integrated monitoring plan for the hanford groundwater

-- -.-,- . .. . . .. . . ..

PNNL-1 1989, Rev. 1

Integrated Monitoring Plan for the HanfordGroundwater Monitoring Project

M. J. Hartman

P. E. Dresel

September 1999

D. R. Newcomer

E. C. Thornton

Prepared for

the U.S. Department of Energy

under Contract DE-AC06-76RL0 1830

Pacific Northwest National Laborato~

Richland, Washington 99352

..

..

DISCLAIMER

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsoredby an agency of the United States Government. Neither theUnited States Government nor any agency thereof, nor anyof their employees, make any warranty, express or implied,or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for theaccuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information,apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents thatits use would not infringe privately owned rights. Referenceherein to any specific commercial product, process, orservice by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, orotherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply itsendorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the UnitedStates Government or any agency thereof. The views andopinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarilystate or reflect those of the United States Government orany agency thereof.

. .. .,. .. ... . ... -7- .,. .. .,. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .~ .. —.-=-- —

DISCLAIMER

Portions of this document may be illegiblein electronic image products. Images areproduced from the best available originaldocument. ‘

,-

Summary

Gmundwater is monitored at the Hanford Site to fulfill a variety of state and federal regulations,including the Atomic Ener~Act of 1954 the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 theComprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 198@ and WashingtonAdministrative Code. Separate monitoring plhns are prepared for various requirements, but sampling iscoordinated and data are shared among users to avoid duplication of effort. The U.S. Department ofEnergy manages these activities through the Hanford Groundwater Monitoring Project.

This document is an integrated monitoring plan for the groundwater project. It documents well andconstituent lists for monitoring required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and its implementing orders;includes other, established monitoring plans by reference; and appends a master welI/constituent/tlequency matrix for the entire site.

The objectives of monitoring fall into three general categories plume and trend tracking, t&atment/storage/disposal unit monitoring, and remediation performance monitoring. Criteria for selecting AtomicEnergvAct of 1954 monitoring networks include locations of wells in relation to known plumes orcontaminant sources, well depth and construction, historical da@ proximity to the Columbia River, watersupplies, or other areas of special interes~ and well use for other programs. Constituent lists were chosenbased on known plumes and waste histories, historical groundwater da~ and, in some cases, statisticalmodeling. Sampling frequencies were based on regulatory requirements, variability of historical da~ andproximity to key areas. For sitewide plumes, most wells are sampled every 3 years. Wells monitoring\specific waste sites or in areas of high variability will be sampled more frequently.

.

...111

I——,

.—.—

.

Contents

.

Summary”...

............................................................................................................................................ 111

1.0 Introduction .............................................................................................................................. . 1.1

1.1 Purpose ............................................................................................................................

1.2 Objectives of Groundwater Monitoring ..........................................................................

1.3 Organization of This Plan ...............................................................................................

2.0 Hydrogeology ...........................................................................................................................

3.0 Monitoring Program .................................................................................................................

3.1 Groundwater-Monitoring Network .................................................................................

3.2 Constituents ....................................................................................................................

\3.3 Sampling Frequency .......................................................................................................

3.4 Changes to Monitoring Program .....................................................................................

4.0 100 Areas ..................................................................................................................................

4.1 Background .....................................................................................................................4:1.1 Waste Sites, Discharges, and Groundwater Operable Units ................................

4.1.2 Groundwater-Monitoring Requirements and History ..........................................

4.2 Conceptual Model ...........................................................................................................

4.3 Monitoring Program .......................................................................................................

5.0 200-West Area ..........................................................................................................................

5.1

5.2

5.3

Background .....................................................................................................................5.1.1 Waste Sites, Discharges, and Groundwater Operable Units ................................

5.1.2 Groundwater-Monitoring Requirements and History ..........................................

Conceptual Model ...........................................................................................................

Monitoring Program-.......................................................................................................

v

1.1

1.2

1.3

2.1

3.1

3.1

3.2

3.3

3.3 ‘

4.1

4.14.14.1

4.4

4.7

5.1

5.i5.15.1

5.3

5.3

..----.- ---~,-,-~~--T . . . ,,-m .. ... ... ,. -=.

-——- -

6.0 200-East lwea ........................................................................................................................... 6.1

6.1 Background ..................................................................................................................... 6.1

6.1.1 Waste Sites, Discharges, and Groundwater Operable Units ................................ 6.1

6.1.2 Groundwater-Monitoring Requirements and History .......................................... 6.3

6.2 Conceptual Model ........................................................................................................... 6.3

6.3 Monitoring Program ....................................................................................................... 6.5

7.0 400 Area ................................................................................................................................... 7.1

7.1 Background ..................................................................................................................... 7.1

7.1.1 Waste Sites .......................................................................................................... 7.1

7.1.2 Groundwater-Monitoring Requirements and History .......................................... 7.1



8.0 300 and Richland North Areas ................................................................................................. 8.1

8.1 Background ..................................................................................................................... 8.18.1.1 Waste Sites, Discharges, and Groundwater Operable Units ................................ 8.18.1.2 Offsite Sources .................................................................................................... 8.38.1.3 Groundwater-Monitoring Requirements and History .......................................... 8.4


8.3 Groundwater-Monitoring Network ................................................................................. 8.6

9.0 600 Area Non-Operational Monitoring Activities .................................................................... 9.1

9.1 Background ..................................................................................................................... 9.19.1.1 Waste Sites ........................................................................................................... 9.19.1.2 Groundwater-Monitoring Requirements and History .......................................... 9.2



10.0 Sampling and Analysis .............................................................................................................. 10.1

10.1 sampling ......................................................................................................................... 10.1

vi

10.2 Analytical Methods .........................................................................................................

10.3 Quality Assurance and Quality Control ..........................................................................

11.0 Water-Level Monitoring ...........................................................................................................

12.0 Data Evaluation ........................................................................................................................

12.1

12.2

12,3

Data Management ...........................................................................................................

Compliance Issues and Data Evaluation ..........................................................................

Reporting ........................................................................................................................

13.0 References ................................................................................................................................

Appendix A- Sampling Matrix for Hanford Groundwater Monitoring Project ................................

10.1

10.1

11.1 .

12.1

12.1

12.1

12.1

13.1

A.1

.

vii

—.

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.5

4.6

4.7

4.8

5.1

6.1

6.2

7.1

8.1

9.1

Figures

Comparison of Generalized Hydrogeologic and Geologic Stratigraphy .................................. 2.2

Hanford Site and Outlying Areas Water-Table Map, June 1998.............................................. 2.3

Distribution of Major Radionuclides in Groundwater at Concentrations Above MaximumContaminant Levels or Interim Drinking Water Standards, Fiscal Year 1998......................... 2.4

Distribution of Major Hazardous Chemicals in Groundwater at Concentrations AboveMaximum Contaminant Levels, Fiscal Year 1998 ................................................................... 2.5

Conceptual Model of Subsurface Contamination in the 100 Areas .......................................... 4.6

Groundwater Project Well Locations:








1OO-B,CArea .............................................................. 4.8

1OO-KArea ................................................................. 4.9

1OO-NArea ................................................................. 4.10

1OO-DArea ................................................................. 4.11

1OO-HArea ................................................................. 4.12

1OO-FArea .................................................................. 4.13

600 Area ...................................................................... 4.14

200-West Area ............................................................ 5.4

Locations of 200-East Area Guard Wells ................................................................................. 6.6





200-East Area ............................................................. 6.8

400 Area ...................................................................... 7.2

300 and Richland North Areas .................................... 8.2

Cenml Landfill Vicinity ............................................. 9.4

...VIII

Tables

1.1 Objectives of Groundwater Monitoring .................................................................................... 1.2 ~.

4.1 Selected Waste Sites in the 100 keas ...................................................................................... 4.2

4.2 Groundwater Monitoring in the 100 Areas ............................................................................... 4.5

5.1 Selected Waste Sites in the 200-West Area .............................................................................. 5.2

6.1 Selected Waste Sites in and Downgradient of the 200-East Area ............................................ 6.2

6.2 200-East Area Guard Wells ...................................................................................................... 6.7

8.1 Selected Waste Sites in the 300 and Richland North Areas ..................................................... 8.3

9.1 Selected Waste Sites in the 600 Area ....................................................................................... 9.2

12.1 Compliance Issues and Methods of Evaluation ........................................................................ 12.2

ix

......7.-...;,-=.,. ,, .1?.. ~ --.=4.-7’=7+, -s.. ... ,, .,. , J ,.-

——

1.0 Introduction

Groundwater is monitored in hundreds of wells at the Hanford Site to fidfill a variety of requirements.Separate monitoring plans are prepared for various requirements, but sampling is coordinated and data areshared among users to avoid duplication of effort. Th~U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) manages theseactivities through the Hanford Groundwater Monitoring Project (“groundwater project”), which is theresponsibility of Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.) The groundwater project does not include all ofthe monitoring to assess pefiormance of groundwater remediation or all monitoring associated with activefacilities.

This document is the first integrated monitoring plan for tie groundwater project and contains: welland constituent lists for monitoring required by the Atomic Energy Act of1954 and its implementingorders (“surveillance monitoring”); other, established monitoring plans by referenc~ and a master well/constituent/frequency matrix for the entire Hanford Site.

1.1 Purpose

The purpose of this plan is to provide a venue to integrate ‘groundwater monitoring for variousrequirements on the Hadord Site. Specific objectives of this plan are the following

●

●

●

design and describe monitoring well networks, constituent lists, sampling frequency, and qualityassurance/quality control for”the surveillance monitoring networlq explain criteria used to design theprogram

encompass Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 (RCRA], Comprehensive Environ-mental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), Washington Ad@nistrativeCode (WAC) regulations, and other monitoring pkms by reference

provide well, constituent and sampling frequency lists for all groundwater monitoring on the site.

This pkm is subordinate to the Environmental Monitoring Plan, Us. Department of Energy, Richknd(operations O@ce (DOE 1997), which is required by DOE Orders, and the HmfordSite Ground-WaterProtection Mmagement Plan (Barnett et al. 1995a). TMs plan describes how DOE will implement thegroundwater-monitoring requirements described in those documents.

Recently, efforts have been made to develop fully integrated monitoring programs to fill data needsfor a variety of requirements using the data quality objectives process (e.g., in the 1OO-Nand 200-East

1Pacific Northwest National Laboratory is operated by Battelle for DOE.

1.1

.— —..-

Areas). The results of these efforts are incorporated into this plan. Additional data quality objectives-based networks will be developed in the future and will be incorporated into changes to the samplingschedule and fhture revisions of this plan.

1.2 Objectives of Groundwater Monitoring

The Environmental Monitoring Plan (DOE 1997) lists the purposes and objectives of groundwatermonitoring and the groundwater project. These purposes and objectives fall into three general categories:1) plume and trend tracking, 2) monitoring of treatment/storage/disposal units, and 3) independent assess-ment of performance monitoring for groundwater remediation activities (Table 1.1).

Plume and trend tracking are the primary objectives of surveillance monitoring. Treatment/storage/disposal unit monitoring includes units regulated under RCRA or state codes (recently active sites),CERCLA (past-practice sites), and the Atomic Energy Act of 1954. Monitoring associated with remedi-ation activities is the responsibility of the environmental restoration contractor, but the groundwaterproject is responsible for “providing continuing, independent assessment of groundwater remediationactivities” (DOE 1997).

Table 1.1. Objectives of Groundwater Monitoring (DOE 1997)

Plume and Trend Tracking

Determinebase~meconditionsof groundwaterqualityand quantity.

Characterizeand definehydrogeologic,physical,and chemicaltrends in the groundwatersystem.

Identi@existingandpotentialgroundwatercontaminationsources.

Assessexistingand emerginggroundwaterqualityproblems.

Evaluateexistingand potentialoffsiteimpactsof groundwatercontaminants.

Providedataon whichdecisions.canbe made concerninglaud-disposalpracticesand managementandprotectionof groundwaterresources.

Treatment/Storage/Disposal Unit Monitoring

Demonstratecompliancewith applicableregulationsand orders(RCR4, WAC).

Providedata to permit earlydetectionof groundwaterpollutionor contamination.

Groundwater Remediation Performance Monitoring

Providecontinuing,independentassessmentof groundwaterremediationactivities(groundwaterremedi-ation and performancemonitoringare conductedby the environmentalrestorationcontractor currently,BechtelHanfordInc.; groundwaterprojectprovidesindependentassessment).

.

1.2

1.3 Organization

A brief overview of the hydrogeology of the Hanford Site is provided in Chapter 2.0 as backgroundfor the remainder of the plan. Chapter 3.0 describes tie monitoring program, with an explanation ofcriteria for choosing well networks, constituent lists, and sampling frequency. Chapters 4.0 through 9.0describe the waste sites, monitoring history, and a conceptual model of the movement of contaminants foreach geographic region of the site. Chapter 10.0 describes the sampling and analysis plan, includingmethods for sampling and analysis, quality assurance, and quality control. Chapter 11.0 describes thewater-level-monitoring program; Chapter 12.0 describes data managemen$ compliance issues, andreporting; followed by Chapter 13.0, the references cited herein.

An integrated monitoring matrix is presented in Appendix A, showing all wells to be sampled by thegroundwater project for various requirements (e.g., sitewide surveillance, RCRA, CERCLA). Theappendix.will bp updated at least annually.

1.3

.- ——.. .. . ,.m- —. —.

2.0 .Hydrogeology

The hydrogeology of the Hanford Site has been described in many documents (e.g., Chapter 3.0 inHartman and Dresel 1998). A brief summary is provided here for the reader’s convenience.

The uppermost aquifer beneath most of the Hanford Site is unconfhed and composed of unconsoli-dated to semiconsolidated sands and gravels deposited on basalt bedrock. In some areas, deeper parts ofthe aquifer are locally confined by layers of silt and clay. Confined aquifers occur within the underlyingbasalt flows and associated sedimentary interbeds. A simplified stratigraphic column is illustrated inFigure 2.1.

Groundwater in the unconfined aquifer system generally moves from recharge areas along the west-ern boundary of the site to the east and north toward the Columbia River, which is the major dischargearea. This natural flow pattern was altered by the formation of groundwater mounds created by largevolumes of artificial recharge at wastewater-disposal facilities. These mounds are declining, and ground-water flow is gradually returning to earlier patterns. Fi~e 2.2 shows a water-table map for June 1998.

The extent of major radionuclide contaminants in groundwater in 1998 is illustrated in Figure 2.3.Tritium, iodine-129, technetium-99, uranium, and strontium-90 were present at levels above drinkingwater standards. Carbon-14, cesium-137, and plutonium exceeded standards in smaller areas. The extentof major hazardous chemicalconstituents in 1998 is shown in Figure 2.4. The most significant of theseinclude carbon tetrachloride, chromium, and nitrate. Trichloroethylene and arsenic are also elevated insmaller areas.

2.1

.. —.-. .,. -,,.,<.. . .. ., ,5- ..,-..: > - .,,,/..,, .. . . . . . . . -- —~

——

—u“”~”.. .....: .... ..... .... .

& :d.-.a :...--:: Eolian/Alluviumx Gradedo=

$8 I>Y392!2?J Pre-

%

L _ --------

$.-.:->.:~g.-- Missoula.:.-.-..Gravels-- . . . ... ;..,:,: ,...,

?... 8.Q>-- . .-. .-—------- : ,/

_TTTT TTTTT _~ Unit 3 (Plio eistocene) ‘-—— ——— ——— .——.——. ........ ..... .. .........-———

——

1-———-——————_<--—.——__—--~=——=——.--—_

Unit 1~~ludes

MissoulaGravels)

‘alouse Soil)

J:___.-——_------—-—-.—--—-:-............................,_..==4,--—-——_--=-........-—_

= Unit2 (Ear

Unit 4 (Upper Fines)

——— ___ ___

Unit 5 (Upper Coarse)

9%!1~:a..~ J —-———— ————..

Saddle Mountains

J Basalt

1Wanapum Basalt

Imnaha Basalt

From Thorne et al. (1993)Not to Scale

c

re-Missoula, Plio-Pleistocene

Upper Ringold

Unit E

. Unit C

After Lindsey (1995)

onglomerate

Flood-BasaltFlow andInterbeddedSediments

.

Figure 2.1. Comparison of Generalized Hydrogeologic and Geologic Stratigraphy

2.2

;“’.”!?G&:.. : +L~xk.kE~f’, ...”5..W.aIII#E \w-~.M2~W--- . , >._ . .-,

~x~ Ringold Formation Lower Mud Unit at Water Table

u Rivers/Ponds

1

I Baaalt Above Water Tabje ; 2;S ~ z? lo kiI.momm

- Water-Table Contour, m(Daahed Where Inferred)

o~10milas

Monitoring Well 4

Vertical Datum: North American Vertical DaWmof1988(NAVD88)

--=%=%-=x

jPm99012FabruarylO,19993:47 PM

Figure 2.2. Hanford Site and Outlying Areas Water-Table Map, June 1998 (fromHartman 1999)

2.3

.

[[

.

–r

r’r-

r-.r

A.P%$sh/A’”

1OO-DArea @

.. /“

1OO-N ‘“4rArea. .:

I

‘1I

❑ Mvers/Ponds - Technetium-99 (DWS 900 pCi/L)

❑ Basalt Above Water Table - ‘Odine-12g ‘Dws 1 ‘~’L)

– lFitium (2,OOO pCi/L) I- Titium (DWS 20,000 pCi/L)

{

o 10 kilomatem~

- Tritium (80,000 pCi/L) -0 5 I’rJlas

- Strontium-90 (DWS 8 pCi/L)

- Uranium (MCL 20 uLI/L) I

~.~

can awmn98 1 fibruanf10,19S9 125-5 PM---

Figure 2.3, Distribution of Major Radionuclides in Groundwater at Concentrations Above MaximumContaminant Levels (MCLS) or Interim Drinking Water Standards (DWSS), Fiscal Year1998 (Hartman 1999)

2.4

I

1J-

1OO-B,C M

L-f,;,,:,,,, Area<~$:/‘ ‘2;;;:s;’, e

// / 1+Area ,.. .

1

1: ‘

U Rivers/Ponds I1llJ1lur uGLllylGIIG IIv

❑ Baaalt Above Water Table

1

Dashed Where Inferred

- Chromium (MCL 100 ug/L) o 10kilamrnrs– Nitrate (20 mg/L)

--

- Nitrate (MCL 45 mg/L) 0123 5 m!le.s

- Carbon Tetrachloride (MCL 5 ug/L)

. ..-—

U..-.—.Area

L;!

,...}..-,.

i..,.

can mNmB98 2 fiixuarvll.1999 3:54PM..=...-.-.-—... . . .

Figure 2.4. Distribution of Major Hazardous Chemicals in Groundwater at Concentrations AboveMaximum Contaminant Levels (MCLS), Fiscal Year 1998 (l%rtman 1999)

2.5

3.0 Monitoring Program

The integrated stipling and analysis matrix for the groundwater project is given in Appendix A. Thematrix was designed for use”in fiscal year 2000; but also includes wells that will be sampled every 2 or3 years, as discussed in Section 3.3. The matrix includes well name, sampling frequency, and constitu-ents to be monitored. Addhional details, such as schedule, analytical methods, etc., reside in a project ‘database.

3.1 Groundwater-Monitoring Network

Wells on the Hanford Site are monitored in compliance with: 1) the AtonzicEnergyAct 1954 andits implementing orders (“surveillance monitoring”), 2) CERCLA operable units, 3) remedial actionpetiormance assessmen~ 4) RCRA, and 5) WAC permits. Monitoring networks for items 2 through 5 aredefined in monitoring plans, interim records of decision (RODS), or change agreements listed in Chap-ters 4.0 through 8.0. Most of these monitoring networks are included in the monitoring matrix of Appen-dix A. The criteria for choosing wells for surveillance monitoring are discussed below.

1,

2.

3.

Defining plumes - A representative areal distribution of wells within !he plume is monitored, with anemphasis on wells with the highest concentrations of contaminants and wells near plume boundaries.Some wells in uncontaminated areas between plumes are also monitored to help control interpretationof plume boundaries and to monitor plume migration. Plumes migrating onto the site from offsitesources are also monitored (e.g., agricultural effects, Richland Landfill, Siemens Power Corpomtion).A geostatistical approach was employed to determine which wells should be sampled to track majorplumes from the 200-East Area (discussed in Chapter 6.0). ~

Monitoring contaminant sources - Waste-disposal facilities not regulated by RCRA or the WAC areincluded in surveilhmce’monitoring (e.g., 1OO-KBasins, 216-U-1 Crib).] Wells downgradient ofthese facilities are monitored to detect their impact on groundwater.

Interval monitored - Most of the groundwater contamination on the Htiord Site is contained in theuppermost (unconilned) aquifer, so most of the monitoring wells are screened there. Newer wellsinstalled for RCRA and CERCLA are screened across the water table and monitor the top 3 to 10 mof the unconfined aquifer. Wells that monitor a longer interval-are less desirable because contami- .nants could be diluted from representative concentrations to below detection limits. A few wellsmonitor deeper intervals of the suprabasalt sediments or confined aquifers in the basalt. These wellsare sampled to monitor whether contamination has migrated deeper in the hydrologic system.

*This type of monitoring has been called “operational monitoring” in the past.’ It is now considered partof surveillance monitoring.

3.1

.. .----- - -.,. . . . .. . .. -.-,+... ,,..,.. ... .-~... ———....

,..

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

100

Historical data - Previous groundwater chemistry or water-level data in a well are usefid for monitor-ing trends and for determining sampling frequency and constituent lists. Wells with historical dataare preferable to those without.

Adequacy of well construction - Wells with poor seals, broken casing, or other problems may notprovide representative da@ and will be remediated or decommissioned.

Amount of water in the well - Declining water levels are causing some wells to go dry. Wells that arelikely to contain suilicient water for sampling are chosen for the network.

Proximity to the Columbia River-In some cases, it is desirable to monitor wells very near the rivershore to assess what concentrations of contaminants are entering the river. In other cases, it is moreadvantageous to choose wells farther inland to avoid fluctuations in concentration caused by bankstorage effects.

Use by other requirements of the groundwater project, (e.g., RCW, CERCLA) - Wells being sampledfor other purposes are used for surveillance monitoring, where possible, for a more cost-effectiveprogram.

“Guard wells” - Key areas have been identified as being of special interesti bands of wells in GableGap and southeast of the 200-East Area were chosen to monitor contamination migrating out of the200 Areas (discussed in Chapter 6.0), wells near the Columbia River, wells in the southern portion ofthe site near the City of Richland’s North Well Field and recharge basins.

Petiorrnance assessment- The environmental restoration contractor (i.e., Bechtel Hanford, Inc.)conducts performance assessment monitoring in conjunction with remedial actions. The groundwaterproject is responsible for providing independent assessment of remedial actions, so wells near theremedial actions are included.

3.2 Constituents

Constituents are included in the sampling matrix of Appendix A. This matrix is an abbreviatedversion of the sampling matrix maintained by the groundwater project which specifies various methodsof analysis for some constituents.

The following criteria were considered to determine what analyses should be run on the samples forsurveillance monitoring:

1. Proximity to known plumes or waste sites -If a well is located in a contamimuit plume or downgradi-ent of a plume, it is generally sampled for that contaminant.

3.2

2.

3.

4.

5.

Historical data in well-Wells are g-rally not Smpkd for constituen~ that have not been detected .or are below some level of interest (e.g., drinking water standards) unless they are monitoring move-ment of a nearby plume.

Statistical modeling (discussed in Chapter 6.0).

Use for other requirements - If there is a choice of analytical method for a desired constituen~ themethod used for other monitoring purposes is chosen if it is satisfactory for surveillance monitoring.

State of Washington Department of Health constituents - Constituents, including total alph~ anions,total be~ gamm~ iodine-129, technetium-99, tritium, and uranium isotopes, are co-sampled toprovide a quality control check.

The choice of constituents for RCRA, CERCLA, and other monitoring requirements are based onwaste history, permit conditions, and constituents of concern, as discussed in their monitoring plans.

3.3 Sampling Frequency

Sampling frequency for RCRA, CERCLA, and othe,rmonitoring requirements are determined byregulation, permits, or other agreements. Frequency for plume and trend tracking are based on thefollowing criteria

1.

2.

3.

Variability of historical data-If previous concentrations are level or are on a steady trend, less-fiequent sampling (every 3 years) is sufficient. Wells with larger variability are sampled morefrequently (annually or more often).

Proximity to key keas - Guard wells (see Section 3.1) and wells monitoring source areas are sampledmore frequently.

Mobility of contaminants in groundwater - Contaminants with greater mobility (e.g., tritium) may besampled more frequently than those that are not very mobile in groundwater (e.g., strontium-90).

3.4 Changes to Monitoring Program

As data are received and evaluated, changes will be made to the program, as needed. For example, ifthe concentration of a contaminant in a well increases suddenly, an additional sample maybe collectedand analyzed to confm or refute the initial result. This lype of “one-time” change may be made withoutrevision of this plan.

Each year the well/constituent matrix in this plan will be reviewed for adequacy and revised, if neces-sary, for the following fiscal year. These revisions will incorporate any changes made to monito~ngplans for RCRA, CERCLA, and other requirements.

3.3

—.-z—. - . ,. .,, ,.. ,.~., . . . . ..-– --- . ..--.—..—- . ..+.

4.0 100 Areas .

For the purposes of this plan, “100 Areas” describes that portion of the Hanford Site north of GableMountain and Gable Butte and south of the Columbia River and includes the six reactor areas (1OO-B,C,100-?&1OO-N,1OO-D,1OO-H,and 1OO-F[upstream to downstream]) fid the 600 Area in between.

4.1 Background

4.1.1 Waste Sites, Discharges, and Groundwater Operable Units

Hundreds of waste sites have been identified in the 100 Areas, including fuel-storage or retentionbasins that leake~ effluent disposal cribs, ditches, and drains; and various spills or other unplannedreleases, Those with site-specific monitoring requirements and those that appear to have affectedgroundwater quality are listed in Table 4.1.

Most of the sites are inactive radiological or mixed waste sites, and will be cleaned up or monitoredunder the requirements of CERCLA or as RCRA past-practice sites. Five sites are regulated under RCRAbecause they were more recently active and contained dangerous waste con~ituents. Two sites currentlydischarge nondangerous effluent to @e ground (sanitary waste and filter backwash in the 1OO-NArea).

Groundwater beneath the reactor areas and surrounding areas is divided into five groundwateroperable units: 1OO-BC-5(1OO-B,CArea), 1OO-KR-4(1OO-K),”1OO-NR-2(1OO-N),100-HR-3 (1OO-Dand 1OO-H),and 100-FR-3 (100-F Area). Pumpand-treat systems are active in the 100-& 1OO-D,and100-H Areas for chromium and in the 1OO-NArea for strontium-90. An in situ treatment system is activein the 100-D Area to chemically reduce hexavalent chromium to insoluble chromium compounds (redoxmanipulation). All of these remediation systems are considered interim actions; final remedial actionshave not yet been selected.

4.1.2 Groundwater-Monitoring Requirements and History

Limited groundwater monitoring has been conducted in the reactor areas since the 1940s. Veryfew monitoring wells existed in the early decades but more were installed in the 100-~ 1OO-N,and1OO-HAreas in the 1970s and monitored for DOE requirements. -RCRA monitoring began in the late1980s in the 1OO-Nand 1OO-Hkeas, and in the early 1990s in the 1OO-DAr% so addhional wells wereinstalled. CERCLA investigations and cleanup actions’in the 1990s resulted in the installation of dozensmore wells, spread ~ong the reactor areas and the intervening 600 Area betieen the 100-D and100-H Areas.

CERCLA interim actions in the 1OO-K 1OO-N,1OO-D,and 1OO-HAreas include specific monitoringrequirements. CERCLA operable unit monitoring networks have also been defined for these areas and for

4.1

..—..-—., ... ..-.

Table 4.1. Selected Waste Sites in tbe 100 Areas(a)

.Constituentsof Interest

for GroundwaterFacility(periodof use) WasteType Monitoring Type of Site

1OO-B,CArea

116-B-I1(1944-68)and Reactorcoolanteffluent leaks Radionuclides,metals Past-practice116-C-5(1952-69) known strontium-90,chromiumretentionbasins

116-B-1(1950-68)and Coolanteffluentfrom fuel- Radionuclides Past-practice116-C-I (1952-68)waste- elementfailure(highlydisposaltrenches radioactive)

116-B-5crib (1950-68) Processeffluent Tntium Past-practice

118-B-6burialground Contaminatedequipment High-leveltritium Past-practice(1950-53)

Storagetanks and transfer Sodiumbichromateleakage Chromium Past-practicefacilities(1944-69) fromwater-treatmentfacilities

1OO-KArea

Reactorbuildingsfhel- Radionuclide-contaminated Tritium,strontium-90 Activestoragebasins (KE: 1955- wate~ leaksknown71; 1975-present.KW1955-71;1981-present)

116-ICE-3(1955-71)and EffluentI?omfuel-storage Tritium,strontium-90 Past-practice116-KW-2(1955-70) basin draiiage collection .fiench dr&/reverse well

116-ICE-I(1955-71)and Reactorcondensate Tritium,carbon-14 Past-practice116-KW-I(1955-71)cribs

116-K-2trench(1955-71) Reactorcoolantwater, Chromium,strontium-90 Past-practicedecontaminationliquids

116-KW-3(1954-70)and Reactorcoolant leaksknown Radionuclides Past-practice116-ICE-4(1955-71)retentionbasins

Storagetanks and transfer Sodiumbichromateleakage Chromium Past-practicefacilities from 183-KEand 183-KW

water-treatmentfacilities

1OO-NArea

1301-Nliquidwaste- Reactorcoolant Strontium-90,tritium, RCIU past-disposalfacility(1963-85) minor hazardous practice

constituents)

1325-Nliquidwaste- Reactorcoolant Strontium-90,tritium, RCRApast-disposalfacility(1983-89) minor hazardous practice

constituents)

1324-NApercolationpond Treateddemineralize effluent . Sulfate,sodium,pJ#’) RCRApast-(1986-90) practice

Fuel station Fuel tank leaksconfirmed Hydrocarbons Past-practice

4.2

Table 4.1. (contd)

Constituentsof Interestfor Groundwater

Facility(periodof use) WasteType Monitoring Type of Site

N Reactorbasins Fuel-storagebasins Radionuclides Inactive

183-Nbackwashdischarge Filterbackwash None Activepond(1983-present)

124-N-IOsewagelagoon Sanitarywaste Nitrate,colifonn Active;WAC(1987-present) permitted

1OO-DArea

116-D-7(1944-67)and Reactorcoolant leaksknown Radionuclides,chromium Past-practice116-DR-9(1950-67)retentionbasins

116-D-1(1947-67)and Highlyradioactivecoolant Radionuclides Past-practice .116-DR-2(1950-67) Ilom fuel-elementfailuretrenches

Reactorcribs,draiis Waterand sludgesfromfuel- Carbon-14,nitrate, Past-practicestoragebasins;decontamina- strontium-90tion solutions;condensatefrom inertgas system

Storagetanks and transfer Sodiumbichromateleakage Chromium Past-practicefacilities fromcorrosionWlbitor

120-D-1ponds (1977-94) Effluentfromwatertreatment pH, mercury@) RCRA clean ‘closed(c)

1OO-HArea

116-H-7(107-H)retention Reactorcoolant leaksknown Tritium,strontium-90 Past-practicebasin(1949-65)

116-H-I(107-H)trench Highlyradioactivecoolant Tritium,strontium-90, Past-practice(1952-65) fromreactorfuel-element nitrate

failure

Reactorcribs,draii Waterand sludgefromfuel- Chromium Past-practicestoragebasins; decontaminat-ion solutions

183-Hsolar evaporation Neutralizedacid etchsolutions Technetium-99,uranium,basins(1973-85)

RCIU(dJnitrate,chromium,fluoride

1OO-FArea

116-F-14retentionbasin Reactorcoolant leaksknown Strontiurn-90,chromium Past-practice ~andpipelines(1945-65)

116-F-2trench(1950-65) Highlyradioactivecookmt Strontium-90,chromium Past-practice

116-F-9trench(1963-76) Cleaningwastesfrom Radionuclides Past-pmcticeexperimentalanimallaboratories

4.3

I

—----- ~T-v.-..- ,,,, .,,,.

_——_— . . . .—

~.- . . ...-. . . . . . . . . . . :, *.-?.-.,,. ,-,-~,-~ ,,.~~.-~’ . ..” “.’.

Table 4.1. (contd)

Constituentsof Interestfor Groundwater

Facility(periodof use) WasteType Monitoring Type of Site

116-F-3(1947-51)and Reactorcoolantand sludge Radionuclides Past-practice116-F-6(1952-65)trenches

116-F-1trench(1953-65) Liquidwaste fromreactorand Radionuclides,metals, Past-practiceassociatedbuildings uranium,strontium-90,

nitrate! ,

118-F-1(1954-65)and Contaminatedequipment Tritium,plutonium Past-practice118-F-6(1965-73)solid animalwastes,coal ashwaste-b&ialgrou&k I I I(a) Siteswith specificgroundwater-monitoringrequirementsand those that appearto have affectedgroundwater

quality.(b) Knownor suspectedin waste;not significantlydetectedin groundwaterto date.(c) Cleanclosedin 1999(nowaste left in place). No furtherRCR4 monitoringrequired.[d) Groundwaterbeneatb 183-Hto be remediatedunder CERCLA.

the 1OO-B,Cand 1OO-FAreas. The K Basins, where spent reactor fhel rods are stored, have leaked in thepast and are monitored under DOE Order 5400.1. Monitoring plans for the K Basins, CERCLA, andRCRA are given in Table 4.2.

The Atomic EnergvAct oJ1954 and DOE Order 5400.1 also require sitewide surveillance monitoringto track contaminant plumes: Wells monitored for those requirements in 1996 were listed by Bisping(1996).

4.2 Conceptual Model

The most widespread contaminants of concern hi 100 Areas’ groundwater are tritiurn, nitrate, andhexavalent chromium. Groundwater is locally contaminated with strontiurn-90, carbon-14, technetiutn-99,uranium, trichloroethylene, and sulfate. Groundwater also flows into the 100 Areas through the gapbetween Gable Mountain and Gable Butte, carrying contamination from the 200 Areas.

Contaminated effluent has been reaching the soil in the 100 Areas for-50 years ftom leakhg reten-tion basins and disposal trenches. Radionuclides with short half-lives decayed in the retention basins orin the vadose zone. Nonradioactive constituents and longer-lived radionuclides were carried downthrough the vadose zone beneath the waste sites. Some of these sorbed to sediments, some remained inthe moisture in the vadose zone, and large quantities were carried into the groundwater (Figure 4.1).

4.4

Table 4.2. Groundwater Monitoring in the 100 Areas

MonitoringRequirement(monitoringplan reference) Comments

— -1OO-B,CArea

CERCLA(FederalFacilityAgreementand Consent Long-termplumemonitoringOrderChangeControlFormM-15-96-07)

1OO-KArea ‘

CERLCA(ROD 1996izDOE 1996a) CERCLAinterimactionfor chromium;wellsnear116-K-2trench(a)

CERCLA(NationalPrioritiesList ChangeControl 1OO-KR-4OperableUnit remedialinvestigation~Form108,11/20/96)

DOEOrder5400.1(Johnsonet al. 1995) KE and KW fhel-storagebasins

1OO-NArea

RCIL4(Hartman1996) 11301-N,1324-N/NA,1325-Nsites

CERCLA@ationalPrioritiesList ChangeControl N springsexpeditedresponseaction(strontium-90plumeForm 113,3/25/97) near 130l-N)(’)

CERCLA(FederalFacilityAgreementand Consent 1OO-NR-2OperableUnit remedial~vestigatiow *O .OrderChangeControlForm M-15-96-08,10/9/96; includesRCIU4wells of Hartman(1996)Borgheseet al. 1996)

1NationalPollutantDischargeEliminationSystem Well 199-N-8TPermitWA-000374-3@)

1OO-DArea

!ERCLA(ROD 1996%DOE 1996a) CERCLAinterimactionfor chromium;wellsnear retentiombasinsand d~posal trenches(’)

CERCLA(NationalPrioritiesList ChangeControl 1OO-HR-3(DArea)OperableUnit remedialinvestigationForm 107, 11/20/96)

1OO-HArea

RCRA(I%rtman1997) 183-Hsolarevaporationbasins

CERCLA(ROD 19964 DOE 1996a) CERCLAinterim”actionfor chromium(’)

ICERLCA(Petersonand IUddl1996 National 1OO-HR-3(H Area)OperableUnit remedialinvestigationPrioritiesList ChangeControlForm 107, 11/20/96)

I 1OO-FArea

CERLCA(FederalFacilityAgreementand Consent Long-tengplumemonitoringOrderChangeControlForm M-15-96-06)(a) Groundwatermonitoredindependentlyof groundwaterproject.(b) Willbe eliminatedwhennew permit issued.

4.5

I--.——..,.7 .,., .—..—-,= .=..- —.-

.

Ground SurfaceFormer

/

. . . . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . Water Table. . . . . . . . . . . . ........................................................ . . . . . . . . . . . . . During Site Use............................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..:...-&.~u.~u...-.. . . . . . . . . . . ...%.- d . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. /-. . ................................................ . High-River Staged . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .*. .: : : : : . - ...............................&._._.. - . .W.w.w..+..w. . . . . . . . . . . . ..-.-.-—r=—.............................................................. . . . . . . .. . . . . . : : : : : . . ................ Average River Stage............................................................. . - . . . . - . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............................................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .‘~q.~.I.~.~.IMgh~Wa~e~?abl~>jAveiage ‘Wate~Ta~~_:..

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

///////’////////// Columbia RiverLow-Permeability Sediments’

//////////////////

IZZZl Contaminants

~ Direction of Groundwater Flow

Not to ScaleRG980900050.1

Figure 4.1. Conceptual Model of Subsurface Contamination in the 100 Areas

When the reactors were active, huge volumes of water were discharged, creating large groundwatermounds that disrupted the natural groundwater-flow patterns. The contaminants moved outward on thesemounds, contaminating a larger area in the saturated zone than in the vadose zone. The moundsdissipated after discharges cease~ and groundwater flow resumed its normal pattern (i.e., toward theriver). Groundwater beneath the 100 Areas continues to carry contaminants to the river, where it dis-charges from springs, seeps, and through the riverbed below the water line. Groundwater nearest the riverofien has lower concentrations of contaminants because of dilution. When river stage is high, the watertable may rise into the former mound areas and mobilize some constituents (see Figure 4.1) or it maydilute contaminants further. This influx of river water,also temporarily disrupts the direction and rate ofgroundwater flow. Locally, groundwater extraction and injection also tiect flow directions and interceptcontaminants before they reach the river.

The vertical component of groundwater flow in the 100 Areas is generally upward, and most of thecontamination is limited to the unconfined aquifer. However, it is likely that when groundwater moundswere presen~ there was a significant downward gradient and several wells that monitor the confinedRingold or basalt-confined aquifers appear to be contaminated.

Contaminant concentrations are expected to decrease with time because of dispersion, dilution,radioactive decay, remediation, and discharge to the river. There are no new sources of contamination,but concentrations will vary because of plume movement and mobilization of vadose zone contamination.

4.6


Locations of monitoring wells for the 100 Areas are illustrated in Figures 4.2 through 4.8 and arelisted in Appendix A. In addition to the shallow unconfined wells, the network includes most of the fewavailable deeper wells (completed in the confined Ringold or the basalt-confimed aquifer). Most of the600 Area wells will be sampled every 3 years. Wells in the reactor areas are sampled every year, exceptfor those wells near the river or wells with highly variable concentrations that are sampled more fre-quently. Wells monitoring the in situ redox manipulation application in the 1OO-DArea are monitoredquarterly.

4.7

-,? :-,-7-Y.- :.2..,;/-..l..;,,,,,,.,/!..,,,.-, .,.’.-.../..~. --- ,.J-, —.----------.——

. ——.

●B2-13

-i

— Roada

C65-132 ● Sampled At Leaat Annually

1“”

o 150 300 450 600 meters7;:+ ~

,~:.;:s$:;:?is:z22?m~ A Sampled Every 3 Yeara.,.-.’.-.. . A;.:,Q:;; ,.. ;,+:,-$$Y-:.; :-”L-.----‘- ‘.‘ “. .“”-.’-, ------:.%

~... . . .,-in.+..,/>:...:.:: :.:+-.,-..,,.$.,.-%., .. 0 1000 1500 flwltL.:..;-., -.;.,,,,...>,,. >,.A+.,z>-+..:,:.:.:&k:...*Al..l...,.,4..,.>...+-.- La- 0 Not Sampled for Surveillance:,!..;;r-, ... ... . . .. ...........*...............s . , . ...W.,-...,.-..-.!..22.,~.~~,.. .... .... . . .

........... . .....$>.-.. ..&.-:., ~ ::.’.:;:yy,~::;:_ -.+,2..%..,.*, -.. ... . .. .t,-., . .-. . -,~.’,.,.$.:“...-:;::.:..-.-..+....-.,,-.~..<..,,-+......+.-.+.>.. . . ..... . .....’ ,.,.L.,. .. .l+. . . .Z.:<,,.;,:..:,..,,...,,..:,-,,<+

can_hart_99009Saptmrter 21,199912S7 PM

Figure 4.2. Groundwater Project Well Locations: 1OO-B,CArea

4.8

_. .._

/

/’/...

116-K-1 &K-18~~ ,9 /0 “Crib

o

,-, .,’., .“

,,, -,- ‘>,, .,. ,/

-~./,’ .

183-KW Water fi~”Teatment Plant ,.-

B Rivers/%nds ● Sampled At Laaat Annually

I Buildings A Sampled Every 3 Yeara

l“”

o 150 300 450 600 meters~ Waste Sites O Not Sampled for Surveillance“ Fences

o~

Well prefix 199- Omitta 1000 1500 feat— Roads

Figure 4.3.

can_halt_s9010Saptatir 20, 1s99 1:45~

Groundwater Project Well Locations: 1OO-KArea

4.9

I

.

—.

~ ●N-51

/’

N-92A

●N-50

9N-14

..-‘1 “. ..’\

\

‘1325-N.LiquidWa

N-70N-a@ /’

/

Disposal Fa “ :

/’ /f’

●N-S?” ,“‘“ ,4w.#-

, ,/{ --/\bd.~J

,~,,/ ‘>

/

/’ ,“/’ /’

/’ /’/’ /’

/’ /’/’ ,’

,’ //’ ,/

,&:,,/’

{,/’ /)

,//

●N-28

AN-74

-<<:[I L ,. !“.. and Psrcojation f%nd---’\.. ~ ,./

--/’ n \

*N-52

Fadlity

\>

“.,~: :.;

..-

“!\. .,

= Rivers/Fnnds

o Buildings

D Waste Sites I‘- Fences

1“’”

o— Roads

150 300 450 600 metm

● Sampled At kast Annually o 500 1000 1500 fact

A Sampled Every 3 Years

O Not sampledfor Surveillance

Well prefixes 199- and 699- Omitted

can_hart_99011Sapramber21,19aa 12A2 PM

Figure 4.4. Groundwater Project Well Locations: 1OO-NArea

.

4.10

.----,

~cl116-DR1,DR2-, 0:

-. ~, Dispossl-., ., Wenches

r

D4-13ti------o4.l5\o

-\\

BD3-2(

[

;,. “.:...”.

“- :-<.-.,-.,-.,0.,-.,:..

.

,+,/ ‘>

/’/ /,////

X/,~D5-27

S44

33-D Fi[telPlant

~

;~ OD‘\

‘\‘\\

2-a

-------------------J

Building

A lrYmla-19 \

i’ DR’Reactor

1771 Building \Ii2

L

5

~ Rivers/Ponds

o Buildings

~ ~nJa~sSites

— Roads

● Sampled At Lsast Annually


O Not Sampled for Surveillance

II Well prefixes 199- and 699- Omitted

o 150 300 450 600 metars

~o 1000 1600 feet

I

Figure 4.5. Gro&dwater Project Well Locations:

4.11

m-haft-99012 %ptambar22, 199912~ pM

1OO-DArea

I

-Z-T-77: n. . . .- < ..-, s . . “. tin=,’ ‘, ‘-., ./,’. -.,--w ., . .

_—. - . . —..

——.—————. ...— —— —...—--—— -—-

●974

Am-a

\

183-H SolarEvap#&on

T -1

\

kH4-lo ‘H4-15CS

H4-15B H4

l-w170

H4-a4~

H4-8~-!9

— r“’H3LAlEme

QH54A/

\

107-H Liquid.

Waste Trench

●He-1

u

\

~ Rivers/Ponds ● Sampled At Least Annually

m Buildings A Sampled Every 3 Years

~ ~n::ssitea 0 Not Sampled for Surveillance

Well prefixes 199- and 699- Omitted— Roads I ‘r

$1 7S 150 2?5 3~0 meters

0 260 500 7601000 feet

ca_hstt.99013 Septarnhr 21, 19991247PM

Figure 4.6. Groundwater Project Well Locations: 1OO-HArea

4.12

k

116-F-1Tenth

\ ●F7-2

Ezr-EzI

u116-F-6Trencha-,,

118-F-I -. ;-,‘,, -,- •Fa~Burial . . .,.,

Ground -“”:”’”-

●F7= ~;~.

●F7-1 Ils;:p

Ground

cFe-4

IF5-1

2

., :,. Fe-l.,’./.,.,

~ Rivers/rends ● Sampled At Leaat Annually

“n Buildings O Not Sampled for Surveillance

1-”’’”

0 150 300 450 600 meters

EZ Waate Sites Well prefix 199- Omitted ~“- Fences o 500 1500 feet

— Roads

can_hart_99014 Septembw 21, 19891:1S PM

Figure 4.7. Groundwater Project Well Locations: 1OO-FArea

4.13

..—

,,r,l.,.,.‘,,

Hanford Site Boundary.—— ——— —

1-—— 1

———-

—— JJ

1

‘-l‘l_

‘1

r

I—4

1 v M\ u

I

‘1

L\_1-.

Ir

r

o.

wm

=E

m- –~

-*CD-

-m

*-

-N

N -.

0- -0

— —

-.

4.14

5.0 200-West Area

The 200-West Area is located on the central plateau of the HanfiordSite. Portions of the 600 Areaaffected by groundwater contamination originating in or near the 200-West Area were evaluated for themonitoring network in this chapter.

5.1 Background

Activities within this area have included irradiated nuclear fiel processing and liquid and solid wastestorage and disposal. This area has been used since the 1940s.

5.1.1 Waste Sites, Discharges, and Groundwater Operable Units

Several processing facilities in the 200-West Area have contributed to groundwater contaminationthrough disposal of radioactive and hazardous liquid wastes in ponds, cribs, ditches, and undergroundstorage tanks. Large quantities of solid wastes, both from on and off the site, have been disposed of innumerous burial grounds in the 200-West Area. The major sites are listed in Table 5.1. Additionalinformation is provided in Hartrnan and Dresel (1998), and more complete site inventories are included inreports listed in the bibliography of that document. A number of facilities are regulated under RCRAbecause they were more recently active and contain, or containe~ dangerous chemical waste constituents.Six RCRA units have groundwater-monitoring requirements, including two low-level burial grounds,which are the only sites actively receiving waste within the 200-West Area. Four single-shell tank wastemanagement areas located in the 200-West Area also are monitored under RCRA; the tanks currently areused to store mixed waste. The 616-A Crib, also known as the State-Approved Land-Disposal Site, islocated just north of the 200-West Aea. The site consists of a drain field that is used to dispose of liquidwaste containing tritium.

Two CERCLA groundwater operable units relate to 200-West Area contamination. The 200-UP-1Operable Unit generally covers the groundwater in the southeastern part of the are%where technetium-99and uranium contamination near U Plant are being remediated by a CERCLA interim action. The -200-ZP-1 Operable Unit generally covers groundwater contamination originating in the northwestern partof the 200-West Are% where interim actions are in place to remediate carbon tetrachloride contamination.


Groundwater-monitoring wells in the 200-West Area were installed to monitor specific disposalfacilities in the mid 1940s. RCR4 monitoring wells were installed beginning in 1987. Several injectionand extraction wells have been drilled to support interim-action pump-and-treat systems.

The Atomic he~gy Act of 1954 and DOE Order 5400.1 require monitoring to identi~ and trackcontaminant plumes. Wells monitored for those requirements in 1996 were listed by Bisping (1996).

5.1

Table 5.1. Selected Waste Sites in the 200-West Area(a)

Constituentsof Interest Type of Sitefor Groundwater (monitoringplan

Facility WasteType Monitoring reference)

Single-shelltank f-s Radioactive/chemical Sodiumhydroxide, RCRA (Caggiano1996a,(WasteManagement slurries sodiumsalts,radionu- Caggianoand GoodwinAreasS-SX,T, ‘IX-TY, elides,ferrocyanide 1991,Caggianoandand U) Chou 1993)

T Plant cribs (216-T-26, Diversechemicaland Tritium,iodine-129, Past-practice-28, -19) and radiologicalwaste technetium-99,nitrate,216-T-25trench chromium,carbontetra-

chloride,chloroform,trichloroethylene,fluoride

Reduction-Oxidation Solvent-extraction Nitrate,trichloroethyl- Past-practice,exceptPlant disposalfacilities processwastes ene, tritium, iodme-129, S-10: RCRA(Airhti(including216-S-10 technetium-99,uranium et al. 1990)pond/ditch)

U Plant disposal Supematantfrom Iodine-129, Past-practice,exceptfacilities(216-U-12and scavengedwaste technetium-99,uranium, U-12 RCRA (Jensenotherretentiontrenches) nitrate,trichloroethylene et al. 1990,Williamsand

Chou 1993). 200-UP-1interimaction(DOE1996b,ROD 1997)0)

PlutoniumFinishing Transuranicand Nitrate,carbontetra- Past-practice200-ZP-IPlant cribs (216-Z-1A chemicalwastes chloride,chloroform, interimaction(Freeman-and -Z-9) trichloroethylene Pollard 1996)0)

Low-levelburialgrounds Radioactivesolid waste Variouschemicaland RCRA (Lastand(WasteManagement radioactivewastes(c) Bjornstad 1989)Areas3 and4)

616ACrib (State- Treatedliquideffluent Tritium Active;WACpermittedApprovedLrmd- (Daviset al. 1996)0)DisposalSite)

Environmental Excavated,contami- None anticipated Active (Weekset al.RestorationDisposal nated soil and debris (double-linedfacility) 1996,Ford 1996)Facility (potentiallyradioactive

and/orhazardous)(a) Siteswith specificgroundwater-monitoringrequirementsand those that appearto have affected

groundwaterquality.(b) Groundwatermonitoredindependentlyof groundwaterproject.(c) Presentin waste;not found in groundwater.

5.2


The most widespread hazardous chemical contmpinants of concern in 200-West Area groundwater arenitrate, carbon tetrachloride, and chloroform. Sm~ler plumes of chromium and trichloroethylene are alsopresent Technetium-99,uranium,triti~ and iodine-129amthe most significantradionuclidesin groundwater.

Contaminated effluent has reached the soil from cribs, trenches, tile fields, surface impoundments,and leaking tanks associated with T Pkm~ Reduction-Oxidation Plant U Plant and Plutonium FinishingPlant. Radionuclides with short half-lives decayed in the vadose zone, while nonradioactive con$ituentsand longer-lived radonuclides were carried deeper. Some of these sorbed to sediments; some remainedin the moisture in the v~ose zone, and large quantities were carried into the groundwater.

The groundwater-flow direction beneath the southern portion of the 200-West Area is to the east.‘Groundwater flows to the northeast beneath the northern part of the area. In the pm waste-disposalpractices created groundwater mounds that caused some westward flow of contaminants. Contaminantsmoved outward from these mounds, contaminating a larger area in the sat&ated zone than in the vadosezone. These mounds are still present but are declining, and the most recent tiormation indicates that thewestward flow has ceased. Interim remedial action systems, where groundwater is extracted, treated, andreinjeoted, locally perturb groundwater-flow directions neaqthe Plutonium I?inishing Plant and east ofu Plant.

“The few shallow and deepwell pairs-indicate that the vertical flow gradient is downward in the200-West Area. Contamination in the deeper parts of the unconfined aquifer appear to be considerablyless than in the upper portion of the aquifer. It should be noted, however, that very few wells monitor thedeeper portions of the aquifer, and at sore-elocations certain contaminants are found at greater concentra-tions at depth. . .

Contaminant concentrations are expected to decrease wi~ time because of dispersion, dilution, radi~active decay, remediation, and migration. There are no new sources of contamination, but concentrationswill vary because of plume movement and mobilization of vadose zone contamination.

5.3 Monitoring Program. .

.

The primary objective of the surveillance monitoring program in the 200-West Area is to monitor theextent of plumes emanating Ilom 200-We”tiArea waste sites. Most of the sites have ceased operation,and many wells monitoring the widespread plumes will be sampled every 3 years to track the rate ofmigration and attenuation. Other wells will be sampled annually or more fi-equently.

Another objective of surveillance monitoring is to address hazardous waste sites that ceased operationbefore 1985 and radioactive waste sites, which are not regulated by RCRA. Wells are monitored near themost significant sources to see if contaminants are declining as expecte-dand to detect contaminants “migrating from the vadose %ne. These wells are monitored annually or more flequentiy.

we locations of the monitoring wells in the 200-West Area are illustrated in Figure 5.1 (600 Areawells were shown in Figure 4.8). Wells and constituents are listed in Appendix A.

5.3

● 40

N

z3\

k

. ..— .——. —.. . —.——.—.. ..— . .

-------------------------------------------------------------------Y

‘rrrci\\\\\. !

\\\\,\\\\\\\

,\\,&----

w’, ,&\,\\ \\ . .

t,.-_L----- _.m--_-- —.-__ .A----------

*

6.0 200-East Area

For the purposes of this plan, “200-East Area” describes that portion of the Htiord Site within the200-East Area fence line, those parts of the site downgradient from the area that shows impacts bycontaminants originating in the 200-East Are% and those disposal facilities outside the fence line butassociated with 200-East Area operations. Thus, B Pond, Gable Mountain Pond, and BC Cribs will beincluded in the following discussion. The 200 Areas Treated Effluent-Disposal Facility also fallsgenerally within this part of the site but is monitored under the specific requirements of its state waste-discharge permit. .

6.1 Background

6.1.1 Waste Sites, Discharges, and Groundwater Operable Units. .

Hundreds of waste sites have been identified in the 200-East Are% including radioactive and mixedwaste-storage tanks; low-level burial grounds; effluent disposal cribs, ditches, drains, and ponds andvarious spills or other unplanned releases. The major sites are listed in Table 6.1. Additional informationis provided in Hartman and Dresel (1998), and more complete site inventories are included in reportslisted in the bibliography of that document. A number of facilities are regulated under RCRA becausethey were more recently active and contain, or containe~ dangerous waste constituents. Several of theRCRA units have groundwater-monitoring requirements and are included in Table 6.1.

The 200 Areas Treated Effluent-Disposal Facility, located east of the 200-East Area proper, is theonly active liquid-disposal facility in the area. As mentioned above, this is monitored under a state waste-discharge permit. The permitted discharge does not include radioactive or hazardous constituents. Low-Level Waste Management Areas 1 and 2 are burial grounds regulated under RCIL4, which continue toreceive radioactive solid waste. Three single-shell tank waste management areas, also regulated underRCRA, no longer actively receive waste but currently store mixed waste.

Groundwater in the northwestern part of the 200-East Area forms the 200-BP-5 Operable UniL whilethe southeastern part of the site is in the 200-PO~l Operable Unit. 200-BP-5 remediation is beingperformed under CERCLA regulations, while 200-PO-1 is being remediated under RCRA regulations “(although requirements of both sets of regulations are considered in the cleanup process). Twogroundwater-extraction treatability tests were petiormed in the 200-BP-5 Operable Unit – the first nearthe 216-B-5 injection well and the second just north of the northwestern comer of the 200-East Area in anarea of contamination originating in the BY Cribs. There is no active groundwater remediation in the200-East Area. The interim action recommended in the Hanford Sitewide Groundwater RemediationStrategy (DOE 1995a) is natural attenuation and decay of contaminant plumes. There is, however, nointerim or final ROD for the operable units in the 200-Ead Area.

6.1

. .

Table 6.1. Selected Waste Sites in and Dowmgradient of the 200-East Area


Facility(periodof use) WasteType Monitoring reference)

200-East Area Proper and Adjacent Facilities

Single-shelltank farms Radioactive/chemical Sodiumhydroxide, RCIL4(Caggianoand(WasteManagement slurries sodiumsalts, radionu- Goodwin 1991,AreasA-AX,B-BX-BY, elides,ferrocyanide Caggiano 1996b)c)216-B-7A,-7B, -8 cribs Supematantfrom Sodiumhydroxide, Past-practice(200-BP-5

settlingtanks sodiumsalts,radionu- OperableUni~ DOEelides,ferrocyanide 1995b)

216-B-37trench Concentratedwaste Sodiumhydroxide, Past-practice(200-BP-5fromtankbottoms sodiumsalts, radionu- OperableUnit; DOE

elides,ferrocyanide 1995b)

216-B-5injectionwell Hot cell drainage; Strontium-90, Past-practice(200-BP-5(1945-46) supemata.ntfrom cesium-137,plutonium OperableUnit DOE

settlingtanks 1995b)

BY cribs and trench Uranium-recoverywaste Ferrocyanide, Past-practice(200-BP-5(1954-55) supematant radionuclides OperableUnit; DOE

1995b)

216-B-63trench Steamcondensate Sulfuricacid, sodium RCFW(Sweeney1995a)(1970-92) hydroxide,radionuclides

Plutonium-Uranium Processdistillate Radionuclides 216-A-1O,-36B, -37-1:ExtractionPlant waste- (especiallytritium, RCRA (Lindberg1997);disposalcribs iodme-129),nitrate others: past-practice

(200-PO-1OperableUni~ DOE 1996c)

216-A-29ditch Plutonium-Uranium Sodiumhydroxide, RCRA(KaszaandExtractionPlant chemi- sult%ricacid Goodwin 1991)cal waste

216-B-3pond B Plant steamconden- Tritium,aluminum RCRA(Sweeneysate and chemicalwaste; nitrate,potassium 1995b)Plutonium-Uranium hydroxide,nitric acid,ExtractionPlant chemi- sulfuricacidcal waste

200 AreasTreated Treatedliquideffluent Trihalomethane Active;WACpermittedEffluent-Disposal from200 Areas (l%rnettat al. 1995b)(’)Facility

Low-LevelBurial Radioactivesolid waste Variouschemicaland RCRA(LastandGrounds(Waste radioactivewastes@) Bjomstad 1989)ManagementAreas 1and2)

6.2

Table 6.1. (contd)

Constituentsof Interest Typeof Sitefor Groundwater (monitoringplan


LiquidEffluent 242-A evaporator Ammonium,acetone, RCRA (Sclunid 1990)RetentionFacility processcondensate ahuniqun, l-butanol,

Z-butanone,tritium,strontium-90,ruthenium-106,cesiurn-137°)

600 Area Facilities

GableMountainPond 200-EastArea liquid Strontium-90, Inactive(1957-87) wastes cesium-137,

ruthenium-106

BC Cribsand Trenches Uraniumrecoverywaste Ferrocyanide, Past-practice(1956-58) supematant radionuclides(a) Groundwatermonitoredindependentlyof groundwaterproject.(b) Presentin waste;not found in groundwater.


Groundwater monitoring has been conducted in the 200-East Area since the 1940s. Very few moni-toring wells existed in the early decades but more were installed in the 1970s and monitored for DOErequirements. Approximately 100 new wells were installed when RCRA monitoring began in the late1980s. CERCLA investigations in the 1990s resulted in the installation of several wells but relied pri-marily on data from existing groundwater-monitoring networks and additional wells installed in supportof RCWL

The zhnic Energy Act CII1954and DOE Order 5400.1 require monitoring to identi& and trackcontaminant plumes. Wells monitored for those requirements in 1996 were listed by Bisping (1996).


The most widespread groundwater contaminants of concern originating from tlie 200-East Area aretritium, nitrate, and iodine-129. These contaminants extend east and southeast of the 200-East Area to theColumbia River and northwest to the gap between Gable Mountain and Gable Butte. A significant plumeof technetium-99 at levels above the drinkiig water .spmdardsextends northwest from the 200-East Areafence line toward the gap between Gable Mountain and Gable Butte. This plume area also contains lowlevels of cobalt-60 and cyanide. Arsenic is found at levels above drinking water standards in the easternpart of the 200-East Area. Groundwater is locally contaminated with strontiurn-90 at high levels nearGable Mountain Pond (decommissioned) and at low levels near cribs south of the Plutonium-Uranium

6.3

.—-. .. --, —.> ,. .,. .. ,.. - ..

Extraction Plant. Contamination with plutonium, strontium-90, and ceshun-137 is found in the immedi-ate vicinity of the 216-B-5 injection well. Localized uranium and chromium contamination is also found.

The most extensive contaminant plumes are attributable predominantly to liquid discharges to cribs,with some contribution from ponds, ditches, and other sources. Most pond discharge, however, was moredilute and did not contribute to the highest levels of contamination. The ponds, particularly B Pond, didhave a large influence on contaminant migration because the large amounts of water that went to theponds ai%ectedflow directions. Groundwater mounding at B Pond remains eviden~ though the mound isdeclining since discharge to the pond ceased. Contamination from tank leaks, unplanned releases, andspecific retention trenches appears to have produced groundwater contamination of limited exten~ thoughconsiderable inventory may remain in the vadose zone. No groundwater impact from low-level waste-burial grounds in the 200-East Area has been identified.

Contaminant levels are declining through much of the area. Many short-lived radionuclides detectedin the p- such as ruthenium-106 and cobalt-60, are no longer detected or are detected at much lowerconcentrations. Tritiurn concentrations near the source areas are declining because of termination ofdischarge and the subsequent dispersion and decay within the plume. It appears that residual contami-nation in the vadose zone at many of the sources continues to drain into the groundwater. It is expectedthat the amount of transport to groundwater will decline with time. Some contaminants that have beenretarded by sorption to sediments or that never reached groundwater because of limited dischargevolumes (i.e., specific retention trenches) may break through to the water table, and concentrations thencould increase. In addition, any uncontrolled discharge, such as leaks from water lines, may enhancetransport of contaminants to the groundwater from the vadose zone. Tritiurn concentrations north of the300 kea near the Columbia River continue to increase, reflecting the continued spread of contaminationat the downgradient plume boundaries. The contamination is predicted not to spread southward beyondthe site boundary (Hartrnan and Dresel 1998).

Several waste streams discharged at the site included chemical complexants along with other radio-active and hazardous constituents. Complexation is known to have enhanced the mobility of some con-stituents such as cobalt-60. Cyanide, a complexant for cobalt-60, is monitored in the northern part of thearea and adjacent 600 Area. Cobalt-60 concentrations are declining because of its short half-life, butother constituents such as americium, plutonium, and neptunium may also have increased mobility. Thedata on these constituents and on complexant concentrations are sparse. More work is needed to evaluatethe potential for complexant-enhanced mobility of radionuclides before including them in routinemonitoring.

Vertical migration of contaminants to deeper parts of the aquifer or deeper aquifers may haveoccurred through several mechanisms. Significant groundwater mounds developed at a number offacilities. By far, the greatest mounding occurred at B Pond, where monitoring evidence indicates therewas some movement of contamination down to the upper basalt-confined aquifer. This moundingproduced vertical gradients to transport contamination downward in the sedimental sequence. Poorlysealed wells may have produced conduits, thus enhancing vertical migration.

6.4

Additional vertical migration probably occurred through the discharge of high-density, high-saltwastes. This dense material migrated down through the aquifer. Few monitoring data are available onthe lower parts of the unconfined aquifer because of,~ paucity of monitoring wells: Dense waste couldhave moved down-dip along the top of basalt. The uitconsolidated sediments are thin in the area where”~gh-density wastes were dischiuged, increasing the potential for the waste to reach the basalt. Furtherevaluation of areas where this type of vertical migration may have occurred is needed to determineadditional monitoring needs.

A third mechanism for vertical migration is the intersection of the water table by confiniig layers inthe suprabasalt sediments. The lower Ringold mud intersects the water table downgradientof B Pond anddips approximately to the south. This serves to induce downward flow to the sediments below the confin-ing mud. The lower part of the Ringold sediments thus forms a confined aquifer in this area. Althoughrelatively few wells are completed below-the lower Ringold mu~ this interval is monitored where wellsare available. Several wells near B Pond and the 200 Area Treated Effluent Disposal Facility arecompleted below the lower mud.


The surveillance monitoring, program in the 200-East Area has been designed to meet several objec-tives and to complement the RCRA monitoring networks. me f- objective is to monitor the extent ofplumes emanating from 200-East Area waste sites. Most of these sites have ceased operations and, thus,it is expected that the monitoring network will be suitable to track the rate of dissipation and attenuationof the plumes. To do this, the overall extent of the major plumes will be sampled at 3-year intervals. .A combination of geostatistical assessment and site knowledge was used in developing the plume-monitoring system. The planned network has been assessed with a geostatistical model of the plumes,and the network was determined to provide sufficient data for plume tracking. The model used stochasticsimulation to provide estimates of concentrations throughout the plume area and a measure of the uncer-tainties associated with the”plume model. These uncertainties were used to rank wells according totheirimportance to the statistical model. Wells close to other wilsand wells in areas where,concentrations donot vary greatly received low rankings, while remote wells and wells where concentrations vary consid-erably over short distances were ranked higher. These rankings were then used by groundwater projectscientists to choose wells to delete from the network. The geostatistical model was then used to evaluatethe proposed network to ensure that similar results could be ob@ined with fewer monitoring wells.

Three bands of guard wells will be monitored annually for a longer list of constituents to ensure thatthe nature of contamination found downgradient of the operational and waste-disposal areas has beensufilciently characterized. These bands are shown in Figure 6.1; the wells are listed in Table 6.2. Oneband is located in the gap between Gable Mountain and Gable Butte and serves to detect contaminantmovement to the north. The second band is located to the southeast of the 200-East Area and detectscontamination moving into the southern and eastern parts of the site. The third band is along the Columb-ia River to provide assurance that offsite irhpacts are identified. In addition to the known contaminants,

6.5

1200WestArea

I kjiB Pond200-East 200 Areas

Area fiTEDF● 41-23

● 32-43

26-33

● 32-22A031-31

Centrallandfill

supplySystem

!’400 Area

(Fast Flux Test Facility)

~ Basalt Above Water Table

o Monitoring Well(Prefix 699- Omitted)

l“’”o 2.5 5 7.5 . 10 kilometers

~o 2 3 miles

\

I1

‘1

12

61B-10Burial Grounds

/

00

S19-E13● i

3(Area

%

—

[

7Ri hlanOrthrea

D1

can_hart_99016 S@m?&r 22, 1S99 1292PM

Figure 6.1. Locations of 200-East Area Guard Wells

6.6

Table 6.2. 200-East Area Guard Wells.

~ Southeast River

699-57-59 699-10-54A(”) 699-10-E12

699-59-58 699-24-46 699-20-E120

699-60-60 699-26-33 699-41-IA

699-61-62 699-31-31 699-46-4

699-61-66 699-32-22A“ 699-S3-E12

699-64-62 699-32-43 699-S19-E13@)“

69941-23(’)

699-46-21B(’)ConstituentList Inductivelycoupled-plasmametals;anions;gross.alph~ be~ andganumqstrontium-90;technetium-99;tritiunq totalorganichalideq ti.tal organiccarbon;and alkalinity. “ -

(a) Reducedlist - Sampletr&m, alph~ be@ anionsammallXFulllist - Sampleevery3 years.

(b) Also monitorssouthernportionof the Hadord Site.—

wells in ‘tiese bands will be monitored for inductively coupled-plasma metals, anions, gross alph~ grossbe~ gamrn~ strontium-90, technetium-99, tritium, total organic halides, total organic catbon, andalkalinity. .

The monitoring nehvork is also designed to complement the RCIL4 detection and assessment moni-toring of contaminant sources. The RCRA-monitoring networks only address sources, containing hazard- .ous constituents, that were operational after 1985. RCIL4 and past-practice source monitoring serves toensure that concentrations of groundwater contaminants are declining near the most significant sourcesand to detect the breakthrough of new contamination fiorn the vadose zone. ‘Thesource monitoringplaces a high priority on the potentially largest cont@nant sources and on areas near the 200-East’Areabotind~. This helps ensure that any new contamination will be detected before it moves out of theoperational area.

Locations of monitoring wells for the 200-Er@ Area are illustrated in Figure 6.2 (wells in the600 Area were shown in Figure 4.8). Wells and constituents are listed in Appendix A.

,..

. .6.7

,

AE23-1

?

!, ,

-411, ., ‘: *

L=AE24-8

J.

r:

,.,:.

218+-45 Ill216C;;6B

~------------------------------------------------------

BC Cribs

Lb m“” ‘

WEEaL ---------------

k3-56

Figure 6.2. Groundwater Projec

—.— . .—

------ —------------- \

~iA4542

‘-apj” ‘“’B4242B

A42-41 4240C

~ ~;i.%’_-__,;* jJy’ ~

IE25-24

‘1

J

,.!1 x ~~;g !

L$&&”11

., qtwi~:l 1“ ~“~1

$ $

!225-37 216-A-37-I. . 5-z9~---

1

s’

E25-31 Crib+ E25.lw~

~+ !-...“,$ 1

E2E-T91

-. 1-..

-..

E25-20-..

.--_____ --lEIE-2

E25-44

E2a-22 216-A-37-2 Crib

C41+2

H

4140

\ 216-B-3C

u

Pond

40.39

ASB-Z9

AEIW I216-A-30 Crib

)747A

C34-41B

A3442

~ Basalt Above Water Table

~ Rivers/Ponds

~ Buildings

B Wa*e Sites‘- Fences

— Roads

● Sampled At Least Annually


O Not Sampled for Surveillance

Well prefixes 299- and 699- Omitted

h ‘-’ ‘f ‘o 300 600 900 1200 metars

o 750 1500 2250 3000 feet

6.8can-hat-_99007 Saptembar la, 19993S0 PM

:11Locations: 200-East Area

.

7.0 “400Area

7.1 Background

This section covers activities in the 400 Aret+ the location of the Fast Flux Test Facility; a liquidsodium-cooled reactor. The reactor is on standby, pending a restart decision for the production of medicalisotopes and tritiurn.

Primary local groundwater-monitoring activities include the area around the 4608 B/C Ponds (alsocalled the 400 Area process ponds), which receive wastewater effluent. The water supply for the400 Are% including the drinking water supply, is also monitored by sampling wells completed in theunconfined aquifer system.

7.1.1 Waste Sites

The 400 Area process ponds are located north of the 400 Area perimeter fence and are unlined infil-tration ponds that receive wastewater from the 400 Area facilities (Figure 7.1). The waste stream consistsprimarily of cooling water and intermittent small contributors such as sinks and drains. “


The 400 Area process ponds are monitored in accordance with State Waste Discharge Permit ST4501,issued on Au&st 1, 1996 and modified on February 10, 1998. This integrated groundwater-monitoringplan provides information related to sampling activities and quality assurance/quality control to ensurethat the data needs of various users are satisfied. The primary objective of groundwater monitoring at thisfacility is to ensure that w&tewater entering the ponds meets acceptable standards and does not adverselyaffect local groundwater quality. The monitoring network includes a downgradient well (699-2-7) and anupgradient well (699-8-17), shown in Figure 4.8. In additio~ a second downgradient well has beeninstalled near the ponds (699-2-6A). Constituents analyzed in quarterly groundwater samples, as speci-fied by the discharge permi$ include unfiltered metals (cadmium, chromium,”lea&mercury, and manga-nese), p~ sulfate, and total “organiccarbon. In addition, the wells are co-sampled for &veillancemonitoring for other constituents, as indicated in Appendix A.

Nitrate is the only contaminant that has been consistently identified at concentrations above regula-tory limits in the local groundwater-monitoring network for the 400 Area process ponds, where it hasbeen monitored in well 699-2-7 since 1986. This is’attributed to a sanitary sewage lagoon locatedimmediately west and upgradient of the ponds. Disposal to the lagoon has been discontinue~ and thelagoon has been backtllle~ thus, groundwater contamination from this source is expected to diminishwith time.

Slightly elevated manganese concentrations have been identified in the effluent wastewater dis-

charged to the ponds. A few of the manganese values are in excess of the discharge permit (50 pg/L,

7.i

___ —.._

—— . .

400 Area Process Ponds

Sanitary Sewage Lagoon El699-2-7 ●

● 699-2-6A

.- J-----

=-=-----------------. --.,

~-:-:-=’==--:-------------46:-:o-f --------s499-s7;,1 1 ,,1

2V/;

,1 1,1 ,,1,1 1 ,11-,1 ,, I,1

,~

bI’----At’ Ij;!;yi :81 ---------- ------,

1 ,________1 I ,------- ----

J

I lllcql[i_E,,4

i] 77t,I____________L_____________----1111 11111 ;----;[a.~@&pa ,--: ! 1,1 ~ I~-;11_____________---------------------J

=Riverslf%nds ● SampIed Atkast Annually

n Buildings

1 “’”:

o~ ~nat~~Sites

75 150 225 300metar6

— Roads0 200400 600 8001000 feet

can_hati-99015 6aptamber 21, 1S99 k26 PM

Figure 7.1. Groundwater Project Well Locations: 400 Area

7.2

unfiltered). Groundwater-sampling data suggest that the elevated manganese values are unlikely to havebeen introduced by the water-supply wells and probably represent particulate matter derived from corro-sion in tanks or disposal lines.

The primary groundwater-monitoring compliance issue related to the 400 Area water supply is relatedto tritium. Wells 499-SO-7 and 499-SO-8, the original water-supply wells, were completed near the top ofthe unconfined aquifer and have been monitored since 1972. When tritium contamination was detected inthe water supply, aq additional well (499-S1-8J) was’ckilled in the lower uncotilned aquifer in 1985.Although well 499-S1-8J is currently the primary water-supply well, wells 499-SO-7 and 499-SO-8 arestill used for backup supply and emergency uses.

Tritium is consistently detected at levels above the interim 20,000-pCi/L drinkhg water standard inthe backup supply wells, but well below it in the primary supply well. Because the backup wells areseldom used, monthly water-supply sampling results indicate that the concentration in the drinking waterdoes not exceed a dosage level of 4 mrem/yr if ingested at the average annual rate of consumption. More-over, the dose-conversion factor used in setting the interim drinking water standard for tritium is moreconservative than that used in more current methodology (Hartman and Dresel 1998).


Water-level contours indicate that groundwater generally flows from west to east across the 400 Area.In addition, tritium and nitrate plumes, which originate in the 200-East Are% indicate that groundwaterflows toward the east to southeast. The @tium plume is detected in the 400 Area water-supply wells, asdiscussed above. Trititim levels are lower in the vicinity of the 400 Area process ponds as a result ofdilution effects. However, nitrate levels are currently elevated in the vicinity of the process ponds, appar-ently from the former disposal of sanitary sewage to a nearby lagoon, as indicated above.


Monitoring well locations in the 400 Areas are presented in Figure 7.1. Upgradient well 699-8-17was shown in Figure 4.8. Constituents monitored and sampling frequencies are presented in Appendix A.

7.3

~— ... .

8.0 300 and Richland North Areas.>

The 300 and Richland North Areas include the southern portion of the Htiord Site and adjacent areato the south between the Yakima and Columbia Rivers. The 300 Area is located aIong the ColumbiaRiver in the southeastern portion of the Hanford Site. The RichlandNorth Are% though not formallydefined, includes the former 1100 Area and the 3000 Are% part of the 600 Area adjacent to the 300 Are%and pzuts of nearby Richkmd. Figure 8.1 shows the locations of these two areas.

,’

“8.1 Background

The 300 Area has been used for research-and-development and nuclear fiel-fabrication processactivities associated with uranium fiel elementi for nuclear reactors. The Richland North Area consistsof a variety of both onsite and offsite land uses, including municipal, industrkl, and.agricukural. Munic-ipal and industrial facilities and agricultural activities in the Richland North Area influence groundwater. “Offsite facilities of particular interest with respect to groundwater include the City of Richkmd’s North ‘Well Field and recharge basins, Siemens Power Corporation, Richkmd Landfill, Lamb-Weston RichlandPlanL Interstate Nuclear Services, and Allied Technology Group. Offsite agricultural inigation influ-ences groundwater over a wide area in the Richkmd North Area.

8.1.1 Waste Sites, Discharges, and Groundwater OperabIe Units

In the 300 Are%inactive waite sites known to have received liquid waste containhig uranium andother known or suspected contaminants include the 316-5 process trenches and the 316-1 and 316-2 pro~-ess ponds. These are ~e primrky sites affecting groundwater contamination. Other sites that receivedwastes include sanitary septic tanks, trenches, and tile fields; ash pits; filter backwash ponds; and.a ‘number of burial grounds. The 300 Area also contained underground tanks for storing gasoline and dieselfuels.

The 316-5 process trenches require grmndwater monitoring to meet RCRA requirements because thetrenches are regulated as dangerous waste surface impoundments. The process trenches were modified aspart of an expedited response action in 1991, and discharges to the trenches ceased in 1994. The 316-1and 316-2 process ponds, m.onitore.dto meet CERCLA requirements, received uranium-contaminatedwastewater until 1975 when the process trenches began receiving the wastewater. The storage tanks weremonitored under the state’s underground storage tank program in the early 1990s, but monitoring is no ‘longer required,by the state. Groundwater in the 300 Area is part of the 300-FF-5 Operable Unit.

Waste sites in the Richkmd North Area include the inactive Horn Rapids Landfill in the 600 Area anda number of disposal pits and underground storage tanks in the former 1100 Area. Groundwater asso-ciated with these waste sites is monitored to meet CERCLA requirements. The 11OO-EM-1OperableUnit ROD (1993) required groundwater monitoring at a point of compliance downgradient from the

8.1

. . “

— _.. . ....... . .-.—.. . —— .—. —— ——— .-—...—..——. — —.

m-UI

%.->a)s

.0mmm0VY

$E

00-N

8-m

00-=

8-m

o-

8.2

inactive Horn Rapids Landfill. There are no waste sites requiring RC&4 groundwater monitoring in theRichland North Area. The waste sites in the 300 and Richland North Areas requiring groundwatermonitoring are listed in Table 8.1 along with their waste types, period of use, associated constituents ingroundwater, and regulatory program.

8.1.2 Offsite Sources

Probable sources of groundwater contamination that originated from the Richkmd North Area off theHanford Site include Siemens Power Corporation, agricultural irrigation, and Lamb-Weston RichlandPlant. Siemens Power Corporation is located adjacent to the Hanford Site boundary southwest of theHorn Rapids Landfill, and a surface impoundment system at the site contributed to solvent and nitratecontamination in groundwater. Fertilizers applied to the agricultural fields upgradient (south) of SiemensPower Corporation and potato-processing waste from the Lamb-Weston Richland Plant are probable ‘sources of nitrate. The Richkmd Landfill, Interstate Nuclear Services, and Allied Technology Group arenot known to contribute to groundwater contamination on the Hanford Site.

Table 8.1. Selected Waste Sites in the 300 and Richkmd North Areas



300 Area

316-5processtrenches Varietyof chemicalaud Uranium,trichloro- RCRA (Lindberg(1975-94) uraniumwastes ethylene,cis-l~- et al. 1995)

dichloroethylene,metals,nitrate

316-1 (SOUth)&d316-2 ~ Varietyof chemicaland UraniW, trichloro- Past-practice(north)processponds uraniumwastes ethylene,cis-l~- (300-FF-1and -5(1940s-75) dichloroethylene OperableUnits,

ROD 1996b,DOE1996d)

Richland North Area

HornRapidsLandfill Officeand construction Trichloroethylene,break- Past-practice(1950s-70) wastes,asbestos,sewage downproductsof (11OO-EM-1Opera-

sludge,fly ash trichloroethylene(vinyl ble Uni$ ROD 1993,chloride,1,l-dichloro- . DOE 1995c)ethylene),chromium,technetium-99,nitrate . .

SiemensPower hunoni~ fluoride,nitrate, Trichloroethylene,nitrate ActiveRCRA;Corporationprocess radionuclides(primarily Siemens(1996)(’)lagoons(offsite) uranium)(1971-present)

Lamb-Weston(offsite) Potato-processingwastes Nitrate Active

Agriculture(offsite) Fertil@rs Nitrate Active

(a) Groundwatermonitoredindependentlyof groundwaterproject.

8.3

—

The Cily of Richland’s North Well Field and recharge basins, located in the south-central part of theRichland North Are% are the primary influence on groundwater-elevation changes in the area. The wellfield serves as a secondary water supply for the City of Richland, and the basins recharge the unconfinedaquifer with Columbia River water. The net recharge causes a groundwater mound to form in this areaand decreases nitrate levels in groundwater to less than ambient. “

Irrigation applied to agricultural fields contributes to groundwater recharge during the growingseason. As a result this contributes to groundwater flow to the northe@ east and southeast.


Extensive groundwater monitoring has been conducted in the 300 Area as fm back as 1975, when the316-5 process trenches replaced the 316-1 and 316-2 process ponds as the main facility for disposal ofuranium-contaminated wastewater. The earliest major study on groundwater contamination in the300 Area was in 1977 (Lindberg and Bond 1979), A site-specific program of groundwater monitoring ofthe 300 Area has been conducted since 1977. In 1985, interim-status groundwater monitoring of theprocess trenches was initiat~ under RCRA, which required additional wells to be installed (Schalla et al.1988). The RCIU4 program went into fmal-statis groundwater monitoring in 1996 (Lindberg et al. 1995).In response to the Tri-Party Agreement (Ecology et al. 1989), CERCLA activities were initiated in theearly 1990s and included additional groundwater monitoring. An expedited response action was implem-ented in 1991 to remove sources of contamination and resulted in lower contaminant concentrations ingroundwater downgradient from the process trenches. An interim remedial action required continuedgroundwater monitoring of contaminants in the 300 Area (ROD 1996b).

Groundwater well installation and monitoring began in the 1100 Area in 1988 after a limitedgroundwater-sarnpling effort in 1986 revealed low levels of contaminants (DOE 1990). A study wasconducted in 1989-1992 and included well installation and groundwater monitoring to determine thenature and extent of groundwater contamination in the 1100 Area (DOE 1992). In 1993, continued andexpanded groundwater monitoring in the 1100 Area were required (ROD 1993). In response to the ROD,additional well installation and monitoring were implemented at the inactive Horn Rapids Landfill (DOE1995c). The ROD required the monitoring of trichloroethylene in groundwater downgradient of theinactive Horn Rapids Landfill. The ROD also required monitoring of trichloroethylene breakdownproducts and nitrate. The monitoring of nitrate was needed because its concentrations were above themaximum contaminant levels for nitrate. ‘

The surface impoundment system at Siemens Power Corporation consists of six lagoons, which areregulated under the Revised Code of Washington, Title 70, Chapter 105 (Siemens Power Corporation1997). Siemens Power Corporation has monitored groundwater at their facility since 1994 to meet therequirements of RCRA interim-status facilities.

.

8.4


The most widespread contaminants of concern in the 300 and Richland North Areas are tritium andnitrate. Groundwater is locally contaminated with uranium and trichloroethylene. The movement anddistribution of these contaminants in groundwater are heavily influenced by Columbia River stage, a .recharge mound at the Richland North Well Field, and agricultural irrigation practices.

The &itiurn plume is derived from past wastewater-disposal activities in the 200-East Area andrepresents the southern margin of the sitewide plume that is encroaching into the 300 Area. Tritiummigrates across the northeastern portion of the 300 Area from the north and enters the Columbia River.Tritiurn levels have generally been steady with time in and north of the 300 Area in recent years. Thesouthward migration of titium is limited to the 300 Area because of the following factors:

●

●

●

Groundwater is recharged by the Yakima River, flows generally from west to easGand discharges tothe Columbia River.

Recharge from agricultural irrigation between the Richkmd Landfill and the for&er 1100 Areacontributes to eastward groundwater flow. ‘

Net recharge at the City of Richkmd’s North Well Field has resulted in a groundwater mound thatdirects groundwater flow outward, including a component to the north.

In the 300 Are% wastewater effluen~ containing uranium and chlorinated solvent compounds, perco-lated through the soils from leaking process trenches and ponds for approximately 50 years. Theseconstituents were driven down through the soils in the vadose zone beneath the waste sites by subsequenteffluent discharges and natural recharge. As the constituents were carried downward, some were sorbedto sediments and trapped in soil moisture and some reached groundwater. Uranium in @oundwatermigrates toward and enters the Columbia River.

Uranium concentrations in groundwater fluctuate indirectly in response to river-stage changes. ASthe river stage rises, groundwater near the river rises into a portion of the vadose zone. As a resulturanium is desorbed from the sediments and mobilized, increasing the uranium concentrations in ground-water. As the groundwater levels drop, uranium concentrations decrease because the thickness of thesaturated sediments from which uranium desorbs decreases.

Chlorinated solvent compounds are generally found in the deeper portion of the uncmfiied aquiferbeneath the process trenches and ponds. They have been found in the upper portion of the unconfhedaquifer for brief periods (e.g., tetrachloroethylene in 1998). Two conceptual model hypotheses have beensuggested for the deeper occurrences. One hypothesis is that dissolved chlorinated compounds in ground-water were transported by a downward vertical hydraulic gradient created when discharged effluent to &eponds and trenches recharged the aquifer, causing groundwater levels to rise. The second hypothesis isthat an immiscible phase that is denser than water was driven to the bottom of the unconfined aquifer bydensity and rested on top of the silty clay unit. A portion of the dense phase would then dissolve into theaqueous phase.

8.5

A nitrate plume is migrating toward the 300 Area from the southwest toward the Columbia River.This area also contains a trichloroethylene plume. Nitrate contamination is the result of offsite industrialand agricultural uses. Wastewater effluent containing ammonia was discharged to lagoons at SiemensPower Corporation. Effluent has apparently leaked to the underlying soils from the lagoons, and some ofthe ammonia reached groundwater. Under aerobic conditions, the ammonia degrades relatively quickly tonitrate, which is highly mobile in groundwater. In agricultural areas to the southwe~ fertilizers con-taining nitrate are applied during the growing season. As irrigation is applied, the dissolved nitrate iscarried downward through the soils and is taken up by crops in the root zone. However, some of thenitrate is carried downward below the root zone by irrigation recharge and reaches groundwater.

Trichlorothylene contamination is suspected to be the result of offsite industrial solvent use atSiemens Power Corporation. Solvents were used during installation, cleaning, and repairing of lagoonliners over a 10-year period between 1978 and 1988. Excess solvents came into contact with the soils byspillage and were driven downward into the vadose zone and reached groundwater, which is very shallowin this area. On reaching groundwater, trichloroethylene is very mobile. One hypothesis has beensuggested that natural attenuation may have reduced the mass of the trichloroethylene in groundwater.Natural attenuation in groundwater can occur by”volatilization through passive pumping and biodegra-dation. Measurable trichloroethylene concentrations were observed in soil gas in the vicinity of theinactive Horn Rapids Landfill (Evans 1989). In FY 1999, only two wells showed trichloroethyleneconcentrations above the MCL. The wells are located immediately downgradient of the Horn RapidsLandfill.

8.3 Groundwater-Monitoring Network

Wells, constituents, and frequencies are listed in Appendix A. Well locations were shown in Fig-ure 8.1. Geostatistical assessment and current knowledge of the site were used in developing the moni-toring network. Geostatistical assessment was used only in developing the monitoring network for theprimary constituents of concern (see Chapter 6.0).

The primary constituents of concern in the 300 and Richland North Areas are tritium and nitrate.Constituents of concern on a localized scale in the 300 lwea include uranium, strontiurn-90, cis-l,2-dichloroethylene, and trichloroethylene. Trichloroethylene is also a local contaminant in the RichlandNorth Area. Special considerations in these areas include tracking the movement of the leading edges ofthe plumes that are near the City of Richland, monitoring effects of river-stage changes, and monitoringwells downgradient from potential offsite contaminant sources.

One objective is to monitor the extent of groundwater contamination in the 300 and Richland NorthAreas to ensure that contaminants have not migrated offsite and have not impacted wells in the City ofRichkmd. This requires intensive monitoring near the leading edges of the plumes, in areas along the siteboundary, and in areas where concentrations are low. Monitoring in areas where levels are low providesa bm”elinefrom which to determine concentration changes and, thus, early detection of offsite migration.An enrichment technique is used to measure tritium at lower detection limits (-10 pCiiL)’than provided ~by the standard method.

8.6

In FY 1999, tritium became elevated above previous trends in some wells in the Richland North Area.The groundwater project conducted special sampling to investigate the change, and the FY 2000 schedule(Appendix A) was modified accordingly. Additional changes maybe required as the investigationcontinues.

Another objective of monitoring the Richland North Area is to define plumes that have migrated ontothe site from offsite sources. This monitoring is needed to show impacts to onsite groundwater and toshow that groundwater contamination attributed to these plumes is not derived from onsite waste sites.

8.7

9.0 600 Area

9.1 Background

Non-Operational Monitoring Activities

The 600 Area includes those parts of the Hanford Site not specifically included within the boundariesof the operational areas, though many of the 600 Area wells serve to monitor large contaminant plumeswith their sources in the operational areas. The 600 Area also includes those areas east and north of theColumbia River, though no Hdord Site disposal facilities are located in that area.

This section largely addresses those parts of the 600 Area of the Hanford Site not included in themonitoring activities associated with the operational areas discussed in the other sections. These wellsprovide a basis for defining background groundwater chemistry. In addition, monitoring of chemistry andhydraulic head data is conducted within conilned aquifers. Specifically, the region addressed in tlissection is that portion of the 600 Area west of the 200-We% east and north of the Columbia River, andseveral facilities not covered in other sections of this plan.

9.1.1 Waste Sites

The Central Landfill, 618-10 burial ground, and 316-4 crib &e facilities located in the 600 Area thatare not included in other sections of this plan and are discussed below. The Gable Mountain Pond andBC Cribs were included in Chapter 6.0 because they were associated with 200-East Area operations.

Agricultural activities in the area west of the Hanford Site contribute nitrate to the western portionof the 600 Area. Similar impacts of agriculture are recognized in the 600 Area north and east of theColumbia River.

9.1.1.1 Central Landfill

The Central Landfill is located approximately 5.5 km southeast of the 200-East Area and consists ofthe Solid Waste Landfill and the Nonradioactive Dangerous Waste Landfill, which are currently consid-ered separately under differing regulations (Table 9.1).

9.1.1.2 618-10 Burial Ground and 316-4 Crib

The burial ground and adjacent crib are located southeast of the 400 Area. The burial ground oper-ated from 1954 to 1963 and received a variety of low-to high-activity radioactive w&es, mostlycomposed of fission products with some plutonium-contaminated material (DOE 1996e). These wasteswere disposed in caissons and trenches and may have included liquid and solid waste forms.

The crib began receiving uranium-bearing waste solutions in 1948 and continued to receive nitrate,hexone, and organic wastes periodically through at least 1962. This site was investigated as part of aCERCLA limited field investigation for the 300-FF-2 Operable Unit (DOE 1996e).

9.1

-. ---—m-.-.— , . . ..- . . . “.. .,.. . . . . . . . . ,..

-. --- --

Table 9.1. Selected Waste Sites in the 600 Area

Facility(periodof use) WasteType

618-10burialgroundimd Low- to high-activily316-4 crib (1948-62) radioactivewaste,SolidWasteLandfill Solidwaste, sewage,

Constituentsof Interest I Type of Sitefor Groundwater (monitoringplan

Monitoring referen;ej

Nitrate,hexone,organic Past-practice(300-FF-2wastes ope~ble Unit)

Organics WACpermitted(Hodges1993)

Organics RCRA (Undberg andHamnan (1999)


Monitoring of groundwater levels and contaminant concentrations in the 600 Area were initiated inthe 1940s. Water-table maps of the unconfined aquifer have been prepared at various times since 1944.The primary monitoring objective is to obtain data needed to track major groundwater-contaminantplumes across the site as required by the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and its implementing orders. Addi-tional wells were installed around the Central Landfill in 1986-1987 for RCRA and landfill monitoring.

9.2 Conceptual ModeI

Groundwater levels indicate that flow directions in the 600 Area west of the 200-West Area aregenerally from west to east. This reflects natural recharge and irrigation input into the upper Cold Creekand Dry Creek Valleys (Hartman and Dresel 1998, Section 3.6). Significant contamination is not presentin this are% though nitrate is present in certain wells. It is inferred that irrigation is the primary source ofnitrate in this area.

Movement of tritium and nitrate plumes and measurement of water levels provide a basis for inferringgroundwater-flow directions in the 600 Area across the central and eastern portions of the Hanford Site.The tritium and nitrate plumes, which originate in the 200-East Area and pass beneath the Central Land-fill, indicate that the principal direction of groundwater flow is toward the southeast and east.

The rate of groundwater flow beneath the landfill is estimated to be on the order of 1.2 to 1.8 m/d,based on site-specific hydrologic testing and the observed hydraulic gradients. However, groundwater-velocity estimates based on tritiurn and nitrate concentrations and tracer test results indicate groundwater-transport rates of 6 to >30 ndd. The lack of a detectable head difference in several well pairs located atthe Central Landfill indicates that the vertical gradient within the upper portion of the aquifer isnegligible.

9.2

The Central Landfill appears to have had little impact on Hanford Site groundwater, owing to mini-mal disposal of liquids at this facility. Associated groundwater monitoring consists primarily of me&-urement of RCRA indicator parameters (pm specific conductance, total organic carbon, and total organichalides), though minor (below maximum contaminant level) contamination with chlorinated hydrocar-bons exists. Localized contamination of groundwater with uranium and hydrocarbons exists in thevicinity of the 618-10 burial ground,and 316-4 crib.

Monitoring of the chemistry and hydraulic head in the upper basalt-confined aquifer is also conductedat the Hanford Site. The primary objective of t.hk activity is to determine if contamination is movingdownward @omthe unconfhed aquifer. In general, the hydraulic gradient appears to be directed down-’ward over most of the central portion of the Hanford Site, though the gradient is directed upward in theeastern portion of the site.

Water-level elevations north and east of the Columbia River are much greater than on the HanfordSite. The water-table elevation to the east of the Columbia River is currently 50 to 150 m higher than onthe Hanford Site. Groundwater flow in the unconfined aquifer system north and east of the ColumbiaRiver follows the bedrock structure and is toward the Columbia River. The water-table conilgumtion inthese areas largely reflects recharge from irrigation.

Steep hydraulic gradients are observed along the eastern bank of the Columbia River east of GableMountain in the area known as White Bluffs and also in the area east of the river and north of the300 Area. These steep gradients represent a series of springs and seepage faces along the bluffs, wheregroundwater flow’intersects the ground surface. Groundwater flow in these areas is controlled primarilyby low-permeability zones (i.e., caliche) near the top of the bluffs and other low-permeability horizons inthe upper Ringold Formation (Hartman and Dresel 1998, Section 3.9).


Except for the monitoring networks at the Central LandfillYthe 618-10 burial groun~ and the “316-4 crib, the 600 Area monitoring activities discussed are not directly related to specific Hanford Sitefacilities. Monitoring wells are maintained west of the 200-West Area and are sampled primarily fornitrate, which is probably related primarily to offsite agricultural activities.

There are six DOE wells located in’the 600 Area north&d east of the Columbia River, three of whichhave been used for contaminant-monitoring activities. Currently, monitoring of contaminant concentra-tions in this area is limited to well 699-42-E9B (shown in Figure 4.8).

Monitoring well locations for the Central Landfill are shown in Figure 9.1 (wells in the rest of the600 Area were presented in Figure 4.8). Constituents monitored and sampling frequencies are presentedin Appendix A.

9.3

. .. ——.. . . .

.—.—.-

26-35A

2635C

25.wD

26-23

2a.34B

2e-34A

I \

25-33A

/

3141?

1 3141

/

25-34A

● Sampled At Least Annually

A Sampled Every 3 Yeara

“1’’’’’”

o 150 300 450 600mntmsO Not Sampled for Surveillance

Well prefix 699- Omitted o 500 1000 1500 feet

can.hafi-99017 Ssrtmnbr 20,1999 2.04PM

Figure 9.1. Groundwater Project Well Locations: Central Landfill Vicinity

10.0 Sampling and Analysis

10.1 Sampling

Employees and subcontractors of Pacific Northwest National Laboratory sample wells for the ground-water project. Samplers follow their company’s documented procedures for sampling, recordkeeping,field measurements, and sample shipment consistent with Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Wutes:Physical/Chemical Methods, 3rdEdition (EPA 1986a). Water levels are measured, wells are purged ofstagnant water, and samples are collected in prepared containers. Nearly all of the wells are equippedwith pumps that are dedicated to a specific well. Most samples for metals are filtered in the field, andmost other samples are unfiltered. Sample integrity is ensured through the use of chain-of-custodyprocedures.

10.2 Analytical Methods

Analytical methods used by the laboratories are described by Hartman (1999, Appendix C). Methodsfor chemical analysis of groundwater samples cor&ormto Test Methoa%forEvaluating Solid Wmtes:PhysicaUChemical Methods, 3rd Edition (EPA 1986a); Methoa%for Chemical Analysis of Water andW&tes (EPA 1982), or other EPA methods; Annual Book ofASTMStandards (American Society forTesting and Materials 1986); and Standard Methodsfor the IZraminationof Water and Watewater,17th Edition (American Public Health Association 1989). The methods used for analysis of radiochem-ical constituents were developed by the analyzing laboratory and are recognized as acceptable within thetechnical radiochemical industry.

10.3 Quality Assurance and Quality Control

The quality assurance and quality control practices used by the groundwater project ensure the relia-bility and validity of field and laboratory measurements conducted to support these programs. Theprimary components used to assess data quality are accuracy, precision, and detection. Representative-ness, completeness, and comparability may also be used. These parameters are evaluated through labora-tory quality control checks (e.g., matrix spikes, laboratory blanks), replicate sampling and analysis,analysis of blind samples and blanks, and interlaboratory comparisons. Acceptance criteria have beenestablished for each of these parameters. When a parameter is outside the criteri% corrective actions aretaken to prevent a fiture occurrence. Quality control practices for the groundwater project are describedin Hartman (1999, Appendix D).

Data are reviewed quarterly according to a Pacific Noxthwest National Laboratory procedure toensure they are complete and representative. The review includes verification of the data in the HanfordEnvironmental Information System (HEIS) database, evaluation of data from field quality control samples(e.g., blanks, duplicates) and laboratory quality control samples, and a technical review by a scientist

10.1

familiar with the hydrogeology of a particular location of the site. If the data review identifies suspectda~ they are investigated to establish whether they reflect true conditions or an error, according toPacific Northwest National Laboratory’s “request for data review” procedure. Groundwater data asso-ciated with out-of-range quality control data or identified as suspect during the technical review areflagged in the database.

“

10.2

11.0 Water-Level Monitoring

Water levels in the groundwater system are monitored on the Hanford Site primarily to help deter-mine the direction and rate of groundwater flow. This Mormation is used to interpret observed contami-nant plume movements and to predict fhture plume movements. Other uses of water-level informationinclude the identification of recharge and discharge areas, assessing the interaction between groundwaterand surfacewater bodies, assessing the interaction betieen aquifers or hy&”ogeologicunits, calibration ofgroundwater-flow models, and assessing the impact of liquid effluent-disposal practices on groundwaterflow.

McDonald et al. (1999) provides a list of wells used for water-level measurements, criteria for theirselection, hydrogeologic units monitored, and describes procedures used to collect the data.

11.1

12.0 Data Evaluation

12.1 Data Management

Results of groundwater sampltig and analysis are made accessible in the HEIS database. Analyticalresults from all Hanford Site groundwater-monitoring activities are stored in this common database, withthe exception of some data collected for limited special projects that may not be directly comparable tostandard data. The data are made available to federal and state regulators for retrieval.

The HEIS programmers and”HEIS data owners, ~cluding the groundwater projec~ ensure databaseintegrity and data consistency through membership in the onsite HEIS configuration control board andother ad hoc groups. The majority of data are loaded into the database from electronic files provided bythe analytical laboratories. This minimizes data-entry errors and reduces the cost of data management.

As discussed in Section 10.3, a data validation and verification process results in flags and qualifiersbased on quality control data and a technical review by a scientist. These flags are stored with the data inHEIS.

12.2 Compliance Issues and Dab Evaluation .

Data collected for the groundwater project are used to comply with a varieiy of requirements, includ-ing the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 (and associated DOE Orders), RCRA, CERCLA, and WAC permits. ,To comply with these requirements, data are compared with standards and subjected to statistical evalu-ations, as appropriate. The requirements and evaluation methods are listed in Table 12.1.

12.3 Reporting

Results of Hanford Site groundwater activities are reported annually (e.g., Hartman and Dresel 1998).That report presents contaminfit-distribution maps, water-level maps, and concentration trend plots ofcontaminants and wells of interest and meets the annual-reporting requirements of RCR4 and DOEOrders. CERCLA activities, including groundwater remediation and monitoring, are summarized.

Quarterly letter reports of RCRA data availability are submitted to the State of Washington Depart-ment of Ecology. Data from RCRA networks and the entire groundwatei project are available on theHEIS database to the regulators.

12.1

—...-—.- . . ----

Table 12.1. Compliance Issues and Methods of Evaluation

[

Requirement Evaluation

DOEOrder5400.1 Comparegroundwaterconcentrationsto drinkingwater standards,derivedconcentrationguides,andhistoricaltrends. Producemaps of contaminantdistribution.

RCRA interim-statusunits Indicatorevaluation- Compareaveragedowngradientconcentrationsofindicatorparametersto backgroundcriticalmeanvalues.

Assessment- Evaluaterate and extentof contamination(methodsdescribedin site-specificmonitoringplans).

RCRAfinal-statusunits Detection- Comparedowngradientconcentrationsof contaminantsofinterestto baselineconcentrations.

Compliance- Comparedowngradientconcentrationsto backgroun~maximumconcentrationlimits,or alternateconcentrationlimits (methodsdescribedin site-specificmonitoringplans and site permit).

Correctiveaction- Trackprogressof cleanupand comparedowngradientconcentrationsof constituentsto backgroun~ maximumconcentrationlimits,or alternateconcentrationlimits (methodsdescribedin site-specificmonitoringplans and site permit).

WAC-permittedunits Compareto conditionsof permit.(216permits)

CERCLAoperableunits Compareconcentrationsto levelsdefinedin RODS,interimRODS,orother agreements.

Performanceassessment Compareconcentrationsto levelsdefinedin RODS,interimRODS,ormonitoring otheragreements.

Certain conditions require reporting to DOE as unusual occurrences or off-normal events (DOEOrder 232. 1-1A). Those applicable to groundwater-monitoring results include the following:

. general environmental monitoring where data are greater than historical dati or than expected ofnormal operations (off-normal occurrence)

● discovery of groundwater contamination resulting from DOE operations not part of an existing plumepreviously identified in either an annual report or in any CERCLA/RCRA activity or report (unusualoccurrence).

Reporting requirements for WAC-permitted facilities are described in their permits.

.

.

12.2

13.0 References

Airh@ S. P., J. V. Borghese, and S. Dudziak. 1990. Interim-Status Ground Water Monitoring Planforthe 216-S-10 Pond and Ditch. WHC-SD-EN-AP-O18. Prepared by Pacific Northwest Laboratory forWestinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

American PublicHealth Association. 1989. StandardMethoak for the lamination of Water andWmtewater, 17th Zliition. New York.

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM). 1986. Annual Book ofASTMStandards.Philadelphi~ Pennsylvania.

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, Ch. 1073,68 Stat. 919;42 USC 2011 et seq.

Barne~ D. B., J. S. Schmid, S. S. Lowe, W. L. Allen, N. A. Ballantine, C. H. Dohrer, M. J. Hartrnan,F. N. Hodges, D. G. Horton, V. G. Johnson, K. J. Luec~ D. J. Or@ A. J. Knepp, B. H. Ford, S. P. Hope,D. K. Tyler, RD. Hildebrand, D. E. Olson, R E. Peterson, G. L. Kas~ D. A. Myers, S. P. Luttrell,P. D. Thorne, and K. R Moser. 1995a. HmfordSite Ground-Water Protection Miiagement Plan.DOERL-89-12, Rev. 2. U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations OffIce, Richhtnd, Washington.

Barne~ D. B., J. D. Davis, L. B. Collard, P. B. Freeman, and C. J. Chou. 1995b. GroumhvaterScreening EvaluationLMonitoringPlan – 200Area Treated Efluent Disposal Facili~ (project W-049@.,WHC-SD-EN-WP-012, Rev. 1. Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

Bisping, L. E. 1996. Environmental Surveillance Mater Sampling Schedule., PNNL-1095O. PacificNorthwest National Laboratory, Richkmd, Washington.

Borghese, J. V., M. J. Hartrnan, S. P. Luttrell, C. J. Perkins, J. P. Boric, and S. C. Tidal. 1996. 100-NPilot Project: Proposed Consolidated Groundwater Monitoring Program. HLO0725. Bechtel Hanford,Inc., Richkmd, Washington. .’

Caggiano, J. A. 1996a. Assessment GroundWaterMonitoring Plan for Single-Shell T~k Waste Manage- .ment Area S-5X WHC-SD-EN-AP-191. Westinghouse HanfiordCompany, Richland, Washington.

Caggiano, J. A.. 1996b. Assessment Groundwater Monitoring Planfor Single-Shell Tank Wrote Manage-ment Area B-BX-BY. WHC-SD-EN-AP-O02. Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

Caggiano, J. A., and C. J. Chou. 1993. Interim-Status Groundwater QuaZityAssessment Planfor theSingle-Shell Tmk Waste Mmagement Areas Tand IX-TX WHC-SD-EN-AP-132. WestinghouseHanford Company, Richland, Washington.

Caggiano, J. A., and S. M. Goodwin. 1991. Interim-Status Groundwater Monitoring Planfor the Single-Shell Treks. WHC-SD-EN-AP-012, Rev. 1. Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washiig$on.

13.1

.. .. .—— — .—

Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liabilip Act of 1980, as amended, PublicLaw 96-510,94 Stat. 2767,42 USC 9601 et seq.

Davis, J. D., D. B. Barne~ C. J. Chou, and P. B. Freeman. 1996. Ground-Water Screening EvaluatiotiMonitoring Plan – 200Area Efluent Treatment Facility (Project C-0181Jl WHC-SD-CO18H-PLN-004,Rev. 1. Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

DOE - See U.S. Department of Energy.

EPA - See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Evans, J. C. 1989. 1100-EM-1 Soil G& Survey Final Report. WHC-MR-0072. Westinghouse HanfordCompany, Richkmd, Washington.

Ford, B. H. 1996. Description of Workfor Routine Groundwater Sampling at the EnvironmentalRestoration Disposal Facility. BHI-00873. Bechtel Hanford, Inc., Richkmd, Washington.

Freeman-Pollard, J. R. 1996. 200-ZP-I IRMPhase IIandIIIRemedial Design Report. DOE/RL-96-07,Rev. 1. U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington.

Harfrnan, M. J. 1991. Groundwater Monitoring Planfor the 1OO-DPonak. WHC-SD-EN-AP-048.Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

Hartrnan, M. J. 1996. Groundwater Monitoring Planfor the 1301-N, 1325-N, and 1324-N~A Sites.WHC-SD-EN-AP-038, Rev. 2. Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

Harbnam, M. J. 1997. Groundwater Monitoring Planfor the 183-HSolar Evaporation Bmins.PNNL-1 1573. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richkmd, Washington.

Hartman, M. J., and Dresel P. E. (eds.). 1998. HmfordSite Groundwater Monitoring for Fiscal Year1997. PNNL-1 1793. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richkmd, Washington.

Hartrnan, M. J. (cd). 1999. HmfordSite Groundwater Monitoring for Fiscal Year 1998. PNNL-12086,Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington.

Hodges, F. N. 1993. Groundwater Monitoring Planfor the Solid WizsteLandJll, Hmfor~ Wwhington.WHC-SD-EN-AP-043. Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richkmd, Washington.

Jensen, E. J., M. A. Chamness, S. M. Goodwin, S. H. Hall, and D. R. Newcomer. 1990. Interim-StatusGround-Water Monitoring Plan for the 216-U-12 Crib. WHC-SD-EN-AP-019. Prepared by PacificNorthwest Laboratory for Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richkmd, Washington.

13.2

Johnson, V. G., C. J. Chow and J. W. Lmdberg. 1995. Groundwater Monitoring andAssessment Planfor the 100-KArea Fuel Storage Basins. WHC-SD-EN-AP-174. Westinghouse Hanford Company,Richkmd, Washington.

Kasu+ G. L., and S. M. Goodwin. 1991. Groundwater Monitoring Planfor the 216-A-29 Ditch.WHC-SD-EN-AP-045, Rev. O-A. Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richhmd, Washington.

LasL G. V., and B. N. Bjomstad. 1989. Revised Ground-Water Monitoring Planfor the 200 Areas Low-Level Burial Grounak. WHC-SD-EN-AP-015. Prepared by Pacific Northwest Laboratory forWestinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

Lindberg, J. W. 1997. Combination RCRA Groundwater Monitoring P1anfor the 216-A-IO, 216-A-36B,and 216-A-37-I PU.Cribs. PNNL-1 1523. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland,Washington.

Lindberg, J. W., and F. W. Bond. 1979. Geohydrologv and Ground-Water Quality Beneath the300 Area, Hanford Site, Wahington. PNL-2949. Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.

Lindberg, J. W., and M. J. Hartman. 1999. Groundwater Monitoring Planfor the Nonradioactive Dan-gerous Wrote Landfill. PNNL-12227. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, Richland, Washington.

Lindberg, J. W., C. J. Chou, and V. G. Johnson. 1995. Groundwater MonitoringPhm for the 300AreaProcess Trenches. WHC-SD-EN-AP-1 85. Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richkmd, Washington.

Lindsey, IL A. 1995. Miocene-to Pliocene-Aged Suprabasalt Sediments of the HmfordSite, South-Central Wahington. BHI-001 84. Bechtel Hanford, Inc., Richkmd, Washington.

McDonald, J. P., M. A. Charnness, and D. R. Newcomer. 1999. Water-Level Monitoring Plan for theHanford Groundwater Monitoring Project. PNNL-13021. Pacific Northwest National Laboratory,Richland, Washington.

Peterson, R. E., and R. F. Raidl. 1996. Groundwater Monitoring Implementation Planfor the 100-BC-5,100-KR-4, 1OO-HR-3,and 100-FR-3 Operable Units. BHI-00916. Prepared by CH2M Hill Hanford, Inc.for Bechtel Hanford, Inc., Richland, Washington.

Record of Decision (ROD). 1993. Record of Decision, USDOEHmford 1100 Area, HmfordSite,Richkmd Wmhington (lIOO-EM-l, 1100-EM-2, 11OO-EM-3and 1100-IVI Operable Units). State ofWashington Department of Ecology, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and U.S. Department ofEnergy, Richland Operations Office, Richland, Washington.

Record of Decision (ROD). 1996a. Declaration of the Record of Decision, USDOEHmford 100 Area,1OO-HR-3and 1OO-KR-4Operable Units, HmfordSite, Benton County, Wmhington, April 1996. State ofWashington Department of Ecology, U.S1Environmental Protection Agency, and U.S. Department ofEnergy, Richland Operations OffIce, llichhm~ Washington.

13.3

Record of Decision (ROD). 1996b. Declaration of the Record of Decision for the 300-FF-I and300-FF-5 Operable Units. State of Washington Department of Ecology, U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency, and U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations OffIce, Richland, Washington.

Record of Decision (ROD). 1997. Declaration of the Record of Decision, US. DOE Hanford 200 Area,HmfordSite, Benton County, Washington (200-UP-1). State of Washington Department of Ecology,U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and U.S. Department of Energy, Richland Operations Offke,Richland, Washington.

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, as amended, Public Law 94-580,90 Stat. 2795,42 USC 6901 et seq.

Revised Code of Washington, Title 70, Chapter 105, Hizzardous Waste Management.

Schal14 R., R. L. Aaberg, D. J. Bates, J.V.M. Carlile, M. D. Freshley, T. L. Liikal~ P. J. Mitchell,K. B. Olsen, and J. T. Rieger. 1988. Revised Ground-Water Monitoring Compliance Planfor the300 Area Process Trenches. PNL-6671. Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington

Schmid, J. S. 1990. Interim Status Groundwater Monitoring Planfor the 200 Ewt Area Liquid EfluentRetention Facili@. WHC-SD-EN-AP-024. Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

Siemens Power Corporation. 1996. Groundwater Quality Assessment Plan, Surface ImpoundmentSystem. EMF-96-194. Richland, Washington.

Siemens Power Corporation. 1997. 1996 Annual RCIL4Report, Groundwater Quality AssessmentProgram. EMF- 1933. Richland, Washington.

State of Washington Department of Ecology, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and U.S. Depart-ment of Energy. 1989. HiznfordFederal Facility Agreement and Consent Order Between theUS. Environmental Protection Agency, the US. Department of Energy, and the State of WashingtonDepartment of Ecology, MV 15, 1989, as amended. Olympi~ Seattle, and Richland, Washington.

Sweeney, M.D. 1995a. Interim-Status Groundwater Monitoring Planfor the 216-B-63 Trench.WHC-SD-EN-AP-1 65. Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richkmd, Washington.

Sweeney, M. D.’ 1995b. Interim-Status Groundwater Monitoring Planfor the 216-B-3 Pond System.WHC-SD-EN-AP-013, Rev. 1. Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richland, Washington.

Thorne, P. D., M. A. Chamness, F. A. Spane, Jr., V. R. Vermeul, and W. D. Webber. 1993. i’?zree-Dimensional Conceptual Model for the Hanford Site UnconjkedAquiJer System, FY 93 Status Report.PNL-8971. Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington.

.

.

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 1990. Phme 1 Remedial Investigation Report for the Hdnford Site1100-EM-l Operable Unit. DOE/RL-90-l 8. Richland Operations OffIce, Richland, Washington.

13.4

.

.

.

.

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 1992. Final Remedial Investigation Study – Environmental Assess-ment Report for the 1100-EM-1 Operable Unit, Hanford. DOERL-92-67, Draft B. Richland OperationsOffIce, Richland, Washington.

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 1995a. Hanford Sitewide Groundwater Remediation Strate~.DOE/RL-94-95, Rev. 1. Richland Operations Office, Richhmd, Washington.

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 1995b. 200-BP-5 Operable Unit Treatability Test Report.DOE/RL-95-59. Richland Operations OffIce, Richland, Washington.

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 1995c. Additional Monitoring Well Installation and Field SamplingPlanfor Continued Groundwater Monitoring at the Horn Rapids Landfill. DOEJRL-95-50. Prepared bythe Department of the Army, Walla Walla District, Corps of Engineers, Walla Wall% Washington for theRichland Operations Ofllce, Richkmd, Washington.

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 1996a. Interim Action Monitoring Planfor the 1OO-HR-3and1OO-KR-4Operable Units. DOE/RL-96-90, Draft A. Prepared by CH2M Hill Hanford, Inc. for RichlandOperations Ofiice, Richland, Washington.

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 1996b. 200-UP-I Groundwater Remedial Design/Remedial ActionWork Plan. DOERL-97-36, Rev. 2. Richland Operations OffIce, Richland, Washington.

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 1996c. R(2L4 Corrective Measure Studyfor the ZOO-PO-1OperableUnit. DOERL-96-69. Richland Operations Oftlce, Richland, Washington.

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 1996d. Operation and Maintenance Planfor the 300-FF-5 OperableUnit. DOERL-95-73. Richhmd Operations OffIce, Richland, Washington.

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 1996e. Limited Field Investigation Report for the 300-FF-2 Opera-ble Unit. DOEIRL-96-42. Richland Operations Ofllce, Richland, Washington.

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE). 1997. Environmental Monitoring Plan, United States Department ofEnergv, RichZandOperations Ofice. DOE/RL-9 1-50, Rev. 2. Prepared by personnel from Pacific North-west National Laboratory, Fluor Daniel Hanford, Inc., and its subcontractor Waste Management FederalServices of Hanford, Inc., and Bechtel Hanford, Inc. for U.S. Department of Energy, Richland OperationsOffIce, Richhmd, Washington.

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 232.1. Occurrence Reporting and Processing of OperationsInformatitm. Washington, D.C.

U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Order 5400.1. General Environmental Protection Program.Washington, D.C.

13.5

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1982. Methodsfor Chemical Analysis of Water andWastes. EPA-60014-82-055. Washington, D.C.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1986a. Test Methodsfor Evaluating Solid Wwtes:Physical/Chemical Methods, 3rd Edition. SW-846. OffIce of Solid Waste and Emergency Response,Washington, D.C.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1986b. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.

(RCRA) Groundwater Monitoring Technical Enforcement Guidance Document (TEGD).OSWER-9950.1. OffIce of Solid Waste and Emergency Response, Washington, D.C. .

Weeks, D. C., G. K. Jager, W. J. McMahon, and B. H. Ford. 1996. Groundwater Protection Plan for theEnvironmental Restoration Disposal Facility. BHI-00079. Bechtel Hanford, Inc., Richland, Washington.

Williams, B. A., and C. J. Chow 1993. Interim-Status Groundwater Quality Assessment Planfor the216-U-12 Crib. WHC-SD-EN-AP-1 03. Westinghouse Hanford Company, Richkmd, Washington.

●

✎

13.6

Appendix A -

Sampling Matrix for Hanford Groundwater Monitoring Project

——,—-—-—l-,.-m. -. , . .. . . . ...- . . .. .. #.-r.., -.. ... . - . ... ,,,.

Appendix A

Sampling Matrix for Hanford Groundwater Monitoring Project

This appendix contains the integrated sampling and analysis matrix for the Hanford GroundwaterMonitoring Project. The matrix was designed for use in fiscal year 2000, but also includes wells that willbe sampled every 2 or 3 years (as discussed in Section 3.3 of the main text). The matrix inciudes wellnames, seeps, sampling frequency, and constituents to be monitored. Additional details, such as schedule,analytical methods, etc., reside “ina project database. Wells sampled independently of the groundwaterproject (e.g., for assessment of pump-and-treat systems) are not included in this matrix.

The following is a description of the columns in the matrix.

WELL Wells are listed numerically by digit e.g., “1199” precedes “199” and “699-Z9-4” precedes“699-S-45.” Wells with a 199- prefix are in reactor areas, 299-in 200 Areas, 399-in 300 Are% 499-in400 Are% 699- in 600-Are~ and 1199-in 1100 Area. For 699-xx-yy wells, xx and yy designate Hdordnorth and west coordinates in thousands of feet from an origin in the southern part of the site. Multiplelistings indicate that a well is used for more than one monitoring requirement and data are shared amongusers. Proposed new wells are listed with temporary designations NEW-PROJ-#. Seeps (shorelinesprings), which are monitored in the reactor areas for the Comprehensive Environmental Response,Compensation, andLiabilityAct of 1980, are designated with the prefixes SB, SK etc. ‘

Most of the wells monitor the uppermost aquifer. Wells that monitor deeper units are noted in theOTHIWCOMMENTS field. However, these designations are incomplete.

PROG (program): This column indicates the requirements the well is being sampled for. me followinggives the fill spellouts:

CERCLA = Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980.DOH = State of Washington Department of HealthFFTF = Fast Flux Test Facility (400 Area process ponds)LTMC = Long-term monitoring, CERCLA (13,C,and F operable units) “RCRA = Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976

‘ SURV = sitewide surveillance (plume and trend tracking).

PROJ (project): This column gives the subsets of the programs listed above.

Project Designation Explanation

100B 1OO-B,C Area

100BC5 1OO-BC-5 Operable Unit

100D 1OO-D Area

A.1

Project Designation Explanation

lOOF 1OO-FArea

IOOFR3 100-FR-3OperableUnit

100H 100-I-IArea

1OOHR3IAM(1)or (2) 1OO-HR-3interimactionmonitoring

100K 1OO-KArea

1OOKR4IAM(1)or (2) 1OO-KR-4interimactionmonitoring

lOON

100NR2IAM

1301N

1324N

1325N

183H

200E

200UP11AM

200W

200ZP11AM

222-s

300

300-APT

300FF2

300FF5

3D400

600

618-10,618-11

A-29

B-62

B-63

B-PLT

BPOND

CITY

ERDF

HRLF

K-Basins

LERF

LLBG(l)

LLBG(2)

LLBG(3)

LLBG(4)

1OO-NArea

1OO-NR-2interimactionmonitoring

1301-Nliquidwaste-disposalfacility

1324-Nsurfaceimpoundmentand 1324-NApercolationpond

1325-Nliquidwaste-disposalfacility

183-Hsolar evaporationbasins

200-EastArea

200-UP-1interimactionmonitoring

200-WestArea

200-ZP-1interimactionmonitoring

222-S Building

300 Area

300 Areaprocesstrenches(316-5)

300-FF-2OperableUnit

300-FF-5OperableUnit

Three-dnensional characterization(deeperwell completion)● 400 Area

600 Area

618-10and 618-11burialgrounds

216-A-29ditch

216-B-62trench

216-B-63trench

B Plant

216-B-3pond

Su&eilkmcemonitoringof City of Richlandwell

EnvironmentalRestorationDisposalFacility

Horn RapidsLandfill

1OO-Kfiel-storage basins

Liquid effluentretentionfacility “

Low-levelburialgrounds,wastemanagementarea 1

Low-levelburialgrounds,wastemanagementarea2



A.2

ProjectDesignation

NRDw

PUREX

REDOX

River

s-lo

SST(A)

SST(B)

SST(C)

SST(S)or (SX)

SST(T)

SST(TXA’Y)

SST(U)

SWL

u-1/2

U-12

U-14

U-PLT

FREQ (sampling frequency): The following are the definitions for this column

2-W 3-xx =

A=M=Q=

SA =

sampled every 2 or 3 years, begiming in fiscal year 2000 (-00),2001 (-01), or 2002 (-02)annuallymonthlyquarterlysemiannually (twice each year).

Records with more than one.listed frequency are sampled for dii%erentconstituents at differentfrequencies (e.g., “A/SAY’is sampled semiannually for each constituent with a “2” in its cohun~ annuallyfor each constituent with a “l” in its column). The designation “1X4” indicates the number of replicatescollected (in this case, four replicates are collected once per year).

The next 20 columns give the most commonly analyzed constituents. Some constituents maybeanalyzed by several methods; however, those details are not specified in this plan and are included in theproject database. The following abbreviations are used:

1-129 = iodine- 129ICP = metals by the inductively coupled-plasma method”

A.3

Explanation .

NonradioactiveDangerousWasteLandfill

Plutonium-UraniumExtractionPlantwaste facilities

Reduction-oxidationproject

Wellsmonitoringpotentialcontaminationnear ColumbiaRiver(seeChapter6.0 in the main text)

216-S-10pond and ditch

Single-shelltanks,wastemanagementareaA-AX

Single-shelltanks,wastemanagementareaB-BX-BY

Single-shelltanks,wastemanagementareaC

Single-shelltanks,wastemanagementarea S-SX

Single-shelltanks,wastemanagementareaT

Single-shelltanks,wastemanagementareaTX-TY

Single-shelltanks,wastemanagementareaU

SolidWasteLandfill’

Wellsmonitoringpotentialcontaminationout of 200 Areas (seeChapter6.0 in the maintext) ,

216-U-1and216-U-2cribs ‘

216-U-12cni

216-U-14ditch

u Plant

21Q#f2:.:_._.. >. ..

SR-90 = strontium-90 (or strontium-89 and -90)TC-99 = technetium-99

TOC = total organic carbonTOX = total organic halidesVOA = volatile organic constituents.

Numbers in the constituent columns indicate the number of samples planned for the sample year (alsosee note under sampling frequency). UnlXtered and filtered samples for ICP metals are denoted U and F,respectively.

OTHER/CO MMENTS: Metals are listed by their standard abbreviations, followed by “F” if filtered.Additional constituents are abbreviated as follows

Amm

C14

COD

CN

Col

DO

O&G

Pu-isoredoxTDsTPH

U-isoS04PCB

NOTES:

= ammonium= carbon-14= chemical oxygen demand= cyanide= coliform bacteria= dissolved oxygen= oil and grease= isotopic plutonium= oxidatioxdreduction potential= total dissolved solids= total petroleum hydrocarbons= isotopic uranium= sulfate= polychlorinated biphenyls.

(a) At 300 Area Process Trenches, each semiannual sampling event comprises four independent samplescollected at monthly intervals.

(b) Additional constituents: SeF, TIF, CN, Col, semivolatile organic constituents, dioxins anddibenzofurans, herbicides, pesticides, organophosphates, polychlorinated biphenyls, radium, sulfate.

(c) McDonald et al. (1999).

A.4

,

-Idl Id I 1- 1- 1- 1-. 1-1-1-.. ----- - . - - -

1 I I I I I I I I I I

..—— . .—____ . —.. .

I I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I I

I uln~nlllllllllllll]. 11111111111

1. . .

I 1- I ---- I I I

A.6

A.7

.- ..—.—.—.-—. . . . .....—.——.-—.. . . --- ..-— --- --- --

VOA

umTJuJ,

XO.L

30J.

SCLL

~-ls

w-l

d31

6ZI-I

A.8

.

.

..+:”:,.

A.9

.g Ei ~s ~ &l “8 ~ 1 g 2

WELL ~ c! z : E I 1 z z E 1! 1! g g $ _K~&PROO PROJ ~ z : $ s a u

99-K-1 1 SURV lCQK A 1 1 F 1 199-K-110A CERCLA IOOKR4L4M(2) 2430 1 ‘1 1 I F/U 199-K-110A SURV K-BASIN A/Q 1 4 4 4 F 4 4 AC1499-K-111A CERCLA IOOKR41AM(2) A ) 1 1 1 F/U 1 C1499-K-111A SURV lOOK AISAIQ 1 1 4 F I 4 SAC14$9-K-I 12A CERCLA ICQKR41AM(I) A/M 12F 1 199-K-112A SURV IOOK A 1 1 F99-K-114A CERCLA IOOKR4L4M(I) A/M 12F ) 199-K-114A SURV 100K A 199-K-117A CERCLA 1OOKR4IAM(1) A/hi 12X4F 1 199-K-117A SURV IOOK A 1 1 F 1?9-K-118A SURV ICQK A 1 1 1 F 1 1W-K-126A CERCLA 1OOKR4IAM(I) AIM 12F 1 1?9-K-18 CERCLA ICOKR41AM(2) AM I 1 1 12F I F/U IW-K-18

ISURV IOOK AIQ 1 1 F 4

W-K-19 CERCLA IOOKR41AM(2) AISA 1 1 1 2F 1 FN I19-K-20 CERCLA 1OOKR4IAM(2) AIM 1 1 1 12F 1 FILJ 1 1?9-K-21 CERCLA IOOKR4LAM(2) AISA 1 1 1 2F 1 F/U 139-K-21 SURV lOOK A 18-K-22 CERCLA 100KR41AM(2) AISA 11 1 2F 1 F/1-J 1S-K-22 SURV 100K A 1 1 F 1 IW-K-23 CERCLA 100KR41AM(2) 2-01 1 1 1 1 Fm 1W-K-23 SURV 100K 1 1 F 1 C14B-K-27 CERCLA 100KR4L4M(2) i/Q 1 I 1 I F/U 4 1)9-K-27 tX3H 1IXIK AISA 2 2 2 2 2B-K-27 s URv

A:C14K-BASIN A/Q/h4 1 4 4 4 F I 12

)9-K-28 s URvAC14

K-BASIN AIQ 1 4 4 4 F 1 49-K-29 s URv

AC14K-BASIN AIQ 1 —44 — — —4 — — — — — — — — — — “ — “ — —F 4

W-K-30~

c ERCLA 100KR41AM(2) 2-01/Q 1 1 1 1 F/u 4 19-K-30 s URv K-BASIN

AC14A/Q/M 1 4 4 4 F 12 AC14

9-K-3 1 c ERCLA 100KR41AM(2) A 1 1 1 1 Fm 19-K-32A c ERCLA 100KR41AM(2) A 1 1 1 1 F/u 19-K-32A s URv K-BASIN Q

AC141 4 4 4 F 1 4 AC14

9-K-32B c ERCLA 100KR41AM(2) A 1 1 I 1 Fm 1 Deep Imanlfined. I9-K-32B s URv 3D 342 1 1 F 19-K-33 c ERCLA 1(XIKR41AM(2) A

— ~1 I 1 1 FIII 1

9-K-33 s URv 100K A 1 1 F 1 19-K-34

1c ERCLA 100KR41AM(2) 2-01

A:C141 1 1 1 Fm I

9-K-34 s URvC14

K-BASIN A/ Q1 4 4 4 F I 4 AC14

, I

I .11111111111111111111111111111111111111

All

.2 5

.!3 ~ ~ .9

WELL PROG PROJ ~REQ $ 3 4 ! r! g i ! ; g ~ ~ $ $ g ~ ~ g j $

199-N-50 SURVOtJrer/Comments

IOON A 1 1 F199-N-51

1CERCLA 100NR2IAM A 1 1

199-N-51 SURV lOON A 1199-N-52 SURV IOON A I 1 F 1199-N-54 CERCLA IOONR21AM SA 2 2 2 2F 2199-N-54 SURV 100N

O&G, TPHA 1 1 F

199-N-57 RCRA 1301N MA 1 1 F 2X4 2X4199-N-57 SURV IOON A 1 1 F I199-N-59 RCRA 1324N SA 2 2 2 2F 2x4 2X4199-N-59 SURV lOON SA 2 2 2F199-N-64

2 2 O&GCERCLA IOONR21AM A 1 1 F 1 I

199-N-64 SURV IOON A 1 1 F 1 1199-N-67 CERCLA lCQNR21AM SA 2 2 2 2F 2199-N-67 SURV . lOON A I I F I 1199-N-69 SURV 3D A 1 1 Bottom upper aquifer.199-N-70 CERCLA IOONR21AM A 1 I I I F 1 1 Bottom upper aquifer.199-N-71 RCRA 1324N SA 2 2 2F 2X4 2X4199-N-72 RCRA 1324N SA 2 2 2F 2X4 2X4199-N-73 RCRA 1324N SA 2 2 2F 2X4 2X4199-N-73 SURV 100N A 1 . 1 F199-N-74 CERCLA 100NR2IAM A 1 1 1 F199-N-74 RCRA 1325N AISA 1 I F 2X4 2X4199-N-74 SURV lOON 3-02 1 1 F 1199-N-75 CERCLA IOONR21AM SA 2 2 2F 2 2 Extinction well.199-N-75 SURV 100N A 1 1 F Extraction well.199-N-76 CERCLA 100NR21AM SA 2 2 2 2F 2 2I99-N-76 s URv 100N A I199-N-77 RCRA 1324N s A 2 2 2 2F 2X4 2X4 Bottom upper aquifer.199-N-80 c ERCLA 100NR21AM A 1 1 I 1 F 1 1 Deep unconfined.199-N-80 s URV 3D 3-02 1 1 F 1 1 Deep rmwnfined.1$9-N-81 c ERCLA 1C0NR21AM A 1 1 F 1 1199-N-81 RCRA 1325N AISA 1 1 F 2X4 2X4199-N-81 s URV I00N A 1199-N-92A c ERCLA 100NRZIAM A 1 I F 1 1199-N-92A s URv 100N A 1 I199-N-%A c ERCLA I00NR21AIU A 1 1 F 1 I199-N-%A s URv 1OON A 1 1 F 1 I199-N-99A c ERCLA 100NR21AM A 1 1 F 1 1199-N-99A s URV 1CQN A 1 1

I

t

.2

. WELL PROO PROJ,mQ ~ $ j ~ ~ j j ~ $ ~ ] ] j ~ g ~ ~ g j ~

Other/Comments

199-E13-14 SURV 200E A 1 1 1 1 F 1 I 1N9-E13-5 SURV 200E A 1 1 1 1 I F I 1199-E16-I SURV 3D 3-00 1 1 1 1 F I Basalt-confined.99-E1 6-2 SURV 200E 3-01 I F 1 1!99-E17-I RCRA PUREX SA 2 2 2 2F 2 2 2F 2 2 2 Amm’!99-E17-12 SURV 200E A 1 1 F 1 1 F 1!99-EI 7-13 SURV 200E . A 1 1 1 F 1 1 F 1 I!99-EI 7-14 RCRA PUREX Q 4 4 4 4F 4 4 4F 4 4 4 Amm!99-E17-14 SURV 200E 3-01 1 F 1 1!99-E17-18 RCRA PUREX SA 2 2 2 2F 2 2 2F 2 2 2 Amm!99-EI 7-18 SURV 200E 3-01 1 F 1 1!99-EI 7-19 RCRA PUREX SA 2 2 2 2F 2 2 2F 2 2 2 Amm!99-E17-19 SURV 200E 3-01 1 F 1 1!99-EI 7-9 RCRA PUREX SA 2 2 2 2F 2 2 2F 2 2 2 Amm!99-EI 7-9 SURV 200E 3-01 1 F I 1N9-E18-I SURV 200E 3-01 1 F 1 F 1N9-E23-I SURV 200E 3-01 1 1 IN9-E24-16 RCRA PUREX Q 4 4 4 4F 4 4 4F 4 4 4’ AmmM9-E24-I 8 RCRA Pu&x SA 2 2 2 2F 2 2 2F 2 2 2N9-E24-I 8

AmmSURV 200E 3-01 1 F I I

N9-E24-19 RCRA SST(A) AJSA 2 2 2 2 2 2 2F 1 2 2 2 2X4 2X4 1 2 AFuisN9-E24-19 SURV 200E A 1 1 1

MM24-20 RCRA SST(A) AISA 2 2 2 2 2 2 2F 1 2 2 2 2X4 2X4 1 2 APuisN9-E24-20 SURV 200E 3-01 I F I 1!99-E24-5 SURV 200E 3-01 I F 1!99-E24.8

1SURV 200E 3-01 1 1 1 1 1 1

!99-E25-1OOO SURV 200E 3-01 1 F 1 1!99-E25-17 RCRA PUREX AISA 2 2 2 2F 2 2 2F 2 2 2 Ahydroq SA Amm!99-E25-17 SURV 200E 3-01 1 F 1 1!99-E25- 18 SURV 200E 3-01 1 F 1 1!99-E25-19 RCRA PUREX Q 4 4. 4 4f 4 4 4F 4 4 4 Amm!99-E25-19 SURV 200E 3-01 1 F 1 1!99-E25-20 SURV 200E 341 1 F 1 1!99-E25-22 SURV 200E 341 1 F 1 1!99-E25-26 RCRA A.z9 AISA 2 2 F 1 2X4 2X4!99-E25-28 RCRA A-29 AISA 2 2 F 1 2X4 2X4 Deep unum!ined,!99-E25-28 SURV 2COE 3-01 1 F 1 1 Desp unmntined.!99-E25-29P SURV 200E 3-01 1 F 1 1!99-E25-29Q SURV 200E 3-01 1 F 1 1

VWIL 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 I It-iI I ImI I I I 1 ImI I I II 1 I II I I

A.14

,

.2 g

!gg ~ “2 ~ “ $ g .5

WELL PROO FREQ < ? “s $ 1 ! 3 : k 3 1 f t E 8 E g g FPROJ

‘-E27-14 RCRA SST(C)OUler/co?nmcnts

Mm 2 2 12 12 2 1 12F 1 1 12 2 2X4 2X4 1 1‘-E27-14 SURV 200E 3-01 1 F 1

SA:CN

-E27-15 RCRAI

SST(C) MAIM 2 2 12 12 2 1 12F-E27-15

1 1 12 2 2X4 2X4 1 1SURV 200E A 1 ) 1

S&CN

-F27-16 RCRA B-63 AISA 1 2 1 2 F 1 2X4 2X4%27-17 RCRA B-63 AISA 1 2 1 2 F 1 2X4 2X4X27-1 7 RCRA LLBO(2) AISA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F-E27-17 SURV

2F 1200E

2X4 2X4 23-01 1 F 1

SAPCB

%27-181

RCRA B-63 AiSA 1 2 1 2 F 1 2X4 2X4%27-I 8 SURV 200E 341 1 F 1%27-19

1RCRA B-63 AtSA 1 2 1 2 F 1 2X4 2X4

-E27-7 RCRA SST(C) AISAIM 2 2 12 12 2 1 12F 1 I 12 2 2X4 2X4 1 1-E27-7 SURV 200E 3-01 1 F

SA:CN1

-E27-81

RCR4 B-63 AISA 1 2 1 2 F 1 2X4 2X4-E27-8 RCRA LLBG(2) AISA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2X4 2%27-9

SA:PCBRCRA B-63 SA 1 2 1 2 F 1 2X4 2X4

-E27-9 RCRA LLBO(2) AISA 2 22 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2X4 2%28-13 SURV 200E 3-oI

SA.PCBII F 1. 1

-E28-17 SURV B-PLT A1 1

1 1 F1 1 1 14328-18

1 1SURV B-62 A 1 1 F 1 1

-E28-2 s URv 200E A1 1

1 1 F 1 1 IF-E28-21

1 1 1s URv B-62 A

Puis

1 1 1-E28-23 s URv 200E A

1 11 1 FN F/U

X28-241 Puis F/U

s URv 200E A 1 1 FN FNE28-25 s URv 200E

1 1A

PAs FNI 1 F 1 FN 1 FN

J?28-26 RCRA1 1 Puis FN

LLEO(1) AISA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F1E28-26 s URv

2X4 2X4 2 2200E 3-01 1 F 1 1

E28-27 RCRA LLEG(I) AiSA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F1.E28-27 RCRA

2x4 2x4 2 2s ST(B) Q 4 4 4 4 4F 4

.E28-27 sURv 200E4 4

3-01CN

1 F 1 1E28-28 RCRA LLBG(l) AlSA 2 2 2 2 2F 2FE28-28

2‘F 1s URv

2x4 2x4 2 2200E 3-01 1 1

)328-51

s URv 200E 3-01 1 1 F 1 1 1 1E28-6 s URv 200E 3-01

1 11 1 F 1 1 1 1

E28-8 RCRA s ST(B)1 1

AlQ1 4 4 4 4 4F 4E32-10 RCRA

4 4LLBe(l) AISA 2 2 2 2

QCN2F 2P

E32-102F1

s URv2x4 2x4 2 2

200E 3-01 1 F 1 1 1 1E32-2 RCM

1 1 c NLLBG(l) AISA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2FI 2x4 2x4 2 2

E32-2 s URv 200E 3-01 1 1 1

.* 5 *

.s * : “8 ~ z g $~ Ci$4 2 E I 1$ $ E E E E ! $ */f~&WELL PROO PROJ ~ 3 $ z 3 8 v

299-E32-3 RCRA LLBG(I ) MSA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2X4 2 2299-E32-4 RCRA BPOND AISA 2 1 2 FiU 1 2X4 2X4299-E32-4 RCRA LLBO(l ) MA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2X4 2 2299$324 SURV 200E 341 1 1 1

299-E32-5 RCRA LLBO(l) AISA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2X4 2 2

2994332-5 SURV 200E 3-01 1 1 1 1

299-E32-6 RCRA LL~l) AISA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2X4 2 2

299-E32-6 SURV 2CK)E 3-01 ) 1 1 1

299-E32-7 RCRA LLBO(l) MA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2X4 2 2

299%32-7 SURV 200E 3-01 1 1 1

299-E32-8 RCRA LLBG(I) AtSA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2X4 2 2

2994332-8 S(JRV 200E 3-01 I 1 1

299-F32-9 RCRA LLBO(I ) AISA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2X4 2 2

299-E32-9 SURV 200E 3-01 1 1 1

299%33-12 SURV 3D 3-00 I 1 1 1 1 1 F 1 1 1 CN. Basalt-mnfmed.

299-E33-13 RCRA SST(B) A/@’i I 12 12 12 12 4 12F 12 4 12 QCN

>299-E33-13 SURV 200E A 1 F 1 1 1 I F/U CN, I-hso

“+ 299+33-15 RCRA SST(B) Q 4 4 4 4 4F 4 4 4 CNm 299-E33-16 RCRA SST(B) Q 4 4 4 4 4 4F 4 4 4 CN

2%M333-17 RCRA SST(B) Q 4 4 4 4 4F 4 4 4 CN

299-E33-18 RCRA SST(B) Q 4 4 4 4 4F 4 4 4 CN

299-E33-20 RCRA SST(B) Q 4 4 4 4 4F 4 4 4 CN

299$33-21 RCRA SST(B) Q 4 4 4 4 4F 4

299-E33-26

4 4 CN

RCRA SST(B) Q 4 4 4 4 4 4F 4 4 4 CN

299$33-26 SURV 20QE 3-01 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

299-E33-28 RCRA LLBG(I ) AISA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2X4 2 2

299-E33-28 RCRA SST(B) Q 4 4 4 4 4F 4 4 4 CN

299%33-29 RCRA LLBG(l) AISA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2X4 2 2

299-E33-29 RCRA SST(B) Q 4 4 4 4 4F 4 4 4 CN

299-E33-29 SURV 200E 3-01 1 F 1 1

299-E33-30 RCRA LLBO(I) AISA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2X4 2 2

299-E33-31 RCRA SST(B) A/Q/M 4 12 12 12 12 4 12F 1 12 4 IX4 1X4 4 12 Q:CN

299-E33-32 RCRA SST(B) AIQM4 4 12 12 12 12 4 12F I 12 4 1X4 1X4 4 12 QCN

299-E33-32 SURV 200E 341 1 F 1

299-E33-33

1

RCRA B-63 ABA 1 2 1 2 F 1

299-E33-33

2X4 2X4

RCRA SST(B) AJQ 4 4 4 4 4 4 4F 1 4 4 1X4 1X4 4 4 QCN

299-E33-33 SURV 200E 3-01 1 F 1 1 1299-E33-34 RCRA LLBO(I) MA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2x4 2X4 2 2

299-E33-34 RCRA SST(B) Q 4 4 4 4 4F 4 4 4 CN

,

VOA

usnlJuJ,

Xol

S(T.L

SIOIHqd

P=’”l

d21

6ZI-I

Al131aJ.q

m

.

,

m

!v

I1

m

!v

I

.

A.17

m

:)

II

...- - .,. --,.-. .. —.. .....,.,., —-———-—— . . .

.g ~~ g g “8

~ Cl/! 2 E 1 ! Ji k @ . . g j j ~er,commmw8 8 m g g

WELL PROO PROJ ~~Q ? 7 9 $ 4 u

299-W1O-1 SURV 200W 3-00 1 1 I 1 F 1299-W1O-I2 RCRA SST(T)

1SA

12 2 2 2 2 2 2F 2 2 2

299-W1O-I2 SURV 21X)W2

3-00 1 1 I 1 F I 1299-W1O-13 RCRA LLBG(3)

1ANA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2X4 2

299-WIO-13 SURV 2CQW 3-00 12

1 12!9-WIO-14 RCRA LLBO(3) MA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2X4 2 2 Deep unmnfined,299-W1O-14 SURV 3D A 1 1 1 1299-WIO-17 RCRA SST(MY) Q

1 Deep umx.mfined.4 4 4 4 4 4 4F 4 4 4 4

299-W1O-I9 RCRA LLBG(3) A/SA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2X4 2299-WIO-19 RCRA SST(T) SA 2

22 2 2 2 2 2

299-WIO-20 RCRA LLBG(3) ANA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2X4 2299-WIO-20 RCRA s ST(T) s A 2

22 2 2 2 2 2

299-WIO-20 s URV 2Oow 3-00 1299-WIO-21 RCRA

1 1LLBO(3) A.iSA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2X4 2

299-W1O-2I RCRA s ST(T) s A 22

2 2 2 22299-WIO-21 s URV

22Oow 3-00 1 1

>2 99-W1O-22 RCRA s ST(T) Q1

4 4 4 4 4 4 4FL

4 4 4 4299-W1O-22 s URV

002Oow s A 2 2 2 2

299-W1O-23 RCM s ST(T) ~Q 4 4 4 4 4 4 4F 1 4 4 4 4299-W1O-24 RCRA s ST(T) AlQ4 4 4 4 4 4 4F 1 4 4 4 4299-WIO-26 RCRA s ST(TMI’Y) AlQ4 4 4 4 4 4 4F 1299-W1O-4 RCRA

4 4 4 4s ST(T) Q 4 4 4 4 4 4 4F

299-W1O-4 s URV4 4 4 4

2Oow A I 1 1 1299-W1O-5 s URV

12Oow A 1 1 1 1

299-W1O-81 F 1

RCRA1

s ST(T) Q1

4 4 4 4 4 4 4F 4 4 4 4299-WI 1-10 s URV 2Oow 3-00 1 1 1299-WI1-12 RCRA s ST(T) Q

I4 4 4 4 4 4 4F 4 4 4

299-WI1-13 s URV 2Oow A s ampleable?299-WI 1-14 sURV 2Oow 3-00 1 1299-W1 1-18 SURV 2OQw 3-00

I I 11 1 1 1 1

299-WI 1-23 RCRA s s T(T) Q 4 4 4 4 4 4 4F 4 4 4 4299-W1 1-24 RCRA Ss T(T) Q 4 4 4 4 4 4 4F299-WI 1-28 RCRA

4 4 4 4SsT(T) Q 4 4 4 4 4 4 4F 4 4 4 4

299-W1 1-28 SURv 2Oow 3-00 1 1 1299-WI 1-3

1 F 1s URV

I2Oow

13-00 1

299 -WI 1-30 CE RCIA 200ZPIIAM SA1 1

299 -W1 1-30 RC RA Ss T(T) SA2

2 2 2 2 2 2F 2 2299-WI 1-30 Su RV

2200w 3-00 I 1

299 -W1 1-31 RC RA1 I I

{

299-WI 1-7 RCRA SST(T) SA 2 2Zw-wi 1-7 SURV 200W 3-00 1299-W12-1 SURV 200W 3-00299-W14-1O SURV 200W A 1299-W14-13 RCRA SST(T?VIY) A@ 4 4299-W14-14 RCRA SST(TXiTY) Q 4 4299-W14-14 SURV 200W A 1299-W14-2 RCRA SST(TXfCY) Q 4 4299-W14-2 SURV 200W 3-00 1299-W14-4 RCRA SST(T~] Q 4 4299-W14-5 RCRA SST(TXtTY] Q 4 4299-W 144 RCRA SST(TX/lY] Q 4 4299-W14-6 SURV 200W 3-00 1

299-W14-9 CERCLA 200ZPIIAM AJQ+ 299-W14-9 SURV 3D A 1L 299-WE-Iw

CERCLA 200ZIUIAM Q299-W15-l 1 CERCLA 2oozrJlL4M Q299-W15-l 1 SURV 200W 3-00

299-W15-12 RCRA SST(TMIY] SA 2 2

299-W15-12 SURV 200W 3-00 1299-WI 5-15 CERCL.A 200ZPIIAM Q299-W15-15 RCRA L.LBG(4] MA 2 2

299-W15-15 suItv 200W 3-00

299-W15-16 CERCLA 200ZP1L4M SA299-W15-16 “ RCM LLBG(4] AISA 2 2

299-W15-16 SURV 200W 3-00

299-Wi5-17 RCIW LLBG(4) A/SA 2 2

M9-W15-17 SURV 3D A 1

299-W15-18 CERCLA 200ZPUAM SA299-W15-18 RCRA LLBG(4) A/SA 2 2

299-W15-2 SURV 200W A 1

299-W15-22 SURV 200W 3-00

299-W15-30 CERCLA 200ZP11AM A

299-W15-31A CERCLA 200ZP11AM Q

299-W15-32 CERCLA 200ZP11AM A299-W15-32 SURV 200W 3-00

299-W15-33 CERCLA 200ZP11AM A

=

11

4

4

1

2=4

1

4

4

4 I

rl=*2

1

2=2

1

2

1

2=2

1

I

=!=I

sg j j ‘~g ~ ] j ~

1 F

I

2 2 2 2F

1 1

1 F

1 1 F.

4 4 4 4F 14 4 4 4F

1 1 1 F

4 4 4 4F

1 1 I F

4 4 4 4F

4 4 4 4F

4 4 4 4F

1 1 1 F

I

I

2 2 2 2F

1 1 F

2 2F 2 2F 2F 1

2 2F 2 2F 2F 1

2 2F 2F 2F 11

2 2F 2 2F 2F I1 1 F

I F.

1

1

1 F

1

~$ ~ ~ ~ g g1 1 1

1

2 2 2

1

I 1 1I 1 1

4 4 4 4

4 4 4 41 14 4 4 4

1 1

4 4 4 4

4 4 4 4

4 4 4 4

1 1

1 I

1

2 2 2 2

1 I

2 2X4 2X4 2

2 2X4 2X4 2

2X4 2X4 2

1

2 2X4 2X4 2

1 1

I I

I 1

1 1

1

1 1

i!+==!,

1I II

I I

,1 lExUaction well.

11 Extraction well. I

. ..: —- ..- ___—._____

VOA

UmpnuflIllm 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 I ! 1 I I

~wu I II

FH-FH+l

A.20

I* - I I Iml l-l I I 1- I I I I It 1 , , ,

A.21

..” — _- .— ..— ——--- —.

p El.!i & ~ .2

WELL PROO PROJE j ~ ; & j ] ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ g j g

~REQ 3 $ : 4 $ u h m > Other/Comments299-W23-1O SURV 200W 3-00 1 1 1 I299-W23-13 RCRA SST(S) Q 4 4 4 4 4 4F 4 4 4 4 4 4 4299-W23-14 RCIM SST(S) Q 4 4 4 4 4 4F 4 4 4 4 4 4 4299-W23-14 SURV 200W A 1 1 1 1299-W23-15 RCRA SST(S) Q 4 4 4 4 lU 4 4F/lU 4 4 4 4 4 4 4299-W23-15 SURV 200W 3-00 1 1 1 1 F 1299-W234

1 I IRCRA SST(SX) Q 4 4 4 4 4F 4 4 4 4 4

299-W23-9 RCM SST(SX) Q 4 4 4 4F 4 4 4 4299-W23-9 SURV 200W 3-00 1 1 1 1 1 1299-w26-12 RCRA s-lo AISA 1 1 1 1 2F F 1 2X4 2X4299-W26-12 SURV 200W A 1 1 1 1299-W26-6

1SURV 200W A F 1 Bottom unconfined.

299-W26-7 RCRA s-lo SA 1 1 1 1 2F F 1 2X4 2X4299-W26-7 SURV 200W 3m F 1299-W26-9 RCRA s-lo AISA 1 1 1 1 2F F 1 2X4 2X4299-W27-I SURV 222-s AIQ 4 4 4 1 1 4 4 1

> 299-W27:2 RCRA s-lo AISA 1 1 1 1 2F F 1 2X4 2X4bm

299-W27-2 SURV 20QW 3-00 1 1 1 1299-W6i0 RCRA SST(T) SA 2 2 2 2 2 2 2F 2 2 2299-W6-10 SURV 200W 3-00 1 1 1 1 F 1 1 1299-W6-12 SURV 2CQW 3-00 1 1299-W6-2 RCRA LLBO(3) AISA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2X4 2299-W6-2

2RCRA s ST(T) SA 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

299-W6-2 SURV 2Oow A 1 1 1 1 1 1299-W6-3 SURV 3D A 1 1 1 1 1 F 1 1 1 Deep unwnfined (c).299-W6-4 RCRA “s ST(T) s A 2 2 2 2 2 2 2F 2 2 2299-W6-4 SURV 2Oow A 1 1 1 1 F 1 1299-W6-5

1s URV 3D A I 1 1 1 F I 1 I Deep unconfined (c).

299-W6-6 s URV 3D 3-00 I 1 1 I F 1 I Deep unwmfined (c).299-W6-7 s URV 2Oow 3-00 1 I 1 I299-W6-9 RCRA s ST(T) s A 2 2 2 2 2 2 2F 2 2 2299-W7-I RCRA LLBO(3) AISA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2X4 2 2299-W7-10 RCRA LLBq3) AISA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2X4 2 2299-w7-l 1 RCRA LLBG(3) AISA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F I 2X4 2X4 2 2299-W7-I I s URv 2Oow 3-00 I299-W7-12 RCRA LLBO(3) AISA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2X4 2 2299-W7-12 s URV 2CQw 3-00 1299-W7-3 RCRA LLBO(3) AlSA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2FI 2X4 2x4 2 2 Deep uneonfmed (c).299-W7-3 s URv 3D A 1 I 1 I I Deep unwnfined (c).

II

I

.

.+ ~ _ .j g jj “: ~ i

g g~ J z 2 2 3 G h k S I-1 Ii ‘E $ 2~f@? =! $ 4 $ v

j 8 8 ~ gWELL PROO PROJ OtJrer/Cornrrrerrts

— . — . . . — . . — — — — . . — . — . — .299-W-4 RCRA LLBO(3) A/SA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 1 2X4 2x4 2 2

299-W-4 SURV 200W A 1 1 1 1 1

299-W7-5 RCRA LLBG(3) AISA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F I

299-W7-5 SURV 200W 3-00 1 1

299-W7-6 RCRA LLBO(3) ANA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F I 2X4 2X4 2 2

299-W74 SURV 200W A I 1 1 1 1

299-W7-7 RCRA LLBO(3) SA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F

299-W7-8

2F 2 2X4 2X4 2 2

RCRA LLBO(3) SA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 2 2X4 2X4 2 2

299-W7-8 SURV 200W 3-00 1

299-W7-9 RCRA LLBG(3] SA 2. 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 2 2X4 2X4 2 2

299-W8-l RCRA LLBG(3) SA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 2

299-W8-l SURV 200W 3-00 1 1

299-W9-I RCRA LLBO(3) SA 2 2 2 2 2F 2F 2F 2 2X4 2X4 2 2

299-W9-1 SURV 200W 3-00 i

309942-16 SURV , CITY A 1 1 City of Richland well

3099-47-18B SURV CITY A 1 1

399-I-IOA RCM 300-APT SA 2X4 2X4 Tl~ see note(a)

399-1-1OA SURV 300 A 1 1

399-1-IOB RCIW 300-APT SA . 2X4 2X4 TIE see note (a)

399-1-IOB SURV 300 A 1

399-I-12 SURV 300 A 1

399-1-13A SURV 300 A 1

399-1-14A SURV 300 A 1 1 1 1

399-1-16A RCRA 300-APT SA 2X4 2X4 Tl~ see. note (a)

399-1-16A SURV 300 A 1

399-1-16B RCRA 300-APT SA 2X4 2X4 Tl~ see note(a). Deepunconfused (c),

399-l-17A DOH 300 SA 2 2 2 2 2 2 Uiso

399-I-17A RCRA 300-APT SA 2X4 2X4 Tl~ we note (a).

399-1-17A SURV 300 AISA 2 2 2 1 1 2 1

399-1-17B

SAUiso

RCRA 3C0-APT SA 2X4 2X4 TIE see note (a), Deep- unwnfincd (c),

399-I-18A RCRA 300-APT SA 2X4 2X4 Tl~ see note(a).

399-1-18A SURV 300 A 1

399-I-18B RCRA 300-APT SA 2X4 2X4 TIE see note (a), Deepunmnfmed (c). .

399-1-18B SURV 3D A 1 TIE see note (a). Deepunconfined (c).

399-1-2 SURV 300 A 1

VOA

Ulnptln

XO.J.

3(3.I

SUL

6,6-3J

06-JS

SIOWqd

P-l

d~l

6ZI-I

Km3Jq’q

suo!~

m

.

I

m

I

●

A.24

VOA

XOL

XM.

SUL

66-3,L

06-1s

SIOWqd

w-l

6ZI-I

W

suo!~

sqdW

B

.

.

.

.

.

)>~

)!

I

i

,m

A.25

.* EU s.-.- “ E

I

~ j

~ ! 4 ! ! 11 ~ J : ; 3 1 i 3 E 8 E g ,g 8

WELL PROO PROJ Dthd20rnrncots699-25-70 SURV 600 A 1 1 F 1699-26-15A SURV m 3-01 1 1 1699-26-33 DOH 600 A 1 1 1 1 I 1 1699-26-33 RCRA NRDW AISA 2 F 1 2X4 2X4699-26-33

2SURV TRANSECT A I 1 1 1 1 F 1 1 1 1 1

699-26-34A RCRA NRDW AISA 2 F 1 2X4 2X4699-26-34B

2RCRA NRDW ANA 2 F 1 2X4 2X4

699-26-35A2

RCRA SW AIQ 4 4 4 4F 1699-26-35A

4X4 4X4 4 4SURV 600

Anun, COD, COI3-01 1 1 1

699-26-35C RCRA NRDW AISA 2 F 1 2X4 2X4 2699-26-89 SURV 600 3-00 1 1699-27-8 SURV 600 3-01 1 1 1699-2840 SURV 600 3-01 I 1 F 1699-29-4 SURV 600 3-01 I 1 I699-31-11 SURV 600 3-01 1 1 1699-31-31 DOH m A 1 1 1 1 1 1 1699-31-31 SURV TRANSECT A 1 1 1 1 1 F 1 1 1 1 1699-31-31P SURV 600 3-01 1 1 1 Coofined Ringold(c).699-32-22A SURV TRANSECT A 1 1 1 1 1 F 1 1 1 1 1699-32-22B SURV 3D 3-00 1 I I BaMIt+mrlfined.699-3243 SURV TRANSECT A 1 1 1 1 1 1 F 1 I 1 1 1699-3242 SURV 6c0 3-00 1 1 F 1699-32-70B SURV 600 340 1 1 1 16$9-32-72A SURV 600 3-00 1 1 1 1699-3342 SURV m 341 1 1 F 1699-33-56 SURV 600 3-00 1 F 1699-34-41B SURV 600 A 1 1 1699-34-42 SURV 600 3-01 1 1 1699-34-61 SURV 600 3-00 1 1 F I699-34-88 s URv 600 340 1 I699-35-66A

1 1CERCLA ERDF s A 2 2 2 2F12U 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 BE, C14, N021N03, @ se

699-35-66A SURv 600 A I 1 1 1699-35-70 DOH 600 s A 2 2 2 2 2699-35-’?0

2 2 2 Ukls URv 600 ABA 2 2 2 2 2 2F 1

699-35-78A SURv2 2 2 sAukl

2Oow 3-00 1 1 F 1 1 1699-35-9 s URv 600 3-01 I 1 1699-36-61A s URv m 3-00 1 1 F 1699-36-67 c ERCLA ERDF s A 2 2 2 2F12U 2 2 2 2 2 2 2699-36-67 s URv 2Oow A 1 1 1

B. T

,(

,,

::.2

l,]

II WELL PROO PRO]~, ~ ~ ~ j $ j j ~ : , ] ~ ~ $ g # g g j $

Other/Commentsif 99-36-70A CERCLA ERDF SA 2 2 2 2FLW 2 2 2 2 2 2 B% C14, NOZN03, @ SeII 699-36-70A RCRA U-12 A@ 4 4 4 4 1 F 4 4 4 4 4

II 699-36-70A SURV 600 3-00 I 1 I699-36-93

IISURV 600 340 1 1

699-3743 SURV 600 3-01 1 1 1

~

699-37-47A R(XM PUREX SA 2 2 2 2F 2 2 2F 2 2 2 Amm99-37-47A SURV 600 ‘ 3-01 1 F 1T-37-68

1CERCLA ERDF SA 2 2 2 2F12U 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 B% C14, NOZN03, ra~ Se

699-37-68 SURV 200W A 1 1 I 1699-37-82A SURV 600 3-00 1 1 1

99-37434 SURV 600 3-01 1 1 1 f’ 1699-38-15 SURV 600 3-01 I 1 1699-38-65 DOH 600 A 1 1 1 1

II

1 1 1 Uiso699-3845 SURV 600 A. 1 1 1 1 1 F 1 1 1 1 Uiso699-38-68A SURV 200W A 1 1 1 F 1 1

II 99-38-70 SURV 600 3-00 1 1 1 1 1 1

# F699-39-39 SURV 600 3-01 1 1 1

il“u 699-39-79 CERCLA 200ZP1L4M A 1 14

1 1699-39-79 SURV 600 3-00 1 \ 1699-40-1 SURV 600 3-01 1 I 1699-40-33A SURV 600 3-01 1 1 1699-40-39 RCRA BPONLI AISA 2 1 2 F/U 1 2X4 2X4699-4042 SURV 600 3-00 1 1 169941-IA DOH 600 A 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1699-41-1A SURV RIVER A 1 1 I 1 1 1 F 1 1 1 1 1699-41-23 SURV ‘HWNSECT 3-OVA 1 A A A 1 F 1 1 1 1 A699-41-40 SURV 3D 3-01 1 1 1 1

I

1 1 ConfinedRingold (c),699-4142 RCRA BPOND AISA 2 1 2 FAJ 1 2X4 2X4 Deep urrcmfincd (c),69%42-12A SURV 600 3-01 1 1 1699-42-39A SURV 600 341 1’ I699-42-39B

1RCRA BPOND ANA 2 1 2 FN 1

699-42-39B2X4 2X4 ConfinedRingold(c).

SURV 600 3-01 1 1 1 1 ConfinedRingold (c).1! 69942-40C SURV 3D 3-00 1 1 1 Bosakonfined.

6994241 SURV 600 3.01 1 F 1

II

1 Confined Ringold (c).69M242B RCRA BPOND . AiSA 2 1 2 FN 1 2X4 2X4 ConfinedRingoid (c).699-42-42B SURV 600 3-01 1 1 1 1 Confined IUngold (c).69%+2-E9B DOH 600 A 1 1 1 1 1 1 Uiso, Basoltumfmed, E of

. river.

II

Gther/Comments

I Uiso.Basalt-confined.E ofriver.

SURV 600 3-01 1 1 1SURV 600 3-01 1 F I 1

1 ConfinedRingold (c),%43-41G RCIM Confined Ringold (c).

AISA 2 2 F 1 2X4 2X4SURV 600 3-01 1 F 1 1

2 1 F 2 F FN F 1 2X4 2X4 I see note (b).

2X4 2X4SURV 600 3-01 1 F 1 1

1 1

1SURV 600 3-00 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 I

>SURV 600 3-01 1 1 1

“N00

1 1 1TRANSECT 3-01/A I A A A 1 F 1 1 1 I A

1 1 1 1 I I F I I I 1 1

1699-47-6Q CERCLA 2OOZPIIAM A 169947-60 SURV 600 3-00 I 1 I I 1 1699-48-71 SURV 600 3-00, 1 I F 169948-77A SURV 6cm

13-00 1 1

69948-7A1

s URV 600 3-oI 1699-49-1OOC DGH 600 A 1 I 1 1 1699-49-1OOC SURV 600 A@ 4 1 4 4 4 F 4 4 4 4 1 4 4 AUsicy QPuis699-49-i3E s URV 600 3-oI 1 1 1 1 1699-49-55

1RCRA s ST(B) Q 4 4 4 4 4 4 4F 4 4 4x4 4 4

699-49-55ACN

s URV 600 3-02 I 1 I I 169?M9-55B s URV 3D 3-00 1 1 1 1 1 I F 1 1 CN. Bssok-cantined.699-49-57A sURV 6of) 3-02 1 F 1 169W9-57B

I 1 CNsURV 3D 3-00 1 1 1 1 1 Basalt-confined.

69949-79 sURV 600 3-00 1 1 1699-50-28B sURV 600 3-01 1 1 1699-50-53A sURV 600 3-02 1 1 1 1 1 CN699-50-53B sURV 3D 3-00 1 1 1699-50-85

1 F 1 1 1 CN. Basskonfmed.sURV 600 3-00 1 I 1

XO.L

30.L

Sal

66-3J,

~-ls

SIOW1/d

w-l

dL)I

6ZI-I

w

qwslv

SUoyv

8qdW

..-. ..- —.,-

A.29

/

—- —.,— . ..— —

1- , ! 1I 1 I I I1 I 1 1 1 I 1 1

I 1I I

,

11

...- ------ ----- ---1 \

Ullll Illlllp?

I ❑ , 1 1 I i 1 1 1 I 1-= 1 1 I I I

I 06-1s - - - -!!!! !lllllllllllll! 1!!---

I t 1 I I 1 t 1 I 1 , l-l I

I spaq~llllll

P=-1111111

6ZI-1111111

Anlal,Jqlll]l]

HHI

U4

, 1 , 1 I

m,”tmnl llllilllllt– I I I I I I I 1 I I1 1 1

, , , 1 1 1 I 1 I 1I m i I 1 1 I 1 II I 1

I

P I I I I I I I I I I I -- I I I

E m , 1 1 t 1 I 1 I 1 m-

=iH+tH-1 ---- ---- -I i I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

, -

psvlllllllllllllll] - - - - - - - -

I++l+tHJ

. . . ---- ---- -

A.30

I 11111111111111111111111111111 1111111111

I.“..

I I I .-IN.,-. ------ ----- 1 I I I ----- I I I ------ .

Wnplwfl 1111111111111111111111111111111111”1-

1 [1 I 1- 1-1 I 111-11 I I 1- 1-1 I 1-1 11111-I-111 1-1111-1111 t-r

A.31

.-, . ,.. —--— ... . . . ... ,..- .——.... .. .

VOA

umpq

XO.L

S(U

1)6-JS

6ZI-I

,

a

m m

a

m

z

{

m m

.

I

I

I

_

—

.

—

.

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

.

—

—

—

-7

k

I~

—

—

-

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

‘m,,

k

I~

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

‘m,,

E

.

m

:)—

—

~

~

—

1i—

~

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

—

I—

!—

.j

II—

-

;

I

Ig

A.32

.i

,, .+ 5 ~.5 ~ ~ .=

i~ $

WELL PROO ~ 3 % 2 6 3 i g $ B ; g g~~Q ? $ 2 ! i v g $PROJ Other/Commcrsts

NEW-SST(B)- SURV 200E A1

Flis

NEW-SST(B)- RCRA SST(B) QIM 3 5 5 5 5 3 5F 5 3 3X4 4 4 CN2

NEW-SST(B)- SURV 200E A Fois2

NEW- RCRA SST(SX) AIQ 3 3 F 3 3 F 3F 3 3SST(SX)-I

3 3 1 see nets (b)

NEW- SURV 200W A 1 1 1 I I ISST(SX)-1

N . RCRA SST(SX)S;T~SX)-2 .

Q, 3 3 3 3 3F 3 3 3 3 3

NEW- “ SURV 200W A I 1. 1 1SST(SX)-2

NEW- RCRA - — “ — — — “ — — — — — — — — — — — — —Q 3 3 3 3 3FSST(SX)-3

3 3 3 r T ~

NEW- SURV 200W A I 1SST(SX)-3

1 1 1

NEW- RCRA SST(TXflY) AIQ 3 3 3 F3 3 F 3 3FssT(Tx/lY)

1 3 3 3 3 I see note(b)

NEW- SURV 2Oow A I 1 I I 1ssT(Txn’Y)

1 1

SB-037-I LTMC 100BC5 A 1 1 1 F 1 1SB-038-3 LTMC 100BC5 A I I 1 F 1s B-039-2

1LTMC I00BC5 A 1 1 1 F 1

s D-loZ-l1

CERCLA I00HR31AM(2) A 1 I 1s D-1 10-1

1c ERCLA 100HR31AM(2) A 1 1 1

s D-1 10-21

c ERCLA 10QHR31AM(2) A 1 1 1s D-98-1

1c ERCLA 100HR31AM(2) A 1 1 1

s F-187-11

LTMc 100FR3 A 1 1 1 F 1s F-190-4

1LTMc

1100FR3 A 1 1 1 F 1

s F-207-I1

LTMC1

100FR3 A 1 1 1 F 1s F-21 1-1

1LTMc

1I00FR3 A 1 1 1 F 1

s H-144-I1 1

c ERCLA 100HR3L4M(2) A 1 1 1s H-145-I

1c ERCLA 100HR31AM(2) A 1 1 1

s H-IS(3-11

c ERCLA 100HR31AM(2) A 1 1 1 1s H-152-2 c ERCLA 100HR31AM(2) A 1 1 1 1s H-153-1 c ERCLA 10QHR31AM(2) A 1 1 1 I

s 53 % i

g .!2~Q q ? ! 1 !! ! c15! !2 ?2 1 13 2 E E E z ~ ?WELL PROO PROJ OtJrer/Commerrts

— — — - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —K-057-3 CERCLA 1COKR41AM(2) A 1 I 1 1 1

K-077-I CERCLA 1OOKR4IAM(2) A I I 1 1 I

K-082-2 CERCLA 1OOKR4L4M(2) A I I 1 1 1

1

I

i.

Distribution

No. of

Q@s

OFFSITE “

R. A. DanielsonState of Washington Department of Health2 South 45th AvenueYakim~ WA 98908

Scott VanVerst

No. of

Q@Ql

Mr. J. R. Wilkinson, ManagerSpecial Sciences and Resources ProgramConfederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian

ReservationP.O. BOX638

.Pendleton, OR 97801 .

“ ONSITE

State of Washington Department of HealthP.O. BOX47827 9Olympi~ WA 98504-7827

Mr. Russell Jim, ManagerEnvironmental Restoration/Waste

Management ProgramConfederated Tribes and Bands .

of the Yakarna Nation2808 Main StreetUnion Gap, WA 98903

Ms. Lenora Seelatsee 2Wanaparn BandGrant County P.U.D.30 “C” Street S.W.P.O. BOX878Ephra@ WA 98823 5

Mr. Patrick Sobot@ Interim DirectorEnvironmental Restoration/Waste

Management ProgramNez Perce TribeP.O. BOX365Lapwai, ID 83540

DOE Richland Operations Office

B. L. FoleyM. J. FurmanR. D. HildebrandR. W. LoberD. E. OlsonK. M. ThompsonA. C. TOrtOSO

Public Reading Room (2)

Bechtel Hanford, Inc.

B. H. FordA. J. Knepp

CH2M Hill Hanford, Inc.

J. V. BorgheseR. F. MldlV. J. RohayL.C. SwansonJ. P. Zoric

HO-12HO-12HO-12H6-60HO-12HO-12HO-12H2-53

HO-21HO-22

HO-21H9-02HO-21H9-02x5-53

. Distr.1

PNNL11989

No. of

Q@=

2 Fluor Daniel Hanford, Inc.

S. M. Price AO-22F. A. Ruck AO-22

4 State of Washington Department ofEcology

S. Leja B5-18W. W. Soper B5-18P.R. Staats B5-18T. A. Wooley B5-18

3 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

D.A. Faulk B5-01L. E. Gadbois B5-01D. R. Sherwood B5-01

3 Waste Management Federal Services ofHanford, Inc.

D. L. Flyckt L6-04B. M. Barnes T4-04J. C. Sonnichsen G1-30

2 Waste Management Federal Services, Inc.,Northwest Operations

M. G. Gardner HI-11S. H. Worley H1-11

No. of

Q@=

43 Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

D. B. BarnettC. J. ChouS. F. ConleyP. E. DreselJ. S. FruchterR. W. HanfM. J. Hartman (5)P.S. HenryF. N. HodgesD. G. HortonV. G. JohnsonJ. W. LindbergS. P. Luttrell (5)J. P. McDonaldR. B. MercerD. J. MorganS. M. NarbutovskihD. R. NewcomerR. E. PetersonJ. T. RiegerR. M. SmithD. L. StewartM.D. SweeneyC. J. ThompsonE. C. ThorntonW. D. WebberB.A. WilliamsM.D. WilliamsInformation Release Office (7)

K6-81K6-81K6-75K6-96K6-96K6-75K6-96K6-75K6-81K6-81K6-96K6-81K6-96K6-96K6-96K6-96K6-96K6-96K6-96K6-96K6-96K6-96K6-81K6-96K6-96K6-96K6-81K9-36K1-06

Distr.2

integrated monitoring plan for the hanford groundwater

Documents