.. A Department of Energy Office of Legacy Management DEC2 9 M004 Ms. Susan Frant, Chief Fuel Cycle Facilities Branch, NMSS U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop T8A33 Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Subject: Transmittal of the Verification Monitoring Report for the Gunnison, Colorado, UMTRCA Title I Processing Site. Dear Ms. Frant: Enclosed is a copy of the Verification Monitoring Report for the Gunnison, Colorado, UMTRA Title I Processing Site. This report assesses the status of the natural flushing compliance strategy using ground water and surface water data collected from 1997 through 2004. Annual updates to this report will be produced as additional data are collected. Concentrations of uranium and manganese in ground water beneath the Gunnison site are still above the relevant maximum concentration limit and risk-based concentration, respectively, but are generally decreasing with time as predicted, indicating that natural flushing is occurring in the alluvial aquifer. Concentrations of uranium in ground water downgradient from the site and deeper in the alluvial aquifer in some areas are still elevated, as expected. As the plume migrates downgradient, concentrations of uranium and manganese in ground water from the domestic wells sampled are below the maximum concentration limit and the Colorado Department of Public Health- and Environment action level for uranium, and below the risk-based concentration for manganese. If you have any questions, please call me at 970/248-6197. Sincerely, Tracy Plessinger Site Manager cc w/enclosure: W. Naugle, CDPHE J. DeVore, Gunnison County Gunnison County Public Library 19901 Germantown Road, Germantown, MD 20874 * 2597 B 3/4 Road, Grand Junction, CO 81503 3610 Collins Ferry Road, P.O. Box 880, Morgantown, WV 26507 * 626 Cochrans Mill Road, P.O. Box 10940, Pittsburgh, PA 15236 1000 Independence Ave., S.W., Washington, DC 20585 REPLY TO: Grand Junction Office
38
Embed
Department of Energy Office of Legacy Management DEC2 9 M004 · DEC2 9 M004 Ms. Susan Frant, Chief Fuel Cycle Facilities Branch, NMSS U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mail Stop
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Subject: Transmittal of the Verification Monitoring Report for the Gunnison, Colorado,UMTRCA Title I Processing Site.
Dear Ms. Frant:
Enclosed is a copy of the Verification Monitoring Report for the Gunnison, Colorado, UMTRATitle I Processing Site. This report assesses the status of the natural flushing compliance strategyusing ground water and surface water data collected from 1997 through 2004. Annual updates tothis report will be produced as additional data are collected.
Concentrations of uranium and manganese in ground water beneath the Gunnison site are stillabove the relevant maximum concentration limit and risk-based concentration, respectively, butare generally decreasing with time as predicted, indicating that natural flushing is occurring inthe alluvial aquifer. Concentrations of uranium in ground water downgradient from the site anddeeper in the alluvial aquifer in some areas are still elevated, as expected. As the plume migratesdowngradient, concentrations of uranium and manganese in ground water from the domesticwells sampled are below the maximum concentration limit and the Colorado Department ofPublic Health- and Environment action level for uranium, and below the risk-based concentrationfor manganese.
If you have any questions, please call me at 970/248-6197.
Sincerely,
Tracy PlessingerSite Manager
cc w/enclosure:W. Naugle, CDPHEJ. DeVore, Gunnison CountyGunnison County Public Library
19901 Germantown Road, Germantown, MD 20874 * 2597 B 3/4 Road, Grand Junction, CO 815033610 Collins Ferry Road, P.O. Box 880, Morgantown, WV 26507 * 626 Cochrans Mill Road, P.O. Box 10940, Pittsburgh, PA 152361000 Independence Ave., S.W., Washington, DC 20585REPLY TO: Grand Junction Office
cc w/o enclosure:W. Von Till, NRCS. Campbell, StollerFile Project GUN 410.00 (Thru D. Roberts)
tbp/GunVerMontRpt.doc
IiiIi'
Ill
111Ii
DOE-LM/G1739-2004
VerificatiOnMonitoring Reportfor the, GjunnisonCi olorad 0U M TRC•ATitleiPrscessing' Site
September,2004
X
• :'. , •
.-
Lrtent I'of Ene.rgy. ..
• •';':• . - .. .. • ..u.Work Performed UnderbDOE Contract No."DE-ACOI-O2GJ79491for the U.S. Department ofEnergy Office of Legacy Management.
"Approed forpublic release; distrbution is unlimited.
Verification Monitoring Report for the
Gunnison, Colorado, UMTRCA Title I Processing Site
September 2004
Work Performed by S.M. Stoller Corporation under DOE Contract No. DE-AC01-02GJ79491for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Legacy Management, Grand Junction, Colorado
S0138200
Contents
Acronyms and Abbreviations ...................................................................................................... v1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Purpose of Report .................................................................................................... 11.2 Site Status ...................................................................................................................... 11.3 Ground Water Quality .............................................................................................. 41.4 Land and Water Use ................................................................................................. 4
.2.0 Monitoring Program ..................................................................................................... 72.1 Monitoring Network................................................................................................ 72.2 Results of 2004 Monitoring Program ....................................................................... 7
2.2.1 DOE Monitor Wells ..................................................................................... 72.2.2 Domestic Wells ............................................................................................ 102.2.3 Surface Water .............................................................................................. 13
3.0 C onclusions ........................................................................................................................... 134.0 R eferences ............................................................................................................................. 14
Figures
Figure 1. Aerial Photograph of the Gunnison, Colorado, Area ...................... .......................... 2Figure 2. Proposed Institutional Control Boundary at the Gunnison, Colorado, Processing Site.. 3Figure 3. Uranium Distribution from May 2004 Sampling, Gunnison, Colorado ...................... 5Figure 4. Manganese Distribution from May 2004 Sampling, Gunnison, Colorado ................. 6Figure 5. Uranium Concentrations in Ground Water in DOE Monitor Wells at the Gunnison,
C olorado, Site ................................................................................... ! .............................. 9Figure 6. Manganese Concentrations in Ground Water for DOE Monitor Wells at the
Gunnison, Colorado, Site............................................................................................ 10Figure 7. Uranium Concentrations in Ground Water in Domestic Wells at the Gunnison,
Colorado, Site .......................................................................................... ........... 11Figure 8. Manganese Concentrations in Ground Water in Domestic Wells at the Gunnison,
Colorado, Site ....... ........................................................................................................ 11Figure 9. Uranium Concentrations in Surface Water at the Gunnison, Colorado, Site ............ 12Figure 10. Manganese Concentrations in Surface Water at the Gunnison, Colorado, Site ..... 12Figure 11. Uranium Concentration-Monitor Well 0113 at the Gunnison, Colorado, Site ......... 14
Tables
Table 1. Ground Water and Surface Water Monitoring at the Gunnison Site ............................ 8
U.S. Department of Energy Verification Monitoring Report-Gunnison, ColoradoSeptember 2004 Doc. No. S0138200
Page iii
.. Appendices
Appendix A-Ground Water Quality Data by Parameter for DOE Monitor WellsAppendix B--Ground Water Quality Data by Parameter for Domestic WellsAppendix C---Surface Water Quality Data by Parameter
Verification Monitoring Report-Gunnison, ColoradoDoc. No. S0138200Page iv
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environmentconstituent of potential concernU.S. Department of EnergyEnvironmental AssessmentU.S. Environmental Protection AgencyFinding of no Significant Impactfoot (feet)Ground Water Compliance Action Planinstitutional control(s)maximum concentration limitmilligram(s) per literU.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissionrisk-based concentrationresidual radioactive materialSite Observational Work PlanUranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control ActVerification Monitoring Report
U.S. Department of EnergySeptember 2004
Verification Monitoring Report--Gunnison, ColoradoDoec. No. SO 138200
Page v
End of cfirrent text
.°..
Verification Monitoring Report--Gunnison, ColoradoDoc. No. S0138200Page vi
U.S. Department of EnergySeptember 2004
1.0 Introduction
1.1 Purpose of Report
The purpose of this Verification Monitoring Report (VMR) is to evaluate ground water andsurface water monitoring data collected during the annual 2004 sampling event at the Gunnison,Colorado, Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act (UMTRCA) Title I processing site andto assess the status of the compliance strategy for ground water cleanup (Figure 1). Detailedinformation for the Gunnison processing site and water quality data through 1999 are found inthe Final Site Observational Work Plan (SOWP) (DOE 2001a). Water quality data from 2000through 2003 are found in the previous VMR (DOE 2003). Water quality data for 2004 areprovided in Appendices A through C of this report. All water quality data for the Gunnisonprocessing site are archived in the SEEPro database at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)Grand Junction Office.
Information regarding monitoring and compliance with water quality standards at the Gunnisondisposal site (6 miles east of the processing site) is reported in the 2003 Annual Site Inspectionand Monitoring Report for Uranium Mill Tailings Radiation Control Act Title I Disposal Sites(DOE 2004).
1.2 Site Status
The SOWP (DOE 2001a) is complete arid has been conditionally accepted by the U.S. NuclearRegulatory Commission (NRC) and the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment(CDPHE). The conditions are that DOE shaill install two additional monitor wells in the networkdowngradient from the site and implement institutional controls (IC) in the potentially affectedarea (NRC 2002) (Figure 2). A draft Ground Water Compliance Action Plan (GCAP) wascompleted based on information in the SOWP (DOE 2001b).
Additional review of the monitoring network was initiated by a letter from DOE to NRC andCDPHE dated August 26, 2003 and a follow-up site visit on September 11, 2003. This led to aletter and Technical Evaluation Report from NRC to DOE dated July 9, 2004 where NRC(1) accepted the proposed locations of the above-mentioned monitor wells; (2) determinedlocations for 3 additional monitor wells to be installed north of Tomichi Creek upstream from itsconfluence with the South Fork of the -Gunnison River; (3) added 3 existing domestic wellssouth of Tomichi Creek to the ground water monitoring network; (4) concluded that 36 unneededmonitor wells could be decommissioned; and (5) added 10 existing monitor wells to themonitoring network (NRC 2004). Installation of the additional monitor wells anddecommissioning activities are scheduled to be conducted before the end of Fiscal Year 2004.Modifications to the monitoring program will be implemented in Fiscal Year 2005.
Discussions with Gunnison County officials and CDPHE regarding ICs and expansion of theexisting domestic water supply System are in progress. The final Environmental Assessment(EA) (DOE 2002) and Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) have been completed anddistributed.
U.S. Department of Energy Verification Monitoring Report-Gunnison, ColoradoSeptember 2004 Doc. No. S0138200Page I
cOLbRADON
-*Gunnison
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY I S.M. Stoller CorporationORAND JUNC110N. COLORtADO 1n18. DOO CmlKomm i~c-om OLORDO . DE-AC01-02GJ'PJ4jl
'Aerial Photograph of the Gunnison, Colorado AreaOctober 1999
September 30, 2004 I S0138300-01I
WWAI I I WN4NOI)DO11201383s0136300.aprcmwh 913W004. W23
. Figure 1. Aerial.Photograph of the,Gunnison, Colorado, Area
rj "lnstitutional Control. Boundaiy'- Water Treatment Plant and Distnbution System September 30, 2004 S
~0
CL • Figure 2. Proposed Ihstitutional Control Boundary'at the Gunnison, Colorado, Processing Site
- " lW
te
IThe GCAP*ill1rh. teviged wheih'th'hb-e61r•6nitbfiifg bonditir6hs arie't and'ICSarfe iifiplace.The final GCAP will be submitted to NRC for concurrence and will provide the guidance forilong-term management.activities at the Gunnison processing site.
1.3 Ground Water Quality
Ground water'-in the alluvial aquifer beneath and downgradient -from the Guniiison processingsite was. contarrnated by uranium processing activities. Uranium mill tailings.and other re:idualradioativpe material (RRM) were removed from the millsite between 1992 and 1995 andstabilized.in adisp6sal cell 6 miles east of Gunnison. RRM beneath the site Was cleaned up tojust below the water table with some contaminated material left in place. Clean fill was placedabove.th ee areas to prevent radiation from emanating to the surface.
Uraniuim is the primaty constituent of potential concern (COPC) in ground water, withconcen1trations up. to 6.80 milligrams per liter (mg/L) beneath the site, and exceeding the
uranium maximum concentration limit (MCL) of 0.044 mgfL (40 CFR 192) several thousandfeet downgradiet. from the site boundary (Figure 3 and Appendix A). Concentrations of uraniumin ground water below the MCL, but above background, extend approximately 7,000 feet (ft)downiradient from the site boundary and have migrated beneath the Gunnison River just beyondthe confluence with Tomichi Creek. The zone of contamination attenuates and migrates deeperinto the aquifer as it progresses laterally in a southwesterly direction.
Manganese is also a COPC in ground water, with concentrations up to 10.0 mg/L beneath the site(Figurk 4.afand Appendix A). There is no MCL for manganese, but an acceptable human healthrisk-basdd concentration (RBC) is 1.7 mg/L (DOE 2001 a). Manganese does not appear to be-widespread in the. aquifer and concentrations beneath the site are decreasing. Concentrations ofmanganese are daboVe the RBC beneath.arid immediately downgradient from site. Concentrationsare below the RB,.C.in all other downgradient monitor wells. The presence of manganese .abovethe RBCin grounid water in the area of the processing site does not represent a risk to humanhealth afid the enrvironment because of ground water use restrictions (DOE 2001 a).
1.4 JLad anad Water Use
The fdrnie, uranium-ore processing-site is owned by Gunnison County. Adjacent properties areowned by Gunnison County, Valco;In.c., and other private parties. Valco, Inc. is involved incommercial aggregate nmining operations just soutl of the Gunnison site. Some of the adja'centarea most likelywill be.subject to residential development in the future. A domestic water supplysystem was constructed in 1994 to provide drinking water to potentially impacted users in thearea (Figure 2). Discuissions with Gunnison County officials and CDPHE regarding ICs andexpansion of the*.existing domestic water supply system are in progress.
.. (...0011)"- - Site Boundary" I0685 Existing Sitel
(0.0. 0683, ,Boundary.
(0.0024102 6 (06V93Y-
(0.0029l06 7" 0....(0.01(.02)-4 oil.'--.•
==,._ 0796• •3:J" ".•New Mexico' .. '
'• 005'"•• 0038 I: • Principal Meridjeh
- o'..(0.33 00.. 1- %o82.'
i .8h 18 - (.0 0081 .,; (0.014) / '"• (0.014)"
10 00045
=~( .- 5o6o)
-." - - Uranium Concentration > 0.0.44 mg/L .0*Existing DOE' Monitor Well ""NI uS. DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Sl.M. Sltatler Corporation.Domestic Well Note: 'Uranium Concentrations are •,u¢o.oo •oc,,
"A Surface Water Sample Location , Shown in Parenthesis for. each Urnu NDistribution •1•
Pr Tocvnshl
Townhd Range.. Sampl Loct .o in mg . from May 2004 Sampling
-- -Manganese Concentration> 1.7 mglL .00"•80•.^* Existing DOE Monitor we!! - .S DPATMNTOo Domestic" W e!!" Note:. Manganese Concentrations are. o= u• o co,.A Surface Water Sample Location Shomn in Parenthesis for each
To*•li•I .. •. Sample Location in mgfL i I Man-Townsh. Range •i from
-Road00 -.....Stream . 1500 0 1500 Feet
• • ive • :" : •= - i: II •September 30, 2(00
Figure 4. Manganese Distribution from May 2004 Sampling, Gunnison, Colorado
ow Aim wý ala Om-
2.00- M-iWito ring P'rgraim.- I:
2.1 Monitoring'Network
Locations in tthe monitoring network at the Gunnison processing site sampled during May 2004included ihirteen DOE, monitor wells, five surface water locations, and nine domestic wells in thearea (Figure 3 and Table 1) (DOE 2001a and 2001b). Uranium and manganeseare the COPCs thatwere analyzed during thi's period. Annual ground water and surface water verification monitoringas proposed in the SOWP and GCAP was implemented id May 2000. Results for the May 2004sampling event are presented in this report. The next update to this report will be compiled afterground water and surfac6 water monitoring in May 2005.
Verification monitoring will be performed annually for the first 5 years after NRC concurrencewith the GCAP (revision in progress) to ascertain that natural flushing is progressing as predictedby ground water flow and transport modeling (DOE 2001 a). Ongoing monitoring requirementswill be periodically evaluated and modified as determined by DOE and the regulators.
2.2 Results of 2004 Monitoring Program
Ground, water and surface water analytical results through October .1999 are discussed in theSOWP (DOE 2001a), and results from 2000 through 2003 are 'presented and discussed in theprevious VMR (DOE 2003). Only concentrations of uranium and manganese in ground water andsurface water are discussed in this report since they are the CQPCs. Concentration versus timeplots for uranium and manganese in DOE monitor Wells, domestic wells, and surface water, from1997 (post-remedial;action) through 2004, are shown in Figure 5 through Figure 10, respectively.The allqvial aquifer has been divided into three zones: (1) shallow zone from 10 to 15 ft;(2) intermediate zone from 35 to 60 ft;,and (3) deep zone from 90 to 100 ft (Table 1). Analyticaldata f6r ufanium and manganese in ground water in DOE monitor wells and domestic wells, andsurface iter for 2004 are provided in Appendices A through C, respectively.
2.2.1 ]?OE Monitor Wells.
Concenir'tions of uranium in ground water in DOE monitoi wells are shown in Figure 5.Concen'trations of uranium in the shallow zone beneath the site (monitor wells 0006 and 0012) arestill above the MCL of 0.044 mg/L. Con~entrations .have decreased since 2003 and the overalltrend iddicates that natural flushing in ground water in the alluvial aquifer is progressing.Concentrations of uranium in ground water in the intermediate zone beneath the site (monitor well0106 anid 0112) remaih,:at or below'background levels. Uranium concentrations in ground waterjust off-the southwestcorner of the site are elevated deeper. in the alluvium' with levels below theMCL in the shallow zone (monitor well 0013) and above theMCL in the intermediateý zone(monit6r well 0113). Concentrations are below the MCL and decreasing in monitor wells 0126(intermediate zone) and-0127 .(deep zone), with concentrations slightly more elevated in the deepzone. Concentrations.are above the MCL in monitor well 0183 in'the deep zone and are decreasing;slightly. Concentrations'are less than the MCL, but also decreasing in monitor well 0188(intermediate zone), and are relatively constant in monitor well 0189 (deep zone). Concentrationsare less than the MCL and slowly decreasing in monitor wells 0160 (intermediate zone) and 0161(deep zone) across the Gunnison River. This pattern of concentration intensity and distribution
U.S. Department of Energy Verification Monitoring Report-Gunnison, ColoradoSeptember 2004 Doc. No. SO 138200Page 7
shows that uranium in ground water is migrating deeper in the alluvial sequence while progressingdowngradient from the site, as predicted.
Table 1. Summary of Ground Water and Surface Water Monitoring Network at the Gunnison, Colorado,Processing Site
II
Location
Ground Water - DOE Monitor Wells
0006 Shallow 10-15 On site Above MCL
0106 Intermediate 34-39 On site Background-... 0012 Shallow 10-15 On site Above MCL
0112 Intermediate 40-45 On site Background
0013 Shallow 11-16 Just off site Below MCL
0113 Intermediate 41-46 Just off site Above MCL
0126 Intermediate 54-59 Downgradient Below MCL
0127 Deep 94-99 Downgradient Below MCL
0183 Deep 93-98 Beneath golf course Above MCL
0188 Intermediate 53-58 West of Gunnison River Above background
0189 Deep 93-98 West of Gunnison River Above background
0160 Intermediate 51-56 West of Gunnison River Above background
0161 Deep 93-98 West of Gunnison River Above background
Surface Water
0248 Tomichi Creek Near Valco gravel pit
0777 Tomichi Creek Downstream
0780 Valco gravel pit At MCL
0792 Gunnison River Upstream
0795 Gunnison River Downstream
Ground Water - Domestic Wells
0080 Shallow Unknown Southeast of Tomichi Creek ..Subdivision
0081 Shallow Unknown Southeast of Tomichi Creek Subdivision
0082 Shallow Unknown Southeast of Tomichi Creek Subdivision
0468 Shallow Unknown East of Gunnison River Subdivision
0469 Shallow Unknown West of Gunnison River Subdivision
0665 Shallow Unknown West of Gunnison River Subdivision
0667 Shallow Unknown West of Gunnison River Subdivision
0683 Shallow Unknown West of Gunnison River Subdivision
0685 Shallow Unknown West of Gunnison River Subdivision
Concentrations of manganese in ground water beneath the site are above the RBC of 1.7 mg/L inthe intermediate zone, with concentrations below the RBC in the shallow zone (Figure 6). Allexceedences of the RBC are beneath or immediately adjacent to the south end of the site.Concentrations are generally decreasing over time. I
Figure 6. Manganese Concentrations in Ground Water for DOE Monitor Wells at theGunnison, Colorado, Site
2.2.2 Domestic Wells
Concentrations of uranium in ground water in the domestic wells downgradient from the site arewell below the MCL of 0.044 mg/L and below the action level set by CDPHE of 0.020 mg/L(Figure 7). Concentration of uranium in the agricultural well (0468) is well below the CDPHEaction level of 0.200 mg/L.
Ground water has been sampled since 2002 in three new domestic wells (0080, 0081, and 0082)installed just southeast of Tomichi Creek in the new Tomichi Creek Preserve subdivision. Thewells are approximately 44 ft deep and the open interval in the casing is uiiknown. Concentrationsof uranium in ground water in these three wells during the past three years has ranged from 0.002to 0.0155 mg/L, with the maximum below the CDPHE action level of 0.020 mg/L for domesticwells. The uranium concentration in ground water in well 0082 was slightly above the upper rangeof background (0.0085 mg/L) (DOE .1996) during May 2003 (0.016 mg/L) and May 2004 (0.014mg/L). It was resampled in September 2003 and the 'uranium concentration was below backgroundat 0.0064 mg/L. The validity and consistency of results from the domestic well may bequestionable as the turbidity.of the water from the well was elevated above that normally requiredduring sampling of DOE monitor wells. Also, the construction of the well is unknown, and mayhave an impact on water quality results. DOE does not use results from domestic wells forcharacterization activities because of these uncertainties. To assess ground water quality in thispart of the aquifer, DOE will install a monitor well adjacent to domestic well 0082 in 2004.
Concentrations of manganese in ground water in the domestic wells are well below the RBC of1.7 mg/L (Figure 8).
Concentrations of uranium in surface water in the Gunnison River during 2004 were at orbelow the background level of 0.003 mg/L, indicating no site-related contamination in the river(Figure 9). Concentration of uranium in surface water in the Valco, Inc. pond (0780) increasedslightly during 2004 and is just at the MCL for ground water. Variable concentrations of uraniumin surface water in the pit are expected since it is recharged by contaminated ground water;concentrations vary depending on the area and depth of pumping, the rate of discharge, andseasonal interactions between ground water and surface water. Concentration of uranium inTomichi Creek approximately 1,500 ft downstream from the Valco, Inc. pond discharge point(0248) was below background levels for ground water during 2004. Concentration farther downTomichi Creek, before the confluence with the Gunnison River, was also below backgroundlevels.
Concentrations of manganese in surface water are well below the RBC of 1.7 mgJL (Figure 10).
3.0 Conclusions
Concentrations of uranium and manganese in ground water beneath the Gunnison processing siteare still above the relevant MCLs and RBCs, but are". decreasing with time, indicating that naturalflushing is occurring in the alluvial aquifer (Figure 5 and Figure 6). Concentrations of uranium inground water downgradient from the site and deeper in the alluvial aquifer in some areas are stillelevated, as expected, as the plume migrates downgradient.
Concentrations of COPCs in ground water in the domestic wells are below the MCL and CDPHEaction levels for uranium, and below the RBC for manganese (Figure 7 and Figure 8).
Concentrations of uranium in surface water of the Gunnison River are below 0.001 mg/L,indicating no site-related contamination of the river.(Figure 9). Concentrations of uranium insurface water in the Valco, Inc. pond are variable, which is expected because the pit is rechargedby contaminated ground water. Based on a risk assessment in the SOWP, there is no unacceptablerisk to human health at these levels (DOE 2001 a). Concentrations of uranium are belowbackground levels for ground water in Tomichi Creek. Concentrations of manganese in surfacewater are at or less than 0.05 mg/L (Figure 10)..
Comparison of uranium concentrations in ground water just off the southwest comer of the site inthe intermediate zone in the alluvial aquifer predicted by ground water flow and transportmodeling, versus actual conceritrations determined by analysis of ground water samples frommonitor well 0113, are shown in Figure 11. There is good correlation between the predicted andactual results, show' ing that the natural flushing process is working in ground water in the alluvialaquifer.
U.S. Department of Energy Verification Monitoring Report-Gunnison. ColoradoSeptember 2004 Doc. No. S0138200
Page 13
0
U
U
C
E
U
0200 -
GU1 -01 3
0.150
0.100-
0.050 1 A
0. 0 0 0 -MI-L
0' cli N.nN N
CD C130F3 NY. N N
0N
0N
(DE0NY
r, 0DZN
004
Date
Figure 11. Uranium Concentration---. Monitor Well 0113 at the Gunnison, Colorado, Site
4.0 References
U.S. Department of Energy (DOE), 1996. Baseline Risk Assessment of Ground WaterContamination at the Uranium Mill Tailings Site Near Gunnison, Colorado, DOEIAL/62350-57,Rev.2, June.
,2001 a. Final Site Observational Work Plan for the Gunnison, Colorado, UMTRA ProjectSite, GJO-2001-214-TAR, March.
200 lb. Ground Water Compliance Action Plan for the Gunnison, Colorado, UMTRAProject Site, draft, GJO-2001-233-TAR, July; revision in progress.
2002. Environmental Assessment of Ground Water Compliance at the Gunnison,Colorado, UMTRA Project Site, DOE/EA-1399, Final, July.
2003. Verification Monitoring Report for the Gunnison, Colorado, UMTRA Project Site,GJO-2003-469-TAC, August.
__,_ 2004. 2003 Annual Site Inspection and Monitoring Report for Uranium Mill TailingsRadiation Control Act Title I Disposal Sites, GJO-2003-528-TAC, January.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), 2002. "Review of the Final Site ObservationalWork Plan for the Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Project Site at Gunnison, Colorado",letter from NRC to DOE dated January 29, 2002.
_ ,_ 2004. "DOE Request to Decommission Monitor Wells at the Gunnison, Colorado,Uranium Mill Tailings Remedial Action Project Site (TAC L51108)", letter from NRC to DOEdated July 9, 2004.
GROUND WATER QUALITY DATA BY PARAMETER WITH DEPTH (USEE200) FOR SITE GUN01, Gunnison Processing SiteREPORT DATE: 9113/2004 11:16 am
LOCATION .LOCATION SAMPLE: DEPTH RANGE QUALIFIERS: DETECTION UN-PARAMETER UNITS ID TYPE DATE ID (FT BLS) RESULT LAB DATA QA LIMIT CERTAINTY
RECORDS: SELECTED FROM USEE200 WHERE site code='GUNO'AND location code inC006'012',0013',W6'112','0113','0126','0127','0160'0 61'.'01B30188,'0189') AND quality assuranceTRUE AND (data validationqualifiers IS NULL OR datavalidationpqualiiers NOT LIKE '%R%' AND dataLvalidationrqualifiers NOT LIKE '%X%' ) AND DATE SAMPLED between #5/1/2004#and #5W302004#
SAMPLE ID CODES: 000X= Filtered sample (0.45 pm). N00X= Unfiltered sample. X replicate number.
LOCATION TYPES: WL WELL
LAB QUALIFIERS:* Replicate analysis not within control limits.+ Correlation coefficient for MSA < 0.995.> Result above upper detection limit.A TIC Is a suspected aldol-condensation product.B Inorganic: Result Is between the IDL'and CRDL Organic: Analyte also found in method blank.C Pesticide result confirmed by GC-MS.D Analyte determined in diluted sample.E Inorganic: Estimate value because of interference, see case narrative. Organic: Analyte exceeded calibration range of the GC-MS.H Holding time expired, value suspect.I Increased detection limit due to required dilution.J EstimatedM GFAA duplicate injection precision not met.N Inorganic or radiochemical: Spike sample recovery not within control limits. Organic: Tentatively identified compund (TIC).P > 25% difference in detected pesticide or Arochlor concentrations between 2 columns.S Result determined by method of standard addition (MSA).U Analytical result below detection limit.W Post-digestion spike outside control limits while sample absorbance < 50% of analytical spike absorbance.X Laboratory defined (USEPA CLP organic) qualifier, see case narrative.Y Laboratory defined (USEPA CLP organic) qualifier, see case narrative.Z Laboratory defined (USEPA CLP organic) qualifier, see case narrative.
DATA QUALIFIERS:F Low flow sampling method used. G Possible grout contamination, pH > 9. J Estimated value.L Less than 3 bore volumes purged pror to sampling. Q Qualitative result due to sampling technique R Unusable result.U Parameter analyzed for but was not detected. X Location is undefined.
QA QUALIFIER: # = validated according to Quality Assurance guidelines.
Page 6
Appendix B
Ground Water Quality Data by Parameter for Domestic Wells
pm_ - -0 - I -_ - - - - - 0- -~ -K -a -
CLASSIC GROUND WATER QUALITY DATA BY PARAMETER WITH ZONE (USEE201) FOR SITE GUN01, Gunnison Processing SiteREPORT DATE: 9/13/2004 11:31 am
LOCATION LOCATION SAMPLE: ZONE FLOW QUALIFIERS: DETECTION UN-
PARAMETER UNITS ID TYPE DATE ID COMPL REL. RESULT LAB DATA QA LIMIT CERTAINTY
Alkalinity, Total (As CaCO3 mg/L 0080 WL 05/12/2004 N001 NR 119. # -
mg/L 0081 WL 05/12/2004 N001 NR 149 F #-
mg/L 0082 WL 05/12/2004 N001 NR 226 F #-
mg/L 0468 WL 05/12/2004 N001 AL D 74 F #-
mg/L 0469 WL 05/11/2004 N001 AL D 98 #-
mg/L 0665 WL 05/11/2004 N001 AL C 114 #-
mg/L 0667 WL 05/12/2004 N001 AL N 123 #
mg/L 0683 WL 05/11/2004 N001 NR N 101 #
mg/L 0685 WL 05/11/2004 N001 NR N 106 #
Manganese mg/L 0080 WL 05/1212004 N001 NR 0.200 # 7.7E-05
mg/L 0081 WL 05/12/2004 N001 NR 0.240 F # 7.7E-05
mgIL 0082 WL 05/12/2004 N001 NR 0.200 F # 7.7E-05
mg/L 0468 WL 05/1212004 N001 AL D 0.550 F # 7.7E-05 -
mg/L 0469 WL 05/11/2004 N001 AL D 0.014 E # 7.7E-05 -
mg/L 0665 WL 05/11/.2004 N001 AL C 0.015 # 7.7E-05 -
mg/L 0667 WL 05/12/2004 N001 AL N 0.0014 B # 7.7E-05 -
mg/L 0683 WL 05/11/2004 N001 NR N 0.0014 B # 7.7E-05
mg/L 0683 WL 05/1112004 •N002 NR N 0.0014 B # 7.7E-05
mg/L 0685 WL 05/11/2004 N001 NR N 0.00013 B U # 7.7E-05
CLASSIC GROUND WATER QUALITY DATA BY PARAMETER WITH ZONE (USEE201) FOR SITE GUN01, Gunnison Processing SiteREPORT DATE: 9/13/2004 11:31 am
LOCATION LOCATION SAMPLE: ZONE FLOW QUALIFIERS: DETECTION UN-
PARAMETER- UNITS • ID TYPE DATE ID COMPL REL. RESULT LAB DATA QA LIMIT CERTAINTY
Sulfate mg/L 0667 WL 05/12/2004 N001 AL N 26 2.5
mg/L 0683 WL 05/11/2004 N001 NR N 25 2.5
mg/L 0683 WL 05/11/2004 N002 NR N 26 # 2.5
mg/L 0685 WL 05/11/2004 N001 NR N 26 # 2.5
Temperature C 0080 WL 05/212004 N001 NR 9.75 # -
C 0081 WL 05/12/2004 N001 NR 10.26 F #
C 0082 WL 05/12k2004 N001 NR 7.84 F #
C 0468 WL 05/12/2004 N001 AL D 5.82 F # -
C 0469' WL 05/11/2004 NOWI AL D 10.39 #- -
C 0665 WL 05/i1/2004 N001 AL C 8.39 # - -
C 0667 WL 05/12/2004 N601 AL N 7.93 # -
C 0683 WL 05r1112004 1I001 NR N 10.33 # -
C. 0685 WL 05/1112004 NOO1 NR N 118.36 "# -
Turbidity NTU 0080 WL 05/12/2004 N001 NR 2.60 # -
NTU '0081 WL 05/12/2004 N001 NR -. 45.3 F #. -
NTU 0082 WL 05/12/2004 N00f NR 131 F #
NTU 0468 WL 05/12/2004 NO0i AL D 52.8• F #
.NTU 0469 WL 05111/2004 N001. AL D 3.88 #
NTU 0665 WL 05/11/2004 N001 AL C 0.86 #
NTU 0657, WL 05/12/2004 N001 AL N 3.96' #
NTU 0683 WL 05/11/2004 N001 NR N 0.53 #
NTU 0685 WL 05/11/2004 N001 NR N 0.59 #
Uranium mg/L 0080 WL 05/12/2004 N001 NR .0.0045 # 6.9E-06mg/L 0081 WL 05/12/2004 N001 NR 0.0037 F # 6.9E-06
mg/L 0082 WL-" 05112/2004 N001 NR .0.014 ýF # 6.9E-06
mg/L . 0468 WL 05./12/20Q4 N001 AL D 0.0032 . " F.. # " 6.9E-06 -
Page 3
CLASSIC GROUND WATER QUALITY DATA BY PARAMETER WITH ZONE (USEE201) FOR SITE GUN01, Gunnison Processing SiteREPORT DATE: 9/13/2004 11:31 am
LOCATION LOCATION SAMPLE: ZONE FLOW QUALIFIERS: DETECTION UN-
PARAMETER UNITS ID TYPE DATE ID COMPL REL. RESULT LAB DATA QA LIMIT CERTAINTY
Uranium mg/L .0469 WL 05/11/2004 N001 AL D 0.0018 E # 6.9E-06 -
mg.L 0665 WL 05/1112004 N01 AL, C 0.0028 # 6.9E-06
mgIL 0667 WL 0511212004 NO01 AL N 0.0024 # 6.9E-06
mg/L _0683 WL 05/1212004 N001 NR N 0.0014 # 6.9E-06 .
mg/L 0683 . WL 05/11/2004 N002 NR N 0.0015 # 6.9E-06 -mg/L *06853. WL 05/11/2004 •N002 NR N 0.0013 6.9E-06 Img/L ..06.85,i . WL .. 05/11/2004 N001 NR N 0.0013 # 6.9E-06
•Pae. .
• .. ,. ...... *.*"...
-. ,,...
• . . . " . . ...
Page 4
CLASSIC GROUND WATER QUALITY DATA BY PARAMETER WITH ZONE (USEE201) FOR SITE GUN01, Gunnison Processing SiteREPORT DATE: 9/13/2004 11:31 am
LOCATION LOCATION SAMPLE: ZONE FLOW QUALIFIERS: DETECTION UN-PARAMETER UNITS ID TYPE DATE ID COMPL REL. RESULT LAB DATA QA LIMIT CERTAINTY
RECORDS: SELECTED FROM USEE200 WHERE site code=GUNO0 AND location code in(ý0080','0081','0082,'0468','0469','0665,'066,'80683','0685') AND qualityassurance =TRUE AND(data-validationqualifiers IS NULL OR dataGvalidationqualifiers NOT LIKE %R%' AND data-validation qualifiers NOT LIKE %X%' )AND DATE-SAMPLED between #5/112004# and#5/30/2004#
SAMPLE ID CODES: 000X = Filtered sample (0.45 pm). NOOX = Unfiltered sample. X = replicate number.
LOCATION TYPES: WL WELL
ZONES OF COMPLETION:AL ALLUVIUM NR NO RECOVERY OF DATA FOR CLASSIFYING
FLOW CODES: C CROSS GRADIENT D DOWN GRADIENT N UNKNOWN
LAB QUALIFIERS:Replicate analysis not within control limits.
+ Correlation coefficient for MSA < 0.995.* Result above upper detection limitA TIC is a suspected aldol-condensation product.B Inorganic: Result Is between the IDL and CRDL Organic: Analyte also found in method blank.C Pesticide result confirmed by GC-MS.D Analyte determined in diluted sample.E Inorganic: Estimate value because of interference, see case narrative. Organic: Analyte exceeded calibration range of the GC-MS.H Holding time expired, value suspect.I Increased detection limit due to required dilution.J EstimatedM GFAA duplicate Injection precision not met.N Inorganic or radiochemical: Spike sample recovery not within control limits. Organic:. Tentatively identified compund (TIC).P > 25% difference in detected pesticide or Arochlor concentrations between 2 columns.S Result determined by method of standard addition (MSA).U Analytical result below detection limit.
W Post-digestion spike outside control limits while sample absorbance < 50% of analytical spike absorbance.X Laboratory defined (USEPA CLP organic) quali.ier, see case narrative.Y Laboratory defined (USEPA CLP organic) qualifier, see case narrative.Z Laboratory defined (USEPA CLP organic) qualifier, see case narrative.
DATA QUALIFIERS:F Low flow sampling method used. G Possible grout contamination. pH > 9. J Estimated value.L Less than 3 bore volumes purged prior to sampling. 0. Qualitative result due to sampling technique R Unusable result.U Parameter analyzed for but was not detected. X Location is undefined. .
QA QUALIFIER: # validated according to Quality Assurance guidelines... .
Page 5
I
Appendix C
Surface Water Quality Data by Parameter
SURFACE WATER QUALITY DATA BY PARAMETER (USEE800) FOR SITE GUN01, Gunnison Processing SiteREPORT DATE: 9/13/2004 11:31 am
LOCATION SAMPLE: QUALIFIERS: DETECTION UN-
PARAMETER UNITS ID DATE ID RESULT LAB DATA QA. LIMIT CERTAINTY
Alkalinity, Total (As CaCO3 mg/L 0248 05/12/2004 0001 98 #-
RECORDS: SELECTED FROM USEE800 WHERE site code='GUN6l AND qualityassurance = TRUE AND (data-validationqualifiers IS NULLOR data.validation qualifiers NOT LIKE /o'R%' AND datavalidationqualifiers NOT LIKE '%X%' ) AND DATE-SAMPLED between#5/1/2004# and #5/3012004#
SAMPLE ID CODES: O00X = Filtered sample (0.45 pm). NOOX = Unfiltered sample. X = replicate number.
LAB QUALIFIERS:* Replicate analysis not within control limits.+ Correlation coefficient for MSA <0.995.* Result above upper detection limit.A TIC Is a suspected aldol-condensation product.B Inorganic: Result is between the IDL and CRDL. 'Organic: Analyte also found in method blank.C Pesticide result confirmed by GC-MS.D Analyte determined In diluted sample.E Inorganic: Estimate value because of interference, see case narrative. Organic: Analyte exceeded calibration range of the GC-MS.H Holding time expired, value suspect.I Increased detection limit due to required dilution.J EstimatedM GFAA duplicate injection precision not met.N Inorganic or radiochemical: Spike sample recovery not within control limits. Organic: Tentatively identified compund (TIC).P > 25% difference in detected pesticide or Arochlor concentrations between 2 columns.S Result determined by method of standard addition (MSA).U Analytical result below detection limit.W Post-digestioh spike outside control limits while sample absorbance < 50% of analytical spike absorbance.X Laboratory defined (USEPA CLP organic) qualifier, see case narrative.Y Laboratory defined (USEPA CLP organic) qualifier, see case narrative.
Z Laboratory defined (USEPA CLP organic) qualifier, see case narrative.
DATA QUALIFIERS:FJ
U
Low flow sampling method used.Estimated value.Qualitative result due to sampling techniqueParameter analyzed for but was not detected.
G Possible grout contamination. pH > 9.L Less than 3 bore volumes purged prior to sampling.R Unusable result.X Location Is undefined.
QA QUALIFIER: # = validated according to Quality Assurance guidelines.