ML20215N686
| ML20215N686 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wood River Junction |
| Issue date: | 10/23/1986 |
| From: | Keimig R, Rabatin K, Roth J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20215N673 | List: |
| References | |
| 70-0820-86-02, 70-820-86-2, NUDOCS 8611070159 | |
| Download: ML20215N686 (4) | |
Text
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION I Report No.
70-820/86-02 Docket No.70-820 License No.
SNM-777 Priority 1
Category URD Licensee: United Nuclear Corporation Recovery Systems Wood River Junction, Rhode Island 02894 Facility Name: UNC Recovery Systems Inspection At: Wood River Junction, Rhode Island InspectionCon{ucted[
August 21-22, 1986' Inspectors:
[
M lO 3 l'h U J th jProjlect Engineer
' dat'e
/
}0 ~> B
'K. Rabatin, Laboratory Technician i datie Approved by:
f
/o-e.r-A K R. Keimig/Chieff/ Safeguards Section date' Nuclear Materia 1FSafety and Safeguards Branch, DRSS Inspection Summary:
Inspection on August 21-22, 1986 (Inspection Report No.
70-820/86-02).
Areas Inspected:
Special announced inspection by two region-based inspectors for the purpose of obtaining water samples from selected monitoring wells and to examine the status of decommissioning the site and the buildings.
Results: No violations were identified.
4 i
i i
l 611070159 861030 DR ADOCK 07000820 PDR k
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted K. Helgeson, Manager Nuclear and Industrial Safety J. Murphy, Health Physics Technician 2.
Monitoring Well Water Sampling The inspector observed as each monitoring well was sampled.
Prior to
. sampling, each well was pumped for about 10 minutes in order to clear the lines of standing water. This water was discarded. The licensee took a five (5) gallon sample from each well and the NRC samples (one (1) gallon) were taken (split) from the licensee's samples.
a.
Well Water Sampling The condition under which each well sample was obtained are shown in the table on page two.
l 4
3 WELL WATER SAMPLES Specific Well Sampling Conductivity Water Well No.
Date (umhos)
Level ~(ft)
Depth (ft)
T-1*
8/22 72 18 65 l
T-2 8/22 50 21 57 T-3*
8/22 55 21 62 T-4*
8/22.
60 21 62 T-5 8/22 46 22 65 T-6*
8/21 100 22 52 T-7*
8/21 46 22 65 T-8*
8/21 36 18 65 T-9 8/22 62 22 53 PW-1 NOT IN SERVICE PW-2*
8/21 34 W-A NOT IN SERVICE W-B*
8/21 58 22 28 W-D 8/22 42 21 30 W-E*
8/22 78 18 28 W-3*
8/21 56 22 25 W-5 8/22 62 18 26 W-6 NOT ACCESSIBLE W-7 8/22 48 26 W-8A*
8/21 74 20.5 30 W-9*
8/21 36 19 33 W-10 8/22 46 16 35 W-11 NOT IN SERVICE W-12*
8/21 74 21 35 76-U*
8/21
~180 75
-- +
77-B*
8/21 1800 15 75 77-D*
8/21 62 24 85 DH-1*
8/21 78 21.5 23-35 DH-1-1 NOT IN SERVICE DH-2-1 NOT IN SERVICE DH-2-2 NOT IN SERVICE DH-2-2 NOT IN SERVICE b.
Sample Analysis The well water samples marked in the table above with an
- were split by the NRC inspector with the licensee.
Samples obtained by the NRC were sent to the USDOE Radiological and Environmental Services Laboratory (RESL) located in Idaho Falls, Idaho, for analysis.
The licensee's samples were sent to Controls for Environmental Pollution, Inc., located in Santa Fe, New Mexico.
Samples in excess of 5 picocuries/ liter gross alpha and/or 50 picocuries/ liter gross beta will be further analyzed, as necessary,
4
'for strontium-90, cesium-137, uranium isotopic, thorium isotopic, and gamma spectroscopy.
c.
Sample Analysis Results The sample analysis results from each laboratory will be compared by Region I.'
This comparison and a trend analysis, utilizing results from prior years, will be addressed in a subsequent inspection re-port. This is an Inspector. Followup Item (IFI 86-02-01).
3.
NRC Independent Review a.
.0bservations Concerning the Status of Site Decontamination During NRC Inspection No 70-820/85-03, the inspector discussed with the licensee the conte'nts of the interim Oak Ridge Associated Uni-versities (0RAU) confirmatory survey report concerning contaminated land areas within the former restricted area. These areas appeared to be contaminated in a systematic manner, approximately correspond-ing to several walls of the former lagoon trenches.
Subsequent to that inspection, the licensee removed and packaged the contaminated
- soil from the identified areas and prepared the packages for shipment to an approved burial site.
Following removal of the contaminated soil, the licensee resampled and analyzed the remaining soil for residual contamination.
During this inspection, the inspector examined the results of the licensee's analyses. He noted that the contamination in seven areas either approached or were in excess of the limits specified in the facility license. Through discussions with licensee representatives, the inspector determined that the licensee had initiated removal of additional soil from the seven identified areas. Upon completion of the removal of this soil by the licensee, the NRC-contractor, ORAU, will verify the licensee's results by independent sampling. This is an Inspector Followup Item (IFI 86-02-02).
i b.
Inspector Observations i
During a tour of the site, the inspector observed that the licensee j
was storing drums of contaminated soil and equipment in the former process area. At the time of this inspection, there were approxi-mately 2500 drums of contaminated soil stored in the area awaiting transport to an approved burial site.
4.
Licensee Discussions l
The inspector held continuing discussions with Mr. K. Helgeson during the inspection. The findings were presented as they were identified. At no i
time during this inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspectoc l
,...,., - - -