ML20004C910
| ML20004C910 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wood River Junction |
| Issue date: | 05/08/1981 |
| From: | Crocker H, Kinney W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20004C907 | List: |
| References | |
| 70-0820-81-04, 70-820-81-4, NUDOCS 8106080030 | |
| Download: ML20004C910 (5) | |
Text
.
~
O U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSI0tl 0FFICE OF INSPECTION AtlD EllFORCEMEllT Region I Report No. 70-820/81-04 Docket No.70-820 License No. SNM-777 Priority 1
Category UR Licensee:
United Nuclear Corporation UNC Recovery Systems Wood River Junction, Rhode Island 02894 Facility Name:
Fuel Recovery Operation Inspection at:
Wood River Junction, Rhode Island Inspection conductt.d:
April 22-24,1981 Inspectors:
d)
/w J~/r/d*/
/
date signed W.W. Xinney, Project Inspector date signed date signed M-Al-
- 8/#/
Approved by Y
'date signed v
H.W. Crocker, Chief, Fuel Facility Projects Section, DRPI Inspection Summary:
Inspection on April 22-24, 1981 (Report 70-820/81-04)
Areas Inspected:
Special announced inspection by a region-based inspector of the drilling of a deep well on UNC Recovery Systems property to assess the profile of the contamination of the ground water in a vertical direction.
The inspection involved 15 inspector-hours onsite by one region-based inspector.
Resulg:
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
Region I Form 12 (Rev. April 77) 81060800 %
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- R.J.
Gregg, Plant Manager, UNC Recovery Systems K.A.
Helgeson, Manager, Nuclear and Industrial Safety, UNC Recovery Systems T.J.
Itteilag, Health Physics Specialist, UNC Recovery Systems K.
Kipp, Hydrologist, USGS B.
Ryan, Hydrologist, USGS J.
Schiff, Goldberg-Zoino & Associates F.
Morra, Department of Environmental Management, State of Rhode Island The inspector also contacted two well drillers during the course of the inspection.
- denotes individual present at the exit interview.
2.
Background and Scope of the Inspection UNC Recovery Systems has retained Goldberg-Zoino & Associates, Inc.
Geotechnical Consultants to study the bydrology of the ground water under their property and the extent and effect of the contamination of the ground water by the leakage of aquecus waste from their lagoon system. A part of this study included the drilling of a deep well to bedrock with sampling of the soil and grour.d sater as the well was drilled. The drilling of the well was to oc performed under the observation and direction of an authorized representative of Goldberg-Zoino & Associates.
The United States Department of Interior Geological Survey (USGS) is also performing a study of the hydrology of the ground water beneath l
the UNC Recovery Systems site.
The USGS was to observe the drilling of the well; advise the Goldberg-Zoino & Associates representative on the drilling and sampling; and receive and analyze the soil and water samples.
The licensee was to receive and analyze the soil and water samples al or. with the USGS to gain additional information on the vertical dispersion of the contaminants in the ground water.
This inspection was performed to observe part of the drilling of the l
deep well on the UNC Recovery Systems site next to present monitoring well T-6.
Part of the sampling of the soil and ground water during the boring of the well was also observed.
Samples of the soil and grcund water will also be received and analyzed by the NRC.
1 t
'~r
.s 3
3.
Drilling of Well The driller used a hollow stem auger in boring the initial 70 feet of the well.
The auger was removed and replaced with casing to a depth of about 80 feet.
The boring was continued below 80 feet uring a rotary drill bit attached to a steel tubing drill rod. A self-destroying drilling fluid was used during the boring of the un-cased hole below 80 feet.
Rock was struck at 110 feet.
Drilling was continued to 124 feet to assure that the rock being drilled wcs actually bedrock.
4.
Sampling of the Soil and Water Soil samples were taken using a 2h inch diameter split-spoon sampler attached to the steel tubing drill rod. The water samples were taken using a well point attached to steel pipe.
Samples were taken as follows:
Depth in feet Soil Water 10-12 X
20-22 X
22-24 X
24-26 X
30-32 X
X 40-42 X
X 46-48 X
50-52 X
(fines plugged well point) 59.5-61.5 X
(fines plugged well point) 70 X
(flow in sample) 80-82 X
(cohesive, clayey-not water producing) 89-91 X
(cohesive, clayey-not water producing)99-101 X
X (Quesionable quality Water samples were not taken at 50 to 70 feet depths because the fine sandy soil clogged the well point screen. From depths of 80 to 91 feet the soil was cohesive, silty, and clayey and would not produce water.
At a depth of 99-101 feet a seven gallon water sample of questionable quality was obtained. The sample could have been contaminated with water used to drill the well.
n 4
According to the USGS they intend to analyze most but no necessarily all, of the wate samples for:
gross alpha, gross beta, gamma scan, uranium-238, -235, -234, thorium-232, -230, -228, strontium-90, cesium-137, lead-210 plutonium, tritium, nitrate, and fluoride. They also plan to determine the concentrations of the following in at least one sample taken above a depth of 70 feet:
calcium, magnesium, sodium, potassium, bicarbonate, sulfate, chloride, and total dissolved solids.
Most of all of the soil samples will be analyzed for:
gross alpha, gross beta, gamma scan, uranium, thorium, cesium, plutonium, radium, and lead.
Accordir.g to UNC Recovery Systems, they plan on analyzing the samples for concentrations of:
gross alpha, gross beta, uranium 'sotopes, thorium isotopes, radium isotopes, strontium-90, cesium 137, tritium, and plutonium-239. Chemical analyses will also be made to determine the concentrations of:
nitrate, fluoride, lead, mercury, zinc, nickel, cadmium, and molybdenum.
The NRC plans to perform gamma spectral analyses of the samples and detailed analyses of the concentrations of the radionuclides in samples having relatively high gamma concentrations.
^0ttawa sand and cave in material filled the hole from 72 to 56 feet.
Again, alternate layers of bentonite clay and Ottawa sand were used:
clay from 56 to 55 feet; sand from 55 to 51 feet; clay from 51 to 50 feet; sand from 50 to 41 feet; clay from 41 to 40 feet.
Then the PVC observation well surrounded by sand was placed from 35 to 25 feet.
Sand and cave in material filled the hole above the observation well to the 20 feet depth. Material drilled from the hole was used to fill the hole from 20 to 4 feet.
Cement was used to fill the hole and well head from the 4 feet depth.
The well head used to protect the sampler installation consisted of a six inch inside diameter metal pipe driven into the ground about 4 to 5 feet below ground level.
The pipe was capped with a screw-on cap.
5.
Installation of Permanent Ground Water Samples Two BARCAD samplers and one observation well sampler were installed.
The inspector did not observe the installation of the samplers. The following information was supplied by Mr. Kipp of the USGS.
The BARCAD samplers are small cylindrical devices connected to the surface by flexible tubing. The observation well'is a pipe and screen arrangement made of polyvinyl chloride (PVC).
The borehole from n depth of 124 to 112 feet was filled with Ottawa sand, a brown quartz sand. The borehole from 112 to 110 3/4 feet was filled with bentonite clay.
Ottawa sand was used to fill the
5 hole from 110 3/4 to 109h feet. A BARCAD sampler surrounded by sand was placed from 109 to 108 feet.
Sand was placed in the hole from 108 to 98 feet.
Bentonite clay was placed in the hole from 98 to 96 feat. Ottawa sand and side cave in material filled the hole from 96 to 91 feet.
Bentonite clay was placed in the hole from 91 to 90 feet.
Sand was used from 90 to 86 feet, and bentonite clay was used from 86 to 84h feet.
Sand was used from 84h to 78 feet, and clay from 78 to 76 feet. Sand was placed in the hole from '/6 to 74 feet. A BARCAD sampler surrounded by sand was placed from 74 to 72h feet.
C.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representative (denoted in para-graph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on April 24, 1981, and presented the scope and findings of the inspection.
l
_..