ML20132G876
| ML20132G876 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 07/08/1985 |
| From: | Weber M NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Gillen D NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| References | |
| REF-WM-39 NUDOCS 8507190479 | |
| Download: ML20132G876 (3) | |
Text
h
- d su<
Q f[
g UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION e
o Y8 d biW CI ---
{
i WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
\\,,,,, *#[
CLG:tNo. _ _ ___ _
PDR. r ~__ _ _
JUL 0 81985 DMribuym
_ _, _ _ _Uw))
NOTE T0:
Daniel M. Gillen, WMLU s3J Division of Waste Management Oktu i t FROM:
Michael F. Weber, WMGT Division of Waste Management
SUBJECT:
STATUS REPORT ON FIRST MEETING OF THE UMTRAP WATERRESOURCESWORKINGGROUP(7/2/85)
In response to your verbal request, this note reports on the status of the first meeting of the UMTRAP Water Resources Working Group (WRWG).
The first meeting focused primarily on the logistics of the WRWG and review of DOE's Preliminary Draft Technical Approach Document for Hydrogeology.
John members, including Thackston provided a copy of this document to work group (NRC), Mike Fliegel Jim Kan (RAC), Dave Brooks (NRC), and myself.
Bill Dam (NRC), Ed Hawkins (NRC-URF0), and Don Phoenix (TAC) also attended portions of the meeting.
~
The WRWG decide'd' to pursue the schedule for future meetings that was proposed by DOE. Revised drafts of NRC's Standard Review Plan (SRP) for Water Resources and DOE's Hydrogeology Technical Approach Document will be exchanged on or before July 16, 1985 in oreparation for the second group meeting to be held in Albuquerque during the week of August 5, 1985.
Comments on the documents will be discussed at this second meeting, which will primarily focus on resolution of issues identified at the first meeting of the WRWG during our review of DOE's Approach Document.
At the first meeting, we commented that DOE's approach document could be strengthened considerably by revising it to identify preferred approaches for hydrogeologic evaluations, justify the application of the preferred approaches, and list defensible alternative approaches.
As currently written, the document merely discusses alternative approaches without identifying the alternatives preferred by 00E.
Consistent with the conclusions of the March DOE-NRC meeting about groundwater evaluations, we also recommended that DOE pursue the simplest approaches first, while providing flexibility to pursue, if necessary, more ccmplicated approaches.
DOE agreed with both of our comments and indicated that the document would be revised to reflect our recommendations.
The group also identified a list of issues (attached) to be discussed at the second meeting of the WRWG along with our presentation of NRC's SRP for Water Resources.
If you have any questions or comments about the first meeting of the WRWG, please contact me.
Enclosure:
Identified Water Resources Issues DBrooks, WMGT//MFliegel, WGT//PHildenbrand, URF0 /WM File 39/ MWeber & r/f cc:
8507190479 850700 PDR WASTE WM-39 PDR
J WATER RESOURCES ISSUES (Based on WRWG review of DOE's Technical Approach Document) 1.
Identification of decision logic and decision points in evaluating the need for and implementation of remedial actions for water resources at UMTRAP sites [Throughoutdocument].
2.
Selection of statistical techniques for comparing background concentrations with downgradient concentrations of contaminants in groundwater and surface water, especially for contaminants below analytical detection limits in background samples [Section 3.3.1.2.1].
3.
Need to sample sites for organic constituents [Section 3.3.1.2.1].
4.
Need to monitor water quality during remedial actions and the timing of quarterly] sampling relevant to submittal of draft and final RAP's [Section
~
- 3. 3. l. 2.1.-
5.
Demonstration that sampling years are normal [Section 3.3.1.2.1].
6.
Reference for Priority Pollutants list [Section 3.3.1.2.2].
7.
Clarification of objectives and alternatives for characterization of existing and future contaminant release rates from tailings piles [Section 3.3.1.3.1].
assessments [Section 3.3.1.3.1] geochemical modeling in support of site 8.
Application and utility of 9.
Validation of geochemical and mass transport models [Section 3.3.1.3.1].
- 10. Characterization of effective porosity and dispersivity [Section 3.3.1.3.1].
- 11. Determination of background soil / sediment properties, such as carbonate bufferingcapacity,cationexchangecapacity,ironoxidecontent[Section 3.3.1.4].
I of contaminants in water resources [Section 3.3.1.4]g existing distributions
- 12. Characterization of attenuative capacities usin
- 13. Need to consider the significance and effects of contaminant desorption
[Section 3.3.2].
- 14. Appropriate types of evaluations to estimate impacts of water contamination on humans, agriculture, and the environment [Section 3.3.3].
l
I F
WM-39/MFW 15.
Selection of water quality standards for comparison in deciding on impacts of water contamination on beneficial uses [Section 3.3.3].
- 16. Prediction of water uses and resource values beyond 30 years [Section 3.3.3].
17.
Evaluation of benefits of restoring or controlling contaminated water resources versus the costs of the actions [Section 3.3.4].
- 18. Alternatives to conventional control or restoration of contaminated water resources [Section3.3.5].
[Additionaland/ormore-detailedissuesmaybeidentifiedinthefuture.]
O 9
9 D