ML072120266
| ML072120266 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 02/28/2000 |
| From: | McLaren Hart |
| To: | AmerGen Energy Co, GPU Nuclear, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Wrona D, NRR/DLR 415-2292 | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML072280171 | List: |
| References | |
| E99575 | |
| Download: ML072120266 (372) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:VOLUME 1 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT/ LSITE INVESTIGATION REPORT-hADIOLOGICAL ,GPU NUCLEAR, INC. YSTER CREEK NUCLEAR VGENERATING STATION U.S. ROUTE NO. 9 FORKED RIVER, NEW JERSEY Site Remediation Program Case No. E99575 WPreparedfor" GPU Nuclear, Inc. U.S. Route No. 9 Forked River, New Jersey 08731 and AmerGen Energy Co, LLC 2301 Market Street S22-1 P.O. Box 8699 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania February 28, 2000 McLaren/Hart, Inc. Blue Bell Executive Campus 470 Norristown Road, Suite 300 Blue Bell, Pennsylvania 19422
§09W f §TRATK~Y tTff:gI.9@@Y? 94%WTt9N4
INTRODUCTION VOLUME 1 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMEN.T/ SITEkINVESTIGATION REPORT - RADIOLOGIc GL$:4 , PU NCJCLEAR, INC.
ý.OYSTJR CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION '
1.S. ROUTE NQ," .
- . rPEO ED RIVER, NEW JERSEY
.-Site Remhediation Program * .;Case:No', E99575 Preparedfor:
GPU Nuclear, Inc. U.S. Route No. 9 Forked River, New Jersey 08731 and AmerGen Energy Co, LLC 2301 Market Street S22-1 P.O. Box 8699 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania February 28, 2000 McLaren/Hart, Inc. Blue Bell Executive Campus 470 Norristown Road, Suite 300 Blue Bell, Pennsylvania 19422
Introduction This Radiological Preliminary Assessment Report (PAR) and Site Investigation Report (SIR) addresses radiological concerns at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (OCNGS). it was assembled, based upon discussions with NJDEP, as part of a request for a deferral of radiological ISRA investigations and remediations, in order to postpone issues of federal preemption and ISRA applicability until decommissioning of the OCNGS. It relies on an extensive database of historical information gathered by the seller, as well as more recent information assembled as part of buyer's due diligence. It does not duplicate all of the information already assembled and submitted to NJDEP on non-radiological issues, some of which may nonetheless be useful to NJDEP. It is submitted without waiving the issues of ISRA applicability and federal preemption raised in GPU Nuclear's application pending before NJDEP. The terms "radiological concerns", "radiological AOC(s)", "area(s) of concern", and "AOC(s)", as used throughout this document, mean any area of concern involving radiological substances regulated by the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) as a "source", "special nuclear" and/or "by product" material, as such terms are defined in and to the extent regulated under the Atomic Energy Act. By "Decommissioning" we mean the complete retirement and removal of OCNGS from service and the restoration of the Site on which OCNGS operates, as well as any planning and administrative activities incidental thereto, including but not limited to (a) the dismantlement, decontamination, storage, and/or entombment of the Plant, in whole or in part, and any reduction or removal, whether before or after termination of the NRC license for the Plant, of radioactivity at the Site, and (b) all other activities necessary for the retirement, dismantlement and decontamination of the Plant, all as regulated by, or required to comply with, all applicable requirements of the Atomic Energy Act and the NRC's or its successor's rules, regulations, orders and pronouncements thereunder, the NRC Operating License for OCNGS and any related decommissioning plan (see, e.g., 10 C.F.R. Parts 50.75, 50.82, 51.53, and 51.95)." Radiological monitoring activities associated with the OCNGS have focused on certain target radionuclides, particularly Cs- 137 and Co-60 and to a lesser extent Sr-90, as trend indicators for radiological contamination. Although there are literally hundreds of radioisotopes present at the plant, mostly in the active fuel in the reactor (most of which have short - seconds to days- half lives), because the fission and activation process is essentially a constant, physically defined process, the ratios between the various longer lived isotopes tend to be fairly constant, particularly when compared with time to similar portions of the process. Thus, radwaste and water transportable long-lived activity in the plant process streams changes little over time. Because of this, a few easily measured radionuclides can be used as surrogate indicators of the entire mix. NRC regulations require detailed analysis of various waste streams including the lower activity, and hard-to-detect nuclides. These periodic analyses provide convincing radioisotopic ratio data that show that the use of the surrogate indicators is an effective tool. When this mixture
ratio data is combined with the values of the NRC default soil guideline limits for decommissioning, the mixture information clearly shows that the unusual and hard to detect isotopes will not contribute significantly to dose to a member of the public or plant workers if remediation decisions are based on the concentrations of the surrogate indicators. Throughout this report, the existing conditions of radionuclide concentrations in soils are compared to the NRC decommissioning default guideline concentrations. This is intended to provide some indication of the limited extent of eventual remediation required when the plant eventually enters decommissioning. However, the NRC decommissioning soil guideline concentrations are not relevant to an operating nuclear power plant. The very existence of the Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM) and the soil guidelines recognizes that conditions at operating facilities are not and will not be always consistent with the decommissioning criteria. This is clearly recognized as acceptable for continued operation by the NRC. During operation, the plant is expected to control effluents and maintain the dose to the public and plant workers at As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) levels. The presence of small amounts of plant related radioactivity in on-site soils or groundwater does not represent a significant or even measurable dose to the public or the plant workers. Throughout this report it is shown that the radionuclide activity currently in the soils at the Oyster Creek plant are not impacting the offsite environment. Doses to plant workers from the limited activity in the soils are also insignificant. The NRC residual activity guidelines assume that a family lives, grows food, and has a drinking water well, etc. on the property. The dose assessment is based on this scenario, and doses are limited to 25 mrem to this resident farmer family. This scenario is impossible at an operating plant. Workers do not live here, they do not grow food crops, and the drinking water is carefully monitored and shown to be unaffected, and is not withdrawn from shallow wells in the highest affected soil areas Even if all of the dose in the resident scenario was from the direct radiation from the activity in the soil, this equates to a dose rate of approximately 0.003 mrem per hour. Workers in the plant routinely enter areas where dose rates are 100,000 times higher than this. The areas where radiological impacts to soils are the greatest, e.g. in the vicinity of the old radwaste surge tank and the condensate storage tank, are not characterized by dose rates of 0.003 mrem per hour. The radioactive materials actually inside the tanks themselves are creating dose rates in the vicinity of the tanks that are thousands of times higher than 0.003 mrem per hour. Far more radiation dose would be accumulated by the plant workers removing the soils as a consequence of the proximity to the contained sources nearby than could ever be avoided by removal of the few thousandths of a mrem per hour being contributed by the soil activity. This Radiological PAR/SIR also documents the fact that any radionuclide contamination of the on-site soil or groundwater at the OCNGS has not impacted the off-site environment. This conclusion is supported by the results of an ongoing Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program that has spanned a period of more than 33 years and has resulted in the collection of more than 40,000 samples of air, surface water, ground water, rain water, sediment, fish, clams, crabs, vegetables and soil. Independent
environmental monitoring programs conducted by the NJ Department of Environmental Protection and the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission have confirmed these results. The results of this off-site Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program satisfy any requirement for a Baseline Ecological Evaluation and Ecological Risk Assessment as specified by the Technical Requirements for Site Remediation (NJ.KC. 7:26E).
NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT REPORT
4/98 NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION DIVISION OF RESPONSIBLE PARTY SITE REMEDIATION P.O. Box 435, TRENTON, NJ 08625-0435 PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT REPORT Ansa al Shuldyouacom~ qestons ny rebansin campletiglg thi form, we recommend that you discus. the matte with a representative from the Site Remediatim Program Submitting incorrect or insufficient data may cause processing delays and possible postponc'iiet of your tmnsaction PLEASE PRINT OR TYPE Dame: February28.2000 Indussri Establishmnent/Site Name d-PI Nuclear. IncJ~hster Cre ulerGneaie tto Address P.O. Box 388, US Route 9 City or Town Forked River -Zip Code 0R731 Municipality, Lacev and Ocean Townshins County Ocean Lacey Township Block (s) 1001 Lots (s) 4 100 1-20 and 20.01 101 1 138 2 139 11 Lacey Township Block (s) 41 Lots (s) 43 63 7 Site Remediation Program Case Number or EPA Identification Number E99575 This PAR is restricted to the radiological issues for the locations described in Question I below. Non-radiological areas of concern were addressed in a separate Preliminary Assessment, which was submitted to the NJDEP in December of 1999. Accordingly, this PAR does not address concerns at the adjacent Forked River site (which is addressed in ISRA Case No. E98542) nor does it address non-radiological concerns. I. Present a history of ownership and operations at the industrial establishment, in tabular form, from the time the site was naturally vegetated or utilized as farmland in accordance with NJI.A.C. 7:26E-3.1(c) L.i. (attach additional sheets as necessary). For the purposes of discussion, the property is divided into two portions. Parcel I is identified as the developed portion of the site located primarily within the "horseshoe" formed by the Intake and Discharge Canals west of Route 9 (identified as the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generation Station or "OCNGS"). Parcel 2 is identified as the area located cast of Route 9 which is primarily heavily vegetated and undeveloped (See Appendices L and M). Summary of Site Operations and Ownership 7 I 02/26/00, 10:21 AM
tOCNGS 1 1001 14 I_ 4614 ------ I1ý; Lacey J P&I I GPUN I 1980 j Present i Summary of Site operations and Ownership (cont.) Ofe roFromn TO East of RL 9 100 1-20 & Lacey NOR-RU-EL, Inc. Same Unknown 6/28/66 20.01
. .....oo ... O..a O...... . oao.....
63 7 Ocean East of RL 9 100 1-20 & Lacey JCP&L Same 6128/66 1980 20.01 East of R. 9 100 1-20 & Lacey JCP&L JCP&LIGPUN 1980 Present 20.01 63 7 Ocean East of Rt. 9 101 1 Lacey Mayer Same Unknown 3/8171 I Construction East of Rt. 9 101 1 Lacey JCP&L Same 3/8/71 1980 East of Rt. 9 101 1 Lacey JCP&L JCP&L/GPUN 1980 Present East of Rt. 9 138 2 Lacey Charles R. Pearl Same Unknown 1/18/66
& Marie D. Pearl East of Rt. 9 138 2 Lacey JCP&L Same 1/18/66 1980 East of Rt. 9 138 2 Lacey JCP&L JCP&I.GPUN 1980 Present East of Rt. 9 139 11 Lacey Wilnor Reah Co. Same Unknown 11/17/65 East of Rt. 9 139 11 Lacey JCP&L Same 11/17/65 1980 East of Rt. 9 139 11 Lacey JCP&L JCP&LIGPUN 1980 Present 2A. In accordance with N.J.A.C. 7:26E-3.1(c) I.ii, provide a clear and concise description of the past industrial/commercial operation(s) conducted on site by each owner and operator. To the extent available the site history shall include an evaluation of the following sources of information: (1) Sanborn Fire Insurance Maps; (2) MacRae's Industrial Directory; (3) Title and Deed; (4) Site plans and facility as-built drawings; (5) federal, state, county and local government files; (6) The Department Geographic Information System. (7) and any additional sources which may be available for a specific site.
Site history is frequently an item where preliminary assessments are incomplete. The Industrial Site Recovery Act requires that a diligent inquiry be made., researching the site history back to January 1, 1932. Common answers to this question have inchuded 'Unknown", or "We are only a tenant on the site and have no knowledge of prior site history". Neither of these answers satisfies the requirement for a due diligent inquiry. To avoid having a PA found incomplete by the Department due to insufficient information, the site history must be researched. The following are ways of obtaining information regarding site history: title searches: contacting the local and county health officials and municipal agencies (for example, local fire and police departments, and local planning, zoning, adjustment boards); requesting any information these public agencies may have on the specific location; and, interviewing long time neighbors of the industrial establishment. Tenants should always request information from the landlord. The applicant should always document any attempts to locate this information to support a claim that a diligent inquiry has been conducted. If the prior site history demonstatems that the current building was built on vacant unimproved 2 02/26/00, 10:21 AM
property, it should be r as such If the site has been, or is now the subject of a site remediation, any prior cases should always be referenced. Provide the page or appendix number where the site history may be found. Appendix A Provide a listing of the resources utilized to compile the site history and as appropriate copies of any maps or information, which wll asist the Department in evaluating your conclusions. Historical Aerial Photography 1940 through 1989 Not Applicable GPUN personnel Not Applicable Not Applicable 2B. Include a detailed description of the most recent operations subject to this preliminary assessment. Provide the page or appendix # where the description of the most recent operations may be found. Appendix B
- 3. Hazardous Substance/Waste Inventory: N.J.A.C. 7:26E-3.1(c) l.iii. List all raw materials, finished products, formulations and hazardous substances, hazardous wastes, hazardous constituents and pollutants, including intermediates and by-products that are or were historically present on the site. Note: If past usage included farming, pesticides may be a concern and should be included in this list (attach additional sheets if necessary).
4 A. In accordance with NJ.A.C. 7:26E-3.1(c) liv provide a summary of all current and historic wastewater discharges of Sanitary and/or Industrial Waste and/or sanitary sludges. Present and past production processes, including dates and their respective water use shall be identified and evaluated, including ultimate and potential discharge and disposal points and how and where materials arc or were received on-site. All discharge and disposal points shall be clearly depicted on a scaled site map. Information required under this item is intended to identify potential discharges to any on-site disposal system, such as a septic system or lagoon or drywell. Site Information Discharge Period Discharge Discharge Location Type From To Construction 1982 Sanitary Former On-site Treatment Facility - Treated liquids of OCNGS discharged to Discharge Canal (DSN 004) under NJPDES in 1969 DSW Permit No. NJ 0005550; solids pumped into steel below ground steel holding tank. 1982 Present Sanitary Ocean County Utilities Authority 1991 Present Industrial Discharge from the Groundwater Treatment System goes to the sanitary lines and to the Ocean County Utilities Authority. 3 02/26/00, 10:21 AM
Late 1970's Present Industrial Seepage pit - Backwash from the pretreatment building discharges to a seepage pit or backwash sump located adjacent to and northwest of the ambulance building. The discharge consists of saund-filter backwash water. The discharge is regulated by NJPDES DGW Permit No. NJ 0101966 (see Appendix D, Question 4A). Discharges authorized under NJPDES Permit Ho NJoOODO are discussed in Appendix D. 4B. Provide a narrative of disposal processes for all historic and ,r process waste streams and disposal points (attach additional sheets if necessary). ISee Appendix E
- 5. This question requires the applicant to conduct a diligent inquiry into the current and historic operations at the site to identify all of the potential areas of concern, which formerly or currently exists at the industrial establishment as defined in N.J.A.C. 7:26E-1.S.
Diligent inquiry as defined in N.J.A.C.7: 26E-1.8 states: A. Conducting a diligent search of all documents which are reasonably likely to contain information related to the object of the inquiry, which documents are in such person's possession, custody or control, or in the possession, custody or control of any other person from whom the person conducting the search has a legal right to obtain such documents; and B. Making reasonable inquiries of current and former employees and agents whose duties include or included any responsibility for hazardous substances, hazardous wastes, hazardous constituents, or pollutants, and any other current and former employees or agents who may have knowledge or documents relevant to the inquiry. In accordance with N.J.A.C. 7,26E3.1(c)l.v., a narrative shall be provided for each area of environmental concern describing the (A) Type; (B) Age; (C) Dimensions of each container/area; (D) Chemical Content; (E) Volume; (F) Construction materials; (G) Location; (H) Integrity (i.e., tank test reports, description of drum storage pad); and (I) Inventory control records, unless a Department-approved leak detection system, pursuant to N.J.A.C. 7:1E or 7:14B, has always been in place and there is no discharge history. If sampling is not proposed for any identified area of environmental concern, please explain why it is believed that the area of environmental concern does not contain contaminants above the applicable remediation standards. Submit all necessary documentation to verify this belief. The required narrative need not describe the sampling to be completed; however, it should state that sampling will be completed in accordance with the appropriate section of N.J.A.C.7:26E. Detailed descriptions of all remediation activities shall be described in the site investigation report in accordance with NJ.A.C.7:26E-3.13. Note: If the industrial establishment has multiple locations for one type of area of concern (example: underground storage tanks are located in 3 separate areas of the facility), each area must be discussed separately. Please indicate if any of the potential areas of environmental concern listed below in #5A through #5G, as defined in N.J.A.C. 7:26E-1.8, formerly or currently exist at the industrial establishment by indicating Yes or No in the appropriate space as provided. For the Location Reference Keyed to Site Map, use either a number or letter identification and be consistent throughout each phase of the remediation, referring to the same identification provided herein. Provide the required narrative as an a*mendix to this report. Do not tr to provide a narrative in the space provided. 4 02/26/00, 10:21 AM
I hereby certify that a diligent inquiry has been conducted to identify all current and historical potential areas of environmental concern and based on the diligent inquiry the areas of environmental concern Identified below in question SA through 5G are the only areas of environmental concern believed to exist at the above referenced industrial establishment 0 A. Bulk Storage Tanks and Appurtenances, including, without limitation: e10enced to Ape
- - - ~~W thei lZ0 oj~i"Ot Liidp'~_ _ _
Aboveground storage tanks and Yes Appendix L, AOC- IA, Appendix F associated piping IC, and AOC 2A throug 4B Underground storage tanks and Yes Appendix L, AOC- S Appendix F associated piping Silos No NA NA Rail cars Yes Appendix L, AOC-6 Appendix F Loading and unloading areas Yes Appendix 1, AOC-7 Appendix F Piping, aboveground and below Yes Appendix L,, AOC- IB Appendix F ground pumping stations, sumps, pits B. Storage and Staging Areas, including Area of Concern Currently or Formerly Location Referenced to Appendix Exists at the Site Yes/No the Site Map Number Storage pads including drum and/or No NA NA waste storage Surface impoundments and lagoons No NA NA Dumpsters No NA NA Chemical storage cabinets or closets No NA NA C. Drainage systems and areas including without limitation: Area of Concern Currently or Formerly Location Referenced to Appendix Exists at the Site Yes/No the Site Map Number Floor drains, trenches and piping and Yes Appendix L, AOC-8 Appendix F sumps through AOC- I I Process area sinks and piping which Yes Appendix L, AOC-12 Appendix F receive process waste Roof leaders when process operations No NA NA vent to the roof Drainage swales and culverts Yes Appendix i, Appendix F AOC-13 through AOC- 15 Storm sewer collection systems Yes Appendix L, AOC-16 Appendix F Storm water detention ponds and fire No NA NA ponds Surface water bodies Yes Appendix L, Appendix F AOC-17 & 18 g ~m tlt- IeL~iI I lUo~ NA pits . Ct. MC c uslor seepage N~o NA pits i 1 M No NIA r~ywcls~ and sumps NA I 5 02/26/00, 10:21 AM
D. Discharge and disposal areas, including, without limitation:
*-'...Area of Concer.C*m* .y- I. ZoedtUItd-to. - Appendix or Fomei-nmtoyorFor**C Exists at the Site Yes/No0 tbeS a Number Areas of discharge per NJ.A.C. Yes Appendix L, AOC 39 Appendix F 7:E* through AOC-40 Waste piles as defined by NJ.A.C No NA NA 7:26 Waste water collection systems Yes Appendix L, Appendix F including septic systems, seepage pits, AOC-19& AOC-20 and dry wells.
Landfills or landfarms No NA NA Sprayfields No NA NA Incinerators No NA NA Historic fill or any other fill material No NA NA Open pipe discharges No NA NA
* - By including a description of these areas neither GPU Nuclear nor AmerGen concede or admit that these areas, or any other area in which radiological materials have been spilled or released, are subject to the requirements of NJDEP typically pertaining to regulated discharges for hazardous substances under New Jersey law. We reserve the right to argue that all such requrements are preempted by federal law governing Radiological AOCs at the OCNGS.
E. Other areas of concern, including, without limitation: Area of Concern Currently or Formerly Location Referenced to Appendix Exists at the Site Yes/No the Site Map Number Electrical transformers & capacitors Yes Non-Radiological ISRA NA Submission Hazardous material storage or Yes Non-Radiological ISRA NA handling areas Submission Waste treatment areas No NA NA Discolored or spill areas Yes Non-Radiological ISRA NA Submission Open areas away from production Yes Appendix L, Appendix F areas AOC-21 through AOC-23 Areas of stressed vegetation No NA NA Underground piping including No NA NA industrial process sewers Compressor vent discharges Yes Non-Radiological ISRA NA Submission Non-contact cooling water discharges Yes Appendix L, Appendix F AOC-24A and AOC-24B Areas which receive flood or storm Yes Appendix' L, Appendix F water from potentially contaminated AOC-24C areas Active or Inactive production wells Yes Appendix 1, Appendix F F.__ _ AOC-25 6 02/26/00, 10:21 AM
F. Building interior areas with a potential for discharge to the environment, including, without limitation: Of C oAo*-* c re aA ,cation Referenced to Appendix ___ -_"__--- _____* *_ _____ __Number Loading or transfer areas Yes Appendix L, AOC-4C Appendix F Waste treatment areas NO NA NA Boger rooms Yes Non.Radlologlcal ISRA Appendix F Submission Air vents and ducts Yes Appendix L, Appendix F AOC-29 Hazardous material storage or Yes Appendix L, Appendix F handling areas AOC-26 through AOC-28 and AOC-30 through AOC-37 G. Any other site-specific area of concern. Area of Concern Currently or Location Referenced to Appendix Formerly Exists at the Site Map Number the Site Yes/No Upland Confined Disposal Facility Yes Appendix L, Appendix F AOC-38 Northern Parking Area Yes Appendix L, Appendix F AOC-41 Berms Yes Appendix L, Appendix F AOC-42 6 If the site area exceeds two acres, an interpretation of the aerial photographic history of the site shall be submitted in accordance with NJA.C. 7:26E-3.1(c)l.vi. The interpretation shall be based on available current and historical color, black and white and infrared aerial photographs (scale ):18,000 or less) of the site and surrounding area at a frequency that provides the evaluator with a historical perspective of site activities. The photographic history shall date back to 1932 or the earliest photograph available. Aerial photographs are available for review at the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection, Tidelands Management Program, Aerial Photo Library, 9 Ewing Street, Trenton, New Jersey, (609) 633-7369. Note the applicant is not required to provide the Department with copies of the aerial photographs reviewed only an interpretation of what was observed in each photograph, which may represent an environmental concern. _ Check here if an aerial photo review was not complete and provide a reason. Provide the appendix number for the air photo review narratives See Appendix G
- 7. Discharge History of Hazardous Substances and Wastes, N.J.A.C. 7"26E-3.1(c)1vii:
All discharges of hazardous waste were reported in the Preliminary Assessment Dated December 1999. Discharges of radioactive materials are discussed in Appendix F and Appendix N. A. Have there been any known discharges of hazardous substances and wastes at the site? _ No (Go to question #8) Yes (Complete Items 7B & 7C) B. Was the Department notified of the discharge? _Yes; No If yes, provide the Case # 7 02/26/00, 10:21 AM
C. Was a no-fulther-action letta, negadivedeclaration approval or full-compliance letter issued as a result of the cleanup of this discharge?
- -- Yes (Submit a copy of the no-further-action apprOval) the action No (Submit a complete Site Investigation or Remedial Action Report documenting taken to address the discharge) any remediation activities 8 In accordance with NJ.A.C.7.26E-3.1 (c) i.vii, provide a description of remedial actions previously conducted or cmrently underway at the site, including dates of discharges, at the site. Copies of taken, and all existing sample resuls concerning contaminants which remain be provided with a Department or other governmental agency no-further-action approvals should also information is especially description of the areas to which the no-further-action approvals apply. This event important if the approval was granted for the remediation of a portion of a site or a specific discharge rather than the entire site subject to this preliminary assessmenLt Check here if this question does not apply.
OCNGS has conducted limited remedial actions in certain Radiological AOCs including Investigation and some excavation. Available details are provided in the discussions of the AOCs below. Provide the appendix number for the required narrative and data summary See Appendix M & N
- 9. Protectiveness of past remedies, Order of Magnitude Analysis, N.J.AC. 7:26E-3.1(c) l.ix and NJ.A.C.
7:26E, 3.2(a)5 A. Have any areas of radiological concern previously received a No-Further-Action approval from the Department or other equivalent government agency for which no additional remediation is proposed? X No ( go to question #10). Yes (complete 9B). B. In accordance with NJ.S.A 58:103B-13(e) the following evaluation of the protectiveness of past remedies shall be completed for all areas of concern for which no further action was previously approved by the Department or other equivalent government agency and for which no additional remediation is proposed. All final sampling results shall be evaluatrd to determine if contaminant levels remaining on site are in compliance with curent nediation craiea The applicant shall complete the following: Include a table comparing the levels of contaminan remaining in each area of concern, the numerical remediation standard approved in the remedial action workplan or at the time of no-further-action approval and the numerical remediation standards applicable at the time of the comparison. The table shall contain all sampling results, including sample location, sample media, field and laboratory identification numbers, and method detection limits, as necessary, and analytical results for all individual contaminants for each area of concern. I hereby certify that the order of magnitude analysis required pursuant to N.J.A.C. 7:26E has been completed, since the issuance of a No-Further-Action approval, negative declaration approval or equivalent remediation approval; and (Check the appropriate statements (1), (2), (3) or (4)): (i) The ,a of concern listed below contain contaminants above the numerical remediation standard applicable at the time of the comparison, however no further action is required because (check the appropriate sub statement): (a) The cortmi'nant concentrations remaining in the areas of concern listed below are less than an order of magnitude (factor of 10) greater than the numerical remediation standard applicable at the time of the comparison; (b) The areas of concern or the site was remediazed using engineering and institutional controls approved by the Department and these controls are still protective of public health, safety and the environment; or (c) The area of concern or the site was remediatd to an approved site specific remediation standard and all of the factors and assumptions which are the basis for deriving the site specific remediazion standard remain valid for the site. Please list the areas of concern for which the previous statement applies. 8 02/26/00, 10:21 AM
. .-A rea -f, - " j..* 4"* Locon Reference Keyed to the Site Map (2). The aess of concern listed below contain contamainnts above the numerical remediation standard applicable at &e time of the comprisnm id further remediation is required because (check the appropr ate sub statement.
(a) The contaminant concentrations remaining in dhe areas of concern listed below are more than an order of magnitude (factor of 10) greater than the numerical remediation standard applicable at the time of the comparison; (b) The areas of concern or the site was rmmediated using engineering and institutional controls approved by the Department and these controls ae no longer protective of public health, safety and the environment; or (c) The area of concern or the site was remediated to an approved site specific remediation standard and some or all of the factors and assumptions which are the basis for deriving the site specific iemediation standard are no longer valid; Please list the areas of concern for which the previous statement applies. Area of Concern Location Reference Keyed to the Site Map (3) - The areas of concern listed below do not contain contaminants above the numerical remediation standard applicable at the time of the comparison and no further remediation is required. Please list the areas of concern for which the previous statement applies. Area of Concern Location Reference Keyed to the Site Map (4) The contaminant concentrations remaining in the below listed areas of concern are more than an order of magnitude greater than the numerical remediation standard applicable at the time of the comparison. However, no further remediation is required by the person conducting this preliminary assessment, because, in accordance with N.J.S.A. 58:10B13(e), that person is not liable for the contamination pursuant to N.J.S.A. 58:10-23.1 g. Please list the areas of concern for which the previous statement applies. Area of Concern Location Reference Keyed to the Site Map
- 10. Historical Data on envirounenal quality at the Industrial Estabisimicm A. Have any previous sampling results documenting environmental quality of the Industrial Establishment not received a no further action approval from the Department or been denied approval by the Department?
(NJ-A.C. 7:26E-3.1(c) l.viii) X Yes (See Attachment si ) No (Go to 11) OCNGS has conducted investigations that have not been the subject of a no further action letter. The results of those investigations either have already been provided to the department, or are being provided to the department with this PAR. B. Have there been any known changes in site conditions or new information developed since completion of previous sampling or remediation? (If sampling results were obtained, but are not part of this application, please explain below (N.J.A.C. 7:26E-3. l(c) xi): 9 02126/00, 10:21 AM
See response to Quoestion 118.A (above).
- 11. List all federal, state and local environmental permits at this facility, including permits for all previous and current owners or operators, applied for, received, or both (attach additional sheets if necessary).
Check here if no permits are involved A. New Jersey Air Pollution Control 099746 12/29/00 Gasoline Storage Tank 100443 02/13/01 EDG Tank Vent Certificate 117677 07/11/04 Emergency Diesel Generator #1 117678 07/11/04 Emergency Diesel Generator #2 122100 09/08/02 Auxiliary Steam Boiler #2 01-97-3007 (Application log #) 10/29/02 Emergency Fire Diesel 1-1 01-97-3550 (Application log #) 10/09/02 Emergency Fire Diesel 1-2 01-97-3800 (Application log #) 11/14/02 Steam Heating Boiler - #1 Boiler B. Underground Storage Tank Registration Number 0043067 Size of Tank (Gallons) Tank Contents 2,000 Normally empty; used for emergency containment (AOC-2A, Appendix F) C. New Jersey Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NJPDES) Permit Permit Discharge Type Discharge Location Expiration Date Number Keyed to Site rap NJ0005550 OC NJPDES DSW Permit NA 11/30/99 (Renewal application submitted 05/2&/99) NJ0101966 OC NJPDES DGW Permit NA 03/31/04 D. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) permit # E. EPA Identification Number NJD 980649172 F. In accordance with N.J.A.C. 7:26E-3.1(c) xii, list all other federal, state, local government environmental permits for all previous and current owners or operators applied for and/or received for the site including : (I) Name and address of the permitting agency (2) The reason for the permit (3) The permit identification number (4) The application date (5) The date of approval, denial or status of the application (6) The name and current address of the permiatees (7) The reason for the denial, revocation or suspension if applicable (3) The permit expiration daze Check here if no other environmental permits were applied for or received for this site. Provide the appendix # for the required listing if other environmental permits exist for this site. Apoendix J
- 12. In accordance with NJ.A.C. 7:26E-3.l(c)xiii, provide a summary of enforcement actions (including but not limited to, Notice of Violations, Court Orders, official notices or directives) for violations of environmental laws or regulations (attach additional sheets if necessary):
A. Check here if no enforcement actions are involved _ (Go to 13; otherwise complete 12B) B. (1) Name and address of agency that initiated the enforcement action 10 02/26/00, 10:21 AM
Appendix LC (2) Date of the enforcement action (3) Section of statute, rule or permit allegedly violated (4) Type of enforcement (5)Description of the violation (6) How was the violation resolved?
- 13. In accordance with NJ.A.C. 7"26E-3.1(c) xiv, please provide a narrative description of all areas where non-indigenous fill materials were used to replace soil or raise the topographic elevation of the site, including the dates of emplacement.
Non-indigenous fill materials were not used at the OCNGS site. Fill materials used at the site consisted of soil and sediment excavated during the construction of the Intake and Discharge Canals.
- 14. A. In accordance with N.J.A.C. 7:26E-3.2(a) 31, submit a scaled site plan, detailing the subject lot and block, property and or leasehold boundaries, location of current and former buildings, fill areas, paved and unpaved areas, vegetated areas, and all areas of concern identified above and all active or inactive wells.
Appendix L Figure L-l: Areas of Concern: Western Portion of Site Figure L-2: Areas of Concern: Eastern Portion of Site Figure L-3: Site Wide Radiological Survey Results for Co-60 Figure L-4: Site Wide Radiological Survey Results for Cs-137 Figure L-5: Groundwater Monitoring Results B. Scaled historical site maps and facility as built drawings (if available). C. A copy of the United States Geologic Survey (USGS) 7.5 minute topographical quadrangle that includes the site and an area of at least one mile radius around the site. The facility location shall be clearly noted. If a portion of the USGS quadrangle is used, the scale, north arrow, contour interval, longitude and latitude with the name and date of the USGS quadrangle shall be noted on the map. Appendix 0
- 15. In accordance with N.J.A.C. 7:26E-3.2, please provide the date that the site visit was completed to verify the findings of the preliminary assessment. Non-Radiological August 12, 1998; Visits for Radiological and additional visits for Non-Radiologicai occurred in December 1999 and February 2000.
- 16. List any other information you are submitting or which has been formerly requested by the Department:
Description Appendix N None at this time-I!I 02/26/00, 10:21 AM
CERTIFICATION: The following certification shall be signed by the highest-ranking individual at the site with overall responsibility for that site or activity. Where there is no individual at the site with overall responsibility for that site or activity, this certification shall be signed by the individual having responsibility for the overall operation of the site or activity. I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this application and all attached documents, and based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, to the best of my knowledge the submitted information is true, accurate and complete. I am aware that there are significant civil penalties for knowingly submitting false, inaccurate or incomplete information, and that I am committing a crime of the fourth degree if I make a written false statement which I do not believe to be true. I am also aware that if I knowingly direct or authorize the violation of any statute, I am personally liable for the penalties. Typed/Printed Name Sander Levin Title Site Director - Oyster Creek Nuclear Generatine Station Signature . *,k
- Date -2-O,-o Sworn to and Subscribed Before Me on this C) Q,,.
Date of ,,I* O,_ý.-&&MOD 6 Notary .P7*'OY'GOODIIEART
.4) '" P*... of New j 12 02/26/00, 10:21 AM
Division of Responsible Party Site Remediation Industrial Site Recovery Act INITIAL NOTICE FEE SUBMITrAL FORM Case # (if known) E99575 Case Name (Active Case) " 9200899 & Check drawn from the account of GPU Nucl ear, Inc. Check/M.O. # 9200900 Amount Enclosed $750.00 Please circle the appropriate payment location(s)
- 1. General Information Notice $100.00 2 Preliminary Assessment Report $250.00
- 3. Site Iv ti ation Re ort $500.00
- 4. Negative Declaration Review $100.00
- 5. Expedited Review Applications $250.00
- 6. Remediation in Progress Waiver Application. $250.00
- 7. Regulated Underground Storage Tank Waiver Applications $500.00
- 8. Area of Concern Waiver Application. $200.00
- 9. Limited Site Review Application. $450.00
- 10. Applicability Determination Application $200.00 II. De minimis Quantity Exemption Application $200.00
- 12. Limited Conveyance Applications $500.00
- 13. Remediation Agreement Application $1000.00 Remediation Agreement Amendment Application $500.00
- 14. Confidentiality Claim $250.00
- 15. Remedial Action Workplan Deferral Application. $750.00 This fee includes the costs of the Department's review of the General Information Notice required pursuant to N.J.A.C. 7:26B-3.2(a). Any person submitting this fee shall not be required to submit a separate General Information Notice fee.
Note: All applicable fees are due with the submission of each document. A case will remain with the Initial Notice Section up through the submission of a Remedial Investigation Report or the submission of a schedule to implement a Remedial Investigation or Remedial Action at Peril. 13 02/26/00, 10:21 AM
APPENDIX A SITE HISTORY
APPENDIX A: QUESTION 2A DESCRIPTION OF PAST INDUSTRIAL OPERATIONS Western Portion of Property or OCNGS: The property inside the "horseshoe" (bounded on the east by US Route 9, and on the north, south and west by the Intake and Discharge Canals), was purchased by Jersey Central Power and Light Company (JCP&L), a subsidiary of GPU, Inc., from Norman C. and Elsie H. Finninger (husband and wife) on 1M28/61. This portion of the site is where the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (OCNGS) is presently located. The approximately 132-acre property is located in Lacey Township as a portion of Block 1001, Lot 4 (Deed Book 2144, pg. 484). Approximately 12.01 acres of land located in Ocean Township, along the south bank of Oyster Creek (Block 41, Lot 43) was also purchased as part of that transaction. Prior to construction of the OCNGS, the site was vacant and undeveloped. JCP&L purchased the land for the purpose of constructing the OCNGS. JCP&L initiated construction of the OCNGS in December of 1963 and commercial operation began on December 23, 1969. JCP&L operated the OCNGS until 1980 when GPUN, another subsidiary of GPU, Inc., assumed responsibility for operations. GPUN continues to operate the OCNGS for JCP&L, doing business as GPU Energy. Eastern Portion of Property: JCP&L purchased the "Finninger Farm Property", located across US Route 9 and east of the OCNGS, from NOR-RU-EL, Inc. on 6/28/66. The 548.07 acre property is located in Lacey Township as Block 100, Lots 1-20 & 20.01 and Ocean Township as Block 63, Lot 7 (Deed Book 2600, pg. 352). Prior to that purchase, the portion of the property located in Lacey Township (536.03 acres) was used for the raising of beef cattle while the 12.04 acre parcel located in Ocean Township was undeveloped. JCP&L purchased an undeveloped 25.25-acre parcel (Lacey Township Block 101, Lot 1) located adjacent to the north side of the Finninger Farm Property, from Mayer Construction Company on 3/8/71 (Deed Book 3110, pg. 357). As part of the land acquisition for the construction if the intake canal for the OCNGS, JCP&L purchased a 2.01 acre undeveloped parcel (Lacey Township Block 138, Lot 2) from Charles R. Pearl and Marie D. Pearl on 1/18/66 (Deed Book 2555, pg. 411), and an undeveloped lot comprising 1.01 acres (Lacey Township Block 139, Lot 11) from Wilnor Realty Company on 11/17/65 (Deed Book 2539, pg. 369).
APPENDIX B: QUESTION 2B DESCRIPTION OF MOST RECENT OPERATIONS Western portion of Proverty: OCNGS consists of a single boiling-water nuclear reactor and a turbine-generator to produce electrical power. This equipment and auxiliary support structum are located within the area bounded on the east by U.S. Route 9 and on the north, south and west by the intake/discharge canal. Three basic steps are involved in the process of producing electricity at the OCNGS. First, heat produced by fission in the nuclear reactor converts high purity water to steam. Second, the steam is used to drive a turbine so that some of the energy in the steam is converted to mechanical energy. Third, the turbine is connected to a generator which converts the mechanical energy of the rotating turbine into electrical energy. Saltwater from Barnegat Bay is used to cool the steam exhausted from the turbine and to condense the steam back into water. This condensed high purity water is returned from the main station condensers to the heat source to be converted into 'steam again to continue to drive the turbine. Eastern Portion of Property. The eastern portion of the site is primarily heavily vegetated and largely undeveloped. JCP&L/GPUN have used the property in the following manner: I. To deposit excavated/dredged soil and sediment during the construction of the intake and discharge canals for the OCNGS during the 1960's.
- 2. As a source of topsoil for re-vegetation projects on and around the OCNGS.
- 3. As an Environmental Laboratory (in buildings formerly located on the property) from 1975-1988.
- 4. To deposit dredged material resulting from periodic maintenance dredging in the intake and discharge canals. This material was all deposited at the location of the existing 17.5 acre upland Confined Disposal Facility during dredging projects in 1978, 1984 and 1997. The Confined Disposal Facility is discussed in Question 5, AOC-38.
- 5. As a location for environmental monitoring activities including continuous air monitoring, ground water monitoring and the planting of gardens to provide vegetables for radiological analyses.
- 6. The Barge Unloading Facility (AOC-7), located along the south shore of Oyster Creek (Discharge Canal) adjacent to U.S. Route 9, has been used to deliver large components, such as the turbine rotor, to the OCNGS. This facility is currently used on an intermittent basis by the Ocean County Engineering Department to load reef construction materials (concrete and used tires) onto vessels for delivery to artificial reefs in the Atlantic Ocean.
I
I APPENDIX C RADIOACTIVE SUBSTANCES/WASTE INVENTORY I I
APPENDIX C: QUESTION 3 Radioactive Substances/Waste Inventory The vastly predominant location for radioactive material is in the reactor building, in two locations. All remaining locations together contain one millionth or less of the activity in the reactor building. The reactor vessel contains the majority of this activity most of which is short lived (half-lives of seconds to days). Fuel performance/bum-up computer calculations show that there we hundreds of different radionuclides in active fuel. However, for practical purposes of radiation protection, the isotopes of most interest in active fuel are the short lived noble gases and iodines (e.g. Xe-133, Xe-135, Kr-88, 1-131, 1-133, etc.). The reactor is inside a full pressure suppression containment and contains 577 used / highly irradiated fuel elements. The second location in the reactor building that contains most of the remaining activity is the spent fuel pool. The spent fuel pool is used to store spent fuel for decay and cooling. The spent fuel pool is inside a secondary containment and currently contains 2420 spent fuel elements of various ages after discharge from about 1.5 years to about 30 years. Following a relatively short period of decay, the nuclide content of the discharged fuel decreases by several orders of magnitude. Major isotopes of interest following this cooling / decay period are Co- 60, which is present as a surface film, and Cs-137 which is in the fuel. Vastly smaller amounts of radioactive material are elsewhere throughout the plant. Short lived noble gases, activation gases (N-16) and radioiodines are present in the turbine building as a result of carry over and degassing into the main steam system. The Augmented Off-gas (AOG) building receives the non-condensable gases from the turbine / condenser system through the 30 minute delay line. The same radionuclides, less decay, (therefore no significant N-16 for example) are present in the AOG building. The New and Old Radwaste buildings contain liquid and solid waste processing. Therefore, dominant radionuclides in this building are consistent with those transported through depressurized water: soluble and particulate fission and activation products. The nuclide mixes associated with the solid waste streams are evaluated periodically per NRC requirements in 10 CFR 61. The majority of the activity in these buildings consists of Co-60, Cs-137, and Fe-55. The low-level Radwaste storage building contains waste that is packaged and staged for disposal and materials and equipment that is stored for re-use. Therefore, the activity in this building is consistent with the solid waste streams in the Radwaste processing buildings, and is dominated by Co-60, Cs-137, and Fe-55. The Radiological instrument calibration facility has several sealed sources of Cs- 137 that provide the dose rates needed to calibrate survey meters etc.
APPENDIX D DESCRIPTION OF WASTEWATER DISCHARGES I
APPENDIX D: QUESTION 4A DESCRIPTION OF WASTEWATER DISCHARGES The OCNGS is authorized to discharge to surface and groundwater in accordance with the requirements of the following NJPDES Permits:
" NJPDES Discharge to Surface Water (DSW) Permit No. NJ0005550, issued 10/21/94, cifective 12/01/94 through 11/30/99 (application for renewal submitted on 05/28/99 and deemed administratively complete by NJDEP on 06/10/99); and, " NJPDES Discharge to Ground Water (DGW) Permit No. NJ0101966 effective 04/01/99 through 03/31/04.
Parts II-B/C and NV-B/C of the NJPDES DSW Permit, which identify the sampling and reporting requirements at each outfal, are provided in this section as an attachment. DSN 001 - Main condenser non-contact cooling water MISW* Samples are collected at the out.fall of DSN 001 for thermal parameters, and in the main condenser discharge tunnel just east of the chlorine monitor shed prior to the outfall or at the outfall of DSN 001 for all other parameters and reported monthly. DSN 002 - Heat exchanger non-contact cooling water (DS Samples are collected from the common header located on the 23-foot elevation of the New Radwaste Heat Exchanger Room, or the sampling point located near the end of the discharge pipe for DSN 002, and reported monthly. DSN 004 - Stormwater runoff, non-contact cooling water from reactor building and emergency service water heat exchangers and discharge from the 1-5 sumn (DSW) Samples are collected at the sample pipe located inside the fence near the terminus of the 30" header or at the outfall of DSN 004 (depending on site conditions), and reported monthly. DSN 005 - Dilution pump discharge water (DSW) Required flow measurements are calculated and reported monthly. DSN 007 - Dilution VUmD seal water (DSW) Samples are collected at the north side of the dilution pump structure at the outfall of DSN 007 and reported monthly. DSN 008 - Intake screen and strainer washwater discharge (DSW) Required flow measurements are calculated and reported monthly. DSN 009 - Fish sampling D0o0 (DSW) Required flow measurements are calculated and reported monthly. DSN K01 - Sand Filter Backwash (DGW) Backwash from the pretreatment building discharges to a seepage pit or backwash sump located adjacent to and northwest of the ambulance building. T-he discharge consists of backflush overflow. G:\STAFF\SHAPEDTECO\Projects\OysterCreekNuilear\PA-RAD\Append D WW Discharges.doc 02/28/00
APPENDIX D: QUESTION 4A DESCRIPTION OF WASTEWATER DISCHARGES The following discharges are permitted under NJPDES Permit No. NJ0005550, but are located at the Forked River Combustion Turbine Facility, remote from the OCNGS. The information is provided for accuracy; however, the following discharges do not represent potential areas of concern for the OCNGS. DSN 012 - Stormwater from the oil/water separator associated with the Combustion Turbine Facility, demineralizer water system drains, and other treated stormwater Samples are collected at the outfall of DSN 012 (former Forked River DSN 012) and reported monthly. DSN 013 - Stormwater Samples are collected at the outfall of DSN 013 (former Forked River DSN 004) and reported monthly. DSN 014 - Stormwater Samples are collected at the outfall of DSN 014 (former Forked River DSN 007) and reported monthly. G :\STAFF\SHAPRED\PECO\Projc~ts\OysterCreckNuI er\A-RAD\Append D WW Discharges.doc 02128/00
APPENDIX E DESCRIPTION OF HISTORIC AND CURRENT WASTE STREAMS I
APPENDIX E: QUESTION 4B DESCRIPTION OF HISTORIC AND CURRENT WASTE STREAMS Waste Streams Waste streams generated at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station include the following:
" Dry Active Waste: Represents the "household trash" from the contaminated areas of the plant. It consists of plastic, paper, wood, and metaL
- Irradiated Hardware: Parts of plant that require periodic replacement and are subject to neutron irradiation in the reactor and become radioactive by neutron absorption.
" Filter Media: The plant uses a filter powder-precoat filter process for cleanup of radioactively contaminated water. This filter material is removed from the filtration vessel and dewatered when expended.
" Resin: Ion exchange materials used for water purification purposes
" Evaporator Bottoms: Residual solids fbIlowing evaporation volume reduction of wastewater
" Spent Fuel: Used nuclear fuel that has been subject to neutron flux and thus contains the mixed fission and activation products resulting from the fission process.
Wastes that pursuant to NRC regulations are approved for transportation and off-site disposal are ultimately sent to the following waste disposal facilities: Radiological Waste Disposal Facility Radiological Waste Disposal Facility Westinghouse/ Waltz Mills Unitech Services (AKA Interstate Nuclear Services) Hunker Road 401 N. Third Ave Madison, PA 15663 Royersford, PA 19568 Interstate Nuclear Services DSSI 295 Parker Street 657 Gallagher Rd Springfield, MA 01151 Kingston TN 37763 American Ecology Recycle Center (AKA Quadrex) Manufacturing Sciences 109 Flint Road 304 Kerr Hollow Rd Oak Ridge TN 37830 Oak Ridge TN 37830 ALARON NSSI/Rcovery Services RD2 Box 2140A PO Box 34042 Wampum PA 16157 5711 Etheridge St Houston TX 77034 GTS Duratek ATG Richland PO Box 2530 PO Box 969 1560 Bear Creek Rd 2025 Battelle Blvd Oak Ridge, TN 37830 Richland WA 99352 I
APPENDIX E: QUESTION 4B DESCRIPTION OF HISTORIC AND CURRENT WASTE STREAMS GTS Duratek West (AKA F W Hake 'Anoiam) Chem Nuclear Systems 1790 Dock Street Chem Nuclear Consolidation Facility Memphis TN 38113 Hwy. 64 Bwnweli, SC 29812 Bamwell Waste Management Facility Maxy Flats Disposal Facility Osborne Rd Bamwell, SC 29812 Moorehead, KY Nuclear Fuel Services West Valley, NY Hanford Disposal Facility Richland, WA Non-Manifested Waste Streams Non-hazardous solids/Non-Radioactive (i.e., paper, cardboard, plastics, metals, and office rubbish) are disposed in dumpsters at various locations at the facility. Wastes are removed for off-site disposal or recycling by the following New Jersey disposal companies: Waste Management, and E&D Recycling, Inc. Clean scrap metal is stored in a dumpster located at the southwestern portion of the site and is removed on an as-needed basis by a scrap metal recycling company. 2
APPENDIX F AREAS OF CONCERN
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION Potential Areas of Concern (AOCs) discussed in this section are shown on the following figures provided in Appendix L: Figure L-l: Areas of Concern: Western Portion of Site Figure L-2: Areas of Concern: Eastern Portion of Site Figure L-3: Radioactive Environmental Soil Results for Co-60 Figure L-4: Radioactive Environmental Soil Results for Cs-137 Figure L-5: Groundwater Monitoring Network and Results Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station ("OCNGS") utilizes aboveground storage tanks, pumping stations, sumps and pits in the production of energy. A number of these operational units and their associated appurtenances contain or transport radiological materials/wastes as part of the process. Each of these systems that contain or transport radiological materials/wastes, which pose as potential Areas of Concern (AOC) as defined in N.J.A.C. 7:26E, is listed below. Non-radiological areas of concern were addressed in a separate Preliminary Assessment, which was submitted to the NJDEP in December of 1999. I.A. BULK STORAGE AREAS AND APPURTENANVCES ABOVEGROUND STORAGE TANKS AND APPURTENANCES (AOCs 1- 4) AOC - 1A Condensate Storage Tank The Condensate Storage Tank ("CST") is a 525,000-gallon tank that provides bulk storage of condensate for use throughout the plant. The tank is located outside the west wall of the Turbine Building. Water for filling the CST is supplied from the demineralized water system. The CST provides a surge volume for the condensate system. The make-up and spill valves transfer water between the CST and the condensate system to absorb volume changes in the condensate system. The CST is located on a concrete rim support and has no secondary containment-OCNGS conducted a soil-sampling program for gamma-emitting radionuclides in the area of the CST and its associated Pump Shack. The results of the sampling program indicate detectable concentrations of Cobalt-60 (Co-60). Four (4) of the thirty-four (34) soil samples were above the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's ("NRC-) default decommissioning facilities of 3.8 picoCuries/gram (pCi/g). Co-60 was detected at concentrations of 157 pCi/g, 22 pCi/g, 20 pCi/g I 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION and 6.8 pCi/g. The two samples with the highest concentrations were associated with a valve and line leak and the two remaining concentrations were associated with bottom leakage from the CST. All samples in AOC-IA were collected in 1991. In addition to the soil data noted above, two monitoring wells (W-5 and W-6) are located hydrogeologicafly cross gradient of the area. The monitoring wells are sampled semi-annually as part of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP). Each well was sampled for gamma-emitting radionuclides associated with fission processes and tritium. The analytical results from these wells during 1999 indicated only tritium was detected in MW-5 at a concentration of 380 pCi/I (USEPA Drinking water standard for tritium is 20,000 picoCuries per liter (pCi/I)). No other plant specific radionuclides were detected in either well. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Attachment I of this Appendix and in Appendix N. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the soils;
- Reduction in concentrations detected between 1991 & 1999,
- Lack of impact to groundwater; and
- Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC- lB Condensate Pump Shack Condensate from the CST is transferred to the Turbine Building through a network of aboveground and underground lines. The two pumps for the CST are located to the south of the tank in a small shack. The pumps take suction on a common header from the CST and discharge the condensate through individual spring check valves and isolation valves to a common discharge header. Normally, one pump operates continuously to supply system loads. Information pertaining to soil and groundwater sampling in this area is provided in AOC-IA above. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the soils;
# Reduction in concentrations detected between 1991 & 1999;
- Lack of impact to groundwater; and 2 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION S DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMMNTATION
- Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC - IC Condensate Transfer System The condensate transfer system supplies condensate water to the Turbine Building. Historically, all of the lines from the CST to the Condensate Pump Shack and the Turbine Building were underground. However, during the 1990s, many of these lines were replaced with aboveground lines or were placed in underground vaults. Detailed information regarding these process lines can be found in Attachment II to this Appendix. Information regarding soils and groundwater in this area is provided in AOC-1A above. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the soils;
- Reduction in concentrations detected between 1991 & 1999;
- Lack of impact to groundwater; and
- Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC - 2A Torus Water Storage Tank ("TWSrT) The TWST is a 750,000-gallon AST, which is located south of the North Gate guardhouse. The TWST was installed during: the construction of OCNGS in the mid to late 1960's for the storage of water used in the Reactor Building's Torus System. This AST is located on a concrete pad and has no secondary containment. The facility conducted a soil-sampling program for the gamma-emitting radionuclides in the area of the TWST. The results of the sampling program indicate detectable concentrations of Co-60 and Cesium-137 (Cs-137), however, the concentrations detected were below the NRC decommissioning guidelines. Twelve (12) soil samples were collected in late 1999. Analytical results for the samples indicated that four (4) of the twelve (12) samples were below the method detection limits for both radionuclides. The highest concentration reported for Co-60 was 0.860 pCi/g, while the highest concentration reported for Cs-137 was 0.150 pCi/g, which is similar to normal environmental background for this nuclide. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Attachment I of this Appendix and Appendix N. 3 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION In addition to the soil data noted above, two monitoring wells (W-5 and W-6) are located hydrogeologically downgradient of the area. As previously noted, the monitoring wells are sampled semi-annually as part of the REMP. Each well was sampled for gamma-emitting radionuclides associated with fission processes and tritium. The analytical results from these wells indicated only tritium was detected in MW-5 at a concentration of 380 pCi/L (USEPA Drinking water standard for tritium is 20,000 pCi/L). No other plant specific radionuclides were detected in either well. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Attachment I of this Appendix and in Appendix N. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the soils;
- Concentrations of the radionuclides detected in the soils were below the NRC's soil guideline for decommissioning facilities;
- Lack of impact to groundwater; and
- Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC - 2B Underground Piping from Torus Tank to Reactor Building A 4-inch coal tar coated carbon steel line, installed in the mid-1980's, is used to transfer liquids to and from the Torus System in the Reactor Building to the Torus Tank. In 1999, the facility conducted a soil-sampling program for gamma-emitting radionuclides in the area of the TWST lines The results of the sampling program indicate detectable concentrations of Cs- 137 However, the concentrations detected were below the NRC decommissioning guidelines. Two (2) of the five (5) samples of Cs-137 obtained were below the method detection limit. The highest concentration reported for Cs-137 was 0.117 pCi/g, which is similar to normal environmental background for this nuclide. Co-60 was not detected in any of the samples. In addition to the soil data noted above, two monitoring wells (W-5 and W-6) are located hydrogeologically downgradient of the area. As previously noted, the monitoring wells are sampled semi-annually as part of the REMP. Each well was sampled for gamma-emitting radionuclides associated with fission processes and tritium. The analytical results from these wells indicated only tritium was detected in MW-5 at a concentration of 380 pCi/L (USEPA Drinking 4 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION S DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION water standard for tritium is 20,000 pCi/L). No other plant specific radionuclides were detected in either well. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Attachment I of this Appendix and in Appendix N. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the soils;
- Concentrations of the radionuclides detected in the soils were below the NRC's soil guideline for decommissioning facilities;
# Lack of impact to groundwater, and
- Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC - 3A Turbine Dirty Oil Tank OCNGS maintains a Turbine Dirty Oil Tank, which has a storage capacity of 15,000 gallons. The tank is located off the northwest corner of the Turbine Building. It is used to store lubricating oil from the turbine system during station maintenance outages that may require the Turbine Lube Oil Main Tank to be drained. The tank is inside containment with a concrete base and concrete containment walls. The volume within this containment is of sufficient capacity for both the contents of the tank plus freeboard for accurmmlated rainwater. At the end of the maintenance work on the turbine system (typically less than 60 days in duration), the oil may be returned and a residual quantity of oil may remain in the Dirty Oil Tank, If oil is determined to be unacceptable for return to the Turbine Lube Oil Main Tank, it is removed and properly disposed. The containment has a drain valve to allow for the removal of accumulated rainwater. All transfers between the Turbine Dirty Oil Tank and the Turbine Lube Oil Main Tank are conducted by underground pipeline. The containment in which the Turbine Oil Dirty Tank is located was inspected for evidence of deterioration or cracking. Based on the results of the inspection, the integrity of the secondary containment unit has not be= breached. OCNGS conducted a soil-sampling program for gamma-emitting radionuclides in the area of the above referenced tank. The results of the sampling program indicate detectable concentrations of Co-60 and Cs-137. However, the concentrations detected were below the NRC decommissioning guidelines and consistent with normal environmental concentrations. Detailed information 5 0212M/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION be found in Attachment I of pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can this Appendix and in Appendix N. and W-6) are located In addition to the soil data noted above, two monitoring wells (W-5 the monitoring wells are hydrogeologically downgradient of the area. As previously noted, for gamma-emitting sampled semi-annually as part of the REMP. Each weil was sampled these wells radionuclides associated with fission processes and tritium. The analytical results from indicated only tritium was detected in MW-5 at a concentration of 380 pCi/L (USEPA Drinking water standard for tritium is 20,000 pCi/L). No other plant specific radionuclides were detected in either well. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Attachment I of this Appendix and in Appendix N. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the soils;
# The tank is located within secondary containment,
- Lack of impact to groundwater-
- Restricted access to the AOC; and,
- Containment system integrity good.
AOC - 3B Turbine Dirty Oil Tank Lines The OCNGS maintains a Turbine Dirty Oil Tank, which has a storage capacity of 15,000 gallons. The tank is located off the northwest corner of the Turbine Building. It is used to store lubricating oil from the Turbine system during station maintenance outages that may require the Turbine Lube Oil Main Tank to be drained The drain line for the tank system runs from the Turbine Building underground to the aforementioned tank Two soil samples wem obtained in the area of the lines and were analyzed for the gamma-emitting radionuclides. No concentratons of Co-60 or Cs-137 were detected in the samples obtained. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Attachment I of this Appendix and in Appendix N. As indicated in AOC-3A, groundwater in the area of the lines has not been impacted. 6 S0212/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
# Lack of radionuclides detected in the soils;
# Lack of impact to groundwater, and
- Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC - 4A Former Waste Surge Tank The Former Waste Surge Tank is a 100,000-gallon aluminum tank situated on a concrete rim support. The tank was historically used to store wastewater from the operational portion of the plant prior to treatment. The tank was removed from service in 1982 when a leak was detected in the base of the tank. Impacted soils were excavated and removed. OCNGS c,,onducted a soil-sampling program for gamma-emitting radionuclides associated with fission processes (e.g., Co-60 & Cs-137) in the area of the Surge Tank. The results of the sampling program indicate detectable concentrations of Co-60 and Cs-137. Of the one hundred seventeen (112) samples collected in 1982, 1992, and 1999 twenty-seven (27) exceed the NRC decommissioning guideline for for Co-60 and twenty-seven (27) of the samples exceeded the guideline for Cs-137. Concentrations of Co-60 ranged from below the method detection level to 1,100 pCi/g and concentrations for Cs- 137 ranged from below the method detection level to 390 pCi/g These maximum concentrations were the result of a spill in 1992. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Attachment I of this Appendix and in Appendix N. OCNGS samples groundwater on a routine basis as part of the REMP. In 1999, fifteen (15) monitoring wells were sampled in March and again in September. The results of the analysis of the thirty (30) samples collected from the on-site groundwater monitoring well network revealed that Tritium was the only plant specific radionuclide detected. Tritium was found in eight of the wells in March and five of the wells in September with concentrations ranging from 140 pCi/L to 580 pCi/L well below USEPA's drinking water standard of 20,000 pCifL. These concentrations also reflect a significant decrease from the concentrations detected in 1998. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results from 1998 referenced above can be found in Appendix N. 7 02/28/00. 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION S DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Lack of impact to groundwater, and
- Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC - 4B Former Waste Surge Tank Lines In 1982, the Former Waste Surge Tank and its associated lines were removed from service. The lines were emptied cleaned, flushed and capped in-place. According to facility personnel, contaminated soils were encountered during the line decommnissioning process. Impacted soils were excavated and removed. Information pertaining to soil and groundwater sampling in this area is provided in AOC-4A above. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Lack of impact to groundwater- and
+ Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC-4C Old Radwaste Building Ramp A ramp located on the eastern side of the Old Radwaste Building was used to load tanked and drummed radwaste for shipment to a licensed disposal facility. The materials were removed from the Old Radwaste Building and were loaded onto or into vehicles for removal to a licensed treatment and/or disposal facility. Thirty-nine (39) samples were collected in 1982 at the truck ramp pavement area. The results of this sampling program indicate that nine (9) samples exceeded NRC decommissioning guideline for Co-60 and four (4) exceed the NRC guideline for Cs-137. The concentrations of Co-60 ranged from below the method detection level to 40 pCi/g. Based on the decay of Co-60 over time, the maximum concentration in 1992 is expected be below the NRC guideline today. Concentrations for Cs-137 ranged from below the method detection level to 24 pCi/g. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results from 1998 referenced above can be found in Attachment I of this Appendix and in Appendix N. 8 02/28/00. 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION OCNGS samples groundwater on a routine basis as part of the REMP. In 1999, fifteen (15) monitoring wells were sampled in March and again in September. The results of the analysis of the thirty (30) samples collected from the on-site groundwater monitoring well network revealed that Tritium was the only plant specific radionuclide detected. Tritium was found in eight of the wells in March and five of the wells in September with concentrations ranging from 140 pCi/L to 580 pCi/L, well below USEPA's drinking water standard of 20,000 pCi/L. These concentrations also reflect a significant decrease from the concentrations detected in 1998. Detailed information-pertaining to the analytical samples and results from 1998 referenced above can be found in Attachment I of this Appendix and in Appendix N. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Relatively limited AOC
- Lack of impact to groundwater- and
- Restricted access to the AOC.
UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK(S) (AOC-5) AOC -5 Waste Drop Tank The Waste Drop Tank (UST Registration No. NJ0043067, expiration 6-30-01) is a 2.00G-gallon lined fiberglass UST that is located immediately outside the southern wall of the Material Warehouse. The floor drain system in the Material Warehouse is connected to the Waste Drop Tank. The floor drains have been directed to the Waste Drop Tank since the construction of the facility. Drums of petroleum and other chemical products (non-radiological) are stored in the portion of the warehouse serviced by the drain system. The purpose of the Waste Drop Tank is to act as a secondary containment sump in the event of a spill or leak from the drums. As such, the tank was constructed with a chemically resistant internal lining. The Waste Drop Tank has no discharge lines; any material collected in the tank would be pumped out within 48 hours for off-site disposal. The tank was pumped out once when mop water from cleaning the warehouse floor was pushed into the tank drains and allowed to accumulate in the tank. Once discovered, the water was pumped out and disposed at an off-site wastewater treatment facility in accordance with 9 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION applicable regulations. The tank has not been used since that event. There have been no materials directed to the Waste Drop Tank, with the exception of the mop water that was a one-time event. OCNGS conducted a soil-sampling program for the gamma-emitting in the area of the above referenced tank. The results of the sampling program indicate detectable concentrations of Cs-137. However, the concentrations detected were below the NRC's decommissioning guidelines. The highest concentration reported for Cs-137 was 0.125 pCi/g, which is similar to normal environmental concentration for this nuclide. Co-60 was not detected in any of the samples. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results from 1998 referenced above can be found in Attachment I of this Appendix and in Appendix N. In addition to the soil data noted above, two monitoring wells (W-14 and W-15) are located hydrogeologically downgradient of the area. As previously noted, the monitoring wells are sampled semi-annually as part of the REMP. Each well was sampled for gamma-emitting radionuclides associated with fission processes and tritium. The analytical results from these wells indicated only tritium was detected in MW-15 at a concentration of 320 pCi/L (USEPA Drinking water standard for tritium is 20,000 pCi/L) No other plant specific radionuclides were detected in either well. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Attachment I of this Appendix and in Appendix N. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the soils;
" Concentrations of the radionuclides detected in the soils were below the NRC's soil guideline for decommissioning facilities;
" Lack of impact to groundwater, and
" Restricted access to the AOC.
RAiL CARS (AOC - 6) AOC-6 Rail Road Siding A railroad siding enters the Property west of U.S. Route 9, immediately north of the Discharge Canal; the siding divides into two spurs. The railroad siding was used for the transport of equipment and materials during the construction of the generating station. The railroad siding is 10 02/28/00. 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION visible in aerial photographs from 1964 and 1972. GPU Nuclear personnel confirmed that the railspurs were not used after 1973. NFA - The Railroad Siding was used solely fbr the transportation of construction equipment and materials into the Property and was not used after 1973. The railroad siding was not used for the transport of radiological materials or wastes. LOADING AND UNLOADING AREAS (AOC-7) AOC- 7 Barge Unloading Facility The Barge Unloading Facility is located along the south shore of Oyster Creek (Discharge Canal) adjacent to US Route 9. The facility is used on an infrequent basis to deliver large mechanical components, such as the turbine rotor, to the OCNGS. The facility is also used on an intermittent basis by the Ocean County Engineering Department, to load reef construction materials (concrete and used tires) onto vessels for delivery to artificial reefs in the Atlantic Ocean. NFA - The Barge Unloading Facility was used solely for the transport of large mechanical components and construction materials The unloading area was not used for the transport of radiological materials or wastes, B. STORAGE AND STAGING ArEAS There are no storage pads, surface impoundments, lagoons, or dumpsters where radioactive materials or wastes are stored. Radiological materials stored on-site are located in one of the buildings designed specifically for the storage of these materials. Each of these buildings is discussed in detail in Section F " Building Interior Areas with Potential for Discharge" of this appendix. I1I 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION IC DISCHARGE AND DISPOSAL AREAS I FLOOR DRAINS, TRENCiES, PIPING & SUMS (AOCs s - l) AOC -8 FLOOR DRAINS The following table summarizes the structures at which floor drains are located, and identifies the destination of discharge(s) to the floor drains. Structure Destination of Discharge :Recommendatio - Office Sanitar, Sewer NFA: because no radiological wastes or materials Building _ are stored in this area. Guard Houses Sanitary Sewer NFA: because no radiological wastes or materials are stored in this arm Emergency Rainwater that enters the EDGB is discharged NFA: because no radiological materials or wastes Diesel to the Canal via a NJPDES permitted outfall are stored or used in this building. Generator (DSN 004). Floor drains near the ASTs also Building discharge to DSN 004. Pretreatment Floor drains are connected to the storm sewer NFA: because no radiological materials or wastes Building system that discharges to the Canal via DSN are stored or used in this building. 004, Chlorination/ Floor drains discharge to storm sewer system NFA: because no radiological materials or wastes Condensate or. in event of discharge. to the condensate are stored or used in this building. Condensate Transfer storage tank drain, and overflow coLleczion transfer system contains condensate in this Pump House system building. Floor drains in the condensate system area are muted underground into the turbine building. Main Office Drains from office area discharge to sanitary NFA: because no non-radiological mnatrials are Building sewer. Drains from laboratory and laundry stored or used in the office area. discharge to Radwaste Treatment. Turbine All 5 drain/sumps discharge automatically to NFA: because drainlsumps discharge automatically Building the Radwaste Treatment System Sump #1-5 to the Radwaste Treatment System. can be manually overmdden to discharge to the canal via DSN 004 Reactor Drains/sumps discharg to Radwaste NFA: because all drains/sumps potentially Building Treatment System with the excption of non- containing radiological materials discharge to _contaminated clean water lines Radwaste Treatment System. 12 02128/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION Old Radwase Fordrains discharge eiter to sumns which NA:L bcms floor drains am directed Building discharge to the Radwaste Treatment systm, tomatically to the Radwaste Treatment System. or ultimately to the storm sewer system (to the Canal via DSN 004). A floor drain outside of secondary containment for former acid/caustic tanks drain to a pit outside of the Old Radwaste Building. The tanks were last used approximately fifteen years ago. The only potential concern associated with this drain would be if a catastrophic tank failure had resulted in an overflow of acid or caustic materials from the secondary containment. Off-Gas Floor drains discharge to building sump and, NFA: because floor drains/sumps are directed Building ultimately, to the Radwaste Treatment System. automatically to the Radwaste Treatment System. One drain discharges directly to the storm sewer system. Boiler House Two floor drains discharge to sump 1-12. NFA: because floor drains/sumps are directed which discharges to the Radwaste Treatment automatically to the Radwaste Treatment System. System. Nevh Radwaste Floor drain/sumps discharge to the Radwaste NFA: because floor drains/sumps are directed Building Treatment System. automatically to the Radwaste Treatment System. Materials Floor drains to Waste Drop Tank (See AOC- NFA: because there are no direct discharges. The Warehouse 2A) drains are directed to the Waste Drop Tank (addressed in AOC-2A). Radwaste Drains within secondary containment routed NFA: because discharges from the Radwaste Storage Tanks either to building sump (or to Radwaste Storage Tank areas discharge to Radwaste Treatment System) or to storm sewer on basis Treatment System. of radiological analyses and visual examination. The Radwaste Storage Tanks have never contained non-radiological hazardous _ _ materials. In addition, as part of the facility's REMP it monitors a composite sampler immediately downstream of discharge point 004. The samples are obtained daily and analyzed weekly for gamma-emitting radionuclides and tritium Information pertaining to surface water, sediment, and aquatic life sampling can be found in AOC-17. AOC- 9 Pipes There are several sections to the Exhaust Tunnel System (ETS) used to transport wastewater and treated water between the Reactor Building, Turbine Building, Exhaust Stack and the Old/New Radwaste Buildings. The lines are suspended from the top of the tunnel on hangers. The sketch shown immediately below is a schematic of the location of the first three segments of the ETS. The shaded portion is the ETS complex as it enters the Exhaust Stack. The ETS near the stack is 13 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION S DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION groundwater large enough that is could be considered a subsurface structure that could impact flow (Figure 9-1). Figure 9-1 SIMPLIFIED PLAN VIEW OF ETS NEAR EXHAUST STACK (not to scale) To Old Radwaste r + t- X 0 SEXHAUST STACK 1 :$:eam~en.t B-Approximately 68 ft. Segment A- Old Radwaste Building to Exhaust Stack Segments D, E, & F of the ETS are also utilized as a pipe chase. A number of pipes from the Turbine Building and Reactor Building pass through the exhaust tunnel and lead to the Old Radwaste Building/New RIadwaste building. The sketch below (Figure 9-2) shows the approximate locations of the remaining three segments of the ETS. "C-Reactor" is the approximate location of the centerline of the reactor. 14 02/28/00. 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION Figure 9-2 Reactor Building Exhaust Tunnel 32 *5 Office Building C-Reactor fNorth Approximate Length: 192 ft. The Exhaust Tunnel is a 2+-ft thick steel reinforced concrete structure. The sidewalls and ceiling range in thickness from 1.75-ft. to 2.5- ft. Although information regarding the construction of the tunnels is limited there is an indication that the 3-layer system similar to the one depicted in AOC-26 (leveling slab, membrane, protective slab) was used in the tunnel construction. Information regarding the potential release of contaminants from this structure is discussed in detail in Appendix M "Theoretical Release Study"- OCNGS conducted a soil-sampling program for the gamma-emitting radionuclides in the area of the above referenced lines. The results of the sampling program indicate detectable concentrations of Cs-137. However, the concentrations detected were below the NRC decommissioning guidelines. The highest concentration reported for Cs-137 was 0.110 pCi/g, which is similar to normal environmental concentrations for this nuclide. Co-60 was not detected in any of the samples obtained. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Attachment I of this Appendix and Appendix N. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
# Limited extent of radiommiides detected in the soils;
# Concentrations of the radionuclides detected in the soils were below the NRC's soil guideline for decommissioning facilities-
# Lack of impact to site wide groundwater- and
- Restricted access to the AOC 15 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION AOC - 1OA Reactor Building Vaults There are several vaults located along the southern wall of the Reactor Building. These vaults are used as a form of secondary containment for pipes. The Reactor Building Vaults extend 3-ft. to 6-ft. from the building and connect the Reactor Building to the Exhaust tunnel. Since these vaults connect with the Exhaust Tunnel System, this AOC is addressed along with AOC-9. Please note AOC- IOA is located between Segment D of the tunnel and the Reactor Building as depicted on Figure 9-2. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the soils;
- Concentrations of the radionuclides detected in the soils were below the NRC's soil guideline for decommissioning facilities;
" Lack of impact to site wide groundwater, and
" Restricted access to the AOC AOC- 10B Torus Tank and Condensate Tank Line Vaults There are several vaults located along the northwestern wall of the Turbine Building. These vaults are used as a form of secondary containment for the CST and the TWST tank lines. Each of these areas of concern is addressed along with AOC-IC and AOC-2B.
Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
" Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the soils;
" Concentrations of the radionuclides detected in the soils were below the NRC's soil guideline for decommissioning facilities,
" Lack of impact to site wide groundwater; and
" Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC- II Sumps Floor drain sumps located in various buildings at the OCNGS are used to collect water that may leak from the Reactor Coolant System, Service Water System or numerous other cooling and water handling systems. Water from the Reactor Coolant System contains some radioactive 16 16O02/28M.O 12M P
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION material but is otherwise highly purified. The Service Water System consists of salt water withdrawn from Barnegat Bay via the Intake Canal. Due to the Federal requirements associated to with the control of radioactive materials, the wastewater disposal systems were designed processing ensure that all wastewater would be processed through the plant radiological waste system. On Sump contents are routinely directed to the plant radiological waste processing system. the Discharge occasion, the contents of the 1-5 sump in the Turbine Building may be directed to Canal via DSN 004 in accordance with the NJPDES DSW Permit No. NJ0005550. Level Sump Control Location Pumps :to:: Posd Acti "" i-I Sump Manual Turbine Building 1-3 Sump Defer Activities until Decommissioning _Basement, NW Corner (See AOC-27) 1-2 Sump Bubbler Condenser Bay Drain Pit Chemical Waste Defer Activities until Decommissioning I System (See AOC-27) 1-3 Sump Bubbler Condensate Pump Pit Chemical Waste Defer Activities until Decommissioning I System (See AOC-27) 1-4 Sump Bubbler Hi/Lo Conductivity Chemical Waste Defer Activities until Decommissioning Room System (See AOC-27) 1-5 Sump Bubbler Turbine Building Chemical Waste Defer Activities until Decommissioning Basement. SW Comer System (See AOC-27) 1-6 Sump Gravity Reactor Building NE 1-7 Sump Defer Activities until Decommissioning Drain (See AOC-26) 1-7 Sump Bubbler Reactor Building SE Chemical Waste Defer Activities until Decommissioning System (See AOC-26) I-8 Drvwell Captured Drywell Pedestal Area Chemical Waste Defer Activities until Decommissioning Sump Air System (See AOC-27) I-9 Sump Bubbler Old Radwaste Large Chermcal Waste Defer Activities until Decommissioning Pump Room System (See AOC-30) 1-10 Sump Bubbler Old Radwaste Small Chemucal Waste Defer Activities until Decommissioning Pump Room Svstem (See AOC-30) 1-II Sump Bubbler ORW Small Pump Room 1-10 Sump Defer Activities until Decommissioning (1 st sumn) (See AOC-30) I - 12 Bubbler Base of Stack Chemical Waste Defer Activities until Decommissioning Sump/62/54 System (See AOC-28) 1-I Sump NRW Bubbler New Radwaste. NW Chemical Waste Defer Activities until Decommissioning corner 23' System (See AOC-31) 1-2 Sump NRW Bubbler New Radwaste, SE Chemical Waste Defer Activities until Decommissioning corner. 23' System (See AOC-3 1) 1-3 Sump NRW Bubbler New Radwaste. SW Chemical Waste Defer Activities until Decommissioning HiConductivityBubbler _comer. 23' System (See AOC-31) Hi Conductiviky Bubbler Hi/Lo Room 1-5 Sump Defer Activities until Decommissioning Tank (See AOC-26) Lo Conductivity Bubbler Hi/Lo Room High Purity Defer Activities until Decommissioning Tank I I Waste System (See AOC-26) 17 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION 0 ... .. ,.. , ., .-:" ', .' .' -,--, Ilir~tL*::..'¢'.'.....,...... Level l r Room Hiih Puriy Defer Activities until Decommissionin Widing Switches Waste Symtm (See AOC-26) Equipment Drain Tank Pump (RBEDT) - Drywell Level Drywell High Purity Defer Activities until Decommissioning Equipment Switches Waste System (See AOC-26) Drain Tank Pump (CW EDT) Decommissionin Lab Tank Pump Manual Reactor Building 23 NW Chemical Waste Defer Activities until Decommissioning System (See AOC-26) Laundry Tank Manual Reactor Building 23 NW Chemical Waste Defer Activities until Decommissioning Pump System (See AOC-26L 1-13 Sump Float TB Basement (conduit 1-3 Sump Defer Activities until Decommissioning run sump) .. _ _(See AOC-2" . 1-14 Sump Manual TB Basement (Stairwell 1-3 Sump Defer Activities until Decommissioning outside SJAE rm) _ (See AOC-27) 1-15 Sump Manual TB Basement (Stairwell 1-3 Sump Defer Activities until Decommissioning outside StAE rm) (See AOC-27) 1-16 Sump Manual TB Basement, near i-I i-5 Sump Defer Activities until Decommissioning air compressor (See AOC-27) Turbine Timer TB Basement (Under 1-5 Sump Defer Activities until Deconumissioning Building TBCCW HX) (See AOC-27) (TBCCW) Heat Exchanger Pit Condensate Manual Turbine Building 1-3 Sump Defer Activities until Decommissioning Transfer Pad (Sme AOC-27) Sump. AOG Sump Manual SW corner or AQO 23' AOG Floor Defer Activities until Decommissioning Drain Sump (See AOC-28) AOG Floor Manual SW comer or AOG 23' 1-12 Sump Defer Activities until Decommissioning Drain Sump under CCW Heat (See AOC-28) Exchange Laundry Drain Manual NW Corner or Reactor Waste Defer Activities until Decommissioning Tank Buidding 2.3 Neutralizer Tank (See AOC-28) or Overboard Lab Drain Tank Manual NW Corner or Reactor Chemical Waste Defer Activities until Decommissioning I___uildi__g ZB" System tSee AOC-28) The sumps at the OCNGS are directed to the plant radiological waste processing system or to the Discharge Canal via the 30" header (DSN 004), where the flow is monitored and reported in accordance with the requirements of the station's NJPDES permit. The sump vaults are constructed with concrete walls and floors with a minimum thickness of 18 to 24 inches. In 18 02128/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION would be addition, the wastewater disposal systems were designed to ensure that all wastewater processed through the plant radiological waste processing system. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Construction of the sumps;
- Lack of impact to site wide groundwater; and
- Restricted access to the AOC.
PROCESS AREA SINKS AND PIPING WHICH RECIEVE WASTE (AOC 12) AOC-12 Process Area Sinks Due to the Federal requirements associated with the control of radioactive materials, the wastewater disposal systems were designed to ensure that all wastewater would be processed through the plant radiological waste processing system. During the construction of the facility, all process sinks at the OCNGS were directed to that system. Discharges from a "'slop" sink in the Wet Lab in the Pretreatment Building are directed to the 30" header, which discharges into the canal. Discharges from the header are monitored and reported in accordance with the station's NJPDES permit. The processes at the OCNGS are directed to the plant radiological waste processing system or to the Discharge Canal via the 30" header, where the discharge is monitored and reported in accordance with the requirements of the station's NJPDES permit. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Construction of the lines from the sinks;
- All process sinks in radiologically contamination areas arm directed to the radwaste treatment ststemn
" Lack of impact to groundwater on-site, and
" Restricted access to the AOC.
19 02/28/00,1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION S DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION DRAINAGE SWALES (AOC 16) AOC-13 Eastern Drainage Swale The eastern drainage swale collects water from the eastern parking lots, fuel storage area and hazardous/non-hazardous waste storage areas. There are no radiological materials or wastes stored in these areas. In 1999, the OCNGS conducted a soil-sampling program in the fuel storage area. This area is located immediately adjacent the eastern drainage swale. The results of the sampling program indicate detectable concentrations of Co-60 and Cs-137. However, the concentrations detected were below the NRC decommissioning guidelines. Twenty (20) soil samples were collected late in 1992 and an additional thirteen (13) soil samples were collected in 1999. Analytical results from the soils indicated that none of the samples obtained in 1999 contained Co-60 and the highest concentration of Cs-137 was reported at 0.111 pCi/g, which is similar to the normal environmental concentration for this nuclide. The results of the 1992 samples indicated the highest concentrations of Co-60 reported was 0.0996 pCi/g and the highest concentration of Cs-137 was 0.211 pCi/g. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Appendix N. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the soils in the area of the drainage swale;
# Concentrations of the radionuclides detected in the adjacent soils were below the NRC's soil guideline for decommissioning facilities;
- Lack of detectable radionuclides in the drainage swale;
+ Lack of impact to site wide groundwater.
AOC-14 Northern Drainage Area The Northern Drainage Area collects water from the north side of the OCNGS property. The drainage swale does not receive surface flow from production areas or radiological material/wastes storage areas. 20 02/28/00. 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION In 1992 and in 1999, the OCNGS conducted a soil-sampling program for the gamma-emitting radionuclides in the northern field area. This area is located immediately adjacent the northern drainage swale. The results of the sampling program indicate detectable concentrations of Co-60 and Cs-137. However, the concentrations detected were below NRC decommissioning guidelines. Eight (8) soil samples were collected in 1992 and three (3) samples were collected in 1999. Analytical results from the soils indicated that none of the samples obtained in 1999 contained either nuclide. The results of the soil samples collected in 1992 indicated the highest concentrations of Co-60 of 0.068 pCi/g and Cs-137 of 0.130 pCi/g. The concentrations are similar to normal environmental concentrations. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Attachment I and Appendix N. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Concentrations of the radionuclides detected in the adjacent soils in 1992 were below the NRC's soil guideline for decommissioning facilities;
- Lack of detectable radionuclides in the drainage swale;
- Lack of impact to site wide groundwater.
AOC-15 Southern Drainage Area The Southern Drainage Area collects water from the southern parking lots, Heli-Port and administration building. There are no radiological materials or wastes stored in the aforementioned areas. In 1999, the OCNGS conducted a soil-sampling program for the gamma-emitting radionuclides associated with fission processes (e.g., Co-60 & Cs-137) in the southern portion of the facility, which ultimately discharged its storm water to the southern drainage swale. The results of the sampling program indicate detectable concentrations of Cs-137 in three (3) of the eleven (I1) samples collected. However, all concentrations detected were below the NRC's soil guideline at decommissioning of 11 pCi/g Analytical results from the soils indicated that the highest concentrations of Cs-137 detected was 0.030 pCi/g, which is consistent with normal environmental background for this nuclide. Co-60 was not detected in any of the soil samples analyzed. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Attachment I of the Appendix and Appendix N. 21 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION S DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the soils in the area of the drainage swale, which is probably normal background,
- Concentrations of the radionuclides detected in the adjacent soils were below the NRC's soil guideline fbr decommissioning facilities;
- Lack of detectable radionuclides in the drainage swale;
- Lack of impact to site groundwater.
STORM SEWER COLLECTION SYSTEMS (AOC-16) AOC-16 Storm Sewer Collection Systems The storm sewer collection system at the OCNGS consists of a series of catch basins and underground storm water pipelines, which receive and transport. storm water throughout the station to various discharge points. Storm water discharges at the OCNGS are directed to the following: a The Intake/Discharge Canal in accordance with the permit limits and monitoring requirements of NJPDES Permit No. NJO005550, 0 a trench located adjacent to a wooded area, north of the Main Gate Entrance (discussed in AOC-13); 0 the water mound located at the northern portion of the OCNGS (discussed in AOC-18); and, 0 a storm drainage area south of the Main Gate Entrance (discussed in AOC-15). NFA - The Storm Sewer Collection System discharges are regulated under NJPDES. In addition, the drainage swales do not receive surface flow from production areas. Finally, information nthe receiving waters, the Canal. is discussed in detail below. 22 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION SURFACE WATER BODIES (AOC-17) AOC - 17 Intake/Discharge Canal The Intake/Discharge Canal was excavated during the construction of the OCNGS in the 1960's to provide cooling water for the facility operations. The Canal receives water from the Barnegat Bay, Oyster Creek and Forked River. Water from the Canal is ultimately discharged back to the Barnegat Bay. The soil and sediment excavated from the canal were used as fill at the site. Prior to the excavation of the canal, the land west of U.S. Route 9 was vacant and undeveloped, while the land east of U.S. Route 9 was used for beef cattle farming. Maintenance of the canal has included dredging activities in 1978, 1984, and 1997. Analytical results of dredge spoils sampling and analysis conducted as part of GPUN's request for interim closure of an Upland Confined Disposal Facility are discussed in AOC-38. Discharges to the canal are discussed in AOC-24. Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station samples the surface water, sediments, and aquatic life on a regular basis. In 1998 twenty-eight (28) surface water samples were obtained and analyzed for gamma-emitting radionuclides. One gamma-emitting nuclide, potassium-40 (K-40) was detected in 27 of the 28 analysis performed. Tritium (H3) activity was detected in one sample. Both of these radionuclides are naturally occurring and commonly found in salt water at or above the observed concentrations. No other plant specific radionuclides were detected in surface water samples. Five gamma-emitting radionuclides were detected in the 8 sediment samples collected during 1998. Four of these radionuclides, beryllium-7 (Be-7), potassium-40 (K-40), radium-226 (RA-226) and thorium-232 (Th-232), are naturally occurring and not attributable to plant effluents. Cesium-137 (Cs-137), which is a fission product, was detected in both background and indicator samples. Cs-137 was widely distributed and detected in considerable abundance as a result of fallout following atmospheric weapons tests and the 1986 Chernobyl accident. Cs-137 was released in small quantities from the plant in liquid effluents in past years. The results of the sediment-sampling program indicate that the presence of Cs-137 in the sediment of the facility discharge canal and nearby portions of the Barnegat Bay may be attributable in part to past liquid discharges from the facility. A review of sediment analysis results form 1994 - 1998 period shows Cs-137 was detected in 82% of the background and only 60% of indicator samples. However, Cs-23 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION 137 concentrations detected at the two indicator stations, which are closest to the facility discharge point, show concentrations consistently higher than those found at background stations. During the previous five years, the mean concentration of Cs-137 at background stations was 0.032 pCi/g-dry, while the average concentration at the two stations closest the effluent discharge was 0.093 pCi/g-dry. In addition, during the five year period, the highest concentration of Cs-137 at an indicator station was 0.240 pCi/g-dry, which was detected in March 1996. The highest concentration found at a background station during the same five year period was 0.067 pCi/g-dry. It is important to note that the highest concentration of Cs-137 observed in sediment (0.240 pCi/g-dry) was only slightly above the 0. 180 pCi/g-dry Lower Limit Detection specified by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and only 12% of their Reporting Level for Cs-137 in fish and broad leaf vegetation (2.0 pCi/g-wet). Over the years, there has been a dramatic reduction in liquid discharges from the facility and there have been no routine discharges of liquid radioactive wastes since 1989. As a result of this reduction in liquid effluent, as well as the ongoing natural radioactive decay process, the level of Cs-137 in sediments continues to decrease. Concentrations of Co-60 were not detected in either indicator or background station sediment samples during 1998. No radionuclides attributable to effluent from the facility were found in samples of clams, crabs and fish collected during 1998. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Appendix N. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the surface water, sediments, and aquatic life samples; and
- Limited concentration of radionuclides detected in the surface water, sediments, and aquatic life samples; AOC-18 Water Mound The water mound is a canal filled with fresh water for the purpose of maintaining a pressure head on the fresh water aquifers to prevent the intrusion of estuarine water from the Oyster Creek intake canal into the ground water. It was constructed in 1967 in accordance with the Second Interim Order issued by the New Jersey Board of Public Utility Commissioners on April 22, 1966.
24 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION Located on the south bank of the intake canal, just west of U.S. Route 9, the water mound is approximately 1,200 feet long, 30 feet wide at the top, and 15-20 feet wide at the bottom. The original depth was 8 feet with overflow drains to ensure a minimum water depth of 1.5 feet. Silt has accumulated in the water mound over the years, reducing the depth considerably. More than 30 years of sampling eleven monitoring wells located around the water mound have demonstrated that there has been no salt-water intrusion into local aquifers attributable to the operation of the intake canal for the Oyster Creek Station. NFA for this potential AOC because the water mound does not receive surface flow from areas containing radiological materials or wastes. D. DISCHARGE AND DISPOSAL AREAS WASTEWATER COLLECTION SYSTEMS - SEPTIC SYSTEMS, SEEPAGE PITS (AOC 20) AOC-19 Former On-site Wastewater Treatment Facility Prior to the connection to the Ocean County Utilities Authority in approximately 1982, sanitary wastes at the OCNGS were directed to a former on-site treatment facility. The former treatment facility was located approximately 200 fi south of the Reactor Building. Discharges to the treatment facility included floor drains in the following: the main office building, the Turbine Building bathrooms, the "clean" (non-radiologically contaminated) portion of the Turbine Building, and the plant engineering building (or the auxiliary office building). Treated liquids discharged to the canal at Discharge Serial No. (DSN) 004 under DSW Permit No. NJ 0005550. Solids were pumped into a steel underground holding tank. Olsen's Septic Service, a local contractor, pumped the tank out on an as-needed basis. Following the connection to the municipal treatment system, aboveground structures associated with the treatment facility were removed. In 1999, the OCNGS collected four soil samples around the former on-site wastewater facility. The results of the sampling program indicated detectable concentrations of Cs-137 in two (2) of the four (4) samples at concentrations 0. 11 pCi/g and 0.036 pCi/g below NRC decommissioning guidelines at decommissioning of I I pCi/g. Co-60 was not detected in any of the soil samples 25 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION analyzed. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Attachment I of the Appendix and Appendix N. NFA - The former on-site Wastewater Treatment System received wastewater from the non-radiological portions of the site. The treatment system was cleaned prior to demolition. In addition, groundwater in the area of the former system is monitored on a regular basis. The analytical results from the site-wide monitoring program can be found in Appendix N. AOC-20 Seepage Pit The domestic water system at the OCNGS withdraws water from a 300 ft deep well finished in the Kirkwood Aquifer. This water is filtered through the plant's domestic water treatment system. Approximately 2,000 gallons per day are backwashed from this treatment system to a 6 ft by 9 ft concrete cylinder with a perforated bottom that is located within 125 feet of the plant's Discharge Canal. Presently, the plant's water treatment system is a fully containerized, mobile treatment system provided by a water treatment contractor. Originally, "hard coal filters" were used to filter the domestic water for the OCNGS, however, these were abandoned in favor of the more modem trailer-mounted system. The present trailer-mounted system uses sand as a filtering media in lieu of the original hard coal system. After water from the 300-fl deep Kirkwood well is processed by the plant's domestic water treatment system, it is also used as raw water for replenishing plant systems. To be used for this purpose, domestic water must be highly purified and demineralized. A second mobile treatment system equipped with ion exchange resins is used for this purpose. Periodically, it is necessary to exchange this second trailer-mounted fully containerized, mobile system with a regenerated system. The schedule for this exchange is not regular or calendar driven, but is dependent upon the quality of the output water. Operating experience to date has shown that a new trailer is needed about once every two months. To ensure that the water in the new system upon arrival at the OCNGS does not affect the high purity requirements of the OCNGS, it is necessary to flush the new system with domestic water that has already been filtered by the sand beds in the first trailer. Flushing is accomplished only when a new trailer-mounted system arrives on site. This new system flush consists of approximately 1,000 gallons of demineralized water, which is discharged to the 6 ft by 9-f4 concrete cylinder previously described. This flushing operation occurs each time that a new trailer arrives on site. 26 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION All of these activities are regulated by NJPDES Discharge to Ground Water Permit No. NJ0101966. This permit requires annual sampling of the backflush of the domestic water treatment system. Samples of the backflush are collected prior to discharge to the 6-ft by 9-ft concrete cylinder, representing the worst case, pre-dilution conditions. The specific sampling location is the pre-treatment building, 160 ft north of the 6-ft by 9-ft cylinder. Required analyses are pH, total dissolved solids (TDS), iron and manganese. There are no permit limits for these parameters; however, reporting to the NJDEP is required if the measured values exceed the historical range. In addition, a quarterly grab sample is required prior to discharging the regenerated treatment system flush to the 6-ft by 9-ft concrete cylinder. The specific sample location is the sample outlet just west of the pre-treatment building. Although no limits are imposed, analyses for pH, TDS, total iron, chlorides, total sodium and total petroleum hydrocarbons are required. The above-described discharges have almost no effect on groundwater quality. The direction of groundwater flow in the vicinity of the discharges is towards the OCNGS Discharge Canal and the Discharge Canal is within 125 feet of the discharge to groundwater. Therefore, only a very small volume of groundwater can actually receive this discharge and that volume eventually discharges to surface water (the Discharge Canal). In 1999, the facility conducted a soil-sampling program for the gamma-emitting radionuclides associated with fission processes (e.g., Co-60 & Cs-137) in the area of the Seepage Pit. The results of the sampling program indicate detectable concentrations of Cs-137. However, the concentrations detected were below the NRC decommissioning guideline of II pCi/g. Three (3) of the five (5) samples of Cs-137 obtained were below the method detection limit. The highest concentration reported for Cs-37 was 0.084 pCi/g, which is consistent with normal background for this nuclide. Co-60 was not detected in any of the five samples. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Appendix N. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
# Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the soils (probably background);
+ Concentrations of the radionuclides detected in the soils were below the NRC's soil guideline for decommissioning facilities;
- Lack of impact to site wide groundwater; and
- Restricted access to the AOC.
27 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION E. Other Areas of Concern OPEN AREAS AWAY FROM PRODUCTION AREAS (AOCs 21 - 23) AOC-21 Undeveloped Areas North, East and South of OCNGS The areas north, east and south of the OCNGS are generally vacant and undeveloped, with the exception of the water mound located along the northern perimeter of this area (discussed in AOC-18). These areas surrounding the OCNGS have not been used for the storage or handling of radioactive material. NFA because there have been no activities which would be expected to impact the soil. AOC-22 Former Laydown Area at Northeast Portion of OCNGS An area identified as the Laydown area is located at the northeast portion of the OCNGS, north-northeast of the Fuel Tank Area. The Laydown Area is a gravel/soil area at which a temporary building was located in 1991 and 1992. Grit blasting was performed in the building. A four-foot high soil pile measuring approximately 50 ft by 25 ft is located in this area. The soil pile was generated during the construction of the new office building in 1994. OCNGS conducted a soil-sampling program for the gamma-emitting radionuclides in the area of the above referenced tank. The results of the sampling program indicate detectable concentrations of Cs-137. However, the concentrations detected were below NRC decommissioning guideline. Four (4) of the five (5) samples for Cs-137 obtained were below the method detection limit. The highest concentration reported for Cs-37 was 0.037 pCi/g, which is consistent with normal environmental background for this nuclide. Co-60 was not detected in any of the samples. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Appendix N. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the soils (probably backgroud),
+ Concentrations of the radionuclides detected in the soils were below the NRC's soil guideline for decommissioning facilities; and 28 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION
- Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC-23 Undeveloped Area East of U.S. Route 9 The majority of the Property consists of undeveloped land located east of U.S. Route 9. This area (Finninger's Farm) was formerly used for raising beef cattle until purchase by JCP&L in 1966. Historical and recent uses for this area include:
- To deposit excavated/dredged soil and sediment during the construction of the intake and discharge canals for the OCNGS (AOC- 17);
- As a source of topsoil for re-vegetation projects on and around the OCNGS;
- As an office and marine-life sample processing facility (in a building formerly located on the property) for environmental consultants studying fish and other marine organisms in Barnegat Bay from 1975 through 1988. These activities included the preservation of samples of marine life in 10% formalin and 40% isopropanol.
- To deposit dredged material resulting from periodic maintenance dredging in the intake and discharge canals. This material was all deposited at the location of the existing 17.5 acre Upland Confined Disposal Facility during dredging projects in 1978, 1984 and 1997 (addressed in AOC-38); and,
- As a location for environmental monitoring activities including continuous air monitoring, ground water monitoring and the planting of gardens to provide vegetables for radiological analyses.
NFA for this potential AOC because the areas listed above have been addressed as separate AOCs or the activities conducted (source of topsoil and environmental monitoring activities) do not present potential impacts to soil/groundwater; and, there was no industrial activity in the remaining portion of the property. NON-CONTACT COOLING WATER DISCHARGES The OCNGS is authorized to discharge non-contact cooling water from the following outfalls in accordance with the requirements of NJPDES Permit No. NJ0005550 which was issued 10/21/94 and is effective 12/01/94 through 11/30/99 (renewal application submitted 05/28/99): 29 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION AOC-24A DSN 001 - Main condenser non-contact cooling water Discharge DSN 001 is located at the southern side of the land bridge that separates the Intake and Discharge Canals. Samples are collected at the outfall of DSN 001 for thermal parameters, and in the main condenser discharge tunnel just east of the chlorine monitor shed prior to the outfall or at the outfall of DSN 001 for all other parameters and reported monthly. The circulating water system supplies cooling water to the main condenser to condense low-pressure turbine exhaust steam. The circulation system consists of the circulating water system pumps and condenser along with a vacuum priming system. The four circulating water pumps each have a designed capacity of 11 5,000-gpm. Under normal operation, the four pumps deliver a total of 460,000 gpm, 450,000-gpm is supplied to the main condenser and 10,000 gpm is diverted to the Turbine Building Cooling Vater heat exchangers. The pumps discharge into 66-inch lines which direct flow to a 10.5 ft. square tunnel to the turbine building west wall. Circulating water enters and leaves the three condenser shells through 6-ft. lines. On the discharge side of the main condenser, the 6-ft. lines join into a 10.5-ft. square tunnel, which leads the water to the discharge canal. The tunnel itself serves as a seal well, since its roof is below minimum water level in the discharge canal. The 5-fi deicing recirculation tunnel runs below the water level back to the intake structure. The total depth of the intake structure is variable. The deepest part of the structure is approximately el. -2 1'. The eastern half of the structure is slightly shallower at approximately el. -18'. The structure appears to be founded on the Cohansey Formation. The clay in this area is shallower than el. -18. In the figure presented below, the bottom of the fill is presumed to be the bottom of the intake structure. SIMPLIFIED CROSS SECTION OF INTAKE STRUCTURE (not to scale) Discharge Tunnels el. 14'6" __J:.i' .i', 7- 6 INTAKE icc 4 7 3 ft. clay fill 1.5 ft clay fill 30 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION As described in the discussion of AOC-17 (Intake/Discharge Canal), extensive sampling of surface water, sediments and aquatic life has demonstrated that CO-60 was not detected in any environmental samples and Cs-137 was only found in sediments at concentrations slightly above the lower limit of detection. In addition, as part of the facility's REMP, a composite sampler located immediately downstream of discharge point 004 monitors for gamma-emitting radionuclides and tritium. Information pertaining to surface water, sediment, and aquatic life sampling can be found in AOC-17. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the surface water, sediments, and aquatic life samples; and
- Limited concentration of radionuclides detected in the surface water, sediments, and aquatic life samples AOC-24B DSN 002 - Heat exchanger non-contact cooling water Discharge DSN 002 is located north of the land bridge that separates the Intake and Discharge Canals. Samples are collected from the common header located on the 23-foot elevation of the New Radwaste Heat Exchanger Room, or the sampling point located near the end of the discharge pipe for DSN 002, and are reported monthly.
As described in the discussion of AOC-17 (Intake/Discharge Canal), extensive sampling of surface water, sediments and aquatic life has demonstrated that CO-60 was not detected in any environmental samples and Cs-137 was only found in sediments at concentrations slightly above the lower limit of detection. In addition, as part of the facility's REMP it monitors a composite sampler immediately downstream of discharge point 004. The samples are obtained daily and analyzed weekly for gamma-emitting radionuclides and tritium. Information pertaining to surface water, sediment, and aquatic life sampling can be found in AOC- 17. 31 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
# Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the surface water, sediments, and aquatic life samples; and
- Limited concentration of radionuclides detected in the surface water, sediments, and aquatic life samples AOC-24C DSN 004 - Storm water runoff, non-contact cooling water from reactor building and emergency service water heat exchangers and discharge from the 1-5 sump Discharge DSN 004 is located south of the land bridge that separates the Intake and Discharge Canals. Samples are collected at the sample pipe located inside the fence near the terminus of the 30" header or at the outfall of DSN 004 (depending on site conditions), and reported monthly.
This point source could receive wastewater from the liquid Radwaste discharge, however, this system has not been used for 10+ years. As described in the discussion of AOC-17 (Intake/Discharge Canal), extensive sampling of surface water, sediments and aquatic life has demonstrated that CO-60 was not detected in any environmental samples and Cs-137 was only found in sediments at concentrations slightly above the lower limit of detection. In addition, as part of the facility's REMT it monitors a composite sampler immediately downstream of discharge point 004. The samples are obtained daily and analyzed weekly for gamma-emitting radionuclides and tritium. Information pertaining to surface water, sediment, and aquatic life sampling can be found in AOC- 17. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information: Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the surface water, sediments, and aquatic life samples-
- Limited concentration of radionuclides detected in the surface water, sediments, and aquatic life samples- and
- Discharges are monitored in accordance with the requirements of NJPDES Permit No.
NJ0005550. Additional information pertaining to permitted discharges at the OCNGS is provided in Appendix D. 32 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION ACTIVE OR INACTIVE PRODUCTION WELLS AOC-25 Production Wells Two production wells on site are installed in the Kirkwood Formation. The South Well (Permit No. 33-1095) is 300 feet deep, located near the Diesel Generator Building and is used for potable water, and as a source of make-up water for plant systems (AOC-IA). The North Well (Permit No. 3323652) is 162 feet deep, located north of the North Parking Area and is used for potable water and as a source of make-up water for plant systems (AOC-IA). The South Well is sampled on a quarterly basis as part of the routine REMP. The results for 1998 showed no plant specific radionuclides in water samples from the well. NFA for this potential AOC because the wells are in use and are tested in accordance with the requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act; and the wells are maintained within secure areas. F BUILDING INTERIOR AREAS WITH POTENTIAL FOR DISCHARGE BUILDING INTERIOR AREAS (AOCs 26 - 37) AOC -26 Reactor Building The Reactor Building stands approximately 150 feet high with 42 feet extending below grade. It serves as a secondary containment unit and houses the primary containment dry well as well as the reactor vessel and its auxiliary systems. In addition, all refueling equipment, and the spent fuel storage pool are all located inside the Reactor Building. The dry well which houses the reactor vessel, is constructed of high-density reinforced concrete with an inner steel liner measuring 120 ft. high and 70 ft. in diameter. The Reactor Building has been designed as a secondary containment system for all operations conducted in the building. The building was designed and constructed specifically to eliminate the potential release of contaminants to the surrounding environment. The building walls are 3ft. thick reinforced concrete. The Reactor Building foundation is a 10-ft. thick steel reinforced concrete slab. Underlying the slab is a waterproofing system that consists of the following: a 3-inch 33 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION concrete leveling slab; a waterproofing membrane which extends to approximately 15-ft. below ground surface (bgs); and a 2-inch concrete protective slab. Groundwater in the area of the Reactor Building is generally located at 6 to 8 ft. bgs. As noted above, the reactor floor is approximately 42 feet below grade. Consequently, a breach in the Reactor Building floor or walls would result in groundwater entering the building. Since no groundwater has permeated the Reactor Building floor or walls, the integrity of building has been maintained. Four soil samples were collected within the vicinity of the Reactor Building in 1999. Concentrations of Co-60 were detected in three (3) of the four (4) soil samples at concentrations raging from 0.75 pCi/g to 1.75 pCi/g. Concentrations of Cs-137 were detected in all four (4) samples ranging from 0.145 to 10.3 pCi/g. Information regarding the potential release of contaminants from this building is discussed in detail in Appendix M "Theoretical Release Study". SIMPLIFIED CROSS-SECTION OF FOUNDATION W/ WATERPROOFING 44 4 .~~d . .......... .. ....
............'10 ft m at
- 2 in. water protection concrete.
4 waterproofing membrane 4 3 in. leveling slab Two monitoring wells (W-3 and W-4) are located hydrogeologically downgradient of the area and an additional two monitoring wells (MW-9 & MW-10) are located cross gradient. As previously noted, the monitoring wells are sampled semi-annually as part of the REMP. Each well was sampled for gamma-emitting radionuclides associated with fission processes and tritium. The analytical results from these wells indicated only tritium was detected in MW-4 and MW-9 at concentrations of 140 pCi/L and 340 pCi/L respectively (USEPA Drinking water standard for tritium is 20,000 pCi/L). No other plant specific radionuclides were detected in either well. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Attachment I of this Appendix and in Appendix N. 34 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Construction features of the building;
- Lack of impact to site wide groundwater; and
# Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC - 27 Turbine Building The Turbine Building houses the turbine-generator, control room, main condensers, power conversion equipment and auxiliary systems. The turbine-generator consists of one high-pressure turbine, three low-pressure turbines, a generator and an exciter. Steam is supplied to the high-pressure turbine from the reactor. After being used to drive the turbines and generator, the steam is condensed in the main condensers and returned to the reactor vessel in the form of water through the condensate and feedwater pumps. There are two sets of tunnels entering or exiting the Turbine Building. These tunnels are used to provide non-contact cooling water to the condensers. The water is subsequently returned to the canal through the second set of discharge tunnels. The Turbine Building has been designed as a secondary containment system for all operations conducted in the building. The building was designed and constructed specifically to eliminate the potential release of contaminants to the surrounding environment. The building walls are 3ft. thick reinforced concrete and extend from the basement levels to the operating floor about 23 ft. above grade. The Turbine Building foundation is 6 ft. to 8-ft. thick steel reinforced concrete slab. The Turbine Building mat or foundation overlaps the Reactor Building mat where the two buildings abut. As noted above, the Turbine Building's bottom floor is approximately 23 feet bgs. Consequently, a breach in the Turbine Building floor or walls would result in groundwater entering the building. A detailed description of the building and information regarding the potential release of contaminants from this building is discussed in detail in Appendix M "Theoretical Release Study. Two monitoring wells (W-3 and W-4) are located hydrogeologically downgradient of the area. As previously noted, the monitoring wells are sampled semi-annually as part of the REMN. Each well was sampled for gamma-emitting radionuclides associated with fission processes and tritium. The analytical results from these wells indicated only tritium was detected in MW-4 at a concentration of 140 pCi/L (USEPA Drinking water standard for tritium is 20,000 pCi/L). No other plant 35 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION specific radionuclides were detected in either well. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Attachment I of this Appendix and in Appendix N. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Construction features of the building;
- Lack of impact to site wide groundwater; and
+ Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC-28 Stack The ventilation stack is 368 feet high with 26 feet extending below grade. The stack provides ventilation for the Reactor Building, Turbine Building and Radwaste facilities and is part of the facility's off-gas system. The air ejector and off-gas systems are designed to remove noncondensables from the main condensers and provide for their safe dispersal to the environment. Three steam jet air ejectors and one mechanical vacuum pump are used in a conventional arrangement for removing noncondensables from the main condensers. The nature of the noncondensables however, is quite different from that found in fossil-fueled plants: gaseous hydrogen and oxygen formed by radiolytic decomposition of the reactor water are the major constituents amounting to more than twice the volume of air in -leakage to the main condensers. The principal radioactive noncondensables are short-lived isotopes of nitrogen that occur normally in the boiling water reactor cycle. Ultimately, the system is designed to remove air and noncondensables from the main condensers, and delays radioactive materials in the hold-up pipe for decay. The exhaust from this system is discharged to the Exhaust Tunnel System and ultimately to the stack. The base of the stack is comprised of a 7-ft. steel reinforced concrete pad. The foundation includes the typical 3 part waterproofing system (leveling slab, waterproof membrane, and protective slab). The waterproofing system may extend around the entire foundation. A single sump (Sump No. 1-12) underlies the stack foundation. The sump has a 4-ft. diameter and is located west of the center of the stack. Two primary tunnels attach to the stack from the Reactor Building/Turbine Building and the Old/New Radwaste buildings. These tunnels are described above in AOC - 9. 36 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION Two monitoring wells (W-9 and W-10) are located hydrogeologically downgradient of the area. As previously noted, the monitoring wells are sampled semi-annually as part of the REMP. Each well was sampled for gamma-emitting radionuclides associated with fission processes and tritium. The analytical results from these wells indicated only tritium was detected in MW-9 at a concentration of 340 pCi/L (USEPA Drinking water standard for tritium is 20,000 pCi/L). No other plant specific radionuclides were detected in either well. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Attachment I of this Appendix and in Appendix N. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
# Construction features of the Exhaust Stack;
- Lack of impact to groundwater, and
- Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC-29 Exhaust System Pipes Exhaust gases from the main condensers are transported to the Exhaust Stack via two pipes. The primary pipe starts as a 38-inch line from the condensers and is processed through the air ejectors. The pipe from the ejectors is a 48-inch line that is used as a 30-minute holdup line to delay decaying radioactive materials. The line from the ejectors leaves the Turbine Building and extends underground to the Exhaust Stack. The second line from the steam packing exhauster and the mechanical vacuum pumps starts as a 30-inch line and expands to 36-inches at the Exhaust Stack. This line also leaves the Turbine Building and proceeds underground to the Exhaust Stack. Once in the Exhaust Stack, the gases from both lines are filtered and monitored prior to dispersion. This area was investigated along with AOC-9. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the soils;
- Concentrations of the radionuclides detected in the soils were below the NRC's soil guideline for decommissioning facilities;
- Lack of impact to groundwater; and
- Restricted access to the AOC 37 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION AOC - 30 Old Radwaste Building The Old Radwaste Building is located directly east of the Reactor Building. The building was historically used for wastewater treatment. However, these operations were relocated to the New Radwaste Building. Currently, operations in the building include water purification and process waste disposal packaging. In addition, equipment used during plant operations for waste compaction and waste transfer is housed in the building. The Old Radwaste Building has been designed and constructed specifically to eliminate the potential release of contaminants to the surrounding environment. The building is a single story reinforced concrete structure with a two-story penthouse. A small basement area is located in the central portion of the building and a pipe tunnel extends from this building to the New Radwaste Building and the Exhaust Stack. The building is comprised of three primary sections, see Figure, two with shallow foundations and the third section (middle section) having a deep foundation. Each of the three sections is constructed on a reinforced concrete mat. Beneath the mat, the building has an impermeable liner that is situated above a concrete leveling pad. Information regarding the potential release of contaminants from this building is discussed in detail in Appendix M "Theoretical Release Study". A detailed description of the building, sumps and tunnels is also provided in the aforementioned appendix. SIMPLIFIED PLAN VIEW OF OLD RADWASTE BUILDING (not to scale) 64ft el. 22' 4" to I el. 20' 0" 94 ft "
.6'. SHALLOW.FDN. 105 ft z
t : : *::
- i... .. .. . . . .. . ..... ......
- 6515 ft 158 ft 38 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION The soils in the vicinity of the Old Radwaste Building were sampled extensively along with AOC-4A, AOC-4B, and AOC-4C. In addition to soil characterization as described in AOC-4, additional sampling was conducted on August 8, 1999. Sampling was conducted within the vicinity of the Old Radwaste Building's concrete pad following a spill of mop water. A total of three surface soil samples were collected for gamma-emitting radionuclides. Two samples exceeded the NRC decommissioning guideline for Co-60 at concentrations of 7 pCi/g and 10.2 pCi/g. Concentrations of Cs-137 ranged from 0.64 pCi/g to 6.04 pCi/g, below NRC decommissioning guidelines. Information regarding the sampling can be found in the respective sections. In addition, detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Attachment I of this Appendix and in Appendix N. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Construction features of the building;
- Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the soils surrounding the building;
- Lack of impact to site wide groundwater; and
- Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC - 31 New Radwaste Building The New Radwaste Building is located northeast of the Reactor Building. The building is used for wastewater purification/treatment processing and waste disposal packaging. The New Radwaste Building has been designed and constructed specifically to eliminate the potential release of contaminants to the surrounding environment. The building foundation is constructed of approximately 4 ft. of steel reinforced concrete underlain by a 2-inch protective concrete layer, a waterproof membrane, and a 2-inch concrete leveling mat. The thickness of the leveling mat is variable (from 2 to 4 inches); hence the use of the term "approximately" is used in describing the foundation thickness. In 1999, the OCNGS conducted a soil-sampling program for the gamma-emitting radionuclides around the New Radwaste Building. The results of the sampling program indicate detectable concentrations of Co-60 and Cs-137. However, the concentrations detected were below the NRC decommissioning. Twenty-seven (27) samples were collected in 1981 and 1999. The highest concentration reported for Co-60 was 1.5 pCi/g and for Cs-137 the highest concentration 39 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION reported was 3.5 pCi/g. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Attachment I of this Appendix and Appendix N. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Construction features of the building;
- Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the soils surrounding the building;
- Concentrations of the radionuclides detected in the soils were below the NRC's soil guideline for decommissioning facilities;
# Lack of impact to site wide groundwater; and
- Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC - 32 New Radwaste Building Tunnel There is a single tunnel leading from the New Radwaste Building to the Old Radwaste Building. The depth of the tunnel is at 7.67 ft. above mean sea level (approximately 14-ft. bgs). The tunnel is constructed of 3-ft. thick steel reinforced concrete. A 4-inch slab protects the bottom of the tunnel; a water membrane. The waterproof membrane extends up the sides of the tunnel and was protected by fiberboard before backfilling. Three-inch keys and 6-inch water stops key the sides of the tunnel to the top and bottom. The tunnel is equipped with a sump at the base of the tunnel where it originates in the New Radwaste Building. The construction of the sump is basically the same as the tunnel itself. The tunnel slopes downward towards the Old Radwaste Building. Information regarding the potential release of contaminants from this building is discussed in detail in Attachment I of this Appendix and in Appendix M "Theoretical Release Study". A detailed description of the building, sumps and tunnels is also provided in the aforementioned appendix. NEW RADWASTE TUNNEL 40 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION qround el. 23' 6" slab el. 19' 4" sump el. 15 4" tunnel el. 7' 9" tunnel sump el. 3' 6" Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Construction features of the tunnel;
- Lack of impact to site wide groundwater; and
- Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC - 33 Low Level Radwaste Storage Building The Low Level Radwaste Storage Building is located north of the New Radwaste Building. The building is used for staging radioactive materials prior to disposal or re-use. The Low Level Radwaste Building has been designed and constructed specifically to eliminate the potential release of contaminants to the surrounding environment. This building has a reinforced concrete walls and base mat. The upper walls and ceiling are steel truss work construction, with precast concrete exterior panels on the walls, while the lower walls are steel reinforced concrete. The top of the base mat of the building is at an elevation of 25 ft. above mean sea level. Information regarding the potential release of contaminants from this building is discussed in detail in Attachment I of this Appendix and in Appendix M "Theoretical Release Study". A detailed description of the building, sumps and tunnels is also provided in the aforementioned Appendix. The facility conducted a soil-sampling program for the gamma-emitting in the area of the Low Level Radwaste Storage Building. The results of the sampling program indicate detectable concentrations of Cs-137 in one of the four (4) samples obtained. However, the concentrations detected were below the NRC decommissioning guidelines. Analytical results for the samples indicated that three (3) of the four (4) samples were below the method detection limits for Cs-137. The highest concentration reported for Cs-137 was 0.017 pCi/g, which is consistent with normal background for this nuclide. Co-60 was not detected in any of the samples collected. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Appendix N. 41 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Construction features of the building;
- Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the soils surrounding the building;
- Concentrations of the radionuclides detected in the soils were below the NRC's soil guideline for decommissioning facilities;
- Lack of impact to site wide groundwater; and
- Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC - 34 Laundry Facility Radioactive Materials A Laundry Facility is used to store laundered clothing. These clothes although laundered, may potentially contain residual licensed radioactive materials. The building is located to the northeast of the Old Radwaste Building. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
# Limited potential for migration of radionuclides, and
- Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC - 35 Radioactive Materials Storage Freight Containers There are five (5) freight containers that are used to store equipment that may potentially contain residual licensed radioactive materials. Two (2) of the containers are located east of the New Radwaste Building; two (2) of the containers are located east of the Old Radwaste Building and the fifth container is located north of the Old Radwaste Building. Each of these areas was investigated along with AOC-4C, AOC-4A, and AOC-3 1. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Limited potential for migration of radionuclides; and
# Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC-36 New Maintenance Building Hot Machine Shop/Respirator Facility 42 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION The New Maintenance Building Hot Machine Shop/Respirator Facility is located immediately north of the Turbine Building. Tools and other surface contaminated equipment are maintained in the facility's Hot Machine Shop. In addition, pumps, parts and other equipment-requiring repair are stored at the machine shop. Once repaired, the equipment is placed back in service or is placed in inventory for future use. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Limited potential for migration of radionuclides; and
- Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC-37 Instrument Calibration Trailer #20 An instrument calibration trailer is located on the southwestern portion of the property. Instruments containing sealed radioactive sources are stored in the trailer for calibration purposes. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Limited potential for migration of radionuclides; and
- Restricted access to the AOC.
G. ANY OTHER SITE-SPECIFIC AREA OF CONCERN AOC-38 UPLAND CONFINED DISPOSAL FACILITY The Upland Confined Disposal Facility (CDF) is a portion of the site located east of U.S. Route 9 used for the deposition of dredged material resulting from periodic maintenance dredging in the intake and discharge canals. Maintenance dredging was conducted in 1978, 1984 and 1997. The CDF consists of 17.5 acres and is identified as Block 100, Lots 13 through 16 & 20. Perimeter fencing surrounds the CDF; locked gates restrict access to the site. Prior to the most recent dredging project (1997), an investigation of the soil at the CDF was conducted. All samples were collected in August of 1997, and represent sediment from previous dredging projects. Eighty-six samples were collected and analyzed for the gamma-emitting 43 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION radionuclides associated with facility effluent (e.g., Co-60 & Cs-137). Only one of the 86 samples detected Co-60 at 0.075 pCi/g. Forty of the 86 samples detected Cs-137, with a maximum concentration of 0.42 pCi/g. All detections of both radionuclides were well below the NRC decommissioning concentration guidelines. Additionally, prior to the 1997 dredging project, nine sediment cores were collected from the Forked River in areas that were to be dredged and deposited in the CDF. Eight of the nine samples had detectable levels of both Co-60 and Cs-137. All results for both radionuclides were well below the NRC guideline; the maximum concentrations for Co-60 and Cs-137 were 0.088 pCi/g and 0.27 pCi/g, respectively. Additional information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Appendix N. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the soils;
- Concentrations of the radionuclides detected in the soils were below the NRC's soil guideline for decommissioning facilities; and
- Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC-39 Condensate Transfer Overboard Discharge Event On September 17, 1998, approximately 148,800 gallons of condensate transfer water was discharged to the Circulating Water discharge tunnel via the Fire Protection System, and ultimately released to the Oyster Creek discharge canal. Following the release, an investigation of potentially impacted surface water, sediments and biota (clams) was conducted. In surface water, tritium levels in the condenser intake were slightly elevated (330 +/- 110 pCi/L). The maximum tritium concentration observed in surface water samples (16,000 pCi/L) did not exceed the USEPA drinking water limit (20,000 pCi/L), and USNRC effluent limitations were not exceeded. Cobalt-60 was the only gamma emitting nuclide to be detected in surface water, detected in only one of 23 samples, downstream of the 30" header (2.0 +/- 1.2 pCi/L). All sediment samples from the Barnegat Bay and the intake canal were less than the limit of detection. In Oyster Creek sediment, Co-60 was detected in 4 of 16 samples. The maximum sediment concentration was 0.056 pCi/g, well below the NRC guideline of 3.8 pCi/g. All sediment samples were less than or equal to those observed in REMP samples prior to the release. Clams in Barnegat Bay were also sampled and determined to be non-detect for Co-60; this was consistent with previous REMP 44 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION sampling results. Tritium was not found in clams collected near the mouth of Oyster Creek, however, low levels attributable to natural background were found in clams from Stouts Creek to the north and Manahawkin Bay to the south. NFA:
- The concentrations of radionuclides measured in sediment, surface water and clams immediately following this event did not exceed any effluent limitations, drinking water standards or decommissioning guidelines;
+ Reduction in concentrations of radionuclides detected in surface water over time; and
- Reduction in concentrations of radionuclides in sediments.
45 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION AOC-40 Torus System Leak (May 2, 1980)
== Description:== The leakage of Torus system water from the containment spray heat exchangers into the station's service water discharge resulted in the release of an unknown quantity of radiologically contaminated water. The leakage that occurred during periods of system testing which occurred for each containment spray system approximately twice per month for 15 to 30 minutes. The Bureau of Radiation Protection was notified of the release, and when facility personnel assumed this satisfied NJDEP notification requirement, no other NJDEP offices were immediately advised. The notification process was immediately reviewed with facility personnel to prevent this oversight from reoccurring. In addition, as part of the facility's REMP it monitors a composite sampler immediately downstream of discharge point 004. The samples are obtained daily and analyzed weekly for gamma-emitting radionuclides and tritium. Information pertaining to surface water, sediment, and aquatic life sampling can be found in AOC-17. Resolution: The containment spray heat exchangers were completely retubed. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Estimated concentrations of the radionuclides released were well below effluent limitations; and
- Limited extent of radionuclides released to the discharge canal.
- Conservative calculations assuming worst case conditions demonstrated that the isotopic concentration of the discharge were well below the effluent limitations specified by the NRC;
- As described in the discussion of AOC-17 (Intake/Discharge Canal), extensive sampling of surface water, sediments and aquatic life has demonstrated that CO-60 was not detected in any environmental samples and Cs-137 was only found in sediments at concentrations slightly above the lower limit of detection.
46 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION AOC - 41 Northern Parking Area Soils from inside the protected area were excavated in 1982 to evaluate the construction of a building and later to adjust topography for paving. These soils contained detectable radionuclides. Following petition for approval from the NRC, these soils were relocated to the area that is now the north parking lot, between the Low Level Radwaste Storage Facility and the north domestic water pump house, placed in trenches, covered with soil and paved over. Based on extensive soil sampling conducted at the time, concentrations in this area are not expected to exceed the NRC decommissioning concentration guidelines due to mixing during relocation, and decay since placement. Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Lack of impact to groundwater, the AOC has been capped; and
- Restricted access to the AOC.
AOC-42 Main Fuel Oil Storage Tank/ Berms The OCNGS excavated and removed soils to complete several projects throughout the site. If during the course of soil excavation contaminated soils are encountered, the soils are sampled and analyzed for fission related radionuclides. Soils containing low levels, but detectable, were placed in piles or in berm on-site. The berm surrounding the main oil storage tank, the berms behind the dilution pumps, the berm on the south side of the Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) and the berm around the waste surge tank have been constructed using these soils. In 1999, the OCNGS conducted a soil-sampling program for the gamma-emitting radionuclides associated with fission processes (e.g., Co-60 & Cs-137) in the berm and soils around the MTOST. The results of the sampling program indicate detectable concentrations of Co-60 in twelve (12) of the seventeen (17) samples collected. However, all concentrations detected were below the NRC's soil guideline at decommissioning of 3.8 pCi/g. The maximum concentration of Co-60 was 0.95 pCi/g. Concentrations of Cs-137 were detected in fifteen (15) of seventeen (17) samples. The maximum concentration of 3.2 pCi/g is below the NRC guideline of 11 pCi/g. Detailed information pertaining to the analytical samples and results referenced above can be found in Appendix N. 47 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
APPENDIX F: QUESTION 5 DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL AREAS OF CONCERN WITH PHOTODOCUMENTATION Defer Activities until Decommissioning based on the following information:
- Limited extent of radionuclides detected in the soils surrounding the building;
- Concentrations of the radionuclides detected in the soils were below the NRC's soil guideline for decommissioning facilities;
- Lack of impact to site wide groundwater; and
- Restricted access to the AOC.
48 02/28/00, 1:25 PM
'I r
ATTACHMENT 1
.AOC TABLES I
Attachment I - 1999 Radi o.,gical Groundwater Data Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station S March 1999 Selptember 1999 Tritium K-40* Ra-226* Th-232* Tritium K-40* Ra-226* Th-232* Station (PCi/L) (t£i/L) (pCi/L) (PCi/L) (pCiiL) (pCi/L) (pCi/L) (pCi/L) WW-I < 130 < 30 < 40 < 7 < 130 < 40 < 60 < 13 WW-2 200 +-90 < 20 < 50 < 8 < 130 < 50 < 80 < 14 WW-3 < 130 < 40 < 60 < 12 160 +-90 < 20 < 40 < 7 WW-4 140 +/-80 < 50 < 80 < 14 < 130 < 20 < 50 < 7 Ww-5 380 +1-00 < 60 < 70 < 14 230 +-90 < 40 < 50 < 13 WW-6 < 130 < 40 < 60 < 1I < 130 < 50 < 70 < 13 WW-7 580 +1-100 < 50 < 70 < 13 190 +/-90 < 50 < 70 < 14 WW-9 340 +1- 90 < 40 < 70 < 10 140 +/- 90 < 110 < 120 < 20 WW-10 < 130 < 50 < 70 < 15 < 130 < 19 < 40 < 6 WW-12 280 +-90 < 40 < 60 < 13 280 +/-90 < 50 < 70 < 14 WW-13 < 130 < 100 < II0 < 20 < 130 < 40 < 60 < 12 WW-14 < 130 < 20 < 40 < 6 < 130 < 40 < 60 < II WW-15 320 +/-90 28 +/ 17 < 40 < 6 < 130 < 50 < 70 < 13 WW-16 340 +1- 90 < 20 < 40 < 6 < 130 < 40 < 60 < II WW-17 < 130 < 40 < 50 < 11 < 130 < 19 < 30 < 4 Number of Wells Sampled Is 15 15 Is 15 15 15 15 Maximum 580 28 N/A N/A 280 N/A N/A N/A Average 322.5 28 N/A N/A 200 N/A N/A N/A Minimum 140 28 N/A N/A 140 N/A N/A N/A Number of Positive Results 8 1 0 0 5 1 0 0
- Gamma isotopic nuclides.
S Attachment I - Soil Dath .-.- the Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station CAA 91-CAA-SB-0034 4/17/1991 Subsurface Soil 0- Under tank 1 CAA 0.037 91-CAA-SB-0029 3/13/1991 Subsurface Soil 0-I' NW of CST 0.470 I CAA 91-CAA-SB-0026 3113/1991 Subsurface Soil 0-1' West of CST 1 0.160 CAA 91-CAA-SB-0022 3113/1991 Subsurface Soil 0-1' SW of CST in yard 1 CAA 91-CAA-SB-0013 3/13/1991 Subsurface Soil 0-1' NW of CST I 0.480 CAA 91-CAA-SH-O00l 3/1311991 Subsurface Soil 0- V North of CST 0.045 1 CAA 91-CAA-SB-0037 5/4/1991 Surface Soil 0 Spill in CST Yard - Collection pit under transfer pipe I CAA 91-CAA-SB-0036 5/411991 Surface Soil 0-6
- Spill in CST Yard at tank discharge valve S CAA 91-CAA-SB3-0033 4/17/1991 Subsurface Soil 4-5' Under tank 0.170 CAA 91-CAA-S-0031 3/13/1991 Subsurface Soil 4-5' NW of CST I <0.030 CAA 91-CAA-SB-0027 3/13/1991 Subsurface Soil 4-5' West of CST I <0.020 CAA 91-CAA-SB-0025 3/13/1991 Subsurface Soil 4-5' NW of CST 0.079 1 CA 91-CAA-SB-0023 3/13/1991 Subsurface Soil 4-5' SW of CST in yard 0.035 S CAA 91-CAA-SB-0009 3/13/1991 Subsurface Soil 4-5' North of CST I <0.020 CAA 91-CAA-SB-0035 4117/1991 Subsurface Soil 6-7' Under tank 0.140 S CAA 91-CAA-SB-0028 3/1311991 Subsurface Soil 6-7' West of CST I CAA <0.014 91-CAA-SB-0024 3/1311991 Subsurface Soil 6-7' SW of CST in yard 0.034 1 CA 91-CAA-SB-0017 3/13/1991 Subsurface Soil 6-7' NW of CST I <0.030 CAA 91-CAA-SB-0030 3/13/1991 Subsurface Soil 8-9' SW of CST in yard <0.015 1 CAA 91-CAA-SB-0032 4/17/1991 Subsurface Soil 9-10' Under tank XWW 91-XWW-SB-0018 0.190 3/13/1991 Subsurface Soil 0-1' SE of CST o/s fence 1 XWW 0.340 91-XWW-SB-0014 3/13/1991 Subsurface Soil 0- V SE of CST o/s fence 0.073 I XWW 91-XWW-SB-0006 3/13/1991 Subsurface Soil 0-1' East of CST I XWW 9l-XWW-SB-0005 3/13/1991 Subsurface Soil 10-1l' SE of CST o/s fence <0.070 1 XWW 91-XWW-SB-0016 3113/1991 Subsurface Soil 4-5' SE of CST o/s fence 0.230 1 XWW 91-XWW-SB-0007 3/13/1991 Subsurface Soil 4-5' East of CST 0.062 1 XWW 91-XWW-SB-0002 3/13/1991 Subsurface Soil 4-5' SE of CST o/s fence <0.030
. XWW 91-XWW-SB-0019 3/13/1991 Subsurface Soil 6-7' SE of CST o/s fence 1.300 1 XWW 91-XWW-SB-0015 3/13/1991 Subsurface Soil 6-7' East of CST 0.180 XWW 91-XWW-SB-0003 3/13/1991 Subsurface Soil 6-7' SE of CST o/s fence <0.020 XWW 91-XWW-SB-0020 3/13/1991 Subsurface Soil 8-9'
= -=r-
= SE of CST o/s fence 0.190 3
I
Attachment I - Soil D tthe Areas of Concern to Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station I xww 9I-xww-SB-Uuuw Jin1/19i 5umsurlacebOtl I East
, of Uzi I -. 420 I I XWW 1l-XWW-SB-00041 3/13/1991 Subsurface Soil 8 SE of CST ols fence <0.050 ! XWW 91-XWW-SB-0021 3/1311991 Subsurface Soil 9-10' SE of CST o/s fence 0.340 Co Cobalt 60 < - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected
=Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60) 4
0 Attachment I - Soil DaJ .ne Areas or Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 2A EM 99-EAA-SS-0020 9/111999 Surface Soil 0-12 TWST Yard east of tank (by pump pad) 0.860 0.150 2A EAA 99-EAA-SS-0010 9/1/1999 Surface Soil 0-12 TWST Yard north of tank <0.019 0.054 2A EAA 99-EAA-SB-0226 12/2/1999 Subsurface Soil 10'-12' Monitoring Well installationSE of TWST ND ND 2A EAA 99-EAA-SB-0227 12/2/1999 Subsurface Soil 12'-14' Monitoring Well installationSE of TWST ND ND 2A EAA 99-EAA-SB-0236 12/3/1999 Subsurface Soil 13-17' Monitoring well installation NW of TWST ND ND 2A EAA 99-EAA-SB-0225 12/2/1999 Subsurface Soil 14'-!8' Monitoring Well installationSE of TWST ND ND 2A EAA 99-EAA-SB-0015 9/1/1999 Subsurface Soil 36-48" TWST Yard north of tank <0.015 0.032 2A EAA 99-EAA-SB-0013 9/1/1999 Subsurface Soil 36-48" TWST Yard east of tank (by pump pad) <0.050 0.110 2A XWW 99-XWW-SS-0012 9/1/1999 Surface Soil 0-12' South of TWST Yard (-3 feet) 0.025 0.087 2A XWW 99-XWW-SS-0009 9/1/1999 Surface Soil 0-12' West of TWST Yard at well location <0.016 0.038 2A XWW 99-XWW-SB-0011 9/1/1999 Subsurface Soil 36-48" South of TWST Yard (-3 feet) <0.010 <0.015 2A XWW 99-XWW-SB-0008 9/1/1999 Subsurface Soil 36-48" West of TWST Yard at well location <0.015 <0.018 Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137
< - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected WGreater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; 11 pCi/g - Cs-177) 5
Attachment I - Soil D S6 ae Areas of Concern 6 Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 22B XWN 99-XWN-SB-0109 11/17/1999 Subsurface Soil 2,5 Torus piping to Rx Bldg ND 0.0615 2B XWN 99-XWN-SB-0105 11/17/1999 Subsurface Soil 2.5-3' Torus piping to Rx Bldg ND ND 2H XWN 99-XWN-SB-009 11117/1999 Subsurface Soil 2.5-3' Torus piping to Rx Bldg ND 0.0841 2B XWN 99-XWN-SB-0167 11/12211999 Subsurface Soil 4.5-5' Torus piping to Rx Bldg ND 0.117 2B XWN 99-XWN-SB-0103 11/17/1999 Subsurface Soil
..... i , ,,, 4.5-5'
~-... - ...
Torus piping to Rx Bldg .. ND ND Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137 < - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; It pCi/g - Cs-137) 6 2b
Attachment I - Soil DA ., the Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 3A XWN 99-XYN-SS-090 11/16/1999 Surface Soil 0-6 Northwest corner of TB at oil spill from 8/87 0.114 0.068 3A XWN 99-XYN-SS-0229 12/3/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" North of Turbine Dirty Oil Collection Tank ND ND Notes-. Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137 < - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; II pCi/g - Cs-I37) 7 32
Attachment I - Soil] D he Areas or Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 3B XWW 99-XWW-SB-0242 12811999 Subsurface Soil I Oil Line from Dirty Oil Tank toTB 3B XWW 99-XWW-SB-0241 12/8/1999 Subsurface Soil 5-6' Oil Line from Dirty Oil Tank to TB ND ND Noesp Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137 < - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected fireater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; I I pCi/g - Cs-137) 9I 3b
0 Attachment I - Soil Datb .- r the Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station S rNonn Or Ktu, Near transtormers west of DIW 4A/B XWN 99-XWN-SS-0053 913199 Surface Soil 0-12" Process Facility ND 0.194 4A/B XWN 99-XWN-SS-0037 912/99 Surface Soil 0-12" North of D/W Support Center <0.030 0.068 4A/B XWN 99-XWN-SS-0029 9/2/99 Surface Soil 0-12" SW comer of D/W Support Center <0.020 0.079 4A/B XWN 99-XWN-SB-0032 9/2/99 Subsurface Soil 192.5-204.5" North of D/W Support Center ND ND North of RB, Near transformers west of D/W 4A/B XWN 99-XWN-SB-0055 9/3/99 Subsurface Soil 204.75-216.75" Process Facility ND ND 4A/B XWN 99-XWN-SB-0034 9/2/99 Subsurface Soil 216-228" SW corner of D/W Support Center ND ND North of RB, Near transformers west of D/W 4A/B XWN 99-XWN-SB-0054 9/3/99 Subsurface Soil 36-48" Process Facility <0.040 0.130 4A/B XWN 99-XWN-SB-0050 9/2/99 Subsurface Soil 36-48" North of D/W Support Center <0.02 0.044 4A/B XWN 99-XWN-SB-0026 9/2/99 Subsurface Soil 36-48" SW comer of D/W Support Center <0.04 0.130 4A/B YAA 99-YAA-SS-0036 9/2/99 Sui-face Soil 0-12" North of ORW, NE Corner of filter pad 0.800 4.200 4A/_._B YAA 99-YAA-SS-0027 9/2/99 Surface Soil 0-12" North of ORW, NW Corner of filter pad 0.950 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0069 10/13/82 Subsurface Soil 0-18" below pipe SW of ORW Surge Tank o/s berm 4A/B YAA 99-YAA-SS-0222 11/30/99 Surface Soil 0'-2' Oil Line near Boiler House ND 0.145 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0098 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 0-22" NE of ORW Surge Tank (25') 4.9 Northeast comer of Boiler House Fuel Oil 4A/B YAA 99-YAA-SS-0223 11/30199 Surface Soil 0-24" pumping station 1.75 10.3 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-OI 1 10/31/82 Subsurface soil 0-28" ORW Surge Tank SW of tank (15') 0.500 0.370 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0123 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 0-30' ORW Surge Tank, South of tank (15') 0.223 0.893 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0133 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 0-30" SW of ORW Surge Tank (25') 1.591 1.848 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0119 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 0-30" ORW Surge Tank SW of tank (20') 1.600 0.800 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-01 12 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 0-30" East of ORW Surge Tank (10') 0.745 0.534 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0109 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 0-30" East of ORW Surge Tank (5') 0.792 1.355 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0105 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 0-30" West of ORW Surge Tank (5') 1.606 7.2 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0103 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 0-30" NE of ORW Surge Tank (10') 4AIB YAA 82-YAA-SB-0088 10/27/82 Subsurface Soil 0-30" SW of ORW Surge Tank o/s bermn 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0008 I017/82 Subsurface Soil 0-33' SE of ORW Surge Tank 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0012 10/7/82 Subsurface Soil 0-33' S. of ORW Surge Tank I 1.612 2.454 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0010 10/7/82 Subsurface Soil 0-33" S. of ORW Surge Tank 2.550 4 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0003 1017/82 Subsurface Soil 0-33" SW of ORW Surge Tank 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-O001 101/82 Subsurface Soil 0-33" SW of ORW Surge Tank o/s berm 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0007 10/7/82 Subsurface Soil 0-40' S. of ORW Surge Tank North of ORW conc pad - background away 4A/B YAA 99-YAA-SS-0003 8/19/99 Surface Soil 0-6" from spill area 1.28 0.64 North or ORWSonc pad - adjacent to mop 4A/B YAA 99-YAA-SS-O02 8/19/99 Surface Soil 0 water spill area = 1 2.43 4ab
Attachment I - Soil Dati zor the Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 0 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SS-0065 10111/82 Surface Soil 0-6" North of ORW - Paving 0.503 0.446 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SS-0064 10/11/82 Surface Soil 0-6" North of ORW - Paving 0.618 0.0624 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SS-0063 10/11/82 Surface Soil 0-6" North of ORW - Paving 1.722 1.422 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SS-0062 10/11/82 Surface Soil 0-6" North of ORW - Paving 0.863 0.625 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SS-0061 10/11/82 Surface Soil 0-6" North of ORW - Paving 1.126 0.777 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SS-0060 10/11/82 Surface Soil 0-6" North of ORW - Paving 1.575 1.677 4AIB YAA 82-YAA-SS-0059 10/11/82 Surface Soil 0-6" North of ORW/South of NRW-Paving 0.540 0.377 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SS-0058 10/11/82 Surface Soil 0-6" North of ORW/South of NRW-Paving 0.913 0.844 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SS-0057 10/11/82 Surface Soil 0-6" North of ORW/South of NRW-Paving 3RtOL At 4AIB YAA 82-YAA-SS-0056 10/11/82 Surface Soil 0-6" North of ORW - Paving collected collected 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SS-0055 10/11/82 Surface Soil 0-6" North of ORW/South of NRW-Paving 1.292 0.615 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SS-0054 10/I 1/82 Surface Soil 0-6" North of ORW - Paving 0.689 0.634 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SS-0053 10/11/82 Surface Soil 0-6" North of ORW/South of NRW-Paving 0.581 0.412 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SS-0052 10/11/82 Surface Soil 0-6" North of ORW/South of NRW-Paving 1.110 0.510 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0126 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 103-120" East of ORW Surge Tank (10') 0.710 0.308 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0102 10/31182 Subsurface Soil 113-143" NE of ORW Surge Tank (25') N/A 0.246 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0127 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 120-140' East of ORW Surge Tank (10') 0.137 0.197 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0123 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 120-145" ORW Surge Tank SW of tank (20') 0.200 0.650 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0132 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 120-150' ORW Surge Tank, South of tank (15') 0.074 0.094 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SR-0094 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 120-150" NE of ORW Surge Tank (10') 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0075 10/13/82 Subsurface Soil 12-45" S. of ORW Surge Tank 2.460 4.160 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0085 10/27/82 Subsurface Soil 15-45" S. of ORW Surge Tank 0.3958 1.993 4AMB YAA 82-YAA-SB-0076 10/13/82 Subsurface Soil 15-48" S. of ORW Surge Tank M 4A/B YAA 99-YAA-SB-0025 9/2/99 Subsurface Soil 192-204" North of ORW, NW Corner of filter pad ND 0.745 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0070 10/13/82 Subsurface Soil 19-52" SW of ORW Surge Tank o/s berm- 1.700 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0083 10/27/82 Subsurface Soil 20-50" SE of ORW Surge Tank 0.7899 2.578 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0092 10/27/82 Subsurface Soil 22-48" S. of ORW Surge Tank 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0099 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 22-53" NE of ORW Surge Tank (25') 0.258 1.600 4AIB YAA 82-YAA-SB-0078 10/13/82 Subsurface Soil 24-57" SE of ORW Surge Tank 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0116 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 28-58" ORW Surge Tank SW of tank (15') 0.2766 0.281 4A/B YAA 99-YAA-SB-0221 11/30/99 Subsurface Soil 3.5'-4' Oil Line near Boiler House ND ND 4AIB YAA 82-YAA-SB-0087 10/27/82 Subsurface Soil 30-33" SW of ORW Surge Tank ols berm ND 2.646 4AIB YAA 82-YAA-SB-0134 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 30-60" SW of ORW Surge Tank (25') 0.823 1.333 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0129 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 30-60" ORW Surge Tank. South of tank (15') 0.343 0.517 2 4ah
Attachment I - Soil Dt6,.,- the Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station East ot URW Surge Tank (Y) YAA YAA YAA 82-YAA-SB-0120 82-YAA-SB-01 13 82-YAA-SB.-O104 sursace 3O01 surface Soil 30-30. JU ORW Surge Tank SW of tank (20') East of ORW Surge Tank (10') NE. of UKW Surge Tank (10') N/A 0.351 I n[A 0. 0. oI I 4A/B 82-YAA-SB-0095 Subsurface Soil 30-60" West of ORW Surge Tank (Y') a YAA 4A/B 82-YAA-SB-0011 Subsurface Soil 33-36" SE of ORW Surge Tank YAA 4A/B 82-YAA-SB-0009 Subsurface Soil 33-36" SW of ORW Surge Tank o/s of berm YAA 4AIB 82-YAA-SB-0005 Subsurface Soil 33-36" S. of ORW Surge Tank YAA 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0004 Subsurface Soil 33-36" S. of ORW Surge Tank 4A/I 82-YAA-SB-O002 1017/82 Subsurface Soil 33-36" SW of ORW Surge Tank YAA 4A/B 99-YAA-SB-0030 9/2/99 Subsurface Soil 36-48" North of ORW, NE Corner of filter pad YAA - --- - 4. - I YAA 99-YAA-SB-O028 912/99 Subsurface Soil 36-48" North of ORW, NW Corner of filter pad 0.190 6.4
-44 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0090 10/27/82 Subsurface Soil 36-61" SW of ORW Surge Tank 4A/B 82-YAA-SB-0006 1017/82 Subsurface Soil 40-42" S. of ORW Surge Tank YAA 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0072 10/13/82 Subsurface Soil 40-43" S. of ORW Surge Tank 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0077 10/13/82 Subsurface Soil 41-44" SW of ORW Surge Tank 4A/B 82-YAA-SB--074 10/13/82 Subsurface Soil 45-48" S. of ORW Surge Tank 4A/B3 YAA 82-YAA-SB-0082 10/27/82 Subsurface Soil 45-49" S. of ORW Surge Tank 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0079 10/13/82 Subsurface Soil 48-51" S. of ORW Surge Tank 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0091 10/27/82 Subsurface Soil 48-52" S. of ORW Surge Tank 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0093 10/27/82 Subsurface Soil 50-55" SE of ORW Surge Tank 0.
4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0080 10/13/82 Subsurface Soil 52-55" SW of ORW Surge Tank 0/s berm 3 4AIB YAA 82-YAA-SB-01 17 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 53-77" ORW Surge Tank SW of tank (15')
- 4. 4. I .
4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0100 10131/82 Subsurface Soil 53-83" NE of ORW Surge Tank (25') 0.155 0.649 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0068 10/13/82 Subsurface Soil 57-60" SE of ORW Surge Tank 1.150 4 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0114 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 60-80" East of ORW Surge Tank (10') 0.368 I 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0084 10127/82 Subsurface Soil 60-86" S. of ORW Surge Tank ND I 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0130 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 60-90" ORW Surge Tank, South of tank (I5Y) 0.670 4AIR YAA 82-YAA-SB-UI21 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 60-90 UKW Surge Tank SW o0 tank (20') 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-01 10 10131/82 Subsurface Soil 60-90" East of ORW Surge Tank (5') 0. 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0108 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 60-90" NE of ORW Surge Tank (10') 2. 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0107 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 60-90" SW of ORW Surge Tank (25') 0.: 4AIRl YAA. 82-YAA-SB-OO96 10/31/82 Subsurface SOil 60-90" West of UKW Surge Tank pY) 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0089 10/27/82 Subsurface Soil 61-65" SW of ORW Surge Tank 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-=073 10/13/82 Subsurface Soil 7-40" S. of ORW Surge Tank ' 0rO.440 d.6 4A/R YAA 82-YAA-Si-4.1 15 10/31/82 Subsurtace Soil I7-1U0" UKW Surge Tank Sw ot tank (15') 4/ -A 82YA-B0 18 10/1/8 4*b
Attachment I - Soil Dat* ne Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station I 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0125 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 80-103' WEst of ORW Surge Tank (15') 0.136 56 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0071 10113/82 Subsurface Soil 8-41 " SW of ORW Surge Tank 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0081 10127/82 Subsurface Soil 86-90' S. of ORW Surge Tank2.1 195 4A/B YAA , 82-YAA-SB-0097 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 90-120' West of ORW Surge Tank (5')0.4 56 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0131 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 90-120" ORW Surge Tank, South of tank (15') 0.438 0.639 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0122 10131/82 Subsurface Soil 90-120" SW of ORW Surge Tank (25') 0.280 0.430 4A/B YAA YAA 82-YAA-SB-O111 82-YAA-SB-0135 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil Soil 90-120" 90-120" EastSurge ORW of ORW SW of TankSurge Tank (20') tank(5') 1.698 0.730 1.844 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0106 10/31/82 Subsurface Soil 90-120' NE of ORW Surge Tank (10') 2.263 6.2 4A/B YAA 82-YAA-SB-0086 10S27/82 96",Sbelowepipe SW of ORW Surge Tank o/s ber" Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137 < - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected
=Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; 11 pCi/g - Cs-137) 4ab 4
6 Attachment I - Soil * - the Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station West of ORW - Truck ramp area 1aving IDA A I 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0048 10110/19821 Surface Soil 0-6 South of ORW - Truck ramp area <M DA 0.0573 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0047 10/1011982 Surface Soil 0-6" West of ORW -Truck ramp area paving 2.762 2.432 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0046 10110/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 0.184 0.2643 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0045 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 2.135 2.435 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0044 10110/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0043 10/10/19821 Surface Soil 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 8.002 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0042 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 1.479 1.514 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0041 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 1.966 4.299 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0040 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0039 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 1.690 1.663 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0038 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 8.6 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0037 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 1.455 1.071 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0036 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 2.484 2.296 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0035 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 3.621 2.900 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0034 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving M 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0033 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" West of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 3.054 1.909 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0032 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 0.605 0.553 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0031 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 3.017 1.967 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0030 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving_ 4.927 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0029 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving I.567 1.348 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0028 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" NW of ORW -Truck ramp area paving 3.103 3.511 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0027 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 3.651 3.585 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0026 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving_ 3.807 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0025 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 1.190 1.347 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0024 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving_ 3.066 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0023 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" South of ORW - Truck ramp area 0.7018 0.7458 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0022 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" NW ofORW - Truck ramp area paving 0.768 0.819 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0021 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" South of ORW - Truck ramp area < MDA <MDA 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0020 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 0.8264 0.6884 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0019 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" South of ORW - Truck ramp area <MDA <MDA 4C YAA 82-YAA-SS-0018 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 0-6" South of ORW - Truck ramp area <MDA 0.3067 13 4c
Attachment I - Soil D10 he Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear GeneratingStation II I-C I4CJ 4C 4CJI 4C1 I YAA YAA YAA YAA YAA 82-YAA-82-YAAK
-0017
-0016 82-YAA. -0015 i2-YAA--SS-0014 82-YAA-SS -0013 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 10/1011982 Surface Soil 10/10/1982 Surface Soil 10110/1982 Surfae Soil 0-6" 0-6" 0-6" 0-6" 0-6' South of ORW - Truck ramp area South of ORW - Truck ramp area South of ORW- Truck ramp area South of ORW - Truck ramp area NW of ORW - Truck ramp area paving 0.1264 1.594
<MDA 0.3449 1.787 O1o I1.
0.1 0.4 1.7F37 Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137
< - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected ýGreater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; II pCi/g - Cs-137) 14
-Z Attachment I - Soil Da" the Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Notes-,
Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137 < - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected MGreater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; I I pCl/g - Cs-137) 15
I Attachment I - Soil Dao -i.. the Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 13 XCD 99-XCD-SS-0062 1 11/15/1999 1 Surface Soil drum storage area SW level D I ND I ND 13 XCD 99-XCD-SS-0065 11/15/1999 Surface Soil 0-24" North of Level D Storage Area at access road ND 0.072 13 XCD 99-XCD-SS-0060 11/15/1999 Surface Soil 0-24" Level D Storage Area, southwest drum storage area ND ND 13 XCD 99-XCD-SS-0059 11/15/1999 Surface Soil 0-24" Level D Storage Area, former drum collection area ND 0.111 13 XCD 99-XCD-SS-O058 11/15/1999 Surface Soil 0-24" Level D Storage Area, former drum collection area ND 0.066 13 XCD 99-XCD-SS-0153 11/22/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Spare Main Transformer ND ND 13 XCD 99-XCD-SS-0152 11/22/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Spare Main Transformer ND ND 13 XCD 99-XCD-SS-0150 11/22/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Spare Main Transformer ND 0.0521 13 XCD 99-XCD-SS-0092 11/16/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Spare Main Transformer ND ND 13 XCD 99-XCD-SS-0086 11/16/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Spare Main Transformer ND ND 13 XCD 92-XCD-SS-0033 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0233 0.0106 13 XCD 92-XCD-SS-0032 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction 0.0159 <0.0236 13 XCD XCD-SS-0031 8/6/1,2 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction 0.0194 0.0111 13 XCD 92-XCD-SS-0030 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0277 <0.0236 13 XCD 92-XCD-SS-0029 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0246 <0.0225 13 XCD 92-XCD-SS-0028 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction 0.0279 0.0319 13 XCD 92-XCD-SS-0027 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction 0.0287 <0.0220 13 XCD 92-XCD-SS-0026 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction 0.0558 0.0973 13 XCD 92-XCD-SS-0019 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.08 <0.0230 13 XCD 92-XCD-SS-0017 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0299 <0.0207 13 XCD 92-XCD-SS-0016 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0"6 Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0228 <0.0207 13 XCD 92-XCD-SS-0015 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction 0.0996 0.211 13 XCD 92-XCD-SS-0014 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0199 0.232 16 13
Attachment I - Soil a.-. ,r the Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 13 XCD 92-XCD-SS-O013 8/611992 Surface Soil 0-6' Proposed ISFSI Construction I <0.0276 0.0211 13 XCD 92-XCD-SS-0012 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6 Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0177 <0.0176 13 XCD 92-XCD-SS-001 1 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0223 <0.0218 13 XCD 92-XCD-SS-0010 8/611992 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0246 <0.0212 13 XCD 92-XCD-SS-0009 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0256 <0.0228 13 XCD 92-XCD-SS-0008 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction <0.0217 <0.0216 13 XCD 92-XCD-SS-0007 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Construction 0.0235 <0.0247 13 XCD 99-XCD-SB-0093 11/16/1999 Subsurface Soil 12-24" Spare Main Transformer ND ND 13 XCD 99-XCD-SB-0159 11/22/1999 Subsurface Soil 18-24" Spare Main Transformer ND ND 13 XCD 99-XCD-SB-0084 11/16/1999 Subsurface Soil 18-24" Spare Main Transformer ND ND Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137 < - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; 11 pCi/g - Cs-137) 17 13
6 0 Attachment I - Soil DaW .,. (he Areas of Concern 0 Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 14 XWS 99-XWS-SS-l I I II Wl tl9 burtace bon1 u-a- Level U btorage Area, southwest drum storage area NU NU 14 YFS 99-YFS-SS-0160 11122/1999 Surface Soil 0-6' Runoff trench east of ISFSI area ND ND 14 YFS 99-YFS-SS-0158 11/22/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Runoff trench east of ISFSI area ND ND 14 YFS 92-YFS-SS-0025 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6' Proposed ISFSI Location 0.0215 0.0292 14 YFS 92-YFS-SS-0024 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Location 0.0474 0.0590 14 YFS 92-YFS-SS-0023 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6' Proposed ISFSI Location 4 <0.0225 14 YFS 92-YFS-SS-0022 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Location 0.068 0.0578 14 YFS 92-YFS-SS-0021 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Location 0.0392 0.0728 14 YFS 92-YFS-SS-0020 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Location 0.0382 0.130 14 YFS 92-YFS-SS-0018 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0--6 Proposed ISFSI Location ND 0.0492 14 YFS 92-YFS-SS-)006 - 8/6/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ISFSI Location 0.0271 0.0328 Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137
< - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected = Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; I pCi/g - Cs-l37) is
Attachment I - Soi Da.. .-. (he Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 15 XCS 99-XCS-SS-0214 11/29/1999 Surface Soil 0-0.5 Transfromer area south of OCAB ND ND 15 XCS 99-XCS-SS-0213 11/29/1999 Surface Soil 0-0.5' Transformer area south of OCAB ND ND 15 XCS 99-XCS-SS-0212 11/29/1999 Surface Soil 0'-0.5' Transformer area south of OCAB ND ND is XCS I99-XCS-SS-021 1 11/2911999 Surface Soil 0'-0.5' Transformer area south of OCAB ND 0.0301 15 XCS 99-XCS-SS-0210 11/29/1999 Surface Soil 0'-0.5' Transformer area south of OCAB ND ND 15 XCS 99-XCS-SS-0207 11/29/1999 Surface Soil 0'-0.5' Transformer area south of OCAB ND ND Is XCS 99-XCS-SS-0202 11/29/1999 Surface Soil 0'-0.5' Transformer area south of OCAB ND ND 15 XCS 99-XCS-SS-0161 11/22/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Oil Line in OCAB Parking Lot near Site VP Space ND ND 15 XCS 99-XCS-SS-0156 11/22/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Oil Line near Protected Area fence by MFOST ND ND 15 XCS 99-XCS-SS-0154 11/22/1999 Surface Soil 0-6' Oil Line near Security outer gate for Sally Port ND ND
=S - XTS 00-XTS-SS-000l 1/6/2000 Surface Soil 0-6" Soil Mound West of South Parking Lot at PA Fence line ND ND Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137
< - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected
ý Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; 11 pCi/g - Cs-137) 19 15
Attachment I - Soil DaO r the Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Subsurface Abandoned on-site waste 19 xws I 99-XWS-SEB-0247 12113/1999 Soil 13.5'-14 water treatment facility ND 0.110 Subsurface Abandoned on-site waste 19 XWS 99-XWS-SB-0203 11/29/1999 Soil 14.5-15.5 water treatment facility ND ND Subsurface Abandoned on-site waste 19 XWS 99-XWS-SB-0224 11/30/1999 Soil 16'-17' water treatment facility ND 0.036 Subsurface Abandoned on-site waste 19 XWS 99-XWS-SB-0248 12/13/1999 Soil 17.5'-18' water treatment facility ND ND Notes-Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137 < - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; I I pCi/g - Cs-137) 19
Attachment I - Soil D .t . ,ne Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 20 XWS 99-XWS-SS-00701 11/15/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" jSeepage pit-pretreatment backwash(shallow) ND ND j 20 XWS 99-XWS-SS-00681 1/1511999 Surface Soil 0-6" ] Seepage pit-pretreatment backwash ND ND 20 XWS 99-XWS-SS-0063 11/15/1999 Surface Soil 0-6' J Seepage pit-pretreatment backwash ND 0.058 20 xwS 99-XWS-SS-0057 11/15/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Seepage pit-pretreatment backwash ND 0.084 S20 XWS xw I*x~s *lso~o*a*,o.Io'I 2o ._,,,S,, 99-XWS-SB-0069 H11~5/1999 Subsurface Soil 10' Seepage pit-pretreatment backwash(deep) ND MMM.D InDI ND Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137
< - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected i*Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; I I pCi/g - Cs-137) 20 20
Attachment I - Soil Dat..,, the Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 22 XTL 99-XTL-SS-0089 11116/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" NE laydown and sandblast ND ND 22 XTL 199-XTL-SS-00751 11i/16/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" NE laydown and sandblast ND 0.037 22 1 XTL ]99-XTL-SB-O0881 11/16/1999 Subsurface soil V'-2' NE laydown and sandblast ND ND Note-0 Co Cobalt 60 Cs-<37 - Cesium 137 < - Detection Limits NIA - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected
- Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; II pCi/g - Cs-137) 21 22
Attachment I - Soil .,. the Areas or Concern _Da" Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station YAA 99-YAASS-05 8/27/1999 Subsurface Soil Unknown East wall Rx Building by chiller pad (SW elbow) 0.75 1.68 26 YAA 99-YAA-SS-0004 8/27/1999 Subsurface Soil Unknown West wall of excavation RB by chiller pad (SW Elbow) 1.39 2.04 26 YAA 99-YAA-SS-0222 11/30/1999 Surface Soil 0'-2' Oil Line near Boiler House ND 0.145 I'I Northeast corner of Boiler House Fuel Oil pumping 26 YAA 99-YAA-SS-0223 11/30/1999 Surface Soil station 1.75 10.3 Notes7 Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137 < - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected l*Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; I I pCi/g - Cs-137) 22 26
Attachment I - Soil Da.. - ,- the Areas oa Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 30 YAA 199-YAA-SS-0003 8/19/ 1999 Surface Soil i spill area 1 1.2 0.64 North or ORW conc pad - adjacent to mop water 30 YAA 99-YAA-SS-0002 %11911999 Surface Soil 0-6" spill area 2.436.4 I 6.04 30 YAA 99-YAA-SS-0001 8/19/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" North of ORW conc pad - Mop water spill Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137 < - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; 11 pCilg - Cs-137) 30
Attachment I - Soil Da@ se Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station S 31 YAA 99-YAA-SS-U044 91211999 Surface Soil 0-12" North of NRW, North of sidewalk, I/S RCA fence 0.210 1.700 31 YAA 99-YAA-SS-0042 9/2/1999 Surface Soil 0-12" West of NRW at macadam repair area <0.020 0.073 31 YAA 99-YAA-SS-0040 9/2/1999 Surface Soil 0-12" South of NRW HX Building (-30 feet) 0.240 1.600 31 YAA 99-YAA-SS-0220 11130/1999 Surface Soil o-6" North of NRW Building at compressor 1.51 0.844 31 YAA 99-YAA-SS-0219 11130/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" North of NRW Building at compressor 1.44 0.956 31 YAA 99-YAA-SB-0039 9/2/1999 Subsurface Soil 12-24" South of NRW HX Building (-30 feet) <0.020 0.250 31 YAA 99-YAA-SB-0038 912/1999 Subsurface Soil 144-156" West of NRW at macadam repair area ND ND 31 YAA 99-YAA-SB-0024 9/2/1999 Subsurface Soil 156.25-168.25" North of NRW, North of sidewalk, I/S RCA fence ND ND 31 YAA 99-YAA-SB-0035 9/2/1999 Subsurface Soil 168-180 North of ORW, NE Corner of filter pad ND ND 31 YAA 81-YAA-SB-0011 3/1/1981 Subsurface Soil 18-30" West of NRW - 14.5' north of NW girder of stairwell, 6' West of building 1.40 2.40 31 YAA 81-YAA-SB-0009 3/1/1981 Subsurface Soil 18-30" West of NRW - 9' south of stairwell pad, 5.5' west of building 0.47 0.88 31 YAA 81-YAA-SB-0012 3/1/1981 Subsurface Soil 18-36" West of NRW - 6' north of NW girder of stairwell, 6' West of building 1.20 2.40 31 YAA 81-YAA-SB-0008 3/1/1981 Subsurface Soil 18-36" West of NRW - 9' South of NW corner, 6.5' west of building not listed not listed 31 YAA 81-YAA-SB-O(O5 3/1/1981 Subsurface Soil 18-36" North of NRW - 4' East of NW Comer, 4' north of building 0.89 1.60 31 YAA 81-YAA-SB-0002 3/1/1981 Subsurface Soil 18-36" East of NRW - 35' south of rollup door, 4' east of building 0.310 1.30 31 YAA 81-YAA-SB-0004 3/1/1981 Subsurface Soil 192-197.5" East of NRW - 35' south of rollup door, 4' east of building <MDA 0.100 31 YAA 81-YAA-SB-OOOl 3/1/1981 Subsurface Soil 197.5-210" East of NRW - 35' south of rollup door, 4' east of building <MDA < NDA 31 YAA 99-YAA-SB-0043 9/2/1999 Subsurface Soil 36-48" North of NRW, North of sidewalk, I/S RCA fence 0.052 0.390 31 YAA 99-YAA-SB-0041 9/2/1999 Subsurface Soil 36-48" West of NRW at macadam repair area <0.014 <0.012 31 YAA 99-YAA-SB-0031 9/2/1999 Subsurface Soil 48.5-60.5" South of NRW HX Building (-30 feet) ND 0.386 31 YAA 81-YAA-SB-0003 3/1/1981 Subsurface Soil 48-64" East of NRW - 35' south of rollup door, 4' east of building 0.18 0.250 31 YAA 81-YAA-SB-0014 3/1/1981 Subsurface Soil 48-66" West of NRW - 9' South of NW comer, 6.5' west of building 1.30 3.50 31 YAA 81-YAA-SB-0013 3/1/1981 Subsurface Soil 48-66" West of NRW - 6' north of NW girder of stairwell, 6' West of building 1.20 2.30 31 YAA 81-YAA-SB-0006 3/1/1981 Subsurface Soil 48-66" North of NRW - 4' East of NW Corner, 4' north of building 0.41 0.610 31 YAA 81-YAA-SB-0015 3/1/1981 Subsurface Soil 96-114" East of NRW - 35' south of rollup door, 4' east of building <MDA <MDA 31 YAA 81-YAA-SB-00l0 3/1/1981 Subsurface Soil 96-114" West of NRW - 9' South of NW comer, 6.5' west of building 0.24 0.490 31 YAA 81-YAA-SB-OO07 3/1/1981 Subsurface Soil 96-114" North of NRW - 4' East of NW Comer, 4' north of building <MDA <MDA
-J -- l I Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137
< - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; II pCi/g - Cs-147) 23 31
Attachment I - Soil Daot. or the Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 33 1 WAA 199-WAA-SS-0209 111/29/19991 Surface Soil 10'-0.5'1 Transformer area at LLRWSF ND I ND 3WAA 99-WAA-SS-020811/29/1999 Surface Soil 0-0.51 Transformer area at LLRWSF ND ND 3=3 WAA 99-WAA-SS-0206 11/29/1999 Surface Soil 0'-0.5'1 Transformer area at LLRWSF ND ND 33 WAA 99-WAA-SS-0201 11/29/1999 Surface Soil 0'-0.5' Transformer area at LLRWSF ND 0.017 Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137
< - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected IiýGreater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCilg - Co-60; II pCi/g - Cs-137) 24 33
6 Ta*.8 Upland Confined Disposal Sample Results S Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0086 8114/1997 I Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 <0.020 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-O085 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36 Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 <0.030 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0084 8/1411997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.060 0.091 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0083 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.064 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0082 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 <0.030 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0079 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.050 0.150 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0077 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.080 0.190 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0076 8/1411997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 <0.040 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0075 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 <0.030 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0073 8114/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.040 <0.050 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0071 8114/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36' Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 <0.030 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0067 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 <0.020 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0064 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.019 <0.020 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0063 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 <0.040 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0062 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.013 <0.020 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0061 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36' Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 <0.020 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0060 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.037 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-O059 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.036 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0058 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.070 0.077 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0057 8/1411997 Subsurface Soil 0-36' Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 <0.030 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0054 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 0.038 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0051 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 <0.030 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0050 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.040 <0.040 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0049 8/1411997 Subsurface Soil 0-36' Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 <0.030 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0046 8/13/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 <0.030 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0043 8/13/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.042 <0.050 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0039 8/13/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 <0.030 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0037 8/13/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.026 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0036 8/13/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 <0.020 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0033 8/1311997 Subsurface Soil 0-36' Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.023 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0030 8/13/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.060 <0.060 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0027 8/13/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 <0.020 _3_ . .... .... .- _,-8, 3 25 38
Tabue* .,.8 Upland Confined Disposal Sample Results Sfi Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 38 ZFS 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0023 8/12/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36' Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.016 1 <0.030 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0022 8/1211997 Subsurface Soil 0-36 Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 < 0.030 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0021 8/12/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 0.035 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0020 8/12/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 <0.020 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0019 8/12/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36' Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.036 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0018 8/12/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.060 <0.040 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0017 8/12/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36' Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 <0.020 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0016 8/12/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36' Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.060 0.077 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0015 8112/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36' Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.070 0.140 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0014 8/12/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.060 <0.070 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0013 8/1211997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 0.043 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0012 8/12/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0,020 0.042 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-001 1 8/12/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin 0.075 0.200 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0010 8/12/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.090 <0.080 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0009 8/12/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36' Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.072 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0008 8/12/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36' Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.050 0.110 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0005 8/12/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36' Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.017 <0.030 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0004 8/12/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 0.059 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-(03 8/1211997 Subsurface Soil 0-36' Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 0.028 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0002 8/12/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 <0.040 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0001 8/12/1997 Subsurface Soil 0-36' Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.080 0.190 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0080 8114/1997 Subsurface Soil 36-72 Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.040 0.120 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0072 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.019 <0.030 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0070 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 36-72' Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.018 0.034 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0069 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 36-72' Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.040 0.170 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0065 8114/1997 Subsurface Soil 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.027 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0056 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.050 <0.050 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0052 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.060 <0.060 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0048 8/13/1997 Subsurface Soil 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.043 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0042 8/1311997 Subsurface Soil 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.053 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0040 8/13/1997 Subsurface Soil 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin < 0020 < 030, 26 38
Tab. Upland Confined Disposal Sample Results 0 Ovqetr Creek Nuclear Generatinp Station 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0038 8/13/1997 Subsurface Soil 36-72* Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 0.079 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0035 8/13/1997 Subsurface Soil 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 <0.030 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0032 8/13/1997 Subsurface Soil 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.060 <0.070 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0029 8/13/1997 Subsurface Soil 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.018 <0.019 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0026 8/13/1997 Subsurface Soil 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.056 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0006 8/12/1997 Subsurface Soil 36-72" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.040 <0.050 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0081 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 0.059 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0078 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.033 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0074 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.041 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0068 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.015 <0.040 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0066 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.018 <0.030 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0055 8/14/1997 Subsurface Soil 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 0.035 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0053 8/1411997 Subsurface Soil 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.060 0.150 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0047 8/1311997 Subsurface Soil 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 <0.040 38 ZFS 97.ZFS-SB-0045 8/13/1997 Subsurface Soil 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.040 0.190 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0044 8/13/1997 Subsurface Soil 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.018 <0.016 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0041 8/13/1997 Subsurface Soil 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.040 <0.050 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0034 8/13/1997 Subsurface Soil 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.015 0.I.053 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0031 8/13/1997 Subsurface Soil 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.080 <0.070 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0028 8/13/1997 Subsurface Soil 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.019 0.040 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0025 8113/1997 Subsurface Soil 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.020 0.037 38 ZFS 97-ZFS-SB-0275 8/12/1997 Subsurface Soil 72-108" Dredge Spoils Retention Basin <0.030 0.025 Note- l Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137 < - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected GM
]IGreater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; I1 pCi/g - Cs-137) 27
6 Attachment I - Soil D . the Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 6 41 XWN 185-XWN-SS-008 1 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0080 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6' Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0079 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location 1.89 1.90 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0078 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0077 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0076 611/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND 0.501 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0075 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0074 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0073 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0072 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESS, Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0071 611/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0070 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0069 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0068 611/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location 1.36 ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0067 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0066 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0065 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND 0.521 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0064 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0063 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0062 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0061 61111985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0060 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND 0.954 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0059 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location 2.1 0.726 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0058 6/111985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0057 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0056 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0055 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0054 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0053 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND 0.71D 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0052 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0051 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-O050 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0049 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 28 41
A-1 6 Attachment I - Soil Di. the Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 6 41 XWN 41 XWN I 4 4. 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0046 6/111985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0045 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-61 Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0044 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0043 6/1/1985. Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0042 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0041 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0040 611/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0039 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0038 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0037 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0036 611/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-O035 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0034 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0033 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0032 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0031 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0030 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0029 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0028 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0027 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0026 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0025 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND 0.443 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0024 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0023 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0022 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0021 6/111985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0020 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0019 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0018 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0017 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41_ _i5XNS-06 6118 6/1/1985 ufaeSi Surface Soil -"Pooe 0-6" Proposed ESSFFLcto Location -D ND -D ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0016 29 41
S Attachment I - Soil Dab . e Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-MJU1 /1111933 burface b)oll U-6" Froposel 1_.SSV Location ND NO 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0014 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0013 6/111985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0012 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0011 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0010 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-O009 6/111985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND 4.60 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-O008 6/111985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND 1.30 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0007 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND 0.968 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0006 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0005 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0004 6/111985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0003 61111985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-0002 6/11/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 XWN 85-XWN-SS-001l 6/1/1985 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location ND ND 41 YAA 86-YAA-SS-0004 4/2911986 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location Along RMA Fence 1.21 0.662 41 YAA 86-YAA-SS-0003 4/29/1986 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location Along RMA Fence 2.81 41 YAA 86-YAA-SS-0002 4/29/1986 Surface Soil 0-6" Proposed ESSF Location Along RMA Fence 2.35 1.48 Notes Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137
< - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected
ýGreater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; 11 pCi/g - Cs-137) 30 41
Attachment I - Soil Do he Areas or Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 6 41 XCP A3 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- --- 0.13 +1- 60.2% 0.10 +1- 59.0% 41 XCP A4 10/8-9/1982 Soil .. .--- 1.59 +/- 10.8% 1.81 4/- 10.0% ...... 41 XCP A5 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- --- 0.11 +/- 52.6% ...... 41 XCP A6 10/8-9/1982 Soil ... --- 0.34 +/- 28.0% 0.47 +/- 15.6% ...... 41 XCP A7 10/8-9/1982 Soil ---.--- --- .--- -- 41 XCP A8 10/8-9/1982 Soil ... --- 0.70 +/- 20.6% 0.75 +/- 14.0% ...... 41 XCP A9 10/8-9/1982 Soil ... .......... - ... 41 XCP AIO 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- ............. 41 XCP All 10/8-9/1982 Soil .... --- . 0.06 +/- 85.0% ...... 41 XCP 0I 10/8-9/1982 Soil ... --- 2.76 +/- 10.0% 2.43 +/- 10.0% ...... 41 XCP 02 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- --- 0.18 +/- 56.2% 0.26 +/- 25.8% --- -- 41 XCP 03 10/8-9/1982 Soil ... --- 2.14 +/- 10.0% 2.44 +/- 10.0% ---.. 41 XCP 84 10/8-9/1982 Soil ... ... +/- 10.0% 9.00 +/- 10.0% 0.78 +/- 20.6% --- 41 XCP 85 10/8-9/1982 Soil ... . .. + 0.0 10.0% 1.82 +/- 12.0% 0.44 +/- 58.0% 41 XCP B6 10/8-9/1982 Soil .- .. . 3.62 +/- 10.0% 2.90 +/- 10.0% 0.14 +/- 40.4% --- 41 XCP B7 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- --- 2.48 +1- 10.0% 2.30 +/- 10.0% ...... 41 XCP B8 10/8-911982 Soil ... ... 1.46 +/- 10.4% 1.07 +/- 15.6% --- 41 XCP B9 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- / 10.0% 8.57 +/- 10.0% 0.39 +/- 32.8% --- 41 XCP BIO 10/8-9/1982 Soil ... ... 1.69 +/- 10.1% 1.66 +1- 10.0% ..... 41 XCP Bl1 10/8-9/1982 Soil ... ... +/- 10.0% 5.71 +1- 10.0% 0.54 +/- 36.6% 2.56 +1- 10.8% 41 XCP B12 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- --- 1.48 +/- 11.8% 1.51 +1- 10.0% 0.07 +1-57.6% --- 41 XCP B13 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- --- 3.05 4/- 10.0% 1.91 +1- 10.0% 0.13 +/-43.0% -- 41 XCP B14 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- --- 4000.0% 2400.0% 270.0% 41 B15 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- --- 1.97 +/- 10.0% 4.30 +/- 10.0% 0.14 3/-33.6% -- 41 XCP CI 10/8-9/1982 Soil ... ... 0.83 +/- 18.2% 0.69 +1- 15.2% .... 41 XCP C2 10/8-9/1982 Soil .10.0% +/- 10.0% 0.21 +/- 25.0% - 41 XCP C3 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- --- 3.02 +/- 10.0% 1.97 +/- 10.0% . 41 XCP C4 10/8-9/1982 Soil ... ... +/ 10.0% 4.93 +/- 10.0% 0.24 +/- 41.8%. --- 41 XCP C5 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- --- 1.57 +/- 11.4% 1.35 +/- 10.6% ...... 41 XCP C6 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- --- 3.10 +/- 10.0% 3.51 +/- 10.0% 0.30 +1- 33.2% --- 41 XCP C7 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- --- 3.65 10.0% 1/- 3.59 +/- 10.0% 0.20 +1- 55.8% --- 41 XCP C8 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- [+./ 10.0% 3.81 +1- 10.0% 0.34 +1- 29.0% --- 41 XCP C9 10/8-9/1982 Soil -- --- 1.19 +/- 16.0% 1.35 +1- 12.5% ---.... 41 XCP CIO 10/8-911982 Soil ...... -+1- 10.0% 3.07 +/- 10.0% 0.20 +I- 32.6% _ _ --- 41 XCP CII 10/8-9/1982 Soil -- --- 1.79 +/- 10.0% 1.72 +1- 10.0% 0.14 +1-.36.0% --- 41 XCP C12 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- --- 0.77 +1- 18.2% 0.82 +1- 14.2% ...... m.. 41 m XCP C13
-E,,
10/8-9/1982 Soil ... ... 0.60 .
+/- 18.4% 0.55 +/- 15.2% ......
31 41b
0 Attachment I - Soil Daý -a- (he Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 41 XCP DI 10/8-9/1982 Soil ---...--- --- --- --- --- 41 XCP D2 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- --- 2.01 +1- !1.2% 1.59 +/- 10.0% ---... 41 XCP D3 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- --- 0.50 +/- 20.2% 0.45 +/- 19.0% ...... 41 XCP D4 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- --- 0.62 +1- 76.8% 0.06 +I- 72.2% ---.... 41 XCP D5 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- 1.72 +1- 10.4% 1.42 +/- 10.0% .... 41 XCP D6 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- 0.86 +/- 15.6% 0.63 +I- 14.2% ...... 41 XCP D7 10/8-9/1982 Soil .. .--- 1.13 +1- 15.4% 0.78 +- 21.0% ---.. 41 XCP D8 10/8-9/1982 Soil -- --- 0.69 +1- 18.2% 0.63 +1- 16.2% ---.... 41 XCP D9 10/8-911982 Soil .
--- -- 1.58 +- 10.0% 1.68 +- 10.0%
41 XCP El 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- --- 1.11 +-- 15.2% 0.51 +/- 21.8% ---.... 41 XCP E2 10/8-9/1982 Soil .
--- -- 0.54 +- 17.8% 0.38 +- 19.6% ---....
41 XCP E3 1018-911982 Soil . .--- 0.91 +/- 16.2% 0.84 +/- 14.4% ---... 41 XCP E4 10/8-9/1982 Soil ... --- 3.47 +1- 10.0% 5.05 +- 10.0% 0.11 +/- 82.2% --- 41 XCP E5 10/8-9/1982 Soil --- --- 0.58 +1- 17.4% 0.41 +/ 22.2% ---... 41 XCP E6 10/8-9/1982 Soil ...--- 1.29 +/- 12.2% 0.62 +/- 16.8% ...... 41 XCP E7 10/8-9/1982 Soil ... ... 1.00 +/- 15.0% 0.78 +1- 14.8% ...... Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137 Cs-134 - Cesium 134 Mn Manganese 54 < - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected
ý Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; II pCi/g - Cs-137) 32 41b
Attachment I - Soil Da- - -. the Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 42 XWE 99-XWE-SS-0048 9/2/1999 Surface Soil 0-12" MFOST Moat North Plug <0.020 0.140 42 XWE 99-XWE-SS-0033 9/2/1999 Surface Soil 0-12" MFOST Moat South Plug ND 0.179 42 XWE 99-XWE-SS-0022 9/1/1999 Surface Soil 0-12" MFOST Collection Sump 0.086 0.210 42 XWE 99-XWE-SS-0018 9/1/1999 Surface Soil 0-12' MFOST NW by RCA fence 0.950 3.200 42 XWE 99-XWE-SS-0016 911/1999 Surface Soil 0-12' MFOST South of Pad ND 0.211 42 XWE 99-XWE-SS-0014 9/1/1999 Surface Soil 0-12" MFOST North of pad at RCA fence 0.480 2.4 42 XWE 00-XWE-SS-0003 1/6/2000 Surface Soil 0-6' Soil from berm at Main Fuel Oil Storage Tank ND ND 42 XWE 92-XWE-SS-0005 4/3/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" MFOST Valve Shed South 0.519 0.968 42 XWE 92-XWE-SS-0004 4/3/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" MFOST Valve Shed West 0.892 1.07 42 XWE 92-XWE-SS-0003 4/3/1992 Surface Soil 0-6' MFOST Valve Shed East 0.610 1.17 42 XWE 92-XWE-SS-002 4/3/1992 Surface Soil 0-6" MFOST Valve Shed North 0.247 0.395 42 XWE 99-XWE-SB-00-49 9/211999 Subsurface Soil 36-48' MFOST Moat South Plug ND ND 42 XWE 99-XWE-SB-0047 9/2/1999 Subsurface Soil 36-48" MFOST Moat North Plug <0.014 0.016 42 XWE 99-XWE-SB-0023 9/1/1999 Subsurface Soil 36-48' MFOST North of pad at RCA fence <0.015 0.040 42 XWE 99-XWE-SB-0021 9/111999 Subsurface Soil 36-48" MFOST South of Pad ND 0.105 42 XWE 99-XWE-SB-0019 9/111999 Subsurface Soil 36-48" MFOST Collection Sump <0.030 0.074 42 XWE 99-XWE-SS-0157 11/22/1999 Surface Soil 0-6' Oil Line near MFOST ND 0.332 42 XWE 99-XWE-SS-0155 11/22/1999 Surface Soil 0-6' Oil Line near MFOST ND ND 42 XWE 99-XWE-SS-0151 11/22/1999 Surface Soil 0-6' Oil Line near MFOST ND 0.672 42 XWE 99-XWE-SB-0017 9/1/1999 Subsurface Soil 36-48' MFOST NW by RCA fence 0.052 0.260 Note-: Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137 < - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; 11 pCi/g - Cs-137) 33 42
0 Attachment I - Soil D -.. ,he Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 0 Uther st of NKW ,IS RCA fence 0 0.510 I. A U.1 - -A Other XWN 99-X 36-48" West of NRW O/S RCA fence <0.015 0.094 N/A Other YAA 86-YA 0-6" Soil between FOST and RR airlock "2.68 N/A
-~ I.
Other XWW 91-XWW 0-1' Circ Water Discharge Structure <0.020 N/A N/A
-4 4- 4 Other XWW 91-XWW Noll 4-5' Circ Water Discharge Structure <0.011 N/A N/A
-4 I 4 4 Other XWW -WW 3/13/1991 Soil 6-7' Circ Water Discharge Structure <0.013 N/A N/A Other XCP 99-XCP-SS-0218 I1/30/1999 Surface S itl 1'-u.,"
~t Transformer
,.,,~1 south of Trailer 300 Complex 4 --- N/A-1/30/1999 Surface Soil 0'-0.5' ND ND N/A Other XCP 99-XCP-SS-0217 11/3011999 Surface Soil Transformer south of Trailer 300 Complex ND ND N/A 0'-0.5' Transformer south of Trailer 300 Complex ND 0.068 N/A Other XCP 99-XCP-SS-0216 11/30/1999 Surface Soil 0'-0.5' Transformer south of Trailer 300 Complex ND 0.236 N/A Other XCP 99-XCP-SS-0215 121/3/1999 Surface Soil 0'-0.5' Transformer area at North Trailer Park ND 0.07 N/A Other XCT 99-XCT-SS-0233 12/3/1999 Surface Soil 0'-0.5' Transformer area at North Trailer Park ND 0.12 N/A Other XCT 99-XCT-SS-0232 12/3/1999 Surface Soil 0'-0.5' Transformer area at North Trailer Park ND ND N/A Other XCT 99-XCT-SS-0231 Other 99-XCT.SS-0228 12/3/1999 Surface Soil 0'-0.5' Transformer area at North Trailer Park ND 0.07 N/A Other XIA 99-XIA-SS-0237 12/3/1999 Surface Soil 0'-1.5' North of road to switchyard south of intake structure ND 0.072 N/A Other XIA 99-XIA-SS-0230 12/3/1999 Surface Soil 0'-2' North of road to switchyard south of intake structure ND 0.059 N/A Other XIA 99-XIA-SS-0199 11/24/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer area east of intake structure ND ND N/A XIA 99-XIA-SS-0198 11/24/1999 Other Surface Soil 0-6* Transformer area east of intake structure ND ND N/A flther XIA 99-XIA-SS-0I96 11/24/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer area east of intake structure ND ND N/A Other XA 99-XIA-SS-017 12 9 Other XLA 99-XLA-SS-0187 11/23/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer at Maintenance Fab Shop Area ND 0.035 N/A Other XLA 99-XLA-SS-0171 11/2311999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer at Maintenance Fab Shop Area ND 0.0672 N/A Other XLA 99-XLA-SS-0170 11/23/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer at Maintenance Fab Shop Area ND 0.0986 N/A Other XLA 99-XLA-SS-0169 11/23/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer at Maintenance Fab Shop Area ND 0.0368 N/A Other XWE 99-XWE-SS-0191 11123/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer at SW corner of warehouse ND 0.177 NIA Other XWE 99-XWE-SS-0190 1i/23/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer at SW comer of warehouse ND 0.179 N/A Other XWE 99-XWE-SS-0184 i 11/2311999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer at SW comer of warehouse ND 0.15 N/A Other XWE 99-XWE-SS;-0183 11/23/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer at SW comer of warehouse ND 0.215 N/A Other XWE 99-XWE-SB-0245 12/9/1999 Subsurface Soil 15'-18' Monitoring well installation SW of MFOST ND ND N/A Other XWN 99-XWN-SS-0179 11/23/1999 Surface Soil 0'-0.5' Transformer area north of Maintenance Building ND 0.070 N/A Other XWN 99-XWN-SS-0178 11/2311999 Surface Soil 0'-0.5' Transformer area north of Maintenance Building ND 0.050 N/A Other XWN 99-XWN-SS-0177 11/2311999 Surface Soil 0'-0.5' Transformer area north of Maintenance Building ND 0.108 N/A Other XWN 99-XWN-SS-0051 9/3/1999 Surface Soil 0-12" NW corner of Outage Command Center 0.041 0.016 <0.014 Other XWN 99-XWN-SS-0076 11/16/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" North of TB at old compressor area ND 0.101 N/A Other XWN 99-XWN-SS-0074 11/16/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" North of TB at Joy Compressor Building ND 0.039 N/A Other XWN 99-XWN-SS-0195 11/23/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer area east of Outage Command Center ND 0.327 N/A Other XWN 99-XWN-SS-O189 11/23/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transfromer area north of NRW building . 0.135 0.296 N/A Other XWN 99-XWN-SS-0188 1112311999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer area north of NRW building ND 0.0549 N/A Other XWN 99-XWN-SS-0186 11/23/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer area north of NRW building ND 0.0183 N/A Other XWN 99-XWN-SS-0185 11/23/1999 Surface Soil 0-6'" Transformer area north of NRW building ND 0.018 N/A
__her _ m....... 34 Other
Attachment I - Soil DaPt .e Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Other XWN 99-XWN-SS-0182 11123/1999 Surface Soil U Transformer area north of NKW building ND 0,146 N/A Other XWN 99-XWN-SS-0181 11/23/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer area east of Outage Command Center 2.21 0.866 NIA Other XWN 99-XWN-SS-0180 11/23/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer area west of DW Process Center 0.156 0.296 N/A Other XWN 99-XWN-SS-0176 11/23/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer area east of Outage Command Center 0.352 0.307 NIA Other XWN 99-XWN-SS-0175 11123/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer area west of DW Process Center 0.136 0.102 N/A Other XWN 99-XWN-SS-0172 11/23/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer area west of DW Process Center 0.071 0.102 N/A Other XWN 99-XWN-SS-0168 11/23/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer area west of DW Process Center ND ND N/A Other XWN 99-XWN-SS-0085 11/16/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Turbine Lube Oil Tank and Purification System ND 0.117 N/A Other XWN 99-XWN-SB-0052 9/3/1999 Subsurface Soil 180-192" NW comer of Outage Command Center ND ND N/A Other XWN 99-XWN-SB-0056 9/3/1999 Subsurface Soil 36-48" NW corner of Outage Command Center 0.027 0.120 N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SS-0079 11/16/1999 Surface Soil 0-24" West of Old Machine Shop ND 0.033 N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SS-0073 11/16/1999 Surface Soil 0-24" West of Old Machine Ship ND ND N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SS-0126 11/18/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" South of Blackout transformer, center of road. ND ND N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SS-0205 11/29/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer area at Demin Trailer ND 0.088 N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SS-0204 11/2911999 Surface Soil 0-6' Transformer area at Demin Trailer ND ND N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SS-0197 11/24/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer area at Demin Trailer ND ND N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SS-0194 11/23/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer area east of Aux Office Building ND 0.0777 N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SS-0193 11/23/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer area east of Aux Office Building ND 0.11 N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SS-0 193 11/23/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer area east of Aux Office Building ND 0.0876 N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SS-0173 11/23/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Transformer area east of Aux Office Building 0.091 0.154 N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SS-0166 11/22/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Oil Line east of Aux Office Building ND ND NIA Other XWS 99-XWS-SS-0165 11/22/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Oil Line west of Aux Office Building ND ND N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SS-0149 ! 1/19/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" West of Hazardous Waste Collection Area ND ND N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SS-0148 11/1911999 Surface Soil 0-6" East of Hazardous Waste Collection Area ND ND N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SS-0147 11119/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" East of Hazardous Waste Collection Area ND ND N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SS-0146 11119/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" South of Hazardous Waste Collection Area ND 0.0899 N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SS-0145 11/19/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" West of Hazardous Waste Collection Area ND ND N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SS-0144 11/18/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" North of Hazardous Waste Collection Area ND 0.0258 N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SS-0143 11/18/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" West of RADIAC trailer ND ND N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SS-0141 11/18/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" West of Hazardous Waste Collection Area ND 0.0628 N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SB-0240 12/8/1999 Subsurface Soil 1.5'-2.5' Oil Line east of Aux Office Building ND 0.050 N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SB-0253 12/13/1999 Subsurface Soil 2'-2.5' Transformer area south of Site Emergency Building ND ND N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SB-0252 12/13/1999 Subsurface Soil 2'-2.5' Transformer area south of Site Emergency Building ND ND N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SB-0250 12/13/1999 Subsurface Soil 2'-2.5' Transformer area south of Site Emergency Building ND 0.067 N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SB-0249 12/13/1999 Subsurface Soil 2'-2.5' Transformer area south of Site Emergency Building ND ND N/A Other XWS 99-XWS-SB-0246 12/13/1999 Subsurface Soil 2'-2.5' Transformer area south of Site Emergency Building ND ND NIA Other XWS 99-XWS-SB-0251 12/13/1999 Subsurface Soil 3'-3.5' Transformer area south of Site Emergency Building ND ND N/A Other XWW 00-XWW-SS-0002 1/6/2000 Surface Soil 0-6" Soil Berm West of Dilution Pump House ND ND N/A Other XWW 99-XWW-SS-0124 11/18/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" West of southern Start-Up Transformer ND ND NIA 35 Other
Attachment I - Soil Dat ._.-the Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Other XWW 99-XWW-SB-O1 12 11/17/1999 Subsurface Soi 2-2.5' Transformer Area, North of all transformers ND 0.0359 N/A Other XWW 99-XWW-SB-0125 11/18/1999 Subsurface Soil 2-2.5' Transformer Area, Southeast of center transformer ND ND N/A Other XWW 99-XWW-SB-O0 14 11/17/1999 Subsurface Soil 2-2.5' Transformer Area, Northeast of all transformers ND 0.0675 N/A Other XWW 99-XWW-SB-O1 11 11/17/1999 Subsurface Soil 2-2.5' Transformer Area, West of northern transformer ND ND N/A Other XWW 99-XWW-SB-0107 11/1711999 Subsurface Soil 2-2.5' Transformer Area, Southeast of southern transformer ND ND N/A Other XWW 99-XWW-SB-0099 11/17/1999 Subsurface Soil 2-2.5' Transformer Area, East of northern transfromer ND ND N/A Other XWW 99-XWW-SB-0097 11/17/1999 Subsurface Soil 2-2.5' Transformer Area, Southwest of southern transformer ND ND N/A Other XWW 99-XWW-SB-0139 11/18/1999 Subsurface Soil 4-4.5' Transformer Area, Southwest of center transformer ND ND N/A Other XWW 99-XWW-SB-01 19 11/18/1999 Subsurface Soil 4-4.5' Transformer Area, Southeast of center transformer ND ND N/A Other XWW 99-XWW-SB-01 10 11/17/1999 Subsurface Soil 4-4.5' Transformer Area, North of all transformers ND ND N/A Other XWW 99-XWW-SB-0106 11117/1999 Subsurface Soil 4-4.5' Transformer Area, Southeast of southern transformer ND ND N/A Other XWW 99-XWW-SB-0104 11/17/1999 Subsurface Soil 4-4.5' Transformer Area, Southwest of southern transformer ND ND N/A Other XWW 99-XWW-SB-0102 11117/1999 Subsurface Soil 4-4.5' Transformer Area, West of northern transformer ND ND N/A Other XWW 99-XWW-SB-0098 11/17/1999 Subsurface Soil 4-4.5' Transfromer Area, East of northern transformer ND ND N/A Other XWW 99-XWW-SB-0095 11/17/1999 Subsurface Soil 4-4.5' Transformer Area, Northeast of all transformers ND ND N/A Other YAA 99-YAA-SB-0235 12/3/1999 Subsurface Soil 16'-18' Monitoring well installation north of new Boiler House ND ND N/A torage Buildi X04 99-X04-SS-0006 6/30/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Bldg 4, Open trench inside building ND 0.0366 N/A torage Buildi XDA 99-XDA-SS-0007 7116/1999 Surface Soil N/A Spill excavation on the north side of the DG Building <MDA 0.0936 N/A torage Buildi XWS 99-XWS-SB-0091 11/16/1999 Subsurface Soil Northeast comer of Building 4 ND ND N/A torage Buildi XWS 99-XWS-SB-0083 11/16/1999 Subsurface Soil East of Building 4 ND ND NIA torage Buildi XWS 99-XWS-SB-0078 11/16/1999 Subsurface Soil South of Building 4 ND ND N/A forage Buildi XWS 99-XWS-SB-0072 11/16/1999 Subsurface Soil East side South end of Building 4 ND ND N/A torage Buildi XWS 99-XWS-SB-0067 11/15/1999 Subsurface Soil Southeast comer of Building 4 ND ND N/A Lorage Buildi XWS 99-XWS-SB-0066 11/15/1999 Subsurface Soil Southwest of Building 4 ND ND N/A torage Buildi XWS 99-XWS-SS-0094 11/16/1999 Surface Soil Northeast corner of Building 4 ND 0.080 N/A iorage Buildi XWS 99-XWS-SS-0081 11/16/1999 Surface Soil East side South end of Building4 ND 0.065 NIA torage Buildi XWS 99-XWS-SS-0080 11/16/1999 Surface Soil East of Building 4 ND ND N/A torage Buildi XWS 99-XWS-SS-0077 11/16/1999 Surface Soil South of Building 4 ND 0.094 N/A torage Buildi XWS 99-XWS-SS-0064 11115/1999 Surface Soil Southwest of Building 4 ND 0.095 N/A 36 Other
Attachment I - Soil DA t* he Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station 0 iorae Buildi i XWS 99-XWS-SS-0164 11/22/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" I Oil Line north of DG Building ND 0.0316 N/A orage Buildi i WS 99-XWS-SS--0163 111/22/1999 Surface Soil 0-6' Oil Line east of Building 4 ND 0.0233 N/A torage Buildi XWS 99-XWS-SS-0162 11/22/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" Oil Line north of DG Building ND 0.0296 NIA torage Buildi XWS 99-XWS-SS-0140 11/18/1999 Surface Soil 0-6' West of DG Building ND ND N/A torage Buildi XWS 99-XWS-SS-0138 11/18/1999 Surface Soil 0-6' NE of DG Building, East of road ND ND N/A torage Buildi XWS 99-XWS-SS-0137 11/18/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" North of Building 4 ND ND N/A torage Buildi XWS 99-XWS-SS-0121 11/18/1999 Surface Soil 0-6' West of Building 4 ND ND N/A torage Buildi XWS 99-XWS-SS-0118 11/18/1999 Surface Soil 0-6' West of Building 4 ND 0.165 N/A torage Buildi XWS 99-XWS-SS-010l 11/17/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" South of DG Building at Oil spill area from 10/80 ND 0.0894 NIA torage Buildi XWS 99-XWS-SS-Ol010 11/17/1999 Surface Soil 0-6" South of DO Building at oil spill area from 10/80 ND ND N/A torage Buildi XWS 99-XWS-SS061 1-i1/15/1999 Surface Soil 0-6 S Southeast coer of Building 4 ND ND100 N/A Notell Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 -Cesium 137
< - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; 1I pCi/g - Cs-147) 37 Other
SAttachment I - Soil Dab .,e Areas of Concern Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Sediment --- 99- -SD-0117 11/17/1999 Sediment 0-3" --- ND 0.0601 N/A Sediment --- 99- -SD-0116 11/17/1999 Sediment 0-3' --- ND ND N/A Sediment --- 99- -SD-0115 11/17/1999 Sediment 0-3" -- ND ND N/A Sediment --- 99- -SD-0113 1111711999 Sediment 0-3" --- ND 0.0775 N/A Sediment --- 99- -SD-0108 11/17/1999 Sediment 0-3" --- ND 0.0621 N/A Notes. Co Cobalt 60 Cs-137 - Cesium 137
< - Detection Limits N/A - Not Analyzed ND - Not Detected Greater than NRC Guideline (3.8 pCi/g - Co-60; I1 pCi/g - Cs-137) 38 Sediment
ATTACHMENT:: . AOC - PROCESS LINES
SQ Attachement - Process Lines Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station uietween me i t5 ana 12" Cond. Transfer Line from CST to 1969 - Please RB on Northwest Core Spray System. see Note 1 Underground Aluminum 3 Condensate Unknown corner of RB 6" Cond. 'Transfer Line from TB (Turbine Building) through Tunnel to RB Repaired 1980 Vault & Tunnel Aluminum <10' Demin. Water Unknown Under Office Bldg. 6" Fuel Pool Cooling line to the Fuel Replaced Epoxy Coating Pool Filter in NRW 1993 Vault Aluminum <10' ReactorWater w/Nukon Wrap 6" from the Cond. Pumps to TB Replaced Condensate Epoxy Coating Between CT Shack (Turbine Building) 1992 Underground Aluminum 25' Transfer w/ Nukon Wrap and TB Above Ground Now Between Cond Replaced in Replaced an Cathodic Shack and Turbine 4" Demin. Water to TB 1998 Underground line Aluminum <15' Demin. Water Protection Building Above Ground Now Between Cond 2" Demin. Water Transfer Pump Replaced in Replaced an Cathodic Shack and Turbine Recirculation Lines to Tank 1998 Underground line Aluminum <5' Demin. Water Protection Building 4" Demin. Water from Demin. Trailer to Replaced in Underground - See Cathodic Turbine Building 1998 Note 2 Aluminum >125' Demin. Water Protection West of CT Shack Above Ground Now
- 6" Line from Demin. Tank to Cond. Replaced in Replaced an Cathodic Transfer shack. 1998 Underground line Aluminum >75' Demin. Water Protection West of CT Shack Replaced Cathodic 4" Demin. Water to RB 1993 Underground/vault Aluminum 10' Demin. Water Protection South of RB 10' Underground Coal Tar &
3" Reactor Cleanup Demin. Resin Inspected Remainder in Piping Stainless Epoxy Coating Transfer Line to Radwaste Bldg. 1993 Tunnel Steel <15' RWCU Resin w/ Nukon Wrap Under Office Bldg.
Attache me nt ,rrocess Lines S Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Coal Tar & 3" Cond. for RWCU Demin. Resin Inspected Stainless Epoxy Coating Transfer 1993 Underground/ Vault Steel <10' Condensate w/ Nukon Wrap Under Office Bldg. Coal Tar & Inspected Stainless Epoxy Coating 11/2" Laundry drains to Radwaste 1993 Vault Steel <10' Water w/Nukon Wrap Southeast Vault Coal Tar & 1" Reactor Cleanup Sludge Transfer Inspected Vault & Piping Carbon Cleanup Epoxy Coating New Vault & Under Line to Radwaste Bldg. 1993 Tunnel Steel <10' Sludge w/Nukon Wrap Office Building Coal Tar & 6" Fuel Pool Cooling to Radwaste Bldg. Inspected Carbon Epoxy Coating New Vault & Under (Filter Bypass) 1993 Vault Steel <10' Reactor Water w/Nukon Wrap Office Building Coal Tar & 6" Cleanup to High Purity Tank (Out-of Inspected Carbon Epoxy Coating New Vault & Under Service). 1993 Vault Steel <15' Reactor Water w/Nukon Wrap Office Building Coal I ar & Inspected Carbon Epoxy Coating New Vault & Under 6" Cleanup to Cond. System 1993 Vault Steel <15' Reactor Water w/Nukon Wrap Office Building Coal Tar & Inspected Vault & Piping Carbon Epoxy Coating New Vault & Under 1 1/2" RBEDT Line to Radwaste Bldg. 1993 Tunnel Steel <15' Water w/Nukon Wrap Office Building Coal Tar & Inspected Carbon Epoxy Coating 2" Laundry Drains to Radwaste Bldg. 1993 Vault Steel <10' Water w/Nukon Wrap Southeast Vault
Attachemeni.. - Process Lines Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Uoal iar & Inspected Carbon Epoxy Coating 3" RB Sump to Radwaste 1993 Vault Steel <10' Water w/Nukon Wrap Southeast Vault Inspected Vault & Piping Carbon 2" DWEDT to Radwaste 1993 Tunnel Steel <10' Water Coal Tar Southeast Vault Coal Tar & Inspected Vault & Piping Carbon Epoxy Coating 14" Containment Spray 1993 Tunnel Steel <10' Torus Water w/Nukon Wrap Southeast Vault Carbon South of RB 3" Heating Steam Cond. Original 1969 Underground Steel <20' Water Coal Tar Between Vaults Carbon South of RB 8" Heating Steam Original 1969 Underground Steel <20' Steam Coal Tar Between Vaults Carbon Boiler House to Base 8" Condensate Original 1969 Piping Tunnel Steel <5' Water Coal Tar of Stack Carbon Boiler House to Base 8" Heating Steam Original 1969 Piping Tunnel Steel <5' Steam Coal Tar of Stack Carbon Boiler House to Base 3" Cond. Heating Steam Original 1969 Piping Tunnel Steel <5' Water Coal Tar of Stack Inspected Carbon 8" RBCCW supply Radwaste 1993 Piping Tunnel Steel <10' Water Coal Tar Under Office Bldg. Coal Tar & Inspected Carbon Epoxy Coating 8" RBCCW return from Radwaste 1993 Piping Tunnel Steel <10' Water w/Nukon Wrap Under Office Bldg.
Attachement - -ProcessLines Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station
%.UdI Idi ot 30/36" Mechanical Vacuum Pump Carbon Epoxy Coating Between the TB, the Offqas Line 19691 Underground Steel 410' Offgas w/Nukon Wrap Stack and the AOG.
Carbon Between the TB, the 48" Offgas Holdup 1969 Underground Steel 510' Offgas Coal Tar Stack and the AOG. Installed early Carbon Denso Anti Between the Stack 4"Offgas to AOG 1980s Underground Steel 100' Offgas Corrosion Tape and the AOG Installed early Carbon Denso Anti Between the Stack 4" Offgas from AOG 1980s Underground Steel 100' Offgas Corrosion Tape and the AOG Replaced in 1996 - replaced From the CT shack 10" Line from Cond. Tank & Cond. underground Carbon to the well wall of the Shack to Hot Well line Aboveground Steel 30' Condensate Coal Tar TB Replaced in 1996 - replaced From the CT shack 8" Line from Cond. To Sucker/Dump underground Carbon to the well wall of the Station line Aboveground Steel 30' Condensate Coal Tar TB Replaced in 1996 - replaced From the CT Shack underground Carbon to the west wall of 1" Line from Cond. Shack to TB line Aboveground Steel 30' Condensate Coal Tar the TB Replaced in 1996- From the CT Tank replaced and the Demin Tank 12" Overflow Line form Cond. Tank & underground Carbon to the west wall of Demin. Tank to TB line Aboveground Steel 75' Air Coal Tar the TB
Attachemen.., rocess Lines Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station From CT Shack to Replaced mid Carbon Internally lined the top of the intake 2 1/2" Chlorine Injection Line 1980s Underground Steel 100' Salt Water (saran) pipe Tunnel Carbon Denso Anti From AOG to Boiler 1 1/2" AOG Drains and Sumps mid 1980s Underground Steel 175' Sump Corrosion Tape House 4" Torus Water Tank Return Line to Carbon the TWST mid 1980s Underground Steel 1000 Torus Water Coal Tar Yard Note #1 : In 1998 OCNGS installed a sample well under this line. OCNGS attempted to collect ground water sample. OCNGS was unable to draw water concluded that this line is not leaking. OCNGS plans to periodically sample Note #2 This line provides clean demineralized water to the plant from the Demin Water Trailers. It's not contaminated. But since the system has been classified as "Potentially Contaminated" OCNGS has been keeping track of it. Note: #3 - The vaults on the South side of the RB have soil bottoms.
APPENDIX G INTERPRETATION OF HISTORICAL AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS I I1 .1 I
APPENDIX G: QUESTION 6 INTERPRETATION OF HISTORICAL AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS Historical aerial photographs were obtained and reviewed for the following years: 1940, 1951, 1958, 1964, 1968, 1976, 1982, and 1989. A discussion of the review of historical aerial photographs is provided below. The Property has been divided into two sections (western and eastern) for the purposes of discussion. 1940 Aerial Photograph Western Portion
" The subject property is heavily vegetated and undeveloped. " Route 9 is visible at the eastern boundary of the site.
Eastern Portion
" The subject property is still heavily vegetated and undeveloped. , The area surrounding the Property is mostly vacant and undeveloped, with some residential dwellings located north of the Property.
" Two access roads (Beach Boulevard located north of the property and an access road trending east from Route 9) are visible leading into the property.
- Forked River is visible north of the Property.
1951 Aerial Photograph Western Portion
- No significant changes have occurred since the 1940 aerial photograph.
Eastern Portion " Buildings associated with Finninger's Farm are visible in the central portion of the site. The majority of the remaining Property is still heavily vegetated and undeveloped.
- The area surrounding the Property has not changed significantly.
1958 Aerial Photograph Western Portion
- No significant changes have occurred since the 1951 aerial photograph.
Eastern Portion " The majority of the property appears to be fields surrounding farm buildings. Some densely vegetated areas are still present on the east side of the property.
- The area surrounding the Property appears to be more developed with residential dwellings and small commercial buildings.
G:STAFF\SHARED\ECO\Ptojects\OysterCr.kNuclcarPA.RAD\Append G Aerials.doc 02/28/00, 2:33 PM
APPENDIX G: QUESTION 6 INTERPRETATION OF HISTORICAL AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS 1964 Aerial Photograph Western Portion
- The OCNGS is under construction; buildings and parking areas are visible at the property. A rail spur enters the property from along west side of Route 9.
- The remaining area surrounding the property is heavily vegetated and undeveloped.
Eastern Portion
- No significant changes have occurred since the 1958 aerial photograph.
1968 Aerial Photograph Western Portion 0 Additional buildings and secondary roads are present at the subject property. The Intake and Discharge Canals are visible at the western portion of the site. Eastern Portion
- The Intake and Discharge Canals are visible along the northern and southern property boundaries.
" Additional buildings are located on the property. " The majority of the property appears to still be used for agricultural purposes.
- The general area surrounding the property is more developed with residential dwellings and small commercial buildings.
1976 Aerial Photograph Western Portion 0 No significant changes have occurred since the 1968 aerial photograph.
- The area beyond the Property is also developed with buildings and roads (associated with the Forked River Generating Station).
Eastern Portion
- No significant changes have occurred since the 1968 aerial photograph.
1982 Aerial Photograph Western Portion 0 No significant changes have occurred since the 1976 aerial photograph. Eastern Portion
- No significant changes have occurred since the 1968 aerial photograph.
- A disturbed area is visible on the property (Note: the disturbed area is at the area from which topsoil is removed for placement at the OCNGS).
G:\STAFF\SHARED\PECO\Projects\OysterCreckNucleaAPA-RAD\Append G Aerials.doc 2 02/28/00, 2:33 PM
APPENDIX G: QUESTION 6 INTERPRETATION OF HISTORICAL AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS 1989 Aerial Photograph Western Portion
- No significant changes have occurred since the 1982 aerial photograph.
Eastern Portion
- No significant changes have occurred since the 1982 aerial photograph.
G:\STAFF\SHARED\PECO\P-ojects\OysterCreckNuclear4A.&AD\Append G Aerials.doc 3 02/28/00, 2:33 PM
APPENDIX H DISCHARGE HISTORY OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AND WASTES I.
APPENDIX H: QUESTION 7 Discharge History of Hazardous Substances and Wastes May 2,1980 (AOC.40) On May 2, 1980, the leakage of Torus system water from the containment spray heat exchangers into the station's service water discharge resulted in the release of an unknown quantity of radiologically contaminated water. The leakage that occurred during periods of system testing which occurred for each containment spray system approximately twice per month for 15 to 30 minutes. Conservative calculations assuming worst case conditions demonstrated that the isotopic concentrations of the discharge were well below the effluent limitations specified by the USNRC. The Bureau of Radiation Protection was notified of the release, and when facility personnel assumed this satisfied NJDEP notification requirement, no other NJDEP offices were immediately advised. The notification process was immediately reviewed with facility personnel to prevent this oversight from reoccurring. In addition, as part of the facility's REMP it monitors a composite sampler immediately downstream of discharge point 004. The samples are obtained daily and analyzed weekly for gamma-emitting radionuclides and tritium. Information pertaining to surface water, sediment, and aquatic life sampling can be found in AOC-17. March 2, 1992 (AOC-4A/B) The Former Waste Surge Tank is a 100,000-gallon aluminum tank situated on a concrete rim support. The tank was historically used to store wastewater from the operational portion of the plant prior to treatment. The tank was removed from service in 1982 when a leak was detected in the base of the tank. Impacted soils were excavated and removed. OCNGS conducted a soil-sampling program for gamma-emitting radionuclides associated with fission processes (e.g., Co-60 & Cs-137) in the area of the Surge Tank. The results of the sampling program indicate detectable concentrations of Co-60 and Cs-137. Of the one hundred seventeen (117) samples collected in 1982, 1992, and 1999
twenty-eight (28) exceed the NRC's guideline for decommissioning facilities of 3.8 pCi/g for Co-60 and twenty-seven (27) of the samples exceeded the guideline of 11 pCi/g for Cs-137. Concentrations of Co-60 ranged from below the method detection level to 1,100 pCi/g and concentrations for Cs-137 ranged from below the method detection level to 390 pCi/g. These maximum concentrations were the result of a spill in 1992. Some soils associated with the release were excavated, removed and disposed of in accordance with NRC regulations. The Surge Tank was removed from service and the lines were emptied cleaned, flushed and capped in-place September 17, 1998 (A OC - 39) On September 17, 1998, approximately 148,800 gallons of condensate transfer water was discharged to the Circulating Water discharge tunnel via the Fire Protection System, and ultimately released to the Oyster Creek discharge canal. Following the release, an investigation of potentially impacted surface water, sediments and biota (clams) was conducted. In surface water, tritium levels in the condenser intake were slightly elevated (330 +/- 110 pCi/L). The maximum tritium concentration observed in surface water samples (16,000 pCi/L) did not exceed the USEPA drinking water limit (20,000 pCi/L), and USNRC effluent limitations were not exceeded. Cobalt-60 was the only gamma emitting nuclide to be detected in surface water, detected in only one of 23 samples, downstream of the 30" header (2.0 +/- 1.2 pCi/L). All sediment samples from the Barnegat Bay and the intake canal were less than the limit of detection. In Oyster Creek sediment, Co-60 was detected in 4 of 16 samples. The maximum sediment concentration was 0.056 pCi/g, well below the NRC guideline of 3.8 pCi/g. All sediment samples were less than or equal to those observed in REMP samples prior to the release. Clams in Barnegat Bay were also sampled and determined to be non-detect for Co-60; this was consistent with previous REMP sampling results. Tritium was not found in clams collected near the mouth of Oyster Creek, however, low levels attributable to natural background were found in clams from Stouts Creek to the north and Manahawkin Bay to the south.
APPENDIX I REMEDIATION ACTIVITIES
APPENDIX 1: QUESTION 8 Description of Previous or Current Remediation Activities 1.0 Former Waste Surge Tank and Associated Lines (AOC-4A & 4B) The Former Waste Surge Tank is a 100,000-gallon aluminum tank situated on a concrete rim support. The tank was historically used to store wastewater from the operational portion of the plant prior to treatment. The tank was removed from service in 1982 when a leak was detected in the base of the tank. Impacted soils were excavated and removed. OCNGS conducted a soil-sampling program for gamma-emitting radionuclides associated with fission processes (e.g., Co-60 & Cs-137) in the area of the Surge Tank. The results of the sampling program indicate detectable concentrations of Co-60 and Cs-137. Of the one hundred seventeen (117) samples collected in 1982, 1992, and 1999 twenty-eight (28) exceed the NRC's guideline for decommissioning facilities of 3.8 pCi/g for Co-60 and twenty-seven (27) of the samples exceeded the guideline of 11 pCi/g for Cs-137. Concentrations of Co-60 ranged from below the method detection level to 1,100 pCi/g and concentrations for Cs-137 ranged from below the method detection level to 390 pCi/g. These maximum concentrations were the result of a spill in 1992. Some soils associated with the release were excavated, removed and disposed of in accordance with NRC regulations. The Waste Surge Tank was removed from service and the lines were emptied cleaned, flushed and capped in-place. 2.0 Northern Parking Area (AOC-41) Soils from inside the protected area were excavated in 1982 to adjust the topography prior to paving. These soils contained detectable licensed radionuclides. Following petition for approval from the NRC, these soils were relocated to the area that is now the north parking lot, between the Low Level Radwaste Storage Facility and the north domestic water pump house, placed in trenches, covered with soil and paved over. Based on extensive soil sampling conducted at the time, concentrations in this area are not expected to exceed the NRC decommissioning concentration guidelines due to mixing during relocation, and decay since placement.
3.0 Berms (AOC-42) The OCNGS excavated and removed soils to complete several projects throughout the site. If during the course of soil excavation contaminated soils are encountered, the soils are sampled and analyzed for fission related radionuclides. Soils containing low levels, but detectable, were placed in piles or in berms on-site. The berm surrounding the main oil storage tank, the berm behind the dilution pumps, the berm on the south side of the Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) and the berm around the waste surge tank have been constructed using these soils. In 1999, the OCNGS conducted a soil-sampling program for the gamma-emitting radionuclides associated with fission processes (e.g., Co-60 & Cs-137) in the berm and soils around the MFOST. The results of the sampling program indicate detectable concentrations of Co-60 in twelve (12) of the seventeen (17) samples collected. However, all concentrations detected were below the NRC's soil guideline at decommissioning of 3.8 pCi/g. The maximum concentration of Co-60 was 0.95 pCi/g. Concentrations of Cs-137 were detected in fifteen (15) of seventeen (17) samples. The maximum concentration of 3.2 pCi/g is below the NRC guideline of 11 pCi/g.
APPENDIX J ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS
APPENDIX J: QUESTION llf ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS Permit Name Issuing Permit # Effective Expiration Agency Date Date OPERATING LICENSE Facility Operating License and NRC License DRP-16 4/9/69 Technical Specifications UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK UST Registration NJDEP 0043067 07/01/98 06/30/01 HAZARDOUS WASTE RCRA Notification (EPA ID#) USEPA NJD980649172 NA NA Hazardous Materials Certificate of USDOT 042298-001-007G 05/19/98 06/30/00 Registration WATER Sea Turtle - Biological Opinion and NMFS M88170 09/21/95 09/21/00 Incidental Take Statement OC Potable Water System NJDEP PWS ID# 1512386 NA NA Water Allocation/Diversion Permit NJDEP 2164P 07/10/97 05/31/01 OC Laboratory Certification NJDEP ID# 15304 07/01/97 06/30/00 Scientific Collecting Permit NJDEP 9813 01/01/98 12/31/99 Special Permit to Collect Shellfish NJDEP S258 01/01/98 12/31/99 NPDES Winter Outage Agreement NJDEP NA 1982 NA Groundwater Remediation NJDEP 93-06-28-1317-29 NA NA Memorandum of Agreement (Case #) Groundwater Remediation Industrial OCUA/ C-13-1991-030 12/01/97 11/30/99 Discharge Permit LMUA (renewal application submitted 08/03/99) OC Riparian Grant NJDEP File No. 87-0629 08/06/90 NA Certification under the NJDEP NA 10/22/79 NA Coastal Zone Management Act FR and OC Biennial Hydrographic NJBPU 2nd Interim Order 04/22/66 Life of Plant Surveys OC Annual Watermound Monitoring NJBPU 2nd Interim Order 04/22/66 Life of Plant OC Sewage Tie-In Agreement and OCUA/ NA 07/27/82 Life of Plant Outfall Semiannual Monitoring LMUA WELLS Numerous monitoring wells are NJDEP Various Various NA permitted throughout the site. i:\projects\8e04179\par\ques II f Page I 02/28/00, 2:34 PM
APPENDIX J: QUESTION 1lf ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS Permit Name Issuing Permit # Effective Expiration Agency Date Date DREDGING Department of the Army Permit USACE CENAP-OP-R- 09/12/97 12/31/07 199701765-39 Tidelands License NJDEP 96-0233-T 08/19/97 08/19/98 Waterfront Development/ Water NJDEP 1512-93-0052.3, .4, 02/04/97 02/04/02 Quality Certification/ Freshwater & .5 Wetland General Permit No. I & 2/ Special Activity Transition Area Waivers for General Permits No. I
&2 UPLAND Soil Erosion & Sediment Control OCSCD 41302 06/30/98 12/31/01 Plan (Upland Confined Disposal Facility) I MEDICAL Medical Waste Generator NJDOH NA NA Authorization TRANSPORTATION OC Helistop NJDOT H-205 11/01/97 11/01/00 Note:
In addition to the above-referenced permits, the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station holds a Facility Operating License (No. DPR-16, Docket No. 50-219) issued by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Abbreviations: DGW = Discharge to Ground Water DSW = Discharge to Surface Water EDG = Emergency Diesel Generator FR = Forked River GWPP = Ground Water Protection Plan LMUA = Lacey Municipal Utilities Authority NA = Not Applicable NJBPU New Jersey Board of Public Utilities NJDEP New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection NJDOH New Jersey Department of Health NJDOT %New Jersey Department of Transportation NMFS = National Marine Fisheries Service NJPDES = New Jersey Pollutant Discharge Elimination System OC = Oyster Creek OCSCD = Ocean County Soil Conservation District OCUA = Ocean County Utilities Authority USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers USDOT United States Department of Transportation USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency i:\projects\8e04 179\par\ques iI f Page 2 02/28/00 2:34 PM
APPENDIX K: QUESTION 12
SUMMARY
OF ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS Date/Description of Violation Name and Address of Agency That Section of statute, rule or Resolution Initiated the Enforcement Action permit allegedly violated December 10, 1991: The Radwaste overboard discharge US. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 3.15.A of the Technical GPU concurred that the monitor was inoperable with no reasonable effort to restore 475 Allendale Rd. Specifications violation occurred. The operable status. King of Prussia, PA 19406 overboard discharge monitor was restored to operable status. September 17, 1996: Release of condensate water through the US. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 6.8.1 of the Technical GPU concurred that the fire service system. 475 Allendale Rd. Specifications violation occurred. Valve was King of Prussia, PA 19406 renumbered to prevent reoccurrence, procedures were modified, and staff briefings were conducted. July 3, 1997: Failure to comply with procedure resulted in small US. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.33 GPU concurred that the upland release from the demineralized water system. 475 Allendale Rd. violation occurred. Valve was King of Prussia, PA 19406 tagged closed and locked. February 5, 1998: Annual land-use survey was not conducted. US. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 6.8.4.b.2 of the Technical GPU concurred that the 475 Allendale Rd. Specifications violation occurred. Section 4.5 King of Prussia, PA 19406 of the off-site Dose Calculation Manual was modified to clarify the annual census is not required if GPU maintains gardens for sampling purposes. February 8, 1998: Failed to establish and implement adequate US. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 6.8.1 of the Technical GPU concurred that the effluent radiation monitoring calibration. 475 Allendale Rd. Specifications violation occurred. Procedures King of Prussia, PA 19406 for RMS calibration were modified. February 8, 1998: Failed to establish and implement procedures US. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 6.8.1 of the Technical GPU concurred that the to verify that the design basis relative to air balance (ventilation) 475 Allendale Rd. Specifications Violation occurred. Procedures in some buildings was maintained. King of Prussia, PA 19406 were modified and differential pressure instrumentation was added. April 4, 1998: Procedure change to allow filling of shell side of US. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 10 CFR 50.59 GPU concurred that the Isolation Condensers was not developed with a safety 475 Allendale Rd. violation occurred. Process of I 2:34 PM, 2/28/00
APPENDIX K: QUESTION 12
SUMMARY
OF ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS Date/Description of Violation Name and Address of Agency That Section of statute, rule or Resolution Initiated the Enforcement Action permit allegedly violated evaluation to provide the basis that the change did not constitute King of Prussia, PA 19406 using condensate for fill was an unreviewed safety question. cancelled and changes to system operating procedures were made. April 4, 1998: Effluent from the shell side of the isolation US. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 6.8.4.a.3 of the Technical GPU concurred that the condensers was not monitored/samples and controlled to 475 Allendale Rd. Specifications violation occurred. Effluent demonstrate compliance with dose limits to the public. King of Prussia, PA 19406 assessment was performed, dose to the public was calculated and reported. The valve that allowed shell to heat up providing motive force for release was repaired. 2 2:34 PM, 2/28/00
APPENDIX M.: THEORETICAL RELEASE STUDY REPORT URS GREINER WOODWARD-CLYDE DECEMBER 1999 .
REPORT THEORETICAL RELEASE STUDY GPU NUCLEAR, INC. OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION U.S. ROUTE NO. 9 FORKED RIVER, NEW JERSEY Preparedfor GPU Nuclear, Inc. U.S. Route No. 9 Forked River, New Jersey 08731 December 1999 URS GreinerWoodward Clyde 201 Willowbrook Boulevard Wayne, New Jersey 07470 47-09E04092.00
TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION I INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1-1 SECTION 2 REVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS ............................................................. 2-1 2.1 Apparent Historical Excavation Sequence ......................... 2-3 2.2 Reactor Building ...................................................................................... 2-4 2.3 Turbine Building ...................................................................................... 2-6 2.4 O ld Radw aste Building ............................................................................ 2-7 2.5 N ew Radw aste Building .......................................................................... 2-9 2.6 Intake Structure ...................................................................................... 2-11 2.7 Tunnels and O ther Structures ................................................................. 2-12 2.7.1 Intake/Discharge Tunnel ............................................................ 2-12 2.7.2 Discharge U nits .......................................................................... 2-14 2.7.3 Exhaust Tunnel System .............................................................. 2-16 2.7.4 Stack ........................................................................................... 2-21 2.7.5 N ew Radw aste Tunnel ............................................................... 2-22 2.8 Sum m ary ................................................................................................ 2-23 SECTION 3 STRATIGRA PHY AND HYDROGEOLOGY ..................................................................... 3-1 3.1 Site Stratigraphy .................................................................................. 3-1 3.2 Construction Im pacts to Site Stratigraphy ......................................... 3-4 3.3 H ydrogeology .......................................................................................... 3-8 3.3.1 Regional H ydrogeology ............................................................... 3-8 3.3.2 Site Hydrogeology ....................................................................... 3-8 3.4 Fracture Flow Analysis ...................................................................... 3-I1 SECTION 4 TW O-DIMENSIONAL MODELING ................................................................................... 4-1 4.1 M odel Selected .................................................................................... 4-1 4.2 M odel Construction ................................................................................ 4-2 4.3 Calibration ................................................................................................ 4-3 4.4 Results and Conclusions ..................................................................... 4-4 4.5 Lim itations of M odel ............................................................................... 4-5 SECTION 5 CONCLUSIONS ...................................................... ............................................ 5-1 5.1 Construction and Stratigraphy ............................................................ 5-1 5.1.1 Impacts of Construction on Site Stratigraphy and Hydrogeology .......................................................................... 5-1 5.1.2 Construction, Stratigraphy and Release Potential ............... 5-2 5.2 Two D im ensional M odel ......................................................................... 5-6 5.3 Data G aps ................................................................................................ 5-6 URS Greiner Woodward Clyde I ROJECTS-,40 ,TO ¢ i
TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 6 LIMITATIONS ................................................................................................................... -1 SECTION 7 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 7-1 TABLES TABLE NO. NAME 3-1 Summary of Stratigraphic and Aquifer Data 3-2 Additional Hydrogeologic Data 3-3 Sample Water Table Elevations 3-4 Water Table Elevations -August 5,1999 3-5 Fracture Flow Rates 3-6 Foundation Elevation vs. Water Table Elevations FIGURES FIGURE NO. NAME 2-1 Major Subsurface Structures and Groundwater Contours 2-2 Estimated Limits of Construction Excavation 3-1 Cross-Sections A-A' and B-B' 4-1 Two Dimensional Modflow Model of Cross-Section A-A' 4-2 Two Dimensional Modflow Model of Cross-Section B-B' APPENDIXES APPENDIX A CASK DROP STUDY - 1996 APPENDIX B SOIL BORING LOGS AND WELL INSTALLATION LOGS URS Greiner Woodward Clyde I OJECTS'Z.,,,0c,:
1.0 INTRODUCTION
URS Greiner Woodward Clyde (URSGWC) has prepared this report for the GPU Nuclear Corporation (GPU), US Route 9, Forked River, NJ. The scope of work for this project was to: Evaluate selected structures to determine if there is the potential for a release of radionuclides from a breach in the floor slab to impact soil and/or groundwater.
- 2. Evaluate probable flow paths for a release using 2 dimensional groundwater modeling and, if applicable, particle tracking analyses.
This scope of work is based on initial conversations between Ms. Beverly Good, Mr. Terry Hanlon and Mr. Jay Vouglitois of GPU and Mr. Michael Carnese (URSGWC). The scope of work was subsequently modified based on the initial review of the data and subsequent conversations between Ms. Good and Mr. Carnese. The structures originally to be evaluated, based on initial conversations, included the following:
- The New Radwaste Building; The Old Radwaste Building;
- The Reactor Building; The Turbine Building; and One unidentified tunnel.
During the course of reviewing the construction drawings it was determined that the unidentified tunnel was, in fact, a tunnel system that includes the following:
" New Radwaste to Old Radwaste;
" Old Radwaste to Exhaust Stack;
" Turbine and Reactor Buildings to Exhaust Stack;
" The Intake Tunnel; and,
" The Discharge Tunnel.
IZt2kJ,4I) Woodward-Clyde Greiner Woodward-Clyde URS Greiner 11 i flOECTSW.OdOr,,,,,*,,,
It was also discovered that the Intake Structure and Discharge Structures were constructed to a depth that potentially impacted the site hydrogeology because the depth of excavation of these structures resulted in the excavation of the clay layer separating the water bearing formations (the Cape May Formation and the Cohansey Formation). The change in the site stratigraphy, based on these excavations, had the potential to impact the planned 2-dimensional groundwater models by changing the hydrogeology between the major structures of concern (the Turbine Building, the Reactor Building, the Old Radwaste Building, etc.) as defined in the initial scope of work a~d the primary potential receptor, the Intake/Discharge Canal It was, therefore, necessary to add these structures to: 1) the summary of the site excavations; 2) the summary of the as-built drawings; 3) the geologic cross-sections; and 4) the two dimensional model cross-sections. This report is organized as follows: " Section 2: Summarizes the review of the as-built and excavation drawings; " Section 3: Summarizes the stratigraphy, hydrogeology and the impacts ofthe construction of selected structures on the stratigraphy and hydrogeology. This section also includes an evaluation of structures with foundations below the water table using fracture flow analysis. " Section 4: Discusses the results of the construction of two 2-Dimensional models using MODFLOW and MODPATH. " Section 5: Presents a summary of the previous sections with conclusions and recommendations; " Section 6: Discusses the limitations of the use of this material by GPU and others; " Section 7: References, including a list of the as-built drawings and other drawings provided by GPU. 1-2 linoJFCtSv.OAOIV,..,*m WISQEu PM URS Greiner Woodward-Clyde LIRS Greiner Woodward-Clyde 1-2
2.0 REVIEW OF CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS The first task was a review of the as-built excavation drawings and the as-built foundation construction drawings. The purpose of the review was to: I. Determine the absolute elevation of the depth of the structure, including associated tunnels, if appropriate;
- 2. Determine the depth to which the initial construction excavation occurred (i.e., did the excavation extend deeper and wider than the structure).
- 3. Evaluate the depth of the structure relative to the local stratigraphy (i.e., the impacts on hydraulic communication between the Cape May Formation and the Cohansey Formation through excavation of the Upper Clay);
- 4. Evaluate the depth of the structure relative to the average depth of the water table aquifer.
- 5. Compile the information in a format useful for evaluating the potential impacts of the structures on the localized groundwater flow paths.
The interpretation of the "as-built" drawings, especially the excavation summary drawings was subject to some interpretation because of the following observations:
- The scale on the as-built drawings often was not "as-shown" because of changes in the size of the drawings when reproduced. It appears the drawings were, at some point, stored on microfilm and then reproduced from the microfilm. The reproduction was not to the scale of the original drawings.
" The survey (monuments) or structural reference points on the historic as-built excavation drawings are not on the current site plans (i.e., the survey monuments used for construction are not the current survey monuments used to register recent drawings). In addition, the building outlines on the as-built excavation drawings do not always agree with the current dimensions or layout of the buildings. " The as-built excavation drawings were all from different dates. The sequence of the drawings and the references to areas already backfilled indicates the excavations for the major structures listed above took place in several stages. URSGWC constructed a composite of the excavations, extrapolating (interpreting) as necessary between drawings of different areas or between drawings that indicated multiple excavations URS Greiner Woodward-Clyde 2-1 1-OMýý-P-- ý I- 4 13PM
in the same area (e.g., The area of the Stack appears to have been excavated as part of the excavation for the Reactor and Old Radwaste Buildings, partially backfilled and later excavated again to the depth of the foundation of the Exhaust Stack).
" The limits of the excavations as shown on the as-built drawings did not always coincide with stratigraphic information from soil borings advanced as part of subsequent geotechnical or environmental investigations. " The method of stabilizing the excavation was not always included on the excavation drawings. For example, there was no detailed excavation drawing for the Intake/Exhaust Tunnel. The standard slope used to maintain a stable excavation on most drawings was 1.5 to 1. There were, however, indications that shoring was used in place of sloping in selected areas. It could not be determined if the Tunnel excavation was one of these areas.
URSGWC compiled the as-built historical drawings into two drawings (Figures 2-1 and 2-2). Figure 2-1 shows the below grade vertical extent of the structures of concern, including the tunnel system. The Exhaust Tunnel System and the Discharge Structure locations have been transcribed from as-built drawings as accurately as was possible. Some of the finer details that would not impact the conclusions of this study have not been included. Features too small to accurately represent on a 1:20 scale drawing or features overshadowed by larger structures (e.g., sumps vs. tunnels) were not transcribed from the individual construction drawings to the composite drawing. These features would be too small to be evaluated on a 2 or 3 dimensional groundwater flow model (Section 4). A summary of the drawings reviewed as part of this study is included in Section 7, References. Figure 2-2 shows the estimates of the vertical and horizontal limits of the excavations implemented during construction. Conservative assumptions regarding the extent of excavations were made in areas where no as-built cross-sections were available based on the engineering practices demonstrated in areas with cross-sections. For example, all cross-sections indicated that for large excavations the sides were sloped at 1.5 ft. horizontal to I ft. vertical (1.5:1). Also, lacking additional information, URSGWC assumed excavation walls were sloped at 1.5:1. URSGWC attempted to resolve the conflicts between the soil boring logs and the as-built construction drawings. The final estimates of the limits of the represent compromises between conflicting data sets. URS Greiner Woodward-Clyde URSGrenerWoowar-Clde 2-2 ,fOEis.q,,.,p.,d,132 qRom -" 1PM
2.1 APPARENT HISTORICAL EXCAVATION SEQUENCE The construction excavations, exclusive of the New Rad-Waste Building and the Intake
& Discharge Canal are summarized in three drawings: " Reactor and Turbine Area Excavation Plan and Sections, Dwg. 4007-3, 9/22/64; " Intake and Turbine Area Excavation and Backfill Plan & Sections, Dwg. 4006-2, 4/29/65; and " Reactor Area Backfill Details, Dwg. 4010-2, 8/22/65 All three drawings were revised for "As-Built Conditions" on 5/5/70. While no drawings indicate the sequence of the excavations, the Intake and Turbine Area Excavation drawing and the Reactor Area Backfill Details refer to completed excavations in the Reactor and Turbine Areas (this includes the Old Radwaste Building).
Reactor and Turbine Area Excavation Plan and Sections The Reactor and Turbine Area Excavation Plan indicated the entire Turbine Building footprint plus a buffer was excavated to elevation (el.) -13' 0". The Turbine Building area, exclusive of the deeper structures such as the Intake/Discharge Tunnel and sump pits, was backfilled to el. 6'-5". The slope of the excavation sidewalls, where shown, was at 1.5:1. This means the excavation extended a minimum of 54 ft beyond the base of the excavation. The dimensions of the excavation exceed the dimensions of the current building. The rectangles shown below show the relative size of the Turbine Building excavation (left) vs the relative size of the Turbine Building (right). Turbine Turbine Note: Relative scales are Building Building approximated. Excavation: 173' x 271' 189' x 298' URS Greiner Woodward-Clyde 2-3 oo ,o ... c , ,m., dl.
The buffer zone surrounding the excavation was, presumably, the additional area needed for construction related activities. Because of the proximity of the Reactor Building to the Turbine Building, the slope of the walls of the Reactor elevation infringed on the limits of the Turbine Building excavation as shown in the sketch below (note: the elevations shown are the approximate elevations of the depth of the excavation beneath each building): 4f Turbine Bldg Reactor Bldg.
-13'-6"
-29'- 6" The detail section of the Reactor/Radwaste Buildings excavation demonstrates the Reactor Building excavation was to a depth of el.-29' 6" and that the Reactor Building was founded on original ground. Because the Reactor Building excavation was significantly deeper than the Turbine Building, the excavation was sloped upwards to el.
-13'0". The detailed sections also indicate the Old Rad-Waste Building excavation extended to el. 13'0", well below the depth of the foundation mat of the building. As with the Turbine Building, the horizontal limits of the base of the Reactor Building and Old Rad-Waste Buildings, is significantly larger than the size of the actual building footprints. The Turbine/Reactor excavation extended beyond the eastern limits of the Old Radwaste Building. This area was also excavated to a depth of approximately el. -14'. The invert of the deep portion of the Old-Radwaste Building slab is at el. +3' 6". 2.2 REACTOR BUILDING The pertinent features of the Reactor Building are summarized below. GreinerWoodwarci-Clyde URS Greiner URS Woodward-Clyde 2-4 24 a~ - in..,,. I, 1 Total Depth: The base of the 10 ft thick mat of the Reactor Building is at el. -29' 6". Approximately 52.5 ft below ground surface (assume ground surface elevation of +23' 0". The mat is, apparently, founded on Cohansey Formation (i.e., there is essentially no backfill beneath the mat). The Reactor Building is the deepest of all buildings on the Site. Foundation Construction: The Reactor Building mat is, as stated above, a 10 ft. thick steel reinforced concrete slab. Underlying the slab is a waterproofing system that consists of the following: 1) a 3 inch concrete leveling slab; 2) a waterproofing membrane; and. 3) a 2 inch concrete protective slab (see below). The waterproofing membrane apparently extends to an elevation of+5' 0" (with different construction details). SIMPLIFIED CROSS-SECTION OF FOUNDATION W/ WATERPROOFING
!I!:- MMRýNý' 10ft mat 4 2 in. water protection concrete.
-1 waterpmofing membrane 4 3 in. leveling slab Tunnels: There is one tunnel associated with the Reactor Building. This is discussed as part of the Exhaust Tunnel System.
Sumps: Two sumps were identified on Dwg. 4097-7 (Reactor Building Foundation Plan and Sections). The invert of the sumps was shown as el. -23' 0". The invert of the Reactor Building mat is deeper in the areas of the sump, to maintain a total mat thickness of approximately 10 ft from the invert of the sump (i.e., mat depth of approximately el. - 33' 0". These sumps are small and so required the deepening of the mat in areas approximately 9 ft square. The sumps are not shown on the drawings or cross-sections. Backfill: As was stated above, the leveling slab appears to be founded on the Cohansey Formation, not backfill. Presumably, the additional excavation for the sumps was localized to the sump area (no excavation details were found). There are no excavation/backfill cross-sections in the sump areas. URS GreinerWoodward-Clyde 2-5 . otwr ,, ,'fl,,, , ,, ,,
2.3 TURBINE BUILDING The pertinent features of the Reactor Building are summarized below. Total Depth: The base of the 6 ft thick mat of the Turbine Building is at el. -6' 0". In the turbine areas the base is thicker (8 ft) therefore the base is deeper, el. -8' 0". The tunnel section of the building is at el. -14'. Please note that this conflicts with the maximum reported excavation depth of el. -13' as shown on the Turbine are as-built excavation drawing. The difference of one foot does not substantially impact the hydrogoelogic model. Foundation Construction: As stated above, the mat of the turbine building is either 6' or 8' thick steel reinforced concrete. The detail drawings show the same leveling slab, waterproofing membrane and water proofing membrane protection concrete as discussed in the Reactor Building construction section (the previous section). The excavation in the vicinity of the Turbine Building extended to approximately el. 13' 6" (near the completion depth of the Intake/Discharge Tunnel. The excavation cross-sections show the base of the tunnel structure to be founded on upper Cohansey. It appears the excavation did not extend deeper than the bottom of the tunnel. SIMPLIFIED TURBINE BUILDING FOUNDATION (not to scale) 6 ftmat Bft. mat 8 ft mat 6 ftmat
*.* FOUNDATION
< e. -4' TUNNEL Tunnels: There are two sets of tunnels entering or exiting the Turbine Building:
" Intake/Discharge Tunnel; and, " Exhaust Tunnel. These tunnels are discussed in subsequent sections. URS Greiner Woodward-Ciyde 2-6reinr URS Wodwaei-Cyde nWOacrS-wz.ob -rw,.... 1- 13M
Sumps: There are five sumps/pits in the turbine building. Three are small pits that are not shown on the summary figure, Figure 2-1. There is a pair of pits adjacent to the Intake/Discharge Tunnel that have inverts of el. -14' and el. -18 ft. These are shown on Figure 2-1 as a combined sump with multiple invert elevations. Backfill: As was stated above, the excavation drawings show the 8 ft and 6 ft mats were constructed on backfill. It appears the area of the Turbine Building was excavated to the planned depth of the intake/discharge tunnel, el. -14'-0". 2.4 OLD RADWASTE BUILDING The pertinent features of the Old Radwaste Building are summarized below. Total Depth: The total depth of the foundation for the Old Radwaste Building is variable (see below), including both shallow foundation and deep foundations. The shallow foundation portions are areas in which the top of the foundation slab is at el. 23' 0" (grade level). The bottom of the slab is el. 22' 4" to el. 21' 6", depending on the type of foundation construction. For the purpose of this report we will consider the average bottom of slab elevation for shallow foundation areas to be el. 22' 0". The bottom of the slab of the deep foundation portion of the building is el. 3' 6", exclusive of small area shown below. Variations in slab construction methods are discussed below. SIMPLIFIED PLAN VIEW OF OLD RADWASTE BUILDING (not to scale) 64ft el 36" SHALLOW FDN. 105 ft 65 ft. el.. 3 .-. . 158 ft Note: The lengths shown on the figure above were taken directly from the construction drawings. These measurements do not always agree with the field measurements collected by GPU as shown on Figure 2-1. 2-7 ~nonnsw.nmnnr.,,.,s.,,.a. n.,. sp54 URS Woorlward-Clyde Greiner Woodward-Clyde URS Greiner 2-7 -OMCT--ýý 1ý41-
We cannot resolve the differences. We have, therefore, used the base map provided by GPU for the base map on all plan view figures since the base map represents actual measurements not as-bualt construction documents. Foundation Construction: Much of the shallow foundation area, particularly the area east of the "deep foundation" portion of the building, is constructed with a variety of construction methods including:
- 8 inches of wire mesh reinforced concrete over 6 inches of gravel with a vapor barrier under the concrete;
- I ft 6 inches of steel reinforced concrete over 6 inches of gravel with or without a vapor barrier under the concrete; or
- 2 ft 6 inches of steel reinforced concrete over 6 inches of gravel with or without a vapor barrier under the concrete.
It is possible that there are additional variations on the designs discussed above. Detail drawings were not provided for the entire building. The foundation supports in these areas range from 2 ft by 2 ft steel reinforced grade beams (base at el. 21' 0") to steel reinforced footings (7 ft at base) founded at el. 15'. The floor is also segmented into several sections and so includes construction (i.e., expansion) joints. The construction joint detail shows the joints included an 8 inch thick poured joint filler. The detail did not show evidence of an underlying vapor barrier or water proofing membrane. The majority of the details reviewed for this report were from the eastern portion of the building, It is presumed that similar construction methods were used in the western portion of the building that has a shallow foundation. The foundation in the "deep foundation" portion of the building is 3 ft thick steel reinforced concrete and includes a water proof membrane. The maximum elevation to which the membrane extends could not be determined. The minimum elevation to which the membrane extends is el. 12' 0". The only variation in foundation elevation is in a shallower portion of the deep foundation portion of the building (see above) in which the slab thickness is reduced to 2 or 2.5 ft. Tunnels: There is a tunnel that extends from the Old Radwaste Building to the Exhaust Stack. This tunnel will be discussed as a separate section. 2-8 r.nnWcrsw.oa2w.,,*,e..,d,~ hvflflr. 13 UHS GreinerWooclwarcl-Clyde URS L~reiner Woodward-Clydle 2-8 1.o-0 7s*o 2*. * *,N,*.,.
Sumps: There is a minimum of one sump in the deep foundation portion of the building. In this area, the concrete thickness is maintained and so the bottom of the slab in the sump area is at el. 0' 0"(the elevation of slab minus elevation of the sump inside the building). There are two additional structures that may be sumps. There were no detailed cross-sections in this area; therefore, the depth of the sumps could not be determined. The sumps are small and have not been included in the final geologic and hydrogeologic cross-sections. Structures this size will not impact the model(s). Backfill: The excavation for this structure extended to el. -14. This means there is approximately 18 ft of fill beneath the base of the deep foundation section and approximately 36 ft of fill beneath the shallow foundation sections of the structure (exclusive of grade beams and footings). SIMPLIFIED EXCAVATION CROSS-SECTION (not to scale) er=120 ft. el. 3' 6" FILL TO EL. -14' 2.5 NEW RADWASTE BUILDING The pertinent features of the New Radwaste Building are summarized below. Total Depth: The foundation slab of the New Radwaste Building extends from el. 23' 6" to el. 19' 4". The base of the building is deeper in the sump areas or in the area of the tunnel to the Old Radwaste Building. The depth of a typical sump extends to el. 15' 4" (5 ft deeper than the normal slab. The bottom of the tunnel is at el. 7' 9" except in the area of the tunnel sump that extends to el. 3' 6". NEW RADWASTE BUILDING CROSS SECTION (not to scale) ground el. 23' 6" slab el. 19'4" sump el. 15' 4"t tunnel sump el. 3' 6" URS Greiner Woodward-Clyde 2-9 wtorcy- * - ,,...,,
Foundation Construction: The foundation is constructed of approximately 4 ft of steel reinforced concrete underlain by a 2 to 4 inch protective concrete layer, a water proof membrane, and a 2-inch concrete leveling mat. The thickness of the leveling mat is consistently 2 inches. The thickness of the protective layer is, as was stated above, variable (from 2 to 4 inches); hence, the use of the term "approximately" in describing the foundation thickness. The waterproof membrane appears to extend the height of the slab, sump or tunnel. Vertical waterproofing does not, however, include protective concrete. There is a note on one of the detail drawings stating the waterproof membrane was to be protected by fiberboard during backfilling of the excavation. Tunnels: There is a single tunnel leading from the New Radwaste Building to the Old Radwaste Building. The depth of the tunnel is, as was stated previously, el. 7' 9". A note on a detail drawing for the tunnel notes that it slopes downward towards the Old Radwaste Building. The finish elevation of the tunnel is not known because there were not detail drawings of the tunnel exclusive of those associated with the New Radwaste Building. Sumps: discussed above Backfill: There are no excavation drawings for the New Radwaste Building. The base of the slab and sumps is likely founded on fill of unknown thickness. Borings near the building suggest between 0 and 10 ft of fill that appears to be very similar to the Cape May formation. The base of the tunnel sump is at the top of the Upper Clay. This could have necessitated some excavation of the clay, perhaps on the order of 1-3 ft. The base of the tunnel, where it exits the south side of the New Radwaste Building, is approximately 2 ft above the top of the Upper Clay. URSGWC has assumed that the construction of the tunnel, near the New Radwaste Building, did not require any significant excavation of the Upper Clay (i.e., enough excavation to result in the change in the hydrogeologic characteristics of the Upper Clay near this structure). Without any information on tunnel construction methods or tunnel geometry (particularly where it enters the Old Radwaste Building), URSGWC URS Greiner Woodward-Clyde 2-10 Lwo- W-Pý
cannot determine if any excavation of the Upper Clay was required for other sections of the tunnel. 2.6 INTAKE STRUCTURE The pertinent features of the Intake Structure are summarized below. Total Depth: The total depth of the intake structure is variable. The deepest part of the structure is approximately el. -21'. The eastern half of the structure is slightly shallower at approximately el. -18'. The structure appears to be founded on the Cohansey Formation. The clay in this area is shallower than el. -18. In the figure presented below, the bottom of the fill is presumed to be the bottom of the intake structure (Dwg. 4006-2). SIMPLIFIED CROSS SECTION OF INTAKE STRUCTURE (not to scale) Discharge Tunnels Foundation Construction: The intake structure is generally constructed of 2 ft thick steel reinforced concrete. Detail drawings reviewed for this report did not indicate the presence of water proofing. Tunnels: The tunnels associated with this structure include the Intake Tunnel and electrical tunnel. The intake tunnel is discussed in Section 2.8.1. The electrical tunnel appears to be located at an elevation well above groundwater and so should not impact the conclusions of this report. Sum No sumps were observed on the drawings reviewed for this report. URS GreinerWoodward-Clyde 2-11
Backfill: The backfill, as seen in the cross-section presented above, does not appear beneath the Intake Structure. The clay fill layer is present (as shown above). The cross-section indicated the western limit of the clay layer is tied into the lower portion of the Upper Clay Formation. The clay fill layer then extends past the limits of the discharge tunnels and thins to 1.5 ft. The eastern terminus of the clay layer is the upper portion of the Upper Clay Formation. Additional details on the construction method and speculation regarding the function of this layer are presented in Section 2.8.1. 2.7 TUNNELS AND OTHER STRUCTURES Tunnels and, if necessary, tunnel segments are discussed individually in the following sections. 2.7.1 Intake/Discharge Tunnel The pertinent features of the New Radwaste Building are summarized below. Total Depth: The intake tunnel runs from the Intake Building to the Turbine Building. The interior of the intake tunnel is 10'6" by 10'6". The tunnel enters the Intake Structure from at approximately el.15'0". The Intake Tunnel slopes downward to el. 13'0" at the intersection with the Unit I Discharge Tunnel. From that point . the Intake and Discharge tunnel are a single structure with a maximum (top) el. of 13'0" and minimum (bottom) el. of 12'-O". The Unit I and Unit 2 Discharge Tunnels are nearly identical. Both tunnels have maximum elevations of 0'6", exclusive of the last 15 ft where the tunnel enters the Discharge Canal. At the terminus, the maximum tunnel elevation appears to be approximately el. +8. The base of the tunnel ranges from el.-15'6" (near Discharge Canal) to el. -14'0" (near the Turbine Building) (see below). Note that Discharge Tunnel No. 2 is deeper than Discharge Tunnel No. 1. The depth where Discharge Tunnel No. 2 crosses underneath Discharge Tunnel No. I is el. -16'6". The simplified figure presented below does not show the upward slope of the Intake Tunnel that takes place west of the western limit of the Discharge Tunnel. URS Greiner Woodward-Clyde URS 2-12 Griner ~ WodwardClyde -If~
Please note that the Unit 2 Discharge Tunnel crosses under the Intake Tunnel approximately 40 ft. from the Intake Building. This tunnel was intended to be the discharge tunnel for a second turbine/reactor. Consequently, the tunnel terminates north of the Intake Tunnel rather than connecting to existing Turbine Building. The sketch below shows Tunnel No. 2 passing under the Intake Tunnel. The western limit of Tunnel No. I is where the Discharge Structure joins the Discharge Tunnel. SIMPLIFIED CROSS-SECTION OF INTAKE/DISCHARGE TUNNELS (not to scale)
" el. 1*'0 INTAKE TUNNEL M ilft DISCARGE TUNNEL NO 1 cf. - 1. U e.166\ Approx. 2 ft. concrete Discharge Tunnel No. 2 Foundation Construction: Burns and Roe Dwg. 4035 includes cross-sections of all three tunnels. The sections show that the tunnels are generally constructed of 2 ft thick concrete (see above). All three tunnels include a minimum of one expansion joint. The drawings reviewed as part of this report did not show evidence of a water proofing membrane.
Sumps: No sumps or pits were observed on the Intake and Discharge Tunnel drawings reviewed for this report. Backfill: The intake and discharge tunnels appear to be founded on native soil. The formation at the depth of the base of the Discharge Tunnels would have been the Cohansey Formation. The Upper Clay appears to have been excavated in the area of these structures. There were two cross-sections which indicated the backfill in the area of the tunnels and the Discharge Structure was the same fill as was used in the Reactor and Turbine Buildings (with the exception of a clay layer of variable thickness (1.5 to 3 inches) that abuts the sides of the tunnels). The possible function of this clay layer was not indicated in the construction drawings or the historical reports. Neither was the method of construction or lateral extent. URS GreinerWoodward-Clyde 2-13 UR GeieWodad.lye r~~m ff41-1-o~r ?
Dwg. 40062, "Intake and Turbine Area Excavation and Backfill Plan and Sections," indicates the following:
" The clay backfill layer discussed above is 3 ft thick west of Discharge Tunnel No. 2. " The clay backfill layer thins to 1.5 fit between Discharge Unit No. I and Discharge Unit No. 2. " The clay backfill layer slopes upward east of Discharge Tunnel No. I. " The clay backfill layer along the face (presumed the southern face) of the Intake Structure and Intake/Discharge Tunnels ends at the top ofthe Upper Clay Layer. " The area above the cooling water tunnel was originally backfilled to an elevation of 14' - 6". The backfill slopes upward to approximately el. 23' - 0" at the north-south road that parallels the face of the Turbine Building.
Unresolved issues regarding the backfill in this area include: " The lateral extent of the clay backfill layer; " The purpose of the clay backfill layer;
- The lateral extent of the tunnel excavation to the south and east; and
" The reason for constructing the clay backfill layer. A note on Dwg. 4006-2 stated: "Clay backfill to be placed in 6" max layers and compacted with sheepfoot roller per specs.... and with not less than 4 passes per layer." A note on Dwg. 4029 (Intake Structure Foundation Plan) stated: "After construction flood intake structure to el. -7' 0" prior to shutting of dewatering system. The clay layer, where horizontal, is el. -8' to el. -11' (3 ft thick or el. -8' to el. -8' to el. -6' 6". Combined, this information suggests the clay layer may have been constructed as part of the overall dewatering plan (i.e., to be able to stop dewatering to below el. -7' 6" because of the presence of the clay fill layer. The drawings indicate the presence of the upper clay at the terminus of the clay fill layer. This further supports the speculation that the clay layer is associated with the dewatering plan (i.e., perhaps forming a temporary hydraulic barrier limiting the vertical movement of groundwater). 2.7.2 Discharge Units The pertinent features of the New Radwaste Building are summarized below. URS GreinerWoodward-Clyde 2-14 fort- t, ,,, ,,, , i I .iL9 i3 P
Total Depth: As was stated above, there are two Discharge Units, No. I and No. 2. No. I is functional. No. 2 was constructed in anticipation of constructing a second reactor building north of the current Reactor Building. SIMPLIFIED DISCHARGE UNIT CROSS-SECTION (not to scale) approx. finish grade: el. 14' 6" el. -12ackfill 3 ft clay filllayer 1.5 ft clay layer Foundation Construction: The Units were constructed of 2 ft thick steel reinforced concrete. Detail drawings reviewed for this report did not indicate the presence of a waterproofing membrane exclusive oftarpaper at some joints. Tunnels: Discharge Unit No. I connects with the Discharge Tunnel that is discussed in Section 2.8.1. Discharge Unit No. 2 does not connect with a Discharge Tunnel because the second reactor was never built. Sumos: No sumps were observed on the drawings reviewed for this report. Backfill: The base of the Discharge Structures is founded on the Cohansey Formation. There were no drawings or cross-sections that indicated the presence of backfill beneath the Discharge Units. As with the Intake/Discharge Tunnels and the Intake Structure, the clay fill layer is present. The position and thickness of the clay layer is shown in the schematic presented above. Drawing Dwg. 4026 (Circulating Water System Sections and Details Sh. #3) indicated the use of retaining walls during the construction of the discharge units. This indicates that the Discharge Units, unlike the main structures, did not require 1.5 to I or 2 to I excavation slope walls on all sides to maintain the stability of the excavation during construction. Unfortunately, there were no drawings that indicated the location or limits of the retaining walls. 2-15 nowcs\.o.mr.,.,~n,..,e,, 2,2mg, 2PM GreinerWoodward-Clyde URS Greiner Woodward-Clyche 2-15
2.7.3 Exhaust Tunnel System. There are several sections to the Exhaust Tunnel System (ETS). The section locations are shown on Figure 2-1. A brief description of each segment (size and depth) is given below. The sketch shown immediately below is a schematic of the location of the first three segments of the ETS. The shaded portion is the ETS complex as it enters the Exhaust Stack. The Exhaust Tunnel System near the stack is large enough that is could be considered a subsurface structure (see below and Figure 2-1). SIMPLIFIED PLAN VIEW OF ETS NEAR EXHAUST STACK (not to scale) To Old Radwaste EXHAUST STACK Approximately 68 ft. URS Greiner Woodward-Clyde 2-16 URSGrenerWoowar-Clde LflOlETS.Oýr-Thp.. o 12fl109 )PM
Segment A: Old Radwaste Building to Exhaust Stack SIMPLIFIED CROSS-SECTION ETS SEGMENT A (not to scale) ground surface: el. 23' el. 240" ild Radwaste t Building Chimney Notes 1) typical wall thickness: 1'9": typical slab thickness 2'
- 2) Interior height 10 ft
- 3) 1"fiberboard around tunnel suggests waterproofing Segment B: Near Exhaust Stack to Southeast Comer of Reactor Building SIMPLIFIED CROSS-SECTION ETS SEGMENT B (not to scale) ground surface: el. 23' 1.1"r.
' 6- -
Woodward-Clyde Greiner Woodward-Clyde 2-17 i neJEcrs~Q d~ OO92V~p~lV.fl 2t2R94.I; ni URS Greiner 2-17 i , t , , ,..,,, = , ,. , ,.
Segment C: Parallel to East Face of Reactor Building SIMPLIFIED CROSS-SECTION ETS SEGMENT B (not to scale) ground surface: el. ;t3' sa el.._... Approximately 83 ft. Part II of Exhaust Tunnel System The sketch below shows the approximate locations of the remaining three segments of the Exhaust Tunnel System. "C-Reactor" is the approximate location of the centerline of the reactor. Reactor Building Offic Sagihs"e - Exhaust Tunnel Budding E4j
.* C-Reactor
.North I2Segment F *: ?I Length: 192 ft. -Approximate 2-I 8 .~Ptoxcmxt.on.*. - ,vn.4 miNd Greiner Woodward-Clyde URS Greiner Wooctward-Clyde 2-18 -Omcrs-ý _
Segment D: Parallel to South Face of Reactor Building: SIMPLIFIED CROSS-SECTION ETS SEGMENT D (not to scale) EAST Length: 141 ft Segment E: Parallel to East Face of Office Building SIMPLIFIED CROSS-SECTION ETS SEGMENT E (not to scale) e.19_ Tunnel el. 189" Segment F
- I
- *t-:;,.:
__ r4--**,-., _ , O T SOUTh Segment D 4 ft thick slab Length: 48' 6" Segment F: Parallel to South Face of Office Building to Turbine Building A cross section of Segment F was not included in the drawings reviewed for this report. The cross-section presented below is based on the known elevation data from the intersection with ETS Segment E and a presumption that the tunnel slopes upward towards the Turbine Building. URS Greiner Woodward-Clyde 2-19 , .i..,. ,i d
ESTIMATED CROSS-SECTION ETS SEGMENT E (not to scale) Turbine Building Tunnel Segment E Fel.19'6"-Lf Length: 51" 0" Note: 1) Assume 9" rise over length of tunnel segment based on similar rise in Segment E Summary of General Tunnel System Characteristics Total Depth: The maximum total depth of the ETS is el. 2' 6" exclusive of a small portion of Segment D along the center line of the reactor. Foundation Construction: Base slabs were typically 2 ft to 2 ft 6 inches thick. The maximum thickness was 4 ft. Sidewall and ceilings were typically I ft 9 inches to 2 ft thick. Base slab construction appears to have included a waterproof membrane (note: the waterproofing detail referenced on the cross-sections was not included in the drawings reviewed for this report). There was one indication that the 3 layer system (leveling slab, membrane, protective slab) was used on portions of the tunnels. The extent to which this system was implemented could not be determined. It is not unreasonable to assume the three layer waterproofing system, similar to that observed on the major structures where below the water table, was used for the tunnel foundation slab with some modifications for the walls (again where below the water table). There were several references to fiberboard used to protect the walls or roof of the tunnel (presumably during backfilling). It would seem likely that the fiberboard was protective some type of waterproofing system that could be damaged during backfilling if not protected. Sumps: No sumps were noted. URS GreinerWoodward-Clyde 2-20 J t, TSoOr q,,,*q, n d., Ih,
Backfill: The entire ETS was constructed on backfill. The backfill in the Reactor/Turbine Area extends, at a minimum, to el. -14' (also the maximum depth of the Stack). The maximum depth of the ETS is el. 2' 6". Assuming I VAto I sidewall slopes for the excavation of the Reactor Building, the Turbine Building and the Stack, the area of the ETS must have been excavated to a depth greater than el. 2' 6". 2.7.4 Stack The pertinent features of the Stack (Chimney) are summarized below. PLAN VIEW OF STACK & FOUNDATION (not to scale) Stack 18'7.5"£ Foundation 45'0 Total Depth: The base of the Chimney foundation is at el. -10' 0". The sump directly under the Chimney extends to a depth of-14' 0" Foundation Construction: The octagonal foundation is constructed of 7 ft of steel reinforced concrete. The foundation includes the typical 3 part waterproofing system (leveling slab, waterproof membrane, and protective slab). The waterproofing system may extend around the entire foundation. Tunnels: see discussion of ETS above. Sumos:. As was stated above, a single sump underlies the stack foundation. The sump is 4 ft in diameter, located west of the center of the stack. URS GreinerWoodward-Clyde 2-21 1-OEMý- ý - A13M
Backfill: The foundation for the stack is likely on Cohansey Formation at the base of the sump and backfill under the remainder of the foundation. The Upper Clay has been excavated in this area. 2.7.5 New Radwaste Tunnel The New Radwaste Tunnel goes from the New Radwaste Building to the Old Radwaste Building. The pertinent features of the New Radwaste Tunnel are summarized below. Total Depth: The total depth of the New Radwaste Tunnel where it exits the New Radwaste Building is el. 7' 9". As was previously stated, the tunnel slopes downward towards the Old Radwaste Building. The depth at which it intersects the Old Radwaste Building is unknown because no construction drawings of the tunnel were provided. Foundation Construction: The only foundation information is from the detail sections on the New Radwaste Building drawings. The tunnel is constructed of 3+ ft thick steel reinforced concrete. The base of the tunnel is protected by a 4-inch protective slab, a water proof membrane and a 2-inch leveling slab. The waterproof membranes extends up the sides of the tunnel and was protected by fiberboard before backfilling. The sides of the tunnel are keyed to the top and bottom with 6-inch by 3-inch keys and 6-inch waterstop. Sumps: The sump at the base of the tunnel where it originates was discussed in the section on the New Radwaste Building. There are no tunnel drawings to determine if there are additional sumps along the length of the tunnel or at the tunnel terminus. Backfill: There are no excavation drawings of the New Radwaste Tunnel between the New Radwaste Building and the Old Radwaste Building. If the slope of the tunnel towards the Old Radwaste Building is minimal, the tunnel excavation should not have disturbed the Upper Clay formation. If, however, the tunnel slopes downward and enters the Old Radwaste Building in the deep portion of the building, portions of the Upper Clay would have been excavated. As-built construction drawings and excavation drawings will be evaluated by URSGWC if supplied by GPU. URS Greiner Woodward-Clyde 2-22 , . 1 -w,*-.j13M
2.8
SUMMARY
The detailed review of the excavation and construction drawings was intended to I. Determine the depth and, in some cases, the location of subsurface structures that have the potential to release radiologically contaminated material to the soil or groundwater;
- 2. Gather data concerning the construction of these structures (e.g., foundation thickness, presence of water proofing system) to allow GPU to evaluate the potential for construction methodologies to positively or negatively impact the potential for a release.
- 3. Combine construction data with stratigraphic and hydrogeologic data to construct an accurate conceptual site model and 2-dimensional groundwater models.
2-23 ~nomc-r~,oonr..,.n~.. 1mw,,4t~ fl URS Greiner Woodward-Clyde UPS Greiner Woodward-Clyde 2-23
3.0 STRATIGRAPHY AND HYDROGEOLOGY 3.1 SITE STRATIGRAPHY There are five stratigraphic units found at the Site (exclusive of fill). These include (from shallow to deep): " The Cape May Formation; " The Upper Clay " The Upper Cohansey Formation; " The Lower Clay; and, " The Kirkwood Formation Descriptions of these formations are based on previous reports, principally the "Geotechnical Study, Proposed Radwaste and Off-Gas Buildings" (February 1975), the ."Phase II Report. Ground Water Monitoring System" (March 1984) , and additional boring log review is presented below. Formation thickness data is based on a review of boring logs from within the study area (Table 3-1) and outside the study area (not tabulated). There is limited information on the Lower Clay and the Kirkwood Formations since most borings were terminated in the Cohansey Formation. An additional source of data that could provide a large amount of additional stratigraphic information would be the pre-construction boring program of 1965. A limited amount of this information (three cross-sections) was reviewed. No boring logs were available to corroborate the cross-sections. No geotechnical boring logs from the original construction foundation studies were provided to URSGWC. Without the boring information it is difficult to identify stratigraphic boundaries because descriptors such as color, density, etc. are not available. Projections of stratigraphic boundaries were, therefore, estimated in areas where data was not available. Fill:
== Description:== The fill is a tan, medium to fine grained sand with trace to some silt. No evidence of soft sediment structures such as lenses of silt or coarse sand. The density is URS Greiner Woodward-Clyde UR 3-1Ge~eWodad-lye lW1~OW..~.n, IiJ2USOA
typically less than the Cape May. Based on the excavation pattern discussed above and the description of the fill, it appears likely that much of the fill is excavated Cape May. Thickness: The fill thickness from soil boring logs varies from 0 ft to 38 ft below ground surface (bgs) (el. 23' to el. -15'). The maximum thickness of fill was in the borings closest to the Turbine Building. The maximum fill thickness must be 53 fi (el. -30 vs. surface elevation of +23 ft) in the vicinity of the Reactor Building. This is based on the depth of the excavation for these structures (no boring log was found indicating 53 ft of fill.). Cape May:
Description:
The Cape May Formation is the youngest formation in the Oyster Creek Region. It is described as a light gray to tan medium to fine grained sand with trace to some silt and occasional coarse sand. It is generally poorly compacted. Thickness: The Cape May Formation in the study area varies from 0 ft to 21.5 ft thick. The variation is largely due to the amount of material excavated and replaced by fill as part of the excavation process. The thickness of the Cape May where not excavated is generally in the range of 17 to 20 ft (presuming a ground surface elevation of 23 fi). Upper Clay:
== Description:== The description is as follows: stiff to hard, gray, plastic organic clay containing inclusions (also described as lenses or partings) of dense fine sand with trace to some organic silt. The deposits of fine sand within the Upper Clay layer have high relative densities and are believed to be in the form of lenses or inclusions. Some boring logs describe the "sand lenses" as the dominant feature over a I to 5 ft. thickness. In the area southwest of the Turbine Building, approximately half of the total thickness of the Upper Clay, is silty sand (not clay). Thickness: The Upper Clay is typically on the order of 15 to 18 ft (where not impacted by excavation). Early reports suggest a thinning trend from east to west. This trend is best observed by reviewing information from outside the study area, specifically boring logs from the "West Site" and preliminary data from the Route 9 area. This data suggests the Upper Clay may be as thick as 25 ft east of Route 9 to 0 ft at the "West Site". The lack of a map identifying the locations of these borings makes correlation difficult and URS Greiner Woodward-Clyde 3-2 4. uno-C-..,.,,, Imfd. I, P
very speculative. The suggestion is, however, that there is a thinning trend from east to west but that the Upper Clay is present at 17 ft +/- 3 ft throughout the study area. Alternatively, it is possible that the conclusions drawn by previous investigators are based on a classification of the gray silty sand found in some borings as Upper Cohansey. The conclusion of this study is that the gray silty sand /sandy silt in question is part of the Upper Clay. This conclusion is reflected in the cross-section B-B'. Cohansey Formation:
Description:
Yellow-brown or tan, medium to fine sand with trace to some silt. Also contains pockets of coarse to fine sand, and occasional gravel and pockets of sandy silt. The lower portion of the Cohansey Formation was deposited in a beach or barrier bar environment, while the upper portion is a fluvial deposit. The upper portion can be identified by lower N-values (approximately 45) than the lower Cohansey (approximately 130). Thickness: The thickness of the Cohansey is estimated to be approximately 60-75 ft. There is not enough data to identify a pattern of the thickness of this formation as with the Upper Clay. Lower Clay:
== Description:== The clay is a dense gray medium to fine sand containing a trace to some organic silt and layers or inclusions of very stiff to hard gray organic clay. Thickness: The thickness of the lower clay is on the order of 10 to 20 ft. Again, there is very limited thickness information on this formation. The majority of the boring reviewed for this study terminate well above the Lower clay. Kirkwood Formation:
== Description:== This is a medium to fine sand with trace silt. Casagrande and Casagrande (1968) reported two hard clay layers within the Kirkwood formation at elevations less than -198 ft. Thickness: Unknown in the study area. URS GreinerWoodward-Clyde UR 3-3 renr odwr-Cye un-nIVbSIflP
3.2 CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS TO SITE STRATIGRAPHY This section will describe the impacts of excavation for selected structures on the site stratigraphy, the most noteworthy of which is the removal of the Upper Clay layer which acts as a hydrogeologic aquitard (i.e., a stratigraphic unit that is a partial barrier to hydraulic communication). Included are sketches of the structure depths with the relative depths of the stratigraphic units presented in an accompanying idealized stratigraphic column. This is intended to show the depth of building and the excavation relative to the stratigraphic column. The impacts of the construction on site stratigraphy is demonstrated on the sketches presented below as well as on the following figures: Figure 2-2 Estimated Limits of Excavation for Selected Structures Figure 3-1 Cross-Section A-A' (includes Old Radwaste Building, Reactor Building, Turbine Building and Intake Structure) Cross-Section B-B' (includes New Radwaste and Turbine Buildings) The "sketches" include the construction information from Section 2 and a simplified stratigraphic column that shows the approximate depth of the Upper Clay relative to the excavation and construction of the structure of interest. Reactor Building The Reactor Building excavation extended to approximately el. -30' (53 ft bgs). This excavation resulted in the removal of the entire Cape May, and Upper Clay Formations as well as part of the upper Cohansey Formation. The sketch presented below shows the estimated elevations of the Cape May, Upper Clay, and Cohansey formations relative to the estimated excavation depths. 3-4 Pftwrms~.,oo,2v,,,,.r,,,.,,, 6., 2flfl94 0 P)4 URS GreinerWoodward-Clyde URS Greiner Woodward-Clyde 3-4 'i-n-
Turbine Bldo Reactor Bldo. el 23' Turbine Bidn Reactor Bldn. el 23'
-133 -6" -
6"Chne Turbine Building: The Turbine Building excavation extended to approximately el. -14' (37 ft bgs). This excavation would also have resulted in the removal of the entire Upper Clay layer as seen in the sketch presented above. The excavation for the Turbine Building extended to el. - 14' in beneath the entire footprint of the building, including areas in which the foundation slab extended only to el. -6'. This was to accommodate the depth of the Intake and Discharge Tunnels (see below). 6 ft mat .'h;;;!:*i:*=*!*! 8 ft, mat ' FOUNDATION i 8**ft mat 6 ft mat Cpe4ay Cape May FILL et. -8 ,1 el. -8 FILL "Co S el -14 - TUNNEL Cohansey Old Radwaste Building: The Old Radwaste Building is, as was previously stated, partially a slab on grade with shallow footings and grade beams, and partially a deep foundation structure (approximately 20 fi bgs; el. 3' 6"). However, the excavation extends to el. -14'. As such, the Upper Clay has been excavated in this area. ground surface: el. 23' Cape May jj Fill to ýell if, URS GreinerWoodward-Clyde URSGriner 3-5 WodwardClyde OhSW4qmnd 71'*
Intake Structure The Intake Structure and the accompanying discharge tunnels are shown on the figure below. This figure demonstrates that the Intake Structure (and the tunnels) are founded deeper than the base of the Upper Clay. The concern with these structures is that the lateral extent of the excavations is not clear from the construction drawings (i.e.. there was no as-built drawing that showed whether the excavation was stabilized by a sloped excavation wall or by sheeting or by a combination of construction methods). Also, the as-built cross-sections show a 1.5 ft to 3 ft clay fill layer that was, apparently placed during the backfill of the Intake Structure and Intake/Discharge Tunnel area. This layer was reported tied into the upper portion of the Upper Clay to the east and the lower portion of the Upper Clay to the west. It is believed, however, that the "tie in" to the west could not exist after the Intake/Discharge Canal was constructed since this appears to have resulted in the excavation of the clay. It is also likely that the "tie in" to the east can currently exist because it appears the excavation for the Turbine Building and, possibly the Intake/Discharge Canals resulted in the excavation of the Upper Clay to the east. Discharge Tunnels e l. 14'6- e C
........ .--'~~ ~~~.
""** .* ,:*.4 c"...
INTAKE STRUCTURE -i - el. -21 3 ft. clay fill 1.5 ft clay fill New Radwaste Building The foundation of the New Radwaste Building (including sumps) is in the Cape May formation. The top of the Upper Clay in this area is between el. 8' and el. 4'. The tunnel and tunnel sump may, therefore, have resulted in the excavation of some portion of the Upper Clay. It is not known (there are no excavation drawings) if the excavation for the construction of the New Radwaste Building was to the depth of the tunnel sump (el. 3' 6") near the tunnel sump only or if the entire building footprint was excavated to the depth of the tunnel sump. It is suspected that the deep excavation would have been performed only in the tunnel area because this is a relatively small portion of the footprint of the entire building. It does not seem likely that the choice would be made to excavate Woociward-Clyde Greiner Woodward-Clyde 3-6 I.WflOWCTS~9,O4O'2',n,,*, URS Greiner 3-6 iwoý-ýV_ý__ iý-ý
and replace fill to el. 3' 6" unless there was a concern for the geotechnical characteristics of the soil. ground el. 23' 6"
*,*'*'; * * ,*-*-**,*.* '*L*-*'*,-.'*'**,*Cape May surnp"el. 15 slab eli.194" ... a.....
sump el. 15' 4" 999 tu-nnel el. r 9" :.-_..,*.** tunnel sump el. 3' 6" Kup '1:6*' Cohansey Intake and Discharge Tunnels The Intake Tunnel is shallower than the Discharge Tunnel. The Intake Tunnel (see below) is founded in the top half of the Upper Clay. The construction of the deeper Discharge Tunnel would have resulted in the excavation of the lower half of the Upper Clay and some of the Cohansey Formation. el. 0 6" el-1 el. 23' S15'0" el . 13-- Cape May INTAKE TUNNEL F~ IDISCHARGE TUNN EL NO 1 el."*el,16' -T4- U J el -14\ eu Approx. 2 ft. concrete Discharge Tunnel No. 2 Exhaust Tunnel System The Exhaust Tunnel System is, as was discussed above, an extensive system. The average elevation of the bonom of the tunnel system is shallower than the elevation of the adjacent larger structure (e.g., the Reactor Building or the Turbine Building). It is. therefore, assumed that the discussion of the excavation for the Reactor Building and Turbine Building (and the later excavation for the Chimney) includes the area disturbed by the Exhaust Tunnel System. Woodwa rd-Clyde Greiner Woodward-Clyde URS Greiner 3-7 3-7 I flOThCTS~O&W1~,,r,,, A 1PM 11111dY9 URS I *lOJlE*2 v*=Ittlort =l=: 17pJ/V9 4.1]pM
New Radwaste Tunnel There is no information on the depth of the New Radwaste Tunnel exclusive of that information included in the discussion of the New Radwaste Building. 3.3 HYDROGEOLOGY 3.3.1 Regional Hydrogeology The following description was presented in the Phase I Groundwater Monitoring Report:
"Both the Cape May and the Cohansey Formations are unconfined aquifers while an artesian aquifer exists in the Kirkwood Formation. The water level in the unconfined aquifer fluctuates seasonally. Occasional thin clay layers in the Cape May and Cohansey formations may cause slightly artesian conditions in localized areas but, in general these two formations communicate hydrologically. Thin clay layers are especially prominent near the coast. A clay layer separates the Kirkwood from the Cohansey. The clay layer acts as a confining layer and artesian heads as high as 22 feet above msl have been found in the Kirkwood (JCP&L, 1972).
Water supplies in the area are derived from wells. These wells are generally 60 to 70 or more feet in depth, penetrating at least one clay boundary to preclude contamination from salt water intrusion or leachate from the many septic tanks in the area. The deeper wells penetrate the Kirkwood aquifer and yield higher quality water. There are also many shallower wells that provide domestic water supplies. On a regional scale, ground water flows generally to the southeast toward the coast, following the trend of the coastal basin sedimentary bedding...." 3.3.2 Site Hydrogeology The site hydrogeology is dominated by two factors: I) the Intake/Discharge Canal; 2) the excavation of the Upper Clay during construction. The excavation of the Upper Clay has resulted in a direct connection between the Cape May and the Cohansey Formations. URS* Greiner Wood/wardl-Clydle 34
East of the Reactor Building the water table is several feet above the Upper Clay. West of the Turbine Building the water table is several feet below the top of the Upper Clay. The construction of the Canal has further contributed to the change in the flow direction of the upper aquifer. Water level in the canal is approximately at sea level (presumed to be el. 0'). Before construction, the water level averaged less than 6 ft below ground surface (approximately el. 20'). Water table levels now average 12 ft below ground surface (approximately el. 12'). This is a result of the change in gradient towards the canal which is at el. 0'. URSGWC has tabulated the stratigraphic and hydrogeologic data collected during previous investigations. The data are tabulated as follows: Table # Name and
Description:
3-1 Summary of Stratigraphic and Hydraulic Conductivity Data: This table includes the stratigraphy and hydraulic conductivity data for former and existing well networks. In instances where data is missing, the boring or well installation log may have been missing of the data was incomplete. 3-2 Additional Hydrogeologic Data: Includes gradient, velocity and dispersivity data from previous work by URSGWC and others. The exact location of all of the data collection points is not known. 3-3 Water Table Elevations: Includes water table elevations and LNAPL thickness (if present). Data is primarily from the area of the diesel fuel spill. The table includes an evaluation of the amount of variation in elevation per well over the rounds of data presented in the table. 3-4 Water Table Elevations: Outer MonitoringNetwork: This is a round of water table elevations from the outer (background) monitoring network. Not all of the locations are shown on Figure 3-2 because some are beyond the area shown in the figure. This data is discussed below. Groundwater elevation data: URSGWC used the groundwater elevation data from the 1982 investigation because no other groundwater elevation data were available that included all of the necessary wells. The data collected quarterly by GPU only includes the wells associated with the diesel URS GreinerWoodward-Clyde 3-9 i '*oF_*Tr *geo4o*vtton*t,*v. a=( 1*4 13*
fuel oil recovery system. This system includes a large number of wells but all are clustered southwest of the area of interest. The background water quality monitoring network is only monitored annually and not at the same time as the quarterly monitoring for the diesel fuel spill. Seasonal Groundwater Elevation Variation: The data reviewed for this report suggest seasonal groundwater elevation variations are generally on the order of 1.5 to 2 ft (Table 3-3). The maximum variation observed was 4.8 ft; however, it could not be determined if this amount of variation was a function of the impacts of the extraction and injection system associated with the diesel fuel remediation system plus seasonal variation. Head Difference between Cape May and Cohansey: Table 3-4 suggests the groundwater elevation in the Cohansey formation is lower than the groundwater elevation in the Cape May. In particular, the water table in wells W-IA and W-2A is significantly lower than any other Cohansey wells. The head difference in these well pairs is on the order of 9 to 10 ft. The head difference in well pairs closer to, but outside of the area in which the Upper Clay was excavated is on the order of 5 to 6 ft. Based on a preliminary review of the survey data for the W-1 and W-2 well pairs it is suspected that there is an error in the survey data. Therefore, until this is resolved URSGWC suggests the data from these pairs is erroneous, GPU has, as part of other site work, re-surveyed these wells. The new data was not available for the preparation of this report. Well Year of Deep or Groundwater Difference Data Shallow Elevation (Shal. -Deep) W-5 1983 Shallow 8.78 W-5/6 Shal. Higher W-6 1983 Deep 3.09 5.69 W-14 1983 Shallow 10.84 W-14/15 Shal. Higher W-15 1983 Deep 5.07 5.77 W-IA 1999 Deep -4.51 W-IA/IB W-IB 1999 Shallow 4.77 9.28 Shal. Higher W-2A 1999 Deep -4.90 W-2A/2B W-2B 1999 Shallow 5.27 10.17 Shal. Higher W-3A 1999 Deep 4.29 W-3A/3B W-3B 1999 Shallow 12.20 7.91 Shal. Higher W-4A 1999 Deep 4.63 W-4A/4B URS GreinerWoodward-Clyde 3-10
Well Year of Deep or Groundwater Difference Data Shallow Elevation (Shal. -Deep) W-4B 1999 Shallow 8.70 4.07 Shal. Higher The instances in which the head difference between the Cape May and the Cohansey Formations is much lower are all in areas in which the Upper Clay has been excavated. This confirms the effectiveness of the Upper Clay as an aquitard. Hydraulic Conductivity: Hydraulic conductivity and other aquifer parameters are tabulated in Tables 3-1 and 3-1. This data will, on an as needed basis, be discussed in Section 4 of this report. 3.4 FRACTURE FLOW ANALYSIS In 1996 Woodward-Clyde prepared a letter report titled: "Groundwater Flow Calculations: Cask Drop Study - Reactor Building." This addressed the hypothetical scenario of dropping a cask of fuel rods onto the slab at the base of the Reactor Buildings. Presumably the cracks would have resulted in a pathway for the entrance of groundwater into the structure. A copy of this letter report is included as Appendix A. Most of the structures included in the current report (including the Reactor Building) are, in part, below the water table (note: in some instances only part of the footprint of the structure is below the water table). We have evaluated the relationship of groundwater elevation to structure depth by applying the analyses used in the Cask Drop Study to all structures. The primary flow mechanisms investigated in the Cask Drop Study were: a) flow through fractures using fractured rock analyses; and, b) "piping" (flow of soil as a viscous liquid through the cracks. The initial study demonstrated that "piping" was not a concern; consequently, we have eliminated the piping calculations from the current analysis as well. The fracture flow analyses are summarized in Tables 3-5 and 3-6. Table 3-5 summarizes the pertinent building data (e.g., slab depth, slab thickness, etc.), groundwater elevation at the building and shows the calculate volume of water required for equilibrium to exist between the aquifer and the building interior (i.e., the water level inside the building URS GreinerWoodward-Clyde 3-I1 LIR GeierWodwrdClde d .it,11P
-lhtS~~4~,,w.
2-
equals the water level outside the building). Using this information, Table 3-6 shows the calculated fracture flow rates for each structure using the formula used in the Cask Drop Study which is presented in Appendix A. The time to reach equilibrium is then calculated by dividing the volume necessary to reach equilibrium by the flow rate (the last row of Table 3-5). Tables 3-5 and 3-6 incorporate the fracture flow formulas presented in Appendix A into an electronic spreadsheet format. URSGWC can provide these tables electronically so that the flow rates and time to equilibrium can be calculated under different conditions (e.g., fewer fractures, high or lower water table, different hydraulic conductivities, etc.). The equilibration times presented are conservative (i.e., biased high) because:
- 1. A high hydraulic conductivity (approximately one order of magnitude higher than the observed average hydraulic conductivity) was used thus generating a higher than expected fracture flow rate;
- 2. A single flow rate was used to estimate the time to equilibration even though the flow rate would decrease as the difference in head between the aquifer and the building interior would decrease as the water level inside the building increased;
- 3. The number (4) and length (42 ft) of the fractures is appropriate to a catastrophic event (i.e., the cask drop scenario) but may be larger than necessary for an "average" release scenario; and,
- 4. The portions of the structures that are below the water table include a water proof membrane below the slab (see Section I) and on the sides of the structures that are at
.or below the water table. This means the event causing the fracture would have had to create not only a breach in the slab but would also have had to breach the integrity of the water proofing system.
The results of the evaluation of ground water elevation vs. foundation elevation and the fracture flow analysis are summarized below. DATA Reactor Turbine Radwaste New Old Intake Radwaste Structure Intake Tunnel Discharge Tunnel Elevation of -19.5 0 0.5 23.5 -18 0.5 -12 Top of Slab Slab Thickness 10 6 3 5 3 2 2 URS GreinerWoodward-Clyde 3-12 , ,
DATA Reactor Turbine Old New Intake Intake Discharge Radwaste Radwaste Structure Tunnel Tunnel Elevation Water 7 5 9 10 4 5 5 Table Total Volume 3665200 1753424 164602 NA 756602 61597.8 89760 (gal) Q (flow) in gpm 0.080 0.025 .088 NA 0.129 0.061 0.135 Time to 88.3 270.7 7.2 NA 22.3 3.9 2.5 equilibrate (yrs) I I I The information presented above is defined as follows: " Elevation of Top of Slab: elevation of the top of the foundation slab of the structure in question (i.e., the elevation of the slab inside the building) " Slab Thickness: the thickness of the base mat of each structure excluding waterproofing (i.e., leveling mat, waterproof membrane and protective mat). " Total Volume (gallons): the volume of water necessary to fill the interior of the structure to the same elevation as the surrounding water table or to the top of the structure if the structure (e.g., the Discharge Tunnel) is completely submerged (i.e., bring inside to outside conditions to equilibrium). " Q(flow): the flow rate of water through the fracture in gallons per minute " Time to equilibrate: the amount of time for the water level inside the structure to equal the water level outside the structure (note: if the structure is submerged this is the amount of time to fill the structure). This data demonstrates the potential for releases from most structures of concerns is limited because the groundwater table is above the top of the base slab (the mat). This creates a positive hydraulic head on the slab that would prevent a release from migrating out of the building. The exceptions to the positive head scenario are: I. The New Radwaste Building: This building, as was stated in Section 1, is a slab on grade. The base of the slab is at el. 19'-4". This is above the groundwater elevation of approximately cl. 10'.
- 2. The Old Radwaste Building: This building is partially a slab on grade with shallow grade beams and shallow footings. There is not, consequently, a positive head preventing a release from impacting soil and groundwater for that portion of the building. The central portion of the building is, however, deeper. The calculations presented on Table 3-5 and 3-6 (and above) are for the center section only.
URS GreinerWoodward-Clyde 3-13 I -IOx
- rý r*,t b IM-I'W413M*
In order to address the potential for releases from the New Radwaste Building and the shallow portions of the Old Radwaste Building, 2-dimensional groundwater flow models have been constructed. These models will be discussed in Section 3. ORS Greiner Woodward-Clyde 3-'14 j - , *,, 0
4.0 TWO-DIMENSIONAL MODELING 4.1 MODEL SELECTED The most universally accepted commercially available numerical groundwater modeling code is MODFLOW, developed in 1988 by Michael G. McDonald and Arlen W. Harbaugh of the United States Geological Survey (USGS). MODFLOW is widely considered to be the industry standard for groundwater flow modeling due to its versatility and ease of application to a variety of groundwater flow problems, including two and three-dimensional flow problems in rectangular as well as radial coordinate systems. MODFLOW is named after its modular program structure, in which different "packages" may be called by the main program to simulate rivers, streams, drains, pumping wells, constant head cells, recharge, and evapotranspiration. A variety of matrix-solving numerical engines may also be called by the main program to perform the finite-difference calculations. MODPATH is the companion particle-tracking code to MODFLOW. MODPATH allows for forward or backward particle tracking of particles in the flow field, as computed using MODFLOW. Particles can be "released" at any location within the saturated zone. Multiple particles can be released in one model run. MODFLOW and MODPATH were selected as the groundwater flow and particle tracking codes to be used for hydrogeologic modeling at the Site because of their ease of use, familiarity to the industry and hydrogeologic community, and applicability to the Site. Applicability was determined by evaluating the goals of GPU and evaluating the ability of MODFLOW and MODPATH to meet those goals. The goals of the modeling phase of this program, as understood by URSGWC were: " Create a two-dimensional hydrogeologic model that included selected structures and calibrate the model using available hydrogeologic data;
- Include modifications to the stratigraphy (excavation of the Upper Clay aquitard) that resulted from the construction of the Reactor Building, the Turbine Building, and other selected structures;
" Evaluate the potential for a theoretical release of a radionuclide to impact downgradient receptors (groundwater and surface water). URS Gremner Woodward-Clyde 4-4-1 .fO1T\.O2=v, 4 rl'I S
MODFLOW and MODPATH were used to create a 2-dimesional hydrogeologic model that:
- 1. Included structures that could potentially impact stratigraphy because of their size and depth;
- 2. Adequately represents the current hydrogeologic conditions based on available data; and,
- 3. Could evaluate the potential migration path of a particle released from a structure of concern (i.e., could a particle released from a building or other structure containing radionuclides impact the canal through a groundwater vector?)?
4.2 MODEL CONSTRUCTION Two separate steady-state groundwater flow models were developed for two separate site vertical cross-sections. The first flow model simulated groundwater flow and particle transport from the Old Radwaste Building along a vertical cross-section through the Old Radwaste Building, the Reactor Building, and the Turbine Building to the Intake Structure and the Discharge Canal, from the east-northeast to the west-southwest along cross-section A-A' (Figure 2-1). The second model simulated groundwater flow and particle transport from the New Radwaste Building along a vertical cross-section through the New Radwaste Building and the Turbine Building to the Discharge Canal, from the north-northeast to the south-southwest along cross-section B-B' (Figure 2-1). Figure 3-1 shows the limits of stratigraphic layers and construction backfill for each cross-section (i.e., geologic cross-sections including major subsurface structures). Both models use the same boundary conditions. One edge of the model is the center of the discharge canal, assumed to be the point of discharge for the Cape May and Cohansey Aquifers at the Site. The other edge of the model is located at a topographic high point, near New Jersey Route 9, assumed to be the location of a local groundwater divide separating groundwater flow to the east towards the Atlantic Ocean from flow to the west towards the discharge canal. The impermeable base of the model is the top of the Lower Clay. The top of the model is the ground surface. Both models consist of 75 twenty-foot wide columns and 30 layers of two-foot and five-foot thicknesses. The models encompass cross-sections 1500 feet long and extending from the ground surface at approximately elevation +23 feet to the bottom of the Cohansey Aquifer at an elevation of approximately -70 feet. URS GreinerWoodward-Clyde 4-2 I-Am
4.3 CALIBRATION Both models were calibrated to the 12/20/83 water table elevations that were measured by Woodward-Clyde and presented in the March 1984 Phase 11 Report, Ground Water MonitoringSystem. Calibration was achieved through varying the recharge and hydraulic conductivity parameters within acceptable ranges until a close match (i.e., within one order of magnitude) was made between the model hydraulic head along the cross-section and the hydraulic head measured on 12/20/83 and interpolated along the cross-section. The following table summarizes the calibrated model hydraulic conductivity: Soil Type Calibrated Model Calibrated Model Horizontal Hydraulic Vertical Hydraulic Conductivity (ft/s) Conductivity (ft/s) Cape May Formation (undisturbed) 6 x 10"' 6 x 10" Backfill I x 10" 1 x 10` Upper Clay 5 x 10` 5 x 10" Cohansey Formation (undisturbed) 7 x 10"' 1 x 10-, Silt at bottom of canal I x l01 I x 10-Hydraulic conductivities used in the model are generally slightly lower than those calculated based on field measurements; however, all values are within the expected range for the type of soils present at the site. Recharge was applied to the top active layer of the model to represent precipitation that migrates through the unsaturated zone to recharge the groundwater. A maximum recharge value of 20 inches per year was assumed to be representative of the Oyster Creek site. This maximum value was applied to the center portions of the models that were not completely paved or covered by structures. For cross-section A-A', a recharge of 20 inches /year was applied to the unpaved area near the canal and to the area east of the Old Radwaste Building. For cross-section B-B', a recharge of 20 inches/year was applied to the area north-northeast of the New Radwaste Building. A reduced recharge value of 15 inches/year was applied to account for portions of the site that are partially paved. For cross-section A-A', this recharge value was applied to the area to the west of the Turbine Building. For cross-section B-B', the 15 inches/year recharge value was applied to the area between the canal and the Turbine Building and the unpaved portions GreinerWoodward-Clyde URS Greiner URS Woodward-Clyde 4-3 4-3 I ,ROWCTSrqOo.2,,,,n,,,, d,~ I - ROMUS'/$ 2ýýon ýo lint.,, HIS. 12iý 1 11]
between the Turbine Building and the New Radwaste Building. Areas of the site that are completely paved or covered by structures were not assigned any recharge. 4.4 RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS The results of the modeling indicate: I. The Intake/Discharge Canal is the ultimate receptor for groundwater in the Cape May formation and Cohansey Formation in the area of the major structures addressed by this report (Figure 2-1);
- 2. A "particle" released in the groundwater from the areas beneath the Old Radwaste Building and the New Radwaste Building migrates downgradient to the Canal. This means that a discharge impacting groundwater in the are of the New Radwaste Building or the Old Radwaste Building could ultimately impact the canal.
- 3. The depth below grade of the Turbine Building and Reactor Building is not, based on available hydrogeologic data, sufficient to prevent a discharge from the New and Old Radwaste Buildings from reaching the Canal (note: a three dimensional model could indicate a different preferred pathway such as around the sides of the deepest structures).
Both models are based on historic hydrogeologic and stratigraphic data that shows that the construction of the Canal and the excavation associated with the construction of the structures addressed in Sections 2 and 3 has resulted in major changes to the hydrogeologic regime including the localized reversal of the direction of groundwater flow in the Cape May and Cohansey formations. Data collected from the historic hydrogeologic studies conducted before and after the construction of the Reactor and Turbine Buildings support this conceptual model. The particle tracking portion of the modeling did not include potential impacts of solubility, dispersion, advection, adsorption, etc. on contaminant fate and transport. These, and other factors not included in "particle tracking" could result in a reduction of contaminant concentrations to below regulatory guidelines and/practical quantitation limits. URS GreinerWoodward-Clyde 4-4Geie Woded-lye UR Pt~CS9O2 Ift I2Il9 rM
4.5 LIMITATIONS OF MODEL A numerical model attempts to represent continuity in space and time using a set of discrete information. The models assume that hydraulic conditions at the site are static and unvarying in magnitude and direction. It assumes homogeneous and uniform hydraulic and geologic properties of each soil type. The use of a two-dimensional model to represent a three-dimensional system may oversimplify the groundwater flow regime. Certain Site features may not be represented since they are beyond the extent of the two dimensional cross-section. The discretization of the model grid was designed to maximize computational efficiency while providing detail in the model; however, the coarseness of the grid spacing limits the placement and depiction of the model features. Despite these inherent limitations, the two dimensional numerical groundwater flow and particle tracking models calibrate to site conditions and reasonably predict particle movement downgradient in the direction of the canal. 4-5 - - ~M Woodwarcl-Clyde Greiner Woodward-Clyde URS Greiner 4-5 flOSECTfl.OC?.W*.,.
5.0 CONCLUSION
S 5.1 CONSTRUCTION AND STRATIGRAPHY This section summarizes the findings of Sections 2 and 3. 5.1.1 Impacts of Construction on Site Stratigraphy and Hydrogeology The construction of the Reactor Building, Turbine Building, Intake & Discharge Structures, etc. (Sections 2 and 3 of this report) resulted in the excavation of the Upper Clay. the aquitard separating the Cape May Formation from the Cohansey Formation. The construction of the Intake/Discharge Canal also resulted in the excavation of the Upper Clay. The largest impacts of these operations were: " The water table aquifer in the Cape May formation and the underlying Cohansey aquifer are in direct communication in areas in which the Upper Clay has been removed. " The groundwater flow direction of the water table aquifer and, at a minimum the upper portion of the Cohansey have been reversed. The groundwater in both the Cape May and the Cohansey formerly flowed east, towards Bamegat Bay. Groundwater in the vicinity of the plant now flows west towards the Canal. " A groundwater trough (i.e, a depression of the piezometric surface) has been created in areas in which the Upper Clay has been excavated. The elevation of the water table aquifer is now less than the average elevation of the Upper Clay in areas west of Route 9. The sketch shown below demonstrates the change in the water table elevation resulting from the construction of the Canal and the excavation of the Upper Clay. I -' 52~ PM G~reinerWOOOWarO-UIyOe UR5 brewer
~
UH~ Woodlward-C.ly~l
~-
5:-1 W~O
el. 23' el. 6 el. -14' NOT TO SCALE Groundwater levels in the water table aquifer have, reportedly, dropped several feet in areas between Route 9 and the Canal. Pre-construction water levels in the Cape May formation were higher before the construction of the canal and the main (i.e., deep) buildings. 5.1.2 Construction, Stratigraphy and Release Potential The features of each structure are summarized in tabular format below. The summary includes a qualitative evaluation of the potential for a release of radiological material within the structure to impact soil or groundwater beneath the structure based on data discussed in the previous sections of this report. The qualitative terms used for building release potential are: " Low: high positive groundwater head relative to the top of the base slab of the building; thick slab (>4 ft); waterproofing present; long equilibration time calculated in fracture flow analysis (minimum 10 yrs) " Medium: low but positive head relative to the top of the building; no confirmation of waterproofing present; " Higth: slab above groundwater; slab less than 3 ft thick; no confirmation of waterproofing during slab construction. These "qualitative terms" are to be used only in the context of this report and for this property only based on the data presented in the previous sections of this report. It is important to note that these terms are not intended to be used ad and indication of the potential for actual release. They do not infer the actual site conditions or the presence or absence of release vectors because:
- 1) No foundation inspections were performed (i.e., no fractures were observed)
Gremner Woodward-Ciyde URS Greiner Woodward-Clyde 5-2 5-2 rnorcrs .ON nr, - ly2IflQ, 2n in- ,-
- 2) All fracture flow analyses are "theoretical" and no quantitative fracture data is available;
- 3) It is not known if significant amounts of radiologically hazardous materials are or were stored in areas with the most negative evaluation characteristics (e.g., thin slab, no positive groundwater head, no waterproofing, etc.). The absence the storage of radiologically hazardous material reduces, if not eliminates, release potential; and,
- 4) There were contradictions between "as built" excavation drawings and later soil borings that could not be resolved.
- 5) These terms have no basis in any "regulatory" framework (e.g., NJDEP, NRC, etc.)
The remainder of this section evaluates the structures of concern. In some instances, the buildings or structures of concern have been evaluated separately (e.g., Reactor Building, Turbine Building). In other instances, structures have been evaluated as a group (e.g., the Exhaust Tunnel System). Reactor Buildine Feature Description Total Depth (Abs. Elev.) -29'-6" (52.5 ft bgs) Slab Construction /Thickness 10' steel reinforced concrete w/ 3 layer waterproofing system. Stratigraphy Founded on Cohansey formation. Upper Clay excavated. Head on Base of Slab Approximately 47 ft. Fracture Flow Analysis . Flow Rate: 0.080 gpm
. Time to Equilibrate: 88 yrs Release Receptors Groundwater.
Release Potential Low Turbine Buildina Feature Description Total Depth (Abs. Elev.) -6' to -8' for majority of foundation. -14' for tunnel areas Slab Construction /Thickness 6 ' to 8' steel reinforced concrete w/ 3 layer waterproofing system Stratigraphy Founded on fill. The excavation extends to the depth of the tunnels which is 6 to 8 ft below the base of the slab. The Upper Clay was excavated. URS GreinerWoodward-Clyde 5-3
Feature Description Head on Base of Slab II ft Fracture Flow Analysis 0 Flow Rate: 0.025 gpm 0 Time to Equilibrate: 271 yrs Release Receptors Groundwater. Release Potential Low Old Radwaste Building Feature Description Total Depth (Abs. Elev.) Total depth is variable (se below). Deep section is el. 3'- 6" (20' below grade). Slab Construction /Thickness Slab on grade with grade beams for shallow parts of building. Slab thickness varies from 8" to 1-6". 3' thick steel reinforced concrete w/ waterproof membrane in deep part of building. Thickness may be reduced to 2' to 2.5 ft is some areas. Stratigraphy Founded on fill. Upper Clay excavated. Head on Base of Slab 9.5 ft Fracture Flow Analysis . Flow Rate:
. Time to Equilibrate:
This does not apply to the portion of the building that is slab-on-grade construction. Release Receptors Soil and Groundwater. Release Potential Shallow Foundation: High (thin slab, possibly no waterproofing; expansion joints shown on drawings) Deep Foundation: Low to Medium: almost 10 ft of head on slab, waterproofing shown on as-built drawings; 3 ft steel reinforced concrete foundation. New Radwaste Building Feature Description Total Depth (Abs. Elev.) -19'-4" (4' bgs) Slab Construction /Thickness 4' steel reinforced concrete w/ 3 layer waterproofing system. Stratigraphy I-ounded on fill or on Cape May. This issue has not been URS GreinerWoodward-Clyde LIR 5-4 Geinroodar-Clde nors ---- _e,.v, in.,ii
Feature Description resolved because no excavation drawings were available for this structure.. Head on Base of Slab Not applicable. Fracture Flow Analysis Not applicable Release Receptors Soil and Groundwater. Release Potential Medium: Approximately 4 ft of steel reinforced concrete with waterproofing. No head of groundwater preventing release from impacting soil or groundwater Intake Structure and Discharge Structure: These structures do not readily lend themselves to the type of qualitative assessment defined above. Both structures have a positive head on the slab but,
- 1) presumably do not contain material (water) that is radiologically hazardous;
- 2) are, in some fashion, open to the Intake and Discharge Canal and so may not be amenable to the same type of fracture flow analysis as the other structures;
- 3) were not considered potential release structures in GPU's initial scope of work.
These structures were considered significant more for their potential to impact the direction of groundwater flow in the water table aquifer (they extend well below the piezometric surface) and in the evaluation of the area in which the Upper Clay was no longer present (i.e., Is the Upper Clay consistently absent from the Old Radwaste Building to, and including, the Intake and Discharge Canal. The orientation and depth of these structures, as presented on Figures 2-1 and 3-1 may impact the flow path for a potential release if a three-dimensional model is constructed at some future date. Tunnels and Other Structures The tunnel network is more complex than initially anticipated. There are six segments to the Exhaust Tunnel System. Three are shown on the sketch below. LIR-S Greiner Woodward-ýClydle 5-5 55 Il~CS%~2,*~ r *PiRo Jl[(Trs*ol* d*
~2f9 i*'*l/qg 4 i:1pJl4
To Old Radwaste u Segment A EXHAUST STACK D ~Segjment B Approximately 68 ft. There are three additional segments leading to the Old Radwaste Building, the Reactor Building and the Turbine Building. In effect, these form a single subsurface structure which includes the area in which the tunnel segments meet and ultimately enter the Exhaust Stack. There are some consistent features of the ETS, regardless of the segment:
" The floor and wall thickness is generally in the are of 2 ft. " The foundation of the tunnels are waterproofed. The walls are also waterproofed but the method of waterproofing could not be determined for all segments. " The tunnels generally slope towards the Exhaust Stack. " The head on the slab is generally low because the tunnels are only partially submerged beneath the water table.
URSGWC calculated the infiltration rate and total time to equilibrium for individual tunnel segments. The average of individual segments is 2.8 years. This calculation presumes that the tunnel segments are distinct and disconnected structures. If, however, the presumption is made that the segments function as a single structure and there is one set of foundation cracks from a single event, the equilibration time is much longer, approximately 17 years. This estimate will increase if the area of the remainder of the ETS structure (stippled pattern) shown in the above sketch exclusive of the tunnels (solid gray color) is included in the calculation of the total are of the ETS. Under this scenario, the estimate to equilibrium is in excess of 25 years. URS GreinerWoodward-Clyde URS Griner 5-6 Wodwarc-Clyde WiT9C2Vp*.efl W i
5.2 TWO DIMENSIONAL MODEL The 2-Dimensional Model (MODFLOW) was used to combine the known information on site stratigraphy and hydrogeology with the construction information (e.g., building depths, excavation extent, etc.) into a single working hydrogeologic model. MODPATH was then used to determine if a contaminant released from a structure of concern could negatively impact groundwater and surface water. The models were not used to evaluate those structures with a positive head on the floor slab. It was assumed that the positive head on the slab would prevent a release from migrating from the inside of the building to the outside of the building. The MODFLOW 2-dimensional models, therefore, accurately reflect the hydrogeologic conditions in the area of the Reactor and Turbine Buildings. This is demonstrated by the fact that an acceptable calibration of the model was achieved and the hydraulic conductivities used for the stratigraphic units are within the acceptable range of variation from the average observed hydraulic conductivities, particularly given the complexity of the sections resulting from multiple subsurface structures and their impact on local stratigraphy. MODPATH confirmed that a discharge impacting groundwater in the are of the New Radwaste Building or the Old Radwaste Building could ultimately impact the canal. Additional contaminant transport and hydrogeologic data is necessary to refine the model. 5.3 DATA GAPS The data gaps identified in this report are as follows: I There is no information regarding the tunnel from the New Radwaste Building to the Old Radwaste Building. 2 There is no excavation as-built for the New Radwaste Building. The depth of the excavation underneath the building could not be determined, 3 The exact nature of the waterproofing could not be determined for all structures. Gaps are discussed in Sections 2 and 3. 4 There are no excavation drawings for the Intake and Exhaust Tunnel. URS Greiner Woodward-Clyde 5-7
5 There is no recent groundwater elevation data that includes enough wells to draw water table aquifer contours across the entire site. The well network exists but is no longer monitored. 6 There is no groundwater elevation data east of the plant. This means the location of the groundwater divide (i.e., water flowing west to the canal vs. water flowing east to Bamegat Bay) could only be estimated. 7 The panicle tracking models demonstrate a release to groundwater east of the Reactor Building could impact the Canal. The particle tracking models cannot evaluate contaminant fate and transport characteristics that could limit the horizontal extent of a theoretical plume (e.g., release volume, release concentration, solubility, dispersion, advection, adsorbtion, etc.). The elimination of these gaps could be used to: a) create a more accurate conceptual model; b) better calibrate the mathematical model; and, c) better determine the potential extent of impact of a contaminant release. URS Greiner Woodward-Clyde Greiner Woodward-Clyde 5-8 5-8 r nomas,.,o.o,.v,,,,,n~.,,..,, ran.,,, ap.,.
6.0 LIMITATIONS URS Greiner Woodward Clyde's work in accordance with our understanding of professional practice and environmental standards existing at the time the work was performed. Professional judgements presented are based on our evaluation of technical information provided by GPU Nuclear and Woodward Clyde and our understanding of site conditions. Our analyses, interpretations and judgements rendered are consistent with professional standards of care and skill ordinarily exercised by the consulting community and reflect the degree of conservatism URS Greiner Woodward Clyde deems proper for this project at this time. Models are constantly changing and it is recognized that model executable code and standards may subsequently change because of improvements in the state of practice. The information and analytical methods used for this investigation are presented in this report. This includes, but is not limited to: I) historical soil boring and well installation logs; 2)historical water level measurements and maps; 3) historical reports relating to environmental or engineering studies; 4) as-built excavation or construction drawings provided by GPU Nuclear, and, 5) commercially available groundwater modeling software. NO third party shall have the right to rely on URS Greiner Woodward Clyde opinions, evaluations or conclusions rendered in connection with the services included in included in this document or any Woodward-Clyde reference document without URS Greiner Woodward-Clyde's written consent and the third party's consent to be bound by the conditions and limitations imposed by an executed contract between URS Greiner Woodward Clyde that specifically addresses this document. This limitation includes all draft and final versions of this document and all documents that include this document as a reference. Woodward-Clyde Greiner Woodward-Clyde URS Greiner 6-I 6-1 WOIEC7S~%O4OQtnp,,*.pd 2~2.994 3Rd
ý-D_
7.0 REFERENCES
Revorts:
"Analyses of Dispersion, Dilution and Travel Time for Hypothetical Radionuclides Spill, Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station," Woodward-Clyde Consultants, September 20, 1977 "A Subsurface Investigation Around the New Radwaste Building at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station," Stephen A. Mollelo, Oyster Creek Environmental Controls Department, April, 1981 "Draft - Preliminary Assessment Report, Non-Radiological, GPU Nuclear, Inc., Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, U.S. Route No. 9, Forked River," NJ, URS Greiner Woodward-Clyde, April 14, 1999 "Forked River Nuclear Station, Investigation of Stability Characteristics of Soils in the Canal Banks," letter report, Casagrande Consultants, April 22, 1972 "Foundation Investigation for the Forked River Nuclear Station, Unit I - West," A. & L.
Casagrande, October 1970 "Geotechnical Investigation, Geophysical Study, and Foundation Recommendations: Proposed Office Building Extension Site: GPU Nuclear, Parsippany, NJ," Woodward-Clyde Consultants, April 27, 1982 "Geotechnical Study, proposed Radwaste and Off-Gas Buildings, Oyster Creek Nulclear Power Station," H.M. Home, Woodward-Moorehouse and Associates, Inc., Clifton, NJ, February 4, 1975 "Groundwater Flow Calculations: Cask Drop Study - Reactor Building. Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Forked River New Jersey," Woodward-Clyde Consultants, letter report of April 16, 1996 "Phase I Report, Recommended Groundwater Monitoring System, Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, GPU Nuclear Corporation, Forked River, New Jersey," Woodward-Clyde Consultants, August 1983 "Phase II Report, Ground Water Monitoring System, GPU Nuclear Corporation, Forked River, NJ," Woodward-Clyde Consultants, March 1984 "Progress Report - Groundwater Contamination Assessment, Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station", Woodward-Clyde Consultants, February 22, 1989 dwa rd-Clyde 7-I 1212W4 2fld GreinerWOO URS Greiner I flOItCTSIq.O'Otvq.,*,,.,s URS Woodward-Clyde 7-1
"Summary of Injection and Pumping Activities at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Forked River, NJ", Woodward Clyde Consultants, January 1992 Drawings:
Reactor Area Backfill Details, Bums and Roe, August 26, 1965 Reactor Building Foundation Plan & Sections, Burns and Roe, October 1, 1965 Reactor Building Foundation Section and Details, Burns and Roe, October 1, 1965 Reactor Building - foundation Wall Elevations and Sections, Bums and Roe, Turbine Building Foundation Plan Sheet No. 1, Burns and Roe, April 21, 1965 Turbine Building Foundation Plan Sheet No. 2, Bums and Roe, April 19, 1965 Turbine Building Foundation Sections & Details, Sheet No. 1, Bums and Roe, April 20, 1965 Turbine Building Foundation Sections & Details, Sheet No. 2, Burns and Roe, April 20, 1965 Turbine Building Basement Floor Plan, Bums and Roe, April 25, 1966 Turbine Building Basement Floor Plan - Sections and Details, Bums and Roe, April 25, 1966 Radwaste Building, Floor @ El. 6'-6, Burns and Roe, October 13, 1966 Radwaste Building Sections and Details, Bums and Roe, October 13, 1966 Radwaste Building Sections and Details, Bums and Roe, October 13, 1966 Radwaste Building Waste Storage Area Fnd'n & Plan @ El. 23'-6, Bums and Roe, October, 13, 1966 Exhaust Tunnel & Fan Fndn: Miscellaneous Sections & Details, Burns and Roe, September 30, 1966 Office Building Foundation and Exhaust Tunnel: Plans and Specs, Burns and Roe, February 4, 1966 Intake & Turbine Area Excavations, Plans & Sections, Bums and Roe, February 4, 1966 Reactor and Turbine Area Excavation Plan & Sections, Bums and Roe, September 22, 1964 URS GreinerWoodward-Clyde 7-2 o
Radwaste Building Foundation Plans - Sections and Details, Bums and Roe, September 9, 1975 Radwaste Building Fdn. Sect. & Det., Burns and Roe, September 8, 1975 Radwaste Building Wall Sections and Details, Bums and Roe, February 1I. 1975 Radwaste Building Plan @ El. 23';.6", Equipment Fdn. & Penetrations, Burns and Roe, September 12, 1975 Radwaste Building Plan at El. 48'-0", Equipment Fdn. & Penetrations, Burns and Roe, September 12, 1975 Circulating Water Tunnel - Sections and Details, Burns and Roe, May 5, 1965 Circulating Water System & Intake Structure - Miscellaneous Details, Burns and Roe, May 5, 1965 Circulating Water System - Sections & Details Sh. 43, Burns and Roe, May 5, 1965 Circulating Water Tunnels Plan - Sections and Details, Bumns and Roe, May 5, 1965 Intake Structure Foundation Plan, Burns and Roe, April 29, 1965 OCGNS Site Composite Underground Facilities, Dwg. No. 3E-SK-M-0491, March 7, 1992 OCGNS Site Composite Underground Facilities, Dwg. No. 3E-12607-009, 010, 011, 012, 013,014, 015, 016, All drawings dated November 22, 1988 URS GreinerWoodward-Clyde URS Greier 7-3 Woadwrd-Clyde I~OC5O~,Iqv, . 22'4M
=*'-*-l*-'*:-*
- -J*.-{::f.*. .: 1 I -( . *,.{* *; * *
'..:.-*,;S
"_=... *::*:*
":¢;**
-* :-' *.--: "'- .-:=:;*-. * ::.*';::*.* *1.-;
FIGURE 2-1. INCLUDED AS FIGURE 2.4.4.1 IN APPENDIX N
FIGURE 2-2.N.CLUDED .AS FIGURE. 2..3.1 IN APPENDIX N
FIGURE 3-1 INCLUDED A S FIGURE 2.4.3.2 IN. APPENDIX N
Tables~ IAZ-
Table 3-2 Additional Hydrogeologic Data Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station CAPE MAY FORMATION Sourceý NaCI Tracer Test At Boring TW-1: Pumping and Natural conditions (1977) Note: This test was performed east (upgradient/sidegradient) of the operational portion of the facility (near Route 9). Presumed to be good indicator of undisturbed Cape May Formation (I.e., no fill). Groundwater Velocity (natural conditions) = 2.86 ft/day Groundwater Velocity (pumping at 6 gpm) = 18.5 ft/day Hydraulic Conductivity (K) = 66.8 ft/day Transmissivity (saturated thickness of 12 ft) = 6,000 gpd/ft Specific Discharge (natural flow conditions calculated using K & I) = 0.641 ft/day Specific Discharge (natural flow conditions using point dilution method) = 0.714 ft/day Specific Discharge (pumping conditions using point dilution method) = 4.62 ft/day) Londitudinal dispersion Dispersion Coefficient (D1) = = 4.34 ft2/day Transvere Dispersion Coefficient (D2) = 0.391 ft2/day Longitudinal Dispersivity = 0.235 ft @ gw velocity of 18.5 ft/day Transverse dispersivity = 0.0211 ft @ Source: Phase II Report Groundwater Monitoring System (1982) Hydraulic Conductivity (K) = 2.0x10E-4 ft/sec Hydraulic Gradient (1) = 0.02 ft/ft Porosity (n) (literature) = 25% Velocity (V) = 1.4 ft/day COHANSEY FORMATION Source; Phase II Report Groundwater Monitoring System (1982) Hydraulic Conductivity (K) = 2.7x10E-4 ft/sec Hydraulic Gradient (I) = 0.01 ft/ft Porosity (n) (literature) = 25% Velocity (V) = 0.9 ft/day i:\projects\9e04092\report\aquiferdata Page 1 12/12/1999
Table 3-2 (4* Additional Hydrogeologic Data Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station KIRKWOOD AQUIFER Source: Mooretrench American. Inc., 1977 Transmissivity (T) = 60,000 gpd/ft Storage Coefficient = 1x1OE-4 Hydraulic Conductivity (K) (using saturated thickness of 250 ft) = 32 ft/day Specific Discharge = 0.01 ft/day Velocity (using assumed porosity of 20%) = 0.055 ft/day Vertical Variation in Hydraulic Head, 12120183 Cape May and Cohansey Formations Shallow Well Pair Sand Cohansey Difference Notes (abs. el.) (abs. el.) (ft) W 3-4 3.74 2.92 0.82 Well 3 Screen: 2 ft fill, 8 ft Upper Clay, Cape May excavated W 5-6 8.78 3.09 5.69 Likely north of Excavation Area W9-10 7.8 5.96 1.84 Well 9 Screen: 9 ft fill, 1 ft Upper Clay, Cape May excavated W 12-13 9.31 5.14 4.17 Well 12 Screen: 9 ft fill, 1 ft Upper Clay, Cape May excavated W 14-15 10.84 5.07 5.77 Upgradient of Excavation Area Max Difference 5.77 Min Difference 0.82 Average Difference 3.66 i:\projects\9e04092\report\aquiferdata Page 2 12/12/1999
Table 3-4 Water Table Elevations - August 5, 1999 GPU Nuclear - Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Casing Reference Distance Distance LNAPL Water Well Number Length Elevation to Water to LNAPL Thickness Elevation W- 1A 50 16.29 20.8 ne -4.51 W- 11 20 16.12 11.35 ne 43777 W- 2A 50 13.35 18.25 ne -4.90 W- 2B 20 13.63 8.36 ne 5,27 W- 3A 50 10.91 15.62 ne 4.29 W- "1'8 20 20.1 7.9 ne 12.20 W- 4A 50 17.85 13.22 ne 4.63 W- 48 20 18.02 9.32 ne 8.70 LW 1 21.6 22.25 NM NM LW 2 47.82 22.63 18.16 ne 4.47 LW 3 21.31 22.32 10.5 ne 11.82 Note:
- 1) GW elevation = (reference elevation - distance to water) + (LNAPL thickness *0.9) where 0.9 = assumed density of floating product.
6 Table 3-5 Fracture Flow Rates Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station New Old New Intake Intake Discharge ETS Seg. ETS Seg. ETS Seg. ETS Seg. ETS Seg. ETS Seg. ETS Seg. Radwaste DATA Reactor Turbine Radwaste Radwaste Structure Tunnel Tunnel A B C D E F F Tunnel Total Flow Distance 50 46 43 45 43 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 NA Constant=40ft/3.38E-5 ft/s 1.22E+06 1.22E+06 1.22E+06 1.22E+06 1.22E+06 1.22E+06 1.22E+06 1.22E+06 1.22E+06 1.22E+06 1.22E+06 1.22E+06 1.22E+06 1.22E+06 NA Constant (Kf) 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 23.9 NA Slab Thickness 10 6 3 5 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 NA Constant (aq. Flow dist.) 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 NA
=slab thickness I Kf 0.41841 0.251046 0.125523 0.209205 0.125523 0.083682 0.083682 0.083682 0.083682 0.083682 0.083682 0.083682 0.083682 0.083682 NA Kt = num/(denoml +
denom2) 4.10E-05 3.77E-05 3.53E-05 3,69E-05 3.53E-05 3.44E-05 3.44E-05 3.44E-05 3.44E-05 3.44E-05, 3.44E-05 3.44E-05. 3.44E-05 3.44E-05 NA Constant (crack length) 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 42 NA Constant (Crack width) 0.0104 0.0104 0.0104 0.0104 0.0104 0.0104 0.0104 0.0104 0.0104 0.0104 0.0104 0.0104 0.0104 0.0104 NA Constant (# of cracks) 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 NA Constant A = crack length *crack width
# of cracks 1.7472 1.7472 1.7472 1.7472 1.7472 1.7472 1.7472 1.7472 1.7472 1.7472 1.7472 1.7472 1.7472 1.7472 NA Total Head 25 5 9.5 0(4) 14 4.5 10 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 NA dh/dl 2.5 0.83 3.17 NA 4.67 2.25 5 3.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 NA Q=K(t)*A*(dh/dl) units = f13/s 1.79E-04 5.49E-05 1.95E-04 NA 2.87E-04 1.35E-04 3.01E-04 2.11E-04 1.50E-04 1.50E-04 1.50E-04 1.50E-04 1.50E-04 1.50E-04 NA Constant (convert to gpm) 448.83 448.83 448.83 448.83 448.83 448.83 448.83 448.83 448.83 448.83 448.83 448.83 448,83 448.83 NA 0 (flow) in gpm 8.04E-02 2.46E-02 8.76E-02 NA 1.29E-01 6.08E-02 1.35E-01 9.45E-02 6.75E-02 6.75E-02 6.75E-02 6.75E-02 6.75E-02 6.75E-02 NA i:\projects\9e04092\reports\buildingdata
U Table 3-6 Foundation vs. Water Table Elevations Oyster Creek Nuclear Geneating Station New Old New Intake Intake Discharge ETS Seg. ETS Seg. ETS Seg. ETS Seg. ETS Seg. ETS Seg. Combine Radwaste IDATA Reactor Turbine Radwaste Radwaste Structure Tunnel Tunnel A B C D E F A to F Tunnel Bldg. Length (1) 140 173 53.25 (3) 85 183 120 45 35 92 141 48.5 51 51 unknown Bldg. Width (1) 140 271 43.5 (3) 85 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 unknown Building Area (ft 2) 19600 46883 2316 13252 7225 1830 1200 450 350 920 1410 485 510 4125 unknown Roof NA NA NA NA NA 13 0.5 16 17 17 19 19 19 17.6 unknown Elevation Bottom of Roof NA NA NA NA NA 11 -1.5 14 15 15 17 17 17 15.8 unknown Thickness of Roof NA NA NA NA NA 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1.8 unknown Elevation of Top of Slab -19.5 0 0.5 23.5 18 0.5 -12 0 5 5 5 5 5 4.2 unknown Elevation of Bottom of Slab (ft) -29.5 -6 3.5 18.5 .21 -1.5 -14 2 3 3 3 3 3 2.8 unknown Slab Thickness (fl) 10 6 3 5 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ,2 2 unknown Elevation Water Table 7 5 9 10 4 5 5 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 unknown Head (Water Table to Top of Slab) 25 5 9.5 0(4) 14 4.5 17 7 5 5 5 5 5 5.0 unknown Total Volume below water table (ft3) 490000 234415 22006 NA 101150 8235 12000 4500 3500 9200 14100 4850 5100 41250 unknown Conversion f13 to gallons 7.48 7.48 7.48 NA 7.48 7.48 7.48 7.48 7.48 7.48 7.48 7.48 7.48 7.48 unknown Total Volume (gal) 3665200 1753424 164602 NA 756602 61598 89760 33660 26180 68816 105468 36278 38148 308550 unknown Infiltration Rate (gpm) 0.079 2.46E-02 8.76E-02 NA 1.29E-01 6.08E-02 1.35E-01 9.45E-02 6.75E-02 6.75E-02 6.75E-02 6.75E-02 6.75E-02 6.75E-02 unknown Time to equilibrate (min.) 46394937 71133168 1879857.6 NA 5863460 1013666 664699.31 356088.9 387741.3 1019206 1562043 537298.6 564994.4 4569808 unknown Convert min. to yrs. 525600 262800 262800 NA 262800 262800 262800 262800 262800 262800 262800 262800 262800 262800 unknown Time to equilibrate 88.3 270.7 7.2 NA 22.3 3.9 2.5 1.4 1.5 3.9 5.9 2.0 2.1 17.4 unknown (yrs) Notes: (1) Only that portion below water table (2) The water table is above the bottom of the slab by 5 fR;however, the slab Is 6 ft thick (minimum). Consequently, the water table elevation in this example is 1 ft below the top of the slab. (3) Building not rectangular. Area = (55*45) + (168°65) (4) Water table is below foundation (5) Water table elevation is above the top of the tunnel; therefore, use the height of the tunnel as the head above water table. (6) For Old Radwaste Building the calculations apply ONLY to the deep portion of the building: i:\projectsl9eO4092\reports~buildingdata
. .. 4 C. ..........-..
Appendix A Cask Drop Study - 1996
Woodward-Clyde W Engineering & sciences applied to the earth & its environment April 16, 1996 6E04626 GPU Nuclear Corporation I Upper Pond Road Parsippany, NJ 07054 Attention: Mr. Abdul Baig
Subject:
Groundwater Flow Calculations: Cask Drop Study - Reactor Building Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Forked River, New Jersey Gentlemen: Woodward-Clyde Consultants (WCC), has completed a groundwater flow and soil piping analysis associated with the hypothetical cracking of the slab of the Reactor Building in the Cask Drop Study for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. This letter report is divided into four sections: introduction, groundwater flow, piping flow, and conclusions. Our review of geotechnical considerations is presented in a separate letter-report.
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Under the hypothetical scenario of dropping the cask of fuel rods onto the slab at the base of the Reactor Building, the cracks formed in the slab create a pathway for the entrance of groundwater into the building. Because the slab elevation is below the water table elevation, and because the elevation of water in the building is also below the water table elevation, a positive inward pressure exists through the cracks, resulting in inward flow through the cracks. The conditions causing this inward flow will change only if the water level inside the building becomes equal to or greater than the outside water table elevation. As shown in the following calculations, it would take approximately 8.7 years of water seepage through the cracks for the water level inside the building to reach that state. Should the cracks in the slab form, two separate flow mechanisms will occur. The hydraulic gradient across the slab will induce flow of groundwater through the cracks. This groundwater flow is limited by the hydraulic gradient across the slab, and the flow rate of water through the aquifer, according to the hydraulic conductivity of the geological formation. The groundwater flow rate into the building will gradually diminish over time as the head inside the Reactor Building rises, however it will be a long-term seepage effect. A calculation of the groundwater flow rates through the cracks is presented in Section 2 of this document. Wayne Office P.O. Box 290
- 201 Willowbrook Boulevard
- Wayne, New Jersey 07470 201-785-0700
- 212-926-2878
- Fax 201-785-0023 t:\PROJECT"S6E04626~LT2.' ,OC i0.-16-961 "n
April 16, 1996 Woodward-Clyde Page 2 The hydraulic gradient across the slab also will induce stresses in the soil directly below the cracks to a level higher than the strength of the soil. The saturated soil will locally lose all strength and will flow as a viscous liquid through the crack until it reaches an equilibrium. This phenomenon is known as piping, and is expected to be a short-term, relatively small quantity flow. Piping flow is limited by the hydraulic gradient across the crack and the soil friction against the sides of the crack. An approximation of the piping static equilibrium is presented in Section 3 of this document for the purposes of establishing the maximum extent of piping flow. In general, piping effects are estimated to be short-term and minimal in effect, with high soil friction limiting piping to flow within the crack. 2.0 GROUNDWATER FLOW 2.1 Assumptions
- 1. A simplification of the groundwater flow scenario is presented in Figure 1.
- 2. The aquifer at the base of the building is hydraulically connected with the Cape May water table aquifer. (Backfill area around building did not include replacement of upper clay layer following construction.) This assumption is conservative because the Cohansey aquifer has a lower head than the Cape May aquifer. Therefore, by using the head of the Cape May aquifer, a higher gradient exists below the slab. The head in the Cohansey aquifer is higher than the level of water in the building and would not cause outflow if used. Using the head for the Cohansey aquifer would reduce the flow rate into the building.
3
- 3. Material below the building slab is Cohansey sand with hydraulic conductivity K '&lxlO" cm/s. This is conservative since aquifer tests on both aquifers indicate this value is an upper limit of aquifer conductivity.
- 4. The head in the water table aquifer and therefore the head at the base of the slab is 40 feet.
This is a parameter taken from site measurements.
- 5. Water leakage from the cracked torus will result in an initial head inside the building of 5.41 feet. This is a parameter taken from simulation predictions.
- 6. The water in the aquifer will instantaneously fill the 10' thick crack, creating a differential head across the crack of 24.59 feet. Because this analysis is steady-state, this assumption allows the aquifer of water outside the building to become hydraulically connected with the water flowing into the building.
I \PROJECTS\6EDA626\.jTR.2.D0C 104-16-96 wy,,
April 16, 1996 Woodward-Clyde Page 3
- 7. Flow into the cracks will not affect the static head of the aquifer. The aquifer is very large in comparison to the size of the cracks and is not expected to experience drawdown. This assumption is conservative because it allows a maximum gradient over time.
- 8. Four cracks are created with width 0.125 inches (= 0.0104 feet) and lengths of 42 feet.
This is a parameter resulting from structural simulations.
- 9. Any piping and running sands have stabilized, and only water flow is taking place. Water flow is a separate process from piping flow and will occur once piping has stabilized.
- 10. A hydraulic flow distance of 40 feet is assumed as a representative flow distance through the aquifer. This is a conservative assumption since it represents a minimum flow path distance from the water table to the base of the building.
2.2 Approach
- Flow through cracks is equivalent to flow though fractured rock using the following formula for hydraulic conductivity of a single fracture (Dominico and Schwartz, p. 87).
- p. gb2 Kf - 12pt where PW = Density of water = 62.37 lbm/ft3 2 g = gravitational acceleration = 32.2 ft/s b fracture width = 0.125 in = 0.0104 ft 2
P 2.359 x 10.5 lbf-sec/fl " Flow through the aquifer is governed by the aquifer hydraulic conductivity. K aquifer hydraulic conductivity = I x 10.3 cm/s = 3.28 x 10-5 ft/s " The hydraulic conductivity controlling flow into the Reactor Building is governed by the aquifer hydraulic conductivity and the fracture hydraulic conductivity according to the following formula: 50feet 40feet 10 feet KT K Kf where KT = the total effective conductivity of the flow regime near a fracture 40 feet = assumed travel distance for flow in aquifer 10 feet = travel distance for flow in fracture LAPROJECMS6E04626\LTh2.DOC / 064I6-96 / wyn
April 16, 1996 Woodward-Clyde Page 4 50 feet = total effective travel distance for flow into the building 0 Flow into the Reactor Building is computed using the following formula: ah Q=KT An-dL where Q total volumetric flow rate A total fracture opening area = 42 feet x 0.0104 feet n number of fractures = 4 dh head drop across the fracture = 30 feet dL length of the fracture = 10 feet 2.3 Computations 0 Fracture hydraulic conductivity is calculated as: 6 2 . 3 7 1bm g lbf (0.0104) 2 pt 2 ft .Ibm. g Kf = p,,12--gb -6
= 23.9 ft/Is 12.2.359 x 105 lbf 2.s fti 0 Total hydraulic conductivity is calculated as:
K7.- 50ft 50ft
=40ft 1Oft= = 4.1 x IV ft/Is 40ft + oft 3.28 xl10-ft /s + 23.9ft/ s K Kf
- Because the aquifer hydraulic conductivity is much smaller than the fracture hydraulic conductivity, the aquifer hydraulic conductivity is the controlling factor in calculating the flow into the Reactor Building through the fractures.
- Flow into the Reactor Building is calculated as:
0 = KT A ah = 4.1 x 10- ft/ s.- 42ft. 0.0104ft-4 24.59 ft = 1.76 x 10-4 ft 3 /s = 0.079 gpm
-aL loft
" This volumetric flow rate represents a high flow rate at the initial time of water influx. As the head inside the building increases, the head differential will drop, thus decreasing the flow rate. 1APFLOJECTS6EO4626\LTPLL0Cc 104-16-96 / -p
April 16, 1996 Woodward-Clyde Page 5 2.4 Sensitivity Analysis
- Since fracture flow does not govern the flow regime, aquifer parameters are the only factors that could affect flow calculations.
- If aquifer hydraulic conductivity were 10-2 cm/s instead of 10-3 cm/s, the resulting flow rate would be 0.79 gpm.
- If the water did not fill the cracks instantaneously, the head differential would be 34.59 feet instead of 24.59 feet and the resulting flow rate would be 0.11 gpm.
2.5 Conclusions Even assuming that the flow rate is constant over time, and that the flow rate is as high as 0.79 gpm, it would take approximately 8.7 years to fill the 140' x 140' Reactor Building to the level of the water table. 3.0 PIPING FLOW 3.1 Assumptions
- 1. A simplification of the piping flow scenario is presented in Figure 2.
- 2. The aquifer at the base of the building is hydraulically connected with the Cape May water table aquifer. (Backfill area around building did not include replacement of upper clay layer following construction.) (see section 2.1 for a description of this assumption).
3
- 3. Material below the building slab is Cohansey sand with hydraulic conductivity K = 1x10" cm/s.
- 4. The head in the water table aquifer and therefore the head at the base of the slab is 40 feet.
- 5. Water leakage from the cracked torus will result in an initial head inside the building of 5.41 feet.
- 6. The differential pressure across the slab is 34.6 feet. This is a conservative assumption since in actuality the flow through the crack will only be subject to this initial head differential and will be reduced over time. By using this value it assumes that the soil will be subject to the maximum stresses.
IV~ROJECTW'h04626\LTh1.DOC / 04)16-96 1wyn
April 16, 1996 Woodward-Clyde Page 6
- 7. Flow into the cracks will not affect the static head of the aquifer.
- 8. 4 cracks of width 0.125 inches (= 0.0104 feet) at the top and 6 inches (0.5 feet) at the bottom, with lengths of 42 feet.
- 9. The piped soils are at rest in a static equilibrium. No dynamic effects are considered. This assumption is conservative since additional head losses would occur as a result of dynamic effects.
- 10. A dry density of the soil, p, is taken to be 2.0 g/ml.
- 11. The friction angle for the sand, 4, is taken to be 35 degrees. This is a standard value for sand against concrete.
- 12. The coefficient of earth pressure (lateral pressure) is taken to be Ko = I - sin 4 0.43.
3.2 Approach Assuming that the piped soil is at static equilibrium in the crack, a determination of the height to which the soil would rise inside the building may be made. Using the diagram in Figure 2, the static upwards and downwards forces can be balanced according to the following force balance equation: Fb =W+ Ff where Fb = the upward buoyant force per unit length of the crack W = the weight of the soil in the crack and above the crack per unit length of the crack Ff the downward friction force opposing the upward flow per unit length of the crack 3.3 Calculations In order to determine these forces, a number of definitions are presented: g gravitational constant p = density of water = 1.0 g/ml p = density of the soil = 2.0 g/ml Pb = buoyant density = p, - p 1.0 g/ml 7, = specific gravity of water = pg IAPROJECTSW\E04626\LTR2.DOC 104-16-96 wyn
April16, 1996 Woodward-Clyde Page 7
- specific gravity of the soil = pog = 2y.
Yb = buoyant specific gravity = y. - y. = YW S = friction angle for sand = 350 Ko = lateral pressure coefficient = 1 - sin 4 = 0.43 z = depth of soil inside building to reach static equilibrium Ah = head differential across the crack = 34.6 feet wt width of crack at top of slab = 0.125" = 0.0104' W), width of crack at bottom of slab = 6.0" = 0.5'. h = height of crack = 10 feet 2 A = area of crack interior in cross-section = 2.55 ft
- The static forces may be expressed in terms of the above parameters, according to the following equations:
Fb =y. Ah w, W= y, A, +y,wz Ff =2hCKoY(z+5fi).tanO Substituting in the above force balance equation gives:
- y. Ah wb = y, A, +yw,z +2hCKoyb(z+5fi).tanb Substituting the above values gives:
y 34.6'-0.5'= 2y , 2.55ft2 +2y .0.0104'-z +2.10'-0.43-0.7-5' y, +2.10'-0.43-0.7-z$7 Simplyfing and rearranging gives an expression for z:
-17.9 = 6.04 z z<0 A value for z of less than zero indicates that the friction force is sufficiently strong to prevent any water/soil mixture from moving completely through the crack and into the building under the process of piping. Soil will flow into the crack, but it will not have sufficient buoyant force to push it through the crack to the other side.
3.4 Conclusions The above static analysis for piping flow equlibrium shows that even under the gross assumptions made, with no regard for dynamic effects, the calculated value for the maximum height the soil could reach in the crack as a result of piping is less than the height of the crack. I'PROAJCT-*AED4626ALT.22 DC 104-16-96%wyn
April 16, 1996 Woodward-Clyde Page 8 Under this conservative scenario, piping will result in a filling Of the crack with sand, after which the sand will stop moving and water will continue to flow through it. 4.0 OVERALL CONCLUSIONS In assessing the overall risk of radionuclide mobilization through the cracks created in the concrete slab under the Reactor Building, neither the piping flow nor the groundwater flow calculations indicate any possible method for water to leave the building under the conditions of positive inflow pressure. It is only after the overly conservative estimated time of 8.7 years, could the head inside the building even potentially reach an equilibrium with the surrounding aquifer, and even then only should the head inside the building rise to a level higher than the surrounding aquifer, could outflow actually occur. In addition, molecular diffusion of dissolved radioactive substances downward through the fractures into the underlying aquifer is not possible while there is a positive inflow pressure. In summary, the findings of the groundwater analysis indicate no risk of radionuclide transport in groundwater out of the Reactor Building in an eight-year period following the cracking of the slab, assuming no further disturbance of the slab and no further hydraulic loading inside the building. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Attachments cc: Dr. Stephen C. Tumminelli, P.E., Parsippany Jay Vouglitois, Oyster Creek Mike Laggart, Parsippany I'PR0JECT5S6EO4626\LTR2.DOC / 04-16.%61-yn
Figure 1 SIMPLIFIED DIAGRAM OF GROUNDWATER FLOW Ground Surface
......................... il~ ii;
;;;.....;i::i;!;;
~'*::i l;;;;
o!......',i'!ii :: i~ii ....... : ; . ..... ........ . ....'* .................... ..... iii ,........ iii i','
.... ..... ,> /
~ ~ ~ ii ii~ ~ i*ii!*i~ iii 3 0i!iii~ ~ :.....::.......:.:::::::::::::::::
~~~ii~ ........
iiii::i::::!i ::::;i:: i i; , .,. . .................. :..... ........ . .. Cohan..ey.Sand to7Sa.. ... ................................. 4 0t .......... kIpeoecftX6We4626YVuiw1 .cE
0 Figure 2 SIMPLIFIED DIAGRAM OF STATIC EQUILIBRIUM IN A CRACK FOR PIPING FLOW Z1 .....5... " of Slab Ff 10' LJ *Ii 6 "...... Base of..Slab Pitt.
........a.d Not to Scale Fb I?~ti$sdu~ieO4826VIgum2a.c~
Appendix B Boring and Well Installation Logs
1973 BORING LOGS W-1 to W-19
WOOD40ARDAIOOIM4OSAE Is ASSOCIATES, PSC. WOODWAKD.MO11OUSM Is ASSCIATES. MIC. co"AVIIN Sae40 ~a40a.m CIOA-lIMQ lO.ttoISII iINbC&.Lflll r&S LOG60OF6616 -.- S ..... ......... L.OGOFBOENG WI 0v'to C,..- M08. A.- S--~a 73=7 '! EE DESCRIPTION SCALE fiM P P~~'I IIPFMAIIKS I u.9011 COt m Lf. Ton. M- _Non IS.t4 ~ GS A th~nGht..15100AIS.ItC, Rantoottc tn.tem~t*.n' Ino. I-a~~ S?] -
"I.~lTttO -Wt 1o,I .. .. 7n 734 It-on I Aw
)13
- d. SI1.ntntb
- o
-25 Z CASING
+
o*.
. j I
itot flit I to"~ ftJ c-I ..... l*Ib
.. --- I
[ ff CA&WISin 1540Lwa a.41 FV Nt - , H. I 2 6 R 2'- S-: PILLo.,t "L 04- n. -- Wft. flto Ot.SAma.- . WI -W S.i It -1 Mq.
'I ..42 -
-d-A- tt-2-
90-22 20.29 - 2- 35 SP SM:-t . -IFt SNo,
- IS6 o w- t tot SAND.
32 23 33 24 Is SP 554 not. too o I.. SAND. lnot
--40 CAPEMAI IS 22 422 ID 77 IA 14 12 fta-o 1.17Ih I2 I
N.-- &.A-- O MI" -ý dt& ItIh W I.?Q
'-* "*---+-- ,,I- I)
.41.--*
k k J 4 ,--dk,,*l I-. Is 6.cnmd &aDItI AS n.9V. ~1405 It4 75 is es,- 2 3 11
- II U.2 ipt CLAY."* ,~t wiop4 HW E
"- . a. a w m SIllS. 40 ijfff CLAY U 4.
65 U fHHI1.75 ft 12 IS 6"n..IMS3.15htw 166
.6.96
£ SP . Ih-OtntSANDS.nf I t.
IN -y - OW.9At14 S CD.ANSEV T* I I,
-j FIG.A-I FIG. A
.~hIi',______
WOOO.ARD.MCOOAOUSE a AV=OIATES. PNC, WOOOWARD-&I0oRHOLM a ASMOCATE5. PNC. CIIIIWIt-4 ast0.**ft AND 0.otoOTSh I. CIPI.U61.6.111.84 -0 86OL"OTSf LOGOF LOGms- OF SWIM-I IY I ELEV. oDesRWIeI* IDOPqh MALI 1.4~ ~ ~
-L-cw*-
PNOW flt RLmL C nu_______ II IELIU ACuAw1ON
-Ia.-4liii 4. 44-4.I c.&. .nwo ta. WcI H2 H 99 U. -- -
KIUKUGOC "3-, 1 ft.4k . 73.12 ft -0
,. . 34 a6
,2I-
- -76-: a3 -"I-
-u
-I 77
.-711 0.4.q IILOft
-. 1"--
zi
-is Sp. SU: -ý -ý WW4 ho I-e LAW. urn w -Il.-
a'
-Il.-
U
.4
-Ia-
-z-
-Ia_
7. 14 U 75
-a,-
Ut I -21 m. UI
.4 U 111 U
9-
.In-in 3,
do U is SP 10:W, -p. - 0 06ýAND. qp- iWL m 4.w
.I-OPaGAWIC CLAY LOWENCLAY s
,A U to W-1 u" -wo- 140jbh U IQ
,21
--- I ý Im-FIG. A-2 FIG. A-2 "
WCOMANID.MOOMOIME & A111OATU, USC 11001IRIMCAOCOMIOWIE A AnCIATES. PNC. ccmAlm. 11MMo 4110AWRI VONWITNGI G"ISIgt S AN G COLOGMTS LOG OF MO0M-63t LOG OF 310561 W2 REMARKS 0,- Cý Ikd-Li*ov Taim*m* km,* m P.- "Coal nm-- m.L LIE a - 0 I ILEV. otmIWTk O~flH SCALE liii 3h.a~ .153 inn.. I, CASM.. L-. T-----. N-4 UCD U*, , MS. £ Oi,-,. ,SI I
,11.6i 3"A f, W.NI 5.Wd, UI.ý - il W4 ft I lmI 4h dwo C~300 I @' b oI 2-17
_______________________7 ________
- .. I, I x.
H - 2C*L 9--wiuwn LM LaG 240-
-41 42.
t2 2-a1 '4 24-4 I Nw fr LIO S 10 12
,14 SPINM FILL 13131.6-I"61l a M fi.S AND. -~ w -. Mtl 7
7 2 2 3 U 6 32 'IANft U- f 14 P*aZAN Wtb- SAD W a2 3I 0- . v- N Wooa3.n 14 32 32 U 24 47 ft I.... ZI575ww 70 32 LPS1aN3 dI fo.0It SAND. -N 3 2A f CH OH: m.o. pW-3i 0.A Y. 6 b*s "N 5,.3.1- W 001G4016 13 N as SU" U 31 SI 24 SAN Umn CL0.AY ftý lima 12 I IV J ftS Lo liN I Poo RDi I r ~1 11IG.A-L ALt FIG. A- 3 III
WjooWApV*,oMrnoUS a AsODCIATE.S.
*wOOwAjARDMOjqHUSE l AOCIATES. NC.
Crat.mm,.0Iw .- a4t SAC@IOGN' rONSULIý fflO ft I R*ES &oaNs O*OGICSS ýV- -- LOGOFw __W2.-,3 o""ICc. LOCG OFDORM m _____ W. -. . 04fl14 ! 1.16mu DESC llION T OF WAL FFT t,,,= C.ANý S4.m PLUND ,iM=C I! ILIEV Iela tiom I'll ESMANKS 4.1d-4 __________E lft."I 312. 4
'I Jll ',/=i LJ.
M'= UA304
- -7 SAMU. oi .4.
13C
-'m, U
3'1
-111r
-1"-
I- SAND.~ W IlI41
-433 it 13-
- a-
-a-i-U.
-op, 4AI1 I -
-m4-
-a-
-a-
-a-108.
SP-S:-L a . La DWp .0 b4 , ORGANIC CLAY LOWER CLAY I I
-'I-
-304 U4 two ln N RN- u
-3m-6 - 3i
-'0,-
EM. .00. .1 1 I i r I I I I l FIG.A-4
WOOD3ARDAMORHOI.Mf & ASSOCAYEg pmt WOiA9014000t*OE A ASUMIATES. PNC. coAT'SMA.owfas 0R801Bl roftaftle" G604fs5 "D ag0006'5 LOG OF 0w"@ W al"AM2S cv- 0,h N.0 ______________X=7 Len -0 Si 44- Mi. tc 14 . m l T-h --
"-40UII. d121g
,11.311
-I
- . .4 3/4 .. bhe IW. 4 U-1 Bmý, ~ ~ f..in
-",~ ft-. 0.8u h CA1-- 1 3WI . I - N4 A. how.
UA4
-4 32r-I 1 OL'u., 140 th I ......
-T 30O 1.
L - I D.2.0 ft CeSCRIPION 3" 4%a ft 1.77 2-2rU I 3L-: 2 3-7 ,.22 ft I A-W OP-IN W. " w mwý.£414. 40-: 4- . ISif SP- S at EL -. -itSM CAPEMAY SO, Ont I P.0- 1.19 ft a
&L-is a--,Loft WLI Ml 2.0 ft SUM
-h Ir WAn L0612 P... 2Aft W-5*. -w SAM- I 17 I.110ft to
-P at ft-w 16MO to P.WIM) l'q
'4 4 -~ + D0.12.0 ft J ft IND I
-as ft- LIPS 4
04 -0ON -. o q-. fOR iADCCOAY
-n f- SJCXnn z Ipplil O.AY h~ 1.17 ft ft 101...17 belO ft II IIs p-.* lft IS m ft ji jI FIG.A-5
-J F I Ii.t.t I I I'
MOOOWARDMOO*00HOLOU II ASSOOA1U. WiC. IPWIRPM04OMOORHOUS IN AS=OCATLS. INC. CONSULT 0418 i MEa"D 91104.44011 tOW"ITING ENGINEESS AND GEOLOGISTS Lm (I - 9 1-
~rr L.
4 tLEV. D(ESI*PTIM 1CL C4MIN@LN FLUIO I - P.0 Im# U',.P f~ I SOM.f [1
.4 I---4,"
-4 C-.MO "ONE ILWO LOMLICI 72 INI-- SAM ft6E a EM V - SIM .i* SPI. 11-d . A..~f 0- 401 IND 73_
6! IJ-3 x RKoa are ZIan .3 IN-N IU At
-S1111l IE.'N lan., 111 ft k
'.W. I A~f SWUM ms VEt-dIa
'7 A ~ aw 4..e.
ft, U-22
- b. N.- I- ESD. E INlit.a ISM4 31.370u IN~d S two &AM~. aINN-d 1.17at j2 S mhI~m "
f 37 i I OEMI.E at IN, lAS OR I I eI ANN W26 END: NIN IN WN'. -a- f ft I
- 1 FA. lim
- ..I owbm mm 3
I I Uf"' f-fw IN mI ftap ok. amasf .Wb I ~A~1.411% I II SI I I I
~If~ A e I uIl. ow-I
AO*U~gOS & ACIOATES. UW. INOOOWARDANOCaIROUAM & A*OcAIU, NC. Cý3 Swam"WAMCWO00U rOSWIc I MG -4 1 S "AD &4QLOOMIS
&=OF~ W l *I#i**X3 LOr OF WMW 04
[.¶Lf i ; 01- Qý "-- P.- S-k,
*ri "J* Iir.i nr ult* L tick IMLUSCa as
- III ILI.
I w MCALf
.]
i b.~*LW WfW *. l, a,, I-* I LMi Dbdk" 6- -- fIs
~hi.b i ills"~... 3 1.-. 34 t, "37/1. I &..%A iI I-2 w !II a.
S4 ý - ft.ý ýi 6 h.f kts mat CSC.
-t - 40 13 S 0-W I.M-140 lb 31D IILI 4 MCM'I0 La 7-:
U-,
'7- I2 so 39-27 SCL 27 A.ý 2,0 6, 27 If S~..1.17
-P-SVWE
'4 179*.1 ate. ..
m 21 112 22 s.. - SAMO. S 14 U p CAPEMAY 12
'4 712 17 22 P ?ftL, I'
7 UI f-pSM... d- Z7mOa AUft 7 R.-d IA ft U I L20 92 v, I ml w? WA lie- t f 21 Is Ii 0H 0- p F.sA2ANG&MK CLAY. ot "S-' WeS I SANeD.
.. w I
tWpSRCLAY 2? No Uw a U I a I U a of I ph. ft--y d.a~ I ftsl 2.0 f
.1 4
4 3' I I I
- L .1. L I FIG.A-?
110=11AM040004OU~ & ASSMATE. siC. WOODWAaO-hMAHOUWE & AZIUMATU. Or-COMLvins 144AISP "D tCm CC.WJLIO 8ft08GM AAD 4NOI01Ms 04 Lao OF osiO LD)GOF O5MW _____106_ . srnsaa [AMA- 012IA In""
~S *1151 U~
091" 0, m 21.5 SMALI I.~. *It EL DgEtRPntI
- -7LI ~III CM-MONLOW2 HAN MLswiC
-i CU-4 .~. PU I
-q ~t .9 ~-p 1:
'IT
.b U 4 Ty 4OLV
'fts b we t 11J5h isll 76
-I1 7,
ON.*am "I qn VANm: . '42& 7w P.~ 0.54ft 5---.sf 20 I
.s U F' 7a 31 K
Ice 101 .71.71 A U4 N I 3' U-12 LM.- -p. *,.woo 0505510 CLAYbe. 104.45 b-~f OGANKMA 104-b,. *A* I0 37 1 U.. N CLAY 455 s 1P 6,R~54 W5AD I I. -: I I. I -I..______________ FMG A-8
WOODWARD4AODOMJOIS GoASSCIATES. IONI, wo JAIuDMOOMO b ASSOCATES. WEC. CONSUDLC llUElft "D 000 Lo SOF S SIN-.w OF Wo" WA manama.s
-lýLfkOTO 3----- pýNM IM5TH VALE 44.J.1.. u~ 1MM. lIt, ft~ ~ 4 r7 to"Ia.b~7 04- Ot. --LOFN OIGWAIE q 3 CLA,. Wih1- nMm DbIMS~T-h "I. w-'"
2
- p~
-~ - -. . M 713 SO,
~~~~4t~~-"
.I-a.-Sf .. f 4. LW zp!- I4.
a I I -. lwa 301011,& NM.&L '1 M - IC 140 Ib k A-4. WI'm 35-- SCAL 33-- I B 47 II 3 1ý &ANDMM. 1- b 42-Z 43-Sp.s F ILL ww b ? Swim. t 12 ai 41 IQ to 7 U 13 0 71 0 P-k FL- W~.- -10f-ft 14 52 t 17
.i104 f S U a
74
=flbf S1,1161 t a so1 t -4k
-21 tbn II&AD U9 1a F U4
-24 du 4I 21-: U
.1t 31 3
114
-32 PM. 2.0ft oCLM I.. II LII N4; I FIG.A-9
WOODWARDMOOMMOJUS So ASUCIATU. OPE. UOOCXAFAMWmO ILOlG
& ASSOCATES. SIX.
rnau'1ý 6"~@S .0 abo"Oo.41 agS 9.4411"D GOiOGO4T C"U. OF4011111,8 -o us ~OF ooo____ mEMLEtS u.~ SM. m~ 0 c.a. 11 ELI~ EkLMV i-i*M+*-~ mf~@SN' 2-u n - - I 12 Is 77 SPVA: o-. i
-d S6AND.
sp am; firSA D- M sIso ýRCLAV l weN 1 -1 1 ________________ FIG. A-jo FIG. A- 10
WOOOWARD.MOORHOL(BE & AMMOIA VIA. WW. nmr ArMOO4Oý t& ASSOCATES.1WNC CmpLitTINGtilVNMA sAD.BLONTa LOAW OFiitt L.~ T..i2i. is US.SCU~ILh 0 ItII §LEIL 01 P154 UCMI itIMASKI 1~~~~I~~ WA,-. MAIi "-I Ttb -,m.d -3' 4
'5.. 4. to ,5 5.4ff bst it itiit 9 Ill CLAYitb- a-:
I n.~t t I cit. N it. it ~- __________
-W st -&t 1W0 M~tl.
a-
- -Ll .' m* Du-Wht, IIToIm-tLEVDESCAPKW -NL WNIM r1111" ____ - -SI. -
-- a-.-
S M.7l1t.44t'p.
-- I -
a--
- 2- 5, Ift- S"6 it.WWY A
m -
-04 )__
- 2-ii-42-I-. SAW4. ni- W
- B- MA: .b. SAND IL, N 4,-
I .. .55.d
- 5-44-
- 7-4'- I
'2 - it-
'it-ii P-itSm -mh p-.A.. LA.5. .t- it, 04-CAP* MAY
- a- S.- U Us-Pl.k5. 13,4 t w
- II- R.-Ne S* it 40-SPS. 134 SANDsi-t.,4
-I)-- P- 23i0 U- I
&19,
-I. -
=3alit U-
-5,- '7-
-z - U-U -
U Cm-fx. ....,.,,-5.,OMOAMIC m - t- NIN AD a, CLAY M.4 I- i-.W
- .0 -v II SAN
-N-4.mP CLAY 3
-a- a I
-a-
- 4 U 26 1a H -a--
LI -a-
- 35-it 8 6
1 L it
.1 U 3 a-
'I FIG. A-II
OwAPD411MOORUSE & ASSCIATES, IWC. WOMWARDOM&IOlMCU & AMMcATU. 1110C leasala as AND GoItolo0Isi C rctmsw ecasULT..O INGINIOS AM.ND @06LD14, OF w LOG _______ LOGOF WRIM IN r* REMARKS ILEV. DESCIFT1. DEPTH4 TN~~~~~~
-""týLLCMAUi I
KAU I i E I I I 73 [ 'M 75 a' it S
'a E 77
* ~4* ~ 1*60..~,
- hit. Wm wd l
'3 al
'U hi 'U I-in 41 p." a U
*a ~ MIbO. a~ -
~6t.*~ ~t- -
a 1 1? Sb U LOMP CLAY r U L *7 4 t. ii. bat at MAq.I r I r I I , ,
~Ir r -i A at'.
. m - j, I
WOODWA*DWORM4OLAU &*AMMOA UW. UOO~A*~in~m &AISMcATFs. MC. mAIvw sma*um AM DO-
,rnOU RuRAft*q 1 OLOGNTS LOGOFWmom~ja__
7~ LaG0 OFswa S M L- I-*-.. EbwJ.M. MS a Am I, IL" S*CALE RE",M. LWinS I PI* I*mr*m*, kv_ K 5 ".--- MW3 I 1,,
-Z 4h 04M~§-%f 7.1 ~ '
1-4? 1i
- -. 1411MSONL- 2..= 4 hM 7 4 AR j Sm I O 2-W.
OLW- 6 04.oCýt--Wft.OPWW*4C 0. IV - F U-Mom 30. *A L . , , OEM 35-U- 2CA 7r-. U - SI*.PA FJLdV-EE?. ..0Mo M 7- - ft "-- " 3 4 1 .2 7 CO.ANNIT 0- SAND. Wh M-14-CAPE MAY of GAM. AMSUK U Sb? 9gM . I&" " o V. &A. ~~~ID SLAND. ft.-. 122h A I,
'aI
'hi Md-4 Mw b-*5-a 0 ."L.
U I'0 04.044 M5 u..OMGAMIECCAV U I urnE PCSAV -Al
-m I
B
-L I I I. I I7 i. ill AE3 -~ .-.- ~ -.
E A_- EQ
rI WOOsWAnDAKORHOUImE St *ASSATi. M I'om, Ao4uooMWM& A321cSATU.00E. in"atga gnmo no, BmMaM eONA TOGNOO 8uI. USWgloSOLOOTIS LOGOFmm I - LO FDMWw O0 ' C- pt-PH w 7:1:110 I ILIM osn04 01MR0 I -.. T I 1l1- . -b' 23 - L tacaaS 'I 1--- .0 .. d.4-* I I I l 1 70 6. on1 I lllb. UM CAST I.X 04.O 0H A bSuw.011CAPPC LA
-S. -~ i-s-.. =11. I - - 0I. w - -w g Own b.. W Iv fs-m 1.... mlI I I I I.,D I Mo4Qb w w. A.A.w Room=
FK IS hL.. 2 14 4,5 SPS:FILL dy aw,g i SAMD .. -W. ul - 2 P.- la. ngno wit. - ou-H4.4U-134 ib 10 52-In ft- SAND. wen wgi to t 4k&5 14.5 Rn-n 1.11 f a I; "I"". 14 is 27-SAMD. nw W, - -d 1
- is I
pfg SAM. Is . d"oa ..Web 2D IRN2.01h SAND, s 54 R - 2J1 5
.22 I
21 1.5 22 Pugh 2A to
- 04. 044 -. ý Irr.00GAHIC CLAY NAl
-rp R S ýL I
J 31 I 3 3
.L.L..L _________________________ .L.....1 I I LIrI I r I". A, i'4
3vOODARD~0W0141CME & AcIN)ATE. Or- ~O~A.M0O40~A ASSMATIES. mc. lmL204 2240m 0~tMT04n AueeGWIN a"D cIOL~OrnTS Lao OFso" I m I p LOG OF-S R S§LJ mwni a. C-.. T*e-td *mrk
'~(f~ C444,.. .. ~ am. it~
_ !,ot -4
.A 1 -rba I, -
.ten I -,-,. .424, 424 -
*44444~
~ ~oII t 4...~
I MOP m
. ~
- 3. m.r-1 IV" ~ FI I
P4.-"..04 31-24 Moh 01 4-C-. 3-30 I I 34 2-
-40 2- lFW.0* fw4.SAJN. 4 L1I I U44 IM 4-IIW4W v044Mhs
--44 5-
*2 lLL FI~ cb.. 4 M ,.
I! B 77 to. AkD. V-o-f- 4 PI,4 3AU, 4 Ii I UAf I." a a
-M J
3
-4 H'
-u
.4m .4
-a is
- 44 -. -
La :
.1 A.
SPm.: SAND. 4, so 4.- 5.5 4044.4Ilk Ut44-450 -4" 4,- 3.0 46-.-~ 4.- wit 3-17-32 fdl § CLAY Vý -12 Mo, 4424
-24 U
Ph 2.0
-3
-v
-u
-a
-u I U41 20411f
-17
-. 3 I
& - &. L~ I - .B I I I FIG. A-15
WCOOMARDA1.MOOLHOU & ASbOcIATf. Mr. WAOONARD4111DRI1MoS A ASSOIATES. PC. winTlllC O-MM9 acW WAU cono~IL , 44 Sal l~0 LOGt~ oS LOGOFODING Win a- I I E. [iT (I.- ý - P- - 'Thl7 if 10pm i...., I0.caIw. 1 SIN .w AS t '1" Ue.,,,,. .... . .t,4 .n~mmraLn cAS U'PIIS. OCCIII . aicIC pfiý-4WOMT I I 'I I it- M--- i- 170 1072 1 loc Imi 0.41141 1.~d 3 7/S~.4.T..-..~. 1 T h In. ~.. ,~a, ~ t ~,Ad, £ ft Cc-...ý mom.- 371 34M4.. 1407£ 303. 1. NEMINIMS-
&LEV. -m Cý NLMW PLLPOLCIM,aTti 3
.; II W104C II31) 1 l 71 SP SW' FILL Ov. vo-t ti. LAND. -1 -wh dtf I-1 d.OI-,. .. - aI 17.3 Cm-M.- mI. -
-I a
13
&AND.ft kC-I-d CAPE MAY of 12 12 a
3, l2 sm 11c.-2 I..sW w-w SAND. ~ sWtl I.2 r17 - CH.-1OH! I~ ,.. .ORGANDCCLAYI
-ý P-1 ift- W" t- . d Id I~f" CLAY 21 11-m .01 w 27 7
20 z I Eft f4b- m2qIt .1
- _3-
=27
-3 L.L...L
-- I - I FIG. A-16
WoO~aARD&O0ORIK2LSU & AOOATU. WIC VOaIO mooanm.U r-A AScSOMTO WW. W43Lvnsanuu am AID, *O6.W3 6o*mm.Twe sum536ea "D WO43O-LOS O00031 OW Lor.O 303100 WHI0 DEPTH___________________ 0.-~I %WY31 2 CMA u~ AKlso~oFUD Pu- ID CIAPI; WX7cmrW LY~m - CAI .D IUD ý M Ion 1073 _____________________________________ 4-
-- I I. 0.111041 TnS .m.4 1- I--,,- .61.431IN
- - - - -. 3 7i1..~ Tn. .MA Ml CA4310 4. .634-,6..1106110.1 100010 LU
- 3. ~- 31-I D-W 24 W, I......
I I~hr*I I S1.310 w.n FLUIDfl ový OF____________ I...h~~~~~pMAL 39-PD--~
- I- W1011 2. 304 -hý.d&3 f d 37-
.11 -
- 2-
- 3- 1 0 WIN.-w -.- 00p. w IFO- SANDu..
--= x---
- 4-1116
- I- ftm...6 Pill ft 6- 1ft. 342
- 3-SP - IM SM:
f - WNq O - 1-0..h LIP3 12.2 - 3- 311-
- 3-
- U- 310 014
-It-SAM~ft0 CAPEMAY
-U-
-U-
-I'-
P.O. . W10 I- -a~
- I.- 6 1eft.10 ft amll,
-'3-pwi.i- a Ism 5*531D.3wtsm
-Il- Ilk Wi - II-
-'I-4M2.
- L.O. II-" 531.3t 04 .06.m:~-jwV..RQIAJHICCIAY 1
I UPPIP CLAY h,.- .1 Per
-H-L161 J
I R.Owt at1L4 f F .42
-a-
-a-11-3 I. 611 LAM.~m.0~*4~~fm uays AC Om
. -m O
21-P.* 2*0f B L r....1LAA...L FIG.A-17
WOOAflD.OOR~MOE a AMOMA1U. Or- WDoWARoAMo00ous( a £SMCIATEU. 111C. COQWILO 11*0iUIfl* "DO@40 oMn CAMWT asmam amGOD01 LOG OFSAi~+/- LOGOFOWIG 1"
= m* --
WT = LiW flt!-
-. a-73CIW I*
r amr w a ILI cagcrw WAUS
¶1
.t 1.1-t U4
-em-ý -- -- I ý" -
~~..@~~I Mk.~r-~ aL- f U..I.
. ... L.... tA* I 140 th AI th-ho IIR!I ~AA.Sis SUNI. WYA N C0.
cn si.. SUN 3.~. gUi U WAL P.N 2A h SP. N Fiji. *"-o .. a - ti 3'a 2 SAM4. -s 43 40 S
"a -I P~m 2.0 ft 1IL3 01-.d 3.0 43 B
I 7 PwM API.Uf ft- LOSft
~
I s sp tP LN 43 CAMt MAY wl- SAW.SD .01.92 ft 44 It I. I sp -iSM pF..- LAND.
,V- is~o
.0
-P 67 R..N P"14 fto 1.5 WSa"I
-d- -
7.1 101
'F 2a,tN phaNS 6.0. bM-g Is4 Or Iwo ID ft A-"IAMPI 04.o ýA Viui.OSGAMC CLAY I
I I FA.- 2AN.ft 1.711f I ft-s.d 23 A1 II -7 AN2.Ofl 1l 33 01- lief A IA____________ FIG.A-18
wvoDWARD4@ombHOLME a *ISOE&A112. USC. 01O0DARDAMOaORfLME & AMDCtATUE. PC. t00,0.S..-a a-t" a.4 adcnr LO F WC UO ML a I! M6- d.014. n a- I 116ý Ld. %W. &t-.C VI A.. Q. I-- ie ~I 7' ft0- .1 wl a- 12fd.O u"
~SPM -:=, t-9 SAND,
-d CAMEMAY - 3 Aý 205h
&I m m i
.7 Eide4 .ebm 17.01t NSA Peal a 5.-
l0~ 21-U- I F [ '7 L It ___ I I ,
-- L- ILII FIG.A-19
WOWARA30MOHOSJE &AUOAMU. Ot WOh.MAFmW A A8MW*ATU. UW.
*Nmvimvim~wmsflin CIONmUTEM8NOI3Sf A* SIOLOSWU LosOFUsUmm--
Lfl~OS nU OF Wn _ 12 R- 6-di 7IM a "m olcoKS 06.~~~~~~~~~~f. -33INWnft . ."7 I mi ~ iIii~-- OWp 0 eaP. JS ft l a./o.-. .- -w- .- SAM
-~-.- I
*L.. i s. 13 0.
I oer ' - - ii
.M,*,* ,.L.llw m- _ I I - IL a
*mm 3L-1-. 60- SAND)
.. SS I- - 140 lb I m 30- H-K.
-I S.u a-.o - -
1~ iiiiE AMO nOS.w~w LOWW. wý lm- - I. lSAMS DM up.1 pm CLAY SAND
-Av - -- 0 A. -ý - m lft LIAs I 2-I low -L -. ..... a 2-I a-I I
I I sm~- .S. -d
" OmLAWS S
I a- Ia N lf -f. AD. AMSbp-W I 1-
'I-: .4 ba-Ltm I
I-I Tow: 'va-G-o OLT I 'as L low. po CLAY p3.ww CLAY I Gms CLAY mk b-o OW- t- a-
-d --
31L 1-3 po CLAY wft 9-~ 0,p 2fA I Ii 21 T.. L"ER CLA 35 Tw
- a. CLAY -
FT 31 32 Smw:p., a- LD Tw - CLAY I . 1 1.
- L 3_ - __ _ _ _ __ _ _ . II
. I I I-b. A-'U
WCOOPARD4M00RHOuE S mSPOcATm. UNC. UO Al.mOý4 & ASOCIA1U. SAC. CamLT~mommO mm
=mm R~O om.Mg t*a0 aaw lMwem*sft toMK*T-o w *"Dl A~mA"S
*IL~l n *.( rnmu* sWI LD I -Wt2
-- OF m--- m
!i
-- I---- , ,jImsmj t!1 ILE%.
D lil sCALE m . opWYLcs 4 --.-
*,~., 0 'm.
a: CLAY CSfl~S - i~on - I ~i *L. -.- VA ~ *~ - -
ýur. V1.Q-,"
LI ~ v F.h-Y WALE 54 .ifAMw .. t9UWYN U v
- SAND c
-- 4-4 0 1 bU 9 9W W.. ~A iJ
*-.A . o Iw "NO.
LAND a 2
- -Y -~
1- S~AM I ULN WW. pw-- ,N..
-0 LAND S..
*50W~d 01 341 TlmmY . -in AS SAN
-I Son wf- I-. LAWD 43-1 -.- - PAD-
-S IS -2 I
.5 I
-s I Top O b.M-yL FAND i a i -S p I
a
" 4 _..
=,-d7 a
I IOMAI.ISE
)"-oft, I i2
.... If l5.1. - IN*55* I) A (l li1b hI 225 "IS *h . 9. wr 1
"-I"
-aD G0v CLAY 0,U. -
o#VW ti.. SANDS
.- o M 6-: - C-Id
-To V"CLAV IS as. 9W .AV
-4' I
1 UPPElA CLAY TO.W wftI &N I ~~~22~
-a- ik1"W: f .AY I
-a-V"- 94W S*AD
-a-L__
&-; p S Taw ir,3o
~2I -
-a- 5-5am.
rA J Top;.ý to.. SAMD III I FIG.A-21
VIo ARAMoOOMmMOUE*maATU* A& UK. F WloOl~ARDAMOO~kHOI3! & AtOC2A1U. IC. cncoeý moawi W15*o~ow renam OF sASG.LS~ 6 0,.o. O- Pc.-. 15-:.RW G~A" 72=0 a I! BestV ot.TIiON
-- In ThL1 fLtt45.-
OtUICSeS St..-S. - E S...L5.... IPS *D3 1Ju* Sob.. sonkm o I-IM 141t m ISPL Ia SW I F ~~SSGY"K S 46.SS..I aff I-. SANDp Ii IA is 955 S a
- S- S ~ a
['1 14 is 4 in I.. I F Apýc-.. 0ý, .1 5
°I~
w: ow 0.4V iJ8~ AIK/ c-Se F- S~0 c-SD J1~
-252.. I..SwAND I, *T":. 6- G& Al I am-- VW CLAY .
P"w 5.5&&AD S- 1...q 13 S. p v.- d o 36-r I 312 AA 1 11 1 I1I I. FIH.A-Z2
wOOOWAROMOOMMOUSS &ASOCIATU sic. I'll AOMOA)4OA A ASO)MATU. PC. wm."Tw 9.0mo &. mminur CONOLTWOI806MSBa"McOGNOLOGIS LOGOFWRUOM w 14 I SAWPLS I *nAll" Of PTh Oiýa c,_. Paa S-ia: ,*bSq WALl moý IBM I on- o diNb 3*.I li lb.~- 545SAM r-,s- . 0... um Mf472 ft w Ii-s !E is.t!!I
-IAW.
a-Ss 14131b !"11G.T Opal.. SCAaS gI. M C. 6M C S.. - U.. - - I-. . . S AND sa-q -i - as ... in.n. ml... £450 ow- *4- SAN Y5M- - . - M.ADI It COKANSEv I 12 S I - 2-4 i '7
*4 I
II I- Lam I a L=I -...- 4
.,T 14 I
12
"]
I uCLAY 9-U B.- Gs- CLAY TM. wft CALAV r."V CLAY U . dIa 5 I- SANSD IN-
- uCLAY I..' TW. W". h-SAND pa. la am I~. Va.CLAY - Wt Is.. wa CLAY p5CLAY 15 W"~I- SAPID II S /
8 /
/
~1 SAND 1~ ISa BAle Is. pay 7-m: ý - B84 33 . I - I I 1 .1
- FIG. A-23
WOA.DMOORMOLIE &AIRBIXATI. SIC. WOODARO-MNOORHnLIE A ASSOCIATES. INC. ccLY smom UE eCOtXLY@G 606MIGNS "D GIOLOG.,rI LOGOFKOM51 116is OF WASM W m p
"-V m
.1R-;-
.1 --
l.,i 7aJ
? I' ICI! ____________________ J n...J.4!i A%7 owms..oLt Ltout.fix.,
[
, - I 'a
*314 -4 111r
*-d 0- M." OWl .. , .y IL Im. S.U 4 12
...... i ....... I..5.
l -- F I ft. 3alow Ia S 140 10641 clýO
-ý ~m L -
37 Ml .f0I..S~ 9 w wP ftwoaf -T 2 3
- en - 4
-42 SLI_
-1 14Aqo -15 I f iI S
S 7 m.46...4 S I N'6 I Ii S I [ I' II Ia a ap- -"f A U 14
~SI -~
1414 614am CI.AY 'S 143W, l~-3
-Il I.
I s m RayI.?f fia. Lk50 114.3 A 27 U"FBRLALA 35 I
=
L.... I I E I i i I I i i -j r iF.A-24
WOODMARDAMOOM40LME & *AtIOCIO W- OMWARD4100MOM a ASSOCATU. IW. MMATEMM i ammo0OD~ VrW,T1 .. Sm sl"UD dIO.OGUT LaG~opemom-l
- Is
-WIN _______________4I~~~ IAE ovY CI k P-.. Smls,, LO Ma OF, Rk-& W4iky.
S.. Ls.1.oPIW.I 8i IsiI I om w-0114Ii DLIJRWJ ________________ I = n . ilt-i______________ m
ýo m.
-" d.~aa-mw mb.n I- 1--J
-a-I 4.1-1.-I 2
Y&b - .~ f- LMQJ a-.. aI // Y4~ -... f~-.%AND
/
1,
~ . LAWND- -YR~ -
a--. I £ 1
- - .ý S l~CI-0, O . - O- . II I A I G..sft .n ai aA C Ia i
I
,I I A0' 6ý.1-
/ T",: W CLAY
/
I
- Ii-..
7
- i0 AY AI.- CA
- lP: W" CLAY H9-i - lauCLOAY V" 9. Sw AND W laP
- w. CLAY UPPE CLAY0 OW w - CLAY Ua" lap CLAY TOP: pay CLAY I
-I
- 7Wmp w CLAY I
i b-=~ paYCLAY 1pa CLAY T": W" C.AV I 2/ r
- Z I III I I -I. A I F'lG. A-25
WOADWADMOORHOI.SE NoASOCATU, M. r r UtD4AOeHOLI & AS3WLATES. WW com"Tm SAMON AN GI.*@U CEMM&m GOMEEaEA AND as0,0601"f LOGF0100010Z W% 1 REMARKS (h,-. C,..A P.- SWME Rd, b.444. 7 ?~O1 4L:I Ollow c~am ,a.intm.*Im. 6 Wa.I1674 *lOOýt of" Z4,- ld...q EE.p - I1 II i ~SA ~K~iAA Y .... cA*.~ In l-S m - - OLa-L-E a I~Mm. I IAGwv 1401b 30m Sk-. WIS -kAsSa Lo-v L ELM Delow"m I
- _3S W -U-E - % MLAND 41 7 Iq I 44 46 6
1 IS I T-mb --f -JL S 4) fa a I 46 IS 1-3-
/
6 9- V.: 0- $ SAND TOP u..CLAY 6-: v" CAY -n%*
.0 W" I- SA14D 33-G, cLAY.... A~
I 1C4 ECLAY I- f CLAY I I£ S I TM: w.'
. CLAY M,.km
- p. CLAY tssSAAG
'6 b-: T: pw UIS CLAY WtwA
.0 V" O.
In* A2"D MISSD t Ji I .4
/
7
/
T;. p. A CLAY V"~ CLAY 6
.4
* " ' I
-'b A_ UI I I rI u.w.6" "
WOODA.RDANOOPA40E A ASSOCATES, Mc mca~~o~wsa4 ASSOCATES. 01C. m..n1C U43W ^.a 6110 UO .11111 LOOF55 mea t new I, LI-01 lock"", OWN III 4117 := 232 --. -
".. ", SitI II-SC 0
-L 31 a- SW W.~O OtMO. ~ 0 C5 c~4 .... ,u tm. ElLa I gI 89I
- 10~ WOW 50 lOW
-- a - - ~-
40 J 41. A 12. WaA .- - to h.e SAM Y~ - to 5 SUM I 6
ý ypo:-~
vw %mS3 S 11 I-~ sw S Um: C*ANSEY 47~ I TM: V.- *-SAM1 II 4.- m v.- --
-u Iat t:4 a a . A 47 lO" 4% W." fi-*0A
-'S 13- :4.0 i
- I, To ;6 V SILT 10.W;V653 Am-g CLAY IV 7_; " 3&A h4*ND Gsw CLAY ým Wf.- W v" ta- oW I
Aaw- -a ft4.30A 7m wvt O
~2. I-IPZ
-a m w.V CLAY lop Ii a-lu h-. s. £0 iou. 4. 5*
J I II I FIG. A-7
WOOcWAR".OOmHOISE S AUDCaATU, DlC. WOWMRAIMOORb4OLSE a ASOCIAMS MlC. cm"TOM ofiamasAmb "Du cOntkwmo ONG-awms "a 080O~OMIY5 Ln6~opmoSl 0-19 LfOO~OuG OFs*ra-. I I I ii. Is~ !AýF" "Ift"1 Iw"- , DEPYY 0.- C. I- RM,, [ ,sImiiIj
$CALI Il Jul so. L GILaV Tri I----W 23kao- -4I I ft--- 5-L * ,*....,-. ,* I*
9 ION to ckuw "M 3'- Ow.vwwq 3'- Jill Is.-p -a~~fts imggg 140 ftI mi
-' m CEM -o.o - -I-~~'~" -- 37..
6.en- m
- ~ ~V bw en.. ~a, - -
I-a-. 2 440 a Yam- - 0 to SAM A
*..nM. - ..
f-LADE I a Iawe. V- P.. $ANe 2 I Ia 43-a I S i w" - 0-. "e I Ia
'I U
U
'4 F" A.l:MI U
1I6 ý, d. I Aw*.,,. O.#. .4 1... rawCLAY I ~ 6 Orn.CLAY
- lap. pWvCLAY
- ~ ~ *~~
6 row CLAY CA
-l .4m ap TOP rap.#-- SAMe - orm COAV 4k.-- Or CLAY .4 ,*o I
I A 1 I UPP5~ CLAY I
- 7ap- v.. fr. Lone F I 31 8-
~ ~Tap:V OrCA h- G p~ LAY r/A Top: F"Wr-* lAND
-J IJ---
FIG.A-2z.
1976 BORING LOGS TW- 1 to TW-3
WOODWARD-MOORHOUSE & ASSOCIATES, INC. SHEET IOF.- LOG OF WELL 7
? Gc e--I I7CO
., E'r TOL#'JI ,AJ.
~~
t~" b~'LL,~c.Co. 'T 7!~ O r.
,Lrc"- / z r No '~~
S44 6 P% 6, (smA)
%,4#TH Fi-JE ro.
G. 4-1 4) b#Ae
WOODWARD-MOORHOUSE & ASSOCIATES, INC. LOG OF WELL-i SHEET .:.;,OF2. DESCRIPTION rrA-j f~ F"rV
`ý,V w) TH TH lv 6I L7 Z-01A1,Jr (Vm j~
Ftf"-7 I 7-4^ý
- cz 6 o9ov I/ F S,4 A.' b Fie" ' Z, f4 C 4 4r C1 4
- C8 4b, Pvc-. wisrH
/OFT LOA-'& S 4 sr 10rr'.I1 r
- 21. Fr.
WOODWARD-MOORHOUSE & ASSOCIATES, INC. I LOG OF WELL 7"_) - Z-. SHEET IOF ._ I oy-rtf~? cr-'cf tAJG -757(_4oq _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ LACZY rvweJ=pjlf' 7 E, / ,Acow " . taS** .. gO.eL Da..L tM It 4() 2 lJ.j SP ~ ..
- EV. 1 1 CON- T ' t -I'PLE CASING ELEV. ; DESCRIPTION pH DEPTH. EYF- I REMARKS BLOWS FT. " 41c TIVITY FT.
ro -.. , Lo& or-Sole I.'v& I AoLVA'r') I i~. p P lb - 11 - I - . - a*t - 4 - I - 4 - J. ~
WOODWARD-MOORHOUSE & ASSOCIATES, INC. " LOG OF WELL SHEET aOF ;- 7THiP4 ('40,J)Ff P)41Our-JC rU,4(WArci Il#JsLLL-' 4I.
)o ;:r ko1c scj~uo )3Tr Bor-YoD,- ?"
Z .1,0 Fr'
I WOODWARD-MOORHOUSE & ASSOCIATES. INC. LOG OF WELL
-L-*-, 7 _-- v c -, e',c 7 IAXrC 'J sl7ic oF AP4 PrI LS0& OF I
p U
I WOODWARD-MOORHOUSE & ASSOCIATES. INC. LOGOFWELL SHEET ýýOF*: I I I I LI S'TIFF C-o,_ FT.IDa F,,AJ
-)
.V,' ( CH ) %.-'
LI ,
¢A y l
(r L vi ITH Pf LI F~o,i i, .- TE ,*m ,,v i ,"Z ' LI I,*,,MLLF.b 4- IN. jLb. 10 Vc- ,JIrif LI Fr Lo-AI Sc,'-?JN A.4.0 7b zi.o Fr II IR I
WOODWARD.MOORHOUSE & ASSOCIATES. INC. LOG OF WELL 4 SHEET I OF (-e,?' " -ci ,.i, 't 1i G s C'cI c,
*7 fff, N or.J E 1'o Si~t ID N... ~..I' -
**?'~ ~
2 T'Wj I ( *LL FT. I I I I I I peL
WOODWARD-MOORHOUSE & ASSOCIATES, INC. - LOG OF WELL ELL) SHEETS OF~ C, CON- SAMPLE DEPTH. CASING ELEV. cc 0 0 2 w DESCRIPTION DUC-TIVITY REMARKS BLOWS FT. FEET U JS~
- '7 bA -RN G4,t-;-
CIA y 237 S75 4-.
1..* WAflflWAF~fl..Mflt~RWflhI~F It, A5~OC DATES INI~ 4 LOG OF WELL T SHEET ? OF ,, VJ.*,. * ,-____ CAOVZ L:AM,&T)vrAF FlNL "to /x mb. ý._..bn TH ii<) 4 t~.jb. pv'L ii wijrrH to Fr p
"-o 4i.o F7-p FINEL QkCiLCL Vý4*P* s
" AHr~f1 I So Rf A3 C- TL-eA,f'-lJAr!,-
I
'I Iji -- I- - I II TW4 I.
UNPAVED PARKING AREA 4c a: cc ASSUMED NATURAL TW-1 GROUNDWATER q FLOW DIRECTION 0 r9 TW-3
'U ui 0
,-FENCE FENCE MAIN GATE ACCESS ROADWAY NOT TO SCALE FIGURE A-1 SKETCH MAP OF TEST WELL AREA OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR POWER STATION WCC JOB NO. 75C409A I
1982 BORING LOGS BE- I to B-3 PE- 1 to PE-8
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING BE, SHEETJOF 3 OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT, EXTENSION SITE 23.4 81C4136 A E. FRITZ AND ASSOCIATES, INC. C. PUENTE 2 MARCH 1982 3 MARCH 1982 TRUCK-MOUNTED AUGER 51 FT, 6N --
*""0"' HOLLOW STEM AUGER ,,,t 16 70 CASING "ewf 1- 17.5 F'--" --
ICASING HAMMER WEIGHT DROP SSAMPLER 2-INCH SPLIT SPOON VERTICAL SAMPLER HAMMER IWEIGHT 140 LB. DROP 30 IN. N. C. SCHREIER III 7 , Il j 115 DESCRIPTION T 2II ,I N.- ___ ____ I I +/-L a .,,.
~ ___
REMARKS ____r6 3' fine rounded gravel at ground surface 2-F r 3-Ground surface elevation deter-mined by GPU 4- surveyors RP-SM: FILL, light brown, medium 5-to fine SAND, trace silt U, U' 5 6- 4 6 7-8- 9-SP-SM: FILL, light brown fine SAND, 10- -7 some coarse to medium sand, U' 9 trace silt 13 11-13-15-SP-SM: FILL, I ight brown, medium -B to fine SAND, occasional piece 22 gravel 43 16-17-17 ft Water encountered 18- at 17 ft 6 in. .CAPE MAY 19..
-7
1*
- WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS I
LOG OF BORING BE I SHEET..LOF 3 DESRIPIO IEC-III Ilm.. rra REAK REMARK I. Le-bM: CH: light brown tine SAND,,at 21" dark gray silty CLAY 21 ft iUL
-22 -
-23 24-U' SM, CH-OH: moist, dark gray, medium S25 - C4 11 U,
to fine SAND, and moist, dark gray- - 26- 16 black, plastic-very plastic ORGANIC silty CLAY with frequent layers U, 6 and partings of non-plastic silt 24 and fine sand; alternating 3" layers
- 29 -
UPPER CLAY
-31 SM, OH: dark gray fine SAND and moist, dark gray-black, plastic ORGANIC silty CLAY, frequent -35 = U,.
if.' 10 layers and partings of fine sand 11 and non-plastic silt; alternating F 3" layers 1 38 ft 2
.SP-SM: wet, red-brown, medium to fine SAND, trace silt U.'
9 13 COHANSEY
-43
-44*
db-V I I I~I f
V. WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOGOF13ORING BIL.... SHEEL.L..OF...IL. wet, SAND P-SM: tan, medium to fine SAND, trace coarse sand and silt ING TERMINATED AT 51 ft 6 in 7 a
V WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING BE2 S-EET__._oF_L. OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT, EXTENSION SITE V - 23.5--
~-- --
of 81c4136A J. E. FRITZ AND ASSOCIATES, INC. C. PUENTE 1 MARCH 1982 2 MARCH 1982 TRUCK-MOUNTED AUGER 51 FT 6 IN -- " "'" HOLLOW STEM AUGER " ""'"" " ýCASING HAMMER WEIGHT ]DROP .ERTCL____ SAMPLER 2-INCH SPLIT SPOON VERTICAL SAMPLER HAMMER IWEIGHT 140 LB. TDROP 30 IN. N. C. SCHREIER II. DESCRIPTION REMARKS
,,,,J d ei Auger to 4 1rt 6 in Ground surface 2- elevation deter-mined by GPU 3- su-veyors 4-
~-SM: FILL, light brown, medium 7
-to fine SAND, trace gravel U) 77 6-7-
9-SP-SM: FILL, light brown, medium .10- 4 to fine SAND, trace SILT 6 7*
.12-
- 1i" 7
SP-SM: FILL, light brown, medium to fine SAND, trace SILT Ln W% 8 7 1- . Approx. Water encounter& at 19 ft
- ~. - - .1.- & I J. & a.1 I L
- WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING BE2 SHEET..LOF 3...L.
DESCRIPTION j REMARKS j 0
.SP-SM: FILL, brown-gray fine SAND, some coarse to medium sand, trace 21 1 silt and fine gravel 22-1 SP-SM: FILL, moist, tan, medium to fine SAND, one 3" layer black fine 25 37 SAND, trace silt . - 37 52 M
27-28-29-SP-SM: FILL, moist, tan, medium to 30 - 5 fine SAND, trace silt 12
-31 24 SP-SM: FILL, moist, tan, coarse to 21 fine SAND, trace silt 50
" 3651
" --- 378
" ~ .SP: moist, tan, medium SAND, some. 7 fine sand, trace coarse sand and o- 149 silt 41 14
* -I1 -
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING BE2 SHEET-L-COF-. SM Mt I REMARKS SP-SM: wet, red, medium to fine SAND, trace silt -46 - 10 COHANSEY 48-SP: wet, red, medium to coarse 50- 13 SAND o U' 7 51- 6 BORING TERMINATED AT 51 ft 6 in 52 53-54
-59 62-63-
-64 65-66-67 68
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS t ' CONSULTING ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING BE3 SHEETJOF 3 STER CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT, Extension Site 23.2 8IC4136
.J.E. FRITZ AND ASSOCIATES, INC. C. PUENTE 2 MARCH 1982 2 MARCH 1982 TRUCK-MOUNTED AUGER 51 FT 6,IN ""
WU- HOLLOW STEM AUGER I-` 6 r 0-- -
.. wNG - ! "--"
NG HAMMER FEIGHT DROP VERTICAL 9 LER 2-INCH SPLIT SPOON VERTICAL 140 LB. _DROP 30 IN.
!1+/-~~I~
LES HAMMER IWEIGHT N. C. SCHREIER DESCRIPTION EAK F Ground surface "2- elevation deter-mined by GPU
- 3- surveyors
- 4-F SM: FILL, tan, medium to fine 2 5-D5AND, trace silt 2 2
- 7-
- 8-
- 9-SP-SM: FILL, tan, medium to fine r.. Pieces of fine SAND, trace fine gravel and silt blue gravel in sample - auger through obstruc-tion
- 14:
SP-SM: FILL, tan, medium to fine SAND, .trace fine gravel to coarse IC sand, silt IC _ 16-Water encountered at 17 ft _.19..
- 4.,
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BOR ING B...Pj_ -...- SHEET..2...OF..L. red d SP-SlI: Fill, layered, B, REMARKS DESCRIPTION SP-SM:. Fill, layered, red medium to fine SAND, tracebt s It CAPE MAY
.SP-SM: wet, tan, fine SAND, one 3" layer CH: gray CLAY D
26 ft
*'-SM,CL-OL:dark gray medium to fine SAND, some silt;and dark gray to black ORGANIC plastic CLAY with frequent partings of fine SAND -
alternating 3" layers UPPER CLAY SP-SM,CH-OH:dark gray, medium to fine SAND, trace silt;and moist, dark gray-black ORGANIC silty CLAY with seams and layers of fine SAND, alternating 3" layers 38 ft SP-SM: wet, yellow, medium to coarse SAND I t
. COHANSEY
.L.
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING .2L....- SHEET-3-.ý-OFJ-
-- - 4 DESCRIPTION IL
- REMARKS I
I -* I-
'U 0
4 +-4 rk - + 0! 1.0iT 4'-1-4-I 46
- I CM 0 20 46-47-48-49-SP-SM: wet, tan, medium to fine SAND trace SILT and coarse sand 50-5 51- 7 4
BOR ING TERMINATED AT 51 ft 6 in - 52-
- 53-
- 54 -
I - 60 -
- 62 -
-641-
- 66 -
e &- I 1.~ J- .L - .~ J.~L .I &
J WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS L LOG OF PROBE PEI SHEETL.OF 1 MI PYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT. EXTENSION SITE 11 C fg. (1) i*.mL.-- *
- im.1 ie'nyinLAII J. E. FRITZ AND ASSOCIATES, INC. C. PUENTE 3 MARCH 1982 3 MARCH 1982 TRUCK-MOUNTED AUGER 14 FT 8 IN ICASING ",.,
ICASING HAMMER EIGHT DROP AL_ MPLER 1.63-INCH DIA. "A" ROD WITH CONICAL POINT VERTICAL AMPLER HAMMER IWEIGHT 140 LB. IDROP 30 IN. N. C. SCHREIER FDESCR ON IIREMARKS W 3 , f t -1 15 (I: Penetration resistance is in 24 blows per. foot. 2-31 (1) Ground sur-3- 36 face elevation 4- estimated based 29 on elevations 5- of nearby borings 19 Strata boundaries 19 are approximate FILL and are based on 7-1~* 23 results of nearbj borings. 23 9-29 33 27
-12.
26
-13 50 F8 4.-
in Probe Terminated at 13 ft 8 in ¶ -16 _18
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS. LOG OF PROBE PE2 SHEET_]..-OF I_ YSTER CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT. EXTENSION SITE 23.5 ft+/-(1) 81 c4ljEA J. E. FRITZ AND ASSOCIATES, INC. C. PUENTE 3 MARCH 1982 3 MARCH 1982 TRUCK-MOUNTED AUGER 15 FT
-A~ttw Yý b U' - w I -
CASING Mowum l"" ow fCASING CASING HAMMER WEIGHT IDROP VERTICAL ISAMPLER 1.63-INCH DIA. "A" ROD WITH CONICAL POINT ISAMPLER HAMMER IWEIGHT 140 LB. IDROP 30 IN. N. C. SCHREIER I. DESCRIPTION I
- 1-8 aj ifi REMARKS Penetration resistance is in 16 blows per foot.
- 2-21
- 3-24 4-4 (1)Ground sur-S 33 face elevation 25 estimated based
- 6- on elevations ILL 17 of nearby boring,
- 7-1- 12 Strata boundaries are approximate 15 and are based on 9- results of nearbj 15 borings.
I 15 I 23 29 I 4-i* 55 63 LI' ~- L Probe Terminated at 15 ft 18- _19..
- I I I - I 1- 1 1 1. . I I
I WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS I LOG OF PROBE _PE3 1 ) 8IC4136A F OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT, EXTENSION SITE 23.5 ft.( J. E. FRITZ AND ASSOCIATES, INC. C. PUENTE 2 MARCH 1982 2 MARCH 1982 TRUCK-MOUNTED AUGER 9 FT 11 IN M .Pum 16W M M, 0 SCASING CASING HAMMER WEIGHT "DROP V ICA SAMPLER 1.63-INCH DIA. "A" ROD WITH CONICAL POINT SAMPLER HAMMER IWEIGHT 140 LB. IDROP 30 IN. N. C. SCHREIER Iii i ii, DESCR IPTION 11-1 r 6 3F ~ REMARKS Penetration 1- resistance is in 5 blows per foot. 2-6 3-5 4- (Ground sur-6 SFILL face elevation 5- estimated based 3 on elevations 6-of nearby boring! 3 7- Strata boundaries 7 are approximate 8- and are based on .it 21 results of nea~rb, 9- borings. 1M III 10- in Probe Terminated at 9 ft 11 in 11-12-13-. 14-15-lI 16-17-18-19.
I. WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS I CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF PROBE PE4 SHEET...2L.OF...I. OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT, EXTENSION SITE 23.5+ (1) 81C1 4136 A
- j. E. FRITZ AND ASSOCIATES, INC- C. PUENTE 3 MARCH 1982 3 MARCH 1982 OU EDT T_
_ _ _ _ _ ____ lm~ _____,____________lm TRUCK-MOUNTED AUGER 13 FT CASING ING HAMMER EIGHT DROP VERTICAL SMPLER 1.63-INCH DIA. "A" ROD WITH CONICAL POINT 'SAM*PLER HAMMER !WEIGHT 140 LB. DROP 30 IN. N. C. SCHREIER U. DESCRIPTION t., l-t REMARKS 121 Penetration resistance is In 17 blows per foot. 2-14 (1) Ground sur-F1 3-13 face elevation 4- estimated based 14 on elevations 5- of nearby boring! 14 LL 6- Strata boundarie: 12 are approximate 7- and are based on 9 results of nearb: 8- borings. 7 9-6 10-8 11-31 12-1", 70 4-.L- I PROBE TERMINATED AT 13 ft 16-17.. 18.. 19-
U.J WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS IT LOG OF PROBE PE!5 SHEETJOF.I affbA." "OF@Alm "I'CYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT, EXTENSION SITE 23.5+ (1) 81C4136A I. X._ E. FRITZ AND ASSOCIATES. INC. IC. PUENTE 3 MARCH 1982 3 MARCH 1982 I;TRUCK-MOUNTED AUGER 8 FT CAUSdG HAMMER EIGH4T JDROP VERTICAL _________ SAAWLER 1.63-INCH DIA. "A" ROD WITH CONICAL POINT LERHAMMER ]WEIGHT 140 LB. DROP 30 IN. N. C. SCHREIER DESCRIPTION FtjI REMARKS Penetration resistance is in blows per foot. 2-16 (1)Ground sur-3- face elevation 9 estimated based 4- on elevations it. 5-6 14 of nearby boringi Strata boundarie 6- are approximate 31 and are based on 7- results of nearb) 91 borings.
'jPaBE TERMINATED AT 8 ft 9-10.
Ii K 12-iF 13-14-I 15-16 I('p 17-p 19. I - - A~ - ~. - - - - A- A
0 WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS 9 LOG OF PROBE PE6 SHEETJ0F I
.OSTE REEK NUCLEARn PLNT us A OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT. EXTENSION SITE 23.5+ (1) 81Ciu136 A J. E. FRITZ AND ASSOCIATES, INC. C. PUENTE 3 MARCH 1982 3 MARCH 1982 .. Los - ow" tam, go TRUCK-MOUNTED AUGER 14 FT sx..&V"." a"i I "tmm - low ,ASI NG i U LOW"
-ASING HAMMER EIGHT DROP AMPLER 1.63-INCH DIA. "A" ROD WITH CONICAL POINT V
- AMPLER HAMMER WEIG4HT 140 LB. DROP 30 IN. N. C. SCHREIER DESCRIPTION 1'EMiARKSIIZ 10 Penetration resistance is In 12 blows per foot.
2-9 3-4- 5 (1)Ground sur-7 face elevation 5-estimated based 7 on elevations 6-FILL of nearby boring! 8 7-Strata boundarie., 7 are approximate 8-and are based on 7 results of nearb: 9-borings. 10.. 8 9 11-12-. 10 26 13-75
- 14. 4~-q-- ~ - - - I 4-4-i PROBE TERMINATED AT 14 ft
_I I.
I i: WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTATS I CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF PROBE PE7 SHEETL._OF I. OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT, EXTENSION SITE 23.5+ (1) 81C4136 A EJ.FRITZ AND ASSOCIATES, E. INC. C. PUENTE 3 MARCH 1982 3 MARCH 1982
..on - a"w _in,.o TRUCK-MOUNTED AUGER 6 FT 8 IN CASING m.,* ,CASING HAMMER EIGHT DROP VERTICAL SAMPLER 1.63-INCH DIA. "A" ROD WITH CONICAL POINT -
IAMPLER HAMMER WEIGHT 140 LB. DROP 30 IN. N. C. SCHREIER DESCRIPTION ~ tiI liI i~I aLJ REMARKS 12 Penetration resistance is in 27 blows per foot. 12 I 33 "FILL 3- 42 44 1 49 6-50 /I 3 4-7-7 *1r1 PROBE TERMINATED AT 6.ft 8 in "I I. 8- ( 1 )Ground sur-face elevation estimated based
-9 on elevations I. of nearby boring.
Strata boundaries are approximate and are based on results of neaxb: borings.
- 13-
-L :19.
IIIIII
- 4*
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF PROBE PE8 SHEET..J...OF_.L.. Ik m mv1 n'TSTER CREEK NUCLEAR PLANT, EXTENSION SITE 23.5+ (1) 81C4136A
- x. E. FRITZ AND ASSOCIATES, INC. C. PUENTE. 3 MARCH 1982 3 MARCH 1982 rRUCK-MOUNTED AUGER 16 FT
%NG HAMMER WEIGHT DROP VERT I CAL %6PLER 1.63-INCH DIA. "A"l ROD WITH CONICAL POINT 440PLER HAMMER IWEIGHT 140 LB. DROP 30 IN. N. C. SCHREIER DESCRIPTION [!jlREMARKS 11 UA 1-Penetration resistance is in blows per foot.
2-3- Auger to 3 ft 14 4-10 ( 1 )Ground sur-5- face elevation 6 estimated based 6- on elevations F1 LL 6 of nearby boring! 7-7 Strata boundaries 8- are approximate 7 and are based on results of nearb:
- 10. 7 borings.
11-7 r 8 12-15 13-38 14-551 15-94
, I lb-l lb-k-I-k-k-k - .4-4-4-4-1
"'"BE TERMINATED AT 16 ft 0 17-18-19.
1983 BORING LOGS or WELL INSTALLATION LOGS W-1 to W-17
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING ........ 4 ......
. SHEET-..3.._OFo..a..
p ~ ~ 4~r4 6~/- ;~j7~~42
. J ~
/I
- I,--,,
r I,'
£4~L
/ /
7' "el 2 K ie..c/@V~4 ~j,// -
// // - (,.
O'~p* ~(
/l 7 c.A'i. JAk~
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS I CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS F. LOG OF BORING-.....1*2/...... SHEET .2.Z OF.,2,.. I I I I I II I,. I. I I I I0
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF SHEET...J....OF.J.A Y"-S.4 11 Al ov
-C,4. Y-
*' /.*,j.; I-Z -""., .- *.,/
.7"7"" '-" i-"
/""
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING-- 4 1.~... SHEET-.2...OF-j...Z x 4r -, ,p-. 4 -~,-g- I
I WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSU LTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING... A__*..' ........ SHEET- ..... OF.
~ac~ i~-
jee "r
I WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING ....... ..o~ SHEET* -~ I I/ I
~y/,~' 4'A~~ £ -ra'i* ,('*'
d~- /~. r i. 'K~
;/~II 47--!
~,*
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING...J*k... SHEET-:9--OF
- T - I U.
r ~ i I h DESCRIPTION I w i I Imiw REMARKS ____________________________________ . -4~~ ly" * ~ -4.~. . a-... .- _ -t _ -- t_
)
It C,
-- I
*1*
I' I I I I I I:
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTIMG ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING ....... SHEET_..j._F.. Stee
VW UULA ,FDVnL*-,L. Iroi.,*. ** ,-'..- - CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS flf Lo uEnlbItm2
-. *.S.-
nai ~ 41k F41.03 ýýY
*1X111 J/zgý' 01&A6,Z, I T /&. --f 7191p CASING - -- L- .-- "
CASING HAMMER WEIGHT DROP SAMPLER _ r "- '--, "- SAMPLER HAMMER IWEIGHT I-.OP-9 ID,/' ' - ____________NiLI___ DESCRIPTION S-1 7 REMARKS
* - p / I-
/ I C- *~
4/ r
-,'/,6 S--
'-f)
-I /'.-~- C., - /1 /'~ J3g2.o 1." X, 4vý,, C I
,-71o Z.i It
- - - S I. ~ I
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING.-by-0*I1.... SHEET..-:a-OF..a.. I I.- U. I I !~ ~ I. F ,jA'~ ~ JAQ.V -
/
*--* *.J *.
WLHJUWAKU-,;I UL; L,-'...-- .... CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS C flfl f41i-**-. Wo Or cminlymu ....... I .... 7
- SHEET .T... OF...I.
is r CA&=NO* <! 7 _ _ ""__
ýTw Lo" 1p.w / ac CASING CASING HAMMER .- WEIGHT DROP SAMPLER "!'z,- "z-* - ýýý SAMPLER HAMMER 1WE iHT ,I.'- DROP 30 ""
DESCRIPTION E a REMARKS 11 , g_ REMAR9 S-f' I.*
/ - J; II I' s-.z
,.91 IV In-
/V re /
LI
-.- /'
I..-, *~- / f%-' /.. I/ T-
ý7 q, 2-X/,7 Z.
I: I:
- &- I - h A I J- ~. I I J
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OFBORING O. ..... *R SHEE..I.O.L w allVA"M AM "7W -a=* U "-_____--__-__"_".V37 /0 --
- ,*- * " - F, - - "-
-' '-* * --i - ? -- o T SAMPLER * " -J CASING HAMMER ,*
- IWEIGHT .-,,,, IDROP -
_
- P * -/ * /
SAMPLER HAMMER iIWEIGHT",/*/* I DROP' 1-4 e,***F 'J DESCRIPTION REMARKS
~V -/ :; /I .'l*
/0 V.
/ ',
P. -
'-9. -
12-t*. - 0'
/11/~,-4--,-.
.1%/i .
I s-A/,
~ -A
>1 .
/
S-i
--y -
I,
& - L- L- - I ....... L - L- I - I- J.- J _______________________
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING ......... t... . SHEET_..J.... OFJ./
- - p."- -
Pam'scT "a roo"7".1ý"/,k/ 115ý,Ivl- -"ý- it . , 0~1lowm me c mf CASIN G HA M MER
ýSAMPLER
[
-'j/..a'
'SAMPLER HAMMER JWEIGHY DESCRIPTION
-IDROP ____
1iiiLi1 REMARKS
/to,
.J A;ý- 41-/,0~
fe"o 7 10-J Is-- i,,-,
* -4 -~'-.
7 I 7 3: 7 3 I
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS I CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS p LOG OF BORING ..... SH E ET_....._O F.... I CAING ! HAME WE0G' - D/P S.-AMPE sopw "..lor ' I A - CSAMPLE HAMMER WEIGHT 30- 009
,DRP tt'/g Ii SAMPLER~~I 0 DESCRIPTION x"
$4_ 4 ,/ I,4,4/"/x - 3"/ ,* /
$t~f~L 3
, e 7
'a ii x'~tfd, SOA74C S-.? 1/7-I t/7'/4-7~ C A9 S-f" "p
C £c~ 4,~-7'
.*a-, ,..&'. , r,/, , &A / S-Si / 5" a/
3 W':".4 7-0-v7 y
/s5 0
'Y17 s/4C A Aj,~/.
M7,
'/~4Q 'f J,4 /J~ 1 0fc...,( r
*'* /* 13 I2.
III - I. ~-I - A- I- A- A~ - .1 - -
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS I CONSULTING ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING...-..-Z/J-! U 's/ r "-1 "* /3
* . 1._.'5 I ) 5#0 I - _ 32" I
I ... ... _._..... .. .....
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF B. BORN ...... fRll SH EET_..3 .... 0 F... *.. aOVAý ^W WM .ma
*ml p
I CASING HAMER -WEIGHT - DROPm I~i1ii SAMPLER ,2y ' " / ',.,' SAMPLER HAMMER 'WEIGHI ID____OP__
",,.G.,
.-- *..,..E. /ZO/. !':"o"3*'./*.*'d,.-*-t" DESCRIPTION - J "* Jw REMARKS I J'e /
I I 7.r 1@ U I 7 I. U I I p p J. - - - - J- i - - - - ~ -
CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOGOOFO O-RING ...... ............ SHEET.L.OF. .
,/z :f..., ,. /1 giI~, CLs4 ~
SA*ID Sq( / c
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS I CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING- ý SHEET.xL..OF:ý
- 1 DESCRIP1IOfd I u j2I'JL ~IREAK T _______
23~ S-f
-1// i ,, , p e s I".,-) "'r -r, /"P- .2p 7
I // ~ (.4~f/f/~/4?/~~..fJ'* 4..' 36 1.....E A ....~....I-L .........-I-.........L ........ I- I- I- I ........-J
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LO* O Aý D I I 00 Pt? 00AffV ps.' m 10 CASING HAMMER EIlGHT - DROP o".QAGVm ItP1 SAMPLER 2 2". r ~ SAMPLER HAMMER tWtIGHT D/.ROP ~' DESCRIPTION REMARKS
//4~.,1 hA/ 3 s-I /0a
/y
/
.4 i II I ,
77'! CiAf,4fl A4 5-y C4,41 I0 I/4-w /.7 I "7. ,.
"C
/
1,,- I' 7 S-7VI? 6' A ~1~~y fJ#~O
-4
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BOIG - SHEE-r- ;F.OF.-2,. I-. U. II AU a
;'.c. 4,.JkOf -'f 9"dru(
/
1'r-411A.. C4...".flfwo
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS I CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING ..... //X3 SHE ET_. ... PF I.. 9 I MGM= am5~1 Y am MYý I Sam e dr NY z -,T CASING -T w 1po zI zjomft CASING HAMMER - WEIGHT - DROP j x* 1 riL SAMPLER -2y--2 *' -. f/I Y a SAMPLER HAMMER tWEIGHT" ., DROPS
- DESCRIPTION ' 11 REMARKS U, Jr. / 'c Ws-,Oy I:
I: 741 I: 4~~AW ~1' 46W'k6~ 6 I - L- L I -,& S S J. J. 1 1 1
I WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG. OF BORING ... SHIEET_... .*..ýOF..Z._ p-ow ~ 6~/ ~&7Z- A1~7/ ILt~AT~ b.1%m p-Gm? A- fMG P DESCRIPTIONi . .... _[ "i ' .M RE REM RKKSi-AR 1r 4 .,#1A'4 oft
/'.fJ119 oy' v // -/.9'.
/Y I
-rofv,,o so,., o' ro-4v,,/ de; S~-211.
yoý _f'A;A;o r 174 S-.3 V,7 2.2 S-f1/,o Z3 7 L I 4 4/ (L - -'pc,-/
/yr i S-S. A37 4)
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING., . -1. SHEET 0 - - .v*gjv*T~ - ~na IýR.Ano- ma a-rtm A'~2 (~(Z ~'
,/-*~'4!/, -'! /'4,ds./*..,Ž-3 ,4yr-+Z.'.,/ ,, o/'7 CASING 5"T" Lftu 7 1 _.i WEIGHT - ' DROP s "A"Emm CASING HAMMER -
SAMPLER 9 ." _- - SAMPLER HAMMER IWEIGAT IDROP~ -4 ~ 01"'1 i-~REMARKS
-- , OI.
DESCRIPTION . ~ I - .. / 7 " / 5-/ 1/,- o-/ - 7_,-, - ,"- y 7 S-2 .z1 I' I* Z
ý-'g / i '7
-4'.. !~K';C~~d -
/
f;I
" *~~.~L..2/, forl:'-'; A.r.,,.
. J,~./..
e'. ,#"'"-
.20
,/c ,/..I ... o , - -- ; -, , ..-.
/
_-.7
/ 4.
/I~l .S
/ //
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS
. 2..
LOG OF BOR ING....- SHiEET_!...OY. I-U.
~'. .~1W4~'
17 r 4/4-~ f~4,j64,Kx / A//,P _6A
$41,0Z
,/
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING...A-týZZZ... SHEET.2L..OF,15.. o1r 4 J/// clq-ý'
- A~, f~fk
&,.,f /6" cl- A),
141/ f,ffc czt.41
I WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF IBORING--..4t*Z*ZJ. SHEETJL-OF,dL..
~A~t~'
MONITOR WELL INSTALLATION REPORT
,~/Monitor
-z'/, / Well No.
Project - Location P,oject No.______________ Installed By- Dote /. , Time" Method of Instlolotion A- - Remarks InSDected By lr)sDeeted By...... ~c --
-e ý - - . .
MONITOR WELL INSTALLATION REPORT
~, .0~Monitor Well Project__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Locati n__________
Project No. Installed By Dote 9//,,L,, . Time -',O, Method of Instal lotion -2* z P Remarks Inspected By A A -7 4*I
I MONITOR WELL INSTALLATION REPORT Monitor Well No.- Location ,- ./ Project By 2 Dote T/'*
"imefne Project No. -Installed L-k..,d 9IIlll iDl IUIWII wII *I P Remarks In-snected AV
MONITOR WELL INSTALLATION REPORT Monitor
.. No. I- /_
Well != - .1611 .7 ,/
-- IA/- a - /
Project __ t.',(r*J4-- c-*-/,,. Location , , 'r-,-.L,.IX Project No Installed B f 5 t Dote ~ ie /'4C Method of Installation ?6~s S~-
/ /
LOG OF MONITOR WELL MONITOR WELL BORING Type of Monitor Well Description Ground Elev. Top of Riser Elev. Vented Cap SI -- l---zD. of RiserPipe,_ _ I I II ~Type of Pipe..... SI F--Type of Backfill Around I I Riser
! I I Lt J Top.of Seal Elev.______
Lis Type of Seol Material
'Z 7 L7 e Top of Filter Elev._
*--* *!-i--*ype of Filter Material-Size at Openings...AZ I.'a Diameter of Monitor Well T,p 4~-ottom of S Mon. Welt Elev._____
II S/
,-L'.:;A;":Bottom of Boring Elev.
L.-m-.-Diometerltof Boring .'.". P Remarks
~-e1~Y/ /
MONITOR WELL INSTALLATION REPORT Prjc Monitor Well No. Projec N.-2eV2 Installed By -ý ' -o;/ A Location Date.. 2 ~~Time AU ic/ 4P' Method of Installation I< 2-4 ~ -'- PRemarks Inspected By
MONITOR WELL INSTALLATION REPORT Monitor Welt No. Z'A~/J4 /Z-/ Project (- 4'ýk Locat ion Project No..*... Installed ByDt Time -" Method of Installaiotan 9
'~-f/ -. 2 A Z /
/ /
LOG OF MONITOR WELL r-MONITOR WELL BORING Type of Monitor Well c f,.:,,o Description Ground Elev. Top of Riser Elev.... Vented Cop I -LD. of Riser Pipet? I iType of Pip "i -f..--Type of Backfill Around Riser-LS-L5 *._*. *'--Top of Seal Elev._ _ I-
.* *-*Type pf ;eat Material__
*1- Lie
*~~A I ,4
.7
";< CL S/-,
Lse
-3 Top of Filter Elev.,
ype of Fitr MatiolI i.4 I.*'- ., Size of Openings -i/ J"C 4 '! Dioameler of Monitor Well
,~~~ ~T p.."*!i!
um-otton of
/,*, 14Z ,,e/-,f -
TL*:..,c.., Mon. Well Elev. aI - .~- - ___________ I-B aotBoring Elev.
/t / --iometer of Boring S U. Remarks e-l-Inspected By 114< ý
MONITOR WELL INSTALLATION REPORT Monitor W elltN.A .- Location No. e.2 4/& Installed By~ D t OfApTime.. Method of Installation A .. & A 4 ./,~ I I- I~ Remarks 4 Inspecte d By "Y ~ 4r WOCODWARD -- CvYDE CMiSUL-TAwT
MONITOR WELL INSTALLATIION REPORT Monitor Well No. project Location -" /- '/ - Project No. - Instolled By Date Z Time 0 SMethod of Installation A[ lrmstecied Sv
I MONITOR WELL INSTALLATION REPORT Monitor Well No. Project 61 Location Project No. Installed By rg Date . Time Zdo',sl Method oi Installaton oAm4 ,
,I LOG OF MONITOR WELL MONITOR WELL BORING Type of Monitor Well
~Description Ground Elev. Top of Riser E .ev_._____
i* E f~ ~2/-/12 I Lw Vented Cap I 4-LD.of Riser Pipe
~II IIType of Pip K I 4 - -Type of B ackfill A~oun t Riser , / Rv I
S " -"*- I
- Top of Seal Elev. _
Lie Type of Seal Mot Ior)' l _ Low? Top of Filter Elev._ S. 1 .- T ype of Filter Mpteriol __ 1.Size 1 Openings O le aI I Diameter of Monitor Well l "atm of Mon. Well Elev. _______
'-I. --
-Bott*iom fBoring EAlv
' i: 4 L-. amter of Boring ...Zp.
ft-m-D ? Remarks Inspected by
MONITOR WELL INSTALLATION REPORT Monitor WellNo. h<
/4--*
Project Location_ Project Noa. Z2eý0 Installed By L zxeý2 Dots-.,"-//AF . Time Z Method of Installation 10-A14 J.14 Remarks Insoected By ,.2' /74-,t't"
MONITOR WELL INSTALLATION REPORT
- ,.Monitor Well No.
Prjeto Installed By / 1- frvtDaeTime 9, 3 Ii Method of lIntallation 4 > Remarks Instpected By '~
MONITOR WELL INSTALLATION REPORT Monitor Well No. Projlc- 4",v . /,* *,*" Location- ___-__________/__ Project No..2 6'*' Insiolled By Date d Time "r Method of instal-ltion £/ 6'z r r emorks
MONITOR WELL INSTALLATION REPORT Monitor Well No. Projeci Project Method of Installation p aeTm i Re-,mr" 10 Remarks II Inspecte d By - -LD O SLA T WOOD WAD0OsLAr
MONITOR WELL INSTALLATION REPORT roject Monitor Well No. --. Project No-e.?-48'*2/ Installed By Date :/.,A.V - Timne.",.ýý, M o _ PRemarks Inspected B 4 WOODWARD L.YDfCOSLhT
IMONITC R WELL INSTALLATION REPORT S.-Monitor Well No UT Project Location Project No. C W e. BDoteE ,n -Time
- Method Ofant oit n P Remarks Inspected By / -
MONITOR WELL INSTALLATION REPORT Sr/Monitor Well No. Project -Location-427'~::, ~L-I Project No. <5R2L: 2"Y$ Installed By ,L.,' ,-Date Z -- /2/0 Time I Method of Installation -- ý40 l LOG OF MONITOR WELL MONITOR WELL BORING Type of Monitor Well JC Description Ground Elev. Top of Riser Eiev. 0*_= Cap
-6'- A,r// ZA,. .f1 ir"ý-Vented
* .##l *r. l%.x/I *VX/AV# # #.ill#
I'-LD. of Riser Pipe -?
! Type of Pipe. 0'%J K 4
CL
-305 2
-Type of Bockfill Around, Riser_______
se,
- p. .A.,;10
[-Top of Seal Elev.
-- Type ofeol Mater'Pl Lil LI..-.---V
/
Lo, -* L? LiiZ* i -Top of Filter Elev._
-Type of Filter Meriol-Z" e/, /
.~
Z1/2< CZ
-Size of Openings .
-Diometer of Monitor Well
-/20- .r' ~74"~
Tip
-Bottom of Mon. Well Elev.
fl-I IQ,-.,.,,/./ f"'. 0 -1111
~-4 -Bottom of Boring Elev.-
-Diameter of Boring -S-"
Remarks Inspected By woO DWAND ,LYDE CONSULTAWTS
1988 BORING LOGS or WELL INSTALLATION LOGS W-24 to W-27 OW- I to OW-5
I WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING ..... L..... SHEET_..j.*...OF***.. ... mcSv& m.ý *Y- we lmv a-- m
-YTE AJ3fjL D?73 vAbc dYIvc4 c461 CREC jf,, p,'* .. o'i ' A.,L ,'I0,I*GV ,2,- 2- Y;F /22-.- II mv~'"@6viAu 1J e.r -rWw A/o/ i c*(A - I CASING CASING HAMMER -WEIGHT ]DROP -
4 SAMPLER .2" I~~e SPoow 5j{HF L CR .V'rcl SAMPLER HAMMER JWEIGHT 1,41/)kb IDROP 30 R. ___________ DESCRIPTION x REMARKS
.~IoAUI~ +/-1" _ -
ID Ito 0 . h a:. I.5 '~1 0
'~C >~rj ~t*I~~7
'-n~ ~A/lL, c " t~o I' h) toS. e S1*
2.0 16 o 7 2 E 10
-12
- 11 -
- 13-
- 12 - c_. rca~~ .2pp--
-14 -
-15 - -I
- 16-- 3
.? CL
- 17-I' tpJU 8bA rLO4diKýbkrm t - 19-
-L. C.f Cl1A .)W C 20
*Z
'1 4
I
WOODWARD--CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORNG.....W.:2.5 ii. - 8B F ,i- uA 7-CA SIN G CASING
,g/o HAMMER 4*
-- EIGHT j/* 4,O&
s L .
- 1 1
.O 1I Li------
.79 SAMPLER 2' LT SPOON SAHPIE SAMPLER HAMMER ]WEIGHT L IDROP "
DESCRIPTION REMARKS vbrowhý tuti~rdt ytI.-J' u, bo f. Sflpg - 1 I1-g 4t E ai 0 tp
-2
-3 3
-A~ iý {fe.L,io.4 fr{.QL y-r -6 2.0 U'
0
-7 I.
- gI
- 10-E T01'J~ AN 6,i ~rfS Qý,t 5..L 2 .0 U
*k a
- 11-trA U
O.-L ppi C
- 12 r
- 13
- 15 z!
lb II- £ V H -fcIIyU
- 16-P.0 0
- 17-Is-d epl-1
I WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS U LOG OF BORING ..... W_- ... SHEET.....?,...OF....?-... I I h,&,K v- siC)y CLAYi, )-r sn~jI~- po 21 I I I I I
I WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS p LOG OF BORING ...... J.-.. ............. SHEET.....I ... OF ... umC pU oYS rC () C~IVEe-l
,..2 I-O JRR VA AJJ awnwmot______~b
ý Dv, --- ft"u no9
_______~~MG sy wT.se' 'f I I CAS1ING CASING HAMMER SAMPLER
*Vol 4sfe(
,2"
ý W-EIGNT S PLITir9pA JO*ROP
.4)OAHPl E,P, sw kL a os~~
VET c. SAMPLER HAMMER IWEIGHT Lb L 1ID. PJ°* I I, L-DESCRIPTION fl iL :i i REMARKS wI 61-0 k4 B 44 I-fAU &ceepraw Fr cl 113 7. CA re~ii a0 iLpg 1111 2 3 T 0~ 4- ,I T. (i q.J 7 10 a (/F 14A' Q 0 11S V..'
*2z N
12 71L-117 Ezol"34 o f t-. 0 EA ASI
-13
-IA a-j-r s~c~f %, -Is-
-17 C Ow (
eC'vi M c. Is-6
-19 I ~1~£~ I - I- .L.......L - .1. - .L- I~ I
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING ....... ..... SHEET .....2-..OF 2 DESCRIPTION REMARKS fj'caf~'.% scon Aa.j' S.CAcl Ay ,.)Q& -- -- HEET...*....O .. ....... yi?-
"" m.Fa/t
I WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTIN#G ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING.... SHEETJ*.. OF. '2t-I I I I I f~~~S e fJIa~r
/,ý A.Lop. Sr;AILj 1
/4AIP gV lw
-- ,p s.eý, o"1 1/0 '-)6 af. ri / "1 tO SAA,M t E 14AI 08gl rlcad,7 ý1 70u P.
O.apf 1-1,v 6,.' / s-'0 p &-. L r k (y-eiIs .. s 'q& bd0f NOfet/fJb ( T, fty tj;O.LL e1cptA
I WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING..... W.-.27 ......... SHEET... I ..... DESCRIPTION InA. II *2. 44kfi 0 I S "17 CLA fLY S-a, 21 Li 5
\ i IIi r'r
-.'tt m @'b.1sA n.% I J.~j1101 Fqfi~
1, f _i IL r A & - A I A A- i 1 A- A I I
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING..D..L_/ smta, , -DT "ot E,, .oIs s , j ,/Z-P --- 7- 88
-s1 z- 7-8B Cli' *4s ie RIF-.-
CASING vo i- Eseg v$ .- - -1 r I", L/.
- WEIGHT -DROP -&- .6 CASING HAMMER SAMPLER 2" S o0l. VE,'77CAL
-?LJT SAMPLER HAMMER /c. Lb ' - mWEIGHT
. wDROP DESCRIPTION I jj REMARKS at.s f AN1d s 2-3-
4-7 - 6- II Rta O L" 0- 2W K4 O, "*-1 dcr1 t b.* 9 10 I-J/%i' 11 p., q0 C-, 12 - 13-14 - 16-z o,- 6 lcr-,. 14AIL; /,ýp f 16- I- 0 1-10--
- WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SI SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORiNG...Q..( ............ SHEET ..... F.
I DESCRIPTIONI iF h I .I-i;-'I I REA S I 4k
'41 a'f, .. ely Cr 8n ,
y, Soen_
-11 V
£ 9
HA V On 0lA I c rAL' . w,,*s . I *,--' *.*c_. U 0ý3C~ucebat vei I I U 9 I I 1: I: I: U: I-Ii I S - I - I - S - I - I - - - I - - - - -
I WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS I LOG OF BORING.....W .2L ............. SHEET.I...OF. I I I I U da 4S a Sa I. r-CAI~cU I dliYL b. 8'& roawad-I I ý>lowk as c.6o,.et-- So ý, CJC I HAI 0 I LjL~~
-r ý -, A "fi I
I )pgu oro
,ý 4 6) -f- ao ck ý) 0 v f- I it/ (_ L -
I
I WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS p LOG OF BORING....0. 4 .2.. .......... SHEET T.... &.....OF,.......... t S~e%- ShqhPok , 4 I. I 06seuq L Well
I WOODWARD--CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF SHEET_.. .... 0OF2..,_ A/ 3 b, i/fe P% . I 16 69 10 1ý kr -1 se S&anlp'C deC'Ct.A'; FICrrM WO S I- A -cY1 -ENPATJ WAI L4CauOgfif'
- e~
jAL ~ Samp if Jt.SZ4. fLrJ
/-/iiIC' 0.2 ppb
..97rc CIS 0, OOakc- ýMJ yt//OWiSk H4NO~-~7-pp&
"7/0 /~ 0L IdcJSovvirJ L 1 A, ep
I WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING ...... b.W .'. ....... SHEET...t...OF .......... I- -1 I~~~ y'?f SIYc~fY, C4 Somw'.I 2.1~ (4 g~J M HqAIV CPw~ Seiy
'1 4' Ic q oPn -t A
-- -- a I I I. I -I I II- J .... I.....
I WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS SHEET_...1... OF....... LOG OF BORING ....... 1dpu oYS7jF' CREEl<" Fodo. ,'ru-.. '0 ova,,4 i 9.1.'1c 4C147 Sz--886. c*,t--~~swft"" sos*ft =:_ c- V, ...- "V 6 A aa !-a 1, 11 -r Ls-'rve mo & CASING Nol S.AMPLERHAMMER CASING .21' o,* - sptl, IEIGHT -5Pooba , DROP PLFr* - , ,.TCA, VfricAL. SAMPLER HAMMER IWEIGHT 1 6 L IDROP S l', DESCRIPTION , REMARKS 1Iowtn Eao t9I LaO,fro 2- -Asomrptc- Scscik:1I0A
-I--
Frfj i.ý I I, s.. o ".3-1 IL 15 L 17 0
- 10-L.,jh wion..&ra-.ftI ief,I~ 1~bL 6A 9 IL
.1 Is- A.
IL d' aLo
-41 .Zpb
-12 f" 4cpn. ck ck 6 o v I?
.~:~ 4A
- 13-
£ r c ftd i I0 A
- 14-i-,sCd" 14 II/ill cs3'ý&S/2- 3
- 16--
- 17 -
/ 74~~~
~ S I- S A4wef")'j
*19
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING....J.\.".. ......... SHEET ....LZ..OF. 2 -. DESCRIPTION IHo 1 jO j a S REMARK(S 3 C-2JI z.0 6 to C .J. qys W7 znkS,/ ID. 01 L-iifv Il(eL r
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING.... .. Lt.......l~. SHEET_..i....OF.. I-6 U S 0 w ý, o SOMIX(ft Ar-SCAllo. F.-c" "J0.h jjaLý ro.3r O~hlK L r < S.J rn L JAAJU tcýaA; m3 0. 1 ,"q-as,0 o t 0 %.j r,, rn L c, P Z "tWU 4 NOW f C.Qk Ck u'at 6(oLk bT IFPh.. 10I
%0,rL t 4zA~o'Je...,ne chc~gvm 'C. 4 Afv c3'.A.v as 10s
-:,Hr\d 0en %I~
Zoo f- *incmosc in 3,e( conI- co~t
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS LOG OF BORING....1. .- .......... SHEET ....!%....OF. . lo tto o 6Ih T fl
I .WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS CONSTRUCTION OF MONITORING WELL NO. VJ-214 I' PROJECT AND LOCATION GROUND ELEV AND DATUM PROJECT NO. I _____PC, i
£pr,-
DRILLING AGENCY
,.30* _ .2, g 4V4R1 .
TOP OF RISER ELEV. 5*'
& 'C- 277___44 DATE FINISHED 12.z- -e
_4 I METHOD OF DRILLING H .* t 6l Wuq k,,L TOP OF PROTECTIVE CASING INSPECTOR: DIA. OFBOREHOLE "ELEV. ?. /*a B GROUND WATER ELEV. CHECKED BY: 0_,)_f'
-'fc,"7.
I DEPTH OF BOREHOLE LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE MUNICIPALITY LOT S PERMIT NO. COUNTY BLOCK GENERALIZED - MANHOLE COVER AND FRAME SOIL SET WITH CEMENT DESCRIPTION - GRAVEL BACKFILL 9 DIA. OF RISER PIPE TYPE OF PIPE -?vc. STEEL PROTECTIVE CAT~ttG A1 0 k /13J.5 to f Ie 01 I L 2 j TYPE F ANNULAR SEAL I L3 _ L4, 10.0.
.,,m,/,0,0,', 6:.
I L6 TYPE OF SEAL m tO'a'v, 4elles IL I L7 i~ I L* ___.__ TYPE AND DIA. OF SCREEN
/ 6 Un t&
L4 U TYPE OF FILTER PACK so hi* d / L5i a NOT TO SCALE . - - TYPE OF BOTTOM SEAL BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE IVALUES REPORTED IN FT) i REMARKS R&Ouc..
., u
,Jp*/'1-1 eliiA,
) ,
rrA//s - tL11 kA,,-ej,.j Ar Qmg,,- r7 ) I S 1 1 57,i',t if~) iniiI4 Q 9flr n P /k/, P Iqff/Uni, iIC/ 14(rl o r&.~v~ 01. re ,
~ I~~fov~(Ev1
*/ .A
I - WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS CONSTRUCTION OF MONITORING WELL NO. W - ý 1-PROJECT AND LOCATION GROUND ELEV. AND DATUM uPO 0 y'r cIR CREF"j< oe*,,fl PROJECT NO.
'7 (,/
I C*10 m,' DRILLING AGENCY Jrr,/~irOf Io's Z . 7 TOP OF RISER ELEV. 2217'
?_2i I?-_ 5- 9 DATE FINISHED I METHOD OF DRILLING DIA. OF BOREHOLE
/ELEV.
E TOP OF PROTECTIVE CASING GROUND WATER ELEV. INSPECTOR: CHECKED BY: I DEPTH OF BOREHOLE LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE __-_._7._____ MUNICIPALITY LOT I PERMIT NO. COUNTY BLOCK I. GENERALIZED SOIL DESCRIPTION
- MANHOLE COVER AND FRAME SET WITH CEMENT
- GRAVEL BACKFILL I DIA. OF RISER PIPE TYPE OF PIPE f v' ,,
I Ll 6, STEEL PROTECTIVE CAStNG tJoE ,s*ofII,;0. p L2 L3I 1,0 TYPE d OF ANNULAR
.kL.
SEAL allke Ilb(_ I L4 10 TYPE OF SEAL b*,d,+/-L,..- f, s. . I L6 - L7 I 19_6 Le 20 TYPE AND DIA. OF SCREEN __1__NC tA'. (/- A I LS TYPE OF FILTER PACK 6 I ?cL_ I NOT TO SCALE Ls /TYPE OF BOTTOM SEAL BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE I [VALUES REPORTED IN FT) REMARKS _74qL{] ol~i cJ~toJ qalekiA 20'i~f, "A~n~ ~r~4PiO
/
N ri's~ & -.9 /f6I'Ji A LC .& -11I S,/h 20 - Q: 11kAu,(,- t7 r4w ear 'I, -k
~~S~~sAP~ ~iiP~ ~.P /A~aIr - L4 (1PAC 1L e)JIIIIpLa I 6hkJW,L t- e U 4 7cpt- 0 . CAuir 0%kaz L I
I - .WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS I1c 14 CONSTRUCTION OF MONITORING WELL NO. W-? 2L PROJECT AND LOCATION GROUND ELEV. AND DATUM PROJECT NO. Cpu Y37-6)? C 6kEF - t'@ICaIA)@ 0i Ili . 9Ci69 4 I E ,7,)/,* DRILLING AGENCY1.r o ,s 2-, 11, TOP OF RISER ELEV. 12- FINISHED DATE $;-8. I METHOD OF DRILLING L400 ,/,,J - TOP OF PROTECTIVE CASING INSPECTOR: EELEV. I DIA. OF BOREHOLE GROUNDWATERELEV. CHECKED BY:
." WV1E I
DEPTH OF BOREHOLE LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE MUNICIPALITY LOT I PERMIT NO. COUNTY BLOCK I. GENERALIZED SOIL DESCRIPTION MANHOLE COVER AND FRAME SET WITH CEMENT GRAVEL BACKFILL I ,A,'\ N',
- DIA. OF RISER PIPE TYPE OF PIPE 4\k/\/\* -
Py i I STEEL PROTECTIVE AS NG p L2 L3 1-8
'..0 TYPEoF` ANNULAR SEAL 0,- ,
J, ei to I _ h, I L4 L5 0 10
- Le TYPE OF SEAL I L6 I L, 20 TYPE AND DIA. OF SCREEN I n Y-s~t P
I 41 TYPE OF FILTER PACK :A 1
...... i L
TYPE OF BOTTOM SEAL I NOT TO SCALE - BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE IVALUES REPORTED IN FT) I REMARKS ,.. cI.-,.. . ,,.'. ,,-h , .A ,I 1. , ,v (.*-ri. r.4._ I Su 1 I - I I IA- u it
~o ~p {4JO~..~ \* '~r ~A M%- !If'(S WQA)O~
I - WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS p CONSTRUCTION OF MONITORING WELL NO. V4 - ll PROJECT AND LOCATION OUND ELEV. AND DATUM PROJECT NO. 4pc,1 oYST-eg ceEr 3_7 b6 hi I DRILLING AGENCY
;To EI okvd If4tbL TOP OF RISER ELEV. DATE FINISHED 1/
/7'//A'J rm7
£ ELEV.OF PROTECTIVE CASING %S -*kO METHOD OF DRILLING MEHDO RLIG 8f ", 0 *TOP TC DIA. OF BOREHOLE o fb iD GROUND WATER ELEV. CHECKED BY:
f rF I DEPTH OF BOREHOLE LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE 2' -P,,._,._-_7" MUNICIPALITY LOT I PERMIT NO. CWNTY BLOCK 3 GENERALIZED SOIL DESCRIPTION
- MANHOLE COVER AND FRAME SET WITH CEMENT
- GRAVEL BACKFILL II DIA. OF RISER PIPE 1.
TYPE OF PIPE PV C £ Li C,.0
'STEL JOF ANN DOE CA ttA G UllARSEAL 9 L2 L3 rO-I-O TYPIE OF ANNULAR SEAL Or*eJ I LS o. -- TYPE OF SEA I L6 I Le 2, ., TYPE AND DIA. OF SCREEN14?C.
I ,( 1 if TYPE OF FILTER PACK
.-,i I.CA I cLL TYPE OF BOTTOM SEAL NOT TO SCALE BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE IVALUES RE 0RTED IN FT)
REMARK L&Ct- ,',.* lt o,. ,,'2c@-, ,A, .
- 4. k ,J ( 6cn uA .
y11k (7-c'Y~.J ht~ AL~J&A %~*I hP LVLbII.IL 6clk t!_~~___ (0, I A -\ (3 1 1 %I - u) lk'ý_ \,j M WRLO J-11 43? V4 ptr,(ýý Of A]
.WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS CONSTRUCTION OF OBSERVATION WELL NO. t) *-"/
PROJECT AND LOCATION GROUND ELEV. AND DATUM PROJECT NO RLLIN 57TOP AGNC Fh-, Op,r_ OF RISER E LEV. 23.11l DATE FINISHED TOP OF PROTECTIVE CASING INSPECTOR METH"OD OF DRILLING !Re DIA. OF BOREHOLE X /0 GROUND WATER ELEV. CHECKED BO DEPTH OF BOREHOLE &-t . MUNICIPALITY LOT LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE PERMIT NO. _____ ____ _____ Ceo= CfNTY BLOCK GENERALIZED - MANHOLE COVER AND FRAME SOIL LOCKING WELL SEAL SET WITH CEMENT DESCRIPTION - GRAVEL BACKFILL it DIA. OF RISER PIPE ,L. TYPE OF PIPE _____ ____. STEWLPROTEC.TIýErASING L2 I.0
-TYE ,F ANNULAR SEAL
,* ,,/ ,
Ls '2.L Ir . . . . L5 *." Lu TYPE OF SEALc .LL,.4*"htL$ L7 La __2 )bL/.. TYPE AND DIA. OF SCREEN
/n k-,A t -
TYPE OF FILTER PACK k TYPE OF BOTTOM SEAL NOT TO SCALE . - .... -- BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE (VALUES REP0 TED IN FTI REMARKS A"ete int-p," ' ". fI-
"" /fJ .jJ Pv c .,..
-J q
I r A /q icPeh w'a/ ;~$o/G$,nL i'u'L.rhd G A/h. t)oA. .h' ~ IL I
*WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS CONSTRUCTION OF OBSERVATION WELL NO. )
- I-)
PROJECT AND LOCATION GROUND ELEV. AND DATUM PROJECT NO. DRILLING AGENCY
&'rq,'rr.. Soi13 TOP OF RISER ELEV. DATE FINISHED tZ..\*"1-('-88 METHOD OF DRILLING N/eg.
?,., A/ q,,- TOP Of PROTECTIVE CASING ELEV.
INSPECTOR R. , DIA. OF BOREHOLE GROUND WAATER ELEV. CHECKED BY DEPTH OF, OREHOLE o0 z,7. - Z" LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE MUNICIPALITY LOT PERMIT NO. COUNTY BLOCK OCCaL I GENERALIZED - MANHOLE COVER AND FRAME SOIL SET WITH CEMENT DESCRIPTION - GRAVEL BACKFILL DIA. OF RISER PIPE Z T.YPE OF PIPE -_ __ _
- _
STEEL PROTECT VECAFING Ll C._a_ L2 t -e)
*TjPE gFANNULA SEAa .A L..
L3 2.0 T I L4 I0L .- Le TYPE OF SEA f c
- t. .E*1 (2
I L6 L7 If -T' LS 2O -C TYPE AND DIA. OF SCREEN t - I m TYPE OF FILTERK .4L 10a9Ljr
- V *vv TYPE OF BOTTOM SEAL NOT TO SCALE - ' ..... BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE (VALUES REPRTED IN FT)
REMARKS .9(0tk dC&ik L P4 I/ 2ilp 1T h Mod4 L I f avyx)A&fIr Air- ýQcAm an TCAIOL 'S). iI/ d/ (L3gf'ulo I't'i f fae ~I~J2 I L4 1 f 6r bf-IeI (7-C' tiv~04 14r!. a1, A k 4'&em r " 6 nA'rJ
*WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS I CONSTRUCTION OF OBSERVATION WELL NO. 0 'A- / )
PROJEC'T AND LOCATON GROUND ELEV. AND DATUM PROJECT NO. II DRILLING AGENCY TOP OF RISER ELEV. DATE FINISHED I oEEv. DRIL'I TOP OF PROTECTIVE CASING E. IL*PECTOR DIA. OF BOREHOLE GROUND WATER ELEV. CHECKED BY DEPTH OF BOREHOLE .2& .e* . V" LATIT'UDE AND LONGITUDE MUNICIPALITY LOT PERMIT NO. COUNTY BLOCK I GENERALIZED SOIL LOCKING WELL SEAL
' MANHOLE COVER AND FRAME
_SET WITH CEMENT I DESCRIPTION
...- ,'.4,:,. ... /
GRAVEL BACKFILL iy ,., "s~ DIA. OF RISER PIPE , T.YPE OF PIPE PV , I Li , Li \N\ STEEL PROTECTIVE rrA. NG L2 TYPE OF ANNULAR SEAL Ca c
- LB -2 TYPE OF $6 ei'ot-,(ii L3 I LE L7 L,
""3 a-.-
L4 I LB 2t TYPE AND DIA. OF SCREEN _2 t%10L PV LS *, ITYPE I OF FILTER PACK -4 L6 - TYPE OF BOTTOM SEAL NOT TO SCALE I BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE IVALUES REPORTED IN FTI REMARKS 2 0 ' Ins cl ý"lJ VrL CArdlll Ci 'i#1i
-2 V 20 1 *,C C*Ied 1a ci e%,k I,% A.vck uNQ'i 2 rhpIkin~j tAi ýd I \, gy, oaŽ1 ilL '%JQAd. ask#- ýni I~ 1 IL. l. Lc 1soI (i 0 ' t, Lj~ i(Sts 3~-T) rl A CAkA CkAWA-~~l ,&
1-k ItC, 1-1C- Uk
.WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS I CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS CONSTRUCTION OF OBSERVATION WELL NO. L Mj-PROJECT AND LOCATION GROUND ELEV. AND DATUM PROJECT NO.
cj ~ A:tcC'eK )V06 Cku*Lglta.. __7C__h9 I DRILLING AGENCY TOP OF RISER ELEV. DATE FINISHED METHOD OF 3 , .TOP OF PROTECTIVE CASING INSPECTOR I DRILLING */9I-J MET RHODOFDRILIG /0t ELEV. koj ,.. DIA.OFBOREHOLE ' 0' GROUND WATER ELEV. CHECKED BY 2ef43 d I DEPTH OF BOREHOLE LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE MUNICIPALITY LOT I PERMIT NO. COUNTY BLOCK GENERALIZED MANHOLE COVER AND FRAME
- a. SOIL LOCKING WELL SEAL SET WITH CEMENT DESCRIPTION GRAVEL BACKFILL I DIA. OF RISER PIPE TYPE OF PIPE
?-
PV_ _I I STEEL PROTEI*TIVE CASING L2 t. TYPE OF ANNULAR SEAL L4i L3 0- he u1Th1I6 i I L 3 TYPE OF SEA*' -*-1%&lJ /16 b I L6 L7 Le
- __ _
I TYPE AND DIA. OF SCREEN I1 % 6t
-2 I TYPE OF FILTER PACK
- q.n "
TYPE OF BOTTOM SEAL I NOT TO SCALE BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE IVALUES REP, RTED IN FT) I REMARKS JOWL- 1/o -og,el _ 0o1 -P2o' ,,14 /14 fr;,of, h.,-4,,,, P, ScO
- I I I
1' j . I.r (.o-,,.r.,-t=£,*(,,,, ,,, , M,
- 01A) _wi 41r.. q,-
.7,, (/-o )/ 1, I
I *WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS 3 CONSTRUCTION OF OBSERVATION WELL NO. id PROJECT AND LOCATION- GROUND ELEV. AND DATUM PROJECT NO. I DRILLING AGENCY TOP OF RISER ELEV. DATE FINISH4ED T,". I METHOD OFRILLING TOP OF PROTECTIVE CASING INSPECTOR OF ETA. DROIEOLELIN- 'f ,, ELEV. Q. t fr, A HGROUND WATER ELEV. CHECKED 2of.,U .LH' I DEPTH OF BOREHOLE - LATITUDE AND LONGITUDE MUNICIPALITY LOT I PERMIT NO. 6 .ea,,,I COUNTY BLOCK I. GENERALIZED SOIL DESCRIPTION LOCKING WELL SEAL
- MANHOLE COVER AND FRAME SET WITH CEMENT
- GRAVEL BACKFILL I DIA. OF RISER PIPE , '
TYPE OF PIPE A VC I L1 C.0 STEEL PROTECTIVE CAStjG L2 /.o TYPE OFANNULAR SEALQ4ýmPj _ j~AptUL 1Wvp L3 2"0 II r I L5 0 "0 TYPE OF lrL j ;,& ,1F U L7,, 0-Le .0-TYPE AND DIA. OF SCREEN A, -;z f a L5 TYPE OF FIL EA 1 , j ",,"- L6 ,TYPE OF BOTTOM SEAL NOT TO SCALE BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE I IVALUES REPORTED IN FT) REMARKS flUqtA d.lllkw to0 q elk 24 20 -7,,J"d L,,,.b a,,, oq4IcaA
,,l '8,c sr.,.lr,,.
, I1' N I I i' U ckv ,* o pr4 . / Lie/ e , iý )e ~,u4 o A t l'- W l I. ao/p,fICI a~ PJ L..
,Sfe I / lad, 114 I
prepared 13-Aug-90 WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS Consulting Engineers, Geologists and Environmental Scientists CONSTRUCTION OF PIEZOMETER: RC-1
;plofori #%&ývA ibwacata Proersc ft. I LDEP "0jienll ftnhId. JEjv~ato. caratm !GPU OYSTER CREEK 87C4.649 .33 - ;7?/31 SAMUEL S70THOFF-DriLier DENNY WENE JINPUT 10.0f ST MAYER _______ ______
99.75___________________ft GENERALIZED SOIL DESCRIPTION ELEVATIONS DEPTHS CONSTRUCTION DETAILS (ft above (ft below Mean Sea ground. Lo.vel) not PROTECTMESTEEL CAP FLIUS bTH GROUNDD to scale) 100.00 0.00 i _ GROUNID S,* ACE 99.75
-PROTECT1/E ST'EEL C.OuNG CEMEPMED IN PL.ACL Orange brown H to 1. SAND, tra:e silt, dry.
I 6 in. Stainless Steel (Johnson Slype) S-. ANNULUS GPOUflETbJN 91.00 9.00 * ~ ...j Portland Cement 89.00 11.00 Orarge brownrM to f. SAND,* ;entonite Pellets tra:e silt, dry. 87.00 13.00
.... I
- I:: - -- : :
Same es above, except wet ........ .... )I Type) F11001E M aroand 15 ft. and firner with oep-h. Dark gray clay trace silt, wet_ 79.98 20.-02 ---- boTTOMt CAP 79.50 20.50 .............. 0"EUTEN OF 10 IN. WEAMAS 1e5nzesa".ih. 0e.4 nheuhW"ot Sameinstallation procedujres a$ for D.l-6 except used 3 bags Of gravel. Well lerminates with a 12 inch flush mount.
prepared 13-Aug-90 WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS Consulting Engineers, Geologists and Environmental Scientists CONSTRUCTION OF PIEZOMETER: RC-2 PW."WsAa IGPU OYSTER ohm CREEK fte 87CI.6h9 NCJJ #AN.0EPwps"MMI N& 33- ;?7l Eiatim~awm~tr I-SAM~UEL S10TII0FF-Dritler DENNlY IWENE INPUT 1100.00 it Datev!Cmbh-LV- I, Tap V'PV~t1 u411 .tVa' 8/6/90 1NLT100.10 It Insaeae Top o fier'm.P4" e ot StEPHEN MAYER INPLT I99.75 it GENERALIZED SOIL DESCRIPTION ELEVATIONS DEPTHS CONSTRUCTION DETAILS (It above (11below Mean Sea ground. Level) not PROTECTfr STM CAP FLULi wrT rnocuND to wcale) I100.0O0 0.O00 z 99.75 m MtM T9 AP VAT)LOCK C~1 PW3TEC7JW S57EELCASWIG CSIEJTED ONPLACE Orange brown P. to 1. SAND, trace silt, dry. 6 in. Stainless Steel (Johnson AMNMAUS aR(JTED It 91.00 9.00 PortlIand Cement 89.00 11.00 ...-SEAL-Orange brown M TO I. SAND, Sentonite Pellets trace silt. dry. 87.00 I 13.00 1 6 inStainless Steel Slot ZO (Johrnson Type)
-. £4NO'GAAE. PAMC
- Sand Morie No. I Sa"e as ebgve, except wet arou6n 15 It. and liner with depth.
Dark gray clay trace silt, wet_ 79.96 20.0* 47 ..... orrom CAP 79.00 21.00
.OF.
DAMIE7I OF SOPA7NOLE 10 IN. Same instal(ation procedures as for OIJ-6 except used 3 bags of gravel. WeLI terminates with a 12 inch flush mount.
1991 WELL INSTALLATION LOGS RC- 1 to RC-5 IJ-1 TO IJ-5
I WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS CONSTRUCTION OF FLUSHMOUNT MONITORING WELL NO. ROJECT AND LOCATION GROUND ELEV.;AND DATUM PROJECT NO. c;1 P(J 87C4.4.q DRILLING AGENCY TOP OF RISER ELEV. DATE FINISHED SAMULEL Srn
£T r 2o. loc 2.23 ./ 11 91 TOP OF PROTECTIVE CASING INSPECTOR:
METHOD OF DRILLING N £roo ALcw r ,6Q4+ ELEV. _______________ K. Kei OIL, OF BOREHOLE Apbkox la GROUND WATER ELEV. CHECKED MY: DEPTH OF BOREHOLE _o I " " f- IMANHOLE COVER AND FRAME GENERALIZED LOCKING WELL SEAL- SET WITH CEMENT SOIL DESCRIPTION /=! RAVEL BACK FILL L DIA. OF RISER PIPE L2 TYPE OF PIPE S "EkNbx.E 4-0 'V%.!
-STEEL PROTECTIVE CASING
*-- - TYPE OF ANNULAR SE ALA SyL.. 'S L9 L2~ .E PE. 1. . V7...... .. I-chNE -
L3C L10 .- TYPE OF SEAL T~c.,-mrro, t-rEL~- L4
-~~TYPE AND OIA. OF SCREEN 4,#0 S"rAiOJ4.6194 S-rcr . 01C) ~SLt TYPE OF FILTER PACK *A 'b; j*/*
TYPE OFBOTTOMEEAL
-- TYPE OF BOTTOM SEAL /
Le NOT TO SCALE I1 I I*- IIOTTOM
~BOTTOM OF IORENOL[
OF BOREHOLE
..*l/,I; 10l"-_
(VALUES REPORTED IN FTI REMARKS: 7-i -E QSC) AI A ?ECCOVIEAy KW4/d. ,I !1 40
~AG~ ~4 A/oA- gAt~ib
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS CONSTRUCTION OF FLUSHMOUNT MONITORING - WELL NO. Yn OJECT AND LOCATION GROUND ELEV. AND DATUM PROJECT NO. O~o r.,C jelrý, IIvo-& A)-,r 87C-Aý494
-- 9. Y TOP OF RISER ELEV. aDATE FINISHED ILUING AGENCY 4
1-. ; o is 5"-9, 5/- I I TOP OF PROTECTIVE CASING INSPECTOR: METHOD OF DRILLING HOLL~OW g-rCM Au, R_ 'o)" 1D') ELEV. DIA. OF BOREHOLE A GROUND WATER ELEV. 9 CHECKED BY: DEPTH OF BOREHOLE r2 0 (D MANHOLE COVER AND FRAME GENERALIZED SET WITH CEMENT SOIL LOCKING WELL SEAL DESCRIPTION G RAVEL BACKFILL T L2 L 06k OF RISER PIPE TYPE OF PIPE Slldfbll 4 40 'Pf. Ll 1 STEEL PROTECTIVE CASING L2 .* TYPE OF ANNULAR SEAL SAý'L-fo L3 ,
~i'*I XOrL Ef~ti~
L4 3'1 , R:LaE-_, 10 L4 TYPEOF SEAL-Rl_#ToirC LSg L7 LS -NA -- TYPE AND DIA. OF SCREEN 4" 304 ___ AIXXS5ý rTrrLr .01c) San-L7 TYPE OF FILTER PACK :a*r_ Kor.-. TYPE OF BOTTOM SEAL NA IB Lg B OTTOM OF BOREHOLE NOT TO SCALE [VALUES REPORTED IN PT) REMARKS: I0 7t' U)5(Z A! A .C4L.jCy WC.". NOT TO SCALE 10 Ke. 'ý 0 1 MOJeJC SAX)IN /"Tl0/lkf ý A.5' 4 A Zc~'
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS, GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS CONSTRUCTION OF FLUSHMOUNT MONITORING WELL NO. JJECT AND LOCATIO IN GROUND ELEV. AND DATUM PROJECT NO. r( p I) rn pie x--t, "Pwre A/T DRILLING AGENCY TOP OF RISER ELEV. DATE FINISHED METHOD OF DRILLING h"&.I', S-t,. AuR*F,.'; ID TOP OF PROTECTIVE CASING INSPECTOR: 4 METODOFDRLLIG0~L-A)~7t~~ (04 D) ELEV. !DIA- OF BOREHOLE APprOX ox ,' GROUND WATER ELEV. CHECKED BY: DEPTH OF BOREHOLE Q2O (ol GENERALIZED MANHOLE COVER AND FRAME SOIL LOCKING WELL SEAL SET WTCEMENT DESCRIPTION T 4"1 L ~ DIA. OF RISER PIPE TYPE OF PIPE SEALc 40 T-./.'_ Its Li ~ L3 STEEL PROTECTIVE CASING L2 TYPE OF ANNULAR SEAL.- AYL6'..-. L 4 J s L L4TYPE OF BOTTOM SEAL N T, NOT TO SCALE BOTTOMA OF BOREHOLE 4 REPORTED IN FT)LVALUES _1o AoMr-SA (SoEALJ& TE O BOT 4_I_. .. -w BOT-TO OFBORE,- o POR IN FT)
WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS CONSULTING ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENTISTS CONSTRUCTION OF FLUSHMOUNT MONITORING WELL NO. J" *3*/ .,OJECT AND LOCATICDN GROUND ELEV. AND DATUM PROJECT NO. I GApO FoR&jg~hPavrc Alt * *0 R7eC(,4-(_ DRILLING AGENCY TOP OF RISER ELEV. DATE FINISHED AGENCY
-(AMUP'f IDRILLING -;rrnr~tr~ (-0. lItA) /i/ - - l METHOD*OF DRILLING°~ -"* *'-k"A L8" mle,-0., TOP OF PROTECTIVE CASING ELEV. INSPECTOR:
DIA.OFBOREHOLE APPRL 4'/ GROUND WATER ELEV. CHECKED BY:. DEPTH OF BOREHOLE -40 :!" GENERALIZED 7- MANHOLE COVER AND FRAME SET WITH CEMENT SOIL DESCRIPTION /GRAVEL SACKF*LL 77ý. ý., - - - .---
---- --- 7n DIA. OF RISER PIPE ,
TYPE OF PIPE Sr Dl 40 ?vCc Li 1 STEEL PROTECTIVE CASING TYPE OF ANNULAR SEALRSAYL.O-_9 L3.Z L4 -/ 1 D4 I i vppr 4.Ptne-L.k CuN L.5 L1 O I -TYPE OF SEAL ?CPJToN -rr,- L7 J TYPE AND DIA. OF SCREEN Lg*PA 40 "PVC .0 s(0 " L9* TYPE OF FILTER PACK -- t :"- L 10 0 S I- TYPE OF BOTTOM SEAL A NOT TO SCALE (VALUES REPORTED IN FT)
-i BOTTOM OF BOREHOLE SLA ft~e.
- 1. CCX-L*W1 RCAlTCVJ i7- 'PCLL 7-S (soll 2X 69PQA& rLAr U )> f rPA..r I
prepared 13-Aug-90 WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS Consulting Engineers, Geologists and Environmental Scientists CONSTRUCTION OF INJECTION WELL: IJ-1 GPIJOYSTER CREEK 87C4649 ~ ai -/'amu
.SAMUJEL STOINOFF-Driller DENNY WENE INMU ___________
TO &WplaoVat"/.'ea im w pa4P rac Zia LonlIfhude i CanplZfl ON9 lB/7/90 INU
~Lowc.Te of Intl 04" RAVVNAM ISTEPREN MAYER IINPUT ')
GENERALIZED SOIL DESCRIPTION ELEVATIONS DEPTHS CONSTRUCTION DETAILS (ft above (ft below Mean See ground. Leve) not P017ECTMESTIEE CAP FLUSH W~THGROUND to wcale) 100.00 0.00 99.20 0.80 - M704 73GHT CAP NfTPMLOCK PROTECTIVE STEEL CAPNG CEMENTED IN PLACE 1Orange brown M. to F. SAND, trace silt, dry. 2 in. Galvanized Pi pe 4-7 AMWEA.IZ GROiJZ IWYK 95.00 5.00 Portland Cement 88.00! 12.00 I...:. ______. At 13 ft. Grey brown H. to F.: 86.00 S&*ND,trace silt, dry. - .. 2 IN. GALVANIZED PO INT SLOT 10 At about 15 ft. &oil is wet At 18 ft. Grey K. to F. SAND, 13.31 16.69 Scow Silt, trace clay, Ig quartz pebbles and twigs. L 82.00 18.000
.... ..... POF HE DAMEFTWIOF 6 IN.
SREMARKS ,Im--,,. e.#mfti) Drilled borehole to 18 feet with 6 inch air rotary roller bit. Installed tewiorary .6 inch steel casing by lowering and driving it to bottom of borehole. Cleaned hole with air and put 12 inches of gravel at bottom of hole. Lowered Galvanized pipe and Galvanized point "into--.... --. borehole. Fill annulus to 12 ft below surface with 2 gravel pack bogs. Remove temporary casing ant backfill hole 'ith lend. Install 2" PVC water supply side pipe to well. Cemented annular space. heil terirnates with or, 8 inch flush mount.
prepared 13-Aug-90 WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS Consulting Engineers, Geologists and Environmental Scientists CONSTRUCTION OF INJECTION WELL: IJ-2 caiw
!P'C,.c, naw £ AoIm W MJrDEP .N jpemoh Af iwtn"im !GPU OYSTER CREEK 87C4.649 33 -Vi3i " I ,SAMUEL SIDTHOFF-Dritler DENNY UENE I NPUT_____________
Date,WC-ombhu ]LwflunVU.fPII~it 1,1 @1419 STEPHEN MAYER ______-i___ INPUT I 2--5 t - GENERALIZED SOIL DESCRIPTION ELEVATIONS E DEPTHS CONSTRUCTION DETAILS (fl above (?I below Mean Sea ground. Level) not ~7TEhT S7M CA FLUSH aWm GROLOWD to scale) 100.00 0.00 I GOROUND LAWACE
.0.60 F bw471 TIGHT CAP WTH7' LOCK iOrarnge brown M. to F. SAND, P 7 sEC M CAS# CEMENTED AV PLACE trace siLt, dry.
2 rin.GajvniZed Pipe
...... ... ANNUL US GRO~UTrED VA.:
95.00 5.00 5.00 II Portland Cement At 12 It. Grey brown M. to F.- 88.00 12.00 SAND, trace silt, cry. I . . ::::.... ES.00__ 15.00 I ~2 INi. GALVAN:ZED P0I N7
-: SLOT 10 A: about 15 ft. soil is wet
-------I.:---- SAND0124VYE1 DWM NTONO PAMC
- .: Sand Mone No. 1 82.60 _ 17.40 i 82.00 18.00 0OTOVOOPOHEL 6iN.
REUAMAS #Vwialieim,. ft-riap w Q: Drilled bcrehote to 18 feet with 6 inch air rotary roller bit. Installed temporary 6 inch steel casinr by lowering and driving it to bottom of borehole. Cleaned hole with air and put 12 inches of gravel at bottom of hole. Lowered Galvanized pipe and Galvanized point into borehole. Fill annulus tY 12 It below surface with 2 gravel pack b*gs. Kemove temporary casing ant tackfill hole with sand. Install 2" PVC water supply side pipe to well. Cemented annular space. well terminates with an 8 inch flush mount.
prepared 13-Aug-90 WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS Consulting Engineers, Geologists and Environmental Scientists CONSTRUCTION OF INJECTION WELL: IJ-3 jGPU OYSIER CREEK 871:4"9 -1 XE.ahnagm 1 3
;SAMUEL STOTNOFF-Driller DENNY &WENE INPUT Des. ofCOMPAPNOMf Lin'gIUa o fwot"g@ 4ýlf 8/8/90 INPUT WP~~~ .I8 b*~~
insCaw LSOMWOTpo 7 pq. ekaww m@m"'V STPEPHEN MAYER INPUT ~.3f GENERALIZED SOIL DESCRIPTION ELEVATIONS DEPTHS CONSTRUCTION DE'TAILS (Itabove (ftbelow Mean Sea ground. not PROTEC17W STEEM CAP FL~ Imwrm' GmODLAo to scale) 100:00 0.00 993 0.66 .- WATER TIOM7 CAP bVTW LOCK K- PRTECTIVE STEE CASMOG CE5MEWTED 1wPLACE Orange brown M. to F. SAND,
- trace silt, dry.
2 in. Galvanized Pipe
-ANAY(LUS DROUJTW VA4THt I= *n yl".uIJ .u Portland Cement
-- SAND 8AOCFLL At 12 ft. Grey brown M. to F, .88.00 '_ 12.00 SAND, trace silt, ary.
SI 1 2 IN. GALVANIZED POIN1
- 8.0 __ .0_ SLOI 10 At 15.5 ft. soil is wet
-- £44'*0R.I4R PAM-Sand Norie No. 1 18.19
- 8.50 18.50 ~
.... ...... MOTT*OA1FBIOWALE D 6UINOF 6 IN.
Criiled borehole to 18.5 feet with 6 inch air rotary roller bit. Installed temp~orary 6 inch steel casing by lowering and driving it to bottom of borehole. Cleaned hole with air and p1t 12 inches of gravel at bottom of hole. Lowered Galvanized pipe and Galvanized point into borehole. l h annulus to 12 it below surface with 2 gravel pack bags. Remove temporary casing e'rd Iackfill hole with Smnd. Install 2" PVC water supply Side pipe to well. Cemented annular soace. w~ell terminates with an 8 inch liush mount.
prepared 13-Aug-90 WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS Consulting Engineers, Geologists and Environmental Scientists CONSTRUCTION OF INJECTION WELL: UJ-4 a-I wnwp ioai.
"ý Aom"e No. MJDp "I/ p.W~ NaEtaia 33-ey Af .3bao3ai SERCREEK
- u B7C&.69 ISAMUEL STOTHOFF-Drilttr DENNY WENE INPUT Dampof C.CmPftetbW Le'9hude eeI W Top of pMMise 5100 A.8 LB/8,90 I NPUT!
,STEPHEN MAYER 'INPUITI
~i CONSTAUCTION DETAILS GENERALIZED SOIL DESCRIPTION ELEVATIONS DEPTHS (ft above (ft below Mean Sea ground.
Level) not pmolrC7rw STM CAP FL usm WernpGROuWD to aVale) 100.00- 0.00
- Orange brown M. to F. SAND, trace silt, trace gravel. dry.
99.10 0.90
- 1. 77-2-- bvATER TAS~gCAP WrrNLOC
~nW1WSv C&SNG CEUENTEDV4 fAW 2 in. Galvanized Pipe
' -- AWLM GROmNTEDI7"H:
95.00 5.000 Port land Cement 88 E.00 12.00 Same as above. 86.00 1l.00 2 IN. GALVANIZED POINT SLOT 10 At about 15.5 It. soil is wet
- - S""
- 4GR PA*'.
Sand horie No. 1 16.s_ ..... ... 3,oMoo T UO B A M 82.00 18.00 .j AMmR OF 6 IN. Drilled borehole to 18 feet with 6 inch air rotary roller bit. Installed temp~orary 6 inch steet casing by lowerino and drivin it to bottom of borehole. Cleaned hole with -air and pu 12 inches of gravel at botTom of hole. Lowered Galvanized pipe and Galvanized*point into borehole. Fill annulus to 12 It below surface with 2 gravel pack bags. Remove temporary casing and tackfill hole with sand. install 2" PVC water suPPLy side pipe to well. Cemented annular space. Weil ieriinr:es with an 8 inch flush mount.
prepared 13-Aug-90 WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS Consulting Engineers, Geologists and Environmental Scientists CONSTRUCTION OF INJECTION WELL: IJ-5 OYSTER P.rn aaJwo &W w&Pn"f. lEie.vaitn aavwt IrPr OYSERawCREEK 87C/"9 Suvyr 33- P~l3' I oh618an-2:-Ts4t D'an; agency SAMUEL S7OTHOFF-Driller DENNY WENE INPUTevn,.
- DmmNPU sevl
__________________0_*proec-*____r IINPU I ttf ial i181890 i~ OP I~a~ STEPHEN MAYER
- GENERALIZED SOIL DESCRIPTION ELEVATIONS DEPTHS CONSTRUCTION DETAILS (fhabove (ft below Mean Sea ground, not PROTEC77 SrEEl
'E CAP FLLAS IWr Gmo.AVO Level) toscale) 100.00 0.00 GROIP*D SLUWACE WA TER TIGhT CAP ,T"f LOCK 99.061 0. 9/
PROTEC71O STM CASING CEMENTrED N PLA Orange brown H. to F. SAND, Trace silt, trace gravel, dry. 2 in. Galvanized Pipe
~J AWL. G5ROIJTE I HffH.t 95.00 5.00 Portland Cement ACPGRLL
-- SAND 88.0D 12.00 Some as above.
86.00 1 .00 2 IN. GALVANIZED POINT SLOT 10 At about 15 It. soil is wet
- v
- .::.. .-.--- .V.AV FLPAOC Sand Morie No. 1 82.30 17.70 82.00 18.00
............ 801TY06 OFBO.REPOLE VmqwErER OF 6
*IENOLE:
6 IN. REUAAPS 0.4IAWM01jA. .00epnwr): Drilled borehole to 18 feet with 6 inch air rotary roller bit. Installed temiporary 6 inch SteeL casing by lowering and driving it to bctttom of borehole. Cleaned hole with air and pit 12 inCheS 0o gravel at bcttom of hole. Lowered Galvanized pipe and Galvanized point into bcrehc:e. Fill annulus io 12 ft below surface with 2 gravel pack bags. Remove temporary casing ainc bjck~il( hole with sand. Inszall 2" PVC water supply side pipe to well. Cemente" annular space. mount. welL te-rinates with an I inch flush}}