Conceptual Site Model - Argonne National Laboratory
Conceptual Site Model - Argonne National Laboratory Conceptual Site Model - Argonne National Laboratory
WVDP Phase 1 CSAPD.3 Area HistoryWMA 4 was not used for any structural purposes during the lifespan of the NFS reprocessingactivities on-site or for any WVDP-related activities other than solid waste disposal in the CDDL.The surface drainage features have been reworked over time to accommodate the CDDL.Figure D.2 shows WMA 4 in 1962 prior to site development. At this time WMA 4 was grasslandand woodland with a marsh or pond in the vicinity of what is now the southwestern corner of theCDDL.Figure D.3 shows WMA 4 in 1966. Development of WMA 5 and WMA 2 is visible. Apart fromsome surface scarring in what is now the eastern end of the CDDL that potentially indicateslimited disposal operations, there are no visible impacts in WMA 4.Figure D.4 shows WMA 4 in 1968. There is no visible change from 1966.Figure D.5 shows WMA 4 in 1977. Additional development of the CDDL area is visible. Inparticular there is some surface scarring, and what appears to be a trench or linear drain installedfrom southwest to northeast across what is now the CDDL footprint, presumably to improvedrainage of the area, and a similar parallel feature to the north of the present CDDL footprint.Figure D.6 shows WMA 4 in 1984. In this photograph, the CDDL has significantly expanded,with placement of material visible. In the eastern end of the CDDL footprint, flowinggroundwater discharge is visible.Figure D.7 shows WMA 4 in 1995. Disposal operations in the CDDL were terminated inDecember 1984 and the closure of the landfill was certified complete by NYSDEC in 1986. Thecurrent configuration of the Swamp Ditch is visible. The Lag Storage additions in WMA 5 havealso been completed adjacent to WMA 4.Figure D.8 shows WMA 4 in 2007. There is no visible change in WMA 4 since 1995.Rev. 1 D-2
WVDP Phase 1 CSAPD.4 Known and Suspected ReleasesD.4.1Cesium ProngPotentially Affected Media:Potentially Affected WMAs:surface soil, subsurface soil, sediments1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12 (northern portion)In 1968, a ventilation system filter in the Process Building (in WMA 1) failed, releasingcontaminated particulate up the Process Building stack. A mixture of radionuclides was released,with Cs-137 predominant. Approximately 0.33 Ci particulate gross beta radioactivity wasreleased. The contaminated particulate was deposited on surface soils, resulting in a large area ofcontamination around the Process Building and to the north-northwest. Detectable depositsextend several miles, including beyond the WVDP premises. WMAs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, and 12North likely are affected. Because Cs-137 is predominant, this area of contamination is known as“the cesium prong” (DOE 2009 Table 2-17, DOE 2010 Section 3.11.5).As originally deposited, surface soil activity concentrations should have decreased towards thenorth, away from WMA 1. However, the surface features of many areas within the WVDPpremises have been reworked significantly since the release; as a result, the current spatial anddepth distribution of soil contamination may be significantly different than the original footprint.In addition, the surface soil contamination likely has been naturally spread by erosion and runoffinto surface drainage features; this phenomenon may have enlarged the area impacted bydeposition, although detailed data regarding this effect are not available (DOE 2010Section 3.11.5).Finally, other releases from the Process Building stack may have produced minor impacts. Theseother releases include the 1968 failure of a dissolver off-gas system filter, resulting in 0.28 Ci ofparticulate activity, and the 1968 failure of a vessel off-gas system filter, resulting in the March1968 releases to exceed the monthly allowance by 15 percent (DOE 2010 Section 3.11.5).Rev. 1 D-3
- Page 206 and 207: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure B.12 WMA 2
- Page 208 and 209: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure B.14 WMA 2
- Page 210 and 211: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure B.16 WMA 2
- Page 212 and 213: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure B.18 WMA 2
- Page 214 and 215: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure B.20 Initia
- Page 216 and 217: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure B.22 WMA 2
- Page 218 and 219: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPThis page intentio
- Page 220 and 221: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPdiameter that are
- Page 222 and 223: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPC.2 Physical Setti
- Page 224 and 225: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPAs originally depo
- Page 226 and 227: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPC.4.3.3Waste Tank
- Page 228 and 229: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPsamples. 10 pCi/L
- Page 230 and 231: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPC.9.1Buried Infras
- Page 232 and 233: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPhole gamma data wi
- Page 234 and 235: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPthese sample resul
- Page 236 and 237: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPTable C.1 Sample N
- Page 238 and 239: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure C.2 WMA 3 F
- Page 240 and 241: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure C.4 WMA 3 A
- Page 242 and 243: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure C.6 WMA 3 A
- Page 244 and 245: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure C.8 WMA 3 A
- Page 246 and 247: WVDP Phase 1 CSAP1Figure C.10 WMA 3
- Page 248 and 249: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure C.12 WMA 3
- Page 250 and 251: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure C.14 WMA 3
- Page 252 and 253: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure C.16 Initia
- Page 254 and 255: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure C.18 Initia
- Page 258 and 259: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPD.4.2North Plateau
- Page 260 and 261: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPcolor-coded by Sr-
- Page 262 and 263: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPD.9 CSAP Pre-Remed
- Page 264 and 265: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPoIf GWS results in
- Page 266 and 267: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPdrainage feature s
- Page 268 and 269: WVDP Phase 1 CSAP• If the GWS res
- Page 270 and 271: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPTable D.2 Sample N
- Page 272 and 273: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure D.2 WMA 4 A
- Page 274 and 275: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure D.4 WMA 4 A
- Page 276 and 277: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure D.6 WMA 4 A
- Page 278 and 279: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure D.8 WMA 4 A
- Page 280 and 281: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure D.10 1990 -
- Page 282 and 283: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure D.12 Histor
- Page 284 and 285: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure D.14 Initia
- Page 286 and 287: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFigure D.16 Initia
- Page 288 and 289: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPcoat, application
- Page 290 and 291: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPWMA 5 is underlain
- Page 292 and 293: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPFinally, other rel
- Page 294 and 295: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPIn 1987, water fro
- Page 296 and 297: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPE.6 Planned Phase
- Page 298 and 299: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPis most likely ass
- Page 300 and 301: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPsample. If biased
- Page 302 and 303: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPsoils and a draina
- Page 304 and 305: WVDP Phase 1 CSAPE.9.6Buried Infras
WVDP Phase 1 CSAPD.4 Known and Suspected ReleasesD.4.1Cesium ProngPotentially Affected Media:Potentially Affected WMAs:surface soil, subsurface soil, sediments1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12 (northern portion)In 1968, a ventilation system filter in the Process Building (in WMA 1) failed, releasingcontaminated particulate up the Process Building stack. A mixture of radionuclides was released,with Cs-137 predominant. Approximately 0.33 Ci particulate gross beta radioactivity wasreleased. The contaminated particulate was deposited on surface soils, resulting in a large area ofcontamination around the Process Building and to the north-northwest. Detectable depositsextend several miles, including beyond the WVDP premises. WMAs 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 10, and 12North likely are affected. Because Cs-137 is predominant, this area of contamination is known as“the cesium prong” (DOE 2009 Table 2-17, DOE 2010 Section 3.11.5).As originally deposited, surface soil activity concentrations should have decreased towards thenorth, away from WMA 1. However, the surface features of many areas within the WVDPpremises have been reworked significantly since the release; as a result, the current spatial anddepth distribution of soil contamination may be significantly different than the original footprint.In addition, the surface soil contamination likely has been naturally spread by erosion and runoffinto surface drainage features; this phenomenon may have enlarged the area impacted bydeposition, although detailed data regarding this effect are not available (DOE 2010Section 3.11.5).Finally, other releases from the Process Building stack may have produced minor impacts. Theseother releases include the 1968 failure of a dissolver off-gas system filter, resulting in 0.28 Ci ofparticulate activity, and the 1968 failure of a vessel off-gas system filter, resulting in the March1968 releases to exceed the monthly allowance by 15 percent (DOE 2010 Section 3.11.5).Rev. 1 D-3