ML16293A178
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:Reference 8-West Valley Demonstration Project Annual Site Environmental Report for Calendar Year 2012, September 2013
Reference 8 - WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report for CY 2012 WEST VALLEY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT ANNUAL SITE ENVIRONM ENTAL REPORT CALENDAR VEAR 2012 CH2M HILL* B&W WEST VALLEY, LLC Prepared by: CH2M HILL
- B&W West Valley, LLC Prepared for: U.S. Department of Energy DOE-WVDP September 2013 10282 Rock Springs Road Under: Contract DE-EM0001529 West Valley, New York 14171-9799
Department of Energy West Valley Demonstration Project 10282 Rock Springs Road West Valley, NY 14171-9799 To the Reader: This report, prepared by the United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE) West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP), summarizes the environmental protection program at the WVDP for calendar year 2012. Monitoring and surveillance of the WVDP facilities are conducted to verify that public health and safety and the environment are protected. The quality assurance requirements applied to the environmental monitoring program by the DOE ensure the validity and accuracy of the monitoring data. At the WVDP, radiological air emissions are controlled and permitted by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants, Subpart H, regulations. Non radiological liquid effluent discharges are controlled and permitted through the New York State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. Generation, storage, and treatment of hazardous and mixed wastes are conducted in accordance with Resource Conservation and Recovery Act interim status regulations and New York State Environmental Conservation Law. Air, surface water, groundwater, storm water, soil, sediment, and biological samples are collected and analyzed for radiological and nonradiological constituents. The resulting data are evalu.ated to assess effects of activities at the WVDP on the nearby public and the environment. The calculated dose to the hypothetical maximally exposed off-s_ite individual from airborne radiological emissions' in 2012 was estimated to be 0.027% of the 10-millirem (mrem) EPA limit. The dose from combined airborne and waterborne radiological releases in 2012 to the same individual was estimated to be 0.019% of the 100-mrem DOE limit, verifying that dose received by off-site residents continues to be minimal. The WVDP was operated in a safe manner during 2012. In 2012, the employees achieved a cumulative total of 5.5 million safe work hours without a lost-time work accident or illness, while accomplishing complex decontamination and waste management activities. CH2M HILL* B&W West Valley, LLC (CHBWV) continued to perform Phase I Decommissioning and Facility Disposition activities for DOE during 2012. The term of the Phase I Decommissioning and Facility Disposition contract is from August 2011 to June 30, 2017. If you have any questions or comments about the information in this report, please contact WVDP Communications at (716) 942-4601 or complete and return the enclosed survey. Sincerely, id- (_.'1i___.-- Bryan C. Bower, Director West Valley Demonstration Project
West Valley Demonstration Project Annual Site Environmental Report for Calendar Year 2012 Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy West Valley Demonstration Project Office Under: Contract DE~EM0001529 September 2013 CH2M HILL e B& W West Valley, LLC 10282 Rock Springs Road West Valley, New York 14171-9799 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Disclaimer This report was prepared by CH2M HILL
- B& W West Valley, LLC {CHBWV} under contract number DE-EM0001529 with the United States (U.S.} ofAmerica, represented by the Department of Energy. Neitherthe U.S. Government nor CHBWV nor any of their contractors, subcontractors, or employees makes any warranty, expressed or im-plied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for any apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or repre-sents th at its use would not infringe on privately owned rights. References herein to any specific commercial prod-uct, process or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endo_rsement, recommendation, or favoring by the U.S. Government or CHBWV. This report contains a summary of major or significant activities occurring at the West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP} only and is not a full disclosure of all details associated with WVDP-related activities. The views and opinions of authors expressed in this report may not specifically state or reflect those of the U.S. Government or any agency thereof ii WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - _Calendar Year 2012
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report Can We Make This Report More Useful to You? We want to make the WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report useful to its readers. Please take a few minutes to let us know if the report meets your needs. Then print, fold and tape this page to place it in the mail. Mail to: WEST VALLEY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT 10282 ROCK SPRINGS ROAD WEST VALLEY, NY 14171
- 1. How do you use the WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report?
D To learn general information about the WVDP D *To learn about doses received for the current year D To learn about site compliance information D To gather effluent or environmental surveillance data D Other:
- 2. Does the WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report contain enough:
- a. Useful illustrations and graphs? D Yes D No
- b. Project background information? D Yes D No
- c. Scientific background information? D Yes D No Comments: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~-
- 3. Is this report: (please check one)
D At appropriate technical level? D Too technical? For example: D Not technical enough? For example:
- 4. If you could change this report to make it more readable and useful to you, what would you change?
- 5. What is your affiliation?
D U.S.DOE D Elected official D NYSERDA D Media D Other government office/agency D Group: D Public interest group D Individual: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
- 6. To help us identify our audience, please indicate your educational background.
D Graduate degree: D Scientific D Nonscientific D Undergraduate degree: D Scientific D Nonscientific 0 Expeiience with science outside college setting D Little or no scientific background If you have questions or comments about the information in this report, please contact WVDP Communications at (716-942-4601).
Preface Environmental monitoring at the West Valley Demonstration Project {WVDP} was conducted by CH2M
- HILL " B& W West Valley, LLC {CHBWV}, under contract to the United States Department of Energy. The data collected provide a historical record of radionuclide and radiation levels, and chemical data from natural and man-made sources in the survey area. The data also document the chemical and radiological quality of the groundwater on and around the WVDP and of the air and water released by the WVDP. Meteorological data are also presented.
It is the policy of CHBWV to conduct the WVDP in a safe, compliant, and cost-effective manner that protects human health and the environment. We achieve this by integrating environmental requirements and pol-lution prevention into our work planning and execution, and taking actions to minimize the environmental impacts of our operations. We establish and communicate environmental responsibilities, provide environ-mental training to our workforce, and implement controls to mitigate environmental hazards. These activi-ties are conducted in accordance with our Environmental Management System. This report represents a single, comprehensive source of on-site and off-site environmental data collected during 2012. The environmental monitoring program and results are discussed in the body of this report. Additional monitoring information is presented in the appendices. Appendix A contains maps of on-site and off-site sampling locations and a summary of the site environmental monitoring schedule. Appendices B through H contain summaries of data obtained during 2012 and are intended for those readers interested in more detail than is provided in the main body of the report. Appendix I contains a copy of the WVDP Act. All of the appendices are included in electronic forms of the document. Appendices B through I can be found in electronic format on the compact disk located inside the back cover of the printed versions of the ASER. A reader opinion survey has been inserted in this report. Requests for digital copies of the 2012 Annual Site Environmental Report {ASER} and questions regarding the report should be referred to WVDP Communica-tions, 10282 Rock Springs Road, West Valley, New York 14171 (telephone: 716-942-4601}. Additional Project information, including links to the current and previous WVDP ASERs, is available on the internet at http:// www.wv.doe.gov. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 iii
This page intentionally left blank iv WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE ...................................................................................................................................................................................... iii EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
................................................................................................................................................. EXE-1 Purpose of This Report ......................................................................................................................................................... EXE-1 Major Site Programs .............................................................................................: ............................................................... EXE-1 Record of Decision ......................................................................................................................................................... EXE-1 DOE/NYSERDA Consent Decree ..................................................................................................................................... EXE-1 Facilities Disposition Contract ....................................................................................................................................... EXE-1 Phase 1 Studies .........................................................................................................................................................: ... EXE-2 Environmental Characterization Support Services ............................................................................ :........................... EXE-2 Permeable Treatment Wall Performance ...................................................................................................................... EXE-2 NOA ............................................................................................................................................................................... EXE-3 WTF Tank and Vault Drying System (T&VDS) ................................................................................................................. EXE-3 Tank 80-4 Sampling and Characterization ..................................................................................................................... EXE-3 Waste-Incidental-to-Reprocessing (WIR) Evaluations for HLW Processing Vessels ....................................................... EXE-3 Safety Success ............................................................................................................................................................... EXE-3 Environmental Management System ...............................................................................................................................,,., EXE"3 Compliance .................................................................................................................................................................... EXE-4 Environmental Monitoring - Performance Indicators .................................................................................................... EXE-4 Quality Assurance .......................................................................................................................................................... EXE-5 Conclusion ............................................................................................................................................................................ EXE-5 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................... INT-1 Site Location ...... ~ ................................................................................................................................................................... INT-1 General Environmental Setting .............................................................................................................................................. INT-1 Climate .................................................................. ,........ : ................................................................................................ INT-1 Ecology ........................................................................................................................................................................... INT-1 Geology and Hydrology ..... ~ ..............................................................................................................:............................. INT-1 Relevant Demographics .................... ;.................................................................................................................................... INT-1 Historic Timeline of the WNYNSC and the WVDP ................................................................... ,............................................. INT-1 ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE
SUMMARY
................................................................................................................ ECS-1 Compliance Program ................................................. ;............................................................... '. .......................................... ECS-1 2012 Accomplishments and Highlights at the WVDP ........................................................................................................... ECS-1 2012 Major Accomplishments ...................................................................................................................................... ECS-1 State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Permit Noncompliance Events ................................................ ECS-2 CY 2011 SP DES Permit Mercury Exceedance ................................................................................................................. ECS-2 PTW Performance ......................................................................................................................................................... ECS-2 Waste Tank Farm (WTF) and the T&VDS ....................................................................................................................... ECS-2 Tank 80-4 Sampling and Characterization ..................................................................................................................... ECS-3 WIR Evaluation for the WVDP Melter, CFMT, and MFHT ............................................................................................... ECS-3 NEPA .................................................................................................................................................................................... ECS-3 EIS Issued ....................................................................................................................................................................... ECS-3 Phase 1 Studies ............................................................................................................................................................. ECS-3 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 v
Table of Contents ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE
SUMMARY
(concluded) NEPA (concluded) Phase 1 Decommissioning Plan (DP) for the WVDP ...................................................................................................... ECS-4 Phase 1 Characterization Sampling and Analysis Plan (CSAP) and the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan (FSSP) for the WVDP ...................................................................................................................................................................... ECS-4 Environmental Characterization Services Contract ....................................................................................................... ECS-5 RCRA ..... , ............................................................................................................................................................................... ECS-5 Hazardous Waste Permitting - RCRA Interim Status Permit Application ....................................................................... ECS-5 RCRA Final Status Permit Application ............................................................................................................................ ECS-5 RCRA §3008(h) Administrative Order on Consent ......................................................................................................... ECS-6 Hazardous Waste Management ..............................................................................................................................:..... ECS-7 Mixed Waste Management ........................................................................................................................................... ECS-7 Nonhazardous, Regulated Waste Management ............................................................................................................ ECS-7 Waste Minimization and Pollution Prevention .............................................................................................................. ECS-8 CDDL Activities, .............................................................................................................................................................. ECS-8 Environmental Issues ........................... , .................................................................... ;............................................................ ECS-8 Unplanned Waterborne Release ................................................................................................................................... ECS-8 EPA Interim Approval to Use Environmental Measurements for National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) Compliance .................................................................. , .......................................................... ECS-8 Erdman Brook Erosion Mitigation ................................................................................................................................. ECS-8 Safety Inspections of the WNYNSC Dams ...................................................................................................................... ECS-8 Project Assessment Activities in 2012 .....................................................................,............................................................ ECS-9 CHAPTER 1. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ******************.********************.*******************.************************************** 1-1 ISMS Implementation ............................................................................................................................................................... 1-1 EMS .......... :............................................................................................................................................................................... 1-1 Environmental Policy ................................. ;............................................ :................................................................................... 1-1 Environmental Aspects ............................................................................................................................................................. 1-1 Legal and Other Requirements .................................................................................................................................................. 1-2 Objectives and Targets ............................................................................................................................................................. 1-2 Environme.ntal Management Program ..................................................................................................................................... 1-2 Structure and Responsibility ..................................................................................................................................................... 1-2 CHBWV West Valley Decommissioning Team Environmental Policy ................................................................................. 1-3 Training, Awareness, and Competence ...................................................................................................:................................ 1-2 10 CFR 851, "Worker Safety and Health Program" ............................................................................................................ 1-2 Safety-Trained Supervisor Program ....................... ; ...............................................................,......................................... 1-10 Communication ...................................................................................................................................................................... 1-10 EMS Documentation, Document Control, and Records ........................................... ,............................................................. 1-10 Operational Control .........................................................;...................................................................................................... 1-10 NOA Interceptor Trench and Pretreatment System ......................................................................................................... 1-10 North Plateau Full-Scale PTW .......................................................................................................................................... 1-11 Emergency Preparedness and Response ................................................................................................................................ 1-11 Environmental Monitoring and Measurement ....................................................................................................................... 1-11 Environmental Management of Wastewater .................................................................................................................. 1-12 Environmental Management of Airborne Emissions ....................................................................................................... 1-12 Environmental Performance Measures .................................................................................................................................. 1-13 Dose Assessment .. :.......................................................................................................................................................... 1-13 Groundwater Monitoring ....................................................................................................: ........................................... 1-13 Environmental Management of Radiation Exposure ................ ,...................................................................................... 1-13 Nonconformance and Corrective and Preventative Action .................................................................................................... 1-13 vi WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Table of Contents CHAPTER 1. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM (concluded) QA Program ............................................................................................................................................................................ 1-13 Responsibility .................................................................................................................................................................. 1-13 Planning ........................................................................................................................................................................... 1-14 Training ............................................................................................................................................................................ 1-14 Control of Design, Procedures, Items, and Documents ..................................................... ,............................................. 1-14 Corrective Action ............................................................................................................................................................. 1-14 Documentation ............................................................................................................................................................... 1-14 Quality Control (QC) ............................................................................................................................................................... 1-14 Field QC ......................................, .................................................................................................................................... 1-15 Laboratory QC .................................................................................................................................................................. 1-15 Crosschecks ..................................................................................................................................................................... 1-15 Data ManagE;ment .............................. ,.................................................................................................................................... 1-16 Data Verification and Validation ............................................................................................................................................. 1-16 Data Assessment and Reporting ............................................................................................................................................. 1-16 Audits, Assessments, and Surveillances ................................................................................................................................. 1-17 EMS Audits ............................................................................................................................................................................. 1-17 External ISO 14001:2004 EMS Stage 1 Audit ................................................................................................................... 1-17 External ISO 14001:2004 EMS Registration Au.dit ........................................................................................................... 1-17 Internal EMS Assessment ................................................................................................................................................ 1-17 Other Environmental Audits and Assessments ...................................................................................................................... 1-18 FY 2012 ISMS and QA Effectiveness Review .................................................................................................................... 1-18 NVSDOH ELAP Audit of ELAB ........................................................................................................................................... 1-18 CHBWV Audit of GEL Laboratories .................................................................................. :....................... : .................. :.... 1-18 DOE and CHBWV Audits and Assessments ...................................................................................................................... 1-18 DOE-WVDP Oversight Assessment of RCRA Hazardous Waste Shipments ...................................................................... 1-18 DOE-WVDP Oversight Assessment .of Process for Reporting Spills/References of Petroleum Products ......................... 1-18 DOE-WVDP Oversight Audit of CHBWV Environmental Protection Programs, Surface Water, Drinking Water Quality,*and Groundwater Monitoring Programs ......................,. ... :............................................ :.................................... 1-18
- DOE-WV DP Oversight Assessment of the SP DES Program .............................................................................................. 1-18 CHBWV Regulatory Strategy Assessment of RCRA Hazardous/Mixed Waste Container Storage Management.. ............ 1-19 CHBWV Regulatory Strategy Assessment of New SPDES Permit Compliance ................................................................. 1-19 EMS Management Review ...................................................................................................................................................... 1-19 EMS Validation ....................................................................................................................................................................... 1-19 EMS Experiences ............................................................................................................:....................................................... 1-19 EMS Challenges ............................................................. ;................................................................................................. 1-19 EMS Best Practices/Lessons Learned .............................................................................................................................. 1-19 EMS Benefits to Agency Mission ..................................................................................................................................... 1-20 DOE-WVDP SSP Goals and Performance ................................................................................................................................ 1-20 Summary ................................................................................................................................................................................ 1-20 CHAPTER 2. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING .................................................................................................................. 2-1 Monitoring Program ................................................................................................................................................................. 2-1 Effluent Monitoring ........................................................................................................................................................... 2-1 Environmental Surveillance ............................................................................................................................................... 2-1 Data Evaluation .................................................................................................................................................................. 2-1 Waterborne Effluent Monitoring .............................................................................................................................................. 2-1 Waterborne Radiological Releases .................................................................................................................................... 2-2 SPDES Permit-Required Monitoring .................................................................................................................................. 2-4 Airborne Effluent Monitoring ................................................................................................................................................... 2-5 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Yeqr 2012 vii
Table of Contents CHAPTER 2. ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING (concluded) Airborne Effluent Monitoring (concluded) Radiological Air Emissions ................................................................................................................................................. 2-5 Ventilation and Emission Systems ..................................................................................................................................... 2-5 The MPPB Ventilation Stack .............................................................................................................................................. 2-5 Unplanned Radiological Airborne Release ........................................................................................................................ 2-5 Other On-Site Air Sampling Systems .................................................................................................................................. 2-6 Nonradiological Air Emissions ........................................................................................................................................... 2-6 Ambient Air Monitoring Program ..........................................................'. ........., ........................................................................ 2-6 New Ambient Air Network ................................................................................................................................................ 2-6 Environmental Surveillance .................................................................. .'................................................................................... 2-7
.Surface Water ..................................................................................................................................................................... 2-7 Drinking Water ...................................................................................................................:............................................ 2-12 Ambient Air ..................................................................................................................................................................... 2-12 Sediment and Soil ............................................................................................................................................................ 2-12 Food ................................................................................................................................................................................ 2-13 Environmental Radiation ................................................................................................................................................. 2-13 Meteorological Monitoring ............................................................................................................................................. 2-14 Special Projects ...................................................................................................................................................................... 2-14 Meteorological Station at the SDA and Stream Flow Monitoring ................................................................................... 2-14 Monitoring Program Changes ................................................................................................................................................. 2-15 Environmental Monitoring Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 2-15 CHAPTER 3. DOSE ASSESSMENT *.............................*....................................................................;.................................. 3-1 Radiation Sources at the WVDP .........................................................................................................................................*...... 3-1 Exposure Pathways ................................................................................................................................................................... 3-1 Land Use Survey and Population Data ...................................................................................................................................... 3-2 Dose Assessment Methodology ........................... :............................................ :............................................. :........................ 3-2 Determination of Radionuclide Concentrations in the Environment from Liquid and Airborne Releases ........................ 3-2 Radiation Dose .................................................................................................................................................................. 3-3 Units of Dose Measurement ............................................................................................................................................. 3-3 Dose to the Public .................................................................................................................................................................... 3-4 Predicted Dose From Airborne Emissions ................................................................................................................................ 3-4 Maximum Dose (Airborne) to an Off-Site Individual ......................................................................................................... 3-4*
Collective Population Dose (Airborne) ....................................................................... :...................................................... 3-5* Predicted Dose From Waterborne Releases ............................................................................................................................. 3-5 Radon-220 ......................... ; ............................................................................................................................................... 3-5 Maximum Dose (Waterborne) to an Off-Site Individual .................................................................................................... 3-7 Collective Population Dose (Waterborne) ......................................................................................................................... 3-7 Predicted Dose From All Pathways ........................................................................................................................................... 3-7 Calculated Dose From Food .............................................................................................................................................. 3-8 Risk Assessment ..................................................................................................................................................................... 3-11 Release of Materials Containing Residual Radioactivity ......................................................................................................... 3-11 Dose to Biota .......................................................................................................................................................................... 3-11 Summary ................................................................................................................................................................................ 3-13 CHAPTER 4. GROUNDWATER PROTECTION PROGRAM .................................................................................................... 4-1 Groundwater Monitoring Program (GMP) ............................................................................................................................... 4-1 Environmental Surveillance ............ ,.................................................................................................................................. 4-1 viii WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Table of Contents CHAPTER.4. GROUNDWATER PROTECTION PROGRAM (concluded) Groundwater Monitoring Program {GMP) (concluded) Groundwater Use and History ........................................................................................................................................... 4-1 Geology and Hydrogeology ...................................................................................................................................................... 4-1 Routine GMP ............................................................................................................................................................................ 4-4 Groundwater Monitoring Network ................................................................................................................................... 4-4 Groundwater Elevation Monitoring ..........................._. ...................................................................................................... 4-4 Groundwater Trigger Level Evaluation .............................................................................................................................. 4-4 Groundwater Screening Levels {GSLs) ............................................................................................................................... 4-4 North Plateau Strontium-90 Plume .......................................................................................................................................... 4-8 Monitoring at North Plateau Seeps ................................................................................................................................. 4-10 Monitoring at the Northeast Swamp Drainage ............................................................................................................... 4-10. Strontium-90 Plume Remediation Activities .......................................................................................................................... 4-10 Full-Scale PTW ................................................................................................................................................................. 4-10 PTW Performance Monitoring Plan (PTWPMP) .............................................................................................................. 4-11 North.Plateau GMP (NPGMP) ......................................................................................................................................... 4-11 PTW Protection and Best Management Plan .................................................................................................................. 4-11 NPGRS ............................................................................................................................................................................. 4-12 Pilot-Scale PTW ............................................................................................................................................................... 4-12 Other Groundwater Sampling Observations on the North Plateau ........................................................................................ 4-12 Monitoring Near Former Lagoon 1.................................................................................................................................. 4-12 Tritium in North Plateau Groundwater ........................................................................................................................... 4-12 Radioisotopic Sampling Results on the North Plateau .................................................................................................... 4-12 Results for Volatile and Semivolatile Organic Compounds (VOCs and SVOCs) ................................ ;............................... 4-12 Metals Sampling on the North Plateau ........................................................................................................................... 4-13 Groundwater Sampling Observations on the South Plateau: Weathered Lavery Till (WLT) and the NDA .............................. 4-13 Interim Measure (lM) ...................................................................................................................................................... 4"13 Radioisotopic Sampling Results on the South Plateau .................................................................................................... 4-13 Additional Monitoring and Investigations ...................................; ............................................ :............................................ : 4-15 Groundwater Monitoring Downgradient of the WTF ...................................................................................................... 4-15 Summary ................................................................................................................................................................................ 4-15 USEFUL INFORMATION **************************.*****.***********.**.***.**.********.****.***.**.**.*********************************..******************************** Ul-1 Radiation and Radioactivity .................................................................................................................................................... Ul-1 Radioactive Decay ................................................................................: ................................................................................. Ul-1 Some Types of Ionizing Radiation ........................................................................................................................................... Ul-2 Measurement of Radioactivity ............................................................................................................................................... Ul-2 Measurement of Dose ............................................................................................................................................................ Ul-3 Background Radiation ............................................................................................................................................................ Ul-3 Potential Health Effects of Radiation ..................................................................................................; ................................... Ul-3 Data Reporting ....................................................................................................................................................................... Ul-4 Limits Applicable to Environmental Media ............................................................................................................................. Ul-6 Dose Standards ............................................................................................................................................................... Ul-6 DOE DCS ........ :................................................................................................................................................................. Ul-6 SPDES Permit Requirements ........................................................................................................................................... Ul-6 CA~88-PC Computer Code .............................................................................................................................................. Ul-6 Water Quality Classifications, Standards, and Limits for Ambient Water ....................................................................... Ul-7 Potable Water Standards ................................................................................................................................................. Ul-7 Soil and Sediment Concentration Guidelines .................................................................................................................. Ul-7 Evaluation of Monitoring Data With Respect to Limits .......................................................................................................... Ul-7 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 ix
Table of Contents GLOSSARY *......*******..**********...*..*..*..********.*..********...*****.************************...********.**.*********........*********.**.*...***..**..******....*** GL0-1 ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS . ."****.....*.*******.....*******..*****.******.*****.**...************.*****.**.*...*..*.*******.***.*....*****.*****.*..*.** A&A-1 REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY ***......**.*.***...******************************************....*...**.*.....****.*****..*.*..*****.**.**.*......***.**.**** R&B-1 DISTRIBUTION **...*.****.*.*..**..*.*.....**.********...*.***..*.*******.*****************.********************.*****.*.**.**********..***.**********.*.**..*******.****** DST-1 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS *********...*..*************...*....**.*****.*****.****.....***********..*****.*****.*.*************......*..*.*...**.*******..*.***..*********** ACK-1 APPENDIX A. 2012 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM .**.***.*********.*.*.*********************..*..*..*****..**..*.**.***..*.************ A-1 Environmental Monitoring Program Drivers and Sampling Rationale ......................................................................................A-1 Sampling Schedule ................................................................................................................................................................... A-1 Sample Location Code .......................................................................................................................................................A-1 Sampling Type/Medium ......................................................... :********* ................................................................................. A-1 Collection Frequency/Total Annual Samples ..................................................................................................................... A-1 Measurements/Analyses .................................. :................................................................................................................ A-1 Index of Environmental Monitoring Program Sample Points ................................................................................................... A-3 Summary of Monitoring Program Changes in 2012 ..... ;......................................................................................................... A-18 APPENDIX B-1.
SUMMARY
OF WATER LIMITS, GUIDELINES,AND STANDARDS ................................................................. B-1 APPENDIX B-2. PROCESS EFFLUENT DATA *******.****.********************************.**********...********..***********.******************.******************** B-9 APPENDIX B-3. SPDES-PERMITIED STORM WATER OUTFALL DISCHARGE DATA *****.********....*.****.****.*.*.*******.******************. B-21 APPENDIX B-4. SITE SURFACE DRAINAGE, SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE, AND CONTAINED WATER DATA *.************.***.*********** B-37 APPENDIX B-5. AMBIENT SURFACE WATER DATA *.*..*.*********************.**********************.***************.*************.********************..*. B-41 APPENDIX B-6. POTABLE WATER {DRINKING WATER) DATA ******************.****.*.**..**..*..*...********** ~ ****************.*******.************** B-47 APPENDIX C.
SUMMARY
OF AIR MONITORING DATA *****.**.*************************.*.*.*. ~ ****.******************************************************* C-1 APPENDIX D-1.
SUMMARY
OF GROUNDWATER SCREENING LEVELS AND PRACTICAL QUANTITATION LIMITS ***********.****** D-1 APPENDIX D-2. GROUNDWATER MONITORING DATA ..************.*********...*************************..***********.************...********..**.******** 0-9 APPENDIX E.
SUMMARY
OF BIOLOGICAL DATA ***.**.*..*.***********.****************************************.***.**********************.*.**********.*..*** E-1 APPENDIX F.
SUMMARY
OF SOIL AND SEDIMENT MONITORING DATA *******.***************************.*.************ ; ***********...******.*.** F-1 APPENDIX G.
SUMMARY
OF DIRECT RADIATION MONITORING DATA ***********************************.***********************************.**..** G-1 APPENDIX H.
SUMMARY
OF QUALITY ASSURANCE CROSSCHECK ANALYSES **********.*****....***************************..*.*****.***..*****. H.-1 APPENDIX I. WEST VALLEY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT ACT ***.*******..**.********.***************************.********************.**************.**.* 1-1 x WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
. Table of Contents List of Figures INT-1 Location of the Western New York Nuclear Service Center ...................................................................................... INT-2 1-1 Annual Effective Dose Equivalent to the Maximally Exposed Off-Site lndividual. ...................................................... 1-14 2-1 Average Gross Beta and Strontium-90 Concentrations in Surface Water on the South Plateau at WNNDADR and WNERB53 Before and After the NOA Interim Measure (IM) was Installed ......................................................... 2-11 2-2 Average Concentration of Tritium in Surface Water at WNNDADR: 2003-2012 ........................................................ 2-11 2-3 10-Year Trends of Environmental Radiation Levels at Perimeter and Background Thermoluminescent Dosimeters (TLDs) ...................................................................................................................................................... 2-13 2-4 Wind Frequency and Speed From the Meteorological Tower {10-m and 60-m Elevations) January 1-December 31, 2012 ................................................................................................ .-................................................... 2-16 3-1 Comparison of Doses From Natural and Man-Made Sources to the Dose From 2012 WVDP Effluents ...................... 3-1 3-2 Dose Percent by Radionuclide in 2012 ......................................................................................................................... 3-6 3-3 Effective Dose Equivalent from Liquid and Airborne Effluents to a Maximally Exposed Individual Residing Near the WVDP ............................................................:............................................................................................. 3-10 3-4 Collective Effective Dose Equivalent From Liquid and Air Effluents to the Population Residing Within 50 Miles (80 km) of the WVDP ................................................................................................................................................. 3-10 4-1 Geologic Cross Sections of the North and South Plateaus at the WVDP ..................................................................... 4~3 4-2 North Plateau Strontium-90 Plume Plotted by Beta Data: 1994, 2002, 2012 .............................................................. 4-9 4-3 Annual Average Gross Beta Concentrations at Monitoring Wells Downgradient of the North Plateau Strontium-90 Plume Source Area .............................................................................................................................. 4-18 4-4 Annual Average Gross Beta Concentrations at Monitoring Wells Centrally Located Within the North Plateau Strontium-90 Plume .................................................................................................................................................... 4-18 4-5 Annual Average Gross Beta at Monitoring Wells Upgradient of the PTW ................................................................. 4-19 4-6 Annual Average Gross Beta at Monitoring Wells Downgradient of the PTW ............................................................. 4-19 4-7 Annual Average Gross Beta Concentrations at Seeps From the Northeast Edge of the North Plateau ..................... 4-20 4-8
- Annual Average Strontium-90 Concentrations at WNSWAMP ................................................................................... 4-20 4-9 Map View of the PTW ................................................................................................................................................ 4-21 4-10 Annual Average Gross Beta Concentrations at Monitoring Wells Near Former Lagoon 1. ........................................ 4-21 4-11 Concentrations of 1,2-DCE-t, 1,1,1-TCA, 1-1-DCA, and DCDFMeth at Well 8612 in the S&G Unit ............................ 4-22 4-12 Concentrations ofTributyl Phosphate at Monitoring Wells Near Former Lagoon 1 in the S&G Unit ........................ 4-22 4-13 Annual Average Gross Beta Concentrations at Monitoring Wells Downgradient of the NOA and at the NOA Trench ..................................................................................................................................;............................. 4-23 4-14 Volume of Water Pumped From the NOA Interceptor Trench ................................................................................... 4-24 APPENDIX A. 2012 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM A-1 West Valley Demonstration Project Base Map .......................................................................................................... A-19 A-2 On-Site Surface Water, Drinking Water, and Soil/Sediment Sampling Locations ....................................................... A-20 A-3 On-Site Storm Water Outfalls .................................................................................................................................... A-21 A-4 Rail Spur Storm Water Outfalls .................................................................................................................................. A-22 A-5 Off-Site Surface Water and Soil/Sediment Sampling Locations ................................................................................. A-23 A-6 On-Site Air Monitoring and Sampling Locations ........................................................................................................ A-24 A-7 Off-Site Ambient Air Monitoring and Sampling Locations ......................................................................................... A-25 A-8 North Plateau Groundwater Monitoring Network (includes Wells Used for Water-Level Measurements) .............. A-26 A-9 South Plateau Groundwater Monitoring Network (includes Wells Used for Water-Level Measurements) .............. A-27 A-10 Biological Sampling Locations ..............................................................................._. .................................................... A-28 A-11 Location of On-Site Thermoluminescent Dosimeters (TLDs) ..................................................................................... 4-29 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 xi
Table of Contents List of Figures lconcluded) APPENDIX A. 2012 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM {concluded) A-12 Location of Off-Site Thermoluminescent Dosimeters {TLDs) Within 5 Kilometers of the WVDP ......... :..................... A-30 A-13 Environmental Sampling Locations More Than 5 Kilometers From the WVDP .......................................................... A-31 A-14 Population by Sector Within 80 Kilometers of the WVDP {2002 Estimate) ................................................................ A-32 List of Tables INT-1 Historic Timeline of the WNYNSC and the WVDP .................................................................................................... INT-3 ECS-1 Compliance Status Summary for the WVDP in CY 2012 ........................................................................................ ECS-10 ECS-2 NEPA Documents Affecting DOE Activities at the WVDP ....................................................................................... ECS-19 ECS-3 WVDP Environmental Permits ............................................................................................................................... ECS-21 ECS-4 WVDP RCRA SSWMUs and Constituent SWMUs Identified in the RFI under the RCRA 3008(h) Order on Consent ................................................................................' ............................. :.............: ................................. ECS-25 ECS-5 Summary of Waste Management Activities at the WVDP During 2012 ................................................................ ECS-27 ECS-6 Recycled Materials for FY 2012 ...............................................: .............................................................................. ECS-28 ECS-7 EO 13514 Pollution Prevention/ Waste Minimization Accomplishments 2012 .................................................... ECS-28 ECS-8 . WVDP 2012 Air Quality Noncompliance Episodes ................................................................................................. ECS-29 ECS-9 Status of EPCRA {SARA Title 111) Reporting at the WVDP For CY 2012 .................................................................... ECS-29 ECS-10 Reportable Chemicals Above EPCRA 312 {SARA Title Ill) Threshold Planning Quantities Stored at the WVDP in 2012 ........................................................................................................................................................ ECS-30 ECS-11 WVDP SPDES Permit Limit Exceedances in 2012 ................................................................................................... ECS-30 ECS-12 WVDP Migratory Bird Nest Depredation Activities in Fiscal Year 2012 ................................................................. ECS-30 1-1 El.ements of the CY 2012 WVDP EMS Implementation ....... '. ................................................:........................................ 1-4 1-2 WVDP Significant Environmental Aspects .................................................................................................................... 1-8 1-3 WVDP EMS Objectives and Targets Completed in CY 2012 .......................................................................................... 1-9 1-4 2012 Radioactivity Releases Versus 10-Year Averages ................... :........................................................................... 1-12 1-5 Summary of Crosschecks Completed in 2012 ............................................................................................................ 1-16 1-6 DOE-SSP Goal Summary and Performance Status ..................................................................................................... 1-21 2-1 Total Radioactivity Discharged at Lagoon 3 {WNSPOOl) in 2012 and Comparison of Discharge Concentrations with DOE DCSs ............................................................................................................................................................. 2-2 2-2 Total Radioactivity Released at Northeast SWAMP {WNSWAMP) in 2012 and Comparison of Discharge Concentrations with DOE DCSs .................................................. ;................................................................................. 2-3 2-3 Total Radioactivity Released at Main Plant Stack {ANSTACK) in 2012 and Comparison of Discharge Concentrations with DOE DCSs .................................................................................................................................... 2-7 2-4 2012 Comparison of Environmental Monitoring Results with Applicable Limits and Backgrounds ............................ 2-8 2-5 WVDP 2012 Monthly Precipitation Totals Compared with 10-Year Monthly Averages .............................................. 2-14 3-1 Potential Exposure Pathways from the WVDP to the Local Off-Site Population .......................................................... 3-2 3-2 Summary of Annual Effective Dose Equivalents {EDEs) to an Individual and Population From WVDP Releases in 2012 ......................................................................................................................................................................... 3-8 3-3 WVDP Radiological Dose and Release Summary .......................................................................................................... 3-9 3-4 2012 Evaluation of Dose to Aquatic and Terrestrial Biota .......................................................................................... 3-12 4-1 Highlights of Groundwater Monitoring History at the WVDP and the WNYNSC ......................................................... 4-2 4-2 Summary of Hydrogeology at the WVDP ..................................................................................................................... 4-5 xii WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Table of Contents List of Tables <continued) 4-3 WVDP Groundwater Monitoring Network Sorted by Geologic Unit ............................................................................ 4-6 4-4 WVDP Groundwater Sampling and Analysis Agenda ................................................................................................... 4-7 4-5 2012 Groundwater Monitoring Overview by Geographic Area ................................................................................... 4-7 4-6 WVDP 2012 Groundwater Monitoring Overview by Monitoring Purpose ................................................................... 4-7 4-7 2012 Maximum Concentrations of Radionuclides in Groundwater at the WVDP Compared With WVDP Groundwater Screening Levels (GSLs) ....................................................................................................................... 4-14 4-8 2012 Summary of Maximum Concentrations or Organic Constituents in Select WVDP Groundwater Wells ............ 4-14 4-9 2012 Groundwater Monitoring Results Exceeding GSLs and Background Levels ...................................................... 4-16 USEFUL INFORMATION Ul-1 Unit Prefixes Used in this ASER ................................................................................................, ....... : ......................... Ul-4 Ul-2 Units of Measure Used in this ASER ................. :......................................................................................................... Ul-5 Ul-3 Conversion Factors Used in this ASER ........................................................................................................................ Ul-5 Ul-4 U.S. Department of Energy Derived Concentration Standards (DCSs) for Inhaled Air or Ingested Water (µCi/ml) ... Ul-8 APPENDIX A. 2012 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM A-1 WVDP Environmental Program Drivers and Sampling Rationale .................................................................................. A-2 A-2 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program .................................................................................................................... A-7 APPENDIX B-1.
SUMMARY
OF WATER LIMITS, GUIDELINES, AND STANDARDS ........................................................................ B-1 B-lA West Valley Demonstration Project State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Sampling Program .......... B-1 B-lB New York State Water Quality Standards and Guidelines ........................................................................................... B-4 B-lC New York State Department of Health/U.S. EPA Potable Water MCLs, MCLGs, and Raw Water Standards ................ B-6 B-lD Department of Energy (DOE) Derived Concentration Standards (DCSs) in Ingested Water ........................................ B-7 APPENDIX B-2. PROCESS EFFLUENT DATA ................................................................................................................................ B-9 B-2A Comparison of 2012 Lagoon 3 (WNSPOOl) Liquid Effluent Radioactivity Concentrations With U.S. DOE-Derived Concentration Standards (DCSs) ....................................................................................................................., B-9 B-2B 2012 SPDES Results for Outfall 001 (WNSPOOl): Water Quality ........................................................................... ;..... B-10 B-2C 2012 SPDES Results for Outfall 001 (WNSPOOl): Metals ............... ,.... :....................................................................... B-13 B-2D 2012 SPDES Results for Outfall 007 (WNSP007): Water Quality and Iron .................................................................. B-14 B-2E 2012 SPDES Results for Sums of Outfalls 001, 007, and 116: Water Quality .............................................................. B-16 B-2F 2012 Annual and Semiannual SPDES Results for Outfall 001: Metals, Water Quality and Organic Compounds ........ B-17 B-2G 2012 SPDES Action Level Requirement Monitoring Results for Outfalls 001 and 007 Metals and Water Quality ..... B-18. B-2H 2012 SPDES Results for Outfall OlB (WNSPOlB): Water Quality ................................................................................ B~18 B-21 2012 PARAQUAT DICHLORIDE Data for Storm Water Discharge Monitoring ............................................................. B-19 B-2J 2012 Radioactivity Results for Sewage Treatment Outfall (WNSP007) ...................................................................... B"19 APPENDIX B-3. SPDES-PERMITIED STORM WATER OUTFALL DISCHARGE DATA .................................................................... B-21 B-3A 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 1 ........................................................................... B-21 B-3B 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 2 ........................................................................... B-23 B-3C 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 3 ........................................................................... B-25 B-3D 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 4 ........................................................................... B-27 B-3E 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 5 .......................................................................... B-29 B-3F 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 6 ........................................................................... B-31 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 xiii
Table of Contents J.ist of Tables (continued) APPENDIXB-3. SPDES-PERMITIED STORM WATER OUTFALL DISCHARGE DATA (concluded) B-3G 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 7 ........................................................................... B-33 B-3H 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 8 .............................. :............................................ B-35 APPENDIX B-4. SITE SURFACE DRAINAGE, SUBSURFACE DRAINAGE, AND CONTAINED WATER DATA.................................... B-37 B-4A 2012 Radioactivity and pH in Surface Water at Facility Year Drainage (WNSP005) ................................................... B-37 B-4B Comparison of 2012 Radioactivity Concentrations in Surface Water at the North Swamp (WNSW74A) With U.S. DOE-Derived Concentration Standards (DCSs) ........................................................................................... B-38 B-4C Comparison of 2012 Radioactivity Concentrations in Surface Water at the Northeast Swamp (WNSWAMP) with U.S. DOE-Derived Concentrations Standards (DCSs) ......................................................................................... B-39 B-4D 2012 Radioactivity in Surface Water Drainage Between the NOA and SDA (WNNDADR) ......................................... B-39 APPENDIX B-5. AMBIENT SURFACE WATER DATA ............................... ,................................................................................... B-41 B-5A 2012 Radioactivity and pH in Surface Water Downstream of the WVDP in Cattaraugus Creek at Felton Bridge (WFFELBR) ...................................................................................................................................................... B-41 B-5B 2012 Water Quality of Surface Water Downstream of the WVDP in Buttermilk Creek at Thomas Corners Bridge (WFBCTCB) ...................................................................................................................................................... B-41 B-5C 2012 Radioactivity of Surface Water Downstream of the WVDP at Franks Creek (WNSP006) .................................. B-44 B-5D 2012 Radioactivity and pH in Surface Water at Erdman Brook (WNERB53) .............................................................. B-44 B-5E 2012 Radioactivity and pH in Surface Water at Franks Creek (WNFRC67) ................................................................. B-45 B-5F Historical Radioactivity and pH in Surface Water at Bigelow Bridge Cattaraugus Creek Background (WFBIGBR) ...... B-45 B-5G 2012 Radioactivity and pH in Surface Water at Fox Valley Road Buttermilk Creek Background (WFBCBKG) ............. B-46 APP,ENDIX B-6. POTABLE WATER.(DRINKING WATER) DATA .... '. ..........................................................................................: .... B-47 B-6A 2012 Water Quality Results in Potable Water at the WVDP ...................................................................................... B-47 B-68 2012 Water Quality Results in Utility Room' Potable Water (Entry Point 002) ........................................................... B-47 B-6C 2012 Water Quality Results in Utility Room Raw (Untreated) Water ......................................................................... 8-48 B-6D 2012 Biological and Chlorine Results From Various Site Tap Water Locations (Analyzed by Cattaraugus County Department of Health) .............................................................................:..................................................... B-48 B-6E 2012 Nitrate Results From the Utility Room Raw Tap Water (Analyzed by Cattaraugus County Department of Health) ................................................................................................................................................................... B-48 APPENDIX C.
SUMMARY
OF AIR MONITORING DATA ...................................................., .......................................................... C-1 C-1 Total Radioactivity Released at Main Plant Stack (ANSTACK) in 2012 and Comparison of Discharge Concentrations with U.S. DOE-Derived Concentration Standards (DCSs) .................................................................... C-1 C-2 i012 Effluent Airborne Radioactivity at Vitrification System HVAC (ANVITSK) ............... , ............................................ C-2 C-3 2012 Effluent Airborne Radioactivity at 01-14 Building (ANCSSTK) ............................................................................. C-2 C-4 2012 Airborne Radioactivity at Contract Size-Reduction Facility (ANCSRFK) ............................................................... C-3
- C-5 2012 Effluent Airborne Radioactivity at Supernatant Treatment System (ANSTSTK) ................................................... C-3 C-6 2012 Effluent Airborne Radioactivity at Container Sorting and Packaging Facility (ANCSPFK) .................................... C-4 C-7 2012 Effluent Airborne Radioactivity at Outdoor Ventilation Enclosures/Portable Ventilation Units (OVEs/PVUs) .... C-4 C-8 2012 Effluent Airborne Radioactivity at Remote-Handl~d Waste Facility (ANRHWFK) ................................................ C-5 C-9 2012 Ambient Airborne Radioactivity and Background Great Valley Location (AFGRVAL) .......................................... C-5 xiv WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Table of Contents List of Tables <concluded) APPENDIX C.
SUMMARY
OF AIR MONITORING DATA (concluded) C-10 2012 Gross Alpha and Beta Radioactivity at Nearsite Ambient Air Sampling Locations and at Background Great Valley Location (AFGRVAL) ................................................................................................................................. C-6 C-11 2012 Ambient Airborne Radioisotope Activity and Background Great Valley Location (AFGRVAL) ............................ C-7 APPENDIX D-1.
SUMMARY
OF GROUNDWATER SCREENING LEVELS AND PRACTICAL QUANTITATION LIMITS ....................... D-1 Groundwater Sampling Methodology ......................................................................................................................................D-1 Groundwater Screening Levels (GSLs) for Radiological Constituents ....................................................................................... D-1 Groundwater Screening Levels for Metals ...............................................................................................................................D-1 D-lA Groundwater Screening Levels (GSLs) for Radiological Constituents ........................................................................... D-3 D-lB Groundwater Screening Levels for Metals .................................................................................................................... D-4 D-lC Practical Quantitation Limits (PQLs) .............................................................................................................................D-5 APPENDIX D-2. GROUNDWATER MONITORING DATA ............................................................................................................:.D-9 D-2A 2012 Indicator Results From the Sand and Gravel Unit .............................................................. ,: ............................... D-9 D-2B 2012 Indicator Results From the Lavery Till-Sand Unit .............................................................................................. D-14 D-2C 2012 Indicator Results From the Weathered Lavery Till Unit...................................................................................... D-15 D-2D 2012 Indicator Results From the Unweathered Lavery Till ........................................................................................ B-16 D-2E 2012 Indicator Results From the Kent Recessional Sequence ...................................................................................0-17 D-2F 2012 Metals Results for Early Warning Monitoring Well 502 ....................................................................................0-17 D-2G 2012 Results for Metals in Groundwater Compared With WVDP Groundwater Screening Levels ........................... 0-18 D-2H 2012 Radioactivity in Groundwater From Selected Monitoring Locations ................................................................ 0-22 APPENDIX E.
SUMMARY
OF BIOLOGICAL DATA ..........................: ............................................................................................. E-1 E-1 2012 Radioactivity Concentrations in Milk .................................................................................................................... E-1 E-2 2012 Radioactivity Concentrations in Venison ............................................................................................................. E-2 E-3 2012 Radioactivity Concentration in Food Crops ......................................................................................................... E-2. E-4
- 2012 Radioactivity Concentrations in Edible Portions of Fish From Cattaraugus Creek ............................................... E-3 APPENDIX F.
SUMMARY
OF SOIL AND SEDIMENT MONITORING DATA ................................................................ :................... F-1 F-lA Radionuclide Comparison Values for Soils ................................................................................................................... F-1 F-2A 2012 Contaminants in On-Site Soils Downstream of the WVDP at Franks Creek (WNSP006) ..................................... F-2
- F-2B 2012 Contaminants in On-Site Soils From North Swamp (SNSW74A) ......................................................................... F-3 F-2C 2012 Contaminants in On-Site Soils From Northeast Swamp (SNSWAMP) ................................................................. F-4 F-2D
- 2012 Results in Surface Soils Collected at Air Stations Around the WVDP .................................................................. F-5 F-2E 2012 Radioactivity in Stream Sediments Around the WVDP ....................................................................................... F-6 APPENDIX G.
SUMMARY
OF DIRECT RADIATION MONITORING DATA ..................................................................................... G-1 G-1 Summary of 2012 Semiannual Averages of Off-Site TLD Measurements .................................................................... G-1 G-2 Summary of2012 Semiannual Averages of On-Site TLD Measurements .................................................................... G-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 xv
Table of Contents List of Tables (concluded) APPENDIX H.
SUMMARY
OF QUALITY ASSURANCE CROSSCHECKANALYSES ........................................................................... H-1 H-1 Crosscheck Sample Comparisons From the DOE Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP); Study 26, February 2012 .............................................................................................................................................. H-1 H-2 Crosscheck Sample Comparisons From the DOE Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP); Study 27; August 2012 .................................................................................................................................................H-5 H-3 Comparisons of Results from Crosscheck Samples Analyzed for Water Quality Parameters as Part of the EPA's 2012 Discharge Monitoring Report - Quality Assurance (DMR-QA) Study 32; (2012) for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) ..................................................................................................... H-10 APPENDIX I. WEST VALLEY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT ACT ..................................................................................................... 1-1 xvi WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
EXECUTIVE SUM MARY Purpose of This Report Close-In-Place, Phased Decision Making (the Preferred Alternative), and No Action. The Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER) for the West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP or Project) is Under the Phased Decisionmaking alternative, the work published to provide information about environmental *will be conducted in two phases. Actions identified un-conditions at the WVDP to members of the public, to the der Phase 1 Site Decommissioning are being carried out United States (U.S.) Department of Energy (DOE) Head- under a facilities disposition contract awarded in 2011 quarters, and to other interested stakeholders. In accor- and discussed below. During Phase 1, originally estimated dance with DOE Order 231.lB, "Environment, Safety, and to take about 10 years, a number of highly contaminat-Health Reporting," this document summarizes calendar ed facilities would be removed at an originally estimat-year (CY) 2012 environmental monitoring data, describes ed cost of approximately 1 billion dollars. Phase 1 also the performance of the WVDP's environmental manage- includes characterization work and focused studies that ment system (EMS), confirms compliance with environ- could facilitate future decisionmaking for the remaining mental standards and regulations, and highlights import- facilities or areas on the property. DOE intends to com-ant environmental monitoring programs. WVDP activities plete any remaining WVDP decisionmaking with its Phase cire conducted in cooperation with the New York State 2 decision (to be made within 10 years of the ROD) and Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA). expects to select either removal or in-place closure, or a combination of those two for the portions of the site for Major Site Programs which it has decommissioning responsibility. The com-plete EIS and the ROD can be viewed online at the DOE-The WVDP is located on the site of a former commercial WVDP website at www.wv.doe.gov. nuclear fuel reprocessing plant, which shut down in 1976. In 1980, Public Law 96-368 (the WVDP Act) was passed, On February 25, 2010, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Com-which authorized DOE to demonstrate a method for mission (NRC) transmitted to DOE-WVDP the "Technical solidifying approximately 660,000 gallons (gal) (2.S mil- Evaluation Report for the Phase 1 Decommissioning Plan lion liters [L]) of liquid high-level radioactive waste (HLW) (DP)," concluding that the Phase 1 DP was consistent with that remained at the site. HLW vitrification (VIT) began in the preferred alternative in the EIS. NRC also determined 1996 and was completed in September 2002. Activities that there is reasonable assurance that the proposed for decontaminating and dismantling the facilities and actions will meet the decommissioning criteria. for managing and disposing of wastes were then initiated and continued through CY 2012. DOE/NYSERDA Consent Decree. DOE and NYSERDA reached an agreement on the cost sharing for cleanup of Record of Decision. In April 2010, DOE released a Record the WVDP and the WNYNSC by signing a Consent Decree of Decision (ROD) for the Final Environmental Impact on August 17, 2010 in the U.S. District Court, Western Statement (FEIS) for the WVDP and the Western New District of New York. While the Consent Decree defines York Nuclear Service Center (WNYNSC) ("Final Environ- the cost-sharing agreement, it does not affect in any way mental Impact Statement for Decommissioning and/or what the cleanup will be or the end state of the WVDP Long-Term Stewardship at the West Valley Demonstra- and the WNYNSC. tion Project and Western New York Service Center," DOE/ EIS-0226, issued on January 29, 2010), allowing for the Facilities Disposition Contract. On June 30, 2011, DOE continued decommissioning and cleanup efforts at the awarded the Phase 1 Decommissioning arid Facility Dis-site using a two-part phased decisionmaking process. position Contract to CH2M HILL
- Babcock & Wilcox, LLC NYSE RDA published its corresponding decision under the (CHBWV). CHBWV is made up of CH2M HILL Construc-State Environmental Quality Review Act in a statement tors Inc., Babcock & Wilcox Technical Services Group, of findings in May 2010. In the FEIS, DOE and NYSERDA Inc., and Environmental Chemical Corporation. CHBWV's evaluated four alternatives: Sitewide Removal, Sitewide small business protege is American Demolition and Nuclear Decommissioning, Inc. The term of the contract WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 EXE-1
Executive Summary is approximately seven years. The scope of the contract NVSERDA intend to conduct these scientific studies to is divided into four primary milestones described below. facilitate interagency consensus to complete decommis-sioning of the remaining facilities. The contract status at the end of CY 2012 for the Facilities Disposition Contract scope of work includes: The Phase 1 Study process employs the ISP and teams of SMEs to evaluate the currently identified Potential Areas Milestone 1 - Completion of HLW canister relocation at of Study (PAS). During 2012, the following teams of SM Es the WVDP: Design of the system is complete and under started to evaluate their respective PAS to develop Phase review. The first activities will be construction of the stor- 1 Study recommendations: age pad and construction of numerous vertical storage casks.
- engineered barriers working group,
- exhumation working group; and Milestone 2 - Processing, shipment and disposal of all leg-
- erosion working group (EWG).
acy waste 0ff site: I.ow-level waste (LLW) shipment is 34% complete, mixed LLW shipment is 25% complete, and in- A climate change workshop was held in August 2012 dustrial and hazardous waste shipment is 100% complete. where climate scientists shared their ideas on climate change topics as they relate to decommissioning and/or Milestone 3 - Demolition and removal of the main plant long-term stewardship. process building (MPPB) and the VIT facility: Preparations continue for demolition, including removal of asbestos, In January 2013, the ISP provided comments to DOE and piping, ceiling grids, lighting and isolation of utility lines. NYSERDA on the document titled "Recommendations for Phase 1 Erosion Studies," prepared by the EWG, dated Milestone 4 - Completion of all work described in the July 20, 2012. Performance Work Statement (including Resource Con-servation and Recovery Act [RCRA] clean closure of the Environmental Characterization Support Services. A sep-remote handled waste facility (RHWF) and disposition of arate contract was awarded by DOE to Safety and Ecology the balance of site facilities: Demolition of several non- Corporation (SEC) to implement work associated with the radiological facilities was completed in 2012, including Phase 1 environmental characterization support services, the maintenance storage area, product storage area, old including work associated with the Phase 1 Character-warehouse and counting lab slabs, vehicle repair shop, ization Sampling and Analysis Plan and the Final Status VIT test facility waste area slab, VIT construction fabri- Survey Plan, which support Phase 1 decommissioning for cation shop slab, and waste tank farm (WTF) test tower. theWVDP. Demolition of the 01-14 building began in 2012 and was completed in 2013. Services to be provided by SEC may include, but are .not limited to: The CHBWV contract scope also includes continuing safe operation of the site which involves:
- soil, sediment, and groundwater characterization;
- environmental monitoring; and
- managing and maintaining site infrastructure;
- preparation of applicable regulatory documentation
- maintaining the lagoon system; supporting WVDP decommissioning activities.
- conducting environmental monitoring; and
- maintaining the underground HLW storage tanks, the Permeable Treatment Wall Performance. The full-NRC-licensed disposal area (NOA), and the north pla- scale PTW, installed in November 2010, has now been teau permeable treatment wall (PTW). monitored for two years. Performance monitoring to date indicates:
Phase 1 Studies. In September 2011, DOE and NYSERDA jointly awarded the Phase 1 Studies contract to Enviro
- Groundwater flow patterns in the PTW area are similar Compliance Solutions, Inc., an independent, agency-neu- to those observed prior to PTW construction, indicat-tral contractor that is jointly funded by the agencies to ing that the PTW installation did not significantly alter administer contracts for all Phase 1 Study activities, groundwater flow conditions on the north plateau; including contracting with the facilitator, subject matter experts (SMEs), the independent scientific panel (ISP),
and contractors performing the study activities. DOE and EXE-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Executive Summary
- Strontium-90 activity in groundwater wells inside the
- achieved lower relative humidity in the tanks and vaults PTW typically is substantially lower than strontium-90 further reducing the corrosion rate.
activity levels upgradient of the PTW; System operations continue to be monitored to reduce
- Geochemical differences were observed in ground- air infiltration, and individual air flows are adjusted to water that has migrated into and through the zeolite, maintain dry conditions in tanks 8D-1 and 8D-2, and to indicating that cation exchange (i.e., treatment) is oc- reduce the humidity in the remaining tanks and vaults.
curring; and Tank 80-4 Sampling and Characterization. Sampling of
- Strontium-90 activity in groundwater downgradient of the liquid, sludge, and internal walls to characterize the the PTW is decreasing. tank 8D-4 contents and internals for radiological and haz-ardous constituents was performed in CY 2012. The 8D-4
- Based on the January 2013 annual sampling results, characterization report was issued to DOE on August 30, there are no longer strontium-90 concentrations great- 2012. DOE and stakeholders now have current data to er than 1.0E-05 µCi/ml (10,000 picoCuries per liter develop disposition plans for tank 8D-4 and its contents.
[pCi/L]) in the downgradient western or central lobes and no detected strontium-90 activities above 1.0E-06 Waste-Incidental-to-Reprocessing (WIR) Evaluations for
µCi/ml (1,000 pCi/L) in the downgradient eastern lobe. HLW Processing Vessels. In February 2012, DOE issued the Final WIR determining that the melter used during These observations indicate the ongoing processes with- the HLW VIT process is LLW incidental to reprocessing. In in the PTW are currently achieving the remedial action February 2013, DOE issued the Final WIR Evaluation for objectives and the functional requirements of the PTW the Concentrator Feed Makeup Tank and the Melter Feed defined in the PTW Performance Monitoring Plan. Hold Tank, determining that these vessels are also LLW incidental to reprocessing. These vessels therefore may NOA. Water level data indicates the cap and slurry wall be managed under DOE's authority in accordance with installed in 2008 are causing the weathered Lavery till to the LLW requirements.
become dry in some areas as designed. Reduced water volume extracted from the interceptor trench since the This categorization as LLW enables the DOE to determine cap and slurry wall were installed also indicates ground- a disposal location for the vessels, and allows prepara-water flow through the NOA is effectively beirig reduced. tion for disposal to begin. Prior to shipment off site, it will be necessary to obtain Department of Transportation WTF Tank and Vault Drying System (T&VDS}. With an approval and route definition and coordinate a sched-ultimate goal of preventing the underground steel tanks ule for transportation. The vessels can then be shipped from corroding under ambient tank and vault conditions, to the selected facility for disposal. The WIR evaluation the WVDP installed a T&VDS in the WTF in 2010. The report indicates either the Nevada National Security Site T&VDS was designed to reduce the liquid volumes in the (formerly the Nevada Test Site) or the Waste Control Spe-tanks, thereby reducing the harmful effects of corrosion cialists facility in Texas are the most suitable off-site LLW on the underground waste tanks situated within concrete facilities under consideration for this waste disposal. vaults originally installed in the 1960s. During the first 26 months of operation (as of the end of February 2013), Safety Success. The radiological and hazardous work envi-the system has operated effectively, achieving the follow- ronment at the WVDP warrants strict adherence to safety ing results: procedures. During 2012, the WVDP workforce achieved a cumulative total of 5.5 million safe work hours without
- maintained dry conditions in tanks 8D-1 and 8D-2; a lost time work injury.
- reduced liquid levels below level indicators in the 8D-1 and 8D-2 vaults and pans; Environmental Management System
- reduced liquid levels in tanks 8D-3 and 8D-4 by about 1,400 gal (5,300 L) per tank, resulting in a residual The WVDP EMS satisfies the requirements of DOE Order of approximately 270 gal (1,022 L) in tank 8D-3 and 436.1, "Departmental Sustainability," and is a key part 4,700 gal (17,791 L) in tank 8D-4; of the WVDP Integrated Safety Management System.
- evaporated all liquid from tank 8D-3 and 8D-4 vault; In 2012, WVDP employees continued to demonstrate and their commitment to an all-inclusive approach to safety, WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 EXE-3
Executive Summary coordinating the EMS with other safety management and ued on and near the site to detect and evaluate changes work planning processes through the integrated environ- in the environment resulting from Project (or pre-Project) mental, health, and safety management program. CHBWV activities and to assess the effect of any such changes on received a certificate of registration for the International the environment or human population. Within the envi-Organization for Standardization 14001:2004 certification ronmental monitoring program, airborne and waterborne of it's EMS on July 31, 2012. (Refer to Chapter 1, "Environ- effluents were sampled and environmental surveillance mental Management System.") of the site and nearby areas was conducted. Compliance. WVDP management continued to provide
- Waterborne Radiological Releases strong support for environmental compliance in 2012.
Requirements and guidance from applicable state and Waterborne radiological releases from the site were federal statutes, executive orders, DOE orders, and stan- from two primary sources, lagoon 3 and a drainage dards are integrated into the Project's compliance pro- channel on the WVDP's north plateau that is contam-gram. inated with strontium-90 from pre-WVDP operations. During 2012, treated process water was released in
- There were no New York State Pollutant Discharge five batches from lagoon 3, totaling approximately Elimination System (SPDES) permit limit exceedances 8.3 million gallons (31.6 million L), and approximately in CY 2012. However, there were two noncompliance 13.5 million gallons (51.2 million L) flowed from the site events that occurred associated with submittal of dis- through the north plateau drainage channel.
charge monitoring reports. There were no unplanned releases of waterborne
- In 2011, a sample result for mercury exceeded the radioactivity in 2012.
SPDES permit limit causing discharge to outfall 007 to be suspended, as described in the 2011 ASER. Follow-
- Airborne Radiological Releases ing investigation and steps taken to address the source of the mercury, the discharge from outfall 007 was In 2012, the WVDP maintained seven NESHAP per-restarted on February 14, 2012. mits for point source release of radiological airborne emissions. The RHWF stack was permitted in 2012. The 0 Inspections by New York State Department of Environ- primary controlled air emission point at the WVDP is mental Conservation (NYSDEC) and the Cattaraugus the MPPB ventilation stack. Uncontrolled releases from County Department of Health verified Project compli- diffuse sources such as evaporation from the lagoons ance with the applicable environmental and health reg- currently contribute more to the site airborne radioac-ulations in 2012. tivity releases than controlled sources.
- WVDP waste management areas were inspected in CY There were no unplanned radiological airborne releas-2012 by NYSDEC and the U.S. Environmental Protec- es at the WVDP during 2012.
tion Agency. (EPA) to ensure compliance with the RCRA
*Interim Status Facility regulations. No findings were
- Estimated Dose noted.
In 2012, the estimated dose to a Maximally Exposed
- Requirements of the Emergency Planning and Commu- Off-Site Individual (MEOSI) from airborne emissions at nity Right-to-Know Act were met in 2012 by collecting the WVDP was 0.0027 mrem (0.000027 millisievert information about hazardous materials used at the ImSv]), about 0.027% of the 10-mrem NESHAP stan-Project and making this information available to the dard. Estimated dose from waterborne sources in appropriate emergency response organizations. 2012 was about 0.016 mrem (0.00016 msv), with 0.007 mrem (0.00007 mSv) attributable to liquid efflu-
- No exceedances to the EPA's National Emission Stan- ent releases and 0.009 mrem (0.00009 mSv) attribut-dards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) dose stan- . able to the north plateau drainage.
dard occurred in 2012. Total estimated dose to the MEOSI from both airborne Environmental Monitoring - Performance Indicators. As and waterborne. sources in 2012 was 0.019 mrem part of the WVDP EMS, environmental monitoring contin- (0.00019 *msv), about 0.019% of the annual 100-mrem EXE-4 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Executive Summary DOE standard. In comparison, the average dose to a *Conclusion member of the public from natural background sources is 310 mrem per year. In addition to demonstrating compliance with environ-mental regulations and directives, evaluation of data col-Estimated dose to the population from both air and lected in 2012 continued to indicate that WVDP activities water within a SO-mile (SO-kilometer) radius of the pose no threat to public health or safety, or to the envi-WVDP from DOE activities in 2012 was 0.07 person-rem ronment. (0.0007 person-Sv). This same population would have received approximately 522,000 person-rem from nat-ural background radiation in 2012.
- Dose to Biota A dose to biota evaluation for CY 2012 concluded that aquatic and terrestrial biota populations (both plants and animals) were not exposed to doses in excess of the existing DOE dose standard for native aquatic animal organisms (1 rad/day) nor the recommended thresholds for terrestrial animals (0.1 rad/day) and plants (1 rad/day).
- Nonradiological Releases Nonradiological releases from Project wastewater and storm water monitoring points were measured and documented under the site's SPDES permit. As noted previously in this chapter, there were no SPDES permit limit exceedances and two noncompliance events that occurred in 2012.
Quality Assurance {QA). In 2012, the QA program con-tinued for activities supporting the environmental and groundwater monitoring programs at the WVDP. As part of this ongoing effort, on-site and subcontract laborato-ries that analyze WVDP environmental samples partic-ipated in independent radiological and nonradiological constituent performance evaluation studies. In these studies, environmental test samples with concentrations only known by the testing agency, were analyzed by the laboratories. Of 250 performance evaluation analyses conducted by or for the WVDP, 99.0% fell within accep-tance limits. Numerous i.nspections, audits, assessments, and surveil-lances of components of the environmental monitoring program were conducted in 2012. Although actions were recommended to improve the program, nothing was found that would compromise the quality of data in this report* or the environmental monitoring program in gen-eral. Refer to "EMS Audits and Other Audits and Assess-ments" in Chapter 1. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 EXE-5
Executive Summary I I This page intentionally left 'blank EXE-6 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
INTRODUCTION Franks Creek, which receives drainage from Erdman Site Location Brook and Quarry Creek, flows into Buttermilk Creek, The West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP or Proj- wh ich enters Cattaraugus Creek and flows westward away ect) is located in western New York State (NYS), about from the WNYNSC. (See Figures A-1 and A-5 .) Cattaraugus 30 miles (mi) (SO kilometers [km]) south of Buffalo, New Creek ultimately drains into Lake Erie, to the northwest. York (Fig. INT-1). The WVDP facil ities currently occupy a security-fenced area of about 152 acres (61 hectares [ha]) Relevant Demographics within the 3,338-acre (1,351 ha) Western New York Nu-clear Service Center (WNYNSC or Center) located primari- Although several roads and a railway approach or pass through the WNYNSC, the public is prohibited from ly in the town of Ashford in northern Cattaraugus County. In 2009, the United States (U .S.) Department of Energy accessing the WNYNSC. A limited public deer hunting program managed by NYSERDA is conducted on a year-(DOE) released approximately 15.5 acres (6.3 ha) of the WVDP (on the north side of the New York State-licensed to-year basis in designated areas on the WNYNSC. No un-escorted public access is allowed on the WVDP premises. disposal area [SDA]) back to the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) as an SDA buffer area fo r conducti ng ongoing erosion mon itor- Land near the WNYNSC is used primarily for agricultu re and arboriculture. Downgradient of the WNYNSC, Cat-ing, control, and maintenance activities associated with taraugus Creek is used locally for swimm ing, canoeing, the SDA. and fishing. Although some water is taken from the creek to irrigate nearby golf course greens and tree farms, no General Environmental Setting pub lic drinking water is drawn from the creek before it Climate. Although extremes of 98.6°F (37°C) and -43.6°F flows into Lake Erie. Water from Lake Erie is used as a (-42°C) have been recorded in western New York, the public drinking water supply. climate is moderate, with an average annual temperature of 48 .5°F (9.2°C) (1981-2010, National Oceanic and The communities of West Valley, Riceville, Ashford Hollow, Atmospheric Administration, May 2013). Precipitation and the village of Springville are located within approxi-is markedly influenced by Lake Erie to the west and, to mately 5 mi (8 km) of the Project. The nearby population, a lesser extent, by Lake Ontario to the north. Regional approximately 9,200 residents within 6.2 mi (10 km) of winds are generally from the west and south at about 9 the Project, relies largely on an agricultural economy. No miles per hour (4 meters/second). maj or industries are located within this area. Ecology. The WNYNSC lies within the northern deciduous Historic Timeline of the WNYNSC and the forest biome, and the diversity of its vegetation is typical of the region. Equally divided between forest and open WVDP land, the site provides a habitat especially attractive to The following summary, presented in Table INT-1, depicts white-tailed deer and various indigenous migratory birds, a historic timeline for the WNYNSC and the WVDP begin-reptiles, and small mammals. No species on the federal ning with the establishment of the WNYNSC as a com-endangered species list are known to reside on the mercial nuclear fuel reprocessing facility, to the creation WNYNSC. of the WVDP, to the current Project mission. The summa-ry includes significant legal directives, major activities, Geology and Hydrology. The Project lies on NYS's and accompl ishments. Allegheny Plateau at an average elevation of about 1,300 feet (ft) (400 meters [m)) above mean sea level. The underlying geology includes a sequence of glacial sed iments above shale bedrock. The Project is drained by three small streams (Franks Creek, Quarry Creek, and Erdman Brook) and is divided by a stream valley (Erdman Brook) into two general areas : the north plateau and the south plateau . WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 INT-1
Introduction FIGURE INT-1 Location of the Western New York Nuclear Service Center N A Cattaraugus County SEE ENLARGED AREA BELOW Wyoming County 9 PROJECT (WVDP) SITE
~
c: 0 u
~ >.
c: c: u "0 F NKLINVILLE j
""CT 5"
u"
.c Cattaraugus County NEW YORK PENNS YLVANIA INT-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Introduction TABLE INT-1 Historic Timeline of the WNYNSC and the WVDP Year Activity 1954 The Federal Atomic Energy Act (AEA) promoted commercialization of reprocessing spent nuclear fuel. 1959 NYS established the Office of Atomic Development (OAD) to coordinate the atomic industry. The NYS OAD acquired 3,345 acres (1,354 ha) of land in Cattaraugus County, Town of Ashford (near West Valley), in 1961 western New York and established the WNYNSC. Davison Chemical Company established Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. (NFS) as a nuclear fuel reprocessing company, and 1962 reached an agreement with NYS to lease the WNYNSC (also referred to as "the Center"). NFS constructed and operated the commercial nuclear fuel reprocessing facility at the WNYNSC from 1966 to 1972. NFS processed 640 metric tons (mt) of spent reactor fuel at the facility, generating 660,000 gallons (gal) (2.5 million liters [L]) of highly radioactive liquid waste. A 5-acre landfill, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)-licensed disposal area 1966 (N DA) was operated for disposal of waste generated from the reprocessing operations from 1966 until 1986. Also, a 15-acre commercial disposal area, the SDA regulated by NYS agencies, under delegation of authority from the NRC, accepted low-level radioactive waste (LLW) from operations at the WNYNSC and from off-site facilities from 1963 until 1975. In 1972, while the plant was closed for modifications, more rigorous regulatory requirements were imposed upon fuel reprocessing facilities. NFS determined the costs to meet regulatory requirements of spent nuclear fuel reprocessing 1972 were not economically feasible. NFS then notified the NYSERDA, the successor to NYS OAD, in 1976 that they would discontinue reprocessing and would not renew the lease that would expire at the end of 1980. Water infiltrated into the SDA trenches and waste burial operations ceased. Between 197S and 1981, NFS pumped, 1975 treated, and released liquids to the adjacent stream. Redesigning the covers reduced, but did not eliminate, water accumulation in the trenches. The U.S. Congress passed Public Law 96-368, the West Valley Demonstration Project Act (WVDP Act), requiring the DOE to be responsible for solidifying the liquid high-level radioactive waste (HLW) stored in underground tanks, disposing of the waste that would be generated by solidification, and decontaminating and decommissioning the facilities used during the process. Per the WVDP Act, the DOE entered into a Cooperative Agreement with NYSE RDA that established 1980 the framework for cooperative implementation of the WVDP Act. Under the agreement, DOE has exclusive use and possession of a portion of the Center (i.e., WNYNSC) known as the Project Premises (approximately 167 acres). A supplement to the Cooperative Agreement (1981 amendment) between the two agencies set forth special provisions for the preparation of a joint Environmental Impact Statement (EIS). DOE and NRC entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that established specific agency responsibilities and arrangements for informal review and consultation by NRC. Because NYSERDA holds the license and title to the 1981 WNYNSC, NRC put the technical specifications. of the license (CSF-1) in abeyance to allow DOE to carry out the responsibilities of the WVDP Act. West Valley Nuclear Services (WVNS), a Westinghouse subsidiary, was chosen by DOE to be the management and 1982 operating contractor. WVNS commenced operations at the WVDP on February 28, 1982. Before discontinuing fuel reprocessing operations, NFS had accepted 750 spent fuel assemblies which remained in storage in the on-site fuel receiving and storage (FRS) area. Between 1983 and 1986, 625 of those assemblies were returned to the utilities that owned them. In 1983, NYSERDA assumed management responsibility for the SDA and 1983 focused efforts to minimize infiltration of water into the trenches. In the 1990s, instaflation of a geomembrane cover over the entire SDA and an underground barrier wall were successful in eliminating increases in trench water levels. The DOE selected the vitrification (VIT) process as the preferred method for solidifying the HLW into glass. Nonradioactive testing of a full-scale VIT system was conducted from 1984-1989. NFS entered into an agreement with 1984 DOE in which DOE assumed ownership of the remaining 125 fuel assemblies in the FRS pool and the responsibility for their removal. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 INT-3
Introduction TABLE INT-1 {continued) Historic Timeline of the WNVNSC and the WVDP Year Activity A large volume of radioactive, non-HLW would result from WVDP activities. On-site disposal of most of this waste was evaluated in an Environmental Assessment {EA [DOE/EA-0295, April 1986]), and a finding of no significant impact was issued. The Coalition on West Valley Nuclear Waste (The Coalition) and the Radioactive Waste Campaign filed suit 1986 contending an EIS should have been prepared. The NYS Department of Environmental Conservation {NYSDEC) was authorized by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to administer the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act {RCRA) hazardous waste program. A decision to potentially dispose of LLW at the Project led to a legal disagreement between DOE, The Coalition, and the 1987 Radioactive Waste Campaign. The lawsuit was resolved by a Stipulation of Compromise which states that LLW disposal at the site and the potential effects of erosion at the site must be included in a comprehensive EIS. In December 1988, the DOE and NYSERDA issued a Notice of Intent (NOi) in the Federal Register (FR) to prepare an EIS in accordance with Section 102(2)(C) of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and Section 8-0109 of the New York State Environmental Quality Review (SEQR) Act. To prepare for VIT, the integrated radwaste treatment system was 1988 constructed to process liquid supernatant from the underground HLW tanks by removing most of the radioactivity in the supernatant, concentrating the liquid, and blending it with cement. The HLW sludge layer was then washed to remove soluble salts. The water containing the salts was also stabilized into cement. About 20,000 drums of cement-stabilized LLW were stored in the aboveground drum cell. The process was completed in 1995. Organic solvent was observed in a groundwater monitoring well immediately downgradient of the NOA in 1983. Following characterization of the area, an interceptor trench bordering the northeast and northwest boundaries of the NDA and a liquid pretreatment system (LPS) were built in 1990-1991. The trench was designed to collect liquid that might migrate from the NOA and the LPS was designed to recover free organic product (if present) from the recovered 1990 liquid. To date, no organic product has been detected in the interceptor trench water; therefore, the water has been pumped and treated through the LLW treatment system. In 1990, NYS was granted the authority to regulate the hazardous waste constituents of radioactive rriixed waste. Subsequently, a Title 6 New York State Official Compilation of Codes, Rules, and Regulations (NYCRR) RCRA Part 373-3 (Part A) Permit Application for the WVDP was filed with NYSDEC for storage and treatment of hazardous and mixed wastes. In 1992, DOE and NYSERDA entered into a RCRA §3008(h) Administrative Order on Consent (Consent Order) with NYSDEC and the EPA. The Consent Order pertained to management of hazardous waste and/or hazardous constituents 1992 from* solid waste management units (SWMUs) at the WVDP. It also required DOE and NYSERDA to perform a RCRA Facility Investigation (RFI) at the WNYNSC to determine if there had been or if there was potential for a release of RCRA hazardous constituents. Final RFI reports were submitted in 1997, *completing the Consent Order investigative activities. In 1993, gross beta activity in excess of 1.0E-06 microcuries per milliliter (µCi/ml) (the applicable DOE Derived 1993 Concentration Guide [DCG] for strontium-90) was detected in surface water on the north plateau, in the vicinity of sampling location WNSWAMP. The gross beta radioactivity was determined to be strontium-90. Extensive subsurface investigations delineated the extent of the strontium-90 plume and determined that the plume originated beneath the southwest corner of the main plant process building (MPPB) during NFS operations and migrated 1994 toward the northeast quadrant of the north plateau. A second lobe of contamination was attributed to the area of former lagoon 1, which was backfilled in 1984. In 1995, a groundwater recovery system consisting of three wells was installed on the north plateau to extract and treat the strontium-90-contaminated groundwater. In 1999, a pilot-scale permeable treatment wall (PTW) was constructed to 1995 test this passive in-situ remediation technology. The VIT building shielding was installed in 1991, the slurry-fed ceramic melter was assembled in 1993, and the remaining major components were installed and tested by the end of 1994. In 1995, the VIT facility was completed, fully tested, and "cold operations" began. INT-4 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Introduction TABLE INT-1 (continued) Historic Timeline of the WNYNSC and the WVDP Year Activity The DOE and NYSE RDA issued a draft EIS (DEIS) for completion of the WVDP and closure or long-term management of the WNYNSC. Following evaluation of the public comments on the DEIS, the Citizen Task Force was convened to enhance stakeholder understanding and input regarding the WVDP/WNYNSC closure process. VIT operations began in 1996 and continued into 2002, producing 275 ten-foot-tall stainless-steel canisters of hardened radioactive glass containing up to 1996 12 million curies of radioactive material (primarily cesium/strontium, without radioactivity from daughter products included). The glass melter was shut down in September 2002. NYSDEC and DOE entered into an Order on Consent negotiated under the Federal Facilities Compliance Act (FFCA) for handling, storage, and treatment of mixed wastes at the WVDP. The Seneca Nation of Indians Cooperative Agreement was signed in 1996 to foster government-to-government relationships between the Seneca Nation and the U.S. government, as represented by DOE. VIT expended materials processing was initiated to begin processing unserviceable equipment from the VIT facility. This 1999 success helped in developing a remote-handled waste facility (RHWF) to process large-scale, highly contaminated equipment excessed during decontamination and decommissioning activities: 2000 Restructuring of the work force and construction of the RHWF began. The 125 spent fuel assemblies that remained in storage at the WVDP since 1975 were prepared for transport to the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL). Initial decontamination efforts began in two significantly contaminated areas in the MPPB, the process mechanical cell and the general purpose cell, to place the 2001 cells in a safer configuration for future facility decommissioning. DOE published formal notice in 66 FR 16447 to split the EIS process into (1) the WVDP Waste Management EIS, and (2) the Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship EIS at the WVDP and the WNYNSC. NRC issued "Decommissioning Criteria for the West Valley Demonstration Project (M-32) at the West Valley Site; Final 2002 Policy Statement" (67 FR 5003). 2003 The remaining 125 spent fuel assemblies were shipped to !NEEL, allowing for decontamination of the FRS to begin. The RHWF became operational. Major decontamination efforts continued and site footprint reduction began as 20 2004 office trailers were removed. In December, the 6 NYCRR Part 373-2 Permit Application (i.e., Part B) was submitted to NYSDEC. In June, the DOE published its final decision on the "WVDP Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement (68 FR 26587)." The DOE implemented the preferred alternative for the management of LLW and mixed LLW. The decision on transuranic (TRU) waste was deferred, and the HLW canisters will remain iri on-site storage until they can be shipped to 2005 a repository. In November, the WVDP was downgraded to a Category 3 nuclear facility, marking the first time in the site's history that it has been designated the least of the three DOE nuclear facility designations. The categorization is based on amounts, types, and configuration of the nuclear materials stored and their potential risks. An EA (DOE/EA-1552) evaluating the proposed decontamination, demolition, and removal of 36 facilities was issued. By the end of 2006, 11 of the 36 structures were removed. The DOE-WVDP office initiated a collaborative, consensus-based team process, referred to as the "Core Team," th,at involved NYSERDA, EPA, the New York State Department of 2006 Health (NVSDOH), N RC, and NYSDEC. This team brought individuals with decision making authority together to resolve challenging issues surrounding the WVDP EIS process and to make recommendations to move the Project toward an "Interim End-State" prior to issuance of the "Final EIS for the Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship at the WVDP and the WNYNSC." Shipment of the cement-filled LLW drums was initiated. Demolition and removal of four more structures identified under DOE/EA-1552 was completed. On June 29, 2007, DOE awarded West Valley Environmental Services, LLC (WVES) a four-year contract (Contract DE-AC30-07CC30000) to 2007 conduct the next phase of cleanup operations at the WVDP. The remaining drums of cemented LLW in the drum cell were packaged and shipped to the Nevada Test Site for disposal. In the fall of 2007, an interim measure to minimize water infiltration into the NOA was initiated with site surveys and soil borings. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 INT-5
Introduction TABLE INT-1 {concluded} Historic Timeline of the WNVNSC and the WVDP Year Activity During 2008, a trench was excavated along two sides of the NOA, on the south plateau. The trench was backfilled with bentonite and soil to form a slurry wall, a low-permeability subsurface barrier to infiltration. A geomembrane cover was placed over the entire landfill. On the north plateau, additional subsurface soil and groundwater samples were collected in the summer and fall of 2008 to further characterize chemical and radiological 2008 constituents within the contaminated groundwater plume beneath and downgradient of the MPPB. The revised DEIS for Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship at the WVDP and WNYNSC was issued in December for public review, which continued through September 8, 2009. Concurrently, the Proposed Phase 1 Decommissioning Plan (DP) for the WVDP was prepared and submitted to NRC. Extensive characterization was completed on the north plateau in 2009 to delineate the leading edge of the subsurface strontium-90 groundwater plume and to find a suitable material to capture and retain the 2009 contamination. DOE released approximately 15.5 acres (6.3 ha) of the WVDP on the north side of the SDA back to NYSERDA. In January, DOE and NYSERDA issued the final EIS (FEIS) for the WVDP and the WNYNSC (DOE/EIS-0226). The phased decisionmaking alternative was selected as the preferred alternative. The phase 2 decision was deferred for no more than 10 years. In February, NRC issued a Technical Evaluation Report (TER) for the DP, concluding that the DP was consistent with the preferred alternative in the EIS. A SEQR notice of completion for the EIS and its acceptance by NYSERDA was issued on January 27. On April 14th, DOE issued the Record of Decision (ROD) for the EIS, and on May 12, NYSERDA issued a SEQR Findings Statement, selecting the phased decision-making 2010 alternative. On August 17th, DOE and NYSERDA reached an agreement and signed a Consent Decree that formally defined the cost sharing for cleanup of the WVDP and the WNYNSC. In September, a revised RCRA Part 373-2 Permit Application was submitted to NYSDEC. An 860-foot-long full-scale PTW near the leading edge of the strontium-90 plume was installed and completed. The Tank and Vault Drying System (T&VDS) was installed to reduce the harmful effects of corrosion on the underground waste tanks. MPPB cell deconta_mination and deactivation activities continued. DOE awarded the Phase 1 Decommissioning and Facility Disposition contract to CH2M HILL* B&W West Valley, LLC (CHBWV) on June 29, 2011. The "continuity of contract" period extended to August 29, 2011 during which time work activities were transitioned, environmental monitoring continued, and licenses and permits were transferred to CHBWV. A separate contract was awar¢ed to Safety and Ecology Corporation to implement work associated with 2011 the Phase 1 characterization support services, which are requirements of the Phase 1 DP. In September 2011, DOE and NYSERDA jointly awarded a Phase 1 Studies contract to Enviro Compliance Solutions, Inc. to identify and implement the Phase 1 Studies. The objective of the studies is to use technical experts to conduct scientific studies that will facilitate interagency consensus for decision making in the Phase 2 decommissioning process. CHBWV continued work on the Phase 1 Decommissioning Facilities Disposition Contract, including design of the HLW canister relocation and storage system, continued legacy waste shipment, preparation for demolition of the MPPB and VIT facility, and nonradiological demolition of Balance of Site Facilities (BOSF). Demolition of the 01-14 building began in 2012 and was completed in 2013. DOE issued a final Waste Incidental to Reprocessing (WIR) Evaluation for the HLW melter in February 2012. DOE also issued a second WIR for the Concentrator Feed Makeup Tank {CFMT) 2012 and Melter Feed Hold Tank (MFHT) in February 2013, determining that these vessels are LLW incidental to reprocessing and therefore may be managed under DOE's authority in accordance with the requirements of LLW. Phase 1 Studies teams of s_ubject matter experts (SM Es) continued development of recommendations for the identified areas of study. Environmental characterization services performed in 2012 included characterization of two reference areas, the HLW canister interim storage area and characterization of two building footprints following demolition. INT-6 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE
SUMMARY
Compliance Program 2012 Accomplishments and Highlights at DOE is currently focusing on accomplishing the Phase 1 theWVDP decommissioning activities specified in the ROD for the In August 2011, CHBWV began performing the Phase EIS for Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship I Decommissioning and Facility Disposition activities of the WVDP and the WNYNSC. for DOE. The term of the Phase I Decommissioning and Facility Disposition contract is from August 2011 to Activities at the WVDP are regulated by various federal June 30, 2017 and includes the following scope: and state, public, worker, and environmental protec-tion laws. These laws are administered primarily by the
- packaging and relocating canisters of HLW to a new EPA, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, the U.S. Army interim dry storage; Corps of Engineers, NYSDEC, and NYSDOH through pro-
- processing and shipping legacy waste; grams and regulatory requirements for permitting,
- dismantling and removing the VIT facility and the reporting, inspecting, self-monitoring, and auditing.
MPPB;
- removing ancillary facilities; and Table ECS-1 describes the WVDP's compliance status with
- continuing safe operations of the site, including:
applicable environmental statutes, DOE directives, execu-managing and maintaining site infrastructure; tive orders (EOs), and state laws and regulations applica-conducting environmental monitoring; ble to the Project activities. maintaining the underground HLW storage tanks, the NDA, and the north plateau PTW; and Table ECS-2 presents a summary of the significant NEPA maintaining the lagoon system. document history. An update of NEPA activities is provid-ed later in this chapter.
- 2012 Major Accomplishments. Major accomplishments towards achieving Phase I Decommissioning and Facility EPA, NYSDEC, and DOE have established standards for Disposition included:
effluents that are intended to protect human health, safe-ty, and the environment. DOE applies to EPA for permits
- developing the design for the HLW canister storage sys-to release limited amounts of radiological constituents tem;*
to the air and applies to NYSDEC for permits to release
- removing waste materials from the MPPB as necessary limited amounts of nonradiOlogical constituents to the air for canister movement;
. and water, in concentrations determined to be safe for
- shipping legacy waste off site for disposal; humans and the envfronment. In general, the permits
- preparing the MPPB and VIT facility for demolition; describe release points, specify management and report-piping removal and asbestos abatement; and ing requirements, list discharge limits on those pollutants isolating utilities and off-gas piping; likely to be present, and define the sampling and analysis
- initiating demolition of the 01-14 building; regimen. Releases of radiological constituents in water
- completing demolition of several minor facilities; are subject to the requirements in DOE Orders 458.1
- establishing an off-site ambient air monitoring network (Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment, in support of facility demolition; and Change 2) and DOE-STD-1196-2011 (Derived Concentra-
- receiving final NYSDEC approval of RCRA closure of the tion Standards [DCSs]). A summary of the WVDP environ-Hazardous Waste Storage Lockers (HWSLs).
mental permits is found in Table ECS-3. (See the compli-ance tables at the end of this chapter.) WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 ECS-1 __J
Environmental Compliance Summary State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) by the WVDP have had a significant impact on reduc-Permit Noncompliance Events. During calendar year ing overall discharges of mercury from WVDP effluents. (CY) 2012, there were no SPDES permit limit exceedanc-es. However, there were two noncompliance events that PTW Performance. Since completion of the full-scale occurred associated with submittal of discharge monitor- PTW, performance monitoring has indicated the follow-ing reports. ing:
- On March 20, 2012, NYSDEC issued a Notice of Vio-
- Groundwater flow patterns in the PTW area are similar lation to the WVDP for failure to submit a complete to those observed prior to PTW construction, indicating SPDES Discharge Monitoring Report (DMR) for the peri- that the PTW installation did not significantly alter gen-od of January 1 through January 31, 2012. A conference eral groundwater flow conditions on the north plateau; call was held on March 30 to discuss this matter, and it was confirmed that a complete version of the DMR in
- Strontium-90 activity in groundwater wells inside the question was received by the NYSDEC Region 9 office in PTW typically is substantially lower than strontium-90 Buffalo, NY. The WVDP submitted three re-signed pages activity levels upgradient of the PTW; of the DMR to the NYSDEC Division of Water in Albany, NY, and on April 12, 20i2, NYSDEC issued correspon-
- Geochemical differences were observed in groundwa-dence rescinding the Notice of Violation. ter that has migrated into and through the PTW zeolite, indicating that cation exchange (i.e., treatment) is oc-
- On March 13, 2012, NYSDEC issued correspondence to curring; and the WVDP documenting the plan to modify the report-ing periods for annual and semiannual SPDES outfall
- Strontium-90 activity in groundwater downgradient of sampling to fall on calendar reporting periods. NYSDEC the PTW is decreasing .
. provided new DMR forms and requested that 2011 annual and semiannual results be resubmitted on the
- Based on the January 2013 annual sampling results, new forms: On March 29, 2012, the 2011 results, which there are no longer strontium-90 .concentrations great-were all within effluent discharge limits, were resub- er than 1.0E-5 µCi/ml (10,000 picoCuries per liter mitted on the new DMR forms. Since the resubmitted [pCi/l]) in the downgradient western or central lobes forms contained the new SPDES permit limits (effective and no detected strontium-90 activities above 1.0E-6 July 1, 2011), a March 2011 sample result for hexachlo- µCi/ml (1,000 pCi/l) in the downgradient eastern lobe.
robenzene appeared to be non-compliant, although, it was within permit limits in effect at the time of sam- These observations indicate the ongoing processes with-pling. Although this was explained on the transmittal in the PTW are currently achieving the remedial action letter to NYSDEC with a note added to the bottom of objectives and functional requirements of the PTW the DMR form, NYSDEC recorded this submittal as the defined in the PTW Performance Monitoring Plan. second noncompliance event for 2012. Waste Tank Farm (WTF) and the T&VDS. With an ulti-CY 2011 SPDES Permit Mercury Exceedance. As described mate goal of preventing the underground steel tanks in the 2011 annual site environmental report {ASER), from corroding under ambient tank and vault condi-discharge from outfall 007 at the wastewater treatment tions, the WVDP installed a T&VDS in the WTF in 2010. facility (WWTF) was suspended in 2011 due to a result The T&VDS was designed to reduce the liquid volumes in for mercury exceeding the SPDES permit limit. Following the tanks, and thereby the harmful effects of corrosion investigation and steps taken to address this issue, on Feb- on the underground waste tanks situated within concrete ruary 9, 2012, NYSDEC was notified of the pending restart vaults originally installed in the 1960s. During the first 26 of the WWTF, and with confirmatory laboratory results, months of operation (as of the end of February 2013), the the discharge from outfall 007 was restarted on February system has operated effectively, achieving the following 14, 2012. On June 27, 2012, the WVDP submitted a Mer- results: cury Minimization Program Report per the SPOES permit. The report identified actions implemented to reduce e maintained dry conditions in tanks 80-1 and 8D-2; mercury discharges at effluent discharge points, and
- reduced liquid levels below level indicators in tanks concluded that, based on obtained results, actions taken 80-1 and 80-2 vaults and pans; ECS-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Environmental Compliance Summary
- reduced liquid levels in tanks 8D-3 and 8D-4 by about evaluate tbe extent to which a proposed action, not cate-1,400 gal (5,300 L) per tank resulting in a residual gorically excluded, will affect the environment.
270 gal (1,022 L) in tank 8D-3 and 4,700 gal (17,791 L) in tank 8D-4; Based on the analyses presented in an EA and consider-
- evaporated all liquid from 8D-3/8D-4 vault; and ing regulatory agency, stakeholder, and public comments,
- achieved lower relative humidity in the tanks and DOE may determine that the proposed action is not a ma-vaults, further reducing the corrosion rate. jor federal action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment within the meaning of NEPA. There-System operations continue to be monitored to reduce fore, DOE may issue a notice indicating the finding of no air infiltration, and individual air flows are adjusted to significant impact (FONSI) and therefore would not be maintain low humidity in the tanks and vaults. required to prepare an EIS.
Tank 80-4 Sampling and Characterizations. Sampling of If a proposed action has potential for significant environ-the liquid, sludge and internal walls to characterize the mental effects, an EIS would be prepared that describes tank 8D-4 contents and internals for radiological and haz- proposed alternatives to an action and explains the ardous constituents was performed in CY 2012. The 8D-4 effects of each . Based on the analyses presented, and characterization report was issued to DOE on August 30, considering regulatory agency and public input, DOE 2012. DOE and stakeholders now have current data to will determine the preferred alternative and issue a ROD develop disposition plans for tank 8D-4 and its contents. regarding the action . WIR Evaluation for the WVDP Melter, CFMT, and MFHT. Since the Project began, a number of proposed site activ-The melter, CFMT, and MFHT, which were used during ities have warranted environmental impact evaluations. the HLW VIT process, were flushed during shutdown A summary of the significant NEPA document history is and characterized for radioactivity. The DOE-WVDP per- presented in Table ECS-2. formed evaluations to determine if the components met the WIR criteria of DOE Manual 435.1-1, "Radioactive EIS Issued. On April 14, 2010, DOE issued the ROD for the Waste Management Manual." Based on the final WIR EIS, "Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship evaluations for the melter (February 2012) and CFMT and at the WVDP and the WNYNSC" (DOE/EIS-0226), select-MFHT (February 2013), and based on consultation with ing the phased decisionmaking alternative. In Phase 1, the NRC, DOE made final determinations that the melter, DOE will decommission the MPPB, the VIT facility, RHWF, CFMT, and MFHT may be disposed of as LLW at an appro- the wastewater treatment lagoons, and a number of priate LLW disposal facility, pursuant to DOE's -authority other facilities. No decommissioning actions will be tak-under the AEA of 1954, as amended, and in accordance en on the underground HLW tanks or the NDA, and the with the provisions of Chapter IV of DOE Manual 435.1-1, HLW canisters will be safely stored on site. NYSERDA will "Radioactive Waste Management Manual." manage the SDA. Phase 1 was estimated to take up to 10 years, during which time DOE will manage the site's NEPA remaining facilities in a safe manner. The Phase 2 decision will be made within 10 years of the EIS ROD. During th is NEPA requires DOE to consider the overall environmen- time, DOE and NYSERDA intend to conduct additional sci-tal effects of its proposed actions. Draft documents are entific studies (i.e., Phase 1 Studies) in order to facilitate prepared that describe potentia l environmental effects interagency consensus to complete decommissioning of associated with proposed Project activities. The level of the remaining facilities . evaluation and documentation depends upon whether the action constitutes a major federal action significant- Phase 1 Studies. In September 2011, DOE and ly affecting the quality of the human environment within NYSERDA jointly awarded the Phase 1 Studies contract the mean ing of NEPA. The categories of documentation to Enviro Compliance Solutions, Inc., an independent, include categorical exclusion (CX), environmental assess- agency-neutral contractor that is jointly funded by the ment (EA), and EIS. agencies to administer contracts for all Phase 1 Study activities, including contracting with the facil itator, SM Es, CXs document actions that, by their nature, will not have the Independent Scientific Panel, and contractors per-a sign ificant effect on the environment. EAs are used to form ing the study activities. During 2012, the following WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 ECS-3
Environmental Compliance Summary teams of SM Es evaluated their respective Potential Areas On February 25, 2010, NRC transmitted to DOE-WVDP a of Study to develop Phase 1 Study recommendations: Technical Engineering Report for the Phase 1 DP, conclud-ing that the Phase 1 DP was consistent with the preferred
- engineered barrie rs working group; alternative in the EIS. NRC also determined that there is
- exhumation working group; and reasonable assurance that the proposed actions wil l meet
- erosion working group. the decommissioning criteria.
A climate change workshop was also he ld in August 2012, Phase 1 Characterization Sampling and Analysis Plan and, with contributions from climate scientists, a Climate (CSAP) and the Phase 1 Final Status Survey Plan (FSSP) Gu idance Document for Phase 1 Stud ies was prepared . for the WVDP. The Phase 1 DP required the preparation The public was updated on the status of Phase 1 Studies of two supplemental documents, the CSAP and the FSSP. during public meetings in May, August, and November These two documents provide the specific details of sam-2012. pling activities to support Phase 1 decomm issioning of the WVDP. The CSAP describes the radiological environ-Phase 1 Decommissioning Plan (DP) for the WVDP. On mental data collection activities (surface and subsurface December 5, 2008, the DOE issued the " Phase 1 De- soils, sed iments, and groundwater) that will specifically commissioning Plan for the West Valley Demonstration support the implementation of the Phase 1 decommis-Project, West Valley, NY" (73 Federal Register 74162) sioning actions within the WVDP premises as described and transmitted it for NRC review. The DP addressed in the Phase 1 DP. Phase 1 of the proposed two-phased approach for WVDP decommission ing, consistent with the preferred alterna- The FSSP provides the techn ica l basis and sampling pro-tive selected in the ROD and the Findings Statement for tocols to demonstrate that specific portions of the WVDP the WVDP and the WNYNSC. On December 18, 2009, DOE prem ises meet the Phase 1 radiological cleanup goa ls for submitted revision 2 of the Phase I DP after incorporating surface and subsurface soils identified in the Phase 1 DP. responses to NRC's comments. Summary of WVDP Contracts
- Phased Decisionmaking ROD
- Final Decommissioning ROD
- Phase 1 Decommissioning Plan
- Phase 2 Decommissioning Plan Phase 1 Decommissioning Phase 2 Decommissioning (Completed by 2020)
Phase 2 Decisions Phase 1 Facility Disposition
- HLW Canister Shipment (permanent disposal
- Relocate 275 HLW canisters to new dry cask storage decision) facility
- Closure decision for Waste Tank Farm
- Demolish Vitrification Facility and MPPB
- Closure decision for 2 Disposal Areas
- Remove ancillary facilities
- Ship Legacy low-level Waste Phase 1 Soil Remediation
- Remove Below Grade Portion of MPPB and Vlt (including source area of plume)
- Remove Lagoons and Liquid Waste Treatment Facility
- Ship legacy TRU Waste
- Remove Remote-Handled Waste Facility and remaining ancillary facilities
- Remediat e all WMA 1 & 2 Soil ECS-4 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Environmental Compliance Summary The FSSP is consistent with the Multi-Agency Radiation with the interim status regulations; therefore, the RCRA Survey and Site Investigation Manual. Part A permit application must be revised prior to chang-es to the Project's RCRA waste management operations. Environmental Characterization Services Contract. In The latest revisions to the RCRA Part A Permit Application December 2010, DOE awarded the Environmental Char- were submitted to NYSDEC on February 3, 2010 and were acterization Services contract to Safety and Ecology Cor- conditionally approved by NYSDEC on June 9, 2011. poration (SEC) to provide environmental characterization services to support Phase 1 decommissioning activities at In accordance with the Part A requirements, DOE pre-the WVDP. SEC is responsible for implementing the data pared closure plans for the hazardous waste manage-collection activities described in the CSAP and the FSSP. ment units at the WVDP. The closure plans were trans-Environmental characterization services performed by mitted to NYSDEC in anticipation of closure activities, and SEC at the WVDP during 2012 included: are revised as appropriate to address NYSDEC comments or changes in activities. To complete closure of a RCRA
- characterization of two reference areas used to devel- unit, NYSDEC must approve the closure plan and must be op background data sets; notified of the closure schedule. Waste is removed, and
- characterization of the HLW canister interim storage impacted areas and facilities are decontaminated and/or area; and removed. When specified in the closure plan, confirma-
- footprint characterization following removal of the tory sampling and analysis are performed, and data are product storage area and the maintenance storage evaluated and presented to NYSDEC in a closure certifica-area. tion report to document completion of closure activities.
RCRA The HWSLs underwent clean-closure activities and sam-pling in December 2011, to confirm clean closure per RCRA and its implementing regulations govern the life the RCRA hazardous waste management unit closure cycle of hazardous waste from "cradle-to-grave" and plan. The RCRA closure certification report was submit-mandate that generators take responsibility for ensuring ted to NYSDEC on March 14, 2012, and a revised and the proper treatment, storage, and ultimate disposal of re-certified report was submitted on August 9, 2012 to their wastes. A hazardous waste permit is required for address NYSDEC comments. In November 2012, NYSDEC facilities that store large quantities of hazardous waste approved the revised report and considered the unit for more than 90 days or treat or dispose of hazardous closed in accordance with all applicable regulations. waste at the facility. The RCRA closure plan for the Cement Solidification Sys-EPA is responsible for issuing guidelines and regulations tem was submitted in May 2013 to NYSDEC for review for the proper management of solid and hazardous waste and approval. Closure plans for the remaining units were (including mixed [radioactive and hazardous] waste). In submitted with the RCRA' 6 NYCRR Part 373-2 Permit New York, EPA has delegated the authority to issue per- application, as described below. mits and enforce these regulations to NYSDEC. In addi-tion, the U;S. Department ofTransportation is responsible R<:RA Final Status Permit Application. In 2003, NYSDEC for issuing guidelines and regulations for labeling, pack- officially requested the submittal of a 6 NYCRR Part 373-2 aging, and spill reporting for hazardous and mixed wastes Permit Application (i.e., Part B) for the WVDP. The com-while in transit. pleted permit application was transmitted to NYSDEC in December 2004. Hazardous Waste Permitting - RCRA Interim Status Per-mit Application. In 1984, DOE notified EPA of hazard- On April 16, 2009, NYSDEC officially requested the sub-ous waste activities at the WVDP and identified DOE as mittal of a revised Part B Permit Application for the a hazardous waste generator. In 1990, to comply with WVDP. The revised permit application was submitted to 6 NYCRR Part 373-3, a RCRA Part A (i.e., Interim Status NYSDEC on September 30, 2010. Due to the scope and or Part A) Permit Application for the WVDP was filed with breadth of the permit application, DOE and NYSERDA NYSDEC for storage and treatment of hazardous waste. agreed to NYSDEC's request for an indefinite suspension The WVDP has operated under interim status ever since. of NYSDEC's completeness review in January 2011. RCRA facility operations are limited to those described in the RCRA Part A Permit Application and must comply WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 ECS-5
Environmental Compliance Summary On March 22, 2012, NYSDEC notified NYSERDA and
- Current Conditions Rep.ort DOE that they would suspend further action relative to a Part B Permit. As part of this approach, process- Per a NYSDEC request, a report entitled "WVDP Sol-ing of the September 2010 Part B Permit Application, id Waste Management Unit Assessment and Current including revisions, will be deferred to authority pro- Conditions Report" was submitted in November 2004, vided by the RCRA Consent Order for corrective actions which summarized the historic activities at each SWMU or operation under existing (Part A) Interim Status. The through the RFI activities and provided environmental site will continue to operate according to the 6 NYCRR monitoring data and information on SWMU activities Part 373-3, Part A (Interim Status) Permit Applica- performed since the RFI reports were submitted.
tion. Upon completion of interim status closure activi-ties, it is anticipated that the 6 NYCRR Part 373-2, Part This document was revised and submitted on Septem-B (Final Status) Permit Application will be revised to ber 29, 2010, incorporating operational status changes include corrective actions, and the closure and post clo- of each SWMU and providing updated environmental sure requirements for any remaining facilities/units. monitoring data. RCRA §3008(h) Administrative Order on Consent. Sec-
- Corrective Measures Study (CMS) tion §3008(h) of RCRA authorizes EPA to issue an order requiring corrective action to protect human health and In 2004, NYSDEC requested CMSs to be performed on the environment if there has been or there is potential for six specific SWMUs at the WVDP. The six SWMUs were:
a release of hazardous waste or hazardous constituents to the environment from a SWMU. DOE and NYSERDA NOA Burial Area (SWMU #2); entered into the Consent Order with NYSDEC and EPA in NOA Interceptor Trench (SWMU #23); March 1992. Consent Order activities performed to date Demineralizer Sludge Ponds (SWMU #5); are summarized below. Lagoon 1 (SWMU #3); Construction Demolition and Debris Landfill (CDDL)
- RCRA Facility Investigation (RFI) . (SWMU #1); and The Low-Level Waste Treatment Facility (LLWTF)
The Consent Order required NYSERDA and DOE's (SWMUs #17, #17a, and #17b). WVDP office to conduct RFls (unit-specific environmen-tal investigations) at SWMUs to determine if a release The CMS Work Plan was conditionally approved by occurred or if there was a potential for release of NYSDEC in October 2006. Draft CMS reports were RCRA-regulated hazardous constituents from a SWMU. revised in 2010 to be consistent with the EIS and ROD As many SWMUs are contiguous or close togeth-and provide corrective measures evaluations. The er, most were grouped into larger units, called super revised documents were submitted to NYSDEC and EPA SWMUs (SSWMUs); terminology unique to the WVDP. on September 29, 2010. SSWMU descriptions and the individual constituent SWMUs are presented in Table ECS-4. Figures A-8 and
- Interim Measure (IM)
A-9 in Appendix A show the WVDP SSWMU locations. Final RFI reports were submitted in 1997, completing The NOA (SSWMU #9) is regulated under the Consent the Consent Order investigative activities. No correc-Order. As an IM in 1990, a trench system was construct-tive actions were required at that time. ed through the weathered Lavery till along the north-east and northwest sides of the NOA to intercept and Groundwater monitoring, as recommended in the RFI collect groundwater potentially contaminated with a reports and approved by EPA and NYSDEC, continued mixture of n-dodecane and tributyl phosphate (TBP). during 2012 per the Consent Order requirements. The Monitoring results in 2012 detected no TBP in ground-groundwater program and monitoring results at the water from the NOA interceptor trench. WVDP are discussed in Chapter 4 "Groundwater Pro-tection Program." Per the approved CMS Work*Plan, in 2008 DOE imple-mented an IM to ensure a minimum 4-ft-thick earth-en cap, minimize the potential release of impacted groundwater from the NOA, and minimize water infil-tration into the NDA until the final disposition of the ECS-6 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Environmental Compliance Summary NOA is determined and can be implemented. An Additional reports are submitted each year to doc-approximate 850-ft-long low permeability slurry ument hazardous waste reduction efforts. Pursu-wall was constructed along the south and west- ant to Article 27, Section 0908 of New York State ern sides of the NOA to limit lateral groundwater Environmental Conservation Law, an annual update_ migration. Part two of the project involved resur- of the WVDP's Hazardous Waste Reduction Plan facing the entire five-acre (2 ha) landfill with addi- must be submitted to NYSDEC biennially and a sta-tional soils, re-grading, compacting, and applying tus report must be submitted in the interim years. an impermeable geomembrane cover. The vol- The plan is updated to reflect changes in the types ume of water pumped from the NOA interceptor and amounts *of hazardous wastes generated at trench has decreased significantly, to 64,035 gal the WVDP. The most recent biennial update to the (242,399 L) in CY 2012, compared with pre-JM Hazardous Waste Reduction Plan was submitted to volumes. Refer to Chapter 4, "Groundwater Pro- NYSDEC on July 1, 2011. The next plan update will tection Program." be submitted in 2013. During the interim years, an Annual Status Report, essentially an abbreviated In July 2012, the entire NOA cap was inspected, version of the biennial update, is submitted. The including storm water basins, walkways, ballast CY 2011 Annual Status Report for the Hazardous tubes, field seams, pipe penetrations, and the an- Waste Reduction Plan was submitted to NYSDEC on chor trench. The need for several minor repairs, June 27, 2012. such as sealing minor holes, was observed; how-ever, the overall cap condition was good, with no Mixed Waste Management. Mixed wastes that general deterioration of the geomembrane not- cannot be treated or disposed of within one year ed. The minor repairs identified have been per- are managed according to the "Site Treatment formed. Plan (STP)," prepared by the DOE under require-ments of the FFCA (an amendment to RCRA), in
- Quarterly Reporting to EPA and NYSDEC acc.ordance with a Consent Order agreement. The annually updated plan describes the development Per the Consent Order, DOE transmits a quarterly of treatment capabilities and technologies for treat-progress report to EPA and NYSDEC, summariz- ing mixed waste. The fiscal year (FY) 2012 update ing all Consent Order activities at the WVDP for brought the mixed waste inventory and treatment the previous quarter. The report includes prog- information current to the erid of FY 2012. The FY ress and accomplishments, contacts with local 2012 plan identified four proposed milestones for community interest groups and regulatory agen- waste streams managed under the WVDP STP, all cies pertaining to Consent Order activities at the of which were completed by September 30, 2012.
WVDP, changes to personnel, projected future During 2012, 16,619 po'unds (7.54 mt) of hazardous work activities, and an inventory of mixed waste and mixed waste were shipped off site for disposal. generated from decontamination activities during (See Table ECS-5.) the reporting period. The other report submit-ted quarterly to EPA and NYSDEC under the Con- Nonhazardous, Regulated Waste Management. sent Order is the groundwater exception report, Nonradioactive, nonhazardous material was shipped including NOA water level data for the interceptor off site to solid waste m*anagement facilities in 2012. trench and the 2008 JM. Certain components of this waste (lead-acid batter-ies and spent lamps [i.e., universal wastes]) were Hazardous Waste Management. Under RCRA, haz- reclaimed or recycled at off-site, authorized rec-ardous wastes at the WVDP are managed in accor- lamation and recycling facilities. (See Tables ECS-5 dance with 6 NYCRR Parts 370-374 and 376. Haz- and ECS-6.) Digested sludge from the site sanitary ardous and mixed waste activities are reported to WWTF was shipped to the Buffalo Sewer Authority NYSDEC in the. WVDP's Annual Hazardous Waste for disposal. Sanitary treated wastewater was rou-Report, which specifies the quantities of waste gen- tinely sampled and discharged to Erdman Brook in erated, treated, and/or disposed of, and identifies compliance with the WVDP's SPDES permit. (See the treatment, storage, and disposal facilities used. Table ECS-5.) During periods when the WWTF was The Annual Hazardous Waste Report for 2012 was submitted to NYSDEC in February 2013. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 ECS-7
Environmental Compliance Summary not operating, sanitary wastewater was shipped to the approval) for use of an alternate method of demon-Buffalo Sewer Authority for treatment and disposal. strating compliance by measuring environmental con-centrations of airborne radionuclides at critical receptor Waste Minimization and Pollution Prevention. The locations. As WVDP facilities continue to be closed, the annual pollution prevention report was submitted to DOE alternative approach of environmental air sampling will summarizing recycling and waste generation information. become the more appropriate method. See Table ECS-6, "Recycled Materials for FY 2012;" Table ECS-7, "EO 13514 Pollution Prevention/Waste Minimiza- DOE submitted an updated request to EPA in February tion Accomplishments in 2012;" and Chapter 1, "Envi- 2009 for approval to use environmental air measure-ronmental Management System (EMS)." Reports are sub- ments to demonstrate NESHAP compliance at the WVDP. mitted to DOE to document hazardous waste reduction The plan includes a one-year period of using both the efforts, as discussed previously in the "Hazardous Waste "measure and model" and the "environmental measure-Management" section. ment" approach to confirm compliance. EPA granted interim conditional approval in July 2009, and extensions COOL Activities. The CDDL was closed in 1986 under a have been granted through July 2014. NYSDEC-approved closure plan for a nonradioactive solid waste disposal facility. A general inspection of the CDDL, The ambient air monitoring network was installed with to note the overall conditions of the grounds, was per- the system undergoing operational baselining and equip-formed in the spring and fall of 2012, with no concerns ment testing in 2012. (Data from the fourth quarter is noted. Over time, the north plateau strontium-90 plume included in Appendix c.) The network consists of 16 am-has migrated from the MPPB into the CDDL area and bient air low-volume sampling stations {one for each of beyond. In 2010, a full-scale PTW was installed, south of the 16 wind directions), strategically located and operat-the CDDL. Construction of the PTW did not impact the ed in areas that provide coverage for airborne radiological CDDL. See "Strontium-90 Plume Remediation Activities" environmental measurements to support NESHAP com-in Chapter 4. pliance during demolition activities. Environmental Issues In addition, one high-volume sampler is co-located in the sector most often identified as the critical receptor. This Unplanned Waterborne Release. There were no sampler serves as an independent source of data for com-unplanned nonradiological waterborne releases during parison with the compliance network data at that loca-2012. Refer to "SPDES Permit Noncompliance Events" tion. Ambient air continues to be monitored at the back-earlier in this chapter. There were also no unplanned ground location, although data from this sampler is not waterborne releases of radiological constituents from the used to demonstrate NESHAP compliance under normal WVDP in 2012. operating conditions. EPA Interim Approval to Use Environmental Measure- Erdman Brook Erosion Mitigation. During the first half of ments for National Emission Standards for Hazard- 2011, design work for erosion mitigation measures was ous Air Pollutants (NESHAP} Compliance. Radiological completed, and work activities in these areas designated NESHAP compliance at the WVDP is currently demon- as federally protected wetlands was permitted under the strated by (1) measuring (and/or estimating) radiological Nationwide Permit 27 - Stream and Wetland Restoration emissions in air released from the site during the CY of Activities. A portion of this work was completed in the interest and (2) using EPA-approved computer models 2011 field season, and the remainder was completed in to estimate dose to the maximally exposed off-site indi- 2012. The work was performed by NYSERDA, but jointly vidual (MEOSI). This method is referred to as the "mea- funded by DOE and NYSERDA. sure and model" approach, and is most suitable for point sources of air emissions such as stacks or ducts. Resulting Safety Inspections of the WNYNSC Dams. The two dams dose estimates for the WVDP have always been far below located on the WNYNSC property are maintained because the 10-millirem (mrem)/year compliance standard. (See they provide water for drinking and operational purposes Chapter 3 for a discussion of dose assessment method- for the WVDP. Also, the WVDP Rail Spur and an access ology.) roadway are located parallel to and run along the crest of both dams. A severe rain event in August 2009 caused NESHAP regulations in Title 40 Code of Federal Reg- flood damage to areas of the reservoirs and spillways. ulations (CFR) Part 61, Subpart H allow (with prior EPA ECS-8 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Environmental Compliance Summary Standard operating. procedure for maintenance, inspection, and operation of the lake dams and emergency spillway has been enhanced. Assess-ment and inspection of the dams occurred during 2012, with no significant findings identified. Project Assessment Activities in 2012 Throughout CY 2012, assessments were conducted through the Integrated Assessment Program (IAP) at the WVDP. This program effectively complies with applicable DOE directives, regulations, standards, and integrated safety management system (ISMS) requirements. The IAP applies to all disciplines including, but not limited to, safety and health, operations, maintenance, environmental protec-tion, quality, decontamination and decommission-ing (D&D), HLW activities, emergency management, business processes, and management. Inspections, reviews, and oversight activities are routinely con-ducted to evaluate performance, reduce risk, and identify improveme.nt opportunities. DOE-WVDP and other agencies with responsibilities for the WVDP also independently reviewed various aspects of the environmental and waste manage-ment programs. At the conclusion of the reporting period, there were no outstanding issues that were not satisfactorily addressed. Overall results reflect-ed continuing, well-managed environmental pro-grams at the WVDP. Refer to Chapter 1, "Environ-mental Management System." WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 ECS-9
Environmental Compliance Summary TABLE ECS-1 Compliance Status Summary for the WVDP in CV 2012 Environmental Statute, WVDP Complian~e Citation
*. DOE Directi~e,f:O,
. ~ " ' AgreemtmtA Status .. '
-~ ' ,, ~ ~- l i '.*> :**
42 United States The AEA of 1954 was enacted to assure the proper See discussions of the WVDP Act, DOE Orders Code (USC) management of source, special nuclear, and by- 435.1, and 458.l
§2011 et seq. product materials. The AEA and the statutes that amended it delegate the control of nuclear energy primarily to DOE, NRC, and EPA.
Public Law The WVDP Act of 1980 authorized DOE to carry out a DOE is focusing on goals that will lead to 96-368 HLW demonstration project at the WNYNSC (the completion of responsibilities listed in the WVDP Center) in West Valley, New York. Act. . Cooperative The Cooperative Agreement between.DOE and Except as delineated in specific sections of the Agreement NYSERDA established a cooperative framework for agreement, DOE was given sole responsibility to between DOE implementing the WVDP Act, effective October 1980, carry out the requirements of the WVDP Act. and NYSERDA as amended in September 1981. In 1990, the first DOE and NYSERDA issued a joint final EIS in supplemental agreement was signed by DOE and January 2010, and subsequent ROD and a Findings NYSERDA which set forth specific provisions for Statement thereby fulfilling the purpose and preparing a joint EIS. A second supplemental intent of the original Supplemental Agreement. In agreement to the Cooperative Agreement was drafted March 2011, DOE and NYSERDA issued a Second in January 2010 and issued by DOE and NYSERDA in Supplemental Agreement setting forth the March 2011. procedures and responsibilities associated with conducting the Phase 1 Studies, initiated during 2012. WVDP MOU The 1981 MOU, mandated by the WVDP Act, In 2002, NRC issued "Decommissioning Criteria for between DOE established procedures for review and consultation by the WVDP {M-32) at the West Valley Site; Final and NRC NRC with respect to activities conducted at the Policy Statement" (67 FR 5003). The "Phase 1 DP WNYNSC by DOE. The agreement encompassed for the West Valley Demonstration Project" was development, design, construction, operation, and prepared by DOE and submitted to NRC in D&D activities associated with the Project as described. December 2008, and March and December, 2009. in the WVDP Act. Under the WVDP Act, and to satisfy In February 2010, NRC issued a TER on DOE's commitments made to NRC, DOE was required to Phase 1 DP. NRC conduct!=d monitoring visits at prepare a DP for the Project and submit it to NRC for the WVDP on June 12-13, November 14-15, and review. December 4, 2012 to review ongoing decommissioning activities. DOE Order DOE Order 231.lB, Environment, Safety, and Health This WVDP ASER is prepared and submitted 231.lB Reporting (updated and approved on June 27, 2011 annually to DOE Headquarters (HQ), regulatory with Change 1 issued on November 28, 2012), was agencies, and interested stakeholders in issued to ensure that DOE and National Nuclear compliance with DOE Order i31.1B. Security Administration receives timely and accurate information about events that could adversely affect the health, safety, and security of the public or workers, the environment, the operations of DOE facilities, or the credibility of the Department. (continued on next page) ECS-10 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Environmental Compliance Summary TABLE ECS-1 {continued) Compliance Status Summary for the WVDP in CY 2012 Environmental Statute, WVDP Compliance Citation DOE Directive, EO, Agreement ~tatus DOE Order This is accomplished through timely collection, This WVDP ASER is prepared and submitted 231.lB reporting, analysis, and dissemination of data annually to DOE HQ, regulatory agencies, and (continued) pertaining to environment, safety, and health issues as interested stakeholders in compliance with DOE required by law or regulations, or in support of U.S. Order 231.lB. political commitments to the International Atomic Energy Agency. DOE Order DOE Order 4S8.1, Radiation Protection of the Public This ASER summarizes radiological estimates of 458.1 and the Environment (including change June 2, 2011), dose to the public an? the environment, and replaced DOE Order 5400.5 and established compares these values with release and dose requirements to protect the public and environment standards established by this Order. In 2012, against undue risk from radiation associated with estimated doses from airborne and waterborne radiological activities conducted under control of DOE releases to the M EOSI were 0.019% of the 100-pursuant to the AEA, by ensuring that (1) operations millirem (mrem) standard, and about 0.006% of are conducted to limit radiation exposure to members natural background radiation. Refer to Chapter 3, of the public pursuant to limits established in the "Dose Assessment," for further discussion. Order, (2) radiological clearance of DOE real and personal property is controlled, (3) potential radiation exposures to members of the public are as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA), (4) routine and nonroutine releases are monitored and dose to the public is assessed, and (5) the environment is protected from the effects of radiation and radioactive material. DOE Order DOE Order 435.1-1, Radioactive Waste Management, The WVDP maintains program documentation 435.1-1 issued in 1999, ensures that all DOE radioactive waste separately for each waste type. Management of is managed in a manner that is protective of worker HLW was conducted in accordance with the and public health and safety and the environment, and "WVDP Waste Acceptance Manual;" TRU waste complies with applicable state, federal, and local laws was managed in accordance with the "TRU Waste and regulations. Under the Order, sites that manage Management Program Plan;" LLW was managed radioactive waste are required to develop, document, as summarized in the "LLW Management Program implement, and maintain a site-wide radioactive waste Plan;" and the radioactive component of mixed management program which includes actions to LLW was managed as summarized in the "Site minimize radioactive waste generation. Treatment Plan (STP) FY 2012 Update." In February 2012, DOE issued the "Waste Incidental to Reprocessing Evaluation for the West Valley Demonstration Project Vitrification Melter," pursuant to DOE Order 435.1-1. In June 2012, DOE issued the "Draft Waste Incidental to Reprocessing Evaluation for the Concentrator Feed Makeup Tank and Melter Feed Hold Tank" for NRC and public review. The final document was issued in February 2013. Refer earlier in this chapter for further discussion. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 ECS-11
Environmental Compliance Summary TABLE ECS-1 (continued) Compliance Status Summary for the WVDP in CY 2012 Environmental Statute, WVDP Compliance Citation pot Dir,ective, EO, Agreemen~
... Status DOE Order DOE Order 436.1, Departmental Sustainability, May 2, The WVDP supports the objectives of DOE Order 436.1, and EOs 2011 replaced DOE Orders 450.lA, and 430.26. The 436.1, and has an established culture of 13423 and Order also incorporates the initiatives of EOs 13423 environmental stewardship through it's 13514 and 13S14, which provide requirements and environmental management system (EMS}.
responsibilities for managing sustainability within DOE Pollution prevention, waste minimization, and to (1) ensure the DOE carries out its missions in a energy efficiency have been incorporated into the sustainable manner that addresses national energy culture through standard practices, procedures, security and global environmental challenges, and training, and encouraging new ideas. On advances sustainable, efficient and reliable energy for November 29, 2012, DOE-WVDP submitted the the future, (2) institute cultural change to factor "WVDP FY 2013 Site Sustainability Plan" to DOE-sustainability and greenhouse gas (GHG} reductions HQ, which outlined performance status and into all DOE decisions, (3) ensure DOE achieves the planned goals to support DOE's sustainability sustainability goals established in its Strategic mission. Refer to Chapter 1, "Environmental Sustainability Performance Plan (SSPP) pursuant to Management System." CHBWV, the WVDP Phase applicable laws, regulations, and EOs. 1 decommissioning and facilities disposition contractor, received a Certificate of Registration for the International Organization for Standardization (ISO} 14001:2004 certification of its EMS on July 31, 2012. In May 2013, an independent EMS ISO 14001 maintenance audit was completed resulting in the recommendation to retain certification .. Title 10 Code of 10 CFR Part 830, Nuclear Safety Management, Subpart A QA program that provides a consistent system Federal A, Quality Assurance Requirements, and DOE Order for collecting, .assessing, and documenting data Regulations (10 414.10 Quality Assurance, provide the quality pertaining to radionuclides in the environment is CFR) Part 830, assurance (QA) program policies and requirements implemented at the WVDP. Subpart A applicable to WVDP activities. 42 USC §4321 et The NEPA of 1969 and as amended in 1970, established NEPA documents are prepared at the WVDP to seq. a national policy to ensure that protection of the describe potential environmental effects environment is included in federal planning and associated with proposed activities. The level of decision-making. The President's Council on documentation depends upon whether the action Environmental Quality established a screening system constitutes a major federal action significantly of analyses and documentation that requires each affecting the quality of the human environment proposed action to be categorized according to the within the meaning of NEPA. Draft documents are extent of its potential environmental impact. prepared and issued for public comment for major federal actions requiring an EIS. Based on the analyses presented, considering regulatory agency and public input, DOE determines the preferred alternative and issues a ROD. Refer to previous sections of this chapter for discussion of NEPA activities. ECS-12 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Environmental Compliance Summary TABLE ECS-1 {continued) Compliance Status Summary for the WVDP in CY 2012 Environ_mental Statute, WVDP Compliance Citation DOE Directive, EO, Aqreement Status 6 NYCRR Part The NY SEQR Act of January 1, 1996, enacted in The SEQR process is an action-forcing statute that 617 NYS September 1976 and as amended on June 26, 2000, requires state agencies to incorporate Environmental requires adequate environmental review and environmental considerations directly into their Conservation assessment of whether a proposed action has the decisionmaking, and where necessary, to modify Law (ECL) potential to have a significant environmental impact, that action to mitigate adverse environmental prior to a decision regarding the action. Where a effects. Coordinated efforts were made at the project involves both NYS and federal approvals, it is WVDP to effectively utilize information from the preferred to coordinate the SEQR and NEPA processes. federal EIS process to make the required SEQR Findings Statement for the WVDP and WNYNSC, which was issued in May 2010. 42 USC §6901 et The RCRA of 1976 and the NYS Solid Waste Disposal Generation, storage, handling, treatment, and seq., and NYS Act (NYS ECL Article 27 [Title 9]) govern the generation, disposal of hazardous waste, and closure of ECL storage, handling, and disposal of hazardous wastes systems that handle hazardous waste at the and closure of systems that handle these wastes. RCRA WVDP, are conducted in accordance with the was enacted to ensure that hazardous wastes are RCRA interim status regulations. NYSDEC managed in a way that protects human health, safety, performed a RCRA hazardous waste compliance and the environment. inspection of the WVDP facilities on March 21, 2012 and reported no violations. DOE performed a surveillance of the RCRA hazardous and mixed waste inventories and shipments at the WVDP between December 2011 and February 2012, with no findings or concerns identified. EPA performed a RCRA compliance inspection in August 2012, and found no violations. Further discussion of RCRA activities is presented earlier in this chapter. Amendment to The FFCA of 1992 (an amendment to RCRA) requires The FFCA requires completing milestones 42 USC §6961 DOE facilities to prepare an STP for treating mixed identified in the STP plan volume. The WVDP STP waste inventories to meet land disposal restrictions for FY 2012 update was submitted to NYSDEC on and to annually update the plan to account for changes February 5, 2013. Refer to "Mixed Waste in mixed waste inventories, capacities, and treatment Management," earlier in this chapter. technologies. DOE entered into a Consent Order with NYSDEC for the WVDP in 1996. Docket No. II DOE and NYSERDA entered into the RCRA §3008(h) Written procedures and site activities are RCRA 3008(h) Administrative Order on Consent with EPA (lead compliant with the Consent Order. In accordance 92-0202 agency) and NYSDEC in March 1992, The state and with the Consent Order, DOE submits quarterly federal RCRA regulations authorize the agencies to reports to EPA and NYSDEC that summarize all issue orders requiring RCRA corrective actions RCRA §3008(h) activities and progress conducted associated with the potential releases of hazardous at the WVDP for the representative quarter. A waste and/or hazardous constituents from SWMUs at discussion of CY 2012 activities is presented the WNYNSC. earlier in this chapter. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 ECS-13
Environmental Compliance Summary TABLE ECS-1 (continued) Compliance Status Summary for the WVDP in CY 2012 Environmental Statute, WVDP Compliance Citation
, DOff .Rirective, £0,Agrf!em{mt,, " Statqs ,, '
", i . ' , ' , " >
RCRA 3016 The RCRA 3016 Statute applies to all federal hazardous WVDP facility hazardous waste activities are Statute waste facilities currently owned or operated by the reported biennially to EPA and NYSDEC. The RCRA government. It requires that facility hazardous waste 3016 Biennial Report for 2011 was submitted on information be submitted to EPA and authorized states January 30, 2012. every two years. 42 USC §7401 et The Clean Air Act of 1970 and the NYS ECL regulate the DOE maintained seven NESHAP permits for seq.; 40 CFR 61, release of air pollutants through permits and air quality radiological emissions and one Air Facility Subpart H; and limits. Emissions of radionuclides are regulated by EPA Registration Certificate for nonradiological 6 NYCRR via the NESHAP regulations. On April 5, 1995, DOE and emissions at the WVDP, during 2012. The 01-14 Chapter 3, Air EPA entered into an MOU concerning the Clean Air Act building ventilation system was shut down in Resources Emission Standards for Radionuclides 40 CFR Part 61 2012 before the start of building demolition. The Including Subparts H, I, Q, and T. Nonradiological RHWF stack was permitted in 2012. The annual emissions are permitted under 6 NYCRR Part 201-4 NESHAP Report summarizing radiological (Minor Facility Registrations). emissions and estimated dose was submitted to the EPA. Estimated dose to the MEOSI from radiological air emissions during 2012 was 0.027% of the 10-mrem Subpart H standard. Refer to Chapter 3, "Dose Assessment," for discussion. In CY 2012, two utility steam boilers were responsible for nonradiological emissions of nitrogen and sulfur oxides (NOx and so.) at 0.19% of the 49.5-ton capping limit for maintaining the minor facility registration certificate. 33 USC §1251 et The Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1977 Monthly SPDES DMRs are submitted to*NYSDEC. A seq. and NYS (Clean Water Ac_t [CWA]) and NYS ECL (Article 17 [Title modified SPDES permit became effective on July ECL 8]) seek to improve surface water quality by 1, 2011. Industrial wastewater was monitored for establishing standards and a system of permits. chemical constituents during lagoon discharges Wastewater and storm water discharges are regulated (outfall 001), and treated sanitary and industrial by NYSDEC through the SPDES permit. Discharges of fill wastewaters were monitored at outfall 007. material are regulated through permits issued by the SPDES-permitted storm water monitoring was U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and water completed during 2012 by sampling the eight quality certifications issued by NYSDEC. drainage basins during storm events. During 2012, all results were within the effluent discharge limits specified in the SPDES permit. Refer to "SPDES Permit Noncompliance Events" earlier in this chapter, and to "SPDES Permit Required Monitoring" in Chapter 2 for further discussion. ECS-14 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Environmental Compliance Summary Table ECS-1 (continued} Compliance Status Summary for the WVDP in CY 2012 Environmental Statute, . WVDP Compliance Citation DOE Directive, ED, Agreement Status NYS ECL Article NYS ECL Article 17 {Titles 7 and 8), and ECL Article 70 During 2012 there were no storm water 17, Titles 7 and regulate storm water discharges related to discharges related to construction activities. 8, and ECL construction activity. Article 70 NYS Navigation NYS ECL Article 17 (Titles 10 and 17), 6 NYCRR 612-614 The last CBS tank at the WVDP was closed under Law and NYS and Parts 595-599, and 6 NYCRR Subpart 360-14 these regulations in 2006. There remain nine ECL regulate design, operation, inspection, maintenance, registered PBS tanks (eight aboveground storage and closure of aboveground and underground tanks [ASTs] and one underground storage tank petroleum bulk storage (PBS) and chemical bulk [UST]) that are periodically inspected and storage (CBS) tanks. These laws also regulate spill maintained. Spills are reported and cleaned up in reporting and cleanup. Under terms of a 1996 accordance with WVDP policies and procedures. agreement, amended in 2005, DOE is not required to There were no reportable spills during 2012. report a spill of petroleum product onto an impervious There were four small spills (less than five gal surface if the spill is less than five gal and is cleaned up (18.9 L] each) during CY 2012, which did not within two hours of discovery. require immediate notification to NYSDEC, but were reported in quarterly reports. EO 11990 EO 11990, Protection of Wetlands, directed federal Wetlands are periodically identified and agencies to avoid, where possible, impacts (e.g., delineated on the WVDP. In 2006, the USACE destruction, modification, or new construction) that confirmed that 34.09 acres (13.8 ha) of wetlands, would adversely effect wetlands wherever there is a subject to federal jurisdiction, exist within and practical alternative. Activities in wetlands are adjacent to the WVDP. A wetland complex of 17.4 regulated by the USACE and NYSDEC permits. The acres (7.0 ha) is subject to NYSDEC jurisdiction. In wetlands on the WVDP are subject to regulation under April 2011, updated wetland delineation was Section 404 of the CWA and NYS ECL Articles 24 and 36. completed for areas impacted by the Erdman Brook erosion mitigation project. Refer to "Erdman Brook Erosion Mitigation, " earlier in this chapter. 42 USC §9601 et The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Based on the results of a Preliminary Assessment seq. Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA, Report prepared for DOE, it was determined that including the Superfund Amendments and the WVDP did not qualify for listing on the Reauthorization Act of 1986 [SARA]) provided the national priorities list. Therefore, no further regulatory framework for remediation of releases of investigation pursuant to CERCLA was warranted. hazardous substances and remediation of inactive However, if a hazardous substance spill exceeds a hazardous waste disposal sites. reportable quantity, CERCLA reporting requirements may be triggered. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 ECS-15
Environmental Compliance Summary TABLE ECS-1 {continued) Compliance Status Summary for the WVDP in CY 2012
,',*\:
Environmental Statute, WVDP Compliance Citation DOE Directive, EO, Agreement Status 42 USC §11001 The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to- Chemical inventories forthe WVDP are reported et seq. Know Act (EPCRA) of 1986 (also known as SARA Title quarterly under EPCRA, as appropriate. A 13,000-Ill} was designed to create a working partnership gal (49.210 L) liquid nitrogen tank was installed in between industry, business, state, and local 2009 to support the nitrocision effort, This tank government, and emergency response representatives was removed in January 2013. Refer to Tables to help local communities protect public health, safety, ECS-9 and ECS-10. and the environment from chemical hazards. 42 USC §300f et The Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 requires that each The WVDP operates a nontransient, seq. federal agency operating or maintaining a public water noncommunity public drinking water system system must comply with all federal, state, and local serving a population of less than 500. All CV 2012 requirements regarding safe drinking water. results from analyses of drinking water were Compliance in NVS is verified by oversight of the reported within limits to the CCHD. The CCHD NVSDOH, through NYS Public Health Law, and the routinely performs inspections of the water Cattaraugus County Health Department (CCHD). treatment and distribution system. 10 CFR Part 851 10 CFR 851 "Worker Safety and Health Program" of Procedures and programs are revised to maintain 2006 requires DOE contractors to provide workers with requirements that comply with 10 CFR 851. Any a safe and healthful workplace. To accomplish this proposed modification that may invalidate a objective, the rule established program requirements portion of the worker health and safety program specific to management responsibilities, worker rights, at the WVDP must be approved by DOE-WVDP. hazard identification and prevention, safety health The plan was reviewed in April 2012, and it was standards, required training, recordkeeping, and determined that no changes to the current plan reporting. were necessary. 10 CFR Part 835 10 CFR Part 835, Occupational Radiation Protection, In February 2012, the document "CH2MHill*B&W amended May 2011, established radiation protection West Valley, LLC Documented Radiation standards, limits, and program requirements for Protection Program and Implementation for 10 protecting individuals from ionizing radiation resulting CFR Part 835, as amended May 2011" was issued from the conduct of DOE activities. providing an update to the prior revision. 15 USC §2601 et The Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 regulates the ACM activities were managed in accordance with seq., and 12 manufacture, processing, and distribution of chemicals, the site "Asbestos Management Plan" and NVCRR Part 56 including asbestos-containing material (ACM) and activities were completed by personnel certified polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Effective September by NYSDOL. Refer to Table ECS-5 for a summary 2006, the NVS Department of Labor {NYSDOL) of asbestos waste management activities. PCBs significantly revised the asbestos regulations, cited in are managed in accordance with the WVDP 12 NYCRR Part 56. As a result, operating procedures document "PCB and PCB-Contaminated Material were revised, special training for asbestos workers was Management Plan." The WVDP operators conducted, and the WVDP applied for and was granted maintain an annual document log that details PCB site-specific variances. use and changes in storage or disposal status. ECS-16 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Environmental Compliance Summary TABLE ECS-1 (continued) Compliance Status Summary for the WVDP in CV 2012 7 USC §136 et The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodentidde Chemical pesticides are applied at the WVDP only seq. Act of 1996 and NVS ECL provide for EPA and NYSDEC after alternative methods are evaluated by control of pesticide distribution, sale, and use. trained and NYSDEC-certified professionals and determined to be unfeasible. Herbicides were not used at the WVDP during 2012 so storm water samples were not analyzed for paraquat dichloride. During 2012, an average of 1.0 pounds (lbs} per day of Steamate NA701 was used as a corrosion inhibitor. NYS ECL, Article NVS ECL, Article 15, Title 5, Protection of Water Two surface water impounding dam structures 15, Title 5, et regulates the safety of dams and other surface water are located on the WNYNSC: NYS Atomic seq. impounding structures, including construction, Development Dam #1 (DEC Dam ID #019-3149) inspection, operation, maintenance, and modification and NYS Atomic Development Darn #2 (DEC Dam of these structures. Revised dam safety regulations ID #019-3150). Inspections and maintenance were became effective on August 19, 2009. The dams routinely performed and documented in CY 2012. maintained by the WVDP, on the WNYNSC property, are classified as Class A - low-hazard dams. NYS ECL Article NYS ECL, Article 15, Title 33 Water Withdrawal A nontransient, noncommunity public water 15, Title 33, Part Reporting requires that any person who withdraws or supply system for drinking water and operational 675 is operating any system or method of withdrawal that purposes is maintained and operated at the has a. capacity to withdraw more than 100,000 gal WVDP. In compliance with the legislation, the (378,541 L) of groundwater or surface water per day "2012 WVDP Great Lakes Water Withdrawal shall file an annual report with NYSDEC. The legislation Report" was submitted to NYSDEC in January* was enacted to gain more complete information for 2013. The WVDP withdrew an average of 58,708 managing the state's water resourc;es. gal/day (222,234 L/day}. NYS Public Public Health Law, Article 5 (Laboratories), Section 502 As of June 30,2012, the WVDP Environmental Health Law (Environmental Laboratories, Examinations, and Laboratory (ELAB) (URS Corporation Laboratory) Certificates of Approval) NYSDOH certification under the Environmental Laboratory Approval Program (ELAP) ended. All regulatory reported analysis is performed by ELAP certified labs. 49 CFR Part 172, 6 NVCRR Part 364.9 regulates handling and storage of The on-site health services office is registered and 6 NYCRR potentially infectious regulated medical waste. 49 CFR with NVS as a "Small Quantity Generator" of Part 364.9 Part 172, Subpart H regulates transportation safety and regulated medical waste. Medical services disposal of regulated medical waste at a licensed generate potentially infectious medical wastes facility. that are securely stored in approved biohazard containers and are handled and controlled by authorized personnel. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 ECS-17
Environmental Compliance Summary TABLE ECS-1 {concluded) Compliance Status Summary for the WVDP in CY 2012
, Environin~,t:J-tal S,tatuter _~ \:,~ W~DP q:>mpliance *
*.DOE Directive; ED, Agr!!emerit ;.2 . **
~' ,'
* *.$f<ltas * '
16 USC §703 et The Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918 implemented DOE maintains a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Bird seq., and 6 various treaties and conventions between the U.S. and Depredation Permit for the WVDP. Effective April NYCRR Part 175 foreign countries for the protection of migratory birds. 1, 2012, NYS implemented changes to NYS ECL 11-Under the Act, taking, killing, or possessing migratory 0521, no longer requiring a NYSDEC depredation birds is unlawful. (See also 6 NYCRR Part 175, Special license. (See Tables ECS-3 and ECS-12.) Licenses and Permits - Definitions and Uniform Procedures.) 16 USC .§1531 et The Endangered Species Act of 1973 provided for the Several ecological surveys of the WNYNSC seq., and 6 conservation of endangered and threatened species of premises have been conducted. Except for NYCRR Part 182 fish, wildlife, and plants. (See also 6 NYCRR Part 182, "occasional transient individuals," no plant or Endangered and Threatened Species of Fish and animal species protected under the Endangered Wildlife; Species of Special Concern.} Species Act are known to reside at the Center. 16 USC §470 The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 Surveys of the WNYNSC have been conducted for established a program for the preservation of historic historic and archaeological sites. Surveys revealed properties throughout the nation. American Indian and historic homestead artifacts, consistent with the area. EO 11988 EO 11988, Floodplain Management, was issued to No activities were performed during 2012 at the avoid adverse impacts associated with the occupancy WVDP that would develop or be adversely and modification of floodplains.and to avoid direct or impacted by the 100-year floodplain Vfithin the indirect support of floodplain development wherever premises. there is a practicable alternative. Stipulation In accordance with Stipulation No. R9-4756-99-03, The system stimulated in-situ biodegradation of Pursuant to NYS dated March 1999, DOE agreed to install a soil petroleum hydrocarbons in the soil by providing ECL Section 17- bioventing system to remediate 'petroleum abundant oxygen to existing microorganisms.
. 0303, and contaminated soils in the warehouse UST site (NYSDEC After reviewing soil and water sampling data and Section 176 of Spill number 9708617}. The remediation plan was to evaluations, NYSDEC determined that no further the Navigation construct a bioventing system, operate it for two years, remediation was required. A determination Law assess performance, and report to NYSDEC. regarding the potential need for future actions will be made consistent with Phase 2 decisionmaking under the NEPA process.
6 NYCRR360 NYS ECL Solid Waste Management Facility Regulations Per a 1986 NYSDEC approved engineering closure define requirements for closure of nonradioactive solid plan, the COOL was closed. As required by the waste disposal facilities in a manner that protects the plan, post-closure inspections of the COOL cover environment. were performed on May 31 and November7, 2012 and all areas were found to be in good condition. ECS-18 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Environmental Compliance Summary TABLE ECS-2 NEPA Documents Affecting DOE Activities at the WVDP
.Year
.. Action Outcome 1982 The FEIS, "Final Environmetnal Impact Statement: Long- The initial period of WVDP Act work activities, Term Management of Liquid High-Level Radioactive completed in September 2002, removed the HLW Wastes Stored at the WNYNSC, West Valley (DOE/EIS- from the tanks and immobilized it into borosilicate 0081)" and associated ROD were issued outlining the glass through VIT. The glass canisters remain on site in actions DOE proposed for solidification of the liquid storage.
HLW contained in the underground tanks. 1988 DOE and NYSERDA published a NOi to prepare the EIS The DEIS was issued in 1996. for "Completion of the WVDP and Closure or Long-Term Management of the Facilities at the WNYNSC (the Center)." 1996 DOE and NYSERDA issued the "Draft EIS for the The DEIS was issued without a preferred alternative Completion of the WVDP and Closure or for a six-month review and comment period. After Long-Term Management of the Facilities at the issuing the DEIS, and despite long negotiations, DOE WNYNSC" (DOE/EIS-0226-D). and NYSERDA were unable to reach an agreement on the future course of action for closure at the Center (see Government Accounting Office, 2001). 1997 Following issuance of the 1996 DEIS, NYSE RDA and DOE The Citizen Task Force's mission is to provide formed a stakeholder advisory group (the West Valley stakeholder input to decisionmaking for development Citizen Task Force) to provide additional input to the of a closure option for the WVDP and the WNYNSC. public comment process required by the NEPA. 1997 DOE-HQ issued the "Final Waste Management The WM PEIS (DOE/EIS-0200F) was issued with the Programmatic EIS," (WM PEIS [DOE/EIS-0200F]} to intent to issue a separate ROD for each type of waste evaluate nationwide management and siting generated, stored, or buried over the next 20 years at alternatives for treatment, storage, and disposal of five 54 sites in the DOE complex. types of radioactive and hazardous waste. 1999 DOE issued a ROD for nationwide management of HLW, The ROD specified that WVDP-vitrified HLW will Vol. 64, FR, p. 46661 (64 FR 46661) remain in storage on site until it is accepted at a geologic repository. 2000 DOE issued a ROD for nationwide management of LLW The. Hanford site in Washington State and the Nevada and mixed LLW (65 FR 10061). Test Site were designated as national DOE disposal sites for LLW and mixed LLW. 2001 DOE published an NOi (66 FR 16447} formally The rescoping plan split the scope of the 1996 WVDP announcing its rescoping plan for preparing the waste DEIS into two phases: (1) near-term waste management EIS for the WVDP. management decisionmaking and (2) final DOE published an Advance NOi (66 FR 56090), decommissioning and/or long-term stewardship announcing in advance, its intention to prepare an EIS decisionmaking. The advanced NOi informed for Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship at interested parties of a pending EIS and provided the WVDP and the WNYNSC. opportunity for public comments early in the process. 2003 DOE issued a notice of availability of the "WVDP Draft The DEIS presented alternatives for near-term Waste Management EIS" (68 FR 2658.7). management of WVDP LLW, mixed LLW, TRU waste, and HLW. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 ECS-19
Environmental Compliance Summary TABLE ECS-2 (concluded) NEPA Documents Affecting DOE Activities at the WVDP Year Action Outcome 2003 DOE, in cooperation with NYSERDA, issued an NOi (68 Based on comments during the scoping process and FR 12044) to issue an EIS for "Decommissioning the complexity of issues relating to long-term agency and/or Long-Term Stewardship at the WVDP and the responsibility, this EIS was delayed (DOE-EIS-0226-R). WNYNSC." 2005 DOE issued a ROD, based on alternative A, for the The HLW canisters will remain in storage on site until "WVDP Waste Management EIS (WVDP WM EIS- transfer to a geologic repository, the decision on TRU 0337)" (70 FR 35073). waste would be deferred until certification is obtained from the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant in Carlsbad, New Mexico, and LLW and mixed LLW would be shipped off site for disposal at commercial or DOE sites. 2005 On August 26, 2005, The Coalition filed a complaint in On September, 28, 2007, the U.S. District Court, the U.S. District Court, Western District of New York, Western District of New York ruled to dismiss the against DOE regarding the NEPA process at the WVDP. complaint .in its entirety. Refer to Case 1:05-cv-00614-The Coalition contended that DOE's rescoping plan to JTC, Document 41, filed September 28, 2007 for the split the 1996 WVDP DEIS violated NEPA and the ruling. Stipulation of Compromise. The Coalition also sought a declaration that DOE is not empowered to reclassify waste at the WVDP using the "waste incidental to reprocessing" determination. 2006 An EA (DOE/EA-1552) evaluated the proposed The EA, with the FONS!, cleared the way for removal decontamination, demolition, and removal of select of 36 facilities that were (or in the next four years site facilities. A FONS! was issued. would be) no longer required to support WVDP activities. 2007 DOE issued an NOi to prepare an EIS for the disposal Nine scoping meetings were held throughout 2007; of Greater-Than-Class-C (GTCC) LLW (72 FR 40135). In the draft was never issued. On February 25, 2011, a March 2011, DOE issued the DEIS for the disposal of notice of availability for the GTCC DEIS was issued GTCC LLW and GTCC-like waste. with the 120-day public comment period ending on June 27, 2011. 2008 DOE issu*ed a notice of availability for the revised The DEIS evaluated the range of reasonable "Draft Environmental Impact Statement for alternatives for decommissioning and/or long-term Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship at stewardship of the facilities at the Center. This DEIS is the WVDP and WNYNSC (DOE/EIS-0226-D [Revised])" a revision of the 1996 Cleanup and Closure DEIS. This (73 FR 74160). DEIS was distributed December 5, 2008, for a six-month public review period, which was extended through September 8, 2009. 2010 In January 2010, DOE issued the "Final EIS (FEIS) for In Phase 1 of the phased decisionmaking preferred Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship at alternative, DOE will decommission the MPPB, the VIT the WVDP and WNYNSC (DOE/EIS-0226 [Revised])". facility, RHWF, the wastewater treatment lagoons, On April 14, 2010, DOE issued the ROD for the FEIS, and a number of other facilities. The Phase 2 decision selecting the phased decisionmaking alternative as the will be made within 10 years of the EIS ROD. preferred alternative. On May 12, 2010, NYSERDA issued a SEQR Findings Statement selecting the phased decisionmaking alternative as the preferred alternative. ECS-20 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Environmental Compliance Summary TABLE ECS-3 WVDP Environmental Permits
- Permit'Name and* Agency/*
Description Updates Status Number Permit Tvne .'* WVDP RCRA Part A NVSDEC Provides interim status DOE is currently operating On Aug~st 29, 2011, Permit Application Hazardous under RCRA for under the February 2010 the permit was (EPAID Waste treatment and storage RCRA Part A Permit transferred to CHBWV.
#NYD980779540) of hazardous waste. Application. Revisions were submitted to NVSDEC in February 2010, and conditionally approved on June 9, 2011.
6 NVCRR Part 373-2 NYSDEC Provides final status Submitted a revised On March 22, 2012, (i.e., Part B) Permit Hazardous under RCRA for application to NYSDEC on NVSDEC suspended Application (Rev. 1) Waste treatment and storage September 30, 2010. In action relative to the of hazardous waste. January 2011, NVSDEC Part B until completion review was suspended of Phase 1 work. indefinitely. Thereafter, remaining hazardous waste management units will be subject to RCRA permitting. Air Facility NYSDEC/ Air Certificate caps NOx and None No expiration date. Registration Emissions SOx emissions from two Certificate boilers. (9-0422-00005/00099) MPPB Ventilation EPA/ NESHAP MPPB ventilation Conditional approval was Original approval on (WVDP-687-01) radionuclide emissions received on July 9, 2009 to December 22, 1987. (originally the Liquid discontinue monitoring Modified on May 25, Waste Treatment after establishing an 1989 for laboratories. System [LWTS]) ambient monitoring Modified February 18, network and meeting EPA 1997 to include the criteria, with a 24-month slurry-fed ceramic extension granted by the melter. No expiration EPA on July 14, 2011. date. VIT Facility Heating, EPA/ NESHAP VIT Facility HVAC Facility being used for Approved on February Ventilation, and Air- system for radionuclide remote processing of 18, 1997. No Conditioning (HVAC) emissions waste. expiration date. System (no permit number) 01-14 Building EPA/ NESHAP Ventilation of The ventilation system and Original approval on Ventilation System radionuclide emissions sampling and monitoring October 5, 1987. (WVDP-187-01) in the 01-14 building. was discontinued in Modified on May 25, October 2012 prior to the* 1989 for LWTS. No start of building demolition expiration date. in December 2012. Note: Permit and license expiration dates are current as of September 2013. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 ECS-21
Environmental Compliance Summary TABLE ECS-3 (continued) WVDP Environmental Permits
;.*. Permit Name and Agency/ .. '
Description
- Updates Status
*Number Permit Type *'
Contact Size- EPA/ NESHAP Contact size-reduction Ventilation not in service; Approved on October Reduction Facility and decontamination ventilated with portable 5, 1987. No expiration (CSRF) facility radionuclide ventilation units (PVUs). date. (WVDP-287-0i) emissions Supernatant EPA/ NESHAP STS ventilation for System receives air Original approval on Treatment System radionuclide emissions ventilated from T&VDS. October 5, 1987. {STS) /PVU Modified on May 4, (WVDP-38 7-01) 1998 for full-time ventilation ofWTF. No expiration date. RHWF(WVDP-RHWF EPA/ NESHAP RHWF ventilation for Permit issued to allow use Approved on April 18, Mod-001) radionuclide emissions of plasma arc cutting 2012. No expiration techniques in the RHWF. date. Outdoor Ventilated EPA/ NESHAP Fifteen PVUs for Since 2007, EPA approval Original approved on Enclosures/ PVUs removal of to expand usage of PVUs December 22, 1987. (WVDP-587-01) radionuclides. from 10 to 15. DOE tracks Modified on December usage on the basis of 10, 2007 for 15 units. annual cumulative No expiration date. estimated dose. SPDES (NY0000973) NYSDEC / Monitors discharges to An amended SPDES permit The permit expires on Effluent water surface waters from was issued by NYSDEC, June 30, 2016. various on-site sources. effective July 1, 2011. NYSDOH ELAP NVSDOH / ELAP Certification of the ELAB Certification is held by URS Certification was Certification to URS certification for the analysis of Corporation Laboratory. terminated on June 30, Corporation, lab ID potable and nonpotable Effective February 2009, 2012.
#10474 water samples for the certificate was revised EPA Lab Code specific radiological and to remove total suspended NV01259 non radiological solids. The certification constituents. was renewed on April 1, 2012.
Frank's Vacuum Truck Sanitary sewage Permit issued to hauler Permit effective July 1, Permit expires July 31, Service sludge hauler of waste from the 2012. 2013. The new (Permit #12-05-TR285) permit WWTF. sanitary waste hauler is Zuech's Environmental Services, Inc. CBS {#9-000158) NYSDEC/ Registration of bulk Currently no tanks at the If regulated CBS tanks regulated CBS storage tanks used for WVDP are regulated under will be needed, a tanks listed hazardous 6 NYCRR Parts 595-599. permit application will chemicals. be submitted under the existing CBS registration. Note: Permit and license expiration dates are current as of September 2013. ECS-22 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Environmental Compliance Summary TABLE ECS-3 {continued) WVDP Environmental Permits P~rmit ,Name and Agency/ ,,, bescriptfon Updates Status Number' Permit Tvoe PLJblic Water System CCHD The WVDP is a None No expiration date. ID #NY0417557 nontransient noncommunity public drinking water system. PBS (#9-008885) NYSDEC/ PBS Registration of bulk Diesel fuel tank FO-D-11 License expires tank registration storage tanks used for was permanently dosed September 2, 2016. petroleum. and removed from the registration on September 11, 2008. Asbestos-Handling NYSDOL/ Asbestos contractors CHBWV was granted The license was license asbestos- license with specific asbestos-handling license renewed on CHBWV #61646 handling and variances for handling in October 2011. September 5, 2012 sampling and monitoring. and expires on activities September 30, 2013; each variance has a unique expiration date. NYS Atomic NYSDEC Division Two Class A Low-Hazard NYSDEC inspected the No expiration date. Development Dam #1 of Water, dams on the WNYNSC dams in 2009 following a (ID #019-3149) Bureau. of Flood property, that supply major storm rain-event. Protection and water for drinking and Repair or construction NYS Atomic Dam Safety operational purposes, activities related to the Development Dam #2 are maintained at the dams will require permits (ID #019-3150) WVOP. from NYSDEC. Inspections and maintenance were routinely performed and documented in CY 2012. Great Lakes Water NYSDEC The legislation was Certificate issued August Certificate expires on Withdrawal enacted to gain more 24, 2011. August 24, 2013. Registration complete information Certificate for managing the NYS's Due to changes in the (NYGL08701) water resources. legislation, the WVDP no longer requires a registration certificate. Underground Injection EPA EPA regulates injection Several wells in the north On November 18, Control Program Groundwater of tracer solutions into plateau PTW were used to 2010, EPA authorized Regulation (UICID: Compliance groundwater wells. inject sodium bromide operation of injection 11NY00906001) Section tracer solution to estimate wells. grouridwater flow velocities. Note: Permit and license expiration dates are current as of September 2013. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 ECS-23
Environmental Compliance Summary TABLE ECS-3 (concluded} WVDP Environmental Permits
, , Permit Nfjme cmd < ~ J) Agency/ ,.,, ':
"' bescriptiori:*
- Updates' ',, Status.
Number Permit Type Bird Depredation NYSDEC/ State license for the NYS no longer requires this Effective April 1, 2012, License (32) Division of Fish removal of nests of license. NYS implemented and Wildlife migratory birds. changes to NYS ECL 11-0521, no longer requiring a depredation license. Federal permitting is required. Bird Depredation U.S. Fish and Federal permit for the Permit was renewed on Permit expires Permit Wildlife Service limited taking of October 1, 2012. September 30, 2013. (MB747595-0) migratory birds and active bird nests. Nationwide Permit Joint Stream and wetland Permit effective on Permit expires in Number 27 Application; restoration activities at September 14, 2011 November 2013. (NWP-27) NYSDEC and Erdman Brook. Stream and Wetland USACE Restoration Activities Nationwide Permit Joint Installation of a Permit effective on Permit is valid until Number 33 Application; temporary dam and a June 29, 2012. June 29, 2014. Installation of a NYSDECand temporary water temporary dam USACE diversion structure in an unnamed tributary to Buttermilk Creek. Note: Permit and license expiration dates are.current as of September 2013. ECS-24 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Environmental Compliance Summary TABLE ECS-4 WVDP RCRA SSWMUs and Constituent SWMUs Identified in the RFI under the RCRA 3008(h) Order on Consent SSWMU SWMU# Constituent SWMUs Former lagoon 1; LLWTF; 3, 4, 17, 17a, SSWMU #1- LLWTF . lagoons 2, 3, 4, and 5; and 17b neutralization pit; and interceptors Oemineralizer sludge ponds and solvent dike; SSWMU #2 - Miscellaneous 5, 6, 7, and 10 effluent mixing basin; and Small Units waste paper incinerator LWTS; 18, 18a Sealed cement solidification system; and SSWMU #3 - LWTS Rooms, and all sealed rooms in .the MPPB (per the RFI Work plan and 22 Current Conditions Report) WTF; SSWMU #4 - HLW Stbrage 12/12a, 13, VIT test facility waste storage tanks; and Processing Area 19, and 20 STS;and VIT facility SSWMU #5 - Maintenance 8 Maintenance shop leach field Shop Leach Field Lag storage additions (LSAs) #1 and #2 hardstands; old and new hardstand storage*areas; 9/9a, 15, SSWMU #6- Low-Level Lag storage building; 16/16a,and Waste Storage Area Lag storage extension; 38 LSAs #3 and #4; and the drum supercompactor SSWMU #7 - Chemical Process Cell-Waste Storage 14 Chemical Process Cell-Waste Storage Area Area SSWMU #8-CDDL 1 COOL NOA and NOA trench soil containment area; 2, 11/lla, 23, kerosene tanks; SSWMU #9-NOA 31, and 39 NOA container storage area; and interceptor trench project and staging area for NOA SSWMU #10 - Integrated 21 Integrated radwaste treatment system drum cell Radwaste Treatment System The SOA is a closed radioactive waste landfill that is contiguous with SSWMU #11- SDA NA the Project premises and is owned and managed by NYSERDA. For more information, see their website at www.riyserda.ny.gov. SSWMU #12 - HWSLs 24 HWSLs 1to4 Note: The WVDP RCRA SWMUs and. SSWMUs are discussed under the section titled "RCRA§3008(h) Administrative Order on
*consent'~.
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 ECS-25
Environmental Compliance Summary TABLE ECS-4 (concluded} WVDP RCRA SSWMUs and Constituent SWMUs Identified in the RFI under the RCRA 3008(h) Order on Consent
.. ... '* . :*.. .WVDP.RCffA SVJ!MUs Not Associqtec/. with an,SSWMU Inactive scrap metal landfill adjacent to bulk storage warehouse 25 (NYSERDA SWMU) 26 Subcontractor maintenance area 27 Fire brigade training area 28 VIT hardstand 29 Industrial waste storage area 30 Cold hardstand area near the CDDL 32 Old sewage treatment facility 33 Existing sewage treatment facility 34 Temporary storage locations for well purge water 35 Construction and demolition area Individual SWMUs 36 Old school house septic system 37 CSRF 40 Satellite accumulation areas and 90-day storage areas
- 41. Designated roadways 42 Product storage area 43 Warehouse extension staging area Fuel receiving and storage area; high-integrity container and 44 SUREPAK' staging area 45 Breach in laundry wastewater line 46 VIT vault and empty container hardstand 47 RHWF
---- Sealed rooms in the MPPB Note: The WVDP RCRA SWMUs and SSWMUs are discussed under the section titled "RCRA §3008(h) Administrative Order on Consent".
ECS-26 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Environmental Compliance Summary TABLE ECS-5 Summary of Waste Management Activities at the .WVDP During 2012 Waste Description/ Type of Project Quantity Discussion Facility Generating Waste in 2012 Includes all sources of 3 Waste packaged and shipped LLW 34,497 cubic feet (ft ) generation (977 cubic meters [m 3
])
TRU waste processing 3 Legacy TRU waste processed in TRU waste 150 ft (4.25 m 3
)
preparation for shipment. Hazardous and Waste management according 16,619 lbs Waste packaged and shipped during Mixed LLW to the STP (7.54mt) CY 2012 Radiological NYSDEC regulates point-source Approximately During CY 2012, five batches of wastewater from liquid effluent discharges of 8,300,000 gal wastewater were processed through the LLWTF (LLW2 treated process wastewater (31,600,000 L) the LLW2. This included groundwater [WNSP001]) through the SPDES permit for recovered from the north plateau the WVDP. groundwater recovery system (NPGRS) and groundwater pumped from the NOA interceptor trench. Treated sewage and Wastewater processing, Approximately The WWTF treated sanitary and industrial discharge i,203,350 gal industrial wastewater that was wastewaters (4 ,555,175 L) discharged through outfall WNSP007 (WNSP007) in CY 2012. NPGRS Pump and treat strontium-90 Approximately The NPGRS operated to recover contaminated groundwater
- 2,900,000 gal groundwater from an area near the (11,000,000 L) leading edge of the strontium-90 plume on the north plateau. Water was treated by ion exchange in the LLW2 to remove strontium-90, then transferred to the lagoons.
NOA interceptor Interceptor trench (WNNDATR) Approximately Groundwater was pumped and trench* and groundwater pre-treatment 64,035 gal transferred to the LLW2. (242,400 L) No n-dodecane or TBP were encountered in CY 2012. No pre-treatment was necessary. Digested sanitary Waste shipping and disposal Approximately Digested sludge and wastewater sludge 2,250,000 gal from the WWTF were shipped to the (8,520,000 L) Buffalo Sewer Authority for disposal during CY 2012. Asbestos Asbestos management and 1,232 linear feet pipe Insulation was removed from abatement insulation; 1,140 square feet piping, and fire doors, tar coatings, 2 2 and caulks were removed in the (ft ) (106 square meters [m ]) asbestos-containing fire doors, MPPB during CY 2012. tar coatings, and caulks. Universal waste Spent bulbs/spent batteries Bulbs - 805 lb ( 0.4 ton) Waste disposed of as universal Batteries - 3,901 lbs (1.9 ton) waste. Note: Certain waste totals are tallied by FY while others are tallied by CY. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 ECS-27
Environmental Compliance Summary TABLE ECS-6 Recycled Materials for FY 2012 Recycled Materials 2012 Quantity Mixed paper and corrugated cardboard 45,600 lbs (20.7 mt) Iron I steel 26,780 lbs (12.1 mt) Styrofoam 30 lbs (0.014 mt) Toner cartridges 1,638 lbs (0.74 mt) Wood 3,600 lbs (1.63 mt) Fluorescent bulbs 805 lbs (0.36 mt) Electronics reuse and recycling 15,893 lbs (7.21 mt) Batteries 4,707 lbs (2.14 mt) Drums 960 lbs (0.44 mt) TABLE ECS-7 EO 13514 Pollution Prevention/ Waste Minimization Accomplishments 2012 DOE Sustainability Award of "Honorable Mention" for Operation of a PTW for /Vlitigation for Strontium-90 in
. * ,, *, , ,, * *,S * , *, , ,,:* Groutj.dwater. , , , ,. " !** ,',,_, ,. ,
The WVDP selected a passive PTW technology to mitigate the spread of strontium-90 contaminated groundwater at the WVDP. Installed in the fall of 2010, the PTW is intended to replace the existing NPGRS. The PTW is an 860-ft-long trench approximately three-feet wide and up to 30-ft-deep. It is a full-scale application of this technology, using a naturally-occurring zeolite-containing mineral (clinoptilolite) for in-situ selective adsorption of strontium-90. The PTW was installed using a single-pass trenching system, which excavated the native soil through the surficial aquifer down to the clay confining layer and cpncurrently back-filled the trench with the treatment media. Upon completing the PTW construction, monitoring wells were installed to augment the existing 22 up- and down-gradient wells to evaluate its performance as a radiological groundwater contaminant mitigative measure. The performance monitoring objectives are to: 1) monitor the physical integrity of the PTW and its components, 2) assess the strontium-90 affected groundwater in the PTW vicinity, and 3) monitor and assess the strontium-90 removal from the groundwater moving through the PTW. During the first two years of monitoring, the PTW construction and ongoing monitoring has demonstrated that all of the design functional requirements have been acheived. In August 2012, DOE received a DOE Sustainability Award of "Honorable Mention" for operation of the PTW and mitigating strontium-90 in groundwater, based on benefits of the mitigation unit including: 1) "Sustainability" - construction is designed to meet a 20-year hydraulic and treatment performance life, 2) "Waste Minimization" - avoidance of the current use of the pump-and-treat system which generates high volumes of wastewater requiring treatment, 3) "Energy Efficiency" - this is a passive operation that requires no utilities, 4) "Resources" - the treatment media is a naturally-occurring mineral with significant cation exchange capacity, 5) "Health, Safety, and Environment" - the treatment media is non-toxic, easily installed and is below ground preventing inadvertent human exposure to the absorbed strontium-90, and 6) "Cost Effective" - the PTW requires no operation and maintenance with the exception of limited landscaping, erosion control, and periodic inspection of above-ground ancillary systems. ECS-28 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Environmental Compliance Summary TABLE ECS-7 {concluded) EO 13514 Pollution Prevention/ Waste Minimization Accomplishments 2012 lnsta/latioQ of the 1.11/TF T&VDS *, }
" ~' .~ ~ "" . ' ' ,' ~ . ,
Through collaboration between the site's EMS and other site management systems, a T&VDS was designed and successfully installed to evaporate residual liquids inside four underground tanks in the WTF, to evaporate groundwater that infiltrates into the associated underground vaults and containment pans, and to maintain a low relative humidity inside the tanks and vaults to essentially halt tank corrosion. The EMS helped to ensure environmental aspects were considered during the design process and facilitated the process of ensuring that all regulatory requirements were addressed, energy efficient components were utilized, and waste minimization was optimized. By evaporating liquid external to the tanks, the need for liquid pumping and treatment was eliminated, the rate of external tank corrosion was greatly reduced, and the potential for a tank leak will be eliminated after the tank interiors are dried out. The WTF consists of two 760,000-gal (2,876,913 L) carbon steel tanks, each contained in an underground steel-reinforced concrete vault, and two 15,000 gal (56,781 L) stainless steel tank~ both contained within a common underground steel-reinforced concrete vault. Residual liquids in these tanks at the start of this drying project were approximately 25, 700 gal (97,285 L). The system is currently operating as expected and tank and vault liquid levels are decreasing. As of December 31, 2012, 20,700 gal (78,358 L) of residual radiologically contaminated liquids from the four tanks have been evaporated in addition to thousands of gallons of liquids evaporated from the three underground vaults. TABLE ECS-8 WVDP 2012 Air Quality Noncompliance Episodes Date(s) *Description/
- Per~it Ty1ie Facility Parameter Exceeded Solutions EPA, NESHAP All All None None NYSDEC Air Permit All All None None TABLE ECS-9 Status of EPCRA {SARA Title Ill) Reporting at the WVDP For CY 2012 EPCRA Section Description of Reporting Submission Required EPCRA 302-303 Planning Notification No EPCRA304 Extremely Hazardous Substance Release Notification No EPCRA311 Material Safety Data Sheet No EPCRA312 Hazardous Chemical Inventory Yes EPCRA 313 Toxic Chemical Release Inventory Reporting No WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 ECS-29
Environmental Compliance Summary TABLE ECS-10 Reportable Chemicals Above EPCRA 312 (SARA Title Ill} Threshold Planning Quantities Stored at the WVDP in 2012
,, d
' . , ' '"' " *' n~." ' ' ', ~ ' ;' ~,,;,:
Chemicals Stored cit the WVDP Above the Threshold Planning Quantities Diesel fuel/No. 2 Fuel Oil . IIon-exchange media !sulfuric acid Unleaded Gasoline ILead-acid batteries IOils -various grades TABLE ECS-11 WVDP SPDES" Permit Limit Exceedances in 2012
.5. *.
N°"**Rt. : *.. Percep~" Permit Type Out]al/(s) Parameter
'* .} ,',<'
No; of Permit 'No. ofsamples .
- Compliant *compliant Exceptions Taken
-* Samples Samples SP DES All All 0 1,580 1,580 -100.0%
- Radionuclides are not regulated under the site's SPDES permit. However, special requirements in the permit specify thal the concentration of radionuclides in the discharge ls subject to*requirements of DOE Order 5400.5, (see letter CHBWV to NYSDEC, January 8, 2013).
Note: The WVDP notified NYSDEC that DOE Order 5400.5 was replaced by DOE Order 458. 1. The WVDP is currently executing the requirements of DOE Order 458.1, including its allied DCSs. TABLE ECS-12 WVDP Migratory Bird Nest Depredation Activities in Fiscal Year 2012 J .. Permit/License Type Parameter Permit limit 2012 Total J U.S. Fish and Wildlife - Removal of Active Barn Swallow Nests 20 0 Bird Depredation Permit U.S. Fish and Wildlife - Removal of Active American Robin Nests 15 0 Bird Depredation Permit U.S. Fish and Wildlife - Removal of Active Eastern Phoebe Nests 5 0 Bird Depredation Permit U.S. Fish and Wildlife - Removal of Active Common Grackle Nests 15 0 Bird Depredation Permit U.S. Fish and Wildlife - Removal of Inactive Migratory Bird Nests Not limited 0 Bird Depredation Permit U.S. Fish and Wildlife - Oiling of Canada Goose Eggs NA 1 Registration NA - Not applicable ECS-30 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 1 ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM ISMS Implementation
- Pollution prevention reporting requirements of the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990.
A plan to integrate environmental, safety, health, and quality (ESH&Q) management programs at the WVDP To support the federal government's sustainability goals, was developed and verified in 1998. Environmental SM Es contractors must develop site sustainability plans (SSPs) routinely participate in a site-wide process to review to identify their respective contributions toward meeting work plans, identify ESH&Q concerns, and specify prac- the goals. Contractors must integrate their SSPs with op~ tices that ensure work is performed safely. For purposes erational plans as applicable. of this policy, the term "safety" includes environmental, radiological, industrial/chemical, and !luclear safety and The second objective addresses the EMS, in that contrac-health and encompasses the public, workers, and the tors must develop and implement a system that is cer-environment. tified by, or conforms with, International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14001:2004. Site sustainability EMS goals must be integrated into the EMS. During the ISMS development, the EMS was identi- The environmental monitoring program is an important fied as an integral part of the ISMS. The WVDP EMS, as component of the EMS, ensuring accomplishment of its
- established, implements sound stewardship practic- mission. The elements of the WVDP EMS are summarized in es that are protective of the air, water, land, and other Table 1-1.
natural and cultural resources potentially impacted by DOE operations and by which DOE cost effectively meets Environmental Policy or exceeds compliance with applicable environmental, public health, and resource protection requirements. The official site environmental policy is provided on the The EMS objectives implement sustainable practices for following page. Activities at the WVDP during 2012 were enhancing environmental, energy, and transportation conducted in full compliance with applicable environ-management performance. mental statutes, DOE directives, EOs, and state laws and regulations. Refer to Table ECS-1, "Compliance Status The first objective emphasizes compliance with the sus- Summary for the WVDP in CY 2012," for details. tainability requirements of the following EOs and legis-lation: Environmental Aspects
- EO 13423, "Strengthening Federal Environmental, Per the IS0:14001 standard, an environmental aspect is Energy, and Transportation Management;" an element of an organization's activities, products, or services that can interact with the environment. Activi-
- EO 13514, "Federal Leadership in Environmental, ties that have regulatory implications or those that could have significant environmental impacts are identified as Energy, and Economic Performance;"
significant aspects. The potential significant environmen-
- National Energy Conservation Policy Act; tal aspects of site activities identified within the elements of the WVDP EMS are summarized on Table 1-2 together
- En"ergy Policy Acts of 1992 and 2005; with the method by which aspects are graded.
- Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007; Site activities related to hazardous and radiological waste management, pollution prevention, air and water emis-
- Inventory and reporting requirements of the EPCRA, sions, energy and materials .use, and recycling are pre-Sections 301 through 313; and sented in the Environmental Compliance Summary (ECS).
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 1-1
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System The WVDP is currently in the D&D phase of operations; Environmental Management Program therefore, current work scope encompasses waste man-agement and disposition, decontamination, deactivation, An environmental management program is a key element facility disposition, and infrastructure reduction. For each to successfully implementing an EMS. The program is facility or structure that is considered for demolition, the implemented by the "WVDP EMS policy," which describes base environmental aspects are identified and addressed how the objectives and targets are achieved and during work planning with the assistance of hazard con- clearly defines responsibilities and time frames. It also trol specialists. Before a building may be demolished, a provides for modifications to ensure that environmental "Demolition Readiness Checklist" that captures the rele- management will apply to new developments and new or vant environmental aspects must be completed. modified activities. This is accomplished through routine
.review and update of policies and procedures, as well legal and Other Requirements as through project schedules, milestone tracking, and commitment tracking.
Requirements contained in DOE orders and directives are incorporated into WVDP contracts with subcontractors as Structure and Responsibility specific terms and conditions. Environmental regulatory reviews are conducted to identify, evaluate, and docu- All project personnel are responsible for adherence to ment changes to applicable environmental regulations. the site's EMS policies. In addition, specific management Items that have an effect upon compliance activities at representatives have defined responsibility and authori-the WVDP are communicated to other appropriate Proj- ty for ensuring that EMS requirements are implemented ect personnel. in accordance with the policy, and for reporting to staff management. Objectives and Targets During 2012, audits were performed by internal and The EMS objectives and targets shown in Table 1-3 are external agencies to identify areas for improvement and intended to prevent pollution, reduce environmental assess compliance to the EMS principles. For further dis-hazards, protect the public and environment, reduce cussion of audits, refer to "EMS Audits and Other Audits waste disposal costs, and improve operational capability. and Assessments" later in this chapter. The goals and objectives were evaluated using a graded
. approach which took into consideration that buildings Training, Awareness, and Competence and infrastructure will be demolished in the coming years.
Human performance/behavior-based safety (HP/BBS) The WVDP's "Waste Minimization and Pollution Preven- training is conducted across the site. Project personnel tion Awareness Plan" establishes the strategic framework are trained to HP/BBS concepts and practices, and HP/ for integrating waste minimization and pollution preven- BBS observer technique training is provided for safety de-tion into waste generating and reducing activities, pro- partment and safety observers. Self-assessment activities curing recycled products, reusing existing products, and are also stressed as a mechanism for evaluating, improv-using methods that conserve energy. The comprehensive ing, and maintaining worker safety. The WVDP operated program drives continual effort to prevent or minimize throughout 2012 in a safe manner that was protective of pollution, with the overall objective of reducing health its workers, the public, and the environment. and safety risks, and protecting the environment. Refer to the ECS Table ECS-6, "Recycled Materials for FY 2012," The radiological and hazardous work environment at the and Table ECS-7, "Executive Order 13514 Pollution Pre- . WVDP warrants strict adherence to safety procedures. vention/Waste Minimization Accomplishments in 2012." . During 2012, the WVDP work force achieved a cumula-tive total of 5.5 million safe work hours without a lost CHBWV has revised the program and received a Certif- time work injury before experiencing a lost time event in icate of Registration for the ISO 14000:2004 certifica- November 2012. tion of its EMS on July 31, 2012, in accordance with the requirements of DOE Order 436.1. New objectives and 10 CFR 851, "Worker Safety and Health Program." 10 targets were established by CHBWV during CY 2012 to CFR 851 became effective in February 2007, with full align with and assist in achieving the goals in the SSP. implementation at the WVDP by May 2007. The legisla-tion superseded DOE Order 440.lA, "Worker Protection Management for DOE Federal and Contractor Employees," 1-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012.
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System Cl~B£i,L Environmental Policy West Valley Decommissioning Team It is the policy of CH2M HILL B&W West Valley, LLC (CHBWV) to conduct the West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) in a safe, compliant and cost-effective manner that protects human health and the environment. We achieve this by integrating environmental requirements and pollution prevention into our work planning and execution, and taking actions to minimize the environmental impacts of our operations. We establish and communicate environmental responsibilities, provide environmental training to our workforce, and implement controls to mitigate environmental hazards. These activities are conducted in accordance with our Environmental Management System (WV -980). Through employee involvement and management commitment to environmental excellence, we will:
- Identify and comply with all applicable environmental laws and regulations.
- Use practicable means to minimize or eliminate the generation of new wastes Without a path for disposition.
- Protect the unique natural, biological and cultural resources associated with WVDP activities.
- Conserve natural resources by reusing and recycling materials, purchasing recycled materials, and using recyclable materials.
- Establish documented environmental objectives and targets and update them as necessary to reflect CHBWV's changing needs, missions, and goals.
- Consider the input of our stakeholders when weighing alternative environmental courses of action .
- Monitor our impact on the environment and measure our performance; and communicate the results to our employees, subcontractors, and stakeholders.
- Continuously improve our environmental management system through self-assessment and corrective action.
- Communicate this policy to all employees and subcontractors and mak.e it available to the public and our stakeholders.
This policy applies to all persons working on behalf of CHBWV at the WVDP. employee and subcontractor is expected to i How this policy and to ~rt en concerns to management Managers shall prof111;>teenvironrnental stewardship, ac n to address concerns and issues and have zero tolerance for Ftoncomplianc:e.
- ent and General Manager WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 1-3
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System TABLE 1-1 Elements of the CY 2012 WVDP EMS Implementation Planning Environme ntal CHBWV shall identify those environmental aspects of site activities, includ ing energy and Aspects transportation functions, which have, or can have significant impact on the environment, including, but not limited to air em issions, water releases, waste man agement, contamination of land, use of raw materials and natura l resources, and other local environmenta l and community issues . Since the WVDP is currently in the deactivation, and D&D phase, the significant aspects are related to these activities as shown in Table 1-2, "WVDP Base Environmenta l Aspects". These aspects are add ressed in the work instruct ion packages with the ass istance of the haza rd control specialists. In add ition, build ing demol it ions require the completion of a demolit ion readiness checklist which captures many of these environmental aspects. These aspects w ill be reviewed and updated if needed when new or modified work scope is added to the contract. Aspects related to these sign ificant impacts must be considered in setting environm enta l objectives at the site, project, activity, and task level. Consideration should be given to promoting long-term stewardsh ip of t he WVDP's natural and cultura l resou rces th roughout its opera t iona l, closure, and post closure life cycle. Efforts shou ld be taken to reduce or elimin ate waste generat ion, the release of pollutants to the envi ronment, and the use of Class I ozone-depleting substances through source reduction including segregation and substitution, re-use, recycling, and sustainable deve lopment, and by procuring environmentally preferable products and services, pursuant to DOE Susta inable Environmenta l Stewardsh ip Goals. Lega l and Other CHBWV sha ll identify and disseminate to employees, and the public upon request, those lega l Requ ireme nts and other requirements to wh ich the company subscribes and wh ich are applicab le to the environmental aspects of site act ivities . Objectives and CHBWV shal l est ablish documented environmental object ives and targets fo r relevant funct ions Ta rgets and at multiple levels (i .e., site, project, activity, and task) . The policy shall take into account and be kept consistent with the follow ing: environmenta l, legal, business, financia l, and other requirements; significant environmental aspects; SSP; technological options; and the views of inte rested parties . Object ives and targets correlate with ISMS Core Function 1, Define the Scope of Work, which requ ires that expectat ions be set, tasks identified and prioritized, and resources allocated . Objectives and ta rgets are set primarily through annua l ISMS Pe rformance Obj ectives, Measures, and Commitments, SSP, management objectives, individual employee performance object ives, and to mitigate potentia l environmental impacts associated with sign ificant aspects at the WVDP. In addition, specific environmental targets are establi shed through regulatory perm its for discharges to air and wate r and through waste minimization and pollution prevention planning . DOE Order 436.1 requires that t he WVDP commit to implement ing an annu al SSP that identifies its respective contribution toward meeting DO E' s sustainability goa ls. These goa ls are also intended to :
- 1. Prevent pollution;
- 2. Reduce environmenta l hazards;
- 3. Protect public health and the environment;
- 4. Avoid poll ution control and waste disposa l costs; and
- 5. Improve operationa l capability and overall mission sustainab ility.
1-4 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System TABLE 1-1 (continued) Elements of the CV 2012 WVDP EMS Implementation Planning (continued) Objectives and Objectives and measurable targets are developed to meet the above goals. Sustainable practices Targets listed in DOE Order 436.1 and the SSP, as well as other methods are utilized to meet these (continued) targets. This list is treated as a "living document" and is updated regularly to track the status of existing targets and to add additional objectives and targets. The establishment of a green initiatives team was completed in early 2012 to brainstorm ideas to help meet EMS goals. In addition~ this team encourages energy use reduction practices that employees can adopt at their homes. Consideration should be given to ensure the early identification of, and appropriate response to, potential adverse environmental impacts associated with DOE operations, including as appropriate, pre-operational characterization and assessment; and effluent and surveillance monitoring. Implementation and Operation Structure and Each procedure referenced in the EMS must define roles, responsibilities, and authorities to Responsibility facilitate effective environmental management. All site procedures define roles and responsibilities and CHBWV management provides resources essential to implement and control the EMS. Resources include human resources and specialized skills, technology, and financial. The environmental manager is the specific CHBWV management representative who, irrespective of other responsibilities, has the defined role, responsibility, and authority for ensuring that EMS requirements are established, implemented, and maintained in accordance with this policy, and for reporting the EMS performance to the CHBWV General Manager. This reporting and associated review provides the _basis for EMS improvement. Training, CHBWV must ensure that employees are aware of the importance of conformance with the Awareness, and environmental policy and with implementing EMS procedures; the significant environmental Competence impacts, actual or potential, of their work activities; the environmental benefits of improved personal performance; their roles and responsibili~ies in achieving conformance with the environmental policy and EMS proce.dures (including emergency preparedness and response requirements); and, the potential consequences of departure from specified operating procedures. Communication CHBWV shall provide for internal communication between the various levels and functions of the company and for receiving, documenting, and responding to relevant communication from external interested parties. Communication includes both formal review of EMS related documents and informal meetings on a day to day basis to exchange critical environmental and operational information. Internal communications include articles in "The West Valley Chronicals" and "Take 5 for Safety," posters, training briefings, and presentations at all-employee meetings. Key external parties include EPA, NRC, NYSDEC, NYSDOH, NYSDOL, and local emergency responders. External communication, including information regarding significant environmental aspects when approved by DOE, includes quarterly public meetings, the reading room, regulatory round tables, monthly citizen task force meetings (for stakeholder communications), and the ASER which is available on the internet at http://www.wv.doe.gov. EMS CHBWV shall establish and maintain information, in paper or electronic form, to describe EMS Documentation core elements, their interaction, and to reference related implementing documentation. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012 1-5
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System TABLE 1-1 (continued) Elements of the CY 2012 WVDP EMS Implementation lmpleinentation and Operdtioh (continued)' J .. ,;.- '" Document Control CHBWV shall maintain controls for EMS related documentation. These controls require that documents be available at locations where operations essential to the effective functioning of the EMS are performed; provide for periodic review and revision; require that obsolete documents be promptly removed from all points of issue and points of use (or otherwise assured against unintended use); and, require that any obsolete documents retained for legal and/or record preservation purposes be suitably identified. EMS related records must be legible, dated (with dates of revision), readily identifiable (uniquely numbered or otherwise distinguishabie), orderly maintained, and retained for a specified period. EMS records are classified, inventoried, indexed, retained, and disposed in accordance with the CHBWV Master File Plan. Documents and records are maintained electronically via easy-docs and environmental data management system. Operational Control CHBWV shall identify those operations and activities that are associated with the identified significant environmental aspects in line with this policy, as well as resultant objectives and targets. Procedures for these operations and activities must provide specific conditions and criteria that must be satisfied to ensure compliance with this policy, including objectives and targets. Emergency CHBWV shall address response to accidents and emergency situations, and the prevention and Preparedness and mitigation of the environmental impacts that may be associated with them. CHBWV shall review Response and revise, where necessary, its emergency preparedness and response procedures, routinely and after the occurrence of accidents or emergency situations (where appropriate). CHBWV must also periodically conduct drills and exercises to assess. the effectiveness of the emergency management program. Checking and Corrective Action Monitoring and CHBWV shall provide for monitoring and measurement of the EMS on a regular basis, as well as Measurement key characteristics of site operations and activities that can have a significa_nt impact on the environment. Monitoring equipment shal.1 be calibrated and maintained and records of these activities retained. CHBWV shall also provide for periodic evaluation of compliance with relevant environmental legislation and regulations. Evaluation of CHBWV shall establish, implement, and maintain a procedure for periodically evaluating Compliance compliance with applicable legal and other requirements. Nonconformance CHBWV shall define responsibilities and authorities for handling and investigating and Corrective and nonconformances, taking action to mitigate any associated impacts, and for initiating and Preventive Action completing corrective and preventive actions. Corrective or preventive actions shall be taken to eliminate the causes of actual and potential nonconformances tailored to the magnitude of problems commensurate with the environmental impacts encountered. Where appropriate, changes shall be made to procedures to formally address corrective and preventive actions. Audit findings and root causes of nonconformance are tracked and addressed. Records CHBWV shall provide for the identification, maintenance, and disposition of environmental records. These records include training records and the results of audits and other reviews. Environmental records shall be legible, identifiable and traceable to the activity, or service involved. These records shall be stored and maintained in such a way that they are readily retrievable and protected against damage, deterioration, or loss. Retention times shall be clearly established and recorded. Records pertaining to the EMS such as forms, data sheets, logs, reports, or any other form of documentation are considered records and when created are to be prepared, maintained, and transferred to the records department. 1-6 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System TABLE 1-1 (conCtuded) Elements of the CY 2012 WVDP EMS Implementation Checking and Correctiv'i:i Action (continued} EMS Audit CHBWV shall conduct periodic EMS assessments to determine whether or not the EMS conforms (Assessments) to the policy requirements; that the EMS has been properly implemented and maintained; and, to provide information on assessment results to CHBWV management. Assessments shall be based on the environmental importance of site activities and consider the results of previous reviews. Assessment procedures must cover scope, frequency, methodologies, and the responsibilities and requirements for conducting assessments and reporting results. These assessments will be performed following one of two methods:
- on specific tasks or activities and will include applicable ISO 14001:2004 elements, or
- on individual core elements and will be assessed across multiple activities or projects.
Frequency of assessments will be at a minimum of one per calendar year. These assessments will include participation by personnel outside the control or scope of the EMS to ensure objectivity and the impartiality of the assessment process and will be included on the integrated assessment schedule. Management Review The CHBWV general manager shall review site environmental performance to ensure the continuing suitability, adequacy, and effectiveness of the EMS. The review must address opportunities for improvement, the need for changes to the EMS, including environmental policy, objectives, and targets, and the following specific set of inputs:
- Results of internal compliance audits and evaluations with legal requirements and with other requirements to which the organization subscribes;
- Communication(s) from external interested parties, including complaints;
- Environmental performance of the organization;
- Extent to which objectives and targets have been met;
- Status of corrective and preventive actions;
- Follow-up actions from previous management reviews;
*Changing circumstances,_ including developments in legal and other requirements related to its environmental aspects; and
- Recommendations for improvement.
Management reviews must be documented. EMS Validation* For this EMS to be considered fully implemented, it must:
- 1. Have been the subject of a formal audit by a qualified party outside the control or scope of the EMS;
- 2. Have the regulatory strategy manager and the DOE-WVDP director recognize and address the findings of the above audit.
- 3. Have the regulatory strategy manager and the DOE-WVDP director declare conformance of the EMS to the requirements of DOE Order 436.1 or the EMS is certified to ISO 14001:2004 in accordance with the accredited registrar provisions of the international standard.
CHBWV has completed the above steps and they must be completed again at least every three years for the EMS to remain fully implemented. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report~ Calendar Year 2012 1-7
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System TABLE.1-2 WVDP Significant Environmental Aspects
. ~mtironmental Aspects. that c.ould l)ave Potential Significant Environmental Impacts
. . (graded. witli overall significance =14 or >" 14 as defiried;below) .* '.*
Rad Air Emissions Air E m i s s i o n s 1 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1 Asbestos Facility Discharge to Water Toxics (Metals, Organics) and Rad Disposition Waste Generation LLW Energy Use Total Energy Saved Air Emissions Canister - Rad Emissions from Decon/Transport/Storage Nuclear Discharge to Water Toxics (Metals, Organics) and Rad Operations Vulnerability and Potential for Release (rad emissions from accident and .Storage Accidental Release scenario HEPA filter failure) Note: Environmental aspects correlate with ISMS Core Function 2, Analyze the Hazards, which requires that the hazards associated with work be identified, analyzed, and categorized. The process for ranking environmental aspects for significance is described in more detail in WV-980; "CHBWV Environmental Managment System". Grading scales: Aspects with an overall significance of 14 or greater were identified as"a significant aspect. Overall significance is computed by the product of the "Likelihood" (scaled from 1-5 as defined below) and the "Environmental Aspects" (also scaled from 1-5), added to the sum of the "Regulatory Impact" (scaled 0-5) and "Community Concerns" (scaled 0-4). Scores for each enviromental aspect are defined as follows: Likelihood Scoring Scale. (1-5): 1 =Unlikely 4 =Frequent 2 =Seldom 5 =Continuous 3 = Infrequent Environmental Impact Scale (1-5): 1 =Insignificant 4 =Frequent 2=Mild 5 = Severe/Catstrophic 3 =Moderate Regulatory Impact Scale (0-5): 0 = No applicable requirments 3 = DOE Operations Office policy 1 = Best Management Practice 4 = DOE-HQ policy 2 = Regulated in the future 5 =Regulated (mandated by a federal, state, or local government agency or contract requirement) Scoring Community Concerns Scale (0-4)*: 0 =Community not likely to become concerned 1 =Community is unconcerned but could easily become concerned 2 =Some community concerns 3 =Serious community concerns including stakeholders, watchdog or advocacy groups 4 =Public anger/lawsuits including statkeholders concerns 1-8 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System TABLE 1-3 WVDP EMS Objectives and Targets Completed in CV 2012 Objective Tar.get
- Responsibility Target Date Status*.
95% of the Goal Exceeded. purchase of PCs, laptops, monitors Electronic will be Electronic 100% of purchases of eligible Environmental Ongoing Stewardship Product equipment met EPEAT Gold Environmental standards. Assessment Tool (EPEAT) certified. Fleet reduction: Goal Exceeded. Reduce fleet size. 2 vehicles in Maintenance 9/30/2012 FY2012. Fleet has been reduced by 6 vehicles. Goal not met. Unable to recycle the test tower scrap metal due to new NYS Waste reduction requirements. Future scrap from demolition of Direct construction metal recycling is pending an test tower. and demolition Facility Disposition 11/30/2012 out-of-state recycling contract waste to recycle. award and issuance of DOE-HQ 100% of clean steel determination of the Product recycled. Environmental Assessment issued in the FR on 12/12/12 (77 FR 73996). Goal met. Place 01-14 in a cold and dark Reduce energy use. Facility Disposition 11/30/2012 Project complete. condition. Goal Exceeded. Evaluate reducing energy use from Reduce pump use Nuclear Operations Initial results indicate a energy moving water to 6/30/2012 by 50%. and Storage . savings of approximately 60 - raw-water storage 70%. tank. Evaluate and trend Goal met. release from the Achieve less than sewage treatment Nuclear Operations Actual lab results have shown SO parts per trillion 12/30/2012 plant for the and Storage* consistent results of criteria. presence of approximately 20 ppt. mercury. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 1-9
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System which directed compliance with specific Occupational Public meetings are held on a monthly basis. In 2012, Safety and Health Administration {OSHA) requirements. there were seven West Valley Citizen Task Force meetings and four quarterly public meetings. In addition to proj-Similar to the OSHA requirements, the rule established ect status reports ad topical discussions, progress on the the framework for an effective worker health and safety Phase 1 Study process was provided at the public meet-program to provide DOE contractor workers with a safe ings. In addition, a climate change workshop was help on and healthy workplace in which hazards are abated, con- August 2, 2012. Refer to "Phase 1 Studies" in the ECS. trolled, or otherwise mitigated in a manner that provides reasonable assurance that workers are adequately pro- EMS Documentation, Document Control, tected from identified hazards. and Records The "WVDP Worker Safety and Health Plan" describes
- All EMS documentation is maintained, updated, and con-how the WVDP complied with 10 CFR 851. The plan was trolled per the WVDP records retention requirements, or reviewed in February 2012 and no modifications were in accordance with specific regulatory requirements for necessary. records maintenance (e.g., NESHAP). On November 13, 2012, the "WVDP FY 2012 EO 13514 RCRA/EO Annual Any person working at the WVDP who has a personal Report on Sustainable Acquisition and Pollution Preven-*
photo badge allowing unescorted access to administra- ti on Progress" was submitted via the on line DOE, Office of tive areas of the site receives general employee training Health, Safety and Security, Pollution Prevention Tracking (GET) that covers health and safety, emergency response, and Reporting System website. In addition, on November and environmental compliance issues. All visitors to the 29, 2012, the "WVDP FY 2013 Site Sustainability Plan"
. WVDP receive a site-specific briefing on safety and emer- was submitted to DOE headquarters .
gency procedures. Operational Control Safety-Trained Supervisor Program. A WVDP certification NOA Interceptor Trench and Pretreatment System. program is maintained whereby employees complete ex-Radioactively contaminated n-dodecane, in combination tensive training to become safety-certified. Standards are with tributyl phosphate (TBP), was discovered in ground-established by the Council on Certification of Health, En-water at the NDA's northern boundary in 1983, shortly vironmental, and Safety Technologists, and the certifica-after DOE assumed control of the WVDP. Investigations tion is offered by the Board of Certified Safety Profession-during 1983 and 1984 determined the source and loca-als. Certified personnel help ensure that the work force tion of the n-dodecane-contaminated water to be from stay current with safety knowledge and practices that are eight 1,000-gal (3,785 L) tanks buried in the NOA. In applicable to managers, supervisors, and lea*d person-1985, these tanks were exhumed and the contaminat-nel. This is especially important in the WVDP's hazardous ed absorbent and tanks were treated and packaged for work environment at the WVDP, where every worker is disposal. To mitigate subsurface migration of potential expected to be responsible for safety. The WVDP certified remaining organic mixture, an interceptor trench and the personnel are recertified every five years by completing liquid pretreatment system (LPS) were installed in 1990. or conducting 30 hours of safety, health, or environmen-In 2008, a slurry wall was installed upgradient of the NOA tal training. and a geomembrane cover was installed over the NOA footprint. Communication c;:ommunications with regulators, stakeholders, employ- Operations personnel maintain the water levels in the ees, and other interested parties are maintained on an NDA trench and environmental monitoring personnel ongoing basis. The WVDP keeps regulators informed monitor for releases from the NDA. As in previous years, through routine reports, teleconferences, and meetings. n-dodecane/TBP was not detected in the trench wa-In addition, in 2012, regulatory roundtable meetings were ter; therefore, no water was treated by the LPS in 2012. held with representatives from NRC, EPA, NYSDEC, and Approximately 64,035 gal (242,400 L) of radiologically NYSDOH in July and November. The roundtables provide contaminated water were pumped and transferred from forums for project personnel and the regulators to en- the interceptor trench to the LLW2 during CY 2012. Refer gage with one another on current activities and upcoming to Chapter 4, "Groundwater Protection Program," under regulatory issues. "Groundwater Sampling Observations on the South Pla-teau: Weathered Lavery Till (WLT) and the NDA" for a 1-10 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System discussion of surface and groundwater monitoring results The ERQ refresher training was updated and completed in the vicinity of the NOA. by 70 individuals. The emergehcy management sections of GET and the CHBWV annual mandatory briefing were North Plateau Full-Scale PTW. A plume of strontium-90 also updated to reflect program changes. New CHBWV contaminated groundwater migrating to the north-north-
- and NYSERDA members were provided training in ERO ex-east, has been monitored for nearly two decades. The pectations and their assigned EOC positions.
contamination source was determined to originate from piping leaks that entered the ground below the southwest Environmental Monitoring and corner of the MPPB, prior to Project*operations. In Octo- Measurement ber and November 2010, an 860-foot-long zeolite-filled PTW was installed along the existing roadway south of Since the WNYNSC is not an active nuclear fuel reprocess-the CDDL. The PTW allows groundwater to pass through, ing facility, the environmental monitoring program at the while adsorbing the radioactive strontium-90. The zeolite WVDP focuses on measuring radiological and chemical used as the PTW media is a natural mineral with a po~ous constituents associated with the aged residual by-prod-structure that adsorbs positively charged ions, such as ucts of former NFS operations, the Project's former HLW strontium. Sixty-six groundwater monitoring wells were treatment operations, and the current operations for installed to monitor the wall's performance. The work for management of HLW, TRU waste, and LLW. this project was completed using American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funding. Refer to Chapter 4, "Ground- Exposure to radioactivity from site activities could occur water Protection Program," under "Strontium-90 Plume through air, water, and food pathways. Therefore, these Remediation Activities" for further discussion. potential pathways are .monitored at the WVDP. Air and surface water pathways are the primary means by which Emergency Preparedness and Response radioactive material could move off site. In the event of health, safety, or environment emergen- The WVDP's on- and off-site monitoring program includes cies, the Incident Commander activates the Emergency measuring the concentration of alpha and beta radioactiv-Operations Center (EOC) and the Technical Support Cen- ity, conventionally referred to as "gross alpha" and "gross ter in accordance with site Emergency Response Organi- beta," in air and water effluents. Measuring the total al-zation (ERO) procedures. pha and beta radioactivity from key locations produces a comprehensive picture of on- and off-site radioactivity Throughout 2012, Emergency Management, ERO, and levels from all sources. Frequent updating and tracking of Operations personnel participated in 13 different drills the gross radioactivity in effluents is required to maintain and/or exercises. To continually improve emergency pre- acceptable operations. paredness and response, corrective actions identified. in drills and exercises are placed into open items tracking More-detailed measurements are also made for specific system {OITS) and followed to completion. Several drills radionuclides. Radionuclides monitored at the Project are are also incorporated in assigned training requirement those that might produce relatively higher doses or that validation checklists and were repeated throughout the are most abundant in air and water effluents. Because year with appropriate personnel. man-made sources of radiation at the Project have been decaying for more than 40 years, the monitoring program The WVDP has provisions in place for interface and coor- does not routinely include short-lived radionuclides, that dination with federal, state, and local agencies and orga- is, isotopes with a half-life of less than two years, which nizations responsible for implementation of off-site emer- would currently be present at less than 1/100,000 of their gency response actions to protect the health and safety original radioactivity levels. of the public and environment. Formal relationships with federal or state agencies are established through feder- The WVDP monitoring program includes sanitary waste-al interc:igency agreements, internal DOE agreement or water discharges and storm water for nonradiological wa-directives, state regulations, or state and local emergency ter quality and chemical constituents. See Appendix A for plans. Other formal relationships with local agencies are the schedule of sample locations and analytical require-documented via MOUs or letters of Agreement (LOAs). ments, and Chapter 2 for a discussion of radiological and All MOUs and LOAs between off site agencies and the nonradiological monitoring program information. WVDP were updated, revised and approved in 2012. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 1-11
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System Environmental Management of Wastewater. Water con- laboratory for the specific radionuclides associated with taining radioactive material from site process operations the radioactive materials being handled in the facilities. is collected in the site's interceptors, then transferred to the LLW2 and treated. The LLW2 includes the LLW treat- Ventilation air through facilities undergoing radioactive ment building and associated holding lagoons. material cleanup passes through high-efficiency filters before being released to the atmosphere. The filters are Lagoon 3 water is contained, sampled, and analyzed generally more effective for particulate matter than for before its release through a SPDES-permitted outfall. In gaseous radioactivity. Therefore, facility air treatment 2012, about 8.3 million gal ( 31.6 million L) of water were tends to remove a lesser percentage of gaseous radio-discharged through outfall 001, the lagoon 3 weir. Table activity (e.g., tritium and iodine-129) than radioactivity 1-4 summarizes the estimated radioactivity releases in associated with particulate matter (e.g., strontium-90 and the 2012 discharge waters, as compared to the previous cesium-137). However, gaseous radionuclide emissions 10-year average. (Also, see Table 2-1 in Chapter 2.) .Note remain far below the most restrictive regulatory limits for that the total releases of tritium, alpha and beta activity public safety such that additional treatment technologies in 2012 through outfall 001 were all below the 10-year beyond those already provided are typically not neces-average. (See "Predicted Dose From Waterborne Releas- sary. es" in Chapter 3.) Table 1-4 shows the gaseous and particulate mat-Effective operation of the site WWTF is indicated by com- ter radioactivity emissions from the MPPB (location pliance with the applicable discharge limits regulated by ANSTACK) in 2012 compared to averages from the pre-the SPDES permit. Approximately 60 chemical and water vious 10-year period. All of the emissions from ANSTACK quality constituents are monitored regularly. were well below the 10-year average. The analytical results are reported to the NYSDEC via monthly DMRs, required under the SPDES program. There were no SPDES effluent limit exceedances and two noncompliance events during 2012. (See "SPDES Permit TABLE 1-4 Noncompliance Events" in the ECS.) Historical limit excep-2012 Radioactivity Releases tions are discussed in previous ASERs. Although the goal Versus 10-Year Averagesa of the LLW2 and operations is to maintain effluent water quality consistently within the permit requirements, if '*
' Radionuclide ,10-Year .%of.
SPDES permit limit exceptions occur, the exceptions are evaluated to determine their cause and to identify cor-
*Average 2012 Curie.s. 10-Year
'* Curies ,.
rective measures. 'Average
.. Aqu,~ous Discharge L_LW2 The NPGRS operated throughout 2012, recovering Tritium 0.077 0.019 25%
groundwater from an area within the western lobe of Gross Alpha 0.018 0.014 78% the strontium-90 plume on the north plateau. During and Beta 2012, approximately 2.9 million gal (10.9 million L) were Air!Jo~_ne Discharge ANSTACK
.. \
recovered and treated by ion exchange to remove stron- Gaseous tium-90. The water was transferred to the lagoon system Tritium 0.010 0.0025 25% and ultimately discharged through the lagoon 3 weir. For lodine-129 0.000070 0.000021 30% a more-detailed discussion of the plume and the NPGRS, Particulate see "Strontium-90 Plume Remediation Activities in 2012" Gross Alpha in Chapter 4. 0.000089 0.0000093 10% and Beta Environmental Management of Airborne Emissions.
*All numbers were rounded to two significant digits after During operations, ventilated air from various WVDP calculations were complete.
facilities is sampled for radioactivity in gases and partic-ulate matter. Ventilated air is monitored and an alarm is activated if particulate matter radioactivity increas-es above preset levels. Samples are analyzed in the 1-12 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System Environmental Performance Measures When a deficiency or issue is noted during an audit or as-sessment, corrective actions are initiated in a timely man-Performance measures can be used to evaluate effective- ner. In addition, there is a robust and well-managed oper-ness, quality, timeliness, safety, or othe r areas that reflect ating experience program {lessons learned) at the WVDP. achievements related to organization or process goals, In CY 2012, one (1) external DOE lessons learned and 23 and can be used as tools to identify the need to institute internal CHBWV lessons learned were written and formal-changes. ly issued . Add itionally in CY 2012, over 175 other Lessons Learned from other fac ilities, DOE occurrence reports, Dose Assessment. As an overall assessment of Proj ect local incidents and events rece ived by other means we re activities and effectiveness of the ALARA pol icy, the low shared with workers via daily safety assessment center potentia l radio logica l dose to the MEOSI is an indicator of reports . Refer late r in th is chapter to "EMS Aud its and wel l-ma naged rad iologica l operations . Other Aud its and Assessments" for furthe r discussion . The relative dose equ ivalents for rad iologica l air emis- QA Program sions, liquid effluent discharges, and other liquid releas-es (including drainage from the WNSWAMP ditch) from The WVDP's QA program provides for and documents 2003 t hrough 2012 are graphed on Figure 1-1. Note that, consistency, precision, and accuracy in collecting and when summed, the total dose is well below DOE's stan- analyzing environmenta l samples and in interpreting and dard of 100 mrem/year. The cons istently low effluent reporting environmental monitoring data. Subcontractor concentrations ind icate that rad iologica l activities at the laboratories providing analytica l services for the environ-site are well-controlled . {See also Table 3-2 in Chapte r 3, mental mon itoring program are contractually requ ired to
" Dose Assessment." ) ma inta in a QA program cons istent w ith WVDP requ ire-ments.
Groundwater Monitoring. The WVDP's groundwater pro-gram is implemented accord ing to DOE Order 458.1 and 10 CFR Part 830, Subpart A, " Qua lity Assurance Require-RCRA §3008{h) Consent Order requirements, as approved ments," Section 830.122, "Quality Assurance Criteria," by NYSDEC and EPA. Mon itoring continued during 2012 . and DOE Order 414.10, "Qual ity Assurance" {DOE, April Refer to Chapter 4, "Groundwater Protection Program," 2011}, document the QA program policies and require-fo r deta ils. ments applicable to WVDP activities. The WVDP QA pro-gram implements the requirement to provide "assurance Environmental Management of Radiation Exposure. that analytica l work for environmental and effluent mon-Ambient environmental radiation is measu red with ther- itoring supports data quality objectives, using a docu-moluminescent dosimeters {TLDs) at on- and off-site mented approach for collecting, assessing, and reporting locations. {See Figures A-11 through A-13 .) Consistent environmenta l data ." The integrated QA program also w ith historical data, 2012 results from three of the eight incorporates the requirements from the consensus TLDs located near on-site waste storage facil ities on the standard "Quality Assurance Program Requirements for north plateau were generally higher than background . Nuclear Facilities" (American Society of Mechan ical Engi-Results from perimeter TLDs, wh ich are more represen - neers [ASME) Nuclear Qual ity Assurance Level 1 [NQA-1], tative of exposure to the public, were statistically indis- 1989}. Controlled documents specific to the WVDP are tingu ishable from background concentrations. {See "Envi - used to implement the integrated QA program . ronmental Radiation" in Chapter 2.) General areas addressed by the QA program are present-Nonconformance and Corrective and ed below. Preventative Action Responsibility. Responsib ilities for overseeing, manag-Throughout CY 2012, comprehensive evaluations, ing, and conducting an activity must be clearly defined. reviews, aud its, and assessments were performed evalu - Personnel who verify that an activity has been complet-ating the implementation of EMS elements at the WVDP. ed correctly must be independent of those who per-Du ring CY 2012, there were no regulatory inspection find - formed it. WVDP program, proj ect, and task managers are ings. Resu lts from va ri ous assessments indicate that an respons ible fo r ensuring that QA requ irements appl icable effective EMS has been implemented at the WVDP. to activities unde r their cogn izance are implemented . WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 1-13
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System FIGURE 1-1 Annual Effective Dose Equivalent to the Maximally Exposed Off-Site Individual 100 DOE All Pathway Sta ndard = 100 m rem/year EPA Air Em iss ion Standa rd = 10 mrem/ year 10 "EQI l ~ 1 c
..9!
*5 CT 0.1 U.J QI a"'
0 QI
.B>
QI ti: 0.01 ,__ '-
- - ~
U.J 0.001 - - - - - ,__ - ,__ ..... 0.0001 .... ..... .._ -- ..... .._ .._.._ 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
- Air Effluent Emissions D Liquid Effluent Discharges D Other Liquid Re leases Planning. Work activities must be pre-planned, the plan be identified as nonconforming and segregated to pre-followed, and activities documented. Purchases of qual- vent inadvertent use.
ity-affecting equipment or items must be planned, pre-cisely specified, and verified fo r correctness upon receipt. Corrective Action. Conditions adverse to quality must be promptly identified, a corrective action planned, respon-Training. Anyone performing an activity supporting sibility assigned, and the problem remedied. the WVDP environm enta l monitoring program must be trained in the appropriate procedures and qualified ac- Documentation. All activity records must be kept to cordingly before carrying out the activity. verify work done and by whom . Records must be clear-ly traceable to an item or activity. Records such as fie ld Control of Design, Procedures, Items, and Documents. data sheets, chain-of-custody (C-0-C) forms, requests for Any activity, equ ipm ent, or construction must be clearly analysis, sample shipping documents, sample logs, data described or defined and tested . Design changes must be packages, training records, and weather measurements, tested and documented. Procedu res must clearly state in add ition to other records in both pape r and electron ic how activities will be conducted. Procedures are reviewed form, are maintained as documentation for the environ-periodically, updated when necessary, and controlled so mental monitoring program. that only approved and current procedures are used. Quality Control (QC) Equipment or particular items affecting environmental data quality must be identified, inspected, calibrated, and The QC practices, an integral part of t he WVDP QA pro-tested before use. Calibrati on status must be clearly indi- gram, are used to ensure that samples are collected cated. Items that do not conform to requirements must and analyzed in a consistent and repeatable manner. 1-14 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System QC methods are applied both in the field and in the lab- To analyze regulatory reported environmental samples oratory. originating from NYS, analytical laboratories are required to maintain the relevant NYSDOH ELAP certification. Field QC. Procedures are defined for collecting each sam-ple type, such as surface water, groundwater, soil, and air. Laboratory QC practices specific to each analytical meth-Trained ELAB field personnel collect the samples. Field . od are described in approved references or procedures. sampling locations are clearly marked to ensure that QC practices include proper training of analysts, maintain-routine samples are continually collected in the same ing and calibrating measuring equipment and instrumen-location. Collection equipment that remains in the field tation, and routinely processing laboratory QC samples is routinely inspected, calibrated, and maintained, and such as standards and spikes (to assess method accuracy), automated sampling stations are kept locked to prevent duplicates and replicates (to assess precision), and blanks tampering. Samples are collected into certified, pre- (to assess the possibility of contamination). Standard cleaned containers of an appropriate material and capac- reference materials (materials with known quantities or ity. Containers are labeled with sample information, such wnstituent of interest concentrations traceable to the as date and time of collection, sample collection person- National Institute of Standards and Technology}.are used nel, and special field conditions. Collection information is to calibrate counting and test instruments and to monitor documented and kept as part of the sample record. their performance. C-0-C documentation is maintained to trace sample pos- The ELAB ended its participation in the NYSDOH ELAP cer-session from time of collection through analysis. Samples tification program on June 30, 2012. Samples that had are stored in a locked, secure location before analysis or been analyzed by the ELAB are now being performed by shipping. Samples sent off site for analysis are accompa- ELAP certified off-site laboratories. nied by an additional c-o-c form. Subcontract laborato-ries are required by contract to maintain internal C-0-C Crosschecks. Crosscheck samples (performance evalua-records and to store the samples under secure conditions. tion samples) contain a constituent of interest concentra-Special field QC samples are collected and analyzed to tion known to the agency.conducting the crosscheck, but assess the sampling process. Duplicate field samples unknown to the participating laboratory. Crosscheck pro-are used to assess sample homogeneity and sampling grams provide an additional means of testing accuracy of precision. Field and trip blanks (laboratory-deionized environmental measurements. Subcontract laboratories water ih sample containers) are used to detect contam- are required to have at least 80% of reported results fall-ination potentially introduced during sampling or ship- ing within control limits. Crosscheck results that fall out-ping. Environmental background samples (samples of air, side of control limits are addressed by formal corrective water, vegetation, venison, fish, and milk taken from loca- actions to determine any conditions that could adverse-tions remote from the WVDP) are collected and analyzed ly affect sample data and to ensure that actual sample to provide baseline information for comparison with results are reliable. on-site or near-site samples so that site influences can be evaluated. The WVDP participates in formal crosscheck programs for both radiological and nonradiological analyses. Laboratory QC. In 2012, samples were collected by ELAB personnel. On-site analyses were performed at the ELAB
- Radiological Crosschecks or the WWTF laboratory. Off-site analyses were per-formed by General Engineering Laboratory, LLC (GEL) Organizations performing radiological analyses as part (Charleston, South Carolina), TestAmerica Laboratories, of effluent or environmental monitoring are encouraged Inc. (Buffalo, New York), and Environmental Dosimetry by DOE to participate in formal crosscheck programs Company (Sterling, Massachusett~). As samples were col- to test the quality of environmental measurements lected, shipped, and analyzed, C-0-C documentation was being reported to DOE by its contractors. Crosscheck maintained to track sample possession from collection samples for radiological constituents are analyzed on through analysis and data reporting. All laboratories are site by the ELAB and off site by GEL. In 2012, the WVDP required to maintain relevant certifications, to participate participated in the DOE Radiological Environmental in applicable crosscheck programs, and to maintain a lev- Sciences Laboratory Mixed Analyte Performance el of QC as defined in their contracts. Evaluation Program (MAPEP), which provides performance evaluation samples for both radiological 1-15 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System and nonradiological constituents. Results for Series Data Management 26 are listed in Appendix H. Due to an administrative change at MAPEP the ELAB did not receive Series 27 The Environmental Laboratory Information Management samples. System (ELIMS) is a database system used at the WVDP to establish environmental sample identification numbers,
- Nonradiological Crosschecks maintain the sample data log, track samples, manage field and analytical data, and record data validation sta-As a SPDES permittee, the WVDP is required to tus and results. The ELIMS is used as a controlled-source participate in the EPA DMR QA performance evaluation database for generating reports and statistical evalua-studies (2012 DMR QA Study #32) for the National tions of data sets to support environmental monitoring Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. Samples and surveillance activities. Subcontract laboratories are from this program are analyzed both on site and by requested to provide data in electronic format for direct subcontract laboratories. In addition, subcontract entry into the ELIMS by WVDP personnel.
laboratories performing nonradiological sample analyses that contain radiological contamination All software packages used to generate data are verified participate in the DOE MAPEP program. and validated before use. All analytical data produced in the ELAB at the bench level are reviewed and signed off In 2012, nonradiological crosschecks were analyzed by a qualified person other than the one who performed by the WVDP WWTF Laboratory, ELAB, GEL, and the analysis. A similar in-house review is contractually TestAmerica. Results are summarized in Appendix H. required from subcontractor laboratories. Results for 2012 from all laboratories that analyzed Data Verification and Validation samples from the WVDP monitoring program* are . summarized in Table 1-5. As presented, 99.0% of the Data validation is the process by which analytical data crosschecks performed in 2012 were acceptable. from both on-site and off-site laboratories are reviewed to verify proper documentation of sample processing and The whole effluent acute toxicity test on the freshwater data reporting, and to determine the data quality and Ceriodaphnia Dubia (water flea), performed by New usability. A graded approach is applied.that, based upon England Bioassay for the DMR-QA. Study 32 was not data quality objectives, dictates the review rigor of the acceptable. The laboratory did a thorough evaluation documentation associated with sample collection and/ of their process and found no obvious cause for the or sample analysis. In the WVDP environmental program, failure. The acute toxicity test was rerun in August data are validated per approved standard procedures 2012 using a new toxicant provided by an accredited before it is assigned approval status and made ready for external proficiency testing provider and acceptable data assessment. results were obtained. Data Assessment and Reporting Approved analytical data, field information, and historical project data are integrated and evaluated to determine whether the constituents of interest are actually present TABLE 1-5 and, if so, at what concentrations. Data problems iden-Summary of Crosschecks Completed in 2012 tified at this level are investigated and appropriately re-solved.
< < l'!\lm\?er.
Percent Within Number Within Environmental monitoring program data are then eval-Type Quality Reported ~tceptai;ice Control Limits uated to assess the effect, if any, of the site operations limits and activities on the environment and the public. Data Radiological 86 84 97.7% from each sampling location are compared with historical Non-radiological 219 218 99.5% All types 305 302 99.0% results from that location, with comparable background measurements, and (if applicable) with regulatory limits or guidance standards. Standard statistical methods are used to evaluate the data. 1-16 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System Audits, Assessments, and Surveillances corrective action. !Rs are tracked to closure in the WVDP open items tracking system. An "improvement action" or Audits, assessments, and surveillances are an important "opportunity for improvement" may be identified to en-part of improving the WVDP's safety program. An integrat- hance, improve, or add value to a process. Good practices ed assessment council, made up of representatives from (noteworthy practices) are identified when actions are different departments, has been established to devel- above and beyond those required by procedural compli-op an annual integrated assessment schedule-based on ance. past performance and the risk and hazards of upcoming work. Internal assessments, audits, and self-assessments External ISO 14001:2004 EMS Stage 1 Audit. During April are performed throughout the year to continuously im- 24-26, 2012, an external audit was conducted to deter-prove safety programs. Issues discovered through the in- mine if the CHBWV EMS was functional and ready for a tegrated assessment program are tracked in a centralized full registration audit. Overall, the EMS was found to be database, statused weekly with senior management, and functional and to meet the requirements of the ISO 14001 trended via a quarterly performance analysis program. standard. Three minor nonconformities were identified and a corrective action plan was developed and approved Audits and assessments are conducted to verify com- by the EMS auditor. These nonconformities included pliance with, and effectiveness of, all aspects of the QA the need to document the communication method of program, and to verify programmatic and functional com~ the site's environmental aspects to the public, revise the pliance with site procedures, applicable local, state, and internal EMS assessment process, and complete a man-federal environmental regulations, and applicable DOE agement review of the EMS status. These actions were Directives. The WVDP environmental monitoring pro- entered into the OITS for tracking. The approved correc-gram is audited by external agencies and evaluated using tive actions have been completed and the open items in internal self-assessments and audits. OITS have been closed out. An audit or assessment provides for objective and inde- External ISO 14001:2004 EMS Registration Audit. During pendent review of site functions to determine if they are June 4-8, 2012, an external audit was conducted to operating within regulatory, programmatic, and proce- determine if the CHBWV EMS was fully functional and dural parameters. The focus and/or topics of an audit or meets the requirements of ISO 14001. Overall, the EMS assessment are selected from specific criteria taken from* was found to be functional and to meet the requirements the protocol, procedure, or regulation against which the
- of ISO 14001 and CHBWV received ISO 14001 registra-function is to be evaluated. Audit personnel (whether tion on July 31, 2012. Three minor nonconformities were external or internal) are empowered and encouraged to identified and a corrective action plan was developed bring safety-related issues to the immediate attention of and approved by the EMS auditor. These nonconformities management and, if serious enough, to stop work. included expanding the list of environmental aspects to include minor aspects and beneficial aspects, improve-EMS Audits . ments needed in the spill notification process, and the need to complete an internal EMS assessment. These Results of EMS Audits are described with respect to "non- actions were entere~ into the OITS for tracking. The conformance" defined as a deficiency in characteristic, approved corrective actions have been completed and documentation, or procedure which renders the quali- the open items in OITS have been closed out.
ty of an item or activity unacceptable or indeterminate.
"Major nonconformity" is an absence or complete break- Internal EMS Assessment. During December 15-31, down of a system or element, or many minor nonconfor- 2012, an internal EMS assessment was conducted by QA mities in one element. "Minor nonconformity" is a single to determine if the CHBWV EMS was fully functional and observed nonconformity. meets the requirements of ISO 14001. While no major nonconformities were identified, three opportunities An "issue" is a condition that, if left uncorrected, could for improvement were noted. This included improved potentially lead to environmental, _safety, operational, communications to the site workers on EMS objectives or reportability improvement or non-conforming condi- and targets, effectiveness of maintaining the site's envi-tions. Such conditions also require corrective action. If an ronmental aspects, and polling other DOE site's on their issue cannot be corrected before the assessment report methods of conducting internal EMS assessments. Acor-is completed, an Issue Report (IR) is initiated to document rective action plan was developed, actions were identi-the condition that needs to be addressed, the required fied and entered into the OITS for tracking.
corrective action, and the timeline for completing the 1-17 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System Other Environmental Audits and during a DOE audit or assessment is defined as a deter-mination of a program breakdown or widespread prob-Assessments lem supported by one or more findings. An immediate FY 2012 ISMS and QA Effectiveness Review. CHBWV response is required. assumed operation of the WVDP under the Phase 1 Decommissioning and Facility Disposition contract on July DOE-WVDP Oversight Assessment of RCRA Hazardous 1, 2011, and performed a limited effectiveness review Waste Shipments. From December 21, 2011 through for the performance period of August 29, 2011 through February 14, 2012, DOE-WVDP performed an assessment September 30, 2011. The effectiveness review time frame of the mixed waste shipments relative to the STP FY 2011 was extended to allow for contractor transition. Update and the WVDP 2011 Hazardous Waste Report. There were no concerns or findings identified. Work documents, event and injury reports, self-assess-ments, due diligence concerns, employee concerns, and DOE-WVDP Oversight Assessment of Process for external surveillances were reviewed to provide support- Reporting Spills/Releases of Petroleum Products. From ive details for comparison with the ISIViS and QA effec- November 23, 2011 through January 24, 2012, DOE-tiveness criterion. CHBWV concluded that adequate ISMS WVDP performed an assessment of the process for and QA programs are in place, and have been appropri- reporting spills/releases of petroleum products. There ately staffed for the near-term work associated with the were three findings identified and a corrective .action plan Phase 1 Decommissioning and Facilities Disposition con- was developed and implemented. The findings related tract. A Safety Conscious Work Environment Program and to the consistency for reporting and documenting minor Nuclear Safety Culture Program were initiated to ensure petroleum spills from vehicles. achievement of FY 2012 performance measures, objec-tives, and commitments. DOE-WVDP Oversight Audit of CHBWV Environmental Protection Programs, Surface Water, Drinking Water NYSDOH ElAP Audit of the ELAB. NYSDOH did not per- Quality, and Groundwater Monitoring Programs. From form an audit of the ELAB in 2012 because the ELAB October 23, 2012 through November 6, 2012, DOE-WVDP ended its participation in the NYSDOH ELAP certification performed an audit of the CHBWV environmental pro-program in 2012. tection programs, surface water, drinking water quality, and groundwater monitoring programs. Three findings CHBWV Audit of GEL Laboratories. CHBWV conducted Were identified and subsequently addressed. One find: an external QA audit of GEL on October 23-24, 2012. ing related to the lack of documentation to show issues The focus of this audit was specific to DOE-STD-1112-98, and associated corrective actions resulting from annual "The Department of Energy Laboratory Accreditation storm water outfall inspections. A new form was created Program for Radiobioassay", ASME NQA-1-2008, "Qual- to address this finding. The second finding related to not ity Assurance Program Requirements for Nuclear Facili- collecti~g storm water samples during qualifying storm ties" with 2009 addenda and DOE Order 414.lD, "Quality events due to safety concerns such as nearby lightning. Assurance:' The audit team verified GEL's QA Program During 2013, a lightning detector was installed to track and procedures to ensure compliance with requirement the presence of lightning storms near the WVDP to aid in documents and standards. There was sufficient objective determination of appropriate sheltering requirements. In evidence to support a mature and effective QA program. addition, CHBWV revised WVDP-233, "Monitoring Plan Within the scope of the audit, there were no issues. for Storm Water Discharges at the West Valley Demon-stration Project," to more clearly define criteria for qual-DOE and CHBWV Audits and Assessments. During 2012, ifying and non-qualifying storm water events. The third self-assessments were conducted to verify programmatic finding related to the issuance of sampling results from effectiveness and functional compliance with site proce- a relocated outfall to NYSDEC. The sampling results from dures and applicable regulations. this outfall were subsequently submitted to NYSDEC. For DOE audits and assessments, a "finding" is defined DOE-WVDP Oversight Assessment of the SPDES Program. as a determination of an individual item which is a direct From January 25, 2012 through February 16, 2012, DOE-deviation to, is an omission of, or is in noncompliance WVDP performed an assessment of the SPDES program with an established requirement and which requires cor- for the WVDP, evaluating compliance with the SPDES per-rection. A response is required. A "concern" identified mit requirements. There were no concerns, one finding, 1-18 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System and two comments associated with the assessment. The EMS Validation finding related to the SPDES Best Management Practices plan not specifically mentioning street sweeping as re- In 2012, a third-party audit of the EMS was conducted quired by the permit. The plan was subsequently revised to determine if ISO 14001:2004 requirements were met. to add street sweeping. One comment related to the The audit concluded that the EMS was fully implemented recommendation to inspect spill kits at the vehicle refu- and IS0:14001:2004 registration was granted on July 31, eling station, which was subsequently incorporated on a 2012. In addition, DOE-WVDP prepared and transmitted monthly basis. The other comment was that a current a declaration to DOE-HQ. This audit is required to be per-copy of the SPDES permit was not readily available for ref- formed once every three years. erence at the WWTF. This was addressed and corrected immediately. EMS Experiences CHBWV Regulatory Strategy Assessment of RCRA Haz- EMS Challenges. Since the major work of the current ardous/Mixed Waste Container Storage Management. contract consists of demolishing radiologically contami-During March 19 to 21, 2012, Regulatory Strategy con- nated facilities, a major challenge for the WVDP is max-ducted assessments of RCRA hazardous/mixed waste imizing the diversion of construction and demolition containers stored in the interim status facilities, satellite waste generated. Waste from radiologically contaminat-accumulation areas, 90-day storage areas, and observed ed ar~as cannot be recycled. It is difficult to obtain radio-activities related to universal waste management. There logical clearance to send out materials from clean areas were no concerns or findings identified. for recycling, but options are being*evaluated. CHBWV Regulatory Strategy Assessment of New SPDES EMS Best Practices/lessons learned. Near the end of Permit Compliance. This assessment was performed to FY 2011, the site's prime contract was transitioned to a evaluate and determine whether the compliance and new contractor with a new scope of work called Phase 1 reporting requirements for the WVDP SPDES permit Decommissioning. The new contractor revised the EMS to (effective date July 1, 2011) have been met. There were align the environmental aspects with the Phase 1 Decom-no concerns or findings identified during the assessment. missioning scope and to strengthen the WVDP's commit-ment to sustainability. CHBWV successfully obtained ISO EMS Management Review 14001:2004 registration in Juiy 2012. To accomplish this, the site's EMS program was aligned with EO 13514, DOE A senior management review was conducted at an Exec- Order 436.1, and the DOE's SSPP. In addition, objectives utive Safety Review Board meeting on April 25, 2012 to and targets were established to assist in achieving the review the site's environmental performance to ensure goals in the SSPP and SSP. A training program was devel-the continuing suitability, adequacy and effectiveness of oped to communicate the changes in the site's EMS pro-the EMS. The following topics were presented: gram to both management and the workforce.
- results of internal audits and evaluations of compliance During the third Party ISO 14001 audit, the following with legal requirements and with other requirements strengths were noted: good understanding of environ-to which the organization subscribes; mental aspects and evaluation shown by managers of
- communication(s) from external interested parties, functional areas; environmental aspects reviewed on including complaints; realtime basis utilizing the work control process; tar-
- environmental performance of the organization; gets were clearly worded; project teams are performing
- extent to which objectives and targets have been met; mockups to ensure work instruction packages are written
- status of corrective and preventive actions; effectively; good training and awareness on EMS provid-
- follow-up actions from previous management reviews; ed at all-hands meeting; plan of the day meetings show
- changing circumstances, including developments
- good communication ori status of projects and involve-in legal and other requirements related to its ment of the technical response team on environmental environmental aspects; and issues; good operator knowledge of risks and aspects;
- recommendations for improvement. .utilizing the "West Valley Chronicles" site newsletter to publicize the site's EMS; and strong QC and commitment to data integrity as shown by staff in the site's ELAB. Ad-ditional strengths noted were: spill reporting database is an excellent tool for documenting and tracking spills; WVDP Annµal Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 1-19
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System management workplace visit program is an excellent pre- and planned actions for FY 2013 for those sustainability ventative action measure; very robust activity hazards goals that are applicable at the WVDP. analysis program; and EMS issues are well managed, doc-umented and monitored. Summary EMS Benefits to Agency Mission. The benefits of Although areas for improvement were identified in the implementing an EMS at the WVDP are to maintain com- course of audits and assessments, nothing was identified pliance, reduce operating costs, integrate environmen- that would compromise the data quality in this report or tal programs into the mission and overall safety culture, the environmental monitoring program in general. increase employee involvement, and reduce environmen-tal impacts. These specifically include:
- minimizing the environmental impacts of D&D activities;
* . reusing excess materials by transfer to other DOE facilities, federal and state agencies, various DOE-sponsored programs, donation programs, auctions, and sales; and
- safe removal of asbestos from highly radiologically contaminated areas.
DOE-WVDP SSP Goals and Performance The DOE-WVDP is committed to supporting the goals of
- DOE Order 436.1, "Departmental Sustainability," to:
- ensure that DOE carries out it's missions in a sustainable manner to address national energy security and global environmental challenges, and advances sustainable, efficient, and reliable energy for the future;
- institute wholesale cultural changes to factor sustainability and GHG reductions into all management decisions; and
- ensure DOE achieves the sustainability goals established in the SSPP pursuant to applicable la.ws, regulations and EOs, related performance scorecards, and sustainability initiatives.
The WVDP has a well-established culture of environmen-tal stewardship. The WVDP's EMS promotes pollution
- prevention, waste minimization, and energy and water conservation. These are incorporated into the site's cul-ture through standard practices, procedures, training, and encouragement of new ideas. The SSP for the WVDP was prepared and applicable goals were established to support the sustainability goals of the Order. Even though many of the DOE's sustainability goals do not apply to the WVDP, energy, water consumption, and GHG emissions will decrease as decommissioning activities progress and parts of the site footprint are reduced. Table 1-5 presents a summary of the WVDP's FY 2012 performance status WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 1-20
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System TABLE 1-6 DOE - SSP Goal Summary and Performance Status SSP : :,' .. " : FY 2012 WVbP Performance .. wvbP Planned Actions and " ,,': DOE Goal' ,' ,. Goal# Status cont~ibutions GOAL 1: GHG Reduction and Comprehensive GHG Inventory 1.1 28% Scope 1 & 2 GHG reduction by FY 2020 FY 2008 baseline established. Cessation of operations and from a FY 2008 baseline. Scope 1 and 2 GHG reduced by demolition of buildings and 45;7%. structures is underway and will continue during the next five years. Reduce fleet as appropriate. 1.2 13% Scope 3 GHG reduction by FY 2020 from a FY 2008 baseline established. Continue to reduce as systems are FY 2008 baseline. Scope 3 GHG reduced by 38.7%. shutdown and site population decreases. G.OAL 2: Buildings, Energy Savings Performance Contract Initiative Schedule, and Regional & Local Planning 2.1 30% energy intensity (British thermal unit per Not applicable (NA) as buildings NA gross). are not owned by DOE. 2.2 Energy Independence and Security Act Section NA as buildings are not owned NA 432 energy and water. by DOE. 2.3 Individual buildings or processes metering: NA as buildings are not owned NA for 90% of electricity (by October 1, 2012); by DOE. for 90% of steam, natural gas, and chilled water (by October 1, 2015).* 2.4 Cool roofs, unless uneconomical, for roof NA as buildings are not owned NA replacements unless project already has CD-2 by DOE. approval. New roofs must have thermal resistance of at least R-30. 2.5 15% of existing buildings greater than 5,000 NA as buildings are not owned NA 2 by DOE. gross ft are compliant with guiding principles of High Performance and Sustainable Building by FY 2015. 2.6 All new construction, major renovations, and NA as DOE does not own the NA alterations of buildings greater than 5,000 facilities and no new 2 construction or major gross ft must comply with the guiding principles. renovations of buildings are planned. 2.7 7.5% of a site's annual electricity consumption 10% renewable energy credits Additional renewable energy credits from renewable sources*by FY 2013. (5% old, 5% new). will be purchased as available. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 1-21
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System TABLE 1-6 (continued) DOE - SSP Goal Summary and Performance Status SSP FY 20~2 WVDP Perfcirm<!hce WV[}j)_;P)anned Actions and,' D'OE Goal
, Goal# Status Confributions GOAL 3: Fleet Management 3.1 10% annual increase in fleet alternative fuel AF not available; Waiver approved for FY 2013 (AF) consumption by FY 2015 relative to a FY Waiver approved for FY 2012. Waivers will be requested as long 2005 baseline. as AF is unavailable.
3.2 2% annual reduction in fleet petroleum Reduced fleet size by six AF not available; use of electric consumption by FY 2020 relative to a FY 2005 vehicles, carts will be encouraged; fuel baseline. 37.2 % reduction from FY 2005. consumed primarily for short distance, site activities. 3.3 100% of light duty vehicle purchases must 45% of fleet are AFV AFVs will be leased through GSA consist of alternative fuel vehicles (AFV) Three vehicles were replaced in if available as old stock is replaced. by FY 2015 and thereafter (75% FY 2000- FY 2012. All vehicles were leased 2015). through General Services Administration (GSA), however AFV were not available. 3.4 Reduce fleet inventory of non-mission critical . Non-mission critical fleet size in Opportunities for fleet reduction vehicles by 35% by FY 2013 relative to a FY FY 2005 = 18 vehicles. will be evaluated. 2005 baseline. Non-mission critical fleet size in FY 2012 = 9 vehicles. 50 % decrease. GOAL 4: Water Use Efficiency and Management 2 4.1 26% potable water intensity (gal per gross ft ) NA as the WVDP does not NA reduction by FY 2020 from a FY 2007 baseline. purchase water. 4.2 20% water consumption (gal) reduction of NA as the WVDP does not NA industrial, landscaping, and agricultural purchase water. water by FY 2020 from a FY 2010 baseline. GOAL 5: Pollution Prevention and Waste Reduction 5.1 Divert at least 50% of non-hazardous solid 23% diverted in FY 2012. Continue to explore avenues to waste, excluding construction and demolition increase recycling and diversion. debris, by FY 2015. 5.2 Divert at least 50% of construction and There were minimal An issue regarding the demolition materials and debris by FY 2015. construction or demolitions nonradioactive metals recycling is activities in FY 2012. 100% of being addressed. Material release the materials generated were {unrestricted) surveys for recycling diverted through metals in NYS are required to be performed recycling. to demonstrate that the material being presented for recycling does not contain radioactivity outside of
+2 sigma*above background (95%
confidence level). 1-22 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System TABLE 1-6 (concluded) DOE - SSP Goal Summary and Performance Status SSP FY 2012 WVDP Performance . WVDP Planned Actions <1nd DOE Goal Goal# Status Contributions ' GOAL 6: Sustainable Acquisition 6.1 Procurements meet sustainability 100% met in FY 2012. Continue to meet goal. requirements by including necessary provisions and clauses (Sustainable Procurements/Biobased Procurements). GOAL 7: Electronic Stewardship and Oat<! Centers 7.1 All data centers are metered to measure a NA as the WVDP does not have NA monthly power utilization effectiveness data centers. of 100% by FY 2015. 7.2 Maximum annual weighted average power NA as the WVDP does not have NA utilization effectiveness of 1.4 by FY 2015. data centers. 7.3 Electronic Stewardship -100% of eligible 95% enabled. Continue to provide guidance to personal computers, laptops, and monitors site personnel on importance of with power management actively using power saving options. implemented and in use by FY 2012. GOAL 8: Innovation and Government Wide Support 8.1 Innovation and government-wide support. Established routine conference calls with regulators to address changes to permit conditions and other regulatory issues. With facility ventilation systems and their associated air monitoring equipment being taken out of service, the WVDP is replacing its air monitoring and modeling approach with an ambient air monitoring program consisting of 16 air monitoring stations at each compass point. This system is currently installed and operating. Developing methods and procedures to protect storm drains and manage potentially contaminated water during D&D activities. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 1-23
Chapter 1. Environmental Management System This page intentionally left blank WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012 1-24
Chapter 2 ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING Monitoring Program Data Evaluation. Data are assessed to determine whether the constituents of interest are present and, if so, their The WVDP environmental monitoring program goal is to concentrations. Data from each sampling location are ensure that the public's health and safety and the envi- compared with applicable regulatory or guidance limits. ronment continue to be protected with respect to releas- Guidance levels for evaluating radiological constituents in es from site activities. To achieve this goal, possible expo- air and water dictated by the DOE were updated in April sure pathways are monitored. 2011. The new DCSs published in DOE-STD-.1196-2011 replace the DOE derived concentration guides (DCGs) The monitoring program primarily focuses on surface wa- found in superseded DOE Order 5400.5. These DCSs are ter, air, and groundwater pathways, as these are the prin- presented in Table Ul-4 in the "Useful Information" sec-cipal means by which potential contaminants are trans- tion of this report, and are used throughout this ASER ported off site. Water, air, groundwater, and other envi- as comparative standards. Refer to the Environmental ronmental media samples are collected and measured Compliance Summary (ECS) in this report for further dis-for radiological and chemical constituents. A description cussion. Regulatory limits for chemical constituents in of and schedule for the sampling program at each loca- discharges to surface water, under the SPDES program, tion and discussion of the environmental monitoring additional water quality standards, and potable water program drivers and rationale, as well maps showing the standards are listed in Appendix B-1. Regulatory stan-2012 sampling locations, are presented in Appendix A. dards for radiological and chemical constituents in soil Groundwater monitoring data are discussed in Chapter 4. and sediment are provided in Appendix F. Groundwater Monitoring data for all other media are discussed in this standards are discussed in Chapter 4. chapter. In accordance with DOE Order 458.1 (Change 2), the monitoring program includes both effluent monitor- Data from near-site locations are compared with back-ing and environmental surveillance. ground concentrqtions using standard statistical meth-ods to assess possible site impacts to the environment. Effluent Monitoring. Liquid effluents and air emissions Results from each location are also compared to historical are monitored by collecting samples at locations on site data from that location to determine if any trends, such where radioactivity or chemical constituents are (or as increasing constituent concentrations, are occurring. might be) released. Release points include discharge out- If indicated; follow-up actions are evalugted and imple-falls, storm water outfalls, site drainage points, and plant mented as warranted. . ventilation stacks. At some points, direct measurements (e.g., radioactivity or flow rates) are also collected. The Waterborne Effluent Monitoring WVDP maintains required permits and/or certificates from regulatory agencies applicable to releases to air and The Project is drained by several small streams. Franks water, as listed in Table ECS-3. Creek enters from the south and receives drainage from the south plateau. As it flows northward, Franks Creek is Environmental Surveillance. Surface water, drinking joined by Erdman Brook, which receives effluent from the water, air, sediment, soil, venison, fish, milk, and food LLW2 (through the lagoon system) and the WWTF. After crops are collected at locations where the highest concen- leaving the Project at the site security fence, Franks Creek trations of transported contaminants might be expected. receives drainage from the northeast swamp areas on Samples are also collected at remote locations to provide the north plateau and from Quarry Creek, which receives background data for comparison with data from on-site drainage from the north swamp location WNSW74A. and near-site samples. Direct radiation is monitored on Franks Creek then flows into Buttermilk Creek, which, a site, at the site perimeter, and at remote background after flowing northward through the WNYNSC, enters location. Cattaraugus Creek and flows westward away from the WNYNSC. Cattaraugus Creek ultimately drains into Lake Erie, to the northwest. (See Figures A-2 and A-5.) WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 2-1
Chapter 2. Environmental Monitoring Waterborne Radiological Releases. The primary sources Discharge through the lagoon 3 weir at SPDES outfall of radionuclide releases to surface waters occur at two WNSPOOl into Erdman Brook is the primary controlled locations, the lagoon 3 weir at* outfall 001 (WNSPOOl on point source of liquid release from the Project. Five batch Figure A-2) and a natural drainage from the northeast releases totaling about 8.3 million gal (31.6 million L)' swamp (monitoring point WNSWAMP on Figure A-2). were discharged from WNSPOOl in 2012. Natural drain-Liquid releases from two other locations, the sewage age from the WNSWAMP location in CY 2012 was esti-treatment outfall [point WNSP007] and the north swamp mated to be approximately 13.. 5 million gal (51.2 million [point WNSW74A] on the north plateau, are also evalu- L). Flow weighted estimates of curies released from these ated each year. However, radiological releases to down- two sources in 2012 and average radionuclide concentra-stream surface water from these points are minor and tions are summarized in Tables 2-1 and 2-2. are not included in this discussion. (Contributions to dose from these minor sources are addressed in Chapter 3, Concentrations from the WNSPOOl outfall and WNSWAMP Dose Assessment.) effluents are reported together with DCSs for comparison TABLE 2-1 Total Radioactivity Discharged at Lagoon 3 (WNSPOOl) in 2012 and Comparison of Discharge Concentrations with DOE DCSs
. Average . . Ratio of Isotope a
Discharge. Activity b *. .DC:Sd " Concentration ..
- Co~centration (Ci) . {Becquerels) c (µCi/ml) (µCi/ml}* **to DCS Gross Alpha 1.10+/-0.09E-03 4.06+/-0.35E+07 3.48+/-0.30E-08 NAe NA Gross Beta 1.31+/-0.02E-02 4.84+/-0.08E+08 4.14+/-0.07E-07 NAe NA H-3 1.88+/-0.14E-02 6.94+/-0.51E+08 5.94+/-0.43E-07 1.9E-03 0.0003 C-14 0.21+/-4.14E-04 0.08+/-1.53E+07 0.07+/-1.31E-08 6.2E-05 <0.0002 K-40 -2.97+/-4.61E-04 -1.10+/-1.70E+07 -0.94+/-1.46E-08 NN NA Co-60 0.22+/-2.35E-05 0.81+/-8. 70E+05 0.69+/-7.45E-10 7.2E-06 <0.0001 Sr-90 5.93+/-0.14E-03 2.19+/-0.05E+08 1.88+/-0.04E-07 1.lE-06 0.1709 Tc-99 5.48+/-0.37E-04 2.03+/-0.14E+07 1.74+/-0.12E-08 4.4E-05 0.0004 1-129 6.02+/-1.82E-05 2.23+/-0.67E+06 1.91+/-0.58E-09 3.3E-07 0.0058 Cs-137 1.25+/-0.06E-03 4.61+/-0.23E+07 3.95+/-0.20E-08 3.0E-06 0.0132 U-232g 2.33+/-0.09E-04 8.62+/-0.34E+06 7.38+/-0.29E-09 9.8E-08 0.0753 U-233/234g 1.68+/-0.08E-04 6.22+/-0.30E+06 5.32+/-0.26E-09 6.6E-07h 0.0081 U-235/236g 5.77+/-1.47E-06 2.14+/-0.55E+05 1.83+/-0.47E-10 7.2E-07 0.0003 U-2389 1.25+/-0.07E-04 4.64+/-0.26E+o6 3.97+/-0.22E-09 7.SE-07 0.0053 Pu-238 2.40+/-0.31E-05 8.88+/-1.14E+05 7.60+/-0.98E-10 1.SE-07 0.0051 Pu-239/240 1.34+/-0.22E-05 4.95+/-0.80E+o5 4.24+/-0.69E-10 1.4E-07 0.0030 Am-241 1.81+/-0.23E-05 6.68+/-0.84E+05 5. 72+/-0. 72E-10 1.7E-07 0.0034 Sum of Ratios 0.29 NA - Not applicable.
*Half-lives are listed in Table Ul-4.
bTotal volume released: 3.16E+10 milliliters (ml) (8.34E+06 gal). c 1 curie (Ci)= 3.7E+10 becquerels (Bq): 1Bq = 2.7E-11Ci;1 microcurie (µCi) =lE-06 Ci. d DCSs are used as reference values for the application of best available technology per DOE Order 458.1.
- DCSs do not exist for indicator parameters gross alpha and gross beta.
1 The DCS is not applied to potassium-40 (K-40) activity because of its natural origin. gTotal uranium (g) =3.69+/-0.07E+02; Average uranium [µg/mL) =1.17+/-0.02E-02. h The DCS for U-233 is used for this comparison. 2-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 2. Environmental Monitoring TABLE 2-2 Total Radioactivity Released at Northeast Swamp (WNSWAMP) in 2012
- and Comparison of Discharge Concentrations with DOE DCSs
.. . b Average ' DCSa Ratio of a Discharge Activity
/sotop~ N Concentration Concentration
{Ci} ... ' toDCS (Becquerels)' (µCi/ml) (µCi/ml) Gross Alpha 26 -2.26+/-4.59E-05 -0.84+/-1.70E+06 -4.40+/-8.95E-10 NAe NA Gross Beta 26 1.16+/-0.0lE-01 4.30+/-0.03E+09 2.27+/-0.02E-06 NAe NA Tritium 26 3.28+/-0.13E-03 1.21+/-0.49E+08 6.41+/-2.59E-08 1.9E-03 0.0001 C-14 2 3.06+/-9.83E-04 1.13+/-3.64E+07 0.60+/-1.92E-08 6.2E-05 <0.0003 Sr-90 12 5.51+/-0.05E-02 2.04+/-0.02E+09 1.08+/-0.0lE-06 1.lE-06 0.98 1-129 2 -0.12+/-3.62E-05 -0.04+/-1.34E+06 -0.23+/-7.07E-10 3.3E-07 <0.0021 Cs-137 12 -2.13+/-4.93E-05 -0.79+/-1.82E+06 -4.16+/-9.62E-10 3.0E-06 <0.0003 U-232' 2 -0.20+/-1.71E-06 -0. 72+/-6.32E+04 -0.38+/-3.34E-11 9.8E-08 <0.0003 U-233/2341 2 7 .97+/-3.35E-06 2.95+/-1.24E+05 1.56+/-0.6SE-10 6.6E-07g 0.0002 U-235/2361 2 0.13+/-1.37E-06 0.47+/-5.08E+04 0.25+/-2.68E-11 7.2E-07 <0.0001 U-238' 2 4.10+/-2.55E-06 1.52+/-0.94E+05 8.00+/-4.98E-11 7.SE-07 0.0001 Pu-238 2 -1. 79+/-9.85E-07 -0.66+/-3.64E+04 -0.35+/-1.92E-11 1.5E-07 <0.0001 Pu-239/240 *2 0.49+/-1.34E-06 1.81+/-4.96E+04 0.96+/-2.62E-11 1.4E-07 <0.0002 Am-241 2 0.86+/-1.37E-06 3.16+/-5.06E+04 1.67+/-2.67E-11 1.7E-07 <0.0002 Sum of Ratios 0.98 Note: the average pH at this location was 7 .10 Standard Units (SU). N - Number of samples. NA- Not applicable. a Half-lives are listed in Table Ul-4. bTotal estimated volume released: 5.12E+10 ml (1.35E+07 gal). c 1Ci=3.7E+10 Bq: 1Bq = 2.7E-11 Ci. d DCSs are used as reference values for the application of best available technology per DOE Order 458.1.
- DCSs do not exist for indicator parameters gross alpha and gross beta.
1 Total Uranium {g) = 1.88+/-0.07E+01; Average Total Uranium {µg/mL) = 3.67+/-0.13E-04. g The DCS for Uranium-233 is used for this comparison. purposes rathe~ than regulatory compliance. DOE- the ratios (also called the "sum of fractions") should not STD-1196-2011 defines DCSs as radionuclide concentra- exceed 1.0, or otherwise expressed as the sum of per-tions that, under conditions of continuous exposure for centages, should not exceed 100%. Tables 2-1 and 2:2 list one year by one exposure mode, would result in an effec- the sum of ratios for each release point. tive dose equivalent of 100 mrem (1 millisievert [mSv]). Members of the public do not have access to the WVDP The sum of ratios for the release from WNSP001 in 2012 and therefore do not have any potential of direct expo- was approximately 0.29, well below the 1.0 criterion. The sure at outfall. WNSPOOl and WNSWAMP. {Note that sum of ratios from WNSWAMP was 0.98, slightly below DCSs are not used for dose assessment. Methods for the DOE-STD-1196-2011 criterion. This is the first year estimating dose from the liquid pathway are discussed in since 2004 that the sum of the ratios was below 1.0. Chapter 3.) The maximum sum of ratios at WNSWAMP to date was 2.67 in 2009. To evaluate each radionuclide released with respect to the DCSs, each annual average radionuclide concentra- As in past years, the relatively high sum of ratios at tion was divided by its respective DCS and the ratios from WNSWAMP .was almost entirely attributable to stron-all nuclides were summed. As a DOE policy, the sum of tium-90. Drainage at the WNSWAMP location largely WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 2-3
Chapter 2. Environmental Monitoring consists of emergent groundwater. Elevated gross beta
- outfall 001 (monitoring point WNSP001), discharge concentrations were first noted at this location in 1993. from the LLW2 through the lagoon system; Subsequent investigations delineated a plume of stron-tium-90-contaminated groundwater on the north pla-
- outfall 007 (monitoring point WNSP007), discharge teau that discharges to the surface water flowing through from the WWTF; the WNSWAMP location. In November of 2010, a PTW designed to remove strontium-90 from the groundwa-
- outfall 116 (pseudo-monitoring point WNSP116, as ter was installed upgradient of the WNSWAMP drainage noted on the permit), a location in Franks Creek that ditch. represents the confluence of outfalls WNSP001, WNSP007, and WNSP008 (which was capped in 2001, Flow weighted annual average strontium-90 concen- and was removed from the SPDES permit in 2011), as trations at WNSWAMP, which first exceeded the stron- well as storm water runoff, groundwater seepage, and tium-90 DCS (1.lE-06 microcurie per milliliter [µCi/ml]) augmentation water. Samples from upstream sourc-in 1995, were slightly below the DCS in 2012. Monthly es are used to calculate total dissolved solids (TDS) at measured concentrations of strontium-90 were above the this location and to demonstrate compliance with the DCS from late June 2012 to mid-October, but decreased SP DES permit limit for this parameter; below the DCS in November and December 2012. (See Figure 4-8 in Chapter 4, "Groundwater Protection Pro-
- 9utfall 01B (monitoring point WNSP.01B), an internal gram.") Activities to limit migration of the strontium-90 monitoring point for the liquid waste treatment sys-groundwater plume, including a description of the PTW, tem evaporator effluent, was historically monitored for are discussed in Chapter 4. flow and total mercury. No effluent was processed or released from this outfall in 2012; and Even though waters with elevated strontium-90 concen-trations drain from WNSWAMP into Franks Creek, then
- nineteen storm water discharge outfalls that receive into Buttermilk Creek, and ultimately into Cattaraugus flows from other minor sources, such as fire hydrant Creek, strontium-90 and gross beta concentrations in testing and groundwater seepage, monitored on a water collected in 2012 from Cattaraugus Creek down- rotational basis. Objectives of the SPDES permit re-stream of the WVDP at the first point of public access (at quirements for monitoring storm water runoff are to WFFELBR) continue to show little or no difference from determine the: (1) levels of water quality and specif-background. (See Table B-5A in Appendix B-5.) ic chemicals in storm water discharges from specified WVDP locations, (2) amount of rainfall, (3) storm event SPDES Permit-Required Monitoring. Liquid discharges duration, and (4) resulting flow at the outfalls. The 19 from the WVDP are regulated for chemical constituents WVDP storm water outfalls are grouped into eight rep-under a SPDES permit, as identified in Table ECS-3. The resentative drainage basins that could potentially be permit identifies compliance points from which liquid influenced by industrial or construction activity runoff.
effluents are released to Erdman Brook (Figure A-2), and One representative outfall from each of the eight out-specifies the sampling and analytical requirements for fall groups listed in Appendix A must be sampled on a each. semiannual basis. Effective July 1, 2011, NYSDEC issued a modified permit The SPDES permit specifies the following conditions for the WVDP which removed two storm water outfalls for a qualifying storm water event eligible for monitor-(502 and S40). An additional storm water location (S43) ing: (1) a period of 72 hours between the monitored was added that was tentatively identified in 2006 and . event and the previous measurable event of 0.1 inch-characterized in 2007 in a wetland near the Live-Fire es of precipitation; (2) a total rainfall of more than 0.1 Range on the WNYNSC. There were no modifications to inch; and (3) resultant storm discharge at the outfall. the SPDES permit in 2012. During CY 2012, storm water samples were collected from The conditions and requirements of the current SPDES all eight outfalls during both semiannual periods. Storm permit are summarized in Appendix B-1. The permit iden- water outfalls that were collected on October 23, 2012, tifies 23 outfalls and compliance points with monitoring were performed sooner than the 72 hour protocol requirements and discharge limits. The monitored out- between the previous storm event due to oncoming winter falls include: 2-4 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 2. Environmental Monitoring weather. This decision was consistent with storm water during CY 2012. Locations with results statistically greater sampling guidance and was documented. than background values are summarized in Table 2-4. Appendix B-2 presents process effluent data with SPDES Ventilation and Emission Systems. Exhaust from each permit limits provided for comparison. Appendix B-3 EPA-permitted ventilation system on the WVDP is con-presents storm water runoff monitoring data for outfalls tinuously filtered and the permanent systems are mon-designated in the WVDP SPDES permit. itored .as air is released to the atmosphere. Because radionuclide concentrations in air emissions from the There were no SPDES effluent limit exceedances and two *site are quite low, a large volume of facility air must be noncompliance events during 2012. The WWTF, tem- sampled to measure the radionuclide quantity released. porarily shutdown in late 2011 due to a mercury SPDES Emissions are sampled for radioactivity in both partic-permit exceedance, was restarted in February 2012 after ulate (e.g., strontium-90 and plutonium-239/240) and corrective measures and confirmatory sampling. For addi- gaseous forms (e.g., tritium and iodine-129). The total tional information refer to "SPDES Permit Noncompliance release of each radionuclide varies from year to year in Events" in the ECS. response to changing site activities. For instance, releas-es of iodine-129 dropped sharply after vitrification was Airborne Effluent Monitoring completed in 2002. Over the years, the annual calculated dose from WVDP air emissions has remained a small frac-Radiological Air Emissions. Federal law allows air con- tion of the NESHAP standard. (See "Predicted Dose From taining small amounts of radioactivity to be released Airborne Emissions" in Chapter 3.) from plant ventilation stacks during normal operations. The releases must meet dose criteria specified in the NE- The MPPB Ventilation Stack. The primary controlled air SHAP regulations to ensure that public health and safe- emission point atthe WVDP is the MPPB ventilation stack, ty and the environment are protected. At the WVDP in ANSTACK, which vents to the atmosphere at a height of 2012, radiological releases have been measured and/or 208 ft (63.4 m). This stack has historically released venti-
~stimated from seven permitted emission points (see lation exhaust from several MPPB facilities, including the Table ECS-3), three non-permitted points, and two dif- liquid waste treatment system, the analytical laborato-fuse sources. The wastewater storage lagoons were the ries, and off-gas from the former VIT system. In 2012, the.
primary source of the diffuse radiological releases to air M PPB stack continued to release ventilation exhaust from at.the WVDP in 2012, with some additional contribution spaces within the MPPB. Emissions from the MPPB stack from stored waste in the high integrity containers. Esti- are an order of magnitude lower than they were during mated emissions from both of these diffuse sources are VIT operations in 2002. calculated for the purpose of annual NESHAP reports. Sampling locations for point source air emissions are Total curies released from the MPPB stack in 2012 are list-shown on Figure A-6 in Appendix A. ed in Table 2-3, together with annual averages, maxima, . and a comparison of average isotopic concentrations with Air releases are evaluated and reported to EPA in the the applicable DCSs. The sum of ratios for radiological annual NESHAP report. Measured radionuclide con- concentrations from ANSTACK was 0.006 well, below the centrations in air are also compared with DCSs (see Ap- DOE guideline of 1.0. Airborne concentrations from the pendix C). Unlike NESHAP dose criteria, the DCSs are stack to the WVDP site boundary are further reduced by expressed in µCi/ml and can be directly compared with dispersion. Historical results from air samples taken near measurements from the monitoring program. The DCSs. the site boundary have confirmed that WVDP operations are used at the WVDP to evaluate airborne emissions at have had no discernible effect on off-site air quality. (See the release point. DCSs for radionuclides of interest at "Ambient Air" monitoring results, later in this chapter.) the WVDP are found in Table Ul-4 in the "Useful Informa-tion" section of this report. When only gross alpha and Unplanned Radiological Airborne Release. No unplanned beta measurements are available in WVDP air sample radiological airborne releases occurred in 2012. results, activity is usually assumed to come from pluto-nium-239/240 and strontium-90, respectively, because Although there were minor smoldering events in the the DCSs for these radionuclides are the most limiting VIT cell during 2012, it was found that no radiological air for major WVDP particulate emissions. No Dess were emissions resulted. exceeded by airborne emissions on an annualized basis WVDP Annual Site Env!ronmental Report- Calendar Year 2012 2-5
Chapter 2. Environmental Monitoring Other On-Site Air Sampling Systems. Sampling systems initiated in October 2012 for operational baselining and similar to those of the MPPB are used to monitor air- equipment testing. The new ambient air sampling pro-borne effluents from the former VIT heating ventilation gram will provide environmental air sampling during and air conditioning system (ANVITSK), the superna- demolition activities, as well as required data for regula-tant treatment system/permanent ventilation system tory compliance. stack (ANSTSTK), the container sorting and packaging facility ventilation stack (ANCSPFK), and the RHWF stack The off-site ambient air sampling system is intended to (ANRHWFK) (Figure A-6). Ventilation from the contact monitor air over a period of time, rather than provid-size-reduction facility ventilation stack (ANCSRFK) was ing instantaneous radiological results. The ambient air discontinued in 2011, and replaced by ventilation of low volume samplers run continuously. Filter samples this facility by a portable unit. Ventilation of the 01-14 are collected biweekly for gross alpha and gross beta building (ANCSSTK) was discontinued in October 2012 in screening and charcoal cartridges are collected monthly preparation for building demolition. for iodine-129 analysis. Samples collected on a biweekly basis are composited quarterly and analyzed for radioiso-Permitted outdoor ventilation enclosures (OVEs) with topes known to have been managed on the site. Samples portable ventilation units are used to provide the venti- of ambient air will include naturally occurring radioiso-lation necessary for personnel safety while working with* topes such as radon decay products which will be detect-radioactive materials in areas outside permanently ven- ed in the gross radioactivity analyses. tilated facilities or in areas where permanent ventilation must be augmented. Air samples from OVEs are collected A high-volume sampler is included in the ambient air net-continuously while emission points are discharging, and work located downwind in the prevailing wind direction, the data collected are included in annual evaluations of which is the direction of the hypothetical critical receptor airborne emissions. (the historical MEOSI). This sampler operates at a flow rate more than five times the low-volume samplers and Appendix C presents total radioactivity released for spe- was installed to confirm the results of the lower volume cific radionuclides at each on-site air sampling location. sampling. Both high-volume and low-volume sampling Isotopic results did not exceed the DCSs at any of the air systems are able to detect site-managed radioisotopes to emission sampling locations during 2012.
- less than 5% of each radioisotope's environmental regula-tory compliance level. Continuous on-site air sampling is Nonradiological Air Emissions. Nonradiological air emis- also performed close to the work area during demolition sions at the WVDP are regulated under an air facility reg- of all radiologically contaminated facilities for health and istration certificate. that caps (limits) nitrogen and sulfur safety purposes by radiological engineering technicians.
oxide emissions (NOx and SOx, respectively) from the Samples collected from these local samplers are analyzed facility at 49.5 tons per year each. (See Table ECS-3.) The for gross radioactivity on a daily basis during demolition certificate applies to two site utility steam boilers, which activities. are the primary sources of NOx and SOx at the site. Based on natural gas usage, the boilers are estimated to have After a full year of monitoring with the new ambient air released about 0.09 tons of NOx and no SOx in 2012, only network, the current method of estimating dose using the 0.19% of the capping limit. "measure and model" approach will be compared to the "environmental measurement" approach using the new Other units with the potential to emit non-radiological ambient air data. NESHAP regulations allow for either pollutants, such as generators listed in the certificate, are method to be used to demonstrate regulatory compli-exempted with the understanding that each unit operates ance. (For additional details on these alternate methods, less than 500 hours per year. refer to "EPA Interim Approval to Use Environmental Measurements for NESHAP Compliance" in the ECS.) As Ambient Air Monitoring Program noted earlier in this chapter, the first quarter of baseline ambient air data collected from October to December New Ambient Air Network. Sixteen ambient air mon- 2012 indicated the sampling results were indistinguish-itoring stations encircling the WVDP were installed on able from background. NYSERDA and private properties in 2012, located between the NYSERDA fence and the closest receptor in each sec-tor (see Figure A-7). Monitoring from these stations was 2-6 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 2. Environmental Monitoring TABLE 2-3 Total Radioactivity Released at Main Plant Stack (ANSTACK) in 2012 and Comparison of Discharge Concentrations with DOE DCSs Total Average Maximum Ratio of DCS' lsotope 0 N Activity Re/easedb Concentration Concentration Concentration' {Ci} (µCi/ml) {µCi/ml} {µCi/ml) to DCS 0 Gross Alpha 26 4.50+/-0.60E-07 6.06+/-0.81E-16 2.70E-15 NA NA Gross Beta 26 8.87+/-0.21E-06 1.24+/-0.03E-14 6.43E-14 NAd NA H-3 26 2.46+/-0.06E-03 3.32+/-0.0SE-12 7.16E-12 2.lE-07 <0.0001 Co-60 2 0.79+/-6.08E-08 1.07+/-8.19E-17 <1.46E-16 3.6E-10 <0.0001 Sr-90 2 1.83+/-0.14E-06 2.46+/-0.18E-15 3.07E-15 1.0E-10 <0.0001 1-129 2 2.Q9+/-0.17E-05 2.82+/-0.22E-14 3.49E-14 1.0E-10 0.0003 Cs-137 2 2.75+/-0.17E-06 3.70+/-0.23E-15 3.85E-15 8.8E-10 <0.0001 Eu-154 2 0.00+/-1.84E-07 0.00+/-2.48E-16 <4.69E-16 7.5E-11 <0.0001 U~232e 2 -2.29+/-3.94E-09 -3.08+/-5.32E-18 <8.07E-18 4.7E-13 <0.0001 U-233/234* 2 1.57+/-0.75E-08 2.12+/-1.0lE-17 2.27E-17 1.0E-lzF <0.0001 U-235/236e 2 -3.18+/-3.81E-09 -4.28+/-5.13E-18 <7.46E-18 1.2E-12 <0.0001 U-238* 2 2.38+/-0.63E-08 3.21+/-0.85E-17 3.91E-17 1.3E-12 <0.0001 Pu-238 2 4.96+/-1.03E-08 6.68+/-1.38E-17 9.22E-17 8.8E-14 0.0008 Pu-239/240 2 9.82+/-1.40E-08 1.32+/-0.19E-16 1.67E-16 8.lE-14 0.0016 Am-241 2 2.04+/-0.25E-07 2. 75+/-0.34E-16 3.14E-16 9.7E-14 0.0028 Sum of Ratios 0.0060 N - Number of samples. NA- Not applicable.
*Half-lives are listed in table Ul-4.
bTotal volume released at 50,000 cubic feet per minute= 7.44E+14 ml/year.
'DCSs are used as reference values for the application of best available technology per DOE Order 458.1.
d DCSs do not exist for indicator parameters gross alpha and gross beta.
*Total uranium= 6.20+/-0.18£-02 g; average= 8.36+/-0.24E-11 µg/ml.
1 DCS for uranium-233 used for this comparison. Environmental Surveillance Radiological and nonradiological results from surface water samples were compared with applicable water Surface Water. On-site surface water drainage is rou- quality standards and guidelines. Radiological results tinely sampled at several points on the north and south from on-site and downstream locations Of! Franks and plateaus, as shown in Appendix A, Figure A-2. Monitoring Buttermilk Creeks were also compared with results from points are sited at locations where releases from possi- the background location on Buttermilk Creek (WFBCBKG), ble source areas on the north and south plateaus could upstream of the WVDP. (Chemical results were com-be detected. Appendices B-4 through B-6 present data pared with historical background values from WFBCBKG, for site surface drainage, subsurface drainage, contained because sampling for chemical constituents was discon~ water, ambient surface water, and potable (drinking) wa- tinued at this location in 2008.) Results from Cattarau- . ter monitoring locations. Off-site sampling locations are gus Creek near Felton Bridge (sampling point WFFELBR), shown on Figure A-5. Results are presented in Appendix were compared with historical results from the upstream B-5. Also provided for side-by-side comparison with these Cattaraugus Creek background at Bigelow Bridge (for-data are reference values, where available, including mer sampling point WFBIGBR). Locations with results background ambient water monitoring data and/or perti- exceeding applicable limits and those with results statis-nent ambient water quality standards and guidelines. tically greater than background values are summarized in Table 2-4. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 2-7
Chapter 2. Environmental Monitoring TABLE 2-4 2012 Comparison of Environmental Monitoring Results with Applicable Limits and Backgrounds I* Locations with .Number of' , . ,. " l Number of Reslllts*Greater than locations Locations with Results Statistically Greater than*
- sample Type Sampling Applicable Limits or
- with Results
* ** Backg~ound (Constituent)
" Locations Screening Levels 0 Greater Than ..
* (Constituent) Background' ., .
Air (1 backgrqund lc;ication) On-site air 7 0 5 ANSTACK (H-3, Sr-90, 1-129, Cs-137, Pu-238, Pu-emission points 239/240, Am-241); ANSTSTK (1-129); ANCSPFK (1-129); ANVITSK (1-129); ANRHWFK 11-129) Surface 'water' (i:backgro~ncl locations; one ori ButterinilkCreek and one [historieal] on Cattar~ugus Creek) J', * ' ';_ On-site controlled 2 0 2 WNSP001 (Gross alpha, Gross beta, H-3, effluents Sr-90, Tc-99; 1-129, Cs-137, U-232, U-233/234, U-235/236, U-238, Pu-238, Pu-239/240, Am-241, bromide, 504, N03-N, total B, total Hg, total antimony, total dissolved solids [TDS]); WNSP007 (Gross beta TDS, oil and grease total Hg) On-site surface 7 WNSWAMP 6 WNSP006 (Gross beta, Sr-90, U-232, U-233/234, U-water (Sr-90, Gross beta) 238, TDS); WNSP006 WNSPOOS (Gross beta, Sr-90); (TDS) WNSWAMP (Gross beta, H-3, Sr-90); WNSW74A (Gross beta, Sr-90); WNNDADR (Gross beta, H-3, Sr-90); WNERB53 (Gross beta); WNFRC67 (Gross beta) Off-site surface 2 WFBCTCBU 2 WFBCTCB (Gross beta); water (total Fee) WFFELBR (Gross beta) WNSPOOG (TD.SJ l l On-site drinking 1 0 0 None Soil (lbackgrouno locatfon) Off-site soil 3 0 0 None Sediment (2 background locations, one on Buttermilk Creekand. qne [histork<tll on Cattaraugus Cre?k) On-site 3 SNSWAMP 3 SNSW74A (Cs-137); sediment/soil (Sr-90) SNSWAMP {Gross beta, Sr-90, Cs-137, Pu-238, Pu-SNSP006 239/240, Am-241); (Cs-137) SNSPQ06 (Gross beta, Sr-90, Cs-137) Off-site sediment 3 0 3 SFTCSED (Cs-137); SFSDSED (Cs-137); SFCCSED ICs-137) NA= Not applicable; no regulatory, guidance, or screening limits are available. a Applicable regulatory, guidance, or screening limits are listed in Table Ul-4 (radionuclides in air and water), and Appendix 8-1 {water). b NYS Class C water qualfry standards were applied at WFBCTCB.
'Measurements at background location WFBCBKG have routinely exceeded the water quality standards.
2-8 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 2. Environmental Monitoring TABLE 2-4 (concluded) 2012 Comparison of Environmental Monitoring Results with Applicable Limits and Backgrounds lqcations with Number of Number of Results Greater than locations loc'ations with Results Statistically Greater than Sample Type Sampling Applic9ble.Limits or with Results Background fFonsti~u~nt) lofations Screening levels a Greater Than
.. (Constituent} Background ..
Biologicals (3 background deer; 1 background per matrix for remainder) Fish 2d 0 0 None Milk 3 0 0 None Deer 3 0 1 BFDNEAR (Cs-137) Vegetables/fruits 3 0 0 None Environmental dosimetry .(1 background) On-site, near 8 0 3 DNTLOs #24, 38, 40 facilities* Perimeter 17 0 0 None NA= Not applicable; no regulatory, guida nee, or screening limits are available.
*Applicable regulatory, guidance, or screening limits are listed in Table Ul-4 (radionudides in air and water), and Appendix 8-1 (water).
b NYS Class C water quality standards were applied at WFBCTCB. c Measurements at background location WFBCBKG have routinely exceeded the water quality standards. d Ten fish samples were obtained from each sa~pling location.
- South Plateau northwestern portions of the SDA is also captured at WNNDADR and WNERB53. Although no radionuclide Two inactive underground radioactive waste dispos- concentrations from these two locations are greater al areas (the NOA, under DOE's control, and the SDA, than (or even approach) DCSs, gross beta concentra-under NYSERDA's control), lie on the south plateau. tions have routinely exceeded background concentra-These disposal sites are possible contaminant sourc- tions at both WNNDADR and WNERB53, as have tritium es to surface water. The area southwest' of the NOA, and strontium-90 concentrations at WNNDADR. These immediately west of the railroad tracks has been exceedances were again observed in 2012. Residual chosen as the storage location for the HLW canisters soil contamination from past waste burial activities is currently stored in the MPPB. These canisters will be thought to be the source.
encased in heavily shielded casks and stored on an engineered concrete slab. Nearby areas of the south As part of an IM to limit groundwater, surface water, plateau are being used to store the three radioactive and precipitation infiltration into the NOA, a geomem-vessels removed from the VIT facility and to tempo- brane cap and slurry wall were constructed at the NOA. rarily store and stage containers of radioactive waste The IM was completed in December 2008. (See Chap-before they are shipped. Also located on the south pla-
- ter 4, "IM" under the discussion of "Groundwater Sam-teau is the drum cell, a building formerly used to store pling Observations on the South Plateau: Weathered drums of processed LLW. The drum cell has been empty Lavery Till (WLT) and the NOA" for more detail.)
since 2007, when the waste drums were shipped off site. Figure 2-1 is a plot of average gross beta and stron-tium-90 concentrations in surface water at sample Surface water drainage downstream of the NDA is mon- points WNNDADR and WNERB53 before and after itored at location WNNDAD.R, immediately north of the completion of the IM. In CY 2012, average concentra-N DA, and further downstream at location WNERB53 on tions since the IM were 48% to 82% lower than histor-Erdman Brook. Some drainage from the western and ical concentrations, indicating the IM's effectiveness in WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 2-9
Chapter 2. Environmental Monitoring reducing groundwater containment migration through Buttermilk Creek, and one downstream location on the NOA, which affects surface water drainage at these Cattaraugus Creek (see Figure A-5). points. Buttermilk Creek receives surface drainage from Tritium concentrations at WNNDADR in CY 2012 the WNYNSC. The background monitoring point is shown on Figure 2-2, remained above background con~ located upstream of the WVDP at Fox Valley Road centrations with the annual average increasing slightly (WFBCBKG) and the downstream location on But-as compared to 2011. However, tritium concentrations termilk Creek is located at Thomas Corners Bridge at this location have been decreasing overall. Although (WFBCTCB), just before Buttermilk Creek flows into the concentration in 2012 is slightly higher than 2011, Cattaraugus Creek. the concentration in 2012 is lower than it was in 2010. Since tritium's half-life is slightly longer than 12 years, Further downstream of Thomas Corners Bridge, decreasing tritium concentrations may be partly attrib- samples are collected from Cattaraugus Creek at utable to radioactive decay. Residual soil contamina- Felton Bridge (WFFELBR), the first point of public tion from past waste burial activities is also thought to access to surface water downstream of the WVDP. be the source of this residual tritium. Northeast of the SDA, Franks Creek is sampled to moni- Until discontinuing sampling in 2008, background tor drainage downstream of the drum cell and the east- samples were also collected from Cattaraugus ern and southern borders of the SDA (point WNFRC67, Creek at Bigelow Bridge, at Route 240, upstream of on Figure A-2). In 2012, the gross beta concentrations the confluence of Buttermilk Creek and Cattarau-at this point were statistically above background, but gus Creek (WFBIGBR). Historical data from this well below the DCSs. location from 1991 through 2007 have been used to establish an upstream background for Cattarau-
- North Plateau gus Creek for comparison to samples collected at WFFELBR (see Table BS-A). Sampling at WFBIGBR On the north plateau, possible contaminant sources was discontinued in 2008.
that could affect surface water include the HLW tanks Applicable guidance levels were exceeded at one of the MPPB, the lagoon system associated with the LLw2'. three off-site surface water monitoring locations affected waste handling and storage facilities, and seepage from by the WVDP in 2012; The New York State Class C and D the strontium-90 groundwater plume. water quality limit for total iron, 0.3 mg/L, was exceeded at location WFBCTCB, with a concentration of 0.6 mg/L. Besides the effluent and drainage locations discussed However, the limit was also exceeded at background lo-earlier in the liquid effluents section, a location on the cation WFBCBKG in eight of the 10 years of measurement east side of the MPPB (point WNSPOOS) monitors sur-before sampling for metals was discontinued in 2008. face drainage on the north plateau. Annual average Historical background results at WFBCBKG ranged from gross beta and strontium-90 concentrations statistically 0.16 mg/L to 7.4 mg/L. These fluctuating, elevated levels exceeded background concentrations at this sampling of iron are thought to reflect natural variability of stream location during CY 2012 but were well below DCSs. One conditions, and are not related to WVDP activities. other sample point, WNSP006, is sampled at Franks Creek at the security fence. WNSP006 *is downgradient Consistent with historical data, concentrations of radio-of the lagoon 3 outfall (point WNSP001). In 2012, as logical constituents above background values, usually in previous years concentrations at WNSP006 exceed-gross beta and strontium~90, were noted at several on-ed background for gross beta,. strontium-90, urani-site surface water monitoring locations as summarized um-232, uranium-233/234, uranium-238, and TDS. The in Table 2-4. However, results from samples taken down-observed concentrations were all well below DCSs. stream at the first point of public access (WFFELBR) were statistically indistinguishable from background or, as with
- Off-Site Surface Water gross beta concentrations, only slightly higher than back-ground, indicating limited Project influence downstream.
Surface water samples were collected at three off-site locations in 2012: one upstream background location The highest average gross beta result at WFFELBR over on Buttermilk Creek, one downstream location on the last 10 years (5.99E-09 µCi/ml in 2006) was about 2-10 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 2. Environmental Monitoring FIGURE 2-1 Average Gross Beta and Strontium-90 Concentrations in Surface Water 0 on the South Plateau at WNNDADR and WNERBS3b Before and After the NOA Interim Measure {IM) was Installed 0 Before IM
- Aft er IM 2.SE-07 2.0E-07 1.SE-07
...J E
~ 1.0E-07 --
5.0E-08 O.OE+OO Gross beta at Gross beta at Strontium-90 at Stront ium-90 at WNNDADR WNERB53 WNNDADR WNERB53 Note : The upper limit of the uncertainty te rm is indicated with each point. Average gross beta and strontium-90 background concentrations in Buttermilk Creek (WFBCBKG) in CY 2012 were 2.31+/-1.53E-09 and 0.97+/-1.lSE-09 µCi/ml, respectively .
- Sample point WNNOAOR is located downstream, immed iate ly north of the NOA.
b Sample point WNERB53 is located farther downstream, on Erdmann brook. FIGURE 2-2 Average Concentration of Tritium in Surface Wate r at WNNDADR: 2003-2012 1.6E-06 1.4E-06 1.2 E-06 1.0 E-06
...J E 8.0E-07
~
6.0 E-07 4.0E-07 2.0E-07 O.OE+OO 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20 11 20 12 Note : The upper limit of the uncertainty term is indicated with each point. Average background tritium concentration in Buttermilk Creek (WFBCBKG) in CY 2012 was <7.56E-08 µCi/ml. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 2-11
Chapter 2. Environmental Monitoring 0.6% of the DCS for strontium-90 (l.lE-06 µCi/ml). The resuspended, especially during periods of high winds or average result in 2012 (3 .85E-09 µCi/ml) was about high stream flow. The resuspended particles may provide 0.35% of the DCS. a pathway for radiological constituents to reach humans either directly via exposure or indirectly through the food Drinking Water. Project drinking (potable) water and util- pathway. ity water are drawn from two on-s ite surface water res-ervoirs. This water is sampled at select locations for both As part of the monitoring program, on-site sed iment/ radiological and chemical constituents . It is monitored soil samples are collected every five years at three loca-at the distribution entry point {WNDNKUR) and at oth- tions on the north plateau where drainage has the po-er site tap water locations to verify compliance with EPA, tential to be contaminated. All of the soil and sediment NYSDOH, and Cattaraugus County Health Department samples were sampled and analyzed fo r radiological con-regulations. Results from 2012 indicated that background stituents in 2012. On-site soils are collected at SNSP006, levels of gross beta radioactivity were found in on-site SNSWAMP, and SNSW74A (see Figure A-2 with results drinking water, and that the Project's drinking water con- summarized in Tables F-2A, F-2 B, and F-2c.) Soil samples tinued to remain below the local, state, and federal max- are also collected at one background location (SFGRVAl, imum contaminant levels and drinking water standards . shown on Figure A-13) and three former near-site air sam-The results are presented in Appendix B-6. pl ing locations {SFRSPRD, SFFXVRD, and SFRT240, shown on Figure A-5 with results summarized in Table F-2D). Ambient Air. Throughout 2012, samples for radionuclides Additional off-site sediment samples are collected at one in air continued to be collected at the background loca- background location on Buttermilk Creek {SFBCSED) and tion at Great Valley (AFGRVAl), 18 mi (29 km) south of the at three downstream locations, one on Buttermilk Creek WVDP. {See Figure A-13 .) This location is considered rep- {SFTCSED) and two on Cattaraugus Creek {SFCCSED and resentative of regional air with no potential to be affected SFSDSED) {see Figure A-5 and Table F-2E). by radiological releases from the WVDP. All three on-site sediment/soil locations and all three As previously noted, during mid-CY 2012, an ambi - off-site sediment sampling locations had concentrations ent air monitoring network was installed between the of cesium-137 statistically above the 10-year average N,YSERDA fence and the closest receptor in each of 16 sec- background sediment/soil values . However, in the off-tors around the site. The first quarter of ambient air data, site soils, no cesium-137 was detected statistically above collected from October to December 2012, indicated the background . Samples from two of the on-site locations, results were indistinguishable from background. (See Ta- SNSP006 and SNSWAMP, also contained strontium-90 bles C-10 and C-11) . As previously described, the air sam- and gross beta statistically above background . Gross beta pling system is able to detect site-managed radioisotopes at the th ird on-site location, SNSW74A, is in the same to less than 5% of each radioisotope's environmental range as the current year background concentrations and compl iance level. The first quarter of isotopic and gross statistically below the 10-year average background result. radioactivity results from the ambient air samplers are Sr-90 was not detected at SNS74A and was not detected similar to the concentrations measured at the Great Valley at any of the background locations. Additional isotopes, background sampling station during this same time peri- Plutonium-238, plutonium-239/240, americium-241, od (see Table C-10) . As the predominant potential source were detected at concentrations statistically above back-of air emissions on the site transitions from point sources ground at SNSWAMP. (i.e., the Main Plant Stack) to diffuse sou rces, the use of ambient air monitoring samplers is a more appropriate The only location where soil or sediment samples exceed-method of demonstrating compliance w ith the NESHAP ed several of the rad ionuclide comparison values for soils standards than the " measure and model" approach . Re- summarized in Table F-lA was SNSWAMP, t he soil/sed i-fer to " EPA Interim Approval to use Environmental Mea- ment sampling location in the swamp ditch on the north surements fo r NESHAP Compliance" in the ECS. plateau near where drainage exits the WVDP, where ele-vated strontium-90 was observed. The soil and sediment Sediment and Soil. Airborne particu lates may be depos- data are used in the biota dose model ing. Although some ited onto soi l by wind or precipitation. Particulate matter concentrations are elevated above background, they did in streams can adsorb rad iological constituents in liquid not result in a dose level of concern (see " Dose to Biota" effluents and settle on the stream bottom as sediment. in Chapter 3) . Soils and sediment may subsequently be eroded or 2-12 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 2. Environmental Monitoring Food. Food samples are collected from locations near Environmental Radiation. TLDs are placed on site at the site (Figure A-10) and from remote locations (Figure waste management units, at the WVDP security fence, A-13) . Milk and deer are collected every year. Fish, ap- around the WNYNSC perimeter and the access road, ples, beans, and corn are collected every five years, with and at a background location remote from the WVDP. 2012 being a collection year (2007 was the previous col- The TLDs directly measure radiation in the environment. lection year) . Fish and deer are collected during seasons Generally, TLDs remain in the same location year-to-year. when they would normally be taken by sportsmen . Corn, However in 2012 four off-site TLDs (DFTLDOS, 08, 10, and apples, and beans are collected at harvest time. Edible 13) were moved from their historical locations to nearby portions are analyzed for radionuclides. 2012 data are new ambient air monitoring locations and two existing presented in Appendix E. TLDs (DFTLD32 and DFTLD34) nearthe drum cell were put back in service in 2012. These two TLD sampling locations In 2012, milk, deer, and fish data continue to demon- had not been monitored since 2005. strate that the Project has a minimal effect on local food sources . Strontium-90 and cesium -137 were detected Results at pe rim eter locations were statistically the same at very low concentrations in some of the food crops in as results from the background TLDs (DNTLD23), in dicat-2012; however, results were indistinguishable from back- ing no measurable dose from Project activities at these ground in 2012, with the exception of one near-site deer locations. Figure 2-3 presents a graph of average ann u-(of the three near-site deer ana lyzed). Concentrations of al exposure rates (in microroentgen per hour) over the cesium-137 have been observed above background in last 10 years at background and perimeter locations. As near-site deer for many years. However, dose calculations shown, results at perimeter locations are comparable to based on results from food sources have consistently background . In addition, no discernible trends over time confirmed low dose estimates modeled on the basis of are evident. Historical measurements at community loca-results from air and water monitoring. (See Chapter 3, tions (discontinued in 2008) have also shown no differ-
"Dose Assessment.") ence from background . Perimeter TLD locations (off-site)
FIGURE 2-3 10-Year Trends of Environmental Radiation Levels at Perimeter and Background Thermoluminescent Dosimeters (TLDs) 8 2003 0 2004 8 2005 0 2006 8 2007 8 2008 0 2009 8 2010 0 2011 0 2012 12 I....
.s:: 8
"':i 2-QJ
~
I.... 6 QJ
~
4 2 0 Perimeter (TLDs #1-16 and 20) Background at Great Valley (TLD #23) Note: The upper and lower limits of the uncertainty term are plotted with each result. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 2-13
Chapter 2. Environmental Monitoring Site barometric pressure is also measured. The meteo-TABLE 2-5 rological tower supplies data to the primary digital and WVDP 2012 Monthly Precipitation Totals Compared analog data acquisition systems on site. with 10-Year Monthly Averages 10-Year The systems are provided with either un interruptible or 2012 Monthly standby power backup in the event of site power failures. Month Monthly Total Average (2002 In 2012, the data recovery rate (the time valid data were (inches} through 2011} logged versus the total elapsed time) was 93 .3%. January 4.04 3.01 February 1.79 2.53 Documentation, such as meteorological system calibra-March 2.75 2.97 tion records, site log books, and analog strip charts, is April 2.68 3.24 stored in protected archives. " Wind roses" showing the May 1.89 3.33 predominant wind direction as measured at the meteor-June 4.81 3.48 ological tower (60-m and 10-m elevations) are shown July 3.29 4.44 on Figure 2-4. The wind measurements at the 60-m el-August 2.60 4.23 evation are predominantly from the west-northwest or September 3.04 3.70 south-southeast and at the 10-m elevation are predomi-October 5.71 3.51 nantly from the northwest or the south-southeast, ap-November 1.79 3.73 parently influenced by the orientation of the topography Decembe r 4.14 3.80 around the site. As expected, wind speeds measured at
- Total (inches) 38.5 42.0 the 10-m elevation were lower than those from the 60-m (Centimeters) 97.9 106.6 elevation .
Because dispersive capabilities of the atmosphere are dependent upon wind speed, wind direction, and atmo-are shown on Figure A-12 in Appendix A, and the data are spheric stability (which includes a function of the differ-presented in Table G-1 in Appendix G. ence in temperature between two elevations), these pa-rameters are closely monitored and are available to the Consistent with historical data, results from three TLDs ERO at the WVDP. If an air release occurred, meteorolog-(DNTLD24, DNTLD38, and DNTLD40) located near north ical data would be used to predict the direction of plume plateau on-site waste storage facilities in 2012 were migration. generally higher than background results as consistently observed in recent years. These locations are within the Special Projects WNYNSC boundary and are not accessible by the public. On the south plateau, on-site TLD results remained at Meteorological Station at the SDA and Stream Flow background levels. On-site TLD locations are shown on Monitoring. Meteorological instruments were installed Figure A-11 in Appendix A, and the data are presented in by NYSERDA at the SDA in 2010 to measure tota l precip-Table G-2 in Appendix G. itation (i.e., rain, snow, and sleet); temperature, relative humidity; barometric pressure; and wind speed and di-Meteorological Monitoring. Meteorological monitoring rection. Data collection at SDA meteorological system at the WVDP provides representative and verifiable data have operated uninterrupted since October 1, 2010. In that characterize the local climatology. These data are 2011, NYSERDA also installed a stage recorder on Butter-used to assess potential effects of routine and non-rou- milk Creek at Thomas Corners Road Bridge (near the con-tine releases of airborne radioactivity and to provide fluence with Cattaraugus Creek) . NYSERDA maintains an input to dispersion models used to calculate dose to off- interactive meteorological database for the SDA station site residents . The on-site 197-ft (60-m) meteorological on the internet at: http://v4.wqdata.com/webdblink/ tower (Figure A-1) continuously monitors wind speed, nyserda .php. The data from these systems are ground wind direction, and temperature at both the 197-ft (60- only measurements. m) and 33-ft (10-m) elevations. Precipitation is monitored near the ELAB. Monthly CY 2012 precipitation totals com-pared with 10-year monthly averages are presented in Table 2-5. 2-14 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 2. Environmental Monitoring Monitoring Program Changes surrounding environment and confirmed the effective-ness of radiological control measures practiced at the Changes to the sampling program during 2012 were asso- WVDP. ciated with ELAB ana lyses, the new ambient air monitor-ing network, the shutdown of ANCSSTK (01-14 building venti lation exhaust), the add ition of two new TLDs, and the five-year sampling of biologicals, soils, and sed iments.
- On June 30, 2012, as a cost savings, the ELAB relin-quished its NYSDOH certifications allowing it to per-form specific reportable analyses on site. Environmen-tal Monitoring Program samples are now sent to off-site certified laboratories for these specific analyses.
The ELAB maintains capabilities for select quick turn-around time analysis in support of site operations, for sample screening, and for tritium, gross alp ha, gross beta, and iodine-129 in air.
- During the fourth quarter of 2012, 16 off-site ambi-ent air monitoring locations were activated to collect one quarter of baseline data in preparation for future demonstration of compliance using ambient air mea-surements in accordance with 40 CFR 61, Subpart H, Section 61 .93(b)(S), (pending final EPA approval) .
- Air sampling location ANCSSTK was shut down on Octobe r 24, 2012, in preparation for the demolition of the 01-14 Building afte r the building ventilation was terminated .
- DNTLD32, located on drum cell road, and DNTLD34, lo-cated at drum ce ll south fence, were added back to the program in January 2012 to monitor activity in the area of the drum cell.
- The environmental monitoring program requires the collection of soils, aquatic sediments, milk, apples, beans, corn, and fish every five years. These parame-ters were currently sampled in 2012 and were previ-ously sampled in 2007.
Environmental Monitoring Summary As in the past, although concentrations of certain radio-logical and nonrad iological constituents from samples collected w ithin the security fence exceeded comparison levels or background concentrations, few results from near-site or downstream locations accessible to the pub-lic did. (See Table 2-4.) Monitoring results from CY 2012 continued to demon-strate minimal or no adverse effects of the WVDP on the WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 2-15
Chapter 2. Environmental Monitoring FIGURE 2-4 Wind Frequency and Speed From the Meteorological Tower (10-m and 60-m Elevations) January 1-December 31, 2012 Key: Numbers indicate sector mean wind speed. Sectors are directions from which the wind is blowing. Wind Speed Range (m/sec) 0.5-3 .0 3.0-6.0 6.0-9.0 9.0-12 .0 Meteorological Tower (10-m)
- >12.0 Meteorological Tower (60-m) 2-16 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 3. Dose Assessment DOSE ASSESSMENT Radiation Sources at the WVDP smoke detectors; fallout from nuclear weapons tests; industrial, research, and educational applications; and Members of the public are routinely exposed to natural effluents from nuclear facilities. and man-made sources of ionizing radiation. An individ-ual living in the U.S. is estimated to receive an average Radioactive materials at the WVDP are residues from the annual effective dose equivalent (EDE) of about 620 mrem commercial reprocessing of nuclear fuel by NFS in the {6.2 mSv) (National Council on Radiation Protection and 1960s and early 1970s. Each year, very small quantities Measurements (NCRP] Report 160, 2009). NCRP Report of the radioactive materials remaining at the WVDP are No. 160, an update of NCRP Report No. 93 (1987), not- released to the environment. Emissions and effluents ed that the average member of the U.S. population was are strictly controlled so that release quantities are kept exposed to significantly more radiation from medical ALARA. procedures than from any other source. (See the "Useful Information" section of this report for discussions of ion- Exposure Pathways izing radiation. See the inset on page 3-3 for discussions of "Radiation Dose" and "Units of Dose Measurement.") An exposure pathway consists of a route for contamina-tion to be transported by an environmental medium from Half of the radiation dose to a member of the public, a source to a receptor. Table 3-1 summarizes the potential about 310 mrem/year, is from natural background sourc- exposure pathways to the local off-site population and es of cosmic and terrestrial origin (Figure 3-1). The other describes the rationale for including or excluding each half is from man-made sources, including: diagnostic and pathway when calculating dose from the WVDP. therapeutic x-rays, tomography, and fluoroscopy; nucle-ar medicine; consumer products suc)'l as cigarettes and FIGURiE 3-1 Comparison of Doses from Natural and Man-Made Sources to the Dose From 2012 WVDP Effluents 350 Other(1} 310 310 300 Cosmic, ground Consumer Products (12) level (31) Terrestrial (19) Nuclear Medicine (7 4) 250 Internal (31} 111 CD 200
~
E
~ 150 E
Radon and Thoran Medical (imaging, therapy} (223) (229) 100 50 0.019 0 Natural Man-made WVDP WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 3-1
Chapter 3. Dose Assessment TABLE 3-1 Potential Exposure Pathways from the WVDP to the local Off-Site Population iEfip~s4r:e.P.i:lthwqy:{lnif'Tfansporting.: *Re,asohtof:/~cltJ<!iiJg/E~ctfl~fnif':::
,:.,.;{;;:;. "o; : ;:*,* Me,di~rrl '. i' z, , ' ;, '~:,;'~;' ~"'~" "'"' . "~ /* ~,' _,
',;'.",~
*,~ ',
Inhalation of gases and particulates in air Off-site transport of contaminants from stacks, vents, diffuse sources, (included) or resuspended particulates from soil or water. Ingestion of vegetables, cultivated crops, Local agricultural products irrigated with potentially contaminated venison, milk, and fish (included) surface or groundwater; airborne deposition on leaves and uptake of deposited contaminants; venison and milk from animals that have inhaled or ingested contaminants; fish that have been exposed to or ingested contaminants in surfa~e water and sediment. Ingestion of surface and groundwater No documented use of local surface water or downgradient (excluded) groundwater wells as drinking water by local residents. External exposure to radiation from Transport of air particulates and gases to off-site receptors; transport particulates and gases directly from air or of contaminants in surface water and direct exposure when swimming, surface water or indirectly from surface wading, boating, or fishing. deposition (included) Potential exposure pathways that are considered include: Dose Assessment Met_hodology inhalation of gases and particulates, ingestion of locally grown food products and game, and exposure to external Dose to the public is evaluated using a two-part meth-penetrating radiation emitted from contaminated materi- od consistent with the requirements of DOE Order 458.1. als. Drinking water is not considered a pathway from the First, measurements (and/or estimates) of radionuclide WVDP because surveys have determined that no public concentrations in liquid and air released from the Proj-water supplies are drawn from downstream Cattaraugus ect are assembled from the CY of interest. The EPA- and Creek before Lake Erie or from groundwater in aquifers DOE-approved models, or factors derived from those potentially affected by the WVDP.
- models~ are then used to estimate the EDE to the MEOSI and the collective EDE to the population within a 50-mi land Use Survey and Population Data . {80-km) radius. {See the inset on "Radiation Dose" and "Units of Dose Measurement.")
Population information is required when using comput-er models for annual dose assessments. Periodic surveys Second, radioactivity measurements in food from loca-of local residents provide information about family size, tions near the WVDP boundaries are taken to corrobo-and sources of food. Population around the WVDP by rate results from the modeled dose calculations. Veg-sector and distance from CY 2000 census is presented etables, fruit, milk, venison, and fish samples from the on Figure A-14. These data indicate an estimated 1.68 WVDP vicinity are collected and analyzed for radiological million people live within 50 mi {80 km) of the site. This constituents. (Biological sampling locations are shown on total includes approximately 148,000 Canadians {Statis- Figures A-10 and A-13.) Results are compared with simi-tics Canada, 2001). The spatial distribution of population lar measurements from samples collected at background within the 50-mi {80 km) radius of the site is utilized in locations to the WVDP. If any near-site results are higher both the air and waterborne dose calculations. than background results, dose calculations are performed. These results are used as an independent confirmation Information from the most recent land use survey, con- of (not added to) the computer-modeled dose estimates ducted in early 2002, was used to update the residential (Table 3-2) because the models already take into accou_nt locations nearest to the site. In 2008, a field verification contributions from all environmental pathways. of the residents closest to the site was conducted to con-firm the location of the nearest receptor in each sector. Determination of Radionuclide Concentrations in The WVDP is in the process of updating its population the Environment From Liquid and Airborne Releases. files with the most recent 2010 U.S. and 2011 Canadi- Because it is difficult to distinguish by direct measure-an census data and will use this update for 2013 annual ment the small amount of radioactivity originating from reporting. the Project or from naturally occurring radiation in the 3-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 3. Dose Assessment Radiation Dose The energy released from a radionuclide is eventually deposited in matter encountered along the path of the radiation. The radiation energy absorbed by a unit mass of material is referred to as the absorbed dose. The absorbing material can be either inanimate matter or living tissue. Alpha particles leave a dense track of ionization as they travel through tissue and thus deliver the most dose per unit path-length.* However, alpha particles are not penetrating and must be taken into the body by inhalation or ingestion to cause harm. Beta and gamma radiation can penetrate the protective dead skin layer of the body from the outside, resulting in exposure of the int.ernal organs to radiation. Because beta and gamma radiations deposit much less energy in tissue per unit path-length relative to alpha radiation, they produce fewer biological effects for the same absorbed dose. To allow for the different biological effects of different kinds of radiation, the absorbed dose is multiplied by a quality factor to yield a unit called the dose equivalent. A radiation dose expressed as a dose equivalent, rather than as an absorbed dose, permits the risks from different types of radiation exposure to be compared with each other (e.g., exposure to alpha radiation compared with exposure to gamma radiation). For this reason, regulatory agencies limit the dose to individuals in terms of total dose equivalent. Refer to the "Useful Information" section for discussion of ionizing radiation. Units of Dose Measurement The unit for dose equivalent in common use in the U.S. is the rem. The international unit of dose equivalent is the sievert (Sv), which is equal to 100 rem. The millirem and millisievert, used more frequently to report the low dose equivalents encountered in environmental exposures, are equal to one-thousandth of a rem or sievert, respectively. Other radioactivity unit conversions are found in the "Useful Information" section at the back of this report. The effective dose equivalent (EDE), also expressed in units of rem or Sv, provides a means of combining unequal organ and tissue doses into a single "effective" whole body dose that represents a comparable risk probability. The probability that a given dose will result in the induction of a fatal cancer is referred to as the risk associated with that dose. For waterborne releases, the EDE is calculated by multiplying the organ dose equivalent by the organ-weighting factors developed by the International Commission on Radiological Protection in Publications 26 (1977) and 30 (1979). For airborne emissions, the EDE calculation is based upon factors in Federal Guidance Report 13, and National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements (NCRP) report Number 123. The weighting factor is a ratio of the risk from a specific organ or tissue dose to the total risk resulting from an equal whole body dose. All organ-weighted dose equivalents are then summed to obtain the EDE. The dose from internally deposited radionuclides calculated for a SO-year period following intake is called the 50-year committed effective dose equivalent (CEDE). The CEDE sums the dose to an individual over 50 years to account for the biological retention of radionuclides in the body. The total EDE for one year of exposure to radioactivity is calculated by adding the CEDE to the dose equivalent from external, penetrating radiation received during the year. Unless otherwise specified, all doses discussed here are total EDE values, which include i i the CEDE for internal emitters.
- I A collective population dose is expressed in units of person-rem or person-sievert because the individual doses I "e '"mmed ove< the enti<e potenU.lly expo"'d popul*tion. The ove"ge lndlvldu*I do,. oon thecefoce be e>ti-Y dividing the collective dose by the population.
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 3-3
Chapter 3. Dose Assessment environment, computer codes are used to model the and ground surface pathwa"ys. {See "CAP88-PC Computer environmental dispersion of radionuclides that originate Code" in the "Useful Information" section.) from on-site monitored ventilation stacks and liquid dis-charge points. Site-specific data for CY 2012 (radionuclide releases in curies per year) were input into the CAP88-PC code, as Actual data from air and water release monitoring sam- were wind data collected from the on-site meteorological ples are collected, together with annual weather mea- tower and information from the most recent local popula-surements and the most recent demographic information tion survey. The output from the CAP88-PC code was then for use in dose calculations. (See Appendices A, B, and C used to determine the total EDE from air emissions to the for details of the sampling program and for summaries of MEOSI and the collective EDE ti:> the population within a results in 2012.) 50-mi (80-km) radius of the WVDP. Results are presented in Table 3-2. Although radon is specifically excluded from Dose to the Public the NESHAP regulation, an estimate of dose from radon at the WVDP is also included in Table 3-2 for comparison Each year an estimate is made of the potential radiologi- purposes. (For a detailed discussion of radon in air emis-cal dose to the public that is attributable to WVDP oper- sions from the WVDP, see the inset on "Radon-220.") ations and effluents during that CY. Estimates are calcu-lated to confirm that no individual could have received a Maximum Dose (Airborne) to an Off-Site Individual. dose that exceeded the limits for protection of the public, Based on the nonradon airborne radioactivity released as established by DOE or EPA. from all site sourc.es during 2012 (i.e., permitted stacks, nonpermitted stacks, and nonpoint sources), it was Figure 3-1 shows the estimated (all pathway) maximum .estimated that a person living in the WVDP vicinity could individual dose from the WVDP in CY 2012 as compared have received a total EDE of 0.0027 mrem (0.000027 mSv) with the average annual dose a U.S. resident receives from airborne releases. (See Table 3-2.) The computer from man-made and natural background sources .. As model estimated that this MEOSI, who was assumed to presented, the estimated dose from the WVDP would eat only locally produced foods throughout the year, was have contributed a very small amount (0.019 mrem located 1.2 mi (1.9 km) north-northwest of the site. [0.00019 mSv]) of the total annual man-made radiation dose to the MEOSI. This is much less than the average The dose from airborne sources is equal to about 5 min-dose received from consumer products and is insignifi- utes of natural background radiation received by an aver-cant compared with average dose from natural sources. age member of the U.S. population, and is well below the 10-mrem (0.1 msv) NESHAP limit established by EPA and Estimated dose from the Project to an off-site resident is mandated by DOE Order 458.1. far below the federal standard of 100 mrem allowed from any DOE site operation in a CY, confirming that efforts at lodine-129, a long-lived radionuclide, has routinely been the WVDP to minimize radiological releases are consis- found in main stack emissions. During HLW VIT, iodine-129 tent with the ALARA philosophy of radiation protection. releases increased because gaseous iodine was not as ef-ficiently removed by the VIT process off-gas treatment Predicted Dose From Airborne Emissions system as were most other radionuclides. As more HLW was removed from the tanks and converted into glass, Airborne radionuclide emissions are regulated by EPA un- less waste was available to emit iodine-129 and the total der the Clean Air Act and its implementing regulations. emitted decreased. In 2012, iodine-129 concentrations DOE facilities are subject to 40 CFR 61, Subpart H, NE- remained at (or below) pre-VIT levels and accounted for SHAP, which contains the national emission standards for about 37% of the dose to an off-site individual from air-radionuclides other than radon from DOE facilities. The borne emissions. A comparison of dose proportions from applicable standard is a maximum of 10 mrem (0.1 mSv) various nuclides in air emissions is presented on the upper EDE to any member of the public in any year. pie chart in Figure 3-2. Note that for this 2012 report, this figure presents the primary nuclides or nuclide groups for Airborne radioactive materials released in 2012 from all airborne emissions, including diffuse sources. As work stacks and diffuse sources on the WVDP were modeled activities at the WVDP progress toward decommission-using the EPA-approved CAP88-PC computer code (Trinity ing and/or facility demolition, the importance of diffuse Engineering, February 2013). This air dispersion code es- sources to dose estimates is expected to increase, and timates EDEs for the ingestion, inhalation, air immersion, 3-4 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 3. Dose Assessment the number cif point sources amendable to normal efflu- Predicted Dose From Waterborne ent monitoring will decrease. Although demolition of the 01-14 building began in 2012, only the asbestos roof and Releases non-radiological portions of the building were removed in Currently there are no EPA standards establishing limits 2012. Therefore, there was no contribution to d~se from on the radiation dose to members of the public from liq-building, demolitions in 2012. The primary contribution uid effluents, except as applied in 40 CFR Parts 141 and to dose from diffuse sources in 2012 was from the LLW2
'143, Drinking Water Guidelines (EPA, 1984a; 1984b). Cor-lagoons.
ollary limits for community water supplies are set by the NYSDOH in the New York State Sanitary Code (10 NYCRR Collective Population Dose (Airborne). About 1.68 mil-5-1.52). Radionuclides are not regulated under the site's lion people were estimated to reside in the U.S. and Can-SPDES permit. However, special requirements in the per-ada within 50 mi {80 km) of the WVDP. (See Figure A-14.) mit specify that radionuclide concentrations in the dis-This population received an estimated 0.0099 person-rem charge are subject to requirements of DOE Order 5400.5 (0.000099 person-Sv) total EDE from radioactive non-ra-(replaced by DOE Order 458.1, "Radiation Protection of don airborne emissions released from WVDP point and the Public and the Environment.") diffuse sources during 2012. The resulting average EDE per individual was 0.0000059 mrem (0.000000059 mSv). Radon-220 Radon-220, also known as thoron, is a naturally occurring gaseous decay product of thorium-232 present in the airborne emissions from the WVDP MPPB. Radon-220 is also associated with the thorium reduction extraction process"related thorium-232 and uranium-232 in the HLW. As reported in Chapter 2 of the 1996 WVDP ASER (West Valley Nuclear Services Company [WVNSCO] and Dames & Moore, June 1997), thoron levels were observed to increase during startup of the 1996 HLW VIT process. An estimate of thoroh released during each waste concentration cycle was developed and used to determine a theoretical annual release. During the VIT phase, an average of about 12 curies per day were assumed to have been released. In 2012, with the VIT process completed, the average thoron release is conservatively estimated to be about three curies per day. Although large numbers of curies were released relative to other radionuclides, the calculated dose from _thoron is quite small because of its short decay half-life and other characteristics. The NESHAP rule specifi-cally excludes thoron from air emission dose calculations, so a dose estimate using CAP88-PC was calculated separately. The theoretical dose to the MEOSI, located 1.2 mile (mi) (1.9 kilometer [km]) north-northwest of the site in 2012, would have been 0.077 mrem (0.00077 mSv), and the collective dose to the population within a 50-mi {80-km) radius would have been 4.4 person-rem (0.044 person-Sv). (See Table 3-2.) These theoretical doses are within the same range as historical doses from the man-made radionuclides found in WVDP effluents. Estimated Radon-220 Releases from the WVDP 20,.-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--. With VIT completed, thoron releases 18-t--~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~---l have decreased to pre-VIT levels. The 16+-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~---l figure presented here provides a 14-f-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--j
~ 12+-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~---l rela.tive indication of recent trends in ~ 10-f-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--j the estimated annual thoron releases.
as
~
6+-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~I 4-f-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--j 0 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 3-5
Chapter 3. Dose Assessment FIGURE 3-2 Dose Percent by Radionuclide in 2012 Air Emissions Am-241, 0.1% 1-129, 36.9% Sr-90, 55.1% Water Releases Cs-137, 37.1% t----Sr-90, 56.1% All Sources: Air Emissions and Water Releases Sr-90, 55.8% Cs-137, 29.6% 3-6 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 3. Dose Assessment As shown in Table 3-1, the public water source and res- are included in the EDE calculations for the MEOSI and idential wells are located upgradient of the WVDP and the collective population. A comparison of dose propor-therefore do not represent a potential source of expo- tions attributable to specific waterborne radionuclides is sure to radioactivity from Project activities. Cattaraugus shown on the middle pie chart on Figure 3-2. As present-Creek is not used as a drinking water supply; therefore, a ed, strontium-90 and cesium-137 account for almost all of comparison of estimated doses from this source with the the estimated waterborne dose, at 56.1% and 37.1%, re-4-mrem/year (0.04-mSv/year) EPA and NYSDOH drinking spectively, as shown by the middle pie chart in Figure 3-2. water limits is not appropriate (although values are well below the drinking water limits). Population dose esti- There were no unplanned releases of waterborne radio-mates are based on the presumption that radionuclides activity in 2012. are even further diluted in Lake Erie before reaching any municipal water supplies. Maximum Dose (Waterborne) to an Off-Site Individual. Based on the radioactivity in liquid effluents discharged Because the Project's liquid effluents eventually reach from the WVDP (lagoon 3 and the WWTF) during 2012, Cattaraugus Creek, the most important waterborne expo- an off-site individual could have received a maximum EDE sure pathway is the consumption of fish from the creek by of 0.0074 mrem (0.000074 mSv). (See Table 3-2.) About local sportsmen and residents. Exposure to external radi- 76% of this dose was from cesium-137. The MEOSI EDE atio.n from shoreline contamination or in the water is also due to drainage from the north plateau was 0.0090 mrem considered in the model for estimating radiation dose. (0.000090 mSv). About 92% of the north plateau dose was attributable to strontium-90, largely from the WNSWAM P The computer codes GENII version 1.485 (Pacific North- drainage point. west Laboratory, 1988), which implements the models in the NRC Regulatory Guide 1.109 (NRC, 1977), and The combined EDE to the MEOSI from liquid effluents LADTAP II (Simpson and McGill, 1980) were used to cal- and drainage was 0.016 mrem (0.00016 msv). This culate site-specific unit dose factors (UDFs) for routine annual dose is very small in comparison to the 310-mrem waterborne releases and dispersion of these effluents. (3.10 mSv) dose that is received by an average member The UDFs derived from those codes are tabulated in the of the U.S. population from natural background radiation.
"Manual for Radiological Assessment of Environmental Releases at the WVDP," WVDP-065 (CHBWV, 2012). Collective Population Dose (Waterborne). As a result of radioactivity released in liquid effluents from the WVDP Five batches of liquid effluents, totaling about 8.3 mil- during 2012, the population living within 50 mi {80 km) lion gal (31.6 million L), were released from the lagoon of the site received an .estimated collective EDE of 0.011 3 weir WNSP001 (SPDES point 001) during 2012. Mea- person-rem (0.00011 person-Sv). The collective dose to surements of the radioactivity discharged in these efflu- the population from the effluents plus the !")Orth plateau ents were combined with the UDFs to calculate the EDE drainage was 0.062 person-rem (0.00062 person-sv). The to the MEOSI and the collective EDE to the population resulting average EDE per individual is 0.000046 mrem living within a 50-mi (80-km) radius of the WVDP. (See {0.00000046 mSv), which is a very small percentage of Table 3-2.) the dose received by the average person from natural background radiation (310 mrem or 3.1 mSv).
In addition to measurements from WNSPOOl, radioactivi-ty measurements from WWTF effluents (WNSP007) were Predicted Dose From All Pathways included in the EDE calculations. The potential dose to the public from both airborne and Besides the two controlled release points at WNSPOOl liquid effluents released from the Project in 2012 is the and WNSP007, water from two natural drainage channels sum of the individual dose contributions. (See Table 3-2 on the north plateau originating on the Project premis- and the lower pie chart on Figure 3-2.) The calculated es contain measurable concentrations of radioactivity: maximum EDE from all pathways to a nearby resident was the northeast swamp (WNSWAMP) and north swamp 0.019 mrem {0.00019 mSv). This dose is 0.019% of the (WNSW74A). Although releases from WNSWAMP and 100-mrem (1-mSv) annual limit in DOE Order 458.1. As WNSW74A are riot considered "controlled" releases, in past years, CY 2012 results continued to demonstrate they are well characterized and are routinely sampled WVDP compliance with applicable radiation standards for and monitored. Results from these monitoring points protection of the public and the environment. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 3-7
Chapter 3. Dose Assessment TABLE3-2 Summary of Annual Effective Dose Equivalents (EDEs) to an Individual and Population From WVDP Releases in 2012 Annual EDE Expos~~e PatHways ~: ,' ' MEOS/ 0 Colle.ctive EtJE ~ mrem fmSvJ_. verson-rem foerson-SvJ Airborne Releases< 2. 7E-03 (2.7E-05) 9.9E-03 (9.9E-05)
% EPA standard (10 mrem) 0.027% NA d
Waterborne Releases . 1.6E-02 (1.GE-04) .6.2E-02 (6.2E-04) Effluents only 7.4E-03 (7.4E-05) 1.1E-02 (1.lE-04) North plateau drainage 9.0E-03 (9.0E-05) 5.lE-02 (5.1E-04) Total From All Pathways 1.9E-02 {1.9E-04) 7.2E-02 {7.2E-04)
% DOE standard (100 mrem) -
0.019% NA air and water combined
% of natural background (310 mrem; 522,000 person-rem) - 0.006% 0.000014%
received from air and water combined Estimated Airborne Radon-220e 7.7E-02 (7.7E-04Y 4.4E+OO (4.4E-02Y Note: Summed values may not exactly match totals due to rounding. NA - Not applicable. Numerical regulatory standards are not set for the collective EDE to the population.
*The maximum exposure to air discharges is estimated to occur at a residence 1.2 mi (1.9 km) north -northwest of the MPPB.
b A population of 1.68 million is estimated to rside in the U.S. and Canada within SO mi (80 km) of the site. c Releases are from atmospheric nonradon point and diffuse sources. Calculations use CAP88-PC to estimate individual and population doses. EPA and DOE limits for individual airborne dose are the same. d Estimates are calculated using the methodolgy described in the "Manual for Radiological Assessment of Environmental Releases at the WVDP';, WVDP-065 (CHBWV, 2012). e Estimated airborne releases are based on indicator measurements and process knowledge. Dose estimates are calculated using CAP88-PC for the MPPB stack. fThe estimated dose from radon-220 is specifically excluded by rule from NESHAP totals. Table 3-3 presents the total curies released to air and Figure 3-4 shows the collective dose to the population water from all sources at the WVDP. As presented on the over the last 10 years. Radioactivity in the human path-bottom pie chart on Figure 3-2, the largest proportion of way represented by these data confirms the continued estimated EDE to an off-site individual in 2012 was from inconsequential addition to the natural background radi-strontium-90 via the waterborne pathway. ation dose that individuals and the nearby WVDP popula-tion receive from Project activities. In CY 2012, the total collective EDE to the popula-tion within 50 mi (80 km) of the site was 0.072 per- Calculated Dose From Food. Most radionuclide concen-son-rem (0.00072 person-Sv), with an average EDE of trations in near-site food samples were statistically indis-0.000052 mrem (0.00000052 mSv) per individual. . tinguishable from concentrations in background samples in 2012. One near-site deer sample exhibited cesium-137 Figure 3-3 shows the calculated annual dose to the hypo- concentrations above historical background. Conser-thetical MEOSI over the last 10 years. As shown by this vative dose estimates due to consuming near-site deer, figure, the largest portion is due to waterborne contribu- fish, milk, beans, corn, and apples were estimated to be tions, which were approximately 62% lower in 2012 than about 0.22 mrem/year {0.0022 mSv/year), which is about those in 2011. 0.035% of the dose received by an average individual due 3-8 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 3. Dose Assessment TABLE 3-3 WVDP Radiological Dose and Release Summary WVDP Radiological Dose Reporting Table Calendar Year (CY) 2012 Dose to the %of DOE Population Estimated Natural Estimated a Maximally Exposed 100-mrem Within 50 Miles Radiation Population Dose Individual Limit (2000 census) Population Dose 0.019 0.00019 0.019 0.072 I 0.00072 1,684,000 522,000 mrem I (mSv) person-rem (person-Sv) person -rem WVDP Radiological Atmospheric Emissionsb CY 2012 in Curies and Becquerels Short-Lived Fission and Fission and Total Kr- Noble Gases Activation Total Radio Total Radio Total Total Other Tritium Activation Other 85 (T 112<40 dy) Products iodine strontium Uranium< Pluton ium (Rn-220) Products Actinides (T112>3 hr) (T112<3 hr) 4.96E-03 NA NA NA 8.97E-05 3.85E-OS l .26E-04 1.53E-07 1.59E-07 2.llE-07 1.10E+03 {1.84E+08) {3.32 E+06) {1.42E+06) (4.66E+06) {5.66E+03) {5.90E+03) {7.81E+03) {4.0SE+13 ) WVDP Liquid Effluent Rel easesd of Radionuclide Material - CY 201 2 in Curies and Becquerels Fission and Activation Total Total Total Total Total Other Tritium Products Radioiodine Radiostrontium U ranium" Plutonium Actinides (T112>3 hr) 2.30E-02 3.33E-03 8.84E-05 6 .13E-02 5.48E-04 3.79E-05 2.25E-05 (8. 51E +08) (1.23E +08) (3.27E +06) (2 .27E +09 ) (2 .03E+07 ) (1 .40E+06) (8 .32E+OS ) Note : There are no known significan t discharges of ra dioactive constituents from the site othe r than those reported in th is table. NA - Not appl icable
*Total population includes the U.S. population from the 2000 ce nsus plus the Canadian popu lation residing wi t hin a 50-mi {80-km) radius (Statistics Ca nada, 2001) .
b Air releases are from point and diffuse sou rces. c Total uranium {a irborne) (g) = l .37E-01 d Water releases are from both contro lled liquid effluent releases and from well -characterized site drainages.
"Total uranium {waterborne) {g) = 3.94E+02 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 3-9
Chapter 3. Dose Assessment FIGURE 3-3 Effective Dose Equivalent from Liquid and Airborne Effluents to a Maximally Exposed Individual Residing Near the WVDP 0 .08 0 .07 0 .06 0 .05 E 0 .04
~
E 0 .03 0 .02 0 .01 0 .00 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
- Liqu id
- Airb orn e FIGURE 3-4 Collective Effective Dose Equivalent From Liquid and Air Effluents to the Population Residing Within 50 Miles (80 km) of the WVDP 0 .45 0.40 0 .35 E 0 .30 cu C: 0 .25 0
le 0 .20 cu Q. 0 .15 0 .10 0.05 0 .00 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
- Liqu id
- Airborne 3-10 WVDP Annual Site Environm ental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 3. Dose Assessment to natural and other man-made sources in 2012. (See the potential for internal contamination, the location Figure 3-1, "Comparison of Doses from Natural and Man- the material was used, and process knowledge of the Made Sources to the Dose from 2012 WVDP Effluents.") item(s) to be released. In accordance with WVDP radio-This estimate assumes the individual consumes the maxi- logical controls manuals and procedures, these criteria mum quantities of each food item. These independent es- are assessed and documented, and the material(s) may timates confirmed the low modeled dose estimates based be radiologically surveyed to verify the survey results are on air and water effluents, as summarized in Table 3-2. within the contamination limits presented in DOE Order 458.1, Requirements, Section 4.j. Records of released Risk Assessment property are maintained. Estimates cif cancer risk from ionizing radiation have been Presently there are no approved criteria for releasing presented by the NCRP (1987) and the National Research WVDP material to the public that may have been con-Council's Committee on Biological Effects of Ionizing taminated in depth or volume; therefore, no unrestricted Radiation (1990). release of scrap metal or other material of this type has occurred. Compliance with the Secretary of Energy's sus-The NCRP estimates that the probability of fatal cancer pension of unrestricted release of scrap metal for recycle occurring is between one and five per 10,000 people who continues at the WVDP. are each exposed to one rem (i.e., a risk coefficient of be-tween 0.0001 and 0.0005). DOE guidance has, in the past, The Secretary does encourage efforts to promote reuse recommended using a risk coefficient of 0.0005 (Inter- and recycling of excess property for use within the DOE national Commission on Radiological Protection [ICRP], complex. These transfers occur only when property is 1991) to estimate risk to a MEOSI. Recent DOE guidance transferred to individuals authorized to use such material. recommends using the even more conservative risk co-efficient of 0.0006 provided by the lnteragency Steering Dose to Biota Committee on Radiation Standards (January 2003). The estimated risk to the hypothetical individual residing near Radionuclides from both natural and man-made sourc-the WVDP from airborne and waterborne releases in es may be found in environmental media such as water, 2012 was about 1 per 100 million (a risk of 0.00000001). sediments, and soils. In the past, it has been assumed This risk is well below the range of 0.000001 to 0.00001 that if radiological controls are sufficient to protect hu-per year considered by the ICRP to be a reasonable risk mans, other living things are also likely to be sufficiently for any member of the public (ICRP Report Number 26, protected. This assumption is no longer considered ade-1977). quate, because plant and animal populations residing in or near these media or taking food or water from these Release of Materials Containing Residual media may be exposed to a greater extent than are hu-mans. Therefore, DOE prepared a technical standard Radioactivity that provides methods and guidance to be used to eval-DOE ensures protection of the public and environment uate doses of ionizing radiation to populations of aquatic through the implementation of the standards and re- animals, riparian animals (i.e., those that live along banks quirements set forth in DOE Order 458.1. In addition to of streams or rivers), terrestrial plants, and terrestrial discharges to the environment, the release of property animals. containing residual radioactive materials is considered a potential contributor to dose received by the public. Methods in this technical standard, "A Graded Approach for Evaluating Radiation Doses to Aquatic and Terrestri-In 2000, the Secretary of Energy placed a moratorium on al Biota" (DOE-STD-1153-2002, July 2002), were used in the release of volumetrically contaminated metals, and 2012 to evaluate radiation doses to aquatic and terrestrial suspended the unrestricted release of metals from radio- biota within the confines of the WNYNSC, which includes logical areas of DOE facilities for recycling. The moratori- the WVDP. Doses were assessed for compliance with the um and suspension currer:itly remain in effect. limit in DOE Order 458.1 for native aquatic animal organ-isms (1 rad/day) and for compliance with the thresholds A graded approach is utilized by the WVDP for the re- for terrestrial plants (also 1 rad/day) and for terrestrial an-lease of equipment and materials to the public for un- imals (0.1 rad/day), as proposed in DOE-STD-1153-2002. restricted use. This approach considers the material use, WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 3-11
Chapter 3. Dose Assessment Note that the absorbed dose unit (rad) is used for biota Concentration data for radionuclides in each medium instead of the units used for indicating human risk (rem). were entered into the RESRAD-BIOTA Code. The value for each radionuclide was automatically divided by its RESRAD-BIOTA for Windows (November 2009), a calcu- corresponding BCG to calculate a partial fraction for each lation tool provided by DOE for implementing the techni- nuclide in each medium. Partial fractions for each medi-cal standard, was used to compare existing radionuclide um were added to produce a sum of fractions. concentration data from environmental sampling with biota concentration guide (BCG) screening values and Exposures from the aquatic pathway may be assumed to to estimate upper bounding doses to biota. Data were be less than the aquatic dose limit from DOE Order 458.1 taken from surface water samples obtained in 2012 and if the sum of fractions for the water medium plus that sediments over the most recent five years of sediment for the sediment medium is less than 1.0. Similarly, ex-sampling (2004-2007 and 2012). Soil data from the most posures from the terrestrial pathway may be assumed to recent 10 years (1995-2004) for which special on-site be less than the proposed dose limits for both terrestrial surface soil sampling was conducted and the most recent plants and animals if the sum of fractions for the water 10 years of routine on-site surface soil sampling (1999- medium plus that for the soil medium is less than 1.0. 2007 and 2012) were used. Differing time periods were used because radionuclide concentrations change more It was found that the isotopes with the highest sums of rapidly over time in surface waters than in sediments and fractions, the radionuclides that contributed the largest soils, as reflected in their sampling frequencies (monthly component of both aquatic and terrestrial dose to biota or quarterly for water, every five years for sediment and were strontium-90 and cesium-137. Per guidance in surface soil). DOE-STD-1153-2002, the populations of organisms most TABLE 3-4 2012 Evaluation of Dose to Aquatic and Terrestrial Slota AQUATIC SYSTEM EVALUATION Mean Mean Water Sediment Water and Water *'.' *Sediment Nuclide aci:;'0 Ratio* BCG 0 Ratio* Sediment Sum ** Value Value
** (pCi/L) ' I. ,, (pCi/g), of Fractions
'{pCi/L) ' *(pCl/g} '
,i *.*~ ' , ' ' " ' ,
Cesium-137 42.7 2.61 6.llE-02 3,130 5.49 1.76E-03 0.063 Strontium-90 279 23.3 8.34E702 583 11.7 2.0lE-02 0.104 All Others NA NA
- 4.68E-04 NA NA 4.72E-04 0.001 Sum of Fractions 1.45E-01 2.23E-02 0~167 Estimated upper bounding dose to an aquatic animal = 0.0050 rad/day; to a riparian animal= 0.017 rad/day.
TERRESTRIAL SYSTEM EVALUATION Mean Water Mean Soi/ Water and Soil
.. , Water SqUBCG.~
*Nuclide' BCG" Ratio ' Value Ratio Sum of ', ,,f Value (pci/g)
(p<;i/L) . {pCl/g) ; Fr,actions
" (pCi/L} '.
Cesium-137 599,000 2.61 4.36E-06 20.8 4.57 2.20E-01 0.220 Strontium-90 54,500 23.3 4.27E-04 22.5 5.16 2.30E-01 0.230 All Others NA NA 1.48E-06 NA NA 8.lSE-04 0.001* Sum of Fractions 4.33E-04 4.51E-01 0.451 Estimated upper bounding dose to a terrestrial plant= 0.0036 rad/day; to a terrestrial animal= 0.045 rad/day. NA - Not applicable
*The biota concentration guides (BCGs) are calculated values. Except for the sums of fractions and dose estimates, which are.rounded to two signficant digits, all values are expressed to three signficant digits.
3-12 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 3. Dose Assessment sensitive to strontium-90 and cesium-137 in this evalu- to the maximally exposed individual that were orders of ation; i.e., those most likely to be adversely affected via magnitude below all applicable EPA standards and DOE the aquatic and terrestrial pathways, were determined to Orders that place limitations on the release of radioactive be populations of riparian animals (such as the raccoon materials and dose to individual members of the public.
.[aquatic dose]) and terrestrial animals (such as the deer The collective population dose was also assessed and mouse [terrestrial dose]). Populations of both animals are found to be orders of magnitude below the natural back-found on the WNYNSC. ground radiation dose. Additionally, estimates indicated that populations of biota at the WVDP are exposed at a In accordance with the graded approach described in fraction of DOE and IAEA guidelines for dose to biota.
DOE-STD-1153-2002, a general screening was first con-ducted using the maximum radionuclide concentrations Based on the overall dose assessment, the WVDP was from surface waters, sediments, and soils. Maximum ra- found to be in compliance with applicable effluent radio-dionuclide concentrations exceeded applicable BCG limits logical guidelines and standards during CY 2012. for both aquatic and terrestrial evaluations. As recommended in DOE-STD-1153-2002, a site-specif-ic screening was then done using estimates of average radionuclide concentrations derived from measurements in site-wide surface waters, sediments, and soils. Results are summarized in Table 3-4. At the site-specific screening level, the sums of fractions for the aquatic and terrestrial evaluations were 0.167 and 0.451, respectively. The sum of fractions for each assess-ment was less than 1.0, indicating that applicable BCGs were met for both the aquatic and terrestrial evaluations. Upper bounding doses associated with the aquatic sys-tem evaluation were 0.0050 rad/day to an aquatic animal and 0.017 rad/day to a riparian animal, far below the 1 rad/day standard from DOE Order 458.1 for dose to a native aquatic animal. Upper bounding doses associated with the terrestrial system evaluation were 0.0036 rad/ day to a terrestrial animal and 0.045 rad/day to a terres-triai plant, again well below the guidance thresholds (0.1 and 1 rad/day, respectively). It was therefore concluded that populations of aquat-ic and terrestrial biota (both plants and animals) on the WNYNSC are not being exposed to doses in excess of the existing DOE dose standard for native aquatic animals (DOE, February 1990) and the international standards for terrestrial organisms (International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), 1992). Summary Tables 3-2, 3-3, and 3-4 summarize radiological dose and release information for CY 2012. Predictive computer modeling of airborne and water-borne releases resulted in estimated hypothetical doses WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 3-13
Chapter 3. Dose Assessment This page intentionally left blank 3-14
- WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter4 GROUNDWATER PROTECTION PROGRAM Groundwater Monitoring Program (GMP) these goals, the GMP describes a groundwater monitor-ing well network designed to monitor groundwater con-The GMP at the WVDP has b_een designed to comply with ditions in subsurface geologic units that represent poten-all applicable state and federal regulations and to meet tial routes of contaminant migration. For a description of the requirements of DOE Order 458.1, "Radiation Pro- these geologic units refer to "Geology and Hydrogeology" tection of the Public and the Environment," (including later in this chapter. Change 2, June 6, 2011) and the RCRA §3008(h) Adminis-trative Order on Consent. Groundwater Use and History. Site groundwater is not used for drinking or operational purposes, nor is WVDP DOE Order 458.1, Section 4.i.2, states that "Groundwa- effluent discharged directly to groundwater. The major-ter must be protected from radiological contamination to ity of site groundwater eventually flows to Cattaraugus ensure compliance with dose limits in the Consent Order Creek and then to Lake Erie. Surveys have determined and consistent with ALARA process requirements. To this that no public water supplies are drawn from groundwa-end, DOE must ensure that: baseline conditions of the ter downgradient of the site or from Cattaraugus Creek
. groundwater quality are documented; possible sourc- downstream of the WVDP. However, upgradient of the es of, and potential for, radiological contamination are site, groundwater is used as a public and private drinking identified and assessed; strategies to control radiological water supply by local residents.
contamination are documented and implemented; mon-itoring methodologies are documented and implement- Highlights of the site groundwater monitoring history and ed; and groundwater monitoring activities are integrated the evolution of the GMP are summarized in Table 4-1. with other environmental monitoring activities." Groundwater monitoring to evaluate the performance
. of tlie full-scale PTW installed in November 2010 on the Compliance with the Consent Order and the conclusions north *plateau is discussed in detail later in this chapter.
in the RFI reports require routine monitoring of certain analytes at specified groundwater monitoring locations. Geology and Hydrogeology {See the "RCRA 3008{h) Administrative Order on Con-sent" and the "RFI" section of the ECS.) The WNYNSC is situated upon a layered sequence of gla-cial-age sediments that fill a steep-sided bedrock valley' Environmental Surveillance. The WVDP EMS (Chapter 1) composed of interbedded shales and siltstones (Rickard, includes requirements for environmental monitoring to 1975). (See Figure 4-1.) Erdman Brook bisects the WVDP detect and evaluate changes in the environment resulting into the north and south plateaus. The MPPB, WTF, and from Project, or pre-Project, activities and for assessing lagoons are located on the north plateau. The drum cell, th.e effect of such changes on the public and the envi- NOA, and SDA are located on the south plateau. (See ronment, including changes due to groundwater con- Figure A-1.) tamination. The WVDP EMS also implements a site-wide approach for groundwater protection; the* "WVDP The glacial sediments overlying the bedrock consist of a Groundwater Protection Management Program Plan" sequence of three silt- and clay-rich glacial tills of Lavery, documents the Project's approach for groundwater pro- l<ent, and possibly Olean age. The tills are separated by
. tection from site activities. stratified fluvio-lacustrine deposits (silty or silty/sandy lakebed sediments). The glacial sediments above the l<ent The primary objectives of the groundwater monitoring till, which include the l<ent recessional sequence, the WLT plan are to identify, delineate, and monitor groundwater and unweathered Lavery till, the intra-Lavery till-sand, migration pathways that could transport contaminants and the alluvial sand and gravel (S&G) unit, are general-off site and to support mitigative actions. To accomplish ly regarded as the predominant* routes for contaminant WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 4-1
Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program TABLE4-1 Highlights of Groundwater Monitoring History at the WVDP and the WNYNSC Year *:* *, Highlight From the time the WNYNSC was established in 1961, to passage of the WVDP Act in 1980, groundwater at the WVDP was periodically sampled by NFS, the New York Geological Society, and the United States 1961-1980 Geological Survey during construction of the MPPB, for spill investigations, and for post-NFS research studies. 1982 Groundwater monitoring at the WVDP began in 1982 under DOE and the site subcontractor, WVNS. 1984 By 1984, 40 wells provided groundwater monitoring coverage near the MPPB and the NDA. 1986 Additional wells were installed to supplement the existing groundwater monitoring network. Ninety-six wells were installed upgradient and downgradient of the WVDP SWMUs for DOE and RCRA 1990-1991 monitoring programs. (The total included wells at the SDA area). 1992 The RCRA 3008(h) Order on Consent was signed. Elevated gross beta activity was discovered in groundwater from the sand and gravel (S&G) unit on the 1993 n*orth plateau. Subsequent investigation delineated a plume of strontium-90-contaminated groundwater originating beneath the MPPB, extending northeast. An RFI expanded characterization program was conducted to assess potential releases of hazardous 1993-1994 constituents from on-site SWMUs. Results from the RFI influenced decision making for the groundwater monitoring program (GMP). A Geo probe investigation of groundwater and soil beneath and downgradient of the MPPB was performed to characterize the elevated gross beta activity in the S&G unit. The presumed source was 1994 found to be near the southwest corner of the MPPB. The primary isotopes responsible for the beta activity were strontium-90 and its daughter product yttrium-90. The GMP was evaluated and analytical constituents were tailored to each sampling point for a more focused and cost-effective program. The NPGRS was installed near the leading edge of the main lobe of 1995 the strontium-90 plume to minimize migration, which consisted of three extraction wells to recover
!groundwater for treatment bv ion exchan!"e.
Several groundwater seeps on the northeast edge of the north plateau were added to the monitoring 1996 program. A Geoprobe soil and groundwater sampling program was conducted to delineate the leading edge of the 1997 strontium-90 plume. In response to recommendations from a 1997 external review of WVDP actions regarding the north 1998 plateau, another Geoprobe soil and groundwater sampling program was carried out to further characterize the core area of the plume. The new radiological data were compared to the 1994 data. A pilot-scale PTW was installed in the eastern lobe of the plume to test this passive in-situ remediation 1999 technology. Well points were installed near the pilot-scale PTW. Additional wells and well points were installed across the leading edge of the strontium-90 plume to 2000-2001 monitor the plume's movement and assess the effectiveness of the pilot PTW. Four new wells were installed to monitor groundwater upgradient and downgradient of the newly 2003 constructed RHWF. 200S Number of analytes or sampling frequencies were reduced at 14 groundwater monitoring wells. The GMP was evaluated, considering current site conditions, activities, and environmental exposure pathways. The analytes and sampling frequencies at 20 monitoring points were reduced and sampling at 2007 four wells was discontinued. Off-site drinking water sampling was also discontinued after an evaluation of historical data had confirmed that site operations had no impact on off-site downgradient groundwater. Two replacement wells, and 21 piezometers, were installed near the NDA during installation of a slurry 2008 wall and geomembrane cover at the NDA. On the north plateau, three subsurface investigations were performed upgradient, within, and downgradient of the strontium-90 plume. An approximately 860-ft-long full-scale PTW was installed along the leading edges of the strontium-90 plume. Sixty-six groundwater monitoring wells were installed upgradient, downgradient, and within the 2010 PTW to monitor wall performance. Four new wells were installed downgradient of the MPPB to supplement the strontium-90 source area monitoring. Groundwater monitoring continued throughout CY 2011 and 2012 per the GMP, the "North Plateau 2011-2012 Groundwater Monitoring Plan," and the "North Plateau PTW Performance Monitoring Plan." There were no changes to the programs and no wells were installed or decommissioned in 2011or2012. 4-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program FIGURE 4-1 Geologic Cross Sections of the North and South Plateaus at the WVDP J1GIS/ArcMa ASER/ASER 2010/ASER 2010 Fi 4*1 20110602.mxd FJC/skw A. North Plateau WSW Main Plant ENE
. Process I Building S&G-SWS 0
0 0 (.C) Lagoon 3 z Q:i QJ I c: 0
.Q 0
;;; M QJ w
~
E 0 a.
- a. 0
<( 0 N
Vertical Exaggeration = - 2:1 B. So uth Platea u East Vertical Exa ggeration= -2.5: 1 Legend S&G-TBU Sand and Gravel - Thick-Bedded Unit KT Kent Till S&G-SWS Sand and Gravel - Slackwater Sequence BR Shale Bedrock LTS Lavery Till Sand Conceptual Groundwater Flow Direction WLT Weathered Lavery Till ENE East-Northeast ULT Unweathered Lavery Till WSW West- Southwest KRS Kent Recessional Sequ ence (NGVD - National Geodetic Vertical Datum) WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 4-3
Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program migration from the Project via groundwater. The Kent till Groundwater elevation mapping of the WLT on the south has a relatively low permeability and does not provide plateau helps evaluate the effectiveness of the NOA inter-a pathway for contaminant movement from the WVDP; ceptor trench, the slurry wall, and geomembrane cover. therefore, it is not discussed here. The S&G unit consists (See "Groundwater Sampling Observations on the South of two subunits: the thick-bedded unit and the slackwa- Plateau: WLT and the NOA.") ter sequence. It only exists on the Project's north plateau . See Table 4-2 for the descriptions and the geographic dis- Groundwater Trigger Level Evaluation. A computerized tribution of these units. data-screening program uses "trigger levels," preset con-servative values for chemical and radiologica l concen-Routine GMP trations and groundwater elevation measurements, to promptly identify anoma lies in mon itoring results that Groundwater Monitoring Network. The WVDP ground- may req uire fu rther investigation. The t rigge r leve ls are water mon itoring network is a vita l component to meet statistica lly derived from historical results, are based on requirements of DOE Order 458.1. Groundwater is rou - regu latory criteria, or are based on analytical detection tine ly monitored across the north and south plateaus and limits. in the six hydrogeologic units described in Table 4-2. In CY 2012, groundwater samples were col lected from 69 on Trigger level exceptions, defined as measurements above
-site, routine groundwater monitoring locations, includ- an upper trigge r level or below a lowe r trigge r level, may ing 63 mon itoring wells and we ll points, five groundwater be the resu lt of normal seasona l fluctuations, laboratory seepage po ints, and one trench sump (see Figures A-8 ana lytical problems, or changes in groundwater qualit y.
and A-9). Many of the wells monitor one or more of the Response actions are identified fo r each ana lytica l result SWMUs or SSWMUs per the Consent Order. Table 4-3 lists exceed ing a trigger level. After each sampling event, the the wells in the routine groundwater monitoring network, current trigge r level exceptions are comp il ed, evaluated, the geologic units monitored, and the analytes measured and summarized w ith recommended response actions. in CY 2012. Table 4-4 identifies the analytical parameters RCRA trigger level exceptions are reported to NYSDEC. defined in each analyte group. In August 2012, groundwater trigger levels for selected The monitoring frequency and the constituents analyzed chemical and radiological constituents were recalculated unde r the groundwater monitoring plan are a function of to incorporate data collected through December 2011. regulatory requirements, historical site activities, current Trigger levels in areas that have seen a process change operating practices, and ongoing groundwater data evalu- were calcu lated only on data that was collected after the ations. Tables 4-5 and 4-6 provide an overview of ground- change occurred . A process change may affect the an-water monitoring performed during CY 2012, organized alytical results collected from a monitoring location by by geographic area and monitoring purpose . altering the underlying physica l conditions that are mon-itored at that sampling point. The upgrad ient NOA slurry Supplemental groundwater monitoring is also performed wall and geomembrane cover installed in 2008 as an IM is for evaluation of the PTW and the north plateau stron- an example of a process change that significantly altered tium-90 groundwater plume discussed later in this chap- the hydrogeologic conditions at mon itoring points locat-ter. ed on and downgradient of the NOA. The geomembrane cover and slurry wall have decreased water infiltration Groundwater Elevation Monitoring. Groundwater ele- and migration into the NOA, which changes water levels vations are measured at the mon itoring network wells in in and downgradient of the NOA. conj unction with the quarterly analytical sampli ng. (See Figures A-8 and A-9 in Appendix A.) These data are used to Groundwater Screening Levels {GSLs). In 2009, GSLs produce maps depicting groundwater flow directions and were developed during the CMS preparations as a tool to grad ients. Long-term trend graphs are used to illustrate identify the presence of chem ica l and radiologica l constit-variations in groundwater elevations over time, including uents in groundwater above levels of concern (e .g., reg-seasonal fluctuations or changes resulting from installing ulat ory limits, guidance limits, or background) . Methods water diversions, such as geomembrane covers, t renches, used to develop the GSLs are discussed in detail in Appen-or slurry walls, and groundwate r t reatment systems (e.g., dix 0 . Analytica l groundwater sampling results fo r 2012 the north plateau pumping wells and the full-scale PTW) . were compared with applicable GSLs and background 4-4 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program TABLE 4-2 Summary of Hydrogeology at the WVDP Groundwater Flow Hydraulic Geologic Unit Description Location Characteristics Conductivitv a S&G; Thick- Silty sand and gravel layer Flow is generally northeast 9 ft/day Surficial unit on the Bedded Unit composed of younger across the plateau toward (3.2E-03 centimeters north plateau (TBU) Holocene alluvial deposits Franks Creek, with [cm]/second [sec]) groundwater near the northwestern and southeastern margins flowing radially outward toward Quarry Creek and Erdman Brook. S&G; lnterbedded silty sand and Flow is to the northeast 17 ft/day Underlies a portion Slackwater gravel layers composed of along gravel layers toward (5.9E-03 cm/sec) of the north Sequence Pleistocene-age Franks Creek. plateau (SWS) glaciofluvial deposits partially separated from the S&G-TBU by a discontinuous silty clay interval Weathered Upper zone of the Lavery Flow has both horizontal 0.07 ft/day Surficial unit on the Lavery Till till which has been and vertical components (2.4E-05 cm/sec); south plateau exposed at the ground allowing groundwater to the highest surface; weathered and move laterally across the conductivities are fractured to a depth of south plateau before associated with 3-16 ft (0.9-4.9 m); brown moving downward into the dense fracture zones in color due to oxidation; unweathered Javery till or found within the contains numerous discharging to nearby upper 7 ft (2 m) of desiccation cracks and root incised stream channels. the unit tubes Unweathered Olive gray silty clay with Flow is vertically 0.002 ft/day Underlies both the Lavery Till intermittent lenses of silt downward at a relatively (8.lE-07 cm/sec) north and south and sand; ranges up to 130 slow rate; unit is plateaus ft (40 ml in thickness considered an aquitard. Lavery Till Sand Thin, sandy unit of limited Flow is to the east- 0.2 ft/day Primarily beneath areal extent and variable southeast toward Erdman (8.6E-05 cm/sec) the southeastern thickness within the Lavery Brook. portion of the till. north olateau Kent lnterbedded clay and silty Flow is to the northeast; 0.01 ft/day Underlies most of Recessional clay layers locally overlain recharge from the (4.3E-06 cm/sec) the Project, except Sequence by coarser-grained sands overlying till and from areas adjacent to and gravels; pinches out bedrock to the southwest; Rock Springs Road near the east side of Rock discharges into Butterrr:iilk Springs Road Creek. Note: Hydrologic conditions of the site are more fully described in "Environmental Information Document, Volume Ill: Hydrology, Part 4" (West Valley Nuclear Services Co. [WVNSCO]. March 1996} and in the "RCRA Facility Investigation Report (RFI) Vol. 1: Introduction and General Site Overview" (WVNSCO and Dames & Moore, July 1997). a Hydraulic conductivities represent an average of testing results from 1991 through 2012. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 4-5
.Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program TABLE 4-3 WVDP Groundwater Monitoring Network Sorted by Geologic Unit Gradient Analyte Group Gradient Ana/yte Group
. Well ID SSWMU Well ID SSWMU Position (ske Table 4-4) Position (See .Table 4-4) .
Sand and Gravel Wells 103° 1, 3 D I, RI, V 803° 8 D I, Rl,SV, V 104 1 c I, RI 804° 8 D I, RI, V 105 1 c I, RI 1302b NA u l,RI, M, 106 1 D I, RI 1304b NA u I, RI, M, R 111° 1 D I, RI, M, SV, V 8603 8 u I, RI 116° 1,8 c,u I, RI, V 8604 1 c I, RI 205 2 D I, Rf 8605° 1, 2 D I, RI, M, SV, V 301° 3 B,U I, RI 8607° 4, 6 D,U I, RI, V 302 3 u I, RI 8609° 3, 4, 6 D,D,U I, Rl,S, V 401° 3, 4 B,U I, RI, R 8612° 8 D I, RI, SV, V 402 4 u l,RI MP-01° 3 D I, RI, M, R-MP, SV, V, T 403 4 u I, RI MP-02° 3 D I, RI, M, R-MP, SV, V, T 406° 4,6 D,U I, RI, R, V MP-03° 3 D I, RI, M, R-MP, SV, V, T 408° 3,4 D I, RI, R, V MP-04° 3 D I, RI, M, R-MP, SV, V, T 501° 5 u I, Rl,S, V WP-Ac NA NA I, RI 502° 5 D I, RI, S, SM, V WP-Cc NA NA I, RI 602A 6 D I, RI WP-He NA NA I, RI 604 6 D I, RI SP04d NA NA RI 605 6 D I, RI SP06d NA NA RI 706° 7 B; D l,Rl,M SPlld NA NA RI 801° 6,8 U,D I, Rl,S, V SP12°'d 8 D I, RI, V 802 8 D I, RI, V GSEEP 0'd 8 C,D I, RI, V Lavery Till Sand Wells 204° 2,3 D I, RI. 206 2 c I, RI Weathered Lavery Till Wells 906° 9 D I, RI 1005° 9,10 c,u I, RI 0 908R 9 B,U I, RI 1006° 9, 10 C,D I, RI 0 909° 9 D I, RI, M, R, SV, V 1008C 9,10 B,U I, RI 0 NDATR 9 D I, RI, M, R, SV, V Unweathered Lavery Till Wells 107 1 D I, RI 704 7 D I, RI 108 1 D I, RI 707 7 c I, RI 0 110° 1 D I, RI, V 910R 9 D I, RI 405 4 D l,Rl,M 1301b NA D I, RI 409 4 D I, Rl 1303b NA u l,Rl,M Kent Recessional Sequence Wells 901° 9 u I, RI 10088 10 B, U I, RI 902° 9 u I, RI 8610° 9 D I, RI 903° 9 D I, RI 8611° 9 D I, RI Gradient Positions: B (background); C (crossgradient); D (downgradient)_; U (upgradient)
*Monitoring for certain parameters is required by the RCRA §3008(h) Consent Order.
b Monitor upgradient and downgradient of the RHWF.
<Monitor north and east of the MPPB.
d Monitor groundwater emanating from seeps along the edge of the north plateau. 4-6 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program TABLE 4-4 WVDP Groundwater Sampling and Analysis Agenda Analyte Gr:oup * Description of Parameters Indicator Parameters (I) pH, specific conductance (field measurements) Radiological Indicator Parameters (RI) Gross alpha, gross beta, tritium Volatile Organic Compounds (V) 6 NYCRR Part 373-2 Appendix 33 Volatile Organic Compounds Semivolatile Organic Compounds (SV) 6 NYCRR Part 373-2 Appendix 33 Semivolatile Organic Compounds and tributyl phosphate Groundwater metals (M) 6 NYCRR Part 373-2 Appendix 33 Metals (antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, vanadium, zinc) Special Monitoring Parameters for early Aluminum, arsenic, barium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, warning wells {SM) Iron, lead, manganese, mercury, nickel, selenium, silver, vanadium, zinc Radioisotopic Analyses: alpha-, beta-, and Carbon-14, strontium-90, technetium-99, iodine-129, cesium-137, gamma-emitters (R) radium-226, radium-228, uranium-232, uranium-233/234, uranium-235/236, uranium-238, total uranium Radioisotopic Analyses MPPB Area (R-MP) Carbon-14, potassium-40, cobalt-60, strontium-90, technetium-99, iodine-129, cesium-137, europium-154, neptunium-237, plutonium-238, plutonium-239/240, plutonium-241, uranium-232, uranium-233/234, uranium-235/236, uranium-238, americium-241, curium-243/244 Strontium-90 (S) Strontium-90 Turbidity (T) Turbidity TABLE 4-5 2012 Groundwater Monitoring Overview by Geographic Area a Number of.:. TotalWVDP North' Plateau "' South Plateau Monitoring Points Sampled - Analytical 69 55 14 Monitoring Points - Water Elevations Only 73 34 39 Monitoring Events 4 4 4 Analyses (analyses groups) 1,029 872 157 Results (individual) 7,213 5,844 1,369 Percent of Nondetectable Results 83% ,82% 87% Water Elevation Measurements 536 324 212
- Does not include PTW monitoring.
TABLE 4-6 WVDP 2012 Groundwater Monitoring Overview by Monitoring Purpose
, Regulatory/ Environmental Numberof... , *Tota~ * 'l
" Waste Mi:magement '$urveiflance Monitoring Points Sampled - Analytical 69 38 31 Monitoring Points - Water Elevations Only 73 1 72 Monitoring Events 4 4 4 Analyses (analyses groups) 1,029 704 325 Results (individual) 7,213 6,339 874 Percent of Nondetectable Results 83% 88% 52%
Water Elevation Measurements 536 148 388 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 4-7
Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program levels. The results are summarized in Table 4-9 at the end Gross beta concentration trends over the last 10 years at of this chapter. monitoring wells located within the plume and near for-mer lagoon 1 are shown on Figures 4-3 through 4-7. These North Plateau Strontium-90 Plume data are plotted on a log scale; therefore, an increase from one gridline to the next represents a 10-fold in-Elevated gross beta has been observed on the north crease in concentration. The log scale was used so that plateau since 1993, and is predominantly confined to data from background locations (with concentrations the S&G unit, the shallowest hydrogeologic unit on the in the 1.0E-09 µCi/ml range) and data from the central north plateau. (See the highlights for 1993 and 1994 in plume (with concentrations in the l.OE-04 µCi/ml range, Table 4-1.) The routine groundwater monitoring plan net- 100,000 times higher than background) could be plotted work for the S&G unit on the north plateau includes 44 on the same graphs. monitoring locations, three well points, and five ground-water seepage locations. Figure 4-3 illustrates the gross beta concentrations in groundwater wells located immediately downgradient of In April 2011, DOE issued a new technical standard (DOE- the MPPB, the strontium-90 source area, and along the STD-1196-2011) that established a .revised set of radio- western edge of the plume (at well 8609). Well 408 and logical concentration standards for radiological environ- the four MPPB wells (MP-01, -02, -03, and -04, installed mental protection programs at DOE facilities and sites. in CY 2010), located northeast of the MPPB closest to the These DCSs were used to evaluate groundwater data source area, exhibit the highest gross beta concentrations collected in 2012. Because there is no DCS for gross beta (up to 3.48E-04 µCi/ml in June 2012) of any routinely in liquid effluents, the strontium-90 DCS (1.lE-06 µCi/ monitored wells in the GMP. Gross beta concentrations, ml) is used as a conservative basis for comparison where remained relatively stable in CY 2012 at these six moni-beta-emitting radionuclides are detected in groundwater. toring wells directly downgradient of the MPPB. Historical monitoring has established that strontium-90 is the most predominant beta emitter found in site Figure 4-4 illustrates gross beta concentrations in wells groundwater. The strontium-90 concentrations would be 104, 501, 502, and 8604 centrally located within the expected to be about one-half of the gross beta result plume area. Gross beta concentrations in these wells because the beta includes strontium-90 and its daugh- slightly decreased overall in 2012 compared with 2011. . ter product, yttrium-90. Therefore, monitoring wells are routinely sampled for gross beta concentrations, support- Figure 4-5 illustrates gross beta concentrations at moni-ed by periodic sample measurement at select wells for toring wells 105, 116, and 8603, upgradient of the PTW.. strontium-90 analysis. For the purpose of the following The gross beta concentrations at these wells in 2012 are discussions, the strontium-90 DCS is used for comparison similar to the 2011 concentrations. Gross beta concentra-with both gross beta and strontium-90. (See the "Useful tions at wells 105 and 8603 decreased slightly whereas Information" section for a discussion of DOE DCSs, and the gross beta concentration at well 116 exhibited a slight Table Ul-4 for a list of the DCSs for radionuclides of inter- overall increase in 2012. est at the WVDP.) Figure 4-6 illustrates gross beta concentrations at mon-Figure 4-2 shows the extent of the strontium-90 plume itoring wells 801, 803, 804, and 8612, downgradient of as defined by the 1.0E-06-µCi/ml gross beta isopleth, the PTW. The plume's leading edge had migrated .past at three time intervals spanning 18 years (1994, 2002, the PTW before it was installed in 2010 as indicated by in-and 2012). As shown, the plume's western boundary has creases in gross beta activity at wells 803 and 8612 since remained relatively constant since 1994, but the plume's 2009. Gross beta concentrations at well 804 exhibited a northern and eastern extents have spread to the north- slight increase from 2011 to 2012. Gross beta concentra-east and east. The leading edge has divided into three tions at wells 801, 803, and 8612, also downgradient of small lobes because of the variable groundwater flow
- the PTW, decreased from 2011 to 2012. Continued mon-rate across the north plateau, due to the heterogeneous itoring will determine whether these recent decreases nature of the sediments within the S&G unit. The uneven may be an indication of treated groundwater migrating distribution of coarse and fine soils within the subsurface out of the PTW.
creates preferential pathways for groundwater flow. The GMP wells that monitor the plume and the measured gross beta concentrations are shown on the figure. 4-8 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 4. Groundw ater Protection Program FIGURE 4-2 North Plateau Strontium-90 Plume Plotted by Beta Data : 1994, 2002, 2012 J.IGIS/ArdrAaplASERJASER 20 12JA N
... SP12
- SP11 A
/ WNSWAMP ...
SP06
- 603 j
rJ i:i. GROSS BETA CONCENTRATIONS (OeQember 2012) WELL ID (lie""1L) IU10 Plant Alea
<t08 1 94E-0-1 8609 158E..o6 MP..01 23"E-04 MP-02 2 89E-04 MP..03 187E-0-1 MP-04 304E..fl.C Ct!ntral Plume 104 657£~
501 7.87E-05 S02 8.13E..05 860<1 5 57E..05 Upgtad!<<ll of P'TW 105 6.0SE-05 106 I 13E..o6 116 2°'E*05 8603 6 31£..oS LEGEND Ooo.ngrad'oent ol PTW 801 996E..o6 2012 Gross Beta Isopleth 803 189E-06 804 3 51E-07 8612 2 OOE-08 2002 Gross Beta Isopleth Seeps 1994 Gross Beta Isopleth GSEEP I 87E..o7 SP04 1 52E-06 SP06 1 84E-07 PTW Alignment SP1 l 7 78E-07 laopje111 Ines at 1E-06 µCUml (Gtoss Beta TOGS) SP12 2 80E-07 Nole Concentrations ate from groundwater Fonnet Lagoon 1 colteclA!<I 10 December 2012 111 6 OSE-06 8605 7.6CE*06 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 4-9
Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program Monitoring at North Plateau Seeps. Groundwater is also Figure 4-8, annual average strontium-90 concentrations at monitored along the northeast edge of the north plateau, WNSWAMP have been close to or above the strontium-90 where it seeps from the steep banks incised by Erdman DCS for nine of the last 10 years. The 2012 average annual Brook and Franks Creek. The downgradient seepage loca- strontium-90 concentration shown on Figure 4-8 is a non-tions (GSEEP, SP04, SP06, SPll, and SP12). located east of flow weighted average. This straight average of month-the CDDL outside of the WVDP fence line, monitor con- ly concentrations was slightly above the DCSs, while ditions on the edge of the north plateau where ground- the flow-weighted average shown in Table 2-2 is slightly water discharges to the surface . (See Figure A-8. in Ap- below the DCS. Both estimates for the annual average pend ix A.) Ten-year trends of gross beta concentrations strontium-90 at WNSWAMP show a decreasing trend for at these five seep monitoring points are shown on Fig- 2012 . The strontium-90 released through WNSWAMP ure 4-7. Annual average gross beta concentrations were accounted for an annua l estimated dose of 8.6E-3 mrem plotted against surface water background values because in 2012. See "Maximum Dose (Waterborne) to an Off-Site water from seepage points occasionally may include sur- Individual" in Chapter 3. face water (i.e., at seepage location SP11). Annual aver-age concentrations at all five monitored seep locations Monitoring of surface water downstream of the WVDP increased during 2012 . at the first point of public access, Felton Bridge on Cat-taraugus Creek (location WFFELBR), continued to show The highest gross beta concentration among the seepage that strontium-90 concentrations in 2012 were similar locations has been observed at SP04, which increased to to historical concentrations from the Cattaraugus Creek an annua l average of 1.46E-06-µCi/ml in 2012 above the background surface water location at Bigelow Bridge DOE DCS for strontium-90 of 1.10E-06-µCi/ml. Howev- (WFBIGBR). er, the strontium-90 concentrations in the north plateau plume have been demonstrated to be approximate- Strontium-90 Plume Remediation ly half of the gross beta concentrations, suggesting the DOE DCSs have not been exceeded at the seep locations. Activities The second highest gross beta concentration at the seep Full-Scale PTW. In November 2010, an 860-ft- long full - sampling locations occurred at SP11, located within the scale PTW was installed to treat the north plateau stron-discharge area of the swamp drainage ditch. The annual tium-90 plume. The PTW has operated now for over two average 2012 concentration at SP11 represents approxi- full years. The overall average concentrations of stron-mately 57% of strontium-90 DCS. The gross beta activity tium-90 immediately downgradient of the PTW are lower detected as SP11 is believed to be the result of contam- than they were when the wall was installed suggesting inated groundwater from the S&G unit that entered the that the PTW is removing strontium-90 from the ground-northeast swamp drainage ditch, and perco lated back water. A map view and cross-section of the PTW installa-into the ground. tion is shown on Figure 4-9. Monitoring at the Northeast Swamp Drainage. The west- The PTW was installed through the entire thickness of ern and central lobes of the plume are partially intercept- the S&G unit (including the thick-bedded unit and the ed by the northeast swamp dra inage ditch flowing west to slackwater sequence, where present), and was keyed into east across the plume's leading edge (see Figure 4-2 and the underlying, low-permeability unweathered Lavery Figure A-2 in Appendix A) . The surface water flow rate in till. Granular clinoptilolite (i.e ., zeolite), a natural miner-this ditch is measured biweekly. Surface water samples al with a porous structure that traps positively charged are collected monthly and analyzed for radiological con- ions by ion exchange, including strontium, while allowing stituents at sampling location WNSWAMP located at the the groundwater to pass through, was used in the PTW. WVDP property boundary. North plateau plume ground- A lined storm water dra inage ditch (Smart-Ditch"') was water seeping into this ditch is believed to be the main also installed in September 2010 south of the PTW to in-source of the strontium-90 activity at WNSWAMP. Ap- tercept storm water from upland site areas and route it proximately 13.5 million gal (51 million L) of water flowed around the PTW to Franks Creek. through this monitoring point in 2012. (See "Waterborne Effluent Monitoring" in Chapter 2.) The PTW was designed to address three remedial action objectives (RAOs): Gross beta and strontium-90 concentrations at WNSWAMP exhibit seasonal variability. As shown on 4-10 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program
- RAO 1: Reduce or eliminate strontium-90 presence in water levels were performed monthly through October groundwater seepage leaving or potentially exiting the 2012, were stopped during November and December north plateau to ALARA, with a goal to be less than the and monitored monthly again in early 2013. Continuous DCG of 1.0E-06 µCi/ml (the RAOs for the PTW were water level monitoring has been performed at five loca-determined before the DCGs were replaced by the tions within the PTW since March 2011.
DCSs); Monitoring data collected to date indicates:
- RAO 2: Minimize the future expansion of the stron-tium-90 plume beyond its current mapped limits; and
- Groundwater flow patterns in the PTW area are similar to flow patterns observed prior to PTW construction,
*_RAO 3: Ensure that a technology selected for current indicating that the PTW installation did not substantial-containment of the strontium-90 plume does not pre- ly alter groundwater flow conditions on the north pla-clude any strategies for addressing the plume during teau; site decommissioning.
- Strontium-90 activity from groundwater wells inside The PTW placement was chosen to not impact the CDDL, the PTW typically is substantially lower than stron-and consequently did not capture the plume's leading tium-90 activity levels upgradient of the PTW; edge as it existed in November 2010. Strontium-90 con-centrations that existed downgradient of the PTW prior
- Geochemical differences were observed in groundwa-to the PTW's installation were expected to increase for ter that has migrated into or through the zeolite, indi-a period of time, and then eventually decrease when cating that cation exchange is occurring; and groundwater treated by the PTW begins to reach these downgradient areas. Recent north plateau monitoring
- Strontium-90 activity in groundwater immediate-shows evidence of treated groundwater exiting the PTW ly downgradient of the PTW, as well as over 100 feet downgradient of the wall. downgradient is steadily decreasing.
DOE continues to evaluate long-term strategies for plume
- Based on the January 2013 annual sampling results, management, including excavating subsurface soils from there are no longer strontium-90 concentrations great-the source area beneath the MPPB. Removal of the MPPB er than 1.0E-05-µCi/ml (10,000 pCi/L) in the downgra-and the plume source area are components of DOE's ROD dient western or central lobes and no detected stron-for decommissioning and/or long-term stewardship of tium-90 activities above 1.0E-06-µCi/ml (1,000 pCi/L) the WVDP and the WNYNSC. in the downgradient eastern lobe.
PTW Performance Monitoring Plan (PTWPMP). The These observations indicate the ongoing processes within PTWPMP was developed and implemented immediate- the PTW are currently achieving the RAOs and the func-ly following the PTW installation. This plan describes the tional requirements of the PTW defined in the PTWPMP. performance monitoring requirements for the PTW. Data collected during 2012 was reported in quarterly and an- North Plateau GMP (NPGMP). A supplementary NPGMP nual PTW performance monitoring reports. The general was also developed in 2010, in conjunction with com-objectives of the PTWPMP include: pleting the full-scale PTW. The primary objective of the NPGMP is to monitor the strontium-90 plume migration e Monitoring the physical integrity of the PTW and its in groundwater farther upgradient and downgradient of components; the PTW than the areas monitored under the PTWPMP. This monitoring program, which includes quarterly gross
- Assessing the movement of strontium-90-affected beta sampling at 26 well locations and water level mea-groundwater in the vicinity of the PTW; and surements at 40 well locations, was performed concur-rent with the PTWPMP throughout 2012.
- Assessing the rem ova I of strontium-90 from groundwa-ter moving through the PTW. PTW Protection and Best Management Plan. The north plateau PTW protection and best management plan de-Quarterly sampling and monthly inspections were per- scribe best management practices implemented to. in-formed throughout 2012. Manual monitoring of PTW crease the effectiveness and longevity of the PTW. The
- WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 4-11
Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program practices include elimination of road-salt use near the lagoon system. Tritium concentrations sitewide have been PTW, storm water management via the upgradient Smart- consistently decreasing. Tritium has a relatively short half-Ditch', and monthly inspections. life (about 12.3 years) and dilution from surface water infiltration and groundwater recharge contributes to the NPGRS. In 1995, the NPGRS was installed to slow the decrease. Residual tritium activity is attributed to former advance of the strontium-90 plume. (See Figure 4-2.) The nuclear fuel reprocessing operations. No new source of NPGRS consists of three wells used to extract contaminat- tritium is suspected. As shown in Table 4-7, the maximum ed groundwater. Extracted groundwater is transferred to tritium concentration measured in groundwater from the the LLW2 for treatment by ion exchange to remove stron- north plateau in 2012, 3.12E-05 µCi/ml, occurred at well tium-90. Treated water is ultimately discharged through point WP-C, downgradient of the MPPB (see Figure A-8 the lagoon system to Erdman Brook via the SPDES-per- for the well point location). This _concentration was ap-mitted outfall 001. proximately two orders of magnitude below the DCS for tritium of 1.9E-03 µCi/ml. The NPGRS operated throughout 2012, processing about 2.9 million gal (10.9 million L) of water. The system has Radioisotopic Sampling Results on the North Plateau. extracted and processed approximately 65. 7 million gal In addition to being analyzed for gross alpha, gross beta, (248.6 million L) since November 1995. One of the NPGRS tritium, and strontium-90, samples from eight groundwa-wells was shut down in December 2012 and the second ter wells in the north plateau S&G unit (401, 406, 408, well was shutdown in April 2013. Should a determination 1304, and MP-01 through MP-04) were analyzed for spe-be made that the system is no longer anticipated to be cific radionudides (see Tables 4-3 and 4-4). The maximum needed, closure will be performed in accordance with radionuclide concentrations measured at either the north SPDES closure requirements. or south plateau during 2012 are presented in Table 4-7. Pilot-Scale PTW. A pilot-scale PTW was constructed in The MPPB wells (MP-01, -02, -03, and -04) were also an-1999 with a clinoptilolite, selected for its ability to adsorb alyzed for radioisotopes not previously included in the strontium-90 ions from groundwater. The data collected WVDP groundwater analytical suites, including neptu-during the testing of the pilot PTW helped determine that nium-237, plutonium-238, plutonium-239/240, plutoni-the PTW technology was an effective remediation method um-241, americiur:n-241, and curium-243/244, to investi-for strontium-90-coritaminated groundwater. Three wells gate their presence as a result of former MPPB operations. within the pilot-scale PTW were monitored in 2012 under None of these radionuclides have been detected to date the NPGMP to support delineation of flow and transport at the MPPB wells. (See Appendix D, Table D-2H.) of the plume across the north plateau. Two sampling locations in the south plateau (well 909 Other Groundwater Sampling and the NDA sump [NDATR]) are also analyzed for specinc radionuclides. Results are discussed later in this chapter. Observations on the North Plateau (Note that radium-226, radium-228, uranium-234, and Monitoring Near Former Lagoon 1. Southeast of the uranium-238 occur naturally in the environment.) (See strontium-90 plume, elevated gross beta concentrations Appendix D-1.) are documented in groundwater downgradient of former lagoon 1, which was backfilled in 198,4. (See Figure 4-2.) Results for Volatile and Semivolatile Organic Compounds Gross beta concentrations in wells 8605 and 111 are con- (VOCs and SVOCs). Per the Consent Order, select wells sistently above the strontium-90 DCS and are remaining within the S&G unit are monitored for voes and SVOCs stable from year to year, as shown in the 10-year trend because concentrations of these compounds exceed-graph on Figure 4-10. The gross beta activity source is ing NYSDEC Technical and Operational Guidance Series assumed to be the radiologically contaminated material (TOGS) 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater Quality Standards used as backfill and the residual sediment within former were detected in some groundwater samples collected lagoon 1. during the RF!. Tritium in North Plateau Groundwater. On the north Currently, the only S&G unit monitoring location with plateau, elevated tritium concentrations have historical- consistent positive voe detections is well 8612, located ly been observed near the lag storage area, the lag stor- northeast and downgradient of the CDDL at the northeast age hardstand, and adjacent to and downgradient of the edge of the north plateau. (See Table 4-8, and Figure A-8 4-12 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program in Appendix A.) Figure 4~11 illustrates the concentration Monitoring Wells" in previous ASERs.) The chromium ranges of four voes detected at well 8612. Only one voe detected at MP-01 was only marginally above the GSL (1,2-Dichloroethylene [total]) continues to be detected during the June and September sampling events, but was slightly above the TOGS 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater below the detection limit in March and December 2012. Quality Standard; the concentration at well 8612 contin-ued to decrease during 2012 from 8.3 micrograms per Groundwater Sampling Observations on liter (µg/L) in March to 7.9 µg/L in December. These con- the South Plateau: Weathered Lavery Till centrations are not significantly above the practical quan- (WLT) and the NOA titation limit of 5.0 µg/L. The VOCs detected in well 8612 are presumed to be from wastes buried in the CDDL. Interim Measure (IM). In 1990, a trench system was con-structed through the WLT along the northeast a_nd north-TBP, an SVOC, has been continually detected in ground- west sides of the NOA to intercept and collect potentially water from well 8605, downgradient of former lagoon 1 contaminated groundwater. Sampling location NDATR since monitoring at this location began. The maximum is a sump at the lowest point of the interceptor trench. concentration measured in 2012 (162 µg/L) was signifi- Groundwater is collected at NDATR and transferred to cantly lower than the historic high of 700_ µg/L measured the LLW2 for processing. In 2012, no organic constituents in December 1996. TBP has also been detected in *well were detected in groundwater from the NOA interceptor 111, located near well 8605, but at concentrations, close trench. Groundwater elevations are monitored quarterly to the quantitation limit of 10 µg/L. (See Figure 4-12.) TBP in and around the interceptor trench to ensure that an is thought to be residual contamination from liquid waste inward gradient is maintained. management activities in the former lagoon 1 area during nuclear fuel reprocessing. A TOGS 1.1.1 water quality A second IM, to improve the stability of the earthen cap standard has not been established for TBP. and to limit infiltration of surface water and precipitation into the NOA, was completed in December 2008. This A summary of maximum VOC and SVOC concentrations included installing a geosynthetic cap over the NOA, a detected in WVDP groundwater wells in 2012, that ex- low-permeability upgradient slurry wall, and surface wa-ceeded TOGS 1.1.1 criteria, is provided in Tables 4-8 and ter drainage diversions. (See also "Interim Measure [JM]" 4-9. under "RCRA 3008(h) Consent Order" in the ECS and "NOA Interceptor Trench and Pretreatment System" in Metals Sampling on the North Plateau. In 2005, 2007, Chapter 1.) Water level data from piezometers installed and 2008, sele.ct groundwater wells were sampled to to monitor the slurry wall indicate that the slurry wall and evaluate metals concentrations in groundwater impact- geomembrane cover are causing the WLT to become dry ed by the strontium-90 plume migrating from the MPPB in some areas. The reduced water volume extracted from source area. No metals have been determined to be as- the interceptor trench since the cap and barrier wall were sociated with the strontium-90 plume. installed is another indication that the JM is effectively re~ ducing flow through the NOA. The total volume pumped During 2012, routine metals sampling continued to be annually from the NOA trench in 2012 {64,035 gal performed, as outlined in the GMP. The sampling results [242,399 L]) was approximately one-fifth of the volume were compared with the established GSLs and back- pumped in CY 2007, before the JM. (See Figure 4-14.) ground levels (see Table 4-9). The only metals detected above background in groundwater in 2oi2 were barium, Refer to ECS "JM" under "RCRA §3008{h) Administrative chromium, and nickel. Barium was detected above back- Order on Consent" for further discussion of the NOA IMs. ground concentrations at wells 502 and MP-01. Nickel was detected at concentrations above the GSLs in wells *Radioisotopic Sampling Results on the South Plateau. 405, 502 and 706, and detected above background in well Gross beta, tritium, and several radioisotope concentra-1303. Chromium was detected above the GSL at wells . tions in groundwater from NDATR (see Table 4-9, Figure 111, 502, 706, and MP-01 (see Appendix D-2G). Wells 4-13, and Appendix A, Figure A-9) continued to be ele-405, 502, and 706 are stainless-steel wells that have his- vated with respect to GSLs or to concentrations in back-torically shown evidence of corrosion. (For additiona I ground monitoring locations on the south plateau. Gross detail, refer to "Investigation of Chromium and Nickel in beta concentrations at NDATR have decreased after the the S&G Unit and Evaluation of Corrosion in Groundwater 2008 IM to below the gross .beta GSL of 1.00E-6 µCi/ml WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 4-13
Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program TABLE 4-7 2012 Maximum Concentrations of Radionuclides 0 in Groundwater at the WVDP Compared With WVDP Groundwater Screening Levelsb (GSLs) Regulatory Compliance Environmental Surveillance Well ID With Maximum Well/D With ! Maximum ' .. GSL Radionuclide
, . , ,. Maximum Flagc Concentration Maximum Flagc Concentration . {µCi/ml)
Concentration
- rilci/mi.J . ,;Conce;,tration . '{ltCi/ml} "
Tritium . 909 8.89E-07 WP-C 3.12E-05 l.78E-07 Strontium-90 MP-02 1.45E-04 - - 5.90E-09 Technetium-99 MP-02 4.SOE-08 - - 5.02£-09 lodine-129 NDATR 2.30E-08 - - 9.61E-10 Cesium-137 - - - - 1.03E-08 Radium-226 406 J 6.0SE-10 1304 3.38E-10 1.33E-09 Radium-228 NDATR J 1.17E-09 1304 3.85E-10 2.16E-09 Uranium-233/234 NDATR 1.54E-09 - - 6.24E-10 Uranium-235/236 MP-04 1.40E-10 - - 8.07E-11 Uranium-238 MP-04 1.00E-09 - - 4.97E-10 Total Uranium NDATR 3.54E-03 1304 4.38E-04 1.34E-03 Note: Bolding indicates that the radionuclide exceeds the GSL.
- indicates that none of the regulatory or environmental surveillance wells exhibited positive results for these radionuclides.
*The table presents the maximum concentrations of radioculides that were positively identified in groundwater wells at the WVDP, all other radionuclides were not positively identified, or were not analyzed.
b GSLs for radiological constituents are set equal to the larger of the background concentrations or NYSDEC Technical and Operational Guidance Series {TOGS) 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater Quality Standards {see Table D-1A). c The "J" flag indicates the result is an estimated value.
- TABLE4-8 2012 Summary of Maximum Concentrations of Organic Constituents in Select WVDP Groundwater Wells
' Regufato'ry/Waste Management "*
NYS
,\,
Monitor{nrt Pr~fJWm C/ass~GA GroundwaterQuali,ty Constitae'nt
',,;, f," .. w_ell with tfte High,est Maximum Standards 0 (µg/L) concentration Conceniration{µg/t) * ., *':< *'
1,2-Dichloroethylene (total) 8612 8.3 5.0 Tributyl phosphate 8605 162 NA NA - Not applicable 0 Source: 6 NYCRR Part 703, Division of Water TOGS 1.1.1, NYS Groundwater Effluent Limitations {Class GA). in 2012 from the maximum observed concentration of radioisotope to the measured gross beta concentrations 1.75E-06 µCi/L in September 2009 after the 2008 IM. in the NDA trench water. The increases immediately following the installation of the upgradient slurry wall and cap are believed to be at- NDATR samples. in 2012 also exhibited the highest con-tributable to less dilution of water collected in the trench centrations for iodine-129. Elevated iodine-129 concen-because groundwater and surface water infiltration into trations observed since the 2008 IM are believed to be at-the NDA was significantly reduced. Similar to the north tributable to less dilution of the water that collects within plateau, strontium-90 is the predominant contributing the trench (See Table 4-7.). 4-14 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program WLT well 909 also exhibited elevated tritium, iodine-129, full-scale PTW across the leading edge of the plume and strontium-90, and several uranium radioisotope concen- installation of the NPGRS in 1996. Two years of post in-trations above the GSL during 2012, consistent with his- stallation monitoring results indicate the PTW is remov-torical values, as shown in Table 4-9 and Appendix D. _Prior ing strontium-90 from the groundwater exiting the wall. to replacement, ULT well 910 began to show increases in Other localized areas of groundwater contamination have gross beta that were not representative of the groundwa- been observed downgradient of former lagoon 1, also ter in the ULT. A down-hole camera inspection determined on the north plateau, and downgradient of the NOA on there was a break in the well riser that allowed shallower the south plateau. Measures to reduce and collect wa-legacy NOA contamination to enter the well. This well was ter moving through the NOA including the NOA trench therefore decommissioned and replaced in 2008, result- installed in 1990 and the slurry wall and geomembrane ing in more representative gross beta concentrations in cover installed in 2008 are reducing the water level in the ULT slightly above background. (See Figure 4-13). the NOA and thus the potential for groundwater contam-ination flowing out of the NOA. The T&VDS is effectively Radionuclide concentrations in groundwater downgradi- drying out the waste tanks, further reducing the potential ent of the NOA are presumed to be associated with for- for groundwater contamination in the WTF. mer waste burial operations. As discussed in the ECS, longer-term measures to reduce Additional Monitoring and Investigations potential groundwater contamination as described in Phase 1 of the EIS preferred alternative selected by DOE Groundwater Monitoring Downgradient of the WTF. in the ROD (April 2010), include removing the MPPB, re-HLW in the underground tanks was removed and solidi- moving the lagoons, and remediating the source of the fied through the VIT process in 2002. The underground north plateau plume. waste tanks are being stabilized by a T&VDS that began operating in December 2010. Two of the tanks are dry and liquid levels are decreasing in the other two. This system is successfully reduci_ng the liquid volume in the tanks and vaults through evaporation. (See "WTF and the T&VDS" in the ECS.)Throughout waste processing activ-ities, groundwater controls were in place to (1) reduce the upward hydrostatic pressure on the tanks, and (2) to maintain an inward hydraulic gradient toward the tanks,
*thereby inhibiting potential leaks from the tanks. The nat-ural inward hydraulic gradient is influenced by periodical-ly pumping a dewatering well, located outside the vault, . that also controls the hydrostatic pressure near the tanks.
Radioactivity in groundwater near the WTF is routinely monitored and evaluated. Elevated gross beta concen-trations from well 8607 have been observed since 1994, with the maximum concentration measured in 2005. Gross beta activity has also been observed in the dewa-tering well and the tank 80-2 pan. During 2012, gross beta concentrations at well 8607 were lower than 2011 concentrations and are near background levels. Summary Evaluation of groundwater results from 2012 continue to show that the most widespread area of groundwater contamination at the WVDP is the strontium-90 plume in the S&G unit on the north plateau. Efforts to reduce contaminant levels in the downgradient portions of the north plateau plume included the 2010 installation of the WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 4-15
Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program TABLE4-9 2012 Groundwater Monitoring Results Exceeding GSLs and Background Levels RADIQlOGICAL PA~METERS ;, *, Number of Locations Geo tog ii:
', '\,
~-- ,' -,:
, exceeding GSls ?* or 'unit . .* , Groundwat{!r Samplil'Jg .Location
'.,',';', :. ::, l,*'*'. :'
Backaround * 'fpJat~aJf: ">tr ., ,'"-,," ' ,, ~:;;.: G~qss Alpna
'"" - /
"" '1 "., . '"'i:';, ,.:; .,: ,,, ,:
7: "" .: ~<, *,' ,:,*;,>.*' ;:;; :.. ' ' """*
,.. , ,, *~ f ,* **:; "' ;.... ,
S&G (NP) 111 501 8605 WP-H 3 > GSL 6> BKG WLT (SP) 906 ULT (SP) 910R G'ro~s sefa "' _,),
; '} ' ' ~* ' ***:: ,',, ::y.*..: < 1,' *:"
GSEEP 105 408 802 8609 WP-C SP04 106 501 803 8612 WP-H SP06 111 502 804 MP-01 S&G (NP) SP11 116 602A 8603 MP-02 20 > GSL 40 > BKG SP12 205 605 8604 MP-03 103 302 704 8605 MP-04 104 401 801 8607 WP-A ULT (NP) 107 WLT (SP) NDATR 909 Tritium"' *. " ' ,; :' .:'.' ,* GSEEP 105 106 8604 WP-A S&G (NP) SP04 106 801 8609 WP-C 19 > GSL 19 > BKG 104 602A 8603 MP-04 WP-H ULT (NP) 108 110 WLT(SP) NDATR 909 Strontium-90 "1," '"*'
" * ' ,;~>.' **/
'" " 1' 408 502 8609 MP-02 MP-04 S&G (NP) 11 > GSL 11 > BKG 501 801 MP-01 MP-03 WLT (SP) NDATR 909 Technetium-99
'" '1;
5 > GSL 5 > BKG S&G (NP) 408 MP-01 MP-02 MP-03 MP-04 1.~dJn~::~29 , , .. :,;>,'
*, ,..:*:, ',;,' ,: *.* .y, 2 > GSL
"'"""*'" ,1',,*
2 > BKG WLT (SP) NDATR
~'-
909
"\
~ranium-233/234 )*
' :1 *,:>*, ,. '*.,:~, *, *.;.. *:". :\,;:,,: ",,,;,,!;
S&G (NP) MP-02 MP-03 MP-04 5 > GSL 5 > BKG WLT (SP) NDATR 909 t..Jrani~rn-235/236 . ' '. 1 > GSL 1> BKG S&G (NP) MP-04
µr<:1niµrr-23s.'., :. . >:' ,.,' ,." *-.;;" '.'. :,;./* . " "' "' .;,, ,,..:, "'.,'. ,.',,< '*
,,, .,., :o.
S&G 408 MP-02 MP-04
.5 > GSL 5> BKG WLT(SP) NDATR 909 Total Ur~mium ..
2 > GSL 2> BKG WLT (SP) NDATR 909 4-16 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program TABLE 4-9 (concluded) 2012 Groundwater Monitoiring Results Exceeding GSLs and Background Levels METALS fl,{umber of Lqcations,, . . . G~o/ogic *
~~c~eding GSLs a or' Unit
,
- Back rounlJ*b * (plateau) .*
Barium 4>GSL 4 >BKG S&G (NP) 111 502 706 MP-01 Ni~ke1 405 502 706 1303 ORGAN its 1 >TOGS 1 > Dl S&G (NP) 8612 Tributyl phosphate No TOGSc 2 >Dl S&G {NP) 111 8605 Note: Bolded wells indicate 2012 results that exceed GSLs. Unbolded wells indicated 2012 results that exceeded background. Key: BKG - Background SP - South Plateau DL - Detection Limit
- ULT- Unweathered Lavery Till NP - North Plateau WLT - Weathered Lavery Till
*The site-specific GSLs for radiological constituents were set equal to the larger of the WVDP background concentratrions or the NYSDEC TOGS 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater Quality Standa.rds as discussed on page D-1 and presented in Table D-lA. The GSLs for metals were set equal to the larger of the background concentration or NYSDEC TOGS 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater Quality Standards as presented in Table D-18.
Organic constituents were compared directly with NYSDEC TOGS 1.1.l Class GA Groundwater Quality Standards. bThe data used for the calculation of background values collected from 1991 through September 2009 were taken from background wells 301, 401, 706, and 1302 in the sand and gravel unit on the north plateau. The background concentration was set to the upper limit of the 95% confidence interval. c No TOGS 1.1.1 standard has been established for tributyl phosphate. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 4-17
Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program FIGURE 4-3 Annual Average Gross Beta Concentrations at Monitoring Wells Downgradient of the North Plateau Strontium-90 Plume Source Area 1 E-03 1 E-04
~
*----* * )I(
- l===-. I
~
\J 1E-05 Cl
...J
__, 1E-06 Strontium-90 DCS 1.1E-06 µCi/ml E d:::!. 1E-07
-A 1E-08 Background wells 1E-09 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 . 2010 2011 2012
°""'"*"""408 ....,._8609 -+-MP-01 -MP-02 -+-MP-03 -B-MP-04 --l:r-Bkg Note: S&G background (Bkg) wells 301, 401, 706, and 1302 are averaged for this comparison.
FIGURE 4-4 Annual Average Gross Beta Concentrations at Monitoring Wells Centrally Located Within the North Plateau Strontium-90 Plume 1E-03 1E-04 ,... QJ 1E-05
]
""0
.:::!. Strontium-90 DCS 1.lE-06 uCilml
__, 1E-06 E d:::!. 1E-07 1E-08 1E-09 Background wells
- - - - -t.,
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
--e-104 -so1 -so2 -8604 --l:r-Bkg Note: S&G background (Bkg) wells 301, 401, 706, and 1302 are averaged for this comparison.
4-18 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year.2012
Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program FIGURE 4-5 Annual Average Gross Beta at Monitoring Wells Upgradient of the PTW Strontium-90 DCS 1.1£-06 µCi/ml 1E-07-r-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~--1 Background wells 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 20IO 2011 2012
--+-105 ~116 _._8603 --fr-Bkg Note: S&G background (Bkg) wells 301, 401, 706, and 1302 are averaged for this comparison.
FIGURE4-6 Annual Average Gross Beta at Monitoring Wells Downgradient of the PTW 1E-03 1E-04
~
1E-05 -
]'
- -- ~
~ ""
t>l 0 Strontium-90 DCS 1.1£-06 uCilmL / 1E-06
-.J E
CT"1. 1E-07
/
L 1E-08 - A
/ /
- - = - -
,/
- ~
Background wells iE-09 2003 2004 2005 2006 200?- 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
--&-801 -803 --+-804 -8612 --fr-Bkg Note: S&G background (Bkg) wells 301, 401, 706, and 1302 are averaged for this comparison.
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 4-19
Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program FIGURE 4-7 Annual Average Gross Beta Concentrations at Seeps From the Northeast Edge of the North Plateau 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
-+-SP04 -sP11 ~SP12 -&-SP06 __._GSEEP -l:r-Bkg Note: Background (Bkg) from surface water sampling location WFBCBKG at Felton Bridge upgradient of the WVDP.
FIGURE 4-8 Annual Average Strontium-90 Concentrations at WNSWA!\/IP Strontium-90 Des= 1.1E-06 µCi/ml 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
-+- Strontium-90 Note: Derived concentration standards (DCSs) are used as an evaluation tool for results from on-site locations as part of the routine environmental monitoring program. However, DOE DCSs are applicable only at locations accessible to members of the public.
4-20 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year2012
Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program FIGURE 4-9 N Map View of the PTW A Soil Containment Structure LSA 4 NPG Smart Ditch
\
Cross-sect ional View of th e PTW
; ,380 -
~ -- ~ l ~ J F.ill~:-
Screened ,- . * .
~ 1370 lnte~~I I I I TBU i *--* ',.___ I I 1 /"
~ **,. . - __,. - j
!:: **-*~ .......____~~~-----~-- ~~------,.-:,...
I / SWS , - .- - ,.
*----D..'iPJb.<£f.!..h_e_eJYL __ ______________ ~---------*~*
FIGURE 4 -10 Annual Average Gross Beta Concentrati ons at M onitoring Wells Near Former Lagoon 1 1 E-04 1 E-05 - -
= - ~
x QJ Strontiu m-90 DCS 1.lE-06 uCi/m L
] 1 E-06
~
""c "E
a 1E-07
- t 1E-08 ... - ... A
~
Background Wells 1 E-09 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 I ~ 111 - 8605 ---il-- Bkg I Note: S&G background (Bkg) wel ls 301, 401, 706, and 1302 are averaged for this comparison . WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Yea r 2012 4-21
Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program FIGURE 4-11 Concentrations of 1,2-DCE-t, 1,1,1-TCA, 1,1-DCA, and DCDFMeth at Well 8612 in the S&G Unit For all analytes: POL = 5 µg/L TOGS 1. 1.1 limit = 5 µq/L _J
'bii 20 -t-~~~~~~~~~~~~---i!i--~_....,-r-r-~~~~~~~~~~~~~
0 +-~~-.-~~-.-~~-.-~~--.-~~---,,..-~~,-~~~~~-.-~~~~~~ 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
- 1,2-DCE-t * * - - * *l,l ,1-TCA - - 1,1-DCA ~ DCDFMETH Note: PQL = Pracitcal Quantitation Limit 1,1-DCA = 1,1-Dichloroethane
=
1,2-DCE-t = 1, 2-Dichloroethylene (total) DCDFMeth Dichlorodifluroromethane 1,1,1-TCA = 1,1,1-Trichloroethane FIGURE 4-12 Concentrations of Tributyl Phosphate at Monitoring Wells Near Former Lagoon 1 in the S&G Unit POL= 10 µg/L TOGS 1.1 .1 Limit = None o -l-+~~::t:+~~~~~:::t==1t::+=~::i11=~~~;::::~~+==P~:!::i=~ 2003 2004 2005 2007 2008 2009 2011 2012 I- 111 8605 1 4-22 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program FIGURE 4-13 Annual Average Gross Beta Concentrations at Monitoring Wells Oowngradient of the NOA and at the NOA Trench
~
~ 1E-07 +-~~~~~~-..,,..,...-.0:-----.~-~~~~~~~~-+~~~~~~~~~--i c:n c
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
--+-- 909 - 910 -e-- 910R ......._ NDATR --lr- Bkg I Notes: WL T background well for the south plateau is 1008C.
In 2007, well 910 was determined to be damaged such that groundwater samples collected from th is well were no longer representative of the ULT. Well 910 was therefore decommissioned in 2008 and replaced with well 910R. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 4-23
Chapter 4. Groundwater Protection Program FIGURE 4-14 Volume of Water Pumped From the NOA Interceptor Trench 900,000 2008 CY Total 800,000 763,308 700,000
'O 600,000 Q) Interim
- a. 2006 CY Total Measure E 452,332 Completed
- l a.. 500,000 (Nov. 2008)
.... 2007 CY Total
~ 389,840 5"' 400,000 0
VI c 300,000
.Q
(.!) 200,000 2009 - 2010 CY 2012 Total CY Total 63,355 64,035 100,000 0 8"' 8'° '°00 8'° 8 00 "'00 8"' 8"' 8"' 8"' 8"' 8"' 8"' 0 0 0 0 N N N N 8 8 N N Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N 0 0 0"" 0 0 0 N
""0 0 0 N 0 "" 0.... 0 0
N 0 M 0 0 0 N 0 "" 0 0 0 N 0 ""0 0.... 0 N 0 "" 0.... 0 Note: Ql = Jan*Mar Q2 =Apr-Jun Q3 =Jul-Sep
- Quarterly Volume a Yearly Cumulative Volume Q4 =Oct-Dec 4-24 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
USEFUL INFORMATION This section provides background information that may of a central core (the nucleus), composed of positively be useful to the reader in understanding and interpreting charged particles (protons) and particles with no charge the results presented in this ASER. First, it presents brief (neutrons), surrounded by negatively charged particles summaries of concepts pertaining to radiation and radio- (electrons) that revolve in orbits in the region surrounding activity, including: the nucleus. The protons and neutrons are much more massive than the electrons; therefore, most of an atom's
- radioactive decay; mass is in the nucleus.
- types of ionizing radiation;
- measurement of radioactivity; An element is defined by the number of protons in its
- measurement' of dose; nucleus, its atomic number. For example, the atomic num-
- background radiation; and ber of hydrogen is one (one proton), the atomic number
- potential health effects of radiation. of strontium is 38 (38 protons), and the atomic number of cesium is 55 (55 protons).
It describes how data are presented in the ASER, and pres-ents tables of unit prefixes, units of measure, and con- The mass number of an atom, its atomic weight, is equal version factors. It discusses limits applicable to air emis- to the total number of protons and neutrons in its nucle-sions and water effluents, and describes (and presents a us. For example, although an atom of hydrogen will al-table of) the dose-based DOE DCSs. It includes a discus- ways have one proton in its nucleus, the number of neu-sion of CAP88-PC, the computer code used to evaluate trons may vary. Hydrogen atoms with zero, one, or two compliance with the air dose standard. It also presents neutrons will have atomic weights of one, two, or three, discussions of 1) water quality classifications, standards, respectively. These atoms are known as isotopes (or and limits for ambient water; 2) potable water standards; nuclides) of the element hydrogen. Elements may have
- 3) oil and sediment guidelines; and 4) evaluation of mon- many isotopes. For instance, the elements strontium and itoring data with respect to limits. cesium have more than 30 isotopes each.
Radiation and Radioactivity Isotopes may be stable or unstable. An atom from an unstable isotope will spontaneously change to another Radioactivity is a property of atoms with unstable nuclei. atom. The process by which this change occurs, that is, The unstable nuclei spontaneously decay by emitting the spontaneous emission from the nucleus of alpha or radiation in the form of energy (such as gamma rays) beta particles, often accompanied by gamma radiation, or particles (such as alpha and beta particles) (see inset is known as radioactive. decay. Depending upon the type on following page). If the emitted energy or particle has of radioactive decay, an atom may be transformed to enough energy to break a chemical bond or to knock an another isotope of the same element or, if the nul')1ber electron loose from another atom, a charged particle (an of protons in the nucleus has changed, to an isotope of "ion") may be created. This radiation is known as "ioniz- another element. ing radiation." Isotopes (nuclides) that undergo radioactive decay are As used in this ASER, the term "radiation" refers only to called radioactive and are known as radioisotopes or ionizing radiation and does not include nonionizing forms radionuclides. Radionuclides are customarily referred to of radiation such as visible light, radio waves, microwaves, by their atomic weights. For instance, the radionuclides of infrared light, or ultraviolet light. hydrogen, strontium, and cesium measured at the WVDP are hydrogen-3 (also known as tritium), strontium-90, Radioactive Decay and cesium-137. For some 'radionuclides, such as cesi-. um-i37, a short-lived intermediate is formed that decays An atom is the smallest particle of an element. It cannot by g;;imma emission. This intermediate radionuclide may be broken down by chemical means. An atom consists be designated by the letter "m" (for metastable) following WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 U/-1
Useful Information Some Types of Ionizing Radiation Alpha Particles. An alpha particle is a positively charged particle consisting of two protons and two neutrons. Compared to beta particles, alpha particles are relatively large and heavy and do not travel very far when ejected by a decaying nucleus. Therefore, alpha radiation is easily stopped by a few centimeters of air or a thin layer of material, such as paper or skin. However, if radioactive material is ingested or inhaled, the alpha particles released inside the body can damage soft internal tissues because their energy can be absorbed by tissue cells in the immediate vicinity of the decay. An exam-ple of an alpha-emitting radionuclide is the uranium isotope with an atomic weight of 232 (uranium-232). Uranium-232 was in the HLW mixture at the WVDP as a result of a thorium-based nuclear fuel reprocessing campaign conducted by Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. Uranium-232 has been detected in liquid waste streams. Beta Particles. A beta particle is an electron emitted during the breakdown of a neutron in a radioactive nucleus. Com-pared to alpha particles, beta particles are smaller, have less of a charge, travel at a higher speed (close to the speed to light), and can be stopped by wood or a thin sheet of aluminum. If released inside the body, beta particles do much less damage than an equal number of alpha particles because.beta particles deposit energy in tissue cells over a larger volume than alpha particles. Strontium-90, a fission product found in the liquids associated with the HLW, is an example of a beta emitting radionuclide. Gamma Rays. Gamma rays are high-energy "packets" of electromagnetic radiation, called photons, that are emitted from the nucleus. Gamma rays are similar to x-rays, but are generally more energetic. If an alpha or beta particle released by a decaying nucleus does not carry off all the energy generated by the nuclear disintegration, the excess energy may be emitted as gamma rays. If the released energy is high, a very penetrating gamma ray is produced that can be effectively reduced only by shielding consisting of several inches of a dense material, such as lead, or of water or concrete several feet thick. Although large amounts of gamma radiation are dangerous, gamma rays are also used in lifesaving medical procedures. An example of a gamma-emitting radionuclide is barium-137m a short-lived daughter product of cesium-137. Both barium-137m and its precursor, cesium-137, are major constituents of the WVDP HLW. the atomic weight. For cesium-13i, the intermediate Measurement of Radioactivity radionuclide is barium-137m, with a half-life of less than three minutes. As they decay, radionuclides emit one or more types of radiation at characteristic energies that can be measured The process of radioactive decay will continue until only and used to identify the radionuclide. Detection instru-a stable, nonradioactive isotope remains. Depending on ments measure the quantity of radiation emitted over a the radionuclide, this process can ta~e anywhere from specified time. From this measu.rement, the number of less than a second to billions of years. The time required decay events (nuclear transformations) over a fixed time for half of the radioactivity to decay is called the radionu- can be calculated. clide's half-life. Each radionuclide has a unique half-life. The half-life of hydrogen-3 is slightly more than 12 years, Radioactivity is measured in units of curies (Ci) or bec-both strontium-90 and cesium-137 have half-lives of ap- querels (Bq). One Ci (based on the rate of decay of one proximately 30 years, and plutonium-239 has a half-life of gram of radium-226) is defined as the "quantity of any more than 24,000 years. radionuclide that undergoes an average transformation rate of 37 billion transformations per second." In the In-Knowledge of radionuclide half-lives is often used to esti- ternational System of Units (SI), one Bq is equal to one mate past and future inventories of radioactive material. transformation per second. In this ASER, radioactivity is For example, a 1.0 millicurie source of cesium-137 in 2006 customarily expressed in units of Ci followed by the equiv-would have measured 2.0 millicuries in 1976 and will be alent SI unit in parentheses, as follows: 1 Ci (3.7E+10 Bq). 0.5 millicuries in 2036. For a list of half-lives of radionu-clides applicable to the WVDP, see Table Ul-4. In this report, measurements of radioactivity in a defined volume of an environmental media, such as air or water, are presented in units of concentration. Since levels of* Ul-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Useful Information radioactivity in the environment are typically very low, vary depending on such factors as geographic location, concentrations may be expressed in µCi/ml, with SI units building ventilation, and personal health and habits. (Bq/L) in parentheses. (One microcurie is equal to one millionth of a curie.) Potential Health Effects of Radiation Measurement of.Dose The three primary pathways by which people may be exposed to radiation are (1) direct exposure, (2) inhala-The amount of energy absorbed by a material that tion, and (3) ingestion. Exposure from radiation may be receives radiation is m.easured in rads. A rad is 100 ergs from a source outside the body (external exposure) or of radiation energy absorbed per gram *of materia I. (An *from radioactive particles that have been taken in by erg is the approximate amount of energy necessary to lift breathing or eating an'd have become lodged inside the a mosquito one-sixteenth of an inch.) "Dose" is a means body (internal exposure). Radionuclides that are taken in of expressing the amount of energy absorbed, taking into are not distributed in the same way throughout the body. account the effects of different kinds of radiation. Radionuclides of strontium, plutonium, and americium concentrate in the skeleton, while radioisotopes of iodine Alpha, beta, and gamma radiation affect the body to dif- concentrate in the thyroid. Radionuclides such as hydro-ferent degrees. Each type of radiation is given a quality gen-3 (tritium), carbon-14, or cesium-137, however, will factor that indicates the extent of human cell damage it be distributed uniformly throughout the body. can cause compared with equal amounts of other ionizing radiation energy. Alpha particles cause 20 times as much Living tissue in the human body can be damaged by ion-damage to internal tissues as x-rays, so alpha radiation has izing radiation. The severity of the damage depends upon a quality factor of 20, compared to gamma rays, x-rays, or several factors, among them the amount of exposure beta particles, each of which have a quality factor of one. (low or high), the duration of the exposure (long-term [chronic] or short-term [acute]), the type of radiation The unit of dose measurement to humans is the rem. (alpha, beta, and gamma radiations of various energies), The number of rem is equal to the number of rads mul- and the sensitivity of the human (or organ) receiving the tiplied by the quality factor for each type of radiation. In radiation. The human body has mechanisms that repair the SI system, dose is expressed in sieverts. One Sv equals damage from exposure to radiation; however, repair pro-100 rem. One rem equals 1,000 mrem, the unit used to cesses are not always successful. express standards for dose to man from air and water sources, as applicable to this ASER. This ASER expresses Biological effects of exposure to radiation may be either dose in standard units, followed by equivalent SI units in somatic or genetic. Somatic effects are limited to the parentheses, as follows: 1 mrem (0.01 millisievert [mSv]). exposed individual. For example, a sufficiently high expo-sure could cause clouding of the eye lens or a decrease Background Radiation in the number of white blood cells. Genetic effects may show up in future generations. Radiation could damage Background radiation is always present, and everyone is chromosomes, causing them to break or join in.correct-constantly exposed to low levels of such radiation from ly with other chromosomes. Radiation-produced genetic both naturally occurring and man-made sources. In the defects and mutations in the offspring of an exposed par-U.S. the average total annual exposure to low-level back- ent, while not positively identified in humans, have been ground radiation is estimated to be about 620 mrem or observed in some animal studies. 6.2 mSv. About one-half of this radiation, approximately 310 mrem (3.1 mSv), comes from natural sources. The Assessing the biological damage from low-level radia-other half (about 310 mrem [3.1 mSv]) comes from medi- tion is difficult because other factors can cause the same cal procedures, consumer products, and other man-made symptoms as radiation exposure. Moreover, the body sources (NCRP Report Number 160, 2009). (See Figure 3-1 is able to repair damage caused by low-level radiation. in Chapter 3.) Epidemiological studies have not demonstrated adverse health effects in individuals exposed to small doses (less Background radiation includes cosmic rays; the decay of than 10 rem) over a period of years. (For comparison, natural elements, such as potassium, uranium, thorium, note that average natural background radiation in the and radon; and radiation from sources such as chemical U.S. is about 0.31 rem/year, and estimated annual dose fertilizers, smoke detectors, and cigarettes. Actual doses WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 U/-3
Useful Information from activities at the WVDP in 2012 was calculated to be low-level environmental analyses for radioactivity are about 0.000019 rem/year [0.019 mrem/year].) especially prone to significant uncertainty in comparison with the result. Radiological data are presented in the fol-The effect most often associated with exposure to rela- lowing manner: tively high levels of radiation appears to be an increased risk of cancer. However, scientists have not been able to Example: 1.04+/-0.54 E-09 demonstrate* with certainty that exposure to low-level radiation causes an increase in injurious biological effects, Where: 1.04 = the result nor have they been able to determine if there is a level +/-0.54 = plus or minus the of radiation exposure below which there are no adverse associated uncertainty biological effects. E-09 = times 10 raised to the power-09 Data Reporting Sources of uncertainty may include random components In the ASER text, radiological units (e.g., rem, rad, curie) (e.g., radiological counting statistics) or systematic com-are presented first, followed by the SI equivalent in ponents (e.g., sample collection and handling, measure-parentheses. Nonradiological measurements are present- ment sensitivity, or bias). Radiological data in this report ed in English units, followed by the metric unit equivalent include both a result and uncertainty term. The uncer-in parentheses. See Tables Ul-1, Ul-2, and Ul-3 for a sum- tainty term represents only the uncertainty associated mary of unit prefixes, units of measurement, and basic with the analytical measurement which for emiironmen-conversion factors used in this ASER. tal samples is largely due to the random nature of radio-active decay. When such radiological data are used in Where results are very large or very small, scientific nota- calculations, such as estimating the total curies released tion is used. Numbers greater than 10 are expressed with from an air or water effluent point, the other parameter a positive exponent. To convert the number to its decimal used in the calculation (e.g., air volumes, water volumes), form, the decimal point must be moved to the right by typically do not have an associated uncertainty value the number of places equal to the exponent. For exam- available. As such, the uncertainties in this report for ple, 1.0E+OG would be expressed as 1,000,000 (one mil- such calculated values only reflect the uncertainty associ-lion). Numbers smaller than 1 are expressed with a nega- ated with the radiological results used in the calculation. tive exponent. For example, 1.0E-06 would be expressed The actual (total propagated) uncertainty of such values as 0.000001 (one millionth). would be larger if other components of uncertainty were available and included in these estimates. Radiological data are reported as a result plus or minus (+/-) an associated uncertainty, customarily the 95% confi- Radiological results are calculated using both sample dence interval. The uncertainty is in part due to the ran- counts and background counts .. If the background count is dom nature of radioactive decay. Generally, the relative greater than the sample count, a negative result term will uncertainty in a measurement increases as the amount be reported. The constituent is considered to be detected of radioactivity being sampled decreases. For this reason, if the result is larger than the associated uncertainty (i.e., a "positive" detection). Nonradiological data are not re-ported with an associated uncertainty. TABLE Ul-1 Unit Prefixes Used in this ASER In general, the detection limit is the minimum amount of a constituent that can be detected, or distinguished Multiplication factor from background, by an instrument or a measurement Scientific notation Decimal form Prefix Symbol technique. If a result is preceded by the symbol "<" (i.e., 1.0E+06 1000000 mega M
<5 parts per million [ppm]), the constituent was not mea-1.0E+03 1000 kilo k surable below the detection limit (in this example, 5 ppm).
1.0E-02 0.01 centi c 1.0E-03 0.001 milli m 1.0E-06 0.000001 micro µ 1.0E-09 0.000000001 nano n 1.0E-12 0.000000000001 pico p U/-4 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Useful Information TABLE Ul-2 Units of Measure Used in this ASER Type Measurement Symbol Type Measurement Symbol Length meter m Dose rad (absorbed dose) rad centimeter cm rem (dose equivalent) rem kilometer km millirem mrem inch in sieve rt Sv foot ft millisievert msv mile mi gray Gy Volume gallon gal Exposure roentgen R liter l milliroentgen mR milliliter ml microroentgen µR cubic meter m3 Concentration parts per million ppm cubic feet ft3 parts per billion ppb Area acre ac parts per trillion ppt hectare ha milligrams per l (ppm) mg/l square meter mz micrograms per l (ppb) µg/l square foot ft2 nanograms per l (ppt) ng/l Temperature degrees Fahrenheit OF milligrams per kg (ppm) mg/kg degrees Celsius oC micrograms per g (ppm) µg/g Mass gram g micrograms per ml (ppm) µg/ml kilogram kg milliliters per ml ml/L milligram mg microcuries per ml µCi/ml microgram µg picocuries per l pCi/l nanogram ng microcuries per g µCi/g pound lb becquerels per l Bq/l tonne (metric ton) t nephelometric turbidity units NTU ton, short T standard units (pH) SU Radioactivity curie Ci Flow rate gallons per day gpd millicurie mCi gallons per minute gpm microcurie µCi million gallons per day mgd nanocurie nCi cubic feet per minute cfm picocurie pCi liters per minute lpm becquerel Bq meters per second m/sec TABLE Ul-3 Conversion Factors Used in this ASER To convert from to Multiply by miles kilometers 1.609344 feet meters 0.3048 inches centimeters 2.54 acres hectares 0.4046873 pounds kilograms 0.45359237 gallons liters 3.785412 curies becquerels 3.7E+10 rad gray 0.01 rem sieve rt 0.01 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 U/-5
Useful Information The number of significant digits reported depends on the ing limits on the radiation dose to members of the public precision of the measurement technique. Integer counts from liquid effluents.) are reported without rounding. Calculated values are cus-tomarily reported to three significant figures. Dose esti- Note that EPA establishes a drinking water limit of mates are usually reported to two significant figures. All 4-mrem/year (0.04-mSv/year) (40 CFR Parts 141and143, calculations are completed before values are rounded. Drinking Water Guidelines). Corollary limits for commu-nity water supplies are set by the NYSDOH in the NYS Limits Applicable to Environmental Sanitary Code (10 NYCRR 5-152). These limits are not ap-plicable at the WVDP because no drinking water sources Media within the Cattaraugus Creek drainage basin are affected Dose Standards. The two dose standards against which bytheWVDP. releases at the WVDP are assessed are those established by EPA for air emissions and that established by DOE DOE DCS. A DCS is defined as the concentration of a regarding all exposure modes from DOE activities. radionuclide in air or water that, under conditions of con-tinuous exposure by one exposure mode (i.e., ingestion of Radiological air emissions other than radon from DOE water, immersion in air, or inhalation) for one year, would facilities are regulated by EPA under the NESHAP regu- result In an EDE of 100 mrem (1 mSv) to a "reference man" lation (40 CFR 61, Subpart H), which establishes a stan- (DOE Order 458.1). DCSs for radionuclides measured at dard of 10 mrem/year effective dose equivalent to any the WVDP are listed in Table Ul-4. At the WVDP, DCSs are member of the public. See "CAP88-PC Computer Code" used as a screening tool for evaluating liquid effluents and in inset. airborne emissions. (DCSs are not used to estimate dose.) DOE Order 458.1 sets the DOE primary standard of SPDES Permit Requirements. On July 1, 2011, a modi-100 mrem/year effective dose equivalent to members fied SPDES permit became effective for the WVDP, and of the public considering all exposure modes from DOE requirements of the CY 2011 SPDES permit are summa-activities. (Currently there are no EPA standards establish- rized in Appendix B-1. The site's SPDES permit defines points where sampling must be conducted, sampling fre-CAP88-PC Computer Code I The WVDP ASER summarizes the airborne radioactivity released (see Appendix C) and the effect from those releases I (Chapter 3) in a manner consistent with that required by EPA. The computer code Clean Air Act Assessment Package-1988 for personal computers (CAP88-PC), Version 3.0, first approved in 2006, is used to perform radiation dose and risk calcu~ lations from WVDP airborne releases. According to EPA website from whence the most recent release can be obtained, any approved version of the code can be used for compliance. Version 3.0 of CAP88-PC (Trinity Engineering Associates, Inc., most recent release, February 2013) was first approved by I EPA for use in February 2006 to demonstrat~ compliance with the 10-mrem/year NESHAP standard. Version 3.0 incorpo-rates updated scientific methods to *calculate radiation dose and risk. Version 3.0 also considers age and gender factors not considered in earlier versions. This version used weighting factors that consider the sensitivity of various human or-gans to radiation. The model also calculates how long radioactive materia I will remain in a particular organ or system. To-gether, these factors are used to calculate dose and cancer risk. The net effect is that dose and risk estimates summarized in the ASER frorri using CAP88-PC Version 2.0 and Version 3.0 are slightly different, even if the radioactivity released from WVDP and meteorology both remain constant. However, test calculations with both versions have resulted in estimated doses far below the compliance limit. At this juncture, EPA accepts the use of any of the three approved versions of CAP88 for compliance purposes. The WVDP used Version 2.0 in 2009 for airborne dose assessment and has used the recommended Version 3.0 code since 2010. U/-6 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Useful Information quency, the type of samples to be collected, nonradio- Potable Water Standards. In addition to achieving CWA logical constituents for which samples must be analyzed, goals for fishing and swimming, the NYSDOH and EPA have and the limits applicable to these constituents. Results further classified its jurisdictional waters and established are reported monthly to the NYSDEC in DMRs. ambient water standards, guidelines, and maximum con-taminant levels (MCLs) or MCL goals to achieve objectives Radionuclides are not regulated under the SPDES per- under the Safe Drinking Water Act for drinking water. mit. However, special requirements in the permit specify These standards serve as the basis for periodic evaluation that the concentration of radionuclides in the discharge of the integrity of the receiving waters and identification is subject to requirements of DOE Order 458.1 (including of needed controls. These standards are expressed as Change 2), "Radiation Protection of the Public and the En- MCLs or MCL goals. See Appendix 8-1 for a summary of vironment." these levels. Water Quality Classifications, Standar~s, and Limits for Soil and Sediment Concentration Guidelines. Contami-Ambient Water. The objective of the Clean Water Act nants in soil are potential sources for contamination of (CWA) of 1972 is to restore and maintain the integrity groundwater, surface water, ambient air, and plants and of the nation's waters and ensure that, wherever attain- animals. Routine soil and sediment sampling is performed able, waters be made useful for fishing and swimming. To every five yea rs. achieve this goal, NYS is delegated with authority under Sections 118, 303, and 510 of the CWA to (1) classify The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the EPA, and designate the best uses for receiving waters, such as in a 2002 memorandum of understanding pertaining to streams and rivers, within its jurisdiction, and (2) establish decommissioning and decontamination of contaminated and assign water quality standards - goals for achieving sites, agreed upon concentrations of residual radioactiv-the designated best uses for these classified waters. ity in soil that would trigger consultation between the two agencies. Consultation "trigger" levels for radioactive The definitions for best usage classification of New York's contamination in both residential and industrial soil are jurisdictional waters and the water quality standard goals listed in Appendix F for nuclides applicable to the WVDP. for these classifications are provided in 6 NYCRR Parts 701-704. Mapping of the Cattaraugus Creek drainage In 2006, the NRC, in a decommissioning guidance docu-basin and assignment of best usage designations and ment (NUREG-1757, Vol. 2, 2006), provided concentra-classification to each receiving water segment within this tion screening values for common radionudides in soil drainage basin are described in 6 NYCRR Part 838. that could result in a dose of 25 mrem/year. For summary tables of screening levels for radionuclides of interest at According to these regulations,, Franks Creek, Quar- the WVDP, see Appendix F. ry Creek, and segments of Buttermilk Creek under the influence of water effluents from the WVDP are identified In 2009, soil cleanup goals were developed from site-spe-as Class "C" receiving waters with a minimum designat- cific data for the "Phase I Decommissioning Plan for the ed best usage for fishing with conditions suitable for fish WVDP," rev. 2, December 2009. These criteria are pre-propagation and survival. sented in Table 5-14 of the DP. Cattaraugus Creek, in the immediate downstream vicinity Evaluation of Monitoring Data with of the WNYNSC, is identified as a Class "B" receiving water with best designated usages for swimming and fishing. All Respect to Limits fresh (nonsaline) groundwaters within New York are as- Monitoring data for this report were evaluated against signed a "GA" classification with a designated best usage the limits presented in Table Ul-4, and in Appendices B, as a potable water supply source. D, and F. Those locations with results exceeding the lim-its are listed in Chapter 2, Table 2-4, and in Chapter 4, Refer to Appendix B for a summary of the water quality Table 4-9. standards, guidelines, and MCLs assigned to these water classifications for those constituents that are included in the WVDP environmental monitoring program for ambi-ent water. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 U/-7
Useful Information TABLE Ul-4 U.S. Department of Energy Derived Concentration Standards (DCSs} a for Inhaled Air or Ingested Water (µCi/ml}
. . b '" DCSs in ln_gested Radionuclide Half-life (years} DCSs in lnhafed Air'
.. " '" Water 8.lE-14 9.8E-08 Gross Alphad NA (as Pu-239/240) (as U-232) 1.0E-10 1.lE-06 Gross Betad NA (as Sr-90) (as Sr-90)
Tritium (H-3) 1.23E+01 2.lE-07* 1.9E-03 Carbon-14 (C-14) 5.70E+03 6.lE-Oi 6.2E-05 Potassium-40 (K-40) . 1.25E+09 2.6E-10 4.8E-06 Cobalt-60 {Co-60) 5.27E+OO 3.6E-10 7.2E-06 Strontium-90 (Sr-90) 2.89E+01 1.0E-10 1.lE-06 Technetium-99 (Tc-99} 2.11E+05 9.2E-10 4.4E-05 lodine-129 (1-129) 1.57E+07 1.0E-10 3.3E-07 Cesium-137 (Cs-137} 3.00E+Ol 8.8E-10 3.0E-06 Europium-154 (Eu-154) 8.59E+OO 7.5E-11 1.5E-05 Uranium-232 (U-232) 6.89E+01 4.7E-13 9.SE-08 Uranium-233 (U-233} 1.59E+05 1.0E-12 6.6E-07 Uranium-234 (U-234} 2.46E+05 1.lE-12 6.8E-07 Uranium-235 (U-235) 7.04E+08 1.2E-12 7.2E-07 Uranium-236 (U-236) 2.34E+07 1.2E-12 7.2E-07 Uranium-238 (U-238) 4.47E+09 1.3E-12 7.SE-07 Plutonium-238 (Pu-238) 8.77E+01 8.8E-14 1.SE-07 Plutonium-239 (Pu-239} 2.41E+04 8.lE-14 1.4E-07 Plutonium-240 (Pu-240) 6.56E+03 8.lE-14 1.4E-07 Americium-241 (Am-241) 4.32E+02 9.7E-14 1.7E-07
- DCSs are defined as the concentration of a radionuclide that, under conditions of continuous exposure for one year.
by one exposure mode, would result in an effective dcise equivalent of 100 mrem (lmSv). bNuclear Wallet Cards. April 2005. National Nuclear Data Center. Brookhaven National Laboratory. Upton, New York.
'The *ocs selection for air utilized the default type lung absorption rates for each nuclide, based on guidance from ICRP-72 for particulate aerosols when no specific chemical information is available.
d Because there are no DCSs for gross alpha and gross beta concentrations, the values for the most restrictive alpha and beta emitters at the WVDP (Pu-239/240 for alpha in air, U-232 for alpha in water, and Sr-90 for both air and water gross beta concentrations) are used as a conservative basis for comparison at locations for which there are no radionuclide-specific data, in which case a more appropriate DCS may be applied.
*The DCS for tritium represents the water vapor standard, selected from Table 5, DOE-STD-1196-2011.
1 The DCS for carbon-14 represents the dioxide chemical form, selected from Table 5, DOE-STD-1996-2011. U/-8 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
GLOSSARY accuracy - The degree of agreement between a mea- background radiation - Natural and man-made radiation surement and its true value. The accuracy of a data set is such as: cosmic radiation, radiation from naturally radio-assessed by evaluating results from standards or sample active elements, and radiation from commercial sources spikes containing known quantities of an analyte. and medical procedures. action plan - An action plan addresses assessment find- becquerel (Bq) - A unit of radioactivity equal to one nu-ings and root causes that have been identified in an audit clear transformation per second. or an assessment report. It is intended to define specific actions that the responsible group will undertake to rem-edy deficiencies. The plan includes a timetable and re-source requirements for implementation of the planned categorical exclusion (CX) - A proposed action that the activities. DOE has determined does not individually or cumulative-ly have a significant effect on the human environment. aquifer - A water-bearing unit of permeable rock or soil See 10 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) 1021.410. that will yield water in usable quantities via wells. Con-fined aquifers are bounded above and below by less per- Class A, B, and C low-level waste - Waste classifications meable layers. Groundwater in a confined aquifer may be from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's 10 CFR Part under a pressure greater than the atmospheric pressure. 61 rule. Maximum concentration limits are set for specif-Unconfined aquifers are bounded below by less perme- ic isotopes. Class A waste disposal is minimally restricted able material, but are not bounded above. The pressure with respect to the form of the waste. Class B waste must on the groundwater at the surface of an unconfined aqui- meet more rigorous requirements to ensure physical sta-fer is equal to that of the atmosphere. bility after disposal. Higher radionuclide concentration limits are set for Class C waste (the most radioactive), aquitard - A low-permeability geologic unit that can store which also must meet physical stability requirements. groundwater and can transmit groundwater at a very Moreover, special measures must be taken atthe disposal slow rate. facility to protect against inadvertent intrusion. as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) - An approach compliance findings - Conditions that may not satisfy to radiation protection that advocates controlling or applicable environmental or safety and health regula-managing exposures (both individual and collective) to tions, DOE Orders and memoranda, enforcement actions, the work force and the general public and releases of agreements with regulatory agencies, or permit condi-radioactive material to the environment as low as social, ti.ons. technical, economic, practical, and public policy consider-ations permit. As used in United States (U.S.) Department confidence interval - The range of values within which of Energy (DOE) Order 5400.5, ALARA is not a dose limit some parameter may be expected to lie with a stated de-but, rather, a process that has as its objective the attain- gree of confidence. For example, a value of 10 with an ment of dose levels as far below the applicable limits of uncertainty of 5 calculated at the 95% confidence level the Order as practicable. (10+/-5) indicates there is a 95% probability that the true value of that parameter lies between 5 and 15. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 GL0-1
Glossary consistency - The condition of showing steady conformity detection limit or level (DL) - This term may also be ex-
.to practices. In the environmental monitoring program, pressed as "method detection limit" (MDL). The smallest approved procedures are in place so that data collection amount of a substance that can be distinguished in a sam-activities are carried out in a uniform manner to minimize ple by a given measurement procedure at a given confi-variability. dence level. {See lower limit of detection.)
Core Team - The "core team approach" is a formalized, dispersion (airborne) - The process whereby particulates consensus-based process in which those individuals with or gases are spread and diluted in air as they move away decision-making authority, including the DOE, the U.S. En- from a source. vironmental Protection Agency (EPA), and State remedial project managers, work together to reach agreement on dispersion (groundwater) - The process whereby solutes key remediation decisions (DOE/EH-413-9911, October are spread or mixed as they are transported by ground-1999). In August 2006, the DOE-West Valley Demonstra- water as it moves through the subsurface. tion Project (DOE-WVDP) requested that the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH), the U.S. Nuclear dosimeter - A portable device for measuring the total ac-Regulatory Commission (NRC), the EPA (region 2), the cumulated exposure to ionizing radiation. New York State Department of Environmental Conserva-tion (NYSDEC), and the New York State Energy Research downgradient - The direction of water flow from a refer-and Development Authority (NYSERDA) participate in a ence point to a selected point of interest at a lower eleva-collaborative process (i.e., Core Team) to resolve techni- tion than the reference point. (See gradient.) cal issues associated with the "Draft E'nvironmental Im-pact Statement for Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship at the West Valley Demonstration Project and Western New York Nuclear Service Center" (DEIS). effective dose - (See effective dose equivalent under ra-diation dose.) cosmic radiation - High-energy subatomic particles from outer space that bombard the earth's atmosphere. Cos- effluent - Any treated or untreated air emission or liquid mic radiation is part of natural background radiation. discharge to the environment. curie {Ci)- A unit of radioactivity equal to 37 billion (3.7 x effluent monitoring - Sampling or measuring specific 1010) nuclear transformations* per second. liquid or gaseous effluent streams for the presence of pollutants to determine compliance with applicable stan-dards, permit requirements, and administrative controls. data set - A group of data (e.g., factual information such environmental assessment (EA) - An evaluation that as measurements or statistics) used as a basis for reason- provides sufficient evidence and analysis for determining ing, discussion, or calculation. whether an environmental impact statement is required or a finding of no significant impact should be issued. See decay (radioactive) - Disintegration of the nucleus of an 10 CFR 1021. unstable nuclide by spontaneous emission of charged particles and/or photons or by spontaneous fission. environmental impact statement (EIS) - A detailed state-ment that includes the environmental impact of the pro-derived concentration standard (DCS) - The concentra- -posed action, any adverse environmental effects that can-tion of a radionuclide in air and water that, under condi- not be avoided should the proposal be implemented, and tions of continuous human exposure for one year by one alternatives to the proposed action ..Detailed information exposure mode (i.e., ingestion of water, inhalation, or im- may be found in Section 10 CFR 1021. mersion in a gaseous cloud), would result in an effective dose equivalent of 100 millirem (mrem) (1 millisievert environmental management system (EMS) - The system- [mSv]). See Table Ul-4 in the "Useful Information" section atic application of business management practices to en-of this report. vironmental issues, including defining the organizational structure, planning for activities, identifying responsibil-GL0-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Glossary ities, and defining practices, procedures, processes, and groundwater - Subsurface water in the pore spaces and resources. fractures of soil and bedrock units. environmental monitoring - The collection and analysis of samples or the direct measurement of environmental media. Environmental monitoring consists of two major half-life - The time in which half the atoms of a radionu-activities: effiue_nt monitoring and environmental surveil- clide disintegrate into another nuclear form. The half-life lance. may vary from a fraction of a second to billions of years. environmental surveillance - The collection and analysis hazardous waste -A waste or combination of wastes that of samples or the direct measurement of air, water, soil, because of quantity, concentration, or physical, chemical, foodstuff, and biota in the environs of a facility of interest or infectious characteristics may: a) cause or significantly to determine compliance with applicable standards and contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in to detect trends and environmental pollutant transport. serious irreversible or incapacitating reversible illness; or (b) pose a substantial present or potential hazard to hu-exposure - The subjection of a target (usually living tis- man health or the environment when improperly treated, sue) to radiation. stored, transported, disposed of, or otherwise managed. high-level radioactive waste (HLW) - The highly radioac-tive waste material that results from t~e reprocessing of fallout - The settling to earth of radioactive materials spent nuclear fuel, including liquid waste produced di-mixed into the earth's atmosphere. rectly in reprocessing and solid waste derived from the liquid, that contains a combination of transuranic waste finding -A DOE compliance term. A finding is a statement and fission products in concentrations sufficient to re-of fact concerning a condition in the Environmental, Safe- quire permanent isolation. (See also transuranic waste.) ty, and Health program that was investigated during an appraisal. Findings include best management practice hydraulic conductivity - The ratio of flow velocity to driv-findings, compliance findings, and noteworthy practices. ing force for viscous flow under saturated conditions of a A finding may be a simple statement of proficiency or a specified liquid in a porous medium; the ratio describing description of deficiency (i.e.; a variance from procedures the rate at which water can move through a permeable or criteria). (See also selfassessment.) medium. fission - The act or process of splitting into parts. A nuclear reaction in which an atomic nucleus splits into fragments (i.e., fission products, usually fragments of comparable integrated safety management system (ISMS)- A process mass) with the evolution of approximately 100 million to that describes the programs, policies, and procedures several hundred million electron volts of energy. used at the WVDP to ensure the establishment of a safe workplace for the employees, the public, and the envi-ronment. The guiding principles of ISMS are line manage-ment responsibility for safety; clear roles and responsi-gamma isotopic (also gamma scan)-An analytical meth- bilities; competence commensurate with responsibilities; od by which the quantity of several gamma ray-emitting balanced priorities; identification of safety standards and radioactive isotopes may be determined simultaneously. requirements; hazard controls; and operations authoriza-Typical nuclea~ fuel cycle isotopes determined by this tion. method include, but are not limited to, cobalt-60, zirco-nium-95, ruthenium-106, silver-llOm, antimony-125, ce- interim status - The status of any currently existing fa-sium-134, cesium-137, and europium-154. Naturally oc- cility that becomes subject to the requirement to have a curring isotopes for which samples may be analyzed are Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) permit beryllium-7, potassium-40, radium-224, and radium-226. because of a new statutory or regulatory amendment to RCRA. gradient - Change in value of one variable with respect to another variable, such as a vertical change over a hor- ion - An atom or group of atoms with an electric charge. izontal distance. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 GL0-3
Glossary ion exchange - The reversible exchange of ions contained lower limit of detection (LLD)- The lowest limit of a given in solution with other ions that are part of the ion-ex- parameter that an instrument is capable of detecting. A change material. measurement of analytical sensitivity. ISO (International Organization for Standardization) - low-level radioactive waste (LLW) - Radioactive waste An international network of nongovernmental standards not classified as high-level radioactive waste, transuranic institutes that forms a bridge between the public and waste, spent fuel, or uranium mill tailings. (See Class A, B, private sectors, and is the largest standards organization and C /ow-level waste.) in the world. ISO enables a consensus to be reached on solutions that meet both the requirements of business and the broader needs of society. ISO 14001:2004 - A standard for an EMS, which requires maximally exposed individual (MEI) - On-site (occupa-an organization to: tional) or off-site (nonoccupational) person that receives the highest dose from a release scenario.
- Determine the organization's impact on the environ-ment and relevant regulations to the operations of the maximally exposed off-site individual (MEOSI} - Member business; of the general public receiving the highest dose from the effluent release. - Create a plan to control the organization's processes to minimize the environmental impact; mean - The average value of a series of measurements. - Monitor the effectiveness of the system at meeting ob- metric ton - (See ton, metric.)
jectives, as well as legal and other; and millirem (mrem)-A unit of radiation dose equivalent that
- Continually analyze the results and improve the organi- a is equal to one one-thousandth of rem. An individual zation's systems. member of the public can receive up to 100 mrem per year according to DOE standards. This limit does not in-isotope - Different forms of the same chemical element clude the roughly 310 mrem, on average, that people in that are distinguished by having the same number of pro- the U.S. receive annually from natural background radi-tons but a different number of neutrons in the nucleus. ation.
An element can have many isotopes. For example, the three isotopes of hydrogen are protium, deuterium, and minimum detectable concentration (MDC} or method tritium, with one, two, and three neutrons in the nucleus, detection limit (MDL) - Depe.nding on the sample me-respectively. dium, the smallest amount or concentration of a radio-active or nonradioactive analyte that can be reliably de-tected using a specific analytical method. Calculations of the minimum detectable concentrations are based on the knicl<point - A term in geomorphology to describe a loca- lower limit of detection. tion in a river or channel where there is a sharp change in channel slope resulting from differential rates of erosion. mixed waste (MW) - A waste that is both radioactive and RCRA hazardous. land disposal restrictions (LDR) - Regulations promulgat-ed by the EPA (and by NYSDEC in New York State) gov- n-Dodecane/tributyl phosphate - An organic solution erning the land disposal of hazardous wastes. The wastes composed of 30% tributyl phosphate (TBP) dissolved in must be treated using the best demonstrated available n-dodecane used to first separate the uranium and plu-technology or must meet certain treatment standards be- tonium from the fission products in dissolved nuclear fuel fore being disposed. and then to separate the uranium from the plutonium. GL0-4 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Glossary neutron - An electrically neutral subatomic particle in the within specified limits of precision during routine labora-baryon family with a mass 1-,839 times that of an elec- tory operations (NYSDEC, 1991). tron, stable when bound in an atomic nucleus, and having a mean lifetime of approximately 16.6 minutes as a free precision - The degree of reproducibility of a measure-particle. ment under a given set of conditions. Precision in a data set is assessed by evaluating results from duplicate field Nitrocision - A robotically controlled, pressurized, liq- or analytical samples. uid nitrogen tooling system used to remove high-activity fixed contamination from cell and equipment surfaces. proton - A stable, positively-charged subatomic particle in the baryon family with a mass 1,836 times that of an notice of violation (NOV) - Generally, an official notifi- electron. cation from a regulatory agency of noncompliance with permit requirements. (An example would be a letter of pseudo-monitoring point- A theoretical monitoring loca-notice from a regional water engineer in response to an . tion rather than an actual physical location; a calculation instance of significant noncompliance with a State Pollut- based on analytical test results of samples obtained from ant Discharge Elimination System [SPDES] permit.) other associated, tributary, monitored locations. (Point 116 at the WVDP is classified as a "pseudo" monitoring nucleus - The positively-charged central region of an point because samples are not physically collected at that atom, made up of protons and neutrons and containing location. Rather, using analytical results from samples col-almost all of the mass of the atom. lected from "real" upstream outfall locations, compliance with the total dissolved solids limit in the WVDP's SPDES permit is calculated for this theoretical point.) outfall - The discharge end of a drain or pipe that carries wastewater or other liquid effluents into a ditch, pond, or river. quality factor (QF) - The extent of tissue damage caused by different types of radiation of the same energy. The greater the damage, the higher the quality factor. More specifically, the factor by which absorbed doses are mul-parameter -Any of a set of physical proper.ties whose val- tiplied to obtain a quantity that indicates the degree of ues determine the characteristics or behavior of some- biological damage produced by ionizing radiation. (See thing (e.g., temperature, pressure, density of air). In radiation dose.) The factor is dependent upon radiation relation to environmental monitoring, a monitoring pa- type (alpha, beta, gamma, or x-ray) and exposure (inter-rameter is a constituent of interest. Statistically, the term nal or external).
"parameter" is a calculated quantity, such as a mean or variance, that describes a statistical population.
particulates - Solid particles and liquid droplets small rad - Radiation absorbed dose. One hundred ergs of ener-enough to become airborne. gy absorbed per gram of solid material. person-rem - The sum of the individual radiation dose radiation - The process of emitting energy in the form of equivalents received by members of a certain group or rays or particles that are thrown off by disintegrating at-population. It may be calculated by multiplying the aver- oms. The rays or particles emitted may consist of alpha, age dose per person by the number of persons exposed. beta, or gamma radiation. For example, a thousand people each exposed to one mil-lirem would have a collective dose of one person-rem. alpha radiation - The least penetrating type of ra-diation. Alpha radiation (similar to a helium nucleus) can plume - The distribution of a pollutant in air or water after be stopped by a sheet of paper or the outer dead layer of being released from a source. skin.
- practical quantitation limits (PQLs) - The PQL is the min- beta radiation - Electrons emitted from a nucleus imum concentration of an analyte that can be measured during fission and nuclear decay. Beta radiation can be stopped by an inch of wood or? thin sheet of aluminum.
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 GL0-5
Glossary radiation sources internal and/or e~ternal to the gamma radiation - A form of electromagnetic, body. The effective dose equivalent is expressed in high-energy radiation emitted from a nucleus. Gamma units of rem or seivert. rays are essentially the same as x-rays and require heavy shielding such as lead, concrete, or steel to be effectively radioactivity - A property possessed by some elements attenuated. {such as uranium) whereby alpha, beta, or gamma rays are spontaneously emitted. internal radiation - Radiation originating from a source within the body as a result of the inhalation, in- radioisotope - A radioactive isotope of a specified - gestion, or implantation of natural or man-made radionu- element. Carbon-14 is a radioisotope of carbon. Tritium is clides in body tissues. a radioisotope of hydrogen. {See isotope.) radiation dose: radionuclide - A radioactive nuclide. Radionuclides are variations (isotopes) of elements. They have the same absorbed dose - The amount of energy absorbed number of protons and electrons but different numbers per unit mass in any kind of matter from any kind of of neutrons, resulting in different atomic masses. There ionizing radiation. Absorbed dose is measured in rads are hundreds of known nuclides, both man-made and or grays. naturally occurring. collective dose equivalent - The sum of the dose reference man - A hypothetical aggregation of human equivalents for all the individuals comprising a physical and physiological characteristics arrived at defined population. The per capita dose equivalent by international consensus. These characteristics may is the quotient of the collective dose equivalent be used by researchers and public health workers to divided by the population. The unit of collective dose standardize results of experiments and to relate biological equivalent is person-rem or person-sievert. insult to a common base. collective effective dose equivalent - The sum of rem -An acronym for Roentgen Equivalent Man. A unit of the effective dose equivalents for the individuals radiation exposure that indicates the potential effect of comprising a defined population. Units of radiation on human cells. measurement are person-rem or person-sievert. The per capita effective dose equivalent is obtained remote-handled waste - At the WVDP, waste that has by dividing the collective dose equivalent by the an external surface dose rate that exceeds 100 millirem population. Units of measurement are rem or sievert. per hour or a high level of alpha and/or beta surface contamination and, therefore, must be handled in such a committed dose equivalent - A measure of internal manner that it does not come into physical contact with radiation. The predicted total dose equivalent to a workers. tissue or organ over a 50-year period after a known intake of a radionuclide into the body. It does not roentgen - A unit of exposure to ionizing radiation. It is include contributions from sources of external that quantity of gamma or x-rays required to produce ions penetrating radiation. Committed dose equivalent is carrying one electrostatic unit of electrical charge in one measured in rem or sievert. cubic centimeter of dry air under standard conditions. The unit is named after Wilhelm Roentgen, German scientist committed effective dose equivalent - The sum of the who discovered x-rays in 1895. committed dose equivalents to various tissues in the body, each multiplied by the appropriate weighting factor. Committed effective dose equivalent is measured in rem or sievert. self-assessment - Appraisals of work at the WVDP by in-dividuals, groups, or organizations responsible for over-total effective dose equivalent - The summation seeing and/or. performing the work. Self-assessments are of the products of the dose equivalent received by intended to provide an internal review of performance to specified tissues of the body and the appropriate determine that specific functional areas are in program-weighting factors. It includes the*dose from GL0-6 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Glossary matic and site-specific compliance with applicable DOE management units - because some individual units are directives, WVDP procedures, and regulations. contiguous or so close together as to make monitoring of separate units impractical. This terminology is unique to finding - A direct and significant violation ofappli- the WVDP, and is not an official regulatory term. (See also cable DOE, regulatory, or other procedural or program- solid waste management unit.) matic requirements. A finding requires documented cor-rective action. surface water - Water that is exposed to the atmospheric conditions of temperature, pressure, and chemical com-observation - A condition that, while not a direct position at the surface of the earth. and significant violation of applicable DOE, regulatory, or other procedural or programmatic requirements, could surveillance - The act of monitoring or observing a pro-result in a finding if not corrected. An observation re- cess or activity to verify conformance with specified re-quires documented corrective action. quirements. good practice - A statement of proficiency or con-firmed excellence worthy of documenting. thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) - A device that sievert - A unit of dose equivalent from the Internation- luminesces upon heating after being exposed to radia-al System of Units {Systeme Internationale). Equal to one tion. The amount of light emitted is proportional to the joule per kilogram. amount of radiation to which the luminescent material has been exposed. solid waste management unit (SWMU) - Any discern-ible unit at which solid wastes have been placed at any ton, metric (also tonne) - A unit of mass equal to 1,000 time, irrespective of whether the unit was intended for kilograms. {See also Table Ul-2, "Units of Measure Used the management of solid or hazardous waste. Such units in This ASER.") include any area at a facility at which solid wastes have been routinely and systematically released or created. ton (short ton)-A unit of weight equal to 2,000 pounds or (See also super solid waste management unit.) 907.1847 kilograms. {See also Table Ul-2, "Units of Mea-sure Used in This ASER.) spent fuel - Nuclear fuel that has been used in a nuclear reactor; this fuel C:ontains uranium, activation products, transuranic (TRU) waste - Waste containing transuranic fission products, and plutonium. elements, that is, those elements with an atomic number greater than 92, including neptunium, plutonium, ameri-spill - A spill or release is defined as "any spilling, leak- cium, and curium. ing, pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying, discharging, injecting, escaping, leaching, dumping, or otherwise dis-posing of substances from the ordinary containers em-ployed in the normal course of storage, transfer, process- universal wastes- Wastes subject to special management ing, or use," outside of the intended procedural action. provisions that are intended to ease the management burden and facilitate recycling of such materials. Four stakeholder - A person or group that has an investment, types of waste are currently covered under the universal share, or interest in something. At the WVDP stakehold- waste regulations: hazardous waste batteries, hazardous ers include ~roject management, scientists, other em- waste pesticides that are either recalled or collected in ployees, politicians, regulatory agencies, local and nation- waste pesticide collection programs, hazardous waste al interest groups, and members of the general public. thermostats, and hazardous waste lamps. standard deviation - An indication of the dispersion of a upgradient - Referring to the flow of water or air, "up-set of results around their average. gradient" is analogous to upstream. Upgradient is a point that is "before" an area of study and that is used as a super solid waste management unit (SSWMU) - Indi- baseline for comparison with downstream or downgradi-vidual solid waste management units that have been ent data. (See gradient and downgradient.) grouped and. ranked into larger units - super solid waste WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 GL0-7
Glossary vitrification - A waste treatment process that encapsu-lates or immobilizes radioadive wastes in a glassy matrix to prevent them from reacting in disposal sites. Vitrifica-tion involves adding chemicals, glass formers, and waste to a heated vessel and melting the mixture into a glass that is then poured into a canister. watershed - The area contained within a drainage divide above a specified point on a stream or river. water table - The upper surface in a body of groundwa-ter; the surface in an unconfined aquifer or confining bed at which the pore water pressure is equal to atmospheric pressure. well point - A small-diameter well that is hammer-driven rather than placed into a pre-drilled borehole. x-ray - Penetrating electromagnetic radiations having wave lengths shorter than those of visible light. They are usually produced by bombarding a metallic target with fast electrons in a high vacuum. In nuclear reactions it is customary to refer to photons originating in the nucleus as gamma rays and those originating in the extranucle-ar part of the atom as x-rays. These rays are sometimes called Roentgen rays after their discoverer, W.C. Roent-gen. GL0-8 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS Note: For abbreviations of units of measure, see Table Ul-2, "Units of Measure Used in This ASER, in the "Useful Information" section. CWA - Clean Water Act CX - Categorical Exclusion CY - Calendar Vear ACM -Asbestos-Containing Material AEA - Atomic Energy Act AF - Alternate Fuel AFV - Alternate Fuel Vehicles ALARA - As Low As Reasonably Achievable D&D - Decontamination and Decommissioning alpha-BHC - alpha-hexachlorocyclohexane DCS - Derived Concentration Standard ASER - Annual Site Environmental Report DEIS - Draft Environmental Impact Statement ASME - American Society of Mechanical Engineers DCG - Derived Concentration Guide AST - Aboveground Storage Tank DMR - Discharge Monitoring Report DO - Dissolved Oxygen DOE - (U.S.) Department of Energy DOE-HQ - Department of Energy, Headquarters Office DOE-WVDP - Department of Energy, West Valley Demon-BCG - Biota Concentration Guide stration Project (title as of June 2006) soo5 - Biological Oxygen Demand (5-day) DP - Decommissioning Plan BOSF - Balance of Site Facilities Bq - Becquerels EA- Environmental Assessment ECL - (New York State) Environmental Conservation Law C-0-C - Chain of Custody ECS - Environmental Compliance Summary CBS - Chemical Bulk Storage EDE - Effective Dose Equivalent CCHD - Cattaraugus County Health Department EIS - Environmental Impact Statement CD - Compact Disk ELAB - (WVDP) Environmental Laboratory COOL - Construction and Demolition Debris Landfill ELAP - Environmental Laboratory Approval Program CEDE - Committed Effective Dose Equivalent HIMS - Environmental Laboratory Information Manage-CERCLA - Comprehensive Environmental Response, Com-ment System pensation, and Liability Act EMS - Environmental Management System CFC - Chlorofluorocarbon EO - Executive Order CFMT- Concentrator Feed Makeup Tank EOC - Emergency Operations Center CFR - Code of Federal Regulations EPEAT - Electronic Product Environmental Assessment CHBWV- CH2M Hill* B&WWest Valley, LLC Tool CMS - Corrective Measures Study EPA - (U.S.) Environmental Protection Agency CSAP - Characterization Sampling and Analysis Plan EPCRA - Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-CSRF - Contact Size-Reduction Facility Know Act WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 A&A-1
Acronyms and Abbreviations ERO - Emergency Response Organization LLW - Low-Level (radioactive) Waste ESH&Q - Environmental, Safety, Health, and Quality LLW2 - Low-Level (liquid) Waste Treatment Facility EWG - Erosion Work Group LLWTF - Low-Level Waste Treatment Facility (historical) LOA - Letter of Agreement LPS - Liquid Pretreatment System LTS - Lavery Till Sand LWTS - Liquid Waste Treatment System FEIS - Final Environmental Impact Statement FFCA - Federal Facilities Compliance Act FONSI - Finding of No Significant Impact FR - Federal Register FRS - Fuel Receiving and Storage MAPEP - Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation FSSP - Final Status Survey Plan Program
'FY - Fiscal Year MCL- Maximum Contaminant Level MCLG - Maximum Contaminant Level Goal MEOSI - Maximally Exposed Off-Site Individual MFHT - Melter Feed Hold Tank '
MGD - Million Gallons per Day GEL" General Engineering Laboratories LLC MOU - Memorandum of Understanding GET - General Employee Training MPPB - Main Plant Process Building GHG - Greenhouse Gas GMP - Groundwater Monitoring Program GSA - General Services Administration GSL - (Site-Specific) Groundwater Screening Levels GTCC - Greater Than Class C NA - Not Applicable. NCRP - National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements NOA - Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC}-Licensed Disposal Area ha - Hectare NEPA- National Environmental Policy Act HEPA - High-Efficiency Particulate Air (filter) NESHAP - Na.tional Emission Standards for Hazardous Air HLW - High-Level (radioactive)Waste Pollutants HP/BBS - Human Performance/Behavior-Based Safety NFS - Nuclear Fuel Services, Inc. HVAC - Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning NH3 - Ammonia HWSL - Hazardous Waste Storage Locker NOi - Notice of Intent N0 2-N - Nitrite (as N) N03 -N - Nitratte (as N) NOx - Nitrogen Oxides IAEA- International Atomic Energy Agency NPGMP - North Plateau Groundwater Monitoring Plan IAP - Integrated Assessment Program NPGRS - North Plateau Groundwater Recovery System ICRP - International Commission on Radiological NPOC- Nonpurgeable Organic Carbon Protection NQA Nuclear Quality Assurance, Level 1 IM - Interim Measure NRC- (U.S.) Nuclear Regulatory Commission INEEL - Idaho National Engineering and Environmental NTS - Nevada Test Site Laboratory (historical) NTU - Nephelometric Turbidity Unit IR - Issue Report NUREG - (U.S.) NRC Regulation . ISMS - Integrated Safety Management System NYCRR - New York Official Compilation of Codes, Rules, ISO - International Organization for Standardization and Regulations ISP - Independent Scientific Panel NYS - New York State NYSDEC - New York State Department of Environmental ~l*~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Conservation NYSDOH - New York State Department of Health LAS - Linear Alkylate Sulfonate NYSDOL - New York State Department of Labor A&A-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Acronyms and Abbreviations NYSERDA - New York State Energy Research and Develop- SME - Subject Matter Expert ment Authority SOx - Sulfur Oxides SPDES - (New York) State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System SSP - Site Sustainability Plan SSPP - Strategic Sustainability Performance Plan OAD - Office of Atomic Development SSWMU - Super Solid Waste Management Unit OITS - Open Items Tracking System STP - Site Treatment Plan OSHA- Occupational Safety and Health Administration STS - Supernatant Treatment System OVE - Outdoor Ventilated Enclosure SU - Standard Unit SVOC - Semivolatile Organic Compound SWMU - Solid Waste Management Unit SWS - Slack Water Sequence PAS - Potential Areas of Study PBS - Petroleum Bulk Storage PCB - Polychlorinated Biphenyl PEIS - Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement PNL - Pacific Northwest Laboratory T&VDS - Tank and Vault Drying System POC - Principal Organic Contaminant TSP - Tributyl Phosphate PPM - Parts Per Million TSU - Thick-Bedded Unit PQL - Practical Quantitation Limit TDS -Total Dissolved Solids PTW - Permeable Treatment Wall TER - Technical Evaluation Report PTWPMP- Permeable Treatment Wall Performance Mon- TKN - Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen itoring Plan TLD - Thermoluminescent Dosimeter PVS - Permanent Ventilation System TOC - Total Organic Carbon PVU - Portable Ventilation Unit TOGS - Technical and Operational Guidance Series TOX - Total Organic Halides TRU - Transuranic TSS - Total Suspended Solids
*QA - Quality Assurance QC - Quality Control U.S. - United States UDF - Unit Dose Factor ULT - Unweathered Lavery Till RAO - Remedial Action Objectives RCRA - Resource Conservation and Recovery Act uoo - Ultimate Oxygen Demand URS - URS - Energy & Construction Division REM - Roentgen Equivalent Man USACE - U.S. Army Corps of Engineers RFI - RCRA Facility Investigation USC - United States Code RH - Remote Handled UST- Underground Storage Tank RHWF - Remote-Handled Waste Facility ROD - Record of Decision VIT - Vitrification VOC- Volatile Organic Compound S&G - Sand and Gravel Unit SARA - Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act SDA - (New York) State-Licensed Disposal Area SEC - Safety and Ecology Corporation WET- Whole Effluent Toxicity SEQR - (New York) State Environmental Quality Review WIR - Waste-Incidental-to-Reprocessing Act WLT- Weathered Lavery Till SI -Systeme Internationale (International System of Units)
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 A&A-3
Acronyms and Abbreviations WNVNSC- Western New York Nuclear Service Center WTC- Water Treatment Chemical WTF - Waste Tank Farm WVDP - West Valley Demonstration Project WVES - West Valley Environmental Services LLC (histor-ical) WVNS - West Valley Nuclear Services (historical) WVNSCO - West Valley Nuclear Services Company (his-torical) WWTF - Wastewater Treatment Facility A&A-4 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY {For a bibliographical listing that includes basis documents not specifically cited in the text~ see the WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report for 2003. [Available on the DOE-WVDP website at www.wv.doe.gov]) American National Standards Institute, Inc. August 20, 1975. American Nationa/Standard: Performance Testing, and Procedural Specifications for Thermoluminescent Dosimetry {Environmental Applications). ANSI N545-1975. American Society of Mechanical Engineers. 1989. Quality Assurance Program Requirements for Nuclear Facilities. ASME-NQA-1. New York: The American Society of Mechanical Engineers. Brookhaven National Laboratory. April 2005. Nuclear Wallet Cards. National Nuclear Data Center. Upton, New York. CHBWV. April 26, 2012. Manual for Radiological Assessment of Environmental Releases at the WVDP. Current revision. WVDP-065. _ _ _ _ _ _ .May 1, 2012. West Valley Demonstration Project {WVDP) Waste Acceptance Manual. Current revision. WVDP-200. _ _ _ _ _ _ . May 2, 2012. Clean Water Act/State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Best Management Practices and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan for the West Valley Demonstration Project. Current revision. WVDP-206.
- - - - - -
- May 30, 2012. Waste Minimization/Pollution Prevention Awareness Plan. Current revision. WVDP-087.
- - - - - -
- J u l y 24, 2012. Groundwater Monitoring Plan. Current revision. WVDP-239.
_ _ _ _ _ _ , October 31, 2012. Low-Level Waste Management Program Plan. Current revision. WVDP-019. _ _ _ _ _ _ . December 13, 2012. WVDP Integrated Safety Management System {ISMS} Description. WVDP-310, including Addendum 1, WVDP Worker Safety and Health Plan, Current revision, April 19, 2012. _ _ _ _ _ _ .December 20, 2012. Environmental Monitoring Program Plan. Current revision. WVDP-098. _ _ _ _ _ _ .January 8, 2013. Letter CHBWV to NVSDEC. "Predischarge Radiological Analysis of Lagoon 3 and Lagoon 4 - December 26, 2012, State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Permit No. NY-000000973, U.S. DOE, WVDP. WR:2013:0006. _ _ _ _ _ _ .January 10, 2013. WVDP Site Treatment Plan: Fiscal Year 2012 Update. Current revision. WVDP-299.
- - - - - -
- February 2013. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Hazardous Waste Report for 2012.
- - - - - -
- February 25, 2013. Monitoring Plan for Storm Water Discharges at the West Valley Demonstration Project. Current revision. WVDP-233.
R&B-1 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
References and Bibliography _ _ _ _ _ _ .April 17, 2013. CHBWV Environmental Management System. Current revision. WV-980. Citizen Task Force. July 29, 1998. West Valley Citizen Task Force Final Report. Executive Order 11988. May 24, 1977. Floodplain Management. 42 FR 26951. Executive Order 11990. May 25, 1977. Protection of Wetlands. 42 FR 26961. Executive Order 13101. September 16, 1998. Greening the Government Through Waste Prevention, Recycling, and Federal Acquisition. 63 FR 49643. (Revoked by Executive Order 13423, January 24, 2007.) Executive Order 13148. April 26, 2000. Greening the GovemmentThrough Leadership in Environmental Management. 65 FR 24595. (Revoked by Executive Order 13423, January 24, 2007.) Executive Order 13423. January 24, 2007. Strengthening Federal Environmental, Energy, and Transportation Management. 72 FR 3919. Executive Order 13514. October 5, 2009. Federal Leadership in Environmental, Energy, and Economic Peeformance. 74 FR 52117. Federal Guidance Report 13. (FGR 13, EPA99) International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). 1992. Effects of Ionizing Radiation on Plants and Animals qt Levels Implied by Current Radiation Protection Standards. Technical Report Series No. 332, IAEA, Vienna, Austria. International Commission on Radiological Protection. 1977. Recommendations of the.International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 26. Oxford: Pergamon Press. _ _ _ _ _ _ . 1979. Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection - Limits for Intakes of Radionuclides by Workers. ICRP Publication 30. OXford: Pergamon Press.
- - - - - -
- 1991. Recommendations of the International Commission on Radiological Protection. ICRP Publication 60, Pergamon Press, New York.
International Organization for Standardization. 1996. Environmental Management Systems. ISO 14001:2004. long, E.R., and LG. Morgan. 1990. The Potential for Biological Effects of Sediment-Sorbed Contaminants Tested in the National States and Trends Program. National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Technical Memorandum No. 5, OMA52, NOAA National Ocean Service, Seattle, Washington. Mitrey, R.J. October 28, 1986. Correspondence from New York State Department of Environmental Conservation to J.P. Hamric, Department of Energy, Idaho Operations Office, West Valley Project Office, regarding the construction landfill. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. 1987. Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States. NCRP-93. Bethesda, Maryland. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements. 2009. Ionizing Radiation Exposure of the Population of the United States. NCRP Report No. 160. Bethesda, Maryland. National Environmental Laboratory Accreditation Conference (NELAC) Standard. June 2003, effective July 2005. R&B-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
References and Bibliography National Research Council. 1990. Health Effects of Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation. Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation (BEIR) V. Washington: National Academy Press. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. 1919 through 2010 Buffalo area climate data. http://www.wbuf.noaa. gov. (also NOAA data at http://nowdata.rec-acis.org/BUF/pubACIS_results). New York State. nd. Environmental Conservation Law (ECL). Article 27, Collection, Treatment, and Disposal of Refuse and Other Solid Waste. Title 9. Industrial Hazardous Waste Management.
- - - - - -
- nd. ECL. Article 15. Water Resources. Title 5. Protection of Water.
- - - - - -
- nd. ECL. Article 15. Water Resources. Title 33. Water Withdrawal Reporting;
_ _ _ _ _ _ . nd. ECL. Article 17. Water Pollution Control. Title 8. State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System. _ _ _ _ _ _ . nd. ECL. Article 24. Freshwater Wetlands Act.
- - - - - -
- nd. ECL. Article 40. Hazardous Substances Bulk Storage Act.
- - - - - -
- nd. Navigation Law. Article 12. Oil Spill Prevention, Control, and Compensation.
_ _ _ _ _ _ . nd. Public Health Law. Article 5. Laboratories. Section 502. Laboratories; Examinations; Certificates of Approval. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. nd. Title 6, New York Codes, Rules, and Regulations {6 NYCRR). Environmental Conservation Rules and Regulations.
- - - - - -
- nd. Hazardous Waste Management Facilities. 6 NYCRR Subpart 373.
_ _ _ _ _ _ . nd. Management of Specific Hazardous Waste. 6 NYCRR Subpart 374.
- - - - - -
- nd. Solid Waste Management Facilities. 6 NYCRR Part 360.
_ _ _ _ _ _ . nd. Title 6 NYCRR, Subchapter D, Water Regulation, Parts 595 (Releases of Hazardous Substances Reporting, Response and Corrective Action); 596 {Hazardous Substance Bulk Storage Regulations), 597 (List of Hazardous Substances), 598 {Handling and Storage of Hazardous Substances); and 599 {Standards for New or Modified Hazardous Substance Storage Facilities).
- - - - - -
- December 27, 1985 (amended February 12, 1992). Title 6 NYCRR Parts 612 (Registration of Petroleum Storage Facilities), 613 {Handling and Storage of Petroleum), and 614 {Standards for New and Substantially Modified Petroleum Storage Facilities).
_ _ _ _ _ .December 31, 1988 (last revised May 12, 2006). Used Oil. 6 NYCRR Subpart 360-14. _ _ _ _ _ _ .January 24, 1994. Determination of Soil Cleanup Objectives and Cleanup Levels. Technical and Administrative Guidance Memorandum (TAGM) #4046. (Rescinded by NYSDEC, December 3, 2010 and replaced with CP-51/Soil Cleanup Guidance). _ _ _ _ _ _ . 1995. Appendix 33 - Groundwater Monitoring List. Title 6 NYCRR Subpart 373-2. _ _ _ _ _ _ .January 1, 1996. State Environmental Quality Review. Title 6 NYCRR, Part 617. R&B-3 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
References and Bibliography _ _ _ _ _ _ . September 3, 1996. Federal Facility Compliance Act: Order on Consent. _ _ _ _ _ _ .June 1998. Ambient Water Quality Standards and Guidance Values and Groundwater Effluent Limitations. Technical and Operational Guidance Series (TOGS) 1.1.1. _ _ _ _ _ _ .January 25, 1999. Technical Guidance for Screening Contaminated Sediments. _ _ _ _ _ _ .March 19, 1999. Stipulation of Agreement Pursuant to Section 17-0303 of the Environmental Conservation Law and Section 176 of the Navigation Law.
- - - - - -
- March 10, 2003 (amended May 12, 2006). 6 NYCRR Part 364, Waste Transportation, Subpart 364.9.
Standards for the Tracking and Management of Medical Waste.
- - - - - -
- February 1, 2004 and modification dates January 1, 2005 and September 1, 2006. State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES} Discharge Permit NY0000973.
------**October 21, 2004. Air Facility Registration Certificate in accordance with 6 NYCRR Part 201-4. - - - - - -
- November 2004. Draft Technical and Operational Guidance Series (TOGS) #5.1.9. In-Water and Riparian Management of Sediment and Dredge Material.
_ _ _ _ _ _ .September 5, 2006. Hazardous Waste Manifest System and Related Standards for Generators, Transporters, and Facilities. 6 NYCRR Subpart 372.
------*September 5, 2006. Identification and Listing of Hazardous Wastes. 6 NYCRR Subpart 371. ------*September 5, 2006. Interim Status Standards for Owners and Operators of Hazardous Waste Facilities. 6 NYCRR Subpart 373-3. - - - - - -
- September 6, 2006. Final Status Standards for Owners and Operators of Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facilities. 6 NYCRR Subpart 373-2.
------*September 6, 2006. Hazardous Waste Management System - General. 6NYCRR Subpart 370.
_ _ _ _ _ _ .December 5, 2006. Land Disposal Restrictions. 6 NYCRR Subpart 376. _ _ _ _ _ _ .October 21, 2010. CP-51/Soil Cleanup Guidance. 6NYCRR Part 375 Standards (as basis). New York State Department of Health. nd. Environmental Laboratory Approval Program (ELAP} Certification Manual.
- - - - - -
- nd. Title 10, New York Code, Rules, and Regulations _(10 NYCRR). Sources of Water Supply. Part 5 (Drinking Water Supplies) and Part 170 (Sources of Water Supply).
New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. May 12, 2010. State Environmental Quality Review Findings Statement. Pacific Northwest laboratory (PNl). November 1988. Napier, B.A., Strenge, D.L., Pelequin, R.A., and Ramsdell, J.V. GENII - The Hanford Environmental Radiation Dosimetry Software System. Version 1.485, PNL-6584. Parks B.L March 1992. User's Guide for CAPBB-PC. Version 1.0. las Vegas, NV: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Radiation Programs. 402-B-92-001. R&B-4 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
References and Bibliography _ _ _ _ _ _ .June 1997. CAP88-PC Version 2.0 User's Guide. Germantown, Maryland. U.S. Department of Energy. Persaud, D., Jaagumagi, R., and A. Hayton. 1992. Guidelines for the Protection and Management of Aquatic Sediment Quality in Ontario. Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Queen's Printer for Ontario .
. Rickard, i..V. 1975. Correlation of the Silurian and Devonian Rocks in New York State. New York State Museum and Science Service Map and Chart Series No. 24.
- Simpson, D.B., and B.L. McGill. 1980. LADTAP II: A Computer Program for Calculating Radiation Exposure to Man from Routine Release of Nuclear Reactor Liquid Effluents. Technical Data Management Center. ORNl/NUREG/TDMC-1.
Standish, P.N. 1985. Closure of the Construction Landfill Site. letter (WD:85:0434) to W.H. Hannum, Department of Energy, West Valley Project Office. Statistics Canada. 2001. Population and Dwelling Counts for Canada, Provinces and Territories, and Census Subdivisions {Municipalities}, 2001 and 1996 censuses --100% data, and topic-based tabulations. <http://www.statcan.ca/english/ censusOl/products/standard> Trinity Engineering Associates, Inc. February 2013. CAP88-PC Version 3.0 User Guide. U.S. Congress. 1918. Migratory Bird Treaty Act. 16 United States Code (USC) §703. et seq.
- - - - - -
- 1954. Atomic Energy Aet of 1954. 42 USC §2011 et seq.
_ _ _ _ _ _ . 1966. National Historic Preservation Act of 1966. 16 USC §470 et seq. _ _ _ _ _ _ . 1969. National Environmental Policy Act of 1969. 42 USC §4321 et seq.
---~--* 1970. Clean Air Act of 1970. 42 USC §7401 et seq.
_ _ _ _ _ _ . 1973. Endangered Species Act of 1973. 16 USC §1531 et seq.
- - - - - -
- 1974. Safe Drinking Water Act. 42 USC §300f et seq.
_ _ _ _ _ _ . 1976. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. Public law 94-580, 90 Stat. 2795, 42 USC §6901 et seq.
- - - - - -
- 1976. Toxic Substances Control Act. 15 USC §2601 et seq.
_ _ _ _ _ _. 1977. Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1977. 33 USC §1251 et seq. (Also known as the Clean Water Act) _ _ _ _ _ _ . October 1, 1980. An Act to Authorize the Department of Energy to Carry Out a High-Level Liquid Nuclear Waste Management Demonstration Project at the Western New York Service Center in West Valley, New York. Public law 96-368 [S. 2443]. Congressional Record, Vol. 126. (Also known as the WVDP Act) _ _ _ _ _ _ . 1980. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Aet of 1980. Public law 96-510, 42 USC §9601 et seq. _ _ _ _ _ _. 1986. Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act of 1986. 42 USC §11001 et seq. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012 R&.B-5
References and Bibliography
- - - - - -
- October 17, 1986. Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act {SARA) of 1986. Public Law 99-499, 100 Stat. 1613, Title 10.
_ _ _ _ _ _ . 1992. Federal Facilities Compliance Act of 1992. Amendment to Section 6001 of the Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 USC 6961).
- - - - - -
- 1996. Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act. 7 USC §136 et seq.
U.S. Department of Commerce. U.S. Census Bureau. Census 2000. U.S. Department of Energy. nd. National Environmental Policy Act Implementing Procedures. 10 CFR Part 1021. Subpart D, Typical Classes of Actions. Appendix B, Categorical Exclusions Applicable to Specific Agency Actions. B6-1, Small-scale, short-term cleanup actions under RCRA, Atomic Energy Act, or other authorities.
- - - - - -
- nd. Quality Assurance Criteria. 10 CFR 830.122.
- - - - - -
- 1981. West Valley Demonstration Project Memorandum of Understanding Between the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
- - - - - -
- J u l y 1981. A Guide for Environmental Radiological Surveillance at U.S. Department of Energy Installations.
DOE/EP-0023. Washington, D.C. _ _ _ _ _ _ .June 1982. Final Environmental Impact Statement: Long-Term Management of Liquid High-Level Radioactive Wastes Stored at the Western New York Nuclear Service Center, West Valley. DOE/EIS-0081.
- - - - - -
- J u l y 1983. A Guide for Effluent Radiological Measurements at DOE Installations. DOE/EP-0096.
Washington, D.C. _ _ _ _ _ _ .January 1991. Environmental Regulatory Guide for Radiological Effluent Monitoring and Environmental Surveillance. DOE/EH-0173T. Washington, D.C. _ _ _ _ _ _ .May 1997. Final Waste Management Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Managing Treatment, Storage, and Disposal of Radioactive and Hazardous Waste. DOE/EIS-0200-F.
- - - - - -
- J u l y 9, 1999. Radioactive Waste Management. DOE Order 435.1, including Change 1 (August 28, 2001).
Washington, D.C. _ _ _ _ _ _ .August 26, 1999. Record of Decision for the Department of Energy's Waste Management Program: Storage of High-Level Radioactive Waste. 64 FR 46661.
- - - - - -
- October 1999. Expediting Cleanup Through a Core Team Approach. DOE/EH-413-9911.
_ _ _ _ _ _ . February 25, 2000. Record of Decision for the Department of Energy's Waste Management Program: Treatment and Disposal of Low-Level Waste and Mixed Low-Level Waste; Amendment of the Record of Decision for the Nevada Test Site. 65 FR 10061.
- - - - - -
- October 26, 2000. National Environmental Policy Act Compliance Program. DOE Order 451.lB, including Change 3 (January 19, 2012). Washington, D.C.
------*March 26, 2001. Revised Strategy for the Environmental Impact Statement for Completion of the West Valley Demonstration Project and Closure or Long-Term Management of Facilities at the Western New York Nuclear Service Center and Solicitation of Scoping Comments. 66 FR 16447.
R&B-6 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
References and Bibliography _ _ _ _ _ _ . May 2, 2001. Department of Energy Management of Cultural Resources. DOE Policy 141.1. _ _ _ _ _ _ . November 6, 2001. Advance Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement to Evaluate Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship at the West Valley Demonstration Project and Western New York Nuclear Service Center. 66 FR 56090. _ _ _ _ _ _ .July 2002. DOE Standard: A Graded Approach for Evaluating Radiation Doses to Aquatic and Terrestrial Biota. DOE-STD-1153-2002. Washington, D.C.
------*January 2003. Estimating Radiation Risk from Total Effective Dose Equivalent {TEDE). lnteragency Steering Committee on Radiation Standards (ISCORS) Technical Report No. 1. DOE/EH-412/0015/0502, Rev. 1.
------*March 13, 2003. Notice of Intent to Prepare an Environmental Impact Statement for Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship at the West Valley Demonstration Project and Western New York Nuclear Services Center. 68 FR 12044.
- - - - - -
- M a y 16, 2003. Notice of Availability of the West Valley Demonstration Project Draft Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement. 68 FR 26587.
_ _ _ _ _ _ . December 2003. West Valley Demonstration Project Waste Management Environmental Impact Statement. DOE/EIS-0337F. _ _ _ _ _ _ .January 2004. Users Guide: RESRAD-BIOTA: A Tool for Implementing a Graded Approach. to Biota Dose Evaluation. Version 1. DOE/EH-0676. (ISCORS Technical Report 2004-2). _ _ _ _ _ _ .June 16, 2005. Record of Decision for WVDP Waste Management Activities. 70 FR 35073.
- - - - - -
- February 2006. Worker Safety and Health Program. 10 CFR 851..
_ _ _ _ _ _ .September 14, 2006. Environmental Assessment for the Decontaminatio.n, Demolition, and Remova/of Certain Facilities at the West Valley Demonstration Project. DOE/EA-1552. West Valley, New York.
- - - - - -
- J u n e 4, 2008. Radioactive Material Transportation Practices Manual. DOE M 460.2-1.
_ _ _ _ _ _ .December 5, 2008. Notice of Availability of the Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship at the West Valley Demonstration Project and Western New York Nuclear Service Center. 73 FR 74160.
- - - - - -
- December 5, 2008. Proposed Phase 1 Decommissioning Plan for the West Valley Demonstration Project, West Valley, New York. 73 FR 74162.
_ _ _ _ _ _ . December 2008, March 2009, and December 2009. Phase 1 Decommissioning Plan for the West Valley Demonstration Project. Revs. O, 1, and 2. Prepared by: Washington Safety Management Solutions - URS Washington Division and Science Applications International Corporation. _ _ _ _ _ _ . November 18, 2009. RESRAD-BIOTAfor Windows. Argonne National Laboratory, with support from U.S. EPA and U.S. NRC.
- - - - - -
- April 14, 2010. Record of Decision: Final Environmental Impact Statement for Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship at the West Valley Demonstration Project and Western New York Nuclear Service Center.
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 R&B-7
References and Bibliography _ _ _ _ _ _ .February 11, 2011. Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment. DOE Order 458.1, including Change 2 (June 6, 2011). Washington, D.C. (Canceled DOE 0 5400.5.)
- _ _ _ _ _ _ .April 2011. DOE Standard Derived Concentration Technical Standard. DOE-STD-1196-2011. Washington, D.C. (Replaced DOE DCGs.)
_ _ _ _ _ _ . April 25, 2011. Integrated Safety Management DOE 0 450.2 for Use with Integrated Safety Management Policy DOE P 450.4A. _ _ _ _ _ _ .April 25, 2011. Quality Assurance. DOE Order 414.10. _ _ _ _ _ _ . May 2011. Rev. 1. Phase I Final Status Survey Plan. West Valley Demonstration Project. Prepared by Argonne National Laboratory, Environmental Science Division, Argonne, Illinois. _ _ _ _ _ _ .May i, 2011. Departmental Sustainability. DOE Order 436.1 (canceled DOE 0 450.lA and 430.2B). _ _ _ _ _ _ .June 2011. Rev. 1. Phase I Characterization Sampling and Analysis Plan. West Valley Demonstration Project. Rev. 0. Prepared by Argonne National Laboratory, Environmental Science Division, Argonne, Illinois.
- - - - - -
- J u n e 17, 2011. Worker Protecti,on Management for DOE Federal and Contractor Employees. DOE Order 440.lB including Change 1 (March 22, 2013). Washington, D.C.
_ _ _ _ _ _.June 27, 2011. Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting. DOE Order 231.lB. Washington, D.C. _ _ _ _ _ _ . September 2012. West Valley Demonstration Project Annual Site Environmental Report. Calendar Year 2011. Prepared by CH2M HILL* B&W West Valley, LLC. .
- - - - - -
- February 2012. Waste-Incidental-to-Reprocessing Evaluation for the West Valley Demonstration Project Vitrification Melter.
U.S. Department of Energy and New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. 1981. Cooperative Agreement between 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, effective October 1, .1980, as amended September 18, 1981. _ _ _ _ _ _ . October 1, 1990. Supplemental Agreement to the Cooperative Agreement Between the United States Department of Energy and the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority Setting Forth Procedures and Responsibilities for th.e Preparation of a Joint Environmental Impact Statement for the Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship at the West Valley Demonstration Project and Western New York Nuclear Service Center. _ _ _ _ _ _. December 2008. Revised Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship at the West Valley Demonstration Project and Western New York Nuclear Service Center. DOE/EIS-0226-D (Revised). _ _ _ _ _ _.January 29, 2010. Final Environmental Impact Statement for Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewarcfship at the West Valley Demonstration Project and Western New York Nuclear Service Center. Prepared by DOE and the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA). DOE/EIS-0226. R&B-8 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
References and Bibliography _ _ _ _ _ _ . March 14, 2011. Second Supplemental Agreement to the Cooperative Agreement Between the United States Department of Energy and the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority Setting Forth Special Provisions for the Identification, Implementation, and Management of the Phase 1 Studies for the Decommissioning and/or Long-Term Stewardship at the West Valley Demonstration Project and Western New York Nuclear Service Center. U.S. Department of Transportation. nd. 49 CFR Chapter 1, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, Department of Transportation. Part 172. Hazardous Materials Table, Special Provisions, Hazardous Materials Communications, Emergency Response Information, an(:} Training Requirements. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. nd. 40 Code of Federal Regulations, Protection of the Environment, Chapter 1, Environmental Protection Agency. _ _ _ _ _ _ . March 1983. Mercury, Method 245.1 {Manual Cold Vapor Technique). Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes. Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory. Cincinnati, Ohio. _ _ _ _ _ _ . 1984a. Drinking Water Guidelines. 40 CFR 141, National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations, Subpart B, Maximum Contaminant Levels.
- - - - - -
- 1984b. Drinking Water Guidelines. 40 CFR 143, National Secondary Drinking Water Regulations, Section 143.3, Secondary Maximum Contaminant Levels.
- - - - - -
- December 151 1989. National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Standards for Radionuclides. 40 CFR 61, including update of September 9, 2002. Subpart H. National Emission Standards for Emissions of Radionuclides Other Than Radon From Department of Energy Facilities. Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Government Printing Office, as amended. _ _ _ _ _ _ . 1992. Region II Administrative Order on Consent. Docket No. II RCRA 3008{h) 0202. In the Matter of: Western New York Nuclear Service Center. ______
- _.March 17, 1994. Communication from P.A. Giardina, Chief Radiation Branch, U.S. EPA Region II, to T.J.
Rowland, Director, U.S DOE. NESHAP Compliance Approval for (1) Periodic Confirmatory Measurements and (2) HVAC Stack Effluent Monitoring Changes. _ _ _ _ _ _ . 1995. Comprehensive Procurement Guidelines for Products Containing Recovered Material. 40 CFR 247. _ _ _ _ _ _ .October 16, 1996. Code of Environmental Management Principles. 61 FR 54062. _ _ _ _ _ _ . August 2002. Method 1631, Revision E: Mercury in Water by Oxidation, Purge and Trap, and Cold Vapor Atomic Fluorescence Spectrometry. EPA-821-R-02-019. _ _ _ _ _ _ .October 9, 2002. Memorandum of Understanding Between the Environmental Protection Agency and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Consultation and Finality on Decommissioning and Decontamination of Contaminated Sites.
- - - - - -
- J u l y 9, 2009. Communication from R. Borsellino, Acting Director, EPA Division of Environmental Planning and Protection, to B.C. Bower, Director U.S. DOE-WVDP. Approval to implement environmental measurements for rad-NESHAP compliance and to modify the MPPB stack.
R&B-9 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
References and Bibliography _ _ _ _ _ _ .July 14, 2011. Communication from K. Bricke, Acting Director, EPA Division of Environmental Planning and Protection, to B.C. Bower, Director U.S. DOE-WVDP. Approval request to grant a 24-month extension of the interim approval to use ambient measurements to demonstrate RAD-NESHAP Compliance to modify the MPPB stack. U.S. General Accounting Office. May 2001. Nuclear Waste Agreement Among Agencies Responsible for the West Valley Site is Critically Needed. Report to Congressional Requesters. GA0-01-314. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. October 1977. Regulatory Guide 1.109: Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I. _ _ _ _ _ _ .July 1997. Radiological Criteria for License Termination. 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix E.
- - - - - -
- February 1, 2002. Decommissioning Criteria for the West Valley Demonstration Project {M-32) at the West Valley Site; Final Policy Statement. 67 FR 5003.
------*September 2006. Consolidated Decommissioning Guidance: Characterization, Survey, and Determination of Radiological Criteria. NUREG-1757, Vol. 2.
_ _ _ _ _ _. February 25, 2010. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Technical Evaluation Report on the U.S. Department of Energy Phase 1 Decommissioning Plan for the West Valley Demonstration Project. URS Group, Inc. April 8, 2002. Land Use Survey. Rev. 0. AR #2002-171. West Valley Environmental Services LLC. March 24, 2004 and May 3, 2010. TRU Waste Management Program Plan. Rev. 0 and Rev. 1. WVDP-417. _ _ _ _ _ _ . October 15, 2008. Characterization Plan for the Mitigation of the Leading Edge of the WVDP North Plateau Strontium-90 Plume. Rev. 1. WVDP-489. _ _ _ _ _ _ .December 23, 2008. WVDP Groundwater Protection Management Program Plan. Current revision. WVDP-091. _ _ _ _ _ _. April 28, 2009. West Valley Demonstration Project North Plateau Plume Area Characterization Report. Rev. 0. WVDP-494. _ _ _ _ _ _. July 23, 2009. Asbestos Management Plan. Current revision. WVDP-072.
------**June 28, 2010. CY 2009 Annual Status Report for the Hazardous Waste Reduction Plan. - - - - - -
- September 14, 2010. North Plateau Permeable Treatment Wall Protection and Best Management Plan.
Current revision. WVDP-516. _ _ _ _ _ _ .October 7, 2010. North Plateau Groundwater Monitoring Plan. Current revision. WVDP-518.
- - - - - -
- March 15, 2011. North Plateau Permeable Treatment Wall Performance Monitoring Plan. Rev. 1. WVDP-512 . .
West Valley Nuclear Services Co., Inc. May 1, 1995. Subsurface Probing Investigation on the North Plateau at the West Valley Demonstration Project. Rev. 0. WVDP-220.
- - - - - -
- March 1996. Environmental Information Document, Volume Ill: Hydrology, Part 4. WVDP-EIS-009.
R&B-10 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
References and Bibliography . _ _ _ _ _ _ .June 11, 1999. 1998 Geoprobe"' Investigation in the Core Area of the North Plateau Groundwater Plume. Rev. 0. WVDP-346. _ _ _ _ _ _ .November 17, 2005. PCB and PCB-Contaminated Material Management Plan. Rev. 8. WVDP-080. _ _ _ _ _ _ .January 2007. Corrective Measures Study Work Plan for the West Valley Demonstration Project. Rev. 0. WVDP-462. _ _ _ _ _ _ . August 16, 2007. Sampling and Analysis Plan for Background Subsurface Soil on the North Plateau. Current revision. WVDP-466.
------*August 16, 2007. Sampling and Analysis Plan for the North Plateau Plume Area. Current revision. WVDP-465.
West Valley Nuclear Services Co., Inc. and Dames & Moore. June 1997. West Valley Demonstration Project Site Environmental Report, Calendar Year 1996.
- - - - - -
- J u l y 1997. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Facility Investigation Report, Vol.1: Introduction and General Site Overview. WVDP-RFl-017.
_ _ _ _ _ _ .June 1998. Final Report: Evaluation of the Pilot Program to Investigate Chromium and Nickel Concentrations in Groundwater in the Sand and Gravel Unit. West Valley Nuclear Services Co. and URS Group, Inc. January 2001. Results of Corrosion Evaluation in Selected Stainless Steel Monitoring Wells on the North Plateau. and Recommendations for Long-Term Management. R&B-11 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
References and Bibliography This page intentionally left blank _/ R&B-12 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
DISTRIBUTION Recipient Federal Organization Recipient State Organization DOE Office of Scientific and Technical Information T.Hoffman NYS Attorney Generars Office W. Eckroade DOE-HQ E. Schneiderman NYS Attorney Generals Office D. Geiser DOE-HQ R. Hardwick DOE-HQ M. Cruden NYSDEC - Albany F. Marcinowski DOE-HQ J. Harrington NYSDEC - Albany R. Natoli DOE-HQ T. Killeen NYSDEC - Albany G. Podonsky DOE-HQ D. lightsey NYSDEC -Albany J. Rhoderick DOE-HQ D. O'Hehir NYSDEC - Albany W. Roege. DOE-HQ T. Rice NYSDEC - Albany A. Williams DOE-HQ J. Weidman NYSDEC - Albany P. Concannon NYSDEC - Region 9 L. Camper NRC-HQ M. Jackson NYSDEC - Region 9 C. Glenn NRC-HQ K. Martin NYSDEC - Region 9 M. Norato NRC-HQ J. Strickland NYSDEC - Region 9 D. Persinko NRC-HQ D. Wi;iss NYSDEC - Region 9 M. Roberts NRC - Region 1 T.Semkow NYSDOH - Albany A. Everett U.S. EPA - Region II L. Sturman NYSDOH - Albany P. Giardina . U.S. EPA - Region II R. Snyder NYSDOH - Troy A: Park U.S. EPA- Region II
- 0. Povetko U.S. EPA - Region II F. Murray NYSERDA - Albany {President)
A. Zipp NYSERDA - General Counsel W. Kappel USGS A. Peterson NYSERDA- Albany P. Bembia NYSERDA C. Collins U.S. Congress, 26th Dist. E. Lowes NYSE RDA B. Higgins U.S. Congress, 27th Dist. A. Mellon NYSE RDA L. Slaughter U.S. Congress, *28th Dist. T. Reed U.S. Congress, 29th Dist. D. Gabryszak New York Assembly, 143rd Dist. K. Gillibrand U.S. Senate, New York S.Ryan New York Assembly, 144th Dist. C. Schumer U.S. Senate, New York K. Smardz New York Assembly, 146th Dist. D. Burling New York Assembly, 147th Dist. J. Giglio New York Assembly, 149th Dist. C. Young New York Senate, 57th Dist. T. Kennedy New York Senate, 58th Dist. P. Gallivan New York Senate, 59th Dist. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 DST-1
Distribution Recipient Local Organization Recipient Local Organization Dr. K. Watkins Director, Catt. County Health Dept. E. Lawton Superintendent, West Valley C. Crawford Cattaraugus County Health Dept. Central School S. Dayton Cattaraugus County Health Dept. D. McCauley West Valley Central School Board B. Hastings Cattaraugus County Health Dept. of Education E. Wohlers Cattaraugus County Health Dept. R. Porter President, Seneca Nation of J. Boser Cattaraugus County Legislature Indians C. Edwards Cattaraugus County Legislature D. John Seneca Nation of Indians G. Felton Cattaraugus County Legislature Energy Planner D. Hale Cattaraugus County Legislature A. Stevens Seneca Nation of Indians R. Klancer Cattaraugus County Legislature Environmental Protection D. Koch Cattaraugus County Legislature Department N. Marsh Cattaraugus County Legislature P. Murphy Cattaraugus County Legislature W. Krebs Mayor, Village of Springville W. Sprague Cattaraugus County Legislature T. Skelton Village of Springville H. VanRensselaer Cattaraugus County Legislature C. Gerwitz Supervisor, Town of Ashford D. Vickman Cattaraugus County Legislature P. Dashnaw Town Clerk, Town of Ashford W. Weller Cattaraugus County Legislature G. Eppolito Supervisor, Town of Concord C. Davis Council, Town of Ashford D. Rivet Cattaraugus County DPW T. Engels Council, Town of Ashford Commissioner W.Heim Council, Town of Ashford J. Pfeffer Council, Town of Ashford J. Williams Cattaraugus County Economic W. Snyder Council, Town of Concord Development, Planning, and Tourism C. Couture West Valley Chamber of Commerce Dr. G.R. Burstein Erie County Health Department l. Lambert League of Women Voters K. Konst Commissioner, Erie County Department of Environment and West Valley Volunteer Hose Co., Inc. Planning P. Kranz Erie County Department of Environment and Planning E. Giardini Laborers Local #621, Olean D. Rychnowski Southern Tier West Development Foundation Citizen Task Force Membership and Alternates Notice of public availability Springville Journal, Springville, New York Olean Times Herald, Olean, New York DS.T-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report was compiled and edited by A.F. Steiner (team leader), M.P. Pendl, and J.T. Kelly of the URS West Valley Demonstration Project staff. R.L. Werchowski, provided desktop publishing services. Other technical preparers and reviewers are listed below. Bennett, LE. Meess, D.C. Bieder~ann, C.A. Mellon, A.L. Bridges, N.L. Mitchell, R.M. Dogal, T.D. O'Leary, J. Dukes, H.H. Pendl, M.P. Fox, J.R. Rendall, J.D. Hoch, J.J. Ruszczyk, D.M. Jeffery, B.N. Shagula, B.P. Kean, W.N. Steiner, R.E. Klenk, D.P. Szalinski, S.J.
'Krentz, M.P. Troescher, P.
Love, RD. Vincent, G. Maloney, M.N. Wedvik, S.K. Wrotniak, C.M. ACK-1 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Acknowledgments This page intentionally left blank ACK-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
APPENDIX A 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program Environmental Monitoring Program A-2 through A-12. Table headings in the sampling sched-ule described in Table A-2 are as follows: Drivers and Sampling Rationale
- Sample Location Code. This code describes the phys-The following schedule represents the WVDP routine en-ical location where the sample is collected. The code vironmental monitoring program for 2012. This schedule consists of seven or eight characters: The first character met or exceeded the requirements of DOE Order 458.1, identifies the s_ample medium as Air, Water, Soil/sedi-
"Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environ-ment, Biological, or Direct measurement. The second ment," and DOE/EH-0173T, "Environmental Regulatory character specifies oN-site or oFf-site. The remaining Guide for Radiological Effluent Monitoring and Environ-characters describe the specific location (e.g., AFGRVAL mental Surveillance." Specific methods and monitoring is Air oFf-site at GReat VALiey). Distances noted at sam-program elements were based on DOE/EP-0096, "A Guide pling locations are as measured in a straight line from for Effluent Radiological Measurements at DOE lnstalla~
the ventilation stack of the MPPB on site. Groundwa-tions," and DOE/EP-0023, "A Guide for Environmental ter and storm water sampling points (e.g., WNW0408, Radiological Surveillance _at U.S. Department of Ener-WNNDATR, WNS004) are often abbreviated in figures gy Installations:' Additional monitoring was mandated or data tables (i.e., "408," "NDATR," "S04"). by air and water discharge permits (under the NESHAP regulations in 40 CFR 61, Subpart H, and the SPDES, re-
- Sampling Type/Medium. Describes the collection spectively). Specific groundwater monitoring is required method and the physical characteristics of the medium by the RCRA §3008(h) Administrative Order on Consent.
or sample. Permits, agreements, and/or programs may require
- Collection Frequency/Total Annual Samples. Indicates formal reports of monitoring results. Radiological air how often the samples are collected. or retrieved and emissions from the WVDP are reported annually in the the total number of each type of sample processed in NESHAP report to EPA. Nonradiological releases in water one year.
effluent and storm water drainage points covered un-der the SPDES permit are reported monthly to NYSDEC
- Measurements/Analyses. Notes the type of measure-in a DMR. Groundwater monitoring results are reported ment taken from the sampling medium and/or the con-quarterly to NYSDEC. Annual results from the monitoring stituents of interest, and (in some instances) the type program, as a whole, are evaluated and discussed in this of analysis conducted.
ASER, which is prepared as directed in DOE Order 231.18, "Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting," and associ-ated guidance. Table A-1 summarizes programmatic drivers and guidance applicable to each environmental medium measured or sampled as part of the WVDP Environmental Monitoring Program. Sampling Schedule Sampling locations are assigned a specific identifier, the location code, which is used to schedule sampling, track samples, and trace analytical results. This appendix de-tails the sampling schedule conducted at each location in 2012. Routine sampling .locations are shown on Figures WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 A-1
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program TABLE A-1 WVDP Environmental Program Drivers and Sampling Rationale Programmatk Drivers Sampling f!ationale
- 40 CFR 61, Subpart H (radiological air emissions); DOE/EH-0173T, Chapter 3.0 (air effluent monitoring);
DOE Order 458.1, Change 2 DOE/EP-0096, Section 3.3 (criteria for effluent measurements) DOE Order 458.1, Change 2 DOE/EH-0173T, Section 5.7.4 {environmental surveillance, air sampling locations); DOE/EP-0023, Section 4.2.3 (air sampling locations and measurement techniques) New York State SPDES Permit No. NY 0000973 DOE/EH~0173T, Section 2.3.3 (sampling locations for effluent (nonradiological; specified points only), monitoring); DOE Order 458.1, Change 2 {radiological) New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH) Environmental Laboratory Approval Program {ELAP) certification for nonpotable water
*. .surfac~Water DOE Order 458.1, Change 2 DOE/EH-0173T, Section 5.10.1 {environmental surveillance water sampling locations and methods);
NYSDOH ELAP certification for nonpotable water DOE Order 458.1, Change 2 DOE/EH-0173T, Section 5.10, (basis and guidance for environmental surveillance, water); NYSDOH ELAP certification for potable water
-011-site Groundwater ' **
RCRA §3008(h) Order on Consent (nonradiological); DOE/EH-0173T, Section 5.10 (basis for environmental DOE Order 458.1, Change 2 (radiological) surveillance, water); NYSDOH ELAP certification for nonpotable water DOE Order 458.1, Change 2 DOE EH-0173T, Sections 5.9 (environmental surveillance soil sampling locations and methods) and 5.12 (sediment sampling locations and methods)
. Biol~gical - *.
DOE Order 458.1, Change 2 DOE/EH-0173T, Sections 5.8 (environmental surveillance, terrestrial foodstuffs) and 5.11 (aquatic foodstuffs)
,. *', Qi re ct j:t~diation -*.
DOE Order 458.1, Change 2 DOE/EH-0173T, Section 5.5 (environmental surveillance external radiation measurement locations and frequency);. DOE/EP-0023, Section 4.6 (external radiation) A-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program Index of Environmental Monitoring Program Sample Points Air Effluent (Figure A-6 [p. A-24]} ANSTACK Main Plant Process Building _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A-7 ANSTSTK Supernatant Treatment System A-7 ANCSSTK oi-14 Building A-7 ANCSRFK Contact Size-Reduction Facility A-7 ANCSPFK Container Sorting and Packaging Facility A-7 ANVITSK Vitrification Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning A-7 ANRHWFK Remote-Handled Waste Facility A-7 OVEs/PVUs* Outdoor Ventilated Enclosures/Portable Ventilation Units A-7 Liquid Effluent, On-Site Water, and Storm Water Outfalls (Figures A-2 through A-4 [pp. A-20 through A-22]) WNSP001 Lagoon 3 Weir Point _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A-8 WNSP01B 0 Internal Process Monitoring Point A-8 WNSP116 Pseudo-Monitoring Point Outfall 116 A-8 WNSP007 Sanitary Waste Discharge A-9 WNURRAW0 Utility Room Raw Water A-9 WNSP006 Facility Main Drainage, Franks Creek at Security Fence A-9 WNSO-Series Storm Water Outfalls GROUP1 WNS004 North Swamp Drainage (WNSW74A) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A-9 GROUP2 WNS006 Northeast Swamp Drainage (WNSWAMP) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A-9 WNS033 LAG Storage Drainage A-9 GROUP3 WNS009 Smartditch - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A-10 WNS012 South Facility Drainage (WNSPOOS) A-10 GROUP4 WNS034.
- Rail Spur Culvert _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A-10 GROUP 5 WNS014 NOA Service Road Drainage North _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A-10 WNS017 NOA Service Road Drainage South A-10 WNS028 Drum Cell West Road A-10 a Not detailed on map WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 A-3
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program Liquid Effluent, On-Site Water, and Storm Water Outfalls (Figures A-2 through A-4) (concluded) GROUP6 WNS036 Live-Fire Range Wetland Drainage _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A-10 WNS037 Pump House Roadway A-10 WNS038. Lake Two Roadway North A-10 WNS039 Lake Two Roadway South A-10 WNS041 Lake One Roadway A-10 WNS042 Pre-Railroad Spur Wetland Area (Near WFBCBKG) A-10 WNS043 Live-Fire Range Drainage East A-10 GROUP 7 WNS020 Disposal Area Drainage (WNNDADR) _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A-10 GROUPS WNS027 Drum Cell Drainage West _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A-11 WNS035 Drum Cell Drainage East A-11 WNSWR01 Storm Water Precipitation pH Measurement Location Near the Site Rain Gauge_ A-10 On Site Surface Water WNSWAMP Northeast Swamp Drainage Point - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A-11 WNSW74A North Swamp Drainage Point A-11 WNSPOOS South Facility Drainage A-11 WNFRC67 Franks Creek East A-11 WNERB53 Erdman Brook A-11 WNNDADR Disposal Area Drainage A-11 WNDNK Series Site Potable W a t e r - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A-11 WNDFILTR Utility Room Potable Water (Entry Point 2) A-11 WNDNl<MP Main Plant Drinking water
- A-11 WNDNKEL ELAB Drinking Water A-11 A-4 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program On-Site Groundwater and Seeps (Figures A-8 and A-9 [pp. A-26 and A-27]) SSWMU#1 LLW2 Wells _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A-12 SSWMU#2 Miscellaneous Small Units Wells A-12 SSWMU#3 LVVT? A-12 SSWMU#4 HLW Storage and Processing Tank Wells A-12 SSWMU #5 Maintenance Shop Leach Field Wells A-12 SSWMU#6 LLW Storage Area Wells A-12. SSWMU#7 Chemical Process Cell - Waste Storage Area Wells A-12 SSWMU#8 COOL Wells A-12 SSWMU#9 NOA Unit Wells and NDATR A-12 SSWMU #10 IRTS Drum Cell Wells A-12 RHWF RHWF Wells A-12 MPPBWells MPPB Oowngradient Wells A-13 North Plateau Seeps Northeastern Edge of North Plateau A-1~ PTWPMPWells PTW Platform and Full Network Wells A-13 Miscellaneous Monitoring Locations (not in a SWMU: Well Points WP-A, WP-C, WP-H) A-13 Surface Elevation Points Surface Water Elevation Points A-13 SOA (SSWMU #11) SDA Unit Wells A-13 Soil and Sediment (Figures A-2, A-5, and A-13 [pp. A-20, A-23, and A-31]) SN Soil Series: On-Site Soil/Sediment _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A-13 SNSW74A Soil/Sediment at North Swamp Drainage Point A-13 SNSWAMP Soil/Sediment at Northeast Swamp Drainage Point A-13 SNSP006 Soil/Sediment at Facility Main Drainage A-13 SF Soil Series: Off-Site Soil Collected at Air Samplers
- A-13 SFFXVRO Surface Soil South-Southeast at Fox Valley A-13 SFRT240 Surface Soil Northeast on Route 240 A-13 SFRSPRO Surface Soil Northwest on Rock Springs Road A-13 SFGRVAL Surface Soil South at Great Valley, Background A-13 .
SF Sediment Series: Off-Site Sediment A-14 SFCCSED Cattaraugus Creek at Felton Bridge, Sediment A-14 SFSDSED Cattaraugus Creek at Springville Dam, Sediment A-14 SFTCSED Buttermilk Creek at Thomas Corners, Sediment A-14 SFBCSED Buttermilk Creek at Fox Valley Road, Background Sediment A-14 Off-Site Surface Water (Figure A-5 [p. A-23]} WFBCBKG Buttermilk Creek near Fox Valley, Background - - - - - - - - - - - - - A-14 WFFELBR Cattaraugus Creek at Felton Bridge A-14 WFBCTCB Buttermilk Creek at Thomas Corners A-14 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 A-5
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program Off-Site Ambient Air (Figure A-7 [p. A-25]) AFOl_N Bond Road - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A-15 AF02_NNE Route 240 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A-15 AF03_NE Route 240 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A-15 AF04_ENE Route 240 A-15 AF05_E Heinz Road - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A-15 AF06_ESE Buttermilk Road A-15
---------------------~
AF07_SE Fox Valley Road- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A-15 AFOS_SSE Fox Valley Road- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A - 1 5 AF09_S Rock Springs Road - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A-15 AF10_SSW Dutch Hill Road - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A-15 AFll_SW Dutch Hill Road - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A-15 AF12_WSW Dutch Hill Road - - - - - - - - - - - - - . , - - - - - - - - - - - - - A-15 AF13_W Dutch Hill Road _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A-15 AF14_WNW Boberg Road- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' A - 1 5 AF15_NW Rock Springs Road _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A-15 AF16_NNW Rock Springs Road - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A-15 AF16HNNW MEOSI location - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A-16 AFGRVAL Great Valley Sampler, Background - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - A-16 Off-Site Biological (Figures A-10 and A-13 [pp. A-28 and A-31]} BFMFLDMN Southeast Milk, Near-Site _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A-16 BFMCTLS Control Milk, South A-16 BFMBLSY Milk, West-Northwest A-16 BFMSCHT Milk, South A-16 BFDNEAR Venison, Near-Site A-16 BFDCTRL Venison, Background A-16 BFVNEAR* Produce, Near-Site A-16 BFVCTRL° Produce, Background A-16 BFFCATC Cattaraugus Creek Fish, Downstream A-17 BFFCATD Cattaraugus Creek Fish, Downstream of Springville Dam A-17 BFFCTRL Cattaraugus Creek Fish, Background A-17 Direct Measurement Dosimetry (Figures A-11 through A-13 [pp. A-29 through A-31]) DFTLD Series Off-Site Direct Radiation. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ A-17 DNTLD Series On-Site Direct Radiation A-17
- Near site and background*produce samples (corn, apples, and'beans) are identified specifically as follows:
corn= BFVNEAC and BFVCTRC; apples= BFVNEAAF and BFVCTRA; beans= BFVNEAB and BFVCTRB. A-6 WVDP Annual Site Environmen~al Report- Calendar Year 2012
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program TABLE A-2 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program
- 1 {i)Jle'i:tiofi1~r~efu~npi)/,,, *'
foi:al:AnnuG:l$arhpJi#s : ANSTACK° Continuous on-line air Continuous measurement of Real-time monitoring - CAM MPPB ventilation exhaust particulate monitors fixed filter; replaced biweekly; stack held as backup ANSTSTK 0 Continuous off-line air Biweekly; 26 each location Gross alpha/beta, gamma ;*n*n***~- upon STS ventilation exhaust particulate filters collection, flow 0 ANCSSTK ' ' *--!-------------+--------~------~---* Composite of biweekly Semiannually; 2 each location 1sr-90, U-232, U-233/234, U-235/236, 01-14 building ventilation particulate filters 1U-238, total U, Pu-238, Pu-239/240, exhaust _ -------1~m-241, gamma is~::ic, : : ______ ANCSRFK0 'd Continuous off-line Biweekly; 26 each at ANSTACK H-3, flow Contact size-reduction desiccant columns for and ANSTSTK only facility exhaust collection of water
- ANCSPFK 0 vapor--------- ----f'-----*------------
Continuous off-line Cartridges collected biweekly 1-129 Container sorting and charcoal cartridges and composited into 2 packaging facility exhaust semiannual samples at each location ANVITSI<" VIT heating, ventilation, and air conditioning exhaust 0 ANRHWFK RHWF exhaust 0 OVEs/PVUs 1contimious off-line air Col!_ected as required by !Gross alpha/beta, gamma isotopicb upon Outdoor ventilated particu late__fi_lt_e_r___-+P_r_o_Je_c_t lcollection, flow enclosures/portable e of filters Semiannually; 2 each location Sr-90, U-232, U-233/234, U-235/236, ventilation units IU-238, total U, Pu-238, Pu-239/240, I IAm-2.41, gamma isotopic, flow
- Required by 40 CFR 61, Subpart H. Results reported in the Annual NESHAP Report and evaluated in the ASER.
b Gamma isotopic analysis done only if gross alpha/beta activity rises significantly. c Operation of the 01-14 building stack was discontinued in October 2012 in preparation for demolition. d Ope.ration of the contact size-reduction stack was discontinued in July 2005. . WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 A-7 I
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program TABLE A-2 (continued) 2012 Monitoring Program WNSP001° Continuous Daily during discharge. Lagoon! Daily flow, hold for flow-weighted Lagoon 3 discharge weir 3 is discharged 4 to 8 times . composite per year, averaging 6 to 7 days per discharge; 24-56
,.._________________ days per year
,___,~----~-- -**----
Twice during discharge; 8-16 Gross alpha/beta, H-3, Sr-90, gamma 1----------!-'-p_e_r_,_y_ea_r______ isotopic _ Flow-weighted 4 to 8 per year Gross alpha/beta, H-3, C-14, Sr-90, Tc-99, composite of daily 11-129, gamma isotopic, U-232,
!samples for each U-233/234, U-235/236, U-238, total U,
,_dis~arge * - - - - ---- Pu-238, Pu-239/240, ~m-~::_1_____ _
I Grab Twice during discharge; 8-16 ettleable solids, TDS, Dissolved Oxygen
!:: per year (DO) .
24-hour comp;site-- Twice during discha~ge; 8--16 1-15*_-d_a_y_B_i_o_lo_g_ic_a_IO_x_y_g_e_n_D_e_m_a_n_d_(.BOD ), 5 1 . per year Total Suspended Solids (TSS), NH 3, TKN, l___ *+t_o_ta_l_F_e_ _~-~ jGrab Once during discharge; 4-8 Total Hg, pH, total recoverable Co, Se, V,
~
per year total residual chlorine, oil & grease, surfactant (as LAS) 4~'h~ri;~site - Once*durlngdls~harge; 4-8 Tot~I Al, total recove~~bi; A;,-dissolved-per year sulfide, N0 3-N, NOz-N, S04 r u r c;mr;osite- Quarter!~; 4 per year for the f~-;;icity (WE~
- - - - - - - - - first r:ar - ------
Semiannually; 2 per year Cyanide amenable to ch1orination, Heptachlor ur composite Semiannually; 2 per year Bromide, B, total Mn, Ni, total
'--------- recover~ble Cu,_fr, Pb, TL~------
!Grab Annually; 1 per year !!Total recoverable Cr+6,_
Dichlorodifluoromethane, I *1trichlorofluoromethane, 3,3-dichlorobenzidine, tributyl phosphate, b h;-;;r comp;~-;- balculated from l~nd TKN Annually; 1 per year per year xylene, hexachlorobenzene, 2-butanone, 1lalpha-BHC, chloroform TTotal Ba, Sb, tot-;1";:;~-0-v-er_a_b_le-Cd - - - - BODs Twice d;;-ringd~cha;ge;-8-16-iUjtin'.;~te Oxyge;D~~ {UO-D)_ _ __ I WNSP01B 0
'conti~uo~s --1~ded ~hen operating -trotal flo':_'V, el~~~-----
lnternal process monitoring Grab hqrnd Twice per month when 1!Total Hg oint operating; 0--24 per year WNSP116° I Calculated Twice per lagoon discharge; jTDS Pseudo-monitoring point ! outfall 116 I 8-16 per year I
*Required by SPDES Permit #NY0000973. Results reported in the SPDES DMR and evaluated in this ASER.
b WET testing shall be performed quarterly for the first year, and repeat the quarterly sampling every five years. A-8 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program TABLE A-2 (continued) 2012 Monitoring Program Sampling Type/ Collection Frequency/ Sample location Code Measurements/Analyses Medium Total Annual Samples
. :.()n-5ite Liquid Effluents ,, ,, ~
WN5P007" 24-hour composite 1 per month; 12 per year Gross alpha/beta, H-3 Sanitary waste discharge lliauid ---------- Composite of monthly Annually; 1 per year Sr-90, gamma isotopic sameles Grab 2 per month; 24 per year pH, settleable solids, TDS, DO, oil &
~-hour grease
------~-*-**-- '--*--------------,.-~-
;;;;;;-poslte 2 per month; 24 per year TSS, 800 5, NH,, total Fe
!Grab Monthly; 12 per year
-- Total residual chlorine, total_l:!!L_ ___
24-hour composite Monthly; 12 per year TKN (as N), NOrN, 24-hour composite 3 per month, 36 per year Flow rate (gpm)
!Calculated from 800 5 Monthly; 12 per year UOD
--and TKN 124-hour ~omposite Quarterly; 4 per yearfor the first yearb WET Testing
-------*--M jGrab Annually; 1 per year Chloroform WNURRAw" t~omposite -lWeekly; 52 per year Total Fe Utility room raw water Grabe Monthly; 12 per year Total Organic Carbon (TOC), alkalinity WN5P006 !Timed continuous Weekly during lagoon Gross alpha/beta, H-3 Franks Creek at the securitylcomposite discharge, otherwise fence biweekly; 26-34 per year I '------------ -
Composite of ;;.,eekly---:- Monthly; 12 per year 'Sr-90 and g~mma isotopic and biweekly samples
- Composite of weekly Quarterly; 4 per year C-14,Tc-99, 1-129, U-232, U-233/234, and biweekly samples U-235/236, U-238, total U, Pu-238, Pu-239/240, Am-241 Grab
~,-~~
Three per lagoon discharge; pre-discharge, near beginning, ros, flow rate
---------~-----
I at end, 12-24 per year I
*.. * *. Storm Water Outfalls *i
*. . i' ,,
Group 1° IFirst flush grab Semiannually; 2 per year pH, oil & grease, 8005 , TSS, TDS, total P, I Al, Fe, total recoverable Cu, Pb, Zn, Cd, WN5004 (504) Cr, Cr+6, Se, V, TKN, ammonia (as NH 3 ),
~-N, NO,-N, tot*I oitrog'" I" NI I
~ow-w'.ighted___ ISeml.o""'"'" pe< '"' ximum flow, total flow, plus all of the ompos1te ve constituents except for pH and oil rease Group 2° IFirst flush grab Semiannually; 2 per year lpH, oil & grease, 80Ds, TSS, TDS, total P, WN5006 (506}
WN5033 {533) I Al, Fe, total recoverable Cu, Pb, Zn,
!surfactant (as LAS) - - - - - * - - - - - *
~ow-w~ighted ------ 2 per year
-- Semiannually; Maximum flow, total flow, plus all of the I composite *above constituents except for pH and oil
& grease "Required by SPDE5 Permit #NY0000973. Results reported in the SP DES DMR and evaluated in this ASER.
b WET testing shall be performed quarterly for the first year, and repeat the quarterly sampling every five years. c Results are reported to the CCHD. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 A-9
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program TABLE A-2 (continued) 2012 Monitoring Program Sampling Type/ Collection Frequency/
- Sample Location Code.. Measurements/Analyses Medium Total Annual Sa(Tlples Storm Water Outfalls Group3°. First flush grab Semiannually; 2 per year pH, oil & grease, B00 5, TSS, TOS, total P, WNS009 (S09) Al, Fe, Hg, total recoverable Cu, Pb, Zn, WNS012 (S12) TKN, ammonia (as NH 3 ), N03-N, NOrN, alpha-Bl-le, total nitrogen (as N)
Flow-weighted Semiannually; 2 per year Maximum flow, total flow, plus all of the composite above constituents except for pH and oil
& grease Group 4° First flush grab Semiannually; 2 per year pH, oil & grease, 8005, TSS, TDS, total P, WNS034 (S34) Al, Fe, total recoverable Cu, Pb, Zn,
-Flow-weighted >--*
Semiannually; 2 per year surfactant (as LA!?_} Maximum flow, total flow, plus all of the composite above constituents except for pH and oil
&grease Group5° First flush grab Semiannually; 2 per year pH, oil & grease, 800 5 , TSS, TDS, total P, WNS014 (S14) Al, Fe, total recoverable Cu, Pb, Zn, V, WNS017 (517) TKN, ammonia (as NH 3 ), NOrN, N02 -N, WNS028 (528) surfactant (as LAS), sulfide, settleable solids, total nitrogen (as N)
Flow-weighted Semiannually; 2 per year Maximum flow~ total flow, plus all of the composite above constituents except for pH and oil
& grease Group 6" First flush grab Semiannually; 2 per year pH, oil & grease, 800 5, TSS, TDS, total P, WNS036 (536) Al, Fe, total recoverable Cu, Pb, Zn, V, WNS037 (537) TKN, ammonia (as NH 3 ), N03-N, N02 -N, WNS038 (S38) surfactant (as LAS), sulfide, settleable WN5039 (S39) ~~~q_gen {as NJ WN5041 (541) 543 only, grab Semiannually; 2 per year Total recoverable Pb WNS042 (542)
WNS043 (543) Flow-weighted composite ISemiannually; 2 locations per Maximum flow, total flow, plus all of the group per yearb above constituents except for pH and oil I& grease Group 7° First flush grab Semiannually; 2 per year pH, oil & grease, 800 5, TSS, TDS, total P, WNS020 {520) Al, Fe, total recoverable Cu, Pb, Zn, TKN,
, ammonia (as NH 3 ), NOrN, NOrN, surfactant (as LAS), sulfide, total nitrogen (as Nl Flow-weighted Semiannually; 2 per year
- Maximum flow, total flow, plus all of the composite above constituents except for pH and oil
&grease
'Required by SP DES Permit# NY0000973. Results reported in the monthly SPDES DMR and evaluated in this ASER.
b One location per group sampled semiannually. A-10 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program TABLE A-2 (continued) 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program
[. '
Sampling .Type/ . Collection Frequency/ ' Satrif>ie Lpcatio~ Code M1wsurements/Analyses Medium Total Annual Samples Storm Water Outfalls (continued} Group 8° WNS027 (S27) I J First flush grab II rm;'"""'"" 2'"'"' pH, oil & grease, BODs, TSS, TDS, total P, Al, Fe, total recoverable Cu, Pb, Zn, TKN, WNS035 (S35) ammonia (as NH 3 ), N03-N, NOrN, iFlow-we;ghte~""'"" 2P"Y"' surfactant (as LAS), total nitrogen (as N) Maximum flow, total flow, plus all of the composite above constituents except for pH and oil I & grease WNSWR01° !Field measurement of 11 each storm water sampling lpH Site rain gauge precipitation 1event
... h,' :.* *k On-Site Surface Water *.:*:. *.'*, '::>'
WNSWAMP Timed continuous I Biweekly; 26 per year Gross alpha/beta, H-3, pH, flow (at Northeast swamp drainage composite liquid WNSWAMP only) I Composite of biweekly Monthly; 12 per year Sr-90 and gamma isotopic WNSW74A North swamp drainage jsamples d
!composite of biweekly !Semiannually; 2 per year C-14, 1-129, U-232, U-233/234, I samples 1 U-235/236, U-238, total U, I I Pu-238, Pu-239/240, Am-241 WNSPOOS Composite of quarterly 'Semiannually; 2 per year ISr-90 and gamma isotopic Facility yard drainage samples WNFRC67 !Grab liquid !Quarterly; 4.per year Gross alpha/beta, H-3, pH Franks Creek east of the I (collected at same time as SDA ~
mposite of q;:;;terly pies f WNNDADR) miannually; 2 per year Sr-90 and gamma isotopic WNERB53 Erdman Brook north of I Grab liquid jQuarterly; 4 per year Gross alpha/beta, H-3, pH
'(collected at same tim_e as disposal areas ,WNNDADR)
WNNDADR Timep continuous !Biweekly; 26 per year I Hold for composite Drainage between NOA and composite liquid_ _ J SDA Composite of biweekly Monthly; 12 per year Gross alpha/beta, H-3, gamma isotopic sampl~----* ;...---------~-~~----- ~--~~-- . ~M~~~------~-*---~~-- Composite of biweekly Semiannually; 2 per year Sr-90 and 1-129 samples
,:; 'y ._ ..;: * , ~- ' '.On~Site Potable (Drinking) Water. **. :' ':::-,.:' .'l' :*:,* ,,,
WNDFLTR Annually; 1 per year As, Ba, Be, Cd, Cr, Hg, Ni, Sb, Se, Tl, Utility room (entry point Grab liquidb cyanide, fluoride [EP-02]) potable water Quarterly; 4 per year TOC storage tank Grab' I WNDNKMP !Grab liquid jAnnually; 1 per year 'Gross alpha/beta, H-3 Main plant drinking water I l WNDNKEL 'Grab liquidd tnnually; 1 per year Total haloacetic acids, total Environmental Laboratory trihalomethanes drinking water I I Note: Pb and Cu are sampled at various drinking water locations once every three years, based on CCHD guidance. Three locations were sampled in CY 2012. The CCHD collects monthly distribution system samples for total coliform and residual chlorine, and reports totheWVDP.
*Required by SP DES Permit# NY0000973. Results reported in the monthly SPDES DMR and evaluated in this ASER.
b Primary inorganic chemical results are reported to the CCHD. A sample for N0 3 (as total nitrate) is collected by the CCHD.
'Total organic carbon is sampled monthly and reported to the CCHD, d Disinfection byproducts are sampled annually and reported to the CCHD.
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 A-11
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program TABLE A-2 {continued) 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program Sampling Type/ Collection Frequency/ Sample location Code Measurements/Analyses Medium Total Annual Samo/es On-Sjte Groundwater LLW2: SSWMU #1 (wells 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, 108, 110, 111, 116, 8604, 8605) Miscellaneous small units: SSWMU#2 (wells 204, 205, 206} LWTS: SSWMU #3 (wells 301, 302} Gross alpha/beta, H-3. Select locations Quarterly during the fisca I for radioisotopic analyses, volatile Grab liquid HLW and processing tank: year (generally0 ); 4 per year organic compounds (VOCs}, semivolatile SSWMU#4 organic compounds (SVOCs), or metals (wells 401, 402, 403, 405, 406, 408, 409} Maintenance shop leach field: SSWMU #5 (wells 501, 502) LLW storage area: SSWMU
#6 (wells 602A, 604, 605, 8607, 8609)
Chemical process cell waste storage area: SSWMU#7 (wells 704, 706, 707) COOL: SSWMU #8 (wells 801, 802, 803, 804, 8603, 8612) Twice each sampling event; NOA: SSWMU #9 Direct field 8 per year for wells sampled Conductivity, pH (wells 901, 902, 903, 906, measurement quarterly 908, 908R, 909, 910R, 8610, 8611, trench NDATR) IRTS drum cell: SSWMU#lO (wells 1005, 1006, 1008B, 1008C) RHWF (not in a SSWMU): (wells 1301, 1302, 1303, 1304)
"Sampling frequency and analyses vary from point to point.
A-12 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program TABLE A-2 (continued) 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program MPPB downgradient wells ~Grab liquid Quarterly during the fiscal (installed in 2010): (wells year (generally°); 4 per year MP-01, MP-02, MP-03, MP- -*~------*- * * - - - - - -
- 04) Direct field Twice each sampling event; 8 Conductivity, pH j.:neasurement per year for wells sampled I
North plateau seeps (not Grab liquid. I quarterly Semiannually {quarterly at !Gross alpha/beta, H-3 (also VOCs at in a SSWMU): (points GSEEP, SP04, SP06, SPll, Direct field GSEEP); 2 {or 4) pe_!:1!:_ar lSemiannually at SP12 GSEEP and SP12)
!pH, conductivity ---------
SP12) measurement of (quarterly at GSEEP); 2 (or 4) sampled water PTWPMP wells: (66 PTW !Grab liquid per year Quarterly (annually at full
! Strontim-90 platform wells at stations 1-* network wells); 4(or1) per 12, installed in 2010 [i.e.
- year at each location PTW-SlA, PTW-SlB and Grab liquid Annually; 1 per year at each Geochemical parameters: Na, K, Ca, Mg, PTW-SlC] and 21 pre- location carbonate, bicarbonate, 504' Cl existing full network wells Direct field Quarterly (annually at full Conductivity, pH, temperature, oxidatlon-(i.e. WP02, MW-5) measurement network wells); 4 {or 1) per reduction potential, Miscellaneous monitoring Grab liquid lyear at each location dissolved oxygen, and turbidity Annually (quarterly at NBlS); jGross alpha/beta, H-3 locations (not in a 1(or4) per ye?_r__ ------! *---*----
SSWMU): Well points WP- Direct field A, WP-C, WP-H measurement of sampled water 1(or4) per year I Annually {quarterly at NBlS); !pH, conductivity Surface water elevation Direct field Quarterly; 4 per year at each !Water level points: (SE007, SE008, measurement location SE009, SEOll) SDA (SSWMU #11) I Groundwater wells in SSWMU #11 are sampled by NYSERDA under a separate program. For Iinformation, see the NYSERDA website at www.nyserda.ny.gov.
- SN on-site soil series; Surface plug composite 1 each location every five Gross alpha/beta, gamma isotopic, SNSW74A (near soil/sediment years (sampled in current year Sr-90, U-232, U-233/234, U-235/236, WNSW74A), SNSWAMP and previously sampled in U-238, total U, Pu-238, Pu-239/240, (near WNSWAMP), and 2007) Am-241 SNSP006 (near WNSP006)
SF off-site soil series Surface plug composite !1 each location every five !Gross alpha/beta, Sr-90, gamma isotopic, (collected at historical air soil years (sampled in current year!Pu-238, Pu-239/240, sampling location[s]); and previously sampled in ,. Am-241. At nearest site (Sf RS PRO) and SFFXVRD, SFRT240, 2007) background (SFGRVAL), also SFRSPRD, SFGRVAL IU-232, U-233/234, U-235/236, U-238, and total U 1 I
*sampling frequency and analyses vary from point to point.
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 A-13
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program TABLE A-2 (continued} 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program Sampling Type/ Collection Frequency/ Sample Location Code Measurements/Analyses Medium Total Annual Samples
*, ;., Off-Site S~diment ; >>
SFCCSED Grab stream sediment 1 each location every five years Gross alpha/beta, gamma isotopic, Sr-90, Cattaraugus Creek at Felton (sampled in current year and U-232, U-233/234, U-235/236, U-238, total U, Bridge previously sampled in 2007) Pu-238, Pu-239/240, Am-241 SFSDSED Cattaraugus Creek at Springville Dam SFTCSED Buttermilk Creek at Thomas Corners Road SFBCSED Buttermilk C.reek at Fox Valley Road (background) Off-Site Surface Water WFBCBKG Timed continuous Biweekly; 26 per year Hold for composite Buttermilk Creek near Fox composite liquid Valley (background)
-----~------
Composite of biweekly Monthly; 12 per year Gross alpha/beta, H-3 samples Composite of biweekly Semiannually; 2 per year C-14, Sr-90, Tc-99, 1-129, U-232, U-233/234, samples U-235/236, U-238, total U, Pu-238, Pu-239/240, Am-241, gamma isotopic WFFELBR Timed continuous Weekly during lagoon 3 Gross alpha/beta, H-3, pH, flow Cattaraugus Creek at Felton composite liquid discharge, otherwise biweekly; Bridge (downstream of Flow-weighted composite Monthly; 12 per year Gross alpha/beta, H-3, Sr-90, and gamma confluence with Buttermilk of weekly and biweekly isotopic Creek); nearest point of public samples access to waters re!=eiving WVDP effluents WFBCTCB Composite of biweekly !Monthly; 12 pe~ year. Gross alpha/beta, H-3 Buttermilk Creek at Thomas samples Comers Road, downstream of Composite of biweekly Semiannually; 2 per year Sr.90, gamma isotopic WVDP and upstream of samples confluence with Cattaraugus Creek Grab liquid Grab liquid
-__._m___________
Monthly; 12 per year ~* Semiannually; 2 per year0 I---- Hardness (Ca and Mg) ----- Temperature {field), pH {field), dissolved oxygen (field), TOX, oil & grease, Hg {method 1631)
-*24-hour timed Semiannually; 2 per year 0
~SS, TDS, NPOC, NH 3 (as N), N03 (as N), N0 2 continuous composite (as N), bromide, fluoride, sulfate, total sulfide, surfactant {as LAS), alpha-BHC, B, Ba, Co, Fe, Na, Mn, Sb, Ti, Tl, V, dissolved Al, As, Cd, Cr, Cu, Ni, Pb, Se, Zn
' l
*Samples are collected when point WNSPOOl is discharging.
A-14 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program TABLE A-2 (continued} 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program Sampling Type/ Collection Frequency/ Sample location Code Measurements/Analyses Medium Total Annual Samples Off-Site Ambiei;it Air AFOl_N Glass fiber filters for air Biweekly; 26 per year Gross alpha/beta screening, flow; North at Bond Road particulates Hold for composite AF02_NNE North-northeast at Rt. 240 AF03_NE Northeast at Rt. 240 AF04_ENE East-northeast at Rt. 240
*1 AFOS_E
-
- cartridge for Charcoal Monthly; 12 per year 1-129 screening, flow; East at Heinz Road iodine Hold for composite AFOG_ESE East-southeast at Buttermilk Road AF07_SE Southeast I
at Fox Valley Road AFOS_SSE South-southeast at Fox Valley Road AF09_S South ___L_ Composite of biweekly glass fibermters I I Quarterly; 4 per year Sr-90, Cs-137, U-232, Pu-238, Pu-239/240, Am-241, flow at Rock Springs Road AFlo_ssw South-southwest at Dutch Hill Road AFll~SW Southwest at Dutch Hill Road AF12_WSW West-southwest at Dutch Hill Road AF13_W Composite of monthly !Quarterly; 4 per year 1-129, flow West charcoal at Dutch Hill Road AFl~_WNW West-northwest I I at Boberg Road AFlS_NW Northwest II at Rock Springs Road I I AF16_NNW North-northwest at Rock Springs Road I WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 A-15
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program TABLE A-2 {continued} 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program Sampling Type/ Collection Frequency/ Sample location Code Measurements/Analyses Medium Total Annual Samples Off-Site Ambient Air AF16HNNW Glass fiber filters for air Biweekly; 26 per year Gross alpha/beta screening, flow; High-volume sampler at particulates Hold for composite presumed MEOSI location north-northwest I I Composite of biweekly Quarterly; 4 per year ISr-90, Cs-137, U-232, Pu-238, Pu-239/240, glass fiber filters Am-241,flow AFGRVAL Glass fiber filter for air Biweekly; 26 per year ~Gross alpha/beta screening, flow; Hold for 29 km south at Great Valley particulates composite (background) Charcoal cartridge for Monthly; 12 per year
-- 1-129 screening, flow; iodine I Hold for composite Composite of monthly Quarterly; 4 per year _J-129, flow .
charcoal Composite of biweekly Quarterly; 4 per year jsr-90, gamma isotopic, U-232, U-233/234, glass fiber filters ,U-235/236, U-238, total U, Pu-238, Pu-239/240, Am-241, flow Off-Site Biological BFMFLDMN Grab milk sample Annual; 1 per year isr-90, 1-129, gamma isotopic Dairy farm 5.1 km southeast ! ofWVDP I BFMCTLS Grab milk sample Each location once every five isr-90, 1-129, gamma isotopic Control location 22 km south years (sampled in current year (background) and previously sampled in 2007) i BFMBLSY II Dairy farm 5.S km west-northwest BFMSCHT Dairy farm 4.9 km south I i ! BFDNEAR Individual collection of Six deer collected annually Gamma isotopic and Sr-90 in edible portions Deer in the vicinity of the venison samples, usually during hunting season of meat,% moisture, H-3 in free moisture WVDP from deer killed in (3 near-site, 3 background) collisions with vehicles BFDCTRL ' Control deer 16 km or more from the WVDP BFVNEAR Grab biological I Each food crop and background, jGamma isotopic and Sr-90 in edible portions, Apples, beans, and corn from once every five years at time of 1% moisture, H-3 in free moisture locations near the WVDP harvest (sampled in current year l and previously sampled in 2007) ! BFVCTRl I Control apples, beans, and corn from locations far from theWVOP I A-16 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program TABLE A-2 (concluded) 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program Sampling Type/ coilection'Frequeney/ *" Sample Location Code .Measurements/Analyses Medium Total Annual Samples
- Off-Site Biological BFFCATC ,l~dividual collection of Once every 5 years; 10 fish from Gamma isotopic and Sr-90 in edible portions, Fish from Cattaraugus Creek fish each location (sampled in % moisture downstream of its confluence current year and previously with Buttermilk Creek sampled in 2007) 1 BFFCATD I Fish from Cattaraugus Creek downstream of the Springville Dam BFFCTRl Control fish sample from nearby stream not affected by WVDP (7 km or more upstream of site effluent point); background Off-Site Direct Radiation*
Iintegrating no DFTLD Series: Off-site environmental thermoluminescent I Semiannually; 2 per year at each location Gamma radiation exposure dosimeters (TLDs): #1 through I
#16, at each of 16 compass I sectors at nearest accessible perimeter point
#20: 1,500 m northwest (downwind receptor)
#23: 29 km south, Great Valley (background) I
*
- On°-Site Direct Radiation * . * *}'. * ** >,J, DNTLD Series: On-site TLDs !Integrating TLD Semiannually; 2 per year at each Gamma radiation exposure location
#33: Corner of the SDA #24, #28: Security fence around the WVDP #32, #34, #35, #36: Drum Cell road and Drum Cell south fence #38, #40: Near operational areas on-site #43: SDA west perimeter fence WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 A-17
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program Summary of Monitoring Program Changes in 2012 Description of Changes Changes to the sampling program during 2012 were associated with ELAB analyses, the new ambient air monitoring network, the shutdown of ANCSSTK (01-14 building ventilation exhaust), the addition of two new thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLD), and the five-year sampling of biologicals, soiis, and sediments. On June 30, 2012 the CHBWV environmental laboratory relinquished its NYSDOH certifications which allowed it to perform specific reportable analyses. The samples are now sent to off-site certified laboratories for specific analyses. The ELAB continues to analyze samples for site operations, for screening and for gross alpha, gross beta, and iodine-129 in air. During the fourth quarter of 2012, 16 off-site ambient air monitoring locations were activated to collect baseline data in preparation for future demonstration of compliance using ambient air measurements in accordance with 40 Code of Federal Regulations {CFR) 61, Subpart H, Section 61.93 (b)(S), pending final EPA approval. Air sampling location ANCSSTK was shut down on October 24, 2012 in preparation for the demolition of the 01-14 building. DNTLD32, located on drum cell road and TLD34 located at drum cell south fence were added back to the program in January 2012 to monitor activity from the drum cell. The environmental monitoring program requires the collection of soils, aquatic sediments, milk, apples, beans, corn, and fish every five years. These parameters were all sampled in 2012; prior to this year they were last sampled in 2007. A-18 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program FIGURE A-1 West Valley Demonstration Project Base Map J-JGIS/ArcMa ASERIASER 2012/ASER 2012 Fi I _....-- I I A
)
I I Legend
- - WVDP Fence --+----i WVDP Railspur WVDP Property Boundary
( ~ Wetlands Delineation WVDP A nnual Site En vironmental Report - Calendar Yea r 2012 . A-19
Appendix A 2012 Environmental Mon itoring Program FIGURE A-2 On-Site Surface Water, Drinking Water, and Soil/Sediment Sampling Locations JJGISIArcMa ASER/ASER 20121ASER 2012 F 02 20110516 mxd
/ N I.
i A
/
Legend
- Water Sampling Location
- Soil/Sediment Sampling Location VNDPFence
--+--i VNDP Railspur VNDP Property Boundary C J Wetlands Delineation D Location Sampled Routinely D Periodic Confirmatory Sampling A-20 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program FIGURE A-3 On-Site Storm Water Outfalls J /GISIArcMa J\SERIASER 2012JASER 2012
\ r N
> ,.. /
I r
/'
A I
\
l!
~
\ ~.
~
~
f---~~~~~~-\.:. Legend e Storm water Outfall
- Rain Gauge Location
__,. WVDP Fence
~ WVDP Railspur WVDP Property Boundary W Wetlands Delineation c:::J Location Sampled Routinely WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 A-21
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Mon itoring Program FIGURE A-4 Rail Spur Storm Water Outfalls N A j Bulk Storage Warehouse I Goosen
- - .!C~Cree
/
f* -*\, I'
) 1'I
/ /ft
, lb
//JJ
/!It.
Legend li~
, ,~
- l.i.
- Storm Water Outfall \ / 1 C-:) Wetlands Delineation
*- *1 ,..
---.I /ii~
- - WOP Fence
'- - *-*- *- -- *- *- ,.- -..-*-*-*..mio*- *-*""!!""'*-*--*-*
-t---1 WI/DP Rallspur c::1 l/VNYNSC Property Boundary
~ Location Sampled Routinely A-22 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Mon itoring Program FIGURE A-5 Off-Site Surface Water and Soil/Sediment Sampling Locations J:IGIS/ArcMa ASER/ASER 2012/ASER 2012 F' N To Nash\lllle To Sprague
-A (39.Skm)
To Springvifle Brook Park .1 (9.4 km) (14 1 km)
,,.._.~
-1.<ln'Ml!IGBR coLE ftO Bulk 1 Storage ./
~ Warehouse 01!
'}It, oOo
~o g
Ci
- I:
- c i= CEMETERY El RD To West' Legend Valley I To Great Valley (62km)
(29km) I
,;. Soil/Sediment Sampling Location e Water Sampling Location l
C=1 'MIDP Property Boundary (=:J VVNYNSC Property Boundary 1 CJ Location Sampled Routinely CJ Periodic Confirmatory Sampling WVDP Annual Site En viron mental Report - Calendar Year 2012 A-23
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program FIGURE A-6 On-Site Air Monitoring and Sampling Locations J IGIS/An:Ma ASERIASER 2012/ASER 2012 F N A Air Monitoring and
+ Sampling Location W.JDP Fence W.JDP Railspur W.JDP Property Boundary Wetlands Delineation D Location Sampled Routinely _a Location ANCSSTK ran during 2012 until 10/24/2012.
__,. r I I ' A-24 WVDP Annual Site En vironmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program FIGURE A-7 Off-Site Ambient Air Monitoring and Sampling locations 7 2013-o3* 18.mxd rO 311sl2Ct13 afs N A NE ENE E SSW Legend c::J \/WOP Property Boundary L.~J WNYNSC Property Boundary
,;r Ambient Air Sampling location Predominant IMnd Direction at 1Om , S-year average WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 A-25
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitorin g Prog r~m FIGURE A-8 North Plateau Groundwater Monitoring Network (includes Wells Used for Water-Level Measurements) J:IG S/Ar I
)
SP06 WI SP04 WI GSEEP ( l
/
I
/
I
/
Moniloring \Nell Surface Water Elevation w.JOP Properly Boundary __,._., WVDP Fence 0
- Monttoring location
~ w.JOP Railspur WI Seepage Mon~oring Point <Ull Analytical Monitoring W \Mltlands Delineation location Super Solid W:iste Monitoring locat ion
- Management Unit 403 Water level Only (SSVvMU)
A-26 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program FIGURE A-9 South Plateau Groundwater Monitoring Network {Includes Wells Used for Water-Level Measurements) N
-A 0
SSWMU 11 New York State-Licensed Disposal Area (SDA)
~
Meteorological 10088 1008C Tower Legend
'C:J Wetlands Delineation WVDP Property Boundary Surface water Elevation -+- WVDP Railspur
- Monitoring Location WVDPFenee Analytical Monitoring Note: The SDA monitoring wells are under 403 Location D NOA Gemembrane Cover NYSERDA's cognizance. For information see Super Solid Waste the NYSERDA website at www.nyserda.ny.gov 403 Monitoring Location -
water Level Only 0 Management Unit (SSWMU) WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 A-27
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program FIGURE A-10 Biological Sampling Locations JJGIS/Ar ASERIASER 2012/ASER 2012 F N-To Springville (9.4 km) To Sprague Brook Partl (14.1 km) I A THO~ CORNERS RO L L-1
\ State-Licensed
' *-1 Disposal Area I WNYNSC i I j
_ o j
- '\
I'"'
.i' IBFMFLOMNI Legend Badlgroond sampling locabOns
[!} NEAR-SITE BIOLOGICAL ~howl'l on Figure A-12. (_:J WNYNSC Property Boundary = BFMCTLS Milk C::J WI/DP Property Boundary = BFOCTRL VerljSO(I BFVCTRL =* Food Crops c:::J Location Sampled Routinely BFFCTRL = Fish r:::::l Periodic Confirmatory Sampling A-28 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program FIGURE A-11 Location of On-Site Thermoluminescent Dosimeters (TLDs) J/GIS/A~ ASER/ASE 2010/ASER 2010 F A11 20120220mxd r.1 3-2().2013 sl<wlafs
\ N A
\.
I
/
Legend
@ On-Site Thermoluminescent Dosimeter WJOPFence
- + - WJOP Railspur WJOP Property Boundary
~ Wetlands oenneatlon ~I E==:I Location Sampled Routinely
- (r WVDP Annual Site En vironmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 A-29
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Monitoring Program FIGURE A-12 Location of Off-Site Thermoluminescent Dosimeters (TLDs) Within 5 Kilometers of the WVDP To Nashville (398 l(m) To Sprague r To Springville Brook Park I (9.4km) (14 1 lun) IDFTL008l Legend Off-Site Thermoluminescent Dosimeter C:J WNYNSC Property Boundary CJ WIOP Property Boundary c::::J location Sampled Routinely A-30 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix A. 2012 En vironmental Monitoring Program FIGURE A-13 Environmental Sampling Locations More Than 5 Kilometers From the WVDP g ( Thermolumlnescent Dosimeter
+ Air Sampler D Biological Sampling Point Soil Sampling Point
- WVDP c:::J Location Sampled Routinely c:::J Periodic Confirmatory Sampling WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 A-31
Appendix A. 2012 Environmental Mon itoring Program FIGURE A-14 Population by Sector Within 80 Kilometers of the WVDP (2002 Estimate) N Lake Ontario
\ A Ontario, Canada I
I WNW/ NEW YORK PENNSYLVANIA 6109 Legend s 6109 =Population by Sector References U S Department of Commerce, 2000, URS, 2002 (0*20 km radius of WI/OP) Statistics Canada, 2001 A-32 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calen dar Year 201 2
APPENDIX B-1 Summary of Water Limits, Guidelines, and Standards TABLE 8-lA West Valley Demonstration Project State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Sampling Program
. . Outfa//.. 001 .* Parameter. ** Effluent.Limit Sample Frequency Flow Monitor - MGD Continuous Aluminum 4.0 mg/L 1/batch Ammonia as (NH 3 ) 2.1 mg/L 2/batch pH 6.5-8.5 SU 1/batch Dissolved Oxygen (DO) 3.0 mg/L (minimum) 2/batch Oil and grease 15.0 mg/L 1/batch Solids, total suspended 45 mg/L 2/batch Solids, Settleable 0.3 ml/L 2/batch Solids, Total dissolved Monitor 2/batch BOD5 10.0 mg/L 2/batch TKN (as N) Monitor 2/batch Nitrate (as N) Monitor 1/batch Nitrite (as N) 0.1 mg/L 1/batch Ultimate oxygen demand (UOD) 22.0 mg/L 2/batch Chlorine, total residual 0.1 mg/L 1/batch Arsenic, total recoverable 0.15 mg/L 1/batch Cadmium, total recoverable 0.002 mg/L 1/year Iron, total Monitor 2/batch Chromium, total recoverable 0.11 mg/L 2/year Chromium, hexavalent, total recoverabl_e 0.011 mg/L 1/year Copper, total recoverable 0.014 mg/L 2/year 001; Process and Cyanide, amenable to chlorination 0.005 mg/L 2/year Storm Wastewater Manganese, total 2.0 mg/L 2/year Lead, total recoverable 0.006 mg/L 2/year Nickel, total 0.079 mg/L 2/year Selenium, total recoverable 0.004 mg/L 1/batch Sulfate Monitor 1/batch Sulfide, dissolved 0.4 mg/L 1/batch Cobalt, total recoverable 0.005 mg/L 1/batch Vanadium, total recoverable 0.014 mg/L
- 1/batch Zinc, total recoverable 0.13 mg/L 2/year Dichlorodifluoromethane 0.01 mg/L 1/year Trichlorofluoromethane 0.01 mg/L 1/year 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine 0.01 mg/L 1/year Tributylphospha~e 0.1 mg/L 1/year Heptachlor 0.01 µg/L 2/year Surfactant (as LAS) - interim Monitor 1/batch Surfactant (as LAS) - final 0.04 mg/L 1/batch Xylene 0.05 mg/L 1/year 2-butanone 0.5 mg/L 1/year Hexachlorobenzene 0.2 µg/L 1/year Mercury, total 50 ng/L 1/batch Alpha- BHC 0.01 µg/L 1/year WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 8-1
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-lA (continued) West Valley Demonstration Project State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Sampling Program
.. . Outfafl 001 .,.,(
'" /, : ... fi',arameter ..
- Action L~vels. .. sample Freqyency Antimony 1.0 mg/L 1/year Barium 0.5 mg/L 1/year Boron 2.0 mg/L 2/year Bromide 5.0 mg/L 2/year Chloroform 0.3 mg/L 1/year 001; Process and Titanium 0.65 mg/L 2/year Storm Wastewater Whole Effluent Toxicity (WET) Testing WET - Acute Invertebrate 0.3 TUa 4/year WET - Acute Vertebrate 0.3 TUa 4/year WET - Chronic Invertebrate 1.0 TUc 4/year WET - Chronic Vertebrate 1.0 TUc 4/year
*. Outfall .007 . .*Para.meter ..., Effluent Limit ... $pmple. Frequency
- pH 6.5-8.5 SU 2/month Dissolved oxygen (DO) 3.0 mg/L (minimum) 2/month Flow Monitor - MGD 1/month Oil and Grease 15.0 mg/L 2/month Solids, total suspended 45 mg/L 2/month Solids, settleable 0.3 ml/L 2/month Solids, total dissolved Monitor 2/month BOD 5 10.0 mg/L 2/month Ammonia (as NH 3 ) 2.1 mg/L 2/month TKN (as N) Monitor 1/month 007; Sanitary and Nitrite (as N) 0.1 mg/L 1/month Utility Wastewater Ultimate oxygen demand (UOD) 22.0 mg/L 1/month Iron, total Monitor 2/month Chlorine, total residual 0.1 mg/L 1/month Mercury, total - interim limit . 200 ng/L 1/month Mercury, total - final limit 50 ng/L 1/month Chloroform 0.20 mg/L 1/year Whole EffluentToxicity (WET) Testing WET - Acute Invertebrate 0.3 TUa 4/year WET - Acute Vertebrate 0.3 TUa 4/year WET - Chronic Invertebrate l.OTuc 4/year WET - Chronic Vertebrate l.OTUc 4/year Outfall01B Parameter Action Levels Sample Frequency 018; Mercury Pre- Flow Monitor - MGD Continuous Treatment Process Mercury, total Monitor - 50 ng/L 2/batch
~su~ of Outfalf$ , : .: Pat:.af7?e.t~t:. :., *: ,,;, ! Ai;tfon. L~ve.fs si:fmf.?le F,requency .
001 and007 Iron, total Monitor - 1.0 mg/L 1/inonth B-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
. Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-lA (concluded}
West Valley Demonstration Project State Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (SPDES) Sampling Program
- Action L'e'ilels .*scimpJe'Frequ~ricY,:
- 116 Solids, total dissolved Monitor - 500 mg/L 2/discharge event
; ., Pardmeter ,,, ',., .,
- Monii<ifing Po1fif "**~..
*
- r * .* *complianlli'11Jn;t sample Frequency; Storm water Outfalls (All} Oil & grease <15 mg/L 1/event Outfall S43 Lead, total recoverable 0.006 mg/L 1/event WVDP Annual Site* Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 8-3
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-lB 3 New York State Water Quality Standards and Guidelines
;:,', ..*;/;... 'Parameter ' Units. * * , ,Class'A'. ; '** *:. <flassB.*,* .. Clas5C ... cJass D Class ..GA .,
Gross Alohab pCi/l (µCi/ml) 15 (1.5E-08) -- -- -- 15 (1.SE-08) Gross Betac pCi/l (µCi/ml) 1,000 (lE-06) -- - -- 1,000 (lE-06) Tritium (H-3) pCi/l (µCi/ml) 20,000 (2E-05) -- -- -- -- Strontium-90 pCi/l (µCi/ml) 8 (8E-09) -- -- -- -- Alpha BHC mg/l 0.000002 0.000002 0.000002 0.000002 0.00001 Aluminum, Dissolved mg/l 0.10 0.10 0.10 -- -- Aluminum, Total mg/l -- -- -- -- -- Ammonia, Total as N mg/l 0.09-2.1 0.09-2.1 0.09-2.1 0.67-29 2.0 Antimony, Total mg/l 0.003 -- -- -- 0.003 Arsenic, Dissolved mg/l 0.050 0.150 0.150 0.340 -- Arsenic, Total mg/l 0.050 -- -- -- 0.025 Barium, Total mg/l 1.00 -- -- -- 1.00 d d Beryllium, Total mg/l 0.003 -- 0.003 Boron, Total mg/l 10.0 10.0 10.0 -- 1.00 Bromide mg/l 2.00 -- -- -- 2.00 Cadmium Dissolved" mg/l -- -- -- -- -- Cadmium, Total mg/l 0.005 -- -- -- 0.005 Calcium, Total mg/l -- -- -- -- - Chloride mg/l 250 -- -- -- 250 Chromium, Dissolved" mg/l -- -- -- -- Chromium, Total mg/l 0.05 -- -- -- 0.05 Cobalt, Tota~ mg/l 0.005 0.005 0.005 0.110 -- Conductivity umhos/cm@25°C -- -- -- -- -- Conner, Dissolved" mg/l -- -- -- -- -- Copper, Total mg/l 0.20 -- - -- 0.20 Cyanide mg/l 0.0052 0.0052 0.0052 0.22 0.200 Dissolved Oxygen (minimum) mg/l 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 -- Fluoride" mg/l -- -- -- -- 1.5 Hardness mg/l -- -- -- -- -- Iron and Manganese {sum) mg/l -- -- -- -- 0.500 Iron, Total mg/l 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30 0.30
-- No applicable guideline or reference standard available.
Note: All water quality and metals standards are presented in mg/L (ppm) to provide consistency in comparisons.
*Source: 6 NYCRR Part 702 - 704; The most stringent applicable pathway (e.g.,wildlife, aquatic, human health) values are reported.
b Gross alpha standard includes radium-226 but excludes radon and uranium, however WVDP results include these isotopes. c Gross beta standard excludes strontium-90 and alpha emitters, however WVDP results include these isotopes. d Beryllium standard for classes "B" and "C" are based on stream hardness values.
*Standards for these constituents vary according to stream location hardness values.
1 Standards for cobalt, thallium, and vanadium are applicable to the acid soluable fraction. g Applies to the sum of those organic substances which have individual human health water source standards listed at 0.100 mg/Lor less in 6 NYCRR Part 703.5. h pH shall not be lower than 6.5 or the pH of natural groundwater, whichever is lower, nor shall pH be greater than 8.5 or the pH of the natural groundwater, whichever is greater. B-4 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-18 (concluded) New York State Water Quality Standards and Guidelines"
,.Parameter.,,~ Units Class A , CfassB Class C C/a~s D, Class GA Lead, Dissolvede mg/L -- -- -- -- --
Lead, Total mg/L 0.050 -- -- -- 0.025 Magnesium, Total mg/L 35.0 -- -- -- 35.0 Manganese, Total mg/L 0.30 -- -- -- 0.30 Mercury, Dissolved mg/L 0.0000007 0.0000007 0.0000007 0.0000007 -- Mercury, Total mg/L 0.0007 - -- -- 0.0007 Nickel, Dissolvede mg/L -- -- -- -- -- Nickel, Total mg/L 0.10 -- -- -- 0.10 Nitrate-N mg/L 10.0 -- -- -- 10.0 Nitrate + Nitrite mg/L 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 Nitrite-N mg/L 0.10 0.10 0.10 -- 1.00 NPOCg mg/L 0.10 -- -- -- -- Oil & Grease mg/L -- -- -- -- -- pH SU 6.5-8.Sh 6.5-8.5h 6.5-8.Sh 6.0-9.5 6.5-8.Sh Potassium, Total mg/L -- -- -- -- -- Selenium, Dissolved mg/L 0.0046 0.0046 0.0046 -- -- Selenium, Total mg/L 0.01 - -- -- 0.01 Silver, Total mg/L 0.05 -- -- -- 0.05 Sodium, Total mg/L - -- -- -- 20.0 Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 500 500 500 -- 500 Solids, Total Suspended mg/l -- -- -- -- -- Sulfate mg/L 250 -- -- -- 250 Sulfide (undissociated form) mg/L 0.002 0.002 0.002 -- 0.050 (as HS) Surfactants (as LAS) mg/L 0.04 0.04 0.04 -- -- Thallium, Totatf mg/L 0.0005 0.008 0.008 0.020 '0.0005 Titanium, Total mg/L -- -- -- -- -- TOX (total organic halides)g mg/L 0.10 -- -- -- -- Vanadium, Totatf mg/L 0.014 0.014 0.014 0.190 -- Zinc, Dissolvede mg/L -- -- -- -- -- Zinc, Total mg/L 2.00 -- -- -- 2.00
-- No applicable guideline or reference standard available.
Note: All water quality and metals standards are presented in mg/L (ppm) to provide consistency in comparisons.
*Source: 6 NYCRR Part 702 - 704; The most stringent applicable pathway (e.g., wildlife, aquatic, human health) values are reported.
b Gross alpha standard includes radium-226 but excludes radon and uranium, however WVDP results include these isotopes. c Gross beta standard excludes strontium-90 and alpha emitters, however WVDP results include these isotopes. d Beryllium standard for classes "B" and "C" are based on stream hardness values.
*Standards for these constituents vary according to stream location hardness values.
1 Standards for cobalt, thallium, and vanadium are applicable to the acid so!uable fraction. g Applies to the sum of those organic substances which have individual human health water source standards listed at.0.100 mg/Lor less in 6 NYCRR Part 703.5. h pH shall not be lower than 6.5 or the pH of natural groundwater, whichever is lower, nor shall pH be greater than 8.5 or the pH of the natural groundwater, whichever is greater. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 B-5
Appendix 8. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-lC New York State Department of Health/U.S. EPA Potable Water MCLs, MCLGs and Raw Water Standards
.EPA .fVICLG.f, . Nrso~J;l I.law;*:
. h.
.. NYSDOHor Parameter f.lnits EPA_MCL a Water Standards c
- Gross Alpha pCi/L (µCi/ml) 15 (1.SE-08) 0 0 --
Gross Beta pCi/L (µCi/ml) 50 (SE-08)" 0 1,000 (lE-06) Tritium (H-3) pCi/l (µCi/ml) 20,000 (2E-05) -- -- Strontium-90 pCi/l (µCi/ml) 8 {8E-09) -- 10 (lE-08) Antimony, Total mg/l 0.006 0.006 -- Arsenic, Total mg/l 0.05 -- 0.05 Barium, Total mg/l 2.00 2.00 1.0 Beryllium, Total mg/l 0.004 0.004 -- cadmium, Total mg/L 0.005 0.005 0.01 Chromium, Total mg/l 0.10 0.10 -- Conductivity µmhos/cm@25°C - -- -- Copper, Total mg/l 1.3 1.3 <0.2 Cyanide mg/l 0.2 0.2 <0.1 E.Coli NA one positive sample 0 -- Fluoride mg/L 2.2 -- <1.5 Free Residual Chlorine mg/l 0.02 (min) 4.0 (max) -- -- Haloacetic Acids-Five (5) mg/l 0.060 -- -- Iron, Total mg/l 0.3 -- -- Lead, Total mg/l 0.015 0 0.05 Mercury, Total mg/l 0.002 0.002 0.005 Nickel, Total mg/l -- -- -- Nitrate-N mg/l 10 10 -- pH SU -- -- 6.5-8.5 POC (Principle Organic Contaminant) mg/l - 0.0005 - Selenium, Total mg/l 0.05 0.05 0.01 Solids, Total Dissolved mg/l - -- 500 Thallium, Total mg/l 0.002 0.0005 -- 2 or more Total Coliform NA 0 -- positive samples Total Trihalomethanes mg/l 0.080 -- -- Turbidity NTU 1(max) -- --
-- No applicable guideline or reference standard available.
Note: All water quality and metals standards are presented in mg/L (ppm) to provide consistency in comparisons. NA - Not applicable.
- MCL - Listed is NYSDOH or EPA Maximum Contaminant Levels. Sources:40 CFR Part 141and/orl0 NYCRR part 5, Subpart 5-1, Section 5-1.52, whichever is most stringent.
b MCLG - Maximum Contaminant Level Goal (non-enforceable) as listed in 40 CFR Part 141. c Source: 10 NYCRR Part 170.4 d Alpha guideline includes radium-226 but excludes radon and uranium, however WVDP results include these isotopes.
- Average annuat concentration assumed to oroduce a total bodv organ dose of 4 mrem/vr.
8-6 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-lD Department of Energy (DOE) Derived Concentration Standards (DCSs)" in Ingested Water
,. .Concentrotionin Ingested.
* *Radionuclide* Units' Wa,ter .*
0 Gross Alpha (as U-232) µCi/ml 9.8E-08 0 Gross Beta (as Sr-90) µCi/ml 1.lE-06 Tritium (H-3) µCi/ml 1.9E-03 Carbon-14 (C-14) µCi/ml 6.2E-05 Potassium-40 (K-40} µCi/ml 4.8E-06 Cobalt-60 (Co-60} µCi/ml 7.2E-06 Strontium-90 (Sr-90) µCi/ml 1.lE-06 Technetium-99 (Tc-99} µCi/ml 4.4E-05 lodine-129 (1-129} µCi/ml 3.3E-07 Cesium-137 (Cs-137} µCi/ml 3.0E-06 Europium-154 (Eu-154) µCi/ml 1.SE-05 Uranium-232 (U-232) µCi/ml 9.8E-08 Uranium-233 (U-233) µCi/ml 6.6E-07 Uranium-234 (U-234) µCi/ml 6.8E-07 Uranium-235 (U-235) µCi/ml 7.2E-07 Uranium-236 (U-236) µCi/ml 7.2E-07 Uranium-238 {U-238) µCi/ml 7.SE-07 Plutonium-238 (Pu-238} µCi/ml 1.SE-07 Plutonium-239 (Pu-239} µCi/ml 1.4E-07 Plutonium-240 (Pu-240) *µCi/ml 1.4E-07 Americium-241 (Am-241) µCi/ml 1.7E-07
- DCS: Derived Concentation Standard. DCSs are established in DOE-STD-1196-2011 and are defined as the concentration of a radiobuclide that, under conditions of continuous exposure for one year by one exposure mode, would result in an effective dose equivalent of 100 mrem (lmSv).
b Because there are no DCSs for gross alpha and gross beta concentrations, the DCSs for the most restrictive alpha and beta emitters in water at the WVDP, uranium-232 and strontium-90 (9.8E-08 and 1.lE-06 uCi/mL, respectively) are used as a conservative basis for comparison at locations for which there are no radionuclide-specific data, in which case a more appropriate DCS may be applied. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 8-7
Appendix 8. Summary of Water Monitoring Data This page intentionally left blank B-8 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data APPENDIX B-2 Process Effluent Data TABLE B-2A Comparison of 2012 Lagoon 3 (WNSPOOl} Liquid Effluent Radioactivity Concentrations With U.S. DOE-Derived Conentration Standards (DCSs)
., . Average . . .. DCSd . Ratio. of, *.
*Jsotope 0
~
- Disch'cirge Activityb .
- Concentration . Concentratiqn
" "' ' ' toDCS
" (ti) (Becquerelst [Jici/mi.J (HCi/inL)
Gross Alpha 1.10+/-0.09E-03 4.06+/-0.35E+07 3.48+/-0.30E-08 NAe NA Gross Beta 1.31+/-0.02E-02 4.84+/-0.08E+08 4.14+/-0.07E-07 NAe NA H-3 1.88+/-0.14E-02 6.94+/-0.51E+08 5.94+/-0.43E-07 l.9E-03 0.0003 C-14 0.21+/-4.14E-04 0.08+/-1.53E+07 0.07+/-1.31E-08 6.2E-05 <0.0002 K-40 -2.97+/-4.61E-04 -1.10+/-1. 70E+07 -0.94+/-1.46E-08 NN NA Co-60 0.22+/-2.35E-05 0.81+/-8. 70E+05 0.69+/-7.45E-10 7.2E-06 <0.0001 Sr-90 S.93+/-0.14E-03 2.19+/-0.0SE+08 1.88+/-0.04E-07 1.lE-06 0.1709 Tc-99 5.48+/-0.37E-04 2.03+/-0.14E+07 1.74+/-0.12E-08 4.4E-OS 0.0004 1-129 6.02+/-1.82E-05 2.23+/-0.67E+06 1.91+/-0.SSE-09 3.3E-07 0.0058 Cs-137 1.25+/-0.06E-03 4.61+/-0.23E+07 3.95+/-0.20E-08 3.0E-06 0.0132 U-232g 2.33+/-0.09E-04 8.62+/-0.34E+06 7.38+/-0.29E-09 9.8E-OS 0.0753 U-233/234g 1.68+/-0.08E-04 6.22+/-0.30E+06 5.32+/-0.26E-09 6.6E-07" 0.0081 U-235/236 9 S.77+/-1.47E-06 2.14+/-0.55E+05 1.83+/-0.47E-10 7.2E-07 0.0003 U-238g 1.25+/-0.07E-04 4.64+/-0.26E+06 3.97+/-0.22E-09 7.5E-07 0.0053 Pu-238 2.40+/-0.31 E-05 8.88+/-1.14E+05 7.60+/-0.98E-10 1.SE-07 0.0051 Pu-239/240 1.34+/-0.22E-05 4.95+/-0.80E+05 4.24+/-0.69E-10 1.4E-07 0.0030 Am-241 1.81+/-0.23E-05 6.68+/-0.84E+OS 5. 72+/-0. 72E-10 1.7E-07 0.0034 Sum of Ratios 0.29 NA - Not applicable.
*Half-lives are listed in Table Ul-4.
bTotal volume released: 3.16E+10 milliliters (ml) (8.34E+06 gal). c1 curie (Ci)= 3. 7E+10 becquerels (Bq): lBq =2.7E-11Ci;1 microcurie (µCi) =lE-06 Ci. d DCSs ~re used as reference values for the application of best available technology per DOE Order 458.1.
- DcSs do not exist for indicator parameters gross alpha and gross beta.
f The DCS is not applied to potassium-40 (K-40) activity because of its natural origin. cTotal uranium (g) = 3.69+/-0.07E+02; Average uranium [µg/mL) = l.17+/-0.02E-02. h The DCS for U-233 is used for this comparison. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 B-9
Appendix 8. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-2B 2012 SPDES Results for Outfall 001 (WNSPOOl): Water Quality ChloPine,*
*,. A.mmonici (as,fvH 3 ) B.OD 5 day Discharge Rate Tdtal Re_disua/. * *
- Permit limit, .1. ; (11}~/LJ.: * '
(mg/L} (MGD} I,*' ,. ,,,, ' .:fmg/LJ. o.i. mg/L daily "
*' --.* ,:,, . . 2.1, mg/L; '
daily 10.0 mg/l daily
~'l ~:' "<,'
Monitor .. maximum ma~imum '" 1 lnaliiniain
'Month Avg Mci£r : .Avg Max **Avg Max Avg ,. Max*
January 0 February 0.34 0.36 <2.0 <2.0 0.287 0.363 0.04 0.04 March *0.14 0.14 <2.0 <2.0 0.194 0.236 0.03 0.03 Apri/ 0 May 0.18 0.23 <2.4 2.8 0.216 0.301 0.07 0.07 a June -- -- -- -- - - - - July 0.039 0.054 2.9 3.0 0.195 0.207 0.01 0.01 Augusta - -- -- -- -- -- - -- September 0 October 0 November <0.013 '0.017 3.4 4.5 0.185 0.235 0.03 0.03 December 0
'i' l\Jitrogen,:total
* , ' ,J>issolved Oxygen .. c ' . Nit[pte (as .IJ.J . Nitrite 1!" ' '< * " . ' . f ', *<"
{as N)
, \" ~ '
K]eldahl (mg/l) * {mg/L) (mg/t)
- Permit limit * ..* . .. . 'ii' :1as NJ fma/LJ * '" :,,. . ~ <., ... _ ) .. ' J. : " : L.
3.0 mg/t:.mil1imucl .. Monitor ' .> 0.1 mg/L daily
,;r .,
Avg ***Avg Month Miii' "ht/a~ Max Nlax January 0 February 13 13 1.1 1.3 0.80 0.80 <0.02 <0.02 March 11 13 0.75 0.79 0.96 0.96 <0.02 <0.02 Apri/ 0 May 8.02 8.13 0.82 1.2 0.12 0.12 0.02 0.02 a June -- -- -- -- - -- - - July 4.3 5.6 1.0 1.4 <0.011 <0.011 <0.02 <0.02 Augusta - -- -- -- -- -- -- -- September 0 October 0 November 12 13 0.91 1.0 0.037 0.037 <0.02 <0.02 December 0 Note: No results exceeded the permit limits. MGD - Million gallons per day. a There was no discharge from outfall 001 during this month in 2012. B-10 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-2B (continued} 2012 SPDES Results for Outfall 001 (WNSPOOl); Water Quality f~ '. "~l ,t , \'{- 'f,,, ' i' 01 ' , '" " SO.lids, * ** ""' :Solids/' :' "'
- Oil & Grease '.pH
- Settleable: *Total Dissolved**~
I . ,: {mg/LY * (staridariiunftsl *
* (mL/L) *1 (mg/L) *:r.~: .1 ~::.
Permit.L;mit '(,'
~~~O,t;ng/L. daily, , 0,3 mL/L*daily . "* . Mon'it6f *,11, *:
. . . rripxi111~m,' ; ,. ,, , , fY!O}gm,µm 1, , , .**" .,., : , * ,,, .**h .::.;,*,, *. ,.
IVlontb M.in . .
- 1 .. M.ax. . Avg .. . fVl,qx * . . .* Avg., . , . /~lax,,, .
0 January February <1.5 <1.5 7.4 7.4 0.1 0.1 883 887 March <1.4 <1.4 7.0 7.0 <0.1, <0.1 816 846 0 Apri/ May <1.4 <1.4 7.5 7.5 <0.1 <0.1 849 908 June a July <1.4 <1.4 6.7 6.7 <0.1 <0.1 1040 1040 0 August 0 September 0 October November 3.0 3.0 7.5 7.5 <0.1 <0.1 '944 954 0 December Sulfide, (as S)
'! ":1* ,,., ,,, . *~
** 1s11rfactant fas tAsi"'
Dissolved
- r *' -:(mg/LJi" f.
r"19/i.l '* ',' <<.
. 'Al(g. ,.. Max Avg *Max***
0 January February <4.0 <4.0 60 60 <0.05 <0.05 0.036 0.036 March <4.0 <4.0 64 64 <0.05 <0.05 0.013 0.013 0 Apri/ May <4.0 4.0 53 53 <0.05 <0.05 <0.013 <0.013 0 June July <4.0 <4.0 100 100 <0.05 <0.05 0.0595 0.0595 0 August 0 September 0 October November <4.0 <4.0 88 88 <0.05 <0.05 0.039 0.039 0 Oecember Note: No results exceeded the permit limits. LAS - linear alkylate sulfonate.
*There was no discharge from outfall 001 during this month in 2012.
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 B-11
Appendix 8. Summary of Water Monitoring Data Table B-28 {concluded) 2012 SPDES Results for Outfall 001 (WNSPOOl): Water Quality Oltiniate oxygen Demand {UOD} 't' ; P'ermit Limit
. {rrig/Lf:.:, ..
22.0 mg/L aauy: ' maximum* Month **! ',,,, Avg' *;'!I' I' :*:Mqx . January 0 February <8.12 <8.94 March <6.40 <6.61 Apri/ 0 May <7.35 9.68 June 0 July 8.82 10.5 August 0 a September -- -- October 0 November 9.24 11.3 December 0 Note: No results exceeded the permit limits.
*There was no discharge from outfall 001 during this month in 2012.
B-12 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-2C 2012 SPDES Results for Outfall 001 (WNSPOOl): Metals
+. '* ,.:.*::*""'** *;, '"!duminum, "*, " ""'"""'Arsenic, * '* "" '" ""CcJ'JiiiYt, '** ' ' *., *z irori, '. "*
s**'"*'. '" r' ':\. '**"Totiit* ' ,. 'rotal"Retoverable
- r iot&lReeoiierbbi'e *. " " 'f~tal ~'
'"Permitliinit*'" *:* i 1 (m~Jrr " * * " ., *. '(rrig/t) ::' * *. * << ** (mg/i}. * *' :., '(fngJLJ *
' '"'." *** ,ir. 4.0mgfl daily * ., Q.1Smq/f..7lciil'tp . : o:Oo5 mg/L dailf'* ~ < ",,, ' ; "' , *""'
*' , "* maximum maximum**, * * "':maxitrium;'>"< ** > . M<mf~Pr;.,
Mon'th';, i * ,~, ,~ "Av!Jll Max*,,, ,, Avg* i Max 1'*** 'Av!J ;. .::. *tvliix' . * * J\vg * *. ' Mai . A 0 January February 0.32 0.32 0.002 0.002 <0.0006 <0.0006 0.480 0.517 March 0.30 0.30 0.0016 0.0016 <0.0006 <0.0006 0.329 0.348 0 Apri/ May 0.25 0.25 0.0016 0.0016 <0.0006 <0.0006 058 0.77 0 June July 0.38 0.38 0.0031 0.0031 0.0006 0.0006 1.8 2.0 0 August 0 September 0 October .- November 0.45 0.45 0.0029 0.0029 <0.0006 <0.0006 0.44 0.48 0
. December I'* ,; 1 , *,2\,......, I'*'~' .,;,!Vfe~f.Unf, '.:.: h SeleiJium, " *'I*<*< Vana'difJmf~ .. i **':I I'"
* :o. *.i.
'i! '. ,. "'.""
,.,: 1 r ,o~t:1/..... .,. Tota/,,Recovera/j/e . ,: 1,: .ro.
- ta/'Re~ove.('aljle~ . .:, '*"
.i?er111it,Liifli~,1,: ,;), .,., .,:(ng/L):,.*,: ,**I.':*.,,.: .,:(rng/LJ **.,. . '.. <:,,,,:(mf//M:;':*:~i *:
.. : . ~~;: * :5.P*'!,g/J,. . *, . ,,, . 0,;004 mg/L daily :; ,*~. 0,;0i~mg/IJ.daify*r .::
,, ,;. l;i.: ***:.: .~ .** 1... .:: m.gxim.urp ": , 1,.~ .. ""naximum. , . +,, r.,,*. ,,,,*.; m.aX.im.~m*: .. ,,fa
- M.ant.h..1w:;.*1;1.,: ?,"' ...,,,,,...Avg," . , ,, MqJ< ,,.,, 1:. Avg.:,.: .. ,,Mm<:.'ii *..'*:*i.4vg:*. ,,,: **4 fl!lpx, . ,:,,,,;
0 January February 42 42 0.0006 0.0006 0.0011 0.0011 March 25 25 <0.0004 <0.0004 <0.0015 <0.0015 0
. Apri/
May 9.08 9.08 0.0006 0.0006 <0.0015 <0.0015 0 June July 5.63 5.63 <0.0004 <0.0004 <0.0015 <0.0015 0 August 0 September 0 October November 5.49 5.49 <0.0004 <0.0004 <0.0015 <0.0015 0 December Note: No results exceeded the permit limits.
*There was no discharge from outfall 001 during this month in 2012.
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 8-13
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-20 2012 SPDES Results for Outfall 007 (WNSP007): Water Quality and Iron
'AmmifnN:t * ,*" ..,, .":*',"'\')*;:.,:?*!
.... ;">>'. cfitorine~* * ' Dissolved*:,**.:
., *w'; 1:. >. .: ,: ""'"' ,.,:, 1*** *"Bea's *." "tJ'talResiCJuii1 * *D!scharge.:Riite (as Nlf 3 ) Oxygen
* " (mg/LJ'.'* 1 * ~ .(MtW}..* *, ' , '
* >) ' ti
*:1 '" ,, '"' '" ~ ... ~' f, ' ~)\ 'j.~
*;;,,,, ....: ' , <*. (!:ng/L) . . ..
1' < , 2:*
. R~rmit litpit *, ... (mg/l) ,, ... ;, '" "
(mg/i:)
~*~: ,"*h.<(;, \; :P:J: 'JI~~~ .~gi{y ' ' : :,.', ..MonitOr
,2.1.mg/L:cfafly.: .10.Q. mgtl daily * ' '
. 3,0mg/L' da)ly:**
J
*' '?* '~
"'"' maximum I** I'* ma,XImU11},;;,'.**:.
'*" ,;> .- ' -: ' : ,/''"
"'":rnq)(im~m .:..... , - *~
,,,\,
~,,
,. mm1,mu171,
,' .:.,,i, ,,, '
M.on~h. *'i,, ,;>.. Avg"i>' **:Maxi** .:.Avg:*.... : .. /111iix*. ,../!ivg,.,, , fY/ax, .,fAvg. , Mqx" Mill.**** ,ivtqx, 0 January February 0.10 0.15 <2.3 2.5 0.01 0.01 0.004 0.007 12 12 March '0.058 0.073 <2.0 2.0 0.01 0.01 0.006' 0.011 12 14 April 0.046 0.058 <2.0 <2.0 0.02 0.02 0.005 0.008 12 12 May 0.032 0.044 <2.0 <2.0 0.01 0.01 0.005 0.008 11 14 June 0.036 0.040 <2.2 2.3 0.01 0.01 0.004 0.010 8.7 9.4 July 0.039 0.049 <2.0 <2.0 0.02 0.02 0.003 0.008 9.4 9.7 August 0.027 0.027 <2.0 <<2.0 0.02 0.02 0.006 0.009 8.2 8.2 0 September October 0.033 0.041 <2.0 <2.0 0.02 0.02 0.009 0.015 9.0 9.7 November 0.020 0.030 <2.6 3.1 0.01 0.01 0.008 0.020 10 11 December 0.031 0.031 3.3 3.4 0.02 0.02 0.010 0.019 11 12 February 0.126 0.128 74.4 74.4 <0.15 <0.15 0.04 0.04 <1.4 <1.4 March 0.0809 0.115 13.6 13.6 0.17 0.17 <0.02 <0.02 <2.9 4.3 April 0.044 0.050 9.71 9.71 <0.15 <0.15 <0.02 <0.02 <1.4 <1.4 May 0.032 0.036 7.75 7.75 <0.15 <0.15 <0.02 <0.02 <1.8 2.2 June 0.045 0.050 15.5 15.5 <0.15 <O.:i5 <0.02 <0.02 <1.4 <1.4 July <0.026 0.032 10.9 10.9 <0.15 <0.15 <0.02 <0.02 <1.4 <1.4 August 0.027 0.027 12.7 12.7 <0.15 <0.15 <0.02 <0.02 <1.4 <1.4 0 September October 0.077 0.11 17.1 17.1 <3.0 <3.0 0.037 0.037 <1.4 <1.4 November 0.030 0.037 20.8 20.8 <0.15 <0.15 0.04 0.04 <1.4 <1.4 December 0.079 ci.13 18.7 18.7 0.47 0.47 <0.02 <0.02 <3.4 5.4 Note: No results exceeded the permit limits. MGD - Million gallons per day.
*rhere was no discharge from outfall 007 during January and September 2012, and only one discharge in August 2012.
8-14 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix 8. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-20 (concluded) 2012 SPDES Results for Outfall 007 (WNSP007): Water Quality
... Soliqs Sp/ids Solids *Ultimate Oxygen .
' .. pH Settleable Total Dissolved fotal Suspended Demand (standard.units} ,.,, j
- P"er~it Limit (mL/l} (mg/L) .(mg/LJ. (mg/l} ...
. G.stos.s**
maximum 0.3 ml/L daiiy maximum* M9nitor 45 mg/l daily maximum 22.0 mg/L daily maximum Mb nth a
. Min Max . Avg' '/VJ ax Avg Mltx Avg Max Avg
- Max January -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --
February 6.7 7.7 <0.1 <0.1 1240 1260 <4.0 <4.0 <4.44 <4.44 March 7.5 8.0 <0.1 <0.1 959 1210 <4.0 <4.0 3.78 3.78 April 7.9 8.1 <0.1 <0.1 . 828 944 <4.0 <4.0 <3.69 <3.69 May 7.5 8.0 <0.1 <0.1 967 994 <4.0 <4.0 <3.69 <3.69 June 7.5 7.7 <0.1 <0.1 989 1220 <4.0 <4.0 <3.69 <3.69 July. 7.3 7.5 <0.1 <0.1 691 778 <4.0 <4.0 <3.69 <3.69 August 7.7 7.7 <0.1 <0.1 452 452 <4.0 <4.0 <3.69 <3.69 September 0 -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- - - October 8.1 8.2 <0.1 <0.1 972 994 <4.0 <4.0 <16.7 <16.7 November 6.8 6.8 <0.1 <0.1 628 730 <4.0 <4.0 <5.34 <5.34 December 6.6 6.7 <0.1 <0.1 443 469 <4.0 <4.0 7.25 7.25 Note: No results exceeded the permit limits. a There was no discharge from outfall 007 during January and September 2012 and only one discharge in August 2012. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 8-15
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-2E 2012 SPDES Results for Sums of Outfalls 001, 007, and 116: Water Quality Iron. To.ta/~ . . .,,., N.et Effluent.Limitation
' Permit limit .
_,--" ~ ~', 1.0mg/l d~ify maxim~m' ( Month Avg* " Max January 0.00 *o.oo February 0.20 0.20 March 0.01 0.01 April 0.00 0.00 May 0.33 0.33 June 0.00 0.00 July <0.86 <0.86 August 0.00 0.00 September 0.00 0.00 October 0.00 0.00 November 0.23 0.23 December 0.00 0.00
*Sum of Outfalls 001 and 007.
Total Dissolveci'soUds'13 . ~:
'1,} ~ 'o" ,~* ;
(mg/Lf**
J~errnl( Li1:r1U soo*mg/l daily
,, d
*maximum ,. .*;
Nfonttr *' 'Avg:: :.* Max -, "'" c January -- -- February 336 387 March 317 336 Aprifc -- -- May 355 386 June' -- -- July 469 471 August' -- -- September' -- -- October' -- - November 305 317 December' -- -- b Outfall 116 only. c There was no discharge from outfall 001 during this month in 2012, therefore, a calculated TDS at 116 is not required. B-16 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix 8. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-2F 2012 Annual and Semiannual SPDES Results for Outfall 001: Metals, Water Quality and Organic Compounds Per:mit,Limit Parameters PermiHimit Monitoring
,,.,, ~a.r!1p~e * ..
Maximum Frequency Date.; ,, Measured 0.5 mg/L 2-Butanone Annual March 2012 <0.002 daily maximum 0.01 mg/L 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine Annual March 2012 <0.0008 daily maximum 0.01 ug/L Alpha-BHC Annual March 2012 <0.007 daily maximum 0.002 mg/L Cadmium, Total Recoverable Annual March 2012 <0.00002 daily maximum 0.011 mg/L Chromium VI, Total Recoverable Annual March 2012 0.0061 daily maximum 0.11 mg/L February 2012 0.0015 Chromium, Total Recoverable Semiannual daily maximum July 2012 0.0015 0.014mg/L February 2012 0.0068 Copper, Total Recoverable Semiannual daily maximum July 2012 0.0043 0.005 mg/L February 2012 <0.005 Cyanide, Amenable to chlorination Semiannual daily maximum July 2012 <0.005 0.01 mg/L Dichlorodifluoromethane Annual February 2012 <0.0003 daily maximum 0.01 ug/L February 2012 <0.006 Heptachlor Semiannual daily maximum July 2012 <0.007 0.2 ug/L Hexachlorobenzene Annual February 2012 <0.01 daily maximum 0.006 mg/L February 2012 0.003 Lead, Total Recoverable Semiannual daily maximum July 2012 0.002 2.0 mg/L February 2012 0.023 Manganese, Total Semiannual daily maximum July 2012 0.20 0.079 mg/L February 2012 0.0033 Nickel, Total Semiannual daily maximum July 2012 0.0048 0.1 mg/L Tributyl phosphate Annual March 2011 <0.0008 daily maximum 0.01 mg/L Trichlorofluoromethane Annual March 2012 <0.0005 daily maximum 0.05 mg/l Xylene Annual March 2012 <0.001 daily maximum 0.13 mg/L February 2012 0.011 Zinc, Total Recoverable Semiannual daily maximum July 2012 0.0074 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 8-17
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-2G 2012 SPDES Action Level Requirement Monitoring Results for Outfalls 001 and 007 Metals and Water Quality
- ' :; 'out]./11/'i ., *, Actionl.eve.f JWpn~t~r.i.mL,, , ?,~mpling , Maximum
~<l f,.,, /S , '\,.< *f>'(c, :~,;* *
** , Parameters . .. .*'Atticin Lever*
' ,, l Fn~qt1ency *.
Date
' ?
flil~asured/mg}L) 1.0 mg/L daily Antimony, Total Annual March 2012 <0.0068 maximum 0.5 mg/L daily Barium, Total Annual March 2012 0.01 maximum 2.0 mg/L daily February 2012 0.058 Boron, Total Semiannual maximum July 2012 0.047 001 5.0 mg/L daily February 2012 0.28 Bromide, Total Semiannual maximum July 2012 0.52 0.3 mg/L daily Chloroform Annual March 2012 <0.0005 maximum 0.65 mg/L daily February 2012 0.0062 Titanium, Total Semiannual maximum July 2012 0.0063 0.3 mg/L daily 007 Chloroform Annual Jul_y 2012 0.06 maximum TABLE B-2H 2012 SPDES Results for Outfall 018 (WNSP01B): Water Quality Internal process monitoring point did not operate during 2012 B-18 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix 8. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-21 0 2012 PARAQUAT DICHLORIDE Data for Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Sampling for herbicides was not requfred in 2012. a The site did not apply any of the herbicide Paraquat Dichloride at the WVDP in 2012. Therefore, in accordance with the SPDES permit, no sampling from the drainage basins potentially affected by the application of herbicide is required. TABLE B-2J 2012 Radioactivity Results for Sewage Treatment Outfall (WNSP007) Average Ratio of 1;?;,,* 'Nb" '. f?ischa~~e A<;~~vity.b . .~
- teoncentration
. . D.qs Isotope'° " 1 *Concentration
,., . {Ci). {Beiquerels) c (µCi/ml) {µCi/ml) tpDCS Gross Alpha 10 3.34+/-5.69E-06 1.24+/-2.lOE+OS 0.73+/-1.25E-09 NA* NA Gross Beta 10 7 .38+/-0.SOE-05 2.73+/-0.19E+06 1.62+/-0.llE-08 NA* NA Tritium 10 1.19+/-1.37E-04 4.39+/-5.08E+o6 2.60+/-3.0lE-08 1.9E-03 <0.00002 sr-90 1 4.69+/-5.38E-06 1.74+/-1.99E+OS 1.03+/-1.18E-09 1.lE-06 <0.0011 Cs-137 1 0.00+/-1. 7 4E-05 0.00+/-6.44E+OS 0.00+/-3.82E-09 3.0E-06 <0.0013 Sum of Ratios <0.0024 N-Number of samples.
NA - Not applicable. a Half-lives are listed in Table Ul-4. b Discharge from the sewage treatment outfall was discontinued and secured in October, 2011 due to a mercury permit exceedence. Discharge from the outfall was restarted on February 14, 2012. There are ten samples because there was also no discharge in September 2012.
<Total volume released; 1.20E+06 gal, (4.56E+09 ml).
d 1 curie (Ci)= 3.7E+10 becquerels (Bq); 1Bq=2.7E-11 Ci. e DOE derived concentration standards (DCSs) do not exist for indicator parameters gross alpha and beta. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 B-19
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data This page intentionally left blank B-20 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix 8. Summary of Water Monitoring Data APPENDIX B-3 SPDES-Permitted Storm Water Outfall Discharge Data TABLE B-3A 2012 Storm Water Dis-charge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 1 STORM WATER OUTFALL S04
" Flaw-weighted Aimlyte *
'~ e
'
- iJiiit~ N FirstFlush Gra*b * /' ' ' '
Composite 03/08/12 03/08/12 Aluminum, Total mg/L 2 1.7 0.49 Ammonia (as NH 3 ) mg/L 2 <0.0090 0.020 BOD5 mg/l 2 <2.0 <2.0 Cadmium, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 <0.000018 <0.000090 Chromium, Total Recoverable mg/l 2 0.0012 <0.0010 Chromium, Hexavalent, Total Recoverable mg/l 2 <0.0050 <0.0050 Copper, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.011 0.020 Iron, Total mg/l 2 3.7 0.58 Lead, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0040 0.0017 Nitrogen, Nitrate (as N) mg/L 2 0.47 0.22 Nitrogen, Nitrite (as N) mg/L 2 <0.020 <0.020 Nitrogen, Total (as N) mg/l 2 <0.82 <1.0 Nitrogen, Total Kjeldahl mg/l 2 o.33 0.80 0 Oil & Grease mg/l 1 11.5 NR pH SU 1 8.0 NR Phosphorous, Total mg/l 2 0.11 0.056 Selenium, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 <0.00044 <0.00044 Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 2 1710 4620 Solids, Total Suspended mg/L 2 120 18 Vanadium, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0027 <0.0015 Zinc, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.039 0.016
. " *
- Rain Event Summary pH of Rainfall During Sampling Event SU 1 7.0 Rainfall During Sampling Event inches -- 0.18 Total Flow During Sampling Event gallons -- 220,000 Maximum Flow Rate During Sampling Event gpm -- 1,400 gpm - gallons per minute.
N - Number of samples. NR - Not required by permit.
*The SPDES permit specifies that oil and grease concentration shall not exceed 15 mg/L WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 8-21
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-3A (concluded) 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 1 STORM WATER OUTFALL 504
* *. Flow-weighted,
,:*:q;';:. '* "*\/.(p~Jyte'* *, " **units *
- N
. , First.Flush Grqb
'"' ' >,*:':*/r,: ~ _ ,, ~'*.,,.;; ',, ,p
~: 0
,.,:
- Composite w,,,* \
10/23/12'. 10/23/12 Aluminum, Total mg/L 3 o.31I0.41 0.74 Ammonia (as NH3 ) mg/L 3 <0.009 J <0.009 <0.009 BOD5 mg/L 3 <2.o I <2.0 2.2 Cadmium, Total Recoverable mg/L 3 <0.000018 /<0.000027 <0.000095 Chromium, Total Recoverable mg/L 3 0.00052 J o.ooos1 0.00098 Chromium, Hexavalent, Total Recoverable mg/L 3 0.0051 J <0.005 <0.005 Copper, Total Recoverable mg/L 3 0.0014 / 0.0014 0.0023 Iron, Total mg/L 3 o.35 J o.5o 0.92 Lead, Total Recoverable mg/L 3 0.0010 I 0.0012 0.0013 Nitrogen, Nitrate (as N) mg/L 3 <0.011 J 0.12 0.089 Nitrogen, Nitrite (as N) mg/L 3 <0.020 I <0.020 <0.020 Nitrogen, Total {as N) mg/L 3 <0.30 I <0.36 <0.53 Nitrogen, Total Kjeldahl mg/L 3* 0.21J0.22 0.42 0 Oil & Grease mg/L 2 <1.4/ <1.4 NR pH SU 1 7.1 NR Phosphorous, Total mg/L 3 o.098 J o.033 0.022 Selenium, Total Recoverable mg/L 3 <0.00044 I <0.00044 <0.00044 Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 3 352/ 354 195 Solids, Total Suspended mg/L 3 7.6 I 8.o 21 Vanadium, Total Recoverable mg/L 3 0.00034 I 0.00035
- 0.0013 Zinc, Total Recoverable mg/L 3 0.0058 I 0.0080 0.012
.. Rain Event Summary i -
pH of Rainfall During Sampling Event SU 1 6.1 Rainfall During Sampling Event inches - 0.89 Total Flow During Sampling Event gallons - 1,300,000 Maximum Flow Rate During Sampling Event gpm -- 13,000 Note: The first flush grab samples were sampled and analyzed in duplicate. gpm - gallons per minute. N - Number of samples. NR - Not required by permit. a The SPDES permit specifies that oil and grease concentration shall not exceed 15 mg/L. B-22 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-38 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitor.ing Data for Outfall Group 2 STORM WATER OUTFALL SOG
,. . ; F.low~weighted **
*,,; ;.\'
' ~,,, '
First Flush Grab Apq/yte ,*. Units 'N ,. *Composite* '.
. ' .. 05/08/12 "' ' .. 05/08/12 Aluminum, Total mg/L 2 <0.068 0.20 BOD 5 mg/L 2 9.2 18 Copper, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.00056 0.00095 Iron, Total mg/L 2 0.15 2.2 Lead, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 <0.00050 <0:00050 0
Oil & Grease mg/L 1 <1.5 NR pH SU 1 6.8 NR Phosphorous, Total mg/L 2 0.062 0.059 Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 2 451 541 Solids, Total Suspended mg/L 2 <2.3 8.5 Surfactant (as LAS) mg/L 2 <0.016 <0.016 Zinc, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0058 0.013
; ','1' }'1 '* ,, : Rain.EventSummary . .. .. ' ' "' ',*, *""' ""
pH of Rainfall During Sampling Event SU 1 7.7 Rainfall During Sampling Event inches -- 0.51 Total Flow During Sampling Event gallons -- 20,000 Maximum Flow Rate During Sampling Event gpm -- 170 gpm - gallons per minute. N - Number of samples. NR - Not required by permit.
"The SPDES permit specifies that oil and grease concentration shall not exceed 15 mg/L.
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 8-23
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-3B (concluded) 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 2 STORM WATER OUTFALL S33
'" *: ,., . ,,..*. *: '* .* <>o'o,, *: : . :
Flow-weightecf"".
- I*: *' :- ~irst Flush Grab, .,
Ana1~e 1
,,_i, ,. ' _,r , ... .*,, ,,,,
Units,, *'
'/(fl
'* composite 1l',,'
.* ' '10/23/12 : I'"
.. iiJ/23/12 :
Aluminum, Total mg/L 2 0.12 0.096 BOD5 mg/L 2 2.1 2.1 Copper, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.00085 0.00071 Iron, Total mg/L 2 2.6 1.6 Lead, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.00023 0.00013 0 Oil & Grease mg/L 1 <1.4 NR pH SU 1 7.1 NR Phosphorous, Total mg/L 2 0.14 0.047 Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 2 313 280 Solids, Total Suspended mg/L 2 14 6.0 Surfactant (as LAS) mg/L 2 0.031 <0.013 Zinc, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0052 0.0032
'** :* , ~,., ,, n,
'. 1? '"" . RaifJ1ElienfSutnmtrry* s Y. . ' " '* "*: .
pH of Rainfall During Sampling Event SU 1 6.1 Rainfall During Sampling Event inches ' -- 0.90 Total Flow During Sampling Event gallons -- 250,000 Maximum Flow Rate During Sampling Event gpm -- 1,800 gpm - gallons per minute. N - Number of samples. NR- Not required by permit.
"The SPDES permit specifies that oil and grease concentration shall not exceed 15 mg/L.
8-24 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-3C 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 3 STORM WATER OUTFALLS12
.,, ' Flow-weighted .
First Flush Grab Anafyte Units N ,<' Composite
,. "', , ~
' 05/08/12' 05/08/12 "'-i,
<0.0000067 Alpha-BHC 3 <0.0000067 mg/L <0.0000067 Aluminum, Total mg/L 3 3.3 / 3.3 3.9 Ammonia (as NH 3 ) mg/L 3 0.034 J 0.035 0.030 BOD5 mg/L 3 <2.o I <2.o <2.0 Copper, Total Recoverable mg/L 3 0.013 J 0.011 0.011 Iron, Total mg/L 3 4.2 / 4.3 5.1 Lead, Total Recoverable mg/L 3 0.0045 / 0.0042 0.0054 Mercury, Total" (1631E) ng/L 1 45.7 NR Nitrogen, Nitrate (as N) mg/L 3 0.14/ 0.16 0.012 Nitrogen, Nitrite (as N) mg/L 3 0.051 / 0.048 0.046 Nitrogen, Total (as N) mg/L 3 0.55 / 0.39 0.41 Nitrogen, Total Kjeldahl mg/L 3 0.36 / 0.18 0.35 0
Oil & Grease mg/L 2 <1.4 I <1.4 NR pH SU 2 6.5 I 6.5 NR Phosphorous, Total mg/L 3 0.31/0.26 0.27 Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 3 185 / 201 271 Solids, Total Suspended mg/L 3 124 / 125 140 Zinc; Total Recoverable mg/l 3 o.o5s J 0.054 0.051 Rain Event Summary ' "' " pH of Rainfall During Sampling Event SU 1 7.7 Rainfall During Sampling Event inches -- 0.51 Total Flow During Sampling Event gallons -- 60,000 Maximum Flow Rate During Sampling Event gpm -- 660 Note: The first flush grab samples were sampled and analyzed in duplicate. gpm - gallons per minute. N - Number of samples. NR- Not required by permit. 8 The SPOES permit requires that Group 3 outfalls be analyzed for mercury as part of the Mercury Minimization Program. b The SP DES permit specifies that oil and grease concentration shall not exceed 15 mg/L. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 B-25
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-3C (concluded) 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 3 STORM WATER OUTFALL S09
. Flow~~eighied First Flush 'Grab ** '
" j
' Analyte" ' i' *" l' *Units ' N ,, , Compqsite "'* ,-,,,.
'11/12/12 ,,
'" ,, '*, '",-- *'\ ii',, ,,;"-*'
**11/12/12 ,.
Alpha-BHC mg/L 2 <0.0000067 <0.0000067 Aluminum, Total mg/L 2 4.9 10 Ammonia (as NH 3 ) mg/L 2 0.30 0.11 8005 mg/L 2 6.8 3.5 Copper, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.015 0.015 Iron, Total mg/L 2 5.5 11 Lead, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0065 0.0061 0 Mercury, Total (1631E)
- ng/L 1 14.0 NR Nitrogen, Nitrate (as N) mg/L 2 0.84 0.40 Nitrogen, Nitrite (as N) mg/L 2 <0.020 <0.020 Nitrogen, Total (as N) mg/L 2 <2.1 <1.0 Nitrogen, Total l<jeldahl mg/L 2 1.2 0.59 Oil & Greaseb mg/L 1 <1.4 NR pH SU 1 8.7 NR Phosphorous, Total mg/L 2 0.13 0.12 Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 2 567 77 Solids, Total Suspended mg/L 2 163 165 Zinc, Total Recoverable mg/L *2 0.18 0.094 j,
- Rain Event Summary . i *,.., .,,.,, ' , '
pH of Rainfall During Sampling Event SU 1 7.4 Rainfall During Sampling Event inches -- 0.56 Total Flow During Sampling Event gallons -- 120,000 Maximum Flow Rate During Sampling Event gpm -- 1,200 gpm - gallons per minute. N - Number of samples. NR- Not required by permit.
"The SPDES permit requires that Group 3 outfalls be analyzed for mercury as part of the Mercury Minimization Program.
bThe SPDES permit specifies that oil and grease concentration shall not exceed 15 mg/L. B-26 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix 8. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-3D 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 4 STORM WATER OUTFALL S34 Flo,w-weigh.teil ,.* First Flush Grab 1"*
*units
, o<
Analyte .. N Compositf! : 03/08/12 03/08/12, ... Aluminum, Total mg/L 2 1.5 0.8 BOD5 mg/L 2 2.2 <2.0 Copper, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0064 0.015 Iron, Total mg/L 2 2.0 1.4 Lead, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0019 0.0041 a Oil & Grease mg/L 1 5.6 NR pH SU 1 7.7 NR Phosphorous, Total mg/L 2 0.019 0.017 Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 2 811 1960 Solids, Total Suspended mg/L 2 76 110 Surfactant (as LAS) mg/L 2 0.095 0.031 Zinc, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.038 0.059
- Rain Event Summary .. ,; . )> .. :**
pH of Rainfall During Sampling Event SU 1 7.0 Rainfall During Sampling Event inches -- 0.18 Total Flow During Sampling Event gallons -- 250,000 Maximum Flow Rate During Sampling Event gpm -- 1,500 gpm - gallons per minute.
- N - Number of samples.
NR - Not required by permit.
*The SPDES permit specifies that oil and grease concentration shall not exceed 15 mg/L.
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 8-27 _J
Appendix 8. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-3D (concluded) 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 4 STORM WATER OUTFALL S34
,,..., Flow-weighted
f . ~ ':'.
'" *" ",/
" ,z,
. First Flush ,Grab
,,f q, Af1q1Y,te. . ,,
. Units N' : i~rnpo~ite. * **
'~" '* , ' *'" ... ~ "' ,10/23/12, 10/23/12 "
Aluminum, Total mg/L 2 0.57 2.1 BOD 5 mg/L 2 <2.0 2.6 Copper, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0032 0.0044 Iron, Total mg/L 2 0.93 3.2 Lead, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0012 0.0027 0 Oil & Grease mg/L 1 <1.4 NR pH SU 1 7.6 NR Phosphorous, Total mg/L 2 0.011 0.062 Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 2 247 134 Solids, Total Suspended ing/L 2 44 120 Surfactant (as LAS) mg/L 2 0.043 0.033 Zinc, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.047 0.073
" ,:" ,}'. .Rain 'Event Summary*** ;, **'*' :. ' ," "
r '~> pH of Rainfall During Sampling Event SU 1 6.1 Rainfall During Sampling Event inches -- 0.89 Total Flow During Sampling Event gallons - 990,000 Maximum Flow Rate During Sampling Event gpm - 8,700 gpm - gallons per minute. N - Number of samples. NR- Not required by permit.
*The SPDES permit specifies that oil and grease concentration shall not exceed 15 mg/L.
B-28 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-3E 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 5 STORM WATER OUTFALL S17 Fjp~-i:vefghteq I First Ffush Grab
'* Anafyte N Composite
*os7os112 <h
,')
'l '"
05/08/12* Aluminum, Total mg/L 2 2.0 6.8 Ammonia (as NH 3 ) mg/L 2 0.025 0.061 800 5 mg/L 2 2.6 <2.0 Copper, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0044 0.0057 Iron, Total mg/L 2 1.2 4.0 Lead, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0023 0.0082 Nitrogen, Nitrate (as N) mg/L 2 <0.011 0.059 Nitrogen, Nitrite (as N) mg/L 2 0.020 <0.020 Nitrogen, Total (as N) mg/L 2 <0.85 <0.49 Nitrogen, 'fatal l<jeldahl mg/L 2 0.82 0.41 0 Oil & Grease mg/L 1 <1.4 NR pH SU 1 7*.s NR Phosphorous, Total mg/L 2 0.54 0.088 Solids, Settleable ml/L 2 0.3 0.2 Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 2 389 216 Solids, Total Suspended mg/L 2 34 141 Sulfide mg/L 2 <0.052 0.16 Surfactant (as LAS) mg/L 2 <0.013 <0.013 Vanadium, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0021 0.011 Zinc, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.013 0.026 Rain.Event Summary 1 **** pH of Rainfall During Sampling Event SU 1 7.7 Rainfall During Sampling Event inches 0.51 Total Flow During Sampling Event gallons 140,000 Maximum Flow Rate During Sampling Event gpm 1,200 gpm - gallons per minute. N - Number of samples. NR ~Not required by permit.
"The SPDES permit specifies that oil and grease concentration shall not exceed 15 mg/L.
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 B-29
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-3E {concluded) 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 5 STORM WATER OUTFALL 528
,., l' : ,, ,,*, << "c. :*" '.t : ., , 1:*. ,:;., '::*,. *,. .,, ' ,**
Flow-weighted
*' ' 'Analyte f*,, *\ '. : Units * ,. ,JV " ,, First Flush Grab ,
;~ ,, ,, ,Composite , * ,
" ,f', ,, ,;_, ,,10/23/12 10,/23/12 Aluminum, Total mg/L 2 0.56 1.1 Ammonia (as NH 3 ) mg/L 2 0.024 <0.009 BODs mg/L 2 2.7 3.1 Copper, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0036 0.0031 Iron, Total mg/L 2 0.60 1.3 Lead, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.00071 0.0015
_j Nitrogen, Nitrate (as N) mg/L 2 0.053 0.093 Nitrogen, Nitrite (as N) mg/L 2 <0.020 <0.020 Nitrogen, Total (as N) mg/L 2 <0.75 <0.51 Nitrogen, Total Kjeldahl mg/L 2 0.68 0.40 0 Oil & Grease mg/L 1 <1.4 NR pH SU 1 6.9 NR Phosphorous, Total mg/L 2 0.033 0.015 Solids, Settleable ml/L 2 <0.1 0.2 Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 2 267 224 Solids, Total Suspended mg/l 2 11 32 Sulfide mg/L 2 <0.052 <0.052 Surfactant (as LAS) mg/L 2 0.031 0.016 Vanadium, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.00098 0.0020
- Zinc, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.013 0.014
,* liafri Evenisitnfinary *
*:' ,, '.'- *'<( . '
' ',' ::* ; t.
pH of Rainfall During Sampling Event SU 1 6.1 Rainfall During Sampling Event inches -- 0.89 Total Flow During Sampling Event gallons -- 260,000 Maximum Flow Rate During Sampling Event gpm -- 2,200 gpm - gallons per minute. N - Number of samples. NR- Not required by permit.
*The SP DES permit specifies that oil and grease concentration shall not exceed 15 mg/L.
B-30 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-3F 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 6 STORM WATER OUTFALL S37
' .. '. ' .* Flow-weighted *
' FirsfFlush Grab Analyte Unjts *N Composite
,,. 05/2f}/12, ,,, 05/2,,9/12 ',*
Aluminum, Total mg/L 2 1.5 ' 0.32 Ammonia (as NH 3) mg/L 2 0.032 <0.009 BOD 5 mg/L 2 14.1 5.1 Copper, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0054 0.0025 Iron, Total mg/L 2 1.4 0.32 Lead, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0013 0.00026 Nitrogen, Nitrate (as N) mg/L 2 0.27 0.023 Nitrogen, Nitrite (as N) mg/L 2 <0.020 <0.020 Nitrogen, Total (as N) mg/L 2 <2.0 <0.69 Nitrogen, Total Kjeldahl mg/L 2 1.7 0.65 0 Oil & Grease mg/L 1 <1.4 NR pH SU 1 8.1 NR Phosphorous, Total mg/L 2 0.088 <0.0050 Solids, Settleable ml/L 2 0.5 0.1 Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 2 307 233 Solids, Total Suspended mg/L 2 123 9.6 Sulfide mg/L 2 0.10 0.053 Surfactant (as LAS) mg/L 2 <0.013 <0.013 Vanadium, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0014 0.00032 Zinc, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.016 0.0054
" ..,. '"
- Raih Eveht summary *"i pH of Rainfall During Sampling Event SU 1 4.5 Rainfall During Sampling Event inches -- 0.52 Total Flow During Sampling Event gallons -- 1,700 Maximum Flow Rate During Sampling Event gpm -- 15 gpm - gallons per minute.
N - Number of samples. NR - Not required by permit. 0 The SPDES permit specifies that oil and grease concentration shall not exceed 15 mg/L. NOTE: Stormwater outfall 543 in outfall group 6 was also analyzed for total recordable lead during this sampling event. The total recordable lead result for 543 in May 2012 = 0.0015 mg/L (Action Level= 0.006 mg/L). WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 B-31
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-3F (concluded) 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 6 STORM WATER OUTFALL 538
,-* t~ ,, ~ FJow~weightei:I
" ' First Flush Grab, AIJ(Jf~te, Units N ' *.:to~posite
' " -~ '
10/23/lt ' : , J.
'" .*: 10/23/12 r*.
,,~,
Aluminum, Total mg/L 2 0.75 2.4 Ammonia (as NH 3 ) mg/L 2 0.012 0.015 800 5 mg/L 2 <2.0 <2.0 Copper, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0070 0.0052 Iron, Total mg/L 2 0.83 2.3 Lead, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0069 0.0045 Nitrogen, Nitrate (as N) mg/L 2 0.29 0.25 Nitrogen, Nitrite (as N) mg/t 2 0.041 0.063 Nitrogen, Total (as N) mg/L 2 0.61 0.66 Nitrogen, Total l<jeldahl mg/L 2 0.28 0.35 0 Oil & Grease mg/L 1 <1.4 NR pH SU 1 7.5 NR Phosphorous, Total mg/L 2 0.078 0.049 Solids, Settleable ml/L 2 0.2 0.3 Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 2 391 371 Solids, Total Suspended mg/L 2 221 186 Sulfide mg/L 2 <0.052 <0.052 Surfactant (as LAS) mg/L 2 0.013 <0.013 Vanadium, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0065 0.0049 Zinc, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.032 0.023
' ' ' Rain EventSummaw ,, ' .,, ,' ' ~. ' .: ,*,.,,,< .,,,,::,., ,,,, : .
pH of Rainfall During Sampling Event SU 1 6.1 Rainfall During Sampling Event inches -- 0.91 Total Flow During Sampling Event gallons -- 140,000 Maximum Flow Rate During Sampling Event gpm -- 950 gpm - gallons per minute. N - Number of samples. NR- Not required by permit.
*The SP DES permit specifies that oil and grease concentration shall not exceed 15 mg/L.
NOTE: Stormwater outfall 543 in outfall group 6 was also analyzed for total recordable lead during this sampllng event. The total recordable lead result for 543 in October 2012 = 0:0009 mg/L (Action Level= 0.006 mg/L). B-32 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix 8. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-3G 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 7 STORM WATER OUTFALL 520 F/ow~weighted .
* .JFirst Fl~~hGrab**
' * ' \ > ,' " *'
" Analyte Units N Composite
'*.,, .. ,. ," "'03/08/12 .. ,
03/08/12 Aluminum, Total mg/L 2 0.75 0.27 Ammonia (as NH 3 ) mg/L 2 0.15 0.063 BODs mg/L 2 3.6 <2.0 Copper, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0032 0.00088 Iron, Total mg/L 2 , 2.0 0.36 Lead, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0025 0.00044 Nitrogen, Nitrate (as N) mg/L 2 0.42 0.24 Nitrogen, Nitrite (as N) mg/L 2 <0.020 <0.020 Nitrogen, Total (as N) mg/L 2 <0.79 <0.41 Nitrogen, Total Kjeldahl mg/L 2 0.35 <0.15 0 Oil & Grease mg/L 1 <1.4 NR pH SU 1 8.1 NR Phosphorous, Total mg/L 2 0.049 0.058 Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 2 39 31 Solids, Total Suspended mg/L 2 76 8.8 Sulfide mg/L 2 <0.052 <0.052 Surfactant (as LAS) mg/L 2 0.071 0.043 Zinc, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.033 0.0060
~* >' ;:, ',;*I ,,, ' i,'*"
"' "' " kain Event S1.immary pH of Rainfall During Sampling Event SU 1 7.0 Total Rainfall During Sampling Event inches -- 0.17 Total Flow During SamplingEvent gallons -- 71,000 Maximum Flow Rate During Sampling Event gpm -- 430 -
gpm - gallons per minute. N - Number of samples. NR- Not required by permit.
*The SPDES permit specifies that oil and grease conc;entration shall not exceed 15 mg/L.
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 B-33
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-3G (concluded) 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 7 STORM WATER OUTFALL 520
" *11\ ,* "c*
**:*;,First Fliish Grab:. ,Fl9.11V-weig~ted,
,Ana(yte, Units. ,N Composite
~ ,;,
': '< : "';*,,; / " '
<<19/oll/i:l. '*" '09/04/12 l .:
Aluminum, Total mg/L 2 0.97 0.58 Ammonia (as NH 3 ) mg/L 2 0.24 0.046 BOD5 mg/L 2 5.3 <2.0 Copper, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0013 0.0014 Iron, Total mg/L 2 0.76 0.52 Lead, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.00048 0.00024 Nitrogen, Nitrate (as N) mg/L 2 0.45 0.38 Nitrogen, Nitrite (as N) mg/L 2 <0.020 <0.020 Nitrogen, Total (as N) mg/L 2 <1.2 <0.87 Nitrogen, Total Kjeldahl mg/L 2 0.68 0.47 a Oil & Grease mg/L 1 <1.4 NR pH SU 1 7.4 NR Phosphorous, Total mg/L 2 0.054 0.0063 Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 2 10 52 Solids, Total Suspended mg/L 2 16 5.2 Sulfide mg/L 2 <0.052 <0.052 Surfactant (as LAS) mg/L 2 <0.013 <0.013 Zinc, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0084 0.0040
,RainEvent summary
" . :\
pH of Rainfall During Sampling Event SU 1 5.7 Total Rainfall During Sampling Event inches -- 0.30 Total Flow Duririg SamplingEvent gallons -- 67,000 Maximum Flow Rate During Sampling Event gpm -- 660 gpm - gallons per minute. N - Number of samples. NR - Not required by permit.
*The SPDES permit specifies that oil and grease concentration shall not exceed 15 mg/L.
B-34 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-3H 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 8 STORM WATER OUTFALL S27
*l*
Flow-weighted
'. *First Flush Grab
- Anq/yt~ Uh its 'tiJ Composite 05/08/12 05/08/12 Aluminum, Total mg/L 2 3.7 3.1 Ammonia (as NH 3 ) mg/L 2 0.019 0.031 BOD 5 mg/L 2 <2.0 <2.0 Copper, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0061 0.0038 Iron, Total mg/L 2 2.2 1.8 Lead, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0073 0.0029 Nitrogen, Nitrate (as N) mg/L 2 0.064 <0.011 Nitrogen, Nitrite (as N) mg/L 2 0.056 0.032 Nitrogen, Total (as N) mg/L 2 0.57 <0.73 Nitrogen, Total Kjeldahl mg/L 2 0.45 0.69 a
Oil & Grease mg/L 1 1.9 NR pH SU 1 7.7 NR Phosphorous, Total mg/L 2 0.15 0.23 Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 2 221 162 Solids, Total Suspended mg/L 2 124 44 Surfactant (as LAS) mg/L 2 <0.013 <0.013 Zinc, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.024 0.011
,,., '0:' ,.,, ,. ,, .. .Rain.EventSlimmary. / ,,, ,*' "'l pH of Rainfall During Sampling Event su. 1 7.7 Rainfall During Sampling Event inches -- 0.51 Total Flow During Sampling Event gallons -- 35,000 Maximum Flow Rate During Sampling Event gpm -- 250 gpm - gallons per minute.
N - Number of samples. NR - Not required by permit.
"The SPDES permit specifies that oil and grease concentration shall not exceed 15 mg/L.
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 8-35
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-3H (concluded) 2012 Storm Water Discharge Monitoring Data for Outfall Group 8 STORM WATER OUTFALL S35
" ,,: ., . '~ *! .... * *i=tow~*weigliteCI "';
;\," :' ~~ '
'"" " : First Flush Grab .* ','.* '*~ y/ / '*N* *:
1'\
,:*JJ.nafytf!?<, ~I .... .Units "* N. .. ... * '(:ot:npqsi~e
,',1
'*\ . ' ,J} ,,,.,' .. . 10/23/12 " .. '\i- 1012_3/n.
Aluminum, Total mg/L 2 1.3 1.2 Ammonia (as NH 3 ) mg/L 2 0.016 <0.009 BOD 5 mg/L 2 <2.0 4.6 Copper, Total *Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0036 0.0033 Iron, Total mg/L 2 1.2 1.1 Lead, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.0064 0.0039 Nitrogen, Nitrate (as N) mg/L 2 0.17 0.078 Nitrogen, Nitrite (as N) mg/L 2 0.033 <0.020 Nitrogen, Total (as N) mg/L. 2 0.63 <0.65 Nitrogen, Total Kjeldahl mg/L 2 0.43 0.55 0 Oil & Grease mg/L 1 <1.4 NR pH SU 1 7.6 NR Phosphorous, Total mg/L 2 0.022 0.020 Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 2 303 250 Solids, Total Suspended mg/L 2 81 56 Surfactant (as LAS) mg/L 2 0.022 0.024 Zinc, Total Recoverable mg/L 2 0.035 0.030
"' ~ .. .. * .1* ,, .,, .. RdinEven.t.Sqmmarv .... . . ; .. '* ... .' .'.J *. ..
pH of Rainfall During Sampling Event SU 1 6.1 Rainfall During Sampling Event inches - 0.89 Total Flow During Sampling Event gallons -- 160,000 Maximum Flow Rate During Sampling Event gpm -- 1100 gpm - gallons per minute. N - Number of samples. NR- Not required by permit.
*The SPDES permit specifies that oil and grease concentration shall not exceed 15 mg/L.
8-36 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data APPENDIX B-4 Site Surface Drainage, Subsurface Drainage,* and Contained Water Data TABLEB-4A 2012 Radioactivity and pH in Surface Water at Facillity Yard Drainage (WNSPOOS)
.. i-,,,.* . !:t" *,.:,.,. -~it ..*.'<<i *. IL*.
~- "X~5ea.~s-~~n~i?faji,~1!,s
[1<< .. ',,.* e ,,'l c 11 ~~i~~li~e~~f~;* .
""I,'
.(:l.naf,yt(-, Units:*;. N.* I~' '" *,, *'!* ,*~ **1'. , ...,., i".
,... .Standard. *,.,:,
;.'.:I*,, Iii*>">' ,I .*L I I* *.**I*:*_.;;,* h*.:~*: :* '~* ,,, . ._.,;Minimum *.*. *
- 1:: * :*,e.11erage *. ,1 .,, Maximum- ':,I<<!, '\'i"if'S'"'_f~~* **:~~f" H./~**,
Gross Alpha µCi/ml 4 <2.99E-09 2.30+/-3.76E-09 4.02E-09 I:*, 9.8E-08c Gross Beta µCi/ml 4 8.92E-08 3.42+/-0.14E-07 7.61E-07 -'. 1.1E-06d Tritium µCi/ml 4 <4.69E-08 1.88+/-7.71E-08 <1.02E-07 1*.r* 1.9E-03 Sr-90 µCi/ml 2 7.28E-08 1. 72+/-0.11E-07 2.71E-07 hr 1.lE-06 Cs-137 µCi/n:il 2 <1.13E-09 0.41+/-1.90E-09 <2.44E-09 1,1; 3.0E-06 pH SU 4 7.12 7.38 8.06 6.0-9.5 N - Number of samples.
- DOE ingestion-based DCSs for 100 mrem/yr dose limit are provided as a guideline for radiological results.
b New York State Water Quality Standards for Class "D" as a. comparative reference for non-radiological results. c Alpha as U-232. . d Beta as Sr-90. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 B-37
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-48 Comparison of 2012 Radioactivity Concentrations in Surface Water at the North Swamp (WNSW74A) With U.S. DOE-Derived Concentration Standards (DCSs) RADIOACTIVE CONSTITUENTS Average. .. ,. Ratfo.of
'",.i),
'" ' "*b * *0CS'c1. *
"* ,;, a. Dischat:ge.Aqi~jty.~;
Isotope N" "'*' Concentration ,,, i* . *Concentration:
'- ,. ",' / '~.. ' :, . ..
(Ci) * (Becquer#ls)' ** (µci/mLr ':' '(µCi/ml::) 'to DCS Gross Alpha 26 0.59+/-3.86E-OS 0.22+/-1.43E+06 1.26+/-8.25E-10 NAe NA Gross Beta 26 S.52+/-0.32E-04 2.04+/-0.12E+07 1.18+/-0.07E-08 NAe NA Tritium 26 0. 79+/-1.09E-03 2.93+/-4.02E+07 1.69+/-2.32E-08 1.9E-03 <0.0001 C-14 2 -0.57+/-1.0GE-03 -2.10+/-3.92E+07 -1.21+/-2.26E-08 6.2E-05 <0.0004 Sr-90 12 2.46+/-0.28E-04 9 .10+/-1.03E+06 5.25+/-0.59E-09 1.lE-06 0.0048 1-129 2 2.93+/-3.24E-05 1.08+/-1.20E+06 6.26+/-6.91E-10 3.3E-07 <0.0021 Cs-137 12 2.47+/-3.46E-05 0.92+/-1.28E+06 5.28+/-7.38E-10 3.0E-06 <0.0002 U-232' *2 0.64+/-1.88E-06 2.37+/-6.94E+04 1.37+/-4.0lE-11 9.8E-08 <0.0004 U-233/2341 2 2.01+/-2. 75E-06 0. 74+/-1.02E+OS 4.29+/-5.87E-11 6.6E-07g <0.0001 U-235/2361 2 -0.30+/-1.58E-06 -1.10+/-5.84E+04 -0.63+/-3.37E-11 7.2E-07 <0.0001 U-2381 2 2.12+/-2.13E-06 7.85+/-7.90E+04 4.53+/-4.56E-11 7.SE-07 <0.0001 Pu-238 2 -1.00+/-5.84E-07 -0.37+/-2.16E+04 -0.21+/-1.25E-11 1.SE-07 <0.0001 Pu-239/240 2 2.55+/-6.09E-07 0.94+/-2.25E+04 0.54+/-1.30E-11 1.4E-07 <0.0001 Am-241 2 0.20+/-1.65E-06 0. 74+/-6.10E+04 0.43+/-3.52E-11 1.7E-07 <0.0002 Sum of Ratios 0.008 Note: The average pH at this location was 7.34 SU. N - Number of samples. NA - Not applicable.
- Half-lives are listed in Table Ul-4.
bTotal estimated vOlume released; 4.68E+10 ml (1.24E+07 gal). c 1 curie (Ci)= 3.7E+10 becquerels (Bq); 1 Bq =2.7E-11 Ci. d DCSs are used as reference values for the application of best available technology per DOE Order 458.1.
- DCSs do not exist for indicator parameters gross alpha and gross beta.
1 Total Uranium = 6.42+/-0.52E+OO (g); Average Total Uranium = 1.37+/-0.llE-04 (µg/ml). 8 The DCS for U-233 is used for this comparison. B-38 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-4C Comparison of 2012 Radioactivity Concentrations in Surface Water at the Northeast Swamp {WNSWAMP) With U.S. DOE-Derived Concentration Standards (DCSs)
'* 'Avwagf: DCSd Ratio of
. a N *.
Discharge Activity b Conc;en.tratio'n Concentration
... Isotope
. (Ci)* (Becquerels) ~
(),iCi/mL) (µCi}~L)
-toDCS Gross Alpha 26 -2.26+/-4.59E-05 -0.84+/-1. 70E+06 -4.40+/-8.95 E-10 NA" NA Gross Beta 26 1.16+/-0.0lE-01 4.30+/-0.03E+09 2.27+/-0.02E-06 NA" NA Tritium 26 3.28+/-0.13E-03 1.21+/-0.49E+08 6.41+/-2.59E-08 1.9E-03 0.0001 C-14 2 3.06+/-9.83E-04 1.13+/-3.64E+07 0.60+/-1.92E-08 6.2E-05 <0.0003 Sr-90 12 5.51+/-0.05E-02 2.04+/-0.02E+09 1.08+/-0.01E-06 l.lE-06 0.98 1-129 2 -0.12+/-3.62E-05 -0.04+/-1.34E+06 -0.23+/-7.07E-10 3.3E-07 <0.0021 Cs-137 12 -2.13+/-4.93E-05 -0. 79+/-1.82E+06 -4.16+/-9.62E-10 3.0E-06 <0.0003 U-23i 2 -0.20+/-1. 71E-06 -0. 72+/-6.32E+04 -0.38+/-3.34E-11 9.8E-08 <0.0003 U-233/234' 2 7.97+/-3.35E-06 2.95+/-1.24E+05 1.56+/-0.65E-10 6.6E-07g 0.0002 U-235/236" 2 0.13+/-1.37E-06 0.47+/-5.08E+04 0.25+/-2.68E-11 7.2E-07 <0.0001 U-238' 2 4.10+/-2.55E-06 1.52+/-0.94E+05 8.00+/-4.98E-11 7.5E-07 0.0001 Pu-238 2 -1.79+/-9.85E-07 -0.66+/-3.64E+04 -0.35+/-1.92E-11 1.5E-07 <0.0001 Pu-239/240 2 0.49+/-1. 34E-06 1.81+/-4.96E+04 0.96+/-2.62E-11 1.4E-07 <0.0002 Am-241 2 0.86+/-1.37E-06 3.16+/-5.06E+04 1.67+/-2.67E-11 1.7E-07 <0.0002 Sum of Ratios 0.98 Note: the average pH at this location was 7.10 Standard Units (SU).
N - Number of samples. NA - Not applicable.
*Half-lives are listed in Table Ul-4.
bTotal estimated volume released: 5.12E+10 ml (1.35E+07 gal). c 1Ci=3.7E+10 Bq: 1Bq = 2.7E-11 Ci. 0 DCSs are used as reference values for the application of best available technology per DOE Order 458.1.
- DCSs do not exist for indicator parameters gross alpha and gross beta.
1 Total Uranium (g) = 1.88+/-0.07E+01; Average Total Uranium (µg/ml) = 3.67+/-0.13E-04. g The DCS for Uranium-233 is used for this comparison. TABLE B-40 2012 Radioactivity in Surface Water Drainage Between the NOA and SDA (WNNDADR) N
" WNivDADR Concentrations
.* Units
' Minimum * .*
- Averqge Maximum.:*
- Gross Alpha µCi/ml 12 <5.67E-10 1.23+/-1.22E-09 4.22E-09 Gross Beta µCi/ml 12 3.00E-09 3.49+/-0.29E-08 5.48E-08 Tritium µCi/ml 12 3.08E-07 4.19+/-0.95E-07 . 5.80E-07 Sr-90 µCi/ml 2 1.37E-08 1.60+/-0.22E-08 1.82E-08 1-129 µCi/ml 2 <1.03E-09 0.62+/-1.06E-09 <1.09E-09 Cs-137 µCi/ml 12 <1.lOE-09 -0.34+/-2.29E-09 <3.53E-09 N - Number of samples.
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 . B-39
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data This page intentionally left blank B-40 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix 8. Summary of Water Monitoring Data APPENDIX B-5 Ambient Surface Water Data TABLE B-SA 2012 Radioactivity and pH in Surface Water Downstream of the WVDP in Cattaraugus Creek at Felton Bridge (WFFELBR)
*WFFELBR *' '*
- Reference Values "
**Analyte . N "
- Concentrations' 0 UnitS N WFBiGBR ,, "Guideline or'
;', 'l *
' ' b
>'i Average Maximum , . Background /jange Standard.
Gross Alpha µCi/ml 12 1. 74+/-1.46E-09 4.21E-09 98 <3.59E-10-4.62E-09 9.8E-08° Gross Beta µCi/ml 12 3.85+/-1.66E-09 6.41E-09 98 <9.03E-10-1.37E-08 1.1E-06e Tritium µCi/ml 12 1.34+/-7 .09E-08 6.53E-08 98 <4.46E-08-2.65E-07 1.9E-03 Sr-90 µCi/ml 12 0.51+/-.1.19E-09 1.55E-09 98 <3.57E-10-1.10E-08 1.lE-06 Cs-137 µCi/ml 12 0.89+/-2.%E-09 2.09E-09 98 <1.34E-09-5.29E-09 3.0E-06 pH SU 33 Range: 7.3-8.4 98 5.80-8.34 6.5-8.5 Note: Historical background data are from Bigelow Bridge, on Cattaraugus Creek upstream ofWFFELBR. Sampling at WFBIGBR was discontinued in 2008. Range was calculated from the most recent 10 years of sampling, 1998-2007. N - Number of samples. *
*DOE ingestion-based DCSs for 100 mrem/yr dose limit are provided as a guideline for radiological results in the absence of water quality standards.
b New York Water Quality Standards for Class "B" as a comparative reference for non-radiological results.
<values represent composite concentrations weighted to monthly stream flow.
d Alpha as U-232.
- Beta as Sr-90.
TABLE B-SB 2012 Water Quality of Surface Water Downstream of the WVDP in Buttermilk Creek at Thomas Corners Bridge (WFBCTCB) RADIOACTIVITY CONCENTRATIONS
, . WFBCTCB , Reference -Values ,*
l i'r ** 0
, jj,nalyte " ,.Units, N Concentrations *,N ... WFBCBKG 1--~~~~~~~~~~~~-1
~Average *
- Maximum Background Range' Gross Alpha µCi/ml 12 1.62+/-1.28E-09 5.S6E-09 12 <5.10E-10-2.80E-09 9.8E-08c Gross Beta µCi/ml 12 7.29+/-1.8SE-09 1.12E-08 12 1. 73E-09-4 . 15E-09 1.1E-06d Tritium µCi/ml 12 1.51+/-7.42E-08 <9.80E-08 12 <4.67E-08-1.07E-07 1.9E-03 Sr-90 µCi/ml 2 1.56+/-1.21E-09 1.98E-09 2 <1.14E-09-<1.16E-09 1.lE-06 Cs-137 µCi/ml 2 1. 74+/-3.34E-09 <4.lOE-09 2 <2.87E-09-3.44E-09 3.0E-06 N - Number of samples.
*Background location.
b DOE ingestion based derived consentration standards (DCSs) for 100 mrem/yr dose limit are provided as a guideline for radiological results. c Alpha as U-232. d Beta as Sr-90. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012. B-41
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-SB (continued} 2012 Water Quality of Surface Water Downstream of the WVDP in Buttermilk Creek at Thomas Corners Bridge (WFBCTCB) CHEMICAL CONSTITUENTS 1** "" '. . ",
*' WFBCTGB, :, >~ ' ,,, ,, ,,
An.qlyte 1 ,,,. units N. . ,, concentration*. *,
.. Standard a
, . ~'
'*,'* '.civerage , -~ '
,,' Mi:Jximum: "' "
Alpha-BHC µg/L 2 <0.009 <0.009 0.002 Aluminum, Dissolved mg/L 2 <0.100 <0.100 0.10 Ammonia-N mg/L 2 <0.05 <0.05 0.09-2.1 Antimony, Total mg/L 2 <0.003 <0.003 -- Arsenic, Dissolved mg/L 2 <0.005 <0.005 0.150 Barium, Total mg/L 2 0.07 0.08 -- Boron, Total mg/L 2 O.D2 0.03 10.0 Bromide mg/L 2 <0.50 <0.50 -- Cadmium, Dissolved mg/L 2 <0.001 <0.001 ; 0.003lb Calcium, Total mg/L 12 38.4 53.3 -- Chloride mg/L 2 27 32 -- Chromium, Dissolved mg/L 2 <0.01 <0.01 . ,' 0.113b Cobalt, Total mg/L 2 <0.005 <0.005 0.005c Copper, Dissolved mg/L 2 <0.005 <0.005 0.014° Dissolved Oxygen mg/L 2 10.S 12.3 4.0(min) Fluoride mg/L 2 <0.10 <0.10 3.39b Hardness mg/L 12 121 168 -- Iron, Total mg/L 2 0.54 0.60 0.30 i* lead, Dissolved mg/L 2 <0.0005 <0.0005 0.0066b Magnesium, Total mg/L 12 6.13 8.65 -- Manganese, Total mg/L 2 0.02 0.02 -- Mercury, Total,
µg/L 2 0.000819 0.000964 "" 0.0007 d Method 1631 Nickel, Dissolved mg/L 2 <0.04 <0.04 0.081b Nitrate-N mg/L 2 0.16 0.16 --
Nitrite-N mg/L 2 <0.02 <0.02 0.10 NPOC mg/L 2 2.6 3.2 -- N - Number of samples.
-- No Reference Standard available for this analyte.
- New York Water Quality Standards for Class "C" as a comparative reference for non-radiological results.
b Calculated from maximum measurement of hardness of surface water stream at WFBCTCB. c Standards for cobalt, thallium and vanadium are applicable to the acid soluble fraction. d Standard is for dissolved mercury. B-42 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-58 (concluded} 2012 Water Quality of Surface Water Downstream of the WVDP in Buttermilk Creek at Thomas Corners Bridge (WFBCTCB) CHEMICAL CONSTITUENTS (concluded)
,__ _, WFBCTCB- .
- i. '), *' '.d' Ana/yte Units N i
Concentration
' Standard 0
-.- -- ' - Average ,-~ ' Maximum 't
,-, i -
Oil & Grease mg/L 2 <5 <5 -- pH SU 2 7.95 7.99 6.5-8.5
~
Selenium; Dissolved mg/L 2 <0.001 <0.001 0.0046 Sodium, Total mg/L 2 19.2 23.6 -- Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 2 210 242 500 Solids, Total Suspended rng/L 2 <9.6 15 -- Sulfate mg/L 2 23.6 27.9 -- Sulfide mg/L 2 <0.05 <0.05 0.002 Surfactants mg/L 2 <0.02 <0.02 --- 0.04 Thallium, Total mg/L 2 <0.008 <0.008 0.008c Titanium, Total mg/L 2 <0.05 <0.05 -- TOX mg/L 1 0.01 0.01 -- Vanadium, Total mg/L 2 <0.01 <0.01 0.014c Zinc, Dissolved mg/L 2 <0.02 <0.02 -- 0.128b N - Number of samples.
-- No Reference Standard available for this analyte.
a New.York Water Quality Standards for Class "C" as a comparative reference for non-radiological results. b Calculated from maximum measurement of hardness of surface water stream at WFBCTCB. c Standards for cobalt, thallium and vanadium are applicable to the acid soluble fraction. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 B-43
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-SC 2012 Radioactivity of Surface Water Downstream of the WVDP at Franks Creek (WNSPOOG)
*~, . ~ "
i .*, ,,. WNSP006 *' . .
- Referen,ce Vplue~, . .'r,',
An,alyte., Units,, N... Average Concentrations Max'imum N WFBCBKG Backgfound Range 0 Guidelit:if b _:: Gross Alpha µCi/ml 33 1.89+/-1.48E-09 9.40E-09 12 <5.10E-10-2.80E-09 9.8E-08c Gross Beta µCi/ml 33 5.08+/-0.33E-08 l.58E-07 " 12 1.73E-09-4.15E-09 l.1E-06d Tritium µCi/ml 33 5.41+/-7.99E-08 1.69E-07 12 <4.67E-08-1.07E-07 1.9E-03 C-14 µCi/ml 4 0.25+/-3.48E-08 <3.85E-08 i(. 2 <2.98E-08-<3.40E-08 6.2E-05 Sr-90 µCi/ml 12 1.93+/-0.25E-08 6.21E-08 2 <1.14E-09-<1.16E-09 1.lE-06 Tc-99 µCi/ml 4 -0.61+/-2.19E-09 <2.43E-09 r 2 <1.98E-09-<2.32E-09 4.4E-05 1-129 µCi/ml 4 1.52+/-8.68E-10 <1.09E-09 2 <7.85E-10-<9.60E-10 3.3E-07 Cs-137 µCi/ml 12 2.06+/-2.76E-09 6.93E-09 2 <2.87E-09-3.44E-09 3.0E-06 U-232 µCi/ml 4 1.83+/-1.20E-10 2.43E-10 < 2 <4.30E-11-<4.35E-11 9.8E-08 U-233/234 µCi/ml 4 3.52+/-1.67E-10 5.33E-10 2 <7.15E-11-<7.39E-11 6.6E-07e U-235/236 µCi/ml 4 1.80+/-4.65E-11 <6.03E-11 2 <3.33E-11-<4.19E-11 7.2E-07 U-238 µCi/ml 4 2. 70+/-1.36E-10 4.34E-10 2 <6.23E-11-1.04E-10 7.SE-07 Total U µg/ml 4 7.63+/-0.39E-04 9.66E-04 2 2.48E-04-2.90E-04 -- Pu-238 µCi/ml 4 0.94+/-3.79E-11 <5.14E-11 2 <1.93E-11-<1.94E-11 l.SE-07 Pu-239/240 µCi/ml 4 2.25+/-3.96E-11 3.SlE-11 2 <2.85E-11-3.24E-11 1.4E-07 Am-241 µCi/ml 4 1.32+/-4.0lE-11 <4.SSE-11 i 2 <3.12E-11-<3. 75E-11 1.7E-07 N - Number of samples.
-- No Guideline or standard available for these analytes.
*Background location.
b DOE ingestion-based DCSs for 100 mrem/yr dose limit are provided as a guideline for radiological results. c Alpha as U-232. d Beta as Sr-90.
- DCS for U-233 is used for this comparison.
TABLE B-50 2012 Radioactivity and pH in Surface Water at Erdman Brook (WNERB53}
., '. , .*wNg~BS~: . . Reference. Vqlues . , .
Analyte Units N Concentrations N WFBCBKG 0 Guideline'~ or.
" 'liv~rage' ";' ,,,,
,'i,i
** Maximum. * \
- Background'Range . ,, statidarCI *" *"%
Gross Alpha µCi/ml 4 0.77+/-1.53E-09 2.34E-09 12 <5.10E-10-2.80E-09 9.8E-08d Gross Beta µCi/ml 4 9.61+/-2.38£-09 1.25E-08 ' 12 1.73E-09-4.15E-09 1.1E-06e Tritium µCi/ml 4 4.98+/-7 .82E-08 1.62E-07 ; 12 <4.67E-08-1.07E-07 1.9E-03 Sr-90 µCi/ml 2 2.12+/-3.39E-09 3.71E-09 2 <1.14E-09-<l.16E-09 1.lE-06 Cs-137 µCi/ml 2 0.13+/-2.32E-09 <3.07E-09 2 <2.87E-09-3.44E-09 3.0E-06 pH SU 4 Range: 7.3-7.9 292 6.4-8.7 6.0-9.5 N - Number of samples.
*Background data are from Buttermilk Creek, upstream of the WVDP. Sampling for nonradiological data was discontinued.
at this location in 2008. The pH range was calculated from the most recent 10 years of sampling, 1998-2007. b DOE ingestion-based DCSs for 100 mrem/yr dose limit are provided as a guideline for radiological results. c New York State Water Quality Standards for surface waters Class "D" as a standard for non-radiological results. d Alpha as U-232.
- Beta as Sr-90.
8-44 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-SE 2012 Radioactivity and pH in Surface Water at Franks Creek (WNFRC67)
'WNFRC67 .. <
- Reference Values Analyte . Units N Concentrations. '~'
N WFBCBKG 0
*.:Guideline v. or
., '* Average '*
Maximµm*. .. Background Range *Standard< Gross Alpha µCi/ml 4 4.66+/-8.23E-10 l.32E-09 12 <5.10E-10-2.80E-09 9.8E-08d Gross Beta µCi/ml 4 3.31+/-1.59E-09 4.17E-09 12 1.73E-09-4.15E-09 1.lE-06" Tritium µCi/ml 4 5.07+/-7.87E-08 1.23E-07 12 <4.67E-08-1.07E-07 1.90E-03 Sr-90 µCi/ml 2 l.65+/-3.29E-09 <4.54E-09 2 <l.14E-09-<l.16E-09 1.lOE-06 Cs-137 µCi/ml 2 -0. 70+/-1.95 E-09 <2.53E-09 2 <2.87E-09-3.44E-09 3.00E-06 pH SU 4 Range: 6.52-8.1 292 6.4-8.7 6~0-9.5 N - Number of samples.
*Background data are from Buttermilk Creek, upstream of the WVDP. Sampling for nonradiological data was discontinued.
at this location in 2008. The pH range was calculated from the most recent 10 years of sampling, 1998-2007. b DOE ingestion-based DCSs for 100 mrem/yr dose limit are provided as a guideline for radiological results. c New York State Water Quality Standards for Class "D" surface waters as a standard for non-radiological results. d Alpha as U-232. e Beta as Sr-90. TABLE B-SF Historical Radioactivity and pH in Surface Water at Bigelow Bridge Cattaraugus Creek Background (WFBIGBR)
. l '. WFBIGBR<l ;'<
Reference Va/Lies Analyte Units ... '. *N ,. 'j, .~;Concentrations ~'l' >;. Guideline b "
.,, ,. ' '"' !' ".'. ._. '* . ..Average . :Maximum. *' .: or'Standard c*. I Gross Alpha µCi/ml 98 0.45+/-1.0SE-09 4.62E-09
- 9.8E-08° Gross Beta Tritium
µCi/ml
µCi/ml 98 98 2.64+/-1.35E-09 0.71+/-7.79E-08 1.37E-08 2.65E-07
. l.lE-06" 1.9E-03 Sr-90 µCi/ml 98 l.27+/-1.46E-09 1.lOE-08 1.1E-06 Cs-137 µCi/ml 98 0.59+/-3.27E-09 5.29E-09 3E-06 pH SU 98 Range: 5.80-8.34 6.5-8.5 N - Number of samples.
a Sampling was discontinued in 2008. Data represent measurements from the most recent 10 years of sampling, 1998 through 2007. b DOE ingestion:based DCSs for 100 mrem/yr dose limit are provided as a guideline for radiological results. c The New York Water Quality Standard for Class "B" is provided as a comparative reference for pH. d Alpha as U-232.
*Beta as Sr-90.
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 8-45
Appendix 8. Summary of Water Monitoring Data
- TABLE B-SG 2012 Radioactivity and pH in Surface Water at Fox Valley Road Buttermilk Creek Background(WFBCBKG)
" . WFBCBKG 0
- Reference Values
,l\~qlyte
"'""'* '., ' ",4 Up its N toncentrotibns * ~' Guideline*b *
- .. i
,, (" ,<
Average'
~
*iVJaximum " or si:cindarac Gross Alpha µCi/ml 12 1.02+/-1.07E-09 2.80E-09 "
9.8E-08° Gross Beta µCi/ml 12 2.36+/-1.57E-09 4.lSE-09 1.1E-06e Tritium µCi/ml 12 2.60+/-7.56E-08 1.07E-07 1.9E-03 C-14 µCi/ml 2 0.55+/-3.20E-08 <3.40E-08 6.2E-05 Sr-90 µCi/ml 2 0.96+/-1.lSE-09 <1.16E-09 1.lE-06 Tc-99 µCi/ml 2 -1.07+/-2.lSE-09 <2.32E-09 1.r 4.4E-05 1-129 µCi/ml 2 -2.60+/-8. 77E-10 <9.60E-10 3.3E-07 Cs-137 µCi/ml 2 1.90+/-2.68E-09 3.44E-09 3.0E-06 U-232 µCi/ml 2 -1.77+/-4.32E-11 <4.35E-11 9.SE-08 U-233/234 µCi/ml 2 5.06+/-7.27E-11 <7.39E-11 6.6E-071 U-235/236 µCi/ml 2 1.03+/-3.78E-11 <4.19E-11 7.2E-07 U-238 µCi/ml 2 7.86+/-7.32E-11 1.04E-10 7.SE-07 Total U µg/ml 2 2.69+/-0.23E-04 2.90E-04 -- Pu-238 µCi/ml 2 -0.90+/-1.94E-11 <1.94E-11 1.SE-07 Pu-239/240 µCi/ml 2 1.82+/-3.0lE-11 3.24E-11 1.4E-07 Am-241 µCi/ml 2 -0.51+/-3.45E-11 <3.75E-11 *' 1.7E-07 pH SU 292 Range: 6.4-8.7 6.0-9.5 N - Number of samples.
- No Guideline or standard available for these analytes.
*Radiological data are from samples collected in CY 2012. Sampling for nonradiological constituents was discontinued in 2008. The pH values represent measurements from the most recent 10 years of sampling, 1998 through 2007.
b DOE ingestion-based DCSs for 100 mrem/yr dose limit are provided as a guideline for radiological results. c The New York Water Quality Standard for Class "D" is provided as a comparative ~eference for pH. d Alpha as U-232. .
- Beta as Sr-90.
1 DCS for U-233 used for this comparison. 8-46 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix B. Summary of Water Monitoring Data APPENDIX B-6 Potable Water (Drinking Water) Data TABLE B-6A 2012 Water Quality Results in Potable Water at the WVDP
*. Analyte **Units*, : WNDNKMP" *WNDNKEL*' Standard'a "
N Gross Alpha µCi/ml 1 -1.28+/-3.07E-10 NA 1.5E-08 Gross Beta µCi/ml 1 2.0l+/-0.87E-09 NA 5E-08 Tritium µCi/ml 1 -3.45+/-3.31E-08 NA 2E-05 Haloacetic Acids-Five (5) mg/l 1 NA 0.024 0.06 Total Trihalomethanes mg/l 1 NA 0.05 0.08 N - Number of samples.
NA- Not applicable, constituent not analyzed.
- New York State Department of Health MCLs for drinking water used as a comparative reference.
TABLE B-68 2012Water Quality Results in Utility Room Potable Water (Entry Point 002) I . 0
;. 'I
**utility Room Concentrations . Standard or :
Analyte. Unit~. N ,,J. 0
,)J "!'"
,,p, .,' I )1 *
- Guideline Minimu.m Maximum Antimony, Total mg/l 1 NA 0.00064 0.006 Arsenic, Total mg/l 1 NA <0.0014 " 0.010 Barium, Total mg/l 1 NA 0.0369 2.00 Beryllium, Total mg/l 1 NA <0.0003 0.004 Cadmium, Total mg/l 1 NA <0.001 0.005 Chromium, Total mg/l 1 NA <0.007 0.10 Cyanide, Total mg/l 1 NA <0.020 0.2 h*
Fluoride mg/l 1 NA <0.20 2.2 Free Residual Chlorine mg/l 1,098 0.4 2.80 0.2-4.0 Iron, Total mg/l 1 NA <0.050 *' 0.3 Manganese, Total mg/l 1 NA 0.0182 0.3 Mercury, Total mg/l 1 NA <0.0002 0.001 Nickel, Total mg/l 1 NA <0.005 -- TOC mg/l 5 1.0 1.9 -- Selenium, Total mg/l 1 NA <0.002 0.05 Thallium, Total mg/l 1 NA <0.0003 0.002 Turbidity NTU 2,142 0.1 0.6 l.Ob Zinc, Total mg/l 1 NA <0.010 5.0 Note: Chemical constituent sampling is required by, and reported to the Cattaraugus County Department of Health. N - Number of samples. NA - Not applicable, constituents sampled annually.
-- No guideline or standard available for these analytes.
*New York State Department of Health MCLs for drinking water.
b A treatment standard of 0.3 NTU applies to the 9Sth percentile on a monthly basis. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 8-47
Appendix 8. Summary of Water Monitoring Data TABLE B-6C 2012 Water Quality Results in Utility Room Raw (Untreated) Water
' .. "Analyte Units **-
.. .. N:*** .. . Unt,reatedRaw Watet concentrations
,-** /Vfinimurn
- Average*
Maximiim .,. Alkalinity mg/L 5 44.0 73.6 118 Iron, Total mg/L 52 0.226 0.661 3.23 Solids, Total Dissolved mg/L 15 34 102 151 TOC mg/L 5 1.5 2.2 3.2 Note: Chemical constituent sampling is required by, and reported to the Cattaraugus County Department of Health. N - Number of samples. TOC - Total organic carbon. TABLE B-60 2012 Biological and Chlorine Results From Various Site Tap Water Locations . (Analyzed by Cattaraugus County Department of Health) Analyte
- Units *
- N* .yaii91.J~.5,it~ T9P W~t,E?,r ~.~fqtiql]~ °'
- standard a.
"'*** *" ... Res.u.fts ..
E.coli NA 12 Negative one positive sample Free Residual Chlorine mg/L 12 Range: 0.10-1.19 4.0 (max) Total Coliform NA 12 Negative two or more positive samples N- Number of samples. NA - Not applicable. a New York State Department of Health MCLs for drinking water or EPA MCLGs, whichever is more stringent. TABLE B-6E 2012 Nitrate Results From the Utility Room Raw Tap Water (Analyzed by Cattaraugus County Department of Health)
- Analyte
>* ".'.: . ' - .. ,,.. - 1'. .... '
l.Jnits N blit~ i:;, Coll~ct~ci
-!'~. ' ,,,, ~
' A~~iiaic~~~enfration::
- Sti:mdar&a **
Nitrate-N mg/L 1 3/1/2012 <1.0 10 N - Number of samples.
- New York State Department of Health MCLs for drinking water.
8-48 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
APPENDIX C Summary.of Air Monitoring Data TABLE C-1 Total Radioactivity Released at Main Plant Stack (ANSTACK} in 2012 and Comparison of Discharge Concentrations with U.S. DOE-Derived Concentration Standards (DCSs)
"°' ' -Total* *Average* Maximum* . '"' *Ratio of' :
DCSC 0
.N Activit'f Released b :Concentration Concentration *- ,, ConcentratiOn
'"' .Jsotope, .. '*
{Ci}. ,., {µCi/mL) . i ... (µq/ml) ,>', (µCi/ml) *.toDC'j Gross Alpha 26 4.50+/-0.60E-07 6.06+/-0.81E-16 2.70E-15 NAd NA Gross Beta 26 8.87+/-0.21E-06 l.24+/-0.03E-14 6.43E-14 NAd NA H-3 26 2.46+/-0.06E-03 3.32+/-0.08E-12
- 7.16E-12 2.lE-07 <0.0001 Co-60 2 0. 79+/-6.08E-08 l.07+/-8.19E-17 <l.46E-16 3.GE-10 <0.0001 Sr-90 2 l.83+/-0.14E-06 2.46+/-0.18E-15 3.07E-15 l.OE-10 <0.0001 I*
1-129 2 2.09+/-0.17E-05 2.82+/-0.22E-14 3.49E-14 l.OE-10 0.0003 Cs-137 2 2.75+/-0.17E-06 3. 70+/-0.23E-15 3.85E-15 8.8E-10 <0.0001 Eu-154 2 O.OO+/-l.84E-07 0.00+/-2.48E-16 <4.69E-16 7.SE-11 <0.0001 U-232° 2 -2.29+/-3.94E-09 -3.08+/-5.32E-18 <8.07E-18 4.7E-13 <0.0001 U-233/234° 2 l.57+/-0.75E-08 2.12+/-1.0lE-17 2.27E-17 l.OE-lzl <0.0001 U-235/236° 2 -3.18+/-3.81E-09 -4.28+/-5.13E-18 <7.46E-18 l.2E-12 <0.0001 U-238° 2 2.38+/-0.63E-08 3.21+/-0.85E-17. 3.91E-17 1.3E-12 <0.0001 Pu-238 2 4.96+/-1.03 E-08 6.68+/-1.38E-17 9.22E-17 8.8E-14 0.0008 Pu-239/240 2 9.82+/-1.40E-08 l.32+/-0.19E-16 l.67E-16 8.lE-14. 0.0016 Am-241 2 2.04:!;0.25E-07 2.75+/-0.34E-16 3.14E-16 9.7E-14 0.0028 Sum of Ratios 0.0060 N - Number of samples. NA - Not applicable.
*Half-lives are listed in table Ul-4.
bTotal volume released at 50,000 cubic feet per minute= 7.44E+14 ml/year. c DCSs are used as reference values for the application of best available technology per DOE Order 458.1. d DCSs do not exist for indicator parameters gross alpha and gross beta.
*Total Uranium= 6.20+/-0.18E-02 g; average= 8.36+/-0.24E-11 µg/ml.
1 DCS for Uranium-233 used for this comparison. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 C-1
Appendix C. Summary of Air Monitoring Data TABLE C-2 2012 Effluent Airborne Radioactivity at Vitrification System HVAC (ANVITSK) Total'; Average Mqximum ,. ,, ., **a "
,. DCS .
'"'"Isotope N' 'Activity Released* Concentration * ,. Concentration I > ~~/
I ,, *, (ti) * (µCi/ml) . (µCi/ml} *" *** {µCi/ml) Gross Alpha 26 -1.36+/-1.41E-08 -3.68+/-3.79E-17 <2.93E-16 NAb Gross Beta 26 1.34+/-3.93E-08 0.36+/-1.06E-16 4.80E-16 NAb Co-60 2 0.92+/-2.43E-08 2.48+/-6.54E-17 <1.04E-16 3.6E-10 Sr-90 2 1.05+/-1.96E-08 2.84+/-5.2 7E-17 <8.43E-17 1.0E-10 1-129 2 5.55+/-1.23E-07 1.50+/-0.33E-15 l.61E-15 1.0E-10 Cs-137 2 -0.28+/-1. 75E-08 -0.76+/-4.71E-17 8.45E-17 8.8E-10 Eu-154 2 3.15+/-4.97E-08 0.85+/-1.34E-16 <2.17E-16 7.5E-11 U-232c 2 -0.40+/-1.61E-09 -1.07+/-4.34E-18 <7.13E-18 4.7E-13 U-233/234c 2 5.36+/-2.84E-09 1.45+/-0. 76E-17 2.21E-17 1.0E-12d U-235/236c 2 0.89+/-1.26E-09 2.39+/-3.40E-18 5.49E-18 1.2E-12 U-238c 2 9.63+/-2.BSE-09 2.59+/-0. 77E-17 3.02E-17 1.3E-12 Pu-238 2 -0.26+/-1.34E-09 -0.70+/-3.60E-18 <6.46E-18 8.8E-14 Pu-239/240 2 0.30+/-1.24E-09 0.82+/-3.34E-18 <5.74E-18 8.lE-14 Am-241 2 0.46+/-1.84E-09 1.25+/-4.96E-18 <7.95E-18 9.7E-14 N - Number of samples. NA - Not applicable.
*DOE-derived concentration standards (DCS's) are used as reference values for the application of best available technology per DOE Order 458.1.
b DCSs do not exist for indicator parameters gross alpha and gross beta.
<Tota! Uranium =2.52+/-0.07E-02 g; average= 6.80+/-0.19E-11 µg/ml.
d DCS for Uranium-233 used for this comparison. TABLE C-3 2012 Effluent Airborne Radioactivity at 01-14 Building (ANCSSTI<) MiixJmum' ** ,, ,,, ,',,
.. Total Average
., . DCS 0
i~ot9pe '. N ,* .4ctivity Refeased,
'~
concentration contentration I 1
" '. {Ci} {µci}ml) . ({l'ci/mf.) ., {µCi/nil)
Gross Alpha 22 0. 75+/-5.89E-09 0.62+/-4.84E-17 <3.94E-16 NAb Gross Beta 22 -0.43+/-1.54E-08 -0.36+/-1.27E-16 <l.07E-15 NAb Co-60 2 7.78+/-7.87E-09 6.39+/-6.46E-17 <1.0lE-16 ' 3.6E-10 Sr-90 2 8.01+/-9.52E-09 6.57+/-7.81E-17 <9.24E-17 l.OE-10 1-129 2 8.36+/-4.17E-08 6.86+/-3.43E-16 9.53E-16 l.OE-10 Cs-137 2 0.48+/-7.0SE-09 0.39+/-5.81E-17 8.74E-17 8.8E-10 Eu-154 2 -0.70+/-2.43E-08 -0.58+/-1.99E-16 <3.lOE-16 7.5E-11 U-232c 2 4.55+/-8.00E-10 3. 74+/-6.57E-18 <9.44E-18 4.7E-13 U-233/234c 2 5.83+/-1.49E-09 4.79+/-1.22E-17 9.19E-17 1.0E-12° U-235/236c 2 3.30+/-3.94E-10 2.71+/-3.23E-18 5.32E-18 : l.2E-12 U-238c 2 5.06+/-1.39E-09 4.16+/-1.14E-17 7.02E-17 1.3E-12 Pu-238 2 -3.38+/-4.09E-10 -2. 78+/-3.36E-18 <6.27E-18 8.SE-14 Pu-239/240 2 2.56+/-3.54E-10 2.10+/-2.91E-18 <5.66E-18 8.1E~14 Am-241 2 1.04+/-6.14E-10 0.85+/-5.04E-18 <8.52E-18 9.7E-14 N - Number of samples. NA- Not applicable.
*DOE-derived concentration standards (DCS's) are used as reference values for the application of best available technology per DOE Order 458.1.
b DCSs do not exist for indicator parameters gross alpha and gross beta.
<Total Uranium= 1.79+/-0.06E-02 g; average= 1.47+/-0.0SE-10 µg/mL.
d DCS for Uranium-233 used for this comparison. Note: Operation of t~e 01-14 building stack was discontinued at the end of October 2012 to prepare for demolition. C-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix C. Summary of Air Monitoring Data TABLE C-4 2012 Airborne Radioactivity at Contact Size-Reduction Facility ( ANCSRFKJ Ventilation Off; System Did Not Operate During CV 2012 TABLE C-5 2012 Effluent Airborne Radioactivity at Supernatant Treatment System (ANSTSTK}
;;:. , ':* :3 *' Total
.. * :"Average * ' Maxim.LIin 1::: .0 DCS Isotope
*,, . . .' IV Adivity .Released Concentration
' *., Concentration
', ' ( .~
{Ci) {µCi/ml) {µCi/ml) {µCi/1J1Lf Gross Alpha 26 -3.25+/-2.86E-09 -4.86+/-4.28E-17 < 2.86E-16 NAb Gross Beta 26 1.62+/-0.84E-08 2.42+/-1.26E-16 4.84E-15 NA" H-3 26 1.67+/-0.SOE-05 2.50+/-0.75E-13 1.26E-12 2.lE-07 Co-60 2 -0.37+/-4. llE-09 -0.55+/-6.lSE-17 <9.96E-17 3.6E-10 Sr-90 2 0.32+/-4.67E-09 0.49+/-6.99E-17 <l.13E-16 1.0E-10 1-129 2 7 .85+/-0.39E-06 1.17+/-0.06E-13 1.41E-13 1.0E-10 Cs-137 2 1.99+/-0.64E-08 2.98+/-0.95E-16 4.23E-16 8.SE-10 Eu-154 2 -0.26+/-1.lOE-08 -0.40+/-1.65E-16 <2.62E-16 7.SE-11 U-232c 2 -1.41+/-3. 77E-10 -2.11+/-5.65E-18 <8.31E-18 4.7E-13 U-233/234c 2 6.64+/-5.27E-10 9.94+/-7.89E-18 1.0SE-17 l.OE-12d U-235/236c 2 2.73+/-2.59E-10 4.09+/-3.89E-18 5.17E-18 1.2E-12 U-238c 2 1.51+/-0.53E-09 2.26+/-0.79E-17 2.43E-17 l.3E-12 Pu-238 2 0.35+/-2.54E-10 0.52+/-3.SlE-18 <5.69E-18 8.8E-14 Pu-239/240 2 0.05+/-2.24E-10 0.07+/-3.35E-18 <5.66E-18 8.lE-14 Am-241 2 -0.05+/-2.66E-10 -0.07+/-3.99E-18 <5.88E-18 9.7E-14 N - Number of samples. NA - Not applicable.
*DOE-derived concentration standards (DCS's) are used as reference values for the application of best available technology per DOE Order 458.1.
b DCSs do not exist for indicator parameters gross alpha and gross beta.
<Total Uranium= 4.56+/-0.lSE-03 g; average= 6.83+/-0.22E-11 µg/ml.
d DCS for Uranium-233 used for this comparison. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 C-3
Appendix C. Summary of Air Monitoring Data TABLE C-6 2012 Effluent Airborne Radioactivity at Container Sorting and Packaging Facility (ANCSPFK}
,.,, .. ;~ *.*.... " *~ "
Total *Average. "; Maximum. * ,'
*Dcs 0
.. .* Isotope. Af, . .~ctivity Released. . Concentration
" ."! . :, ,Concentration (Ci} fµCi/ml) (µCi/mi} {/J.Ci/rhL)
Gross Alpha 26 -3.78+/-7.60E-10 -2.13+/-4.27E-17 <3.07E-16 NAb 0 Gross Beta 26 4.18+/-2.13E-09 2.35+/-1.20E-16 9.24E-16 NA Co-60 2 -1.25+/-1.46E-09 -7.02+/-8.22E-17 <1.19E-16 3.6E-10 Sr-90 2 5.68+/-9.37E-10 3.19+/-5.26E-17 <8.79E-17 1.0E-10 1-129 2 7.37+/-0.62E-08 4.14+/-0.35E-15 5.46E-15 1.0E-10 Cs-137 2 4.89+/-9.17E-10 2. 74+/-5.15E-17 <7.32E-17 8.8E-10 Eu-154 2 -1.48+/-3.54E-09 -0.83+/-1.99E-16 <2.94E-16 7.SE-11 U-232c 2 -l.14+/-0.86E-10 -6.43+/-4.86E-18 <8.44E-18 4.7E-13 U-233/234c 2 2.98+/-1.36E-10 1.68+/-0.76E-17 1.82E-17 1.0E-12d U-235/236c 2 1.14+/-5.76E-11 0.64+/-3.24E-18 4.90E-18 1.2E-12 U-238c 2 2.94+/-1.26E-10 1.65+/-0.71E-17 1.72E-17 1.3E-12 Pu-238 2 -3.31+/-5 .33E-11 -1.86+/-2.99E-18 <4.72E-18 8.8E-14 Pu-239/240 2 2.64+/-6.54E-11 1.48+/-3.67E-18 <5.42E-18 8.lE-14 Am-241 2 2.22+/-1.48E-10 1.25+/-0.83E-17 1.82E-17 9.7E-14 N - Number of samples. NA - Not applicable.
*DOE-derived concentration standards (DCS's) are used as reference values for the application of best available technology per DOE Order 458.1.
b DCSs do not exist for indicator parameters gross alpha and gross beta.
<Total Uranium= 1.02+/-0.03E-03 g; average= 6.76+/-0.19E-11 µg/ml.
d DCS for Uranium-233 used for this comparison. TABLE C-7 2012 Effluent Airborne Radioactivity at putdoor Ventilation Enclosures/ Portable Ventilation Units (OVEs/PVUs} rota! Average Maximum. H.* , lsotbp~* *. *iv AC:tJvitY Rel~ased *" *calicentration""* cdrif:e'htraiion
*' * ,. *. . '(Ci} , * *{µCi/ml:.) ,_ ., *. {µCi/ml:.},* ***'* * {µCi/ml.},
0 Gross Alpha 154 -4.97+/-3.17E-09 -3.37+/-2.15E-17 2.36E-16 NA Gross Beta 154 0.32+/-8.98E-09 ci.22+/-6.0SE-17 1.99E-15 NA 0 Co-60 2 0.01+/-2.78E-09 0.004+/-1.89E-17 <3.13E-17 3.6E-10 Sr-90 2 -1.03+/-1.85E-09 -0.70+/-1.25E"17 <1.92E-17 1.0E-10 Cs-137 2 -0.22+/-2.79E-09 -0.15+/-1.89E-17 <3.17E-17 8.8E-10 Eu-154 2
- 1.08+/-7.40E-09 0.73+/-5.0lE-17 . <8.55E-17 7.SE-11 U-232c 2 0.51+/-1.35E-10 3.45+/-9.llE-19 <1.57E-18 4.7E-13 U-233/234' 2 3.32+/-0.47E-09 2.25+/-0.32E-17 2.46E-17 1.0E-12d U-235/236' 2 2.05+/-1.52E-10 1.39+/-1.03E-18 2.29E-18 1.2E-12 U-238' 2
!--~~~~~~-+-~--+~~~~~~~+-~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
3.48+/-0.46E-09 2.36+/-0.31E-17 2.40E-17 ' 1.3E-12 Pu-238 2 -0.98+/-1.lSE-10 * -6.65+/-8.0lE-19 <1.53E-18 8.8E-14 Pu-239/240 2 6.15+/-9.44E-11 4.17+/-6.39E-19 <9.19E-19 8.lE-14 Am-241 2 2.43+/-2.llE-10 1.65+/-1.43E-18 <2.34E-18 9.7E-14 N - Number of samples. NA - Not applicable.
*DOE-derived concentration standards (DCS's) are used as reference values for the application of best available technology per DOE Order 458.1.
b DCSs do not exist for indicator parameters gross alpha and gross beta.
<Total Uranium= 1.15+/-0.05E-02 g; average= 7.78+/-0.37E-11 µg/ml.
d DCS for Uranium-233 used for this comparison. C-4 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012 L
Appendix C. Summary of Air Monitoring Data TABLE C-8 2012 Effluent Airborne Radioactivity at Remote-Handled Waste Facility (ANRHWFK) rota/' Average Maximum 0
, ' ~* > DCS
*isotope N Activity Released Cohcen tration Cohcentration (Ci} (µCi/ml) (µCi/ml} (µCi/ml)
Gross Alpha 26 -l.40+/-8.62E-09 -l.16+/-7.13E-17 <5.32E-16 NAb Gross Beta 26 -1.48+/-2.25E-08 -l.23+/-1.86E-16 <l.05E-15 NAb Co-60 2 0.54+/-1.27E-08 0.45+/-1.05E-16 <1.53E-16 3.6E-10 Sr-90 2 1.83+/-9.84E-09 1.51+/-8.14E-17 <l.28E-16 l.OE-10 1-129 2 1.06+/-0.07E-06 8.75+/-0.55E-15 1.45E-14 l.OE-10 Cs-137 2 1.10+/-1.llE-08 9.11+/-9.19E-17 <1.48E-16 8.8E-10 Eu-154 2 -0.32+/-3.63E-08 -0.26+/-3.00E-16 <4.73E-16 7.5E-11 U-232c 2 -5.27+/-9.39E-10 -4.36+/-7.77E-18 <l.19E-17 4.7E-13 U-233/234c 2 3.34+/-1.83F09 2.76+/-1.SlE-17 3.73E-17 1.0E-12° U-235/236c 2 1.89+/-7.25E-10 l.56+/-5.99E-18 <8.81E-18 1.2E-12 U-238c 2 3.83+/-1.39E-09 3.16+/-1.lSE-17 3.49E-17 1.3E-12 Pu-238 2 0.25+/-6.17E-10 0.21+/-5.llE-18 <8.20E-18
- 8.8E-14 Pu-239/240 2 0.56+/-4.98E-10 0.47+/-4.12E-18 <7.10E-18 8.lE-14 Am-241 2 2.20+/-9.SOE-10 l.82+/-7.86E-18 <l.36E-17 9.7E-14 N - Number of samples. NA- Not applicable.
*DOE-derived concentration standards (DCS's) are used as reference values for the application of best available technology per DOE Order 458.1.
b DCSs do not exist for indicator parameters gross alpha and gross beta. cTotal Uranium= 1.44+/-0.04E-02 g; average= l.19+/-0.03E-10 µg/ml. d DCS for Uranium-233 used for this comparison. TABLE C-9 2012 Ambient Airborne Radioactivity at Background Great Valley Location (AFGRVAL) i~otope
. Na AFfiRVAL
µCi/ml
'} ,,
Average Maximum Gross Alpha 26 8.13+/-3.97E-16 1.65E-15 Gross Beta 26 1.75+/-0.lSE-14 2.84E-14 K-40 3 0.66+/-1.73E-15 1.68E-15 Co-60 3 0.20+/-1.20E-16 <1.35E-16 Sr-90 3 0.93+/-1.lSE-16 1.56E-16 1-129 3 -0. 70+/-1.58E-16 <2.44E-16 Cs-137 3 -0.10+/-1.21E-16 <l.59E-16 Eu~154 3 -0.12+/-3.35E-16 <3.67E-16 U-232b 3 0.63+/-7.89E-18 <8.99E-18 U-233/234° 3 7.46+/-2.34E-17 1.25E-16 U-235/236b 3 3.36+/-8.68E-18 <1.0lE-17 U-238b 3 9.49+/-2.40E-17 l.64E-16 Pu-238 3 -0.61+/-5.28E-18 <6.45E-18 Pu-239/240 3 1.30+/-7.96E-18 <9.08E-18 Am-241 3 1.67+/-6.97E-18 <8.62E-18 N - Number of samples.
"The sampling frequencey at AFG RVAL was changed from semiannually to quarterly after the June 2012 semiannual sample was collected.
b Total Uranium: AFGRVAL average= 2.60+/-0.13E-10 µg/ml. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 C-5
Appendix C. Summary of Air Monitoring Data TABLE C-10 2012 Gross Alpha and Gross Beta Radioactivity at Nearsite Ambient Air Sampling Locations and at Background Great Valley Location (AFGRVAL)
*Gross Alphd
- Gross Beta * *
- Monitoring ., N 'jici/mL * * µCi/ml
.Location* ' *"
. Ayerage .Average * **Maxiniam' AFOl_N 7 1.05+/-0.19E-15 1.44E-15 1.89+/-0.07E-14 2.SSE-14 AF02_NNE 7 1.07+/-0.19E-15 1.66E-15 l.90+/-0.07E-14 2.64E-14 AF03_NE 7 1.11+/-0.19E-15 1.47E-15 1.99+/-0.07E-14 2.72E-14 AF04_ENE 7 1.15+/-0.20E-15 1.47E-15 1.97+/-0.07E-14 2.69E-14 AFOS_E 7 1.02+/-0.20E-15 1.40E-15 1.96+/-0.07E-14 2.74E-14 AF06_ESE 7 1.10+/-0.20E-15 1.55E-15 1.98+/-0.07E-14 2.67E-14 AF07_SE 7 1.08+/-0.20E-15 1.36E-15 1.94+/-0.07E-14 2.54E-14 AFOS_SSE 7 1.11+/-0.20E-15 1.53E-15 1.93+/-0.07E-14 2.59E-14 AF09_S 7 1.06+/-0.19E-15 1.48E-15 2.03+/-0.07E-14 2.76E-14 AFlO_SSW 7 1.09+/-0.19E-15 1.GOE-15 l.92+/-0.07E-14 2.66E-14 AFll_SW 7 9.89+/-1.88E-16 1.64E-15 1.94+/-0.07E-14 2.72E-14 AF12_WSW 7 1.05+/-0.19E-15 1.52E-15 2.00+/-0.07E-14 2.74E-14 AF13_W 7 l.15+/-0.20E-15 1.70E-15 1.95+/-0.07E-14 2.71E-14 AF14_WNw" 6 1.03+/-0.19E-15a 1.51E-15 2.08+/-0.07E-14a 2.71E-14 AFlS_NW 7 1.17+/-0.20E-15 1.48E-15 1.92+/-0.07E-14 2.66E-14 AF16_NNW 7 1.08+/-0.19E-15 1.64E-15 l.95+/-0.07E-14 2.68E-14 AF16HNNW 7 1.78+/-0.31E-15 J 6.20E-15 3.13+/-0.llE-14 J 1.lOE-13 AFGRVAL 26 8.13+/-3.97E-16 1.65E-15 1. 75+/-0.15E-14 2.84E-14 N - Number of samples.
New Ambient air network went online in October 2012.
*The duration of the first sample collected at AF14_WNW was less than one day and it is excluded from the average of the remaining six biweekly samples.
J - High volume sampling results have more variability than the other sampling locations due to uncertainty in the flow values measured during the first quarter of operation - the fourth quarter of 2012. C-6 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix C. Summary of Air Monitoring Data TABLE C-11 2012 Ambient Airborne Radioisotope Activity and Background Great Valley Location (AFGRVAL)
- Monitoring * *. * * .,. * ** *5r"90
- 1-129 . :cs'-137 . " tJ-232 .
*"
- locattbn *' N ** *,*.
- iJ,c;/m'L" 'µCi/ml ** lia/mi * ..(.' ~µ~JJ:mi:. .,, ** L.
b AF01_N 1 1. 74 +/- 1.32E-16 1.00 +/- 0.72E-16 0.09 +/- 1.00E-16 0.00 +/- 8.19E-18 AF02_NNE 1 -3.05 +/- 6.64E-17 0.77 +/- 7.43E-17 0.15 +/- 1.08E-16 0.51+/-1.00E-17 AF03_NE 1 0.79 +/- 1.33E-16 1.77 +/- 6.98E-17 -0.73 +/- 1.18E-16 2.97 +/- 6.99E-18 AF04 ENE 1 0.21+/-1.43E-16 2.61+/-8.39E-17 1.98 +/- 8.22E-17 -0.41 +/- 1.06E-17 AFOS E 1 1.16 +/- 1.2SE-16 5.32 +/- 9.42E-17 8.27 +/- 8.80E-17 -5.76 +/- 6.77E-18 AF06 ESE 1 5.51 +/-9.88E-17 0.95 +/-7.SlE-17 -0.06 +/- 1.40E-16 0.00 +/- 8.92E-18 AF07 SE 1 -0.31+/-1.16E-16 4.61+/-8.56E-17 -2.26 +/- 9.75E-17 -2.17 +/- 7.96E-18 AF08 SSE 1 -0.16+/-1.13E-16 0.00 +/- 1.26E-16 2.86 +/- 9.86E-17 0.74+/-1.03E-17 AF09 S 1 1.05 +/- 1.35E-16 6.32 +/- 8.07E-17 0.19 +/- 1.28E-16 2.17 +/- 7.95E-18 AF10_SSW 1 0.60 +/- 1.28E-16 3.25 +/- 7.20E-17 -0.97 +/- 1.08E-16 0.59 +/- 1.16E-17 AF11_SW 1 2.04 +/- 1.50E-16 b 3.07 +/- 8.16E-17 0.32 +/- 1.09E-16 0.00 +/- 1.04E-17 AF12_WSW 1 0.68 +/- 1.25E-16 -1.01+/-9.06E-17 -0.51+/-1.07E-16 0.34 +/- 1.12E-17 AF13_W 1 0.93 +/- 1.28E-16 -5.31+/-7.56E-17 0.41+/-1.16E-16 -7.29 +/- 9.43E-18 AF14_WNW 1 1.58 +/- 1.40E-16 b -0.03 +/- 1.04E-16 0.54 +/- 1.25E-16 -1.23 +/- 8.00E-18 AF15_NW 1 0.38 +/- 1.15E-16 -0.26 +/- 1.01E-16 -0.14 +/- 1.08E-16 0.81+/-1.06E-17 AF16 NNW 1 0.31.+/- 1.09E-16 -4.25 +/- 7.19E-17 -1.63 +/- 8.45E-17 -4.47 +/- 7.59E-18 AF16HNNWa 1 4.28 +/- 2.86E-17 J b NA 0.68 +/- 3.96E-17 J -0.74 +/- 2.32E-18 J AFGRVAL (range) 3 <7.73E-17-1.56E-16 <5.02E-17-<2.44E.-16 <9.11E-17-<1.59E-16 <5.95E-18-<8.99E-18 5% of*NESHAP*
- 9,SoE-16 :. : :6.S!JE;17"-:
Compliance Limit,.
- <t,,, ....... *pu;:23s* :* ** * *** . ..
Am-241 ' .. MonitoriJJ{f' . Pu-239/2'4~*' N *'"'.
,. * ' focatibn *
' ****. j.LCi/m'L "
i <'* ,lc;;iril. .: *µci1int '. *.J .*
AF01 N 1 0.00 +/- 4.28E-18 -1.97 +/- 5.07E-18 7.25 +/- 8.11E-18 AF02 NNE 1 2.15 +/- 6.33E-18 -2.20 +/- 7.63E-18 -0.05 +/- 7.57E-18 AF03 NE 1 -1.05 +/-4.99E-18 3.10 +/- 7.61E-18 -0.02 +/- S.21E-18 AF04 ENE 1 0.00 +/- 5.29E-18 1.19 +/- 7.47E-18 8.06 +/- 9.04E-18 AFOS- E 1 0.00 +/- 5.30E-18 1.~0 +/- 7.49E-18 2.72 +/- 6.67E-18 AF06_ESE 1 1.09 +/- 6.84E-18 2.17 +/- 8.36E-18 3.27 +/- 5.79E-18 AF07_SE 1 0.00 +/- 4.86E-18 3.31 +/- 8.13E-18 3.17 +/- 7.79E-18 AFOS_SSE 1 0.00 +/- 4.45E-18 -2.05 +/- 5.28E-18 0.87 +/- 7.04E-18 AF09_S 1 -2.12 +/- 5.46E-18 0.00 +/- 4.60E-18 -0.85 +/- 6.76E-18 AF10 SSW 1 -0.02 +/- 6.59E-18 -1.02 +/- 4.86E-18 -0.75 +/- 4.9SE-18 AF11 SW 1 1.13 +/- 9.14E-18 0.58 +/- 1.12E-17 0.74 +/- 7.22E-18 AF12_WSW 1 0.00 +/- 4.46E-18 -0.02 +/- 6.62E-18 1.46 +/- 6.73E-18 AF13_W 1 0.99 +/- 6.22E-18 -1.03 +/- 6.81E-18 -2.50 +/- 8.12E-18 AF14_WNW 1 1.17 +/- 7.30E-18 1.17 +/- 7.30E-18 -3.83 +/- 7.20E-18 AF15- NW 1 -3.04 +/- 5.59E-18 -0.02 +/- 6.53E-18 -2.33 +/- 6.67E-18 AF16_NNW 1 1.99 +/- S.87E-18 3.98 +/- 7.04E-18 0.00 +/- 3.26E-18 AF16HNNWa 1 -0.01+/-1.68E-18 J 0.26 +/- 1.60E-18 J 1.04 +/- 1.63E-18 J AFGRVAL (range) 3 <4.38E-18-<6.4SE-18 <S.63E-18-<9.08E-18 <4. 7 4E-18-<8.62E-18
.... 5% of NESHAP':
\cq~J'>Hand! Limit
.." .'" i.os~-16 ;:1-, 'I" 1.00E-16 -: ... * . ;'..9. .50frf7 .... ..
~ ;* .
N - Number of samples. NA - Parameter (1-129) is not sampled for at this location.
*Location AF16HNNW is the high volume sampler at the same location as AF16_NNW.
b Although result is greater than the uncertainty, the result is below the Minimum Detectable Activity (MDA). WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 C-7
Appendix C. Summary of Air Monitoring Data This page intentionally left blank C-8 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
APPENDIX D-1 Summary of Groundwater Screening Levels and Practical Quantitation limits Groundwater Sampling Methodology Groundwater samples are collected from monitoring wells using either dedicated Teflon well bailers or bladder pumps. Bailers are used in low-yield wells; bladder pumps are used in wells with good water-yielding characteristics. This sampling equipment is dedicated to an individual well to reduce the likelihood of sample contamination from external materials or cross contamination. To ensure that only representative groundwater is sampled, three well volumes are removed (purged) from the well before the actual samples are collected. In low-yield wells, pumping or bailing to dryness provides sufficient purging. Conductivity and pH are measured before and after sampling to confirm the geochemical stability of the groundwater during sampling. The bailer, a tube with a check valve at the bottom, is lowered slowly into the well to minimize agitation of the water column. The bailer containing the groundwater is then withdrawn from the well and emptied into a sample container. Bladder pumps use compressed air to gently squeeze a Teflon bladder that prevents air contact with the groundwater as it is pumped into a sample container with a minimum of agitation and mixing. A check valve ensures that the water flows in only one direction. Groundwater. samples are cooled and preserved, with chemicals if required, to minimize chemical and/or biological chang-es after sample collection. A strict chain-of-custody protocol is followed for all samples collected by the WVDP. Groundwater Screening levels (GSls) for Radiological Constituents: Background values for radiological constituents in ground-water were derived for the Corrective Measures Studies in 2009 using data from background wells 301, 401, 706, and 1302 in the sand and gravel unit on the north plateau for samples collected from 1991 through September 2009. The 95% upper . confidence limit (UCL) was applied in a similar statistical calculation for each radiological constituent. The site-specific GSLs for radiological constituents were set to the larger of the background levels or the NYSDEC Technical and Operational Guidance Series (TOGS) 1.1.1 Class GA groundwater quality standard for each radiological constituent. The NYSDEC TOGS standards are only established for gross alpha and gross beta concentrations, consequently most of the screening values for radiological con-stituents are set to equal the site background values. The GSLs for radiological constituents are listed in Table 0-lA. The site monitoring well radiological concentrations presented in the data tables in Appendix D-2 are compared with these GSLs. Bolding indicates that the measured concent!Ction exceeded the GSL. Groundwater Screening levels for Metals: The calculated WVDP GSLs for metals were established in WVDP-494, North Pla-teau Plume Area Characterization Report. The GSLs for metals were selected as a greater of the NYSDEC TOGS 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater Quality Standards or background concentrations in groundwater as documented in Appendix E of WVDP-494. The groundwater background concentrations were derived from a statistical calculation of the mean plus two standard deviations for metals data collected from four background wells {301, 401, 706, and well 1302). Elevated levels of chromium and nickel were identified in site wells constructed with stainless steel (which includes 301, 401, and 706), as presented to NYSDEC in a report entitled Final Report: Evaluation of the Pilot Program to Investigate Chromium & Nickel Concentration in Groundwater in the Sand & Gravel Unit (WVNSCO, 1998). The findings of this report were subsequently accepted by NYSDEC in their memo-randum dated September 15, 1998. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 D-1
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data Consequently, the majority of the chromium and nickel results from these stainless-steel wells were omitted from the dataset used to establish background, relying primarily on the results from polyvinyl chloride (PVC) well 1302 for these two constitu-ents. The groundwater screening values for metals are listed in Table D-18. The site monitoring well metals .concentrations presented in the data tables in Appendix D-2 a re compared with these GS Ls. Bolding indicates that the measured concentration exceeded the GSL. D-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data TABLE D-lA Groundwater Screening Levels (GSLs) for Radiological Constituents Range of Qbserved W,VDP 95% UCL NYSDEC TOG~ 1.1.1,
' Concentrptions From Background Class GA
,. Radiological Constituent Background Monitoring, wells 301; 401, 106, *
- Groundwater.' ,Groundwqter.
WVDPGSLsf
. , (µ.Clfml}. '
Concentration ° Quality Standards ,b and).302°, *, -)" (µCi/ml) (µCi/mt) (µClfmL)' Gross alpha < 7.78E-10 - l.SSE-08 7.61E-09 1.SOE-08 1.SOE-08 Gross beta < 2.lSE-09 - 2.35E-08 l.56E-08 1.00E-06 1.00E-06 Tritium < 3.17E-08 - 2.63E-07 1.78E-07 NE 1.78E-07 Carbon-14 < 1.36E 5.02E-08 2.82E-08 NE 2.82E-08 Cesium-137 5.79E 1.90E-08 1.03E-08 NE 1.03E-08 lodine-129 < 2.85E 1.58E-09 9.61E-10 NE 9.61E-10 Potassium-40 < 5.00E 3.56E-07 1.99E-07 NE 1.99E-07 Radium-226 < 1.lOE-10 - 2.99E-09 1.33E-09 NE 1.33E-09 Radium-228 < 2.23E-10 - 3.20E-09 2.16E-09 NE 2.16E-09 Strontium-90 < 2.41E 6.40E-09 5.90E-09 NE 5.90E-09 Technetium-99 < 8.21E-10 - 8.61E-09 5.02E-09 NE 5.02E-09 Total Uranium < 1.27E 3.46E-03 1.34E-03 NE 1.34E-03 Uranium-232 < 1.71E 3.78E-10 l.38E-10 NE 1.38E-10 Uranium-233/234 < 3.85E 1.53E-09 6.24E-10 NE 6.24E-10 Uranium-23Si236 < 1.80E-11 - 1.39E-10 8.07E-11 NE 8.07E-11 Uranium-238 < 1.32E-11 - 1.26E-09 4.97E-10 NE 4.97E-10 NE - No NYSDEC TOGS 1.1.1 groundwater quality standard has been established for this analyte.
*The data used. for the calculation of backgroun_d values was taken from background wells 301, 401, 706, and 1302 in the sand and gravel unit on the north plateau for samples collected from 1991 through September 2009. The background was set to the upper limit of the 9S% confidence interval.
b NYSDEC TOGS 1.1.1(June1998/2004 addendum) Class GA groundwater quality standards and guidance values. c The GSLs for radiological constituents were set equal to the larger of the background concentrations or the NYSDEC TOGS 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater Quality Standards. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 D-3
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data TABLE D-lB Groundwater Screening Levels for Metals RaQge of Observed
,NYSDEC TOGS ',L.1~1 I
Concentrations From Background wvbiC3rdllndwiiter
Background:
- Class*GA
,1,' ., Groundwa.ter'.,*, Scr~.~nif!ft Level~.
- Anaiyte'ii' ; ' *: >>, '>, "' * '
- b GrouriHivatei. "I Monitoring Wefls 301, Concentrat10n {G$Ls)c Quality Standards 401;705, find 1sa2 '> (µg/L) " .*fP.tifl) .:: .
- I. :.fµg/p
(µg/L} Antimony, total 0.5 - 19.7 15.1 3 15.1 Arsenic, total 1.5 - 34.4 20.9 25 25 Barium, total 71.7 - 499 441 1,000 1,000 Beryllium, total 0.10 - 2.50 1.85 3 3 Cadmium, total 0.30 - 5.30 7.27 5 7.27 Chromium, totala s - 66 52.3 so 52.3 Cobalt, total 2.05 - 60.9 67.8 NE 67.8 Copper, total 1.4 - 90.5 59.9 200 200 Lead, total 0.5 -120 42.7 25 42.7 Mercury, total 0.03 - 0.4 0.263 0.7 0.7 Nickel, totala 10 - 77.8 59.5 100 100 Selenium, total 1.0 - 25.0 10.1 10 10.1 Silver, total 0.1 -10 15.5 50 50 Thallium, total 0.3 -13.1 13.9 0.5 13.9 Tin, total 5.6 - 3,000 4,083 NE 4,083 Vanadium, total 0.6 - 73.1 69.6 NE 69.6 Zinc, total 5.71 - 256 127 2,000 2,000* NE - No TOGS 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater quality standard has been established for this arialyte.
- Analytes listed are those identified in the 6 NYCRR Part 373-2 Appendix 33 List.
b Data used for the calculation of background values.was taken from wells 301, 401, 706, and 1302 in the S&G unit on the north P.lateau for samples collected from 1991 to December 2008. The background concentration was set equal to the mean plus two standard deviations (as reported in WVDP-494). Ninety-five percent of measurements are expected to fall below this value. Data were rounded to three significant digits or the closest integer. 0 Metals GSLs were set equal to the larger of the background concentration or the TOGS 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater Quality Standards. d Elevated chromium and nickel concentrations attributed to well corrosion were noted in wells 301, 401, and 706 over the monitoring period. All results suspected to be affected by corrosion (i.e., all chromium and nickel results for 301 and 401,
*and all results after May 2004 from 706) were excluded from the background calculation.
D-4 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data TABLE D-lC Practical Quantitation Limits (PQl.s) 6 NYCRR 0
- Appendix 33 Volatile Organic tom pounds '
*-* PQL **'PQL Compound Compound
... (µg/L). .,. ... (µg/L) ..
Acetone . 10 cis-1,3-Dichloropropene s Acetonitrile 100 Ethyl Benzene s Acrolein 11 Ethyl methacrylate s Acrylonitrile s 2-Hexanone 10 Ally! chloride s lsobutyl alcohol 100 Benzene s Methacrylonitrile s Bromodichloromethane s Methyl ethyl ketone 10 Bromoform (methyl bromide) s Methyl iodide s Bromomethane 10 Methyl methacrylate s Carbon disulfide 10 4-Methyl-2-pentanone (MIBK) 10 Carbon tetrachloride s Methylene bromide 10 Chlorobenzene s Methylene chloride s Chloroethane 10 Pentachloroethane s Chloroform s Propionitrile so Chloromethane (methyl chloride) 10 Styrene s Chloroprene s 1,1,1,2-Tetrachloroethane s 1,2-Dibromo-3-chloropropane s 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane* s Dibromochloromethane s Tetrachloroethylene s 1,2-0ibromoethane s Toluene s tra ns-1,4-Dichloro-2-butene s 1,1,1-Trichloroethane (1,1,1-TCA) s 1,1-Dichloroethane (1,1-DCA) s 1,1,2-Trichloroethane (1,1,2-TCA) s 1,2-Dichloroethane (1,2-DCA) s Trichloroethylene (TCE) s 1,1-Dichloroethylene (1,1-0CE) s Trichlorofluoromethane s trans-1,2-Dichloroethylene (1,2-DCE{trans]) s 1,2,3-Trichloropropane s Dichlorodifluoromethane (DCDF Meth) s Vinyl acetate 10 1,2-Dichloropropane s Vinyl chloride 10 trans-1,3-Dichloropropene s Xylene (total) s
,~, ,, '* .... "
' 0 PQL' PQL 6* NYCRR Appe~dix 33 Metals G 0 NYCRR Appendix 33 Metals:
. "*. *""** ' ,,. *, '. "* (µg/L):. ,,_ ', -<' * ' ><<_" e',/' '"" ~/ ; >" (µg/L}.
Aluminumb 200 Manganeseb 1S Antimony 10 Mercury 0.2 Arsenic 10 Nickel 40 Barium 200 Selenium 5 Beryllium 1 Silver 10 Cadmium 5 Thallium 2 Chromium 10 Tin 3,000 Cobalt so Vanadiom so Copper 2S Zinc 20 Lead 3 Note: Specific quantitation limits are highly matrix dependent and may not always be achievable. 0 lltle 6 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules, and Regulations of the State of New York. b Not a 6 NYCRR Appendix 33 parameter; sampled for the north plateau early warning program. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 D-5
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data TABLE D-1C (continued) Practical Quantitation Limits (PQLs) 0 "' 6 NYCRR Appendix 33 Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds
'PQL ' : '" PQL compound , (p.g/L) ,' >' ,,,:, ..: ,Compound* *,,,: *.'.' (µg/L)
Acenaphthene
- 10 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 10 Acenaphthylene 10 2,6-Dinitrotoluene 10 Acetophenone 10 Diphenylamine 10 2-Acetylaminofluorene 10 Ethyl methanesulfonate 10 4-Aminobiphenyl 10 Famphur 10 Ana line 10 Fluoranthene 10 Anthracene 10 Fluorene 10 Ara mite 10 Hexa'chlorobenzene 10 Benzo[a]anthracene 10 Hexachlorobutadiene 10 Benzo[a]pyrene 10 Hexachlorocyclopentadiene 10 Benzo[b]fluoranthene 10 Hexachloroethane 10 Benzo[gh i]perylene 10 Hexachlorophene 10 Benzo[k]fluoranthene 10 Hexachloropropene 10 Benzyl alcohol 10 lndeno(l,2,3,-cd)pyrene 10 Bis(2-chloroethyl)ether 10 lsodrin 10 Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane 10 lsophorone 10 Bis{2-chloroisopropyl)ether 10 lsosafrole 10
.Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate. 10 Ke pone 10 4-Bromophenyl phenyl ether 10 Methapyrilene 10 Butyl benzyl phthalate 10 Methyl methanesulfonate 10 Chlorobenzilate 10 3-Methylcholanthrene 10 2-Chloronaphthalene 10 2-Methylnapthalene 10 2-Chlorophenol 10 1,4-Naphthoquinone 10 4-Chlorophenyl phenyl ether 10 1-Naphthylamine 10 Chrysene 10 . 2-Naphthylamine 10 Di-n-butyl phthalate 10 Nitrobenzene 10 Di-n-octyl phthalate 10 5-Nitro-o-toluidine 10 Diallate 10 4-Nitroquinoline 1-oxide 40 Dibenz[a,h]anthracine 10 N-Nitrosodi-n-butylamine 10 Dibenzofuran 10 N-Nitrosodiethylamine 10 3,3-Dichlorobenzidine 10 N-Nitrosodimethylamine 10 2,4-Dichlorophenol 10 N-Nitroso-di-n-propylamine 10 2,6-Dichlorophenol 10 N-Nitrosodiphenylamine 10 Diethyl phthalate 10 N-Nitrosomethylethylamine 10 Dimethoate 10 N-Nitrosomorpholine 10 7,12-Dimethylbenz[a]anthracene 10 N-Nitrosopiperidine 10 3,3-Dimethylbenzidine 20 N-Nitrosopyrrolidine 10 2,4-Dimethylphenol 10 Naphthalene 10 Dimethyl phthalate 10 0,0,0-Triethyl phosphorothioate 10 4,6-Dinitro-o-cresol 25 0,0-Diethyl 0-2-pyrazinylphosphorothioate 10 2,4-Dinitrophenol 25 Note: Specific quantitation limits are highly matrix dependent and may not always be achievable.
"'Title 6 of the Qfficial Compilation of Codes, Rules, and Regulations of the State of New York.
D-6 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data TABLE D-lC (concluded) Practical Quantitation Limits (PQLs) Ei NYCRR0 , Appendix 33 Semi-Volatile Organic Compounds PQL , ' J>QL c6mpound (µg/l) Compound (µg/l)' p-(Dimethylamino)azobenzene 10 2,3,4,6-Tetrachlorophenol 10 p-Chloroaniline 10 Tetraethyl dithiopyrophosphate 10 p-Ch loro-m-cresol 10 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene 10 p-Cresol 10 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 25 p-Dichlorobenzene 10 2,4,6-Trich lorophenol 10 p-Nitroaniline 25 alpha,alpha-Dimethylphenethylamine 50 p-Nitrophenol 25 m-Cresol 10 p-Phenylenediamine 10 m-Dichlorobenzene 10 Parathion 10 m-Dinitrobenzene 10 Pentachlorobenzene 10 m-Nitroanaline 25 Pentachloronitrobenzene 10 o-Cresol 10 Penta ch lorophenol 25 o-Dichlorobenzene 10 Phenacetin 10 o-Nitroaniline 25 Phenanthrene 10 o-Nitrophenol 10 Phenol 10 o-Toluidine 10 Pron amide 10 sym-Trinitrobenzene 10 Pyrene 10 2-Picoline 10 Safrole 10 Pyridine 10 1,2,4,5-Tetrachl orobenzene 10 1,4-Dioxane 10 dtner Organii:: tompoun<:Js '" " j,, c ,,,, 1,2-Dichloroethylene (Total) 5 N-Dodecane 60 Tributyl phosphate 10 Note: Specific quantitation limits are highly matrix dependent and may not always be achievable. a Title 6 of the Official Compilation of Codes, Rules, and Regulations of the State of New York. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 D-7
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data This page intentionally left blank D-8 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
----- ---~-----------------
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data APPENDIX D-2 Groundwater Monitoring Data TABLE D-2A 2012 Indicator Results From the Sand and Gravel Unit
- Conductivity Location Hydraulic . Date pH
- Gr<?.SS A/plw ' '* Gross Beta .:1*
- Tr,itiuro* .. 1 c;de'
- p~~iti~~ 'a C~JJ~~ted **su * " µnihos/cm@ . µCi/nil µCi/;;L µCi/f;,,i .
25gC
- Grout? ifwater Scriening'Levels b . *: NA ' * *
- NA *~ . l:soE-os 1.00£~06
- 301 UP . Mar-12 6.73 . 1180 -0.28+/-1.82E-09 6.20+/-2.14E-09 3.99+/-4. 76E-08 301 UP Jun-12 6.60 1837 1.51+/-2.23E-09 7.20+/-2.98E-09 8.03+/-7.28E-08 301 UP Sep-12 6.39 2576 -0.67+/-3.30E-09 6.96+/-4.95E-09 -1.10+/-1.04E-07 301 UP Dec-12 6.83 2153 2.04+/-2.87E-09 1.03+/-0.32E-08 7 .08+/-6. 68E-08 302 UP Jun-12 6.71 4942 5.72+/-5.64E-09 4.64+/-7.02E-09 5.79+/-7.15E-08 302 UP Dec-12 7.00 4736 -4.23+/-6.64E-09 2.33+/-0.92E-08 3.69+/-6.44E-08 401 UP Mar-12 7.20 3790 0.00+/-5.98E-09 1.19+/-0.57E-08 3.52+/-4.77E-08 401 UP Jun-12 6.99 2822 0.86+/-3.16E-09 6.37+/-4.03E-09 5.16+/-7.13E-08 401 UP Sep-12 6.71 2841 6.01+/-4.65E-09 0.92+/-6.96E-09 -0.52+/-1.04E-07 401 UP Dec-12 7.06 2694 -0.62+/-7.24E-09 1.59+/-0.49E-08 4.23+/-6.27E-08 402 UP Jun-12 6.86 5382 1.91+/-4.40E-09 2.96+/-6.07E-09 2.69+/-6.98E-08 402 UP Dec-12 7.15 5476 1.25+/-0.92E-08 1.24+/-0.67E-08 8.80+/-6.84E-08 403 UP Jun-12 7.02 1697 2.96+/-2.42E-09 1.10+/-0.30E-08 3.13+/-8.13E-08 403 UP Dec-12 7.13 1820 -0.50+/-3.62E-09 1.34+/-0.37E-08 5.23+/-8.89E-08 706 UP Mar-12 6.98 583 -4.43+/-8.68E-10 5.88+/-2.29E-09 2 .80+/-4. 77E-08 706 UP Jun-12 6.83 1016 0.18+/-1.39E-09 1.28+/-0.21E-08 4.56+/-6.81E-08 706 UP Sep-12 6.50 1075 0.45+/-1.04E-09 8.25+/-1.38E-09 8.25+/-8.78E-08 706 UP Dec-12 7.11 772 1.4 7+/-1.05E-09 6.14+/-0.94E-09 6.22+/-8.80E-08 1302 UP Dec-12 6.94 1036 -1.68+/-1.60E-09 0.64+/-1.66E-09 1.28+/-0.88E-07 1304 DOWN Mar-12 7.13 1876 -1.42+/-4.80E-09 1.72+/-2.70E-09 -0.61+/-4.72E-08 1304 DOWN Jun-12 7.04 2408 1.60+/-2.18E-09 4.08+/-2.67E-09 3.48+/-8.96E-08 1304 DOWN Sep-12 7.00 1340 3.80+/-2.SOE-09 9.24+/-1.84E-09 7 .80+/-7 .90E-08 1304 DOWN Dec-12 7.08 1277 0.74+/-3.91E-09 6.94+/-1.90E-09 9.33+/-8.55E-08 NA - Not applicable.
SU - Standard units. a Hydraulic position is relative to other wells within the same hydrogeologic unit. b The GSLs for radiological constituents are set equal to the larger of the background concentrations or the TOGS 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater Quality Standards (see Table D-1A). WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 D-9
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data TABLE D-2A (continued} 2012 Indicator Results From the Sand and Gravel Unit
, . Con.f!!:'ctivitr Lo~~tio~ *'Hydraulic Date pH
µmhos/cm@
Gross Alpha. < *Gross Beta Tritium . Code'.:
,. . Po,sf.~ion ~ Collected, SU 2S.9C ' , * ,i""*
µCi/ml
,' .,: ,,, ' µCVmL µCi/ml 0
,'*el Groundwater Screenina Levels .NA NA 1.SOE-08 , 1.00E-06 1.78E-07 103 DOWN Mar-12 8.48 2570 2.43+/-4. 76E-09 3.78+/-0.59E-08 0.78+/-4.72E-08 103 DOWN Jun-12 8.08 2388 5.40+/-2.66E-09 3.35+/-0.37E-08 4. 72+/-8.99E-08 103 DOWN Sep-12 8.36 1916 3.05+/-1.64E-09 l.82+/-0.22E-08 5.83+/-7.15E-08 103 DOWN Dec-12 8.62 1388 2.50+/-1.63E-09 1.21+/-0.22E-08 6.23+/-8.95E-08 104 DOWN Mar-12 7.15 1698 4.51+/-6.37E-09 4.90+/-0.22E-05 1.98+/-0.SOE-07 104 DOWN Jun-12 7.13 1638 2.09+/-5.42E-09 5.50+/-0.04E-05 7.41+/-8.90E-08 104 DOWN Sep-12 6.92 1932 5.42+/-6.92E-09 7 .25+/-0.03E-05 1.49+/-0.99E-07 104 DOWN Dec-12 7.27 1832 -0.40+/-5.95E-09 6.57+/-0.03E-05 1.82+/-0.94E-07 111 DOWN Mar-12 6.67 544 1.00+/-2.49E-09 2.34+/-0.11E-06 2.45+/-4. 75E-08 111 DOWN Jun-12 6.60 906 3.99+/-1. 77E-09 5.97+/-0.03E-06 5.75+/-9.13E-08 111 DOWN Sep-12 6.45 2042 1.57+/-1.28E-08 7 .96+/-0.12E-06 l.46+/-0.98E-07 111 DOWN Dec-12 6.70 1102 8.32+/-6.53E-09 6.05+/-0.08E-06 l.10+/-0.84E-07 205 DOWN Jun-12 7.17 2485 3.23+/-2.46E-09 7.75+/-2.62E-09 3.86+/-6.12E-08 205 DOWN* Dec-12 7.25 2678 -0.34+/-6.69E-09 2.21+/-0.58E-08 5.24+/-8.92E-08 406 DOWN Mar-12 6.98 1110 * -0.48+/-1.50E-09 6.50+/-1.92E-09 l.57+/-4.75E-08 406 DOWN Jun-12 7.04 867 0.26+/-1.20E-09 6.87+/-1.86E-09 7.21+/-9.21E-08 406 DOWN Sep-12 7.17 712 2.18+/-8.32E-10 3.83+/-0.67E-09 8.69+/-7.36E-08 406 DOWN Dec-12 7.22 864 -0.46+/-1. 76E-09 6.50+/-2.llE-09 5.89+/-8.87E-08 408 DOWN Mar-12 7.33 2982 0.31+/-1.15E-08 1.92+/-0.lOE-04 5.13+/-4.81E-08 408 DOWN Jun-12 7.21 3622 3.51+/-8.59E-09 1.98+/-0.0lE-04 0.21+/-1.16E-07 408 DOWN Sep-12 6.90 2499 0.10+/-1.30E-08 2.14+/-0.0lE-04 2.97+/-8.21E-08 408 DOWN Dec-12 7.21 3266 1.56+/-2.81E-09 1.94+/-0.0lE-04 5.95+/-9.84E-08 501 DOWN Mar-12 7.40' 2300 1.12+/-8.06E-09 8. 73+/-0.39E-05 0.92+/-3.38E-08 501 DOWN Jun-12 7.40 2651 1.23+/-1.08E-08 8. 70+/-0.04E-05 l.38+/-1.19E-07 501 DOWN Sep-12 6.45 2499 2.69+/-8.06E-09 7.10+/-0.04E-05 2.42+/-8.05E-08 501 DOWN Dec-12 7.41 2498 1.16+/-2.27E-09 7 .87+/-0.07E-05 0.56+/-1.0lE-07 502 DOWN Mar-12 7.39 2256 -2.28+/-7.74E-09 8.45+/-0.38E-05 5.77+/-4.82E-08 502 DOWN Jun-12 7.36 2441 1.74+/-5.66E-09 7. 76+/-0.03E-05 1.38+/-1.19E-07 502 DOWN Sep-12 7.01 2392 0.50+/-1.23E-08 7 .91+/-0.04E-05 4.13+/-8.25E-08 502 DOWN Dec-12 7.34 2295 0.55+/-2.52E-09 8.13+/-0.07E-05 7 .30+/-7 .28E-08 602A DOWN Jun-12 6.75 618 1.24+/-1.21E-09 l.06+/-0.14E-08 1.45+/-0.69E-07 602A DOWN Dec-12 7.03 666 1.78+/-1.02E-09 2.10+/-0.17E-08 2.34+/-1.131:-07 Note: Bolding indicates radiological concentration that exceeds the GSL NA - Not applicable.
- SU - Standard units.
- Hydraulic position is relative to other wells within the same hydrogeologic unit.
b The GSLs for radiological constituents are set equal to the larger of the background concentrations or the TOGS 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater Quality Standards (See Table D-lA). D-10 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data TABLE D-2A (continued) 2012 Indicator Results From the Sand and Gravel Unit Conductivity . Locatipn Hyqraulic
.., Date pH
µmhos/cm@'
Gros~Alpha ... Gross.Beta
'* Tritium Code Position° Collected SU µCi/ml µCi/ml µCi/ml
*. .. . 2s. 2c . ' .f
. . b Groundwater Screening levels NA NA 1.50£-08 1.00E-06 1.78£-07 604 DOWN Jun-12 6.35 1474 l.24+/-1.60E-09 8.44+/-3.09E-09 7.39+/-9.44E-08 604 DOWN Dec-12 6.86 1605 l.02+/-2.69E-09 l.10+/-0.22E-08 4.62+/-8.76E-08 8605 DOWN Mar-12 6.81 1030 l.03+/-0.54E-08 5.59+/-0.25E-06 -0.81+/-4. 72E-08 8605 DOWN Jun-12 6.45 1376 9.61+/-8,15E-09 5.68+/-0.09E-06 2.52+/-9.23E-08 8605 DOWN Sep-12 6.64 1878 7 .83+/-7 .25E-09 4.75+/-0.0SE-06 5.16+/-8.63E-08 8605 DOWN Dec-12 6.68 1308 1.47+/-0.31E-08 7 .60+/-0.24E-06 1.02+/-0.81E-07 8607 DOWN Mar-12 6.66 1608 -1.95+/-5.34E-09 2. 78+/-0.44E-08 -1.01+/-4.72E-08 8607 DOWN Jun-12 6.23 1558 l.23+/-1.87E-09 2.78+/-0.31E-08 1.17+/-1.01E-07 8607 DOWN Sep-12 6.43 1376 -0.20+/-1. lOE-09 6.04+/-i.91E-09 5.48+/-7.lOE-08 8607 DOWN Dec-12 7.19 1222 0.53+/-2.82E-09 2.74+/-0.21E-08 l.27+/-0.91E-07 8609 DOWN Mar-12 7.09 2084 1.88+/-5.55E-09 8.95+/-0.41E-07 1.10+/-0.49E-07 8609 DOWN Jun-12 7.49 2008 0.19+/-3.40E-09 1.23+/-0.06E-06 1.92+/-8.43 E-08 8609 DOWN Sep-12 6.74 2190 -1.44+/-5.67E-09 1.32+/-0.05E-06 1.67+/-1.11E-07 8609 DOWN Dec-12 7.05 2250 0.86+/-1.06E-08 1.58+/-0.0GE-06 2.08+/-0.95E-07 105 DOWN Mar-12 7.15 2198 -1.56+/-7.13E-09 5.45+/-0.26E-05 2.25+/-0.SOE-07 105 DOWN Jun-12 7.09 1951 -3.05+/-6.40E-09 5.06+/-0.04E-05 l.61+/-0.99E-07 105 DOWN Sep-12 6.91 2078 5.27+/-9.44E-09 5.19+/-0.03E-05 3.15+/-1.27E-07 105 DOWN Dec-12 7.29 2155 -1.39+/-5.48E-09 6.05+/-0.03E-05 2.42+/-0.99E-07 106 DOWN Mar-12 6.72 1221 1.10+/-3.25E-09 9.85+/-0.44E-07 3.17+/-0.52E-07 106 DOWN Jun-12 6.90 1353 -1.05+/-2.61E-09 9.89+/-0.52E-07 5.54+/-1.22E-07 106 DOWN Sep-12 6.67 1534 2.36+/-4.90E-09 1.15+/-0.04E-06 7.38+/-1.59E-07 106 DOWN Dec-12 6.90 1438 4.50+/-6.90E-09 1.13+/-0.04E-06 4.18+/-1.14E-07 116 DOWN Jun-12 7.02 1915 -4.92+/-3.62E-09 1.66+/-0.02E-05 -0.66+/-8.50E-08 116 DOWN Dec-12 7.09 2030 -3.86+/-5.46E-09 2.04+/-0.02E-05 7.82+/-8.02E-08 605 DOWN
- Jun-12 6.64 678 3.75+/-8.00E-10 2.22+/-0.16E-08 1.66+/-5.85E-08 605 DOWN Dec-12 . 6.98 826 -0.12+/-1.04E-09 6.27+/-0.26E-08 l.Ol+/-0.94E-07 Note: Bolding indicates radiological concentration that exceeds the GSL.
NA - Not applicable. SU - Standard units.
- Hydraulic position is relative to other wells within the same hydrogeologic unit.
b The GSLs for radiological constituents are set equal to the larger of the background concentrations or the TOGS 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater Quality Standards (See Table D-1A). WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 D-11
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data TABLE D-2A (continued) 2012 Indicator Results From the Sand and Gravel Unit
<; pH Conducti1tity focaii6n
- Hydr,autic :*Date Gross.Alpha Gross Beta. ..*TritilJm 1.
µ'/;,/i~~Jcm@
.Code. . Position. q Co.lff!Cted , . SJ! ;: . 2SQC ,µCif.ml .µCi/ml
.. J:ICi~pL
., b Groundwa.ter. Screening .Levf!fs : NA .,,,I' . NA ; .* . , iSOf-08, . .1..00¥:06 1.78£:07..
801 DOWN Mar-12 6.64 1342 0.69+/-4.95E-09 1.45+/-0.0GE-05 2.29+/-0.51E-07 801 DOWN Jun-12 6.60 1320 0.63+/-4.69E-09 1.11+/-0.01 E-05 1.25+/-1.18E-07 801 DOWN Sep-12 6.46 1180 0.90+/-3. 76E-09 8.84+/-0.09E-06 1.03+/-0.89E-07 801 DOWN Decc12 6.73 1184 1.14+/-2.14E-08 9.96+/-0.36E-06 7 .08+/-9.95E-08 802 DOWN Mar-12 6.33 155 0.60+/-1.20E-09 2.26+/-0.32E-08 -1.63+/-4.73E-08 802 DOWN Jun-12 7.17 464 -0.28+/-8.lOE-10 2.12+/-0.04E-07 5.54+/-6.09E-08 802 DOWN Sep-12 6.91 909 4.83+/-7.33E-10 5.81+/-0.07E-07 -0.47+/-1.03E-07 802 DOWN Dec-12 7.02 810 -1.16+/-8.97E-10 5. 70+/-0.07E-07 4.22+/-7 .03E-08 803 DOWN Mar-12 7.25 2024 -2.15+/-7.29E-09 2.03+/-0.llE-06 5.69+/-4.84E-08 803 DOWN Jun-12 7.05 2252 0.81+/-4.19E-09 2.16+/-0.05 E-06 l.46+/-0.69E-07 803 DOWN Sep-12 5.77 2316 0.65+/-1.48E-08 2.04+/-0.0GE-06 1.18+/-0.91E-07 803 DOWN Dec-12 7.20 2126 3.05+/-2.86E-09 1.89+/-0.12E-06 1.63+/-1.lOE-07 804 DOWN Mar-12 6.76 1030 0.00+/-4.05E-09 2.88+/-0.14E-07 -3.24+/-4.68E-08 804 DOWN Jun-12 6.80 1164 5.72+/-2.55E-09 3.34+/-0.07E-07 1.03+/-0.67E-07 804 DOWN Sep-12 6.46 1866 0. 73+/-2. OOE-09 4.40+/-0.09E-07 -1.04+/-1.03E-07 804 DOWN Dec-12 6.65 1382 2.35+/-1.26E-09 3.51+/-0.05E-07 1.10+/-0. 70E-07 8603 DOWN Jun-12 7.34 1964 0. 78+/-4.0SE-09 5.11+/-0.04E-05 4.86+/-8.76E-08 8603 DOWN* Dec-12 7.43 . 2226 -0.78+/-5.74E-09 6.31+/-0.04E-05 2.60+/-0.98E-07 8604 DOWN Jun-12 7.17 1925 2.10+/-6.29E-09 4.04+/-0.02E-05 2.14+/-1.23E-07 8604 DOWN Dec-12 7.31 2106 -1.55+/-5 .90E-09 S.57+/-0.03E-05 1.50+/-0.90E-07 8612 DOWN Mar-12 7.01 2250 0.94+/-8.18E-09 2.16+/-0.57E-08 3.06+/-4.81E-08 8612 DOWN Jun-12 7.20 2186 3.82+/-3.55E-09 2.43+/-0.40E-08 1.27+/-0.68E-07 8612 DOWN Sep-12 6.71 2174 cl.60+/-2.93E-09 1.27+/-0.35E-08 0.17+/-1.05E-07 8612 DOWN Dec-12 7.30 2122 -1.06+/-2.07E-09 2.00+/-0.31E-08 1.38+/-0.77E-07 GSEEP DOWN Mar-12 6.62 1296 -2.61+/-4.15E-09 8.26+/-0.64E-08 2.08+/-0.SlE-07 GSEEP DOWN Jun-12 6.83 1321 -0.57+/-1.80E-09 1.46+/-0.06E-07 2.29+/-1.11E-07 GSEEP DOWN Sep-12 6.72 1513 3. 72+/-2.57E-09 2.17+/-0.06E-07* 2.81+/-0.89E-07 GSEEP DOWN Dec-12 6.76 1343 0.46+/-1.27E-09 1.87+/-0.05E-07 3.93+/-1.25E-07 Note: Bolding indicates radiological concentration that exceeds the GSL NA - Not applicable. SU - Standard units. a Hydraulic position is relative to other wells within the same hydrogeologic unit. b The GS Ls for radiological constituents are set equal to the larger of the background concentrations or the TOGS 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater Quality Standards (See Table D-1A). D-12 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data TABLE D-2A {concluded) 2012 Indicator Results From the Sand and Gravel Unit Conductivity locatii>Q Hydraulic Date pH Gross Alpha Gross Beta Tritium
* µmhos/cm@ ,
.Code Position° Collected ~u ', ~' -,i;:Qr ,. µCi/'?1l .>'
µCi/ml µCi/ml.* ,*
Groundwater Screeninafevefs 0
. Nlf < ,* NA', .. :<.* 1. . .1.50E*08 .. \ I
- l;OOE-06 '.'. . 1:78E-07 . ,.,
SP04 DOWN Mar-12 NS NS NS 1.46+/-0.06E-06 NS SP04 DOWN Jun-12 NS NS 1.82+/-2.55E-09 1.40+/-0.02E-06 1.88+/-1.08E-07 SP04 DOWN Dec-12 NS NS -6.07+/-2.07E-09 1.52+/-0.0SE-06 2.35+/-0.97E-07 SP06 DOWN Mar-12 NS NS NS 1.01+/-0.07E-07 NS SP06 DOWN Jun-12 NS NS 1.02+/-2.36E-09 1.24+/-0.0SE-07 4.63+/-8.82E-08 SP06 DOWN Dec-12 NS *Ns -0.44+/-4.94E-09 l.84+/-0.12E-07 l.13+/-0.98E-07 SP11 DOWN Mar-12 NS NS NS 5.17+/-0.28Ec07 NS SP11 DOWN Jun-12 NS NS 7.36+/-2.87E-09 6.30+/-0.llE-07 1.61+/-1.04E-07 SPll DOWN Dec-12 NS NS 2.13+/-3.54E-09 7. 78+/-0.26E-07 8.62+/-9.51E-08 SP12 DOWN Mar-12 NS NS NS 2.00+/-0.lOE-07 NS SP12 DOWN Jun-12 7.28 2126 -1.77+/-1.77E-09 2.04+/-0.06E-07 1.09+/-0.99E-07 SP12 DOWN Dec-12 6.73 2031 2.00+/-4.0lE-09 2.82+/-0.20E-07 6.40+/-9.97E-08 WP-A 'DOWN Sep-12 7.07 121 -0.81+/-2.56E-10 1.91+/-0.llE-08 8. 75+/-0.45E-06 WP-C DOWN Sep-12 7.03 862 1.28+/-6.02E-10 1.28+/-0.03 E-07 3.12+/-0.08E-05 WP-H DOWN Sep-12 6.72 1240 1. 76+/-0. 76E-08 3.37+/-0.0SE-06 8.05+/-1.62E-07 MP-01 DOWN Mar-12 7.18 3146 -0.08+/-1.lOE-08 2.88+/-0 .14E-04 0.61+/-4.80E-08 MP-01 DOWN Jun-12 7.25 3752 2.90+/-3.96E-08 2.89+/-0.0lE-04 0.97+/-1.19E-07 MP-01 DOWN Sep-12 7.16 3449 -1.39+/-1.07E-08 2.85+/-0.0lE-04 1.20+/-0.91E-07 MP-01 DOWN Dec-12 7.07 3182 3.66+/-4.80E-09 2.34+/-0.0lE-04 0.94+/-1.02E-07 MP-02 DOWN Mar-12 7.18 2501 2.46+/-9.02E-09 3.14+/-0.14E-04 1.63+/-4.BOE-08 MP-02 DOWN Jun-12 7.20 2309 -1.78+/-9.46E-09 3.46+/-0.0lE-04 0.77+/-1.17E-07 MP-02 DOWN Sep-12 7.01 2734 4.72+/-9.79E-09 3.34+/-0.0lE-04 3.38+/-8.02E-08 MP-02 DOWN Dec-12 7.02 2588 2.92+/-3.26E-09 2.89+/-0.0lE-04 0.97+/-1.05E-07 MP-03 DOWN Mar-12 7.4i 1872 0.04+/-7.00E-09 1.89+/-0.08E-04 -0.31+/-4.llE-08 MP"03 DOWN Jun-12 7.33 2471 -1.61+/-4.36E-09 2.34+/-0.0lE-04 0.51+/-1.lSE-07 MP-03 DOWN Sep-12 7.18 2094 -1.01+/-1.00E-08 2.23+/-0.0lE-04 7.31+/-8.41E-08 MP-03 DOWN Dec-12 7.39 1898 4.57+/-3. lOE-09 1.87+/-0.0lE-04 0. 77+/-1.00E-07 MP-04 DOWN Mar-12 7.33 2166 2.19+/-8.04E-09 3.47+/-0.lSE-04 0.00+/-4. 78E-08 MP-04 DOWN Jun-12 7.30 2662 -1.35+/-4.60E-09 3.48+/-0.01E*04 1.81+/-1.21E-07 MP-04 DOWN Sep-12 7.07 2232 4.84+/-7.73E-09 3.04+/-0.0lE-04 1.01+/-0.88E-07 MP-04 DOWN Dec-12 7.31 2044 2.84+/-2.43E-09 3.04+/-0.0lE-04 1.35+/-1.07E-07 Note: Bolding indicates radiological concentration that exceeds the GSL. NA - Not applicable.
- NS - Not sampled.
SU - Standard units.
- Hydraulic position is relative to other wells within the same hydrogeologic unit.
b The GS Ls or radiological constituents are set equal to the larger of the background concentrations or the TOGS 1.1.1 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 D-13
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data TABLE D-28 2012 Indicator Results From the Lavery Till-Sand Unit Location Hydrauik. Date C, IT pH cotidi.Jctivity * '{',* . Gross Alpha_
. \ ';_ *:.,:*.*,
, Gross Beta
'1;,, ~
Tritium
µmhos/cm@
Code Position a Collected. SU µCi/ml_ µCi/m,l µCifml
"' 25QC Gtqflvd.water.Sp:e~ning LeJels1~.: NA .. *.NA I' ' -** l.SO_E-08. '.: ., 1.00£-0fi. 1{78E*07 *,
204 DOWN Mar-12 7.46 1728 -1.55+/-2.15E-09 2.87+/-2.53E-09 0.59+/-4. 71E-08 204 DOWN Jun-12 7.50 1932 2. 79+/-1.91E-09 6.13+/-2.71E-09 4.57+/-6.22E-08 204 DOWN Sep-12 7.04 1977 -0.74+/-1.54E-09 2.00+/-3.03E-09 -1.29+/-1.02E-07 204 DOWN Dec-12 7.45 1957 1.45+/-2.34E-09 5. 72+/-2.42E-09 5.83+/-9.00E-08 206 DOWN Jun-12 7.44 2066 6.87+/-2.80E-09 5.32+/-2.81E-09 5.30+/-6.16E-08 206 DOWN Dec-12 7.42 2042 -4.21+/-4.00E-09 3.20+/-3.02E-09 8.07+/-9.18E-08 NA - Not applicable. SU - Standard units.
*Hydraulic position is relative to other wells within the same hydrogeologic unit.
b The GSLs for radiological constituents are set equal to the larger of the background concentrations or the TOGS 1.1.l Class GA Groundwater Quality Standards (See Table D-lA). D-14 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data TABLE D-2C 2012 indicator Results From the Weathered Lavery Till Unit
'J:;rolina).~v"dt~f:'str'e~i1i!ifi:z;fi1t'e1§'
908R UP Dec-12 1005 UP Jun-12 7.23 790 3.06+/-1.80E-09 2.60+/-1.29E-09 1.98+/-6.79E-08 1005 UP Dec-12 7.16 800 1. 73+/-2.08E-09 3.28+/-1. 78E-09 S.85+/-9.03E-08 1008C UP Jun-12 7.42 589 0. 79+/-2.00E-09 3.53+/-1.28E-09 2.98+/-6.90E-08 1008C UP Dec-12 6.99 565 0.82+/-2.26E-09 0.89+/-1.76E-09 1.00+/-0.83E-07 906 DOWN Jun-12 7.28 577 1.28+/-0.70E-08 5.65+/-3.57E-09 2.65+/-6.87E-08 906 DOWN Dec-12 7.37 596 0.00+/-1.36E-09 3.55+/-1.51E-09 0.57+/-8.31E-08 1006 DOWN Jun-12 7.22 1600 6.49+/-5.03E-09 7.05+/-2.67E-09 1.34+/-6.82E-08 1006 DOWN Dec-12 6.99 1629 7.05+/-2.88E-09 7.49+/-1.99E-09 1.26+/-0.98E-07 NDATR DOWN Mar-12 8.18 718 -0.4 7+/-2.60E-09 S.45+/-0.20E-07 3.30+/-0.37E-07 NDATR DOWN Jun-12 7.64 1013 3.14+/-1.62E-09 8. 70+/-0.09E-07 2.38+/-1.12E-07 NDATR DOWN Sep-12 6.91 1175 4.25+/-6.60E-09 1.00+/-0.04E-06 2.18+/-1.00E-07 NDATR DOWN Dec-12 7.85 758 1.05+/-3.21E-09 6.04+/-0.08E-07 2.46+/-1.25E-07 909 DOWN Jun~12 6.75 1372 3.52+/-3.3 lE-09 2.13+/-0.07E-07 7.62+/-1.GOE-07 909 DOWN Dec-12 6.63 1533 2.46+/-3.13E-09 4.01+/-0.lOE-07 8.89+/-1;71E-07 Note: Bolding indicates radiological concentration that exceeds the GSL NA - Not applicable. SU - Standard units.
*Hydraulic position is relative to other wells within the same hydrogeologic unit.
bThe GSLs for radiological constituents are set equal to the larger of the background concentrations or the TOGS 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater Quality Standards (See Table D-1A). WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 D-15
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data TABLE D-20 2012 Indicator Results From the Un weathered Lavery Till
,,,\ %Cihi!uEfi~itf. I,,;* *::,: :151*****. *'!'. ** ,;'...::;,;.; t~r; *'.;:;c't;~~ ~;~~:~ :;\: ;<':.::; 'J*~.,,....,..
i~i~ 1~;~~:3 1,;~f;;:::;* if.ii'<.,,""; "',,,*,
- }ivdri/u1i1:::
1*tr~~J"~ *~g:!~.:~*:; '"' .
',**;;")/?)~ ;';'.'@
~~:~1~ ~-::1 ;~i/iMJ~,:11: µm,. '?.$ . ~V'! . :. '~~qw,.f < ;~;.i:':::1 .,,b,H*.
,:.:. '* "'" z,::70*.*
','f j '. ~:*; >'~:'.:1~,2, ~*1:;~;:2s*~~.~1:*:: i, ii!::*; ' 1:*:: .>;.: *:'<;'": / ,
'.;§r_J~11Cli~ii!Jfi!Esir'g'eiiifig fl!~~,~~:;* :*:.:Nil.,'!'.,; .. :: ,.. ;;;, '"' ~i~.;'.:~~$iJe,o~<.,:*;:' 1 ~i*+,.\:<J.:opt:tp6.* ;l';'.i:.. : ~:,:1.7}J.E~0,t,.,,.,*;
;,\';" ;;' ........'C,,{ ;,:,,;
405 UP Mar-12 7.23 1170 -0.26+/-1. 72E-09 3.51+/-1.83E-09 -0. 70+/-4. 70E-08 405 UP Jun-12 7.36 i121 4.16+/-1.80E-09 5. 73+/-1.81E-09 -3.65+/-8.02E-08 405 UP Sep-12 6.93 1488 -2.30+/-2.29E-09 7 .28+/-2.03E-09 6.36+/-7.71E-08 405 UP Dec-12 7.67 1341 6.69+/-5.33E-09 1.19+/-0.33E-08 5.95+/-9.18E-08 1303 UP Mar-12 8.03 272 1.07+/-1.52E-09 0.04+/-2.01E-09 -2.03+/-4. 71E-08 1303 UP Jun-12 7.99 251 6.36+/-9.99E-10 1. 77+/-1.08E-09 -2.66+/-8.07E-08 1303 UP Sep-12 7.45 265 6.93+/-9.56E-10 0. 75+/-1.13E-09 -1.52+/-6.33E-08 1303 UP Dec-12 7.81 280 2.22+/-6.22E-10 6.26+/-9.SOE-10 -0.59+/-8.36E-08 110 DOWN Mar-12 7.55 536 3.57+/-7.54E-10 3.27+/-1.47E-09 8.20+/-0.42E-07 110 DOWN Jun-12 7.41 556 1.84+/-1.20E-09 3.05+/-1.18E-09 S.85+/-0.95E-07 110 DOWN Sep-12 7.49 570 4.54+/-6.87E-10 1.30+/-0.57E-09 7 .40+/-1.18E-07 110 DOWN Dec-12 7.50 562 2.25+/-1.64E-09 2.91+/-1.54E-09 7~16+/-1.SOE-07 704 DOWN Mar-12 6.66 766 -9.27+/-9.62E-10 4.S2+/-2.50E-09 2.85+/-4. 74E-08 704 DOWN Jun-12 6.41 1562 -0.54+/-2.48E-09 7 .04+/-2.81E-09 1.50+/-8.73E-08 704 DOWN Sep-12 6.43 1196 0.98+/-1.47E-09 2.06+/-0.26E-08 9 .34+/-7.40E-08 704 DOWN Dec-12 6.90 980 1.15+/-2.05E-09 5.16+/-1.73E-09 5.85+/-9.03E-08 707 DOWN Jun-12 6.56 399 3.64+/-9.35E-10 3.95+/-1.53E-09 2.89+/-9.11E-08 707 DOWN Dec-12 7.02 446 7.72+/-7.98E-10 5.00+/-1.17E-09 7 .57+/-9.20E-08 107 DOWN Mar-12 7.75 697 -0.18+/-1.18E-09 1.48+/-0.33E-08 8.48+/-4.83E-08 107 DOWN Jun-12 7.37 786 2.47+/-1.36E-09 1.59+/-0.18E-08 1.31+/-0.67E-07 107 DOWN Sep-12 7.45 799 1.73+/-1.23E-09 1.49+/-0.14E-08 1.28+/-0.76E-07 107 DOWN Dec-12 7.24 551 0.56+/-1.17E-09 1.82+/-0.18E-08 l.50+/-1.02E-07 108 DOWN Jun-12 7.72 572 1.91+/-1.07E-09 1.69+/-1.06E-09 2.52+/-0.SOE-07 108 DOWN Dec-12 7.60 546 2.96+/-1.09E-09 6.28+/-1.18E-09 0. 78+/-1.0SE-07 409 DOWN Mar-12 8.06 344 0.75+/-1.13E-09 1. 70+/-1.51E-09 -1.05+/-4. 70E-08 409 DOWN Jun-12 7.75 343 1.42+/-1.16E-09 1.94+/-1.11E-09 -3.24+/-7.78E-08 409 DOWN Sep-12 7.56 330 1.79+/-0.96E-09 1.24+/-0.60E-09 0.68+/-6.63E-08 409 DOWN Dec-12 8.03 367 1.84+/-1.23E-09 1.96+/-1.08E-09 -0.58+/-8.19E-08
. 910R DOWN Jun-12 7.09 1457 1.56+/-0.39E-08 6.93+/-2.57E-09 1.33+/-5.84E-08 910R DOWN Dec-12 7.15 1485 1.29+/-0.39E-08 5.08+/-3.39E-09 1. 77+/-8. 70E-08 Note: Bolding indicates radiological concentration that exceeds the GSL.
NA - Not applicable. SU - Standard units.
- Hydraulic position is relative to other wells within the same hydrogeologic unit.
b The GSLs for radiological constituents are set equal to the larger of the background concentrations or the TOGS 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater Quality Standards (See Table D-1A). D-16 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data TABLE D-2E 2012 Indicator Results From the Kent Recessional Sequence 1 ~
' ' .conductivity LocotJim Hydrau(ic Date' pH ..* Gross;i;\lpha . Gr:oss Beta'** .. rritium.
pmhosfcm@ . ' ' Code Position ° Co/fected SU 25QC-
/id/ml µCi/ml µCi/ml Groundwater Screening Levels " NA. NA, 1.SOE-08 1.00E-06 1.78E-07 901 UP. Jun-12 7.27 424 8.22+/-7.96E-10 2.35+/-0.81E-09 -0.65+/-8.24E-08 901 UP Dec-12 6.93 418 9.14+/-9.58E-10 2.36+/-1.23E-09 1. 76+/-8.67E-08 902 UP Jun-12 8.16 412 8.27+/-5.32E-10 2.71+/-0.81E-09 2.83+/-6.SSE-08 902 UP Dec-12 7.61 442 -1.15+/-7.46E-10 2.07+/-1.23E-09 2.34+/-8.73E-08 10088 UP Dec-12 7.72 460 -3.91+/-6. 78E-10 4.28+/-0. 76E-09 6.46+/-9.14E-08 903 DOWN Jun-12 7.46 984 -0.48+/-1.84E-09 1.84+/-1.77E-09 0.00+/-6.64E-08 903 DOWN Dec-12 7.39 960 2. 78+/-1.67E-09 . 3.29+/-2.13E-09 7 .00+/-8.24E-08 8610 DOWN Jun-12 7.41 1306 0.14+/-1. 78E-09 2.85+/-2.17E-09 0.67+/-6. 78E-08 8610 DOWN Dec-12 7.30 1382 1.33+/-3.38E-09 8.37+/-4.36E-09 0.57+/-8.28E-08 8611 DOWN Jun-12 7.34 1240 2. 77+/-1.53E-09 4.17+/-1.96E-09 -1.98+/-6.40E-08 8611 DOWN Dec-12 7.35 1247 0.56+/-1.96E-09 2.55+/-2.62E-09 7.50+/-9.25E-08 NA- Not applicable.
SU - Standard units.
*Hydraulic position is relative to other wells within the same hydrogeologic unit.
b The GSLs for radiological constituents are set equal to the larger of the background concentrations or the TOGS 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater Quality Standards (See Table D-1A). TABLE D-2F 2012 Metals Results for Early Warning Monitoring Well 502
. Date Aluminum Iron Mangan~se
. ' *Location
, '*<< .,., -, "*,. : **Q~ll~cted *.,;;, *. µg/L ., µg'/L .. ;,.
µg/d<... ~....
Jun-12 <200 12,700 47.8 502 Dec-12 <200 18,700 49.5 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 D-17
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data TABLE D-2G 2012 Results for Metals in Groundwater Compared With WVDP Groundwater Screening Levels Location Hydraulic Date Antimony Arsenic Barium Beryllium Cadmium Chromium Cobalt Copper
,*Code Position C,oilected µg/L µg/L µg/L µg/L ,* µg/L ', µg/L µg/L µg/L G,round,water Screenina:i:e,'ve1s:a . ;:1,s~1u.,:
- 25*' , 1;0(JO ' 3 ,* 1~,: 7.27 .*sz:s.:, '67.8. *' ~::~QO Sand and Gravel Unit 706 UP Mar-12 <3 <10 <200 <1 <S lS <SO <2S 706 UP Jun-12 <3 <10 <200 <1 <5 29 <50 <25 706 UP Sep-12 <3 <10 <200 <1 <5 42 <50 <25 706 UP Dec-12 <3 <10 <200 <1 <S 96 <50 <25 1302 UP Dec-12 <3 <10 <200 <1 <5 <10 <SO <2S 1304 DOWN Mar-12 <3 <10 <200 <1 <5 <10 <SO <25 1304 DOWN Jun-12 <3 <10 <200 <1 <5 <10 <SO <25 1304 DOWN Sep-12 <3 <10 <200 <1 <S <10 <50 <25 1304 DOWN Dec-12 <3 <10 <200 <1 <5 <10 <SO <25 111 DOWN Dec-12 <3 <10 <200 <1 <5 425 <50 <25 502 DOWN Jun-12 NS <10 507 NS <5 1,070 <50 43 502 DOWN Dec-12 NS <10 509 NS <5 905 <SO 49 8605 DOWN Dec-12 <3 <10 <200 <1 <5 <10 <SO <25 MP-01 DOWN Mar-12 <10 <10 410 <1 <5 <10 <SO <2S MP-01 DOWN Jun-12 <10 <10 470 <1 <5 54 <SO <25 MP-01 DOWN Sep-12 <3 <10 402 <1 <S 68 <50 <2S MP-01 DOWN Dec-12 <3 <10 37S <1 <5 <10 <50 <25 MP-02 DOWN Mar-12 <10 <10 <200 <1 <S 17 <SO <2S MP-02 DOWN
- JLin-12 '<10 <10 <200 <1 <5 <10 <SO <25 MP-02 DOWN Sep-12 <3 <10 <200 <1 <S <10 <SO <2S MP-02 DOWN Dec-12 <3 <10 <200 <1 <5 <10 <SO <25 MP-03 DOWN Mar-12 <10 <10 236 <1 <S <10 <SO <2S MP-03 DOWN Jun-12 <10 <10 287 <1 <S <10 <SO <25 MP-03 DOWN Sep-12 <3 <10 264 <1 <5 <10 <SO <25 MP-03 DOWN Dec-12 <3 <10 225 <1 <S <10 <50 <2S MP-04 DOWN Mar-12 <10 <10 268 <1 <S <10 <SO <2S MP-04 DOWN Jun-12 <10 <10 298 <1 <5' <10 <SO <25 MP-04 DOWN Sep-12 <3 <10 239 <1 <5 <10 <50 <25 MP-04 DOWN Dec-12 <3 <10 236 <1 <5 <10 <50 <2S Note: Bolding indicates a metal concentration that exceeds the GSL NS - Not sampled.
- GSLs have been established by selection of the larger of the WVDP background concentration or the 6 NYCRR TOGS 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater Quality Standards. (See Table D-lB).
D-18 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data TABLE D-2G (continued) 2012 Results for Metals in Groundwater Compared with WVDP Groundwater Screening Levels Locatiowi Hydraµ~i,~, Date lead fl.1ercury , Nickel $elenium: .Silver :l'!hallium,.... Tin,,,,p,::: : lf.GJJCUii~m* :?inc.
'Code 0
**Position Collected 0
*'I '
µg/L µg/l µg/l µg/L . µg/L r* µg/l, µg/l µg/L µg/l Groundwater Scrt:ening Levels 42.7 0.7 100 10.1 50 13.9 4,083 69.6 2,000 Sand and Gravel Unit 706 UP Mar-12 <3 <0.2 70 <S <10 <0 <3000 <SO <20 706 UP Jun-12 <3 <0.2 126 <S <10 <0 <3000 <SO <20 706 UP Sep-12 <3 <0.2 573 <S <10 <0 <3000 <SO <20 706 UP Dec-12 <3 <0.2 593 <S <10 <0 <3000 <SO <20 1302 DOWN Dec-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <S <10 <0 <3000 <SO <20 1304 UP Mar-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <S <10 <O <3000 <SO <20 1304 UP Jun-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <S <10 NS <3000 <SO <20 1304 UP Sep-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <S <10 <0 <3000 <SO <20 1304 UP Dec-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <S <10 <0 <3000 <SO <20 111 DOWN Dec-12 <3 <0.2 41 <S <10 <2 <3000 <50 <20 S02 DOWN Jun-12 <3 <0.2 149 <5 <10 NS NS <50 <20 502 DOWN Dec-12 <3 <0.2 163 <5 <10 NS NS '<50 <20 8605 DOWN Dec-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <5 <10 <2 <3000 <50 <20 MP-01 DOWN Mar-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <5 <10 <10 <3000 <50 <20 MP-01 . DOWN Jun-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <5 <10 <10 <3000 <SO <20 MP-01 DOWN Sep-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <5 <10 <2 <3000 <50 <20 MP-01 DOWN Dec-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <S <10 <2 <3000 <50 <20 MP-02 DOWN Mar-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <S <10 <10 <3000 <50 <20 MP-02 DOWN Jun-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <5 <10 <10 <3000 <SO <20 MP-02 DOWN Sep-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <5 <10 <2 <3000 <50 <20 MP-02 DOWN Dec-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <S <10 <2 <3000 <50 <20 MP-03 DOWN Mar-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <5 <10 <10 <3000 <SO <<20 MP-03 DOWN Jun-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <S <10 <10 <3000 <SO <20 MP-03 DOWN Sep-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <5 <10 <2 <3000 <SO <20 MP-03 DOWN Dec-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <S <10 <2 <3000 <50 <20 MP-04 DOWN Mar-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <5 <10 <10 <3000 <50 <20 MP-04 DOWN Jun-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <5 <10 <10 <3000 <50 <20 MP-04 DOWN Sep-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <5 <10 <2 <3000 <50 <20 MP-04 DOWN Dec-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <5 <10 <2 <3000 <50 <20 Note: Bolding indicates a metal concentration that exceeds the GSL.
NS - Not sampled.
- GSLs have been established by selection of the larger of the WVDP background concentration or the 6 NYCRR TOGS 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater Quality Standards (See Table D-1B).
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 D-19
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data TABLE D-2G (continued) 2012 Results for Metals in Groundwater Compared with WVDP Groundwater Screening levels Location* 'Hydraulic *oate'::** Antimony Arsenic 'Barium' '{3eryl/Wm *cadmiu'm. Chromium Colialt Copper Code_: Position Collected µg/l µg/l µg/l µg/L µg/l µg/l µg/l µg/l Groundwater 5ti-eening' "'.* ' *!is.1- *:
- 25' '1.;000 ' le** 3)::*. **:i '.'7.2 7 :.,, " '*52.3 :, '
67:8,-' -~zoo ;;;, *- Weathered Lavery Till Unit NDATR DOWN Mar-12. <10 <10 <200 <1 <5 <10 <SO <25 NDATR DOWN Jun-12 <10 <10 <200 <1 <5 <10 <50 <25 NDATR DOWN Sep-12 <3 <10 <200 <1 <5 <10 <50 <25 NDATR DOWN Dec-12 <3 <10 <200 <l <S <10 <50 <25 909 DOWN Dec-12 <3 15 254 <1 <5 <10 <50 <25 Unweathered Lavery Till Unit 405 UP Mar-12 <3 <10 <200 <1 <5 23 <50 <25 405 UP Jun-12 <3 <10 <200 <1 <5 30 <50 <25 405 UP Sep-12 <3 <10 <200 <1 <5 43 <50 <2S 405 UP Dec-12 <3 <10 <200 <1 <5 <10 <SO <25 1303 UP Mar-12 <3 <20 266 <2 <5 <20 <100 <SO 1303 UP Jun-12 <3 13 <200 <l <5 10 <50 <25 1303 UP Sep-12 <3 14 201 <1 <S <10 <50 <25 1303 UP Dec-12 <3 14 200 <1 <5 <10 <SO <25 a GSLs have been established by selection of the larger of the WVDP background concentration or the 6 NYCRR TOGS 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater Quality_Standards (See Table D-1B). D-20 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitorin gData TABLE D-2G (concluded) 2012 Results for Metals in Groundwater Compared with WVDP Groundwater Screening Levels Location Hjtc!rau/ic Date .lead Mercury Nickel Selenium Silver Thallium Tin Vanadium Zinc Codf!) .* Pqsition *. i::ctlleCJed *µg/l µgfl _µg/l . *, ..'µg/~ . µg/l . *.:.µg/L µg/l .. : µg/L . µg/{: Groimdwater Screening*
',t n,*'
42.7 o.'i*
- 100. . Ytf1 '. 50 . '13;9 41083 69.6 2,000 .
Weathered Lavery Till Unit NDATR DOWN Mar-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <5 <10 <10 <3000 <50 <20 NDATR DOWN Jun-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <5 <10 <10 <3000 <50 <20 NDATR DOWN Sep-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <5 <10 <2 <3000 <50 61 NDATR DOWN Dec-12 <3 <0.2 '<40 <5 <10 <2 <3000 <SO <20 909 DOWN Dec-12 <3 <0.2 <40 <5 <10 <0 <3000 <50 <20 Unweathered Lavery Till Unit 405 UP Mar-12 <3 <0.2 2,330 <5 <10 <0 <3000 <50 <20 405 UP Jun-12 <3 <0.2 1,850 <5 <10 <O <3000 <50 <20 405 UP Sep-12 <3 <0.2 2,260 <5 <10 <0 <3000 <50 <20 405 UP Dec-12 <3 <0.2 961 <5 <10 <0 <3000 <50 <20 1303 UP Mar-12 12 <0.2 <80 <10 <10 <0 <3000 <100 <40 1303 UP Jun-12 7 <0.2 <40 <5 <10 NS <3000 <SO 37 1303 UP Sep-12 7 <0.2 <40 <5 <10 <0 <3000 <SO 38
. 1303 UP Dec-12 7 <0.2 <40 <5 <10 <O <3000 <SO 40 Note: Bolding indicates a metal concentration that exceeds the GSL.
- GSLs have been established by selection of the larger of the WVDP background concentration or the 6 NYCRR TOGS 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater Quality Standards (See Table D-1B}.
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 *D-21
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data Table D-2H 2012 Radioactivity in Groundwater From Selected Monitoring Locations I Location Hydraulic I Date
. . Position a Collei;teiJ .
C-14
µCi/ml Sr-90
µCi/mL Tc-99
*.µCi/ml 1-129
,µCi/ml Cs"137
µCf/ml Ra-226
µCi/ml G':p~~i~rf~ter S~ree~ing,'. *i:*~:
- :: ' *i.eveJs b
.: z.szi~os*.\. 11, 5.90E-q9* . .
I *
.*I:}*:: 5.92s~o9 ... I :~::.rf61f:-10.
.. ,;a)~~E~OB * *.*. :,;a.Z3i's"o9* .
- ":",,:~?~~~"; ".,,,:":, :. :,~
~ 1}/i,,;,r: ~~ J;'" ,:. ',;
i: " I, t**~ ,,,, l
'0, Sand and Gravel Unit
- 401 I UP I Dec-12 0.00+/-2.82E-08 -6.12+/-9.47E-10 -0.32+/-2.30E-09 2.91+/-5.80E-10 -2.69+/-2.76E-09 3.03+/-1.53E-10 1304 I UP I Dec-12 -2.52+/-3.44E-08 0.11+/-1.03E-09 0.86+/-2.46E-09 -2.41+/-8.27E-10 0.34+/-2.46E-09 3.38+/-1.65E-10 406 I DOWN I Dec-12 -1.46+/-3.40E-08 0.52+/-1.04E-09 3.40+/-2.56E-09 2.60+/-7.57E-10 0.20+/-2.83E-09 4.70+/-1.93E-10 408 I DOWN I Dec-12 -0.41+/-2. 64E-08 8.79+/-0.0lE-05 1.35+/-0.27E-08 3.08+/-5.27E-10 -1.21+/-4.00E-09 5.04+/-2.34E-10 501 I DOWN I Dec-12 NS 4.38+/-0.0lE-05 NS NS NS NS 502 I DOWN I Dec-12 NS 3.63+/-0.0lE-05 NS NS NS NS 8609 I DOWN I Dec-12 NS 7.54+/-0.16E-07 NS NS NS NS 801 I DOWN I Dec-12 NS 4.86+/-0.04E-06 NS NS NS NS MP-01 I DOWN I Dec-12 4.53+/-2.87E-08 1.20+/-0.0lE-04 2.94+/-0.30E-08 3.05+/-5.27E-10 0.83+/-3.97E-09 NS MP-02 I DOWN I Dec-12 -1.10+/-2.60E-08 1.45+/-0.0lE-04 4.50+/-0.35E-08 0. 77+/-1.00E-09 1.08+/-4.73E-09 NS MP-03 I DOWN I Dec-12 0.89+/-2. 70E-08 8. 76+/-0.02E-05 2.35+/-0.29E-08 6.14+/-6.84E-10 1.31+/-3.89E-09 NS MP-04 I DOWN I Dec-12 0.96+/-2. 71E-08 1.38+/-0.0lE-04 3.51+/-0.32E-08 3.37+/-8.59E-10 0.12+/-4.16E-09 NS Weathered Till Unit NDATR I DOWN I Jun-12 -0.75+/-3.20E-08 4.45+/-0.10E-07 0.52+/-1.66E-09 1.74+/-0.38E-08 -0.11+/-2.96E-09 3.25+/-2.52E-10 NDATR I DOWN I Dec-12 -0.46+/-2. 77E-08 2.04+/-0.0SE-07 1.55+/-1.66E-09 2.30+/-0.34E-08 -0.59+/-2.49E-09 2.28+/-1.7SE-10 909 I DOWN* 1 Dec-12 -0.19+/-3.43E-08 1.40+/-0.05E-07 2.58+/-2.52E-09 9.57+/-2.25E-09 1.24+/-3.83E-09 3.49+/-1.87E-10 Note: Bolding indicates radiological concentration that exceeds the GSL.
NS- Not sampled. a Hydraulic position is relative to other wells within the same hydrologic unit. b The GSLs for radiological constituents are set equal to the larger of the background concentrations or the TOGS 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater Quality Standards (See Table D-lA). D-22 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data Table D-2H (continued) 2012 Radioactivity in Groundwater From Selected Monitoring Locations Location
*I Hydraulic I Date Position ° Collected Ra-2is *
µCi/mL
" U-232
µCi/ml U-233/234
µCi/ml U-23S/236
µCi/ml U-238
µCi/ml TotalU
µg/mL
~- Groundwat~.r Screening * >
L~ve1s b
'1 "k .2.1~£"09, * :i.3sM:o. **,
- 6,i24E-10 8.07E-11 4.97E-10 . 1.i9i:"e13*
Sand and Gravel Unit 401 I UP I Dec-12 4.47+/-3.22E-10 2.48+/-4.08E-11 2.87+/-1.07E-10 3.28+/-4.19E-11 6.96+/-5.21E-11 3.33+/-0.22E-04 1304 I UP I Dec-12 3.85+/-3.41E-10 0.23+/-1.13E-10 l.36+/-1.49E-10 2.67+/-9.13E-11 0.58+/-1.03E-10 4.38+/-0.29E-04 406 I DOWN I Dec-12 l.31+/-3.14E-10 0.52+/-8.30E-11 2.10+/-9.48E-11 l.24+/-6.87E-11 l.19+/-1.20E-10 2.91+/-0.lSE-04 408 I DOWN I Dec-12 5.56+/-3.SOE-10 0.96+/-5.33E-11 4.55+/-2.04E-10 4.22+/-7.23E-11 5.16+/-2.llE-10 1.10+/-0.0SE-03 MP-01 I DOWN I Dec-12 NS 5.21+/-9.23E-11 4.96+/-2.17E-10 3.43+/-9.04E-11 2.97+/-1.74E-10 NS MP-02 I DOWN I Dec-12 NS 5.44+/-7.84E-11 9.27+/-2.82E-10 2.14+/-6.03E-11 S.24+/-2.14E-10 NS MP-03 I DOWN I Dec-12 NS l.46+/-6.56E-11 6.42+/-2.28E-10 0.88+/-1.03E-10 4.58+/-1.89E-10 NS MP-04 I DOWN I Dec-12 NS l.90+/-6.49E-11 1.11+/-0.29E-09 1.40+/-1.llE-10 1.00+/-0.27E-09 NS Weathered Till Unit NDATR I DOWN I Jun-12 9:07+/-4.19E-10 3.82+/-6.40E-11 1.48+/-0.29E-09 4.52+/-5.62E-11 9.54+/-2.32E-10 3.40+/-0.27E-03 NDATR I DOWN I Dec-12 3.85+/-4.44E-10 l.37+/-4.66E-11 1.13+/-0.20E-09 l.80+/-3.19E-11 9.07+/-1.78E-10 2.85+/-0.16E-03 909 I DOWN I Dec-12 9 .29+/-4.06E-10 l.59+/-9.36E-11 7.91+/-2.03E-10 4.36+/-6.SOE-11 6.73+/-1.84E-10 3.10+/-1.lSE-03 Note: Bolding indicates radiological concentration that exceeds the GSL. NS - Not sampled.
- Hydraulic position is relative to other wells within the same hydrologic unit.
b The GSLs for radiological constituents are set equal to the larger of the background concentrations or the TOGS 1.1.1 Class GA Groundwater Quality Standards (See Table D-1A). WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 D-23
Appendix D. Summary of Groundwater Monitoring Data Table D-2H (concluded} 2012 Radioactivity in Groundwater From Selected Monitoring Locations Location Hydraulic *oate' Nf1~2a1b
.... b Puc238 * * .f>'tJ-2a9/24o'b i. ,'
*'j,~c241 b>* Aln-241.b Cm*i4J/244 b. .*
Position a Collected µCi/ml µCi/ml µCi/ml µCi/ml µCi/ml µCi/ml Sand and Gravel Unit MP-01 DOWN Dec-12 -0.92+/-8.68E-11 0.47+/-4.08E-11 0.55+/-5.76E-11 -2.02+/-8.46E-09 0.00+/-2.26E-11 -2.79+/-2.58E-11 MP-02 DOWN Dec-12 0. 76+/-1.0lE-10 0.00+/-4. 74E-11 1.22+/-6.80E-11 -0.37+/-1.08E-08 1.60+/-3.13E-11 -0.53+/-2.73E-11 MP-03 DOWN Dec-12 -4.48+/-7.66E-11 -0.46+/-3.94E-11 1.45+/-5.42E-11 4. 72+/-9.lGE-09 0.00+/-1. 79E-11 0.00+/-3.30E-11 MP-04 DOWN Dec-12 4.24+/-7.GGE-11 0.49+/-4.22E-11 1.06+/-5.89E-11 -1.56+/-9.20E-09 0.00+/-1.93E-11 -0.49+/-2.86E-11
*Hydraulic position is relative to other wells within the same hydrologic unit.
b Groundwater screening levels have not been established for Np-237, Pu-238, Pu-239/240, Pu-241, Am-241, or Cm-234/244. D-24 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012 l
APPENDIX E Summary of Biological Data Table E-1 2012 Radioactivity Concentrations in Milk K-40 Sr-90 '.J-.129 Cs-137 {~ocatiOn., (µCiJml)
*<(µCi/mtr , r. {µCi/ml}.
' (µCi/ml}
BFMBLSY 1.32+/-0.16E-06 6. 76+/-6.06E-10 l.00+/-2.40E-10 -1. 75+/-2.31E-09 Once every five years Note: This milk sample (BFMBLSY) was collected from a dairy farm 5.5 km westnorthwest of the site. It was previously sampled in 2007. l<-40 Sr-90 1-129 Cs-137
.location
"/,<
'* (µCi/ml} .*<* (µCi/ml) : .., .(µ"Gi/mLJ .. {µCi/ml} ' ],
BFMSCHT 1.26+/-0.16E-06 1.26+/-0.86E-09 l.05+/-2.29E-10 -0.49+/-3.24E-09 Once every five years Note: This milk sample (BFMSCHT) was collected from a dairy farm 4.9 km south of the site. It was previously sampled in 2007. 1(~40 Sr-90 1-129 Cs-137
**.Location.,., '
(JiCf/mL)' ; ' (µCi/riff} ,,;*,*'
. '(/,ici/mL) (µCi/fui) '
BFMFLDMN 1.31+/-0.17E-06 1.19+/-0.SSE-09 2.02+/-1.82E-10 4.87+/-4.25E-09 Annual Note: The near-site milk sample (BFMFLDMN) is located 5.1 km southeast of the site. It was previously sampled in 2011. K-40 Sr-90 i-129 Cs-137 Location {µCi/ml) (µCi/ml) {µCi/ml) (µCi/ml} BFMCTLS (Background) 1.17+/-0.16E-06 -5.06+/-5.98E-10 0.44+/-1.SOE-10 -1.33+/-3 .66E-09 Once every five years Note: The control milk sample (BFMCTLS) is located 22 km south of the site. It was previously sampled in 2007. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 E-1
Appendix E. Summary of Biological Data TABLE E-2 2012 Radioactivity Concentrations in Venison
... , ;. '. ' I "
"i~",-v
%Moisture
"' J* H:.3. !<:~40 ., ' , Sr-90 ' Cs-137 i.oca"i:ion
(~cf/g-.dryJ {µCi/ml) " {µCi/g - dry) * (µCi/g - dry) BFDCTRL 73.8 0.44+/-1.07E-07 1.20+/-0.07E-05 -2.36+/-2.37E-09 2.18+/-0.28E-07 {Background) BFDCTRL 73.6 l.12+/-0.94E-07 9.97+/-0.74E-06 0.66+/-2. 72E-09 2.09+/-2.71E-08 (Background) BFDCTRL 74.5 5.24+/-8. 77E-08 1.11+/-0.07E-05 1.91+/-2.53E-09 0.00+/-3.07E-08 (Background) BFDNEAR 74.6 1.20+/-0.96E-07 l.03+/-0.06E-05 1.24+/-2.76E-09 1.86+/-1.79E-08 (Near-Site) BFONEAR 74.6 l.12+/-0.98E-07 l.26+/-0.07E-OS -l.80+/-2.60E-09 0.00+/-2.94E-08 (Ne<wSite) BFDNEAR 73.1 l.04+/-0.96E-07 l.06+/-0.07E-OS -0.01+/-2. 73E-09 2.88+/-0.34E-07 {Near-Site) Note: The venison samples are collected on an annual basis. Table E-3 2012 Radioactivity Concentrations. in Food Crops CORN H-3 K-40 Co-60 Sr-90 Cs-137
~>
Location*
' "~ ! 9/f"~'?istu~:: -{µCi/;p~'.~JJ;,y).: ~-(µCi/g~ D~y) *:.(µGi/g.- Qry) . /,J,ci/g*Dry), * {µCi/g,-.pry).
BFVCTRC {Background) 78.1 -0.23+/-1.14E-07 1.14+/-0.13E-05 1.11+/-2.30E-08 0.52+/-2. 71E-09 0.95+/-2.17E-08 BFVNEAC (Near Site) 79.4 -0.02+/-1.17E-07 1.17+/-0.14E-05 2.91+/-2.41E-08 -0.43+/-2.68E-09 0.32+/-2.lOE-08
" ., ,*," ' ' ,. ,~' ~
BEANS l,"
(
H-3 K-40 Co-60 Sr-90. Cs-137 Locatiq_n~ %.Moisture
--'* \ --: (V.Ci/mL~ Dry}: ;.{µCi/g.~ Dry) *'(j.iCi/g - pry) . : (µ.Q/g - Dry) (µ'Ci/g - Dry} -
BFVCTRB (Background) 91.9 0.05+/-1.lSE-07 2.79+/-0.27E-05 0.87+/-2.19E-08 S.58+/-0.57E-08 3.09+/-1.86E-08 BFVNEAB (Near Site) 84.2 0.24+/-1.17E-07 2.65+/-0.2SE-05 0.22+/-2.58E-08 4.15+/-2.97E-09 -0.29+/-2.27E-08
" . .* ... "",, : ti' :", *-. ':.":'\ ~ -Jl:PPLES' * ** ,. ;' "*' '~" ' .. *:.;, ' ' ,' t.:::'- ,,
H-3 K-40 Co-60 Sr-90 Cs-137 Location* % Moisture
. : . (µCi/ml* Dry). (µCi/g - Dry) . {µCi/g - Dry) (µCj/g - Dry) (µG/g-Dry)
BFVCTRA (Background) 83.6 0.79+/-1.20E-07 5.89+/-0.72E-06 0.54+/-1. 78E-08 0.80+/-2.62E-09 0. 76+/-1.58E-08 BFVNEAAF (Near Site) 82.6 -0.62+/-1.14E-07 8.98+/-1.03E-06 0.34+/-1.36E-08 4.70+/-3.09E-09 1.17+/-2.26.E-08
*Food crops are sampled once every five years, consistent with guidance on periodic confirmatory sampling in DOE/EH-0173T. Food crop samples were previously collected in 2007.
E-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
Appendix E. Summary of Biological Data TABLE E-4 2012 Radioactivity Concentrations in Edible Portions of Fish From Cattaraugus Creek Cattaraugus Creek above the Springville Dam (BFFCATC}
. .. Species % Moisture '"Sr-90 Cs-137
(µCi/g- dry) (µCi/g - dry) Hog-nosed Sucker- 9.5" 79.1 3. 78+/-0.31E-08 5.13+/-6.06E-08 Hog-nosed Sucker- 10" 80.9 2.66+/-2.77E-09 0.50+/-4. 77E-08 Hog-nosed Sucker- 11" 78.1 2.49+/-2.21E-09 1.86+/-7.45E-08 Hog-nosed Sucker- 12" 77.5 1.52+/-2.52E-09 1.21+/-3.llE-08 Hog-nosed Sucker- 12" 78.2 -0.68+/-2.35E-09 3.64+/-3.32E-08 Hog-nosed Sucker- 12" 79.3 -0.53+/-2.07E-09 -1.40+/-5.25E-08 White Sucker- 10" 79.4 2.83+/-0.28E-08 -0.36+/-1.20E-07 White Sucker-11" 80.1 2.60+/-0.27E-08 0.49+/-1.19E-07 White Sucker- 11" 80.0 7 .10+/-3.SSE-09 3.23+/-5.22E-08 White Sucker- 11.5 80.7 0.59+/-1. 76E-09 0.96+/-1.23E-07 Average% Moisture 79.3 Median 2.64E-09 <5.66E-08 Maximum 3.78E-08 3.64E-08 Minimum <1.76E-09 <3.llE-08 Note: Fish samples are collected once every five years, consistent with guidance on periodic confirmatory sampling in DOE/EH-0173T. Fish samples were previously collected in 2007. TABLE E-4 (continued) 2012 Radioactivity Concentrations in Edible Portions of Fish From Cattaraugus Creek
. Cattaraugus Creek below the Springville Dam (BFFCATO}
*Species ','*,' .. % MoiSture ., *sr~9o _, >.,
. Cs*137* * "
(JJ:Ci/g - dry) (µCi/g - dry)
'c' . " " *~* ,* '* ,1," :~ '\-*~ "' '"'/-
***o., .. ~ '
Steelhead Trout-23" 72.7 -1.56+/-2.60E-09 2.85+/-2.55E-08 Steelhead Trout-26.5" 76.0 -2.26+/-2.19E-09 0.00+/-3.91E-08 Steelhead Trout-24" 75.6 0.34+/-2.55E-09 2.30+/-1.95E-08 Steelhead Trout-22" 75.8 0. 78+/-2.67E-09 1.28+/-1.88E-08 Steelhead Trout-21" 74.5 1.95+/-2.68E-09 2.63+/-3.19E-08 Steelhead Trout-25" 73.0 1.88+/-3.04E-09 0.05+/-1.47E-08 Steelhead Trout-16" 71.2 0.25+/-2.94E-09 3 .47+/-2.80E-08 Steelhead Trout-17" 72.2 -1.14+/-1.94E-09 -0.64+/-2.41E-08 Steelhead Trout-16" 71.9 0.57+/-2.61E-09 0.54+/-3.02E-08 Steelhead Trout-15.5" 73.9 1.10+/-2.14E-09 2.73+/-2.89E-08
., '* ,c '<"f" Average% Moisture 73.7 Median <2.60E-09 <2.87E-08 Maximum <3.04E-09 3.47E-08 Minimum <1.94E-09 <1.47E-08 Note: Fish samples are collected once every five years, consistent with guidance on periodic confirmatory sampling in DOE/EH-0173T. Fish samples were previously collected in 2007.
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 E-3
Appendix E. Summary of Biological Data TABLE E-4 (concluded) 2012 Radioactivity Concentrations in Edible Portions of Fish From Cattaraugus Creek Cattaraugus Creek Background (BFFCTRL)
<' , Specie~,* ,: : , . ::,f": l\!loist4re .., sr,90 ,~c:~-1~? '
'~"\".""";4*f" "c"
{µCi/g- dry) (µCi/g; dry) Brown Trout-8.5 74.5 0.64+/-2.82E-09 0.33+/-1.0GE-07 Brown Trout-9" 71.4 -2.52+/-2.29E-09 1.34+/-3.97E-08 Brown Trout-9.5" 77.7 0. 76+/-2.81E-09 -1. 77+/-5.60E-08 Brown Trout-11" 74.7 0.61+/-2.64E-09 1.68+/-4.21E-08 Brown Trout-11.5" 75.6 -0.10+/-2.39E-09 -0.08+/-4.SOE-08 White Sucker-8 11 80:4 7 .85+/-4.26E-09 0.49+/-1.45E-07 White Sucker-10" 80.2 1.39+/-1.91E-09 4.63+/-8.82E-08 Bullhead-9" 80.4 1.13+/-0.36E-08 -0.04+/-9. 72E-08 Hog-nosed Sucker-8" 79.6 1.60+/-0.37E-08 8.24+/-9.85E-08 Hog-nosed Sucker-11" 77.6 6.39+/-2.lOE-09 -0.76+/-9.77E-08 Average% Moisture 77.2 Median <2.82E-09 <9.27E-08 Maximum 1.60E-08 <1.45E-07 Minimum <1.91E-09 <3.97E-08 Note: Fish samples are collected once every five years, consistent with guidance on periodic confirmatory sampling in DOE/EH-0173T. Fish samples were previously collected in 2007. E-4 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
APPENDIX F Summary of Soil and Sediment Monitoring Data TABLE F-lA Radionuclide Comparison Values for Soils Con~ultation.Triggersfor Safi ** NUREG-+,757 CbntarifinatiOn ~ ~* Screening'Vii/iies bf*>* ( Radionuclide Units Common Railionuclides* Site-Specific Soil Residential Industrial/ for Soil Surface Cleanup Goqls c SoJJ, . :;~. ' Commercial " " ,,,,,, Contamination Levels Concentration Concentration Co-60 µCi/g 4E-06 6E-06 3.8E-06 Sr-90 µCi/g 1.7E-06 3.7E-06 Sr-90+0° µCi/g 2.3E-05 1.07E-03 Cs-137 µCi/g 1.1E-05 1.4E-05 Cs-137+0° µCi/g 6E-06 1.lE-05 U-232 µCi/g 1.4E-06 U-233 µCi/g 7.SE-06 U-234 µCi/g 4.01E-04 3.31E-03 1.3E-05 7.6E-06 U-235 µCi/g 8E-06 3.1E-06 U-235+0~ µCi/g 2.0E-05 3.9E-OS 2.9E-07 U-238 µCi/g 1.4E-05 8.9E-06
- U-238+0° µCi/g 7.4E-OS 1.79E-04 SE-07 Total U µg/g 4.7E+Ol 1.23E+03 Pu-238 µCi/g 2.97E-04 1.64E-03 2.SE-06 3.6E-05 Pu-239 µCi/g 2.59E-04 1.43E-03 2.3E-06 2.3E-05 Pu-240 µCi/g 2.4E-05 Am-241 µCi/g 1.87E-04 5.68E-04 2.1E-06 2.6E-05
*Memorandum of Understanding between the Environmental Protection Agency and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission "Consultation and Finality on Decommissioning and Decontamination of Contaminated Sites",October 9, 2002.
b U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "Consolidated Decommissioning Guidance: Characterization, Survey and Determination of Radiological Criteria. NUREG-1757, Vol. 2, Rev. 1. September 2006. c Soil Cleanup goals developed from site-specific data for the WVDP Phase 1 Decommissioning Plan (DP), Rev. 2, Table 5-14, December 2009 (most restrictive soil/sediment criteria). d Concentrations apply to the parent radionuclide but assume that the daughter products are in equilibrium. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 F-1
Appendix F. Summary of Soil and Sediment Monitoring Data TABLE F-2A 2012 Contaminants in On-Site Soils Downstream of the WVDP at Franks Creek (SNSPOOG) RADIOACTIVE CONSTITUENTS fl!UREG-1757
. 'sJVSP006. . Soil' Screening Site-Specific.
(sotopi" *. *
- units ',,
N**. k". '
*tontamindtiOn
. k .
' j \ ,~
'soil
" ~
levels"' Cleanup Goals b Gross Alpha µCi/g 1 1.40+/-0.GOE-05 -- -- Gross Beta µCi/g 1 3.42+/-0.SOE-05 -- -- K-40 µCi/g 1 1.55+/-0.16E-05 -- - Co-60 µCi/g 1 -l.77+/-2.62E-08 *3.SE-06 -- Sr-90 µCi/g 1 5.04+/-0. 79E-07 1.7E-06 3.7E-06 Cs-137 µCi/g ,l 1.14+/-0.lOE-05 l.lE-05 1.4E-05 U-232 µCi/g 1 1.23+/-4.45E-08 -- 1.4E-06 U-233/234 µCi/g 1 5.99+/-1.35E-07 1.3E-05 7.6E-06d U-235/236 µCi/g 1 2.62+/-3.34E-08 8.0E-06' 3.lE-06° U-238 µCi/g 1 6.82+/-1.40E-07 1.4E-OS' 8.9E-06 Total U µg/g 1 1. 79+/-0.09E+OO - -- Pu-238 µCi/g 1 1.32+/-1.54E-08 2.SE-06 3.6E-05 Pu-239/240 µCi/g 1 3.91+/-2.43E-08 2.3E-06 2.4E-05d Am-241 µCi/g 1 4.06+/-2.14E-08 2.lE-06 2.6E-05 N - number of samples.
-- No reference standard avallable.
0 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "Consolidated Decommissioning Guidance: Characterization, Survey and Determination of Radiological Criteria. NUREG-1757, Vol. 2, Rev.1. bSoil Cleanup goals developed from site-specific data for the WVDP Phase 1 Decommissioning Plan (DP), Rev. 2, Table 5-14, December 2009 (most restrictive soil/sediment criteria). cWVDP-related uranium isotopes are not assumed to be in equilibrium with daughter products because of their relatively recent origin as processed nuclear materials. Therefore, the single-nuclide screening levels for U-235 and U-238 were selected for comparison with radionuclide concentrations. d The site-specific cleanup goals selected for Pu-239/240 and U-233/U234 is the maxima of Pu-239 and Pu-240, and U-233 and U-234, respectively from Table 5-14 ofthe DP. Only criteria for U-235 (not U-236) are provided in DP Table 5-14. F-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix F. Summary of Soil and Sediment Monitoring Data TABLE F-2B 2012 Contaminants in On-Site Soils From North Swamp (SNSW74A) RADIOACTIVE CONSTITUENTS NUREG-1757 Soil 1;- ;
,.,. .N * * : *:.sNsw74'A *. Scre~~IJJng Site-Specific .
- 1sotbpe' ' IJnifs
' Contamination
*, v, ***
Soil
.. ; Levelsb '
Cleanup Goals b Gross Alpha µCi/g 1 1.57+/-0.61E-05 -- -- Gross Beta µCi/g 1 2.50+/-0.46E-05 -- -- K-40 Co-60
µCi/g
µCi/g 1
1 1.63+/-0.16E-05
-2.08+/-2.67E-08 3.SE-06 Sr-90 µCi/g 1 4.64+/-5.76E-08 1.7E-06 3.7E-06 Cs-137 µCi/g 1 1.57+/-0.lSE-06 1.lE-05 1.4E-05 U-232 µCi/g 1 -1.04+/-3.04E-08 -- 1.4E-06 U-233/234 µCi/g 1 8.26+/-1.60E-07 1.3E-05 7.6E-06d U-235/236 µCi/g 1 3.49+/-3.97E-08 8.0E-06' 3.1E-06d U-238 µCi/g 1 9.32+/-1.69E-07 1.4E-05' 8.9E-06 Total U µg/g 1 2. 75+/-0.12E+OO -- --
Pu-238 µCi/g 1 0.62+/-1.92E-08 2.SE-06 3.6E-05 Pu-239/240 µCi/g 1 2.48+/-1.92E-08 2.3E-06 2.4E-0Sd Am-241 µCi/g 1 3.30+/-1.57E-08 2.lE-06 2.6E-05 N - number of samples.
- No reference standard available.
0 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory.Commission. "Consolidated Decommissioning Guidance: Characterization, Survey and Determination of Radiological Criteria. NUREG-1757, Vol. 2, Rev. 1. b Soil Cleanup goals developed from site-~pecific data for the WVDP Phase 1 Decommissioning Plan (DP); Rev. 2, Table 5-14, December 2009 {most restrictive soil/sediment criteria). cWVDP-related uranium isotopes are not assumed to be in equilibrium with daughter products because of their relatively recent origin as processed nuclear materials. Therefore, the single-nuclide screening levels for U-235 and U-238 were selected for comparison with radionuclide concentrations. d The site-specific cleanup goals selected for Pu-239/240 and U-233/U234 is the maxima of Pu-239 and Pu-240, and U-233 and U-234, respectively from Table 5-14 of the DP. Only criteria for U-235 (not U-236} are provided in DP Table 5-14. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012 F-3
Appendix F. Summary of Soil and Sediment Monitoring Data TABLE F-2C 2012 Contaminants in On-Site Soils From Nµrtheast Swamp (SNSWAMP) RADIOACTIVE CONSTITUENTS
;,:, NUREG-1757 Soil
~
screening Site_-Spe~iftc : \;* Isotope* Units N SNSWAMP, Contamination Soil *'
" /,
, i~v~lsb ~Jedhdp Gi>~Js'b .. >
i Gross Alpha µCi/g 1 2.16+/-0.68E-05 ' -- -- Gross Beta µCi/g 1 S.32+/-0.19E-04 - -- K-40 µCi/g 1 1.29+/-0. lSE-05 -- -- Co-60 µCi/g 1 3.61+/-3.56E-08 3.SE-06 -- Sr-90 µCi/g 1 2.65+/-0.02E-04 " 1.7E-06 3.7E-06 Cs-137 µCi/g 1 4.21+/-0.36E-06 1.lE-05 1.4E-OS U-232 µCi/g 1 -1.15+/-2.22E-08 -- 1.4E-06 U-233/234 µCi/g 1 6.60+/-1.33E-07 1.3E-05 7.6E-06d U-235/236 µCi/g 1 4.59+/-4.38E-08 8.0E-06' 3.lE-06° U-238 µCi/g 1 7.02+/-1.3SE-07 1.4E-05' 8.9E-06 Total U µg/g 1 3.41+/-0. 74E+OO - - Pu-238 µCi/g 1 7.64+/-2.88E-08 2.SE-06 3.6E-05 0 Pu-239/240 µCi/g 1 1,37+/-0.39E-07 2.3E-06 2.4E-OS Am-241 µCi/g 1 2.34+/-0.35E-07 2.lE-06 2.6E-OS N - number of samples.
-- No reference standard available.
a U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. "Consolidated Decommissioning Guidance: Characterization, Survey and Determination of Radiological Criteria. NUREG-1757, Vol. 2, Rev. 1. b Soil Cleanup goals developed from site-specific data for the WVDP Phase 1 Decommissioning Plan (DP), Rev. 2, Table 5-14, December 2009 (most restrictive soil/sediment criteria). c WVDP-related uranium isotopes are not assumed to be in equilibrium with daughter products because of their relatively recent origin as processed nuclear materials. Therefore, the single-nuclide screening levels for U-235 and U-238 were selected for comparison with radionuclide concentrations. d The site-specific cleanup goals selected for Pu-239/240 and U-233/U234 is the maxima of Pu-239 and Pu-240, and U-233 and U-234, respectively from Table 5-14 of the DP. Only criteria for U-235 (not U-236) are provided in DP Table 5-14. F-4 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix F. Summary of Soil and Sediment Monitoring Data TABLE F-20 . 2012 Results in Surface Soils Collected at Air Stations Around the WVDP Background Location Analyte Units N SFRSPRD SFGRVAL Gross Alpha µCi/g 1 l.93+/-0.53E-05 2.51+/-0. 70E-05
}'
Gross Beta µCi/g 1 2.94+/-0.44E-05 2.93+/-0.45E-05 K-40 µCi/g . 1 1.17+/-0.12E-05 1.06+/-0.13E-05 Co-60 µCi/g 1 1.21+/-2.54E-08 0.05+/-2.61E-08 Sr-90 µCi/g 1 5.74+/-3.87E-08 ' 3.49+/-4.03E-08 Cs-137 µCi/g 1 l.94+/-0.45E-07 li1 3.50+/-0.58E-07 U-232 µCi/g 1 -0.84+/-2.86E-08 -0.34+/-2. 73E-08 U-233/234 µCi/g 1 7 .80+/-1.17E-07 8.00+/-1.20E-07 U-235/236 µCi/g 1 5.56+/-3.67E-08 I* 3.71+/-3.70E-08 U-238 µCi/g 1 8.28+/-1.16E-07 1.0l+/-0.13E-06 Total U µg/g 1 2.26+/-0.13E+OO 2.26+/-0.14E+OO Pu-238 µCi/g 1 0.60+/-1.19E-08 2.75+/-9.34E-09 Pu-239/240 µCi/g 1 0.46+/-1.11E-08 ,, 1.65+/-1.70E-08 Am-241 µCi/g 1 0.93+/-1.46E-08 1'.* 0.61+/-1.06E-08 Background Location Analyte Units N SFFXVRD SFRT240 SFGRVAL Gross Alpha µCi/g 1 1.84+/-0.59E-05 1.61+/-0.57E-05 2.51+/-0. 70E-05
*1*:*
Gross Beta µCi/g 1 2.45+/-0.44E-05 1.83+/-0.38E-05 2.93+/-0.45E-05 K-40 µCi/g 1 1.20+/-0.12E-05 1.18+/-0.13E-05 1.06+/-0.13E-05 Co-60 µCi/g 1 -0.42+/-1.96E-08 0.68+/-2.35E-08 0.05+/-2.61E-08 Sr-90 µCi/g 1 2.94+/-3.93E-08 -1. 72+/-3.60E-08 3.49+/-4.03E-08 Cs-137 µCi/g 1 2.41+/-1.97E-08 1.50+/-0.35E-07 3.50+/-0.SSE-07 Pu-238 µCi/g 1 4.13+/-8.10E~09 0.53+/-1.05E-08 2.75+/-9.34E-09 Pu-239/240 µCi/g 1 4.13+/-9.92E-09 1.24+/-1.26E-08 1.65+/-1. 70E-08 Am-241 µCi/g 1 -0.31+/-1.22E-08 0.87+/-1.21E-08 0.61+/-1.06E-08 N- number of samples. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 F-5
Appendix F. Summary of Soil and Sediment Monitoring Data TABLE F-2E 2012 Radioactivity in Stream Sediments Around the WVDP Background Location Analyte Units N SFCCSED SFSDSED 0 SFBISED Gross Alpha µCi/g 1 1.46+/-0.60E-05 1.04+/-0.53E-05 1.16+/-0.35E-05 Gross Beta µCi/g 1 1.84+/-0.43E-05 l.89+/-0.46E-05 l.69+/-0.29E-05 K-40 µCi/g 1 1.29+/-0.15E-05 1.32+/-0.14E-05 l.37+/-0.15E-05 Co-60 µCi/g 1 -0.97+/-2.77E-08 0.10+/-2.25E-08 0.02+/-1.62E-08 Sr-90 µCi/g 1 0.86+/-3.60E-08 -0.38+/-2.90E-08 0.04+/-4.97E-08 Cs-137 µCi/g 1 1.57+/-0.SlE-07 1.58+/-0.45E-07 3.73+/-2.27E-08 U-232 µCi/g 1 -0.61+/-2.13E-08 1.10+/-2.85E-08 0.00+/-5.52E-08 U-233/234 µCi/g 1 6.17+/-1.llE-07 4. 73+/-0.93E-07 5.42+/-1.19E-07 U-235/236 µCi/g 1 3.14+/-3.13E-08 2.24+/-2.94E-08 5. 73+/-3.88E-08 U-238 µCi/g 1 5.84+/-1.09E-07 5 .39+/-0.94E-07 5.30+/-1.14E-07 Total U µg/g 1 1.95+/-0.llE+OO 1.81+/-0.lOE+OO 1.91+/-0.04E+OO Pu-238 µCi/g 1 -3.30+/-9.69E-09 3.24+/-8.97E-09 1.11+/-i.86E-08 Pu-239/240 µCi/g 1 5.34+/-9.60E-09 8.09+/-9.SlE-09 1.44+/-1.44E-08 Am-241 µCi/g 1 0.54+/-1.0SE-08 -1.49+/-9.67E-09 1. 70+/-2.24E-08 Anrt1Yte
" ,' 1' ;'*~"'£* '*'
- i 1
.}(nJts . ' N*
~>*;, \ ..
SFTC,S~q
'* .* ::*.:, . ' ' **.';' .~.\" . - *'.'.;
Background Location
'.*;*,,. :sFBCSJiti.:~ ; * * :
Gross Alpha µCi/g 1 1.07+/-0.55E-05 -- 1.06+/-0.39E-05 Gross Beta µCi/g 1 1.72+/-0.42E-05 -- 2. 75+/-0.32E-05 K-40 µCi/g 1 l.17+/-0.09E-05 -- 1.30+/-0.14E-05 Co-60 µCi/g 1 -0.12+/-2.26E-08 -- 0.13+/-2.54E-08 Sr-90 µCi/g 1 5.99+/-3.88E-08 -- -2.65+/-3.67E-08 Cs-137 µCi/g 1 1.05+/-0.07E-06 -- 0.36+/-2.50E-08 U-232 µCi/g. 1 -0.02+/-3.06E-08 -- -0.91+/-2.50E-08 U-233/234 µCi/g 1 5.10+/-1.00E-07 -- 5.35+/-0.97E-07 U-235/236 µCi/g 1 6.87+/-3.97Ec08 -- 4.23+/-3.77E-08 U-238 µCi/g 1 5. 77+/-0.99E-07 -- 6.21+/-1.0lE-07 Total u µg/g 1 1.59+/-0.lOE+OO -- 2.28+/-0.14E+OO Pu-238 µCi/g 1 -1.64+/-9.62E-09 -- 0.00+/-1.44E-08 Pu-239/240 µCi/g 1 0.33+/-1.20E-08 -- 0.98+/-1.39E-08 Am-241 µCi/g '1 0.16+/-1.26E-08 -- -0.34+/-1.15E-08 N - number of samples.
-- Not applicable; no additional sampling location.
a Sediment sampling at Bigelow Bridge {SFBISED), the upstream Cattaraugus Creek background, was discontinued in 2005. The ten-year historical average is used as the comparative reference for the Cattaraugus Creek locations. b Sampling data at the location upstream in Buttermilk Creek (SFBCSED) is presented as a ten-year rolling average as a comparative reference for Thomas Corners in Buttermilk Creek (SFTCSED} immediately downstream of facility effluents. F-6 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012
APPENDIX G Summary of Direct Radiation Monitoring Data TABLE G-1 Summary of 2012 Semiannual Averages of Off-Site TLD Measurements a (mR+/-2 SD/quarter) Location Location 1st Half 2nd Half
'Numberb A'verage DFTLDOl 16+/-2 17+/-2 17+/-2 DFTLD02 17+/-2 17+/-1 17+/-1 DFTLD03 14+/-1 14+/-1 14+/-1 DFTLD04 16+/-2 17+/-2 16+/-2 DFTLD05 15+/-2 16+/-2 16+/-2 DFTLD06 15+/-1 17+/-1 16+/-1 DFTLD07 14+/-1 14+/-1 14+/-1 DFTLDOS 16+/-2 17+/-1 16+/-2 DFTLD09 16+/-2 17+/-1 16+/-2 DFTLD10 14+/-2 15+/-1 15+/-1 DFTLD11 15+/-2 15+/-1 15+/-2 DFTLD12 15+/-1 16+/-1 16+/-1 DFTLD13 17+/-1 18+/-1 17+/-1 DFTLD14 15+/-2 16+/-1 16+/-2 DFTLD15 15+/-1 16+/-1 16+/-1 DFTLD16 15+/-1 16+/-1 16+/-1 DFTLD20 14+/-1 14+/-1 14+/-1 DFTLQ23(Background) 16+/-1 17+/-1 17+/-1
*The frequency of collection at the TLD locations was reduced from quarterly to semiannual in 2008, however data are reported in units of mR per quarter for comparability with historical results.
b Off-site locations are shown on Figures A-12 and A-13. Conversion factor: Milliroentgen (mR) units are used to report exposure rates in air. To convert mR to mrem (dose to humans), a conversion factor of 1.03 must be applied. For example, a reported exposure rate of 18.lmR/quarter would be equivalent to 18.6 mrem/quarter (based upon dose-equivalent phantom calibration using cesium-137)" WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 G-1
Appendix G. Summary of Direct Radiation Monitoring Data TABLE G-2 Summary of 2012 Semiannual Averages of On-Site TLO Measurements" (mR+/-2SD/quarter) DNTLD24 547+/-66 544+/-58 DNTLD28 17+/-2 18+/-1 18+/-2 DNTLD32 15+/-1 17+/-2 16+/-2 DNTLD33 18+/-2 20+/-3 19+/-2 DNTLD34 18+/-2 18+/-1 18+/-2 DNTLD35 19+/-2 18+/-1 18+/-1 DNTLD36 18+/-2 17+/-1 17+/-1 DNTLD38 50+/-7 51+/-9 50+/-8 DNTLD40 123+/-17 131+/-17 127+/-17 DNTLD43 14+/-1 15+/-1 14+/-1
*The frequency of collection at the TLD locations was reduced from quarterly to semiannual in 2008, however data are reported in units of mR per quarter for comparability with historical results.
b On-site locations are shown on Figure A-11. Conversion factor: MiUiroentgen (mR) units are used to report exposure rates in air. To convert mR to mrem (dose to . humans), a conversion factor of 1.03 must be applied. For example, a reported exposure rate of 18.lmR/quarter would be equivalent to 18.6 mrem/quarter (based upon dose-equivalent phantom calibration using cesium-137). G-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report_ - Calendar Year 2012
APPENDIX H Summary of Quality Assurance Crosscheck Analyses TABLE H-1 Crosscheck Sample Comparisons From the DOE Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP)"; Study 26; February 2012
" *: \ ,, ~ "'"' *,*
'Report~d Reference ,Anqlyzeq.
Analyte Matri)f Units Acceptance Range Atcept?b Value* Value *, *.. ", *"' , by: MAPEP - *12 - Grf26, Air Filter-_Gro~s J\lpha/l:!eta :- ., ., Gross alpha Air Filter Sq/sample 0.499 1.2 0.4-2.0 Yes ELAB Gross beta
- Air Filter Bq/sample 2.50 2.4 1.2-3.6 Yes ELAB
" MAPEP-12-RdF26, Air Filte1;- Radiological "
Am-241 Air Filter Bq/sample 0.0660 0.073 0.051-0.095 Yes GEL Cs-137 Air Filter Bq/sample 1.910 1.79 1.25-2.33 Yes GEL Co-60 Air Filter Bq/sample 2.235 2.182 1.527-2.837 Yes GEL Pu-238 Air Filter Sq/sample 0.004 0.0015 Sensitivity Evaluation Yes GEL Pu-239/240 Air Filter Sq/sample 0.088 0.097 0.068-0.126 Yes GEL c Sr-90 Air Filter Bq/sample 0.012 False Positive Yes GEL U-233/234 Air Filter Bq/sample 0.010 0.0188 0.0132-0.0244 No GEL U-238 Air Filter Bq/sample 0.111 0.124 0.087-0.161 Yes GEL
. .*MAPEP .., GrW26, Water..,. Gross Alpha/Betp *'-
Gross alpha Water Bq/L 2.02 2.14 0.64-3.64 Yes ELAB Gross beta Water Bq/L 6.19 6.36 3.18-9.54 Yes / ELAB Gross alpha Water Bq/L 2.043 2.14 0.64-3.64 Yes GEL Gross beta Water Bq/L 6.820 6.36 3.18-9.54 Yes GEL MAPEP , XqW26, Wa~er -Al/c.a)ine ", lodine-129 Water Bq/L 12.2 12.29 8.60-15.98 Yes GEL
.. . MAPEP-12 :- fV!aW26, Water- Rqdlological Cs-137 Water Bq/L 40.0 39.9 27.9-51.9 Yes ELAB Co-60 Water Bq/L 23.5 23.72 16.60-30.84 Yes ELAB H-3 Water Bq/L 454 437 306-568 Yes ELAB c
Sr-90 Water Bq/L 0.0930 False Positive Yes - ELAB Am-241 Water Bq/L 1.5067 1.63 1.14-2.12 Yes GEL Cs-137 Water Bq/L 41.15 39.9 27.9-51.9 Yes GEL Co-60 Water Bq/L 23.9 23.72 16.60-30.84 Yes GEL H-3 Water Bq/L 481.7 437 306-568 Yes GEL Pu-238 Water Bq/L 0.5550 0.629 0.440-0.818 Yes GEL Pu-239/240 Water Bq/L 1.230 1.34 0.94-1.74 Yes GEL c Sr-90 Water Bq/L 0.01 False Positive Yes GEL Tc-99 Water Bq/l 26.3 27.9 19.5-36.3 Yes GEL U-233/234 Water Bq/L 0.381 0.392 0.274-0.510 Yes GEL U-238 Water Bq/L 2.537 2.76 1.93-3.59 Yes GEL ELAB - WVDP Environmental Laboratory. GEL - General Engineering Laboratory. Note: This report includes only those matrix/analyte combinations performed in support of the analysis of environmental samples collected as part of the WVDP monitoring program or special investigations.
- MAPEP monitors performance and requests corrective action as required.
b "Yes" - Result acceptable; "No" - Result not acceptable. Bias>+/- 50% or the reported result is not statistically positive at two standard deviations. c Altho_ugh no actual reference value or acceptance range was provided, the results were assessed by MAPEP as acceptable. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year 2012 H-1
Appendix H. Summary of Quality Assurance Crosscheck Analyses TABLE H-1 (continued) Crosscheck Sample Comparisons From the DOE Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP)"; Study 26; February 2012
,;/,, "", ', (i.** " l \
\'o<
Reported'
- Reference' Acce'pfonc'e *' "Aiia/yzed A11aiyt~. Ma.trlx .Units AccepV b : .
o', Value '" \!pit.le : * ** Range' : by! MAPEP-12...:: MaW26,* Water- lnbrg'an/C " :*.* ' Antimony Water mg/L 2.58 2.71 1.90-3.52 Yes GEL Arsenic Water mg/L <0.03 <0.01 False Positive Yes GEL Barium Water mg/L 0.728 0.808 0.566-1.050 Yes GEL Beryllium Water mg/L 0.733 0.808 0.566-1.050 Yes GEL Cadmium Water mg/L 0.394 0.418 0.293-0.543 Yes GEL Chromium Wate*r mg/L 1.64 1.73 1.21-2.25 Yes GEL Cobalt Water mg/L 1.29 1.45 1.02-1.89 Yes GEL Copper Water mg/L 0.923 0.929 0.650-1.208 Yes GEL Lead Water mg/L 0.693 0.779 0.545-1.013 Yes GEL Mercury Water mg/L 0.00352 0.00375 0.00263-0.00488 Yes GEL Nickel Water mg/L <0.005 <0.01 False Positive Yes GEL Selenium Water mg/l 0.203 0.223 0.156-0.290 Yes GEL Thallium Water mg/L 0.730 0.846 0.592-1.100 Yes GEL Uranium - total Water mg/L 0.197 0.222 0.155-0.289 Yes GEL Vanadium Water mg/L 1.45 1.44 1.01-1.87 Yes GEL Zinc Water mg/L 2.13 2.28 1.60-2.96 Yes GEL IVJAP~P-:P-:/VlpS26~ ~pif-:lf1or.ganf'?, * ' . Antimony Soil mg/kg 50.1 NE NE NE GEL Arsenic Soil mg/kg 45.3 48.2 33.7-62.7 Yes GEL Barium Soil mg/kg 645 655 459-852 Yes GEL Beryllium Soil mg/kg 43.8 47.5 33.3-61.8 Yes GEL Cadmium Soil mg/kg 9.28 10.6 7.4-13.8 . Yes GEL Chromium Soil mg/kg 81.6 89.3 62.5-116.1 Yes GEL Cobalt Soil mg/kg 99.8 113 79-147 Yes GEL Copper Soil mg/kg 197 206 144-268 Yes GEL Lead Soil mg/kg 69.5 74.4 52.1-96.7 Yes GEL Mercury Soil mg/kg 0.0785 0.0733 00513-0.0953 Yes GEL Nickel Soil mg/kg 163 186 i30-242 Yes GEL Selenium Soil mg/kg 12.5 14.2 9.9-18.5 Yes GEL Silver Soil mg/kg 81.0 85.5 59.9-111.2 Yes GEL Thallium Soil mg/kg 13.1 14.4 10.1-18.7 Yes GEL Uranium - total Soil mg/kg 24.6 26.5 18.6-34.5 Yes GEL Vanadium Soil mg/kg 99.1 104 73-135 Yes GEL Zinc Soil mg/kg 248 286 200-372 Yes GEL GEL - General Engineering Laboratory. NE-Not Evaluated.
- MAPEP monitors performance and requests corrective action as required.
b "Yes" - Result acceptable. H-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix H. Summary of Quality Assurance Crosscheck Analyses TABLE H-1 (continued) Crosscheck Sample Comparisons From the DOE Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP)"; Study 26; February 2012 Reported Reference Analyzed
... :J?,nalyte Matrix
";o':'
.Units Value Value (tcceptance Range
"'* .,, ' ',. . .~ ~ Accept?~. by:
, MAPEP Ma526, Soil - Radiological Am-241 Soil Bq/kg 152 159 111-207 Yes GEL c
Cs-137 Soil Bq/~g -0.04 False positive Yes GEL Co-60 Soil Bq/kg 0.97 1.56 Sensitivity Evaluation Yes GEL Pu-238 Soil Bq/kg 127.67 136 95-177 Yes GEL Pu-239/240 Soil Bq/kg 61.13 65.8 46.1-85.5 Yes GEL K-40 Soil Bq/kg 1495 1491 1044-1938 Yes GEL Sr-90 Soil Bq/kg 391.7 392 274-510 Yes GEL Tc-99 Soil Bq/kg 345.3 374 262-486 Yes GEL U-233/234 Soil Bq/kg 62.90 68.1 47.7-88.5 Yes GEL U-23.8 Soil Bq/kg 309.33 329 230-428 Yes GEL MAPEP RdV26, Vegetation- Radiological c Am-241 Veg Bq/sample 0.005 False positive Yes GEL c Cs-137 Veg Sq/sample -0.025 False positive Yes GEL Co-60 Veg Bq/sample 6.255 6.05 4.24-7.87 Yes GEL Pu-238 Veg Bq/sample 0.194 0.219 0.153-0.285 Yes GEL Pu-239/240 Veg Bq/sample 0.1226 0.152 0.106-0.198 Yes GEL Sr-90 Veg Bq/sample 1.613 2.11 1.48-2.74 Yes GEL U-233/234 Veg Bq/sample 0.030 0.0411 0.0288-0.0534 Yes GEL U-238 Veg Bq/sample 0.224 0.278 0.195-0.361 Yes GEL
.. MAPEP OrW26, Water""'. Organic Compounds c
Heptachlor Water µg/L <0.02 <1.0 Yes GEL c 1, 2,4-Tri chi or ob en zen e Water µg/L <10.0 <10.0 Yes GEL c, 1,2-Dichlorobenzene Water µg/L <10.0 <10.0 Yes GEL 1,3-Dichlorobenzene Water µg/L 50.2 53.76 10.39-97.14 Yes GEL c 1,4-0ichlorobenzene Water µg/L <10.0 <10.0 Yes GEL 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol Water µg/L 61.8 57.19 25.35-89.02 Yes GEL 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol Water µg/L 87.5 79.7 32.2-127.2 Yes GEL 2,4-Dichlorophenol Water µg/L 169 138.6 59.3-218.0 Yes GEL 2,4-Dimethylphenol Water µg/L 81.8 83.4 23.2-143.5 Yes GEL 2,4-Dinitrophenol Water µg/L 98.5 81.4 11.9-167.7 Yes GEL 2,4-Dinitrotoluene Water µg/L 95.8 107.2 50.4-164.1 Yes GEL c 2,6-Dichlorophenol Water µg/L <10.0 <10.0 Yes GEL 2,6-Dinitrotoluene Water µg/L 148 156.9 79.3-234.5 Yes GEL c 2-Chloronaphthalene Water µg/L <1.0 <10.0 Yes GEL 2-Chlorophenol Water µg/L 104 113.3 41.8-184.7 Yes GEL c 2-Methylnaphthalene Water µg/L <1.0 <10.0 Yes GEL GEL - General Engineering Laboratory.
- MAPEP monitors performance and requests corrective action as required.
b "Yes" - Result acceptable; "W" - Result acceptable with warning 20%<Bias<30%; "No" - Result not acceptable.
<Although no actual reference value or acceptance range was provided, the results were assessed by MAPEP as acceptable.
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 H-3
Appendix H. Summary of Quality Assurance Crosscheck Analyses TABLE H-1 (concluded) Crosscheck Sample Comparisons From the DOE Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP)*; Study 26; February 2012 f?eported Reference Acceptance Analyzed
" AfJi:1/yt~ Matrix Units Accept?~
,, ",~, ,: ',{'cl' ,*l,,\ .. ,vafu.e .. . Value . . <.
- Range . .. . by;, ..*
.. .'( " *
- JVJAPER:H 12 - OrW26, Wqt~r :- Organic caiiipdiin'tls ; x;; *V
'\'*
2-Methylphenol Water µg/L 73.2 81.5 21.6-141.4 Yes GEL c 2-Nitrophenol Water µg/L <10.0 <10.0 Yes GEL 4-Methylphenol Water µg/L 33.9 36.45 5.25-70.40 Yes GEL c 4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol Water µg/L <10.0 <10.0 Yes GEL c 4-Bromophenyl-phenvlether Water µg/L <10.0 <10.0 Yes GEL 4-Chloroc3-methylphenol Water µg/L 69.7 64.43 29.42-99.43 Yes GEL 4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether Water µg/L 156 156.7 72.6-240.7 Yes GEL c 4-Nitrophenol Water µg/L <10.0 <10.0 Yes GEL Acenaphthene Water µg/L 17.7 20.64 10.88-30.40 Yes GEL c Acenaphthylene Water µg/L <1.0 <10.0 Yes GEL Anthracene Water µg/L 44.4 70.65 35.69-105.61 Yes GEL Benzo(a )anthracene Water µg/L 28.2 37.63 19.47-55.80 Yes GEL Benzo(a}pyrene Water µg/L 24.8 31.47 11.86-51.09 Yes GEL Benzo(b)fluoranthene Water µg/L 16.8 22.39 8.23-36.55 Yes GEL Benzo(g,h,i}perylene Water µg/L 13.6 22.19 5.59-38.789 Yes GEL Benzo(k)fluoranthene Water µg/L 19.8 24.82 5.94-43.71 Yes GEL c bis(2-chloroethoxy}methane Water µg/L <10.0 <10.0 Yes GEL bis(2-chloroethyl)ether Water µg/L 45.5 51.94 19.21-84.68 Yes GEL c bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether Water µg/L <10.0 <10.0 Yes GEL Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate Water ug/L 17.8 27.75 9.50-46.00 Yes GEL Butylbenzylphthalate Water µg/L 78.4 88.4 20.1-156.6 Yes GEL Chrysene Water µg/L 15.0 22.01 10.35-33.68 Yes GEL c
. Di-n-butylphthalate Water µg/L <10.0 <10.0 Yes GEL c
Di-n-octylphthalate Water µg/L <10.0 <10.0 Yes GEL Dibenzo( a, h )anthracene Water µg/L 10.9 16.11 4.33-27.89 Yes GEL c Dibenzofuran Water µg/L <10.0 <10.0 Yes GEL c Diethylphthalate Water µg/L <10.0 <10.0 Yes GEL c Dimethylphthalate Water µg/L 116 105.1 Yes GEL c Fluoranthene Water µg/L <1.0 <10.0 *Yes GEL Fluorene Water µg/L 23.8 27.90 11.76-44.05 Yes GEL Hexachlorobenzene Water µg/L 20.9 38.06 18.80-57.32 Yes GEL c Hexachlorobutadiene Water M/L <10.0 <10.0 Yes GEL c Hexachlorocyclopentadiene Water µg/L <10.0 <10.0 Yes GEL Hexachloroethane Water µg/L 86.5 91.2 15.2-167.1 Yes GEL lndeno(l,2,3-c,d)pyrene Water µg/L 15.4 26.25 5.30-47.20 Yes GEL lsophorone Water µg/L 39.9 50.56 23.82-77.30 Yes GEL Napthalene Water µg/L 143 124.S 44.3-204.6 Yes GEL c Nitro benzene Water µg/L <10.0 <10.0 Yes GEL Pentachlorophenol Water µg/L 64.9 64.83 19.04-110.62 Yes GEL c Phenanthrene Water ug/L <1.0 <10.0 Yes GEL Phenol Water µg/L <10.0 <10.0 14.86-199.28 Yes GEL Pyrene Water ug/L 20.5 29.69 10.59-48. 79 Yes GEL GEL - General Engineering Laboratory.
' MAPEP monitors performance and requests corrective action as required.
b "Yes" - Result acceptable. c Although no actual reference value or acceptance range was pr~vided, the results were assessed by MAPEP as acceptable. H-4 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report- Calendar Year2012
Appendix H. Summary of Quality Assurance Crosscheck Analyses TABLE H-2 Crosscheck Sample Comparisons From the DOE Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP)*; Study 27; August 2012
~*,;:: ' i ' ( ' ; . \ ;:*
~j; ~t' ~ c... , ,,,,,
1i* :t"
*.*'.':*::::1:;L~~;.~h.f.~~:.
Ci:.
., *.: * ' *' * .,,,.,* .Referenc~~
'.>"r., ***'.*R,efiofle(J
*<~*.','Value
'~"' * \'>c,;~/,, * ... * *** ~:*,,
,;.;** ~"":%::...
"* *A~ , ,,....by" *""' d
,,%;.."> ,.,, ~
,r;1*1*~'!;; 8:\ ~ 1: ;;;};: , ' .**..*.;,.:., .':**;'.'*' *.,dYJA,REP,~;~2.::;G,iF2,7j*'Aif'f,iltet .,-,'(;roSS,'A,/pf!flXBfi(f/,'.~: '.*'~:) ': .,;;\.. :,.:, :i'.,:l,:';::;t~*~.t)i*.~
Gross Aipha Air Filter Bq/sample 0.2253 0.97 0.29-1.65 No GEL Gross Beta Air Filter Bq/sample 1.930 1.92 0.96-2.88 Yes GEL
*.* *: *, ** :z;">t.ff \. * ' r* .: *' c;>[:: ,,* , *', ; M~P:Efi'5i: 1:.~~;R<ff,27;':1\li;'Flft~r'.:,.. [l~(J,(gkfg{cal1' ,,, .:, '. ' '.,;).
', ,\ ,.:>,;:":: **, ,,* '..:;"":.,:(;::* ....*"*;
Am-241 Air Filter Bq/sample 0.0716 0.0780 0.0546-0.1014 Yes GEL c Cs-137 Air Filter Bq/sample -0.016 False positive Yes GEL Co-60 Air Filter Bq/sample 1.865 1.728 1.210-2.246 Yes GEL Pu-238 Air Filter Bq/sample 0.061 0.0625 0.0438-0.0813 Yes GEL d Pu-239/240 Air Filter Bq/sample -0.002 0.00081 Yes GEL Sr-90 Air Filter Bq/sample 0.914 1.0;l 0.72-1.34 Yes GEL U-233/234 Air Filter Bq/sample 0.009 0.0141 0.0099-0.0183 No GEL U-238 Air Filter Bq/sample 0.087 0.1 0.070-0.130 Yes GEL I::' :::~ .: . , . ..'l;:.-~,.
;;o::,'.'::J*:< '~:",*.., ?,.*: << .MA'PEP'.::/12:!-*Gfitiiii,'.!Ndter'-"Gri:i'Ss'Alpfic{!Beti{~"E
',A *- *," ~* " '-* **~~ ,,, ,,,,*,,,,, ',,, ,* ,,_,* * ' ' N>-' ',,_ ':;,'<:__ ,_> " ?*}**~ ~;,,':t ,: /~.* :V, ::1;/ * * /
Gross Alpha Water Bq/L 1.737 1.79 0.54-3.04 Yes GEL Gross Beta Water Bq/L 8.893 9.1 4.6-13.7 Yes GEL
".r.~:\:L~'.."*-~*:t':.{1; *\: 1
;'.~:*'.** .MA,RE'/J;,2,j,"2;7/VJ.aJ!q27fW.dteff'.f3aqi§l0'9!taf'.::.<:>IY:~:.~ 1 "*';'i'.. 1 :
'it!"i ','" ' >,:,
Am-241 Water Bq/L 0.9407 1.06 0.74-1.38 Yes GEL Cs-137 Water Bq/L 17.05 16.7 11.7-21.7 Yes GEL c Co-60 Water Bq/L 0.03 False positive Yes GEL H-3 Water Bq/L 334.0 334 234-434 Yes GEL a Pu-238 Water Bq/L 0.0088 0.013 Yes GEL Pu-239/240 Water Bq/L 1.440 1.61 1.13-2.09 Yes GEL Sr-90 Water Bq/L 11.13 12.2 8.5-15.9 Yes GEL Tc-99 Water Bq/L 4.5 4.58 3.21-5.95 Yes GEL U-233/234 Water Bq/L 0.414 0.451 0.316-0.586 Yes GEL U-238 Water Bq/L 2.960 3.33 2.33-4.33 Yes GEL GEL - General Engineering Laboratory. Note: This report includes only those matrix/analyte combinations performed in support of the analysis of environmental samples collected as part of the WVDP monitoring program or special investigations. 0 MAPEP monitors performance and requests corrective action as required. b "Yes" -Result acceptable; "No" (Gross Alpha) = Result not acceptable, Bias>+/- 70% or the reported result is not statistically positive at two standard deviations (Result/Uncertainty); "No" (U-233/234) = Result not acceptable Bias> 30%. c Although no actual reference value or acceptance range was provided, the results were assessed by MAPEP as acceptable d Sensitivity evaluation, reported a statistically zero result. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 H-5
Appendix H. Summary of Quality Assurance Crosscheck Analyses TABLE H-2 (continued) Crosscheck Sample Comparisons From the DOE Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP)"; Study 27; August 2012 I,
,}:';'7An(lly~e *,
.' .*un*1:ts*,,*, .** Rep.ort.f!.d,*, Re.,feren.c,e Af<=.,e....P....t.,a.,nc,e.,,
A*'*, 't?b Anafyzed:Ui
, .. -,,1/* **. *,valU?' ' ;;'\f.a/ue f1~nge: ,. , ,JC',',e..,... .
P,
. ***..:.*, "
- b, y.* , .,.*
** MAPEP-12-MaW27,,iNater-Jnorgahii *,
Antimony Water mg/L 3.28 3.38 2.37-4.39 Yes GEL Arsenic Water mg/L 1.16 1.13 0.79-1.47 Yes GEL Barium Water mg/L 3.72 4.00 2.80-5.20 Yes GEL Beryllium Water mg/L <0.005 c False Positive Yes GEL Cadmium Water mg/L 0.496 0.506 0.354-0.658 Yes GEL Chromium Water mg/L 0.538 0.561 0.393-0.729 Yes GEL Cobalt Water mg/L 2.91 3.11 2.18-4.04 Yes GEL Copper Water mg/L <0.01 c False Positive Yes GEL Lead Water mg/L 1.94 2.06 1.44-2.68 Yes GEL Mercury Water mg/L 0.0032 0.00349 0.00244-0.00454 Yes GEL Nickel Water mg/L 3.73 3.99 2.79-5.19 Yes GEL Selenium Water mg/L <0.005 c False Positive Yes GEL Thallium Water mg/L 2.17 2.47 1.73-3.21 Yes GEL Uranium :-total Water mg/L 0.244 0.268 0.188-0.348 Yes GEL Vanadium Water mg/L 1.67 1.59 1.11-2.07 Yes GEL Zinc Water mg/L 3.22 3.27 2.29-4.25 Yes GEL A(JAPEP JV!aS27., Soil - Inorganic , Antimony Soil mg/kg 106 111.5 78.1-145.0 Yes GEL Arsenic Soil mg/kg 48.7 55.7 39.0-72.4 Yes GEL Barium Soil mg/kg 785 896 627-1165 Yes GEL Beryllium Soil mg/kg 43.5 47.0 32.9-61.1 Yes GEL Cadmium Soil mg/kg 13.0 15.4 10.8-20.0 Yes GEL Chromium Soil mg/kg 90.5 99.0 69.3-128.7 Yes GEL Cobalt Soil mg/kg 110 127 89-165 Yes GEL Copper Soil mg/kg . 202 204 143-265. Yes GEL Lead Soil mg/kg 84.4 97.6 68.3-126.9 Yes GEL Mercury Soil mg/kg 0.172 0.172 0.120-0.224 Yes GEL Nickel Soil mg/kg 260 300 210-390 Yes GEL Selenium Soil mg/kg 14.0 17.7 12.4-23.0 W GEL Silver Soil mg/kg 89.3 95.5 66.9-124.2 Yes GEL Thallium Soil mg/kg 77.4 91.0 63.7-118.3 Yes GEL Uranium -total Soil mg/kg 19.65 21.2 14.8-27.6 Yes GEL Vanadium *Soil mg/kg 248 271 190-352 Yes GEL Zinc Soil mg/kg 462 549 384-714 Yes GEL GEL- General Engineering Laboratory.
- MAPEP monitors performance and requests corrective action as required.
b "Yes" - Result acceptable; "W" - Result acceptable with warning 20%<Bias<30%.
'Although no*a_ctual value or acceptance range was provided, the results were assessed by MAPEP as acceptable.
H-6 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix H. Summary of Quality Assurance Crosscheck Analyses TABLE H-2 (continued) Crosscheck Sample Comparisons From the DOE Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP)"; Study 27; August 2012
* *. Reported Reference . Acceptance Analyzed.
.. An ply_~~ \'. * * ; ry'atrix Units
. *vatue 'Value* *<::..* Range
. "b
,l\ccep{~. V
.,, .. : .':.bw
'b'*' . .,. .. ..
" -:,* ... ~ . : MAPEP :...12 - MaS27, Soil - Rcteiiol~gical Am-241 Soil Bq/kg 106.67 111 78-144 Yes GEL Cs-137 Soil Bq/kg 1230 1150 805-1495 Yes GEL Co-60 Soil Bq/kg 551.5 531 372-690 Yes GEL Pu-238 Soil Bq/kg 104.6 105.8 74.1-137.5 Yes GEL Pu-239/240 Soil Bq/kg 132.33 134 94-174 Yes GEL K-40 Soil Bq/kg 723 632 442-822 Yes GEL Sr-90 Soil Bq/kg 476.7 508 356-660 Yes GEL Tc-99 Soil Bq/kg 385.3 469 328-610 Yes GEL U-233/234 Soil Bq/kg 51.6 60.3 42.2-78.4 Yes GEL U-238 Soil Bq/kg 238.33 263 184-342 Yes GEL MA PEP RdV27, Vegetation~ Radiological Am-241 Veg Bq/sample 0:142 0.163 0.114-0.212 Yes GEL Cs-137 Veg Bq/sample 4.575 4.38 3.07-5.69 Yes GEL Co-60 Veg Bq/sample 5.440 5.12 3.58-6.66 Yes GEL Pu-238 Veg Bq/sample 0.176 0.187 0.131-0.243 Yes GEL Pu-239/240 Veg Bq/sample 0.120 0.123 0.086-0.160 Yes GEL c
Sr-90 Veg Bq/sample O.o18 False Positive Yes GEL U-233/234 Veg Bq/sample 0.024 0.02S7 . 0.0180-0.0334 Yes GEL U-238 Veg Bq/sample 0.143 0.158 0.111-0.205 Yes GEL MAPEP XaW27, Water- Radiological 1-129 Water Bq/L 6.229 6.82 4.77-8.87 *Yes GEL GEL - General Engineering Laboratory.
- MAPEP monitors performance and requests corrective action as required.
b "Yes" - Result acceptable. . c Although no actual value or acceptance range was provided, the results were assessed by MAPEP as acceptable. WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 H-7
Appendix H. Summary of Quality Assurance Crosscheck Analyses TABLE H-2 (continued) Crosscheck Sample Comparisons From the DOE Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP)"; Study 27; August 2012 Reported Reference Acceptance Analyzed Analyte Matrix, Units Accept?b Vdlue.* . .
- Value " . Range ,*,, by:,,.
', MAPEP.-?12*--'0rW27,:w1::tt,e~:::..:,orgqnic Cotitf!ounds c c c Heptachlor Water µg/L 5.16 GEL 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzene Water µg/L 43.4 50.2 14.6-85.7 Yes GEL 1,2-Dich lorobenzene Water µg/L 40.3 50.5 8.6-92.5 Yes GEL 1,3-Dichlorobenzene Water µg/L 30.9 40.4 8.0-72.8 Yes GEL 1,4-Dichlorobenzene Water µg/L 44.3 56.3 8.7-104.8 Yes GEL 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol Water µg/L 110 116 50-183 Yes GEL d
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol Water µg/L <10.0 <10 Yes GEL 2,4-Dichlorophenol Water µg/L 63.4 63.0 25.1-100.8 Yes GEL 2,4-Dimethylphenol Water µg/L 107 109 31-186 Yes GEL 2,4-Dinitrophenol Water µg/L 74.8 73 11-152 Yes GEL 2,4-Dinitrotoluene Water µg/L 58.5 64.5 29.0-100.1 Yes GEL a 2,6-Dichlorophenol Water µg/L <10.0 <10 Yes GEL 2,6-Dinitrotoluene Water µg/L 16.8 18.6 8.0-29.2 Yes GEL 2-Chloronaphthalene Water µg/L 87.1 107 43-170 Yes GEL 2-Chlorophenol Water µg/L 61.2 75.5 28.5-122.5 Yes GEL 2-Methyl naphthalene Water µg/L 49.0 46.6 11.9-81.4 Yes GEL 2-Methylphenol Water µg/L 44.6 53.4 14.0-92.8 Yes GEL 2-Nitrophenol Water µg/L 105 106 32-181 Yes GEL 4-Methylphenol Water µg/L 55.0 59.0 8.7-113.8 Yes GEL a 4,6-Dinitro-2-methylphenol Water µg/L <10.0 <10 Yes GEL 4-Bromophenyl-phenylether Water µg/L 102 115 45-185 Yes GEL 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol Water µg/L 127 126 59-193 Yes GEL 4-Chlorophenyl-phenylether Water µg/L 37.0 42.8 19.7-66.0 Yes GEL 4-Nitrophenol Water µg/L 28.4 37.3 6.9-94.8 Yes GEL d Acenaphthene Water µg/L <1.0 <10 Yes GEL d Acenaphthylene Water µg/L <1.0 <10 Yes GEL d Anthracene Water µg/L <1.0 <10 Yes GEL a Benzo{a)anthracene Water µg/L <1.0 <10 Yes GEL d Benzo{a)pyrene Water µg/L <1.0 <10 Yes .,GEL d Bem;o{b )fluoranthene Water µg/L <1.0 <10 Yes GEL d Benzo(g,h,i)perylene Water µg/L <1.0 <10 Yes GEL d Benzo(k)fluoranthene Water µg/L <1.0 <10 Yes GEL bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane Water µg/L 67.8 71.5 35.6-107.5 Yes GEL bis(2-chloroethyl)ether Water µg/L 10.9 15.5 6.4-24.6 Yes GEL bis(2-chloroisopropyl)ether Water µg/L 42.3 55.9 19.4-92.4 Yes GEL a Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate Water µg/l <10.0 <10 Yes GEL Butylbenzylphthalate Water µg/l 50.0 62.5 11.7-113.3 Yes GEL GEL - General Engineering Laboratory.
- MAPEP monitors performance and requests corrective action as required.
b "Yes" - Result acceptable. c Analyte was not evaluated by MAPEP. d Although no actual value or acceptance range was provided, the results were assessed by MAPEP as acceptable. H-8 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix H. Summary of Quality Assurance Crosscheck Analyses TABLE H-2 (concluded) Crosscheck Sample Comparisons From the DOE Mixed Analyte Performance Evaluation Program (MAPEP)"; Study 27; August 2012 Reported Reference Acceptance Accept? Analyzed Analyte Matrix Units b .*
. ' ./',." ' ~) ... Value .. .Va.J.ue , ,.Rqngr; by: ..
'". MAPEP OrW27, Water - Organic Compo'unds *.* " '
c Chrysene Water µg/L <1.0 <10 Yes GEL Di-n-butylphthalate Water µg/L 62.7 64.9 25.9-103.9 Yes GEL Di-n-octylphthalate Water µg/L 73.4 81.l 21.4-140.8 Yes GEL c Dibenzo(a,h)anthracene Water µg/L <1.0 <10 Yes GEL Dibenzofuran Water µg/L 51.3 59.2 26.1-92.3 Yes GEL Diethylphthalate Water µg/L 42.8 44.1 8.6-79.6 Yes GEL Dimethylphthalate Water µg/L 66.5 59.8 8.8-128.6 Yes GEL c Fluoranthene Water µg/L <1.0 <10 Yes GEL c Fluorene Water µg/L <1.0 <10 Yes GEL Hexachlorobenzene Water µg/L 22.0 38.9 19.2-58.5 Yes GEL Hexachlorobutadiene Water µg/L 25.5 35.8 5.3-67.2 Yes GEL Hexachlorocyclopentadiene Water µg/L 55.1 65 11-146 Yes GEL Hexachloroethane Water µg/L 24.1 32.3 4.9-59.7 Yes GEL c lndeno(l,2,3-c,d)pyrene Water µg/L <1.0 <10 Yes GEL lsophorone Water µg/L 64.1 63.9 30.0-97.9 Yes GEL c Napthalene Water µg/L <1.0 <10 Yes GEL Nitrobenzene Water µg/L 45.8 48.9 20.1-77.7 Yes GEL Pentachlorophenol Water µg/L 115 124 41-207 Yes *GEL c Phenanthrene Water µg/L <1.0 <10 Yes GEL Phenol Water. µg/L 23.4 . 44.7 7.9-107.8 Yes GEL c Pyrene Water µg/L <l.O <10 Yes GEL GEL- General Engineering Laboratory.
- MAPEP monitors performance and requests corrective action as required.
b "Yes" - Result acceptable.
'Although no actual value or acceptance range was provided, the results were assessed by MAPEP as acceptable.
WVDP Annual Site *Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 H-9
Appendix H. Summary of Quality Assurance Crosscheck Analyses TABLE H-3 Comparisons of Results From Crosscheck Samples Analyzed for Water Quality Parameters as Part of the EPA's 2012 Discharge Monitoring Report - Quality Assurance (DMR-QA) Study 32; (2012) for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Reported Refere1rce Acceptance Ana/yte
. " ,, * :; - U!!its *., va1u'e Value ,
- Ra~ge~
Atr;ept?b, Analyzed by:
\' , ' ;*;"' ' '
Aluminum µg/L 935 967 778-1,150 Yes TestAmerica Aluminum* µg/L 2,770 2,520 2,080-2,930 Yes GEL Ammonia (as N) mg/L 6.1 6.77 4.97-8.56 Yes TestAmerica Antimony µg/L 509 532 372-640 Yes TestAmerica Arsenic µg/L 62.7 71.7 55.8-87.1 Yes TestAmerica Barium µg/L 439 434 376-489 Yes TestAmerica Biochemical oxygen demand mg/L 45.6 79.3 25.2-87.2 Yes TestAmerica BOD mg/L 97 90.4 45.. 7-135 Yes GEL Cadmium µg/L 310 315 268-358 Yes TestAmerica Chlorine (total residual) µg/L 110 154 94.0-214 Yes WWTF Chromium (total) µg/L 561 583 508-660 Yes TestAmerica Chromium (hexavalent) µg/L 82.8 71 52.7-86.7 Yes TestAmerica Cobalt µg/L 207 222 194-250 Yes TestAmerica Copper µg/L 310 303 273-335 Yes TestAmerica Copper µg/L 848 812 731-893 Yes GEL Cyanide, total mg/L 0.305 0.293 0.145-0.447 Yes TestAmerica Iron µg/L 302 315 275-361 Yes TestAmerica Iron µg/L 433 406 356-463 Yes GEL Lead µg/L 1,410 1,470 1,290-1,640 Yes TestAmerica Lead µg/L 316 320 276-363 Yes GEL Manganese µg/L 2,520 2,480 2,230-2, 750 Yes TestAmerica Mercury, 1631E µg/L 13.8 14.0 8.62-18.9 Yes GEL Nickel µg/L 2630 2690 2,420-3,000 Yes TestAmerica Nitrate (as N) mg/L 33.6 37.3 29.1-45.0 Yes TestAmerica Nitrite (as N) mg/L 0.456 0.459 0.331-0.578 Yes TestAmerica Oil & Grease (Gravimetric) mg/L 179 188 139-213 Yes TestAmerica Oil & Grease (Gravimetric) mg/L 62.0 65.0 43.8-77.6 . Yes GEL pH SU 7.23 7.23 7.03-7.43 Yes ELAB Phosphorus (total, as P)
- mg/L 2.45 1.99 1.59-2.44 No GEL Selenium µg/L 1)10 1,230 981-1,430 Yes TestAmerica Sulfate mg/L 56.4 54.0 44.3-62.3 Yes TestAmerica Settleable solids mg/L 42 34.1 28.1-43.0 Yes WWTF Settleable solids ml/L 9.50 9.34 6.70-12.8 Yes TestAmerica Suspended solids (total) mg/L 18 25 16.7-30.7 Yes TestAmerica Total dissolved solids mg/L 334 358 271-445 Yes GEL Total dissolved solids mg/L 467 509 391-627 Yes TestAmerica Total Kjeldahl nitrogen (as N) mg/L 26.4 25.7 16.9-33.0 Yes TestAmerica Vanadium µg/L 735 775 679-867 Yes TestAmerica Zinc µg/L 954 1,040 893-1,190 Yes TestAmerica Zinc µg/L 364 366 313-424 Yes GEL TestAmerica - TestAmerica Laboratories; Inc., Buffalo.
WWTF - WVDP Wastewater Treatment Facility Laboratory. GEL- General Engineering Laboratory. El.AB -WVDP Environmental Laboratory. Samples provided by Environmental Research Associates (ERA).
- Acceptance limits are determined by ERA or the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH), as applicable.
b "Yes" - Result acceptable; "No" - Result not acceptable. H-10 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
Appendix H. Summary of Quality Assurance Crosscheck Analyses TABLE H-3 (concluded) Comparisons of Results From Crosscheck Samples Analyzed for Water Quality Parameters as Part of the EPA's 2012 Discharge Monitoring Report - Quality Assurance (DMR-QA) Study 32; (2012) for the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System {NPDES) 0
,: ' Analyte Units,
,Rep0,rtM JJefet:erite, :Acceptane_~: !Accept?
vai~~* '.'< Range
't, ,,, 1~' ' b
',* '*:'\;'
'~ri}i/yied by: c ..
Yalue 0 '.' ., Toxicity Fathead Minnow Acute MHSF 25Q - LC50 754 % 27.8 21.0 5.95-36.0 Yes New England Bioassay F~thead Minnow Chronic MHSF - Survival NOEC 756 % 25.0 25.0 12.5-50.0 Yes New England Bioassay Ceriodaphnia Acute MHSF 25Q - LC50 764 % 100.0 46.1 7.23-85.1 No New England Bioassay Ceriodaphnia Chronic MHSF - Survival NOEC 766 % 50.0 25.0 12.5-50.0 Yes New England Bioassay Ceriodaphnia Chronic MHSF - Reproduction IC25 767 % 31.9 23.1 2.27-43.9 Yes New England Bioassay Ceriodaphnia Chronic MHSF - Reproduction NOEC 768 % 25.0 12.5 6.25-25.0 Yes New England Bioassay Fathead Minnow Chronic MHSF - Growth IC25 (ON) 808 % 24.3 29.4 9.33-49.4 Yes New England Bioassay Fathead Minnow Chronic MHSF - Growth NOEC (ON) 810 % 25.0 25.0 12.5-50.0 Yes New England Bioassay Samples provided by Environmental Research Associates (ERA). a Acceptance limits are determined by ERA or the New York State Department of Health (NYSDOH), as applicable. b "Yes" - Result acceptable; "No" - Result not acceptable.
'Analyzing Laboratory- New England Bioassay A Division of GZA GeoEnvironmental, Inc.
WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 H-11
Appendix H. Summary of Quality Assurance Crosscheck Analyses This page intentionally left blank H-12 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012
APPENDIX I West Valley Demonstration Project Act West Valley Demonstration Project Act {Public Law 96-368 [S.2443); October 1, 1980) (As presented in Exhibit G of the Cooperative Agreement between 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; Effec-tive October 1, 1980 as amended September 18, 1981.) EXHIBIT G WEST VALLEY PROJECT DEMONSTRATION ACT PUBLIC LAW 96-368 [S. 2443]; October l, 1980 WEST VALLEY DEMONSTRATION PROJECT ACT F1ir Legislatire liislvry of this trnd olher LmJ.*s, see TablC' JJ Pub/it La.,;,*s and L*gislative History, at rnd of final <*o/ume An Act to authorize th-e Department or Energy to carry out a high.revel llquld nuclear waste management d-emonatratlon proJect at the Weotern New Yori< Sef"vfce Center ln Wellt Valley, New York. Be it enacted by tM Senate and Hou.se of &prewi.tatil.Je8 of the United States ofAmerica in Co~ assembf.ed, West Valley Demoruitration SECTION 1. This Act may be cit.ed as the "West Valley Demonstra- Project Act. tion Pro* ect Act". use SEC. ~. (a) The Secretary shnll carry out, in accordance with this 12 2021. note. Act, a high level radioactive wasts llllll1Bg0ment demonstration 12 USC 21l2la project at the Westem New York Servica Center in Weat Valley, New note. York, for the PtllJlOSe of demolllltrating solidification techniques which can be used for preparing high fevel radioactive waste for disposal.. Under the project the Beeretary shall carry out the follow- Activities. ing activities: (1) The Secretary shall solidjfyi in e. form suitable for transwr-tation and ~' the high eve! radioactive waste at the Center by vitrification or by such other technology which the Secret!iry determines tA:I be the most effective for solidification. (2) The Secretary shall develop containem suitable for the permanent disposal of the high level radioactive waste solidified at the Center. (3) The Secretary shall, as soon as feasible, transport, in w:cordanca with applicable provisions of law, the wiµrt.e solidified at the Center tA:I an appropriate Federal repository for permanent
~~~Secretary ahall, in accordance with applicable licensing requirements, dispose of low level radioactive waste and transu-ranic waste produced by the eolidification of the high level radioactive waste under the project.
(5) The Secret.aty shall decontaminate and decommission-(A) the tankil and other facilities of the Center in which
- the high level radioactive waste solidified under the project was stored, (B) the facilities used in the solidification of the waste, and (C) any material and hardware used in connection with in ~~~th such requirements as the Commission may preScribe.
(b) Before undertaking the project and during the fiEcaJ. year encling
&ptember 30.z. 1981, the Seeretary shall carry out the followin~ Hearinga.
(l) The oecretary shall hold in.the vicinity of the Center puhlli:: hearings tA:I inform the residents of the area in which the Center Is located of the activities proposed tA:I be undertaken under the project and to receive theix comments on the project. (2) The Secretary shall consider the various tethnologies avail* able for the solidification and lumdling of high level riidioactive waste takiru! into acrount the unique chaiacteriatice of such waste at the 'Center. 94 STA1'. 1347 G-1 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 1-1
Appendix /. West Valley Demonstration Project Act P.L. 96-368 LAWS OF 96th CONG.-2nd SESS. Oct. l (8) The Secretary shall-(A) undertake detailed engineering and cost estimates for th~roject, (BJ prepare a plan for the safe removal of the hhtb level radioactive waste at the Center for the purposes of solidifica-tion and include in the plan provisions respecting the safe breaching of the tanks in which the waste is stored, operat-ing equipment to accomplish the removal, and sluicing techniques, .
~C) conduct appropriate safety analyses of the project, and (D) prepare required environmental impact analyses of the project.
(4) The Secretary shall enter into a cooperative agreement with the State in accordance with the Federal Grant and Cooper-4l use 501 ative Agreement Act of 1977 under which the State will carry out note. the following: (A) The State will make available to the Secretary the facilities of the Center and the high level radioactive waste at the Center which a.re necessary for the completion of the project. The facilities and the waste shall be made available without the transfer of title and for such period as may be required for completion of the project. (B) The Secretary shall p:roviiie technical. assistance in securing required license amendments. State costs, (C) The State shall pay 10 per centum of the coots of the percentage. project, a.a determined by the Secretary. In determining the costs of the project, the Secretary shall consider the value of the use of the Center for the project. The State may not use Federal funds to pay its share of the cost of the project, but mey use the perpetual care fund to pay such share. LirenBing (D) Submission jointly by the Department of Energy and amendment tile State of New York of an application for a licensing application. amendment as soon as PoSSible with the Nuclear Regulatory
.Commission providing for the demonstration.
(c) Within one year from the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary shall enter into an agreement with the Commission to establish arrangement.a for review and consultation by the Commis-sion with respect to the project: Provided, That review and consul-tation by the CommisBion pursuant to this subsection shall ba conducted informally by the Commission and shall not include nor require formal procedures or actions by the Commission pursuant to 42 use 2011 the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, the Energy Reo~ note. tion Act of 1974, as amended, or any other law. The agreement shall 42 use 5801 note. provide for the following: (1) The Secretary shall submit to the Commission. for its review-and comment, a plan for the solidification of the high level radioactive waste at the Center, the removal of the waste (<!r p~ of its solidification, the preparation of the waste for
~* an~ the decontamination of the facilities to be used in solidifying the waste. ID: pre~ ita comments on the plan, the Commission shall s~ with precision its objections to any Publications provision of the plari. Upon submission of a. plan to the "Commis-in Federal sion, the Secretary shall publish a notice in the Federal Register Regli!ter.
of the submission of the plan and of ita availability for public inspection, and, upon receipt of the comments of the Commisaion respecting a. pla.ri, the Secretary shall publish a notice in the Federal Register of the receipt of the comments and of the availability of the comments for public inspection. If the Secre-94 STAT. 1348 G-2 1-2 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report c Calendar Year 2012
Appendix I. West Valley Demonstration Project Act Oct. 1 WEST VALLEY PROJECT ACT P.L. 96--368 t.ary does not revise the pl.an w meet objections specified in the comments of the Commission. the Secretary shall publish in the Federal Register a detailed statement for not so revising the P1{2) The Secretary shall consult with the Commission with respect w the form in which the high level radioactive wasts at the Center shall be solidified and the containers w oo used in the permanent disposal of such waste. (3) The Secretary shall submit to the Commission safety Rej)orb! and analysis reports and such other information as the Commission other information may require w identify any danger w the public health and to Commimion. safety which may be presented by tlie project. (4) The Secretary shall afford the Commission access to the Center w enable the Commission to monitor the activities under the project for the purpose of assuring the public health and safety. (d) In carrying out the project, the Secretary shall consult with the c.ansultation with Adminiatraror of the Environmental Prorection Agency, the Secre- EPA and othen<. tary of Transportation, the Director of the Geologic8l Survey, and the commercial operator of the Center. SEC. 3. (a) There are authorized w be appropriated w the Secretary Appropriation for the project not more than $5,000,000 for the fiscal year ending authorit.ation. 42 use 20'..!la September 30, 1981. DO(e. (b) The rotal amount obligated for the project by the Secretary shall be 90 per centum of the costs of the project. (c) The authority of the Secretary to enter inro contracts under this Act shall be effective for any fiscal year only to such extent or in such amounts as are provided in advance by appropriation Acts. Sro. 4. Not later than February 1, 1981, and on February 1 of each Report to. calendar year thereafter during the term of the project, the Secretary Speaker
!louse and of the shall transmit w the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President f"'
President pro tempore of the Senate an u~tcrdate report containing a t.empore o the detailed description of the activities of the Secretary in ~out ~n"te. the project, including agreements entered inro and the costs mcirred 42 USC 202la note. dunng the period reported on and the activities to be undertaken in the next fisCal year and the estimated costs thereof. SEC. 5. (a) Other than the costs and responsibilities established by 42 USC 202la this Act for the project, nothing in this Act shall be construed BB ~- affecting any rights, obligations, or liabilities of the commercial operaror of the Center, the State, or any person, as is appropriate, arising under the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 or under any other law, t2 USC 2tlll rontract, or agreement for the operation, maintenance, or decontami- oota nation of any_ facility or property at the Center or for any wastes at the Center. Nothing in this Act shall be construed as affecting any applicable licensing requirement of the Atomic Energy Act of Ul54 or the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974. This Act shall not apply or be . "2 USC 5801 extended w any facility or ~roperty at the Center which is not used in ~ conducting th~rojei:t. This Act may not be ronstrued to expand or diminish the
- ts of the Federal Government.
(b) Thia Act oes not authorize the Federal Government to acquire title to any high level radioactive waste at the Center or to the Center or any portion thereof. SEC. 6. For purposes of this Act: Definition.s. (1) The term "Sacre~' means the Secretary of Energy. 42 use 202la (2) The term "Commission" means the Nuclear Regularor,y note. Commission. (3) The term "State" means the State of New York. 94 STAT. 1349 G-3 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012 1-3
Appendix I. West Valley Demonstration Project Act P.L. 96-36!1 LAWS OF 96th CONG.-2nd SESS. Oct. 1 (4) The term "high level radioactive waste" means the high level radioactive .waste which was produced by the reprQOeSSing at the Center of spent nuclear fuel Such term includes both liauid wast.es which are produced clliec_tly in re~. dry solid material derived fri>m such liquid waste, and such other material ::is the Commission deeignat.ea as 1iigh level radioactive waste for purpoaes of protecting the public health end safety. (5) The term "transuranic waste" means material contami-nated with elements which have an atomic number greater than 92, including ne"tunium, plutonium, americium, and curium, and which are in" concentrations greater than 10 nanocuries per gram, or in such other concentrations as the Commission may prescribe to protect the public health and saf~. (6) The term "low level radioactive waste" meiµlS radioactive waste not classified as high level radioactive waste, transuranic waste, or byproduct material. as defined in section 11 e. (2) of the 42 USC 2014. Atomic Energy Act ofl954. (7) The term "project" means the project prescribed by section 2(a). (8) The term "Center" mea.n.e the Western New York Servi~ Center in West Valley, New York. Approved October 1, 1980. G-l~ 1-4 WVDP Annual Site Environmental Report - Calendar Year 2012}}