ML20128F902
| ML20128F902 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 06/05/1985 |
| From: | Gnugnoli G NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Higginbotham L NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| References | |
| REF-WM-64 NUDOCS 8507080404 | |
| Download: ML20128F902 (3) | |
Text
l JUN 5 1985 WM64/000/05/05/20 MEMORANDUM FOR: Leo B. Higginbotham, Chief Distribution:
WMLU RE Browning MJ Bell DE Martin MR Knapp FROM: Giorgio N. Gnugnoli M Fliegel RD Smith WMLU P Hildenbrand E Hawkins GN Gnugnoli
SUBJECT:
TRIP REPORT FOR DENVER, COLORADO MEETING AND TL Johnson LAKEVIEW, OREGON SITE VISIT. DM Gillen JT Greeves JO Bunting #
to s r P o a. p PURPOSE: The Denver, Colorado meeting served to discuss with 00E/AL and the draft contractor Environmental staff initial NRC/HQ(and URF0 comments Assessment Plan (RAP) for the UMTRAP remedial action at Lakeview, Oregon.
The site visit to Lakeview permitted NRC/HQ staff to observe the exact location of the proposed disposal area, as well as the proposed borrow area for the rock cover.
Denver, Colorado Meeting: May 20, 1985 at NRC/URF0 NRC DOE E. Hawkins, URF0 M. Matthews, DOE /AL M. Fliegel, WMGT L. Stepp, TAC G. Gnugnoli, WMLU W. Taber, TAC P. Hildenbrand, URF0 J. Thackston, TAC T. Johnson, WMGT B. Keshian, TAC R. Brich, URF0 R. Portillo, TAC K. Ries, TAC P. Zelle, TAC
- WM Rscord file WM Project ___d_f (* Telephone participation)
Dcchet No.
POR __R
~ ~ ~ ~
Distribution;_ -.
[kbb'bd;1,b23SS) _ _
0FC :WMLU:rb : : : : : :
_____:____________:..__ 7 ____.:..._____..._:_ ..........:. __........:.._________
NAME :GN Gnugnoli : P 850605 : : :
.....:_______....:....... 4 .......__.....:..____....._:.____._____
DATE :85/05/ : : . : : :
WM64/GNG/85/05/28 JUN 5 1985 Discussion: Participants addressed draft NRC comments individually.
Most notable points are listed as follows:
o The draft EA and RAP contained a discrepancy regarding the placement of a capillary break in conjunction with the compacted natural liner material. DOE stated that this capillary break has been eliminated from consideration.
o DOE was questioned on the amount of organic material (woodchips from an operating lumber mill) that would end up in the disposal area. DOE consultants indicated that no more than 5% of the total disposed material would consist of organic material to maintain slope stability. NRC indicated that DOE should address impacts from the decay of organic material to avoid problems similar to those at Canonsburg. DOE indicated that this would be handled in the final RAP.
o DOE was questioned concerning certain ground water analyses, which appeared to be inappropriate with respect to the assumptions used. DOE indicated that further analysis would be performed, which would be more consistent with the apparent underlying aquifer conditions. DOE went on to indicate that more sampling was being done at the processing and disposal sites.
o The geophysical analysis appeared to be insufficient especially for the disposal site. However, it appeared that certain sections of the EA describing regional seismology had been overlooked. This area will be handled separately since neither URF0 nor DOE geology staff was present at the meeting.
o There still was disagreement on the adequacy of the design to meet acceptable erosion protection criteria. The main problem consists of progressive sediment buildup compromising the performance of the diversion ditches.
Furthennore, DOE needed to revise its techniques to account for the rock / soil material cover, as opposed to a pure rock cover. NRC suggested larger sized rock both on top and on the side to provide sufficient assurance against erosion.
DOE indicated that it would re-evaluate the design in light of NRC concerns.
3FC :WMLU:rb : : : : : :
2 ...:....--------:--------- ..:.--------.--:--....------: .........--:...--.....--:------ ....
NAME iGN Gnugnoli : : : : : :
e....:------------:------------:-----------.:...---------: ... .-...--:-----------.:...--.--.--
DATE :85/05/ : : : : : :
WM64/GNG/85/05/28 M5 g o Questions in the area of health physics (HP) led DOE to agree to submit the HP backup calculations for radiological support of the EA. DOE indicated that the questions raised by NRC in this area would likely be addressed by this information.
DOE felt strongly that this type of initial review of NRC concerns is profitable and should be routine for all UMTRAP reviews. NRC staff indicated that where this was possible, it would be pursued. URF0 staff indicated that final comments would be sent to NRC/HQ by the end of May.
Lakeview, Oregon Site Visit: May 21, 1985 NRC DOE M. Fliegel, WMGT M. Matthews, DOE /AL G. Gnugnoli, WMLU T. Johnson, WMGT
SUMMARY
- Participants visited the processing site, the proposed disposal site and the proposed borrow site. Notable observations are listed as follows:
o The upstream surface drainage area was remarkably free of gullies and rills. It is mostly comprised of silty soil materials.
o There was evidence of gullying at the disposal site area south of the tailings disposal area.
o A drilling crew was sampling subsurface soils and had gotten to 250 feet in depth.
o There was evidence of animal burrows on the east end of the disposal area. It was difficult to ascertain whether these had been occupied following the fire last sumer.
Giorgio N. Gnugnoli WMLU OFC :W! : : : : : : :
b/-
.....:- 7 h---:------------:------------:------------:------------:------------:-----------
NAME :G gn611 : : : : : :
...- g.......-....:.....-..--..:...- ---.---:....------..:...---......:.--.... --..:-------....
'DATE :85/,05/J 6 : : : : : :
l ol n