
The DCGLw and DCGLEMc values (i.e ., the cleanup goals) for 18 radionuclides of interest are expressed in Table 5-14 in Section 5. Tables 9-1 , 9-2, and 9- 3 provide ranges of area factors . The DCGLs apply to the following areas:
- The surface soil DCGLs. apply to surface soil throughout the project premises where there is no subsurface contamination below one meter and to the sides of the WMA 1 and WMA 2 large excavations from the ground surface to one meter below the ground surface,
- The subsurface soil DCGLs apply only to the bottoms of the WMA 1 and WMA 2 large excavations and to the sides of these excavations from the bottoms up to one meter below the ground surface, and
- The streambed sediment DCGLs apply only to the streambeds and banks of the portions of Erdman Brook and Franks Creek shown in Figure 5-12.
Rev 2 9-2
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table 9-1 Surface Soil Cleanup Goal Area Factors(1) 2 Area Factors (DCGLeMc/DCGLw)
DCGLw 10,000 m Nuclide 2 2 (pCi/g) 100 m 1m Am-241 2.6E +01 1.5E+01 1.5E +02 C-14 1.5E+01 2.8E +02 1.1 E+05 Cm-243 3.1E+01 3.0E+OO 2.4E+ 01 Cm-244 5.8E +01 1.8E +01 2.1E+02 Cs-137 1.4E+01 2.8E+OO 2.2E+01 1-129 2.9E-01 3.8E +01 2.1 E+03 Np-237 2.3E-01 6.0E+OO 3.2E +02 Pu -238 3.6E +01 1.7E +01 2.1E+02 Pu-239 2.3E +01 2.5E+0 1 3.0E +02 Pu-240 2.4E+01 2.4E+01 2.9E +02 Pu-241 1.0E +03 1.3E+01 1.3E+02 Sr-90 3.7E +OO 2.6E +01 2.1E+03 Tc-99 1.9E +01 2 .2E+01 1.4E+03 U-232 1.4E+OO 5.4 E+OO 4.4E +01 U-233 7.5E +OO 3.7E+01 1.1 E+03 U-234 7.6E+OO 4.1E+01 2.1E+03 U-235 3.1E+OO 2 .6E+01 1.9E +02 U-238 8.9E+OO 2.9E+01 3.3E +02 NOTE: (1) Th e values in the second column are the cleanup goals (CGw) from Table 5-14 and are based on the probabilistic peak*of-the-mean DCGLw values for combined soil-streambed sediment exposure assuming 22.5 mrern/y from surface soil. The area factors are based on the limiting case among the probabilistic analysis resident farmer analysis, the deterministic resident farmer analysis, and the deterministic residential gardener analysis.
1 Table 9-2. Subsurface Soil Cleanup Goal Area Factorsl J DCGLw 2,000 m 2 Area Factors (DCGLeMc/DCGLw)
Nuclide (pCi/g) 92 m2 (2) 1m 2
Am-241 2.8E+03 1.1 E+OO 4.3E +OO C-14 4.5E+02 1 .2E+01 1.8E +02 Cm-243 5.0E +02 3.2E +OO 8.0E +OO Cm-244 9.9E +03 1.5E+OO 4 .5E+OO Cs-137 1.4E +02 9.3E+OO 1.2E +01 1-129 3.4E +OO 4.7E +OO 9 .9E+01 Np-237 4.SE-01 4.2E+OO 9.6E+01 Pu-238 5.9E +03 1.0E+OO 4 .8E +OO Pu-239 1.4E +03 1.6E +OO 1.9E +01 Pu -240 1.5E +03 1.5E +OO 1.7E+01 Rev 2 9-3
WVDP PHAS E 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table 9-2. Subsurface Soil Cleanup Goal Area Factorsl1 J DCGLw 2,000 m 2 Area Factors {DCGLEMc/DCGLw)
Nuclide (pCi/g) 92 m 2 (2) 1m 2
Pu-241 1.1 E+05 2 .3E+UO 6.2E+OO Sr-90 1.3E +02 2.6E+OO 5.6E+01 Tc-99 2.7E+02 8.1 E+OO 5.7E+01 U-232 3.3E+01 2.1 E+OO 1.3E+01 U-233 8.6E+01 3.6E+OO 1 .1 E+02 U-234 9.0E+01 3.6E+OO 1.0E+02 U-235 9.5E+01 3.5E+OO 3.5E+01 U-238 9.5E +01 3.6E+OO 1.0E+02 NOTE: (1) The va lues in th e second colum n are the clea nup goals (CGw) from Table 5-14. The area faotors are based on the multi-souroe analysis or the resident farmer analysis.
2 (2) The 92 m area resu lts from the grid spaoing of the STOMP model, Whioh is described in Seotion 5.
1 Table 9-3. Streambed Sediment Cleanup Goal Area Factors( )
DCGLw Area Factors (DCGLEMc/DCGLw) 2 Nuclide 1,000 m 2 2 100 m 1m (pCi/g)
Am -241 1.0E+03 2.9E+OO 2.1E+01 C-14 1.8E+02 2.0E +01 3.3E +03 Cm-243 3 .1E+02 1.2E+OO 9.0E+OO Cm -244 3.8E+03 8 .7E+OO 9.4E+01 Cs- 137 1.0E +02 1.2E +OO 9.4E +OO 1-129 7.9E+01 8.6E +OO 2.5E+02 Np-237 3.2E +01 3.4E+OO 3.3E +01 Pu -238 1.2E+03 9.1 E+OO 1.4E+02 Pu -239 1.2E+03 9.1 E+OO 1.4E+02 Pu -240 1.2E+03 9.1E+OO 1.4E+02 Pu -241 3.4E+04 2.9E+OO 2.2E+01 Sr-90 4.7E+02 7.2E +OO 1.5E+02 Tc-99 6.6E+04 5.1E+OO 6.3E +01 U-232 2.2E+01 1.2E+OO 9.5E +OO U-233 2.2E+03 2.7E +OO 2.0E+01 U-234 2.2E+03 8 .5E+OO 9.7E+01 U-235 2.3E +02 1.2E+OO 8.6E+OO U-238 8 .2E+02 1.4E+OO 1.0E+01 NOTE : (1) The values in the second column are the cleanup goals (CGw) from Table 5-14 and are based on the probabilistic peak-of-the-mean DCGLw values for combined soil-strea mbed sediment exposure assuming 2.5 mrem/y from streambed sediment. The area factors are based on the deterministic evaluation of the recreationist scenario .
Rev 2 9-4
WVDP PHASE 1 D ECOMMISSIONING PLAN A surrogate radionuclide is a radionuclide in a mixture of radionuclides whose concentration is more easily measured and can be used to infer the concentrations of the other radionuclides in the mixture . If actual radioactive contamination levels are below the specified concentrations of the surrogate radionuclide, then the sum of doses from all radionuclides in the mixture will fall below the dose limit of 25 mrem/y. Tables in Section 5 do not presently show DCGLw values for a surrogate radionuclide because available data on radionuclide distributions in soil and sediment are not sufficient to support this , but Section 5 may be revised after additional chara cteri zation data become availabl e to provid e such information .
As characterization and in-process surveys are performed, additional data will become available that could necessitate re-evaluation of the DCGLs, if, for example, assumptions used in development of the DCGLs were found to be incorrect based on the additional data. If-such a situation develops, revised DCGLs will be calculated and this plan changed to incorporate the revised DCGLs and any related changes.
9.2 Types of Surveys and Their Purposes Seven types of radiological surveys are associated with the WVDP Pha se 1 decommissioning project: (1) background surveys, (2) scoping surveys, (3) end-of-task surveys taken at the conclusion of deactivation activities, (4) characterization surveys, (5) in-process or remedial action support surveys, (6) Phase 1 final status surveys, and (7) confirmatory surveys . The nature of these surveys and, in some cases, the basic requirements are summarized here; more detail is provided further below on background surveys (9 .3). characterization surveys (9.4) , in-process surveys (9 .5), and Phase 1 final status surveys (9 .6) .
9.2.1 Background Surveys Background surveys are performed in non-impacted areas around the facility and in non-impacted buildings of construction similar to those impacted buildings of interest. Background surveys establish the baseline levels of radiation and radioactivity from radionuclides occurring in the environment or incorporated into the structural materials . Requirements for background surveys are summarized in Section 9.3 below.
9.2.2 Scoping Surveys Scoping surveys are conducted (1) to provide preliminary data to suppl ement historical site assessment information needed to guide planning of characterization surveys, (2) to identify radionuclide contaminants, (3) to identify relative radionuclide ratios , and (4) to identify the general levels and extent of contaminants . As noted in Section 4, much of the existing radiological data associated with the WVDP decommissioning project falls into the category of scoping survey data, although these data were generally not acquired as scoping survey data but were acquired for other operational needs . Additional scoping surveys are not planned for Phase 1 of the WVDP decommissioning.
Rev 2 9-5
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 9.2.3 End-of-Task Surveys As explained in Section 1, additional deactivation w.ork will be completed in certain areas of the Process Building duning work to be accomplished before the Phase 1 decommissioning activities begin, and numerous ancillary project facilities will be removed during this period . After each area is deactivated and after each facility .is removed, end-of-task or "final radiological characterization" surveys will usually be performed to define the resulting radiological conditions .
Such surveys are not within the scope of this plan since they will be completed before decommissioning activities begin . However, their results will be considered in connection with defining characterization surveys and Phase 1 final status surveys to be performed during the decommissioning .
9.2.4 Characterization Surveys Characterization surveys include facility and site sampling, monitoring, and analysis activities to determine the extent and nature of residual contamination. They provide the basis for planning decommissioning actions, and provide technical information to develop, evaluate, and select appropriate remediation techniques. They also provide information for radiation protection purposes and for characterizing waste.
Four WVDP characterization survey programs have been completed: (1) the characterization program for the underground waste tanks, (2) the Facility Characterization Project. (3) a series of Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) facility investigations performed in the 1990s, and (4) investigations of the north plateau 1
groundwater plume using a Geoprobe. Additionally, routine groundwater and other environmental media sampling and analysis are performed as required by DOE Orders for annual monitoring programs . The results of these programs are summarized in Section 4.
The approaches used are outlined in Section 9.7 below .
As indicated in Section 4 and Section 7, additional characterization will be performed.
The requirements for this characterization are addressed in Section 9.4.
9.2.5 In-Process Surveys In-process surveys, also referred to as remedial action support surveys, include facility and site sampling, monitoring, and analysis activities performed in support of decontamination work. They provide information necessary for radiation protection, for guiding cleanup work, for determining when field decontamination goals have been attained, and to indicate when areas are ready for Phase 1 final status surveys . Requirements for in-process surveys are discussed in Section 9.5 below.
1 As indicated in Section 4, additional characterization of subsurface soi l in the area of the north plateau groundwater plume was accomplished in 2008 . The results of this program are summarized in Section 4. Also, a sample and analysis plan for additional characterization of the Waste Tank Farm was developed in 2008 and 2009 (Michalczak and Hadden-Carter 2009) . This plan is expected to be implemented for additional characterization of Tank 80-4 and possibly Tanks 80-1 and 80-2 as well.
Rev 2 9-6
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 9.2.6 Final Status Surveys A final status survey using MARSSIM guidance is performed to demonstrate completion of any necessary decontamination in preparation for release of the site or facility . To reflect the phased nature of the decommissioning, this plan uses the terminology "Phase 1 final status" and "radiological status" rather than "final status".
Because the decision to release or a final decision on status of the Phase 1 decommissioned areas will not be made until during Phase 2 decision making , using the terminology "final statu s" alone could be misinterpreted . The Phase 1 final status surveys consist of measurements and sampling to describe the radiological conditions at the close of Phase 1 decommissioning activities . The intent is that Phase 1 final status surveys will be designed with quality, quantity and statistical objectives such that the data could be used in a MARSSIM-based "final status" evaluation in the future without a need to re-survey the areas, unless subsequent site activities influence their status . Requirements for the Phase 1 final status surveys are addressed in Section 9.6 below.
Note that surveys of shallow excavations to remove infrastructure such as floor slabs, foundations, and hardstands are being performed in accordance with the Charactenization Sample and Analysis Plan, rather than the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Pla n. These surveys
- which are similar to the Phase 1 fina l status surveys - are simply called "radiological status" surveys in recognition of the difference in the requirements document.
9.2.7 Confirmatory Surveys Confirmatory surveys include limited, independent third-party measurements, sampling, and analysis to verify the results of the licensee's final status survey. Typically, confirmatory surveys conducted by NRC or its contractor consist of two components: (1) a review of the licensee's final status survey plan and report to identify any deficiencies in the planning, execution, or documentation, and (2) measurements taken at a small percentage of locations, previously surveyed by the licensee, to determine whether the licensee's results are valid and reproducible. (Note that while DOE is performing the Phase 1 final status surveys as part of its responsibilities under the WVDP Act. DOE is not the licensee for any part of the Center.) .
DOE anticipates that NRC will arrange for independent in-process surveys to be performed after Phase 1 decommissioning work in an area is completed. DOE also anticipates that confirmatory surveys will be performed on an area basis after the Phase 1 final status survey has been completed for that area, a strategy that experience shows to be more efficient that a single confirmatory survey at the conclusion of the project. An area in this context may be a group of related survey units or an entire waste management area (WMA) .
To facilitate NRC in-process and confirmatory surveys, DOE will :
- Keep NRC informed of the schedule and status of decommissioning activities and the Phase 1 final status survey,
- Notify NRC when particular areas are to be ready for confirmatory surveys, and Rev 2 9-7
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
- Prepare the portion of the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Report that addresses survey results section-by-section and provide to NRC in draft form sections that describe DOE survey results for those areas in which NRC is to perform confirmatory surveys.
Experience has shown that this practice promotes efficiency. 2 9.3 Background Surveys Some information on background radiation and radioactivity in non-impacted areas is available, such as that contained in annual site environmental reports (WVES and URS 2009) and that described in Section 4. Table 4-11 shows background concentra~i ons in various environmental media for most radionuclides of interest.
Additional background measurements will be taken in connection with characterization surveys outlined in Section 9.4 . The characterization surveys for environmental media will be described in a separate Characteri zation Sample and Analysis Plan to be developed and submitted for NRC review. Tlhe additional measurements will include exposure rates and samples from non-impacted soil in suitable non-impacted (background) reference areas.
These additional samples will be subjected to appropriate radionuclide-specific analyses to address all 18 radionuclides of interest.
Applicable guidance for background surveys in the MARSSIM (NRC 2000) and in NUREG-1505 (Gogolak, et al. 1997) will be incorporated. Guidance provided in NUREG-1757, Vol. 2, (NRC, 2006) will be considered to ensure that quality objectives and survey execut.ion, controls, and results are consistent with those of the characterization and Phase 1 final status surveys.
The surveys and sampling in non-impacted offsite areas to establish a basis for background radioactivity levels will be described in detail in the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan. The application of the background data during assessment and use of the data obtained in the characterization and Phase 1 final status surveys will be based on guidance in Chapter 8 of the MARSSIM (NRC 2000) and will be described in each of the respective plans.
Since all surface soil in areas of interest on the project premises will be treated as impacted for Phase 1 final status surveys purposes, it is anticipated that the Sign test will be used in the Phase 1 final status surveys to show DCGLw compliance and application of a background reference area will not be necessary. (If the DCGLs were to be revised in a manner that results in lower values for naturally occurring radionuclides, the Wilcoxon Rank Sum test would be required instead, and a background reference area would become necessary.)
9.4 Characterization Surveys As noted above, four formal characterization survey programs have been completed for portions of the project premises, additional characterization for the Waste Tank Farm is 2
As explained in Section 9.8. DOE and the decommissioning contractor may choose to prepare multiple Phase 1 final status survey reports because of the site complexity. In this case, complete draft reports could be provided to NRC in support of the confirmatory sur\teys.
Rev 2 9-8
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN planned, and routine sampling and analysis of environmerntal media are performed in connection with the WVDP environmental monitoring program .
1lhe Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan, the contents of which are described below, will prov;ide for addiNonal charactenization of soil, sediment, and groundwater on the project premises . Tlhis plan 1is expected to be issued before the start of Phase 1 decommissioning activities. The oharacterization performed will be consistent with the following objectives and guidance.
9.4.1 Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan Content This plan will provide details of characterization surveys to be performed to more precisely determine the extent and the amount of residual radioactivity in environmental media as Phase 1 decommissioning activities begin.
Scope of the Plan The plan will focus primarily on radioactivity in soils, sediment, and groundwater on the project premises. It will also address the following matters :
- Identifying the presence of buried infrastructure,
- Collecting geotechnical data to support hydraulic ba!1f1ier wall design,
- Determining the radiological status of soil around representative Process Building foundation pilings when they become accessible during demolition of the Process Building,
- Determining the radiological status of the HLW transfer trench after piping and equipment in the trench is removed,
- Determining the radiological status of soil in the bottom of shallow excavations after removal of infrastructure such as concrete slabs and foundations, and
- Collecting data to guide soil removal and to verify that remediation goals for a particular location have been achieved .
The plan will not address characterization of structures or characterization of materials (equipment, demolition debris, or excavated soil) for waste management purposes . Section 9.4 .5 describes additional characterization surveys to support facility removal that will be performed in connection with Phase 1 decommissioning activities.
For characterizing materials for waste management purposes, the decommissioning contractor will provide a procedure and obtain DOE approval of this procedure. This procedure will be consistent with applicable DOE requirements and guidance, as well as any applicable State-specified waste acceptance criteria for radioactivity in the offsite landfill(s) where uncontaminated material may be disposed of. It will apply to, among other materials, surface and subsurface soil not known to have been impacted by radioactivity. (As an alternative, these matters may be addressed in the Waste Management Plan.)
Rev 2 9-9
WVDP PHAS E 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Requirements and Guidance to be Followed This plan will follow provisions in NUREG-1757, Volume 2 (NRC 2006) and applicable guidance of the MARSSIM (NRC 2000).
Radionuclides of Interest and Radionuclide Ratios This plan will identify the radionuclides of interest. It will also address the variability of radionuclide ratios across the site and identify areas where the ratios need to be confirmed for use in the Phase 1 final status survey analysis . An additional 12 radionuclides have been identified as possibly (but unlikely to .be) present at the site. In addition, the presence of progeny not in equilibrium with the 18 radionuclides of interest has also been identified as a possible concenn. Both issues have the potential for requiring changes to the radionuclides of interest list. Data collected in implementation of the Characiteriza~ion Sample and Analysis Plan will determine whether this is necessary.
Data Quality Objectives This plan will identify data quality objectives (DQOs) for the characterization surveys, as discussed in Section 9.4 .2.
Use of Characterization Data for Final Status Survey Purposes A key objective of this plan will be to produce data for the Phase 1 final status survey of sufficient quality and quantity to serve final status survey purposes when practicable, and this matter will be addressed in the Chara cterization Sample and Analysis Pl an .
Background Radiation and Radioactivity The Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan will specify appropriate measurements in reference areas for materials and structures to establish background levels, taking into account available data on background radioactivity provided in Section 4, in Appendix B, and that compiled in connection with the WVDP environmental monitoring program .
Characterization Methods for Radioactivity This plan will specify the methods to be used to collect the necessary characterization data . Among the methods considered will be:
- Exposure rate measurements
- Surface contamination scans
- Surface contamination direct measurements
- Smear surveys for removable contamination
- Soil samples
- Groundwater samples
- Sediment samples Rev 2 9-10
WVOP PHAS E 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Note that surface conta1111ination scans, surface contamination direct measurements, and smear surveys for removable contamination apply only to surveys of the empty HLW transfer trench .
Other, more technically sophisticated characterization methods may be used as well, such as in-situ gamma spectroscopy and advanced characterization technologies that DOE has helped develop. Any new technology or instrumentation to be used will be shown to perform with sensitivities that allow detection of residual radioactivity at an appropriate fraction of the DCGLs and corresponding investigative levels .
Radiological Instrumentation The Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan will specify the field and laboratory instruments to be used and the sensitivity of these instruments and methods. Table 9-4 shows typical field instruments to be addressed in the plan .
Table 9-4. Radiological Field Instruments Instrument Approximate Survey Type Characteristics Remarks (or equivalent) SensitivityC2>
Exposure rate Eberline RO -7C1l Ion chamber > 1 R/h For high-rang e readingsYl Exposure rate Eberline R0 -2C1l Ion Chamber 0.1 mrem/h For low-range readings . <3l Exposure rate Ludlum 44-1oCll 2-inch Nal scintillator 900 cpm/µR/h For scanning soil , low potential areas .
Exposure rate FIDLER 5-inch diameter Nal 500 cpm per uCi/m2 For scanning soil for scintillator low energy gamma.
2 Alpha Ludlum 43 -89(1) ZnS (A~) scintillator, 100 dpm/100 cm Scans 100 dpm, 2
100 cm probe 85 dpm/100 cm direct measurements 85 dpm. <3>
2 Beta Ludlum 43 -89(1) ZnS (A~) scintillator, 2,500 dpm/100 cm Scans 2,500 dpm, 100 cm probe 800 dpm/100 cm 2 direct measurements 800 dpm. C3l Beta-gamma Ludlum 44-40(1) Geiger-Mueller (G -M) 3,300 cpm/mrem/h For scanning in tight shielded pancake probe areas. <3>
Beta-gamma Ludlum 44 _9<1> G-M unshielded pancake 3,300 cpm/mrem/h For scanning in tight probe areasC3l Beta-gamma Ludlum 44_5C1l G-M sidewall detector 1,200 cpm/mrem/h For use as a pipe probe.C4l NOTES : (1) To be used with an appropriate scaler-ratemeter.
(2) These are approximate values based primarily on manufacturer's ratings. Th e sensitivities depend on background, count time, and other factors . Calculated , more precise information will be specified in the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan.
(3) Suitable for surveys of empty HLW transfer trench but not of soil areas.
(4) For use in surveys of underground lines on the edges of excavations as specified in Section 9.7.
Samples may be analyzed onsite or shipped to an offsite contract laboratory for analysis .
Laboratory methods, instruments and sensitivities will be in accordance with New York State protocols for environmental analysis . Any laboratory used for environmental sample analysis Rev 2 9-11
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN will have appropriate New York State Department of Health Environmental Laboratory Approval Program certification, or equivalent.
Table 9-5 indicates the target minimum detectable ooncentrations for radionuclides in laboratory analyses of soil samples. Minimum detectable concentration requirements are set to whichever is lower: (1) approximately 1O percent of the most restrictive radionuclide-specific cleanup goal identified in Table 5-14, (2) 25 percent of nominal background for naturally occurri ng radionuclides, or (3) standard laboratory minimum detectable ooncentrations.
Table 9-5. Radionuclide Target Sensitivity for Laboratory Sample Analysis Nuclide lnstrumenUMethod Target Sensitivity pCi/g(l)
Am-241 Alpha and/or gamma speotrometry 1(4)
C-14 Sample oxidizer and liquid scintillation 2(4)
Cm-243/244 <5l Alpha and/or gamma spectrometry 1(4)
Cs-137 Gamma spectrometry 0.1<4)
Gamma spectrometry and/or gas flow 1-129 0.06<2>
proportional counting Np-237 Alpha and/or gamma spec 0.01 (2)
Pu-238 Alpha spectrometry 1(3)
Pu-239/240<5> Alpha spectrometry 1(3)
Pu- 241 Liquid sci.ntillation 15(3)
Sr-90 Liquid scintillation 0.9(2)
Tc-99 Gas flow proport.ional counting 3(2)
U-232 Alpha spectrometry 0.5(2)
U-233/234 (5) Alpha spectrometry 0.2(3)
U-235 (-236) (5) Alpha spectrometry 0.1(3 )
U-238 Alpha spectrometry 0.2(3 )
NOTES: (1) Dependent on sample size, counting time, etc.
(2) Approximately 10 percent of the most restrictive radionuclide-specific cleanup goal identified in Table 5-14.
(3) 25 percent of background for naturally occurring radionuclides.
(4) Standard laboratory minimum detectable concentrations.
(5) When analytical resu lts cannot be identified to a single isotope, the results will be applied to the isotope with the more restrictive DCGL.
Survey Locations This plan will specify how to locate and identify sampling and measurement locations, such as how to lay out and mark appropriate size su rvey grids . Grid control points and positions of samples and survey readings within the grid will be located using global position system devices or conventional surveying . Class 1: Class 2, and Class 3 survey units are discussed in Section 9.6.1 .
Rev 2 9-12
WVDP PHASE 1 D ECOMMISSIONING PLAN Surveys and Sampling of Individual Facilities and Areas Thi s plan will specify the type and extent of characterization measurements in different facilities and areas .
Handling Waste Generated During Characterization The Characterization Sample and Analysis Pl an will specify how to minimize and manage investigative derived waste.
Health and Safety This plan will identify health and safety requirements associated with characterization activities; it may reference the project Health and Safety Plan for this purpose .
Quality Assurance The Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan will address quality control and quality assurance requirements for characterization, addressing matters identified in Section 9.4 .3 and referring to the Quality Assurance Project Plan as appropriate.
Supporting Procedures This plan will specify necessary supporting procedures, such as those for obtaining, handling, preserving, and packaging samples, as well as chain of custody procedures.
Documentation This plan will detail the requirements for formally documenting characterization data in a written report.
9.4.2 Characterization Data Quality Objectives The Data Quality Objectives for the characterization will be detailed in the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan; they may be briefly stated as follows :
The Problem Available characterization data in many areas are insufficient to support decommissioning activities and waste characterization and , in some cases, planning for radiation protection .
The Decision The principal study question is what additional radiological data are needed for decommissioning activities, waste management, and radiation protection . The decision statement may be expressed as follows : if collection of additional data is warranted, collect data of sufficient quality and quantity to support decommissioning activities, waste characterization and/or planning for radiation protection.
Inputs to the Decision Rev 2 9-13
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Inputs to the decision include : (1) available data on radiological conditions; (2) professional judgment concerning data necessary to support the decommissioning activities, waste management, and radiation protection; and (3) available characterization measurement methods to collect necessary additional data, such as using field instruments to determine exposure rates and contamination levels and obtaining samples of materials and having them analyzed in a laboratory.
Study Boundaries The study bound aries include :
- The characteristics of the contaminants of interest: Various radionuclides known to be present at the site from reprocessing of spent nuclear fuel and the hazardous and toxic materials that may be present based on facility history and process history, along with the physical parameters of the facilities and areas involved, such as size, geometry, and material composition .
- The spatial boundary of the decision statement: The facilities and areas within the scope of the DP , including soil from the su rface to depths of six inches (15 cm) and 3.3 feet (one meter) from the surface and, when contamination is present, down to a depth indicating the boun.d of sub-surface impacts.
- The temporal boundary of the problem : The data can be acquired any time before the beginning of decommissioning activities in the facility or areas involved, so long as sufficient time is allowed to make preparations based on the data .
Measurements and sampling in outside areas are dependent on the weather.
- Scale of decision-making: Areas of interest will generally conform to particular areas to undergo decommissioning, i.e., decisions will be made on specific areas or survey units, rather than the project premises as a whole .
- Practical constraints on data collection : These include limited access to certain areas, radiation exposure to those collecting data , availability of personnel and equipment, laboratory capabilities and capacity, and costs. Another constraint is the risk of releasing contamination to the environment and introducing new environmental contamination transport mechanisms .
Decision Rule The decision rule on whether or not to collect data in particular areas and how much data to collect will be addressed in the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan. It will involve the use of project experience and professional judgment to determine the adequacy of available data and the type and extent of any additional data needed .
Limits on Decision Errors The conclusion that a facility or area has been adequately characterized is subject to the possibility of a decision error. Decisions are based on data subject to different variabilities due to choices on sample number, location, collection, and analysis . The acceptable Rev 2 9-14
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN probability of making a decision error on the adequacy of the characterization (false positive and false negative) will be addressed .
Optimizing the Design The content of the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan will reflect an optimum design based on the various factors considered in its preparation. including the matters discussed above .
9.4.3 Characterization Quality Requirements The quality requirements of Section 8 will apply to characterization . The following matters will also be addressed in the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan.
Quality Objectives for Measurements Objectives for precision, bias, completeness, representativeness , reproducibility.
comparability and statistical confidence (control charts) will be addressed .
Field Instruments Field instruments will be calibrated in accordance with written procedures using standards traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology. They will be calibrated every six months and following any substantial repair . Battery status, check source response , and background measurements will be performed prior to use each day. at the completion of use each day, and any time that instrument operation is in question . Control charts with specified limits of acceptability will be used to document and trend source response and background measurements.
Laboratory Instruments Laboratory instruments such as alpha spectrometers. gamma spectrometers. low-background alpha-beta counters. and liquid scintillation counters will also be calibrated in accordance with written procedures using standards traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology. Appropriate operational checks such as background counts and reproducibility checks will be performed before use . Control charts with specified limits of acceptability will be used to document and trend source and background checks.
Offsite analytical laboratories will be required to meet all applicable quality requirements; the laboratory Quality Assurance Plan will be reviewed to ensure that applicable requirements are included. Offsite laboratories will be audited to assure quality performance.
Sample Chain of Custody Sample chain of custody procedures will be established and followed to ensure that sample accountability and integrity are maintained . This process will include appropriate documentation utilized from the point of collection to the point where the sample is consumed in analysis, transferred to another organization, or properly disposed of.
Analytical Quality Control Quality controls utilized for analytical chemical processes will include:
Rev 2 9-15
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
- Maintaining the quality of standards,
- Maintaining controls over sample flow,
- Controlling batch quality using method blanks,
- Using laboratory control standards traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology or using other industry-accepted standards or reference materials,
- Formally evaluating unacceptable results , and
- Utilizing process control charts as appropriate.
Data Quality Control Data will be recorded in a legible manner and reviewed for matters such as accuracy of recording and transcription, procedure compliance, completeness, and consistency. Data recorded on the location of field measurements and samples in excavations will include ~he depth of the measurement point wi~ respect to the nearby ground surface or the eleva ~i on above mean sea level. Calculations will be checked and conclusions will be peer reviewed .
Problems identified will be resolved before the data are utilized . Data reports and documents will be archived and maintained to comply with the Project Quality Assurance Program described in Section 8.
9.4.4 Applying DQOs for Characterization Surveys The following example illustrates how DQOs will be applied to characterize a particular area of interest in a manner supportive of final status survey information needs.
The example is the footprint of the old hardstand, Which was located on the west side of the Lag Storage Additions 3 and 4 . The old hardstand footprint has the potential for radioactive contamination below the surface due to the major spill described in Table 2-17 .
The footprint of the old hardstand will undergo characterization as part of the planned Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan activities.
The Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan includes a set of characterization objectives that form the basis for OQO planning process. Of this set. the following are pertinent to the old hardstand area :
- Evaluate appropriateness of the current list of radionuclides of interest.
- Verify absence of additional radionuclides of interest.
- Identify the presence/absence of buried contamination,
- Determine extent of surface contamination,
- Identify soil waste stream characteristics, and
- Obtain data to support Phase 2 planning .
Data collection requirements specific to the old hardstand for each of these objectives will be developed as part of the DQO evaluation contained in the Characterization Sample and Ana lysis Plan . Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan decision-making (and Rev 2 9-16
WVDP PHAS E 1 D ECOMMISSIONING PLAN consequently, Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan data collection activities) will be sequential with respect to these objectives . For example, data collection to venify the absence of additional radionuclldes of interest may result in changes to the list of analytes for the balance of sampling work conducted for the old hardstand . As another example, if samplirng iden~ifies oontamination likely to require remediation (either as a discrietionary Phase ~ activity or during Phase 2), analyses would be conducted to determine waste stream characteristics.
Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan data collection will support final status survey requirements in a number of ways. llhe first two Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan objeotives listed above will determine the list of radionuclides that final status survey activities will need to address. If contamination is encountered deeper than one meter (third objec~ive) , then the old hardstand area will not be a candidate for Phase 1 final sta~us survey data collection, and instead data collection will focus on identifying the nature and extent of surface and subsurface contamination that is present. Alternatively, if contamination is present above Phase 1 DCGL requirements but not at depths greater than one meter, DOE may defer remediation until Phase 2.
If initial Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan data collection indicates the old hardstand area is a candidate for Phase 1 final status surveys (i.e., there is no evidence of contamination exceeding DCGL requirements in surface soils and no evidence of contamination deeper than one meter), then the balance of soil sampling from the former hardstand area would be conducted in a manner consistent with final status survey DQO requirements. Final status survey sampling requirements are described in detail in the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan. In general, these would include biased surface soil samples (representative of a 0 to 15 cm depth and representative of a 0 to 1 m depth) that targeted specific locations of concern (e.g., historical locations where contamination was present, gamma walkover survey anomalies, etc.) to determine DCGLEMc compliance, and systematic surface soil sampling (representative of a 0 to 15 cm depth and representative of a 0 to 1 m depth) to determine DCGLw compliance.
9.4.5 Characterization Surveys of Structures Because the structures within the scope of Phase 1 decommissioning activities will be entirely removed, the additional characterization of these structures will focus on data necessary to support worker protection, waste management, and minimizing airborne radioactivity releases during demolition, this last factor being especially important for the Process Building . This characterization will take into account available radiological data .
NOTE Because the additional characterization of structures within the scope of Phase 1 of the decommissioning is being performed for the purposes of health and safety, environmental control, and radioactive waste management - activities which are based on DOE procedures as explained in the Section 1 and will have no bearing on conditions at the conclusion of Phase 1 decommissioning activities - the additional characterization is briefly summarized below, rather than being described in more detail.
Rev 2 9-17
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Available Radiological Data Available oharacterization data on sbnucbures to be removed duning Phase 1 of bhe deoommissioning are summarized in Sec'bion 4.1.5. A large body of data is available on different areas of the Process Bu'ilding and Uhe Vitrification Building from the Facility Characterization Project undertaken durii ng the .2002 to 2005 period . The Facility Characterization Project produced a total of 33 radioisotope inventory reports wi ~h bounding estimates of residual radioactivity in different building areas. Characterization data on stmatures other than tihe Process Building and Vitnification Facility are more limited.
A substantial amount of data on radionuolide dis~ri bu ti ons in different parts of tihe Process Building was developed durirng the Facility Characterization Project. These data have been used for waste management purposes duning deaotivation work and the characteristics of many of bhe waste streams associated with Process Building equipment have been well defined .
Due to the continuing deactivation work, radiolog ical conditions in parts of the Process Building and some other areas will have changed by the time the interim end state is reached. Updated characterization data may be available for some areas before Phase 1 decommissioning activities begin.
Given this situation, the initial step in additional characterization of the structures of interest will entail review of available data to determine the additional data that will be needed.
Review of Available Radiological Data Radiological conditions within the structures can vary widely. In the Process Building, some areas have never been entered since plant operations began due to high radiation levels while others have virtually no conta mination .
Available radiological data for the facility or area of interest will be reviewed , considering activities that may have taken place since those data were collected . Such data will include data collected in the Facility Characterization Project and in end of task surveys discussed in Section 9.2.3 . Conditions in the facility or area of interest will be taken into account in evaluating these data, such as cases where concrete grout has been poured over contamination on a floor or a fixative applied to a contaminated wall .
Because radiological conditions in different areas vary widely, the scope of additional characterization will be tailored to the potential hazards involved .
Exposure Rate Measurements A clear understanding of the general area dose rates and any significant hot spots is necessary for all controlled areas where people will be working .
Before work begins in such an area , exposure rate measurements will be taken to identify the general area dose rates and the hot spots in those areas with hot spot potential, unless such data reflecting current conditions are already available. Table 9-6 identifies field instruments suitable for a wide range of exposure rate measurements inside structures.
Rev 2 9-18
WVDP P HASE 1 D ECOMMISSIONING P LAN Table 9-6. Radiological Field Instruments for Facility Characterization Survey Instrument Approximate Characteristics Sensitivity(Zl Remarks Type (or equivalent)
Exposure rate Eberl ine RO-7!1l Ion chamber > 1 R/h For high-range readings.
Exposure rate Eberline R0-2!1l Ion Chamber 0.1 mrem/h For low-ra nge rea dings Exposure rate Bicron Micro Organic scintillator Several µrem/h For scanning low Rem potential areas.
Exposure rate Ludlum 44-10!1l 2-inch Nal scintillator 900 cpm/µR/h For scanning low potential areas .
2 Alpha Ludlum 43-89(1) ZnS (A~) scintillator, 100 dpm/100 cm Scans 100 dpm, 2
100 cm probe 85 dpm/100 cm direct measurements 85 dpm.
2 Beta Ludlum 43-89(1) ZnS (A~) scintill ator, 2,500 dpm/100 cm Scans 2,500 dpm, 2
100 cm probe 800 dpm/100 cm d*irect measurements 800 dpm.
Beta-gamma Ludlum 44-4ol 1l Geiger-Muell er (G-M) 3,300 cpm/mrem/h For scanning in tight shield ed pancake probe areas Beta-gamma Ludlum 44 _9!1l G-M unshielded pancake 3,300 cpm/mrem/h For scanning in tight probe areas Contamination Measurements A general understanding of accessible removable contamination is necessary for all controlled areas where people will be working. Before work begins in such an area, smears will be taken on representative surfaces and counted for removable beta and alpha
. radioactivity unless sufficient data on removable contamination are already available.
Airborne radioactivity measurements will be made as necessary to support radiation protection planning. Surface scans for total alpha and/or beta contamination will be performed only in cases where the resulting data would be useful for planning purposes.
Because the facilities of interest in Phase 1 of the decommissioning will be entirely removed , surveys of inaccessible areas are not expected to be necessary.
Characterization Data for Waste Management Purposes Where necessary for waste stream characterization, exposure rate measurements will be made and smears or other physical samples of materials will be analyzed to determine radionuclide distributions.
Documentation of Additional Characterization Surveys These characterization data will be formally documented and reviewed. Information recorded for exposure rate and contamination measurements will include the date, location, type of measurement. instrument type, instrument serial number, and mode of operation .
Rev 2 9-19
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Samples will be conbrolled and laboratory analyses performed and documented using the processes for environmental media samples described above.
Quality Assurance and Quality Control All faoility charactenizatiom measurements will be accomplished and documented in acoordance with the provisions of Seotion 8 of ti'ilis plam and the Ql.!lality Assurance Projeot Plan.
9.5 In-Process Surveys In-process or remedial action support surveys will be performed while remediation is in progress . The pnimary purposes of these surveys are to guide decontamination and determine when remediation to the cleanup goals specified in Section 5 has been attained .
In-process surveys also support radiation protection .
9.5.1 Measurement Methods and Instrumentation Measurement methods and instruments used will be identical to those utilized during the characterization surveys described in Section 9.4 and the Phase 1 final status surveys.
Survey quality objectives during in-process survey activities for soil and sediment will be aligned with the quality objectives of the Phase 1 final status surveys, to ensure that decisions and interpretations of data have the same confidence as those based on the Phase 1 final status survey results. Data quality objectives and quality control parameters will be consistent with those identified for the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan. in Section 9.4, above. Media-specific and instrument/met.hod-specific background levels developed by measurements and sampling in the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan will be applied during the remediation, usually through subtraction from onsite analysis of samples.
The Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan will specify the sampling. instruments and data objectives for surveys in the area around the Process Building foundation pilings, an area that will not be readily accessible until late in the excavation in WMA 1 when overlaying structures are removed . In-process surveys in this area will be used to guide remediation and to identify locations for biased sampling .
Because surveys performed in the deep excavations are expected to be dominated by Sr-90, nuclide-specific measurements by onsite sample analysis will be used to guide the excavation. Where practicable, correlations between gamma exposure rates and soil radioactivity concentrations will be used to help determine when removal of target soil has been completed and to demonstrate that the instrument scan and direct measurement sensitivities are sufficient for the purpose of the in-process survey.
9.5.2 Scan Surveys and Direct Measurements Investigation levels for scanning surveys to identify areas of elevated activity will be determined in the implementation of the Characterization and Sampling Plan . Scanning surveys will be performed to locate radiation anomalies indicating residual gross activity that may require further investigation or action . Areas of elevated activity typically represent a small portion of the site or survey unit. Thus, random or systematic direct measurements or Rev 2 9-20
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN sampling on a grid spacing may have a low probability of identifying these areas. so that scanning surveys are typically performed before direct measurements or sampling . Because of the inability to detect certain radionuclides of interest in scann ing surveys as discussed below, collection and analysis of soil samples will be necessary using protocols speoified in the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan and the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan.
Scan Minimum Detectable Concentrations Procedures are provided in the MARSSIM for calculating scan minimum detectable concentrations (MDCs) for particular survey instruments. More detail on signal detection theory and instrument response is provided in NU REG -1507, Minimum Detectable Concentrations with Typical Radiation Survey Instruments for Various Contaminants and Field Conditions (NRC 2007) . These procedures will be followed to obtain appropriate scan MDCs for the specific instruments to be used at the site. These calculations will take into account site-specific factors such as soil properties, the expected distri bution of radionuclides in soil , and the scanning speed . This information will be developed as part of future planning activities for the project and will be available for NRC review.
To assist wiU1 current planning activities, estimated scanning MDCs in soil for the radionuclides of interest were obtained for field survey instruments by reviewing available information. and these values are shown in Table 9-7 . Information is only provided for 14 of the 18 radionuclides. as four have no or minimal photon (gamma ray and X-ray) emissions making ~hem impractical to detect with field scanning instruments . Field survey instruments for soil contamination are generally limited to those that can detect photons, given the uneven terrain and conditions encountered in the field. This is in contrast to survey instruments that can be used for buildings, many of which allow for the detection of alpha and beta contamination as well as gamma emissions.
Table 9-7. Estimated Scanning Minimum Detectable Concentrations (MDCs) of Radionuclides in Soil Radionuclide Type of detector Scan MDC (pCi/g)
Am-241 FIDLE R 30 C-14 NA<1> -
Cm-243 2" by 2" Nal 50 Cm-244 FIDLER 300 Cs-137 2" by 2" Nal 7(2) 1-1 29 FIDLER 60 Np-237 FIDLER 30 Pu -238 FIDLER 100<3>
Pu-239 FIDLER 200<3>
Pu-240 FI DLER 100 Pu -241 NA<1> -
1 Sr-90 NA<> -
Rev 2 9-21
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table 9-7. Estimated Scann ing Minimum Detectable Concentrations (MDCs) of Radionucl ides in Soil Radionuclide Type of detector Scan MDC (pCi/g)
Tc-99 NA1aJ -
U-232 FIDLE R 60 U-233 FIDLER 500 U-234 FIDLER 60 U-235 FIDLER 30 U-238 FIDLER 60 NOTES: (1 ) NA mea ns mot applicable; either there are no photons assooia ted with the radionuolide or the photon y iel d is too low to allow for detection by field scaranirng instruments.
(2) A speoific ca loulation of scanning minimum detectable count r ate for Cs-137 in soil perfonmed in connection with preparation of the Phase 1 Decommissioning Plan yielded a va lue equivalent to 7 pCi/g Cs- 137. A comparable va lue of 6.4 p Ci/g is given in Table 6.7 of the MARSSIM When units are given in pCi/g.
(3) While scan MDCs of 10 and 20 pCi/g are reported for Pu-238 and Pu-239, respectively , in Appendi x H of MARSSIM. much larger va lues were reported elsewhere. The va lues given here are those expected to be reasonably achievable under field conditions.
The scanning MDCs given in Table 9-7 are representabve of those that reasonably can be expected to be obtained with currently available instruments under conditions encountered in the field . These values were obtained from reported values and scanning 3
experience at other radioactively contaminated sites.
Experience for the Shallow Land Disposal Area site in Pennsylvania indicated that the calculated values were much lower than was actually obtainable under field conditions, which is reflected in the values given in Table 9-7 . For some rad ionuclides (such as Pu -238 and Pu-239) , a wide range of values was reported . In this case, a midpoint value is given in the table.
Information for scan MDCs was not available for about half of the radionuclides . In these cases, the energy spectrum and yields of the gamma rays and X-rays were reviewed along with the relative detector response (by photon energy) . This allowed for an estimate to be made of the scan MDCs for those radionuclides without published information .
The scan MDCs for some radionuclides exceed surface and subsurface soil DCGLw values (cleanup goals) given in Table 5-14 of this plan. Also, the general approach used to calculate scan MDCs assumes flat terrain and does not account for situations where scans may be occurring on the sides of excavations. Experience has shown that it is difficult to obtain scan MDCs at the levels calculated using conditions that are more ideal than 3
Calculations of scan MDCs are provided in a number of gamma wa lkover plans including the Site Radiological Survey Plan for the CWM Chemical Services site in Model City, New York (CWM 2006) and the Final Gamma Walkover Survey Sampling and Analysis Plan for the Shallow Land Disposal Area FUSRAP site in Pennsylvania (USACE 2003) . Additional information reviewed included the article Detection of Depleted Uranium in Soil Using Portable Hand-Held Instruments (Coleman and Murray 1999) and Ask an Expert Question and Answer Page on Survey Instruments (conventional) (ORAU 2009) . These sources provided a range of scan MDCs for several different detectors.
Rev 2 9-22
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN generally occur at the site. llhe values given in Table 9-7 account for expected field conditions.
Because ~here may be multiple radionuclides present at many locations, it will be necessary to achieve soil concentrations at some relatively small fraction of the DCGLs to arrive at definitive conolusions as to the need to conduct ~urther remedial aotion. llhis typically cannot be done using scanning instruments. Rather, scanning techniques are generally used to indicate the presence of elevated radioactivity (above background) and the radionuclides that may have elevated concentrations. Defiin'itive concll!lsiorns as to tihe presence or absernce of contamination above radionuclide-speci~ic DCGLs will be made by making direct static measurements or by oollectirng samples for analysis.
Direct Measurements Direct measurements may be collected at random locations in the area of interest.
Alternatively, direct measurements may be collected at systematic locations to supplement scanning surveys for the identification of small areas of elevated act!vity. Direct measurements may also be collected at locations identified by scanning surveys as part of an investigation to determine l!he source of the elevated instrument response . Professional judgment may also be used to identify locations .for direct measurements to further define the areal extent of residual radioactivity and to determine maximum radiation levels within an are.a , although these types of direct measurements are usl!lally associated with preliminary surveys (i .e., scoping , characterization, remedial action support) . All direct measurement locat,ions and results shall be documented.
For those radionuclides that cannot be effectively measured directly in the field, samples of the soil in the area under investigation will be collected and then analyzed with a laboratory-based procedure including gamma spectrometry, beta analysis using liquid scintillation counting , or alpha spectrometry following separation chemistry.
9.5.3 Documentation Data collected during in-process survey field measurements and sampling will be formally controlled and documented as specified in Section 8. Data recorded on the location of field measurements and samples in excavations will include the depth of the measurement point with respect to the nearby ground surface or the elevation above mean sea level. Data reports and documents will be archived and maintained to comply with the Project Quality Assurance Program described in Section 8 .
9.6 The Phase 1 Final Status Survey As indicated previously, the Phase 1 final status survey will be accomplished in accordance with a Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan(s) . Because the decommissioning work spans a significant period of time and area of the site, the Phase 1 final status survey efforts may be more readily described and controlled in several area-specific or survey unit-specific plans rather than a single, more complex plan. The use of the DQO process in the project planning cycle will ensure consistency in the design, execution, and evaluation of Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plans if multiple plans are developed .
Rev 2 9-23
WVDP PHAS E 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN This Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan(s) will have an integrated design incorporating :
- Analysis of media samples from systematic positions to determine the average concentration of activity distributions in relatively large areas, and
- Surface scanning meter surveys to identify localized areas of elevated activity.
Appendix G desoribes the conceptual framewo ~k for the Phase 1 Final Status Survey PJan.
9.6.1 Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan Content The Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan(s) will provide details of the Phase 1 final status surveys to demonstrate that residual radiological conditions satisfy the cleanup criteria described in Section 9.1 or to document final radiological conditions as indicated below. (The plan elements described below will apply to all Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plans if multiple plans are prepared .)
Requirements and Guidance to be Followed The Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan will follow provisions in NUREG-1757 Volume 2 (NRC 2006) and guidance of the MARSSIM (NRC 2000) .
Overview of Survey Design This plan will provide a brief overview of the survey design. This design will follow NUREG-1757 Volume 2 (NRC 2006) and the MARSSIM (NRC 2000), utilizing statistical tests to determine adequate sample density.
Radionuclides of Interest This plan will specify the radionuclides of interest identified in Section 9.1, considering that all radionuclides may not be of interest in certain areas.
Designating Residual Radioactivity Limits and Investigative Levels This plan will identify the cleanup criteria specified in Section 5. It will also identify investigative levels and how they were established .
Use of Characterization Data for Phase 1 Final Status Survey Purposes As indicated previously ~ DOE plans to produce characterization data of sufficient quality to serve Phase 1 final status survey purposes when practicable for areas that appear to meet the cleanup criteria without the need for remediation, and this matter and the data of interest will be addressed in the Phase 1 Final Statu s Survey Plan .
Additional Radioactivity Not Accounted For During Characterization
. If any radioactivity from licensed or WVDP operations is not accounted for by characterization performed previously or in connection with decommissioning activities, this will be identified in the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan.
Classification of Areas Different areas of the project premises facilities and areas of interest will be classified based on potential for radioactive contamination. Four classifications will be used :
Rev 2 9-24
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
- Class 1: impacted areas that, prior to remediation, are expected to have concentrations of residual radioactivity that exceed the DCGLw; Class 2 : impacted areas that, prior to remediation, are not likely to have concentrations of residual radioactivity that exceed the DCGLw; Class 3 : any impacted areas that have a low probability of containing residual radioactivity; and Non-impacted : areas without reasonable potential for radioactive contamination from licensed or WVDP activities.
Impacted areas are identified in Section 4 based on information available in 2009 .
Preliminary classification will be confirmed or adjusted based on subsequent characterization and in-process survey data .
Survey Units Survey units are geographical areas of specified size and shape for which a separate decision will be made as to whether or not that area exceeds the regulatory limit. Areas within a survey unit will have a similar usage history and contamination potential and be contiguous areas of the same area classification.
Survey units will be specified in the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan . They will be identified in tables or drawings or a combination of the two. Among areas considered in designating survey units wil l be:
- The bottoms and sides of the WMA 1 and WMA 2 excavations before they are back-filled;
- Laydown areas for excavated soil after bhe soil has been removed ; and
- Areas where Phase 1 final status surveys are to be performed for surface soil . '
In some survey units, data from characterization will be sufficient for Phase 1 final status survey purposes; this matter will be addressed in the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan .
Background Radiation and Radioactivity Appropriate measurements will be taken in non-impacted background reference areas to establish background levels, taking into account available data on background summarized in Section 4, in Appendix B, that compiled in connection with the WVDP environmental monitoring program, and that collected during characterization . Media background will be subtracted from Phase 1 final status survey results .
Data Quality Objectives Data Quality Objectives for the Phase 1 final status survey will be established as indicated in Section 9.6.2.
Survey Methods Rev 2 9-25
WVDP PHASE 1 D ECOMMISSIONING PLAN The methods to be used to collect the necessary data in Phase 1 final status surveys will be similar to methods used in characterization surveys discussed previously . Among these are:
- Surface contamination scans,
- Direct measurements for contamination,
- Exposure rate measurements, and
- Soil and/or other media samples.
The Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan will incorporate performance-based measurement systems, specifying the analytical sensitivity goal of each survey method . Individual methods (i.e., static surface counts) will then be translated to fie ld procedures (instrument, detector, geometry, and count time) to assure attainment of the sensitivity required . Information necessary to perform the surveys and sampling, such as procedures for collecting and preparing samples, will be specified . Other survey methods may be used in support of the methods specified above, such as gamma scans to help identify locations of soil samples .
Radiological Instrumentation This plan will specify the field and laboratory instruments to be used and the sensitivity of these instruments and methods. Table 9-8 shows typical field instruments to be addressed in the plan .
Table 9-8. Radiological Field Instruments for Phase 1 Final Status Survey Instrument Approximate Survey Type Characteristics Remarks (or equivalent) Sensitivity(1>
Exposure Bicron Micro Organic scintillator Several µrem/h For scanning soil.
rate Rem Exposure Ludlum 44-10 2-inch Nal scintillator 900 cpm/µR/h For scanning soil.
rate Exposure FIDLER 5-inch diameter Nal 500 cpm per For scanning soil Rate scintillator µCi/m2 for low energy ga mmas NOTE: (1) These are approximate valu es ba sed primarily on manufacturer's rating s. The sensitivities depend on background , count time, and other factors. Calculated, more precise information will be specified in the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan .
The Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan will specify how the minimum detectable concentration (MDC) for media samples and the MDC for scanning surveys (MDCscanl will be determined for each instrument and technique using methods specified in NUREG-1757, Volume 2 (NRC 2006) . It will also demonstrate that the instrument scan and direct measurement sensitivities are consistent with MARSSIM (NRC 2000) guidance and sufficient for the goals of the Phase 1 final status survey.
The laboratory instruments and methods to be utilized will also be addressed in the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan, along with the minimum detectable concentrations of the methods used . Instruments and methods are expected to be similar to those shown in Table 9-5.
Rev 2 9-26
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Scan Surveys Scan surveys of survey units of the different classifications will be performed as indicated in Table 9-9 below. The purpose of such scan surveys is to identify small areas of elevated activity.
Table 9-9. Scan Surveys for Different Survey Area Classifications Classification Scanning Required Scanning Investigative Levels Class 1 100% coverage(1l >DCGLEMC 2
Class 2 10-100% coverage( l >DCGLw or
>MDCscan if MDCscan is greater than DCGLw.
Class 3 Judgmental >DCGLw or
>MDCscan if MDCscan is greater than DCGLw.
Non-impacted None Not applicable.
NOTES: (1) Entire surface of accessible soil areas.
(2) Surveys will be both systematic and judgmental.
The derivation of scan and fixed MDCs will take into account instrument efficiencies (surface and detector) , scan rates and distances over surfaces, surveyor efficiency, and minimum detectable count rate, using guidance in the MARSSIM (NRC 2000) and NUREG-1507 (Abelquist, et al. 1998).
Sample Collection and Handling A brief description of how samples are to be collected, controlled, and handled will be provided, with reference to the detailed procedure(s) to be used for this purpose.
Survey Grids Survey grids of appropriate size will be laid out and marked on excavations and land areas . Where practicable, grids established for characterization surveys will be re-established for use in the Phase 1 final status survey. Grid control points and positions of samples and survey readings within the grid will be located using global position system devices or conventional surveying .
Surrogate Radionuclides Surrogate measurements focusing on Cs-137 may be used in areas where the radionuclide mix in a survey unit is consistent and Cs-137 is one of the dominant radionuclides . The Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan will specify how this will be done in particular areas.
Surveys and Sampling of Individual Facilities and Areas This plan will specify the process to determine the number of samples required in different areas following MARSSIM protocols . This process will include the following elements :
- Developing DQOs consistent with the requirements in Section 9.6.2, Rev 2 9-27
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
- Utilizing as the null hypothesis (H 0 ) to be tested the assumption that the residual contamination exceeds the release criteria with the alternative hypothesis (HA) being that the residual contamination meets the release criteria,
- Determining the relative shift - a ratio involving the difference between the DCGLw and the field remediation concentration goal divided by the variability in the concentration across the survey unit following remediation,
- Determining acceptable decision errors,
- Determining the number of samples needed for the Wilcoxon rank sum test (for radionuclides present in background} ,
- Determining the number of samples needed for the Sign test (for radionuclides not present in background} , and
- Determining the number of additional samples needed if the MDCscan is greater than the DCGLw.
Evaluation of Results and Determination of Compliance The measurement data will be first reviewed to confirm that the survey units were properly classified . In any cases where the results show that an area was misclassified with a less restrictive classification , the areas will be reclassified correctly, and a survey appropriate to the new classification will be performed .
Whether the measurement results demonstrate that the survey unit meets the release criteria will then be determined . The process for this and the statistical tests to be used will
- be specified in the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan, taking into account the multiple radionuclides present at the site and the different radionuclide distributions present in some areas.
If compliance is not demonstrated, then additional remediation followed by additional Phase 1 final status surveys will be performed until the release criteria are achieved .
One radionuclid.e (1 -129} in surface soil will be treated as a special case because its cleanup goal is the same order of magnitude as the minimum detectable concentration in 4
typical laboratory sample analyses. Section 7 of the MARSSIM indicates that the analytical detection limits should be 10-50 percent of the DCGL. but that higher detection sensitivities may be acceptable when lower limits are impracticable (NRC 2000) . Because this radionuclide should not appear in background soil samples, analysis at a detection limit near the DCGL will be sufficient to flag results should a sample indicate the presence of either radionuclide above its detection limit.
4 In Revision 1 of this plan, both 1-129 and Np-237 were identified as special cases because of low cleanup goals. The revised surface soil cleanup goal for Np-237 is higher than the Revision 1 valu e (0.23 vs . 0.096 pCi/g) . Typical laboratory detection limits for Np-237 in soil samples are around O.Q1 pCi/g as shown in the 2008 data in Table C-4. However, typical laboratory detection limits for 1-129 are in the 0.1to0.3 pCi/g range as shown in Table C-4, so the laboratory detection limit may exceed 50 percent of the cleanup goal for this radionuclide . Although Table 9-5 specifies a target detection limit of 0.06 pCi/g for 1-129, it is unlikely that this value can be consistently achieved in practice without special efforts .
Rev 2 9-28
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN The Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan will provide an alternate method for evaluating analytical results for 1-129 that do not exceed the minimum detectable concentration . This alternate method may involve use of an easy to detect surrogate radionuclide prevalent in surface soil, such as Cs-137 or Am-241 , to infer the concentration of 1-129. Scaling factors for spent fuel reprocessed specified in Table 4-1 will be suitable for this purpose. Another suitable alternate evaluation method could involve larger soil volumes and longer counting times for representative samples to reduce the minimum detectable concentration to a value well below the cleanup goal.
The amounts of 1-129 that might be found in surface soil contamination, if any, will likely be small . This conclusion is based on comparisons between the estimated amounts of this radionuclide at the site at the conclusion of spent fuel reprocessing compared to the estimated amounts of predominant radionuclides such as Sr-90 and Cs-137. Table 2-5 in Section 2 shows estimates for the radionuclide content of the underground waste tanks at the completion of reprocessing . This table shows the estimated inventory of 1-129 to be more than seven orders of magnitude less than the estimated Cs-137 present.
Health and Safety This plan will identify health and safety requirements associated with survey activities; it may reference the project Health and Safety Plan for this purpose .
Quality Assurance The Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan will address quality control and quality assurance requirements for characterization, addressing matters identified in Section 9.6.3 and in Section 8, referring to the Project Quality Assurance Plan as appropriate.
Supporting Procedures This plan will specify necessary supporting procedures, such as those for obtaining and managing samples .
Documentation This plan will detail the requirements for formally documenting and archiving Phase 1 final status survey data, in accordance with the requirements of Section 9.8. Data recorded on the location of field measurements and all sample locations in excavations will include the depth of the measurement point with respect to the elevation above mean sea level.
9.6.2 Data Quality Objectives for the Phase 1 Final Status Survey The DQOs will be detailed in the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan; they will involve considerations such as :
- Stating the problem : Provide adequate data of sufficient quality to determine the extent and magnitude of residual radioactive contamination .
- Identifying the decision : Will the data generated be adequate to support all survey objectives?
- Identifying inputs to the decision : Available data, including final characterization data obtained in connection with deactivation, information needed, measurement methods that will produce necessary data .
Rev 2 9-29
WVDP PHAS E 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
- Defining the study boundaries . Radionuclides of interest. areas of interest, necessity to obtain data to support the decommissioning schedule, appropriate-sized units, limited access to certain areas, availability of personnel and equipment, laboratory analysis throughput.
- Developing a decision rule . How to make the judgment as to whether or not additional data will need to be collected .
- Specifying limits on decision error. Consider the consequences of inadequate survey data and express what is acceptable in this regard.
- Optimizing the design . Data quality assessment will be used to determine the validity and performance of the data collection design and determine the adequacy of the data set to support the decision .
9.6.3 Phase 1 Final Status Survey Quality Requirements The quality requirements of Section 8 will apply, along with the quality requirements for the characterization survey as identified in Section 9.4 .3. These matters will be addressed in the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan.
9.7 The Survey Process By Waste Management Area This section outlines surveys completed and surveys to be accomplished in each WMA (9 .7.1 through 9.7.11) and, separately, surveys completed and planned for environmental media across the project premises (9. 7 .12) . Note that other considerations such as decommissioning activities in adjacent areas and the impact of routes for transportation of radioactive materials on survey units and area classification will be addressed as appropriate in the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan(s) .
9.7.1 WMA 1 Process Building and Vitrification Facility Area Characterization surveys of the Process Building and Vitrification Facility have been performed in connection with the Facility Characterization Project. However, because radiological conditions in most building areas will change during deactivation work performed before the start of the decommissioning, additional surveys will be performed as decommissioning activities begin . Characterization of the contaminated soil in WMA 1 that is the source for the north plateau groundwater plume is addressed in Section 4.2; surveys related to its remediation are addressed in Section 9.7 .12 below.
The Facility Characterization Project As noted previously, the Facility Characterization Project focused on development of conservative source term estimates for various areas of the Process Building and Vitrification Facility . It followed the MARSSIM (NRC 2000) process and was carried out in accordance with the WVNSCO Characterization Management Plan (Michalczak 2004) .
Description of Previous Survey Measurements. The primary process for determining the source term in a particular a.rea involved using exposure rate measurements to quantify the amount of a surrogate gamma-emitting radionuclide such as Cs-137 , and using scaling ratios to estimate the amounts of other radionuclides present. Scaling Rev 2 9-30
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSION ING PLAN ratios were based on sample analysis, process knowledge , or other bounding assumptions . In some cases, samples were collected and the analytical results were used in calculating a source term based on surface area or volumetric computations.
The process entailed four basic steps: (1) collection and evaluation of existing data and preparation of a draft technical approach, (2) review of these data and the approach by a Technical Review and Approval Panel, (3) collection of any needed data and modeling to estimate the source term , and (4) review and concurrence on the. estimated source term by the Panel. Where additional data were needed, a biased sampling approach was used that typically involved field measurements such as radiation and contamination levels, along with samples of materials analyzed in a laboratory. Radiation level measurements were typically taken with a Geiger-Mueller detector (Ludlum Model 133-6) or ion chamber (Eberline R0-20) attached to a scaler/rate meter. Smears were counted with a Tennelec gas-flow proportional counter. Detection sensitivities for the exposure rate instruments were approximately 0.1 mrem/h for the R0-20 and higher for the Model 133-6, whose scales range from 1 mR/h to 1000 R/h .
Due to the high activity associated with most of the samples, samples taken in connection with the project were analyzed in the former onsite Analytical and Process Chemistry Laboratory. Table 9-10 shows laboratory instruments and methods, along with their sensitivities.
Table 9-10. Laboratory Methods Nuclide Instrument/Method WVDP Procedure Approximate Sensitivity<1l Am-241 Alpha and/or gamma spectrometry ACM -2707 /3104 1.0 E-05 µCi/g C-14 Sample oxidizer and liquid scintillation ACM -4904 1.0 E-02 µCi/g Cm-234/244 Alpha and/or gamma spectrometry ACM -2707 /3104 1.0 E-03 µCi/g Cs-137 Gamma spectrometry ACM -3103/3104 1.0 E-03 µCi/g 1-129 Gamma spectrometry ACM-3104 1.0 E-03 µCi/g Np-237 Alpha and/or gamma spec ACM -2707 /31 04 1.0 E-03 µCi/g Sr-90 Liquid scintillation ACM-2707 /3002 1.5 E-05 µCi/g (1 g sample)
Tc-99 Gas flow proportional counting ACM-4001 1.0 E-06 µCi/g (1g sample)
Pu-238 Alpha spectrometry ACM -2704 1.0 E-05 µCi/g Pu-239/240 Alpha spectrometry ACM -2704 1.0 E-05 µCi/g Pu-241 Liquid scintillation ACM -2707 /2708 1.0 E-05 µCi/g U-2 32 Alpha spectrometry ACM -2 707 1.0 E-05 µCi/g U-233/234 Alph a spectrometry ACM-2707 1.0 E-05 µCi/g U-235 (-236) Alpha spectrometry ACM -2707 1.0 E-05 µCi/g U-238 Alph a spectrometry ACM -2707 1.0 E-05 µCi/g NOTES: (1) Dependent on sample size, counting time, etc.
Rev 2 9-31
WVDP PHASE 1 D ECOMMISSIONING PLAN Formal quality assurance requirements were implemented. Data quality objectives following the MARSSIM (NRC 2000) process were used. Data collected were compiled into individual reports for the area or facility . Each report included a discussion of availabl e historical data, the approach used to gather additional data , and the conservatively bounding source term estimate, along with all the supporting information .
Justification for Previous Survey Measurements. The focus on conservative source term s supported one of the decommissioning alternatives envisioned by DOE when the Facility Characterization Project began. This alternative would have entailed leaving most of the Process Building and Vitrification Facility in place beneath a multi-layer cap .
The focus on source term estimates rather than general radiological conditions produced information important to the performance assessment under this alternative .
The process for collection and evaluation of historical data was similar to that used for historical site assessments . Data acquired during the effort were obtained following MARSSIM quality protocols. However, these data are being treated as scoping survey data in some cases because of their limited extent.
Process Building and Vitrification Facility Characterization Surveys In connection with decommissioning activities in each area, characterization measurements will be taken as specified in Section 9.4.5 . The measurements will take into account data from deactivation end-of-task surveys and fill in data gaps for areas where these surveys were not performed . Characterization measurements will be performed on the WMA 1 facilities commensurate with plans for their disposition , which is removal in each case. As indicated in Section 7, there are no plans to release these facilities from radiological controls before dismantlement or demolition, which limits characterization data needs .
Description of Planned Survey Measurements. Measurements will typically include exposure rates, removable contamination, and total contamination . Samples will be analyzed for specific radionuclides to confirm radionuclide distributions where such information is not already available and to provide information for radiation protection and waste characterization. Areas inaccessible to surveys will be exposed so surveys can be made only in cases where this is essential for radiation protection purposes .
Justification for Planne*d Survey Measurements. These are the appropriate measurements necessary to facilitate radiation protection and support planning decommissioning activities and waste management.
Characterization of Other WMA 1 Facilities The other facilities to remain within WMA 1 after 2009 that may have been impacted by radioactivity are: (1) the 01 -14 Building, (2) the Plant Office Building, (3) the Utility Room, and (4) the Utility Room Expansion . Because these facilities will be entirely or partially within the bounds of the planned excavation, characterization measurements will be performed on these WMA 1 facilities commensurate with plans for their disposition, which is removal in each case . As indicated in Section 7, there are no plans to release these facilities from radiological controls before dismantlement or demolition, which limits characterization data needs .
Rev 2 9-32
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Routine WVDP surveys taken through mid -2009 in these areas have typically not shown removable contamination above detection limits. However, contamination from the major acid spill during NFS operations that produced the north plateau groundwater plume is known to be present beneath the floor in the men's shower room of the Plant Office Building and some areas on the third and fourth floor in the 01 -14 Building that contain ventilation system equipment, are not routinely surveyed.
Description of Planned Survey Measurements. Measurements will typically include exposure rates, removable contamination, and total contamination . Representative embedded piping in the 01 -14 Building floor slab, except for sealed floor drains, will be characterized , with measurements such as (1) total beta using a suitable pipe probe (such as a Ludlum 44-6 sidewall detector) in the exposed ends of the pipe, (2) removable alpha and beta contamination in the ends of the pipe by smears, and (3) exposure rates on the accessible piping . (Note that some equipment will be removed from the 01 -14 Building during deactivation .)
Characterization is not planned for the non-impacted facilities in WMA 1 - the Fire Pump House and water tank and the electrical substation.
Justification for Planned Survey Measurements. These are the appropriate measurements necessary to facilitate radiation protection and support planning decommissioning activities and waste management.
Characterization of Subsurface Piping in WMA 1 DOE has evaluated contaminated underground piping as descri bed in Appendix F. This evaluation produced conservative source term estimates based on existing data, but it did not include characterization measurements. Subsurface piping within the bounds of the WMA 1 excavation will be removed , packaged and disposed of at offsite disposal facilitie s. There is no intent in Phase 1 of the decommissioning to trace or excavate underground piping outside the bounds of the excavation .
When these lines become exposed during the course of decommissioning work, measurements will be taken as necessary, for instance for waste characterization purposes for lines removed or to provide data to support Phase 2 decision-making for portions of lines remaining in place.
Description of Survey Measurements. The measurements will be taken after the interior surfaces of the lines are exposed during the course of decommissioning work.
Three types of measurements will be taken as appropriate: (1) total beta using a suitable pipe probe (such as a Ludlum 44-6 sidewall detector) in the exposed ends of the pipe, (2) removable alpha and beta contamination in the ends of the pipe by smears, and (3) exposure rates on the accessible piping . Where sufficient data on radionuclide distributions are not available, smears or metal coupons will be obtained and analyzed to determine the radionuclide distributions.
Justification for Survey Measurements. These measurements will provide information on interior contamination levels that will support radiation protection, waste management, and Rev 2 9-33
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN subsequent disposition determinations. The lines have a constant downward slope and ones that carried higher concentrations of radioactive liquid are made of stainless steel. This design makes contamination traps unlikely and contamination levels in areas where piping will be cut are expected to be representative of the entire length . Line 7P120 that carried THOREX waste frorri the Chemical Process Cell to Tank 80-4 is expected to contain the most residual radioactivity.
In-Process Surveys in WMA 1 Facilities In-process surveys will be performed in the Prooess Building and Vitrification Faoility during remediation as specified in Section 9.5. In-process surveys in other WMA 1 fadlities will also be performed during remediation as described in Section 9.5. However, the scope of such surveys will be minimal because of the relative low potential for contamination, except in some areas of the 01-14 Building which may contain significant contamination .
In-Process Surveys in the WMA 1 Excavation In-process surveys will be performed in connection with removing soil during ~h e large WMA 1 excavation as specified in Section 7 and Section 9.5. They will be coordinated with surveys performed around Process Building foundation pilings that are specified in the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan .
When the excavation has reached the planned depth of at least one foot into the unweathered Lavery till , a systematic in-process survey will be performed as specified in the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan. Survey grids will be laid out. A complete gamma scan of both the floor and the sides of the excavation will be performed to identify areas of elevated activity as evidenced by above-background measurements. Biased soil samples will be collected from areas of elevated activity and analyzed onsite for Sr-90 and Cs-137.
Systematic soil samples will also be collected and analyzed onsite for Sr-90.
The survey results and sample analytical data will be used to determine if additional soil removal is necessary. If additional soil removal is necessary, an additional in-process survey will be performed in the area of interest after the soil is removed using the protocols described in the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan .
In-Process Surveys Related to Subsurface Piping in WMA 1 In-process surveys will be performed during removal of piping as described in Section 9.5. Some characterization surveys will effectively be in-process surveys since they will be performed in conjunction with piping removal activities .
Phase 1 Final Status Surveys in the WMA 1 Excavation As explained previously, the final end-state of the Process Building and Vitrification Facility will involve total removal including excavation of th e subsurface portions, backfilling with soil, and installing a vertical hydraulic barrier wall on the down-gradient side of the excavation footprint. Phase 1 final status surveys will be performed for exposed subsurface areas before they are backfilled in accordance with the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan, which will provide details of the surveys required .
Rev 2 9-34
WVDP PHASE 1 D ECOMMISSIONING PLAN Separate Phase 1 final status surveys of the piping not encountered during excavation and subsequently abandoned in place are not planned ; characterization survey data are intended to serve Phase 1 final status survey purposes.
Confirmatory Surveys in the WMA 1 Excavation After Phase 1 final status surveys are completed, arrangements will be made to have any desired confirmatory surveys performed .
Radiological Status Surveys Outside of the Large Excavation Mter all facilities within WMA 1 have been removed, radiological status surveys of the areas outside of the large excavation will be performed . These areas will consist of the shallow excavations for removal of infrastructure not within the large excavation footprint, that is, the foo~prints of the portions of the Utility Room, Utility Room Expansion, and the Laundry Room floor slabs and foundations and the floor slabs and foundations for the Fire Pumphouse and Water Storage Tank. These surveys will be performed in accordance with the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan .
Confirmatory Surveys in Areas Outside of the Large Excavation After these radiological status surveys are completed, arrangements will be made to have any desired confirmatory surveys of the se areas performed before they are backfilled .
9.7.2 WMA 2 Low-Level Waste Treatment Facility Area Of the facilities to remain within WMA 2 after 2009 that have been impacted by radioactivity, significant characterization data are available for only one: the Old Interceptor.
Only limited data on radiological conditions are available for the others within the scope of the plan: (1) the LLW2 Building, (2) the Neutralization Pit, (3) the Solvent Dike, (4) the twin New Interceptors, and (5) the North Plateau Groundwater Pump and Treat Facility.
Note that the five lagoons in WMA 2 are addressed as environmental media in Section 9.7.12 below.
Existing Characterization Data for Old Interceptor Description of Previous Survey Measurements on Old interceptor. Two radiation surveys taken in 2003 show levels up to 408 mrem/h (WVNSCO 2003a and WVNSCO 2003b) 5 .
Justification for Previous Survey Measurements. While these surveys provided useful information, they did not completely characterize the facility, which is expected to contain contamination in depth and contamination covered by a layer of concrete added to the floor.
Characterization of WMA 2 Facilities 5
Although no radioisotope inventory report was issued for the Old Interceptor, these radiation surveys were taken for characterization purposes for the Facility Characterization Project.
- Rev 2 9-35
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Characterization measurements will be performed on the WMA 2 facilities commensurate with plans for their disposition, which is removal in each case. As indicated in Section 7, there are no plans to release these facilities from radiological controls before dismantlement or demolition, which limits characterization data needs.
Description of Planned Survey Measurements. Measurements will typically include exposure rates , removable contamination, total contamination, and core samples of facility surfaces in cases where they will produce information of value. Smears or samples of building materials will be obtained and analyzed to provide information on radionuclide distributions.
Justification for Planned Survey Measurements. These are the appropriate measurements necessary to facilitate radiation protection and support decommissioning activities and waste management in cases where st.1ch informaition is not already available.
Characterization of Subsurface Piping in WMA 2 Underground piping within WMA 2 is comprised primarily of Duriron wastewater drain lines leading to the Interceptors and interconnecting with equipment in the treatment buildings, the interceptors. and the lagoons . Also within WMA 2 is a portion of the Leachate Transfer Line from the NRC-Licensed Disposal Area (NOA) .
Subsurface piping within the bounds of the WMA 2 excavations will be removed, packaged and disposed of at offsite disposal facilities . There is no intent in Phase 1 of the decommissioning to trace or excavate underground piping outside the bounds of the excavations.
When these lines become exposed during excavation of the WMA 2 Facilities, during removal of the LLW2 Building floor slab and foundations, and during removal of Lagoons 4 and 5, measurements will be taken as necessary, for instance for waste characterization purposes for lines removed or to provide data to support Phase 2 decision-making for portions of lines remaining in place .
Description of Survey Measurements. Measurements will be taken after the interior surfaces of the lines are exposed when the lines are cut. Two types of measurements will be taken : (1) removable alpha and beta contamination in the end of the pipe measured by smears, and (2) exposure rates of the accessible piping .
Justification for Survey Measurements. These measurements will provide information to support waste characterization purposes and to support decision-making for Phase 2 of the decommissioning .
In-Process Surveys of WMA 2 Area In-process surveys will be performed during remediation as described in Section 9.5 .
These surveys will include the surface of the soil in excavations made during removal of the interceptors, the Neutralization Pit, and the associated valve pits .
In-Process Surveys in the WMA 2 Excavation Rev 2 9-36
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN In-process surveys of the completed large excavation will be performed in a manner similar to those for the WMA 1 large excavation described in Section 9.7 .1, except that thlere are no foundation pilings involved . In-process surveys will be performed on all sides of ~he excavation . The different conditions in WMA 2 will be taken into account. especially the situation where Lagoon 2 and Lagoon 3 extend within the Lavery till and require only limited excavation to reach the point where all of the sediment and at least one foot of ~he undenlying Lavery till has been removed , as specified in Section 7.
In-Process Surveys Related to Subsurface Piping in WMA 2 In-process surveys as subsurface piping is encountered during remediation will be performed as specified in Section 9.5.
Phase 1 Final Status Surveys in WMA 2 Areas After decommissioning activities are completed in these areas, Phase 1 final status surveys will be performed in each survey unit in accordance with the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan . These surveys will focus on the exposed soil in the large excavation made to remove Lagoons 1-3, the interceptors, the Neutralization Pit. and Solvent Dike .
Radiological status surveys will be performed in other areas of interest in accordance with the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan . These surveys will include the exposed soil surfaces from removal of remaining floor slabs and foundations of facilities removed prior to the start of decommissioning : the 02 Building, the Test and Storage Building, the Vitrification Test Facility, the Maintenance Shop, the Maintenance Storage Area , the Vehicle Maintenance Shop, and the Industrial Waste Storage Area . Similar surveys will also be performed in the excavation to remove the Maintenance Shop leach field equipment and in the areas where Lagoons 4 and 5 were removed.
Confirmatory Surveys in WMA 2 Areas After the Phase 1 final status surveys are compl eted , arrangements will be made to have confirmatory surveys performed . NRC or its contractor will be afforded an opportunity to perform confirmatory surveys in excavations before they are filled in.
Phase 1 Final Status Surveys of Subsurface Piping in WMA 2 Separate Phase 1 final status surveys of the piping not encountered during excavation and subsequently abandoned in place are not planned; characterization survey data are intended to serve Phase 1 final status survey purposes . .
Confirmatory Surveys of Subsurface Piping in WMA 2 Arrangements will be made for any confirmatory surveys NRC desires to be accomplished at the time when the piping ends are accessible, prior to the excavation being filled in.
9.7.3 WMA 3, Waste Tank Farm Area Rev 2 9-37
WVDP PHAS E 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Four facilities or groups of equipment within WMA 3 have been impacted by radioactivity and are within the scope of the plan : (1) the pumps in Tanks 80-1, 80-2 , 80-3, and 80-4, (2) the piping and equipment in the HLW transfer trench, (3) the Equipment Shelter and Condensers, and (4) the Con-Ed Building . Limited data on radiological conditions are available for these facilities and this equipment as indicated in Section 4.
WMA 3 Facility Characterization Surveys Characterization measurements will be performed in connection with decommissioning activities.
Description of Planned Survey Measurements. Measurements will typically include exposure rates, removable contamination, and total contamination in areas of interest.
Justification for Planned Survey Measurements. These are the appropriate measurements necessary to facilitate radiation protection and support decommissioning activities and waste management.
WMA 3 Facility In-Process Surveys In-process surveys will be performed during remediation as specified in Section 9.5.
WMA 3 Facility Radiological Status Surveys After decommissioning activities are completed in this area. radiological status surveys will be performed in accordance with the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan .
Procedures and detection levels for scan surveys may be modified due to the higher ambient radiation levels in the area from radioactivity in the HLW tanks.
WMA 3 Confirmatory Surveys Arrangements will be made for any confirmatory surveys desired by NRC or its contractor.
WMA 4, Construction and Demolition Debris Landfill This landfill . which was closed in 1986, is not within the scope of the Phase 1 decommissioning work.
9.7.4 WMA 5 Waste Storage Area The primary facilities within WMA 5 impacted by radioactivity and within the scope of the plan are the Remote Handled Waste Facility and Lag Storage Addition 4 and its associated Shipping Depot. Other facilities in WMA 5 within the scope of the plan are concrete pads and foundations remaining from facilities removed prior to the start of decommissioning .
Characterization of the Remote Handled Waste Facility Characterization measurements will be performed in this building commensurate with plans for its disposition, which is removal.
Rev 2 9-38
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Description of Planned Survey Measurements. Measurements will typically include exposure rates, removable contamination, and total contamination. Representative smears will be analyzed for radionuclides of interest.
Justification for Planned Survey Measurements. These are the appropriate measurements necessary to facilitate radiation protection and support decommissioning activities and waste management.
Characterization of Lag Storage Addition 4/Shipping Depot Characterization measurements will be performed in this building commensurate with plans for its disposition, which is removal.
Description of Planned Survey Measurements. Measurements will typically include exposure rates, removable contamination, and total contamination .
Justification for Planned Survey Measurements. These are the appropriate measurements necessary to facilitate radiation protection and support decommissioning activities and waste management.
Characterization of Subsurface Piping in WMA 5 Within WMA 5 is underground piping running from the Remote-Handled Waste Facility to Tank 80-3 . Portions of this piping within the bounds of the building excavation will be removed , packaged and disposed of at offsite disposal facilities . As indicated in Section 7, the portion of the piping outside of the building excavation will remain in place unless it has been impacted by radioactivity.
When these lines become exposed during excavation to remove the Remote-Handled Waste Facility, measurements will be taken to confirm the radiological status for waste characterization purposes for lines removed and to provide data to support Phase 2 decision-making for the portions of the piping to remain in place .
Description of Survey Measurements. Measurements will be taken after the interior surfaces of the lines are exposed when the lines are cut. Two types of measurements will be taken : (1) removable alpha and beta contamination in the end of the pipe measured by smears, and (2) exposure rates of the accessible piping.
Justification for Survey Measurements. These measurements will provide information to support for waste characterization purposes and to support decision-making for Phase 2 of the decommissioning.
In-Process Surveys In-process surveys will be performed during remediation of the Remote-Handled Waste Facility and the Lag Storage Addition 4/Shipping Depot as specified in Section 9.5. In-process surveys of subsurface piping will also be performed as specified in .section 9.5 as this piping is encountered during remediation of the Remote-Handled Waste Facility.
Radiological Status Surveys of the Excavations Where Facilities Are Removed Rev 2 9-39
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN As explained previously, the Rernote-Handled Waste Facility will be completely removed.
After decommissioning activities are completed, including demolition and removal of the floor slab and foundation and removal of the empty underground tank vault, radiological status surveys of the exposed excavation surface will be performed in accordance with the Oharaoterizatlon Sample and Analysis Plan . Similar surveys will be performeol in the shallow excavaNon where the Lag Storage Addition 4/Shipping Depot is rennoved.
Confirmatory Surveys of the Excavations Where Facilities Are Removed After the radiological status surveys are completed in the areas where the Remote-Handled Waste Facility and tile Lag Storage Addition 4/Shipping Depot were removed ,
arrangements will be made to have any desired confirmatory surveys accomplished by the NRC or its contractor. Arrangements will also be made for any confirmatory surveys NRC desires to be accomplished at the time when the piping ends in tile Remote-l-landled Wast.e Facility excavation are accessible, prior to the excavation being filled in .
Radiological Status and Confirmatory Surveys of Other Floor Slabs and Foundations Also considered in the radiological status surveys and confirmatory surveys will be the soil surfaces exposed following excavations of remaining floor slabs and foundations of impacted facilities removed prior to the start of decommissioning . The facilities of interest are the Lag Storage Building and its additions, the Chemical Process Cell Waste Storage Area, and several hardstands and gravel pads .
After surveys specified in the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan are completed, the areas of interest will be made available to NRC or its contractor for any desired confirmatory surveys.
9.7.5 WMA 6 Central Project Premises In WMA 6, the facilities to be removed during Phase 1 indude the Sewage Treatment Plant. the Equalization Tank, the Equalization Basin, the two demineralizer sludge ponds, and the south Waste Tank Farm Test Tower, along with remaining floor slabs and foundations, including the underground structure of the Cooling Tower. The Equalization Basin and the two demineralizer sludge ponds are addressed along with other environmental media in Section 9.7.12.
Characterization of the Remaining Part of the Cooling Tower The only WMA 6 structure known to have been impacted by radioactivity as of 2008 is the remaining part of the Cooling Tower. Characterization measurements will be performed in this structure commensurate with plans for its disposition, which is removal.
Description of Planned Survey Measurements. Measurements will typically include exposure rates, removable contamination, and total contamination . Representative smears will be analyzed for radionuclides of interest.
Justification for Planned Survey Measurements. These are the appropriate measurements necessary to facilitate radiation protection and support decommissioning activities and waste management.
Rev 2 9-40
WVDP PHASE 1 D ECOMMISSIONI NG PLAN Radiological Status and Confirmatory Surveys Following Removal of Floor Slabs and Foundations After the structures and their floor slabs and foundations have been removed, the exposed soil surface of the resulting excavations will be considered in the radiological status surveys. After surveys specified in the Charaotenization Sample and Analysis Plan are completed, the areas of interest will be made available to NRC or its contractor for any desired confirmatory surveys.
Rad iological Status Surveys of Equalization Tank Excavation Even though the equalization tank was not known to be impacted by radioactivity in mid-2009, as indicated in Section 7, radiological status surveys will be performed in the excavation made to remove the tank as a good practice . These surveys will be performed as specified in Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan and will typically include measurements with a sensitive gamma detector.
After surveys specified in the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan are completed ,
the area will be made available to NRC or its contractor for any desired confirmatory surveys .
9.7.6 WMA 7 NOA and Associated Facilities No additional characterization will be performed in the NDA itself. Table 4-10 summarizes the estimated NDA radionuclide inventory. In WMA 7, only removal of concrete and gravel pads associated with the NDA Hardstand is withi n th e scope of this plan .
WMA 7 Facility Characterization Surveys Characterization measurements of the hardstand will be performed in connection with decommissioning activities.
Description of Planned Survey Measurements. Measurements will typically include exposure rates and material samples analyzed for radionuclides of interest.
Justification for Planned Survey Measurements. These are the appropriate measurements necessary to facilitate radiation protection and support decommissioning activities and waste management.
WMA 7 In-Process Surveys In-process surveys will be performed during remediation as specified in Section 9.5.
WMA 7 Radiological Status Surveys Surveys of the resulting exposed excavation surfaces will be performed in accordance with the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan .
WMA 7 Confirmatory Surveys Arrangements will be made for any confirmatory surveys desired by NRC or its Rev 2 9-41
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN contractor before the excavation is filled in .
9.7.7 WMA 8, State Licensed Disposal Area There are no facilities within WMA 8 that are within plan scope.
9.7.8 WMA 9, Radwaste Treatment System Drum Cell Area Phase 1 decommissioning activities in WMA 9 include total removal of the building. floor slabs and foundations of the Radwaste Treatment System Drum Cell , the NOA trench soil container area. and the subcontractor maintenance area.
Characterization of the Radwaste Treatment System Drum Cell Area Characterization measurements will be performed in this building commensurate with plans for its disposition, which is removal. Characterization measurements will also be taken in the trench soil container area and the subcontractor maintenance area .
Description of Planned Survey Measurements. Measurements will typically include exposure rates, removable contamination. and total contamination .
Justification for Planned Survey Measurements. These are the appropriate measurements necessary to facilitate radiation protection and support decommissioning activities and waste management.
In-Process Surveys Related to the Radwaste Treatment System Drum Cell In-process surveys will be performed during removal activities as specified in Section 9.5.
Radiological Status Surveys of the Radwaste Treatment System Drum Cell Following building demolition and removal of the floor slab and foundation. radiological status surveys on the exposed excavation surface will be performed in accordance with the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan .
Confirmatory Surveys of the Radwaste Treatment System Drum Cell Excavation After the radiological status surveys are completed, arrangements will be made to have any desired confirmatory surveys accomplished .
The NOA Trench Soil Container Area and the Subcontractor Maintenance Area Characterization measurements will be performed in these areas commensurate with plans for their disposition, which is removal.
Description of Planned Survey Measurements. Measurements will typically include exposure rates and soil samples analyzed for radionuclides of interest.
Justification for Planned Survey Measurements. These are the appropriate measurements necessary to facilitate radiation protection and support decommissioning activities and waste management.
Rev 2 9-42
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Other surveys of this area will include in-process surveys in accordance with Section 9.5, radiological status survey of the excavations in accordance with the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan, and any confirmatory surveys desired by the regulators .
9.7.9 WMA 10, Support and Services Area Neither of the facilities within WMA 1O within plan scope, the New Warehouse and the former Wa ste Management Storage Area , nor the remaining concrete floor slabs and foundations to be removed , had been impacted by radioactivity as of mid-2009.
WMA 10 Facility Characterization Surveys Characterization measurements will be performed in these facilities. floor slabs, and foundations in connection with decommissioning activities.
Description of Planned Survey Measurements. Measurements will typically include exposure rates, removable contamination, and total contamination.
Justification for Planned Survey Measurements. These are the appropriate measurements necessary to facilitate radiation protection and support decommissioning activities and waste management.
WMA 10 Facility In-Process Surveys In-process surveys will be performed during remediation as specified in Section 9.5 .
WMA 10 Facility Radiological Final Status Surveys Radiological status surveys on the exposed excavation surfaces will be performed in accordance with the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan .
Radiological status surveys will be performed in the Security Gatehouse as a good practice because of the proximity of this facility to the Process Building . These surveys will be judgmental in scope and include scan surveys with a sensitive gamma detector such as a Bicron Micro Rem instrument.
Confirmatory Surveys of WMA 10 Facilities Arrangements will be made for any confirmatory surveys desired by NRC or its contractor.
9.7.10 WMA 11, Bulk Storage Warehouse and Hydrofracture Test Well Area No facilities in WMA 11 are within plan scope. Neither characterization nor Phase 1 final status surveys are planned in this area .
9.7.11 WMA 12, Balance of the Site No facilities in WMA 12 are within plan scope. However. characterization surveys are planned for soil and for the banks and streambeds of Erdman Brook and Franks Creek in the portion of WMA 12 that lies within the project premises .
9.7.12 Environmental Media Rev 2 9-43
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Environmental media to be considered includes soil, sediment. groundwater, and surface water on the project premi ses.
Existing Characterization Data Description of Previous Survey Measurements. As explained in Section 4.2, existing data on radioactivity in environmental media comes from three principal sources: (1) the site environmental monitoring program, (2) a series of RCRA facility investigations compl eted in the mid-1990s, and (3) Geoprobe investigations of the north plateau groundwater plume. Data are also availabl e on surface radiation levels that are indicative of soil contamination in some areas from 1984 and earlier aerial surveys and a 1990 overland survey that measured gamma radiation levels .
As explained in Section 4.2, data on radioactivity in environmental media were obtained using methods such as laboratory analysis of soil and groundwater samples and measuring exposure rates using sensitive gamma detectors.
Justification for Previous Survey Measurements. Th e mea surements were made for several purposes, including regular monitoring of the environment and specific investigations related to hazardous materials and the north plateau groundwater plume .
Soil and Sediment Characterization Surveys Surface soil, subsurface soil, and sediments in the Phase 1 areas will be surveyed and sampled for laboratory analysis. However, subsurface soil in the non-source area of the plume and in other Phase 2 areas will not be addressed at this time.
Description of Survey Measurements. The process to be utilized will include:
- Consideration of available characterization data ;
- Surface scans for gamma activity in areas likely to contain residual contamination;
- Surface and near-surface 6
soil samples, with the samples analyzed for the I radionuclides of interest;
- Subsurface soil samples where indicated by contamination potential, including locations of subsurface features such as tanks and process lines;
- Additional subsurface samples in the top portion of the Lavery till in the WMA 1 and WMA 2 excavation footprints as specified in Section 7.2.2; and
- Sediment samples where indicated by contamination potential, including sediment in Erdman Brook and the portion of Franks Creek within the project premises security fence .
Special attention will be paid to the lagoons, basins, and discharge ponds, including the area of Lagoon 1 where previously buried radioactive debris will be removed. Details will appear in the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan . To facilitate development 6
Near-surface in this context means a few feet below the surface.
Rev 2 9-44
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN of the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan, DOE had a set of goa ls developed for this plan and considered the input of other agencies on these goals as the Cha~acterization Sample and Analysis Plan was prepared .
Justification for Survey Measurements. These measurements will provide information on soil and sediment contamination to support decontamination activities, facilitate radiation protection, and waste disposal plans .
Phase 1 Final Status Surveys of Soil Areas Description of Survey Measurements.
Selected surface soil areas will undergo Phase 1 fiinal status surveys, as explained in Section 7. The process to be utilized will be similar to that for characterization surveys, with details included in the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan . If gr,ids were established for characterization surveys, the same grids will be reestablished and used where practicable . Characterization data will be considered in the survey design and used for Phase 1 final status survey purposes where practicable .
Also, radiological status surveys will be performed as specified in the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan in the . excavations made to remove the Equalization Basin and the two demineralizer sludge ponds.
Justification for Survey Measurements. These measurements will provide information on soil and sediment contamination to demonstrate that release criteria are achieved as applicable.
Confirmatory Surveys of Soil Areas and Areas Containing Sediment Arrangements will be made for confirmatory surveys by N RC or its contractor after the Phase 1 final status surveys and radiological status surveys are completed .
Groundwater Radioactivity in groundwater will continue to be monitored during Phase 1 of the decommissioning by laboratory analysis of samples drawn from the network of monitoring wells . Appendix D addresses monitoring of groundwater following the completion of Phase 1 decommissioning activities. Limited characterization surveys will be performed for groundwater.
Surface Water/Stream Sediment Radioactivity in surface water and associated stream sediment will continue to be monitored during the decommissioning in connection with the environmental monitoring and control program outlined in Section 1.8 and Appendix D. The characterization program will includes surveys and sampling of the banks and beds of Erdman Brook and the portion of Franks Creek on the project premises, as noted previously.
9.8 Phase 1 Final Status Survey Report Requirements The requirements for the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Report will be identified in the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan. As indicated previously, because of the site complexity Rev 2 9-45
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN there may be multiple Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plans. Consequently there may be multiple Phase 1 Final Status Survey Reports . The content and coverage of the plans and reports will be determined using the DQO Process in the project planning cycle . These report requirements will include the following .
9.8.1 Overview of Results The report will summarize the results of the surveys.
9.8.2 Discussion of Changes The report will include a discussion of any changes that were made in the Phase 1 final status survey from what was desoribed in this plan or other prior submittals.
9.8.3 Description of How Numbers of Samples Were Determined The report will include a description of the method by which the number of samples was determined for each survey unit.
9.8.4 Sample Number Determination Values The report will include a summary of the values of site parameters and data statistics used to determine the number of samples and a justification for these values .
9.8.5 Results for each Survey Unit The report will include the survey results for each survey unit, including:
- The number of samples taken for the survey unit;
- A map or drawing of the survey unit showing the reference system and random start 7
systematic sample locations for Class 1 and 2 survey units and random locations shown for Class 3 survey units and reference areas;
- The measured sample concentrations;
- The statistical evaluation of the measured concentrations;
- Judgmental and miscellaneous sample data sets reported separately from those samples collected for performing the statistical evaluation;
- A discussion of anomalous data, including any areas of elevated direct radiation detected during scanning that exceeded the investigation level or measurement locations in excess of DCGLw and any actions taken to reduce them , if any, upon detection 8 ; and
- A statement that a given survey unit satisfied the DCGLw and the elevated measurement comparison if any sample points exceeded the DCGLw.
9.8.6 Survey Unit Changes 7
This will include the location of "increment" samples used to form composite samples as described in Appendix G.
8 This will include application of the as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) principal as discussed in Section 6.
Rev 2 9-46
WVDP PHASE 1 D ECOMMISSIONING PLAN The report will include a description of any changes in initial survey unit assumptions relative to the extent of residual radioactivity.
9.18. 7 ALARA Practices llhe report. will include a desoniption of how ALARA prac~i ces were employed to aohieve Final activity levels.
9.8.8 Actions Taken for Failed Survey Units If a survey unit fails, a description of the investigation conducted to ascertain the reason for the failure and a discussion of the impact that the failure has on the conclusion that the facility is ready for Phase 1 final radiological surveys will be included in the report.
9.8.9 Impact of Survey Unit Failures I For any survey units that fail, the report will include a discussion of the impact that the I reason for the failure has on other survey unit information .
9.9 References DOE Orders, Policies, Manuals, and Standards DOE Order 5400.5 , Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment, Change 2. U.S.
Department of Energy, Washington, D.C .. January 7, 1993.
Other References Abelquist, et al. 1998, Minimum Detectable Concentrations With Typical Radiation Survey Instruments for Various Contaminants and Field Conditions, NUREG-1507 .
Abelquist. E .. W. Brown, and G. Powers, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C .. June 1998.
BNL 2001, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Bldg 811 Waste Concentration Facil ity Remed iation . Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, New York, 2001 .
Coleman and Murray 1999, "Detection of Depleted Uranium in Soil Using Portable Hand-Held Instruments," IAEA-SM-359/P-5. Coleman, R.L. and M.E. Murray, Proceedings of the IAEA Annual Conference, Washington, D,C .. November 1999.
CWM 2006, Site Radiological Survey Plan, Model City, NY, prepared by CWM Chemical Services, LLC ., with assistance from Shaw Environmental, Inc. and URS Corporation, November 2006.
Gogolak, et al. 1997, A Nonparametrical Statistical Methodology for the Design and Analysis of Final Status*Decommissioning Surveys, NUREG-1505, Revision 1. Gogolak, C.V, G. Powers, and A. Huffert, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC, 1997.
Luckett, et al. 2004, Radioisotope Inventory Report for Underground Lines and Low Level Waste Tanks at the West Valley Demonstration Project, WSMS -WVNS 0001, Revision 0. Luckett, L.W., J. Fazio, and S. Marschke, Washington Safety Management Solutions, West Valley, New York, July 6, 2004.
Rev 2 9-47
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Michalczak 2004, Characterization Management Plan for the Facility Characterization Project, WVDP-403, Revision 3. IMiohalcz.ak, L.M ., West Valley Nuclear Services Company, West Valley, New York, January 16, 2004 .
Michalczak and Hadden-Carter 2009, Sample and Analysis Plan for the Waste Tank Farm Characterization Project, WVDP-451, Revision 2 (or later revision). Michalczak, IL.M.
and P.J. Hadden-Carter, West Valley Envjronmeflltal Services LLC, West Valley, New Vonk, June 18, 2009.
ORAU 2009, Ask an Expert Question and Answer Page on Survey Instruments (conventionalj, at http :l/www.orau.gov/ddsc/expert/answers/instruments .htm, accessed on July 23. 2009.
NRC 1997. Minimum Defee.fable Concentrations w,ith Typical Radiation Survey Instruments for Various Contaminants and Field Conditions, NUREG-1507. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C .* December 1997.
NRC 2000, Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM) ,
NUREG -1575, Revision 1. NRC, Washington, DC, August, 2000. {Also EPA 4-2-R-97-016, Revision 1, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and DOE-EH-0624, Revision 1, DOE)
NRC 2006, Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance: Characterization, Survey, and Determination of Radiological Criteria, Final Report, NUREG 1757 Volume 2, Revision
- 1. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Washington, DC, September, 2006 .
USACE 2003, Final Gamma Walkover Survey Sampling and Analysis Plan, Part 1 - Field Sampling Plan, prepared for the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Buffalo District, by URS Corporation. April 21 . 2003.
WVNSCO 2003a , Radiological Survey Report 120396. West Valley Nuclear Services Company, West Valley, New York, June 11 , 2003.
WVNSCO 2003b, Radiological Survey Report 1121097. West Valley Nuclear Services Company, West Valley, New York, August 4, 2003 .
WVES and URS 2009, West Valley Demonstration Project Annual Site Environmental Report, Calendar Year 2008, WVES and URS Group, Inc ., West Valley, New York, September 2009 .
Rev 2 9-48
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN APPENDIX A DECOMMISSIONING PLAN ANNOTATED CHECKLIST PURPOSE OF THIS APPENDIX The purpose of this appendix is to assist NRC staff in review of the plan by providing the checklist used in its preparation , annotated to show where each applicable topic is addressed .
INFORMATION IN THIS APPENDIX This appendix provides in Table A-1 a comparison between the major topics of the decommissioning plan evaluation checklist found in Appendix D to Volume 1 of NUREG-1757 , Consolidated Decommissioning Guidance, Decommissioning Process for Materials Licensees (NRC 2006), and the major sections of th is plan .
It then replicates the NUREG-1757 Appendix D checklist and identifies:
- The topics that do not apply to this plan based on discussions between NRC and DOE that took place in a decommissioning plan scoping meeting held on May 19, 2008 (NRC 2008), which are marked NA for not applicable;
- The section and page number in this plan where each applicable topic is addressed ; and
- The cases where NRC has agreed that DOE procedures (i .e. , DOE regulations , orders, and technical standards) can be cited in the plan instead of providing details called for by the NRC checklist (NRC 2008).
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PARTS OF THE PLAN This appendix shows how the other parts of this plan address the applicable topics of the NRC decommissioning plan evaluation checklist.
Revision 2 A-1
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table A-1. NUREG-1757 Checklist- Phase 1 Decommissioning Plan Comparison NUREG-1757 Checklist WVDP Phase 1 Decommissioning Plan Sec Subject Sec Subject I Executive Summary Executive Summary 1 Introduction II Facility Operating History 2 Facility Operating History Ill Facility Description 3 Facility Description IV Radiolog ical Status of Facility 4 Radiological Status of Facility v Dose Modeling 5 Dose Modeling VI Environmental Information 3 Facility Description VII ALARA Analysis 6 ALARA Analysis VIII Planned Decommissioning 7 Planned Decommissioning Activities Activities IX Project Management and 1.6 Project Management and Organization Organization x Health and Safety 1.7 Health and Safety XI Environmental Monitoring and 1.8 Environmental Monitoring and Control Control XII Radioactive Waste Management 1.9 Radioactive Waste Management Program Program XIII Quality Assurance Program 8 Quality Assurance Program XIV Facility Radiation Surveys 9 Facility Radiation Surveys xv Financial Assurance Not applicable.
XVI Restricted Release/Alternate Criteria Not applicable.
App A Decommissioning Plan Annotated Checklist App B Environmental Radioactivity Data App C Details of DCGL Development and Integrated Dose Analysis App D Engineered Barriers and Post Remediation Activities App E Dose Modeling Probabilistic Uncertainty Analysis App F Estimated Radioactivity in Subsurface Piping AppG Phase 1 Final Status Survey Conceptual Framework The annotated NUREG-1757 decommissioning plan evaluation checklist begins on the next page. Acronyms and abbreviations used in the checklist are as follows:
App =appendix ES =Executive Summary NA =not applicable Revision 2 A-2
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE I. EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
0 The name and address of the licensee or owner of the site ES ES-3 0 The location and address of the site ES ES-3 L A brief description of the site and immediate environs ES ES-4
~ A summary of the licensed activities that occurred at the site ES ES-10 0 The nature and extent of contamination at the site ES ES-1 3
':j The decommissioning objective proposed by the licensee (i .e., ES ES-1 7 restricted or unrestricted use)
~
The DCGLs for the site, the corresponding doses from these DCGLs, Table ES-1 ES-1 9 and the method that was use to determine the DCGLs [Note that Table ES-2 ES-20 cleanup goals below the DCGLs are the criteria to be used for remediation activities in Phase 1. These are specified in Table ES-2.)
0 A summary of the ALARA evaluations performed to support the ES ES-21 decommissioning n
LJ If tl:le liGeAsee FeEj1::1ests liGeAse teFFAiAatieA l::lAEleF FestFiGteEl GeAElitieAs, NA NA tl:le FestFiGtieAs tl:le liGeAsee iAteAEls te 1::1se te limit Eleses as FeEjl::liFeEl iA 1Q ci:=R Part 2Q.14Q3 9F 2Q.14Q4, aAEl a Sl::lFAFAaF)' ef iAstit1::1tieAal G9Atrnls aAEl fiAaAGial aSSl::lFaAGe D If tl:le liGeAsee F8Ejl::lests liGeAse teFmiAatieA 1::1AEleF FestFiGteEl GeAElitieAs eF NA NA 1::1siA§ alternate GFiteFia, a s1::1rnrnar:y ef tl:le 131::1sliG 13artiGi13atieA aGti ..1ities l::lAElertakeA sy tl:le liGeAsee te G9FAJ3IY witl:l 1Q ci:=R Part 2Q.14Q3(El) 9F 2Q.14 Q4 (a)(4) 0 The proposed initiation and completion dates of decommissioning ES ES-21 0 Any post-remediation activities (such as ground water monitoring) that the ES ES-21 licensee proposes to undertake prior to requesting license termination CJ A stateFAeAt tl:lat tl:le liGeAsee is FeEjl::lestiA§ tl:lat its liGeAse se arneAEleEl NA NA te iAGeF13emte tl:le DP Revision 2 A-3
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE
- 1. Introduction Because of the complexities of the project, DOE has included an Introduction section. It addresses matters such as the purpose of the plan and the scope of the Phase 1 decommissioning activities. It explains the background of the project, including the relationship between the plan and the Decommissioning EIS and the general responsibilities of the organizations involved. It describes the site conditions that will be in effect at the time the decommissioning activities begin, i.e., the interim end state. It explains the relationship between Phase 1 and Phase 2.
The Introduction also briefly addresses the following matters covered by DOE procedures:
- Project management,
- Health an.d safety,
- Environmental monitoring and control, and
- The radioactive waste management program.
II. FACILITY OPERATING HISTORY II.a. LICENSE NUMBER/STATUS/AUTHORIZED ACTIVITIES D The radionuolides and maximum aotivities of radionuolides authorized and NA NA used under the ourrent lioense D The ohemioal forms of the radionuolides authorized and used under the NA NA ourrent lioense
- A detailed desoription of how the radionuolides are ourrently being used NA NA at the site n
Ll The looation(s) of use and storage of the various radionuolides authorized NA NA under ourrent lioenses n
C5 A soale drawing or maf) of the building or site and environs showing the NA NA ourrent looations of radionuolide use at the site n
Ll A list of amendments to the lioense sinoe the last lioense renewal NA NA 11.b. LICENSE HISTORY
~ The radionuclides and maximum activities of radionuclides authorized and 2.1 2-2 used under all previous licenses Table 2-1 2-2 Table 2-2 2-3 Table 2-3 2-3 Revision 2 A-4
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE D The chemical fo rms of the rad ionuclides authorized and used under all Table 2-1 2-2 previous licenses Table 2-2 2-3 Table 2-6 2-11 Table 2-7 2-1 2 Table 2-8 2-1 3 Table 2-9 2-17 A detailed description of how the rad ionuclides were used at the site 2.1.1 2-5 2.1.2 2-1 4 L.J The location(s) of use and storage of the various radionuclides authorized 2. 1.1 2-5 under all previous licenses 2.1.2 2-15 A scale drawing or map of the site, facilities , and environs showing Figure 2-3 2-2 1 previous locations of radionuclide use at the site Figure 2-4 2-22 11.c. PREVIOU S DECOMMISSIONING AC TIVITIES A list or summary of areas at the site that were remediated in the past 2.2 2-1 8 Table 2-11 2-19 Also addresses additional remediation planned to achieve the interim Table 2-13 2-25 end state. Figure 2-5 2-23 D A summary of the types, forms , activities, and concentrations of Table 2-11 2-19 radionuclides that were present in previously remediated areas Table 2-13 2-25 D The activities that caused the areas to become contaminated 2.1.1 2-5 2.1.2 2-1 4 c The procedures used to remediate the areas, and the disposition of 2.2.1 2-19 radioactive material generated during the remediation 2.2.2 2-19 D A summary of the results of the final radiological evaluation of the Table 2-13 2-25 previously remediated area 2.2.2 2-29 Table 4-5 4-16 Table 4-6 4-17 Table 4-8 4-1 9
- J A scale drawing or map of the site, facilities , and environs showing the Figure 2-5 2-22 locations of previous remedial activity 11.d. SPILLS Does not include spills inside facilities that did not impact the environment.
A summary of areas at the site where spills (or uncontrolled 2.3 2-32 releases) of radioactive material occurred in the past Revision 2 A-5
WVOP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE D The types, forms, activities, and concentrations of radionuclides involved Table 2-16 2-34 in the spill or uncontrolled release Table 2-17 2-38 Table 2-18 2-41 D A scale drawing or map of the site, facilities , and environs showing the Figure 2-3 2-21 locations of spills Figure 2-4 2-22 Figure 2-6 2-33 The locations of major spills are shown in the figures listed. The locations Figure 2-7 2-37 of minor spills are identified in Table 2-17 (page 2-39) and Table 2-18 (page 2-41).
11.e. PRIOR ONSITE BURIALS IJ A summary of areas at the site where radioactive material has been 2.4 2-42 buried in the past
- The types , forms , activities and concentrations of waste and Table 2-19 2-43 radionucl ides in the former burial Table 2-20 2-44 Table 2-21 2-45 c A scale drawing or map of the site , facilities, and environs showing the Figure 2-3 2-21 locations of former burials Figure 2-4 2-22 Ill. FACILITY DESCRIPTION This section incorporates information from the DEIS. The SDA is not addressed.
Ill.a. SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION D The size of the site in acres or square meters 3.1.2 3-2 D The State and county in which the site is located 3.1.1 3-2 D The names and distances to nearby communities , towns , and cities 3.1 .1 3-2 3.2.2 3-32 D A description of the contours and features of the site 3.1 .2 3-2 Figure 3-3 3-95 Figure 3-4 3-96 D The elevation of the site 3.1 .2 3-2
- A description of property surrounding the site, including the location of all 3.1.4 3-27 off-site wells used by nearby communities or individuals 3.2.1 3-29 The location of the site relative to prominent features such as rivers and Figure 3-1 3-93 lakes Figure 3-2 3-94 Revision 2 A-6
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE O A map that shows the detailed topography of the site using a contour Figure 3-3 3-95 interval Figure 3-4 3-96 O The location of the nearest residences and all significant facilities or 3.1.4 3-27 activities near the site A description of the facilities (e.g., buildings, parking lots, and fixed 3.1.3 3-3 equipment) at the site 111.b. POPULATION DISTRIBUTION
~ A summary of the current population in and around the site, by 3.2 3-29 compass vectors Figure 3-44 3-1 30 A summary of the projected population in and around the site by 3.2.2 3-32 compass vectors [Projections not available by compass vector.]
111.c. CURRENT/FUTURE LAND USE C A description of the current land uses in and around the site 3.3.1. 3-35 Figure 3-45 3-1 31 O A summary of anticipated land uses 3.3.2 3-38 111.d. METEOROLOGY AND CLIMATOLOGY O A description of the general climate of the region 3.4.1 3-40
~ Seasonal and annual frequencies of severe weather phenomena 3.4.2 3-41 O Weather-related radionuclide transmission parameters 3.4.3 3-41 O Routine weather-related site deterioration parameters 3.4.4 3-42 O Extreme weather-related site deterioration parameters 3.4.4 3-42 D A description of the local (site) meteorology 3.4.5 3-42
'l The National Ambient Air Quality Standards Category of the area in which 3.4.5 3-47 the facility is located and, if the facility is not in a Category 1 zone, the closest and first downwind Category 1 Zone 111.e. GEOLOGY AND SEISMOLOGY A detailed description of the geologic characteristics of the site and the 3.5 3-47 region around the site Revision 2 A-7
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE D A discussion of the tectonic history of the region, regional geomorphology, 3.5 3-47 physiography, stratigraphy, and geochronology D A regional tectonic map showing the site location and its proximity to Figure 3-55 3-41 tectonic structures A description of the structural geology of the region and its relationship to 3.5 3-47 the site geologic structure A description of any crustal tilting , subsidence, karst terrain, landsliding , 3.5.3 3-52 and erosion rJ A description of the surface and subsurface geologic characteristics of the 3.5 3-47 site and its vicinity
" A description of the geomorphology of the site 3.5.3 3-52
~ A description of the location, attitude, and geometry of all known or 3.5.4 3-55 inferred faults in the site and vicinity D A discussion of the nature and rates of deformation 3.5.3 3-52 D A description of any man-made geologic features such as mines or 3.1.1 3-2 quarries D A description of the seismicity of the site and region 3.5.5 3-61 D A complete list of all historical earthquakes that have a magnitude of 3 or 3.5.5 3-61 more, or a modified Mercalli intensity of IV or more within 200 miles of Table 3-15 3-6 1 the site
- 111.f. SURFACE WATER HYDROLOGY D A description of site drainage and surrounding watershed fluvial 3.6.1 3-65 features D Water resource data including maps, hydrographs, and stream records 3.6.1 3-65 from other agencies (e .g., U.S. Geological Survey and U.S. Army Corps Figure 3-3 3-95 of Engineers) u Topographic maps of the site that show natural drainages and man- Figure 3-3 3-95 made features Figure 3-4 3-96 A description of the surface water bodies at the site and surrounding 3.6.1 3-65 areas A description of existing and proposed water control structures and none diversions (both upstream and downstream) that may influence the site Revision 2 A-8
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE D Flow-duration data that indicate minimum , maximum , and average 3.6.1 3-67 historical observations for surface water bodies in the site areas D Aerial photography and maps of the site and adjacent drainage areas Figure 3-3 3-95 identifying features such as drainage areas, surface gradients, and Figure 3-4 3-96 areas of flooding
" An inventory of all existing and planned surface water users, whose 3.6.4 3-68 intakes could be adversely affected by migration of rad ionuclides from the site 0 Topographic and/or aerial photographs that delineate the 100-year Figure 3-4 3-96 floodplain at the site D A description of any man-made changes to the surface water hydrologic No such system that may influence the potential for flood ing at the site changes 111.g. GROUND WATER HYDROLOGY D A description of the saturated zone 3.7.1 3-70 D Descriptions of monitoring wells 3.7.2 3-72 4.2.8 4-58 Figure 4-12 4-63 Table B-15 B-41 D Physical parameters 3.7.3 3-73 D A description of ground water flow directions and velocities 3.7.1 3-71 Figure 3-62 3-148 Figure 3-63 3-149 Figure 3-64 3-1 50 Figure 3-65 3-151 D A description of the unsaturated zone 3.7.4 3-73 D Information on all monitor stations including location and depth Table B-15 B-41 D A description of physical parameters 3.7.3 3-73 D A description of the numerical analyses techniques used to characterize 3.7.7 3-75 the unsaturated and saturated zones 11 The distribution coefficients of the radionuclides of interest at the site 3.7.8 3-77 Table 3-20 3-80 Revision 2 A-9
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE 111.h. NATURAL RESOURCES D A description of the natural resources occurring at or near the site 3.8 3-82 A description of potable, agricultural , or industrial ground or surface 3.8.3 3-84 waters A description of economic, marginally economic, or subeconomic 3.8 3-82 known or identified natural resources as defined in U.S. Geological Survey Circular 831 r Mineral, fuel , and hydrocarbon resources near and surrounding the site none which , if exploited , would effect the licensee's dose estimates IV. RADIOLOGICAL STATUS OF FACILITY Information on residual radioactivity and radiation levels in facilities is provided at a summary level consistent with DOE having primary responsibility for the health and safety aspects of the facility removal activities. Additional characterization will be performed in connection with the decommissioning activities as specified in Section 9.
IV.a CONTAMINATED STRUCTURES IJ A list or description of all structures at the facility where licensed activities 4.1.2 4-5 occurred that contain residual radioactive material in excess of site Figure 4-1 4-7 background levels Figure 4-2 4-8 Figure 4-3 4-9 Figure 4-4 4-10 Figure 4-5 4-11
'.J A summary of the structures and locations at the facility that the licensee 4.1.3 4-12 has concluded have not been impacted by licensed operations and the rationale for the conclusion D A list or description of each room or work area within each of these NA NA structures o A summary of the background levels used during scoping or NA NA characterization surveys
~ A summary of the locations of contamination in each room or work area NA NA A summary of the radionuclides present at each location, the maximum NA NA and average radionuclide acti'rities in dpm/100 cm 2 , and , if multiple radionuclides are present, the radionuclide ratios
_ The mode of contamination for each surface (i.e., whether the NA NA radioacti't'e material is present only on the surface of the material or if it has penetrated the material)
Revision 2 A-10
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE o The maximum and average radiation levels in mrem/hr in each room or NA NA work area
~ A scale drawing or map of the rooms or work areas showing the locations NA NA of radionuclide material contamination IV.b. CONTAMINATED SYSTEMS AND EQUIPMENT c A list or description and the location of all systems or equipment at the NA NA facility that contain residual radioactive material in excess of site background levels
~ A summary of the radionuclides present in each system or on the NA NA equipment at each location , the maximum and average radionuclide activities in dpm/1 OOcm~. and , if multiple radionucl ides are present, the radionuclide ratios
~ The maximum and average radiation levels in mrem/hr at the surface of NA NA each piece of equipment D A summary of the background levels used during scoping or NA NA characterization surveys D A scale drawing or map of the rooms or work areas showing the loeations NA NA of the contaminated systems or equipment IV.c. SURFACE SOIL CONTAMINATION Information provided focuses on the project premises using existing data, which are not available for all locations on the project premises. Contamination in stream sediment is also addressed.
D A list or description of all locations at the facility where surface soil 4.2.3 4-29 contains residual radioactive material in excess of site background Figure 4-6 4-32 levels D A summary of the background levels used during scoping or 4.2.2 4-26 characterization surveys Table 4-11 4-27 Figure B-1 B-3 Table B-1 B-4 D A summary of the radionuclides present at each location, the maximum 4.2.3 4-29 and average radionuclide activities in pCi/gm , and , if multiple 4.2.5 4-36 radionuclides are present, the radionuclide ratios
~ The maximum and average radiation levels in mrem/hr at each location 4 .2.6 4-49
[Data are not available at sample locations.]
Revision 2 A-11
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE D A scale drawing or map of the site showing the locations of Figure 4-6 4-32 radionuclide material contamination in surface soil IV.d. SUBSURFACE SOIL CONTAMINATION Information provided focuses on the project premises using existing data, which are not available for all locations on the project premises.
A list or description of all locations at the facility where subsurface soil 4.2.4 4-31 contains residual radioactive material in excess of site background Figure 4-7 4-33 levels Figure 4-8 4-35 D A summary of the background levels used during scoping or 4.2.2 4-26 characterization surveys
'"' A summary of the radionuclides present at each location, the maximum 4.2.4 4-31 and average radionuclide activities in pCi/gm , and, if multiple 4.2.5 4-36 radionuclides are present, the radionuclide ratios n The depth of the subsurface soil contamination at each location Figure 4-8 4-35 4.2.5 4-36 D A scale drawing or map of the site showing the locations of subsurface Figure 4-7 4-33 soil contamination Figure 4-8 4-35 IV.e. SU RFAC E WATER
[Information provided focuses on the project premises using existing data, which are not available for all locations on the project premises.]
D A list or description of all surface water bodies at the facility that contain 4.2.7 4-55 residual radioactive material in excess of site background levels Figure 4-11 4-56 O A summary of the background levels used during scoping or Table 4-11 4-27 characterization surveys O A summary of the radionuclides present in each surface water body and Table 4-24 4-57 the maximum and average radionuclide activities in becquerel per liter (Bq/L) (picocuries per liter (pCi/L)
IV.f. GRO UN D WATER Information provided focuses on the project premises.
- A summary of the aquifer(s) at the facility that contain residual radioactive 4.2.8 4-58 material in excess of site background levels A summary of the background levels used during scoping or Table 4-11 4-27 characterization surveys Revision 2 A-12
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE D A summary of the radionuclides present in each aquifer and the Table 4-25 4-59 maximum and average radionuclide activities in Becquerel per liter (Bq/L) (picocuries per liter (pCi/L))
V. DOSE MODELING V.a . UNRESTRICTED RELEASE USING SCREENING CRITERIA Screening criteria are not used.
V.a.1. Unrestricted Release Using Screening Criteria for Building Surface Residual Radioactivity
~ The general oonoeptual model (for both the souroe term and the NA NA building environment) of the site
~ A summary of the soreening method (i.e. , running DandD or using the NA NA look up Tables) used in the DP V.a.2. Unrestricted Release Using Screening Criteria for Surface Soil Residual Radioactivity D Justifioation on the appropriateness of using the soreening approaoh NA NA (for both the souroe term and the en*,iironment) at the site D A summary of the soreening method (i.e. , running DandD or using the NA NA look up Tables) used in the DP V.b. UNRESTRICTEDRE1£ASEUSINGSlTC-SPECIFICINFORMATION Although no remediated areas will be released for unrestricted use during Phase 1, information specified in this subsection is provided for development of DCGLs and cleanup goals for surface soil, subsurface soil, and streambed sediment. The level of detail provided is similar to that in the Decommissioning EIS.
D Source term information including nuclides of interest, configuration of the 5.1.2 5-2 source, and areal variability of the source D Description of the exposure scenario including a description of the 5.2.1 5-21 critical group 5.2.2 5-26 5.2.3 5-34 5.2.8 5-52 Figure 5-7 5-21 Figure 5-8 5-27 Figure 5-9 5-32 Figure 5-10 5-34 Figure 5-13 5-53 Revision 2 A-13
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE 0 Description of the conceptual model of the site including the source 5.2.1 5-21 term , physical features important to modeling the transport pathways, 5.2.2 5-26 and the critical group 5.2.3 5-34 5.2.8 5-52 Figure 5-7 5-2 1 Figure 5-8 5-27 Figure 5-9 5-32 Figure 5-10 5-34 F,igure 5-13 5-53
~ Identification/description of the mathematical model used (e.g., hand 5.2.4 5-38 calculations, DandD Screen v1 .0, and RES RAD v5.81) 5.2.8 5-55
~ Description of the parameters used in the analysis Table C-1 C-3 Table C-2 C12 Table E-1 E-10 Table E-2 E-11 Table E-3 E-12 Table E-4 E-13 Table E- 5 E- 14 Table E-6 E-15 o Discussion about the effect of uncertainty on the results 5.2.6 5-44 o Input and output files or printouts, if a computer program was used App C C-1 Related CD App E E-1 Related CD V.c. RESTRICTED RELEASE USING SITE-SPECIFIC INFORMATION Although Phase 1 decommissioning activities will not result in a restricted release, this plan provides a limited site-wide integrated dose assessment to help place the Phase 1 decommissioning activities involving remediation of soil in the WMA 1 and WMA 2 excavations into context with regard to supporting potential Phase 2 decommissioning alternatives. Information provided on the topics in this subsection is limited to that necessary to support this assessment.
The level of detail is similar to that in the Decommissioning EIS.
o Source term information including nuclides of interest, configuration of the 5.1.2 5-2 source, areal variability of the source , and chemical forms
..., A description of the exposure scenarios, including a description of the 5.2.1 5-21 critical group for each scenario 5.2.2 5-26 5.2.3 5-34 5.2.8 5-52 Figure 5-7 5-21 Figure 5-8 5-27 Figure 5-9 5-32 Figure 5-10 5-34 Figure 5-13 5-53 Revision 2 A-14
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAG E D A description of the conceptual model(s) of the site that includes the source 5.2.1 5-2 1 term , physical features important to modeling the transport pathways, and 5.2.2 5-26 the critical group for each scenario 5.2.3 5-34 5.2.8 5-52 Figure 5-7 5-2 1 Figure 5-8 5-27 Figure 5-9 5-32 Figure 5-10 5-34 Figure 5-13 5-53
'-' Identification/description of the mathematical model(s) used (e.g. , hand 5.2 .4 5-38 calculations and RESRAD v5.81) 5.2.8 5-55 A summary of parameters used in the analysis Table C-1 C-3 Table C-2 C12 Table E- 1 E-10 Table E-2 E-11 Table E-3 E-1 2 Table E-4 E-13 Table E- 5 E-14 Table E~6 E- 15 D A discu ssion about the effect of uncertainty on the results 5.2.6 5-44 D Input and output files or printouts, if a computer program was used App C C-1 Related CD App E E-1 Related CD V.d. RELEASE INVOLVING ALTERNATE CRITERIA DOE will not use alternative criteria.
D Source term information inoluding nuolides of interest, oonfiguration of the NA NA souroe, areal variability of the source , and ohemioal forms D A desoription of the exposure soenarios, inoluding a desoription of the NA NA oritioal group for eaoh soenario
~ A desoription of the oonoeptual model(s) of the site that inoludes the source NA NA term , physioal features important to modeling the transport pathways, and the oritioal group for eaoh soenario ldentifioation/desoription of the mathematioal model(s) used (e.g., hand NA NA oaloulations and RES RAD v5 .81)
A summary of parameters used in the analysis NA NA n A disoussion about the effeot of unoertainty on the results NA NA Revision 2 A-15
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE D Input and output files or printouts, if a oomputer program 'Nas used NA NA VI. ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION D Environmental information described in NUREG-17 48 3 u For an EIS , the environmental information is reviewed by the EPAD EIS Noted project manager VII. ALARA ANALYSIS The ALARA analysis focuses on the DCGLs for surface and subsurface soil and streambed sediment.
u A description of how the licensee will achieve a decommissioning goal 6.2 6-3 below the dose limit A quantitative cost benefit analysis 6.3 6-6 6.4 6-12 D A description of how costs were estimated 6.3.2 6-8 D A demonstration that the doses to the average member of the critical 6.3 6-8 group are ALARA 6.4 6-12 VIII. PLANNED DECOMMISSIONING ACTIVITIES The remediation tasks are described in general terms. Every room and area is not addressed since decontamination will be limited and the facilities will be demolished. Typical remediation techniques to be used are described in Section 7.12, starting on page 7-48. More detail will be provided later in the Decommissioning Work Plan(s). Measures for preventing contamination or recontamination of the site due to decommissioning activities are addressed in Section 7.2.2 on page 7-6.
VIII.a. CONTAMINATED STRUCTURES D A summary of the remediation tasks planned for each room or area in the 7.3.3 to 7-1 6 to contaminated structure, in the order in which they will occur 7.3.9 7-29 O A description of the remediation techniques that will be employed in 7.1 2 7-47 each room or area of the contaminated structure c /\summary of the radiation protection methods and control procedures that NA NA will be employed in each room or area
~ /\ summary of the procedures already authorized under the existing NA NA lioense and those for which approval is being requested in the DP 1
Section 3 provides a detailed description of the affected environment. All of the information specified in NUREG-1748 is contained in the Decomm issioning EIS.
Revision 2 A-16
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE D A commitment to conduct decommissioning activities in accordance with 7.2.2 7-5 written , approved procedures D A summary of any unique safety or remediation issues associated with 7.2.2 7-5 remediating the room or area For Part 70 lioensees, a summary of hmv the lioensee will ensure that NA NA the risks addressed in the faoility's Integrated Safety Analysis will be addressed during deoommissioning Vlll.b. CONTAMINATED SYSTEMS AND EQUIPMENT ri A summary of the remediation tasks planned for each system in the 7.3.3 to 7-1 6 to order in which they will occur, including which activities will be conducted 7.3.9 7-29 by licensee staff and which will be performed by a contractor A description of the techniques that will be employed to remediate each 7-1 2 7-47 system in the facility or site
~ A desoription of the radiation proteotion methods and oontrol prooedures NA NA that will be employed while remediating eaoh system D A summary of the equipment that will be removed or decontaminated and 7.3 7-16 how the decontamination will be accomplished 7.4.2 7-31 7.5 7-38 D A summary of the prooedures already authorized under the existing NA NA lioense and those for whioh approval is being requested in the DP D A commitment to conduct decommissioning activities in accordance with 7.2.2 7-5 written , approved procedures D A summary of any unique safety or remediation issues associated with 7.2 .2 7-6 remediating any system or piece of equipment D For Part 70 lioensees, a summary of how the lioensee will ensure that NA NA the risks addressed in the faoility's Integrated Safety Analysis will be addressed during deoommissioning Vlll.c. SOIL
' A summary of the removal/remediation tasks planned for surface and 7.3.8 7-21 subsurface soil at the site in the order in which they will occur, including 7.4.3 7-32 which activities will be conducted by licensee staff and which will be 7.7.4 74 3 performed by a contractor Revision 2 A-17
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE D A description the techniques that will be employed to remove or 7.3.8 7-21 remediate surface and subsurface soil at the site
- 7.4.3 7-32 7.7.4 7-43 7.1 2 7-47
,..., A desoription of the radiation proteotion methods and oontrol prooedures NA NA that will be employed during soil rem9" al/ remediation 1
A summary of the prooedures already authorized under the existing NA NA lioense and those for whioh approval is being requested in the DP
~ A commitment to conduct decommissioning activities in accordance with 7.2.2 7-5 written , approved procedures A summary of any unique safety or removal/remediation issues 7.2.2 7-6 associated with remediating the soil u For Part 70 lioensees, a summary of how the lioensee will ensure that NA NA the risks addressed in the faoility's Integrated Safety Analysis will be addressed during deoommissioning Vlll.d. SURFACE AND GROUND WATER Surface water removed from the lagoons will be remediated in Phase 1 of the decommissioning, and groundwater removed from the WMA 1 and WMA 2 excavations will be treated also.
D A summary of the remediation tasks planned for ground and surface 7.3.8 7-26 water in the order in which they will occur, including which activities will 7.4.3 7-35 be conducted by licensee staff and which will be performed by a contractor D A description of the remediation techniques that will be employed to 7.3.8 7-26 remediate the ground or surface water 7.4.3 7-32 O A desoription of the radiation proteotion methods and oontrol prooedures NA NA that will be employed during ground or surfaoe water remediation
!J A summary of the prooedures already authorized under the existing NA NA lioense and those for whioh approval is being requested in the DP
- J A commitment to conduct decommissioning activities in accordance with 7.2.2 7-5 written, approved procedures A summary of any unique safety or remediation issues associated with 7.2.2 7-6 remediating the ground or surface water Revision 2 A-18
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE Vlll.e. SCHEDULES O A Gantt or PERT chart detailing the proposed remediation tasks in the Figure 7-16 7-56 order in which they will occur O A statement acknowledging that the dates in the schedule are contingent 7.13 7-55 upon NRC approval of the DP u A statement acknowledging that circumstances can change during 7.1 3 7-55 decommissioning , and, if the licensee detennines that the decommissioning cannot be completed as outlined in the schedule , the licensee will provide an updated schedule to NRC G If the deoommissioning is not expeoted to be oompleted within the NA NA timeframes outlined in NRG regulations , a request for alternative sohedule for oompleting the deoommissioning IX. PROJECT MANAGEMENT AND ORGANIZATION This seetioR foeuses OR projeet maRagemeRt aRd orgaRicatioR related to the fiRa! status sur.ce;cs.
Matters in this section are addressed by the DOE procedures identified in Section 1.6.
IX.a. DECOMMISSIONING MANAGEMENT ORGANIZATION O A desoription of the deoommissioning organization NA NA O A desoription of the responsibilities of eaoh of these deoommissioning NA NA projeot units D A desoription of the reporting hierarohy within the deoommissioning NA NA projeot management organization D A desoription of the responsibility and authority of eaoh unit to ensure NA NA that deoommissioning aoti'>'ities are oonduoted in a safe manner and in aooordanoe with approved written prooedures IX.b. DECOMMISSIONING TASK MANAGEMENT
~ A desoription of the manner in whioh the deoommissioning tasks are NA NA managed D A desoription of how individual deoommissioning tasks are evaluated and NA NA how the Radiation Work Permits (RVl/Ps) are developed for eaoh task D A desoription of how the RWPs are reviewed and approved by the NA NA deoommissioning projeot management organization
. Revision 2 A-19
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE O A description of how RWPs are managed throughout the NA NA deoommissioning projeot
- A description of how individuals performing the deoommissioning tasks NA NA are informed of the prooedures in the RVl/P IX.c. DECOMMISSIONING MANAGEMENT POSITIONS AND QUALIFICATIONS A description of the duties and responsibilities of each management NA NA position in the deoommissioning organization and the reporting responsibility of the position
- A desoription of the duties and responsibilities of each ohemioal , NA NA radiologioal , physioal , and oocupational safety related position in the deoommissioning organization and the reporting responsibility of eaoh position A description of the duties and responsibilities of eaoh engineering , NA NA quality assurance, and 'A'aste management position in the deoommissioning organization and the reporting responsibility of each position
- The minimum qualifications for each of the positions desoribe above, and NA NA the qualifications of the individuals currently oooupying the positions
,::::; A description of all deoommissioning and safety oommittees NA NA IX.d. RADIATION SAFETY OFFICER C A desoription of the health physios and radiation safety eduoation and NA NA experience required for individuals aoting as the lioensee's RSO O A description of the responsibilities and duties of the RSO NA NA O A desoription of the specifio authority of the RSO to implement and NA NA manage the lioensee's radiation proteotion program IX.e. TRAINING C:: A description of the radiation safety training that the lioensee will provide tp NA NA each employee A desoription of any daily worker "jobside" or "tailgate" training that will be NA NA provided at the beginning of eaoh workday or job task to familiarize workers with job specific procedures or safety requirements
= /\description of the documentation that 'Nill be maintained to NA NA demonstrate that training commitments are being met Revision 2 A-20
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE IX.f. CONTRACTOR SUPPORT D A summary of desommissioning tasks that will be performed by NA NA.
sontrastors D A description of the management interfaces that will be in place NA NA between the site's management and onsite supervisors, and contractor management and onsite supervisors
- D A description of the oversight responsibilities and authority that the NA NA licensee will exercise over contraster personnel D A description of the training that will be provided to contractor personnel NA NA by the licensee and the training that will be provided by the contractor D A commitment that the sontractor will comply with all radiation safety NA NA and license requirements at the facility X. HEAL TH AND SAFETY PROGRAM DURING DECOMMISSIONING: RADIATION SAFETY CONTROLS AND MONITORING FOR WORKERS Matters in this section are addressed by the DOE procedures identified in Section 1. 7.
X.a. AIR SAMPLING PROGRAM D A description which demonstrates that the air sampling program is NA NA representative of the *.vork.ers breathing zones
- o A description of the criteria which demonstrates that air samplers with NA NA appropriate sensitivities will be used, and that samples will be collected at appropriate frequencies D . A description of the conditions under which air monitors will be used NA NA D A description of the criteria used to determine the frequency of NA NA calibration of the flow meters on the air samplers D A description of the action levels for air sampling results NA NA D A description of how minimum detecTable activities (MDA) for eaeh NA NA specific radionuclide that may be collected in air samples are determined X.b. RESPIRATORY PROTECTION PROGRAM o A description of the process controls, engineering controls, or NA NA
. procedures to control sonsentrations of radioactive materials in air Revision 2 A-21
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE D A description of the evaluation which will be performed when it is not NA NA praotioal to apply engineering oontrols or prooedures
- D A description of the considerations used which dernonstrates NA NA respiratory protection equiprnent is appropriate for a speoifio task based on the guidance on assigned protection factors c A desoription of the rnedioal soreening and fit testing required before NA NA
'Norkers will use any respirator that is assigned a protection faster D A description of the written procedures maintained to address all the NA NA elernents of the respiratory protection prograrn c A description of the use, rnaintenanoe, and storage of respiratory NA NA protection devises n A desoription of the respiratory equiprnent users training prograrn NA NA.
~ A description of the considerations rnade when selecting respiratory NA NA protection equiprnent X.c. INTERNAL EXPOSURE DETERMINATION D A description of the rnonitoring to be perforrned to deterrnine worker NA exposure c A aesoription of hov<< worker intakes are deterrnined using NA NA rneasurernents of quantities of radionuolides excreted frorn, or retained in the hurnan body D A description of how 'Norker intakes are determine a by rneasurernents of NA NA the concentrations of airborne radioactive rnaterials in the workplace c A description of how vvorker intakes for an aault, a rninor, and a declared NA NA pregnant wornan (DPl/I/) are deterrnined using any oornbination of the rneasurernents above, as rnay be necessary D A description of how '.Yorker intakes are converted into oornrnitted effective NA NA dose equivalent
.X.d. EXTERNAL EXPOSURE DETERMINATION
~ A description of the individual rnonitoring devices which will be provided. NA NA to workers
~ A desoription of the type, range, sensitivity, and accuracy of each NA NA individual rnonitoring device Revision 2 A-22
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE D A desaription of the use of extremity and whole body monitors when the NA NA external radiation field is non uniform D A desoription of 'JVhen audible alarm dosimeters and poal<:et dosimeters NA NA
'Nill be provided D A description of how external dose from airborne radioactive material is NA NA determined D A desaription of the proaedure to insure that surveys neaessary to NA NA supplement personnel monitoring are performed D A description of the action le'1els for worl<:er's external exposure, and the NA NA teahniaal bases and actions to be taken 'Nhe~ they are exceeded X.e. SUMMATION OF INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL EXPOSURES D A description of how the internal and external monitoring results are used NA NA to calculate TODE and TEDE doses to occupational work.ors D A description of hov,r internal doses to the embryo/fetus, whiah is based NA NA on the intake of an occupationally exposed DPW will be determined D A description of the monitoring of the intake of a DPW, if determined to NA NA be necessary D A description of the program for the preparation, retention, and NA NA reporting of records for oacupational radiation exposures X.f. CONTAMINATION CONTROL PROGRAM D A descriptio'n of the written procedures to control access to, and stay time NA NA in, aontaminated areas by work.ors, if they are needed D A desaription of surveys to supplement personnel monitoring for work.ors NA NA during routine operations, maintenance, clean up activities, and special operations D A description of the surveys which will be performed to determine the NA NA baseline of back.ground radiation le*1els and radioactivity from natural sources for areas where decommissioning activities 'Nill tal<e place D A desaription in matrix or Tableular form Yo'hich describes NA NA contamination action limits (that is, actions taken to either decontaminate a person, place, or area, restrict access, or modify the type or frequency of radiological monitoring)
Revision2 A-23
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE D A desoription (inoluded in the matrix or Table mentioned above) of NA NA proposed radiologioal oontamination guidelines for specifying and modifying the frequenoy for eaoh type of survey used to assess the reduotion of total oontamination D A desoription of the prooedures used to test sealed souroes, and to NA NA insure that sealed souroes are leaked tested at appropriate intervals X.g. INSTRUMENTATION PROGRAM
. D A desoription of the instruments to be used to support the health and NA NA safety program
~ A description of instrumentation storage, calibration, and maintenance NA NA facilities for instruments used in field surveys
- D A desoription of the method used to estimate the MDC or MDA (at the NA NA 95 peroent oonfidenoe level) for eaoh type of radiation to be detested D A description of the instrument oalibration and quality assuranoe NA NA procedures D A desoription of the methods used to estimate unoertainty bounds for NA NA eaoh type of instrumental measurement O A description of air sampling calibration procedures or a statement that NA NA the instruments \Viii be oalibrated by an aooredited laboratory
- X.h. NUCLEAR CRITICALITY SAFETY D A desoription of how the NCS funotions, including management NA NA responsibilities and teohnioal qualifications of safety personnel, will be maintained when needed throughout the deoommissioning prooess D A description of how an awareness of procedures and other items NA NA relied on for safety will be maintained throughout decommissioning among all personnel, with access to systems that may contain fissionable material in sufficient amounts for critioality D A summary of the review of NCS/\'s or the ISA indicating either that the NA NA prooess needs no new safety prooedures or requirements, or that.new requirements or analysis have been performed D A summary of any generic NCS requirements to be applied to general NA NA decommissioning, deoontamination, or dismantlement operations, inoluding those dealing with systems that may unexpeotedly oontain fissionable material Revision 2 A-24.
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE X.i. HEALTt-1 PHYSICS AUDITS, INSPECTIONS, AND RECORDKEEPING PROGRAM
~ A general desoription of the annual program re*,.imv oonduoted by NA NA exeoutive management 0
LJ A description of the records to be maintained of the annual program review NA NA and executive audits
~ /\ description of the types and frequencies of surveys and audits to be NA NA performed by the RSO and RSO staff c ,A, desoription of the prooess used in evaluating and dealing with violations NA NA of NRG requirements or license commitments identified during audits
[;! A desoription of the reoords maintained of RSO audits NA NA XI. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND CONTROL PROGRAM Matters in this section are to be addressed by the DOE procedures identified in Section 1.8.
XI.a. ENVIRONMENTAL ALARA EVALUATION PROGRAM c A desoription of ALAR/\ goals for effluent oontrol NA NA 0
/\ description of the procedures, engineering controls, and process NA NA oontrols to maintain doses /\L/\R/\
c /\ description of the /\L/\R/\ reviews and reports to management NA NA Xl.b. EFFLUENT MONITORING PROGRAM c A demonstration that background and baseline oonoentrations of NA NA radionuclides in environmental media have been esTablelished through appropriate sampling and analysis c /\ desoription of the knovm or expeoted oonoentrations of radionuolides NA NA in effluents 0
/\ description of the physical and chemical characteristics of NA NA radionuclides in effluents c /\ summary or diagram of all effluent disoharge looations NA NA 0
/\demonstration that samples will be representative of actual releases NA NA 0
/\ summary of the sample collection and analysis procedures NA NA
~ /\ summary of the sample collection frequencies NA NA Revision 2 A-25
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE D A description of the environmental monitoring recording and reporting NA NA procedures
~ A description of the quality assurance program to be established and NA NA implemented for the effluent monitoring program Xl.c. EFFLUENT CONTROL PROGRAM D A description of the controls that will be used to minimiz:e releases of NA NA radioactive material to the environment
~ A summary of the action levels and a description of the actions to be NA NA taken should a limit be exceeded D A description of the leak detection systems for ponds, lagoons, and NA NA taRk&
~ A description of the procedures to ensure that releases to sewer systems NA NA are controlled and maintained to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 20.2003
~ A summary of the estimates of doses to the public from effluents and a NA NA description of the method used to estimate public dose XII. RADIOACTIVE WASTE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Matters in this section are t6 be addressed by the DOE procedures identified in Section 1. 9.
XII.a. SOLID RADWASTE D A summary of the types of solid radwaste that are expected to be NA NA generated during decommissioning operations D A summary of the estimated volume, in cubic feet, of each solid radwaste NA NA type summariz:ed in Line 1 above D A summary of the radionuclides (including the estimated activity of each NA NA radionuclide) in each estimated solid radwaste type summariz:ed in Line 1 above D A summary of the volumes of Class A, B, C, and Greater than NA NA Class C' solid radwaste that will be generated by decommissioning operations
" A description of how and where each of the solid radwaste summariz:ed NA NA in Line 1 above 1.vill be stored onsite prior to shipment for disposal Revision 2 A-26
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE o A desoription of ho'N the ea oh of the solid radwastes summarized in NA NA Line 1 above will be treated and paekaged to meet disposal site aooeptanoe oriteria prior to shipment for disposal
- ..:; If appropriate, how the lioensee intends to manage volumetrioally NA NA oontaminated material D A description of how the licensee will prevent contam.inated soil, or 7.2.2 7-6 other loose solid radwaste, from being re-disbursed after exhumation and collection
- ..:; The name and looation of the disposal faoility that the lioensee NA NA intends to use for each solid radwaste type summarized in Line 1 a9eve Xll.b. LIQUID RADWASTE
- ..:; A summary of the types of liquid radwaste that are expeoted to be NA NA generated during deoommissioning operations
- ..:; A summary of the estimated volume, in liters, of eaoh liquid NA NA radwaste type summarized in Line 1 above o A summary of the radionuolides (inoluding the estimated aotivity of NA NA each radionuclide) in each liquid radwaste type summarized. in Line 1 a9eve n A summary of the estimated volumes of Class A, B, C, and Greater NA NA than Class C liquid radwaste that will be generated by deoommissioning operations o A desoription of how and where eaoh of the liquid radwastes NA NA summarized in Line 1 above will be stored onsite prior to shipment for disposal
- ..:; A desoription of how the eaoh of the liquid radwastes summarized in NA NA Line 1 above will be treated and paekaged to meet disposal site aeceptanee eriteria prior to shipment for disposal c The name and looation of the disposal faoility that the lioensee NA NA intends to use for eaoh liquid radwaste type summarized in Line 1 a9eve Xll.c. MIXED WASTE
" A summary of the types of solid and liquid mixed waste that are NA NA expeoted to be generated during deeommissioning operations Revision 2 A-27
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTEN1 SECTION PAGE D A summary of the estimated volumes in cubic feet of each solid mi*8d NA NA waste type summarized in Line 1 above, and in liters for each liquid mixed \e,raste D A summary of the radionuolides (inoluding the estimated aotivity of eaoh NA NA radionuclide) in eaoh type of mixed waste type summarized in Line 1 aOOve D A summary of the estimated volumes of Class A, B, C, and Greater than NA NA Class C mixed 'Naste that will be generated by deoommissioning operations D A description of how and where each of the mixed wastes summarized in NA NA Line 1 above will be stored onsite prior to shipment for disposal
~ A desoription of how the each of the mixed v,iastes summarized in Line 1 NA NA above will be treated and paokaged to meet disposal site acceptanoe criteria prior to shipment for disposal D The name and location of the disposal facility that the licensee intends to NA NA use for each mixed waste type summarized in Line 1 above D A disoussion of the requirements of all other regulatory agencies having NA NA jurisdiction over the mixed waste n A demonstration the that the lioensee possesses the appropriate EPA or NA NA State permits to generate, store, and/or treat the mixed wastes XIII. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM This section focuses on characterization surveys, the final status survey, engineering data, calculations; and dose modeling.
XIII.a. ORGANIZATION D A description of the QA program management organization 8.1 8-2 Figure 8-1 8-2 D A description of the duties and responsibilities of each unit within the 8.1.1 8-3 organization and how delegation of responsibilities is managed within 8.1.2 8-4 the decommissioning program D A description of how work performance is evaluated 8.2 8-4 D A description of the authority of each unit within the QA program 8.1.1 8-3 8.1.2 8-4 D An organization chart of the QA program organization Figure 8-1 8-2 Revision 2 A-28
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE Xlll.b. QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM D A commitment that activities affecting the quality of site 8.3.1 8-7 decommissioning will be subject to the applicable controls of the QA program and activities covered by the QA program are identified on program defining documents D A bi"ief summary of the company's [DOE's] corporate QA policies 8.3.1 8-7 D A description of provisions to ensure that technical and quality assurance 8.3 8-6 procedures required to implement the QA program are consistent with regulatory, licensing, and QA program requirements and are properly documented and controlled D A description of the management reviews, including the documentation of 8.1.1 8-3 concurrence in these quality-affecting procedures 8.2.1 8-5 8.2.2 8-6 D A description of the quality-affecting procedural controls of the principal 8.2.1 8-4 contractors 8.2.2 8-5 8.2.3 8-6 8.3.2 8-7 D A description of how NRC will be notified of changes (a) for review and 8.3.1 8-7 acceptance in the accepted description of the QA program as presented or referenced in the DP before implementation and (b) in organizational elements within 30 days after the announcement of the changes D A description is provided of how management regularly assesses the 8.8 8-12 scope, status, adequacy, and compliance of the QA program D A description of the instruction provided to personnel responsible for 8.2.1 8-4 performing activities affecting quality 8.2:2 8-5 8.2.3 8-6 8.3.2 8-8 D A description of the training and qualifications of personnel verifying 8.3.1 8-7 activities D For formal training and qualification programs, documentation includes the 8.9 8-13 objectives and content of the program, attendees, and date of attendance D A description of the self-assessment program to confirm that activities 8.8 8-13 affecting quality comply with the QA program D A commitment that persons performing self-assessment activities are 8.8 8-13 .
not to have direct responsibilities in the area they are assessing Revision 2 A-29
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE D A description of the organizational responsibilities for ensuring that 8.1.1 8-3 activities affecting quality are (a) prescribed by documented 8.1.2 8-4 instructions, procedures, and drawings and (b) accomplished through implementation of these documents D A description of the procedures to ensure that instructions, 8.3.1 8-7 procedures, and drawings include quantitative acceptance criteria and qualitative acceptance criteria for determining that important activities have been satisfactorily performed Xlll.c. DOCUMENT CONTROL
- D A summary of the types of QA documents that are included in the 8.4 8-11 program D A description of how the licensee develops, issues, revises, and retires QA 8.4 8-11 documents Xlll.d. CONTROL OF MEASURING AND TEST EQUIPMENT D A summary of the test and measurement equipment used in the 8.5 8-12 program D A description of how and at what frequency the equipment will be 8.5 8-12 calibrated 9.4.3 9-11 D A description of the daily calibration checks that will be performed on 8.5 8-12 each piece of test or measurement equipment D A description of the documentation that will be maintained to 8.5 8-12 demonstrate that only properly calibrated qnd maintained equipment was used during the decommissioning Xlll.e. CORRECTIVE ACTION D A description of the corrective action procedures for the facility, 8.7 8-12 including a description of how the corrective action is determined to be adequate D A description of the documentation maintained for each corrective 8.7 8-12 action and any follow-up activities by the QA organization after the corrective action is implemented Xlll.f. QUALITY ASSURANCE RECORDS D A description of the manner in which the QA records will be managed 8.9 8-13 D A description of the responsibilities of the QA organization 8.1.1 8-3 Revision 2 A-30
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE O A description of the QA records storage facility 8.9 8-14 Xlll.g. AUDITS AND SURVEILLANCES c A description of the audit program 8.8 8-14
"' A description of the records and documentation generated during 8.8 8-14 the aud its and the manner in which the documents are managed A description of all follow-up activities associated with audits or 8.8 8-14 surveillances O A description of the trending/tracking that will be performed on the results 8.8 8-14 of audits and surveillances XIV. FACILITY RADIATION SURVEYS XIV.a. RELEASE CRITERIA The Phase 1 DP focuses on DCGLs for surface soil. subsurface soil, and streambed sediment.
DCGLs are provided in Section 5 only to avoid duplication. Note that cleanup goals below the DCGLs are specified in Section 5 in Table 5-14 on page 5 these are the criteria to be used for remediation activities in Phase 1.
O A summary Table or list of the DCGLw for each radionuclide and Table 5-14 5-62 impacted media of concern [Table 5-14 provides the cleanup goals.]
If Class 1 survey units are present, a summary Table or list of area Table 9-1 9-3 factors that will be used for determining a DCGLEMc for each Table 9-2 9-3 radionuclide and media of concern Table 9-3 9-4 D If Class 1 survey units are present, the DCGLEMC values for each Table 5-14 5-62 radionuclide and medium of concern O If multiple radionuclides are present, the appropriate DCGLw for the NA NA survey method to be used [A DCGLwfor a surrogate radionuclide will be developed if practicable after additional characterization data are obtain during Phase 1 decommissioning activities.]
XIV.b. CHARACTERIZATION SURVEYS D A description and justification of the survey measurements for impacted 9.2.4 9-6 media 9.4 9-8 9.7 9-30
.J A description of the fi eld instruments and methods that were used for 9.4 9-11 measuring concentrations and the sensitivities of those instruments and Table 9-4 9-1 1 methods Revision 2 A-31
. I
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE o A description of the laboratory instruments and methods that were used 9.4.1 9-1 1 for measuring concentrations and the sensitivities of those instruments 9.4.3 9-1 5 and methods Table 9-5 9-12 u The survey results, including tables or charts of the concentrations of Table 2-10 2-1 8 residual radioactivity measured [The report of additional characterization Table 2-19 2-43 to be performed early in Phase 1 of the decommissioning will present Table 4-3 4-15 data in tables and figures similar to those in Section 2 and Section 4.) Table 4-4 4-1 6 Table 4-5 4-16 Table 4-6 4-1 7 Table 4-8 4-1 9 Table 4-9 4-21 Maps or drawings of the site, area , or building , showing areas classified Figure 4-1 4-7 as non-impacted or impacted [The drawings provided in Section 4 will Figure 4-2 4-8 be confirmed or revised when additional characterization data become Figure 4-3 4-9 available early in Phase 1 of the decommissioning.} Figure 4-4 4-10 Figure 4-5 4-11 o Justification for considering areas to be non-impacted [The justification 4.1.3 4-12 provided in Section 4 will be confirmed or revised when additional characterization data become available early in Phase 1 of the decommissioning.}
O A discussion of why the licensee considers the characterization survey to 9.7 9-30 be adequate to demonstrate that it is unlikely that significant quantities of residual radioactivity have gone undetected [The subsections of Section 9. 7 provide justification for both previous and planned characterization measurements by WMA.]
O For areas and surfaces that are inaccessible or not readily accessible, 9. 7.1 9-32 a discussion of how they were surveyed or why they did not need to be surveyed O For sites, areas, or buildings with multiple radionuclides, a discussion 9.4.1 9-9 justifying the ratios of radionuclides that will be assumed in the final status survey or an indication that no fixed ratio exists and each radionuclide will be measured separately XIV.c. IN-PROCESS SURVEYS n A description of field screening methods and instrumentation 9.5 9-20
" A demo.nstration that field screening should be capable of detecting 9.5 9-20 residual radioactivity at the DCGL {As indicated in Section 9.5, methods Table 9-7 9-21
. and instruments for in -process surveys will be similar to those used during characterization and final status surveys. The field instruments suitable for scanning soil will not be able to detect non-gamma emitting radionuclides.]
Revision 2 A-32
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE XIV.d. FINAL STATUS SURVEY DESIGN Phase 1 final status surveys will be performed in cases where the decommissioning activities will make an area inaccessible for later final status surveys and confirmatory surveys. These surveys will be managed as final status surveys although a potential for recontamination may exist in certain areas. Details will be provided in the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan. Appendix G describes the conceptual framework for the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan.
A brief overview describing the final status survey design 9.6.1 9-24 A description and map or drawing of impacted areas of the site, area , or 9.6.1 9-24 building classified by residual radioactivity levels (Class 1, 2, or 3) and divided into survey units with an explanation of the basis for division into survey units [Survey units will be specified in the Final Status Survey Plan as indicated in Section 9. 6. 1 on page 9-17.)
A description of the background reference areas and materials, if they will 9.6.1 9-25 be used, and a justification for their selection [Details will appear in the Final Status Survey Plan.]
A summary of the statistical tests that will be used to evaluate the 9.3 9-8 survey results [Details will appear in the Final Status Survey Plan.] 9.6.1 9-28 D A description of scanning instruments, methods, calibration , operational Table 9-8 9-26 checks, coverage, and sensitivity for each media and radionuclide 9.6.1 9-26
- J For in-situ sample measurements made by field instruments, a Table 9-8 9-26 description of the instruments, calibration , operational checks, 9.6.1 9-26 sensitivity, and sampling methods, with a demonstration that the instruments and methods have adequate sensitivity [The only field instruments planned for use are the instruments in Table 9-5 on page 9-18.)
D A description of the analytical instruments for measuring samples in 9.6 .1 9-26 the laboratory, as well as calibration , sensitivity, and methods with a Table 9-5 9-12 demonstration that the instruments and methods have adequate sensitivity D A description of how the samples to be analyzed in the laboratory will be 9.6.1 9-27 collected, controlled , and handled A description of the final status survey investigation levels and how they Appen G G-9 were determined A summary of any significant additional residual radioactivity that was not 9.6.1 9-24 accounted for during site characterization Revision 2 A-33
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
- CONTENT SECTION PAGE D A summary of direct measurement results and/or soil concentration 9.6.1 9-28 levels in units that are comparable to the DCGL, and if data is used to estimate or update the survey unit 0 A summary of the direct measurements or sample data used to both 9.6.1 9-28 evaluate the success of remediation and to estimate the survey unit variance XIV.e. FINAL STATUS SURVEY REPORT DOE is addressing each checklist topic as a requirement for the report.
O An overview of the results of the final status survey 9.8.1 9-45 O A discussion of any changes that were made in the final status s.urvey from 9.8.2 9-45 what was proposed in the DP or other prior submittals
~ A description of the method by which the number of samples was 9.8.3 9-46 determined for each survey unit D A summary of the values used to determine the number of samples and 9.8.4 9-46 a justification for these values O The survey results for each survey unit include: 9.8.5 9-46 The number of samples taken for the survey unit; 9.8.5 9-46 A description of the survey unit, including (a) a map or drawing of 9.8.5 9-46 the survey unit showing the reference system and random start systematic sample locations for Class 1 and 2 survey units and random locations shown for Class 3 survey units and reference areas, and (b) a discussion of remedial actions and unique features; The measured sample concentrations in units that are comparable 9.8.5 9-46 to the DCGL; The statistical evaluation of the measured concentrations; 9.8.5 9-46 Judgmental and miscellaneous sample data sets reported separately 9.8.5 9-46 from those samples collected for performing the statistical evaluation ;
A discussion of anomalous data, including any areas of elevated 9.8.5 9-46 direct radiation detected during scanning that
- exceeded the investigation level or measurement locations in excess of DCGLw ;
and Revision 2 A-34
WVOP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE A statement that a given survey unit satisfied the DCGLw and the 9.8.5 9-46 elevated measurement comparison if any sample points exceeded the DCGLw.
- A description of any changes in initial survey unit assumptions relative to 9.8.6 9-46 the extent of residual radioactivity (e.g ., material not accounted for during site characterization)
- A description of how ALARA practices were employed to achieve final 9 .8.5 9-46 activity levels D If a survey unit fails , a description of the investigation conducted to 9.8.7 9-46 ascertain the reason for the failure and a discussion of the impact that the failure has on the conclusion that the facility is ready for final radiological surveys and that it satisfies the release criteria If a survey unit fails, a discussion of the impact that the reason for the 9.8.8 9-47 fa ilure has on other survey unit information XV. FINANCIAL ASSURANCE This matter is not applicable to the Phase 1 DP consistent with 10 CFR 30.35(f)(4) .
XV.a. COST ESTIMATE D A cost estimate that appears to be based on documented and reasonable NA NA assumptions XV.b . CERTIFICATION STATEMENT D The certification statement is based on the licensed possession limits and NA NA the applicable quantities specified in 10 CFR 30 .35, 40 .36, or 70 .25 D The licensee is eligible to use a certification of financial assurance and, if NA NA eligible, that the certification amount is appropriate
- : : : The financial assurance mechanism supplied by the licensee consists of NA NA one or more of the follO'tving instruments:
Trust fund; Escrow account; Government fund ;
Certificate of deposit; Deposit of government securities; Surety bond ;
Revision 2 A-35
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE Letter of credit; Line of credit; Insurance policy; Parent company guarantee; Self guarantee; External sinking fund ;
Statement of intent; or By special arrangements with a government entity assuming custody or ownership of the site.
XV.c. FINANCIAL MECHANISM
- : : The financial assurance mechanism is an originally signed duplicate NA NA D The wording of the financial assurance mechanism is identical to the NA NA recommended wording provided in Appendix F= of this document D F'or a licensee regulated under 10 CF'R Part 72, a means is NA NA identified in the DP for adjusting the financial assurance funding le*1el over any storage and surveillance period CJ The amount of financial assurance coverage provided by the licensee for NA NA site control and maintenance is at least as great as that calculated using the formula provided in this NUREG XVI. RESTRICTED USE/ALTERNATE CRITERIA Because there will be no facility or property release associated with the Phase 1 of the decommissioning, this section does not apply.
XVI.a. RESTRICTED USE XVl.a.1. Eligibility Demonstration D A demonstration that the benefits of dose reduction are less than the cost NA NA of doses, injuries, and fatalities
- : : A demonstration that the proposed residual radioactivity levels at the site NA NA are ALARA XVl.a.2. Institutional Controls DOE will continue to manage the project premises and provide for monitoring and maintenance until the actions required by the WVDP Act have been completed. DOE's site management plan for the post-Phase 1 period will provide de facto institutional control of the site during this period.
Accordingly, DOE will briefly describe this plan, addressing the topics identified as applicable Revision 2 A-36
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE below as they apply to the post-Phase 1 period under DOE control.
0 A ElessFiptioA of tl::ie le§ally eAfeFseaele iAstitt1tioAal soAtFol(s) aAEl aA NA NA explaAatioA of how the iAstitl:ltioAal soAtrnl is a le§ally eAferneaele meshaAism n
Ll A ElessFiptioA of aAy EletFimeAts assosiated with the maiAteAaAse of the NA NA iAstitt1tioAal soAtrnl(s)
~ A descFiptioA of the rnstFictioAs OR prnseAt aAd ft1tt1FO laAElowAeFs NA NA D A description of the entities enforcing, and their authority to enforce, the AppD D-32 institutional control(s )
D A description of the design features of the site that support institutional App D D-32 controls n
L..J A discussion of the durability of the institutional control (s), including the App D D-8 performance of any engineered barriers used
~ A ElessFiptioA of the astivities that the eAtity with the at1th0Fity to eAfeFse NA NA the iAstitt1tioAal sontmls may t1ndertake to enforne the institt1ti0Aal sontrnl(s)
~ A dessFiption of the manneF in whish the entity with the at1th0Fity to NA NA enfoFse the institt1tional sontrnl(s) will ee Feplaced if that entity is no lon§eF willin§ OF aele to enfoFce the institt1ti0Aal contml(s) (this may not ee AeedeEl foF FeEleml oF State entities) n C5 A ElescFiptioA of the Elt1Fation of the institl:ltional contml(s), the easis foF the NA NA Elt1Fation , the coAElitioAs that will end the institt1tional contrnl(s), and the activities that will ee t1nElertaken to one the institt1tional contml(s)
~ A descFiption of the plans foF coFFOcti*t<e actions that may ee l:lAElertaken in NA NA the eveAt the institt1tional contrnl(s) fail 0 A ElescFiption of the FecoFEls pertainin§ to the instit1:1tional contrnls, how NA NA anEl whern 'Nill they will ee maintaineEl, and how the p1:1elic will have access to the rncoFEls XVl.a.3. Site Maintenance and Financial Assurance J A Elemonstmtion that an apprnpFiately q1:1alified entity has seen prnvided NA NA to contrnl and maintain the site
~ A description of the site maintenance and control program and the basis AppD D-1 8 for concluding that the program is adequate to control and maintain the site Revision 2 A-37
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE D A desoription of the arrangement or oontraot with the entity oharged with NA NA oarrying out the aotions neoessary to maintain oontrol at the site
~ A demonstration that the oontraot or arrangement will remain in effeot for NA NA as long as feasible , and inolude provisions for renewing or replaoing the oontraot
~ /\ desoription of the manner in whioh independent oversight of the entity NA NA oharged with maintaining the site will be oonduoted and what entity will oonduot the oversight
- A demonstration that the entity providing the oversight has the authority NA NA to replaoe the entity oharged with maintaining the site
~ A desoription of the authority granted to the third party to perform , or have NA NA performed, any neoessary maintenanoe aoti*,iities 2 Unless the entity is a government entity, a demonstration that the third NA NA party is not the entity holding the finanoial assuranoe meohanism CJ A demonstration that suffioient reoords evidenoing to offioial aotions and NA NA finanoial payments made by the third party are open to publio inspeotion CJ A desoription of the periodio site inspeotions that will be performed by the NA NA third party, inoluding the frequenoy of the inspeotions D A oopy of the finanoial assuranoe meohanism pro*,iided by the lioensee NA NA c::: /\demonstration that the amount of finanoial assuranoe provided is NA NA suffioient to allow an independent third party to oarry out any neoessary oontrol and maintenanoe aotivities XVl.a.4. Obtaining Public Advice This section does not apply because public advice is not being sought under the provisions of 10 CFR 20.1403(d) to support license termination under restricted conditions.
- CJ A desoription of how individuals and institutions that may be affeoted by NA NA the deoommissioning were identified and informed of the opportunity to provide advise to the lioensee
,.., A desoription of the manner in wh ioh the lioensee obtained ad'rioe from NA NA these individuals or institutions A desoription of how the lioensee provided for partioipation by a broad NA NA oross seotion of oommunity interests in obtaining the advioe A desoription of how the lioensee pro'1ided for a oomprehensive, NA NA oolleotive disoussion on the issues by the partioipants represented Revision 2 A-38
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE C A copy of the publicly available summary of the results of NA NA discussions, including individual viewpoints of the participants on the issues, and the extent of agreement and disagreement among the participants n A description of hov,r this summary has been made available to the NA NA
~
c A description of how the licensee evaluated the advice, and the rationale NA NA for incorporating or not incorporating the advice from affected members of the community into the DP XVl.a.5. Dose Modeling and ALARA Demonstration c A summary of the dose to the average member of the critical group NA NA when radionuclide levels are at the DCGL with institutional controls in place, as well as the estimated doses if they are no longer in place c A summary of the evaluation performed pursuant to Chapter 6 of NA NA Volume 2 of this NUREG series, demonstrating that thece doses are ALA RA
~ If the estimated dose to .the average member of the critical group could NA NA exceed 100 mrem/y (but would be less than 500 mrem/y) when the radionuclide levels are at the DCGL, a demonstration that the criteria in 10 CFR 20.1403(e) have been met XVl.b. ALTERNATE CRITERIA c A summary of the dose in TEDE(s) to the average member of the critical NA NA group when the radionuclide levels are at the DCGL (considering all man made sources other than medical) c A summary of the evaluation performed pursuant to Chapter 6 of Volume 2 NA NA of this ~JUREG series demonstrating thaf these doses are ALARA c An analysis of all possible sources of exposure to radiation at the site and NA NA a discussion of why it is unlikely that the doses from all man made sources, other than medical, will be more than 1 mSv/y (100 mrem/y) c A description of the legally enforceable institutional control(s) and an NA NA explanation of how the institutional control is a legally enforceable mechanism n A description of any detriments associated with the maintenance of the NA NA institutional control(s) c A description of the restrictions on present and future landowners NA NA Revision 2 A-39
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN CONTENT SECTION PAGE D A description of the entities enforcing and their authority to enforce the NA NA institutional control(s)
- D A discussion of the durability of the institutional control(s) NA NA D A description of the activities that the party with the authority to enforce the NA NA institutional controls will undertake to enforce the institutional control(s)
D A description of the mariner in which the entity with the authority NA NA to enforce the institutional control(s) will be replaced if that entity is no longer willing or able to enforce the institutional control(s)
C A description of the duration of the institutional control(s), the basis for the NA NA duration, the conditions that will end the institutional control(s), and the activities that will be undertaken to end the institutional control(s) n A description of the corrective actions that will be undertaken in the event NA NA the institutional control(s) fail n A description of the records pertaining to the institutional controls, how NA NA and vvhere they will be maintained, and how the public will have access to the records c A description of how individuals and institutions that may be affected by , NA NA the decommissioning 'A'ere identified and informed of the opportunity to provide advice to the licensee n A description of the manner invvhish the licensee obtained advise from NA NA affected individuals or institutions
~ A description of how the licensee provided for participation by a broad NA NA cross section of community interests in obtaining the advise c A description of how the licensee provided for a somprehensive, NA NA collective discussion on the issues by the participants represented c A copy of the publicly available summary of the results of NA NA discussions, including individual viewpoints of the participants on the issues and the extent of agreement and disagreement among the participants c A description of how this summary has been made available to the NA NA f*:lbH6 n A description of how the licensee evaluated advice from individuals and NA NA institutions that could be affected by the decommissioning and the manner in which the advice was addressed Revision 2 A-40
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN References NRC 2006, NUREG-1757, Consolidated Decommissioning Guidance, Volume 1, Revision
- 2. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., September 2006.
NRC 2008, Summary of a Meeting Between NRG and DOE on the WVDP Phase 1 Decommissioning Plan, May 19, 2008.
Revision 2 A-41
This page is intentionally blank.
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN APPENDIX B ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOACTIVITY DATA.
- ,*, .,r ., _ t -.,
- rile .*P~~pose'. o_fc.'this'*:api;>endix )s t6 .* pro\iide *i.nfprmati(fo:<on 'radiqac;tivity *in e'nvitoi1m:e~tal m:e:di~'to* s'uppl.Jmehtinformation \i~*:Sectibn*4~2 ... l'his*. app~ndix .
- . ~a\scu'sses* :~~.w:. r~di bn~cliBe~sp.~cific'.*~rJd *m.e:dla~sp~¥ifi:b::9~~~grpq 8~* *v~ Iu:s; !Nere. *
- C!~ve1op~d.:*and~,de$9ribes t~~ n:1~thod~ lj$edto .~eterrnirie '.'tvlietbe'r'sp~qi'fip,areas :of*~:
- the 'sjte bave' b.een 'impaded.(i :~:;.contain :media with radioactivify hofi'6ent~ations in:*.
,~xc~~s.9fba9kgrp!J11~*r* .*; :.*::*. :. . <*<~*** .i '>"*".* *
{ . 1~FoRMAnof~*m rtii,s:.Ae~EN01x . .. ..
, . , - *:.:!.., ',;, ,* ~ ... '?*>'.- . _,,-.- .. ,.:/ -~ ,_ -~' "__ ' '*'* .> ' .' *-:~-~. '.'_"-' '.i:,,
- ,This' app~nd. ix.:ide11tifies 'loqations used ,rn .:*establ!§hing b.a¢kgroi:Jnd radJbactivfty
":cor;ice~tratiPns.* and r11etiiods used for calcUlatlng'. these.;concentrati6ns .. It* ats~
- J~ro~icies *tabi~~ :~( ba~k~rotmd*,s~mrhatY ciata"for. *eaco~~nvitd~inJntai"'m~dium!~:
.:."eJ<pf8:fn;:; lnetooqs'0sed:t0 ~valqate' conc'l:f6W~!iq'ns exq.eedin9;.b~~kgr60no.:ih 6h:>it8,'.
- i*e.nvirob 01 el1t~*i:rrif;lciia~~Pr.o'-!id,e~:t~bles
. ,, . ','*._*:--:*<,- ...____ , '*"'"'.",* -~-._;' .' __.,._ ..
'.ofradib,~~c1rci¢~*r,citi6~;,a,qcf<:*>**
~*1"'1 ' ' * ,,_**, ** -* .;;' ,.
pro'-!kf~.~*~:~mmii"r:Y
__ ,.,,_,,.*,,.-._.. ,*,_,f
, : dqta; of radidactiyity.c;:ohcentratioris and status With .resp~ctto.. backg(Oljnd'a(:onsite . *.
. r~utine .ih~riit~ring:fo~atioris,~
~.I.*._,~,~-<"-~ "_-." :;,*, ,*!:;:/-:'*,_; ,_' --. --::.
Supplem~ntary
- ~;-,/:"*,""'".' .'* ;*'-j *:
data*
groJ~ci~ate'r for ~-*.:,,:-. ___ .*._ . --~* <,
sa~pli~d points .
,_*:> ~-:'~;::' '* *'_*-:.*. 1
- Je.g:;, location*coordihates,: sample* depth, *geolpgic' unit)*.areals0 provided..,:-":. * . '*
- *. r:* :*~ . -~~lA;,~~~~I~.~ ~TliERi1~r~*?F: THreµ~ '.; /. . *.*. * ** *
- The* information i!J, this. appendixsupplements that provided .in. Section.4.2 arid:*
- "su*~~ort§ *:_:pl~~nin.g '.to~' ;additi~~~I ",characferfz~tio~("~f ~~ii , i:f~d ... s~di.rrient * )~ ,'*
~cc6r~a~~e;,:W\th..the*: ..~~ar~cterizktia~~;a~p1~;:~~8 ;A~c\ly~i§.,i:>l~h." de~crib~ci.-'i~-;
- .,s'~tt!9n ~;' .
- .* :. * "' *} ** ,:'.::>.: * .. ,. * * " *:: :_ * . : * * * "~* *
- c'. ,' ',:**.: {" ' ~ ~
Revision 2 B-1
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 1.0 Locations Used for Background Calculations Samples of surface soil, sediment, surface water, and groundwater are routinely collected from background locations (i.e., "control" or "rference" locations) as part of the WVDP Environmental Monitoring Program Plan (WVES 2008a) and the WVDP Groundwater Monitoring Plan (WVES 2008b ). Environmental radiation measurements are also taken with thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) at background locations as described in the Environmental Monitoring Program Plan. Location designators beginning with a "W" indicate a water sample. Those beginning with an "S" indicate soil or sediment samples. A designator beginning with a "D" indicates direct measurement of environmental exposure.
1.1 Surface Soil Surface soil samples were collected annually until 2004, when the collection period was reduced to once every three years. (In 2008, the frequency was reduced further to once every five year?, and sampling at most locations was discontinued.) Data from only two background locations were available. One (SFGRVAL, located at the air sampling station in Great Valley) is the primary (and current) background location. The other (SFNASHV, located at the former air sampling station at Nashville) was discontinued in 2003. (See Figure B-1.) Therefore, few data points were available to calculate surface soil backgrounds.
To increase the number of data points for estimating background radionuclide concentrations, data from soil collected at other offsite sampling locations (i.e., at perimeter locations and in the nearby communities of West Valley and Springville) were evaluated for the possibility of using data from each in soil background calculations. Data sets for each radionuclide from each soil sampling location ( 1995-2007) were statistically compared with the comparable data set from the primary background location, SFGRVAL, using the nonparametric Mann-Whitney U-test (Sheskin 1997). The null hypothesis being tested was.
that the median of the test data set was higher than the median at the reference data set (SFGRVAL) (one-tailed test, P<0.05), The results are summarized in Table B-1 below, with the sample locations shown in Figure B-1 or B-2. (Note that, at the .0.05 level, the possibility of making an incorrect decision regarding the status of the location with respect to background could have occurred by chance alone five percent of the time.)
Revision 2 B-2
~- -----
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Legend
@ Therm oluminescent Dosimetry A Soil Sampling Point
,. WVDP Figure B-1. Background Sampling Locations More Than 10 Kilometers From the WVDP Revision 2 B-3
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-1. Summary of Comparisons of Radionuclide Data from Test Surface Soil Locations vs. SFGRVAL Background Radionuclide Measurement Location Gross Gross U-233/ U-235/ Pu-239/
Sr-90 Cs-137 U-232 U-238 Pu-238 Am-241 alpha Beta 234 236 240 SFGRVAL vs.
SFNASHV NS NS NS NS --- --- --- --- NS NS NS SFFXVRD NS NS NS NS --- --- --- --- NS NS NS SFTCORD NS Higher NS NS --- --- --- --- NS NS NS SFRT240 NS NS NS NS -- --- --- --- NS NS NS SFSPRVL NS NS NS NS -- --- --- --- NS NS NS SFWEVAL NS NS NS NS --- --- --- -- NS NS NS SFBOEHN NS NS NS NS NS Higher NS NS NS NS NS SFRSPRD NS NS NS Higher NS NS NS NS NS NS NS SFBLKST NS Higher NS NS --- --- --- --- NS NS NS KEY: Higher= Null hypothesis was not rejected ; results higher than background {P<0 .05).
NS = Null hypothesis was rejected ; results were not significantly higher than background.
= Constituent was not measured at this location .
LOCATION CODES: SFGRVAL = Background at Great Valley; SFNASHV = Background at Nashville in the town of Hanover; SFTCORD = Perimeter at Thomas Corners Road; SFRT240 = Perimeter at Route 240; SFSPRVL = Community at Springville; SFWEVAL =Community at West Valley; SFBOEHN =Perimeter at Boehn Road ;
SFRSPRD = Perimeter at Rock Springs Road ;
SFBLKST = Perimeter at Bulk Storage Warehouse.
(Location SFNASHV was discontinued in 2003 ; locations SFTCORD, SFBOEHN , and SFBLKST were discontinued 2005.)
See Figures B-1 and B-2 for sample locations.
If data were determined not to be statistically higher than background (i.e., unlikely to have been impacted by the WVDP , indicated by "NS" results in the above table) , the data were pooled with data from Great Valley and included in background calculations.
As discussed in Section 4.2.1 of this plan, data were extracted from the WVDP Laboratory Information Management System . Samples from which the data were taken had been collected and analyzed in accordance with controlled sampling plans and defined quality assurance protocols. All data used for background calculations were independently validated and approved .
Although not all analyses were performed by the same laboratories over the years ,
before a laboratory was awarded a contract, analytical procedures were reviewed ,
laboratories were audited by WVDP personnel familiar with radioanalytical methods, and Revision 2 B-4
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN performance on proficiency samples for the radionuclides of interest were examined for acceptability. Analysis of alpha-emitting radionuclides - U-232, U-233/234, U-235/236, U-238, Pu-238, Pu-239/240, and Am-241 - was done by alpha spectrometry to meet contractual detection limits. After contracts were awarded , laboratories were contractually required to participate in formal crosscheck programs and perform acceptably. During the term of the contracts, laboratories were routinely audited by WVDP personnel to ensure that contractually required standards were maintained .
1.2 Subsurface soil Data from only two boreholes (BH-38 on the north plateau and BH-39 on the south plateau) were available for this calculation when Revision 0 to this plan was prepared. The boreholes were driven into areas of the WVDP classified as non-impacted as part of a Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Facility Investigation (RFI) soil characterization study in 1993. (See Figure B-3.) Although samples were taken from three depths at each borehole, the surficial samples (0-2 feet depth) were classified as surface soil for the purposes of this plan . Therefore , only two samples from each borehole, a total of four samples, were classified as subsurface soil. Although subsurface soil background values were calculated from these four data points, they were not used initially as reference values because there were too few points. Instead, surface soil background results were used to evaluate the presence of radionuclide concentrations in excess of background in subsurface soil samples.
In 2008 , subsurface soil background locations in the sand and gravel and unweathered Lavery till geological units underlying the site were sampled as part of the North Plateau Characterization Program (Michalczak 2007, Klenk 2008). Results from the sand and gravel and unweathered Lavery till samples were statistically indistinguishable, so all were combined , together with the 1993 results , to produce a subsurface soil background for the site .
1.3 Surface Water and Sediment The routine Environmental Monitoring Program background locations were used as the source of background data. Both surface water and sediment background data were taken from samples collected at Buttermilk Creek upstream of the WVDP (surface water monitoring point WFBCBKG and sediment monitoring point SFBCSED) and at Bigelow Bridge on Cattaraugus Creek upstream of the point where Buttermilk Creek, containing effluent from the WVDP, flows into Cattaraugus Creek (surface water point WFBIGBR and sediment point SFBISED). (See Figure B-2.)
Revision 2 B-5
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN N
~\
Town of Concord 1
Town of Yorkshire WNYNSC Town of East Otto Town of Machias SFWEVAL Town of Ashford l r Legend A Soil Sampling Location Town
- Sediment sampling Location of Ellicottville
+ Surface .Water Sampfiog Location Figure B-2. Sampling Locations Within 10 Kilometers of the WVDP Used for Background Calculations Revision 2 B-6
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 1.4 Groundwater The routine background locations from the Groundwater Monitoring Program were used as the source of background data. (See Figure 8-3.) Radionuclide concentrations were taken from monitoring wells WNWNB1S , WNW0204, WNW0301 , WNW0401 ,
WNW0405, WNW0706 , WNW0901 , and WNW0908, which serve(d) as upgradient reference locations for the following geologic units: the sand and gravel (S&G) unit (WNWNB1S, WNW0301 , WNW0401 , and WNW0706); the Lavery Ull sand (LTS) unit (WNW0204); the unweathered Lavery till (ULT) unit (WNW0405); the Kent recessional sequence (KRS) unit (WNW0901 ); and the weathered Lavery till (WL T) unit (WNW0908).
Because few background data points were available for most radionuclides in groundwater and no background isotopic data (or very limited data) were available for groundwater from some of the geological units (e.g., the Lavery till sand and the Kent recessional sequence), data sets for the various units were combined to calculate one overall site groundwater background value for each radionuclide . Potential implications of pooling the data were considered to be minimal because most of the data sets were comprised largely of nondetect values as shown in Table 8-7, and because, when positive detects were noted (with the exception of naturally occurring radionuclides) , they were usually below (or slightly higher than) the contractual detection limits .
1.5 Gamma Radiation Measurements From TLDs TLD data were taken from four background locations (three no longer active) over the 1986-2007 time period . (See Figure 8-1.) Measurements were taken at:
(1) The current background location (DFTLD23), located 18 miles (29 km) south of the WVDP at the Great Valley air sampler; (2) The five-points landfill (DFTLD17), located 12 miles (19 km) southwest of the Site; (3) The former air sampling location at Nashville in the town of Hanover (DFTLD37),
located 23 miles (37 km) northwest of the Site; and (4) Sardinia-Savage Road (DFTLD41 ), 15 miles (24 km) northeast of the Site.
Quarterly exposure rates (in mR/qtr) and hourly exposure rates (in mR/h) were calculated.
Revision 2 8-7
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMM ISSIONING PLAN JJGIS/lv N
A
\
i
'i
\
\.
)
(
Le gend
$ 2008 Geoprobe Location Gr01.Jndwaler Monitoring Well A Subsurface Soil Borehole
- - WI/OP Fence
--+---< WI/OP Railspur r=:::J \'lktlands Figure B-3. Onsite Groundwater and Subsurface Soil Locations Used as Background Revision 2 B-8
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 2.0 Methods Used for Background Calculations Radionuclides for which backgrounds were estimated were selected with consideration of ( 1) radionuclides of interest from the Facility .Characterization Project, as listed in Decommissioning Plan section 4.1.1, and (2) radionuclides that are routinely monitored in environmental media at the WVDP, for which sufficient data were available to develop a reliable estimate of background. (See Section 4.2.2 of this plan for a more detailed discussion of how background constituents were selected.)
Once radionuclides and locations applicable to each environmental medium had been defined, sample results were extracted from the Laboratory Information Management System database using the Environmental Affairs Trend Tool. As part of the extraction process, data from duplicate samples (i.e., separate samples of one medium collected at the same.place and time; co-located samples) were combined into a single result for use in calculations, as were data from replicate samples (i.e., recounts or splits of the same sample). Calculations to combine results from duplicates and replicates, using protocols defined in controlled WVDP Procedure EM-11 (WVNSCO 2004b), were automatically done by the Environmental Affairs Trend Tool during data extraction.
Extracted data files ~ere block copied into Microsoft Excel spreadsheets and the information identified in Table B-2 was summarized for each environmental medium.
Table B-2. Summary Information for Environmental Medium Background Calculations Constituent Gross. measurement, radionuclide measurement, or direct radiation measurement Average* In the LIMS database, individual radionuclide concentration measurements result are represented by a result term plus or minus an associated uncertainty term. The average result is the direct average of result terms from all samples in the data set, including negative nymbers and zeros.
Uncertainty The uncertainty term associated with the average result is calculated from associated the sample uncertainty terms in accordance with-Procedure EM-11 per the with the following formula:
average 2 uncertainty= SQRT((uncertainty/ + ... + uncertaintyN ) IN) result where uncertainty1 = the uncertainty term from sample 1 uncertaintyN = the uncertainty term from sample N N = the total number of samples SQRT = square root Median To estimate the median of each data set, each sample result+/-uncertainty was assigned a single result equal to the larger of the result or the uncertainty term. Using the Excel median function, the median was selected from the set of single values. If more than half the sample results were nondetects, the median was assigned a "<" sign, indicating that the median represented a nondetect value.
Revision 2 B-9
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-2. Summary Information for Environmental Medium Background Calculations Item - Explanatory Notes Note that if a data set is symmetric, the average and median will .be the s.ame. However, if the distribution is skewed to the right (that is, it contains a large number of low values and a few high values), the average will usually be higher than the median. For this reason, with asymmetrically distributed data sets (as is often the case with environmental data) the median may be the more reliable estimator of central tendency.
Maximum The maximum was selected from only the results indicating that activity had been detected. If no activity had been detected in any of the samples from that data set, the maximum was set equal to the highest uncertainty term and assigned a "<" sign, indicating that it was a nondetect.
N Total number of samples. (Duplicate samples were counted as one, as were replicate samples.)
%NDs If the uncertainty term for a sample was larger than the result (i.e., the range around the result term included zero), the radionuclide was considered not detected (ND) in that sample. Total number of ND samples divided by the total number of samples was expressed as a percentage.
Years The period of years from which the data set was taken.
Data A listing of the sampling locations from which background data were taken.
source locations Soil and sediment data, as extracted from the Laboratory Information Management System, were in units of µCi/g (dry weight). Surface water and groundwater data were in units of µCi/ml. All calculations were performed in units as extracted from the Laboratory Information Management System. Environmental dosimetry readings were in mR/qtr. For comparisons with onsite sample results, background data were then converted to the units specified in the Decommissioning Plan using the following conversion factors:
Soil and sediment: 1 µCi/g = 1E+06 pCi/g Water: 1 µCi/ml= 1E+09 pCi/L 3.0 Background Summary Data for Each Environmental Medium Summary tables of background values (in units of pCi/g per unit dry weight [soil or sediment]. pCi/L [surface water and groundwater], or mR/quarter [environmental exposure])
used to evaluate data from onsite sampling locations are presented in the following tables.
Revision 2 B-10
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table 8-3. Surface Soil Background Radionuclide Concentrations for the WVDP< 1l*< 2l Avg. Concentration (pCi/g). Median Maximum
. t N %NDs Years .Data Source Locations Result +/- Uncertainty (pCi/g) (pCi/g)
SFGRVAL, SFNASHV, SFFXVRD, SFTCORD, Gross alpha 1.34E+01 +/- 3.58E+OO 1.29E+01 2.73E+01 104 0% 1995-2007 SFRT240, SFSPRVL, SFWEVAL, SFBOEHN, SFRSPRD,SFBLKST SFGRVAL, SFNASHV, SFFXVRD, SFRT240, Gross beta 2.03E+01 +/- 3.11E+OO 2.00E+01 4.00E+01 84 0% 1995-2007 SFSPRVL, SFWEVAL, SFBOEHN, SFRSPRD SFGRVAL, SFNASHV, SFFXVRD, SFTCORD, Sr-90 1.51 E-01 "'+/- 1.46E-01 9.48E-02 . 3.10E+OO 104 25% 1995-2007 SFRT240, SFSPRVL, SFWEVAL, SFBOEHN, SFRSPRD, SFBLKST SFGRVAL, SFNASHV, SFFXVRD, SFTCORD, Cs-137 4.50E-01 +/- 6.68E-02 4. 17E-01 1.21E+OO 93 0% 1995-2007 SFRT240, SFSPRVL, SFWEVAL, SFBOEHN, SFBLKST U-232 5.52E-03 +/- 2.80E-02 < 2.35E-02 1.89E~02 32 97% 1995-2007 SFGRVAL,SFBOEHN,SFRSPRD U-233/234 7.79E-01 +/- 1.15E-01 7.88E-01 9.39E-01 22 0% 1995-2007 SFGRVAL, SFRSPRD U-235/236 5.98E-02 +/- 3.36E-02 5.24E-02 2. 18E-01 32 9% 1995-2007 SFGRVAL,SFBOEHN,SFRSPRD U-238 7.79E-01 +/- 1.13E-01 7.87E-01 9.31E-01 32 0% 1995-2007 SFGRVAL,SFBOEHN,SFRSPRD SFGRVAL, SFNASHV, SFFXVRD, SFTCORD, Pu-238 5.39E-03 +/- 1.38E-02 < 1.21 E-02 4.02E-02 92 86% 1996-2007 SFRT240, SFSPRVL, SVWEVAL, SFBOEHN, SFRSPRD,SFBLKST SFGRVAL, SFNASHV, SFFXVRD, SFTCORD, Pu-239/240 2.01 E-02 +/- 1.79E-02 1.55E-02 2.34E-01 104 44% 1995-2007 SFRT240, SFSPRVL, SFWEVAL, SFBOEHN, SFRSPRD,SFBLKST SFGRVAL, SFNASHV, SFFXVRD, SFTCORD, Am-241 1.45E-02 +/- .1.92E-02 < 1.62E-02 1.93E-01 104 64% 1995-2007 SFRT240, SFSPRVL, SFWEVAL, SFBOEHN, SFRSPRD, SFBLKST LEGEND: N = Number of samples ND= Nondetect NOTES: (1) Soil samples collected at air samplers at background locations (SFGRVAL =Great Valley; SFNASHV =Nashville), perimeter locations (SFFXVRD =Fox Valley Road; SFTCORD =Thomas Corners Road; SFRT240 = Route 240; SFBOEHN = Boehn Road; SFRSPRD = Rock Springs Road; SFBLKST = Bulk Storage Warehouse), and community locations (SFSPRVL =Springville; SFWEVAL =West Valley).
(2) Data from perimeter and community samplers were pooled with data from background locations if they were not statistically higher than background.
Revision 2 DRAFT 1 B-11
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-4. Sediment Background Radionuclide Concentrations for the WVDP( 1 J Average concentration* (pCi/g). *, %' ".
Data Source Constituent Median (pCi/g) Maximum (pCi/g)
- N NDs Years Lpcations Result +/-:' Uncertainty .,
Gross alpha 1.02E+01 +/- 3.28E+OO 9.21E+OO 2.18E+01 22 0% 1995-2006 SFBCSED, SFBISED Gross beta 1.74E+01 +/- 3.01E+OO 1.64E+01 2.71 E+01 23 0% 1995-2007 SFBCSED, SFBISED Sr-90 1.49E-02 +/- 4.91E-02 < 3.35E-02 1.57E-01 23 65% 1995-2007 SFBCSED, SFBISED cs~137 3.50E-02 +/- 2.50E-02 3.75E-02 7.84E-02 23 30% 1995-2007 SFBCSED, SFBISED U-232 1.15E-02 +/- 5.50E-02 < 3.10E-02 3.92E-02 23 87% 1995-2007 SFBCSED, SFBISED U-233/234 5.99E-01 +/- 1.19E-01 6.59E-01 8.58E-01 23 4% 1995-2007 SFBCSED, SFBISED U-235/236 5.31E-02 +/- 3.67E-02 4.57E-02 2.78E-01 23 22% 1995-2007 SFBCSED, SFBISED U-238 6.11E-01 +/- 1.19E-01 6.52E-01 9.01E-01 23 4% 1995-2007 SFBCSED, SFBISED Pu-238 1.67E-02 +/- 1.79E~02 < 1.41 E-02 1.29E-01 23 74% 1995-2007 SFBCSED, SFBISED Pu-239/240 1.08E-02 +/- 1.37E-02 < 1.22E-02 6.07E-02 23 83%. 1995-2007 SFBCSED, SFBISED Am-241 1:07E-02 +/- 1.83E-02 < 1.41 E-02 8.60E-02 23 74% 1995-2007 SFBCSED, SFBISED LEGEND: N =Number of samples ND =Nondetect NOTE: (1) Sediment samples were collected at upstream sampling locations on Buttermilk Creek (SFBCSED) and Cattaraugus Creek (SFBISED).
Revision 2 DRAFT 1 B-12
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN T a bl e B 5 S u b su rface S 01*1 B ac kgr0 und Radionuclide Concentrations for the WVDP Average concentration (pCi/g) Maximum Constituent ., Median (pCi/g)
(pCi/g)
. ' N %NDs*.* Years Data Source Locations(1l Result* + Uncertainty 1993, BH-38 and 39 (1993); GPBG01-08, GPBG02-08, Gross alpha 1.20E+01 +/- 4.76E+OO 1.26E+01 1.69E+01 18 0%
2008 GPBG03-08, GPBG04-08, and GPBG05-08 (2008) 1993, BH-38 and 39 (1993); GPBG01-08, GPBG02-08, Gross beta 3.19E+01 +/- 3.99E+OO 2.86E+01 6.10E+01 18 0%
2008 GPBG03-08, GPBG04-08, and GPBG05-08 (2008) 1993, BH-38 and 39 (1993); GPBG01-08, GPBG02-08, Sr-90 1.80E-02 +/- 2.59E-02 < 2.30E-02 1.24E-01 18 89%
2008 GPBG03-08, GPBG04-08, and GPBG05-08 (2008) 1993, BH-38 and 39 (1993); GPBG01-08, GPBG02-08, Cs-137 4.51E-03 +/- 2.43E-02 < 2.41E-02 1.49E-01 18 94%
2008 GPBG03-08, GPBG04-08, and GPBG05-08 (2008) 1993, BH-38 and 39 (1993); GPBG01-08, GPBG02-08, U-232 -2.65E-03 +/- 2.55E-02 < 2.44E-02 < 4.19E-02 18 100%
2008 GPBG03-08, GPBG04-08, and GPBG05-08 (2008) 1993, BH-38 and 39 (1993); GPBG01-08, GPBG02-08, U-233/234 6.83E-01 +/- 1.19E-01 7.91E-01 1.08E+OO 18 0%
2008 GPBG03-08, GPBG04-08, and GPBG05-08 (2008) 1993, BH-38 and 39 (1993); GPBG01-08, GPBG02-08, U-235/236 5.14E-02 +/- 3.47E-02 4.25E-02 1.17E-01 18 33%
2008 GPBG03-08, GPBG04-08, and GPBG05-08 (2008) 1993, BH-38 and 39 (1993); GPBG01-08, GPBG02-08, U-238 7.19E-01 + 1.22E-01 8.64E-01 1. 11 E+OO 18 0%
2008 GPBG03-08, GPBG04-08, and GPBG05-08 (2008) 1993, BH-38 and 39 (1993); GPBG01-08, GPBG02-08,
- Pu-238 4.32E-04 +/- 1.30E-02 < 1.15E-02 < 2.41 E-02 18 100%
2008 GPBG03-08, GPBG04-08, and GPBG05-08 (2008) 1993, BH-38 and 39 (1993); GPBG01-08, GPBG02-08, Pu-239/240 1.72E-03 +/- 1. 19E-02 < 1.04E-02 < 1.87E-02 18 100%
2008 GPBG03-08, GPBG04-08, and GPBG05-08 (2008) 1993, BH-38 and 39 (1993); GPBG01-08, GPBG02-08, Am-241 -1.93E-03 +/- 1.0?E-02 < 1.09E-02 < 1.27E-02 18 100%
2008 GPBG03-08, GPBG04-08, and GPBG05-08 (2008)
LEGEND: N =Number of samples ND = Nondetect * * .
NOTE: (1) Background locations are shown on Figure B-3. After testing to ensure that sub~urface soil results for the sand ~nd g~avel unit and the unweathered Lavery till were statistically indistinguishable, values were combined into a single subsurface soil background value for each radionuclide.
Revision 2 DRAFT 1 B-13
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-6. Surface Water Background Radionuclide Concentrations for the WVDP
. -Average concentration (pCi/L) ,.
M11ximum % : . '
Constituent 'Median lpci/L) N Years Data Source Locatiqris Result +/- Uncerta\nty (pCi~L)
- N.Os Gross alpha 4.74E-01 +/- 1.28E+OO < 9.55E-01 5.43E+OO 387 74% 1991-2007. WFBCBKG, WFBIGBR Gross beta 2.64E+OO +/- 1.43E+OO 2.34E+OO 2.03E+01 388 12% 1991-2007 WFBCBKG, WFBIGBR H-3 1.35E+01 +/- 8.43E+01 < 8.21E+01 6.33E+02 388 85% 1991-2007 WFBCBKG, WFBIGBR C-14 1.19E+01 *+/- 4.44E+01 < 1.33E+01 4.05E+02 68 81%. 1991-2007 WFBCBKG Sr-90 2.00E+OO +/- 1.61 E+OO 9.04E-01 1.23E+01 251 47% 1991-2007 WFBCBKG, WFBIGBR Tc-99 -4.40E-01 +/- 1.80E+OO < 1.80E+OO 7.25E+OO 52 85% 1995-2007 WFBCBKG 1-129 1.39E-01 +/- 8.71 E-01 < 7.86E-01 2.02E+OO 68 90% 1991-2007 WFBCBKG Cs-137 6.31E-01 +/- 5.98E+OO < 4.15E+OO 1.01E+01 *250 95% 1991-2007 WFBCBKG, WFBIGBR U-232 1.81E-02 +/- 8.91E-02 < 4.28E-02 2.60E-01 68 87% 1991-2007 WFBCBKG U-233/234 1.10E-01 +/- 7.02E-02 9.94E-02 2.98E-01 61 16% 1992-2007 WFBCBKG U-235/236 1.71 E-02 +/- 4.07E-02 < 3.28E-02 1.00E-01 67 82% 1991-2007 WFBCBKG U-238 7.44E-02 +/- 6.35E-02 5.72E-02 4.00E-01 68 35% 1991-2007 WFBCBKG Pu-238 1.45E-02 +/- 6.24E-02 < 3.10E-02 1.02E-01 68 93% 1991-2007 WFBCBKG Pu-239/240 9.17E-03 +/- 3.50E-02 < 2.71 E-02 1.98E-01 68 91% 1991-2007 WFBCBKG Am-241 5.42E-02 +/- 7.15E-02 < 3.27E-02 2.20E+OO 68 81% 1991-2007 WFBCBKG LEGEND: N = Number of samples ND = Nondetect WFBCBKG = Buttermilk Creek background; WFBIGBR =Cattaraugus Creek background at Bigelow Bridge.
Revision 2 DRAFT 1 B-14
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-7. Groundwater Background Radionuclide Concentrations for the WVDP Average concentration (pCi/L) Maximum %
. Constituent. .. Median (pCi/L) N. 1
- Years Data Source Locations Result +/-
- Uncertainty (pCi/L) NDs WNW-NB1S, -0204, -0301, -0401, -
Gross alpha 1.06E+OO +/- 5.69E+OO < 2.59E+OO 2.19E+01 566 87% 1991-2007 0405, -0706, -0901, -0908 WNW-NB1S, -0204, -0301, -0401, -
Gross beta 6.19E+OO +/- 5.11E+OO 4.56E+OO 2.82E+01 566 28% 1991-2007 0405, -0706, -0901, -0908 WNW-NB1 S, -0204, -0301, -0401, -
2.11 E+01 +/- 8.55E+01 < 8.58E+01 9.41E+02 566 81% 1991-2007 H-3 0405, -0706, -0901, -0908
- +/- 2.63E+01 < 2.66E+01 7.43E+OO 56 98% 1993-2007 WNW-NB1S, -0401, -0405, -0706, -0908 C-14 4.95E+OO Sr-90 2.69E+OO +/- 1.35E+OO 2.44E+OO 7.38E+OO 56 16% 1993-2007 WNW-NB1S, -0401, -0405, -0706, -0908 Tc-99 -3. 71 E-01 +/- 1.91E+OO < 1.85E+OO 3.98E+OO 56 96% 1993-2007 WNW-NB 1S, -0401, -0405, -0706, -0908 1-129 2.39E-01 +/- 7.38E-01 < 6.01 E-01 1.58E+OO 56 86% 1993-2007 WNW-NB 1S, -0401, -0405, -0706, -0908 WNW-NB1S, -0204, -0301, -0401, -
Cs-137 1.75E+OO +/- 2.39E+01 < 2.22E+01 1.90E+01 258 98% 1991-2007 0405, -0706, -0901, -0908 U-232 2.28E-02 +/- 1.00E-01 < 4.92E-02 3.78E-01 56 88% 1993-2007 WNW-NB1S, -0401, -0405, -0706, -0908 U-233/234 4.88E-01 +/- 1.94E-01 1.60E-01 8.20E+OO 56 13% 1993-2007 WNW-NB1S, -0401, -0405, -0706, -0908 U-235/236 4.52E-02 +/- 6.03E-02 < 5.00E-02 1.93E-01 56 71% 1993-2007 WNW-NB1S, -0401, -0405, -0706, -0908 U-238 3.18E-01 +/- 1.48E-01 1.21 E-01 5.30E+OO 56 21% 1993-2007 WNW-NB1S, -0401, -0405, -0706, -0908 Pu-238 5.94E-02 +/- 9.59E-02 < 4.65E-02 2.20E-01 6 83% 1993-1994 WNW-NB1S, -0405, -0908 Pu-239/240 4.95E-02 +/- 8.35E-02 < 5.28E-02 2.?0E-01 6 83% 1993-1994 WNW-NB1S, -0405, -0908 Am-241 4.32E-02 +/- 4.76E-02 < 3.81E-02 1.80E-01 6 83% 1993-1994 WNW-NB1S, -0405, -0908 Legend: N = Number of samples ND= Nondetect "WNW" locations refer to individual wells that serve as groundwater backgrounds for solid waste management units in the groundwater monitoring program.
Revision 2 DRAFT 1 B-15
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-8. Background Environmental Radiation Levels at the WVDP Average (mR/quarter) .. /
Constituent Median Maximum* N Years.
- Data Source Locationst1l Result +/- Unc;ertairity '* ..
DFTLD23, DFTLD17, DFTLD37, Environmental radiation 19.3 +/- 7J 19.2 35.0 264 1986-2007 DFTLD41 NOTE: (1) Background locations: DFTLD17 (Five Point Landfill); DFTLD23 (Great Valley); DFTLD37 (Dunkirk); DFTLD41 (Sardinia-Savage Road).
Revision 2 DRAFT 1 B-16
_J
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 4.0 Methods for Evaluating Concentrations Above Background in Onsite Environmental Media Data from onsite sampling were available in three forms:
(1) Single observations or measurements with no associated uncertainty term (for example, a sediment concentration from 1988 presented in a historical report);
(2) A radionuclide concentration result, plus or minus an associated uncertainty term, from a sample collected as part of a one-time sampling project (i.e., the RFI soil, sediment, and subsurface soil survey done in 1993; Geoprobe studies done in 1994, 1997, 1998, and 2008); and (3) Multi-year data sets from samples collected at specified locations as part of the routine Environmental Monitoring or Groundwater Monitoring programs.
4.1 Single-Value Observations Single-value observations were directly compared with the maximum result from the applicable background radionuclide-medium combination. For example, a Cs-137 concentration from lagoon sediment, as reported in WVNSCO 1994, was compared directly with the maximum Cs-137 concentration observed in background sediment. A value higher than the background result was classified as exceeding background.
4.2 Single Samples With Specified Uncertainty A single-sample result reported with an associated uncertainty term, such as the result from a sample collected as part of the 1993 RFI investigation, was compared with background using the relative errors ratio test. This test (as described in WVDP procedure EM-74, WVNSCO 2004a) is primarily used as a data validation tool to test the acceptability I
. I of results from duplicate samples (i.e., to determine the likelihood that the samples could I I
have come from the same population).
In the relative errors ratio test, one sample result (plus or minus its associated uncertainty term) is compared another sample result (plus or minus its associated uncertainty term). To perform the relative.errors ratio calculation, th~_absolute value of the difference between the two sample results is divided by the sum of the squares of the estimated standard deviations (as based on the error terms) from each. If the result is not greater than 1.96 (approximating a 95 percent confidence interval), the two samples would be considered acceptable as duplicates. In other words, the samples .could have been drawn from the same population (the test sample could have been drawn from the background population) if the confidence intervals bracketing the result terms from the* two samples overlap.
For purposes of the current evaluation, each onsite sample result was tested against the mean (plus or minus the associated uncertainty term) of the applicable radionuclide/
medium background value. If the test sample result met the three following conditions, the result was classified as exceeding background:
- The radionuclide was detected Revision 2 B-17
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
- The relative errors ratio value was greater than 1.96, and
- The result term for the sample was higher than the average result term for the background.
Areas with radiological concentrations exceeding background, as determined by the RER calculation, are summarized in Decommissioning Plan Figures 4-6 (surface soil and sediment), 4-7 (subsurface soil), and 4-13 (Geoprobe groundwater). Maximum above-background concentrations for specific radionuclides at locations in each WMA are summarized in Decommissioning Plan Section 4.2.5, Tables 4-12 through 4-22 (surface soil, sediment, and subsurface soil), and Decommissioning Plan Section 4.2.8, Table 4-26 (Geoprobe groundwater).
4.3 Data From Routine Monitoring Locations Radionuclide concentration data sets from routine monitoring locations were compared with applicable background data sets using the nonparametric Mann-Whitney "U" test. As recommended in MARSSIM, a nonparametric test was used because environmental data are usually not normally distributed and because there are often a significant number of results lower than detectable concentrations. Both conditions were true of the WVDP data sets examined in this evaluation.
Because of the larger number of observations available for these comparisons, the "U" test was more sensitive at detecting concentrations exceeding background at a specific location than was the RER test that considered only one measurement. Note that trends (i.e., increasing or decreasing radionuclide concentrations) were not evaluated as part of this exercise, which focused only on comparisons with background. (Data trends at the WVDP are routinely evaluated and conclusions summarized in formal reports associated with the Environmental Monitoring and Groundwater Monitoring Programs.)
The Mann-Whitney U test, similar to the Wilcoxon Rank Sum test used in MARSSIM, is a rank-based test. The null hypothesis being tested was that the median of the tested da.ta set was higher than the median at the background location (one-tailed test, P<0.05). To perform the test, data sets were assembled for radionuclide concentrations at each of the onsite routine monitoring points (soil/sediment sampling locations, surface water sampling locations, and routine groundwater sampling locations). So that the data could be ranked, each radionuclide measurement was assigned a single value. All "detect" values (i.e., the result term was larger than the uncertainty term) were set equal to the result term of the measurement; all "nondetect" values (i.e., the uncertainty term was larger than the result term) were set equal to zero. In this way, all nondetect values received the same rank.
(Note that summary statistics, such as averages, hi=!d already been calculated for each data .
set. The arbitrarily assigned zero values were used only for ranking purposes.)
The two data sets (test location and background reference location) were then combined into one data set and the results ranked in numerical order from the smallest to the largest. From the assigned ranks, the test statistic (i.e., "U") was calculated for each (Sheskin 1997). The normal approximation for larger sample sizes ("z") was also calculated. Critical values of "U" and "z" were taken from statistical tables in Sheskin 1997.
Revision 2 B-18
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN If the 'U' value was lower than the critical value of "U" (or, for larger numbers of samples, if the "z" value exceeded the critical level of "z"), and the mean rank from the test data set was greater than that from the background data set, then the null hypothesis (i.e.,
that the median of the test data set exceeded that of the background data set) was not rejected. In other words, at a 95% confidence level, it was likely that the median of the test data set exceeded that of the background data set.
Locations where results from routine monitoring locations exceeded background are summarized by waste management area and radionuclide in section 4.2, Table 4-17.
(sediment from sampling location SNSWAMP), Table 4-18 (sediment from sampling location ~NSW74A), Table 4-22 (sediment from sampling location SNSP006}, Table 4-24 (routine onsite surface water monitoring locations), and Table 4-25 (routine groundwater monitoring locations).
Direct onsite measurements of environmental radiation {TLD results), for which the data sets approximate a normal distribution, were compared with background measurements using the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) Excel function (p<0.05).
If the "F" statistic exceeded the critical Value of "F," and the average from the test data set exceeded the background average, measurements from the test location were determined to exceed background. Results are summarized in section-4.2, Table 4-23.
5.0 Radionuclide Ratios to Cs-137 The concentrations of hard-to-measure radionuclides in a medium are often estimated on the basis of their relationship to a more easily measured nuclide, such as Cs-137; as defined in a well-characterized distribution. As discussed in Section 4.1.4 of this plan, two primary distributions have been identified at the WVDP: (1) the Spent Nuclear Fuel distribution - applicable to nuclear fuel prior to reprocessing, and (2) the .Batch 10 distribution - applicable to the high-level waste after the uranium and plutonium had been extracted. Comparable ratios from the two distributions are presented in Table 4-3. As shown in Table 4.3 of this plan, Sr-90 may comprise a larger relative fraction of the total radioactivity _in the "feed and waste" category .(i.e., before waste reprocessing), while a larger relative fraction of Am-241 may be more characteristic of the "product" category (i.e.,
after waste reprocessing).
If surface soil, sediment or subsurface soil samples contained both Cs-137 and other radionuclides at above-background concentrations, the ratio of 'each above-background
. radionuclide to Cs-137 was calculated. Only data. from the same discrete samples were used to calculate ratios. Ratios in surface soil, sediment, and subsurface soil are summarized by WMA in Tables B-9, B-10, and B-11, respectively. For each medium, the following information is listed: .
- Number of samples for which each nuclide exceeded background,
- Minimum ratio,
- Median ratio,
- Maximum ratio, Revision 2 B-19
WVDP PHJ)SE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
- Concentration of Cs-137 (in pCi/g dry) in the sample with the maximum ratio, and
- Location at which the maximum ratio was observed.
With respect to environmental co.ncentrations exceeding background, the ratio of a radionuclide to Cs-137 may help to better trace the source of the activity. For instance, the area of elevated Sr-90 concentrations on the north plateau downgradient of the Process Building has been traced to a leak of radioactively contaminated acid in the late 1960s.
This plume is characterized by high Sr-90-to-Cs-137 ratios.
6.0 Supplementary Data for Onsite Monitoring Locations Summary statistics were calculated for radiological constituents measured at all routine monitoring locations on the WVDP site, sediment for the years 1995 through 2007, and surface water and groundwater for 1998 through 2007. Constituents exceeding background levels at each location are presented in Section 4.2. Complete results, including those from locations determined to be non-impacted, are presented in the following tables for onsite sediment (Table B-12), surface water (B-13), and groundwater (B-14).
Supplementary information about routine groundwater monitoring locations (i.e.,
location coordinates, surface elevation, construction material of the well or trench, diameter of the well [if applicable], screened interval, and geologic unit monitored) are summarized in Table B-15. Similar information for special Geoprobe groundwater sampling points is provided in Table B-16.
Note that only routine monitoring locations included in the current Groundwater Monitoring Program were included in the evaluation presented in Section 4.2.8 of this plan.
A large number of points at which groundwater had been sampled in the past were not included in this evaluation. For completeness, information on excluded points is summarized in Table B-17. Reasons for exclusion included:
- The well was dry;
- No radiological data were available;
- Data were not validated (e.g., piezometers, surface elevation points, wells for the north plateau groundwater recovery system, wells used to evaluate the pilot permeable treatment wall);
- Wells had been dropped from the groundwater program because existing coverage was considered sufficient (e.g., more than twenty wells discontinued in 1995); or
- Sampling points were lo.cated in areas outside the scope of the Phase 1 Decommissioning Plan (e.g., groundwater seeps outside the process premises, wells from WMA ~ [New York State-Licensed Disposal Area]).
7.0 References Klenk 2008, West Valley Demonstration Project North Plateau Background Soil Characterization Report, WVDP-493, Revision 1. Klenk, D.P., West Valley Environmental Services LLC, West Valley, New York, December 29, 2008.
Revision 2 B-20
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Michalczak 2007, Sampling and Analysis Plan for Background Subsurface Soil on the North Plateau, WVDP-466, Revision 0. Michalczak, L., West Valley Nuclear Services Company, West Valley, New York, August 16, 2007.
Sheskin 1997, Handbook of Parametric and Nonparametric Statistical Procedures.
Sheskin, D.J., CRC Press LLC, 1997.
WVES 2008a, Environmental Monitoring Program Plan, WVDP-098, Revision 15. West Valley Environmental Services LLC. West Valley, New York, January 7, 2008.
WVES 2008b, Groundwater Monitoring Plan, WVDP-239, Revision 12. West Valley Environmental Services LLC, West Valley, New York, February 12, 2008.
WVNSCO 1994, Environmental Information Document, Volume IV: Soils Characterization,
- WVDP-EIS-008, Revision 0. West Valley Nuclear Services Company, West Valley, New York, September 15, 1994.
WVNSCO 2004a, Radioanalytical Data Validation, EM-74, Revision 8. West Valley Nuclear Services Company, West Valley, New York, November 22, 2004.
WVNSCO 2004b, Documentation and Reporting of Environmental Data, EM-11, Revision
- 8. West Valley Nuclear Services Company, West Valley, New York, December 27, 2004.
Revision 2 B-21
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-9. Radionuclides in Surface Soil: Ratios to Cs-137( 1)
)
Radionuclide N Minimum *Median Maximum Cs-137 (pCi/9)( 3 l Locatie>;n *of Maximum Ratio WMA2 . Sr-90 5 0.015 0.28 1.4 8.5E-01 Surface soil near Lagoons 4 and 5 (BH-04)
WMA3 U-238 1 .0.047 0.047 0.047 2.2E+01 Surface soil near Waste Tank Farm Am-241 1 0.011 0.011 0.011 2.2E+01 Surface soil near Waste Tank Farm WMA4 Sr-90 3 0.29 0.96 9.5 1.2E+OO COOL soil (6-12" depth, 1990)
WMA5 Sr-90 2 0.019 0.047 0.075 1.1E+01 Surface soil near RHWF (BH-38}
Pu-238 1 0.0033 0.0033 0.0033 1.1E+01 Surface soil near RHWF (BH-38}
Pu-239/240 1 0.015 0.015 0.015 1.1 E+01 Surface soil near RHWF (BH-38)
Am-241 4 0.026 0.033 0.073 1.2E+01 LSA 3 &4 footers (1990) c
-*C'*-90 12 0:036 0.094 1.7 2.9E+OO Rail spur by FRS (1994)
WMA7 Sr-90 8 0.11 1.9 8.3 1.1E+OO NOA Surface Soil (1994)
Pu-238 1 0.021 0.021 0.021 4.1E+OO Surface soil by the NOA Interceptor Trench (BH-42)
Pu-239/240 1 0.022 0.022 0.022 4.1E+OO Surface soil by the NOA Interceptor Trench (BH-42)
Am-241 1 0.037 0.037 0.037 4.1E+OO Surface soil by the NOA Interceptor Trench (BH-42)
WMA 12 Sr-90 4 0.14 0.25 0.29 4.5E+OO Surface soil near WMA 2 and WMA 6 (BH-16)
NOTES: (1) Ratios were calculated from samples for which both Cs-137 and the nuclide of interest exceeded background, with ratios rounded to two significant digits or nearest integer.
(2) No surface soil data were available for WMA 1. No radionuclides exceeded background in WMA 9. Only Cs-137 exceeded background in WMA 10.
(3) Cs-137 concentration at the location with the maximum ratio.
LEGEND: BH = bore hole CDDL =Construction and Demolition Debris Landfill
- FRS = Fuel Receiving and Storage LSA = Lag Storage Addition N = number of samples RHWF = Remote-Handled Waste Fadlity.
Revision 2 B-22
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-10. Radionuclides in Sediment: Ratios to Cs-137l1 J Areal2J Radionuclide N Minimum Median Maximum Cs-137 (pCi/g)!Jl Location of Maximum Ratio WMA2 Sr-90 41 0.0063 0.065 144 1.0E+01 Sediment from the Solvent Dike (1986)
U-232 , . 1 0.0054 0.0054 0.0054 1.4E+03 Lagoon 3 sediment (1994)
U-233/234 2 0.0032 0.030 0.056 1.7E+01 Sediment from drainage downgradient of Solvent Dike (ST-28)
U-235/236 7 0.000010 0.000076 0.011 1.7E+01 Sediment from drainage downgradient of Solvent Dike (ST-28)
U-238 28 0.000052 0.0014 0.057 2.1 E+01 Lagoon 3 sediment (1990)
Pu-238 10 0.00028 0.0015 0.018 4.4E+04 Lagoon 2 shoreline sediment (1990)
Pu-239/240 9 0.00051 0.0011 0.019 1.7E+01 Sediment from drainage downgradient of Solvent Dike (ST-28)
Am-241 29 0.00058 0.0019 4.2 1.0E+01 Sediment from the Solvent Dike (1986)
WMA4 Sr-90 18 0.041 0.80 16 3.1 E+OO Sediment from drainage through CDDL (ST-30)
U-233/234 9 0.036 0.11 1.4 6.6E-01 Sediment at Northeast Swamp (SNSWAMP)
U-235/236 2 0.023 0.14 0.27 6.6E-01 Sediment at Northeast Swamp (SNSWAMP)
U-238 9 0.036 0.12 1.3 6.6E-01 Sediment at Northeast Swamp (SNSWAMP)
Pu-238 10 0.0057 0.022 0.057 5.2E+OO Sediment at Northeast Swamp (SNSWAMP)
Pu-239/240 13 0.0089 0.033 0.21 1.1E+01 Sediment at Northeast Swamp (SNSWAMP)
Am-241 14 0.010 0.056 0.22 2.1E+OO Sediment at Northeast Swamp (SNSWAMP)
WMA5 Sr-90 15 0.026 0.13 3.3 6.4E-01 Sediment at North Swamp (SNSW74A)
U-233/234 4 0.12 0.37 0.75 1.1 E+OO Sediment at North Swamp (SNSW74A)
U-235/236 1 0.047 0.047 0.047 2.7E+OO Sediment at North Swamp (SNSW74A)
U-238 4 0.15 0.34 2.0 4.?E-01 Sediment at North Swamp (SNSW74A)
Pu-238 1 0.015 0.015 0.015 3.8E+OO Sediment at North Swamp (SNSW74A)
Pu-239/240 9 0.019 0.035 0.096 4.?E-01 Sediment at North Swamp (SNSW74A)
Am-241 11 0.0011 0.057 0.087 6.4E-01 Sediment at North Swamp (SNSW74A)
Revision 2 B-23
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-10. Radionuclides in Sediment: Ratios to Cs-137 11 l
~rea" , Radiqnuclide N Minimum. Medi~n,
- Maximum,, C~*137 _(pCj/gtl3l
.. Location of. Maximum Ratio A6 Sr-90 3 0.062 0.27 0.59 5.9E-01 Sediment from south Demineralizer Sludge Pond (ST-36)
WMA7 Sr-90 1 3.7 3.7 3.7 9.0E-01 Sediment from drainage near Interceptor Trench (ST-23)
Pu-238 1 0.096 0.096 0.096 9.0E-01 Sediment from drainage near Interceptor Trench (ST-23)
Am-241 1 0.046 0.046 0.046 9.0E-01 Sediment from drainage near Interceptor Trench (ST-23)
WMA 12 Sr-90 33 0.022 0.058 0.59 2.?E-01 Sediment from Franks Creek (ST-13) near burial areas U-232 2 0.0010 0.0021 0.0031 3.5E+01 Sediment from Erdman Brook (ST-19) after Lagoon 3 discharge U-233/234 3 0.034 0.038 0.075 1.1E+01 Sediment from Franks Creek at fence line (SNSP006)
U-238 4 0.0094 0.035 0.058 1.4E+01 Sediment from Franks Creek at fence line (SNSP006)
Pu-238 10 0.00070 0.0034 0.042 5.9E+01 Sediment from Erdman Brook (ST-20) after drainage from WMA 2 Pu-239/240 7 0.00068 0.0029 0.012 5.9E+01 Sedimenffrom Erdman Brook (ST-20) after drainage from WMA 2 Am-241 18 0.0012 0.0047 0.033 4.3E+01 Sediment from Erdman Brook (ST-22) downgradient of NOA NOTES: (1) Ratios were calculated from samples for which both Cs-137 and the nuclide of interest exceeded background, with the ratios rounded to two significant digits or the nearest integer.
(2) No sediment data were available for WMAs 1, 3, or 9. Only Cs-137 exceeded background in WMA 10.
(3) Cs-137 concentration at the location with the maximum ratio.
LEGEND: COOL= Construction and Demolition Debris Landfill N = number of samples Revision 2 B-24
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-11. Radionuclides in Subsurface Soil: Ratios to Cs-137l 1 J
~WMA1 Radionuclide Sr-90 N Minimum Median Maximum Cs-137 (pCi/g)(3J 5.0E-02 Location of Maximum Ratio Inside MPPB (GP7898, 21-23' depth) 45 0.31 303 63,419 Tc-99 6 0.0027 2.3 5.6 1.1E-01 Outside MPPB, south of FRS (GP7208, 14-16' depth)
U-232 1 0.023 0.023 0.023 2.0E+OO Outside southeast corner of MPPB (GP2908, 14-16' depth)
U-233/234 9 0.0074 . 0.79 12 7.2E-02 Inside MPPB (GP10008, 30-32' depth)
U-235/236 5 0.013 0.063 1.1 1.4E-01 Outside eastern wall of MPPB (GP3008, 4-6' depth)
U-238 7 0.82 6.1 18 7.2E-02 Outside MPPB, north of FRS (GP10108, 20-22' depth)
Pu-238 5 0.0025 0.019 0.18 1.5E-01 Outside MPPB, south of FRS (GP7208, 4-6' depth)
Pu-239/240 8 0.015 0.067 0.80 5.5E-02 East of laundry building (BH-18, 14-16' depth)
Am-241 16 0.025 0.19 2.7 3.6E-02 Inside MPPB (GP77, 19-23' depth)
Cm-243/244 1 0.015 0.015 0.015 1.0E+01 Inside MPPB (GP8008, 25-27' depth)
WMA2 Sr-90 27 0.037 1.9 750 4.8E-02 Northwest of Lagoon 1 (BH-09, 10-12' depth)
U-232 11 0.0050 0.021 1.0 4.8E-02 Northwestof Lagoon 1 (BH-09, 10-12' depth)
U-233/234 8 0.0046 1.9 7.0 2.7E-01 Solvent dike (BH-11, 10-12' depth)
U-235/236 7 0.000038 0.55 1.1 2.7E-01 Solvent dike_ (BH-11, 10-12' depth)
U-238 7 0.00052 0.052 4.4 2.?E-01 Solvent dike (BH-11, 10-12' depth}
Pu-238 15 0.0049 0.023 0.089 1.9E+OO Between Interceptors and Lagoon 1 (BH-14, 14-16' depth)
Pu-239/240 15 0.0046 0.031 0.11 1.6E-01 Maintenance Shop Leach Field (BH-35, 18-20' depth)
Pu-241 7 0.030 0.11 0.21 1.6E+01 East of Test and Sto,rage Building (BH-35, 6-8' depth)
Am-241 18 0.010 0.051 0.23 2.?E-01 Solvent dike (BH-11, 10-12' depth) 4 Sr-90 2 0.73 0.75 0.77 8.8E-02 Southeast corner of CDDL (BH-28, 6-8' depth) 5 Sr-90 1 6.3 6.3 6.3 4.8E-02 Between LSA 3 and LSA 4 (BH-30, 10-12' depth)
WMA6 Sr-90 5 1.1 174 1115 1.3E-01 Downgradient of MPPB (GP10208, 16-18' depth)
U-232 1 0.087 0.087 0.087 1.1E+OO Downgradient of MPPB (GP10208, 14-16' depth)
Revision 2 B-25
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-11. Radionuclides in Subsurface Soil: Ratios to Cs-137( 1 J Area(2l Radionuclide N . Minimum Median Maximum Cs-137 (pCi/g)(3J Location of MaximlJm Ratio*
U-233/234 2 1.2 4.6 8.0 1.3E-01 Oowngradient of MPPB (GP10208, 16-18' depth)
U-235/236 2 0.33 0.82 1.3 1.3E-01 Oowngradient of MPPB (GP10208, 16-18' depth)
U-238 2 1.3 5.2 9.0 1.3E-01 Oowngradient of MPPB (GP10208, 16-18' depth)
Pu-238 2 0.025 0.030 0.035 4.3E+OO Southeast of FRS (BH-19A, 12-14' depth)
Pu-239/240 3 . 0.040 0.047 0.047 1.1 E+OO Oowngradient of MPPB (GP10208, 14-16' depth)
Pu-241 1 0.35 0.35 0.35 4.3E+OO Southeast ofFRS (BH-19A, 12-14' depth)
Am-241 4 0.13 0.2d 0.33 1.3E-01 Oowngradient of MPPB (GP10208, 16-18' depth)
WMA7 Sr-90 1 2.6 2.6 2.6 5.4E-02 Northern corner of NOA (BH-42, 25-27' depth)
WMA 12 Sr-90 1 1.5 1.5 1.5 . 4.4E-02 Northwest of the NOA (Bti-24, 6-8' depth)
NOTES: (1) Ratios were calculated from samples for which both Cs~137 and the nuclide of interest exceeded background, with ratios rounded to two significant digits or the nearest integer.
(2) No subsurface soil data were available for WMAs 3 and 9. No Cs-137 results exceeding background were f9und in WMA 10.
(3) Cs-137 concentration at the location with the maximum ratio.
LEGEND: N = Number of Samples; MPPB = Main Plant Process Building; FRS = Fuel Receiving and Storage; CDDL = Construction and Demolition Debris Landfill; LSA =Lag Storage Area; NOA= Nuclear Regulatory Commission Licensed Disposal Area Revision 2 B-26
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-12. Summary of Radionuclide Results from Routine Onsite Sediment Monitoring Locations
/ .,
- Aiterage(pOi/g) **
A* .: "'.;
- E~c~eded Monitoripg. Medi~h .* noaximum **
- WMA*>> . ' ',* ",
- .Constituent.....
~***'
~ ; ',.
.'Point
." '.T
~-
>. :.:* * ::; (pCi/g):'. . ,.
. R.~~u'1t +/- ' : ~~c,~,[t~i~ty>: '; (i)pllg) r ~
Background.?!1) *...
WMA4 SN SWAMP Gross alpha 13 1.73E+01 1.68E+01 +/- 3.95E+OO 2.26E+01 Yes Sediment Gross beta 13 5.43E+01 5.51 E+01 +/- 4.66E+OO 8.98E+01 Yes at northeast Sr-90 17 2.35E+OO 5.20E+OO +/- 4.97E-01 2.98E+01 Yes swamp Cs-137 17 7.40E+OO 9.99E+OO +/- 1.39E+OO 3.14E+01 . Yes drainage U-232 17 <2.19E-02 9.20E-03 +/- 3.41 E-02 4.79E-02 No U-233/234 16 8.21 E-01 7-.24E-01 +/- 1.79E-01 1.13E+OO Yes U-235/236 16 5.82E-02 5.94E-02 +/- 5.38E-02 1.76E-01 No U-238 16 7.93E-01 7.06E-01 +/- 1.65E-01 1.14E+OO Yes Pu-238 10 2.79E-01 2.62E-01 +/- 6.87E-02 4.32E-01 Yes Pu-239/240 17 2.26E-01 2.58E-01 +/- 7.10E-02 6.42E-01 Yes Am-241 17 4.59E-01 5.13E-01 +/- 1.22E-01 1.29E+OO Yes WMA5 SNSW74A Gross alpha 13 1.19E+01 1.29E+01 +/- 3:06E+OO 2.20E+01 Yes Sediment Gross beta 13 2.33E+01 2.35E+01 +/- 2.97E+OO 3.47E+01 Yes at north Sr-90 17 3.28E-01 4.67E-01 +/- 8.73E-02 2.10E+OO Yes swamp Cs-137 17 2.55E+OO 2.83E+OO +/- 2.54E-01 8.82E+OO Yes drainage U-232 17 <2.16E-02 8.57E-03 +/- 2.53E-02 4.23E-02 No U-233/234 16 7.18E-01 6.24E-01 +/- 1.74E-01 1.06E+OO No U-235/236 16 5.49E-02 5.59E-02 +/- 4.05E-02 1.26E-01 No U-238 17 6.82E-01 6.36E-01 +/- 1.BOE-01 1.35E+OO No Pu-238 10 2.37E-02 2.30E-02 +/- 1.88E-02 5.59E-02 No Pu-239/240 17 6.17E-02 6.52E-02 +/- 4.13E-02 1.92E-01 Yes Am-241 17 6.10E-02 9.01E-02 +/- 5.09E-02 2.58E-01 Yes Revision 2 B-27
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-12. Summary of Radionuclide Results from Routine Onsite Sediment Monitoring Locations Monitoring .'. , . ' Median Averag~ (pC.i/g) Maximum *Exceeded WMA Constituent 'N Point (pCi/g) Result +/- On certainty ,(pCi/g) Background?(1)
- WMA 12 SNSP006 Gross alpha 13 1.10E+01 1.01 E+01 +/- 2.84E+OO 1J2E+01 No Sediment Gross beta 13 4,27E+01 5.01E+01 +/- 4.09E+OO 1.60E+02 Yes from Franks Sr-90 17 8.38E-01 1.49E+OO +/- 2.29E-01 9,98E+OO Yes Creek at Cs-137 17 1.30E+01 2,10E+01 +/- 2.75E+OO 9,76E+01 Yes security U-232 17 4.07E-02 4.01E-02 +/- 6.81E-02 1.43E-01 Yes fence U-233/234 16 6.40E-01 6.05E-01 +/- 1.78E-01 1,02E+OO No U-235/236 16 4.56E-02 3.87E-02 +/- 5.46E-02 1.04E-01 No U-238 17 6.07E-01 5.53E-01 +/- 1.68E-01 9.15E-01 No Pu-238 10 3.17E-02 4.29E-02 +/- 2.58E-02 1.40E-01 Yes
. Pu-239/240 17 2.60E-02 2.97E-02 +/- 2.54E-02 1.08E-01 Yes Am-241 17 4.34E-02 6.51 E-02 +/- 4.78E-02 2.40E-01 Yes NOTE: (1) Using the nonparametric Mann-Whitney "U" Test, the data set of sediment background results (summarized in Table B-4) was compared with the data set from each of
, the sampling locations. See Appendix B, Section 4.3.
Revision 2 B-28
WVDP PHASE 1 QECOMMISSIONING PLAN Tabl e B 13 5 ummary ofR a d"1onucl"d 1 e Resu Its f rom ROU f me 0 ns1e "t 5 u rface. W at er Mom"tormg . Loca1onsf
.~~~,;,i;~~A~:ir~ i~****'***~
- 1:B~:r;; .. l:~;!~~ ....,. :
- ~.,.*1\<;.:**.*r::.:::.-.* - ..* _,,* ;~(.ri~i*;~2t~r?~~~t~~~~1:1!:~
"~~~!-5V:1. ~Y~!~~eJfi:cut:i ~:.;:~*i'fc;
~~;t:~~:*;Re~u1hi~':i:;,::fµ.n.~1tff~iniY111 *~:};\~~~~w~}t-~'~i! "(~t~~t~~i;;~~;(;yt'~
WMA2 WNSP001 Gross alpha 232 1.75E+01 1.92E+01 +/- 1.32E+01 1.01E+02 Yes Lagoon 3 Gross beta 433 2.56E+02 3.01E+02 +/- 2.25E+b1 8.18E+02 Yes Discharge H-3 231 2.47E+03 2.75E+03 +/- 1.42E+02 7.17E+03 Yes
~ Weir t-14 62 <2.82E+01 1.35E+01 +/- 2.24E+01 4.75E+01 Yes Sr-90 231 9.88E+01 1.21E+02 +/- 7.42E+OO 3.19E+02 Yes Tc-99 197 6.53E+01 7.90E+01 +/- 4.79E+01 3.36E+02 Yes 1-129 62 2.13E+OO 2.44E+OO +/- 1.48E+OO 1.04E+01 Yes Cs~137 231 6.10E+01 7.57E+01 * +/- 1.88E+01 3.29E+02 Yes U-232 62 8.02E+OO 8.98E+OO +/- 9.91E-01 .2.14E+01 Yes U-233/234 62 5.04E+OO 5.49E+OO +/- 6.20E-01 1.36E+01 Yes U-235/236 62 2.62E-01 2.75E-01 +/- 1.21 E-01 5.84E-01 Yes U-238 62 3:76E+OO 3.82E+OO +/- 4.87E-01 7.57E+OO Yes Pu-238 62 6.53E-02 1.53E-01 +/- 6.78E-02 1.62E+OO Yes Pu-239/240 62 5.17E-02 1.34E-01 +/- 6.19E-02 1.39E+OO Yes Am-241 62 6.79E-02 1:18E-01 +/- 6.01E-02 9.74E-01 Yes WMA4 WNSWAMP Gross alpha 450 <1.87E+OO 2.86E-01 +/- 2.28E+OO 7.25E+OO No Northeast Gross beta 451 3.01E+03 3.24E+03 +/- 5.33E+01 9.98E+03 Yes Swamp H-3 451 1.13E+02 1.13E+02 +/- 8.21E+01 5.20E+02 . Yes Drainage C-14 34 <1.58E+01 2.13E+OO +/- 2.09E+01 3.72E+01 No Sr-90 121 1.52E+03 1.70E+03 +/- 3.14E+01 5.16E+03 Yes 1-129 34 <9.05E-01 5.39E-01 +/- 9.28E-01 1.29E+OO No Cs-137 120 <2.43E+OO 6.76E-01 +/- 3.33E+OO 5.74E+OO No U-232 34 <6.42E-02 7.47E-03 +/- 1.59E-01 9.76E-02 No U-233/234. 34 1.73E-01 1.97E-01 +/- 1.36E-01 9.27E-01 Yes U-235/236 34 <4.20E-02 2.54E-02 +/- 5.77E-02 8.82E-02 No U-238 34 1.01 E-01 1.21 E-01 +/- 1.0?E-01 7.21E-01 Yes Pu-238 34 <3.11E-02 1.20E-02 +/- 9.54E-02 1.50E-01 No Pu-239/240 34 <2.90E-02 1.48E-02 +/- 6.65E-02 1.44E-01 No Am-241 34 <3.42E-02 2.86E-02 +/- 9.57E-02 1.79E-01 No Revision 2 B-29
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 1 e Resu Its f rom R outme 0 ns1e Table B-13. Summary of Radionuc l"d "t s u rface water M om"tormg . L oca1ons f
Monitoring Median
. Average (p~i/L) *.,,Maximum : Exceeded WMA Constituent 'N Point (pCi/L)(2l
- Result +/- *Uncertainty (pCi/L) , Background?(1l WMA5 WNSW74A Gross alpha 450 <2.17E+OO 3.88E-02 +/- 3.09E+OO 7.89E+OO No North Gross beta 450 1.17E+01 1.21 E+01 +/- 4.34E+OO 4.24E+01 Yes Swamp H-3 450 <8.18E+01 -2.14E+OO +/- 8.07E+01 2.80E+02 No Drainage C-14 34 <1.40E+01 -7.72E-01 +/- 1.94E+01 1.50E+01 No Sr-90 120 5.52E+OO 5.46E+OO +/- 1.89E+OO 1.25E+01 Yes 1-129 34 <7.10E-01 2.09E-01 +/- 7.37E-01 1.31 E+OO No Cs-137 120 <7.08E+OO 1.20E+OO +/- 8.85E+OO 1.18E+01 No U-232 34 <4.83E-02 8.38E-03 +/- 6.79E-02 6.22E-02 No U-233/234 34 1.54E-01 1.64E-01 +/- 8.44E-02 3.54E-01 Yes U-235/236 34 <3.70E-02 1.89E-02 +/- 3.99E-02 1.38E-01 No U-238 34 1.01 E-01 1.04E-01 +/- 6.65E-02 2.00E-01 Yes Pu-238 34 <2.10E-02 1.43E-02 +/- 3.36E-02 1.16E-01 No Pu-239/240 34 <2.39E-02 4.73E-03 +/- 2.73E-02 <6.94E-02 No Am-241 34 <2.81 E-02 1.68E-02 +/- 3.17E-01 8.63E-02 No WMA6 WNSP007 Gross alpha 324 <2.62E+OO 1.37E-01 +/- 3.32E+OO 4.80E+OO No Sanitary Gross beta 324 1.45E+01 1.53E+01 +/- 5.02E+OO 4.05E+01 Yes Waste H-3 324 <8.25E+01 2.26E+01 +/- 8.18E+01 1.53E+03 No Discharge Sr-90 14 3.11E+OO 3.38E+OO +/- 1.75E+OO 1.17E+01 Yes Cs-137 35 <2.92E+OO 8.12E-01 +/- 3.94E+OO 4.44E+OO No WNCOOLW Gross alpha 73 <1.91E+OO 5.65E-01 +/- 2.03E+OO 5.81E+OO No Cooling Gross beta 73 6.83E+OO 9.05E+OO +/- 3.64E+OO 3.43E+01 Yes Tower Water H-3 73 <8.17E+01 2.86E+OO +/- 7.94E+01 4.27E+02 No Sr-90 10 1.60E+OO 1.50E+OO +/- 1.40E+OO 4.68E+OO No Cs-137 31 <7.20E+OO 8.61 E-01 +/- 8.32E+OO 9.15E+OO No Revision 2 B-30
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-13. Summa of Radionuclide Results from Routine Onsite Surface Water Monitorin Locations WMA 12 WNSP006 Gross alpha 471 <1.50E+OO 9.49E-01 +/- 1.61E+OO 1.07E+01 No Franks Creek Gross beta 471 3.53E+01 4.44E+01 +/- 3.99E+OO 1.94E+02 Yes at security H-3 471 <8.54E+01 1.36E+02 +/- 8.33E+01 2.25E+03 Yes fence C-14 40 <1.85E+01 -1.31 E+OO +/- 2.09E+01 2.06E+01 No Sr-90 120 1.87E+01 1.98E+01 +/- 2.99E+oo .4.96E+01 Yes Tc-99 40 <2.09E+OO 3.28E+OO +/- 2.15E+OO 5.24E+01 Yes 1-129 40 <7.04E-01 3.26E-01 +/- 7.25E-01 1.65E+OO No Cs-137 120 <8.02E+OO 6.32E+OO +/- 9.50E+OO 7.33E+01 Yes U-232 40 3.17E-01 3.16E-01 +/- 1.34E-01 7.51 E-01 Yes U-233/234 40 3:66E-01 3.73E-01 +/- 1.31 E-01 6.87E-01 Yes U-235/236 40 <4.41 E-02 3.26E-02 +/- 4.61E-02 9.57E-02 No U-238 40 2.54E-01 2.77E-01 +/- 1.12E-01 7.43E-01 Yes Pu-238 40 <3.36E-02 2.14E-02 +/- 3.39E-02 1.36E-01 Yes Pu-239/240 40 <2.79E-02 1.13E-02 +/- 3.02E-02 6.62E-02 No Am-241 40 <3.30E-02 3.23E-02 +/- 3.69E-02 1.60E-01 No WNSP005 Gross alpha 140 <2.71E+OO 1.22E+OO +/- 3.24E+OO 1.85E+01 No Facility yard Gross beta 140 1.50E+02 1.63E+02 +/- 9.11 E+OO 4.53E+02 Yes drainage H-3 140 <8.28E+01 3.78E+01 +/- 8.23E+01 1.25E+03 Yes Sr-90 35 9.61E+01 1.02E+02 +/- 6.52E+OO 1.98E+02 Yes Cs-137 14 <1.91E+OO 9.28E-01 +/- 2.19E+OO <3.69E+OO No WNNDADR Gross alpha *130 <1.34E+OO 8.22E-01 +/- 1.40E+OO 5.84E+OO No Drainage Gross beta 136 1.74E+02 1.83E+02 +/- 6.45E+OO 4.06E+02 Yes between NOA H-3 546 1.00E+03 1.16E+03 +/- 1.02E+02 4.02E+03 Yes /'
and SDA Sr-90 41 8.48E+01 8.40E+01 +/- 5.45E+OO 1.22E+02 Yes 1-129 34 <8.12E-01 2.62E-01 +/- . 8.53E-01 1.15E+OO No Cs-137 120 <6.67E+OO 5.99E-01 +/- 8:48E+OO 1.86E+01 No Revision 2 B-31
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-13. Summary of Radionuclide Results from Routine Onsite Surface Water Monitoring Locations
'* -~ . . .:,"" :
Monitoring '*
- Median ' Average '(p'Ci/Lr '
- . Maximum Exceeded WMA Constituent N' Point (pCi/L)( l 2
Result +/- Uncertainty (pCi/L) Background?(1l WMA 12 WNERB53 Gross alpha 401 <1.45E+OO 1.56E-01 +/- 1.65E+OO 2.51E+OO No Erdman Brook Gross beta 401 1.73E+01 1.81E+01 +/- 2.92E+OO 4.37E+01 Yes north of burial H-3 403 <8.31E+01 3.08E+01 +/- 8.11E+01 3.46E+02 Yes areas Sr-90 14 8.23E+OO 8.04E+OO +/- 1.98E+OO 9.91E+OO Yes Cs-137 14 <2.07E+OO 7.52E-01 +/- 3.96E+OO 2.41E+OO No WNFRC67 Gross alpha 99 <7.00E-01 9.41 E-02 +/- 7.56E-01 3.89E+OO No Franks Creek Gross beta 99 2.63E+OO 2.56E+OO +/- 1.50E+OO 9.00E+OO No east of burial H-3 99 <8.31E+01 3.08E+01 +/- 8.11E+01 3.46E+02 Yes.
areas Sr-90 19 <1.17E+OO 5.00E-01 +/- 1.09E+OO 3.42E+OO No Cs-137. 19 <2.13E+OO 5.50E-01 +/- 2.58E+OO 2.26E+OO No NOTES: (1) Using the nonparametric Mann-Whitney "U" Test, the data set of surface water background results (summarized in Table 8-6) was compared with the data set from each of the above sampling locations. See Appendix 8, Section 4.3.
(2) 1 pCi/L =3.?E-02 8q/L Revision 2 B-32
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 1
Table B-14. Summary of Radionuclide Results from Routine Onsite Groundwater Monitoring Locations( l 1
Mor,iit9ring . * ** * 'Average:(pCi/Lf >.:* : Maximum *
- Exceeded
, . . .. . Point(2) * * *co.11stituenf; * *
- ft * + *u rt** ty *(.pCi/.L..*) * *.a.ack'g. round?(4l
- Resu .. .,:- .. nee .ai'1 ** * .
WMA1 WP-A Gross alpha 12 <3.56E-01 1.71E-01 +/- 2.12E+OO 1.82E+OO No S&G Gross beta 12 2.41E+01 3.09E+01 +/- 4.55E+OO 5.44E+01 Yes H-3 12 1.18E+04 1.12E+04 +/- 6.24E+02 1.26E+04 Yes WMA2 WNW0103 Gross alpha 40 <7.32E+OO 1.06E+OO +/- 1.01 E+01 1.25E+01 No S&G Gross beta 40 1.45E+02 1.85E+02 +/- 1.93E+01 5.53E+02 Yes H-3 40 <8.42E+01 5.19E+01 +/- 8.12E+01 2.02E+02 No WNW0104 Gross alpha 40 <3.86E+OO 2.23E-01 +/- 5.95E+OO 5.04E+OO No S&G Gross beta 40 5.88E+04 5.63E+04 +/- 1.64E+03 1.01E+05 Yes H-3 40 3.73E+02 3.91 E+02 +/- 8.65E+01 7.53E+02 Yes WNW0105 Gross alpha 41 <4.21E+OO 1.04E+OO +/- 7.17E+OO 4.60E+OO No S&G Gross beta 41 3.88E+04 3.30E+04 +/- 1.54E+03 1.02E+05 Yes .
H-3 40 3.57E+02 3.72E+02 +/- 9.12E+01 7.09E+02 Yes WNW0106 Gross alpha 40 <2.SOE+OO 1.94E+OO +/- 3.44E+OO 1.31 E+01 No S&G Gross beta 40 1.64E+01 8.22E+01 +/- 7.99E+OO 5.76E+02 Yes H-3 40 9.56E+02 1.04E+03 +/- 1.00E+02 1.82E+03 Yes WNW0107 Gross alpha 40 <1.85E+OO 8.97E-01 +/- 1.88E+OO 5.71E+OO No
- ULT Gross beta 40 7.00E+OO 8.23E+OO +/- 2.63E+OO 2.22E+01 Yes H-3 40 3.74E+02 4.78E+02 +/- 9.04E+01 9.85E+02 Yes WNW0108 Gross alpha 40 1.64E+OO 1.47E+OO +/- 1.46E+OO 4.31E+OO Yes ULT Gross beta 40 2.49E+OO 2.42E+OO +/- 1.90E+OO 5.36E+OO No H-3 40 1.17E+02 1.1 OE+02 +/- 8.38E+01 2.47E+02 Yes WNW0110 Gross alpha 40 <1.49E+OO 1.01 E+OO +/- 1.61 E+OO 4.39E+OO No ULT Gross beta 40 2.32E+OO 2.23E+OO +/- 1.95E+OO 7.92E+OO No H-3 40 1.31 E+03 1.28E+03 +/- 1.08E+02 1.66E+03 Yes WNW0111 Gross alpha 40 <4.38E+OO 3.15E+OO +/- 5.06E+OO 1.03E+01 Yes S&G Gross beta 40 5.55E+03 5.87E+03 +/- 1.40E+02 1.18E+04 Yes H-3 40 1.97E+02 2.34E+02 +/- 8.39E+01 7.97E+02 Yes Revision 2 B-33
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-14. Summary of Radionuclide Results from Routine Onsite Groundwater Monitoring Locations( 1l Monitori~g *Median Average (pcitL) Maximum : Exceeded WMA Constituent N' Pointl2l_ (pCi/L)l3l Result +/- Uncertainty (pCi/L) B~ckground?!4l .
WMA2 WNW0116 Gross alpha 40 <3.08E+OO 8.94E-01 +/- 4.35E+OO 7.03E+OO No*
S&G Gross beta 40 8.69E+02 1.98E+03 +/- 1.55E+02 9.51 E+03 Yes H-3 40 1.67E+02 1.88E+02 +/- 8.24E+01 4.66E+02 Yes WNW0205 Gross alpha 35 <4.87E+OO 4.37E-01 +/- 7.67E+OO <2.73E+01 No S&G Gross beta 35 1.61 E+01 1.66E+01 +/- 8.39E+OO 4.08E+01 Yes H-3 35 <8.14E+01 9.44E+OO +/- 8.02E+01 2.09E+02 No WNW0206 Gross alpha 35 <2.47E+OO 6.69E-01 +/- 3.33E+OO 5.02E+OO No LTS Gross beta 35 <3.16E+OO 1.95E+OO +/- 3.53E+OO 6.11E+OO No H-3 35 <8.18E+01 2.94E+01 +/- 7.96E+01 2.07E+02 No WNW0408 Gross alpha 40 <3.58E+OO -7.91E+OO +/- 9.05E+OO 6.44E+OO No S&G Gross beta 39 3.96E+05 4.01E+05 +/- 3.04E+03 6.28E+05 Yes H-3 40 1.52E+02 1.86E+02 +/- 1.13E+02 2.21E+03 Yes C-14 10 <2.16E+01 -7.20E-01 +/- 2.27E+01 <3.42E+01 No Sr-90 10 1.54E+05 1.54E+05 +/- 1.73E+02 2.53E+05 Yes Tc-99 10 1.57E+01 1.70E+01 +/- 3.28E+OO 2.51E+01 Yes 1-129 10 <9.94E-01 7.65E-02 +/- 2.~3E+OO 9.46E-01 No Cs-137 10 <4.01E+OO -3.24E-01 +/- 4.29E+OO <6.72E+OO No U-232 10 <6.32E-02 6.31 E-02 +/- 2.04E-01 5.31E-02 No U-233/234 10 4.51 E-01 5.34E-01 +/- 2.22E-01 1.27E+OO Yes U-235/236 10 <5.44E-02 8.34E-02 +/- 9.98E-02 3.11E-01 No U-238 10 2.87E-01 3.11E-01 +/- 1.57E-01 4.82E-01
- Yes Pu-238 2 <6.83E-02 2.09E-02 +/- 7.45E-02 <9.80E-02 No Pu-239/240 2 <6.56E-02 7.?0E-03 +/- 6.65E-02 <7.68E-02 No Am-241 2 4.60E-02 3.60E-02 +/- 4.72E-02 5.90E-02 No WNW0501 Gross alpha 40 <4.79E+OO .4.82E-01 +/- 8.34E+OO 6.10E+OO No Revision 2 B-34
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN (1)
Table B-14. Summary of Radionuclide Results from Routine Onsite Groundwater Monitoring Locations Monitoring Median Average (pCi/L) Maximum Exceeded WIYIA Point!2l Constituent N (pCi/L)!:i) (pCi/L) Background?<4l
,* Result +/- *Uncertainty*
WMA2 S&G Gross beta 40 1.93E+05 1.91 E+05 +/- 2.61 E+03 3.24E+05 Yes H-3 40 1.35E+02 1.25E+02 +/- 8.37E+01 3.15E+02 Yes Sr-90 10 9.18E+04 9.33E+04 +/- 2.43E+02 1.48E+05 Yes WNW0502 Gross alpha 40 <4.40E+OO 7.94E-01 +/- 8.04E+OO 1.46E+01 No S&G Gross beta 40 1.68E+05 1.64E+05 +/- 2.80E+03 2.33E+05 Yes H-3 40 1.33E+02 1.44E+02 +/- 8.36E+01 4.98E+02 Yes Sr-90 10 8.36E+04 8.27E+04 +/- 2.05E+02 1.16E+05 Yes WNW8603 Gross alpha 41 <5.02E+OO 3.92E-01 +/- 7.89E+OO 9.30E+OO No S&G Gross beta 41 5.66E+04 4.81E+04 +/- 1.20E+03 9.01E+04 Yes H-3 40 3.37E+02 3.43E+02 +/- 8.79E+01 5.81E+02 Yes WNW8604 Gross alpha 35 <4.68E+OO 1.07E+OO +/- 7.83E+OO 9.00E+OO No S&G Gross beta 35 4.12E+04 4.57E+04 +/- 1.12E+03 1.04E+05 Yes H-3 35 3.48E+02 3.76E+02 +/- 8.38E+01 6.41 E+02 Yes WNW8605 Gross alpha 40 9.11 E+OO 8.46E+OO +/- 7.66E+OO 2.08E+01 Yes S&G Gross beta 40 1.09E+04 1.10E+04 +/- 1.73E+02 1.62E+04 Yes H-3 40 3.70E+02 4.19E+02 +/- 8.68E+01 1.27E+03 Yes WP-C Gross alpha 12 <3.95E-01 9.03E-01 +/- 2.74E+OO <6.92E+OO No S&G Gross beta 12 2.44E+01 4.16E+01 +/- 5.48E+OO
- 1.19E+02 Yes H-3 12 4.91E+04 4.75E+04 +/- 1.56E+03 6.61E+04 Yes WP-H Gross alpha 13 6.08E+OO 7.90E+01 +/- 2.33E+01 7.42E+02 Yes S&G Gross beta 13 6.97E+03 7.23E+03 +/- 1.87E+02 1.25E+04 Yes H-3 13 2.99E+03 3.42E+03 +/- 5.00E+02 7.38E+03 . Yes WMA3 WNW8609 Gross alpha 40 <3.10E+OO -3.75E-01 +/- 5.55E+OO 3.84E+OO No S&G Gross beta 40 1.51 E+03 1.37E+03 +/- 4.15E+01 2.28E+03 Yes H-3 40 4.51E+02 4.66E+02 +/- 9.10E+01 7.88E+02 Yes Sr-90 20 7.99E+02 7.17E+02 +/- 2.07E+01 1.12E+03 Yes WMA4 WNW0801 Gross alpha 40 <3.85E+OO 6.31 E-02 +/- 6.49E+OO 5.45E+OO No Revision 2 B-35
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN T abl e B 14 Summary o f Rd" "t Groun d wa t er M omtonng L oca f ions (1) 1 e Resu Its f rom R ou f me 0 ns1e a 1onuc l"d r-"* *c *~
Average (~Ci/L)
-~1
- Monitoring Median . *Maximum I WMA
- Cpnstituent N (pCi/L)(3J .
Pointl2l Result* +/- Uncertainty (pCi/L) Bae WMA4 S&G Gross beta 40 7.95E+03 8.59E+03 +/- 2.72E+02 1.46E+04 Yes H-3 40 1.51 E+02
- 1.64E+02 +/- 8.24E+01 3.82E+02 Yes Sr-90 40 4.13E+03 4.33E+03 +/- 4.73E+01 7.99E+03 Yes WNW0802 Gross alpha 40 <1.33E+OO 1.05E+OO +/- 2.03E+OO 1.66E+01 No S&G Gross beta 40 9.94E+OO 3.47E+01 +/- 5.14E+OO 2.84E+02 . Yes H-3 40 <1.05E+02 9.00E+01 +/- 8.00E+01 4.20E+02 Yes WNW0803 Gross alpha 40 <3.01E+OO 9.79E-01 +/- 3.38E+OO 8.96E+OO No S&G Gross beta 40 1.48E+01 1.51 E+01 +/- 4.69E+OO 2.50E+01 Yes H-3 40 1.84E+02 1.60E+02 +/- 8.46E+01 3.42E+02 Yes WNW0804 Gross alpha 40 <2.04E+OO 6.00E-01 +/- .2.87E+OO 6.54E+OO No S&G Gross beta 40 2.58E+02 2.86E+02 +/- 1.07E+01 6.89E+02 Yes H-3 40 1.19E+02 1.14E+02 +/- 7.98E+01 3.60E+02 Yes WNW8612 Gross alpha 40 <2.62E+OO 3.33E-01 +/- 3.34E+OO 4.57E+OO No S&G Gross beta 41 <3.58E+OO 1.57E+OO +/- 3.60E+OO 5.91 E+OO No H-3 40 4.21E+02 4.33E+02 +/- 8.88E+01 8.46E+02 Yes WMA5 WNW0406 Gross alpha 40 <2.22E+OO 1.54E-01 +/- 2.58E+OO 4.49E+OO No S&G Gross beta 40 7.44E+OO 8.08E+OO +/- 3.49E+OO 1.67E+01 Yes H-3 40 1.17E+02 1.06E+02 +/- 8.42E+01. 4.38E+02 Yes C-14 10 <2.65E+01 -2.04E+OO +/- 2.36E+01 2.72E+01 No Sr-90 10 1.92E+OO 2.15E+OO +/- 1.45E+OO 4.57E+OO No Tc-99 11 2.19E+OO 2.53E+OO +/- 1.91E+OO 8.50E+OO Yes 1-129 10 <8.91 E-01 3.48E-01 +/- 9.17E-01 1.72E+OO No Cs-137 10 <6.41E+OO -9.30E-01 +/- 7.35E+OO <1.48E+01 No U-232 10 <4.55E-02 2.47E-02 +/- 1.24E-01 <3.59E-01 No U-233/234 10 1.37E~01 1.42E-01 +/- 1.05E-01 2.67E-01 No U-235/236 10 <3.97E-02 2.32E-02 +/- 5.51E-02 6.92E-02 No U-238 10 8.0SE-02 . 8.87E-02 +/- 8.17E-02 1.92E-01 No Revision 2 B-36
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 1
Table B-14. Summary of Radionuclide Results from Routine Onsite Groundwater Monitoring Locations< l Avera,ge (pCi/L) ' -
Monitoring Median Maximum Exceeded WMA Constituent N Point(2l '*
(pCi/L)(3l . Result * . +
- Uncertainfy. ' (pCi/L) Background?t4l WMA5 WNW0409 Gross alpha 40 <1.01 E+OO 9.39E-01 +/- 9.94E-01 2.32E+OO Yes ULT Gross beta 40 2,56E+OO 2,36E+OO +/- 1.37E+OO 4.38E+OO No H-3 40 <8.01E+01 -3.82E+OO +/- 7.86E+01 2.10E+02 No WNW0602A Gross alpha 35 <1,37E+OO 4.04E-01 +/- 1.60E+OO 2,51E+OO No S&G Gross beta 35 1.21 E+01 1.32E+01 +/- 2,87E+OO 3.46E+01 Yes H-3 35 2,15E+02 2.18E+02 +/- 8,88E+01 4,88E+02 Yes WNW0604 Gross alpha 41 <2.04E+OO 3,35E-01 +/- 2.45E+OO 3.10E+OO No S&G Gross beta 41 6.06E+OO 6.29E+OO +/- 2.97E+OO 1.29E+01 Yes H-3 40 <8.14E+01 t99E+01 +/- 8.01E+01 2.07E+02 No WNW0605 Gross alpha 35 <1.54E+OO 4.40E-01 +/- 1.59E+OO t13E+01 No S&G Gross beta 35 4.83E+01 5.07E+01 +/- 3.98E+OO 8.82E+01 Yes H-3 35 <8,08E+01 1.59E+01 +/- 7.86E+01 1.44E+02 No WNW0704 Gross alpha 40 <1.93E+OO 1.75E-01 +/- 2,25E+OO 2.23E+OO No ULT/S&G Gross beta 40 8.05E+OO 820E+OO +/- 3.05E+OO 1.34E+01 Yes H-3 40 <8.20E+01 -1.69E+01 +/- 8.24E+01 2.16E+02 No WNW0707 Gross alpha 40 <1.15E+OO 3.09E-01 +/- 1.35E+OO 4.40E+OO No ULT/S&G Gross beta 40 4.17E+OO 4,16E+OO +/- 1,98E+OO 9.85E+OO No H-3 40 <8.22E+01 -1.89E+01 +/- 8.11E+01 1,05E+02 No WNW1303 Gross alpha 19 <9.42E-01 1.19E+OO +/- 2.06E+OO 5.46E+OO No ULT Gross beta 19 2,17E+OO 2.24E+OO +/- 2.25E+OO 9.38E+OO No H-3 19 <825E+01 -4.98E+01 +/- 2.09E+02 1.26E+02 No WNW1304 Gross alpha 19 <6,14E+OO -8,58E-01 +/- 8.32E+OO 6.92E+OO . No S&G Gross beta 19 <8,20E+OO 4.92E+OO +/- 8.11 E+OO 1.33E+01 No H-3 19 <9.44E+01 2.36E+01 .+/- 2.16E+02 1.60E+02 No C-14 18 <3.03E+01 2.02E+OO +/- 2.92E+01 3.69E+01 No Sr-90 18 1.60E+OO 1.93E+OO +/- 1.28E+OO 6.33E+OO No Tc-99 18 <1,94E+OO 1.25E-01 +/- 1.91 E+OO 2.62E+OO No Revision 2 B-37
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-14. Summary of Radionuclide Results from Routine Onsite Groundwater Monitoring Locations' 1l Monitoring Median Average (pCi/L) Maximum" Exceeded WMA Point<2l Constituent N (pCi/L)t 3l Result * +/- Uncertainty* (pCi/L) Background?t4J WMA5 1-129 18 <7.52E-01 3.39E-01 +/- 1.33E+OO 2.83E+OO No Cs-137 18 <2.77E+OO 7.11E-01 +/- .4.88E+OO 2.52E+OO No U-232 18 <3.73E-02 -1.09E-02 +/- 6.74E-02 <2.17E-01 No U-233/234 18 2.66E-01 2.93E-01 +/- 1.26E-01 5.65E-01 Yes U-235/236 18 <4.07E-02 3.85E-02 +/- 5.31E-02 1.77E-01 No U-238 18 1.91 E-01 2.15E-01 +/- 1.05E-01 5.77E-01 Yes WNW8607 Gross alpha 40 <2.36E+OO -7.83E-02 +/- 4.40E+OO 9.45E+OO No S&G Gross beta 40 2.57E+01 2.75E+01 +/- 5.30E+OO 7.63E+01 Yes H-3 40 <8.47E+01 1.97E+01 +/- 8.30E+01 2.04E+02 No WMA7 WNW0902 Gross alpha 20 1.46E+OO 1.34E+OO +/- 1.34E+OO 5.44E+OO Yes KRS Gross beta 20 2.70E+OO 2.76E+OO +/- 1.64E+OO 4.92E+OO No H-3 20 <8.08E+01 -3.35E+01 +/- 8.18E+01 1.18E+02 No WNW0909 Gross alpha 26 <3.24E+OO 1.16E+OO +/- 3.83E+OO 1.14E+01 No WLT Gross beta 34 3.74E+02 3.70E+02 +/- 1.40E+01 6.44E+02 Yes H-3 30 8.23E+02 1.54E+03 +/- 1.20E+02 3.95E+03 Yes C-14 10 <2.49E+01 7.23E+OO +/- 2.39E+01 3.53E+01 No Sr-90 17 1.87E+02 1.83E+02 +/- 8.33E+OO 2.21E+02 Yes Tc-99 11 <1.86E+OO 1.31E+OO +/- 1.82E+OO 5.01E+OO Yes 1-129 11 6.21E+OO 6.30E+OO +/- 1.88E+OO 9.65E+OO Yes Cs-137 10 <5.51E+OO 1.09E+OO +/- 6.42E+OO <1.28E+01 No U-232 12 <5.99E-02 6.37E-02 +/- 1.62E-01 5.26E-01 No U-233/234 12 5.97E-01 7.42E-01 +/- 2.40E-01 1.34E+OO Yes U-235/236 11 6.71 E-02 7.66E-02 +/- 7.65E-02 2.48E-01 No U-238 12 4.72E-01 5.44E-01 +/- 1.97E-01 1.03E+OO Yes Revision 2 *B-38
_J
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN T a bl e B 14 Summary o f Rd" a 1onuc l"d 1 e Resu Its f rom R ou f me 0 ns1e "t Groun d wa t er M om"tormg . L oca f ions (1)
'Average (pCi/~)
**'/
- Monitoring* Median ,. *Maximum, Exceeded .
""MA con~tituent .N **' ' * *~ackg~ound?<4l Point(2l ** * ,, ' 1
.,: :,. . . (pCi/k~<3J ., Result , <<+/-. Uncertaiilty~ .(pCi/L),
WMA7 WNW0910 Gross alpha 25 <2.53E+OO 1.88E+OO +/- 2.29E+OO 3.45E+OO Yes ULT. Gross beta 25 3.80E+01 1.46E+02 +/- 8.51 E+OO 1.54E+03 Yes H-3 24 <8.06E+01 -1.24E+01 +/- 8.05E+01 2.39E+02 No WNNDATR Gross alpha 160 2.22E+OO 2.08E+OO +/- 2.11E+OO 1.06E+01 Yes
- WLT Gross beta 166 1.45E+02 1.75E+02 +/- 8.36E+OO 5.51E+02 Yes H-3 164 3.65E+03 5.00E+03 +/- 2.28E+02 1.99E+04 Yes C-14 20 <2.18E+01 3.02E-01 +/- 2.39E+01 1.33E+01 No Sr-90 28 5.84E+01 7.85E+01 +/- 5.55E+OO ~.84E+02 Yes Tc-99 21 <1.94E+OO 6.32E-01 +/- 1.89E+OO 5.12E+OO No 1-129 41 <9.14E-01 8.44E-01 +/- 9.35E-01 7.00E+OO Yes Cs-137 140 <6.80E+OO 7.20E-01 +/- 8.88E+OO 1.50E+01 No U-232 21 <7.12E-02 5.11E-02 +/- 1.18E-01 4.72E-01 No U-233/234 21 1.67E+OO 1.51E+OO +/- 2.81 E-01 2. 11 E+OO Yes U-235/236 21 1.06E-01 1.35E-01 +/- 9.47E-02 3.04E-01 Yes U-238 21 1JOE+OO 1.22E+OO +/- 2.50E-01 1.73E+OO Yes WNW8610 Gross alpha 20 <2.21E+OO . 6.60E-01 +/- 2.88E+OO 6.35E+OO No KRS Gross beta 20 4.41 E+OO 4.79E+OO +/- 3.09E+OO 9.91E+OO No H-3 20 <8.17E+01 -3.80E+01 +/- 7.96E+01 1.46E+02 No WNW8611 Gross alpha 21 <1.98E+OO 1.23E+OO +/- 2.25E+OO
- 4.50E+OO No KRS Gross beta 21 <2.71E+OO 2.83E+OO +/- 2.81E+OO 1.67E+01 No H-3 20 <8.15E+01 -4.98E+01 +/- 8.08E+01 8.44E+01 No WMA9 WNW1005 Gross alpha 20 <2.49E+OO 1.97E+OO +/- 2.92E+OO 4.69E+OO No WLT Gross beta 20 <3.52E+OO 2.36E+OO +/- 2.98E+OO 5.14E+OO No H-3 20 <8.36E+01 1.24E+01 +/- 8.14E+01 2.01E+02 No Revision 2 B-39
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-14. Summary of Radionuclide Results from Routine Onsite* Groundwater Monitoring Locations' 1>
WMA 9 WNW1006 Gross alpha 20 <5.10E+OO 4.24E+OO +/- 5.50E+OO 1.02E+01 Yes WLT Gross beta 20 <6.80E+OO 4.58E+OO +/- 5.68E+OO 1.03E+01 No H-3 20 <8.20E+01 -1.81E+01 +/- 8.24E+01 1.67E+02 No WMA 10 WNW0302 Gross alpha 36 <5.51E+OO 8.24E-01 +/- 9.02E+OO 1.55E+OO No S&G Gross beta 36 <7.22E+OO 4.13E+OO +/- 8.13E+OO 1.27E+01 No H-3 36 <8.23E+01 3.72E+01 +/- 8.11E+01 1.87E+02 No WNW0402 Gross alpha 35 <5.13E+OO 5.02E-01 +/- 6.93E+OO 7.45E+OO No S&G Gross beta 35 <5.64E+OO 2.53E+OO +/- 6.56E+OO 8.33E+OO No H-3 35 <8.21E+01 2.73E+01 +/- 8.05E+01 1.99E+02 No .
WNW0403 Gross alpha 35 <2.11 E+OO 3.8.5E-01 +/- 2.45E+OO 5.94E+OO No S&G Gross beta 35 5.76E+OO 6.17E+OO +/- 3.26E+OO 1.06E+01 No H-3 35 <8.22E+01 2.20E+01 +/- 7.97E+01 1.92E+02 No WNW1008B Gross alpha 20 <1.08E+OO 7.09E-01 +/- 1.12E+OO 3.11 E+OO No KRS Gross beta 20 2.68E+OO 3.15E+OO +/- 1.46E+OO 9.18E+OO No H-3 20 <8.04E+01 -2.23E+01 +/- 7.96E+01 No WNW1008C Gross alpha 20 <1.51E+OO 8.13E-02 +/- 1.48E+OO <1.89E+OO No WLT Gross beta 20 <1.86E+OO 1.15E+OO +/- 2.00E+OO 3.03E+OO No 20 <8.15E+01 -1.06E+OO +/- 8.10E+01 . 1.33E+02 No WNW1301 Gross alpha <1.48E+01 1.43E+01 +/- 1.48E+01 <1.48E+01 No ULT Gross beta <1.02E+01 -1.04E+01 +/- 1.02E+01 <1.02E+01 No H-3 <8.61E+02 -6.09E+02 +/- 8.61 E+02 <8.61 E+02 No WNW1302 Gross alpha 19 <3.69E+OO 1.00E+OO +/- 5.69E+OO 4.88E+OO No S&G Gross beta 19 <5.62E+oo 2.76E+OO +/- 6.44E+OO 6.47E+OO No H-3 19 <9.37E+01 -4.07E+01 +/- 2.05E+02 1.15E+02 No Revision 2 8-40
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 1
Table B-14. Summary of Radionuclide Results from Routine Onsite Groundwater Monitoring Locations( l Monitoring Median Average (pCi/L) Maximum Exceeded WMA Constituent .N '
Point(2l (pCi/L)(:!i, *. (pCi/L) *. Background?(4l Result +/- Uncertainty*
WMA 12 WNW0903 Gross alpha 20 <1.90E+OO 3.35E-01 +/- 2.26E+OO 4.29E+OO No KRS Gross beta 20 <2.42E+OO 2.30E+OO +/- 2.62E+OO 9.21E+OO No H-3 20 <8.20E+01 -5.34E+01 +/- 8.16E+01 1.62E+02 No WNW0906 Gross alpha 20 . <1.78E+OO 1.47E+OO +/- 1.72E+OO 4.19E+OO No WLT Gross beta 20 4.50E+OO 4.92E+OO +/- 2.22E+OO 1.41E+01 No H-3 20 <8.43E+01 3.80E+OO +/- 8.23E+01 1.55E+02 No NOTES: (1) See Figure 4-12 in Section 4 of this plan for the locations of monitoring wells where concentrations exceed background.
(2) Geologic unit is indicated below each monitoring point.
(3) 1 pCi/L = 3.?E-02 Bq/L.
(4) Data sets for radiological constituents in groundwater were compared with data sets from background wells using the nonparametric Mann-Whitney "U" test, as described in Appendix B, Section 4.3.
LEGEND: S&G =Sand and Gravel; ULT= unweathered Lavery till; KRS = Kent Recessional Sequence; WLT =weathered Lavery till; LTS = Lavery till sand.
Revision 2 B-41
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-15. Groundwater Monitoring Locations: Coordinates, Depth, Screened Interval, and Geologic Unit
.* Well Well Depth to Depth.to Monitoring North East Surface Geologic Unit of Construction Diameter Screen Top Scree!'! Bpttom Location(1) .. Coordinate(2) Coordinate(2) . Elevation (ft) Screened lnterv.al Material *(in) * (ft) ,* (ft~
WNW0103 893013.68 1129469.99 1399.99
- ST. STL. 2 6 21 S&G-TBU WNW0104 893295.07 1129574.51 . 1399.29 ST. STL. 2 8 23 S&G-TBU/SWS WNW0105 893536.70 1129768.63 1385.59 ST. STL. 2 13 28 S&G-TBU/SWS WNW0106 893495.37 1129926.24 1383.73 ST.STL. 2 9.5 14.5 S&G-TBU WNW0107 893399.05 1130060.32 1376.40 ST. STL. 2 8 28 ULT WNW0108 893110.00 1129915.26 1381.66 ST. STL. 2 13 33 ULT WNW0110 893024.67 1129881.74 1387.74 ST. STL. 2 13 33 ULT WNW0111 892874.91 1129694.33 1392.54 ST. STL. 2 6 11 S&G-TBU WNW0116 893518.81 1129560.10 1387.39 ST. STL. 2 6 11 S&G-TBU WNW0204 892670.48 1129380.67 1406.83 ST. STL. 2 38 43 LTS WNW0205 892696.37 1129528.87 1398.32 ST, STL. 2 6 11 S&G-TBU WNW0206 892705.65 1129535.43 1398.39 ST. STL. 2 32.8 37.8 LTS WNW0301 892593.20 1128914.31 1418.44 ST.STL. 2 6 16 S&G-TBU WNW0302 892599.05 1128910.79 1418.46 ST. STL. 2 23 28 S&G-SWS WNW0401 892708.28 1128864.51 1418.57 ST. STL. 2 6 16 S&G-TBU WNW0402 892702.84 1128867.50 1419.34 ST. STL. 2 24 29 S&G-SWS WNW0403 892865.78 1128790.38 1419.66 ST. STL. 2 8 13 S&G-TBU WNW0405 893405.48 1128685.08 1408.56 ST. STL. 2 7.5 12.5 ULT WNW0406 893250.04 1128992.47 1405.85 ST. STL. 2 11.8 16.8 S&G-TBU WNW0408 893074.34 1129214.81 1405.56 ST. STL. 2 28 38 S&G-TBU/SWS WNW0409 893256.53 1128988.16 1404.34 ST. STL. 2 44 54 ULT WNW0501 893186.25 1129277.65 1402.18 ST. STL: 2 23 33 S&G-SWS WNW0502 893325.38 1129406.73 1397.45 ST.STL. 2 8 18 S&G-TBU/SWS WNW0602A 893403.75 1129244.07 1397.27 PVC 2 5 15 S&G-TBU Revision 2 B-42
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-15. Groundwater Monitoring Locations: Coordinates, Depth, Screened Interval, and Geologic Unit Well .well Deptli to Dept~ to _
Monitoring North East Surface _ Geolggic Unit of Coordinate(il - _ - Construction Diameter. Screen Top Screen Bottom Location(1) Coordinate(2) - Elevation (ft) Screened Interval
- Material (in) (ft) .(ft)
WNW0604 893576.30 1128926.84 1398.95 ST. STL. 2 6 11 S&G-TBU WNW0605 893815.08 1129254.11 1383.90 ST. STL. 2 6 11 S&G-TBU WNW0704 893763.67 1128814.82 1395.36 ST. STL. 2 5.5 15.5 ULT WNW0706 893512.77 1128608.18 1409.03 ST. STL. 2 6 11 S&G-TBU WNW0707 893896.47 1128617.53 1396.26 ST. STL. 2 6 11 ULT WNW0801 893679.20 1129555.29 1383.51 ST. STL. 2 7.5 17.5 S&G-TBU WNW0802 893904.53 1129687.61 1377.50 ST. STL. 2 6 11 S&G-TBU WNW0803 893914.79 1129907.88 1370.17 ST. STL. 2 8 18 S&G-SWS WNW0804 893751.72 1129982.56 1373.04 ST. STL. 2 4 9 S&G-TBU WNW0901 891449.83 1129923.88 1392.72 ST. STL. 2 121 136 KRS WNW0902 891671.96 1129774.24 1390.46 ST. STL. 2 118 128 KRS WNW0903 892064.50 1129974.91 1380.69 ST. STL. 2 118 133 KRS WNW0906 891945.99 1129796.90 1384.55 ST. STL. 2 5 10 WLT WNW0908 891453.85 1129920.53 1392.94 ST. STL. 2 6 21 WLT WNW0909 892085.66 1130121.37 1372.99 ST. STL. 2 8 23 WLT WNW0910 892088.89 1130128.11 1372.69 PVC 2 25 30 ULT WNW1005 890964.33 1130017.26 1389.68 ST. STL. 2 9 19 WLT WNW1006 891264.17 1130206.69 1392.32 ST. STL. 2 10 20 WLT WNW1008B 890904.46 1129534.09 1402.35 ST. STL. 2 46 51 KRS WNW1008C 890914.13 1129545.20 1402.43 ST. STL. 2 8 18 WLT WNW1301 893111.93 1128386.20 1429.49 PVC 2 20 30 ULT WNW1302 893111.83 1128386.64 1429.47 PVC 2 5 8 S&G-TBU WNW1303 893400.10 1128599.38 1414.65 PVC 2 23 38 ULT WNW1304 893405.10 1128595.82 1414.36 PVC 2 *6 10 S&G-TBU Revision 2 B-43
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-15. Groundwater Monitoring Locations: Coordinates, Depth, Screened Interval, and Geologic Unit Well Well Depth to Depth to Monitoring North East Surf~ce GeologiC Unit of
- Construction Diameter Scree11 Top Screen Bottom Location!1) Coordinate!2) .. *coo rd inc:ite!2) Elevation (ft) .. Screened Interval
. Material .(in) (ft) (ft}
WNW8603 893537.65 1129716.56 1385.45 PVC 4 8.25 23.25 S&G-TBU/SWS WNW8604 893396.47 1129624.90 1390.41 PVC 4 6 21 S&G-TBU/SWS WNW8605 892864.58 1129650.32 1393.19 PVC 4 5.5 10.5 S&G-TBU WNW8607 893392.16 1128904.17 1405.03 PVC 4 11 16 S&G-TBU WNW8609 893126.56 1129091.64 1407.07 PVC 4 12.7 22.7 S&G-TBU WNW8610 891896.52 1130392.29 1376.88 STL. 2 97.33 112.33 KRS WNW8611 892067.89 1130297.10 1376.34 STL. 2 103.5 118.5 KRS WNW8612 893983.30 1130028.31 1367.76 PVC 4 6.6 16.6 S&G-TBU/SWS WNWNB1S 892513.28 1128353.79 1447.08 ST. STL. 2 8 13 S&G-TBU WNNDATR 892068.35 1130126.06 1374.89 CONCRETE 60 0 0 WLT WP-A 892883.92 1129232.58 1408.34 IRON 2 29 33 S&G-TBU/SWS WP-C 892986.95 1129411.57 1400.89 IRON 2 19 23 S&G-TBU WP-H 892925.41 1129367.85 . 1405.38 IRON 2 13 17 S&G-TBU NOTES: (1) Radiological data from the current monitoring locations, as listed in the 2008 Groundwater Monitoring Program, were evaluated for the WVDP Phase 1 DP.
Monitoring point WNNDATR is an interceptor trench. *
(2) Western New York State Planar Coordinate System LEGEND: STL =steel, ST.STL =stainless steel, PVC= polyvinyl chloride, S&G =sand and gravel, TBU =thick bedded unit, SWS = slack water sequence, ULT = unweathered Lavery till, LTS = Lavery till sand, KRS = Kent recessional sequence, WLT = weathered Lavery till.
Revision 2 B-44
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-16. Location, Elevation, and* Depth of Geoprobe Groundwater Sampling Points Surface Location Year North' East Elevation Sample Depths (ft) and Geologic Unlts(2J
- Code Sampled Coordinate(1) Coordinate(1J (ft)
GP01 1994 893754.94 1129433.58 1375.00 04-06 GP0197 1997 893527.20 1129733.08 1382.35 00-04, 04-08, 08-12, 12.5-14, 12-16, 16-20, 17.5-19, 20-24, 22.5-24, 24-28 (ULT)
GP02 1994 893701.98 1129480.46 1378.95 06-08 GP0297 1997 893527.37 11291389.35 1383.08 00-04, 04-08, 08-12, 12.5-14, 12-16, 16-20, 17.5-19, 20-24, 24-28. 25.5-27 GP03 1994 893684.86 1129546.39 1380.07 08-10, 13-15 GP0397 1997 893527.23 1129662.34 1383.08 00-04, 04-08, 08-12, 10.5-12, 12-16, 15.5c 17, 16-20, 20.5-22, 20-24, 24.5-26, 24-28, 28-32 (ULT)
GP04 1994 893587.10 1129609.73 1381.96 10-12 GP0497 1997 893529.48 1129630.86 1383.10 08.5-10, 13.5-15, 18.5-20, 23-24.5 GP05 1994 893556.85 1129746.34 1391.59 15-17. 20-22, 25-27 GP0597 1997 893531.83 1129600.53 1383.51 08.5-10, 13.5-15 GP06 1994 893523.31 1129743.01 1382.59 15-17, 20-22, 25-27 GP0697 1997 893635.51 1129508.65 1381.39 08.5-10, 13.5-15, 17.5-19 GPO? 1994 893623.69 1129777.03 1378.60 07.5-09.5 GP0797 1997 893633.61 1129535.22 1380.88 08.5-10, 13.5-15, 18.5-20 GP08 1994 893485.68 1129640.70 1384.66 09-11, 14-16, 19-21 GP0897 '1997 893629.21 1129567.72 1380.15 08.5-10, 12.5-14.5, 17.5-18.5 GP09 1994 893446.05 1129609.75 1385.81 09-11, 14-16, 19-21 GP0997 1997 893630.01 . 1129599.46 1379.30 08.5-10, 13.5-15 GP10 1994 893495.08 1129514.19 1386.41 09-11 GP1097 1997 893628.00 1129624.69 1379.01 08.5-10, 13.5-15, 1.8.5-20 GP11 1994 893514.96 1129468.64 1386.51 08-10 GP1197 1997 893625.73 1129664.22 1378.57 08.5-10, 13.5-15, 17.5-19, 23.4-25 GP12 1994 893594.08 1129526.20 1382.41 07-09 GP1297 1997 893623.09 1129706.63 1378.15 00-04, 04-08, 07.5-09, 08-12, 12.5-14, 12-16, 16-20, 17 .5-19, 20-24, 22-23.5, 24-28 (ULT)
GP13 1994 893422.90 1129419.73 1390.67 10-12 GP1397 1997 893621.53 1129744.33 1377.93 09-10.5, 13.5-15, 18.5-20 GP13A 1994 893385.24 1129395.73 1392.97 11-13' 15-17' 16-18 GP14 1994 893179.41 1129370.33 1399.11 15-17, 20-22, 25-27, 30-32 GP1497 1997 893619.43 1129784.76 1378.09 00-04, 04-08, 08-09.5, 08-12, 12-16, 16-20 (ULT)
Revision 2 B-45
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-16. Location, Elevation, and Depth of Geoprobe Groundwater Sampling Points Surface Location Year North East Elevation Sample Depths (ft) and Geologic Units!2J Code Sampled Coordinate!1) Coordinate!1)
(ft) .
GP15 1994 893222.77 1129158.76 1402.57 15-17 GP1597 1997 893662.03 1129761.57 1376.85 08-10, 13-15, 18-20 GP16 1994 893217.10 1129056.60 1402.66 15-17, 20-22 GP1697 1997 893662.85 1129707.70 1377.19 08-10, 12-15, 18-20 GP17 1994 893055.18 1129446.69 1399.01 12-14 GP1797 1997 893733.87 1130014.29 1370.09 08-10, 13-15 GP18 1994 892932.47 1129283.29 1404.16 18-20, 21.5-23.5 GP1897 1997 893666.65 1129642.75 1387.08 08-10, 13-15, 17.5-19.5 GP1898 1998 892929.53 1129281.76 1403.99 12-14, 16-19, 22-24 GP1997 1997 893528.51 1129675.56 1383.27 00-04, 04-08, 08-12, 12-16, 14-16, 16-20, 19-21, 20-22, 22-24, 24-26, 26-28, 28-30 GP20 1994 893141.44 1129083.93 1403.07 15-17 GP2097 1997 893529.48 1129645.74 1383.35 00-04, 04-08, 08-12, 12-14, 12-16, 16-20, 17-19, 20-24, 22-24, 24-28 GP2197 1997 893531.19 1129615.48 1383.43 00-04, 04-08, 08-12, 12-16, 13-15, 16-20, 20-24, 23-25, 24-28 (ULT), 28-32 (ULT), 32-36 (ULT)
GP2297 1997 893462.46 1129692.02 1384.93 12-14, 17-19, 22-24 GP23 1994 892960.50 1129165.19 1409.41 20-22, 22.5-24.5, 27-29, 32-34 GP2397 1997 893512.71 1129715.96 1383.06 12-14, 16-19, 22-24 GP2397 1998 892980.83 1129165.77 1408.96 17-19, 22-24, 25-29,' 32-34 GP24 1994 893006.32 1129151.08 1408.99 17-19' 22-24, 26-28, 30-32 GP2497 1997 893506.39 1129771.02 1382.83 00-04, 04-08, 08-12, 12-16, 14-16, 16-20, 19-21, 20-24, 24-26, 24-28, 28-30, 30-32 (ULT)
GP2597 1997 893804.22 1129989.94 1368.40 08-10 GP26 1994 892992.21 1129084.84 1409.'63 17-19 GP2697 1997 893671.61 1129961.64 1375.36 04.5-06.5, 09-11, 14-16 GP27 1994 892960.10 1129096.04 1408.86 16-18, 21-23, 26-28 GP2797 1997 893576.18 1129713.16 1381.18 12-14, 16-19, 22-24 GP28 1994 892855.87 1129220.94 1408.08 16-18, 21-23, 26-28, 31-33 GP2897 1997 893579.60 1129663.78 1381.44 12-14, 16-19, 22-24 GP29 1994 892783.34 1129163.61 1410.01 15-17, 21-23, 27-29, 33-35 GP2997 1997 893583.58 1129622.59 1381.56 12-14 Revision 2 B-46
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-16. Location, Elevation, and Depth of Geoprobe Groundwater Sampling Points Surface Location Ye~r North East Elevation Sample Depths (ft) and Geologic Units(2l Code Sampled Coordinate!1J Coordinate(1l (ft)
GP2998 1998 892781.53 1129163.00 1409.81 17-19, 19-21, 21-23, 22-24, 23-25, 25-27, 27-29, 29-31, 31-33, 33-35, 34-36, 35-37, 37-38 (ULT), 38-39 (ULT), 39-40 (ULT), 40-41 (ULT)
GP2908 2008 892784.10 1129167.91 1410.50 17-19, 29-31, 35-37 GP30 1994 892835.65 1129144.49 1409.32 18-20, 22-24, 27-29, 32-34 GP3098 1998 892829.94 1129141.96 1409.18 18-20, 20-22, 22-24, 23-27, 23-37, 24-26, 26-28, 28-30, 30-32, 32-34, 34-36, 36-36.5, 36.5-37 (ULT), 37-37.5 (ULT), 37.5-38 (ULT), 38-38.5 (ULT), 38.5-39 (ULT), 39-39.5 (ULT); 39.5-40 (ULT)
GP3008 2008 892837.12 1129147.27 1409.83 20-22, 28-30, 35-37 GP31 . 1994 893269.27 1129335.71 1396.59 12-14, 17-19 GP32 1994 893827.03 1129487.70 1372.83 05-07 GP32A 1994 893831.75 1129475.59 1372.45 05-07 GP33 1994 893813.09 1129337.41 1375.73 05-07 GP33A 1994 893819.60 1129347.72 1375.24 05-07 GP35 1994 893858.20 1129143.23 1384.48 04-06 GP36 1994 893815.85 1128971.59 1387.17 03.5-05.5 GP37 1994 893720.92 1128930.11 1389.11 05-07 GP38 1994 893594.09 1128959.27 1392.71 06.5-08.5 GP39 1994 893498.24 1128979.05 1396.44 06-08, 10-12 GP40 1994 893459.75 1129103.74 1394.08 08-10, 13-15 GP41 1994 893388.58 1129138.49 1396.5.9 14-16 GP42 1994 893362.12 1129180.49 1395.96 11-13 GP43 1994 893334.39 1129257.32 1396.17 12-14 GP44 1994 893003.49 1129551.08 1393.29 09-11, 14-16 GP45 1994 892995.79 1129523.66 1394.34 10-12, 15-17, 18.5-20.5 GP46 1994 892968.45 1129466.90 1397.24 12-14, 17-19 GP47 1994 892969.21 1129522.40 1394.24 11-13, 16-18 GP48 1994 892924.74 1129842.93 1386.88 07-09 GP50 1994 892833.51 1129852.05 1384.55 08-10 GP51 1994 893825.87 1129561.74 1374.48 06.5-08.5 GP52 1994 893859.57 1129634.30 1374.21 08-10 GP53 1994 893278.77 1128978.62 1401.62 14-16 GP56 1994 892704.20 1129025.11 1410.49 06-08, 15.5-17.5 Revision 2 B-47
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-16. Location, Elevation, and Depth of Geoprobe Groundwater Sampling Points Surface location Year* North East Elevation Sample Depths (ft) and Geologic Units!2)
Code sampled Coordinate!1l Coordinate!1l (ft)
GP59 1994 892859.54 1129363.33 1399.83 09-11, 17-19 GP60 1994 892870.18 1129409.83 1400.01 12-14, 17-19 GP61 1994 893875.01 1129563.26 1372.91 06-08 GP62 1994 893933.30 1129567.59 1371.20 04-06 GP64 1994 893781.92 1129295.55 1379.81 09-11 GP66 1994 893125.94 1129318.33 1403.62 17-19, 22-24, 26-28, 30-32 GP67 1994 893186.02 1129410.00 1399.12 15-17' 20-22, 25-27' 30-32 GP68 1994 893199.21 1129449.59 1398.42 15-17, 20-22, 25-27, 30-32 GP69 1994 892721.81 . 1129189.75 1410.10 19-21, 29-31, 34-36 GP70 1994 892815.80 1129223.19 1409.19 16-18, 21-23, 26-28 GP71 1994 892845.53 1129242.84 1406.51 16-18, 21-23, 25-27 GP72 1994 892873.33 1129179.42 1409..41 16-18, 21-23, 20-32 GP7298 1998 892873.12 1129178. 71 1409.17 17-19, 19-21, 21-23, 22-24, 23-25, 25-27, 27-29, 29-31, 31-33, 32-34, 33-35, 35-37, 37-39 (ULT), 39-41 (ULT)
GP7208 2008 892871.89 1129180.55 1410.07 20-22, 25-27, 31-33, 38-40 GP73 1994. 892908.21 1129176.59 1410.51 21-23, 26-28, 30-32 GP7398 1998 892899.43 1129186.81 1410.00 18-20, 20-22, 22-24, 24-26, 25-27, 26-28, 28-30, 30-32, 32-34, 34-36, 35-37, 36-38, 38-40, 40 .5-41 (ULT), 40-45 .5 (ULT), 41.5-42 (ULT), 41-41.5 (ULT)
GP74 1994 892906.72 1129072.17 1409.69 18-20, 23-25, 28-30 GP75 1994 892804.03 1129071.55 1410.49 19-21, 23-25, 27-29 GP76 1994 892829.00 1129049.17 1414.49 19-21, 23-25' 27-29 GP7608 2008 892824.00 1129049.00 1415.00 20-22, 34-36 GP77 1994 892748.07 1129075.00 1414.49 19-21, 19-23, 27-29, 31-33 GP78 1994 892841.92 1129109.44 1414.48 19-21, 19-23, 23-25, 27-29, 31-33 GP7898 1998 892831.03 1129127.81 1409.70 19-21-, 20-22, 21-23, 23-25, 24-27, 25-27, 27-29, 29-31, 30-32, 31-33, 33-35, 35-37 GP7808 2008 892843.00 1129107.00 1410.21 20-22, 28-30, 34-36 GP79 1994 892757.54 1129099.11 1414.49 21-23, 25-27, 29-31 GP80 1994 892809.20 1129126.66 1414.48 25-27, 30-32, 34-39, 35-35, 35-37 GP8098 1998 892792.03 1129125.21 1414.28 22-24, 24-26, 26-28, 27-29, 28-30, 30-32, 32-34; 34-36, 36-38, 38-40, 40-42 (ULT)
GP8008 2008 892812.00 1129141.00 1415.00 25-27, 32-34, 39-41 GP8198 1998 893048.83 1129217.96 1403.98 15-17' 20-22, 25-27' 30-32, 35-37 Revision 2 B-48
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-16. Location, Elevation, and Depth of Geoprobe Groundwater Sampling Points
" Year**
- Surface
- Location 'North*.* . East
- Sample Depths (ft) and G.eologic Units\~l *. * .
Elevation.
1 Cod.e
- Sampl~d ',,...,,
- coori:linate(1)
. Cpordinate!1)
(ft) '
GP8298 1998 892996.19 1129315.09 1402.13 12-14, 17-19, 20-24 GP8398 1998 892982.69 1129187.54 1407.43 17-19, 19-21, 20-22, 21-23, 23-25, 25-27, 27-29, 29-31, 31-33, 32-34, 33-35, 35-37 GP8308 2008 892980.71 1129181.86 1409.79 22-24, 30-32, 38-40 GP8698 . 1998 892845.57 1129161.24 1409.02 18-20, 20-22, 22-24, 24-26, 24-27, 26-28, 28-30, 30-32, 32-34, 34-36, 35-37, 36-38, 38-39, 39-39.5, 39.5-40 (ULT), 40-40.5 (ULT), 40.5-41(ULT),41-41.5 (ULT), 41.5-42 (ULT)
GP8798 1998 892813.15 1129225.60 1408.43 15-17, 20-22, 25-27, 28-32 GP8898 1998 893533.28 1129528.60 1384.14 07-09, 12-14 GP8998 1998 893722.00 1129516.58 1379.09 06-08, 11-13, 16-18 GP9098 1998 893826.72 1129596.32 1373.46 03-05' 08-10 GP9198 1998 893875.44 1129596.20 1372.82 03-05 GP9298 1998 893811.26 1129533.79 1373.71 04-06, 09-11, 14-16, 18.5-21 GP9398 1998 893821.48 1129568.33 1372.62 04-06' 09-11, 14-16 GP9498 1998 893874.66 1129532.98 1372.01 03-05, 08-10, 12-15 GP10008 2008 892805.00 1129048.00 1415.00 20-22, 35-37 GP10108 2008 892924.08 1129094.92 1410.30 21-23, 28-30 GP10208 2008 892838.12 1129224.43 1409.11 27-29 GP10308 2008 892977.38 1129140.72 1410.53 21-23, 30-32, 35-37 GP10408 2008 892953.72 1129241.54 1405.91 21-23 GP10508 2008 893026.27 1129223.72 1405.04 16-18, 28-30, 34-36 GP10608 2008 893026.76 1129312.67 1403.39 16-18, 20-22, 28-30 GP10708 2008 893119.33 1129306.52 1403.80 15-17' 22-24, 30-32 GP10908 2008 893138.89 1129224.21 1402.60 14-16, 28-30, 34-36 NOTES: (1) Western New York State Planar Coordinate System (2) All screened intervals ,were within the Sand and Gravel (S&G) unit except for those from the Unweathered Lavery Till unit, designated as "ULT."
Revision 2 B-49
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-17. Groundwater Points Excluded from the Evaluation< 1l
':i, ' E:1evatiori .af
- Elevation*at* ,.,,* *GeologiC'
- Surface.' . ~* * *Top of *. *
- Sa.mpling ' ,
- No.rth. *
.',, East** Bottom of ... ,*'
- . Unit of' Coordinate,,
L9catfon ** Coqrdinate !2r *.Elev~tion,(ft)' . Screened " '.
- s'creened :,' ' Scr.eimed
- ..* ' .. (3),*.
' lpt9ry~l . (ft) " . lnterl/~1. (ft) . , . .>lritervaL' ,
NOA WP-A 892047.61 1130117.37 1375.47 1355.27 1348.77 ULT NOA WP-8 892045.71 1130112.17 1375.45 1360.25 1357.75 WLT NOA WP-C 892006.26 1130115.39 1378.47 1367.67 1362.17 WLT NP0101 893602.56 1129427.10 1386.10 1379.60 1374.60 S&G NP0102 893577.38 1129428.82 1389.40 1381.90 1376.90 S&G NP0103 893586.49 1129466.86 1385.10 1376.60 137t60 S&G NP0104 893621.36 1129460.64 1384.10 1379.60 1369.(30 S&G NP0105 893528.03 1129853.06 1382.50 1374.50 1359.50 S&G NP0106 893598.16 1129779.73 1380.70 1369.70 1364.70 S&G NP0107 893542.52 1129601.69 1384.10 1375.60 1370.60 S&G NP0108 893518.32 1129601.99 1385.30 1376.30 1371.30 S&G NP0109 893543.29 1129552.36 1384.30 1376.30 1369.30 S&G NP0110 893573.10 1129628.57 1383.50 1373.50 1370.50 S&G NP0111 893609.48 1129621.28 1381.40 1366.40 1363.40 S&G NP0112 893605.26 1129622.72 1381.50 1373.50 1368.50 S&G NP0113 893578.74 1129574.71 1383.00 1373.00 1368.00 S&G NP0114 893564:04 1129564.66 1383.50 1375.50 1370.50 S&G NP0115 893484.80 1129685.67 1385.60 1366.60 1359.60 S&G NP0116 893490.96 1129688.62 1385.30 ' 1373.80 1368.80 S&G NP0117 893446.35 1129634.45 1386.40 1368.40 1363.40 S&G NP0118 893439.47 1129630.61 1386.60 1375.60 1370.60 S&G NP01'19 893526.14 1129664.12 1385.10 1364.10 1359.10 S&G NP0120 893526.24 1129655.74 1385.30 1371.30 1366.30 S&G NP0121 893518.59 1129668.60 1384.60 1373.60 1358.60 S&G NP0122 893512.26 1129663.29 1384.60 1377.60 1362.60 S&G NP0123 893513.46 1129649.40 1384.90 1370.90 1365.90 S&G NP0124 893512.56 1129653.52 1384.70 1365.70 1360.70 S&G NP0125 893518.72 1129631.75 1384.60 1377.60 1362.60 S&G NP0126 893513.83 1129634.52 1384.70 1377.70 1362.70 S&G NP0127 893561.96 1129508.64 1386.10 1379.60 1369.60 S&G NP0128 893611.18 1129516.76 1382.80 1375.80 1365.80 S&G NP0129 893585.08 1129529.17 1383.40 1376.40 1366.40 S&G NP0130 893629.71 1129576.60 1381.00 1374.00 1364.00 S&G.
NP0131 893535.80 1129735.81 1383.00 1366.00 1356.00 S&G NP0132 893556.54 1129690.68 1383.70 1364.70 1360.70 S&G NP0133 893616.82 1129670.92 1379.90 ' 1364.90 1354.90 S&G PTWRP 893516.03 1129663.87 1384.88 1380.88 1360.88 S&G Revision 2 B-50
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-17. Groundwater Points Excluded from the Evaluation< 1l Elevation at Elevation at Geologic East Sampling North Surface Top of Bottom of Unit of Coordinate Location Coordinate (2) (2)
Eievation (ft) Screened Screened Screened Interval (ft) Inter\lal (ft) Interval PZ01 893501.64 1129644.29 1385.10 1378.10 1363.10 S&G PZ02 893502.55 1129658.76 1385.10 1378.10 1363.10 S&G PZ03 893509.15 1129639.29 1384.60 1377.60 1362.60 S&G PZ04 893508.56 1129664.33 1384.70 1377.70 1362.70 S&G PZ05 893519.11 1129676.77 1384.40 1377.40 1362.40 S&G PZ06 893538.60 1129638.19 1384.30 1377.30 1362.30 . S&G PZ07 893537.58 1129663.80 1384.00 1377.00 1362.00 S&G PZ08 893516.74 1129643.87 1385.40 1368.40 1365.40 S&G PZ09 893516.34 1129651.79 1385.40 1367.90 1365.40 S&G PZ10 893521.60 1129632.18 1384.60 1375.60 1372.60 S&G RW01 893556.21 1129506.87 1384.43 1379.43 1369.43 S&G RW02 893559.26 1129478.22 1384.38 1380.38 1370.38 S&G RW03 893565.07 1129493.51 1385.28 1380.28 1370.28 S&G WNGSEEP 893765.77 1130322.30 1356.89 NA NA S&G WNGSP04 893866.63 1130309.52 NA NA NA S&G WNGSP06 893960.73 1130283.50 NA NA NA S&G WNGSP11 894065.05 1130090.45 NA NA NA S&G WNGSP12 894171.90 1130050.85 NA NA NA S&G WNNDATR 892068.35 1130126.06 1372.49 NA NA WLT WNSE007 893850.15 1129578.86 1371.11 NA NA S&G WNSE008 893791.04 1130002.44 1368.52 NA NA S&G WNSE009 893683.63 1129699.74 1378.11 NA NA S&G WNSE011 893838.93 1129534.25 1373.08 NA NA S&G WNW0109 892972.05 1129830.09 1386.84 1373.84 1353.84 ULT WNW0114 893452.77 1129988.66 1377.01 1368.01 1348.01 ULT WNW0115 893525.49 1129564.84 1384.19 1366.19 1356.19 ULT WNW0201 892419.73 1129383.16 1408.19 1398.19 1388.19 S&G WNW0202 892407.19 1129390.47 1407.95 1374.95 1369.95 LTS WNW0203 892670.42 1129376.09 1404.62 1396.62 1386.62 S&G WNW0207 892503.34 1129677.53 1396.11 1390.11 1385.11 S&G WNW0208 892488.90 1129674.25 1396.26 1378.26 1373.26 LTS WNW0305 892630.33 1129176.24 1410.38 1394.38 1379.38 S&G WNW0306 892633.70 1129174.87 1410.32 1344.32 1329.32 KRS WNW0307 892634.87 1129177.55 1410.53 1404.53 1394.53 S&G WNW0404 892871.77 1128786.30 1416.69 1390.19 1380.19 S&G WNW0407 893250.92 1128996.78 1402.40 1336.90 1326.90 ULT WNW0410 892868.61 1128789.26 1416.64 1348.64 1338.64 KRS Revision 2 B-51
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-17. Groundwater Points Excluded from the Evaluation( 1l Elevation .a:t . Elevation at Geo)ogic .
East Sampling North Surface Top of Bottom of Unit of Coordinate Location Coordinate (2l (2)
Elevation (ft) Screened Screened Screened Interval (ft) Interval (ft) . lnt.erva.1 WNW0411 892694.15 1128869.23 1416.27 1370.27 1350.27 KRS WNW0601 893810.70 1129256.11 1381.14 1377.14 1375.14 S&G WNW0603 893519.08 1128736.33 1401.14 1393.14 1388.14 S&G WNW0701 893501.78 1128611.97 1406.52 1383.52 1378.52 ULT WNW0702 893775.67 1128516.08 1397.68 1369.68 1359.68 ULT WNW0703 893887.50 1128622.76 1393.12 1382.12 1372.12 ULT WNW0705 893779.24 1128509.78 1397.87 1391.87 1376.87 ULT WNW0904 892066.15 1129984.19 1377.95 1361.95 1351.95 ULT WNW0905 892131.67 1130069.18 1373.56 1355.56 1350.56 S&G WNW0907 891901.62 1129774.48 1382.27 1376.27 1366.27 WLT WNW1001 890969.42 1130010.26 1387.55 1281.55 1271.55 KRS WNW1002 891267.67 1130208.43 1389.76 1291.76 1276.76 KRS WNW1003 891303.20 1130437.01 1387.65 1259.65 1249.65 KRS WNW1004 891085:15 1130459.09 1383.89 1290.89 1275.89 KRS WNW1007 891306.41 1130433.26 1387.55 1374.55 1364:55 WLT WNW1101A 891062.41 1130830.41 1379.37 1373.37 1363.37 WLT WNW1101B 891060.33 1130826.90 1379.42 1359.42 1349.42 ULT WNW1101C 891058.61 1130823.07 1379.13 1285.13 1270.13 KRS WNW1102A 891508.74 1131146.27 1382.71 1375:71 1365.71 WLT WNW1102B 891514.11 1131142.06 1382.59 1361.59 1351.59 ULT WNW1103A 891925.14 1130822.28 1379.90 1373.90 1363.90 WLT WNW11038 891929.54 1130818.73 1379.83 1358.83 1343.83 ULT WNW1103C 891934.64 1130815.86 1379.51 1273.51 1258.51 KRS WNW1104A 892289.10 1130545.05 1376.12 1372.12 1357.12 WLT WNW1104B 892285.42 1130549.21 1376.10 1355.10 1340.10 ULT WNW1104C 892282.05 1130553.29 1375.96 1261.96 1251.96 KRS WNW1105A 892608.51 1130294.17 1365.80 1354.80 1344.80 ULT WNW11058 892608.20 1130289.77 1366.01 1345.01 1330.01 ULT WNW1106A 891960.87 1130374.92 1374:36 1368.36 1358.36 WLT WNW1106B 891964.09 1130372.02 1374.32 1353.62 1343.62 ULT WNW1107A 892368.58 1130256.16 1377.16 1373.16 1358.16 WLT WNW1108A 891312.43 1130600.10 1380.93 1374.93 1364.93 WLT WNW1109A ' 891929.92 1130329.31 1374.86 1368.86 1358.86 WLT WNW11098 891934.27 1130326.01 1374.02 1358.02 1343.02 ULT WNW1110A 892100.29 1130691.11 1377.05 1367.05 1357.05 WLT WNW1111A 891654.21 1131042.28 1380.22 1369.22 1359.22 ULT WNW80-4 893687.98 1129428.98 1386.55 1373.98 1368.98 S&G
, Revision 2 B-52
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table B-17. Groundwater Points Excluded from the Evaluation' 1>
Elevation at Elevation at .Geologic East Sampling North Surface Top of Bottom of Unit of Coordinate (2J Coordinate Location (2)
Elevation (ft) Screened Screened Screened Interval (ft) Interval (ft) Interval WNW834D 893670.95 1129435.35 1380.48 1256.18 1249.98 KRS WNW834E 893670.95 1129435.35 1381.64 NA NA BR WNW8606 892694.89 1129523.46 1396.49 1390.89 1385.89 S&G WNW8608 893250.67 1128985.62 1401.59 1394.59 1384.59 S&G WNW9017 891913.54 1130323.78 NA NA NA WLT WNW9611 891991.27 1130117.11 1379.89 1374.89 1369.89 WLT WNW9612 891915.18 1130305.03 1380.41 1374.91 1369.91 WLT WNW9613 891898.75 1129901.48 1380.32 1372.32 1367.32 WLT WNW9614 891872.40 1129910.29 1381.36 1374.36 1369.36 WLT WNWEW-1 893578.98 1129453.22 1384.91 1379.91 1371.91 S&G WNWEW-4 893546.14 1129515.19 1384.17 1380.17 1368.17 S&G WNWWP-4 893486.96 1129473.70 1387.63 1379.63 1377.63 S&G WP01 893485.51 1129520.87 1386.57 1378.57 1376.57 S&G WP02 893566.19 1129521.75 1383.10 1376.10 1373.10 S&G WP03 893513.64 1129490.62 1385.88 1377.88 1375.88 S&G WP05 893584.51 1129490.37 1383.91 1376.91 1373.91 S&G WP06 893548.40 1129479.09 1384.94 1377.94 1374.94 S&G WP07 893520.93 1129467.36 1386.08 1378.08 1376.08 S&G WP08 893500.03 1129447.32 1387.34 1.379.34 1377.34 S&G WP09 893591.43 1129438.20 1384.81 1377.81 1374.81 S&G WP10 893533.21 1129414.87 1390.47 1383.47 1380.47 S&G WP11 893537.89 1129741.98 1382.08 1370.08 1367.08 S&G WP12 893552.47 1129785.92 1381.68 1369.68 1366.68 S&G WP13 893603.74 1129840.46 1379.78 1367.78 1364.78 S&G WP14 893561.33 1129744.79 1381.38 1369.38 1366.38 S&G WP15 893530.52 1129536.70 1384.08 1377.08 1374.08 S&G WP16 893591.77 1129669.06 1381.61 1365.61 1362.61 S&G WP17 893631.05 1129660.29 1379.01 1371.01 1368.01 S&G WP18 893627.96 1129702.66 1378.66 1370.66 1367.66 S&G WP200 892845.95 1129162.30 1409.60 1379.60 1376.6 S&G WP20S 892844.41 1129162.58 1409.60 1388.60 1385.60 S&G WP21 893534.74 1129529.93 1384.50 1377.50 1374.50 S&G WP22 893723.11 1129517.68 1379.80 1365.80 1362.80 S&G WP23 893809.43 1129533.65 1374.60 1366.60 1363.60 S&G WP24 893874.64 1129534.13 1372.50 1364.50 1361.50 S&G WP25 893522.25 1129629.76 1384.70 1377.70 1362.70 S&G WP26 893511.05 1129650.65 1384.50 1377.50 1362.50 S&G Revision 2 B-53
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 1
Table B-17. Groundwater Points Excluded from the Evaluation< l Elevation at Elevation at Geologic East Sampling North Surface Top of Bottom of Unit of
.Coordinate .
Location Coordinate <21 (2)
Elevation (ft) Screened. .Screened Screened Interval (ft) Interval (ft) Interval WP27 893519.23 1129672.49 1384.40 1377.40 1362.40 . S&G WP28 893513.60 1129644.17 1384.60 1377.60 1362.60 S&G WP29 893519.34 1129643.90 1385.10 1378.10 1363.10 S&G WP30 893526.35 1129644.34 1385.20 1378.20 1363.20 S&G WP31 893519.50 1129651.73 1385.40 1378.40 1363.40 S&G WP32 893520.70 1129651.71 1385.40 1378.40 1363.40 S&G WP33 893522.25 1129651.70 1385.40 1378.40 1363.40 S&G WP34 893526.13 1129651.67 1385.40 1378.40 1363.40 S&G WP35 893538.42 1129651.63 1384.00 1377.00 1362.00 S&G WP36 893513.55 1129659.28
- 1384.70 1377.70 1362.70 S&G WP37 893519.29 1129659.11 1385.30 1378.30 1363.30 S&G WP38 893520.62 1129659.08 1385.40 1378.40 1363.40 S&G WP39 893522.08 1129659.00 1385.40 1378.40 1363.40 S&G WP40 893526.27 1129659.35 1385.30 1378.30 1363.30 .S&G NOTES: ( 1) This table lists points that were not included in the evaluation for DP section 4.2 because: a) no
. radiological data were available; b) data from that point were not validated (e.g., piezometers, surface elevation points, wells for the north plateau groundwater recovery system, wells for evaluation of the permeable treatment wall); c) sampling was dropped.from the groundwater program because coverage was considered sufficient and no additional sampling was required (e.g., several points discontinued in 1995); d) the well was dry; ore) the sampling point was from an area outside the scope of the Phase 1 DP (e.g., groundwater se_eps outside the process premises, wells from WMA 8).
(2) Western New York State Planar Coordinate System LEGEND: S&G =sand and gravel, ULT= unweathered Lavery till, WLT =weathered Lavery till, LTS =Lavery till sand, KRS = Kent recessional sequence, BR= bedrock.
Revision 2 B-54
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN APPENDIX C DETAILS OF DCGL DEVELOPMENT AND THE INTEGRATED DOSE ASSESSMENT PURPOSE OF THIS APPENDIX The purpose of this appendix is to provide supporting information related to development of deterministic derived concentration guideline levels (DCGLs) and the limited integrated dose assessment perfor'med to ensure that cleanup criteria for surface soil , subsurface soil, and streambed sediment used in Phase 1 of the decommissioning will support any decommissioning approach that may be selected for Phase 2.
INFORMATION IN THIS APPENDIX This appendix provides the following information:
- Table C-1 in Section 1 provides a complete list of RESRAD input parameters, except for distribution coefficients, and the bases for these parameters .
- Table C-2 in Section 1 provides a list of distribution coefficients and their bases .
- Table C-3 in Section 1 provides the exposure pathways considered in the analysis .
- Table C-4 in Section 1 provides data on measured radionuclide concentrations in the Lavery till in the area of the large excavations in Waste Management Area 1 and Waste Management Area 2.
- Section 2 describes the information that comprises Attachment 1, which supports the calculation of DCGL and cleanup goal values presented in Section 5 of the Decommissioning Plan.
- Attachment 1 provides electronic RESRAD input and output files for the three base cases (surface soil, subsurface soil, and streambed sediment),
the limited integrated dose analysis, and the input parameter sensitivity analyses performed, along with the associated Microsoft Excel spreadsheets.
- Attachment 2 provides an additional electronic file (a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet) used in the preliminary dose assessments.
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLAN SECTIONS This appendix provides supporting information for Section 5. Information provided in Section 5 and in Section 1 on the project background will help place the information in this appendix into context.
Revision 2 C-1
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 1.0 Tabulated Data Table C-1 identifies input parameters used in the RESRAD models, except for the distribution coefficients, which are included in Table C-2. Input parameters are provided for the three source exposure scenarios: surface soil (SS), subsurface soil (SB), and stream bank sediment (SD). The RESRAD input parameters presented in Table C-1 were selected as discussed in Section 5.
Distribution coefficients (Kds) are presented in Table C-2 for chemical elements of the 18 radionuclides and their decay progeny for each of the three analyses (SS, SB and SD) for each of the modeled media (contaminated zone, unsaturated zone and saturated zone) used in RESRAD . The conceptual models assume the sand and gravel unit is representative of the three RESRAD zones, except that in the SB and SD analyses, the contaminated zone is assumed to be represented by the Lavery till. The table includes the RESRAD default value, the specific value input into the RESRAD model for DCGLw calculations, either measured site-specific or reference values (as identified in Note 1 to table C-2). and the range of values used in the sensitivity analysis. The Kd values were selected to represent the central tendency of the site-specific data or were based on specific soil strata characteristics where available. Variability/uncertainty in the Kd values was addressed through the sensitivity analysis and also in the probabilistic uncertainty analysis described in Section 5 and Appendix E.
The exposure pathways presented in Table C-3 were based on the critical groups identified for each of the source media. The resident farmer was the critical receptor for soil exposure and the recreationist was identified as the critical receptor for stream bank sediment exposure. Alternate receptors were considered as discussed in Section 5, including acute dose from subsurface material to a well driller during cistern installation, dose from subsurface material during installation of a natural gas well , *and dose from surface and subsurface material to a resident gardener.
The data in Table C-4 are the basis for the maximum radionuclide concentration data in Table 5-1 . These data comprise the available characterization data for radionuclides in the Lavery till within the footprints of the large excavations for the Process Building-Vitrification area and the Low-Level Waste Treatment Facility area that are described in Section 7.
Preliminary dose assessments have been performed for the remediated WMA 1 and WMA 2 excavations. These assessments made use of the maximum measured radioactivity concentration in the Lavery till for each radionuclide as summarized in Table C-4, and the maximum detection level concentration for non-detected radionuclides . (It should be noted that the minimum detection levels for non-detected radionuclides may range several orders of magnitude . Use of the maximum detection level concentration for non-detected radionuclides results in added conservatism in the reported preliminary dose assessment.) The results were as follow :
WMA 1, a maximum of 1.3 mrem a year WMA 2, a maximum of 0.04 mrem a year Revision 2 C-2
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Given the limited data available, these results must be viewed as order-of-magnitude estimates . However, they do suggest that actual potential doses from the two remediated areas are likely to be substantially below 25 mrem per year . Table C-4B in Attachment 2 shows how these doses were estimated .
Note that the probabilistic uncertainty analysis described in Section 5 and Appendix E produced somewhat different results, as did other analyses such as the multi-source analysis for subsurfaoe soil.
Revision 2 C-3
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table C-1. RESRAD Input Parameters RESRAD Parameter (Units) Default Value Medium Comment/Reference Area of contaminated zone (m2) 1.00E+04 1.00E+04 SS Assumed area of 10,000 m2for subsistence farmer scenario; garden is 2,000 m2.
1.00E+04 1.00E+02 SB Assumed area of 100 m2for excavated contaminated cistern cuttings scenario.
Alternative configurations were considered in the sensitivity analysis.
1.00E+04 1.00E+03 SD Assumed 1000 m2area along stream bank (3 m wide by - 330 m length}.
Thickness of contaminated zone (m) 2.00E+OO 1.00E+OO SS, SD Assumed surface soil contaminated zone thickness.
2.00E+OO 3.00E-01 SB Assumed thickness of contaminated cistern cuttings spread on surface over a 100 m2area. Alternative configurations were considered in the sensitivity analysis.
Length parallel to aquifer flow (m) 1.00E+02 1.65E+02 SS Selected to achieve site specific groundwater dilution factor of 0.2, based on DEIS groundwater model correlation. Only applicable for non-dispersion model.
Time since placement of material (y) O.OOE+OO O.OOE+OO All Only non-zero if Kd values are not available. (Site-specific Kds are available).
Cover depth (m) O.OOE+OO O.OOE+OO All No cover considered.
Density of cover material (g/cm 3) O.OOE+QO not used All No cover considered.
Cover depth erosion rate (m/y) O.OOE+OO not used All No cover considered.
Density of contaminated zone (g/cm3) 1.50E+OO 1.70E+OO All WVNSCO 1993a and WVNSCO 1993c.
Contaminated zone erosion rate (m/y) 1.00E-03 O.OOE+OO All Assumed for no source depletion.
Contaminated zone total porosity 4.00E-01 3.60E-01 All WVNSCO 1993c.
Contaminated zone field capacity 2.00E-01 2.00E-01 All WVNSCO 1993c.
Contaminated zone hydraulic conductivity (m/y) 1.00E+01 1.40E+02 All Average for Sand and Gravel Thick Bedded Unit (4.43E-03 cm/s from Table 3-19) divided by 10 to provide vertical conductivity that accounts for potential anisotropy (DEIS Appendix E, Table E-3).
Contaminated zone b parameter 5.30E+OO 1.40E+OO All Yu, et al. 2000, Att. C table 3.5-1 , mean for loamy sand (ln(mean)=0.305).
Average annual wind speed (m/sec) 2.00E+OO 2.60E+OO All WVNSCO 1993d.
Humidity in air (g/m3) 8.00E+OO not used All Applicable for tritium exposures only.
Revision 2 C-4
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table C-1. RESRAD Input Parameters RESRAD Parameter (Units) Default Value Medium Comment/Reference Evapotranspiration coefficient 5.00E-01 7.80E-01 All Evapotranspiration and runoff coefficients selected to achieve infiltration rate of 0.26 m/y.
Precipitation (m/y) 1.00E+OO 1.16E+OO All WVNSCO 1993d.
Irrigation (m/y) 2.00E-01 4.?0E-01 SS, SB Beyeler, et al. 1999.
2.00E-01 O.OOE+OO SD Not applicable for non-farming scenario.
Irrigation mode overhead overhead All Site-specific.
Runoff coefficient 2.00E-01 4.10E-01 All Runoff and evapotranspiration coefficients selected to achieve infiltration rate of 0.26 m/y.
Watershed area for nearby stream or pond (m2) 1.00E+06 1.37E+07 All Based on drainage area of site of 13.7 km 2or -5.2 mi 2for Buttermilk Creek.
Accuracy for water/soil computations 1.00E-03 1.00E-03 All Default assumed .
Saturated zone density (g/cm3) 1.50E+OO 1.70E+OO All WVNSCO 1993a and WVNSCO 1993c.
Saturated zone total porosity 4.00E-01 3.60E-01 All WVNSCO 1993c.
Saturated zone effective porosity 2.00E-01 2.50E-01 All WVNSCO 1993c.
Saturated zone field capacity 2.00E-01 2.00E-01 All WVNSCO 1993c.
Saturated zone hydraulic conductivity (m/y) 1.00E+02 1.40E+03 All Average for Sand and Gravel Thick Bedded Unit (4.43E-03 cm/s from Table 3-19)
Saturated zone hydraulic gradient 2.00E-02 3.00E-02 All WVNSCO 1993b.
Saturated zone b parameter 5.30E+OO 1.40E+OO All Yu , et al. 2000, Att. C table 3.5-1 , mean for loamy sand (ln(mean)=0.305).
Water table drop rate (m/y) 1.00E-03 O.OOE+OO All Site Specific.
Well pump intake depth (m below water table) 1.00E+01 5.00E+OO SS Assumption based on site hydrogeology and site-specific groundwater dilution factor. Only applicable to non-dispersion model.
Model: Non-dispersion (ND) or Mass-Balance ND ND SS Applicable to areas >1 ,000 m2 (Yu, et.al. 2001 , p.E-18)
(MB)
MB MB SB, SD Applicable to areas <1 ,000 m2 (Yu, et. al. 2001 , pE-18)
Revision 2 C-5
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table C-1. RESRAD Input Parameters RESRAD Parameter (Units) Default Value Medium Comment/Reference Well pumping rate (m3/y) 2.50E+02 5.72E+03 SS, SB Based on 2.9 m3/y drinking water (2 Ud per 4 people for 365 days), 329 m3/y household water (225 Ud per 4 people for 365 day), 385 m3/y livestock watering (5 beef cattle at 50 Ud , 5 milk cows 160 Ud) and 5,000 m3/y for irrigation of 10,000 m2(at rate of 0.5 m/y) from Yu , et al. 2000, Attachment C, Section 3.10.
2.50E+02 O.OOE+OO SD Not applicable for non-farming scenario.
Number of unsaturated zone strata 1.00E+OO 1.00E+OO All Assumed.
Unsaturated zone thickness (m) 4.00E+OO 2.00E+OO SS. SB Site specific.
4.00E+OO O.OOE+OO SD Assumed saturated for stream bank.
Unsaturated zone soil density (g/cm3) 1.50E+OO 1.70E+OO SS, SB WVNSCO 1993a and WVNSCO 1993c.
Unsaturated zone total porosity 4.00E-01 3.60E-01 SS. SB WVNSCO 1993c.
Unsaturated zone effective porosity 2.00E-01 2.50E-01 SS. SB WVNSCO 1993c.
Unsaturated zone field capacity 2.00E-01 2.00E-01 SS, SB WVNSCO 1993c.
Unsaturated zone hydraulic conductivity (m/y) 1.00E+01 1.40E+02 SS, SB Average for Sand and Gravel Thick Bedded Unit (4.43E-03 cm/s from Table 3-19) divided by 10 to provide vertical conductivity that accounts for potential anisotropy (DEIS Appendix E, Table E-3).
Unsaturated zone b parameter 5.30E+OO 1.40E+OO SS, SB Yu , et al. 2000, Alt. C table 3.5-1 , mean for loamy sand (ln(mean)=0.305).
Distribution coefficients - radionuclides Contaminated zone (mUg) varies Site specific All See Table C-2 for distribution coefficients.
Unsaturated zone 1 (mUg) varies Site specific All See Table C-2 for distribution coefficients.
Saturated zone (mUg) varies Site specific All See Table C-2 for distribution coefficients.
Plant Transfer Factor varies Chemical- All Default values assumed.
specific Fish Transfer Factor Varies Chemical- SD Default values assumed.
specific Leach rate (1/y) varies not used All Using site-specific Kd values instead of assigning leach rate.
Revision 2 C-6
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table C-1. RESRAD Input Parameters RESRAD Parameter (Units) Default Value Medium Comment/Reference Solubility constant varies not used All Using site-specific Kd values instead of assigning solubility constant.
Inhalation rate (m3/y) 8.40E+03 8.40E+03 All Beyeler, et al. 1999.
Mass loading for inhalation (g/m3) 1.00E-04 1.48E-05 All Beyeler, et al. 1999. Based on relative time fractions and mean dust loadings.
Assumes 288 hours0.00333 days <br />0.08 hours <br />4.761905e-4 weeks <br />1.09584e-4 months <br /> of active farming per year.
Exposure duration (y) 3.00E+01 1.00E+OO All Yearly dose estimates calculated.
Filtration factor, inhalation 4.00E-01 1.00E+OO SS, SB Beyeler, et. al. 1999.
Shielding factor, external gamma 7.00E-01 2.73E-01 SS, SB Yu , et al. 2000, Att. C Figure 7.10-1, mean of distribution approximates a frame house with slab or basement.
Fraction of time spent indoors 5.00E-01 6.60E-01 SS, SB Yu, et al. 2000, Att. C Figure 7.6-2, value represents -50th percentile of distribution.
5.00E-01 O.OOE+OO SD Assumed .
Fraction of time spent outdoors 2.50E-01 2.50E-01 SS, SB . RESRAD default value used.
2.50E-01 1.20E-02 SD Based on 104 hour0.0012 days <br />0.0289 hours <br />1.719577e-4 weeks <br />3.9572e-5 months <br />s/year ( 2 hour2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />s/day, 2 day/week, 26 weeks/y) spent on the stream bank over 8760 residence hours per year (24 hr/day, 365 days/y)
Shape factor flag, external gamma 1.00E+OO 1.00E+OO SS, SB RESRAD default.
Fruits, vegetables and grain consumption (kg/y) 1.60E+02 1.12E+02 SS, SB Beyeler, et al. 1999.
Leafy vegetable consumption (kg/y) 1.40E+01 2.10E+01 SS, SB Beyeler, et al. 1999.
Milk consumption (Uy) 9.20E+01 2.33E+02 SS, SB Beyeler, et al. 1999.
Meat and poultry consumption (kg/y) 6.30E+01 6.50E+01 All Beyeler, et al. 1999.
Fish consumption (kg/y) 5.40E+OO 9.00E+OO SD Exposure Factors Handbook (EPA, 1999). The value represents the 951h percentile of fish consumption by recreational anglers Other seafood consumption (kg/y) 9.00E-01 O.OOE+OO SD Assumes only fish consumed from the stream Soil ingestion rate (g/y) 3.65E+01 1.83E+01 All Yu , et al. 2000, Att C. Figure 5.6-1 , value represents mean of distribution for resident farmer (50 mg/d).
Drinking water intake (Uy) 5.10E+02 7.30E+02 SS. SB Beyeler, et al. 1999.
Revi sion 2 C-7
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table C-1. RESRAD Input Parameters RESRAD Parameter (Units) Default Value Medium Comment/Reference 5.10E+02 1.00E+OO SD Based on 104 hour/year exposure and 10 mUhr for wading scenario (http://www.epa.gov/Region4/waste/ots/healtbul.htm)
Contamination fraction of drinking water 1.0 1.0 All Assumed . For streambed sediment, this is 100% of incidental ingestion.
Contamination fraction of household water 1.0 1.0 SS. SB Assumed.
Contamination fraction of livestock water 1.0 1.0 SS, SB Assumed .
Contamination fraction of groundwater 1.0 0 SD All water ingested is from surface water.
Contamination fraction of irrigation water 1.0 1.0 SS. SB Assumed .
Contamination fraction of aquatic food 1.0 1.0 SD Assumed.
Contamination fraction of plant food -1 1.0 SS, SB Assumes all ingestion is from the contaminated source.
Contamination fraction of meat -1 1.0 All Assumes all ingestion is from the contaminated source.
Contamination fraction of milk -1 1.0 SS. SB Assumes all ingestion is from the contaminated source.
Livestock fodder intake for meat (kg/day) 6.80E+01 2.73E+01 SS. SB Beyeler, et al. 1999.
6.80E+01 2.25E+OO SD Assumption for deer.
Livestock fodder intake for milk (kg/day) 5.50E+01 6.42E+01 SS, SB Beyeler, et al. 1999.
Livestock water intake for meat (Uday) 5.00E+01 5.00E+01 All Beyeler, et al. 1999, assumed for venison exposure to sediment source.
Livestock water intake for milk (Uday) 1.60E+02 1.60E+02 SS.SB RESRAD default value used.
Livestock soil intake (kg/day) 5.00E-01 5.00E-01 All RESRAD default. assumed for venison exposure to sediment source.
Mass loading for foliar deposition (g/m3) 1.00E-04 4.00E-04 SS. SB Beyeler, et al. 1999.
Depth of soil mixing layer (m) 1.50E-01 1.50E-01 SS, SB Beyeler, et al. 1999.
Depth of roots (m) 9.00E-01 9.00E-01 All RESRAD default, represents crops with short growing seasons.
Drinking water fraction from ground water 1.0 1.0 All Assumed.
Household water fraction from ground water 1.0 1.0 SS, SB Assumed.
Livestock water fraction from ground water 1.0 1.0 SS, SB Assumed.
Revision 2 C-8
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table C-1. RESRAD Input Parameters RESRAD Parameter (Units) Default Value Medium Comment/Reference Irrigation fraction from ground water 1.0 1.0 SS. SB Assumed.
Wet weight crop yield for non-leafy (kg/m2) 7.00E-01 1.75E+OO SS. SB Yu, et al. 2000, Att. C Figure 6.5-1 value is mean of distribution.
Wet weight crop yield for leafy (kg/m2) 1.50E+OO 1.50E+OO SS. SB RESRAD default.
Wet weight crop yield for fodder (kg/m2) 1.10E+OO 1.10E+OO SS, SB RESRAD default.
Growing season for non-leafy (years) 1.70E-01 1.70E-01 SS. SB RESRAD default.
Growing season for leafy (years) 2.50E-01 2.50E-01 SS. SB RESRAD default.
Growing season for fodder (years) 8.00E-02 8.00E-02 SS. SB RESRAD default.
Translocation factor for non-leafy 1.00E-01 1.00E-01 SS, SB RESRAD default.
Translocation factor for leafy 1.00E+OO 1.00E+OO SS. SB RESRAD default.
Translocation factor for fodder 1.00E+OO 1.00E+OO SS, SB RESRAD default.
Dry foliar interception fraction for non-leafy 2.50E-01 2.50E-01 SS. SB RESRAD default.
Dry foliar interception fraction for leafy 2.50E-01 2.50E-01 SS. SB RESRAD default.
Dry foliar interception fraction for fodder 2.50E-01 2.50E-01 SS, SB RESRAD default.
Wet foliar interception fraction for non-leafy 2.50E-01 2.50E-01 SS.SB RESRAD default.
Wet foliar interception fraction for leafy 2.50E-01 6.70E-01 SS, SB Yu , et al. 2000, Att. C Figure 6.7-1 represent the most likely value.
Wet foliar interception fraction for fodder 2.50E-01 2.50E-01 SS. SB RESRAD default.
Weathering removal constant (1/y) 2.00E+01 1.80E+01 SS, SB Yu , et al. 2000, Att. C Figure 6.6-1 represent the most likely value Carbon-14-related exposure parameters C-12 concentration in water (glee) 2.00E-05 2.00E-05 All RESRAD default.
C-12 concentration in soil (g/g) 3.00E-02 3.00E-02 All RESRAD default.
Fraction of vegetable carbon from soil 2.00E-02 2.00E-02 All RESRAD default.
Fraction of vegetable carbon from air 9.80E-01 9.80E-01 All RESRAD default.
Revision 2 C-9
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table C-1. RESRAD Input Parameters RESRAD Parameter (Units) Default Value Medium Comment/Reference C-14 evasion layer thickness in soil (m) 3.00E-01 3.00E-01 All RESRAD default.
C-14 evasion flux rate from soil (1/sec) 7.00E-07 7.00E-07 All RESRAD default.
C-12 evasion flux rate from soil (1/sec) 1.00E-10 1.00E-10 All RESRAD default.
Fraction of grain in beef cattle feed 0.8 0.8 All RESRAD default.
Fraction of grain in milk cow feed 0.2 0.2 All RESRAD default.
Storage times of contaminated foodstuff (days)
Fruits, non-leafy vegetables, and grain 1.40E+01 1.40E+01 SS, SB RESRAD default.
Leafy vegetables 1.00E+OO 1.00E+OO SS, SB RESRAD default.
Milk 1.00E+OO 1.00E+OO SS, SB RESRAD default.
Meat 2.00E+01 2.00E+01 SS, SB RESRAD default.
Fish 7.00E+OO 7.00E+OO SD RESRAD default.
Crustacea and mollusks 7.00E+OO 7.00E+OO Not used RESRAD default.
Well water 1.00E+OO 1.00E+OO SS, SB RESRAD default.
Surface water 1.00E+OO 1.00E+OO SS. SB RESRAD default.
Livestock fodder 4.50E+01 4.50E+01 SS,SB RESRAD default Radon-related exposure parameters Thickness of building foundation (m) 1.SOE-01 not used All Applicable for Radon exposures only Bulk density of building foundation (glee) 2.40E+OO not used All Applicable for Radon exposures only.
Total porosity of cover material 4.00E-01 not used All Applicable for Radon exposures only.
Total porosity of building foundation 1.00E-01 not used All Applicable for Radon exposures only.
Volumetric water constant of the cover material 5.00E-02 not used All Applicable for Radon exposures only.
Volumetric water constant of the foundation 3.00E-02 not used All Applicable for Radon exposures only.
Revision 2 C-10
WVOP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table C-1. RESRAD Input Parameters RESRAD Parameter (Units) Default Value Medium Comment/Reference Diffusion coefficient for radon gas (m2/sec) in cover material 2.00E-06 not used All Applicable for Radon exposures only.
in foundation material 3.00E-07 not used All Applicable for Radon exposures only.
in contaminated zone soil 2.00E-06 not used All Applicable for Radon exposures only.
Radon vertical dimension of mixing (m) 2.00E+OO not used All Applicable for Radon exposures only.
Average building air exchange rate (1/hr) 5.00E-01 not used All Applicable for Radon exposures only.
Height of building or room (m) 2.50E+OO not used All Applicable for Radon exposures only.
Building indoor a.rea factor O.OOE+OO not used All Applicable for Radon exposures only.
Building depth below ground surface (m) -1 not used All Applicable for Radon exposures only.
Emanating power of Rn-222 gas 2.50E-01 not used All Applicable for Radon exposures only.
Emanating power of Rn-220 gas 1.50E-01 not used All Applicable for Radon exposures only.
LEGE ND : SS = surface soil, SB = subsurface soil, SD = streambed sediment.
Revision 2 C-11
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 1
Table C-2. Soi l/Water Distribution Coefficients<>
RES RAD Surface Soil DCGL Subsurface Soil DCGL Sediment DCGL Unsaturatedl2> Saturatedl3>
Radionuclide Default Contaminated Contaminated Contaminated Zone (ml/g) Zone (ml/g)
(ml/g) Zone (mllg) Zone (ml/g) Zone (ml/g)
Principal Elements Americium 20 1900(4) 4000(5) 4000(5) 1900(4) 1900(4)
(420 - 111 ,000) (420 - 111,000) (420 - 111 ,000) (420 - 111,000) (420 - 111,000)
Carbon 0 5(4) 7(5) 7(5) 5(4) 5(4)
(0.7 -12) (0.7 - 12) (0.7 - 12) (0.7-12) (0.7-12) 6 Curiuml ) calculated 6760 6760 6760 6760 6760 (780 - 22 ,970) (780 - 22 ,970) (780 - 22,970) (780 - 22 ,970) (780 - 22 ,970)
Cesium 4600 280(4) 480(5) 480(5) 280(4) 280(4)
(48 - 4800) (48 - 4800) (48 - 4800) (48 - 4800) (48 - 4800)
Iodine calculated 1(4) 2(7) 2(7) 1 (4) 1(4)
(0.4 - 3.4) (0.4 - 3.4) (0.4 - 3.4) (0.4 - 3.4) (0.4 - 3.4)
Neptunium calculated 2.3(8) 3(5) 3(5) 2.3(8) 2.3(8)
(0.5 - 5.2) (0.5 - 5.2) (0.5 - 5.2) (0.5 - 5.2) (0.5 - 5.2)
Plutonium 2000 2600(8) 3000(5) 3000(5) 2600(8) 2600(8)
(5 - 27,900) (5 - 27,900) (5 - 27,900) (5 - 27,900) (5 - 27,900)
Strontium 30 5(9) 15l5) 15(5) 5(9) 5(9)
(1 - 32) (1 - 32) (1 - 32) (1 - 32) (1 - 32)
Technetium 0 0 .1l4) 4.1l7) 4.1l7) 0.1(4) 0.1l4)
(0.01 - 4.1) (1 - 10) (1 - 1 O) (0.01 - 4.1) (0.01 - 4.1)
Uranium 50 35 l4) 10(9) 1 ol9) 35 l4) 35 l4l (10 - 350) (1 - 100) (1 - 100) (10 - 350) (10 - 350)
Progeny Elements(lO)
Actinium 20 1740 1740 1740 1740 1740 Lead 100 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 Revision 2 C-12
WVDP PHASE 1 D ECO MMI SSI ONING P LAN Ta ble C-2. Soil/Water Distributi on Coefficients t11 RES RAD Surface Soil DCGL Subsurface Soil DCGL Sediment DCGL Unsaturated(z) Saturated(3)
Radionuclide Default Contaminated Contaminated Contaminated Zone (mllg) Zone (mllg)
(mllg) Zone (mllg) Zone (mllg) Zone (mllg)
Protactinium 50 2040 2040 2040' 2040 2040 Radium 70 3550 3550 3550 3550 3550 Thorium 60,000 5890 5890 5890 5890 5890 NOTES: (1) Sources of Kd values considered included Table 3-20; NUREG-5 512 (Beyeler, et al. 1999), Tabl e 6.7; RE SRAD User's Guide (Yu, et al. 2001). Tables E-3, E-4; Sheppard, et. al. 2006, and Sheppard and Thibault 1990. Values in parentheses are the bound s used in the sensitivity evaluation, selected considering site-specific and literatu re values to reflect a reasonable ra nge.
(2) Sediment model assumes no unsaturated zone. Values used for surface and subsurface soil evaluation only.
(3) Values presented here are those used for surface soil DCGLs based on the non-dispersion model.
(4) From Sheppard and Thibault 1990, for sand .
(5) Site specific va lue for the unweathered Lavery till (see Section 3.7 .8, Tabl e 3-20) .
(6) Beyeler, et. al. 1999 (7) Site specific value for the Lavery till (see Section 3.7.8, Table 3-20) .
(8) Site specific value for the sand and gravel unit (see Section 3. 7.8, Table 3-20) .
(9) Site specific data (Dames and Moore 1995a, 1995b) . Th e Sr-90 value of 5 mUg is consi ient with the value used in th e Decommissioning EI S.
(10) Progeny Kds were not included in the sensitivity analysis; DE IS values were used in all cases.
Revision 2 C-13
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Table C-3 Scenario exposure pathways for WVDP DCGL development Resident Farmer Recreationist Exposure Pathways (surface soil and (sediment .
Lavery Till source) source)
Incidental ingestion of source *
- External exposure to source *
- Inhalation of airborne source *
- Ingestion of groundwater impacted by source
- x Ingestion of milk impacted by soil and water sources
- x Ingestion of beef impacted by soil and water sources
- x Ingestion of produce impacted by soil and water
- x sources Incidental *ingestion of surface water impacted by 0 source Ingestion of fish impacted by source 0 Ingestion of venison impacted by sediment and water 0 sources LEGEND:
- - Pathway is co nsidered com plete and is includ ed in OCG L development.
o - Pathway is considered potentially complete but unlikely, and is not included in OCGL development.
x - Pathway is considered incomplete and is not includ ed in DCGL development.
Revision 2 C-14
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Table C-4. Radiological Concentrations from Soil Samples Containing Lavery Till in the WMA 1 and WMA 2 Excavation Areas(ll Sample Depth I Location Nuclide Result (pCi/g)
Interval (ft)
BH-17 (WMA 6, 1993) Sr-90 1.1 E-01 26 -28 Depth to Lavery till - 27 ft Cs-137 2.6E-02 26-28 U-232 < 3.2E-03 26-28 U-233/234 1.6E-01 26-28 U-235 < 5.8E-03 26-28 U-235/236 < 6.9E-03 26-28 U-238 1.1 E-01 26-28 Pu-238 < 4.3E -03 26-28 Pu -239/240 < 4.3E -03 26-28 Pu -241 1.3E +OO 26-28 Am-241 < 9.6E-03 26-28 BH-21A (WMA 1, 1993) Sr-90 4.5E +02 36-38 Depth to Lavery till - 37 .5 ft Cs-137 < 3.0E -02 36-38 U-232 < 7.4E-03 36-38 U-23 3/234 8.6E -02 36-38 U-235 < 5.1 E-03 36-38 U-235/236 < 7.2E -03 36-38 U-23 8 7.1E -02 36-38 Pu-23 8 < 4.8E-03 36-38 Pu -239/240 < 4.8E -03 36-38 Pu -24 1 < 1.1 E+OO 36-38 Am-241 < 7.2E -03 36-38 GP3098 (WMA 1, 1998) Sr-90 6.6E+OO 36 .5-37 Depth to Lavery till - 37 ft Sr-90 4.2E+OO 37-37 .5 Sr-90 6.3E +OO 37 .5-38 Sr-90 5.5E+01 38-38.5 Sr-90 5.9E +01 38 :5-39 Sr-90 3.4E+01 39 -39.5 Sr-90 2.9E+01 39 .5-40 GP3008 (WMA 1, 2008) l. -14 < 1 OF-01 17-<Q Depth to Lavery till - 37 ft Sr-90 1.7E+OO 37-39 Tc-99 < 5.5E -01 37-39 1-129 < 1.1E-01 37-39 Cs-137 < 2.0E-02 37-39 Revision 2 C-15
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Table C-4. Radiological Concentrations from Soil Samples Containing Lavery Till in the WMA 1 and WMA 2 Excavation Areas(1l Sample Depth Location Nuclide Result (pCi/g)
Interval (ft)
U-232 < 2.2E-02 37-39 U-233/234 9 .7E-01 37-39 U-2 35/236 1.3E-01 37-39 U-238 1.1 E+OO 37-39 Np-237 < 9 .8E-03 37-39 Pu -238 < 1.1E-02 37-39 Pu-239/240 < 1.2E-02 37-39 Pu-241 < 4.8E-01 37-39 Am -241 < 1.2E-02 37 -39 Cm-243/244 < 1.2E-02 37-39 GP7398 (WMA 1, 1998) Sr-90 1.9E+OO 40-40.5 Depth to Lavery till - 39 ft Sr-90 1.8 E+OO 40.5-41 Sr-90 5.2E+OO 41-41 .5 Sr-90 8.4E +OO 41 .5-42 GP7608 (WMA 1, 2008) l.-14 1 1 F -01 1R-40 Depth to Lavery till - 38 ft Sr-90 1.5E +01 38-40 Tc-99 < 2.7E-01 38-40 1-129 < 2.9E-01 38-40 Cs-137 3.9E +OO 38-40 U-232 < 2.7E-02 38-40 U-233/234 2.3E +OO 38-40 U-235/236 1.0E-01 38 -40 U-238 8 .1E-01 38-40 Np-237 < 1.6E-02 38-40 Pu-238 < 2.3E -02 38-40 Pu-239/240 6.4E -02 38-40 Pu-241 < 5.7E-01 38-40 Am-241 1.3E -01 38-40 Cm-243/244 < 2.3E -02 38-40 GP7808 (WMA 1, 2008) C-14 < ? QE-01 37-39 Depth to Lavery till - 37 ft Sr-90 8.6E+OO 37-39 Tc-99 < 4.4E-01 37 -39 1-129 < 2.3E-01 37 -3 9 Cs-13 7 < 2.2E-02 37 -39 U-232 < 1.3E-02 37 -39 U-233/234 8 .2E-01 37 -39 U-235/236 9.2E-02 37 -39 U-238 1.1 E+OO 37-39 Np-237 < 2.1E-02 37 -39 Pu -238 < 1.1E-02 37-39 Revision 2 C-16
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Table C-4. Radiological Concentrations from Soil Samples Containing Lavery Till in the WMA 1 and WMA 2 Excavation Areas( 1l Sample Depth*
Location N.uclide Result (pCi/g)
Interval (ft)
- Pu-239/240 < 1.5E-02 37-39 Pu-241 < 4.9E-01 37-39' Am-241 < 1.7E-02 37-39 Cm-243/244 < 1.6E-02 37-39 GP8098 (WMA 1, 1998) C-14 < 8.6E-02 40-42 Depth to Lavery till - 41 ft Sr-90 1.3E+01 40-42 Tc-99 < 2.6E-01 40-42 1-129 < 2.3E-01 40-42 Cs-137 < 2.2E-02 40-42 Pu-241 < 2.1 E+OO 40-42 GP8008 (WMA 1, 2008) C-14 < 2.8E-n1 <0-41 Depth to Lavery till - 40 ft C-14 < 2.8E-01 41-43 Sr-90 5.3E+OO 39-41 Sr-90 1.4E+OO 41-43 Tc-99 < 3.4E-01 39-41 Tc-99 < 3.7E-01 41-43 1-129 < 1.2E-01 39-41 1-129 < 1.2E-01 41-43 Cs-137 < 2.3E-02 39-41 Cs-137 < 2.8E-02 41-43 U-232 < 1.0E-02 39-41 U-232 < 1.3E-02 41-43 U-233/234 5.2E-01 39-41 U-233/234 1.1 E+OO 41-43 U-235/236 3.9E-02 39-41 U-235/236 1.1 E-01 41-43 U-238 8.2E-01 39-41 U-238 1.4E+OO 41-43 Np-237 < 1.1E-02 39-41 No-237 < 1.2E-02 41-43 Pu-238 < 1.5E-02 39-41 Pu-238 < 1.5E-02 41-43 Pu-239/240 < 1.6E-02 39-41 Pu-239/240 < 1.5E-02 41-43 Pu-241 < 4.4E-01 39-41 Pu-241 < 5.2E-01 41-43 Am-241 < 1.2E-02 39-41 Am-241 < 1.5E-02 41-43 Cm-243/244 < 1.3E-02 39-41 Cm-243/244 < 1.6E-02 41-43 GP8308 (WMA 1. 2008) C-14 < 3 5E-01 4n-4?
Revision 2 C-17
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Table C-4. Radiological Concentrations from Soil Samples Containing Lavery Till in the WMA 1 and WMA 2 Excavation Areas( 1l Sample Depth
- L~cation ,I Nuclide
- R~sulf (pCi/g):
Interval (ft)
Depth to Lavery till - 41.5 ft Sr-90 1.5E+OO 40-42 Tc-99 < 3.6E-01 40-42 1-129 2.4E-01 40-42 Cs-137 < 2.7E-02 40-42 U-232 < 2.4E-02 40-42 U-233/234 9.BE-01 40-42 U-235/236 2.2E-01 40-42 U-238 1.1 E+OO 40-42 Np-237 < 1.3E-02 40-42 Pu-238 < 1.1E-02 40-42 Pu-239/240 < 1.1 E-02 40-42 Pu-241 < 2.7E-01 40-42 Am-241 < 1.2E-02 40-42 Cm-243/244 < 1.8E-02 40-42 GP8698 (WMA 1, 1998) Sr-90 2.2E+OO 39-39.5 Depth to Lavery till - 39 ft Sr-90 1.0E+OO 39.5-40 Sr-90 3.0E+OO 40-40.5 Sr-90 1.0E+01 40.5-41 Sr-90 4.1E+01 41-41.5 Sr-90 3.0E+01 41.5-42 GP10008 (WMA 1, 2008) C-14 < 3.0E-01 17-19 Depth to Lavery till - 37 ft Sr-90 6.7E+OO 37-39 Tc-99 < 4.0E-01 37"39 1-129 < 1.4E-01 37-39 Cs-137 < 2.7E-02 37-39 U-232 < 1.3E-02 37-39 U-233/234 7.6E-01 37-39 U-235/236 7.5E-02 37-39 U-238 9.5E-01 37-39 Np-237 < 1.2E-02 37-39 Pu-238 < 2.2E-02 37-39 Pu-239/240 < 1.1 E-02 37-39 Pu-241 < 4.3E-01 37-39 Am-241 < 1.4E-02 37-39 Cm-243/244 < 2.3E-02 37-39 GP10108 (WMA 1, 2008) C-14 < 3.1 E-01 32-14 Depth to Lavery till - 33 ft Sr-90 6.3E-01 32-34 Tc-99 < 5.4E-01 32-34 32-34 1-129 < 9.1 E-02 Revision 2 C-18
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Table C-4. Radiological Concentrations from Soil Samples Containing Lavery Till in the WMA 1 and WMA 2 Excavation Areas( 1l Sample Depth Location Nuclide Result (pCi/g) lnterva.1 (ft)
Cs-137 < 2.6E-02 32-34 U-232 < 1.6E-01 32-34 U-233/234 . 6.0E-01 32-34 U-235/236 5.0E-02 32-34 U-238 7.3E-01 32-34 No-237 < 1.0E-02 32-34 Pu-238 < 9.5E-03 32-34.
Pu-239/240 < 8.8E-03 32-34 Pu-?L11 < 4 7F-01 32-34 Am-241 < 1 1 E-n? 1?-'.U l.m-?Ll ':\/?LILL < 1 1 F-n? 1/-'{Ll GP10408 (WMA 1, on border of WMA 2) l.-14 < 1 RF-01 ?4-?R Depth to Lavery till - 24 ft Sr-90 7.4E+OO 24-26 Tc-99 < 5.1E-01 24-26 1-129 < 1.1 E-01 24-26 Cs-137 < 5.5E-02 24-26 U-232 4.1 E-02 24-26 U-233/234 8.8E-01 24-26 U-235/236 1.4E-01 24-26 U-238 7 .9E-01 24-26 Np-237 < 6.9E-03 24-26 Pu-238 < 1.2E-02 24-26 Pu-239/240 < 1.2E-02 24-26 Pu-241 < 3.1E-01 24-26 Am-241 < 1.3E-02 24-26 Cm-243/244 < 1.4E-02 24-26 BH-05 (WMA 2, 1993), located Sr-90 8.5E-01 12-14 downgradient of Lagoon 1 Cs-137 12-14 4.SE-01 Depth to Lavery till - 12 ft U-232 1.2E-02 12-14 U-233/234 1.8E-01 12-14 U-235 < 5.9E-03 12-14 U-235/236 < 8.3E-03 12-14 U-238 1.1E-01 12-14 Pu-238 1.0E-02 12-14 Pu-239/240 < 5.9E-03 12-14 Pu-241 < 1.3E+OO 12-14 Am-241 3.0E-02 12-14 BH-07 (WMA 2, 1993) Sr-90 1.3E-01 12-14 Depth to Lavery till - 13 ft Cs-137 7.5E-02 12-14 Revision 2 C-19
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Table C-4. Radiological Concentrations from Soil Samples Containing Lavery Till in the WMA 1 and WMA 2 Excavation Areas(1l
- sample Depth
. Lo.cation Nucljde Re~ult (pCi/g)
'
- 1.nter\fal (ft)
U-232 < 8.7E-03 12-14 U-233/234 2.2E-01 12-14 U-235 < 6.6E-03 12-14 U-235/236 < 7 .6E-03 12-14 U-238 1.5E-01 12-14 Pu-238 < 4.7E-03 12-14 Pu-239/240 < 6.2E-03
- 12-14 Pu-241 9.5E-01 12-14 Am-241 < 5.1E-03 12-14 BH-08 (WMA 2, 1993), located Sr-90 1.8E+02 10-12 downgradient of Lagoon 1 Cs-137 2.5E+02 10-12 Depth to Lavery till - 11 .5 ft U-232 1.9E+01 10-12 U-233/234 9.7E+OO 10-12 U-235 3.2E-01 10-12 U-235/236 5.0E-01 10-12 U-238 1.3E+01 10-12 Pu-238 3.9E+OO 10-12 Pu-239/240 7.6E+OO 10~12 Pu-241 2.7E+01 10-12 Am-241 1.1 E+01 10-12 BH-12 (WMA 2, 1993) Sr-90 1.8E-01 14-16 Depth to Lavery till - 15. 5 ft Cs-137 < 2.2E-02 14-16 U-232 < 6.0E-03 14-16 U-233/234 1.1 E-01 14-16 U-235 < 7.0E-03 14-16 U-235/236 1.3E-02 14-16 U-238 9.7E-02 14-16 Pu-238 < 4.9E-03 14-16 Pu-239/240 < 4.9E-03 14-16 Pu-241 < 1.0E+OO 14-16 Am-241 < 4.6E-03 14-16 BH-13 (WMA 2, 1993) Sr-90 1.8E-01 18-20 Depth to Lavery till - 19 ft Cs-137 2.7E+OO 18-20 U-232 1.6E-02 18-20 U-233/234 8.5E-02 18-20 Revision 2 C-20
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Table C-4. Radiological Concentrations from Soil Samples Containing Lavery Till in the WMA 1 and WMA 2 Excavation Areas(l)
Sample Depth Location Nuclide Result (pCi/g)
Interval (ft)
U-235 < 5.1E-03 18-20 U-235/236 < 8.2E -03 18-20 U-238 5.3E-02 18-20 Pu -238 2.4E-02 18-20 Pu -239/240 2.6E-02 18-20 Pu-241 < 8.1E-01 18-20 Am-241 9.5E -02 18-20 BH -14 (WMA 2, 1993) Sr-90 1.8E+01 14-16 Depth to Lavery till - 1 5 ft Cs-137 1.9E+OO 14-16 U-232 2.0E -02 14-16 U-233/234 1.9E-01 14-16 U-235 < 7.9E-03 14-16 U-235/236 < 1.1E-02 14-16 U-238 2.8E-01 14-16 Pu -238 1.7E-01 14-16 Pu -239/240 1.6E-01 14-16 Pu -241 < 1.1 E+OO 14-16 Am-241 1.1E-0 1 14-16 NOTE: (1) Data are from the 1993 RCRA facility investigation and the other Geoprobe'" studies described in Section 4.
2.0 Information Provided in Attachment 1 Other information associated with the dose mQdeling is provided in Attachment 1. As explained in Section 5, the dose calculations were performed using RESRAD 6.4 and the results were exported to Microsoft Excel for post-processing . Attachment 1 provides :
- RESRAD input files to verify input parameters and model setup,
- RES RAD output files to verify input parameters and results,
- Excel result files containing (1) RESRAD output results (exported from the RESRAD summary report), (2) summaries of data [maximum dose-source ratios (DSRs) and times of maxima). (3) calculation of DCGLw values from the maximum DSRs, (4) ca lculation of area factors and DCGLEMc values , and (5) summary of sensitivity results DCG L development was based on entering unit source concentrations (1 pCi/g) for 18 radionuclides into RESRAD to generate DSRs in units of mrem/y per pCi/g (RESRAD output results based on unit concentrations can be interpreted as either the dose or DSR, and the terms are used interchangeably in this document) . The individual, peak DSRs are then used to generate DCGLs for each radionuclide based on the following equation :
Revision 2 C-21
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS DCGL (pCi/g) = Dose Limit (mrem/y) I Maximum DSR (mrem/y per pCi/g) (Eq.1)
The dose limit of 25 mrem/y and maximum DSRs were used as the basis for developing the DCGLs. Further details regarding the Attachment 1 files are presented below. Because of the uncertainty in the actual distributions and mixtures of radionuclides in the environmental media, the DCGL for each radionuclide is calculated individually.
Following characterization, the working cleanup levels for mixtures can be developed using the sum of fractions method discussed in Chapter 5 of the MARSSIM .
2.1 Input Parameters Tables The parameters input to the RESRAD model include:
- Base case values for the DCGLw calculations,
- Modification of source area only for DCGLEMCcalculations, and
- Variation of key parameters to evaluate model sensitivity The Excel file "WV Sensitivity Parameters Table - Rev1 .xis" (Table C.5) provides a summary of the following parameters which were varied to evaluate model sensitivity.
- Surface Soil Sources Indoor/outdoor time fraction Source thickness Unsaturated zone thickness Irrigation/well pumping rate Soil/water distribution coefficients Hydraulic conductivity (Vertical/Horizontal)
Runoff/Evapotranspiration coefficients/ Infiltration rate Depth of well intake Length of contaminated area parallel to aquifer flow Hydraulic gradient Gamma shielding factor Indoor air filtration factor Mass loading for dust inhalation Depth of roots Food transfer factors Use of mass balance instead of non-dispersion groundwater model
- Subsurface Soil Sources (subsurface soil distributed on the surface) :
Indoor/outdoor time fraction Revision 2 C -22
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Source thickness Unsaturated zone thickness Irrigation/well pumping rate Soil/water distribution coefficients Hydraulic conductivity (Vertical/Horizontal)
Runoff/Evapotranspiration coefficients/ Infiltration rate Gamma shielding factor Indoor air filtration factor Mass loading for dust inhalation Dep~h of roots Food transfer factors
- Stream Bank Sediment sources:
Outdoor time fraction Source thickness Unsaturated zone thickness Soil/water distribution coefficients Runoff/Evapotranspiration coefficients/ Infiltration rate Mass loading for dust inhalation Root depth Food transfer factors These sensitivity parameters were selected based on preliminary model simulations and consideration of parameter priorities presented in Table 4.2 of NUREG -6697 ,
Attachment B (Yu, et al. 2000) . The parameters selected for analysis are discussed further below.
Sensitivity parameter values were selected to represent a reasonable range in order to provide bounds on the uncertainty in the DCGL calculations. The basis for particular parameter values are discussed below.
Indoor/Outdoor fraction - varied from 0.45/0.45 to 0.8/0 .1 from the base case values of 0.66/0.25 . The lower indoor fraction represents equal time indoors and outdoors, while the higher fraction was selected to represent a farmer spending inordinate amounts of time indoors.
Source thickness - for surface soil and sediment, varied from 0.5 to 3m to bound the base case value of 1m with potential thicknesses resulting from remedial activities and to account for potential source erosion uncertainty. For subsurface soi l, the source Revision 2 C-23
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS volume was evaluated for three thickness/area configurations to conserve the total amount of excavated material. The source thickness/area was varied from 0. 1nn/300m 2 2
to 0.6 m/50 m 2 , to bound the base case of 0.3 m/100 m . The subsurface source thickness is dependent on the amount of material excavated during well/cistern installation, and depths less than the base case would correspond with a smaller source area for a given excavated volume (assumed to be - 30 m3).
Unsaturated zone thickness - varied from 1 to 5 m to bound the 2 m base case value with the range possible for the site. The range of results also provides an assessment of potential source erosion uncertainty. llhe sediment model assumes bhat there is no unsaturated zone for the stream bank .
Irrigation/well pumping rate - varied from 0.2/2720 to 0.8/8720 (m/y)/(m 3/y) to bound the base case of 0.5/5720 (m/y)/(m 3/y) . The irrigation rate and well pump rate are directly related and the range reflects changes in crop irrigation only. For all cases, the assumed household and livestock water ingestion rates were held constant. This parameter is applicable to soil exposure only, not to sediment exposure Soil/Water distribution coefficients - varied for each radionuclide based on site-specific data where available. If a range of site-specific distribution coefficients was not available (as was the case for the majority of radionuclides) , values were selected from the literature to provide a bound on the base case uncertainty. The conceptual models assume the sand and gravel unit is representative of the three RESRAD zones (contaminated, unsaturated and saturated), except that in the SB and SD analyses. the contaminated zone is assumed to be represented by the Lavery till.
Hydraulic conductivity - for the contaminated and unsaturated zone, varied the vertical conductivity from 63 m/y (2.0E-04 emfs) to 220 m/y (7.0E-03 emfs) to bound the base case value of 140 m/y (4.4E-04 emfs) which is the average for the sand and gravel unit divided by 10 to account for anisotropy (DEIS Appendix E, Table E-3) .
Similarly for the saturated zone, the horizontal conductivity was varied from 630 to 2200 m/y from the base case of 1400 m/y. The conceptual model assumes the sand and gravel unit is representative of the unsaturated and saturated zone. Values were selected to ensure that the site-specific groundwater conceptual model assumptions (that the well captures the entire width of the plume, but that there is some vertical dilution within the water table) were maintained .
Runoff/evapotranspiration coefficient - varied from 0.41 /0.6 to 0.41/0.9 to bound the base case of 0.41/0.78 . The base case was selected to achieve infiltration rate of 0.26m/y which corresponds to the calibrated three dimensional groundwater model used in the Decommissioning EIS (DEIS Appendix E) . The upper and lower bounds are assumed values for these parameters that maintain the site-specific groundwater dilution assumptions .
Depth of well intake - applicable to non-dispersion model only (surface soil base case) . Varied from 3 to 10 m to bound the base case value of Sm . The lower bound represents the minimum for a 1 m contaminated thickness and 2 m unsaturated zone.
The upper bound represents the upper end of observed thickness of the saturated Revision 2 C-24
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS zone on site . The upper and lower bound values for these parameters also maintain the site- specific groundwater dill!ltion assumptions.
Length of contaminated area parallel to aquifer flow - applicable to non-~ispersion model only (surface soil base case). Varied from 50 m to 200 m to bound the base case of 165 m. Base value was selected to achieve site-specific groundwater dilution factor of 0.2 . Values were selected to ensure that the site-specific groundwater concept ual model assumptions (that the well captures the entire width of the pll!lme, but
~hat there 1 is some vertical dilution within the water table) were maintained .
Hydraulic gradient - applicable to non-dispersion model only (surface soil base case}.
Varied from 0.02 to 0.04 to bound the base case of 0.03 .
Gamma shielding factor - applicable to ~h e surface and subsurface soil models.
Va ni ed from 0.17 to 0.51 to bound base ca se of 0.273, representing a range of possible home construction methods.
Indoor air filtration factor - applicable to ~e surface and Sl!lbsurface soil models.
Varied from 0.4 to 0.75 to evalu ate less oonserva tive assumptions ~han the base case value of 1.0.
Mass loading for inhalation - applicable to all models. For ~e soil models, the range of 4.5E-06 to 2.5E -05 bound the base case of 1.5E-05 g/m3
- For sediment the base case of 3.2E -06 is bounded by the range of 1 E-06 to 1E-05 .
Root depth - applicable to all models. Varied from 0 .3 to 3.0 from the base case of 0.9 m to re~ ect a range of potential crops.
Food transfer factors - varied from the constituent specific base cases by increasing and decreasing each parameter an order of magnitude .
Groundwater model - the surface soil base case non-dispersion model is varied to provide results for the mass balance model for comparison . The RESRAD User's 2
Manual su ggests the non-dispersion model for areas >1,000 m (Yu et al. 2001 , p.E-
- 18) .
2.2 RESRAD Input Files The following RESRAD input files are provided to allow verification of input parameters and reproduction of the output files and summary graphics :
- DCGLw input files:
WV Surface - 10k Base.RAD (Surface soil source of 10,000 m 2)
WV Subsurface - 100 Base .RAD (Subsurface material as a surface source of 100 m 2)
WV Sediment - 1k Base. RAD (Sediment source of 1,000 m2 )
- DCGLEMc input files (varying only source area from DCGLw files):
Surface Soil Source Revision 2 C-25
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS
- WV Surface - 5k EMC .RAD (5 ,000 m2 source)
- WV Surface - 1k EMC .RAD (1 ,000 m2 source) 2
- WV Surface - 500 EMC . RAD (500 m source)
- WV Surface - 100 EMC .RAD (100 m 2 source)
- WV Surface - 50 EMCRAD (50 m 2 source)
- WV Surface - 10 EMC .RAD (10 m 2 source)
WV Surface - 5 EMC .RAD (5 m2 source)
WV Surface - 1 EMC .RAD (1 m 2 source)
Subsurface Source
- WV Subsurface - 50 EMC .RAD (50 m2 source)
- WV Subsurface - 10 EMC .RAD (10 m2 source)
- WV Subsurface - 5 EMC .RAD (5 m2 source)
WV Subsurface - 1 EMC. RAD (1 m 2 source)
Stream Bank Sediment Source
- WV Sediment - 500 EMC.RAD (500 m2 source)
- WV Sediment - 100 EMC.RAD (100 m2 source)
- WV Sediment - 50 EMC .RAD (50 m 2 source)
- WV Sediment- 10 EMC .RAD (10 m 2 source)
- WV Sediment - 5 EMC.RAD (5 m 2 source)
- WV Sediment - 1 EMC . RAD (1 m2 source)
Note: sediment source area width was maintained at 3 m when varying areas to represent assumed stream bank configuration.
- Sensitivity analysis input files :
Surface soil Source
- WV Surface - SENS1 .RAD (decreased indoor fraction)
- WV Surface - SENS2 . RAD (increased indoor fraction)
- WV Surface - SENS3 .RAD (decreased source layer thickness)
- WV Surface - SENS4 .RAD (increased source layer thickness)
- WV Surface - SENS5 .RAD (decreased unsaturated zone thickness)
- WV Surface - SENS6 .RAD (increased unsaturated zone thickness)
- WV Surface - SENS7 .RAD (decreased well pumping rate)
Revision 2 C-26
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS
- WV Surface - SENS8 .RAD (increased well pumping rate)
- WV Surface - SENS9 .RAD (decreased Kct values)
- WV Surface - SENS10. RAD (increased Kct values)
- WV Surface - SENS11.RAD (decreased Kct value)
- WV Surface - SENS12 .RAD (increased Kct value)
- WV Surface - SENS13 .RAD (decreased runoff/evapotranspiration)
- WV Surface - SENS14 .RAD (increased runoff/evapotranspiration)
- WV Surface - SENS15 .RAD (decreased well intake depth)
- WV Surface- SENS16 .RAD (increased well intake depth)
- WV Surface - SENS17 .RAD (decreased length parallel to flow)
- WV Surface - SENS18 .RAD (increased length parallel to flow)
- WV Sunface - SENS19 .RAD (decreased hydraulic gradient)
- WV Surface - SENS20.RAD (increased hydraulic gradient)
- WV Surface - SENS21 .RAD (decreased gamma shielding factor)
- WV Surface - SENS22.RAD (increased gamma shield ing factor)
- WV Surface - SENS23.RAD (decreased indoor air filtration factor)
- WV Surface - SENS24 .RAD (increased indoor air filtration factor)
- WV Surface - SENS25 .RAD (decreased mass loading factor for inhalation)
- WV Surface - SENS26 .RAD (increased mass loading factor for inhalation)
- WV Surface - SENS27 .RAD (decreased root depth)
- WV Surface - SENS28 .RAD (increased root depth)
- WV Surface - SENS29 .RAD (decreased food transfer factors)
- WV Surface - SENS30 .RAD (increased food transfer factors)
- WV Surface - SENS31 .RAD (mass balance groundwater model)
Subsurface Soil Source
- WV Subsurface - SENS1 .RAD (decreased indoor fraction)
- WV Subsurface - SENS2 .RAD (increased indoor fraction)
- WV Subsurface - SENS3.RAD (decreased source layer thickness)
- WV Subsurface - SENS4 .RAD (increased source layer thickness)
- WV Subsurface - SENS5 .RAD (decreased unsaturated zone thickness)
- WV Subsurface - SENS6.RAD (increased unsaturated zone thickness)
Revision 2 C-27
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS
- WV Subsurface - SENS7.RAD (decreased well pumping rate)
WV Subsurface - SENS8.RAD (increased well pumping rate)
- WV Subsurface - SENS9.RAD (decreased Kd values)
- WV Subsurface - SENS10.RAD (inc(eased Kd values)
- WV Subsurface - SENS11 .RAD (decreased Kh value)
- WV Subsurface - SENS12 .RAD (increased Kh value)
- WV Subsurface - SENS13.RAD (decreased runoff/evapotranspiration)
- WV Subsurface - SENS 14.RAD (increased runoff/evapotranspiration)
- WV Subsurface - SENS15.RAD (decreased gamma shielding factor)
- WV Subsurfaoe - SENS16.RAD {inoreased gamma shielding factor)
- WV Subsurface - SENS17.RAD (deoreased indoor air fiil~ra ~ion factor)
- WV Subsurface - SENS18 .RAD (i ncre.ased indoor air filtration factor)
- WV Subsurface - SENS19. RAD (decreased mass loading factor for inhalation)
- WV Subsurface - SENS20.RAD (increased mass loading facrtor for inhalation)
- WV Subsurface - SENS21 .RAD (decreased root depth)
- WV Subsurface - SENS22.RAD (increased root depth)
- WV Subsurface - SENS23 .RAD (decreased food transfer factors)
- WV Subsurface - SENS24 .RAD (increased food transfer factors)
Sediment Source
- WV Sediment - SENS1 .RAD (decreased outdoor fraction)
- WV Sediment - SENS2 .RAD (increased outdoor fraction)
- WV Sediment - SENS3 .RAD (decreased source layer thickness)
- WV Sediment - SENS4 .RAD (increased source layer thickness)
- WV Sediment - SENS5 .RAD (increased unsaturated zone thickness)
- WV Sediment - SENS6.RAD (largest unsaturated zone thickness)
- WV Sediment - SENS7 .RAD (decreased Kd values)
- WV Sediment - SENS8 .RAD (increased Kd values)
- WV Sediment - SENS9 . RAD (decreased runoff/evapotranspiration)
- WV Sediment - SENS10 .RAD (increased runoff/evapotranspiration)
- WV Sediment - SENS11 .RAD (decreased root depth)
Revision 2 C-28
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS
- WV Sediment - SENS12 .RAD (increased root depth)
- WV Sediment - SENS13 .RAD (decreased food transfer factors)
- WV Sediment - SENS14 .RAD (increased food transfer factors)
The dose results from the above input files were the basis for calculation of DCGLw and DCGLEMc values .. The DCGLs were calculated in Excel spreadsheets, based on exported data from the RESRAD summary output report. The following section describes the RESRAD output files, which are provided for informational purposes .
2.3 RESRAD Output Files The RESRAD output files are provided to allow review of results without running the simulations. For the DCGLw simulations, summary, detailed, daughter. and concentration reports are included in the QA files. The summary report is also available for the DCGLEMc simulations. As indicated in the previous section, DCGL calculations are based on data exported from the RESRAD summary output report. RESRAD output files generated are as follows;
- DCGLw output files :
Surface Soil Source
- WV Surface - 1Ok Base_sum .TXT (summary report)
- WV Surface - 1Ok Base_ det. TXT (detailed report)
- WV Surface - 10k Base _dtr.TXT (daughter report)
- WV Surface - 10k Base _conc .TXT (concentration report)
Subsurface Soil Source
- WV Subsurface - 100 Base_sum.TXT (summary report)
- WV Subsurface - 100 Base_det.TXT (detailed report)
- WV Subsurface - 100 Base_dtr.TXT (daughter report)
- WV Subsurface - 100 Base_conc.TXT (concentration report)
Sediment Source
- WV Sediment- 1k Base_sum .TXT (summary report)
- WV Sediment - 1k Base_det.TXT (detailed report)
- WV Sediment - 1k Base_dtr.TXT (daughter report)
- WV Sediment - 1k Base_conc .TXT (concentration report)
- DCGLEMc output files (varying only source area from DCGLw files) :
Surface Soil Source
- WV Surface - Sk EMC_sum.TXT (5 ,000 m 2 source)
- WV Surface - 1k EMC_ sum.TXT (1,000 m 2 source)
Revision 2 C-29 L
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS
- WV Surface - SOO EMC_sum .TXT (SOO m2 source)
- WV Surface - 100 EMC_sum .TXT (100 m2 source) 2
- WV Surface - 10 EMC_sum.TXT (10 m2 source)
- WV Surface - S EMC_sum .TXT (S m 2 source) 2
- WV Surface - 1 EMC_sum.TXT (1 m source}
Subsurface Soil Source
- WV Subsurface - 10 EMC_sum .TXT (10 m2 source) 2
- WV Subsurface - S EMC_sum .TXT (S m source) 2
- WV Subsurface - 1 EMC_sum .TXT (1 m source)
Sediment Source
- WV Sediment - SOO EMC_sum .TXT (SOO m 2 source)
- WV Sediment-100 EMC_sum.TXT (100 m 2 source)
- WV Sediment - 1O EMC_sum .TXT (10 m2 source)
- WV Sediment - S EMC_sum.TXT (S m2 source)
- WV Sediment - 1 EMC_sum.TXT (1 m2 source)
- Sensitivity analysis output files :
Surface Soil Source
- WV Surface - SENS1 _sum.TXT (decreased indoor fraction)
- WV Surface - SENS2_sum .TXT (increased indoor fraction)
- WV Surface - SENS3_sum.TXT (decreased source layer thickness)
- WV Surface - SENS4_sum .TXT (increased source layer thickness)
- WV Surface - SENSS_sum .TXT (decreased unsaturated zone thickness)
- WV Surface - SENS6_sum.TXT (increased unsaturated zone thickness)
- WV Surface - SENS7 _sum.TXT (decreased well pumping rate)
WV Surface - SENS8_sum .TXT (increased well pumping rate)
- WV Surface - SENS9_sum .TXT (decreased Kd values)
- WV Surface - SENS10_sum.TXT (increased Kd values)
- WV Surface - SENS11 _sum .TXT (decreased K value)
Revision 2 C-30
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS
- WV Surface - SENS12_sum.TXT (increased K value)
- WV Surface - SENS13_sum .TXT (decreased runoff/evapotranspiration)
- WV Surface - SENS14_sum .TXT (increased runoff/evapotranspiration)
- WV Surface - SENS1 S_sum .TXT (decreased well intake depth)
- WV Surface - SENS16_sum.TXT (increased well intake depth}
- WV Surface - SENS17_sum .TXT (decreased length parallel to flow)
- WV Surface - SENS18_sum .TXT (increased length parallel to flow)
- WV Surface - SENS19_ sum .TXT {decreased hydraulic gradient)
WV Surface - SENS20_sum.TXT (increased hydraulic gradient)
- WV Surface - SENS21 _ sum .TXT (decreased gamma shielding factor)
- WV Surface - SENS22_sum.TXT (increased gamma shielding factor)
- WV Surface - SENS23_sum.TXT (decreased indoor air filtra tion factor)
- WV Surface - SENS24_sum.TXT (increased indoor air fi ltration factor)
- WV Surface SENS25_ sum.TXT (decreased mass loading factor for inhalation)
- WV Surface SENS26_ sum .TXT (increased mass loading factor for inhalation)
- WV Surface - SENS27 _sum.TXT (decreased root depth)
- WV Surface - SENS28_sum.TXT (increased root depth)
- WV Surface - SENS29_sum .TXT (decreased food transfer factors)
- WV Surface - SENS30_sum .TXT (increased food transfer factors)
- WV Surface - SENS31 _sum .TXT (mass balance groundwater model}
Subsurface Soil Source
- WV Subsurface - SENS1 _sum .TXT (decreased indoor fraction)
- WV Subsurface - SENS2_sum.TXT (increased indoor fraction)
- WV Subsurface - SENS3_sum.TXT (decreased source layer thickness)
- WV Subsurface - SENS4_sum.TXT (increased source layer thickness)
- WV Subsurface - SENSS_sum .TXT (decreased unsaturated zone thickness)
- WV Subsurface - SENS6_sum.TXT (increased unsaturated zone thickness)
- WV Subsurface - SENS7_sum.TXT (decreased well pumping rate)
Revision 2 C -31
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS
- WV Subsurface - SENS8_sum .TXT (increased well pumping rate)
- WV Subsurface - SENS9_sum .TXT (decreased Kd values)
- WV Subsurface - SENS10_sum .TXT (increased Kd values)
- WV Subsurface - SENS11 _sum .TXT (decreased K value)
- WV Subsurface - SENS12_sum.TXT (increased K value)
- WV Subsurface - SENS13_sum .TXT (decreased runoff/evapotranspiration)
- WV Subsurface - SENS14_sum.TXT (increased runoff/evapotranspiration)
- WV Subsurface- SENS15.RAD {decreased gamma shielding factor)
- WV Subsurface - SENS16. RAD (increased gamma shielding factor}
- WV Subsurface - SENS17 .RAD (decreased indoor air filtration factor)
- WV Subsurface - SENS18.RAD (increased indoor air filtration factor)
- WV Subsurface - SENS19.RAD {decreased mass loading factor for inhalation)
- WV Subsurface - SENS20.RAD (increased mass loading factor for inhalation)
- WV Subsurface - SENS21 .RAD (decreased root depth)
- WV Subsurface - SENS22 .RAD (increased root depth)
- WV Subsurface - SENS23_sum .TXT (decreased food transfer factors)
- WV Subsurface - SENS24_sum .TXT (increased food transfer factors)
Stream Bank Sediment Source
- WV Sediment - SENS1 _sum .TXT (decreased outdoor fraction)
- WV Sediment - SENS2_sum .TXT (increased outdoor fraction)
- WV Sediment - SENS3_sum.TXT (decreased source layer thickness)
- WV Sediment - SENS4_sum .TXT (increased source layer thickness)
- WV Sediment - SENS5_sum .TXT (increased unsaturated zone thickness)
- WV Sediment - SENS6_sum.TXT (largest unsaturated zone thickness)
- WV Sediment - SENS7 _sum .TXT (decreased Kd values)
- WV Sediment - SENS8_sum .TXT (increased Kd values)
- WV Sediment - SENS9_sum.TXT (decreased runoff/evapotranspiration)
- WV Sediment - SENS1 O_sum .TXT (increased runoff/evapotranspiration)
- WV Sediment - SENS11 _sum .TXT (decreased root depth)
- WV Sediment - SENS12_sum.TXT (increased root depth).
Revision 2 C-32
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS
- WV Sediment - SENS13_sum.TXT (decreased food transfer factors)
- WV Sediment - SENS14_sum .TXT (increased food transfer factors)
The following section presents the methods used to generate DCGLs from the RESRAD model output previously described .
2.4 Excel Result Files The outputs of the RESRAD simulations (the DSR for each of the radionuclides at various future times) were exported to Excel from the RESRAD summary output report (specifically, the DSR values in the table presented at the bottom of page 45 of each RES RAD summary report) . For each simulation, dose results were exported for each of the 18 radionuclides, which includes the simulation year and dose (for that year) for each radionuclide. These have been generated for DCGLw. DCGLEMC* and sensitivity simulations for each source media and isotope. The peak dose for each radionuclide is identified and used as the basis for the DCGL calculation as follows; DCGLw = Dose Limit I Peak radionuclide DSR (Eq .2)
Specific Excel result files are described below.
2.4.1 Surface Soil DCGLs Surface soil DCGLs were calculated to conform with the annual dose limit for large areas (DCGLw). smaller areas of elevated concentrations (DCGLEMc). and to evaluate the sensitivity of the model to variations in specific parameters . The files associated with these calculations are described below.
Surface Soil DCGLw Values The soil DCGLw values were calculated based on resident farmer exposure for a 2
10,000 m source area and results from the RES RAD summary output report are presented in the Excel file "WVDP Surface DCGLs_Rev1 .XLS" in the sheet "Base" (Table C-6) . The input files for the surface soil evaluation are presented in Section 2.2 . These surface soil DCGLw values are the basis for calculation of surface soil area factors and DCGLEMc values .
Surface Soil DCGLEMc Values The DCGLw values calcu lated on the Excel summary sheet previously discussed serve as the base case for subsequent DCGLEMc development; DCGLEMc values are based on 2
varying the source area from the 10,000 m value used for the DCGLw as discussed in Chapter 5 of the MARSSIM. The Excel file "WV Surface DCGLs_Rev1 .XLS" has sheets for each of the source areas used to generate the DCGLEMC (Tables C-7 to C-14) . The sheet "Summary" in the Excel file "WV Surface DCGLs_Rev1 .XLS " summarizes the DCGLEMc (Table C-15} and Soil Area Factors (TableC-16) for each of the 18 radio nuclides and selected *source areas (ranging from 1 to 10,000 m2) .
Revision 2 C-33
DOE R ESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Surface Soil DCGLw Sensitivity Analysis The surface soil DCGLw sensitivity to key parameters was assessed by varying the input values for specific parameters and tabulating the results . The Excel file "WV Surface DCGL Sensitivity_Rev1 .XLS" contains the DSRs and DCGLs for each of 18 radionuclides from the RES RAD summary report output for each of the sensitivity simulations. Results of each run are in sheets SENS1 through SENS31 (Tables C-17 to C-47). Also included in the file are a summarization of the calcu lated DCGLs (Table C-48) and a summary of the percent change from the base case (Table C-49) for each of the sensitivity runs (also presented in Table 5-9) . Table C-50 below presents a summary of the surface soil sensitivity results .
Table C-50 Summary of Surface Soil DCGL Sensitivity Analysis Change in Minimum Maximum Parameter Run Sensitivity Parameter Change Nuclide(s) Change Nuclide(s)
Cm-244 1 -32% -22% U-232 0%
Indoor/Outdoor Fraction C-141 -129 Np-2 21 % 0% 237 Tc-99 U- 28% U-232 234 3 -50% 9% U-232 231 % C-14 Source Am-241 Cm-Thickness 243 Cm-244 4 200% -57% C-14 0%
Cs-137 Pu-239 Pu -240 Am-241 C-14 Cm-243 Cm -
244 Cs-137 5 -50% -10% Tc-99 0%
Pu -238 Pu-239 Pu -240 Unsaturated Sr-90 U-232 Zone Thickness Am-241 C-14 Cm-243 Cm-244 Cs-137 Pu-6 150% 0% 12% U-235 238 Pu-239 *Pu -
240 Sr-90 U-232 Irrigation/Pump 7 -57% -1% U-232 65% 1-129 Rate 8 70% -36% 1-129 1% U-232 Soil/Water 9 lower -99% Pu-239 2% C-14 Distribution 10 higher -3% U-232 867% U-234 Coefficients (Kd)
Revision 2 C-34
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Table C-50 Summary of Surface Soil DCGL Sensitivity Analysis Change in Minimum Maximum Parameter Run Sensitivity Parameter Change Nuclide(s) Change Nuclide(s)
Am-241 C-14 Cm-243 Cm-244 Cs-137 11 -55% -36% 1-129 0%
Pu -238 Pu-239 Pu-240 Hydraulic Sr-90 U-232 Conductivity (Kh) Am-241 C-14 Cm-243 Cm-244 Cs-137 Pu-12 57% 0% 40% 1-129 238 Pu-239 Pu-240 Sr-90 U-232 Runoff/Evapora 13 -23% -29% U-234 2% U-232 tion Coeffi cient 14 15% -2% U-232 81 % Np-237 Am-241 C-14 Cm-243 Cm-244 Cs-137 15 -40% -40% 1-129 0.0%
Pu-238 Pu-239 Pu-240 Depth of Well Sr-90 U-232 Intake Am-241 C-14 Cm-243 Cm -
244 Cs-137 Pu-16 100% 0% 99% 1-129 238 Pu-239 Pu-240 Sr-90 U-232 Am-241 C-14 Cm-243 Cm-Length Parallel 244 Cs-137 Pu -
17 -30% 0% 30% 1-129 to Aquifer Flow 238 Pu-239 Pu -
240 Sr-90 U-232 Am-241 C-14 Cm-243 Cm-244 Cs-137 18 21 % -12% 1-129 0.0% Pu-238 Pu-239 Pu-240 Pu-241 Sr-90 U-232 Am-241 C-14 Cm -243 Cm-Hydraulic 244 Cs-137 19 -33% -23% 1-129 0 .0%
Gradient Pu-238 Pu-239 Pu-240 Sr-90 U-232 Revisio n 2 C-35
DOE R ESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Table C-50 Summary of Surface Soil DCGL Sensitivity Analys is Change in Minimum Maximum Parameter Run Sensitivity Parameter Change Nuclide(s) Change Nuclide(s)
Am-241 C-14 1-129 Cm-243 Cm-244 Cs-137 Pu-20 33% 0% 23.3%
238 Pu -239 Pu -
240 Sr-90 U-232 Gamma Shielding 21 -38% 0% no change 0.0% no change Factor 22 87% -24% U- 232 0.0% Np-237 C-14Cs-1371-Indoor Dust 23 -60% 0% 129 Np-237 Sr- 0.6% Cm -244 Filtration Factor 90 Tc-99 U-234 C-14Cs-1371 -
129 Np-237 Sr-24 -25% 0% 0.3% Pu-241 90 Tc-99 U-233 U-234 C-14 Cs-137 I-Dust Load ing 25 -70% 0% 129 Np-237 Sr- 1.0% Cm-244 Factor 90 Tc-99 U-234 C-14 Cs- 137 1-129 Sr-90 26 67% -1% Cm -244 0.0%
Tc-99 U-235 U-238 27 -67% 0% no change 0.0% no change Root Depth 28 233% 0% 1-129 199.7% C-14 29 lower -38% U-235 875% Sr-90 Food Transfer Factors 30 higher -97 % Sr-90 -14% Np-237 Am-241 C-14 Cm-243 Cm-Mass Balance 244 Cs-137 31 NA -67% U-234 0.0%
Model Pu -238 Pu-239 Pu-240 Sr-90 U-232 2.4.2 Subsurface Soil (Lavery till) DCGLs To evaluate an excavation that would expose the resident farmer to subsurface material , DCGLs were developed to address this potential future source. It is possible that a farmer may install a cistern or well to access groundwater, and in the excavation process, Revision 2 C-36
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS contaminated Lavery till material from the subsurface may be spread on the ground surface and be a source of exposure. The following subsections discuss the files associated with this calculation.
Subsurface Soil DCGLw Values The subsurface DCGLw values are presented in the Excel file "WV Subsurface DCGLs_Rev1 .XLS" in the sheet "Base" (TableC-51), and are based on the RESRAD input file "WV Subsurface - 100 Base .RAD " and results from page 45 of the RESRAD summary output report "WV Subsurface - 100 Base .TXT".
2 For calculation of the distributed soil, DCG Lw values for a 100 m source area of Lavery till on the surface were increased by a factor of 10 to account for an assumed blending of residually contaminated till with clean overlying soil in the excavation process (assuming 0.5 m of till for each 5 m of total excavation) . This factor is applied to the final RESRAD generated DCGLw as presented in the overall summary table (See "DCGL Summary" section) .
The input files for the subsurface soil evaluation are discussed in Section 2.2. These Lavery Till DCGLw values are used as the basis for calculation of the subsurface soil DCGLEMC values and for sensitivity analysis as described below.
Subsurface Soil DCGLEMc Values Calculation of DCGLEMC values for the subsurface Lavery till was based on the base 2
case area of 100 m used for development of the DCGLw values (after accounting for blending) . The DCGLEMc values were generated by varying the source area . The RESRAD output for these simulations are presented and summarized in the Excel file "WV Subsurface DCGLs_Rev1 .XLS". The results for each source area are presented in individual sheets (Tables C-52 to C-55). The sheet "Summary" presents the DCGLEMc values (Table C-56) and subsurface soil area factors (Table C-57 ) for each of the 18 radionuclides and selected source areas (ranging from 1 to 100 m2).
Subsurface Soil Sensitivity Analysis The subsurface soil DCGLw sensitivity to key parameters was assessed by varying the input values for specific parameters and tabulating the results . The Excel file "WV Subsurface DCGL Sensitivity_Rev1 .XLS " contains the OS Rs and DCGLs for each of 18 radionuclides from the RESRAD summary report output for each of the sensitivity simulations . Results of each run are in sheets SENS1 through SENS24 (Tables C-58 to C-81 ). Also included in the file is a summarization of the calculated DCGLs (Table C-82) and a summary of the percent change from the base case (Table C-83) for each of the sensitivity runs (also presented in Table 5-1 O) . Table C-84 below presents a summary of the subsurface soil sensitivity results.
Table C-84 Summary of Subsurface Soil DCGL Sensitivity Analysis Change in Minimum Maximum Sensitivity Parameter Run Parameter Change Nuclide(s) Change Nuclide(s)
Indoor/Outdoor 1 -32% -25 % Cs-137 0.5% Pu-238 Fraction 2 21 % 0% C-14 35% U-232 Revision 2 C-37
DOE RESPO NSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Table C-84 Summary of Subsurface Soil DCGL Sensitivity Analys is Change in Minimum Maximum Sensitivity Parameter Run Change Nuclide(s) Change Nuclide(s)
Parameter Source 3 -67 % -65% U-238 204% Tc-99 Thickness 4 233% -33% C-14 98% U-234 5 -50% - 2% Np-237 58% U-238 Am-241 C-14 Cm -243 Cm -244 Unsaturated Cs-13 7 Pu-238 Zone Thickness 6 1'50% 0% Pu- 239 Pu-240 2218% U- 23 4 Pu-241 Sr-90 T c- 99 U-2 32 U-2 35 7 -57 % -39% 1-129 57% U-238 Irrigation/Pump Rate Am-241 Cm-243 Cm-244 Pu -
8 70% 0% 20% 1-129 238 Pu -239 Pu-240 Soil/Water 9 lower -99% Pu-239 116% U-232 Distribution Coefficients 10 higher -20% U-232 2168% U-234 (Kd)
Hydraulic 11 -55% 0% No change 0% No change Conductivity (Kh) 12 57% 0% No change 0% No cha nge Runoff/Evapora 13 -23% -44% U-234 61 % U-238 tion Coefficient 14 15% -11 % U-232 117% U-234 Indoor Gamma 15 -38% 0% U-238 19% U-232 Shielding Factor 16 87% -27% Cs-137 1% U-238 17 -60% 0% U-238 13% Cm -244 Indoor Dust C-14 Cs-137 I-Filtration Factor 129 Np-237 Sr- '
18 -25% 0% 5% Cm-244 90 Tc-99 U-233 U-234 U-238 19 -70% 0% U-238 22% Cm-244 Inhalation Dust C-14Cs-1371-Loading 20 67% -15% Cm-244 0% 129 Np-237 Sr-90 Tc-99 21 -67% -67 % Tc-99 1% U-233 Root Depth 22 233% 0% U-238 227 % Tc-99 Revision 2 C-38
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Table C-84 Summary of Subsurface Soil DCGL Sensitivity Analysis Change in Minimum Maximum Sensitivity Parameter Run Parameter Change Nuclide(s) Change Nuclide(s)
Food Transfer 23 lower -0.1% U-238 582% Tc-99 Factors 24 higher -93 % Sr-90 0% U-234 2.4.3 Streambed Sediment DCGLs DCGLs were also developed to account for potential exposure associated with stream bank sediment (including direct pathways, fish ingestion, and venison ingestion). The stream bank rather than the streambed was the focus of the analysis because the recreationist is assumed to be in direct contact with the stream bank, and not the stream bed.
Files associated with the calculations are discussed below and presented in the files attachment.
Streambed Sediment DCGLw Values The sediment DCGLw values were calculated based on a recreationist exposure for a 2
1,000 m source area and results from the RESRAD summary output report are presented in the Excel file "WVDP Surface DCGLs_Rev1 .XLS" in the sheet "Base" (Table C-85). The input files for the sediment evaluation are discussed in Section 2.2. These sediment DCGLw values are the basis for calculation of Sediment Area Factors and DCGLEMC values.
Streambed Sediment DCGLEMc Values The DCGLw values calculated on the Excel summary sheet previously discussed serve as the base case for subsequent DCGLEMC development, which are based on varying the 2
source area from the 1,000 m value used for the DCGLw values . The RESRAD output for these simulations are presented and summarized in the Excel file "WV Sediment DCGLs_Revl .XLS". The results for each source area are presented in individual sheets (Tables C-86 to C-91). The sheet "Summary" presents the DCGLEMC values (Table C-92) and sediment area factors (Table C-93) the 18 radionuclides and selected source areas (ranging from 1 to 1,000 m 2) .
Streambed Sediment Sensitivity Analysis The sediment DCGLw sensitivity to key parameters was assessed by varying the input values and tabulating the results . The Excel file "WV Sediment DCGL Sensitivity_Revl .XLS" contains the RESRAD summary report output for each of the sensitivity simulations . Results of each run are in sheets SENS1 through SENS14 (Tables C-94 to C-107). Also included in the file is a summarization of the calculated DCGLs (Table C-108) and percent change from the base case (Tabl e C-109) for each of the sensitivity runs (also presented in Table 5-11) . Table C-11 0 below presents a summary of the sediment sensitivity analysis.
Revision 2 C-39
DOE R ESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSION ING PLAN RAIS Table C-110 Summary of Sediment DCGL Sensitivity Analysis Change in Minimum Maximum Parameter Run Sensitivity Parameter Change Nuclide(s) Change Nuclide(s) 1 -50% 0% C-14 98% Cm-243 Outdoor Fraction 2 100% - 50% Cm-243 0% C-14 Am-241 3 -50% 0% 157% C-14 Cm-243 Source Thickness Am-241 Cm-243 Cm-244 4 200% -52% C-14 0%
Pu-238 Pu-239 Pu -240 Soil/Water 5 lower -91 % Pu -239 26% U-232 Distribution Coefficients (Kd) 6 higher -65% U-233 52 % U-234 Am-241 Cm-243 Cm-244 Cs-7 -23% 0% 4% U-232 137 Pu-238 Pu -239 Pu-240 Runoff/Evaporation Coefficient Am-241 Cm-243 Cm-244 Cs-137 Pu-8 15% -3% 1-129 0% 238 Pu-239 Pu-240 9 -70% 0% Np-237 1% Cm-244 Mass Loading for Inhalation C-14Cs-137 10 67% -4% Cm-244 0%
1-1 29 Sr-90 11 -67% 0% no change 0% no change Root Depth Cm-243 U-12 233% 0% 50% Sr-90 232 U-235 Food Transfer 13 lower 1% Cm-243 852% Sr-90 Factors 14 higher -98% Sr-90 -11 % Cm-243 Consideration of Subsurface Lavery till as a Continuing Source to Groundwater An evaluation of the potential for the Lavery till to act as a continuing source to groundwater was conducted and concluded the following (See section 3.7 and Table 3-19 of the body of the plan) :
- A well screened entirely in the Lavery Till could not produce enough groundwater for the resident farmer scenario.
Revision 2 C-40
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS
- A well screened in both the sand and gravel unit and Lavery till would likely pump mostly groundwater from the sand and gravel unit due to the much higher relative hydraulic conductivity and subsequent development of preferential flowpaths, and contain highly diluted contributions of contaminated groundwater from the Lavery Till.
- Advective movement from the Lavery Till to the overlying Sand and Gravel Unit is unlikely considering the vertical downward groundwater gradient.
- Diffusive movement from the Lavery Till to the Sand and Gravel Unit is unlikely considering the very low diffusion coefficients for radionuclides .
- Migration vertically upward from the till through the aquifer and into a well that is screened several meters above the till is unlikely.
DCGL Summary The Excel File "WV DCGL Summary Tables_Rev1 .xis" (Table C-111 ) summarizes the DCGLs for the surface soil, subsurface soil and sediment, and presents DCGLw and DCGLEMc for a 1 m2 area (also presented in Table S-8).
Integrated Dose Assessment In order to account for potential exposure to multiple sources, a combined dose assessment was conducted . The assessment considered which combination of exposures was likely, and conclud ed that the resident farmer may also spend time in recreation along the stream bank.
The Excel File "WV DCGL Summary Tables_Rev1 .xis" presents the calculated DCGLw and DCGLEMC values when considering the combined doses from surface soil (90% x 25 mrem/y = 22.5 mrem/y) and sediment sources (10% x 25 mrem/y = 2.5 mrem/y). which are summarized in Tables C-112, C-113, and C-114 (also presented in Table 5-13) . In the same Excel file, Table C-115 presents the cleanup goals to be used as the criteria for the remediation activities. Values in Table C-11.5 represent the DCGLw and DCGLEMC values for surface soil and sediment (considering the combined dose), as well as cleanup goals for subsurface soil (which are 50 percent of the DCGLw and DCGLEMC values adjusted to provide a margin of confidence/safety factor for excavation success for each radionuclide (also presented in Table 5-12) .
Evaluation of Institutional Control Period After Phase 1 remediation there is assumed to be a 30 year period of institutional controls (associated with storage of the HLW canisters until 2041), prior to site access by the critical receptors. During this period, radionuclide inventories will be subject to decay and leaching, which will result in site concentrations at the time of exposure that are reduced from th e initial concentrations left at the time of remediation. With the exception of Sr-90 and Cs-137, DCGLs were developed neglecting the effects of decay and leaching from the source during the 30 year institutional control period . The ratio of the initial concentrations in soil to the RESRAD generated soil concentration after a 30 year Revision 2 C-41
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS simulation was used to provide an evaluation of uncertainty associated with the assumption of neglecting decay/leaching . A RESRAD simu1ation was run using the surface soil base case without irrigation, well pumping. or plant/animal/human uptake from soil (see RESRAD input file "WV SURFACE - 10k - LCH_DCAY .RAD" and output file "WV SURFACE -10k - LCH_DCAY_sum .txt" . The RESRAD concentration output summary file (see page 8 of the file "WV SURFACE - 10k - LCH_DCAY_conc.txt") provides the soil concentration at year 30, which is then related to the initial soil concentration to quantify the effects of leaching/decay (see Excel file "WV Institutional Control.xis" Table C-116).
Evaluation of Potential Dose Drivers and Sensitivity Parameters The impact of specific sensitivity parameters is dependent on the radionuclides that contribute the majority of the dose to the receptor. Due to limited site data, a full evaluation cannot be performed until additional site characterization data is available. In the interim, Table C-117 presented below identifies the primary dose pathways for each radionuclide and indicates which of the sensitivity parameters have significant impact on the dose. This evaluation will be refined as additional site data are collected .
Table C-117 Summary of Primary Dose Pathways Year of Nuclide Primary Pathway for Dose Key ParametersPl Peak Dose Surface Soil Am-241 Water independent (plant uptake) plant transfer factors, source thickness O.OOE+OO C-14 Water independent (plant uptake) source thickness O.OOE+OO Cm-243 External Exposure, Water independent plant transfer factors , source thickness O.OOE+OO (plant uptake)
Cm-244 Water independent (plant uptake) plant transfer factors, source thickness O.OOE+OO Cs-137 External Exposure outdoor fraction, plant transfer factors O.OOE+OO 1-129 Water dependent (water ingestion, plant K, Kd, runoff/evap coefficients, well intake 9.21E+OO and milk uptake) depth, groundwater model Np-237 Water dependent (water ingestion, plant hydraulic conductivity, Kd, runoff/evap 2.01 E+01 uptake) coefficients, well intake depth, groundwater model Pu-238 Water independent (plant uptake) Kd, plant transfer factors O.OOE+OO Pu-239 Water independent (plant uptake) Kd, plant transfer factors O.OOE+OO Pu-240 Water independent (plant uptake) Kd, plant transfer factors O.OOE+OO Pu-241 Water independent (plant uptake) Kd, plant transfer factors 5.52E+01 Sr-90 Water independent (plant uptake) source thickness, plant transfer factors , Kd, O.OOE+OO groundwater r:nodel Tc-99 Water dependent (water ingestion, plant source thickness, well intake depth , plant 1.54E+OO uptake), independent (plant uptake) transfer factors, length parallel to flow, Kd , K, groundwater model U-232 External Exposure outdoor fraction , plant transfer factors 8.17E+OO Revision 2 C-42
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Table C-117 Summary of Primary Dose Pathways Year of Nuclide Primary Pathway for Dose Key Parameters(1l Peak Dose U-233 Water dependent (water ingestion, plant irrigation/pump rate, Kd, runoff/evap 2.96E+02 uptake) coefficients, groundwater model U-234 Water dependent (water ingestion, plant irrigation/pump rate, Kd, runoff/evap 2.96E+02 uptake) coefficients, groundwater model U-235 Water dependent (water ingestion , plant irrigation/pump rate, Kd, runoff/evap 2.96E+02 uptake) coefficients, groundwater model U-238 Water dependent (water ingestion, plant irrigation/pump rate, Kd, runoff/evap 2.96E+02 uptake) coefficients, groundwater model Subsurface Soil Am-241 External Exposure, Water independent source thickness, plant transfer factors O.OOE+OO (plant uptake)
C-14 Water independent (plant uptake) source thickness O.OOE+OO Cm-243 External Exposure outdoor fraction , source thickness O.OOE+OO Cm-244 Water independent (plant uptake) source thickness, plant transfer factors O.OOE+OO Cs-137 External Exposure outdoor fraction , source thickness O.OOE+OO 1-129 Water dependent (water ingestion) source thickness, irrigation/pump rate, Kd , 6.32E+OO runoff/evap coefficients Np-237 Water independent (soil ingestion, plant source thickness, Kd , runoff/evap coefficients 1.37E+01 uptake)
Pu-238 Water independent (plant uptake, soil source thickness, Kd, plant transfer factors O.OOE+OO ingestion and inhalation)
Pu-239 Water independent (plant uptake, soil source thickness, Kd, plant transfer factors O.OOE+OO ingestion and inhalation)
Pu-240 Water independent (plant uptake, soil source thickness, Kd, plant transfer factors O.OOE+OO ingestion and inhalation)
Pu-241 Water independent (plant uptake) source thickness, Kd, plant transfer factors 6.14E+01 Sr-90 Water independent (plant uptake) source thickness, Kd, plant transfer factors O.OOE+OO Tc-99 Water dependent (plant uptake) source thickness, plant transfer factors O.OOE+OO U-232 External Exposure outdoor fraction , source thickness 4.60E+OO U-233 Water dependent (water ingestion) Kd, runoff/evap coefficients 1.97E+02 U-234 Water dependent (water ingestion) Kd , runoff/evap coefficients 1.97E+02 U-235 External Exposure outdoor fraction , source thickness , Kd O.OOE+OO U-238 Water dependent (water ingestion) source thickness , irrigation/pump rate, Kd , 1.98E+02 runoff/evap coefficients, groundwater model Sediment Am-241 External Exposure, Soil ingestion, Water outdoor fraction O.OOE+OO Revision .2 C-43
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Table C-117 Summary of Primary Dose Pathways Year of Nuclide Primary Pathway for Dose Key Parameters(1l Peak Dose independent (meat uptake)
C-14 Water independent (meat uptake). Water source thickness, unsaturated thickness, Kd O.OOE+OO dependent (fish uptake)
Cm-243 External Exposure outdoor fraction O.OOE+OO Cm-244 Soil ingestion outdoor fraction O.OOE+OO Cs-137 External Exposure outdoor fraction O.OOE+OO 1-129 Water independent (meat uptake), Water unsaturated thickness, Kd, fish transfer O.OOE+OO dependent (fish uptake) factors Np-237 External Exposure, Water independent unsaturated thickness, Kd , fish transfer O.OOE+OO (meat uptake), Water dependent (fish factors uptake)
Pu-238 Water independent (meat uptake), Soil outdoor fraction , Kd O.OOE+OO ingestion Pu-239 Water independent (meat uptake), Soil outdoor fraction, Kd 2.82E-01 ingestion Pu-240 Water independent (meat uptake), Soil outdoor fraction, Kd 1.18E-01 ingestion Pu-241 External Exposure, Water independent outdoor fraction , Kd 5.78E+01 (meat uptake), Soil ingestion Sr-90 Water independent (meat uptake) plant and fish transfer factors O.OOE+OO Tc-99 Water independent (meat uptake) Kd, plant and fish transfer factors O.OOE+OO U-232 External Exposure outdoor fraction , Kd 7.72E+OO U-233 External Exposure, Water independent outdoor fraction, unsaturated thickness, Kd, 1.56E-01 (meat uptake), Water dependent (fish plant and fish transfer factors uptake)
U-234 Water independent (meat uptake), Water outdoor fraction , unsaturated thickness, Kd, 1.81E-01 dependent (fish uptake) fish transfer factors U-235 External Exposure outdoor fraction O.OOE+OO U-238 External Exposure outdoor fraction, fish transfer factors O.OOE+OO NOTE: (1) Key parameters identified in sensitivity runs. As additional site characterization data becomes available. the radionuclides driving dose and parameters most critical to calculating dose can be used to refine the sensitivity analysis.
3.0 References Beyeler, et al. 1999, Residual Radioactivity from Decommissioning, Parameter Analysis, NUREGICR-5512, Vol 3, Draft Report for Comment. Beyeler, W. E.. W. A.
Hareland , F. A. Duran, T. J. Brown, E. Kalinina , D. P. Gallegos, and P. A. Davis, Sandia National Laboratories, Albuquerque, New Mexico, October 1999.
Revision 2 C-44
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Dames and Moore, 1995a, Testing and Characterization of Glacial Deposits: Geochemical and Radionuclide Adsorption Data, Project 10805-953-8251 . Dames and Moore, Orchard Park, New York, June 26, 1995.
Dames and Moore, 1995b, Investigation of Strontium Behavior in the Surficial Sand and Gravel-Groundwater System, Project 10805-953-8251 . Dames and Moore, Orchard Park, New York, June 9, 1995.
EPA 1997, Exposure Factors Handbook. National Center for Environmental Assessment.
Office of Research and Development. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C .. 1997.
N RC 1997, Generic Environmental Impact Statement in Support of Rulemaking on Radiological Criteria for License Termination of NRG-Licensed Nuclear Facilities; Final Policy Statement. NUREG-1496, Vol. 1. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Regulatory Research, Division of Regulatory Applications , Washington, D.C .. July 1997.
Sheppard and Thibault 1990, "Default Soil Solid/Liquid Partition Coefficients, Kds, for Four Major Soil Types: A Compendium ," Sheppard, M.I .. and D.H. Thibault. Health Physics, 59 :471-482, 1990.
Sheppard, et. al .. 2006, "Revision and meta-analysis of selected biosphere parameter values for chlorine, iodine, neptunium , radium , radon, and uranium", Journal of Environmental Radioactivity, 89: 115-137, 2006.
Yu , et al. 1993, Data Collection Handbook to Support Modeling Impacts of Radioactive Material in Soil. Yu, C .. et al .. Environmental Assessment and Information Sciences Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois, April 1993.
Yu, et al. 2000, Development of Probabilistic RESRAD 6.0 and RESRAD-BUILD 3.0 Computer Codes, NUREG/CR-6697, ANL/EAD/TM-98 . Yu, C.. et al ..
Environmental Assessment Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois, November 2000.
Yu , et al. 2001 , User's Manual for RESRAD Version 6, ANL/EAD-4. Yu, C.. et al ..
Environmental Assessment Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois, July 2001 .
WVNSCO 1993a, Environmental Information Document, Volume I, Geology, WVDP-EIS-004, Rev. 0. West Valley Nuclear Services Company, West Valley, New York, 1993.
WVNSCO 1993b, Environmental Information Document, Volume Ill, Hydrology: Part 4, Groundwater Hydrology and Geochemistry, WVDP-EIS-009, Rev. 0. West Valley Nuclear Services Company, West Valley, New York, 1993.
WVNSCO 1993c, Environmental Information Document, Volume Ill, Hydrology: Part 5, Vadose Zone Hydrology, .WVDP-EIS-009, Rev. 0. West Valley Nuclear Services Company, West Valley, New York, 1993.
Revision 2 C-45
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS WVNSCO 1993d, Environmental Information Document, Volume VIII, Air Resources: Part 2, Meteorology, WVDP-EIS -014 , Rev. 0. West Valley Nuclear Services Company, West Valley, New York, 1993.
Attachments
- 1. Electronic Files Described in Section 2 (provided separately}
- 2. Eleotronic File Desoribed in Section 1 (provided separately)
Revision 2 C-46
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN APPENDIX D ENGINEERED BARRIERS AND POST-REMEDIATION ACTIVITIES PURPOSE OF THIS APPENDIX The purpose of this appendix is to provide additional detail on engineered barriers installed during Phase 1 decommissioning and describe the post-remediation monitoring , maintenance, and institutional control program to be implemented for the WVDP premises following Phase 1 Decommissioning .
INFORMATION IN THIS APPENDIX This appendix includes information on engineered barrier conceptual designs and the conceptual post-remediation monitoring , maintenance, and institutional control program ,
organized as follows :
- Section 1 describes the conceptual designs of the engineered barriers to be installed during Phase 1 decommissioning ;
- Section 2 describes the conceptual post-remediation site monitoring and maintenance program that will be implemented for the project premises at the conclusion of Phase 1 decommissioning;
- Section 3 describes the conceptua l post-remediation site institutional control program that will be implemented for the project premises at the conclusion of Phase 1 decommissioning .
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLAN SECTIONS Information provided in Section 1 on the project background and Section 7 on decommissioning activities, will help place the information in this appendix into context.
The content of Appendix D, like that of other parts of the plan , is consistent with the annotated NRC decommissioning plan checklist in Appendix A, which expresses NRC's expectations for section content.
1.0 Description of Engineered Barriers This section presents a detailed description of the conceptual designs for the engineered barriers to be installed during Phase 1 decommissioning , supplementing the physical descriptions previously presented in Section 7. Engineered barriers will be installed at the WMA 1 and WMA 2 excavations to facilitate the removal of sub-grade structures, excavate contaminated soil to meet unrestricted release criteria , and to prevent the recontamination of the WMA 1 and WMA 2 excavated areas by the non-source area of the North Plateau Plume .
The final design of the barrier walls and French drain will be prepared by the site decommissioning contractor after Phase 1 decommissioning activities start in 2011 . The final design details of the hydraulic barriers and French drain will be provided to the NRC for technical review before their installation , as indicated in Section 1.6 of this plan.
Revision 2 D-1
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN The development of the WMA 1 and WMA 2 hydraulic barrier walls and French drain designs will be supported by the collection of subsurface soil geotechni cal data, the installation of groundwater monitoring wells to provide groundwater eleva'tiorn monitoring data, and groundwater modeling to evaluate the potential impacts these structures have on groundwater flow patterns in WMA 1 and WMA 2 and in surrounding areas such as WMA 3.
According to the NRC's Final Policy Statement (67 FR 22), engineered barriers are generally passive manmade structures or devices intended to improve a facility's ability to meet a site's performance objectives. While institutional controls are designed to restrict access, engineered barriers are usually designed to inhibit water from contacting waste , limit releases , or mitigate doses to intruders.
1.1 Waste Management Area 1 Phase 1 of the WVDP decommissioning will include the removal of all above grade and sub-grade structures of WMA 1 and the removal of the underlying soils associated with the source area of the north plateau groundwater plume to a.maximum depth of approximately 50 feet. The removal of the sub-grade structures and the soils of the source area of the plume will require the installation of temporary and permanent subsurface hydraulic barrier walls prior to excavation as described in Section 7. A French drain system will be installed in the backfilled excavation to prevent mounding of groundwater against the permanent barrier wall as described in Section 7. The WMA 1 barrier walls and French drai n will be designed to result in minimal changes to groundwater flow patterns and water levels in WMA 3. These barrier walls and the French drain system are described in greater detail below.
1.1.1 Need for Subsurface Engineered Barriers and French Drain During Phase 1 decommissioning sub-grade structures (building cells , underground piping and tanks) and underlying vadose and saturated soils associated with the source area of the North Plateau Plume in WMA 1 will be removed down into the underlying Lavery till to meet the unrestricted release criteria in 10 CFR 20.1402. Much of the WMA 1 excavation will be within the saturated sand and gravel unit within the north plateau groundwater plume .
Subsurface hydraulic barrier walls will be installed on each side of the WMA 1 excavation to :
- Isolate the excavation from the non-source area of the north plateau groundwater plume ,
- Prevent groundwater intrusion into the excavation from the surrounding sand and gravel unit,
- Allow dewatering of saturated soils within the excavation ,
- Facilitate removal of sub-grade structures,
- Allow excavation of subsurface soil down into the Lavery till and up to the hydraulic barrier walls ,
- Allow final status surveys and NRC confirmatory surveys to be performed in the bottom and sides of the excavation , and
- Prevent recontamination of the remediated and backfilled WMA 1 excavation from the Revision 2 D-2
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN non-source area of the north plateau groundwater plume until a Phase 2 decommissioning decision is made.1 Subsurface soil characterization will be performed in WMA 1 before excavation begins to identify the lateral extent of subsurface soil contamination associated with the source area of the North Plateau Plume. This subsurface soil data will be used to locate the temporary interlocking sheet piling which will be driven through the uncontaminated sand and gravel unit into the underlying Lavery till on the upgradient and cross-gradient sides of the WMA 1 excavation to prevent groundwater intrusion into the excavation from upgradient sources. A permanent hydraulic barrier of slurry wall type construction will be installed on the downgradient side of the excavation in soil contam inated by the north plateau groundwater plume to act as an intrusion barrier to prevent the migration of Sr-90 contaminated groundwater from the non-source area of the north plateau groundwater plume into the WMA 1 excavation .
The permanent downgradient hydraulic barrier will :
- Prevent recontamination of the remediated and backfilled WMA 1 excavation from the non-source area of the plume until a Phase 2 decommissioning decision is made, and
- Minimize groundwater recharge to the non -source area of the plume, thereby minimizing hydraulic heads and groundwater velocity.
A French drain system will be installed adjacent and hydraulically upgradient of the permanent hydraulic barrier wall once the WMA 1 excavation has been backfilled to maintain groundwater elevations near their current levels. The French drain system will :
- Prevent groundwater mounding against, and potential overtopping of, the permanent downgradient hydraulic barrier wall ;
- Maintain hydraulic heads on the upgradient side of the barrier wall that coincide with the elevation of the French drain system , that are higher than groundwater levels downgradient of the barrier wall . This will create a hydraulic gradient towards the non-source area of the north plateau groundwater plume, preventing seepage from the plume through the wall into the backfilled excavation ; and
- In conjunction with the permanent downgradient hydraulic barrier, minimize groundwater recharge to the non-source area of the North Plateau Plume thereby minimizing hydraulic heads and groundwater velocity across the North Plateau.
1.1.2 Hydraulic Barrier Walls and French Drain System The WMA 1 excavation will require the installation of approximately 2,250 linear feet of subsurface hydraulic barrier wall comprised of temporary interlocking steel sheet piling on the upgradient and cross-gradient sides of the excavation and a permanent hydraulic barrier wall on the downgradient side of the excavation before excavation begins as shown on Figure 0-1 .
Temporary Sheet Pile Barrier Walls Approximately 1,500 feet of conventional interlocking sheet piles will be installed in uncontaminated soils along the upgradient and cross-gradient sides of the excavation boundary before excavation begins (Figure 0 -1). The piles will be driven a minimum of two feet into the underlying Lavery till to prevent groundwater from migrating beneath the piles into the WMA 1 excavation .
1 The recontamination potential is low since groundwater flows northeast away from WMA 1.
Revision 2 0 -3
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
/
/
Figure D-1. Plan View of the WMA 1 Excavation Contaminated soil exceeding the subsurface soil cleanup criteria specified in Section 5 will be excavated leaving a soil cut-back slope against the sheet pile walls containing soil with radionuclide concentrations below the subsurface soil clean-up criteria .2 The soil cut-backs along the sheet pile walls will be surveyed during the Phase 1 final status surveys as specified in Sections 7 and 9 of this plan. The sheet pile barrier wall will be removed as specified in Section 7 once the final status survey, the independent verification survey, and backfilling of the 2
Figure 7-8 in Section 7 of this plan shows typical excavation slopes .
Revision 2 D-4
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN WMA 1 excavation is completed to allow a return to typical groundwater flow patterns within the sand and gravel unit.
Permanent Downgradient Hydraulic Barrier Wall The permanent hydraulic barrier wall constructed on the downgradient side of the WMA 1 excavation (Figure D-1 ) will be a vertical soil-cement-bentonite slurry wall installed using slurry wall trenching technology. This hydraulic barrier technology was selected because of its long history of successful usage. This wall will prevent migration of Sr-90 contaminated groundwater from the non-source area of the North Plateau Plume into the WMA 1 excavation both during excavation and after backfilling the excavation with clean fill.
The hydraulic barrier wall downgradient of the WMA 1 excavation will be installed under a carefully planned and rigorous quality control-quality assurance program as described in Section 8.
The soil-cement-bentonite barrier wall will be a mixture of 85 percent soil , five percent Portland cement, and 10 percent bentonite. The Portland cement will provide internal stability to the barrier wall and it will have an initial maximum design hydraulic conductivity of 6.0E-06 emfs .
The soil-cement-bentonite barrier wall will be approximately 750 feet long , two to 13 feet wide, and will be up to 50 feet deep with an average depth of 27 feet. The wall will extend through the sand and gravel unit and a minimum of two feet into the Lavery till to minimize groundwater flow beneath the bottom of the wall.
Approximately 225 feet of barrier wall outside of the excavation boundary will be two to three feet thick. The remaining 525 feet of barrier wall within the boundary of the excavation will be at least 13 feet thick to allow the excavation of subsurface soils up to and into the barrier wall. The thickness will allow an excavation cut back slope of 1:2 (horizontal to vertical), which is typical of what can be achieved in most stiff clayey soils. The barrier wall material within the excavation cut-back slope will be surveyed during the Phase 1 final status survey. 3 The upper three feet of the barrier wall will be constructed of clean backfill similar to the surrounding sand and gravel unit. This material will allow vehicular traffic over the barrier wall without damaging the underlying barrier wall.
French Drain System A French drain system will be installed upgradient of the permanent hydraulic barrier wall during the backfilling of the WMA 1 excavation (Figure D-1 ). The French drain will be installed to keep groundwater levels at their current level on the upgradient side of the barrier wall to prevent groundwater mounding against the wall, prevent potential overtopping of the wall , and promote groundwater flow towards the non-source area of the north plateau groundwater plume .
The French drain will be constructed by excavating a trench , approximately four feet wide and 10 feet deep, placing perforated pipe into the bottom of the trench , and backfilling the trench with permeable granular materials. The northwest and southeast portions of the French drain will meet at a concrete manhole located near the mid-point of the barrier wall . The French 3
As explained in Section 7 of this plan , any soil found to exceed cleanup goals will be removed only within the confines of the planned excavation, that is, within the confines of the downgradient hydraulic barrier wall and the sheet piles .
Revision 2 D-5 L
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN drain will be sloped to the southeast to discharge by gravity flow to a surface water drainage discharging to Erdman Brook.
1.2 Waste Management Area 2 The Phase 1 decommissioning activities in WMA 2 will include the removal of Lagoons 1 through 3, the Neutralization Pit, Interceptors, Solvent Dike, and surrounding contaminated soils within a single excavation down into the underlying Lavery till. Most of this excavation is cross gradient to the non-source area of the North Plateau Plume (Figure D-2). The removal of the lagoons, sub-grade structures, and surrounding soils will require the installation of a permanent subsurface hydraulic barrier wall prior to excavation to facilitate removal activities and to prevent potential recontamination of the area from the non-source area of the north plateau groundwater plume as described in Section 7. The barrier wall for WMA 2 is described in greater detail below.
1.2.1 Need for Subsurface Engineered Barriers Lagoons 1 through 3, sub-grade structures, and surrounding contaminated vadose and saturated soils will be removed to a depth of approximately 14 feet to meet the unrestricted release criteria in 10 CFR 20 .1402. Most of the WMA 2 excavation may be impacted by migration of Sr-90 contam inated groundwater from the adjacent non-source area of the north plateau groundwater plume. The need for a subsurface hydraulic barrier wall for the 4.2-acre excavation area across WMA 2 is the same as the rationale described earlier in Section 1.1.1 of this Appendix for the excavation of WMA 1.
A permanent hydraulic barrier of slurry wall type construction will be installed on the northwest and northeast side of the WMA 2 excavation to act as an intrusion barrier to prevent the migration of Sr-90 contaminated groundwater from the non-source area of the north plateau groundwater plume into the WMA 2 excavation. This permanent downgradient hydraulic barrier will prevent recontamination of the remediated and backfilled WMA 2 excavation from the non-source area of the north plateau plume until a Phase 2 decommissioning decision is made.
1.2.2 Hydraulic Barrier Wall Before excavation activities begin in WMA 2 a permanent subsurface hydraulic barrier wall will be installed on the northwest side of the WMA 2 excavation as shown on Figure D-3.
Permanent Hydraulic Barrier Wall The permanent hydraulic barrier wall constructed on the northwest and northeast side of the WMA 2 excavation will be a vertical soil-cement-bentonite slurry wall installed using slurry wall trenching technology. This hydraulic barrier technology was selected because of its long history of successful usage. This wall will prevent migration of Sr-90 contaminated groundwater from the non-source area of the north plateau plume into the WMA 2 excavation both during excavation and after the excavation has been backfilled with clean fill.
The hydraulic barrier wall installed northwest of the WMA 2 excavation will be installed under a carefully planned and rigorous quality control-quality assurance program as described in Section 8. The barrier wall will be approximately 1, 100 feet long , sufficiently wide to provide the stability necessary to permit excavation close to the edge of the excavation, and up to 20 feet deep, with an average depth of 16 feet. The wall will extend through the sand and gravel unit and a minimum of two feet into the Lavery till to minimize groundwater flow beneath the bottom of the wall.
Revision 2 D-6
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
-111' WMA 4
lagoon 1 (Deactivated) *'
Lagoon 3 \ \
Legend /
c::J \'\b~c Monogcmc:nt Ncoo c:J Building
- - Lagoon Cross Section c::J Concrete Foundation Borthola LOQl~on 0 Asph1lt Rood Streanwl Siormwater Ora nageWllys CJ Gravol Road/ Pad
,, I
-..-- FencG FonMr Lagoon 50 0 50 100 150 200 Feet VI.h t rbodies
-.: = -- 1 1 I
/ 10 0 10 20 30 40 M ters Figure D-2. Plan View of the WMA 2 Excavation Revision 2 D-7
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN The upper three feet of the barrier wall will be constructed of clean backfill similar to the surrounding sand and gravel unit. This material will allow veh icular traffic over the barrier wall without damaging the underlying barrier wall.
1.3 Durability of Engineered Barriers The materials used in the construction of the soil-cement-bentonite slurry walls are common natural geologic construction materials that exhibit long-term durability with in the natural environment. The engineered barriers are expected to retain their de,sign effectiveness until the start of Phase 2 of the decomm ission ing at a minimum . Their continued use will be among the factors evaluated in determining the approach to Phase 2 of the decommissioning .
The low-permeability bentonite used in the slu rry wall construction is a natural geologic material exhibiting demonstrated long-term mineralogical and geolog ic stability (Mitchell 1986 and Mitchell 1993). Chemical contaminants that might degrade the physical characteristics and/or compromise the hydraulic conductivity of soil-bentonite slurry walls include :
- .Concentrated solutions of organic fluids (Mille, et al. 1992 and Khera and Tirumala 1992),
- Organic groundwater contam inants (Evans, et al. 1985b and Grube 1992), and
- Acidic or highly alkaline solutions (Evans, et al. 1985a and Fang et al. 1992).
However, these conditions are not present within the project premises.
The backfill to be used for slurry wall construction will be a mixture of soil , Portland cement, and commercial sodium bentonite. The soil can be any material that could be classified as CL, CL/ML or ML/CL by the Unified Soil Classification System. The soil backfill will be natural geologic materials similar to the sand and gravel unit in the North Plateau . Uncontaminated sand and gravel from the trench excavation may also be used as soil backfill for the slurry wall.
The sodium bentonite .will be added at a rate recommended by the vendor to achieve a hydraulic conductivity on the order of 1 E-08 to 1 E-06 cm/s.
The geotechnical stability of the soil-cement-bentonite slurry wall has been evaluated under combined static and seismic loading conditions . The evaluation results indicate that the soil-cement-bentonite slurry wall will provide the necessary strength to withstand damage from static and seismic loads predicted to occur during a hypothetical earthquake generating a horizontal acceleration of 0.20 gin the soil , with an approximate factor of safety of greater than 1.3 to greater than 3.0 (URS 2000).
The French drain will be constructed of natural (stone backfill) and man-made (perforated drain pipe, geotextile) materials. The French drain trench backfill will be designed to minimize silting of the drainpipe. The French drain will be periodically monitored and maintained until the start of Phase 2 decommissioning to ensure it is fur:ictioning properly.
1.4 Engineered Barriers and Groundwater Flow Groundwater flow in the sand and gravel unit is currently to the northeast across the north plateau through WMA 1 and parallel to WMA 2 (Figure D-2). The permanent hydraulic barrier wall and French drain to be installed on the downgradient side of the WMA 1 excavation will be nearly perpendicular to the current groundwater flow path in the sand and gravel unit in the north plateau .
Revision 2 D-8
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 1.4.1 Conceptual Model A three-dimensional near-field groundwater model was developed to simulate groundwater flow conditions near the engineered barriers installed at WMA 1 and WMA 2 using the STOMP computer code (Nichols, et al. 1997)4. This model is a revised version of the near-field model described in Appendix E to the Decommissioning EIS. Figure D-3 shows the boundaries of the north plateau near-field model.
w 75 - 0 75
~ ~ M.tets
. 250 0 250 1I --~-- Sc:M ., Feot l'en i"'
I~
/
I
/
\
\
\
Figure D-3. North Plateau Groundwater Flow Model Boundary The north plateau model mimics the shape of the lateral extent of the sand and gravel unit.
It is oriented from the southwest to the northeast and extends downward from the ground surface to the top of the Kent Recessional Sequence .
Hydrogeologic units represented in the model are the thick-bedded unit, the slack-water sequence and the unweathered Lavery till. Together, the thick-bedded unit and the slack-water sequence comprise the surficial sand and gravel unit. The thick-bedded unit comprises glaciofluvial gravel and alluvial deposits that range from one to six meters in thickness overlying the unweathered Lavery till. The slack-w_ater sequence is a depositional sequence with layers of gravel , sand and silt filling a southwest-to-northeast trending channel in the upper portion of the unweathered Lavery till. The slack-water sequence varies in thickness from zero to five meters with the thickest portions beneath the Process Building . The unweathered Lavery till is a glacial till with a thickness range of 10 to 17 meters in the model volume .
4 STOMP (Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases) solves the relevant conservation equations for the flow of both liquid and gas (air with water vapor) phases in a porous matrix confined in a cylindrical shape.
This computer code was developed by DOE's Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.
Revision 2 D-9
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN The hydrogeologic units incorporated into the north plateau near-field flow model are represented in Figures D-4 through D-8. The slack-water sequence appears in the northeastern portion of the model as shown in Figures D-6 through D-8. The hydraulic conductivities of these units are assumed constant over the model domain with values of 2.5 E-03, 5.3 E-03, and 6.0 E-08 centimeters per second for the thick-bedded unit, slack-water sequence, and unweathered Lavery till , respectively. Two variants of the north plateau near-field model were developed to simulate current north plateau groundwater flow conditions and to evaluate north plateau groundwater flow conditions associated with the hydraulic barriers to 23 Thick-bedded Unit 20 Unweathered Lavery Till 0 200 300 400 Meters be installed during Phase 1.
Figure D-4. Cross Section of North Plateau Near-Field Model - Southwest to Northeast Distance of 0 to 80 Meters 23 Thick-bedded Unit
~--'
20 17 Unweathered Lavery Till 0
0 200 300 400 640 Meters Figure D-5. Cross Section of North Plateau Near-Field Model - Southwest to Northeast Distance of 80 to 120 Meters Revision 2 D-10
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 23 Thick-bedded Unit 1
~ l~---'
> 20 17 Slook-wot" Soqu'"oe 14 Unweathered Lavery Till 0 200 300 400 Meters Figure D-6. Cross Section of North Plateau Near-Field Model - Southwest to Northeast Distance of 120 to 250 Meters 23 Thick-bedded Unit 20 17 Slack-water Sequence 14 Unweathered Lavery Till 0 200 300 400 Meters Figure D-7. Cross Section of North Plateau Near-Field Model - Southwest to Northeast Distance of 250 to 310 Meters Revision 2 0 -11
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 23 Thick-bedded Unit
~ 1 20 17 Slock-wate< Seq""""' ,.....- - _ .
14 Unweathered Lavery Till 0
0 200 300 400 640 Meters Figure D-8. Cross Section of North Plateau Near-Field Model - Southwest to Northeast Distance of 310 to 820 Meters 1.4.2 Modeling Current Conditions To simulate current conditions , the horizontal portion of the near-field groundwater model grid comprised rectangular blocks with 81 blocks in the southwest-to-northwest direction and 64 blocks in the southwest-to-southeast direction . Grid blocks with horizontal dimension as large as 50 meters were used along the west and north boundaries while grid block horizontal dimensions range from 1 to 10 meters over most of the model domain. For the vertical direction, the upper three meters were represented using 15 0.2-meter-thick layers, the next three meters were represented using six 0.5-meter-thick layers, and the bottom 17 meters were represented using 17 1.0-meter-thick layers. With these dimensions, the model utilized approximately 174,000 grid blocks.
Boundary conditions applied for the near-field model are consistent with site observations and with those applied for the site-wide model. At the bottom of the unweathered Lavery till, atmospheric pressure was applied representing the presence of a water table in the Kent Recessional Sequence. On the sides of the model, no flow conditions were applied for the unweathered Lavery till. On the southwest side of the model , lateral recharge into the thick-bedded unit of 20 cubic meters per day was applied . On the northwest, southeast, and northeast sides of the model , atmospheric pressure conditions were applied for the thick-bedded unit and slack-water sequence to represent seepage to Quarry Creek, Erdman Brook, and Franks Creek, respectively.
Evaluation of simulated pressures and measured conditions in target groundwater wells showed that a uniform recharge of 26 centimeters per year produced the closest match to existing conditions. Table 0-1 compares measured hydraulic heads in wells screened in the sand and gravel unit from the north plateau with predicted hydraulic heads generated by the near-field model for three different recharge rates . Figure 0-9 shows the resulting plot of water table elevation in the thick bedded unit for a recharge of 26 centimeters per year. These water table elevations are consistent with the measured heads and the predictions of the site-wide Revision 2 0-12
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN groundwater model described in Appendix E to the Decommissioning EIS. Table D-2 shows the modeled flow balance.
Table D-1. North Plateau Near-field Flow Model Calibration for Head(1)
Groundwater Measured Predicted Head (ft) at Specified Recharge Well Head (ft) 18 cm/y 26 cm/y 34 cm/y 103 1391 .4 1386.8 1391 .6 1394.5 104 1385.5 1379.6 1383.1 1385.7 116 1380.5 1372.4 1376.8 1379.4 203 1394.4 1400.2 1401 .6 1404.2 205 1393.1 1397.9 1399.2 1401.2 301 1410.7 1401.9 1406.8 1410.6 401 1410.3 1401.5 1406.4 1409.5 406/86-08 1393.5 1394.1 1397.4 1400.0 601 1377.3 1376.9 1378.9 1380.9 603 1391 .9 1395.0 1397.0 1399.6 604 1391 .6 1389.7 1391.9 1394.6 86-09 1391 .8 1391 .6 1396.5 1399.8 86-12 1364.8 1343.6 1345.2 1346.8 408 1391 .8 1391 .0 1394.8 1398.4 501 1391.3 1386.8 1391 .5 1394.5 403 1408.0 1401 .1 1405.8 1409.1 801 1376.6 1369.3 1373.1 1375.7 804 1369.9 1356.0 1359.2 1360.4 Sum of Squared Residuals (tt 2 i2 > 1111.4 730 .1 831.4 NOTES: (1) This specified recharge is the net inflow at the ground surface that results from the balance of precipitation , evapotranspiration , and run-off.
2 (2) Sum of squared residuals = (Measured Head - Pred.icted Head) for each location, then summed .
Table D-2. Summary of Sand and Gravel Unit Flow Balance(1>
Inflow Outflow 3
Location Rate (m /y) Location Rate (m 3/y)
Recharge at the Down Flow to the KRS 9,060 Ground Surface 107,624 Recharge from 7,304 Seepage to Quarry Creek 8,456 Bedrock from the Seepage to Erdman Brook 15,238 Revision 2 D-13
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLA.N Table D-2. Summary of Sand and Gravel Unit Flow Balance(1>
Inflow Outflow Location Rate (m /y)3 I Location I Rate (m 3/y) I Southwest Seepage to Frank's Creek 66,713 Seepage to North Plateau 15,445 Ditch Totals 114,928 114,912 NOTE: (1) For a recharge rate of 26 centimeters per year LEGEND: KRS = Kent Recessional Sequence The relationship between rate of flow in the slack-water sequence and the thick-bedded unit above the slack-water sequence was investigated through tabulation of groundwater velocities along a flow path extending from the location of the Process Building to the north plateau ditch . Average linear velocities predicted by the near-field model for this path are presented in Table D-3. An effective porosity value of 0.225 was used for the thick-bedded unit and an effective porosity value of 0.35 for the slack-water sequence. For the slack-water sequence and thick-bedded unit above the slack-water sequence, the travel time and average velocity along the flow path are 1.90 years and 161 meters per year and 2.0 years and 157 meters per year, respectively.
Table D-3. Average Linear Velocity for Flow Path Originating at the Process Building Distance Along Flow Average Linear Velocity (m/y)
Path (m) Slack-water Sequence Thick-bedded Unit 0 to 10 114 105 10 to 63 130 132 63 to 110 143 147 110 to 160 156 161 160 to 210 171 174 210 to 260 192 180 260 to 310 220 176 NOTE : To convert meters per year to feet per year, multiply by 3.2803.
1.4.3 Modeling Conditions Following Phase 1 of the Decommissioning The near-field groundwater flow model developed to assess current groundwater flow conditions was used to evaluate groundwater flow following the installation of the Phase 1 hydraulic barriers and WMA 1 French drain . The WMA 1 and WMA 2 slurry walls are modeled as one-meter thick extending downward to the unweathered Lavery till with a hydraulic conductivity of 1.0 E-06 emfs. The WMA 1 hydraulic barrier wall downgradient of the Process Building is oriented parallel to the groundwater elevation contours and perpendicular to groundwater flow as shown in Figure D-9. The segment of barrier wall between the Process Building and the Waste Tank Farm has been modeled parallel to groundwater flow due to the model constraints. The French drain for WMA 1 was modeled as one-meter thick with a depth Revision 2 D-14
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN of three meters and a hydraulic conductivity of 10 cm/s.
The cross-sectional structure of the aquifer is that represented in Figures D-4, D-5, D-6, D-7, and D-8 with the same vertical discretization as the current conditions case.
Figure D-9 shows the distribution of hydraulic heads predicted following completion of Phase 1 of the decommissioning . The results indicate an overall increase in water table elevation of several feet across the large backfilled WMA 1 and WMA 2 excavations formerly I occupied by the Process Building and the lagoons, respectively.
The higher groundwater elevations in the backfilled WMA 1 excavation suggest that groundwater would flow through the WMA 1 slurry wall to the northeast, towards the non-source area of the north plateau groundwater plume . However, a significant volume of this flow would be diverted by the French drain and discharged to Erdman Brook (Table D-4).
Groundwater elevations coincide on either side of the slurry wall separating the backfilled WMA 1 excavation from the Waste Tank Farm, suggesting little potential for groundwater flow from the backfilled WMA 1 excavation toward the Waste Tank Farm.
Groundwater elevations coincide with the bottom of the French drain near the WMA 1 barrier wall. Groundwater elevations on the downgradient side of the WMA 1 barrier wall are I approximately 10 feet lower than on the upgradient side, resulting in a steep hydraulic gradient across the barrier wall and a shallower gradient along the non-source area of the north plateau groundwater plume.
Groundwater levels in the backfilled WMA 2 excavation are several feet higher than modeled in the current conditions scenario and would be below grade across the backfilled WMA 2 excavation. Groundwater elevations are up to 10 feet lower on the north plateau plume side of the WMA 2 barrier wall , suggesting groundwater flow to the northwest and northeast through the WMA 2 slurry wall towards the non-source area of the north plateau groundwater plume and to the southeast towards Erdman Brook.
Table D-4 summarizes the modeled flow balance. Table D-5 shows the average linear velocities predicted by the near-field model for conditions after Phase 1.
Table D-4. Summary of Sand and Gravel Unit Flow Balance After Phase 1<1l
--~--~----------~~~~~----.------------------------------~~
Inflow Outflow 1--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-+~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Location Rate (m 3/y) Location Rate (m 3/y) t---------------------+---------+------------------------+-----------11 Recharge at the Ground 107,624 Down Flow to the KRS 8,909 Surface
>---~~~~~~~~~--+-~~~~---~~~~~~~~~~~~-+-~~~~--1 Recharge from Bedrock 7,304 Seepage to Quarry Creek 8,780 from the Southwest Seepage to Erdman Brook 14,915 (TBU)
French Drain to Erdman Brook 21 ,698 Seepage to Frank's Creek 46 ,791 Seepage to North Plateau Ditch 13,783 Total 114,928 114,876 NOTE: ( 1) For a recharge rate of 26 centimeters per year.
Revision 2 D-15
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
_L_ 1
~<t1 \1J.to ..__
~ ---
1370 1340 1390 700 "1 700 -
c::>
1410 1360
/--
- - 1360 ~
130 - z 600 600 0 L*goo"3 E'
~
ro Q)
Lagoon 3
D 500 1380 £..... 500 - - 1380 0
z
..8 Logoo,, Lagoon 2 400 ~__...,.---
Waste Tank Farm
I- (j)
~
0 Cf) a)
400 - - - - - 1390 1390 - - - -..J 300
/
1400
\t..<::J~ --------- (.)
c ro (j) 300 0 Waste Tank Farm ""'--I WMA 1Excavation 200
,,---------. ,.,---- 200
~1 Main Plant Process Building r
100 1420
~
100 100 200 300 400 500 600 100 200 300 400 500 600 Distance, Northwest to Southeast (m) Distance, Northwest to Southeast (m)
CURRENT CONDITION AFTER PHASE 1 Figure D-9. Groundwater Flow Associated with the WMA 1 and WMA 2 Engineered Barriers Revision 2 0-16
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table D-5. Average Linear Velocity for Flow Path Originating at the Process Building Area After Phase 1 Distance Along Flow Average Linear Velocity (m/y)
Path (m) Slack-water Sequence Thick-bedded Unit 0 to 40 81 .0 81 .2 40 to 80 79.2 82.2 80 to 120 22.5 1.9 120 to 160 61 .2 1.8 160 to 200 104.3 1.9 200 to 240 95.6 6.0 240 to 280 112.6 84.7 280 to 320 131 .3 111.5 NOTE : To convert meters per year to feet per year, multiply by 3.2803.
In calculation of linear velocities shown in Table 0-5, the value of effective porosity of 0.35 was used for the slack-water sequence while the moisture content of the thick-bedded unit was used to reflect unsaturated conditions that develop along the flow path north of the location of the slurry wall. For the slack-water sequence and thick-bedded unit above the slack-water sequence, the travel time and average velocity along the flow path are 6.37 years and 50 meters per year and 70 years and 4.6 meters per year, respectively .
1.4.4 Groundwater Modeling Predictions for Conditions Following Phase 1 The revised near-field groundwater model for the- north plateau suggests that the engineered barriers to be installed during Phase 1 decommissioning would have the following effect on groundwater flow in the north plateau :
- Groundwater flow patterns upgradient of the WMA 1 barrier wall and French drain would be similar to current flow patterns in the sand and gravel unit shown in Figure 0-9.
- Water table elevations in WMA 1 would be approximately 10 feet higher on the upgradient side of the northeastern segment of the WMA 1 barrier wall compared to water levels imm ediately downgradient of this wall segment.
- This steep hydraulic gradient suggests that groundwater would preferentially.flow from the backfilled WMA 1 excavation to the northeast across the barrier wall into the non-source area of the north plateau plume, rather than from the non-source area of the plume into the backfilled WMA 1 excavation .
- Groundwater elevations coincide on either side of the northwestern segment of the WMA 1 barrier wall separating the backfilled WMA 1 excavation from the Waste Tank Farm , suggesting low potential for groundwater flow across the barrier wall from either the backfilled excavation or Waste Tank Farm .
Revision 2 0 -1 7
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
- Flow contours southeast of the WMA 1 barrier wall suggest that groundwater would flow to the east into the area of the backfilled WMA 2 excavation , as discussed in Section 1.4.3 of this appendix.
- Downgradient of the WMA 1 barrier wall groundwater flow in the sand and gravel unit would continue to the northeast across the north plateau . However, the upgradient diversion of groundwater flow by the barrier wall system would result in an overall reduction in the hydraulic gradient of the non-source area of the north plateau groundwater plume .
.* Groundwater elevations in the backfilled WMA 2 excavation are expected to be up to 10 feet higher than present in the non-source area of the north plateau groundwater plume.
- Higher groundwater elevations within the backfilled WMA 2 excavation suggests groundwater would flow across the WMA 2 barrier wall to the northwest and northeast toward the non-source area of the north plateau groundwater plume and also to the southeast toward Erdman Brook.
2.0 Conceptual Post-Remediation Site Monitoring and Maintenance DOE will be responsible for maintaining insMutional controls and for monitoring and maintenance of the project premises until the completion of Phase 2 of the WVDP decommissioning .
This section describes the post-remediation site monitoring and maintenance program to be implemented by the DOE at the project premises following the completion of Phase 1 decommissioning. The Phase 1 program will include monitoring and maintenance associated with engineered barriers installed within the project premises and monitoring of environmental media within and outside the project premises. This monitoring and m_ain.tenance program will continue until the start of Phase 2 of the decommissioning , when the program requirements will be re-evaluated. DOE concludes that this program will be adequate to control and maintain the project premises because it is similar to the successful program currently in use and because it appropriately addresses all facilities of importance.
2.1 Monitoring and Maintenance of Engineered Barriers and Systems The performance of the engineered barriers installed at WMA 1 and WMA 2 during Phase 1 decommissioning will be routinely monitored up to the start of Phase 2 of the decommissioning to ensure they function as designed . Systems and engineered barriers installed during work leading to the interim end state, such the Tank and Vault Drying System at WMA 3 and the geomembrane cover and slurry wall at WMA 7, will also be routinely monitored and maintained as part of the DOE monitoring and maintenance program . Corrective actions will be implemented to correct any observed defects or irregularities with these engineered barrier and systems.
2.1.1 North Plateau Subsurface Barrier Walls and French Drain The monitoring and maintenance program will monitor the performance and condition of the subsurface hydraulic barriers installed at WMA 1 and WMA 2, and the French drain at WMA 1.
This program will include routine inspections of these systems for signs of degradation or loss of performance.
Revision 2 D-18
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Hydraulic Barrier Walls A series of nested piezometers screened at different depth intervals will be installed at regular intervals upgradient and downgradient of the permanent hydraulic barrier walls installed downgradient of the WMA 1 and northwest of the WMA 2 excavations (Figure D-10) to monitor their performance. These piezometers will be spaced at intervals at least equal to the maximum lateral spacing recommended by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 1998). Water levels in these piezometers will be routinely monitored to identify any changes in water levels that may indicate the development of defects with in the barrier walls that require corrective action. Groundwater will be routinely sampled and analyzed for radiological indicator parameters (gross alpha, gross beta , tritium ) and for Sr-90 to evaluate the effectiveness of the barrier walls in preventing recontam ination of WMA 1 and WMA 2. Changes 1in groundwater concentrations of these radiological indicator parameters may iderntify defects associated with the barrier walls that require corrective action to limit the potential recontam ination of the backfilled WMA 1 and WMA 2 excavations.
If groundwater monitoring suggests repairs to the walls are required , these repairs will be accomplished through grouting , consistent with past industry experience and practice (e.g.,
EPA 1998).
French Drain Monitoring and maintenance activities associated with the French drain installed upgradient of the WMA 1 hydraulic barrier wall will include monitoring of groundwater levels in piezometers installed on the upgradient and downgradient sides of the French drain following installation .
The need for and extent of repairs to the French drain , if any, will be determined based on analysis of the groundwater level data, which will be evaluated to ide.ntify evidence for any local ized defect(s) in the French drain .
2.1.2 Waste Tank Farm Tank and Vault Drying System The Tank and Vault Drying System installed in WMA 3 during the work to establish the interim end state will be routinely monitored and maintained during the Phase 1 period to ensure its continued operation as designed . The major components of the system - such as the blowers, heaters, and dehumidifier units - will be inspected and repaired or replaced as necessary to ensure continued operation of the system .
2.1.3 Waste Tank Farm Dewatering Well As specified in Section 7 of this plan , the existing dewatering well will continue to be used to artificially lower the water table to minimize in-leakage of groundwater into the tank vaults.
The water from this well will be collected , sampled , treated if necessary using a portable wastewater treatment system , and released to Erdman Brook through a State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System-permitted outfall.
2.1.4 NRG-licensed Disposal Area Engineered Barriers The geomembrane cover and the hydraulic barrier wall installed at the NOA during work to establish the interim end state will be routinely monitored and maintained throughout Phase 1.
Geomembrane Cover The geomembrane cover will be routinely inspected for signs of deterioration or damage to Revision 2 D-19
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN the membrane. The seams connecting the geomembrane panels will be inspected to evaluate their condition . The geomembrane cover will be repaired to remedy any defects or irregularities identified during these inspections.
Hydraulic Barrier Wall A monitoring and maintenance program similar to that described for the barrier walls installed at WMA 1 and WMA 2 will be implemented for the hydraulic barrier wall installed upgradient of the NDA. Twenty-one piezometers were installed upgradient and downgradient of the barrier wall during its construction . Water levels in these piezometers will be routinely monitored during Phase 1 to evaluate the performance of the barrier wall in limiting groundwater flow into the NDA.
Revision 2 D-20
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
\,..,
I N
I ' *\ -'<\
A l
, *-\%
j .~
../ \Q
, \'~
i Permeable i
Treatme'nt Wall 1
I I
'\
\
., \ ~
--..-*** """'~...._.-,.,..,,. \
\
....._\
\,.
\ *, ,-._.(
Proposed Monitoring Locations r~*~*
North Plateau Total South Plateau Total ;
Seepage Monitoring Location 2 0
.a. Hydraulic Monitoring Piezometer 38 21
+ Kent Recessional Unit Groundwater Monitoring Well 3 3 Sand & Gravel Unit Groundwater Monitoring Well 29 0
- Weathered Till Unit Groundwater Monitoring Well O 5 Figure D-10. Groundwater Monitoring Locations within the Project Premises during the Phase 1 Institutional Control Period Revision 2 D-2 1
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 2.1. 5 Security Features The features important to security on the project premises and to security of the new Canister Interim Storage Facility during the period before Phase 2 of the decommissioning will be periodically inspected and maintained in good repair. These features include the security fences, signs, and security lighting described in Section 3.2 of this appendix.
2.2 Environmental Monitoring The Phase 1 decommissioning activities will include the removal of the following facilities :
- Above-ground and below-grade facilities in WMA 1 and the underlying source area of the north plateau groundwater plume within a single excavation down into the underlying Lavery till ;
- Lagoons 1, 2, and 3, the Neutralization Pit, Interceptors, Solvent Dike, and surrounding contaminated soils in WMA 2 within a single excavation down into the underlying Lavery till ; and
- Most remaining facilities and concrete slabs down to a maximum depth of two feet.
The following facilities and contamination areas within the project premises will not be considered during Phase 1 decommissioning but will be addressed during Phase 2:
- The Waste Tank Farm in WMA 3, including the Permanent Ventilation System Building and the Supernatant Treatment System Support Building ;
- The Construction Demolition Debris Landfill in WMA 4;
- The NDA in WMA 7; and
- The non-source area of the north plateau groundwater plume.
The DOE will implement an environmental monitoring program to monitor closed and remaining facilities and the non-source area of the north plateau*groundwater plume as part of its management of the project premises during the Phase 1 institutional control period.
Environmental monitoring will include onsite groundwater, storm water, and air monitoring, and onsite and offsite surface water, sediment, and radiation monitoring as described below. Annual reports will be issued summarizing the monitoring results . These reports will include analyses of the data collected , along with conclusions about trends and compliance with regulatory limits.
2.2.1 Groundwater Monitoring Within the Project Premises Groundwater within the project premises will be monitored during the Phase 1 institutional control period in accordance with the DOE WVDP Groundwater Monitoring Plan in effect at the time. Offsite groundwater monitoring will not be performed as this monitoring program was discontinued in 2007. The onsite grounding monitoring program for the project premises is described below and shown on Figure D-10 . A total of 40 groundwater wells will be routinely monitored along with 59 piezometers.
WMA 1 - Process Building and Vitrification Facility Area Groundwater in the sand and gravel unit in the backfilled WMA 1 excavation will be monitored using the network of piezometers installed to monitor the effectiveness of the hydraulic barrier wall and French drain described in Section 2.1.1 of this Appendix. A monitoring well screened in the sand and gravel unit will also be installed in the upgradient Revision 2 D-22
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN portion of the WMA 1 excavation to provide information on groundwater quality flowing into the backfilled excavation.
An additional monitoring well screened in the Kent Recessional Sequence will be installed immediately upgradient of the WMA 1 hydraulic barrier wall to monitor groundwater in this unit and to evaluate potential migration of groundwater from the source area of the north plateau groundwater plume that was removed during Phase 1 decommissioning .
Groundwater from these piezometers and monitoring wells will be sampled semiannually for radiological indicator parameters (gross alpha , gross beta , and tritium) and for Sr-90 during the Phase 1 institutional control period .
WMA 2 - Low-Level Waste Treatment Facility Area Groundwater in the sand and gravel unit in the backfilled WMA 2 excavation will be monitored using the network of piezometers installed to monitor the effectiveness of the hydraulic barrier wall and French drain described in Section 2.1.1 of this Appendix. Three monitoring wells screened in the sand and gravel unit will also be installed on the southeastern boundary of the WMA 2 excavation to provide information on groundwater flow and quality in this area.
Groundwater from these piezometers and monitoring wells will be sampled semiannually for radiological indicator parameters (gross alpha , gross beta, and tritium) and for Sr-90 during the Phase 1 institutional control period .
WMA 3 - Waste Tank Farm Area Groundwater in the sand and gravel unit and the Kent Recessional Sequence will be routinely mo'nitored at WMA 3 during the Phase 1 institutional control period . Eight wells will be screened in the sand and gravel unit with three wells upgradient and five wells downgradient of the Waste Tank Farm . Two wells screened in the Kent Recessional Sequence will be installed downgradient of the Waste Tank Farm .
Groundwater from these wells will be sampled semiannually for radiological indicator parameters (gross alpha, gross beta, and tritium) and for Sr-90 during the Phase 1 institutional control period .
WMA 4 - Construction Demolition Debris Landfill Area Groundwater in the sand and gravel unit at WMA 4 will be routinely monitored at six locations, including four monitoring wells around the Construction and Demolition Debris Landfill , and at two groundwater seep locations along the edge of the north plateau outside of the WVDP fence line.
Groundwater at WMA 4 will be sampled semiannually for radiological indicator parameters (gross alpha , gross beta, and tritium) and for Sr-90.
WMA 6 - Central Project Premises Groundwater in the sand and gravel unit at WMA 6 will be routinely monitored at two well locations, including one well upgradient of the rail spur and the other well downgradient of the rail spur and the removed Demineralizer Sludge Ponds and Equalization Basin .
Groundwater at these locations will be sampled semiannually for radiological indicator parameters (gross alpha , gross beta, and tritium).
Revision 2
- D-23
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN WMA 7-NDA Groundwater in the weathered Lavery till and Kent recessional unit at WMA 7 will be routinely monitored by five wells screened in the weathered Lavery till and three wells screened in the Kent Recessional Sequence . One well cluster will be located upgradient of the NOA and will include a well screened in the weathered Lavery till and one screened in the Kent Recessional Sequence. Two well clusters, each with a well screened in the weathered Lavery till and Kent Recessional Sequence , will be located downgradient of the burial area . The two rema ining wells screened in the weathered Lavery till will be located down gradient of the burial area.
Groundwater at WMA 7 will be sampled semiannua lly for radiological indicator parameters (gross alpha, gross beta, and tritium ) and annually for specifi c rad ionuclides (Cs-137, Sr-90, Am-241 , and Pu isotopes).
Non-Source Area of the North Plateau Plume Groundwater in the sand and gravel unit will be routinely monitored at 11 well locations within the non-source area of the north plateau groundwater plume. These wells are located along the length of the plume from the WMA 1 barrier wall to the Construction and Demolition Debris Landfill in WMA 4. Three wells are located downgradient of the Permeable Treatment Wall to evaluate its effectiveness in reducing Sr-90 concentrations in groundwater from the sand and gravel unit.
Groundwater in the non-source area of the north plateau groundwater plume will be sampled semiannually for radiological indicator parameters (gross alpha, gross beta, and tritium) and for Sr-90.
2.2.2 Surface Water, Sediment, and Storm Water Monitoring Surface water and associated stream sediments will be routinely monitored both within and outside the project premises during the Phase 1 institutional control period . The monitoring locations are currently part of the DOE WVDP annual environmental monitoring program .
These locations have been uniquely sited to monitor surface water releases from the WVDP and the Center. Several of the locations have been actively monitored since the implementation of the program in 1982 providing a significant historical record of surface waters leaving the WVDP and the Center.
Eight surface water-sampling locations within the project premises will be routinely monitored during the Phase 1 institutional control period (Figure D-11 ). These locations monitor streams both within (WNDNKEL, WNSP005 , WNNDADR, WNFRC67, WNERB53) and leaving the project premises (WNSW74A, WNSWAMP, and WNSP006). Sediment samples will be collected from three locations where surface waters leave the project premises (SNSW7 4A, SNSWAMP, and SNSP006).
Surface water will be routinely collected and analyzed from three sampling locations outside of the project premises (Figure D-12). These locations will monitor surface water quality in Buttermilk Creek and Cattaraugus Creek where these streams leave the Center (WFFELBR, WFBCTCB) and where Buttermilk Creek enters the Center (WFBCBKG ). Sediment samples will be collected from all three off-site locations (SFBCSED, SFTCSED, SFCCSED).
Surface water and sediment samples will be collected from these locations semi-annually and will be analyzed for rad iological indicator parameters (gross alpha , gross beta, and tritium ).
Revision 2 D-24
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN N
A
.- ~.,,,,,. ~
\
Waste Tank Fa\ ~O
/ .........""'-
\ .;ran1ts,-
.... __ Cree~
}
.../
.(
Legend
,. Water SampHng Location
& SoiVSediment Samplmg Location Seepage Monitoring Location
- - WI/DP Fence
__,____.. Radspur 1,000
\
c;::j Wellands Delineation
\ I Feet Figure D-11 . Surface Water and Sediment Sampling Locations on the Project Premises during the Phase 1 Institutional Control Period Revision 2 D-25
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN m 2006 N
To Nashville (39.8 lml)
To Springville To Sprague Brook Park ,./..,
A ;
(9.4 km) (14.1 km) \
v
. . . .. /
................... ~
SCHWARTZ RO i
i_
L .....
I *"* "-.
I iv-I
- -.. WNYNSC j i
iI BSW 0 * ,.. .
i c,<f**)
\ .. ,
GQ0911"""',...
I ,* - .. - :
r* "' '\*r ,<-=-...._...L-~
WFBCBKG
\
To \Nesf I Valley i To Great Valley Legend (6.2 l<m) \
(29km)
.t. SoiVSedimenl Sampling Location
- I/Va er Sampling Loca tion c::J WVDP Boundary r::J WNYNSC Boundary 0 0.25 0 .5 1.5 I
2 IMiles Figure D Offsite Surface Water and Sediment Sampling Locations during the Phase 1 Institutional Control Period Revision 2 D-26
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN The New York State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit issued to the DOE WVDP requires periodic sampling from storm water outfalls located within the project premises.
Sampling from these outfalls during storm events is designed to assess specific chemicals in storm water discharges that may originate from industrial or construction activity runoff from locations within the project premises. The planned storm water sampling locations are identified on Figure D-1 3. Sampling will be performed semi -annually for the non-radiological parameters specified in the New York State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit.
2.2.3 Air Monitoring The stack discharge from the Permanent Ventilation System Building in the Waste Tank Farm in WMA 3 will be the only air monitoring location to be routinely monitored within and outside of the project premises during the Phase 1 institutional control period (Figure D-14 ).
The Permanent Ventilation System ventilates the Supernatant Treatment System Valve Aisle and Tanks 8D-1 , 8D-2, 8D-3 , and 80-4 in WMA 3. The air discharged from these facilities passes though high-efficiency particulate air filters before discharge through the Permanent Ventilation System Building stack. Air discharged from the Tank and Vault Drying System will also be treated in the Permanent Ventilation System Building .
Air discharges from this location will be analyzed for radiological indicator parameters (gross alpha, gross beta, and tritium ) and specific radionuclides (Cs-137, Sr-90 , 1-129, Am-241 ,
and U and Pu isotopes).
2.2.4 Direct Radiation Monitoring Direct radiation monitoring using thermoluminescent dosimeters will be performed at 19 locations within and outside of the project premises. These monitoring locations are currently part of the DOE WVDP annual environmental monitoring program and were sited to monitor both on-site and off-site radiation exposure from facilities within the project premises and the State-Licensed Disposal Area . Several of these locations have been actively monitored since 1982.
Eight monitoring locations will be within the project premises (Figure D-15) and eleven stations will be located on the perimeter of the Center (Figure D-16). All locations will be routinely monitored for gamma radiation exposure on a quarterly monitoring schedule.
Revision 2 D-27
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN JJGISI 2IJOll F
! (
NV .
A
\
\
\
\
\\ ,,,..
r-TJ.. .
, ( \
~ \ \
A.
\
legend e Storm W!lter ovtfatl e Ram Gauge Location Seepage Monitoring Location
VWOP fence
-+--i Raltspur
.W Wettands Delineation Figure D-13. Storm Water Sampling Locations on the Project Premises during the Phase 1 Institutional Control Period Revision 2 D-28
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
\
\. : "
N \ ./
A
\
.,. :* :*- 11\
-~ . . S\
~
~~ r,WMA3 , -~_...
r Waste Tank Farm \ ,/.).
I
, v~
' t --.. ,
. jANSTSTK j
\ ..
\ \
\ \
\
\
\
\
"\ .,.............\.,
}.
.r----/ j
. '*\ .
Legend
+ Air Monitoring and Sampfing Loca tion
___,. WI/DP Fence
--+--< Rallspur
~ W!ttands Delineation Figure D-14. Air Monitoring Locations on the Project Premises during the Phase 1 Institutional Control Period Revision 2 D-29
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN I
-~I
./
Legend
+ On-Site Thermoluminesceni Dosimeter WI/DP Fence
-1 Rallspur W \M!tlands Delineation Figure D Direct Radiation Monitoring Locations on the Project Premises during the Phase 1 Institutional Control Period Revision 2 D-30
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN N
To Nashville To Sprague ,.. -.
-)\.:
./
(39.8 km)
To Springville Brook Par1< ~*/ \. I (9.4 km) (14.1 km) \ -
y
/
r
( ........ _./
0 c
~
- r:
- t:
r:;o ,___ ___,
0 *- ..
To West!
Valley i To Great Valley (6.2 km) \
(29 km)
')
I i
Legend l Off-Site Thermoluminescent c:::J WI/DP Boundary
(=:J WNYNSC Bou ndary 0 0 .25 0 .5 1.5 2 I Mi les Figure D-16. Offsite Direct Radiation Monitoring Locations during the Phase 1 Institutional Control Period Revision 2 0-31
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 3.0 Phase 1 Institutional Control Program This section describes the institutional control program that will be implemented for the project premises during and following the completion of the Phase 1* remedial activities.
3.1 Government Control of the Project Premises NYSERDA is the current owner of the project premises property and will remain owner following Phase 1 activities. As stipulated in the Cooperative Agreement with NYSERDA, DOE shall remain in exclusive use and possession of the project premises and project facilities throughout the remainder of the project term (DOE and NYSERDA 1981 ). DOE will therefore continue control of the project premises during the implementation of the Phase 1 decommissioning activities and during the Phase 1 institutional control period . In this capacity, DOE carries the full authority of the federal government in enforcing institutional controls over the project premises.
DOE will be responsible for operating and maintaining facilities within the project premises such as the Waste Tank Farm , the NOA, and the non-source area of the north plateau groundwater plume in a safe manner. DOE will continue to implement the environmental radiation protection program for the project premises as required by DOE Order 5400.5, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment. NRC will also be involved in a regulatory oversight capacity over the project premises, which will remain under NRC license .
3.2 Institutional Control Design Features The institutional control program for the project premises will prevent its unacceptable use and protect against inadvertent intrusion into the site. DOE in its capacity as the steward of the site will ensure that institutional controls are maintained at the project premises during Phase 1 decommissioning and during the Phase 1 institutional control period. These institutional controls will include:
- Security fencing and signage along the perimeter of the project premises to prevent inadvertent intrusion into the site and to notify individuals that access is forbidden without permission from the DOE,
- A full time security force to prevent unauthorized access into the project premises,
- Authorized personnel and vehicle access into the project premises will be limited to designated gateways through the perimeter security fence
- The environmental monitoring program implemented at the project premises during the Phase 1 institutional control period will ensure that operations at the site protect members of the public and the environment from radiation risk.
Additional institutional controls will be provided for the new Canister Interim Storage Facility on the south plateau . These will include measures such as security fencing around the area and appropriate security lighting.
Revision 2 D-32
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
- 4.0 References Code of Federal Regulations and Federal Register Notices 10 CFR 20 Subpart E, Radiological Criteria for License Termination.
67 FR 22, Decommissioning Criteria for the West valley Demonstration Project (M-32) at the*
West Valley Site; Final Policy Statement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C., February 1, 2002.
DOE Orders DOE Order 5400.5, Change 2, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment. U.S.
Department of Energy, Washington, D.C., January 7, 1993.
Other References DOE and NYSERDA 1981, Cooperative Agreement between the United States Department of Energy and New York State Energy Research and Development Authority on the Western New York Nuclear Service Center at West Valley, New York. Signed November 3, 1980, amended September 18, 1981.
EPA 1998, Evaluation of Subsurface Engineered Barriers at Waste Sites, EPA 542-R-98-005.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, D.C., August 1998.
Evans, et al. 1985a, "Organic Fluid Effects on the Permeability of Soil-Bentonite Slurry Walls,"
Evans, J.C., et al. Proceedings of the National Conference on Hazardous Wastes and Environmental Emergencies, pp. 267-271; Cincinnati, Ohio, 1985.
Evans, et al. 1985b, "Containment of Hazardous Materials with So.ii Bentonite Slurry Walls,"
Evans, J.C., et al. Proceedings of the 5th National Conference on Management of Uncontrolled Hazardous Waste Sites, pp. 369-373, Washington, D.C. November 1985.
Fang, et al. 1992, "Soil-Pollution Effects on Geotextile Composite Walls," Fang, H. et al. in Slurry-Walls Design, Construction, and Quality Control, ASTM Special Technical Publication STP 1129, pp. 103-116, ASTM, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1992.
Grube 1992, "Slurry Wall Trench Cut-off Walls for Environmental Pollution Control," Grube, W.
in Slurry Walls - Design, Construction, and Quality Control, ASTM Special Technical Publication STP 1129, pp. 69-77, ASTM, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1992.
Khera and Tirumala 1992, "Materials for Slurry Walls in Waste Chemicals," Khera, R.P., arid Tirumala, R.K.. in Slurry Walls - Design; Construction, and Quality Control, ASTM Special Technical Publication STP 1129, pp. 172-180, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, 1992.
Millet, et al. 1992, USA Practice Slurry Wall Specifications 10 Years Later, in Slurry Walls -
Design, Construction, and Quality Control. Millet, R.A., et al., ASTM Special Technical Publication STP 1129, pp. 42-66, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, 1992.
Mitchell 1986, "Hazardous Waste Containment," Mitchell, J. K., in Groundwater in Engineering Revision 2 D-33
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Geology, Mitchell, J. K., J.C Cripps, F.G. Bell, and M.G. Culshaw (eds.). Geological Society Engineering Geology Special Publication No. 3, pp. 145-157, 1986.
Mitchell 1993. Fundamentals of Soil Behavior, Second Edition, Mitchell, J. K. John Wiley &
Sons, Inc., New York, New York, 1993.
Nichols, et al. 1997, STOMP Subsurface Transport Over Multiple Phases: Application Guide, PNNL-11216 (UC-2010). Nichols, W.E., N.J. Aimo, M. Oostrom, and M.D. White, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory*, Richland, Washington. 1997.
URS 2000, Evaluation of Stability of Proposed WMA1&3/WMA7 Slurry Walls Under Hypothetical Seismically-induced Horizontal Acceleration of 0.2g, Calculation BUF-2000-069, Rev. 0. URS Corp., Orchard Park, New York, July 17, 2000.
Revision 2
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN APPENDIX E DOSE MODELING PROBABILISTIC UNCERTAINTY ANALYSES I The purpgse :of :,tliis appeodix <i.s . td ~<;lesd-ibe 'probal5ilisti~ 1 ' uric;:ef1pin,ty', an9lyse? ;:
"p~~forme<;I* to eJc11u~te' th~ degree ofconsery51tisr;n),rf ~ey'jnputpf]raqieter~~'for<:the"*
- . cpn:C~pt~al rnQci~Js: tl$~d !<? d~velpp .cJ~riyed ;cbnC.~nfr.a(i~;, 'guig~fin~)~ve1i.*,(b't~ Ls)'; 1
- '(6r*'suif~,~~ -~6(( 's'Q~stjrtace s~il; arjd .~tfe~mbed*secji"nien( al6~ g 'with '.th~'.'.i~sult~:9r" 1
- iH~S,~ ~n~lys~?':'- *~". * *.. -;: s: . ; .., *. * '
1 1
- c. .' .:: INFORMA"FION iN THIS APP~~N-DIX
/fhi~.~'pp:endix *pro~id~~*tH~:follo~iAg~"i~formati~n::**. 1
':::' ' ,'.:* .:. ~~6tib~ *,- ~~i;ides;i~;rbdu ~t9t§ "1nf~r~atioo to':h~i~* pla'c:~it~~::Cii~C.tl~~lo~s ,
0 tnatfolio\N*i~t6cont~xt. '* " * ,,. * * * * :: '* * ' .'.*** .. *
.. *?e~tiory.2 ae,firie~.~~y form~' use.a in,the ciisd~s~ioh~::- .* . . .* . ..* .*
.. ~sec\i~~-;j**:-~[1mmJri~e~s; ~ne: R-r~6.aJ)i1istl~*~oci1ys*i~ ca:p~6i1i~ief c)tt~~:~~~'sRPl°b *:
.,_-: . :-~~M.~~.t~~-~~id~'G-~e~"in/h.~ .~~~;lys:~~**.~*. * ,.:. .;i~* : :~ . . .:, .. . . ,*.. /:,'.".,* ~- '.; '.~: ;*.* :<:*:: .'
'.;~eet(oi1 ...4 d.~s9r.ib*e.~ ,criteria* ys~d :.fb,r.-§el~~iir)g; p~~a,rriet~r,5Jor;un¢~rfa.inty..
.;.( :[~i~:~ ~~it~~~~:~~~.Per*~;;.&~;~~;:~:?nVl*;e,~~1~c\~ :.,.. .."
. s~~ti8~*6' i:i~'sc~ibes torfelation bf parameters. . ..
_"'<. :".!,~,1'*.*:,>'.,,4~ <<.*.,.*<\' <:*"*>_"'*:*'*~:~ **.\.:,, ' ,f ,' ,; "
e ::* S.eGti6n J..describes .tlie LJnC~rtpinty analysis 'rElSUlts for each pf. the. 'three
- ,1, . ._._,"."" * .. ~* *,, ~ <> *+/-*, _*.: ', :/. ~'"_-, . .' ,*.' ,* -* ** :'* ,.,-~,. .:~ _,." "<p *.* .. _., *".' - <,*_:*~,.-.~
- .;¢pn¢eµ,iu~1. :rrio9e1s; ins!udir\g D.c;c;;_4s< ~xprE:l??~d* ?s. tp~.:.. peaK"of~tli¢,cr'ri.e'an *.**
- (501~ perteniilef*and 95th pel:2entile.* :* ' ** *. * * * * * **** * *. ** : * * .:.
- * ' ' ,< * ~, " , "'...; : "'"' ,~ ~' * <; ' , .,_ ' 'r ' ' ' ,*
1
- $~¢ticlh s'*ges¢~il1e~ p.~r~meterqutput r~.nk'iorrelations., *. .
0
- t;~*.~frovid~~~on,~IU~i~~~;aad
- ,~::F:O:s~~~ns fuken ob,~2'~~:~;~/
IWachrneri~:, 1. *qohtai r:is};opi$~ ot tepr:es~ntat,ive p(ot)apilis~.it :pu~pµt p19ts:
' ~1 ' " , : ~ -~ ;._ * " r '"' - " * * "
- ~",Attactiment ,2 .cqntaips, th~ electrqni~ files
, ' ' . '** ', "' ,.,,s ,'\, ,,~,.',,
dev,eio.pe.d. ,~,
_in p~rfopiling
~ ,>'.. <
- tne -
- *'\'\.}
. *:~:~. ,*'. "'? ' ' *.~: . ' (/<
<) ,. *"' "
- ar\a,lyse's. " '. ....
c, ,; , ':. *, ~. *' ** '
. RElAJIO.NS,HIP TO OTHER:PtA~.SEQTIONS* * '*
. T~is a'pp~nai~, pr0vid~s.*s~ppo;£ing~:inforniatior;fJor:Se~ti~~. 5. lnfor~ation pidvici-~dJn '._
'.S~C:tlon 5~ a*nd 'i~ Settion 1.ori*the proje2t ba~kgrouhd wiif h~lp,place:the infbrmatioo;.
'.*i~-t~is*appenaj~ irito.coniexi:: '.' ** * , , *~ * * *
- Revision 2 E-1
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Purpose The probabilistic uncertainty analyses discussed in this appendix were performed to evaluate the degree of conservatism in key input parameters for the conceptual models used in developing DCGLs for surface soil, subsurface soil, and streambed sediment that are described in Section 5 of this plan. The DOE letter that forwarded Revision 0 of this plan to NRC for review (DOE 2008) noted that this matter was still under evaluation when Revision 0 was completed.
These probabilistic uncertainty analyses supplement the deterministic sensitivity analyses described in Section 5 of this plan. They compute the total uncertainty in the DCGLs resulting from the uncertainty in or the variability of tlie input parameters. They also help determine the relative importanGe of the contributions of different input parameters to the total uncertainty in the DCGLs.
These analyses thereby provide additional perspective on the relationships between conceptual model input parameters and estimated dose, along with sets of DCGLs expressed in probabilistic terms. This information supports a risk-informed approach to establishing cleanup goals for Phase 1 of the decommissioning.
1.2 Background The DCGLs for surface soil, subsurface soil, and streambed sediment were developed using the basic RESRAD deterministic approach in which the analysis is performed by assigning each parameter a single value, as described in Section 5 of this plan. As noted in Section 5, RESRAD was selected as the mathematical model for DCGL development due to its extensive use by DOE and by NRC licensees in developing DCGLs and evaluating doses from residual radioactivity at decommissioned sites.
General NRC Guidance on Uncertainty and Sensitivity Analyses NRC guidance on uncertainty and sensitivity analyses appears in Appendix I to NUREG-1757, Volume 2 (NRC 2006}. NRC concludes that while the deterministic modeling approach has the advantage of being simple to implement and easy to communicate to a non-specialist audience, it has significant limitations:
- It does not allow consideration of the effects of unusual combinations of input parameters;
- It does not provide information on uncertainty in the results, which would be helpful to the decision-maker; and
- It often leads to overly conservative evaluations because it has to rely on the use of pessimistic estimates of each parameter of the model to ensure a bounding dose estimate, that is, results that are likely to overestimate the actual peak dose.
The first two limitations apply to the deterministic dose analysis described in Section 5, which did not include evaluation of different parameter combinations or estimates of uncertainty. And while DOE used conservative model input parameters in many cases, it is*
difficult to demonstrate that the results of the deterministic dose analysis are bounding.
Revision 2 E-2
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN NRC encourages the use of probabilistic techniques to evaluate and quantify the magnitude and effect of uncertainties in dose assessments, and the sensitivity of the calculated risks .from individual parameter values and modeling assumptions. Probabilistic uncertainty analysis provides more information to the decision-maker than deterministic analysis, as it characterizes a range of potential doses and the likelihood that a particular dose may be exceeded. (NRC 2006)
- Uncertainty analyses in the RESRAD probabilistic modules use Latin hypercube 1
sampling , a modified Monte Carlo method, allowing for the generation of representative input parameter values from all segments of the input distributions. Input variables for the models are selected randomly from probability distribution functions for each parameter of interest. Parameter distribution functions may b<? either independent or correlated to .other input variable distributions. The analysis is then performed hundreds of times to obtain a distribution of doses resulting from each set of randomly selected input parameters.
The results of a probabilistic uncertainty analysis provide a distribution of doses illustrating the effects of random combinations of input parameters. It should be recognized that some percentage of the calculated distribution of doses may exceed the regulatory limit, which is expressed as a (deterministic) single value. Compliance can be stated in terms of a metric of the distribution such as the mean falling below the limit, or only a percentage of calculated doses exceeding the limit. (NRC 2006)
NRC indicates that when using probabilistic dose modeling, the "peak-of-the-mean" dose distribution should be used for demonstrating compliance with its License Termination Rule in 10 CFR Part 20, Subpart E (NRC 2006).
Specific NRC Guidance for Phase 1 of the WVDP Decommissioning
- DOE and NRC held two scoping meeting on DOE's dose modeling plans. The NRC summary of the second meeting (NRC 2008) included the following statements:
"NRC indicated that it might not be acceptable to use the mean or most likely value for those parameters that have the largest impact on dose in a deterministic analysis (e.g.,
for parameters such as Kds that have a large parameter range and uncertainty)."
"NRC warned of the potential pitfalls of performing a deterministic analysis with a sensitivity analysis in lieu of a probabilistic assessment. Depending on the combination and range of parameter values selected and models employed (e.g., mass balance versus non-dispersion model in RESRAD), key radionuclides and pathways, the results of the sensitivity analysis could be misleading and the full range of uncertainty difficult to determine. Selection of parameter values should be guided by conservative
. assumptions when uncertainty is large and cannot be reduced. To determine the impact of a particular parameter value on the dose results, DOE must identify key risk drivers and perform a comprehensive sensitivity analysis to ensure that its selection of parameter values in its deterministic analysis errors on the side of conservatism."
DOE identified key risk (i.e., dose) drivers and included a comprehensive sensitivity analysis in Section 5.2.4 of Revision 1 to the plan. The analyses described in this appendix, complete DOE actions on these matters.
1 The Latin hypercube method is a modified Monte Carlo method; see Section 2 below for definitions of terms such as these. NRC supported development of the probabilistic version of RES RAD for use in determining compliance with its License Termination Rule (Yu, et al. 2000). RESRAD probabilistic modeling capabilities are discussed in Section 3 below.
Revision 2 E-3
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN .
1.3 Analyses and Associated Electronic Files The probabilistic dose analyses discussed herein were performed using the probabilistic modules of RESRAD Version 6.4 (LePoire, et al. 2000; Yu, et al. 2000; Yu, et al. 2001) making use of the stratified sampling of the Latin hypercube method.
For the surface soil model, three groups of results were generated. for 1000 sets of input parameters, with calculated statistical parameters (minimum, maximum, mean, percentiles) output by RESRAD for each of the three input parameter datasets. For the subsurface and streambed sediment models, use of the mass balance groundwater option results in long computation times for multiple parameter input sets. Therefore, only a single set of 1000 input values for each parameter was used for the subsurface soil and sediment evaluation where simulation times were extensive.
Included in the electronic files of Attachment 1 are the RESRAD input and output files for surface soil ("RESRAD PROB SURF.zip"), subsurface soil ("RESRAD PROB SUBS.zip"). and sediment ("RESRAD PROB SEO.zip"), and a Word file containing output plots of dose over time for each radionuclide in each media ("PROB Dose Plots.doc").
1.4 Products of the Probabilistic Uncertainty Analyses The primary products of these analyses are as follows:
- Sets of peak-of-the-mean DCGLw values for surface soil, subsurface soil, and streambed sediment, that is, values that have a 50 percent probability that the specified concentration for each radionuclide would correspond to a dose of 25 mrem in the year of peak dose;
- Sets of 95th percentile DCGLw values for surface soil, subsurface soil, and streambed sediment, that is; values that have a 95 percent probability that the specified concentration for each radionuclide would correspond to a dose of 25 mrem in the year of peak dose;
- Preliminary dose estimates for the remediated Waste Management Area (WMA) 1 excavation expressed as the peak of the mean (50 1h percentile) and the 95th percentile; and
- Preliminary dose estimates for the remediated WMA 2 excavation expressed as the peak of the mean and the 95th percentile.
- As discussed in. Section 9.2 of th.is appendix, the results of the probabilistic uncertainty analyses indicate that some input parameters used in the deterministic modeling to develop DCGLs may not be sufficiently conservative to ensure bounding results.
2.0 Key Terms Because of the technical nature of the discussions in this appendix, some readers may find the following definitions to be useful. These definitions are tailored to the use of the terms in this appendix.
Revision 2 E-4
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Behavioral parameter. Any conceptual model input parameter whose value would depend on the _receptor's behavior within the scenario definition. For the same group of receptors, a behavioral parameter value could change if the scenario changed, e.g., parameters for recreational use could be different from those for residential use. (See also metabolic parameter and physical parameter.)
Correlation. A measure of the strength of the relationship between two variables (e.g.,
conceptual model input parameters) used to predict the value of one variable given the value of the other.
Correlation coefficient. Correlation coefficients (R values) are expressed on a scale from
-1.0 to + 1.0, with the strongest correlations being at both extremes and providing the best predictions. Negative values reflect inverse relationships. (See also partial rank correlation coefficient.)
Deterministic analysis. In a deterministic analysis, each input parameter is assumed to be an exactly known single value, as are the analysis results.
Empirical distribution. An empirical distribution is a parameter distribution* well defined by available data to the extent that additional sampling would not be expected to significantly change the distribution's shape.
Latin hypercube sampling. A modified Monte Carlo method used to generate random samples of input parameters in the probabilistic version of RES RAD.
Lognormal distribution. In a lognormal distribution, the logarithm of the parameter has a normal distribution. A lognormal distribution is defined by two parameters, the logarithmic mean and its standard deviation.
Mean. The arithmetic mean as used here is the mathematical average of a set of numbers.
The mean is calculated by adding a set of values and dividing the total by the number of values in the set.
Metabolic parameter. A parameter representing the metabolic characteristics of the potential receptor that is independent of scenario. (Metabolic parameters were not included in the evaluation discussed in this appendix.)
Monte Carlo method. A technique which obtains a probabilistic approximation to the solution of a problem by using statistical sampling techniques. Monte Carlo methods rely on repeated random sampling to compute their results, and are often used to simulate complex physical and mathematical systems.
Normal distribution. Probability values in a normal distribution follow a bell shaped curve centered about a mean value with the width of the "bell" described by the standard deviation. In a bounded normal distribution, upper and lower limits to the range are specified.
2 Overall coefficient of determination. This coefficient, denoted by R , provides an indication of the variability in the overall radionuclide dose accounted for by the selected input parameters. It varies between 0 and 1; the higher the value, the greater the influence.
A value of O indicates the selected parameters do not influence the calculated dose at all.
Revision 2 E-5
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Partial rank correlation coefficient. The partial. rank correlation coefficient measures the strength of the relationship between variables after any confounding influences of other variables have been removed. (See also .rank correlation coefficient.)
Peak of the mean. The highest dose value in a plot of the estimated mean dose over time .
.Physical parameter. Any parameter whose value would not change if a different group of receptors was considered. Physical parameters are site-specific factors determined by the source, its location, and geological or physical characteristics of the site.
Probabilistic analysis. In a probabilistic analysis, statistical distributions are defined for input parameters to account for their uncertainty, and the analysis results reflect the resulting uncertainty, e.g., a distribution of values rather than a single value. Such analyses use a random sampling method to select parameter values from a distribution. Results of the calculations appear in the form of a distribution of values.
Probability density function. A graphical representation of the probability distribution of a continuously random variable illustrating the range of possible values and the relative frequency (probability) of each value within the range. Uncertainty in a conceptual model input parameter is represented by the probability density function for that parameter.
Prob.ability distribution functions provided for in RESRAD include empirical, uniform, triangular, normal, and lognormal.
Rank correlation coefficient. A correlation coefficient between two variables that is used for determining the relative importance of input parameters in influencing the resultant dose.
Regression analysis. A mathematical method of modeling the relationships among three or more variables used to predict the value of one variable given the values of the others.
Triangular distribution. In a triangular distribution of a continuous random variable, the graph of the probability density function forms a triangle, with a range defined by minimum and maximum values and a mode value which is the most frequent (probable) value.
Uniform distribution. In a uniform distribution, each value within the range has the same probability of occurrence.
3.0 The Probabilistic Version of RESRAD The probabilistic RESRAD code is an extended and enhanced version of RESRAD.
RES RAD Version 6.4, which was used for' the dose analyses described in Section 5 of this plan, provides both deterministic and probabilistic analysis capabilities.
The probabilistic version of RESRAD was developed for use in site-specific dose mo.deling in support of NRC's License Termination Rule compliance process for decontamination and decommissioning of NRC-licensed sites. Probabilistic analysis capabilities were incorporated into RESRAD in external software modules integrated into the code. Three reports describe these* probabilistic analyses capabilities and how they are applied:
- NUREG/CR-6676, Probabilistic Dose Analysis Using Parameter Distributions Developed for RESRAD and RESRAD-BUILD Codes (Kamboj, et al. 2000);
Revision 2 E-6
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
- NUREG/CR-6692, Probabilistic Modules for the RESRAD and RESRAD-Build Computer Codes, User Guide (LePoire, et al. 2000} ; and
- NUREG/CR-6697, Development of Probabilistic RESRAD 6.0 and RESRAD-BUILD 3.0 Computer Codes (Yu, et al. 2000) .
Three basic types of input parameters are considered in probabilistic analyses : physical parameters, behavioral parameters, and metabolic parameters 2 . Certain parameters fall into more than one category, e.g., inhalation rate is both a behavioral parameter and a metabolic parameter.
The probabilistic modules in RESRAD Version 6.4 provide default values and distributions for various parameters . Default probability distributions include normal ,
lognormal, uniform, triangular, and empirical. These default distributions are based primarily on the quantity of relevant data ava ilable in reviewed technical literature. 3 For three parameters of interest in this plan - cover depth, precipitation rate, and well pumping rate - a default distribution type is not provided.
In a RES RAD probabilistic analysis, the results from all input samples are analyzed and presented in a statistical format in terms of the average value, standard deviation, minimum value, and maximum value. The cumulative probability distribution of the output is presented in both tabular and graphical forms.
The basic process includes the following steps :
- Identifying parameters for probabilistic evaluation;
- Defining distributions of key parameters;
- Assigning correlations between input parameters, which is done to limit the occurrence of unrealistic physical conditions;
- Verifying that simulation input values reflect the desired correlations by visual inspection of scatter plots of correlated parameters;
- Determining parameters with highest rank correlation coefficients in the results, i.e.,
those that most influence dose; and
- Confirming output parameter correlations with scatter plots of parameter input values versu? calculated dose.
Figure E-1 illustrates the process .
2 Metabolic parameters were not included in this evaluation because the deterministic values represent means for the generic population, which would be independent of site conditions (Kamboj, et al. 2000) .
3 Parameter distributions developed for use with RESRAD and RESRAD-BUILD and their bases are described in Attachment C to NUREG/CR-6697 (Yu, et al. 2000) .
Revision 2 E-7
WVDP PHAS E 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Develop DCGLs using RESRAD Perform deterministic Identify parameters for deterministic approach ~ sensitivity analyses ~ probabilistic evaluation (Section 5, Appendix C) (Section 5.2.4) (Appen E, Section 4)
Define parameter distributions Assign correlation coefficients Run RESRAD (Appendix E, Section 5, (Appendix E, Section 6, ~ simulation for 3 models Tables E-1 , E-2, E-3, E-6) Table E-7) (Appendix E, Section 7)
I Dose-to-source ratios
.(Tables Surface soil DCGLs (Table E-9)
)
E-8, E-9, E-10) Subsurface soil DCGLs (Table E-11)
Streambed sediment DCGLs (Table E-13)
Examine scatter plots and results matrices Verify simulation inputs Determine parameters with Confirm output reflect desired correlations ) highest rank correlations ---),.. parameter correlations (Appendix E, Section 7.1) (Appendix E, Section 8 (Appendix E, Section 8.)
" Tables E-14. E-15. E-16) t Examine scatter plots and input correlation matrices Based on model generated Examine results J Conclusions about input parameter conservatism (Appendix E, Section 9.1)
, ~
Actions on Results (decision to use peak-of*
Remediated WMA 1 excavation dose / the-mean DCGLs)* ~
Remediated WMA 2 excavation dose estimate (Appendix E, Section 7.4) (Appendix E, Section 9.2) estimate (Appendix E, Section 7.5)
- For surface soil and streambed sediment. See Section 5.2.8 for subsurface soil DCGLs.
Figure E-1. Probabilistic Uncertainty Analysis Process Revision 2 E-8
WVOP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 4.0 Key Parameter Selection The main criteria used for identifying key parameters to be evaluated involved the expected parameter influence on dose variability. That is, key param,eters are those that have the largest effect on the dose analysis r\:!SUlts.
Section 5.2 .4 of this plan describes the results of sensitivity analyses for key input parameters for each of the three conceptual models. Tables E-1 , E-2 , and E-3 identify key parameters for the three conceptual models described in Section 5 of the plan, along with their assigned distributions, which are discussed in the next section .
Section 5.2.4 identifies Sr-90 and Cs-137 as likely to be the primary dose drivers for .
surface soil, subsurface soil and sediment exposure pathways . However, all eighteen radionuclides of interest were evaluated in the probabilistic analyses for the sake of completeness.
Other factors considered in parameter selection included the availability of site-specific information that could be used to define the distributions and NRC guidance on potentially significant parameters. Preference was also given to including parameters for which input correlations with other input variables could be defined, and where ambiguous input correlations with other input parameters was limited . Additionally, a number of parameters were used to establish a site-specific dilution factor (See Appendix C) corroborated by the detailed three dimensional flow model. These parameters were not varied with the exception of hydraulic conductivity, well pumping rate and length parallel to aquifer flow .
For these parameters the probabilistic evaluation included values that would vary the dilution factor within a reasonable site-specific range.
Initial probabilistic simulations included parameters such as soil density, total porosity, and effective porosity for the contaminated, unsaturated, and saturated zones . These parameters consistently had correlation coefficients below 0.25. Because the correlation of these parameters with other more significant input parameters (i.e. hydraulic conductivity) was not clear, these parameters were dropped from subsequent analysis . Additional information regarding parameter input correlation is provided in Section 6.0.
5.0 Parameter Distribution Selection This section first addresses the statistical distributions of model input parameters other than Kd values and then addresses Kd values.
5.1 Parameters Other Than Distribution Coefficients Distributions selected for the input parameters are presented in Tables E-1, E-2, and E-3, and were based on applicable guidance in NUREG/CR-6676 (Kamboj, et al. 2000) and NUREG/CR-6697 (Yu, et al. 2000) . Site specific parameters were generally assigned triangular distributions centered on the most likely value (e .g., source thickness, contaminated length parallel to aquifer flow) .
Table E-1 identifies parameters of interest and their assigned distributions for the surface soil conceptual model that were varied during the analyses and the distribution used for each parameter, except for distribution coefficients and the plant, meat and milk biotransfer factors . The distribution coefficients for all ten elements associated with the radionuclides of interest were also varied using bounded lognormal distributions.
Revision 2 E-9
WVDP PHAS E 1 DECOMMISSIONI NG PLAN Table E-1. Input Parameter Distributions for Surface Soil Model (Other than Kd and Biotransfer Factor Values)(1H2l RESRAD Parameters(J)
Parameter Description Units Distribution Parameter THICKO Contaminated zone thickness m triangular 0.5 1 3 LCZPAQ Length parallel to aquifer flow m triangular 100 165 200 HCSZ Saturated zone hydraulic m/y 630 1400 2200 conductivity triangular uw Well pumping rate mJ/y bounded 5900 1270 2618 7586 normal RI Irrigation rate m/y bounded 0.47 0.12 0.14 0.64 normal FIND Indoor time fraction none triangular 0.45 0.66 0.8 FOTD Outdoor time fraction none triangular 0.1 0.25 0.45 HCUZ{1) Unsaturated zone hydraulic m/y triangular 63 140 220 conductivity HCCZ Contaminated zone hydraulic m/y 63 140 220 conductivity triangular DROOT Root depth m triangular 0.3 0.9 3 PRECIP Precipitation rate m/y bounded 1.03 0.13 0.86 1.36 normal THICKO Contaminated zone thickness m triangular 0.5 1 3 (4) (4) (4)
SHF1 External gamma shielding none triangular factor NOTES : (1) Values in RESRAD file "
SUMMARY
.REP"'.
(2) Radionuclide specific Ko values were varied (see Table E-6) and plant, meat. milk transfer factors were assigned the RESRAD default distribution.
(3) Parameters for the distributions are: TRIANGULAR - minimum, mode, maximum and BOUNDED NORMAL - mean, standard deviation, minimum , maximum.
(4) Radionuclide specific distribution. Dose drivers Cs-137 and U-232 were evaluated .
In general, site -specific physical parameters in Table E-1 were described with triangular distributions across the range of values associated with the site, including hydraulic conductivity, and indoor/outdoor time fraction, etc. Depth of roots was assigned a triangular distribution ranging from 0.3 meter (onions, lettuce) to three meters {alfalfa) , centered on 0.9 m (corn) .
Precipitation was based on a normal distribution described by statistical parameters (mean = 1.03 meter, standard deviation = 0.13 meter) that were calculated from meteorological data collected over the last 30 years in Buffalo, New York
{http ://www.weatherexplained .com/Vol-4/2001 -Buffalo-New-York-BU F.html) . The precipi-tation data was then used to assign a distribution for the irrigation rate, assuming that a total of 1.5 m/y of applied water was needed, and the well pumping rate was assigned a distribution based on the irrigation volume needed . These parameters were also correlated to ensure this relationship in the input values.
Revision 2 E-10
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN The total onsite fraction of 0.91 equates to a total of 33 days each year. or 15 hours1.736111e-4 days <br />0.00417 hours <br />2.480159e-5 weeks <br />5.7075e-6 months <br /> each week. away from the site inclusive of time spent taking livestock/crops to market.
assisting on neighboring farms , or other travel off-site. (vacation, family occasions, religious services, etc .).
The plant-soil, meat-soil, and milk-soil bioaccumulation factors were simulated using the RESRAD default lognormal-N distributions. and were correlated (R = -0.87) with the Kd as described in Section 6.0.
Table E-2 identifies parameters of interest and their assigned distributions for the subsurface soil conceptual model, except for distribution coefficients and the plant. meat and milk biotransfer factors , that were varied during the analyses and the distribution used for each parameter. The distribution coefficients for all ten elements associated with the radionuclides of interest were also varied using bounded lognormal di stributions.
Table E-2. Input Parameter Distributions for Subsurface Soil Model (Other than Kd and Biotransfer Factor Values) (1H2l RES RAD Parameter Description Units Distribution Parameters(3)
Parameter uw Well pumping rate m3/y bounded norm al 5900 1270 2618 7586 RI Irrigation rate m/y bounded normal 0.47 0.12 0.14 0.64 FIND Indoor time fraction none triangular 0.45 0.66 0.8 FOTD Outdoor time fraction none triangular 0.1 0 .25 0.45 DROOT Root depth m triangular 0.3 0.9 3 PRECIP Precipitation rate m/y bounded normal 1.03 0.13 0.86 1.36 (4) (4) (4)
SHF1 External gamma none triangular shielding factor NOTES : (1) Values in RESRAD file "
SUMMARY
.REP".
(2) Radionuclide specific Ko values were varied (see Table E-6) and plant, meat, milk transfer factors were assigned the RESRAD default distribution.
(3) Para meters for the distributions are: TRIANGULAR - minimum, mode, maxi mum and BOUNDED NORMAL - mean, standard deviation, minimum, maximum.
(4) Rad ionucli de specific distribution. Do se drivers Cs-137 and U-232 were evaluated Because the subsurface soil model is based on the well drilling scenario. only a limited 3
amount of material is available from the excavation ( approximately 30 m ). The parameter ranges and correlation described below were selected assuming deterministic values for the contaminated zone area and depth . The sensitivity of the models to specific area and thickness combinations was evaluated in Section 5 of the body of this plan . Note that the subsurface soil evaluation is based on the mass balance groundwater model.
The plant-soil , meat-soil, and milk-soil bioaccumulation factors were simulated using the RESRAD default lognormal -N distributions, and were correlated (R = -0.87) with the Kd as described in Section 6.0.
Table E-3 identifies parameters of interest and their assigned distributions for the streambed sediment conceptual model, except for distribution coefficients and the plant and meat biotransfer factors. that were varied during the analyses and the distribution used for each parameter. The distribution coefficients for all ten elements associated with the radionuclides of interest were also varied using bounded lognormal distributions Revision 2 E-11
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table E-3. Input Parameter Distributions for Streambed Sediment Model (Other th an Kd and Biotransfer Factor Values)(1H2l RES RAD Parameter Description Units Distribution Parameters (3l Parameter HCCZ Contaminated zone hydraulic m/y triangular 63 140 220 conductivity PRECIP Precipitation rate m/y bounded 1.03 0.13 0 .86 1.36 normal FOTD Outdoor time fraction none triangular 0.006 0.012 0.024 NOTE S: (1) Values in RESRAD file "SU MMARY. REP"..
(2) Radionuclide specific K" values were varied (see Table E-6) and pl ant, meat, fish transfer factors were assigned the RESRAD default distributi on.
(3) Param eters for the distributions are: TRIANGULAR - minimum, mode, maximum and BOUNDED NORMAL - mean, standard deviation, minimum, maximum .
Soil parameters were varied over the same ranges used for the soil models. Parameter values for the fraction of time outdoors were taken from the deterministic sensitivity analysis described in Section 5 of the plan for likely recreational exposures.
The plant-soil C)nd meat-soil bioaccumulation factors were simulated using the RESRAD default lognormal-N distributions, and were correlated (R = -0.87) with the Kd as described previously. Fish transfer factors were also simulated using the RESRAD default lognormal-N distributions, however no correlations were included .
5.2 Distri bution Coefficients Table C-2 of this plan identifies the distribution coefficients (Kd values) used in the dose analyses described in Section 5 of the body of this plan . Section 3.7.8 and Table 3-20 of this plan provide information on measurements of the distribution coefficients in soils at the site. However, these data are not sufficient to establish a site-specific distribution of the Kd parameter for each of the 10 chemical elements represented in the 18 radionuclides of interest in dose modeling.
Sheppard and Thibault (Sheppard and Thibault 1990) and NUREG/C R-6697 (Yu, et al.
2000) recommend that the Kd parameter be described as a lognormal distribution. Table E-4 summarizes data on Kd values from two key sources compared to the values used in the dose modeling described in Section 5 of this plan . Table E-5 provides a summary of the parameters describing the lognormal distributions as given in these reports .
Consideration of the data in Table E-5 from the two sources led to the distribution parameters in Table E-6, wh ich were used in the uncertainty analyses. The distributions were bounded based on the values presented in Table E-6 to constrain unreasonably large or small values, which is consistent with the approach suggested in NUREG-6697 (Attachment C) . The values in the table were established as follows:
- When Sheppard and Thibault sand values were used for Kd in the basic RESRAD analysis, then the Sheppard and Thibault sand distribution was used in the uncertainty analysis; and
- For cases when WVDP site-specific values are available, a distribution was se lected so that the distribution mean [exp(µ)] provides a closer approximation to the Kd used in the basic RESRAD analyses .
Revision 2 E-12
WVDP PHASE 1 D ECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table E-4. Summary of Data on Kd Parameter (ml/g) for the 10 Elements of Interest Geometric Mean and Range Values Used in Section 5 Modeling Range RES RAD [Sheppard and Thibault 1990] Surface Soil, Subsurface Soil Element [EPA 1999] Unsaturated and Sediment in Default
[EPA 2004] Zone , Saturated Contaminated Sand Loam Clay Organic Zone Zone (1) (2)
Am 20 1,900 9,600 8.400 11 2, 000 8.2 - 2,270,000 1900 4000 8 .2 - 300,000 400 - 48,309 25 - 400,000 6,398 - 450,000 (420 - 111 ,000) (420 - 111 ,000) c 0 not 5 (1) 7 (2) 5 20 1 7 addressed (O. 7 - 12) (0.7-12)
Cm ca lculated 4,000 18,000 6,000 6, 000 93 - 51 ,900 calculated calculated 780 - 22,970 7,666 - 44,260 ND 0 Cs 460 280 4,600 1,900 270 10 - 66,700 280(l) 480(2) 0 .2 - 10,000 560 - 61 ,287 37 - 31,500 0 .4 - 145,000 (48 - 4800) (48 - 4800)
(1) (3)
I calculated 1 5 1 25 0 .05 - 10,200 1 2 0 .04 - 81 0 .1 - 43 0.2 - 29 1.4 - 368 (0.4 - 3.4) (0.4 - 3.4)
(4) (2)
Np ca lculated 5 25 55 1200 0 .36 - 50,000 2.3 3 0 .5-390 1.3-79 0.4-2,575 857 -1,900 (0.5 - 5.2) (0.5 - 5.2) 3000(2)
(4)
Pu 2,000 550 1200 51 00 1900 5 - 2,550 2600 27 -36,000 100-5,933 316-190,000 60-62 ,000 (5 - 27,900) (5 - 27 ,900)
(5) (2)
Sr 30 15 20 110 150 1 -1,700 5 15 0.05-1 90 0 .01 -300 3.6-32,000 8-4800 (1 - 32) (1 - 32)
(1) (3)
Tc 0 0 .1 0 .1 1 1 0 .01 - 340 0.1 4.1
- 0. 0 1-16 0 .01-0.4 1.16-1 .32 0.02 -3 40 (0.01 - 4.1) (1 - 10)
(1 ) (3) u 50 35 15 1600 410 0 .4 - 1,000,000 35 10 0.03 -2,200 0 .2-4,500 46-395, 100 33-7,350 (15 - 350) (1 - 100)
NOTES: (1) From Sheppard and Thibault 1990, for sand .
(2) Site specific value for the unweathered Lavery till (see Section 3.7.8, Table 3-20).
(3) Site specific va lue for the Lavery till (see Section 3.7 .8, Table 3-20) .
(4) Site specific va lue for the sand and gravel unit (see Section 3.7.8, Table 3-20) .
(5) Dames and Moore (1995a, 1995b).
Revision 2 E- 13
WVDP PHASE 1 D ECOMM ISS IONING PLAN Table E-5. Lognormal Distribution Parameters for Kd Values from Literature Sand Soi1 '1l Clay Soil(2l RESRAD Default(3l Element No. of (4) (5) (6) No. of (4) (5) (6) No. of (4) (5) (6)
Obs. IJ C1 exp(µ) Obs. IJ C1 exp(µ) Obs. IJ C1 exp(µ)
Am 29 7.6 2.6 1,998 11 9.0 2.6 8,100 219 7.28 3.15 1.451 (7) c 3 1.1 0 .8 3 0 0.8 2.2 NA 2.40 3.22(B) 11 (7)
Cm 2 8.4 2.4 4.447 0 8 .7 6,000 23 8.82 1.82 6.761 Cs 81 5.6 2.5 270 28 7.5 1.6 1,810 564 6.10 2.33 446 I 22 0 .04 2.2 1.0 8 0 .5 1.5 1.7 109 1.52 2.19 4.6 Np 16 1.4 1.7 4.1 4 4.0 3.8 55 77 2.84 2.25 17 Pu 39 6 .3 1.7 545 18 8.5 2.1 4,920 205 6.86 1.89 953 Sr 81 2.6 1.6 13.5 24 4.7 2.0 110 539 3.45 2.12 32 Tc 19 -2. 0 1.8 0.1 4 0 .2 0.06 1.2 59 -0.67 3. 16 0 .51 u 24 3.5 3.2 33 7 7.3 2.9 1.480 60 4.84 3.13 126 NOTES: (1) From Sheppard and Thibault 1990, Table A-1 .
(2) From Sheppard and Thibault 1990, Table A-3 .
(3) From Yu. et al. 2000. Table 3.9-1 .
(4) The mean of th e underlying normal distribution after taking natural logarithm of the Kd va lues.
(5) The standard deviation of the underlying normal distribution after taking natural logarithm of the Kd values.
(6) Exponential of the mean value [mUg] or the geometric mean Kd.
(7) Default values for µ and exp(µ) have been predicted using soil-to-plant concentration ratios for nuclides with 0 observation s.
(B) Standard deviation for data obtained from using the RESRAD default root uptake transfer factor and the correlation between Kd and the concentration ratio for loamy soil was set to 3.22 to consider a potential wide range of distribution.
LEGEND: NA = not avai lable Revision 2 E-14
WVDP PHAS E 1 D ECOMMISSIONIN G PLAN Table E-6. Lognormal Distribution Parameters Used for Kd Uncertainty Analyses Surface Soil, Unsaturated Zone Subsurface Soil and Sediment Saturated Zone in Contaminated Zone Bounding Element (1) (3) (4) (1) (3) (4)
Range Source µ (2) a exp(µ) DP Kd Source µ (2) a exp(µ) DP Kd Am S&T Sand 7.6 2.6 1,900 1,900 S&T Sand 7.6 2.6 1,900 4,000 0.5 - 390 c S&T Sand 1.1 0.8 5 5 S&T Sand 1.1 0 .8 5 7 0.7 - 12 Cm RES RAD 8.82 1.82 6,761 6760 RES RAD 8.82 1.82 6,761 6760 780 - 22970 Cs S&T Sand 5.6 2.5 280 280 RES RAD 6.10 2.33 446 480 10 - 10000 I S&T Sand 0 .04 2.2 1.0 1 S&T Clay 0.5 1.5 1 2 0.4 - 81 Np S&T Sand 1.4 1.7 5 2.3 S&T Sand 1.4 1.7 5 3 0.5 - 390 Pu RES RAD 6.86 1.89 953 2,600 S&T Clay 8 .5 2.1 5,100 3,000 27 - 2550 Sr S&T Sand 2.6 1.6 15 5 D&M 2.6 1.6 15 15 1 - 190 Tc S&T Sand -2 .0 1.8 0 .1 0.1 RES RAD -0 .67 3.16 0.51 4.1 0.01 - 16 u S&T Sand 3.5 3.2 35 35 S&T Sand 3.5 3.2 35 10 0.4 - 2200 NOTES: (1) Sources: S&T Sand is Table A-1, Sheppard and Thibault 1990; S&T Clay is Table A-3, Sheppard and Thibau lt 1990; D&M from Dames and Moore, 1995a, 1995b, and RESRAD is Table 3.9-1, Attachment C, NUREG/CR-6697 (Yu, et al. 2000)
(2) The mean of the underlying normal distribution after taking natural logarithm of the Kd va lues.
(3) The standard deviation of the underlying normal distribution after taking natural logarithm of the K" values.
(4) Exponential of the mean valu e [mUg] or the geometric mean.
Revision 2 E-15
WVDP PHASE 1 D ECOMMISSIONI NG PLAN 6.0 Para meter Correlation The RESRAD code allows correlation of input parameters to limit the occurrence of unrealistic physical conditions (e.g .. high outdoor and also high indoor time fractions).
Parameters were correlated in pairs based on the user specified rank correlation coefficient as presented in Table E- 7. The basis for the correlation coefficients for each conceptual model is discussed following the table.
Table E-7. Input Correlations fo r Probabilistic Eva luation<1>
Correlation Surface Subsurface Sediment Parameter 1 Parameter 2 Basis Coefficient Soil Model Model Model Indoor time fraction Outdoor time fraction -0.95 Continuity of *
- onsite time Contaminated zone Unsaturated zone 0.95 Homogeneity in
- hydraulic conductivity hydraulic conductivity soil column Contaminated zone Saturated zone 0.95 Homogeneity in
- hydraulic conductivity hydraulic conductivity soil column Unsaturated zone Saturated zone 0.95 Homogeneity in
- hydraulic conductivity hydraulic conductivity soil column Precipitation rate Rate of irrigation -0.95 Less irrigation *
- when rainy Precipitation rate Well pumping rate -0.95 Less pumping for *
- irrigation when rainy Rate of irrigation Well pumping rate 0.95 Pumping volume *
- due mainly to irrigation Contaminated zone Kd Unsaturated zone Kd 0.95 Homogeneity in
- soil column Unsaturated zone Kd Saturated zone Kd 0.95 Homogeneity in
- soil column Contaminated zone Kd Saturated zone Kd 0.95 Homogeneity in
- soil column Contaminated zone Kd Plant transfer factor -0.87 Baes, et. al. 1984 * *
- Contaminated zone Kd Meat transfer factor -0.87 Plant correlation * *
- used for meat Contaminated zone Kd Milk transfer factor -0.87 Plant correlation *
- used for milk Unsaturated zone Kd Plant transfer factor -0. 87 Baes, et. al. 1984
- Unsaturated zone Kd Meat transfer factor -0.87 Plant correlation
- used for meat Unsaturated zone Kd Milk transfer factor -0.87 Plant correlation
- used for milk Saturated zone Kd Plant transfer factor -0.87 Baes, et. al. 1984
- Saturated zone Kd Meat transfer factor -0.87 Plant correlation
- used for meat Saturated zone Kd Milk transfer factor -0.87 Plant correlation
- used for milk NOTES: (1) Presented in the RESRAD probabili stic output files "LHS.REP" for each media.
Revision 2 E-16
WVOP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 6.1 Surface Soil Model This section discusses the parameters correlated in the surface soil model, including distribution coefficients, plant transfer factors, hydraulic conductivities, as well as irrigation, precipitation, and well pumping rates .
The strongly negative correlation (R = -0.87} of Kd with plant transfer factors is based on regression results obtained from computer simulation for a range of elements (Baes, et.
al. 1984) . This Oak Ridge National Laboratory investigation included all areas of the country and therefore represents average results, which are used in lieu of site-specific correlations. Similarly, the meat and milk transfer coefficients were strongly correlated with the contaminated zone Kd for the principal radionuclides . Transfer factors for principal radionuclide daughter products were not correlated. As each additional parameter requires cross correlating with transfer factors for each soil layer, reducing the number of required correlations allows for reasonable code execution times.
The rate of irrigation and the well pumping rate were strongly correlated (R = 0.95) since the majority of water pumped by the well is used for irrigation . The precipitation rate was strongly negatively correlated (R = -0 .95) with the irrigation and well pumping rate, assuming less groundwater will be needed to adequately water crops during wet years .
To ensure that the soils reflect relative homogeneity, the hydraulic conductivity in the three zones (contaminated, unsaturated and saturated} were correlated (R = 0.95) .
6.2 Subsurface Soil Model The subsurface soil model is based on a cistern excavation scenario, and is therefore based on a limited volume of source material brought to the surface. The potential configurations of contaminated zone area and thickness were evaluated in the deterministic sensitivity analysis presented in Section 5. Alternate parameters were selected for probabilistic evaluation .
6.3 Streambed Sediment Model Parameters correlated in the streambed sediment model included:
- Contaminated zone and saturated zone hydraulic conductivity (0.95) , and
- Contaminated zone Kd and plant/meat transfer factors (-0.87} .
To ensure that intended correlations were reflected in the RESRAD model input vectors, values were viewed graphically to verify the parameter relationships for each media and radionuclide .
7 .0 RES RAD Output 7 .1 Basic Approach The results of the probabilistic evaluation are output from RESRAD in numerous summary data files and graphic displays. As suggested in NUREG/CR-6676 (Kamboj, et al.
2000), the input values generated by the specified distributions and corre lations were graphically viewed to verify parameter associations. RESRAD output was tabulated and probabilistic-based DCGLs were calculated as described below.
Additionally. the tabulated output parameter correlation ranks were used to identify the parameters most significantly associated with the modeled dose, as described in Revision 2 E-17
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN subsequent sections. Plots of the modeled dose over time are included in Attachment 1 for each radionuclide and media model. DCGLs were calculated from the RESRAD DSRs in the same manner as described in Appendix C to this plan.
7.2 Surface Soil Key results of the surface soil evaluation are presented in Table E-8. Table E-9 compares the resulting probabilistic DCGLs with the DCGLs developed using the deterministic method.
As can be seen in Table E-9, key dose drivers Cs-137, Sr-90, 1-129 and U-232 had probabilistic peak-of-the-mean DCGLs below the deterministic values. as did all radionuclides except Np-237 . Radionuclides were identified as key dose drivers based on preliminary characterization data in WMA 1 and WMA2 (See Attachment 1, Tables Att-1 and Att-2) . Cs-137, Sr-90, 1-129 and U-232 are discussed below (See also Table E-14).
- The Cs-137 dose is due primarily to external exposure in the initial years of exposure . However the depth of source thickness and exposure time fractions were the probabilistic parameters that are directly related to the external pathway, and were not highly correlated with resulting dose .
- The Sr-90 dose is due primarily to plant uptake in the initial years of exposure.
Plant uptake factors and depth of roots were highly correlated with the resulting dose.
- 1-129 dose is primarily due to ingestion of water and milk in the initial decades of exposure. Length parallel to groundwater flow and contaminated zone thickness were the most highly correlated parameters with the resulting dose .
- U-232 dose is primarily due to external exposure during the initial years of the simulation . The gamma shielding factor, and indoor/outdoor time fractions were most highly correlated with the resulting dose.
Attachment 1 presents plots of the probabilistic (peak-of-the-mean and 95th percentile) and deterministic dose-source ratios (DSRs) for comparison , for the radionuclides listed above. Also presented are plots of deterministic results compared with the cumulative probability derived from the probabilistic modeling . For all radionuclides (with the exception of Np-237) the peak-of-the-mean DCGLs were smaller than the deterministic DCGLs.
Table E-8. Key Output Dose Statistics (DSRs) - Surface Soil Model (mrem/y per pCi/g)(1l Year of 95th Radionuclide Minimum Maximum Mean Peak Dose Percentile Am-241 2.01 E+02 4.04E-02 3.49E+01 8.68E-01 1.32E +OO C-14 O.OOE +OO 2.12E-01 2.83E +OO 1.53E+OO 2.56E+OO Cm-243 O.OOE +OO 2.70E -01 4.69E +OO 7.21E-01 1.60E+OO Cm-244 O.OOE +OO 4.94E-02 7.38E+OO 3.85E-01 1.04E+OO Cs-137 0.0E+OO 1.8E+OO 2.2E+01 3.3E+OO 6.3E+OO 1-129 3.43E+OO 3.31 E-01 1.86E+03 7.68E+01 4.68E+02 Np-237 1.1 8E+01 9.16E -01 1.02E +03 9.59E+01 5.17E+02 Pu-238 O.OOE +OO 8.51 E-02 8.10E+OO 6.26E -01 1.78E+OO Revision 2 E-18
WVDP PHAS E 1 D ECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table E-8. Key Output Dose Statistics (DSRs) - Surface Soil Model (mrem/y per pCi/g)(1l Year of 95th Radionuclide Minimum Maximum Mean Peak Dose Percentile Pu -239 8.84E+02 2.73E-02 1.48E+01 9.86E -01 5.83E+OO Pu-240 7.81 E+02 5.28E-02 1.32E+01 9 .48E -01 5.84E+OO Pu-241 5.18E+01 3.34E-03 2.47E-01 2.15E-02 6.00E-02 Sr-90 O.OOE +OO 2.12E-01 2.11 E+02 1.22E +01 4 .17E+01 Tc-99 O.OOE +OO 2.30E -02 1.39E +01 1.19E+OO 3.64E+OO U-232 1.2E +01 1.5E +OO 5.6E +02 1 .7E +01 1.1 E+02 U-233 1.51 E+01 2.07E -02 8.61 E+01 3.02E +OO 2.96E +01 U-234 1.33E+01 1.41 E-02 1.35E +02 2.96E +OO 2.60E +01 U-235 6.63E +01 7.77E -01 2.20E +01 7.20E +OO 1.60E +01 U-238 1.33E+01 3.34E-02 6.82E +01 2.54E +OO 2.27E +01 NOTE: (1) From RESRAD probabilistic output file "MC
SUMMARY
.REP".
Table E-9. Surface Soil DCGLw Values for 25 mrem in Peak Year in pCi/g Probabilistic(2) Percent Difference Nuclide Deterministic(i) Deterministic and 1 Peak of the Mean Peak-of-the-Mean 95 h Percentile Am-241 4.31 E+01 2.88E +01 1.89E+01 -33%
C-14 2.00E +01 1.63E+01 9.77E+OO -18 %
Cm-243 4.06E +01 3.47E +01 1.56E+01 -15%
Cm-244 8.22E +01 6.49E +01 2.40E +01 -21 %
3 4 Cs-137( H l 2.43E+01 1.52E+01 7.95E+OO -37 %
1-129(4) 3.47E-01 3.26E-01 5.34E-02 -6%
Np-237 9.42E -02 2.61 E-01 4.84E-02 177%
Pu -238 5.03E +01 3.99E +01 1.40E+01 -21 %
Pu-239 4.53E+01 2.54E +01 4 .29E+OO -44%
Pu -240 4.53E +01 2.64E +01 4.28E+OO -42 %
Pu-241 1.42E+03 1.16E+03 4.17E+02 -18%
3 4 Sr-90( H l 6.25E+OO 4.10E+OO 1.20E+OO -34 %
Tc-99 2.37E +01 2.10E+01 6.87E +OO -11 %
U-232(4) 5.84E+OO 1.51 E+OO 2.23E-01 -74 %
U-233(4) 1.90E +01 8.28E +OO 8.45E-01 -56 %
U-234(4) 1.97E+01 8.45E +OO 9.62E -01 -57 %
4 U-235( l 1.87E +01 3.47E +OO 1.79E+OO -81 %
U-238(4) 2.06E +01 9.84E+OO 1.10E+OO -5 2%
NOTES: (1) From Tab le 5-8 of Section 5.
(2) From RES RAD probabi listic output file "MCS UMMARY.REP".
(3) DCGLs for these radionuclides are multiplied by a factor of two to account for decay during 30 year instituti onal control period.
(4) Dose driver radionucl ide (see Section 5.2.4 of the plan) .
Revision 2 E-19
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 7.3 Subsurface Soil Key results of the subsurface soil evaluation are presented in Table E-10 . Table E-11 compares the resulting probabilistic DCGLs with the DCGLs developed using the deterministic method. Note that the deterministic DCGLs used in this table for comparison purposes are the DCGLs from Table 5-8, which are based on the original base-case conceptual model. The DCGLs from the multi-source analysis that takes into account continuing releases from the bottom of the deep excavations are not directly comparable with the peak-of-the -mean DCGLs because the model used in development of the latter does not account for this secondary source. Table 5-11 c in Section 5 of this plan compares all of the different subsurface soil DCGLs .
Note also that the DCGLs presented in Table E-11 reflect a 10 fold dilution of the 1
source term (i .e. using 1/10 h the DSRs presented in Table E-10) as described in Sections of the DPlan .
As can be seen in Table E-11 , only Sr-90, Tc -99, and U-232 had probabilistic peak-of-the-mean DCGLs at least 10 percent below the deterministic values. These radionuclides are discussed below (See also Table E-15) .
- The Sr-90 dose is due primarily to plant uptake in the initial years of exposure .
Depth of roots and plant uptake factors were highly correlated with the resulting dose .
- The Tc-99 dose is due primarily to plant uptake in the initial years of exposure .
Depth of roots and plant uptake factors were highly correlated with the resulting dose.
- The U-232 dose is due primarily to external exposure in the initial years of the simulation. The contaminated zone Kd and gamma shielding factors were most highly correlated with the resulting dose.
Attachment 1 presents the plots of the probabilistic (peak-of-the-mean and 95th percentile) and deterministic DSRs for comparison, for the key dose drivers Sr-90, Cs-137, and U-232. Also presented are plots of deterministic results compared with the cumulative probability derived from the probabilistic modeling . For seven other radionuclides, the peak-of-the-mean DCGLs were greater than or equal to the deterministic .
Table E-10. Key Output Dose Statistics (DSRs) - Subsurface Soil Model (mrem/y per pCi/g)(1l Year of 95th Radionuclide Minimum Maximum Mean Peak Dose Percentile Am-241 O.OE+OO 2.4E-02 2.4E -01 3.7E -02 5.8E-02 C-14 O.OE+OO 1.4E-04 1.2E-03 3.5E-04 6.9E-04 Cm-243 O.OE+OO 1.6E-01 3.8E-01 2.2E-01 2.7E-01 Cm-244 O.OE+OO 6.0E -03 7.3E-02 1.1 E-02 2.3E-02 Cs-137 O.OE+OO 1.4E+OO 2.4E+OO 1.7E+OO 1.8E+OO 1-129 1.2E+01 2.1E-03 1.7E+OO 3.7E-01 9.6E-01 Revision 2 E-20
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table E-10. Key Output Dose Statistics (DSRs) - Subsurface Soil Model (mrem/y per pCi/g)(1l Year of 95th Radionuclide Minimum Maximum Mean Peak Dose Percentile Np-237 2.5E+01 6.5 E-08 2.3E +01 2.7E +OO 8.5E+OO Pu -238 O.OE+OO 9.7E-03 1.6E-01 1.8E-02 3.7E -02 Pu -239 O.OE+OO 1.1 E-02 1.9E-01 2.0E-02 4.lE-02 Pu-240 O.OE +OO 1.lE-02 4.7E-01 2.lE-02 3.9E -02 Pu-241 5.2E+01 2.0E-04 7.7E-03 1.0E-03 1.6E-03 Sr-90 O.OE +OO 1.3E-02 5.0E +OO 1.5E-01 4.8E-01 Tc-99 O.OE+OO 5.5E-04 5.2E-01 1.7E-02 5.7E-02 U-232 6.4E+OO 5.4E-03 5.1 E+OO 3.4E+OO 4 .6E +OO U-233 3.7E+02 2.3E-14 -6.3E-01 2.5E-02 7.4E-02 U-234 3.7E +02 4.5E-07 1.3E+OO 2.0E -02 6.7E-02 U-235 O.OE+OO 1.5E-01 3.6E-01 2.7E-01 . 3.3E -01 U-238 O.OE +OO 3.3E-02 1.1 E-01 5.4E-02 6.6E-02 NOTE : (1) From RESRAD probabilistic output file "MC
SUMMARY
.REP".
Table E-11. Subsurface Soil DCGLw Values for 25 mrem in Peak Year in pCi/g Probabilistic(2) Percent Difference 1
Nuclide Deterministic( l Deterministic and 1
Peak-of-the-Mean 95 h Percentile Peak-of-the-Mean Am-241 7.16E +03 6.81 E+03 4.30E +03 -5%
C-14 5.59E +05 7.18E+05 3.64E +05 28%
Cm-243 1.15E+03 1.12E+03 9.33E +02 -3%
Cm-244 2.37E+04 2.21 E+04 1.08E +04 -7 %
3 4 Cs-137( H l 4.36E+02 3.01E+02 2.72E+02 -31 %
4 1-129( ) 6.46E+02 6.70E+02 2.60E+02 4%
Np-237 5.77E +01 9.33E +01 2.95E +01 62 %
Pu-238 1.47E+04 1.37E+04 6 .83E +03 -7%
Pu-239 1.33E+04 1.23E+04 6.11 E+03 -7 %
Pu -240 1.33E+04 1.21E+04 6 .44E+03 -9%
Pu -241 2.41 E+05 2.50E+05 1.59E +05 4%
3 4 Sr-90( H l 4.36E+03 3.42E+03 1.03E+03 -21 %
Tc-99 1.59E+04 1.44E+04 4 .36E+03 -10%
4 U-232( ) 1.06E +02 7.40E +01 5.43E +01 -30%
4 U-233( ) 2.72E +03 9.92E+03 3.39E +03 264%
Revision 2 E-21
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table E-11. Subsurface Soil DCGLw Values for 25 mrem in Peak Year in pCi/g Probabilistic<2) Percent Difference Nuclide Deterministic<1) Deterministic and 1
Peak-of-the-Mean 95 h Percentile Peak-of-the-Mean U-234<4 ) 2.81 E+03 1.26E+04 3.75E+03 349%
4 U-235<> 9.41E +02 9.33E+02 7.60E +02 -1%
4 U-238( ) 2.94E+03 4.60E+03 3.79E+03 57 %
NOTES: (1) From Table 5-8 of Section 5. More limiting deterministic val ues for the resident gardener are available as an alternative comparison for some radionuclides. Refer to Section 5.2.8 for a compa rison between the probabilistic DCGLs and all other sets of subsurface soil DCGLs.
(2) From RESRAD probabilistic output fi le "MC
SUMMARY
.REP" for the resident fa rmer with a contamination zo ne of 100 m2 .
(3) DCGLs for these radionucli des are multiplied by a factor of two to account for decay during 30 year institutional control period.
(4) Dose driver radionuclide (see Section 5.2.4 of the plan).
7.3 Streambed Sediment Key results of the streambed sediment evalu ation are presented in Table E-12. Table E-13 compares the resulting probabilistic DCGLs with the DCGLs developed using the deterministic method .
As can be seen in Table E-13 , all radionuclides had probabilistic peak-of-the-mean DCGLs at least 10 percent below the deterministic values. Key dose drivers for sediment are Sr-90 and Cs-137 . These radionuclides are discussed below (See also Table E-16) .
- Sr-90 dose is due primarily to ingestion of venison in the initial years of exposure .
The resulting dose is highly correlated to the contaminated zone Kd value ;
however, the plant and fish biotransfer factors were more closely correlated than the meat biotransfer factors .
- Cs- 137 dose is primarily due to external exposure in the initial years of exposure.
As expected, the outdoor time fraction was highly correlated with dose.
Attachment 1 presents the plots of the probabilistic (peak-of-the-mean and 95th percentile) and deterministic DSRs for comparison. Also presented are plots of deterministic results compared with the cumulative probability derived from the probabilistic modeling .
Table E-12. Key OutRiut Dose Statistics (DSRs) - Streambed Sediment Model (mrem/y per pCi/g) 1>
Year of 95th Radionuclide Minimum Maximum Mean Peak Dose Percentile Am-241 1.0E+OO 9.1E-04 5.7E-02 2.SE -03 4.8E-03 C-14 O.OE +OO 5.8E-03 4.SE-01 1.4E-02 3.4E-02 Cm -243 O.OE +OO 3.7E -03 1.4E-02 8.2E-03 1.2E-02 Cm-244 O.OE +OO 2.6E-04 2.4E-03 6.SE -04 9.9E-04 Cs-137 O.OE+OO 2.3E-02 8.8E-02 4.8E-02 6.9E -02 1-129 O.OE +OO 6.1E-03 6.6E-01 3.2E -02 7.2E -02 Revision 2 E-22
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table E-12. Key Out~ut Dose Statistics {DSRs) - Streambed Sediment Model
{mrem/y per pCi/g) i )
Year of 95th Radionuclide Minimum Maximum Mean Peak Dose Percentile Np-237 O.OE+OO 1.0E-02 2.2E+OO 7.7E-02 2.3E -01 Pu-238 1.0E+OO 6.9E-04 1.4E-01 2.0E-03 3.6E -03 Pu-239 1.0E+OO 8.8E -04 2.3E -02 2.1 E-03 4.1E-03 Pu-240 1.0E +OO 9.0E-04 1.6E-02 2. 1 E-03 4.2E -03 Pu-241 5.2E +01 2.8E-05 1.9E-03 7.3E -05 1.3E -04 Sr-90 O.OE +OO 1.4E-03 1.5E-01 1.1 E-02 3.0E-02 Tc-99 O.OE +OO 3.4E-06 1.1 E-03 3.8E -05 1.1 E-04 U-232 7.2E +OO 4.6E -02 9.3E -01 1.1 E-01 1.7E -01 U-233 O.OE +OO 1.1 E-04 5.2E-02 1 .2E -03 3.9E-03 U-234 O.OE +OO 1.2E-04 2.9E-02 1.2E-03 4.2E-03 U-2 35 O.OE +OO 4. 9E -03 4.0E-02 1.1 E-02 1.6E-02 U-238 O.OE +OO 1.1 E-03 9.0E -02 3.1 E-03 5.5E -03 NOTE: (1) From RESRAD probabi li stic output file "MC
SUMMARY
.REP".
Table E-13. Streambed Sediment DCGLw Values for 25 mrem in Peak Year in pCi/g Probabilistic'2l Percent Difference Nuclide Deterministic(iJ Deterministic and 1
Peak-of-the-Mean 95 h Percentile Peak-of-the-Mean Am -241 1.55E +04 1.02E +04 5.19E+03 -34%
C-14 3.44E +03 1.84E +03 7.42E +02 -46%
Cm-243 3.59E +03 3.06E+03 2.08E+03 -15 %
Cm-244 4.84E +04 3.83E +04 2.52E +04 -21 %
3 4 Cs-137( H l 1.29E+03 1.04E+03 7.24E+02 -19%
1-129 3.69E +03 7.91 E+02 3.49E+02 -79%
Np-237 5.19E+02 3.25E+02 1.11 E+02 -37 %
Pu-238 1.99E +04 1.24E +04 7.02E+03 -38%
Pu -239 1.79E+04 1.19E+04 6.08E +03 -33 %
Pu-240 1.79E +04 1.20E +04 5.98E+03 -33 %
Pu -241 5.11E +05 3.44E +05 1.92E +05 -33 %
3 4 Sr-90' H l 9.49E+03 4.72E+03 1.67E+03 -50%
Tc-99 2.17E+06 6.61 E+05 2.38E +05 -70%
U-232 2.61 E+02 2.23E +02 1.49E+02 -15 %
U-233 5.75E +04 2.16E+04 6.38E +03 -62 %
U-234 6 .04E +04 2.16E+04 5.94E+03 -64 %
Revi sion 2 E-23
WVOP PHAS E 1 D ECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table E-13. Streambed Sediment DCGLw Values for 25 mrem in Peak Year in pCi/g Probabilistic(2l Percent Difference 1
Nuclide Deterministic( l Deterministic and Peak-of-the-Mean 951h Percentile Peak-of-the-Mean U-235 2.89E+03 2.34E+03 1.58E +03 -19%
U-238 1.25E +04 8.17E+03 4.55E +03 -34%
NOTE S: (1) From Tabl e 5*8 of Section 5.
(2) From RESRAD probabilistic output fil e "MC
SUMMARY
.RE P".
(3) DCG Ls for these raa ionuclides are multiplied by a factor of two to account for decay during 30 year institutional control period .
(4) Dose driver radionuclide (see Section 5.2.4 of the pl an).
7.4 Preliminary Dose Assessment for Remediated WMA 1 Excavation As indicated in Section 5.4 .4 of this plan, the preliminary dose assessment for the remediated WMA 1 excavated area estimated by using information from the multi -source deterministic analysis was a maximum of approximately 8 mrem per year. Using the probabilistic modeling results, the estimates are as follows:
- A peak-of-the-mean estimate of 1.9 mrem per year
- A 95th percentile value of 2.8 mrem per year Table Att-1 of Attachment 1 shows the calculations of these values. The probabilistic results were not used because they were lower than the 8 mrem per year estimate produced using information from the multi -source deterministic analysis.
7.5 Preliminary Dose Assessment for Remediated WMA 2 Excavation As indicated in Section 5.4.4 of this plan, the preliminary dose assessment for the remediated WMA 2 excavated area estimated by using information from the multi -source deterministic analysis was a maximum of approximately 0.2 mrem per year. Using the probabilistic modeling results, the estimates are as follows:
- A peak-of-the-mean estimate of 0.11 mrem per year *
- A 95th percentile value of 0.13 mrem per year Table Att-2 of Attachment 1 shows the calculations of these values. The probabilistic results were not used because they were lower than the 0.2 mrem per year estimate produced using information from the multi -source deterministic analysis .
8.0 Parameter Output Rank Correlations The RESRAD results include several correlations of input para meters with the output modeled dose . Several correlations are available based on actu al numerical calcul ated values and relative rankings .
Guidance for RESRAD probabilistic modeling in NUREG/CR-6676 (Kamboj , et al.
2000) indicates that correlation coefficients based on relative ranking s are preferable where nonlinear relationships, widely disparate scales, or long tails are present in the input and outputs . Therefore, determinations of parameter significance presented in thi s section are Revision 2 E-24
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN based on the partial rank correlation coefficient (PRCC) . Where strong correlations between an input parameter and the dose were indicated in the output ranking , scatter plots were inspected to confirm the conclusion.
2 RESRAD also ca lculates the overall coefficients of determination (R ) for each model, which provides an indication of the variability in the overall radionuclide dose accounted for by the selected input parameters.
As described previously, numerous parameters . were selected for probabilistic evaluation for each radionuclide . The tables presented and discussed below focus on the three highest ranked parameter correlations for all included parameters for each radionuclide in each media .
To ensure sufficient model iterations were being used to allow for convergence of the results, three sets of 1,000 iterations were selected . This was considered to be appropriate as the peak-of-the-mean doses for the three datasets were within approximately +/-10 percent. The run with the largest peak-of-the -mean dose was selected as the basis for the information in the summary tables .
8.1 Surface Soil Model Table E-14 presents a summary of the parameters which correlate most closely with the overall dose for each rad ionuclide . In general, Kd, plant transfer factors, and root zone depth were most strongly correlated with dose . The plant transfer factors have the higher correlations (mostly >0.7) when compared with Kd (<0 .7) .
2 The R values ranged from 0.71 (U-232) to 0 .99 (1-129) . Where the overall correlation is low, identification of additional probabilistic parameters for these rad ionuclides may better describe the variabi lity in the model output.
Table E-1 4. Summary of Parameter Rankings - Surface Soil Model(1J Parameter Ranking Simulation Nuclide 1 2 3 No. (R2)
Am-241 Plant transfer factor for Contaminated zone Depth of roots (-0.49) 3 (0.93)
Am (0.78) Thickness (0.54)
C-14 Contaminated zone Plant tran sfer factor for C Depth of roots (-0 .79) 3 (0 .96) thickness (0.98) (0 .08)
Cm-243 Plant transfer factor for Contaminated zone Depth of roots (-0 .64) 2 (0.96)
Cm (0 .86) Thickness (0 .65)
Cm-244 Plant tran sfer factor for Contaminated zone Depth of roots (-0.67) 3 (0 .96)
Cm (0 .87) Thickness (0 .68)
Cs-137 Plant transfer factor for Cs Contaminated zone Depth of roots (-0 .56) 3 (0 .95)
(0.71) Thickness (0 .52) 1-129 Length parallel to Contaminated zone Irrigation rate (0 .34) 2 (0.99) groundwater flow (0.64) Thickness (0 .62)
Np-237 Length parallel to Contaminated zone Saturated zone hydraulic 2 (0 .99) groundwater flow (0.73) Thickness (0.60) conductivity (-0 .45)
Revision 2 E-25
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table E-14. Summary of Parameter Rankings - Surface Soil Mode1<1>
Parameter Ranking Simulation Nuclide 1 2 3 No. (R 2)
Pu-238 Plant transfer factor for Pu Contaminated zone Depth of roots (-0.67) 3 (0.96)
(0.86) Thickness (0.66)
Pu-239 Plant transfer factor for Pu Contaminated zone Depth of roots (-0.44) 1 (0.91 )
(0.72) Thickness (0.43)
Pu-240 Plant transfer factor for Pu Contaminated zone Depth of roots (-0.44) 1 (0.91 )
(0.74) Thickness (0.43)
Pu-241 Plant transfer factor for Contaminated zone Depth of roots (-0.37) 1 (0.75)
Am (0.81 ) Th ickness (0.39)
Sr-90 Plant transfer factor for Sr Contaminated zone Depth of roots (-0.62) 3 (0.96)
(0.84) th ickness (0.60)
Tc-99 Contaminated zone Plant transfer factor for Tc Depth of roots (-0.33) 3 (0.92)
Thickness (0.67) (0.55)
U-232 Gamma shileding factor Outdoor time fraction Indoor time fraction (0.21) 1 (0.67)
(0.38) (0.34)
U-233 Contaminated zone Meat transfer factor for U Plant transfer factor for Th 3 (0.92)
Thickness (0.23) (-0.19) (0.18)
U-234 Contaminated zone Meat Iran sfer factor for U Depth of roots (-0.13) 3 (0.95)
Thickness (0.32) (-0.15)
U-235 Length parallel to Contaminated zone Saturated zone Kd (-0.46) 3 (0.93) groundwater flow (0.78) Thickness (0.77)
U-238 Contaminated zone Length parallel to Depth of roots (-0.16) 1 (0.96)
Thickness (0.23) groundwater flow (0.16)
NOTE: (1) From RESRAD probabili stic output file "MC
SUMMARY
.REP". Simulation (out of three) with largest peak-of-th e-mean dose was used to determi ne the parameter ranking, based on the PRCCs with statistic (either R or R2) in parentheses.
8.2 Subsurface Soil Model As shown in Table E-15, the most highly correlated parameters for the subsurface model, like with the surface soil model , are the Kd. plant transfer coefficients , and root depth . The highest correlations (-0.99) were calculated for the depth of roots ; however the Kd correlations were generally lower than those for the plant transfer factors . The R2 values ranged from 0.17 (U -233) to 1.00 (Np-237).
Tabl e E 15 S ummaryof Parameter Ran k"mgs - SU bSU rface S01*1 Mod e 1<1>
Parameter Ranking Simulation Nuclide 1 2 3 No. (R 2)
Am-241 Depth of roots (-0.82) Plant transfer factor for Outdoor time fraction (0.58) 1 (0.93)
Am (0.76)
- C-14 Depth of roots (-0.99) Meat transfer factor for C Plant transfer factor for C 2 (0.98)
(0.18) (0.17)
Cm-243 Outdoor time fraction Indoor time fraction (0.53) Plant transfer factor for Cm 1 (0.96)
(0.91) (-0.44)
Revision 2 E-26
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN T abl e E 15 S ummary of Paramet er Ran k"mgs - s U bSU rface S01*1 Md o e l(ll Parameter Ranking Simulation Nuclide 1 2 3 No. (R2)
Cm-244 Depth of roots (-0.93) Plant transfer factor for Indoor time fraction (0.40) 1 (0.97)
Cm (0.89)
Cs-137 Outdoor time fraction Gamma shielding factor Indoor time fraction (0.81) 3 (0.96)
(0.93) (0.92) 1-129 Contaminated zone Kd for Well pumping rate (-0.56) Irrigation rate (0.27) 1 (0.99)
I (-0.94) .
Np-237 Contaminated zone Kdfor Well pumping rate (-0.55) Irrigation rate (0.29) 3 (1 .00)
Np (-0.95)
Pu-238 Depth of roots (-0.93) Plant transfer factors for Outdoor time fraction (0.32) 1 (0.97)
Pu (0.32)
Pu-239 Depth of roots (-0.93) Plant transfer factor for Pu Outdoor time fraction (0.29) 2 (0.97)
(0.89)
Pu-240 Depth of roots (-0.93) Plant transfer factor for Pu Indoor time fraction (0.33) 1 (0.97)
(0.90)
Pu-241 Plant transfer factor for Depth of roots (-0.62) Contaminated zone Kdfor 1 (0.77)
Am (0.81) Am (0.52)
Sr-90 Depth of roots (-0. 94) Plant transfer factor for Sr Contaminated zone Kdfor 1 (0.98)
(0.91) Cs (-0.10)
Tc-99 Depth of roots (-0.93) Plant transfer factor for Tc Well pumping rate (-0.10) 1 (0.97)
(0.90)
U-232 Contaminated zone Kdfor Gamma shielding factor Outdoor time fraction (0.41) 3 (0.87) u (0.49) (0.48)
U-233 Contaminated zone Kci for Milk transfer factor for U Plant transfer factor for U 3 (0.17) u (-0.34) (-0.31) (-0.29)
U-234 Contaminated zone Kd for Milk transfer factor for U Meat transfer factor for U 3 (0.25) u (-0.31) (-0.24) (-0.22)
U-235 Outdoor time fraction Indoor time fraction (0.28) Meat transfer factor for U 2 (0.85)
(0.71) (-0.15)
U-238 Outdoor time fraction Milk transfer factor for U Meat transfer factor for U 1 (0.62)
(0.48) (-0.22) (-0.21)
NOTE: (1) From RESRAD probabilistic output file "MC
SUMMARY
.REP. Simulation (out of three) with largest peak-of-the-mean dose was used to determine the parameter ranking, based on the Partial Rank Correlation Coefficients (PRCC) with statistic (either R or RZ) in parentheses.
8.3 Streambed Sediment Model Table E-16 shows the correlation coefficients and highest ranked sediment parameters for streambed sediment. Fourteen radionuclides have a correlation coefficient greater than 2
or equal to 0.85 and one radionuclide has a coefficient below 0.5. The R values ranged from 0.23 (U -233) to 0.99 (Cm-243) . The outdoor time fraction accounted for the majority of the highest correlations .
Revision 2 E-27
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Ta bl e E- 16. S ummary of Parameter Ran k ings - s tream bed s ed iment o e Parameter Ranking Simulation Nuclide No. (R2) 1 2 3 Outdoor time fraction Fish transfer factor for Am Meat transfer factor for Am Am-241 1 (0.81)
(0.86) (0.43) (0.13)
Fish transfer factor for C Contaminated zone Kd for Meat transfer factor for C C-14 1 (0.97)
(0.98) c (-0.43) (0 .. 07)
Outdoor time fraction Contaminated zone Kd for Fish transfer factor for Cm Cm-243 1 (0.99)
(1 .00) Cm (-0.14) (0.11)
Outdoor time fraction Fish transfer factor for Cm Meat transfer factor for Cm Cm-244 1 (0.89)
(0.92) (0.29) (0.26)
Outdoor time fraction Meat transfer factor for Cs Plant transfer factor for Cs Cs-137 1 (0.98)
(0.99) (0.33) (0.18)
Fish*transfer factor for I Contaminated zone Kd for Meat transfer factor for I 1-129 1 (0.95)
(0.81) I (-0.48) (0.44)
Fish transfer factor for Np Outdoor time fraction Contamin ated zone Kdfor Np-237 1 (0.93)
(0.89) (0.52) Np (-0.47)
Outdoor time fraction Fish transfer factor for Pu Contaminated zone Kd for Pu-238 1 (0.87)
(0.82) (0.74) Ptl (-0.23)
Outdoor time fraction Fish transfer factor for Pu Contaminated zone Kdfor Pu-239 1 (0.86)
(0.81) (0.74) Pu (-0.27)
Outdoor time fraction Fish transfer factor for Pu Contaminated zone Kd for Pu-240 1 (0.96)
(0.81) (0.74) Pu (-0.30)
Outdoor time fraction Contaminated zone Kdfor Fish tran sfer factor for Am Pu-24 Wl 1 (0.72)
(0.79) Am (-0.58) (0.38)
Contaminated zone Kd for Fish transfer factor for Sr Plant transfer factor for Sr Sr-90 1 (0.97)
Sr (-0.73) (0.59) (0.30)
Fish transfer factor for Tc Plant transfer factor for Tc Meat transfer factor for Tc Tc-99 1 (0.86)
(0.91) (0.17) (0.13)
Outdoor time fraction Fish transfer factor for U Plant transfer factor for U U-232 1 (0.93)
(0.96) (0.27) (-0.14)
Contaminated zone Kdfor Outdoor time fraction Meat transfer factor for Tc U-233 1 (0.23)
Th (-0.21) (0.26) (0.20)
Fish transfer factor for U Outdoor time fraction Contaminated zone Kd for U-234 3 (0.78)
(0.45) (0.28) u (-0.26)
Outdoor time fraction Fish transfer factor for U Meat transfer factor for U U-235 1 (0.90)
(0.94) (0.35) (0.20)
Outdoor time fraction Fish transfer factor for U Contaminated zone Kdfor U-238 1 (0.85)
(0.85) (0.41) u (-0.23)
NOTES: (1) From RESRAD probabilistic output file "MC
SUMMARY
.REP". Simulation (out of three) with largest peak-of-the-mean dose was used to determine the parameter ranking , based on the Partial Rank Correlation Coefficients (PRCC) with stati stic (either R or R2) in parentheses.
(2) This analog was assumed give the decay of Pu-241 to Am-241 .
Revision 2 E-28
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 9.0
- Conclusions from the Uncertainty Analyses and Related Actions 9.1 Conclusions
- The following conclusions can be drawn from the results of the probabilistic modeling described above.
Surface Soil DCGLs Table E-9 shows that deterministic DCGLs for 17 of the 18 radionuclides of interest are not bounding because they are greater than the peak-of-the mean probabilistic DCGLs.
Parameters highly correlated with the output are plant transfer factors, depth of roots, and length parallel to aquifer flow.
The length parallel to aquifer flow is a parameter selected to vary the dilution factor iri groundwater.
These input parameters therefore lack sufficient conservatism insofar as the 17 radionuclides are concerned. This group of radionuclides includes three that have been identified as dose drivers: Sr-90, Cs-137, and U-235.
The lack of conservatism in these surface soil criteria can be quantified in another manner by considering the average soil concentrations at the deterministic DCGLs. If the average residual concentration of Sr-90, for example, were to be 6.25 pCi/g (the deterministic DCGL for surface soil), then the probabilistic modeling would indicate that the probability that the resulting dose would not exceed 25 mrem in the peak year would be approximately 55 percent (see Figure Att-2 in Attachment 1).
The primary conclusion for the surface soil model is that some input parameters used in the deterministic modeling are not sufficiently conservative and, consequently, the deterministic DCGLs for 17 radionuclides are not bounding.
Subsurface .Soil DCGLs Table E-11 shows that 1O of the deterministic DCGLs are not bounding because they exceed the peak-of-the mean probabilistic DCGLs, however only three radionuclides were below the deterministic DCGL by more than 10 percent. The comparisons above are based on the deterministic values for the resident farmer scenario, however more limiting values are available for the resident gardener scenario for comparison. The most limiting of all determini~tic and probabilistic scenarios will be used to establish the cleanup levels (See Section 5). Parameters highly correlated with the output are depth of roots, contaminated zone Kd, *and outdoor time fraction. The. outdoor time fraction is based on assumptions of anticipated activity and may be refined with additional site-specific considerations. Refer to Section 5.2.8 for comparisons between the probabilistic DCGLs and other sets of subsurface soil DCGLs.
Streambed Sediment DCGLs Table E-13 indicates that none of the deterministic DCGLs are bounding because they all exceed the peak-of-the-means DCGLs. For the key sediment dose drivers Sr-90 and Cs-137, the probabilistic values less than the deterministic by 50 percent and 19 percent respectively. The outdoor time fraction is most highly correlated with the dose for Cs-137, Revision 2 E-29
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN and Sr-90 was most highly correlated with the contaminated zone Kd. The outdoor time fraction is based on assumptions of anticipated activity and may be refined with additional site-specific considerations.
Preliminary Dose Assessments The probabilistic dose _estimates for the WM_A 1 excavation area show that doses are likely to be less than 1.9 mrem/y, due primarily to Sr-90. The probabilistic dose estimates for the WMA 2 excavation area show that the doses are likely to be less than 0.11 mrem/y, due primarily to Cs-137.
Based on these results, it is anticipated that a small number of radionuclides will account for the majority of the dose.
Input Parameters and Dose Variability The determination of which input parameters account for the majority of variability !n the output was accomplished by inspection of the output correlation coefficients, which indicated. the following:
- For surface soil, output dose results were well described by the input parameters, as only two radionuclides (Pu-241 .and U-232) had coefficients of determination
<+/-0.9. The highest parameter correlations (~'+/-0.7) were for plant transfer factors and contaminated zone thickness.
- For subsurface* soil, the variability in the calculated dose was moderately well 2
described by the input parameters (six radionuclides with R <+/-0.9). The highest correlations for individual parameters (>+/-0.9) were the depth. of roots, contaminated zone Kd, and outdoor.time fraction
- Sediment dose variability was well described by the input parameters (nine radionuclides with R2 <+/-0.9); with the highest correlations (>+/-0.9) observed for the outdoor time fraction and fish transfer factor.
.The probabilistic evaluation has identified parameters that are well correlated. with the calculated dose. Based on these results, the input parameters that account for the majority of variability in the output are plant transfer factors, contaminated zone thickness, depth of roots, contaminated zone Kd '. outdoor time fraction, and fish transfer.factors.
9.2 *Actions The conclusions on the probabilistic uncertainty analysis results just described led to the decision to make use of the probabilistic peak-of-the-mean DCGLs in place of the deterministic DCGLs provided in Revision 0 to this plan for surface soil and streambed sediment. The probabilistic peak-of-the-mean DCGLs were used for !?Ubsurface soil for three radionuclides as discussed in Section 5.2.8. Changes in Section 5 made as part of Revision 2, including changes to the cleanup goals, reflect these decisions.
10.0 References Baes. et.al. 1984, A Review and Analysis of Parameters for Assessing Transport of Environmentally Released Radionuclides through Agriculture, ORNL-5786. Base, C.F. Ill, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, September, 1984.
Revision 2 E-30
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN DOE 2008, DOE letter from Cynthia Anderson (Deputy Chief Operations Officer) to Keith McConnell of NRC (Deputy Director, Decommissioning and Uranium Recovery Licensing Directorate) dated December 3, 2008.
EPA 1999, UNDERSTANDING VARIATION IN PARTITION COEFFICIENT, Kd, VALUES, Volume II: Review of Geochemistry and Available Kd Values for Cadmium, Cesium, Chromium, Lead, Plutonium, Radon, Strontium, Thorium, Tritium (3H), and Uranium, Report EPA 402-R-99-004B. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., August 1999.
EPA 2004, UNDERSTANDING VARIATION IN PARTITION COEFFICIENT,Kd, VALUES, Volume Ill: Review of Geochemistry and Available Kd Values for Americium, Arsenic, Curium, Iodine, Neptunium, Radium, and Technetium, Report EPA 402-R-99-004C. US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, D.C., July 2004.
Kamboj, et al. 2000, Probabilistic Dose Analysis Using Parameter Distributions Developed for RESRAD and RESRAD-BUILD Codes, NUREG/CR-6676, ANL/EAD/TM-89.
Kamboj, S. et al. Environmental Assessment Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Chicago, Illinois, May 2000.
LePoire, et al. 2000, Probabilistic Modules for the RESRAD and RESRAD-Build Computer Codes, User Guide, NUREG-CR-6692, ANL/EAD/TM-91. LePoire, D., et al.
Environmental Assessment Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Chicago, Illinois, November 2000.
N RC 2006, Consolidated NMSS Decommissioning Guidance: Characterization, Survey, and Determination of Radiological Criteria, Final Report, NUREG 1757 Volume 2, Revision 1. NRC, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Washington, DC, September, 2006.
NRC 2008, Report of October 21, 2008 Meeting With U.S. Department of Energy on Dose Mo.deling Approach for Phase 1 Decommissioning Plan. Forwarded by letter from NRC (Rebecca Tadesse, Chief, Materials Decommissioning Branch, Decommissioning and Uranium Recovery Licensing Directorate) to DOE (Bruce Bower, WVDP) dated November 18, 2008.
Sheppard and Thibault 1990, "Default Soil Solid/Liquid Partition Coefficients, Kds, for Four Major Soil Types: A Compendium," Sheppard, M.I., and D.H. Thibault, Health Physics, 59:471-482, 1990.
Yu, et al. 2000, Development of Probabilistic RESRAD 6.0 and RESRAD-BUILD 3.0 Computer Codes, NUREG/CR-6697, ANL/EAD/TM-98. Yu, C., et al.,
Environmental Assessment Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois, November 2000.
Yu, et al. 2001, User's Manual for RESRAD Version 6, ANL/EAD-4. Yu, C., et al.,
Environmental Assessment Division, Argonne National Labo'.atory, Argonne, Illinois, July 2001.
11.0 ATTACHMENTS (1) Plots of Probabilistic and Deterministic Results (2) Electronic Files Described in Section 1.3 (provided separately)
Revision 2 E-31
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN ATTACHMENT 1 Plots of Probabilistic an.d Deterministic Results Note that the deterministic results used in this attachment are the deterministic results based on the original base-case conceptual model. The multi-source analysis results were not used because they are not directly comparable with the probabilistic results.
Revision 2 E-32
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS 4.50E+01
- Probabilistic 95th Percentile 4.00E+01 - Probabilistic fl/lean
!? 3.50E+01
- Deterministic u
~ 3.00E+01 Q)
~ 2.50E+01
~
2.00E+01 et:
§. 1.50E+01 a:::
~ 1.00E+01 5.00E+OO -+--~:--~.-:--~~--.k;::--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-j O.OOE +00 L_,____.__=:~i:::~~~+/-:;~;;;;~~&;;;;;;;;=-11~-.....~-+-.......-"---111~~-l.
O.OE+OO 5.0E+01 1.0E+02 1 .5E+02 2.0E+02 Year Figure Att-1. Probabilistic and Deterministic Dose-Source Ratio vs. Time, Sr Surface Soil Revision 2 E-33
DO E RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAI S Cummulative Probability DSR - Surface Soil - SR90 1.0 0.9 ~
0.8
/
~
- .0 0.7 I
n:J
.0 0 0.6 I
I a..
Q) I
> 0.5
- 0:0
~
- I 0.4 I E
E
- I 0.3 I
0 0.2 I 0.1 / -
- C ummu l a t i~ Probabi lity - Year 0 Determini stic DSR (DCGL=6.25 pCi/g) -
~
0.0 1.00E-01 1.00 E+OO 1.00 E+01 1.00 E+02 1.00 E+03 DSR (mrem/yr per pCi/g )
Figure Att-2. Cumulative Probability Dose-Source Ratio, Sr Surface Soil Revi sion 2 E-34
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Probabilistic and Deterministic DSR vs. Time - Surface Soil - CS137 7.0E+OO
- Probabilistic 95th Percentile 6.0E+OO - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - +- Probabilistic Mean
--..- Deterministic g> 5.0E +OO
(...)
a.
Q)
- a. 4.0E +OO
~
E
.... 3.0E+OO Q)
.s 0:::
en 2.0E+OO c
1.0E +OO O.OE+OO O.OOE+OO 5.00E+01 1.00E+02 1.50E +02 2.00E+02 2.50E +02 3.00E+02 Year Figure Att-3. Probabilistic and Deterministic Dose-Source Ratio, Cs-137 - Surface Soil Revision 2 E-35
DOE R ESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAI S Cummulative Probability DSR-Surface Soil - CS137 1.0 0.9
~
0.8
/
~
- .cnl 0.7 I Jl 0 0.6 I c..
QI
> 0.5 I
- i
..!2
- I E
0.4 I
u E
- I 0.3 I 0.2 I - Cummulatil. Probability - Year O -
0.1 J
I - Determini stic DSR (DCGL=24.3 pCi/g) 0.0 1.0E+OO 1.0E+01 1.0 E+02 DSR (mrem/yr per pCi/g )
Figure Att-4. Cumulative Probability Dose-Source Ratio, Cs-137 - Surface Soil Revision 2 E-36
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Probabilistic and Detenninistic DSR vs. Time - Surface Soil - U232
Probabilistic 95th Percentile
--+-- Probabilistic lllean
-.- Deterministic
.El
~ 8.0E+01 Q) c.
-f 6.0 E+01 e!
.§.
ct: 4.0E +01 en c
2.0E+01 O.OE+OO ~:::=:~::;::~~~~*3~;;;;;;;;;:,;;;:;;;1;;;;;;;J1t:=;;;:;;;;;;;;;;.,...iiiim!...__ _ .,_.~_..._,._'--+__._. . . . . . . . . . . ._j O.OE+OO 5.0E+01 1.0E +02 1.SE+02 2.0E+02 2.SE+02 3.0E+02 3.SE+02 4.0E+02 Year Figure Att-5. Probabilistic and Deterministic Dose-Source Ratio vs. Time, U-232 - Surface Soil Revi sion 2 E-37
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING P LAN RAI S Cummulative Probability DSR - Surface Soil Dose - U232
~
1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7
(------
I
- cca
..c
...0 c.
0.6
~
Q)
> 0.5
- J 0.4 E
E
- I 0.3 0
0.2 I - Cummulati1.e Probability - Year 70 -
0.1 I/
J - Deterministic DSR (DCG L=18. 7 pCi/g) 0.0 O.OE+ OO 1.0E+01 2. 0E+ 01 3. 0E+01 4.0E +01 5.0E+01 6.0E+ 01 DSR (rTYem'yr per pCi/g)
Figure Att-6. Cumulative Probability Dose-Source Ratio, U-232 - Surface Soi l Revision 2 E-38
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING P LAN RAIS Probabilistic and Detenninistic DSR vs. Time - Subsurface Soil - SR90 6.E-01
- Probabilistic 95th Perc entile 5.E-01 -+- Probabilistic l\/lean C> -...- Determini stic uc. 4.E-0 1 Q) c.
~ 3.E -0 1 E
Q)
- E 0::
CJ) 2.E-0 1 c
1.E-0 1 O.E+OO O.OE +OO 2.0E +01 4.0E+01 6.0E +01 8 .0 E+01 1.0E +02 1.2E+02 Year Figure Att-7. Probabilistic and Deterministic Dose-Source Ratio vs. Time , Sr Subsurface Soil Revision 2 E-39
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAI S Cummulative Probability DSR - Subsurface Soil - SR90 1.0 0.9 /
0.8
/
~ /
.c 0.7
.c RI v
...0 0.6 a.
(I)
> 0.5 I
..!l!
- I 0.4 I E
E
- I 0.3 I 0
0.2 I 0.1
/ - Cummulative Probability - Year 0 0.0
/ - Determini sti c DSR (DCGL=4360 pCi/g) 1.0 E-04 1.0E-03 1.0 E-02 1.0 E-01 1.0E+OO DSR (mrem/yr per pCi/g)
Figure Att-8. Cumulative Probability Dose-Source Ratio, Sr Subsurface Soil Revision 2 E-40
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Probabilistic and Deterministic DSR vs. Time -Subsurface Soil - CS137 2.0E +OO
Probabili sti c 95th Percentile 1.8E+OO - - Proba bilistic Mean
Determini sti c 1.6E +OO Cl
- 1.4E+OO CJ a.
Q) 1.2E+OO
...a.
~ 1.0 E+OO E
Q)
.§. 8.0E-01
~
"'c 6.0 E-01 4.0 E-01 2.0 E-01 O.OE +OO O.OE+OO 5.0E+0 1 1.0 E+0 2 1 .5E +02 2.0E +0 2 2.5E+0 2 3.0 E+0 2 3.5E+0 2 4.0 E+02 Year Figure Att-9. Probabilistic and Deterministic Dose-Source Ratio vs. Time, Cs-137 - Subsurface Soil Revision 2 E-4 1
~-- - -- - --- - ---
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONIN G PLAN RAI S Cummulative Probability DSR - Subsurface Soil - CS137 1.0 0.9 r I
0.8
~
.Q 0.7 C1'
.Q
...0 a..
0.6 Q)
> 0.5
+:
~
- s 0.4 E
E 0.3
- s
(..)
0.2
- Cummulatil. Probabi lity - Year 0 0.1 I - Deterministic DSR (DCG L=436 pCi/g) -
0.0 I I 1.0E-02 1.0E-01 1.0E+ OO DSR (mrem/yr per pCi/g)
Figure Att-10. Cumulative Probability Dose-Source Ratio, Cs-137 - Subsurface Soil Revision 2 E-42
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Probabilistic and Deterministic DSR vs. Time - Subsurface Soil - U232 5.0E+OO
- Probabilistic 95th Percentile 4.5E+OO ~-----------------------1 -+- Probabilistic Mean
--.-- Deterministic 4.0E+OO Cl
- 3.5E+OO
(.)
...c.Q) 3.0E+OO c.
~ 2.5E+OO E
Q)
.s 2.0E+OO 0:::
(/)
1.5E+OO 0
1.0E+OO 5.0E-0 1 O.OE+OO O.E+OO 1.E+02 2.E+02 3.E+02 4.E+02 5.E +02 6.E+02 Year Figure Att-11 . Probabilistic and Deterministic Dose-Source Ratio vs. Time, U-232 - Subsurface Soil Revision 2 E-43
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Cummulative Probability DSR - Subsurface Soil - U232 1.0 0.9
- Cummulati-.e Probability - Year 10
(
0.8
- Deterministic DSR (DCGL=106 pCi/g) (
..c 0.7 n:s I
..c 0 0.6 J
D.
Q)
> 0.5 I
- J 0.4 J
E E 0.3
- J /
/
0 0.2
~
0.1 0.0 1.0E-02 1.0E-01 1.0E+OO DSR (mrem/yr per pCi/g)
Figure Att-12. Cumulative Probability Dose-Source Ratio, U-232, Subsurface Soil Revision 2 E-44
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Probabilistic and Deterministic DSR vs. Time - Sediment - SR90
- 3. SE-02
- Probabilistic 95th Perc entile 3.0 E-02 - Probabilistic fl..'ean
- C>
- 2.SE-02
--.- Determ inistic
(..)
c.
Q)
...c. 2.0 E-0 2
~
E Q) 1.S E-02
_§_
a:::
en 1 ~ 0 E-02 c
5.0E -03 O.OE+OO O.OE+OO 2.0 E+01 4. 0E +01 6.0E +01 8 .0 E+01 1.0E +02 1.2 E+02 Year Figure Att-13. Probabilistic and Deterministic Dose-Source Ratio vs. Time, Sr Streambed Sediment Revision 2 E-45
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAI S Cummulative Probability DSR - Sediment - SR90 1.0 0.9
~
0.8
/
~
- c 0.7
/
..c
....0 0.6
/
c..
Cll
> 0.5 I
- l E
0.4 v
I E I
- l 0.3
(.)
0.2 I - Cummulati1.e Probability - Year O -
0 .1
/ - Deterministic DSR (DCGL=9490 pCi/g) -
0.0
/
1.0E-0 3 1.0E-02 1.0E-01 1.0 E+OO DSR (mrem/yr per pC i/g)
Figure Att-14. Cumulative Probability Dose-Source Ratio, Sr Streambed Sedim ent Revision 2 E-46
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Probabilistic and Deterministic DSR vs. Time - Sediment - CS137 8.0E-02
- Probabilistic 95th Percentile 7.0E-02 - Probabilistic l\/lean
--.-.. Deterministic "cri 6.0E-02 ua.
Cll 5.0E-02
...a.>.
e...
Cll 4.0E-02
-E 0:::
(/)
3.0E-02 c
2.0E-02 1.0E-02 O.OE+OO O.OE+OO 5.0E +Ol 1.0E +02 1.5E +02 2.0E +02 2.5E+02 3.0E +02 Year Figure Att-15. Probabilistic and Deterministic Dose-Source Ratio vs. Time, Cs-137 - Streambed Sediment Revision 2 E-47
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONIN G PLAN RAI S Cummulative Probability DSR - Sediment - CS137 1.0 0.9 ~
0.8
/
~
..c 0.7 I
ta
..c 0 0.6 I I
~
a..
Cl.I
> 0.5
- 0:
.!!l
- l 0.4 I E
E
- l 0.3 I
I u
/ -
0.2 0.1
/ -
Cummulati1.e Probabi lity - Year 0 Deterministic DSR (DCG L=1290 pCi/g) -
__-/
0.0 1.0E-02 1.0E-01 DSR (mrem/yr per pCi/g )
Fi gure Att-16. Cumulative Probability Dose-Source Ratio , Cs-137 - Streambed Sediment Revision 2 E-48
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Table Att-1. Estimated WMA 1 Doses from Observed Maximum Radionuclide Concentrations in the Lavery Till Maximum Peak-of-the-Mean 95th Percentile Peak-of-the-Mean 95th Percentile Radionuclide Detection Depth (ft) Subsurface Soil Subsurface Soil Estimated Estimated (pCi/g) (1l DCGLw (pCi/g) (2l DCGLw (pCi/g) Dose (mrem/y) (3l Dose (mrem/y) (3l Am-241 1.3E-01 38-40 6.8E+03 4.3E+03 4.8E-04 7.6E-04 C-14 1.lE-01 38-40 3.7E+05 3.6E+05 7 .3E-06 7.5E -06 Cs-137 3.9E+OO 38-40 3.0E+02 2.7E +02 3.6E -01 3.6E-01 Cm-243 2.3E-02 38-40 1.1 E+03 9.3E+02 6.2E-04 6.2E-04 Cm -244 2.3E-02 38-40 2.2E+04 1.1 E+04 5.3E-05 5.3E-05 1-129 2.9E-01 38-40 5.2E+01 5.2E+01 1.4E-01 1.4E-01 Np-237 2.1 E-02 37-39 4.3E+OO 4.3E+OO 1.2E-01 1.2E-01 Pu-238 2.3E-02 38-40 1.4E+04 6.8E+03 4.2E-05 8.4E-05 Pu-239 6.4E-02 38-40 1.2E+04 6.1E+03 1.3E-04 2.6E-04 Pu-240 6.4E-02 38-40 1.2E+04 6.4E+03 1.3E-04 2.5E-04 Pu-241 5.7E-01 38-40 2.4E+05 1.6E+05 5.9E-05 8.9E-05 Sr-90 5.9E+01 38.5-39 3.2E+03 1.0E +03 4.6E-01 1.4E+OO Tc-99 5.5E-01 37-39 1.1 E+04 4.4E+03 1.2E-03 3.2E-03 U-232 4.1E-02 24-26 7.4E +01 5.4E+01 1.4E-02 1.9E-02 U-233 2.3E+OO 38-40 1.9E+02 1.9E+02 3.0E-01 3.0E-01 U-234 2.3E+OO 38-40 2.0E+02 2.0E+02 2.9E-01 2.9E-01 U- 235 1.4E-01 24-26 2.1 E+02 2. 1 E+02 1.7E-02 1.7E-02 U-238 1.4E+OO 41-43 2.1E+02 2.1E+02 1.7E-01 1.7E-01 Total Estimated Dose 1.9E+OO 2.8E+OO NOTES : (1) Maximum detections from Table 5-1. Radionuclid es with maximum detections below the detection limit were evaluated at the detection limit.
(2) Subsurface DCGLs are presented in Appendix E and account for 10 to 1 dilution of contam inated till with clean overlying soil during excavation . Subsurface DCGL are the lower of the deterministic values for th e resident gardener and farmer or the probabilistic va lue for the farmer.
(3) Estimated dose (mrem/y) = 25 (mrem/y) x (maximum detection I DCGLw)
Revision 2 E-49
DOE RESPONSES TO WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN RAIS Table Att-2. Estimated WMA 2 Doses from Observed Maximum Radionuclide Concentrations in the Lavery Till Maximum Peak-of-the-Mean 95th Percentile Peak-of-the-Mean 95th Percentile Radionuclide Detection Depth (ft) Subsurface Soil Subsurface Soil Estimated Estimated (pCi/g)(1) DCGLw (pCi/g) (2) DCGLw (pCi/g) Dose (mrem/y)(3) Dose (mrem/y) (3)
Am-241 3.0E-02 12-14 6.8E+03 4.3E+03 1.1 E-04 1.7E-04 C-14 . None None 3.7E+05 3.6E+05 NA NA Cm-243 None None 1.1 E+03 9.3E +02 NA NA Cm-244 None None 2.2E+04 1.1 E+04 NA NA Cs-137 4.5E-01 12-14 3.0E +02 2.7E+02 4.1E-02 4.1 E-02 Np-237 None None 4.3E+OO 4.3E+OO NA NA 1-129 None None 5.2E+01 5.2E +01 NA NA Pu-238 1.0E-02 12-14 1.4E+04 6.8E+03 1.8E-05 3.7E-05 Pu-239 5.9E-03 12-14 1.2E+04 6.1 E+03 1.2E-05 2.4E-05 PU-240 5.9E-03 12-14 1.2E+04 6.4E+03 1.2E-05 2.3E -05 Pu-241 1.3E +OO 12-14 2.4E+05 1.6E+05 1.4E-04 2.0E-04 Sr-90 8.5E-01 12-14 3.2E+03 1.0E+03 6.7E -03 2.1E-02 Tc-99 None None 1.1 E+04 4.4E+03 NA NA U-232 1.2E -02 12-14 7.4E+01 5.4E+01 4.1E-03 5.5E-03 U-233 1.8E-01 12-14 1.9E+02 1.9E+02 2.3E -02 2.3E-02 U-234 1.8E-01 12-14 2.0E+02 2.0E+02 2.3E-02 2.3E-02 U-235 5.9E-03 12-14 2.1 E+02 2.1 E+02 7.1 E-04 7.1 E-04 U-238 1.1 E-01 12-14 2.1 E+02 2.1 E+02 1.3E -02 1.3E-02 Total Estimated Dose 1.1 E-01 1.3E-01 NOTES: (1) Maximum detections from Table 5.1 . Radionuclides with maximum detections below the detection limit were evaluated at the detection limit.
(2) Subsurface DCGLs are pre sented in Appendix E and account for 10 to 1 dilution of contaminated till with clean overlying soil during excavation . Subsurface DCGL are the lower of the deterministic values for th e resident gardener and farmer or the probabilistic value for the farmer.
(3) Estimated dose (mrem/y) = 25 (mrem/y) x (maximum detection I DCGLw)
LEGEND: NA = not available Revision 2 E-50
WVOP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN APPENDIX F ESTIMATED RADIOACTIVITY IN SUBSURFACE PIPING PURPOSE OF THIS APPENDIX The purpose of this appendix is to provide conservative estimates of residual radioactivity in underground piping to supplement information on the radiological status of facilties discussed in Section 4.1.
INFORMATION IN THIS APPENDIX Information in this appendix was drawn from a radioisotope inventory report completed in July 2004. Included are a list of all buried pipelines and estimates for residual activity in pipelines in three areas: (1) ben~ath the Process Building, (2) west of the Process Building, and (3) east of the Process Building. An estimate is also included for residual radioactivity in the Leachate Transfer Line that runs from the NRC-Licensed Disposal Area (NOA) to Lagoon 2.
RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PARTS OF THE PLAN The information in this appendix supplements the information provided in Section 4 and supports the decommissioning activities described in Section 7.
1.0 Introduction Various underground lines in WMA 1 and WMA 2 carried radioactive liquid during NFS and WVDP operations . All were evaluated and conservative estimates of residual radioactivity were made as described in the radioisotope inventory report (Luckett, et al. 2004) . During this evaluation, the sources were divided into categories, including :
- Lines beneath the footprint of the Process Building,
- High-activity lines primarily west of the Process Building,
- Low-activity lines primarily east of the Process Building, and
- The leachate transfer line from the NOA to Lagoon 2.
The evaluation process included the following steps:
- Collection and review of available information and data on pipe design and location;
- Consideration of process history to determine which lines had actually carried radioactive liquid;
- Review of radiological data and inventories generated by the Facility Characterization Project;
- Preparation of activity estimates for indicator radionuclides based on (1) data on fluids carried by the pipes and an empirical relationship between the activity of the HLW fluid Revision 2 F-1
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN and the resulting residual contamination on the pipe interior or (2) the results of surveys of rooms and systems where the pipe contents originated;
- Application of conservative radionuclide distribution scaling factors from the point of origin of the contamination to produce a conservative estimate of the activity in each line; and
- Combining individual line estimates into conservative curie estimates. that were corrected for decay and ingrowth to 2011 , for groups of related lines appropriate to dose modeling.
A listing of the underground lines identified in the evaluation is provided in Table F-1. The column "Radionuclide . Distribution Surrogate" refers to the distribution of radionuclide ratios assigned to each line, based on process history, the origin and terminus of the line, and the geographic location category . Note that acronyms used in the table are defined in the legend at the end of the table . Residual activity estimated to remain inside the lines is summarized below in Section 2 through 4 of this appendix . Details of the calculations, a discussion of the basis for the assignment of the surrogate radionuclide distribution. and the surface contamination (µCi/m 2) for each radionuclide in each of the distributions are provided in Luckett, et al. 2004 .
Table F-1 . List of Buried Pipelines Length (feet)
Radionuclide Line Pipe Dia. Below West of East of From To Distribution Number (in) Process Process Process Surrogate Bldg Bldg Bldg 1P64-1 1 FRS MSM Valve Pit 25 0 400 CD Pit 7P19-1 1 Miniature Cell Tank 7D-14 70.6 0 0 Not Used 7P331a-3 0.25 Tank 7D-13 capped 0 30 0 Tank 7D-13 7P331b- 3 0.25 Tank 7D-13 7D-13 Sample station 0 30 0 Tank 7D-13 southwest stairwell 7P331c-2 0.50 Tank 7D-13 7D-13 Sample station 0 30 0 Tank 7D-13 southwest stairwell 7P63-1 1 Tank 7D-8 Miniature Cell 76.6 0 0 Not Used 7P71-3 3 CPC Floor 59 ft Outside Bldg Capped 70 59 0 Not Used 7P74-3 3 CPC Floor 59 ft Outside Bldg Capped 70 59 0 Not Used 7P90-3 3 CPC Floor 59 ft Outside Bldg Capped 70 59 0 Not Used 7P112-3 3 CPC Floor Tank 8D-1 65.8 462 0 Not Used 7P113-3 3 Tank 7D-10/ CPC Floor Tank 8D-2 64.3 462 0 7P113 7P114-3 3 CPC Floor 59 ft Outside Bldg Capped 67.5 59 0 Not Used 7P115-3 3 CPC Floor 59 ft Outside Bldg Capped 67.6 59 0 Not Used 7P116-3 3 CPC Floor 59 ft Outside Bldg Capped 67.7 59 0 Not Used 7P120-3 3 Tank 7D-4/ CPC Floor THOREX to 8D-4 58.7 462 0 7P120 7P151-3 3 Tank 7D-10 Future HLW Storage 68.2 59 0 Not Used Capped 59 ft Outside Bldg Revision 2 F-2
WVDP PHAS E 1 D ECOMMISSIONI NG PLAN Table F-1 . List of Buried Pipelines Length (feet)
Radionuclide Line Pipe Dia. Below West of East of From To Distribution Number (in) Process Process Process Surrogate Bldg Bldg Bldg 7P156-2 2 Tank 7D-13 Vent OGC 35.6 20 0 Tank 7D-13 7P159-2 2 Tank 7D-13 Jet GP Catch Tank 7C-5 0 60 0 Tank 7D-13 7P170-2 2 7C-5 Jet Tank 8D-1 0 482 0 Tank 8D-1 7P177-12 1.5 7 E-13 GP Evap. 7D-13 0 60 0 Tank 7D-13 7P180-1 2 1.5 7 E-13 via 7P177 15WW568 0 10 0 WW 7P271-2 2 7D-6 Weak Acid Catch Interceptor 0 10 0 WW Tank Pump 7G-1 8P11-2 2 Tank 8D-1 8G-4 Lagoon 0 0 825 Vault Drip Pan 8P12-3 3 Waste Tank Off Gas Tank 813-1 0 41 0 Tank 8D-1 Knockout Drum 8D-6 8P27-3 3 Waste Tank Off Gas Tank 8D-2 0 52 0 Tank 8D-2 Knockout Drum 8D-6 8P29-16 16 Tanks 8D-1via8P13; Waste Tank Off Gas 0 52 0 8P29-16 and 8D-2 via 8P28; and Condensers and Relief PVS Knock Out Drum 8D-7 8P34-2 2 Waste Tank O/H 7C-5 0 425 0 Tank 8D-2 Condensate Pump 8G-1 8P35-2 2 Waste Tank Cond. 8D-2 via 7P170 0 5 0 Tank 8D-2 Pump 8G-1 via 8P34 8P38-2 2 Waste Tank Blowers Tank 8D-2 via 8P-27 0 5 0 Tank 8D-2 8K-1/ 8K-1A VIA 8P-46 8P46-6 (old) 6 Waste Tank Blowers Stack 15F-1 0 435 0 8P46-6 8K-1/8K-1A 8P46-6 (new) 6 Waste Tank Blowers To line 6P95-8 0 415 0 8P46-6 8K-1/8K-1A 8P68-2 2 Equipment shelter Lagoon 0 52 0 Vault Drip Pan Manifold 8P95-3 3 Con Ed Tank 8C-1 Tank 8D-6 Off-Gas 0 52 0 Tank 8D-4 Caustic Scrubber Knockout Drum 8P120-3 3 Tank 8D-1 0 52 0 Tank 8D-1 4P92-1 2 1.5 Tank 4D-2 Jet 4H-60 59 ft Outside Bldg Capped 61 .8 59 0 Not Used 15CH739-3 3 PMC Floor Drain GPC Sump via 15CH760-3 13.2 0 0 PMCR 15CH750-3 3 CCR Drain Tank 35104 via 12CH240-6 40.2 0 0 CCR 15CH752-3 3 Equipment Decon Tank 35104 via 12CH240-6 65.8 0 0 EDR Room Revision 2 F-3
WVDP PHASE 1 D ECOMM ISSIONI NG P LAN Table F-1. List of Buried Pipelines Length (feet)
Radionuclide Line Pipe Dia. Below West of East of From To Distribution Number (in) Process Process Process Surrogate Bldg Bldg Bldg 15CH753-2 2 GPC Sump Jet and 1st U Cycle Tank 4D-10 66.8 0 0 GCR Tank 35104 Eductor 15CH754-1 2 1.5 From GCR Sump Jet Tank 7D-2 77 0 0 GCR 15CH758-3 3 Mechanical Crane Tank 35104 via 12CH240-6 65.5 0 0 PMCR Room 15CH760-3 3 PMC Floor Drain GPC Sump 47.6 0 0 PMCR 15CH763-3 3 Scrap Removal Tank 35104 via 12CH240-6 57.9 0 0 SRR 15CH773-3 3 Tank 35104 Eductor Tank 7D-2 98.2 0 0 Tank 35104 15H-1 15CH774-3 3 CPC/EDR Door Slot Tank 35104 via 12CH240-6 6.6 0 0 CPC Drain 1WW48-4 4 FRS Cask Decon Drain Interceptor via 15WW571-6 20 0 0 CD Pit 1WW49-4 4 FRS Cask Decon Drain Interceptor via 15WW571-6 20 0 0 CD Pit 1WW50-4 4 FRS Cask Decon Drain Interceptor via 15WW571-6 6.5 0 0 CD Pit 1WW51-4 4 FRS Cask Decon Drain Interceptor via 15WW571-6 6.5 0 0 CD Pit 1WW52-4 4 FRS Cask Decon Drain Interceptor via 15WW571 -6 6.5 0 0 CD Pit 1WW53-4 4 FRS Cask Decon Drain Interceptor via 15WW571-6 6.5 0 0 CD Pit 1WW54-4 4 FRS Cask Decon Drain Interceptor via 15WW571 -6 6.5 0 0 CD Pit 1WW55-4 4 FRS Cask Decon Drain Interceptor via 15WW571-6 6.5 0 0 CD Pit 1WW56-4 4 FRS Cask Decon Drain Interceptor via 15WW571-6 6.5 0 0 CD Pit 02WW359-3 3 Lagoon 1 Lagoon 2 0 0 540 WW 02WW360-6 6 LLWTF underslab LLWTF Sump 0 0 80 WW piping drains 02WW362-6 6 LLWTF underslab LLWTF Sump 0 0 40 WW piping drains 02WW363-8 8 Sump Manhole, LLWTF Lagoon 1 0 0 167 WW 02WW364-3 3 LLWTF underslab Lagoon 2 0 0 150 WW piping drains 15WW533-6 6 Neutralization Pit Interceptor 0 0 10 WW 15WW534-6 6 Neutralization Pit New Interceptor thru West 0 0 120 WW Valve Pit 15WW536-2 2 West Valve Pit New Interceptor A 0 0 30 WW 15WW538-4 4 Interceptor B thru E Lagoon 2 thru new 0 0 35 WW Valve Pit 15WW549-4 15WW539-4 4 New Interceptor A E Valve Pit 0 0 10 WW 15WW549-4 4 East of Interceptor Lagoon 1 0 0 200 WW Revision 2 F- 4
WVDP PHAS E 1 D ECOMMISSI ONING PLAN Table F-1. List of Buried Pipelines Length (feet)
Radionuclide Line Pipe Dia. Below West of East of From To Distribution Number (in) Process Process Process Surrogate Bldg Bldg Bldg 15WW567-2 2 Tank 7D-13 Interceptor thru 15WW568-2 80 0 0 WW 15WW568-2 2 Tank 7D-13 Interceptor thru 15WW569-6 50 0 0 WW 15WW569-6 6 Trunk Line S side Interceptor thru 15WW533-6 100 0 110 WW Process Bldg 15WW570-4 4 N side Process Bldg I Interceptor thru 15WW571-6 0 0 200 WW FRS 15WW571-6 6 FRS Cask Decon Interceptor thru 15WW843-6 60 0 13 CD Pit Drains 15WW841-4 4 N Side of MSM Repair Interceptor thru 15WW852-3 12 0 25 WW 15WW842-3 3 E Side of MSM Repair Interceptor thru 15WW570-4 19 0 15 WW 15WW843-6 6 Trunk Line East of Interceptor thru 15WW569-6 72 0 120 WW Process Bldg 15WW846-3 3 Under Lower Warm Interceptor thru 15WW569-6 5 0 0 WW Aisle 15WW847-3 3 Under Lower Warm Interceptor thru 15WW569-6 5 0 0 WW Aisle 15WW848-3 3 Trunk line, upper floors Interceptor thru 15WW569-6 5 0 0 WW South side Process Bldg 15WW850-4 4 Under Floor RAM Interceptor thru 15WW843-6 16 0 0 WW Equipment Room 15WW851-3 3 Under Floor CPC Interceptor thru 15WW895-4 80 0 0 WW 15WW852-3 3 Equipment Decon Interceptor thru 15WW570-4 13.3 0 55 WW Room 15WW857-3 3 Under Floor PMC Interceptor thru 15WW851 -3 45 0 0 WW 15WW858-3 3 Under Floor RAM Interceptor thru 15WW895-4 6 0 0 WW Equipment Room 15WW859-3 3 Under Floor RAM Interceptor thru 15WW895-4 20 0 0 WW Equipment Room 15WW860-3 3 Under Floor Cell Access lnterceptorthru 15WW851-3 16 0 0 WW Aisle 15WW861-3 3 Under Floor W Main Op Interceptor thru 15WW895-4 25 0 0 WW Aisle 15WW863-3 3 Under Floor W Main Op Interceptor thru 15WW895-4 6 0 0 WW Aisle 15WW885-2 2 Sink Drains Tank 7D-13 120 0 0 WW 15WW887-2 2 Sink Drains Tank 7D-13 via 15WW885-2 25 0 0 WW 15WW892-3 3 Scrap Removal Room Interceptor thru 15WW852-3 10 0 10 WW Revision 2 F-5
WVDP PHAS E 1 D ECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table F-1. List of Buried Pipelines Length (feet)
Radionuclide Line Pipe Dia. Below West of East of From To Distribution Number (in) Process Process Process Surrogate Bldg Bldg Bldg 15WW895-4 4 Under Floor RAM Interceptor thru 15WW843-6 25 0 0 WW Equipment Room 15WW896-3 3 GOA Sump ejector Interceptor thru 15WW841-4 3 0 0 WW 15WW899-3 3 Floor PPS Interceptor thru 15WW843-6 3 0 0 WW 15WW900-3 3 Floor UPC Interceptor thru 15WW843-6 15 0 0 WW 15WW916-6 6 FRS Resin Wash Pit Interceptor thru 15WW843-6 5 0 20 WW 15WW917-4 4 Tank 14D-1 and Tank Interceptor thru 15WW920-4 0 0 15 WW 14D-2 15WW918-4 4 Tank 14D-1 and Tank Interceptor thru 15WW920-4 0 0 .15 WW 14D-2 15WW919-4 4 Tank 14D-1 and Tank Interceptor thru 15WW920-4 0 0 15 WW 14D-2 15WW920-4 4 Tank 14D-1 and Tank Interceptor thru 15WW569-6 0 0 125 WW 14D-2 15WW923-6 6 Utility Room Floor Drain Interceptor thru 15WW569-6 30 0 0 WW 15WW924-4 4 Utility Room Floor Drain Interceptor thru 15WW569-6 30 0 0 WW 15WW925-6 6 Utility Room Floor Drain Interceptor thru 15WW569-6 30 0 0 WW 15WW926-2 2 Utility Room Floor Drain Interceptor thru 15WW569-6 30 0 0 WW 15WW927-4 4 Utility Room Floor Drain Interceptor thru 15WW569-6 30 0 0 WW 15WW929-3 3 Tank 15D-6 New Interceptor East Valve 0 0 660 WW Pit 15WW1231-3 3 Floor Drain PPS Interceptor via 15WW569-6 15 0 0 WW 15WW1232-3 3 Floor Drain Acid Rec Interceptor via 15WW569-6 15 0 0 WW Pump Room 15WW1744-2 3 Laundry Sump New Interceptor A 0 0 175 WW 6-71-6-001 6 6-50-2-015, 6-71-2-019, Tank 35104 0 0 15 WW 6-71-2-675, 6-50-2-01 5 6-71-2-003 2 12CH241 Tank 35104 Pump Suction 0 0 15 WW 6-71-1-006 1 Tank 35104 Pump LWTS Evaporator 0 0 40 WW Discharge 6-71-3-016 3 Floor Drain in 35104 General crane Room 0 0 30 WW pump niche extension 6-71-2-019 2 Truck Fill Tank 35104 via 6-71-6-001 0 0 4 WW 6-71-2-020 2 Tank 7D-13 Eductor PPC manifold via 01/14 & 0 0 45 WW 7H-19 via 7P159 Pipe Chase Revision 2 F-6
WVDP PHASE 1 D ECOMM ISSI ON ING PLAN Table F-1 . List of Buried Pipelines Length (feet)
Radionuclide Line Pipe Dia. Below West of East of From To Distribution Number (in) Process Process Process Surrogate Bldg Bldg Bldg 6-71-2-021 2 Tank 70-13 Eductor Interceptor via 15WW848 0 0 25 WW 7H-19 via 7P159 6-71-4-022 4 CSS Drain Header Tank 70-13 0 0 70 WW 6-71-2-023 2 Tank 35104 Pump 6-50-2-153, return to STS 0 0 10 WW Discharge 6-71-2-031 2 Drain from 70-13 valve Tank 70-13 via 6-71-4-022 0 0 15 WW pit 6-71-2-032 0.5 Tank 35104 Pump 35104 Sample Station GPC- 0 0 50 WW Discharge CR Lower Air lock 6-71-2-675 0.5 35104 Sample Station 35104 Waste Catch tank via 0 0 50 WW GPC-CR Lower Air lock 6-71-6-001 12CH240-6 6 Drains Tank 35104 0 0 30 WW 12CH241-3 3 Tank 35104 Eductor Tank 70-2 LWC or Tank 0 0 20 WW 35104 Pump Suction 12CH365-1/8 0.125 35104 Pit Cut and Capped 1B' below 0 0 10 WW grade 12CH366-2 0.5 35104 Pit Cut and Capped 18' below 0 0 10 WW grade 12CH367-1 1 35104 Pit Cut and Capped 1B"below 0 0 10 WW grade undesignated 2 Tank 150-6 MSM Valve Pit 0 0 150 Tank 50-6 undesignated 2 MSM Shop 2 Floor Tank 150-6 50 0 50 Tank 150-6 Drains Leachate Line 2 NOA Hardstand LLWTF Lagoon 2 0 0 2,000 n/a LEGEND: Tanks referred to are located within the Process Building, except 1SD-6 that is an underground tank located northeast of the Process Building. CCR is the Chemical Process Cell Crane Room. CD Pit is the Cask Decon Pit. CPC is the Chemical Process Cell . CSS is the Cement Solidification System. EDR is the Equipment Decontamination Room. FRS is Fuel Receiving and Storage. GOA is General Purpose Cell Operating Aisle. GP is General Purpose. GPC is General Purpose Cell. GPC-CR is the General Purpose Cell Crane Room. LWC is the Liquid Waste Cell . LWTS is the Liquid Waste Treatment System . MSM is Master-Slave Manipulator. OGC is the Off-Gas Cell. PMCR is the Process Mechanical Cell Crane Room. PPC is the Product Purification Cell. SRR is the Scrap Re moval Room. STS is the Supernatant Treatment System. WW is wastewater.
2.0 Lines Beneath the Process Building Review of drawings and process history established that 57 pipelines or portions of pipelines located beneath the Process Building, Utility Room, or Utility Room Expansion carried radioactive liquid. These inclu de:
- Eleven process drains,
- Two waste transfer lines, Revision 2 F-7
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
- Eleven Fuel Receiving and Storage Area cask decon lines,
- Thirty-three wastewater drains.
There were 11 lines under the Process Building that were designed to carry radioactive fluids, but were spares that were never used as designed . Their inventory is considered negligible (zero) .
Figure F-1 shows the lines that were estimated to contribute more than 98 percent of the total activity in the lines beneath the Process Building . The lines in each category and the estimated source terms are described below.
Revision 2 F-8
WVDP PHASE 1 D ECOMMISSIONING PLAN l DR 15CH750-3 LW 0"'6..JSA- L*~ O r*
XC-1 J<C - 2 L L 7P 11
- 1 : c 7/IJ7' *J "* <: .., /
r Figure F-1 . Location of Pipelines Beneath the Process Building. (Marked lines are estimated to contain more than 98 percent of the activity in piping under the building .)
Revision 2 F-9
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 2.1 Process Drain Lines All 11 lines are stainless steel pipe designated for chemical service. Eight are three-inch, two are two-inch, and the other is 1.5-inch in diameter. Each*line is encased in an outer carbon steel pipe providing double containment. They are located in side-by-side runs within earth fill beneath the Process Building's reinforced concrete floor sl abs.
The lines run typically about 10 feet below grade (reference elevation approximately 90 feet) and are sloped downward in the direction of flow, typically about 0.25 inch per foot. Table F-2 shows conservative estimates of the total activity within all 11 lines.
Table F-2. Estimated Process Drain Line Activity in Curies (a s of 2011)
Nuclide Activity Nuclide Activity Nuclide Activity Am-241 7.5E -02 Np-237 3.7E-05 Tc-99 3.9E -04 C-14 1.3E -04 Pu -238 1.8E-02 U-232 4.4E-05 Cm-243 7.8E-05 Pu-239 1.7E-02 U-233 4.2E-05 Cm-244 1.8E-03 Pu-240 1 ..1 E-02 U-234 1.6E-05 Cs-137 8.0E -01 Pu -241 2.6E-01 U-235 6.8E-05 1-129 2.0E-06 Sr-90 4.6E-01 U-238 2.0E -05 2.2 Waste Transfer Lines Both lines are three-inch stainless steel pipe; each is encased within an outer six-inch carbon steel pipe. These lines run approximately 1O feet below grade within a concrete pipe trench . The lines are sloped downward in the direction of flow, about 0.25 inch per foot. Estimated activity in the lines is shown in Table 0-3 below.
Line 7P120-3 contains much more radioactivity than the other line, 7P113-3 . Line 7P120-3, which runs from the Chemical Process Cell to HLW Tank 80-4, was used by NFS to transfer THOR EX process waste during one fuel reprocessing campaign . Line 7P113-3 was used by NFS to transfer PUREX process wastes to Tank 80 -2; this line was flushed with decontamination solutions and with lower level waste solutions after reprocessing operations ended . Table F-3 shows conservative estimates of the total activity within both lines.
Table F-3. Estimated Waste Transfer Line Activity in Curies (as of 2011)
Nuclide/Line 7P113-3 7P120-3 Nuclide/Line 7P113-3 7P120-3 Am-241 1.1 E-05 1.0E -02 Pu-240 1.3E-06 3.3E -04 C-14 1.9E-07 5.4E-06 Pu-241 1.7E-05 1.1E-02 Cm-243 3.8E -08 5.3E-06 Sr-90 2.9E-04 1.0E+01 Cm-244 8.9E-07 2.2E-04 Tc-99 2.2E -07 4.3E-03 Cs-137 3.6E -03 1.1 E+01 U-232 3.6E-08 8.9E-05 Revi sion 2 F-10
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table F-3. Estimated Waste Transfer Line Activity in Curies (as of 2011)
Nuclide/Line 7P113-3 7P120-3 ; Nuclide/Line 7P113-3 7P120-3 II 1-129 1.6E-07 7.4E-06 U-233 1.6E-08 8.7E-05 Np-237 9.9E-09 1.3E-05 U-234 7.9E-09 9.1 E-05 Pu-238 2.4E-06 1.6E-02 U-235 6.3E-11 2.1 E-07 Pu-239 1.7E-06 6.4E-04 U-238 8.0E-10 2.9E-09 2.3 Cask Decon Lines Nine lines are four inches in diameter and are associated with floor drains for the Fuel Receiving and Storage Building; these lines connect to the six-inch trunk line (15WW571-6). Line 1P64-1, a one-inch discharge line running toward the Low-Level Waste Treatment Facility (LLWTF) Interceptor, is also grouped with the cask decon lines.
The estimated activity in these lines, based on the assumption that their average interior surface contamination is similar to that remaining on the floor of the Cask Decon Pit, is shown in Table F-4.
I. Nuclide Table F-4. Estimated Cask Decon Line Activity in Curies (as of 2011)
Activity I . Nuclide Activity Nuclide Aetivity .
Am-241 1.9E-02 Np-237 2.3E-06 Tc-99 5.2E-05 C-14 2.5E-05 Pu-238 2.8E-03 U-232 2.9E-06
- Cm-243 7.4E-06 Pu-239 5.4E-03 U-233 6.9E-06 Cm-244 1.5E-04 Pu-240 2.8E-03 U-234 5.9E-07 Cs-137 1.3E-01 Pu-241 7.6E-02 U-235 8.4E-07 1-129 1.2E-07 Sr-90 1.2E-01 U-238 7.1 E-06 2.4 Wastewater Drain Lines These lines deliver low-level or uncontaminated wash water and spills from various drains in the Process Building to the LLWTF Interceptor. This piping is made of Duriron, a high silicone cast iron, in diameters ranging from two-inch to six-inch. Beneath the Process Building, the runs are encased within concrete of 12-inch-square cross section. They are located eight to 12 feet below grade, sloping about 0.25 inch per foot.
The estimated activity in these lines was based on an empirical relationship between the residual contamination and the radioactivity in the fluid carried by the lines observed in HLW lines. (This relationship is based on WVDP experience with residual contamination measured in other piping where the activity of the liquid that passed through the piping was known.) The LLWTF Interceptor operating limit (0.005 µCi/ml) was used in the calculations for conservatism; many discharges though the lines likely had radioactivity concentrations well below this value.
The use of the bounding spent nuclear fuel distribution as the surrogate for the waste water also Revision 2 F-11
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN provides a level of conservatism by assigning the maximum radionuclide ratio observed in any spent fuel batch to the residual in the waste water pipes. The total estimated activity in all the lines is shown in Table F-5.
Table F-5. Estimated Wastewater Drain Line Activity in Curies (as of 2011)
, . Nuclide- Activity 'Nuclide . Activity Nuclide Activit Am-241 2.1 E-06 Np-237 1.3E-09 Tc-99 5.6E-09 C-14 3.2E-11 Pu-238 2.3E-07 U-232 5.8E-10 Cm-243 1.2E-08 Pu-239 7.2E-08 U-233 2.4E-10 Cm-244 2.6E-07 Pu-240 5.2E-08 U-234 9.7E-11 Cs-137 1.4E-04 Pu-241 1. 1 E-06 U-235 2.5E-12 1-129 2.6E-14 Sr-90 1.3E-04 U-238 2.3E-11 2.5 Total Estimated Inventory in Lines Beneath the Process Building Footprint As shown in Table F-6 the total estimated residual inventory for all the combined lines beneath the Process Building footprint is approximately 23 Ci, predominantly Sr-90 and Cs-137 activity. The table indicates that Line 7_P120-3 and the process drain lines have over 95 percent of the Cs-137 and Sr-90 activity under the Process Building, as well as 71-98 percent of the Pu and U isotopes.
Table F-6. Estimated Total Residual Inventory in Lines Under the Process Building (as of 2011)
Residual Inventory (Ci) Contribution to Total Nuclide Line 7P120-3 Total All Process Line . Line Lines 7P120-3 7P120-3 .and Process Drains Drains Am-241 1.0E-01 7.5E-02 1.0E-02 10.0% 85.0%
C-14 1.6E-04 1.3E-04 5.4E-06 3.4% 84.6%
Cm-243 9.1 E-05 7.8E-05 5.3E-06 5.8% 91.5%
Cm-244 2.2E-03 1.8E-03 2.2E-04 10.0% 91.8%
Cs-137 1.2E+01 8.0E-01 1.1 E+01 91.7% 98.3%
1-129 9.7E-06 2.0E-06 7.4E-06 76.3% 96.9%
Np-237 5.2E-05 3.7E-05 1.3E-05 25.0% 96.2%
Pu-238 3.7E-02 1.8E-02 1.6E-02 43.2% 91.9%
Pu-239 2.3E-02 1.7E-02 6.4E-04 2.8% 76.7%
Pu-240 1.4E-02 1.1E-02 3.3E-04 2.4% 80.9%
Revision 2 F-12
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table F-6. Estimated Total Residual Inventory in Lines Under the Process Building (as of 2011)
Residual Inventory (Ci) Contribution to Total Nuclide*.**. *.**
Total All~:.* ..
- Process*. Line :~
Line
- Un~'7P120-3***
Lines* 7P120-3 7P120-3 and Process Drains Drains
. Pu-241 3.5E-01 2.6E-01 1.1E-02 3.1% 77.4%
Sr-90 1.1 E+01 4.6E-01 1.0E+01 90.9% 95.1%
Jc-99 4.7E-03 3.9E-04 4.3E-03 91.5% 99.8%
U-232 1.4E-04 4.4E-05 8.9E-05 63.6% 95.0%
U-233 1.4E-04 4.2E-05 8.7E-05 62.1% 92.1%
U-234 1.1 E-04 1.6E-05 9.1 E-05 82.7% 97.3%
U-235 6.9E-05 6.8E-05 2.1 E-07 0.3% 98.9%
U-238 2.8E-05 2.0E-05 2.9E-09 0.0% 71.4%
3.0 Lines West of the Process Building The lines west of the Process Building identified in Table F-1 include:
- Four ventilation lines;
- Three waste transfer lines, two of which were used; and
- Twenty-four other lines that carried wastewater or ventilation condensate.
3.1 Lines of Interest Ventilation Lines The ventilation lines are:
- 8P29-16, a 16-inch header line that runs from the Permanent Ventilation System to the Equipment Shelter
- 8P46-6 (old and new), two six-inch lines that connect the Equipment Shelter to the Main Plant Stack.
Waste Transfer Lines The two waste transfer lines of interest are the downstream ends of those discussed in Section 2.2, 7P120-3 and 7P113-3.
Revision 2 F-13
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Other Lines West of the Process Building The other 24 lines of interest shown in Table F-1 carried process drain fluids, wastewater, and ventilation condensate.
3.2 Estimated Inventory in Lines West of the Process Building The estimated total inventory of the 31 underground lines west of the Process Building is shown in Table F-7. The total length of all of these lines together is approximately 4, 176 feet. The total interior surface area is approximately 3.47E+06 cm 2
- Table F-7. Estimated Total Residual Inventory of Lines West of the Process Building in Curies (as of 2011)
Nuclide*
-
- Nutilide * -'Activit~' **. * -Nuc1lde . '
., Activity. 'Activity Am-241 8.3E-02 Np-237 1.0E-04 Tc-99 3.4E-02 C-14 4.6E-05 Pu-238 1.3E-01 U-232 7.1 E-04 Cm-243 4.4E-05 Pu-239 5.2E-03 U-233 6.9E-04 Cm-244 1.8E-03 Pu-240 2.7E-03 U-234 7.2E-04 Cs-137 8.5E+01 Pu-241 8.6E-02 U-235 1.8E-06 1-129 6.0E-05 Sr-90 8.1E+01 U-238 1.0E-06 4.0 Lines East of the Process Building 4.1 Lines of Interest Table F-1 identifies 47 lines east of the Process Building. Most deliver low-level radioactive or uncontaminated wastewater, wash water, or liquid from spills from various drains throughout the Process Building to the Interceptor in WMA 2. From the Interceptor, the water can be sampled, diverted to storage tanks, sent to the LLWTF for treatment, or released to the lagoon system through other lines identified in the table. Other lines in WMA 2 connect various tanks
- with the LLWTF and the LLWTF to the lagoons. From the lagoons, waters can be discharged to surface streams on the Center.
Various underground lines were realigned from Lagoon 1 to Lagoon 2 and from Lagoon 2 to Lagoon 3 in 19.84 when Lagoon 1 was removed from service. At that time, Lagoon 2 became the initial receiving lagoon for the LLWTF. Originally, water treatment was performed in the 02 Building, but it was replaced by the LLWTF. The New Interceptors (A and B) were installed in 1967 to replace the single Old Interceptor.
4.2 Estimated Inventory in Lines East of the Process Building The estimated total inventory of the 47 underground lines east of_ the Process Building is shown in Table F-8. The total length of all of these lines together is approximately 4,559 feet. The total interior surface area is approximately 3.40 E+06 cm 2 .
Revision 2 F-14
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Table F-8. Estimated Total Residual Inventory of Lines East of the Process Building in Curies (as of 2011)
Nuclide Activity Nuclide Activity Nuclide Activity Am -241 1.3E-02 Np-237 1.5E -06 Tc-99 3.4E-05 C-14 1.6E-05 Pu-238 1.9E -03 U-232 1.9E-06 Cm-24 3 4.9E -06 Pu- 239 3.6E -03 U-233 4.6E -06 Cm -244 9. 9E -05 Pu -240 1.9E -03 U-234 3.9E -07 Cs-137 8.5E-02 Pu -241 5.0E-02 U-235 5.6E-07 1-129 7.9E-08 Sr-90 7.9E-02 U-238 4.7E-06 5.0 Leachate Transfer Line 5.1 Description The Leach ate Transfer Line is a buri ed two-inch polyvinylchloride pipe that originates on the south pl ateau at the NOA and continues northward across WMA 6 to Lagoon 2 in WMA 2. The line was laid within a five-inch sand layer at the base of a 36-inch wide trench located five feet below the surface .
The line was originally used to transfer fluids originating from the SDA Lagoons to Lagoon 1 in the LLWTF via a pumphouse adjacent to the NOA hardstand . More recently, it has been used to transfer groundwater from the N DA interceptor trench to Lagoon 2. The total length of the line is approximately 2,000 feet. The location of the Leachate Transfer Line is shown on Drawing 40C-S-1057, on which Figure F-2 is based .
Revision 2 F-15
WVDP PHASE 1 D ECOMMISSIONING P LAN Lagoon 3 Lagoon 2 NRC-Licensed Di sposal Area (NOA)
Figure F-2. Leachate Transfer Line Routing From NOA to Lagoon 1 (based on drawing 40C-S-1057) 5.2 Fluids Conveyed by the Line The use of the Leachate Transfer Line to convey burial trench leachate is described in the RCRA Facility Investigation Report for the NYSERDA-maintained portions of the Center (NYSERDA 1994) .
Revision 2 F-16
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN In March 1975 leachate levels in Trenches 4 and 5 of the SDA1 reached the ground surface and seeped through the earthen covers. NFS began a permitted operation to pump, treat and dispose of leachate 2 from the burial trenches. From 1975 through 1981 NFS pumped over 2,850,000 gals of fluid through the Leachate Transfer Line to Lagoon 1 in WMA 2 for treatment in the LLWTF arid eventual discharge to Erdman Brook. Typically, concentrations of radionuclides were in the range of 1 E-03 to 1 E-06 µCi/ml, although in the case of tritium (H-3), concentrations up to -4 µCi/ml were observed. Before transfer to Lagoon 1 the leachate was chlorinated to destroy biological matter and then treated to reduce water hardness and to precipitate some of the radionuclides. A list of SDA trench-pumping events and volumes is provided in Luckett, et al.
2004. Activity concentrations of radionuclides detected in the leachate are also provided in Luckett, et al. 2004.
The NOA interceptor trench was installed in 1991 on the northeast and northwest boundaries of the N DA to intercept and collect potentially contaminated groundwater migrating from the NOA. The base of the trench extends to a minimum of one foot below the interface of
.the weathered till with the unweathered till. The trench is drained by a drainpipe that directs accumulated water to a collection sump.
Liquid that collects in the sump is routinely sampled, analyzed, and transferred through the Leachate Transfer Line to Lagoon 2 in WMA 2 for treatment and release. Since its installation, over 3,000,000 gallons of intercepted groundwater have been pumped through the Leachate Transfer Line. Details of fluid volumes pumped through the Leachate Transfer Line from the interceptor trench during the period 1991-2003 are provided in Luckett, et al. 2004.
The NOA interceptor trench is sampled as part of the WVDP environmental monitoring program. Radionuclides detected in samples of the fluid are typically in the range of 1 E-07 to 1 E-10 µCi/ml with two exceptions: Tritium (H-3) is observed in the range of 1 E-05 µCi/ml and uranium, attributed to naturally occurring materials, is observed in the range of 3E-03 µg/ml. A summary of radionuclides detected and their concentrations in the samples of the fluid during the period 1993-2003 are provided in Luckett, et al. 2004 5.3 Estimate of Activity Inventory in Leachate Transfer Line Based on the design, operating history, and radioactivity analyses of fluids conveyed by the line, residual activity remaining in the line is insignificant to the performance assessment. Among the factors which led to this conclusion:
- The line is made of plastic designed to be non-reactivewith water-based fluids.
1 The term "leachate" is used here as a general term for water that has accumulated in a disposal trench and leached constituents from the materials disposed of in the trench. The use of the term does not imply that the water and the associated leached constituents constitute a regulated "leachate" as defined under RCRA or other regulatory regimes.
Revision 2 F-17
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
- The leachates were dilute fluids, which had been treated with a precipitant; there would have been little material in solution to plate out or deposit in the pipe.
- The leachate had been chlorinated; there would have been little opportunity for flora or scum to grow in the pipe and filter or trap radioactive materials conveyed in the fluids.
- The major activity in the leachate was tritium which passed through the pipe with the fluid.
- Since the leachate was conveyed in the pipe, the pipe has been flushed with over 2,600,000 gallons of groundwater that is essentially free of radionuclides.
- Measured radionuclide concentrations are detectable only with the most sensitive analysis and are well below the regulatory limits for the LLWTF inflow waters of 5 .OE-03
µCi/ml.
- The total uranium observed is typical of uranium occurring naturally in groundwater, and is well below the EPA drinking water standard of 30 µg/L (or 3.0 E-02 µg/mL) for uranium, as specified in Title 10 CFR 40, Part 141.55.
6.0 References Luckett, et al. 2004, Radioisotope Inventory Report for Underground Lines and Low Level Waste Tanks at the West Valley Demonstration Project, WSMS-WVNS-04-0001, Revision 0.
Luckett, L., J. Fazio, and S. Marschke, Washington Safety Management Solutions, Aiken, South Carolina, July 6, 2004.
NYSE RDA 1994, RCRA Facility Investigation for NYSERDA-Maintained Portions of the Western New York Nuclear Services Center, NYSE RDA, West Valley, New York, December 1994.
Revision 2 F-18
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN APPENDIXG PHASE 1 FINAL STATUS SURVEY CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
. t::.p,URPdse:dfftH15APPE.~DD(*:.
, -~ ~ , . ., . *.' ~ *, . '*- . . . . :* '*'*
.,' .,' o*.,
. ;.. 'INFbR~J\TIQ~ 1~;Tf,flS.Ai;J~i::NOIX
- rhis~*app~~.~i~:d~sc~i*o.~~,the de?igh :*ba~is: for;th¢**p~~~~e-~1*~.rina'1 si~tU? :~ur.\f~yj=>\~h;
- ipciu~foi'g .t~¢: key* a~~uoiptions; ar1d-~h~~::outiines th~ fin*~,* ~t~tus survey ~pprq~cr .. *
- .* 'i.t 'dO~~S* With:..*~ .*tjis9u~siqlJ,.of dbGy'm~nt~tion: reqcli,remer\ts:..:Log,ic'.:!dlagranls ~re,*;;
. prcwld~d(o'illu~trate thE3 p[()tes~esoin"vo.lv~d~.** * :' : * .* > *. ::>*. r:/< .: *V
. . . .... *:;R~CAifo.~sHi~Tb-oi"~~~-PARf~ oF\He PlAN:* *.
~*:th~ *lnform~tion~:i~*tni~. ap~~ridix'su~pi~m~nt;'thireq.ulrem~~i~.:f6~**t~e* Ph~se* .1*
- 'Fi.~~'~.t~t~~;s.~~e~;~~:~'.9esc,~io~~'.T:~~stio:~.-:9r' * * ** *~ .*. ~;.*.-**: *
- Revision.2 G-1
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN 1.0 Introduction The purpose of this conceptual framework is to describe the design basis and general appr'?ach for .the WVDP Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan, thus augmenting the requirements outlined in Section 9 of this plan.
Section 7.2.2 of this plan provides for Phase 1 final status surveys in three types of areas:
(1) The major areas to be made inaccessible during Phase 1 decommissioning activities, that is, the bottom and sides of excavations for removal of key WVDP facilities and contaminated subsurface soil (i.e., the WMA 1 and WMA 2 large excavations);
(2) Excavated soil laydmivn areas after the soil and ground covering are removed; and (3) Potentially impacted areas with no subsurface soil contamination that meet the unrestricted release criteria during Phase 1 of the decommissioning.
The primary objective of these surveys is to confirm that cleanup goals specified iri Section 5 of this plan *have been achieved. However, if an excavated soil laydown area is knowri to have subsurface cpntamination, then the objective of the survey of that area will be to determine the radiological status ofthe surface soil.
- Note that the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan, rather than the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan, will provide for radiological status surveys of:
( 1) Soil in the footprints of structures, concrete slabs, asphalt pavement, and gravel pads outside of the WMA 1 and WMA 2 large excavations to be removed during Phase 1 decommissioning activities; and (2) The interior of. the HLW transfer trench following removal of piping and equipment in the trench and the associated pump pits and diversion pit.
If DOE chooses to demonstrate that soil in the footprints of selected structures, concrete slabs, asphalt pavement, or gravel pads outside of the WMA 1 and WMA 2 large excavations removed during Phase 1 decommissioning activities meets the unrestricted release criteria, then Phase 1 final status surveys will also be performed in those areas if the characterization data are not sufficient for final status survey purposes.
2.0 Final Status Survey Design Basis As required by Section 9 of this plan, the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan will be consistent, to the extent possible, with the MARSSIM (NRC 2000). There are aspects of the WVDP project premises (e.g., buried subsurface soil contamination, etc.) that are. beyond MARSSIM's scope. In those instances, the protocols will be consistent with the intent of MARSSIM.
2.1 Project Premises and Phase I Activities As explained in Section 3 of this plan, the project premist;is comprise 156.4 acres. The major features of the project premises include existing facilities and associated above-
. ground and buried infrastructure, disposal areas, wastewater lagoons, roads, hardstands, paved parking lots, a railway spur, streams that drain the parcel, and open land. The Revision 2 G-2
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN project premises were used for spent fuel reprocessing in the 1960s and early 1970s.
Reprocessing activities resulted in environmental releases of radionuclides to surrounding soils, surface water, and groundwater as discussed in Section 2 of this plan.
To address known historical releases whose residual environmental contamination pose significant dose concerns, Phase 1 *activities include the following planned environmental remediation activities:
(1) A deep (30 - 45 feet), extensive (approximately three acre) excavation of contaminated soils adjacent to and beneath the Main Plant Process Building (WMA 1);
(2) A deep (up to 14 feet), extensive (approximately four acre) excavation of contaminated soils adjacent to and beneath facilities and lagoons associated with the Low-Level Waste Treatment Facility (WMA 2); and (3) Excavation of contaminated and uncontaminated near-surface soils (approximately two feet below grade) associated with selected building and infrastructure removal in WMA 1, WMA 3, WMA 5, WMA 6, WMA 7, WMA 9, and WMA 10.
In addition to these planned excavations, DOE may also choose to remove additional contaminated soils and/or sediments as part of Phase 1 decommissioning work. Any residual contamination within the project premises that still poses a dose concern will be addressed by Phase 2 decommissioning activities.
2.2 Cleanup Criteria As indicated in Section 5 of this plan, there are 18 radionuclides of interest for the project premises. The DCGL values for each radionuclide are_ based on a 25 mrem/y dose requirement (incremental to background) assuming a goal of unrestricted release.
The DCGL requirements include a DCGLw value to be applied as an area-averaged goal to final status survey units and a DCGLEMc value applicable to 1-square meter (m 2 )
areas. Different DCGL values are provided for surface soils (defined as soils to a depth of 1 m), for subsurface soils (defined as soils at significant depth that will be temporarily exposed by Phase 1 excavation activities in WMA 1 and WMA 2), and for streambed sediments. These DCGL values were further refined to reflect cumulative dose concerns, 1
resulting in a final set of cleanup goals reflected in Table 5-14 qf this plan
- 2.3 Key Assumptions This conceptual framework includes several key assumptions:
- Decommissioning Plan Changes. This conceptual framework is based on DCGLs in Revision 2 to the plan. Any changes in DCGL values or definitions may require changes to this framework.
- DCGL Definitions. The surface soil DCGLs apply to a vertical interval (contamination zone thickness) of one meter. The planned characterization work 1
Section 5 of this plan explains the difference between the DCGLs developed to correspond to 25 mrem per year for individual areas and the cleanup goals to be used in remediation activities. As in Section 9 of this plan, the term DCGL as used in this appendix from this point on is understood. to mean cleanup goal.
Revision 2 G-3
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN may identify project premises characteristics that are inconsistent with the conceptual site model used for DCGL derivation (e.g., surface contamination restricted to the top few inches of soil surface, subsurface contamination covered by a few inches of clean soil, or contaminated soils extending to a depth greater than one meter). To address this potential issue:
(1) Surface soil DCGL standards will only be applied when contamination impacts are less than one meter in depth; (2) Surface soil DCGL standards will be applied separately to the top 15 cm (six inches) of soil and to the top one meter soil interval as part of. the final status survey process; and (3) The presence of thin, highly elevated zones overlain by clean surface soils will be evaluated by Characterization Sampling and Analysis Plan data collection. If near surface contaminated layers are encountered during this data collection effort that result in potential dose concerns but that would not have been identified by the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan data collection approach, the Final Status Survey Plan process will be modified to meet the specific needs of those areas.
- LBGR. MARSSIM's Lower Bound on the Grey Region (LBGR) corresponds to the average residual activity concentration that will be present when final status survey data collection activities begin. For areas that do not require remediation, the LBGR is the existing average level of contamination present. For areas requiring remediation, the LBGR is the cleanup level targeted by the remediation program.
In combination with the Type II error rate and expected sample variability, the LBGR is an important determinant of the number of systematic samples required to demonstrate compliance with the DCGLw values.
- Data Gaps. There are key data gaps that will be addressed as part of the pre-design characterization work discussed in Section 9 of this plan. One example of these is the presence and spatial prevalence of the 18 radionuclides of interest. A second example is the presence and importance of radionuclides other than the 18 identified in this plan. While unlikely, the Final Status Survey Plan framework may need to be revisited if Phase 1 conditions encountered during characterization work are determined to be significantly different from the assumptions and conceptual site model in this plan.
- Chemical Contamination. Chemical contamination may exist for portions of the facility. Chemical contamination concerns will be addressed in compliance with RCRA requirements, and are not directly within the scope of the Final Status Survey Plan. Sampl!;!s collected as part of the Final Status Survey Plan process may also be analyzed for chemical constituents as necessary for waste stream characterization needs,. and/or to fulfill RCRA requirements.
- Scope of Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan Data Collection. As part of Phase 1 decommissioning activities, data will be collected to demonstrate that the floors and the sides (at depths greater than three feet) of the WMA 1 and 2 excavations meet the appropriate DCGL requirements. In addition, DOE may also choose to collect Revision 2 G-4
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN data to demonstrate that surface soils for other portions of the WVDP project premises also meet the Phase 1 cleanup goals for those situations where contamination is not present at depths greater than one meter. Examples of these areas indude: (1) soils exposed by hardstand, pad, or foundation removal that are believed to be below DCGL requirements; (2) soils with surface contamination above DCGL goals that DOE chooses to remediate; and/or (3) other soils where there is no evidence of contamination above DCGL requirements. The Final Status Survey Plan framework as described applies to soils and does not apply to sediments, surface water or groundwater.
- Sign Test Applicability. Because all 18 radionuclides identified in the decommissioning plan are either not naturally occurring or have DCGLw requirements an order of magnitude or more .above background levels, the Sign test is considered appropriate for demonstrating compliance with wide-area DCGL (DCGLw) requirements. In the event that DCGL values are lowered it may be necessary to establish a background reference area and use the Wilcoxon Rank Sum (WRS) test instead to demonstrate compliance with the DCGLw requirements.
2
- DCGLEMc Applicability. The DCGLEMC is radionuclide-specific and applies to 1-m areas. Gross gamma surveys will be used for demonstrating compliance with the DCGLEMc criteria where appropriate. In addition, appropriate DCGLEMC values will be calculated that correspond to the area represented by systematic samples collected to demonstrate DCGLw compliance using area factors provided in Tables 9-1 and 9-2 of Section 9 of this plan. The latter approach is intended to address the radionuclides of interest that are not detectable by gamma scans and that may exist in isolation for specific portions of the project premises (e.g., the floor of the WMA 1 dig where Sr-90 may be the principal radionuclide of interest).
- Radionuclides of Interest List. Because processes and contaminant release scenarios vary from location to location across the project premises, not all 18 radionuclides of interest may be pertinent to specific areas. The assumption is that Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan data collection may be used to determine which of the 18 radionuclides of interest are pertinent to specific areas and that final status survey sampling for those areas may be limited to the smaller set of the pertinent radionuclides of interest.
- Use of Sum-of-Ratios Calculations. Because of the many radionuclides of interest, all final status survey determinations will be based on sample sum-of-ratios calculations. The sum-of-ratios calculation for any particular sample will be based on the radionuclides pertinent to the final status survey unit that was the source of the sample.
" Subsurface Soil Contamination. The Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan is not applicable to areas outside the WMA 1 and 2 excavations where subsurface contamination exists at depths greater than one meter.
- Null Hypothesis and Acceptable Error Rates. For the Sign test, the null hypothesis will be that final status survey units are contaminated above DCGLw levels based on sample sum-of-ratios values. In this context, the acceptable Type I Revision 2 G-5
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN error rate (i.e., rejecting the null hypothesis when it should have been accepted) will be 0.05. The Type II error rate (i.e., accepting the null hypothesis when it should have been rejected) will be set based on an engineering cost analysis that weighs the potential for false contaminated conclusions with the costs of final status survey data collection. The Type I error rate establishes the minimum number of systematic samples required for Sign test implementation. In the case of an error rate of 0.05, the minimum number is five samples per survey unit; final status survey units, however, will likely require more systematic samples than this minimum number to meet Type II error rate needs.
- Role of Composite Sampling. While not discussed in MARSSIM, the use of composite samples is one means for attaining desired Type II error rates while controlling analytical costs when performing DCGLw evaluations. Composite sampling can also significantly increase the likelihood that DCGLEMc exceedances are identified for radionuclides that are not detectable by gross activity scans.
Composite sampling*combines soil increments systematically distributed across a portion of a final status survey unit into homogenized composite samples before analysis. The minimum number of composites per survey unit is determined by the desired Type I error rate. The minimum number of soil increments contributing to each composite sample is a function of the desired Type II error rate, the degree of heterogeneity expected within survey units, and the expected average residual activity concentration. Composite sampling will be used when appropriate during the final status survey process to improve overall decision-making performance.
Sufficient composite samples are collected from each survey unit to satisfy Sign or WRS test requirements. The type of compositing proposed, and its advantages are well documented, have been used effectively within the RCRA and Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) cleanup programs, and have regulatory support (see EPA 1995, EPA 2002a-and EPA 2002b).
NOTE There currently is insufficient soil characterization information available within the project premises to determine whether the use of composite soil sampling for FSS purposes is appropriate. A decision oh whether the use of composite soil sampling for final status survey purposes is appropriate will be ma.de once the soil. sampling data collection and interpretation associated with the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan is completed.
- Analytical Methods. Some of the radionuclides of interest have relatively low DCGLw values. The 18 radionuelides span a range of required analytical
.techniques, induding gamma spectroscopy, alpha spectroscopy, liquid scintillation, and gas proportional counting. The Final Status Survey Plan will specify the analytical performance requirements expected for each radionuclide (Table 9-5 of this plan identifies target detection limits). In some cases (e.g., gamma spectroscopy and liquid scintillation), a field-based laboratory may prove Revision 2 G-6
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN advantageous, particularly for those radionuclides that will likely be the primary decision drivers (e.g., Cs-137 and Sr-90). Whether data from field deployable techniques can be used for final status survey compliance demonstration purposes will depend on whether data quality standards can be achieved and documented.
There may be cases where a particular field-deployable technique may not have sufficient data quality for final status survey purposes, but where the technique still serves an important and useful role as a screening tool for elevated area concerns, or as part of pre-final status survey/remedial support data collection to determine that an area is ready for final status survey data collection.
- Use of Pre-Design lnvestigatiOn Data for Final Status Survey Purposes. The final status survey logic and Final 'status Survey Plan were developed in tandem with the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan for pre-design data collection.
The intent is that pre-design data, if collected consistent with Final Status Survey Plan protocols and data quality standards, can potentially be used for final status survey purposes if contamination levels requiring remediation are not identified.
2.4 Role of Pre-Design Data Collection The Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan will address key data gaps pertinent to decommissioning work.* Some of those data gaps are also important from the perspective of designing and implementing the final status survey process for the project premises.
These include:
- . Determining whether the list of the 18 radionuclides of interest as identified by the DP is complete. An additional 12 radionuclides have been identified as possib.ly (but unlikely to be) present at the site. In addition, the presence of progeny not in equilibrium with the 18 radionuclides of interest has also been identified as a possible concern. Both issues have the potential for requiring changes to the radionuclides of interest list. T.he Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan will determine whether this is necessary.
- Addressing the prevalence, spatial distribution, and potential collocation of the 18 radipnuclides of interest. There are several potential outcomes from this data collection. If particular radionuclides of interest are either not present to any significant degree or are always dominated from a sum-of-ratios perspective by other radionuclides~ the analytical list for systematic samples may be reduced to those that are pertinent. The list of "pertinent" radionuclides of interest might vary with location. Alternatively, if a few readily measurable radionuclides of interest (e.g., Cs-137) are ubiquitous and at relatively stable ratios to other radionuclides of interest, a surrogate approach might be adopted for DCGL analysis.
- Determining the presence/absence and prevalence of near-surface subsurface soils (e.g., soils that are at depths just below one meter) that exceed DCGL standards. The Phase 1 surface soil DCGL requirements are only applicable to areas where contamin;:ition is not present below a depth of one meter.
The Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan will delineate where near-surface subsurface soil contamination is a concern.
Revision 2 G-7
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
- Identifying whether thin layers of buried contamination exist within the top one meter of soils that might pose dose concerns if exposed but would be missed by the Final Status Survey Plan sampling logic. The Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan will determine if this is the case, and if so, identify the areas where this will be a concern. If such areas exist, then the Final Status Survey Plan logic will be adjusted to address those concerns.
- Supporting layout offinal status survey unit areas for the site. The MARSSIM defines three different classifications of final status survey units that may potentially be applied to one or more areas of a site. The selection of the appropriate final status survey unit classification for a particular area depends on its expected contamination status relative to the DCGLs. The Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan will provide the data necessary for the correct classification and delineation of MARSSIM final status survey units.
- Estimating likely residual radionuclide activity concentrations to be encountered after Phase 1 activities are complete. Expected average residual activity concentrations, in conjunction with expected heterogeneity and Type II error requirements, will affect final status survey sample numbers.
3.0 Final Status Survey Approach Final status survey data colledion will take place for soils within the project premises.
In the case of soils, if the final status survey data collection conclusions are that DCGL standards have not b~en attained, DOE may remediate the area and collect additional final status survey data to demonstrate compliance with DCGL requirements ..
For the deep excavated surfaces within WMA 1 and WMA 2, additional remediation will take place if subsurface DCGL requirements are not met. For areas outside the WMA 1 and WMA 2 deep excavations, if a final status unit fails the final status survey process, DOE may choose to remediate the affected area until DCGL requirements are met or to postpone remediation until Phase 2.
If DOE chooses to remediate soils exceeding DCGL standards and the original unit was a Class 1 unit, final status survey data collection will be repeated after additional remediation is complete. If the original unit was an unexcavated Class 2 or Class 3 unit, the affected area will be remediated, reclassified as one or more Class 1 units, and final status survey data collection repeated. DOE may defer remediating areas that are not currently identified as requiring excavation by the DP until Phase 2.
3.1 Surface Soils A complete logged gamma walkover survey of accessible areas within the project premises using an appropriate detector (e.g., Field Instrument for Detecting Low Energy Radiation (FIDLER)) will be performed as part of Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan data collection activities. This walkover survey, in conj4nction with biased surface soil sampling and intrusive GeoProbe data collection, will be used to identify areas likely requiring remediation or impacted at levels approaching soil DCGL levels but not planned for remediation (Class 1 areas), areas impacted but with no evidence of soil DCGL exceedances (Class 2 areas), and areas within the WVDP project premises' boundary that Revision 2 G-8
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN either show no evidence of impacts, or are minimally impacted at very low levels compared to soil DCGL standards (Class 3 areas). Based on data available to date, it is expected that the majority of the project premises will be classified as either Class 1 or Class 2 final status survey units.
As part of Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan data collection, a background reference area will be identified that can be used to assess the background response of the detector used and that can serve as a source of background samples if a WRS test is.
required to demonstrate DCGLw compliance. One outcome of reference area gross gamma data collection will be the identification of appropriate field investigation levels to be applied to gross gamma data during routine use of detectors for pre-design characterization, remediation support, and final status survey data collection.
An example of. a field investigation level will be a detector response that is not statistically consistent with background readings (e.g., above the 95 percent upper tolerance limit for background data sets). Biased sampling, in conjunction with gamma walkover survey data and associated field investigation levels, will be used during pre-design data collection work in contaminated areas to develop additional field investigation levels that could potentially be used to reliably identify gross activity responses that might be indicative of soil DCGL exceedance concerns.
For areas that are excavated, the final exposed dig face (walls and floors) will be scanned using one or more logged detectors to evaluate the potential presence of either general contamination above soil DCGLw standards, or very localized contamination potentially associated with soil DCGLEMc concerns. Biased sampling will be used to further evaluate evidence of contamination potentially above soil DCGL standards if encountered by the detector. Detector data will be collected with the goal of complete spatial coverage at a density of one logged measurement per square meter, on average.
Prior to the initiation of final status survey sample collection, the layout of final status survey units will be finalized for surface soils that are considered ready for final status survey data collection. Areas that are candidates for Phase 1 final status survey data collection are areas where there is no evidence or concern about contamination deeper than one meter, and where Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan data indicate that residual contamination levels likely meet surface soil DCGL requirements. Soil Class 1 2
survey units will not exceed 2,000 m in size. Soil Class 2 survey units will not exceed 2
10,000 m in size. There is no size constraint for Class 3 survey units.
For each survey unit the pertinent radionuclides of interest subset will be defined based on historical information, Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan sampling results for that area, and remedial support data in the case of excavated area Class 1 units.
In all cases of sample collection and analysis (systematic and biased), the sum-of-ratios values calculated for samples will be used to test compliance with DCGL standards.
Sum-of-ratios values will be calculated based on soil DCGLEMc requirements and based on soil DCGLw requirements. As part of the sum-of-ratios calculation, background will not be subtracted for those radionuclides that occur naturally. The radionuclides of interest subset used for sum-of-ratios calculation purposes may vary from survey unit to survey unit, Revision 2 G-9
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN depending on which radionuclides of interest have been determined to be pertinent to the area of interest.
The primary determinant of soil DCGLEMc compliance for each survey unit will be scanning results combined with associated biased sampling for radionuclides of interest that lend themselves to scanning, and systematic soil samples for radionuclides of interest that are not detectable via scans. All survey units (Class 1, Class 2, and Class 3) will have complete scanning coverage. Scanning data sets will be logged to allow for post-data collection mapping, analysis, presentation, and data preservatio"n. Biased samples collected in response to scan results, or for any other reason, will be compared to 1-m 2 soil DCGLEMC requirements.
If biased soil samples are collected, two samples will be collected and analyzed for each biased sampling location: one that is representative of the top 15 cm of exposed soils, and one that is representative of a 1 m soil depth. Sample results (biased or systematic) that exceed soil DCGLEMC requirements indicate soil conditions requiring further remediation. In addition, appropriate DCGLEMc values will be calculated based on the areas represented by systematic samples collected for DCGLw purposes using area factors provided by the DP; systematic sample results will also be compared to these additional DCGLEMc values.
The primary determinant of soil DCGLw compliance will be systematic sample results.
Systematic samples will be collected on a random start triangular grid. Systematic samples will be composite samples formed from soil increments distributed across the immediate area the systematic sample represents. Two composite samples will be formed from each grid node, one representative of soils to a depth of 15 cm and one representative of soils to a depth of one meter. The minimum number of systematic soil sample grid locations per survey unit will be five (consistent with achieving a Type I error rate of 0.05). In the case of each composite, sufficient soil mass will be collected to allow analysis for all 18 radionuclides of interest, if necessary.
Figure G-1 contains. a decision logic flow diagram for surface soil final status survey units. Sum-of-ratios values for systematic sample results will first be calculated based on soil DCGLEMc requirements. There are two applicable DCGLEMc values of interest. The first 2
is the 1-m DCGLEMc value explicitly defined in this plan. This standard will be applied to biased soil sample results. 1:he second is a DCGLEMc value determined from the DCGLw using area factors (provided in Section 9 of the plan) that are appropriate for the area the systematic sample represents. This approach will be applied to systematic soil sample results.
If there are no soil DCGLEMc concerns, sum-of-ratios values corresponding to soil DCGLw requirements will be calculated. Samples results representing depths of 15 cm will be evaluated separately from sample results representing a depth of one meter. In each case, if the average of the results is less than unity, the Sign test will be applied assuming a Type I error rate of 0.05. If the null hypothesis is rejected for both depth intervals, the unit will be considered compliant with all relevant soil DCGL standards.
3.2 Subsurface Soils Revision 2 G-10
. WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN In the case of the final exposed soil surface for the WMA 1 and 2 deep excavations, the general final status survey process will mirror what has already been described in Section 3.1 utilizing the appropriate subsurface DCGL standards. (One exception is that the sample interval for subsurface soil will be 0-1 m; no 0-15 cm samples are required for subsurface soil.)
The primary differences in the case of WMA 1 are the foundation pilings that will remain in place after excavation is complete. There are some 476 pilings and there are concerns that they may have provided vertical preferential flow pathways for contaminated groundwater into the Lavery Till, resulting in soil contamination at levels of potential concern within the till. This issue will be addressed both .by remedial support data collection described in the Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan, and by data collection as part of the final status survey process for final status survey units that include foundation pilings.
If foundation piles did serve as preferential pathways for contamination entry into the Lavery Till, the following conditions would be expected:
- Contamination would have occurred between the piling and surrounding soil,
- Contamination that penetrated into the till would have left evidence at the till/sand and gravel unit interface (i.e., soil contamination at that interface), and
- The possibility for till contamination to occur would have been greatest where groundwater contamination was the greatest - beneath the original release point and immediately down gradient.
Based on these assumptions, the final status survey process for demonstrating that there is no significant till contamination concerns associated with pilings would have the following components:
- Excavation work will ide.ntify the exact locations of pilings and remedial action support surveys will determine where contaminated soil at levels of concern existed immediately above the Lavery Till.
- Pilings will be considered in two groups: pilings that fell within the greater-than-DCGL footprint of contaminated soils immediately above the Lavery till, and pilings that did not - final status survey data collection will target those pilings falling within the greater-than-DCGL footprint.
- In this set of pilings, sampling will be a combination of biased and systematic data collection:
Ten piling locations will be selected for biased sampling to look for DCGLEMc exceedances. This selection will target those pilings most likely to exhibit till contamination, if it existed. The selection will be based on a combination of factors, including proximity . to the original release event, level of soil contamination as identified by remedial support sampling immediately above the till, visual evidence of "spaces" between the till and pilings that might have provided preferential flow pathways, etc.
A minimum of eight of the pilings in the footprint will be selected for each final status survey unit, at random, for DCGLw sampling. In the event that this random Revision 2 G-11
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN selection process identifies a piling already selected for biased sampling, the sample collected from that piling will be used for both DCGLEMC and DCGLw compliance demonstration purposes.
For those pilings selected for sampling (either biased or systematic) sampling focus on obtaining a soil sample from immediately along the piling at a depth of one meter below the excavation surface.
If any individual soil sample identifies contamination above DCGLEMc requirements, additional excavation will occur to identify the extent of contamination and remove it.
Additional samples will be collected from the final exposed dig face to demonstrate that no further DCGLEMc exceedances exist.
For each final status survey unit that includes pilings falling within the greater-than-DCGL qverburden footprint, the systematic sample results from pilings will be evaluated using the Sign test. If the pilings satisfy the Sign test and there are no biased piling samples with DCGLEMc exceedances, till contamination associated with pilings will not be considered an issue. If fewer than five systematic piling samples are available, rather than the Sign test all systematic piling samples will be compared to the DCGLw requirement. If none are above the DCGLw values, then till contamination associated with pilings will not be considered an issue.
Figure G-2 shows the decision flow logic for final status survey data collection from the deep excavations in WMA 1 and WMA 2 floors.
3.2 Sediments NOTE The initial issue of the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan will not provide for Phase 1 final status surveys of Erdman Brook and Franks Creek. If it is la.ter determined that such surveys will be performed during Phase 1 of
- the decommissioning, the Phase 1 Final Status* Survey Plan will be revised to address these surveys following the protocols described below.
For the purposes of this conceptual framework, sediments are defined as soil or sediment-like materials associated with the bed and banks of Erdman Brook and Franks Creek within the project premises.
Historical data have demonstrated that stream sediments in Erdman Brook and Franks Creek contained within the WVDP fence line are impacted by Phase 1 radionuclides. The Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan pre-design data collection will include stream sediment and stream bank sampling to determine if remediation may be required fo~
portions of the stream within the WVDP fence line. Currently there is no remediation planned for sediments as part of the Phase 1 decommissioning activities. Because of the integrating nature of project premises drainage features, final status survey data collection for stream features will likely be one of the final activities to avoid the possibility of re-contamination occurring post-final status survey data collection due to soil erosion and deposition within drainage features.
Revision 2 G-12 I
- I I
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN However, to support overall final status survey planning, the delineation of final status survey unit areas for stream and drainage features within the WVDP fence line will occur as part of Phase 1 activities. All stream features will be classified as Class 1 areas. Consistent with the sediment DCGL derivation contained in the decommissioning plan, the definition of a stream final status survey unit includes sediments within the streambed itself and three m of bank on either side of the stream bed. Each unit will be at most 333 m long, comprising an area of at most 2,000 m2 . Subsurface contamination deeper than the 1-m definition of sediments is not considered a plausible scenario for a stream setting; consequently final status survey data collection will focus on surface sediments and adjacent bank soils. This assumption will be tested by Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan data collection.
The decision logic for sediment survey units is identical to surface s9ils (Figure G-1 ).
As with surface soils across the site, a complete gamma walkover of exposed sediments and associated banks will be performed using an appropriate detector. Biased samples will be collected to clarify scan results that might be indicative of DCGL excedances. For locations where biased samples are collected, two samples will be collected, one representative of a depth of 15 cm, and one representative of a depth of 1 m.
Biased samples collected in response to scan results or for any other reason from 2
within sediment final status survey units will be compared to sediment 1-m DCGLEMC requirements. In addition, appropriate DCGLEMc values will be calculated based on the areas represented by systematic samples collected for DCGLw purposes using a*rea factors provided in Section 9 of this plan; systematic sample results will also be compared to these additional DCGLEMc values. Sample results (biased or systematic) that exceed sediment DCGLEMc requirements indicate conditions requiring remediation.
Sediment DCGLw compliance will be demonstrated through the use of systematic sediment samples. A minimum of five systematic composite samples will be collected and submitted for laboratory analysis. For each location where a composite sample is obtained, two samples will be formed, one representative of a depth of 15 cm and one representative of a depth of 1 m. The radionuclides of interest subset for the analyses will be determined based on historical data and Characterization Sample and Analysis Plan data collection results.
The systematic sediment sample locations will conform to a linear grid down the length of the survey unit with a fixed grid node separation distance but random start. At each grid node, the sample collected will be formed from three increments, one from the stream centerline, and two collected from randomly selected distances up the bank from the bank's edge. In the case of each composite, sufficient soil/sediment mass will be collected to allow analysis for all 18 radionuclides of interest, if necessary.
Systematic sediment samples will be submitted for analysis based on the radionuclides of interest subset pertinent to that final status survey unit. Sum-of-ratios values for systematic sample results will fir.st be calculated based on sediment DCGLw requirements corrected by appropriate area factors contained in Section 9 of this plan and evaluated for DCGLEMC exceedances. If there are no sediment DCGLEMc exceedances, sum-of-ratios values corresponding to sediment DCGLw requirements will be calculated. If the average of these is less than unity, the Sign test will be applied assuming a Type I error rate of 0.05.
Revision 2 G-13
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN This will be done for both depth intervals. If the ni:tll hypothesis is rejected in both cases, the unit will be considered compliant with all relevant soil DCGL standards.
In the event that the radionuclides of interest subset does not include all 18 radionuclides, one composite sample per survey unit will be formed by sub-sampling all individual systematic composite samples (after homogenization) representative of a depth of one meter from a survey unit and submitted for a complete analysis of all 18 radionuclides.
If the resulting sediment DCGLw sum-of-ratios value exceeds unity, then the unit will require additional remediation. If the sum-of-ratios value is significantly influenced by radionuclides that were originally not considered. pertinent to that final status survey unit, the remaining cohiposite soil mass for each radionuclide will be analyzed for the balance of the 18 radionuclides not already analyzed, DCGLw sum-of-ratios values recalculated, and compliance with DCGLw standards re-evaluated.
4.0 Documentation Requirements Due to the complexity and time span of the Phase 1 decommissioning activities,~ it is expected that multiple Final Status Survey Reports will be prepared in accordance with Section 9.8 of this plan. Such reports, for example, may address a group of related survey units, such as those associated with the WMA 1 excavation, or -a particular excavated soil laydown area. The use of multiple Final Status Survey Reports will facilitate independent confirmatory surveys and support periodic progress reports to interested stakeholders as the Phase 1 decommissioning activities take place.
Technical data packages will be prepared for in.dividual survey units. Each Final Status Survey Report together with the related technical data packages will contain the information specified in Section 9.8 of this plan, including:
- An overview of the final status survey results;
- A description of the final l')tatus survey units comprising the area being evaluated,.
including any changes from what had been originally planned;
- A summary of the pertinent radionuclides of interest subset and the appropriate DCGLw and DCGLEMc standards;
- A description of the basis for sample numbers and the analyses used to support sample number determinations for each survey unit;
- A presentation of the gamma scan data for each survey unit, including a map showing the extent of coverage and discussion of the scan data;
- A presentation of the data collected for each survey unit, including a map or drawing of the survey units illustrating the random start systematic sample locations and the location of other samples (i.e., judgmental, biased, and miscellaneous sample data sets which will be reported separately from those samples collected for performing the statistical evaluation);
- A review of quality control parameters associated with data sets;
- A statistical analysis of the data sets with respect to the DCGLw values in the context of MARSSIM final status survey guidance; Revision 2 G-14
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN
- An evaluation of survey and sampling data to address DCGLEMc standards;
- A conclusion about whether DCGLw and DCGLEMc requirements have been met;
- A description of how ALARA practices were employed to achieve final activity levels; and
- If a unit fails to meet DCGL
- requirements, the reason for the failure, the
. implications for other final status survey units, the actions taken to correct the failure, and/or the implications for Phase II activities Revision 2 G-15
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Garmma Walkover Survey of Accessible Surface
>--Yi_e_s_+l .Collect Biased Soil Samples &
Analyze for All 18 RCOC No Determine Pertinent - - - - - - - <
RCOC List Collect Systematic Surface Soil Samples Unit Fails No Yes LEGEND: FSS =final status survey RCOC = radiological contaminant of concern FSS Unit Satisfies SOR = sum of ratios Unrestricted Release Criteria Figure G-1. Decision Logic for Surface Soil and Sediment Survey Units
- Revision 2 G-16
WVDP PHASE 1 DECOMMISSIONING PLAN Garmma Walkover Survey of Accessible Surface Yes Collect Biased Soil Samples &
Analyze for All 18 RCOC Determine Pertinent 1+-----N_o-<
RCOC List Select & Sample Soils for 10 Foundation Pilings Randomly Select Minimum 8 Foundation Pilings & Sample Soils Collect Systematic Surface Soil Samples Remediate and Resample as Appropriate No No No LEGEND: FSS =final status survey FSS Unit Satisfies RCOC = radiological contaminant of concern Unrestricted Release Criteria SOR = sum of ratios Figure G-2. Decision Logic for WMA 1 and WMA 2 Subsurface Soils Revision 2 G-17