ML20247J210
| ML20247J210 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07001201 |
| Issue date: | 04/29/1998 |
| From: | Elliott G FRAMATOME COGEMA FUELS (FORMERLY B&W FUEL CO.) |
| To: | Lamastra M NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20247J217 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-L30746, NUDOCS 9805210362 | |
| Download: ML20247J210 (23) | |
Text
--__
-12N E.R'A M AT O M E C O G E M A F U E L S April 29,1998 Mr. Micheal Lamastra Licensing Section 2 Licensing Branch Division of Fuel Cycle Safety & Safeguards, NMSS United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555
SUBJECT:
Release of the Wet Weather Stream for Unrestricted Use (TAC No. L30746),
Docket No. 70-1201, SNM-1168
Dear Mr. Lamastra:
This letter is written to address the outstanding issues surrounding the release of the area known as the Wet Weather Stream (WWS) for unrestricted use. The data and information contained herein address each of the items identified in our correspondence to your office dated June 27,1997. In that correspondence, Framatome Cogema Fuels (FCF) proposed a plan which outlined specific actions and additional infom1ation necessary to address the outstanding issues relative to the release of the WWS.
A two-fold approach was implemented to obtain the necessary information and accomplish the required actions. First, records and existing data were reviewed to provide additional information and clarification where necessary. Each of these issues of this type are outlined with an explanation of how the issue was addressed in Attachment I. Where necessary, additional attachments are included to provide the necessary information.
Second, a comprehensive survey of the entire WWS area was performed.
ABB Site Remediation Services of Michigan (SRS) performed the survey of the WWS area over a two-week period beginning on March 16,1998. A comprehensive report, including all of the data obtained,is enclosed. In addition to the report provided by our contractor, specific details and
' information concerning the survey work is provided in NRC Inspection Report No. 70-1201/98-01.
)
i During the performance of the survey work, the contractor identified several areas of
- p!
elevated Uranium activity (greater than three times the guideline value of 30 pCi/gm). After
/
discussing the situation with representatives from the NRC Region II Office, it was determined that remediation of these areas would not change the effectiveness of the survey effort, provided 9805210362 990429 ~
l PDR ADOCK 07001201 B
]
pop IFRAMATOME rramamene Cogems Fuels
[
Po. Box 11646, Lynchburg, VA 24506-1646 7ECHNOLOOIES Telephone: 804 832 5000 Fax: 804 832 5167 1
[
that additional measurements were obtained after completion of the remediation work. With the intent to,, achieve release of the WWS area for unrestricted use, FCF proceeded to remove 40 drums of soil from these areas of elevated activity. The post remediation status of these areas of elevated activity is summarized in the enclosed report from SRS. A careful review of previous information available for the WWS Project revealed that each area of elevated activity identified during the SRS survey was adjacent to an area remediated during earlier efforts in 1991 and 1994. This indicates that the methods originally used to characterize the area and soil sampling that followed may have inadequately addressed the extent of contamination in the WWS. Due to the comprehensive nature of the surveys performed by SRS, we feel that the area has now been adequately characterized and that all areas of elevated activity have been identified. The survey report contains data for the entire WWS area following remediation.
As discussed with you in the preparation phase for the recent survey work, it would be of significant benefit to FCF if the survey, performed by our independent contractor, could be considered the final confirmatory survey for the WWS. Our laboratory has completed the processing of the soil samples collected by SRS during their work. The results for these samples are also attached. A duplicate set of samples was released to Ms. Deborah Seymour of NRC Region II, who observed the collection of all samples and documentation of chain of custody information.
According to the survey report, the WWS area is suitable for release for unrestricted use, being within the guidelines specified in NUREG/CR-5849. The average soil contamination reported for the WWS ( a) is 19.2 pCi/ gram, without subtraction of background (background was not subtracted because the gross value was less than the guideline value of 30 pCi/ gram at the 95% confidence level). The average net exposure rate for the WWS area is 1.3 R/ hour.
The soil sample results (submitted for analysis upon completion of the survey measurements), with two exceptions, also indicate levels of soil contamination within the guidelines specified in NUREG/CR-5849. The results for two soil samples exceeded three times the guideline value with results of 141 and 126 pCi/gm, total Uranium. These samples are composite samples, one from within and one from outside the boundary of two different areas of elevated activity. The survey results for the corresponding grid center locations indicate Uranium concentrations of 40 and 49 pCi/ gram, which are below three times the guideline value. Application of the (100/A)* formula to the survey results for these areas also indicates that these areas are suitable for release. Considering this additional survey information and the surveys for adjacent areas, it is not likely that the level of activity indicated by the soil sample results for two locations is widespread beyond the sample points. Comparison of our sample results with the. duplicate samples for these two locations should help determine whether additional action is required for these locations. In the event that you determine additional remediation is required for these two localized areas, FCF requests that the remainder of the WWS area be considered released. Releasing the balance of the area would reduce the scope of the WWS project and significantly decrease the amount of effort required to bring closure to this project.
Based on the information contained herein, FCF would like to request that the area known as the Wet Weather Stream be considered released for unrestricted use. The attachments i
1
address all of the outstanding issues from our previous correspondence. In addition, the
. epelosed survey report documents a substantive effort and provides a comprehensive review of the entire WWS area. The survey report provides a complete look at the WWS project and will aid in bridging the gaps between the 1991 and 1994 work periods. If after reviewing the enclosed report and the information submitted to address the other outstanding issues you do not reach the same conclusion, please make me aware of whatever additional information you may require. You may reach me by telephone at (804) 832-5202.
Sincere)y,
)
e ayle F. Elliott Manager, Safety & Licensing Summary of Attachments /
Enclosures:
l FCF Response to Issues In June 1997 Letter to NRC WWS Soil Sample Results, March 1998 Comparison of1991 and 1994 Data l
Enclosure Radiological Survey Report, WWS Survey Provided by ABB Site Remediation Services 3 Volumes 1
GFE/ dig FCF Rg.sponse to Issues In June 1997 Letter to NRC In the June 27,1997 letter to NRC, FCF identified several issues for which additional information or actions were required to address comments received from NRC. Each of these items are listed below in the same order as indicated in Attachment I to the June 27,1997 letter.
A title is assigned to each, paraphrased from the original document.
- 1. Use of the contamination levels for soil from areas of the plant site not included in the WWS affected area as background soil contamination level. Soil sample averages for the calendar years 1991 and 1994 will be provided.
Response
The soil sample results for the unaffected area on the FCF plant site for 1991 and 1994 have been compiled. The average soil concentration for 1991 is 8.774 pCi/ gram. The average soil contamination for 1994 is 1.26 pCi/ gram.
In the survey report or tabular presentations of data for the WWS area, the values stated above, which represent the background soil contamination levels for this site, are not subtracted from the WWS soil sample data. Given the number of ways the data has been presented and the volume ofinfonnation involved, it was considered prudent to state the background levels without restating the data already established for the WWS. An area adjacent to the WWS was surveyed to establish a background radiation level. The data for this portion of the survey is included in the enclosed report.
- 2. Correct application of the (100/A)% ormula for evaluation of the areas with concentrations f
above 67 pCi/ gram.
Response
At the time the June 27,1997 letter was submitted, there were no areas that required application of this formula. There are areas of elevated activity identified in the enclosed report for the recent comprehensive survey and sampling effort. The information on these areas in specified in that report.
- 3. FCF is in the process of developing a table, which clearly identifies the results of the surveys for the elevated areas, and the year in which the surveys were taken.
Response
A report that summarizes the elevated readings for the 1991 and 1994 soil samples is attached. The report provides the necessary correlation between location identification codes used in the two years in question. Soil samples collected in the recent survey work do Y
l not comply with these identification schemes, although the same grid layout was utilized for l
.., the en, tire WWS project from 1991 through the present, u
- 4.~ Perform a surface scan of the entire affected area.
I
Response
l The enclosed survey report provides the results for the comprehensive survey effort
(-
' performed by ABB Site Remediation Services. One component of the survey was a l
complete surface scan of the entire affected area using a sodium iodide instrument.
- 5. Exposure rate measurements were not included as recommended in NUREG/CR-5849. FCF l
committed to submission of exposure information for individuals involved in the i -
remediation effort.
l
Response
L The original comment by NRC was misunderstood. Submission of exposure records for individuals would not satisfy the requirements specified in NUREG/CR-5849.
The survey report provided by ABB Site Remediation Services includes exposure rate l
measurements as required in NUREG/CR-5849.
6.'
Provide additional data to support the conclusion that the soil contamination present in the WWS is only in the top six (6) inches of the soil.
l
Response
The December 1994 report provided details of the sampling plan for each grid. The plan l
specified that five samples would be collected from the 0 to 6" depth, and that the sixth l
sample would be a composite sample collected for each of the first five locations from 6 to 12" depth. A previous review of those sample results suggested that contamination was generally located within the top 6" of soil. This observation was supported by operational history and process knowledge. All of the Uranium handled within the facility has been Class Y, insoluble Uranium dioxide. In addition, the soil in the WWS area is a very dense, clay-like material, making it unlikely that Uranium would migrate very deeply into the soil.
Notwithstanding the information stated above, information provided by employees involved in the remediation effort have stated that in most cases, soil was removed to a depth much j
greater than 6" due to the techniques and equipment used for the work. For these reasons, it is likely that remediation activities were adequate and removed all of the soil contamination from the areas involved, despite the suggestion that the contamination was only in the top 6" layer.
- 7. Evaluation of the " hot spots" to determine the extent of contamination at each location of elevated radioactivity.
~
_- _____ __- _____-___ - __ - _____ _ _ _ _ - _ _ ____-_ j
Response
The enclosed survey report provides detailed information for each area of elevated activity identified in the WWS area. The survey was very comprehensive and therefore it is not -
likely that hot spots, or areas of elevated activity, exist except as identified in the enclosed report.
t l
1 i
r WWS Soil Sample Results, March 1998 l
l l
l l
1
l WET WEATHER STREAM SOIL SAMPLE RESULTS l
MARCH 1998 ANALYSIS PROVIDED BY: MCDERMOTT TECHNOLOGIES 8 AMPLE ID:,
- iMETHOD, RESULTS; UNCERTAINTY MDA
.4 4 f(pCilg)l HS-B3-2 ALPHA SPEC 1.99 0.11 0.33 INSIDE U-234 9804015-01 ALPHA SPEC 0.08 0.02 0.07 U-235 ALPHA SPEC 1.96 0.13 0.03 U-238 ALPHA SPEC 4.03 0.17 0.34 U-TOTAL GAMMA SPEC 0.25 0.03 0.08 U-235 HS-B3-2 ALPHA SPEC 46.88 1.76 1.97 OUTSIDE U-234 j
9804015-02 ALPHA SPEC 1.83 0.12 0.05 U-235 ALPHA SPEC 26.23 0.92 0.05 U-238 ALPHA SPEC 74.94 1.99 1.98 U-TOTAL GAMMA SPEC 1.62 0.07 0.09 U-235 HS-B3C3-1 ALPHA SPEC 54.73 1.97 2.11 OUTSIDE U-234 9804015-03 ALPHA SPEC 2.18 0.12 0.03 U-235 ALPHA SPEC 23.22 0.79 1.35 U-238 ALPHA SPEC 80.13 2.12 2.52 U-TOTAL GAMMA SPEC 2.26 0.12 0.05 U-235 HS-B3C3-1 ALPHA SPEC 51.76 1.81 0.03 INSIDE U-234 9804015-04 ALPHA SPEC 1.76 0.10 0.03 U-235 ALPHA SPEC 18.25 0.62 0.03 U-238 ALPHA SPEC 71.78 1.92 0.14 U-TOTAL 1
l l
___________________j
GAMMA SPEC 2.39 0.13 0.07 I
U-235 HS-E3-1 ALPHA SPEC 43.98 1.52 1,47 i
INSIDE U-234 9804015-05 ALPHA SPEC 1.51 0.09 0.03
)
U-235 ALPHA SPEC 10.81 0.38 0.03 I
U-238 ALPHA SPEC 56.30 1.57 1.48 U-TOTAL i
GAMMA SPEC 1.46 0.07 0.11 U-235 HS-E3-1 ALPHA SPEC 30.81 1.07 1.20 OUTSIDE U-234 9804015-06 ALPHA SPEC 1.06 0.07 0.23 U-235 ALPHA SPEC 8.60 0.31 0.62 U-238 ALPHA SPEC 40.47 1.12 1.38 I
U-TOTAL GAMMA SPEC 1.14 0.06 0.06 l
U-235 T-9 ALPHA SPEC 27.29 0.96 1.10 i
U-234 9804015-07 ALPHA SPEC 1.21 0.07 0.23 U-235 ALPHA SPEC 7.09 0.27 0.58 U-238 ALPHA SPEC 35.58 1.00 1.27 U-TOTAL GAMMA SPEC 0.93 0.06 0.05 U-235 V-12 ALPHA SPEC 27.24 0.97 1.12 U-234 9804015-08 ALPHA SPEC 1.07 0.07 0.23 U-235 ALPHA SPEC 6.94 0.27 0.03 U-238 ALPHA SPEC 35.26 1.00 1.15 U-TOTAL GAMMA SPEC 0.99 0.06 0.07 U-235 V-6 ALPHA SPEC 26.15 0.95 1.36 U-234 9804015-09 ALPHA SPEC 1.13 0.08 0.27 U-235
ALPHA SPEC 6.86 0.28 0.03 U-238 ALPHA SPEC 34.13 1.00 1.40 U-TOTAL i
GAMMA SPEC 0.93 0.06 0.06 U-235 L-3 ALPHA SPEC 1.71 0.09 0.29 U-234 9804015-10 ALPHA SPEC 0.10 0.02 0.07 U-235 ALPHA SPEC 1.19 0.09 0.02 U-238 ALPHA SPEC 3.00 0.13 0.31 U-TOTAL GAMMA SPEC 0.15 0.03 0.05 U-235 Q-7 ALPHA SPEC 51.71 1.81 0.03 U-234 9804015-11 ALPHA SPEC 1.71 0.10 0.29 U-235 ALPHA SPEC 13.13 0.46 0.80 U-238 ALPHA SPEC 66.56 1.87 0.86 U-TOTAL GAMMA SPEC 1.85 0.10 0.06 U-235 HS-C3-2 ALPHA SPEC 43.49 1.55 1.61 OUTSIDE U-234 9804015-12 ALPHA SPEC 1.95 0.11 0.03 U-235 ALPHA SPEC 14.72 0.53 0.03 U-238 ALPHA SPEC 60.16 1.64 1.62 U-TOTAL GAMMA SPEC 0.77 0.05 0.05 U-235 HS-C3-2 ALPHA SPEC 14.61 0.55 1.05 INSIDE U-234 9804015-13 ALPHA SPEC 0.45 0.04 0.20 U-235 ALPHA SPEC 5.20 0.23 0.62 U-238 ALPHA SPEC 20.26 0.60 1.24 U-TOTAL GAMMA SPEC 0.88 0.05 0.09 U-235
HS-R7-1 ALPHA SPEC 4.46 0.19 0.46 INSIDE U-234 9804015-14 ALPHA SPEC MDA NA 0.09 U-235 ALPHA SPEC 1.87 0.11 0.03 b 238 ALPH A SPEC 6.33 0.22 0.47 U-1 OTAL GAMhiA SPEC 0.19 0.02 0.04 0-235 HS-R7-1 ALPHA SPEC 42.30 1.46 1.44 OUTSIDE U-234 9804015-15 ALPHA SPEC 1.55 0.09 0.03 U-235 ALPHA SPEC 10.83 0.38 0.03 U-238 ALPHA SPEC 54.68 1.51 1.45 U-TOTAL GAMMA SPEC 1,56 0.07 0.08 U-235 HS-T8-1 ALPHA SPEC 113.25 3.96 2.72 OUTSIDE U-234 9804015-16 ALPHA SPEC 3.91 0.19 0.53 U-235 ALPHA SPEC 24.20 0.81 1.21 U-238 ALPHA SPEC 141.36 4.05 3.04 U-TOTAL GAMMA SPEC 3.77 0.15 0.12 U-235 HS-T8-1 ALPHA SPEC 20.84 0.74 0.95 INSIDE U-234 9804015-17 ALPHA SPEC 0.71 0.05 0.02 U-235 ALPHA SPEC 5.04 0.20 0.02 U-238 ALPHA SPEC 26.59 0.77 0.95 U-TOTAL GAMMA SPEC 0.83 0.05 0.05 U-235 HS-V11-1 ALPHA SPEC 2.00 0.11 0.32 INSIDE U-234 9804015-18 ALPHA SPEC 0.06 0.01 0.03 U-235 ALPHA SPEC 1.57 0.11 0.03 U-238
i I
i ALPHA SPEC 3.62 0.15 0.32 U-TOTAL GAMMA SPEC 0.22 0.04 0.06 U-235 HS-S6-1 ALPHA SPEC 99.42 3.43 2.09 U-234 9804015-19 ALPHA SPEC 3.74 0.17 0.47
- U-235 l
ALPHA SPEC 23.53 0.78 1.05 U-238 l
ALPHA SPEC 126.69 3.52 2.43 U-TOTAL GAMMA SPEC 3.57 0.18 0.07 U-235 HS-R9-1 ALPHA SPEC 52.53 1.83 0.03 U-234 9804015-20 ALPHA SPEC 2.03 0.11 0.03 U-235 ALPHA SPEC 12.94 0.45 0.03 U-238 ALPHA SPEC 67.50 1.89 0.15 U-TOTAL GAMMA SPEC 1.96 0.10 0.05 U-235 4
i I
l Comparison of1991 and 1994 Data
I I
Grids of elevated points for 1991 and 1994 I
Grid B-3 ID 91 Total U pCi/g ID 94 Total U pCi/g B3-1 2.6 B3-1 3
B3-2 2142 B3-2 3
B3-3 2
B3-3 4
B3-4 5.7 B3-8*
7 B3-5 111 B3-4 246 B3-6 99 B3-5 11 B3-9
- 33 B3-6 63 B3-7 1748
- -Duplicate B3-2 from 1991 is the same point that B3-5 (and B3-9) from 1994.
Drawine of the erid B-3 in 1991 and 1994:
1991 1994 30 - O <'
So '. e ^
~.
4 4
.s s.1 ss.s -
.' y.L g 5. g
9 e
N.
':m.)3 5 i
O r
0 7
' g gg g D
s' N..<-
e, ~
s' e
o
.8% s 8.5C4-o s.g m
,s e'
,.83-1 86M 3
3 8
c B
c I
I The grid from 1991 presented 2 elevated points: B3-2 and B3-5 because it is located near the discharge point, the presence of the stream cross it, and the standing water, 9 samples were taken in 1994.
This samples included 2 duplicates. In 1991, B-3 grid was the higher area determined during the previous sampling.
In 1991, B3-2 was the higher point of the grid B-3 (30'x30'). So in 1994, this point was call B3-5 because it became the center of a new grid (18'x18'). This 2 points have not the same ID between 91 and l
94, but they have the same position in the area B-3.
\\
Grids of elevated points in the wet weather stream Page 1 of 10 l
1
Grid J-3 ID 91 Total U pCi/g.
ID 94 Total pCi/g J3-1 2
J3-1 23 J3-2 2
J3-2 3
J3-3 1.5 J3-3 20 J3-4 2
J3-4 43 J3-5 73 J3-5 34 J3-6 29 J3-6 42 J3-7 11 J3-5 from 1991 is exactly the same point tnat J3-5 in 1994.
Drawine of the erid J-3 in 1991 and 1994 1991 1994 Bo '- o
- 5o ' - o n 4
4
,=
., 3._K-2 35,r}
, n a'.. ~
Aa -.*.
'e
=*
,~
o o
.n
.x
,35-g e.
- 2..y5
.v, s
o
,/
2
% g..,b. G %g.,
o K'
~
d5-o 3&, 4 3,
3 I
k I
k In 1991, one elevated point was found in this area: J3 5.
In 1994, seve.n (7) were alloted to better define the contaminated zone around this higher point. Five (5) locations surround this elvated point in a 10'x10' area. An additional 10'x10' was sampled on two (2) locations nen the estream to determine if the contaminationhad spread down the current of the water. The two 10*x10' squares were side by side, to cover the stream.
Grids of elevated points in the wet weather stream Page 2 of 10
i Grid S-6 ID 91 Total U pCi/g ID 94 Total pCi/g S6-1 22 S6-1 71 l
S6-2 75 S6-2 100 S6-3 28 S6-3 45 l
S6-4 26 S6-4 80 S6-5 20 S6-5 69 S6-6 7
S6-6 102 S6-7 84-S6-2 from 1991 is the same point that S6-5 from 1994.
1 Drawine of the erid S-6 in 1991 and 1994 1991 1994 3o#-o*
3 o '. o
- 7 7
- 3... ?7
' SG-2 SV:.3 o
E.
}./5 N. '
4 w
1
/I A -
.5 6 5 O
e o
y.
3 J
s, O
j m
. k,. o SC.~.A
[,
4.'
S r
S T
l i
l l
l In 1991, one elevated point was found in this grid, it was the point:S6-2.
l l
In 1994, five (5) samples were shared around this location, and two (2) others were located between this previous higher point and the stream. The new sampled area was a 15'x15' square.
l Grids of elevated points in the wet weather stream Page 3 of 10
Grid S-8 ID 91 Total U pCi/g ID 94 Total pCi/g S8-1 4.8 S8-1 90 S8-2 1.5 S8-2 51 S8-3 11.5 S8-3 30 S8-4 70 S8-4 53 S8-5 8.5 S8-5 58 S8-6 4.5 S8-6 52 S8-7 31 There is no similar point between 1991 and 1994.
Drawine of the grid S-8 in 1991 and 1994 1991 1994
$O ' - o "
50 '- O
.0 O *_
..' S.8-2
.S8 f 7
...(
c 0
.-* ry o
' :s t 5 O
o M
,/
,/
M Z
3 y
,'.,m
,gt. i 5 Rv+
a s's V'-
S T
S 9
52 r g$*,O" In 1991, one elevated point was found in the area S-8, it was the point S8-4.
In 1994, seven (7) samples were used to define the contamination in a 15'x15' square containing the stream Two (2) samples were specifically located on both sides of the stream to define a possible underground spreading.
Grids of elevated points in the wet weather stmam Page 4 of 10 l
w J
Grid T-8 ID 91 Total U pCi/g ID 94 Total pCi/g T8-1 99.6 T8-1 46 T8-2 19 T8-2 5
T8-3 16 T8-3 113 T8-4 21 T8-4 51 T8-5 9.5 T8-5 118 T8-6 14.5 T8-8
- 44 T8-6 23 T8-7 71 l
- .Dupucate T8-1 from 1991 is the same point that T8-5 and its duplicated T8-8 from 1994 samples.
Drawine of the erid T-8 in 1991 and 1994 1991 1994 3 c'- o
- 3 o *- o "
3 3
' qt-2.
rg-3' c
t 0
' g,~ y y,5 7
O y
- v..... s.
4 9.
4 6 o M
4g.s
~T1*A,
'S.'
s 4 .
8, U
~T U
~T
=
- 5,_ o.
4 l
l l
In 1991, one elevated point was found in the grid T-8, it was the point T8-1.
The stream crosses this location next to S-8. In 1994, to define where the samples should be collected, knowing the eventuality of a spreading in this sandy soil due to the stream, it was decided to split the 14 samples allowed to s-8 and t-8 as if the two grids were one with two elevated point.
r I
l Grids of elevated points in the wet weather stream Page 5 of 10
[
Grid T-10 ID 91 Total U pCi/g In 94 Total pCi/g T10-1 2.6 T10-1 67 T10-2 67.2 T10-2 29 T10-3 4.5 T10-3 66 l
T10-4 5
T10-4 57 T10-5 2.5 T10-5 34 I
T10-6 3.5 T10-6 32 T10-7 55 T10-2 fmm 1991 is the same point that T10-5 from 1994.
Drawine of the erid T-10 in 1991 and 1994 1991 1994 me 50 O "
bo '- o
11 ll I.,,. '$
v,i o - 2.
rse/j o
D i
...s(.
6 u
o s
s o
's v
's t
~
e
+.
o
,'(T 8 o S'
,i O
7 o
m tn
,i~
' y,
, 'ho. s Tso %,
~
'O so,
y U
T U
ln 1991, one elevated point was found in the grid T-10, it was the point T10-2.
The stream crosses the grid T-10, but is located on the opposite side. Tids grid is supposed to check the eventual existence of an underground stream or natural retention zone due to soil composition.
l In 1994, a 15'x15' square was used to collect the 7 samples. Two (2) samples were located between I
the contamined spot and the stream Grids of clevated points in the wet weather stream Page 6 of 10
I f
Grid T-11 l
ID 91 Total U pCi/g In 94 Total pCi/g Til-1 3.5 T11-1 47 Til-2 2.5 Til-2 51 Til-3 5.5 Til-3 46 Til-4 66 Tll-4 19 Til-5 37 Tll-5 40 l
l Til-6 3
T11-6 34 Til-7 25 Ti l-8*
48
- - Duplicate i
There is no similar point between 1991 and 1994 for tlw grid T-11.
Drawine of the grid T-11 in 1991 and 1994 1991 1994 3o', o "
3e'.o^
12 l 'l
.Til-2.
T sf3
's.
.i S
g o
.gT35 O
,~.
,,3 *.
g w
o A
8 D.
-@n. g tis b 6
'e e.
.a u
}g 7
5' 5'c r-U T'
Q l S '- o "
I in 1991, the elevated point in the grid T-il was the point: Tl1-2.
A 15'x15' square was defined to take four (4) samples around the contaminated spot and three (3) l other samples between Til 4 and the wet weather stream, which is located on the nearest grid, U-9. One duplicate was taken in this area (Til-8).
Grids of elevated points in the wet weather stream Page 7 of 10
i 1
I l Grid V-8 f
ID 91 Total U pCi/g ID 94 Total pCi/g V8-1 127 V8-1 36 V8-2 1.7 V8-8
- 41 V8-3 3
V8-2 23 V8-4 2.3 V8-3 21 V8-5 43 V8-4 34 V8-6 1.8 V8-5 46 V8-6 18 V8-7 14
- - Duplicate V8-1 from 1991 is the same point that V8-5 from 1994.
V8-5 from 1991 is the same point that V8-7 from 1994.
Drawine of the erid V-8 in 1991 and 1994 I
,,1991 1994 30'-o*
30 '- 0 "
3 g
' yg.t y g,_3
~e.
.s'
.~
t
..X.k. -
)r.'.7. -
t o
o F4 J
,f g
,g v.
s
.s a
.v.
..1/$-l VtH
'D'.
g f
- i
.4~
~.
V v
w s5 aa In 1991, the elevated point, in the grid V-8, was the point: V8-1 (127 pCi/g).
This grid V-8 is not crossed by the stream. Five (5) locations were sampled around the higher point and two (2) other locations were placed towards the direction of V-9 to determine how the contamination may have spread. One (1) duplicate was taken (V8-8).
~
Grids of elevated points in the wet weather stream Page 8 of 10
i l Grid V-12 m 91 Total U pci/g ID 94 Total pci/g V12-1 64 V12-1 5
V12-2 2.5 V12-2 5
V12-3 18.5 V12-3 14 V12-4 47 V12-4 27 V12-5 12.5 V12-5 11 V12-6 9
V12-6 26 V12-7 26 V12-8*
28
- - Duplicate There is no similar point between 1991 and 1994.
Drawine of the erid V-12 in 1991 and 1994 1991 1994 Lo ', o
- 3o '- o
- 13 13
'V12-2 Vit/'3
s.
~.
.~
t t
O o
~.q.
~.-i,'..
}
- yIt S l
O L
3-O m
.A
,.s
.v.,
of
'yja.:
vit. '4~
I2-
. '8 4
- 12.,
'7
['
v w
v IS '- air In 1991, the elevated point, in the grid V-12, was the point: V12-1 (63 pCi/g).
l In 1994, four (4) samples were located around the higher point from 1991 to define the concerned area. Three (3) other locations were chosen between this spot and the stream to determine the possible spread of uranium. One duplicate was taken.
Grids of elevated points in the wet weather stream Page 9 of 10 o__________________________
Grid X-7 JD 91 TotalU Ci/g 10 94 Total pci/g P
X7-1 73 l
X7-1 31 X7-2 38 X7-2 5
X7-3 2.5 X7-3 6
X7-4 3
X7-4 4
X7-5 61 X7-5 4
X7-6 3
X7-6 3
X7-7 7
X7-11
- 10 X7-8 12 X7-10*
15 X7-9 4
- - Duplicate X7-2 from 1991 is the same point that X7-3 from 1994.
X7-3 from 1991 is the same point that X7-4 from 1994.
X7-4 from 1991 is the same point that X7-5 from 1994.
Drawine of the erid X-7 in 1991 and 1994 1991 1994 5e ' - o ((
3o '- o
- o g7 2 x 7-g' 6 '- "
./
'h j
c z
h i-j
-' 7-5
- 2. <
~~
, g.,
e a
l g
- o..
,g I
",i,r.......
,..X 7.
X 7 '4,
'I g...
(
m 6
In 1991, tids grid presented the characteristic to combine two (2) elevated spots: X7-1 (73 pCi/g) and I
X7-5 (61 pCi/g).
This grid is situated far from the wet weather stream. In 1994, nine (9) samples were shared in tids zone to define the contamination, The decision was made to surround the luger spots using 8 samples de.ignated by a symmetrical frame, plus one more, pointed toward the deep gully widch may have been I
the origin of the contamination. Two (2) 15'x15' squares were defined to create a frame for the sample points.
Grids of elevated points in the wet weather stream Page 10 of 10
_.. _ _ _ _ _.