ML072410434: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
| issue date = 08/08/2000 | | issue date = 08/08/2000 | ||
| title = Jersey Central Power & Light Company (Jcp&L). 2003. Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Groundwater Assessment/Remediation Activities Semi-Annual Report, January-June 2002 for Isra Case No. 99575 | | title = Jersey Central Power & Light Company (Jcp&L). 2003. Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Groundwater Assessment/Remediation Activities Semi-Annual Report, January-June 2002 for Isra Case No. 99575 | ||
| author name = Downey T | | author name = Downey T | ||
| author affiliation = State of NJ, Dept of Environmental Protection | | author affiliation = State of NJ, Dept of Environmental Protection | ||
| addressee name = Roche M | | addressee name = Roche M | ||
| addressee affiliation = GPU Nuclear Corp, NRC/NRR | | addressee affiliation = GPU Nuclear Corp, NRC/NRR | ||
| docket = 05000219 | | docket = 05000219 | ||
| Line 16: | Line 16: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:Stale of Wrfu 3troq Christine Todd Whitman Department of Environmental Protection Robert C. Shinn, Jr.Governor Division of Responsible Party Site Remediation Commissioner Southern Field Office P.O. Box 407 Trenton, New Jersey 08625-0407 | {{#Wiki_filter:Stale of Wrfu 3troq Christine Todd Whitman Department of Environmental Protection Robert C. Shinn, Jr. | ||
.(609) 584-4150 (609) 584-4170-Fax 7 2000 August 8, 2000 Mr. Michael B. Roche Vice President and Director GPU Nuclear Corporation P.O. Box 388 -U.S. Route 9 Forked River, New Jersey 08731 | Governor Division of Responsible Party Site Remediation Commissioner Southern Field Office P.O. Box 407 Trenton, New Jersey 08625-0407 | ||
.(609) 584-4150 (609) 584-4170- Fax 7 2000 August 8, 2000 Mr. Michael B. Roche Vice President and Director GPU Nuclear Corporation P.O. Box 388 - U.S. Route 9 Forked River, New Jersey 08731 | |||
==Subject:== | ==Subject:== | ||
Memorandum of Agreement | Memorandum of Agreement - GPU Nuclear Corporation Route 9 South, Lacey Township, Ocean County DSPRS Case #93-06-28-1317 File #15-12-03 | ||
-GPU Nuclear Corporation Route 9 South, Lacey Township, Ocean County DSPRS Case #93-06-28-1317 | |||
==Dear Mr. Roche:== | ==Dear Mr. Roche:== | ||
A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) was entered into by you on behalf of GPU Nuclear Corporation and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (Department) on June 21, 1995 for remedial activities at the above referenced site. Due to the site triggering ISRA as a result of the sale of the property, the MOA is being terminated. | A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) was entered into by you on behalf of GPU Nuclear Corporation and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (Department) on June 21, 1995 for remedial activities at the above referenced site. Due to the site triggering ISRA as a result of the sale of the property, the MOA is being terminated. | ||
Therefore, the MOA between the Department and GPU Nuclear Corporation dated June 21, 1995 is Hereby Tererminated. | Therefore, the MOA between the Department and GPU Nuclear Corporation dated June 21, 1995 is Hereby Tererminated. and Departmental oversight will be conducted by the Bureau of | ||
and Departmental oversight will be conducted by the Bureau of-Environimental Evaluation, Cleanup and Responsibility Assessment Section.If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at (609) 584-4150.Sincerely, Zo~sW. Down Section Chief c: File #18-08-99P Health Department Vince Krisak, CAS Matt Coeffer New | -Environimental Evaluation, Cleanup and Responsibility Assessment Section. | ||
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at (609) 584-4150. | |||
Sincerely, Zo~sW. Down Section Chief c: File #18-08-99P Health Department Vince Krisak, CAS Matt Coeffer New Jerseyis an Equal Opportunity Employer Recycled Paper | |||
OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION GROUND WATER ASSESSMENT/REMEDIATION ACTIVTIES SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT, JANUARY - JUNE 2002 FOR ISRA CASE NO. 99575 Prepared by Jersey Central Power & Light Company, A FirstEnergy Company 300 Madison Avenue Post Office Box 1911 Morristown, NJ 07962-1911 May 2003 | |||
BACKGROUND The 650 MW Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station plant is a single-unit, five-loop General Electric Boiling Water Reactor (BWR). The plant site, about 800 acres, is located within Lacey and Ocean Townships of Ocean County, New Jersey. Located approximately nine miles south of Toms River, New Jersey, the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station plant is about 50 miles east of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and 60 miles south of Newark, New Jersey.Oyster Creek is owned and operated by Amergen Inc. Specific environmental obligations pursuant to the June 1995 New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP)Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between NJDEP and GPU Nuclear Corporation, currently GPU Energy, are continuing to be fulfilled by Jersey Central Power & Light Company, a FirstEnergy Company (JCP&L). This work and NJDEP oversight received NJDEP case number 93-06-28-1317-29. | |||
The NJDEP terminated the MOA via letter dated August 8, 2000 due to the site triggering ISRA as a result of the sale of the property. | TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Facility B ackground ........................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Summary of Groundwater Treatment/Monitoring Activities .......................................... 2 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Location of OCNGS Injection and Fuel Oil Recovery Wells in Relation to the Fuel Oil Plume Figure 2 Schematic of Groundwater Flow in the Cohansey and Cape May Aquifers Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Forked River, New Jersey Figure 3 Water Table Surface of The Cape May Formation (Feet Above Mean Sea Level - February 22, 2002) | ||
The NJDEP advised in the letter that oversight by the NJDEP will be conducted by the NJDEP's Bureau of Environmental Evaluation, Cleanup and Responsibility Assessment (BEECRA) Section. The NJDEP assigned ISRA Case No. 99575 to this project. Groundwater treatment effluent is discharged under Ocean County Utilities Authority (OCUA) Industrial Discharge Permit #C-13-1991-030. | Figure 4 Water Table Surface of The Cape May Formation (Feet Above Mean Sea Level - April 9, 2002) | ||
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Forked River, New Jersey | Figure 5 Floating Product Isopleth Map (April 9, 2002) | ||
Figure 6 Location of Monitoring Wells Used for Semi-Annual Groundwater Analysis Figure 7 Monitoring Well Semi-Annual Ground Water Sampling Analytical Data (Compounds Detected Above NJDEP GWQS) | |||
Figure 8 Volume of Groundwater Treated and Fuel Oil Recovered LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Quarterly Monitor Well Data Report and Inspection Log - February 22, 2002 Table 2 Quarterly Monitor Well Data Report and Inspection Log - April 9, 2002 Table 3 Potable Water and Potable Water Treatment System Backwash Injection Summary Table 4 Groundwater Analysis Data Summary, May 9, 2002 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A May 9, 2002 Monitoring Well Sampling Analytical Data Package Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Forked River, New Jersey | |||
1.0 FACILITY BACKGROUND The 650 MW Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station plant is a single-unit, five-loop General Electric Boiling Water Reactor (BWR). The plant site, about 800 acres, is located within Lacey and Ocean Townships of Ocean County, New Jersey. Located approximately nine miles south of Toms River, New Jersey, the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station plant is about 50 miles east of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and 60 miles south of Newark, New Jersey. | |||
Oyster Creek is owned and operated by Amergen Inc. Specific environmental obligations pursuant to the June 1995 New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP) | |||
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between NJDEP and GPU Nuclear Corporation, currently GPU Energy, are continuing to be fulfilled by Jersey Central Power & Light Company, a FirstEnergy Company (JCP&L). This work and NJDEP oversight received NJDEP case number 93-06-28-1317-29. The NJDEP terminated the MOA via letter dated August 8, 2000 due to the site triggering ISRA as a result of the sale of the property. The NJDEP advised in the letter that oversight by the NJDEP will be conducted by the NJDEP's Bureau of Environmental Evaluation, Cleanup and Responsibility Assessment (BEECRA) Section. The NJDEP assigned ISRA Case No. 99575 to this project. Groundwater treatment effluent is discharged under Ocean County Utilities Authority (OCUA) Industrial Discharge Permit #C-13-1991-030. | |||
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 1 Forked River, New Jersey | |||
2.0 | |||
==SUMMARY== | ==SUMMARY== | ||
OF GROUNDWATER TREATMENT/MONITORING ACTIVITIES In 1995 a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) and associated Remedial Action Workplan (RAW) replaced NJPDES permit #NJ0076147 as the documentation specifying the monitoring and reporting requirements for the remediation of the fuel oil and chlorinated solvent contamination of the soil and groundwater at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (OCNGS). This document is the 1 4 th semi-annual report, covering the period of January through June 2002. The NJDEP terminated the MOA via letter dated August 8, 2000 due to the site triggering ISRA as a result of the sale of the property. | OF GROUNDWATER TREATMENT/MONITORING ACTIVITIES In 1995 a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) and associated Remedial Action Workplan (RAW) replaced NJPDES permit #NJ0076147 as the documentation specifying the monitoring and reporting requirements for the remediation of the fuel oil and chlorinated solvent contamination of the soil and groundwater at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (OCNGS). This document is the 1 4 th semi-annual report, covering the period of January through June 2002. The NJDEP terminated the MOA via letter dated August 8, 2000 due to the site triggering ISRA as a result of the sale of the property. The NJDEP advised in the letter that oversight by the NJDEP will be conducted by the NJDEP's BEECRA Section. ISRA Case No. | ||
The NJDEP advised in the letter that oversight by the NJDEP will be conducted by the NJDEP's BEECRA Section. ISRA Case No.99575 was assigned to the project by the NJDEP.In October 1986 a small hole (1/8" x 1/4") in a No. 2 diesel fuel transfer line was discovered beneath a storage building at the OCNGS. The hole in the pressurized line resulted in the introduction of an estimated 15,000 gallons of diesel fuel into the soil and ground water. Soil and ground water contamination are confined to a relatively small area of the OCNGS site, north and east of the Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) Building (Figure 1). The contamination appears to be limited to the upper Cape May formation and does not present a threat to the on-site or off-site drinking water wells. A clay layer up to 15 feet thick separates the Cape May formation from the lower Cohansey formation throughout most of the site. Major exceptions include those areas around the Turbine and Reactor Buildings where the clay layer was breached during foundation construction (Figure 2).Injection of potable water into wells located between the Turbine Building foundation breach and the remediation project area prohibits migration of contaminated ground water to the underlying Cohansey Aquifer. The locations of the injection points are depicted on Figure 1.The injection effort creates a hydraulic barrier to the flow of shallow ground water in the Cape May Aquifer, directing it away from any potential mixing with the Cohansey Aquifer. Ground water contour maps for the Cape May aquifer wells were prepared based on water table elevation data for February and April 2002. These data are summarized in Tables 1 and 2.Figures 3 and 4 depict the orientation and magnitude of hydraulic gradient for the February and April 2002 quarterly ground water elevation monitoring episodes. | 99575 was assigned to the project by the NJDEP. | ||
These maps depict the effectiveness of the ground water injection activities in redirecting ground water flow.Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 2 Forked River, New Jersey Specifically, the maps illustrate a hydraulic mound at the injection area. This mounding deflects groundwater flow away from the foundation breach and toward the remediation area.In addition to ground water injection in the area between the Turbine Building foundation breach and the remediation project, injection also occurs along the southern edge of the contaminant plume. In order to prevent southerly migration of the plume, the potable water treatment system sand filter backwash is discharged to the area south of the Machine Shop (Figure 1).Table 3 provides a summary of the potable water and sand filter backwash injection quantities. | In October 1986 a small hole (1/8" x 1/4") in a No. 2 diesel fuel transfer line was discovered beneath a storage building at the OCNGS. The hole in the pressurized line resulted in the introduction of an estimated 15,000 gallons of diesel fuel into the soil and ground water. Soil and ground water contamination are confined to a relatively small area of the OCNGS site, north and east of the Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) Building (Figure 1). The contamination appears to be limited to the upper Cape May formation and does not present a threat to the on-site or off-site drinking water wells. A clay layer up to 15 feet thick separates the Cape May formation from the lower Cohansey formation throughout most of the site. Major exceptions include those areas around the Turbine and Reactor Buildings where the clay layer was breached during foundation construction (Figure 2). | ||
Measurable free-phase product was not detected in any of the onsite wells during the February 22, 2002 quarterly ground water elevation monitoring episode. Measurable free-phase product was detected in ground water monitoring wells OW-1, OW-3, OW-4, W-18, W-26, W-27, and W-31 during the April 9, 2002 water table elevation monitoring event. Figure 5 depicts the floating product isopleth map for the April 9, 2002 water table elevation monitoring event Figure 6 depicts the locations of the ground water monitoring wells included in the semi-annual ground water sampling program. Some modification to the wells included in the sampling program occurred in response to NJDEP's August 21, 2000 correspondence. | Injection of potable water into wells located between the Turbine Building foundation breach and the remediation project area prohibits migration of contaminated ground water to the underlying Cohansey Aquifer. The locations of the injection points are depicted on Figure 1. | ||
Specifically, in its letter, NJDEP required sampling from the contaminant plume area. Accordingly, during the May 2002 sampling event, a sample was obtained from well OW-5 and submitted for laboratory analysis. | The injection effort creates a hydraulic barrier to the flow of shallow ground water in the Cape May Aquifer, directing it away from any potential mixing with the Cohansey Aquifer. Ground water contour maps for the Cape May aquifer wells were prepared based on water table elevation data for February and April 2002. These data are summarized in Tables 1 and 2. | ||
The laboratory analytical results of the May 2002 semi-annual groundwater sampling event are summarized in Table 4; contaminant concentrations exceeding NJDEP Ground Water Quality Standards (GWQS) are plotted on Figure 7. Decreases in Tetrachloroethene concentrations from the levels observed during the December 3, 2001 sampling event were observed in W-21, W-24, W-25, W-30, and W-34. Increases in the Tetrachloroethene concentrations from the levels observed during the December 3, 2001 sampling event were observed in W-3 and W-32, with W-7 remaining the same. Trichloroethene was observed in only W-34 and was a decrease in the concentration that was observed during the December 3, 2001 sampling event. Benzene concentrations decreased in W-30 and W-21 from those that were observed during the December 3, 2001 sampling event. The benzene concentrations in OW-5 and W-24 showed slight increases over those observed during the December 3, 2001 sampling event, but remained below the Ground Water Quality Standards. | Figures 3 and 4 depict the orientation and magnitude of hydraulic gradient for the February and April 2002 quarterly ground water elevation monitoring episodes. These maps depict the effectiveness of the ground water injection activities in redirecting ground water flow. | ||
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 3 Forked River, New Jersey Central to the remediation task was the continuous operation of a dewatering well network and package treatment plant. The 12-well dewatering system pumps ground water/product to the treatment plant which discharges to the local sanitary sewer. Startup of the plant in June 1994 was followed by full time operation in February 1995. Prior to the dewatering system operation, only one of the de-watering wells contained any fuel oil. Subsequent dewatering activities have drawn fuel oil into the dewatering wells, and have recovered 4,871 gallons of fuel oil.For the period of January through June 2002, remediation activities resulted in the treatment of 46,555 gallons of water. Fuel oil recovery for the period totaled 63.9 gallons. A summary of water volume processed through the treatment system and quantity of fuel oil recovered is indicated in Figure 8.Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Forked River, New Jersey | Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 2 Forked River, New Jersey | ||
I Ground Water Row Within Cohansey Aquifer o iOO 200 Figure 2 11 %N NJDEP ISRA Case Number 99575 Horizontal Scale: 1. = 100' Schematic of Ground Water Flow In Vertical Scale: As Shown The Cohansey and Cape May Aquifers Jersey Central Power & Light Company, Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station A FirstEnergy Company Noodward-Clyde Consultants (14 January 1991) Forked River, New Jersey Turbine Generator W-25 Legend: FIGURE 3 G Cape May monitor well -shallow (20')M deep potable water supply well A injection well/v water table surface (feet) | |||
no data W-19 23.32 ..... Well inaccessible (equipment storage); | Specifically, the maps illustrate a hydraulic mound at the injection area. This mounding deflects groundwater flow away from the foundation breach and toward the remediation area. | ||
no data W-20 23.24 -.... Well inaccessible (buried under crushed stone); no data W-21 23.76 18.31 5.45 ....W-22 23.39 --Well inaccessible (equipment storage); | In addition to ground water injection in the area between the Turbine Building foundation breach and the remediation project, injection also occurs along the southern edge of the contaminant plume. In order to prevent southerly migration of the plume, the potable water treatment system sand filter backwash is discharged to the area south of the Machine Shop (Figure 1). | ||
no data W-23 22.99 18.36 4.63 ...W-24 22.86 --Well inaccessible (equipment storage); | Table 3 provides a summary of the potable water and sand filter backwash injection quantities. | ||
no data W-25 23.39 18.25 5.14 .....W-26 23.11 -- - | Measurable free-phase product was not detected in any of the onsite wells during the February 22, 2002 quarterly ground water elevation monitoring episode. Measurable free-phase product was detected in ground water monitoring wells OW-1, OW-3, OW-4, W-18, W-26, W-27, and W-31 during the April 9, 2002 water table elevation monitoring event. Figure 5 depicts the floating product isopleth map for the April 9, 2002 water table elevation monitoring event Figure 6 depicts the locations of the ground water monitoring wells included in the semi-annual ground water sampling program. Some modification to the wells included in the sampling program occurred in response to NJDEP's August 21, 2000 correspondence. Specifically, in its letter, NJDEP required sampling from the contaminant plume area. Accordingly, during the May 2002 sampling event, a sample was obtained from well OW-5 and submitted for laboratory analysis. The laboratory analytical results of the May 2002 semi-annual groundwater sampling event are summarized in Table 4; contaminant concentrations exceeding NJDEP Ground Water Quality Standards (GWQS) are plotted on Figure 7. Decreases in Tetrachloroethene concentrations from the levels observed during the December 3, 2001 sampling event were observed in W-21, W-24, W-25, W-30, and W-34. Increases in the Tetrachloroethene concentrations from the levels observed during the December 3, 2001 sampling event were observed in W-3 and W-32, with W-7 remaining the same. Trichloroethene was observed in only W-34 and was a decrease in the concentration that was observed during the December 3, 2001 sampling event. Benzene concentrations decreased in W-30 and W-21 from those that were observed during the December 3, 2001 sampling event. The benzene concentrations in OW-5 and W-24 showed slight increases over those observed during the December 3, 2001 sampling event, but remained below the Ground Water Quality Standards. | ||
no data W-27 23.17 --No measurable ground water in well; no data W-28 23.20 18.35 4.85 ......W-29 23.22 19.51 3.71 .....W-30 24.40 18.20 6.20 ....W-31 23.94 18.95 4.99 -..W-32 23.50 18.14 5.36 -...W -33 24.23 18.84 5.39 -....W-34 23.13 19.21 3.92 -...[a]Water table elevation corrected for presence of floating product (diesel fuel) per following formula: hc h +[tfp* SG]where: hc corrected ground water elevation (feet)h = measured ground water elevation (feet)tfp = free product thickness SG = specific gravity of free product (0.84 g/cc assumed for diesel fuel) | Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 3 Forked River, New Jersey | ||
TABLE 2 OYSTER CREEK GENERATING STATION -QUARTERLY MONITOR WELL DATA REPORT AND INSPECTION LOG -APRIL 9, 2002 Reference Depth to Water Water Elevation Depth to Floating Product Product Well Number Elevation (feet) (feet) Floating Thickness Remarks (feet) Product (feet) Elevation (feet) [a] (inches)OW-1 23.21 16.83. 6.38 16.73 6.46 0.10 OW-2 23.15 -----Well Inaccessible (buried under crushed stone); no data OW-3 22.88 16.85 6.03 16.24 6.54 0.61 OW-4 23.19 16.70 6.49 16.63 6.55 0.07 OW-5 22.90 16.71 6.19 -.W-2 22.72 19.64 3.08 ...W-3 20.55 17.00 3.55 ....W-4 20.55 17.57 2.98 ....W-7 23.36 15.96 7.40 --.W-18 23.43 16.95 6.48 16.25 7.07 0.70 W-19 23.32 16.26 7.06 --.W-20 23.24 -Well inaccessible (buried under crushed stone); no data W-21 23.76 17.83 5.93 ...W-22 23.39. ---Well inaccessible (equipment storage); | |||
no data W-23 22.99 18.78 4.21 --.W-24 22.86 15.79 7.07 --W-25 23.39 15.64 7.75 -- | Central to the remediation task was the continuous operation of a dewatering well network and package treatment plant. The 12-well dewatering system pumps ground water/product to the treatment plant which discharges to the local sanitary sewer. Startup of the plant in June 1994 was followed by full time operation in February 1995. Prior to the dewatering system operation, only one of the de-watering wells contained any fuel oil. Subsequent dewatering activities have drawn fuel oil into the dewatering wells, and have recovered 4,871 gallons of fuel oil. | ||
Table 3 Gallons of water delivered each month into the Cape May aquifer by backwash along the south edge and by injection along the north edge of the fuel oil plume at OCNGS from January 2002 through June 2002.Month Iniected Backwash Total January 8,598 6,500 15,098 February 7,766 6,500 14,266 March 16,704 6,500 23,204 April 8,083 6,500 14,583 May 1 22,2091 650 28,709 June 24,858 6,5001 31,358 Table 4 Concentration (ppb) of the contaminants detected In monitoring wells at OCNGS during May 2002 Parameter | For the period of January through June 2002, remediation activities resulted in the treatment of 46,555 gallons of water. Fuel oil recovery for the period totaled 63.9 gallons. A summary of water volume processed through the treatment system and quantity of fuel oil recovered is indicated in Figure 8. | ||
[fe 5 < 0.8 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.8 < 0.4 < 0.4 Chrysene [e] 5 <1.0 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.6 <0.5 <1.0 <0.5 <0.5 bis (2-Ethyihexyl) phthalate 30 16.0 B [d] 1.4 B 3.6 B 1.2 B 1.1 B 1.9 B 0.9 B 2.3 B 1.5 B 2.6 B Di-n-octylphthalate 100 0.5 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.3 < 0.1 < 0.1 Benzo (b) fluoranthene | Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 4 Forked River, New Jersey | ||
[e] 5 0.6 <.0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 1.0 < 0.3 < 0.5 < 0.3 < 0.3 Benzo (k) fluoranthene (e] 5 < 1.6 < 0.8 < 0.8 < 0.8 < 0.8 < 0.9 < 0.8 < 1.6 < 0.8 < 0.8 Benzo (a) pyrene [e] 5 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 0.5 < 0.2 < 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.2 Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene [e] 5 < 0.3 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.7 < 0.1 < 0.3 < 0.1 < 0.1 Dibenz (a,h) anthracene | |||
[e] 5 < 1.3 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.7 < 0.6 < 1.3 < 0.6 < 0.6 Benzo (g,h,I) perylene [el 5 < 0.7 < 0.41 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 0.7 < 0.4 < 0.7 < 0.4 < 0.4 Semi VOA TIC's 1,483 8.3 3,862 9.5 Notes:[a] New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Ground Water Quality Standards (GWQS; promulgated February 1993)[b] Method detection limit listed for compounds listed as not detected (ND) in laboratory analytical data package[c] Tentatively Identified Compounds (d] Detected compounds with "B" qualifier indicates analyte was found in the laboratory blank as well as the sample, indicating possible laboratory contamination. | FIGURES Turbine Building Legend: | ||
[e] Interim Generic Ground Water Quality Criteria for Synthetic Organic Compounds[9] Well W-7 identified as MW-7 in analytical laboratory data package Compounds detected at concentrations exceeding NJDEP GWQS shown in shaded cells 26.0. | FIGURE 1 0 recovery well | ||
* Cape May monitor well - shallow (20') | |||
* deep potable water supply well GPU ENERGY | |||
* Injection well Location of Oyster Creek | |||
[* location of fuel oil beneath soil surface Nuclear Generating Station backwash Injection" Injection and Fuel Oil Recovery Wells in Relation 50 0 50 Feet to the Fuel Oil Plume | |||
Elevation (ft. above MSL) Elevation (ft. above MSL) 25.00 25.00-- | |||
W-3 W-4 W-7 Ground Surface W-24 IJ-5 20.00 -- | |||
15.00-- | |||
10.00 DISCHARGE CANAL 5.00 0.00 | |||
-5.00 - | |||
-10.00j_ COHANSEY AQUIFER Maximum Thickness of Cohansey Aquifer Approximately 250 feetl -- ..... | |||
LEGEND' Ground Water Flow Within Cape May Aquifer | |||
.............................. I Ground Water Row Within Cohansey Aquifer o iOO 200 Figure 2 11 %N NJDEP ISRA Case Number 99575 Horizontal Scale: 1. = 100' Schematic of Ground Water Flow In Vertical Scale: As Shown The Cohansey and Cape May Aquifers Jersey Central Power & Light Company, Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station A FirstEnergy Company Noodward-Clyde Consultants (14 January 1991) Forked River, New Jersey | |||
Turbine Generator W-25 Legend: FIGURE 3 G Cape May monitor well - shallow (20') | |||
M deep potable water supply well GPU ENERGY A injection well Water Table Surface of | |||
/v water table surface (feet) the Cape May Formation (feet above mean sea level) so 0 so 100 Feet 60 0 50 100 Foot February 22, 2002 | |||
Turbine Generator Discharge Canal Legend: FIGURE 4 0 Cape May monitor well - shallow (20') | |||
0 deep potable water supply well GPU ENERGY A. injection well Water Table Surface of 1v water table surface (feet) the Cape May Formation (feet above mean sea level) 100 Feet April 9, 2002 0I | |||
Turbine Generator Discharge Canal Legend: FIGURE 5 E Cape May monitor well - shallow (20') | |||
N deep potable water supply well GPU ENERGY | |||
/,./ floating product isopleth (feet) ao product thickness (feet) Floating Product Isopleth Map so 0 50 100 Feet Pý Fý April 9, 2002 | |||
A 3 | |||
(J~ Turbine 0 | |||
Generator 30 3 | |||
0 W-7 Legend: FIGURE 6 e Cape May monitor well - shallow (20') | |||
* Cohansey monitor well - deep (50') GPU ENERGY 0 deep potable water supply well Location of Monitoring Wells Used for Semi-Annual Groundwater Sampling 50 i, | |||
0 50 Feet | |||
=n and Chemical Analyses | |||
Turbine Generator 0 | |||
00 W-30 Diesel Building W-21 t | |||
F79W-32 SWater | |||
*.Supply Well Legend: | |||
G Cape May monitor well - shallow (20') | |||
FIGURE 7 | |||
* Cohansey monitor well - deep (50') | |||
GPU ENERGY 9 deep potable water supply well 3.2 Tetrachloroethene concentration (ug/L) Monitoring Well Semi-Annual | |||
-.2 Trichloroethene concentration (ugIL) | |||
Groundwater Sampling I Analytical Data above GWQS (ug/L) so 100 Fedt so 10 tMa May 9,,20 2002 | |||
Figure 8 Gallons of Water Treated and Oil Recovered | |||
[IGalions of Groundwater -Gallons of Fuel Oil 40,000- 35 35,000 30 30,000 25 25,000 (U | |||
20=0 20,000,, | |||
o 150 15,000 | |||
-10 10,000-5,000 5 0 i 0 qA CbA1.:ýA(P Cý) C§I CP Cp 01% qq 40, 0Iq (P qlý qq 61 ýi) (il 61 is, ZN QNý ZN Qý (SI is, | |||
'SN | |||
TABLES TABLE 1 OYSTER CREEK GENERATING STATION - QUARTERLY MONITOR WELL DATA REPORT AND INSPECTION LOG - FEBRUARY 22, 2002 Reference Depth to Product Well Number Elevation Depth to Water Water Elevation Floating Floating Product Thickness Remarks (feet) (feet) (feet) Product (feet) Elevation (feet) [a] (inches) | |||
OW-1 23.21 17.35 5.86 ... | |||
OW-2 23.15 17.30 5.85 ... | |||
OW-3 22.88 16.45 6.43 .... | |||
OW-4 23.19 17.11 6.08 ---.. | |||
OW-5 22.90 17.21 . 5.69 ..... | |||
W-2 22.72 19.30 3.42 ---.. | |||
W-3 20.55 16.91 3.64 ... | |||
W-4 20.55 17.10 3.45 ... | |||
W-7 23.36 16.95 6.41 ... | |||
W-18 23.43 - - Well inaccessible (equipment storage); no data W-19 23.32 ..... Well inaccessible (equipment storage); no data W-20 23.24 - .... Well inaccessible (buried under crushed stone); no data W-21 23.76 18.31 5.45 .... | |||
W-22 23.39 - - Well inaccessible (equipment storage); no data W-23 22.99 18.36 4.63 ... | |||
W-24 22.86 - - Well inaccessible (equipment storage); no data W-25 23.39 18.25 5.14 ..... | |||
W-26 23.11 --. - Well inaccessible (equipment storage); no data W-27 23.17 - - No measurable ground water in well; no data W-28 23.20 18.35 4.85 ...... | |||
W-29 23.22 19.51 3.71 ..... | |||
W-30 24.40 18.20 6.20 .... | |||
W-31 23.94 18.95 4.99 -.. | |||
W-32 23.50 18.14 5.36 -... | |||
W -33 24.23 18.84 5.39 -.... | |||
W-34 23.13 19.21 3.92 -... | |||
[a] Water table elevation corrected for presence of floating product (diesel fuel) per following formula: | |||
hc h +[tfp* SG] | |||
where: hc corrected ground water elevation (feet) h = measured ground water elevation (feet) tfp = free product thickness SG = specific gravity of free product (0.84 g/cc assumed for diesel fuel) | |||
TABLE 2 OYSTER CREEK GENERATING STATION - QUARTERLY MONITOR WELL DATA REPORT AND INSPECTION LOG - APRIL 9, 2002 Reference Depth to Water Water Elevation Depth to Floating Product Product Well Number Elevation (feet) (feet) Floating Thickness Remarks (feet) Product (feet) Elevation (feet) [a] (inches) | |||
OW-1 23.21 16.83. 6.38 16.73 6.46 0.10 OW-2 23.15 - - - - - Well Inaccessible (buried under crushed stone); no data OW-3 22.88 16.85 6.03 16.24 6.54 0.61 OW-4 23.19 16.70 6.49 16.63 6.55 0.07 OW-5 22.90 16.71 6.19 - . | |||
W-2 22.72 19.64 3.08 ... | |||
W-3 20.55 17.00 3.55 .... | |||
W-4 20.55 17.57 2.98 .... | |||
W-7 23.36 15.96 7.40 - -. | |||
W-18 23.43 16.95 6.48 16.25 7.07 0.70 W-19 23.32 16.26 7.06 - -. | |||
W-20 23.24 - Well inaccessible (buried under crushed stone); no data W-21 23.76 17.83 5.93 ... | |||
W-22 23.39. - - - Well inaccessible (equipment storage); no data W-23 22.99 18.78 4.21 - -. | |||
W-24 22.86 15.79 7.07 - - | |||
W-25 23.39 15.64 7.75 - . - | |||
W-26 23.11 16.35 6.76 16.00 7.05 0.35 W-27 23.17 16.15 7.02 16.05 7.10 0.10 -- | |||
W-28 23.20 18.00 5.20 - . - | |||
W-29 23.22 - - No measurable ground water in well; no data W-30 24.40 17.87 6.53 -- - -- | |||
W-31 23.94 18.62 5.32 18.54 5.39 0.08 W-32 23.50 17.58 5.92 - - -- | |||
W-33 24.23 18.36 5.87 .... | |||
W-34 23.13 19.01 4.12 . | |||
[a] Water table elevation corrected for presence of floating product (diesel fuel) per following formula: | |||
hc h + [tfp*SG] | |||
where: hc = corrected ground water elevation (feet) h = measured ground water elevation (feet) tfp = free product thickness SG = specific gravity of free product (0.84 g/cc assumed for diesel fuel) | |||
Table 3 Gallons of water delivered each month into the Cape May aquifer by backwash along the south edge and by injection along the north edge of the fuel oil plume at OCNGS from January 2002 through June 2002. | |||
Month Iniected Backwash Total January 8,598 6,500 15,098 February 7,766 6,500 14,266 March 16,704 6,500 23,204 April 8,083 6,500 14,583 May 1 22,2091 650 28,709 June 24,858 6,5001 31,358 | |||
Table 4 Concentration (ppb) of the contaminants detected In monitoring wells at OCNGS during May 2002 Parameter GGWQS NJDEP[a]IIIIIIIIIOW-5 W-3 W-7 [f] W-21 W-22 W-24 W-25 W-30 W-32 W-34 Volatile Organic Compounds 1,1-Dichloroethane 50 < 0.3 [b] < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 0.4 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 70 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 5.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 0.7 < 0.3 5.7 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 30 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 0.7 < 0.3 < 0.3 0.5 < 0.3 Trichloroethene 1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 <0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 .!.. 4.4-Benzene 1 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 0.6 < 0.3 0.5 < 0.3 < 0.3 Tetrachloroethene 1 0.3 1 . 260 5'. < 0.2 4187-- .9 &8 71 Toluene 1,000 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2, < 0.2 Ethylbenzene 700 0.4 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.21 < 0.2 Xylenes 1,000 1.7 <.0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 VOA TIC's [c] 222 1 1 1 8.2 124 Semi-Volatile Organic Cormounds Naphthalene 300 < 1.3 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 0.8 < 0.6 < 1.3 < 0.6 < 0.6 Acenaphthene 400 2.0 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 1.2 < 0.6 < 0.6 Diethylphthalate 5,000 < 0.9 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.5 < 0.4 < 0.9 < 0.4 < 0.4 Fluorene 300 1.4 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.7 < 0.6 < 1.2 < 0.6 < 0.6 Phenanthrene (e] 100 4.1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 0.6 < 0.5 1.9 < 0.5 < 0.5 Anthracene 2,000 3.5 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.5 < 0.4 2.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 Di-n-butylphthalate 900 < 0.8 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.5 < 0.4 < 0.8 < 0.4 < 0.4 Fluoranthene 300 2.0 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 1.3 < 0.4 1.0 < 0.4 < 0.4 Pyrene 200 3.1 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 0.9 < 0.4 2.1 < 0.4 < 0.4 Butylbenzylphthalate 100 < 0.8 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0:8 < 0.4 < 0.4 Benzo (a) anthracene [fe 5 < 0.8 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.8 < 0.4 < 0.4 Chrysene [e] 5 <1.0 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.6 <0.5 <1.0 <0.5 <0.5 bis (2-Ethyihexyl) phthalate 30 16.0 B [d] 1.4 B 3.6 B 1.2 B 1.1 B 1.9 B 0.9 B 2.3 B 1.5 B 2.6 B Di-n-octylphthalate 100 0.5 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.3 < 0.1 < 0.1 Benzo (b) fluoranthene [e] 5 0.6 <.0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 1.0 < 0.3 < 0.5 < 0.3 < 0.3 Benzo (k) fluoranthene (e] 5 < 1.6 < 0.8 < 0.8 < 0.8 < 0.8 < 0.9 < 0.8 < 1.6 < 0.8 < 0.8 Benzo (a) pyrene [e] 5 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 0.5 < 0.2 < 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.2 Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene [e] 5 < 0.3 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.7 < 0.1 < 0.3 < 0.1 < 0.1 Dibenz (a,h) anthracene [e] 5 < 1.3 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.7 < 0.6 < 1.3 < 0.6 < 0.6 Benzo (g,h,I) perylene [el 5 < 0.7 < 0.41 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 0.7 < 0.4 < 0.7 < 0.4 < 0.4 Semi VOA TIC's 1,483 8.3 3,862 9.5 Notes: | |||
[a] New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Ground Water Quality Standards (GWQS; promulgated February 1993) | |||
[b] Method detection limit listed for compounds listed as not detected (ND) in laboratory analytical data package | |||
[c] Tentatively Identified Compounds (d] Detected compounds with "B"qualifier indicates analyte was found in the laboratory blank as well as the sample, indicating possible laboratory contamination. | |||
[e] Interim Generic Ground Water Quality Criteria for Synthetic Organic Compounds | |||
[9] Well W-7 identified as MW-7 in analytical laboratory data package Compounds detected at concentrations exceeding NJDEP GWQS shown in shaded cells 26.0. | |||
APPENDIX A May 9, 2002 Semi-Annual Monitoring Well Volatile and Semi-Volatile Organic Analysis, QA/QC Report and Electronic Deliverable Format}} | APPENDIX A May 9, 2002 Semi-Annual Monitoring Well Volatile and Semi-Volatile Organic Analysis, QA/QC Report and Electronic Deliverable Format}} | ||
Latest revision as of 03:08, 23 November 2019
| ML072410434 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 08/08/2000 |
| From: | Downey T State of NJ, Dept of Environmental Protection |
| To: | Roche M GPU Nuclear Corp, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Davis J NRR/DLR/REBB, 415-3835 | |
| References | |
| 15-12-03, 93-06-28-1317-29, 99575 | |
| Download: ML072410434 (22) | |
Text
Stale of Wrfu 3troq Christine Todd Whitman Department of Environmental Protection Robert C. Shinn, Jr.
Governor Division of Responsible Party Site Remediation Commissioner Southern Field Office P.O. Box 407 Trenton, New Jersey 08625-0407
.(609) 584-4150 (609) 584-4170- Fax 7 2000 August 8, 2000 Mr. Michael B. Roche Vice President and Director GPU Nuclear Corporation P.O. Box 388 - U.S. Route 9 Forked River, New Jersey 08731
Subject:
Memorandum of Agreement - GPU Nuclear Corporation Route 9 South, Lacey Township, Ocean County DSPRS Case #93-06-28-1317 File #15-12-03
Dear Mr. Roche:
A Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) was entered into by you on behalf of GPU Nuclear Corporation and the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (Department) on June 21, 1995 for remedial activities at the above referenced site. Due to the site triggering ISRA as a result of the sale of the property, the MOA is being terminated.
Therefore, the MOA between the Department and GPU Nuclear Corporation dated June 21, 1995 is Hereby Tererminated. and Departmental oversight will be conducted by the Bureau of
-Environimental Evaluation, Cleanup and Responsibility Assessment Section.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact me at (609) 584-4150.
Sincerely, Zo~sW. Down Section Chief c: File #18-08-99P Health Department Vince Krisak, CAS Matt Coeffer New Jerseyis an Equal Opportunity Employer Recycled Paper
OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION GROUND WATER ASSESSMENT/REMEDIATION ACTIVTIES SEMI-ANNUAL REPORT, JANUARY - JUNE 2002 FOR ISRA CASE NO. 99575 Prepared by Jersey Central Power & Light Company, A FirstEnergy Company 300 Madison Avenue Post Office Box 1911 Morristown, NJ 07962-1911 May 2003
TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 Facility B ackground ........................................................................................................... 1 2.0 Summary of Groundwater Treatment/Monitoring Activities .......................................... 2 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Location of OCNGS Injection and Fuel Oil Recovery Wells in Relation to the Fuel Oil Plume Figure 2 Schematic of Groundwater Flow in the Cohansey and Cape May Aquifers Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Forked River, New Jersey Figure 3 Water Table Surface of The Cape May Formation (Feet Above Mean Sea Level - February 22, 2002)
Figure 4 Water Table Surface of The Cape May Formation (Feet Above Mean Sea Level - April 9, 2002)
Figure 5 Floating Product Isopleth Map (April 9, 2002)
Figure 6 Location of Monitoring Wells Used for Semi-Annual Groundwater Analysis Figure 7 Monitoring Well Semi-Annual Ground Water Sampling Analytical Data (Compounds Detected Above NJDEP GWQS)
Figure 8 Volume of Groundwater Treated and Fuel Oil Recovered LIST OF TABLES Table 1 Quarterly Monitor Well Data Report and Inspection Log - February 22, 2002 Table 2 Quarterly Monitor Well Data Report and Inspection Log - April 9, 2002 Table 3 Potable Water and Potable Water Treatment System Backwash Injection Summary Table 4 Groundwater Analysis Data Summary, May 9, 2002 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A May 9, 2002 Monitoring Well Sampling Analytical Data Package Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Forked River, New Jersey
1.0 FACILITY BACKGROUND The 650 MW Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station plant is a single-unit, five-loop General Electric Boiling Water Reactor (BWR). The plant site, about 800 acres, is located within Lacey and Ocean Townships of Ocean County, New Jersey. Located approximately nine miles south of Toms River, New Jersey, the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station plant is about 50 miles east of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and 60 miles south of Newark, New Jersey.
Oyster Creek is owned and operated by Amergen Inc. Specific environmental obligations pursuant to the June 1995 New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP)
Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between NJDEP and GPU Nuclear Corporation, currently GPU Energy, are continuing to be fulfilled by Jersey Central Power & Light Company, a FirstEnergy Company (JCP&L). This work and NJDEP oversight received NJDEP case number 93-06-28-1317-29. The NJDEP terminated the MOA via letter dated August 8, 2000 due to the site triggering ISRA as a result of the sale of the property. The NJDEP advised in the letter that oversight by the NJDEP will be conducted by the NJDEP's Bureau of Environmental Evaluation, Cleanup and Responsibility Assessment (BEECRA) Section. The NJDEP assigned ISRA Case No. 99575 to this project. Groundwater treatment effluent is discharged under Ocean County Utilities Authority (OCUA) Industrial Discharge Permit #C-13-1991-030.
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 1 Forked River, New Jersey
2.0
SUMMARY
OF GROUNDWATER TREATMENT/MONITORING ACTIVITIES In 1995 a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) and associated Remedial Action Workplan (RAW) replaced NJPDES permit #NJ0076147 as the documentation specifying the monitoring and reporting requirements for the remediation of the fuel oil and chlorinated solvent contamination of the soil and groundwater at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (OCNGS). This document is the 1 4 th semi-annual report, covering the period of January through June 2002. The NJDEP terminated the MOA via letter dated August 8, 2000 due to the site triggering ISRA as a result of the sale of the property. The NJDEP advised in the letter that oversight by the NJDEP will be conducted by the NJDEP's BEECRA Section. ISRA Case No.
99575 was assigned to the project by the NJDEP.
In October 1986 a small hole (1/8" x 1/4") in a No. 2 diesel fuel transfer line was discovered beneath a storage building at the OCNGS. The hole in the pressurized line resulted in the introduction of an estimated 15,000 gallons of diesel fuel into the soil and ground water. Soil and ground water contamination are confined to a relatively small area of the OCNGS site, north and east of the Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) Building (Figure 1). The contamination appears to be limited to the upper Cape May formation and does not present a threat to the on-site or off-site drinking water wells. A clay layer up to 15 feet thick separates the Cape May formation from the lower Cohansey formation throughout most of the site. Major exceptions include those areas around the Turbine and Reactor Buildings where the clay layer was breached during foundation construction (Figure 2).
Injection of potable water into wells located between the Turbine Building foundation breach and the remediation project area prohibits migration of contaminated ground water to the underlying Cohansey Aquifer. The locations of the injection points are depicted on Figure 1.
The injection effort creates a hydraulic barrier to the flow of shallow ground water in the Cape May Aquifer, directing it away from any potential mixing with the Cohansey Aquifer. Ground water contour maps for the Cape May aquifer wells were prepared based on water table elevation data for February and April 2002. These data are summarized in Tables 1 and 2.
Figures 3 and 4 depict the orientation and magnitude of hydraulic gradient for the February and April 2002 quarterly ground water elevation monitoring episodes. These maps depict the effectiveness of the ground water injection activities in redirecting ground water flow.
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 2 Forked River, New Jersey
Specifically, the maps illustrate a hydraulic mound at the injection area. This mounding deflects groundwater flow away from the foundation breach and toward the remediation area.
In addition to ground water injection in the area between the Turbine Building foundation breach and the remediation project, injection also occurs along the southern edge of the contaminant plume. In order to prevent southerly migration of the plume, the potable water treatment system sand filter backwash is discharged to the area south of the Machine Shop (Figure 1).
Table 3 provides a summary of the potable water and sand filter backwash injection quantities.
Measurable free-phase product was not detected in any of the onsite wells during the February 22, 2002 quarterly ground water elevation monitoring episode. Measurable free-phase product was detected in ground water monitoring wells OW-1, OW-3, OW-4, W-18, W-26, W-27, and W-31 during the April 9, 2002 water table elevation monitoring event. Figure 5 depicts the floating product isopleth map for the April 9, 2002 water table elevation monitoring event Figure 6 depicts the locations of the ground water monitoring wells included in the semi-annual ground water sampling program. Some modification to the wells included in the sampling program occurred in response to NJDEP's August 21, 2000 correspondence. Specifically, in its letter, NJDEP required sampling from the contaminant plume area. Accordingly, during the May 2002 sampling event, a sample was obtained from well OW-5 and submitted for laboratory analysis. The laboratory analytical results of the May 2002 semi-annual groundwater sampling event are summarized in Table 4; contaminant concentrations exceeding NJDEP Ground Water Quality Standards (GWQS) are plotted on Figure 7. Decreases in Tetrachloroethene concentrations from the levels observed during the December 3, 2001 sampling event were observed in W-21, W-24, W-25, W-30, and W-34. Increases in the Tetrachloroethene concentrations from the levels observed during the December 3, 2001 sampling event were observed in W-3 and W-32, with W-7 remaining the same. Trichloroethene was observed in only W-34 and was a decrease in the concentration that was observed during the December 3, 2001 sampling event. Benzene concentrations decreased in W-30 and W-21 from those that were observed during the December 3, 2001 sampling event. The benzene concentrations in OW-5 and W-24 showed slight increases over those observed during the December 3, 2001 sampling event, but remained below the Ground Water Quality Standards.
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 3 Forked River, New Jersey
Central to the remediation task was the continuous operation of a dewatering well network and package treatment plant. The 12-well dewatering system pumps ground water/product to the treatment plant which discharges to the local sanitary sewer. Startup of the plant in June 1994 was followed by full time operation in February 1995. Prior to the dewatering system operation, only one of the de-watering wells contained any fuel oil. Subsequent dewatering activities have drawn fuel oil into the dewatering wells, and have recovered 4,871 gallons of fuel oil.
For the period of January through June 2002, remediation activities resulted in the treatment of 46,555 gallons of water. Fuel oil recovery for the period totaled 63.9 gallons. A summary of water volume processed through the treatment system and quantity of fuel oil recovered is indicated in Figure 8.
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 4 Forked River, New Jersey
FIGURES Turbine Building Legend:
FIGURE 1 0 recovery well
- Cape May monitor well - shallow (20')
- deep potable water supply well GPU ENERGY
- Injection well Location of Oyster Creek
[* location of fuel oil beneath soil surface Nuclear Generating Station backwash Injection" Injection and Fuel Oil Recovery Wells in Relation 50 0 50 Feet to the Fuel Oil Plume
Elevation (ft. above MSL) Elevation (ft. above MSL) 25.00 25.00--
W-3 W-4 W-7 Ground Surface W-24 IJ-5 20.00 --
15.00--
10.00 DISCHARGE CANAL 5.00 0.00
-5.00 -
-10.00j_ COHANSEY AQUIFER Maximum Thickness of Cohansey Aquifer Approximately 250 feetl -- .....
LEGEND' Ground Water Flow Within Cape May Aquifer
.............................. I Ground Water Row Within Cohansey Aquifer o iOO 200 Figure 2 11 %N NJDEP ISRA Case Number 99575 Horizontal Scale: 1. = 100' Schematic of Ground Water Flow In Vertical Scale: As Shown The Cohansey and Cape May Aquifers Jersey Central Power & Light Company, Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station A FirstEnergy Company Noodward-Clyde Consultants (14 January 1991) Forked River, New Jersey
Turbine Generator W-25 Legend: FIGURE 3 G Cape May monitor well - shallow (20')
M deep potable water supply well GPU ENERGY A injection well Water Table Surface of
/v water table surface (feet) the Cape May Formation (feet above mean sea level) so 0 so 100 Feet 60 0 50 100 Foot February 22, 2002
Turbine Generator Discharge Canal Legend: FIGURE 4 0 Cape May monitor well - shallow (20')
0 deep potable water supply well GPU ENERGY A. injection well Water Table Surface of 1v water table surface (feet) the Cape May Formation (feet above mean sea level) 100 Feet April 9, 2002 0I
Turbine Generator Discharge Canal Legend: FIGURE 5 E Cape May monitor well - shallow (20')
N deep potable water supply well GPU ENERGY
/,./ floating product isopleth (feet) ao product thickness (feet) Floating Product Isopleth Map so 0 50 100 Feet Pý Fý April 9, 2002
A 3
(J~ Turbine 0
Generator 30 3
0 W-7 Legend: FIGURE 6 e Cape May monitor well - shallow (20')
- Cohansey monitor well - deep (50') GPU ENERGY 0 deep potable water supply well Location of Monitoring Wells Used for Semi-Annual Groundwater Sampling 50 i,
0 50 Feet
=n and Chemical Analyses
Turbine Generator 0
00 W-30 Diesel Building W-21 t
F79W-32 SWater
- .Supply Well Legend:
G Cape May monitor well - shallow (20')
FIGURE 7
- Cohansey monitor well - deep (50')
GPU ENERGY 9 deep potable water supply well 3.2 Tetrachloroethene concentration (ug/L) Monitoring Well Semi-Annual
-.2 Trichloroethene concentration (ugIL)
Groundwater Sampling I Analytical Data above GWQS (ug/L) so 100 Fedt so 10 tMa May 9,,20 2002
Figure 8 Gallons of Water Treated and Oil Recovered
[IGalions of Groundwater -Gallons of Fuel Oil 40,000- 35 35,000 30 30,000 25 25,000 (U
20=0 20,000,,
o 150 15,000
-10 10,000-5,000 5 0 i 0 qA CbA1.:ýA(P Cý) C§I CP Cp 01% qq 40, 0Iq (P qlý qq 61 ýi) (il 61 is, ZN QNý ZN Qý (SI is,
'SN
TABLES TABLE 1 OYSTER CREEK GENERATING STATION - QUARTERLY MONITOR WELL DATA REPORT AND INSPECTION LOG - FEBRUARY 22, 2002 Reference Depth to Product Well Number Elevation Depth to Water Water Elevation Floating Floating Product Thickness Remarks (feet) (feet) (feet) Product (feet) Elevation (feet) [a] (inches)
OW-1 23.21 17.35 5.86 ...
OW-2 23.15 17.30 5.85 ...
OW-3 22.88 16.45 6.43 ....
OW-4 23.19 17.11 6.08 ---..
OW-5 22.90 17.21 . 5.69 .....
W-2 22.72 19.30 3.42 ---..
W-3 20.55 16.91 3.64 ...
W-4 20.55 17.10 3.45 ...
W-7 23.36 16.95 6.41 ...
W-18 23.43 - - Well inaccessible (equipment storage); no data W-19 23.32 ..... Well inaccessible (equipment storage); no data W-20 23.24 - .... Well inaccessible (buried under crushed stone); no data W-21 23.76 18.31 5.45 ....
W-22 23.39 - - Well inaccessible (equipment storage); no data W-23 22.99 18.36 4.63 ...
W-24 22.86 - - Well inaccessible (equipment storage); no data W-25 23.39 18.25 5.14 .....
W-26 23.11 --. - Well inaccessible (equipment storage); no data W-27 23.17 - - No measurable ground water in well; no data W-28 23.20 18.35 4.85 ......
W-29 23.22 19.51 3.71 .....
W-30 24.40 18.20 6.20 ....
W-31 23.94 18.95 4.99 -..
W-32 23.50 18.14 5.36 -...
W -33 24.23 18.84 5.39 -....
W-34 23.13 19.21 3.92 -...
[a] Water table elevation corrected for presence of floating product (diesel fuel) per following formula:
hc h +[tfp* SG]
where: hc corrected ground water elevation (feet) h = measured ground water elevation (feet) tfp = free product thickness SG = specific gravity of free product (0.84 g/cc assumed for diesel fuel)
TABLE 2 OYSTER CREEK GENERATING STATION - QUARTERLY MONITOR WELL DATA REPORT AND INSPECTION LOG - APRIL 9, 2002 Reference Depth to Water Water Elevation Depth to Floating Product Product Well Number Elevation (feet) (feet) Floating Thickness Remarks (feet) Product (feet) Elevation (feet) [a] (inches)
OW-1 23.21 16.83. 6.38 16.73 6.46 0.10 OW-2 23.15 - - - - - Well Inaccessible (buried under crushed stone); no data OW-3 22.88 16.85 6.03 16.24 6.54 0.61 OW-4 23.19 16.70 6.49 16.63 6.55 0.07 OW-5 22.90 16.71 6.19 - .
W-2 22.72 19.64 3.08 ...
W-3 20.55 17.00 3.55 ....
W-4 20.55 17.57 2.98 ....
W-7 23.36 15.96 7.40 - -.
W-18 23.43 16.95 6.48 16.25 7.07 0.70 W-19 23.32 16.26 7.06 - -.
W-20 23.24 - Well inaccessible (buried under crushed stone); no data W-21 23.76 17.83 5.93 ...
W-22 23.39. - - - Well inaccessible (equipment storage); no data W-23 22.99 18.78 4.21 - -.
W-24 22.86 15.79 7.07 - -
W-25 23.39 15.64 7.75 - . -
W-26 23.11 16.35 6.76 16.00 7.05 0.35 W-27 23.17 16.15 7.02 16.05 7.10 0.10 --
W-28 23.20 18.00 5.20 - . -
W-29 23.22 - - No measurable ground water in well; no data W-30 24.40 17.87 6.53 -- - --
W-31 23.94 18.62 5.32 18.54 5.39 0.08 W-32 23.50 17.58 5.92 - - --
W-33 24.23 18.36 5.87 ....
W-34 23.13 19.01 4.12 .
[a] Water table elevation corrected for presence of floating product (diesel fuel) per following formula:
hc h + [tfp*SG]
where: hc = corrected ground water elevation (feet) h = measured ground water elevation (feet) tfp = free product thickness SG = specific gravity of free product (0.84 g/cc assumed for diesel fuel)
Table 3 Gallons of water delivered each month into the Cape May aquifer by backwash along the south edge and by injection along the north edge of the fuel oil plume at OCNGS from January 2002 through June 2002.
Month Iniected Backwash Total January 8,598 6,500 15,098 February 7,766 6,500 14,266 March 16,704 6,500 23,204 April 8,083 6,500 14,583 May 1 22,2091 650 28,709 June 24,858 6,5001 31,358
Table 4 Concentration (ppb) of the contaminants detected In monitoring wells at OCNGS during May 2002 Parameter GGWQS NJDEP[a]IIIIIIIIIOW-5 W-3 W-7 [f] W-21 W-22 W-24 W-25 W-30 W-32 W-34 Volatile Organic Compounds 1,1-Dichloroethane 50 < 0.3 [b] < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 0.4 cis-1,2-Dichloroethene 70 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 5.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 0.7 < 0.3 5.7 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 30 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 0.7 < 0.3 < 0.3 0.5 < 0.3 Trichloroethene 1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 <0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 .!.. 4.4-Benzene 1 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 0.6 < 0.3 0.5 < 0.3 < 0.3 Tetrachloroethene 1 0.3 1 . 260 5'. < 0.2 4187-- .9 &8 71 Toluene 1,000 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2, < 0.2 Ethylbenzene 700 0.4 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.21 < 0.2 Xylenes 1,000 1.7 <.0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 VOA TIC's [c] 222 1 1 1 8.2 124 Semi-Volatile Organic Cormounds Naphthalene 300 < 1.3 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 0.8 < 0.6 < 1.3 < 0.6 < 0.6 Acenaphthene 400 2.0 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 1.2 < 0.6 < 0.6 Diethylphthalate 5,000 < 0.9 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.5 < 0.4 < 0.9 < 0.4 < 0.4 Fluorene 300 1.4 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.7 < 0.6 < 1.2 < 0.6 < 0.6 Phenanthrene (e] 100 4.1 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 < 0.5 0.6 < 0.5 1.9 < 0.5 < 0.5 Anthracene 2,000 3.5 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.5 < 0.4 2.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 Di-n-butylphthalate 900 < 0.8 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.5 < 0.4 < 0.8 < 0.4 < 0.4 Fluoranthene 300 2.0 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 1.3 < 0.4 1.0 < 0.4 < 0.4 Pyrene 200 3.1 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 0.9 < 0.4 2.1 < 0.4 < 0.4 Butylbenzylphthalate 100 < 0.8 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0:8 < 0.4 < 0.4 Benzo (a) anthracene [fe 5 < 0.8 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.8 < 0.4 < 0.4 Chrysene [e] 5 <1.0 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 0.6 <0.5 <1.0 <0.5 <0.5 bis (2-Ethyihexyl) phthalate 30 16.0 B [d] 1.4 B 3.6 B 1.2 B 1.1 B 1.9 B 0.9 B 2.3 B 1.5 B 2.6 B Di-n-octylphthalate 100 0.5 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.3 < 0.1 < 0.1 Benzo (b) fluoranthene [e] 5 0.6 <.0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 < 0.3 1.0 < 0.3 < 0.5 < 0.3 < 0.3 Benzo (k) fluoranthene (e] 5 < 1.6 < 0.8 < 0.8 < 0.8 < 0.8 < 0.9 < 0.8 < 1.6 < 0.8 < 0.8 Benzo (a) pyrene [e] 5 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 < 0.2 0.5 < 0.2 < 0.3 < 0.2 < 0.2 Indeno (1,2,3-cd) pyrene [e] 5 < 0.3 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 < 0.1 0.7 < 0.1 < 0.3 < 0.1 < 0.1 Dibenz (a,h) anthracene [e] 5 < 1.3 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.6 < 0.7 < 0.6 < 1.3 < 0.6 < 0.6 Benzo (g,h,I) perylene [el 5 < 0.7 < 0.41 < 0.4 < 0.4 < 0.4 0.7 < 0.4 < 0.7 < 0.4 < 0.4 Semi VOA TIC's 1,483 8.3 3,862 9.5 Notes:
[a] New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Ground Water Quality Standards (GWQS; promulgated February 1993)
[b] Method detection limit listed for compounds listed as not detected (ND) in laboratory analytical data package
[c] Tentatively Identified Compounds (d] Detected compounds with "B"qualifier indicates analyte was found in the laboratory blank as well as the sample, indicating possible laboratory contamination.
[e] Interim Generic Ground Water Quality Criteria for Synthetic Organic Compounds
[9] Well W-7 identified as MW-7 in analytical laboratory data package Compounds detected at concentrations exceeding NJDEP GWQS shown in shaded cells 26.0.
APPENDIX A May 9, 2002 Semi-Annual Monitoring Well Volatile and Semi-Volatile Organic Analysis, QA/QC Report and Electronic Deliverable Format