Search NASA⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search NASA

Results for “Waste Compliance”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 217 records · Page 12

West Valley Demonstration Project (WVDP) Annual Site Environmental Report (ASER) for Calendar Year 2024

The report, prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy West Valley Demonstration Project office (DOE-WVDP), summarizes the environmental protection program at the WVDP for calendar year (CY) 2024. Monitoring and surveillance of the facilities used by the DOE are conducted to verify protection of public health and safety and the environment. The report is a key component of DOE’s effort to keep the public informed of environmental conditions at the WVDP. The quality assurance protocols applied to the environmental monitoring program ensure the validity and accuracy of the monitoring data. In addition to demonstrating compliance with environmental laws, regulations, and directives, evaluation of data collected in 2024 continued to indicate that WVDP activities pose no threat to public health or safety, or to the environment.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Waste Management Project Success - Regulatory Assurance Systems - 20118

Waste management (WM) and remediation projects are essential within a restorative environmental culture. Despite years of experience, challenges and obstacles associated with efficient and effective WM project execution remain. Although some obstacles are project specific, a common challenge is navigating the regulatory landscape from planning through execution, particularly with first of a kind (FOAK) and first in a while (FIAW) projects. The absence of a comprehensive regulatory assurance strategy places significant hurdles in the path of project success. To clear a path for the successful execution of increasingly complex WM projects, this paper focuses on development of a comprehensive regulatory assurance strategy and implementation plan that effectively engages stakeholders, agencies, and performers to produce project plans that fully and cost effectively integrate applicable regulatory requirements. The most reliable way to align regulatory processes and decisions needed for mission success is through a regulatory assurance system. This system establishes a healthy interface with regulatory decision makers, to work in a collaborative manner, to create a common vision for regulatory decisions on an agreed upon schedule. A regulatory assurance system consists of several elements. Although the mission may vary from cleanup to site closure to nuclear component production, the elements of a regulatory assurance system remain essentially constant and must include: 1) identifying a common vision or end state, 2) developing a long-term, integrated strategy and schedule, 3) establishing a regulatory partnering team consisting of key decision-makers, 4) regular and frequent communication with decision-makers, 5) ensuring consistent surveillance for early identification of issues and changes that may impact the project, 6) quick resolution of emerging issues to prevent schedule impact, 7) identifying core compliance functions, 8) periodically assessing progress of the project as it relates to regulatory assurance and, 9) providing constructive feedback to improve the process. A regulatory assurance system provides a living, multi-faceted approach to planning, visioning, communicating and tracking to avoid surprises and ensure smooth and timely progress to the project. The overall success measures will be whether the system produces common sense regulatory decisions supporting the vision on time without appeal. Effective regulatory frameworks rarely happen on their own. Balanced, common-sense regulatory decisions stem from teams that are trained to work together to achieve shared goals. In this paper, particular attention is placed on the importance of starting with a shared vision for a regulatory assurance and execution strategy that leverages experience to establish optimal approaches. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Techno-economic evaluation of emission control configurations for AMP/PZ-based post-combustion CO 2 capture

Minimizing the environmental impacts of amine-based post-combustion carbon capture technologies is essential for regulatory compliance and public acceptance. Experimental campaigns at RWE's CO 2 capture pilot plant in Niederaussem using CESAR1 demonstrated that combining existing emission abatement technologies can substantially reduce the concentration of amines and degradation products in the CO 2 -depleted flue gas to below the detection limit of an infrared spectrometer. The campaign confirmed that a proprietary dry bed technology (OEASE aerozone™) or a second water wash can reduce AMP and PZ emissions to below 1 mg/Nm 3 . However, an acid or chemically active wash downstream of the water wash is necessary to reduce NH 3 emissions to very low levels (<2 mg/Nm 3 ). Combining a dry bed with an acid wash significantly reduces both the required acid solution and the resulting acid waste. The techno-economic analysis indicates that implementing emission mitigation technologies provides substantial environmental benefits for the CESAR1 process, with only a marginal increase (<1 €/tCO 2 ) in both the carbon capture cost (CCC) and CO 2 avoidance cost (CAC). The additional capital cost associated with extra column packing is offset by operational cost savings from reduced solvent losses. For stringent emission permits targeting NH 3 , a configuration combining a dry bed upstream of the water wash followed by an acid wash achieves the best balance between emission control and cost efficiency. This configuration results in a Levelized Cost of Electricity (LCOE) of 143 €/MWh, a CCC of 45.4 €/tCO 2 , and a CAC of 88.4 €/tCO 2 .

AMP↗

NESHAPs CY19 Report: Radionuclide Air Emission Report for 2019

Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC operates facilities at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) in which radionuclides are handled and stored. These facilities are subject to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) in Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 40, Part 61, Subpart H, which regulates radionuclide emissions to air from Department of Energy (DOE) facilities. Specifically, NESHAPs limits the emission of radionuclides to the ambient air to levels resulting in an annual effective dose equivalent of 10 mrem (100 μSv) to any member of the public. Using measured and calculated emissions, and building-specific and common parameters, LLNL personnel applied the EPA-approved computer code, CAP88-PC, Version 4.0.1.17, to calculate the dose to the maximally exposed individual member of the public for the Livermore Site and Site 300. In 2019, LLNL maintained its compliance with 40 CFR 61, Subpart H. All radioactive air emissions resulted in calculated doses far below the annual 10 mrem (100 μSv) sitewide standard. The annual doses to the site-wide maximally exposed individual member of the public at the Livermore Site and Site 300 from planned and unplanned operations in 2019 are: Livermore Site: 4.3 x 10⁻³ mrem (4.3 x 10⁻² μSv); Site 300: 9.5 x 10⁻⁸ mrem (9.5 x 10⁻⁷ μSv).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Biochemical Conversion of Herbaceous Biomass to Renewable Diesel: Biorefinery Marginal Air Quality Impacts and Comparison to Feedstock Production

This study assesses the air quality impacts of an advanced biorefinery that produces renewable diesel blendstock (RDB) from lignocellulosic biomass via aerobic respiration (Davis et al. 2022) by estimating fine particulate matter (PM2.5) impacts from biorefinery emissions. It continues a prior analysis that used a geospatial assessment to identify source regions for biomass feedstocks and studied the impact of feedstock production emissions on air quality (Thind et al. 2022). Thind et al. (2022) identified RDB biorefineries that can use corn stover feedstocks of 2,000; 5,200; and 9,100 dry metric tons per day (DMT/day), based in Iowa, and suggested 7 unique counties can serve as hosts for a biorefinery that draws biomass feedstock from neighboring counties. Given 13 unique county-biorefinery size combinations and two waste lignin end uses at the biorefinery (lignin as a fuel for electricity generation and lignin for pellet production), the air-quality-related sustainability aspects of each of these 26 scenarios are assessed by estimating the annual average impacts of biorefinery emissions on the dispersion and formation of secondary PM2.5 in the atmosphere using a novel reduced-complexity air quality model called the Intervention Model for Air Pollution (InMAP). The 26 biorefinery design combinations help capture how a biorefinery's emissions of air pollutants and their resulting impact on local and regional air quality are influenced by the magnitude of production scale, lignin utilization strategy, and location of a proposed biorefinery. Methods developed in Thind et al. (2022) are applied to estimate the constraints on primary PM2.5 and secondary PM2.5 precursor emissions based on compliance with U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) annual primary National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) of PM2.5 (i.e.12.0 micrograms per cubic meter (microgram/m3)) at downwind receptors of a biorefinery. Incremental PM2.5 concentrations caused by the emission of biorefining corn stover into RDB are assessed and compared to those of corn stover production. To illuminate which upstream supply chain stage of renewable diesel production contributes most to air quality impacts, marginal PM2.5 concentrations are compared between both stages at multiple downwind air quality monitor locations. In addition, through a hotspot analysis, we identify the primary contributing factors of emissions within the feedstock production and biorefinery stage operations. In doing so, we provide insights for improving the air pollutant emission-related sustainability of advanced lignocellulosic biofuel production.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

MARSAME Radiological Release Report for Diamond Drive Widening and Roundabout Construction Projects, Revision 1

Environmental Protection and Compliance, Environmental Stewardship (EPC-ES) has determined that the soil, concrete and asphalt associated with the Diamond Drive Widening/Roundabout Projects (Figure 1) meets the criteria for unrestricted release to the public under Department of Energy (DOE) Order 458.1, Radiation Protection for the Public and the Environment (DOE, 2020). These conclusions are based on the known history of the area combined with soil sample data collected in 2022; the findings are consistent with DOE Order 458.1 and Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) Functional Series Document EPC-ES-FSD-004, Environmental Radiation Protection (LANL, 2021). Sampling and data analysis, as described in this report, were sufficient to meet measurement quality objectives (MQOs) under the Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Assessment of Materials and Equipment (MARSAME) manual (NUREG, 2009) and LANL procedures (LANL, 2020). Final approvals for waste disposition will come from LANL’s Waste Management Program.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

US EPA Superfund Remediation Program Update: Revisions to Risk and Dose Assessment Models - 20368

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Superfund remedial program is finishing up a significant number of revisions to its guidance for the risk assessment process at radioactively contaminated Superfund sites. The six Preliminary Remediation Goal (PRG) and Dose Compliance Concentration (DCC) internet-based calculators for radiation risk and dose assessment at Superfund sites are being reformatted to match the chemical calculators and improve the user experience, revised to add a new peak risk and dose output option, and to add some adjustment options for external exposure. A new Radon Vapor Intrusion Screening Level (RVISL) calculator is expected to be finished in 2020, will be similar to the Vapor Intrusion Screening Level (VISL) for chemical calculator that was finished in 2018. (authors)

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Private, public, and bottled drinking water: Shared contaminant-mixture exposures and effects challenge

Background: Humans are primary drivers of environmental–contaminant exposures worldwide, including in drinking-water (DW). In the United States, point-of-use DW (POU–DW) is supplied via private tapwater (TW), public-supply TW, and bottled water (BW). Differences in management, monitoring, and messaging and lack of directly–intercomparable exposure data influence the actual and perceived quality and safety of different DW supplies and directly impact consumer decision–making. Objectives: The purpose of this paper is to provide a meta-analysis (quantitative synthesis) of POU–DW contaminant–mixture exposures and corresponding potential human–health effects of private-TW, public-TW, and BW by aggregating exposure results and harmonizing apical–health–benchmark–weighted and bioactivity–weighted effects predictions across previous studies by this research group. Discussion: Simultaneous exposures to multiple inorganic and organic contaminants of known or suspected human-health concern are common across all three DW supplies, with substantial variability observed in each and no systematic difference in predicted cumulative risk between supplies. Differences in contaminant or contaminant–class exposures, with important implications for DW–quality improvements, were observed and attributed to corresponding differences in regulation and compliance monitoring. Conclusion: The results indicate that human-health risks from contaminant exposures are common to and comparable in all three DW–supplies, including BW. Importantly, this study’s target analytical coverage, which exceeds that currently feasible for water purveyors or homeowners, nevertheless is a substantial underestimation of the breadth of contaminant mixtures in the environment and potentially present in DW. Thus, the results emphasize the need for improved understanding of the adverse human-health implications of long-term exposures to low–level inorganic–/organic–contaminant mixtures across all three distribution pipelines and do not support commercial messaging of BW as a systematically safer alternative to public-TW. Regardless of the supply, increased public engagement in source-water protection and drinking–water treatment is necessary to reduce risks associated with long-term DW–contaminant exposures, especially in vulnerable populations, and to reduce environmental waste and plastics contamination.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

MARSAME Radiological Release Report for Diamond Drive Widening and Roundabout Construction Projects

Environmental Protection and Compliance, Environmental Stewardship (EPC-ES) has determined that only a portion of the soil associated with the Diamond Drive Widening/Roundabout Projects (Figure 1) meets the criteria for unrestricted release to the public under Department of Energy (DOE) Order 458.1, Radiation Protection for the Public and the Environment (DOE, 2020). The remaining soil did not meet the criteria for unrestricted release and must be managed appropriately. These conclusions are based on the known history of the area combined with soil sample data collected in 2022; the findings are consistent with DOE Order 458.1 and Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) Functional Series Document EPC-ES-FSD-004, Environmental Radiation Protection (LANL, 2021). Sampling and data analysis, as described in this report, were sufficient to meet measurement quality objectives (MQOs) under the Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Assessment of Materials and Equipment (MARSAME) manual (NUREG, 2009) and LANL procedures (LANL, 2020). Final approvals for waste disposition will come from LANL’s Waste Management Program.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Thermal system and environmental testing of the Mars Helicopter

The Mars Helicopter will be a technology demonstration conducted during the Mars 2020 mission. The primary mission objective is to achieve several 90-second flights demonstrating the feasibility of heavier than air flight on Mars and capture visible light images via forward and nadir mounted cameras. These flights could possibly provide reconnaissance data for sampling site selection for other Mars surface missions. A solar array and batteries for flight operations, imaging, communications, and survival heating power the Helicopter. The thermal design is driven by minimizing survival heater energy while maintaining compliance with allowable flight temperatures in a variable thermal environment. Due to the small size of the Helicopter and its complex geometries, along with the fact that it operates with very low power and small margins in the extreme Mars environment, additional care had to be paid while planning thermal tests and designing the thermal system. The first section of the paper describes the evolution of the thermal system of the Mars Helicopter. After the first thermal vacuum test of the engineering model, the thermal team has conducted a partial effect analysis on the thermal design components that had a major impact on the system performance. Several design choices derived by analysis and test have been made to meet the energy allocation and the temperature requirements. These changes included increased gas gaps to reduce gas conduction, low emissivity coatings for internal components, blanket implementation, optimization of wire routing and fine-tuning of surface operations to optimize waste heat recovery. The second part of the paper describes the flight model thermal vacuum test and the subsequent thermal model correlation necessary to confirm the fidelity of the analysis results.

Pauken, Michael↗

MARSAME Radiological Release Report for Replacement Water Lines from TA-48 to TA-55

Environmental Protection and Compliance, Environmental Stewardship (EPC-ES) has determined that only a portion of the soil associated with Replacement Water Lines from Technical Area (TA)-48 to TA55 (Figure 1) meets the criteria for unrestricted release to the public under Department of Energy (DOE) Order 458.1, Radiation Protection for the Public and the Environment (DOE, 2020). The remaining soil did not meet the criteria for unrestricted release and must be managed appropriately. These conclusions are based on the known history of the area combined with soil sample data collected in 2022; the findings are consistent with DOE Order 458.1 and Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) Functional Series Document EPC-ES-FSD-004, Environmental Radiation Protection (LANL, 2021). Sampling and data analysis, as described in this report, were sufficient to meet measurement quality objectives (MQOs) under the Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Assessment of Materials and Equipment (MARSAME) manual (NUREG, 2009) and LANL procedures (LANL, 2020). Final approvals for waste disposition will come from LANL’s Waste Management Program.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

MARSAME Release Report for Replacement Water Lines From TA-48 to TA-55, Revision 2

Environmental Protection and Compliance, Environmental Stewardship (EPC-ES) has determined that only a portion of the soil associated with Replacement Water Lines from Technical Area (TA)-48 to TA 55 (Figure 1) meets the criteria for unrestricted release to the public under Department of Energy (DOE) Order 458.1, Radiation Protection for the Public and the Environment (DOE, 2020). The remaining soil did not meet the criteria for unrestricted release and must be managed appropriately. These conclusions are based on the known history of the area combined with soil sample data collected in 2022; the findings are consistent with DOE Order 458.1 and Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL) Functional Series Document EPC-ES-FSD-004, Environmental Radiation Protection (LANL, 2021). Sampling and data analysis, as described in this report, were sufficient to meet measurement quality objectives (MQOs) under the Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Assessment of Materials and Equipment (MARSAME) manual (NUREG, 2009) and LANL procedures (LANL, 2020). Final approvals for waste disposition will come from LANL’s Waste Management Program.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Safety Analysis Report For Packaging, Y-12 National Security Complex, Model ES-3100 Package with Bulk HEU Contents

This safety analysis report for packaging (SARP) presents the results of the safety analysis prepared in support of the Consolidated Nuclear Security, LLC (CNS) request for licensing of the Model ES-3100 package with bulk highly enriched uranium (HEU) contents and issuance of a Type B(U) Fissile Material Certificate of Compliance. This SARP, published in the format specified in the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Regulatory Guide 7.9 and using information provided in UCID-21218 and NRC Regulatory Guide 7.10, demonstrates that the Y-12 National Security Complex (Y-12) ES-3100 package with bulk HEU contents meets the established NRC regulations for packaging, preparation for shipment, and transportation of radioactive materials given in Title 10, Part 71, of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) [10 CFR 71] as well as U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) regulations for packaging and shipment of hazardous materials given in Title 49 CFR.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Eligibility Assessment of Items in the TA-60 Rack Assembly and Alignment Complex Legacy Storage Yard

The U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration, Los Alamos Field Office (NA-LA), documented and evaluated seven structures in the Technical Area 60 (TA-60) Rack Assembly and Alignment Complex (RAAC) legacy storage yard at Los Alamos National Laboratory (LANL or Laboratory) for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (National Register). This documentation and evaluation was conducted in compliance with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended; the Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR 800); the Programmatic Agreement among the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration, Los Alamos Field Office, the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Office and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Concerning Management of the Historic Properties at Los Alamos National Laboratory, Los Alamos New Mexico (PA)1; and A Plan for the Management of the Cultural Heritage at Los Alamos National Laboratory, New Mexico (LANL’s Cultural Resources Management Plan (2017). NA-LA makes the following National Register eligibility determinations: la cuna; the rack transporter (jeep, rack trailer, and steering dolly); the Mexia diagnostic rack; the Mexia device canister; the Mexia device mounting stand; and the Mexia target stand are eligible for listing in the National Register, and the second steering dolly is not eligible for listing in the National Register. This National Register evaluation was completed because LANL proposes to develop a consolidated waste facility in TA-60 next to the former RAAC. Across 3.56 acres, LANL proposes to construct an 8,000-square-foot, pre-engineered waste storage building; a 1,500-square-foot office/warehouse building; and 28,500 square feet of covered storage. The development will also include access control features and fencing, parking spaces, and utilities. Additionally, the Laboratory will continue to use the southern part of TA-60-0017 and reuse TA-60-0086 and TA-60-0324 in the development. The consolidated waste facility will operate as a central accumulation area—storing universal waste, mixed low-level (radioactive) waste, hazardous chemicals, and New Mexico special waste—until the waste can be shipped off site.

99 GENERAL AND MISCELLANEOUS↗

LANL ACRSP Parameter Recommendations for CRA-2026 Performance Assessment

This report provides recommendations made by the Los Alamos National Laboratory—Carlsbad Operations (LANL-CO) Actinide Chemistry & Repository Science Program (ACRSP) for the following parameters used in the 2026 Compliance Recertification Application (CRA) Performance Assessment (PA) calculations: OXCUTOFF, CONCMIN, CONCINT, CAPMIC, PROPMIC, and SOLMOD (SOLCOH and SOLSOH). A summary of the values recommended for the WIPP parameters are included in the Tables below. The shaded cells indicate a change from the CRA-2019 recommended values. A short summary of the basis and justification for each parameter and recommendation is given in this document.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Spatiotemporal Analyses of Groundwater and Shoreline Cr(VI) Concentrations in the 100 Areas at Hanford

Cleanup efforts have been ongoing since the late 1990s to remediate contaminated waste sites and groundwater in the 100 Areas at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Hanford Site. One of the primary contaminants of concern is hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI)), which was used as a corrosion inhibitor in cooling water for nuclear reactors that formerly operated along the shoreline of the Columbia River. Cleanup efforts have included 1) removal, treatment (as needed), and disposal of contaminated sediments; 2) in situ redox manipulation as a permeable reactive barrier; 3) pump-and-treat; 4) soil flushing; and 5) monitored natural attenuation. DOE’s annual groundwater monitoring reports document the significant reductions in Cr(VI) plume areas that have occurred over the past 10 years or more as a result of these cleanup efforts. The Record of Decision for the 100-HR-3 operable unit specified a cleanup level (CUL) for Cr(VI) in groundwater of 48 µg/L to protect human receptors, and a surface water CUL of 10 µg/L to protect aquatic organisms in the Columbia River. The Record of Decision did not specify point-of-compliance locations for the surface water CUL. Data for 2019 from the six groundwater operable units (OUs) in the 100 Areas indicate that the 48 μg/L groundwater CUL has been achieved in 100% of the wells in the 100-BC and 100-NR OUs, and in 89- 97% of the wells in the other OUs (100-KR, 100-HR-D, 100-HR-H, 100-FR). Data for 2019 indicate that 100% of the aquifer tubes monitored for Cr(VI) in the 100 Areas have concentrations below the 48 μg/L groundwater CUL. However, the 10 μg/L standard has not yet been consistently achieved for both inland groundwater monitoring wells and shoreline aquifer tubes. This report describes a series of data analyses performed to identify consistent relationships, if any, between inland well and shoreline Cr(VI) concentrations within the 100 Areas. To this end, select monitoring data for Cr(VI) measured in groundwater and aquifer tubes at the 100 Areas were analyzed for a 10-year period—2010 to 2019. Relationships between inland groundwater plumes and surface-water points of discharge in and along the Columbia River were examined through several analyses that included inland well and aquifer tube concentrations as a function of distance from the shoreline, evaluation of cumulative probability plots, trend analysis, correlation analysis, cluster analysis, and identification of plume trajectories for each of the 100 Areas. The analyses did not identify consistent relationships between inland groundwater Cr(VI) concentrations and shoreline concentrations within the 100 Areas due to several confounding factors influencing groundwater flow directions and Cr(VI) concentrations. The proximity of groundwater Cr(VI) plumes to the river, and the highly dynamic nature of the river, influence the transport behavior of the plumes and create challenges for quantifying attenuation of Cr(VI) between the inland monitoring wells and shoreline concentrations. Other factors contributing to temporal and spatial Cr(VI) concentrations, as supported by some of the data analyses, include the presence of vadose zone sources, variable sorption behavior, and complexities associated with Cr(VI) mass transfer between the upper and lower aquifers and their interactions with the river. Hence, monitoring to assess compliance with target CULs will need to be determined for each area individually since several factors influence Cr(VI) concentrations in the 100 Areas.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Guidance for Monitoring Passive Groundwater Remedies Over Extended Time Scales

Passive remediation can be appropriate where natural processes and actions such as institutional controls mitigate exposure to contaminated groundwater, achieving remedial action objectives and protectiveness of human health and the environment. Monitored natural attenuation (MNA) is a prevalent passive remediation strategy supported by a regulatory framework and monitoring design guidance. However, long-term passive remedies are usually selected in combination with at least one active remedy, such as source removal, in situ treatment, or pump-and-treat, functioning as a complementary method for achieving remediation objectives and meeting the applicable statutory and regulatory requirements. However, MNA and existing monitoring guidance primarily target situations where the remedial action objectives are met within a few decades. When time scales for passive remediation extend to many decades (50 years or more), a corresponding change in monitoring strategy is needed to adapt to the extended time scale. This document provides guidance for implementing an extended-scale monitoring (ESM) approach appropriate for long-duration passive remediation. Extended-scale is defined in this document with respect to time (i.e., a long duration of remediation) and a large enough physical scale such that downstream receptors will not be impacted within the remediation timeframe. ESM applies to slow-moving groundwater contaminant plumes and emphasizes monitoring primarily for potential exposure pathways. For this approach, the primary monitoring objective is to demonstrate that the plume diminishes before reaching the receptor zone or point of compliance and/or a receptor does not receive concentrations above the compliance limit. While the overall objectives of protecting human health and the environment are the same as for plumes where remediation can occur over a shorter time period, the time scales between decisions are longer and the dynamics of plume evolution are slower. To this end, a scenario-based strategy is described for different plume and source conditions, defining a containment and receptor zones. The containment zone is the area where the risk of exposure to groundwater contamination can be mitigated (e.g., through institutional controls) during the remediation time period. The receptor zone is defined as the area where exposure to groundwater contamination cannot be mitigated and compliance concentration standards must be met. Within the containment zone, slow plume migration may occur, leading to concentrations that exceed compliance standards. However, where distance to the receptor zone is large relative to plume migration and attenuation rate, this approach can be protective of the receptor zone. Selection of a long-duration passive remedy needs to be based on sufficient understanding of contaminant sources, hydrogeology, and contaminant plumes. A strong technical basis, supported by predictive analysis, is recommended to substantiate that contamination is expected to stay within the containment zone during the active remediation and attainment phase of the remedy, and diminish to meet compliance standards within the extended timeframe prior to reaching the receptor zone (e.g., many decades or even centuries). The ESM approach is based on verification of plume behavior and not on detailed plume dynamics. Monitoring is conducted to confirm expected behavior with an emphasis on exposure pathways to verify that plumes remain contained in areas where the protectiveness objectives can be met. ESM should not be adopted if there is significant risk of the plume extending beyond the containment zone. Given the slow movement within the containment zone, less frequent sampling is required relative to approaches used for conventional-scale remediation.

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗

Annual Site Environmental Report (2019)

Los Alamos National Laboratory’s (the Laboratory’s) annual site environmental reports are prepared by the Laboratory’s environmental organizations, as required by U.S. Department of Energy Order 231.1B, Administrative Change 1, Environment, Safety, and Health Reporting, and Order 458.1, Administrative Change 3, Radiation Protection of the Public and the Environment. The following chapters in this report discuss our success in complying with environmental laws, regulations, and orders (Chapter 2, Compliance Summary); how we manage the Laboratory’s environmental performance (Chapter 3, Environmental Programs); how we monitor for air emissions of radioactive materials and climate conditions (Chapter 4, Air Quality); how we monitor for effects of Laboratory operations on groundwater quality (Chapter 5, Groundwater Protection); how we monitor the movement of chemicals and radionuclides by storm water runoff and the levels of chemicals and radionuclides in deposited sediment (Chapter 6, Watershed Quality); how we monitor for the presence, levels, and effects of chemicals and radionuclides in plants, animals, and soil (Chapter 7, Ecosystem Health); and finally, what radionuclide dose or risk from chemical exposure members of the public may experience as a result of Laboratory operations (Chapter 8, Public Dose and Risk Assessment).

12 MANAGEMENT OF RADIOACTIVE AND NON-RADIOACTIVE W↗