Text

Quarterly Remedial Action Progress Report, Fourth Quarter 2007 PSEG Nuclear, LLC, Salem Generating Station
	ML080930203
Person / Time
Site:	Salem
Issue date:	03/25/2008
From:	Suey G; Public Service Enterprise Group
To:	Tuccillo K; Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, State of NJ, Dept of Environmental Protection, Bureau of Nuclear Engineering
References
	SCH08-032
	Download: ML080930203 (90)
	v • d • e

PSEG Nuclear LLC P.O. Box 236, Hancock Bridge, NJ 08038-0236 CERTIFIED MAIL 0 PSEG Nuclear LLC March 25, 2008 " .2 ,/I7 SCH08-032 Karen Tuccillo Radiation Protection Programs Bureau of Nuclear Engineering New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection 33 Arctic Parkway Trenton, New Jersey 08625 QUARTERLY REMEDIAL ACTION PROGRESS REPORT, FOURTH QUARTER 2007 PSEG NUCLEAR, LLC, SALEM GENERATING STATION

Dear Ms. Tuccillo:

PSEG Nuclear LLC (PSEG) has prepared this Quarterly Remedial Action Progress Report (RAPR) summarizing groundwater remediation activities performed in 2007 including activities performed since the submission of the previous RAPR in December 2007 at the PSEG Nuclear, LLC, Salem Generating Station (Station).

The Station is located on Artificial Island in Hancock's Bridge, Salem County, New Jersey.Groundwater remediation activities are being conducted to address tritium detected in shallow groundwater adjacent to and south of the Salem Unit 1 Reactor Containment and Fuel Handling Building.

The Station site plan is depicted in Figure 1.The release of tritium contaminated water to the environment ceased in February 2003 when the Salem Unit 1 telltale drains were cleared and the Spent Fuel Pool (SFP) water that had accumulated behind the liner was drained. Following draining activities, a regular program was instituted whereby the telltale drains are monitored for flow and the seismic gap is continuously drained.Short-lived gamma-emitting radioisotopes, which are associated with site operations, had not been consistently detected in groundwater collected from the seismic gap since May 2004 until recently.

Since May 2007 cobalt 58 (Co-58) has been sporadically detected in groundwater collected from within the seismic gap. However, short-lived gamma-emitting radioisotopes have not been detected and tritium concentrations have continued to decline in groundwater collected outside of the seismic gap indicating that current draining protocols are adequately capturing groundwater.

At present, it is estimated that the previous estimate of 2 to 5 Curies of tritium in the plume where it exists above the NJDEP Ground Water Quality Criteria (GWQC) has been reduced by approximately 0.6 Curies since the first quarter of 2006. The range is.W dependant on the amount of tritium drawn back through the seismic gap, the actual degree of variability in the tritium concentrations of the groundwater, and the amount of mass held in dead end pore space.The following sections present the background of environmental investigation and remedial action at the site, the details and results of activities conducted since the submittal of the December 2007 RAPR, the progress of remedial actions conducted to date, and provide a discussion of upcoming activities projected for the next reporting period.1 Project Background In April 2004, a Remedial Investigation Report (RIR) was submitted to the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Nuclear Engineering (NJDEP-BNE) presenting the details and results of a groundwater investigation conducted following the discovery of tritium in groundwater adjacent to Salem Unit 1. The results of the remedial investigation indicated that the source of tritium detected in groundwater was the Spent Fuel Pool, the tritium release to the environment had been stopped, and that tritium had not migrated to the property boundary above the New Jersey GWQC.Based on the results of the remedial investigation a remedial action strategy was developed to hydraulically limit further migration and reduce the concentration of tritium remaining in groundwater adjacent to Salem Unit 1. In April 2004, PSEG initiated a pilot* study designed to demonstrate the effectiveness of groundwater extraction for achieving remedial objectives.

The pilot study proved to be effective, and in July 2004, a Remedial Action Work Plan (RAWP) proposing the operation of a full-scale groundwater extraction system was prepared and submitted to the NJDEP-BN.

The RAWP was approved by the NJDEP-BNE in November 2004 and a full-scale groundwater extraction system was subsequently installed.

Further, in September 2005, weekly draining of the Unit I seismic gap was initiated to ensure that the flow of water entering the seismic gap was directed toward the interior of the building for treatment rather than outward toward the environment.

Continuous draining of the Unit 1 seismic gap was initiated in late February 2007.2 Continued Groundwater Monitoring Groundwater monitoring activities continued through this reporting period in accordance with the schedule provided to NJDEP-BNE.

The sampling program is designed to provide representative data necessary to evaluate plume containment.

Monitoring activities include the periodic collection of groundwater samples from the 36 Station monitoring wells. A summary of monitoring well construction details is presented in Table 1. Monitoring well locations are depicted on Figure 1.*1 Groundwater samples are initially submitted to Salem Chemistry for analysis for tritium and short-lived gamma-emitting radioisotopes.

Samples indicating tritium 2 concentrations less than 50,000 picocuries per liter (pCi/L) are sent to Maplewood Testing Services for more refined analysis.Historical and current analytical data indicate that plant related gamma-emitting radioisotopes have not been detected in groundwater from any monitoring well since monitoring was initiated in 2003. Detailed historic analytical radioisotope groundwater results were presented in the previously submitted RIR and RAPRs and are not presented herein.Historical analytical tritium results for groundwater collected from the Station monitoring wells are presented on Figure 1 and Table 2. Included on Figure 1 are: panel 1) the extent of tritium in groundwater at the completion of the remedial investigation (Baseline Plume); panel 2) the extent of tritium in groundwater one year ago in December 2006;and, panel 3) the extent of tritium in groundwater in December 2007. Based on a review of Figure 1, it is apparent that the mass of tritium in groundwater has been significantly reduced by the remedial efforts occurring at the site. Details regarding these activities are discussed below.The analytical results for groundwater samples collected from the monitoring wells were evaluated based on the water-bearing zone in which they are screened.

The three primary water-bearing units investigated beneath the Station are: 1) the Vincentown Formation;

2) the shallow water-bearing unit within the limits of the cofferdam surrounding Salem Unit 1; and, 3) the shallow, water-bearing unit outside the limits of the cofferdam.

2.1 Tritium Analytical Results for the Vincentown Formation The following wells are screened in the Vincentown Formation:

Well V, Well K, Well L, Well P, Well Q, and, Well CB. Groundwater quality for Well K, Well L, Well P, and Well Q is currently monitored on a semi-annual basis. Groundwater quality for Well V and Well CB is currently monitored on a quarterly and monthly basis, respectively.

Tritium has consistently not been detected above laboratory detection limits or detected at relatively low levels in groundwater at all monitoring wells screened within the Vincentown formation since the initiation of monitoring at these locations.

The groundwater monitoring results continue to indicate that the previous release of tritium impacted water from the SFP has not significantly migrated below the shallow water-bearing unit.2.2 Tritium Analytical Results for Wells Installed Within the Limits of the Cofferdam The following wells are screened in the shallow, water-bearing unit within the limits of the cofferdam:

Well M, Well N, Well 0, Well R, Well AC, Well AE, Well Al, Well AM, 3 Well AN, and Well AO. Groundwater quality for these wells is currently monitored on a monthly basis. However, Well AO has been inaccessible due to site constraints and has not been sampled since January 2007.Groundwater collected from Well AC, Well AM, and Well AN exhibit the highest concentrations of tritium at the Site, likely due to their location relative to the previous release from the Salem Unit 1 seismic gap. However, groundwater at these wells exhibits general decreasing temporal tritium concentration trends since the initiation of monitoring in 2003. For instance, tritium concentrations at Well AC, located directly southeast of the Salem Unit 1 seismic gap, have steadily declined from a maximum of 15,000,000 pCi/L in April 2003 to 53,500 pCi/L during the most recent sampling event in December 2007. Further, the decrease in tritium concentrations at Well AC is additional confirmation that tritium impacted groundwater is no longer being released from the seismic gap and the remedial groundwater recovery system is effectively reducing concentrations of previously released tritium. Well AM exhibits fluctuating concentrations which continue to be addressed using the mobile groundwater extraction unit. The mobile unit has previously been used with success at this and other wells to remediate localized portions of the tritium plume and will continue to be used in this manner.Tritium concentrations at Well 0 are typically below GWQC. However, some seasonal fluctuation is typically observed in this area. Fluctuations are believed to be associated with the changes. that occur in the plume as a result of seasonal variation in the groundwater flow patterns within this area.Tritium concentrations at Well M, Well N, Well R, Well AE, Well Al, and Well AO are below GWQC and generally show consistent declining temporal trends. Tritium concentrations at all well locations within the cofferdam have generally decreased by one order of magnitude or more since the initiation of monitoring, indicating that remedial activities are effectively removing mass from the areas of greatest concentration.

2.3 Tritium Analytical Results for Wells Installed Outside the Limits of the Cofferdam The wells installed in the shallow, water-bearing unit beyond the limits of the cofferdam are Well S, Well T, Well U, Well W, Well Y, Well Z, Well AA, Well AB, Well AD, Well AF, Well AG (Shallow and Deep), Well AH (Shallow and Deep), Well AJ, Well AL, Well AP, Well AQ, Well AR, Well AS, Well AT, and Well CA. These wells are screened either just above the clay confining unit that separates the shallow water-bearing unit from the Vincentown Formation, or in the interval indicating the highest tritium concentrations found in the shallow water-bearing unit at each boring location at the time of the Supplemental' Investigation completed in August 2003.4

As discussed in previous RAPRs, increased concentrations of tritium were detected in Wells W and AP in 2005. In response the mobile groundwater extraction unit was activated to spot remediate these wells. As a result, concentrations of tritium in groundwater at these well locations exhibited a general downward temporal trend.Tritium concentrations at these wells are currently below the GWQC.Recently higher concentrations of tritium (around 80,000 pCiIL) have been observed in groundwater samples from Well AR these are believed to be associated with the higher concentrations observed in Well AM during May of 2006. These slightly elevated concentrations represent material not captured by the operation of the mobile groundwater recovery unit during the summer of 2006. The mobile unit was deployed to Well AR to capture this additional volume and as a resulting in decreased tritium concentrations.

Tritium concentration trends for wells screened in the shallow, water-bearing unit indicate that the groundwater extraction system has demonstrated the ability to achieve the remedial action objectives (i.e., reduce the mass of tritium in groundwater, and maintain hydraulic control).

The current distribution of tritium in groundwater (December 2007) is presented on Figure 1, along with the distribution of tritium prior to the initiation of the pilot study (March 2004) and in December 2006. As shown on Figure 1, the mass of tritium in groundwater has continued to decrease through the operation of the groundwater extraction pilot study system and operation of the full-scale system..3 Groundwater Extraction Groundwater extraction as a remedial strategy at the site was initiated with the operation of a pilot test from April 2004 to February 2005. In accordance with the RAWF' developed for the site, a full-scale groundwater recovery system (GRS) was subsequently implemented in February 2005 and has continued to operate to the present.3.1 Full-Scale System The objectives of the full-scale GRS consist of: 1) maintaining hydraulic containment of the tritium plume; and, 2) reducing tritium concentrations in groundwater.

The present operation of the GRS consists of groundwater extraction from Wells AB, AD, AJ, AN, AS, and AT. Well. S is not currently operating and has not been. in operation during 2006 or 2007 as a result of its low yield and resulting pump failures.Groundwater extracted from the wells is processed in accordance with the Station's United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC) license and plant procedures.

Details of the extracted effluent are discussed below.3.2 Mobile Groundwater Recovery Unit 5 The mobile groundwater recovery unit was designed and built to target specific areas of the plume exhibiting greater tritium activity.

The mobile unit typically operates between March and November (weather permitting).

The mobile unit collects water in nominal 1,000 gallon batches for handling in accordance with the station's permits. The mobile unit has historically been used successfully at Wells AP and AM. Recently it has operated at Wells AR and AM which have shown relatively elevated concentrations with respect to the remainder of the plume 3.3 Total System Effluent Data and Evaluation The GRS became operational on February 16, 2005. The system operated in various configurations as part of the optimization process for approximately the first month. The GRS discharges continuously in accordance with the Station's USNRC permit allowing the GRS to be more effective and efficient than the pilot-scale system. As of December 31, 2007, the GRS has recovered greater than 17 million gallons of groundwater.

This is equivalent to an average .recovery rate of approximately 12 gallons per minute or greater than 17 times the recharge rate for the extraction area (calculated to be 0.7 gallons per minute, based upon an assumed percentage of annual precipitation).

Table 3 presents a summary of the full-scale system discharges through December 31, 2007.3.4 Water-Level Data and Evaluation Water level measurements from the extraction and select observation wells have been monitored to confirm hydraulic containment of the tritium groundwater plume. Water levels are periodically collected and evaluated according to the schedule described in the Q4 2006 RAPR submitted in February 2007. Groundwater elevation contours developed from water level measurements collected in August 2007 and January 2008 are presented in Figure 2 and. Figure 3, respectively.

These contours indicate that the GRS system continues to be effective at capturing the extent of the tritium groundwater plume. Table 4 presents the water level measurement data.3.5 Cumulative Curies Removed The various groundwater recovery activities conducted to date have been successful in recovering tritium from groundwater at and downgradient of the Salem Unit 1 seismic gap.Figure 4 summarizes the results of groundwater remediation activities conducted using the well field and including both the pilot study and the permanent system. As shown on Figure 4 and Table 3, greater than 2.6 curies of tritium have been recovered from the operation of the GRS through December 31, 2007. Approximately 0.93 curies of tritium were removed by the pilot system. As the mass remaining in the plume 6 decreases so will the rate of tritium recovery by the GRS. The effectiveness of the GIRS is emphasized by the decrease and stabilization of system effluent concentrations since the activation of the full scale system in February 2005. System effluent concentrations averaged 21,510 pCiIL during the fourth quarter of 2007. This indicates that the GIRS has been successful at significantly decreasing tritium concentrations in groundwater as discharge concentrations are now less than 25 percent of the peak concentration (109,000) observed in March 2005. The mass of tritium in the plume was .recalculated in early 2006 to be approximately 2 to 5 Curies (depending on the amount of tritium drawn back through the seismic gap, the actual variability in discharge concentrations and the amount of tritium remaining in dead end pore spaces) at concentrations above the NJDEP GWQC. Based upon the tritium removed since the last recalculation, the present estimate would indicate that the plume retains 1.2 to 4.2 Curies of tritium.Therefore, GRS operations may achieve end criteria for tritium removal ahead of the previously communicated schedule.

Ongoing data collection will provide additional data to confirm this preliminary conclusion later in 2008.4.0 Operation of the Seismic Gap Drain In addition to the operation of the GIRS and mobile groundwater recovery unit, the seismic gap drains in Salem Unit 1 and Unit 2 are being used to continuously drain the water from these gaps, resulting in the recovery of residual tritium concentrations recovering concentrations from the seismic gap. The operation of these permanent gap drains creates an inward gradient towards the gaps facilitating the recovery of water from low accessibility areas.Water samples from the seismic gap drains are periodically collected for tritium analysis.

Table 5 and Figure 5 summarizes the results of periodic tritium analysis from the seismic gap. A comparison of Figure 1 and Figure 5 reveals the concentrations of tritium in water recovered in the Unit 1 seismic gap have been consistently significantly higher than those detected in groundwater samples collected from Well AC and Well AM located to the southeast and southwest of the seismic gap, respectively.

Thus, continuous operation of the Unit 1 seismic gap drain is effectively removing residual SEP water in the seismic gap, resulting in the reduction of tritium concentrations in groundwater adjacent to the seismic gap. Significant concentrations of tritium continue to be removed from the Unit 1 seismic gap however the exact mass removed can no longer be accurately determined due to monitoring limitations imposed at the initiation of continuous draining.

The concentration distribution of tritium at the gap drains will vary with the source of the water being drained, the amount of precipitation since the last draining, and the movement of the water within the seismic gap.During the winter of 2006 to 2007, increased levels of tritium were detected in samples collected from the Unit 1 seismic gap drain. Concentrations began declining in early January and by late January had decreased significantly from the peak concentrations.

Since mid-February tritium concentrations have fluctuated around a mean of 70 million pCi/L. During July the lowest concentration since early 2005 was reported in the Unit 1 7 seismic gap. Additionally, the highest concentration since January 2007 was detected in September.

Relatively high concentrations have continued through December 2007.Increased tritium concentrations detected in water collected from the seismic gap drains suggests that under the continuous draining program, instituted in late February 2007, portions of the seismic gap previously unaffected by the draining program may be supplying water to the gap drain.Continuous or nearly continuous draining provides a positive assurance of an inward gradient of groundwater to the seismic gap and assures that there is no further potential to discharge to the environment.

Concentrations of tritium from the Unit I seismic gap (summarized by week) are shown on Figure 5.Monitoring of water drained from the Unit 2 seismic gap acts as a screen for a potential release from the Unit 2 SFP. Currently, plant related gamma-emitting radioisotopes have not been detected in samples collected from the Unit 2 seismic gap drain.Short-lived gamma-emitting radioisotopes Were not consistently detected in samples collected from the Unit I gap for the period between May 2004 and May 2007.Beginning in May 2007 sporadic detections

'of Co-58 and Sb-125 have occurred in water collected from the Unit-i seismic gap drain. PSEG is presently evaluating the gap draining program. Although continuous draining ensures an inward gradient, the elevation to which the gap is drained could be optimized to ensure a continuous inward gradient with a lower volume discharge.

The lack of the presence of short-lived gamma-emitting radioisotopes and decreasing tritium concentrations in groundwater at well locations outside of the Unit 1 seismic gap suggest that these radioisotopes are not migrating beyond the Unit-I seismic gap.Water samples will continue to be periodically obtained from the Unit 1 and Unit 2*seismic gap drain to evaluate the potential for the release of radioisotopes to the environment.

5.0 Upcoming Activities Activities projected for the first half of 2008 (January through June) include the following:

Ongoing evaluation of the Unit I Seismic Gap to refine the procedures and protocols as necessary to adaptively manage the operation and sampling of the GRS;* Continue to measure groundwater levels and evaluate flow and plume containment;

Continued groundwater sampling and analysis; and," Continued operation and evaluation of the GRS performance.

Continue to monitor continuous draining of seismic gap drains 8 If you have any questions or comments regarding the contents of this report, please do not hesitate to contact me at (856) 339-5066.Sincerely, Greg Suey Manager -Salem Chemistry, Environmental, and Radwaste C Ron Nimitz- NRC NRC -Salem Resident Inspector NRC -Document Room 9 BC: Chris White H15 George Gellrich S05 Ben Neufeld S07 Edward Keating N21 John Valeri Jr. T5 File#Groundwater EXTERNAL Peter Milionis, ARCADIS Bradley Pierce, ARCADIS Scott Potter, PhD., ARCADIS Christopher Sharpe, ARCADIS 10 a Well Construction Details, PSEG Nuclear, LLC, Salem Generating Station, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey.I of 2 Table 01.Installation Construction Diameter Total Depth Monitoring Monitored MP MP Northing Easting Well ID Date Details (inches) (feet bgs) Interval Hydrogeologic Elevation Elevation (NAD 83) (NAD 83)(feet bgs) Unit (feet RPD) (feet amsl)Well K Feb-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 80.0 70.0- 80.0 Vincentown 1 102.00 12.08 231,435 199,697 Well L Jan-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 80.0 70.0-80.0 Vincentown 1 101.46 11.54 230,933 199,263 Well M May-03 Sch-40 PVC 1 20.0 10.0 -20.0 Cofferdam 2 102.17 12.25 230,843 199,546 Well N Jan-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 20.0 10.0-20.0 Cofferdam 2 101.65 11.73 230,777 199,661 Well 0 Jan-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 20.0 10.0-20.0 Cofferdam 2 101.33 11.41 230,804 199,839 Well P Mar-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 80.0 70.0-80.0 Vincentown

' 101.13 11.21 230,336 200,000 Well Q Mar-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 80.0 70.0-80.0 Vincentown

' 106.59 16.67 230,645 201,196 Well R Jun-03 Sch-40 PVC 1 19.0 9.0- 19.0 Cofferdam 2 102.35 12.43 230,906 199,640 Well S 4 May-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 34.7 24.7-34.7 Shallow 3 99.04 9.12 230,711 199,613 Well T Jun-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 31.2 21.2-31.2 Shallow 3 104.13 14.21 231,575 199,575 Well U 4 May-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 32.2 27.2-32.2 Shallow3 98.57 8.65 231,370 199,618 Well V 4 Jun-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 79.5 69.5-79.5 Vincentown

' 98.74 8.82 231,355 199,548 Well W 4 Jun-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 35.0 25.0- 35.0 Shallow 3 98.26 8.34 230,777 199,450 Well Y Sep-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 37.0 27.0-35.0 Shallow 3 101.81 11.89 230,771 199,343 Well Z Sep-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 37.5 27.5-37.5 Shallow 3 101.86 11.94 230,681 199,399 Well AA 4 Sep-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 36.0 26.0- 36.0 Shallow 3 99.07 9.15 230,603 199,541 Well AB 4 Oct-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 42.0 32.0- 42.0 Shallow 3 98.93 9.01 230,623 199,677 Well AC 4 Sep-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 24.0 14.0 -24.0 Cofferdam2 98.77 8.85 230,724 199,725 Well AD 4 Oct-03 Sch-40 PVC 6 43.0 33.0-43.0 Shallow 3 98.99 9.07 230,684 199,607 Well AE Oct-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 37.5 27.5-37.5 Cofferdam2 101.54 11.62 230,829 199,845 Notes: MP Measuring Point bgs Below ground surface RPD Relative to plant datum amsl Relative to mean sea level (NAVD 1988)1 Monitoring well is screened in the Vincentown Formation.

2 Monitoring well is screened in the shallow, water-bearing unit at a location within the limits of the cofferdam.

3 Monitoring well is screened in the shallow, water-bearing unit at a location outside the limits of the cofferdam.

4 The surface completions of Monitoring Wells S, U, V, W, AA, AB, AC, and AD were converted from above-grade to flush-grade in February 2004.

a 2 of 2 Table 01.Well Construction Details, PSEG Nuclear, LLC, Salem Generating Station, Hancock's Bridge, New Jersey.Installation Construction Diameter Total Depth Monitoring Monitored MP MP Northing Easting Well ID Date Details (inches) (feet bgs) Interval Hydrogeologic Elevation Elevation (NAD 83) (NAD 83)(feet bgs) Unit (feet RPD) (feet amsl)Well AF Oct-03 Sch-40 PVC 2 45.0 35.0 -45.0 Shallow 3 101.61 11.69 230,491 199,702 Well AG-Shallow Feb-04 Sch-40 PVC 1 24.2 14.2 -24.2 Shallow 3 99.29 9.37 230,496 199,508 Well AG-Deep Feb-04 Sch-40 PVC 1 40.0 30.0 -40.0 Shallow 3 99.20 9.28 230,496 199,508 Well AH-Shallow Feb-04 Sch-40 PVC 1 24.5 14.5 -24.5 Shallow 3 102.58 12.66 230,450 199,596 Well AH-Deep Feb-04 Sch-40 PVC 1 40.0 30.0 -40.0 Shallow 3 102.70 12.78 230,450 199,596 Well Al Jan-04 Sch-40 PVC 4 22.0 12.0 -22.0 Cofferdam 2 98.79 8.87 230,798 199,521 Well AJ Jan-04 Sch-40 PVC 4 35.3 15.3 -35.3 Shallow 3 98.85 8.93 230,670 199,665 Well AL Jan-04 Sch-40 PVC 2 25.3 15.3 -25.3 Shallow 3 99.13 9.21 230,594 199,806 Well AM Jan-04 Sch-40 PVC 4 20.9 10.9 -20.9 Cofferdam 2 98.55 8.63 230,762 199,680 Well AN Jun-04 Sch-40 PVC 4 25.0 10.0-25.0 Cofferdam2 98.76 8.84 230,727 199,735 Well AO Jun-04 Sch-40 PVC 4 21.0 11.0 -21.0 Cofferdam2 98.82 8.90 230,765 199,556 Well AP Jun-04 Sch-40 PVC 4 40.0 15.0 -40.0 Shallow3 98.65 8.73 230,694 199,464 Well AQ Jun-04 Sch-40 PVC 41 45.0 20.0-45.0 Shallow3 99.05 9.13 230,526 199,540 Well AR Jun-04 Sch-40 PVC 4 43.0 18.0-43.0 Shallow3 99.22 9.30 230,622 199,626 Well AS Jun-04 Sch-40 PVC 4 41.5 16.5-41.5 Shallow3 99.44 9.52 230,566 199,604 Well AT Jun-04 Sch-40 PVC 4 44.0 19.0 -44.0 Shallow3 99.25 9.33 230,546 199,566 Well BW Dec-06 Sch-40 PVC 1 10 5-10 Shallow1 98.72 8.80 231563.00 199,864 Well BX Dec-06 Sch-40 PVC 1 10 5-10 Shallow1 98.72 8.80 231582.00 199,876 Well CA Dec-06 Sch-40 PVC 4 38 28.0 -38.0 Shallow 2 98.87 8.95 231318.00.

199,791 Well CB Dec-06 Sch-40 PVC 2 80 70.0 -80.0 Vincentown 3 98.98 9.06 231328.00 199,787 Notes: MP Measuring Point, bgs Below ground surface RPD Relative to plant datum amsl Relative to mean sea level (NAVD 1988)1 Monitoring well is screened in the Vincentown Formation.

2 Monitoring well is screened in the shallow, water-bearing unit at a location within the limits of the cofferdam.

3 Monitoring well is screened in the shallow, water-bearing unit at a location outside the limits of the cofferdam.

4 The surface completions of Monitoring Wells S, U, V, W, AA, AB, AC, and AD were converted from above-grade to flush-grade in February 2004.

Table 02. Groundwater Analytical Results, PSEG Nuclear, LLC, Salem Generating Station.for Samples collected between 01/22/2003 and 12/29/2007 Well Sample Tritium I Major Cations and Anions Identification Date Note Result (pCi/L)I LLD Deviation Boron(mg/L)

SCH08-032, Quarterly Remedial Action Progress Report, Fourth Quarter 2007 PSEG Nuclear, LLC, Salem Generating Station

Text

Dear Ms. Tuccillo:

Navigation menu

Search