ML21239A126
ML21239A126 | |
Person / Time | |
---|---|
Site: | 07000925 |
Issue date: | 06/02/2008 |
From: | Lux J Cimarron Corp |
To: | Kenneth Kalman Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards |
References | |
Download: ML21239A126 (36) | |
Text
CIMARRONCORPORATION June2,2008 Mr.Kenneth Kalman Office ofNuclear Materials Safety
&Safeguards U.S.Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Re: Docket No.70925;License No.SNM-928 License Amendment Request for Groundwater Decommissioning
DearMr.Kalman:
Cimarron Corporation (Cimarron) hascompleted thedecommissioning ofbuildings and soils attheCimarron
- site, andisprepared to complete decommissioning byreducing theconcentration ofuranium ingroundwater to comply with thelicense criterion of180 pCi/I total uranium.
Cimarron proposes toremediate groundwater byconverting dissolved uranium tothesolid
- phase, andestablishing geochemical conditions that prevent its remobilization atconcentrations exceeding thelicensecriterion.
In1999,NRCapproved asite decommissioning plan (combining theApril 1995Site Decommissioning PlanandtheJuly1998Decommissioning Plan Groundwater Evaluation Report) requiring additional groundwater assessment, andcommitting to additional action should itbedetermined that natural attenuation would notreduce groundwater concentrations toacceptable levels.
Subsequent evaluation indicated that itwould takedecades forgroundwater toattain thestipulated release criteria bynatural attenuation.
Consequently, Cimarron nowsubmits theenclosed Groundwater Decommissioning Planasanamendment totheNRCapproved Site Decommissioning Plan.
Cimarron provides Attachment 1describing thecontent andstatus ofthe documents referenced inLicense Condition 10,whichrelate tothe decommissioning of thesite.
Cimarron requests that License Condition 10berevised toread:
Foruseinaccordance with statements, representations, andconditions contained inletters dated September 14,1990; July 25,1995; January 28,1997; February 10,1998, andJune2,2008.
Attachment 2provides atable showing howthis submittal, inconjunction withpreviously submitted documents, satisfy therequirements forthecontent ofadecommissioning plan aspresented inNUREG-1757, "Consolidated Decommissioning Guidance",
l Attachment 3provides atable showing howCimarron's Quality System satisfies the quality assurance requirements ofRegulatory Guide 4.15, "Quality Assurance for j
Radiological Monitoring Programs (Inception Through Normal Operations toLicense j
Termination)
- Effluent Streams andtheEnvironment" Jeff
- Lux, Senior Project Manager a Tronox Worldwide, LLC 405.775.5194 OneLeadership Square
- 211N.Robinson Ave.e Oklahoma
- City, OK731268859 Fax
- 405.302.4637
Attachment 4provides atable showing howthis submittal addresses technical issues raised inthePNNLreport, "Evaluating theEfficacy ofUranium Bioremediation inthe Subsurface:
Technical BasesandPerformance Indicators"
- Finally, Attachment 5providesatable listing thedeficiencies identified byNRCin Cimarron's December 2003license amendment
- request, identifying howandwhere those deficiencies are addressed intheGroundwater Decommissioning Plan.
Cimarron andits contractors (ENSR, LNSTandARCADIS) havebeenpursuing the implementation ofaneffective, cost-efficient approach toremediate thegroundwater at theCimarron site formore than three years through aninsitu bioremediation program.
Webelieved that suchanapproach isconsistent with NRC's"Principles ofGood Regulation"
- However, ithasbecome apparent that theNRCisreluctant tosupport this
- approach, asshownbythe continuing requests foradditional information.
Achronology ofthenumerous requests for information and conference calls overthepast18months aresummarized inAttachment 6.
NRChasinformed Cimarron that NRCwill not approve full-scale implementation ofan insitu bioremediation
- program, stating that NRCwill approve thedevelopment ofinsitu reactive zonesinsmall areas.
NRCasserts that information obtainedfrompilot-scale tests isneeded tojustify full-scale implementation ofthis technology, aswell asto determine howlong post-decommissioning monitoring should beperformed.
Cimarron concludes that theconduct ofpilot scale tests isimpractical fortworeasons.
- First, ifCimarron conducts pilot tests andNRCthendoesnot approve full-scale implementation, there will beareas within which groundwater hasbeen converted to reducing conditions anduranium hasbeenimmobilized.
Thiswill make any subsequent remediation technology, other thanexcavation ofthewater-bearing unit, prohibitively moreexpensive.
- Second, ifNRCdoesnotaccept thegeochemical modeling which demonstrates that immobilized uranium will notre-mobilize whether ornotreducing conditions aremaintained assufficient todemonstrate thelongevity ofremediation, evendecades ofpost-decommissioning monitoring will beinsufficient topredict uranium concentration ingroundwater overathousand yearperiod.
Cimarron submits asAttachment 7anALARAEvaluation forgroundwater remediation.
This ALARAEvaluation showsthat noformofgroundwater remediation isjustifiable on acost-benefit basis evenifgroundwater inthemostcontaminated area werecurrently being usedasdrinking water.
Since groundwater isnot being used,there isactually no reduction indoseasaresult ofgroundwater remediation.
Therehasbeennomeasurable exposure tolicensed material atthesite forseveral years.
Thislackofexposure will continue aslong asthesite iscontrolled, preventing theuseofshallow groundwater for drinking water.
Consequently, ifNRCisunable to approve theenclosed plan through full-scale implementation, Cimarron proposes to "default" tonatural attenuation, which will overtimereduce groundwater concentrations Jeff Lux,Senior Project Manager e Tronox Worldwide, LLC 405.775.5194 OneLeadership Square a 211N.Robinson Ave.a Oklahoma
- City, OK731268859 Fax-405.302,4637
to less than thelicense criterion foruranium.
This isthemethod originally approved by NRC intheApril 1995Site Decommissioning PlanandtheJuly1998Decommissioning Plan Groundwater Evaluation Report.
Cimarron proposes toimplement thefollowing controls in lieuofmore"active" groundwater remediation:
Continue annual environmental monitoring ofapproximately 20wells distributed throughout the threeareas inwhich groundwater exceeds license criteria.
Monitoringwells tobesampledandanalytical parameters will beagreed uponby NRC,DEQ,and Cimarron.
- Control useofthe site topreventuseofshallow groundwater asdrinking
- water, documented byquarterly site inspections. Cimarron would bewilling to incorporate arestriction against theuseofshallow groundwater fordrinking water inthedeed.
Cimarron would notconsider theuseofsuchacontrol to result ina"restricted release" because this institutional control would beineffect onlyuntil groundwater complies with unrestricted release criteria.
- Discontinue itsradiation protection program except asnecessary tomonitor the annual sampling andanalysis ofgroundwater.
- Pursue closure forthose issues addressed intheAugust 31,2007submittal.
- Pursue NRCconcurrence that surfaceand subsurface soil inSubarea F
complies withlicense criteria for unrestricted release.
Cimarron acknowledges that thetimeperiod requiredfor natural attenuation toreduce groundwater concentrations toless than thelicense criterion islonger thanwas anticipated whentheJuly 1998Decommissioning Plan Groundwater Evaluation Report wasapproved byNRC.However, theproposed groundwaterremediation program would represent expenditures ofmillions ofdollars perman-remavoided if someone werecurrently using groundwater fromthemosthighly impacted area.
But, asnoted
- above, nooneisusing thewater.
Consequently, theapplication ofmore expensive j
technologies cannot bejustified.
NRCapproval ofthis license amendment request isrespectfully requested.Ifyou have j
anyquestions regarding this license amendment
- request, please call meat405-775-5194(OKC) or405-642-5152 (mobile).
Sincerely, i
/
Jeff Lux Project Manager Cc: Blair Spitzberg, NRCRegion IV David
- Cates, DEQ MikeBroderick, DEQ Jeff Lux,Senior Project Manager e Tronox Worldwide, LLC 405.775.5194 OneLeadership Squaree 211N.Robinson Ave.e Oklahoma
- city, OK73126-8859 Fax
- 405.302.4637
Attachment 1
Cimarron License SNM-928 Condition 10References
<i
Attachment 1
Cimarron License SNM928Condition 10References c9u nt Description Recommendation Request topossess 6,000kgThorium License Item6(D) authorizes possession of 11/19/1985 6,000kgThorium
- delete fromlicense.
Request toincrease authorized quantity of<5%License Item6(A) authorizes possession of 3/3/1986 U-235from 1,200 gto6,000g 1,200 gofU-235
- delete fromlicense.
Request tobury Option 2material onsite Disposal ofOption 2material iscomplete 9/4/1987 delete fromlicense.
Final release survey for Puplant Subarea I,inwhich thePuplant
- resides, has 11/2/1989 beenreleased forunrestricted use
- delete from license.
Request todiscontinue filing 70.59 reports 9/14/90 letter from NRC(next citation) 8/22/1990 approves request
- delete fromlicense.
9/14/1990NRCapproval todiscontinue 70.59 reports See8/22/90 above
- Retain incondition 10 Request forinformation fromNRC Organization haschanged multiple times since Organization
- chart, detail oninvoice, status of this submittal,financial detail wasprovided, Puplant license termination, status ofonsite Subarea with Puplant wasreleased for 6/24/1992disposal cell
- approval, status ofadequacy of unrestricted use,disposai iscomplete and disposal areaandlagoon cleanup (Subarea L).Subarea Lwasreleased forunrestricted use delete from license
Response
to1/8/93 RAlondisposal cell Disposal and associated workiscomplete, Subsidence, Windandwater
- erosion, Deed condition 23 stillrequires continuing inspections 2/25/1993notice andlocation
- markers, Commitment to
- delete from license.
complete decommissioning Onsite Disposal Plan
- Responsibilities, Decommissioning and disposal ofsoils is I
Defintions, Precautions, Characterization, complete
- delete from license.
4/19/1994Transportation,
- Disposal, Determination of activity
- incell, Run-on andrun-off
- control, Cap
- lacement, Record ofdisosal t
Response
to4/19/94 RAls
- Final survey of Decommissioning anddisposal of soils is i
material
- incell, Average concentrationcomplete, issues addressed.
Subarea N Mnan, RegGuide1.86
- criteria, Optiondemonstrated releasable, butnot released due 5/31/19942limit, Hotspotaveraging, Final survey of togroundwater InSubarea K - delete from excavations, Final survey
- ofcap, Useof license.
Response
to7/18/94 RAl
- Howtosample and Decommissioning anddisposal ofsoils is I
7/20/1994analyze forKdofsoil indisposal cell complete
- delete fromlicense.
Response
to8/12/94 RAls
- Hotspotaveraging Disposal iscomplete, soil counter calibration I
ofsoil indisposal
- cell, QCsamples, haschanged since this timeandhasbeen 9/21/1994NUREG/CR-5849 calculations, Soil counterinspected repeatedly
- delete fromlicense calibration Follow upontelephone conversation Decommissioning anddisposal ofsoils is 11/3/1994Exposure toworkers placing soil indisposal cell complete
- delete fromlicense.
License Amendment Request
- Changes to Appendix AandAnnex Ahavechanged Appendix AandAnnex A
substantially since this submittal.
This 11/15/1994 submittal isnolonger relevant
- delete from license.
Page1of3
Attachment 1
Cimarron License SNM-928
- Condition 10References Document Description Recommendation License Amendment Request
- Cimarron License Condition 24designates Karen Morgan 12/16/1994desires todesignate Karen Morgan asRSO asRSO
- nolonger needed
- delete from license.
4/12/1995Soil density testresults for wasteinandcaponDecommissioning anddisposal ofsoils is disosalcell Cell2 comlete
- delete fromlicense.
Resume for Karen Morgan License Condition 24designates Karen Morgan 6/5/1995 asRSO
- nolonger needed
- delete from license.
Response
totelephone inquiry onhotspot Thesubject area(Subarea K)hasbeen 7/5/1995 averaging inSouth Uranium Yard released forunrestricted usedelete from license.
7/25/1995Submittal ofFinal Status Survey Plan forPhaseFSSRforSu,barea F,aPhase
- IIarea, isinNR IIAreas review
- retain inCondition 10.
8/9/1995 Submittal ofFinal Status Survey Report for AIIPhase Iareas havebeenreleased for Unaffected AreasPhaseI unrestricted use-delete from license.
Response
toNRCcomments onFinal Status AllPhaseIareas havebeenreleased for 11/13/1995 SurveReortforPhaseIAreas unrestricted use-delete fromlicense.
License Amendment Request
- Organization Organization haschanged since this submittal 1/23/1996Change it is nolongerappropriatedelete fromlicense 4/25/1996Option 2materal disposal procedure change Decommissioning anddisposal ofsoils is (Listed twice) fromstockpiling todirect transportation tocellcomplete
- delete fromlicense.
6/10/1996RAlsregarding 4/25/96 proposal Decommissioning anddisposalofsoils is comlete
- delete from license.
Hotspotaveraging instockpiles andcell
- not Decommissioningand disposal ofsoils is 8/28/1996 erformed infiveondareas comlete
- delete from license.
Response
to8/16/96 RAlsLicense Appendix AandAnnexA have changed 9/20/1996Amendment Request
- Changes toAppendix A substantially since this submittal
- delete from I
andAnnexA license.
Proposed lung fluid solubility test Decommissioning anddisposal of soils is 11/20/1996 comlete
- delete from license.
Response
to12/2/96 RAlsonAnnex A
Appendix AandAnnexAhave changed 1/2/1997 substantially since this submittal
- deletefrom license.
Response
to10/31/96 NRCComments on FSSRforSubarea F,aPhaseIIarea, isinNR 1/28/1997Final Status SurvePlanforPhaseIIAreas review
- retain inCondition 10.
Response
to2/25/97 NRCComments Issues all addressed except groundwater Volumetric averaging andgroundwater Groundwater isaddressed inCondition 27(b) 5/6/1997 contamination atPonds1and2,Averaging of delete fromlicense.
paved
- areas, concrete indrainageways.
Response
to3/5/97 NRCComments onRPP
- Appendix AandAnnex Ahavechanged 5/16/1997 substantially since this submittal
- delete from license.
Response
to10/3/97 NRCComments on FSSRsforall Phaselil areas havebeen 12/5/1997PhaseIll Final Status Survey Plan approved byNRC.Thisisnolonger needed delete fromlicense.
Page2of3
Attachment 1
Cimarron License SNM928Condition 10References oc9u ent Description Recommendation Agenda for2/17/98 Meeting w/NRC
- includes Provides basis forlimits nowstipulated inthe 2/10/1998information ondose calculations license.
Includes information ondose calculations
- retain inCondition 10.
Response
to2/9/98NRCComments onPhaseFSSRsforall Phase Ill areas havebeen 6/26/1998Ill Final Status Survey Plan approved byNRC.Thisisnolonger needed delete fromlicense.
Responses to7/1/98 Conference Call Issues raised during conference call havebeen 7/2/1998 Resolving questions about inspection reportaddressed
- delete fromlicense.
- 70925/97-02
- soilcounter "traceability" and t o rahical error 2/15/2000Submittal ofFinal StatusSurvey Report for Subarea Khasbeenreleased fromlicense Phase
- Ill, Subarea K
delete fromlicense.
Response
to1/29/01 NRCComments onFSSRSubarea Khasbeenreleased fromlicense 2/20/2001forPhase
- Ill, Subarea K - Hot spot averaging, delete fromlicense.
revise Table 4.1 Decommissioning Schedule Schedule nolonger relevant
- delete from 4/17/2002 license.
Revised Decommissioning Schedule Schedule nolonger relevant
- delete from 5/10/2002 license.
I I
I I
I i
Page3of3 I
Attachment 2
NUREG1757 Decommissioning Plan Requirements Addressed inCimarronDocuments I
I I
I Il il 1
I
Attachment 2
NUREG1757 Decommissioning PlanRequirements Addressed inCimarron Documents Decommissioning PlanContents Location TopicDiscussed AsPer NUREG-1757 inCimarron Documents SiteDescrition Executive Summa Facilit O eratin Histo Lic eNumber/Status/Authorized Presented inApr1995Site Decommissioning Plan
- Section 1
PresentedinOct1994Site Characterization Report
- Section 2
License History Updated inApr1995Site Decommissioning Plan
- Section 1
U datedinAu 2005Sub-Area FFinal Status SurveReort
- Section 1
Presented inApr1995Site Decommissioning Plan
- Section 1
Updated inJul1998DecommissioningPlanGround WaterEvaluation Previous Decommissioning ActivitieS Report
- Section 4 U dated inAu 2005Site-Wide Groundwater Assessment Review S ills Described in Aug 2005Site-Wide Groundwater Assessment Review Burials FacilitDescri tion Site Location andDescri tion Presented inA r1995 Site Decommissionin Plan
- Section 1
Poulation Distribution Addressed inA r2008 Groundwater Decommissionin Plan
- Section 2
Current/Future LandUse Addressed inA r2008 Groundwater Decommissionin Plan
- Section 2
Meteorolo andClimatolo Presented inOct2006Conce tualSite Model
- Rev.01
- Section 3
Geology
- Described inJul1998 Decommissioning PlanGround Water Evaluation Report
- Sections2and 3 Geology andSeismology Updated inOct2006ConceptualSite Model
- Rev.01
- Sections 2and3 Seismolo notrelevant toroosed roundwater remediation Described inJuf1998Decommissioning Plan Ground WaterEvaluation Surface WaterHydrology Report
- Section 3
U dated inOct2006Concetual Site Model
- Rev. 01-Section 3
Described inJul1998Decommissioning Plan Ground Water Evaluation Groundwater Hydrology Report
- Section 3
U dated inOct2006Concetual Site Model
- Rev.
01
- Section 3
Onlynatural resource which wouldimpact dose estimates is shallow Natural Resources groundwater
- addressed inJun2008Groundwater Decommissioning Plan I
- Sections 3 - 5 Radiolo ical Status ofFacilit Contaminated Structures Decommissioned andreleased byNRCasdescribed inAug2005Sub-Contaminated S stemsandE uiment AreaFFinal Status SurveReort
- Section 1
Surface Soil Contamination Soil decommissioning complete asdescribed inAug2005Sub-Area F
i Subsurface Soil Contamination Final Status SurveRe ort
- Section 1
Described inJul1998Decommissioning PlanGround WaterEvaluation Surface Water Report
- Section 3
U dated inOct2006Concetual Site Model
- Rev.01-Section 3
Described inJul1998Decommissioning PlanGround WaterEvaluation Ground Water ReportSection 3
U dated inOct2006Concetual Site Model
- Rev.01-Section 3
I
,I Page1of2
Attachment 2
NUREG-1757 Decommissioning PlanRequirements Addressed inCimarron Documents Decommissioning PlanContents Location Topic Discussed AsPer NUREG-1757 InCimarron Documents ProramOr anization Planned Decommissionin Activities Contaminated Structures Decommissioning ofstructures andsoil complete asdescribed inAug Contaminated S stems andE ui ment 2005Sub-Area FFinal Status Survey Report
- Section 1
Addressed inJun2008Groundwater Decommissioning Plan
- Sections Surface andGround Water 3
- 5 Schedules Addressed inJun2008Groundwater Decommissionin Plan
- Section 5
Pro~ect Mana ementandOranization Decommissioning Management Oranization Decommissionin TaskManaement Addressed inJun2008Groundwater Decommissioning Plan
- Section 2
Decommissioning Management Positions andQualifications Addressed inSep 2007 QualitySystem Manual
- Section 2
3 DiO9 Addressed inFeb 2008 Radiation SafetPlan
- Section 2
Addressed inSep2007 Quality System Manual
- Sections 1and7 Contractor Support Addressed inFeb2008 Radiation SafetPlan
- Section 1
Rad tion Safety Controls andMonitoring Addressed inFeb2008 Radiation SafetyPlan
- Sections 6 - 14 Nuclear Criticali Safet N/A
- as erLicense Condition19 Health Physics
- Audits, Inspections, and Addressed inSep2007Quality System Manual
- Section 6
Recordkee inProram Addressed inFeb2008Radiation Safe Plan
- Section5 Environmental Monitorin andControl Proram Environmental ALARAEvaluation ProramAddressed inFeb2008Radiation Safet Plan
- Sections 4and15
- noduenMWN WM dudng gmunha man nt ont ro m Radioactive WasteManaementProram Solid Radioactive Waste LiuidRadioactive Waste N/A
- nowaste will begenerated during groundwater remediation activities i
Mixed Waste Qualit Assurance Proram Oranization QualiAssurance Proram Document Control I
Control ofMeasuring andTestEquipment Alltopics listed inthis section areaddressed inSep2007Quality System Manual Corrective Action Qualit Assurance Records Audits andSurveillances I
Modifications toDecommissionin ProramsandProcedures Provision formodifying Site Decommissioning Planandprocedures is s ecified inLicense Condition 27e I
Page2of2
Attachment 3
Comparison oftheCimarron Quality System toRegulatory Guide4.15 "Quality Assurance forRadiological Monitoring Programs (inception Through NormalOperations toLicense Termination)
EffluentStreams and TheEnvironment"
Attachment 3
Comparison oftheCimarron Quality SystemtoRegulatory Guide4.15 "Quality Assurance forRadiological Monitoring Programs (inception through NormalOperations toLicense Termination)
- Effluent Streams and theEnvironment" Regulatory Guide4.15 Cimarron QASystemSection and Rev.2Requirements Item Description Addressed 1.0Organizational Structure andResponsibilitiesofManagerial and C1 O erational Personnel 2.0Quality AssuranceProgram C,C.'2 3.0Design Control C.8 4.0Procurement Document Control N/A 5.0Instructions, Procedures, andDrawings C.3 6.0Document Control C.3 7.0Control ofPurchased Items andServices N/A 8.0Identification andControl ofItems N/A 9.0Control ofProcesses C.3 10.0Inspection C.3 11.0TestControl C.8 12.0Control ofMeasuring andTestEquipment (M&TE)
C.6.1 13.0Handling, Storing andShipping C.3 14.0Inspection, TestandOperating Status C.3 15.0Control onNonconforming Items C.10 16.0Corrective Action C.10 17.0Quality Assurance Records C.4 18.0Audits C.9 19.0Quality Control inEnvironmental Sampling C.5 20.0Quality Control intheRadioanalytical Laboratory C.6 21.0Internal Quality Control Samples andAnalysis C.6.2 22.0Performance Evaluation Program C.6.3 i!
23.0QAPP(Quality Assurance Project Plan)
B,paragraph 3
ii Page1of1
Attachment 4
Comparison oftheGroundwater Decommissioning Planto"Prioritized information andMonitoring Parameters forAssessment ofBioremediation OfU(VI) inGroundwater (Table 5.1from PNNL Report 16385[Long and
- Yabusaki, 2007))
i I
Attachment 4
Comparison oftheGroundwater Decommissioning Planto"Prioritized information andMonitoring Parameters forAssessment ofBioremediation of U(VI) inGroundwater" (Table 5.1fromPNNLReport 16385[Longand
- Yabusaki, 2007))
HowParameter isAddressed intheGroundwater Decommissioning PlanorOther Cimarron Parameter Detailed inthePNNLReport Documents Mandatory Site information: Uranium Distribution, Form,andMobility Site conceptual model for uranium source term Fully explained inENSR'srefined Oct.06Conceptual Site Model(CSM)
Rev.01
- Section 4
Spatial extent ofcontaminationzone (plume Theareas ofuranium impacts havebeenfully geometry)
(to i20%)
delineated through anextensive monitoring program as documentedinJuly 1998Decommissioning Plan GroundWaterEvaluation Report
- Section 3andOct 06CSMRev.01
- Section 3
Formandmobility/lability (to i30%)
Uranium hasbeenanalyzed inthesoil and groundwater; geochemicalmodeling hasbeen performed topredict speciation (uranyl carbonate);
the distribution ofuraniumbetween soil andgroundwater has been determined (ENSR, 2006,Section 5.1.2).
Additionalcharacterization will beperformed aspartof the groundwater remediation activities todetermine the uranium concentration andforminthesoil atthestart ofremediation (Section 5.2.1.1 oftheGroundwater Decommissioning
- Plan, baseline soil mineratogy).
Mandatory Siteinformation:
Hydrologic andGeologic Data Site conceptual modelforsubsurface (vadose Detailed inOct06CSMRev.
01; vadose zoneisnota zoneandgroundwater) flow andcontaminant significant continuing source ofuranium tothe transport groundwater asdiscussed inDecember 2007 teleconference with theNRCandasdocumented in associated materials submitted totheNRC in I
November 2007inpreparation forthe teleconference.
Temporal recharge (to 120%)
Extensively characterized anddetailed intheHydrology Addendum totheGroundwater Decommissioning Plan (Appendix B).
Vadose zonehydrogeology:
- porosity, water Thevadose zoneisnotasignificant continuing source retention function parameters (to i20%)
ofuranium tothegroundwater asdiscussed in December 2007teleconference with theNRCandas documented inassociated materials submitted tothe i
NRCinNovember 2007inpreparation for the teleconference.
Theneedtohavethis level ofdetail is baseduponPNNLexperience atHanford wherethe vadose zoneextends atsomelocations
>250' below j
ground surface andhasresidual source contamination.
I Groundwater flowvelocity (Darcy flux) and Characterized foreachareaofthesite whereuranium direction (to 130%)
ispresent at>180pCi/L asdescribed intheOct06 i
CSMRev.01.Tracer testin will alsobe erformed as j
Page1of4 f
i
Attachment 4
Comparison oftheGroundwater Decommissioning Planto"Prioritized Information andMonitoring Parameters forAssessment ofBioremediation ofU(VI)inGroundwater" (Table 5.1fromPNNLReport 16385[Longand
- Yabusaki, 2007))
HowParameter isAddressed intheGroundwater Decommissioning PlanorOther Cimarron Parameter Detailed inthePNNLReport Documents described inSection 5.2.1.2 oftheGroundwater Decommissioning Plantoobtain highresolution data ongroundwater flow velocity anddirection.
Water table dynamics Current conditions detailed intheHydrology Addendum included asAppendix BtotheGroundwater Decommissioning PlanandOct06CSMRev.01 Waterlevels inwells will bemonitored prior toand during remediation asdescribed inSection 5.2ofthe plan.
Sitehydrogeology:
hydraulic conductivity, Fully characterized anddetailed inOct06CSMRev.
- porosity, dispersivity, hydrofacies 01.
Additional focused information will beobtained through tracertesting during thegroundwater remediation asdescribedinSection 5.2.1.2 ofthe Groundwater Decommissioning Plan.
Remediation process conceptual model Conceptual models havebeendeveloped forthe remediation hydrology andgeochemical aspects ofthe in-situ remediation plan asdetailedinSection 3ofthe Groundwater Decommissioning Plan.
Particle sizecharacteristics Thebaseline soil mineralogy analyses tobeperformed asdescribed inSection 5.2.1.1 ofthe Groundwater Decommissioning Planwill provide thisinformation prior tothestart ofremediation.
Mandatory Geochemical andMicrobiological Performance Monitoring Parameters
Background
U(VI) concentration, monthly orbi-Groundwater U(VI) concentrations have been monthly andevent-based (e.g.,
high water extensively monitored; concentrations weremonitored table).
during August 2007(high watertable).
Baseline sampling will takeplace prior tothestart ofremediation asdescribed inSection 5.2.1.1 oftheGroundwater Decommissioning Plan.
Treatment zoneanddown-gradient U(Vl) Sections 5.2.2.4 and5.2.3.1 detail theperformance concentration (required tobebelow MCLaftermonitoring andremedy completion demonstration treatment) testing ofgroundwater, respectively, tobeconducted, withspecific criteria fordetermining that theMCLhas beenmetandmaintained for8consecutive quarters with nosignificant increasing trends inthedataas determined using EPASen's SlopeEstimator method.
DO,ORP,specific conductivity, andpH Field parameters will besampled aspart ofthe measured hourly to4times daily inbackground remediation program asdescribed inSection 5.2ofthe andtreatment zone(autonomous Groundwater Decommissioning Plan.
multiparameter probes)
Page2of4
Attachment 4
Comparison oftheGroundwater Decommissioning Planto"Prioritized Information andMonitoring Parameters forAssessment ofBioremediation of U(VI) inGroundwater" (Table 5.1fromPNNLReport 16385[Long and
- Yabusaki, 2007))
HowParameter isAddressed intheGroundwater Decommissioning PlanorOther Cimarron Parameter Detailed inthePNNLReport Documents Aqueous electronacceptors andreduction Electron acceptors andreduction byproducts will be byproducts inbackground andtreatment zone:monitored asdetailed inSections 5.2.1.1 and5.2.2.4 of
- nitrate, nitrite,
- ammonium, Mn(IV/II),
sulfate, theGroundwater Decommissioning Plan; these sulfide analyses will include:
total organic
- carbon, sulfate,
- sulfide, dissolved
- nitrate, and alkalinity.
Manganese will notbeanalyzed since dissolved iron andferrous iron will beindicators ofiron reduction.
Fe(Ill) mineral abundance Baseline mineralogy analyses will focus
- oniron, including quantificationandspeciation oftheiron prior to thestart ofremediation, andthechanges that occur to iron mineralogy astheremediation progresses.
The baseline soil samplingandanalyses aredetailed in Section 5.2.1.1 oftheGroundwaterDecommissioning Plan.
Fe(II),
sulfide measured infield attimeof Ferrous ironand sulfide areperformancemonitoring sampling forU(VI)
(upgradient, treatment zone,parameters and will bemonitored asdescribed in anddowngradient)
Sections 5.2.1.1 and 5.2.2.4 oftheGroundwater Decommissioning Plan.
Electron donor concentration inthetreatmentMeasurement oftotal organic carbon (TOC) isdetailed zone throughout Section 5.2ofthe Groundwater Decommissioning Planandisa key aspect ofthe remediation hydraulics approach(e.g., facilitating i
distribution ofTOCwill bethegoal of the injection and extraction systems).
Tracer forelectron donor(to provide accurateSection 5.2.1.2 oftheGroundwater Decommissioning indication ofdonor distribution) Plandetails tracer testing tobeconducted aspart of thefirst stage oftheremediation system forthe j
impacted groundwater areas.
Thegoalofthetracer I
testing will betorefine theinjection andextraction system toachieve optimum TOCdistribution).
Alkalinity (measured inthefield)
Alkalinity will beroutinely measured aspart ofthe performance monitoring program asdescribed in Sections 5.2.1.1 and5.2.2.4 oftheGroundwater Decommissioning Plan.
Page3of4
Attachment 4
Comparison oftheGroundwater Decommissioning Planto"Prioritized Information andMonitoring Parameters forAssessment ofBioremediation ofU(Vl)inGroundwater" (Table 5.1fromPNNLReport16385[Long and
- Yabusaki, 2007))
PNNL "Desirable" or"Optional" Performance Monitoring Parameters thatare included intheGroundwater Decommissioning Plan Desirable
- Depth discrete U(VI) data (upper/mid/lower part ofcontaminated zone):
Soil samples will be obtained from twodepths ateachsample location asdescribed Sections 5.2.1.1 and5.2.3.2 ofthe Groundwater Decommissioning Planandsummarized onpage3ofFigure 5-1 Desirable
- Depth-discrete sediment sampling/extraction forU,Fe,AVS:Theseparameters will be analyzed foratbaseline, during the course ofremediation (as part ofthesoil performance monitoring program),
andaspartofthe remedy completion demonstrationtesting asdescribed inSections 5.2.1.1, 5.2.2.4 and5.2.3.2, respectively,of the Groundwater DecommissioningPlanandsummarized onpage3 ofFigure 5-1 Optional
- Insitu redox status ofUbydirect sampling ofinsitu materials:
Thiswill bedetermined through theuseofelectron andx-ray microprobe methods during thesoil performance monitoring and remedy completion demonstration testing phases as described inSections 5.2.2.4 and5.2.3.2 ofthe Groundwater Decommissioning Planandsummarized onpage3ofFigure 5-1 Reference
- Long, P.E.,
andYabusaki, S.B.
2007.
Evaluating the Efficacyof Uranium Bioremediation inthe Subsurface:
Technical BasesandPerformance Indicators.
Pacific Northwest National Laboratory Report PNNL-16385.
l Ii i
Page4of4
Attachment 5
Comparison oftheGroundwater Decommissioning PlantotheDeficiencies Noted InNRC'sMarch27,2007Correspondence
Attachment 5
Comparison oftheGroundwater Decommissioning PlantotheDeficiencies Noted inNRC'sMarch27,2007Correspondence HowDeficiency isAddressed in Deficiency NumberandConcern Groundwater Decommissioning Planor OtherCimarron Documents 1,2,3-Thepotential impactofseasonal events ontheAHydrology Addendum wasprepared to re-mobilizationof uranium after in-situ bioremediation.
evaluate regional andsite-specific transient a
Thenumber and duration ofevents presented was hydrologic processes.
Section 3.3ofthe underestimatedin extent, andthepossible Groundwater Decommissioning Planprovides introduction ofoxygen and otherredox sensitiveasummary ofthehydrologic modeling and compounds introduced during theflooding eventsassessment completed, andthecomplete could induce changes tothe groundwater Hydrology Addendum isincluded asAppendix geochemistry.
Btotheplan.
Section 3.4.4 oftheplan Accordingly consideration wasprovided for:
discusses incorporation oftheHydrology o
River flood stage events; Addendum evaluations andresults into the o
Periods ofheavy rainfall; and 9eochemical modeling evaluations.
o Pondedwater vertically infiltrating tothe watertable.
4
- Final calibration input andoutput files (electronic Theelectronic input andoutput MODFLOW files) fortheMODFLOW andMODPATH model runs filesfortheBA#1andWAAmodels are areneeded(with theappropriate documentation via included asAppendix Fonacompact disk.
CDorDVD) sothat theNRCstaff canindependently The Groundwater FlowModeling Report verify these calibration runs.
(ENSR, 2006)included asAppendix Aserves ascom letedocumentation for these models.
5
- TheSDPdidnotprovide anyinformation onthe Section 3.4 oftheGroundwater calibration ofthese transport models.
Decommissioning Plan describes the geochemical modefing completed.Inaddition, Inorder toconduct independent reviews ofthe the Groundwater Flow Modeling Report is transport
- models, theNRCstaff should be included asAppendix Atotheplan andthe provided with thefinal calibration input andoutputoutput fromthemodeling isincludedona files (electronic files) toreview theMT3DMSmodelcompact disk inAppendix Fasnoted above.
I runs.
6 - Unsaturated zonecharacterization andmodelingFigures 3-1and3-2 summarize current areneededifaconsiderable source ofresidual uranium groundwater activityinformation for uranium isintheunsaturated zone.
theareasofconcem.
Theinformation Characterization andmodelin'g oftheunsaturated indicates that nosignificant changes inthe flow andtransport conditions maybewarranted to uranium areaofimpact locations orextent assess theearlier discussion onground-waterhaveoccurred, despite the significant j
recharge andwater-table fluctuations.
precipitation andponding events that occurred during thesummerof2007.
7
- TheSDPshould contain adetailed QA/QC programSection 6oftheGroundwater planspecific tocharacterization, monitoring, and Decommissioning Planpresents asummary of modeling toconfirm theefficacy oftheuranium theCimarron Quality Assurance Program.
In bioremediation program.
- addition, preliminary DataQuality Objectives a
Further discussion ofquality assurance (QA) and forthegroundwater decommissioning activities quality control (QC) protocols needstobe areincluded inAppendix Ctotheplan.
I provided Appendix Eincludes theQuality System Manual Table ofContents andacross reference fortheQuality System Manual sections totheapplicable sections ofthe Regulatory Guide 4.15todemonstrate how Cimarron's Quality System satisfies the j
reuirements ofthisuidance.
Page1of4
Attachment 5
Comparison oftheGroundwater Decommissioning PlantotheDeficiencies Noted inNRC'sMarch27,2007Correspondence HowDeficiency isAddressed in Deficiency NumberandConcern Groundwater Decommissioning Planor Other Cimarron Documents 8
- Better address thedifficultyindetermining injection Section 5.2oftheGroundwater andsubsurfacedistribution of"amendment"inanon-Decommissioning Plandescribes the homogenous setting.
proposed recirculation remedial approach in a
Moredescriptionis needed todescribe the"staged which injection andextraction wells will be approach" toinjections and monitoring.
usedtoaccelerate themovement of amendment tolocations wherethe groundwater hasnaturally taken uranium since its release andtoensure that theamendment isdistributed throughout theimpacted areas of theformation.
Inaddition, performance monitoring will beconducted asdescribed in Section 5.2.2.4 toensure that appropriate distributionoftheamendment isachieved.
Section 5.2.1.2 describes theestablishment andmonitoring ofinitial treatment areas at downgradient,
- middle, andupgradient locations within theareasofimpact with results ofmonitoring oftheinitial treatment areas used torefine theCS'Mandtoprovide information fordesignofthefull-scale treatmentsystem.
Thisstaged approach to theremediation isdepicted graphically in Figure 5-1.
9-Themonitoring programandwell network is Figure 5-2oftheGroundwater l
inadequate given theuncertainty associated with re-Decommissioning Planshows theproposed mobilization ofuranium.
monitoring well network and initially selected monitoring locations forthe baseline
- sampling, performance andremedy demonstration completion monitoring ofgroundwater as described inSection 5.2.
Thegroundwater sampling andmonitoring program is summarized onpage3ofFigure 5-1.in
- addition, Figure 5-2showsthelocation of several additional monitoring wells proposed forinstallation aspart oftheinitial treatment area imlementation.
l 10
- Additional characterization ofuranium intheWA Figure 3-2summarizes current uranium AreaandWestern Upland(WU) areas ingroundwater groundwater activity information fortheWAA isrequested andWUAandincludes data fromanAugust 2007sampling event toprovide additional l
characterization ofgroundwater impacts.
j Additional information will becollected during thestaged implementation andtheinformation collected will beusedtorefine theCSM.This information will beshared withtheNRCatthe intervals asdepicted onFigure 5-1which presents theBioremediation Implementation Process.
Page2of4 I
Attachment 5
Comparison oftheGroundwater Decommissioning PlantotheDeficiencies Noted inNRC'sMarch27,2007Correspondence HowDeficiency isAddressed in Deficiency NumberandConcern Groundwater Decommissioning Planor Other Cimarron Documents 11
- Additional information isrequested forthe Theproposed approach fortheWUAwill remediation procedure ofthe ground-water system in utilize aseries ofinjection andextraction wells theWUareawhere the licensee proposes touse similar totheapproach proposed fortheother infiltration andrecovery trenches with treated ground-impacted areas atthesite asdescribed in water toremove uranium from the ground-water.
Section 5.2oftheGroundwater Decommissioning Plan.
12-Additional information isrequested forthe Asdiscussed withtheNRConApril 20and numerical ground-water flow model that ENSR April 30,2007,nonumerical (coded) developed toevaluate flowtoareceptor trench inthe groundwater model wasdeveloped forthe wUarea.
WUAthat issuitable forevaluating the Theinput andoutput files (electronic files) ofthe remediation design.
Groundwater flow numerical modelshould beprovided with the directions, gradients andfluxes were appropriate documentation viaCDorDVD so that evaluatedusing water level measurements theNRCstaff canindependently verify thismodeL obtainedfromwells installed throughout this area.Aninjectioniextraction wellapproach is now proposed forremediation ofthis areaas described inSection 5.2oftheGroundwater Decommissionin Plan.
13
- Information isrequested onhowtheuranium Section 4oftheGroundwater currently associated with thesolids will react when Decommissioning Plandescribes indetail the molasses isinjected.
processby which uraniumboundtotheiron a
Iftheuranium ispresently sorbed toiron oxides willbe released uponreductive oxyhydroxides, conversion ofthese solid phases dissolution ofthe iron minerals butthenwill be tosulfides could release moreuranium into the immediately reduced andincorporated into the ground-water.
Since thegeochemical model iron sulfide matrix.
assumes equilibria, itcannot predict whether the Section 3.4discussesthe geochemical uranium will desorb orprecipitate.
Therefore, the rnodeling approach andhow themodel conceptual models needtoconsider non-addresses non-equilibriumconditions.
equilibrium conditions andits affect onuranium behavior.
14
- Provide evidence tosupport that phases inthe Section 4oftheGroundwater future would bemoresorptive thanthose nowpresentDecommissioning Plan describes indetail the isunfounded.
iron andsulfide phases that will form under a
Demonstrate that theaquifer solids will bemore reducing conditions.
Numerous literature sorptive toward uranium after in-situ remediation.
sources arereferenced inthis section and clearly demonstrate that amorphous ferric iron mineral hases arehiblsortive foruranium.
15
- Provide supporting evidence forthe"coating" Section 4oftheGroundwater process bywhich uraninite will beprecipitated first, Decommissioning Plandescribes indetail the followed byIronSulfide (FeS) which would belaid uranium immobilization process.
Numerous downover theUranium Oxide asaFeScoating.
literature sources arereferenced inthis section Will thisprocess reduce theporosity ofthe tosupport theunderstanding and formation?
documentation ofthis process.
Inaddition, Section 4.3includes adiscussion i
oftheeffects oftheimmobilization process on theporosity oftheformation andincludes an estimate ofporosity changeusing theKozeny-Carmenequation (which relates permeability toporosity, tortuosity andaneffective bdraulic oreradius Page3of4
Attachment 5
Comparison oftheGroundwater Decommissioning PlantotheDeficiencies Noted inNRC'sMarch27,2007Correspondence HowDeficiency isAddressed in Deficiency NumberandConcern Groundwater Decommissioning Planor OtherCimarron Documents 16
- Residual concentrations ofuranium could exceedThegeochemical model hasbeenrevised to 180pCi/L in155 years aftertreatment.
usesite-specific information whenavailable Groundwatercontaining uraniumatconcentrations andtoavoid useofunrealistic extremes to abovetheLicense Condition 27.b.
limit would not demonstrate theefficacy oftheproposed besafeforaresident farmer.
approach asdescribed inSection 3.4ofthe Groundwater Decommissionin Plan.
17
- Characterization ofsolidphases presentneeded Theproposed soil sampling andanalyses to tojustify equilibrium.
beconducted aredescribed inSections a
Proposed analytical techniques may notprovide 5.2.1.1 (baseline sampling),
5.2.2.4 sufficient definition forminor amounts ofcertain (performance monitoring),
and5.2.3 (remedy solid phaseminerals.
completion demonstration testing) ofthe GroundwaterDecommissioning Planand summarizedonpage3ofFigure 5-1.
Additionaldetail onthesoil analytical methods isprovidedinAppendix Dtotheplan.
i I
i Page4of4
Attachment 6
SummaryofEfforts toAddress Continuing NRCQuestions OvertheLast18Months I
Attachment 6
SummaryofEfforts toAddress Continuing NRCQuestions OvertheLast18Months December 11, 2006 SubmissionofLicense Amendment
- Request, Including:
o Groundwater Remediation WorkPlan o
Geochemical Modeling Report o
Groundwater FlowModel Report January 2007 Receipt andreview of"guidance" from DOEintheformofaPNNLreport entitled "Evaluating theEfficacy ofUranium Bioremediation intheSubsurface:
Technical Bases and Performance Indicators":
o Careful consideration ofthereport showed that ithadlimited applicability toCimarron given thevery different nature ofthe conditions betweentheCimarron andHanford
- sites, forexample:
=
Depth togroundwaterandresidual source material in vadose zone:
a 20feet atCimarron, source areas removed 100 to~250feet atHanford; entire thickness of vadose zone potentially contaminatedwith residual uranium source March27,2007 Receipt ofDeficiencies Notice andRejection of LAR fromNRC:
o 17"deficiencies" noted;
- however,
=
2ofthedeficiencies weremerely requests for input/output files from modeling activities conducted to support theLAR.
=
1deficiency isnotapplicable tothe Cimarron site because thedeficiency requests discussion oftreatment ofaresidual source inthevadose zone;
- however, sucha residual source ofuranium isnotpresent atthe site.
=
9ofthedeficiencies wererequests for additional information onthegeochemistry
- process, approach to treatment oftheWUA,soil analytical method
- details, monitoring program
- details, site geology anduranium impact
- details, Cimarron QA/QCprogram, andplanned staged approach toremediation.
=
Theremaining 5deficiencies wererequests foradditional
- analyses, including ahydrologic analysis toaddress potential infiltration andriver impacts ongroundwater flow andremedial activities, updating ofthegroundwater flow model toaccount fortransient processes, evaluation of non-equilibrium conditions inthegeochemical
- modeling, anduseofsite-specific rather than worst-case values in modeling activities.
Page1of7
Attachment 6
SummaryofEfforts toAddress Continuing NRCQuestions OvertheLast18Months April 20,2007 Full daymeeting with NRC,Cimarron, ARCADIS,andENSRstaff atNRC Headquarters:
o Meeting objective(s):
todiscuss License Amendment Request deficiencies andapplicability ofworkperformed anddescribed in aPNNLreport o
Meeting outcome:
=
TheNRCprovided moredetail ontherequested additionalinformation andanalyses assummarized above inthelisting ofdeficiencies.
=
TheNRCwasconcerned with howtodemonstrate the longevity oftheremedy andsuggested that leaching tests (column studies) beconducted onsoil samples fromthe treated areas.
=
TheNRC indicated that they believed that pilot testing wasrequired prior tofull-scaleimplementation sothat initial field information couldbeusedtoconfirm the success ofthe approach andtoprovide additional information for refinement oftheimplementation
=
TheNRCandtheCimarron team agreedtoadditional technical discussions on:
Hydrologic assessments and modeling
=
QA/QCprogram for the Cimarron site WUAgeology andremediation approach Geochemical modeling inputs andapproach to addressing transient events j
April 30,2007 Seventy-five minute conference call with NRCandENSRregarding groundwater flow modeling andhydrologic assessment ofsite:
o Call objective(s):
Discuss deficiencies 1,2,3,and6especially as theypertained tothehydrology/hydraulics ofthesite andto identify action items/path forward toaddress thedeficiencies.
o Call outcome:
Perdiscussion with theNRC,theCimarron team agreed toconduct thefollowing additional analyses toaddress thedeficiencies:
=
Collect site-specific dataontransient processes including installation ofameteorological station andcollection of waterlevels andriver stage information.
=
Evaluate hydrologic processes using analytic or numerical modeling asappropriate.
Page2of7
Attachment 6
SummaryofEfforts toAddress Continuing NRCQuestions OvertheLast18Months
=
Evaluate theeffects ofthetransient hydrologic conditions onthegeochemistry andinclude pertinent results ofthe hydrologic study inthegeochemical modeling.
=
Re-evaluate theWUACSMandapproach.
May23,2007 Submission ofPowerPointpresentation ongeochemistry andgeochemical modeling toNRC:
o Submission objective(s):
Provide information ongeochemical basis for treatment technology asbackground forconference call.
May24,2007 Twohour conference callwith NRC,ARCADIS,ODEQ,andCimarron staff:
o Callobjective(s):
toprovide theNRCwith abetter understanding ofthe geochemical process andthegeochemical modeling approach.
o Call outcome:
=
NRCrequested additional information onuranium concentrations in the vadose zoneandpotential for leaching tothe water table, aswellastreatment ofthe vadose zone.
=
NRCrequested additional information onthelinkage of thegroundwater model and the geochemical model.
=
Tronox agreed topreparation ofa flow chartfor submission totheNRCtoillustratethe staged field implementation approach andthemodeling adjustments/re-evaluations that will beconducted as additional information iscollected during the staged implementation oftheremediation process.
April through AugustDuetorecord precipitation intheMaytoJuly timeframe, Cimarron identifiedthe 2007 opportunity toobtain site-specific data(rather thanmodeled orpredicted information) foruseinpreparation oftherequested hydrologic analysis forthe i
site.
Cimarron obtained measurements ofdepth towater atanumber ofwells in theBA#1areaduring this period inwhich almost twice thenormal precipitation fell.
Observations werealsomadewith respect totheriver's elevation relative to thesite andtonoteifthere wereanyareas ofponded water(due toovertopping orpoordrainage).
August 13,2007 Submission ofdraft flow chart with staged remediation approach anddeficiencies matrix:
o Submission objective(s):
Address eachofthedeficiencies noted intheMarch 27,2007letter fromNRCindetail andtoprovide the agreed-upon flow chart illustrating thestaged field implementation approach.
Page3of7
Attachment 6
SummaryofEfforts toAddress Continuing NRCQuestions OvertheLast18Months August 14-23, 2007 Conductedadditional groundwater sampling attheCimarron site:
o Sampling objective(s):
Obtain additional geochemical and uranium area ofimpact delineation information forsite perNRC request included indeficiency 10andasdiscussed attheApril 20,2007meeting.
September 5,2007 Conference call with NRC,Cimarron,
- ARCADIS, LNST,ENSR,ODEQstaff:
o Call objective(s): Review Cimarron's responses tothe deficiencies identified bytheNRCwith respect totheDecember 2006 LARinorder toobtain aclear understanding ofany remaining regulatory issues andclear thepathforward forwork plancompletion andthesubmission ofarevised LARtotheNRC.
o Call outcome:
=
Revisions were requestedbytheNRCtothehydrologic modeling and assessments conducted tofurther address flooding and recharge events onthevertical flux ofwater through the vadose zone
=
Calibration ofsitemodels wasrequestedbytheNRC using recently obtained site-specific dataanddiscussion ofthis calibration intherevised LAR.
=
Cimarron teamtoprepare 3-D illustrations ofsite i
- geology, areaofimpact location and proposed remedial design forsubmission toNRC.
=
Cimarron teamtoprovide additional information on design ofremedial process including timeframe for reactions, injection frequencies
- andrates, approach to ensuring that"pushing" ofuranium impacts does not occur.
=
Cimarron teamagreed tofurther discussions with NRC I
about defining "completion" ofremediation from a
licensing perspective.
=
Cimarron teamagreed toanadditional conference call between NRCandLNSTregarding details ofQAprogram forCimarron.
=
Cimarron teamagreed toanadditional conference call to further address potential vadose zoneissues.
September 19,2007 Conference call withNRC(Jacob Philip) andLNST(Barb Lucas):
o Call objective(s):
Discuss Cimarron's QASystem o
Call outcome:
l
=
Itwasa reedthat therevised LARwill contain abrief Page4of7
Attachment 6
SummaryofEfforts toAddress Continuing NRCQuestions OvertheLast18Months narrative describing theCimarron site Quality Assurance System(QAS) withsupporting "documents",
including the table ofcontents oftheQAManual, acopyofthecross walktable between Cimarron QASandthevarious QA System requirements, andDQOsfortheactivities included inthegroundwater decommissioning.
=
TheNRCagreed that eachcontractor could
/should provide itsownQAPPwithnorequirement foraCimarron QAPPwhich addresses theentire project inasingle document.
November 11,2007 Additional information submission totheNRC:
o Submission objective(s):
Information addressing NRCrequests submitted in advance for discussion onDecember 19,2007, including:
=
An"excerpt" fromtheHydrology Addendum in preparation by ENSR for incorporationinto theRevised License Amendment Request that focused onthevadose zoneissues NRC raised inthe September 5,2007call.
=
Asetoffigures that illustrate 1)thelocations and concentrations ofuranium insoilsattheBurial Area#1 plume and2)the lithology of thealluvium andspatial relationship ofthe underlying sandstone andmudstone, and3)acomparison between the vadose zoneand seasonally-saturated zoneuranium concentrations at Hanford andCimarron.
=
A proposed agenda fora'comprehensive" December 19, 2007conference call.
=
Anupdated flow chart that provides better clarity onthe overall process ofimplementing the remediation program anddefining whenremediation will becomplete and how Cimarron would propose toachieve license termination.
=
Alisting ofadditional data tobeincluded inCimarron's revised License Amendment Request.
December 19,2007 Ninety minute conference call with NRC,Cimarron, ARCADIS,LNST,ENSR, ODEQstaff:
o Call objective(s):
=
Cimarron objective:
Toconfirm that all questions have beenanswered, all issues
- resolved, all deficiencies addressed.
=
NRCobjective:
Todiscuss thepotential vadose zone
- issues, endpoint/license termination requirements, and methods ofdemonstrating longevity oftheremedy.
Page5of7
Attachment 6
SummaryofEfforts toAddress Continuing NRCQuestions OvertheLast18Months o
Call outcome:
=
Discussed that theHanford andCimarron vadose zones arenotcomparable andthat there isnotaresidual source ofuranium intheCimarron vadose zone.The amountofuranium leaching fromthecapillary/vadose zoneatCimarron will beminimal, buthasbeen accounted forinthegeochemical model.
=
Discussed theresults oftheHydrology Addendum preparedbyENSRandhowtheresults havebeen incorporated into theremedial plan.
=
Discussed the3-Ddepictions ofthegeology atthesite and howtheproposed remedial design will address the different hydrogeologic zones.
=
Presented asummary oftheproposed oxidative aging testing procedure tobeusedtodemonstrate that adequate mineralogy isinplace andwill havethe required permanence.
=
Presented asummary oftheproposed statistical evaluation ofgroundwater monitoring results to demonstrate achievementof the remedial objectives.
=
Discussed therequirements for license termination and datatobeprovided totheNRCto demonstrate success andlongevity oftheremedy.
January 7,2008 NRCCall toARCADIS(Cimarron teammember):
o Call objective(s):
,i
=
Seeking information onpotential conflict ofinterest with therole ofPNNLgoing forward.
=
Advising oftheNRC'sinterest tohaveafollow-up call to thecall ofDecember 19,2007
- formoreinformation transfer.
o Call outcome:
=
PNNLwill notserve asasubcontractor toARCADISon j
theARTproject attheHanford site toavoidanypotential conflicts ofinterest.
=
Based ontheadditional analyses conducted, information provided toNRC,andconference calls
- todate, Cimarron believes that all oftheNRC'sdeficiencies havebeen addressed andthat theGroundwater Decommissioning Plansubmission provides all oftheinformation needed bytheNRCtoevaluate thebioremediation planforthe Page6of7
Attachment 6
SummaryofEfforts toAddress Continuing NRCQuestions OvertheLast18Months Cimarron site andtherefore further conference calls are notneeded.
January 9,2008 Submit minutes ofDecember 19,2007conference call totheNRC:
o Submission objective(s):
Toidentify areas ofconcurrence from theDecember 19,2007conference call andtoestablish NRC support fortheproposed bioremediation Groundwater Decommissioning Planinorder tooptimize thechances that the revised LARwouldbeaccepted after morethanayear of addressing NRCquestions andconcerns.
o NRC response:
TheNRCdidnotprovide aresponse tothe conference call summarysubmittal.
i
!I Page7of7
Attachment 7
Technical Memorandum "ALARACalculation for Cimarron Groundwater"
Corporate Offices:
Louisville Offices:
5403Bluebird Trail LucasNewman 13802 BelVista Court S.
Stillwater, OK 74074
- Prospect, KY 40059 Scienace
& Technologies, Inc.
(405)3724506voice C
(502) 4097231 voice (405)377-1474 fax (502) 4095282 fax Technical Memorandum May27,2008 To:Jeff Lux From:Harry J.Newman, CHP 5ooB
Subject:
ALARACalculations for Cimarron Groundwater Introduction Cimarron Corporation (Cimarron)is evaluating methodsforgroundwater remediation atitsCrescent, Oklahoma site and hasrequestedanevaluation of thehypothetical dosewhichwouldbeavoided ifgroundwater containing total uranium above180pCi/Ltotal uraniumwere remediated toan activity concentration below180pCi/L.The180pCi/L concentration level fortotal uranium ingroundwater istheremediation criterion approved byNRCinlicense condition 27(c).
Groundwater attheCimarron site exceeds thiscriterioninthree areas; themostelevated concentrations arefound downgradient fromBurial Area#1(BA#1) inthenortheastern portion ofthesite.
All other sourceterms havebeenremediated, thus,there arenosoil sources toimpact groundwater except those associated with soil/water partitioning.
Thismemorandum discusses theALARA' considerations andpresents analysis ofthehypothetical dosetoindividuals fromtheinstallation ofawell inthe most highly impacted groundwater attheCimarron facility.
Thecalculated dose is hypothetical because:
1.There arenopotential receptors living onsite using groundwater.
2.Themostseverely impacted groundwater iswithin theCimarron River floodplain, andisperiodically inundated, making useofawell inthis area unfeasible over time.
3.Current land management prohibits theuseofgroundwater atthesite.
4.Apotable public water supply isavailable onthesite.
I ALARAmeans"AsLow AsisReasonably Achievable" whichisanapproach usedforradiation protection tomanageandcontrol exposures (both individual andcollective totheworkforce andtothe general public) andreleases ofradioactive material totheenvironment sothat thelevels areaslowasis reasonable taking into account
- social, technical,
- economic, practical, andpublic policy considerations.
ALARAisnotadoselimit, butrather aprocess which hastheobjective ofattaining doses asfarbelow the applicable limit ofthis partasisreasonably achievable.
TM:ALARACalculations for Cimarron Groundwater 1
Lucas NewmanScience andTechnologies, Inc.
Corporate Offtees:
Louisville Offices:
S403Bluebird Trail Lucas Newman 13802 BelVista Court S.
Stillwater, OK 74074
- Prospect, KY 40059 Science& Technologies, Inc.
(405)3724506voice (502) 4097231 voice (405) 377-1474 fax (502) 409-5282 fax Methods/Discussion TheALARA calculations utilize aproprietary groundwater pathways dosemodel developed by Lucas NewmanScience andTechnologies, inc.(LNST).
Thedose modelhasbeen utilized atseveral NRC-licensed
- sites, anditsresults havebeen accepted byNRC TheLNSTdosemodelincludes capabilities forinput of probabilistic parameter distributions, anddetermines dosefromallcredible pathways.
Themodel assumes nosoil source termexcept asassociated with soil/water partitioning,and calculates dosenotonly fromdrinking water ingestion, butalsofrom consumption of crops, milk, soil (incidental),
andcattle, aswell as inhalation ofre-suspendedsoil impacted viabyirrigation.
TheALARAcalculation required the projection oftotal uranium concentration
- overtime, since continuous extraction ofwaterfromthemosthighly impacted areas will result indeclining concentrations overtime.A well pumping model2 wasdeveloped byENSRInternational,Inc. (ENSR) baseduponthenumerical hydrogeological modelcreated forBA#1 at the Cimarron site,Appendix 1
provides theanalysis whichyielded concentration oftotal uranium versus time whenpumping from themosthighly impacted area within theplume.
ThegraphinAppendix 2presents total uranium concentration versustimewhile
- pumping, anddisplays theexponential equation describing thedeclining radioactivity concentration inthehypothetical well.
Appendix 2 alsoprovides calculations ofthehypothetical doserateatthebeginningof each yearbased uponthetotal uranium concentration being withdrawn from wellat the beginning oftheyear.
Aninitial (time zero) total uranium concentration of3,000 pCi/L was utilized.
Calculations yielded acorresponding initial doserate of303 mrem/yr3 Becausetheuranium concentration beginstodecline immediately upon
- pumping, thedoserate also begins todecline immediately.
Solving the following integral yields thecumulative hypothetical doseoveranytime period immediately following initial pumping fromthewell.
Cumulative hypothetical dose(mrem)
= 303e-0.6037t dt Notethat theconcentration ofuranium declines atsucha ratethat byyearfive groundwater concentrations arebelowthegroundwater release criterion.
Consequently, doseincurred following thispoint wouldisnotassumedto contribute tothehypothetical doseavoided through remediation.
Theintegral doseavoided iscalculated as477mremtotheindividual.
Forafamily offour persons living onsite andusing thegroundwater fromawell installed inthemost 2 Email fromM.Meenan, ENSRtoH.Newman,LucasNewmanScience andTechnologies, Inc.,
dated 3/21/2008.
Thewell pumping modelassumptions areprovided inAppendix 1.
3Thecalculations referred toarecompany privileged andproprietary information andcanbesubmitted under separate cover inaccordance with theprovisions of10CFR2.390 ifrequested.
TM:ALARACalculations forCimarron Groundwater 2
Lucas Newman Science andTechnologies, Inc.
Corporate Offices:
Louisville Offices:
5403Bluebird Trail Lucas Newman 13802 BelVista Court S.
Stilhvater, OK 74074
- Prospect, KY 40059 science& Technologies, Inc.
(405)372-4506voice (502) 409-7231 voice (405) 377-1474fax (S02) 4095282 fax highly impacted
- area, thetotal hypothetical doseavoided wouldbeless than2 rem.
Theresident farmer scenarioforexposure isa hypothetical scenario atthe Cimarron site; there arenocurrent public exposure routes.
Itshould beevident that calculateddose totheresidentialfarmer family fromtheinstallation ofawell within themost highly impacted areaatthefacility isalso hypothetical.
Since no doseisbeing
- received, nodosewouldbeavoided byreducing groundwater to less thanthestipulated criteria.
Therefore, using this
- measure, thecurrent cost perperson-rem avoidedis infinite.
Theaccepted measure usedfor comparison ofwhether actions taken maybe considered ALARAis$1,000 to$2,000 perperson-rem avoided4 Ifaresidential farmer family weretoreside under the worstcaseconditions cited above,it appears that thecostcould beontheorder ofmillionsofdollars perperson-rem avoided.
Thecost toavoid dosewill continue toincrease asthecommencement ofremediation isdelayed, since natural attenuation oftheplumewill continue to reduce themaximumconcentration ofuranium in groundwater overtime.
Conclusion An evaluation was performed todetermine theorder ofmagnitude costs associated withreduction ofdoseduetoahypothetical well installed andused under theresidential farmer scenario attheCimarron site.
Because thereisno actual exposure atthis
- time, theactual doseavoided iszeroand thecostper person-rem avoided isinfinite.
Under thehypothetical resident farmer
- scenario, thecosttoreduce exposure wouldappear toapproach thelevelof millions of dollars perperson-rem avoided.
Thesecosts wouldexceedtheestablished criteria
($1,000 to$2,000 perperson-rem) bymanyorders ofmagnitude 4Thestatement over-simplifies theALARAconcept.
Further information maybelocated at:
httpL//wwwarcsovLreadjng9m/doc-collestjongnspmanual/inspection-procesjum TM:ALARACalculations forCirnarron Groundwater 3
Lucas Newrnan Science andTechnologies, Inc.
Teowin uain neive oacuae euanium onenaion inounwa um ou om awi a
nim:
.'mae K
=uanium iiuion oiien
/
- osan, o
i,an si a
=
oi ueni
/
=auie ooi Q=umin m
eomm
.+
ic w/
wa ae isaiae i
ume an ie e
oiai i
i meae s
umin uaion a
aia iw waao ai e
i a
e
=ume awiin eaiu oinunce oe umin we
^
aoiae ae om i
raivaus a
o snchin aoanion zi
.D
=in oauie e
iu w/
.Umom nomoenou auie mme
.umin ae Q
iaum onn n
an:
uow inuanium nso iion m'
s nanaou euiiium ewn oi anwae; Wnae ae
/
s
.m umin we in ne oume;,m Noiniaion omunaua one,No inx ouanium om aea ouie e
iuoinu euion inu aniniaion mcou eivd owve euaion cam vmice an iicu oove.
Mo
- imon, einiaion em onocn eu om aov euain me anone en.
As
- aeu, inaion em ino in eaove euaion APPENDX o
M'PKd p
+
A C,
=uauum onenaion om umin w
aime i/L C/
=innia uanium concnmon inounwa Ci/
Cw
=Cw Wee:Aumion:
APPENDX 2
w
.+
.+
.4 Concenraion VS im
,+
+.4w=
.+
+.4w=
.+
+4w=
.+
+4w=
4+
.+
.4 iw=
.+
.+.4w=
.+
.+.4w=
.+
.+.4w:
.+
.+.4w=
.4
.+
.4dw=
.4
.+
.4Qw=
,+
.+
X:w
.+
.+
o i;
S
.4
.+.+w
.4
.+
+
j j
.4
.+
.+io
.4
,+
.+Ew=
,+.+w
.4
.+
.+
O p
g 4,m
+
.+
ja:.e.:,ej;T""---pe
+
.+"#
.4
+.+w
.4
+.+w
+.+C
.5
+
.+
4 2
4
.5 3
+,+Cw
+
.+
Tine e
.+
,+
iCw
+
.+
ni eae mm/
- aoemem, ea aeii o
w ai w=
.4
+
.+