ML20055H046
| ML20055H046 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 07/05/1990 |
| From: | Jack Parrott NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Hurt R NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9007250110 | |
| Download: ML20055H046 (3) | |
Text
--.
~,
t
}
s o
[
l-M
~
July 5, 1990 E
t MEMORANDUM FOR:
R. Davin Hurt Advanced Fuel and Special Facilities Section i
Fuel Cycile Safety Branch Division of Industrial and Medical' Nuclear Safety, NHSS FROM:
Jack D. Parrott Siting Section Technical Branch
' Division of Low-Level Waste Management and' Decommissioning, NHSS OBSERVATIONS ON TRIP TO AMAX SITE NEAR i
.SUBJFCT:
~ PARKERSBURG, WEST VIRGINIA JUNE 26-27, 1990 There are presently four monitoring wells within the AMAX site stabilization area.
Each of these wells has a dedicated submersible pump through which the wells are purged ~and sampled.
Because of the presence of these pumps and the way the wells are constructed it would be' extremely difficult to obtain water level data from{these' wells.
In fact, quantitative water level data e
does not exist for these wells.
In the absence of quantitative l
water level data it has been assumed that the flow of groundwater below the site is towards the Ohio River.
It appears that the groundwater below the AMAX site is connected hydrologicallysto the Ohio River.
During a period of severe i
drought, for example during the years 1987-1988, as the water 1
level'in the river decreased significantly, so apparently did the-water levsle in the site wells.
This is borne out by the fact q
i
,that all of the wells were unsampleable due to lack of water L
during the driest period of'the drought.
Although the amount of water that can be extracted from these wells has improved over the last couple of years one well is still.unsampleable.
Perhaps l.
by this fall the grgundwiter will return to a normal condition
-and all the wells wis' be -rmpleable.. However, drought conditions in the futury could cause a loss of data from these wells.
j l
l.
In an effort to settle the water level measurement question AMAX lfj pulled the pumps from these wells and took water level D-measurements on June 22nd or this year, just before our site NRC HLE CENTER COPY g
y 0
9 meh
~
o
4
.v visit.
The data from these water level measurements does not indicate a clear cut movement of all groundwater below the site-towards the Ohio River.
Well logs.and welliconstruction diagrams do not exist or could not be found for the wel?s.
From a visual inspection of the welle and a verbal description by Jim Kerrigan of how they were constructed, it appears that they are not adequate for measuring certain physical characteristics of the aquifer such as hydraulic conductivity.
Although these wells may be adequate for sampling gross alpha and beta in the groundwater, they appear to be inadequate for sampling certain chemical parameters the DOE may W
want to sample.
In addition, new well borings may also be needed to better characterize the geology below the site.
In any case DOE wants these types of data before they will take over this site.-
It appears that the construction of the cap is not as DOE would have'liked.
However, from my observations the cap seems to be stable with respect to erosion.
Areas'of erosion outside the fence,-which existed the first few years after the construction of the. stabilization area, are now thickly vegetated' The southwest corner of the stabilization area, which has the steepest slope, has a terrace on it which intercepts sheet flow
'and diverts it toward a drainage ditch,along the south side of
~
the stabilization area.
The DOE *s concerns about radon emanation, water infiltration and animal intrusion through the cap, expressed in their February 23, 1990 memorandum, were not discussed during our meetings with them.
Perhaps these concerns have been addressed in further information provided to DOE by AMAX bef. ore our arrival in Parkersburg.
-In sumnary, DOE wants four new monitoring welle installed around the att.bilization area to replace the existing wells.
The groundvater pathway seems to be their major concern, therefore DOE wants to collect various groundwater data from these new welle.
The most important of their concerns has to do with; 1) the possibility of hazardous chemical constituents being in the groundwater _below the site, and 2) measuring the direction and speed of groundwater flow beneath the site and determining how this flow changes over an extended period.
They will want'this done before they take control of the site.
Given the time frame desired by NRC for the completion of title transfer and license termination it is not clear how this will be accommodated.
In my opinion, what the DOE wants to do on the site with respect to acquiring new groundwater data is the minimum that should be done on a site of this type in order to fully understand what is occurring in the groundwater pathway.
With the installation of new welle and the collection of new specific groundwater data the concerne expressed by DOE should be addressed and they will move ahead in the acquisition of the site.
In addition, there may be information on this site in the NRC's docket file which may facilitate the DOE's evaluation of this property.
a
.a
~
s Because-this is still an NRC licensed site any on-site changes the DOE may want to make before they take title to this property should be' reviewed by NRC staff.- If you have any questions please. corr'.' 's me, s-Qeiginal Signed ly Jack D. Parrott Siting Section
' Technical Branch
'I Division of Low-Level Waste Management and Decommissioning,.NMSS Distribution:
^
CentpeluFiles:'
LLTB r/f NHSS r/f RBangart JGrp JSurmeier JStarmer JAustin PDR Yes:/ - V-e PDR No:/
/
Reason:
P pr etary /
/ or CF Only /.
/
ACNW Yes:/
/
No:/
OFC :LLTB
[#:LLTB
- LLTB
- LLTB
- LLWM NAME:JParrott :J$tarmer
===x====================n============================
DATE: 7/5~/90 : 7 /j'/90 ' :
/
/90
/- /90
/
/90 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY s
+
t i
l i
l i
-