ML22350A048
| ML22350A048 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07000925 |
| Issue date: | 12/15/2022 |
| From: | Lux J Environmental Properties Management |
| To: | Davis P, James Smith Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, State of OK, Dept of Environmental Quality (DEQ) |
| References | |
| Download: ML22350A048 (12) | |
Text
December 15, 2022 Mr. James Smith U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 Mr. Paul Davis Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality 707 North Robinson Oklahoma City, OK 73101 Re: Docket No. 07000925; License No. SNM-928 Cimarron Environmental Response Trust Proposal to Abandon Monitor Wells T-99, T-100, and 1371 - 1373 - Corrected
Dear Sirs:
Solely as Trustee for the Cimarron Environmental Response Trust (CERT), Environmental Properties Management LLC (EPM) submits herein a proposal to abandon certain monitor wells at the Cimarron Site. Five monitor wells (Monitor Wells T-99, T-100, and 1371 through 1373) were installed near the Cimarron River in December 2014 as part of the 2014 Design Investigation project. EPM requests approval to abandon these monitor wells from both the U. S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ).
The NRC noted that the heading for the table that listed analytical data for Monitor Wells 1371, 1372, and 1372 in the September 8, 2022, letter proposing to abandon these monitor wells did not include 1373. This submittal is a corrected version of that September 8, 2022, letter.
Background
The NRC Criterion of 180 picocuries per liter (pCi/L) for uranium in groundwater was established and stipulated in License SNM-928 in 1995. Prior to 2014, the extent of uranium in groundwater exceeding the NRC Criterion had been defined. However, the DEQ had not established remediation criteria for uranium, nitrate, and fluoride until after the CERT was established in 2011. The State Criteria for these contaminants are:
Uranium - 30 micrograms per liter (µg/L)
Nitrate - 22.9 milligrams per liter (mg/L)
Fluoride - 4 mg/L Prior to 2014, the extent of groundwater exceeding State Criteria had not been defined for any of these contaminants of concern (COCs). The 2014 Design Investigation completed the delineation of these contaminants in groundwater.
Cimarron Environmental Response Trust Proposal to Abandon Monitor Wells T-99, T-100, 1371 and 1372 Thirty-five (35) additional monitor wells were installed site-wide during the 2014 Design Investigation, and groundwater samples were collected from over 60 monitor wells for laboratory analysis.
Monitor Wells T-99 and T-100 Numerous flood events have occurred since Monitor Wells T-99 and T-100 (in the Western Alluvial Area) were installed. The deposition of sand during flood events has reconfigured the topography in the area surrounding these wells, resulting in the accumulation of sand around both wells. The following pictures show that all but 10-12 inches of the protector pipe for Monitor Well T-99 and all but 18-20 inches of the protector pipe for Monitor Well T-100 have been buried in sand. Re-grading the area to remove the sand is impractical; subsequent flood events will continue to bury them. EPM believes these wells should be abandoned before they are completely buried.
Monitor Well T-99 Monitor Well T-100 contains a map showing the locations of these monitor wells and the analytical data obtained from samples collected from these monitor wells. Monitor Well T-99 has yielded groundwater averaging 33 mg/L nitrate and 36 ug/L uranium. Monitor Well T-100 has yielded groundwater averaging 26 mg/L nitrate and 29 ug/L uranium. Fluoride concentrations are less than 1 mg/L for groundwater in both wells. The concentration of uranium in both wells is far below the DCGL, but the concentration of uranium exceeds the MCL in T-99. The concentration of nitrate exceeds State Criteria in both monitor wells.
EPM believes that there is no reason to maintain these two monitor wells. They are no longer sampled on a regular basis, and they do not serve any purpose in the decommissioning of the site because they are far outside of the extent of uranium exceeding the NRC Criterion. Additionally, because they are within the area in which nitrate (and uranium in T-99) exceed the State Criterion, they dont complete the delineation of the respective dissolved plumes to those levels.
Page 2 of 4
Cimarron Environmental Response Trust Proposal to Abandon Monitor Wells T-99, T-100, 1371 and 1372 Monitor Wells 1371 Through 1373 Numerous flood events have occurred since Monitor Wells 1371, 1372, and 1373 (in Burial Area
- 1) were installed. The deposition of sand and the scouring of channels during flood events has reconfigured the topography in the area surrounding these wells, creating ridges and gullies in the path to these wells. Re-grading the area to level the terrain is impractical; subsequent flood events will continue to both scour and deposit sand. These monitor wells are now a challenge to access on an annual basis when groundwater sampling crews obtain depth-to-water measurements for all monitor wells on the Site. EPM believes that paths to these wells should be cleared and the wells abandoned before ridges and scour-channels make it still more difficult to access the wells. contains a map showing the locations of these monitor wells and the analytical data obtained from samples collected from these monitor wells. Monitor 1371 has yielded groundwater averaging 27 ug/L uranium. Monitor Well 1373 has yielded groundwater averaging 43 ug/L uranium. Monitor Well 1372 has yielded groundwater averaging 10 ug/L uranium. Both nitrate and fluoride concentrations are less than 1 mg/L for groundwater in both wells. The concentration of uranium in all three wells is far below the DCGL.
EPM believes that there is no reason to maintain these two monitor wells. They are no longer sampled on a regular basis, and they do not serve any purpose in the decommissioning of the site because they are far outside of the extent of uranium exceeding the NRC Criterion. There is no nitrate or fluoride in Burial Area #1 and Monitor Well 1373 does not complete the delineation of the uranium in groundwater to the State Criterion.
Well Abandonment Upon approval by the NRC and the DEQ, all five wells will be abandoned in accordance with Oklahoma Water Resources Board regulations. Assuming approval by both agencies is received by the end of September 2022, the work will be completed during 2022, being funded by budget Task 6, Out of Scope Work. 93.2% of the cost will be paid out of the Federal Environmental Cost Account and 6.8% of the cost will be paid out of the State Environmental Cost Account.
(The rest of this page was left blank intentionally.)
Page 3 of 4
Cimarron Environmental Response Trust Proposal to Abandon Monitor Wells T-99, T-100, 1371 and 1372 If you have any questions or desire clarification, please call me at (405) 641-5152.
Sincerely, Jeff Lux, P.E.
Project Manager cc: Robert Evans, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region IV Michael Broderick, Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Monitor Wells T-99 and T-100 Map and Data Attachment 2 - Monitor Wells 1371, 1372, and 1373 Map and Data Page 4 of 4
Cimarron Environmental Response Trust Proposal to Abandon Monitor Wells T-99, T-100, 1371 and 1372 ATTACHMENT 1 MONITOR WELLS T-99 AND T-100 MAP AND DATA
q r s u v s { l op q r s u v s { }
op Monitor Wells to be Abandoned q r s u v s { ~
op q r s t u u s { w op q r s u v s { ?
op q r s u v s { w op q r s u v s { x op q r s u v s { y op q r s u v s { z op q r s t u u s v x op q r s t u u s v w op q r s u v s { v op q r s u v s { z u op q r s u v s { v u op q t s u v s { y u op q t s u v s { z u op q t s u v s { v u op q r s t u u s v y op q r s t u u s v z op q r s t u u s v v op q r s t u u s { x op op q r s t u u s v {
q r s t u u s { v q r s t u u s { l op op q t s z s { x op q r s t u u s { }
op q r s t u u s { z op q t s z s { y op q r s t u u s { ~
op op op q t s z s { z q t s z s { x u q r s t u u s { ?
op op q t s z s { v op q r s t u u s { y op q t s z s { v u q t s v s { z u op q t s v s { y u op op q r s t s { z u op q t s v s { v u q t s v s { x u op op q t s t s { v u q r s t s { v u op
% ( ! " # $ % & '
q r s t s { v
) * * +
op
, - . / 0
1 2 3 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 6 : ; < = < > ? @ =
A B C D E F G H I J H K L M L N O P Q F G H R N S T U N O S V W N X O P Q F G H Y G Z B N U Q H F R N A J H J [ J R F N \ F B R ] J H Q J P N ^ J ] R _ A ` a R N b c C \ Y U N d ^ O A X e Q P F R N b c C f B C R N g h i j N g h i j d J R F ^ J ] R N g h i j d J R F ^ J ] i k l g g m E n f
Cimarron Environmental Response Trust Analytical Data for Monitor Wells T99 and T100 Monitor Total Date Analyte Result DL Unit Qual Well Uranium T-99 12/16/2014 0.552 0.033 mg/L Fluoride T-100 12/16/2014 0.772 0.033 mg/L 11/6/2018 37.3 1.7 mg/L 12/16/2014 22.3 0.425 mg/L 3/26/2015 24.1 0.850 mg/L 2/18/2016 36.8 0.850 mg/L 5/9/2016 46.6 0.850 mg/L 8/9/2016 38.4 1.700 mg/L 10/17/2016 31.4 1.700 mg/L Nitrate/Nitrite 2/7/2017 30.8 0.425 mg/L 4/19/2017 18.1 0.425 mg/L T-99 8/1/2017 34.3 1.700 mg/L 11/8/2017 40.8 0.850 mg/L 2/6/2018 46.2 1.700 mg/L 5/9/2018 37.2 0.850 mg/L 8/21/2018 18.9 1.700 mg/L 33.1 Mean 46.6 Maximum 9.3 Standard Deviation ()
51.7 Mean + 2 11/6/2018 21.3 0.85 mg/L 12/16/2014 49.3 0.850 mg/L 3/26/2015 51.6 1.700 mg/L J+
2/18/2016 32.3 0.425 mg/L 5/9/2016 25.4 0.850 mg/L 8/9/2016 14.6 0.850 mg/L 10/17/2016 21.9 0.425 mg/L Nitrate/Nitrite 2/7/2017 27.3 0.425 mg/L 4/19/2017 22.5 0.850 mg/L T-100 8/1/2017 25.4 1.700 mg/L 11/8/2017 18.7 0.850 mg/L 2/6/2018 20.6 1.700 mg/L 5/9/2018 16.0 0.850 mg/L 8/21/2018 20.7 1.700 mg/L 26.3 Mean 51.6 Maximum 11.2 Standard Deviation ()
48.7 Mean + 2 Page 1 of 2
Cimarron Environmental Response Trust Analytical Data for Monitor Wells T99 and T100 Monitor Total Date Analyte Result DL Unit Qual Well Uranium 12/16/2014 Uranium-238 48.1 48.1 0.067 ug/L 3/26/2015 Uranium-238 46.6 46.6 0.067 ug/L 2/18/2016 Uranium-238 36.8 36.8 0.067 ug/L 5/9/2016 Uranium-238 35.1 35.1 0.067 ug/L 8/9/2016 Uranium-238 33.2 33.2 0.067 ug/L 10/17/2016 Uranium-238 35.1 35.1 0.067 ug/L 2/7/2017 Uranium-235 0.288 35.088 0.010 ug/L 2/7/2017 Uranium-238 34.8 0.067 ug/L 4/19/2017 Uranium-235 0.290 35.790 0.010 ug/L 4/19/2017 Uranium-238 35.5 0.067 ug/L 8/1/2017 Uranium-235 0.260 32.260 0.010 ug/L 8/1/2017 Uranium-238 32.0 0.067 ug/L 11/8/2017 Uranium-235 0.269 32.769 0.010 ug/L T-99 11/8/2017 Uranium-238 32.5 0.067 ug/L 2/6/2018 Uranium-235 0.286 33.686 0.010 ug/L 2/6/2018 Uranium-238 33.4 0.067 ug/L 5/9/2018 Uranium-235 0.303 34.503 0.010 ug/L 5/9/2018 Uranium-238 34.2 0.067 ug/L 8/21/2018 Uranium-235 0.205 25.705 0.010 ug/L 8/21/2018 Uranium-238 25.5 0.067 ug/L 11/6/2018 Uranium-235 0.312 34.612 0.01 ug/L 11/6/2018 Uranium-238 34.3 0.067 ug/L 35.7 Mean 48.1 Maximum 5.6 Standard Deviation ()
46.9 Mean + 2 12/16/2014 Uranium-238 30.8 30.8 0.067 pci/L 3/26/2015 Uranium-238 31.6 31.6 0.067 ug/L J 4/19/2017 Uranium-235 0.189 24.789 0.010 ug/L 4/19/2017 Uranium-238 24.6 0.067 ug/L T-100 29.1 Mean 31.6 Maximum 3.7 Standard Deviation ()
36.5 Mean + 2 Page 2 of 2
Cimarron Environmental Response Trust Proposal to Abandon Monitor Wells T-99, T-100, 1371 and 1372 ATTACHMENT 2 MONITOR WELLS 1371, 1372, AND 1373 MAP AND DATA
M1372 Monitor Wells to be Abandoned M1373 M1371 M1414 M1416 M1369 M1413 M1344 M1368 M1415 MTMW-24 M02W48 M1370 M1367 M1363 M1365 M1366 M1412 M1417 M1364 M1361 M1411 M02W43 M02W45 M1362 M02W35 M02W37 M02W44 M02W62 M1410 M02W34 M02W36 M02W18 M02W38 M02W21 M02W24 M02W19 M02W14 M02W11 MTMW-23 M02W12 M02W23 M02W17 M02W06 M02W07 M02W08 M02W13 M02W32 M02W05 MTMW-13 M02W16 M02W22 M02W33 1404 M
M02W04 M02W15 TMW-07 M
M02W03 M02W02 MTMW-05 TR-08 MTMW-18 M TMW-19 M1405 M02W01 M02W53 M M02W28 M02W10 MTMW-09 02W27 MTR-09 MTMW-06 M1316R M1406 M02W30MTMW-17 M02W09 M1315R MTR-10 M02W39 M02W42 MTMW-08 M02W26 MTMW-21 MTMW-01 M02W41 M02W40 M02W25 MTMW-25 M02W20 MTR-06 02W47 1408 M
M1407 MM1409 MTMW-20 MTMW-02 M02W51 MTR-07 M02W50 M02W52 2018 BASE MAP - BA1 AREA CIMARRON ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE TRUST CIMARRON SITE, OKLAHOMA M1314 0 35 70 140
+/- 210 280 Feet DATE:
Source: Esri, DigitalGlobe, GeoEye, Earthstar Geographics, CNES/Airbus DS, USDA, USGS, AeroGRID, IGN, and the GIS User Community MAP PRODUCED - 1/16/2019 Document Path: Z:\Clients\ENS\CERT\_ClientInfo\Sites\Database\Geospatial\Maps & Dwgs\ArcGIS\BMCD_Files\Arcdocs\2018\2018 Base Maps\2018 Base Map - BA1 11x17.mxd
Cimarron Environmental Response Trust Analytical Data for Monitor Wells 1371, 1372, and 1373 Monitor Total Date Analyte Result Unit Qual Well Uranium 1371 0.41 mg/L 1372 12/16/2014 Fluoride 0.42 mg/L 1373 0.37 mg/L 1371 0.05 mg/L U 1372 12/16/2014 Nitrate-Nitrite 0.05 mg/L U 1373 0.05 mg/L U 12/16/2014 Uranium-238 30.8 30.8 ug/L 3/23/2015 Uranium-238 31.3 31.3 ug/L Uranium-235 0.2 ug/L 4/19/2017 21.5 Uranium-238 21.3 ug/L 1371 27.9 Mean 31.3 Maximum 5.5 Standard Deviation ()
38.9 Mean + 2 12/16/2014 Uranium-238 10.5 10.5 ug/L 3/23/2015 Uranium-238 8.8 8.8 ug/L Uranium-235 0.1 ug/L J 4/19/2017 8.8 Uranium-238 8.8 ug/L 1372 9.4 Mean 10.5 Maximum 1.0 Standard Deviation ()
11.3 Mean + 2 Page 1 of 2
Cimarron Environmental Response Trust Analytical Data for Monitor Wells 1371, 1372, and 1373 Monitor Total Date Analyte Result Unit Qual Well Uranium 12/16/2014 Uranium-238 31.2 31.2 ug/L 3/23/2015 Uranium-238 29.0 29.0 ug/L U 2/17/2016 Uranium-238 57.5 57.5 ug/L 5/9/2016 Uranium-238 55.1 55.1 ug/L 8/11/2016 Uranium-238 64.3 64.3 ug/L 10/18/2016 Uranium-238 33.8 33.8 ug/L 12/15/2016 Uranium-235 0.3 ug/L 27.9 12/15/2016 Uranium-238 27.6 ug/L 2/7/2017 Uranium-235 0.4 ug/L 31.3 2/7/2017 Uranium-238 30.9 ug/L 4/19/2017 Uranium-235 0.3 ug/L 25.3 4/19/2017 Uranium-238 25.0 ug/L 8/2/2017 Uranium-235 0.5 ug/L 44.1 8/2/2017 Uranium-238 43.6 ug/L 1373 11/9/2017 Uranium-235 0.4 ug/L 37.6 11/9/2017 Uranium-238 37.2 ug/L 2/7/2018 Uranium-235 0.7 ug/L 64.4 2/7/2018 Uranium-238 63.7 ug/L 5/8/2018 Uranium-235 0.8 ug/L 68.6 5/8/2018 Uranium-238 67.8 ug/L 8/27/2018 Uranium-235 0.4 ug/L 28.9 8/27/2018 Uranium-238 28.5 ug/L 11/7/2018 Uranium-235 0.5 ug/L 40.3 11/7/2018 Uranium-238 39.8 ug/L 42.6 Mean 68.6 Maximum 15.3 Standard Deviation ()
73.1 Mean + 2 Page 2 of 2