Conceptual Site Model - Argonne National Laboratory

Conceptual Site Model - Argonne National Laboratory Conceptual Site Model - Argonne National Laboratory

10.07.2015 Views

WVDP Phase 1 CSAPOne sample will be selected downstream from the confluence of Erdman Brook andFranks Creek, but within the WVDP premises, that is expected, based on GWS results, torepresent the heaviest sediment contamination. This sample will represent a depth of 0 –15 cm and will be analyzed for the 18 ROIs plus the 12 potential ROIs.• Systematic sampling locations will be distributed along Erdman Brook and Franks Creekfor those portions where the sediment CG requirements apply and there is a possibility ofcontamination exceeding sediment CG w requirements. Systematic samples will becollected from the stream center-line. A minimum of three sample locations will beidentified for each portion of the creeks that meet the above criteria, with a systematicsample location spacing of 30 m. Based on current information, only a portion of ErdmanBrook is expected to require this sampling (see Appendix J). Samples will berepresentative of the 0- to 15-cm depth interval under the assumption that ifcontamination is present, it is most likely confined to surface sediments. The sampleresults will be used to determine whether sediment contamination potentially exceedssediment CG w requirements. If any sample yields results above background conditions, asecond sample will be analyzed from that location representative of a 15-cm to 1-m depthinterval. If that sample yields a result above background conditions, a third sample willbe analyzed representative of a 1- to 2-m depth interval. This process will continue untilthe vertical extent of contamination impacts above background is bounded.• Biased and systematic samples will be analyzed for all 18 ROIs. Biased samples will alsobe analyzed for the 12 potential ROIs. If any of these 12 is present at potentiallysignificant levels, the balance of sediment samples will also be analyzed for thoseradionuclides of potential interest that were observed at potentially significant levels.6.8 Define Required Extent of WMA 1 and 2 ExcavationsTwo deep, extensive excavations are planned for WMA 1 and WMA 2 as part of Phase 1decommissioning activities. The excavations will extend, at minimum, 1 ft into the underlyingLavery Till. The lateral extent is to some degree fixed by structure constraints. A minimum extentis required to safely remove buried foundations associated with the Process Building. Likewise,the footprint and layout of the lagoons establish the minimum requirements for the WMA 2excavation. The maximum extent is also physically constrained in some instances. For example,Rev. 1 40

WVDP Phase 1 CSAPthe northern wall of the WMA 1 excavation cannot compromise the structural integrity of theHLW Tanks in WMA 3.Within those constraints, one goal of the two excavations is to remove subsurface contaminationthat exceeds the subsurface CG requirements derived by and contained in the Phase 1 DP.To verify that the planned excavation footprints do, in fact, address subsurface contaminationabove CG w requirements, subsurface sampling will take place along the planned footprintboundaries for WMA 1 and WMA 2. The sampling strategy defining the lateral extent of theWMA 1 and WMA 2 excavations has the following components:• Continuous soil cores will be collected with a spacing of 10 m for locations along sheetpile wall footprints and 20 m for locations along slurry wall footprints, with intact soilcores retrieved. Soil cores will include at least 1 m of the underlying Lavery Till. Thereason for the 10 m spacing along sheet pile wall footprints is to provide a reasonableprobability that contamination with a significant subsurface spatial extent is identified.“Significant extent” is defined as subsurface contamination that may extend more than 10m beyond the proposed excavation footprints; the assumption is that if this is the case, thecontamination would have extended along the excavation boundary at least as long. In thecase of slurry walls, contamination is assumed to be present on the side opposite theexcavation; in this case the spacing is driven by geotechnical design needs for those walls(e.g., depth to till). For both sheet pile and slurry walls, the proposed spacing may bemodified in response to field conditions if those are different from initial assumptions.For example, in the case of the slurry wall, if significant variation in the depth to theLavery Till was found from core location to core location, the spacing might be reducedto better capture the variations in Lavery Till depth.• For each core location from sheet pile wall footprints and from the southern boundary ofthe WMA 2 excavation, a down-hole gamma scan will be performed with an appropriateNaI detector to the extent practicable. Each hole will extend beneath the water table;consequently, usable down-hole gamma scan data will likely not be available for the fulldepth of the core. Each core will also be scanned ex situ for gamma and gross betaactivity by using an appropriate detector.Rev. 1 41

WVDP Phase 1 CSAPthe northern wall of the WMA 1 excavation cannot compromise the structural integrity of theHLW Tanks in WMA 3.Within those constraints, one goal of the two excavations is to remove subsurface contaminationthat exceeds the subsurface CG requirements derived by and contained in the Phase 1 DP.To verify that the planned excavation footprints do, in fact, address subsurface contaminationabove CG w requirements, subsurface sampling will take place along the planned footprintboundaries for WMA 1 and WMA 2. The sampling strategy defining the lateral extent of theWMA 1 and WMA 2 excavations has the following components:• Continuous soil cores will be collected with a spacing of 10 m for locations along sheetpile wall footprints and 20 m for locations along slurry wall footprints, with intact soilcores retrieved. Soil cores will include at least 1 m of the underlying Lavery Till. Thereason for the 10 m spacing along sheet pile wall footprints is to provide a reasonableprobability that contamination with a significant subsurface spatial extent is identified.“Significant extent” is defined as subsurface contamination that may extend more than 10m beyond the proposed excavation footprints; the assumption is that if this is the case, thecontamination would have extended along the excavation boundary at least as long. In thecase of slurry walls, contamination is assumed to be present on the side opposite theexcavation; in this case the spacing is driven by geotechnical design needs for those walls(e.g., depth to till). For both sheet pile and slurry walls, the proposed spacing may bemodified in response to field conditions if those are different from initial assumptions.For example, in the case of the slurry wall, if significant variation in the depth to theLavery Till was found from core location to core location, the spacing might be reducedto better capture the variations in Lavery Till depth.• For each core location from sheet pile wall footprints and from the southern boundary ofthe WMA 2 excavation, a down-hole gamma scan will be performed with an appropriateNaI detector to the extent practicable. Each hole will extend beneath the water table;consequently, usable down-hole gamma scan data will likely not be available for the fulldepth of the core. Each core will also be scanned ex situ for gamma and gross betaactivity by using an appropriate detector.Rev. 1 41

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!