• ._, ,_ _., t347"_ WHC-FP-0412

NOV1 8 lggl

Fate and Transport ofConstituents Leakedfrom Tank 241-A-105

Prepared for the U.S. Department of EnergyOffice of Environmental Restoration andWaste Management

_ Westingh0useHanfordCompanyRichland, Washington

Hanford Operations and Engineering Contractor for theU S Department of Energy under Contract DE-ACO6-87RL10930

Approved for Public Release

LEGAL DISCLAIMER

This report was prepared as an .ccount of work sponsored byan agency of the United States Government. Ne=thertheUnited Sta_es Government nor any _;ency thereof, nor any oftheir employee_, nor any of their contractors, subcontractorsor their employees, makes any warranty, express or Jmphed,r'r assumes any legal habiltty or respons=bdity for theaccuracy, completeness, or any third party's use or the resultsof such use of any =nform,:.°_on,apparatus, product, or processdtsclosed, or represents t!tat its use woulc: not infringeprwately owned rights. Reference herein to any specificcommercial product, process, or service by trade name,trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarilyconstitute or _mply _ts endorsement, recommendation, orfavoring by the Un_ted States Government or any agencythereof or Jts contractors or subcontractors. The views and

opmtons of authors expressed herein do not necessarily stateor reflect those of the Llmted States Government or anyagency thereot.

This report has been reproduced from the best avadable copy.AvaPlable =n paper copy and m_croflche.

Available to theU.S Department of Energyand =tscontractors fromOffice of Scientific and Technical InformahonP O Box 62Oak Rtdge. TN 37831(615) 576.8401

Available to the public from the US. Department of CommerceNational Techmcal Information Service5285 Port Royal RoadSpr_ngfieid. VA 22161(703) 487-4650

Pr,r_iu3 ,r= the Unlled Stales ot America

DISCLM.1 CHP =1-_Ii

m

WHC-E P--0 412

DE92 002914

• Fate and Transport ofConstituents Leakedfrom Tank 241-A-105J. A. Caggiano

Date Published

October 1991

Prepared for the U.S. Department of EnergyOffice of Environmental RestorationandWaste Management

(_ WOStilt_h01JN P.O. Box 1970• HalTf01_C01ItpSIIy Richland,Washington99352

HanfordOperationsandEngineeringConb'actorfortheU.S.Departmentof EnergyunderContractDE-AC06-87RL10930

Approved for Public Release MASTER

DISFRIff>UTION OF THIS DOCUMENT IS UNLIMITED

WHC-EP-0412

Document Title- Fate and Transportof ConstituentsLeaked from Tank 241-A-I05

wl

Prepared by" (__'_/_'___--_,._._, _t/e_[_,J_/{._l_aggianqC]OPrincipalScientist

Reviewed by: D-G. FFortonManagerGeosciences

Approved by: R.E. Raymond DateProgramManager c_

WHC-EP-0412

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

J. J. Consort drafted the cross section shown in Figure 2.N. J. Vermeulen and R. R. Rios provided access to logs of dry wells andlaterals as well as reports in files relating to incidentsat various tanks.N. A. Holman provided data on tanks and cribs from Waste InformationData

. System. J. A. Serkowski and W. A. Jordan provided groundwatermonitoring datafrom the Hanford Ground Water Data Base. A draft of this report was reviewedby K. R. Fecht, D. G. Horton, V. G. Johnson, A. J. Knepp and A. G. Law.F. J. Ungefug and associates retrievedboxes from archival storage andprovided assistance in the WestinghouseHanford Company Records Holding Area.Gratitude is extended to each for contributingto this report.

iii

i

i

WHC-EP-0412

This page intentionallyleft blank.

i

iv

WHC-EP-0412

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Following a January 28, 1965 sudden steam release in Tank 241-A-105, the

carbon steel liner of the tank was noted to have bulged to a maximum height of

. about 8.5 feet (2.6 meters). Most of this bulging likely resulted from the

January 28, 1965 incident. But availabledata indicatethat some bulging

during an earlier leak in 1963 when waste was being added to the tank may have

contributed. By March 8, 1965, increases in radiationin the 14-05-03 leak

detection lateral indicatedthat fluids had escaped the tank and that the

liner was ruptured. Waste was subsequentlytransferredfrom Tank 241-A-I05to

other tanks, and liquid levels in Tank 241-A-105were maintained at about

18 inches to control temperatureto preventdeteriorationof the concrete.

Spray cooling water was added weekly to the tank from February 1971 to

December 1978 to maintain liquid levels and temperatures,and some of this

fluid is assumed to have leaked from the tank.

This study examined availabledata to determine, to the extent possible,

the distributionof the leaked constituentsin surroundingsoils and whether

they migrated to groundwater. In this assessment,availabledata from gross

gamma logging of dry wells and leak detectionlaterals as well as data from

analyses of groundwater sampleswere examined throughout the period of

interest. Logs of wells and photographstaken during constructionof the

241-A-105 Tank Farm were also examined.

" Analyses of scintillationlogs from dry wells and laterals surrounding

Tank 241-A-I05 indicate that radionuclideshave escaped the tank and entered

the soils. The limited number and depth of the dry wells and the depth and

distributionof the laterals are not sufficientto map the present location of

V

WHC-EP-0412

all the constituentsleaked from the tank. Interpretationof logs of the

scintillation(gross gamma) probes run in the dry wells and laterals indicate

that the gamma-emittingradionuclidesapparently leaked from the seam at the

intersectionof the side and bottom of the liner and may have penetratedo

vertically in the soils beyond the 125-footdepth of the dry wells. Some

activitywas seen in dry wells E25-66 (10-05-10) and E25-68 (10-05-02)at the

north end of the tank where, because of the bulge in the south end of the

tank, the remaining fluids ponded before escaping the tank. Metal cations

tend to sorb and move more slowly than the non-sorbingconstituents. The fate

of hazardousconstituentsleaked from the tank is unknown; anions likely moved

with the moisture front through the soils. The ultimate fate of these

constituentsin the soil surroundingTank 241-A-I05cannot be determined

without additional drilling and sampling.

Available records indicate that fluids leaked from Tank 241-A-I05

constitutemost of the contaminantsleaked to the soils from the A Tank Farm.

Small leaks have been reported from Tanks 241-A-I03 and 241-A-I04, but these

total less than 10,000 gallons. A break in a two-inch raw water line in

February 1978 along the east side of the A Tank Farm leaked approximately

60,000 gallons to the soil and induced some soil collapse between

Tanks 241-A-I02 and 241-A-I05.

Analyses of data from groundwatermonitoring wells in and around the

A Tank Farm indicate that the groundwaterbeneath the tank farm was

contaminatedbefore the operation of most tanks in the farm and before leaks

were reported from any tanks in the farm. Data from wells E25-I and E25-2 for

1958 reveal contaminants in the groundwater severalyears before the

vi

I

WHC-EP-0412

1965 steam explosion and subsequentrelease of fluids from Tank 241-A-I05.

Availablerecords indicate that the volume of liquids discharged to nearby

PUREX cribs, french drains and trenches exceeds 3.6 billior,gallons, much more

than the estimates of about 50,000 to 950,000 gallons of fluids leaked fromI

Tank 241-A-I05. High-densitywaste discharged to the BY cribs during uranium

. scavengingoperations in the mid 1950's is likely to have penetrated the

unconfined aquifer and may have flowed southeastwardalong the top of basalt

toward the area of the A Tank Farm. The waste streams discharged to the

PUREX and BY cribs contain many of the same constituentsas those discharged

to Tank 241-A-I05. Because of the volume of fluids dischargedto nearby

facilitiesand the similarity (not in terms of their concentration/activity)

of the constituentsin the waste streams discharged to both facilities,it is

not possible to determine from availablegroundwatermonitoringdata whether

any contaminantsleaked from Tank 241-A-105have descended the 285 feet to

reach the water table. The discharges to nearby facilities and the absence of

any unique indicatorsof Tank 2¢1-A-I05waste make it impossibleto determine

whether fluid leaked from the tank ever reached groundwater. Liquid waste

discharges to nearby facilitiesmask any contributionTank 241-A-I05 may have

made to degradationof groundwaterquality beneath the A Tank Farm.

vii

WHC-EP-0412

This page intentionallyleft blank.t

viii

WHC-EP-0412

CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION............................ I

2.0 WASTE COMPOSITIONAND DETECTABILITY ................ 2

3.0 REVIEW OF UNSATURATEDZONE DATA .................. 4• 3.1 LEAK DETECTIONSYSTEM ..................... 4

3.2 OTHER SOURCES OF FLUID .................. 163.3 ANALYSIS OF AVAILABLEDATA" . ................. 20

4.0 REVIEW OF GROUNDWATERDATA ............... 204.1 HYDROGEOLOGYOF THE 241-A TANK FARM .............. 204.2 MONITORING WELLS ...................... 324.3 THE MONITORING EFFICIENCYMODEL .......... 334.4 SAMPLING AND ANALYSES OF GROUNDWATER ...... 364.5 ANALYSES OF DATA FROM NEARBY CRIB MONITORING WELLS ...... 684.6 ANALYSES OF GROUNDWATERDATA ................. 72

5.0 SEARCH FOR HISTORIC DATA ON TANK 241-A-I05 ............. 73

6.0 CONCLUSIONS ............................ 74

7.0 REFERENCES ............................. 75

APPENDIX

A AS-BUILT DIAGRAMS OF GROUNDWATERMONITORING WELLSAROUND THE A TANK FARM ..................... APP A-i

ix

WHC-EP-0412

LIST OF FIGURES

1 Tank 241-A-105 Fission Product Inventories ............. 3

2 Dry Wells Around the 241-A Tank Farm ................ 5

3 The 2_1-A Tank Farm Laterals and External Dry Wells ......... 7

4 Logs of 24i-A Tank Farm Dry Wells .................. 10w

5 Selected Logs Taken in Dry Well 10-05-02 .............. 11

6 Logs Gf 241-A Tank Farm Dry Well 10-05-10.............. 12

" Inferred Zone of ContaminatedSediments Beneath Tank 241-A-I05 . . . 17

8 1988 Water Table Map of the Hanford Site .............. 25

9 EstimatedWater Table Map of the Hanford Site for 1944 ...... 26

10 Geologic Cross Section of tile241-A Tank Farm ............ 27

11 June 1990 Water Table Map of the 200 East Area ........... 30

12 Hydrographs of Wells Near the 241-A Tank Farm ............ 31

13 Groundwater MonitoringWells Around the 241-A Tank Farm ....... 35

14 GroundwaterMonitoring Wells Adjacent to Cribs ........... 69

LIST OF TABLES

1 Dry Wells Around Tank 241-A-I05 ................... 6

2 Lateral Data from Stalos and W_!ker (1985) ........... 14

3 Liquid Effluent FacilitiesClose to 241-A Tank Farm ......... 21

4 Groundwater Elevations in Wells Around 241-A Tank Farm ....... 29

5 GroundwaterMonitoring Wells Surrounding the A-AX Tank Farms .... 34

6 Constituents from the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells ....... 37

WHC-EP-0412

GLOSSARY

Computer Automated SurveillanceSystem (CASS). A computer-basedsystemthat records and stores various instrumentaldata measured within wastestorage tanks and that is part of a system used to assess the safety of tanksand containedwastes.

Claddinq. The outer jacket of nuclear fuel elements used to preventcorrosion of the fuel and release of fission products into reactor coolants.

" Cri____bb.An undergroundstructuredesigned to receive liquid waste that canpercolate into the soil directly and/or after travelling to a connected tilefield. Crib designs vary. All liquid disposal facilities bear the number 16after the area designator;thus, the number 216-A-8 designates a liquiddisposal facility in the 200 Area, in this case the 216-A-8crib. Cribs with"A" as the letter designator received waste; from the 202-A canyon building,sometimes known as "A" plant or by the process that was conductedwithin, thePUREX process.

Curie. A unit of radioactivitydefined as the amount of a radioactivematerial_hat has an activity of 3.7'0disintegrationsper second;one picocurie= 10"_zcurie.

Dry Weil. A borehole constructedof carbon steel (usually6- or 8-in.diameter) that terminates above the water table and is used as an access portfor geophysical logging instrumentsused to detect characteristicsof the soilin the immediatevicinity of the weil. Dry wells are a part of theleak-detectionsystem that has been used at tank farms to detect loss ofcontainment. Dry wells around tank farms may be 75 to 150 ft deep. These"wells" are identifiedby two different numbering schemes" one is an 8- or9-digit identifier used to number all wells on the Hanford Site; the other isa Tank Farm Surveillanceidentificationnumber based on relative position on a"clock" (with north as 12 o'clock). For example, well 299-E25-67 in theHanford well system is a dry well (numbersgreater than 50 do not penetratethe water table) located in section 25 of the 200 East Area. Tank FarmSurveillancepersonnel identify this well as 10-05-02. The number "10" is theCASS system identificationnumber unique for the 241-A tank farm;05 identifiesthe well as located adjacent to the 241-A-105tank; and02 indicatesthat it is in the 2 o'clock (or approximatelynortheast)position.

French Drain. A rock-filledencasementwith an open bottom to allow

seepage of liquid waste into the ground. Numerical designators are given tofrench drains in the same manner as stated above for cribs.

Gross Gamma Loq. A record from a type of borehole geophysicallogging• tool obtained from a detector that senses gamma-emittingradionuclides in the

medium through which the detector is passed, lt detects the cumu1_tive outputof gamma radiation emitted by all gamma emitting radionuclides(comparedwitha Spectral Gamma Log, which records various peaks in a spectrum of gammaradiation and allows identificationof specific gamma-emittingradionuclides).

GL-i

WHC-EP-0412

Leak Detection Lateral. A horizontal borehole constructed beneath asingle-shellwaste storage tank that allows passage of geophysical instrumentsthat detect gamma-emittingradionuclidesin the immediatevicinity of theborehole. These are present only beneath the self-boilingtanks in the241-A and 241-SX Tank Farms. Leak detection laterals were constructedafterthe tanks were built at a depth of B to 10 ft bel,_wa tank. There were threeleak detection laterals beneath each tank that extended horizontallyfrom a12-ft-diametervertical caisson that is 75 ft deep. These laterals aredifferent from others that contained thermocouplesand that were designed tosense temperature in the soil immediatelybelow the concrete pad and footingson which the tanks were built.

Rever_e Weil. An early Hanford liquid disposal waste structureconsisting of a well that terminated above or at the water table into whichwaste solutionswere pumped.

r,l-_

WHC-EP-0412

FATEANDTRANSPORTOF CONSTITUENTSLEAKEDFROMTANK241-A-105

k,.

I.0 INTRODUCTION

D

The WestinghouseHanford Company (WestinghouseHanford) GeosciencesGroupevaluated availabledata from dry wells and groundwatermonitoring wells toascertainthe spatial distributionof fluids leaked from Tank 241-A-I05 andtried to determine whether any leaked fluids reached groundwater. Fluids werereported to have leaked from the tank in 1963 during the initial addition ofwaste to the tank that began in May 1962. A "severe bump" (steam explosion)in the tank in January 1965 caused a bulging of the steel liner and leaking ofadditionalwaste. The addition of cooling water from 1971 to 1978 alsocontributedto the leak volume. Using temperaturesrecorded in thermocouplesbeneaththe tank (Jansenet al. 1965) it is estimatedthat between 5,000 and15,000 gal leaked from the tank in January 1965. The tank continued to leakduring the addition of spray cooling water between 1971 and 1978 to stabilizethe in-tank temperatureat safe levels that would not further damage theconcrete. The volume of water added to the tank from 1971 to 1978 has beendifficult to estimate. Differentreports indicate that somewhere between1,000 and 2,000 gal of water were added each week during the 7-yr period.Somewherebetween 50,000 and 950,000 gal of cooling water are estimatedtohave been added to the tank from 1971 to 197_. Water was continually added tomaintain in-tank liquid levels, suggesting that some of the water was beinglost from the tank. Some water was undoubtedlyevaporated and exhausted fromthe tank through the exhaust system (Allen.1991) However, the volume ofwater added seems to exceed the volume tha_ could have evaporated, indicatirgthat some of the fluid escaped the tank and entered the adjacent soils.Increasingcounts"in the leak detection laterals and dry wells in 1978indicatethat gamma-emittingradionuclidesmigrated to where they could bedetected. There was also an inadvertentadditionof excess water toTank 241-A-105 in 1975 that raised the in-tank liquid levels about 4 in.before the liquid level was corrected.

To conduct this study, data from dry wells and laterals surrour,dingTank 241-A-I05 and neighboringtanks, as well as data from nearby groundwatermonitoringwells, were compiled and evaluated. Some dry well and lateral datawere obtained from the Waste InformationData System (WIDS) as well as fromrecordsmaintained in the Tank Farm Surveillanceand Analysis Support Group(TFSAS)and in summary form in some reports (e.g.,Stalos and Walker 1978).

. Groundwaterdata were obtained from the Hanford Ground Water Data Base(HGWDB). Process records relating volumes and constituentsdischarged tovarious liquid effluent disposal facilities in the area of the A Tank Farmwere also obtained from WIDS. A search was also made for historic data thatare not in WIDS or the current files of TFSAS.

The files of a retired Hanford soil chemistwere used for historicinformationand data that may not be in reports. These files supplied someuseful informationand data and are housed in the Geosciences technical files.

WHC-EP-0412

2.0 WASTE COMPOSITIONAND DETECTABILITY

The compositionof the waste in Tank 241-A-I05 affects the detectabilityof wastes leaked from the tarjkand the ability of personnel to determinewhether a ieak has occurred. Tank 241-A-I05was a self-boilingtank thatreceived wastes primarily from the Plutonium-UraniumExtraction (PUREX)process. The PUREX uses tributyl phosphate in kerosene to recover uranium andplutonium from nitric acid solutionsmade from irradiateduranium-bearingfuelrods. Most nitric acid is recovered and recycled in the PUREX process, butsome residual nitric acid is neutralizedbefore discharge to the waste storagetanks. Initially,cladding (alloys of aluminum for early reactors andzirconium for N Reactor) is dissolved and produces highly metallic waste thatis dischargedto tanks. The PUREX waste, like most tank waste at the HanfordSite, was modified into an alkaline slurry before it was discharged to tanksto minimize corrosion of the tank carbon steel liners. Through the additionof various sodium compounds, alkalinity (pH of between 9.5 and 12) wasmaintained, and salt concentrationwas stabilized at about 7.0M sodium. Likeother single-shelltanks (SST),Tank 241-A-I05 contains primarily inorganicwastes consisting of sodium hydroxide, sodium salts of nitrate, nitrite,carbonate, aluminate and phosphate and hydrous oxides of iron and manganese.The radioactivecomponents consist of various fission products. Figure Igives the original inventory and the likely inventoryafter decay and actinideelements such as uranium, thorium, plutonium and neptunium. Jansen et al.

(1965)_from analyses of slu#qe and superna_e, list _theprincipal contents ofTank _I-A-I05 as 9°Sr, 137Cs,_Ce, 'WRu, '--Pmand "_Zr-Nb. Following decayof short-livedfission products (Figure I), the principal radionuclidesremai ' "n the tank when the spray cooling water was added were 144Ce,1°6Ru147pm,nl3n_csland 9°Sr. The waste forms in Tank 241-A-I05 are principally sludgeand salt cake, with minimal interstitialfluid.

The radionuclidesmost likely detected in soils (i.e.,,_nthe dry wellsand laterals) using a gross gamma probe are 1_Ce, 147pmand '_'Cs(and daughterisotopes in the decay chain). Other gamma-emitting,fission prodL,ctradionuclideswith short half lives are unlikely to be found because theyprobably would have decayed to a ground state or very low levels within thetank. Radionuclidesthat decay principally by emission of alpha or betaparticleswill not penetrate steel casing and would not be detected by a grossgamma probe. Any daughters that also emit gamma energy or decay to an isomermight contribute some gamma energy to the total activity detected by a gammaprobe.

Constituentsdetected in groundwaterlikely would be those of greatestmobility, i.e., radionuclidesand anions not readily sorbed in passing throughthe soils of the unsaturatedzone en route to grounTdwater(en.g. tritium NO3,S04). Most of the metal fission products such as '_'Csand "vSr'arelikely tosorb close to their point of origin (Van Luik and Smith 1982). Analyses inthe HGWDB indicate the presence of some of these constituentsin groundwatershortly after PUREX began operating, suggesting that the reported results mayreflect improper techniques of sampling and/or analyses,or that constituents

WHC-EP-0412

WHC-EP-0412

were transportedto groundwatervia direct pathways along poorly sealed wells.The annular space in early wells was not sealed, and many of these wells weredrilled close to the cribs they were intended to monitor.

Nonradioactive,largely inorganiccompounds,while present in the waste,were never sought by detecting probes in the soils. Radionuclideswere theprincipal concern, and the gamma emitterswere the easiest to detect. Ifgamma-emittingradionuclideswere detected by gross gamma probes in lateralsand dry wells, it is likely that other waste constituentswere present.Confirming evidence of the nonradioactivecomponents is lacking.

3.0 REVIEWOF UNSATURATEDZONEDATA

3.1 LEAKDETECTIONSYSTEM

Liquid levels were measured in the SSTs so that changes not _ccounted forby operational or known processes in the tanks could Le further investigatedas possible leaks and wastes could be removed from leaking tanks. However,liquid levels in the tanks in the 241-A Tank Farm were never static becausethese were self-boilingtanks. Therefore, it was more difficult to determinewhether wastes in the A Farm tanks were being confined within the tanks usingliquid level measurements.

In order to confirm tank leaks suspected from measured changes of in-tankfluid levels, a number of shallow boreholeswere constructed around each tankin the 241-A Tank Farm to provide access for radiationdetection instruments(Figure2). These shallow boreholes, known as "dry wells," were constructedin 1962 to a depth of 75 ft and in 1978 were deepened to 125 ft aroundTank 241-A-I05 (Table I). They are located about 10 ft beyond the edge ofTank 241-A-I05 and provide access for instrumentsthat can be used to detectchanges in radiation levels in the boreholes. Initially,Geiger-Muellertubeswere to be used to detect changes in activity,but these probes weresubsequentlyreplaced by gross gamma logging tools. Gross gamma logging isused to measure changes in radiation above backgroundor some otherestablishedbaseline. After compiling baseline values, subsequent logging isused to note any changes in the pattern of activity different from that in thebaseline. These gross gamma probes can note an increase or decrease inradiation intensityas radioactivecontaminantsmove past a well or decay, ortrace the movement of a peak to greater depth and thus movement ofgamma-emittingradioactivecontaminants. Changes in radiation levels in thedry wells can also indicatethat a leak may have "self healed";i.e., precipitationof salts effectively reduce or eliminate the pathway alongwhich fluids migrate. Loss of hydraulic head from reduction or eliminationoffluids in a tank can also result in reduction of activity seen in the logs.

Additionally,three radiationdetection lateral lines were constructed in1962 about 10 ft beneath each tank in A Farm. These extend from one of two12-ft diame'cer,75-ft-deepcaissons (Figure3). Scintillationprobes areinserted under pneumatic pressure to the end of the lines. Then the lines arelogged as the probes are retrieved. While not calibrated to allow aquantitativeinterpretation,gross gamma logging neverthelesspermits

WHC-EP-0412

WHC-EP-0412

Table I. Dry Wells Around Tank 241-A-105.

Well number* Date Depth** Diameter

E25-56 6/55 151 8"(10-04-04)

E25-62 4/62 125 (75) 8"(10-05-09)

E25-63 4/62 125 (75) 8"(10-04-05)

E25-66 4/62 130 (125) 6"(10-05-10)

E25-67 4/62 125 (75) 8"(10-05-12)

E25-68 5/62 121 4"(10-05-02)

E25-69 4/64 130 (125) 6"(10-06-09)

E25-70 4/62 75 8"(10-05-05)

E25-71 4/62 75 8"(10-05-07)

E25-98 1/66 56 6"(1o-o5-o8)

NOTE: There are 51 dry wells in A Tank Farm.Laterals are also present--3laterals per

tank at about 10 ft below each tank. Theselaterals extend from two central caissons.

*Number in parenthesesis tank farmmonitoring number. Number 10 is code number forA Tank Farm; 05 (secondpart of number) is numberof tank; the third part of the number is clockposition,with north as 12 o'clock. Thus, well10-05-09 is a leak detectiondry well at the west(9 o'clock) location around the 241-A-I05 tank.

**Number in parenthesesis the original depthof the well before deepening.

WHC-EP-0412

Figure 3. The 241-A Tank Farm Laterals and External D'cyWells.

TK-104-A TK-105-A TK-106-A

S • •

e,,m ,m

Q

D

TK-101-A TK-102-A TK-10_.A

Plan View: A Farm Laterals and External Dry WellsH9104011.4

WHC-EP-0412

detectionof changes in radiation levels between readings. When recommendedin 1961, the system of three radiation detectionlaterals and seven dry wellsfor each self-boilingtank was intended to detect any leak of 6,400 gal ormore from a tank (Stivers 1961) assuming optimum conditions and the abi|ity todetect gamma-emittingradionuclidesup to 7 ft from the borehole.

These probes detect only gamma-emittingradionuclidesand indicate onlycumulativelevels of activity,not the specific isotope(s)producing theactivity. Without detailed knowledge of the specific tools, shielding,logging rates, and procedures used to obtain these logs, interpretationisnecessarilyqualitative. More detailed interpretationmight be possible withfurther investigationinto these parameters and how they changed with time.In reporting the data in the ensuing paragraphs,activity is reported in bothcounts per minute (c/m) and counts per second (c/s) correspondingto theoriginal units recorded. No attemptwas made to convert c/m to c/s becausethe data reported as c/m were taken by different instrument(s)with differentsensitivitythan those reported as c/s. Without specific calibration,conversionof units is not recommended.

Fully calibrated spectralgamma logging tools are currently beingdevelopedthat will permit the identificationof specific radionuclidesproducingthe activity. After logging and interpretation,the spatialdistributionof specific radionuclidesin the upper part of the vadose zonearound Tank 241-A-I05 (and other facilities)will be better understood,whichwill in turn facilitatemodeling to determine the extent of transport ofradionuclidesthat have escaped from Tank 241-A-I05. Closure of the SSTsrequires data of the spatialdistribution,and any changes with time, ofradionuclides.

Scintillationlogs or summariesof scintillationlogs from dry wellslisted in Table I were studied for the period 1972 to present. Logs from thepre-1972 era are in archival storage and were not retrieved in time for thisreport. The minutes from meetings held in 1965 in response to theTank 241-A-I05 steam release incidentprovided some unconfirmed values oflateral logs.

The first leak from Tank 241-A-I05was reported on November 19, 1963,when 17,000 c/m were detected in lateral number 3. Seven days later, theactivity had increasedto 150,000c/m in this lateral (Beard et al. 1967).Radiationwas detected over only a very short segment of the lateral,indicatinga small "finger" of waste from a relatively small leak hadencounteredthe lateral. Radioactivitycontinuedto decrease in this lateralto about 50,000 c/m until March 8, 1965 when it "increasedby a factor of 60and then remained constant. No radiation increaseswere detected in the otherlaterals or the vertical wells that indicatedleakage. One well was drilledto a depth of 65 ft and terminated at the same depth as the laterals, 10 ftfrom the high radiationreading in the number 3 lateral. No radioactivecontaminationwas detected in the soil samples removed from the test wells,and the maximum temperatur_ in the test wells was 206 °F. These dataindicatedthe leakage was 'small'" (Beard et al. 1967, p. 15).

Logs of most dry wells around Tank 241-A-I05generally reveal backgroundlevels of decay, with no peaks. Logs of dry wells (see Glossary) 10-05-05(E25-70),10-05-07 (E25-71),10-05-09 (E25-62),and 10-05-12 (E25-67) reveal

WHC-EP-0412

background values (up to 50 c/s with present instruments)(Figure4) fromsurfaceto total depth (0 to 75 or 0 to 125 ft) for the entire period ofrecord studied. Several wells reveal a shallow peak at a depth of 3 to 8 ft,indicatinglikely surface contaminationfrom undocumentedspills or theeffects of fluids in nearby transfer lines that pass very close to the drywells. Transfer lines are not double contained, and small leaks were likelyduring use. However, dry well 10-05-02was deepened in the summer of 1978

, because of a peak that appeared at the 75-ft-level (bottom)of the weil. Theearliest records examined (I/27/75)reveal this peak reading at 75 ft to be2,800 c/s. This peak persistedat levels between 300 and 900 c/s leading todeepening of the well to better determinethe level of activity and depth.Tabulated data for this dry well in Stalos and Walker (1978) indicate that thepeak value was 200 c/m, with values exceeding 10,000 c/m at the bottom of theweil. With the initiationof a new probe in 1975, values near the bottom ofthe well changed to 1,684 c/s (January20, 1975) and declined steadily to189 c/s in July 1978 just before the well was deepened.

The first log obtained after deepeningwell 10-05-02was on July 21,1978. The log indicated a peak of 1,516 c/s at 100 ft. On August 7, 1978,this well showed a peak of 1,100 c/s at a depth of 95 ft. The peak decayed asrevealed by the next two logs on September4 and October 2, 1978. The Octoberrecord shows that a single broad peak split into two peaks that are nearly thesame depth and are initiallyidenticalin counts. The second peak at a depthof 100 to 102 ft appears to decay at a slower rate from October 1978 toJuly 1979, when only one broad peak is visible on the log. This single broadpeak continues to decay until November 1983, at which time it has decayed tobackgroundlevels (30 to 40 c/s). Selected logs taken in dry well 10-05-02are shown on Figure 5.

Tabulated data from the leak detection dry well 10-05-10exhibited a peakof 473 c/s at 60 ft, which declined steadily to a value of less than 50 c/s onNovember 28, 1977. A bottom readingof up to 1,070 c/s was noted inOctober 1973 and April 1974.

Elevated counts were also reported in dry well 10-05-10 just after thewell was deepened in 1978. Only backgroundvalues were noted on this logimmediatelybefore deepeningthe well except for an increase in counts at thebase of the 75-ft weil. Because counts were increasingat 75 ft and had notreached a peak, the well was deepenedto determine the full extent of thispeak. Two broad peaks showed in the first logs taken after deepening of drywell 10-05-10,and these peaks persistedthrough 1990, although with somereduction in intensity (Figure6). The broad peak that first appeared afterdeepening the dry well to 125 ft appeared at a depth of about 25 to 50 ft. At

- about 25 ft, counts increasedto about 60 to 75 c/s and decreased from about100 c/s to background at about 50 ft. Peak values within this broad peakgenerally reached between about 120 and 135 c/s. Because this peak appeared

• in the first log after deepeningof the well at an interval at which onlybackgroundvalues appeared, it is assumed that this peak is somehow related tothe deepening of the weil. A handwrittennote in the files of R. C. Routson,retired Principal Soil Scientist and long-time tank farm researcher, indicatesthat the casing of well E25-66 was pulled during deepening of the well toinvestigatethe corrosion of casing of tank farm dry wells. The originalcasing was heavily corroded betweenthe 60- and 70-ft depths, and the casingfacing the tank had corroded completelythrough. Pulling the original casing

WHC-EP-0412

Figure 4. Logs of 241-A Tank Farm Dry Wells.

100512 #4 (U) 75 x 100 100509 #4 (U) 75 x 100 100507 #4 (U) 7S x 100

103

I

;

10 2

ct)0.0

101 -

f I i I I i , I I l I t I .L__10 20 40 60 80 0 20 40 60 80 0 20 40 60 80

1-7-85 _los_._ 1-7-85 .oloe_._ 1-7-85 _loso_ 3

100508 #4 (U) 75 x 100 100505 #4 (U) 75 x 100

103 -

10 2

-101 -

Number destgnalofs

refer lo Dry Wells 1 1 I I J I J I I I I I I I .. I .......shown on Figure 2 0 20 40 60 80 0 20 40 60 80

1 - 10-85 1- 10-85Hg,OSO"_4 .o,oso'_s "

I0

WHC-EP-0412

Figure 5. Selected Logs Taken in Dry Well 10-05-02.

103 - I

Well100502105-A#4 Probe - Well 100502(lOS-A)#4 Probe 100502#4 (tj) 75 x 100

• ft -

10 -

,1I I I ! I I I I, I I I t I I ,I , I , , I , I I I I I , J

10 20 40 80 80 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 0 20 40 60 80 100 1207-3-78 8-7-78 7- !7-80_oso_s.o H,_oso2s.7 Hgl0So_.8

1 100502#4 IU) 75 x 100 100502#4 IU) 75 x 100

(/)(3.

lO I

I li - It I I I t I I I I I i i I, I I I I I I J I _ _ I i I i I i I l I10 20 40 60 80 100 120 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 0 20 40 60 80 100 120

4-6-81 Hgloso2s.e 1-12-82 H91oso'as.I!4-5-82 H010S02S.10

10 2- 100502#4 (U) 75 x 100

(/)o.C)

• V101

1 ! I I I t I I t _ 1 t0 20 40 60 80 100 120

8-8-83 HS_os02S12

1]

WHC-EP 412

Figure 6. Logs of 241-A Tank Farm Dry Well 10-05-10.

10 3 l--

We_l 100510(105,.A1 I 100510 _4 100510 tM

o

101 -

!

1_1 I ..I I I I I I [ I I I I , I , I , , i , I I I , I , I I0 20 40 60 80 0 20 40 60 8(; 100 120 0 20 40 60 80 100 120

8-7-78 9-'JZ-Te 11-6-78

r'nlO 2r..)o_ p,,

101 -

/

1 I i I I I I I.. l I ! i _..L_:I , I I I I I I I I I ' I , I I I I I i I ,0 20 40 60 80 100 120 0 20 40 60 _ 100 120 0 20 40 60 O0 100 120

12-8-79 HOtOS_.Ie 12-1-£0 _lOSO'a17 8-4-86 _-mos_sle

° "Q.0

w

10

t

100510 j_r (U) 75 x I00

1 I ] I J ] J I J J j0 20 40 60 80 100 120

8-8-90 H_IOSO2Slg

12

WHC-EP-0412

and driving replacementcasing to deepen the well could have led to the broadpeak between 25 and 50 ft, presumablyby introductionand driving of somecontaminationduring construction.

The second peak revealed the extent of the increase barely sensed at thebase of the 75-ft weil. Counts increasedto 150 c/s at 75 to 80 ft, decreasedto below 100 c/s and then increasedto a second 125 c/s peak on this broad

• "double peak" at 80 ft before decliningto background values. While thisdouble peak persistedthrough 1990, it slowly declined in intensity, perhapsbecause of radioactivedecay, passage of the plume past the dry weil, sealingof the opening through which fluids passed, or reductionof the volume offluids leaking from the tank.

In-tankphotographs and contouringof the tank bottom indicate thatbulging of the liner in the southern half of the tank led to ponding of fluidsin the northe_, part of the tank. In-tankphotographs indicatethat the tankbottom was not smooth, but rippled, allowing fluids to accumulatepreferentiallyin low points. Fluids were apparentlydirected toward drywells 10-05-02 and 10-05-10 either by the accumulationin low points at theselocations,or by movement to these locationswhere fractures in the tank wallor footingsnear these dry wells allowedthe fluids to escape the tank.

Early reports indicatethat contaminantsleaking from Tank 241-A-I05 werefirst detected in the laterals,not in the dry wells. Minutes of a meetingheld on March 19, 1965 indicatereadings of 220,000 to 260,000 c/m in lateralnumber 3, but do not specify a location for these values. Readings were takenat least once per shift for the next several months and remained at about220,000 c/m or above until June when a new probe was introduced. With theintroductionof a new probe, counts per minute dropped to 200,000. Minutesfrom a November 8, 1965 meeting indicatedthat only lateral number 3 showedelevated readings near previous levels,with readings from an unshielded probeused to log the other laterals revealing "nothing significant." Meetingminutes from December 17, 1965 indicate a possible downward trend in thereadings in lateral number 3, with a similar notation in the minutes of aMarch 28, 1966 meeting.

Tabulateddata in Stalos and Walker (1985) indicate clearly thatradioactivityhas been consistentlyhighest in lateral number 3, with agradual and progressivedecline in values for the period September 1972 toOctober 1984. Radiation levels in the number i lateral are the lowestreadings for any one date of survey,with intermediatevalues for the number 2lateral. Readings for September11, 1972 in the number 3 lateral are580,000 c/m at a distance of 17 ft from the end of the lateral and decline

. progressivelyas indicatedin Table 2.

Occurrence report 78-49 (May 15, 1978) noted a major increase in thecounts detected in leak detection lateral 14-05-03 from 8,600 c/s on May 8,1978 to 18,000 c/s 61 ft from the end of the lateral on May 15, 1978. Twopossible explanationswere offered for this increase: (I) water added toTank 241-A-I05to control the in-tanktemperature,and (2) a spill of "rawwater" on February 23, 1978 along the east side of the tank farm. Shortlyafter the spill of raw water, water was discovered in the base of the caisson

13

WHC-EP-0412

Table 2. Lateral Data from Stalos and Walker (1985).(sheet I of 2)

Peak DistanceLateral number Date reading from end Comments

(c/m) (ft)

I. N-77-O1'-W 9/13/72 16,600 12 Red probe(14-05-01) 4/26/74 11,550 12 " "

1/03/75 4,350 12 " "5/12/75 3,900 12 " "8/15/75 6,200 12 " "1/07/76 6,300 15 " "6/04/76 5,750 16 " "9/10/76 7,500 16 New red probe

12/06/76 7,715 16 " "3/28/77 7,300 166/17/77 400 c/s 154 New monitoring9/05/77 445 c/s 155 equipment c/m to c/s12/09/77 430 c/s 155 distance from top6/09/78 380 c/s 15512/20/78 430 c/s 15512/25/79 390 c/s 15812/16/80 240 c/s 158" New measurement12/28/81 301 c/s 158 method12/15/82 373 c/s 15811/18/83 158 c/s 16010/15/84 160 c/s 160

2. N-58-15'-W 9/08/72 198,000 80(14-05-02) 4/26/74 175,000 80 Red probe

1/06/75 76,999 90 " "5/12/75 51,000 75 " "8/15/75 54,000 88 " "1/21/76 54,000 888/30/76 79,300 89 New red probe12/08/76 82,000 89 " "3/28/77 80,700 896/17/77 3,250 c/s 101 New monitoring9/05/77 3,000 c/s 94 equipment c/m to c/s12/09/77 2,700 c/s 94 distance from top6/05/78 3,000 c/s 9412/25/79 2,300 c/s 9472/16/80 2,266 c/s 10412/16/80 2,266 c/s 94* New measurement10/28/81 2,656 c/s 94 method12/15/82 2,481 c/s 9311/18/83 2,204 c/s 9610/15/84 2,449 c/s 97

14

WHC-EP-0412

Table 2. LateralData from Stalos and Walker (1985).(sheet 2 of 2)

Peak DistanceLateral number Date reading from end Comments

(c/m) (ft)

, 3o N-39°-30'-W 9/11/72 580,000 17 Red probe(14-05-03) 4/26/74 485,000 17

1/10/75 192,000 17 Red probe6/02/75 202,500 17 " "8/18/75 199,500 17 " "1/05/76 198,000 148/30/76 273,000 16 New red probe

10/04/76 347,000 16 " "12/08/76 356,000 17 " "3/28/77 310,000 176/16/77 12,000 C/S 163 New monitoring9/05/77 10,800 c/s 161 equipment c/m to c/s12/09/77 9,500 c/s 161 distance from top3/29/78 6,450 c/s 1616/26/78 13,500 c/s 1619/27/78 11,000 16112/20/78 14,500 16112/25/79 3,200 16212/16/80 3,696 154" New measurement10/28/81 7,237 153 method12/15/82 6,633 15311/18/83 3,933 15410/15/84 6,661 154

*See page 10-05-14,paragraph 2.

q

lb

WHC-EP-0412

from which these leak detectionlaterals extend. As a result of thisoccurrence,it was recommendedthat spray irrigationwater no longer be addedto Tank 241-A-I05.

The pattern of high counts in the lateral lines (Figure7) suggests thatthe leaks occurred near the peripheryof the tank and developed from failureof the liner at or near the intersectionof the sides and bottom. The timingof the failure likely coincideswith the steam explosion in Tank 241-A-I05 in1965, because 37 days after the steam explosion, the number 3 lateral linereportedlybegan to show increasinglevels of radiation. There was a smallleak detected in one of the laterals shortly after the tank first received_vastein 1963, but apparently it was small. Decreasing activity in thelaterals indicated that the 1963 leak may have "self healed" by precipitationof salts. However, because of the need for storage volume, the tank wasfiIIed in December 1964.

3.2 OTHERSOURCESOF FLUID

Two other tanks in the 241-A Tank Farm are assumed leakers:Tanks 241-A-104 and 241-A-103. A small leak from Tank 241-A-104, discoveredin April 1975, was estimated at up to 2,500 gal. Tank 241-A-104 was reducedto 28,000 gal total waste and interim stabilized in September 1978. The leakin Tank 241-A-104 was discovered by increased radiation in the leak-detectionlaterals beneath the tank, as was the leak at the adjacent Tank 241-A-105(see Figure 3 for a map of leak detection lateral lines). Scintillation logdata for seven dry wells for this tank through 1984 indicate only backgroundlevels of radiation. In March 1975, increases began to appear in lateralnumber 2 beneath Tank 241-A-104 (see Figure 3 for a map of laterals beneathtanks in the 241-A Tank Farm). A new peak of 105 c/m was identified inMarch 1975, 25 ft from the end of the line. In April 1975, a second peak at220 c/m was identified73 ft from the end of the line. Both peaks continuedto increase over the next severalweeks until maxima were r_corded: 7,550 c/m23 ft from the end of the line on October 6, 1975, and 1,200 c/m 73 ft fromthe end of the line on May I, 1975. Both peaks continued to decline steadilyover the next few years. In March 1977, new monitoring equipment wasintroduced,and distanceswere then recorded from the top of the lateral. Forthe first logs using the new equipment, three peaks were noted: 250 c/s at161 ft, 60 c/s at 151 ft, and 40 c/s at 107 ft. These peaks continued todeclineto background levels by 1981.

A new peak of 105 c/m in lateral number I beneath Tank 241-A-I04 wasnoted in April 1975 at a point 76 ft from the end of the line. This peakcontinuedto increase in intensityto a peak of 6,450 c/m on June 9, 1975, •from which it continued to decline. A second new peak of 650 c/m was recorded64 ft from the end of the line on May 19, 1975. The value for this secondpeak quickly reached a maximum value on October 6, 1975, at which time itcontinued to decline. A third new peak of 450 c/m was noted 55 ft from theend of lateral number 1 on March 2, 1976 and continued to increase throughMarch 1977 up to 1,260 c/m. As with the 14-04-02 lateral, a new system ofmonitoring equipmentwas introducedin the spring of 1977. The first logstaken after this change reveal three peaks of 120, 74 and 57 c/s at distancesof 125, 118 and 107 ft from the top of the lateral. These values continued todecline to background by 1980.

16

WHC-EP-0412

Figure 7. Inferred Zone of ContaminatedSedimentsBeneath Tank 241-A-105.

__ E25-6710-05-12 ActivityDetected

A , 4/65_ _ E25-66 _/'-_...

10-05-10 "T _, E25-68_" "_10-05-02

,Activity JDetected " 241-A-105 Actlvlty

"°"" Detected7/68

E25-62 (__. : __ E25-6910.05-09 _ 10-06-09

Activity _,Detected

7/68 _ E25-5610-04-04

Q E25-98 Caisson

10-05-08 Number 2

.__ E25-71 .__ E25-7010.05-07 10-05-05 Activity ,,Detected _ A'10/67

f ..... ,. Inferred Zone of'..... t / Contaminated Sediments0 5 Meters

I _ _ i i I mL- Detected RadioactivityH9104Oll.3

17

WHC-EP-0412

Lateral number 3 also showed a new peak of 205 c/m on April 22, 197514 ft from the end of the line. This peak increasedto a maximum of 325 c/min May 1975, declined through October and then increasedto a second peak of330 c/m in January 1976 from which it continueda steady decline. When thenew instrumentswere introducedin March 1977, two peaks of 60 and 17 c/s at143 and 88 ft from the top appeared. These peaks declined steadily tobackground values in 1980. The readings in the 241-A-I04 laterals are assumedto reflect a leak that occurred in 1975 and not the spread of contaminantsleaked from the adjacentTank 241-A-I05. However, contaminantsleaked fromTank 241-A-I05may have contributedto these recorded peaks beneathTank 241-A-I04.

In 1987, up to 5,500 gal of waste were estimatedto have leaked fromTank 241-A-I03. Changes of in-tank liquid levels over a period of severalyears precedingJune 1987 led to the conveningof a committee of fiveengineers to evaluate the data to determinewith 95% confidence,whether thetank could be declared sound. Two of five members felt that they could notdeclare the tank sound with 95% confidence, and therefore Tank 241-A-I03wasdeclared an "assumed leaker." This designationwas made despite the absenceof any changes in the profile of radioactivityseen in the scintillationlogstaken in both the dry wells and laterals. There has been no increase abovebackground in these dry wells and laterals since the designation of "assumedleaker" has been applied to this tank. Nevertheless,Tank 241-A-I03wasinterimstabilized in August 1988, and its contentswere reduced to370,000 gal of waste.

Two additional dry wells, 10-01-16 and 10-01-28,were constructedsoutheastof Tank 241-A-I01 in 1981 and 1984, respectively. When drywell 10-01-16 was first logged in February 1981, two peaks were detected:1,304 c/s at 34 ft and 725 c/s at 29 ft. By May 1983, these two peaks hadmerged at about 36 ft and increasedto 6,203 c/s, from which the intensitycontinued to decline through at least November 1986 to 3,420 c/s. When drywell 10-01-28 was first logged in January 1984, a peak of 13,295 c/s was foundat 30 ft. Through several readings thereafter,the peak continued to declineto about 10,789 in November 1986 while remainingfixed at about the 30-ftdepth. Nearby dry well 10-01-04 began showing a rise in counts at a depth of38 ft about 2 yr after the well was deepened to 125 ft in September 1978. Therise continued until the counts peaked at 1,343 in May 1983 when countscontinued to decline to 729 c/s by November 1986. No changes were noted inany readings in dry well 10-01-05 during this interval of time, with readingscontinuallyat backgroundlevels. Occurrence report 0R-81-03 was issued onJanuary 13, 1981 after the initial increase in activity in dry well 10-01-04.The assumed cause of this increase in observed activity was leakage of waterfrom an unknown source that mobilized Cs-137 and Ru-106 present in the soilaround a nearby sluice pit. Counts in dry well 10-01-04 at the 40-ft depthstabilized in 1983 and have slowly declined with time to 510 c/s onFebruary 21, 1989. Peaks in dry wells 10-01-16 and 10-01-28 at 36 ft and32 ft, respectively,have been on the decline since 1985 and have reachedvalues of 1,260 and 9,000 c/s on February 27, 1989. All this activityoccurred on the southeast side of Tank 241-A-I01,with no activity noted inany laterals or dry wells toward Tank 241-A-I05. Therefore, the activity inthe dry wells surroundingTank 241-A-I01does not appear to be related to anyleak or spreading from a source in Tank 241-A-I05.

18

WHC-EP-0412

Both Tank 241-AX-I02 and Tank 241-AX-I04 in the adjacent tank farmimmediatelynorth of the 241-A Tank Farm are assumed leakers. Leak detectionin the AX Farm is performedby in-tankmeasurementsof liquid levels, by drywells and by a collection system between the carbon steel liner and theconcrete. (Several drains collectany fluid accumulatingin the space betweenthe liner and the concrete and direct the fluid to a sump.) Leak-detectionlaterals are not present beneath tanks in the AX Tank Farm. Tank 241-AX-I04

• was assigned "QuestionableIntegrity"status in November 1977 because ofincreasingactivity in several dry wells. A radiation peak that appearedinitiallyat the 60-ft depth in dry well 11-04-08 in May 1976 had quadrupled

. in intensityby March 1977. After investigation,the increasing activity inseveraldry wells was believed by some to result from the 20-in. vapor lineand the tie line to the 24-in. vessel vent header. Tank 241-AX-I04 wasinterim stabilized in August 1981 at which time the total waste volume wasreducedto 7,000 gal. Up to 8,000 gal may have leaked from Tank 241-AX-I04.

A peer review panel convened in August 1988 to evaluate the status ofTank 241-AX-I02. When the integrityof the tank could not be determined with95% confidence,the tank was declared a leaker on August 17, 1988 despite theabsenceof any change in the backgroundlevels of radiationdetected in thedry wells surroundingthe tank and the absence of any indication of a leakfrom the leak detection pit beneaththe tank. Tank 241-AX-I02 was interimstabilizedin September 1988 based on an assumed leak of 3,000 gal.Tank 241-AX-I02 currentlycontains 39,000 gal of waste after interimstabilization.

Between the morning of February 22, 1978 and 5:30 pm February 23, 1978,approximately60,000 gal of uncontaminated"raw water" leaked to the groundfrom a broken 2-in. pipe along the east side of the 241-A Tank Farm(OccurrenceReport 78-24). The water was found ponded in a 6- to 8-ft-dia.hole of unknown depth. At the edge of the hole radiation readings of1,000 mrem/h were recorded. A cave-inwas discovered on the morning ofFebruary 24, 1978 between Tanks 241-A-102 and 241-A-I05. The leak wasattributedto the rupture of the M5a line approximately30 ft southeast of the501 Valve Pit building. The soil subsidence between Tanks 241-A-I02and 241-A-I05was attributedto subterraneanflow of water along a pipe, whichresulted in subterraneanerosion that led to sinking of the ground surface.Neutron-neutronlogs were run in some nearby dry wells, but no moisture couldbe definitely detected. Between February 21, 1978 and February 24, 1978, thecounts jumped from about 15 c/s to about 130 c/s in all three laterals beneathTank 241-A-I03 about 60 to 70 ft from the top of the lateral. This peak hasremained at about the same intensityto date. The rapid appearance of thisleaked water in the laterals indicateshigh transmissivityof the sediments

, surroundingand beneaththe tank and the mobilizationof gamma-emittingcontaminantsthat were detected by scintillationlogging. Other leaks ofwater lines may have occurred, but no documentationcould be found to

• substantiatesuch leaks.

Minutes from a March I, 1965 meeting state "Well number 2 near theI04-A tank increasedto greater than 1,000,000counts at about seven feetbelow ground level. This increasewas very likely due to the back-up in thenew line which drained out into the excavation near the weil." There is nofurther explanationof this occurrence,but it does indicate a leak from a

19

WHC-EP-0412

"new line" that must have contained some waste destined for Tank 241-A-104(or other) tank. No other documentationof this event was found.

Several other liquid waste disposal facilities are present within a1,000-ft radius of Tank 241-A-I05, includingreverse wells and cribs (seeGlossary for definitions). The cumulativevolume of liquid effluent added tothese facilities greatly exceeds the estimatesof water added toTank 241-A-I05. More than 3.6 billion gal of liquid effluent have beendisposed to the soil from 1955 to the present in various cribs, french drains,etc., that received wastes from PUREX and that are listed on Table 3. Most,but not all, of these discharges occurred during times when PUREX wasoperating (1956 to 1972 and 1982 to 1988). Note that the contaminantsin theliquidsdisposed include essentiallythe same constituentsdisposed toTank 241-A-I05and that the list includesonly radionuclidesfor which thereare recordsof disposal. Nitrate is the only nonradioactivecontaminantlisted in this table, although there were very likely unknown quantities ofvarious chemicalsdisposed to these facilities,constituentsthat arecurrently listed as dangerouswaste but that were not monitored before theinitiationof the Resource Conservationand Recovery Act (RCRA) groundwatermonitoring.

3.3 ANALYSISOF AVAILABLEDATA

Process and historical records, along with data from logging of the drywells and leak detection laterals beneathTank 241-A-I05, suggest that fluidshave escaped from the tank and spread into the soils. However, with thelimited number, distribution,and depth of wells and laterals in theunsaturatedzone, it is not possible to map a plume to determine the presentdistributionof these leaked fluids. The general absence of activity shown onscintillationlogs in the dry wells suggests that gamma-emittingradionuclidesleaked from the tanks along the ruptured seam of the side and bottom of theliner and have probably penetratedvertically downward in the soils below the125-ft depth of the dry wells. The general absence of activity in the drywells suggests no significantlateral spreading immediatelybelow the tank.Little can be interpretedconcerning the fate of alpha- and beta-emittingradionuclidesor hazardouswastes in the soils for which there are no data.The gamma-emittingradionuclidesare tracers of leaked waste, so it isreasonable to assume that other alpha- and beta-emittingradionuclidesas wellas nonradioactivecomponents are also present in the soils. However, thereare no definitive data to indicate their distribution in the soils.

4.0 REVIEW OF GROUNDWATER DATA

4.1 tIYDROGEOLOGYOF THE 241-A TANK FARM

Groundwateroccurs in the unconfined aquifer at a depth of about 285 ftbeneath Tank 241-A-I05 in unconsolidatedsedimentsof the Hanford or RingoldFormation (Price and Fecht 1976). In the 200 East Area, recharge to theunconfined aquifer occurs mostly by discharge of liquid to unlined ponds,trenches and cribs, perhaps supplementedminimally by natural precipitation

20

WHC-EP-0412

21

WHC-EP-0412

I t'.') _ OO _ t',,")O _ OO

P--' f,#') I I I",, I I I ,_ I I I_I I I",, I I(.,l VI _'ql" =I L .O..} V'i O'S =l f,.- 4..) _ '_il" =I f,.=,ll_

'_ =I .,f,,,.} f,._,.,.,r_,*f,,,r,)_ f.,._Ni2. (i'_G,) f,.,1.--,,".*(.n(= ¢._ :_I I =iO _ _ I =i_

o .,-, ..s.....-.-"-'-,-.,0 oC,,,C"'- (1,)_i:_ ,--_Q,-O_ir'.)

,,.('w,i_ _ ('NJ .,,.=.,,--ie- (',wi..,N,-",I I I (v} I I i_. .l.a I (") -, I i_= I it'5 I I _.,

I =l {=Q= r_ (.=,}

W.I= f,.,(#I._. _ o

I Oq,.- at m s..

"_ _ .._ _.l I= _L f_= _'= _,) (],) l= E l

(4 I _l (_l,l _'_l1,- 0 (1) 0 _'_ f,. _ N 4-) _ 00 (I,1I-- rO v) v) I

,.,., _ e"X _(4,- _ _ (I/ (w,1¢',wi _ X

I I .,'-- 4-,) "_ Ir_ .,.- ]_ .,1..._ L.IJ _ U I:= Li=/"_ I ",="

'ii" _. _ _- _ 0 _ wl_ Lr--" S,--,'- _) _ f,.- f,,- _) 0 _1" L

rml

•,-, G oC ,--•..- _ .=-, I'_ O_ aO

P" N CO N

LL

(= _ l.n q,D N

P,,,- * ,mt ,,,,,w ..,,q ,,-,.0_I-, r/I "1_ , I I , ' '

_w• s"_

_r

.=_

r_

M- _ I I

pl. I I I I I I I I•.- .=:: .c_ .:II: ._ .:Z: ._ ":_U I I I I I I I I

22

WHC-EP-0412

23

WHC-EP-0412

(mean annual precipitationat Hanford is 6.25 in.). Artificial recharge fromliquid disposal facilities in the SeparationsAreas on the Hanford Sitegreatly exceeds natural recharge, if any, to the unconfined aquifer (Routsonand Johnson 1990). Some natural recharge may occur in areas where the groundsurface consists of gravel and is unvegetated (Gee and Kirkham 1984). Since1944 when Hanford operations began, liquid effluent discharges have raised the Lwater table several tens of feet and resulted in mounds beneath the 216-B-3,216-U-I0, and 216-A-25 (Gable Mountain)ponds. These mounds have alsoaffected the direction and rate of flow of groundwateras can be seen bycomparing a 1988 water table map of the Hanford Site (Figure8) with ahindcast map for 1944 (Figure 9).

Sediments underlyingTank 241-A-I05are mostly medium to coarse sandcontaining various percentagesof pebble and cobble gravel. Figure 10(a northeast trending cross section) shows the degree of lateral variabilityin the fluviallydeposited sedimentsof the Hanford formation. Note thatthere is a finer grained horizon at the top of the Ringold Formation at andjust above the water table. These unsolidatedsediments of the Hanfordformation have relativelyhigh permeability. In places, the clasts aredominant and the material becomes a sandy gravel or gravel rather than theusual gravelly sand. Thin, laterallydiscontinuousunits of silt or siltyfine sand may be interbeddedin the section. While volumetricallyinsignificant,these thin units may be hydrogeologicallysignificant in thatthey may serve to laterallydisperse downward percolatingfluids. Photographstaken during constructionof the 241-A Tank Farm in 1954-55 revealstratificationin the sideslopes of the excavation. Interbeddedfine sand andsilt units such as these would enhance lateral transport of fluids. Similarstrata are likely within the sedimentsbetween the base of the tanks and thewater table and would thus facilitatethe lateral dispersal of fluids leakedfrom the tanks. Thin, discontinuousunits can be seen in several crosssections beneath the A Tank Farm in Price and Fecht (1976). Similar unitswere encounteredin drilling RCRA groundwatermonitoring wells around theA Tank Farm in 1989.

In a stratigraphicallylayered (heterogeneous)system like that beneathTank 241-A-105, the variations in permeabilityof the various strata affectthe degree of lateral spreading of downward percolating fluids and thus thevolume of voids that could become saturated by fluids leaking fromTank 241-A-I05. The larger the volume of sediment affected by downwardpercolatingfluid, the larger the total volume of voids for the fluids tooccupy and thus the greater quantity of fluid that can be accepted and held bythe sediments before draining by gravity to groundwater. The volume of fluidthat can be retained in a column of soil without draining to groundwater istermed the field capacity. The greater the lateral spreadingof fluidsbeneath a leak (source),the larger the volume of fluid that will be retained.Samples analyzed for moisture content during drilling of RCRA groundwatermonitoring wells in 1989 indicate less than 5% moisture (by weight) istypically present in the sand and gravel around the A Tank Farm. Samples fromthin, finer-grainedunits containing some silt have yielded moisture contentsof up to 26% (by weight). The three groundwatermonitoring wells constructedin 1989 are in upgradient and downgradientlocations just beyond the perimeterfence of the A Tank Farm. These finer-grainedunits must become saturatedbefore fluids will drain through to underlying strata. Because the voids in

24

WHC-EP-0412

Figure 8. 1988 Water Table Map of the Hanford Site.. e

," 100-H 11f,A o

• m m ,i

IO0oDj

, .., IO0oN

100-K -e,, 100-F #

IO0-B,C 390 "

• • • , Hanford• e Site

• " " " _ Boundary

#

450 )70 •

480 • -"4' ,IP

470

200 West "200 East •" 400

Yakima Area :460 Area "" • • \Ridge { ;0 , .

• _ _4 )® 370360_ _, lo . " . a9O3,ol) . I •""/,"III////I_ I - \ Washington ""

June 1988 .... "////"_at!/ee_-'__- . " \ . /Public Power --

TA/-aier'Ta;leElevations .....::'q,_?,.__ _ / Supply System

L_,d_,i-i,_i,s,,.L.v= "_//////_ _ "[]Contour Interval = lOft (3.1m) "///'_ \ 400

• Monitoring Wells for Water "//////_ _, Area

Level Mctasuroments "//_ \ ,5/0/

_'///////'4 WaterTable _ _V_er \ i. ( .;0 3 Mlles __ J

I I _ _ 300

I i Area• 0 3 Kilometers

H9107031.1

25

WHC-EP-0412

Figure 9. Estimated Water Table Map of the Hanford Site for 1944.

S

Hanford Site FJ .F- _ .Boundary F-

V" i

. . J

Gable.Butte

_41o Gable Mountain

_241.A Fa_

Cold Creek 430 _ 1 |

0

200 West / 200 EastArea

\ Area ,, 38oi \ X 'I

Dry Creek \ \ \ \\ \ ',• 39O 370

360

\ 350\

\

_ Ba,_;: Outcrop

380 Water Table Contours in Feet\ Above Mean Sea Level

0 5 MilesI , , L J II i' | _. I I

0 5 Kilometers Richland ,

1-19104011.6

26

WHC-EP-0412

Figure 10. Geologic Cross Section of the 241-A Tank Farm.

10 °>. _ I-2.c+ - , +-- _ _ r. Ii ,1o i i.

(.9 _ 10C >,>, 1.5 v, _ _ I mm> > " " =_ -> _ o oi ,.'I,"ol >. _ is+., J=> ,_ ,i

al) m +1o 10 ,.+ _._ N _P w,..:•+: "+'o+ 10 " 2 :_ =,-='+ ,,c =_5 •+,+,,N_ ", m .-, c _ _o I++;;+ :+ + + -+ ++ + = = mt +_ j. . I. --J Cl ts}

• o t.. i . J. . • -. m _,+,0. --_Lrl, ,,,,+ ! , .I! :l-T--hl :ll 1,,_,,,,+,_,-I_ +_Rg +lr_ I'Ii101 t t _ l ,' , ,1 , , if,l\ _'I , 11 I ' " "'t\ ___,,L___J_;_._ kl n II ct ! t I I I 1 I t I too Ii_ "" _,i; II _i ! II , I , I !, , , l,----,+=3:+

; ii! I I 10 I I I i i i: ; I i_;r, _m i..+,,,o^I I !, i ,I ,_'_,,_ o_-I ;' ,t;. _ , =. ,, .... " '"- '-

I 10 Jl I I I m _ ouc> I , 10 I _' ti I IXl !m.";l -_ :_" I = + lt _ I m. I I ' + ml" ' + +''I _ mo c? I I .I I I _ m ,I c m_+II I>> t > I I.I m t ! q=," • , rl >,

_: , m ,. , _;I_ , t', _. i _Ii, +__.I_,,.,..,,3 14. _xl II I 'j I I " -

'l J'! [,,, ,' • o,' I I_" l _. o . - _c

. _ t/ ; ,',. '_ I ;,7, I _ E := _ .'+-' ' ' Is" ,xul I I ,,I o E= ..g;_,,+" , l . +cI, ' ' '+ w -. 10=0-_i I I I o, I = _' I +0_ = " :' =''Cl 10 I • I +:PP, m _0. --ali _.":_I c i I -' +o 10 I _ I , "o-= meu--OI i I , tj o. ,',I

_, _ , - ! __ _ "l +" ! l ,,_--Ooo_o=,,_o....oI I,_l i o , __._- I-.I.-_0 _0 oF"_ , _ I _ l l >,-..,-' l _ [ l _c _l , l l mo_w_ _..-e.cc-.,°.I o I m

i I/ t , I I I I

L I r,it' I I r+ ./- ,,:.... k I I I I _" ,oI| ,-........ + t+,_, I ! _:1 I .= >- • "-I I ='Il,,, I I _°I I m ; _+ o, "_ m;|/ , ,al , + ---;= + o;

---._om /_ _:0 0 n+: l I _ ! += .c._ c +,5.-_..n_ IX _ l ; +,1 I

_=o-. |X I 'E:I I IP. I ; :u :_=uo n "= =-o •--0-- q' I-o L ......... I I : =.lo u .+"_ _ J _ lm! .o = I _! I > I ,.,., o_u,- m _--'_I I ,! .....+,-° , I I _", l " •o,10,+.... | I . _ , _._u'T• !/1_£ IITTTll f111II I'."._ 10 ! , I , i I_.:'_--o . C--_ v I

_,-_ I ">"; , ,_ n ' I _I _E_,,.... . +.. ,;,+,_o.u I +ore ! .I . I''_00 1 _ I r,l rJ ;i, i

/ I I '_, I I _ li I A _1 i _ " 10l I ''+ I l .I. I , > _ P:

I ........ -I _+ \ I,ii I I I t_ -" 10,..,' o I IXxi ' , , , _ o_: o .+

_>-u _.+tl_J _ '_ IX ? I I -_ .c ":c-oI

I ' m I I _ I i=l o+'- _; CI, =< II m _.x,- ' ; I I __ "-:+ "_:"I ; c_ li ixld '/. _10: _ I, I t_ .=u E_'=I 0 .mo O_l ,XlXI I', _," I I !,1 I u_c -e_P.IIoI .+ I1 v Os

A u.-_ I I _I , =mI, l , !,,,,<,,o I l_->o o._;_P';_>'_-o_,,=/'. ! , 'I >'>1 I l.,_l u.+ co>=

= 10 :> , I+s i 10 I_"_ _0">-• I==-_ I +-] _=o,_ I ! m(_ l " ",',10++-- --" ;++ ,' , ' I ', ,,,_ K '++r_ O 0'1 _ < I '

o, 0 '+ -< " c I' ,'_,- ml, +" ,+x_' I1_ , o c .., ,,,• [ ,r >'_. ;" . . + -+,

4 I l , ,Iv , =_ >. T.._ " "-".L:_---T-:: " u_

. o 10 ' n l/_ _ 10'." _? li 5 E 'Pi +I110 ++

-m_"_": I Iii; _ I_ li_l ;" ! -I_i I IWI / _ _I _I?-,

++_mmlVd_',_, , l,i,i_,i,t.t', ;.l _,t, '_ =_.-',,-'', , 10 , 10 - 10 "-_ = o= _L, __

........,..,....0..o+ io _ | >,, ,,n ->" _ ->" =,"->" / _= _: e_ o=;I = :_ -- >. -- =-- --II 10_ _0 .• 10 . 10 >e : >" ? c_.> 10_+. .. "Tc

10 o >_ o : c ,, =++ _ _,m = _ -_ m-_ :_ _ _ : -- ....._-----!..: _ = _ _ " " _°_ I I I ti I I I l I .... ' o0o_-_ ,

II011+^01_

27

WHC-EP-0412

the sedimentshave to become saturatedbefore fluid will infiltratedownward,the measured moisture contents suggest that the sediments could holdsubstantiallymore fluids; i.e., the fluids in the sediments generallydo notexceed the field capacity of the soils. The difference between the moisturecontent and the field capacity is the water that can be stored in the soil.

The groundwatermound beneath B Pond has resulted in a very lowgroundwatergradient in the 200 East Area, with the most likely flow of ogroundwater beneath the A Tank Farm being toward the west to southwest (seeFigures 8 and 9). Little difference in the elevation of the water table hasbeen measured recently between wells on the upgradient (east) side of the tankfarm and wells on the downgradient (west) side (Table 4). The low groundwatergradient beneath the 200 East Area is attributableto the high transmissivityof the sedimentsconstitutingthe unconfined aquifer. Because of this lowgradient and high transmissivity,large volumes of water disposed to the soilcolumn and percolatingto groundwaterare unlikely to result in a persistentgroundwater mound unless the volume of waste discharged overwhelms andsaturatesmuch of the unsaturatedzone (as at B Pond).

Water levels in the 200 East Area have risen and fluctuated with time.A hindcast map of the water table at the Hanford Site suggests that theelevationof the water table in the eastern part of the 200 East Area wherethe A Tank Farm is located was about 380 ft in 1944 (see Figure 9). Waterlevel elevations beneath the A Tank Farm are presently about 403 to 404 ftabove sea level (see Figures 8 and 11).

Several wells have a long-termrecord of water level change in thevicinity of the A Tank Farm, includingE25-2 (an upgradient weil).Hydrographs of some of these wells are shown on Figure 12. Water levelelevation from 1956 to 1969 in this well increasedfrom about 395 ft to about407 ft; from 1970 to 1973, the water level declined about a foot. Nomeasurementswere made from 1973 to 1990. In well E24-4, located a fewhundred feet west of the A Tank Farm adjacentto the 216-A-9 crib, the waterlevel elevationwas 401.9 ft in September 1960. By May 1973, the water levelelevation in this well had increasedto 404.01 ft and has remained within I ftof this elevation through May 1990. In well E25-4, located several hundredfeet northeastof the A Tank Farm adjacentto the 216-A-8 crib, the waterlevel elevation in May 1956 was 399.06 ft. By September 1960, the water levelin this well had risen to 402.5 ft and by May 1973, had reached 404.43 ft. InDecember 1983, water level had risen to 406.13 ft and reached 407.34 ft inDecember 1985. Since then, water levels have been declining to 402.76 ft inJune 1990. The rise of water table elevation in 1983 correspondedto re-useof this crib, which was out of service from 1976 to 1983. In well E26-4,located adjacent to the 216-A-24 crib, water level elevation was 400.69 ft inDecember 1958. By August 1965, water level elevation in this well hadincreasedto 405.5 ft and has remained essentiallywithin a foot of this valuethrough more than 20 measurementsuntil June 1990. In well E27-3, locatedseveral hundred feet northwest of the A Tank Farm, water level elevation inSeptember 1960 was 402.0 ft. By August 1965, water level had reached404.49 ft in this well and increasedslowly to a maximum elevationof 406.32

in April 1969 from where it has declined slowly. The most recent water levelmeasurement was taken in December 1982 when the water level elevation was400.69 ft.

28

WRC-EP-0412

Table 4. GroundwaterElevations in Wells Around 241-A Tank Farm.

Well WMA Date Depth to Well Water levelnumber water elevation elevation

E24-13 A-AX 6/28/90 286.87 691.13 404.2611/26/90 287.43 403.70

• E24-19R A-AX 6/28/90 289.54 693.65 404.1111/26/90 289.97 403.68

E25-I A-AX 6/28/90 286.29 690.57 404.2811/26/90 286.76 403.81

E25-2 A-AX 6/27/90 271.06 675.45 404.3911/27/90 271.44 404.01

E25-13 A-AX 6/28/90 278.15 682.43 404.2811/26/90 278.60 403.83

E25-15 A-AX 6/28/90 285.46 689.73 404.2711/26/90 285.93 403.80

E25-40R A-AX 6/28/90 261.42 665.71 404.2911/26/90 261.79 403.92

E25-41R A-AX 6/28/90 266.91 671.26 404.3511/26/90 267.28 403.98

R indicatesthat the well is a Resource Conservation andRecovery Act groundwatermonitoring well that meets theconstructionspecificationsin WAC 173-160.

Although drilled during differentyears, all wells wereresurveyed to the same datum in September1990 so that waterlevel data are consistent and comparable.

WMA = Waste Management Area.

29

WHC-EP-0412

1 .... " _ F.23-2 "" - PUREXPlan_ _kl

l _ _"_="=_==_24":-2"24 16 E25-36 Ill

/ E18-1, EI_--_ -- Jll. k_ l _ _ E17-17. U_:17 16 Iii_W ]r - lit / _ E17-13. - - III

i i

• Groundwater Monitoring Well

E16-1 Well Used in Creating WaterTable Map (Number Prefixedby 299-)

f40# "_ Water Table Contour, FeetAbove Mean Sea Level

LLWMA Low-Level Waste Iganagernent Area

PUREX Plutonium-Uranium Extraction (Plant)

WMA Waste Management Area0 1000 2000 FeetI I I0 500 Metersl I

GEOSCl \010991 - D

30

WHC-EP-0412

Figure 12. Hydrographs of Wells Near the 241-A Tank Farm.

Well 299-E25-2 408 Well 299-E25-4

407 407 -

406 406 -

405

405 ............ 404F ,..-.... ,,,.404 _ ="

i :::F40, 4°°F_400 = 399h_399

398 39811 /397 397l I_

396 396 -

395 39C394 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I t _ I 3956 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 78 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92

Year _el_=s.M Year mt_ 21Well 29g-E25-9

Well 299-E25-8 408,408 I

407 i 4O7I" _g,

_y

4o51-405

404-

=403F\- 4O34o2 4°2F\ /

4ol 4olt- b'=_ 400 4oo_-

3gg 3gg1"-

398 398 F

397 397 F

396 f 396F395 395

I I ' J t J t I I I I I I I t t t 394 L I l I I I I I t t I I l I I I _ z394,56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 88 88 90 92 58 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 88 88 90 92

Year ,,.os_sn Year m_m_m_s

Well 299-E26-4 Well 299-E27-3

408 408 /407P407 -

406 406 I" I_L. R

--_-405- _, 4051

S _

(o _ 404 I404

_=4o3 _4o31E4o21,. 402 _ 4011401 I

400 ; 4oo!399 399 -

398' 398 "

397 397 -

t 396 396 F395 395

394 I. I I I I I I I t I I I I I I I I . 394 I I I i I I I I I I I t t I I I56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 58 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92

Year _,=o_ Year _,.o_s_,

FIg105025.20-26

31

WHC-EP-0412

An April 1966 water table mah for the Hanford Site indicates that theelevation of the water table beneath B Pond was greater than 415 ft, within afew feet of present elevation. However, maps of groundwater contaminationinthe early 1950's suggest that before the beginningof PUREX operations and thedischarge of large volumes of effluent to cribs in the vicinity of that plant,the flow of groundwaterfrom the northern part of the 200 East Area wassoutheasttoward PUREX. Before the startup of PUREX, the annual volumes ofliquid discharged to B Pond were less than 500 million gal (comparedwithdischarges of several billion gallons in the 1960's to present). Largedischarges to cribs and discharges to reverse wells in the area of B Plant inthe 1940's and early 1950's, along with a significantlylower water table nearthe present A Tank Farm because of the low discharges to PUREX cribs andB Pond in the early 1950's,may have created a sufficient head to directgroundwater flow from the area of the BY cribs toward the A Tank Farm. Thesaturated thicknessof the unconfined aquifer in the area of the BY cribs in1990 is between 15 and 20 ft. Sediments of the Hanford formation in this arearest directly on southwarddipping basalts of the Columbia River Basalt Groupalong the flanks of the Cold Creek syncline. The axis of the Cold Creeksyncline plunges southeast.

Although water level elevations have changedwith time, the dominance ofthe B Pond mound and its control of water level elevations and direction offlow in the area of the A Tank Farm was establishedby the 1960's. However,an earlier groundwaterflow regime before the large volumes of effluentdischarged to PUREX cribs and B Pond caused groundwater to flow southeastwardfrom the area of the BY cribs. The high volume of high-salt liquid wastesdischarged to the BY cribs and trenches during uranium scavenging operations(approximately45.7 million gal) in the early to mid 1950's most likely wouldhave sunk to the bottom of the unconfined aquifer because of high density andmay have flowed southeastwardalong the top of the basalt toward the areacurrently occupied by the 241-A Tank Farm and PUREX. Once high-saltwastessank to the base of the unconfined aquifer, control of flow was determined bythe interplayof the groundwatervelocity and by the sloping top of basalt.This contrasts with shallowflow in the unconfined aquifer where flow iscontrolled by head differences in the unconfined aquifer.

Water levels beneath the 200 East Area (and thus A Tank Farm) areanticipated to be on a long-term decline with decrease in the volume of liquideffluents discharged to B Pond and nearby cribs. However, water levelsmeasured recently in wells suggest that there may be some slight seasonalfluctuationof groundwaterlevels.

4.2 MONITORING WELLS

Six wells constructedbetween 1955 and 1969 were used to monitor theunconfined aquifer in and around the 241-A Tank Farm before initiationofRCRA groundwatermonitoring in 1989. Some of these wells located outside thetank farm proper were located to monitor nearby cribs. The older wells wereconstructed of carben steel, with the casing perforated at various intervalsin the unconfined aquifer. N,te that casing liners were installed in thesewells in the mid 1970's. Initially,the annulus between the casing and theformationwas open and provided direct access to groundwater along the casing.Any surface spills or caved portions of the formationcontaining contaminants

327

WHC-EP-0412

potentially could have reached groundwater directly between the time the wellswere constructed and the time that the liner was installed and grout was addedas a seal ant.

Three RCRAStandard groundwater monitoring wells that conform withconstruction specifications in WAC173-160 for resource protection wells wereadded to this network in August 1989. These wells are constructed usingannular seals in accordance with the requirements of WAC173-160, The new

• wells monitor Waste ManagementArea (WMA) A-AX, one of several RCRA wastemanagement units at the SSTs on the Hanford Site. These groundwatermonitoringwells are listed in Table 5 and shown on Figure 13. Summaryas-built diagrams of the nine wells are included in Appendix A. AdditionalRCRA Standard monitoring wells may be installed at WMA A-AX in the futuredepending on the efficiencyof the existing groundwaternetwork determined bythe Monitoring Efficiency Model (MEMO) (see following section).

4.3 THE MONITORING EFFICIENCY MODEL

The likelihood of detecting any contaminantsleaked to groundwater fromTank 241-A-I05 is related to the number and location of groundwater monitoringwells that could detect contaminantsin the groundwater. Without a suitablenumber and location of wells, any contaminantsreachinggroundwater could goundetected,thus giving a false sense of environmentalconsequencesof anyleak/spill. These wells must also be sampled at the proper times, and thesamplesmust be analyzed for the proper constituentsto fully assess theimpact of a leak or spill.

The MEMO (Jacksonet al. 1991) was run for the 241-A Tank Farm toascertainthe likelihood of interceptinga plume of contaminants leaked togroundwaterfrom Tank 241-A-I05. Given certain input, the model generates ahypotheticalplume from a continuouslyleaking source, allows the plume tomigrate and spread, and determines the likelihoodthat a network ofgroundwatermonitoringwells would interceptthe hypotheticalplume. Theplume generation model is basicallythe two-dimensionalanalytical transportmodel of Domenico and Robbins (1985). The MEMO inputs include data on thecharacteristicsof the sediments (soils), the volume and rate of leaking ofcontaminants,the direction of groundwater flow and the coordinates of wellsused to monitor the facility. As output, the model provides a map showingwhere releases from the facilitywould and would not likely be detected bymonitoringwells under the known constraints assumed for the analysis.Cumulatively,MEMO calculates an efficiency for the groundwatermonitoringnetwork, which is basicallythe probability (expressedas a percentage)of aplume being detected by the network of groundwatermonitoring wells.|

The MEMO was run for the 241-A Tank Farm using the perimeter fence as theboundary of the tank farm and an assumed southwestdirection of groundwaterflow because of the B Pond mound. An April 1966 water table map for theHanford Site shows the B Pond mound at nearly its current elevation;therefore, the current direction of groundwaterflow approximatesthe pastdirections of flow when contaminantsmay have leaked to groundwater.

33

WHC-EP-0412

Table 5. GroundwaterMonitoringWells Surroundingthe A-AX Tank Farms.

Depth Casing(s) Open interval Date" Sampled by

Upgradient

E25-2 375 8", 6" 276-316 ftb 3/55 (1/82) Bailer

E25-13 317 8", 6" 265-316 10/63 (9/76) Bailer .

E25-40c 274 4" 252-273 9/89 Hydrostar

E25-41c 279 4" 255-276 9/89 Hydrostar .

Downgradient

E24-13 340 6", 4" 270-308 9/69 (6/75) Bailer

E25-16 340 6", 4" 270-307 7/69 (10/76) Bailer

E25-I 322 8", 4" 280-310 2/55 (10/76) Bailer

E25-15 340 6", 4" 270-338 7/69 (10/76) Bailer

E24-19c 303 4" 279-300 9/89 Hydrostar

NOTE- E24-20 is currentlybeing completed."Dates of modification (liner installation)given in parentheses.bBlankcasing from 316 to 375 ft--top of basalt at about 365 ft.CResourceConservationand Recovery Act GroundwaterMonitoring Wells

(complywith WAC 173-160).

34

WHC-EP-0412

Figure 13. GroundwaterMonitoring Wells Around the 241-A Tank Farm.

241-AX Tank Faro Ii

i

O0 '""_ O0• Double-Shell

Tanks

• E25-13 j O

241-A Tank Farm L E25.41 Generalized Direction

o _._ of Groundwater Flow8

,, OOO "'-'",-'--,,.,"/_._

E25-1E25-16 • Q E25-15

E24-1'9 0 '[ _._, N-41000

242-A Evaporator

Legend

• Pre.1989 Groundwater _ 100 Series Single-Monltodng Well _ Shell Tank

O RCRA Groundwater ------- Fences

Monltodng Well _ RoadsE25-1 Numberlng System for

Groundwater Monltorlng N-42000 Hanford PlantWells. All Wells Prefixed Coordlnatesby 299-

Note" Not Drawn to Scale

H9104011.5

35

WHC-EP-0412

The MEMO is designed to determine the efficiencyof monitoring with agiven set of wells; nonetheless,the model can be used to estimate whethercontaminantsleaked from Tank 241-A-I05 to groundwatermight be detected.The network of groundwatermonitoring wells in existence in 1970 had a78% likelihood of detectingany contaminantsleaked to groundwater from tanksin the A Tank Farm. The areas where contaminantsleaked to groundwater fromthe A Tank Farm would most likely not be detected are along the western marginand the southeast corner nf the tank farm. The likelihood of detecting anycontaminantsleaked to groundwaterfrom the area of Tank 241-A-I05 isconsiderablyhigher. With the addition of two groundwatermonitoring wells in1989 and 1990 (E24-19and E24-20), the efficiencyof the present groundwatermonitoring network increasesto about 97%.

4.4 SAMPLINGANDANALYSESOF GROUNDWATER

The six wells that existed during the period of water addition toTank 241-A-105 have been sampled intermittently by bailer and analyzed for alimited list of constituents. Before 1987, all analyses were forradionuclides only, with a few anions analyzed because of their associationwith processing facilities and their mobility in soils and groundwater(e.g., NO,, SO4). Constituentsand dates of sampling are given in Table 6.Some of t_ese wells were originally located to monitor other facilities(e.g., E25-2 was located to monitor the 216-A-8 crib). Therefore, many of theanalytes in past groundwateranalyses were chosen to monitor discharges toother liquid disposal.facilitiesand were not chosen to check for constituentsdischarged to and then leaked from the 241-A-I05 (and/orany other) tank.While the data are limited,they do permit some interpretationof constituentsreaching groundwater.

Some of the liquidsdischarged to SSTs were allowed to settle for a shortperiod so that certain short-livedfissionproducts would decay to lowerlevels of activity and to permit settling/precipitationof dense constituents.After curing and settling,the remaining supernatantwas frequently dischargedto nearby cribs to make more room in the tanks. This practice was followed inthe 1950's when wastes from the BY Tank Farm were discharged to the BY cribs.No records are availableto suggest that this practicewas followed at A TankFarm. Through the use of transfer lines, wastes from various plants wererouted to different tank farms. Thus, distinctionof sources from whichcontaminantsin groundwatermay have been derived is complicated by past wastemanagement practices and discharges.

Groundwateranalyses results available in the HGWDB are summarized inTable 6. Note that the number and frequency of analyses vary from well towell and that there are periods during which no analyses are reported. Forexample, gross beta was analyzedweekly in 1957 in well E25-2 during periodsof discharge to nearby liquid disposal facilities. Monthly or bi-monthlyanalyses for gross beta were continued through 1958 and 1959, but there are nodata for this well for gross beta between 1959 and 1971, when monthly samplingwas resumed. Some data are obviously spurious. For example, an analysis forgross beta is shown for 1951 in well E25-I; however, the well was not drilleduntil 1955 shortly after constructionof the A Tank Farm was completed. Somevalues are very high compared to others and may represent analyticalerror

36

q

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet 1 of 29)

WELL CONSTITUENT RESULTo iii m li O (+ 0 li lo O li li eWe e_ e ooeo eooe eeeo ego oeoooe ooelleooeooooo,o,nl oeeeoooooq eo oooeoo i o oeoooeease eo e e o o e e e o e e o e

Detection 8mq=L0 AnaLysisMm Mm Units L|m! t Dote VaLue

e e_oeeqlnle_a ee eel Qeeleaoe eet eoeee..eee eeaQ eeeeeee oeeteeeoe e elmeqnp e ee etoooolmo.ee

2-f24-13 Cesium-137 PCl/1. 20.0 4102187 < - 1.09102/87 < - .33/10188 < -2.7

. 7128188 < 1.4

6108189 < 0.0CobmLt-60 PCI/L 22.5 4/02/87 < -9.6

9102187 < 2.33110188 < -5.3

7128188 < - .46108189 8.7

Gross beta PCI/L 8.0 1/14171 180.02109171 150.0

3129171 150.04122171 2:30.0_J118171 170.06/16/71 170.0

7108171 220.08117/71 Z40.09124171 150.0

10125171 260.011/11/71 280.0

12114171 2:30.0

1/13172 600.0

2108/72 410.0

3/09/72 340.04118172 350.0

5/22172 370.06114172 410.0

7120172 430.08116/72 370.0

;_/15/T3 270.0

3121173 170.0

4118173 220.0

5/16173 80.06120173 75.07119173 75.o

8116173 130.0

• 9113173 80.010118173 90.011114173 TJ .012114173 TJ .01123174 TJ.0

. =

MOte: Omre lte unofficlot led should not _ referenced without permission from the Geosciencos Group

37

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet 2 of 29)

_ELI, CONSTI TUENT RESULT***meeeaoe..eo e l*..,.oe o*.l *,l..,I.,I,leeoe..._e.oe. m_e*. eee_e_e_eo..e*.e.eee | * ..e ee_ _.e.......** .*...

Detect 4on Saint • Aria{ys isWm W_ Unl ts LImt t Date VaLue

.g.®.oeee. . e o...._. _ o,lo o .ee eel oe.. : o.. =.. ©e..e.e . .,:....o,. ..leea.ee eeooo......

P

2-|24-13 Gross Wta P(:I/L 8.0 2/l&/?& 75.03111174 85.0

4118174 110.05114174 75.0 .

6/19/7& 85.07/18/74 75.0

811&/74 73.0911717& 80.0

10/17/7A 75.0

11113171. 80.0

12112/?& 80.0

1/17/7'} 80.0

2111/7_ 80.03112/7'J 80.0&116/73 75.05/21/_ 75.0

6/11/73 75.0

7116173 80.05109177 75.0

8110177 75.011114177 75.02/06178 75.0

5102178 73.0

7/Z5/78 75.011113/78 75.05107179 75.0

7127179 75. o10123/79 7'} .0

11115179 75.0

2111180 75.08122180 100.0

3110181 340.0

6116181 18.0

9109181 _4.011/13/81 17.0

3105182 13.05127182 1.0

8123182 8.8 •

31O9183 10.4

6101183 13.58/24183 11.1

11115183 25.0

wote: Data are unofficial end should not be referenced without permission from the Geoscier_:as Group

38

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet3 of 29)

WELL CONSTITUENT RESULTeelQoeoeoQeleelelo leloeooOoelee.eleel, weloeldleleleloe0_Q.oeloelOeeel. OSoee.eoool.oe m.mlse I ooeloelelOeelqne.eee_e.ooo_.e

Oetect 40n S_pte Anetysi sI_m Wmne Uni tj LImlt Omre Ve(ue

eoeee,qloa_8 e. elQo clio eQ ooe eeeloel oeo eeo mo o ee _ ecotone elelouoeoe. _ooeeeoe o e 4le o e Oooo.

" Z-EZ&e13 Gross b_t8 PC|/L 8.0 3/08/8/, 27.85/21/8& 1:3.78/O7/84 40.6

. 11/21/84 6.1211318S 5.3

4/10185 3.52/28186 5. ?

5/05186 6.3811&186 7. ?

11104186 6.64102187 8.0

6129187 6.9

9/02/87 9.410/28/87 8.43110188 5.8

5/121M 6.6

7/28/88 5.6

10126t88 6.7

2107189 5.76109189 9.0

Iodine-129 COrJnktngWater Sta PCI/L 1.0 7/28188 2.66108189 2.2

gt trate pPII SO0.0 11/0_/86 3010.0

4102187 2950.0

Nitrate, High Oet_t|on Lever PP8 2500.0 6129187 4210.09102187 2640.0

10/28/87 2750.0

3/10188 , 2.500.0

5112188 '( 2500.0

7128188 < 2SO0.010126188 < :)500.0

2107189 /,300.0

Nitrate, Phenodisutfonic Acid MGIL .5 2113185 2._,

4110185 _?..32/28/86 3. I5105186 2.58/I &/86 2.6

• Ruthenit.m-106 PCXIL 17"_.5 &I02187 84.0

9102187 < 15.Z

3110188 _ -18.5

7128188 71.86108189 _ 15.7

i iii' i

Note: Oat= ere unofftciat and should not be referenced without permission fro=, the Gaosctences GrouD

39

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet 4 of 29)

.SLL :=S_nJSWT m_SULT

Detlcti_t SampLe ArmtysisUmne mime I_l ts LIsi t Oete VaLue

oooeeeeaoG: e o o e e ee * ea o¢=e e e w o ee aea oo i1:_e a : oG f_ _eoclee eaeeeeoee eeeooQee eoeeeeaeeee

2o|26-13 Strcmt (tru-gO I_i/b 5.0 6/02/87 • .2

9/02/87 • .53/10/88 ¢ - .07128/88 < .76/06/89 • .6

Tr ( t tue PC!/L 500.0 6/02/87 22200.09102J87 8430.03/lOllm 63g0.0

7/28188 612C.06/O8/89 6310.0

2-_25-1 Cesium-137 I_l/t. 20.0 10/07/51 7&O.O7/02/57 740.0

7/23/57 740.07/30157 7AO.08/06157 740.0

_/13157 7t.O.0_119157 740.0

8127157 740.0

9/04157 740.0

9/10157 7&0.0

9/17/57 740.091Z5157 740.0

9/30/57 740,010107157 7&O.O

I0114157 740.0

10122/57 740.010129157' 7&O.011106157 7&O.0

11111157 7/,0.011118157 7_.0.0

11125157 7r.O.0

12/02/5"/ 7&O.0

12109157 740.012116157 7&O.012130157 740.0

1/27158 740.02103158 740.0

2124158 7&O.0

3103158 740.o3/2c,/58 740,0

3131/58 7/.0.0 r

Mote: Omta are unofficial end =heutd not be referenced without permission from the Geosciences G,,'oup

40

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet 5 of 29)

_t_ C_STtTU_WT Rt_TeQoeoQooQoeeQao | oeoe_aoeeeeGeeeaweeBeeooeeeem.oo_a_l_.eeeeeeoelee_e_.e_ee_ | e_eeeeeeqDee_eo.ee.t e.. e e

Detect | on Smllpt • Anall ys | •Nam Hamm Llnl ts Liml t Date Va tue

._oQeQeeae O o eee ee_eeoet eee e4Deame eoee_ee e oOe_e_ eeeQeeeee eeeee_se eeeeeaeeeee

• 2-E25- I Gesi_z- 137 PCl/L 20.0 4/21/58 740.0

4128158 740.0

5/26/58 7r.O. 0

6102/58 740.0

6123/58 740.0

6/30/58 740.0

7/28158 740.0

8104158 740.0

8/25/58 740.0

9/02/58 740.0

9/22/58 740.0

9/29/58 740.0

!2/01/58 740.0

Chmicat sod4us tw _ MG/L 1.0 6/?.3/53 58.0

7/28/58 83.0

9/22/58 34.0

Cobat t*60 PCl/L 22.5 3125157 440000.0

12/01158 740.0

Gross beta PCI/L 8.0 10/07/51 140000.0

3/25/57 28000000.0

7/02/57 58000.0

7/23157 97000.0

7/30/57 I00000.0

8106157 120000.0

8/13/57 98000.0

8/14/57 93000.0

8/19/.';7 93000.0

8127157 110000.0

9/04157 1I0000.0

9110157 120000.0

9/17/57 !20000.0

9125157 130000.0

9130157 140000.0

10107157 I_.0000.0

10/14157 210000.0

10/22/57 120000.0

10129157 110000.0

11106/57 120000.0

11111157 120000.0

11118157 120000.0

11125157 140000.0

12/02157 110000.0

Note: Data ere un0fftc|mt end sh_atd not be referenced without peraismion fr_ the Geoscier_es Grout)

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet6 of 29)

utLL CO.STITUE.T _eSULT|gleloeelelleel oieOOOeoolgoloooG_oleeooooleleeeOOeoeQlegoeol.eogoooeo_ol eli_eooOooooeeeeeogeeolw

Detection Sm'Ore AnetysisMi lm Units Limit Oete value

uOaOOQQ_O QeeOwOeoQeoeooeee_ooeeo_eaeeee e:eeoee e.eeooeeo e.eeeooe .eeme_oteee

2-e_.-i Gross Ntu PCI/L 8.0 12109157 150000.0

12/16/57 100000.0

1212..3/57 100000.0

12/30157 96000.0 J

1/27/58 85000.0

Z/03158 220000.0

2/24158 63000.0

3/03158 56000.0

3126/58 56000.0

3131158 56000.0

4121158 53000.0

4128/58 51000.0

5/26158 6_000.0

6/02/58 67000.0

6123158 65000.0

6130158 65000.0

7128/58 6_000.0

8/06/58 52000.0

8125158 3_000.0

9102158 40000.0

9122158 44000.0

9129158 79000.0

10/13/58 100000.0

12101158 48000.0

1126159 82000.0

2102159 120000.0

2123159 100000.0

3102159 97000.0

3/26/59 110000.0

3130159 100000.0

4102159 32000.0

4127159 88000.0

5106159 120000.0

6122159 150000.0

6/29/59 160000.0

8103159 160000.0

8126159 160000.0

8125159 160000.0

8131159 150000.0

9/28/59 130000.0

10/05/59 120000.0

1116171 420.0

i

Note= Oltl 8reunofftciaL imd should not be referenced without permission from the Geosciences Group

42

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet 7 of 29)

WELL CONSTITUENT RESULT_I_o_eoeeee_Qe_-eee_Q--oQQQ_0_o_--e_eO_o_-----_-_-_e-_-_-t--_._-e_e_e-e_--e-_--_

Oetection Sampt@ Anstys_s

Wm Wm Units Limit Dite Vstuee.eeeeoeoo eeee. Oe.oeellleem._Qom=_leeole eeome.. ...eOQO.I oeOOOeel .e.e* ..... •

' 2°E25-1 Gross beto PCI/L 8.0 2109171 350.03129171 260.0

4122/71 430.0

5118171 220.0

6116/71 350.0

7/08171 360.0

8117171 290.0

9/24/71 370.0

10/25171 340.0

11111171 400.0

12114/71 530.0

1113172 2200.0

210817"2 _50.0

3109172 340.0

4118172 350.0

5122172 460.0

6114172 450.0

7120172 5_0.0

8116172 570.0

2115173 280.0

3121/73 310.0

4118173 230.0

5116173 90.0

6120173 90.0

7119173 110.0

81161?'3 99.0

9113173 75.0

10116173 90.0

11/14173 75.0

12114173 75.0

1123174 75.0

211417& 75.0

3/11174 85.0

4118174 75,0

5114174 75.0

6119174 75.0

7118174 80.0

. 8114174 75.0

9117174 80.0

10117174 75.0

11/13174 80.0

12112174 80,0

II I _ --

Motel Oats mrs unofflclet gm¢l shoutd not be referenced without permission from the Geosciences Group

43

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet 8 of 29)

14ELL CONSTITUENT RESULT

Oetect|on Sampte Analysisim Name Units Limit Dite Vatue

le_QO_IIO tO_elleeleeeee.eoeeel._lle_li i_lme.e .e.lee.ol ..leSlie eleelll:l..t

2-E25-1 Gross beta PCI/L 8.0 1117175 75.0

3/12/7_ 7_ .o

4/16/75 75.0

5121175 7_. 0

6111175 75.0

N|trote, Phenodisutfonic Acid MG/L .5 8/26157 33.0

9/03/57 5.0

912&/57 71.0

9130157 4.0

1011&/57 73.0

10121157 4.0

11125157 100.0

12123157 4.5

1/27/58 17.0

2124158 64.0

3124158 150.0

4121158 97.0

5126158 170.0

612.3158 110.0

7128158 25.0

8125158 140.0

9/22/58 160.0

9124162 19.0

7101163 17.0

ORGANIC MG/L 8117167 .1

Plutonium PCI/L .1 910/,157 110.0

9130157 110.0

10129157 110.0

12109157 110.0

Strontium-90 PCIIL 5.0 7102157 200.0

7123157 200.0

7/30157 2GO.O

8106157 ZO0,O

8113157 200.0

8/19/57 200.0

8/27/57 200.0

910&i57 200 0

9110157 200.0 *

9117157 200.0

9125157 ZO0.O

9/30/57 200.0

10107157 200.0

iii Ji ill

Note: Oata are unofficio( and should not be referenced without permission from the Geosciencos Grot_D

44

WHC-EP-O_12

Table 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet 9 of 29)

_LL ¢O.STITUENT _ESULT

Detect|on S4wmte AnaLysisNmmm Nem Units Limit Oete VaLue

.oeememoe_ eeoo._oe_ege.._.eo.aee.ee.o..* _.o...e =o.._ee.e .._eee. ...*. ......

2-E25-1 Str_ntiLm-90 PCI/L 5.0 10/14157 200.0

10115157 200.0

10122/57 200.0

. 10/29157 200.0

11106157 200,0

11111157 200.0

11118/57 200.0

11125157 200.0

12102157 200.0

12109157 200.0

12116157 200.0

12130157 200.0

1127158 200,0

2103158 200.0

2124158 200.0

3103158 200 0

3118158 200 o

3124158 200 0

3131158 200 0

4121158 200 0

4128158 200 0

5126158 70 0

6103158 70.0

6123158 70.0

6130158 70.0

7128158 70.0

8104158 70.0

8/25/58 70.0

9102158 70.0

9108158 70.0

9122158 70._

9129158 70._)

12101158 70.0

3101159 70.0

1/ 25160 70. o

5102160 70.0

7105160 70.0

. 7126160 70.0

10124160 70.0

10131160 rO.O

1/23161 70.0

4103161 55.0

Note= Date ereunofficia( and should not _ refererced without permission from the Geosciences Group

45

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet 10 of 29)

WELL CONSTITUENT RESULTeQeIge_O_oQee_|0eee_e`-e_Ieeeeee_ee-_eee----e_--Q_(_`_Qe_-eo_ee_e_oeee_e_---_e--_`e_

Oetectiori Salllpte AnaLysis

Mm Mm Units Limit Date Valueoe_ee_Qeeo meee_ee_oeomee_eee.e.n..ee_----- em.eeee .eeeeeeee eee_e_e .e.oeeme...

2-E25-1 $tronttun-90 PCI/L 5.0 4111161 55.0

4124161 55.0

7124161 56,0

7131161 56.0

2"E25Q 13 1,1,1" trtchloroethaww PPO 5.0 3122/90 < 5.0

1,1,2- t r (cht oroethorm PPO 5.0 3122/90 • 5.0

1,1-di ¢ht oi,r_thnne PPl 5.0 3122190 • 5.0

1,2-dlchtoroath_ PPB 5.0 3/22/90 • 5.0

Acatone by VOA PPE 10.0 3122190 < 10.0

ALpha, High Oetection Level PCI/L 4.0 3/22/90 2.7

Benzene PPO 5.0 3122190 • 5.0

|raamide PPR 1000.0 3122190 • 1000.0

Carbon TetrachLoride by GCIMS PPB 5.0 3/22/90 < 5.0

ChLoride PPB 500.0 3122190 29900.0

ChLoroform PPB 5.0 3/22/90 • 5.0

Conductivity, Laboratory URNO 1.0 3/2Z/90 1490.0FLuoride PPE 500.0 3122190 500.0

Gross beta PCI/L 8.0 4129171 150.0

5118171 150.0

6116/71 240.0

7108171 150.0

8117/71 500.0

9124171 150.0

10125171 160.0

11111171 160.0

12114171 580.0

1/13172 190.0

2108172 260,0

3109172 210.0

4118172 150.0

5122172 170.0

6114172 430.0

7/20/72 500,0

8116_72 340,0

2115173 150.03121173 150.0

4118173 150.0

5116173 7_.0

6120173 _. 0

7119173 75.0

8116173 75. o

MOte= Oata are _a_offtctst iwm¢lshould not be referenced without permission from the Geosciencos Group

46

WHC-EP-0412

Fable 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet. 11 of 29)

WELL CONSTI TUENT RESULT

o..Im,..=eo-,eQe. ,......-..------------------------------------------------ ,------------------------ •

Detec t ! on Sam(e Aria tys i s

Mm Mwl Uni ts L imi t OltQ Vmtue..,=o,_..oo. .......................... .... oo..°.. ....... .. o...o.o. ..... ......

2-E25° 13 Gross beta PCI/L 8.0 9/13173 80.0

10/18/73 75.0

11/14/73 75 0

12/14173 75,0

1123174 75 0

2/14174 75,O

311117& 75.0

4118/74 80.0

5/1&/74 75.0

6/19174 75.0

7/18/7& 80.0

8/14/7& 75.0

9117171. 75.0

1OI 1717& 75,0

11113174 80.0

12112174 80.0

1/17/75 75.0

2/11/75 8O.O

]112175 75,0

4116175 80.0

5121175 75.0

6/11/75 80.0

7/16/75 140.0

8113175 80.0

3117177 75.0

6117177 75.0

12/12177 75.0

8124178 75. O

(}/05/79 75,0

81_.9179 75,0

11115179 75.0

12111/79 75.0

3106/80 75.0

6102180 75.0

3110181 8.O

6116181 •8

9109181 10.0

. 11113/81 38.0

3105/82 13.0

5/27/82 1a.08123182 12.0

• 3109183 8.1

Mote: Dcta are unofficial and shoutd not be referenced without permission from the Geosciencos Group

47

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet 12 of 29)

WELL CONSTITUENT RESULT

OetectJon SampLe AnaLysis

Ham Mm Units Limit Dote VaLueQeelooeeee ea_eeu_eoee_ee_e_e_e.uae.eee_ eeeoQee .eeaeeaee eeoeeeae weeeeeeoa..

2-E25-13 Gross I_tn PCI/L 8.0 6101183 6.0

8124183 9.4

11115183 178.0

3108184 16.5 •

5121184 16.1

8107184 -5.8

11121184 11.9

2113185 12.9

&/10/85 13.7

8130185 10.4

2128186 11.4

5105186 11.1

8/1&186 8.7

11104186 7.5

4102/87 11.1

6129187 10.8

9102187 7.8

10128187 91

31O9188 8.7

5111188 6.8

7128188 6.7

10127188 9.0

2110189 12.4

3122190 15.2

Methyt Isoi_Jtyt Ketone PP8 10.0 3122190 < 10.0

Methyl ethyl ketone PPB 10.0 3122/90 < 10.0

MethyLene ChLoride PPB 5.0 3122190 < 5.0

Nitrate PPB 500.0 11/04186 31&000,0

4/02/87 390000.0

3122190 370000.0

Nitrate, High Oetection Level PPB 2500.0 6129187 128000.09/02/87 443000.0

10128/87 327000.0

3109188 96400.0

5111188 68200.0

7128188 95900.0

10/27/88 129000.0

2/10/89 237000.0

Nitrate, Phenodisutfonic Acid MG/L .5 12/08/60 .2

1119161 8.4

3/13161 6.7

3120161 4.1

MOtet Data are unofficial and should not be referenced without permission from the Geosciences Group

48

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet 13 of 29)

kMLL C;ONST|TUENT RESULTooeqeooeeeeeee oeeo eee e eegee ee e_e ale oeeoeeoeeeeol, eeeeeeeeeeoeeweoe e eoeoe eeeooeeeeeesee o eee eoeeee

D0t_t Ian lint0 ,_maLyai sNem Wmo Llnlto Llml t Data Value

eeeeaoe_ee WeOeeeee Oeeee eOe oteaee eOleo_ee eeeeeee eeeeeeeee eeoeoeee .oeeee._eee

2-|25-13 Nitrate, Phenodlsutfonic Acid NGIL .$ 4/10161 1.34/17/61 .4

5/15/61 1.3" 6/19/61 12.0

7117/61 9.9

8/14/61 16.09111/61 7.3

9/18/61 8.411113/61 9.32/13/8S 280.04110/85 133.0

8/30/_ 208.02128186 478.0

51O5186 509.0811&/86 258.0

Nitrite PPll 1000.0 3/22190 ( 1000.0

Phos_a _e PPll 1000.0 3122/90 , 1000.0

Speci ftc cm'|ck._unce uxHO 1.0 3122190 1409.0

SoLfate PP| 500.0 3122/90 306000.0

Tat rlr,hLortmthyLw_e PPg 5.0 3122190 • S.0Totrihydrofuran Pl)li 10.0 3122/90 • 10.0

Tot_ PM 5.0 3122/90 • 5.0Total Organic HaLogen, LowDot FP8 10.0 3122/90 • 6.0

Trms- 1, Z-di chtoroethene Plql S.O 31_/90 < 5.0Trtchtor_thyL_ PPll S.O 3/22/90 • 5.0

TriI:i_ PClII. 500.0 3122190 36000.0

Vinyl chloride PP8 10.0 3/22/90 • 10.0

Xytene-m PPtl 5.0 3122190 • 5.0

XyLerm-o,p ppll .S.O 3/22190 • 5.0

p-Oichtorobenzene PPO 5.0 3122190 • 5.0I_, FieLd MeasurwMltlt .I 3122190 7.7iN, Laboratory Naasurmont .0 3122190 7.6

2-E25-15 Gross beia PCI/L. 8.0 1/1&171 420.02110171 390.0

3/29171 390.0

4122171 400.0

$118171 270,06116/71 330,07108171 370.0

- 0117/71 260,0

9124171 380.0

NOtOSData are unofficial _ should not be roferencncl without pomisaion frm rho Geosctences Grot4:

49

........................... mrnriflll

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet 14 of 29)

UELL CONSTITUENT RESULToe:qDoaeomqD i eeo i oa ee ooe elQueeogeegoeleeo ..eel ea=aoOa--Qoeeeeoe_eloeeee_e_Q oeaoee_eQeeeeoeeee eoo.eo

Dotecttm_ Sampto AnaLysiswm Wm Unl t0 LIml t O0to V0Lue

eQoell=oQ._ e O e Oe e_ee _ee e e_e eg,.I e. m_..,I,l_l ©_.JQo:e ,.oe_oeee: eeloolee ......oo._.

2-||5-15 Qross beth ACI/L 8.0 10/ZS/71 350.0

11/11/71 880.012/14/71 340.0

1/13/72 36O.0

Z108172 430.O3/O9172 370.0&/18172 ZTO.0

5/2.=;172 350.06/14/7'2 &30.O7/20/72 S6O.0

8116172 SSO.O

2/15/73 350°03/Zl/73 190.0

4/18173 250.05/16173 130.06/20173 75.0

7/19/73 7_.08/16/73 90.09113/73 _ .0

10118/73 90.0

11/1&/73 7'3.01211&173 _ .0

1/23174 7S.0

2114t74 90.0

3/11174 80.0

4118174 80.0

5/1&/74 7_.06t19/74 90.0

7/18174 7_.08114174 _ .0

9117/74 75.010117174 80.0

11113/T4 80.0

1;U12174 7_.0

I11717qJ 7_.0211117_ 75.0

3/12175 80.04116175 7S.0

51:;1175 80.06/11175 7S.O

5110176 7_.0

ii

Noto80etu ere unofftcfet and should not be rQferenctd without pemise|on fr_n the Geosctences Group

50

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet 15 of 29)

WELL CONSTITUENT rESULTQoe.eeoooQeeee eoee _e eeoeeeee_oe,aapeeeoqmoeoeeeeoeeee eeeaaP_ _,oea eee e_ee_oee | eeeweeeeeeqee e e .eeee ee oee

Detect|oil S8111pto Anliy$|lWm Nmmm llnl ts Llet t Dote VaLue

eeee=em_ee en e_eeeeoeeeeleeleeee.eeeoooee eea_eee teeeoeeee eleeeeee eeeqleeeeeee

2-1E25-16 Grou beta PCI/L 8.0 7/08171 330.08117171 390.0

9124/71 340.0• 10/25/71 670.0

11111/71 320.012/14/71 790.0

1/13/72 410.02/O8172 _)0.0

3109t72 400.04/18172 430.0

5/22/72 440.0

611/,/72 330.0

7120172 490.0

8116172 150.021151'13 300.0

3121/73 150.04118173 220.05116173 120.0

6120173 75.07/19173 120.0

8/16173 80.09/13173 75.0

t0/18/73 100.0

1111&173 9_.012/14173 90.0

1/2317& 75,02/1&lT& n.0

3/11/7& 85.0

&/18/7& 150.0511417& n .0

611917& 75.0

711817& 130,0

B/14/74 75.0911717& 80.0

1011717& 80.01111317/, 80.0

• 12112174 75.01117175 80.05110176 75.0

- 2-E25-2 ALpha, High Detection Love( PCI/L 4.0 /,127190 4.6

5/21/_ 1.3

i i i llml

NOteS Oeto are unofftciot and should not be referenced without permission from the Geosc|encos GrouD

51

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet 16 of 29)

WELL CONST|TUENT RESULTeeee,,oo.ooo ce. I eoo--.---e..o_e.oo,.ee.e..o_,oo.o.e.aoe,mG.e,,.eoee., o o.e.ll. I oooeleo,,oeo o.....o..,,., o

Oetect ion SiliWJL• Aria|ys tslime wm Untts L ini t Oa=e VaLue

oee eoeeeo eegeeee oooQaeoee eeeeeeeo eveeeeooeee• ee. eeooleeeoo _e,D_oooego_oeeeoo

|-Ii_o2 Bromide I_l 1000.0 &127/90 • 1000.0

5121/90 ¢ 1000.0CosIum-137 PCI/L 20.0 10/07/5 1 7/*0.0

/*/01/57 7/*0.05/O6/57 750.05/17/57 920.0

6/03/57 7&O°06106/57 .0

7/02/57 7&O.07/09/57 7/.0.07/15157 7/*0.0

7/23/57 7&O.07/30/57 7/.0.0

8/06/57 740.0

8113/57 740.08/19/57 7&O.0

8/27/57 740.09/0/,157 7/*O.0

9/10/57 740.09117/57 740.0

9/25/57 740.0

9130/57 7&O.0

10107/57 7/*0.01011&/57 7/*0.0

10122/57 7/,0.010129157 7/*0.0

11106157 7/*0.0

11/11/57 740.011/18157 ?t,O.O

11125/57 7/*0.012/02/57 740.0

12/09157 7/*0.012116157 740.0

12/30157 740.01127150 7_0,0

2103158 740.02/2&/58 740.0

3/03/58 7/*0.0

3/2&158 7/*0.03/31158 7/.0.0

/.121158 740.0

/.128/58 7't,O.0

Hote: Oeta are unofficial, and Ih_JLd not be referet_ed without Jxrslsjt0n from the Geosc|ences Gro4jp

52

.............................................. i .,,,,rk ............................

WHC-EP-04]2

Table 6. Constituents from the A-AX Groundwater Monitoring Wells.(sheet 17 of 29)

WELL ¢ONSTI TUINT I RESULT

o OeIe_OCD,IIIeIOO: ¢Jell ello e o d o tiee g dlo entt el e g ¢lt_O4liooee O e 0o e le oi ooeee o e e lago o o e e o e o o e I e e eele gaol O g o e g e e g o o e o e e

Oetectl(m J Slmp(o AnaLysisImno Wmo Units l.t.mit I Oete VaLue

ooQuoeeeJoe eoee,e ioeeooeeoe e, oQeo*oo .oeoaeoo Ioeooee, o*,leQIloe I ooooowee ge ..,e,e ee,le iI

2-|25-2 Cntt,m- 137 PCI/L 20.0 J 5126158 7t,O.OI 6102158 740.0I 6123158 740.0

• I 6/3o158 740.0I ?128158 740.0I _1_4 740.0I 8125158 740.0I 9102/58 740.0i 912158 740.0

9129158 740.0

10128158 740.0

11103158 740.011124168 ;'40.0

, 12/01/58 740.01112159 740.0

1119159 740.0

2/09159 740.02/19159 7'40.0

3103159 500.03/O9159 500.0

3/16/59 500.04106159 500.0

5101159 500.05111159 500.0

5/22/59 500.06101159 500.0

6/08159 500.06115/59 500.0

7/06/59 500.0

7113159 500.0

8110159 500.0

8117159 500.0

9108159 500.09/14159 SO0.O

10110160 500.0

7101163 50.0

5117171 16.07108171 26.0

9123171 7.3

11/11171 13.0

1113/72 7.0\

3/13/72 14.0

| i ii i

NOtes Oats are unoffSctst end should not be referenced without permission from the GeoscfemcesGroup

53

WHC-EP-0412

+ Table 6. Constituents from the A-AX Groundwater Monitoring Wells.(sheet 18 of 2._)

MELL _T !11JEMT RESULT..,e_..,D_e_.,=,w.,. ! ,D.=*O*'_._e'I_O_.,m,DO,P'D,.'D'_.,D,IO_O .._O*._._Q_OQ.Q**ee*_._.. ! OOeO,De,IQe_Q..,I. q...., ..._

_tecticm SimpLe ArmLysisWmm Wmrw Unlts Liat t 0ore VuLue

og*lgee_llP! e _ e e Q tl_e qlffo _e o leeelQe e _ ! e*ll eo_ _ele_e w_lo_e_eqP eelNioel_e ooq Oqln.loeelm,

2-1[_-2 ees i _z.,,137 PCI/L 20.0 5t22/72 12.0

7119172 7.5312Oln lO.O5115173 10.0 "7/18/73 32.09/12/73 20.0

11/13/73 23.01/22/74 20.03112/74 22.05/15/74 23.0

7117/7& 31.0

9t1817& 27.03130187 < 2.39103187 < - 6.7

2/01/U < 1. I9101/88 < 5.46/01/89 < 1.8

Chemical =odi_.mby AA WG/L 1.0 12/Z3/$7 37.0

5/26/58 50.0Cht oride l:qDt 500.0 4/27/_ 3300.0

5/21/90 3100.0

Col=lt t-60 P¢I/L 22. $ 12/01158 740.06/O3163 1200.0

11111/71 69.0

3113172 13.0

7/17/7& 45.0

7127179 ZO,0

; 4120183 3,57120183 5.3

10117183 11.02/07/8& - I. B

51O3184 2.0

7106184 ".5I012_184 - I. 22113185 _ ,5

4110185 -1.010116185 /,.0

4129/86 • - 1.0

7108186 < 20.03130187 < "3.0

9103187 < - 9.22101188 < ".8

Mote: Date are unoff+clet wtd should not be reforerced u|th_Jt plmllsian from the GeosciencN Group

=

54

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituents from the A-AX Groundwater Monitoring Wells.(sheet 19 of 29)

WELL C_IISTITUEWT J RESULT

emloooelJoeoQen e me o e ,oo e en,m e en _ q,e oen epmmen eem me eoeQe_ Q oQ o_o eQ _o o oo e em _ e m o o e e e Qem_ I eeen_enoquleoo Qo eQ e Qo e eemo m Q

Oete©tJon J Samte knetystsWi Weme Uni ts LSmlt J Oste Value

ZQe25"Z C(WxtC-60 PCl/t. 22.5 I 9101188 ,c -4.0J 6101189 < .&

ConckJi=tivJty, Lit:oratory UI4HO 1.0 I 4127/g0 2/.4.0

• J 5121/90 2t.2.0Fluoride _ 500.0 l 4127/90 ,c 500.0

I 5121/90 < 500.0Grou beta PCl/t, 8.0 l 10107/51 160000.0

l 312O157 16000.0I 3125/57 35000.0

I 4101157 32000.0

I 4108157 45000.0l 4115157 50000.0I 4122/57 45000.0I 4122157 50000.0I 4129157 50000.0

5106157 75000.05113157 77000.0

5117/57 76000.0

5120157 76000.0

5131/57 84000.0

6103157 100000.0

6111157 1O0000.06118157 110000.0

6126157 110000.0

7/02/57 140000.07109157 150000.0

7115/57 150000.0

7123157 140000.07130157 150000.0

8/06157 140000.0

8/13/57 170000.08119157 180000.0

8127157 160000.0

9/0_/5 7 170000.09110157 20000.09117157 150000.0

9125157 150000.0" 9130157 180000.0

10107157 160000.01011&/57 210000.0

,,,. 10122/57 180000.010129157 16000C.0

iii

Wote: 08to or, unofficial, _ shoul,dnot be referenced without permission from t_e GeoSclL_nce=Grouo

55

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet 20 of 29)

_,LL CONSTI TUEMT RESULTeoeGu, eoQeoo.ee_ : o wpoe_ ooe e o eeee ee eo eoo eooQee_ ©eemeeQoeeoee_eeID_oo_e e e--eeoo e e emlqnlaeol e. e o e _ _ e e e _ qm,. _

Detect Ian lanl:Le JmetysisNim Mm Unl ts Llmtt Oete VaLue

ooeoge,moee ee eeeo©e ee_.o eoeeee©eoeenoeeese oaeeoea eoeQIc_eoo eolooenoe ee.eooeoeoeII

2o|25-2 Gross beta PCI/L 8.0 11/06/57 180000.011/11/57 150000.011/18/57 160000.0

11/25/57 190000.0 _'

12/02/57 160000.012/09157 170000.O12/16/57 160000.012/23/57 150000.012/30/57 160000.0

1/27/58 100000.02/O3158 59O0O0.0

2126158 T?O00.0

31O3/58 7_000,0

3124/58 940q0.03/31/58' 92000.04/21/58 100000.0

.I," 4128/58 100000.0.... 5119158 180000.0

5126158 150000.06102158 160000.O

6123158 130000.O6130/58 140000.0

7128/58 180000.0

8104158 110000.O

8125158 86000.0

9/02/58 85000.09122158 85000.

9129158 83000.010128158 87000.011/03/58 74000.0

11/24/58 68000.0

12/01/58 71000.01/12159 58000.0

I119159 50000. O2109159 84000.02119159 94;000.03109159 86000. O

4,

+ " 3116/59 93000. O

4106159 120000.05111159 130000.0

5122159 110000.0 o

6108159 130000.0

.

Mote: Data are unoffictat uradshould not be referenced without pemtssim from the Geosciences GroLqo

_ 56

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituents from the A-AX Groundwater Monitoring Wells.(sheet 21 of 29)

WELL CONSTITUENT RESULT

Oetectton SampLe _natysisMama Namo Untts t.(mi t Dste value

eooe_e.loo_e o q. ! _Q oi l_a oa. e :o o e. o o m .,,D.eJ o...e :e_oo,Jq. I_I_.. .,ioeQoa_ .e.oooooo_o

2-|25-2 Grc,ss beta PCI/L 8.0 6/15/59 140000.0

7/06/59 140000.0

7113/59 260000.0

• 8/10/59 130000,08117/59 120000.0

9108/59 120000,09116/59 110000.0

10112/59 110000.0

3125/69 150.0

4130169 160.05127169 120.0

6124169 170.07108/69 170,08108169 160.0

9116/69 380.0

10127/69 160.011121169 160.0I / 14171 290.0

21_171 220,03126/71 2(;,0.04/22/71 150.05117171 150.0

6116 '71 210.0

71O8171 290.08117171 5_.0

9123171 230,010125171 230,0

11111171 300.0

12114/71 270.0I113172 150.0

2108172 340,03113/72 270.0

4118/72 160.0

5122172 770,0

611&172 310.0

711917"2 270.0

8115172 2S0.02/14173 150.0

3120173 150.01,117/73 150.0

, 5115173 75.f)6119173 75.0

• i i , i i i i

)lots: Oats sre unoffic|at end should not bo referenced uithout pem|ss|on from the Giosciences Group

i57

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet 22 of 29)

_LL CONST! YUEWT RESULTm_Oogo_e_gQ_e e e o _ _ Q t,am,ee e_q=,_ a=_le e e e,iD_ _ _ oe _ ¢._,um,_w. ee e_eo_ _eo e em,e. w.. oe _ o o e e | e e e e ee_ ee _ e -- e _ e -- Q Q -- -- e e o e

Detection SimpLe ArmLySili

Ilm llama Units Limt t Data VaLueo_ G _e JmN*e_ o o qau__ m Q _ _ _ _ Inl_,_ _ Q ql__ o 4u_*g= _ 0 Q _ _ _ _ o mm @elweee_ ecl_O_e_ oeclo_e oeemlee_o.e

2°1[_°2 Gross beta PCI/L 8°0 7118/7"5 75°08115173 76.09112173 75.0

10/16173 75.0 "

11113/73 2'5.012/11173 75.01/22/7& 75.0

2/12/74 75.03112174 80.0

4/17174 130.0

511517/* 75.0611817/* 80.07/17/74 75,0

8/1317/, 7"3o09/1817/* 75.0

12/09176 75.03114/T'/' 75.0

5109177 75.06110177 75.0

9112177, 75.0

10/18/77 75.012107177 75.0

2106178 75.0

,;/04178 75.05101178 7500

7/18/78 75.09126178 75.O

10111178 75.0

2105/79 75.0

3128179 ,'3 o0

5107179 75.O7127/79 75.0

9120179 75.010115179 75.0

/*129181 20.0

4129181 7S.0

10113181 1.810114181 75.0

31O9182 75.0

4128182 28.0

1011418,2 11.14120183 12.I

Wore: Data are _mfficlet and sltouL-dmt be referer_ed without pemission fr_ the Geosciermes Gro_)

58

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet23 of 29)

WELL COIISTLTUENT I RE,T_JLT

Detection [ $ulpLe AnaLysiS

Nam Units Limit I Omre VaLue

meeeeeeeee eeoc e_e_eee e _ d0ee o_ee mea eeo@eeo B_ _lbQedo eeQee_eee I eeleeWee eeeaeeeeeee

2-125-2 Gross mta PCilL 8.0 I 10117183 10.7.l 5/03/84 -33,4

10124184 16.1• 4103185 4.8

9106185 5.83131187 3.89103187 4 .I.

2/01188 5.19101/88 4.3

3122189 8.74/27190 6.3

5121190 3.4Ni trate FPtI 500.0 3131/87 1580.0

3/31187 1650.04127190 1400.0

5121/90 1200.0

Nitrate, High Detection Level PPB 25Q0.0 9103187 • 2500.02101188 '< 2500.09101/88 < 2500,0

3/22/89 < 2500.0

Nitrate, Phe_xJisuttonic Acid I4G/L .5 9103157 3.09109157 4.0

9116/57 4.0

9/24157 4.010/07157 45.010114157 27.0

10121157 61.010128157 430.0

11125157 150.012/23157 S.6

1/27/58 59.0

2124158 340.0312(,t58 17'0.0

4121/58 150.0

5126158 240.06123158 800.0

7128158 1500.0

8125/58 540.09/22/58 1500.0

10128158 430.0

, 12/18161 1.31116162 1. I

i ii,,

Note: Data ,re unoff|ciaL and shoutd not be referenced without permission fram the Geosciences Group

59

n

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet 24 of 29)

WELL CONSTITUENT RESULT

Deter t _ _(e A_ t _ i •_!amm R=am U_i ta L|mi t Date VaLue

o oolooo t_r,o o mee_,_mQom mo _oo oo,motmooo _ moo oo_ _mo_m mo_m_me_ m_m_m_m eeooeoeoQ_l

2oE25o2 Nitrate, Phenod|suLfonlc Acid MG/L 05 7/02/62 .97130162 12.0

12117162 31.0

2/0&/63 11,0 •4/01163 2.6

6/03163 7. I7101163 5o. 0

12/09176 2.63/1&177 2.B

5109177 2.9

6110/77 I_99/12/77 1oi,

10118177 1.6

12107177 1.4

2/06178 2.84104178 1.8

5101178 2. I7118178 3. I

9126178 2.8I0111/78 5.7

2/O5179 2.4312BI79 5.05107179 4.5

7127179 8.29120179 7.6

10115179 7,44129181 7+0

4/29181 8.3

10/13/81 .510/14t81 .5

3/091B2 5,9

4128182 6.9

4128182 8+6;'122/82 8.1

10114/82 4.31107183 4.72/02183 5.3

4120/83 S.6 "

4120183 6. I

10117183 6.6

ZlOTIS& 4,1 ,,_5/03/B4 3+4

| n, i

Rote: Data are unofficial end should not be referenced without ;)emission from the Oeosc|ences GrOUl:)

6O

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituents from the A-AX Groundwater Monitoring Wells.(sheet 25 of 29)

UELL CONSTITUENT I RESULT

eomenoooemoen o ace eeeeeeeeeee.eeeQeeemeeweeo4:eaeoeseeemeeeeeeeeoee.l.eeeloqeem _ e eeaeeeeeeeee e--e----e I e e--e

OetwtJon J Samqmte ArmtysisNam Nim Units LJm|t J Dlltg VaLue

. oolOeCllOeOe . e e e e e o e e 4lie e e eeo oeeee e o INI e e e eee ee eeeqlJe e.oel.ees _ eeeeQamee eleeeeeeeee

2-E25-2 )ii trato, Phenodtsutfonic Acid MG/L -5 I IO/ZA/S& 4.3

I 4103185 .3I 9/O6185 4.8

* Wttrmte- Ion MQ/L .5 I 7/20183 20,0

I 510318_ 12.0I 7/O6/S_ 7.zI lo/z4/a_ lO.OJ 2113/85 8,6I 4/10/85 7,3I 10116/85 16.0[ 4/29/86 4.9

witr| to PPlJ 1000.0 4/27/90 c lO".g.0

5/21/90 < 1000.0ORP.,AN! C W,GIL 8/18/67 .1

Phosl:hmta PPli 1000.0 &/27/9O . ¢ 1000.05/21/90 < 1000.0

PLUtoni'_m PC!/L ,1 6/04/57 220.09104157 110.0

9130157 110.0

10129157 110.0121(_9/57 110.0

Iluthon:_n- 106 _1/L 172.5 8117171 130.09123/71 130.0

1113/72 120+03/13172 95.05122/72 83.0

7119172 120.09112172 110.03130187 38.29103187 27.8

2101188 ( 0.0

9/01/88 < 1.0

6101189 < "20.8

Spec|f |c conductance UMHO 1.0 4127190 368.05t21190 250.0

Stront tLm-q0 POX/L S. 0 4101157 200.04122/57 50000.0

+ 51061,1;7 200.06/03/57 200.0

6104157 200.0• 7102157 200.0

7109157 200.0

u |

Mote: Data are unofficial _ should not be referenced without permission from the Geoscter_:es Group

61

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6, Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet 26 of 29)

WELL ¢_liST| TUEWT RESULTeaoQo_ag=_ee_ee eerie e en eeeQeee oo.. ee.eeeee eeeeaeeeJ,oemao_.e_oeaoeeeoo_ooeo_ m,u, oa, eeeee o o e e e Q ! o o e. e. e o.

OetectlQn SampLe _w_tyetsNem Ham Unl ts Ltmit Oate VaLue

et enQo_oe lt, o o en mo i el e e eel, o m e 9 o eploe, e.. e eGeeee e4peeneeo eeoeme..e enaoeeeee eeeeee.geom

2oE25-2 StPont( Lm-90 P¢1/L 5.0 7/15/57 200.0

7/23/57 200.0

7/30157 200.08106157 200.0 *'8113/57 200.08/19/57 200.0

8/27/57 2oa.09104157 200.09/10/57 200.09/17/57 200.0

9125/57 200.0

9/30/57 2OO,O10/07157 200.0

10/1&/57 200.0

10/15/57 200.010122/57 200.0

10/29/57 200.0

11/06/_7 200.011/11/57 200.011/18157 200.011125/57 200.0

12/02/57 200.0

12109/57 200.0

12116157 200.0

12/30157 200.0

1127158 200.02/03/58 200.0

2/24158 200.03/03/58 200.0

3/18/58 200.03/24/58 200.0

3/31158 200.04121158 200,04/28/58 200.0

5126158 70.06/03158 7'0.06/23/58 70.0

6130158 7O.0 -

7/28/58 70.08104158 70.0

l" 8/25/58 70.0 ,l 9/02/58 70.0

Wore-"Data tpo ur_ffl©tai _d should not be rofoTenced without pea|sl|on from the GeosctqmcosGrouD

62

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet 27 of 29)

WELL CONSTITUEMT RESULTeo.m_eelm_ge_e oow _oeeeeeee_. m ge o..e_weoe_o_e_oe_eoOoegeoQeemoe mo ee_gloo e_elqmnDeu eQOOO e I I e e e0 t o o o e.

Ootect|an SMIpto AnaLysisMm Mmm Llnlts LLintt Oete vat ue

eeeogee.ee . e.e e e e leeQ. e me owe elD•J, ooe_ see se c_eQee4De eeeteeQee _eoQe_le e..e.e.ee.e

2-F2S-2 St font i Lm-90 PC!/L 5.0 9/M/58 70.09/22/58 70.0

9/29/58 79,010/28158 79.0

11/03158 70.011124/58 79.o12101158 79.01112/59 70.0

1119159 70.02101159 70.02109159 79.02/19159 70.0

3101/59 79.0

3/O9/59 "_0.03/16159 70.04101159 70.0

t ,.lO6159 7'oo5101/59 79.O

5/11/59 79.05122/59 79.0

6/01159 79.06108/59 79.0

6115159 79.07101159 79.0

7106159 70.07113159 TO.0

8110/59 70.08117159 70.0

9108159 70.0

9114/59 70.0

I0112159 70.0

10119159 70.0

11109159 70.011/16159 70.0

1/11160 70.O111816,0 70.04111160 70.0

4118160 70.O

6120160 20.07111160 70.0

. 7122160 70.0

10117/60 ?0°0

i D_t_ i _!, i i ,li i,

J

.o=.- .,.. ,,.,+,',+,:+.t_ ,.,o,,.,td,',o,:u. ,".f.,-.,'.,,,+.+,,ou._,-,,,+..+=,'r'., m. O.o.,:i.,',,:..(+,",,,.+

63

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituentsfrom the A-AX GroundwaterMonitoring Wells.(sheet 28 of 29)

.iu. :_S,_T_WT .SULT,._ e,Q_l=_q:ooe.e I eo:woo_:_oeoeso_eeweGo_oo, eeeoee_oeo:emeeeee_e..e::m,au.----eee eo_eeoooeeeeoeoeo..e.moo

Ootectl0n $sauq:to Analysisllm Ma Uni_ LInl t omre Vot_

:e e eeeeeoooe eeeeoeeooeeada Den,o Doel _,:o_ eooeeeeoeeoeeoa, oeo_le_oe ada o e._e, eooo

2- |25- 2 Strmt lue- 90 PCI/L $ .0 1/09161 70.0

1116/61 70.03/20/61 55.0

_,110/61 55.0 o,

6t19161 56.09118/61 56001/07/63 70.021_/63 70.0

3104163 7000410116,3 70.0

5106163 70.07101163 70.0

10101/63 70°03/30/87 5o0

9103/87 • .12/01188 < - .29101188 • .5

6/01189 ¢ .1SuLfate PPli 500.0 4/27/g0 16&00.0

5121190 16100.0

Total Organtc Halogen, Lou Oer PPl 10.0 5121190 • 3.0Tri tlLm PCI/L 500,0 12/21/66 880000,0

12/09176 2_mO00.0

3/1/,/77 230000.05/O9177 280000.0

6110177 2?0000°0

9/12/77 230000.0

10/18/77 230000.0

12107177 210000.0Z/06/78 210000.0

4/04t78 210000.0

5101178 200000.0

7118/78 180000.0

9/26178 170000.0

10111/78 160000.02/05179 150000.0

3128179 120000.05/07/79 120000o0

9/20/79 120000.0

10/15/79 110000.0- 4129181 46000.0

4129/81 51000.0

i ii

Motet Oato lte unoff4claL attd Idtoutd not be referenced without permisst_ from the Geosc|ef_ce8Grocq)

64

WHC-EP-0412

Table 6. Constituents from the A-AX Groundwater Monitoring Wells.(sheet 29 of 29)

_L CO.ST:TUnT I ._Tteee, aeQeeoeeee J eeeneteoeeee,loee.oe41, eemeeeooem_meeeeeeeoeaeQeeeeeeeeeeeeee Jeoeoeeoeneooeeeeeeeeeoeeee

Oet_tloet I SampLe AnaLysislm Jim Uni ts I. lbl t I hto Value

q eenegeooeeqn qt o o eu etr o o e o e eeo e e e g oeo e en e a o o o o qn e o eeeeoee eoooooq, oe I eoeeesooo q, eeeeeeeeee

2-|_-2 TrJt JtJll JJC|/t. 500.0 j 10/13181 69000.0J 10/1&/81 65000.0

,,t ] 3/09182 5100o.0I 4/Z8/82 52000.0l 4,,a.8/82 8_ooo.oI 7/ZZ/OZ 47000.0I _o/_4/8a 362oo.oI 1/07/tD 38000.0I z/o2/83 TZ000.0[ 6120183 27500.0I 61201lB 36000.0I 7/ao/s3 35ooo.oI _o/_7/83 327oo.oI Z/OT/e_ 41000.0.I 5/o3/_ ze5oo.oI 7/06/_ • 35000.0I lo/z6/86 1:36000.0I 2/13/85 I/,OOO.OI 41o3/e_ _9_00.0I 4/lo/a5 _2ooo.ol 9/06/85 15100.0I _o/16/m _3ooo.oI 4/zg/s6 T_ooo.ol 7/08/86 96oo.oI 3/30/87 766o.oI 3131/87 866(3.0I 9103/87 71g0.0

I 2/01188 5940.0I 9/o_/88 6z_o.ol 3122/89 0650.0

_, Fietd Neesur_t .1 l 4/27/90 6.5

{ 5121190 6.6p44, Laboratory 14emsurement .0 l 4127190 7.6

I 5/21/90 7.8I

Motet Oete are unofelcta! and' shoutd not be referenced without pemlsslon from the Geosc4encesGrot_

65

WHC--EP-0412

that is difficult, if not impossible,to substantiate. Limits of detectiongenerally improvedwith time as analyticalcapability improved. Nonetheless,the data taken in toto do r_',ealsome past management practices and dischargesthat affected groundwater.

A search was initiatedto determine if any analyses of groundwatersampleswere classified,but no data were located. A conversationwithJ. R. Raymond, a scientist involved in groundwatermonitoring at theHanford Site for several decades, indicatedthat data from the 1950's aregenerally not classified now. The data either were never classified or, ifclassified,were subsequentlydeclassified, lt is possible that there aresome groundwatermonitoring data that are classified;only titles ofclassified documentscan be retrieved,and these must be scanned to determinewhether any relevant data are containedwithin--a lengthy process. However,data from special studies not taken as part of routinemonitoring may not havebeen entered into the HGWDB. A search could be made for possible data thatwere never entered into the database or that were lost from the databaseduring conversion from one computer system to another, but that is beyond thescope of this study and could require a lengthy, intensiveeffort. Gaps inthe data likely represent times when sampleswere not collected and analyzed.

The oldest monitoring well in the A Tank Farm is 299-E25-I,which wasconstructed in October 1955 between but slightly south of Tanks 241-A-101and 241-A-I02 shortly after completionof constructionof the A Tank Farm.The earllest constituentdata from this well are for 1957 (aside from thespurious 1951 record). In March 1957, Co-60 at 440,000 pCi/L and gross betaat 2,800,000 pCi/L were detected from this well just 14 months afterTank 241-A-I01and 12 months after Tank 241-A-I02were first put into service.(Tank 241-A-I05was put into service in 1963 and was the last tanK put intoservice in the 241-A Tank Farm.) These were the second and third tanks to beused in the _ T_nk Farm (241-A-103was the first). All available data fromin-tank liquid levels and the logging of dry wells and laterals indicate thatTanks 241-A-I01 and 241-A-I02are still sound and have never leaked.Therefore, the elevated values obtained for Co-60 and gross beta must be fromanother liquid disposal site. Values for Pu and Sr-gO for September 1957 andJuly i957, respectively,for this well are 110 pCi/L and 200 pCi/L. Assumingthe anclyticaldata are valid, the implicationof these results is thatgroundwaterbeneath the A Tank Farm was contaminatedbefore the time thatTank 241-A-105was put into service. As can be seen from Table 3, many of theliquid effluent disposal facilities near the A Tank Farm were put into servicebefore the first sampling from well E25-I, includingsome of the larger cribs,which received high liquid volumes (e.g., the 216-A-8 crib).

Well E25-2, an upgradientwell a few hundred feet east of Tank 241-A-I05,was sampled regularly in 1957 and analyzed for gross beta throughOctober 1959, as well as later dates in the late 1960's and early 1970's.From an initialvalue of 10,000 pCi/L on March 20, 1957, the values for grossbeta escalated regularlyto 180,000 pCi/L on August 19, 1957 and remained ator close to this level through 18 subsequent analyses until lateDe_ember 1957. Analyses were also run for Sr-gO (and other constituents)onE25-2, with Sr-gO values generally at 200 pCi/L throughout all of 1957 (exceptfor one seemingly spurious value of 50,000 pCi/L on April 22, 1957). Thenumber of 200 pCi/L values suggestthat this may have been a detection limitat the time. The appearanceof Sr-gO in groundwaterjust a few years after

66

WHC-EP-0412

the initiationof PUREX operations is unusual because Sr-gO generally sorbs insoils within 10 to 20 m of the source and would not be expected to havereached groundwater from discharges to cribs. The appearance of Sr-gO ingroundwater suggests some lack of qualitycontrol on the sampling/analyticalprocess as well as the possibilitythat this radionuclidewas transporteddirectly to groundwateralong a poorly sealed weil. The proximity of thiswell to the 216-A-8 crib and the dates of operationof this crib suggest that

• the groundwaterupgradientof the A Tank Farm had already been contaminatedbefore the use of Tank 241-A-I05. The likely source of this contaminationisthe 216-A-8 crib.

6

The limited data from wells E25-I and E25-2 suggest that groundwaterupgradient in the vicinity of the A Tank Farm and beneath the southwesternpart of the A Tank Farm was contaminatedby discharges to liquid effluentdisposal facilitiesbefore Tank 241-A-I05was placed into service. Becausemany liquid disposal facilities continuedto operate during the periodTank 241-A-I05was receivingwastes and the period spray irrigationwater wasbeing added to the tank to control the in-tank temperature,the likelihood ofdetecting contaminantsthat were specificallyderived from Tank 241-A-I05 isimpossiblewith the available data.

Three groundwatermonitoring wells were constructed in the southwestcorner of the A Tank Farm to supplementE25-I in 1969: E24-13, E25-15 andE25-16. All three were constructedin the sumer of 1969, which coincideswith events at Tank 241-A-I05. All three monitor the upper part of theunconfined aquifer, but E25-15 has a longer perforated interval. Sampling andanalyses began in 1971 at all three of these wells. Only gross beta wasanalyzed regularly for E24-13, and most of these values are less than500 pCi/L, except for a reading of 600 pCi/L on January 13, 1972. All valuesfor gross beta are less than 100 pCi/L after 1974 except for a reading of100 pCi/L on August 22, 1980 and 340 pCi/L on March 3, 1981. Otherconstituentswere not analyzed until 1985, and most of these values fornitrate and other radionuclidesare below current established regulatorylimits. Values for gross beta generally correlatebetween wells E24-13and E25-I, which are separated by about 100 ft.

Only gross beta was analyzed for samples from well E25-13 for the period1971 through 1976. The maximum value was 420 pCi/L for the first analysis inJanuary 1971 and declined steadily through 1976 to 75 pCi/L until analyseswere terminated in May 1976.

Similar to well E25-15, well E25-16 was analyzed only for gross betabetween 1971 and 1976. The maximum recorded value of 670 pCi/L was recordedon October 25, 1971. The minimum value of 75 pCi/L was recorded onMay 10, 1976.

Well E25-13 was constructed in October 1963 and is located in thesouthwestcorner of the AX Tank Farm, which was constructed in 1963-64.Well E25-13 is completed in the top of the unconfined aquifer and has a longopen intervalextending from 265 to 316 ft depth. From April 1971 to thepresent, gross beta was analyzed at least once each year, and in most years,several times. The maximum value for gross beta for this well is 580 pCi/L on

67

WHC-EP-0412

December 14, 1971. Values from 1973 to the present are generally less than100 pCi/L except for two values: 140 pCi/L on July 16, 1975 and 178 pCi/L onNovember 15, 1983. Some hazardouswaste constituentswere analyzed inMarch 1990 and are generally within regulatorylimits. Nitrate was analyzedfrom 1986 to the present and has consistentlyexceeded the 45,000 ppbSecondaryMaximum ContaminantLimit. Several values for nitrate in 1960 and1961 are considered spurious because E25-13 was not constructeduntil 1963.

4.5 ANALYSES OF DATA FROM NEARBY CRIB MONITORINGWELLS

Groundwatermonitoringwells adjacent to nearby cribs (Figure 14) weresampled and analyzed for some constituentsin the 1960's and 1970's. Most ofthese wells were analyzed for gross beta and tritium, but some samples wereanalyzed for specific radionuclides. Values for gross beta, Co-60, Cs-137 andSr-90 exceeded current regulatory standards in 1969 in well E24-4, whichmonitors the nearby 216-A-9 crib. Analyses for gross beta in this well weredone several times per year in subsequentyears. The preponderanceof

i 75 pCi/L values suggest that this was likely the detection limit for grossbeta during the 1970's. Tritium analyses for this well began in 1972, and forseveral analyses done from 1972 to 1976, the values greatly exceeded thecurrent regulatorystandard of 20,000 pCi/L. A similar pattern forconstituentsfor the _ame period was also noted in well E24-5, which alsomonitors the 216-A-9 crib, except that tritium analyses were not performedonsamples from this weil. While the 216-A-9 crib is located downgradientof the216-A-9 crib, it illustratesthat groundwater in the vicinity of the A TankFarm was receiving constituentsabove current regulatory limits during timesof operation of the tank farm.

The 216-A-8 and 216-A-24 cribs are located upgradient of the A Tank Farm,and data from wells monitoring these facilitieswere evaluated as anindicationof constituentsreaching groundwaterupgradient of the A Tank Farm.

• Values for Cs-137, Co-60, and Sr-gO from 1960 and 1961 in well E25-4 exceedcurrent regulatory standards. Gross beta as well as tritium values for the1960's also exceed current regulatory standards1.• Values for Cs-137, Co-60,gross beta, Sr-g0 and a single value for tritium obtained during the 1960'sand 1970's from well E25-5 similarly exceed current regulatory standards.Numerous analyses of groundwatersamples from well E25-6 indicate a similarpattern of crib dischargesreaching groundwater. Values for Cs-137 from thiswell exceed current regulatory limits for several a_lyses done in 1969, buLnumerous analyses for this isotope performed in the 1970'_ indicate thatCs-137 was below current regulatory standardsof 200 pCi/L. All analyses forCo-60 From this well in the 1970's are below the current regulatorystandard of 100 pCi/L except for one value of 100 pCi/L in September 1974.Values for gross beta for numerous analyses done in the period March 1969

¢

IAlthoughthere were no federallymandated limits for variousconstituentsin the 1960's,guidelines for activity/concentrationwereestablished in Table I of the Report of Committee II (ICRP 1959), and theselimits were subsequentlyincorporatedinto the Derived ConcentrationGuideiines that are now included in uu_ urder 5480.ii. These earlier valuesfor radionuclidesmay differ from those establishedby currentregulations/standardsfor groundwateror drinking water.

l

68

WHC-EP-0412

,II

_ 69

WHC-EP-0412

through November 1980 all exceed the current regulatory standard of 50 pCi/L;however, many values of 75 pCi/L suggestthat this was probably the limit ofdetection for this constituentduring this pm'iod. All values for Ru-106during the 1970's for this well exceed current regulatory standardsof30 pCi/L, but two values for analyses in October and November 1980 are belowthis standard. Many analyses for Sr-gO in 1960 and 1961 exceed the currentregulatorylimit of 8 pCi/L. All but one of numerous values for tritiumgreatly exceed the current regulatory limit of 20,000 pCi/L for well E25-6.For well E2S-7, all values for Cs-137 in the period March 1963 throughOctober 1969 exceed the current regulatory standard of 200 pCi/L, although twovalues for this constituentfrom early 1971 are below the standard. Gross ogamma logging and subsequent spectralgamma logging in wells at the216-A-8 crib suggest that Cs-137 has penetrated only 30 m beneath this cribafter more than 20 yr of active use and discharges of more than200 million gal of wastewater (EnvironmentalDivision 1990). Similar resultsfrom logging beneath the 216-S-1 and 216-S-2 cribs indicate that Cs-137 sorbedwithin 10 m of the crib, but Cs-137 in groundwater resulted from a casingfailure in a groundwatermonitoringwell (Van Luik and Smith 1982). Thus, thepresence of Cs-137 in groundwatersuggests improper sampling/analyticalcontrol or movement of Cs-137 directly to groundwater along a poorly sealedwelI.

All the gross beta analyses done during 1969 exceed the currentregulatory standard, but three analyses done in 1971 do not. All values forSr-gO analysesdone in 1960, 1961 and 1963 exceed the c_,rrentregulatorylimit. Tritium analyses for March 1963 through April I_64 for well E25-7greatly exceed the current regulatory standard, although one value forJanuary 1963 is only 500 pCi/L. Values for Sr-g0 analyses in well E25-8 forthe period January 1960 to October 1963 exceed the current regulatorystandard,although the frequent occurrence of the value 70 pCi/L suggests thatthis may have been the limit of detection for this constituentat this time.For well E25-9, values for gross beta for the period April 1971 to July 1980all exceed current regulatory standards. The Sr-g0 values from January 1960throughAugust 1962 for this well all exceed current limits for thisconstituent. One analysis of tritium for this well done in February 1963 iswell below the regulatory limit, but four done in 1975 and 1976 exceed thecurrent regulatorylimit. Liquidsdischarged to the 216-A-8 crib havecontributedto groundwater contaminationupgradient of the A Tank Farm duringthe period in question.

Severalwells monitor the 216-A-24 crib located northeast and upgradientof the A Tank Farm: E26-2, E26-3, E26-4, E26-5 and E26-7. Gross beta valuesfor the period November 1974 throughAugust 1980 for well E26-2 all exceed thecurrent regulatory standard. The preponderanceof 75 pCi/L values suggeststhat this may have been the detectionlimit for this constituent at the time.Values for Sr-90 done in 1960 and 1961 fo_"this well all exceed the currentregulatory standard. Six analyses for tritium in 1974-76 all exceed thecurrent regulatory limit for tritium. The Cs-137 exceeded the currentregulatory standard in the first analysis i_ well E26-3 in 1965, butsubsequent analyses in 1971 and 1980 indicated that Cs-137 was well below thecur.-entstandard. All four values for Co-60 analyzed in 1971, 1979, and twoin 1980, were below the current regulatory standard. For numerous analyses,

i

70

WHC-EP-0412

gross beta exceeded the current standardbetween 1971 and July 1980 in thisweil, with many values of 75 pCi/L. An analysis in October 1980 for grossbeta was well below the standard in well E26-3. Analyses for Ru-106 and Sr-90in 1971 and 1980, and 1960 and 1961, respectively,were above currentregulatory standards,with numerous values for 70 pCi/L for Sr-90 suggestingthat i_hismay have been the limit of detectionfor this period. Tritiumanalyses for E26-3 in 1977, 1978, 1979 and 1980 all exceeded the current

. regulatory standard. Numerous analyseswere run for Cs-137 in the 1960's and1970's on samples from well E26-4. One analysiswas run in January 1961, andseveralwere run in 1964-65. All were at or above the 200 pCi/L regulatorylimit. Numerous analyses were run for this isotope from July 1971 toFebruary 1977. All but three analyseswere below the regulatory limit-1,100 pCi/L were reported on August 15, 1972; 330 pCi/L were reported onJune 18, 1974; and 400 pCi/L were reported on September 17, 1974. Oneanalysis for Co-60 exceeded the limit in 1960 in well E26-4; all others in the1970's were below the 100 pCi/L limit. Numerous analyses were run for grossbeta in this weil, the first several of which were in 1967. Values generallydeclined from a maximum of 4,600 pCi/L (exceptfor one seeminglyspuriousvalue of 31,000 pCi/L on March 31, 1967) to numerous values of 75 pCi/L in theperiod 1976 through 1980. Another seeminglyspurious value of 12,000 pCi/Lwas noted in September 1974. All values for Ru-106 performed from 1971through 1975 exceeded the current regulatory limit in E26-4. Except for threevalues _or Sr-gO in 1967, all analyses for this isotope exceeded the currentregulatory limit. All of many values for tritium for this well greatlyexceeded the current regulatory limit for this isotope. Numerous analyseswere run For Cs-137 and Co-60 in well E26-5. All of many values from the1960's exceeded the current regulatorylimit; all values from the 1970's arebelow the current limits. However, there are significantgaps in the datafrom the late 1960's. Gross beta values for E26-5 for the period 1971 through1977 exceed the current regulatory limit, with many reported values of75 pCi/L. All values for Ru-106 from 1971-1975exceed current limits. Datafor Sr-gO from 1960 through 1963 all exceed current limits,with many valuesof 70 pCi/L (a likely detection limit). All values for Cs-137, Ru-106, grossbeta, and tritium in well E26-7 exceed current regulatory limits for theseconstituents. The data are all from the early to mid 1970's. The few valuesfrom the early 1970's for this well for Co-60 are all below current regulatorylimits.

All the analyses summarized above come from wells that are adjacent toand that monitor groundwater beneathcribs. These analyses clearlydemonstrate that the cribs have contributedsignificantlyto the degradationof groundwaterquality in the area of the A Tank Farm. Analyses for wellsmonitoring the 216-A-8 and 216-A-24 cribs clearly indicate that groundwaterupgradient of the A Tank Farm had been contaminatedby discharges to cribsbefore the operationof the A Tank Farm and the reported releases fromTank 241-A-I05. The constituentsused to assess contamination are the same asthose measured in wells in the monitoringnetwork for the A Tank Farm. Thewastes dischargedto the tanks in A Tank Farm are similar in composition(althoughnot concentration/activity)as those discharged to the nearbyupgradient cribs. Therefore, any constituentsfrom Tank 241-A-I05 that mayhave reached groundwaterwould have been more than masked by the overwhelmingvolume of liquid wastes discharged to nearby cribs.

71

WHC-EP-0412

4.6 ANALYSESOF GROUNDWATERDATA

The available data from chemical analyses of groundwater sampled fromwells in and near the 241-A Tank Farm as well as from wells at nearby PUREXcribs indicate that groundwater both upgradient and downgradient of the241-A Tank Farm was contaminated before operation of Tank 241-A-105 and beforeany tanks in the 241-A Tank Farm leaked. Analytical data for 1958 fromwells E25-I aridE25-2 iw_dicatethat the groundwaterbeneath the A Tank Farmwas contaminatedbefore the reported tank leaks in the A Tank Farm and severalyears before the 1965 steam explosion in Tank 241-A-I05. Before the mid

,, 1980's,most of the groundwatersample data are for radionuclidesorindicatorsof radionuclidecontamination. Only nitrate and/or sulfate of thenonradioactiveconstituentswere analyzed before this time. The availabledata indicate that contaminationprecedes the leaking of cooling water fromTank 241-A-I05 and likely derives from liquid effluentsdischarged to nearbyPUREX cribs, french drains and trenches. The total volume of liquiddischarged to these facilitiesexceeds 3,600,000gal, as _hown in availablerecords.

Southeastwardflow of groundwaterfrom the area of the BY cribs andreversewells before the initiationof PUREX operations also may havecontributedto the contaminationof groundwater in the area of the A Tank Farmbefore use of tanks in the farm. Uranium scavengingoperations in the earlyto mid 1950's led to the discharge of large volumes of high-saltwastesderived from tanks to the BY and BC cribs and specific retention trenches.A density greater than one might cause these constituentsto flow from theBY cribs to the southeastalong the top of the basalt,which would directtheir flow beneath the area of the present A Tank Farm.

Because the constituentsin the waste streams discharged to liquiddisposal facilities are similar to those discharged to the SSTs and becausesupernatantwas discharged from the tanks to the BY cribs after cooling andprecipitationin the tanks, the ability to detect any constituentsdischargedto groundwater arising from Tank 241-A-I05 is severely hampered. Thedischarges to cribs that have reached groundwaterclearly mask anyconstituentsthat may have reached groundwaterfrom Tank 241-A-I05. No clearindicatorsare known that would allow one to confirm that constituentsleakedfrom Tank 241-A-105 have reached groundwater.

While the concentration/activityof radioactiveand hazardousconstituentsdischarged to cribs is likely less than those discharged tot_nks, the availabledata do not allow one to conclude affirmativelythatwastes discharged to Tank 241-A-I05have reached groundwater. Many of theradionuclidesdischargedto cribs and that have leaked from tanks are metals,which typically sorb/precipitatein soils and would thus not be available fortransport to the groundwater. However, sorption can be significantlyreducedif the heavy metals are complexedwith other compounds, especially organics°The net result would be greater mobility and a more rapid rate of transportthrough the soils to groundwater. Poorly sealed groundwatermonitoring wellssuch as at the 216-S-I and 216-S-2 cribs (Van Luik and Smith 1982) may havealso contributed to groundwatercontaminationby providingdirect pathways togroundwater.

72

WHC-EP-0412

Data from the wells monitoring nearby PUREX cribs clearly indicate thatmany constituentscommon to the waste streams discharged to cribs and thetanks have reached groundwater, lt is indeterminatewhether transport togroundwateroccurs because of complexingwith other constituents,because thevolume of _!uids disposed to the cribs exceeds the specific retention of thesoils, or because of poorly sealed groundwatermonitoring wells. Dischargesto cribs surroundingthe A Tank Farm and cribs around the BY Tank Farm are the

, likely source of contaminantsin groundwater and mask any contributionthatmay have arisen from Tank 241-A-I05.

5.0 SEARCHFORHISTORIC DATAONTANK241-A-105

As part of the assessmentof the fate of fluids leaked fromTank 241-A-I05, historic data and records of logging and constructionof thedry wells and laterals as well as any records of earlier investigationsof theleaking tank were sought. Contactwith the Tank Farm InformationCenter andthe SurveillanceAnalysis and Support Group led to the discovery ofphotographsof the A Tank Farm under constructionin 1954-55,three boxes ofdata that were subsequentlyretrievedfrom archival storage containingoriginal strip chart records of dry wells and laterals (Box #101711 andBox #61274), draft reports, in-tankphotographs and personal files ofcorrespondence,calculations,etc. (Box #8487g). Personal files of a retiredsoil scientiston file in the GeosciencesGroup were also perused.Correspondenceand some data relatingto Tank 241-A-105 and 241-A-I04 werefound in these files.

Black and white photographswith original U.S. Atomic Energy Commission(AEC) numberswere located, and copies of these prints were ordered fromBoeing Computer Services Richland, Inc. Photography. Boeing Computer ServicesRichland, Inc. was unable to locate the original negatives using the AECnumbers so the prints were taker,to the laboratory where new negatives weremade and current numbers assigned to the photos. These photos can now berequestedfrom Boeing Computer Services Richland, Inc. using the currentnumbers that have been transmittedto the Tank Farm InformationCenter.

A box of original strip chart records proved to be useless because thecharts are not labeled so the reader can determinewhich variables are beingplotted. Wells are numbered using an older scheme. With interpretationbysomeone familiar with early Hanford Site logging, these records may revealsome potentiallyuseful data.

Personal files of G. J. Jensen pertaining to Tank 241-A-I05were found inone of the retrieved boxes and containedminutes of meetings held shortlyafter the Tank 241-A-I05 steam explosion. The minutes reveal some data aboutleak detectionand temperaturelaterals and data obtained from them.

A number of in-tankphotographs,both black and white and color, datingfrom the 1970's,were found but were not pertinentto the subject study, solittle attentionwas devoted to them.

73

WHC-EP-0412

6.0 CONCLUSIONS

I. Analysis of scintillation (grossgamma) logs from dry wells andlaterals surroundingTank 241-A-I05indicate that radionuclideshaveescaped the tank and entered the soils.

2. Only the cumulative activitygenerated by gamma-emittingradionuclides (and daughter isotopes) such as Cs-137, Sr-g0 andPm-144 is detected by the gross gamma probes that have been run inthe dry wells and laterals surroundingTank 241-A-I05. The •nonradioactive,hazardous and alpha- and beta-emittingcomponents ofthe waste have not been detected, and their distributionin thesoils cannot be determined using only these tools.

3. Without further research into the specific tools, shielding, loggingrates and procedures employed during past logging and changes inthese parameters with time, the conclusions reached during thisstudy are necessarilyqualitative.

4. lt is not possible to map the present distributionof the leakedwastes in the soils. Metals such as Cs-137 and Sr-g0, whichtypically sorb in Hanford Site soils within 10 to 20 m of a source,likely have not been transportedthrough the soils to groundwaterfrom the Tank 241-A-105 leak and are likely the source of thepersistent activity seen in dry wells and laterals. The presence ofthese constituentsin groundwatermonitoring wells in and near theA Tank Farm suggests other routes for direct transmissionof theseconstituentsto groundwater. Non-sorbing constituentshave likelyspread farther from Tank 241-A-I05than the sorbed metals and, givencertain conditions as assumed in some transportmodels, may haveeven reached groundwater.

5. The present southwesterlydirectionof groundwater flow beneath theA Tank Farm that is establishedby flow from the B Pond mound wasestablishedby the 1960's, if not earlier. An earlier groundwaterflow direction to the southeastfrom the area of the BY cribs likelyoccurred before the large volumes of water discharged to PUREX cribsand the increaseddischarges to B Pond in the late IgSO's andthereafter.

6. High-saltwastes with density greater than one, such as thosedischarged to the BY cribs in the mid 1950's, likely would have sunkto the bottom of the unconfinedaquifer and may have flowedsoutheastwardalong the top of basalt toward the A Tank Farm.

7. The network of groundwatermonitoring wells in existence around the241-A Tank Farm in 1970 had a 78% efficiency accordingto the MEMO.Thus, the n_twork had a high probabilityof interceptingany plumeof waste reaching groundwaterif it was of sufficientconcentrationto be detected during analyses.

74

WHC-EP-0412

8. Groundwaterupgradient of the 241-A Tank Farm was contaminatedbydischarges to PUREX cribs, french drains and trenches beforeTank 241-A-105was put into service. The similarity of constituentsdischargedto liquid disposal facilitiesand tanks makes detectingcontaminantsin groundwater specificallyderived from Tank 241-A-I05nearly impossibleusing the availabledata. The volume of liquideffluentsdischarged to nearby PUREX liquid disposal facilities

. masks any contributionto groundwatercontamination by leakage fromTank 241-A-I05.

9. No unique indicatorsare known that would allow identificationofspecific constituentsin groundwaterthat derive fromTank 241-A-105.

10. The areal distributionin soils of constituentsleaked fromTank 241-A-I05 cannot be.determinedwithout further intrusive fieldinvestigations. Logging of existing single-caseddry wells andgroundwatermonitoring wells with the spectral gamma logging systemwould allow better definition of the distributionof radionuclidesin the soils.

7.0 REFERENCES

Allen, G. Ko, 1991, Tank 241-A-I05EvaporationEstimate 1970 through 1978,WHC-EP-0410,WestinghouseHanford Company, Richland,Washington.

Beard, S. J., P. Hatch, G. Jansen and E. C. Watson, Jr., 1967, Purex TK-IOS-AWaste Storage Tank Liner Instabilityand its Implicationson WasteContainmentand Control, ARH-78, Atlantic Richfield Hanford Company,Richland,Washington.

Domenico, P. A. and G. A. Robbins, 1985, "A New Method of ContaminantPlumeAnalysis," Ground Water, Vol. 23, No. 4, pp. 476-485.

EnvironmentalDivision, 1990, Liquid Effluent Study Final Project Report,WHC-EP-0367,WestinghouseHanford Company, Richland, Washington.

Gee, G. W. and R. R. Kirkham, 1984, Arid Site Water Balance:Evapo-transpirationModeling and Measurements,PNL-5177, PacificNorthwest Laboratory,Richland,Washington.

ICRP, 1959, Recommendationsof the InternationalCommission on RadiologicalProtection,Publication2, Report of Committee II on PermissibleDose forInternal Radiation, Table I (Maximumpermissible body burdens and maximumpermissibleconcentrationsof radionuclidesin air and water foroccupationalexposure), Pergamon Press, New York, New York, pp. 41-84.

75

WHC-EP-0412

Jackson, R. L., R. B. Mercer, C. R. Wilson, and C. M. Einberger, 1991,"Efficiency-BasedGroundwaterMonitoring Network Design for HazardousWaste Sites," WHC-SA-I157-FP(manuscriptsubmittedto NWWA-AGWSE forpublication in Ground Water), WestinghouseHanford Company, Richland,Washington.

Jansen, G., Jr., Wo E. Willingham,and W. V. DeMier, 1965, Techniques forCalculatingTank Temperaturesand Soil TemperaturesNear Leaks--Application to Purex Waste Tank I05A, BNW[-CC-376,Pacific NorthwestLaboratory,Richland,Washington.

Kipp, K. L. and R. D. Mudd, 1974, Selected Water ;able Contour Maps and WellHydrographs for the Hanford Reservation,19d4-1973, BNWL-B-360, PacificNorthwest Laboratory,Richland,Washington.

Maxfield, H. L., 1979, 200 Area Waste Sites (3 Vols.), RHO-CD-673, RockwellHanford Operations, Richland,Washington.

Price, W. H. and K. R. Fecht, 1976, Geology of the 241-A Tank Farm,ARH-LD-127,Atlantic RichfieldHanford Company, Richland, Washington.

Routson, R. C. and V. G. Johnson, 1990, "Recharge Estimatesfor the HanfordSite 200 Areas Plateau,"Northwest Science, Vol. 64, No. 3, p. 150-158.

Stalos, S. P. and C. M. Walker, 1978, Waste Storage Tank Status and LeakDetection Criteria, RHO-CD-213,Rev. 01/11/85 (WHC-SD-WM-TI-356is a morerecent update of this report), Rockwell Hanford Operations, Richland,Washington.

Stivers, H. W., 1961, Proposed Leak Detection System for Existing StorageTanks Containing Self-BoilingRadioactiveWastes (Scope and DesignCriteria), HW68661, General Electric, Richland,Washington.

Van Luik, A. E., and R. M. Smith, 1982, 216-$-i and S-2 Mixed Fission ProductCrib CharacterizationStudy, RHO-ST-39, Rockwell Hanford Operations,Richland, Washington

76

WHC-EP-0412

DISTRIBUTION

Number of copies

ONSITE

. 16 DOE Field office, Richland

G. J. Bracken R4-04K. W. Bracken A5-22R. F. Christensen A4-02J. M. Clark A4-02J. K. Erickson A5-!9R. D. Freeberg A5-19M. J. Furman A5-21R. E. Gerton A4-02R. D. Hildebrand A5-55Jo E. Newson (5) R4-04W. W. Rutherford R3-27Reading Room A1-65

6 Pacific NorthwestLaboratory

B. M. Johnson (5) KI-78Technical Files KI-11

61 Westinqhou_e Hanford Company

G. Ko Allen H0-34Ho Babad H4-Z3M. L. Bell H4-23R. Vo Berg L6-29To D. Blankenship R2-30J. R° Brodeur G6-50L° C. Brown H4-51J. A° Caggiano L8-19J. A. Caggiano,Jr. (5) H5-29E. J. Campbell B3-30G. M. Christensen H4-23J. I. Dearing H5-58C° Defigh-Price(5) H4-23J. L. Deichman H4-23

. G.T. Dukelow R2-97J. W. Fassett G6-50K. R. Fecht H4-_6J. R. Freeman-Pollard H4-55K. A. Gasper H4-23J. G. Granger H4-57D. J. Green H5-53V. W. Hall L4-88C. S. Hailer L6-2gC. E. Hanson H5-O'J

Distr-1

WHC-EP-0412

DISTRIBUTION (cont)

WestinahouseHanford Comoanv (cont).

H. D. Harmon R2-52D. G. Horton H4-56M. N. Islam R3-08 .R. L. Jackson H5-29V° G. Johnson H5-29A. J. Knepp H4-56C. J. Koizumi G6-50 -M. S. Kowalski H4-17A. G. Law H4-56S. Marchetti R2-50E. H. Neilsen L6-29P. R. Praetorius R2-56R. K. Price G6-50J. G. Propson R2-18T° E. Rainey RI-49R. E. Raymond R1-80R. R. Rios R1-80F. A. Ruck H4-57J. D. Thomson RI-30R. E. Vandercook $6-07N. J. Vermeulen R1-80Ro K. Welty RI-80Ro D. Wojtasek L¢-92Central FiIes L8-04EnvironmentalDataManagement Center H4-22

InformationReleaseAdministration (3) H4-17

Tank Farm Info_aationCenter R2-95

Distr-2

WHC-EP-0412

APPENDIXA

AS-BUILT DIAGRAMSOF GROUNDWATERMONITORINGWELLSAROUNDTHE A TANKFARM

APP A-i

WHC-EP-04]2

This page intentionallyleft blank.

APP A-ii

WHC-EP-0412

299-E24-13=

Drilling

Well Completion Uthology Comments

o _ -- _?:4_.','.':" o_ "1" 3" _,.:._. Backfill-- Cable Tool _

II -- -r _ ,_.."_:'..'i_::"..SlightlyMuddy Method -

" _ _"_':

Perforated and _:,:::,::_,: GravellySand _GroutedAnnulus '/::.'_.."._, -- 50

50 -- Between4 in _; _ : MuddySandy Gravel _and 6 in Casings _%_ to GravellySand

_,,_':, h

-- _ "1" 6 in. CarbonSteel

100 _. _ Casing _-.: "'a.::_

__ _:.:._,.:.., -- 100

-- 1" 4 in CarbonSteel C";..'._

-_ - lr" 1" Casing _::,.,'_,jd;: SlightlyGravelly Sand - :0

-_ :I: I ...,......,...,'_"".';i tosand -_ '_150 T' I-- '"_:","_" SlightlyC_'avellySlightly -- 150

.3

__ 1" I '..'_:q" :" ::':-- . . . Muddy Sand to Muddy -- ._

1" I -_ I- -,- ...,.._...:. -

" 20o -- 1" I ,_.':'_ -- 200- i- z ....,':. "_-- "r _. V._:::',", "-

- 1" I "_:;_-"" -

250 -- I I_ Packer :',:,:-:',,_:',:. -- 250- Perforated ,,_-;,_,- --

- ,,,,, 27o,,-3o ._ ,,,,,,q ,. , -

,,,,,,,| _mw -- lllllllJ -- --

300 -- tt t Cement Plug ---- 300

, .."._.{_"• Sandy Gravel to- 308 ft-313 ft .._.._..._ Gravelly Sand --- ;_.":,:,4..:_ -_ ,:"_-.... -._'_. _

f -"..:::'.i_'.:./Backfitted .=._..-d:_.:

- ;_:'_.:::I_ ':..'.,,_r.'.'.[:._.:-::,:¢.:.:- :_.'_:."-:'.:1 :':_;':''':''_ --- From DrUler'sLogs --

400 -- Drill Depth:340 ft -- 400Well Complete.'_:9/69

Not to Scale Casing Elevation"691.05 ftDepth toWater:Approximately288 ft

._ _ .... WaterTable (Estimated from Measurementat Well 299-E25-1 on 7/12/74)

$8g05011 14

APP A-I

t

WHC-EP-0412

299-E25-1

Drilling

Well Completion Uthology Comments0 ,-- C

3" "r Backfill - - Cable Tool• :_ SlightlyMuddy Method

Perforatedand GravellySand

GroutedAnnulus 5050 Between 4 in. Muddy Sandy Gravel

and 8 in. Casing to SlightlyGravelly Sand

8 in.CarbonSteel SandCasing Gravelly Sand to

100 _-- 1"1,. ; _ Sand 1004 in. CarbonSteel- 1" "1" casing -== 03

03 -- "r"r 3"3. SlightlyMuddy Slightly "_"_ 150 -- GravellySand to 150 _i

._ _ _" z c_el,ys_ __I -r"_ - 1: -r Sand

200 -- I_ 3: 2O0_ r I- r I- I" I

-- T" I Slightly Gravelly Sand to250 -- I I 250.... Packer Slightly MuddyGravelly

=-°_ IIIII -- _-

3oo Ill II IIII _ Perforated Gravel to Muddy

SandyGravel 3OO

280 ft-310 ft

-- From Driller's Logs-- Cement Plug-- -- 350

-- DdgDepth:322 ft m

-- Well CompleWd:2/55

_ Casing Elevation:690.21 ft _

400 -- DepthtoWater: 287.06 ft (7/12/74) l 400

Not to Scale =

._ _ _ Water Table

$8905011.18

APP A-2

WHC-EP-0412

299-E24-13

DrillingWell Completion Uthology Comments

0 _ 0_ I" T" Cab., _-- 1" _._ SlightlyMuddy Method --

" "'_ Perforatedand GravellySand --

50 -- GroutedAnnulus -- 50Between4 in. MuddySandyGravel _and 6 in. Casings to GravellySand _

" _ 6 in.CarbonSteel -_

1

-100 -- Casing -- 100

-- I 4 in. CarbonSteel-c -- ' SlightlyGravellySand= T' 1" Casing -- =u) -- to,,Cw_rwJ -- u)

"r "I" _ -_"_ 150 _ 3" 1" SlightlyGravellySlightly -- 150 .J_o _ I T MuddySand tOMuddy --

_ I- "r -14= LI.

200 -- I" I -- 200- r T- 7' T-- 7" T

250 -- I I . P_r -- 250

- _ Perforated- I li I _ 270 ft - 308 ft_ III

'li300 --- III _1 / Cement Plug Sandy Gravel to --- 300

- _1 _ 308ft-313ft GravellySand -

p:-..*.-

- ::.::i 313 ft - 340 ft350 -- ;::':: -- 350

• ;..=':--- From Driller'sLogs --

400 -- Drill Depth: 340 ft -- 400Well Completed: 9/69

Not toScale Casing Elevation:691.05 ftDepth to Water: Approximately288 ft

._ _ .. Water Table (Estimatedfrom Measurementat Well 29g-E25-1 on 7/12/74)

s8g05011.14

APP A-I

WHC-EP-0412

299-E25-2

• DrillingWetl Completion Uthology Comments

0 _ 0

_ _ __ Muddy Sand to Cable Tool _• _ Sand with Method -

_ _ "I" Perforatedand MinorGravels Caves -- "1" GroutedAnnulus a 50

50 a 1" "I" Between6 in. and

_- iJ,_,,,,--_ 8 in CarbonSteel

100 -- I,_ Casing SlightlyMuddy GravellySand -- 100

= J "1" Casing SlightlyMuddy Caves --_ 1" SlightlyGravellySand

150 --- to Sand 150 --

_ -

"¢ 200 _ Sandy Gravel 200

-_ . . _ Packer- Perforated

250 _ / 276 ft - 316 ft SlightlyMuddy GravellySand --_ 250

MuddySandy Gravel_ IIIIIIIIIi t t t t t t t t to SlightlyMuddy

- I I i =t i=t I GravellySand ---- tttllllll -- 300IIIIIIIII-- IIIIIIIII

-- E_rillsHard --

350 _ m 350_ SlightlyMuddy GravellySand _- _ _s=t -

From Driller's Logs a

400 _ DrillDepth:375 ft -- 400Well Completed:3/55

Not to Scale Casing Elevation:675.04 ftDepth to Water:270.82 ft (5/1/73)

_. _ ... Water Table

s8g050 11.12

APP A-3

WHC-EP-0412

299-E25-13

DrillingWell Completion Uthology Comments

0 -- ...p.:...,._. 0_ "T .T }i .:-.":::"_" " SlightlyMuddySand Cable Tool _ qb-- -r" _ [: _:: to Gravelly Sand Method

_ .-_ ":'_:'::'.,_".:. ---- Perforatedand l'_.._".'i:'_ --

50 -- GroutedAnnulus I_._._._ii: SandyGravel to --Between4 in.and [_-.':_._: SlightlyGravellySand -- 50

_-- 8 in. Casings }'_:":.& --Sand with

-- -- - '_ 8 in. CarbonSteel i .... ".'._". Minor Gravel-- I _ Casing "'-:" ":'i :-:.': -- 100

100 -- I _ i - - -8 -- I 4 in. CarbonSteel r.:=..: -->-.._e-- z "r casing(/) __ =i

I T =.'...:-.:-,l-.: - u}

..= 150 -- Z I" -- @==.:,.: -- 150 ..u

_ 1- z __ I" "I" --;:: _

#. - I "r _ ®200 -- I" T ,.-%0. -- 200 u.

- 1" "r _. _l : . ..

- Z I ,..... --- "r / Packer .._,..:

250 -- L J Perforated -- 250

-- IIIIIII II / 256 ft- 315 ft l'____,..::._.::..,._:..._ Muddy Sand to Gray Clay --r.k-:. :._,_-__-,GravellyMuddy Sand- IIIII _Z_ _:_....-_:,_:--- -- IIIIII I

- I IIIII I I-""_":";"l:..::;.:._;:SandyGravellYGraveISandto _3oo -- IIIIII II t._.'.'...... 3oo...:._: ...'_- I IIIII II I._-_:_'.-... --- NJ,,,.7._'y;n_ 1

-- FromDriller'sLogs --

350 350_ DrillDepth:317 ft_ Well Completed: 10/63-- CasingElevation:680.56 ft _-- Depth to Water:Approximately277.5 ft _

400 _ (Estimated from Measurement _ 400at Well 299-E25-1 on 7/12/74)Not to Scale

_. _ _ Water Table

$8g05011.15

APP A-4

WHC-EP-0412

299-E25-15

DrillingWell Completion Uthology Comments

i::&.".:!_%"_"Slightlyl_4uddy Method --

50 " _" MuddySandyGravel to

.:_,,.,.,_, Gravelly MuddySand.__,..... _._.'..:s,g.w.uddys,g,,y:.:_..:.;:C._'.;;GravellySand to Sand

,oo 1 ,oo,_ "r 4 in. CarbonSteel Heaving -,_:.::.-:.

"r I I "r Casing I _-'.'._"/: SlightlyGravelly Sand -cn , -_=-:.;.,'m_..-Sand to SlightlyMuddy-1:I I 1- I '.'_'_:i Gravelly Sand

_[ lIT __'::_'.'.;',.';:.',:'::_?_:?Gravelly Sand to Sand.,._:....,_,,...', _,.,NIIN :'...-_...-:.-_..-:-,.::" 200 ."=..'.:'._:" 200

_....-.;::--_

Packer

250 _ Lm__, .,, Perforated 250I IIII I III L,/ 270 ft - 338 ft _'"-_,,_ MuddySand to,- -¶ ,

IIiiiiiiir _z , ._ Muddy Sandy GraveliIiiiiIiir "---_: _"( -- -- '--llllllllll ....; _ SandyGravelto

300 Ii11111111 Gravelly Sand_._...:_... 3o0

_ From Driller's Logs _

350 _ m 350_ Drill Depth: 340 ft __ Well Completed: 7/69 __ Casing Elevation:689.67 ft __ Depth to Water:Approximately286.5 ft _

400 -- (Estimatedfrom Measurement -- 400at Well 299-E25-1 on 7/12/74)

Not toScale

._= _ _. Water Table

S8905011.16

APP A-5

WHC-EP-0412

299-E25-16If

DrillingWell Completion Uthology Comments

0 -- -- 0

_ "r _,,,, Backfill-- Cab. Tool_ ."lr " SlightlyMuddy Method --

GravellySand

L T Perforatedand Very --i

50 ! GroutedAnnulus Compacted__-- 50_ Between4 in.and SlightlyMuddyGravelly __ 6 in. Casings Sand to Muddy Sandy _

-- _ 6 in. CarbonSteel Gravel _

100 -- 1" _ Casing SlightlyMuddy -- 100-- 1" _ 4 in. CarbonSteel Sand to Sand Caves and _

-- "r "1" Casing GravellySand Heaves --cn - "r "r - cn

-"_ _ SlightlyMuddy SlighlJy --15O -- GravellySand to Sand -- 150

_ - "r 1" - __

LI.

2O0 -- 1" "!" -- 200_ "r 1"- 1" 1" o:o _- 1- 1"-- 1" _ Packer

25O -- - "_ / -- 25O

-- • BI / Performed- Iii111111i 270_-307ft- -- IIIIIIII1!_ -- _ _ _ MuddySand --

Cement Plug Gravelly3oo -- 1111111 1 307 ft - 312 ft ;=" --- 300-- ;1_-.', --

Backfilled -.-_a-- I 312 ft- 340 ftm

350 -- From DdUer'sLogs -- 350

-- Drill Depth:340 ft ---- Well Completed:7/69 --

400 -- Casing Elevation:691.17 ft --Deplh to Water:Approximately288 ft -- 400

Not toScale (Estimatedfrom MeasurementatWell 299-E25-1 on 7112/74)

_.. _ _. Water Table

$89050 11.17

APP A-6

WHC-EP-0412

WELL NAME 299-E24-I9 TOTAL DEPTH DATE 08/09/89CASING ELEV. 693,65 FeetWELL DEPTH 300,68 Feet DEPTH TO WATER 285.6 FeetDRILL DEPTH 303.t9 FeetCOORDINATES N-S 41075,8 P

E-W -47821.4 P PAGE t of !

ELI_v./OCPm ILL CFINSTRUCTIBN W_LITHCILOGY L$. Percent_Holsture

'" ' * *I ) .e

680

20

g '660

40

l

640

60

l

620

80

600

!00

|

5BO

120

560 _)s ...

140

540

160

520

180

5OO

200

480 I

220

460

240

440 _|s

p 260

420N

_80

400 P "-'- so

300 _

38O

"t,,_n , ......I InCh a 40"

Vet. I.O DIAMETER (inches) Percent

APP A-7

WHC-EP-0412

WELL NAME 299-E25-40 TOIAL DEPTH 0,,TE 0_:,.C.:,.-'CASING ELEV. 665,71 FeetWELL DEPTH 273.00 Feet DEPTI4 TO WATER _'_,7.4 Fe.-*:DRILL DEPTH 274.00 FeetCOORDINATES N-S 4!759.6 P

E-W -47334.8 P PAGE [ of 'i

ELEV./DEPn4 _/ELL CONSTRUCTZON _ LITHOLOGY CLS. Per'cent_Holsture

660 O. :.i_;-_Li21'__:'_._:i_:,_l:,_.:,..,, _,;; .;_L_;,_._'.%'_',_' .:,

?

"i .%E.._.._;.- iv."._..'...FT.._.'iSI.'.='6_0 _ • • • • / _.::.,.,,,J;..:F., ()

, _, • ,, • • ._:d:.)..,'._....t.'.,'::_.::'.,_._.d.$.,...... .-_..:.._,t_l t..._,_ ._'I.._,t_.I

, • / / # • ,.t'a_*)t._.t.4._t&_..t'/_,gtt.4t,.._', _ )

• • i' / / :::;!4:'X'R"_;"K;}_.;CR"-W='_{;'60 -4 , • • , / / L':,"o,',,t..(...._._'_. '.2,_'_,...., ¢6)| 4 )

......,, ,, &'=__i_--_=_.=._ ._'_"..._ " '£. , .... r, _',._

...... ,,_/ ,is l

• / ,' -.:F:,._:.:.=t.:._,.:...._-.i_;_:,{-,

..... : .. : ,. :...., ... ;.,,,........ .;:_;_3_-__;_ "!,'i'.t;_!,"_._' " " ' ' :".':!::.-.::.':_'."";:'_;:-_i:'_';'

I_:0 ,_ " " ' • :" ":_" """ ...... "_...... _:.:-;.;._,.,_.;,_:;,-:'_.,._',;,_,:540 , • • ,,, :;O_¢,;;V._',':i_::',"._,;_t;:.t

.o,q_ N;,,... o.t.t_.._._.-...... '.::"I_.:;_._.,i:;,_:'-,.'.._,."__!

,,, .,, _;_• ,' .... _:,'.;;4.4_i;-',.;_.':_:,!i,.L.",

_.0 -_, ,,- i ,.,',,_,,,.:..t_',,.......... _ o('" I " :::'-'.':::.h.-i.;_,':.='_,:i_.::._;:_{_

• ' , ..,_.._,._t:.._,._..,;'.,:_.,:.._:!160 ,. • :""'/_'-'_'_":'._":');_'

•,, ,,, _-.,_i._._.,'.V_._,-_;_:_• " ,..,,,_.,_/x.,.",'"',v_....

j ', _::..,.-..:_.'.v::_,,.._:1" _":'b.'.-.-!¢,_'..',"!_;:;':.','_.[:

4_u ,, , i':;_iC.q;_Jt,!_2'_':_.;i'v.-_';:_:.ii_i'"

0 . •o .,II .'_ o-c_ ,, :, . ,;_.,_.'_!_..

• ,. ,/[

' -,:bt.._,,.q:,'_(_'._t.";_, ,.._"__l"X"_ '-"_' "• ._'_2',. . .._4. ;'. c{k.:;.._:'. ,h.._.t._t..t. t_m....,/._'a_O .i .... '• / ,i .';- K_._:=, ':_.':... _._ _):.;..,..:.,;,._,.... ..._.:,.__.%'."

• • , /I . (_..:wt._..,'v...';;,_.t_to _ ()' ,I :._-'.'th:f."C:".:":!:-,'::_r:-&'

_40 , / , ,, .'."..:a._...t_."._., ,,., _4...a, _;_,,'.._, 'b:'_:_t Z.• • .' s • _..'k'_:'._:.....:_P_2_."_'e :

|t:_ _'! " '_60 -- -- ": _ i .?a_=.o,)o._._.,.,_ . r,. --

_80

380

3OO360

Ver. 1.0 DIAMETER (inches) Percent ....

APP A-8

WHC-EP-0412

WELL NAME 299-E25-41 TOTAL DEPTH DATE 08/08/89CASING ELEV. 671,26 FeetWELL DEPTH 276.00 Feet DEPTH TO WATER 262,24 FeetDRILL DEPTH 279.00 FeetCOORDINATES N-S 4t541,8 P

E-W -47330,9 P PAGE t of Lii ii i i

i

ELrV./q}(P_, VELL CONSTRUCTION' _ LITHOLOGY CLS, Percent_Molsture ,, , , - _' - ; , • , :,._.+.i{,.'...:._:=.+.',.":_'mi

660 " ._._...-._L2_..,,P,.-..+_+,+qk:_,.4-_(_

_._p_;+._._

• _?_..,0+_.....:_'_i"'_ _;_,b-_l'}'*_''_';'':'+'""P:,_"""'_;_:$ 61

•_,._'_.[._;_++_..'. _

• .. _._,"lv.._.aP.z• _ '-'1v(,_, s

•W't•-"_ %} *"}'I *"" "t'*"'+"_ "_ +%} ( ' '"

•.W- +'+"_-._'; .a, "+ os'r+.+. .'. ,.+*_

+°. -+,:,++,._oo -__'

• ._+._- ;r_,,:,+_, ,+ ..'+,,ct: S.. _._.. ,_,,

• ,,,:_+_#._,_.,_'(,.t,t_',

4o " .i,_.":-+_'_r%_,_.:,_'+..-:_:

. ___e_c_O ;_,,_.::!>.,..+:+_.,+,:',,"t..;:.._;,+;:,_ (_

160

_.',eGi._.,t.+.i_._._+-a_'_,_.j_¢-lO)|

_-!_li %i,if } l:_&*+ ,.$• • t

480 _ ,..r.d;&,._'#.,._;.,.,_.,};...'_;..&,

460 " _:'_IY_W':'P I_':,.'._:,..i?,_:r.'}

. {_-+.+_.)_._ I_.20. _ '.__ -so

O., la_ _llJt._l._l_mw.cee_,_a[ I. ,,

. |.;." _.',.," .,._. _,;,__

++++,oo jEaZ_E._._ "!° _it= ,,,

aco. -+

380

3OO!

360 i

"l_rl ..

Ver. |.0 DIAMETER (inches) Percent

APP A-9

r

&